HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 050807•
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Special Meeting: 5:30 P.M.
Redevelopment Agency: 6:30 P.M.
City Council: 7:00 P.M.
City Hall
Council Chambers
6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, California
0 SPECIAL MEETING: 5:30 P.M.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Pro Tem Brennler
ROLL CALL: Mayor Luna
Mayor Pro Tem Brennler
Council Member Beraud
Council Member Clay
Council Member O'Malley
COMMUNITY FORUM: (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to
address the Council on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has
jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to five minutes. Please state your name for the record
before making your presentation. The Council may take action to direct the staff to
place a matter of business on a future agenda. A maximum of 30 minutes will be
allowed for Community Forum, unless changed by the Council.)
1
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call 0
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: (On their own initiative, Council
Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities.
Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to staff or take
action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Council may
take action on items listed on the Agenda.)
Ak CONSENT CALENDAR: (All items on the consent calendar are considered to
be routine and non -controversial by City staff and will be approved by one motion
if no member of the Council or public wishes to comment or ask questions. If
comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the item will be removed from the
consent calendar and will be considered in the listed sequence with an
opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council concerning the
item before action is taken.)
1. City Council Meeting Minutes — April 10, 2007
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Meeting
Minutes of April 10, 2007. [City Clerk]
2. Weed Abatement — Contractor Award (City Bid No. 2007-003)
■ Fiscal Impact: None. Funds are budgeted, annually, to cover the costs of
the weed abatement program, and are recovered through assessments on
property tax bills of those parcels abated.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute the
contract with Jack R. Bridwell for weed abatement. [Fire] ,
3. Colony Park Frontage Improvements Award (City Bid No. 2007-002)
■ Description: The proposed project will include curb, gutter, sidewalks and
street lights along Traffic Way, from Olmeda Avenue to the eastern
boundary of Colony Park.
■ Fiscal Impact: Total estimated expenditure of $212,500.00.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a
contract with Union Asphalt in the amount of $ 161,437.30 for construction
of the frontage improvements for the new Colony Park Community Center.
[Public Works]
4. Final Map 2006-0143 (Tract 2814) 5900 Madera Lane (TTM 2005-0079)
Eddin s
■ Description: Creates four airspace units on a 0.5 acre common lot.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt and approve Final Map 2006-0143 (Tract 2814); and
2. Authorize and direct City Clerk to endorse the City Council's approval
on the Final Map. [Public Works]
2
5. Parkina & Business Improvement Area (PBIA) Assessment
■ Description: The annual PBIA assessment is imposed on downtown
businesses for improvements in the downtown.
■ Fiscal Impact: The City receives approximately $10,500 annually from the
Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area assessments.
■ Recommendation: Council adopt the Draft Resolution of Intention,
declaring intent to levy annual Downtown Parking & Business
Improvement Area assessment, and set a public hearing for June 12,
2007. [City Manager]
. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. General Plan Text Amendment and Title 9 Planning and Zoning Text
Amendment — GPA 2006-0017 / ZCH 2006-0125 / PLN 2006-1139 (City of
Atascadero)
■ Description: The Council will consider the adoption of an Ordinance to
establish permanent creek setbacks.
■ Recommendations: Planning Commission Recommends on a 3-3 vote:
1. Council adopt Draft Resolution A denying General Plan Amendment
2006-0017 and the associated environmental document and Zoning
Text Amendment.
If Council chooses to adopt staffs proposed Creek Ordinance and
General Plan Amendment the following are provided:
2. Draft Resolution A certifying Proposed Negative Declaration 2006-
0039-land,
006-
0039;and,
3. Draft Resolution B to approve General Plan Amendment 2006-0017
(PLN 2006-1139) based on findings; and,
4. Draft Ordinance A to introduce an ordinance for first reading, by title
only, approving Zone Change 2006-0125 (PLN 2006-1139) based on
findings. [Community Development]
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Campaign Contribution Limitations
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council provide direction to City Staff regarding the
Draft Ordinance adopting campaign contribution limitations. [City Attorney]
2. Work Plan for City Council Strategic Planning Goals
• Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council provide direction on the work plan for the City
Council strategic planning goals. [City Manager]
•
3
U
E
F
M
COMMITTEE REPORTS: (The following represent standing committees.
Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary): 0
Mayor Luna
1. County Mayor's Round Table
2. Finance Committee
3. S.L.O. County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Water Resources
Advisory Committee
4. Nacimiento Water Purveyors' Contract Technical Advisory Group
5. North County Water Purveyors Group
Mayor Pro Tem Brennler
1. Air Pollution Control District (APCD)
2. Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC)
3. Atascadero Youth Task Force
Council Member Beraud
1. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA)
2. City / Schools Committee
Council Member Clay
1. City / Schools Committee
Council Member O'Malley •
1. S.L.O. Council of Governments (SLOCOG) / S.L.O. Regional Transit
Authority (SLORTA)
2. Finance Committee
3. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC)
4. League of California Cities — Council Liaison
INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Clerk
3. City Treasurer
4. City Attorney
5. City Manager
ADJOURNMENT:
•
Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this Agenda in court, that
person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to this public hearing. Correspondence submitted at this
public hearing will be distributed to the Council and available for review in the City Clerk's office.
I, Shannon Sims, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the penalty of perjury
that the foregoing agenda for the May 8, 2007 Regular Session of the Atascadero City Council was
posted on May 2, 2007 at the Atascadero City Hall, 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
and was available for public review in the Customer Service Center at that location.
Signed this 2nd day of May, 2007 at Atascadero, California.
Shannon Sims, Deputy City Clerk
City of Atascadero
•
•
5
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m., at the City Hall
Council Chambers, 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero. Matters are considered by the Council in the order of the printed
Agenda.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file
in the office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours at the Central
Receptionist counter and on our website, www.atascadero.org. An agenda packet is also available for public review at
the Atascadero Library, 6850 Morro Road. Contracts, Resolutions and Ordinances will be allocated a number once they
are approved by the City Council. The minutes of this meeting will reflect these numbers. All documents submitted by the
public during Council meetings that are either read into the record or referred to in their statement will be noted in the
minutes and available for review in the City Clerk's office. Council meetings are recorded and may be reviewed by the
public. Copies of meeting recordings are available for a fee. Contact the City Clerk for more information (470-3400).
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 or the City Clerk's Office, both at (805)
470-3400. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in
assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS (from Title 2, Chapter 1 of the Atascadero Municipal Code)
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject, staff will give their
report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is open and
will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding the matter being considered to step up to the podium. If
you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way:
1. You must approach the podium and be recognized by the Mayor
2. Give your name and address (not required)
3. Make your statement
4. All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other
individual, absent or present
6. All comments limited to 5 minutes (unless changed by the Council)
7. No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so, and no one
may speak more than twice on any item.
If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the City Clerk's office at least 24
hours prior to the meeting. Access to hook up your laptop to the City's projector will be provided. You are required to
submit to the City Clerk a printed copy of your presentation for the record. Please check in with the City Clerk before the
meeting begins to announce your presence and turn in the printed copy.
The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public comments will be
heard by the Council.
TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, "COMMUNITY FORUM", the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience having business with the
Council to:
• Please approach the podium and be recognized
• Give your name and address (not required)
• State the nature of your business
This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Council's attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will be
allowed for Community Forum (unless changed by the Council).
TO HAVE ITEMS PLACED ON AGENDA
All business matters to appear on the Agenda must be in the Office of the City Manager 14 days preceding the Councils
meeting. Should you have a matter you wish to bring before the Council, please mail or bring a written communication to
the City Manager's office in City Hall prior to the deadline.
0
•1970 CITY OF A TASCADER#
ITEM NUMBER: A-1
DATE: 05/08/07
COUNCILCITY
DRAFT MINUTES
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT — CLOSED SESSION
2. CALL TO ORDER
a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Govt. Code Sec.
54957.6)
Agency Designated Representatives: City Manager Wade McKinney,
Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis
Employee Organizations: Department Heads, Confidential, Atascadero
Police Association, Atascadero Professional Fire Fighters Association
Local 3600, Unrepresented Employees: Part -Time Employees.
b. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
(Govt. Code Sec. 54956.8)
Property: Easement from Capistrano Avenue to Stadium Park along
APN# 029-105-028
Agency Negotiator: Patrick Enright, City Attorney
Negotiating Parties: Dr. Gary Renzaglia
Under Negotiation: Instruction to negotiator will concern price and terms
of payment.
c. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -- Existing Litigation
(Govt. Code Sec. 54956.9 (a))
1. Citv of Atascadero v. Pacific Gas and Electric
3. ADJOURN: 7:08 p.m.
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Pagel of 11 7
CLOSED SESSION REPORT 0
City Attorney Patrick Enright announced that Council met in Closed Session and for
Items #2.a and b., further direction was given to the labor negotiator and real property
negotiator, and Item #2.c was continued.
REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Luna called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. and Council Member O'Malley led
the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Beraud, Clay, O'Malley, Brennler, and Mayor
Luna
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk / Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson,
Deputy City Clerk Grace Pucci
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis,
Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard, Community
Development Director Warren Frace, Public Works Director Steve
Kahn, Community Services Director Brady Cherry, Police Lt. Carole
Robinson, Fire Chief Kurt Stone, and City Attorney Patrick Enright.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Tom Gaddis, Atascadero Ministerial Association, introduced Pastor Varnum Schultz of
Atascadero First Baptist Church who led those present in prayer.
Greg Barbour stated his objections to the Administrative Use Permit process and
indicated he was bothered that he had received the notice as he does not feel he has
the right to oppose the project.
Glen Horn asked several questions regarding the proposal for creek setbacks and
urged the city to get more information before the setbacks are imposed.
Jolene Horn spoke about the creek setback issue and expressed concern that it could
potentially decrease the value of her property.
•
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 2 of 11
Mark Phillips played a DVD of a reporter interviewing an individual regarding the
discovery of a surveillance operation that it is believed Wal Mart is using.
David Curtiss spoke about a report he had read regarding the City of Stockton,
California and the legal events surrounding the proposed construction of a Wal Mart in
that city.
Mike Jackson spoke about the creek setback proposal and expressed his concerns that
such a proposal would affect almost every parcel in town. He also commented on the
effect of woodland canopy on local streams and creeks.
John Shadak spoke about the last Planning Commission meeting where the creek
setback proposal was voted on and stated that a majority of the public present were
against it. He considered the setbacks a land seizure as property is being taken but the
owner must continue to pay the taxes.
Kelly Long said she was a small business owner with a store across from the Del Rio
property and spoke in favor of a Wal Mart, which she feels will stimulate business and
bring foot traffic to the businesses at that end of town.
Mark Gibbs addressed the proposed creek setback ordinance and how it would affect
many property owners in Atascadero. He hoped the City Council would work with the
community before they take any action.
Lee Perkins stated she would like Atascadero to stay Wal Mart free. She indicated she
would like to see diverse development at the Annex that would be good for the
community but would not include a super Wal Mart.
Tino Santos commented that he had visited the Wal Mart in Paso Robles and found no
negative employee issues there. He stated Atascadero needs the jobs and increased
business a Wal Mart would bring.
Tom Comar, Oppose Wal Mart spokesperson, explained their primary mission and
stated the proposed super center is dividing the community. He spoke of studies that
show a super center would not bring good economic development to Atascadero.
Mayor Luna closed the Community Forum period.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council
Member Clay to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote.
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 3 of 11
9
PRESENTATIONS: 0
1. Proclamation declaring April 2007 "Month of the Child" and "Child
Abuse Prevention Month" and April 14, 2007 "Day of the Child."
Council Member Beraud read the proclamation and presented it to of Carol Capito,
Child Care Planning Council, who spoke about child care programs available in the
North County and stated there was a serious lack of child care accessibility in the
county.
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
Council Member Clay commented that up to 50% of the property owners in Atascadero
could be affected by the proposed creek setback ordinance. He stated that every
property owner in the city should be noticed regarding the May 8th meeting to let them
know that their property might be impacted.
There was Council consensus that city wide notification will be made for the
hearing on the creek setback ordinance.
Council Member Clay spoke about the Wal Mart issue, and reported on the interview of
the CEO of Wal Mart that he recently watched on cable television. He would like to see
the issue go to a vote of the people. 0
Mayor Pro Tem Brennler reported that he attended the California Summit for Safe
Communities with the City Manager and explained that this meeting dealt with the
housing and placement of high risk sex offenders. He advocated writing an ordinance
to establish residency restrictions for such individuals based on protected properties
within the city.
City Manager Wade McKinney reported that the Police and Fire Chiefs are formulating
an action plan on this topic under the Council's public safety goal.
Council Member Beraud, in responding to the creek setback comments, reported that
setbacks have been part of the General Plan since the city was incorporated. She
asked staff to include in their report information on what other cities do to protect their
riparian areas, and the recommendations from the tree inventory. She stated her
appreciation to the public for bringing forth information regarding Wal Mart that is not
available in the local media, and indicated that the City Council is pro business.
Council Member O'Malley made the following announcements: 1) He was asked to join
the statewide League of California Cities Committee for Children's Health Care, 2) He
has asked Jo Ann Main of the Chamber to report on businesses in the community that
have closed and those that have opened, 3) Received a report at the last Economic
Vitality Corporation meeting from Chamber members who had visited China, 4) Has •
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 4 of 11
10
asked SLOCOG to give a presentation to the Council on the model they use for
assessing the economic impacts of council decisions as it pertains to Atascadero, 5)
He is working with Main Street Executive Director Steve Martin on the potential for
tourism in the area, and 6) the Finance Committee is committed to finding ways to
promote and support business in Atascadero.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. CitV Council Strateqic Planning Workshop Notes — FebruarV 23-24, 2007
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Strategic
Planning Workshop Notes of February 23-24, 2007. [City Clerk]
2. City Council Strategic Planning Workshop Minutes — FebruarV 23-24,
2007
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Strategic
Planning Workshop Minutes of February 23-24, 2007. [City Clerk]
3. City Council Meeting Minutes — FebruarV 27, 2007
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Meeting
Minutes of February 27, 2007. [City Clerk]
4. City Council Meeting Minutes — March 13, 2007
+* City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Meeting
Minutes of March 13, 2007. [City Clerk]
5. FebruarV 2007 Accounts Payable and Payroll Disbursements
■ Fiscal Impact: $2,448,838.51.
■ Recommendation: Council approve certified City accounts payable,
payroll and payroll vendor checks for February 2007. [Administrative
Services]
6. Acceptance of the Offers of Dedication Tract 2495 (Apple ValleV)
■ Description: Acceptance of the Offers of Dedication and refection of
maintenance of the public improvements will allow the property owners of
Apple Valley to fund the maintenance of the improvements.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt the Draft Resolution accepting the Offers of Dedication on Tract
2495 for
a) Streets;
b) Public Pedestrian Access Easements;
c) Public Landscape Easement;
d) Public Utility Easement;
e) Public Drainage Easement;
f) Public Sewer Easement;
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 5 of 11
11
g) Lots 71, 72, 73; and
2. Reject the improvements in the areas of dedication for maintenance.
[Public Works]
7. Final Map 2006-0144 (Parcel Map AT 06-0113) 8905 Montecito Road (TPM
2006-0085) (Gearhart)
■ Description: Tentative Parcel Map approved the division of 1.11 acres into
three (3) lots.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt and Approve Final Map 2006-0144 (Parcel Map AT 06-0113);
and,
2. Reject, without prejudice to future acceptance on behalf of the public,
the offers of dedication for Public Utility, Drainage, and Pedestrian
Access Easement.; and,
3. Authorize and direct City Clerk to endorse the City Council's approval
on the Map. [Public Works]
8. Final Map 2004-0079 (Parcel Map AT 01-091) 9230 Vista Bonita (TPM
2002-0028) (Fredrick)
■ Description: Tentative Parcel Map approved the division of 4.33 acres into
two lots of 1.87 and 2.46 acres.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt and Approve Final Map 2004-0079 (Parcel Map AT 01-091).
2. Order the abandonment of Vista Bonita Avenue (formerly EI Dorado
Avenue) as shown on the Map of Tract 5 in accordance with
Government Code Section 66445j, with the filing of Parcel Map AT 01-
091, and reserving the easements so designated on Parcel Map AT
01-091 as:
a. For Private Access and Public Drainage Purposes and all uses
incidental thereto for the use and benefit of the present or future
owners of the lots affected by such easements, and
b. For Public use and the benefit of the several Public Utility
Companies and Atascadero Mutual Water Company ("AMWC")
which are authorized to serve in said subdivision, easements for
public utility purposes, delineated on said map as "Public Utility
Easement" or "P.U.E."
3. Authorize and direct City Clerk to endorse the City Council's approval
on the Map and Certify that the City Council ordered the abandonment
of Vista Bonita Avenue as shown on the map. [Public Works]
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 6 of 11
12
9. Final Map 2006-0149 (Tract 2681) 2865 Ferrocarril Road (TTM 2004 -
0059)(Tharp
• Description: Final Map 2006-0149 creates a five lot residential
subdivision.
• Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt and Approve Final Map 2006-0149 (Tract 2681).
2. Reject, without prejudice to future acceptance on behalf of the public,
the offers of dedication for all Public Roads and the Public Easement
for equestrian and pedestrian purposes, as shown on the map.
. Authorize and direct City Clerk to endorse the City Council's approval.
[Public Works]
Items pulled: Council Member Beraud, Item #A-1.
MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member
O'Malley to approve Items #A-2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. (Item #A-6 Resolution No.
2007-012)
Item #A-1:
• There was Council consensus to continue this item for Council Members to
individually review the Minutes and make structural comments.
B. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Adopt -A -Road Program
■ Description: This program would provide an additional tool to assist with
the litter removal aspect of road maintenance.
■ Fiscal Impact: Some City staff time will be necessary for the direction and
coordination of the program participants, and purchase and installation of
recognition signs will cost approximately $200.00 per sign.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the Public Works Director to
implement an Adopt -A -Road Program. [Public Works]
Public Works Director Steve Kahn spoke about the program and introduced Julia Beckia
and Georgia Harrison of the Interactive Club who addressed the Council and answered
their questions.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Eric Greening stated this is another sterling example of youth taking the leadership in
making this a better place, and they should be supported.
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 7 of 11
13
Mayor Luna closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council
Member Clay to authorize the Public Works Director to
implement an Adopt -A -Road Program.
Motion passed 5;0 by a roll -call vote.
2. Eagle Creek Golf Course Reuse — Study Session
■ Disclosure of Ex Parte Communications
Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council provide direction to staff and Planning
Commission on how to proceed with amendments to the Eagle Creek Golf
Course project. [Community Development]
Ex Parte Communications
■ Mayor Luna stated he met with Mr. Gearhart about a year ago regarding a different
subject but this came up and he suggested that Mr. Gearhart hold a neighborhood
meeting, which he did.
■ Council Member O'Malley stated he had discussed the previous project proposal at
this site with the applicant, and spoke with several neighbors regarding their
thoughts on the current project. He also received an email from a neighbor to this
project, which he forwarded to staff.
• Mayor Pro Tem Brender stated he had contacted the neighborhood previous to his
election, and had received an email from a neighbor to the project.
Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report and answered
questions of Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Jamie Kirk, applicant's representative, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the project
and answered questions of Council.
Doug Pirrto, spokesperson for the neighborhood property owners, stated the concerns
of the neighbors, their principles regarding this project and their concerns for the value
of their properties. He requested that this project move forward as quickly as possible,
and submitted a packet containing neighborhood statements, implementation goals,
emails and roster. (Exhibit A)
Mayor Luna closed the Public Comment period.
Council discussed the proposed project and gave the following direction to staff:
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 8 of 11
14
•
There was Council consensus to move forward with this project and expedite the
• process, there will be no second units, staff will process the General Plan
Amendment and zoning map changes, staff may use one of the reserved General
Plan Amendment cycles, and will concurrently process any permits along with
the hearing for the amendment process.
Mayor Luna recessed the hearing at 9:42 p.m.
Mayor Luna called the meeting back to order at 9:51 p.m.
3. Adoption of Commissioner Norms
■ Description: Adoption of this Resolution will create conduct guidelines for
Commissioners.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council adopt Draft Resolution adopting Norms for the
Planning Commissioners and Parks and Recreation Commissioners. [City
Attorney]
City Attorney Patrick Enright gave the staff report and answered questions of Council.
Changes to Commissioner Norms agreed upon by Council included:
• Page 101, #11: Delete the word "lobby" and use the word "influence".
■ Page 102, #12: Leave in "visits a site".
■ Page 102, #16, bullet #3: Change to "Listen to speakers and Commissioners".
■ Page 107 Staff Suggestions: There was no consensus to include these. The City
Attorney stated he can look at adding something on "Commissioner conduct with
the public outside of meetings" to the Norms in the future.
■ Page 101 #1: Change to "We will behave professionally and respect one another's
right to hold and voice differing positions or opinions".
■ Page 101, #6: Change "blindside" to "surprise".
•
PUBLIC COMMENT
Sandy Jack, Planning Commissioner, clarified the Commission's reasoning for the
change they had made to Item #16, and stated their concern was that many times those
running the meeting are not being attentive to the speaker.
Mayor Luna closed the Public Comment period.
There was Council consensus to continue this item and any Council input should
go to the City Attorney to be drafted up and come back on a future agenda.
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 9 of 11
15
4. Adoption of General Plan Amendment Policy
■ Description: General Plan Amendment Policy would reflect current City
process in written form.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council adopt Draft Resolution establishing a policy for
amending the General Plan. [City Attorney]
City Attorney Patrick Enright gave the staff report and answered questions of Council.
A copy of the General Plan Amendment Policy was distributed to Council. (Exhibit B)
There was Council agreement Item A under Section 5 would be moved to become Item
A under Section 3.
PUBLIC COMMENT — None
MOTION: By Council Member Beraud and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Brennler to accept the General Plan Amendment Policy with
revisions as identified.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. (Resolution No. 2007-013)
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: None
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
City Council
Mayor Pro Tem Brennler suggested considering public comment on the creek
setback issue, scheduled for May 8th, be limited to three minutes. City Attorney
Patrick Enright explained that it is not possible for Council to change the time
limit.
Mayor Pro Tem Brennler reaffirmed his support for an employee satisfaction
survey. City Manager Wade McKinney stated this issue is on staff's future issues
list.
Council Member Beraud asked if there will be another workshop when the Wal
Mart/Rottman project comes in again. Community Development Director Frace
explained that there would be, as they had withdrawn their application.
Mayor Luna suggested starting the May 8th meeting early to accommodate the
zone change/conditional use permit/precise plan for the hotel and office building
next to the Post Office. The City Attorney stated he would check to see if this
item could be heard at an earlier time on the 8th
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 10 of 11
16
U
Council Member Clay inquired if there will be another Wal Mart meeting similar to
the May 30th session. Director Frace stated that whatever is submitted will be
packaged up and brought to the City Council to determine if staff should begin
processing that project through, and that would be noticed as a public meeting.
City Manager
a. Commission Attendance Reports: City Manager Wade McKinney
reported that the Commission Attendance Reports were circulated
to the Council.
F. ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Luna adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled
meeting of the City Council on April 24, 2007.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
0 Grace Pucci, Deputy City Clerk
•
The following exhibits are available for review in the City Clerk's office:
Exhibit A — Doug Pirrto, informational packet
Exhibit B — City Attorney, General Plan Amendment Policy
CC Draft Minutes 04/10/07
Page 11 of 11
17
�i
•
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Fire Department
ITEM NUMBER: A - 2
DATE: 05/08/07
Weed Abatement — Contractor Award
(City Bid No. 2007-003)
RECOMMENDATION:
Council authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Jack R. Bridwell for
weed abatement.
DISCUSSION:
A legal notice, inviting sealed bids, was printed in the Atascadero News and The
Tribune from April 4 through April 18, 2007.
A total of 27 Invitations to Bid were distributed, and two bids were received. This bid for
weed abatement contract was opened on Monday, April 23, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. See
attached bid summary.
Staff recommends awarding the bid to Jack R. Bridwell
FISCAL IMPACT:
None. Funds are budgeted, annually, to cover the costs of the weed abatement
program, and are recovered through assessments on property tax bills of those parcels
abated.
ALTERNATIVES:
Council can reject the bid and re -bid the contract. This alternative is not recommended
because it would not allow the appropriate time to enter assessments on the 2007-2008
tax roll.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Legal Notices: Inviting Sealed Bids (Atascadero News and The Tribune)
2. Bid Summary
3. Agreement for Services of Contractor
19
CITY OF ATASCADERO
FIRE DEPARTMENT
FAX TRANSMITTAL
DATE: April 2, 2007 TIME:
TO: FIRM: Atascadero News
NAME: Leal Notices
DEPARTMENT: Lei al Notices
805- 466-2714
FROM: ATASCADERO CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT
NAME Ellen Perkins, Administrative Assistant
FAX #: 805-466-2907
We are transmitting 2 pages, including this cover sheet. If you do not receive all
of the pages, please call us at 805-470-3300.
NOTES: Please print the attached Notice Inviting Sealed Bids for Vegetative
Growth and/or Refuse Abatement in the Atascadero News on April 4, 6, 11, 13, 18,
2007.
Thank you!
206005 LF.WTS AVENUE • ATACCADFR(1_ (A 93422 a (RO5) 461-5070 • FAX (805) 466-2907
•
•
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO
FIRE DEPARTMENT
FAX TRANSMITTAL
DATE: April 2, 2007 TIME:
TO: FIRM: The Tribune
NAME: Legal Notices
DEPARTMENT: Legal Notices
• FAX # 805-781-7947
FROM: ATASCADERO CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT
NAME Ellen Perkins Administrative Assistant
FAX #: 805-466-2907
We are transmitting 2 pages, including this cover sheet. If you do not receive all
of the pages, please call us at 805-470-3300.
NOTES: Please print the attached Notice Inviting Sealed Bids for Vegetative
Growth and/or Refuse Abatement in the Tribune newspaper on April 5, 7, 12, 14,
17 2007.
0 Thank you!
6005 i.FWiS AVFNTIF • ATASC'ATlFRO. CA 93422 • (R05) 461-5070 • FAX (805) 466-290721
City of Atascadero �
Office of the City Clerk
BID SUMMARY
TO: Kurt Stone, Fire Chief
FROM: Marcia McClure Togerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
BID NO.: 2007-003
OPENED: Monday, April 23, 2007
PROJECT: 2007 Weed Abatement
Two (2) bids were received and opened today, as follows:
Bidder Tractor Mowing Hand Work 40
1. Travis Hansen DBA Hansen Bros Custom Farming $ 65.00 per $90.00 per
1161 Dorothy Street half hour half hour
Paso Robles, CA 93447
2. Jack R. Bridwell $ 50.00 per $75.00 per
11600 Viejo Camino half hour half hour
Atascadero, CA 93422
22
•
•
ml MIM N,n
1918 197a� City of Atascadero
Ea+�' Fire Department
WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES OF CONTRACTOR
This agreement is made upon the date of execution, as set forth below, by and between
Jack R. Bridwell, a weed abatement contractor, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor", and the
City of Atascadero, Atascadero, California, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City". The parties hereto, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, hereby
agree to the following terms and conditions:
1.00 GENERAL PROVISIONS
1.01 TERM: This agreement will become effective on the date of execution set forth
below, and will continue in effect until June 1, 2008, or is terminated as provided
herein.
• 1.02 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY CONTRACTOR: Contractor agrees to
perform or provide the services specified in "Professional Services to be
performed by Contractor" attached hereto as "Exhibit A" hereby incorporated
herein.
Contractor shall determine the method, details and means of performing the
above -referenced services.
Contractor may, at Contractor's own expense, employ such assistants, as
Contractor deems necessary to perform the services required of Contractor by this
agreement. City may not control, direct or supervise Contractor's assistants or
employees in the performance of those services.
1.03 COMPENSATION: In consideration for the services to be performed by
Contractor, City agrees to pay Contractor the consideration set forth in the
amounts and under the terms provided in "Exhibit B", hereby incorporated herein.
6005 LEWIS AVENUE — ATASCADERO, CA 93422 — (805) 461-5070 — FAX (805) 466-2907
23
2.00 OBLIGATIONS OF CONTRACTOR 0
2.01 MINIMUM AMOUNT OF SERVICE BY CONTRACTOR: Contractor agrees
to devote the hours necessary to perform the services set forth in this agreement in
an efficient and effective manner. Contractor may represent, perform services for
and be employed by additional individuals or entities, in Contractor's sole
discretion, as long as the performance of these extra -contractual services does not
interfere with or present a conflict with City's business.
2.02 TOOLS AND INSTRUMENTALITIES: Contractor shall provide all tools
and instrumentalities to perform the services under this agreement except those
listed in "Tools and instrumentalities provided by City" attached hereto as
"Exhibit C" and hereby incorporated herein.
2.03 WORKER'S COMPENSATION AND OTHER EMPLOYEE BENEFITS:
City and Contractor intend and agree that Contractor is an independent contractor
of City and agrees that Contractor and Contractor's employees and agents have no
right to worker's compensation and other employee benefits. If any worker
insurance protection is desired, Contractor agrees to provide worker's
compensation and other employee benefits, where required by law, for
Contractor's employees and agents. Contractor agrees to hold harmless and
indemnify City for any and all claims arising out of any claim for injury,
disability, or death of any Contractor and Contractor's employees or agents.
2.04 INDEMNIFICATION. Contractor hereby agrees to, and shall hold City, it's
elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees, harmless and shall
defend the same from any liability for damage or claims for damage, or suits or
actions at law or in equity which may allegedly arise from Contractor or any of
Contractor's employees or agents' operations under this agreement, whether such
operations be by Contractor or by any one or more persons directly or indirectly
employed by, or act as agent for, Contractor; provided as follows:
a. That the City does not, and shall not, waive any rights against Contractor
which it may have by reason of the aforesaid hold -harmless agreement,
because of the acceptance by City, or the deposit with City by Contractor,
of any of the insurance policies hereinafter described.
b. That the aforesaid hold -harmless agreement by Contractor shall apply to
all damages and claims for damages of every kind suffered, or alleged to
have been suffered, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations of
Contractor or any agent or employee of Contractor regardless of whether
or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable
to any of such damages or claims for damages.
2 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
24
•
•
2.05 INSURANCE. Contractor shall not commence work under this contract until
he/she shall have obtained all insurance required under this section and such
insurance shall have been approved by City as to form, amount and carrier:
a. Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance.
Contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of this contract such
public liability and property damage insurance as shall protect City, its
elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees, and
Contractor and any agents and employees performing work covered by
this contract from claims for damages for personal injury, including death,
as well as from claims for property damage which may arise from
Contractor or any subcontractor's operations under this contract, whether
such operations be by Contractor or by anyone directly or indirectly
employed by Contractor, and the amounts of such insurance shall be as
follows:
(1) Public Liability Insurance.
In an amount not less than $1,000,000 for injuries, including, but
not limited to death, to any one person and, subject to the same
limit for each person, in an amount not less than $500,000 on
account of any one occurrence;
(2) Property Damage Insurance.
In an amount of not less than $500,000 for damage to the property
of each person on account of any one occurrence.
(3) Comprehensive Automobile Liability.
Bodily injury liability coverage of $500,000 for each person in any
one accident and $1,000,000 for injuries sustained by two or more
persons in any one accident. Property damage liability of
$500,000 for each accident.
(4) Worker's Compensation Insurance.
In the amounts required by law as set forth in Section 2.03 above.
b. DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS:
Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to, and approved
by, the City. The City may require that either the insurer reduce or
eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City,
its elected or appointed officials, employees, agents or volunteers; or the
contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of all losses, and
related investigation, claims administration and legal expenses.
3 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
25
C. PROOF OF INSURANCE.
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.
2.06 REMEDY FOR CONTRACTOR'S ERRORS
Contractor agrees to reimburse the City in a period of up to one year for errors that he
creates in either the billing or work process. (See Section 2.07) Upon identification that
an error was made on the contractor's part, the abatement officer shall present the
documentation, which explains the error to the contractor for reimbursement. The
contractor shall provide reimbursement within 7 days of notification by the abatement
officer for his portion of the abatement fee, plus the County fee for billing.
2.07 REFUNDS TO PROPERTY OWNERS
Should any member of the public dispute the charges on their property tax bill and the
contractor is unable to produce photos as proof of the weed abatement done, the
Contractor shall bear the cost of the refund to the property owner.
3.00 OBLIGATIONS OF CITY 0
3.01 COOPERATION: City agrees to comply with all reasonable requests of
Contractor necessary to the performance of Contractor's duties under this
agreement.
3.02 PLACE OF WORK: City agrees to furnish space for use by Contractor while
performing the services described in this agreement only as set forth in "Exhibit
D", hereby incorporated herein. Any work space requirements not set forth in
"Exhibit W shall be the responsibility of Contractor, and Contractor may use
alternate space for performing described services.
4.00 TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
4.01 TERMINATION ON NOTICE: Notwithstanding any other provision of this
agreement, any party hereto may terminate this agreement, at any time, without
cause by giving at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other parties to
this agreement.
4 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
9.1
4.02 TERMINATION OF OCCURRENCE OF STATED EVENTS:
• This agreement shall terminate automatically on the occurrence of any of the
following events:
(1) Bankruptcy or insolvency of any party;
(2) Sale of the business of any party;
(3) Death of any party;
(4) The end of the thirty (30) days as set forth in Section 4.01;
(5) End of the contract to which Contractor's services were necessary; or
(6) Assignment of this agreement by Contractor without the consent of the City.
4.03 TERMINATION BY ANY PARTY FOR DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR:
Should any party default in the performance of this agreement or materially
breach of any of its provisions, a non -breaching party, at their option, may
terminate this agreement, immediately, by giving written notice of termination to
the breaching party.
4.04 TERMINATION: This Agreement shall terminate on June 1, 2008 unless
extended as set forth in this section. The City, with the agreement of Contractor,
is authorized to extend the term of this Agreement beyond the termination date, as
needed, under the same terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Any
such extension shall be in writing and be an amendment to this Agreement. The
condition of this contract is to abate those properties as identified and presented
for City Council action on April 24, 2007 and work is to be completed prior to
is Jnuly 15, 2007. Any subsequent abatable properties discovered after July 15,
2007, will be forwarded to the contractor within the one year contract window.
5.00 SPECIAL PROVISIONS
None
6.00 MISCELLANEOUS
6.01 REMEDIES: The remedies set forth in this agreement shall not be exclusive but
shall be cumulative with, and in addition to, all remedies now or hereafter allowed
by law or equity.
6.02 NO WAIVER: The waiver of any breach by any party of any provision of this
agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent
breach of this agreement.
6.03 ASSIGNMENT: This agreement is specifically not assignable by Contractor to
any person or entity. Any assignment or attempt to assign by Contractor, whether
it be voluntary or involuntary, by operation of law or otherwise, is void and is a
material breach of this agreement giving rise to a right to terminate as set forth in
Section 4.03.
5 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
27
6.04 ATTORNEY FEES: In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute between
the parties hereto, arising out of or related to this agreement, or the breach thereof,
the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to other such relief as may be
granted, to a reasonable sum as and for attorney fees.
6.05 TIME FOR PERFORMANCE: Except as otherwise expressly provided for in
this agreement, should the performance of any act required by this agreement to
be performed by either party be prevented or delayed by reason by any act of
God, strike, lockout, labor trouble, inability to secure materials, or any other cause
except financial inability not the fault of the party required to perform the act, the
time for performance of the act will be extended for a period of time equivalent to
the period of delay and performance of the act during the period of delay will be
excused; provided, however, that nothing contained in this Section shall exclude
the prompt payment by either party as required by this agreement or the
performance of any act rendered difficult or impossible solely because of the
financial condition of the party required to perform the act.
6.06 NOTICES: Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, any and all notices
or other communications required or permitted by this agreement or by law to be
served on or given to any party to this agreement shall be in writing and shall be
deemed duly served and given when personally delivered or in lieu of such
personal service when deposited in the United States mail, first-class postage
prepaid to the following address for each respective party:
PARTY ADDRESS
A. CITY OF ATASCADERO 6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
Attention: Fire Department
B. JACK R. BRIDWELL 11600 Viejo Camino
Atascadero, CA 93422
6.07 GOVERNING LAW: This agreement and all matters relating to this agreement
shall be governed by the laws of the State of California in force at the time any
need for the interpretation of this agreement or any decision or holding
concerning this agreement arises.
6.08 BINDING EFFECT: This agreement shall be binding on and shall insure to the
benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the
parties hereto, but nothing in this Section shall be construed as consent by City
to any assignment of this agreement or any interest in this agreement.
6 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
W:
6.09 SEVERABILITY: Should any provision of this agreement be held by a court of
competent jurisdiction or by a legislative or rulemaking act to be either invalid,
is void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this agreement shall remain in
full force and effect, unimpaired by the holding, legislation or rule.
C�
6.10 SOLE AND ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This agreement constitutes the sole and
entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.
This agreement correctly sets forth the obligations of the parties hereto to each
other as of the date of this agreement. All agreements or representations
respecting the subject matter of this agreement not expressly set forth or referred
to in this agreement are null and void.
6.11 TIME: Time is expressly declared to be of the essence of this agreement.
6.12 DUE AUTHORITY: The parties hereby represent that the individuals executing
this agreement are expressly authorized to do so on and in behalf of the parties.
6.13 CONSTRUCTION: The parties agree that each has had an opportunity to have
their counsel review this agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect
that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting shall not apply in the
interpretation of this agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. The
captions of the sections are for convenience and reference only, and are not
intended to be construed to define or limit the provisions to which they relate.
6.14 AMENDMENTS: Amendments to this agreement shall be in writing and shall
be made only with the mutual written consent of all of the parties to this
agreement.
7 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
e
Executed on
ATTEST:
, at Atascadero, California.
is
MARCIA McCLURE TORGERSON, C.M.C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PATRICK ENRIGHT
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RACHELLE RICKARD
Director of Administrative Services
30
r,
CITY OF ATASCADERO
WADE G. MCKINNEY
City Manager
CONTRACTOR:
JACK R. BRIDWELL
Contractor
WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
•
is
0
•
EXHIBIT A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO BE
PERFORMED BY CONTRACTOR
Contractor agrees to complete the project consisting of destroying vegetative growth
(noxious or dangerous weeds) or other flammable materials found upon or in certain lots and
lands in the City of Atascadero, and the removal of tree branches, refuse and other waste
materials, including clearance of drainage ditches as required by weed abatement regulations.
q WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
31
EXHIBIT B
CONSIDERATION FOR SERVICES
Bid No. 2007-003, as follows:
Mowing large parcels (one acre or more) by tractor with operator, shall be the rate of
$50.00 per 1/2 hour, with the minimum time per job on any parcel or lot to be one-half
hour.
Hand work (weed -eater) on small lots or lots not accessible with a tractor, the cost shall
be $75.00 per 1/2 hour (entire 4 -person crew), with the minimum time per job on any
parcel or lot to be one-half hour.
Hauling of debris from parcels to the landfill, the cost shall be as follows:
PUBLIC RATES — CHICAGO GRADE LANDFILL
Hauling: Removal of debris from parcel to landfill
CONTAINER TYPES
RATE
SMALL TO MEDIUM LOAD
$20
Less than 1.7 cubicyards)
30 Gallon Trash Bag(s)
0-55 Gallon Trash Can(s)
Small Pickup with Tool Box
Partial Pickup Load
Kort bed and Small Pickup
Long bed Pickup with Tool Box
Long bed Less Than Full
Trailer Up to 7' Lon
LARGE LOAD
$30
1.7 to 2.8 Cubic Yards)
Long bed Pickup
Flatbed Pickup
Flatbed or Trailer Longer than 8'
LOADS OVER 2.8 CUBIC YARDS
$45
Or over 10,000 pounds
(gross vehicle weight) are weighed
RECYCLING CHARGES
Common household recycling items
FREE
Green Waste/Wood Waste
$20/load up to $45/ton
Appliance with Freon
$15
Appliance without Freon
$20fload up to $45/load
Mattress/Couch
$15 per mattress or $20/set up
to $45/ton
elevision or Computer Monitor
FREE / $20.00
NTRACTOR BID
45.00
No
45.00
40.00
50.00
35.00
40.00
10 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
32
•
•
•
r�
L -1i
•
TIRES
RATE PER TON
Passenger Car Tire
$1.50
Passenger Car Tire (on rim)
$4.00
Truck Tire (under 24.00 x 24)
$7.00
Truck Tire (on rim)
$10.00
ruck Tire (over 24.00 x 24)
SEE OFFICE
COMMERCIAL RATES
COMMERCIAL LOADS ARE
RATE PER TON
CLASSIFIED AS ANY LOAD OVER
:]
ONE TON
OMMERCIAL
$45.00
• Uncompacted
FRANLCHISED HAULER
$45.00
• Uncom acted
FRANCHISED HAULER
$39.90
• Compacted
IRES
$60.00
• State Tire Hauler Permit required to haul
more than 7 tires
4.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
Chicago Grade Landfill Fees - 77te contractor pays these.fees upon the delivery of each load.
The City reimburses these costs when the original receipt is attached to the corresponding parcel worksheet.
Chicago Grade Landfill Fees
These fees are paid by the contractor at the delivery of each load, and will be reimbursed from
the appropriate receipts, attached to the corresponding parcel worksheet.
Photos:
The contractor must provide photos of each lot before and after work is complete. While using a
digital camera he/she is to take a picture of each lot he/she cleans before and after the work is
completed. The digital pictures must be placed on a CD (disc) and submitted to the City. This
disk must meet city requirements and be compatible with their computer software. The file name
for each digital picture must be the property's APN number indicating a `B' for "before" and an
"A" for "after".
The photos are to include items to be removed, such as: weeds, refuse, appliances, or any other
abatable material, as directed in the contractor's work order. Before and after photos shall be
taken from the exact place and direction, so as to include significant and identifiable
landmarks, and to confirm location. All photos must be identified by parcel number, with
an easel or dry erase board in the photo with the appropriate Assessor Parcel Number
(APN) indicated. The APN indicated on the board must be clearly visible for payment. As a
bidder and proof of work performed, you are responsible for all costs incurred to generate the
required photos. Pictures must be identified with the APN number followed by an "a" for after
shot and "b" for before shot (example APN #----000-000a & APN #000-000-000b), organized by
pairs and submitted on a CD.
11 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
33
Payment: 0
Calculated worksheets are to be submitted to the Fire Department Administrative Assistant by
fiscal year: one for all work completed during the 2006-2007 fiscal year (June 2 — 30), and
another for 2007-2008 fiscal year (July 1 — 14). The due dates of the calculated worksheets are
time sensitive as listed below and must be adhered to:
2006-2007 (June 2 - 30)--------------- Due: July 1, 2007
2007-2008 (July 1 —15)---------------- Due: Aug 1, 2007
Year-round abatements are paid by calculated worksheet and invoice.
Assurance:
The contractor will hold the City harmless from any failure or inability to prove that the work
was completed. The contractor will hold the City harmless from any errors or omissions of the
contractor, even where those errors or omissions are discovered past the date of payment for
work performed.
Safety:
Safety equipment to be provided as required by the City of Atascadero Fire Department. Each
towing and/or crew vehicle must have installed, on board, one 2A10BC fire extinguisher and two
round -point shovels. Each tractor must have installed, on board, one 2 1/2 gallon water
extinguisher and one 2A10BC fire extinguisher. Prior to beginning work, the contractor must
schedule an inspection of all equipment with the weed abatement officer at fire station one. Each
tractor and weed eater must have spark arrestors, and be inspected for continuity.
12 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
34
•
U
1) Map books
Work orders
3) Street marking
•
•
EXHIBIT C
TOOLS AND INSTRUMENTALITIES
PROVIDED BY CITY
13 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
35
EXHIBIT D
PLACE OF WORK
14 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES 2007-2008
CO.,
11
ITEM NUMBER: A - 3
DATE: 05/08/07
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
Colony Park Frontage Improvements Award
(City Bid No. 2007-002)
(The proposed project will include curb, gutter, sidewalks and street lights along
Traffic Way, from O/meda Avenue to the eastern boundary of Colony Park.)
RECOMMENDATION:
Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Union Asphalt in the
amount of $ 161,437.30 for construction of the frontage improvements for the new
Colony Park Community Center.
DISCUSSION:
Background: On March 13, 2007, the City Council authorized the Administrative
Services Director to allocate Redevelopment Agency funds to supplement previously
allocated Community Development Block Grant funds for the construction of required
frontage improvements for the new Colony Park Community Center. Currently, there
are no sidewalks or streetlights along the section of Traffic Way from Olmeda Avenue to
the eastern boundary of Colony Park. The route is a heavily traveled pedestrian
corridor, with pedestrian traffic increasing following the opening of the Colony Park
Community Center. The Colony Park Community Center project conditions require
these planned frontage improvements. The proposed project will include curb, gutter,
sidewalks and street lights along this section of Traffic Way.
Analysis: The project was advertised from March 23, 2007 through Monday, April 23,
2007. A total of eight (8) bids were received for this project. The bids were reviewed for
accuracy and compliance with the City of Atascadero bidding requirements. Union
Asphalt is the apparent, qualified low -bidder at $ 161,437.30.
Conclusion: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to
execute a contract with Union Asphalt in the amount of $ 161,437.30 for construction of
the frontage improvements for the new Colony Park Community Center.
37
ITEM NUMBER: A - 3
DATE: 05/08/07
FISCAL IMPACT:
EXPENDITURES
Design
$10,000
Construction (Engineers Estimate
$162,000
inspection / Testing / Construction Administration
$8,100
Contingency
$32,400
Total Estimated Expenditure:
$212,500
ALTERNATIVES:
Approve the staff recommendations as stated in the Staff Report.
2. Do not award the contract. Direct staff to redesign and re -bid the project.
ATTACHMENTS:
Bid Summary
•
0
0
10
City of Atascadero
Office of the City Clerk
BID SUMMARY
TO: Public Works Department
FROM: Marcia McClure Togerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
BID NO.: 2007-002
OPENED: Monday, April 23, 2007
PROJECT: Traffic Way Sidewalk Project
Eight (8) bids were received and opened today, as follows:
Bidder Total Bid Price
1. Union Asphalt $ 161,437.30
1625 E. Donovan Road
P.O. Box 1280
Santa Maria, CA 93458
2. Wysong Construction
201,382.00
8720 El Camino Real, #B
Atascadero, CA 93422
3. Granite Construction
193,461.00
585 W. Beach Street
Watsonville, CA 95076
4. Souza Engineering Contracting, Inc.
213,468.50
d.b.a. Souza Construction, Inc.
P.O. Box 3810
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-3810
5. R. Burke Corporation
239,881.30
P.O. Box 957
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406-0957
W
Bid No. 2007-002
City of Atascadero
Page 2
6. Brinar Construction, Inc. 248,724.87
156 Casa Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
7. V. Lopez, Jr., and Sons 239,549.00
General Engineering Contractors
200 E. Fesler, #203
Santa Maria, CA 93454
8. G. Sosa Construction, Inc. 199,131.25
2880 Santa Maria Way, Ste. D3
Santa Maria, CA 93455
.E
•
•
•
i�
•
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
ITEM NUMBER: A - 4
DATE: 05/08/07
Final Map 2006-0143 (Tract 2814)
5900 Madera Lane (TTM 2005-0079)
(Eddings)
(Creates four airspace units on a 0.5 acre common lot.)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council:
1. Adopt and approve Final Map 2006-0143 (Tract 2814); and
2. Authorize and direct City Clerk to endorse the City Council's approval on the
Final Map.
DISCUSSION:
Tentative Tract Map 2005-0079/Tract 2681 was approved by the City Council on June
20, 2006. Final Map 2006-0143 creates four airspace units on a 0.5 acre common lot.
Staff has determined that Final Map 2006-0143 is consistent with approved Tentative
Tract Map 2005-0079. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66440 the
approving legislative body (City Council) cannot deny a final
an approved tentative map. The applicant is not making any
City.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Final Map 2006-0143 (Tract 2814) Sheet 2
map that is consistent with
offers of dedication to the
41
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE:
Exhibit A
Final Map 2006-0143 (Tract 2814)
5900 Madera Lane
Royce Eddings
42
A-4
05/08/07
�
9��'A�dy
�$��
C
ti•�q
SA
V
It
�R
pjz
�bF
"w` Sia
A-4
05/08/07
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE:
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report — City Manager's Office
A-5
05/08/07
Parking & Business Improvement Area (PBIA) Assessment
(The annual PBIA assessment is imposed on downtown businesses
for improvements in the downtown.)
RECOMMENDATION:
Council adopt the Draft Resolution of Intention, declaring intent to levy annual
Downtown Parking & Business Improvement Area assessment, and set a public
hearing for June 12, 2007.
DISCUSSION:
Background: The City of Atascadero established a Downtown Parking and Business
Improvement Area in 1986 (Chapter 11 of the Atascadero Municipal Code) for the
purpose of acquisition, construction or maintenance of parking facilities, decoration of
public places, promotion of public events, and general promotion of business activities
in the downtown area. The formation and operation of a Business Improvement Area
is governed by the California Streets & Highways Code (Section 36500 et. Seq.)
Historically, the budget for the Business Improvement Area is submitted in conjunction
with the City's annual budget. An annual draft Resolution of Intention declaration of
intent to levy annual Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment
and holding a public hearing is required by the California Streets & Highways Code for
the City to continue to levy and collect the assessment.
Analysis: The Streets & Highways Code requires that the "advisory board" provide a
report to the City Council annually for the expenditure of funds derived from the
assessment paid by businesses in the downtown area. The Business Improvement
Association Board of Directors was dissolved in 2001 and Main Street's Board of
Directors has taken its place. The report identifies the proposed improvements and
activities for the area, based upon the National Main Street Program's four -point
approach. The report does not propose any changes to the area or of the assessment.
The Atascadero Main Street Board of Directors are proposing expenditures for 2007-08
with the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area funds as follows:
W
ITEM NUMBER: A - 5
DATE: 05/08/07
BIA Funds requested for 2007- 2008 $10,500
Carry over from 2007-2008 $ 0
Total Proposed Funding Available $10,500
2007-2008 Proposed Exaenditures:
Signage & Banners
$
500
Membership Directory
$
1,500
Fast Fapade Augmentation
$
1,500
Art Coordination
$
1,000
Winter Wonderland
$
5,000
Sweetheart Stroll
1,000
Total Proposed Expenditures for 2007- 08
$10,500
Fund Residual
$
0
Consistent with State law, the City Council is required to adopt a Draft Resolution of
Intention and set a public hearing to receive public comment prior to the assessment
being collected. Staff is proposing that the hearing be conducted at the next regular
meeting scheduled for June 12, 2007.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City receives approximately $10,500 annually from the Downtown Parking and
Business Improvement Area assessments.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The City Council may set an alternative date for the public hearing, but no later than
June 30, 2007.
2. The City Council may choose not to adopt the Resolution of Intention to levy
assessment, thereby discontinuing the collection of Downtown Parking and
Business Improvement Area assessments.
Alternative 2 is not recommended because the Downtown Parking and Business
Improvement Area assessment revenue provides funding to Atascadero Main Street to
effectuate downtown revitalization activities and programs.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area Report and Proposed
Expenditures for 2007-2008
2. Draft Resolution of Intention
Atascadero Main Street
Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area
Annual Report for Fiscal -Year 2007/2008
The California Streets and Highways Code Section 36533 requires the preparation of a
report for each fiscal year for which assessments are to be levied and collected to pay the
costs of improvements and activities of the Improvement Area. The report may propose
changes, including, but not limited to the boundaries of the parking and business
improvement area or any benefit zones within the area, the basis and method of levying
the assessments, and any changes in the classification of businesses. There are no
boundary changes proposed. The boundaries are more specifically described as follows:
From the South corner of Morro Road at the Highway 101 over -crossing
then in the generally northwest direction immediately adjacent to
Highway 101, to a point, at the intersection of El Camino Real and
Rosario Avenue, then easterly along Rosario Avenue, to a point at the
intersection of Rosario and Palma Avenue, then easterly along Palma
Avenue to the rear lot line of parcels on the east side of Traffic Way,
then north along said rear lot lines to include Lot 24 of Block LA, of
Atascadero, then northerly along the center line of Traffic Way, to a
point, then easterly to include the presently existing National Guard
Armory Property. Then to a point easterly to the intersection of West
Mall and Santa Ysabel Avenue at the West Mall bridge, then southerly
along Santa Ysabel Avenue to a point at the intersection of the southerly
leg of Hospital Drive and Santa Ysabel Avenue, then easterly from that
point to the extension of proposed Highway 41, then southwesterly to
the Morro Road/Highway 101 over -crossing, point of beginning.
The Atascadero Main Street organization is the advisory body and sub -contractor to the
City regarding the downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area. Since 2000, the
City, Community Redevelopment Agency, Main Street and the community have worked
to strengthen the downtown business community, increase the capacity of the Main Street
organization and implement the downtown revitalization strategy. Each licensed
business in the Improvement Area shall contribute to the assessment. Activities and
improvements in the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area are funded by
the assessment.
1
45
The proposed work plan and budget for fiscal year 2007-2008 is as follows:
BIA Funds requested for 2007- 2008 $10,500
Carry over from 2006-2007 $ 0
Total Proposed Funding Available $10,500
2007-2008 Proposed Expenditures:
Signage & Banners
$
500
Membership Directory
$
1,500
Fast Fagade Augmentation
$
1,500
Art Coordination
$
1,000
Winter Wonderland
$
5,000
Sweetheart Stroll
1,000
Total Proposed Expenditures for 2007- 08
$10,500
Fund Residual
$
0
This report shall be filed with the City Clerk on behalf of the Downtown Parking and
Business Improvement area for fiscal year 2007-2008
L ---j
161
DRAFT RESOLUTION
• A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENT TO LEVY AN
ANNUAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO STREETS & HIGHWAYS
CODE SECTION 36500 ET. SEQ.
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has formed a Parking and Business Improvement
Area, pursuant to Section 36500 of the Streets & Highway Code of the State of California; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has received a report pursuant to Section 36533 of said
code; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved such report and is required to adopt a
resolution of intention pursuant to Section 36534; and,
WHEREAS, the report proposes no changes to the boundaries or assessment amounts
that are currently applies in said area; and,
WHEREAS, the report identifies the proposed improvements and activities for the area
based upon the National Main Street Program four point approach. Such report is on file and
• available for inspection at the office of the City Clerk.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council herby declares its intent to levy and collect assessments
within the Parking and Business Improvement Area for fiscal year 2007-2008.
Section 2. The area is known as the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement
Area. The area is generally located in the downtown core including the area between Highway
41 on the south, Rosario on the north, Highway 101 on the west, and an irregular boundary
generally along Santa Ysabel on the east.
Section 3. The City Ordinance, consistent with Section 36527 of the Streets and
Highways Code proposes the following uses of Area revenue:
a. The acquisition, construction, or maintenance of parking facilities for the
benefit of the area.
b. Decoration of public place in the area.
c. Promotion of public events that are to take place on or in public places in the
area.
d. The general promotion of business activities in the area.
•
47
Section 4. A report is on file in the office of the City Clerk, which includes a full and
detailed description of the improvements and activities to be provided in the fiscal year 2007-
2008, the boundaries of the area, and the proposed assessments to be levied upon the businesses 40
within the area for fiscal year 2007-2008.
Section 5. The City Council will hold a public hearing on the levy of the proposed
assessment for fiscal year 2007-2008 on June 12, 2007 at 7:00 p.m., or sometime shortly
thereafter, in the City Council Chambers.
Section 6. Written or oral protests may be made at the hearing. The form of the protests
shall comply with Sections 36524 and 36524 of the Streets and Highways Code.
Section 7. The City Clerk is hereby directed to give notice of the public hearing by
causing this resolution to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the city not
less than seven days before said hearing.
On motion by Council Member , and seconded by
Council Member the foregoing Resolution is hereby
adopted by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Dr. George Luna, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
LOW
59
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
•
r�
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
A tascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Development Department
General Plan Text Amendment and
Title 9 Planning and Zoning Text Amendment
GPA 2006-0017 / ZCH 2006-0125 / PLN 2006-1139
(City of Atascadero)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Planning Commission Recommends on a 3-3 vote:
1. The City Council adopt Draft Resolution A denying General Plan Amendment
2006-0017 and the associated environmental document and Zoning Text
Amendment.
If Council chooses to adopt the proposed Creek Ordinance and General Plan
Amendment, the following are provided:
1. Draft Resolution B certifying Proposed Negative Declaration 2006-0039; and,
2. Draft Resolution C approving General Plan Amendment 2006-0017 (PLN 2006-
1139) based on findings; and,
3. Draft Ordinance A to introduce an Ordinance for first reading, by title only,
approving Zone Change 2006-0125 (PLN 2006-1139) based on findings.
Staff is recommending the following exceptions be added to the proposed Zoning
Ordinance if approved:
1. Allow the rebuilding of completely destroyed structures in the setback.
2. Clarification of process for additions to structures within setbacks.
3. Exceptions for narrow lots and Downtown lots.
4. Clarification of "significant drainage courses."
5. Exception for culvert piping in significant drainage courses for driveway
40 crossings.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
Staff recommends that the following text be added to the Exhibit C of the proposed draft
Ordinance A to approve these exceptions:
(e) Exceptions.
(3) Structures shall be allowed to be rebuilt in the location originally permitted, even if
the structure is 100% destroyed and located within a creek setback area. The area of
disturbance within the setback shall not be increased.
(4) Additions to non -conforming structures shall be allowed, provided that the addition is
located outside the creek setback. Additions proposed within the creek setback area shall
be required to obtain a Minor Conditional Use Permit along with biologist,
hydrogeomorphologist, and Geological Phase 1 reports.
(5) Shallow lots that are less than 125 -feet in depth may reduce the front setback to 15 -
feet and the rear creek setback to 20 -feet.
(6) Culvert piping may be placed in significant drainage courses for the purposes of
roads and driveways crossings, provided the pipe does not exceed 30 -feet in length.
Significant Drainage Course. 0
Natural creeks or topographic low points, tributary to blueline streams, creeks, or rivers.
Significant drainage course contain a well defined channel or riparian vegetation,
REPORT -IN -BRIEF:
The project consist of a proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Ordinance text
change to the setbacks along creek reservations, blueline creeks, the Salinas River,
jurisdictional wetlands, and other significant drainage courses. The proposed
Ordinance serves a dual purpose of ensuring the uninterrupted natural flow of the
streams and protection of the riparian ecosystem, as well protecting the public health
and safety by minimizing the exposure of structures to creek bank failure and flooding.
The proposed ordinance has been developed to implement Policy 8.2 of the 2002
General Plan (page II -33). The proposed changes consist of text amendments to
portions of the Land Use, Open Space, and Conservation Element of the General Plan,
and portions of Title 9, the Planning and Zoning Ordinance of the Atascadero Municipal
Code.
Situation and Facts
1. Applicant: City of Atascadero is
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
2. General Plan Designation:Y Citywide
3. Zoning District: Citywide
4. Environmental Status: Initial Study and Proposed Negative
Declaration #2006-0039
Planning Commission Recommendation:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this project on April 3, 2007. The
Planning Commission voted 3-3 on a motion to recommend the amendments to City
Council, Since a 3-3 vote did not garner a majority vote, the Planning Commission's
vote, therefore, reflects a recommendation for denial.
The proposed amendments were discussed by the Commissioners following a very
lengthy public testimony. (Refer to Planning Commission Minutes, April 3, 2007, see
Attachment 1 of this report; audio files also available at www.atascadero.org.)
Commissioners O'Keefe, O'Grady, and Marks voted to recommend the amendments as
proposed. Commissioner Slane stated that he doesn't agree with the 35 -foot setbacks
and does not think the Salinas River should be included. He stated that he would
41 consider a positive recommendation for a 20 -foot setback, but felt that 35 -feet was too
large. Vice Chairperson Fonzi recommended that this go back to staff to have it
reworked. She stated there should be more discussion on whether the setback is
measured from the creek reservation or high water mark. Philosophically, she stated
she has a problem with the Ordinance in general. Jurisdictional wetlands must be
identified and put before the public, and "significant drainage courses" must be clarified.
Commissioner Jack stated that he thought a 35 -foot setback was too much and a 20 -
foot setback was all he could support. Commissioner Jack was unsure why the Salinas
River setback needs 50 feet rather than 20 or 35.
Commissioner Heatherington abstained from voting on the item due to her previous
employment as the executive director of ECOSLO. The City Attorney determined that
there was no conflict of interest for the Commissioner under the Political Reform Act
since it had been over twelve months since she was employed by ECOSLO, and she is
no longer a member of the organization. Commission Heatherington, however, chose
to abstain from voting on the item to avoid any appearance of impartiality.
Setbacks and Easements:
During the public review process and public comment at Planning Commission, some
questions have been raised. One main point of confusion appears to be the difference
between setbacks and easements. The difference between the two is summarized as
follows:
0
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
Setback:
• An open area on a lot between a building and a property line unoccupied and
unobstructed from the ground upward.
• Example: Front setback, rear setback, side setback, setbacks between
structures.
• Setbacks do not have any affect on lot line location or lot sizes, and do not
allow public or private access or use within the setback area.
• Setbacks regulate building permits.
Easement:
• An area which allows the use of land by another party, either for public use,
private access roads, or utility locations. Easements are recorded with the
county on an individual property basis, and are not a standard Citywide
development standard like a building setback would be.
No easements are being proposed with this Ordinance. The proposed creek setbacks
would be for creek protection and would aide in building permit review by ensuring the
safe placement of structures. No public access could be legally allowed within the
setback areas.
Trail Systems
There is public concern that the setbacks will give public access to properties through a •
future trail system. Atascadero is in the process of designing and constructing a trail
system along portions of Atascadero Creek on public property. This project is already
underway and is not related to the Creek Setback Ordinance. A trail system is
proposed from the Salinas River, following Atascadero Creek, leading to the Lake Park,
and then continuing down Highway 41 West. The trails have been designed to be
located on City -owned creek reservations and public right-of-ways. The trails are
designed to follow the creeks where possible, however many areas of Atascadero
Creek are not physically suitable for a trail or are not owned by the City, so in those
areas the trail will be installed along the road in the public right-of-way.
Significant Drainage Courses
The proposed Creek Setback Ordinance has been written to include a 20 -foot setback
from any "significant drainage courses." Significant drainage courses are creeks that
were not mapped by USGS as "blueline creeks" after World War II (see picture below).
Often these creeks have the same characteristics as blueline creeks and are subject to
regulation by Department of Fish and Game, the Water Quality Board, and Army Corps
of Engineers. There are concerns that the term "significant drainage course" is not
specific enough. Staff is recommending that the following definition be added;
"significant drainage courses are natural creeks or topographic low points, tributary to 0
•
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
blueline streams creeks or rivers. Significant drainage course contain a well defined
9 9
channel or riparian vegetation."
Staff has included these drainage courses under the Creek Setback Ordinance because
of the importance of these creeks for water quality and habitat protection. If significant
drainage courses are not listed in the Setback Ordinance, protection of these types of
creeks would be more difficult. Construction around these drainage courses would still
require evaluation and permits by the agencies listed above; the applicant would work
directly with the agencies to obtain permits.
Example of a "significant drainage course" that would be protected under the ordinance.
Biologists and Hydrogeomorphologists
Some questions have been raised about qualifications of the biologist or
hydrogeomorphologist required to write the reports for creek setback exceptions. The
proposed Ordinance requires reports from a "qualified biologist" and a "professional
• engineer or geologist qualified in hydrogeomorphology" in order to build within the creek
setback area. Hydrogeomorphology, also referred to as fluvial -geomorphology, is a
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 40
specialization in the study of the physical appearance and operational charter of a
waterway as it adjusts its boundaries to the magnitude of stream flow and erosional
debris produced within the attendant watershed. Specific licensing is not required for
biologists or the specific hydrogeomorphology specialization.
Determination of Setback
The Watershed Action Plan report has given staff a good basis of information to
determine necessary setbacks. In addition, the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) states that creek setbacks of 32-65 feet are necessary to ensure creek
protection and water quality (see following letter). The RWQCB is supportive of the
proposed 35 -foot creek setback as a minimum standard and thinks that a 20 -foot
setback is inadequate. For these reasons, a 35 -foot setback has been proposed along
Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek as these are the major watershed
areas within the City. Staff has proposed a 20 -foot setback on smaller waterways such
as blueline creeks, significant drainage courses, and wetlands. A 50 -foot setback is
proposed on the Salinas River due to the fact that this is a major regional river. The
Salinas River has a history of significant creek bank failure and movement of the
watercourse. Staff has compared Creek Setback Ordinances from other cities and
jurisdictions in determining the proposed setbacks. Other agency's setbacks vary
anywhere from 20 to 100 feet depending on the watercourse and jurisdiction. Examples
of other city's setbacks are listed as case studies and precedents in Attachment 11. •
Additional Use Restrictions within the Setback
Some members of the public have brought up concerns that the Ordinance could
actually do more to protect the creeks. It has been suggested that the Ordinance
should also include restriction on the proximity of farm animal corals and grazing next to
creeks. Herbicides such as Round -Up have also been questioned as a possible
detriment to the heath of creeks and the quality of the water. Staff has not included
restrictions on these items in the proposed Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance enables
staff to enforce setbacks for new construction, however, farm animal grazing and use of
chemicals are very difficult to monitor and enforce since permits are not required for
these temporary uses. If City Council sees fit, these items may be added to the list of
non -permitted used in the Zoning Ordinance (see public comments in Attachment 6.)
Refer to Attachment 2 for addition responses to Public Comments as discussed by City
Attorney, Patrick Enright.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
DISCUSSION:
Project Description
The project consists of an Amendment to General Plan Policy 8.2 in the Land Use,
Open Space, and Conservation Element of the General Plan. The Creek Setback
Ordinance is proposed to be included in Chapter 4, Site Development Standards of Title
9, Planning and Zoning Ordinance, of the Atascadero Municipal Code. Following the
current General Plan Policy 8.2, revisions to the General Plan are proposed which
would replace the interim creek setbacks. The updates are intended to establish a 35 -
foot setback along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek reservations, a
50 -foot setback along the Salinas River, and a 20 -foot setback along all other blueline
creeks, jurisdictional wetlands, and significant drainage courses. The Planning
Commission would be able to approve exceptions to the creek setbacks in the form of a
Minor Conditional Use Permit with a biologist, a hydrogeomorphologist report, and an
Archeological Phase 1 study if the project can meet the required findings. The purpose
of the studies is to demonstrate that the creek and surrounding habitat will not be
significantly affected by the development, and that the creek bank is stable enough to
withstand the proposed improvements.
• Background: History of Creek Setbacks in Atascadero
Creek setbacks were originally identified by EG Lewis. Creek reservation parcels were
established with the City's Colony maps in 1913 and are still in place today. Creek
reservation parcels are non -buildable parcels, with separate APN numbers, located over
Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek.
In addition to the reservations, EG Lewis established a 50 -foot setback, measured from
the bank of all streams, and a one -acre buffer around all springs. EG Lewis discusses
the importance of the streams, springs, and natural habitat in the 1916 and 1923 bulletin
reports which were distributed to inform people of the goals of the Colony (See
Attachment 3, courtesy of the Atascadero Historical Society.)
The 50 -foot setback along creeks and streams was in place through the 1960's and
1970's. A 50 -foot setback on creeks and the Salinas River is identified in the 1980
General Plan which was adopted in March of 1980, just after the City incorporated:
"Building set -back requirements shall be established along the banks of both
creeks to insure the uninterrupted natural flow of the streams. Access to and
recreational use of the creeks shall be assured by establishing building setbacks of not
less than 50 feet from the bank of the creek." (pages 83-85, 1980 Atascadero General
Plan, see Attachment 4.)
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
In 1983, the City Council passed a General Plan amendment which removed the 50 -foot
setback from creeks. During the 1992 General Plan update creek setbacks were
debated again but were not included in the update. No creek setbacks were in place
from 1983 up until the 2002 General Plan update. In July 2002, the City of Atascadero
adopted the 2025 General Plan. The General Plan identified watershed protection as a
high priority (see following General Plan section). During the General Plan update, an
interim 20 -foot setback was created along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and all
other 7.5 minute series USGS quadrangle blueline creeks in order to prevent
development from encroaching on the riparian areas and flood ways. An exception
process with a Conditional Use Permit was included to relieve hardships for parcels
where a 20 -foot setback would sufficiently protect the waterway and surrounding
habitat.
•
•
ITEM NUMBER
0 DATE:
2002 General Plan Watershed Protection Goal and Policies:
B-1
05/08/07
Goal LOC 8. Watershed areas of Atascadero shall be protected.
Policy 8.1: Ensure that development along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creeks, the Salinas
River, blue line creeks, natural springs, lakes or other riparian areas does not
interrupt natural flows or adversely impact riparian ecosystems and water quality.
Programs:
1.
Work with other agencies to implement the Erosion Control Assistance Program for
review of development proposals to minimize sedimentation of creeks and the
Salinas River.
2.
Update the Appearance Review Manual to include provisions for preserving,
reclaiming and incorporating riparian features in conjunction with new development.
3.
The waterways in the City shall be maintained in a natural state and concrete
channelization creeks shall be prohibited.
4.
The City shall strongly discourage underground piping, and unnecessary disturbance
of creeks and streams, and encourage use of bridges and arched culverts. Any
.
alterations required for public safety will be guided by this policy.
5.
Allow flood protection measures (such as selective brush cleaning), low -impact trail
development, streambed maintenance and bank protection, along streams where
appropriate and with necessary permits.
6.
Prohibit new structures or disturbance of riparian habitat along creek banks except
for restoration purposes.
7.
Maintain a current GIS -based map of the riparian areas within Atascadero.
8.
Prior to permit approval, refer projects along blue -line creeks to the Corps of
Engineers, Department of Fish and Game, Regional Water Quality Control, and
Upper Salinas -Las Tablas Resource Conservation District.
9.
Creek reservations and the Salinas River shall be preserved for open space and
recreational use, with appropriate areas left in their natural state for public enjoyment
and habitat purposes. Any recreational use of the River and creeks shall minimize its
impact on the habitat value and open space qualities of the creeks.
Final Plan
0
Page II -33
June 25, 2002
ITEM NUMBER: B-1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
Ci by of A tascadero
General Plan Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Element
10. Land disturbance shall be minimized in proximity to watercourses including
necessary flood protection measures, such as selective brush clearing, and low -
impact trail development.
11. Areas subject to flooding, as identified through flood hazard overlay zoning and flood
maps, shall be protected from unsound development consistent with the City's flood
hazard ordinance requirements.
12. Wellhead and Aquifer Recharge Area Protection Zones
The City shall adopt and maintain an ordinance that identifies existing and potential
well sites and aquifer recharge areas including sufficient buffers to protect them from
contamination. The ordinance shall define restricted and prohibited land uses within
the wellhead/recharge protection zones and provide for the review and approval by
both the City and the Atascadero Mutual Water Company of any project or
development within the specified zones. The ordinance will establish a policy to
provide for the monitoring of activities within these protection zones.
13. Support the establishment and protection of floodable terraces, wetlands and
revegetation along creeks and streams.
Policy 8.2: Establish and maintain setbacks and development standards for creekside •
development.
Program:
1. Adopt and maintain a creek setback ordinance that will establish building setbacks
and development standards along the banks of Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek,
blueline creeks and the Salinas River to ensure the uninterrupted natural flow of the
streams and protection of the riparian ecosystem with flexible standards for the
downtown area.
Responsibility: CDD, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Adopt Ordinance in 2003.
2. Prior to adoption of a creek setback ordinance an interim 20 -foot creek setback shall
be in effect along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek and all other 7.5 min USGS
quadrangle blueline creeks as follows:
a) On Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek setbacks shall be measured from the
edge of the creek reservation.
b) All other bluelinp creek setbacks shall be measured from ordinary high water
mark.
c) The Planning Commission may approve exceptions to the interim creek setbacks
in the form of a Conditional Use Permit if the finding can be made that creeks,
riparian areas and site improvement will not be negatively impacted by the •
exception.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
Following adoption of the General Plan, the Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo
(ECOSLO) filed a lawsuit against the City regarding the 20 -foot creek setback.
Following a period of negotiations, a settlement agreement was entered into between
ECOSLO and the City of Atascadero to settle the lawsuit. One of the actions that the
City agreed to included amending LOC Policy 8.2.2. of the Land Use Element of the
General Plan, changing the interim creek setback on Atascadero Creek and Graves
Creek from 20 feet to 35 feet (refer to Attachment 5.) The 35 -foot interim setback was
adopted on March 9, 2004 with a sunset date of March 1, 2005. A six month extension
to September 2005 was approved by the City Council. After September 2005 the
setback reverted to 20 -feet.
Both the original 2002 General Plan Policy 8.2. and the 2004 amended General Plan
Policy 8.2 state that the City will replace the interim setbacks with a new adopted creek
setback ordinance. LOC Policy 8.2. of the General Plan states: "Adopt and maintain a
creek setback ordinance that will establish building setbacks and development
standards along the banks of Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, blueline creeks, and the
Salinas River to ensure the uninterrupted flow of the streams and protection of the
riparian ecosystem with flexible standards for the downtown area." The policy states
that it is the responsibility of the Community Development Department, the Planning
Commission, and the City Council to meet the requirements of this Policy Program
(page II -33, 2025 General Plan.) The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning
Ordinance text change has been developed to meet this General Plan Policy.
Watershed Protection and Action Plan
In 2004, a Watershed Action Plan report was prepared for the State Water Resources
Control Board. The plan is a comprehensive planning document for use by landowners,
agencies, and groups in their individual efforts to improve and restore natural resources
within the 2,000 square mile area of the Upper Salinas River Watershed. The Salinas
River and Atascadero Creek were studied in detail. The primary objectives of the
Watershed Action Plan are to improve water quality, ensure adequate water resources,
foster the future well being of agriculture, reduce the loss of soil, and enhance habitat
conditions. The planning area includes all of the rivers, streams, and arroyos as well as
upland areas from which water flows into the river and its tributaries. While most of the
area is comprised of agricultural use, Atascadero is one of the urban areas identified
within the watershed.
The Watershed Action Plan explains the importance of our watershed and the erosion
and channel conditions specific to both the rural and urban areas of Atascadero Creek.
Additional maps and text are included in Attachment 7 of this report; a complete
Watershed Action Plan is available at City Hall for review.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
Native Tree Inventory Report
In January of 2006, a Native Tree and Biological GIS Mapping Inventory was prepared
for the City of Atascadero. The report identified native tree inventory and
recommendations to aid the City in protecting woodland species, heritage trees,
ecological diversity, and high value habitat.
A Habitat Suitability Index identified wildlife corridors for specific species of interest.
The woodland and riparian areas west of EI Camino Real (where Atascadero Creek,
Graves Creek, and the many blueline tributaries are primarily located) were identified as
Atascadero's primary habitat area with good and very good habitat suitability.
The report also included recommendations for riparian corridors:
Riparian corridors. These corridors, especially in perennially wet areas and
seeps, are biodiverse, provide rare and endangered habitat and biodiversity.
Protection buffers for streamside conservation areas should be maximized
where possible.
The Habitat Suitability Index diagram and additional recommendations from the Native
Tree Inventory Report are shown in Attachment 8. is
Creek Bank Erosion Examples
Creek bank erosion has been demonstrated to be a serious local safety concern when
building too close to creek banks. The bowling alley between Capistrano and EI
Camino Real, now the new City Hall, required a major overhaul to stabilize the quickly
eroding creek bank. Years of creek flow had eroded the soil right out from under the
building, causing a hazard for the back corner of City Hall (see pictures below.) The
restoration project was lengthy and expensive and included relocating a portion of
gravel bar, keying in large rocks, construction of a concrete wall, and replanting the
creek bank with native willows and other bank vegetation. According to the Upper
Salinas Action Watershed Plan, the structure, having been built so close to the bank, is
another probable source of sediment impacting Atascadero Creek.
The purpose of requiring additional biologist and hydrogeomorphologist reports for
reduced setbacks is to ensure that future structures will be built on stable ground
around the creeks.
0
•
•
•
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
Atascadero Creek behind City Hall: prior to stabilization project
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
•
•
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
Analysis
1. General Plan Amendment:
The proposed text changes consist of an Amendment to LOC Policy 8.2. and Programs
8.2.1 and 8.2.2. of the Land Use, Open Space, and Conservation Element of the
General Plan. The proposed Amendment would remove the sunset date from the 35 -
foot setback, thereby replacing the interim setback with a permanent setback.
The setbacks on Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek are proposed to be 35 -feet,
measured from the creek reservation. A 35 -foot setback is also being proposed along
Boulder Creek reservations. Boulder Creek is located on the west edge of Atascadero
near Santa Lucia and Loomis Road, leading off from Graves Creek (see map below.)
There are about 15 parcels which abut Boulder Creek, with creek reservation parcels
located over the blueline creek itself. Boulder Creek is proposed with a 35 -foot setback
to be measured from the edge of the creek reservation, consistent with the Atascadero
and Graves Creek reservation setbacks. At the time of the General Plan Update,
Boulder Creek was thought to be a fork of Graves Creek.
The setbacks from all other 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle blueline creeks are proposed
to remain at 20 -feet, measured from the ordinary high water mark. Blueline creeks are
primarily tributaries to Atascadero and Graves Creek. A 20 -foot setback from
jurisdictional wetlands and other significant drainage courses, as identified by a qualified
biologist or Army Corps of Engineers, is also included in the proposed Amendment.
The proposed General Plan Amendment includes a 50 -foot setback for development
along the Salinas River. The setback from the Salinas River would be measured from
the ordinary high water mark. The residences recently developed along the Salinas
were designed with a 50 -foot minimum setback from the Salinas River, including The
Lakes development and the residences along North Ferrocarill. The 50 -foot setback
therefore, will not affect these structures.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
cal creek setback locations from a creek reservation
CtAam�-
'FLAtJ
C. - !�s4c4L LI ae-
O
LoT
•
0
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
is
Typical setback location from a blueline creek
"e w"16
•
Ful V t I
13")F�wale- C*e5 c
jo -{br� omolaAvr( P*H vwrmm
0
Summary of Setbacks:
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
•
•
Current Rule
Proposed Ordinance
Atascadero Creek
Building Permits:
35 ft setback from
20 ft setback from reservation
reservation
Planned Developments:
35 ft setback from reservation
Graves Creek
Building Permits:
35 ft setback from
20 ft setback from reservation
reservation
Planned Developments:
35 ft setback from reservation
Boulder Creek
Building Permits:
35 ft setback from
20 ft setback from reservation
reservation
Planned Developments:
35 ft setback from reservation
Salinas River
20 ft setback from ordinary
50 ft setback from ordinary
high water mark
high water mark
Blueline Creek
20 ft setback from ordinary
20 ft setback from ordinary
high water mark
high water mark
Jurisdictional Wetland
Setback determined by special
20 ft setback from edge of
study
wetland
Significant Drainage Course
Setback determined by special
20 ft setback from ordinary
(creeks that were not
study
high water mark
mapped by USGS)
•
•
€1
�i
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Proposed General Plan Amendment Text:
(Deleted text is shown aster-ese Gell, added text is shown as underlined)
Goal LOC 8. Watershed areas of Atascadero shall be protected.
Policy 8.2: Establish and maintain setbacks and development standards for creek side
development.
Program:
1'_ flat -anal m L4aintain a creek setback ordinance t4at--wW-which establishes building
setbacks and development standards along the banks of Atascadero Creek: Graves
Creek, Boulder Creek. blue line creeks_ --Ad he Salinas River. jurisdictional
wetlands, and any other significant drainage courses to ensure the uninterrupted
natural flow of the streams and protection of the riparian ecosystem with flexible
standards for the downtown area.
2.•
hQ fffst. al c qAtascadero Creeks Graves Creek and Boulder Greek shall have a
35 -foot setback WAW 1%.4ar-r,1. 2005f All other 7.5 min U'SGS quadrangle blue line
creeks, jurisdictional wetlands. and other significant drainage courses shall have an
20 -foot setback. The Salinas River shall have a 50 -foot setback. The
setbacks shall be subject to the following:
a) on Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek. and Boulder Creek setbacks shall be
measured from the edge of the creek reservation.
b) All other blue line creeks -setbp . the Salinas River. and any other significant
drainage courses shall have setbacks bo -measured from the ordinary high water
mark.
c) The Planning Commission may approve exceptions to the imtri�m setbacks
in the form of a Minor Conditional Use Permit with a biologist report. a report
prepared by a. professional engineer or geologist qualified in
ydroaeomcrrahQlacrv. and an Archaeological Phase 1 study. . _
•
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
2.) Zone Text Change
Consistent with the General Plan Policy Program 8.2, a Creek Setback Ordinance is
proposed to be included in Title 9 of the Atascadero Municipal Code. The Ordinance is
designed to give further details, criteria, and definitions to the General Plan Policy
regarding creek setbacks. The City's General Plan sets the goals and policies of the
City, while the Zoning Ordinance further describes specific development standards and
zoning regulations.
Currently, the Zoning Ordinance does not include a section on development standards
for work done around creeks or other watercourses. The proposed Ordinance would
establish a new section for creek setbacks to be included along with other property
setbacks in Chapter 4, General Site Design and Development Standards.
$-4.104
Exceptions to setback standards.
5-4.105...
Use of setbacks.
-4.1pE
Front setbacks.
9-4.107
Side setbacks.
--
--
'9-4.108
_
Rear setbacks.
---
-4.109
Interior setbacks and open areas_
j9-4.110
Projections into required setbacks.
9-4.1 11 T
!Setbacks from bllle line,creeks
Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Change:
9-4.111 Blueline Creek Setbacks
(a) Definition: Blueline creek: A creek stream or watercourse indicated by a solid or broken blue
line on a U.S. Geologic Survey 7.5 minute series quadrangle map.
(b) Development setbacks for creekside development are as follows:
(1) Atascadero Creek Graves Creek and Boulder Creek. Thirty-five (35) foot setback
measured from the edge of the creek reservation;
(2) Where Atascadero Creek Graves Creek and Boulder Creek channels are located outside
of creek reservations a twenty (20) foot setback measured from the ordinary high water
mark shall be required;
(3) Blueline creeks Twenty (20) foot setback measured from ordinary high water marks;
(4) Significant drainage courses Twenty (20) foot setback measured from ordinary high
water mark for other significant drainage courses as identified by Army Corps of
Engineers Department of Fish and Game and/or qualified biologist or
hydro eg omorphologist;
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
(5)
Jurisdictional Wetlands. Twenty (20) foot setback measured from jurisdictional wetland
boundary as defined by a qualified biologist;
(6)
Salinas River. Fifty (50) foot setback measured from the ordinary high water mark.
(c) Improvements permitted within setbacks:
1 Bridges
(2)
Engineered drainage outlet;
(3)
Minor landscape features not requiring _ grading-,
(4)
Non-invasive landscaping installation;
(5) Raised decks;
(6)
Repairs to existing structures and facilities;
7 Trails;
(8)
Transparent fencing which does not block water flow;
(9)
Underground utilities that are permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers, California
Department of Fish and Game, and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board;
(10)
Water course monitoring or gaugingfacilitiesoperated by local, State, or Federal
Agencies.
(d) Improvements not permitted within setbacks include, but are not limited to:
(1)
Detention basins;
(2)
Grading (cut or fill);
(3)
Over -excavation;
(4)
Parking, driveways, other vehicular surfaces;
(5)
Removal or disturbance of riparian vegetation, unless permitted by the California
Department of Fish and Game;
(6)
Retaining walls;
(7)
Septic systems (see section 8-5.103 Table 4.3 for septic setback requirements);
(8)
Structures (except as listed in section (c) above).
(e) Exceptions.
(1)
Structures that were legally permitted before the effective date of this ordinance shall be
permitted to remain;
(2)
The Planning Commission may approve exceptions to creek setbacks for Atascadero
Creek, Graves Creek, Boulder Creek, and the Salinas River with a minor Conditional Use
Permit. A biologist report, a hydro e�rpholo ig st report, and an Archaeological Phase
1 study shall be required.
(i) Requirements for biologist and hydro eg omorpholo ig st reports:
(A) Qualified biologist and professional geologist or engineer who is qualified in
hydro eg omorphology;
(B) Topographical and vegetation survey of creek channel with one (1) foot contour
lines at one (1) to twenty (20) foot scale from bank to bank to include one
hundred (100) feet up and down steam from property lines. Survey shall identify
thirty five (35) foot setbacks;
(C) Engineeredrg ading and drainage plan of the entire site which includes the creek
survey shall be provided;
(D) Written analysis of the project impacts with an assessment of the potential
impacts to the creek flow, bank stability, riparian vegetation and habitat, water
quality, and any structures resulting from the reduced setback shall be provided;
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
(E) Mitigation measures.
(ii) Required findings for Planning Commission approval;
(A) Creek channel and storm water flows will not be significantly impacted;
(B) Habitat and riparian vegetation will not be significantly impacted;
(C) Native trees and canopies will not be significantly impacted;
(D) Water quality will not be significantly impacted;
(E) Bank stability will not be significantly impacted;
(F) Proposed improvements will not be subject to damage caused by creek bank
migration;
tion;
(G) Archeological resources will not be significantly impacted.
Proposed definitions have also been included in section 9-9.102: General Definitions, in
the Municipal Code. Proposed definitions include:
Blueline Creek A creek stream or watercourse indicated by a solid or broken blue line on a
U.S. Geologic Survey 7.5 minute series quadrangle map and/or shown on Figure II -8 of the 2002
General Plan.
Jurisdictional Wetland An area which meets the criteria established by the US Army Corps of
Engineers for a wetlands including being regularly saturated by surface water or groundwater
and supporting an ecosystem of plants and animals that are adapted to wet conditions.
Archeological Phase 1 Study. A complete surface survey done by a qualified archeologist to
determine what is located on a site.
Hydrogeomorphology. The study of the physical appearance and operational character of a
waterway as it adjusts its boundaries to the magnitude of stream flow and erosional debris
produced within the attendant watershed.
Creek Reservation An unbuildable parcel located over Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, or
Boulder Creek which is identified on 1913 Atascadero Colony Mans as "Creek Reservation."
Ordinary High Water Mark The top of the bank of the channel typically the same as the ten-
year flood plane; location to be determined by an engineer or biologist.
Significant Drainage Course Natural creeks or topographic low points tributary to blueline
streams creeks or rivers Significant drainage course contain a well defined channel or riparian
vegetation._
Note: Staff suggests that a definition for Significant Drainage Courses and any additional
clarification of this term be added to the proposed zoning text shown in Exhibit C of Draft
Ordinance A.
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
CADFG —1600 Streambed alteration
agreement: wetland and riparian zone
USACE — CWA Section 404 jurisdiction:
Ordinary high water (OHW)
R.WQCB — CWA Section 401 jurisdiction:
CEOA compliance and water quality
Diagram: Ordinary High Water Mark
Example: Significant Drainage Course
Location: Balboa Road East of Llano.
1]
ITEM NUMBER: B-1
is DATE: 05/08/07
Exceptions
Staff is suggesting that City Council include the following exceptions in the proposed
Zoning Ordinance:
• Reduced setback with Conditional Use Permit
• Rebuilding existing structures within setbacks
• Additions within the setback
• Shallow Lots / Downtown Lots
• Culverts in significant drainage courses
Reduced setback with Conditional Use Permit:
The existing General Plan text allows for reduced setbacks on Atascadero Creek,
Graves Creek, Boulder Creek, and the Salinas River with approval of a Minor
Conditional Use Permit. The proposed Zoning Ordinance elaborates on the
requirements which need to be in order to approve the reduced setback.
There are three reports which would be required in order to apply for the reduced
setback. A biologist report is required in order to ensure that the creek will not be
significantly impacted by the proposed developments. A hydrogeomorphologist report,
prepared by a licensed engineer or geologist, is required in order to show that the creek
bank is stable and will be able to withstand the proposed improvements. The third
report is an Archeological Phase 1 study, which is required to ensure that cultural and
historical resources will not be impacted by building close r to the creek bank.
The following items would need to be completed by the biologist and
hydrogeomorphologist with the Minor CUP submittal:
(A) Qualified biologist and professional geologist or engineer who is qualified in
hydrogeomorphology;
(B) Topographical and vegetation survey of creek channel with one (1) foot contour lines at
one (1) to twenty (20) foot scale from bank to bank to include one hundred (100) feet up and
down steam from property lines. Survey shall identify thirty five (35) foot setbacks;
(C) Engineered grading and drainage plan of the entire site which includes the creek survey
shall be provided;
(D) Written analysis of the project impacts with an assessment of the potential impacts to
the creek flow, bank stability, riparian vegetation and habitat, water quality, and any
structures resulting from the reduced setback shall be provided;
(E) Mitigation measures.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
In order to approve the reduced setbacks, the following findings would need to be made
by the Planning Commission:
(A) Creek channel and storm water flows will not be significantly impacted;
(B) Habitat and riparian vegetation will not be significantly impacted;
(C) Native trees and canopies will not be significantly impacted;
(D) Water quality will not be significantly impacted;
(E) Bank stability will not be significantly impacted;
(F) Proposed improvements will not be subject to damage caused by creek bank migration.
(G) Archeological resources will not be significantly impacted.
Existing structures within setbacks:
During the public review process, the question of existing structures within the setbacks
has been brought up several times. Staff is recommending including an exception in
the Zoning Ordinance to allow structures that were legally permitted before the effective
date of this Ordinance to remain.
The current Zoning Ordinance states that if a non -conforming structure is destroyed or
partially destroyed to the extent of seventy-five percent (75%) or more of the
replacement cost of the total structure before destruction, the structure must be brought
into conformity, and moved outside the setback area. If a non -conforming structure is
partially destroyed to less than seventy-five percent (75%) it may be restored to its
former non -conforming status.
Citizens have voiced some concerns with this non -conforming status. Staff
recommends including an exception in the proposed Ordinance to allow these non-
conforming structures to be rebuilt as originally permitted, even if the structure was
destroyed 100% and located within the setback area. A Conditional Use Permit would
not be required in order to rebuild.
Staff also recommends including provisions to address the issue of increasing the size
of a non -conforming structure located within the setback area. Under the current
Zoning Ordinance, a non -conforming structure may be maintained, but not increased in
size. Staff suggests including an exception in the Creek Setback Ordinance to allow
additions to the non -conforming structures, provided that the addition is located outside
of the creek setback area. Additions located within the setback area should be required
to obtain a Minor Conditional Use Permit with biologist and hydrogeomorphologist
reports. A Variance application would not be required. Staff suggests the following be
added to proposed Zoning Ordinance if adopted:
0
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
(e) Exceptions.
(3) Structures shall be allowed to be rebuilt in the location originally permitted, even if
the structure is destroyed 100% and located within the setback area. The area of
disturbance within the setback shall not be increased.
(4) Additions to non -conforming structures shall be allowed, provided that the addition is
located outside the creek setback. Additions proposed within the creek setback area shall
be required to obtain a Minor Conditional Use Permit along with biologist,
hydroaeomor_pholo ist and Geological Phase 1 reports.
Shallow Lots
Concerns have also been brought up regarding shallow lots that abut the creeks. With
a standard 25 -foot front setback, and a 35 -foot rear creek setback, shallow lots could be
overly restricted by the Ordinance for available building area. Staff suggests adding an
exception to the proposed Ordinance to allow shallow lots that are less than 125 -feet in
depth to reduce the front and rear creek setback to allow for additional buildable area.
The front setback could be reduced to 15 -feet, and the rear setback to 20 -feet on lots
less than 125 -feet in length. This would effectively create an equal setback area to a
standard, non-creekside lot (which has standard 25 -foot front and 10 -foot rear
setbacks), eliminating any hardship brought on by the creek setback (see diagrams
below.) A Conditional Use Permit would not be required to use the reduced setbacks
on shallow lots. Staff suggests the following be added to proposed Zoning Ordinance if
adopted:
(e) Exceptions.
(5) Shallow lots that are less than 125 -feet in depth may reduce the front setback to 157
feet and the rear setback to 20 -feet.
This exception would be similar to the existing Ordinance Section 9-4.106 for front
setbacks on shallow lots. The existing Ordinance states that front setback may be
reduced to 20 -feet for any lot less than 90 -feet deep.
1. Standard lot setbacks:
(35' total setback area)
0.E A6R
SVTVPtGK
:;VDgT
src--rbALV-
2. Shallow lot creek setbacks (option):
(35' total setback area; same as a standard lot)
(srmee T )
G2titiK.
S E'i PahN�
FRONT
s-eria�tu;
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Flexible standards for the downtown area:
The current General Plan states that the proposed Ordinance shall have flexible
standards for the downtown. As many lots in the downtown area are about 100 -feet in
depth, a shallow lot exception would give these parcels some relief from the setback.
As shown in the diagrams below, by reducing both the front and rear setbacks for
shallow lots, and by allowing additional provisions for non -conforming structures which
were previously built within the setbacks, downtown parcels would be provided with
flexible standards and relief from some standard requirements of the creek setbacks.
Driveway Culverts in Significant Drainage Courses:
Driveways often need to cross drainage courses due to the location of existing roads.
Staff is recommending that an exception to the code be allowed for culverts to be
placed in Significant Drainage Courses for driveways.
(e) Exceptions.
(6) Culvert piping may be placed in significant drainage courses for the purposes of
roads and driveways crossings, provided the pipe does not exceed 30 -feet in length.
•
•
0
•
•
;7
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Downtown Aerial Photo
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Summary of Proposed Exceptions: 0
In summary, there are four exceptions which staff recommends adding to the proposed
Zoning Ordinance. These exceptions will give relief to lots in the downtown, shallow
lots, and existing structures located within the setbacks. Staff recommends that these
be added in addition to the conditionally approved reduced setback which is already in
the proposed text:
(e) Exceptions.
(3) Structures shall be allowed to be rebuilt in the location originally permitted,
even if the structure is destroyed 100% and located within the setback area. The
area of disturbance within the setback shall not be increased.
(4) Additions to non -conforming structures shall be allowed, provided that the
addition is located outside the creek setback. Additions proposed within the creek
setback area shall be required to obtain a Minor Conditional Use Permit along
with biologist, hydroeg omorphologist, and Geological Phase 1 reports.
(5) Shallow lots that are less than 125 -feet in depth may reduce the front setback
to 15 -feet and the rear setback to 20 -feet.
(6) Culvert piping may be placed in significant drainage courses for the purposes
of roads and driveways crossings, provided the pipe does not exceed 30 -feet in
length
Tribal Council Review
In accordance with State Senate Bill 18, the City has referred the proposed General
Plan Amendment for a 90 -day Tribal Council Review. Letters were sent to the Northern
Chumash Tribal Council, the Salinas Tribal Council, the Native American Heritage
Commission, and the Cultural Resource Specialist for PSHS Services.
City staff has met with Fred Collins of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council. The Tribal
Council has requested that a provision be included with the Minor Conditional Use
Permit exception to the 35 -foot setback. Since the creeks and waterways are often
important archeological resource areas, a reduced setback along the creeks could pose
an impact to the tribal resources along the creeks. A requirement has been included in
the proposed ordinance text to require an Archeological Phase 1 study when a reduced
setback is requested. An Archaeological Phase 1 study is a complete surface survey to
determine what is on the site. Upon discovery of cultural materials, a Phase II study,
which is subsurface testing, may be necessary. The Archeological Phase study must
show that archeological resources will not be significantly impacted by the reduced
setback. The Northern Chumash Tribal Council recommends approval of the General
Plan Text Amendment as shown above.
•
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
Proposed
Environmental Determination
An Initial Study and Proposed Negative Declaration 2006-0039 was prepared with the
recommended findings that there will be no significant adverse environmental impacts
associated with this project application.
CONCLUSIONS:
The proposed text amendments are consistent with the current General Plan, which is
implemented by the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendments would replace the
interim creek setbacks with the proposed setbacks, and a Creek Setback Ordinance
would be added to Chapter 4, Site development Standards in the Municipal Code.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this project on April 3, 2007 and
does not recommend the proposed amendments to the City Council.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The City Council may make modifications to the proposed text amendments.
2. The City Council may determine that more information is needed on some aspect
of the project and may refer the item back to the Planning Commission and staff
to develop the additional information. The Council should clearly state the type
of information that is required and move to continue the item to a future date.
3. The City Council may deny the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed amendments are not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on the
City of Atascadero.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Minutes: Planning Commission Hearing: Proposed Creek
Setbacks April 3, 2007
Attachment 2: Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Proposed Creek
Setback Ordinance: City Attorney Patrick Enright
Attachment 3: Atascadero Bulletins: 1916 & 1923 reports by EG Lewis
Attachment 4: 1980 General Plan text: Creek Policy Proposals; 50 -setback
Attachment 5: 2004 ECOSLO settlement
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
Response Letter: Jonalee Istenes
Attachment 11: Creek setback standards from other cities
Attachment 12: Draft Negative Declaration 2006-0039
Attachment 13: Draft Resolution A: Resolution to deny project
Attachment 14: Draft Resolution B: To approve Negative Declaration
Attachment 15: Draft Resolution C: To approve General Plan Amendment
Attachment 16: Draft Ordinance A: To approve Zone Text Change
•
0
DATE: 05/08/07 40
and 2003-0007 General Plan Amendment Text
Attachment 6:
Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek Setback Options &
Council Report August 8, 2006
Attachment 7:
Upper Salinas River Watershed Action Plan
Attachment 8:
Native Tree Inventory Recommendations and Habitat
Suitability Index
Attachment 9:
Tribal Council Review Letter
Attachment 10:
Response to comments:
Regional Water Quality Board,
Atascadero Historical Society,
Atascadero Realtor's Association
Response Letter: Jonalee Istenes
Attachment 11: Creek setback standards from other cities
Attachment 12: Draft Negative Declaration 2006-0039
Attachment 13: Draft Resolution A: Resolution to deny project
Attachment 14: Draft Resolution B: To approve Negative Declaration
Attachment 15: Draft Resolution C: To approve General Plan Amendment
Attachment 16: Draft Ordinance A: To approve Zone Text Change
•
0
•
0
ATTACHMENT 1: Minutes: Planning Commission Hearing April 3, 2007
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 3, 2007 - 7:00 P.M.
4. CITYWIDE CREEK SETBACK ZONING ORDINANCE AND GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, PLN -2006-1139
Applicant:
City of Atascadero, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422, Phone: 461-5000
Project Title:
Zone Change 2006-0125, General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, PLN 2006-1139
Creek Setback Zoning Ordinance and General Plan Amendment
Project
Citywide
Location:
Project
The project consists of a proposed Creek Setback Ordinance to be included in Chapter 4, Site
Development Standards of Title 9, Planning and Zoning Ordinance, in the Atascadero Municipal
Description:
Code. Following General Plan Policy 8.2, revisions to the General Plan are proposed which
would replace the interim creek setbacks. The updates are intended to establish a 35 foot setback
along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek reservations, a fifty foot setback along
the Salinas River, and a twenty foot setback along all other blue line creeks, wetlands, and
significant drainage courses. The Planning Commission would be able to approve exceptions to
the creek setbacks in the form of a Minor Conditional Use Permit with a biologist and a
geomorphologist report if the project can meet the required findings to show that the creek and
surrounding habitat will not be significantly affected.
Proposed
Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Negative Declaration is proposed. The proposed
Environmental
Negative Declaration is available for public review at 6907 El Camino Real, Community
Development Department from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Determination:
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Commissioner Heatherington stepped down from consideration of this item stating that
she was the Director of the Environmental Center when the lawsuit about creek
setbacks was filed. Though she has not been an employee of that organization for
almost two years and she has no conflict of interest, she stated she will recuse herself
for this issue because she thinks it is best for public deliberation for that to happen.
Commissioner Heatherington reserved the right to speak as a member of the public.
Community Development Director Warren Frace and Assistant Planner Callie Taylor
gave the staff report and answered questions of the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Richard Bastian stated his concerns because Graves Creek meanders all over his
seven acre property and the setback would restrict his ability to enjoy his property.
Sid Bowen stated he was in favor of protecting riparian habitats and wetlands but does
not think this ordinance has been properly thought through, and that the cost for the
studies alone would be too expensive for an owner who wants to improve his property.
John Vesnamer commented that the Planning Department process is working already,
that decks should not require a CUP, and the focus should really be on degradation of
the creeks. 40
John Shadak spoke about an experience he had with the city regarding placement of a
drainage pipe in his back yard and stated there is no longer 35 feet left. He urged the
Commission to deny the ordinance.
Mike Jackson stated he did not think there had been adequate notification to property
owners. He expressed concern regarding all the oversight that has been added to the
ordinance, and that the wetlands and drainage courses have not yet been plotted.
Maria Hooper read from a prepared statement written by Anthony Doko regarding his
concerns over an artificial drainage area on his property and how it would affect plans to
improve or build on his property under this proposed ordinance. (Exhibit A)
Dorothy Bench spoke in support of preservation and protection of creeks; however she
stated an ordinance requiring 35 foot setbacks is divisive and illogical. She thinks if
enough land is taken to preclude the owner from reasonable use of his land he must be
compensated.
Ken Jones was concerned that the city is placing an arbitrary restriction that has no
meaning, and that some areas requiring setbacks never experience flooding.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
is DATE: 05/08/07
Jim Scrivener stated he owns one acre bordering the Salinas River and had received no
notification of this hearing. He indicated a 50 foot loss on his property would be a
significant loss and is not acceptable.
Mark Gibbs, Chairman Governmental Affairs Committee for the Atascadero Association
of Realtors, asked the Commission to consider the implications of this ordinance on
property rights.
Tim McCutchen commented that he did not see any mitigation to property owners for
the loss of their properties in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and was concerned
with the setbacks for "significant drainage courses," which are not currently mapped and
would affect many property owners who have not been notified.
Mitch Culver stated he saw this as an attempt for a land grab and that there currently is
a permit process in place that protects the creeks and wetland areas. He asked that
this go back and be redesigned as is it unclear how many would be affected by the
ordinance.
Susie Anderson was concerned with the ramifications of this ordinance to the people in
the community who may not understand that the creek reservation line is actually their
property line. She asked why the city should usurp private property rights when the
lawsuit was based on commercial property not residential.
Richard Shannon stated that this ordinance would not encourage redevelopment in the
downtown along the creek. His concerns were that this is arbitrary, it takes property
without compensation, and would put a two to three year time frame on processing
permits.
Chuck Cooper stated this proposal is a gross injustice and is tantamount to taking land
from the property owner without just compensation.
Don Blaize gave a PowerPoint presentation outlining the negative aspects of this
proposed ordinance. (Exhibit B)
Chairperson O'Keefe recessed the hearing at 9:41 p.m.
Chairperson O'Keefe called the meeting back to order at 9:51 p.m.
John Hollenbeck read from a prepared statement stating his belief that further extending
the open space easements in the form of creek setbacks is illegal. (Exhibit C)
Steven Arnold stated it would be better to enforce existing laws, keep ATV usage down
and encourage people to be more responsible stewards of their backyard wetlands.
Taking away property rights will anger people and lead to less cooperation.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
Jeff Van den Eikhof explained that because the creek does not follow the creek
reservation line, using it to establish the setback may create a hardship for many
property owners. He suggested that the ordinary high water mark shown on site plans
should be the point from which setbacks are determined. He questioned who would
determine what drainage course is "significant," and also suggested the Commission
not apply this to those already in the planning process.
Bill Bargues expressed concern that his property would be significantly reduced by this
ordinance and questioned how the measurements would be derived as changes in the
creeks occur seasonally due to the amount of rainfall and flow of the creek.
Brad Taunt stated he is in support of creek preservation but opposed to this ordinance
as presented. He was concerned with the arbitrary nature of the 25 to 35 foot number,
and suggested there be additional thought and investigation on what properties are
negatively affecting the creeks.
Lon Allen cited several incidents in Atascadero history that demonstrated the need for
building back from the creek, and read a letter from Marge Mackay into the record from
the Atascadero Historical Society Board of Directors, stating their support for the creek
setback proposal.
Glen Horn stated the proposed ordinance would restrict him from developing his
property by one-third. He indicated that when he purchased his property he researched
the possible restrictions and found none; if he had known about this he would not have
purchased the property.
John Galaher asked several questions, stated he considers this a taking, and that for
every mile that this takes, 8.5 acres of property will be given up. He said it was the
city's job to monitor the creek and have it cleaned up by those who abuse it.
Warren Miller stated the city doesn't need any more ordinances to restrict private
property, if there are problems in the creek then the city has should charge the guilty
party to clean up the creek.
Ken Lombardi spoke about his own property and explained that the 35 foot setback
would leave him with nothing for a lawn or expansion of his home.
Nick Miller spoke about the restrictions existing on his property at this time and was
concerned about overlapping ordinances, challenges for weed abatement and privacy
issues.
Rick Johansen spoke in favor of cleaning up the creek rather than taking property away
from owners. He stated the Commission should represent the people in the town and
that the majority in Atascadero do not want this. 0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
40 DATE: 05/08/07
Sue Bagdonis said she saw an ulterior motive in this of trying to get trails and bike
paths, which she thought would cause more of a problem by creating impacts to the
wildlife and bringing in crime.
Ben Richardson spoke about organic architecture and engineering concerns along the
creeks. He agreed that there had not been adequate notice, and commented that if 35
feet is taken from commercial properties along the creek, the city will actually be
reducing its inventory of commercial properties.
Andrew De Villers stated he owns property on both sides of the creek, and increasing
the setback would render his property 20% useful, and if he wanted to expand the costs
would be so great he could not justify it.
Larry Cooks said he owns 5 % acres long both sides of the creek and is in a flood zone
so he would not have much property left if this goes through; he stated this was
stealing.
Chuck Green commented that if the setbacks are increased it would increase the city's
responsibility to clean up the creek, which is not happening now. He stated he works
hard to keep his property clean and if it is taken he will be unable to use his garden.
Bill Schaffer stated the financial magnitude of the problem must be defined; what is the
financial impact to property owners, and the dollar value of the land the city is taking
possession of.
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner
Slane to go past 11:00 p.m.
Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote.
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner
Jack to continue Item #5.
Motion passed 4:2 by a roll -call vote. (Slane, Marks opposed)
Margie George stated that the notice she received did not mention that the Salinas
River properties were involved in the setback issue and fears that those who live along
the river may not be aware that their properties will be affected.
Jonalee Istenes commented that this ordinance will protect water quality and that the
General Plan protects water shed in the city and promotes trails along the creeks. She
urged the Commission to err on the side of caution to protect creeks from chemical
contamination.
Bill Arkfeld explained that in other communities these decisions are handled through the
development of a water shed plan with public participation. He said if the city takes the
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
right steps it can get past the problems and craft a good ordinance that respects
property rights.
Julie Bennett stated she was very concerned that this be stopped now, as it is an issue
of personal property rights and should not be a way to solve previous litigation issues in
the city.
John Hollenbeck read a message from his wife into the record in opposition to the
ordinance, and asked several questions regarding the proposed setbacks.
Ben Richardson asked if the ordinance addresses what could be done within in the
setback other than as a building site, and questioned if a specific study has been made
about any species that needs environmental protection on the north side of Atascadero
Creek from City Hall to the river.
Cliff Haggard stated that at one time there were crews of CYA wards that cleared areas
to promote good drainage, however now no one can clean up the creek because it is so
overgrown. He urged the city to clean up the creeks, not take away property.
Pam Heatherington asked the City Attorney to define a `taking'; spoke about the
impacts to Atascadero Creek, the need to address downstream liability, and determine i
archeological findings. She commented that creeks, rivers, and streams are a public
trust.
Joe Montoya said he owns property along the creek and would like to be able to
develop it as he has envisioned it, but that he would loose 40% of his property if this
passes. He also stated that many of his neighbors had not received notice of this
meeting.
Chairperson O'Keefe closed the Public Comment period.
City Attorney Patrick Enright and Community Development Director Warren Frace
addressed questions raised during Public Comment.
Vice Chairperson Fonzi recommended that this go back to staff to have it reworked
because it is not uniform; there should be more discussion on whether the setback is
measured from the creek reservation or high water mark. Philosophically, she stated
she has a problem with this in general. Jurisdictional wetlands must be identified and
put before the public, and "significant drainage courses" must be clarified.
Commissioner Slane stated he doesn't agree with the 35 foot setbacks and does not
think the Salinas River should be included.
Commissioner Jack thought 35 feet is too much, 20 feet is all he can support, and he
was unsure why the Salinas River setback needs 50 feet rather than 20 or 35.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
MOTION: By Chairperson O'Keefe and seconded by Commissioner
O'Grady to adopt Resolution PC 2007-0019, 2007-0020, and
2007-0021 recommending that the City Council certify
proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0039 and
introduce an amendment for first reading, by title only, to
approve General Plan Amendment 2006-0017 and Zone
Change 2006-0125 based on findings and with the exceptions
for shallow lots and existing structures as written by staff.
Motion tied 3:3, recommendation is not to adopt. (Slane, Jack,
Fonzi opposed)
Commissioner Slane stated for the record that if it was at 20 feet for the setback he
might have voted for it.
The following exhibits are available for review in the Community Development
Department:
• Exhibit A - Anthony Doko, email
Exhibit B - Don Blaize, PowerPoint handout
Exhibit C - John Hollenbeck, letter
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
ATTACHMENT 2: Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Proposed Creek Setback Ordinance:
City Attorney Patrick Enright
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS REGARDING THE
CREEK SETBACK ORDINANCE
1. What is the difference between the existing creek setbacks and proposed creek
setbacks?
is
Current Rule
Proposed Ordinance
Atascadero Creek
Building Permits:
35 ft setback from
20 ft setback from
reservation
reservation
Planned Developments:
35 ft setback from
reservation
Graves Creek
Building Permits:
35 ft setback from
20 ft setback from
reservation
reservation
Planned Developments:
35 ft setback from
reservation
Boulder Creek
Building Permits:
35 ft setback from
20 ft setback from
reservation
reservation
Planned Developments:
35 ft setback from
reservation
I
I
Salinas River
120 ft setback from ordinary
50 ft setback from
high water mark
ordinary high water mark
Blueline Creek
20 ft setback from ordinary
20 ft setback from
high water mark
ordinary high water mark
Jurisdictional Wetland
Setback determined by
20 ft setback from edge
special study
of wetland
Significant Drainage
Setback determined by
20 ft setback from
Course (creeks that were
special study
ordinary high water mark
not mapped by USGS)
is
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
2. What is the difference between an easement and a setback restriction?
Setback requirements RESTRICT the use of property. All properties have setback requirements
that prohibit buildings and structures within a certain distance of the property line, whether the
front, side, or back yards. In this case, the City is considering the adoption of a setback
requirement for any building along the creeks and river to ensure the uninterrupted flow of the
streams and to protect the riparian ecosystem. As with all setbacks it is a restriction on the use of
the property and does not give the City or any other party (i.e. the public) any right to use private
property in any way.
An easement is a property right that a party acquires to USE private property. This could be in
the form of a trail, a driveway for access, or most commonly, properties have these for utilities
(usually PG&E, the phone company). This is a property right between the property owner and a
third party.
3. What is allowed within the creek setback?
The following list identifies what is permitted and prohibited in the proposed creek setback. If
adopted this list would be added to the zoning ordinance.
858964.1 11335.1
0
Improvements permitted within setbacks:
(1) Bridges;
(2) Engineered drainage outlet;
(3) Minor landscape features not requiring grading;
(4) Non-invasive landscaping installation;
(5) Raised decks;
(6) Repairs to existing structures and facilities;
(7) Trails;
(8) Transparent fencing which does not block water flow;
(9) Underground utilities that are permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers,
California Department of Fish and. Game, and/or Regional Water Quality
Control Board; and,
(10) Water course monitoring or gauging facilities operated by local, State, or
Federal Agencies.
Improvements not permitted within setbacks include, but are not limited to:
(1) Detention basins;
(2) Grading (cut or fill);
(3) Over -excavation;
(4) Parking, driveways, other vehicular surfaces;
(5)Removal or disturbance of riparian vegetation, unless permitted by the
California Department of Fish and Game;
(6) Retaining walls;
(7) Septic systems (see section 8-5.103 Table 4.3 for septic setback
requirements); and,
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
(8) Structures (except as listed in section (c) above).
Exceptions.
(1) Structures that were legally permitted before the effective date of this
ordinance shall be permitted to remain.
4. Can the City use the setbacks for trails or public access?
No, the City can not use the setbacks for trails or any other public use. As a setback, the City
and/or public acquires no property interest in the property. If the City desires to have trails along
the creeks and river the City would have to acquire the property, either in fee (purchase) or an
easement. There are no plans to acquire easements for trails across private property along
creeks.
5. What types of exceptions are allowed for narrow lots?
Concerns have also been brought up regarding shallow lots that abut the creeks. With a standard
25 -foot front setback, and a 35 -foot rear creek setback, shallow lots could be overly restricted by
the ordinance for available building area. Staff is recommending adding an exception to the
proposed ordinance to allow shallow lots that are less than 125 -feet in depth to reduce the front
yard and rear creek setback to allow for additional buildable area. The front setback would be
reduced to 15 -feet, and the rear setback to 20 -feet on lots less than 125 -feet in length. This
would effectively create an equal setback area to a standard, non-creekside lot (which has
standard 25 -foot front and 10 -foot rear setbacks), eliminating any hardship brought on by the
creek setback (see diagrams below.) A Conditional Use Permit would not be required to use the
reduced setbacks on shallow lots. Staff suggests the following be added to proposed Zoning
Ordinance if adopted:
(e) Exceptions.
(5) Shallow lots that are less than 125 -feet in depth may reduce the front setback
to 15 -feet and the rear setback to 20 -feet.
This exception would be similar to the existing ordinance section 9-4.106 for front setbacks on
shallow lots. The existing ordinance states that front setback may be reduced to 20 -feet for any
lot less than 90 -feet deep.
u
r�
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Standard lot setbacks:
(35' total setback area)
RE P,R
3 E.'1"I`iA�K
=V pPT
Shallow lot creek setbacks:
(35' total setback area; same as a standard lot)
(S -r R>=r- -r l
cv Eetl L
f -M µT
st�Tlayk ,l,
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
6. Is a setback requirement, prohibiting structures within 35 feet of the creek
reservation boundary, a taking under the federal and state constitutions?
Government regulations, by their very nature, have an impact on property values. However,
mere fluctuations in value are "incidentals of ownership," and are not "considered a `taking' in a
constitutional sense."' The United States Supreme Court consistently has "recognized in a wide
variety of contexts, that the government may execute laws or programs that adversely affect
recognized economic values."
Setback restrictions are considered a regulatory restriction and are explicitly authorized under
Government Code section 65850(e).2 The courts have long held that regulatory restrictions are
constitutional, under both the federal and state constitutions as long as the restriction does not
prohibit all viable economic use of the parcel. Cities may adopt reasonable regulations for each
zoning district to promote the public health, safety and welfare. The city's ability to regulate is,
however, limited by the 5`h Amendment to the United States Constitution which states in part
that ".. , nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." A
"taking" can occur when the government either takes physical possession of private property, or
when it adopts regulations that: i) do not substantially advance legitimate public interests, or ii)
deny an owner substantially all economically viable use of his or her property. If a "taking"
occurs, the property owner is entitled to just compensation.
In determining whether there is economic value to the property, the courts (both the U.S.
Supreme Court and the California courts) look to the entire property and do not segment the
property. For instance, in this case, the property owner may argue that while he can build a
home on his property, he is precluded from use on the 35 foot setback area. However, the courts,
would not require compensation for the 35 foot segment, unless it makes the rest of the parcel
totally worthless.
7. If the structure is totally destroyed, may I replace it? What requirements are there?
Staff is recommending that the proposed draft ordinance allow reconstruction of a
building/structure in the setback, which is totally destroyed. A variance or use permit will not be
needed, and the only permits would be the normal building permit and any new permits required
for any building to be constructed.
8. What is the status of the ECOSLO lawsuit?
The ECOSLO lawsuit was filed by the Environmental Center for San Luis Obispo County in
July 2002 contending that the City's EIR for the General Plan Amendment was legally
' Danforth v. United States (1939) 308 U.S. 271, 285
2 Government Code section 65850(e) provides: The legislative body of any county or city may, pursuant
to this chapter, adopt ordinance that do any of the following:
(e) Establish and maintain building setback lines.
858964.1 11335.1 0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
inadequate and the General Plan Amendment violated state law. The lawsuit was settled in May
2003, and required in part:
(vi) the City will adopt a 35 -foot interim setback along Atascadero Creek and Graves
Creek. This setback will remain in place until the City adopts an ordinance establishing
permanent creek setbacks. The City will provide notice to ECOSLO of land use
proposals on the property known as Dove Creek.
The City General Plan in 2004 was amended to impose an interim 35 foot setback until March
2005 (for one year). On February 22, 2005, the Council considered extending the interim
setback requirement and did until September 1, 2005.
The General Plan requires the Council to adopt and maintain a creek setback ordinance along the
creeks and the Salinas River. An interim resolution was adopted in 2004, with a timeframe of
2005. The proposed ordinance is to implement the General Plan requirement. Even if there is no
ordinance adopted, the Council/Planning Commission could not approve a project that is
inconsistent with the General Plan, which requires that there be setbacks along the creeks and
river.
9. How was the determination made that the appropriate setback requirement is 35
foot along the creeks and 50 foot along the Salinas River, in contrast to other distances, i.e.
20 foot, 25 foot or 50 foot?
Questions have also been brought up about how the setback dimensions were determined. The
Watershed Action Plan report has given staff a good basis of information to determine necessary
setbacks. In addition, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) states that creek
setbacks of 32-65 feet are necessary to ensure creek protection and water quality (see following
letter). The RWQCB is supportive of the proposed 35 -foot creek setback as a minimum standard
and thinks that a 20 foot setback is inadequate. For these reasons, a 35 -foot setback has been
proposed along Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek as those are the major
watershed areas within the City. Staff has proposed a 20 -foot setback on smaller waterways such
as blueline creeks, significant drainage courses, and wetlands. A 50 -foot setback is proposed on
the Salinas River due to the fact that this is major regional river. The Salinas River has a history
of significant creek bank failure and moment of the watercourse. Staff has compared creek
setback ordinances from other cities and jurisdictions in determining the proposed setbacks.
Other agency's setbacks vary anywhere from 20 to 100 -feet depending on the watercourse and
jurisdiction.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
N,
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Linda Adams Central Coast Region
Arnold Schw
.Secrenrryfor Internet Address: h[tpu/svww.swi'cb.Lu.govlrwgeb3 Gore
Envirorrmewal 895 Aerovista Place, Suite 101, San Luis Obispo. California 93401
Protection Phonc (805) 549-3147 - PAX (805) 543-0397 _
February 26, 07
RECEIVE �
Callie Taylor FEB
6907 EI Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422 cOMMUNM, Of"',,
Ms. Callie Taylor:
RE: Negative Declaration, Creek Setback Text Amendment, City of Atascadero,
San Luis Obispo County SCH# 2007011138
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed Negative
Declaration for the Creek Setback Text Amendment for the City of Atascadero,
California. The Central Coast Water Board supports setbacks from creeks and rivers,
and applauds the City of Atascadero for being proactive in this regard. We do,
however, have some concerns.
Research indicates that a fixed setback (buffer) distance for all streams is not
appropriate. The buffer distance needed to protect water quality and habitat varies
considerably with field conditions. For example, slope, stream width, flow regime,
vegetation type, etc., all play a role in the determination of the correct buffer width.
However, if a fixed buffer distance is to be used, research indicates that a 10-20 meter
(32-65 feet) buffer on each side of the water course be used to protect stream
temperature, with wildlife needing considerably wider buffers. Therefore, the Water
Board does not support the 20 -foot setback applied to blue line streams and other
"significant drainage courses", but would support the 35 foot buffer for these water
bodies.
The draft proposal states that exceptions to the ordinance would be considered, but
would require a biologist and geomorphologist report submitted to the Planning
Commission for consideration. The exception would require a "Minor Conditional Use
Permit," and would potentially allow a variance of the setback for Atascadero Creek,
Graves Creek, Boulder Creek, and the Salinas River, allowing the setback to be
reduced to 20 -feet. However, as mentioned previously, it appears that the 35 -foot
setback proposed for Atascadero, Graves, and Boulder Creeks, represent the minimum
buffer recommended. Therefore, it would not be advisable to reduce the setback to 20 -
feet under any circumstance; doing so could potentially cause a significant impact, and
therefore the negative declaration would not apply.
The draft proposed zoning ordinance defines a blue -line creek as a stream or
watercourse indicated by a solid or broken line on a USGS 7.5 minute series
quadrangle. However, there may be differences in blue lines on different printings of
7.5 minute quads. For example, a 1960's printing has very few blue lines within the city
California Envirownental Protection Agency .
�.7 Recycled Pnper
ITEM NUMBER:
B-1
• DATE: 05/08/07
•
0
Callie Taylor
2of2
, ebruary 26, 2007
of Atascadero. The Water Board recommends incorporating a map in the proposed
ordinance that clearly defines the blue lines occurring within the city. Providing such a
map in the ordinance would provide clarity for all stakeholders.
The setback measurement on Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek are
to be measured from the "creek reservation." However, the creek reservation is not
defined.
The Proposed Zoning Ordinance states that some improvements are allowed within the
setback zone. Allowed improvements include non-invasive landscaping, raised decks,
and transparent fencing that does not block water flow. The Water Board does not
support these allowed improvements. The following are examples of what could occur if
these activities were allowed. Some landscaping, e.g. herbaceous vegetation could
reduce shading if the previous vegetation were trees and/or shrubs, resulting in
increased water temperature and perhaps erosion. Similarly, raised decks may result in
the removal of shade -producing trees and/or shrubs. In addition, decking over riparian
areas may negatively impact wildlife movement in the riparian corridor. Any type of
fencing, whether transparent or otherwise, has the potential to impede wildlife
movement through the riparian corridor. And finally, landscaping that requires
vegetation management may rely on a variety of chemicals which pose a threat to water
quality when applied near a waterbody.
Water Board staff request that these issues be addressed and potentially mitigated for
in any setback ordinance considered for adoption by the City of Atascadero.
If you have any questions please contact Chris Rose at (805) 542-4770 or via email at
crow@waterboards.ca.cgov.
Sincerely,
f� �
(7 �, ...
,, f
./Roger W. Briggs
Executive Officer
S:ICEOA\Ccnment Letters\San Luis Obisoo CounfylCreek Selback.doc
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 •
10. The City's General Plan requires that the City adopt a set back ordinance, what
happens.if the City never implements the General Plan policy?
Atascadero's General Plan provides as follows:
Policy 8.2 Establish and maintain setbacks and development standards for creek side
development.
Program:
1. Adopt and maintain a creek setback ordinance that will establish building setbacks and
development standards along the banks of Ataseadero Creek, Graves Creek, blue line
creeks and the Salinas River to ensure the uninterrupted natural flow of the streams and
protection of the riparian ecosystem with flexible standards for the downtown area.
Responsibility: CDD, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Adopt Ordinance in 2005.
This is the General Plan policy that the Council is considering adopting in the ordinance to
establish a 35 foot setback along the creeks and a 50 foot setback on the Salinas River. The
ordinance should have been adopted in 2005, but never was, and the interim resolution expired
on September 1, 2005 requiring a 35 foot set back. 0
Zoning ordinances must be consistent with the General Plan. Actions approved by a city that are
in conflict with the general plan are void. If a zoning ordinance becomes inconsistent with thea
General Plan because of an amendment to the General Plan, or to any element of the plan, the
ordinance must be amended within a reasonable time so that it is consistent with the amended
plan. (Government Code section 65860(c))
The statute and courts have not defined what a "reasonable time" is, but in this case, the General
Plan itself puts forth a timeframe to implement the policy. The Policy states that the Council will
adopt an ordinance in 2005, and it is now 2007. Therefore, the Council has only two options,
either adopt an ordinance as provided for in the General Plan, or amend the General Plan to
delete or amend Policy 8.2 of the General Plan.
In the interim, since all zoning, subdivisions, building permits etc. must be consistent with the
General Plan, the City could not approve any project/structure that would be inconsistent with
the policy by permitting any building/structure that interrupts the natural flow of any the streams
and does not protect the riparian ecosystem.
•
•
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
11. What is a "significant drainage course?"
Significant drainage courses are creeks that were not mapped by USGS as "blueline creeks" after
World War 11 (see picture below). Often these creeks have the same characteristics as blueline
creeks and are subject to regulation by Department of Fish and Game, the Water Quality hoard,
and Army Corps of Engineers. There have been some concerns that the term "significant
drainage course" is not specific enough. Staff is recommending that the following definition be
added;
"significant drainage courses are natural creeks or topographic low points, tributary to blueline
streams, creeks, or rivers. Significant drainage course contain a well defined channel or
riparian vegetation."
Staff has included these drainage courses for protection under the creek setback ordinance
because of the importance of these creeks to water quality and habitat protections. If significant
drainage courses are not listed in the setback ordinance, protection of these types of creeks would
be more difficult. Construction around these drainage courses would stili require evaluation and
permits by the agencies listed above; the applicant would work directly with the agencies to
obtain permits.
Example of a "significant drainage course" that would be protected under the ordinance.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
12. What is the required notice for the hearing?
A zoning ordinance amendment which affects the permitted uses of real property requires that
notice be given by newspaper publication or posting in at least three place at least 10 days before
the hearing. Notice must also be mailed or delivered to all property owners within 300 feet of
the property that is the subject of the hearing or, if the number of owners to who notice would be
mailed is greater than 1000, by publishing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in
at least one newspaper of general circulation. Notice must also be provided to any person who
has filed a written request with the City Clerk and to any California Native American tribe that is
on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission.
In this instance notice was mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the affected
properties, and for the Council will be mailed to every property owner in the City. Additionally,
a display ad will be placed in the Atascadero News.
13. Do the restrictions apply to commercial parcels?
The setback restrictions apply to commercial and residential parcels equally. There are certain
narrow lot exceptions for parcels in the downtown area as well as residential areas of the city.
14. To obtain an exception from a setback requirement, why do I need the following: 0
Biologist report
Hydrogeomorphologist report
Archaeological Phase 1 study
The purpose the of creek setback ordinance is two -fold: 1) to protect the creek habitat and 2) to
protect private property. If a property owner wishes to build within the proposed creek setback a
biologist report would determine if the project would negatively impact the riparian plants and
habitats along the creek's bank. Likewise, the hydrogeomorphologist would determine if there
was a likelihood that the creek would change course and undermine the bank where the structure
is proposed.
In 2004, Senate Bill 18 was approved by the Governor of California mandating that all local
agencies (cities) consult with local Native American tribe on any General Plan amendments.
During the City's consultation with the Northern Chumash Tribal Council, the tribe requested
that any exceptions to the setback ordinance include a preliminary (Phase I) archaeological
study. It is a well documented fact that Native American artifacts are commonly found near
crocks and water bodies.
•
•
9
ATTACHMENT 3: Atascadero Bulletins: 1916 Report by EG Lewis
at the physical improvement of the land,
streets, roads, water and sewer sirstem5, but
embraces the equallyimportant planning of
the commercial, industrial, financial, educa-
tional and social development of the com-
munity along sound economic lines. The en-
tire construction and development of the com-
munity, from the preliminary surveys to the
ultimate marketing of the Product of the
thousands of acres of orchards, the intellect-
ual, artistic and recreative development of the
community as a whole, was treated as one
great problem, each mart of which was to be
solved in its relation. to the other, and of
which the engineering and physical construc-
tion was but the foundation. The Colony
Holding Corporation, being the promoter, de-
rives its profits from the ownership of the
public utilities and such institutions which
it reserves exclusively to itself as affect the
welfare of the entire community, but. all these
must in turn become profitable only through
the success, contentment and prosperity of
the individual land owners.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
in ent.
RESIDENTIAL VALUES
As a place of residence either throughout
the entire year, or for winter or summer
months, it would be impossible to find more
ideal conditions of climate, natural advan-
tages, means of enjoyment and fine improve-
ments.
Surrounding the Civic Center approximate-
ly 2,500 acres have been laid out as a high-
class, highly restricted private residence
section. Since this section is surrounded by
the restricted orchards, which may not be
subdivided, the present residential section
comprises the limit: of residential subdivision,
so that once the present residence lots have
been sold, none will be obtainable in Atasca-
dero, excepting by purchase from original buy-
ers. We do not know of a similar condition,
where rival subdivisions cannot arise or the
residential section be enlarged. The superb
oak trees, hundreds of years old, have been
preserved tbrougjiout this residential district
and the streets are being planted with choice
0
I
shade trees, a single type of tree to a street.
LAND SALES
Park spaces are located at favorable dis-
The Colony Holding Corporation is not alone
tances, and the streets have been laid out: on
in the business of selling land, but in that or
contour lines to give the most beautiful effect.
building up a successful, prosperous, con-
It may reasonably be expected that the values
tented community, in which it will own the
of residential lots in Atascadero will
public utilities, and those general institu-
eventually reach the highest point ever
in the state aside from a few Iimiited
tions of a quasi -public nature.
Of the more than three million dollars of
reached
locations adjacent to the two largest cities.
orebards and residence lots sold to date, in
The fact that because of the restrictions, no
Ataseadero, approximately eighty per cent
unsightly building, or nuisance of any sort
creep into the residential district or, in
were selected by the management of the
Holding Corporation for the purchasers. The
can
fact, into a.ny�,paTA-Of t� W." gstate, except -
great majority of the thousands of purchasers
Ing thosw limited areas so locate - to be
no�a�ed and reserved for manufactrtri�,
have since, visited Atascadero in person, but
less than two per cent of then have desiredyes
co
a residential value most extraordinary*
to make any change from the lands we had
'/ one-fourth the entire estate of approxi -.,k .
is for
selected for them, whether orchards, farms.dr
mately forty square miles, reserved
as are the banks of all streams,
residence lots. /
There is little doubt but that given a rea-
parks,
and an acre surrounding the principal springs,
sonable amount of information as to wlrct the
and from end to end of this immense Estate
purchaser desires, whether for an invastment
the resident is surrounded by restrictions
that his neighborhood will al-
or for the purpose of making his 110111ein Atas-
which insure
desirable. So fax as we know, it
cadero, we can matte a far better seiegtion for
hirci than he could make for himself on the
ways remain
is the only cominlinity in existence which
grounds.
cannot be marred by the creeping in of u.n-
This Estate comprises approximately* forty
Ad two
sightly structures and nuisances. This gives
stability to residential values not elsewhere
square aril -es of hills and valleys
were spent in the most exh<rustive
a
to be had. One lives in the midst of a vast
years
investigation of it, this information llaing
estate ten Guiles long and seven wide, entirely,
tabulated with the utmost case, so that we•are
restricted and maintained as a ;great ririval:.e
able to select with certainty just what All
estate, with five thousand acres of its area f
meet the purchaser's desires, provided 'the
reserved as public parks. ..I
0
I
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 3: Atascadero Bulletins: 1923 Report by EG Lewis
AL
Approximately five thousand acres of Atascadero', vast'
throughout the Atascadero estates have been reserved for
large areas cov4ed with great oaks, the banks r,
estate of forty square miles is taken up with its fine parks,
The Salinas leer
parks, while .
of all streams far fifty feet on both sides, and an acre
aeras preserves, lakes and streams,
haws for ten miles along its eastern side, subtle three moue.
surrounding all springs, have also been reserved for parks. �+
Atascadero for an epopulation
Iain streams, Crraves Creek, Atascadero Creek and ants
ofatwenty-fi etthousand people, anded
i in �
it, the greatest care was taken to assure the ,
preservation of the wonderful natural beauty of f
j the immense property for all time.
a
Throughout Atascadero's great expanse of
y, plain, valley and hills numberless springs Am
i `IniincL sync of the largest being, iu.the ' iighest
Thea`e springs' ti'ie mountains streams that
4
traverse it, the abundant rainfall (averaging over
water -table that un•
<
19 inches). with the great
derlies the entire estate at a depth of from
ninety to 100 feet, gave it its ancient Spanish
..
UL
name of A-tas-ka-dero, the place of springs,
marshes and water. Lying at an elevation of a
A tx,e #acro Hcaeh, with MGITV 1toeh in the distance.
iilsdiota
water at actual coat of Pumping-
For
umping.f:or women who desire a profitable
occupation in connection with their home,
WW
COT Ffawt
Margarita Creek traverse it from west to east. -"
flowing from the mountains separating Alas-
sea eastward to the Salinas"
cudero from the
River. 114
At the head of the central valley of Atasca-
dero, leading out from the Civic Center, is
Atascadero Lake, a partially natural and
jpartly constructed lake, into which a branch
of Atascadero Creek has been led through
large mains, feeding it with mountani spring
bathing and fishing -e en-
joyed
Flowae and bulb sales booth on highway.
water. Boating g
on this lake, which is surrounded by a
grotty park of a hundred acres, Part of which tioq._a�...� _.�JG¢rowinc_of..flowers..and._.ludl,�-�9••.
is beautifully landscaped and planted, the resthe sea, the
being natural beauty. Atascadero Lake is regularly stwhil River on their eastern a ae, instead tof into tleain taea,e Sdinare
with game fish and affords find fishing covered with a growth of enormous white and live
visitors are always welcome and residents of aiEtp�rts i oaks, the latter retaining their green leaves throughout the
the county come to enjoy this lake and park, y the beautiful mantles of
all the parks of Atascadero and its game enjoyment eand lean'*. are carpeted spring
with wonderfully beautiful hills and vAl-
constructed, laid out and reserved for i,mild flowers of every hue. Atascadero has been so favored
use of the residents of Atascadero and are strictly private by nature that every effort has been to not spoil it, whip
Property.
The ridges and skylinra of the hills and mountains improving it.
•
L J
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Attachment 4: 1980 General Plan text: Creek Policy Proposals; 50 -setback
Areas of open space available for recreation that shall be
preserved are listed below:
The banks and bed of Atascadero Creek
The inundation area of the Salinas River
Atascadero Lake and its surrounding park
The Sunken Gardens
Chalk Mountain Regional Park
The three Little League baseball fields
The banks and bed of craves Creek
Pine Mountain (in part)
The Wranglerette Arena
Areas of open space that shall be considered for acquisition
by a public agency and/or preserved for recreation are listed
below:
Chandler Parkland
Fine Mountain Amphitheater
County -owned lots fronting; on Lakeview adjacent to
Atascadero Lake
Both categories are shown in Table VI -4. The Creek Reserves,
actual and potential, are shown on Map VI -4.
• Atascadero Creek bisects the Colony on a west to east line,
running along the southern portion of the Central Business
District and the administrative -civic center complex.
Portions of the Creek Reserve already are in public owner-
ship. Natural vegetation and scenic quality are abundant
along both creeks.
Creek Policy Proposals
1. Possible purchase of privately owned portions, or
negotiation of easement rights, shall be considered in
order to develop the whole area as recreational land.
These actions can be financed through public subscrip-
tion, general obligation bonds, revenue-sharing funds
or�oper�atiag• marptm5-- . _. _. . —
. r.• Building set -back requirements shall be established• �.
along the banks of both creeks to insure the uninter-
upted natural flow of the streams. Access to and
recreational use of the creeks shall be assured by I
establishing building setbacks of not less than 50 ,.'
,.feet from the bank of the creek.
3. The bacteriological 'cMt!e?rt•dr UM water in both creeks
shall be monitored at appropriate intervals, to insure
against contamination by inflow of effluent from nearby
septic tank leach -lines. This possibility may exist
along Atascadero Creek from the Capistrano _kvenue Bridge
to the railroad overpass.
40 83,
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
-DATE:. 05/08/07
.04. Land disturbance shall be minimized within at least
f 50 feet of water courses, except for that maintenance'
j' such as brush clearing which shall protect adjacent
properties from flood hazards. Other minor exception
could be made for harvesting sand and gravel and for
low -intensity recreational uses, such as trails and p"
nic areas. Channelization of creeks with concrete
shall be prohibited.
5. Some areas' Crf• tie -creaks .shall. be- tCft""in their natur
state for public enjoyment and to provide a continuin`
home for the beaver population, as well as the foxes,`;
weasels, coyotes, wildcats and raccoons.
6. Facilities for picnics, playgrounds and riding, biki
and hiking trails are appropriate to these watercour
areas. ?Multiple -use trails for hiking and riding sh
be developed the length of the creeks.
7. A series of check dams on the upper portions of Atas-
cadero Creek could provide year-round water (see
Chapter VII, SERVICES) for fishing and swimming acti-
vities. However, the alteration of natural drainage
patterns shall be minimized, and the existing minor
drainage channels shall be left in open space, in mos
cases, to provide for runoff.
8. The Atascadero Creek Plan, as prepared by SEDES and
approved as amended by the Board of Supervisors (1975
is an integral part of this General Plan and represen
a potential horizon plan for the subject area. The C
Plan is shown on Map VI -2.
9. That portion of the Atascadero Creek Reserve from El
Camino Real Bridge to the proposed Lewis Avenue Bridg
shall be developed into a park.
The Salinas River and its watershed recharge at least some
of the riverbed wellfields of the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. The unimpeded flow of the river and its tributar
must be assured. The Salinas River offers spectacular Dos
bilities for certain types of recreational uses, as well a
playing an important role in the County Riding and Hiking
Trail System. Certain sections are endowed with abundant
natural vegetation. River bottom areas above normal flow
levels are particularly suited to camping and picnicking
development. A specific study for this type of use shall
be made of the more favorable river areas.
1. Agricultural and recreational land uses shall be main
tained the full length of the river's flood plain as
it passes through the Colony. Building permits shall
be denied in the potential inundation areas.
84,
•
•
•
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05!08/07
2. Recreational trails shall be encouraged, particularly
alon„q.the vresferri banks o� the H1,Mr.— • ...
.r 3.� Public access to and recreational use of the Salinas*%%.
a ` River bank adjacent to the light industry reserve
r' shall be assured in the future by apnropriate develop- •`+
ment regulation including the possible establishment
`t of a substantial industrial building setback from the 1
top of the bank of not less than 50 feet, where land- e'
•�" scape treatment could blend with the setting. It is ,,•
• ' .. hown on Map VI -2.
Atascadero Lake - — - —
The 25 -acre Atascadero Lake and its surrounding 10 -acre
park not only provide a home for aquatic and bird life but
also serve as the primary recreational area for the Colony
and, indeed, for surrounding portions of the entire County.
The Dark is so heavily used that additional areas will have
to be acquired to keep pace with the patronage. A park
development Plan approved by the Board of Supervisors foresees
acquisition and construction of a greater variety and number
of recreational facilities. A long-term Capital Outlay_
Program is necessary to properly allocate construction funds
40 for these projects.
During summer, the lake water becomes quite warm, resulting
in a tremendous bloom of microscopic plant life. Current
chemical methods of controlling the growth, are not compatible
with the existence of fish -in the same water." No chemical
action shall be taken to discourage the periodic plant life.
The lake and Dark shall remain in public ownership.
Pine Mountain Amphitheater or Stadium Park served as an
important cultural and recreational site for the original
community of Atascadero. Pine mountain is characterized by
dense growth and steep slopes where recreational activities
would logically be of a varied nature. It, provides a grand
central setting for a large community park., This twenty-six
acre area shall be developed for its original purpose, It
is detailed in Map VI -1. The City shall consider purchasing
it if it appears necessary to assure such a development.
Funding for such acquisition and development could be accom-
plished through public subscription, general obligation bonds,
revenue-sharing funds, operating surplus or purchase and
donation.
The Sunken Gardens are another attractive reminder of the
caliber and tone of E. G. Lewis' vision of 60 years ago.
The portion of the original Sunken Gardens east of the
Veterans' Memorial Building, now part of the Junior High
School campus, shall be considered for acquisition and
restoration (:see SEDES Creek Plan, Appendix B), Further
MIS
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
ATTACHMENT 5: 2004 ECOSLO settlement and
2003-0007 General Plan Amendment Text
AGREEMENT OF SETTLEMENT AND COMPROMISE
This Agreement of Settlement and Compromise ("Agreement's is made and
entered this4rday of May 2003 by and between the City of Atascadero ("the City"} and
the Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo ("ECOSLO').
Recitals
A. On or about June 25, 2002, the City adopted City Council Resolution No.
2002-031 (General Plan Amendment 2000-0001) which had the effect of amending the
City's existing General Plan ("the General Plan Amendment").
B. On or about July 26, 2002, ECOSLO filed the lawsuit entitled ECOSLO F
vs. City of Atascadero el al., San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. CV 020723 ("the
Lawsuit"). ECOSLO, through the lawsuit, contended, among other things, that (i) the
environmental impact report for the General Plan Amendment was legally inadequate and
(b) the General Plan Amendment otherwise violated state law.
C. The parties met on several occasions in an attempt to arrive at a settlement a
of the Lawsuit. The parties have reached an agreement of settlement and compromise on
the terms and conditions set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and ECOSLO agree as follows:
1. Dismissal of Lawsuit. Concurrent with the execution of this Agreement by the
parties, ECOSLO will deliver to the City a fully executed Request for Dismissal of the
Lawsuit as to all parties, with prejudice. The City will file the Request for. Dismissal and
provide ECOSLO with a file -endorsed copy.
2. Mutual Release of Liability. The parties hereby and forever release and discharge
each other and their respective members, representatives, employees, consultants,
officials, agents, boards, committees, consultants, attorneys, successors and assigns from
any and all claims, disputes, causes of action, fees and costs that arose from or in relation
to the adoption of the General Plan. Amendment including alleged deficiencies in the -
General Pian as a result of the General Plan Amendment, the environmental review for
the General Plan Amendment, the proceedings leading up to the General Plan, the filing
of the Lawsuit, or any matter raised or that could have been raised in the Lawsuit, and
any claim.for costs, expenses or attorney fees incurred in relation to the General Plan
Amendment or in the Lawsuit. Each party shall bear their own costs and attorney fees
incurred in the Lawsuit.
CiObligations. The City has agreed to take the following actions:
(i) The City will complete the Master Sewer Plan on or before December 31, 1
2003. The City Staff will propose to the City Council, and the City Council will consider
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
in good faith, an ordinance to the effect that property owners with existing residential
dwellings would only be required to connect to the public sewer system if their system
has failed. A septic system has failed if (a) effluent has escaped to the surface, or
otherwise jeopardizes ground or surface water, and (b) it cannot be repaired or replaced
consistent with Appendix K of the UPC within a reasonable time.
(ii) The City is in the process of completing a habitat survey for plant
communities within the City. This survey, when completed, will be used as a basis for
preparing a map of wildlife corridors and habitat in the City. The Citywill use
reasonable efforts to complete this survey in 2003.
(iii) The City will complete a fiscal analysis of the impact of the zoning and
density changes that are likely to occur as a result of the General Plan Amendment. This
analysis will be completed by the City Manager within a reasonable time but no later than
the end of 2004. The parties recognize that the current budgetary crisis in California may
impact the completion of this survey,
(iv) The City will provide ECOSLO with a map that delineates the property lines
within and adjacent to the Salinas River. Further, the City, as a property owner, will
participate in reasonable efforts to manage and control the Salinas River Corridor.
t
(v) The City hereby acknowledges that it has an existing policy to acquire open
space easements where feasible. It is also the City's policy to seek the dedication of open
space easements where legally permissible.
(vi) The City will adopt a 35 -foot interim setback along Atascadero Creek and
Graves Creek. This setback will remain in place until the City adopts an ordinance
establishing permanent creek setbacks. The City will provide notice to ECOSLO of all
land use proposals on the property known as Dove Creek.
(vii) The City will amend Table H-3 of the General Plan to show that the listed
figures are projected build out and not the maximum build out.
(viii) The Atascadero Mutual Water Company is in the process of preparing an
urban water study. The City will use the urban water study to analyze the water demands
of future development projects. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to preclude 1.
the City from using other studies, reports, expert analysis or other similar information in
its analysis of water demands.
4. No Admission of Liability. This Agreement is entered in settlement and
compromise of a lawsuit and should not be construed as an admission or representation of
the merit, or lack thereof, of any lawsuit or dispute.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 5: 2003-0007 General Plan Amendment Text
Policy 8.2: Establish and maintain setbacks and development standards for creek -side
development.
Program:
Adopt and maintain a creek setback ordinance that will establish building setbacks
and development standards along the banks ofAtascadero Creek, Graves Creek,
blueline creeks and the Salinas River to ensure the uninterrupted natural flow of the
streams and protection of the riparian ecosystem with flexible standards for the
downtown area.
Responsibility: CDD, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Adopt Ordinance in 2DCL2005.
2. Prior to adoption of a creek setback ordinance an interim 2G5 -foot creek setback
shall be in effect alon g Atascade ro C re ek-and Graves Creek_ ard-akAll oth er 7.5
min X15 quadrangle blueline creeks shall have an interim 20 -foot setback. The
interim setbacks shall be subject to the following: a:; ig"Aws=
a) On Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek setbacks shall be measured from the
edge of the creek reservation.
b) All other blueline creek setbacks shall be measured from ordinary high water
mark.
c) The Planning Commission may approve exceptions to the interim creek setbacks
in the form of a Conditional Use Permit if the finding can be made that creeks,
riparian areas and site improvement will not be negatively impacted by the
exception.
runt P Sar
•
1�1
i�
•
is
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 6: Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek Setback Options
Council Report 8-8-06
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek
Creek Setback Options
RECOMMENDATION:
The Council direct staff to prepare a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change
establishing a 35 -foot setback from the Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek
reservation boundaries.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The City of Atascadero adopted the 2025 General Plan in July 2002. At that time the
General Plan contained Policy LOC 8.2.2. which established a 20 -foot setback along all
blueline creeks in Atascadero. The setback was intended to prevent development from
encroaching on the riparian areas and flood ways. The City's purpose for this setback
was to protect the creek's riparian habitats and to protect property and structures from
shifting creek alignments. Following adoption of the General Plan, the Environmental
Center of San Luis Obispo (ECOSLO) filed a lawsuit against the General Plan.
Following a period of negotiations, an agreement was entered into between ECOSLO
and the City of Atascadero to settle the lawsuit. One of the actions that the City agreed
to included amending portions of the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
One of the Land Use Element amendments was an increase to the setbacks along
Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek to 35 -feet. The City Council amended the
General Plan in March 2004 to increase the setback on Atascadero and Graves Creeks
to 35 feet from the edge of the creek reservation. Since the increase of the creek
setback could affect development on smaller parcels an exception process with a
Conditional Use Permit was created to relieve hardships. The Council also placed a
one year sunset provision on the 35 -foot setback. Therefore, the 35 -foot was to revert
back to 20 feet on March 1, 2005. On February 22, 2005 the Council extended the
setback for an additional 6 -months to September 2005. Due to funding constraints and
limited staff resources, staff was not able to prepare a creek setback ordinance prior to
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
the end of the sunset provision. The sunset provision was not extended past
September and the setback has now reverted back to the original 20 -foot setback.
Analysis
The original idea for the creek setback ordinance was to prepare a detailed mapping of
channels, topography and riparian communities along Atascadero Creek and Graves
Creek. This base information would then be used in a series of community workshops
to build consensus for setbacks along the creeks. Staff envisioned that the setbacks
would be customized to deal with different lot size and habitat conditions throughout
Atascadero. Unfortunately, this approach has proven to be too expensive and staff
intensive and therefore could not been started.
However, the interim 35 -foot setback appeared to work well during the 18 -months it was
in effect. In most cases, projects were designed to accommodate the setback and,
where hardships could be demonstrated, the Planning Commission granted relief.
Based on this experience, staff thinks that codifying the 35 -foot setback as the
permanent creek setback may be the best approach. The 35 -foot setback typically
provides protection for the creek channel and its riparian habitats yet allows reasonable
use of private property.
Staff could prepare the necessary General Plan Amendments, Zone Change and
environmental documents at a minimal cost within the next six months. •
FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of the 35 -foot creek setback with a routine hearing process could be handled
by existing staff with no additional cost to the City.
Development of a city wide creek setback study and public participation process will
likely exceed $100,000 and take at least 18 months to complete.
ALTERNATIVES
4. The Council could direct staff to begin the process of developing a city wide
creek setback study. This project is currently not budgeted and funds would
need to be allocated to hire a consultant.
5. The Council could take not action and allow the existing 20 -foot creek setback to
remain in effect.
6. The Council could refer this issue back to staff to analyze additional options.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 Council Minutes 2-2-05
Attachment 2 General Plan Policy LOC 8.2.2.
•
ATTACHMENT 7: Upper Salinas Watershed Action Program
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
Trash and vehicles in Atascadero Creek increase erosion and pollution.
A. Overview: "Urban centers of Paso Robles, Atascadero, San Miguel, Templeton,
Santa Margarita and Shandon have experienced significant growth during the last half
of the 20th century. The Upper Salinas Watershed has been transformed by these
changes. Steelhead fisheries within the Salinas River and tributaries have declined
over a number of years and water quality has degraded. Eroded soil has polluted
streams and riparian vegetation has disappeared." (California State Lands
Commission, 1993; ch. 2, pg. 6, Watershed Action Plan)
E. Land Use Issues: "While the majority of land within the watershed is either open
space or agriculture, urban land uses have a major impact on stream water quality and
erosion. This is due to the intensity of the urban development and the fact that the cities
are nestled along the banks of the Salinas River and several of its tributaries.
Approximately 30 lineal miles of the Salinas River and its tributaries are fronted with
urban uses (including parts of these tributaries: Atascadero Creek...)" (ch. 2, pg. 15)
•
`7n urban areas, roads, buildings, and parking lots prevent rainfall from percolating into
the soil. Vegetation removed from the land has also served to increase runoff. Stream
channels in urban areas have exhibited high levels of pollutants and increased
suspended sediment." (ch. 2, pg. 17) 0
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
A. Wildlife: "The Upper Salinas watershed is home for many species exotic, unlisted,
listed, and candidates into the Federal Endangered Species List... Based upon an
evaluation by the US Geological Survey, Biological Resource Division, the following lists
of species are indicative of habitat connectivity and habitat quality. Partial list includes:
mountain lion, coyote, bobcat, gray fox, black bear, kit fox, mule deer, tule elk, spotted
owl, riparian associated birds, neotropical migratory birds, red -legged frog, and
steelhead trout." (ch. 3, pg. 1)
A.2.1 Steelhead: "Steelhead has been considered as a bioindicator of the water body's
health in the Upper Salinas River Watershed. Also steelhead populations are
considered a true barometer of the health of watershed and oceans. Steelhead is a
federally listed species and for the South -Central California Coast Evolutionary
Significant Unit it is listed as a threatened species." Steelhead, once plentiful within the
waters of the Salinas, have been relegated to a few remaining tributaries, Atascadero
Creek being one of those. "These streams contain a few hardy steelhead, the remnants
of a once thriving population... The Salinas has been listed as a `Category 1, Impaired
Watershed' and one of the most critical rivers in California by the State Water
Resources Control Board due to its degraded condition and the impacts of non -point
pollution on water quality." (ch. 3, pg. 3-5)
• B.2. Changes on the Riparian Vegetation; Atascadero Reach of the Salinas River:
The average cover of the riparian vegetation has changed dramatically throughout the
years since 1949... Within this reach, there has been an overall loss of 271 acres of
riparian vegetation over the past 54 years. Slightly over 90 percent of the riparian
vegetation within this reach has been lost." (ch. 3, pg. 17) Possible reasons for the loss
of riparian areas and additional functions and values of the riparian vegetation for the
Salinas River are shown in Attachment 6.
Salinas Rever, Atascadero Study Reach_
Year
1949
2003
Length of Reach
14,000 ft.
14,000 ft
Channel Average Width
1,200 ft. t<�
990 ft.
Channel Widest Width
2,100 ft. • %
2,100 ft. i
Channel Narrowest Width
990 ft
990 ft
Total Area of Channel Within Reach
385 ac.
378 ac.*
Total Area of Riparian Vegetation
365 ac.
39 ac.
Percentage of Riparian Vegetation Cover
95%
10%
* Since 1949, horizontal erosion added 5 acres of channel area. During that same time period, land
0
encroachment by property owners subtracted 12 acres of channel area.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Chapter 4: Erosion, Sediment, and Channel Conditions: "Nature creates a balance
of erosion and soil production... Man's activities have altered the landscape and, in
many cases, increase the rate of soil erosion. The system becomes out of
balance... Atascadero creek at the confluence with the Salinas River is 19.7 square
miles... The Atascadero watershed is impacted by both urban and agricultural land
uses."(ch. 4, pg. 2-3)
D. Urban Watershed Streams: "The urban study area evaluated stream channel
stability and erosion as well as water quality impacts within channels impacted by urban
uses. The urban land uses include the residential, commercial, and industrial uses
within the Cities of Atascadero, Paso Robles, and San Miguel."
The report included a close study of Atascadero Creek near west mall bridge. "The
channel is highly entrenched... It is likely that the upper portion of this reach of the
channel has transitioned from a stable C-3 and C-5 channel to the current unstable F-3,
F-5, and F-6." Upstream of the bridge, the left channel bank is 23- feet in height and
vertical. "This area f the channel is extremely entrenched and unstable. Due to the
extreme entrenchment, the channel velocities are very high. The Army Corps estimates
velocities of 10.6 feet per second during a 100 -year storm and flows 6,625 cubic feet
per second."
During the four years it took to complete the study of the watershed, the left bank of •
Atascadero creek at this section eroded horizontally four feet. "Erosion has occurred
even during drought conditions and fairly low channel flow storms."
Fence
Rebar
Thedweg 2002
Figure 4.15
Atascadero Creek Channel Estimated Erosion Progression
Site Location of Cross -Section: 350 feet southwest of West Mall Bridge
0
ITEM NUMBER: B-1
•DATE: 05/08/07
'According to Simon's `Channel Evolution Model,' Atascadero Creek is beginning its
widening cycle as it tries to create a new state of equilibrium. The channel will continue
to broaden as Atascadero Creek tries to regain a new floodable terrace at lower
elevation. In this reach, it is estimated that approximately 15 cubic yards per lineal foot
of channel have erode and washed downstream."
C.
"The channel bottom is degrading (the bed is eroding). It is estimates that the channel
thalweg has eroded vertically almost 4 feet within the past 21 years, an average of 0.2
feet per year... Further downstream the bank is collapsing under an auto salvage yard.
During an inspection in 2002, there were several vehicles and car parts strewn along
the base of the bank within the channel."
Photo 4.17
Left bank, January 2001, Cross -Section 5,300'
Photo 4:18
December 2003 survey shows 4 feet of bank erosion
"During the course of the study, Atascadero Creek has experienced moderate to sever
bank erosion along over 25% of the distance from the confluence with the Salinas River
and the Curbaril sewer crossing. As a result, sediment has filled pools and gravels and
cobbles have become embedded. Water quality and habitat for aquatic life has been
affected."
ITEM NUMBER:
DATE:
Atascadero Greek
STREAM CHANNEL
MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
Cross Section of Atascadero Creek: December 4. 2003
Atascadero Creek Longitudinal Profile: January 3-4, 2001
4,585-5,450 Foot (approx.) upstream from Confluence with Salinas River
dope: u.47o
Sinuosity: 1.17 Figure 4.17
Chapter 4, Page 45
B-1
U5/U8/U7
Water
Surlace
�'`✓ Thalweg
m
Upper Salinas -Lae Tablas
Resource Conservation District
�-A
•
7
Study Reach F
(Urban inf ittrnre 1
Distance to
BMW
o LargeOak
Wast Miall aHdasth Lett 8W*R
Q
Expoced
(HktoaoHt y418rk19e} v Rock Flprap&
\
drainage pipe from
826.
CMACES willow Pied V
_,,. _ .. , __. J,. .. _
i
t (5.3233,
f!+ Vertical lei bank
L from confluence)
� y
E
o
Paol
a 824.00
I
Fbot - -Foot- PooF
���
�.
a
�
t
i 822.00
I
� -_
Pod
Hundreds of
I small IlSh
820.0
_.. ... .. .. . ......... . .... ... +
�
t
V)
818.00,
`V
4700 4800 4900 5000 5100 5200
5300
5400 5500
Distance
dope: u.47o
Sinuosity: 1.17 Figure 4.17
Chapter 4, Page 45
B-1
U5/U8/U7
Water
Surlace
�'`✓ Thalweg
m
Upper Salinas -Lae Tablas
Resource Conservation District
�-A
•
7
•
C7
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Salinas River Vegetation Comparison Study
ITEM NUMBER: B-1
DATE: 05/08/07 .
B.3 Depletion of the Riparian Vegetation:
Despite the vital importance of the riparian vegetation within the Upper Salinas River Watershed, it
remains relatively unprotected from human activities and land use. The following list describes possible
reasons for the loss of the riparian areas:
• Development both urban and rural within the watershed has increased stormwater runoff and
reduced the infiltration of rain into the ground. This contributes to depletion of the groundwater
and possibly reduced spring flow into the channel and tributaries. Increased runoff has also
resulted in increased flood flow volumes and velocities, which in turn accelerates channel erosion
and loss of riparian vegetation.
• Channel changes include bed and bank erosion, sedimentation of the channel and flood plain, and
channel migration and avulsion can affect the riparian vegetation. During the US -LT RCD's
morphological study of the Salinas River and tributaries, accelerated channel erosion is very
evident. The loss of vegetation is also undoubtedly a major contributor to this increased channel
erosion. 0
• Unrestricted livestock access within channels results in the grazing and trampling of riparian
vegetation, compacting soils which prevents regeneration, and making pathways which erode
banks. They also transport weed seeds in fur and faeces, and contribute organic nutrients that are
transported by runoff to the stream and rivers and adversely affect the water quality.
• Groundwater extraction by wells can affect the survival of riparian areas. Overall groundwater
supplies within the study area have been impacted; in some areas water levels have declined but
other regions have see increases. Wells are frequently placed near the rivers and streams. Water
wells can create localized "depressions" or "troughs" in the groundwater level, making it difficult
for riparian species to access sufficient water for survival.
• Dams have had a major impact on stream flow and riparian vegetation. There are three major
dams within the Upper Salinas watershed: Nacimiento, San Antonio and Santa Margarita.
Nacimiento and San Antonio Dams release stored water into the Salinas River in Monterey
County, but the water from Santa Margarita is exported out of the basin. A study of flows through
the Santa Margarita dam indicates a severe reduction of water reaching the main channel
downstream of the dam. The exportation of water to other areas reduces the water necessary for
and Ve
Chapter 3, Page 24 Wildlife9etation •
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
sustaining riparian vegetation and aquatic habitats in the Upper Salinas River Watershed in San
Luis Obispo County.
• Changes in flow regimes can also affect the riparian vegetation either directly by drowning, or
indirectly through erosion and bank slumping. Drowning is not suspected to be a significant
problem due to decreased surface flows.
• An increase in the intensity of fire reduces the successful regeneration of some plants species
and encourages introduced plants to grow. Better fire management could improve conditions
within the stream corridors.
• Vehicle access and adjacent landuses are a critical problem within the Upper Salinas River.
Disturbances include creation of track paths, crushing and trampling of vegetation. Also, OHV's
(Off Highway Vehicles) can ignite fires, cause soil compaction, and spill fuels.
OHV's in the Upper Salinas River Watershed
BA Value of the Riparian Vegetation:
Riparian vegetation zones are the transition areas between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems 9,10,11
Riparian plant communities both protect the river and depend on the river. Some of many functions of
the riparian vegetation are:
0 Chapter 3, Pape 25 Wildlife and Vegetation
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
Upper Salinas River
Watershed Action Plan
• Bank stabilization and water quality protection. The roots of riparian trees and shrubs help
hold streambanks in place, preventing erosion. Riparian vegetation also traps sediments and
pollutants, helping keep the water clean.
• Biofilter. Riparian vegetation acts as a filter for sediments, phosphorus and organic nitrogen which
improves the quality of water entering watercourses. This is especially important along smaller
streams which feed into the main channels. Riparian vegetation is essential for maintaining high
water quality in streams and rivers.
• Fish and wildlife habitat. As dying or uprooted trees fall into the stream, their trunks, root wads,
and branches slow the flow of water. Large snags create fish habitat by forming pools and riffles in
the stream. Riffles are shallow gravelly sections of the stream where water runs faster. Many of the
aquatic insects that salmon eat live in riffles. Salmon also require riffles for spawning. They use
pools for resting, rearing and refuge from summer drought and winter cold.
• Food chain support. Steelhea.d during the freshwater stage of their cycle, eat mainly aquatic
insects. Aquatic insects their life in they feed leaves
spend most of water; on and woody material
such as logs, stumps and branches that fall into the water from streambanks. Standing riparian
vegetation is habitat for other insects that sometimes drop into the water, providing another food
source for fish.
• Thermal cover. Riparian vegetation shields streams and rivers from summer and winter
temperature extremes that may be very stressful or even fatal, to fish and other aquatic life. The
cover of leaves and branches brings welcome shade, ensuring that the stream temperature remains
cool in the summer and moderate in the winter. Cooler, shaded streams have fewer algae and are
able to hold more dissolved oxygen, which fish need to breathe.
• Flood control. During high stream flows, riparian vegetation slows and dissipates floodwaters.
This prevents erosion that damages fish spawning areas and aquatic insect's habitats.
The riparian vegetation within the Upper Salinas River Watershed needs to be restored, in order to
protect and improve the water quality and wildlife habitat value of these areas.
Chapter 3, Pape 26 Wildlife and Vegetation 0
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 8: Native Tree Inventory Recommendations and Habitat Suitability Index
Prepared by Thomas Gaman, East-West Forestry Associates, Inc.
HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX
Red= no habitat
Pink=poor
Yellow=fair
Lt. Green=good
Dark green= ^_ —A
Wildlife corridors and habitat for specific species of interest can be identified
using WHR 8.0 provided by Fish and Game. Having assigned WHR codes for all
the areas in the City, wildlife habitat relations can be readily assessed using the
science base of the WHR system. This will be very useful for specific planning
efforts as individual permit applications are received.
7. Recommendations.
Valley Oaks. Large old Valley Oaks in Atascadero are exhibiting serious
decline. While many areas of Atascadero are excellent growing sites for these
large trees, many or most of the local population have serious rot and appear
to be at the very end of their life cycle. This will lead to significant loss of
heritage trees and habitat. I recommend protection of all large valley oaks and
landowner incentives to plant and protect young valley oaks. A more intensive
0 38
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 10
(100%) inventory of large valley oaks would provide detailed information on
this population that is only partially described via this current inventory project.
Blue Oaks. This is one of the very valuable habitat types, valuable to a large
number of species. At the minimum we should assure for protection and
regeneration of blue oaks and leave as much undeveloped blue oak habitat as
possible.
Coastal Oak Woodlands. These types generally appear healthy, extensive in
Atascadero. Encourage size and age class diversity.
Shrub lands. These lands are less diverse, heavily vegetated with shrub
cover, and provide very sparse woodland cover. Chaparral shrublands are
dominated by chamise (Adenostoma fasiculatum) on thinner soils. In some
cases chaparral scrublands harbor R&E species and should be carefully
surveyed.
Riparian corridors. These corridors, especially in perennially wet areas and
seeps, are biodiverse, provide rare and endangered habitat and biodiversity.
Protection buffers for streamside conservation areas should be maximized
where possible.
Native Plant Education and Nursery Stock Availability. ANTA and the City •
should continue their community education projects, including neighborhood
habitat protection and assuring the availability of native woodland species for
landscaping purposes.
Tree Ordinance. The Atascadero Tree Ordinance, which I have not seen,
should be reviewed to assure that it is effectively protecting Atascadero's
significant vegetation and habitat types.
Fire. Consider the impacts of wildland fire when making policy and planning
decisions. Fire hazard has not been addressed in this report.
More analysis of data. This inventory provides baseline GIS coverages and
inventory data. These data are compatible with the WHR system as provided
by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG 2002). Further analyses
of this information base in cooperation with ANTA and planning staff is now
necessary. Landscape analyses should consider the "outlying habitat" beyond
the City and Colony boundaries.
Periodic Update. Many areas of Atascadero have changed even since the
2002 imagery. The GIS coverage and mapping should be regularly updated.
The tree inventory should be updated every 10-20 years.
39 0
•
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 9: Tribal Council Review Letter: Completion of 90 -day review
I 17 7 Marsh Street, Suite 110
Saiz Luis Obispo, California 93401.
805-73-0806
Callie Taylor February 28, 2007
Associate Planner
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: General Plan Amendment — Creek Setbacks
Dear Callie:
The Northern Chumash Tribal Council (NCTC) would like to thank you, Warren and Steve for
the meeting we had to discuss the issues concerning the Creek Setback for the City of
Atascadero.
NCTC is in agreement with the proposed changes to Policy 8.2 with the following changes:
1. Policy 8.2 # 2 subparagraph c) -to included the wording "Archaeological Phase I study"
2. Policy 9-4.111 Blue Line Creek Setbacks section (c) — subsection (2) — (i) to included the
wording "Archaeological Phase I study" and under subsection (2) — (i) — subsection (A)
to included the wording "Archaeological Phase I study".
Please send us a copy of the final draft of the new General Plan Amendment.
Thank you,
Fred Collins
Spokesperson
Northern Chumash Tribal Council
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 10: Comments: Water Quality Control Board
'� California Regional Water Quality Control Board f
(,inda Adams Central Coast Region Arnold Scbn
secreiuryfa, Into ncc Address: http),'VM%.ss�Tcb.cu.gov/rnycb3 Gorr
Em•vm .rm'd 895 Aerovista Place, Suite 101, San Luis Obispo, California 93301
Prorertion Phone (805) 549-3147 - FAX (805) 543.0397
February 26, 07
Callie Taylor
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
Ms. Callie Taylor:
RECEIVED
r��y
FEB 2 S. 200! 7
CDrtlriillNIP' k."rk
RE: Negative Declaration, Creek Setback Text Amendment, City of Atascadero,
San Luis Obispo County SCH# 2007011138
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed Negative
Declaration for the Creek Setback Text Amendment for the City of Atascadero,
California. The Central Coast Water Board supports setbacks from creeks and rivers,
and applauds the City of Atascadero for being proactive in this regard. We do,
however, have some concerns.
Research indicates that a fixed setback (buffer) distance for all streams is not
appropriate. The buffer distance needed to protect water quality and habitat varies
considerably with field conditions. For example, slope, stream width, flow regime,
vegetation type, etc., all play a role in the determination of the correct buffer width.
However, if a fixed buffer distance is to be used, research indicates that a 10-20 meter
(32-65 feet) buffer on each side of the water course be used to protect stream
temperature, with wildlife needing considerably wider buffers. Therefore, the Water
Board does not support the 20 -foot setback applied to blue line streams and other
"significant drainage courses", but would support the 35 foot buffer for these water
bodies.
The draft proposal states that exceptions to the ordinance would be considered, but
would require a biologist and geomorphologist report submitted to the Planning
Commission for consideration. The exception would require a "Minor Conditional Use
Permit," and would potentially allow a variance of the setback for Atascadero Creek,
Graves Creek, Boulder Creek, and the Salinas River, allowing the setback to be
reduced to 20 -feet. However, as mentioned previously, it appears that the 35 -foot
setback proposed for Atascadero, Graves, and Boulder Creeks, represent the minimum
buffer recommended. Therefore, it would not be advisable to reduce the setback to 20 -
feet under any circumstance; doing so could potentially cause a significant impact, and
therefore the negative declaration would not apply.
The draft proposed zoning ordinance defines a blue -line creek as a stream or
watercourse indicated by a solid or broken line on a USGS 7.5 minute series
quadrangle. However, there may be differences in blue lines on different printings of
7.5 minute quads. For example, a 1960's printing has very few blue lines within the city
California Environmental Protection Agency
RrcvOM Pnrvr
•
•
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
•
ATTACHMENT 10: Comments: Water Quality Control Board
Callie Taylor 2 of 2 .-ebruary 26, 2007
of Atascadero. The Water Board recommends incorporating a map in the proposed
ordinance that clearly defines the blue lines occurring within the city. Providing such a
map in the ordinance would provide clarity for all stakeholders.
The setback measurement on Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek are
to be measured from the "creek reservation." However, the creek reservation is not
defined.
The Proposed Zoning Ordinance states that some improvements are allowed within the
setback zone. Allowed improvements include non-invasive landscaping, raised decks,
and transparent fencing that does not block water flow. The Water Board does not
support these allowed improvements. The following are examples of what could occur if
these activities were allowed. Some landscaping, e.g. herbaceous vegetation could
reduce shading if the previous vegetation were trees and/or shrubs, resulting in
increased water temperature and perhaps erosion. Similarly, raised decks may result in
the removal of shade -producing trees and/or shrubs. In addition, decking over riparian
areas may negatively impact wildlife movement in the riparian corridor. Any type of
fencing, whether transparent or otherwise, has the potential to impede wildlife
movement through the riparian corridor. And finally, landscaping that requires
vegetation management may rely on a variety of chemicals which pose a threat to water
quality when applied near a waterbody.
Water Board staff request that these issues be addressed and potentially mitigated for
in any setback ordinance considered for adoption by the City of Atascadero.
If you have any questions please contact Chris Rose at (805) 542-4770 or via email at
crose@waterboards.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
�y
}� /Roger W. Briggs
Executive Officer
SACEOAVComment LetterslSan Luis Obispo CountoCroek Setback.doc
California Environmental Protection Agency
0 Recycled NIX,
0
ATTACHMENT 10: Response to Comments: Water Quality Control Board
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 •
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION #2006-0039
(Creek Setbacks: GPA 2006-0017 / ZCH 2006-0125 / PLN 2006-1139)
Roger Briggs, California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Dated February 26, 2007
1. Comment: •
A fixed setback is not as appropriate as site specific setbacks.
Response:
In order to create site specific setbacks, surveys and biologist reports would have to be completed to
analyze all of the creeks and waterways within the City. At this time, it would be too costly for the City
to identify site specific setbacks for all watercourses. Site specific setbacks could be determined by
requiring the applicant to obtain a survey and biologist report during building permits, however this
would put a costly burden on property owners if it was required with every building permit. The fixed
setback will help to identify clear development standards for building near creeks and waterways in order
to protect the creeks. Relief from the 35 -foot setback would still be possible with a Minor Conditional
Use Permit if the applicant can show that the project meets all of the required findings and does not have
a significant impact to the creek.
2. Comment:
Recommend a 35 -foot buffer (rather than 20 -foot) on blueline creeks and other significant drainage
courses.
Response:
This suggestion will be taken into consideration. However, at this time, a 35 -foot buffer on all blue line
creeks and significant drainage courses may be viewed as a significant increase. The major creeks,
including Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek are proposed with the 35 -foot setback,
consistent with the interim setbacks which have been in place.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
3. Comment:
Not advisable to reduce the setback to 20 -feet with the Conditional Use Permit.
Response:
Given the idea that site specific setbacks are more desirable than fixed setbacks, the General Plan includes
provisions to allow reduced setbacks with a Conditional Use Permit on sites where a 20 -foot setback
would adequately protect the creek. A biologist, hydrogeomorphologist, and Archeological Phase 1
report would be required. The project would have to meet the required findings and show that the
reduced setback would not have any negative impacts on the creek or the proposed development.
4. Comment:
Recommend incorporating a map with the ordinance to show all bluelines.
Response:
This suggestion has been taken into consideration. A map will be included in the General Plan, the
Zoning Ordinance, and/or as a link on the City's webpage. The City's GIS system maps all 7.5 minute
series blueline reeks as shown on USGS quadrangle maps, which is available for public view in detail at
City Hall.
5. Comment:
Define creek reservation.
Response:
A definition has been included in the zoning Ordinance for the creek reservation. A creek reservation is a
separate parcel, created on the original colony maps where the creek is located. Creek reservations are
located over Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek.
6. Comment:
Allowed improves within setback not supported.
Response:
The City understands the concerns associated with allowing any improvements within the setback area.
However, to restrict all use of the area within the setback would put too much restriction on individual
property owners. The City believes that the allowed improvements listed have very little potential to
harm the riparian area or the quality of water along the creeks. The allowed improvements enable the
property owner to use of this portion of land for limited use.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
ATTACHMENT 10: Comments: Atascadero Historical Society
'y f � � � Madero Historical Society
Post Office Box 1047
Atascadero, California 93423
Phone (805) 466-8341
A Non -Profit Corporation
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
—111-1A STATE W510RICAi LAHOMAR% NUMBER SSB -2 / 7
L.Ib ILP IW NATIOVAL REGISTRY Of—ORICAL PLACES T+'`
City of Atascadero
Att: Warren Frace, Director of Community Development
Subject: Creek setbacks
I am responding to your letter regarding creek setbacks to the Atascadero Historical
Society Board of Directors. We agree that creek setbacks are necessary for the protection
of anyone building on creekside property. Erosion happens so setbacks will help to
protect in time of floods. I personally prefer a 50 ft. setback on Atascadero Creek but
the 35 ft. proposal is a, good compromise. We favor your proposal.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely.
Marjorie R. Mackey for The Atascadero Historical Society
P.Q. Box 1047, Atascadero, CA 93423
is
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 10: Comments: Atascadero Association of Realtors
March 22,2007
TO: Chairperson Joan O'Keefe
Vice Chairperson Roberta Fonzi
Commissioner Sandy Jack
Commissioner Gregory W. Slane
Commissioner Pamela Heatherington
Commissioner Doug Marks
Commissioner Daniel P. O'Grady
Warren Frace,
Community Development Director
From: The Atascadero Association of Realtors
Subject: Proposal of zone change 2006-0125,General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, PLN 2006-
1139.
The Atascadero Association of Realtors is aware of the above mentioned issues open for public
comment at the April 3`°, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. We have concerns regarding how
and why the "creek set -back" changes are affecting the private property rights and values of
current property owners and future property owners.
We will attend the Planning Commission meeting of April 3d, 2007 to voice our concerns. As an
advisory comment, there may be a higher than normal amount of public comment.
Sincerely,
Mark Gibbs
Chairman, Governmental Affairs Committee
Atascadero Association of Realtors
(805) 459-7468 (direct)
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Attachment 10: Response Letter: Jonalee Istenes
Dear City Council,
Regarding the creek setback ordinance, the City Council not only needs to agree to a creek setback, but
fund more fully the maintenance. A concern was raised regarding the creek crossing at Hwy 41 and
Carmelita. This could be easily remedied with boulders as was used around the lake. A Fish and Game
representative was there and told me this was not the worst of it. More of a concern was erosion and
pollution. The 35' creek setback allows for a buffer of plant materials for filtration and erosion control.
If funding could be found for a 2 million dollar study, we could be more exact in the individual
requirements affecting water quality for each property. Without that, it is better to err on the site of
caution in your responsibility to the citizens of our state. Water quality is of the utmost importance -what
we do here affects water quality 100's of miles away.
Citizens that spoke at the Planning Commission's last meeting did not seem to have a clear understanding
with how a setback would affect their property. I discussed several properties near the creek as examples
with your staff. Please have your staff state what would be required in a few cases - for your benefit as
well as the public. This may help answer many similar questions along blue line creeks. Clearly, it needs
to be restated that this is a setback, not and easement - there is a difference.
Their is no point drafting an ordinance that offers no real protection. Unless the city has a method to
approve the biologist, you may end up with a weak ordinance like the tree ordinance. The Planning
Commission was negligent in their duty to recommend protection of the creeks. It is in your General
Plan. Total disregard for your own General Plan does not bode well for the community that has gone
through years of process to create such a document. Where is the respect for those voices that that
document represents - our own town's consensus.
In regards to our own Cities use of herbicides in our watershed, I am sure the staff follows the proper
technique and safety rules for applying chemicals. I question whether we should be spraying any
chemical within such close proximity to water that drains into our creek and ultimately our drinking
water. Since we are seeking creek protection, the city should be setting the standard, not seeking to
justify its own chemical dependency. We should at the minimum, set a recommendation into the
ordinance to ban chemical use within and appropriate distance from the water (20'? 35'?), and follow
through with a master plans to cut the chemical use.
Thank you for your consideration on this important issue.
Sincerely,
•
Jonalee Istenes 0
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 11: Creek setback standards from other cities
Creek Setback Ordinance Examples
Participating Communities: Setbacks
(Information provided in part by City of Arroyo Grande)
San Luis Obispo City: 50 -foot setback on San Luis Obispo Creek; 35 -foot setback on other
major creeks; 20 -foot setback on all other creeks not specifically identified. Larger setbacks
identified as needed in compliance with CEQA.
Arroyo Grande: Currently Arroyo Grande has a moratorium for building along creeks. All
discretionary projects require an offer of dedication along the creek, which includes the area 25 -
feet from the high water mark. The City is in the process of writing a creek setback ordinance.
Pismo Beach: 25 feet from top of bank.
San Luis Obispo County: Creek setbacks identified specifically for each area within the
County. Setbacks vary depending on whether the creek is on the coast or inland, and whether
or not there are any specific environmental concerns for the area. The setback in an urban area
is generally 50 feet from the upland extent of riparian vegetation and it is generally 100 feet in
rural areas. A biologist report is usually required for work done around creeks; a setback can be
determined based it the site specific biologist report.
Colma: 15 -foot setback from the top of the bank of the creek.
Goleta: 50 -ft setback for the riparian corridors of creeks, from the top of the bank or the edge of
riparian vegetation (outer edge of the tree canopy), whichever is greater. This setback increases
to a minimum of 100 feet for new subdivisions and development of certain vacant lots.
Corning: 20' setback requirement NOT in the Code.
Redding: 25 -foot setback from the centerline of the stream on both sides.
Winters: No new structural development shall be allowed within fifty (50) feet of the top of bank
along Putah Creek west of Railroad Avenue and along Dry Creek or within one hundred (100)
feet of the top of bank of Putah Creek east of Railroad Avenue.
Yountville: Creek Overlay Zone that's defined as a 35 foot setback from the centerline of the
creek and not less than 10 feet from the bank (it's a small creek in width).
Salinas: A 100 -foot setback area shall be established along Gabilan and Natividad Creeks and
other unnamed creeks within the planning area.
0 Mill Valley: 30 -foot creek setback.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Novato: Buffer zone at least 50 feet wide, measured from the top of the channel bank.
City Responses and Contacts:
(Information provided by City of Arroyo Grande)
Arroyo Grande
Our General Plan policy requires a 25 ft. setback from top of stream bank. Our code only has a
25 foot easement dedication provision for discretionary projects. We have a moratorium on
building on creekside parcels to develop better setback protection standards in our code and
zone all the creeks C/OS (most are zoned public/quasi pubic facility and many drainages are
zoned residential). We are still developing alternatives but it looks like we will recommend a
C/OS overlay over all creeks and drainages and a wide buffer (50ft) for the purposes of review
and include standards such as setbacks 25-35 ft from TOB depending on the creek (2 creeks
have steelhead potential and AG creek is deeply incised so those will include the larger
setbacks). We are trying to integrate other creek protection requirements - generally storm
water, as well. Setback encroachment provisions may be available for the Village area and
agriculture and also if a project includes less impervious surfaces or with a stream bank
restoration, or stabilization project. Early public comment included wanting an incentive
program instead of or in addition to regulations.
Teresa McClish
Planner, City of Arroyo Grande
tmcclish @arroyogrande.org
Colma
We have prepared the General Plan for the small Town of Colma in San Mateo County. Colma
Creek is still open through some parts of Town and we hope eventually to create a pedestrian
walkway along the creek. Accordingly, the General Plan contains policies urging retention of the
remaining open portions of the creek and recommending a 15 foot setback from the top of the
bank of the creek. In the current case the 15 foot setback approximates a 2:1 line projected
back from the inside toe of the creek bed insuring some measure of bank stability and sufficient
space to locate a pathway. See-through fences can be used to restrict access to the creek and
to adjoining private properties. The setback can be addressed through your CEQA process as
well. Implementation of the policy has so far been successful with just the General
Plan however we may need to address access easements and zoning provisions when
extending pathways from public right-of-way to private land.
Mac Carpenter
Goleta
The City of Goleta currently requires a minimum 50 -ft setback for the riparian corridors of creeks
and streams. The 50 feet is measured on both sides of the riparian corridor from the top of the
bank or the edge of riparian vegetation (outer edge of the tree canopy), whichever is greater.
Standards for riparian corridor setbacks are set forth in the City's Interim General Plan Policies,
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
as the City of Goleta is in the process of adopting its first General Plan. (Standards for riparian
corridor setbacks are also stipulated in the City's Coastal Zoning Ordinance.)
The City's draft Conservation Element, however, maintains these minimum riparian corridor
setbacks for parcels that have already been developed or subdivided, and increases the
setback to a minimum of 100 feet for new subdivisions and development of certain vacant
lots. Hope this information helps.
Rob Mullane
Senior Planner
City of Goleta
Planning & Environmental Services
ph. (805) 961-7544
Corning
We have a 20' setback requirement NOT in the Code and we require dedication "in fee" of both
the creek and the setback for access and future trail. We have discussed with knowledgeable
people the need to actually set it at the high-water mark as a minimum in order to include all the
inundation area.
Steve Kimbrough
City of Corning, California
Laguna Beach
We are not an agricultural community but we have hillside areas where we have designated
watercourses. Section 25.50 of our zoning code requires a 25 foot setback from the centerline
of the stream on both sides. The centerlines and setbacks are mapped on our GIS system.
Here's the link to the code Section if you need it: http://bpc.iserver.net/codes/laqunab/ . Section
25.50.030 describes what type of improvements are or are not allowed within this setback.
Blue -line streams such as Aliso Creek fall under the Coastal Commission jurisdiction and have
addition requirements.
Jenifer Murillo
Assistant Planner
City of Laguna Beach
(949) 497-0321
Winters
No new structural development shall be allowed within fifty (50) feet of the top of bank along
Putah Creek west of Railroad Avenue and along Dry Creek or within one hundred (100) feet of
the top of bank of Putah Creek east of Railroad Avenue.
Dan Sokolow
Community Development Director
City of Winters
530-795-4910, ext. 114
Pismo Beach
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
In Pismo Beach we also have a General Plan policy governing creek setbacks. We are trying to
move away from overlay zones whenever possible to minimize layers of regulations.
Carolyn Johnson
Pismo Beach Planning Manager
Santa Paula
Conservation and Open Space Element
pg. CO -32. Open space buffers should be included between future development and the river.
These buffers could include agriculture, natural open space, parks, or continued aggregate
operations, if compatible with proposed development.
pg. CO -32. Implementation Measures
28. For new development on or adjacent to native habitat areas, the following standards shall
apply:
Biological surveys/reports shall be required;
Buffer zones shall be maintained between urban development and sensitive native habitats;
Night lighting shall be shielded and no spill over shall occur;
Excessive night lighting shall not be allowed adjacent to sensitive habitats, natural areas, or
wildlife corridors.
pg. CO -49. Water Resources Policies
9e.e. Development adjacent to the Santa Clara River should be compatible with the continued
flood threat. (IM 38, 39)
*Note: Based on incomplete word search of the Conservation and Open space Element, under
"buffer", "setback", "River", and "flood"
Anna Arroyo, Associate Planner
City of Santa Paula
Yountville
The Town of Yountville has a Creek Overlay Zone that's defined as a 35 foot setback from the
centerline of the creek and not less than 10 feet from the bank (it's a small creek in width).
No construction, fences/walls, and grading or depositing of material can occur with the overlay.
At grade trails, paths, and patios are excepted.
Bob Tiernan, Planning Director
Town of Yountville
Salinas
Setbacks and Open Space Easements to Protect Riparian and Wetland Corridors: S
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Require project developers to protect and enhance riparian corridors through setbacks and open
q P 1 P
space easements within development areas along Gabilan and Natividad Creeks and other
streams in the planning area. Protect and enhance wetlands by requiring setbacks and open
space easements within future development areas in the planning area. A 100 -foot setback area
shall be established along Gabilan and Natividad Creeks and other unnamed creeks within the
planning area. The setback shall be measured from the top of bank, or outside edge of riparian
woodland, whichever is greater. A 100 -foot setback area shall be established along wetlands not
associated with creeks (i.e., seasonal wetland swales or ponds) within the planning area. The
riparian setback shall be measured from the top of bank, or outside edge of riparian woodland,
whichever is greater. The wetland setback shall be measured from the outside edge of the
wetland. Development activities would be prohibited in the setback area; however, the City shall
consider exceptions for passive recreational uses (i.e., trails, playfields, and picnic areas). No
building or structure shall be developed in the setback area. The existing riparian woodland or
wetland shall be protected from construction disturbance. Fencing shall be temporarily placed at
the outside edge of the setback area. This fencing shall remain in-place until construction is
complete. If recreational trails are placed within the buffer area, implement a revegetation program
wherein a vegetative buffer is established between the trail and the outside edge of the riparian
woodland.
Andrew Myrick
Assistant Planner
City of Salinas
40 Mill Valley
We have a "30 -foot creek setback" that is actually just a little sentence in our floodplain
management ordinance. Technically, it only applies to projects that are subject to the floodplain
management ordinance (those in a flood zone that are doing a substantial improvement).
However, in practice, we have applied it to any structure that is 30 feet from any of the major
creeks in the city and have applied our regular zoning code variance regulations to people who
want to build within that area. We are proposing an ordinance that would actually put this creek
setback into the zoning code.
Elise Semonian
Associate Planner
City of Mill Valley
�J
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
ATTACHMENT 12: Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0039
SEE FOLLOWING
•
•
•
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 13: Draft Resolution A: Resolution to deny project
DRAFT RESOLUTION A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADER09 CALIFORNIA,
DENYING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-0017 AND
ZONE CHANGE 2006-0125 (PLN 2006-1139)
(Citywide/City of Atascadero)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from the City of Atascadero (6907 El
Camino Real), to consider a project consisting of a General Plan Amendment consisting of text
changes to LOC Policy 8.2. of the Land Use Element of the General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration 2006-0039 were prepared
for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
• WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is not in the best interest of the City
to enact this amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element to protect the health, safety and
welfare of its citizens; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject General Plan
Amendment application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at
which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said General Plan
Amendment; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on April 3, 2007, studied and considered General Plan Amendment 2006-
0017, after first studying and considering the Proposed Negative Declaration prepared for the
project, has recommended denial of the proposed General Plan Amendment on April 3, 2007 on
a 3-3 vote; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing on April
24, 2007 following the close of the review period to consider the Initial Study and Proposed
Negative Declaration; and,
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero takes the following
actions:
SECTION 1. Denial. The City Council of the City of Atascadero, in a session assembled on
April 24, 2007, resolved to deny the General Plan Amendment 2006-0017 and Zone Change
2006-0125 (PLN 2006-1139.)
On motion by Council Member , and seconded by Council Member
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
George Luna, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick Enright, City Attorney
the
•
•
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 14: Draft Resolution B: To approve Negative Declaration
DRAFT RESOLUTION B
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING
PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2006-0039 PREPARED FOR
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-0017
AND ZONE CHANGE 2006-0125 (PLN 2006-1139)
(Citywide/City of Atascadero)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from the City of Atascadero (6907 El
Camino Real), to consider a project consisting of a General Plan Amendment consisting of text
changes to LOC Policy 8.2. of the Land Use Element of the General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration 2006-0039 were prepared
for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to
enact this amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element to protect the health, safety and
welfare of its citizens; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject General Plan
Amendment application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at
which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said General Plan
Amendment; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on April 3, 2007, studied and considered General Plan Amendment 2006-
0017, after first studying and considering the Proposed Negative Declaration prepared for the
project, and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing on April
24, 2007 following the close of the review period to consider the Initial Study and Proposed
. Negative Declaration; and,
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, hereby resolves to
certify Proposed Negative Declaration 2006-0039 based on the following Findings, and as shown
in Exhibit A:
1. The Proposed Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and,
2. The Proposed Negative Declaration was presented to the City Council, and the
information contained therein was considered by the City Council, prior to
recommending action on the project for which it was prepared; and,
3. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation
measures are incorporated into the project; and,
4. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental
goals; and,
5. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable; and,
6. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or
indirectly; and,
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
• ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick Enright, City Attorney
0
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
George Luna, Mayor
Exhibit A: Proposed Negative Declaration 2006-0039
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
CITY" OF ATASCADERO PROPOSED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION #2006-0039
690' El Camino Real Atascadaro, C.°► 93,422 S05461-5000
Applicant
Citi: of Atiscadese, 4907 El Camino R* Atuzadero, CA P342-1 Phone: &ti-41-5coo
Project Title:
Zone Chance X -X-012-4, General PIM Amendment 2006-00171 PLN 20D6-1139„
Creek 5etba--- Zoning Ordinsace and Geaeral Plan Ammdment
Project
Cir.mide
Location:
Project
The proje,-t comists of a proposed aeal setback ordinance to be induded in Chapter 4, Site
Description:
D -en elopmett Standards of Title t', Pla=n and Zoning- Ordinances in the Atascader Municipal
Coxae Following C -neral Plan Policy &." revision to the Crenersi Plan are proposed vtich vmuld
replace the interim creek setoa,,ks. The updffi-m ase intended to establish a 35 foot setback- alotg
Atascadero Cr= -et Gm- Cre& and BoulderCrea-k reeenatior� a fift mit aatls -k along tlae Sah
River, -end a twenty foot setbak alon.9 all other blue lime creeks, wetlands, and s _=ifieant dugs
coumas. The Plarmine Commission v-vald be able to approve exceptions to the creek setbacla in the
fb= of a h -limn Conxiiticrosl L s-- Permit v- th a biologist and a report if the piaeject
cam: meet the required findinvs to show thffi the creek mixt surrounding habitat will not be sipifrcantlt
affected.
Findings -
I. The project does not have the potential to degrade the envuoarnmt.
2 The project will not achie.,e short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environme tal goals.
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
4. The project vv -ill not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly car indirectly.
Determination:
Based on the above findings, and the information contained in the initial study 2006-W39 Omade apart hereof In,
reference and on file in the Community Development Department), it has bean determined the above project will not
have an adverse impact on the environment.
Prepared By:: C221ie Tgylor, Am
Date Posted: Januar., 30, 2007
Public Review Ends: February H, 200'
Attachments: Initial Study 2006-0039
•
•
0
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 15: Draft Resolution C: Approval of General Plan Amendment
DRAFT RESOLUTION C
A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-0017, AMENDING
THE LAND USE, OPEN SPACE, AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF
THE ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN
(Citywide/City of Atascadero)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from the City of Atascadero (6907 El
Camino Real), to consider a project consisting of a General Plan Amendment consisting of text
changes to LOC Policy 8.2. of the Land Use Element of the General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration 2006-0039 were prepared
for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
0 WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to
enact this amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element to protect the health, safety and
welfare of its citizens; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject General Plan
Amendment application was held by the City Council of the City of Atascadero at which hearing
evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said General Plan Amendment; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on April 3, 2007, studied and considered General Plan Amendment 2006-
0017, after first studying and considering the Proposed Negative Declaration prepared for the
project, and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing on April
24, 2007 following the close of the review period to consider the Initial Study and Proposed
Negative Declaration; and,
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero takes the following
actions:
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a General Plan Amendment to the Land Use,
Open Space, and Conservation Element of Atascadero as follows:
1. The proposed amendment is in the public interest.
2. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the adopted General Plan Goals,
Policies, and Programs and the overall intent of the General Plan.
3. The proposed amendment is compatible with existing development, neighborhoods and
the environment.
4. The proposed amendment will not create any new significant and unavoidable impacts to
traffic, infrastructure, or public service impacts.
5. The proposed amendment is consistent with adopted General Plan EIR and mitigation
monitoring program.
6. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City to enact this amendment to the
General Plan Land Use Element to protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens
and is compatible with existing and proposed development; and,
SECTION 2. Approval. The City Council of the City of Atascadero, in a regular
session assembled on April 24, 2007, hereby resolves to approve General Plan Amendment
2006-0017 consistent with the following:
1. Exhibit B: General Plan LOC Policy 8.2. Text Amendment
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
0 ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick Enright, City Attorney
0
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
George Luna, Mayor
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 •
Exhibit B: General Plan LOC Policy 8.2. Text Amendment
Gaal LOC S. Watershed areas of Atascadero shall be protected.
Policy 8.2: Establish and maintain setbacks and development standards for creek side
developm ent.
Program:
1. t a+d-;-4-il��;laintain a creek setback ordinance ha# :ill :,hick establishes building
setbacks and development standards along the banks of Atascadero Creek, Graves
Creek. Boulder Creek. blue line creeks_-;nd the Salinas River_Wrisdictional
%:Wetlands, and anv other significant drainage courses to ensure the uninterrupted
natural flow of the streams and protection of the riparian ecosystem with flexible
standards for the downtown area.
Tim frap-Q Adopt (4din= n Jfln i
2
J -in c+#� Atascadero Creek. Graves Creek. and Boulder Creek shall have a •
35 -foot setback " `' _ All other 7.5 min USGS quadrangle blue line
creeks, jurisdictional wetlands. and other significant drainage courses shall have au
iitQrwr420-foot setback. The Salinas River shall have a 50 -foot setback:. The i,4tQr+nz
setbacks shall be subject to the following:
a) On Atascadero Creek. Graves Creek. and Boulder Creek setbacks shall be
measured from the edge of the creek reservation.
b) All other blue line creeks Tata . the Salinas Ri, er. and anv_other significant
drainage courses shall have setbacks b,�--measured from the ordinary high water
mark.
c) The Planning Commission may approve exceptions to the iwQ,im creek setbacks
in the form of a l -Minor Conditional Use Permit vvith a biologist report. a report
prepared 1_)v a professional engineer or geoloc i�ualified in
�:v'drQgY.O.plQrl 11[I.Qga'. and an Archaeological Phase 1 study. if thA i1pdiAg oap bi;
•
•
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
ATTACHMENT 16: Draft Ordinance A: Approval of Zone Text Change
DRAFT ORDINANCE A
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, AMMENDING THE
ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE BY APPROVING ZONE CHANGE
2006-0125 TO ESTABLISH A CREEK SETBACK ORDINANCE
(Citywide/City of Atascadero)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from the City of Atascadero (6907 El
Camino Real), to consider Zone Change Text Amendments to create a Creek Setback Ordinance
to coincide with the General Plan requirements; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0039 were
prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and,
0 WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to
enact this amendment to Title 9 Planning and Zoning of the Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Planning and
Zoning Text Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero
at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Planning and
Zoning Text Amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing
held on April 3, 2007, studied and considered Zone Change 2006-0125; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing on April
24, 2007 following the close of the review period to consider the Initial Study and Proposed
Negative Declaration; and,
actions:
0
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero takes the following
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a Zone Text Chante. The City Council finds
as follows:
1. The Planning and Zoning text change is consistent with General Plan policies and all
other applicable ordinances and policies of the City.
2. Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance will provide for the orderly and efficient use of
lands where such development standards are applicable.
3. The text change will not, in itself, result in significant environmental impacts.
SECTION 2. Approval. The City Council of the City of Atascadero, in a regular
session assembled on April 24, 2007 resolved to introduce for first reading by title only, an
ordinance that would amend the City Zoning code text with the following:
Exhibit C: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
On motion by Council Member , and seconded by Council Member the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: ( ) 0
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
George Luna, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Toraerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick Enright, City Attorney
0
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
. DATE: 05/08/07
Exhibit Q Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 71
Title 9 PLANNING AND ZONING
Chapter 4 GENERAL SITE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
9-4.101 Purpose.
9-4.102 Applicability of the standards.
9-4.103 Setbacks.
9-4.104 Exceptions to setback standards.
9-4.105 Use of setbacks.
9-4.106 Front setbacks.
9-4.107 Side setbacks.
9-4.108 Rear setbacks.
9-4.109 Interior setbacks and open areas.
9-4.110 Proiections into reauired setbacks.
9-4.111 Setbacks from blueline creeks
9-4.1124 Heights.
9-4.113-2 Measurement of height.
9-4.1143 Height limitations.
9-4.1154 Parking and Loading.
• 9-4.1165 Off-street parking required.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
9-4.1176 Location of parking on a site.
9-4.1187 Parking design standards.
9-4.1198 Required number of parking spaces.
9-4.1204-9 Parkina lot construction standards.
9-4.1218 Off-site parking.
9-4.1224 Off-street loading requirements.
9-4.1232 Drive-in and drive-throuah facilities.
9-4.1248 Driveway standards for single-family residential uses.
9-4.1254 Landscaping, screening and fencing.
9-4.1266 Landscape standards.
9-4.1276 Standards for landscaping materials.
9-4.1287 Landscaping plans.
9-4.1298 Fencina and screeni
9-4.1302-9 Solid waste collection and disposal.
9-4.137 Exterior lighting.
9-4.138 Grading.
9-4.139 Grading plan required.
9-4.140 Grading permit required.
9-4.141 Grading permit: Application content.
9-4.142 Grading permit review and approval. •
•
9-4.143 Special grading standards.
9-4.144 Grading standards.
9-4.145 Sedimentation and erosion control.
9-4.146 Nuisance and hazard abatement.
9-4.148 Drainage.
9-4.149 Drainage plan required.
9-4.150 Environmental determination required.
9-4.151 Drainage plan preparation and content.
9-4.152 Drainage plan review and approval.
• 9-4.153 Plan check, inspection and completion.
9-4.154 Drainage standards.
9-4.156 Street trees (Reserved).
9-4.157 Tree management plan (Reserved).
9-4.158 Street and frontage improvements.
9-4.159 Curbs. autters and sidewalks.
9-4.160 Streets.
9-4.162 Archeological resources.
9-4.164 Lot line adjustment review for flag lots.
•
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
9-4.103 Setbacks.
The following sections establish standards for the use and size of building setbacks. The
purpose of these standards is to provide for open areas around structures where needed for:
visibility and traffic safety; access to and around buildings; access to natural light,
ventilation and direct sunlight; separation of incompatible land uses; and space for privacy,
landscaping and private recreation. These standards are organized as follows:
9-4.104
Exceptions to setback standards.
9-4105Use
of setbacks.
9-4 106
Front setbacks.
9-4.107
Side setbacks.
9-4.108
Rear setbacks.
9-4.109
Interior setbacks and open areas.
lil9-4.110
Projections into required setbacks.
9-4 111
Setbacks from blueline creeks
(Ord. 68 § 9-4.103, 1983)
•
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
9-4.111 Blueline Creek Setbacks
(a) Definition: Blueline creek: A creek stream or watercourse indicated by a solid or broken blue
line on a U.S. Geologic Survey 7.5 minute series quadrangle map.
(b) Development setbacks for creekside development are as follows:
(1) Atascadero Creek Graves Creek and Boulder Creek. Thirty-five (35) foot setback
measured from the edge of the creek reservation;
(2) Where Atascadero Creek Graves Creek and Boulder Creek channels are located outside
of creek reservations a twenty (20) foot setback measured from the ordinary high water
mark shall be required;
(3) Blueline creeks Twenty (20) foot setback measured from ordinary high water marks;
(4) Significant drainage courses. Twenty (20) foot setback measured from ordinary high
water mark for other significant drainave courses as identified by Army Corps of
Engineers Department of Fish and Game and/or qualified biologist or
h hydro geo morphologist;
(5) Jurisdictional Wetlands. Twenty (20) foot setback measured from jurisdictional wetland
boundary as defined by qualified biologist;
(6) Salinas River. Fifty (50) foot setback measured from the ordinary high water mark.
(c) Improvements permitted within setbacks:
(1) Bridges
(2) Engineered drainage outlet;
. (3) Minor landscape features not requiring_ grading,
(4) Non-invasive landscaping installation;
(5) Raised decks;
(6) Repairs to existing structures and facilities;
7 Trails;
(8) Transparent fencing which does not block water flow;
(9) Underground utilities that are permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers, California
Department of Fish and Game and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board;
(10) Water course monitoring or gauging facilities operated by local, State, or Federal
Agencies.
(d) Improvements not permitted within setbacks include but are not limited to:
(1) Detention basins;
(2) Grading (cut or fill);
(3) Over -excavation;
(4) Parkin driveways, other vehicular surfaces;
(5) Removal or disturbance of riparian vegetation unless permitted by the California
Department of Fish and Game;
(6) Retaining_ walls;
(7) Septic systems (see section 8-5.103 Table 4.3 for septic setback requirements);
(8) Stnictures (except as listed in section (c) above).
(e) Exceptions.
(1) Structures that were legally permitted before the effective date of this ordinance shall be
. permitted to remain;
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
migration;
(G) Archeological resources will not be significantly impacted.
0
DATE: 05/08/07
.
(2) The Planning Commission may pprove exceptions to creek setbacks for Atascadero
Creek
Graves Creek Boulder Creek and the Salinas River with a minor Conditional Use
Permit. A biologist report, a hydro eg omorpholo ist report, and an Archaeological Phase
1 study
shall be required.
(i) Requirements
for biologist and hydro eomorphologist reports:
(A)
Qualified biologist and professional geologist or engineer who is qualified in
hydro eomoMhology;
(B)
Topographical and vegetation survey of creek channel with one (1) foot contour
lines at one (1) to twenty (20) foot scale from bank to bank to include one
hundred (100) feet up and down steam from property lines. Survey shall identify
thirty five (35) foot setbacks;
(C)
Engineered grading and drainage plan of the entire site which includes the creek
survey shall be provided;
(D)
Written analysis of the project impacts with an assessment of the potential
impacts to the creek flow, bank stability, riparian vegetation and habitat, water
quality, and any structures resulting from the reduced setback shall be provided;
(E)
Mitigation measures.
(ii) Required
findings for Planning Commission approval;
(A)
Creek channel and storm water flows will not be significantly impacted;
(B)
Habitat and riparian vegetation will not be significantly impacted;
(C)
Native trees and canopies will not be significantly impacted;
(D)
Water quality will not be significantly impacted;
(E)
Bank stability will not be significantly impacted;
(F)
Proposed improvements will not be subject to damage caused by creek bank
migration;
(G) Archeological resources will not be significantly impacted.
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
Chapter 9 GENERAL DEFINITIONS
9-9.102 General definitions.
A -weighted sound level. The sound level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using
the A -weighting network. The level so read is designated "db(A)" or "&A."
Above grade. Any elevation higher than the natural ground contour.
Access. The safe, adequate, usable means of vehicular or pedestrian entrance or exit to a site.
Agriculture. The science and art of farming, producing crops, floriculture, horticulture and
animal husbandry.
Agricultural accessory building. An uninhabited structure, designed and built to store farming
animals, implements, supplies, or products (not including commercial greenhouses or buildings
for agricultural processing activities), which is not used by the public.
Agricultural products. Food and fibre in their raw, unprocessed state (except for such field
processing that may occur in conjunction with harvesting) and ornamental plant materials.
Air contaminant. Any combination of smoke, charred paper, dust, soot, carbon, noxious acids,
fumes, gases, or particulate matter.
Ambient noise level. The composite of all noises from all sources near and far. In this context,
the ambient noise level is the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
Apartment. A room or flat occupied or designed to be occupied by one family for living or
sleeping purposes with cooking facilities.
Apartment house or multiple dwelling unit. A building or portion of a building designed or
used for occupancy by three or more families living independently of each other and containing
three or more dwelling units.
Appeal, scope of. The matters to be heard on appeals filed pursuant to this title shall be confined
to the project as proposed to the original or first decision maker, without change. However, the
applicant, or person appearing on appeal, shall not be prevented from submitting information
concerning the unchanged proposal which had not been submitted with the original proposal.
Arcade. Any site or business providing in part or as a whole, an amusement service consisting of
coin-operated games or devices, where more than five (5) coin-operated games or devices are
present or where more than twenty-five (25) percent of the public area is used for the placement
or operation of such games or devices.
IArcheolozical Phase 1 Study. A complete surface survey done by a Qualified archeologist to
determine what is located on a site.
Archeological resource. Any Native American or pre-Columbian artifact or human remains.
Basement. That portion of a building between the floor and ceiling that is partly below and
partly above grade so located that the vertical distance from grade to the floor below is less than
the vertical distance from grade to ceiling.
Billboard. See "Sign. Off -Premises."
Blueline Creek A creek, stream or watercourse indicated by a solid or broken blue line on a
U.S. Geologic Survey 7.5 minute series quadrangle ma and/or shown on Figure II -8 of the 2002
General Plan.
Boardinghouse. A boardinghouse is a structure where lodging and meals are furnished for
0 compensation to at least five (5) persons.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Buildable area (developable area). The area of the site in which structures may be located, not
including required yard areas (see Figure 9-A).
t
spot �crrx. -�
rs rut .�e..w
25'
1nmT
srn�
i
[ WTMG
3 ! 1
FIGURE 9-A: BUILDABLE AREA
Building. Any structure having a roof supported by columns and/or walls and intended for
shelter, housing, and/or enclosure of any person, animal or chattel, but not including tents or •
mobilehomes.
Building, accessory. A detached subordinate building the use of which is incidental to that of a
main building on the same lot.
Building and construction ordinance. Title 8 of this Code.
Building face. The exterior walls of a building extending vertically from the building line.
Building height. The vertical distance from the average level of the highest and lowest point of
that portion of the lot or building site covered by the building to the topmost point of the
structure, excluding chimneys or vents (see Figure 9-B).
y HX
HIGHEST
PDINT ukj
DER Ir HV➢GMT71T
AYERAG( OF U1639E5:.
ANM LOWEST POINTS
LOWEST "im?
.WmDER ♦BUILDiN
FIGURE 9-B; BUILDING HEIGHT 0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
• DATE: 05/08/07
Building, main or principal. A building where the principal use of its lot and or building site is
conducted.
Building site. The area within a lot of record (or contiguous lots under single ownership)
actually proposed for development with buildings or structures, including areas immediately
adjacent to the buildings or structures to an extent equivalent to any required setback areas.
Carport. A permanent roofed structure with not more than two enclosed sides, which is used or
intended to be used for automobile shelter or storage.
Channel. The area occupied by the normal flow of an intermittent of perennial stream during
nonflood conditions.
Combustible liquid. Any liquid having a flash point at or above 100° F. and below 200° F.,
including but not limited to diesel fuel, kerosene and Jet A.
Commercial coach. A vehicle, with or without motive power, including any mobilehome or
recreational vehicle, designed and equipped for human occupancy.
Commission. The Planning Commission of the City.
Common wall development. Two (2) residences on adjoining lots, constructed so that they abut
each other at their common property line (see Figure 9-C).
r STRICT
{fi
FIGURE 9-C: COMMON WALL
DEVELOPMENT
Communication towers. Any tower or other structure erected for the purpose of radio,
television or microwave transmission or line -of -sight relay devices.
Community sewer system. A sewage effluent collection network, treatment and disposal
facilities provided within a prescribed service boundary, which results in the primary, secondary,
or tertiary treatment of such effluent.
Community water system. A water storage and distribution network for the provision of
potable water to the public for human consumption within a prescribed service boundary,
operated and maintained by the Atascadero Mutual Water Company.
Construction. Any site preparation, assembly, erection, substantial repair, alteration or similar
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
action, for or of rights-of-way, structures, utilities or similar property.
Construction permit. Any or all of the various entitlements established by Title 8 of this Code
that authorize commencement of construction activities, including but not limited to building
permits, grading permits, electrical and plumbing permits, demolition permits and moving
permits.
Convalescent hospital. A place or institution which provides for bed care or for chronic
convalescent care for two (2) or more persons, exclusive of relatives, who by reason of illness or
physical infirmity are unable to care for themselves.
Council. The City Council of the City.
County. The County of San Luis Obispo.
Coverage. Site or lot coverage means the extent of a lot of record occupied by structures and
paving.
Creek Reservation. An unbuildable parcel located over Atascadero Creek Graves Creek or
Boulder Creek, which is identified on 1913 Atascadero Colony Maps as "Creek Reservation."
Crop production. Includes the following crop types and activities and further defined as
indicated:
(a) Specialty Crops. Strawberries, herb crops, flower seed and cut flower crops (open field), kiwi
vines, edible pod peas, bushberry crops, Christmas trees and other outdoor ornamentals,
intensive horticulture, sod farms, clover seed, hops, and wholesale nurseries (see separate
definition).
(b) Row Crops. All vegetable truck crops except edible pod peas. Includes lima and snap beans.
(c) Orchards. All fruit and nut tree crops. Does not include kiwi, berry, or other vine crops.
(d) Field Crops. Beans other than snap or lima beans, barley, oats, safflower, wheat, grain and
hay including alfalfa, silage and grain corn, sugar beets, melons, cotton.
(e) Rangeland. Grazing of livestock on grasses without irrigation.
(f) Pasture (Irrigated). Grazing of livestock on irrigated grasses.
(g) Vineyards. Grapevines.
(h) Preparation For Cultivation. Land -contouring, clearing, irrigation construction and other
preparation of soil for crops.
(i) Field Processing. Mechanical processing of crops in the field at harvest, when such activities
do not involve a permanent structure. Such activities include but are not limited to hay baling
and field crushing of grapes.
Dance club or nightclub. Establishment providing for live or recorded music and an area for
dancing, including disco.
Dance studio or school. An establishment where instruction in the dance arts (ballet, modern
dance or any other dance form) is provided students for a fee, except where instruction in
predominantly social dance is provided on the premises of a dance club as defined by this title.
Density. The measure of the ratio of population to the area of land occupied by that population,
which may be expressed as dwelling units per acre, families per acre, persons per acre, or
conversely as acres per dwelling unit or square feet per dwelling unit. "Gross density" is the
number of lots derived from dividing the area of a site by the area required for each lot or
dwelling unit. "Net density" is the number of lots resulting from subtracting the area required for
streets from the total area of the undivided site, and then dividing the remaining area by the area
required for each lot.
Development. Any activity or alteration of the landscape, its terrain contour or vegetation,
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
including the erection or alteration of buildings or structures. New development is any
construction, or alteration of an existing structure or land use, or establishment of a land use after
the effective date of this title.
Discretionary permit. An entitlement that may be issued under the provisions of this title, but
requires the exercise of judgment and the resolution of factual issues to determine if the
application and requested entitlement conform with the provisions of this title. Generally, a
discretionary permit consists of any entitlement that requires a decision to approve, approve
subject to conditions or disapprove, based on the judgment of the Planning Commission after a
hearing (see "Ministerial Permit").
Drainage facilities. Constructed improvements for the storage or conveyance of storm runoff in
drainage channels, including channels, culverts, ponds, storm drains, drop -inlets, outfalls, basins,
pumps, gutter inlets, manholes, and conduits.
Dredging. Mechanical alteration of the grade of bottom sediments in any body of water.
Drive-in restaurant. Any building or structure in which food or drink are prepared for service to
customers outside such buildings or structure or to customers occupying vehicles outside such
structure, even though food and drink are served to customers inside such building or structure.
Shall include self-service restaurants for food take-out.
Driveway. A road providing access to a site or land use from a street. A driveway serves no
more than four (4) separately owned parcels (see also, "Road, Private").
Dude ranch. Transient guest occupancy facilities incidental to a working ranch, which may
include other accessory recreational facilities and common eating facilities open to overnight
guests only.
Dwelling unit. An independent, attached or detached residential building designed to house and
provide living space, including kitchen and bathroom facilities, for an individual family.
Entitlement. Authority acquired by an applicant after receiving approval of an application. For
the purposes of this title, land use entitlements are the plot plan, precise plan and conditional use
permit (see "Zoning Approval").
Exploration. The search for minerals by geological, geophysical, geochemical or other
techniques including, but not limited to, sampling, assaying, drilling, or any surface or
underground works used to determine the type, extent, or quantity of minerals present (includes
prospecting).
Extraction. The removal from the earth of oil, gas or geothermal resources by drilling, pumping
or other means, whether for exploration or production purposes.
Family. One person living alone or two (2) or more persons related each to all others by blood,
marriage or legal adoption, or a group of no more than five (5) unrelated persons living in a
single dwelling.
Family, immediate. Relatives of an applicant or spouse of applicant, limited to grandparents,
parents, children, and siblings.
Flammable liquid. Liquids with flash points below 100° F., including but not limited to
gasoline, acetone, benzene, ethyl ether and ethyl alcohol.
Flash point. The minimum temperature of a liquid at which sufficient vapor is given off to form
an ignitable mixture with the air near the surface of the liquid.
Flood fringe. That portion of the floodplain outside the floodway.
Flood, 100 -year. A flood inundation event, the extent of which has a statistical probability of
occurring once every one hundred (100) years.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Floodplain. Land that has been or may be hereafter covered by flood water, including but not
limited to the one hundred (100) year flood.
Flood profile, storm. A graph or longitudinal profile showing the relationship of the water -
surface elevation of a flood event to location along a stream or river.
Floodproofing. Any combination of structural provisions or adjustments in areas subject to
flooding primarily to reduce or eliminate flood damage to properties, water and sanitary
facilities, structures, and the contents of buildings in a flood hazard area.
Floodway. The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be
reserved to discharge the one hundred (100) year flood without cumulatively increasing the
water surface elevation more than one foot.
Floor area. Includes the total floor area of each floor of all buildings on a site, including internal
circulation, storage and equipment space, as measured from the outside faces of the exterior
walls, including halls, lobbies, stairways, elevator shafts, enclosed porches and balconies.
Frontage. A property line of a lot that abuts a street. Primary frontage is indicated by the street
for which the property is given a street number. Secondary frontage includes all other frontages.
Garage, private. A building for storing self-propelled vehicles that is not open to the public,
which may include an accessory workshop.
Garage, public. Any premises (except a private garage) used for the storage and/or care of self-
propelled vehicles, or where such vehicles are equipped for sale or lease.
General Plan. The City of Atascadero General Plan, including all elements thereof and all
amendments thereto.
Government Code. The Government Code of the State of California. •
Grazing. For the purposes of this title, grazing means the keeping for commercial purposes of
cattle, horses or sheep using feed produced on the site.
Greenhouse. See "Nursery."
Guesthouse. Sleeping facilities detached from a principal residence and occupied for the sole
use of members of the family, temporary guests or persons temporarily employed on the
premises; which may include a bathroom and other living space, but not kitchen facilities.
Health Department. The County of San Luis Obispo Health Department under contract to the
City of Atascadero.
Home occupation. Any use customarily conducted entirely within a dwelling or building
accessory thereto and carried on by the inhabitants thereof, which use is clearly incidental and
secondary to the structure for dwelling purposes and which use does not change the character
thereof and does not adversely affect the uses permitted in the zone of which it is a part.
Hospital. An institution providing physical or mental health services inpatient or overnight
accommodations and medical or surgical care of the sick or injured.
Hotel. A building containing six (6) or more rooms intended or designed to be used, or which are
used, rented or hired out to be occupied for sleeping purposes by guests.
Hydroaeomorphology. The study of the physical appearance and operational character of a
waterway as it adjusts its boundaries to the magnitude of stream flow and erosional debris
produced within the attendant watershed.
Impulsive sound. Sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset
and rapid decay. Examples of sources of impulsive sound include explosions, hammering, and
discharge of firearms.
Inoperative vehicle. Any vehicle which is not currently registered or which is not capable of
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
•
self -propulsion.
Irrigated. A lot having existing wells, water storage, and/or drip irrigation system adequate to
support any crop suited to the soil type and climate of a site.
Jurisdictional Wetland An area which meets the criteria established by the US Army Corps of
Engineers for a wetlands including being regularly saturated by surface water or groundwater
and supporting an ecosystem of plants and animals that are adapted to wet conditions.
Junk yard. An area improved or unimproved in excess of two hundred (200) square feet:
(a) Upon or in which is stored or kept junk salvage materials, scrap metals, inoperative vehicles
and equipment or any combination thereof; or
(b) Upon or in which vehicles, equipment or other property is dismantled or wrecked; or
(c) Upon or in which salvage materials, inoperative vehicles or equipment, or parts therefrom, or
scrap metals, or any combination thereof, is kept for resale.
Materials or equipment kept on any premises for use in the construction of any building on such
premises, and any materials or equipment customarily used on a farm or ranch, and so situated,
shall not be deemed "junk" or "salvage material" within the meaning of this section.
Light source. A device that produces illumination, including incandescent light bulbs,
fluorescent and neon tubes, halogen and other vapor lights and reflecting surfaces or refractors
incorporated into a lighting fixture. Any translucent enclosure of a light source is considered to
be part of the light source.
Loading space. A space used exclusively for loading or unloading of other than passengers from
vehicles into the floor area, use area, or storage area of a building.
Lot, corner: Side and front. A corner lot is located immediately adjacent to the intersection of
two public vehicular rights-of-way, including railroads. The narrowest frontage of a corner lot
facing the street is the front and the longest frontage facing the intersecting street is side,
regardless of the direction in which the dwelling faces (see Figure 9-13).
FIGURE 9-U; CORNER 1.CYI' ANI) KFY LOT
Lot depth. The horizontal distance between the front and rear lot lines, measured in the mean
direction of the side lot lines.
Lot, double -frontage. A lot extending between two streets, so that both front and rear yards abut
a street (see Figure 9-E).
0
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07 0
k jJ i�.[Ct
k i
i i 1 1 i
I i 1 11
5 T R C [ T
FIGURE 9-£: IIOUBLF FRONTAGE LOT
Lot, key. The lot located immediately adjacent to a corner lot, oriented so the narrowest
dimension of one of the corner lot side yards is adjacent to the narrowest dimension of the front
yard of the key lot (see Figure 9-D).
Lot width. Distance between interior property lines measured along the front setback line.
Mined lands. Includes the surface, subsurface. and groundwater of an area where surface mining
operations will be, are being, or have been conducted, including all accessory access roads, land
excavations, workings, mining waste, and areas where structures, facilities, and surface mining
equipment, machines, tools or other material or property are located.
Minerals. Any naturally occurring chemical element, compound or groups of elements and
compounds, formed from inorganic processes or organic substances, including but not limited to
coal, granite, limestone, metals, peat, "redrock" sand and gravel, tar sand and bituminous
sandstone, but excluding geothermal resources, natural gas, and petroleum.
Mining waste. Includes residual soil, minerals, liquid, vegetation, tailings, abandoned
equipment, tools, other materials or physical conditions directly resulting from or displaced by
mining.
Ministerial permit. Any permit that may be issued under the provisions of this title without
review by the Planning Commission or City Council. A ministerial decision involves only the
evaluation of a proposal with respect to fixed standards or objective measurements, without the
use of subjective criteria.
Nonresidential use. All uses of land including agricultural, communication, cultural,
educational, recreation, manufacturing, processing, resource extraction, retail trade, services,
transient lodging, transportation and wholesale trade uses.
Nursery school. See 'Preschool."
Obstruction in floodway. Any dam, wall, wharf, embankment, levee, dike, pile, abutment,
projection, excavation, channel rectification, bridge, conduit, culvert, building, wire fence, rock,
gravel, refuse, fill, structure or matter in, along, across, or projecting into any channel,
watercourse, or flood hazard areas that may impede, retard or change direction of flow, either in
itself, or by catching or collecting debris carried by such water, or that is placed where it might
be carried downstream and damage life or property.
Occupant. The person occupying, or otherwise in real or apparent charge and control of, a
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
P
DATE: 05/08/07
remises.
Official plan line. A line adopted by the City Council to indicate the area proposed to be
acquired for an enlarged right-of-way.
Open area. All areas of a lot not included within the definition of floor area: parking, recreation
spaces, passive open areas landscaped areas and other open, unpaved areas of the site.
Ordinary Hi!h Water Mark The top of the bank of the channel typically the same as the ten-
year flood plane,• location to be determined by an engineer or biologist.
Outdoor activity area. Any part of a site where commercial, industrial, recreation or storage
activities related to the principal use of a site are conducted outdoors, except for parking.
Owner. The person or persons, firm, corporation or partnership that is the owner of record of a
premises identified on the last equalized assessment roll.
Ownership. Ownership of one or more parcels of land (or possession under a contract to
purchase or under a lease the term of which is not less than ten (10) years) by a person or
persons, firm, corporation or partnership, individually, jointly, in common or in any other
manner whereby such property is under single or unified control.
Parcel.
(a) A parcel of real property shown on a subdivision or plat map, required by the Subdivision
Map Act or local ordinance adopted pursuant thereto, to be recorded before sale of parcels shown
on the map or plot, at the time the map was recorded;
(b) A parcel of real property that has been issued a certificate of compliance pursuant to
Government Code Section 66499.35; or
• (c) A parcel of real property not described in (a) or (b) of this definition, provided the parcel
resulted from a separate conveyance or from a decree of a court of competent jurisdiction which
was recorded before the requirement of the filing of the subdivision map by the Subdivision Map
Act or local ordinance adopted pursuant thereto.
Person. Any individual, firm, copartnership, corporation, company, association, joint stock
association, city, county, state or district; and includes any trustee, receiver, assignee, or other
similar representatives thereof.
Planning Department. The City of Atascadero Planning Department, including the Planning
Director and all subordinate employees.
Planning Director. The Planning Director of the City of Atascadero. As used in this title,
Planning Director may include designated staff of the Planning Department when acting in an
official capacity.
Porch. Outdoor steps, stairs, and/or a raised platform less than one hundred (100) square feet in
area, located immediately adjacent to the entry of a building for the purpose of providing
pedestrian access from the outdoor ground elevation to a building interior. If the platform portion
of a porch, not including steps, is more than one hundred (100) feet, it is considered a deck.
Preschool. Any type of group child day care programs including nurseries for children of
working mothers, nursery schools for children under the minimum age for education in public
schools, parent cooperative nursery schools and programs covering afterschool care for school
children provided such establishments are institutional in character and are licensed by the State
or County and conducted in accordance with State requirements.
Project. Any land use, activity, construction or development which is required to be authorized
• by a zoning approval pursuant to this title before beginning construction or establishment of the
use.
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
•
Property line. The recorded boundary of a lot of record.
Property line, front. The recorded boundary between the front yard of a lot of record and the
abutting public or private street right-of-way.
Property line, interior. The recorded boundary between two (2) or more lots of record.
Property line, street frontage. The recorded boundary between a lot of record and a street right-
of-way.
Public Resources Code. The Public Resources Code of the State of California.
Public utility. A company regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
Reader board. A sign that accommodates changeable copy and which displays information on
activities and events on the premises, but not including a marquee.
Reclamation. The process of land treatment that minimizes and mitigates otherwise unavoidable
or existing water degradation, air pollution, damage to aquatic or wildlife habitat flooding,
erosion, and other adverse effects from surface or underground mining operations, including
adverse surface effects incidental to underground mines, so that mined lands are reclaimed and
restored to a usable condition readily adaptable for alternate land uses and that will constitute no
danger to public health or safety. The process may extend to affected lands surrounding mined
lands, and may require backfilling, grading, resoiling, revegetation, soil compaction,
stabilization, or other measures.
Reclamation plan. A mine operator's completed and approved plan for reclaiming the lands
affected by mining operations conducted after January 1, 1976, as called for in Section 2772 of
the Public Resources Code.
Recreational vehicle. A motorhome, house car, travel trailer, truck camper or camping trailer,
•
with or without motive power, designed for human habitation or recreational or emergency
occupancy, eight (8) feet or less in width and forty (40) feet or less in length.
Recycling facility. Any lot or portion of a lot used for the purpose of outdoor storage, sorting,
handling, processing, dismantling, wrecking, keeping or sale of inoperative, discarded, wrecked,
or abandoned appliances, vehicles, boats, building materials, machinery, equipment, or parts
thereof, including but not limited to scrap materials, wood, lumber, plastic, fiber, or other
tangible materials that cannot, without further reconditioning, be used for their original purposes.
Includes wrecking yards for vehicles.
Residential care facility. Any facility, place, or building that is maintained and operated to
provide nonmedical residential care or day care, services for children or adults (except for
preschools which are separately defined) who are physically handicapped or mentally retarded.
Resource extraction well. Any facility constructed or installed for the purpose of extracting
minerals from the earth that occur in a fluid or gaseous state, or minerals converted to a gaseous
or semifluid state through extraction processes, which involve the penetration of subterranean
regions by means of drilling apparatus. For the purposes of this definition only, mineral
resources include oil, gas, geothermal steam, or other subterranean deposits, except water.
Extraction wells as defined herein may be for purposes of exploration or production.
Rest home. See "Residential care facility."
Revegation. Any combination of mechanical or other means by which a graded surface is
returned to a condition where it supports significant natural vegetation.
Right-of-way. A road, alley, pedestrian or other access right-of-way with width described in
recorded documents.
Road, private. A road providing vehicular access to four (4) or more lots of record that is not in
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
the City -maintained roads stem.
Y Y
Road, public. A road providing vehicular access that is in the City -maintained road system.
Scrap. Used metal including appliances and machine parts, which can be recycled or reused only
with repair, refurbishing, or attachment to other such materials.
Sedimentation. The addition of soil materials through erosion to a stream or water body that
increases the turbidity of the water.
Setback. An open area on a lot between a building and a property line unoccupied and
unobstructed from the ground upward, except as otherwise provided in Section 9-4.103 (see
Figure 9-F).
i—rW�i {1r.aeL
FIG UPW 9-F. SETBACM AND
0 BUILDABLE AREA
Setback, front. An open area without structures, extending across the front of a lot between the
side property lines. The front of a lot is the most narrow dimension of the lot parallel to a street
and adjacent to that street, except as provided for flag lots with both fee title and easement access
strips where applicant may determine that portion of the site to constitute the front yard.
Setback, interior. Any open area of a site not within a required front, rear, or side setback area
(see Figure 9-F).
Setback line. The line formed by the measurement of required front, side, or rear yard areas
required by this title. All setback lines together define the buildable area.
Setback, rear. A primarily open area without principal structures, extending across the full
width of the lot and measured between the rear line of the lot and the nearest line of the building
(see Figure 9-F).
Setback, side. A primarily open area without principal structures, between the side line of the lot
and the nearest line of the building and extending between the required front and rear setbacks
(see Figure 9-F).
Sign. Any visual device or representation designed or used for communicating a message, or
identifying or attracting attention to a premises, product, service, person, organization, business
or event, not including such devices visible only from within a building.
Sign area. The area of the smallest rectangle within which a single sign face can be enclosed.
. Sign copy. The information content of a sign, including text, illustrations, logos, and trademarks.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Sign, directory. A sign identifying the location of occupants of a building or group of buildings
which are divided into rooms or suites used as separate offices, studios or shops.
Sign, exterior -illuminated. Any sign, any part of which is illuminated from an exterior artificial
light source mounted on the sign, another structure, or the ground.
Sign face. The visible portions of a sign including all characters and symbols, but excluding
structural elements not an integral part of the display.
Sign, freestanding. A sign not attached to any buildings and having its own support structure.
Sign, freeway identification. An on-site sign permitted for a highway -oriented use.
Sign height. The vertical distance from average adjacent ground level to the top of the sign
including the support structure and any design elements.
Sign, identification. Any sign identifying an occupant, apartment, residence, school, church, or
certain business uses and not advertising any product or service.
Sign, interior -illuminated. A sign with any portion of the sign face or outline illuminated by an
interior light source.
Sign, monument. A self -supported sign with its base on the ground, not exceeding six (6) feet in
height.
Sign, nonilluminated. A sign illuminated only incidentally by ambient light conditions.
Sign, off -premises. A sign directing attention to a business, service, product, or entertainment
not sold or offered on the premises on which the sign is located.
Sign, political. A sign drawing attention to or communicating a position on any issue, candidate,
or measure in any national, state, local or school campus election.
Sign, price. A sign on the premises of a gasoline service station, identifying the cost and type or
grade of motor fuel only.
Sign, roof. Any sign located on, or attached to the roof of a building.
Sign, suspended. A sign attached to and located below any permanent eave, roof, or canopy.
Sign, temporary. A sign used not more than sixty (60) days, or other period limited by the
duration of a temporary use.
Sign, wall. A single -faced sign painted on or attached to a building or wall, no part of which
extends out from or above a wall more than six (6) inches.
Sign, window. A sign displayed within a building or attached to a window but visible through a
window or similar opening for the primary purpose of exterior visibility.
Site area, gross. The total area of a legally created parcel (or contiguous parcels of land in single
or joint ownership when used in combination for a building or permitted group of buildings),
including any ultimate street right-of-way, existing rights-of-way deeded to the parcel, and all
easements, except open space easements, across the site.
Site area, net. The gross site area minus any ultimate street rights-of-way and all easements,
except open easements, that limit the surface use of the site for building construction.
Site area, usable. Net site area minus any portions of the site that are precluded from building
construction by natural features or hazards, such as areas subject to inundation.
Slope, average. The characteristic slope over an area of land, expressed in percent as the ratio of
vertical rise to horizontal distance. Average slope is to be determined based on the most accurate
available topographic information for each proposed new lot. One of the following methods for
determining average slope is to be used:
(a) Basic Method. Where a line drawn between highest and lowest points on a parcel is adequate
to represent direction and extent of slope for the entire parcel, the difference in elevation between
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 05/08/07
the high and low points, divided by the distance between the points, will determine the average
slope.
(b) Sectional Method. Where the parcel contains distinct sections of differing slope, the average
slope of each section may be determined according to either the basic method in (a) of this
definition or the contour measurement method in (c) of this definition. The average slope of each
section is then used in proportion of the section's area to the total area to determine the average
slope of the entire parcel.
(c) Contour Measurement Method. Where precise measurement of the average slope is required
due to varied slope conditions or complex topography, the following formula will be used:
S=(2.29X 10-3)IL
A
Where S = Average slope of parcel in percent
A = Total number of acres in the parcel (or section of parcel)
L = Length of contour lines in scaled feet
I = Vertical distance of contour interval in feet
Sound level meter. Any instrument including a microphone, amplifier, output meter and
frequency weighing networks for the measurement of sound levels, which meets or exceeds the
requirements pertinent for type S2A meters in ANSI specifications for sound level meters, S 1.4-
1971, or the most recent revision thereof.
State board. The State Mining and Geology Board, in the Department of Conservation, State of
California.
State Geologist. The individual holding office as structured in Section 677 of the Public
Resources Code.
Storage area. An area proposed or used for the outdoor storage of supplies or equipment, or
goods for sale, lease, or incidental use.
Story. Usable floors of a building, except that where this ordinance uses stories as a
measurement of a building height. Basements or building floors six (6) feet or more below street
level are not included.
Structural alteration. Any change in the supporting members of a building, such as bearing
walls, columns, beams or girders.
Structure. Any artifact constructed or erected, the use of which requires attachment to the
ground, including any building, but not including fences or walls six (6) feet or less in height.
Structure, accessory. A structure, the use of which is incidental to that of a principal structure
on the same lot. May be either detached or attached if part of the principal structure.
Subject site. A parcel or parcels of land which are the intended or actual location of a land use or
land development project which is the subject of an application for zoning approval, construction
permit, variance or adjustment, or an amendment to the land use element.
Substation. Any public utility electrical substation, pumping station, pressure regulating station,
or similar facility.
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Surface mining operations. All or any part of the process involved in the mining of minerals or
construction materials on mined lands by removing overburden and mining directly from the
mineral deposits, open -pit mining of minerals naturally exposed, mining by the auger method,
dredging and quarrying, or surface work incidental to an underground mine. In addition, surface
mining operations include, but are not limited to:
(a) Inplace distillation, retorting, or leaching.
(b) The production and disposal of mining waste.
(c) Prospecting and exploratory activities.
(d) Extractions of natural materials for building, construction, etc.
Temporarily deactivated operation. A surface mine that has been closed down and which the
operator has maintained in the expectation of reopening it when conditions justify.
Terrace.
(a) In the case of a grading or surface mining operation, a terrace is a relatively level step
constructed in the face of a graded slope surface for drainage and maintenance purposes.
(b) A terrace is also an outdoor living or activity area constructed with tile, asphalt, concrete or
other paving laid upon continuous base material or fill, placed directly on grade.
Use. The purpose for which a parcel of land, a premises or building is designed, arranged or
intended, or for which it is or may be occupied or maintained.
Use, accessory. A use accessory to any permitted use and customarily a part thereof, which is
clearly incidental and secondary to the permitted use and does not change the character of the
main use.
Use, allowable. A use of land identified in Chapter 9-3 being appropriate in a given zoning
district subject to the standards of this title.
Use, approved. A use of land authorized to be constructed and/or established through issuance
of an approved plot plan, precise plan or conditional use permit.
Use, area. The area of a site used for buildings (main or accessory) and storage area or other
incidental use, but not including parking or landscaping.
Use area, active. All portions of a site and buildings included in the use area, except storage,
parking and landscaping.
Use, new. A use of land which is proposed to be established or constructed after the adoption of
this title.
Use, principal or main. The primary purpose for which a building, structure, or lot is designed,
arranged, or intended, or for which they may be used, occupied, or maintained under this title.
Use, structural. A use of land accompanied by a building or structure (not including fences), on
the same lot of record.
Wall, building. The length of a building wall is the horizontal distance from corner to corner
measured from a plan parallel to the appropriate side, rear or front lot lines.
Watercourse. The normal channel or limits of an intermittent or perennial stream, or other body
of water, during nonflood conditions.
Yard. An open space, other than a court, on a lot which space is unoccupied and unobstructed
from the ground upward.
Zero lot line development. A residential project where dwelling units on individual lots of
record are located so they all abut one side property line, without a setback (see Figure 9-G).
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
0 DATE: 05/08/07
-t-t-fi-
itttt7
FIGURE 9-G: ZERO LOT LI.NE
DFVF.1.0P AFNT
Zoning approval. Same as entitlement.
(Ord. 237 § 1(B), 1992; Ord. 82 § 9-9.102,1984; Ord. 75 § 2(1), 1984; Ord. 68 § 9-9.102, 1983)
•
0
•
c:
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - City Attorney
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
Campaign Contribution Limitations
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to City Staff regarding draft ordinance adopting campaign contribution
limitations.
DISCUSSION:
1. BACKGROUND
Cities and counties throughout the State of California have adopted ordinances
addressing campaign contribution limitations for candidates during the election season.
Often times, these policies aim to protect the integrity of the electoral process since
local government should serve the needs and respond to the wishes of all citizens
equally, without regard to their wealth. And though monetary contributions to political
campaigns are a legitimate form of participation in the political process, the financial
strength of certain individuals or organizations should not permit them to exercise a
disproportionate or controlling influence on the election of candidates for municipal
office and the passage or defeat of City ballot measures. Therefore, limitations on
contributions of money, services and materials by individuals and especially groups or
businesses to municipal election campaigns should be imposed to protect the public
health, safety and welfare. These limitations, however, should be reasonable so as not
to discourage personal expression or participation in the political process.
II. PERMISSIBLE RESTRICTIONS
The City may not impose unreasonable contribution limitations since such
limitations may in fact infringe on the contributor's ability to engage in free
communication and association, and consequently, their First Amendment rights. With
that said, limitations are legitimate tools to curb the appearance of impropriety
associated with large campaign contributions and the City may regulate them to a
certain degree.
l�
125
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 05/08/07
These limitations are especially helpful in regulating contributions made by non-
persons or "organization contributions." There is a legitimate governmental interest in
closely regulating the contributions made by organizations given the unique
characteristics of corporate structure; particularly, a corporation's easy access to larger
sums of money and the high possibility that organizations may provide large
contributions to candidates with expectations of future aid for their own interests. This
concern appears to provide cities with the ability to treat organizations differently from
individuals with respect to campaign finance regulations.
III. INITIATIVES AND REFERENDUMS
Unlike campaign contributions made by organizations, which the City has greater
discretion to regulate, the City may not limit contributions to committees that support or
oppose local initiations, referendums, or other ballot box measures. Since campaign
contributions in these efforts are not being used to support a particular candidate, the
city's interests in preserving government integrity does not outweigh the public's right to
control laws and regulations.
IV. ASSEMBLY BILL 1294
Assembly Bill 1294 ("AB 1294"), introduced by Assembly Members Mullin (D-19)
and Leno (D-13), proposes to provide local jurisdictions the ability to use ranked voting
systems to elect their representatives. Pertinent to the City of Atascadero, future
elections for council members, for example, could be done through a ranked system if
this legislation passes. It is important to note; however, that this legislation merely gives
local agencies the option to use this system, but does not make it mandatory.
The bill also allows "Instant Runoff Voting" ("IRV") for single -winner elections or
"Choice Voting" (a ranked voting system similar to IRV) for multiple -winner elections.
IRV is essentially a method that requires at least a majority of votes for a candidate to
win. At present, only charter cities and counties may use the ranked system, though
many general law cities and voters throughout the State of California have expressed
interest in this method.
IRV also works to ensure that the winner of a single -winner election has the
support of the majority of voters in any given election. Consequently, IRV eliminates the
need for run-off elections and vote -splitting effects since the winner is, as the method is
appropriately entitled, "instantly" chosen among the candidates with fewer votes.
V. OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Numerous other jurisdictions throughout the State of California have already
adopted similar, sometimes more stringent, campaign finance laws and contribution
limits. The City of Irvine's limits, codified at Section 1-2-401 limit contributions to $300
from any person in any election cycle.
126
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 05/08/07
Newport Beach has also adopted election campaign contribution and expenditure
controls and requires the filing of certain documents with the City Clerk. Newport Beach
limits contributions to $500 from any person in any given election cycle (Codified in
Chapters 1.25 and 1.30 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code).
The City of Concord's limitations greatly exceed the others raising contribution
limitations to $1,000 from any person in any given election cycle to a candidate and
$1,500, if that amount comes from a political committee. (Concord Municipal Code
section 26-31).
The City of San Diego is another example of a city capping campaign
contributions. This city's limit differs based on who is making the donation. For
example, whether the source is a family member, political organization, or anonymous
person, affects the maximum dollar contribution. (San Diego Municipal Code Chapter 2,
Article 7, Division 29).
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
• ALTERNATIVES:
Provide direction to Staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Draft Ordinance Adopting Campaign Contribution Limitations
is
127
DRAFT ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, ADDING CHAPTER 2-19 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATED TO CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS
The City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows:
Section 1.
The City Council hereby desires to adopt a Campaign Finance Ordinance.
Section 2.
Chapter 2-19 is hereby added to the Municipal Code to#O as, ollows.
Sections: "
2-19.01 Title.
2-19.02 Findings.
2-19.03 Purpose and intent.E
2-19.04 Definitions.
2-19.05 Campaign treasurer — Appointment', tw6dz — Compliance with provisions
required.
2-19.06 Contribution limitations
2-19.07 Contributions.- �
2-19.08 Contribution Limitations >to Persons ,or Committees Making Independent
Expenditures' vim.atio•
2-19.09 Making and Acceptance of ar-b
Con ution
2-19.10 Aggregn of Cotnbutions, "`°
2-19.11 Contnwbutions by Spouses and dhildren.
2-19.12 Contributions by Spouse, Children or Family Members of Candidate.
2-19.13 ElectronMcampaign"U;cpynts
2-19.14 Campal�stateaent
2-19 15.E;
G p aigm.
y�
2-19 l i d0ous biIit of City Clerk.
2- 7� Cr m misd ineanor actions.
218 Civil actions.
2-1, InjunctivB lief.
2-1Cost of htigaton.
2-19 Disqualific4lion.
2-19.22 Construction_cbf provisions.
2-19.23 A plicati, State Laws.
2-19.24 Entceent.
2-19.25 Effect% ;e`date of Contribution Limitations.
2-19.26 Severability.
•
128
2-19.01 Title.
This chapter may be cited as the "Campaign Finance Ordinance" of the city of Atascadero.
2-19.02 Findings.
The city council of the city of Atascadero finds and declares as follows:
A. The policy of this city is to protect the integrity, honesty and fairness of the electoral
process. Local government should serve the needs and respond to the wishes of all citizens
equally, without regard to their wealth.
B. Monetary contributions to political campaigns are a legtttmate form of participation in the
political process, but the financial strength of certain ind yj.' rgrorganizations should not
permit them to exercise a disproportionate or controlling) or%he election of candidates
for municipal office.
C. The increasing amounts of expenditures .n fpolitical campaigns 'Iia�e_ forced many
candidates for elective office to raise larger and�Aarger sums from individuals ox interest groups
with a specific financial stake in city matters r has can cam a public perce}t%n that the
decisions of city council members are being imp�}��xl,y anu'riced by monetary contributions.
These perceptions can undermine the credibility council and the elective and
governmental processes.f�
D. The best interests of the citizens f `t%e� are served Eby reducing direct and indirect
campaign contributions.NRI
����,
E. The city finds that tmtittons on ccmtaabutttons of �x►iney, services and materials by
individuals or groups tax riunicipalection ca3iapbons should be imposed by law to protect the
public health, safety t"n `'welfare These limitattons, however, should be reasonable so as not to
discourage personal ression or papicipation a e political process.
p,- guiictpalfface :c'ampaigns is escalatinb to dangerous and
F. Campaigns endtra for Q
unreasonablgdi The tx eg�fy of the 1egt l ve process, the competitiveness of campaigns,
and pub ®n deq Wji el'' e q� municipal officials are all diminishing because of the perceived
effecttpl'arge campatgar contb ions.
G. ,bcordingly, the Council deehares that there is a compelling interest to prevent potential
and percei d corruptive influence of any campaign contributions on the decisions of public
officials in th management 5� public assets and franchises, in the disposition of public funds,
and in decisions that
provide R uncommon financial benefits.
2-19.03 Purpose_,and intent.
The city council of the city enacts this chapter to accomplish the following purposes.
A. To encourage public trust in the electoral and decision-making processes of the city, and
to ensure that individuals and interest groups have a fair and equal opportunity to participate in
the elective and legislative process;
B. To reduce the potential for influence by large contributors with a specific financial stake
in matters before the city, thus countering the perception that decisions of municipal officials are
influenced by the size of contributions rather than by the merits of proposals and the best
129
interests of the people of the city; •
C. To encourage smaller contributions by placing realistic and enforceable limits on the
amounts persons may contribute in municipal election campaigns;
D. To help ensure public trust in the city's legislative and electoral institutions by requiring
public disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures, including but limited to those
made in support or in opposition to candidates or measures in municipal elections;
E. To limit the use of loans and credit in the financing of political campaigns for municipal
elective office;
F. To ensure that funds contributed to a campaign are used4WW,y for campaign purposes and
tc allow appropriate use of signage in municipal, state and federal apaigns.
G. To provide, in conjunction with the Political Reform Act and thc' ulations adopted by
the California Fair Political Practices Commission implementing thePtttcal Reform Act, a
comprehensive system for regulating the conduct of campaigns for city elects 6 office, including
but not limited to the provisions of state laB;ch prohibit ,any cotro11 . ttee of a
candidate from making independent expendituftnes, and froni�i'Wntributing fun to another
committee for the purpose of making independent ,expen�#itres (Government Code Section
85501) and which prohibit defined officials from recei`g r soliciting campaign contributions
of more than two hundred fifty dollar$,& prri defined perscros during proceedings before the city
in which such defined persons are interested and for three`ignths thereafter (Government Code
Section 84308).
2-19.04 Definitions
Unless a particular u�?:rd or phrase is othe u,%se specifically defined in this chapter, or the
contrary is stated or clearly appears,'from the scontext, the definitions set forth in the Political
Reform Act of 1974R`,Government Cede Sections `81000 et seq.) shall govern the constructions,
meaning and applicatton, ofwords and phrases' -used in this chapter. References to particular
sections of the Govern rre�t Code or`ather statutes° car laws, including references in this section,
shall be dee�c to inclu elan" changes tci uch sections, statutes or laws, including any
amendmet is el'e ons, additions, renumberings or recodifications that may occur subsequent to
the entnent of the orcilance'codified in this chapter.
TrynA G ]
Ver �
" N6pia Political Reform Acte means the California Political Reform Act, Government
Code Sechnns 81000 et sea r
"Campaign contribution :account" means an account established pursuant to California
Government Code- Section -.,,8520 1.
"Campaign statement""means a report, made on a form prescribed and supplied by the City
Clerk, which provides the information required by this chapter of candidates and committees.
Each campaign statement shall reflect all contributions received and expenditures made through
the closing date specified in Section 2-19.14.
"Campaign treasurer" means the duly appointed representative responsible for financial
accounting and reporting as required by this chapter. A committee may have only one campaign
treasurer and one assistant treasurer. is
130
"Candidate" means an individual who has filed a statement pursuant to California
Government Code Section 85200 indicating an intent to run for city elective office.
"City" means the city of Atascadero.
"City elective office" means the office of city council member.
"Contribution" means contribution as defined in California Government Code Section 82015,
and shall include nonmonetary contributions, extensions of credit, and loans to the extent that
these are considered contributions pursuant to California Government Code Section 84216,
subject to the following: '
1. Unsecured Loans. If the loan is not secured or guaranteed, it shall be considered a
c: )ntribution from the maker and shall be subject to the contnRt bfilhinits of this chapter. .
2. Secured or Guaranteed Loans. Notwithstanding _California bve nment Code Section
84216, a loan which is secured or guaranteed shall be considered a con trlbttlon from the lender
and guarantor or person whose property secures theoan, and shall be sublect=fo the contribution
limits of this chapter.
1
Exception: A loan made to a candidate by a cg'mmerczal lending institution in the regular
course of business on the same terms available topers of the public which is either
unsecured, personally guaranteed by, k ecandidate, or secured by property owned by the
�
candidate, shall not be subject to the coRm'= ution liter.
h 3F
"Controlled committee" means a controlled c' ed in California Government
Code Section 82016.��
"Election cycle" means`
a. For general elections � the city ccs"uracil, the period from the day after the election
until the day of the ne"t„election forwtle same city elective office.
b �E r specials o"I'ons to the , ty�dbbficil, the period from the day on which the seat
becomes�eani u l�the day taf.,the special election.
AY
ar
In the case,�of a re�alJ, the period from the date of the filing of the notice of
mtenfia Tao circulate a rec4.11 .petrtioAlntil the date of the election. This election cycle shall also
apply toy ?lidates to fill a vacancy in the City elective office that may be created by such recall.
"Expenditarvu means a payment, forgiveness of a loan, payment of a loan by a third party, or
an enforceable promise to Make payment, unless it is clear from the surrounding circumstances
that it is not made "'�pplixical purposes. When expenses are incurred to support election -related
litigation, they are considered expenditures. An expenditure is made on the date the payment is
made or on the date consideration, if any, is received, whichever is earlier.
"Immediate family” means a candidate's or elected officeholder's spouse or domestic
partner, and/or dependent children.
"Independent expenditure" means those expenditures defined in California Government Code
Section 82031.
131
"Independent expenditure committee" means, for purposes of this Chapter, persons, as
defined in this Chapter, whose primary purpose or objective is to make Independent
expenditures for or against any candidate for City elective office.
"Late contribution" means a late contribution as defined in California Government Code
Section 82036, except that for purposes of this chapter, the dollar threshold contained in Section
82036 shall be revised to read one hundred dollars.
"Measure" means any proposition which is submitted to a popular vote at any municipal
election by the City Council, or which is submitted or is intended to be submitted to a popular
vote at a municipal election by initiative or referendum whether or not; it qualifies for the ballot.
"Person" means an individual or any proprietorship, I
venture, syndicate, business trust, company, corporation, as
committee or any other entity or organization or group of peg
2-19.05 Campaign treasurer - Appoin
required.
A. Each candidate and/or each committee
may serve as the campaign treasurer for his/her
treasurer may also be appointed.
B. Each campaign treasurer shall be
California Government Code in addition
2-19.06
A. Contribution :units to City
0
firm, partnership, joint
itical action committee,
er organized.
- Compliance, with provisions
3mpaign treasurer. A candidate
his/her committee. An assistant
with the requirements of the
'sions of this chapter.
1. Limitation No person shall.m*acid no candidate for city elective office or a
controlled commixttee of said candidate or person acting by or on behalf of said candidate or said
candidate's controlled_ committee shall accept, any contribution which would cause the total
amount :contributed =b3': that person during any election cycle to the candidate, or to the
candidate's controlled committee; to exceed two hundred fifty dollars ($250). Nothing in this
section is ,intended to limit the amoiint.a candidate may contribute to his or her campaign for city
council from his or her personal funds'; provided, however, that if a candidate contributes more
than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2500) during an election cycle to his or her campaign
from his or her ;personal funds, then the limitation on contributions that may be made to or
accepted by othefcandidates for the same city elective office, and their controlled committees,
shall be increased -to :five�h ' dred dollars.
A candidate who contributes more than $2500 during an election cycle to his or her campaign
from his or her personal funds shall notify the City Clerk in writing within 24 hours after making
the contribution that causes the total contributed by the candidate to exceed $2500, which
notification shall be available for review by the public upon receipt by the City Clerk.
Notification shall be provided by one of the following methods:
a. facsimile transmission;
b. electronic mail;
132
r�
•
C. telegram;
d. guaranteed overnight delivery through the United States Postal Service; or
e. personal delivery.
2. Written Solicitations by Candidates. Any candidate or his or her controlled committee
making a written solicitation for a contribution for the candidate's campaign for city elective
office shall include the following written notice in no less than eight -point type on each such
solicitation:
NOTICE
The Atascadero Municipal Code limits the amo
candidate for elective office to an aggregate
contributions to the candidate, to persons or
candidate, and to persons or committees making'
against the candidate.
If the maximum contribution amount for a can
dollars pursuant to Section 2-19.06, the dollar amount
increased from "$250" to "$500".
of
independent
may give to a
This includes
Trolled by the
rid ures for or
en increased to five hundred
date's written notices may be
3. Exception for Campaign Indebtedness. A contribution specifically made to, accepted by
and expended by a candidate, or incumbent for the 'Tpifrpose of eliminating campaign debts
incurred by the candidate%or incumbent in the course of a pE ious campaign for city elective
office shall be considered a' contribution made aid accepted during the election cycle in which
the debts were incurred:
2-19.07 Contributions.
A Transmyttaa to Campaign Treasurer. All persons who receive contributions on behalf of a
candidate or committee shall transmit the contributions in full to the campaign treasurer
proripthy, together with �a list showing the name and address of each contributor and the amount
of the contribution, subject, he exceptions provided in this section.
L =
B. Refusal to Accept A candidate or a campaign treasurer shall have full authority to refuse
and to return any; contribution offered, provided the contribution is returned within 14 days of
receipt.
C. Requirements for Acceptance of Contributions. A candidate or a campaign treasurer
shall not accept any contribution for any other person under an assumed name or under the name
of any other person. The candidate or campaign treasurer shall obtain the name, address,
occupation and employer of each contributor.
2-19.08 Contribution Limitations to Persons or Committees Making Independent
Expenditures.
0 1. Limitation. No person shall make, and no person or committee making independent
133
expenditures supporting or opposing a candidate for city elective office shall accept, any
contribution which would cause the total amount contributed by that person during any election
cycle in support of or in opposition to that candidate to exceed two hundred fifty dollars.
2. Written Solicitations by Persons Making Independent Expenditures or by Independent
Expenditure Committees. Any individual or independent expenditure committee making a
written solicitation for a contribution in support of or in opposition to a candidate for city
elective office shall include the following written notice in no less than eight -point type on each
such solicitation:
NOTICE'
The Atascadero Municipal Code limits the amount that.acontributor may give to
persons or committees making independent expenditures in support of or in
opposition to a candidate for City elective office to a total of $250 for each
candidate. This includes contributions to the candidate, persons or committees
controlled by the candidate.
3. Nothing contained in this Section 2-19.
limitation on the right of a person to make inde.
shall be interpreted to be, a
A. Late Contributions. Late contributions shall be "' orted in accordance with California
Government Code Section 84203. No person, candidate o didate's committee shall make or
accept any contribution greater than $50: after 5:00., Monde , days preceding the day of the
election, except that a candidate and/W�a candidate's familyshall be permitted to make
additional contributions to the candidate or to the candidate's committee.
B. Contribution Limitations to City Measures. There are no contribution limits to any
measure submitted or intended to be submitted to a popular vote at a municipal election by
initiative or referendum. However, any contribution of $1,000 or more from a single source
which is made to or received by a committee primarily formed to support or oppose a ballot
measure during the 125 days immediately preceding the election at which the measure is being
voted upon must, -be reported to the City Clerk within 24 hours of the time it is received or
contributed or within 24 hours after the measure qualifies for the ballot. Any contribution of
$100 -6f more from a single source which is made to or received by a committee primarily
fornk "to support or oppose a ballot measure during the 8 days preceding the election at which
the measure is being voted upon must be reported to the City Clerk within 24 hours. Late
contribution reports must be filed by fax, telegram, mailgram, guaranteed overnight delivery
service, or personal delivery (not by regular mail).
2-19.09 Making and Acceptance of a Contribution.
For purposes of this chapter, a contribution shall be considered to have been "made" and
"accepted" as follows:
A. Monetary Contributions.
1. Making of Monetary Contributions. For purposes of the contribution limitations of this
chapter, a monetary contribution is "made" on the date the contribution is mailed, delivered or
otherwise transmitted to the candidate, controlled committee, or person or committee making
independent expenditures. The date of the check or other negotiable instrument by which the
contribution is made may be presumed by the candidate, committee, or person receiving the
contribution to be the date on which the contribution is mailed, delivered or otherwise
134
•
C7
transmitted, unless it is known to the candidate, committee, or person receiving the contribution
to be later than the date the contribution is mailed, delivered or otherwise transmitted, in which
case the earlier date shall be considered the date on which the contribution is "made."
2. Acceptance of Monetary Contributions. For purposes of the contribution limits of this
chapter, a monetary contribution shall be deemed "accepted" on the date that it is made; provided
that a monetary contribution shall not be considered accepted for purposes of this chapter if it is
not cashed, negotiated or deposited and, in addition, is returned to the donor within fourteen days
of receipt.
a.
b t Its monetary equivalent; or
The monetary: amounoy which the value of the nonmonetary contribution
exceeds titµcontribution limtts,,of this chapter.
2-19.10 aggregation of Contributions.
A. All contribut�,ons=mar1e during an election cycle directly to a candidate or to any of the
candidate's
co troll
shall be aggregated for purposes of the two -hundred -fifty -
dollar individual contribution limitation established in Section 2-19.06.
B. The limit established in Section 2-19.06 pertains to the aggregate total of all contributions
made during an election cycle for or against a candidate for elective office. This amount includes
the total of the contributions to the candidate, to the candidate's controlled committees, and to
persons or committees making independent expenditures for or against the candidate.
C. All payments made by a person or organization whose contributions or expenditure
is
activities are financed, maintained or controlled by any corporation, labor organization,
association, political party or any other person or committee, including any parent, subsidiary,
135
branch, division, department or local unit of the corporation, labor organization, association,
political party or any other person, or by any group of such persons, shall be considered to be
made by the person financing, maintaining or controlling the contribution or expenditure.
0
D. Two or more persons shall be treated as one and the same person for purposes of the
contribution limitations set forth in Section 2-19.06, and their contributions shall be aggregated
and shall not exceed the limitations set forth in Section 2-19.06, in the following situations:
1. Related Entities. Two or more entities shall be treated as one person when such
entities:
a. Share the majority of members of their boards of directors;
b. Share two or more corporate officers;
c. Are owned or controlled by the same majority shareholder or shareholders; or
d. Are in a parent -subsidiary relationship. A parent-subsidiary'relationship exists
when one corporation directly or indirectly owns ,shares possessing more than fifty.,percent of the
voting power of another corporation.
2. Controlling Interest. A person and any general or''limited partnership in which the
person is a general partner, or a person and any corporation in which the person owns a
controlling interest, shall be treated as one person. For purposes of this subsection, a controlling
interest in a corporation means fifty percent or mora -of the voting power of a corporation.
E. Notwithstanding the provisions of j. 8:66 -tion 2-1 :06, candidates, controlled
committees, and persons or committees making independent expenditures shall not be deemed to ,
be in violation of this section if"any of them accepts a contribution from a person that was made
in violation of the contribution limits of this Chapter. It is the intent of this section to make
contributors, and not",' candidates, ..controlled committees, or persons or committees making
independent expenditures, liable for violations occurring as a result of the applicability of this
Chapter to contribution'limits.
2-19.11 Contributions bv..SDouses and
A;s Contributions by �ahusband. and wife shall be treated as separate contributions and shall
not be aggregated.
B. Contributions by dependent children shall be treated as contributions by their parents and
attributed proportionately to each parent (one-half to each parent or the total amount to a single
custodial Darentl:
2-19.12 Contributions by Spouse, Children or Family Members of Candidate.
Contributions to a candidate by his or her spouse, children or any other family member shall
be subject to the contribution limits of this chapter.
2-19.13 Election campaign accounts.
A. Candidate Intention Statement and the Campaign Bank Account.
1. Candidate Intention Statement. Any individual who intends to be a 0
136
candidate for a City elective office must file a statement of intention to run for office prior to
• soliciting or receiving any contribution or loan. Form 501 (Candidate Intention) is used to
comply with this requirement, and is filed with the City Clerk.
•
.7
2. Candidate Campaign Bank Account. In addition to filing the candidate
intention statement, an individual who plans to run for a City elective office and who plans to
accept contributions and make campaign related expenditures must set up a campaign bank
account at a financial institution with a branch located in the City of Atascadero.
3. City ballot measure committees must set
financial institution with a branch located in the City of Atasca
B. Statement of Organization. For each c
b
contributions totaling $1,000 are received (including
days of receiving contributions of $1,000 or n
Organization (Form 410) must be filed with the,&
with the City Clerk. If a recipient committee quaf
must file, by telegram, fax or personal delivery with:
information required to be reported in the Statemen
be filed with the City Clerk.
C. Deposit of Contributii
treasurer shall be deposited into the
his/her authorized agent.
D. Expenditui
against the election camp,;
a candidate or committee
considered for
person.
a
bank account at a
npaign anlc account into which
iidate's personal funds) or within 10
recipient cornet#tee Statement of
,tary of State. A copy shall also be filed
during the 16 days prior t'6,,an election, it
?4 hours p qualifying as a committee, the
Wrgariization. A copy of this form shall
accepted by a campaign
the campaign treasurer or
expenditures shall be made only by checks drawn
the campaign treasurer or authorized agent, except that
;e;petty; cash account.
Athan $100 may be in the petty cash fund at any time, and no
may --be made from a petty cash account. The petty cash account
associated with the candidate's election to the specific office for
;_ash or funds in the election campaign account shall not be
be personal funds of a candidate, campaign treasurer or any other
E. Access to Records by City Clerk. The City Clerk shall have full access at all
reasonable hours to the bank's records concerning all election campaign accounts.
F. Disbursement of Unexpended Campaign Funds, If, following the election, the
final campaign statement for any committee discloses an unexpended campaign surplus, the
campaign treasurer shall disburse the whole of the surplus to the City and/or a nonprofit
charitable organization (qualified for federal income tax exemption) of the candidate's or
137
campaign treasurer's choice. This shall be done no later than 90 days after the election.
G. Closing of Account. No later than 90 days following the election, the campaign
treasurer shall close the election campaign account and file a State Form 460 (Recipient
Committee Campaign Statement) with the City Clerk. The campaign treasurer shall also file a
State Form 410 (Statement of Organization — Termin ation). with the Secretary of State, with a
copy to the City Clerk. However, should litigation arise as a result of the conduct of the
campaign, either during the campaign period or after the conclusion of the campaign, the account
may be kept open until such litigation is finally concluded. Within 45 days of such conclusion, a
final campaign statement shall be filed with the City Clerk.
H. Retention of Records. The campaign treasurer
and all other records required by this chapter for a period of,4
2-19.14 Campaign statements.
A. Required Filing Schedule. Every°campaign
$100 or more, shall file with the City Clerk campaign
schedule:
1. State campaign 'statements_ shall be
the Government Code.
2. A supplemental City'campogn staten
noon, Tuesday, one week before fhe election.- The closing
p.m., Monday, 8 days before the election.
all campaign statements
the election.
upon receivingor expending
:s according to the following
d as required by the provisions of
fall be filed no later than 12:00
of this statement shall be 5:00
1 Each State campaign statement filed shall contain the information required
under the provisions of the Government Code.
2. The supplemental City campaign statement shall consist of
a. The name, address and amount of the contribution for each person
who contributes greater than $50. In addition, the occupation of the contributor and the name of
the employer shall -be provided for contributions of $100 or greater.
b'. The total amount received from all persons who each contribute
$50 or less.
C. The total expenditures made by each committee.
C. Filing. Each document required to be filed in this chapter sha] 1 he filed with the
City Clerk during business hours, and elsewhere as may be required by the Government Code.
138
•
•
• D. Filing Fees. Filing fees, if any, shall be established by Council resolution.
E. Publication. On the Friday preceding the election, the City Clerk shall publish in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City of Atascadero the following information for each
committee:
I*
•
1. Total receipts.
2. Total expenditures.
C. Defmiri6`z6. "Campaign signs means a sign intended to draw attention to or
communicate a pos�tlon on any is1ue, candidW,_ or measure in any national, state or local
election and which otherwise is nctt:subject to regulation under Chapter 9-15 (Signs).
T7 -V A�ation. on of this section shall be an infraction.
M Enforcement. Enforcement of this section shall be pursuant to either Chapter 1.3
(PenaltyE. Tovisions) or Chapter 1.6 `(Administrative Citations, Fines and Hearing Procedures) of
the Municipal Code.
2-19.16`ResponsibiLties of City Clerk.
A. Duties ,;,I'addition to any other duties required of the City Clerk under this
chapter, the City Clerk's'hall:
1. Prescribe and furnish, without charge, appropriate forms for all campaign
statements, documents and reports required to be filed by this chapter.
2. Determine whether required statements and declarations have been filed
and, if so, whether they conform on their face with the requirements of this chapter.
139
3. Promptly notify all persons who have failed to file a statement in the form •
and at the time required by this chapter.
4. Report, in writing, apparent violations of this chapter to the City Attorney.
5. Place a timely advertisement(s) in a newspaper of general circulation in
the City of Atascadero advising the public that a person(s) supporting or opposing a
candidate(s) or a measure(s) through newspaper or other advertisements may be subject to City
reporting requirements.
6. Compile and maintain a current log of all, -filed statements pertaining to
each reporting committee.
7. Provide an appropriate form, and ,prescribe a date for submission, which
allows any candidate to file a 200 -word ballot statement of qualifications and/or description of
his/her stand on issues. Such statement shall be -on' a form provided by the City Clerk in
accordance with any other provision as set forth b' Elections Code Section 13307. et seq.
B. Additional Help or Services. The „'
authorized and directed to hire
part-time help, contract for services, and purchase supplies: -.as the City Clerk deems necessary to
carry out the additional duties imposed Qn the -City Clerk's office by this chapter. Within 90 days
after each election, the City Clerk shall provide_,;the CounciF`W' ith a detailed report of the total
direct and indirect labor, materials and,Fother costsincurred ba=the City Clerk's office in
performing such additional duties.
2-19.17 Criminalmisdemeanor actions.
Any person whbyiolates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor. Any
person who causes anyother person to violate any provision of this chapter, or who aids and
abets any,,,. ;iI. rson in theAViolation of any provision of this chapter, shall be liable under the
provisisnsof this section.
2-19.18 `. Civil actions.
A _Any person who intentionally or negligently violates any provision of this chapter
shall be liable Yn a civil action' brought by the City Attorney or by a person residing within the
City for an amount, not more than three times the amount of the unlawful contribution or
expenditure.
B. If any person files an original City campaign statement after any deadline
imposed by this chapter, he or she shall pay, in addition to any other penalties provided for under
this chapter, the sum of $100 per day after the deadline until the statement or report is filed.
Liability may not he enforced if, on all impartial basis, the City Clerk determines that the late
filing was not willful and that enforcement of the liability will not further the purposes of this
chapter. Liability shall not be waived if the supplemental City campaign statement is not filed
within 5 days of the deadline after the City Clerk has sent specific written notice of the filing •
140
•
•
•
requirement. In addition, the City Clerk may assess any applicable fines in accordance with State
law.
C. If two or more persons are responsible for any violation, they shall be jointly and
severally liable.
D. Any person, before filing a civil action pursuant to this section, shall first file with
the City Attorney a written request for the City Attorney to commence the action. The request
shall contain a statement of the grounds for believing a cause of action:_exists. The City Attorney
shall respond within 10 days after receipt of the request indicatmg4wh6ther he or she intends to
file a civil action. If the City Attorney indicates in the affirmative-an'd files a suit within 30 days
thereafter, no other action may be brought unless the action,li'�'%tl &City Attorney is dismissed
without prejudice.
E. In determining the amount of li
seriousness of the violation and the degree of
entered against the defendant or defendants in a
amount recovered. The remaining 50% shall be
brought by the City Attorney, the entire amount s.
F. No civil action allegin
more than 4 years after the date the vi
2-19.19 Injunctive
:)iHty"N "the court may bike, into account the
�pability of the defendanttdf a judgment is
fiction, the plaintiff shall recelue;50% of the
leposited ante° the City treasury: In an action
ill'beApaid§ 0 -the City treasury.
of any pruwsion of this chapter shall be filed
The City Attorney or any person residing in the City may sue for injunctive relief to
enjoin violations or lo compel comp, lx nce with th&provisions of this chapter.
E
C /s%� F ''
2-19.20 Cost of 1iti atlowl-
Pcourt may�ard to laintiff or defendant who prevails in any action authorized by
thisa{% pter his or het�ostsnt��lxrigation, including reasonable attorneys' fees; provided,
howewbamo costs of litigat x or attorneys' fees shall be awarded against the City.
2-19.21
In additiiMo.,an� other penalties prescribed by law, if an official receives a contribution
in violation of this clr''the official shall not be permitted to make, participate in making or in
any way attempt to use his or her official position to influence a governmental decision in which
the contributor has a Financial interest. The provisions of Government Code Section 87100 et
seq. and the regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission shall apply to interpretations
of this section.
2-19.22 Construction of provisions.
A. This chapter shall be in addition to all other City and State laws applicable to
141
municipal elections. Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the •
definitions and terms set forth in the Government Code shall govern the interpretations of terms
used in this chapter. This chapter shall be construed liberally in order to effectuate its purposes.
B. If any provision of this chapter, or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance, is held invalid, the validity of the remainder of the chapter and the applicability of
such provision to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
2-19.23 Application of State Laws.
Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to exempt any person from complying with
applicable provisions of any other laws of this state, including but riot limited to, the contribution
limitations contained within the California Political Reform Adi foi "special elections.
4.
2-19.24 Enforcement.
A. Any person who willfully or knowingly violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of
a misdemeanor.
B. If the City Clerk discovers through a campaign statement that any provision of this
chapter has been violated, the City Clerk shall prompt]ynotifythe District Attorney.
2-19.25 Effective date of Contribution:�Limitations.
A. Notwithstanding the date of adoption and'the,effective date ,of the ordinance codified in
this chapter, and except as ,otherwise provided in ,:Sections 2-19'.-, _, and , the •
contribution limits of this chaptershall apply to contributions made on or after July 1, 2007, to:
1. Any candidate for city elective office, including an incumbent, who sought or who will
seek election in any'ection for city, elective office. Contributions made prior to July 1, 2007,
shall not be considered for purposesbf the individual contribution limits contained in Sections 2-
19.06 and 2-19.08; and
B. C®.tributions made prior to the effective date of this Ordinance shall not be considered or
aggrem&ffor purposes of the contribution limits contained in Sections 2-19.06 and 2-19.08.
_w
C: In determining whether a candidate's contributions toward his or her own campaign have
triggered e increased contribution limitations for other candidates provided for in Section 2-
19.06, contributions by a candidate toward his or her own campaign which were made prior to
July 1, 2007. shall be counted, but only up to $2500, regardless of the amount actually
contributed by the.candidate prior to July 1, 2007.
D. No candidatej, `controlled committee, or person or committee making independent
expenditures shall be `deemed to have violated any provisions of this chapter solely because
contributions in excess of the limitations contained in Sections 2-19.06 and 2-19.08 were
accepted or made before the date specified in subsections A or B above. Nothing in this
subsection shall be deemed to require the return of any contribution made prior to the effective
date of the ordinance codified in this chapter.
2-19.26 Severability.
If any provision of this chapter, or the application of any such provision to any person or •
142
circumstances, shall be held invalid, the remainder of this chapter, to the extent it can be giv*
effect, or the application of those provisions to persons or circumstances other than those as to
which it is held invalid, shall not be affected thereby, and to this end the provisions of this
chapter are severable.
SECTION 2. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together with
the names of the Council members voting for and against it, shall be published at least five days
prior to its final passage, in the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in this
City. This ordinance will go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Councilhpld on January 23, 2007, and
PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero, State of California, on
February 13, 2007, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
A'
APPROVED AS
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
•
C., City Clerk
143
171
•
•
144
a
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - City Manager's Office
ITEM NUMBER: C - 2
DATE: 05/08/07
Work Plan for City Council Strategic Planning Goals
RECOMMENDATION:
Council provide direction on the work plan for the City Council strategic planning goals.
DISCUSSION:
At the strategic planning meeting of February 23-24, 2007, the City Council adopted six
16 major goals. This report outlines work plans for each of these goals. The six goals are:
1. Improving City's Economic Base
2. Continue Emphasis on Roads
3. Repair City Hall
4. Enhance Public Safety
5. Campaign Reform
6. Natural Resources Program
Improving the City's Economic Base
Enhancing the City's economic base to ensure adequate revenues for services remains
a top priority for the City Council. Specifically, staff is proposing:
• Involve the public in a series of roundtable meetings to gather information about the
community's preferences and priorities for economic development projects.
• Adopting a revised Economic Development strategy building on the successes of the
2003-08 plan. The strategy will outline ways to enhance the fiscal health of the
community and support the existing business climate in a way that is consistent with
the General Plan.
• Implementing the Council -adopted wayfinding program installing identification and
directional signs throughout the community.
• Determining an appropriate scope of development for the Del Rio intersection.
• Successfully promoting and supporting infill development including the following:
145
ITEM NUMBER: C - 2
DATE: 05/08/07
o Rite Aide center development
o Additional retail stores at Mission Oaks
o Completion of Colony Square
o Downtown business district improvements
• Continuing to make progress on permit streamlining.
• Investing in redevelopment projects in the downtown area including streetscape
improvements and additional lighting.
• Conducting another tax increment financing to gain additional capital for
improvements in the redevelopment area.
• Promoting hotel development & tourist friendly development along the freeway
corridor.
• Working with the Chamber of Commerce and the Main Street Association to retain
and attract new businesses to the community.
Continue Emphasis on Roads
All asphalt surfaces deteriorate over time due to traffic loading, storm water,
temperature variation and age. Well-timed preventative maintenance of a roadway
surface increases its service life and delays the need for expensive rehabilitation or
reconstruction. The Atascadero Road Program was developed to focus the City's efforts
in maintaining and protecting the roads of Atascadero in an organized, efficient and
cost-effective manner. To continue the emphasis on roads, staff is proposing:
• Rehabilitating pre -determined sections of the circulation plan roads, collectors and
arterials. Sections of roads scheduled for rehabilitation are determined by
pavement condition evaluation, safety considerations, traffic impacts and other
factors.
• Inspecting and rating the surface condition of the roads. Research new and cost
effective methods for road maintenance.
• Preserving and enhancing the roads we have rehabilitated over the last 7 years by
using slurry seals, cap seals and other forms of maintenance.
• Aggressively seeking additional funding for road maintenance and repair.
• Overlaying approximately one -mile of local roads per year with City staff and
equipment.
• Installing roadside drainage improvements and upgrades to remove storm water flow
from the road surface therefore preserving it from further damage.
• Working with neighborhoods, to pave non -city maintained roads, using the Road
Loan Program.
• Providing cold mix at fire station one free of charge to residents.
• Updating the Atascadero Engineering Standards to require improved construction
related to roads and drainage.
Un -congested circulation for vehicle, pedestrians and bicycles is important to the quality
of life for the citizens and visitors to the community. City Staff will seek to improve
circulation systems to provide a high level of service, therefore ensuring an enjoyable
experience and easy access to our community. Specifically staff is proposing:
146
ITEM NUMBER: C-2
DATE: 05/08/07
• Approving the Interchange Operational Improvement Study. This study will define
cost effective improvements to improve the level of service at Atascadero's eight
Interchanges.
• Improving traffic safety by improving coordination between the Police and Public
Works Departments pertaining to public education, engineering, and enforcement.
• Installing improvements from the Interchange Operational Improvement Study.
• Completing construction of the Lewis Ave Bridge.
• Installing interconnected signals at the Santa Rosa Road Interchange.
• Installing traffic calming, pedestrian access and bicycle routes in the Downtown.
• Working with Caltrans to complete the US 101/SR 41 Interchange Project and
;)rovide the public advance information about the project and circulation impacts.
• Implementing the Adopt -A -Road Program to allow citizens groups to remove litter
from the right-of-way.
• Operating and promoting local and regional transit systems and park and ride lots to
provide alternate transportation modes and reduce vehicle trips.
Repair City Hall
Completing a Funding Package
Obtaining funding for the building remains our first priority. Negotiations with FEMA
have resulted in only moderate success in getting disaster relief funding to repair the
damage to City Hall that resulted from the San Simeon earthquake. It has recently
become clear that FEMA is unwilling to make any changes to their proposed funding.
Staff is proposing:
• Aggressively pursuing appeals locally and in Washington.
• Working with Congressman McCarthy and other political channels to insure that our
arguments are heard.
• Carefully monitoring the project to insure that FEMA regulations are followed
throughout the process and that the City's funding options do not become limited.
• Continuing to aggressively search for new grants and funding opportunities.
Construction
Once a project worksheet is received from FEMA, the construction clock starts moving.
We anticipate this worksheet very soon. During the next year, staff is proposing
• Assembling the City's architecture and engineering consultant team to begin
generating rehabilitation design drawings, to be developed into construction
documents.
• Completing an operations plan and programming space for staff needs.
• Preparing bid documents and completing a successful bid process.
• Constructing the building including repair of all of the cracks and structural issues
throughout the building.
• Restoring selected historic elements within the building.
147
ITEM NUMBER: C - 2
DATE: 05/08/07
Enhance Public Safety 0
Public safety remains an important goal. Staff has prepared a detailed work plan and is
proposing:
• Reducing attrition and increasing retention by improving salaries, enhancing the
working environment, and increasing opportunities for training and professional
development.
• Finding ways to create a "farm team" for future recruitments including participating in
job fairs, recruiting high school cadets and ROP work -experience students, and
converting the cadet programs from volunteer to paid programs
• Providing timely and relevant information to the public on topics of interest that
enhance the safety of the community.
• Seeking out opportunities to interact with the school system and community groups
such as participating in the Every 15 Minutes Drug and Alcohol program,
in school open houses, and other events that offer opportunities for public safety
presentations.
• Improving traffic enforcement by articulating problem areas to patrol staff for
selected enforcement.
• Establishing a liaison with Atascadero State Hospital with respect to coordinating the
release of any High Risk Sex Offenders or others in the Sexual Violent Predator
category to insure that information regarding such releases is shared in a timely
manner, and seeking additional ordinances or regulations if necessary to monitor or
regulate the placement of released persons.
• Reevaluating the existing Police and Fire radio coverage to measure the
effectiveness of the new radio system and make strategic changes as appropriate.
• Testing, evaluating and changing the City's Emergency Plan where needed to
ensure the most efficient and effective response.
• Continuing staff development in responding to emergencies.
• Developing homeowner fire safety and evacuation maps of the west side of the City
and completely testing the evacuation plan.
• Beginning planning for new or upgraded Police and Fire facilities.
• Purchasing a ladder truck in preparation for the construction of additional three and
four story buildings including hotels.
Campaign Reform
The City Attorney has prepared a campaign reform program that considers
comments previously made by council members.
Natural Resources Program
The native oak forest is the character defining feature of Atascadero. The General Plan
and the City's Tree Ordinance both require the protection and preservation of native
trees. To preserve the forest staff is proposing: 40
ITEM NUMBER: C - 2
DATE: 05/08/07
• Monitoring and protecting impacted trees during development by retaining a City
• Arborist.
• Developing a more comprehensive strategy for the acquisition of easements and
open space to protect undisturbed portions of the native forest.
• Developing a systematic plan for reducing fuel loads to better protect the native
forest from wildland fires.
The Native Tree inventory concluded that both Valley Oaks and Blue Oaks are not
regenerating at sufficient rates to sustain these stands of trees. The diversity of oak
species in Atascadero is an important part of the visual character, habitat quality and
long term sustainability of the native forest. Staff is proposing:
• Implementing a tree replanting program that will plant 3,000 native oak trees by
2010.
• Creating a native oak seedling give-away program.
Atascadero's native forest and network of creeks and streams support a wild range of
wildlife. Although the community values and appreciates the wildlife that live within
Atascadero, the City does not have a formal process to evaluate and protect the
habitats that support this wildlife. Staff is proposing:
• Hiring a contract biologist to allow for the informal and early review of both small and
large development projects. The biologist could also provide peer review of
. biological studies and monitoring that is occurring on development projects.
• Identifying and protecting wildlife corridors, riparian areas and wetlands.
• Using GIS mapping technology to identify sensitive habitats.
Atascadero takes its name from the numerous creeks and wetlands that snake through
the hills. These creeks support a variety of wildlife, including the endangered steelhead
salmon and these creeks provide the City with all of its drinking water. It is a difficult,
but extremely important task to balance development and urbanization with riparian
protection and water quality. Staff is proposing:
• Creating a downtown creek master plan to manage the creek area.
• Finalizing the Creek Setback Ordinance
• Implementing the Atascadero Lake Water Quality Plan
• Implementing the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase
II program.
Both the General Plan and the Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement commit the City
to take steps to maximize energy and resource conservation. There are steps that the
City can take to improve energy conservation, including encouraging Green Building
practices and recycling of construction debris. Staff is proposing:
• Finding a way to reinstate the chipping program to recycle bio mass and protect aii
quality.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 2
DATE: 05/08/07
• Creating Green building incentives and a construction recycling program.
• Implementing steps outlined in the Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement
The 2002 General Plan was developed on a framework of Smart Growth Principles.
These Principles encourage compact, mixed use infill development within the
Downtown and along EI Camino Real. This type of development is more pedestrian
scaled, less auto dependent and provides for affordable housing. Staff is proposing:
• Increased use of mixed use and compact, walkable development.
• Promoting Infill Affordable Housing.
Continuing the Downtown Revitalization efforts including improved lighting,
streetscape, and retail attraction.
• Creating a Trails and Bikeway Master Plan.
Next Steps
Staff is looking for comments regarding this work plan. This outline has focused on
capturing the broad thoughts from the Council's goal setting session. The next step is
provide additional comments to staff so specific action plans can be established and
included as part of the 2007-09 budget.