HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 05/26/1992 f
pBLIC REVIEW OQP'Y #
,�2I_SEt�itE
R
E
i
f
A G E N D A
k
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6500 PALMA AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM
MAY 26, 1992
Y
7:00 P.M.
i
C
This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section
54954.2. By listing a topic on this agenda, the City Council has expressed its intent to
discuss and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in th 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; authorizati n to enter into
negotiations and execute agreements pertaining to the item; adoption or, approval; and,
disapproval.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation retating to each item of b siness referred
to on the agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk (Room 208) and in the Information
Office (Room 103), available for public inspection during City Hatt business hours. The City
Clerk wilt answer any questions regarding the agenda.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to
participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City
Manager's Office ((805) 461-5010) or the City Clerk's Office ((805) 461-5074 . Notification
at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City
staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide acce�sibitity to the
meeting or service.
v
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 ever 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; the speaker 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.
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance -
Roll Call
City Council Comments
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 statusreportswill 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
B. CONSENT CALENDAR:
All matters listed under Item B, Consent Calendar, are consid-
ered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form
listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these items.
A member of the Council or public may, by request, have any item
removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then be reviewed and
acted upon separately after the adoption of the Consent Calendar:
1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 28, 1992
2. CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT - APRIL 1992
I
2
F
3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 92-003, 4440 Potrero Road consideration
of a tentative parcel map request to divide .65 acres into
three parcels of 2.75 (net) , 2.76 and 2.87 ares for single
family residential use (Randall/Cuesta Engine ring)
4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 92-004, 8785 Atascadero Ave. - Division
of one existing lot of approx. 1.34 acres gross into two new
parcels of .55 and .50 acres net for single family residential
use (Johnson/Central Coast Engineering)
w
5. AWARD OF BID NO. 92-03 - WEED ABATEMENT CONTRICT
6. AWARD OF BID NO. 92-02 - DIAL-A-RIDE BUS FACILITY
7 . RESOLUTION NO. 43-92 - APPROVING FISCAL YEAR 11991-92 BUDGET'
ADJUSTMENT FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT
E
8. ACTION FOR ANIMALS' RIGHTS (AFAR) REQUEST FOR 'JGRANT SPONSOR-
SHIP
V
C. HEARINGS:
1. ANNUAL WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM PROTEST HEARINGP
f
2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT REQUEST - CARLTON SQUARE
PROJECT
3. P.E.R.S. TWO YEARS ADDITIONAL SERVICE CREDIT (Cont'd from 5/12
& 5/14/92)
A. ORDINANCE NO. 247 - Authorizing an amendm nt to the con-
tract between the City of Atascadero an the Board of
Administration of the California Pubic Employees'
Retirement System
(Recommendation to waive reading in fulland approve on
first reading, by title only)
B. RESOLUTION NO. 42-92 - Giving Notice of Intention to
approve an amendment to contract betwee the Board of
Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System
and the City of Atascadero
4. ORDINANCE NO. 246 - AMENDING TITLE 7 OF THE (CITY MUNICIPAL
CODE (SANITATION ORDINANCE) (Cont'd from 5/12/92) (Request
continuance to 619/92)
E
t
D. REGULAR BUSINESS:
k
1. CITY-INITIATED ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS Robert iaight
3
2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT #92-3 - PROPOSED EXTENSION OF URBAN
SERVICES LINE (Cont'd from 5/12/92)
3. PROPOSED ANNUAL LEASE AGREEMENT - PAVILION CONCESSION
4. CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION CORPS - LETTER OF SUPPORT
5. ORDINANCE NO. 245 - 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)
(Recommendation to waive reading in full and approve on second
reading, by title only)
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council: State Water - Potential County-wide Tax (Mrs.
Borgeson)
2. City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
S. City Manager: Contract expiration
* NOTICE: THE COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO A CLOSED SESSION FOR PURPOSES
OF DISCUSSION REGARDING PERSONNEL MATTERS PURSUANT TO
GOVT. CODE SEC. 54957.6.
4
Agenda Item #B-1
MeetingDate: 5/26/92
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
APRIL 28, 1992
MINUTES
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Councilperson
Dexter led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Councilmembers Nimmo, Lilley, B4rgeson, Dexter
and Mayor Shiers
Absent: None
Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee
Raboin, City Clerk
Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Henry Engen,
Community Development Director; Art Montandon,
City Attorney; Mark Joseph, ;Administrative
Services Director; Greg Luke, Public Works
Director; Andy Takata, Commutnity Services
Director; Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief and
Lt. Bill Watton, Police Department
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Mayor Shiers announced that there would be a nationwide effort of
prayer for moral rebirth of America on the steps of City Hall on
Thursday May 7th at approximately 12:30 p.m.
Councilwoman Borgeson reported that she had seen numerous articles
in the Atascadero news relating to scholastic ' and athletic
achievements of the local youth. She suggested :that the City
Council should, through the mayor, acknowledge in some way those
outstanding accomplishments.
PROCLAMATIONS•
Mayor Shiers read the proclamation for "Municipal (Clerk's Week",
May 3 - 9th, 1992 and presented it to City Clerk, Lee Raboin. He
also mentioned that the Clerk had recently been awarded a $200.00
scholarship from the International Institute of Municipal Clerks to
go towards tuition costs for continuing education and
CC04/28/92
Page 1
X1(}0000
certification.
Fred Motlo, Atascadero Fire Department; and Maureen Johnson and Art
Lehr, both of San Luis Ambulance, were present and jointly accepted
the proclamation for "Emergency Medical Services Week" , -May 10-16,
1992.
Mayor Shiers read and presented a proclamation for "National Police
Week", May 11-17, 1992 to Lt. Barlow.
Mayor Shiers also read proclamations for "Victims of Pornography
Week" , May 3-9, 1992 and "Small Business Opportunities Day", June
16, 1992.
Councilman Nimmo reported that he had received a call from a
resident who is a builder by trade who indicated that he was giving
up building in Atascadero. He remarked that the caller had stated
that he would confine his activities to the City of Paso Robles.
Councilman Nimmo stated that this was another example of entrepre-
neurship in Atascadero not receiving the kind of support and
welcome it properly deserves.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Jeff Farkas, 4580 Viscano, asked staff to define "chartered
franchise City Attorney, Art Montandon, indicated that he was
not familiar with the term but explained the types of franchise
agreements granted by the City.
Iry Jenkins, Pismo Beach resident, announced that Sanoform
Corporation would be taking over Chicago Grande Landfill on May 1,
1992 and noted that certain improvements would be made. He
indicated that residents would be happy with the changes and
invited questions.
Terry Graham, 6205 Conejo Road, spoke in support of the people
electing the mayor and asked Councilwoman Borgeson to introduce the
concept at the next election. In addition, he criticized a recent
decision to summarize ordinances in the newspaper.
Leo Korba, 10905 Santa Ana Road, responded to a commentary in the
Atascadero News regarding the publication of ordinances and thanked
the Council for taking the necessary action to save money. He
added that the recommendation of staff made sense. Mr. Korba also
commented that he was opposed to a mayor running the City and
remarked that he believed City staff appointed by the Council was
the only way for a small city to be run.
Terry Graham stated that he did not mean to insinuate that he
wanted to see managerial duties taken from the City Manager and
CC04/28/92
Page 2
000001
clarified that he thought an elected mayor would end turmoil-
resulting
urmoilresulting from frequent staff turnover.
Councilman Nimmo asserted that the last four years under the
direction of City Manager Ray Windsor had been a productive period
and observed that most residents appreciate that.
A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing
committees. Informative status reports were given, as
follows) :
1. S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/Regional Transit
Authority - Councilwoman Borgeson reported that SLOACC
and SLORTA had met on April 8, 1992 and highlighted the
important issues addressed. (Minutes on file with the
City Clerk) .
2. Recycling Committee - Mayor Shiers reported that the
committee had put together a new brochure and were
looking at educational programs for use in elementary
schools. He noted that a waste audit had; been conducted
and local business persons were asking:! a way to
recycle cardboard.
3. Economic Opportunity Commission - Councilman Dexter
reported that a site had been selected for a second "Head
Start" program.
4. City/School Committee - Councilman Dexter' announced that
the next meeting would be May 21, 1992.
5. Traffic Committee - Councilman Dexter reported that the
committee had met and received requests for action. The
Public Works Director indicated that these matters would
be brought before the Council soon.
6. Economic Round Table - The City Manager stated that the
round table had met, but taken no action because
Councilman Lilley was absent. He reported that the next
meeting would be May 20, 1992 and discussion would
include what future direction the committee will take.
Councilwoman Borgeson mentioned that she and Councilman Nimmo had
been meeting with the Procurement Committee. In'' addition, she
noted that she and Councilman Dexter had been meeting with the
Homeless Coalition and requested that these two committees be added
to the list of reports given at future meetings.
CC04/28/92
Page 3
000002
B. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Mayor Shiers read the Consent Calendar, as follows:
1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992
2. CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT - MARCH, 1992
3. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25-89, 5805 CAPISTRANO - Consideration of
a one-year time extension (Hotel Park - Messer/Lewis)
4. RESOLUTION NO. 39-92 - DECLARING WEEDS A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND
COMMENCING PROCEEDINGS FOR ABATEMENT
5. RESOLUTION NO. 40-92 - SUPPORTING SB 1691: ELIGIBILITY FOR
INTERCITY RAIL CORRIDOR BOND FUNDING
Councilwoman Borgeson pulled Item #B-1. Eric Greening pulled Item
#B-3.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to
approve the Consent Calendar with the exceptions of Items
#B-1 and B-3; motion carried unanimously by roll call
vote.
Re: Item B-1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- APRIL 14, 1992
Councilwoman Borgeson and Councilman Lilley voiced objection to
receiving the minutes too late to review them:
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson
to continue Item #B-1 to the next Consent Calendar
agenda; motion carried unanimously.
Re: Item B-3 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25-89, 5805 CAPISTRANO -
Consideration of a one-year time extension (Hotel
Park - Messer/Lewis)
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle Avenue, asked what effect the proposed
Highway 41 realignment would have on this project. Henry Engen,
Community Development Director, replied that the precise plan and
tentative tract map were designed around access to Highway 41 and
explained that the conditions call for guarantees for access either
onto Highway 41, by bonding, or by providing other kinds of access
if the realignment does not occur. Mr. Engen clarified that if the
realignment does not go through, staff would meet with the
applicants to determine how to meet the condition for proper
access. Mr. Greening indicated that his concern had been
addressed.
CC04/28/92
Page 4 10
000003
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Lilley to
approve the one-year time extension; motion carried 5:0.
C. HEARINGS:
1. ORDINANCE NO. 243 — ESTABLISHING MANDATORY TRASH COLLECTION
CITY-WIDE
Greg Luke, Public Works Director, provided background and reviewed
the staff recommendation. Individual Council comments followed.
Councilwoman Borgeson shared concern about the effect the proposed
ordinance would have on elderly and handicapped residents. In
addition, she voiced opposition to the City not going out to bid
for garbage service.
Councilman Dexter mentioned that the Council had already agreed to
give the service to Wil-Mar Disposal and reported that Wil-Mar had
purchased equipment based on the approved contract'. He asserted
that it was not appropriate to debate that matter at this time and
suggested that the issue be looked at when the present contract
runs out. Councilman Dexter agreed with Councilwoman Borgeson that
certain hardship cases may merit some considerations..
The Public Works Director indicated that it was difficult to single
out who is entitled to preferential treatment and pointed out that
Wil-Mar' s rate for one-can service (with curbside recycling) is the
lowest in the County.
Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that the Americans with Disabilities
Act now requires cities to serve the handicapped and urged staff to
note this state mandate when negotiating contracts for services to
the public.
Councilwoman Borgeson reported that she had received calls from the
public about the rental fee for the yellow curbside' recycling bin
and asked if the cost could be negotiated. She indicated that some
had expressed a desire to buy the bin outright, rather than pay a
monthly fee for it. Mr. Luke replied that staff 'can look at a
variety of options and bring them back to the Council. He added
that the Council has the ability and power to control the rates.
Mayor Shiers referred to Wil-Mar' s financial statement (prepared by
David K. Smith, Certified Public Accountant) and' asked for an
explanation of a 116% return" . Mark Joseph advised that the Council
receive a specific response from a representative of Wil-Mar (see
Page 7) -
Noting the April 22, 1992 letter from Wil-Mar's attorney Betty
CC04/28/92
Page 5
000004
Sanders, Councilman Lilley reported that projections for rates and
an economy of scale were different than what he had been led to
believe would occur. Mr. Luke, in response, reported that the
present program is working sufficiently and Wil-Mar is operating at
peak efficiency. He indicated that revenues were expected to be
low because in order for Wil-mar to serve additional customers, it
will have to add services. Charges for those services, he
clarified, will be based on the rates reflected by Council' s chosen
policy to encourage trash reduction.
Councilman Nimmo suggested that, before going further, Council
allow Steve Devencenzi from the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating
Council to give, for the benefit of the public, an explanation of
the mandates set forth by the State in AB939. Mr. Devencenzi
provided an overview of the legislation and fine provisions. He
reported that Atascadero was the only city in the County without
mandatory garbage collection. Responding to questions from the
Council, he remarked that the State will require a waste generation
study to be conducted in the future to compare with one prepared in
1990 to evaluate the reduction in solid waste. He explained that
it may be necessary to employ a material recovery facility which
would sort out all garbage taken to the landfill, but added that
this might be avoided if all cities cooperate in implementing all
related programs possible.
Public Comments:
Jeff Farkas spoke in opposition to the proposed ordinance
asserting that mandatory pick-up is not needed and that emphasis
should be placed on other issues. He mentioned that there was a
need for a localized way to get rid of cardboard materials.
Richard Moen, 4200 Portola, expressed doubt that mandatory pick-up
would reduce the amount of solid waste going to the dump and
proclaimed that a more effective way would be to encourage the
community to do more recycling. In addition, he asked the Council
to look into the possibility of Wil-Mar offering the element of
curbside pick-up service only.
Renee Silberman, member of the Recycling Committee, expressed the
views of the committee and indicated support. She mentioned that
the curbside recycling program offers pick-up for so many items,
including those that do not have a monetary redemption value.
Roger Cook, 10600 Colorado Road, protested an unnecessary tax on
senior citizens and proclaimed that it would be better to educate
people about how to recycle than impose mandatory pick-up.
Gary Kirkland, 4640 Portola Road, spoke in opposition and declared
that if Council imposes mandatory pick-up, it should give the
CCO4/28/92
Page 6
000005
residents a choice of who will be the waste hauler and to what
landfill trash will be taken.
Al Sherman, 7340 Navajoa, also objected to mandated 'trash- pick-up.
He remarked that government should begin regulating products to
ensure that they can be recycled. In addition, he 'suggested that
Wil-Mar go back to selling trash bags to be placed on the curb when
they are full.
Susan Litteral, 8605 San Rafael, was opposed and 'questioned how
mandatory pick-up would encourage waste reduction. '
Lindsey Hampton, 8402 Alta Vista, exhibited a variety of plastic
and stryofoam containers that Wil-Mar is willing to pick up and
proclaimed that she thought the curbside recycling; program would
indeed encourage more recycling.
Ken Gouff, 4400 Portola, voiced objection to the City mandating
trash pick-up by Wil-Mar and indicated that the service should be
taken to the competitive bid process.
Terry Graham, 6205 Conejo Road, suggested that the ;City may favor
mandatory pick-up because it will increase its' revenue from the
franchise agreement. In addition, he complained about rate
increases at the dump and about certain landfill : policies. He
declared that County residents were actively working toward
protecting the environment and did not need government mandates.
Iry Jenkins, responding to Mr. Graham' s comments, invited him to
come to the landfill and take all the scrap metal and wood he
wanted because Sanoform Corporation has trouble getting rid of it.
Ron Silberman, 9210 Lucinda, indicated that some of his neighbors
were against mandatory pick-up. He pointed out that these same
neighbors were disposing their garbage in a questionable manner.
The following speakers provided additional testimony';: Richard Moen
urged Council to consider the fact that most !of the public
testimony they have received has been in opposition. Jeff Farkas
asserted that some people will not participate regardless of the
mandate. Gary Kirkland asked why not allow other entrepreneurs to
have an opportunity to provide the recycling component. Roger Cook
stated customers should pay for only what they put out at the curb
and remarked that education is the only way to promote recycling.
Terry Graham mentioned that he hoped those who did not come out to
speak did not believe they would have no impact.
Marj Mackey, Recycling Committee member, observed that many
residents chose to stay home rather than come before Council and
speak on items, particularly if they are in favor ', of them. She
CCO4/28/92
. Page 7
000006
noted that people speak out when they are opposed.
Betty Sanders, attorney for Wil-Mar, clarified the intent of her
letter to Greg Luke. She stated that her comments were accurate
and were not misleading. Ms. Sanders indicated that the City had
achieved much because of the efforts of the Recycling Committee and
argued that mandatory pick-up is necessary in order to keep an
accurate accounting of the City' s solid waste. Attempting to
address the mayor' s question about 116% return", Ms. Sanders replied
that she understood the figure to represent the rate of return on
the cost of implementing the services.
Dennis Bryant, 7410 Sombrillo, commented that Wil-Mar Disposal was
a small company and that he did not know many small companies that
could afford to pay their attorney to represent them at 3-hour
public hearing. This expense, he proclaimed, goes right into the
cost to the consumer.
Mary Jazwecki, 4780 El Camino Real, asked staff if she would have
to pay for garbage service at her residence when she currently has
three commercial bins. Mr. Luke indicated that she would. Ms.
Jazwecki replied that she, then, was opposed.
Ray Jansen, Recycling Committee member, reported that he had become
educated during the course of his involvement with the committee
and stated that he believed mandatory pick-up to be in the best
interest of the City at large. In addition, he noted that although
it is impractical, Wil-Mar is currently picking up some items (like
newspaper and plastic milk jugs) that there is no market for.
The City Clerk relayed comments presented to her on the telephone
by Mrs. Lois Rauch of Atascadero. Mr. and Mrs. Rauch as well as
two of their neighbors, she reported, were opposed and urged the
Council to give consideration to the elderly and those with low-
income. Mrs. Rauch also posed a question regarding whether or not
property owners would be required to pay for pick-up service when
a home was sitting vacant.
Mayor Shiers mentioned that he had received a call from ninety-one
year old resident, Dick Frank, who is in a wheelchair and is
opposed because he would need someone to assist him getting his can
to the curb.
----End of Public Testimony----
Individual Council comments followed. Councilwoman Borgeson voiced
opposition to mandatory pick-up and urged the community to become
more involved in recycling. She suggested that the Council adopt
a proclamation in support of recycling and in opposition to non-
recyclable products and that this proclamation be sent out to
CCO4/28/92
Page 8 0
0000(n
product manufacturers and grocery stores.
Mayor Shiers asked the Public Works Director to respond to the
question of empty residences. Mr. Luke explained- :that the
ordinance specifically states that all occupied premises -shall have
refuse service.
Councilman Dexter pointed out the on-going occurrence of illegal
dumping in the creeks and reported that the City has received
numerous complaints from merchants who have had others dump garbage
in their commercial dumpsters. He remarked that the trash service
was inexpensive and convenient and said he was: in favor of
mandatory pick-up because it was the only way to meet State
mandates.
Councilman Nimmo commented that public service carries with it an
obligation to take responsible action and indicated he would
support the ordinance.
Mayor Shiers asked staff how other communities handle special
circumstances. Greg Luke advised that, although a number of
surveys have been done and there are a variety of rate structures
for different needs, staff was not recommending any exemptions from
the program at this time.
Councilman Lilley voiced confidence in the recommendation of the
Recycling Committee and staff. He stated that there were no other
practical, rational alternatives to date and emphasized that the
Council has the right to release Wil-Mar -if they feel it is not
providing good service.
Mayor Shiers remarked that Wil-Mar' s subsidy does encourage
recycling and spoke in support of mandatory pick-uip. He argued
that the garbage service and subscription to cable television were
not comparable because illegal dumping is a public health and
safety issue. He noted that when others dispose of their garbage
inappropriately, it is imposing costs on others.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Dexter to
waive the reading in full and approve by title only;
motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to
introduce and adopt Ordinance No. 243 on ''first reading.
Discussion on the motion: Councilwoman Borgeson stated that
mandatory pick-up will not stop illegal dumpingcompletely and
stressed that the City needs to educate the public. Mayor
Shiers commented that while he believed mandatory pick-up
CC04/28/92
Page 9
k
000008
would reduce solid waste and control illegal dumping, he did
not believe it was the only alternative. He mentioned that
the Council does have control over Wil-Mar' s rates and has the
power to audit their books and chose to either grant or deny
any requests for rate increases.
The City Manager pointed out that the City Council does not
have control over the rates at the landfill.
Vote on the motion: Motion to adopt on first reading an
ordinance implementing mandatory garbage collection
carried 4: 1 with Councilwoman Borgeson voting in
opposition.
Mayor Shiers called a break at 10:05 p.m. At 10:20 the meeting
resumed.
2. ZONE CHANGE 91-016/TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 91-006, 8005 and 8025
AMAPOA - Request for tentative tract map to subdivide two con-
tiguous parcels into seven (7) parcels ranging in size from
3,095 to 4,810 square feet, along with a zone change request
to add a planned development overlay (PD7) to the underlying
residential multiple-family zoning of the site (Miller/Mon-
tanaro)
A. Ordinance No. 244 - Amending Map 17 of the official zon-
ing 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
first reading, by title only)
Henry Engen presented the staff report and recommendation to
approve the project based on the Conditions of Approval. He
confirmed that the project met the criteria set for in the Planned
Development Standards ordinance.
Warren Miller, co-applicant, provided background on the project and
objected to several conditions of approval (#2, 4, 13 & 20(b) ) . He
declared that it was unfair for he and his partner to bear the
costs of the entire drainage system and debated the need for
interior fencing. He mentioned that he was also concerned about
language relating to traffic devices and asked that specific
requirements be spelled out. Mr. Miller indicated that the most
critical concern was Condition #20(b) relating to drainage and
passed out to Council a map prepared by Cuesta Engineering to
illustrate the area (see Exhibit A) . He voiced opposition to the
drainage requirements and asked about the status of the fees
already collected in Amapoa-Tecorida drainage area.
CC04/28/92
Page 10
0010009
Mr. Luke noted that there was approximately $80,0001 in the Amapoa-
Tecorida fund. He provided history of the drainage problems in the
area and explained that the monies were intended for more regional
drainage needs. Councilwoman Borgeson asked the Public Works
Director if the fees established in 1981 had ever been updated.
Mr. Luke indicated that they had not.
Councilman Nimmo objected to the applicants being '';conditioned to
mitigate the drainage problems of existing and future development
in addition to being required to pay into the fund; He exclaimed
that it should be one or the other. Mr. Luke reported that the
project was a substantial development and advised that logical
improvement is required at that location. Councilman Nimmo stated
that the criteria ought to be what is fair and'' equitable and
mentioned that other lots, now undeveloped, should '';pay their fair
share.
Responding to inquiry from Councilman Dexter, the Public Works
Director reported that there was not, in place, a mechanism for
recovering from future development the cost for drainage
improvements. He added that the Amapoa-Tecorida fees may be out of
date and Council could ask staff to re-examine tho$e fees.
(By motion, Council resolved to extend the meeting beyond 11:00
p.m. )
David Montanaro, co-applicant, noted Condition #2 relating to the
location and orientation of Unit V. He submitted, a revised plan
(see Exhibit B) which he thought would satisfy both staff and
applicants. He asked that the verbiage in the condition be
modified to reflect the change, indicating that he would submit
full-size plans to the Community Development Department.
Mr. Montanaro also addressed the drainage issue and proclaimed that
he and Mr. Miller were being taken advantage of. Heargued that it
was unfair to be expected to pay over $5,000 in drainage fees in
addition to being required to install over $15,000 in drainage
improvements.
Councilwoman Borgeson asked the applicants if they ',had been aware
the property was in a flood zone when it was purchased and if they
had paid a lesser price because of it. Mr. Montanaro replied that
they had known the land was in the flood zone and'; had paid full
price as comparable with other properties without ';such problems.
He pointed out that they had not considered they world be expected
to install a drainage system under the street and this cost had not
been factored into the individual lot cost.
Council questions of staff and lengthy discussion ',;followed. The
Community Development Director indicated concurrence for the
CC04/28/92
Page 11
000010
modification offered on Unit V. He also mentioned that the City
Council had the power to give the applicants a credit for drainage
fees. Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Shiers indicated support.
Relating to internal fencing, Councilman Lilley' suggested that a.
decision to construct an inside fence be left up to the buyers.
Mr. Miller proposed that two or three types of fencing be approved
and let the individual property owners make the choice. Mr.
Montanaro added that the C.C.&R. ' s would spell this out.
MOTION: By Mayor Shiers, seconded by Councilman Lilley to waive
the reading in full and approve by title only; motion
unanimously carried.
MOTION: By Mayor Shiers, seconded by Councilman Lilley to approve
Ordinance No. 244 on first reading with Conditions of
Approval as modified and with the understanding that
Amapoa-Tecorida drainage area fees will be waived; motion
carried 5:0.
(Note: Conditions modified were #1, 2, 20(b) and 24) .
D. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1. ATASCADERO LAKE PARK PAVILION - EQUIPMENT UPDATE
Andy Takata provided the staff report and recommendation to approve 0
certain purchases to be paid for out of the General Fund Reserves.
There were no questions or additional comments from the Council or
the public.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
direct staff to pursue the purchase of remaining
furniture and equipment needed to complete the Atascadero
Lake Park Pavilion project; motion carried 5:0 by roll
call vote.
2. ORDINANCE NO. 242 - ADDING CHAPTER 9 TO TITLE 5 OF THE ATASCA-
DERO MUNICIPAL CODE, ADOPTING SURFACE MINING AND RECLAMATION
PLAN REGULATIONS
(Recommendation to waive reading in full and approve on second
reading, by title only)
Mayor Shiers mentioned that this matter was back for second reading
and adoption. There were no comments from the Council.
CCO4/28/92
Page 12
O00011
Public Comment:
John Flaherty, 11900 Cenegal Road, indicated that he had been
involved in the issues for over a year and was supportive_ of the
ordinance. He stated that although he did not wish to delay the
matter he did have some proposed changes and outlined them.
Brief discussion followed. The City Attorney reported that he had
not heard of the changes suggested by Mr. Flaherty until now and
advised that Council adopt the ordinance as written.; He added that
the ordinance could be amended at a later date.
Mr. Engen pointed out that the ordinance had been modeled after the
State' s and that the State had already given approval to the
ordinance as introduced.
The City Manager proposed, to avoid delay, that Council adopt the
ordinance and direct staff to meet with Mr. Flahety to discuss
suggested changes and determine further action.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
adopt Ordinance 242 by title only; motion'' carried 5:0 by
roll call vote.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council:
A. Public Smoking Issue - Clarification of Direction
Councilman, Dexter reported that he had conducted an informal survey
and had changed his position on a smoking ban. Referring to his
memo dated 4/6/92, he highlighted suggestions for efforts to
educate the youth about the harmful effects of smoking and proposed
that staff be directed to develop an ordinance banning cigarette
machines. He also proposed that a coalition for a smoke-free
environment be
formed and suggested membership could comprise of a
member of the City Council, representatives from the County Health
Department, Chamber of Commerce, school district, Police Department
and members of the public-at-large.
Brief discussion ensued. Councilwoman Borgeson criticized
Councilman Dexter for changing his mind on the matter and for
putting the staff and public to so much trouble',. The mayor,
Councilman Lilley and Councilman Nimmo indicated that they could
support the suggested made by Councilman Dexter. By consensus,
Council directed staff to draft an ordinance bannning cigarette
machines.
CCO4/28/92
Page 13
0000 .2
p
2. City Treasurer
Micki Korba remarked that she served as a member on the City's
Economic Round Table and wanted to state for the record- that she
had absolute faith in the integrity of each member. She commented
that all are dedicated individuals who are giving their time and
abilities.
In addition, the City Treasurer reported favorably on the City' s
investment with the Orange County Investment Pool and stated that
Orange County is no longer allowing cities outside of the county to
participate.
Ms. Korba also reported that she had recently attended the Annual
State Municipal Treasurer's Conference and had learned much
valuable information. She asked Council, while deliberating about
next year' s budget, to consider the importance of continuing
support for educational seminars and workshops for the City Clerk
and the City Treasurer. She noted that if knowledge is limited and
contacts are eliminated, it could be costly to the City.
5. City Manager
Mr. Windsor asked Council to set a closed session for 6: 15 p.m. on
Tuesday, May 12, 1992 for the purpose of discussions relating to
pending litigation and personnel matters. By unanimous consensus,
Council agreed to meet in closed session as recommended.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Dexter to
adjourn the meeting; motion passed.
THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 12:30 P.M. TO A CLOSED SESSION ON
TUESDAY, MAY 12, 1992 AT 6:15 P.M.
MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY:
/�l x
LEE %tABOIN, City Clerk
Attachments: Exhibit A (Map - Miller/Montanaro)
Exhibit B (Site Plan - Miller/Montanaro)
CC04/28/92
Page 14
000013
Y �� �� •.� -�` �'. • . ' CC4/2$/92
,17 .
'.��.\•. f.. �_ � � �,. �. •`:� . •'� EXHIBIT A
At
IN
AAJ
1
41V 0
Ci qb
19
08
ear
\ �/,�� �•..z• -_ � _- _ � �'—•r• ick y, iO .�
�'�_ _ • Irl•- � •, .iIx
_� -... �.� ••�'� �t � � ♦ • ••♦ �G 3�' . .;
1 • • i •
• ._ -,• t•• ..�-- , r— >, �'� ;> /o � • ''gip n� �- .
C-2 17
. 16 p 7---:-- l
iN�L�� ✓ y 1No
U k y~\t r •
cI
ter► . ••`"•� �'�r� /'• ;'< ,
"'`�"\ 1 y `.) ra`. j� • I
�zo to
o
34
i.�RJQA
t
CC4/28/92
EXHIBIT B
J _ I
�� i •( J�+w i t d � I
J
A j N 3�s 1 r
Coefir
It
1S�^9 d
� � J
OO C > I•v_ i
n
Y eJ a
O� y J
e1
1 15
i
V
O.
� d
� t
jb
�I 1
ti
L 7
1
z
fi
1
Y'ni � �evAD�l'kl r--
i i•� ��y
A ✓11
MEETING AGENDA
PATE V-Zti__!�? ITEM/ .D 2.....�..
i - -
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH ENDING APRIL 30, 1992
TABLE I: SCHEDULE OF CASH RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
1992 1991
Beginning Cash Balance 4,982,072.32 6,896,291 .00
Plus: Receipts 2,020, 173.31 1,612,354.00
Less: Disbursements (799,523.61) (829, 112.47)
Ending Cash Balance 6,202,722 02 7,670,532.53
Plus: Outstanding Transactions 81,081.53 148,032.28
------ -------------
Adjusted Cash Balance 6,283,803.55 7,82' ,564.81
TABLE II: SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS
-----------------------------------------------------------------*------------------------
Interest Intearest Interest
Name Amount Rate For Month Year-to-Date
-----------------------------------------------------------------*---------------- -------
Orange County Invest. Pool 4,721 ,998.84 9.30% 0.00 236.864.72
L.A. I .F. 1,272,707.01 5.69%_ 0.00 13,910.52
Mid State Bank 288, 147.70 3.58% k, 105.05 8,663.46
Petty Cash 950.00 N/A N/A N/A
------------- ---- -------- -------------
TOTAL: 6,283,803.55 1 , 105.05 259,438.70
Key: N/A (Not Applicable)
L.A.I .F Interest Paid Quarterly
Orange County Investment Pool Interest Paid Quarterly
I certify that this report reflects all Governmental Agency pooled
investments and is in conformity with the Investment Policy of
the City of Atascadero as stated in Resolution No. 109-91 dated
12/10/91. A copy of this Resolution is available at the Office
of the City Clerk. The Investment Program herein shown provides
sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet ' next month's estimated
expenditures.
SIGNED:
Muriel Korba, City Treasurer
000016
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING APRIL 30, 1992 (83%)
TABLE III : SCHEDULE OF CURRENT MONTH ACTIVITY AND PRIOR YEAR VARIANCES •
APRIL CURRENT PRIOR
DESCRIPTION 1992 YR-TO-DATE YR-TO-DATE VARIANCE
REVENUE
Property Taxes 729, 886 2, 129,405 1 , 966, 871 8 . 3%
Sales Tax 114 ,000 1 , 371 , 382 1 ,420 , 329 -3 . 4%
Bed Tax 15 , 143 75 , 220 72, 585 3 . 6%
Prop. Transfer Tax 2, 986 24, 942 31 , 664 -21 . 2%
Franchise Fees 6, 658 360, 206 326, 969 10. 2%
Special Assessments 50, 602 126 ,874 133 ,898 -5 .2%
Business Licenses 2, 985 69 , 340 71 , 504 -3 . 0%
Building Permits 17 ,826 191 , 123 275 ,412 -30 . 6%
.Motor Vehicle Tax 68,001 664,478 685 , 822 -3 . 1%
Other State In-Lieu 3 , 270 50 , 928 63, 955 -20 . 4%
Gas Tax Receipts 44,480 314 , 638 301 ,478 4 .4%
TDA Receipts 242, 193 352, 885 100, 596 250. 8%
Other Intergov'al 199,077 451 , 382 513 , 704 -12. 1%
Recreation Fees 30, 344 287 , 343 251 ,469 14 . 3%
Zoo Admissions 11 , 153 71 ,955 49 , 821 44 .4%
Planning Fees 7 ,002 109 , 860 112, 692 -2. 5%
Wastewater Fees 181 , 914 565 , 996 666, 659 -15 . 1%
Development Fees 35,069 290 , 912 380 , 257 -23 . 5%
Dial-A-Ride Fares 2, 921 27 ,467 29 , 331 -6. 4%
Police Services 459 5 , 357 4 , 788 11 . 9%
Weed Abatement 10,467 35 , 976 39 , 159 -8 . 1%
Other Fees/Charges 119 2, 329 - - 3 ,820 -39 .0%
Fines & Forfeits 3, 536 34, 690 57 , 579 -39 . 8%
Interest Earnings 2, 186 407 , 367 452, 591 -10. 0%
Other Rents/Cty.Crews 1 , 203 3 , 991 4 , 417 -9 . 6%
Proceeds from Sales 94, 557 171 ,467 128 , 688 33 . 2%
Miscellaneous 3 , 129 41 , 944 42 , 855 -2. 1%
-----------------------------------------
TOTALS 1 ,881 , 166 8,239,457 8, 188,913 0.6%
EXPENDITURES
General Gov' t 23 , 677 261 , 770 235 ,080 11 .4%
Police 163,682 1 , 736,972 1 , 652, 204 5 . 1%
Fire 81 ,467 941 ,428 901 , 554 4 .4%
Public Works/Eng. 25 , 987 325 , 211 314 , 814 3 . 3%
Wastewater 42, 125 452 , 284 457 , 571 -1 . 2%
Dial-A-Ride 20, 512 245 ,437 243 , 526 0 .8%
Community Development 61 , 240 653 , 401 604 ,899 8 .0%
Recreation 40, 617 485 ,810 449 , 329 8 . 1%
Parks & Bldg. Maint 51 , 641 511 , 578 423 , 333 20. 8%
Zoo 17, 707 189 , 531 179 , 736 5 .4%
Streets 61 , 212 471 , 963 438 , 122 7 . 7%
Admin. Services 25 , 304 558,424 645 , 197 -13 .4%
Non-Departmental 27 ,835 487 , 108 453 , 338 7 .4%
Major Capital 149,929 1 , 679, 850 1 ,080,029 55 . 5%
Debt Service/Trust0244, 539194 ,52725_7%
-----------------------------------------
- ---- ---- ----
TOTALS 792,935 9, 245, 306 8,273, 259 11 .7%
NET SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) 1 ,088,231 ( 1 ,005,849) (84,346) 1092.5%
000011
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING APRIL 30, 1992 (83X)
TABLE IV. BUDGET-TO-ACTUAL REPORT
CURRENT CURRENT COLLECTED PRION PRIOR COLL/
DESCRIPTION BUDGET YR-TO-DATE /SPENT BUDGET YR-TO-DATE SPENT
REVENUES
Property Taxes 2.276,500 2, 129,405 93.5% 2,050,':000 1 ,966,871 95.9%
Sales Tax 1,700,000 1,371,382 80.7% 1 ,850,',000 1,420,329 76.8%
Bed Tax 105,000 75,220 71.6% 110,''000 72,585 66.0%
Prop. Transfer Tax 40,000 24,942 62.4% 60,'•000 31,664 52.8%
Franchise Fees 370,000 360,205 97.4% 330,000 326,969 99. 1%
Special Assessments 151,753 126,874 83.6% 151,'753 133,898 88.2%
Business Licenses 110,000 69,340 63.0% 105,',D10 71 ,504 68. 1%
Building Permits 325,225 191 , 123 58.8% 3811575 275,412 72.2%
Motor Vehicle Tax 825,000 664,478 80.5% 860,'.;000 685,822 79.7%
Other State In-Lieu 75,700 50,928 67.3% 95,900 63,955 66.7%
Gas Tax Receipts 416, 162 314,638 75.6% 393,'100 301 ,478 76.7%
TDA Receipts 482,957 352,885 73. 1% 402,1«;521 100,596 25.0%
Other Intergov'al 632,400 451,382 71.4% 4551'700 513,704 112.7%
Recreation Fees 419,550 287,343 68.5% 310,850 251,469 80.9%
Zoo Admissions 72,500 71 ,955 99.2% 71, 00 49,821 70.2%
Planning Fees 178,923 109,860 61.4% 192,612 112,692 58.5%
Wastewater Fees 690,200 565,996 82.0% 660,';200 666,659 101 .0%
Development Fees 717,000 290,912 40.6% 562,500 380,257 67.6%
Dial-A-Ride Fares 36,000 27,467 76.3% 34,1000 29,331 86.3%
Police Services 6, 100 5,357 87.8% 4,800 4,788 99.8%
Weed Abatement 40,000 35,976 89.9% 30,1000 39, 159 130.5%
Other Fees/Charges 57,650 2,329 4.0% 3,1000 3,820 127.3%
Fines & Forfeits 82,050 34,690 42.3% 81,550 57,579 70.6%
Interest Earnings 392,920 407,367 103.7% 389,450 452,591 116.3%
Rentals 2,000 3,991 199.6% 149200 4,417 31 . 1%
Proceeds from Sales 190,000 171,467 90.2% 68,500 128,588 187.9%
Miscellaneous 149,000 41 ,944 28.2% 19,430 42,855 220.6%
-------------------------------------------- ------------------------
TOTALS 10,544,590 8,239,457 78.1% 9,687,451 8,188,913 84.5%
EXPENDITURES
General Gov't 348,085 261,770 75.2% 305,225 235,080 77.0%
Police 2,084,300 1,736,972 83.3% 2,053,318 1 ,652,204 80.5%
Fire 1 , 107,500 941,428 85.0% 1, 164,1492 901 ,554 77.4%
Public Works/Eng. 361,205 325,211 90.0% 389,010 314,814 80.9%
Wastewater 808,960 452,284 55.9% 801,585 457,571 57. 1%
Dial-A-Ride 299,245 245,437 82.0% 388,393 243,526 62.7%
Community Development 809,917 653,401 80.7% 795,689 604,899 76.0%
Recreation 513,848 485,810 94.5% 553,529 449,329 81.2%
Parks & Bldg. Maint. 562,680 511 ,578 90.9% 521,530 423,333 81 .2%
Zoo 221,275 189,531 85.7% 222,500 179,736 80.8%
Streets 635,425 471 ,963 74.3% 606,565 438, 122 72.2%
Admin. Services 668,635 558,424 83.5% 726,075 645, 197 88.9%
Non-Departmental 775,820 487, 108 62.8% 733,093 453,338 61 .8%
Major Capital 5,046,000 1 ,679,850 33.3% 2,692,453 1,080,029 40. 1%
Debt Service/Trust 402,692 244,539 60.7% 741,916 194,527 26.2%
------ ------------------------------------+-------------------------
TOTALS 14,645,587 9,245,306 63.1% 12,695,573 8,273,259 65.2%
NET SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (4, 100,997) (1,005,849) 24.5% (3,008,122) (84,346) 2.8%
000018
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 1992
TABLE V: SCHEDULE OF SIMPLIFIED BALANCE SHEETS, SELECTED FUNDS
GENERAL GAS DEVELOPER TREE
FUND TAX FEES FUND
--------------------------------------------------------------
ASSETS:
Cash 535,996. 16 1,260,588.57 714,062.85 26,304.40
Other Assets 192,724. 12 24,097.70 21,656.44 1 ,661.74
------------- ------------- -------------- -------------
Total Assets 728,720.28 1,284,686.27 735,719.29 27,966. 14
LIABILITIES 318, 189.71 0.00 0.00 300.50
FUND EQUITIES:
Fund Balance-Reserved 35,000.00 9, 148.00 0.00 0.00
Fund Balance-Unreserved 375,530.57 1,275,538.27 735,719.29 27,665.64
------------- ------------- -------------- ----- ------ !
Total Fund Equity 410,530 57 1,284,686.27 735,719.29 27,665.64
TOTAL LIAB/FUND EQUITY 728,720.28 1 ,284,686.27 735,719.29 27,966. 14
ZOO OPERATING DIAL-A-RIDE WASTEWATER
FUND OPERATING OPERATING
----------------------------------------------
ASSETS:
Cash (13, 134.63) (5,968.81) 3, 161,017.91
Other Assets 1 , 122.00 105,691.89 8,685,794.90
------------- ------------- --------------
Total Assets (12,012.63) 99,723.08 11 ,846,812.81
LIABILITIES 2, 121.85 0.00 1,456,320.68
FUND EQUITIES:
Fund Balance-Reserved 0.00 105,361.56 8, 187,617.59
Fund Balance-Unreserved (14, 134.48) (5,638.48) 2,202,874.54
Total Fund Equity (14, 134.48) 99,723.08 10,390,492. 13
TOTAL LIAB/FUND EQUITY (12,012.63) 99,723.08 11,846,812.81
00001=)
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING APRIL 30, 1992
Notes to the Treasurer's Report:
1. The numbers in Tables I and II are cash based; Tables III,
IV and V are accrual-based. Thus, Tables I and II measure
cash actually received or spent during the month; the other
tables present revenues earned and expenditures incurred,
regardless of when the actual receipt or disbursement
occurs. As a result, figures from the two sets of tables
are not expected to tie-in together.
2. The Adjusted Cash Balance in Table I includes checks still
outstanding. This figure ties-in to the total amount of
invested funds (including the City's checking account with
Mid-State Bank) .
3. Table V. Modified Balance Sheets
a. ) The funds selected cover the bulk of the City's
operating funds. Other funds may be included, as directed
by Council .
b. ) Gas Tax includes LTF/Non-Transit monies; Developer Fees
include all impact fees (except Amapoa-Tecorida) .
c. ) The Unreserved Fund Balance represents that portion of a'
particular fund available for any purpose for which the fund'',
was established. It is a more reliable figure to use than
the cash balance for that fund.
I Mark Joseph, do hereby certify that the above information is
accurate and reflects the City's financial position for the
period specified. However, the information in these reports is''
unaudited, and may therefore be subject to future revisions.
Mark Joseph, nance Director
�i,lUA:�U
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-3
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. pate: 05/26/92
From AO- L. Decamp, City Planner File No: TPM 92-003
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a tentative parcel map request to divide 8. 65
acres into three parcels of 2.75 (net) , 2.76, and 2.87 acres for
single family residential use at 4440 Potrero Road (William and
Gail Randall/Cuesta Engineering) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Per the Planning Commission's recommendation, approval of the land
division request based on the Findings for Approval and subject to
the revised Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND:
On May 5, 1992, the Planning Commission conducted 'a public hearing
_ p g
on the above referenced subject. On a 6:0: 1 voteM the Commission
recommended approval of the parcel map as noted above. There was
discussion and public testimony as evidenced in the attached
minutes excerpt.
Attachments: Staff Report - May 5, 1992
Minutes Excerpt - May 5, 1992
Revised Conditions of Approval - May 5, 1992
cc: William and Gail Randall
Cuesta Engineering
000021
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B-3
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: May 5, 1992.
BY: Gary Kaiser, Associate Planner(31^7-1 File No: TPM #92003
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a tentative parcel map application to divide an
8.65-acre lot into three (3) parcels of 2.75 (net) , 2.76, and 2.87
acres for single family residential use.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map #92003 based on
the Findings contained in Attachment J and the Conditions of
Approval contained in Attachment K.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .William & Gail Randall
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cuesta Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4440 Potrero Road
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lot 40, Blk 21, A.C.
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8.65 acres
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (Residential Suburban)
7. General Plan Designation. . . . . . . . . . .Suburban Single Family
8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Single Family Residence
9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
April 14, 1992
B. ANALYSIS•
The project site, an 8.65-acre original Colony Lot, is located on
the east side of Obispo Road, between Traffic Way and Del Rio Road
(Attachment A) . Physical access to the site is presently available
by way of an access easement to Potrero Road (which explains the
address on Potrero Road) . The applicants request approval of a
tentative parcel map application to subdivide this site into Parcel
1 of 2. 87 acres, Parcel 2 of 2.75 acres (net) , and Parcel 3 of 2.76
acres (Attachment B) .
1
000022
i�
• There is an existing single-family residence on proposed Parcel 1,
which is occupied by the applicants; proposed Parcels 2 & 3 are
vacant. Percolation tests have been performed on both proposed
vacant lots, which indicate their suitability far conventional
septic/leachfield systems.
As required by the Subdivision Ordinance, the applicants have
provided potential building site locations on each of the proposed
lots, and have displayed feasible leachfield and driveway locations
(Attachment C) . It is clear from this information'': that no native
trees need be impacted by this proposal, and the extent of
necessary grading would be virtually nonexistent.
Minimum Lot Size/Density
Staff has calculated the minimum lot size for ' the site, as
prescribed in Section 9-3. 144 of the City Zoning Ordinance. The
results are as follows:
Lot Size Factor
Distance from Center ( 12,000' - 14,0001 ) 0.40
Septic Suitability (<20 min./inch: well-suited) 0.50
Average Slope ( 11% - 20%) 0.75
Access Condition (Paved Road >15% slope) 0.50
General Neighborhood Character (2.91 ac) 0.58
Minimum Lot Size. . . . . . .2.73 acres
• The proposed subdivision is thereforeP ossible under the minimum
lot size and density standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance;
each of the proposed lots, not counting the "flag" ', portion of
proposed Parcel 2, exceeds 2.73 acres.
Site Characteristics/Topography
The average slope of the site, as calculated by staff using the
contour interval method, is 15.3%. Although the site is somewhat
hilly throughout, the extreme western portion of the site, beyond
any development proposed by this project, is very steep and tends
to skew impressions of average slope. For informational
purposes, staff has calculated the average slope on lands
proposed for development (8.7%) separately from lands proposed to
be left undisturbed (25.5%) , as shown in Attachment D.
It should be noted that the average slope calculation for the
westerly, steeper portion of the site does not take into
consideration the substantial fill slope associated with recently
constructed Obispo Road. This fill slope has intensified the
ravine between Obispo Road and the project site, and has made
access to the site from the Obispo Road frontage dramatically
more difficult than plans portray (topographic information on
plans in accurate, but was generated prior to construction of
Obispo Road) .
2
000023 ' v
Project Alternatives
The applicants have provided written and graphic descriptions of
project alternatives which were explored, and the reason why each
was rejected for the current proposal (Attachment E) .
There is little question that establishing access to any number
of lots from Obispo Road would have significant environmental
consequences, especially as compared to the preferred
alternative. Staff agrees that the current proposal is indeed
the best alternative, given the objective to create two
additional lots.
Because the access road to Potrero Road is shared by the adjacent
property to the south, the requirement to improve the access road
to Fire Department standards would remain regardless of whether
the current proposal was for one additional lot or two additional
lots. Hence, the proposed three-lot subdivision does not
substantially increase the cost of the project, nor would it
substantially increase site disturbance.
Given its rather benign effects on the environment, staff
anticipates that discussion will focus on matters of subdivision
design; specifically, the creation of flag lots and the degree to
which the project "fits" into the character of the neighborhood.
Subdivision Design -- Findings and Criteria for Flag Lots
Section 11-8.209 of the Subdivision Ordinance establishes
specific findings that must be made in approving flag lots. One
required finding is that the subdivision is consistent with the
character of the neighborhood. Staff has looked carefully at the
neighborhood as a means of evaluating subdivision design.
As Attachment F shows, there are several existing flag lots in
the neighborhood. In fact, contiguous lots on three sides of the
project site are flag lots. Attachment G shows existing lots in
the neighborhood which are smaller than all three proposed lots.
Indeed, there are numerous smaller lots in the neighborhood.
Attachment H is a composite graphic, showing existing lots in the
neighborhood which are flag lots, smaller than all proposed lots,
and those which are both.
Based on this information, it is difficult for staff to make a
negative determination on neighborhood consistency. Rather,
staff feels the finding for neighborhood consistency can be made
in the affirmative. The ultimate test with respect to the
project' s consistency with the neighborhood, of course, will come
upon consideration of public testimony.
3
00002,1
The other required findings for flag lot approval, '',namely that
i proposed flag lots are justified by topographic conditions and
that a standard street is infeasible should be rather easy to
make. As demonstrated earlier in this report, gaining-access
from Obispo Road would involve substantial site disruption that-
would far outweigh any benefits derived from avoiding flag lots.
With respect to the latter finding, the Public Worlds and Fire
Departments agree that this access road has little 'potential to
be a "through street" in the future, and does not Warrant
improvements beyond that recommended herein. Moreover, the
existing 24-foot access easement is not sufficiently wide to
accommodate a City-standard street.
Once it is established that the aforementioned mandatory findings
can be made, "approvable" flag lot subdivisions must adhere to
certain other criteria, as follows (also listed under Section 11-
8.209 of the Subdivision Ordinance) :
A. The accessway serving the flag tot(s) shall not be included in the determination of
required lot area for any lot.
B. The original tot shall have frontage on a dedicated street of at le4:st the minimum length
required by these regulations for the zone in which it is located, plus the accessway
required to potential rear lots.
C. The accessway to the rear shalt be at least twenty (20) feet wide (developed to City
Standards) for residential zones, except where the accessway is more than one hundred fifty
(150) feet tong it shall be at least twenty-four (24) feet wide with twenty (20) feet of
pavement. For all other zones, the accessway shalt be at least thirty (30) feet wide with
a paved roadway at least twenty-four (24) feet wide.
D. Each lot shall have yards as required by the zoning regulations, indtuding a ten (10) foot
setback along any accessway, whether easement or lot line.
E. The lot furthest from the street shalt own the accessway in fee. 01her tots using the
accessway shalt have an access and utility easement over it.
F. Lots utilizing the accessway of a flag lot may be required to enterinto a road maintenance
agreement to insure perpetual maintenance and repair of the accesswdy.
G. A reflectorized house numbering master sign shalt be located at the''intersection of the
street and accessway, and individual reflectorized address signs shell be placed on the
right hand side of the driveway to each individual lot.
The existing accessway satisfies the 24-foot width requirement
and the applicants propose to widen existing pavement within the
accessway to meet the 20-foot paved surface requirement. The
flag area is proposed to be owned in fee by the parcel farthest
from the street, and has not been counted towards satisfying
minimum lot size requirements.
Conditions contained in Attachment K are adequate to ensure
conformance with other flag lot criteria, including recordation
of a road maintenance agreement and development of '', an appropriate
house numbering system. Please note that staff is ', also
recommending that a one-foot access denial strip, And a building
exclusion (setback) area, be shown on the final map to protect
the steep, heavily wooded westerly portion of the site.
4
000025 ���
Environmental Review
An Initial Study has been conducted for the project, and a
Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) .
Basically, the project would result in increased residential
density on the project site in a manner consistent with the
General Plan and its implementing ordinances. While site
topography is undulating, and a considerable number of mature
native trees exist on the site, it is certainly possible to
develop the proposed two (2) additional lots without any tree
removals or a significant amount of grading. Therefore, and
because all subsequent development on the site would also be
subject to environmental review under CEQA, this project is not
thought to have the potential to result in significant adverse
impacts on the environment.
Review of Other Agencies
The project has been referred to all potentially affected public
agencies for review and comments. Although no outside agencies
are opposed to the project, the Fire Department has emphasized
the need to insure proposed road improvements, including a
turnaround and new fire hydrant at the westerly terminus of the
accessway. Staff assures the conditions in Attachment K are
sufficient in this regard. The Fire Department was also
instrumental in recognizing an existing addressing problem in the
area. A change of the applicant' s street address has been
initiated by staff and will resolve this problem.
CONCLUSIONS:
The project, with the attached conditions of approval, is
consistent with the General Plan, complies all Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinance provisions, and would have no significant
effects on the natural environment. Pending public testimony,
staff feels all the necessary findings can be made for project
approval.
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -- Location Map
Attachment B -- Tentative Parcel Map
Attachment C -- Potential Bldgs/Septic/Dwys
Attachment D -- Division of Site' s Average Slope
Attachment E -- Project Alternatives
Attachment F -- Flag Lots in the Neighborhood
Attachment G -- Smaller Lots in the Neighborhood
Attachment H -- Composite Map of Neighborhood
Attachment I -- Negative Declaration
Attachment J -- Findings for Approval
Attachment K -- Conditions of Approval
5
ATTACHMENT A
•.•' .• k CITY OF ATASCADERO Location Map
�� Ma left TPM #92003
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
s u ........
, AZO "
ss
TLs^:;0 rERROC
... ..... ..... ......
FFIC AY— TRA Ff iC
40v
w
N
• S, '• •YS•. v
Z*xR,
M*:,:*x
<r�z C t.
O
r 0 \
y � Quo ' �\z
�..� R10 LOA
`j.fi=r
'fN cpfe �'Q*... £ ♦ �� COLI A—"
1
• m
Z f
/ A t
000027 144
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF ATASCADERO Tentative Parcel Map
TPM #92003
� '.1. ���� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
fF 1
y tg i -'1 1 i a
1 (
w � o
ib b I¢�1� 1 j g z o7
Xj g L W
~
9 YB ter.. Is i l y
�p� 6 �o � �i i � •rte z
o
1 ,
L__ � ' ; � H � � •i��t jl._�1 a�j- � '�� / i '_
e it
v 1 /, ! _1ai1 s 1 � `� /s 1 6 EP. �S r•.
- 'r -''Y'f• `� 1
000028
' ` 1
Kz� ' `\ ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF Potential Locations for
,,! ..•. .• � ATASCADERO
1070 Bidgs/Sept is/Dwys
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TPM #92003
DEPARTMENT
i �
i
\ \\� " 111111\• �, \� �2�L�c �\ �`.� 2� �L-�_� �'----1
eaaar
PARCEL 7
P>>
I a I I 1 1 I J I 1 ��7��; 44:�� „< ` •`\ \\ \\ \ /''! NP•.+N/ X.
I 1 I 1 ' "� .ri'Fr1�2.� ` 4`t•`I \ `\_ / IIfPANI.ON�A•G
NN
I y\ \\11 \1 t, \\\\arNa u�.rLs > <``( •.�\ � ': .�.o.. \ ?\ suaawc aat
cFk-
.9110
\ \\ \1 \ \ \ � `` t '� _�� •..f •.[000 al.N01/af
i.sarr \ \ �• \ 1 1 \ naw
711 lo' :ll;Fi'
L.107.7 /, /
1 / �CCCSS[.7(w[ f n[9 wS R
i ` .a1 QI f1 I O 44r 71
00002;) ' �
ATTACHMENT D
,4 CITY OF ATASCADERO Divided Average Slope
rte'�hra 1:
TPM #92003
..-7
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
i
t \ ► II,P, 1 1\ �_ p M\! '\�� •`, \ i to ��' -
1 t l 1 13 111 l Y \ \ \ •.l 1
1\ t lit\:1
` tL• 1 :, l l \ x S.i
PARCEL 3 \\
276 ACR-: \
1 1 1 �C �A9rawnit fnr .rra 1�� � \
� 1 \ 1 ► i ► ) \' �\\,� arvwvarwv.urs
11 �.
Ni -.\ NrrGgWa arra;
aw
1 \ \ \\\
l.9a•I9' \ \ \ \ 1'1
— �• 1Y9.q' 1
I•
W119
MERE
SLOP 01 �4J�AUE
SLOPS = 8.7 5/o 0
000030,#1
ATTACHMENT E
CITY OF ATASCADERO Project Alternatives
N, (contains 4 pages )
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TPM #92003
DEPARTMENT
ALTERNATIVES
Attached are maps indicating two alternative subdivision proposals
which involve access from Obispo Road. Both alternatives would
leave Parcel 3 with the existing access to Potrero Road. Since the
number of lots served by the access to Potrero Road would remain
at two (Parcel 3 and adjacent Lot 39) in both ipstances, no
improvements to this access would be necessary.
Alternative "A" would provide a common driveway for Parcels 1 and
2 to Obispo Road. This alternative was determined not to be
feasible because extensive grading would be required to build a
driveway in conformance with the 20% maximum slope criteria. This
grading would result in the removal of many trees including White
Oaks. Serving each lot individually from Obispo Road wpuld require
two driveways with equally extensive grading.
Alternative "B" would provide access from Obispo Road in an area
where the trees are less dense. It is conceivable that a driveway
could be constructed in this area without tree removal.
Alternative "B" was rejected because it would crenate a long
irregular access easement across Parcel 2 for Parcel 1!. Also, the
total area of site disturbance due to grading the driveway in
Alternative "B" is much greater than the site disturbance related
to improving the access to Potrero Road as indicated on the
Tentative Parcel Map submitted with the application. 11
The design of the subdivision as submitted will result in the
improvement of the existing driveway to Potrero Road.', This will
be a benefit to the existing residence and the residence on Lot 39.
C,
000031
. :.., .. CITY OF ATASCADMo
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
r
nn I �I�t ti
1 1 7
00
C4 \
W
O 444////
uj
3is
qm
):,77-
2 Q
LLL
zi
ww^ 1
J � 1" /.. / N Z� � / � IVC i+'< / //"�\ � •\
���-i _� �� "r"+ill<� •• \\ I I � � ��,\r �N
w
rr
000032 '
.r.. ... k CITY OF ATA.SCADaO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
,. DEPARTMENT
1 1
N ♦ � _ _
1.y
y. Ol SII'C�`
O W _ii Lu1
/ Q
r �•�
10
Zul
J
�� •f� OC
1
\1l1
L 1 .yam /, /�• i'1 t `/ �.
LE
C
?�.� �",'' /�� i�� -•�'_r„ ��;rr•••1,y,F_ //�/ /. � t 1 � '� �\�,\ a' 111�n Q �
uj
cd
to
c asr ; I 9
It]
� �Aw
A'T'TACHMENT F
CITY OF ATASCADERO EXisting Flag Lots in
the Neighborhood
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TPM #92003
DEPARTMENT
• � i� `!� •y�., 'i / .� .°•.-moi .,� \.�/ t/ 7
�• ' " ;��
M •` , N V
A
{•f r x •k • .((T�
o �-
• � { ` � a V* c yv/' off. .�� (�' .•pJ
L--
(J ��-. is s. •�•• �
`� 4. .Irk (<) (I,• � (�I Y I.•I',v J r
000035
Pith - - • • •i•
v
a .� o
• /�`
Weil
a r
-� OurIVA
-�" Ap' %r ,
J
ON - 0 ►
ms'm P-P f, -Ml 0 �r �
� f
r •��'1�°fir
� `•�..�it
Fro 0,
OA
1� ,IP-
\� � ��t�jf • ,ter! ��! ..:-
�/�j!����`�:s`�` �����.♦mac' �'` C�' �����.
vA
ATTACHMENT I
•• •• CITY OF ATASCADaO Negative Declaration
TPM #92003
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
C
CITY OF ATASCADERO
ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 6500 PALMA AVE, ATAS DERO.CA 93422 (805)461-5035
APPLICANT: LJiIliA-^ P.AO Ga:L RA4r0aLL-
4r -to
A� c. t GAS 93422
PROJECT TITLE: 7-1i'K—,M,iJE PAer-et- Moj--� 9Zo03
PROJECT LOCATION:
4440 `l- TC?E tZo ��
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
*Qco S- aF 2.7S, 2.76 , ,,vp Z.87 Acmes jFoQ Si-tZ vsE.
FINDINGS:
1. The project does not have the poteaW to degrade the environment.
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-team ezivironmental goals.
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited.but comulatively considerable.
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly.
DETERMINATION:
Based on the above findings.and the information contained is the initial study(made a part hereof by refer-
ence and on file in the Community Development Department).it has been determined that the above project I
will not have as adverse impact on the environment.
I
1
Henry Engen
Community Development Director
Date Posted:
Date Adopted
;
COD U.M.
0000;18
ATTACHMENT J - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92003
4440 Potrero Road (Randall/Cuesta)
May 5, 1992
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project
is adequate.
MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable
General and Specific Plans.
2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed '';subdivision is
consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed
improvements, will not cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and
wildlife or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by
the public at large for access through or the '',use of
property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially
equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision design, and/or the type of
improvements proposed, will not cause serious '',public health
problems.
8. The project conforms to all provisions of the ';Subdivision
Ordinance pertaining to the creation of flag lots, and all
mandatory Findings contained therein specific ''to flag lot
subdivisions are hereby made.
TPM92003.fin
0000. 1� L
ATTACHMENT K - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92003
4440 Potrero Road (Randall/Cuesta)
May 5, 1992
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. An access denial strip shall be shown on the final map along
the entire Obispo Road frontage. Said access denial strip
shall be at least one-foot in width. In addition, a
building exclusion area shall be shown on the final map
affecting all portions of the site within one hundred sixty
(160) feet of the westerly property line.
2. The entire "flag" portion of Parcel 2 shall be owned if fee
by Parcel 2 and shall appear on the final map as an access
and utility easement for the benefit of Parcels 1 and 3.
3. A road maintenance agreement shall be recorded prior to or
in conjunction with the recordation of the final map to
insure perpetual maintenance and repair of the accessway.
Prior to its recordation, the road maintenance agreement
shall be submitted to the Community Development Department
for review and approval.
4. The pavement along the entire accessway, form Potrero Road
to the easterly boundary of Parcel 1, shall be widened to
twenty (20) feet. At the westerly terminus of the
accessway, an approved "hammerhead" turnaround and new fire
hydrant shall be installed to the approval of the Fire
Marshall.
5. An addressing system shall be developed and installed to the
approval of the City Fire Marshall prior to final map
recordation. Said addressing system shall include a
reflectorized master address sign located at the
intersection of the accessway and Potrero Road which shall
include the addresses of all lots served by the accessway.
No addresses need be assigned or changed for lots not
affected by this subdivision; however, the street addresses
for parcels hereby created shall be as follows: Parcel 1 --
4560 Potrero Road; Parcel 2-- 4540 Potrero Road; and Parcel
3 -- 4520 Potrero Road. In addition to the reflectorized
master address sign, directional signs shall be placed along
the accessway, as required by the Fire Marshall.
6. Construction of the all accessway improvements (including
pavement widening, turnaround, fire hydrant, addressing
system, utility extensions, etc. ) shall be completed prior
to recordation of the final map. A building permit shall be
sought and issued, and a final inspection approved, for said
accessway improvements.
(page 1 of 3)
000040 1407
7. All new on-site utility connections, and relocations of
existing utilities, shall be placed underground.
Public Works Department Conditions:
8. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel prior to the recording of the final map.
9. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to ;the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map.
10. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
11. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Public
Works Department prior to the start of road (Accessway)
widening.
12. Prior to the recording of the final map, a soils
investigation as required by the Subdivision leap Act shall
be submitted, recommending corrective actions 'which will
prevent structural damage to each structure proposed to be
constructed in the area where soil problems exist, as
indicated in the Preliminary Soils Report. The date of such
reports, the name of the Engineer making the report, and the
location where the reports are on file shall be noted on the
final map.
13. A final map, in substantial conformance with tthe_ approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final
map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land
Surveyor as required by the Land Surveyors Act and
Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set ';within any
road right of way shall conform to City standard
drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to section 66497 of the Subdivision Map
Act the engineer or surveyor shall notice the City
Engineer in writing that the monuments have been
set.
C* A recently updated preliminary title report shall
be submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the final map.
(page 2 of 3)
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the final map.
14. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two (2) years
from the date of final approval, unless an extension of time
is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to
the expiration date.
(page 3 of 3)
TPM92003.con
000042 1 G �
PLANNING COMMISSION - MINUTES EXCERPT - MAY 5, 19912
4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 92-003:
Application filed by William and Gail Pandall (Cuesta
Engineering) for the division of an 8.65 acre site into
three (3) parcels of 2.75 (net) , 2.76, and 2.87 acres,
for single family residential use. Subject site is
located at 4440 Potrero Road.
Gary Kaiser presented the staff report which focused on issues
including site characteristics and topography, project
alternatives, subdivision design, findings and criteria for
flag lots, and environmental review. Mr. Kaiser noted that
the Public Works Director had reconsidered Condition #12
(soils report) and suggested that this condition be deleted in
light of the increased building setback which would prohibit
building on the steeper portions of the site.'.
Commission questions followed.
- Public Testimony -
John Falkenstien with Cuesta Engineering, representing the
applicant, thanked Mr. Kaiser for his work on ',the application
noting that the proposal is very much in accordance with the
neighborhood character. Mr. Falkenstien remarked that in
speaking with adjoining neighbors, support was expressed for
the project.
With regard to Condition #7 (onsite utility connections) , Mr.
Falkenstien pointed out that there is a PG&E, overhead line,
which is actually a limited transmission line; that currently
goes through the middle of Parcel 3 which will need to be
relocated; however, it cannot feasibly be placed underground.
He requested modification to the condition Ito exempt this
particular overhead line from the undergrounding requirement.
In addressing the issue of access alternatives, Mr.
Falkenstien stated that the existing access from Potrero Road
is the ideal access from a site disturbance standpoint. The
access between Lots 1 and 2 would be the '' worst from an
environmental standpoint, bot with respect', to trees and
grading.
Rush Kolemaine, 4580 Potrero, asked for clarification of the
access denial strip and indicated that he shares staff's and
the applicant's concerns with building any roads from Obispo
Road onto the subject site. Mr. Kolemaine commented that he
may wish to subdivide his property at some future date and
expressed concern that the 160 foot setback imposed for the
Randall project may be required for his site as well. He
asked if this would be precedent setting.
000043
- End of Public Testimony -
In response to query, Mr. Kaiser explained that the access
denial strip applies just to the frontage of the subject site,
as well as the setback area in an attempt to mandate the most
feasible development altnerative. The access strip
requirement would be applied on a case by case basis.
Discussion followed.
In addressing Mr. Falkenstien's statement regarding Condition
#7, Mr. Decamp offered language to accommodate his request.
Commissioner Waage questioned whether the rear parcel would
satisfy the conditions of a flag lot. Mr. DeCamp noted that
the parent lot has frontage on Obispo Road. He added that in
this case, Parcel 3 is actually located behind Parcels 1 and
2, so an attempt has been made to justify the flag lot
findings. Mr. DeCamp further stated that in this case, the
environmental considerations would override the flag lot
findings in any event.
Commissioner Waage remarked that the way the easement was
granted, the front parcel now has 4 lots that access through
his property. Mr. DeCamp noted that the easement is for
ingress and egress adding that if the rear lot subdivides,
then the access is still guaranteed because the parent lot
still has the access rights. Discussion continued.
MOTION: By Commissioner Lochridge and seconded by
Commissioner Hanauer to approve Tentatie Parcel Map
92-003 based on the Findings and subject to the
Conditions of Approval with the following
modifications:
- deletion of Condition #12
117. All new on-site utility connections, and
relocations of utilities to the existing
residence, shall be placed underground."
The motion carried 6:0:1 (with Commissioner
Highland absent) .
Chairperson Luna declared a recess at 8:30 p.m. ; meeting
reconvened at 8:45 p.m.
OU0044
9
ATTACHMENT K - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92003
4440 Potrero Road (Randall/Cuesta)
Revised by the Planning Commission at May 5, 1992 Meeting _
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. An access denial strip shall be shown on the final map along
the entire Obispo Road frontage. Said access 'denial strip
shall be at least one-foot in width. In addition, a
building exclusion area shall be shown on the ';final map
affecting all portions of the site within one hundred sixty
( 160) feet of the westerly property line.
2. The entire "flag" portion of Parcel 2 shall be owned if fee
by Parcel 2 and shall appear on the final map ',as an access
and utility easement for the benefit of Parcels 1 and 3.
3. A road maintenance agreement shall be recorded prior to or
in conjunction with the recordation of the final map to
insure perpetual maintenance and repair of the accessway.
Prior to its recordation, the road maintenance agreement
shall be submitted to the Community Development Department
for review and approval.
4. The pavement along the entire accessway, form Potrero Road
to the easterly boundary of Parcel 1, shall be' widened to
twenty (20) feet. At the westerly terminus of the
accessway, an approved "hammerhead" turnaround and new fire
hydrant shall be installed to the approval of ';the Fire
Marshall.
5. An addressing system shall be developed and installed to the
approval of the City Fire Marshall prior to final map
recordation. Said addressing system shall include a
reflectorized master address sign located at the
intersection of the accessway and Potrero Road which shall
include the addresses of all lots served by the accessway.
No addresses need be assigned or changed for ]Lots not
affected by this subdivision; however, the street addresses
for parcels hereby created shall be as follows: Parcel 1 --
4560 Potrero Road; Parcel 2-- 4540 Potrero Road; and Parcel
3 -- 4520 Potrero Road. In addition to the reflectorized
master address sign, directional signs shall be placed along
the accessway, as required by the Fire Marshall.
6. Construction of the all accessway improvements (including
pavement widening, turnaround, fire hydrant, Addressing
system, utility extensions, etc. ) shall be completed prior
to recordation of the final map. A building permit shall be
sought and issued, and a final inspection approved, for said
accessway improvements.
(Page 1 of 2)
7. All new on-site utility connections, and relocations of
utilities to the existing residence, shall be placed -
underground.
Public Works Department Conditions:
8. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel prior to the recording of the final map.
9. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map.
10. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
11. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Public
Works Department prior to the start of road (accessway)
widening.
12. A final map, in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision ordinance prior to the recording of the final
map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land
Surveyor as required by the Land Surveyors Act and
Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within any
road right of way shall conform to City standard
drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to section 66497 of the Subdivision Map
Act the engineer or surveyor shall notice the City
Engineer in writing that the monuments have been
set.
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall
be submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the final map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the final map.
13. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two (2) years
from the date of final approval, unless an extension of time
is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to
the expiration date.
(page 2 of 2)
i
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-4
Through:: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date:- VS/26/92
From-0teven L. DeCamp, City Planner File No: TPM 92-004
SUBJECT•
Consideration of a tentative parcel map to subdivide one existing
lot of approximately 1. 34 acres gross into 2 new parcels of .55 and
.50 acres net, for single family residential use at X8785 Atascadero
Avenue (Edward and Alice Johnson/Central Coast Engxineering) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Per the Planning Commission's recommendation, approval of Tentative
Parcel Map 92-004 based on the revised Findings for Approval
(addition of a flag lot finding) , and subject to the revised
Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND•
On May 5, 1992, the Planning Commission conducted 4! public hearing
on the above referenced subject. On a 6:0: 1 vote,'; the Commission
recommended approval of the land division request as noted above.
There was discussion and public testimony as evidenced in the
attached minutes excerpt.
Attachments: Staff Report - May 5, 1992
Minutes Excerpt - May 5, 1992
Revised Findings for Approval - May 5, 1992
Revised Conditions of Approval May:; 5, 1992
cc: Edward and Alice Johnson
Central Coast Engineering
00004'7
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B-4
STAFF REPORT
FOR Planning Commission Meeting Date: May 5, 1992
BY Robert B. Malone, Assistant Planner File No: TPM #92-004
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a tentative parcel map application to subdivide
one (1) existing lot of approximately 1.34 acres gross into two
(2) new parcels of .55 and .50 acres net, for single-family
residential use.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map #92-004 based
on the Findings contained in Attachment E and the Conditions
contained in Attachment F.
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Edward& Alice Johnson
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Central Coast Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8785 Atascadero Avenue
4. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.34 acres, gross
5. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-X (Res. Single Family)
6. General Plan Designation. . . . . . . . . . .High Density Single Family
7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Single Family Residence
8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration
posted April 14, , 1992
DESCRIPTION:
The project is located on the north side of Atascadero Avenue
between Curbaril Avenue and Portola Road (see Attachment A -
General Plan & Attachment B - Zoning Maps) and is within the
Urban Service Area. The site was enlarged from .56 to 1.34 acres
by lot line adjustment (TPM 89-002) that recorded on July 29,
1991 (ATAL 88-299) .
The proposed parcels are designed in tandem using a panhandle
configuration with parcel 1 located to the rear and parcel 2
1
000048 t v
located in front along Atascadero Avenue (see Attachment C -
Tentative Parcel Map) . The parcel 2 panhandle consists of a 50
foot wide by 250 foot long road easement with offer to dedicate
that provides access to the rear parcel.
The site is currently developed with one single family residence
located on the proposed front parcel with access taken from
Atascadero Avenue. The proposed rear parcel is vacant with one
large Mulberry tree on the north property line. All utilities,
including sewer, are available from Atascadero Avenue.
The lot slopes to the west towards Atascadero Avenue with an
average grade of 6 percent. As staff anticipates only minor
grading for a residence on the rear parcel and a septic system is
not required, a conceptual site development plan was not
submitted.
The road easement is a remnant of a tentative subdivision located
between Atascadero Avenue and Coromar Road. Two single family
residences to the northwest of the subject site (8753 and 8705
Atascadero Avenue) currently take access from the easement. A
dirt road serving these residences is located on tie southerly
boundary of the easement. Mature landscaping is located along
the northerly boundary of the easement.
Properties to the north, south and west are developed with single
family residences. To the north of the rear parcel is
tentatively approved Tentative Tract Map 89-014 (Iverson) , a 23
lot, one-half acre subdivision (see Vicinity Maps) ,
Although most of the surrounding properties in thii neighborhood
are developed, many are under developed exceeding twice the
minimum lot size of one-half acre. This is due to '';tlie large five
to ten acre original colony lots that existed between Atascadero
Avenue and Coromar Road. Most of these large lots ,, have been
subdivided using a flag lot configuration with lot sizes ranging
between one-half acre and one acre.
ANALYSIS•
The design of the proposed subdivision has been reviewed
according to the requirements and standards of the ' Subdivision
Map Act, CEQA, and the City's General Plan, Zoning ',Ordinance, and
Subdivision Ordinance. The following discussion focuses on the
applicable design elements and concerns relative to; the
application and proposed subdivision:
State Map Requirements - The standards for information and
subdivision design specified in the Subdivision Map Act have been
provided on the submitted tentative parcel map and ',accompanying
application information.
2
0 w 1
00049
CEOA Review - The proposed subdivision and preliminary driveway
grading plan have been reviewed under the guidelines of the
California Environmental Quality Act. An initial study was
conducted and the proposed subdivision design does not- c-reate
significant environmental impacts (see Attachment E - Negative
Declaration) .
General Plan - The 1992 General Plan Land Use Element did not
change the previous 1980 land use designation of High Density
Single-Family Residential. The subdivision, if approved, will
meet the minimum lot size of one-half acre, net.
Staff believes the subdivision design using the panhandle
configuration is appropriate based on compatibility with the
neighborhood subdivision character. The attached vicinity map
indicates there are a significant amount of panhandle lots in
this area of the city. The vicinity map also shows the Tentative
Tract Map 89-014 (Iverson) subdivision that is composed of one-
half acre lots with streets designed to city standards.
Minimum Lot Size Criteria - The minimum lot size in the RSF-X
zone is one-half ( .50) acre. The minimum lot size performance
standards of the Zoning Ordinance are not applicable to the RSF
zone with the "X" suffix. The front parcel has .56 acres gross
and is required to dedicate a 5'-0" strip along Atascadero Road
to achieve a 30 foot width from centerline. This dedication will
result in .55 acres, net. The rear parcel has .78 acres gross
and has .50 acres net without the road easement.
Solar Orientation The front parcels existing residence solar
orientation will not be affected by the proposed lot split. The
rear parcel is large enough to allow proper building orientation
and maximum feasible control of solar exposure by the lot owner.
Depth-Width Relationship - The application of the 3 to 1 lot
depth-width relation and minimum lot size clearly indicate that a
deep lot subdivision could not occur on the rear parcel.
Lot Lines - Proposed lot lines are aligned perpendicular and
parallel to the street, which is encouraged by the Subdivision
Ordinance.
Utilities & Easements - The property is served with all utilities
(gas, electricity, water, telephone and sewer) which are
contained within the Atascadero Avenue right-of-way. Utilities
will be extended to the rear parcel via the road easement.
The Planning and Engineering Divisions are recommending the
existing 50 foot wide road easement with offer to dedicate be
converted to a 50 foot wide private access and utility easement.
The easement will be for purposes of ingress and egress to the
rear lot and to the two existing residences at 8753 and 8705 i
000050 /if
Atascadero Avenue. The offer to dedicate will be removed from
the easement. This alteration of the road easement will clarify
that the underlying easement rights of the neighboring property
owners are not being altered, but enhanced, by this proposal.
The Subdivision Ordinance requires the easement be at least
twenty-four feet wide with twenty feet of pavement, Staff is
recommending the paved access road be located in the current
position of the dirt road serving the two adjacent residences.
This alignment along the southern side of the access easement
will maintain the existing mature vegetation in front of the
adjacent residences and keep vehicles from passing under the drip
line of the large Mulberry tree on the rear parcel# The paved
road is recommended to be installed prior to recording the parcel
map.
Interdepartmental Review - The responses from the ether agency
review (see Attachment F - Conditions of Approval) indicate that
with conditions the project complies with the standards of the
Fire and Public Works Departments and the Building Division.
CONCLUSIONS:
Staff believes that the proposed two lot subdivision is
consistent with all applicable provisions of the General Plan and
the Atascadero Municipal Code, and that the proposed project can
be approved subject to the attached findings (see Attachment F -
Findings of Approval) and conditions.
ATTACHMENTS Attachment A - Location Map - General Plan
Attachment B - Location Map - Zoning
Attachment C - Tentative Parcel Map ',
Attachment D - Developers Statement ';
Attachment E - Negative Declaration '
Attachment F - Findings of Approval ''
Attachment G - Conditions of Approval
4
000051 � ' .
�C\ ATTACHMENT A - LOCATION M,
CITY OF ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN
�k TPM 92-004
"�I 8785 ATASCADERO AVENUE
—SC
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOHNSON/CENTRAL COAST
DEPARTMENT
MAF eq -014 (!YE,,0SaxQ1
J
� 4V go i-v1
J� 4 VF
1
\� f �„\
1 /
ASA N S1T' a
�Ao ova
l
Avan u t
0000.52 rG► 4
ATTACHMENT B - LOCATION
CITY OF ATASCADERO TPMING 92-004
rt*lx.. NG _ 9 107 __, -._. 8785 ATASCADERO AVENUE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOHNSON/CENTRAL- COAST EN(
DEPARTMENT
T�'d�v� �z�- Map 89- 4' C t�cr►�
I �► q V
IV
TV
K
7 �
qs�t v 1T E Q
� O
613 b70; At;m �, Avevu,e.
0000.53 /�5
ATTACHMENT C - TENT . PARC:
CITY OF ATA.SCADERO TPM 92-004 MAP
_ 8785 ATAXSCADERO AVENUE
�R� ./�
19111•� L, IY7S—)
* COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOHNSON/CENTRAL COAST
DEPARTMENT
N
O
W
4 I /
m 14Z.9k,Dt N
/
<0 0
0—
Q
,Ib.14 N
�r ,Shot �r
4a"olmn aNv A
1�. (541'10 Z141)1,Wba \ �'
CQ �a1M,0A'J-41Y3 '�, S
rte_
0
r �_-��
j� a o 0
cc s \
r �
L
Iu,n' us ly f
000054
ATTACHMENT D - DEVELOPER
CITY OF ATASCADERO TPM 92_004 STATEMENT
17,e.,a ria 885 ATASCADERO AVENUE
' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOHNSON/CENTRAL- COAST EN
DEPARTMENT
CENTRAL COAST
ENGINEERING
3%Bucklev Road March 13, 1992
San Luis Obispo E1900
California 93301
Addendum to Environmental
Information Form
The project site and the adjacent uses are within an established single family
residential area. Topography ranges from flat to gently rolling (5%) with
landscaping provided by use. If desired, present zoning allows for small domestic
animals. All utilities are onsite or within the adjacent roadway with existing
structures providing living area and corresponding uses. There are no cultural,
historical or scenic aspects to the neighborhood beyond that',which the family uses
provide.
Uses to the immediate north, south and west are single family homes. To the west
and adjacent.north is tentatively approved Tract 1753, a 23 lot, OS min. acre
subdivision created by long time resident Clark Iverson,. To this date, no
improvement construction has commenced
Edward and Alice Johnson have lived at this location since: the creation of their
parcel in 1963. Mrs.Johnson from that time to the present bas been employed by
her neighbor,Clark Iverson,assisting him with the responsibilities of providing care
of mentally deficient young men.
Prior to the subdivision of the lands known as Tract 1753, Mr. Iverson performed
and recorded ATAL 88-299. This map added .78 gross ''acres of land to the
Johnsods for retirement security.
This present application is now requesting a split of the (!,Johnson's ownership
creating a OS net acre flag Parcel 1 with access provided by an 50 foot strip that was
dedicated and not accepted in 1963. This dedication will remain intact. To be
created Parcel 2, will return to the original parcel configuration owned by the
original Johnson's_
0000.,:,5 1(0 1
ATTACHMENT E NEGATIVE DECLARATION TPM 92-00
8785 ATASCADERO AVENUE JOHNSON/CENTRAL COAST
ENG
CITY OF ATASCADERO
y
ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATO070
tots -
�� NEGATIVE DECLARATIO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 6500 PALMA AVE. ATASCADERO, CA 93422 (805) 461-5035
APPLICANT:
Alice. ..(ohnaon
87 455 Atda"cle ra Avmnv z.
A+a."dr ro , CA a13 4
PROJECT TITLE: -(V+4-r.-r 1 Ve_ QA L Map q2-ooh-
PROJECT LOCATION: d'185 A*rA*CbG4Pfi A*10*+00
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: -rwv 1-oT ue�ni�+siont
FINDINGS:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment.
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited. but comulatively considerable..
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly.
DETERNIINATION:
Based on the above findings. and the information contained in the initial study(made a part hereof by refer-
ence and on file in the Community Development Department). it has been determined that the above project
will not have an adverse impact on the environment.
Henry Engen
Community Development Director
Date Posted: A-?w V 14, t gcj2
Date Adopted:
0000;56
ATTACHMENT F - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92-004 (Johnson/Central Coast Engineering)-
8785 Atascadero Avenue
May 5, 1992
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant :, impact on the
environment. The Negative Declaration prepared and posted for the
project is consistent with state guidelines.
MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable General
and Specific Plans.
2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type ,of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, - and/or the proposed
improvements, will not cause substantial environmental damage
or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or
their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the
public at large for access through or the use of property
within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent
alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision design, and/or the type of
improvements proposed, will not cause serious'' public health
problems.
00005-; !L
ATTACHMENT G - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92-004
8785 Atascadero Avenue (Johnson/Central Coast Engineering)
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the (Property line)
frontage of each parcel, or its public utilities easement
prior to the recording of the final map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
4. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer
shall be submitted €or review and approval by the Public Works
Department, prior to the recording of the map. Road
improvements shall include, but not be limited to the
following;
a. Pavement widening of Atascadero Avenue to 20' from
centerline.
b. Curb, gutter, and a five foot sidewalk. If directed by
the Director of Public Works, the applicant shall
contribute $25.00 per linear foot to the "In-Lieu
sidewalk sinking fund" instead of constructing the
sidewalk.
C. R-value testing shall be done, and the pavement section
designed by a registered civil engineer to the
satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, prior to
the start of construction.
5. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City of
Atascadero Public Works Department prior to the start of
construction. The applicant shall enter into an Inspection
Agreement with the City guaranteeing that the work will be
done to a standard acceptable to the Director of Public Works
and that the inspections are paid for. The applicant shall
pay the City the current rate for inspection of the public
improvements.
6. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100%
Performance Guarantee and a 50% Labor and Materials Guarantee
until the public improvements are deemed substantially
complete by the City Public Works Department. Prior to the
final inspection of the public improvements, and before the
other guarantees mentioned in this condition are released, a
10% Maintenance Guarantee shall be posted to cover the public
improvements for a period of 1 year after the final
inspection. The guarantee amounts shall be based on an
engineer' s estimate submitted by the project engineer and
approved by the Public Works Department. The - Guarantees
posted for this project shall be cash depositor a letter of
credit.
7. Construction of the public road improvements shall be
completed, or bonded for prior to the recording of the map.
8. An annexation fee (for sewer connection) shall be paid for
prior to the recording of the final map.
9. A grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil
engineer shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Public Works Department, prior to the issuance of any building
permits, or the recording of the final map.
10. Drainage Facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero
Standards. All work shall be completed, or bonded for prior
to recording of the final map.
11. All lot grading and drainage improvements shall require
written statement by a registered Civil Engineer that all work
has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved
plans.
12. All grading and erosion control measures shall 'be designed by
a registered Civil Engineer and constructed in accordance with
the City of Atascadero grading codes and standards (including
all Flood Hazard Overlay Zone requirements) .
13. Offer to dedicate to the City of Atascadero': the following
rights-of-way.
Street Name: Atascadero Road
Limits: 30' from the centerline of the right-of-way to the
property line, along the entire property frontage.
14. Offer to dedicate to the public for public utility purposes
the following easement.
a. A 6'-0" PUE along the property frontage.
b. A 6 '-0" PUE along all internal property lines.
15. Offers of dedication shall be completed, and ',recorded prior
to, or in conjunction with the recording of the map.
16. The 50 foot wide public road easement and offer to dedicate
shall be converted to a 50 foot wide private access (for
ingress and egress) and utility easement in favor of property
located at 8705 and 8753 Atascadero Avenue. The access
easement and covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be
0000:59 i '7
submitted and approved prior to recording of the final map.
17. A 20 foot wide paved access drive located in the position of
the existing dirt road in the 50 foot wide public road
easement shall be completed prior to recording of- the final
map.
18. Prior to the recording of the final map, a soils investigation
as required by the Subdivision Map Act shall be submitted,
recommending corrective actions which will prevent structural
damage to each structure proposed to be constructed in the
area where soil problems exist, as indicated in the
Preliminary Soils Report. The date of such reports, the name
of the Engineer making the report, and the location where the
reports are on file shall be noted on the final map.
19. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth
herein shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners by a
Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor as
required by the Land Surveyors Act and Subdivision Map
Act. Monuments set within any road right of way shall
conform to city standard drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to section 66497 of the- Subdivision Map Act the
engineer or surveyor shall notice the City Engineer in
writing that the monuments have been set.
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
20. Provide and maintain at least a 3'-0" clearance around the
fire hydrant at the front of the property on Atascadero
Avenue.
21. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from the
date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted
pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date.
PLANNING COMMISSION - MINUTES EXCERPT - MAY 5, 1992
4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 92-004:
Application filed by Edward and Alice Johnson (Central
Coast Engineering) for the division of one lot (enlarged
by PM 88-299) into two (2) parcels of .$5 and .50 acres
for single family residential use. Subject site is
located at 8785 Atascadero Avenue.
Robert Malone presented the staff report ;and provided a
background on the prior lot line adjustment ',associated with
this site. Staff is recommending approval subject to certain
conditions.
Mr. Decamp remarked that with regard to, Condition #18
(requirement for soils reports) , as with the prior subdivision
(Randall) , staff is recommending that 118 be ',deleted at this
time given the knowledge of the soil conditions in this area.
Mr. DeCamp pointed out that this application needs to include
the necessary deep lot subdivision findings contained in the
Subdivision Ordinance.
Mr. Malone offered that a condition requiring the project to
have a master addressing system needs to be added.
Mr. Malone recommended that Condition #14 dedication for
public utility easement) be deleted as Condition #16 addresses
the same issue.
With regard to Condition #16 (ingress and egress and utility
easement) , Mr. Malone suggested the word "public" be added
before "utility easement" .
Commission questions followed.
Chairperson Luna noted that the lot line adjustment
contributed 3/4 of an acre to the original panel, adding that
he had understood that lot line adjustments are not supposed
to create new lots.
Mr. Malone clarified that the lot line adjustment was an
adjustment between two lots; however, an additional lot was
not created with that adjustment.
Mr. DeCamp commented that the lot line adjustment added area
to an existing lot and the subsequent parcel map is what is
creating the building site.
000061
Public Testimony -
Dennis Schmidt with Central Coast Engineering, representing
the applicant, provided a brief history on the lot line
adjustment, and thanked Mr. Malone for his work on the
application.
Mr. Schmidt requested that he be allowed to bond for the
installation of the water lateral across the street (Condition
11) noting that the applicant would like to put in all of the
necessary improvements at one time.
With regard to Condition #16, Mr. Schmidt stated that the back
parcel has a deeded easement across the property; the front
parcel does not but has been using that area for a period of
time. He indicated agreement with the abandonment of the
dedication but would like to have flexibility in being able to
establish a new easement for the front parcel to give future
owners rights for ingress and egress.
John Hammond, P.O. Box 4113, San Luis Obispo, representing
Betty Hammond, northerly property owner (8705 Atascadero
Avenue) commented that Mrs. Hammond is the individual who has
deeded rights to that easement. He thanked Mr. Malone for his
efforts in trying to resolve everyone's concerns over the
easement as there have been problems with this in the past.
Mr. Hammond stated that Mrs. Hammond has no real objection to
the land division; her objection primarily comes with the fact
that there is a drainage problem that has existed for several
years. He added that both Mrs. Hammond and the applicants
have attempted to repair that road each year. _ Mr. Hammond
stressed that the drainage problems must be resolved with
impending development of the property.
Mr. Hammond expressed concern with an existing knoll in front
of the applicant's property which could cause site distance
problems with traffic, adding that the easement is at the base
of that knoll.
Commissioner Johnson pointed out that Conditions #9 and #10
require the preparation of a grading and drainage plan by a
registered civil engineer which should take care of Mr.
Hammond's concern. Chairperson Luna added that Mr. Hammond
would have the opportunity to review these plans and, if not
satisfied, could appeal to the Commission.
Mr. Schmidt concurred with the Hammonds' concerns about the
drainage. He noted that with the completion of the Clark
Iverson subdivision, there will be a perimeter open channel
that will catch the drainage and carry it out through Mr.
Iverson's subdivision so a lot of the water running onto the 0
OU00h2
50 foot easement will be diverted by the subdivision itself.
Mr. Schmidt further commented that he will deal directly with
the Hammonds on the drainage issues.
- End of Public Testimony -
In addressing the applicant's request to bond for Condition
#1, Mr. Malone stated this condition has been, proposed by the
Public Works Department whose policy has been; not to bond for
these types of improvements. Discussion followed. Mr. Malone
added that the curb and gutter improvements could go in
concurrently with the water lines.
MOTION: By Commissioner Hanauer and seconded by commission-
er Kudlac to approve Tentative Parcel Map 92-004
based on the revised Findings'; contained in
Attachment E and subject to the Conditions of
Approval as modified:
Findings: Addition of Finding #8: ''
108. The project conforms to all provisions of the
Subdivision Ordinance pertaining to the
creation of flag lots, and,, all mandatory
Findings contained therein specific to flag
lot subdivisions are hereby made."
Conditions:
- Deletion of Condition #14
- Deletion of Condition #18
1116. The 50 foot wide public road easement and
offer to dedicate shall be converted to a 50
foot wide private access (for ingress and
egress) and public utility easement in favor
of property located at $705 and 8753
Atascadero Avenue. The access easement and
covenants, conditions and retractions shall be
submitted and approved prior :to recording of
the final map."
The motion carried 6:0:1 with Commissioner Highland
absent.
000063
ATTACHMENT F - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92-004 (Johnson/Central Coast Engineering)
8785 Atascadero Avenue
As Amended by Planning Commission May 5, 1992
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. The Negative Declaration prepared and posted for the
project is consistent with state guidelines.
MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable General
and Specific Plans.
2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed
improvements, will not cause substantial environmental damage
or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or
their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the
public at large for access through or the use of property
within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent
alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision design, and/or the type . of
improvements proposed, will not cause serious public health
problems.
8. The project conforms to all provisions of the Subdivision
Ordinance pertaining to the creation of flag lots, and all
mandatory Findings contained therein specific to flag lot
subdivisions are hereby made.
000064
ATTACHMENT G - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #92-004
8785 Atascadero Avenue (Johnson/Central Coast Engineering)
As Amended by Planning Commission May 5, 1992
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the ,(Property line)
frontage of each -.parcel, or its public utilities easement
prior to the recording of the final map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, ',open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final ';map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to'; the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
4. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer
shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works
Department, prior to the recording of the map. Road
improvements shall include, but not be limited to the
following;
a. Pavement widening of Atascadero Avenue to 20' from
centerline.
b. Curb, gutter, and a five foot sidewalk. If directed by
the Director of Public Works, the applicant shall
contribute $25.00 per linear foot to, the "In-Lieu
sidewalk sinking fund" instead of constructing the
sidewalk.
C. R-value testing shall be done, and the pavement section
designed by a registered civil engineer to the
satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, prior to
the start of construction.
5. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City of
Atascadero Public Works Department prior to the start of
construction. The applicant shall enter into an Inspection
Agreement with the City guaranteeing that the work will be
done to a standard acceptable to the Director of Public Works
and that the inspections are paid for. The applicant shall
pay the City the current rate for inspection of the public
improvements.
6. All public improvements shall be covered!, with a 100%
Performance Guarantee and a 50% Labor and Materials Guarantee
until the public improvements are deemed' substantially
complete by the City Public Works Department.,, Prior to the
final inspection of the public improvements, ',and before the
other guarantees mentioned in this condition are released, a
00006b
10% Maintenance Guarantee shall be posted to cover the public
improvements for a period of 1 year after the final
inspection. The guarantee amounts shall be based on an
engineer' s estimate submitted by the project engineer and
approved by the Public Works Department. The -Guarantees
posted for this project shall be cash deposit or a letter of
credit.
7. Construction of the public road improvements shall be
completed, or bonded for prior to the recording of the map.
8. An annexation fee (for sewer connection) shall be paid for
prior to the recording of the final map.
9. A grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil
engineer shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Public Works Department, prior to the issuance of any building
permits, or the recording of the final map.
10. Drainage Facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero
Standards. All work shall be completed, or bonded for prior
to recording of the final map.
11. All lot grading and drainage improvements shall require
written statement by a registered Civil Engineer that all work
has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved
plans.
12. All grading and erosion control measures -shall be designed by
a registered Civil Engineer and constructed in accordance with
the City of Atascadero grading codes and standards.
13. Offer to dedicate to the City of Atascadero the following
rights-of-way.
Street Name: Atascadero Road
Limits: 30' from the centerline of the right-of-way to the
property line, along the entire property frontage.
14. Offer to dedicate to the public for public utility purposes
the following easement.
a. A 6 ' -0" PUE along the property frontage.
15. Offers of dedication shall be completed, and recorded prior
to, or in conjunction with the recording of the map.
16. The 50 foot wide public road easement and offer to dedicate
shall be converted to a 50 foot wide private access (for
ingress and egress) and public utility easement (PUE) in favor
of property located at 8705 and 8753 Atascadero Avenue. The
access easement and covenants, conditions and restrictions
shall be submitted and approved prior to recording of the
final map.
000066
17. A 20 foot wide paved access drive located in the position of
the existing dirt road in the 50 foot wide public road
easement shall be completed prior to recordinlg of the final .
map.
18. An addressing system shall be developed and installed to the
approval of the City Fire Marshall prior , to final map
recordation. Said addressing system shall include a
ref lectorized master address sign located at the intersection
of the accessway and Atascadero Avenue that shall include the
addresses of all lots served by the accessway
18. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth
herein shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's
Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners by a
Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor as
required by the Land Surveyors Act and Subdivision Map
Act. Monuments set within any road right of way shall
conform to city standard drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to section 66497 of the Subdivision Map Act the
engineer or surveyor shall notice the City Engineer in
writing that the monuments have been set.
C. A recently updated preliminary- title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
19. Provide and maintain at least a 3'-0" clearance around the
fire hydrant at the front of the property on Atascadero
Avenue.
20. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two: years from the
date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted
pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date.
060067
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-5
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager/7AI Meeting date: 5/26/92
•v�, C
From: Michael P. McCain, Acting Fire Chief ,
SUBJECT
Weed abatement contract - Bid #92-3
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend awarding of contract for hand work and tractor work to
Brett's Tractor Service.
BACKGROUND
Bids for the weed abatement contract were opened 5/12/91, by Lee
Raboin, City Clerk. As indicated on the attached bid summary sheet,
two bids were submitted.
Based on the lower cost of administration and the ability of a single
contractor to complete all work, it appears to be in the best interest
to award the 1992 weed abatement contract to Brett's Tractor Service.
Although this bidder's hourly price for tractor work is slightly higher
than the other bidder's, the bulk of the abatement completed by the
city contractor in previous years has required hand work (Weed-Eater)
and his hand work price is the lowest bid.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds are budgeted annually to cover costs of the weed abatement
program and fees are recovered through assessments On property tax
bills.
000068
:3
BID SUMMARY
TO: Mike McCain
Acting Fire Chief
FROM: Lee Raboi.n
City Clem
BID NO. : 92-03
OPENED : 5/12/92
PROJECT: Weed Abatement 1992
The following two bids were received and opened today:
Name of Contractor Part I Part II
per hr. per h hr. per hr. per hr.
Jack Bridwell 26.50 18.00 20. 00 15 .00
11600 Viejo Camino
Atascadero, CA
Brett' s Tractor Service 29 .00 18.00 15.00 8.00
Brett Butterfield
605 Third Street
Paso Robles, CA
i
I
I
I
I
I
000069
2 �9rL
N Of AUSCApERO
CITY OF ATASCADEROgER1CSOFFICE
Office of Purchasing Agent
6500 Palma Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
BID NO. 92-3
INVITATION AND BID
Sealed bids, subject to the conditions hereon, will be received at the office
of the City Clerk until 2:00 o'clock, P.M., May 12, 1992, and 'then publicly
opened, for furnishing the following services at various locations within the
City of Atascadero:
WFFn A
BATEMENT
100
Bidder-Contractor:
�
Address:
w1�
Tnst riot;ons
You may bid on any one or all of the following items. The' contractor must
comply with the attached Legal Regulations and Responsibilities. The City
larity Or
reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to law a The F reny �Chief, or
informality of any bids to the extent permitted by work
his authorized representative, may exercise the authority t4 reject any
not considered satisfactory.
This bid includes both large parcels (tractor work) and ceall lots
ot sb(hone--half
work
- weed-eater) . The minimum time per job on any p lot
twillequipment
hour. Please indicate tractor and mower size and type.l or Recommended
for large parcels is two 4-wheel drive tractors; for small parcels (hand work)
is a 4-man crew.
Part I• Bare parcel: Mowing (one acre or more)
$ SC? per hr
Tractor with operator
$ S� per 1/2 hr
Part II: Hand Work: Weed-eater (small lots or lots not
accessible with tractor)
$ .� per hr
$� E�C?
per 1/2 hr
The Contractor upon being awarded the abatement contract, shall provide
evidence of insurance as per City requirements. He shall provide a camera and
all the black and white film needed so as to take a picture of each lot he
cleans before and after work is completed. The film shall be developed and
submitted with the Contractor's bill for abatement work. Each picture shall
be identified by parcel number, date work completed, and !operator. If the
contractor cannot prove he did the work, then he is to absorb the cost.
Include in your bid the cost of the film and film developin; for each parcel.
0000170
WEED ABATEMENT BID - Instructions Bid. NO. 92-3
Page 3 of 3
(c) Proof of insurances
Contractor shall furnish City, concurrently with the execution
hereof, with satisfactory proof of carriage of the insurance
required, and adequate legal assurance that each carrier will give
City at least thirty (30) days' prior notice of the cancellation
of any policy during the effective period of this contract. The
certificate or policy of liability insurance shall name City as an
additional insured with the Contractor.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TO THE CITY PURCHASING AGENT: Date: 4q
In compliance with the above invitation for bids, and subject to all the
conditions thereof, the undersigned offers, and agrees, if this bid be
accepted within days from the date of opening, to furnish any or all of
the items upon which prices are quoted, at the price set opposite each item,
delivered at the point (s) as specified and, unless otherwise specified within
days after receipt of order.
Discount of lj % will be allowed for payment within 30 days from date of
delivery.
Bidder: j R ' `✓ l wt
By:_ U l J'C
J(signature of adithorized person)
Title:
Address: v�� ttE
Phone:
C)-5 `1
oil
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER: Bids must be sealed and
addressed to:
City of Atascadero, City Clerk, Bid No. 92-3
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
(One copy of this bid to be retained by bidder)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
0600"A
` I
e
D
MAY ( 2
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Office of Purchasing Agent COY OFATAMER0
6500 Palma Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 WYCIERK' mm
INVITATION AND BID SID NO. 92-3
Sealed bids, subject to the conditions hereon, will be received at the office
of the City Clerk until 2:00 o'clock, P.M., May 12, 1992, and then publicly
opened, for furnishing the following services at various locations within the
City of Atascadero:
WEED ABATEMENT pp
Bidder-Contractor:-Br-,-Tr
Address: GOA TL,�rcl Ste- �c�e �isr_S �A'' _Z 4,
Tnstruntionno
You may bid on any one or all of the following items. The contractor must
comply with the attached Legal Regulations and Responsibilities. The City
reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to waive any irregularity or
informality of any bids to the extent permitted by law. the Fire Chief, or
his authorized representative, may exercise the authority to reject any work
not considered satisfactory.
This bid includes both large parcels (tractor work) and small lots (hand work
- weed-eater) . The minimum time per job on any parcel or lot will be one-half
hour. Please indicate tractor and mower size and_type. Recommended equipment
for large parcels is two 4-wheel drive tractors; for small parcels (hand work)
is a 4-man crew.
Part I: LargeParcel: Mowing (one acre or more)
,r n
Tractor with operator $ Z C� , per hr
$ 1:5 V per 1/2 hr
Part II: Hand Work: Weed-eater (small lots or lots not
accessible with tractor)
per hr
$ V per 1/2 hr
The Contractor upon being awarded the abatement contract, shall provide
evidence of insurance as per City requirements. He shall provide a camera and
all the black and white film needed so as to take a picture- of each lot he
cleans before and after work is completed. The film shall'' be developed and
submitted with the Contractor's bill for abatement work. Each picture shall
be identified by parcel number, date work completed, and operator. If the
contractor cannot prove he did the work, then he is to ',absorb the cost.
Include in your bid the cost of the film and film developing', for each parcel..
Yti�p Mgr Y r__r"v..:s Jiy wc� �,J f ' i('1 7(40
/-fir ✓v. Jw c' �'^
�ASS�y �-f_. (.�SOr� y �-' C` t.s� t_/S 1 v'1 <J.✓Gr�
900072
WEED ABATEMENT BID - Instructions Bid. No. 92-3-
Page 3 of 3
(c) Proof of in-gurann
Contractor shall furnish City, concurrently with the execution
hereof, with satisfactory proof of carriage of the insurance
required, and adequate legal assurance that each carrier will give
City at least thirty (30) days' prior notice of the cancellation
of any policy during the effective period of this contract. The
certificate or policy of liability insurance shall name City as an
additional insured with the Contractor.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TO THE CITY PURCHASING AGENT: Date:
In compliance with the above invitation for bids, and subject to all the
conditions thereof, the undersigned offers, and agrees, if this bid be
accepted within Z O days from the date of opening, to furnish any or all of
the items upon which prices are quoted, at the price set opposite each item,
delivered at the point(s) as specified and, unless otherwise specified within
days after receipt of order.
Discount of will be allowed for payment within 30 days from date of
delivery.
Bidder:
By: c <
(signature o authorized person)
Title: rc.--
Address: -1�^ -- J PA 5t
Phone:—
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER: Bids must be sealed and
addressed to:
City of Atascadero, City Clerk, Bid No. 92-3
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
(One copy of this bid to be retained by bidder)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -
1�i Ci
—, I.., c 1ST Ll
P10 ry --A Tom.- v✓1 i y v l 7 7-
r4
r 4 t er
€3U0073
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 5/26/92
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-6
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Construction of a Dial-A-Ride bus facility
RECOMMENDATION:
Award the base bid and additives 1, 2 amd 3 to Rarig
Construction for $42,349.00, and authorize the Director of Public
Works to solicit bids and award a contract to construct a safety
fence at the facility for an amount not to exceed ',$5, 000.
DISCUSSION:
This bid is for the construction of a Dial-A-Ride bus facility
to be located at the Corporation Yard on Traffic Way. The
structure designed in a metal building providing two storage bays
. and one service bay for the Dial-A-Ride bus fleet. The bid was
broken down into the following components:
Base Bid: Grading, Electrical, Concrete, Metal Building
Additive Item 1: Additional Service Bay
Additive Item 2 : Overhead Doors
Additive Item 3 : Concrete apron
In addition to the project bid, we are proposing to have a
fence constructed along the rear property line whigh will increase
the cost of this project by $5, 000 and is reflected in the cost
listed below.
Our ultimate goal is to have protected parking for all buses,
however monetary limitations have dictated the scope of this
initial project. The building has been designed to be expanded if
subsequent grants can be obtained.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Total Cost: $47,349 The City received an UMTA Section 18
contract which provides 80% funding with a maximumcontribution of
$40, 000. The remaining funds are available in the transportation
portion of the 1991-92 budget.
Attachments: Attachment A - Bid Summary
Attachment B - Bid from Rarig Construction
UUOU'74
BID SUMMARY
TO: Greg Luke
Public Works Director
FROM: Lee Raboin
City Cler
BID NO. 92-02
OPENED : 5/14/92
PROJECT: Dial-A-Ride Bus Facility
The following bids were received and opened today:
Contractor Name & Address Base Bid Additives
#1 #2 #3
Rarig Construction $24,250 11,213 2,946 3,940
4540 Broad Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
Bordonaro & Sons Construction 29,100 11,237 3,611 3,011
5275 Camp 8 Road
Paso Robles, CA
J. Miller Construction 32,499 12,799 3,392 2,842
P.O. Box 53
San Luis Obispo, CA
Sansone Co. , Inc. 32,918 16,259 3,740 4,822
710-21 Fiero Lane
San Luis Obispo, CA
c: Intercode Inc. (Bids)
ODU�r75
=141OF ATASCADERO `
BID FORK CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
TO: The City of Atascadero, State of California, herein called Owner:
1. Pursuant to and in compliance with your Notice to Bidders and
Contract Documents relating to the construction of ` e. Dial-A-Ride
Bus Facility including Addenda Nos. the Undersigned
bidder, having become thoroughly familiar with the terms and
conditions of the Contract Documents and with local conditions
affecting the performance and the costs of the Work & the place
where the Work is to be done, hereby proposes and agrees to fully
perform the Work within the time stated in strict accordance with
the Contract Documents (including the furnishing of any and all
labor, materials, tools, expendable equipment, and utility and
transportation services necessary to fully perform the Work and
�complete it in a workmanlike manner) for the total Base Bid sum of
ZY ZSo sO
1B. Additive Alternate No. 1: for installation of the additional service
,,,bay_
1C. Additive Alternate No. 2: supply and installation of overhead
sectional roll up doors.
1D. Additive Alternate No. 3: supply and installation of a', concrete
apron.
'. _t is understood that Owner reserves the right to reject this
proposal and that it shall remain open and not be withdrawn for a
period of ninety (90) days from the date prescribed for its opening.
3. :trached hereto, in compliance with Section 4100-4113 of the Public
Contracts Code of the State of California, is a "Designation of
Subcontractor".
_s understood and agreed that if written notice of ¢he acceptance
�L this proposal is mailed or delivered personally to the
undersigned bidder within ninety (90) days after the opening of the
Proposal, or at any time thereafter before is withdrawn, the
- idersigned bidder will execute and deliver the Contract Documents
-o Gunner in accordance with the proposal as accepted together with
=he insurance documents specified in Article 14 of the 'General
Conditions, and will also furnish and deliver to Owner the
Performance Bond and Payment Bond as herein specified, all within
6
0000,76
f
I ten (10) days after personal delivery or deposit in the mail. as the
case may be. of the notification of award and that the work.under
the Contract shall be commenced by the undersigned bidder on the
date to be stated in Owner's Notice to Proceed. and shall be
completed in the time specified in Section 2 of the Agreement of
said Contract Documents.
I 5. Notice of acceptance or request for additional information may be
addressed to the undersigned bidder at the business address set
forth below.
6. Wherever in this proposal an amount is stated in both words and
figures, in case of discrepancy between words and figures the words
shall prevail; if all or any portion of the proposal is required to
be given in _unit prices and totals and a discrepancy between words
and figures the words shall prevail; if all or any portion of the
proposal is required to be given in unit prices and totals and a
discrepancy exists between any such unit prices and totals so given,
the unit prices shall prevail.
Accompanying this proposal is bidder 's bond (insert words
"cash" "cashier's check "certified check". or `bidder's bond", as the
case nay be) in an amount equal to at least ten percent of total of the
bid.
i
f
1
7
0000717
r 3
r
The names of all persons interested in the foregoing proposal as:
principals as follows:
IMPORTANT NOTICE: If bidder is a corporation, the legal name of the
corporation shall be set forth below together with the signature of the
officer or officers authorized to sign contracts on behalf of rhe co
if bidder or other interested person is a co rhoration;
corporation, if must .furnish a
certificate attesting to corporate existence and authority of officers to sign
contracts and other documents. State legal name of corporation,, names of the
president, secretary, treasurer, and manager thereof; if a copartnership,
state true name of firm, also names of all individual copartners firm; if
bidder or other interested person is an individual, state first and last names
in full.
Name of Corporation: Rarig Construction Co Inc
Corporate Address: 4540 Broad Street San Luis Obis
o, CA 93401
Date: May 14
,1992
NOTE: If bidder is a co-partnership, the true name of the firm shall be set
forth above together with the signature of the partner or partners authorized
to sign contracts in behalf of the copartnership; and if bidder is an
individual, his signature shall be placed above.
i
Business address: same as above
Place of residence: Cayucos, CA
Date: May 14 19 92
4
)RPORATE CERTIFICATE
i
I, Chris J. Rarig
of the Corporation namec as Contract certif thaCoI am tthe
that
eretary
or in thei
Steve Ra ria -
who signed said Contract on behalf of the Contractor,
was then President
Contract was dull signed for and in behaifoofssaidCcorporation byauthothat rity of
its governing body and is within the scope of its corporate power$.
(Corporate Seal).
(Secretary)
8
0000,78
DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTORS
In compliance with the provisions of Sections 6100 et seq. of the Public
Contracts Code of the State of California, and any amendments thereof, the
undersigned bidder has set forth below:
(a) The name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor
who will perform work or labor, or render service to the undersigned in or
about the construction of the work to be performed hereunder, or a
subcontractor licensed by the State of California. who. under subcontract to
the undersigned, will- specifically fabricate and install a portion of said
work according to detailed drawings contained in the plans and specification,
in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent of the undersigned's total
bid; and
(b) The portion of the work which will be done by each subcontractor for
each subcontract in excess of one-half of one percent of the undersigned's
total bid. The undersigned shall list only one subcontractor for each such
portion.
NOTE: Schen there is a failure to list a subcontractor, the law provides that
the prime contractor acrees to do the work himself, and that said prime
contractor agrees that he is fully qualified to perform such work.
PORTION OF WORK SUBCONTRACTOR ADDRESS
concrete Rarig Constrution Co. ,. Inc. San Luis Obispo, C
steel building Varco-Pruden Buildings Turlock, CA
,(/Bidder's Signature/) > /
� (i�c/i',�.� ¢ if'xfq�,,f,'oti - �il�C,°� d ./Oiu �'.�l-p v to✓ C'�'
i
10
060079
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AgendaV Item: B-7
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Through: Ray Windsor, City ManageMeeting Date: 5/26/92
i.
From: Mark Joseph, Admnistrati.ve Services Director
SUBJECT: Approving Additional Appropriations for Fire
RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. 43-92 increasing the
Fire Department's appropriations by $95,000.
BACKGROUND:
At Council's May 12 meeting, the issues of reappropriati.ng
prior year encumbrances and budgeting for unanticipated employee
services costs were discussed. Council agreed to the additional
appropriations $20,000 for prior year encumbrancesil $75,000 for
employee costs) and directed staff to return with the enabling
resolution.
a: fire-approp
#3
O00080
i.
RESOLUTION NO. 43-92 •
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
INCREASING THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S
FY 91-92 APPROPRIATIONS BY $95,000
Section One: The FY 91-92 Fire Department budget is hereby
increased from $1,067,500 to $1, 162,500, or an increase of
$95, 000.
Section Two: This Resolution shall take effect immediately
upon adoption.
On motion by Councilperson seconded by
Councilperson, the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its
entirety on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
• ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor
ATTEST:
LEE RABOIN, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER MONTANDON
City Attorney
•
000081
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: B-8
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 5/26/92
From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Council endorsement of a Doris Day Anima. League Grant
for Spay/Neuter Assistance.
RECOMMENDATION: By motion, approve submittal of the attached
grant for $10,000 for purposes of spay/neuter assistance.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Action for Animals' Rights (AFAR) has requested the City's
sponsorship for a $10,000 grant from the Doris Day4Animal League.
If awarded to the City, the City would transfer the money to AFAR
for the sole purpose of providing spay/neuter certificates to
Atascadero pet owners. The program would operate the same as
present; only the funding source would be different.
The attached Calls for Grant Proposals and grant application
should be self-explanatory. The filing deadline is June 1, 1991;
a decision on the grant award will be made sometime in the summer
or fall.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no costs involved in applying for the grant. If
successful, the $10,000 would either replace or augment any other
City support for spay/neutering financial assistance, depending
upon Council decision during its upcoming budget hearings.
a:dorisday
#3
000082
I DO
DORIS DAY ANIMAL LEAGUE
CALL FOR GRANT PROPOSALS
A 2-2-2 Project of the Doris Day Animal League-
We estimate that if 200 more people help
Board of Directors neuter two animals each year until the year
2000, we could literally prevent up to TWO
Doris Day
President BILLION BIRTHS!
Terry Melcher
Vice President 1. Introduction: The Doris Day Animal League is soliciting grant proposals from local
Secretary governmentsfor new projects designed to reduce Pet oVerPoPulation within theirjurisdiction. The League
Jacqueline Melcher will award a maximum of three grants in 1992 up to an amount of$10,000 each to local governments for
Treasurer the purpose of reducing the numbers of healthy domestic animals euthanized due to the lack of good
Holly Hazard homes.
Executive Director
Edgar Haber 2. The Problem: Each year humane societies and government shelters kill as many as 17
million unwanted dogs and cats. Many of these animals are adoptable but there are simply not enough
Advisory Members good homes available.
of the Board Cities spend millions of dollars on animal control problems. A major component of this
Bob Hope expenditure is directly related to the crisis of pet overpopulation. Unlike many problems facing local
Rue McClanahan governments,pet overpopulation has a clear solution.
Martina Navratilova The obvious solution is to reduce the number of animals being born. This solution is
widely promoted within the humane community through low-cost spay/neuter programs, mandatory
Public Affairs neutering of animals adopted through shelters, and public education.
Director
Linda Dozoretz However, the numbers of animals going through the shelter system is a fraction of the
number of animals of breeding age within any community. Therefore, even if shelters had 100%
compliance with their policies and regulations regarding sterilization, they can not solve this problem on
their own.
For every dollar put into population control in 1992, a government can expect to save
over$18 by the year 2002. This is because one cat and her offspring can produce 420,000 cats in seven
years. Dogs are not as prolific but one female dog and her offspring can be the source of 67,000 puppies.
Local government, already burdened with decreasing financial resources and increasing
demands for service can clearly reduce its expenditures on this problem in future years by investing in a
solution Lodgy.
As the problem gets worse, local governments will be forced to take on more of this
burden. It is time for local governments to get involved now! To develop models for local government
involvement the Doris Day Animal League is offering "2-2-2 Project"grants.
3. Application Process: Any local government may apply for these grants by filling out
the enclosed application form. Grants maybe used to implement new or existing legislation or for agency
programs or projects. A local government may contract out for services provided in the grant to a not-
for-profit humane society,veterinarian,or other professional as applicable,but the grantee must be a local
governing body such as a city, county, or township.
Grants shall be awarded based on the innovative nature of the proposal, the number of
animals affected by the proposal, and/or the potential positive impact the proposal may have on the
problem of pet overpopulation.
4. Deadline For Application June 1,1992.
Suite 303 - 900 2nd Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002 • 202/842-3325 - FAX: 202/842-0412 �����3
Printed on recycled paper -
I DO
DORIS DAY ANIMAL LEAGUE
GRANT PROPOSAL
2-2-2 Project
Name of Government. City of Atascadero
Board of Directors
Address: 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
Doris Day
President
Telephone. (805) 461-5012
Terry Melcher
Vice President
Secretary Date: May 20, 1992
Jacqueline Melcher
Treasurer Contact Person: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director
Holly Hazard
Executive Director Grant Amount Requested.•$10,000
Edgar Haber '
Description of Proposal:
Advisory Members
of the Board Please attach all pertinent legislation, brochures,or related materials.
Bob Hope
Rue McClanahan
Martina Navratilova See attached narrative
Public Affairs
Director
Linda Dozoretz
1/13/Mite 303 • 900 2nd Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002 • 202/842-3325 • FAX: 202/842-0412 000084
,� �j
Punted on recycled paper l�U U f(�"4
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
If awarded to the City of Atascadero, the City would
transfer the $10,000 grant to Action for Animals' Rights- (AFAR) ,
a community-based not-for-profit humane organization authorized_
under 501(c) (3) . AFAR would use the money to provide
spay/neuter financial assistance to approximately 550 local
residents for their pets.
AFAR has administered a spay/neuter assistance program for
the City of Atascadero for over seven years, allocating some
$58,000 annually in spay/neuter certifications (worth $15-25
each) . Over 4,200 cats and dogs have been served under the
program to date.
Because of this long-standing partnership, there would be no
delays in program development or implementation. In addition, no
administrative overhead or expense would be charged to the
grant -- 100 percent of grant proceeds would go towards
spay/neuter financial assistance.
Since 1979, AFAR has demonstrated its commitment to humane
education and treatment of animals, by providing emergency pet
care, pet rescue, lost and found services, counseling, student
projects and support for animal rights issues.
AFAR' s efforts towards humane pet population control is
shown by the relative reduction in animals euthanized: since
1984, Atascadero's human population has grown- 33 percent (from
18, 000 to 24,000) while animals euthanized have shown almost no
increase, from 753 in 1984 to only 783 in 1991. Grant proceeds
would help maintain the successful nature of AFAR's efforts in
this regard.
Program services would be limited to Atascadero residents
only. Attached are sample materials used by the existing AFAR
spay/neuter program.
000085
rn
Action For Animals'Rights (AFAR)
8935 Morro Rd.,Suite 2
Atascadero,CA 93422
p�
2 AR _
o,� 6
'QNtMP�.
To:ACTION FOR ANIMALS'RIGHTS (AFAR)
8935 Morro Rd.,Ste.2
Atascadero,CA 93422 Telephone:(805)466-5403
Yes,I want to help animals. Enclosed is my annual membership fee:
❑ Student $10 ❑ Supporting $30
❑ Individual $15 ❑ Patron $50
❑ Family .$20 ❑ Life $200;
❑ Donation $
Membership includes AFARMONTHLY BRIEF,a digest of importantlegislative news and information foractive
participation,keeping you informed about AFAR progress and activities.
❑ AFAR Monthly BRIEF only$5.00 •All contributions deductible for income and estate tax purposes
Name Occupation toptionaD
Address
City State Zip Telephone 0
C1410 04 0
a � a v .� $ ' � a� aa' �
al
w �v Q 4) I.,O cd Q
A � Cd � Q" oboo0 C.✓ ° a'� � r 0 J
U .20 o .� � �. ate .° oCd %02
� � G �,bo CA
° Q � � p
0 bo
v-, G � o
'v O u G
m s�. p CLO
O a, W
CU
ci
G •""3 E
G u ca
as
5 ,0. -a bO o
o . cd �TI 0 cl °' � bO-aoo -0 bo a bGO
W O ca (d .� '' 3 .G ,�! .5 S A. G ..„ cn cu .o ..,
o ° -In ^O .a° G
�. .� ca Q Cz 0 Z:.� > •° ca, Q N 'o G ca" +� �. .4 cn ca o
x, cn
Its bo
G aJ . Q', .�.+ sQ•l� bo u a N G N. a)m 'd G ca a� 0. G 0 vi �, .4
cd o
bp
° .0 � G % it �1r - aJ
� `� y .�.+ O •G 'v .a• aJ ,v��i: " va ai as O, "., G O — Q G
134
G Wea �. G a1 U ca G• a. ca cacd ^C�
o c < 11640boTS ° , cv as c
QO ca O
V� .a..
cis E4: M
�• O' ' a1 0- 0 P4 'tX O a) a). bo� a) y, vi ' w G .:. cd
, o CL
� ' ca: ;�• EW, a! .G u ,G u '�3" a.G — - O G cu.
z cd-
td
.4 t: "a �.•. G O c� �., � as $, . a1: Cr .p
CA cEj, (3) a�..-. Q .. ti Q� orf �: O � .— x Qr � OG
•Ef s1, � u. u ;UT M` " ,II: �•_ �3. a • it. E• p G v
GGo. a, „� o . G• �. "�" � o � �
.,• U. aj
f, G ca ,r O M t,,.. c; j; Q O. O ta' + Q u . -, -+ N. p-A
$41 .moiUl
jy:OL O �-ln- 4). a�" �Y (a'. —Cd
W. r.- aJ- u G G" G a�.. G ,.. O. ; G bO•3'
Q u.,G ea. •LS- a) as .�: Z ca: O al A,-ca �. ... pp cd
" a;. `�'�" .uC G. 'u aJ- Q cn Pizo w a ¢',OJw cl :� G al
Q u �` � O- �,. C;' cn � ou E-+ G �.• cn "C3 �.,, '�; �, G: G '� � �G
-
•; f�+' i r �; 1-•' ;�. �-, a0G
ea: est" ai •al k* Q"'"' toN '�
Action For Animals'Rights(AFAR)
8935 Morro Road,Suite 2
Atascadero,CA 93422
•,�. (805)466-5403
The Spay/Neuter Assistance Program is
- provided by the City of Atascadero, and
administered by Action For Animals' Rights
3 (AFAR), a local non-profit volunteer
organ zation devoted to helping al" ,animals, wild and
domestic.
As a pet owner, you are free to go to the
veterinarian of your choice, provided he/she is
participating in the program. (Check with your
veterinarian before completing the einclosed
application.)
Assistance is limited to set amouni-s:: per animal:
$15.00 toward neutering of male cat
$20.00 toward spaying of female cat
$20.00 toward neuteringof male sl dog
$25.00 toward spaying of female dog
The owner will be responsible for any required
inoculations or other incurred expenses, and will be
required to pay veterinarian upon release of animal.
Owner will pay veterinary fee less amount as stated
above. AFAR pays this amount to the veterinarian.
DONATIONS, from individuals and grou0s, to help
with administration of the Spay/Neuter As stance
Program are appreciated, and are tax'',
deductible.
1
000088
z
O >4
M S A +> O a d)
o a) N +) a) fu (a >Y O
y E �4 bt E U >. H O $id a)
a) O a) O d) 04 (0 a1 W O 4 a)
tit d) �4 t1. R5 d) 4-) .1.) 3 .1J w 0 v
a)
Q cLY, 'a 'a 44 H res S r Q. a) r a t~ u s~
�- .0C ra E04 x z O 4,J
U 0 b 44 I=-
UI rl U O H O O `a N
D
�* o rNi rtEs trt 3 m N 3 O C V >4 E A
(� = c s( rts ro = - > C a) (a ra w E a1 O CZ
# u U) O at .--1 >ti >r a) Q) m U) '"� O' w Z >'ul
to E )4 O d) to � U2 � 0 w •,1 4J 44 rd m H O x C
4J 4J 4J 4a U x t01I m 4J (a LL
a U) (a (0 01 O -H O '�-+ '+ u (n (0a C G � (a � (n
• W tU1) U U) U a) +� H F •.) u) 4.) to a) d) a) U E-4 a)
Q >° r. U) (0 z O w r~ a (0 O O v7 O U U w H
z O O O �'
m , (0 o ,.1 rd U A 'a
c o w a) +- o O a
tL U (a 01 •r-+ >� +� c m z +, U
yC
pH w 3 r- >f�Y W ((aa a) Oz a O Ea 4OO Ot 4-)
N a) ra>( U (o >r n Aa)
a +� O H 44 �4 >
Q `o -r( w (a 4.) A a) sz u O (0 zs
U a) a) E 'a +� A 01 +� U a) O U � (1) O
m^+ (ll ',3 O 7-r X N a) •r( RS � H -H � a) (aO
E-4 z 4.) 1~ Z -*0i 4 3 d 44 -4 d) U 40 D) a) r_ a)
<r) f 04O f 4 N .1.) O C ra O H '"1
i Ul
44 .-1 (13 M E
a) •�+ 41
U ra Z O at 44 4-) N
z O E -H E (D o A
E-4 (1)
.. co EQ)
H .3 • -0 a) 4-) a) >1 (Z -4 2) A
W rta) U
a) s E (T5d
s a 4j RC
U) fZCL-r+ O U •4 W E+ a) cd •• .-1 U) u)
4 O 14 U .,.q O U r 4 E N O O O O a) (n
(y ,-1 01 44 4J cJ (3) >4 U 00 00 )( Wa)
tz f< a) 0 41 -r•( O W O z . .
W > 14 M 4-) '0 14 U) H a) (a tr) O O to O a) O
E- O C 04 )4 �4 0 a) E- O tat +.) .-1 N N (14 O a) ra
A 4.) a) Q2 -- (1) M 'a x 0 0 U xc u) a4 (1) r0 ^ lq
w M 44 U (a (7 (,4 H + W 4.) s4
z z rZ , U H U) ra (L) C (a
>4 0 z O v .-1 (a :.t N (a w s4 (n �4 �(
+) 4-) w H -.•+ 41 - .,., N d) a) a) a) ra ra 04 �
a. a) (L) O a E 4 U) ::3 IT W .-r .-4 1-1 •-r a 1~ u
Ul W �4 a) >4 ra a m M o (0 ra (a (a -.-4 -•-( a) a) +)
4-) 4-4 rn 44 E E E 1•+ 4.) (n a)
(a a) as a) a) a) a) (a (o >
o r a U .-1 74 ,� H �.' QJ 1.1 4.4 W 44 a.) 4.) U QJ
W N a) f1) N +) z a U . 1 a) a) a) a) •i .-1 'a a)
44 (rS x4 0 •r( P4O c0 ) > -) ra > > 44 Q >
(un 4-) M +) 14 O 3 a O O A U a) d) QA a) 04 >4 >.4-) $4 �
w a) •N s4 (13 • 3a) O )4 >4 z u) z U) (a ra >4
w a)ZD .-1 (n (L) > (n 4-) > w �4 Q) u a fl4 a) a) 44 C
W Eu- fn O .-1 z X (a .. .. U N at
a
a O 'a (a a) (d 41 o U ,-1 U) W m -4 0 o a �
U) a) ra 'a cn E-4 M (a •• a) (1) (o O E 3 tW m 44 m
a) (n > 'a a) a U O Q H O E U U A 'a O (n O -
U) m -H (a a) 4..) E 4 oo ra 1.1 (0 C s4 14 a) w �+
m �4 a) 'a > -� E CA z (a a) a) +) a) >4 O v
a) 'aUz �4E :5
c mooz a z o
OU0689
ACTION FOR ANIMALS RIC I-ITS
y
(AFAR) f.;T•.
-R.O.-80X-008(80AT�4
" RO,CA 93423
(�
`" \+ CERTIFICATE ='
Present this Certificate to: (veterinarian) '
Entitles (Name and Address)
to receive a credit of $ towards the spaying/neutering of
(age) Must be used by/(date)..
r
Name V
n I t -
/' Issued By
� , rr 1'
VETERINARIAN Please co'-pl�feand return entire certificate to AFAR for payment of S
N�
Cat/ . . Dog. . . . . . . (as above)was spayed. . . . . .neutered',. . . . . .
by me on (date)
Signature of Veterinarian Signature of Owner
Certificate is not transferable, and only one certificate per family. This certificate may not be
reproduced or copied.
ACTION FOR ANIMALS'RIGHTS (AFAR) and its members assume no legal or financial
responsibility beyond the quotation above.
•
060090
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCII.
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-1
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting date: 5/26/92
c
From: Michael P. McCain, Acting Fire Chief _
SUBJECT
Weed abatement public hearing
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend action by motion, i.e., "I move that the Fire Chief or his
authorized representatives are ordered to abate the nuisance of
noxious or dangerous weeds on the lots identified in Resolution No.
32-92."
BACKGROUND:
As part of the weed abatement process, the City Council is required to
hear objections to the proposed removal of weeds; rubbish, and other
combustible material. This hearing allows any affected property owner
to protest the proposed abatement of hazards on his property.
After hearing the objections, Council overrules or allows any
objections. This can be done by resolution or motion. I recommend
action by motion, i.e., "I move we (allow -- overrule) the objection to
the proposed removal of noxious or dangerous weeds on the lots
identified."
After disposing of the objections, or if no objections are made, the
Council orders the abatement of the nuisance. This al$o can be done
by motion or resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Costs involved in administering this program are recovered through
the administrative fee charged to parcels abated by the City contractor.
i
000091
M E M O R A N D U M
To: City Council
From: Ray Windsor, City Manager
Subject: Weed Abatement Protest Hearing
Date: May 20, 1992
The attached is provided as information based on action last year.
RW:cw
000092
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-1
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting date: 5/28/91
From: Michael McCain, Acting Fire Chief
SUBJECT
Weed abatement public hearing
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend action by motion, i.e., "I move that the Fire Chief or his
authorized representatives are ordered to abate the nuisance of
noxious or dangerous weeds on the lots identified in Resolution No.
30-91."
BACKGROUND:
As part of the weed abatement process, the_City Council is required to
hear objections to the proposed removal of weeds, rubbish, and other
combustible material. This hearing allows any affected property owner
to protest the proposed abatement of hazards on his property.
After hearing the objections, Council overrules or allows any
objections. This can be done by resolution or motion. I recommend
action by motion, i.e., I move we (allow -- overrule) the objection to
the proposed removal of noxious or dangerous weeds on the lots
identified."
After disposing of the objections, or if no objections are made, the
Council orders the abatement of the nuisance. This also can be done
by motion or resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Costs involved in administering this program are recovered through
the administrative fee charged to parcels abated by the City contractor.
OU0093
MINUTES EXCERPT -CITY: COUNCIL 5/28/
or Tai7ley propose co
Atto ' s opinion had been rendered.
MOTION: By cilman Dexter and seconded by Cou man Nimmo to
continue em #B-7; motion carried
Re: Item #B-8. RESOLUTIO . 43- - CREATING A POLICY RELATED
TO CAPITAL PRO FUNDING
The City Manager requ ed continuing thD,, ttt tter until the next
meeting.
MOTION: y Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman 'ers to
continue item #B-8 until the next regular meeting; m-ation
passed 4:0.
Re: Item #B-10. AWARD OF BID #91-6 FOR PERFORMANCE OF ANNUAL WEED
ABATEMENT (Recommendation: To award the contract
for hand work and tractor work to Vines of Life
Landscape Care)
Micki Korba, City Treasurer, brought attention to the fact that the
apparent low bidder' s 1/2 hour rate was lower than the full hourly
rate. The City Manager urged Council to award the bid and direct
staff to clarify the question.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Shiers to
approve the award of the bid subject to clarification of
half-hour/hourly rates and to direct staff to report back
at the next regular meeting; motion carried 4:0 by roll
call vote.
C. HEARINGS APPEARANCES.
1. ANNUAL WEED ABATEMENT - PROTEST HEARING
Mayor .Lilley opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
Tom Bench, 7503 Carmelita Avenue, objected to the abatement notice
CC5/28/91
Page 4
he had received reporting that he had cut the weeds one week prior
to the inspection. The City Manager indicated that the matter
4 would be clarified and that he personally would get back in touch
with Mr. Bench.
Paul Miller, resident of Templeton, complained about the previous
year' s abatement-. He disputed the administrative charge and the
hourly rate.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Shiers to
order the Fire Chief or his authorized representative to
abate the nuisance of noxious or dangerous weeds on the
lots identified in Resolution No. 30-91; motion OU06911
unanimously carried.
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item.: C-2
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 5/26/92
From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Community Development Block Grant Request - Carlton
Square Project
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends no grant request ' be made at
this time, for the reasons noted below.
BACKGROUNDIANALYSIS:
Council has been very supportive of the Carlton Square
Project and has directed staff to assist the projedt in the area
of low-cost governmental financial assistance. Staff has been
successful in identifying a low-cost housing loan (for the upper
floor) and a grant writer proficient in preparing the necessary
paperwork.
In addition, staff identified a potential $50N,OOO Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) , which could be used to cover the
renovation costs for commercial uses on the bottow floor. It was
originally anticipated that such a grant would be requested by
the City and loaned to the project. At this point: however, the
developer has concluded that the only assistance necessary is the
housing loan noted above. Thus, although grateful for the City's
efforts, a CDBG application is not being requested'', at- this time.
A Public Meeting was held on May 15 to discus$ the CDBG
program as it relates to Downtown Revitalization and the Carlton
Project in particular. Although a Public Hearing has also been
scheduled for Council's May 26 meeting, under the circumstances,
such a hearing may be for informational purposes only.
Looking forward, the block grant money may still be needed
to address Downtown improvements. For example, additional
parking in the Downtown area might be one use for ODBG monies,
provided there is a linkage between the parking and the provision
of new jobs. Likewise, direct loans to potential tenants in the
Downtown area (e.g. , to acquire start-up equipment) is another
use for grant monies.
Staff will continue to work with both the Carlton Project
team and the BIA in general, in order to best utilize any
available grant monies.
a:grant-Carlton
#3
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda ',:Item: C-3 A & B
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meetingl Date: -054132-
r 05/26/92
ate: -054132-
05/26/92
From: Alicia Lara, Personnel Coordinator
SUBJECT: Amendment to PERS contract adding Two Years Additional
Service Credit.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends Council adopt the attached ;resolution and
ordinance amending the PERS contract to incljude 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-tune 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 January 1, 1993.
Employees retiring under this section receive an ::, additional two
years of service credit without additional compensation. The
employee must have a minimumoffive 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
96
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
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;ranting 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 I% 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
December 31, 1992
Presiding Officer
Attest:
Clerk
Date:
C0610
000098
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 RABOIN, City Clerk By: ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor 0
Oeb -
000099
RESOLUTION NO. 42-92
Page Two
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney
MIM Oft
EXHIBIT A TO- RESOLUTION 42-92
P
,
k PAGE 1 OF 3
( C� V
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT
�O
BETWEEN THE
BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION 0�
OF THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Joo
AND THE '-
CITY COUNCIL �.
OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Q
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 i
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: 0
NO ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS
WVTO 1
EXHIBIT A TO ;RESOLUTION 42-92
PAGE 2 OF 3
'LEASE DO NOT SIG.pq "E;XMIM
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.
ililt1iO2
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 &4 effective on the day of
(36 , 19
BOARD OF ADMINISTRA CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MENT SYSTEM OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
BY '` BY ti
CHIEF, CONTRA4W SERVICES DIVISION Presiding Officer
PUBLIC EMPLO EES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
�� ,=a
Witness Date
C~
Attest:
QG
Ua'�•
Clerk q
PERS-CON-702 (AMENDMENT)
(Rev. 1/92)
000103
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. SHIEIRS, Mayor
iLEE RABOIN, City Clerk
a Me�tl=tsal�
Ordinance No. 247
Page 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney
i
000105
-000W 11
p EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE 247
PAGE 1 OF 3
�i
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE 00
BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION
OF THE "
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM', `�
AND THE
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO yf,
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 Publid 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
000106
EXHIBIT A TO OKI)1NANLt L4/
PAGE 2 OF 3
PLEASE Do moi SIGN ` EXHIBIT 4Nlr
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.
contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined
10. Public Agency shall co y
g Y
by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respectect to local
miscellaneous members and local safety members of said Retirement System.
it
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 includin the costs of special
ag Y� g
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.
illiU30 7
EXHIBIT ',A 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 4beq, ective on the day of
9
BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' NT SYSTEM OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
BY BY
CHIEF, CONTRAKS SERVICES DIVISION Presiding Officer
PUBLIC EMP1 ES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
Witness Date
Attest:
Clerk
PERS-CON-702 (AMENDMENT)
(Rev. 1/92)
fit;U�(�b
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 5/26/92
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-1
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Formation of Assessment Districts for Road Improvement
RECOMMENDATION
Council hear the presentation by Robert Haight. If Council's
reaction is favorable, direct staff to prepare 4 report on how
specifically the program can be implemented
BACKGROUND
Over the past year the Council has been working on methods to
resolve the matter of "non-city maintained" roads. Technical,
financial and legal issues have been examined. It is an
understatement to say that the original Colony road right-of-way
presents several problems which have proved- quite difficult to
resolve.
The financial issue is one of those difficult problems: how
can the money be raised to bring the non-city maintained roads up
to a level where the City can bring them into the City system? In
January the Council was presented with an array of funding
alternatives. City-wide Mello-Roos Districts were discussed as
were the establishment of one or more Benefit Districts. For
various reasons, using 1911/1913 Assessment Districts seem to be
the least complex and the preferred method for financing road
repair.
DISCUSSION
The presentation this evening builds upon the concept of using
the traditional Assessment District for raising funds. One of the
major stumbling blocks to forming an Assessment District has been
the need to gather signatures from 60`s of the property owners on a
petition to form a District. For a large area, collecting
signatures from hundreds of property owners, some of whom are
absentee owners, has proved to be a onerous task for neighborhood
volunteers.
ill)0 i(l'(#
Consequently, staff is presenting Council with the concept of
City initiated Assessment District. That is, the Council can
announce its intention to form an Assessment District for road
upgrades in a specific area. The property owners in that area then
have the opportunity to protest that formation. If protests are
received from more than 50% of the property owners, the Council is
prevented from proceeding with the District formation.
This method of forming an Assessment District has another
advantage. Once the District formation is confirmed, the City can
issue so called Bond Anticipation Notes (BANS) which can be used to
pay for the preparation of plans, specifications and other pre-
construction costs. With a petition initiated District these up
front cost have to be borne by the property owners (or the City) .
A final advantage is that the City can combine several areas
into one District formation procedure. Each sub-area would stand
alone with a separate assessment charge. However, the
administrative cost of forming a District would need to be incurred
only once thus allowing this cost to be shared by each sub-area.
In the case of a small project, reducing the administrative cost of
forming a District would result in a substantially lower cost to
each property owner.
Currently, staff has received serious inquiries about forming
a District from 3 areas: Las Encinas I, 3-F Meadows, and Tecorida
Road. Quite likely other areas will be interested in participating
once the matter receives more publicity.
ANALYSIS
From past experience, relying on petition initiated Assessment
Districts is a painfully slow process. Many of the non-city
maintained roads in the more developed areas are deteriorating at
a rapid rate. Expressions of concern from residents who live on
these roads will become more frequent in the future and the cost of
solving the problem will increase as the roads continue to
deteriorate. City initiated Assessment Districts may prove to be
the tool the City needs to significantly improve this long standing
problem.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
No direct cost to the City, other than staff time for
coordination.
000110
a
HAIGHT & "GHT
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Municipal Bond Counsel
Robert M.Haight
Raymond M.Haight
Robert M.Haight,Jr.
Cameron A.Weist
April 7, 1992
Greg Luke
Director of Public Works
City of Atascadero
City Administration Building
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, California 93422
Dear Greg:
It was a pleasure seeing you again and I appreciate you making yourself available
to see me last Monday.
As I mentioned at our meeting, in any of these projects that appear doubtful as to
a majority protest, it is our suggestion that the City initiate the assessment proceedings on
its own motion (therefore, no need for a petition), have the engineer prepare "schematic"
plans and specifications and hold a public hearing on the estimate of costs. If less than a
majority of property owners protest, the assessment can be confirmed and then the
expensive detailed plans and specifications can be prepared. Further, the City has the
ability to issue Bond Anticipation Notes ("BANs"), which is a shortterm note whereby
the necessary costs of engineering can be paid. By the foregoing procedure no moneys —1
be advanced by the general fund of the City.
I again will make this office available to discuss these financing techniques and
alternatives with the City Council or a committee of the City Council if you so desire. With
regard to the Camino Real Fashion Outlets being proposed by Golden West Development,
please be advised that they are considering the use of a possible assessment district to
finance their off-site improvements. I don't know if this will become a reality but I will
keep you informed.
5522 Scotts Valley Drive • Scotts Valley,California 95066 • (408)438-6610•Fax(408)438-1367
'
C
Greg Luke
Director of Public Works
City of Atascadero
April 7, 1992
Page -2-
Please advise any questions.
Very truly yours,
HAIGHT HAIGHT
ROBERT M. HAIGHT
RMH:Ik
cc: Bob Tartaglia
0 01312
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-2
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. pate: : 05_/26/92
From: Steven L. DeCamp, City Planner�,{.� File' No: GPA 92-3
SUBJECT:
Initiation of proposed amendment to the City's General Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
After discussion and definition of an appropriate study area,
initiate General Plan Amendment 92-3 and associated Zoning Ordi-
nance map amendment as required.
BACKGROUND:
On May 12, 1992, the City Council discussed the 4bove referenced
subject. The Council requested that staff return with a map
showing an expanded study area to include property held by the San
Ramon Land Company. That map is attached hereto.
Staff will make a verbal presentation relative to this expanded
study area.
SLD:ps
Attachments: May 12, 1992 Staff Report
Study Area Map
000113
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-1
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Datee-05/12/92
From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. ,M File No: GPAC 92-1
SUBJECT•
Initiation of proposed amendments to the City's General Plan.
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. On a 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
-f 1t3'9�o 011
. 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
RECOBMNDATION:
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
�1 fJ%J 717-
4leel►� � L
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 regarding 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
00011,
4WOI tl'`
/
14
0
,�; wi,'V94
•.J
lit
T
i
h
•t•
7
i
Z
l
•t
:.:�.;':'tom�?;'•:•,
l
g
:
.t
:,•f ti
":t•Y
1 �
tr
ti• ':t J
iti,•�
ti•}.
i•i•:.•:.. 't. s:ti•'
.tom .t 1 :t J.•t:.,t...
} -�'a•{3%'`• � 'rtt�tti•,;i•y:.•"i{::„✓,•:~:��5`:'{}F�;•:,;,: iti
ti,� yw ,� '•:1': '' .%t r••:••:{;•::it' ���'"t••"l,•";5�:}:tS.y.:N/" ••r' �t •'
'; :•:ti la P
l 11
.:{v •�ti' �'t'-t J T(”JA'JY?t:?:T�
�1Mgt;
we.; ��.
Xq
IOU
It
LOt�''}1}}}titi:�fy, �{Yy{Nl'1 �.•::::'::=t::::�:t 7;;:' � � RA'
h:ti;�'{LS�.t}• Y•.{C;•jY•:�.:.. � •.•..;J:ti••::: •�.:jl.�
� ice^ I � 7fy► Y� i••���� �'
6
i
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL ITEM: D-3
DATE: 5/26/92
FROM: Andrew J. Takata, Director Cf/-
Department of Community Services
THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED ANNUAL LEASE AGREEMENT - ATASCADERO LAKE PARR PAVILION
FOOD CONCESSION
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council award a one year food concession lease at Atascadero
Lake Park Pavilion to:
FELICIA DELOUTH
"FELICIA'S HUNGRY HORSE"
June 1, 1992 - May 31, 1992
at a sum of 20 percent of the total gross earnings Orovided to the
City of Atascadero on a monthly basis.
BACKGROUND:
With the recent construction completion of the Atasdadero Lake Park
Pavilion, staff advertised for and mailed out; requests for
proposals for the operation of a food concession at the facility.
Food concession revenues received by the City will help offset
Pavilion operating costs.
DISCUSSION•
The requests for proposals provided to the public for the operation
of a food concession had a submittal deadline of March 27, 1991.
As of March 27th, Felicia's Hungry Horse was the only proposal
received. After extending the deadline, two additional proposals
were submitted.
Attached, you will find copies of all proposals submitted, along
with a staff summary evaluation.
AJT:kv
;pay.col
Attachments
000121
PROPOSAL NUMBER 1
FELICIA'S HUNGRY HORSE
POSITIVE:
1. Twenty percent of revenues received to be provided to the
City.
2. High potential for revenue due to menu and deli style
sandwiches offered.
3 . Proposal was submitted prior to the deadline set forth.
4. Positive past experiences in cooperative efforts on special
events offered by the Department of Community Services.
5. Full menu proposed with deli sandwiches and reasonable prices.
6. Hours of operation will be open year round on a full-time
basis.
NEGATIVE•
1. Need additional information related -to the recent closing of
an established restaurant business.
0001212
PROPOSAL NUMBER 2
OLD COUNTRY TIME FUN
POSITIVE:
1. Has four years experience at Atascadero Lake Park working in
the "Duck Hut" concession stand.
2 . Submitted detailed menu with a variety of reasonably priced
items.
3 . Proposed hours are from 9: 00 a.m. 6:00 p.m.;
4 . Twenty percent of revenues received to be provided to the
City.
NEGATIVE:
1. Proposal submitted after deadline.
2 . Does not immediately plan to offer deli style sandwiches.
000123
PROPOSAL NUMBER 3
ERIC KARR
POSITIVE:
1. High potential for revenue due to full menu, including deli
style sandwiches and salads.
NEGATIVE:
1. Proposal submitted after deadline.
2 . Fifteen percent of revenues received to be provided to the
City.
0
000124
ATASCADERO LAKE PARK PAVILION
FOOD CONCESSION LEASE
June 1, 1992 - May 31, 1992
FELICIA DELOUTH
"Felicia's Hungry Horse"
The CITY OF ATASCADERO, a political subdivision of the State
of California hereinafter called the City, having'; property or
space being presently not required for use for City purposes,
hereby gives permission, pursuant to the provisions of
Government Code Section 25536, to- FP1 i cia DP10uthL
doing business under the fictitious
name of "Felicia's Htmgry Horse" ,
hereinafter called Lessee, to use the following described
City property or space for such purposes and upon such terms
and conditions as are herein provided: Concession Stand at
Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion.
WITNESSETH
In consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions,
promises, and agreements herein obtained, the City and Lessee
hereby mutually covenant and agree to that which follows:
1. Lessee may use the premises for the following ',
purposes:
a. Premises shall be used for the- purpose ' of selling
over-the-counter items such as soft drinks,
cigarettes, candy, snacks, hot dogs, popcorn and cold
sandwiches. NO ALCOHOL MAY BE SOLD.
b. Furnish and install at his own expense all necessary
equipment required for proper service to 'the general
public.
C. The storage and service thereof shall be in an area
approved by the Director of Community Services.
d. Furnish and maintain proper facilities, equipment and
devices for the concession as herein provided.
e. Operate the facilities in a business-lik4 manner and
to the satisfaction of the Director, subject to the
maintenance of said areas of conformance with the
highest standards of safety for patrons of said
operation.
f. All items to be sold shall be approved by ' the
Director of the Department of Community Services.
The Lessee shall have the right and duty to manage,
operate and control all of the above mentioned activities
and to do all things necessary in the exercise of such
management, operation and control, subject to the terms
and conditions of this agreement.
000125
2 . Condition of Premises: The taking of possession of the
subject premises by Lessee shall, in itself, constitute
acknowledgement that the premises are in goody and
tenantable condition. Lessee agrees to accept said
premises in their presently existing condition, "as is" ,
and the City shall not be obligated to make any
alterations, additions or betterments thereto.
3. Term: The term of this agreement shall be for a period
of one ( 1) year and shall commence on _ llne i ,
1992 and end on may 31 —11993 both dates
inclusive, unless renewed or extended as herein provided.
At the expiration or termination of this agreement as
herein provided, premises or otherwise dispose of in a
manner satisfactory to the City, all personal property
belonging to Lessee located on said premises subject to
the provision of Paragraph 9 of this agreement. Should
Lessee fail to remove or dispose of his property as
herein provided, the City may, at its election, consider
such property abandoned or may dispose of same at owner' s
expense. Also, at the expiration or termination of this
agreement, Lessee shall quit and surrender the said
premises including real property improvements in a good
state of repair, damage by matter over which Lessee has
no control, flood, earthquake, riot, fair wear or tear
except provided that such exculpatory provisions shall
not extend to any risk which Lessee is required to insure
against has herein provided.
Should the Lessee hold over after the expiration of the
term of this agreement with the expressed or implied
consent of the City, such holding over shall be deemed a
month-to-month tenancy at herein stated rent, subject
otherwise to all the terms and conditions of this
agreement.
Lessee shall maintain such records and accounts as the
City Director of Administrative Services shall require.
The City may require the Lessee to have his records and
accounts audited by an auditor acceptable to the City,
and shall present said audit to the City Director of
Administrative Services within thirty ( 30) days after the
completion of the audit. City may make its own audit of
Lessee' s records and accounts at or about said time, if
it so desires. If Lessee has failed to make the required
audit, or said audit is shown by the City' s audit to be
incorrect then Lessee shall pay the costs of City' s
audit. The City further reserves the right to examine
all such books and records at any time during the one ( 1)
year period following the termination of this agreement.
000126
Time is of the essence in the tendering of payments under
this rental agreement. Failure by the Lessee to :tender
within thirty (30) days of any payment so due, shall be
sufficient cause for the City to terminate this
agreement.
4 . Quitclaim Deed: Upon termination of the rights hereby
granted, Lessee shall execute and deliver to the City
within thirty (30) days after service of written demand
therefore, a good and sufficient quitclaim deed to the
premises described herein, including the improvements
thereon. Should Lessee fail or refuse to deliver to the
City a quitclaim deed as aforesaid, a written notice by
the City reciting the failure of Lessee to execute and
deliver said quitcliam deed as herein provided, shall
after ten ( 10) days from the date of recordation of said
notice be conclusive evidence against Lessee and all
persons claiming under Lessee of the termination of said
agreement.
S . Rental: Lessee shall pay the sum of 20 percent
of the total gross earnings monthly of Lessee in this
operation hereunder. The City shall pay ', reasonable
utility costs including water, electric and gals.
The term "gross earnings" wherever used in this agreement
shall mean all monies, property or any - other things of
value received by Lessee from the use of the premises
described above without any deduction or deductions,
provided that the term "gross earnings" shall ''not include
any sales or excise taxes imposed by any governmental
entity or collected by Lessee.
Payments to the City shall be made to the order of the
City of Atascadero, Department of Community Services,
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California 53422 . All
such payments shall be made the tenth ( 10th) of the month
following that in which said earnings are received by
Lessee.
Lessee shall keep true and accurate books and records
showing all its business transactions in separate records
of account for the concession, in a manner acceptable to
the City, and the City shall have the right through its
representatives, and at all reasonable times,' to inspect
such books and records, including State of California
sales tax records; and, Lessee hereby agrees that all
such records and instruments are available to the City.
All Federal tax returns of the Lessee insofar as this
agreement is concerned shall also be available to the
City for reviewing purposes.
00012'7
Lessee shall not use or permit the subject premises to be
used in whole or part during the term of this agreement
for any other purpose other than as set forth without
first obtaining written consent of the City. Lessee
expressly agrees at all times during the term of this
agreement, at its own cost and expense, to maintain and
operate said premises in a clean, safe, wholesome and
sanitary condition, free of trash, garbage or obstruction
of any kind, and in compliance with any governmental
authority, now or at any time during the term of this
agreement in force relating to sanitation or public
health, safety or welfare; and Lessee shall at all times
faithfully obey and comply with all laws, rules and
regulations of federal, state, county or other
governmental bodies or departments or offices thereof.
No rights expressed or implied, other than those
expressly given in this agreement are granted, and any
other rights are hereby denied Lessee under this
agreement.
6 . Termination: This agreement may be terminated by the
City at any time and for any reason deemed sufficient by
the City Council of said City, by giving thirty (30) days
written notice to Lessee of its intention to do so.
7 . Title to Improvements: Lessee acknowledges the title to
all real property is vested in the City.
8 . Personal Property: Title to all personal property
provided by the Lessee shall remain in the Lessee.
9 . Construction or Modification of Improvements: Lessee may
construct or modify with the prior written approval of
the Director of the Department of Community Services any
concession improvements. Such construction or
modification shall be without cost to the City.
10 . In the event that the construction modification or
addition to concession improvements are desired, the
approval, in writing, of the City shall first be obtained
prior to such construction, modification or addition.
Additionally, plans and specifications for such changes
shall be submitted to the City for approval.
11. Completion of Improvements: The Lessee, at his own
expense, shall completely equip the concession
improvements described herein and shall keep the same
equipped in a first class manner and to the satisfaction
of the Director of the Deparment of Community Services
throughout the term of the agreement.
000128
12 . Ownership of Improvements: Title to improvements on the
premises at the commencement of this agreement_ is
retained by the City and this permit is subject- to any
rights or ownership in the improvements. All
improvements constructed on the premises by Lessee as
permitted by the agreement shall be owned by Lessee until
expiration of the term or sooner termination of this
agreement. Lessee shall not, however, remove any
improvements from the premises or waste, ' destroy or
modify any improvements on, the premises, '' except as
permitted by this agreement.
All improvements on the premises at the expiration of the
term or sooner termination of this agreement shall
without compensation to Lessee, become City property free
and clear of all claims to or against them by Lessee or
any third person and Lessee shall defend and indemnify
the City against all liability and loss arising from such
claims or from the City' s exercise of ;the rights
conferred by this paragraph.
13 . Maintenance and Use of Improvements: Lessee agrees to
maintain any and all concession facilities on' the subject
premises in good order and repair, at his own cost and
expense, during the entire term of the agreement.
Lessee shall perform at his own cost and expense, any
required maintenance and repairs, and should Lessee fail,
neglect or refuse to do so, the City shall have the right
to perform such maintenance or repairs for the Lessee' s
account; and, the Lessee agrees to promptly reimburse the
City for the cost thereof, provided however, that the
City shall first give Lessee ten ( 10) days written notice
of its intention to perform such maintenance'', or repairs
for the Lessee' s account for the purpose of enabling
Lessee to proceed with such maintenance or repairs at his
own expense. Lessee hereby expressly waives the right to
make repairs at the expense of the City.
Permittee may employ, pay and supervise personnel to look
after the concession. Such personnel', shall be
responsible to Lessee and cooperate with City personnel.
All of Lessee' s personnel shall be of good moral
character and shall be physically able to handle their
duties and must be promptly replaced when derelict in
their duties. There shall be no drinking of liquor or
other alcoholic beverages in or around the area by Lessee
or Lessee' s employees. There shall be no smoking inside
the concession stand or in any portion of the Pavilion
building.
14 . Utilities and Services: City shall pay electric, gas,
disposal and water fees; any other utility charges are
the responsiblity of Lessee.
000129
15 . Equipment: Lessee, at his own expense, shall
completely equip the concession improvements de.seri.bed
herein and shall keep the same equipped in a first class
manner throughout the term of this agreement.
16 . Signs and Approval of Name: No signs, names or placards
shall be inscribed, painted or fixed upon said premises
without consent of the City.
17 . Quality of Service and Con-trolled Rates and Charges:
Lessee agrees that he will operate and manage the service
and facilities offered in a first class manner and
comparable to other first class concessions providing
similar facilities and services during the entire term of
the agreement. With the term of this description Lessee
agrees to maintain a high standard of service at least
equal to that of other establishments in the City and/or
adjacent communities for similar operations.
The City shall have access to, and the right to inspect
the schedule of prices and rates for goods sold, rented
or services rendered or performed upon the subject
premises. If the City determines that any price or
prices are unreasonable or inappropriate for the services
rendered or the items sold, the same shall be modified as
directed by the City provided that Lessee, prior to such
notifications, shall be given a reasonable opportunity to
confer with City and justify such prices.
The City reserves the right to prohibit the sale of any
item which it deems objectionable or beyond the scope of
merchandise deemed necessary for proper service to the
public. A competent employee shall be on the premises at
all times while the concession is in operation. Lessee
shall post rates and prices for all items in such places
as may be designated by the City.
18 . Closure: At any time should an occurrence necessitate
the closing of the Pavilion to the general public, the
Lessee shall have no recourse by law to the City for
losses incurred.
19 . Hold Harmless Agreement: Lessee hereby agrees to defend,
indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers,
agents and employees in any and every way from any and
all manner of damages, charges, suits and expenses which
they may sustain or be put to by reason of Lessee' s
occupancy or use of the premises, or any activity carried
on by Lessee in connection therewith.
000130
r
4 . BROAD FORM property damage liability must be
afforded.
5 . The City of Atascadero and their officers,
employees and agents, shall be named insured under
the policy, and the policy shall stipulate that
this insurance will operate as a primary insurance
and that no other insurance effected by the City
or other named insured will be called upon to
contribute to a loss covered thereunder.
c. The following requirements apply to all liability
insurance to be provided by Lessee:
1. A certified copy of each policy and a '; certificate
of insurance shall be furnished to the Department
of Community Services twenty (20) days after
execution of this agreement. (A certificate alone
is not acceptable. ) Certificates and policies
shall state that the City is not liable for the
payment of any premiums or assessmelits on this
property.
2 . Certificates and policies shall state that the
policy shall not be cancelled or reduced in
coverage without thirty (30) days written notice to
City. Ten ( 10) days written _ notice is not
acceptable except in connection with worker's
compensation insurance.
3 . Insurance required shall be placed in a company or
companies acceptable to City and shall have a
policy holder' s surplus of at least ten ( 10) times
the amount of limit of liability afforded by the
insurance company.
4. Approval of the insurance by the City shall not
relieve or decrease the extent to which the Lessee
or any sublessee may be held responsible for
payment of damages resulting from its operation.
5 . No policy is acceptable if it contains an exclusion
relating to occurrences in any manner '' arising out
of the use of alcoholic beverages ', providing,
however, that said policy will be acceptable if it
contains a specific endorsement providing coverage
under the limits and provisions set forth
hereinabove, for any occurrence arising out of the
use of alcoholic beverages.
000131
20. Liability Insurance: Lessee agrees to obtain and keep in
force during the term of this permit, at Lessee' s
expense, worker' s compensation and public liability and
property damage insurance in companies authorized to
issue such insurance in the State of California. Said
insurance policy shall consist of the following:
a. Worker' s Compensation and Employer' s Liability
Insurance: Lessee shall maintain in full force and
effect, for the period covered by this permit, full
worker' s compensation and employer' s liability
insurance with limits of at least statutory
requirements with an insurance carrier satisfactory to
the City. In the event Lessee is self-insured, he
shall furnish a certificate of permission to self-
insure signed by the Department of Industrial
Relations Administration of Self Insurance,
Sacramento.
b. Liability Insurance: Lessee shall maintain in full
force and effect, for the period covered by this
permit, bodily injury, personal injury including death
resulting therefrom and property damage insurance with
an insurance carrier satisfactory to the City. This
liability insurance shall include, but shall not be
limited to, protection against claims arising from
bodily and personal injury, including -death resulting
therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any
act or occurrence occurring in or about the premises
which are subject to this agreement, or resulting from
Lessee' s use of owned or non-owned automobiles . The
amounts of insurance shall not be less than the
following:
Single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal
injury including death resulting therefrom, and
property damage or a combination of both - $300,000 .
The following endorsements must be attached to the
policy:
1. If the insurance policy covers on an "accident"
basis, it must be changed to read "occurrence" .
2 . The policy must cover personal injury as well as
bodily injury.
3 . The policy must cover complete contractual
liability. Exclusions of contractual liability as
to bodily injuries, personal injuries and property
damage must be eliminated from the basic policy
and endorsements.
000132
d. If Lessee does not keep the insurance required by this
paragraph in full force and effect at all times:-during
the term hereof, this agreement shall immediately and
automatically terminate, and all rights and privileges
granted hereunder to the Lessee shall be extinguished
thereby. It is expressly understood that no notice by
the City is required to effect the termination
specified herein.
21. Taxes: Lessee agrees to pay all lawful taxes,
assessments or charges which at any time may be levied by
the state, county, city or any tax assessment or
assessment governing body upon any interest in this
agreement or any possessory right which Lessee may have
in or to the premises covered hereby or the improvements
thereon by reason of its use or occupancy', thereof or
otherwise as well as all taxes, assessments and charges
on goods, merchandise, pictures, appliances!,. equipment
and property owned by it in or about said preses.
22 . Inspection of Premises: Lessee agrees that the City
acting through its authorized agents and employees, shall
have the right to enter upon the premises at any
reasonable time to inspect them.
23 . Inspection and Maintenance: The City reserves the right
of ingress and agrees to inspect, investigate and survey
said premises as deemed necessary by the City, and the
right to do any and all work of any nature for the
preservation of, maintenance of and operation of the
concession at the Pavilion in any areas ': within the
confines of said Pavilion. Lessee shall be given
reasonable notice when such work may become necessary and
will adjust his operation in such a manner that the City
may proceed expeditiously.
24 . Agreement Notice: Any notices herein provided to be
given, or which may be given by either party to the
other, shall be deemed to have been fully given when made
in writing and deposited in the United States mail,
postage prepaid and addressed as follows:
To the Lessee: Felicia Delouth
8790 Morro Road
Atascadero, California 93422',.
(466-7670)
To the City:: City of Atascadero
Department of Community Services
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
(461-5001)
000133
The address to which the notices shall or may be mailed
as aforesaid by either party shall or may be changed by
written notice given by such party to the other as
therein before provided, but nothing herein contained
shall preclude the giving of such notice by personal
service.
25 . Waiver of Agreement Terms: No waiver by City at any time
of the terms, conditions, or covenants of this agreement
shall be deemed as appropriate, not any condition or
covenant herein contained.
No delay, failure or omission of the City to re-enter the
premises or to exercise any right, power, privilege or
option can be construed as a waiver of such default or a
relinquishment of any right or any acquiescence therein.
No notice to Lessee shall be required to restore or
revive time as of the essence after the waiver by the
City of any default. No option, right, power, remedy or
privilege of the City shall be construed as being
exhausted by the exercise thereof in one or more
instances. The rights, powers, options, and remedies
given to the City by this permit shall be deemed
cumulative.
26. Modification of Agreement: Not withstanding any of the
provisions of this agreement, the parties may hereafter,
by mutual consent, agree to modifications thereof or
additions thereto in writing which are not forbidden by
law. The City shall have the right to grant extensions
of time to Lessee for any purpose for the performance of
any obligation of Lessee hereunder.
27 . Assignment and Subleases: Lessee shall neither assign,
sublease or otherwise convey any interest of any sort
granted by this agreement to any person or persons,
entity or entities whatsoever without prior written
consent and approval by the City. Any document by which
an interest is granted, subject to the approval of the
City, shall indicate that the person acquiring that
interest has been advised of all of the terms of this
agreement and takes his interest subject to those terms
and conditions, and recognizes that upon termination of
this agreement, the City at its sole option, may elect to
treat any assignee, subtenant, or holder of any interest
conveyed by Lessee as the City' s tenant, subject to the
terms and conditions of this agreement and that entered
into between the assignees, subtenant or holder of any
interest conveyed by Lessee.
000134
28. Breach of Agreement: This agreement is made upon the
condition that, if the rents or other sums which= Lessee
herein agrees to pay or any part thereof shall be unpaid
on the day of which the same shall come ''; due, or if
default be made in any of the terms, agreements,
conditions or covenants herein contained on ,the part of
the Lessee, or should Lessee become insolvent, or
bankrupt, either voluntarily or involuntarily, then, and
in such event at the option of the City, this agreement
shall cease and terminate; and the City may enter upon
the premises. Lessee' s interest hereunder shall not be
assignable in bankruptcy.
29 . Waiver of Claims: Lessee hereby waives any claims
against the City, it officers, agents, or employees for
damage or loss caused by any suit or proceeding directly
or indirectly attacking the validity of this agreement,
or any part thereof or by any judgment or award in any
suit or proceeding declaring this agreement null, void or
voidable, or delaying the same or any part ihereof from
being carried out..
30 . Actions: In the event of any action or suit upon this
agreement, the prevailing party shall be ;entitled to
receive reasonable attorney' s fees and all costs,
disbursements and expenses including administrative
expenses .
31. Right of Entry as Agent: In any case in which provision
is made herein for the termination of this agreement by
the City in case of abandonment or vacating of the
premises by Lessee, the City in lieu of declaring a
forfeiture may enter upon the premises . In such case,
the City may re-let the premises upon such 'terms as it
may deem proper, and if a sufficient sum shall not be
realized thereby, after paying expenses of such re-
letting, to satisfy the rent and other sums herein agreed
to be paid by Lessee, Lessee agrees to save the City
harmless from any loss or damage or claim arising out of
the action of the City in pursuance of this paragraph.
32 . Time of Essence: Time shall be of essence in' the
performance of this agreement.
33. Photography: The City may grant permits to', persons or
corporations engaged in the production ofstill and
motion picture and related activities, for ; the use of
said premises for such purposes when such'', permission
shall not interfere with the primary business ', of Lessee.
34 . Hazardous Substances: No goods, merchandiseor material
shall be kept, stored or sold in or on said premises
which are in any way explosive or hazardous; and no
offensive or dangerous trade, business or, occupation
000135
shall be carried on therein or thereon, and nothing shall
be done on said premises, other than is authorized by
this agreement, and no machinery or apparatus shall be
used or operated on said premises which will in any way
injure said premises or structures, provided that nothing
contained in this paragraph shall preclude Lessee from
bringing, keeping or using on or about said premises such
materials, supplies, equipment and machinery as are
appropriate or customary in carrying on its said
business.
35 . Nondiscrimination: Lessee and his employees shall not
discriminate because of race, sex, religion, color,
marital status, ancestry or national origin against any
person by refusing to furnish such person accommodation,
facility, or his employyees publicize the accommodations, .
facilities, services or privileges in any manner that
would directly or inferentially reflect upon or question
the acceptability of the patronage of any person because
of race, age, sex, religion, color, marital status,
ancestry or national origin.
In the performance of this agreeement, Lessee will not
discriminate against any employee or applicant for
employment because of race, sex, age, color, marital
status, religion, ancestry or national origin.
36 . Hours of Operation: Lessee is authorized to operate the
concession on a daily basis. Hours to be established by
Lessee upon mutual agreement with the Director of the
Department of Community Services.
The City will not restrict individuals, organizations or
clubs with a confirmed permit for use of a Pavilion
assembly room or meeting room from providing meals or
concessions during their special event provided that the
meals or concessions are specifically for participants or
the said special event and provided they meet the health
codes and standards established by the San Luis Obispo
County Health Department.
37 . Paragraph Titles: The paragraph titles in this agreement
are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for
reference, and in no way define, limit or describe the
scope or intent of this agreement or in any way affect
this agreement.
38 . Agreement in Counterparts: This agreement is executed in
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original.
000136
39. Remedies Not Exclusive: The use by either party of any
remedy specified herein for the enforcement of this
agreement is not exclusive and shall not deprive the
party using such remedy of, or limit the application of,
any other remedy provided by law.
40 . Independent Contractor: Lessee enters into this
agreement solely and exclusively as an independent
contractor and only in that capacity and lnot as a
partner, employee or other agent of the City.; Further,
Lessee acknowledges that this agreement issues and is
effective only upon execution by the City council.
41. Advertising: Lessee shall not advertise or ',permit any
publicity designed to attract the general public to an
activity conducted by Lessee within the confines of said
Pavilion without the knowledge and permission of the
Director of the Department of Community Services.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these
present to be executed the day and year first above written.
CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION DATE:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
LEE RABOIN, CITY CLERK ALDEN SHIERS, MAY6R
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM: PREPARED BY:
ART MONTANDON, CITY ATTORNEY ANDREW J. TAKATA, ', DIRECTOR
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
c
00013'7
LEASE AGREEMENT
Lessee accepts the foregoing Lease Agreement subject to all
of the terms and conditions contained herein. Lessee
acknowledges that the Agreement will not become operative
until compliance is made with Paragraph 20 relating to
insurance.
LESSEE SIGNATURE
LESSEE
000138
PROPOSAL FORM FOR CONCESSION LEASE AGREEMENT
ATASCADERO LAKE PARK PAVILION
Pursuant to Notice to Proposers to Establish and Operate a
Concession at the Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion: '
NAME OF PROPOSER: FELICIA' S HUNGRY HORSE DELI
BUSINESS ADDRESS: 8790 MORRO RD
CITY/STATE/ZIP: ATASCADERO CA 3422
PLACE OF RESIDENCE: 8600 SAN CREGORIO RD
STREET/CITY/STATE/ZIP: ATASCADERO CA 93422
TELEPHONE: (Bus. ) DTSCONEC_'TED (Res. ) 466-7670
In the event a Concession Lease Agreement is awarded to the
undersigned Proposer, Proposer agrees to executer in a timely
manner, and perform undersaid Agreement, and to pay to the
City of Atascadero a monthly fee of: **20** % of gross
receipts. .
The Notice to Proposers, Questionnaire and', the Lease
Agreement are all made a part of this Proposal by reference,
and this Proposal is made subject to all the provisions
thereof, whether or not expressly set forth herein.-
IMPORTANT NOTICE:
If the Proposer is a corporation, the authorized corporate
officers must sign this Proposal Form and the corporate seal
must be affixed. If the Proposer is a partnership, a general
partner must sign. If the Proposer is an .n. iv_4 4Ua'_, sig: Ab
using first, middle and last name in full.
Executed this 26 day of -*ARCH , 1992 .
By: FELICIA DELOUTH
Title: OWNER
4 of 7 000139
QUESTIONNAIRE 0
This Questionnaire is submitted in conjunction with and -is a
part of the Proposal to establish and operate a concession
stand at Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion. Information
contained in this Questionnaire must be verifiable under
oath. All questions must be answered in full. If additional
space is required, please use the back of the page on which
the question appears. If the question is not applicable,
please mark "Not Applicable" .
1. What is your present business or employment? DFT.T
Fpr TrTA' S HUN RY HORSE TS TEMPORTAT Y CLOSED PFNDTNCNEW LDCATION
a. For how long? QNR YFAR
b. Is your business a sole proprietorship, corporation,
partnership, or other? Explain: --
SOLF PROPRTFTORSHT
C. If a sole propietorship, are you the owner? if
other, what is your position? YES
d. How many people do you employ or supervise? FOUR
e. How many years of concession operation experience do
you have? NONE
f. What professional organizations do you belong to?
NONE
g. Financial:
1) If involved in any litigation, describe: NO
2) Furnish names and addresses for all- banks in
which you have accounts: SECURITY PACIFIC
SPRING ST. PASO ROBLES
3) List by company, amount, and expiration date, all
insurance carried by your business:
JOHNSEY INSURANCE AGENCY 75,000. 00 7-3-92
4 ) Give the names and addresses of at least three
firms with whom you have had accounts during the
past three years: SAN LUIS SOURDOUGH 3580 SUELD SAN LUIS
PRODUCERS P.0, BOX 1 231 FRESNO CA
CENTRAL COAST BEVERAGE 750 FARROLL SUITE 1 GROVER CITY
h.. Give any other information concerning your present
business or employment which you feel is pertinent:
NONE ----
g. Attach a list of your proposed concession items and
sale prices (i.e. foods, drinks, miscellaneous) .
5 of z 000140
VERIFICATION OF QUESTIONNAIRE
(NOTE: SELECT PROPER VERIFICATION FOR EXECUTION)
INDIVIDUAL
The undersigned deposes and says that he/she has read and
executed the foregoing Questionnaire and knows the contents
thereof, and that they are true of his/her own knowledge
except as to matters that he/she believes to be true.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct.
Dated this 26thday of MARr•H , 1992 at ATAs -AD .u0
California.
PARTNERSHIP
The undersigned state that they are a partnership, that they
have read and executed the foregoing Questionnaire and -know
the contents thereof, and that they are true Of their own
knowledge except as to matters which are therein stated of
their information or belief and as to those matters that they
believe them to be true.
We, and each of us, declare under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Dated this day of , 1992, at
California.
GENERAL PARTNER
GENERAL PARTNER
6 of 7000141
Dear Sir/Madam:
We have completed and attched our proposal for the Lake Park
Concession. Outlined below is our list of products and pricing
we expect to use:
FOUNTAIN OR CAN SODA . 65-1 . 00
CANDY . 50
HOT DOGS 1 .00 -1 . 50
CINNAMON ROLLS 1 . 00
COFFEE . 40
POTATO CHIPS & POPCORN . 69 - 1 . 50
COLD & HOT SANDWICHES 3. 99
Also attached are letters of appreciation from several
satsfied local customers.
We appreciate the opportunity to bid on the Lake Park Concession
and thank you for considering us. Should you need addtional
information please let us know.
Sincerely,
--yjJ
l
Felicia Delouth
000142
PROPOSAL FORM FOR CONCESSION LEASE AGREEMENT
ATASCADERO LAKE PARK PAVILION
Pursuant to Notice to Proposers to Establish and Operate a
Concession at the Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion:
NAME OF PROPOSER: >/ (''�� y_�_ (j l/ •' (�I 1 i Yll it 1t1�1'�' LZ �'1 'f
BUSINESS ADDRESS:
CITY/STATE/ZIP: f�f -C`1���/ G� ; Ow— ( i-342 .2
PLACE OF RESIDENCE:
STREET/CITY/STATE/ZIP:
TELEPHONE: (Bus. ) (Res. )
In the event a Concession Lease Agreement is awarded to the
undersigned Proposer, Proposer agrees to execute, ''in a timely
manner, and perform undersaid Agreement, and to pay to the
City of Atascadero a monthly fee of: ;ZG� of gross
receipts.
The Notice to Proposers, Questionnaire and the Lease
Agreement are all made a part of this Proposal by reference,
and this Proposal is made subject to all the ' provisions
thereof, whether or not expressly set forth herein.
IMPORTANT NOTICE•
If the Proposer is a corporation, the authorized corporate
officers must sign this Proposal Form and the corporate seal
must be affixed. If the Proposer is a partnership, a general
partner must sign. If the Proposer is an individual, sign by
using first, middle and last name in full.
Executed this ��_ day of , 1992.
By, &ot
Title:
4 of 7 00014.3
QUESTIONNAIRE
This Questionnaire is submitted in conjunction with and is a
part of the Proposal to establish and operate a concession
stand at Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion. Information
contained in this Questionnaire must be verifiable under
oath. All questions must be answered in full. if additional
space is required, please use the back of the page on which
the question appears. If the question is not applicable,
please mark "Not- Applicable" .
1. What is your present business or employment?
a. For how long? .? L11LS
b. Is your business a sole �roRr gt- .9hj , corporation,
partnership, or. other? Explain: , 01, 11P�ILXAA
n inn oslwi ,< i
c. If a sole -,propietorship, are you the owner? If
other, what is your position? JapO
d. How many people do you employ or supervise? )
e. How many years of concession operation experience do
you have? L Ar)r�C�rl r ,i ( Y
f. What prof essionna organiz ions do you belong to?
Norx-1 4 'n L L, 't f �,
g. Financial: v
1) If involved in any litigation, describe:_
2) Furnish names and addresses fr all banks in
which you have accounts: Rank rT Arvian a-,
P`7i'A 0-r-p-a t 1 (.rum,
3) List by company, amount, and expiration date, all
insurance carried by your business:
Nf,r�i- �, �i , 6-Y010r'2fr_
4 ) Give the names and addresses of at least three
firms withwhom yo� have had accounts during. the
past three years: l'l 7196,.,
h. Give any other information concerning your present
business or employment Which you feel ' s pertinent:
I � n i l
g. Attach a list of your propose& concdssion items and
sale prices (i.e. foods, drinks, miscellaneous) .
5 of 7 000144
L/ L.
res �
VERIFICATION OF QUESTIONNAIRE
(NOTE: SELECT PROPER VERIFICATION FOR EXECUTION-) --
INDIVIDUAL
The undersigned deposes and says that he/she has read and
executed the foregoing Questionnaire and knows the contents
thereof, and that they are true of his/her own knowledge
except as to matters that he/she believes to be true.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct.
Dated this 14 day of , 1992 at
California.
PARTNERSHIP
Th ndersigned state that they are a partnership, that they
have d and executed the foregoing Questionnaire -and know
the cont s thereof, and that they are true of their own
knowledge e t as to matters which are therein stated of
their informati or belief and as to those matters that they
believe them to be ue.
We, and each of us, decla under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correc
Dated this day of , 1992 at
California.
GENERAL PARTNER
GENERAL PARTNER
6 of ..7 0001,16
TZ r, Le �fcC o 7�
�. d �
V12
9
MLZ
Aae
C4�4 .4� V/
00014'7
PROPOSAL FORM FOR CONCESSION LEASE AGREEMENT
ATASCADERO LAKE PARK PAVILION
Pursuant to Notice to Proposers to Establish and Operate a
Concession at the Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion:
NAME OF PROPOSER: Eric Karr
BUSINESS ADDRESS: 3355 El Camino Real
CITY/STATE/ZIP: Atascadero, CA 93422
PLACE OF RESIDENCE: same
STREET/CITY/STATE/ZIP:
TELEPHONE: (Bus. ) 805-466-3400 (Mrs . )(Res. ) 466-1428 =
In the event a Concession Lease Agreement is awarded to the
undersigned Proposer, Proposer agrees to execute, in a timely
manner, and perform undersaid Agreement, and to pay to the
City of Atascadero a monthly fee of: 15 % of gross
receipts.
The Notice to Proposers, Questionnaire and the Lease
Agreement are all made a part of this Proposal by reference,
and this Proposal is made subject to all the provisions
thereof, whether or not expressly set forth herein. -
IMPORTANT NOTICE:
If the Proposer is a corporation, the authorized corporate
officers must sign this Proposal Form and the corporate seal
must be affixed. If the Proposer is a partnership, a general
partner must sign. If the Proposer is an individual, sign by
using first, middle and last name in full.
Executed this day of 1992 .
By:
Title:
0
4 of 7 000148
QUESTIONNAIRE
This Questionnaire is submitted in conjunction with -and is a
part of the Proposal to establish and operate a concession
stand at Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion. Information
contained in this Questionnaire must be verifiable under
oath. All questions must be answered in full. If additional
space is required, please use the back of the page on which
the question appears. If the question is not: applicable,
please mark "Not Applicable" .
1. What is your present business or employment? ',Supervising Cook I at
CMC and Karr 's- Katering (my own business )
a. For how long? CMC 5 yrs. Own business 10+ yrs .
b. Is your business a sole proprietorship, corporation,
partnership, or other? Explain: Sole proprietorship .
Family operation
C. If a sole propietorship, are you the owner? If
other, what is your position? Owner/operator
d. How many people do you -employ or supervise? Supervise 10 at CMC
e. How many years of concession operation experience do
you have? 7
f. What professional organizations do you belong to?
None
g. Financial:
�) If involved in any litigation, describe: n/a
2 ) Furnish names and addresses for all- banks in
which you have accounts: State Employees Credit Union
#122 checking and savings
List by company, amount, and expiration date, all
insurance carried by your business:
4 ) Give the names and addresses of at least three
firms with whom ,you have had accounts during the
past three years: Kaney Foods, Sysco, Smart & Final,
, Rykoff all cash accounts
Give any other information concerning :your present
v business or employment which you feel is pertinent:
I have 20+ years in the food industry and have the personal
people skills, catering skills, concession skills an upervisory sills to
run a very professional an ucra ive concession stand.' over
g. Attach a list of your proposed concession items and
sale prices (i.e. foods, drinks, miscellaneous) ..
5 of 7
OU0149
I am a graduate of Atascadero High School, 1966, and have lived here
for 30 years. I have a genuine interest in keeping revenue within the
City of Atascadero. If I am elected to run the Lake Pavillion Concessioo
I will do my best to buy locally and provide a reasonable_ priced menu for
local consumers. My wife and daughters have always assisted my in the
catering and donut/sandwhich shops I have operated. They too, are local
graduates and have a genuine concern for the growth and economy of Atascadero
Myself, my wife and daughters would be the major employees of the concession.
Our family comraderie and local loyalty would provide a fun, pleasant, and
fair concession to our local residents.
CONCESSION AND BALE PRICES:
Fresh Salads $ 1. 25
Cold Sandwhiches 3. 00
Hot dogs . 75
Popcorn . 50
Candy & Gum . 50
Soda 's and various soft drinks . 50 to . 75
Coffee . 50
Snow cones . 50 to . 75
Ice cream and yogurt . 80
Chips and pretzels . 75
Some items and prizes may vary, depending upon availability and market
pricing, as the economy dictates .
000.150
i
VERIFICATION OF QUESTIONNAIRE
(NOTE: SELECT PROPER VERIFICATION FOR EXECUTION)
INDIVIDUAL
The undersigned deposes and says that he/she has read and
executed the foregoing Questionnaire and knows the contents
thereof, and that they are true of his/her own knowledge
except as to matters that he/she believes to be true.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct.
Dated this 7th day of April , 1992at
Atascadero , California.
PARTNERSHIP
The undersigned state that they are a partnership, that they
have read and executed the foregoing Questionnaire and .know
the contents thereof, and that they are true of their own
knowledge except as to matters which are therein stated of
their information or belief and as to those matters that they
believe them to be true.
We, and each of us, declare under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Dated this day of , 1992 ''; at
California.
GENERAL PARTNER
GENERAL PARTNER
6 of 7
U�rrli�J�
t '
MEETING AGENDA
DATE r Cly ITEM# D-4
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93408 • 805-549-5450
LAURENCE L. LAURENT
DISTRICT TWO
May 15, 1992 CITY
Ray Windsor, City Manager
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Ave.
Atascadero, CA 93422
Dear Mr. Windsor:
By now you've heard of the State of California's proposed decision to close, the local
California Conservation Corps base in our county. I'm confident that your city has utilized the
energy of the Conservation Corpsmembers in environmental improvement projects, just as
San Luis Obispo County has benefitted from joint projects with them. If the State's decision
stands, we will be losing a remarkable and irreplaceable resource of human power which is
available to both public and private interests when good works need doing.
Enclosed is letter that all five members of the Board of Supervisors signed and sent to
Governor Wilson and our locally elected State representatives asking that this decision be
reversed, or at least modified. If you share the County's concern about losing our local CCC
camp, I'm asking that you encourage your Council to send a similar letter of support to
Sacramento.
If we are going to keep a CCC presence in this county, Sacramento noeds to hear, as soon
as possible, from all supporters of the Corps. I hope your Council Will join the Board of
Supervisors in letting your community's voice be heard in the Governor's office.
Sincerely,
LAURENCE L. LAURENT, Chairman
Board of Supervisors
Enclosure
sr pc:a\ccccity.ftr
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93408 - 805-549-5450
LAURENCE L. LAURI
May 12, 1992 DISTRICT T
The Honorable Pete Wilson 004P
Governor's Office
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Governor Wilson:
State officials, reacting to the state budget crisis, recently decided to eradicate the services
of the California Conservation Corps (CCC) on the Central Coast. This action would result
in a negative impact on the economic, environmental, and social communities of the Central
Coast. Historically, the CCC has been able to supply invaluable support to contribute to the
quality of life in our communities. Probable cutbacks in other local services would make the
continued existence of the CCC of greater significance than ever before.
The California Conservation Corps has been an integral part of our community for the last*
fifteen years. They have performed over three-quarters of a million hours of public service
conservation work. The CCC has assisted federal, state,county, city,and nonprofit agencies
in conserving and improving the natural resources of the Central Coast. Over the last five
years, the CCC has added $3 million annually to the local economy. They have provided a
clean industry with a favorable impact on the community.
The obvious benefit of the Conservation Corps is two-fold. First, the CCC provides an
avenue for urban and rural youth to fashion productive lives -- the stories of lives turned
around by the CCC are legend. Second, the CCC allows government and private sector
interests a way of accomplishing environment-improving programs in the most cost-effective
ways possible. If the existence of a CCC installation in this county is lost, the benefits the
CCC provides simply cannot be replaced -- and this will have a measurable impact on the
quality of life for humans and other species.
It is particularly ironic that the decision to close the CCC installations followed so closely on
the heels of the civil disturbances in Los Angeles. In the aftermath of that tragedy, and others
like it around the nation, one of the solutions observers seem to agree upon is the need to
establish programs exactly like the one already provided by the California Conservation
Corps.
II
May 12, 1992
Page Two
While the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors appreciates the state budget
situation, since we are also directly affected by it, we believe that cutting the Conservation
Corps programs as recom;nended would be counter-productive. We also see that a
substantial economio:investment has been made in this county in building up the CCC
Academy and the Operations`Base, and we wonder at the wisdom of wasting this investment.
Therefore, the individual members of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors join
together in asking that you please do everything you can to restore the Conservation Corps'
funding in order to keep all installations in California intact. If funding cuts must be made, at
the very least, we ask that any reductions required of the CCC not be disproportionate to
budget reductions in other state agencies.
If the proposed funding decision is not reversed,we then ask that the State of California give
the CCC base in San Luis Obispo County an additional three month$, until October 1, 1992,
in which local governmental and private entities would attempt to secure a greater level of
reimbursement funding for future CCC projects so that our facility could justify its continued
existence.
Thank y u, Assemblywoman Seastrand, for your assistance in this most vital issue.
i
Harry L. Ovi , Supervisor, District One Evelyn Del y, Supervisor, Dis ct Three
Ruth E. Brackett, Supervisor, District Four David Blakely, Supervisor, District Fiv
Laurence L. Laur nt, Board Chair
pc:6[\ccc1tra!!
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-5
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg.:' Date: - 5/26/92
From P-6teven L. DeCamp, City Planner File: No: ZC 01-91
SUBJECT:
Adoption of the Noise Ordinance to replace the existing noise
standards in the Zoning Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 245 on second reading.
BACKGROUND:
On May 12, 1992, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the
above referenced subject and, in concurrence with the Planning
Commission's recommendation, approved Ordinance NO. 245 on first
reading.
Attachment: Ordinance No. 245
001.55
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
0001LI f
0600f -3--
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'', 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
Ott015 7
I
Chapter 14. Noise Ordinance 0
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.
0001.1
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.
l
i. Equivalent Sound Level (Leg) - means thesound level
containing the same total energy as a time varying
signal over a given sample period. Leq 's 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.
ODU19
__ i
II
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.
UU
U 16U
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 'ahe 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 9 p.m. ) (9 p.%. to 7 a.m.1
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.
� 000161
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 9 p.m. ) (9 R-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.
000162
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 9714.04 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
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 (,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.
00006;3
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 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
followings
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.
•
00016
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.
�UU16S
MEET! AGENDA
DATE q�26/92 rrEm# EE...�........
M E M O R A N D U M
To: City Council
From: Bonita Borgeson
Subject: State Water - Potential County-wide Tax
Date: May 21, 1992
It looks as if the North County residents are going to be taxed for
water from the State Water Project even if North County residents
won't get a drop of State water.
Not only will the residents of North County be stuck with that tax
but, also, a new tax to cover possible future defaults by South
County water purveyors.
This item should have full Council discussion. Council members
should endorse raising taxes for North County residents (Atasca-
dero) or say no! I am attaching some documentation on this issue
which I would like to share with Council.
Please ask the Mayor to place this item on the agenda.
BB:cW
Attachments
000165, /
v
County of San Luis Obispo
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER.RM.370■SAN LUIS OBISPO.CALIFORNIA•(805)549-5011
OFFICE OF THE
May 7, 1992 COUNTY ADMUIISTRATOR
Richard J. Ramirez, City Manager
City of El Paso De Robles
P.O. Box 307
Paso Robles, CA 93447-0307 MAY 8 1992
BOARD Of SUPERV�SGi;S
Dear Mr. Ramirez: j COUNTY Of SAN LUIS OBIS-3
Your letter of April 24 to Board of Supervisors Chairman Laurence Laurent was forwarded
to-me with a request that I respond to the questions you posed. Though no aspect of the
issue of state water should be taken for granted,we thought that the general ideas expressed
in your questions were understood by the various interested parties in the county. However,
as that may not be the case, we were happy to provide the clarification you requested.
Attached you will find responses to each of your questions. For ease of identification we
have restated each question followed immediately by our response. In addition, we have
included a brief explanation as to the reasoning for continuation of the tax rate for state
water. After reviewing this information, If you have any further questions, please let me
know.
Sincerely,,
61z'
_ T_
ROBERT E. HENDRIX
County Administrator
attachment
cc: Board of Supervisors
County Engineer
adm\swpaso
Response to Paso Robles Questions
Question A
Will the Board of Supervisors remove the tax if the City of EI Paso de Robles refuses
to participate in the State water?
Answer A
We expect the Board to make this determination at their special meeting on
Wednesday, May 27, 1992.
Question B
On April 13 1992, a report was received by our Director of Plublic Works regarding
reconsidering participation in State water. Does the estimated cost assume the alluded
to tax remains in place, or does the acre-foot cost exclude the;;existing tax?
Answer B
The estimated costs -do assume the alluded to tax remains W place. The low-end
estimate assumes 2000 AF/yr unallocated amount of State wader is reserved and the
high-end estimate assumes 6270 AF/yr unallocated amount of State water is reserved.
Note that the first two cost columns in the table refer to-repayment of State facilities.
The repayment of the unallocated amounts are proposed to be repaid through the
alluded to tax.
The remainder of the figures for costs of local facilities include monies for the
unallocated entitlements. This is because Proposition 13
will not permit imposing a tax to pay for the local facilities without voter approval. Voter
approval on the State facilities occurred in 1960 and therefore the tax can be continued for
repaying the costs. Although all of the State facilities costs could be repaid by taxes, it is not
the intent to do so. It is proposed by the County Engineer that only the unallocated amount
for repayment to the State be covered by the tax rate and then only for a temporary period
until a future contract or contracts could be awarded after which the tax rate would be
eliminated.
Question C
If the County refuses to lift the alluded to tax for North County non-participants, will
the money be placed in a fiduciary fund, so that if at some later date, North County
wishes to participate, funds will be available.
UK �
b
00016JJ,3
1
G �
Answer C
No, the tax funds would be paid to the State to repay the costs for State Project
facilities built for this County. Note though, that it would be possible for the North
County to participate at a later day only if the project is built of a size to accommodate
the original contractors and late comers to the extent of the unallocated balance
available -- that's the reason why the Board will consider maintaining the tax.
Question D
If the County refuses to lift the State water tax, how will the County use the funds?
Answer D
The tax funds would be used to repay the State for the project facilities built by the
State for this County and then only to extent needed to repay the share of the costs
associated with the unallocated entitlements.
Question E
What is the actual financial impact to say the City of San Luis Obispo if the City of EI
Paso de Robles does not participate?
Answer E
Paso Robles non-participation would increase the City of San Luis Obispo's cost by
probably less than $90/AF or about 15°x.
Paso Robles non-participation has a much greater impact on the North County
Communities (because of the non-participation in the spur line to the North County).
For Templeton the costs would increase from about $850/AF to about $3400/AF.
stw\prquest.ltr.cmc
0001wi. q
Reason for the Board to Consider Continuation of the Taps Rate
for the State Water Project
The General Plan for the County and the seven cities would accommodate some 1/2 million
plus people.
Overall the ground water basins in the County are in an estimated overdraft of 61,000 AF/yr.
County agriculture uses about 80% of the water and supplemental w1ater projects are not
deemed affordable by agriculture with the possible exception of a minor amount for specialty
crops.
The urban communities will require about 50,000 AF/yr of supplemental water for full
buildout.
The County's (actually the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control andl Water Conservation
District) share of the State Project Water is 25,000 AF/yr and for Nacimiento for export away
from the lake is 16,200 AF/yr. Accordingly, the County will need all of its State water, all of
its Nacimiento water and other -- more expensive -- projects water as well.
If the decision is made to keep all of the State water but there are not enough commitments
for the full 25,000 AF/yr entitlement, then how can such be done? Cpne answer is for the
Board to continue the tax rate to repay the State for sizing the State facilities for the full 25,000
• AF/yr entitlement. And, to have the initial contractors temporarily pick up the costs for
repayment of the local facilities through their contract payments. (It is legal to pay for the State
facilities by imposing a tax but not for the local facilities without voter approval).
The concept would be to do the above and that as late comers participate they would be
required to "buy in' retroactively thus reducing the costs to the initial participants and reduce
the overall unit costs because of economy of scale. Under this scenario, the tax rate would
eventually be reduced to zero. (Remember it is the District (Countywide) tax payers which
have been paying for so many years to reserve out rights in both the State Water Project and
the Nacimiento Water Project).
Attached are some tax rate scenarios presented to the Board of Supervisors at their special
hearing on March 25, 1992. Note that the Board could choose to repay all costs for the full
25,000 AF/yr to the State by imposing a tax. That is not proposed but assuming the Board
chose to do so and assuming that the assessed value inflated at 5% per year then the maximum
tax on a $100,000 property would be $37.29 in the highest year (1996-37). The point is that
a tax could be imposed to repay the State costs for an unallocated entitlement at a fairly
nominal tax. (If 5000 AF/yr were retained as an unallocated balance and the assessed value
increased at 5% then the maximum tax on a $100,000 property would'be $7.46 per year in
1996-97). Remember, too, that the imposition of a tax would be necessary only until all of
the water is allocated by contract; thereafter the tax would be zero.
stw brdreason.ltr.cmc v
0001FS,5'
a
i
1r 4
°�• CITY or EL PASO DE ROBLES
�JhE�QSS Of 1:hE lJQ1�t1�
e '
April 24, 1992
Mr. Bud Laurent, Co. Supervisor
County of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
Dear Mr. Laurent:
During our City Council meeting of April 21, 1992, a report dealing
with State Water was given by our City Attorney that was not well
received by El Paso de Robles City Council. Specifically, we
learned that the Board of Supervisors does not intend to remove the
"special tax" currently being charged to the North County/Paso
Robles citizens, regardless whether or not the area desires to
receive State Water. In other words, although North County
citizens who may not want nor would they receive State Water, the
Board of Supervisors intends to keep the current tax in place.
Further, the tax may actually be -increased, Frankly, we find the
above hard to believe. As represented, the County would keep a tax
in place that serves a select group of people at the expense of
tens of thousands of North County residents.
Based on the aforementioned, we respectfully request an immediate
meeting with County Counsel, supervisor Harry Ovitt, and yourself
with a committee from El Paso de Robles, to learn the following:
a) Will the Board of Supervisors remove the tax if the City of El
Paso de Robles refuses to participate in State Water?
b) On April 13 , 1992, a report was received by our Director of
Public Works regarding reconsidering participation in State
Water (see attached) . Does the estimated cost assume the
alluded to tax remains in place, or does the acre/foot cost
exclude the existing tax?
C) If the County refuses to lift the alluded to tax for North
County non-participants, will the money be placed in a
fiduciary fund, so that if at some later date, North County
wishes to participate, funds will be available?
d) . If the County refuses to lift the State Water tax, how will
the County use the funds?
City Manager • Post Office Box 307 • Faso Robles,California 93447-0307 • (805)238-0400 • FAX (805)238-4704
000irli
y
e) What is the actual financial impact to say the City of San
Luis Obispo if the City of El Paso de Robles does not
participate?
Given the political and economic implications mf the above
questions, we would hope the above meeting could be arranged before
our May 5, 1992 City Council meeting. We look forward to hearing
back from you.
Respectfully,
Richard J. Ramirez
City Manager
RJR:ca
attachment
cc: City Council
Bob Hendricks
Co. Board of Supervisors
000165,7
n L UIS BISPO COU UY ENGINEERING
O DEPARTMENT
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER • ROOM 207 • SAN LUIS 081SPO.CALIFORNIA 93408
CANTON MILNE PHONE (805) 549.5252 FAX (805) 546-1 —� fl
County Engineer
GaN t PliDDY
x-Iry;Ours.(r+G.Mt(r
NOEL UNG TL
TOADS
TIANLT
ROOD CONT[Ol
WAnt COPMfVAnON
3 ec» covNm wrve(or
March 2, 1992 "'�CSKCW DWItI sRWSM
nr i N LUS noicoO ,
MEMORANDUM
TO: David Blakely, Supervisor District 5
FROM: Clinton Milne, County Engineer 3 2 qv
SUBJECT: State Water Project - Response to-your Memo of February 18,1992.
The following is my response in answer to your. questions: ;
41. Can the local purveyors contract directly with the State, leaving the County out of the
deal?'
In my opinion, the answer is 'No.' I suppose were the State willing to accept, and the
District willing to relinquish some of its enddement and recommend that the State .
contract with the local purveyor that such could be done. It is my opinion that this '
could potentially adversely affect the financial inftrity pf the Rate Water P an
the State would not approve the transfer one of the things that the State requires is
ecurity that In the event o e ault in payment, the District would impose a tato
make up for the default; a local purveyor could not provide that security (because of '
roposition 13).
'2. Is the County ultimately responsible if the purveyors cannot pay the obligations that
they have for the State Water? If so, how will the County propose covering that cost?'
In the agreements, we intend to make it as nearly foolproof as possible that there will
o need for the District tax to back up any defauldrig contractors.i If such aAevenEshould occur, en a tax can im to up a payments to the the State facilities. That is the security that was developed so that the bondwould provide a low interest rate on the bonds. Such was approved by the vot
to Proposition 13 and therefore, is not governed by Proposition 13.
In the case of repayment for the local facilities needed to take State Project water
(regional treatment plan, spurlines, etc.), we are proposing agreements which would
provide that if one purveyor defaults, other purveyors would provide up to a 25%
0001C,5, �_
j
• backup so that the District would not have to cover the cost. (These local facilities�� ;
cannot be backed up with taxes.) This kind of backup should prove to the benefit of
all participants because it would give the bond buyers more security with the result of �`z
a lower interest rate. Also, should the unlikely event ever occur, then the defaulting w '.
purveyor's water entitlement would be transferred to the other purveyors. Should the
25% backup not be adequate for the local facilities, then the bond buyer-would take
the loss, not the District
83. Is it possible to have the local jurisdictions bond or provide some';collateral to cover
their requested amounts of water?'
It is not traditionally done between public agencies and in light of the proposed •�''
agreements, it would not appear to be necessary.
Frankly, I believe the risk of default on a water supply project is about as minimal as
can be achieved.
a\m\swpres.mmo.ams
;r•
•
�- P
MEETING AGENDA
DATLL6 2 ITEM# EES
M E M O R A N D U M
To: City Council
From: Ray Windsor, City Manager
Subject: City Manager's Contract
Date: May 11, 1992
As you know, my current employment agreement expires June 30, 1993,
with an understanding that further renewal would/could be negoti-
ated at that time. Although it is a year in advance, I feel it is
time for me to announce that I will be stepping down as Manager
concurrent with the expiration of my contract on June 30, 1993.
It is my desire to make the announcement at this time in order to:
1. Give ample notice of my intention to make a transition in
my life;
2. Avoid any inference or suspicion that the new Council
majority resulting from the election on June 2nd was in
any way responsible for the decision;
3. Allow the Council time to fully explore its options with
respect to my replacement.
With respect to Item #3, I have previously announced my intention
to appoint Andy Takata as the Assistant Manager, effective July 1,
1992, and I am hopeful that this move could possibly- lead to the
longer term solution to the transition in my office.' But obviously
this is a decision to be made by Council in the future.
Finally, I just want to say that from a timing standpoint--that is
to say, in terms of where the City is in its history-}-stepping down
as Manager has merit beyond my own personal reasons. During the
past four years, I have been privileged to be part 4f some unprec-
edented community accomplishments. Now, with the kinds of revenue
reductions being experienced by communities in California, there
will, of necessity, have to be a period of fiscal retrenchment
limiting the opportunities for significant additional capital im-
provements and related projects. Given this fact; it is likely
that Atascadero, like most of its counterparts in California, will
have to settle for several years of budgets directed solely at re-
establishing its revenue reserves.
It is obviously too early for comments or reflections on my tenure
in Atascadero, but I would be remiss if I didn't end this memo with
special thanks to Alden Shiers, Rollin Dexter and Bob Lilley, since
they will be stepping down themselves in June. I cannot tell you
how grateful I am to have had the opportunity to work under their
OU0166
guidance and counsel these past four years. And while our connec-_
tion may: be a; function of the job, reflecting a diversity of
s •
political philosophies, my admiration for and friendship with all
three far, transcends such a narrow focus. In this regard, _I can
echo similar sentiments for every member of the Council which,
while it may not make me unique, certainly gives me cause to feel
very fortunate.
This announcement will appear under the City Manager' s reports on
the May 26, 1992, agenda.
RW:cw
2