HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 03/24/1992 # PLIC REVIEW COPY #
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
FROM'COUNTER
A G E N D A
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6500 PALMA AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM
MARCH 24,, 1992
7 :00 P.M.
This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the require-
ments of Government Code Section 54954.2. By listing a topic on
this agenda, the City Council has expressed its intent to discuss
and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in the
brief general description of each item, the action that may be tak-
en shall include: A referral to staff with specific requests for
information; continuance; specific direction to staff concerning
the policy or mission of the item; discontinuance of consideration;
authorization to enter into negotiations and execute agreements
pertaining to the item; adoption or approval; and, disapproval.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to
each item of business referred to on the agenda are on file in the
office of the City Clerk (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 speaker may
respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not
initiate further discussion.
* The floor will then be closed to public participation and
open for Council discussion.
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
. Roll Call
City Council Comments
Presentation: California Parks & Recreation Society Agency Show-
case Award (Parks & Recreation Commission)
COMMUNITY FORUM:
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. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing
committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt
necessary. ) :
1. S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/North Coastal Transit
2. Solid/Hazardous Waste Management Committee
3. Recycling Committee
4 . Economic Opportunity Commission
5. City/School Committee
6. Traffic Committee
7 . County Water Advisory Board
8. Economic Round Table
9. B.I.A.
10. Colony Roads Committee
B. CONSENT CALENDAR:
All matters listed under Item B, Consent Calendar, are consid-
ered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form
listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these items.
A member of the Council or public may, by request, have any item
removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then be reviewed and
acted upon separately after the adoption of the Consent Calendar:
1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 28 (Cont 'd from 3/10/92) &
FEBRUARY 11, 1992
2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 92-001, 9025 LA PAZ - Request to divide
a 10.51 acre lot into three parcels of 3. 01, 3.21 and 4.29
acres each for single family residential use (Burton/Stewart)
3. CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT FEBRUARY, 1992
4. INTERVIEWS FOR TRAFFIC COMMITTEE AND ATASCADERO COMMUNITY
SERVICES FOUNDATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS (6 p.m. , 4/14/92)
5. LAS ENCINAS I - REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR PRELIMINARY ENGI-
NEERING STUDY FOR THE FORMATION OF AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
6. RESOLUTION NO. 31-92 - APPROVING SUPPORT FOR SLO COUNTY HEALTH
DEPARTMENT REDESIGNATION AS THE LOCAL ENFORCEMENT AGENCY,
PURSUANT TO THE CA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1989
7. RESOLUTION NO. 28-92 - DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON
CAYUCOS AVENUE AT LOBOS AVENUE
8. RESOLUTION NO. 29-92 - DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON SAN
BENITO AVENUE AT DEL RIO ROAD
9. RESOLUTION NO. 30-92 - DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON
MONTECITO AVENUE AT EAST FRONT ROAD
C. HEARINGS: None scheduled.
D. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1. DOWNTOWN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MODIFICATION (Streets,
• drainage, sidewalks, et al)
2. REQUEST TO HOLD CARNIVAL AT PALOMA CREEK PARK, 416-4/19/92
(B&B Amusements)
3. ORDINANCE NO. 241 - AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS TO CON-
FORM WITH THE LAND USE MAP OF THE REVISED GENERAL PLAN (ZC 01-
92, City of Atascadero)
(Recommend motion to waive reading in full and adopt on second
reading, by title only) (Cont'd from 3/10/92)
4. COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING REQUESTS FOR LEGAL OPINIONS - REQUEST
HOLD FOR FULL COUNCIL (April 14th) (Verbal)
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
5. City Manager
* Notice: THE COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO 6:00 P.M. , APRIL 14, 1992,
4TH FLOOR, FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERVIEWING APPLICANTS TO
. THE CITY'S TRAFFIC COMMITTEE AND ATASCADERO COMMUNITY
SERVICES FOUNDATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS. SAID INTERVIEWS
ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL DATE: 3/24/92
FROM: Andrew J. Takata, Director ITEM: (Presentation`
Department of Community Services
THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager
SUBJECT•
PRESENTATION OF SHOWCASE AWARD FROM THE CALIFORNIA PARRS AND
RECREATION SOCIETY
BACKGROUND•
At the March, 1992 , annual California Parks and Recreation Society
Conference, the City of Atascadero was awarded the Agency Showcase
Award for a special facility brochure for the recently re-designed
Atascadero Lake Park/Charles Paddock Zoo Brochure. This award
recognizes premier printed and audio visual materials for Park,
Recreation and Community Service Agency facilities.
The City of Atascadero competed against agencies throughout the
State of California in it's category of under 50, 000 population.
• DISCUSSION•
Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission will be present at
the City Council Meeting to present the award to Council.
AJT:kv
;cprs.award
000000
Agenda Item: B-1
Meeting Date: 3/24/92
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 28, 1992
MINUTES
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilperson
Lilley led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Councilmembers Nimmo, Lilley, Borgeson, Dexter
and Mayor Shiers
Absent: None
Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee
Raboin, City Clerk
Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Henry Engen,
Community Development Director; Art Montandon,
City Attorney; Mark Joseph, Administrative
Services Director; Greg Luke, Public Works
Director; Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief; and
Lt. Bill Watton, Police Department
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Councilman Dexter introduced the latest member of the Atascadero
Police Department - police dog "Rommel" . Special Agent William
Tilley exhibited the four-year old Rottweiler and explained that he
had been donated to the police department by an anonymous donor.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
There were no comments from the public.
A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing
committees. Informative status reports were given, as
follows) :
1. S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/North Coastal Transit -
Councilwoman Borgeson provided a preview of the next
meeting' s agenda.
0
2. Recycling Committee - Mayor Shiers reported that the
CC01/28/92
• Page 1
�i�UC1C}1
committee had met on January 23, 1992 at which time a .
work schedule was set up and a creek clean-up day
planned. He noted that the committee was preparing a
report to the Council on the accomplishments of the past
year and goals for future.
3. Economic Opportunity Commission - Councilman Dexter
stated that the next meetingwouldbe February 27, 1992.
4. City/School Committee - Councilman Dexter reported that
the committee would meet again on February 20, 1992.
5. Traffic Committee - Councilman Dexter indicated that the
committee had met and discussed a number of traffic
matters, some of which would be before the Council for
action at a later date.
6. County Water Advisory Board Councilwoman Borgeson
stated that the board had met on January 8, 1992 and
discussed pros and cons of "State Water" . She reported
that the next meeting would be on February 5, 1992.
7 . Colony Roads Committee - The City Manager announced that
he was endeavoring to schedule a meeting for the first or
second week in February.
B. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Mayor Shiers read the Consent Calendar, as follows:
1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 14, 1992
2. CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT - DECEMBER, 1991
3. BOARD OF APPEALS VACANCIES - SCHEDULE INTERVIEWS
4. NOTICE OF TRAFFIC COMMITTEE VACANCIES
S. AUTHORIZE RENEWAL OF CONTRACTS FOR HEALTH INSURANCE POLICIES
6. RESOLUTION NO. 08-92 - AUTHORIZING RENEWAL OF COOPERATIVE PER-
SONNEL SERVICES TEST USE AGREEMENT
7 . JUNE 2, 1992, MUNICIPAL ELECTION
A. Resolution No. 09-92 - Calling and Giving Notice of
Election
B. Resolution No. 10-92 Requesting Consolidation with
S.L.O. County
CC01/28/92
Page 2 0
000002
8. RESOLUTION NO. 14-92 - AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREE-
MENT WITH CONTRACT SURVEY DESIGN FOR PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR RELIEF SEWER
9. AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT WITH COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE
COMPANY AS PLAN ADMINISTRATOR FOR FLEXIBLE BENEFITS FOR POLICE
AND FIRE DEPARTMENT BARGAINING UNITS
Councilman Nimmo pulled item #B-1 from the agenda.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Dexter to
approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item
#B-1; motion carried 5: 0 by roll call vote.
Re: #B-1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 14, 1992
Council discussion ensued regarding Page #15 of the Minutes
relating to General Plan amendments. Regarding the 30% slope
policy, Councilman Dexter indicated that the intent of his motion
was to include the word "or" - not "and" - in joining the two
exceptions. Councilman Nimmo and Councilman Lilley concurred,
stating that when they voted in favor of the motion, they believed
they were voting in support of the word"or" .
The City Attorney advised that a reconsideration of the motion
would delay the adoption of the General Plan two weeks; but
clarified that because Councilman Dexter' s intent was not reflected
in the recorded motion, the action could be amended by making and
voting on a revised motion.
Mayor Shiers reported that his "yes" vote was predicated on the use
of the word, "and" ; and emphasized that he believed that it would
be a significant policy change if the "and" was changed to "or" .
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to
replace the word "and" with "or; motion carried 3:2 with
Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Shiers voting in
opposition.
The policy will now read: "New lots averaging 30% or more slope
shall not be permitted; provided that exceptions may be permitted
when the following conditions apply: ( 1) Such a lot contains a
"building envelope" with less than 20% average slope which includes
building footprint, access drives, leach field, etc. , or (2 ) The
creation of such a lot offers public dedications or easements which
would have a direct benefit to city residents. "
On another matter, the City Attorney reported that zoning on
certain lots on Lakeview Drive had not been addressed at previous
General Plan hearings and proposed that the Council direct the
CC01/28/92
Page 3
000003
matter back to the Planning Commission for a General Plan
Amendment. There was unanimous Council consensus to follow said
recommendation.
Regarding Page #12 of the Minutes, Councilwoman Borgeson mentioned
that she believed there had been some agreement to delete certain
language in P.II-37, Section 9(c ) relating to a specific ratio of
police officers per population. Other councilmembers agreed, and
by consensus the following language was deleted from said text, "to
achieve at least a ratio of 1.2 police officers per 1000
population" .
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson
to approve the Minutes of the meeting of January 28,
1992, as amended; motion carried unanimously.
C. HEARINGSIAPPEARANCES: (See Item #D-1) .
D. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1. RESOLUTION NO. 07-92 - AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION
FOR A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FOR PLANNING/TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE TO FIND AND OPTION A SITE FOR THE NORTH COUNTY
WOMEN'S SHELTER
Henry Engen mentioned that this item had been noticed as a public
hearing but placed on the agenda under Regular Business. He then
presented the staff report including background and recommendation
to approve Resolution No. 07-92 authorizing the grant application.
He reported that the City' s financial contribution would be $3,300,
given a successful application.
Public Comments:
Barbara MacGregor, Executive Director of the North County Women' s
Resource Center, provided an overview of the services offered at
the center and outlined reasons for the request for assistance.
She and Pat Wickerstrom, representing People' s Self-Help Housing
Corporation, then responded to brief questions from Council.
Larry Etter, Pastor of the Community Church, spoke in favor of the
concept and encouraged the Council to approve the application.
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, also spoke in support.
---End of Public Testimony---
Individual Council comments were shared in favor of the proposal
and the following motion was made:
CC01/28/92
Page 4
UC►UUU�}
• MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to
approve Resolution No. 07-92 authorizing submittal of a
CDBG grant application and further authorizing the
expenditure of $3,300 in the event the application is
successful; motion unanimously carried by roll call vote.
2. SLO AREA COORDINATING COUNCIL: PRESENTATION RE: FORMATION OF
A SOLID WASTE JPA AND DESIGNATING THE AREA COUNCIL AS THE MET-
ROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION & CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY
Ron DeCarli and Steve Devencenzi of the San Luis Obispo Area
Coordinating Council (SLOACC) were present and provided reports and
recommendations on the following:
A. Resolution No. 04-92 - Supporting Establishment of a
County-wide Recycling and Market Development Zone
Mr. Devencenzi responded to a variety of questions from Council.
Councilman Nimmo expressed opposition to the Solid Waste Task Force
(SWTF) being the operating agency, an option recommended by SLOACC,
and mentioned that he did not approve of non-elected individuals
making decisions for the City. Mr. Devencenzi mentioned that the
by-laws could be amended and Greg Luke added that membership could
be altered to include elected officials.
Councilwoman Borgeson, City Council representative on the SLOACC,
• asked how often solid waste issues would be reported on. Mr.
Devencenzi responded that items would come before them on a
quarterly basis; while the SWTF would look at them monthly.
Councilman Lilley indicated that he did not see the need to create
a bureaucracy and stated that local entities are already responding
to meet State mandates.
Mayor Shiers cautioned that the City must be kept informed each
step of the way and shared concern for the potential creation of
natural monopolies. Mr. Devencenzi remarked that each city' s
garbage collector/recycler could remain under Council direction, if
so desired.
B. Resolution No. 05-92 - Supporting Designation of the Area
Council as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for
S.L.O. County
C. Resolution No. 06-92 - Supporting Designation of the Area
Council as the Congestion Management Agency for S.L.O.
County
Mr. DeCarli reported that the technical committee and SLOACC were
unanimously in support of the recommendation to designate the Area
Council as the Congestion Management Agency for the region.
. CC01/28/92
Page 5
f)t}0005
Public Comments: .
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, asked Ron DeCarli where, if SLOACC is
designated as recommended, public input on these matters will be
taken. Mr. DeCarli predicted that there would be public meetings
and workshops before SLOACC and recommended that the same continue
in each jurisdiction.
---End of Public Testimony---
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded Mayor Shiers to
approve Resolution No. 06-92 supporting the designation
of the SLOACC as the Congestion Management Agency for San
Luis Obispo County; motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson
to adopt Resolution No. 05-92 supporting the designation
of SLOACC as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for
San Luis Obispo County; motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: By Mayor Shiers, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
approve Resolution No. 04-92 supporting the establishment
of a Countywide Recycling and Market Development Zone;
motion carried 3:2 with Councilmembers Lilley and Nimmo
voting in opposition.
The City Manager interjected that city managers in the County were .
unanimous in supporting the recommendation for a Joint Powers
Agreement for solid waste management.
Mayor Shiers called a break at 8:42 p.m. At 8:59 p.m. the meeting
was reconvened.
3. HOMELESS SHELTER TASK FORCE - COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
Councilwoman Borgeson, Task Force member, reported that she
believed it would be appropriate to use the National Guard Armory
as a homeless shelter and recommended that it be opened up per the
Governor' s directive.
Councilman Dexter, also a Task Force Member, disagreed. He stated
that the Armory was not appropriate for families and, now, because
of the timing, it would be impractical to pursue. He recognized,
however, that there was still an issue to deal with and recommended
that the task force be expanded to include citizen members with a
view to making recommendations for a comprehensive approach to the
problem.
Councilman Nimmo asserted that he would not vote in support of
opening the Armory without additional information.
CC01/28/92
Page 6
000006
Public Comments:
Russ Kolemaine, 4580 Potrero Road, that he was horrified by the
negative media coverage and indicated that he was supportive of
Councilman Dexter' s recommendation. He stated that the Council had
not been given all the facts and suggested that the City look into
the situation further.
Mike Keller, resident nearby the Armory, voiced opposition to the
site being used for the homeless and suggested that Camp Roberts or
Camp San Luis Obispo be used instead.
Doug Lewis, Tunitas Avenue resident, shared his concern that the
Armory was located so close to schools.
Sean Johnson, 5065 El Camino Real, spoke in favor of using the
Armory and encouraged the Council to allow it to be opened up.
Eric Greening advocated problem solving discussions, rather than
the laying of blame.
Larry Etter, local pastor, emphasized that two weeks had passed and
nothing had happened. He proclaimed that the City has a
responsibility on the issue and urged the Council to respond to the
recommendations of the committee in a positive manner.
Lee Perkins, resident and parent of school-aged childred, spoke in
support of opening up the Armory.
Brad Goans, San Luis Obispo resident, urged the Council to
appropriate funds and ask the County and the City of Paso Robles to
match those funds in an effort to open up the Armory. He also
supported the recommendation made by Councilman Dexter to work for
a long-term solution.
---End of Public Testimony---
Brief Council discussion ensued regarding security at the Armory if
and when it was opened up for the homeless. Gwen Guyre, Homeless
Shelter Supervisor, responded to questions and assured the Council
that the County would make arrangements for security and janitorial
services. She indicated, however, that the County had not been
willing to discuss all the details of opening up the Armory until
Atascadero agrees to it and pointed out the program would be ending
on February 15th. She emphasized that it may now be more prudent
to work on the long-term issue.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Mayor Shiers that
the City of Atascadero recommends to the County that the
Armory located in the City of Atascadero be opened as the
CCO1/28/92
Page 7
�IUU(+t!'7
Governor has requested.
Discussion of the motion: Councilman Nimmo indicated that he
would vote in favor of the motion but revealed that he would
be watching EOC and the County very closely to see if they
meet their responsibilities.
Vote on the motion: Motion carried 5: 0.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter to compose a task force or committee
to look at regional contacts and develop a long range
solution for the homeless issue.
Motion amended: Councilman Lilley suggested that the
committee be a standing committee of the City Council to
report on the situation. Councilman Dexter amended his motion
to reflect this recommendation.
Discussion: Mayor Shiers reported that the issue has also
been raised at the Mayors/City Managers group and that the
subject was an agenda topic for discussion at a joint meeting
of the Board of Supervisors and City Councils slated for
February 1, 1992 in San Luis Obispo. In addition, he
indicated that he had received calls from three citizens who
were willing to be involved.
Second and vote on the motion: Councilman Lilley
seconded the motion as amended; motion passed
unanimously.
4. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
A. Letter From Wil-Mar Disposal regarding interim changes to
recycling program for multi-family and commercial units
Greg Luke reported that Wil-Mar had requested that the City
establish an interim program and corresponding fee which would
allow people who are not now covered by the recycling program to
receive voluntarily the pick-up service. He indicated that there
was more work to be done in setting up a program for both multi-
family and commercial recycling, and projected it would take the
balance of the year to establish a fixed program.
There were no comments from the public.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to
adopt changes to the recycling program for multi-family
and commercial units; motion passed.
B. Procedures for considering mandatory pick-up implementa-
CC01/28/92
Page 8
000008
tion .
The Public Works Director reported that one year ago Council had
approved an integrated waste management strategy program. Manda-
tory waste collection, he continued, was the only component that
has not yet been implemented and he projected that it would be
approximately one year before mandatory collection for single-
family, multi-family and commercial units could be implemented.
Mr. Luke suggested that Council set a public hearing date and give
staff further direction.
Council discussion ensued regarding the current waste pick-up
program and associated costs. Councilman Lilley shared concerns
about how mandatory pick-up may create inequities in the rate
structure, particularly with regard to commercial and residential
rates. Councilwoman Borgeson inquired as to whether individual
rates would decrease if mandatory collection was put in place.
Mayor Shiers commented that the Council will want to see fair
economies of scale for all customers. There was consensus to
discuss fees at the same time a public hearing is held on the
mandatory issue.
Public Comment:
Doug Lewis mentioned that it seemed like the community was finding
more ways for getting less.
---End of Public Testimony---
Council, by consensus, directed staff to proceed with details,
including billing, and bring the matter back to Council at a future
date.
5. PURCHASING PROCEDURES - COUNCIL MEMBER(S) APPOINTMENT
Mayor Shiers appointed Councilmembers Borgeson and Nimmo to work
with staff on reviewing and revising its procurement process.
6. PAVILION CHANGE ORDERS
Greg Luke provided an overview of the change orders and responded
to questions from Council.
Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that she would not approve the
change orders without putting on record her concerns that the
architect has some responsibility for the overruns. The City
Attorney reported that he was in the process of reviewing the
agreement with architect and, when completed, would be reporting
back to Council.
CC01/28/92
Page 9
000009
Mayor Shiers asked for clarification from the Public Works Director
about the recommended action. Mr. Luke asked Council to approve
the change orders as presented, noting the costs the contractor has
already incurred.
City Treasurer, Micki Korba, reported that as the Trustee for the
construction funds she, too, was concerned about overruns.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to
approve the construction change order documents.
Discussion on the motion: Mayor Shiers also voiced similar
distress about additional construction costs. Councilwoman
Borgeson asked the Public Works Director if any of the
overruns were due to the contractor or his subs. Mr. Luke
confirmed that they were not. In addition, she pointed out
that certain windows shown in the architectural drawings were
not, in fact, installed and asked for answers to this and
other deviations from the plans.
Vote on the motion: Motion to approve the change orders
passed 5: 0 by roll call vote.
7. SMOKE-FREE MEASURES - DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES
Mayor Shiers informed the public that the Council was not
considering a "no-smoking ordinance" and assured those present that •
there was no ordinance before the Council. He added that there
would be a full, public hearing if and when any proposed regulation
is drafted.
Public Comments:
Bill Mazzacane, Executive Director of the Atascadero Chamber of
Commerce, spoke in opposition to the Council asking staff to draft
an ordinance. He added that business owners are aware of the
situation and asked that the decision be left to the market place.
Eric Greening spoke in support of a citywide ban and asked the
Council to enact a comprehensive strategy to protect the air
quality, including banning cigarette machines.
Russ Kolemaine voiced disagreement with the need to regulate
smoking, especially in areas of private business.
Jim Edwards, local business owner speaking on behalf of two other
business persons, asserted that the issue will resolve itself
without the mandate of local government.
Sandy Taborski, Atascadero Travel, stated that San Luis Obispo
CCO1/28/92
Page 10
�fll1(1(l1�l
businesses have lost revenue since its ' city-wide ban and
proclaimed that it is the business owner' s right to make a decision
of this nature.
Hugh Sladen, Cuesta College student, said that they were too many
restrictions on small businesses already.
MOTION: By Mayor Shiers, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
extend the meeting past 11:00 p.m. ; motion unanimously
carried.
(Public testimony regarding "no-smoking" , continued. )
Norris Thompson, Players ' Pizza, remarked that the Council had no
right to mandate businesses to regulate smoking.
Gaylen Little, Creekside Lanes, urged the Council to let the
business owners make their own choice in the matter.
Anne Melvin reminded the Council that in November two citizen
petitions had been presented in support of a smoking ban. She
asked the Council to consider the fact that the public wants a ban.
Gene Crawford, Atascadero resident, opposed smoking regulations.
Larry Easterday, local business owner, also protested a ban on
smoking.
Terry Lathrop, Terry' s Bar & Grill, asserted that citizens do not
have to go to businesses that permit smoking if they don't want to
be subjected to it.
---End of Public Testimony---
Council discussion ensued regarding options proposed by staff.
Councilwoman Borgeson indicated that she could support proposed
Options #3 & 4 (adopt a prohibition less stringent than San Luis
Obispo' s and adopt a policy to encouraged reduced public smoking
based on voluntary compliance) . She added that to take no action
would be irresponsible.
Councilman Nimmo asked how Option #4 would be implemented. The
City Manager advised that there was not yet a specific program
formulated, but noted that it had come to his attention that
several restaurants in town have voluntarily discontinued smoking.
He suggested that this along with providing available information
regarding the effects of second-hand smoke could be incorporated.
Councilman Nimmo said he had no quarrel with the option as long as
there was a practical way to implement it. He stressed that he did
CCO1/28/92
Page 11
0000-41
not, however, support Options #1, 2 & 3 because of the fact that
local businesses are struggling already and was opposed to adding
another level of regulation.
Councilman Dexter indicated that he also favored Options #3 & 4 and
would support an ordinance addressing both. He emphasized the need
to encourage the young to refrain from smoking and that the
educational process is important.
Mayor Shiers stated that the matter was a public health issue and
warranted looking at some prohibitions. He noted agreement with
proposed Options #3 &4 .
Councilman Lilley remarked that he supported Option #4.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson to direct staff to bring back an
ordinance that combines the features of Options #3 & 4
with particular emphasis on the phasing out of smoking in
restaurants.
Amendment and second to the motion: Councilman Dexter asked
the maker to include a restriction as to the areas where
cigarette vending machines are allowed and stressed that they
should not be permitted in areas where children frequent. He
commended the owner of Creekside Lanes for not allowing
cigarette machines on the premises. Councilwoman Borgeson
amended the motion to include in an ordinance a restriction
regarding the placement of cigarette vending machines.
Councilman Dexter seconded the motion.
Discussion of the motion: Councilman Nimmo referred to
language in Option #3 relating to "phasing out" and asked what
exactly the Council was voting for. Councilwoman Borgeson
explained that her intent was to provide a time period to
reduce smoking by a certain percentage and voiced hope that
the staff would bring back options for Council consideration.
The City Manager indicated that the matter would more than
likely take several drafts and eventually there would be a
document and opportunity to take public testimony. He also
reminded the Council that although the School District had
already voted to adopt a program regarding smoking on school
grounds, it would not begin until the new school year.
Vote on the motion: Motion to direct staff to draft an
ordinance regarding smoking passed 3:2 with Council-
members Lilley and Nimmo voting in opposition.
CCO1/28/92
Page 12
8. LETTER FROM SLOACC RE: FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
• Mr. Windsor introduced the item and asked Council for direction.
By consensus, Council agreed to support the San Luis Obispo Area
Coordinating Council' s 1992 Legislative Program.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
No additional reports or comments were made.
AT 11:30 P.M. , THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED TO A CLOSED SESSION FOR
THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSIONS REGARDING PERSONNEL MATTERS. SAID
MATTER HELD PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.
MINUTES RECORDED PREPARED BY:
LEE RABOIN, City lerk
CC01/28/92
Page 13
O00013
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
FEBRUARY 11, 1992 WILL BE DISTRIBUTED SOON
•
t
Agenda Item: B-1
Meeting Date: 3/24/92
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 11, 1992
Mayor Shiers called a special session to order at 6: 11 p.m. for
purposes of interviewing five members of the public interested in
serving on the City' s Building & Construction Board of Appeals.
Those interviewed to fill two vacancies were: Lyle Curry, John
Clarke, Frances George, Gary Cochran and Bob Fisher. A letter from
applicant Ed Nolan, who was unable to attend, was reviewed.
Following the interviews and voting, Lyle Curry was selected as the
citizen member-at-large and Bob Fisher as the professional design
member.
At 7: 00 p.m. , the mayor called the regular meeting to order and the
roll was called as follows:
ROLL CALL:
Present: Councilmembers Nimmo, Lilley, Borgeson, Dexter
and Mayor Shiers
Absent: None
Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee
Raboin, City Clerk
Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Henry Engen,
Community Development Director; Art Montandon,
City Attorney; Mark Joseph, Administrative
Services Director; Greg Luke, Public Works
Director; Andy Takata, Director of Community
Services Department; Bud McHale, Police Chief
and Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Councilwoman Borgeson noted that she had received a letter of
request to be issued a permit to carry a concealed weapon from
citizen David Duncan. She asked that a review of the application
process be taken up as a future agenda item.
CC01/28/92
Page 1
• Resolution No. 15-92 - Appointing (2) members to the City's
Building & Construction Board of Appeals
Mayor Shiers noted that Council had met in early session to
interview candidates and had made their selection. He asked
Council to make the appointments formal by adopting Resolution No.
15-92. The City Clerk pointed out a change in term dates.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Dexter
to approve Resolution No. 15-92 with the corrections;
motion carried unanimously.
• D.A.R.E. Presentation - Police Department
Bud McHale, Police Chief, reported that there had been 3,208
students graduated to date from the D.A.R.E. Program. He
introduced and congratulated School Resource Officer Bill Swift.
Officer Swift presented D.A.R.E. T-Shirts to the City Manager and
members of the City Council.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, voiced whole-hearted support for the
D.A.R.E. Program and the efforts to keep youth sober. In addition,
he mentioned that the older generation should assess and combat
its ' own addictions.
Sylvia Vickers, General Manager of Falcon Cable, presented a
franchise check in the amount of $104,017.00 to Mark Joseph.
A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing
committees. Informative status reports were given, as
follows. ) :
1. S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/North Coastal Transit -
Councilwoman Borgeson noted that she had attended the
meeting on February 4, 1992 and would provide a full
report at the next meeting.
2. Recycling Committee - Mayor Shiers announced that there
would be a report from this committee under Item #D-1.
He added that the next meeting would be Thursday,
February 13, 1992 at 5: 00 p.m. in Room 102 of City Hall.
3. Economic Opportunity Commission - Councilman Dexter
reported that the next meeting would be on February 27,
1992.
4. City/School Committee - Councilman Dexter announced that
the committee would meet on the 20th of February.
CCOl/28/92
Page 2
5. Traffic Committee - Councilman Dexter stated that the
committee had forwarded three action items to Council
(see Consent Calendar #B-1) .
6. County Water Advisory Board - Councilwoman Borgeson
reported that the board had met on February 4, 1992 and
were in the process of counting votes regarding "State
Water" . She indicated that she would report further at
the next meeting.
7 . Economic Round Table - Councilman Lilley announced the
next meeting date to be February 19, 1992.
9. Colony Roads Committee - The City Manager indicated that
he was coordinating a meeting date of February 20, 1992
at 11:30 a.m.
Mayor Shiers reported that he had attended a joint meeting of the
San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors and members of six of
the seven city councils in the County. He explained that issues of
concern discussed included economic development, water, growth,
vision and fiscal policies.
B. CONSENT CALENDAR:
The mayor read the Consent Calendar, as follows:
1. TRAFFIC COMMITTEE ITEMS:
A. Resolution No. 11-92 Designating a no-parking zone on
Viejo Camino, from El Camino Real southerly to the end of
the curb
B. Resolution No. 12-92 - Designating a stop intersection on
San Francisco St. @ Marchant Ave.
C. Resolution No. 13-92 - Designating a stop intersection on
Pino Solo @ La Linia Ave. .
2. CONFIRM MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE: 6:00 P.M. , TUESDAY, 2/25/92
3. RESOLUTION NO. 19-92 - ENCOURAGING AND ENDORSING RESPONSIBLE
PET OWNERSHIP
Councilman Wimmo pulled Item #3.
MOTION: By Councilman Wimmo, seconded by Mayor Shiers to approve
the Consent Calendar Items #1 & 2; motion carried
unanimously.
. CC01/28/92
Page 3
Re: Item #3. RESOLUTION NO. 19-92 - ENCOURAGING AND ENDORSING
RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERSHIP
Councilman Nimmo explained that although he had no quarrel with
endorsing the proposed resolution, he did object to Section 2
regarding humanely euthenizing animals. Other members of Council
expressed support for deleting that portion and endorsing the
balance of the resolution.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to
adopt Resolution No. 19-92 removing Section #2; motion
passed unanimously.
C. HEARINGS•
1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 91-009, 9300 CORRIENTE - APPEAL OF PLAN-
NING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF PROPOSED DIVISION OF AN 8.21 ACRE
PARCEL INTO TWO 4.1 ACRE LOTS (Young/Cuesta Engineering)
Henry Engen provided an overview of the concerns highlighted in the
appeal and responded to questions from Council regarding driveway
easement, the septic system, percolation testing and lot size.
Public Comments:
Appellant Robert Cardillo, 9400 Corriente Road submitted a prepared
statement and additional support for the appeal (see Exhibit A) .
Deborah Hollowell, Cuesta Engineering, spoke on behalf of the
applicants, Traci and Andrew Young, and urged the Council to
approve the project. She addressed five points made by the
appellant in his letter of January 21, 1992 (see Agenda Packet) and
additional remarks made during his testimony. In addition, Ms.
Hollowell submitted a photograph of the area to illustrate the
distances between existing homes.
Andrew Young, 8730 Sierra Vista Road, provided a history of the
property and why they desire a lot split. He asserted that the
subdivision is legally acceptable and the appellant had full
knowledge of the lot split application before purchase of his
property.
Stu Matson, 9605 Corriente Road, voiced opposition to the lot split
because he believed it to be inconsistent and out of character with
the neighborhood.
Karen Oakes, 6705 Llano Road, stated that she had not been notified
of the proposed lot split and had trouble finding it as it was not
well posted. She stated that the intent of numerical guidelines is
CCO1/28/92
Page 4
to provide quality development and asked the Council, unless they
were absolutely sure there would be no detriment, to not allow the
split.
Frank Henderson, 9205 Balboa, indicated that he was the owner of
property adjacent to the subject site and spoke in opposition to
the application. He asked the Council to consider it as a flag lot
and stated that if it were approved, the Council may be setting a
precedent for small lot subdivision.
Beryl Davis, 13505 Santa Ana Road, spoke in opposition to the lot
split and asked Council to support a quality of life for all.
Brian Miracle, 8570 Corriente Road, also spoke out against the
proposed subdivision.
Nora Rum, 8405 Corriente Road, proclaimed that there were C.C.&R. ' s
to protect the area and asked the Community Development Director
when neighbors are notified of lot split applications. Mr. Engen
explained posting and notification procedures. Deborah Hollowell
confirmed that, as part of the process, she had mailed notices to
those who own property within three hundred feet. Mr. Engen noted
that sometimes notices are not received by the right owner.
Mike Olsten, 9600 Sausalito, opposed the project and expressed
concern for septic effluent draining into the lower lot.
Jim Murray, 9500 Corriente Road, reported that he had not received
any notice of the lot split and indicated that he also thought the
project was inconsistent with the area.
Andrew Young presented final comments urging Council to approve his
request. He emphasized that he was not proposing to construct an
additional driveway; only the one original road which would be
needed to serve the whole lot.
---End of Public Testimony---
Council discussion followed regarding percolation testing. Deborah
Hollowell explained that the testing had been done before any
topographical survey work was begun. She pointed out that if the
perc tests had indicated that a standard septic system would not be
acceptable, her firm would not have proceeded with the topo map.
She explained that five holes had been drilled in the field of each
lot, one of which was deep-boring. Mr. Cardillo debated that the
map on file with the City showed something different.
Councilwoman Borgeson stated that noticing was inadequate and
shared concern for the process. She indicated that she had
questions regarding the drainage impacts and steepness of drive,
CC01/28/92
Page 5
and added that the lot split was out of character with the
neighborhood. She then questioned the Community Development
Director about staff interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance with
regard to percent slope.
Councilman Nimmo asserted that while he did not like the specific
lot split, the issue was whether or not it meets the criteria
established by the City. He acknowledged that the criteria may be
faulty, but added that unless and until it is changed, the Council
must live by the ordinance, deny the appeal and approve the lot
split.
Councilman Lilley declared that he did not like the lot split for
a combination of reasons: slope, size of the lot, location of the
building envelope, proximity to the Cardillo' s home and incompati-
bility with the neighborhood. In addition, he revealed that he had
problems with the septic system and could not approve it without a
special precise plan and additional data to assure him that the
septic system would not be a part of any drainage run-off burdening
the Cardillos.
Councilman Dexter disagreed that the split was not inconsistent
with the neighborhood, pointing out that there were lots of similar
size in the area but added that he was not particularly in favor of
the application.
Mayor Shiers voiced opposition to the lot split because he believed
it did not meet all the map findings.
Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief, responded to inquiry from
Councilman Lilley about the proposed driveway. He reported that
the Fire Marshall had reviewed the plans and determined that the
driveway does not exceed the maximum acceptable slope standards.
Mr. Engen pointed out that the driveway would be the same whether
it serves one or two lots.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo to deny the appeal and approve
Tentative Parcel Map 91-009 subject to submittal of a
precise plan. Motion died for lack of second.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson to uphold the appeal of the
Planning Commission' s approval of Tentative Parcel Map
91-009 at 9300 Corriente Road.
Discussion, motion amended and seconded: Henry Engen asked if
the motion was to include directing staff to bring back formal
findings for denial. Councilwoman Borgeson indicated that she
would amend her motion to reflect said direction. Councilman
Lilley seconded the motion.
CCO1/28/92
Page 6
Vote on the motion: Motion to uphold the appeal carried
• 4: 1 with Councilman Nimmo voting in opposition.
D. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1. RECYCLING COMMITTEE - STATUS REPORT
Greg Luke, Public Works Director, introduced Dennis Loftus,
Chairman of the Recycling Committee. Mr. Loftus highlighted the
efforts and accomplishments of the past year and provided an
overview of the goals for the coming year.
Members of Council commended the committee for their fine work.
2. CREEKWAY MANAGEMENT POLICY - STAFF PRESENTATION
Greg Luke reported that, given the complexity and cost implications
of the issue, staff was recommending that Council take no action at
this time, but to set a meeting for a future date to provide
specific direction to staff leading to the development of a
Creekway Management Plan.
The City Manager pointed out that funding and staff resources are
limited and noted that certain levels of expertise are not
available in-house. Mr. Windsor explained that staff will need
clear direction from Council about what level of detail is being
• sought.
Councilwoman Borgeson voiced disapproval for staffrecommendation
to take no action at this time and mentioned that the materials
provided in the packet should be relevant. She stated that the
plans provided as examples are wetland or coastal and would not be
appropriate for Atascadero' s creeks. The City Manager clarified
that the attachments were merely examples of management tools from
other communities and reiterated the need for specialized expertise
for developing a plan for Atascadero.
Councilman Lilley asserted that a professional, proactive plan is
required with specific recommendations for creeks and trails. He
stated that it must be a pragmatic, common-sense plan with the
support from the community and noted that he was not supportive of
using outside consultant services.
Mayor Shiers, noting budget restraints, favored utilizing the staff
wherever possible. He encouraged continuing study of other
creekway plans in an effort to develop certain areas along the
creek and proposed that the City hire outside services only as
needed for specialized areas.
Councilman Nimmo emphasized the need to move slowly without
CC01/28/92
is Page 7
incurring any outside consultant costs and spoke in support of •
continuing the creekway mapping and riparian area definition
processes.
Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that the City has made some progress
with the creekway intrusion ordinance and now it is time to begin
protecting the creeks and addressing erosion. She remarked that
staff in the Community Services Department could be involved in the
process.
Councilman Lilley spoke in favor of community participation and
proposed that a committee be formed to develop a plan the public
would support.
Public Comments:
,loan O'Keefe, 9985 Old Morro Road, proclaimed that the Council had
ignored the testimony presented by a majority of people who spoke
at the special City Council meeting on December 19, 1991 who favor
creek setbacks. She criticized the staff report and recommendation
to take no action.
Russ Kolemaine, 4580 Potrero Road, commented that the creekway
mapping should be completed and if the City cannot afford a
consultant to do it, it must direct staff to finish the mapping of
all waterways. He spoke in support of a citizens' committee
approach as suggested by Councilman Lilley. •
Sarah Gronstrand, 7620 Del Rio Road, asked that while the mapping
is being completed, the City consider re-vegetation to restore the
creek where clear cutting has resulted. She shared concern for
vandalism occurring in the Salinas River and cautioned the Council
to not leave this waterway out of the plan.
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, agreed that re-vegetation is needed and
necessary and shared concern for the affect a proposed recreational
vehicle park may have on the Salinas River.
---End of Public Testimony---
Councilwoman Borgeson emphasized that she was opposed to a blanket
setback but clarified that it did not mean she did not want creek
preservation. She indicated that she could support an advisory
committee to help write the plan.
Mayor Shiers remarked that he believed it was important to measure
the riparian corridor and continue to develop a plan that will
offer protection for the creek. He added that there should be
varying setbacks depending on what the sensitive resources are in
the areas.
CCOl/28/92
Page 8
Councilman Dexter commented that any setback must be applicable to
the area and agreed that mapping should be continued. In addition,
he concurred that re-vegetation should begin and encouraged the use
of community volunteers.
The City Manager advised that the recommendation from staff was his
after consultation with the Public Works Director and without
conference with Council. He reiterated that the City's resources
are limited and underscored that to really pursue this matter, it
will take a long time. He mentioned that he would endeavor to
obtain a copy of the Boulder, Colorado plan developed by Randy
Rossi for Council to review. In addition, he suggested that a task
force could be put together and a blueprint developed to help
implore community interest and expertise.
Greg Luke referred to the nine steps outlined in the packet and
pointed out that it appeared, based on the discussion, that the
Council was ready to move forward with the first four steps.
Councilman Dexter suggested that it may be appropriate to set a
study session in which Council could fine tune the issues and
objectives.
3. ANIMAL REGULATION
A. Resolution No. 17-92 - Authorizing the execution of a
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement with the City of Paso
Robles to provide animal regulation services
B. Resolution No. 18-92 - Creating two new position classi-
fications and allocating two additional positions to the
Police Department
Mark Joseph provided an overview of the staff report and recom-
mendations.
Councilman Nimmo shared concern for adding two additional regular
employees and remarked that he would be more supportive if they
were contractual. Other members of Council agreed. Mr. Joseph
indicated that Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) would allow for this
stipulation.
Chief McHale suggested that the position classifications of Animal
Control Supervisor and Animal Control Officer be changed to Animal
Services Supervisor and Animal Services Officer.
Public Comments:
Daphne Fahsing, co-founder of Action for Animal Rights, asked the
Council to delay a decision and hold one or more public hearings on
the matter before the plan is an established fact. She asserted
CC01/28/92
Page 9
that in order for the program to be successful, it must have public
support. She asked what position the City of Paso Robles held.
Mark Joseph reported that the city supports the concept and was
intending to approve the matter on February 18, 1992 if Atascadero
does so.
---End of Pubic Testimony---
Councilmembers Nimmo and Lilley indicated that they were prepared
to move ahead. Councilman Dexter concurred, adding that there be
a contingency if the City of Paso Robles rejects.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to
adopt Resolution No. 17-92; motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Dexter to
adopt Resolution 18-92 as amended; motion carried
unanimously.
Chief McHale asked the Council to give consideration to addressing
a possible urgency ordinance relating to the location of a animal
shelter.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to
direct staff to bring back an urgency ordinance
pertaining to the zoning of an animal services center at
the soonest possible meeting; motion unanimously passed.
4. AMBULANCE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS - PARTICIPATION WITH SAN LUIS
OBISPO
The City Manager reported that emergency medical services are
integrated within the incorporated cities of the County and
explained further that the City provides service to unincorporated
areas of the County without any reimbursement. He indicated that
staff was recommending that the Council agree to participate with
other cities in a study of emergency medical services in an effort
to provide the best possible life support service and, at the same
time, recover some of the costs involved in doing so. Mr. Windsor
noted that the staff report reflected a recommended expenditure of
not more than $1,500, but proposed that the figure be lowered to
$1,200.
There was no public testimony.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson
to approve spending an amount not to exceed $1,200 for
the city' s share of a review of the existing emergency
medical services program; motion carried 5: 0.
CCO1/28/92
Page 10
5. P.E.R.S. MILITARY SERVICE CREDIT FOR EMPLOYEES
A. Resolution No. 16-92 - Giving Notice of Intention to
approve an amendment to contract between the Board of
Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System
and the City of Atascadero
B. Ordinance No. 238 - Authorizing an amendment to the con-
tract between the City of Atascadero and the Board of
Administration of the California Public Employees ' Re-
tirement System
(Recommend motion to waive reading in full and approve on
first reading by title only)
Mark Joseph reported that the recommended action was a formality to
implement a contract amendment agreed to as part of the current
Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Fire
Captains/Firefighters Bargaining Units and request from department
heads. He added that there would be no cost to the City.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Dexter to
adopt Resolution No. 16-92; motion carried 5: 0.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Dexter to
waive the reading in full and adopt Ordinance No. 238 on
first reading; motion passed 5:0.
• E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
Mayor Shiers suggested that the City present a plague to the
anonymous donors of the police dog.
2. City Clerk
The City Clerk mentioned that the nomination period was open and
the following five members of the public had taken out candidate
papers for City Council: Tom Bench, Gary Kirkland, George Luna,
Dale Cradduck and Dennis Bryant.
THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 10:38 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL MEET
IN SPECIAL SESSION AT 6:00 P.M. ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1992 FOR
THE PURPOSE OF MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW AND AUDIT REPORT. THE
REGULAR MEETING WILL BEGIN AT 7:00 P.M.
CCO1/28/92
is Page 11
MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY:
0 /- L� Aj--IJ •
LEE RABOIN, Ci y Clerk
Attachments: Exhibit A (Cardillo)
Exhibit B (Cuesta Engineering)
CCO1/28/92
Page 12
CC2/11/92 EXHIBIT(,"A"
rM L5
Robert L. Cardillo
9400 Corriente Road
Atascadero, CA CITY OFATASCADERO
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
1�'Iembers of the Atascadero City Council
I felt it important to attach Page 1 of The Subdivision Ordinance
and Chapter 1 of The Zoning Ordinance expressing the purpose of
the Zoning Regulations. I will summarize the main points for the
benefit of the audience here tonight.
The Regulations are to protect and provide for the health, safety
and welfare of the residents.
To minimize adverse effects on the public resulting from inap-
propriate use of building sites, structures, or other land uses
by providing appropriate standards for development. `
To provide for the development of lend use in a manner that
encourages and supports the goals and policies of the General Plan.
To ensure that real property which is to be divided can be used
without damage to inhabitants or property.
To protect and enhance the value of land and minimize conflicts
among the uses of land and buildings.
And to ensure development that- will best reflect the capability
of the land to support a desirable living environment.
Had the City Planners and Engineers followed these regulations,
this lot split application would never have reached this point,
as the goals and regulations have been violated. I have also
attached some of the ordinances that have not been followed so
that City Council can review this matter and reach a fair con-
clusion. I also ask the City Council to take note of the fact
that prior to the Planning Commission vote, the only two commissioners
to view the property voted against the split.
Bill Barnes, who split many of these lots years ago, suggested I
ask you, "Don' t you think he would have split this lot if it were
possible?" It already was part of a lot Bill had split. Frank
Henderson, who recently developed most of the immediate properties,
is on record as stating this split is completely out of character
for the area. A neighbor had an option to purchase and split the
Young' s lot and decided against it as his studies indicated it
would depress the value of neighboring homes and the split would
c: ecrease the value of the split lot. Also, it would destroy the
character of the area.
I feel the lot split violates City Ordinances in the following areas.
Ordinance 11-8 206 States lots with
ratio of Depth to Width
greater than 3 shall not be permitted if subsequent development
is detrimental to adjacent properties. This is nearly 4 to 1 .
Ordinance 11-8 209 States Flag lots may be approved providing
the subdivison is consistent with the character of the immediate
neighborhood. It is not! As. some members of the Planning Com-
mission stated, "this is a flag lot without the name."
Ordinance 11-8 209 States the access way serving the flag lot
shall not be included in the determination of required lot area
for any lot. This lot would not meet minimum lot size criteria
if calculated properly.
oning Ordinance 1-5 States$ when rounding quantities .5 goes
to the next highest whole number.
City states average slope is 30.5/
Zoning Ordinance 379 states 26-30/ uses a 1 .25 factor.
31-35/ uses a 1 .75 factor. The City used the 1 .25 factor
which is incorrect. Had they used 1 .75factor, the minimum lot
size would not be met and the lot split would not be allowed.
Septic System violates the ordinance.
Perc tests provided by Mid Coast shows two perc tests are less
than 50 feet from water drainage. The City states the septic
cannot go in this area, which drains onto our property. Cuesta
Engineering states this is the only feasible location. No
further perc tests have been done. How can this lot split be
approved when the City and Cuesta Engineering cannot agree?
This is a danger to our health and welfare which the City is
supposed to protect.
I have made all my points known to the Planning Department and
naturally they have had sufficient time to offer rebuttal and
try to circumvent the regulations to back the lot split in
every case. Why is this happening? No one seems to know.
Should we lose, we will appeal the Negative Declaration and
file suit for Violation of the California Environmental Quality
Act along with other necessary legal action.
11-8.203 Solar orientation.
The longest dimension of each lot should be oriented within thirty degrees of south,
unless the subdivider demonstrates that for certain lots:
A. The lots are large enough to allow proper building orientation and maximum
feasible control of solar exposure by the lot owner, regardless of lot
orientation;
B. Buildings will be constructed as part of the subdivision project (as in
condominium or planned development), and the buildings themselves will be
properly oriented, with adequate solar exposure;
C. Topography makes variations from the prescribed orientation desirable to
reduce grading or tree removal or to take advantage of a setting which favors
early morning or late afternoon exposure, or where topographical conditions
make solar energy infeasible;
D. The size of the subdivision in relation to surrounding streets and lots
precludes desirable lot orientation.
11-8.204 Reserved.
11-8.205 Multiple frontages.
Single family residential lots with frontage on more than one street are
discouraged, except for corner lots or where topography makes a single frontage
impractical. The City may require the release of access rights on one" frontage
which shall be noted on the subdivision map.
1-8.206 De th-width relationshi .
Lots with a ratio of depth to width greater than three shall not be permitted unless
there is adequate assurance that deep lot subdivision",will not occur or that deep
lot subdivision and subsequent development will be accomplished without detriment
to adjacent properties.
11-8.207 Lot lines.
A. Lot lines should be at the top of slope banks.
B. Side lot lines should be perpendicular to the street on straight streets, or
radial to the street on curved streets, unless another angle would provide
better building orientation for solar exposure or more lot area to the south
of the likely building site, or unless another lot configuration would better
suit the site topography or planned design of the development.
C. on corner lots, the intersection lot lines adjacent to streets shall be
rounded with a twenty-foot radius.
11-8.208 Taxing district boundary. -
No lot shall be divided by a taxing district boundary.
11-8.209 Flag lots (deep lot subdivisions) .
lots 'subject to
Flag lots may be approved for subdividing ,deep the following
findings: (1) the subdivision`'is`consistent with the character of the immediate
neighborhood; (2) the installation of_a-,standard street, either alone or in conjunc-
tion with neighboring properties,is,•not;feasible;_..•and.;(3)_:the flag lot as justified
by topographical-conditions.•-.-Such-subdivisions'shall"-conform with the following.
A. The `>accessway serving " -the .flag :aot(s),,, shall `:not,, be'7__included `in the
determination:of"required,lot-area";for-'•an`y lot:'a
B. The original lot shall have frontage on a dedicated street of at" least the
minimum length required by "these regulations for the zone in which it is
located, plus the accessway required to potential rear lots.
C. The accessway to the 'rear shall be at least twenty feet wide (developed to
City standards) for residential zones, except`,where the -.accessway is more
28
ADOPTED JUNE 27, 1983 ZorV/ j
Percolation tests may be substituted for the Soil Conse -
tion Service Reports. These shall be prepared by a registered
civil engineer or licensed sanitarian. The following conver-
sion chart shall be used to determined the appropriate lot
size factor:
PERCOLATION RATING MINUTES PER INCH
well-suited less than 20
Moderate or slow 20 to 39
Slow 40 to 59
Severe greater than 60
(3) Averaqe S102e: Using the Basic, Sectional or Contour
Measurement Method, the lot size factor based on this
performance standard shall be:
SLOPE LOT SIZE FACTOR
0 - 10% 0.50
11 - 20$ 0.75
21 25% 1.00 _.
26 30$ 1:25
36 40$ 1 "7.5 ,
2.00
40% + 2.25
(4) Condition of Access: Using the road right-of-way with
the shortest accessible distance between a lot and an
improved collector road, the lot size factor based on
this performance standard shall be:
CONDITION LOT SIZE FACTOR
City accepted road 0.40
paved road, < 15% slope 0.40
paved road, > 15% slope 0. 50
all-weather road 0.75
< 15% slope
all-weather road 1. 00
> 15% slope
unimproved road 1.25
< 15% slope
unimproved road 1. 50
15% slope
3-9
71
U
1-5
ADOPTED JUNE 27, 1983
. f
(b) Language:
(1) Construction: When used in this Title, the words
"shall", "will", and "is to" are always mandatory
and not discretionary. The words "should" or
"may" are permissive. The present
tense includes the past and futuretenses; and the
future tense includes the present. The singular
number includes the plural, and the plural the
singular.
(2) Time of Day: Whenever a certain hour or time of
! day is specified in this Title, or any permit,
condition of approval or notice issued or given as
set forth in this Title, such hour shall be
standard time or daylight savings time, whichever
! is in current use.
(3) Number of Days: Whenever a number of days is
specified in this Title, or in any permit,
condition of approval or notice issued or given as
set forth in this Title, such number of days shall
be deemed to be consecutive calendar days, unless
the number of days is specifically identified as
working days.
(4) . Rounding:-orf :Quantitie
�: a • r`es consideration f distances, .°numbers ofd
dwelling„�units�'-parkingy:spacg or: other a'spe_d#sof
development expressed im numerical quantities that
are
fractions of'whole,-numbers and this'Titleses
4x
such' antities in"°the form of• whole numbers only,.--
such-:;numbers are to be rounded to the next highests
whole _number when the fraction is .5 or more . and;
to the-next lowest whole numberswhen the, stiction
is -less than .5; provided,however, teat
quatit .es eitpressing `areas off' land are''to''rounded
only"in he case of acreage.
(c) Map Boundaries and Symbols: If questions arise about
the location of any zoning district boundary, or the
location of a proposed public facility, road alignment
or other symbol or line on the official maps, the
following procedures shall be used to resolve such
questions:
i
(1) Where a boundary is shown as approximately
' following a lot line, the lot line shall be
1 •
Chapter 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
11-1.001 Title.
11-1.002 Purpose.
11-1.003 Adoption authority - Conformance with other regulations.
11-1.004 Interpretation and application.
11-1.005 Conflict with public provisions.
11-1.006 Conflict with private provisions.
11-1.007 Actions by persons with interest.
11-1.008 Severability.
11-1.009 Procedure Summary.
11-1.001 Title.
This chapter shall be known and cited as the "Atascadero Subdivision Ordinance."
11-1.002 Purpose.
The regulations codified in this Title are adopted for the following purposes:
A. To protect and provide for the public health, safety and general,Twelfare;
B. To guide the development of the City in accordance with the general plan and
specific plans;
C. To ensure that real property which is to be divided can be ,used ,without
danger to inhabitants or property due to fire, flood, soil instability, noise
or other hazard;
D. To ensure that proper provision will be made for traffic circulation, public
utilities, facilities, and other improvements within the subdivided land and
within the City as a whole;
E. To protect and enhance the value of land and improvements and to minimize
conflicts among the uses of land and buildings;'
F. To protect potential buyers and inhabitants by establishing standards of
design, and by establishing procedures which ensure proper legal description
and monumenting of subdivided land;
G. To protect the natural resources of the community, including topographic and
geologic features, solar exposure, water courses, wildlife habitats and
scenic vistas, and to increase reasonable public access to such resources;
H. To enable innovations in subdivision procedures which facilitate development
that will best reflect the capability of the"land to support ''a �'desirable
living environment.
11-1.003 Adoption authority - Conformance with other regulations_._
A. These regulations are adopted pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, as a
"local ordinance" as that term is used in that act, and to supplement the
provisions of that act. All provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and future
amendments thereto not incorporated in these regulations shall apply to all
subdivisions, subdivision maps and proceedings under these regulations.
B. Nothing in this section shall be read to limit the rights of the City to
enact additional provisions concerning the division of land as are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare.
C. Approval or conditional approval of a subdivision map shall not excuse
compliance with other applicable provisions of this code or other applicable
ordinances, rules, regulations and policies adopted by the City.
1
11-1.004 Interpretation and application.',
In their interpretation and application, .these regulations shall be' held.to'be the
minimum requirements for the promotion of the public health, safety and°`general
welfare.
11-1.005 Conflict with public provisions.
These regulations are not intended to annul any other law or regulation. where any
provision of these regulations imposes restrictions different from those imposed by
any other provision of these regulations or any other regulation or law, whichever
provisions are more restrictive or impose higher standards shall control.
11-1.006 Conflict with private provisions.
These regulations are not intended to abrogate any easement, covenant or any other
private agreement or restriction; provided, that where the provisions of these
regulations are more restrictive or impose higher standards or regulations than such
easements, covenants, the requirements of these regulations shall govern. when the
provisions of the easement, covenant or private agreement or restriction impose
duties and obligations more restrictive, or higher standards than the requirements
of these regulations or the determinations of the advisory agency or council in
approving a subdivision or in enforcing these regulations, and such private
provisions are not inconsistent with these regulations or determinations thereunder,
then such private provisions shall be operative and supplemental to these
regulations and determinations made thereunder.
11-1.007 Actions by persons with interest.
When any provisions of the Subdivision Map Act or of these regulations require the
execution of any certificate or affidavit or the performance of any act of a person
in his official capacity who is also a subdivider or an agent or employee thereof,
such certificate or affidavit shall be executed or such act shall be performed by
some other person duly qualified therefore and designated so to act by the Council.
11.108 Severability.
If any part or provisions of these regulations or application thereof to any person
or circumstances are adjudged invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such
judgment shall be confined in its operation to the part, provision or application
directly involved in the controversy in which the judgment shall have been render �
and shall not affect or impair the validity of the remainder of these regulation
or the application thereof to other persons or circumstances. The council declares
that it would have enacted the remainder of these regulations even without any such
part, provision or application.
2
TITLE 9. ZONING REGULATIONS
Chapter 1. Enactment, Administration, and Amendment
9-1. 101. Title and Purpose: This Title is known as the Zoning
Regulations of The City of Atascadero, Title 9 of the Atascadero
Municipal Code. These regulations are established and adopted 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; and,
(c) Protects and enhances the unique and significant
natural, historic, cultural and scenic resources within
the City; and,
(d) Assists the Public in identifying and understanding
regulations affecting the development and- use of the
land.
9-1. 102. Official Zoning Maps: Those certain maps specifically
identified, and duly note thereon, as the Official Zoning Maps of
the City of Atascadero as adopted by Ordinance No. 68 on June 27,
1983, including all amendments thereto adopted pursuant to
procedures set forth in this Title.
9-1. 103. Open Space Zoning: The purpose of each of the
following provisions, together with all other applicable
provisions of this Title, are consistent with the intent of the
Open Space and Conservation Element of the Atascadero General
Plan, and shall constitute the Open Space Zoning pursuant to
Section 65910 et. seq. of the Government Code:
(a) The Agriculture, Residential Suburban, Recreation,
Special Recreation and Public Zoning Districts.
(b) The Overlay Zoning Districts where applied for flood,
L
P 9
'lll •� Y �� ,� �` 'a''SS y� p
�• �"� i~�< a hyo,
a �" r. �{{� 'F:� -fir:.� e � `•,
ca
t• $ :� t� t y.F.
• � t� of ,�
1111 % T S
i•,
S.
- rtl
' t l�'i�, r.� f• ± ky'
r
i
!x
r:
m
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-2
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 03/24/92
From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir..W, File No: TTM 92-001
SUBJECT:
Request to divide a 10.51 acre lot into three parcels of 3. 01,
3 .21, and 4.29 acres each for single family residential use at 9025
La Paz Road - Philip Burton/Daniel J. Stewart
RECOMMENDATION•
Per the Planning Commission's recommendation, approval of Tentative
Parcel Map 92-001 based on the Findings and subject to the revised
Conditions of Approval (specifically Condition #14) .
BACKGROUND:
On March 3, 1992, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the above referenced subject. On a 5:0:2 vote
(Commissioners Hanauer and Lochridge absent) , the Commission
recommended approval of the land division request subject to the
revised Conditions of Approval. There was discussion and public
testimony as evidenced in the attached minutes excerpt.
HE:ps
Attachments: Staff Report dated March 3, 1992
Revised Conditions of Approval - March 3 , 1992
Minutes Excerpt - March 3, 1992
cc: Philip Burton
Daniel J. Stewart
000014
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: 8-2
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: March 3, 1992
BY: Gary Kaiser, Associate Planner File No: TPM #92001
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a tentative parcel map application to divide a
10.51-acre lot into three (3) parcels of 3.01, 3.21, and 4.29
acres for single family residential use.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map #92001 based on
the Findings contained in Attachment E and the Conditions of
Approval contained in Attachment F.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Philip Burton
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Daniel J. Stewart
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9025 La Paz Road
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lot 30, Blk 66, A.C.
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.51 acres
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (Residential Suburban)
7. General Plan Designation. . . . . . . . . . .Suburban Single Family
8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Single Family Residence
9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
February 11, 1992
B. ANALYSIS:
The project site, a 10.51-acre original Colony Lot, is located on
the northwest side of La Paz Road, at its junction with
Atascadero Road (Attachment A) . The applicant requests approval
of a tentative parcel map application to subdivide the project
site into Parcel 1 of 3.01 acres, Parcel 2 of 4.29 acres, and
Parcel 3 of 3.21 acres (Attachment B) .
•
000015
There is an existing single-family residence on proposed Parcel
2, which is occupied by the applicant; proposed Parcels 1 & 3 are
vacant. Percolation tests have been performed on Parcels 1 & 3,
which indicate that both of these lots would be suitable for
conventional septic/leachfield systems.
Minimum Lot SizefDensity
The minimum lot size in the RS zone ranges from 2 1/2 to 10
acres, depending on several performance standards, as described
in Section 9-3. 144 of the City Zoning Ordinance. - Staff has
determined that the minimum lot size for the project site is 3.06
acres, as follows:
Lot Size Factor
Distance from Center (16,000' - 18,0001 ) 0.60
Septic Suitability (<20 min./inch: well-suited) 0.50
Average Slope ( 11% - 20%) 0.75
Access Condition (Paved Road <15% slope) 0.40
General Neighborhood Character (4. 06 ac) 0.81
Minimum Lot Size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. 06 acres
A division of this 10.51-acre site into three lots is therefore
possible under the minimum lot size standards of the Zoning
Ordinance. In fact, there would be 1.33 acres "to spare" as far
as planned density is concerned.
The topographic information shown on the tentative map is helpful
in visualizing the "lay of the land. " However, the map tends to
exaggerate the relief of the site by showing two-foot contours at
a 1" = 100' scale. Although a slope range of 11% - 20% was used
for the purposes of minimum lot size determination, the average
slope of the site, as calculated by staff, is only 10.7% .
Subdivision Design
The lot line between proposed Parcels 1 & 2 has been positioned
to retain as much of the existing orchard and landscaped area as
possible on proposed Parcel 2 (where the existing residence is
located) . Staff is not opposed to this intention of the
applicant, provided the minimum lot size is honored. Thus, staff
recommends that a condition of approval be imposed that would
require a slight relocation of this lot line prior to recordation
of a final Parcel Map. The fact that proposed Parcel 1 is 0. 05
acres shy of the minimum lot size should not be construed as
problematic with respect to the Commission' s ability to
conditionally approve this application.
2
000()16
The proposed new lot line between Parcels 2 & 3 would follow a
high pressure gas line that exists in the center of a fairly
well-defined valley, or swale. This proposed lot line would
therefore recognize the natural topography of the site, as
encouraged by the Subdivision Ordinance.
It should be noted that a condition of approval is recommended
which would require that an access denial strip be established
along Atascadero Road (except within the La Paz Road right-of-
way) and along both sides of the southern-most portion of La Paz
Road. The intent of this condition is two-fold. First, it would
serve to control traffic through minimizing encroachments onto
Atascadero Road. Second, it would maximize, to the extent
feasible, safe site distance at this intersection. A "side
effect" of this condition would likely be to minimize necessary
grading on proposed Parcel 1. This is probable because the
condition would require any future driveway approach onto La Paz
Road to be placed at roughly the same elevation as the best and
most likely building site.
Each proposed parcel is adequate in area to ensure opportunities
for preferred solar orientation, depth-width ratios and zoning
are sufficient to preclude the creation of future flag lots, and
proposed lot lines are straight and perpendicular to the street.
All aspects of the project with respect to subdivision design are
consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance.
Environmental Review
An Initial Study has been conducted for the project, and a
Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) .
Basically, the project would result in increased residential
density on the project site in a manner consistent with the
General Plan and its implementing ordinances. While site
topography is undulating, and a considerable number of mature
native trees exist on the site, it is certainly possible to
develop the proposed two (2) additional lots without any tree
removals or a significant amount of grading. Therefore, and
because all subsequent development on the site would also be
subject to environmental review under CEQA, this project is not
thought to have the potential to result in significant adverse
impacts on the environment.
3
0000J'7
Review of Other Agencies
The project has been referred to all potentially affected public
agencies for review and comments. Although no outside agencies
are opposed to the project, the Atascadero Unified School
District has submitted a letter reminding the Commission of the
problem of overcrowding in local schools. The Commission will
recall this issue being addressed in the Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) prepared for the recent General Plan Update. Other
comments received are reflected in the conditions of approval
attached hereto, including installation of two (2) new fire
hydrants on La Paz Road and those necessary to protect utility
easements and facilities.
CONCLUSIONS•
The project, with the attached conditions of approval, complies
with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance,
Subdivision Ordinance, and Atascadero Municipal Code. The
project would also be consistent with, and therefore would serve
to implement, the General Plan. Finally, the project site, upon
buildout, would be consistent with surrounding densities and land
uses in the neighborhood.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Location Map
Attachment B - Tentative Parcel Map
Attachment C - Developer' s Statement
Attachment D - Negative Declaration
Attachment E - Findings for Approval
Attachment F - Conditions of Approval
TPM-92001.sr
4
900016
CITY OF ATA AD Attachment A
�'� ••� � _ � SC ERO Location Map
�•—•-7�'�"""_ -" TPM #92001
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 0
f < ! d
yIEro
~ C4QIAO ytR► /
1. ( FH
\O ANO
3diO R S QEn
Cr
v° /
CA
R S �.
a
a
r
_
gacr° 1 � —
t y P.I
ATASCAOE%-
- r4
I OA
H
W
a
_ PRo3�cT R (FH)
StT�
_\ ° \
is
i
41000 J
�; Attachment B
,, CITY OF ATA
M� SCADERO Tentative Parcel Map
TPM #92001
9c,►ne�,;;•, :�__. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
— ,� DEPARTMENT
oc $ Co ��V g
•�� n i
sz - ... . 4
0, •,� Z / moi",, ,\ �' ���� l
M
/ SCA0
v'�� , ,Y
/''. 90002
CITY OF ATA Attachment c
SCADERO Developer' s Statement
r� _
tOft��:w�'f - . TPM #92001
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
DANIEL J. STEWART & ASSOC.
<,rt ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS
POST OFFICE Box 2038 597 Twelfth Street
PASO ROBLES,CALIFORNIA 93446 (805)238-0700
' ✓gnNgrr � �9 jZ .
City oftAtascadero
C01:11auLity Deveigm ent
City Hal
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: Burton Tentative Map AT 91-162
9025 La Paz
Developers Statement: I, Philip Burton, wish to divide my property as
shown on UT ten vetatl map. I do not intend to construct residences
peon but only to convey Parcels 1 and 3 at sare time in the future to
Prospective developers or convey the two parcels to my heirs.
The division line between parcels 2 and 3 will approximate the existing
-wale which is also the location of a high-pressure gas line. A
Proposed location of a future residence could quite easily be
constructed where I have indicated on this tentative map. There are
also other developable sites on this parol 3.
The division line between Parcels 1 and 2 was established by creating
the n&dnnntt lot size of 3.01 acres. I had hoped that this line could be
established along my existing fence line, but since I could not have the
lot line there, I will be content where it is shown. I have indicated a
location of a proposed residence on Parcel 1.
I hereby request that if any street inprovenents are required as a
condition of approval of this parcel map, that the improvements fronting
Parcels 1 and 3 be waived pursuant to Section 66411..1 of the subdivision
map act. (See copy attached).
Please Proceed with the processing of this application.
Very truly yours,
GG�
Phili Burtch, Owner
PDaniel J. S , Engineer
DJS/nm
�� `\ Attachment D
.,.. CITY OF ATASCADERO
����, • ���'�`� �'-��" TPM a#92001eclaration
" COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
CITY OF ATASCADERO
ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR
. NEGATIVE DECLARATION
COMMMM DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 8500 PALMA AVE. ATASCADERO.CA 93422 (805)461-5035
APPLICANT-. ?*4;,-:P 'eo Q,.D t.,
101--7 LA 'PAa- VzD
CA 934-ZZ
PROJECT TITLE: �
texTa'ci,JE M� �'9200 I
PROJECT LOCATION:
%-LS' LA 1>6Z. Vfit)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
"IDS, k0.S1 - A�S2E S�iE lN� 'h�QEL C3� t2cEC S
%Z SiNEat-E- Pjw1
FINDINGS:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment.
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-tern environmental goals.
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited.but comulatively considerable.
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly.
DETERMINATION:
Based on the above findings.and the information contained in the initial study(made a part hereof by refer-
ence and on file in the Community Development Department),it has been determined that the above project
will not have an adverse impact on the environment.
Henry Engen
Community Development Director
Date Posted: C-R. its t°1°►Z„
Date Adopted: _
coo$I'm
000022
Attachment E - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92001
9025 La Paz Road
(Burton/Stewart)
March 3, 1992
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project
is adequate.
MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable
General and Specific Plans.
2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
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 proposed subdivision design, and/or the type of
improvements proposed, will not cause serious public health
problems.
TPM92001.fin
000023
Attachment F - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92001
9025 La Paz Road
(Burton/Stewart)
March 3, 1992
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The proposed new property line between Parcels 1 and 2 shall
be relocated northeasterly to ensure that Parcel 1 meets the
minimum lot size of 3.06 acres (gross) . Said property line
shall remain straight and perpendicular to La Paz Road.
2. An access denial strip, at least one-foot in width, shall be
shown on the final map, as follows:
(a) Along the entire Atascadero Road frontage,
excepting therefrom the La Paz Road right-of-way;
and
(b) Along both sides of La Paz Road within one hundred
( 100) feet of its junction with Atascadero Road.
3. No grading whatsoever shall occur on the project site
without prior written approval from the Southern California
Gas Company; no permanent structures (i.e. , buildings,
concrete pads, block walls, etc. ) shall be placed within the
high pressure gas pipeline easement between parcels 2 and 3;
and ingress and egress to and from said pipeline shall be
maintained in perpetuity.
4. All on-site utility connections shall be placed underground.
Fire Department Conditions:
5. Two (2) new fire hydrants shall be installed along La Paz
Road in conjunction with road improvements described below.
One of said hydrants shall be placed approximately two-
hundred twenty five (225) feet northeast of the intersection
of La Paz Road and Atascadero Road; the second new hydrant
shall be placed eight-hundred (800) feet northeast of the
first new hydrant. The precise location of required fire
hydrants shall be as approved by the City Fire Marshall.
6. All residences on the site shall be equipped with smoke
detectors, including the existing residence. The applicant
shall demonstrate to the City Fire Marshall that the
existing residence meets this requirement prior to
recordation of the final map.
00002,}
Public Works Department Conditions: 0
7. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel, or its public utilities easement, prior to the
recording of the final map.
8. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map.
9. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
10. 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 current State of California uniform
sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be
subject to review and modifications after construction.
11. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil
engineer shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Public Works Department prior to the construction of the
improvements. Road improvements shall include, but may not
be limited to the following:
a. Pavement widening of La Paz Road, as necessary,
along the entire property frontage, according to
City Standard A-2.
b. R-value testing shall be done, and the pavement
section designed by a registered civil engineer to
the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works,
prior to the start of construction.
C. 2" Asphalt Concrete overlay of La Paz Road along
entire property frontage, or as directed by the
Director of Public Works.
d. Grading, drainage and erosion control measures
shown on said improvement plans shall be approved
by the Director of Public Works.
12. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City of
Atascadero Public Works Department prior to the start of
construction. The applicant shall enter into an Inspection
Agreement with the City guaranteeing that the work will be
done to a standard acceptable to the Director of Public
Works and that the inspections are paid for. The applicant
shall pay the City a rate of twenty-five dollars per hour 0
for inspection of the public improvements.
000025
13. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100%
Performance Guarantee and a 50% Labor and Materials
Guarantee until the public improvements are deemed
substantially complete by the City Public Works Department.
Prior to the final inspection of the public improvements,
and before the other guarantees mentioned in this condition
are released, a 10% Maintenance Guarantee shall be posted to
cover the public improvements for a period of l year after
the final inspection. The guarantee amounts shall be based
on an engineer' s estimate submitted by the project engineer
and approved by the Public Works Department. The Guarantees
posted for this project shall be cash deposit or a letter of
credit.
14. Construction of the public road improvements shall be
completed prior to the recording of the map.
15. Offer to dedicate to the City of Atascadero the following
rights-of-way.
Street Name: Atascadero Road
Limits: 50' from the centerline of the right-of-way
to the property line, along the entire
property frontage.
Street Name: La Paz Lane
Limits: 25 ' from the centerline of the right-of-way
to the property line, along the entire
property frontage.
16. Offer to dedicate to the public for public utility purposes
the following easement:
a. A 6 '-0" PUE along all street frontages.
b. A 6 '-0" PUE along all internal property lines.
17. Offers of dedication shall be completed, and recorded prior
to, or in conjunction with the recording of the map.
18. Prior to the recording of the final map, a soils
investigation as required by the Subdivision Map Act shall
be submitted, recommending corrective actions which will
prevent structural damage to each structure proposed to be
constructed in the area where soil problems exist, as
indicated in the Preliminary Soils Report. The date of such
reports, the name of the Engineer making the report, and the
location where the reports are on file shall be noted on the
final map.
19. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
0f 00;?6
Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final
map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land
Surveyor as required by the Land Surveyors Act
and Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within
any road right of way shall conform to city
standard drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to section 66497 of the Subdivision Map
Act the engineer or surveyor shall notice the City
Engineer in writing that the monuments have been
set.
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall
be submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the final map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the final map.
20. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two (2) years
from the date of final approval, unless an extension of time
is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to
the expiration date.
TPM92001.con
0000217
Attachment F - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92001
9025 La Paz Road
(Burton/Stewart)
Revised by the Planning Commission March 3, 1992
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The proposed new property line_ between Parcels 1 and 2 shall
be relocated northeasterly to ensure that Parcel 1 meets the
minimum lot size of 3. 06 acres (gross) . Said property line
shall remain straight and perpendicular to La Paz Road.
2. An access denial strip, at least one-foot in width, shall be
shown on the final map, as follows:
(a) Along the entire Atascadero Road frontage,
excepting therefrom the La Paz Road right-of-way;
and
(b) Along both sides of La Paz Road within one hundred
( 100) feet of its junction with Atascadero Road.
3. No grading whatsoever shall occur on the project site
without prior written approval from the Southern California
Gas Company; no permanent structures (i.e. , buildings,
concrete pads, block walls, etc. ) shall be placed within the
high pressure gas pipeline easement between parcels 2 and 3;
and ingress and egress to and from said pipeline shall be
maintained in perpetuity.
4. All on-site utility connections shall be placed underground.
Fire Department Conditions:
5. Two (2) new fire hydrants shall be installed along La Paz
Road in conjunction with road improvements described below.
One of said hydrants shall be placed approximately two-
hundred twenty five (225) feet northeast of the intersection
of La Paz Road and Atascadero Road; the second new hydrant
shall be placed eight-hundred (800) feet northeast of the
first new hydrant. The precise location of required fire
hydrants shall be as approved by the City Fire Marshall.
6. All residences on the site shall be equipped with smoke
detectors, including the existing residence. The applicant
shall demonstrate to the City Fire Marshall that the
existing residence meets this requirement prior to
recordation of the final map.
000018
Public Works Department Conditions:
7. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel, or its public utilities easement, prior to the
recording of the final map.
8. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map.
9. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
10. 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 current State of California uniform
sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be
subject to review and modifications after construction.
11. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil
engineer shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Public Works Department prior to the construction of the
improvements. Road improvements shall include, but may not
be limited to the following:
a. Pavement widening of La Paz Road, as necessary,
along the entire property frontage, according to
City Standard A-2.
b. R-value testing shall be done, and the pavement
section designed by a registered civil engineer to
the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works,
prior to the start of construction.
C. 2" Asphalt Concrete overlay of La Paz Road along
entire property frontage, or as directed by the
Director of Public Works.
d. Grading, drainage and erosion control measures
shown on said improvement plans shall be approved
by the Director of Public Works.
12. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City of
Atascadero Public Works Department prior to the start of
construction. The applicant shall enter into an Inspection
Agreement with the City guaranteeing that the work will be
done to a standard acceptable to the Director of Public
Works and that the inspections are paid for. The applicant
shall pay the City a rate of twenty-five dollars per hour
for inspection of the public improvements.
UliUf��9
13. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100%
Performance Guarantee and a 50% Labor and Materials
Guarantee until the public improvements are deemed
substantially complete by the City Public Works Department.
Prior to the final inspection of the public improvements,
and before the other guarantees mentioned in this condition
are released, a 10% Maintenance Guarantee shall be posted to
cover the public improvements for a period of 1 year after
the final inspection. The guarantee amounts shall be based
on an engineer' s estimate submitted by the project engineer
and approved by the Public Works Department. The Guarantees
posted for this project shall be cash deposit or a letter of
credit.
14. Construction of the public road improvements shall be
completed prior to the recording of the map, or suitably
guaranteed in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney and
as approved by the Directors of Community Development and
Public Works.
15. Offer to dedicate to the City of Atascadero the following
rights-of-way.
Street Name: Atascadero Road
Limits: 50' from the centerline of the right-of-way
to the property line, along the entire
. property frontage.
Street Name: La Paz Lane
Limits: 25 ' from the centerline of the right-of-way
to the property line, along the entire
property frontage.
16. Offer to dedicate to the public for public utility purposes
the following easement:
a. A 6 '-0" PUE along all street frontages.
b. A 6 '-0" PUE along all internal property lines.
17. Offers of dedication shall be completed, and recorded prior
to, or in conjunction with the recording of the map.
18. Prior to the recording of the final map, a soils
investigation as required by the Subdivision Map Act shall
be submitted, recommending corrective actions which will
prevent structural damage to each structure proposed to be
constructed in the area where soil problems exist, as
indicated in the Preliminary Soils Report. The date of such
reports, the name of the Engineer making the report, and the
location where the reports are on file shall be noted on the
final map.
000030
19. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final
map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land
Surveyor as required by the Land Surveyors Act
and Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within
any road right of way shall conform to city
standard drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to section 66497 of the Subdivision Map
Act the engineer or surveyor shall notice the City
Engineer in writing that the monuments have been
set.
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall
be submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the final map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the final map.
20. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two (2) years
from the date of final approval, unless an extension of time
is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to
the expiration date.
TPM92001.con
000031
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - 3/3/92
2 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 92-001:
Application filed by Philip Burton (Daniel J. Stewart) to
divide 10.51 acres into three parcels of 3 . 01, 3 .21 and
4. 29 acres for single family residential use. Subject
location is 9025 La Paz Road.
Gary Kaiser presented the staff report on this land division
request noting staff's recommendation for approval subject to
20 Conditions.
Commission questions and discussion followed.:
In referring to Condition #11-a (road standards) , Chairperson
Luna inquired if the Council has formally adopted City
Standard A-2 . Mr. Kaiser responded that he did not think this
was the case.
Chairperson Luna inquired whether any trees would be impacted
as a result of the road improvements. Mr. Kaiser explained
that there is a considerable distance between the existing
paved surface and the trees. There is a 25 foot perpetual
offer of dedication along the La Paz frontage of the site and
an equal width offer of dedication on the adjacent property
across La Paz; hence, there is 50 feet to work with.
Chairperson Luna pointed out that Public Works is asking for
50 feet from the centerline and asked if that will be the norm
for arterials. Mr. DeCamp offered that one reason for the 50
foot offer of dedication on Atascadero Avenue is that some
significant improvements are anticipated for this street under
the Capital Improvement Program (vertical curve problems and
horizontal curve problems) . The 50 feet will provide some
additional latitude in placement of the road.
- Public Testimony -
Dan Stewart, agent for the applicant, referred to his
development statement which requested that improvements be
waived fronting the two proposed parcels until they are
developed. He noted that according to the Subdivision Map
Act, such a waiver can be requested.
Mr. Stewart expressed opposition to Condition #11 noting that
the costs for the road improvements are quite extensive, and
cited the cost estimates it would take to comply with the road
conditions; he estimated that it would cost approximately
$75, 000 to complete the parcel map. He also noted that there
are two trees that would be affected by road widening at the
northerly end of the property.
Mr. Stewart objected to improving the road for the two
additional lots. He pointed out that no other lot splits
could occur in this area. In addition, the applicant will be
11)0( 0( Q
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSIN - 3/3/92
losing approximately an acre of land as a result of dedica-
tions as well as improving the road far above standards of
other roads.
Mr. Stewart inquired why an encroachment permit is needed as
La Paz is still a private road. He objected to Condition #13
(performance guarantees) stating that this condition would
require $200, 000 in equity in order to complete the map. Mr.
Stewart voiced his feeling that this cost is more than what
the land is worth.
In addition, Mr. Stewart disputed Condition #18 concerning the
need for a soils investigation; he stated that this is not
required by the Map Act since it is not a tract map.
- End of Public Testimony -
Commissioner Highland asked that if it was determined that the
road improvements could be less than what is suggested in the
conditions, what type of mechanism exists that would insure
compliance of the road improvements as the lots are sold?
Mr. Decamp reminded the Commission that for approximately six
years, the Commission's first choice has been to require the
improvements before the map is filed. A second option
provided by the Government Code would be to enter into an
agreement and post a performance guarantee with the City; the
City then establishes a time by which the improvements would
need to be done, typically a year after map has been recorded.
Chairperson Luna inquired about Mr. Stewart's concern with
Condition #18 (soils reports) not required by the Subdivision
Map Act. Mr. Decamp responded that the Map Act and local
ordinance allow the Public works Director to request that
information.
Chairperson Luna conveyed his concern that there may be trees
impacted by the road improvements. Mr. Decamp offered that if
those trees were to be impacted, the Tree Ordinance allows the
Public Works Director to modify the road standard in those
areas where trees may be affected. It is anticipated that at
the extreme end of the road, the A-2 standard could be
reduced. Mr. Decamp noted that the right-of-way width should
provide adequate room for moving the road a little to avoid
taking out the trees.
In further discussion, Mr. Decamp stated that road improve-
ments would involve essentially the same review as a precise
plan; a very specific review of effects of both drainage and
grading, etc.
0
0000:13
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - 3/3/92
• In responding to a concern expressed by Chairperson Luna, Mr.
Decamp remarked that the Commission could specify as a
condition to the map that any tree removal to occur subsequent
to this map approval be referred to the Commission.
Chairperson Luna pointed out that La Paz is a private road and
asked what right the City has to require encroachment permits.
Mr. DeCamp explained that La Paz intersects with Atascadero
Avenue (a City road) adding that there is already an offer to
dedicate along La Paz which would tend to indicate that if the
road is built to a City standard, then the City would consider
accepting that road into the City maintained system. But at
that point, without benefit of an encroachment permit, one
will not know what is there.
Commissioner Kudlac speculated whether all of La Paz Road
would be accepted into the City's road system even though the
road would only be improved up through Parcel #3 .
Mr. DeCamp pointed out that he does not know under what cir-
cumstances or conditions the City would be willing to take
that road in. He emphasized that with a dedication of 25
feet, if the City accepts that offer, and if the road is built
to City standards within that dedicated area, that this has
been a standard condition to be met prior to acceptance of a
. road into the City's road system.
Commissioner Highland commented that at the easterly end of La
Paz (fronting on San Diego Road) , there are two large lots
that could conceivably be split sometime in the future. He
expressed his feeling that requiring improvement of La Paz may
give the City an opportunity to complete the road through to
that easterly end; the City sadly lacks cross streets.
Commissioner Waage stated that if the applicant is required to
improve the road to a City standard, then that road should be
accepted into the system.
Discussion ensued relative to the ability of the Commission to
require that La Paz be accepted into the City maintained road
system (after improving the road to City standards) . It was
the Commission's consensus to strongly recommend to the
Council that this action be taken.
Chairperson Luna asked for the Commission's input relative to
requiring that any tree removal connected with the road
widening be referred to the Commission. After discussion, it
was the Commission's general feeling not to include this as
part of the conditions.
• In discussing the issue of Mr. Stewart's cost estimates,
Mr. DeCamp replied that it is expensive to develop property.
The applicant is under no legal obligation to do so and incur
000 0, ,
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - 3/3/92
additional costs or benefits of subdivision. He further •
stated that if the Commission desires to provide some type of
flexibility to the applicant in providing these improvements
at a later date, language could be added to modify Condition
#14. Discussion followed.
Commissioner Waage reiterated that he would like to see
something recommended that this road be looked at with regard
to accepting it into the City's road system when it is
developed to City standards. Upon further discussion, the
Commission conveyed their feelings that La Paz should be
accepted into the City-maintained road system if it is
improved to City standards.
Mr. Decamp suggested that this issue might be one which the
Commission and Council could discuss at a future study
session, along with input from the Public Works Director.
Commissioner Johnson stated that perhaps the improvements
should be done after the sale of the first parcel. Mr. Decamp
commented that this needs to be addressed in the agreement
that is established between the City and applicant. The
language in the Government Code indicates that a reasonable
time be established following approval of the map.
MOTION: By commissioner Highland and seconded by Commis-
sioner Kudlac to approve Tentative Parcel Map
92-001 based on the Findings and, subject to the
Conditions of Approval with modification to
Condition #14 as follows:
1114. Construction of the public road improvements
shall be completed prior to the recording of
the map, or suitably guaranteed in a form
satisfactory to the City Attorney and as
approved by the Directors of Community Devel-
opment and Public Works."
I
MEETI AGENDA
DATE ITEM Y3
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH ENDING FEBRUARY 29, 1992
TABLE I: SCHEDULF, OF CASH RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
1992 1991
Beginning Cash Balance 5,938,766.49 7,445,596.88
Plus: Receipts 620,509.60 515,102.84
Less: Disbursements ( 1 ,002, 155.49) (846,079.76)
-------------- -------------
Ending- Cash Balance 5,557, 120.60 7, 114,619.96
Plus: Outstanding- Transactions 56,641.95 274,884.65
-------------- -------------
Adiusted Cash Balance 5,613,762.55 7,389,504.61
-------------- -------------
-------------- -------------
TABLE, I T: SCHE,DULE OF INVESTMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interest Interest Interest
Name Amount Rate For Month Year-to-Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange County Invest. Pool 5,354.029.96 9.29% 0.00 123.895.84
. I...A. I.F. 170,910.52 5.86% 1,567. 15 13,910.52
Mid State Bank 87,872.07 4. 13% 501.20 6,627.79
Petty Cash 950.00 N/A N/A N/A
------------- ------------- -------------
TOTAL: 5,613,762.55 2,068.35 144,434. 15
Keys: N/A (Not Appicable)
L.A.I.F Interest Paid Quarterly
Orange County investment Pool Interest Paid Quarterly
I certify that this report reflects all Governmental Agency pooled
investments and is in conformity with the Investment Policy of
the City of Atascadero as stated in Resolution No. 126-90 dated
12/11/90. A copy of this Resolution is available at the Office
of the City Clerk. The Investment Program herein shown provides
sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet next month's estimated
expenditures.
SIGNED:
Muriel Korba, City Treasurer
y
0000.46
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING FEBRUARY 29, 1992 (66.70
TABLE III: SCHEDULE OF CURRENT MONTH ACTIVITY AND PRIOR YEAR VARIANCES
FEBRUARY CURRENT PRIOR
DESCRIPTION 1992 YR-TO-DATE YR-TO-DATE VARIANCE
REVENUE
Property Taxes 37,327 1,337,275 1,322.337 1.1%
Sales Tax 161,800 1. 119,362 1, 157,727 -3.30
Bed Tax 7.726 60,078 53, 110 13. 1%
Prop. Transfer Tax -3.049 20. 130 27,105 -25.7%
Franchise Fees 110,532 146,142 37.432 290.4%
Special Assessments 212 69,749 84.046 -17.0%
Business Licenses 3,363 62.795 67,759 -7.3%
Building Permits 16,646 160, 119 221,615 -27.7%
Motor vehicle Tax 70,841 525,269 563,893 -6.8%
Other State In-Lieu 18, 154 46,060 31,550 46.0%
Gas Tax Receipts 0 252.723 231,412 9.20/1c'
TDA Receipts 0 110.692 100,596 10.0%
Other Interaov'al 23,832 230.029 482,791 -52.4%
Recreation Fees 34.702 235.362 216.706 8.6%
Zoo Admissions 7,281 52,069 37.364 39.4%
Planning Fees 3. 156 87,586 90,571 -3.3%
Wastewater Fees 12,385 360,598 420,797 -14.3%
Development Fees 16,511 228,668 290.669 -21.3%
Dial-A-Ride Fares 2,918 21,100 22,870 -7.7%
Police Services 536 4,396 3,800 15.7%
Weed Abatement 0 23,880 43.588 -45.2%
Other Fees/Charges 161 1,921 3.690 -47.9%
Fines & Forfeits 2.751 27,276 26,348 3.5% •
Interest Earnings 1.385 270,701 310,185 -12.7%
Rentals 1,755 2,041 2,626 -22.3%
Proceeds from Sales 500 76,250 122,187 -37.61/1c'.
Miscellaneous 4,660 38,083 36,276 5.0%
TOTALS 542.183 5,570,354 6,009,050 -7.3%
EXPENDITURES
General Gov't 24,614 217,203 184,488 17.7%
Police 176.852 1 .410, 130 1,349,596 4.5%
Fire 84.958 776,980 723.216 7.4%
Public Works/En Q.. 30.890 268.275 237.320 13.0%
Wastewater 39, 199 361,727 361,824 -0.0%
Dial-A-Ride 20.553 119,367 206,984 -42.3%
Community Development 59. 121 525,998 487,398 7.9%
Recreation 37.821 403.844 361,757 11.6%
Parks & Bldg. Maint 46.367 418.338 341,481 22.5%
Zoo 19-281 145,609 144.252 0.9%
Streets 40,395 342.499 334,018 2.5%
Admin. Services 31 .627 482.879 579.016 -16.6`,
Non-Departmental 29,234 345,975 412,004 -16.00/1,
Major Capital 181,972 1.246,709 959.796 29.9%
Debt Service/Trust 39,640 244.539 196,285 24.6%
------------------------------
TOTALS 862,524 7,310,072 6,879,435 6.3%
NET SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (320,341 )(1,739,718) (870,385) 99.9%
0000:37
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE; PERIOD ENDING FEBRUARY 29, 1992 (66.7%)
TABLE IV. BUDGET-TO-ACTUAL REPORT
CURRENT CURRENT COLLECTED PRIOR PRIOR CALL/
DESCRIPTION BUDGET YR-TO-DATE /SPENT BUDGET YR-TO-DATE SPENT
REVENUES
Pronertv Taxes 2,326,500 1,337,275 57.5% 2,050,000 1.322.337 64.50,,,
Sales Tax 11900,000 1,119,362 58.9% 1,850,000 1,157,727 62.6%
Bed Tax 105,000 60.078 - 57.2% 110,000 53,110 48.3%
Prop. Transfer Tax -50.000 20,130 40.3% 60,000 27,105 45.2%
Franchise Fees 360.000 146.142 40.6% 330.000 37.432 11.3%
Special Assessments 151,753 69,749 46.0% 151.753 84,046 55.40,(1,
Business Licenses 110,000 62,795 57.1% 105,010 67,759 64.5%
Building Permits 362.050 160,119 44.2% 381.575 221,615 58.1%
Motor Vehicle Tax 875,000 525,269 60.0% 860,000 563,893 65.6%
Other State In-Lieu 103,200 46,060 44.6% 95.900 31,550 32.9%
Gas Tax Receipts 416,162 252,723 60.7% 393,100 231,412 58.9%
TDA Receipts 482,957 110,692 22.9% 402,521 100,596 25.0%
Other Intergov'ai 403.400 230.029 57.0% 455,700 482,791 105.9%
Recreation Fees 342.550 235,362 68.7% 310,850 216,706 69.7%
Zoo Admissions 72,500 52.069 71.8% 71,000 37,364 52.6'.
Planning Fees 286.723 87,586 30.5% 192,612 90.571 47.0%
Wastewater Fees 690,200 360,598 52.2% 660,200 420,797 63.7%
Develonment Fees 717,000 228.668 31.9% 562.600 290.669 51.7`0
Dial-A-Fide Fares 36.000 21,100 58.6"% 34,000 22,870 67.3°'.
Police Services 6,100 4,396 72.1% 4.800 31800 79.2%
Weed Abatement 40,000 23.880 59.7% 30.000 43.588 145.3%
Other Fees/Charges 57.650 1.921 3.3% 3.000 3,690 123.0%
Fines & Forfeits 82,050 27,276 33.2% 81.550 26.345 32.3°0
Interest Earnings 452.920 270,701 59.8% 389,150 310,185 79.7%
Rentals 21000 2.041 102.1% 14,200 2.626 18.5°,•
Proceeds from Sales 90.000 76,250 84.7% 68,500 122,187 178.4%
Miscellaneous 50,000 38.083 76.20% 19.430 36.276 186.7°;.
TOTALS 10,571,715 5,570,354 52.7% 9,687,451 6,009.050 62.0%
EXPENDITURES
General Gov't 318.085 217,203 68.3% 305,225 184.488 60.4%
Police 2.084.000 1,410.130 67.7% 2.053,318 1.349.596 65.7%
Fire 1.106.300 776,980 70.2% 1,164.492 723,216 62.1%
Public works/Eng. 346.905 268,275 77.3% 389,010 237,320 61.0%
Wastewater 808.960 361.727 44.7% 801,585 361,824 45.1 %,
Dial-A-Ride 299,245 119,367 39.9% 358,393 206,984 53.3",
Community Development .785.617 525,998 67.07. 795,689 457,398 61.3%
Recreation 514,298 403.844 78.5% 553,529 361.757 65.4%
Parks d Bldg. Maint. 537.680 418,338 77.8% 521.530 341.481 65.5°x•
Zoo 221.275 145.609 65.8% 221.500 144.252 64.8°x.
Streets 635.425 342.499 53.9% 606,565 334,018 55.1%
Admin. Services 666.335 482.879 72.5% 726.075 57'9,016 "9.?%
Non-Departmental 531.120 345,975 65.1% 733,893 412.004 56.1°;.
Maior Canital 4.S46.000 1.246.709 25.1% 2.692.453 959.?96 35.6%
C)eht Service/Trust 216,692 244.539 112.9% 741,316 196,285 26.5%:,
----------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS 13,917,937 7,310,072 52.5% 12,695,573 6,879,435 54.21X
NET SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (3,346,222) (1,739,718) 52.0% (3.008,122) (870,385) 28.9%
Ou 0WAS
CITY OF ATAS
CARERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH ENDED FEBRUARY 29, 1992
TABLE V: SCHEDULE OF SIMPLIFIED BALANCE SHEETS, SELECTED FUNDS
GENERAL GAS DEVELOPER TREE
FUND TAX FEES FUND
ASSETS:
Cash 5.026.18 1,075,894.40 742,439.37 29,420.81
Other Assets 133.036.70 20,149.72 16,335.17 586.77
Total Assets 138.062.88 1,096,044.12 758,774.54 30.007.58
LIABILITIES 207,314.05 0.00 0.00 0.00
FUND EQUITIES:
Fund Balance-Reserved 35,000.00 9.148.00 0.00 0.00
Fund Balance-Unreserved (104,251.17) 1.086.896.12 758,774.54 30.007.58
------------- ------------- -------------- -------------
Total Fund Equity (69.251.17) 1,096.044.12 758,774.54 30.007.58
TOTAL LIAB/FUND EOUITY 138,062.88 1.096,044.12 758,774.54 30,007.58
------------- ------------- -------------- -------------
------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
ZOO OPERATING DIAL-A-RIDE WASTEWATER
FUND OPERATING OPERATING
ASSETS:
Cash (26,904.08) (22,337.90) 3,066,893.47
Other Assets 1 .122.00 106,303.81 8.658.636.55
------------- ------------- ---- ---------
Total Assets (25,782.08) 83.965.91 11.725,530.02
------------- ------------- --------------
------------- ------------- --------------
LIABILITIES 2. 121.85 0.00 1,463.678.56
FUND FOUITIES:
Fund Balance-Reserved 0.00 105,361.56 8.187.617.59
Fund Balance-Unreserved (27,903.93) (21,395.65) 2.074.233.87
------------- ------------- --------------
Total Fund Equity (27,903.93) 83.965.91 10,261.851.46
TOTAL. LIAB/FUND EOUITI' (25,782.08) 83,965.91 11,725,530.02
. TREASURFR'S REPORT FOR THF PERIOD ENDING FEBRUARY 29, 1992
Notes to the Treasurer's Report:
1 . The numbers in Tables I and II are cash based; Tables III ,
IV and V are accrual-based. Thus, Tables I and II measure
cash actually received or spent during the month; the other
tables present revenues earned and expenditures incurred.
regardless of when the actual receipt or disbursement
occurs. As a result, figures from the two sets of tables
are not expected to tie-in together.
2. The Adiusted Cash Balance in Table I includes checks still
outstanding. This figure ties-in to the total amount of
invested funds ( including the City's checking account with
Mid-State Rank) .
3. Table V. NModified Balance Sheets
a. ) The funds selected cover the bulk of the City's
operating funds. Other funds may be included, as directed
by Council .
b. ) Cas Tax includes LTF/Non-Transit monies; Developer Fees
• include all impact fees (except Amapoa-Tecorida) .
c. ) The Unreserved Fund Balance represents that portion of a
particular fund available for any purpose for which the fund
was established. It is a more reliable figure to use than
the cash balance for that fund.
I Mark Joseph, do hereby certify that the above information is
accurate and reflects the City's financial position for the
period specified. However, the information in these reports is
unaudited, and may therefore be subject to future revisions.
7Finance
/,•Mark Joseph, hector
tji�1}l1�fU
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL_ Meeting Date: 3/24/92
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item # B-4
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From Lee Raboin, City Clerkb�'
SUBJECT:
Citizen vacancy on the City' s Traffic Committee and three
member-at-large seats on the newly formed Atascadero Community
Services Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors.
RECOMMENDATION•
To agree to meet at 6:00 p.m. on April 14, 1992 for the
purpose of interviewing applicants interested in serving on the
Traffic Committee and Board of Directors for the Atascadero
Community Services Foundation.
BACKGROUND:
Due to an expiring term, there is one citizen vacancy on the
City' s Traffic Committee. The City Clerk has recruited for
interested applicants and has received response from the following
residents: Norman Rogers, Jerry Ferguson, Ray Jansen and Cindy
Campbell.
The by-laws for the Atascadero Community Services Foundation,
Inc. calls for three members of the public on the Board of
Directors. The City Clerk has advertised and three individuals
have responded: Irene Bishop, Gregg Cobarr and Harold Carden.
Attachments: 7 applications
0008,11
Please return to: FBI 80
CITY CLERK
6500 Palma Avenue TY OFATASCADERO
Room 208 CMK'S OFFICE
Atascadero, CA 93422
A P P L I C A T I O N
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TRAFFIC COMMITTEE
Name: Norm Rogers
Address:_8 Quail Ridge Drive
Telephone: 466-6663H/756-71960 Occupation: Media Specialist
Please give a summary of your education, experience and reasons for
wishing to serve on the Atascadero Traffic Committee.
I earned a B.A. degree in Public Relationsfrom Cal State, San Jose
and complete coursework for a Masters in Telecommunicaitons & Film
at San Diego State. I am a returned Peace Corps Volunteer, worked
with the U.S. Information, U.S. Agency for International Development,
a Head Start project in the East Los Angeles area and the Sousson
Foundation as a volunteer. For the past five years I have been
TV coordinator at Cal Poly. Prior to that, I worked as a freelance
writer/producer of television documentaries . I want to become more
involved with community affairs in Atascadero. Because I have traveled
extensively in, the U.S. and abroad, there have been lots of chances
to observe different ways of dealing with traffic problems . I am
also concerned about Atascadero maintaining its unique and charming
character.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is correct, and that I am a
resident of the City of Ata adero.
e
Signature: Date: ° �CX-
i
0000 42
Please return to:
CITY CLERK
6500 Palma Avenue
Room 4e3-,
Atascadero, CA 93422 Aaste4a;!,dq4epfC10ATED
RECEd V E77'
A P P L I C A T I O N j
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TRAFFIC COMMITTEE CH' fdGR.
Address: ����Dy,� •� %Nb // Gf�DE� 9 3�2 2-
Teleahone: ��� � g�� � Occupation:
Please give a summary of your education, experiences and/or
reaasons for wishing to serve on the Atascadero Traffic Commit ee:
R.A ,N ��Eo�//oJ�G#'� l /`iniiu cyc'2c/� �
92K Ig T.�) l"o`;c�' ��lv%G�� J i/uC� �`3�8 �I�✓ /C/!/ �%� �
T
4,-777-1 T,AFFI
/�S�'oc%✓�% iSSC�ES 1.���� f3g_ <)� j3En>�F�/' oN TIdE �,y,s�-ri7TEE
� NoT % /� S"trT / �•e=�i �C/wo-� v T w�X45
PA-
L f� u i2�Cj D/v i OJ 6 7?��
ALL
I hereby certify that the foregoing is correct , and that I am a
re stered vot r the City of Atascadero .
( siynat ei (date ?
l
Please return to:
CITY CLERK
6500 Palma Avenue
Room
Atascadero, CA 93422 IS tCaCl�h® � a
At
ATED JULY 2. 1979
A P P L I C A T I O N
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TRAFFIC COMMITTEE
Name:
Address
14OMS z AAb1-'te041 �a.IZrGtnlb AUMtnllSTRaL R
Telephone : wa2+G.s 75fo -1ole5B oc_upat.on :
Please give a summary of your education, experiences and/or
reasons for wishing to serve c the Atascaderc Traffic Committee :
I hereby certify that the foregoing -orrect , and that I am a
regi ter vo or the City o - Atascade-
- ignature ) ( date
00 0 o'I'l
Attachment to Application/Traffic Committee
Cindy S. Campbell
In my current position as Parking Administrator with the Public
Safety Department at Cal Poly , one of my responsibilities is to
ensure the existence of proper painting and signage for traffic and
parking areas on campus . While my organization' s function is
Primarily that of parking related enforcement , we have a sense of
responsibility to approach traffic safety from a proactive poit Of
r_
view . My program staff are also responsible for monitoring traffic
flow and parking lot usage as well as enforcing all applicable C.,._
Poly and California Vehicle code sections on campus .
I serve as a member of the University ' s Public Safety/Parking and
Traffic Sub-committee. ;his committee deals with issues rearing
to the campus parking and traffic master plan , City and regiona'_
bus subsidy and service , Van pooling programs , air quality
management and other various traffic related issues .
r arr; aiso a member of the California Public Parkina Associat-lon ,
and currently in my second Fear Of serv'. C.. on the Assocat _o : ' s
iegisiative committee .
My employment background is not that of a certified traffic
enaineer , but rather through, practical application and experience .
My family and I have been residents of the city of Atascadero fo -
the past 5 years . We left our native residence of San Luis Obispo
for tine amity oriented community atmosphere that Atascadero has to
offer . It is my desire to serve my community by being a member cf
the advisory Traffic Committee .
000045
Please return to:
CITY CLERK E.
6500 Palma Avenue
Room
Atascadero, CA 93422
114ai
eade 0ATED JULY 2.1979 R GA' C E ' 1 f ED
A P P L I C A T I O N ;:r:,M,Ero
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TRAFFIC COMMITTEE
Name :
Address: ee55 Country Club Drive. Atasc dero
Teleohone: 466-4733 occupation: Teacher,—R .tired
Please give a summary of your education, experiences and/or
reasons for wishing to serve on the Atascadero Traffic Committee:
I hold Bachelor of Science and Master of Science Degrees
from the University of Southern Calfnrnia A resident of Atas-
cadero for the past five and one half years which follows a period
of residence in Wales.. United Kingdom for fourteen years.
My professional experience consists of twenty-one years_of
teachingand seven ears work in public safety. Ever since the ears
y p y v
in public safety I have been a strong advocate of a traffic manage
ated of n ineer'
ment which represents a cord�.n influence E >� ina Enforce-
ment and Education In addition to thatSociety needs a well-in-
formed electorate committed to the principle of observance of the
law.
Presently, I serve on the Recycling Committee plus some other
volunteer work and believe I can handle the stated commitment of one
meeting a, month with the Traffic Committee.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is correct , and that I am a
regist ed voter in th ity of Atascadero .
February 39 1992
( signature ) (dot`-')
000()•16
MAR 8 1992
Please return to: CITY OFATASCADERO
• CITY CLERK CITY CLERK'S OFFICE i
6500 Palma Avenue
Room 208
Atascadero, CA 93422
A P P L I C A T I O N
CITY OF ATASCADERO
ATASCADERO COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION, INC.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Name:—
Address:
ame:Address• / 7 (�00 6-AZ-4141A GO u JZ7
Telephone: 7 SPG- S�9 Occupation: SPoA)r&QsHIP II,4)2KCC-rNG—
Please give a summary of your education, experience and reasons for
wishing to serve on the Atascadero Community Services Foundation
Board of Directors.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is correct, and that I am a
resident of the City of Atascadero.
Signature. Date:
0000117
March 17, 1992
Dear City Council Members,
As part of the application for a position on the Board of Directors of the
newly formed Atascadero Community Services Foundation, Inc. you
requested reasons for my wanting to serve on the Foundation Board of
Directors. I am happy to address that first and my resume follows.
Throughout my life, my contributions to the community in which I have
lived has been very important to me. I truly believe that it is each
individual's responsibility to serve humanity to the best of one's ability. It
is only through this service that we not only enhance our own life, but
enable humanity to prosper in a more enriched environment.
I have chosen to live with my wife and raise our two children, ages 5 and
3, in a small rural community because it will enable them to appreciate the
real values that life has to offer and will continuously remind me of how
important are even the simplest, but most precious elements of life. The
natural beauty that abounds throughout the surrounding area of
Atascadero is a constant reminder that the basic but important qualities of
life are to be appreciated and upheld in their highest form at all time. 0
To me, one of the most important of these elements of life is the
appreciation of arts and culture. I have been very fortunate in my lifetime
to be able to pursue my interests in the arts and culture, not only through
my own work, but to study and enjoy the finest examples of almost every
area of the arts and cultural activities. The amount that my life has been
enhanced as a result of my exposure to arts and culture throughout the
world is absolutely immeasurable. I can only say that I am extremely
thankful for what I have experienced during my lifetime in these areas.
I hope that my greatest contributions as a Board member of the
Foundation will be to help provide greater opportunities within the
Atascasdero area for the cultural enrichment of the lives of children and
adults within our community. In the eight years that I have lived in the
North County and of that, three years in Atascadero, the one element that I
have always felt needed much greater attention and which I still feel
needs to make enormous strides, is the development of arts and cultural
activities within our community. Hopefully, my work as a Board member
of the Foundation will touch the lives of both children and adults in the
Atascadero area for many generations to come.
Sincerely, 66;;t,�
000048
Gregg Cobarr
9560 Gallina Court Atascadero, CA 93422-1710
Phone (805) 466-6569
Fax (805) 466-8457
I. Education
California Institute of the Arts - Master of Fine Arts
Film and Television Production
Brooks Institute of Photography - Bachelor of Arts
Photography and Cinematography
UC Santa Barbara - Art, Music and Literature Study Group in Europe
II. Business Experience
Present
Owner of Cobarr Creative Marketing - a sponsorship and fundraising
agency dealing in the areas of events, festivals, arts, sports,
entertainment, cause and non-profit sponsorships, with past and
present National, Regional and local clients such as: a waterfront
harbor festival, a 4th of July beach event, a Jazz Festival, the
American Music Awards, a Women's Shelter program, a public radio
station and a recreational park
Past
A. Los Angeles - Independent marketing and promotions projects in
the entertainment industry - over 200 projects for CBS Records; 150
projects for Twentieth-Century Fox, Film/TV; plus MCA/Universal,
Capitol Records, Columbia Pictures, RCA
B. SLO County - Owner and Creative Director of Regional Advertising
Agency with clients such as Mazda dealerships, Computerland
franchisees, radio stations, financial services company, a multi-
million dollar farm supply company
III. Cultural Organization and Non-Profit Volunteer /Projects
A. Century City Cultural Commission, Advisory Council - responsible
for formulating a cultural master plan for the Westside of Los
Angeles, writing and obtaining a grant from the National Endowment
for the Arts; planning, then implementing on-going performing arts
and arts education events in Century City, including acting as
Chairman of the Festival of Learning and Knowledge (FOLK Festival)
0000,19
(Gregg Cobarr con't, page 2)
and Chairman of the Education Committee of the Century City
Cultural Commission; the "Armand Hammer Awards Luncheon" was
initiated as a major fundraising event, businesses were invited and
an award to the business leader who made the greatest contribution
to the arts was given
B. "Concerts in the Park", Paso Robles - as Board Member of ACORN
(A Community Organization Recognizing Need), created the concept,
planned and implemented a sponsored, bi-weekly, family summer
music series - "Concerts in the Park", in Downtown Paso Robles
(Concerts in the Park is in it's 6th year); I also developed the
sponsorships and fundraising
C. Centennial Park, Paso Robles - as a Board Member of ACORN,
spearheaded the campaign to raise 1.1 million dollars within the
community of Paso Robles for a desperately needed community and
recreation center; produced the fund raising video (arranged for
Gov. George Deukmajian to appear in it), spoke on TV and radio, met
with community leaders and groups on the importance of the project;
the money was raised within eight months, Centennial Park was built
within two years and is continuing to be a vital part of the
community
D. Extravaganza '89 - Harder Stadium, UCSB - Directed all of the
marketing, advertising, sponsorships, graphic materials, including
logo design, and produced the TV commercial for the most successful
large scale free event in the history of UCSB
E. Cuesta College Friends of The Library, Board of Directors - direct all
fundraising activities towards business, create all endowment
programs, help direct library business and marketing strategies as
Chairman of the Business Committee
F. Morro Bay Harbor Festival - Sponsorship Director - identified all
potential sponsors, developed all the corporate and media
sponsorship packages, negotiated all the sponsorships and wrote all
the sponsorship contracts; increased sponsorship money by 110%
over previous year
000050
ST�43
7:
SANTA LUCIA NATIONAL BANK
March 4, 1992
City of Atascadero
City Council
RE: Atascadero community services Foundation
Board of Directors
Dear council:
Gregg Cobarr would like to serve on the Atascadero
Community Services Foundation Board of Directors and asked
that I write a letter of recommendation for him.
I have known Gregg for about four years and have found
him to be a trustworthy, sincere and ethical individual. He
shows concern for his community, his family and does a good
job when he takes on any challenge.
I think he would be ideal for your board. He works
well with people and is willing to take on responsibility.
He has indicated in conversations how well he likes our
community and I am sure he will work hard to keep this a
great place to live and even make it better.
Sincerely,
SANTA LUCIA NATIONAL BANK
Stanley R. Cherry
President
SRC:cf
0000.,,
(805) 466-7087 • P.O. BOX 6047 • 7480 EL CAMINO REAL • ATASCADERO, CA 93423
'
Please return to: Aft
CITY CLERK CITY OF ATASCAGER0 qW
6500 Palma Avenue CITY CLERK'S f)FFICE
Room 208
Atascadero, CA 93422
A P P L I C A T I O N
CITY OF ATASCADERO
ATASCADERO COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION, INC.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Name• Irene T. Bishop
Address: 7151 Serena Ct., Atascadero, CA 93422
Telephone: 466-4370 Occupation: Laboratory Technician
Please give a summary of your education, experience and reasons for
wishing to serve on the Atascadero Community Services Foundation
Board of Directors.
I have a B.S. degree in Biology and have worked in both laboratory and office
situations over the years. I have owned property here since 1976 and have
lived here since 1983, and I have been involved in the community continuously
since then. I have served as Church Bookkeeper for the United Methodist Church
of Atascadero, have been past Secretary of the Atascadero Historical Society
and am currently President of the Atascadero Community Band. I have finally
completed construction of my dream home, and I plan to spend the rest of my
life here. I love this community, and I wish to be a part of its development
in the years to come. I think serving on this Board of Directors would be an
exciting opportunity toward that goal. Thank you for your consideration.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is correct, and that I am a
resident of the City of Atascadero.
Signature: — r�� Date: J 9-
0000!-�z
D [ � R9W
Please return to:
CITY CLERK MAR - 6 10
6500 Palma Avenue
Room 208
Atascadero, CA 93422
A P P L I C A T I O N
CITY OF ATASCADERO
ATASCADERO COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION, INC.
8� OF DIRECTORS
Name: A,A704 C7 E�
Address: ,5���-S �,�1 .lgc/Avm
Telephone: reCX5) 46 —Z//z Occupation: SuAf, UASOR
Please give a summary of your education, experience and reasons for
wishing to serve on the Atascadero Community Services Foundation
Board of Directors.
�G� HTiAC'i/Er7
I hereby certify that the foregoing is correct, and that I -am a
resident of the Ci y f ascadero.
Signature: Date:
0000:_3
Harold L. Carden, III
5355 San Jacinto Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
March 5, 1992
City Clerk's Office
Room 208
City Hall
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Attn: Lee Rabbin
Dear Ms. Rabbin:
Attached is a copy of my resume for your consideration to serve
as a member of the Board of Directors for the Atascadero
Community Services Foundation, Incorporated. The resume provides
a summary of my education and experience which, I believe, you
will find compatible with the needs of the board. I have lived
in the community of Atascadero four years now and feel it is time
to become involved in the activities of that community.
In the past, job travel has limited my ability to provide
dependable time and effort to community service. Present
conditions provide the stability I believe necessary to be a
dependable contributor and not a burden to the organizations to
which I would participate.
The activities which the Community Services Foundation will
support, the _zoo, public parks, recreational and cultural
facilities, are the fabric around which a community grows. They
are the most used and, I believe, most taken for granted. It is
in support of the quality of life added, and by the level of
effort required to maintain and expand these facilities, that I
submit my name for consideration as a member of the Board of
Directors of ACSF, Inc.
Sincerely,
4444X
Hal Carden, III
00001��
HAROLD L. CARDEN, III
5355 San Jacinto Avenue
Atascadero, California 93422
(805) 466-2111 (Home)
(805) 545-6625 (Work)
Voter Registration - Atascadero Homeowner Birth Date: 9/29/52
SUMMARY
Over 18 years of increasing responsibility and experience in the areas of
planning, budget management, cost control and project management, in the
pulp and paper, petro chemical and utility industries. Proven ability to
reduce costs, motivate employees and increase department operating
efficiency. Experienced in use of latest management tools.
BUSINESS EXPERIENCE
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. Nov. 1986 to Present
Cost & Scheduling Supervisor/Controls Manager. Present position includes
the administrative, technical and career development responsibility for a
department twenty-five management and three bargaining unit employees.
46rectly responsible for the development and maintenance of a $3 ,500,000
partment budget.
Department is responsible for the development, tracking and analysis of a
$100, 000, 000 capital budget and a $60,000,000 M&O budget.
Major Accomplishments:
o Developed and implemented a staffing concept which improved project
coordination and reduced head count by 15 consultants, resulting in an
annual savings of $800, 000 per year to PG&E.
Fluor Constructors 1981 to 1986
Administrator of Project Controls Administration/Manager of Projects. This
position included the administrative, technical and development responsi-
bilities for a group of eight cost/controls supervisors. Directly
supervised all planning, estimating and cost functions.
Major Accomplishments:
o Developed and implemented a complete management control system for the
fledgling maintenance division of'F1uor Corporation.
o Responsible for staffing this new division.
Responsible for client and corporate cash flow, budget prep and
analysis.
OGOW";J
Resume of Harold L. Carden, III
BUSINESS EXPERIENCE continued
Scott Paper Co. 1974 to 1981
Chairman of Engineering Standards Committee and Planning Administrator:
The position included the administrative and technical responsibility for
the development and implementation of engineering and construction
standards and procedures, planning and scheduling of all major capital
projects as well as long range corporate strategic planning.
EDUCATION
Graduate Studies - Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA - Finance (Risk
Analysis in Capital Budgeting)
Undergraduate - Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA - B.S. Management
Science
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND
Member Board of Directors - Hydrogen Resources Corp. of New Jersey 1978-
1980, a non-profit organization for research and development of
hydrogen fuel cells for state transportation.
Founder of Organizational Research & Development Corp. - an organization to
provide assistance for small business startup.
Student Member of the Drexel University Tenure Review Committee.
REFERENCES AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
0V00;_4;
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date:3-24-92
. CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-5
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Greg Luke, Director of P lie Works
SUBJECT:
Request for Preliminary Engineering Study for the formation of
an Assessment District in Las Encinas I.
RECOMMENDATION:
Direct the Director of Public Works to retain a qualified
engineer to perform preliminary engineering related to upgrading
the roads in Las Encinas I in order to be accepted into the City-
maintained system. The amount of the contract shall not exceed
$5000.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council has expressed its desire to promote the
formation of Assessment Districts to upgrade non-City maintained
roads and bring them into the City road system. As a means to
accomplish this Council has established a policy to provide
assistance in the formation of potential districts. The City has
recently been working with the residents of 3-F Meadows to form
such a District in accordance with Council policy.
The City Manager recently received a letter from Mr. R. W.
Lindsay requesting a preliminary engineering study be made for the
Las Encinas I area (see letter, Attachment A) . The roads to be
included in the study are shown in Attachment B.
ANALYSIS•
A number of residents of the Las Encinas I area have
informally expressed their desire to form an Assessment District.
Mr. Lindsay has triggered the process by making the request for
engineering services from the City.
This preliminary study is important to the residents because
it provides a "ball park" estimate of the costs to form a District.
Without this initial estimate, many residents are understandably
reluctant to participate in the project. The fear of giving the
City a "blank check" has proven a strong deterrent against forming
any District in the past.
i
UUUU�'>
By taking the first step of conducting an engineering study,
the City effectively communicates its desire to encourage this
method of upgrading our non-City maintained road system.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
The cost to the City will not exceed $5000.
000058
RONALD W. LINDSAY
Ray Windsor
City Manager
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Av.
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: Las Encinas I
On behalf of a number of property owners of Las Encinas I ,
I would request that a preliminary engineering study be made of
the roads in Las Encinas I to bring them to the required standard
for this class of road prior to forming an assessment district
to petition the city to accept these roads.
The roads referred to are Del Rio, San Gregorio and the
spur of Alturas that is not now city maintained. All within
the area defined as Las Encinas I .
Please furnish this information including costs to me and
I will then have my associates secure the required signatures
to petition the city for the approval and acceptance.
Sincerely,
R. W. Lindsay
8505 San Gregorio Rd.
cc: Greg Luke
Department of Public Works
0000; 9
3
t
Mkt I INN AGENDA
DATE-)12-4.1.9-2 ITEM#
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
; ry. 2156 Sierra Way • P.O. Box 1489 0 San Luis Obispo, California 93406
TELEPHONE (805) 549-5544 • FAX (805) 549-4211
March 13 , 1992
Ray Windsor, City Manager � f
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA. 93+22
JEJ.'4.CT: LOCAL ENFORCEMENT AGENCY DESIGNATION
The San Luis Obispo County Health Department — Division of Environ-
mental Health is seeking redesignation as the Local Enforcement
Agency (LEA) pursuant to requirements of the California Integrated
Waste Management Act of 1989 which has now been codified in the
Public Resources Code (PRC) . Sections 43202-03 apply to desig-
nation. (copy enclosed) NO
Our Department has functioned as the LEA for the incorporated
cities and unincorporated county area since its original desig-
nation in 1977 . We are currently responsible for the enforcement
of laws and regulations governing the storage, collection, trans-
portation and disposal of solid waste throughout the county.
State law now requires each LEA to file a Designation Information
Package (DIP) , including copies of all resolutions, and an Enforce-
ment Program Plan (EPP) in order to become certified as the LEA.
We are, therefore, requesting that your Council approve a resolu-
tion similar to the sample enclosed designating our Department as
the LEA. We would further request that a certified copy of the
approved resolution be sent to us within 30 days.
The Solid Waste Task Force his reviewed this issue anal has
supported our continued role as the LEA. A copy of the Task Force
recommendation is enclosed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact
Mr. John Scholtes of the Solid Waste Section (805) 549-5557 .
G.B. ROWLAND, M.D.
Health Agency Director
TIM MAZZACANO, R. E.H. S. , Director
Division of Environmental Health
TM\JS\mj
Enclosure
A DEPARTMENT OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY HEALTH AGENCY 0000#13
RESOLUTION NO. 1-92
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
APPROVING THE DESIGNATION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT - DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AS ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
FOR THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
WHEREAS, The County of San Luis Obispo and its incorporated
cities are required by Sections 43202-03 of the Public Resources
Code to designate an enforcement agency to carry out the provi-
sions of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989;
and
WHEREAS, The San Luis Obispo Health Department - Division of
Environmental Health, possesses the required capabilities in
solid waste enforcement to implement enforcement provisions of
the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 and the
regulations and ordinances that have been and will be adopted
pursuant thereto; and
WHEREAS, The San Luis Obispo County Health Department
Division of Environmental Health will provide the technical ex-
pertise, adequate staff resources, adequate budget resources and
training to carry out the enforcement program specified by law;
and
WHEREAS, It is the understanding of this Council that the
County of San Luis Obispo and a majority of the cities within
said county containing a majority of the population of the incor-
porated area of the County of San Luis Obispo intend to designate
the San Luis Obispo County Health Department - Division of Envi-
ronmental Health as the enforcement agency for the county and all
cities contained within the county;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Atascadero that it hereby approves the designation of the San
Luis Obispo County Health Department - Division of Environmental
Health as the enforcement agency for the City of Atascadero, pur-
suant to Sections 43202-03 of the Public Resources Code.
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:
000062
Resolution No. 31-92
Page 2 of 2
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney
00004,Z3
r'
fl
48
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2.' SOLID WASTE HANDLING AND which contains the majority of the population of the
DISPOSAL incorporated area of the county.._
(Chapter 2 added by Stats. 1989,Ch. 1095,Sec.22) (b) The county and the cities within'
.;•the county
may enter into a joint exercise of powers agreement
Article 1. Local Enforcement Agencies pursuant to Section 6500 of the Government Code
I' (Article 1 .,dried by Stats. 1989,Ch. 1095,Sec. 22) for the purpose of establishing an enforcement
43200. (a) On or before August .1, 1991, the agency to carry out this chapter in the jurisdiction of
board shall prepare and adopt certification re.;ula_ the joint powers agency.
tions for local enforcement agencies. The regula- (c) A city council may designate an enforcement
tions shall specify requirements that a local agency agency to carry out this chapter in the city.
shall meet before being designated as an enforce- (d) The board of supervisors of the county may
ment agency. The regulations shall include, but are -designate an enforcement agency to carry out this
not limited to, all of the following: chapter in the unincorporated areas of that county.
(1) Technical expertise. (Amended by Stats. 1990, Ch. 1355, Sec. 28. Effective
September 27, 1990.)
(2) Adequacy of staff resources.
Y; (3) Adequacy of budget resources. 43204. No enforcement agency may exercise the i
(4) Training requirements. powers and duties of an enforcement agency until
(5) The existence of at least one permitted solid the designation is approved by the board. After
waste facility within the jurisdiction of the local August 1, 1992, the board shall not approve a
agency. designation unless it finds that the designated en-
(b) The regulations adopted pursuant to subdivi- forcement agency is capable of fulfilling its respon-
sion (a) shall specify four separate types of certifi- sibilities under the enforcement program and meets
.; cations for which an enforcement agency may be the certification requirements adopted by the board
is designated, as follows: pursuant to Section 43200.
(1) Permitting, inspection, and enforcement of (Amended by Stats. 1990, Ch. 1355, Sec. 29. Effective
regulations at solid waste landfills. September 27, 1990.)
(2) Permitting, inspection, and enforcement of 43205. If no enforcement agency is designated,
solid waste incinerators. the board shall become the enforcement agency,
(3) Permitting, inspection, and enforcement of and shall assume all powers and authorities estab-
transfer and processing stations. lished pursuant to this chapter. Nothing in this
(4) Inspection and enforcement of litter, odor, chapter prevents a designation of an enforcement
l and nuisance regulations at solid waste landfills. agency under Section 43202 at a later date.
(Added by Stats. 1989,Ch. 1095,Sec.22.) (Added by Stats. 1989,Ch. 1095,Sec.22.)
43201. After August 1, 1992, no enforcement 43206. A designation made pursuant to this arti-
agency shall be designated pursuant to this article cle may be withdrawn in the same manner in which
unless the board determines that the agency fully it was made.
complies with one or more of the certification types (Added by Stats. 1989,Ch. 1095,Sec.22.)
specified in Section 43200. No enforcement agency 4,8207. No local governmental department or
shall, after August 1, 1992, exercise the powers of an
enforcement agency pursuant to this chai
agency which is the operating unit for a solid waste
ter unless agency
hric
I the agency has been certified by the board. disposal• ofnr operation shall.. be the enforce-
(Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 1095,Sec. 22.) ment agency for the types of solid waste handling or
disposal operation it conducts.
43202. There may be designated within each (Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 1095,See. 22.)
county an enforcement agency to carry out this 43208. Notwithstanding any other provision of
chapter. If an agency is not designated and certified, law, except as provided in Chapter 6.5 (commene-
the board, in addition to its other powers, shall be ing with Section 25100) of Division 20 of the Health
the enforcement agency within the county. and Safety Code, and Section 731 of the Code of
(Added by Stats. 1989,Ch. 1095,Sec.22.) Civil Procedure,no local governing body may enact,
43203. The designation of the enforcement issue, enforce, suspend, revoke, or modify any ordi-
agency shall be made by any one of the following nance, regulation, law, license, or permit relating to
procedures: a facility that accepts both hazardous wastes and
(a) The board of supervisors of the county may other solid wastes and which meets any of the
designate the enforcement agency to carry out this criteria enumerated in subdivision (a) of Section
chapter in the county. The designation is subject to 25148 of the Health and Safety Code, and was
the approval by a majority of the cities within the operating as of May 1, 1981, pursuant to a valid solid
county which contain it majority of the population of waste facility permit, so as to prohibit or unreason-
the incorporated areas of the county except in those ably regulate the operation of, or the disposal,
counties which have only two cities in which case treatment, or recovery of resources from solid
the designation is subject to approval by the city wastes at any such facility. flowever, nothing in this
ou0064
SAN LUIS OBISPO AREA COORDINATING COUNCIL
1129 Pacific Street, San Luis Obispo Ca. 93401 (805) 549-4662
0 SOLID WASTE TASK FORCE
February 14, 1992
San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors
County Goverrmient Center
San Luis Obispo, CA, 93408
SUBJ: Local Enforcement Agency (LFA) Certification
Dear Members of the Board;
The Solid Waste Task Force (SWFF) is unanimously recommending that the
County Board of Supervisors designate the Environmental Health Division of
the County of San Luis Obispo Health Department as the Local Enforcement
Agency (LEA) for the Cities and County of San Luis Obispo. This action
was taken at the February 6, 1992 meeting of the SWrF on motion of
Supervisor Ovitt, second by Councilmember Fiorentino, and unanimously
• carried to recommend Environmental Health be designated as the LEA.
John Scholtes and Tim Mazzacano of the Environmental Health Division have
made presentations to both the S%TF and Solid Waste Technical Advisory
Committee (SWrAC) on this issue. Both bodies have unanimously recommended
that Environmental Health bontinue as the LFA. Representatives of the
affected agencies expressed appreciation for the efforts of the Health
Department and the quality of the services they have historically
provided.
The members of both the SWTF and SWTAC expressed a strong desire for the
LFA function to remain locally based. The Environmental Health Division
OZ the Health c`epar-bioint was re arded as the most
czpNLC�`r1atD agar C y �.^
provide this service.
If you should have any questions please contact me at 549-4662.
Stephen A. Devencenzi
Solid Waste Program Manager
�v U0fi
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 3-24-92
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-7
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT
Establishment of Stop intersections.
RECOMMENDATION
The Traffic Committee recommends that Council adopt Resolution
No. 28-92 creating a stop intersection on Cayucos Avenue at Lobos
Avenue.
DISCUSSION
The request for this modification originated from a resident
in this neighborhood.
At this location Cayucos intersects Lobos in a "T"
configuration. Due to sight limitations it is recommended that a
stop sign be installed on Cayucos Avenue at this location.
OPTIONS
1) Approve Resolution No. 28-92
2) Deny Resolution No. 28-92
3) Return to Traffic Committee for further consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of this installation is estimated to be approximately
$100. 00 to be paid out of current fiscal year budgeted funds.
•
00006t;
RESOLUTION NO. 28-92
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON CAYUCOS AVENUE AT
LOBOS AVENUE
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.801 et seq. of the Atascadero Municipal
Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of
STOP intersections, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or
markings indicating the same; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic committee has recommended that
Establishing a STOP intersection on Cayucos Avenue at the
intersection with Lobos Avenue will improve a potentially hazardous
traffic situation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero
directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate
signs or markings indicating STOP intersections at the locations
listed above.
On motion by Councilmember and seconded by
Councilmember , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted
in its entirety on the following roll all vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
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
City Engineer
i
0000F7
•
O
C
, �
y �
Op
�d ►b
� O
ZC
_. U�Ufi��
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 3-24-92
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B_g
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works �L
SUBJECT
Establishment of Stop intersections.
RECOMMENDATION
The Traffic Committee recommends that Council adopt Resolution
No. 29-92 creating a 4-way stop intersection on San Benito at Del
Rio. There are currently stop signs on the Del Rio Road legs of
this intersection, this action would provide for the remaining two
signs.
DISCUSSION
The request for this modification comes from the Atascadero
Unified School District. Concern over traffic safety with the
opening of the new San Benito Road School has prompted a review of
the traffic controls in the surrounding area.
While the Traffic Committee agreed that a 4-Way stop at this
location was needed, a recommendation was forwarded to the School
District to have a traffic study prepared for this area. Mr. Paul
Monn, Business Manager for the School District, is looking into the
preparation of this study.
OPTIONS
1) Approve Resolution No. 29-92
2) Deny Resolution No. 29-92
3) Return to Traffic Committee for further consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of this installation is estimated to be approximately
$200. 00 to be paid out of current fiscal year budgeted funds.
•
000069
RESOLUTION NO. 29-92
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON SAN BENITO AVENUE AT
DEL RIO ROAD
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.801 et seq. of the Atascadero Municipal
Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of
STOP intersections, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or
markings indicating the same; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic committee has recommended that
Establishing a STOP intersection on San Benito Avenue at the
intersection with Del Rio Road will improve a potentially hazardous
traffic situation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero
directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate
signs or markings indicating STOP intersections at the locations
listed above.
On motion by Councilmember , and seconded by
Councilmember the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted
in its entirety on the following roll all vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
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
City Engineer
0000'70
Q
R1
r
H
nx dz
Otr-' v� lb�
p V1 D z
00
b r
�n 7�
H O�
b
O � �
O �
� M
................................................................................
o
m H
r
Z � y
r �
• y
D
4 � 0vGt)'71
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 3-24-92
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-9
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT
Establishment of Stop intersection.
RECOMMENDATION
The Traffic Committee recommends that Council adopt Resolution
No. 30-92 creating a stop intersection on Montecito Avenue at East
Front Road.
DISCUSSION
Due in part to the opening of the card-lock service station
traffic has increased, particularly large truck traffic. This
intersection is the main access from the station to the freeway and
is currently uncontrolled.
OPTIONS
1) Approve Resolution No. 30-92
2) Deny Resolution No. 30-92
3) Return to Traffic Committee for further consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of this installation is estimated to be approximately
$100. 00 to be paid out of current fiscal year budgeted funds.
OU00'72
RESOLUTION NO. 30-92
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO .
DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON MONTECITO AVENUE
AT EAST FRONT ROAD
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.801 et seq. of the Atascadero Municipal
Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of
STOP intersections, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or
markings indicating the same; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic committee has recommended that
Establishing a STOP intersection on Montecito Avenue at the
intersection with East Front Road will improve a potentially
hazardous traffic situation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero
directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate
signs or markings indicating STOP intersections at the locations
listed above.
On motion by Councilmember and seconded by
Councilmember , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted
in its entirety on the following roll all vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
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
City Engineer
0UU0Vj
SANTARQSA
ROAD
Hb
� O r
z � n
• y 0
OQ,LI��.LI�iOL1t
ouuc ',I
;REPORT 'TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date:3-24-92
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Stem: D-1
'Thco-Augh Ray Windsor, City Manager
Vrom: Greg Luke, Director of 'Public Works
SUBJECT:
Downtown Street Improvements
RAP COMAiENDiTION:
1. Council augment the Downtown Street Overlay budget in order to
undertake a more comprehensive Downtown Street Improvement Program.
2 . Council recognize that this proposal will likely affect the
magnitude of the Demonstration Intersection Project at Entrada and
Palma . Therefore, take no action on that portion of the project at
this 'gime and direct staff to bring the project back for
reconsideration at a later time once the total cost of the project
has been verified.
. BACKGROUND:
The Council adopted budget approved a Capital Improvement
Project entitled the Downtown Street Overlay. The original intent
of the project was to rehabilitate the streets between ECR and
Olmeda and Traffic Way to East Mall. However, primarily as a
w sul1_ of the recent heavy rains other issue have surfaced.
Upon a detailed investigation of the streets in this area, it
was determined that numerous other problems existed which were the
contributing factor to the deteriorating pavement. Decades of
street overlays had created sags or "birdbaths" in the pavement.
In addition, asphalt had built up so high in some areas that the
curb has almost vanished.
A major flooding problem exists on Traffic Way, causing many
of the stores to sandbag their doorway during heavy rains. This is
caused by a substandard storm drain network that has undersized
pipes and poorly designed inlet structures.
Finally, the sidewalks have numerous locations where the
concrete has lifted, creating a danger for tripping and the
assn-,fated liability problem. In other areas the sidewalk is simply
no`s constructed, with a drop between concrete and dirt. Entrances
to driveways and alleys are broken-up and often ill-defined.
000075
ANALYSIS:
Based on this more detailed analysis of the area, it is clear
that little maintenance has been performed on the downtown streets.
One asphalt overlay after another has been put down; while the
cause for much of the problem, (ie, poor drainage control) , has been
neglected.
We have concluded that another overlay is not the prudent
course of action to repair the downtown streets. In fact, it would
only aggravate the drainage problem. Instead, a comprehensive
repair and rehabilitation program to fix the drainage, improve the
condition of the sidewalks, grind down old paving to remove the
areas where water is ponding, and finally a quality repaving job is
needed.
With these improvements in place, the downtown streets would
not only take on a rehabilitated appearance, little if any
maintenance would be required for the next 25 years.
This year's budget allocated $100, 000 for the Downtown Overlay
Project. The more comprehensive project described above is
estimated to cost approximately $300, 000. The additional funds
which are available as described in the attached memo on the Status
of the Road Tax Fund.
Council will recall that a companion project, the so called
Demonstration Intersection at Palma and Entrada was approved to be
constructed in conjunction with this project. During the initial
design period questions have been raised regarding the feasibility
of constructing the modified intersection design at the proposed
location. Turning radii, drainage control and transition to
existing grade are some of the early problems encountered.
Staff has not fully analyzed what impact the expanded Downtown
Overlay Project would have on the Demonstration Intersection, and
consequently is not asking for Council action on this item.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approximately $200, 000 needs to be transferred from the Gas
Tax Fund to this year's Capital Improvement Budget.
000075, )
TO: City Council MEMORANDUM
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
Mark Joseph, Director of Administrative Services
SUBJECT: Status of Road Tax Fund.
DATE: March 18, 1992
The City receives revenues from approximately 12 different
fundG which are solely dedicated to the construction and
maintenance of public roads. The purpose of this memorandum is to
inform the Council of the current and future status of the Road Tax
Fund in relation to the City's ability to construct Capital
Improvement Projects specified in the 5-year CIP. In particular,
the summary is provided to show the financial impact of allocating
additional money to the Downtown Street Improvement Program.
The numbers -are presented in a summary fashion and rounded off
where necessary to make the report easier to understand. It should
be noted that the Federal, State, and County-level governments have
some control over the flow of revenues into this fund; and in the
past their actions have dramatically added or subtracted from this
fund. As a precaution, the numbers are conservatively estimated.
Resources Available
Current Fund Balance $1, 650, 000
Additional Revenues (expected this year) 385, 000
Projected Balance Available, July 1992 ,$2 ,035, 000
Projected Revenues, FY92-93 415, 000
Projected Balance Available, July 1993 $2, 650, 000
Anticipated Capital Improvement Projects:
Budgeted for FY90-91 & FY91-92 $1,715, 000
(See Table 1)
Less money spent to date (200, 000)
Plus extra allocation to Minor Street Repair 100, 000
*Plus extra allocation to Downtown Improvem'ts 200, 000
Cost of Improvement Projects to date $2 , 020, 000
Projected FY92-93 Projects (per 5-yr CIP) 280, 000
(See Table 2)
Projected Funds Needed, July 1993 $2 , 300, 000
Augmentation requested at March 24, 1992 Council meeting
0000'75, L
From the above tables, the encumbered fund balance as of July,
1992 would be $15,000 ($2, 035, 000 - $2,020, 000) and as of July,
1993 would be $350, 000 ($2,650, 000 - $2,300, 000) . It should be
noted that the flow of money into the City occurs on a regular
schedule, while the flow out to Capital Improvement Projects lags
significantly behind. Therefore, the City will always maintain a
comfortable surplus between inflows and outflows.
The above tables do show, however, that the City's current
Capital Improvement Plan is essentially in balance through FY92-93 .
TABLE 1
Fiscal Year 90-91 and 91-92 Capital Improvement Projects - budgeted
ECR Road Improvements/Phase I $550, 000
ECR/San Gabriel-San Rafael 200,000
Atas Ave/San Diego -SB 175,000
Downtown Road Repairs 100, 000
Graves Creek Road 200, 000
Portola/Ardilla-Carmelita 150, 000
Reflective Traffic Markers 20, 000
Traffic Circulation Element 100, 000
Traffic Safety Study 30, 000
Minor Road Improvements 190, 000
$1,715,000
TABLE 2
Fiscal Year 92-93 Capital Improvement Projects - planned
E1 Monte Road $125,000
Violetta Road 55, 000
Minor Road Improvements 100, 000
$285, 000
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL DATE• 3/24/92
FROM: Andrew J. Takata, Director ITEM: D-2
Department of Community Services
THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager
SUBJECT:
PROPOSAL BY B AND B AMUSEMENTS TO UTILIZE PALOMA CREEK PARR FOR A
FOUR DAY CARNIVAL - APRIL 16 - 19, 1992
BACKGROUND:
Staff was recently contacted by B and B Amusements regarding
offering a co-sponsored carnival event at Paloma Creek Park in
April, 1992 .
On February 20, 1992 the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed
the proposal (minutes attached) and determined that due to the
short time frame, there would not be enough time to develop a co-
sponsored event with a specific theme and involving community
service organizations. They did feel, however, that such a co-
sponsored event could be considered for a later date.
. DISCUSSION:
B and B Amusements are still interested in providing the four-day
event with or without co-sponsorship from April 16 - 19, 1991. The
event is a four day event, with two additional days to set-up and
take-down the equipment.
Because Paloma Creek Park is located within the County of San Luis
Obispo jurisdiction, but operated by the City of Atascadero,
authorization for such an event would need to be presented to both
entities.
Related circulation impacts would need to be reviewed by the City
Police Department and the County Sheriffs Department.
County General Services Department would need to be notified and a
related permit issued, if required.
Parking related to the event would be the park's paved parking lot,
which accommodates approximately 147 vehicles and the equestrian
arena based parking lot, which accommodates approximately 150
vehicles would be utilized for on-site parking.
Portable restrooms would need to be provided by Band B Amusements
in an amount to be determined by the Director of Community
Services.
Ute Ulib
Liability Insurance for the event, naming the City of Atascadero as
co-insured would be required in the amount of $5 million.
Security for the event would be provided by B and B Amusements in
a manner to be determined by both the Chief of Police and the
Director of Community Services.
B and B Amusements would be required to obtain all pertinent County
permits and authorizations and provide copies to the Department of
Community Services.
B and B Amusements would be required to pay for any damaged items
at Paloma Creek Park for the duration of their event.
Due to the close time frames related to this proposal, Council
action would be necessary at the March 24th Council Meeting to
allow time to coordinate the event.
Staff suggests that if the carnival proposal is approved, the City
Attorney prepare the necessary agreement documentation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff is proposing receiving 10 to 15 percent of the Carnival's
gross sales for the event, which is expected to be between $10, 000
to $20, 000.
Staff time related to the coordination of this event should be of
an administrative nature and costs should be minimal.
AJT:kv
;carn
Attachment - B and B Amusement Proposal
Park and Recreation Commission 2/20/92 Minutes
cc: Bud Mc Hale, Police Chief
000077
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES -
FEBRUARY 20, 1992
ADDED ITEM - PROPOSED CARNIVAL AT PALOMA CREEK PARR:
Staff notes that this is an added item, as staff was just recently
contacted by B and B Amusement Company, who are requesting to
utilize Paloma Creek Park for a four day carnival with two
additional days to set-up and take-down this April. The company is
offering 20 percent of all gross sales in return for utilizing the
facility and has all required liability insurance. Profit related
to such an event is guestimated by staff to be $20, 000.
B and B Amusement Company is considered a reputable carnival, and
annually provides annual events in Arroyo Grande, Mid State Fair,
Orange County Fair, etc. It is noted that Arroyo Grande received
$10, 000 last year from their event.
It is the Commission's consensus that although liking the idea,
feels there is not adequate time to coordinate all details and
mitigate all impacts tied to such a large event. They welcome the
event for 1993 in coordination with a community event.
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-3
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 3/24/92
From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Director 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:
Approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 241 on second reading.
BACKGROUND
On March 10, 1992, the City Council conducted a public hearing on
this matter and, concurring with the Planning Commission's
recommendation, approved Ordinance No. 241 on first reading.
HE:ps
Attachments: Ordinance No. 241.
000()'79
.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
{)00080
_040 I't-
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
000081
-f 000
ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A
Page / of II
0-
• y � it ''�, 1' ���w ��/
Afo
00
Q
lit
I � FKG
FIA
40
I � 6
New Zone="ABC'
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged
ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A
Page 7— of 1 tl
. 2 ICZ 910
-E RAO ARM L' !
LA
CPUOA
t�\
-- \`�_.__ --------.--= --- +s� fir ;-�"✓
p^ ,
Pk
• KHY:
New Zone="ABC'
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged 000083
%r-
ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A
Page 3 of
a \ �It 1ST
'zd
\� G VE`-
AVE
713
Wy
Lj
Ir
j
i
i
KEY: •
New Zone="ABC'
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged
ORDINANCE NO. 241
EXHIBIT A
Page -4 of /I
c
TIMt ,
' .'—rte•
1AVE i !L� �► f
r
SAM�_',
11
^ R �
Y
h �
� Y
Q \
1
New Zone="ABC'
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged
000085
ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A
Page S of !I
i ll�
t I i
'as
co
New Zone="ABC'
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged
ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A
Page 6 of
i
y
� � G
1�
ti 1 t, /\Y
'x
KIM
Qx. i
New Zone="ABC'
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged ()
ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A
Page 7 of !11
lrl �6
J P% RMF • I ►�.
14
A k
_ � R
0.4
I �
v�c
i'
SIX s
New Zone="ABC'
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged
000088
ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A
Page 8 of!1
r
Jew
y..
�`�,% 1,
At.
LAM y ,
=� 40 '�\
�a 3 Coo
Rs
New Zone="ABC'
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged
ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A
Page of t!
/ 1
30U71`,�RIVFR
b i
'n
w/ 1
t
'fr J
New Zone="ABC
Old Zone=(XYZ)
All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged
00 IL 9 2