Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 05/08/1992
C # PUPE.IC REVIEW COPS' DO'NOT REMOVE - f r A G E N D A ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 6500 PALMA AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROM f MAY 12, 1992 7:00 P.M. This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the requirements of Govern nt Code Section 54954.2. By listing a topic on this agenda, the City Council has express d its intent to discuss and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in t e brief general description of each item, the action that may be taken 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 ori approval; and, disapproval. Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of bLisiness referred to on the agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk (Room 208) and in the Information Office (Room 103), avai table for public inspection during City Hall business hours. The City Clerk will answer any questions regarding the agenda. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need speci t assistance to participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City, pleasecontact the City Manager's Office ((805) 461-5010) or the City Clerk's Office ((805) 461-5074 Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service. i k 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 eve one 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; theispeaker may respond but, after the allotted time has expi�ed, may not initiate further discussion. * The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. E Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call City Council Comments Proclamations: • "National Flag Day", June 14, 1992 "Deaf Awareness Month", May 1992 • "National Public Works Week", May 17-23, 1992 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. Colony Roads Committee 10. Procurement Committee 11. Homeless Coalition 2 F B. CONSENT CALENDAR: f All matters listed under Item B, Consent Calen ar, 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 - APRIL 14, 1992 (Cont'd from 4/28/92) 2. AWARD OF ROAD IMPROVEMENTS CONTRACT, EL CAM�NO REAL (State Hospital frontage) i C. HEARINGS: 1. NOISE ELEMENT A. Resolution No. 41-92 - Approving the doption of an updated Noise Element to be incorporated as New Chapter IV of the General Plan (GPA 1C-91; City f Atascadero) N B. Ordinance No. 245 - Deleting Section 9-4.163 of the Zon- ing Ordinance text and adding a new Noise Ordinance as Chapter 14 to Title 9 of the Atascadero Municipal Code (ZC 01-91; City of Atascadero) (Recommendation to waive reading in full and approve on first reading, by title only) 2. ORDINANCE NO. 246 —AMENDING TITLE 7 OF THE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE (SANITATION ORDINANCE) (Recommendation to waive reading in full and approve on first reading, by title only) i 3. P.E.R.S. TWO YEARS ADDITIONAL SERVICE CREDIT Y A. ORDINANCE NO. 247 Authorizing an amendment to the contract between the City of Atascadero and the Board of Administration of the California Pub is Employees' Retirement System (Recommendation to waive reading in fulliand approve on first reading, by title only) B. RESOLUTION NO. 42-92 - Giving Notice - f Intention to approve an amendment to contract betwe n the Board of Administration of the Public EmployeesR tirement System and the City of Atascadero 3 f D. REGULAR BUSINESS• 1. INITIATION OF PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS CYCLE 92-1 2. HIGHWAY 41 REALIGNMENT EIR - STAFF COMMENTS ON FINDINGS 3 FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT - FIRE DEPARTMENT 4. ORDINANCE NO. 244 - Amending Map 17 of the official zoning maps by rezoning certain real properties at 8005 and 8025 Amapoa Ave. from RMF/10 (FH) to RMF/10 (FH) (PD7) (ZC 91016; Miller/Montanaro) (Recommendation to waive reading in full and approve on second reading, by title only) 5. IMPLEMENTATION OF MANDATORY WASTE COLLECTION A. ORDINANCE NO. 243 - Amending Title 6 of the City Munici- pal Code (Health and Sanitation) (Recommendation to waive reading in full and approve on second reading, by title only) E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager * NOTICE: The City Council :will adjourn to 4,:00 p.m. on Thursday, 5/14/92 for a Closed Session for the purpose of discus- sions regarding, (1) Potential Litigation (session held pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) ) ; (2) Labor Negotiations and Compensation (session held pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6) ; and (3) Personnel Matters (session held pursuant to Government Code Section 54957) . 4 • PROCLAMATION "NATIONAL FLAG DAY" June 14, 1992 WHEREAS, By act of Congress of the United States dated June 14, 1777, the first official Flag of the United States was adopted; and WHEREAS, By Act of Congress dated August 3, 194{9, June 14 of each year was designated "NATIONAL FLAG DAY" ; and WHEREAS, The Congress has requested the President to issue annually a proclamation designating the week in which June 14 occurs as NATIONAL FLAG WEER; and WHEREAS, On December 8, 1982, the National Flag Day Foundation was chartered to conduct educational programs and to ''encourage all Americans to PAUSE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE on Flag Day, June 14; and WHEREAS, By Act of Congress, Public Law 99-54 Was passed to have the PAUSE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE as part of the celebra- tion of National Flag Day throughout the nation; and WHEREAS, Flag Day celebrates our nation's symbol of unity, a democracy in a republic, and stands for our country's devotion to freedom, to the rule of all, and to equal rights for all; THEREFORE, The Council of the City of Atascadero hereby pro- claims June 14, 1992 as "National Flag Day" and urges all citizens of Atascadero to pause at 7 p.xt . EDT on this date for the thirteenth annual PAUSE FOR THE PLEDGE ''OF ALLEGIANCE to the Flag and join all Americans in reciting the Pledge of alle- giance to our flag and nation. ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor City of Atascadero, CA Dated: May 12, 1992 National 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Officers League Washington, D.C. President of 20004 Glenda E.Hood Commissioner,Orlando.Florida • Cities (202)626-3000 First Vice President Fax: (202) 626-3043 Donald M.Fraser Mayor,Minneapolis,Minnesota Second Vice President Sharpe James March 4, 1992 Mayor,Newark,New Jersey Immediate Past President Sidney J.Barthelemy Mayor,New Orleans,Louisiana Dear Mayor: Executive Director Donald J.Borut I am writing this letter to the leaders of our nation's cities and towns to encourage you to lead your community in observing Flag Day on June 14, and to join in the national "Pause for the Pledge of Allegiance." This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Pledge of Allegiance. Written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, the Pledge has become just as enduring a statement about our nation as the flag it honors. And no symbol represents our ideals so immediately and universally as the American flag. The "Pause for the Pledge" is a call for Americans everywhere to join in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at 7 p.m. EDT on Flag Day.. Conceived in 1980 by the National Flag Day Foundation in Baltimore, the "Pause for the Pledge" has gained widespread support from the President and Congress, from state and local leaders, and civic, business, service, and educational groups nationwide. The "Pause for the Pledge of Allegiance" was made an official Flag Day ceremony by an Act of Congress in 1985. That year marked the 100th anniversary of the first recorded Flag Day ceremony, organized by a young schoolteacher in Wisconsin, Bernard Cigrand. June 14th marks the date in 1777 when the Continental Congress acted to establish an American flag. In 1985, President Reagan went to Baltimore to speak at a "Pause for the Pledge" ceremony at Fort McHenry, where Francis Scott Rey composed the "Star Spangled Banner" during the War of 1812. President Bush has been invited to lead this year's "Pause for the Pledge." And once again, the governors of all 50 states will each select a young person to go to Baltimore to carry the state's flag and join in leading the annual "Pause for the Pledge" ceremony at Fort McHenry. The National League of Cities has joined with the National Flag Day Foundation to spread the word about Flag Day and the Pause for the Pledge. Enclosed with this letter are some informational materials about activities, promotional ideas, participants, sponsors, checklists and other suggestions for organizing local Flag Day events. The National Flag Day Committee has prepared this information in the hope that Flag Day and the Pause for the Pledge of Allegiance can become a unifying event in communities throughout our country. I hope it will help you to organize and lead a Flag Day program and Pause for the Pledge in your community. Sincerely, iF• Glenda E. Hood, President Commissioner, City of Orlando Past Presidents:Tom Bradley,Mayor,Los Angeles,California•Ford L.Harrison,Mayor,Scotland Neck.North Carolina•Cathy Reynolds,Councilwoman-at-Large,Denver,Colorado•Directors: Joseph L.Adams,Councilmember,University City,Missouri•Victor Ashe,Mayor.Knoxville,Tennessee•Barbara M.Asher,Councilmember,Atlanta,Georgia•Margaret Carroll Barrett,Council Member,Jackson,Mississippi•Kenneth Bullock,Executive Director,Utah League of Cities and Towns•James V.Burgess,Jr.,Executive Director,Georgia Municipal Association•William D.Burney,Jr.,Mayor,Augusta,Maine•Jon G Burrell,Executive Director.Maryland Municipal League•Patricia Castillo,Mayor,Sunnyvale,California•Peso Chavez,Councilor,Santa Fe, New Mexico•Larry D.Cole,Mayor,Beaverton,Oregon•John G.Curran,City Council President,Rochester.New York•Beth Boosalis Davis,Alderman,Evanston.Illinois•Thomas G.Fitzsimmons, Executive Director,Illinois Municipal League•Martin Gipson,Alderman,North Little Rock.Arkansas•Gardest Gillespie,Council President,Gary,Indiana•Vicki H.Goldbaum,Councilwoman, Southfield,Michigan•Charles K.Hazama,Mayor,Rochester.Minnesota•William Jarocid,Executive Director.Association of Idaho Cities•Lawrence J.Kelly,Mayor,Daytona Beach,Florida •Bob Knight,Mayor,Wichita.Kansas•Christopher C,Lockwood,Executive Director,Marne Municipal Association•Gary Markenson,Executive Director,Missouri Municipal League•Jeffrey T.Markland,Mayor,Urbana,Illinois•Gary McCaleb,Mayor,Abilene,Texas•Meyers Oberndorf,Mayor,Virginia Beach.Virginia•Judith P.Olson,Councilmember,Madison,Wisconisn Charles.J.Pasqua,Executive Director,Louisiana Municipal Association•Elaine A.Pfalzgrat,Councilmember,Cedar Fails,Iowa•Sandra Pickett,Mayor Pro Tempore,Liberty,Texas•Mark Schwartz,Council Member.Oklahoma City,Oklahoma•William F.Stellworth,Councilman,Biloxi,Mississippi•Daniel K.Tabor,Councilmember,Inglewood,California•Paul E.Thornton, Councilmember,Vienna,West Virginia•Doris Ward,Supervisor,San Francisco,California Wellington Webb,Mayor.Denver,Colorado•Mary Rose Wilcox,Councilwoman.Phoenix,Arizona • Rillastine R.Wilkins,Councilwoman,Muskegon Heights,Michigan•Alice K.Wolf,Mayor,Cambridge.Massachusetts•Robert G.Young,Jr.,Mayor,Henderson,North Carolina Recycled Paper PROCLAMATION "DEAF AWARENESS MONTH" May, 1992 WHEREAS, Deaf Awareness Month has been celebrated in the State of California since it was proclaimed by the California Legislature in 1975 for the purpose of educating the public about deafness, deaf culture and the many positive aspects of deaf people's lives; and WHEREAS, One out of every ten people in California are hearing impaired; and WHEREAS, Hearing impairments are largely misunderstood because of their invisible disabilities; and WHEREAS, These misconceptions further hinder communication and result in decreased opportunities for these special '';citizens; and WHEREAS, The communicative barriers which these people face can be removed if an open and effective communication system is utilized that involves the efforts of all the citizens of this state--both hearing and hearing impaired--through increased com- munity awareness and understanding; NOW, THEREFORE, The Council of the City of Ata4cadero hereby proclaims the month of May 1992 as "Deaf Awareness Month" as a special effort to educate and inform the geneal public in regard to the many challenges associated with significant hearing loss, the diverse programs established to remedy or, mitigate the impact of such loss, the achievements of hearing-impaired indivi- duals and the still-unrealized potential of such individuals. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That all organizationls, public and private, be called on to plan and carry out appropriate programs to educate and inform the general public in the arca of hearing impairment, and that a copy of this proclamation be transmitted to the Board of Directors of the Greater Los Angeles Council on Deaf- ness, Inc. ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor City of Atascadero, CA May 12 1992 owl i Z 1ASCAOERO • Y OFFICE T R I C © U N T Y G L A D Serving Deaf and Hard of Hearing People in Ventura, Santa Baroara and San Luis Obispo Counties April 21, 1992 Mayor Alden Shires 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mayor Shires: The month of May is DEAF AWARENESS MONTH in California, 616 E.Main Street and we would like your support in the local celebration Ventura,CA 93001 of this event. DEAF AWARENESS MONTH has been celebrated ;805)648-4523 in the state of California since it was proclaimed. by the V,7DD California Legislature in 1975 . Its objectives are to educate the public about deafness, deaf culture and the A Subsidiary of the Positive aspects of deaf people's lives. Many activities Greater Los Angeles are planned for the Southern California area, and the Council on Deafness, tri-county area is no exception. We would like you to Incorporated share in the recognition of DEAF AWARENESS MONTH in two specific ways. The first is to create an accessible and welcoming environment for the deaf residents of Atascadero. By doing so, deaf people will be afforded an opportunity to more fully participate in city government. This can be done effortlessly by providing sign language interpreters for a City Council meeting any time during the month of May. The Tri-County G.L.A.D. office will be responsible for disseminating information about these accessible meetings to the Deaf community and to the general public in the form of press releases announcing those councils in the tri-county area who will be having their meetings interpreted. In addition, this office will also be happy to facilitate the assignments of certified interpreters for the meetings. The second suggestion would be to present a proclamation in recognition of DEAF AWARENESS MONTH. Again, this office would identify a local Deaf community leader that could come to a council meeting to accept the proclamation. The services of a sign language interpreter would also be appropriate for this presentation. A sample proclamation has been included with this letter as well as general information about interpreting services and the Greater Los Angeles Council on Deafness. Although deafness is an "invisible" disabilityr it is our hope that members of the Deaf community are not invisible to local government officials. Please feel free to contact our office for additional information or assistance in facilitating interpreter services for your meetings. 'Thanks in advance for considering our request. Sincerely, 63 Coleen Ashly Acting Coordinator Enclosures P R O C L A M A T I O N "NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK" May 17-23, 1992 WHEREAS, Public works services provided in our community are an integral part of our citizens' everyday lives; apd WHEREAS, The support of an understanding and ;informed citi- zenry is vital to the efficient operation of publid works systems and programs such as engineering, sewers and recycling; and WHEREAS, The health, safety and comfort of *his community greatly depends on these facilities and services; and WHEREAS, The quality and effectiveness of these ',facilities, as well as their planning, design and construction, is vitally depen- dent upon the efforts and skill of public works officials; and WHEREAS, The efficiency of the qualified and dedicated person- nel who staff public works departments is materially influenced by the people' s attitude and understanding of the importance of the work they perform; NOW, THEREFORE, The Council of the City of Atafscadero hereby proclaims the week of May 17 through May 23, 1992 as "National Public Works Week in the City of Atascadero and encourages all citizens and civic organizations to acquaint themselves with the issues involved in providing our public works and to recognize the contributions which public works officials make every day to our health;, safety, com- fort and quality of life. ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor City of Atascadero, CA May 12, 1992 Agejnda Item: B-1 Meeting Date: -41-2.8142 5/12/92 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL APRIL 14, 1992 MINUTES The Mayor called a special session to order at 6: 10 p.m. for the purpose of interviewing candidates for the City's Traffic Committee and for the Board of Directors for the Atascaclero Community Services Foundation, Inc. Interviewed for the Traffic Committee were Cindy ''; Campbell, Ray Jansen and Jerry Ferguson. It was noted that one applicant, Norm Rogers, was' unable to attend the interviews dude to a prior commitment. The Council asked the Clerk to extend to him their regrets for not being able to interview him and to encourage him to re-apply at some other time. The selection process followed the interviews and Cindy Campbell was chosen to serve a, two-year term on the Traffic Committee. Interviews were then conducted for the Atascadero Community Services Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors. Interviewed were Hal Carden, Irene Bishop, Greg Cobarr, Ron Nordeen and Sandra Schaefer. Council also considered the application of Barbara Leiter, who was not present. Andy Takata, Director of Community Services, indicated that the by- laws for the newly-formed foundation allowed three,', five or seven members of the public to serve on the Board of Directors. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Mayor Shiers to appoint five members-at-large to the Board of Directors; motion carried 5:0. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Dexter to appoint Irene Bishop, Hal Carden and Gregg Cobarr for three-year terms each and to appoint Ron Nordeen and Sandra Schaefer for two-year terms each; motion carried unanimously. At approximately 7:45 the regular meeting was called to order. Mayor Shiers led the Pledge of Allegiance. CC04/14/92 Pagel 000000 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; Mary Redus Gayle, Assistant City Attorney; Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director; Andy Takata, Director of Community Services; Greg Luke, Public Works Director and Bud McHale, Police Chief APPOINTMENTS: Mayor Shiers announced to the public that the Council had interviewed and selected candidates for appointment to the City' s Traffic Committee and the Board of Directors for the Atascadero Community Services Foundation, Inc. The appointments were formally made as follows: A. RESOLUTION NO. 37-92 APPOINTING ONE MEMBER TO THE CITY OF ATASCADERO'S TRAFFIC COMMITTEE • MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Dexter to adopt Resolution No. 37-92 and appointing Cindy Campbell to the Traffic Committee; motion unanimously carried. B. RESOLUTION NO. 38-92 - APPOINTING THREE MEMBERS-AT-LARGE TO THE ATASCADERO COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION, INC. , BOARD OF DIRECTORS MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Dexter to adopt Resolution No. 38-92 appointing five board members to the Atascadero Community Services Foundation Inc. ; motion unanimously passed. Councilman Dexter commented that all applicants were outstanding. PROCLAMATIONS: The mayor read proclamations for "Month of the Child", April 1992 and "Community Services Month" , April 1992. He also read the proclamation for "Public Schools Week", April 20-26, 1992 and presented it to Bill Berry, local mason. CC04/14/92 Page 2 000001 Barbara MacGregor, Executive Director of the NorthlCounty Womens'_ • Shelter accepted a proclamation for "Atascadero Crime Victims' Rights Week" set for April 26-May 2, 1992 and thanked the City of its' continued support. She invited all to a special luncheon at the end of the week and mentioned that the Atascadero Police Department would be honored for outstanding service. Mayor Shiers read the proclamation for "National Volunteers Week", April 26-May 2, 1992 and presented official copies to Marilyn Wilson and Toni Andre, Directors of the C.A.L.L. Agency; to Carol Conway, Project Director for R.S.V.P. and to Jody Neal, Educational Coordinator for the San Luis Obispo County Zoological Society. "S.H.O.E. Walk Day" was declared as May 3, 1992 and Mayor Shiers presented the proclamation to Margaret Fertschneider and Livia Kellerman. COMMUNITY FORUM: George Luna, candidate for City Council, announced that 19 of his political campaign signs had been vandalized. In addition, he reported signs for another Council candidate had also been damaged and- offered a $250.00 reward for information leading to the arrest of the vandals. Ray Jansen, 6655 Country Club Drive, read a prepared statement . regarding the proposed realignment of Highway 41 (see Exhibit A) . COUNCIL COMMENTS: Councilwoman Borgeson voiced concern about campaign sign vandalism and indicated that she would contribute an additional $100.00 to the reward offered by Mr. Luna. Councilman Nimmo remarked that sign vandalism had affected more than two candidates and added that, as a candidate himself two years ago, he had also had signs destroyed. He noted that episodes like this are part of the political arena and stated that he hoped it did not impact the Police Department. Councilman Lilley mentioned that he was distressed about vandalism at the Senior Citizens' Center and urged the community at-large to be more vigilant to the destruction of property of 'others. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing committees. Informative status reports wore given, as follows. ) : 1. S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/North Coastal Transit- Councilwoman Borgeson announced that she would present a CCO4/14/92 Page 3 000002 report at the next meeting. 2. Solid/Hazardous Waste Management Committee - Councilman Nimmo reported that the committee had met on April 2, 1992 and discussion ensued regarding a series of workshops with the various jurisdictions relating to the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) . He indicated that his position had been that the workshops not be conducted until after the SRRE is complete, but no resolution had been reached. In addition, Councilman Nimmo explained that the committee considered a new budget and the recommendation to the Area Council was to approve the budget approved by the technical advisory committee which reduced the County plan by reducing one associate planner for a savings of approximately $30,000. He noted that until the SRRE is finally completed and approved, costs would not clearly be known and speculated that the budget may need to be amended later by the Area Council. 3. Recycling Committee - Mayor Shiers reported that the committee was working on a display for Earth Day, Sunday, April 26, 1992. In addition, he stated that the committee is also updating a brochure defining what can be recycled and where it can be taken and working on a plan for providing recycling receptacles during community events. The next meeting, he added, would be Thursday, • April 16th at 5:00 p.m. 4. Economic Opportunity Commission - Councilman Dexter indicated that the commission would be meeting Thursday, April 16th and announced that a new Head Start Program would be opening in Atascadero. 5. City/School Committee - Councilman Dexter announced that the meeting for April had been postponed until May 21, 1992. 6. Traffic Committee —Councilman Dexter reported that the committee would meet on the following afternoon and would address five items of business. 7 . Economic Round Table - (See Item #D-2) . 8. Colony Roads Committee - (See Item #D-1) . B. CONSENT CALENDAR: The mayor read the Consent Calendar, as follows: CCO4/14/92 Page 4 000003 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 25, 1992 • 2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 10, 1992 3. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 24, 1992 4. RESOLUTION NO. 33-92 - RELATIVE TO PUBLICATION OF CITY ORDI- NANCES 5. RESOLUTION NO. 34-92 - OPPOSING NEW STATE MANDATE REQUIRING PROOF OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PRIOR TO ISSUING BUSINESS LICENSES 6. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY REPORT - STATE WATER 'PROJECT, NORTH COUNTY EXTENSION (Cont'd from 3/10/92) 7 . SEWER EXTENSION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT 8. RESOLUTION NO. 35-92 - APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE URBAN FORESTRY GRANT PROGRAM UNDER THE CALIFOR- NIA WILDLIFE, COASTAL AND PARK LAND CONSERVATION BOND ACT OF 1988 FOR THE EL CAMINO REAL NATIVE TREE PLANTING PROJECT 9. RESOLUTION NO. 36-92 - AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREE- MENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA STATE OFFICE OF 11ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS TO PROVIDE HEARING SERVICES i10. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PARCEL MAP 19-89, 7675 '',BELLA VISTA - Subdivision of one lot containing 6.5 acres into two lots of 2.83 & 3.72 acres (Gearhart) Councilwoman Borgeson pulled Item #B-6. Councilman Lilley pulled Item #B-5. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Dexter to approve Consent Calendar Items #1, 2, 3, j4, 7, 8, 9 and 10; motion carried 5:0 by roll call vote., Re: 5. RESOLUTION NO. 34-92 - OPPOSING NEW STATE MANDATE REQUIRING PROOF OF WORKERSCOMPENSATION PRIOR TO ISSUING BUSINESS LICENSES Councilman Lilley indicated that he did not want this resolution to go un-noticed by the public. He stated that this bind of mandate has become the rule rather than the exception by the State and voiced objection to the City being asked to enforce a State regulation without compensation. The City Attorney advised that AB 1576 extends the ruling of a former lawsuit involving another City whereby the government entity CC04/14/92 Page 5 000004 was held responsible for not asking for workers' compensation coverage certification. Mark Joseph reported that staff will . comply but had wanted to go on record as being opposed to the legislation because it was a burden not only to staff but to the business person. He added that the mandate will be instituted with the June business license renewals. MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to adopt Resolution No. 34-92; motion carried unanimously. Rea 6. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY REPORT - STATE WATER PROJECT, NORTH COUNTY EXTENSION (Cont'd from 3/10/92) Councilwoman Borgeson explained that she believed this item deserved to be considered separately from the Consent Calendar. She noted that she thought there would be a hearing on the consistency of the pipeline with an opportunity for the public to address the issue and voiced objection to the City Manager' s draft letter to the County Engineer on the subject. She indicated that while she recognized that Atascadero Mutual Water Company will ultimately decide on the State Water project, the City was charged only with making a determination about the pipeline. Councilwoman Borgeson asked staff to explain where the pipeline was going. Henry Engen illustrated the general location proposed for the pipeline broadly following Traffic Way along the Southern Pacific Railroad alignment in a 30 to 50 foot wide right-of-way. He confirmed that a specific location was yet to be negotiated and reported that the Zoning Ordinance allows pipelines in all zones. Council discussion ensued regarding the City's draft response to the County. Councilwoman Borgeson stated that she objected to the first sentence of the second paragraph because the City was not being asked to ascertain whether State Water was consistent with the General Plan, but rather if the pipeline was. She stated that she could support the letter if that sentence were deleted. Councilmembers Nimmo, Lilley and Dexter agreed that the State Water project was conceptually consistent with the General Plan and indicated support for the language presented in the draft. Mayor Shiers stated that he would like to see language added to the letter indicating that the City is not aware of the exact location of the proposed pipeline. Councilwoman Borgeson asked the Community Development Director if the task of the Council was to determine if State Water was consistent with the General Plan. Mr. Engen clarified that the County was literally asking for an indication of the consistency of the North Coastal Branch of the State Water Project and added that CC04/14/92 Page 6 000005 if State Water is chosen by the water company there would need to- be obe some kind of pipeline. Councilwoman Borgeson reiterated that without knowing the alignment of the underground " pipeline, she could not say it was, in fact, consistent with the General Plan. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo to approve Consent Calendar Item #B- 6. (Motion held to receive public comment) . Public Comment: Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, urged the Council to :: not find the pipeline in consistency because the City does not ' know where it will be. ----End of Public Testimony---- Second to the motion on the floor: Motion seconded by Councilman Lilley. Discussion on the motion: Councilman Lilley clarified that the intent of the motion was to s4nd the City's draft response letter to the County Engineer as worded. Mayor Shiers commented that he recollected that the Council was to consider only the pipeline and not the State Water Project as a whole. Councilman Dexter mentioned that the action had nothing to do with a location, but was only approving a concept. Mayor Shiers indicated that the matter had been handled inappro- priately, that it had been rushed and the proper procedures had not been followed. Roll call vote on the motion: Motion carried 3:2 with Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Shielps voting in opposition. Councilwoman Borgeson remarked that it looked peculiar to her that the letter had been written without the Council's direction. Councilman Dexter mentioned that his vote on the motion did not mean he approves the State Water Project. Councilwoman Borgeson clarified that her vote did not mean she did not approve the project, just the procedure. C. HEARINGS: None D. REGULAR BUSINESS• 1. COLONY ROADS STATUS REPORT - ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY Mary Redus Gayle, Assistant City Attorney, provided 'an overview of her fifteen-month research of title records to identify: ( 1) roads • CC04/14/92 Page 7 000006 which are in the maintained street system over which the City has easements by -right of prescription or other rights granted to the City and (2) paper roads which were not clearly deeded to the City. The parties involved, she explained, are Wells Fargo Bank who is the heir or successor in interest to the Anglo-American National Bank who foreclosed on properties that belonged to the City' s founder, E.G. Lewis. Mr. Gordon Davis, she continued, is the current trustee of the trust established by court action in 1932 and is a successor in interest to those people who had purchased property in the City from E.G. Lewis on contracts of sale and who had certain rights in the road system. Ms. Gayle further explained that the City of Atascadero is the governing body over most of the roads, known as the "Colony Project" and the County of San Luis Obispo, to a lesser degree, has control over certain roads that came out of the "Colony Project" . The attorney emphasized that the principal issue was the fact that E.G. Lewis reserved unto himself the fee title interest in all roads in the Colony and granted easements to the those people who lived in the City over those roads. The purpose in undertaking the project, she noted, was to determine how to get title to the easements in the roads that are not in the current system but which are recognized as being necessary by the Circulation Element. She indicated that the research was essentially complete and staff was prepared to proceed with legal action. Ms. Gayle remarked that during the past five months staff has been concentrating on negotiations with the County with respect to their participation. Wells Fargo Bank, she reported, wants to be relieved of its, liability and ownership in the County and the City portions of the Colony Roads and cannot do so unless both the County and City participate. She added, that Wells Fargo has offered to make a $15,000 contribution to the total cost of the project in three $5,000 payments, all of which are conditioned on County participation. The County Counsel, Ms. Gayle reported, had written the City expressing the County's position that they are willing to come into litigation as a party to the suit, but do not have any money to contribute towards legal fees. Before responding to Council questions, Ms. Gayle noted that the original title company estimate for the research and legal work on this project was a quarter of a million dollars. Mark Joseph reported that the City' s legal costs through the month of February were about $40,000. Mary Gayle reported that the Colony Roads Committee had projected it would take another $20-25,000 to finish the project; however, she quickly added that this is a unique case and noted that there may be some unknown challenges to the litigation. Mayor Shiers asked the Assistant City Attorney what kind of CC04/14/92 Page 8 . 00000 monetary participation the County would have to make before Wells Fargo would put in the $15,000 it has offered. Ms. Gayle indicated that Wells Fargo was not interested in how much money the County would contribute, but rather wanted the County to ''be involved in the litigation so that Wells Fargo could get their liability taken care of in one court action. The County, she added', �has agreed to do that. Councilman Lilley asked if the additional $20-25,000 included the $15, 000 contribution by Wells Fargo. Ms. Gayle responded that $20- 25,000 was the total cost, to which the $15,000 would be applied, resulting in a net cost of approximately $10,000 to the City. Responding to inquiry from Council, Mary Gayle reported that Gordon Davis, trustee, has nothing financially to gain or lose by the lawsuit because the trust has no assets. She clarified that what the City would get, as the end result, from Wells Fargo and Gordon Davis is an offer of dedication of all right, title and interest they may have in the Colony Roads. Mayor Shiers mentioned that there were two homeowner groups looking at forming assessment districts and asked what affect unresolved title over the easements of those roads might have. City Attorney, Art Montandon, advised that it would be questionableiwhether or not the district could be formed if someone were to challenge it with a prior right of ownership. He noted that as part of the assessment district process, the City can accept a road into its' maintained system and, to cure any defect in title, !laim ownership because of adverse possession after a period of five years of maintaining the road. There were no public comments. Councilwoman Borgeson remarked that Wells Fargo stands to benefit greatly and proposed that the City request them to contribute more than $15,000. The City Manager emphasized that negotiations had begun over four years ago and indicated that he favored diligent resolution of the matter. He stated that Wells Fargo was indeed the major beneficiary and it was only reasonable to ask them to pay their fair share. Mr. Windsor recommended that Council give him and Mary Gayle direction to go back to Wells Fargo and bargain for more monetary participation. There was consensus among the Council in support of this recommendation. Councilman Doxter suggested further that this be done soon so that the Council could have a response by the first or second meeting in May. Mayor Shiers called a break at 9:15 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:30 p.m. 2. ECONOMIC ROUND TABLE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL ', - REQUEST FOR CC04/14/92 Page 9 000008 ENDORSEMENT OF STATUS REPORT & RECOMMENDATIONS (Cont'd from. 3/10/92) Councilman Lilley, member of the Economic Round Table, provided introductory comments and highlighted some of the committee recommendations. He commended the members of the committee who had given their time, expertise and hard work at no cost to the City. Councilman Nimmo remarked that he was proud of the effort and the final product. He stated that the City was facing declining revenues and spoke favorably about the committee recommendations. He added that he would like to see some aspects of City government, as it relates to small business, streamlined and related that he could support looking at the concept of re-development. Councilwoman Borgeson commented that there were some recommen- dations she could support and others she could not. She stated that she believed the newly-approved factory outlet continues strip-development, which the General Plan does not encourage. She voiced hope that the Economic Round Table was working for the benefit of the City as a whole and to protect and preserve the rural environment. Councilman Dexter indicated that he was in favor of revitalization and emphasized that businesses should be encouraged to be located in areas compatible with one another. Mayor Shiers stated that there was much to agree with, but noted that he would like additional information on some of the recom- mendations, like reftdevelopment. He added that the City is moving away from strip development and voiced support for tightening up zoning regulations to provide compatible businesses. The mayor indicated that he did not know if the City could decide what regional needs are being met by private enterprise. Councilman Lilley qualified that committee recommendations focus on the uniqueness of the community and explained that the Economic Round Table was looking for some direction from the Council about whether the recommendations were consistent with Council policy and, further, to identify specific priorities. Public Comments: Ray Johnson, member of the Economic Round Table, noted that there were no special interests by anyone on the committee and reiterated that the committee' s objective was to get direction for focus from the Council. ----End of Public Testimony---- CC04/14/92 Page 10 000009 write of the whole zoning ordinance. • The Cit Manager City g reiterated that, in order for the around table to move forward, Council needed to make a commitment and give direction. Councilwoman Borgeson remarked that she'; could support implementing some of the cost-effective recommendations right away, but emphasized that she wanted to move slowly on more controversial items. There was Council consensus to direct staff to gather data on the pros and cons of redevelopment as a starting point, clarifying that they were not authorizing a full cost study. The Public Works Director advised that if it is the Council' s will to upgrade a significant portion of the business area, the monies cannot be drawn from existing revenue sources. Councilman Nimmo reiterated his two suggestions regarding the sign ordinance and internal review of permit processes. Brief discussion ensued regarding the sign ordinance. Mr. Engen, responding to additional inquiry about the sign ordinance, mentioned that it could be pulled out of the Zoning'', Ordinance and acted upon as a free-standing ordinance. Regarding simplifying permit processes, Mr. Windsor indicated that staff had received the message and would get together in an effort • to improve the present system. Council concurred on the following recommendations outlined in the Report to Council (see agenda packet, item', #D-2) : 1(a) , 1(b) , 2(a) , 5 & 6. In addition, there was mutual agreement to direct staff to fast-track the sign ordinance. , 3. AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR LEAD AGENCY STATUS AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 242 ADDING CHAPTER 9 TO TITLE 5 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE ADOPTING SURFACE MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN REGULATIONS Henry Engen presented background and the staff recommendation to authorize application for lead agency status and approve the ordinance on first reading. Councilwoman Borgeson asked for a legal opinion about the reclamation plan approved by the County for Millhollin Mining. The City Attorney replied that, because of the time that has gone by, the City did not have the opportunity to void the plan. He pointed out that there is a yearly review in the proposed ordinance whereby the City can address deficiencies and ensure compliance. Mr. Engen added that he understood that Supervisor Ovitt was going to refer the issue of how Millhollin Mining adopted the plan', to the County CC04/14/92 Page 12 060010 Counsel. _ There were no public comments. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Lilley to read by title only Ordinance No. 242, adding Chapter 9 to Title 5 of the Atascadero Municipal Code adopting surface mining and reclamation plan regulations; motion unanimously carried. MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to adopt Ordinance No. 242 on first reading and direct staff to develop a work schedule; motion passed 5:0 by roll call vote. MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to extend the meeting past 11:00 p.m. ; motion passed. 4. DOWNTOWN STREET IDENTIFICATION SIGNS AND SUPPORT POLES - AWARD BIDS Henry Engen provided the staff report and recommended that Council award the bids and authorize installation of 21 downtown street identification signs. Public Comment: John Himes, representing the B.I.A. , remarked that the project would enhance the downtown and encouraged the Council to accept the bids. ----End of Public Testimony---- MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to award the bids and authorize installation of 21 downtown street identification signs; motion carried unanimously by roll call vote. 5. PROPOSED COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING LEGAL OPINION REQUESTS (Cont'd from 3/24/92) Art Montandon recommended adoption of City Council Policy No. 92-01 regarding legal advice. Councilman Lilley indicated that the policy met his concerns. Mayor Shiers asked the City Attorney if most items take more than one billable hour. Mr. Montandon replied that most requests for opinion take less than one hour. He pointed out that lengthy (2 or 3 pages) requests can take extended amounts of time. Mr. Windsor pointed out that the policy specifies that Council CC04/14/92 Page 13 000011 approval will be sought for all requests initiate$ from outside. Council or staff. There were no public comments. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to adoption of proposed Council policy regarding legal opinion requests; motion carried unanimously. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Manager Mr. Windsor announced that answers to questions raised by Council regarding mandatory trash pick-up would be brought back as part of the public hearing on the matter on April 28, 1992. He asked the Council if they wanted to discuss the issue of: a no-smoking ordinance at the same meeting or wait until May. Council directed staff to put both matters on the agenda for April 28, 1992. AT 11:09, THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED TO A CLOSED SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION REGARDING: (1) TWO MATTERS OF PENDING LITIGATION ENTITLED, O'KEEFE v. CITY OF ATASCADERO AND CITY OF ATASMERO v. FLUITT (Session held pursuant to Section 54956.9 of the Govern- ment Code) ; 2) TWO MATTERS OF POTENTIAL LITIGATION (Session held pur- suant to Section 54956.9(a) of the Government Code) . MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY: LEE AAf3OIN, Cit Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A - Jansen CC04/14/92 • Page 14 CC 4/14/92 EXHIBIT "A" Remarks for Public Forum A lot of people may not know it, but we are going to have s April 23rd; in or around. the Pavilion, courtesy ofaltran So, before all that attendant, blitz, and glitz, I want to take this opportunity to re my recent letter. I am not expecting a. formal reply in the form of words. More than that, however, I am speaking to encourage a positive response in the form of deeds. Even doing nothing will constitute a responae. The easy course is to do what the world wants us to do. The more difficultlis to do what is right Q little over for Atasca ,._,As noconstituted, you have. ' 4- two months in which to make difference to the future of Atascadero. Just four quick points, pleases 1. Alternates B and I do not induce growth beyond Atascadero's ability to manage or control it.. Both A and A Modified invite precisely that. 2. Alternate, 1,, ,plus b., will improvetraffic circulation; A or A Modified will increase traffic and compound its adverse effects. 3.� Several members of past Atascad.ero Advisory Committee wish me suc- Z;/ AiX a Pia:t a jV cess in my efforts. A+.he only thing going for Alternative A (and its still possible hidden agenda) is the years. it has been hanging around. Some people think we ought to do it for that reason. Two examples of that kind of fallacy: Both, the ide& the earth was- flat, and the idea the sun moved around the Earth, were accepted for hundreds of years. That did not make them correct. 4• A bridge eleven-hundred feet long ought to have a name. Who, on this council, would would like this bridge. to be named after him? I use the mascu- line deliberately because I know Council Member borgeson has been a longatanding opponent to it. In fact, concerning who is for it, I find it more and more difficult to find those who are in favor. Rememb.eac-omy petition! One-hundred and sixty opposed it and amere six were in favor. Finally, if you cannot be decisive and end. this idea; with its questionable origin by a vote of 5 to 0. at least its. status should not be determined befor August when the circulation E1ement of the General Plan is to be finalized. 16 Raymond K. Jansen 4/14/92 00001; REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Dalte: 5-12-92 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-2 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: El Camino Real Road Improvements RECOMMENDATION: Award the base bid and additive item 3I to Whitaker Construction for $382,349.10, pending staff's detejrmination that the bid is the lowest responsive bid. DISCUSSION: Attachment A shows the extent of the improvemehts planned for the south E1 Camino Real project. Basically, the work involves full width road improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, median turn lanes and drainage improvements. The bid was broken down into the following components: Base Bid: Road Widening, repaving, curb and gutter Additive Item 1: Road improvements along the Biaggini Project Additive Item 2: Road improvements along the Hawkins Plaza Project Additive Item 3 : Raised median rather than painted median The Bid Summary prepared by the City is included for reference as Attachment B. The Engineers Cost Estimate for the base bid was $350, 000. Items 1 and 2 were solicited in case the two projects listed failed to proceed in a timely manner. Both projects appear to be moving forward, therefore additive items 1 and 2 are not recommended. Item 3 is for the construction of a raised median rather than a painted median. Considering the history of traffic accidents in the project area, I recommend that the raised media4 be installed. This would make the bid award $302, 175.00+$80, 174. 14 =$382 , 349. 10. 000014 FISCAL IMPACT• City cost: 232, 349. 10. The State Hospital will participate in the project for $150,000. The City budgeted $200,000 in the Capital Improvement Budget. Thus, this project will use 32,349. 10 of unallocated reserve from the gas fund. Attachments: Attachment A - Project description Attachment B - Bid Summary Attachment C - Bid from Whitaker Contractors 000015 i CONTROL MONUMENT i EL=939.14 CL BC MON STA. 306+89.28 CONDOMINIUMS TRACT 2061 (IN-PROGRESS) --•--•--•--•--•r-------t i ------------- ---------f - - ---------- -- I - � - -- PR RAISED MEDIAN ---r '--•--•--•--•-•+-cam•-i�s� ..,�- ------- III ' Irl rIAll CASA GRANDE APARTMENTS SHEET 3 moo tv ------------------------- ------ ------------ ------------------------- ------- ---------------------------------------------------ZSED � I 1 ATASCADERO STATE HOSPITAL i SHEET 4 I EXHIBIT "q 514EET I OF3 00001.6 i 1 11 M 1 II I II I II �caar.aaaseear _ 1 __ _—•++alms:----- ------------------ ATASCAOERO STATE HOSPITAL ! i � SHEET 5 I Woo 1 I I EaaE�ixac 1 t Qr oP I 11 _�r• I..�_ IF=r i SHEET 6 000011'7 SNEE T 2 OF3 CONTROL MONUMENT EL=951.07 CL MONUMENT ' STA.. 332+86.02 j CONDOMINNMS CHALK MOUNITAIN LIQUOR 1 ' / PROPOSED RAISED MEDIAN " I f II 1 I J SI R MOBILE HOME PARK HOONAan FUTURE I ISI H.U.D. GOLD PWEST COMMERCIAL ARK SHEEN" 7 000018 SHEET 3 OF3 Attachment B BID SIRAIM • TO: Greg Luke Public Works Director FROM: Lee Raboin City Cler BID NO. : 92-04 OPENED : 5/6/92 PROJECT: Street Improvements of El Camino Real Six bids were received and opened today. They are listed as follows: Contractor Name & Address Base Bid Additives #1 #2 #3 Whitaker 'Contractors, Inc. $302,175.00 28,946.00 81343.60 80,174. 10 22985 E1 Camino Real Santa Margarita, CA Union Asphalt, Inc. 354,139.25 35, 186.00 10,508.50 96,525.75 P.O. Box 1280 Santa Maria, CA 93456 So. Pacific Milling Co. 372,523.95 27,861.00 7,852.00 91,761.55 P.O. Box 71 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 R. Burke Construction 372,671.00 35,990.00 7,913.00 98,722.00 P.O. Box 957 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 Madonna Construction Co. 400,766.65 33,635.00 10,379.00 91,502.80 P.O. Box 3910 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 A.J. Diani Construction Co. 410,466.00 35,914. 80 12,392.00 149,719. 00 P.O. Box 636 Santa Maria, CA 93456 i 000019 BID SHEET Attachment C IPROJECT: STREET IMPROVEMENT OF EL CAMINO REAL BID OPENING: 2:00 p.m. May 6, 1992 NAME OF BIDDER: 1AJ N i rA-KEIT lo-7 M'q BUSINESS ADDRESS: �. 9,5EL Ca4l''1 GA10 RFL P D . K 10 MA-2(; 42c rA �G4 43 S3 PHONE: C205 ) q39-6-75( RESIDENCE ADDRESS: 6794 Monte, tqd Obispo, C.44340 PHONE: C805) 545 45( TO: CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO The undersigned declares that he has carefully examined the location of the proposed work, that he has examined the Plans and Specifications and read the accompanying instructions of bidders, and hereby proposes to furnish all materials, machinery, tools, labor and services, and do all the work necessary 'tto complete the project in accordance with said Plans, Specifications, and Special Provisions for the unit prices shown. �. The undersigned declares that he has read and acknowledges the following: Bids are required for the entire work. The amount of the Bid for comparison purposes will be the total of all items. The total of unit basis items will be determined by multiplying the unit price bid by the estimated quantity set forth for the item. The Bidder shall set forth for each item of work, lin clearly legible figures, a unit price and a total for the 'item in the respective spaces provided for this purpose. In the case of the unit basis items, the amount set forth under,the "Total" column shall be the multiplication of the unit price bid 'by the estimated quantity of the item. In case of discrepancy between the unit price and 'the total set forth for the item, the unit price shall prevail; ',provided, coNooc.Ar Bid Sheet - 1 REL 1.0 04/07/92 000020 however, if the amount set forth as a unit price is ambiguous, unintelligible, or uncertain for any reason, or is omitted, or in 1 the case of unit basis items, is the same amount as the entry in the "Total" column, then the amount set forth in the "Total" column for the item shall prevail in accordance with the { following: 1. As to lump sum items, the amount set forth in the "Total" column shall be the unit price. I2. As to unit basis items, the amount set forth in the "Total" column shall be divided by the estimated quantity for the item and the price thus obtained shall be the unit price. The Owner reserves the right to reject all bids. i The Bid Sheet is divided into four sections with a Sum of Total Price Column for each one. All sections must be bid and a Total Price shown for each one. The first section is for the Base Bid, which includes the median strip defined with paint striping only. The second section is for Bid Additive No. 1, which is for the itemized work at areas outlined on the plans as Additive No. 1. The third section is for Bid Additive No. 2, which is for the itemized work at areas outline on the plans as Additive No. 2. The last section is for Bid Additive No. 3, which is for the itemized work to construct the concrete median strip and curbs per the plans, and requires a CREDIT for the paint definition of the median strip which is a part of the Base Bid. BASE BID Unit Total Item Item Unit of Estimated Price Price No Description Measure Quantity (Figures) (Figures) i 1. Clear & Grub LS 1 /3-7/ g" 13 -7/8 •�� 2. Excavation LS 1 02b4cjQ 00 3 . 2.511AC/10"AB SF 3,000 r a° .3 (000-o0 -70 4. 4.25"AC/14/5"AB SF 26,745 L(' 144 3q(:). q•O j 5. Overlay SF 25,755 0• �8 1 a 3 - bo 6. Curb & Gutter LF 1,836 11. 60 a�7. C0H00c.AT Bid Sheet - 2 REL 1.0 04/07/92 000021 i I OO °° 7. 10' Sidewalk LF 904 a 20 7q a 8. X-Gutter/Spand/Return EA 5 2626. � /a `15• o 0 o 00 6o �a. p ° 9. Lg. Drain Inlet EA 2 Boa �• °,0 35 Og, 00 10. Sm. Drain Inlet EA 2 _�S4_ 11. Headwall EA 1 a 36©,0 12. Field Inlet Box EA 1 �� 0�� ��p4•oD 13 . 36" Stormdrain LF 1,007 44.00 �" 30g•OD po 14. 30" Stormdrain LF 100 �o ( ( q-00 00 g OO,00 15. Conc. Encasement LS 1 ;00• 16. Subsurface Drain LF 500 So a7S0 00 10000 o 17. Rip-Rap & Conc. CY 32 bb.- �h 00 ago 00 18 . Adjust M.H. EA 2 ( �{4�• 19. Hydroseeding SF 5,920 -- Oil- 20. Median Striping LF 4,905 2. 00 C�t81� 21. Striping LF 13,620 i 22. Signage (new) EA 23 Z150 S-7wQ - f 23 . 5' Agg. Base Path LF 1, 067 '70 Q a is-. 9 O 24. Grind Pavement LF 400 25. Sidewalk Underdrain EA 1 02p. Do � o0 36O,00 26. Agg. Base Shoulder LF 120 o O 27. Signage Relocate EA 16 28 . Misc. Traffic Control LS 1 O�QgdOO oo ca 0 - i 29. Fog Seal LS 1 3381 Do 332-7.o O 00 0-0i 30. Fire Hydrant Relocate EA 5 �- 3 g9O 31. Electrolier Relocate EA 2 g3'rc O0 b �O• Oa Sum of Total Price Column $ Jif-75. i CONDOCAT Bid Sheet - 3 REL 1.0 04/07/92 000022 ADDITIVE NO. 1 Unit Total Item Item Unit of Estimated Price Price No Description Measure Quantity (Figures) (Figures) 1. 4.25"AC/14.5"AB SF 8, 100 /3 441b 2. Overlay SF 3,900 0. 4? oD 0394. 8 ° 3. Curb & Gutter LF 378 6 4 4. 10' Sidewalk LF 378 a3.Oc gG4 •o0 _ 00 5. Hydroseeding SF 200 0 •3a 6 6. Signage Relocate EA 2 51 00 (OoZ .00 I 7. Fog Seal LS 1 334-00 394. 00 90 Sum of Total Price Column $ �gQ46. ADDITIVE NO. 2 Unit Total Item Item Unit of Estimated Price Price No Description Measure Quantity (Figures) (Figures) 1. 2.511AC/1011AB SF 100 /• ca IoZO. � 80 2. 4.25"AC/14.5"AB SF 380 1. 66 3O' 00 3. Overlay SF 850 0 . 64 54 4. Curb & Gutter LF 168 (o0 t q4 go 5. 10' Sidewalk LF 168 x3.00 3 g(v4.00 O 00 6. Grinding LF 55 �,00 3 3 7. Fog Seal LS 1 og•0O I a g •t)0 00 8. Fire Hydrant Relocate EA 1 7 7 g 00 778. �L 6o Sum of Total Price Column $ 1 CON000.AT _ Bid Sheet - 4 REL 1.0 04/07/92 000023 ADDITIVE NO. 3 Unit ', Total Item Item Unit of Estimated Price Price . No Description Measure Quantity (Figures) (Figures) i 1. Deduct Median O'0 Striping LF 4,905 2. 11B3" CurbLF 4,903 14. /0 ao 1 oa • 3 0 g 3. Median Conc. SF 21,220 3 b4 � • 0 0 4. Signage EA 10 a q Do a ( Q p. Sum of Total Price Column $ gy 7`t•� The Contractor shall comply with the requirements ' of-Division 5, Part I, of the State Labor Code, and specifically ',with Sections 6705 and 6707 thereof. The-Contractor shall submit for approval a detailed plan showing the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection for all areas to be excavated to a depth of five feet or more. If the. plan varies from the shoring system standards, the plan shall be prepared by a registered civil or structural engineer. The undersigned further agrees that in case of default in executing and submitting the Contract with requir4d bonds and insurance within ten (10) working days after having received notice that the Contract is ready for signature, the proceeds of the check or bond accompanying this Bid shall become the property of the City. The Contractor to whom the contract is awarded shall submit a statement each month certifying that it is in conformance with the City's Affirmative Action Program. The following Certification of Affirmative Action', Program,. Contractor's Licensing Statement, List of Subcontractors, Bid Security Form and Non-Collusion Affidavit shall be filled out, signed, and submitted by each Bidder and shall be', part of the Contract Documents. i coHooc.ar. Bid Sheet - 5 REL 1.0 04/07/92 000024 LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS , In accordance with the provisions of Section 4100 et. seq. of the Government Code of the State of California, the Bidder shall, in its Bid, list the name and place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the prime contractor in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent or $10, 000, whichever is greater, of the prime contractor's total bid. Name under which License No. Address Specific Subcontractor is and of Office Description Licensed Classification Mill or Shop of Subcontract Woaks S-n�tpi4c- 51IQT7 4a-70EI+ei,\St S`(TiR1 NO M a2K i N9 Se.2-V ice I tic,. �dw 0_rR C A ° i W. 1 i Do not list alternative subcontractors for the same work. I CONDOCAT List of Subcontractors - 1 f REL 1.0 04/07/92 0 0 0 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-1 (A&B) Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager , Mtg. Dalte: 05/12/92 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir..�j File Nd: GPA 1C-91 & ZC 01-91 SUBJECT• Consideration of an updated Noise Element of the General Plan along with coinciding Noise Ordinance to replace the existing noise - standards in the Zoning Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Per the Planning Commission's recommendation, approval of the following: 1) Approval of Resolution No. 41-92 adopting a new Noise Element to the General Plan (GP 1C-91) ; and 2) Approval of Zone Change 01-91 as follows: a) Motion to waive reading of Ordinance No. 245 in full and approve on first reading, by title only. ; BACKGROUND: On March 17, 1992, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the above referenced subject. On a ' 7:0 vote, the Commission recommended approval of both the General Plan amendment and Zone Change request with minor modifications as reflected in Resolution No. 41-92 and Ordinance No. 245. There was considerable discussion and public testimony as evidenced by the attached minutes excerpt. HE:ps Attachments: Staff Report for GPA 1C-91 - 3/17/92 '' Staff Report for ZC 01-91 - 3/17/92 Minutes Excerpt - 3/17/92 Resolution No. 41-92 Ordinance No. 245 Separate Cover: Noise Element 000026 CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B_1 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: March 17, 1992 BY: Doug Davidson, Senior Planner File No: GPA 1C-91 SUBJECT: Consideration of an updated Noise Element of the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 1C-91 to the City Council based on the Findings for Approval in the Draft Resolution (Attachment A) and the noise policies as contained in the proposed Noise Element document. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .City of Atascadero 2. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . .City-wide 3. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted February 25, 1992 BACKGROUND: An informational hearing was held before the Planning Commission May 21, 1991 to gather comments from the public and the Commission on the proposed Noise Element and Ordinance. Since then the consultant has submitted final versions of the Element, Ordinance, and supporting technical documents. Also, a set of nine (9) maps showing noise contours along major roadways of the City has been received. ANALYSIS• The Noise Element of the General Plan is one of seven mandated elements of the General Plana It is a planning document which provides a policy framework by which potential noise impacts may be analyzed in project review and advance planning. State law requires the Noise Element to identify current and projected noise conflicts in the City. For existing noise conflicts the Element should offer some feasible mitigation measures. In long range planning, the Element should guide the land use pattern of the City to avoid exposure of residents to excessive noise. The Noise Element is clearly interrelated with the Land Use, Housing, Circulation, and Open Space Elements. 00002'7 The Noise Element consists of three parts: 1. The Policy document contains the fundamental goals, policies, and implementation programs to reduce future noise impacts. The Element also contains the contour maps showing exposure from the major noise sources in the City (roadways and railways) . 2. The Technical Reference Document is included under separate cover and intended to be a technical source for information on the methods used in the noise inventory. It provides tools to evaluate project noise-related implications. 3. The Acoustical Design Manual offers noise mitigation measures to reduce noise impacts in project design. It also defines the situations when standard mitigation measures are not adequate and a professional acoustical analysis should be prepared. The primary purpose of the Noise Element is to minimize or avoid future noise conflicts. The proposed Element provides policies and implementation methods to achieve this goal, while the two supporting documents offer mitigation measures and site design techniques. The noise contour maps complete the informational network. These maps show that the existing roadway' noise generation in Atascadero averages 60 to 65 db, a range level acceptable in many circumstances. Some future noise-sensitive land uses will require mitigation measures, but it is anticipated that projects demanding an acoustical analysis will'', be rare. CONCLUSIONS• The proposed Noise Element is the result of a coordinated effort, initiated in June, 1989, between the County, Cities';, and the consultant, Brown-Buntin Associates. The Element has been prepared using the 1990 Noise Element Guidelines supplied by the State Office of Planning and Research and California Department of Health Services. Staff is confident that this comprehensive Noise Element will provide the tools to minimize future noise conflicts. It also does not conflict with the adopted Land Use Element and the noise contour maps will be valuable' in the preparation of the Circulation Element. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Draft Resolution, incl!lding Noise Element ,Attachment B - Technical Reference Document (Title Page, Table of Contents, List of Tables, List of Figures, and Introduction. ) %Attachment C - Acoustical Design Manual (Title Page, Table of Contents, List of Tables, List of Figures, and Introduction. ) THE COMPLETE TECHNICAL REFERENCE DOCUMENT AND ACOUI'STICAL DESIGN MANUAL ARE LOCATED IN ROOM 311, CITY HALL 0000';18 ATTACHMENT B NOISE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA VOLUME II - TECHNICAL REFERENCE DOCUMENT PREPARED FOR SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF ARROYO GRANDE, ATASCADERO, GROVER CITY, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH AND SAN LUIS OBISPO PREPARED BY BROWN-BUNTIN ASSOCIATES, INC. 319 WEST SCHOOL AVENUE VISALIA, CALIFORNIA 93291 SEPTEMBER 1991 } BBA 319 West School Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 • (209) 627-4923 • Fax: (209) 627-6284 5150 Sunrise Blvd., Suite D-3 • Fair Oaks, CA 95628 • (916) 961-5822 • Fax: (916) 961.6418 000029 TECHNICAL_REFERENCE DOCUMENT-NOISE ELEMENT, VOLUME III 1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-I 2.0 NOISE AND ITS EFFECTS ON PEOPLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.1 Fundamentals of Noise Assessment: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2 Criteria for Acceptable Noise Exposure: . . . . . 2-4 3.0 EXISTING AND FUTURE NOISE ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.1 Overview of Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.2 Methods and Noise Exposure Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.3 State Highways and Major County and City Roadways . . . . . . 3-3 3.4 Railroad Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-24 3.5 Airports . . . . . . . . 3-27 3.6 Major Stationary Noise Sources . . . . . . . . . . . 3-35 3.7 Camp Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-47 4.0 COMMUNITY NOISE SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 5.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 APPENDICES ' A FHWA Model Traffic Noise Input Data B Noise Contour Maps of Stationary Noise Sources . POLICY DOCUMENT - NOISE ELEMENT, VOLUME I ACOUSTICAL DESIGN MANUAL - NOISE ELEMENT, VOLUME III 000030 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 SUBJECTIVE REACTION TO CHANGES IN NOISE LEVELS OF SIMILAR SOURCES 2-7 3-1 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC NOISE CALIBRATION STUDIES . . . . . . . . . 3-6 3-2 ADJUSTMENTS TO TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS DUE TO TOPOGRAPHY . . . . . . . 3-7 3-3 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC COUNTS - SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY CITIES 3-11-3-12 3-4 DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF ROADWAY -TO L.,r CONTOURS . . . . . . 3-13-3-23 3-5 SUMMARY OF RAILROAD NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT DATA . . . . . . . . 3-26 3-6 DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF TRACK TO L., CONTOURS . . . . . 3-27 3-7 FUTURE DAILY AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS - SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AIRPORT 3-31 3-8 NOISE ZONES AND ACCEPTABILITY LIMITS . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-49 4-1 SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY NOISE SURVEY DATA . . . . . . . . 4-5-4-8 000031 • LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1 EXAMPLES OF NOISE LEVELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 3-1 MAJOR NOISE SOURCES . . . . . . . . . . o o 3-2 3-2 PERCENT CHANGE IN AADT COMPARED TO TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL . . . . . 3-23 3-3 PASO ROBLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT — FUTURE CNEL CONTOURS . . . . . 3-32 3-4 OCEANO AIRPORT — FUTURE CNEL CONTOURS . . . . . . 3-33 3-5 SAN LUIS OBISPO .COUNTY AIRPORT — FUTURE CNEL CONTOURS' . . . . . . 3-34 3-6 CAMP ROBERTS NOISE ZONES . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-50 4-1 COMMUNITY NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS . . . . . 4-2 4-2 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS. — CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO o o 4-9 4-3 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS — CITY OF PASO ROBLES . . . 4-10 4-4 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS — CITY OF PISMO BEACH 4-11 4-5 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS — CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE . . . . . . . . 4-12 4-6 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS — CITY OF GROVER CITY . . . . . 4-13 4-7 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS — CITY OF MORRO BAY . . . . . . . . 4-14 4-8 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS — CITY OF ATASCADERO . . 4-15 • 4-9 — — AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS SOUTH BAY COUNTY AREA �. 4-16 000032 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Technical Reference Document is adopted as part of the Noise Element of the General Plan. It provides background information on the data and methods used to prepare noise exposure information for major noise sources within San Luis Obispo County and its incorporated cities in compliance with the Government Code. Information concerning the measurement and effects of noise on the community is also included in this document. The Technical Reference Document should be used as a resource when evaluating the noise-related implications of specific development proposals or long-range planning efforts. 1-1 I 000033 ATTACHMENT C NOISE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN , SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA VOLUME III - ACOUSTICAL DESIGN MANUAL PREPARED FOR SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF ARROYO GRANDE, ATASCADERO, GROVER CITY, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH AND SAN LUIS OBISPO PREPARED BY BROWN-BUNTIN ASSOCIATES, INC. 319 WEST SCHOOL AVENUE VISALIA, CALIFORNIA 93291 SEPTEMBER 1991 : BBA 319 West School Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 • (209)627-4923 • Fax: (209) 627-6284 5150 Sunrise Blvd., Suite D-3 • Fair Oaks, CA 95628 • (916) 961-5822 • Fax: (916) 961-6,08 000034 ACOUSTICAL DESIGN MANUAL-NOISE ELEMENT, VOLUME III TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Limitations: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 2.0 TERMINOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :. 2-1 3.0 DETERMINATION OF NOISE EXPOSURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.1 Noise Exposure Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.2 Noise Source Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 4.0 NOISE MITIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.1 Site Design: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.2 Standard Noise Mitigation Packages: . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.2.1 Mitigation in Outdoor. Activity Areas . . . . . . . . . 4-2 4.2.2 Interior Noise Mitigation: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4 APPENDICES A Techniques for Noise Control B Example of Attic Vent Baffle Treatment POLICY DOCUMENT - NOISE ELEMENT, VOLUME I TECHNICAL REFERENCE DOCUMENT - NOISE ELEMENT,. VOLUME II 1 000035 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 Design Manual Flow Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-2 3-1 Chart For Locating Noise Exposure Information . . 3-2 4-1 Examples of Simple and Complex Barrier Situations .! . . . . . . 4-6 LIST OF TABLES Table 4-1 Determination of Noise Barrier Effectiveness . . 4-5 000036 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Limitations: This Acoustical Design Manual is adopted as part of the Noise Element of the General Plan. The purpose of this manual is to provide county and city staff, developers, builders and homeowners with a guide for reducing outdoor and indoor noise exposure from traffic, railroads and aircraft to acceptable levels. The manual is not intended to address situations where noise is produced by stationary noise sources (e.g., power plants, mining operations or other commercial, industrial or agricultural operations). In addition, this manual should not be used to address complex acoustical situations where the noise source is at an elevation significantly different from the receiver or the noise source is shielded from the receiver by buildings or topography. Such situations should be studied by an acoustical expert. Figure 1-1 is a flow chart illustrating the process which should be followed in applying the recommendations of this manual . This manual contains standard noise mitigation packages which may be used to reduce exterior noise exposure by up to 5 dB and interior noise levels by 15, 20, 25, and 30 dB. The standard noise mitigation packages should be used with the noise exposure information contained within the Policy and Technical Reference Documents of the Noise Element to achieve compliance with the policies of the Noise Element in relatively simple situations. Standard noise mitigation packages may be prescribed in lieu of the requirement for a detailed acoustical analysis. See Figure 1-1 for the situations where the standard mitigation packages may be used. t 1-1 000037 • ` CITY OF ATASCADERO ' Item: B-2 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: March 17, 1992 BY: Doug Davidson, Senior Planner File No: ZC 01-91 DIP SUBJECT: Consideration of a proposed new Noise Ordinance to '',replace the existing noise standards of the Zoning Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Zone Change 01-91 to the City Council based on the Findings for Approval in the Draft Ordinance (Attachment A) :land the noise standards as contained in the proposed Ordinance. SITUATION AND FACTS: I. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .City of Atasc4dero . 2. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . .City-wide 3. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted February 25, 1992 BACKGROUND: The preparation of a Noise Ordinance was included in the Noise Element work program undertaken in conjunction with San Luis Obispo County. The consultant has prepared and submitted a final version of the Ordinance in October, 1991. Since then the document has been reviewed by the City Attorney, Compliance Official, Community Development Director, and other City personnel. ANALYSIS: The Noise Ordinance implements the policies of the ';Noise Element and establishes noise standards and enforcement methods. Similar to the 1980 Noise Element of the General Plan, the ',City' s existing Noise Ordinance as contained in Zoning Ordinance Section 9-4. 163 is outdated. The coordinated effort among ''•the Cities and County has resulted in a consistent pattern of regulations and standards for noise throughout the County. III 000038 The proposed Noise Ordinance has been modified slightly to • reflect the opinions of the City Attorney and to respond to local, unique situations. First, instead of exempting all activities at schools or parks, the proposed wording exempts "City or school sponsored activities. " This language will not exempt the model speed boats at Atascadero Lake, a continuing nuisance for some area residents. Subjecting some activities, such as the model speed boats or rock bands, to the Noise Ordinance may be difficult to enforce. The sounds . are of limited duration or might be bona fide nuisances to local residents without actually exceeding the noise standards. For this reason, staff is suggesting a section be added to recognize local petitions of three or more residents as possible nuisances (Section 9-14.09) . This language is borrowed from the Municipal Code section dealing with animal control. CONCLUSIONS: Staff is confident that this Ordinance will carry out the policies of the Noise Element and provide staff with the standards and procedures to enforce the Ordinance. It is the result of a long coordinated effort with the County and an expert consultant. For this reason, staff has limited its review to reflect local conditions, while keeping the basic principles and standards as proposed by the consultant and just recently adopted by the County. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Draft Ordinance • 000039 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY0F ATASCADERO DELETING SECTION 9-4.163 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AND ADDING A NEW NOISE ORDINANCE AS CHAPTER 14 TO TITLE 9 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE (ZC 01-91; City of Atascadero) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has been regulating noise standards under a section of the Zoning Ordinance adopted in 1983; and WHEREAS, the existing noise standards are in need of updating, in addition to the regulatory and enforcement methods pursuant thereto; and WHEREAS, the City participated in a joint powers agreement with San Luis Obispo County and Cities to update the Noise Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have ';a significant adverse impact upon the environment.. The Negative ,Declaration prepared for the project is adequate under the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 17, 1992 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 01-91; and WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Section 9-4. 163 of the Atascadero Zoning Ordinance (Title 9 of the Municipal Code) is hereby repealed. Section 2. There is hereby added to Title 9 of the Atascaldero Municipal Code a new Chapter 14 as contained in 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 Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this 000040 Ordinance No. Ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: ALDEN SHIERS, Mayor City of' Atascadero, California ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: RAY WINDSOR, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director 000041 EXHIBIT A ORDINANCENO. Chapter 14. Noise Ordinance i Sec. 9-14.01. Purpose and Intent. This chapter establishes standards for acceptable exterior and interior noise levels and describes how noise is to be measured. These standards are intended to protect persons from excessive noise levels, which are detrimental to the public health, welfare and safety and contrary to the public interest because they can: interfere with sleep, communication, relaxation, and the full enjoyment of one' s property; contribute to hearing ',impairment and a wide range of adverse physiological stress conditions; and adversely affect the value of real property. It is the intent of this chapter to protect persons from excessive levels of noise within or near various residential development and ':.other specified noise-sensitive land uses. Sec. 9-14.02 Definitions. The following words, phrases, and terms as used in ';this Ordinance shall have the following meanings: a. Agricultural Property - means land uses for or devoted to the production of crops and livestock.', b. Ambient noise levels - means the composite of noise from all sources excluding the alleged offensive noise. In this context it represents the normal ';or existing level of environmental noise at a given location for a specified time of the day or night. C. A-weighted sound level - means the sound '',1evel in decibels as, measured with a sound level meter using the A-weighted network (scale) at slow meter '',response. The unit of measurement is referred to herein as dB. d. Compliance Official - means the City Community Development Director or his duly authorized deputy. e. Construction - means construction, erection, enlargement, alteration, conversion or movement of any building, structures or land together with any scientific surveys associated therewith. ' f. Decibel - means a unit for measuring the 'amplitude of a sound, equal to twenty times the logarithm to the base ten of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is twenty micropascals. g. Dwelling Unit - means a unit intended for permanent human habitation and does not include accessory structures, such as garages, guesthouses,', etc. 000042 h. Emergency Work - means the use of any machinery, equipment, vehicle, manpower or other activity in a short time effort to protect, or restore safe conditions in the community, or work by private or public utilities when restoring utility service. i. Equivalent Sound Level (Leg) - means the sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. Leq is typically computed over 1, 8 and 24-hour sample periods. j . Hospital - means any building or portion thereof used for the accommodation and medical care of the sick, injured or infirm persons and includes rest homes and nursing homes. k. Impulsive Noise - means a short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay. 1. Intruding Noise Level - means the sound level created, caused, maintained, or originating from an alleged offensive source, measured in decibels, at a specified location while the alleged offensive source is in operation. M. Noise Disturbance - means any sound which violates the quantitative standards set forth in this chapter. n. Residential Property - means a parcel of real property which is developed and used either in whole or in part for residential purposes. o. School - means public or private institutions conducting regular academic instruction at preschool, kindergarten, elementary, secondary or collegiate levels. p. Simple Tone Noise - means any noise which is distinctly audible as a single pitch (frequency) or set of pitches as determined by the Compliance Official. q. Sound Level Meter - means an instrument meeting American National Standard Institute' s Standard S1.4- 1971 for Type 1 of Type 2 sound level meters or an instrument and the associated recording and analyzing equipment which will provide equivalent data. 000043 i Sec. 9-14.03 Noise Source Exemptions: The following activities shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter: A. City or school sponsored activities conducted in public parks, public playgrounds and public or private school grounds, including but not limited to school athletic and school entertainment events; B. Any mechanical device, apparatus or equipment used related to or connected with emergency activities or emergency work; C. Noise sources associated with construction, provided such activities do not take place before six a.m. or after ten p.m. on any day except Saturday or Sunday, or ]before seven a.m. or after ten p.m. on Saturday or Sunday; D. Noise sources associated with the maintenance of residential property provided such activities take place between the hours of six a.m. and ten p.m. on any day except Saturday or Sunday, or between the hours of seven a.m. and'; ten p.m. on 0 Saturday or Sunday; E. Noise sources associated with agricultural activities on agricultural property; F. Noise sources associated with a lawful commercial or industrial activity caused by mechanical devices or equipment, including air conditioning or refrigeration systems, installed prior to the effective date', of this chapter; provided that this exemption shall expire one year after the effective date of this chapter; after which time notice and nuisance abatement proceedings shall be initiated. G. Noise sources associated with work performed by private or public utilities in the maintenance or modification of its facilities; H. Noise sources associated with the collection of waste or garbage from property devoted to commercial or', industrial uses; I. Any activity to the extent regulation thereof has been preempted by state or federal law. i 000044 Sec. 9-14.04 Noise Measurement Criteria: Any noise measurement made pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance shall be made with a sound level meter using the A- weighted network (scale) at slow meter response. Fast meter response shall be used for impulsive type sounds. Calibration of the measurement equipment utilizing an acoustical calibrator shall be performed immediately prior to recording any noise data. Exterior Noise Levels. Exterior noise levels shall be measured at the property line of the affected noise-sensitive land use. Where practical, the microphone shall be positioned three to five feet above the ground and away from reflective surfaces. Interior Noise Levels. The interior noise levels shall be measured within the affected dwelling unit, at points at least four (4) feet from the wall, ceiling or floor nearest the noise source, with windows in the normal seasonal configuration. The reported interior noise level shall be determined by taking the arithmetic average of the readings taken at the various microphone locations. Sec. 9-14.05 Exterior Noise Level Standards: A. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the incorporated area of the City to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any noise, on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the exterior noise level when measured at any affected single-or multiple-family residence, school, hospital, church or public library situated in the City to exceed the noise level standards as set forth in the following table: EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS Daytime Nighttime (7 a.m. to 10 p.m. ) (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) Hourly Equivalent Sound 50 45 Level (Leq, dB) Maximum, dB 70 65 B. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level. 000045 C. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises. D. If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be measured, the noise level measured while the source is in operation shall be compared directly to the noise level standards'. Sec. 9-14.06 Interior Noise Level Standards: A. It is unlawful for any person at any location Within the incorporated area of the City to operate or cause to be operated within a dwelling unit (intended for permanent human habitation) a source of noise or allow the creation of any noise which causes the noise level when measured inside a receiving dwelling unit situated in the incorporated area to exceed the noise level standards set forth in the following table: INTERIOR NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS me Da tiNighttime Y g (7 a.m. to 10 p.m. ) ( 10 prm. to 7 a.m. Hourly Equivalent Sound 40 35 Level (Leq, dB) Maximum Level 60 55 B. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to' equal the ambient noise level. The ambient noise level includes the noise generated by the receiving dwelling unit: C. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring'' impulsive noises. D. If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be measured, the noise level measured while the source is in operation shall be compared directly to the noise level standards: 00004E Sec. 9-14.07 Air Conditioning and Refrigeration: Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9-14.02 the intruding noise source when measured as provided in Section I is an air conditioning or refrigeration system or associated equipment installed prior to the effective date of this chapter, the exterior noise level shall not exceed 55 dB, except where such equipment is exempt from the provisions of this chapter. The exterior noise level shall not exceed fifty dB for such equipment installed or in use one year after the effective date of this chapter. Sec. 9-14.08 Waste and Garbage Collection Equipment: Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9-14.02, noise sources associated with the collection of waste or garbage from residential property by persons authorized to engage in such activity, and who are operating truck-mounted loading or compacting equipment, shall not take place before six a.m. or after seven p.m. , and the noise level created by such activities when measured at a distance of fifty feet (50) in an open area shall not exceed the following standards: 1. Eighty-five (85) dB for equipment in use, purchased or leased within six months from the effective date of this chapter. 2. Eighty (80) dB for that equipment set forth in subsection VI (1) above after five years from the effective date of this chapter. 3. Eighty (80) dB for new equipment purchased or leased after six months from the effective date of this chapter. 4. Seventy-five (75) dB for new equipment purchased or leased after thirty-six months from the effective date of this chapter. Sec. 9-14.08 Electrical Substations: Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9-14.02, noise sources associated with the operation of electrical substations shall not exceed fifty dB when measured as provided in Section 9-14.04. Sec. 9-14.09 Nuisance by Neighborhood Petition Whenever it shall be affirmed in writing" by three (3) or more persons living in separate dwellings in a neighborhood that noise is causing a nuisance or undue annoyance, the Compliance Official, if he finds such a public nuisance to exist, shall serve notice upon the property owner that the public nuisance shall be abated. 000047 Sec. 9-14.10 Exceptions: A. The owner or operator of a noise source which the Compliance Official has determined violates any of the provisions of this chapter may file an application with the Compliance Official for an exception from strict compliance with any particular provisions of this chapter where such an exception will not result in a hazardous condition or a nuisance and strict compliance would be unreasonable in view of all circumstances. The owner or operator shall set forth all actions taken to comply with such provisions, and the reasons why immediate compliance cannot be' achieved. A separate application shall be filed for each noise source; provided, however, that several mobile sources'' under common ownership or fixed sources under common ownership on a single property may be combined into one application. B. Upon receipt of the application and within thirty days, the Compliance Official shall either (1) approve s6ch request in whole or in part, (2) deny the request, or (3)' refer the request directly to the Planning Commission for action thereon in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. In the event the exception is approved, reasonable conditions may be imposed which may include restrictions on noise level, noise duration and operating hours, an approved method of achieving compliance and a time schedule for its implementation. The decision of the Compliance Official is subject to appeal to the Planning Commission for a hearing de novo by filing a written appeal with the Cojmpliance Official not later than fifteen days following the mailing of the Compliance Official' s decision to the applicant. C. Factors which the Compliance Official or Planning Commission must consider shall include but not be limited to the following: 1. Uses of property within the area affected by noise; 2. Factors related to initiating and completing all remedial work; 3. Age and useful life of the existing noise 'sources; 4. The general public interest, welfare and safety. D. The Planning Commission may grant exceptions from provisions of this chapter subject to such terms, conditions and requirements and may be deemed reasonable to achieve compliance with the provisions of this chapter'. E. Within fourteen days following the decision of' the Planning Commission on an application for an exception,', the applicant may appeal the decision to the City Council for a hearing de novo by filing a notice of appeal with the Citi Clerk. The City Council shall either affirm, modify or reverse the 0000118 decision of the Planning Commission. Such decisions shall be final and shall be based upon the considerations set forth in this section. Sec. 9-14.11 Violation-Enforcement: The violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be a misdemeanor, citable at the discretion of the City Attorney as an infraction. Violation of these provisions is deemed a public nuisance and punishable as provided in Chapter 3 of Title 1 of the Municipal Code. The provisions of this chapter may also be enforced by an injunction issued out of the superior court upon suit of the City. The City Community Development Director or his designee shall enforce the provisions of this chapter. Enforcement procedures are set in Chapter 8 of Title 9 and are intended to assure due process by establishing proper notice and abatement proceedings. 000049 MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 17 1992 1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AC-91: Consideration of an Updated Noise Element of the General Plan. 2 . ZONE CHANGE 01-91: Consideration of a proposed new Noise Ordinance to replace the existing noise standards of the Zoning Ordinance. It was noted that due to the nature of the two items, they will be considered simultaneously; however, separate actions will be taken. Doug Davidson presented the staff reports noting that the Noise Element is one of seven mandated elements of the General Plan. The Noise Ordinance implements the policies of the Noise element and establishes noise standards and enforcement methods. Further, the Noise Element is a pl4inning document which provides a policy framework by which potential noise impacts may be analyzed in project review and advance planning. Mr. Davidson discussed the dilemma of model speed boats at Atascadero Lake wherein neighboring residents will look to the Noise Element for relief for this problem which occurs most frequently on weekends. He noted that this activity is a private one and, therefore, is not exempt from:: the provisions stated in Section 9-14. 03 (Noise Source Exemptions) of the Ordinance. Mr. Davidson pointed out that under Exemptions (Section 9- 14. 03) , that Subsections c and d should reflect 7: 00 a.m. to 10: 00 p.m. beginning and ending times for noise sources associated with construction or with the maintenance of residential property. Commission questions and discussion followed. ' Commissioner Waage expressed his concern that 10: 00 p.m. is too late for someone constructing a home nextto a neighbor. It was his opinion that 9: 00 p.m. is a more suitable ending period of time for construction projects in residential areas. Commissioner Highland disagreed. After taking a poll, the Commission, on a 4:3 vote, felt that 9 : 0''0 was a more appropriate time. Discussion followed relative to the issue of noise from • construction versus general home improvement, small home projects, etc. Chairperson Luna asked if the standards and policies are "generic" to the entire County. Mr. Davidson replied that this is the case, but the ordinance itself is specific to Atascadero. PC 3/ 17/92 Chairperson Luna inquired about noise sources associated with . the collection or garbage and asked if recycling is included; he noted the controversy generated with Coast Recycling over noise. Mr. DeCamp replied that the Council approved a Commercial Service designation for Coast Recycling's property which will allow the business to apply for a conditional use permit to remain in operation at their location. One of the major concerns expressed by the Council and by residents was the excessive noise created in the past with this particular business. With approval of a use permit, the Commission would have the discretion of setting standards they felt to be appropriate for the performance of that activity, (hours of operation, etc. ) . In response to query by Commissioner Kudlac concerning the status of the model boats at the Lake, Mr. Davidson noted that concern was first expressed in May, 1991 (initial hearing on the Noise Element) . These boats would appear to exceed noise standards; it is more of a mobile, impulsive sound. The option of this situation being a nuisance to more than three residents could apply since this activity is not exempt under the provisions of Section 9-14. 03 (Noise Source Exemptions) . Commissioner Highland stressed that the ordinance will completely rule out any model powered boats at the lake. Mr. Davidson stated that there is always the possibility of a City sponsored activity for the boats. However, contact with the Community Services Director indicated that it would not be their intent at this time to take over that activity. Commissioner Kudlac suggested that measurements be taken on the boats. He noted that there are mufflers available that could lower the decibel ratings. Commissioner Highland remarked that this is a situation where there appears to be no compromise. The boats would not be exempted so they would be subject to the noise standards. Mr. Davidson referenced Section 9-14. 10 (Exceptions) adding that this section could provide the type of flexibility that Commissioner Kudlac is seeking. Discussion followed. In referencing the nuisance provisions (3 neighbors) , Mr. DeCamp pointed out that all this provides initially is a hearing before the City Council. The Council then determines whether or not the activity constitutes a nuisance; if the Council deems it to be a legitimate recreational activity, then it may not be necessarily banned just because three residents have complained. 0000iil PC 3/ 17/92 Discussion continued on possible compromises.- give and take situations that could include specific days and hours of operation, etc. In referencing 9-14.03 (a) , Commissioner Johnson asked if this would not preclude baseball activities such as Little League, Babe Ruth, etc. Mr. DeCamp remarked that most of these activities being referred to, if they are not sponsored, they aIe sanctioned by the City or school. Discussion ensued relative to changing the word sponsor to sanction which would cover any of the baseball diamonds that are leased or rented from the school or City. ' The Commission agreed with the word change. Commissioner Kudlac referenced Section 9-14. 08 (garbage and waste collection) and asked how realistic the: language is in order to meet the goals set for the decibel manges, etc. Mr. Davidson noted that Wil Mar Disposal has reviewed the document and had no comments to offer. Public Testimony - Rush Kolemaine, Atascadero resident, presented extensive testimony based on the attached document (Attachment A) in which he elaborated further on the various comments contained therein. Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, agreed with Mr. Kolemaine's statements in relationship to the affect noise has on small children. If they do not have adequate sleep, they are not capable of following what is going on in school the next day. He favored limiting the time from 8: 00 a.m. to 8: 00 P.M. In addressing the noise contour maps, Mr. Greening noted that in the Pine Mountain area, it appears that the old routing of Highway 41 along Capistrano would be nosier than if the new routing took place along the base of Pine Mountain. He voiced confusion as to what scenario is being used to (determine those maps and lines. Whitey Thorpe, 8025 Santa Ynez remarked that he is not so much concerned about noise impacts as he is about neighborhoods with barking dogs. It was his feeling that the noise ordinance is unenforceable. Mr. Thorpe stated that he takes exception when the government infringes cin individuals' personal rights and liberties. He felt that laws already exist for curtailing excessive damaging noises through the nuisance abatement process. 0000. 2 PC 3/17/92 Bob Huot, 3850 Ardilla Road, commented that he would encourage a well enforced, yet reasonable, noise ordinance while also recognizing that there is a very delicate balance between rights of property owners and the rights of neighbors to enjoy their peace and tranquility. Mr. Huot voiced his feeling that the real issue involves responsibility and respect. He then relayed a personal experience he had with a neighbor who was creating excessive noise levels wherein decibel levels ranged as high as 180. The problem was ultimately resolved 'with the help of Planning Commission members and the Community Development staff. Mr. Huot would favor the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. - End of Public Testimony - Clarification was provided on Section 9-14.06 (Interior Noise Level Standards) . Chairperson Luna referenced Mr. Greening's comment with the Highway 41/Capistrano maps in which it appears that the two areas are basically the same noise levels; an increase in noise levels along the roadways does not appear to be the casse. Discussion continued. In addressing Mr. Thorpe's comments on barking dogs, Chairperson Luna inquired as to what the policy is. Mr. Decamp explained that these types of complaints are first referred to the Police Department. If peace cannot be reached, the matter is then referred to the Department of Animal Regulations (Atascadero's animal control authority) for further action. Mr. Decamp clarified that there is an existing ordinance dealing with barking dogs that is independent of the noise ordinance. Commissioner Johnson expressed concern that one of the areas that should be designated as a sensitive noise receptor is the ZOO. Noises from the streets, neighborhood, etc. greatly affect the animals, especially during mating season. He proposed the noise levels not exceed anything beyond 60 decibels. Mr. Davidson indicated that this would be a separate category in neighborhood parks for the zoo. ' He noted that in reviewing the document, the Community Services Director did not indicate this area as needing a special criteria for noise. Commissioner Johnson noted a study currently being conducted for the Santa Barbara Zoo for the same problem, and added that experts have have expressed concern that other noise sources do have a great impact upon animals during their mating season. Discussion continued. 0000; 3 PC 3/17/92 • Mr. Decamp suggested that this issue be referred to Alan Metzler, Zoo Director and ascertain from him', if a necessity exists for a certain noise level range and make whater corrections necessary prior to forwarding thellpackage to City Council. He added that Commissioner Johnson''s point is well taken. Commissioner Lochridge concurred with Commissioner Waage's comments concerning adjustments with time frames for noise sources associated with construction and with maintenance of residential property. He questioned the definition "construction" contained in the ordinance With regard to whether home hobbies, etc. would fall under this definition. Commissioner Lochridge further stated that overall, the ordinance appears to be a clear document which is workable. With regard to the model speed boat dilemma, he hoped that an avenue can be found to keep that activity continuing. Discussion focused on time frames and whether exceptions should be made for weekends versus days of the week on the two separate issues: noise sources associated with construction and noise sources associated with maintenances of residential property. It was pointed out that in the'•,; summer, it is typically very hot during the middle of the day and most people prefer to work in cool mornings or later evenings. Commissioner Hanauer commented that no distinction should be made between days of the week; however 10: 00 p.m. is too late and an earlier time should be sought. Commissioner Waage noted his preference would be for 7:00 a.m. to 8: 00 p.m. It was his feeling that Saturdays and Sundays should have later starting times such as 8:00, a.m. Commissioner Highland pointed out that there are a lot of large lot owners that must work on the weekends to maintain their property. He cautioned that latitude must be allowed in determining appropriate limits. In response to questions, Mr. Davidson commented that in the current Zoning Ordinance, the hours are from 7: 00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Kudlac stressed that if one cannot get along with his neighbor and there is not an open relationship, then nothing will be solved. Communication is the key issue in dealing with neighbors, especially in light of increased regulations. Commissioner Johnson referenced 4 .12 (page 4-5) of the Noise Element) , "a" (rerouting traffic onto streets that have low traffic volumes or onto streets that do not adjoin noise sensitive lands) and "d" (lowing speed limits)'„ and expressed nnnnFin PC 3/ 17/92 his opposition to these mitigation measures. It was his feeling that you are mitigating for a development at the expense of a quiet neighborhood. Mr. Decamp explained that the intent is if there is a noise sensitive land use that has been affected by a new noise generator, then that generator can be moved someplace else where it is no longer affecting that or any other sensitive receptor. The idea is to move traffic away from the sensitive receptors. Discussion followed. Commissioner Johnson emphasized that when you reroute traffic from one area to another street, then you will be increasing traffic significantly on that street. Mr. Decamp pointed out that these mitigation measures are recommended measures to be investigated;. they are not conditions of approval at that point. It is important to leave open as many possible ways there are to mitigate adverse effects of increased noise. After further discussion, Commissioner Johnson recommended a change to 4. 12 to add the word "and" to "or (and/or) . MOTION: By Commissioner Waage and seconded by Commissioner Johnson to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 1C-91 based on the Findings for Approval in the Draft Resolution and the noise policies as contained in the proposed Noise Element document . with amendment to Section 4.12 (x) as follows: "a. Rerouting traffic into streets that have low traffic volumes and/or onto streets that do not adjoing noise-sensitive land uses." The motion carried 7:0. MOTION: By Commissioner Waage and seconded by commissioner Johnson to recommend approval of Zone Change 01-91 to the City Council based on the Findings for Approval contained in the draft ordinance with the following modifications: Section 9-14.03 (Noise Source Exemptions) : A. City or school sanctioned activities conducted in public parks, public playgrounds, and public or private school grounds, including but not limited to school athletic and school entertainment events." C. Noise sources associated with construction, . provided such activities do not take place before seven a.m. or after nine p.m. 000055 PC 3/17/92 D. Noise sources associated withlthe maintenance . of residential property provided such ac.,tivities take place between the hours of seven a.m. and nine p.m. The motion carried 7:0. C. INDIVIDUAL COMMENT 1. Planning Commission Commissioner Johnson inquired on the status of the "parking lot". Mr. Decamp replied that Payless Stores will not receive a sign permit until this nuisance has been completely abated. 2. City Planner Mr. Decamp reported on the Draft EIR for Highway 41 should arrive any day now. CalTrans has scheduled an informational meeting for April 23rd at the new Pavilion Which will be a two-part session (open house at 2:30 with the hearing begin- ning at 7: 00 p.m. ) . He further stated that the comment period on the draft EIR is anticipated to close on May 22nd, and noted that CalTrans is the lead agency on this project. Chairperson Luna inquired about any City public hearings relative to General Plan conformity reports. Mr. Decamp anticipated that there would be such a hearing before any construction would take place or prior to'; completion of rights-of-way acquisition. Meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. MINUTES RECORDED BY: PAT SHEPPHARD, Administrative ,,Secretary MINUTES APPROVED BY: STEVEN L. DECAMP, City Planner; 0000.56 PC 3/ 17/92 ATTACHMENT A rskci a ❑ uuaoaa ❑ ❑ uaauuaua ❑ ❑ ❑ asouaaaaaa ❑ ❑ n ❑ a ❑ auaaana ❑ aa ❑ aua ❑ aa Russell S.Kolemaine/P.O.Box 1990/Atascadero/CA 93423.1990 [8051466,8200(Voice/FAX/Msgs) City of Atascadero PLANNING COMMISSION c/o Mr. George Luna, Chmn 6500 Palma Atascadero, CA 93422 REF: (a) General Plan Amendment 1C-91 Noise Element update; (b)Zone Change 01-91, Proposed Noise Ordinance. 17 March 92 Sirs: Upon review of the consultant and staff reports submitted to the Planning Commission on this date, I am prompted to submit the following observations and comments regarding the above. In general, I am personally pleased by the demonstrated effort of the consultants and staff in drafting these documents, and by the serious concern demonstrated by the Commission and the City Council regarding the impact of noise within our urban environment. I am amply aware of the negative and destructive effects of this .environmental condition from personal experience and extensive research on behalf of citizen groups elsewhere. Some of what follows derives from this experience, and is here submitted for the benefit of the Commission and the Council and city staff in hopes that Atascadero residents will, in the future, enjoy the benefits of more effective and enlightened city policies in this area. GENERAL COMMENTS ON URBAN NOISE 1. Noise is unnatural. That is, it rarely occurs in Nature except in the case of thunder, wind storms, earthquakes, landslides or animal stampedes. In general, it should be recognized that noise is usually created by human agency. Any serious consideration of noise should always recognize that places such as factories or highways do not of themselves create noise, people do.In Atascadero, therefore, there are 23,210 humans who are the receptors, and 23,210 humans who are the sources of noise among a population of 23,210 people. 2. Within our society, certain categories of people tend most frequently to be noise sources, others most frequently are noise receptors. Males between the ages of 10 and 40 generate greater volumes of noise through their work and play activities in proportion to their numbers than almost all others. Women are not only the gentler and fairer segment of society, but those who are usually the quietist. (Those few in their teens and twenties among the general population who risk their hearing alongside their male peers through listening to dangerously over-amplified music are a minority.) 3.Those most harmed physically by noise are infants, small children and the elderly. Of special concern to regulators should be those afflicted with arteriosclerosis, a commonly called"hardening of the arteries". Medical studies in Amsterdam, Zurich, New Jersey and elsewhere demonstrate a positive correlation between loud, sudden or constant noise and damage to blood vessels, either directly through involuntary (Continued) 0000.57 Atascadero Planning Commission 17 March 92 Page Two motor response to the actual noise, or indirectly through noise-induced stress. According to the American Heart Assn., one in seven Americans are afflicted with this disease, which occurs most frequently among (in order) the elderly, women, minorities, and low income/poor diet classifications. In Atascadero, with our relatively larger proportion (14.65% vs 11.2% nationally) of retired and older citizens, it can be safely interpolated that at least 3,000 people are at risk from this disease and therefore, deserve greater 'consideration in the regulation of noise-making activities 4. Noise can be reasonably predicted to occur in certain broad areas through simple observation of population, movement and social interaction. As an example, we know that in Atascadero we have ap' rommately 9,000 ' employed persons 4,500 who commute to San Luis Obispo), 1,200 business owners and managers (including about 500 licensed to operate in their own homes), and 5,600 2 children enrolled in schools, 3,4003 persons over age 60,' of whom 2,700 are retired; plus another 3,800 persons of other categories (homemakers, self-employed, unemployed, convalescents, etc.). Given this data, it can be reasonably assumed that residentially zoned areas of the city will contain approximately 23,000 receptor/sources during night time hours, while commercially and industrially zoned areas will be nearly vacant except for travelers stopping over and those with night time employment. During weekday daytime morning hours, these same residential areas will have a maximum population of only about 7,000 receptor/sources. During weekday evening and_weekend daytime hours, however, the same areas would have a population of receptor/sources at least double or greater than weekday mornings. 5. Noise sources most frequently complained about within an urban environment are not those resulting from stationary and permanent transportation activities.Those of greatest annoyance result from human activities that involve the use of powered tools and toys; or result from overly exuberant and thoughtless celebrants in residential settings. I Source:Atascadero Chamber of Commerce Z Source:Atascadero Unifiigd School District 3 Source:U.S.Census, 19901 COMMENTS ON GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1C-91 NOISE ELEMENT UPDATE 1. While the proposed Noise Element addresses issues of noise from',transportation and most identifiable stationary sources, it is noticeably deficient in it's acknowledgement of other activities or sources that generate noise, as described above, and further lacks clear understanding of the differences in noise generating activities definable by both time and specific land uses. Within these contexts, the Noise Element adopted by the City should properly • describe maximum allowable noise exposures during specific week and day parts. Weekends, comprising 115 days of the year (almost 1/3rd of our lives) are not the same as weekdays in residentially-zoned areas in terms of numbers of either receptors or sources (Continued) 000058 Atascadero Planning Commission 17 March 92 Page Three and should be protected from non-stationary and non-transportation related sources accordingly. Further, special concern needs to be demonstrated for residential areas of special character, such as those with smaller property sizes (vis-a-vis the 2.5 acre Atascadero "standard), especially mobile home parks and other condominium properties designed and in use by senior residents, and multiple family residential units. Whereas in areas with larger lot sizes, noise can be more effectively dampened by distance, in areas of greater population density, lower maximum dB levels (See: Table 3-2) are required to mitigate the negative effects of noise on receptor/sources. COMMENTS ON PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE 9-14 2. Sec.9-14.03 Noise Source Exemptions, sub (C) and (D): -T:0,0 1,�v Hours related to construction and maintenance of residential property noise provide a far greater window of opportunity for these activities ( 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily, 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM weekends) than most residents would find acceptable, especially in existing residentially-zoned areas of smaller lot sizes, and within multifamily and condominium projects. Although during the hotter four months of the year those engaged in such activities may prefer to complete their work before midday, activity involving the use of powered tools such as saws, grinders, drills and air hammers, or mowers, edgers and tillers (which in some cases produce dB levels high enough to require OSHA ear protectors for the user), should not be permitted to commence at such early hours. This is especially.true during the other eight months of the year. An 8:00 AM start-up of power tools during weekdays and on Saturdays would have a less damaging effect on the quality of life for receptors. The 8:00 AM Saturday start-up time provides opportunity for completion of household maintenance tasks sufficient to justify a 12:00 Noon start-up limitation on Sundays. Construction work in residential areas requiring use of power tools should not be permitted on Sundays under any except extreme emergency circumstances. Similarly, the 10:00 PM shut-down in residential areas would fall at least two hours later than recommended bedtimes for smaller children as well as for senior residents and should therefore be changed to 8:00 PM on all days. 3. Sec. 9-14.05 Exterior Noise Level Standards, sub (A) and (B): As described above, standards for maximum exterior noises require revision to take into consideration the distinctions among human activities, the probable numbers of receptors/sources, and specific residential zoning. In most large-lot residential areas, ambient nighttime sound levels that would be applicable are actually closer to 35-45 dB. Weekday maximum levels of 60/50 dB (daytime/nighttime) in the noise ordinance would be more appropriate. In the areas where noise level standards would have to be applied, a maximum weekday 65/55 dB (daytime/nighttime) level would be more appropriate. Sunday standards should reflect nighttime standards prior to noon, daytime standards thereafter until 8:00 PM in all residentially-zoned areas. (Continued) 000059 Atascadero Planning Commission 17 March 92 Page Four 4. Sec.9-14.06 Interior Noise Level Standards,sub (A) and (B): In these sub-sections, there is some lack of clarity for a lay readar as to whether the intended interior level standards apply only within the source location, or apply also within another, receptor, location at some distance. In the former instance, enforcement is improbable at best, in the latter case, application of exterior standard levels should suffice to alleviate any problems for receptors except in apartment houses and hotel rooms. The wording used in Sec.9-14.06 should be reviewed for clarification and intent. 5. Sec.9-14.09 Nuisance by Neighborhood Petition: While adequate in dealing with stationary noise sources, this means of abatement falls short of providing residents of a means to cope with noise emanating from non- stationary sources, those that happen on an occasional but recurring and/or impulsive basis, a common situation in any urban environment. In such instances, the normal tendency is for aggrieved receptprs to contact law enforcement officers, in the hope of assistance in abating the noise nuisance. In all except the most egregious situations, police officers can only hope to carry aE message to those responsible for the source regarding neighbors dissatisfaction. Unless provided with means and/or time to measure dB's within''a property, or at a property line, most police calls of this nature are unlikely to be resolved in a timely and satisfactory manner acceptable to those affected. Additional consideration of Sec. 9-14.09 is needed to determine a more effective means of providing effective resolution of these situations. Respectfully, Rush Kolemaine 000060 RESOLUTION NO. 41-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF AN UPDATED NOISE ELEMENT TO BE INCORPORATED AS NEW CHAPTER IV OF THE GENERAL PLAN. (GPA 1C-91 - City of Atascadero) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has grown considerably since incorporation; and WHEREAS, the City's General Plan, which was prepared in the 1970' s and adopted in 1980 to guide the City' s general growth is in need of updating; and WHEREAS, the City has undertaken a comprehensive update program in conjunction with San Luis Obispo County and its Cities; WHEREAS; the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero conducted a public hearing on the subject amendment on March 17, P g 7 1992; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65356 provides that a General Plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows: 1. The proposed Noise Element reflects policies and standards appropriate for the city of Atascadero. 2. The proposed General Plan amendment will not have a significant adverse affect on the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to approve General Plan Amendment GPA 1C-91 as follows: 1. Amendment to the General Plan by adoption of an updated Noise Element to be incorporated as Chapter IV, as contained in attached Exhibit A. 2. Rescinds chapter XII Noise of the 1980 General Plan. 3. Incorporates the following additional materials by reference into the Technical Appendix Noise Element Technical Reference Document, September, 1991; Noise Element Acoustical Design Manual, September, 1991. 000061 • Resolution No. 41-92 Page 2 On motion by and seconded by the foregoing resolution'' is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERQ CA • ALDEN SHIERS o Ma rr Y ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: RAY WINDSOR, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director Ut�(1U�;2 ORDINANCE NO. 245 . AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DELETING SECTION 9-4.163 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AND ADDING A NEW NOISE ORDINANCE AS CHAPTER 14 TO TITLE 9 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE (ZC 01-91; City of Atascadero) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has been regulating noise standards under a section of the Zoning Ordinance adopted in 1983; and WHEREAS, the existing noise standards are in need of updating, in addition to the regulatory and enforcement methods pursuant thereto; and WHEREAS, the City participated in a joint powers agreement with San Luis Obispo County and Cities to update the Noise Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate under the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 17, 1992 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 01-91; and WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Section 9-4.163 of the Atascadero Zoning Ordinance (Title 9 of the Municipal Code) is hereby repealed. Section 2. There is hereby added to Title 9 of the Atascadero Municipal Code a new Chapter 14 as contained in 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 Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this 000063 Ordinance No. 245 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 'jfull force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: ALDEN SHIERS, Mayas City of Atascadera', California ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: RAY WINDSOR, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: . HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director 000064 EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO . 245 Chapter 14. Noise Ordinance Sec. 9-14.01. Purpose and Intent. This chapter establishes standards for acceptable exterior and interior noise levels and describes how noise is to be measured. These standards are intended to protect persons from excessive noise levels, which are detrimental to the public health, welfare and safety and contrary to the public interest because they can: interfere with sleep, communication, relaxation, and the full enjoyment of one's property; contribute to hearing impairment and a wide range of adverse physiological stress conditions; and adversely affect the value of real property. It is the intent of this chapter to protect persons from excessive levels of noise within or near various residential development and other specified noise-sensitive land uses. Sec. 9-14.02 Definitions. The following words, phrases, and terms as used in this Ordinance shall have the following meanings: a. Agricultural Property - means land uses for or devoted to the production of crops and livestock. b. Ambient noise levels - means the composite of noise from all sources excluding the alleged offensive noise. In this context it represents the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location for a specified time of the day or night. C. A-weighted sound level - means the sound level in decibels as measured with a sound level meter using the A-weighted network (scale) at slow meter response. The unit of measurement is referred to herein as dB. d. Compliance Official - means the City Community Development Director or his duly authorized deputy. e. Construction - means construction, erection, enlargement, alteration, conversion or movement of any building, structures or land together with any scientific surveys associated therewith. f. Decibel - means a unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound, equal to twenty times the logarithm to the base ten of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is twenty micropascals. g. Dwelling Unit - means a unit intended for permanent human habitation and does not include accessory structures, such as garages, guesthouses, etc. 000065 h. Emergency Work - means the use of any machinery, equipment, vehicle, manpower or other activity in a short time effort to protect, or restore ',safe conditions in the community, or work by private or public utilities when restoring utility service. i. Equivalent Sound Level (Leg) - means the ';sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. Leq is typically computed over 1, 8 and 24-hour sample periods. j . Hospital - means any building or portion thereof used for the accommodation and medical care of the sick, injured or infirm persons and includes rest homes and nursing homes. k. Impulsive Noise - means a short duration,', usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay. 1. Intruding Noise Level - means the sound Bevel created, caused, maintained, or originating from a:n alleged offensive source, measured in decibels, at a specified location while the alleged offensive source is in operation. M. Noise Disturbance - means any sound which violates the quantitative standards set forth in this chapter. n. Residential Property - means a parcel of real property which is developed and used either in whale or in part for residential purposes. o. School - means public or private institutions conducting regular academic instruction at preschool, kindergarten, elementary, secondary or collegiate levels. p. Simple Tone Noise - means any noise which', is distinctly audible as a single pitch (frequency) or set of pitches as determined by the Compliance Official.'' q. Sound Level Meter - means an instrument meeting American National Standard Institute' s Standard S1.4- 1971 for Type 1 of Type 2 sound level metiers or an instrument and the associated recording and analyzing equipment which will provide equivalent data. 000066 • Sec. 9-14.03 Noise Source Exemptions: The following activities shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter: A. City or school sanctioned activities conducted in public parks, public playgrounds and public or private school grounds, including but not limited to school athletic and school entertainment events; B. Any mechanical device, apparatus or equipment used related to or connected with emergency activities or emergency work; C. Noise sources associated with construction, provided such activities do not take place before seven a.m. or after nine p.m. ; D. Noise sources associated with the maintenance of residential property provided such activities take place between the hours of seven a.m. and nine p.m. ; E. Noise sources associated with agricultural activities on agricultural property; F. Noise sources associated with a lawful commercial or industrial activity caused by mechanical devices or equipment, including air conditioning or refrigeration systems, installed prior to the effective date of this chapter; provided that this exemption shall expire one year after the effective date of this chapter; after which time notice and nuisance abatement proceedings shall be initiated. G. Noise sources associated with work performed by private or public utilities in the maintenance or modification of its facilities; H. Noise sources associated with the collection of waste or garbage from property devoted to commercial or industrial uses; I. Any activity to the extent regulation thereof has been preempted by state or federal law. 00006 Sec. 9-14.04 Noise Measurement Criteria: Any noise measurement made pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance shall be made with a sound level meter using the A- weighted network (scale) at slow meter response. Fast meter response shall be used for impulsive type sounds. 'Calibration of the measurement equipment utilizing an acoustical calibrator shall be performed immediately prior to recording any noise data.. Exterior Noise Levels. Exterior noise levels shall be measured at the property line of the affected noise-sensitive land use. Where practical, the microphone shall be positioned three to five feet arbove the ground and away from reflective surfaces. Interior Noise Levels. The interior noise levels shall be measured within the affected . dwelling unit, at points at least four (4) feet frown the wall, ceiling or floor nearest the noise source, with windows in the normal seasonal configuration. The reported interior noise level shall be determined by taking the arithmetic averagIe of the readings taken at the various microphone locations.'; Sec. 9-14.05 Exterior Noise Level Standards: A. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the incorporated area of the City to create any no or to allow the creation of any noise, on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the exterior noise level when measured at any 'affected single-or multiple-family residence, school, hospital, church or public library situated in the City to exceed the noise level standards as set forth in the following table: EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS Daytime , Nighttime (7 a.m. to 10 p.m. ) (10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Hourly Equivalent Sound 50 45 Level (Leq, dB) Maximum, dB 70 65 B. In the event the measured ambient noise level :exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to' equal the ambient noise level. 000068 C. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises. D. If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be measured, the noise level measured while the source is in operation shall be compared directly to the noise level standards. Sec. 9-14.06 Interior Noise Level Standards: A. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the incorporated area of the City to operate or cause to be operated within a dwelling unit (intended for permanent human habitation) a source of noise or allow the creation of any noise which causes the noise level when measured inside a receiving dwelling unit situated in the incorporated area to exceed the noise level standards set forth in the following table: INTERIOR NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS Daytime Nighttime (7 a.m. to 10 p.m. ) (10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Hourly Equivalent Sound 40 35 Level (Leq, dB) Maximum Level 60 55 B. In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level. The ambient noise level includes the noise generated by the receiving dwelling unit. C. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises. D. If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be measured, the noise level measured while the source is in operation shall be' compared directly to the noise level standards. 000069 Sec. 9-14.07 Air Conditioning and Refrigeration: Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9-14.02 the intruding noise source when measured as provided in Section Itis an air conditioning or refrigeration system or associated equipment installed prior to the effective date of this chapter, the exterior noise level shall not exceed 55 dB, except': where such equipment is exempt from the provisions of this chapter. The exterior noise level shall not exceed fifty dB for such equipment installed or in use one year after the effective date of this chapter. Sec. 9-14.08 Waste and Garbage Collection Equipment: Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9-14.02, noise sources associated with the collection of waste or garbage from residential property by persons authorized to engage in such activity, and who are operating truck-mounted loading or compacting equipment, shall not take place before six a.m. or after seven p.m. , and the noise level created by such activities when measured at a distance of fifty feet (50) in an open area shall not exceed the following standards: 1. Eighty-five (85) dB for equipment in use, purchased or leased within six months from the effective date of this chapter. 2. Eighty (80) dB for that equipment set forth in'' subsection 9-14. 08 (1) above after five years from the effective date of this chapter. 3. Eighty (80) dB for new. equipment purchased or leased after six months from the effective date of this chapter. 4. Seventy-five (75) dB for new equipment purchased or leased after thirty-six months from the effective date of this chapter. Sec. 9-14.08 Electrical Substations: Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9-14.02, noise sources associated with the operation of electrical substations shall not exceed fifty dB when measured as provided in Section 9-14. 04. Sec. 9-14.09 Nuisance by Neighborhood Petition Whenever it shall be affirmed in writing by three ( ) or more persons living in separate dwellings in a neighborhood that noise is causing a nuisance or undue annoyance, the Compliance Official, if he finds such a public nuisance to exist, shall 000070 serve notice upon the property owner that the public nuisance shall be- abated. Sec. 9-14.10 Exceptions: A. The owner or operator of a noise source which ',the Compliance Official has determined violates any of the provisions of this chapter may file an applicajtion with the Compliance Official for an exception from strict compliance with any particular provisions of this chapter where such an exception will not result in a hazardous condition or a nuisance and strict compliance would be unreasonable in view of all circumstances. The owner or operaltor shall set forth all actions taken to comply with such provisions, and the reasons why immediate compliance cannot be achieved. A separate application shall be filed for each noise source; provided, however, that several mobile sources under common ownership or fixed sources under common ownership on a single property may be combined into one application. B. Upon receipt of the application and within thirty days, the Compliance Official shall either (1) approve such request in whole or in part, (2) deny the request, or (3), refer the request directly to the Planning Commission for action thereon in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. In the event the exception is approved, reasonable conditions may be imposed which may include restrictions on noise level, noise duration and operating hours, an approved method of achieving compliance and a time schedule for its implementation. The decision of the Compliance Official is subject to appeal to the Planning Commission for a hearing de novo by filing a written appeal with the Compliance Official not later than fifteen days following the mailing of the Compliance Official' s decision to the applicant. C. Factors which the Compliance Official or Planning Commission must consider shall include but not be limited to the following: 1. Uses- of property within the area affected by noise; 2. Factors related to initiating and completing all remedial work; 3. Age and useful life of the existing noise '',sources; 4. The general public interest, welfare and safety. D. The Planning Commission may grant exceptions from provisions of this chapter subject to such terms, conditions and requirements as may be deemed reasonable to achieve compliance with the provisions of this chapter. i 0uGO j1 E. Within fourteen days following the decision of the Planning Commission on an application for an exception, the applicant may appeal the decision to the City Council for a hearing de novo by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk. The City Council shall either affirm, modify or reverse the decision of the Planning Commission. Such decisions shall be final and shall be based upon the considerations set forth in this section. Sec. 9-14.11 Violation-Enforcement: The violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be a misdemeanor, citable at the discretion of the City Attorney as an infraction. Violation of these provisions is deemed a public nuisance and punishable as provided in Chapter 3 of Title 1 of the Municipal Code. The provisions of this chapter may also be enforced by an injunction issued out of the superior court upon suit of the City. The City Community Development Director or his designee shall enforce the provisions of this chapter. Enforcement procedures are set in Chapter 8 of Title 9 and are intended to assure due process by establishing proper notice and abatement proceedings. 000(V;I. REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting ]pate: 5-12-92 CITY OF ATASCADERO Item No.:'� C-2 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Modification of Ordinance No. 181 - Sanitation Regulations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council adopt attached Ordinance No. 246 pertaining to Sanitation regulations. DISCUSSION: The primary purpose for revising Ordinance 181 at this time is to modify the requirements for mandatory connectilon. Currently properties must connect within 24 months after I sewer service becomes available. The difficulty arises when theFproperty owner refuses to connect and the city has no method to f6rce connection except legal action, which is cumbersome. We have on record 187 residential properties to which sewer is available but not connected to the structure. The majority of these properties are in Assessment District #4 (Seperado Cayucos) . Any future extensions, such as the 26 parcels in the'' Lakeview/Santa Rosa project, would be noticed in the same manner. ', Under the requirements of the revised Ordinance, the 24 month requirement would be eliminated and replaced with a jrequirement for connection upon failure of the septic system or change of ownership. To ensure compliance a Notice would be recorded on the property title stating that the property must be connected to sewer prior to change of ownership. The property would also be flagged on our in house computer tracking system (Govtech) to prohibit issuance of a permit for replacement of a failed sOptic system. The other changes proposed are for the purpose of clarification of existing regulations and to updatei this Ordinance to conform with Federal and State regulations. 0000'73 FISCAL IMPACT: Permit Fees would be collected upon issuance of a sewer connection permit, however, City Council waived the connection fees for all properties in Cease and Desist areas. Additionally, these properties are currently being charged $7.00 per month for sewer availability which would increase to $10.54 per month upon connection. 000074 ORDINANCE NO 246 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 7 OF THE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE (SANITATION ORDINANCE,) (City of Atascadero) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero adoptedan Ordinance establishing the Wastewater Division of the ' Public Works Department, and Setting Rules and Regulations Thereto (Ordinance No. 181) ; and WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of amending its wastewater regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments promote the', public health, safety and general welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Title 7 of the City of Atascadero Municipal ! Code is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit A, which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Section 2 . Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, ,published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 3 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12: 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. 000075 Ordinance No. 246 Page 2 On motion by and seconded by the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following role call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor City of Atascadero ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: GREG LUKE, Dir. of Public Works 000076 EXHIBIT A WASTEWATER ORDINANCE 1991 Revisions 7-01. 003 Liability for Violations: Any person , violating any provision of this Ordinance shall be liable to the City for all damages to City property and or fines levied resulting therefrom. A violation of any provision of this Ordinance is ',a misdemeanor. Penalties for violation of this ordinance shall be set forth in Chapter 3 of Title 1 of this Code. Chapter 2. Definitions All code numbers assigned to individual definitions shall be deleted from the code. The following definitions are to be integrated and alphabetized with existing definitions Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) : The quantity of oxygen utilized in the. biochemical oxidation of organic matter, after 5 days, using standard laboratory procedures and expressed in milligrams per liter (MG/1) . Domestic Wastewater: Water bearing only those wastes derived from the ordinary living processes and of such character as to permit satisfactory disposal to, and treatment at the City Wastewater Treatment Plant. Grease: All fat, grease, oil, wax' or other trichlorotrifluoroethane soluble matter of animal, vegetable, petroleum or mineral origin. Industrial User: A person who discharges nondomestic wastewater into the City sewer system. Person: Any individual, firm, company, association, society, corporation, group, governmental agency or educational institution. 7-3 . 002 The City Council hereby finds and declares the maintenance or use of eesspoele septic systems and other local means of sewage disposal within the City Urban Services Line to constitute a public nuisance, and finds it to be in the public interest that property to which a public sewer is available be required to connect thereto. 000077 7-3 .003 When-apub l i e sewer bee *.!able by a---private-sewage-dispel l system, said building shall: be eenneeted-te the-pubs-ie-sewer within-twes-ty-€eur (2 4) ment s after said-pulse-sewer-isaaallable-and-said-private-disposal -yst�-� shall be-abandened-in the manner r'eseribed by the Gi y Building Department in—aeeerdanee-with the e...r r:tl._ adepted editlen of 4_hc When a public sewer becomes available to a building served by a private disposal system, said building may be connected at anytime but shall be connected to the public sewer system upon 1) Failure of the on-site disposal system or 2) Sale of the property, whichever occurs first. The City shall cause notice to be placed on the title to all property to which sewer is available stating these requirements. Said on-site disposal system shall be abandoned in the manner prescribed by the City Building Department in accordance with the currently adopted edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code unless a variance is granted by the City of Atascadero. 7-4. 09 In addition to such fees as shall be assessed for sewer connection and sewer taps, applications for sewer service shall be assessed a sewer annexatien extension fee, subject to the following exceptions and applications of Section 7-4.010, as follows: 7-4.010 Exception to and application of mat! " extension fees will be as follows: (a) A vacant lot presently inside Maintenance District No 1 where sewer is available will be exempt from payment of an annemati extension fee. (b) Where a lot inside Maintenance District Number 1 is subject to a lot-split, and the mat! extension fee has not been previously paid, the applicant shall pay an annexatien extension fee for all but one lot in addition to such other fees as shall be required according to the City of Atascadero. (c) Areas designated Cease and Desist and adjacent areas covered by a Health Officer's letter will be exempt from new charges and increase in annexati extension fees, but will pay the fees in effect prior to passage of this ordinance - eight hundred fifty (850) dollars. 7-5. 001 Extensions of the public sewer system of the Wastewater Collection Facilities shall be made as follows: UUOU'78 (a) Any person desiring an extension of the public sewer system shall make a request in writing t& the City for a preliminary investigation of the feasibility of said extension. , he Gity shall prepare-a-preiininaryestimate-ef the-eeste€--said by said sewer extenren- (b) Requestor shall submit improvement plans of the proposed extension, prepared by a Registered Civil (Engineer in the State of California, for approval by the '',, City Engineer. (c) The person requesting said extension shall execute and file a written Sewer Extension Performance Agreement, the terms of which shall be subject to approval by the City Council, whereby said person agrees to complete all required improvements at his expense{ and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, within the time period specified within the agreement. Said person further agrees to provide the City Engineer with a detailed cost break-down of his actual expenditures for any improvements authorized in the agreement.', The agreement shall also provide for inspection by the ', City Engineer, or his designated representative, of all improvements, and reimbursement of the City by the reggestor, for the costs of the inspection. The City will invoice the requestor for such inspection costs and any amount unpaid for such inspection costs and any amount unpaid thirty (30) days from the date of the City's involice shall bear interest at ten (10%) percent per annum beginning within thirty (30) days after the date of the invoice. The Sewer Extension Performance Agreement may also provide: (1) for the construction of the improvements and units; and (2) for an extension of the time under conditions that are unspecified. No extension of'' time shall be granted except upon certification by the City Engineer that such extension is justified and upon approval of the City Council. In addition to the requirements of this section said person shall provide the City with a 100% performance and 50% labor and material 1 bond or other suitable security as deemed appropriate by the City Attorney. net to -emeeed fifty fty (58%_ef the eestef aments The City Council may waive such requirements for a bond at its option. (d) No hookup to the public sewer will be permitted until all improvement work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and all charges have been paid by the requestor in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance. 0000'79 7-5. 002 The City may approve 'a refund agreement with persons who have paid for public sewer extensions. Said agreements shall provide for reimbursement of the excess cost borne by said persons, at such time within fifteen (15) years as money is paid to the City for service from said sewer extension. The City shall require the applicant to file and have approved by the City Engineer a reimbursement map showing the method and amount of cost spread to each future connection to the sewer extension. Upon execution of a Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement the City shall cause notices to appear on the title of all property to which service has been provided stating that connection is required and payment due upon change of ownership or failure of on-site disposal system, whichever occurs first. 7-6.002 Pipe and Joint Testing: All piping and all joints shall pass an air pressure test as per UPC 318. After backfilling and compaction, the pipeline shall also pass a mandrel test. Television inspection may also be required as directed. ��- 7-6.003 Certificate of Inspection: When it appears to the satisfaction of the City that any work authorized by these regulations has been constructed according to and meets the requirements of, all provisions of this Ordinance and other applicable laws, and that all the fees for the doing and inspection thereof have been paid, the City shall cause to be issued to the person, firm or corporation constructing such work a certificate of final inspection, which certificate shall recite that such work as has been done pursuant to the permit has been constructed according to the Ordinance provisions of said City, that said work is in sanitary condition. The City shall not issue such certificate of inspection unless the requirements of this Ordinance have been met. 7-7. 903 Ne Building sewer shall be eenstrueted with pipe of- emeZdiameter less than fe ekes. 7-7. G$4 Building sewers S1rrull be-plaeed-en a uniferm crepe-ef less than -f eurth (1/4)ef a�n��rfeet, eme'^Gpt that when -it- is itis net i raettiea9z te ebta - this slepe, then , s epe—enet ess than ene-eighth (Ij8) ef an ineh per feet may be used when appreved by the Gity. 7-7. 005 A clean-out shall be placed in every building sewer within five (5) feet of each building, at all changes in alignment or grade in excess of twenty-two and one-half (22-1/2) degrees within five (5) feet of the junction with the public sewer or at the right-of-way line, as directed by the City Engineer, and at intervals not to exceed one hundred (100) feet in straight runs. The clean-out shall be made by inserting a "Y" fitting in the line and fitting the clean-out in the "Y" branch in an approved manner. However in the case of the clean-out near the junction of the public sewer, the "Y" branch shall be extended to a depth of not more than twe—(2) feet, ner- lessthanone (1) foot below the surface of the ground before the clean-out is installed. 000080 • has been inspeeted and appreved by the Gity. 4-4- 004 All }ging-acrd-ail jeltts in eaehbuld' . are to watertight and shall be tested by—filling thebuilding sewer water, in its—entirety—ems in seetiens, in sueha� ~~ that no partis tested with less-than-t- t:-rLte (3) feet hec^cccerwcrccr-rte tu to a -also be required as--diree-tea the alignment 4-4. 098 - g-se ming fixturesieeated-Ri= nn--e-ievat-ien ef less than 'A --nearest upstreara nhele the main sewe' --- - -==g �T-i; tires shall dr-ai-n--�"y gravi 1 _,...4.. the 11 be preteeted frem baekflew ef sewage by main sewer-, and installing an appreved type baek water valve, andleaeh sueh baek water valve shall be installed enly in the braneh e3� seetien ef the less-than-ene--feet abeve the-nearest—upstream manhele c_�__r. 7-8. 001 Service to Areas Outside Existing System: ', (e) The City may approve a ria reimbursement agreement with persons who have paid more than their proportional cost of the sewer service extension. The '',agreement shall provide for reimbursement of the excess cost borne by said persons at such time within fifteen (15) years as money is paid to the City for service from said sewer extension. The City shall require the applicant to file and have approved by the City Engineer a reimbursement map showing the method and amount of cost spread to each future connector to the sewer extension.'' 7-8. 003 The annexati-- extension fees shall be paid', before a permit is issued for a sewer connection pursuant to this 'Chapter in that amount as set forth in Chapter IV. For the purposes of this chapter, lot splits or changes in use of lots shall be considered an annexal extension for the payment of the a„„-..at extension fee. 7-9. 002 No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged any of the following described waters or wastes to any public sewers: (a) Any gasoline benzene, naphtha, fuel ;oil, or other flammable or explosive liquid, solid or' gas that has a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140 degrees F or 60 degrees C using the test methods specified in 40 CFR 261:21. (b) Any waters or wastes containing toxic, infectious, or or poisonous solids, liquids, or gases in sufficient quantity, either singularly or by interaction with other wastes, to injure or interfere with any waste water treatment process or constitute a nuisance or hazard to humans, er- animal, the local environment, or create any hazard in the—reee' warmers of the stewa}eM treatment hazardous condition to occur in the sewage system. (c) Any waters or wastes having a pH lower than 5. 51 or higher than 9, or having any other corrosive property capable of causing damage or hazard to structures, equipment, and personnel or the wastewater treatment and collection system. (g) Any waters or wastes containing suspended solids or oxygen demanding pollutants or such character and quantity that unusual attention or expense is required to handle such materials at the wastewater treatment plant. (I) Any water added to a wastewater discharge for the sole purpose of dilution as a means to achieve compliance with any pretreatment standard or local limit; (j) Any waters or wastes containing any radioactive materials or wastes of such half-life or concentration that they do not comply with regulations issued by appropriate authorities (section 30285 and 30287 of the California Code of Regulations) ; (k) Any waters or wastes containing color which is not removed in the ordinary Wastewater Treatment Plant process; 7-9.006 Pretreatment Facilities: Where pretreatment of discharge is required by the City, the necessary facilities shall be provided, operated and maintained at the user's expense. Detailed plans showing the facilities and their operating procedures shall be submitted to the City for review. Such plans must be acceptable to the City before construction is begun. Any changes in the pretreatment facilities or method of operation must be reported to and approved of by the City prior to implementation of the proposed changes. Operational difficulties or failures of pretreatment facilities shall be reported immediately to the City. • 00oOS ; 7-9.007 Control Manhole: When required by the City, the owner of any property served by a building sewer carrying industrial wastes shall install a suitable control manhole in the building sewer to facilitate observation, sampling and flow measurement of the discharge. Such manhole, when required, shall be ''accessible and safely located, and shall be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the City. The manhole shall be installed by the owner at his expense and shall be maintained by him so as: to be safe and accessible at all times. 7-9.008 Measurements and Tests: All measurements, tests and analyses of the characteristics of water and wastes shall be determined by the testing procedures specified in 40 CFR Part 136. When required by the City, the industrial user shall provide safe and secure access to the proper sampling point for the determination of compliance with federal categorical standards and/or local discharge limits. This may require the installation of a control manhole as described above. All testing shall be performed by an approved laboratory and conducted at the expense of the discharger. CHAPTER 12 . POLICY STATEMENTS The following Policy Statements are hereby adopted by the City of Atascadero to be a part of this Ordinance. 7-12. 001 All sewer main extensions are to be funded by those requesting xat a service. 7-12 . 002 rune~.. ens Extensions must be contiguous to the existing Maintenance Districts, however, for a problem sewer area, the City Council may annex extend service to public areas to provide continuity. 7-12 . 003 In consideration of the annexati.... extension requests, the City Engineer may be required to furnish ', an engineer's evaluation of adequacy of existing sewer mains affected by the service extension. This would include an evaluation of the down- stream line capacities as well as any possible upgrading of existing lift stations. 7-12. 004 On-going service to the annexed areas serviced by the extension shall not require substantially higher costs than other areas presently served. Typical of this consideration would be a need for an additional sewer lift station. 7-12 . 005 Anne..atiens Extensions will be processed'', as outlined in Chapter 8 of this Ordinance. 7-12. 006 Tnnexati Extension fees, based on use, will be due and payable upon application for annewati extension or lot splits or use change or rezoning. Uk,UUNJ 7-12.007 Should the proponent of the xat ..~ extension wish to receive reimbursement for an sewer„ main extension b those Y Y connecting within the annexed newly served area, then the proponent shall file a reimbursement map with the City upon completion of the extension. 7=12 .008—Annematlens beCse a eid teenneetien is net made rifithin 12 menths after the applieatien, and fees will be deemed ferfeited after that time. Re-appileatlen shall re- sh new fees as are etferth in this -ThnmQeet}e:M mhall net apply to y eant lets—that—are—merged within eine—year, er vacant lets At ah=cire�eve��arm-ras been extendeawithin one ycax—vxraeanrt lets w-hieh abut upen an existing sewerma�— 7-12 . 013 Where there is a change of use from apartments to condominiums, the applicant shall pay the difference in current fees and rates as established by this Ordinance prior to the approval of such change. Specifically, an apartment comp lex which is converted to condominiums shall be assessed a connection charge of forty (40) dollars per unit and an annexati extension fee of eighty (80) dollars per unit. REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-3 A & B Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 05/12/92 From: Alicia Lara, Personnel Coordinator SUBJECT: Amendment to PERS contract adding Two Yeors Additional Service Credit. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends Council adopt the attached resolution and ordinance amending the PERS contract to include Two Years Additional Service Credit benefit for Miscellaneous and Safety employees. BACKGROUND: This benefit option has resulted from the recognition within the State that financial crises exist. As a result the State Public Employees Retirement System has agreed to a one-time amendment to its retirement procedures for State and local agencies under PERS. Any agency opting to adopt this one-time program must guarantee that at least one position, in any department or other organizational unit created by retirements under ::this section, remain permanently unfilled, thereby resulting in a overall reduction in the work force of such department or organizational unit. It is scheduled to be repealed effective Januuary 1, 1993. Employees retiring under this section receive an additional two years of service credit without additional compensation. The employee must have a minimum of five years service credit and be in employment status with the City for at least one day during the designated period. FISCAL IMPACT• The direct cost will be calculated after the expiration of the designated period. The cost to the City will be based upon the number of employees that elect to retire under this benefit using 000085 a formula which includes their age and annual salary. There is also a $10.00 valuation fee for each member retiring under this benefit. The cost savings, of course, will be the reduction in workforce, so there will be a net savings to the City immediately upon the individuals retirement. Attachments: Resolution #42-92 Ordinance #247 Certificate of Compliance 000086 CERTIFICATE Of Compliance With Section 20818 Government Code In accordance with Section 20818, Government Code, and the contract between the City of Atascadero and Public Employees' Retirement System, the City of Atascadero hereby certifies that: 1. Because of an impending curtailment of, or change in the manner of performing service, the best interests of the agency will be served by granting such additional service credit. 2. It has elected to become subject to Section 20818 because of impending mandatory transfers, demotions, and layoffs that constitute at least 1% of the job classification, department or organizational unit designated resulting from the Curtailment of or change in the manner of performing its services. 3. Its intention at the time Section 20818 becomes operative is to keep all vacancies or at least one vacancy in any position in any department or other organizational unit created by retirements under this section, permanently unfilled thereby,, resulting in an overall reduction in the work force of such department or organizational unit. THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero hereby elects to provide the benefits of Section 20818, Government Code, to all eligible members who retire within the designated period, July 11, 1992 through October 8, 1992 Presiding Officer Attest: Clerk Date: C0610 00008'7 RESOLUTION NO. 42-92 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO 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 WHEREAS, The Public Employees' Retirement Law permits the participation of public agencies and their employees in the Public Employees` Retirement System by the execution of a contract and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may elect to subject themselves and their employees to amendments to said Law; and WHEREAS, One of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its intention to approve an amend- ment to said contract, which resolution shall contain a summary of the change proposed in said contract; and WHEREAS, The following is a statement of the proposed change: To provide Section 20818 (Two Years Additional Service Credit) for local miscellaneous members and local safety members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Atascadero does hereby give notice of intention to approve an amendment to the contract between the City of Atascadero and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto as an "Exhibit" and by this reference made a part hereof. On motion by Councilmember , seconded by Council- member , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: City of Atascadero LEE RABOINr City Clerk By: ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor 000088 RESOLUTION NO. 42-92 Page Two APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney 000089 �`- EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 42-92 C✓�, �� �� ,,� PAGE 1 OF 3 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT �O BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM G, AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE yI CITY OF ATASCADERO `�(►/�J 1� Y The Board of Administration, Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective April 19, 1980, and witnessed March 19, 1980, and as amended effective July 1, 1980, April 30, 1983, January 7, 1984, July 14, 1990, November 9, 1991 and April 12, 1992, which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as follows: A. Paragraphs 1 through 13 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective April 12, 1992, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 13 inclusive: 1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 60 for local miscellaneous members and age 50 for local safety members. 2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after April 19, 1980 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency. 3. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members); b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members); C. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members). 4. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: NO ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS 000090 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 42-92 PAGE 2 OF 3 PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY* 5. This contract shall be a continuation of the benefits of the contract of the Atascadero Fire Protection District, hereinafter referred to as "Former Agency", pursuant to Section 20567.2 of the Government Code, Former Agency having ceased to exist and having been required by law to be succeeded by Public Agency on July 1, 1980. Public Agency, by this contract, assumes the accumulated contributions and assets derived therefrom and liability for prior and current service under Former Agency's contract with respect to the Former Agency's employees. Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 1988. 6. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21251.13 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 60 Full).', 7. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local safety member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21252.01 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 50 Full). 8. Public Agency elected to be subject to the following optional provisions: a. Sections 21380-21387 (1959 Survivor Benefits) including Section 21382.2 (Increased 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local safety members only. b. Sections 21263, 21263.1 and 21263.3 (Post-Retirement Survivor Allowance)for local miscellaneous members only. C. Section 20930.3 (Military Service Credit as Public Service), Statutes of 1976. d. Section 20818 (Two-Years Additional Service Credit). 9. Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20759, shall not be considered an "employer" for purposes of the Public Employees' Retirement Law. Contributions of the Public Agency shall be fixed and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20759, and such contributions hereafter made shall be held by the Board as provided in Government Code Section 20759. 10. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said Retirement System. 11. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows: a. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. b. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required bylaw. 000091 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 42-92 PAGE 3 of 3 12. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 13. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct payments between the employee and the Board. B. This amendment shall �effective on the day of O 19 BOARD OF ADMINISTRA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' REMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY '4`, BY CHIEF, CONTVA4ZY SERVICES DIVISION Presiding Officer PUBLIC EMPLOMEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM - t Witness Date Attest: a� .4� . Clerk PERS-CON-702 (AMENDMENT) (Rev. 1/92) 00009`: ORDINANCE NO. 247 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF' ATASCADERO AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM ' The City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. That an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of Atascadero and the Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System is hereby authorized, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, marked Exhibit, and by such reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full. Section 2. The Mayor of the Atascadero City Council is hereby authorized, empowered and directed to execute said amendment for and on behalf of the City of Atascadero. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty-one (31) days after the date of its adoption, and prior to the expiration of fifteen ( 15) days from the passage thereof shall be published at least once in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, pub- lished and circulated in the City of Atascadero, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and 'effect. On motion by Councilmember , seconded by Council- member , the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA ATTEST: By: ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor LEE RABOIN, City Clerk 000093 Ordinance No. 247 Page 2 APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney 00009,1 GEXHIBIV A TO ORDINANCE 247 � ra PAGE 1 OF 3 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL , OF THE Y" CITY OF ATASCADERO y� 01 The Board of Administration, Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency,having entered into a contract effective April 19, 1980, and witnessed March 19, 1980, and asi amended effective July 1, 1980, April 30, 1983, January 7, 1984, July 14, 1990, November 9, 1991 and April 12, 1992, which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public .Agency hereby agree as follows: A. Paragraphs 1 through 13 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective April 12, 1992, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 13 inclusive: 1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public;Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 60 for local miscellaneous members and age 50 for local safety members. 2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after April 19, 1980 making its employees as hereinafter prov:ided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency. 3. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members); b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members); C. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members). 4. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: NO ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS OUOOy5 EXHIBIT A_TO.ORDINANEt. Z4/ PAGE 2 OF 3 VASE DO NO-r "EXHIBIT ONLY'" 5. This contract shall be a continuation of the benefits of the contract of the Atascadero Fire Protection District, hereinafter referred to as "Former Agency", pursuant to Section 20567.2 of the Government Code, Former Agency having ceased to exist and having been required by law to be succeeded by Public Agency on July 1, 1980. Public Agency, by this contract, assumes the accumulated contributions and assets derived therefrom and liability for prior and current service under Former Agency's contract with respect to the Former Agency's employees. Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 1988. 6. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21251.13 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 60 Full). 7. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local safety member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21252.01 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 50 Full). 8. Public Agency elected to be subject to the following optional provisions: a. Sections 21380-21387 (1959 Survivor Benefits) including Section 21382.2 (Increased 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local safety members only. b. Sections 21263, 21263.1 and 21263.3 (Post-Retirement Survivor Allowance)for local miscellaneous members only. C. Section 20930.3 (Military Service Credit as Public Service), Statutes of 1976. d. Section 20818 (Two-Years Additional Service Credit). 9. Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20759, shall not be considered an "employer" for purposes of the Public Employees' Retirement Law. Contributions of the Public Agency shall be fixed and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20759, and such contributions hereafter made shall be held by the Board as provided in Government Code Section 20759. 10. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said Retirement System. 11. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows: a. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. b. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required bylaw. ODUUyb EXHIBIT :IA TO ORDINANCE 247 PAGE 3 OF 3 12. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall'be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 13. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period,''proper adjustment shall be made in connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct payments between the employee and the Board. B. This amendment shall be aective on the day of 9 BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETI NT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO dr BY BY CHIEF, CO SERVICES DIVISION Presiding Officer PUBLIC EMPP ES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Witness Date Attest: Clerk PERS-CON-702 (AMENDMENT) (Rev. 1/92) REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO AgEenda Item: D-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 05/12/92 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. , File No: GPAC 92-1 SUBJECT: Initiation of proposed amendments to the City's General Plana RECOMMENDATION: Per the Planning Commission's recommendation, initiate the three General Plan amendments and associated Zoning Ordinance map amend- ments as required. BACKGROUND: On April 7, 1992, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the above referenced subject. Ona 6: 0: 1 vote (Commissioner Waage absent) , the Commission recommended initiation of the three amendments. No public testimony was received, and there was brief discussion by the Commission. HE:ps Attachment: Staff Report - April 21, 1992 000098 CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B , 2 STAFF REPORT MTG. DATE: 4/21/92 FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: April 21, 1992 BY: oSteven L. DeCamp, City Planner File No: GPAC 92-1 SUBJECT: Initiation of proposed amendments to the City' s General Plan RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission should recommend that the City Council initiate the three requested General Plan amendments, and associated Zoning Ordinance Map amendments as may be required. BACKGROUND: City policy establishes that amendments to the General Plan will be considered twice each year. The filing period for the first round of amendments for 1992 closed on April 1 with three amendment request having been filed. ANALYSIS• Two of the proposed General Plan amendments (GPA 92-1 & GPA 92-2) were generated by the City Council late in the public hearing process preceding adoption of the General Plan in January of this year. The third application (GPA 92-3) was submitted by a private party. The following will briefly outline each of the proposals . GPA 92-1 (City Owned Lots - City of Atascadero) : The City of Atascadero owns several parcels on Lakeview Drive adjacent to Atascadero Lake. The General Plan land use designation for these lots is "Moderate Density Single Family" while the lots are zoned "Residential Single Family - Moderate Density" (RSF-Y) and "Recreation" (L) . The Council has requested that these lots be specifically analyzed for their suitability for "Recreation" land use and zoning district designations . Refer to Exhibit A. GPA 92-2 (6325 Tecorida - City of Atascadero) : The land use designation for these parcels (3) was changed from "Commercial Retail" to "Office" with the adoption of 000099 General Plan Amendment Cycle 2 Staff Report the revised General Plan. The zoning district designation has been changed to "Commercial - Professional." to reflect the General Plan amendment . During the hearing process, it was suggested that "Tourist Commercial" land use and zoning designations might be more appropriate for these parcels. Rather than delay adoption of the Plan, the Council referred this proposal for review during the first round of General Plan amendments. Refer to Exhibit B. GPA 92-3 (6010 Del Rio - Hemingway) : The land use designation for this parcel is Tourist Commercial with a corresponding zoning district . Prior to the adoption of the revised General Plan, the'; land use designation for this parcel was "Suburban Single Family" . The property is located on the west side of the freeway and is situated outside the Urban Services Line. The applicant believes that inclusion of the property within the Urban Services Line will increase the development potential of the parcel . Staff recommends that this study area be expanded to include all of the Tourist Commercial parcels on the west side of US 101 . Refer to Exhibit C. CONCLUSIONS• Although no indication can be made at this time retarding future action or recommendations, there appears to be some merit in considering each of the requested amendments to the City' s General Plan. Specific recommendations for approval or denial of these requests will be made only after appropriate', environmental review, and analysis of the anticipated physical and fiscal affects of the proposals . As per usual practice, associated Zoning Ordinance amendments, as required, will be analyzed and recommended for action concurrently with action on', the General Plan amendments . ATTACHMENTS : Exhibit A - GPA 92-1 Exhibit B - GPA 92-2 Exhibit C - GPA 92-3 000100 0 ImA �� WA v � E h. i \ h t� r� ..t t.... :.t. .y .•..lf .'titi::>,{.} �'. :. .;ttti;'.'1:;..,1:':•;.:..,r,.:t+,St.}• ..}L•;}Y \\' . ,: �� �•. rl_3, .:.Y'• :.:,art y::'r:.•:'+:"'T".;''L'•'lY,:.::•'',.-:':`l•": � �. ..• .•;:.311}:S'..�!f.•'�•J,l:'}}.:.•.;;.;;::'.•�•:.•a;lt. ., �.•.' � .i:•:.'t'x:.l„... .;.}t.f�+.4....: Kra. golf OF law tp rr , �►11 Not :iii • � � � � � � , _�-R/•,°"�r` '!� 1 � in .. -� ;4v 1 PW Mill .� WA oa OR : ••••l�,f••••••••'•••••Y UT tv {}•'fid 5i;:;+:y{{S:•+:;:;�:::-: � .. ..;-.. Y::.�•.•..�•'''•.:: .:.�•.{y�•::}.':till' ��� ��� 94 i\<v\��:{�}:,S� Y ji'1''3:y�'••Y�,' •i;rti;»:.r t��.� ,a;- �� .}:t<.y,.¢.. .:�fc''F;iii'+;^•i��� Ore PWF4WALrl Ll �A:4- 4,r WA WA f r 4 MEEIN AGENDA I}AT 5� ffEM# D...-2 .,_ M E M O R A N D U M TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager May 1, 1992 FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director , SUBJECT: Response To Comments Deadline: Highway 1 Bridge Replacement and Realignment EIR At the April 23rd Highway 41 EIR Hearing at then Pavilion, the public was reminded that they have until May 22nd to respond to the Draft Environmental Impact Report. I would recommend that we would want to be on record on selected substantive issues ;relative to the EIR by that date also, as follows: 1. Stadium Park Bridge (Pages 9 & 36) . The EIR acknowledges that • the proposed 45 foot height of fill at the entrance to Stadium Park could be mitigated by construction of a bridge, which they've indicated would cost $600, 000 and would be at local expense. The City should note, that Alternate A Modified (which was developed in response to earlier City comments to lessen environmental impacts) saves $800,000 over the original Alternate A project design. That savings should absorb the cost of a Stadium Park Bridge. 2 . Traffic Signals at E1 Camino Real and Highway' 41 and Highway 101 (Page 8) . These improvements, together With additional left turn lanes at this location, are proposed as mitigation for impacts associated with Alternate A or Alternate A Modified. These improvements should also be included as mitigation for Alternate B. 3 . Long Range Design of Highway 101/41 Intersegtion. The EIR makes no commitment for a long range plan for the appropriate design of this State Highway Interchange. That commitment should be sought as a follow-up action to the% EIR regardless of which alternative is approved. 4 . Population (Parte 29) . The Environmental Impact Report quotes County population projections of 47, 423 persons for Atascadero for the year of 2015. The EIR should affirm that the holding capacity of the City's .,most recently adopted General Plan is 31, 150 persons: VUU1V11 I have asked Kathy Di Grazia, Cal Trans' Project Engineer, for a written request to you relative to their desire to hear from the City as to our preferred alternate. The above comments are intended to respond to environmental issues by May 22nd, but it is my understanding that they would take a communication advising of the City's preferred route in the near future after May 22nd. They would like to conclude with a preferred route as part of the Final EIR and its' response to public comments. HE:ph • OOOJ O;, 7 e� REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: D-3 CITY OF ATASCADERO ' Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 5/12/92 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: FY 91-92 Budget Adjustment for Fire RECOMMENDATION: Review the Acting Fire Chief's request for additional appropriations and direct staff to retur=n with the necessary confirming resolution. BACKGROUND: The attached memo from the Acting Chief McCain outlines his needs for $75,000 in additional appropriations. Basically they relate to higher than budgeted employee service costs, due to two extended illnesses and Acting Chief McCain's efforts to reduce the. Department' s unfunded leave liability. A second, more technical adjustment, is reappropriating the Fire Department's prior year encumbrances, which totaled $20,000. The items were ordered last year, but received in this fiscal year. If Council approves both issues, the total appropriation - increase would be $95,000. 000106 •w E •1 ,s MEMORANDUM DATE: 4/28/92 TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager FROM: Michael McCain, Acting Fire Chief SUBJECT: Year end budget adjustment Due to a number of circumstances beyond my control, I am requesting a budget adjustment of $75,000. There are a number of reasons for this deficit, beginning with accounts in employee services. For budgeting purposes permanent salaries are now figured at the actual rate, which does not leave excess money previously relied upon to supplement the overtime account and other employee services accounts that generally run over. I'm sure that when these figures were given to me to prepare the current budget, it was not anticipated that the Fire Chief would remain on the books for an entire year, or that one of our Engineers would injure his back, thus causing us to use temporary/part time help to fill positions for six months. Due to these two factors alone, the Workers Compensation, overtime and temporary/part time salaries accounts sky-rocketed compared to last year. It should also be noted that employee services accounts were reduced by $14,000 for the current fiscal year. Other areas that contributed to this deficit were: (a) The enormous unfunded liability of vacation and holiday time that was on the books. On July 1, 1991, we had 4,720 hours total of vacation and holiday time creating an unfunded liability of j $85,715. (It should be noted that the cost for excess time is figured at top step Engineer pay.) The Firefighters Association and city bargaining units worked to create an agreeable vacation and holiday policy. Due to a slow fire season and anticipated money from the vacant Chief s position, I made a commitment to reduce excess time by July 1, 1992. (b) Paramedic continuing education at $9,044 per year for shift coverage, and paramedic internship for two new medics, 2,564 hours equaling $46,562. As you are aware, I developed a program with San Luis Obispo City to trade intern medic firefighters saving a large portion of that money. OU0101y iMemo to Ray Windsor 4/28/92 Page 2 (c) One firefighter attended the Fire Academy, 346 lours equaling $5,712. (d) Sick leave coverage was required for 1,515 hours, equaling $27,512. (This figure does not include time used by Mike Hicks.) (e) Seasonal firefighters worked from 6/1/91 through 10/1/91, at a cost of $15,813. (fl Department staff meetings twice monthly. Although we did have a $190,358 liability, we were able, to cover those shifts at a cost of $120,121. By using Firefighter ''II's and other creative scheduling ideas, we have a net savings of $70,237. After monitoring the budget carefully, by mid-year it was clear that there would be a possible deficit by year end if employee services accounts continued to follow the pattern of the first part of the year. At that point no money was spent from the operating accounts, Battalion Chiefs worked engine companies and many more cost savings programs went into effect. In March we were the: that approximately $19,530 of encumbered money from the previous year was not rolled over at mid-year and would have to be handled as a year end adjustment. (My memo to you of 4/6/92 stated this amount was $15,741, however after discussions with Finance Department the actual figure was shown to be $19,530. Per discu$sion with the Finance Director, it was agreed the requested money on the 4/6/92 memo would be adjusted and submitted for re-appropriation.) I want to assure you that I have done everything possible to finish the current fiscal year inthe black. I've tried to make adjustments for all of the problems that came before us that effected the outcome of this budget. However, unless we make provisions for vacation and holiday time, provisions for sick and extended leave time, ',provisions for mandatory state or local training requirements, and closer estimates on employee services figures, we will have to continueto rely on the operating portion of our budget to make up the deficiencies in our employees services section. It should be noted that because of this problem the fire department for the past two years virtually has not had an operating portion of the budget. tliyvat3� Memo to Ray Windsor 4/28/92 Page 3 Taking all of the above into account, with the re-appropriation of the $19,530, the employee services portion of our budget will be approximately $75,000 over budget, in part due to expenses for PERS and Workers Compensation which will run approximately $63,731 over budget. The balance was used to cover shift shortages due to Engineer Engelking's absence and manpower shortage due to the absence of Chief Hicks, as well as items (a)-(f) mentioned above. Needless to say, there have been absolutely no unnecessary expenditures this fiscal year. Again, I would like to apologize for the problems this adjustment may create and I hope the necessary adjustments will be made in the future to prevent this from happening again. Respectfully, �c MICHAEL MCCAIN cc: Mark Joseph 0 OU0109 4 t . REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-4 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. ' Date: 5/12/92 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Director File No: ZC 91-016 SUBJECT: Zone change request to add a planned unit development overlay (PD7) to the underlying residential multiple family zoning at 8005 and 8025 Amapoa Avenue (Warren Miller/David Montanaro) RECOMMENDATION: Approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 244 on second reading. BACKGROUND: On April 28, 1992, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the zone change application, and in concurrence with the Planning Commission's recommendation, approved Ordinance Nd. 244 on first • reading. HE:ps Attachment: Ordinance No. 244 cc: Warren Miller David Montanaro 000110 ORDINANCE NO. 244 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES AT 8005 AND 8025 AMAPOA AVENUE FROM RMF/10 (FH) TO RMF/10 (FH) (PD7) (ZC 91016: MILLER/MONTANARO) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent with the General Plan in effect at the time of application acceptance, 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 proposed amendments will not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 7, 1992, and has recommended approval of Zone Change 91016. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Council Findings. 1. The proposal is compatible with surrounding land uses and the zoning in effect at the time of application acceptance. 2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan in effect at the time of application acceptance. 3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. 4. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted to promote orderly and harmonious development. 5. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a beneficial effect on the area. 000111 Ordinance No. 244 Page Two 6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably achieved through existing development _ standards or processing requirements. 7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to compensate for requested modifications. Section 2 . Zoning Map. Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed'; below, and shown on the attached Exhibit A, which are hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Lots 21 and 22; Block DC; Atascadero Colony Development of said property shall be in accordance with the standards of the Planned Development Overlay Zone go. 7, the Site Plan shown on the attached Exhibit B, and any conditions of approval imposed during the approval of this zone Change and/or any other associated applications. • Section 3 . Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in ', the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, 'published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 4 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in 'full force and effect at 12: 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by , the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: UU()lj' Ordinance No. 244 Page Three By: ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk RAY WINDSOR, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director 000113 --Oid 0-149 At ORDINANCE NO. 244 give A a CITY OF ATASCADERO Exhibit s — _0SCAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT i to .�. ;� •{eta�_ �t��ASR t � _ AMAPOA AVENUE a ------------ U l� 'Liv�1�.J REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 5-12-92 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-5 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT• Implementation of Mandatory Waste Collection RECOMMENDATION: Approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 243 on second reading. BACKGROUND• On April 28, 1992, the City Council conducted a€ public hearing on the above referenced subject, and approved Ordinance No. 243 on the first reading. Attachment: Ordinance No. 243 ORDINANCE NO. 243 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 6 OF THE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE (HEALTH AND SANITATION) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero adopted Ordinance 56 establishing Title 6 of the Municipal Code pertaining to Health and Sanitation; and WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of amending the Health and Sanitation regulations; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Title 6 of the City of Atascadero Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit A, which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Section 2 . Publication The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 3. Effective Date This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: 0u0117 c Ordinance No. 243 page 2 ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ALDEN SHIERS,' Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: GREG LUKE Director of Public Works i EXHIBIT A Sec. 6-4.18. Mandatory Service. All premises within the limits of the city which are occupied _ shall have refuse service from the City's refuse collector. Any person electing not to accept such service shall be required to pay the minimum charge for solid waste service.