Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 072407r� CITY OF A TASCA DERO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Tuesday, July 24, 2007 Redevelopment Agency: 6:30 P.M. City Council: 7:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, California • REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M. REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member O'Malley ROLL CALL: Mayor Luna Mayor Pro Tem Brennler Council Member Beraud Council Member Clay Council Member O'Malley APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call 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 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.) PRESENTATIONS: 1. Employee Service Award Presentations. 2. Citizen Barbara Mamoud will make a presentation to several police officers. A. 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 Special Meeting Minutes - May 29, 2007 ■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Special • Meeting Minutes of May 29, 2007. [City Clerk] 2. City Council Meeting Minutes — June 12, 2007 ■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes of June 12, 2007. [City Clerk] 3. April 2007 Investment Report • Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council approve the City Treasurer's report for April 2007. [Treasurer] 4. 2007-2008 Annual Spending Limit ■ Description: Approval establishes the City's annual spending limit which must be approved by the Council at the beginning of each fiscal year. ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt the Draft Resolution, establishing the annual spending limit for fiscal year 2007-2008. [Administrative Services] 5. Temporary Road Closure / Movies in the Park (Community Services Department) ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council approve a request by the Community • Services Department to close a portion Palma Avenue on the following five Saturdays: 7/28/07, 8/4/07, 8/11/07, 8/18/07 & 8/25/07 for the movies in the park events. [Community Services] 0 • 6. Request for Proposal (RFP) Process - City Attorney ■ Description: Circulation of RFP's for City Attorney services to review the service levels and rates in the market. ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council approve the attached Request for Proposals for City Attorney services and direct the City Manager to implement the recruitment process. [City Manager] 7. Pre -Tax Payroll Deduction Plan for Employees Choosing to Purchase CaIPERS Service Credit ■ Description: Approval would allow employees the option to purchase service credit with pre-tax dollars for previous years they may have or could have worked for a public agency. ■ Fiscal Impact: All costs associated with additional service credit purchases are picked up by the employee. Recommendation: Council approve the Draft Resolution allowing pre-tax payroll deductions for California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS) service credit purchases. [City Manager] 8. Purchase of Network Servers and Related Technical Support ■ Description: Approval to purchase new network servers to replace the older existing server configuration. ■ Fiscal Impact: Funding has been budgeted in the Technology Replacement Fund for this purpose. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Hewlett Packard for network servers for the amount of $67,604.17; and, 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Pinnacle Technologies for Storage Area Network (SAN) software, replication and backup software and related installation services and support for the amount of $49,052.00. [City Manager] 9. Graffiti Abatement Ordinance ■ Fiscal Impact: Staff has previously estimated that, on average, it is costing $400 per incident to abate. However, Staff has developed a tracking procedure that should provide a greater accounting of actual costs associated with abating graffiti. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt, on second reading, by title only, the Draft Graffiti Abatement Ordinance, thereby amending Atascadero Municipal Code Title 5 to add Chapter 14. [City Manager] 0 3 10. City Manager Salary Review and Amendment to Management/Non- Represented Employment Resolution ■ Fiscal Impact: The additional cost of the City Manager's salary and the retirement plan has been budgeted for in the 2007-09 budget. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Adopt the facilitator's recommendation to increase the City Manager's salary by 5% for a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) and 5% for a merit increase, and; 2. Adopt the Draft Resolution amending Resolution 2007-066 establishing the compensation and benefit plan for non -represented professional and management workers and confidential employees effective July 1, 2007 - June 30, 2009. [City Manager] 11. Consultant Selection - Transit Center Site Selection Study ■ Description: Approval authorizes RRM Design Group to proceed with the study to locate and recommend a site for a transit center in Atascadero. ■ Fiscal Impact: $86,000.00. ■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with RRM Design Group in the amount of $86,000.00, for a Transit Center Site Selection Study. [Public Works] 12. Santa Cruz Landslide Repair Award (City Bid No. 2007-006) ■ Description: Repair of the existing landslide under and along the west end of Santa Cruz Road, near San Gregorio. ■ Fiscal Impact: Total project expenditure of $405,554.00. • • Rell commendafio-,s: Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Raminha Construction to construct the Santa Cruz Landslide Repair; and 2. Authorize the Public Works Director to file a notice of completion after the project is finished; and 3. Authorize the Closure of Santa Cruz Road between Lenosa Lane and San Gregorio Road. [Public Works] 13. Atascadero Lake Park Restroom Replacement Proiect Award (City Bid No. 2007-001 ■ Description: Project will modify the Lake Park restroom facilities to meet all of the ADA compliance requirements. ■ Fiscal Impact: $334,360.00 from CDBG Funds. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Wysong Construction in the amount of $247,800.00 for the Restroom Replacement Project; and 2. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate an additional $66,710.00 in CDBG Funds for the Restroom Replacement Project. [Public Works] 0 • 14.200612007 Road Rehabilitation Traffic Wav Pavinq Award (City Bid No. 2007-004 ■ Description: Project will widen and repave Traffic Way from Olmeda Ave. to Via Ave. ■ Fiscal Impact: Estimated expenditure of $485,844.00. ■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Union Asphalt, Inc. in the amount of $347,645.15 for construction of the Traffic Way Road Rehabilitation Project. [Public Works] 15. Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement (Apple Valley) ■ Description: Approval of a sewer extension reimbursement agreement for Apple Valley. ■ Fiscal Impact: The City will collect a 2% Administrative Charge from all reimbursements. This charge will be deducted from the total amount refunded. ■ Recommendation: Council approve a Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement for the Apple Valley Residential Development. [Public Works] 16. Sewer Extension Reimbursement Aqreement (Violeta Ave. ■ Description: Approval of a sewer extension reimbursement agreement for Violeta Ave. ■ Fiscal Impact: The City will collect a 2% Administrative Charge from all reimbursements. This charge will be deducted from the total amount • refunded. ■ Recommendations: Council: [Public Works] 1. Accept the Violeta Ave. Sewer Extension as complete and accept the improvements into the City sewer system; and 2. Approve the attached Public Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement. [Public Works] 17. Authorization to Purchase Aerial Ladder Truck • Fiscal Impact: $871,167.00 from the Aerial Fire Truck Fees Fund. ■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Pierce Manufacturing Co. to build and deliver a model year 2007 aerial ladder truck for $871,167.00. [Fire] 18. Temporary Road Closure — Hot EI Camino Cruise Nite 2007 ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council approve the Draft Resolution authorizing the closure of EI Camino Real, from Curbaril to Traffic Way, on Friday, August 17, 2007 from 5:00 p.m.- 8:30 p.m. and the closure of East Mall, Palma and West Mall from 1:00 p.m. - 8:30 pm [Community Services] • 0 B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. PLN 2007-1205 / APL 2007-0012 / PLN 2099-0183 / APL 2007-0013: Appeal of Planning Commission's Conditions of Approval for Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 (5105 and 5305 Chauplin Lane) Finch/Messer ■ Disclosure of Ex -Parte Communications ■ Description: Request to reverse the Planning Commission's approval of Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 for the removal of 62 native trees subject to mitigation measures. ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt Draft Resolution B thereby denying the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval of Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 for the removal of sixty-two (62) native trees subject to mitigation measures. [Community Development] 2. Confirminq the Cost of Veqetative Growth and/or Refuse Abatement ■ Description: Request confirmation of abatement costs. ■ Fiscal Impact: No direct fiscal impact. The contractor costs for the 2007 weed abatement / refuse abatement totals are $23,125.00 with $15,637.50 recovered through assessments placed on the 2007-2008 property tax bills. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt the Draft Resolution, confirming the cost of vegetative growth (weeds) and/or refuse (rubbish) abatement. [Fire] • C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. Referendum Petition Concerning Creek Setbacks / Resolution No. 2007- 022 / General Plan Amendment #2006-0017 ■ Description: Council to decide whether to repeal General Plan Amendment or call for an election. ■ Fiscal Impact: $0 — 70,000, depending on the option chosen. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Receive the Certificate of Sufficiency from the City Clerk, certifying the "Referendum Against a Resolution Passed by the City Council, Resolution #2007-022," that was filed with the City Clerk on June 7, 2007; and, 2. Take one of the following actions: a. Adopt Draft Resolution A, to repeal Resolution No. 2007-022, removing the General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, which amended the Land Use, Open Space, and Conservation Element of the Atascadero General Plan; and give staff direction on how the City Council wants to proceed on a permanent creek setback ordinance; or, b. Adopt Draft Resolution B, to call for an election to submit • Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the ballot measure election with the next general municipal election on November 4, 2008; or, W c. Adopt Draft Resolution B, to call for a Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the Special Election with the February 5, 2008 Presidential Primary; or, d. Adopt Draft Resolution B, to call for a Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the Special Election with the June 3, 2008 Statewide Direct Primary; or, e. Adopt Draft Resolution C, to call for a stand-alone Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to schedule the stand-alone Special Election on a date specific, not less than 88 days from July 24, 2007 (October 21, 2007 and beyond), and on a Tuesday. 2. Human Service Grants ■ Description: Approval of the distribution of $20,000 in grant funds to assist local service providers that have a profound impact on the community. ■ Fiscal Impact: The program is budgeted at $20,000. ■ Recommendation: Council approve Human Services Grants to the Agencies and in the amounts recommended by the Finance Committee in Attachment A. [City Manager] 3. Desianation of Votinq Deleqate — League of California Cities' Annual • Conference ■ Description: Designation of voting delegate to attend the League's Annual Business Meeting and take action on conference resolutions that guide cities and the League in their efforts to improve the quality of local government in California. ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendations: Council designate a voting representative and an alternate who will be present at the Annual Business Meeting of the League of California Cities' Annual Conference in September 2007, and direct the City Clerk to inform the League of the designation. [City Clerk] D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: (The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary): 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 N 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 E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Clerk 3. City Treasurer 4. City Attorney 5. City Manager a. Commission Attendance Reports F. 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 July 24, 2007 Regular Session of the Atascadero City Council was posted on July 17, 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 17th day of July, 2007 at Atascadero, California. Shannon Sims, Deputy City Clerk City of Atascadero 0 • ITEM NUMBER: A - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 �l T[1To'i"�Tt7To1 ;' 1III�/ ga lEl� I �i ldl 14 • CITY COUNCIL ROLL CALL: **SPECIAL MEETING** DRAFT MINUTES Tuesday, May 29, 2007 6:00 P.M. Present: Council Members O'Malley, Clay, Beraud, Brennler and Mayor 9 Luna 1-1 Absent: None Others Present: City Clerk / Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis, Community Development Director Warren Frace, and City Attorney Patrick Enright. CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT — CLOSED SESSION: None 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 CC Special Meeting Draft Minutes 05/29/07 Page 1 of 7 11 Employee Organizations: Department Heads, Confidential, Atascadero Police Association, Atascadero Professional Fire Fighters Association Local 3600, Service Employees Intl. Union Local 620. 3. ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Manager Wade McKinney announced that no reportable action was taken. SPECIAL MEETING: 7:00 P.M. Mayor Luna announced that Council Member O'Malley would be leaving the meeting for health reasons. Mayor Luna explained the difference between Regular meetings and Special meetings. Council Member Clay led the Pledge of Allegiance. COMMUNITY FORUM: Ray Jansen asked the Council to remember universal health care coverage and endorse the universal health plan proposal. Ann Ketcherside suggested the public request a copy of the settlement agreement between the City and ECOSLO, spoke of her concerns regarding the creek setback issue, and her concerns with the Community Center being built on the former waste water site. Eric Greening stated he was glad to see AGP Video filming the meeting, and spoke in support of Mr. Jansen's issue of health care for all. Mr. Greening expressed his concerns regarding the Governor's May revise of the State budget, and suggested agendizing a letter of concern to the Governor. Mark Phillips spoke about the issue of campaign finance reform and announced it would be on the June 26th Council agenda. Mr. Phillips stated his opposition to the proposed recall of Council Member Beraud and Mayor Pro Tem Brennler. Jolene Horn stated her concerns regarding the Creek Setback Ordinance, and asked Council to reconsider the Ordinance and to consider this issue on a case-by-case basis. Jim Istenes expressed his support for Council Member Beraud and Mayor Pro Tem Brennler during this recall proposal. 9 CC Special Meeting Draft Minutes 05/29/07 Page 2 of 7 12 Lee Perkins stated that it had been a year since the original Wal Mart meeting in May 2006 at which time many expressed their opposition to a super Wal Mart. Ms. Perkins also commented on development currently underway in Atascadero Heather Moreno warned the Council to be cautious concerning universal health care and explained what its actual consequences have been shown to be. Tom Comar, spokesperson for Oppose Wal Mart, stated that the Wal Mart super center and the proposed recall are dividing the community. He expressed his opposition of the recall and his support for Council Member Beraud and Mayor Pro Tem Brennler. Steve Tillman stated that the word "activist" seemed to have a negative connotation in Atascadero, but he felt it was a positive word and commented that activists are people who work for a cause. David Broadwater stated he was pleased that this meeting was being video taped and public comment on non -agenda items was being taken. He made several suggestions including reports at Council meetings regarding Strategic Planning Session decisions, follow-up on public meeting notices, and that the recall proponents should reimburse the City for the election costs. Jim Shannon expressed his frustration of decisions made by the Council since December 2006. Mayor Luna closed the Community Forum period. Mayor Luna and Council Members responded to comments made during the Community Forum period. There was Council consensus to direct staff to write a letter to state legislators concerning Atascadero's opposition to the May revise. A. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. Request for Funding Commitment to Assist in Purchase of Property by the Atascadero Land Preservation Society (8300, 8350. 8400 Toloso Road ■ Fiscal Impact: $50,000 from the Tree Fund, and $200,000 from the Open Space Acquisition Fund. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Approve the request for funds from the Atascadero Land Preservation Society, in the amount of $250,000.00, to cover the remainder of the purchase price for the Davis property, at Highway 41, near the three bridges; and, CC Special Meeting Draft Minutes 05/29/07 Page 3 of 7 13 2. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate $50,000 from the Tree Fund, and $200,000 from the Open Space Acquisition Fund to cover the remainder of the purchase price for the Davis property, at Highway 41, near the three bridges; and, 3. Authorize the City Manager to execute a Deed of Conservation Easement and Agreement Concerning Easement Rights with the Atascadero Land Preservation Society, to guarantee open space status on this property in perpetuity. [City Manager] Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. Council Member Clay stated that this property cannot be developed residentially and the Davis family isn't going to be able to sell it. He said that he's not opposed to purchasing the property, but feels the cost is too high. PUBLIC COMMENT Dug Chisholm, ALPS representative, explained the grant process and answered questions of the Council. Marty Brown expressed her support of ALPS' request. She also stated that she supports Council Member Beraud and Mayor Pro Tem Brennler. ' President of ANTA stated their board voted unanimous) to Joan O'Keefe, Pres Y support this project. She explained her concern regarding the possibility of future development of the Rural Residential zoned parcel included in this proposal, and said she agrees that the price is high, but she feels it is worth it to protect the property. Eric Greening explained why he supports this funding request and stated that none of the local match is city General Fund or tax money, but comes from fees. Bruce Boniface, ALPS Board Member, urged Council to support dedication of funds towards acquisition of this property. Geraldine Brasher Phemister, Board Member of ALPS, urged the Council to grant this funding request. Ray Lockhead stated he owns the property next to this site, and only heard about this funding request yesterday. He indicated he would like an opportunity to purchase the property himself and asked the Council to give him a week. Rick Mathews encouraged the Council not to pass up this opportunity to leverage $250,000 to acquire property worth almost $2 million dollars. CC Special Meeting Draft Minutes 05/29/07 Page 4 of 7 14 r� Steve Tillman stated his support of ALPS' funding request and asked that this property be preserved for generations yet to come. Chuck Ward stated he came to the meeting with several questions, which have been answered, and though he would still like to see an objective market evaluation of the property, he believes this is a good project for the city. Marge Mackey, Board Member of ALPS, reviewed the history of this project and urged the Council to grant this funding request. Jonalee Istenes, distributed handouts to support her comments urging the Council to grant this funding request. (Exhibit A) Dave Graham stated he supported this funding request as it would bring money from outside the community to boost Atascadero's economy. Don Blazej, asked for clarification on the tree mitigation requirements, suggested there could have been more notice of tonight's meeting, and asked for assurance that this would be for public use. Livia Kellerman stated that this property will attract people to Atascadero for hiking and other activities, and once they are here, they may stay, eat, or go to a movie. • Pamela Heatherington spoke about San Luis Obispo's open space areas and stated that trails and open space areas are needed to provide healthy recreation activates for the youth of the city. She urged the Council to vote for this proposal. Fred Frank endorsed the previous speakers' comments, stating that this would be a very wise use of these funds. David Broadwater stated that he supports the staff proposal for this request. He also asked if any of the requested funds are taxpayers' money, as some have claimed. Dug Chisholm answered more questions of Council. Mayor Luna closed the Public Comment period. Mayor Luna recessed the hearing at 9:38 p.m. Mayor Luna called the meeting back to order at 9:45 p.m. MOTION: By Council Member Beraud and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Brennler to (1) Approve the request for funds from the Atascadero Land Preservation Society, in the amount of $250,000.00, to cover the remainder of the purchase price for • the Davis property, at Highway 41, near the three bridges; and, CC Special Meeting Draft Minutes 05/29/07 Page 5 of 7 15 (2) Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate $50,000 from the Tree Fund, and $200,000 from the Open Space Acquisition Fund to cover the remainder of the purchase price for the Davis property, at Highway 41, near the three bridges; and, (3) Authorize the City Manager to execute a Deed of Conservation Easement and Agreement Concerning Easement Rights with the Atascadero Land Preservation Society, to guarantee open space status on this property in perpetuity. Motion passed 3:1 (Clay opposed, O'Malley absent) (Item #A- 1.3 Contract No. 2007-011 2. Resale of Moderate Inclusionary Housing Unit (8985 Cason Court) (City of Atascadero) ■ Description: Request for City to purchase an affordable unit, allowing the City to retain the affordable unit, provide a fair and equal process for the next homebuyer, and allow current owner to sell without incurring debt or undergoing foreclosure. ■ Fiscal Impact: The proposed purchase of the affordable unit would result in the initial expenditure of approximately $330,000 from the Inclusionary Housing In -lieu fees. Approximately $295,000 (moderate purchase price plus closing costs) would be returned to the fee • account upon sale of the unit leaving an outstanding cost of approximately $35,000. If the unit were to sell in the future, prior to the expiration of the 30 year deed restriction, the City would receive payment of the silent second in the amount of approximately $215,000 and 43% of any equity realized by the appreciation of the affordable unit. (All numbers have been rounded up.) Recommendations: Council adopt the Draft Resolution, thereby: 1. Authorizing the City Manager to purchase 8985 Cason Court for an amount not to exceed $321,000, including closing costs; and, 2. Authorizing the City Manager to sell 8985 Cason Court under the provisions of the City's current Inclusionary Housing Program, to a qualified buyer at the Moderate restricted price level; and, 3. Authorizing the Director of Administrative Services to appropriate $325,000 from the Inclusionary Housing Program In -lieu fees for the purchase of 8985 Cason Court; and, 4. Authorizing the return of all proceeds from the sale of 8985 Cason Court to be returned to the Inclusionary Housing Program In -lieu fee fund. [Community Development] Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. 0 CC Special Meeting Draft Minutes 05/29/07 Page 6 of 7 16 • PUBLIC COMMENT Mike Jackson, asked for clarification on the inclusionary housing process and payment of property taxes. Brian Atwell, Midland Pacific Mortgage, representing the potential buyers of this property, spoke about the actions they have taken to this point and asked the Council to approve this request. Mayor Luna closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Council Member Beraud and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Brennler to 1. Authorize the City Manager to purchase 8985 Cason Court for an amount not to exceed $325,000, including closing costs; and, 2. Authorize the City Manager to sell 8985 Cason Court under the provisions of the City's current Inclusionary Housing Program, to a qualified buyer at the Moderate restricted price level; and, 3. Authorize the Director of Administrative Services to appropriate 5325,000 from the Inclusionary Housing Program In -lieu fees for the purchase of 8985 Cason Court; and, 4. Authorize the return of all proceeds from the sale of 8985 Cason Court to be returned to the • Inclusionary Housing Program In -lieu fee fund. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote. (O'Malley absent). (Resolution No. 2007-023) B. ADJOURNMENT: 10:05 p.m. Mayor Luna adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council on June 12, 2007. MINUTES PREPARED BY: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C. M.C., City Clerk The following exhibit is available for review in the City Clerk's office: Exhibit A — Jonalee Istenes, handouts CC Special Meeting Draft Minutes 05/29/07 Page 7 of 7 17 • • 18 • • ITEM NUMBER: A - 2 DATE: 07/24/07 ;a $' ,976 CITY OF A TASCADERO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES Tuesday, June 12, 2007 CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 P.M. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT — CLOSED SESSION — None 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, Service Employees Intl. Union Local 620. 3. ADJOURN: 6:10 p.m. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Patrick Enright announced that Council met in Closed Session with its labor negotiators and Rave final directions on the MOU, which will be on the public agenda for the June 27t meeting. REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M. Mayor Luna called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. and Council Member Beraud led the Pledge of Allegiance. CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 1 of 17 19 ROLL CALL: 0 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, Public Works Director Steve Kahn, Community Development Director Warren Frace, Fire Chief Kurt Stone, Police Chief John Couch, Community Services Director Brady Cherry, Deputy Public Works Director Geoff English, Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris, Associate Planner Kelly Gleason, Assistant Planner Callie Taylor and City Attorney Patrick Enright. Mayor Luna announced that he would like to switch the Approval of the Agenda with Community Forum, and because of the referendum filed against Item #A-8, (the second reading of the Creek Ordinance) he would like to pull that item from the agenda and continue it to a date after the City Clerk has verified the signatures for the referendum. He explained that the zoning ordinance (Creek Ordinance) must be consistent with the General Plan and if there is a referendum on the text changes to the General Plan it will have an impact on what the zoning ordinance says. There was Council discussion of Mayor Luna's suggestion. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Beraud to amend the agenda by continuing Item #A-8 until the City Clerk comes back with the validated signatures on the referendum. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. Mayor Luna read the decorum rules. COMMUNITY FORUM: Bob Wood, AGP Video, stated they are working hard on eliminating the difficulties with Channel 20 and asked the community to call AGP at 772-2715 to report any problems. CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 2 of 17 20 11 • Pastor Tom Farrell, Atascadero Bible Church, invited the community to attend the annual All City Prayer in the Sunken Gardens to be held on June 24th at 6:00 p.m. Pastor Farrell led those present in prayer. Ann Ketcherside requested the City Clerk and City Attorney prepare a letter stating that pulling agenda Item # A-8 was legally done, stated that 5599 Traffic Way is not a suitable site for a Youth Center because of health risks, and stated her concern that the creek setback is a taking. Richard Mullen referred to several recent newspaper articles which have portrayed Atascadero as being incompetent. He stated much is going on in Atascadero, but only the negative news makes the headlines, and he encouraged all members of both sides of an issue to sit down and find civil solutions to their differences. John Shadak sees a problem with the agenda change, as there was a clear message against the creek setback from the public and now he is concerned with how much it will cost if the issue is forced to an election. Joan O'Keefe requested the City Manager prepare a report regarding violations at a senior complex built by developer Kelly Gearhart, asked when the community center would be completed, and reviewed her concerns regarding reports from the Redevelopment Director as expressed earlier at the Redevelopment Agency meeting. Cal Wilvert, Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo County (ECOSLO) board member, spoke about the controversy generated by the creek setback ordinance, gave a history of setbacks in the city, and stated ECOSLO advocates an even more protective ordinance than that proposed by the city. Eric Greening spoke about upholding the Clean Water Act and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System when considering creek setbacks. He also suggested a downtown access and marketing plan be prepared for the period of the reconstruction and enlargement of the 101/41 interchange, and setting a public hearing for Cal Trans to explain the different phases of the project. Jolene Horn spoke about collecting signatures for the petition on the Creek Setback amendment to the General Plan, and stated the primary concerns of many citizens included: elimination of Item #7 (trails), what is the true cost of a hydrogeomorphologist, what does a water gauging facility look like, and does the official who will monitor that facility have the right to go onto private property. Sally Thompson said she believes that both sides on the creek setback issue are genuinely trying to take the best position, and hoped there was room for a compromise. She asked if a property owner could apply for a dispensation if they could show there was no flood danger as they were at a high enough elevation. CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 3 of 17 21 Lee Perkins spoke about the creek setbacks and stated the only issue before the City Council is the responsibility to protect the citizens, their property and the natural habitat of the creeks. Susie Anderson stated she witnessed the petition signing last weekend and related stories about various signers. She asked that the second petition not be required, and urged Council to return to the original General Plan and to consider setbacks on a case by case basis. Charlie Whitney speaking on behalf of the SLO Transfer of Development Credits Blue Ribbon Committee, asked for a response to their invitation to the city to participate on the committee. Mr. Whitney answered questions of Council. Russ Wright stated he lives on a blue line creek and has been trespassed upon many times. He asked if blue line creeks were included in the lawsuit by ECOSLO and urged the Council to step back and reassess this issue. Fred Frank stated the Council should be commended on the job they did on the setback, as it provides flexibility for landowners, and a lot of exceptions. He believed the petitioners were giving out misinformation and urged the City Clerk to take a look at how the issue was presented to the public. Cindy Sazar remarked that clear answers to the questions raised by Mrs. Horn will be the key to alleviating a great deal of confusion and anxiety over the setback issue. Dug Chisholm, President of the Atascadero Land Preservation Society (ALPS), clarified the role of ALPS in the community is to preserve and protect open space within the city of Atascadero by either purchase from willing buyers at market value or as gifts from donors. He stated they do not take positions on specific political issues or candidates. Tino Santos spoke about businesses in Atascadero that have moved out of the city or closed and stated his belief that Atascadero is anti -business. He stated he resents people telling him what he can do with his property, and wants Atascadero to thrive like other local communities. Tom Comar, spokesperson for Oppose Walmart, stated their opposition to a super center is based on studies done on its deleterious impact on local communities. Mr. Comar urged the Council to prevent the building of a super center through a big box grocery ordinance. Don Blazej asked for clarification on the aerial photo that showed the creek reservation and setback line, and stated it was his understanding that E.G. Lewis created the creek reservations, but that there was not a 50 foot setback at that time. CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 4 of 17 46 0 Steve Tillman remarked that the issue of setbacks has been in the process for five years and in the past there has been no outcry by the public. He stated he sees a City Council that is being targeted for something that has been 5 years in the making. Marty Brown stated she lives near the creek and supports the creek setback as it will ensure her property value and protect the drinking water. David Broadwater expressed his support for a reconsideration of the big box ordinance, spoke about the sunset agreement on the creek setbacks, and applauded the city for the notice given for tonight's agenda and hoped that would continue. Glen Horn stated he could not understand the reverence people have for ECOSLO, as it is a social organization consisting of those who believe in things having to do with eco - friendly issues, and not a governmental organization. He also said he bought his property without knowledge that it had a setback and was concerned that people living along the creek were not notified about the lawsuit and the setback issue. Mayor Luna closed the Community Forum period. Mayor Luna and city staff answered questions raised during the Community Forum period. Council Member Beraud explained her thought process regarding the creek setback issue and stated she looked at the big picture and what would be best for Atascadero long term. She indicated she would support an effort to have a public workshop to discuss all issues related to the setbacks. Council Member Clay addressed the issue of misinformation coming from petitioners and stated he thought there might have been some entrapment going on. He also stated that the public didn't rise up for the setback issue in the past because they had never been properly notified, and he explained that without the sunset clause, the sitting Council at that time would not have signed the settlement with ECOSLO. Council Member O'Malley remarked that it was important not to rush the public process for the setback issue stating that if there had been more time they might have come closer to something everyone could agree on. He indicated his support for all issues of creek protection, but stated he wanted the city to do a study to identify problem areas and not leave that to property owners. He thought it was important for government to look at the entire ecosystem rather than doing it on a smaller scale. Regarding the studies done about Wal Mart super centers, Council Member O'Malley stated studies must apply to a specific area, and indicated he would not make a decision prior to an extensive public process and analysis. Mayor Luna explained that most residential properties in Atascadero have a 25 foot front setback, and that the city could not put in trails on private property unless there is was an easement, and setbacks are not easements, which are on a person's deed. He CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 5 of 17 23 indicated property owners are still responsible for cutting weeds within a setback and that they can put up fencing and do landscaping. He also explained why it is estimated that over half the houses in the city are legal non -conforming uses, and expressed surprise that there should be this furor over creek setbacks because most properties have setbacks; however he has listened to the public and if this goes further he will make sure their concerns are heard. Mayor Pro Tem Brennler stated he did not run on a platform of setbacks, but rather on a platform of accountability, and this issue happened before he got on the Council. He explained his thought process and commented that he would continue to act in the best interest of the public. He would like to see some of the creek setback language cleared up, and would not be against future educational workshops. He expressed disappointment with some of the inflammatory language, and suggested spending less time dwelling on differences and to try to find common ground to make this a better community. Mayor Luna recessed the hearing at 9:15 p.m. Mayor Luna called the meeting back to order at 9:22 p.m. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: Mayor Luna spoke about the recent Economic Summit where he spoke about the need for the Council to come together on issues they agree on to try to bring the community together. He would like to bring the Council together on their #1 goal of enhancing the economic base of Atascadero, and asked for Council agreement to direct the City Manager to 1) take campaign finance off of the next agenda, and 2) focus on economic development. Council Member Beraud stated she fully supports Mayor Luna's suggestion to bring the community together, especially regarding economic development. She reported on the ICSC (shopping center) conference she recently attended, and encouraged other Council Members to attend. Council Member Beraud also stated she is in touch with Aaron Rios the representative from Wal Mart and waiting to have direct talks with him regarding the uniqueness of Atascadero, their plans for the center, and to give Council input. Council Member O'Malley agreed that economic development must be the city's top priority, and that it must be addressed with a unified approach. He also agreed the Council must take some issues off the table to more quickly address economic development, but he has a concern with removing campaign finance reform to a date uncertain, stating he wants a date certain of February 2009, which would be after the 2008 election cycle. CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 6 of 17 24 • C-1 Mayor Pro Tem Brennler stated he supports kick starting the issue of economic development and reported that he had visited Cal Poly's City and Regional Development Department, and they are willing to help the city achieve a vision for the community. Council Member Clay stated that economic development has to be all inclusive; surveys must go out to all people including those who cannot come to meetings. He commented that there are many upcoming issues that will create division in the community, and for that reason he thinks campaign finance should be continued to a date certain of 2009. There was further Council discussion regarding Mayor Luna's suggestion. MOTION: By Council Member Beraud and seconded by Mayor Luna to take campaign finance off the next City Council agenda to allow Council to focus on economic development and that a public workshop be scheduled for September on campaign finance reform. Council Member O'Malley moved to amend the motion. MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Clay to amend the motion that Council complete the process of the economic development plan first and then address campaign finance reform. Motion failed 2:3 by a roll -call vote. (Beraud, Brennler, Luna opposed) MOTION: By Council Member Beraud and seconded by Mayor Luna to take campaign finance off the next City Council agenda to allow Council to focus on economic development and that a public workshop be scheduled for September on campaign finance reform. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. City Council Strategic Planning Notes — February 23-24, 2007 ■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Strategic Planning notes from the February 23-24, 2007 meetings. [City Clerk] 2. City Council Meeting Minutes — April 24. 2007 ■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes of April 24, 2007. [City Clerk] CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 7 of 17 25 3. Apple Valley Assessment Districts ■ Description: Annual approval and notice of Public Hearing on June 26th. ■ Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact to general residents within the City. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Adopt Draft Resolution A initiating proceedings for the levy and collection of annual assessments for Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 01 — Apple Valley for fiscal year 2007/2008; and 2. Adopt Draft Resolution B accepting and preliminarily approving the Engineer's Annual Levy Report regarding the Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 01 — Apple Valley; and 3. Adopt Draft Resolution C declaring the City's intention to levy and collect annual assessments within Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 01 — Apple Valley in fiscal year 2007/2008, and to appoint a time and place for the public hearing on these matters; and 4. Adopt Draft Resolution D initiating proceedings for annual levy of assessments for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 01 — Apple Valley for fiscal year 2007/2008 pursuant to the provisions of Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code; and 5. Adopt Draft Resolution E for preliminary approval of the Annual Engineer's Levy Report for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 01 — Apple Valley for fiscal year 2007/2008. Adopt Draft Resolution F declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 01 — Apple Valley for fiscal year 2007/2008. [Administrative Services] 4. De Anza Estates Assessment District ■ Description: Annual approval and notice of Public Hearing on June 26tH ■ Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact to general residents within the City. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Adopt Draft Resolution A initiating proceedings for the levy and collection of annual assessments for Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 03 — De Anza Estates for fiscal year 2007/2008; and 2. Adopt Draft Resolution B accepting and preliminarily approving the Engineer's Annual Levy Report regarding the Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 03 — De Anza Estates; and 3. Adopt Draft Resolution C declaring the City's intention to levy and collect annual assessments within Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 03 — De Anza Estates in fiscal year CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 8 of 17 26 2007/2008, and to appoint a time and place for the public hearing on • these matters; and 4. Adopt Draft Resolution D initiating proceedings for annual levy of assessments for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 03 — De Anza Estates for fiscal year 2007/2008 pursuant to the provisions of Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code; and 5. Adopt Draft Resolution E for preliminary approval of the Annual Engineer's Levy Report for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 03 — De Anza Estates for fiscal year 2007/2008; and 6. Adopt Draft Resolution F declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 03 — De Anza Estates for fiscal year 2007/2008. [Administrative Services] 5. Las Lomas (Woodridge) Assessment Districts ■ Description: Annual approval and notice of Public Hearing on June 26tH ■ Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact to general residents within the City. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Adopt Draft Resolution A initiating proceedings for the levy and collection of annual assessments for Street and Storm Drain . Maintenance District No. 02 —Woodridge for fiscal year 2007/2008; and 2. Adopt Draft Resolution B accepting and preliminarily approving the Engineer's Annual Levy Report regarding the Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 02 — Woodridge; and 3. Adopt Draft Resolution C declaring the City's intention to levy and collect annual assessments within Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 02 — Woodridge in fiscal year 2007/2008, and to appoint a time and place for the public hearing on these matters; and 4. Adopt Draft Resolution D initiating proceedings for annual levy of assessments for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 02 — Woodridge for fiscal year 2007/2008 pursuant to the provisions of Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code; and 5. Adopt Draft Resolution E for preliminary approval of the Annual Engineer's Levy Report for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 02 — Woodridge for fiscal year 2007/2008; and 6. Adopt Draft Resolution F declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for the Atascadero Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 02 — Woodridge for fiscal year 2007/2008. [Administrative Services] CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 9 of 17 27 6. Annual Street Striping Award ■ Fiscal Impact: Expenditure of $ 27,365.49 for Fiscal Year 2007-2008 and • $ 29,992.15 for Fiscal Year 2008-2009. ■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Central Coast Striping in the amount of $57,357.64 for two years of annual Street Striping. [Public Works] 7. Temporary Road Closure (Calvary Chapel of Atascadero) ■ Fiscal impact: $160.00 per event for the installation of Road Closed signs by Public Works Staff. ■ Recommendation: Council approve a request by Calvary Chapel of Atascadero for the closure of Palma Avenue from East Mall to West Mall on Sunday, June 24th and Friday, September 28th for events in the Sunken Gardens. [Public Works] 8. Title 9 Planning and Zoning Text Amendment ZCH 2006-0125 / PLN 2006-1139 ■ Description: Consideration of the adoption of an Ordinance to establish permanent creek setbacks. ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Change 2006-0125 based on findings. [Community Development] 9. CT Text Amendment ZCH 2006-0130 / 9700 EI Camino Real (Jacobson/Patel) ■ Description: Proposal for the construction of a Hotel at 9700 EI Camino Real. ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Change 2006-0130 amending the CT zoning code text to conditionally allow "health care services" based on findings. [Community Development] 10. Off-site Alcohol Sales License Determination PLN 2007-1211 / 8360 EL Camino (Food 4 Less) ■ Description: Request from Food 4 Less to approve the additional general Alcohol Beverage Control license application to expand alcohol sales to include liquor. ■ Fiscal Impact: None. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt Draft Resolution A finding that public convenience would be served by allowing the issuance of a general alcohol sales license to Food 4 Less located at 8360 EI Camino Real. [Community Development] Items pulled: David Broadwater, Item #A-1. 0 CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 10 of 17 • MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Beraud to approve Items #A-2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, and 10. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. (Item #A-3.1 Resolution No. 2007-024, Item #A-3.2 Resolution No. 2007-025, Item #A-3.3 Resolution No. 2007-0026, Item #A-3.4 Resolution No. 2007- 027, Item #A-3.5 Resolution No. 2007-028, Item #A-3.6 Resolution No. 2007-029, Item # A-4.1 Resolution No. 2007-030, Item #A-4.2 Resolution No. 2007-031, Item #A-4.3 Resolution No. 2007-032, Item #A-4.4 Resolution No. 2007-033, Item #A-4.5 Resolution No. 2007-034, Item #A-4.6 Resolution No. 2007-035, Item #A-5.1 Resolution No. 2007-036, Item #A-5.2 Resolution No. 2007-037, Item #A-5.3 Resolution No. 2007-038, Item #A-5.4 Resolution No. 2007-039, Item #A-5.5 Resolution No. 2007-040, Item #A-5.6 Resolution No. 2007-041, Item #A-6 Contract No. 2007-012, Item #A-9 Ordinance No. 509, Item #A-10 Resolution No. 2007-042) Item #A-1: David Broadwater spoke about the February Strategic Planning Workshop and reviewed the issues that were discussed there by Council. He requested that reports on Strategic Planning be taken off the consent calendar in the future and placed on the • agenda as a regular item so there can be a full verbal report, discussion by the Council and public comment. Eric Greening stated he agreed with Mr. Broadwater and spoke of the great importance of what is decided at those sessions. He suggested the sessions be moved back into City Hall to allow public comment, that notes be more detailed and specific, that the session be video taped, and if taping is not possible, then a public hearing given as part of a regular Council meeting to sum up what was decided at the session. Mayor Luna explained the process used for Strategic Planning sessions, and Council commented on the issues raised by the speakers. MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Beraud to approve Item #A-1. Motion passed 5:0 by a voice vote. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Planned Development #25 Zone Change 2005-0110. Master Plan of Development (CUP 2005-0174), Tentative Tract Map 2005-0081 / 7298 & 7312 Santa Ysabel Avenue (Patel & Patel) 0 CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 11 of 17 29 Description: Approval of the construction of twelve (12) new attached single-family residences and the demolition of two existing single-family . residences. Fiscal Impact: Based on the revenue projections from the Taussig Study, the City has developed standard conditions of approval for new development projects that require the cost of maintenance and emergency services to be funded by the project through a combination of road assessment districts, landscape and lighting districts and community facilities districts or other approved means (CUP and TTM Conditions #18 and #19). Recommendations: Planning Commission recommends Council: 1. Adopt Draft Resolution A certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0036; and, 2. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Change 2005-0110 based on findings; and, 3. Adopt Draft Resolution B approving Conditional Use Permit 2005-0174 (Master Plan of Development) based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, 4. Adopt Draft Resolution C approving Tentative Tract Map 2005-0081 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring. [Community Development] Ex Parte Communications • ■ Mayor Luna stated he received four emails regarding this issue dealing with parking and bulb outs, and one on the lights over the trash enclosure • Council Member Clay stated he received a call from David Lowe regarding parking, as well as the email on the lights. ■ Council Member O'Malley stated he received the same emails and worked with staff to respond. ■ Mayor Pro Tem Brennler stated he received the same emails and a letter and call from David Lowe. ■ Council Member Beraud stated she received the same emails. Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. PUBLIC COMMENT Gil Rodriguez, project designer, spoke about the project. Jeremiah Lowe stated he has lived on Santa Ysabel long enough to see the changes to the street, new development, and the effect of it all on traffic. He commented that on - street parking must be part of this project to eliminate future problems. CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 12 of 17 30 • David Lowe said he owns the apartment project across the street and expressed his Is concerns regarding parking, which included lack of adequate parking in the project, parking for construction trucks and work crews, and handicapped parking. Mayor Luna closed the Public Comment period. Staff addressed issues raised during the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by to Mayor Pro Tem Brennler to adopt Draft Resolution A certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0036; and, introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Change 2005-0110 based on findings; and, adopt Draft Resolution B approving Conditional Use Permit 2005-0174 (Master Plan of Development) based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, adopt Draft Resolution C approving Tentative Tract Map 2005-0081 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring, with the inclusion of a motion sensor light for the trash enclosure. Motion passed 4:1 by a roll -call vote. (Beraud opposed) (Item #B-1.1 Resolution No. 2007-043, Item #B-1.3 Resolution No. 2007-044, Item #B-1.4 Resolution No. 2007-0045) Council Member Beraud stated for the record that she believes there should be on - street parking. 2. EI Corte Planned Development #17: PLN 2099-0795 (Eddinps) ■ Description: Project approval would allow a 7 -unit residential planned development on a project site that is currently developed with a single family residence. • Fiscal Impact: Based on the revenue projections from the Taussig Study, the City has developed standard conditions of approval for new development projects that require the cost of maintenance and emergency services to be funded by the project through a combination of road assessment districts, landscape and lighting districts and community facilities districts (Conditions CUP 18 and 19/ TTM 8 and 9). ■ Recommendations: Planning Commission recommends Council: 1. Adopt Resolution A certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0031; and, 2. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Change 2006-0112 based on findings; and, 3. Adopt Resolution B approving Conditional Use Permit 2006-0178 (Master Plan of Development) based on findings and subject to • Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 13 of 17 31 4. Adopt C approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2006-0082 based on • findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring. [Community Development] Ex Parte Communications ■ Mayor Luna stated he received an email from Larry Putnam supporting the project. ■ Council Member Clay stated he talked to Royce Eddings about his concern regarding naming the cul-de-sac driveway after his daughter, and he attended the Planning Commission hearing. ■ Council Member O'Malley stated he discussed this project in a few previous iterations with Mr. Eddings and discussed the issue of naming a street for a relative. ■ Mayor Pro Tem Brennler stated he attended the Planning Commission meeting. Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. PUBLIC COMMENT Royce Eddings, applicant, gave a brief history of the project and explained that he had tired to address all the concerns and suggestions made by neighbors and Planning Commissioners. He requested the street be named after his deceased daughter Erica and would like to name it Erica Court. Mr. Eddings answered questions of Council. Robert O'Brien, EI Corte Road, asked that the Council deny any significant changes to the zoning of this neighborhood and the quantity of homes listed in this plan. He expressed concern with changing the character of the neighborhood as it currently exists given this increase in density. MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Brennier to go past 11:00 p.m. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. Catherine McDonald, EI Corte Road, asked that the Council not approve this development, as she thinks it is inconsistent with the neighborhood to allow seven homes on this site. She stated she is opposed to the project based on the density only. Deal Salina Cardinale stated she agrees with the previous speakers and believes that seven houses are too many; it should be four as called for in the original zoning. Joanne Main applauded the applicant for meeting with the neighbors and responding to all their suggestions. She stated the applicant listened to what the Planning Commission wanted, has been a good member of the community, and hires local people. Mayor Luna closed the Public Comment period. CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 14 of 17 32 MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem 0 Brennler to adopt Resolution A certifying Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0031; and, introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Change 2006-0112 based on findings; and, adopt Resolution B approving Conditional Use Permit 2006-0178 (Master Plan of Development) based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring; and, adopt C approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2006-0082 based on findings and subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring including the naming of the street Erica Court. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote (Item #B-2.1 Resolution No. 2007-046, Item #B-2.3 Resolution No. 2007-047, Item #B-2.4 Resolution No. 2007-048) Mayor Luna recessed the hearing at 11:12. Mayor Luna called the meeting back to order at 11:24 3. Operating Budget 2007 - 2009 • Fiscal Impact: Total expenditures for all funds in 2007-2008 is $42,835,020. Total expenditures for all funds in 2008-2009 is $46,251,880. ■ Recommendations: Council: 1. Adopt Draft Resolution for Budgets for the 2007-2008 and the 2008- 2009 fiscal years and delegate to the City Manager the authority to implement same; and 2. Adopt Draft Resolution amending the 2006-2007 fiscal year budget. [City Manager] Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. PUBLIC COMMENT - None MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Beraud to adopt Draft Resolution for Budgets for the 2007-2008 and the 2008-2009 fiscal years and delegate to the City Manager the authority to implement same; and adopt Draft Resolution amending the 2006-2007 fiscal year budget with the following modifications: Designation of $10,000 for EVC and finding an additional $50,000 within the budget for the Community Outreach area in the first year and $30,000 in the second year. CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 15 of 17 33 Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. (Item #B-3.1 Resolution No. 2007-049, Item #B-3.2 Resolution No. 2007-050) 0 4. Downtown Parking & Business Improvement Area (PBIA) (FY 2007-2008) Confirmation of Annual Assessment ■ Description: Request for Council to confirm annual assessment for downtown PBIA. • Fiscal Impact: Downtown Parking and Business Improvement District revenue of approximately $10,500 for fiscal year 2007-2008. ■ Recommendation: Council adopt the Draft Resolution confirming annual assessment for Downtown Parking & Business Improvement Area (Fiscal Year 2007-2008). [City Manager] Assistant to the City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson gave the staff report. PUBLIC COMMENT — None MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Clay to adopt the Draft Resolution confirming annual assessment for Downtown Parking & Business Improvement Area (Fiscal Year 2007-2008). Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. (Resolution No. 2007-051) C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. Convevance of CalTrans Capistrano Avenue Drainaae Easements to the City of Atascadero ■ Description: Request for Council to accept drainage easements from CalTrans. ■ Fiscal Impact: There will be no fiscal impact as a result of the initiation of transference and acceptance of these drainage easements. The City will save a significant amount of funds by not having to pay for these easements in the future. ■ Recommendation: Council direct staff to initiate the transference of five (5) CalTrans drainage easements to the City. [Public Works] Public Works Director Steve Kahn gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. PUBLIC COMMENT — None CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 16 of 17 34 • MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Brennier to direct staff to initiate the transference of five (5) CalTrans drainage easements to the City. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: Council Member Beraud 1. Would like to speak about compensation for the Planning Commission and City Council in the future. Council Member O'Malley 1. S.L.O. Council of Governments (SLOCOG) / S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA): Brought up problems at Portola and Highway 41 regarding the trail system and requested a meeting with D.J. Funk and Cal Trans to lobby for easing up on requirements. SLOCOG: spoke with the Executive Director and he believes they can help with the Stadium Park easement and/or parking. Housing and Community Development has requested San Luis Obispo County start a housing needs assessment. SLOCOG staff wants to consider county -wide development impact fees and has requested the Community Development Director attend that meeting. 0 E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: City Council Council Member Clay stated he spoke with Mr. Funk regarding the 94% loss of riparian vegetation figure referred to at the meeting regarding creek setbacks and he agreed there must have been a mistake in that figure as there is more riparian vegetation, not less. F. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Luna adjourned the meeting at 12:06 a.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council on June 26, 2007. MINUTES PREPARED BY: Grace Pucci, Deputy City Clerk CC Draft Minutes 06/12/07 Page 17 of 17 35 • • 36 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - City Treasurer April 2007 Investment Report RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the City Treasurer's report for April 2007 REPORT IN BRIEF: Cash and Investments Checking Money Market Accounts Certificates of Deposit Government Securities LAIF Cash with Fiscal Agents Cash in Banks at April 30, 2007 Deposits in Transit Outstanding Checks Cash and Investments at April 30, 2007 Investment Activity Securities Purchased: None Securities Matured: None Securities Sold/Called Prior to Maturity: None Other Reportable Activities: None • ITEM NUMBER: A - 3 DATE: 07/24/07 April 2007 2,834,124 1 7,718,980 10,253,306 17,717,133 150,590 $ 38,674,134 (479,051) $ 38,195,083 Page 1 of 15 37 CITY OF ATASCADERO TREASURER'S REPORT CASH & INVESTMENTS ACTIVITY SUMMARY FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2007 Balance per Banks at April 1, 2007 Receipts Disbursements Transfers In Transfers Out Balance per Banks at April 30, 2007 Deposits in Transit Outstanding Checks Adjusted 'Treasurer's Balance CHECKING FISCAL ACCOUNT INVESTMENTS AGENT TOTALS $ 191,173 $ 7,385,491 (2,347,540) 1,570,000 (3,965,000) $ 2,834,124 $ 33,089,508 $ 149,967 $ 33,430,648 204,912 623 7,591,026 - - (2,347,540) 3,965,000 - 5,535,000 (1,570,000) - (5,535,000) 35,689,420 $ 150,590 38,674,134 Page 2 of 15 (479,051) $ 38,195,083 • L�z • 39 M O 0 O 0 O C C O o C oo r N C) c c O o o O 0 o O 0 c O 0 o O 0 o 0 0 r v vi vi C, �4 r- C, vi �o r" o, vi O -� ca ca eV ea ca co m ca <a ea O W) W V 4 C M O O O O O O Cl C oo r N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C G C O O O r vi vih O, D, C, C, N r D\ o, D\ d\ O VQ` 69 y ry O O O O O C O O O� Ly Fr o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 O Cl c� O t{ M M M M cwo � w� � � etl ed eE cC N cd cd (tl etl ctl � t0 Cd � _O M Z O o �. � 7 w 0 o, 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a ❑ o a a q � a p y [ w O w o w O w o w O w O w O w O w U=tl C T U U U U U U U coU U id U G C > °C= y > O U U U U U u U U C7 U U C7 Vj N RO N O N \O N O M O N O N 3O N O R N !R N O R N N O M O O O n O O O O Q 00 O oo O oo O oo O m O O, O O\ O O O C C C I o a 6. O N r.7 as Y g o G a u C `o e iy W d U a O cc Ca N CC O �( g 17, \• >, yl u rd a�7 C C C .moi O O y p" •� UC ('j oo R atl q ca co = 0 a -o 6. rn x M z m z# tj ¢ �'� L c o z 3 �' At on o .a o an d u sem. �7 Z> v a :L' d zv w3 wv 4. En 6, ra0 wU v � o r O%1 r r Vl r ,D r r 00 r O, r N r oo O Ol a O Qoo oo oo 0o O, O, O O, �C Iy 39 40 O O O O O O O O 00 O O N O O O N O O LZ, w O 00 D\ a C, r O, r T r 0\ Vi C, 00 C, ,D O, O� C, O O r" a r M r O, O O h M M M 69 a h nt m O ro C C m N ca �c oo 00 c 1L" C ti 5 a A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V j 00 o` C, C, r" rn r" rn r" C, v rn 00 a c o, o o o 0 r C, o v r" o, o o 69 C r O 00 O 00 O M v1 M O O O Vl N W O M r N O M O Vl M M V M M M M M Vl M M M M A h o 0 o U1 c O o O 0 O 0 v1 0 O 0 O 0 V1 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O Q� Q �7 Vl d' v1 r O 00 00 M M O V'1 r M O M V1 0 M M M M M M M C' M M M 7 M q a � h �V o `° `° v. �� w W �ti •y •h •N •H •y •N � •V�i Vii w'�+ N � in T V Z a N a U 4 N a N 0 N a N n. U a N 0 d .0 7 o d •G O o d •C V W W W W W W W W W W W O h cd co ecl ca a td e7 cd cd cu m ed cd �tl cE U U U U U U U U U U U z t'' > > > iJ U U U U U U U V C7 U C7 U C7 C N N N N h r o o V O o N �o O, O h O CDO O O O O O 0. 9 O O a c tea m Ci 5n h o U C C i c W Ca y p r z a P y m 9 E a a a X N oro X x a oo E E bz .i y w O. a°n ° o i ,C Er °'° 3 e W $ ow ap.J o'o �� p C � co co O U O O Z U 9En C C 'a 5 U E U 4F Q H UU ►C.i x U3 x0 U2 dIm Luu Via. W da ciU r r r r r r r r r r o0 00 00 oc 0 o 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 o c h O O 0 O i oo o, n a ei 40 41- O O O O O O O O O O C1 �D O O O O O O O O O O O C w O 00 O o0 O 00 O O O Vl 7 N 1� O D1 00 r- 00 O+ OG Q` O D\ D\ N D, D, N N • 0 j 6A ed tc m Cd ed v .Ni ar A O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 D, O 00 O 00 O o O vi O vi D\ O o O 0 N C; C, o r" 00 00 N �L 69 Q o 0 0 0 0 o c O 0000 r 0 1 O O O O O O 00 N �l O ON O� vi N M f'? M M M M M M wl V'1 V1 O N O h O O g O O O O O O O O O N M V M fry o 0 �r Awo z w� ca co t's m cd Cd ed N y N c C C o 44 o C o 0 0 v v :: p p ca Cd W_ jm cai W u w w O w O O w U O C7 O C7 w U w U O C7 w U w U U U U U C7 C7 00 h C W O p O N N N Q O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O 00 O 00 O k C C Y C Y Y c wO d 3 o CC m Ca ra R ° 0 V Go a _ 6 s•' - "n, R J m�ayy b y L ld C1 ca ippk,,,,:ppt,, L U :Q w w O W C: co G m O 3 cd 7 L r-7. L a ew+ L a L h cOd Z C 0 3 = o° p d b C7 i w U Gv� wU wU Uc. wU wv H¢ 3�n wwwU • 0 0 0 oo 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 ty o 0 0 0 0 0 ►' N O C O Cl N N N O O z N N O `o C, � 0 0 o 0 i 0 r 0 i 0 oo 0 Cl0 0 0 0 0 41- 42 N N O O a D\ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cl O O O O O O O O v1 O O O O O O O O O O O C W r" a, a rn ,o o` o, rn r` C. r" rn o o o a, awl a o, wl ON o r' o, r a f.. h O 00 ti O O O C Cl O O O Cl O Cl O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cl O C 0 0 0 C C 0 C C 0 C C C 0 o CN rn o r o, o, a, r o, r a O o a, o, o, a v o, r a r o, r a, Q V va Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V M O, O Op O h O V1 N O N O -- ,O ,D ,D U1 ,O v) r Cl M Y1 M Q44 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 O 0 O 0 -- 0 O 0 V) 0 V1 0 Ln 0 It) 0 kn 0 O 14 O O V1 �q ,O vl M Vj o M M V M In V V M M M M M M 0 4wo Q 0 N LyV ftl Ld ftl RS F A lC m etl f0 t0 f0 ^, Vj y ~ Q 0 ' .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .+ .. . .. .. V` h o a a 0 a 0 a 0 a a 0 a d 0 a a C a o o as m 0 0 a d 0 a 0 a a 0 a 0 a a W w o w O w O w O w O w O w O w O w O w O w O O. w o w O cd cd �tl N c0 cd «O+ 0 .U.. coca U tz U U U U U u U U U u U U u U U u U U U U U U U U C7 U U U U U U U W O OO OO O O O O O O V N r \O O \O N N O M b N O O C O ►�1. Q r O O, O .-. O ... � O V'1 O r O O O O -r O N O N O L O a Y C h i=., ►' tol _ = to a+ Y as ¢w O W coo C a ce a z Z z s U z O •C •� fl e¢ ai a :. •R N goy .NNO x w W au". T E� L ._. H y 7 C y .J bC0 uJ ?Mkel '�' C +�+ � c pCO o d E O d n u .04 W era •y O C L C •h V .OD cLd v� az ua v,3 w wU UU 00 00 00 00 00 OO CN a, O, a, [" 0 o v v Q N •--� O N N M O N � � O F�r 00 ate, O O \O 42 43 Z 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vn r- ac 00 000 � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 a 0 o 0 C a ON C, rn ON a a LI)o pr a, rn N M tn 4nO 69 '� td cC cC ai ctl V1 N ftl N R1 ed etl \ctl l0 4 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t� o 0 o o 0 rn 0 vi rn 0 vi a o o vi o oo rn vi o O o [� a o r" o 00 a Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 In 0 V1 0 Vl 0 vl V vl O v1 v1 O O O n M N Cl! M M M M V W h o 0 0 0 0 0 0 t o o e o 0 0 �D O V1 vi vi vi N vi l� o O Ir .n N N � N N 0 en m In m M In 0 O e � ,r � �' .N a � ,O a, •O a O a 'C ❑ O � O �' O ,a, 'C O O O O W `� i/� y d a0 to +O ca ce td eE ed tl ctl j = w w u w w w w w w ? r U C7 U U U C7 U U U C7 U U U U 1 ty o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o Np O O O O O O O O CD O O O C a L O pp p C C W R d Y m X > w V m N c 1 a Er 0. eCa U a,°aC4 a=a w c Q X cc 6 d G� p a x M # u x U a d �C O C 4) 3pk, aCi C O �c O C C at O cc L+ •^�, a0 p., u W a w a V G� b 'OC V ^ ^ r O O 0 L .Y ty^ W O O a0+ •ld O O d✓ •Ri lC d 'fl O O d 3� 4.v W [d uv E=a" d .� wv m[- z 3m 41 0.0 x"z Ov v,A tom. r ty rn o a 0 o, 0 a 0 o 0 (71o 0 0 a 0 a 0 o 0 v 0 o 0 0 Ir \V O kr) O N OO v1 N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 r O O 0 Cl O O O 0 Cl M O 0 O N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o M o c v a C, r- a0 Cl r" a r a r o r o, o, o, a o o 0 o 0 v, O vi N M M to t7 N cced r0 cd ctl c6 l� R1 cC Cd 0 Q � 0 p 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O o O O O o O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o W) r' o, r O, r" O, 0 O r" o, r r r C, a o, h o o a y Nrn W rys A o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0+ o 0 0 4 °. Cl � O O O O a v1 oo O v� O O v� O O O v1 O O � � M M .4 !Y M M 0 0 o 0 O 0 � O 0 � O 0 0 O 0 In 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 (W.i e O O Vl C� --� O O+ 00 V1 O O O O Vl O O V M M R M M R eT 'af It LQ Fr N Q 1L 1c Q h u�j Ln Q F' , .o .� .o o o •o :t4 •� .o U: 6. •C •G •� •C •G W ID A Q G A Q Q A A 8 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a o > w '� w 'z w '� C > c= '� w '� w '� w '� w •tom > > > r^ •� C7 U U U C7 U U U U U C7 C7 C7 U W e ry I v O O O o, �O �OO O M M •-- N Q 00 O 00 O o, O O, O ,o O T O O, O O Vl O .-- 00 O h O N 0. U h U y o x L/. Ca0 Qa 91, W M W Q: ze Q� M ww°rr µ, M in 61 O1 CU Y V W CO r Z M n Q 0� Q d C7 L W F •L' ° M CO .M LTi M boy 7 F. perp,,,, i F �y 6� F." bA �yC F. [tl a Iq W W M C7 C C L ice. 7 Ci io.cc .a h W O i.7 rn .b x Qw d d G C LN s C C c, F p O per, L f. 9 L °: 7 per, L 7 V y 7 wv d rte. v ow H3 xm U°cS v0 ;;wu wu wv 3 o o` ON v o, a, a o, ty o 0 0 0 o c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N Q" 00 00O O O O O O O N f� i:4 a • Er O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o M r N N C O O o O O 0 O O 0 O O o o o0 o0 q 00 o o C vi C v r" a, �D c r" r C7, 0 o0 D\ H O� N O\ O� D\ O kn D\ N Ll LO) Ni ti a C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O oo O x O o0 O 0 O n Ol a O\ r" O,In o 0 Q\ Cl r Q\ r o0 a D\ O Cn N �N `vi o, o In o v, +l o v, o kn o 0 o v, q N o 0 0 0 0 In 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 o e o to Oco O O In O Cl N N N O V1 N O M N M N cti V N Z ca ¢ W ¢ cm ¢ ¢ C a ee � L ao 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 w ani ani ani U ani U o C7 ani U o C7 ani U C7 U C7 U U U U U vi p vi p n vi v) wnoo 0 0 N C oo O O N N N N N O fNV 7- O O rq O O O O O O O O O O O 0. ci Cc om or - E"y cc un W on '_ 4D O r LO+ oo o C Y c¢ Y > C w C7 n o c q f v1 ` o z ']L � ^ 'du � 0 Ci !. •ea � Y d x L y � -i.' � � � y> eC W V `.� U U cl O C �3 ¢ L wx a wc� xx Go wU 3U wU aa� Lik 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 077 0 Er 00 00 O N N N Q O .: O N O N O M O t+1 O M O K O h O tr) O \O O O r O 1� O 45 Ir 0 O o O - C o O o O c o Vn v U, r M �c O 0 0 0 O 0 O O O lz O O M V' O� v1 V o0 O C w L 00 O1 00 C\ V N 00 ol r (71 O, N N o\ r N 000 N M O, O O� r CN Ln 69 V'1 oo Oo A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl oo oo L1 N oo D\ r O� O O O O M N O N M - M O O r Cl O- O r Q1 69 Q o 0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 0 o 0 0 4 O V:00 Vl \D 00 'C V1 M O O � C' V � �f d• h Vl V1 C V} V1 V1 V1 �!1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V1 0 0 V1 0 Cn 0 0 U1 0 0 In 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 O o h 1.10 O O O Vl V1 e V Vl V m of M et M V1 vi � �V qw w O fx N ti N R c0 td O cam w w e0 a7 en 'VI •N � V1 V1 Vl L' � L• � � VJ � M y� V � [r o o G o o 0 Ia.aai 0 C C 7 G z o C o � aai A aai A aai � v U U e0+atv U U ��", U d aO.r U w c w^ z w d a� d a� t•• o d u u o > 0 > > 0 > 0 > 0 x > o U V C7 U U U C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 U u U vi 0 Ln 0 wn 0 vi 0 Ln 0 vi 0 �o 0 �o 0 vi 0 �o 0 �o 0 �o 0 0 0 0 0 N C OzzN oo N N v1 •-• O •• M oo N O Q O r O oo O C1 O O T O f� oo O v1 O O N O N O 4, a a C L O L O Z 0 ••� �' (� L L G CG G (x Ci NO Qa � ow 4p a oz y o�w OD off oN o� x oC7 foas �� aA ao aX aw V hd `. � n, £ 0. bF�A m u X e w X w v o ? pa a+ X o � •y C W " V .� x# z� W W W # W y :r� cc of aol 0 W^ xx ww wU vow mv� Ow wU wU wU r1 U wU u a9i wU z 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 71 ►7 Qr N r 00 O Ol oo N\N.. r N M O N O N O O O 0000 O O cl^ O O O O w It 47 d O O O � O 0 OM N a N R h h O Z G O O vOi 4, A O O O O O � y 0 \ \ o 0 0 � vi a u'i vi vi V1 � vl ul V1 0 � �I Q to N h C7 C7 (7 C7 G7 y o 0 0 0 0 ti (� � r N a O v N a N o0 •--� O O O O 4 a 0 Q W L G 00 W v1 {NL O W F X y o M z wU 6iU ciU 0o 00 00 N o 0 0 w It 47 d City of Atascadero Investments by Type April 2007 Cash with Fiscal Agent 1% Other of Deposit 21% Investment April 2007 LAIF Certificates of Deposit Government Securities Cash with Fiscal Agent Other $ 17,717,133 7,718,980 10,253,306 150,590 1 $ 35,840,010 48 Page 12 of 15 LAIF 49% U C7 C� L` City of Atascadero Investments by Maturity April 2007 One Month to One Year 9% Investment April 2007 On Demand $ 17,717,134 Within One Month One Month to One Year 3,222,693 One to Five Years 14,749,593 $ 35.689,420 Page 13 of 15 41% 0, City of Atascadero Investments by Custodial Agent April 2007 Union Bank Bank of 49% Custodial Agent April 2007 State of California $ 17,717,133 Other 52,279 Union Bank 17,920,008 Bank of New York 150,590 $ 35,840,010 50 Page 14 of 15 0 • 0 City of Atascadero Investment Yield vs. 2 -Year Treasury Yield For the Month Ended April 30, 2007 Page 15 of 15 51 5.00% 4.50% 2 -Yr 4.00% 3.50% 3.00% Weighted 2.50% 2.00% 1.50% Yield 1.00% 4.13% 0.50% 1 May 2006 0.00% Oro0 OrO OHO OHO OHO OHO OHO OrO OHO O� O� O� 6 ALO ALO `LO `LO 'LO ti0 �O ti0 ti0 �O rL�O ti0 � O i�City Yield --4-2-Yr Treasury Weighted Portfolio Yield Page 15 of 15 51 2 -Yr Treasury Weighted Portfolio City Yield Yield April 2006 4.13% 3.87% May 2006 4.28% 3.92% June 2006 4.39% 4.06% July 2006 4.47% 4.05% August 2006 4.51% 3.94% September 2006 4.58% 3.88% October 2006 4.58% 3.84% November 2006 4.60% 3.83% December 2006 4.66% 3.91% January 2007 4.70% 4.05% February 2007 4.72% 4.02% March 2007 4.72% 3.88% April 2007 4.76% 3.98% Page 15 of 15 51 • • 52 • ITEM NUMBER: A-4 DATE: 07/24/07 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Administrative Services Department 2007-2008 Annual Spending Limit (Approval establishes the City's annual spending limit which must be approved by the Council at the beginning of each fiscal year.) RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt the Draft Resolution, establishing the annual spending limit for fiscal year 2007-2008. DISCUSSION: The City's annual spending limit (Gann Limit) must be approved by Council at the beginning of each fiscal year. Staff calculates the new limit based on the formula set forth in Proposition 111. The limit was calculated as follows: A. Prior Year Spending Limit $15,386,461 B. Population Factor 1.010200 C. Inflation Factor 1.044200 D. Adjustment Factor (B*C) 1.054851 E. Total Adjustment (A*(D-1)) $843,963 F. Current Year Limit (A+E) $16.230.424 FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: None ATTACHMENT: Draft Resolution 53 DRAFT RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007-2008 ANNUAL SPENDING LIMIT WHEREAS, Proposition 111 revises the methodology used to calculate the Annual Spending Limit; and, WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero must select the most appropriate criteria to be used in calculating the annual limit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Atascadero SECTION 1. That the City of Atascadero elects to use the following criteria for fiscal year 2007-2008 in establishing its new Annual Spending Limit: City Population and Per Capita Personal Income SECTION 2. That the annual spending limit for 2007-2008 is calculated as follows: Fiscal Year Percentage Change New Limit 2007-2008 5.4851% $16,230,424 SECTION 3. Any judicial action or challenge must be commenced within 45 days of the effective date of this resolution. SECTION 4. Documentation used in determining the Annual Spending Limit is available to the public in the Administrative Services Department, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, California. 54 • • Draft Resolution Page Two On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO George Luna, Mayor Attest: . Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney 55 • • • 56 • Atascadero City Council ITEM NUMBER: A - 5 DATE: 07/24/07 Staff Report - Community Services Department Temporary Road Closure - Movies in the Park (Community Services Department) RECOMMENDATION: Council approve a request by the Community Services Department to close a portion Palma Avenue on the following five Saturdays 7/28/07, 8/4/07, 8/11/07, 8/18/07 & 8/25/07 for the movies in the park events. DISCUSSION: Background: On July 2, 2007, the Atascadero Community Services Department submitted a Street Closure Request Form to close Palma Avenue from East Mall to West Mall on five Saturdays (July 28 - August 25, 2007) from 5:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. for the Movies in the Park, "Cinema Under the Stars." Analysis: City staff has reviewed the submitted Street Closure Request and recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Proper traffic controls must be maintained throughout the duration of the event. The City of Atascadero will provide and set-up the required traffic control devices as indicated on the attached map. Fees for this service may apply in the future. 2. Emergency vehicle access is required at all times. Community Services staff is responsible to ensure that individuals are assigned to remove the barricades to provide emergency vehicle access. 3. Community Services Staff is responsible for removing trash generated in the area of the road closure. 4. Community Services Staff is responsible to remove all traffic controls immediately following the event. Conclusion: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a request by Atascadero Community Services to close a portion Palma Avenue from East Mall to West Mall on five Saturdays from 7/28/07 — 8/25/07 for the Movies in the Park, "Cinema Under the Stars." 57 FISCAL IMPACT: None. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the Street Closure Request as recommended 2. Deny the Street Closure Request ATTACHMENTS: 1. Street Closure Request Form 2. Street Closure Map RN • • • CITY OF ATASCADERO STREET CLOSURE REQUEST FORM FULL NAME OF ORGANIZATION: City of Atascadero, Community Services Department NAME OF PERSON MAKING APPLICATION: Paula Anton, Recreation Supervisor ADDRESS: 6907 El Camino Real CITY: Atascadero. Ca. ZIP: 93422 PHONE: 461-5000 ext. 3472 DAY Same EVENING Same DATE (S) OF REQUESTED ROAD CLOSURE: Saturdays: 7/28, 8/4, 8/11, 8/18, & 8/25 NAME OF STREET: East Mall/West Mall/Palma Avenue FROM (ADDRESS OR STREET): See attached map 6500 Palma Ave TIME OF CLOSURE: FROM: 5:00 pm TO: 11:00 pm PURPOSE FOR CLOSURE: Movies in the Park Close Palma Avenue — East Mall to West Mall PROPOSED ALTERNATE ROUTE: El Camino Real to West Mall to Lewis Avenue El Camino Real to East Mall to Lewis Avenue. PROPOSED EMERGENCY ACCESS PLAN: Same as alternate route. PROPOSED TRAFFIC CONTROLS (SIGNS, POLICE, ETC.) : Community Services Department: barricades, signs. CS staff post no parking signs 24 hours before event, on above street. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT: DATE: (Request must be made a minimum of 20 working days prior to event) • 59 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date Received: Approved by (all departments must approve): Fire Department Police Department _ Approved _ Approved Denied _ Denied Refer to Council _ Refer to Council Signature: Signature: Date: Date: Reason for denial or comments: (Use additional page if necessary) City Manager's action: Signature: City Council action (If applicable): Public Works _ Approved Denied Refer to Council Signature: Date: Date: C 0 • EI Camino Real Sunken Gardens 2007 Movies in the Park Saturday 7/28, 8/4, 8/11, 8/18 & 8/25 Palma Ave. Lewis Ave. CD cn 61 • 62 • • • Atascadero City Council Staff Report - City Manager's Office ITEM NUMBER: A-6 DATE: 07/24/07 Request for Proposal (RFP) Process City Attorney (Circulation of RFPs for City Attorney services to review the service levels and rates in the market.) RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the attached Request for Proposals for City Attorney services and direct the City Manager to implement the recruitment process. DISCUSSION: City Attorney services are provided on a contract basis through the law firm of Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedmann & Girard (Kronick). The firm has provided City Attorney services since January 2005. It is good practice to review service levels and rates in the market place every few years; therefore, the City Council intends to circulate a Request for Proposals for City Attorney services. The RFP will be sent to Kronick and other firms to evaluate service levels available to the City. The process outlined in the attached Request for Proposals includes an interview of the top qualified firms by the City Council. The final decision rests with the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. This action will lead to a contract for legal services that will have a financial impact. ALTERNATIVES: Modify the Request for Proposals or the process. ATTACHMENTS: Request for Proposals 63 7/16/2007 .A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR CITY ATTORNEY July 2007 Dr. William Mathis Mathis & Associates Attn: Janice Mathis Erica Hernandez CITY OF ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Page 1 of 8 0 is • • REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES Introduction The City Council of the City of Atascadero is seeking a contract Attorney or legal firm to serve as primary Attorney for the City. The City invites interested law firms and individuals with a minimum of seven (7) years of municipal law experience representing general law cities to submit a written proposal to provide City Attorney services. As City Attorney, the selected law firm or individual will be expected to provide a wide range of legal services to the City. The City Attorney is selected by the City Council and works closely with the City Manager and other staff. The City Attorney serves as a key member of the Atascadero executive management team. The City Attorney's primary role is to provide expert legal advice to the City Council, City Manager and Department Heads. The City Attorney is expected to establish, develop and maintain a close and trusted relationship with the City Manager. The City Council believes this is critical to the success of the City. The selected attorney shall perform the tasks specified in the Request for Proposals (RFP). Firms and Individuals are hereby invited to submit a proposal based upon the requirements and conditions set forth in the RFP. Mailing Instructions Dr. Bill Mathis Management Consultant Mathis & Associates 3435 Valle Verde Drive Napa, CA 94558 Inquiries Questions pertaining to the RFP should be directed to Dr. Bill Mathis at dr.bill@mathisassociates.com or phone number (707) 252 -2151 - Submittal Date Eight copies of the proposal are due to Dr. Mathis no later than 4:00 PM, August _, 2007. Proposals should provide a straightforward and concise presentation adequate to satisfy is the requirements of the RFP. Emphasis should be on completeness and clarity of 7/16/2007 Page 2 of 8 65 contents. Responsiveness to the RFP will be a principal basis for evaluation. The City of Atascadero reserves the right, without qualification, to: 0 • Select any proposal based on written or oral communication with any or all of the firms or individuals when such action is considered to be in the best interest of the City of Atascadero. • Reject all proposals. • Exercise discretion and apply its judgment with respect to any proposals submitted. • All proposals will be deemed confidential and will be retained by the City of Atascadero The City of Atascadero may select proposals, based on initial proposals received, without discussion or after detailed discussions or contract negotiations. Proposal Content and requested information The City of Atascadero requires the applicant to submit a concise proposal clearly addressing all of the requirements outlined in this RFP. To be considered responsive, the proposal must provide specific and succinct answers to all questions and requests for information. Indirect, imprecise or incomplete responses can serve only to the disadvantage of the applicant. Submission of individual resumes is optional, but encouraged, although alone will not be considered responsive to any • specific questions. Experience and Qualifications 1. Please describe the nature of your law firm's practice and your qualifications for providing City Attorney services for the City of Atascadero. Please provide a professional chronology of the individual who will be designated to serve as City Attorney as well as for others who you anticipate will be involved in providing legal services to the City of Atascadero. 2. Please provide the overall capabilities, qualifications, training and areas of expertise for each of the principals, partners and associates of the law firm, including the length of employment for each person and his/her area of specialization for those involved in the assignment. 3. For the person whom you propose to designate as City Attorney, and for each person or firm you propose to designate as a deputy, supporting counsel for special services or backup, please provide the following: a) Legal training and years of practice (including date of admission to the California Bar.) 7/16/2007 Page 3of8 • b) Years of municipal (general law or charter city) or other local public sector law practice as a full-time local government attorney and/or in a private law office specializing in the representation of general law cities. c) Knowledge of, and experience with, California Municipal Law or other public sector experience or redevelopment law, including RDA land sale and purchase transactions. d) Types of clientele represented and years representing each. e) Litigation experience and demonstration of a good court track record. Cite examples of municipal (general law city) litigation experience. f) Experience with and knowledge and practice of law representing general law cities relating to land use and planning, environmental law including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), redevelopment law, general plans, real estate, code enforcement, hazardous waste and other related law. g) Experience in the area of contracts and franchises. h) Experience in the preparation and review of ordinances and resolutions for general law cities. i) Experience in public sector personnel and labor negotiations. j) Experience in municipal Wastewater, Water and Garbage enterprises. k) Experiences in the area of the California Public Records Act, the Ralph M. Brown Act and the California Elections Code. 1) Intended office location and accessibility to the City of Atascadero. m) Scholastic honors and professional affiliations. n) If the firm/individual, or any of the attorneys employed by the firm, have ever been sued by cities or other clients for malpractice, been the subject of complaints filed with the State Bar, or had discipline imposed by the State Bar, please provide information on the nature of the incident, the dates of which the matter began and was concluded, and the results of the situation. • Performance i. Describe how you would establish, develop, and maintain an effective working relationship with the City Council, City Manager, Department Heads, and City Staff. 2. Define the standard time frames for response by the City Attorney to direction and/or inquiry from the City Council or City Manager and City staff. 3. Describe the staffing of your office and include any staffing changes you would propose for your firm should you be awarded the contract to provide City Attorney services for the City. 4. Describe the systems or mechanisms that would be established for monthly reporting of the status of projects, requests and litigation. The City of Atascadero will require a billing methodology that identifies the specific task; the attorney completing the task and the time billed for completion of the specific task. We would like a high quality product with little paperwork and no micromanaging. 7/16/2007 Page 4 of 8 67 5. Describe the computer resources currently utilized within your office. The City of Atascadero presently utilizes a Microsoft Office suite of software including Microsoft i Word and Excel. Compatibility with Microsoft Word and Excel is required. The City of Atascadero will also require the City Attorney to maintain Internet services such that mail and files can be transmitted between staff and the City Attorney electronically. Current Clients/Conflict of Interest 1. Please list all current or former clients residing in San Luis Obispo County or having an interest in a business or owning an interest in property within the City of Atascadero's sphere of influence within the past three years. 2. Please list all cities (general law and charter) and other public clients for which you or your firm currently provides services under a fee for services basis or on a retainer basis. 3. Please identify any foreseeable or potential conflicts of interest, which would result from such representation and the manner in which you would propose to resolve such conflicts. 4. For the person to be designated as City Attorney, please outline qualifications. Compensation and Reimbursement • The City Attorney will be required to attend City Council study sessions and City Council meetings. The City prefers that these meetings be included in any retainer fee arrangement proposed. There are typically two (2) City Council meetings each month. Any additional on-site presence at City offices, although optional, should be identified and is considered a plus. We would prefer some hours on-site. The selected City Attorney will be expected to provide services under a retainer fee format for regular City Council meetings and weekly department head meetings. It is anticipated the City Council may expect the firm/individual selected as City Attorney to continue to provide services under a fixed monthly retainer format with additional special legal services provided at a fixed hourly rate by the firm regardless of individual attorney billing rates. We are not low -bidder oriented; we want quality and availability as a premium. Attendance at all City Council regular, special and adjourned meetings (regular City Council meetings are held on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month beginning at 7:00 p.m. (Closed Sessions are usually held at 5:00 or 5:30 p.m.). Attendance at other board, commission and committee meetings as required. Attendance at staff meetings and meetings with staff as needed. Staff meetings are generally held weekly on the first and third Mondays of the month, from 10:3o a.m. to 12:00 P.M. 0 7/16/2007 Page 5 of 8 .7 Related duties will include: rendering of legal advice and opinions concerning legal matters that affect the City. Legal work pertaining to property acquisitions, property disposals, public improvements, easement dedications, right-of-way abandonment. Enforcement of City codes, zoning regulations and building standards through administrative and judicial actions. The monitoring of pending and current state and federal legislation and court decisions as appropriate. Please define what type of work you would consider to be extra or specialized work which would be billed in addition to basic services. Evaluation and Selection Process All proposals must be received by Dr. Mathis by August _, 2007. Proposals will be screened, and the top candidates will be selected by Dr. Mathis and the Council Subcommittee on selection of City Attorney services. The top candidates will be submitted to full Council on , 2007. Qualifications for top candidates will be verified and references will be checked by Dr. Mathis. In reviewing the proposals, the City will carefully weigh: a. Depth and breadth of experience and expertise in the practice of law, most specifically in those areas most often encountered in municipal government operations; b. Capability to perform legal services promptly and in a manner that permits the City Council and staff to meet established deadlines and to operate in an effective and efficient manner; c. Degree of availability for quick response to inquiries that arise out of day- to-day operating questions or problems; d. Degree to which firm and individual attorneys stay current through continued professional development and active communication with practitioners in the municipal law field; e. Communication skills; f. Cost of services; and g. Other qualifications/criteria as deemed appropriate by the City Council. The City Council will conduct interviews of top candidates and make the final selection. Dr. Mathis and the subcommittee will negotiate final contract. The City Council will formally approve the contract and appoint the next City Attorney. Services to the City of Atascadero are anticipated to begin on or shortly after 7/16/2007 , 2007. Page 6 of 8 .! Background 0 Atascadero is located in the heart of the Central Coast, offering a blend of natural beauty and rural lifestyle. Its comfortable climate and atmosphere are influenced by the beautiful Pacific Ocean on the West, and also by the Salinas River and open countryside to the East. Local scenery includes oak -studded hills, creeks, and scenic vistas of the Santa Lucia Mountains. The City of Atascadero is a community located halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco on Highway io1, about 225 miles from each city. Atascadero is situated within an oak forest off Highway 1o1 twenty miles north of San Luis Obispo and io miles south of Paso Robles. Nearby CA Highways 41 and 46 provide easy access to the Pacific Coast and the Central Valley of California. Atascadero was incorporated in 1979. Today, with nearly 28,000 residents, Atascadero is the third-largest city in San Luis Obispo County. Many of the very principles that E.G. Lewis envisioned for his "utopian city" are ensured through the city's general plan, which includes preservation of open space, protection of trees and hillsides, the keeping of domestic animals, and large lot sizes. It was Mr. Lewis who first had the vision in which he foresaw the future of Atascadero as a creative, rural community. The City offers many recreational possibilities such as our Downtown and Sunken Gardens area, golf, scenic roads and trails, shopping, restaurants, and the Atascadero Lake Park and Zoo facilities. Accommodations are available to include numerous Motels, Bed and Breakfast Inns, and the recently opened Carlton Hotel described by the editors of the Tribune as the "jewel" of the Central Coast. Atascadero is also home to one of the County's largest employers, the Atascadero State Hospital, and is a growing center of tourism, commerce and employment in Northern San Luis Obispo County. The City of Atascadero operates under the council-manager form of government. The City Council consists of five members; each elected for four year overlapping terms. The position of mayor is elected by the citizens. The City of Atascadero has a variety of boards, commissions and committees. The City Manager, who is appointed by the City Council, is responsible for day-to-day operations of the City of Atascadero. Establishing and maintaining an effective and successful working relationship with the City Manager and Department Heads is critical. The City Attorney is also appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the City Council, although some modification of the reporting relationship may occur as a result of this contract. The City of Atascadero provides a full range of public services including police, fire, water, sewer, planning, zoning, housing and community development, and parks and recreation. The City of Atascadero operates its own water and sewer facilities. 7/16/2007 Page 7 of 8 70 • • LJ The City of Atascadero has a redevelopment agency, which is governed by the members of the City Council, sitting as board members of the redevelopment agency board. The individual or firm selected as City Attorney is expected to have considerable expertise and familiarity with redevelopment law. Tentative Calendar Mathis & Associates complete contract for City Attorney Recruitment with Mayor and City Manager. Dr. Mathis will contact major firms and offer invitations by , 2007. Final interview by , 2007; City Council selection to be between moo a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Dates to be set. Contract awarded soon thereafter negotiations (approximately , 2007). 7/16/2007 Page 8 of 8 71 • L' 72 a Atascadero City Council Staff Report - City Manager's Office ITEM NUMBER: A-7 DATE: 07/24/07 Pre -Tax Payroll Deduction Plan for Employees Choosing to Purchase CalPERS Service Credit (Approval would allow employees the option to purchase service credit with pre-tax dollars for previous years they may have or could have worked for a public agency.) RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the Draft Resolution allowing pre-tax payroll deductions for California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS) service credit purchases. is DISCUSSION: As a personal decision, employees may elect to pay on their own an extra amount to CalPERS to purchase additional service credit for previous years they may have or could have worked for a public agency. Unless specific action has been taken by the governing board, these additional contributions come after wages have been taxed. There is an option that allows employee service credit to be purchased with pre-tax dollars. By filing the attached Resolution with CalPERS, employers are allowed to extend the pick-up of member contributions currently paid on a pre-tax basis under Internal Revenue Code section 414(h)(2) to member payments by payroll deductions for service credit purchases. Employers who opt to participate in this program provide their employees with the benefit of deferring income tax liability on service credit purchases. There are several employees currently looking towards retirement who are interested in purchasing service credit. This action will allow them to make the purchase in a manner that has the least amount of financial impact them. This is an administrative change only and has no financial impact on the City. FISCAL IMPACT: 40 All costs associated with additional service credit purchases are picked up by the employee. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution 73 DRAFT RESOLUTION 0 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, EMPLOYER PICKUP RESOLUTION PRE-TAX PAYROLL DEDUCTION PLAN FOR SERVICE CREDIT PURCHASES (CONTRIBUTION CODE 14) WHEREAS, the Board of Administration of the California Public Employee's Retirement System (Ca1PERS) at the April 1996 meeting approved a pre-tax payroll deduction plan for service credit purchases under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 414(h)(2); and WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has the authority to implement the provisions of IRC section 414(h)(2) and has determined that even though implementation is not required by law, the tax benefit offered by this section should be provided to those employees who are member of Ca1PERS; and WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero elects to participate in the pre-tax payroll deduction plan for all employees in the following Ca1PERS employee groups or classifications: Safety and Miscellaneous NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Atascadero SECTION 1. That the City of Atascadero will implement the provisions of IRC section 414(h)(2) by making employee contributions for service credit purchases pursuant to the California State Government Code on behalf of its employees who are members of Ca1PERS and who have made a binding irrevocable election to participate in the pre-tax payroll deduction plan. "Employee contributions" shall mean those contributions reported to Ca1PERS which are deducted from the salary of employees and are credited to individual employee accounts for service credit purchases, thereby resulting in tax deferral of employee contributions. SECTION 2. That the contributions made by the City of Atascadero to Ca1PERS, although designated as employee contributions, are being paid by the City of Atascadero in lieu of contributions by the employees who are members of Ca1PERS. SECTION 3. That the employees shall not have the option of choosing to receive the contributed amounts directly instead of having them paid by the City of Atascadero to Ca1PERS. SECTION 4. That the City of Atascadero shall pay to Ca1PERS the contributions designated as employee contributions from the same source of funds as used in paying salary, thereby resulting in tax deferral of employee contributions. SECTION 5. That the effective date for commencement of the pre-tax payroll deduction plan cannot be any earlier than the date the completed resolution is received and approved by CalPERS. 0 74 SECTION 6. That the governing body of the City of Atascadero shall participate in and adhere to requirements and restrictions of the pre-tax payroll deduction plan by reporting pre-tax payroll deductions when authorized by Ca1PERS for those employees of the above stated employee groups or classifications who have elected to participate in this plan. On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torg erson, C.M.C., City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney • CITY OF ATASCADERO Dr. George Luna, Mayor 75 • • • 76 • Atascadero City Council Staff Report - City Manager's Office ITEM NUMBER: A - 8 DATE: 07/24/07 Purchase of Network Servers and Related Technical Support (Approval to purchase new network servers to replace the older existing server configuration.) RECOMMENDATIONS: Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Hewlett Packard for network servers for the amount of $67,604.17; and, 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Pinnacle Technologies for Storage Area Network (SAN) software, replication and backup software and related installation services and support for the amount of $49,052.00. DISCUSSION: As part of the 2007-09 budget, the City Council approved funds for the purchase of new network servers to replace the older existing server configuration. The new network servers will have greater processing power which will allow the organization to work more efficiently. Additionally, the new servers will come with ample storage to accommodate the City's growing reliance on technology. Staff is recommending purchasing servers that are configured to process information "virtually." Virtual servers are now commonplace in the public and private sector and they allow for a much more efficient use of processing power and storage capacity because they allow for several servers to be installed on one physical server at the same time. Virtualized servers separate storage from processing and they are designed to allow staff to seamlessly accommodate data growth. The County and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo currently use virtualized servers and Paso Robles is considering 10 use of the same. 77 ITEM NUMBER: A - 8 DATE: 07/24/07 In addition to effective storage management, the technology will allow for the rapid deployment of new virtual servers at no cost to the organization and it will also allow us is to perform real-time replication of our network data to a remote site. If we have a failure at either one of our data centers (located at City Hall and the Police Department) as the result of an earthquake or other disaster, we will have an up-to-date copy immediately available to continue City operations. Currently if there was a major disaster, it would take two or three days to return the system to a minimally functional level and it would be several days before the network would be fully operational. The new virtualized servers will be scalable, more powerful, and redundant. They will provide for safer and more efficient network operations. The purchase of the servers comes with installation assistance and training. Prior to this purchase, staff visited with several vendors to determine the best products on the market for an organization our size. Additionally, staff met with the IT departments of the County of San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. There are basically three major manufacturers in the marketplace that produce the types of servers the city is interested in: Hewlett Packard, IBM, and EMC. Of these three, IBM and EMC cater to much larger businesses. Hewlett Packard caters to smaller businesses similar in size to the City organization. Additionally, most all of the City's existing network servers and network switches are HP products. Based on their position in the marketplace, consistency with existing equipment, and on current experience with HP technicians, staff is recommending the purchase of network servers from Hewlett Packard for $67,604.17. The City will be purchasing the servers off of the WSCA-2 state purchasing contract. Once the hardware and the configurations were decided, in accordance with the purchasing rules, a staff committee was established to review and select vendors for software and installation services. Staff contacted three different companies, Pinnacle, GovPlace and MTM Technologies to determine qualifications, reputation, and level of service. Each company was interviewed and references were checked. Based on these interviews it was determined that Pinnacle Technologies provided the best service and training. Staff is recommending that software and installation services be purchased from Pinnacle Technologies for $49,052.00. FISCAL IMPACT: Funding has been budgeted in the Technology Replacement Fund for this purpose. C-' • • City of Atascadero Staff Report — City Manager's Office ITEM NUMBER: A-9 DATE: 07/24/07 Graffiti Abatement Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt, on second reading, by title only, the Draft Graffiti Abatement Ordinance, thereby amending Atascadero Municipal Code Title 5 to add Chapter 14. DISCUSSION: There are thee types of graffiti: gang related, tagging, and political. In recent months the City of Atascadero has sustained a number of serious graffiti incidents in addition to other communities throughout the north county. Vandalism like graffiti is a crime, and the Atascadero Police Department is active in enforcement related to graffiti. Public Works staff is working diligently to abate graffiti as soon as it appears. Key elements to the ordinance include: 1. Makes the legal distinction that graffiti is a nuisance and unlawful. 2. Makes it unlawful for any person under the age of eighteen (18) years to possess any graffiti implement while on any school property, grounds, facilities, buildings, or structures, or in areas immediately adjacent to those specific locations upon public property, or upon private proper. 3. Encourages the prompt removal of graffiti from walls, pavement, structures and other improvements on both public and private property. 4. In the case where graffiti is applied by a minor, the parents or legal guardian of the minor shall be jointly and severally liable for the payment of civil damages resulting from the minor's misconduct in an amount not to exceed Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000) for each offense. 79 ITEM NUMBER: A - 9 DATE: 07/24/07 5. The ordinance makes it unlawful for any person, firm, partnership, or corporation to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Chapter. 6. Sets standards for graffiti removal to include complete covering to render it inconspicuous using paint that matches the original color, and/or completely repainting. 7. The City Manager, or his/her designee, may conduct programs designed to educate the community about graffiti prevention in coordination with local businesses. On June 26, 2007, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider a graffiti ordinance, and adopted the Draft Ordinance for first reading by title only. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff has previously estimated that, on average, it is costing $400 per incident to abate. However, Staff has developed a tracking procedure that should provide a greater accounting of actual costs associated with abating graffiti. ATTACHMENT: Draft Ordinance 0 I ]l s • DRAFT ORDINANCE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ADDING CHAPTER 14 OF TITLE 5 TO THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO GRAFFITI Section 1. Purpose and Intent. (A) The Council finds and declares that: (1) Graffiti is detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community in that it leads to urban blight; encourages gang activity; is detrimental to property values, business opportunities, and the enjoyment of life; is inconsistent with the City's property maintenance goals and aesthetic standards; and results in additional graffiti and in other properties becoming the target of graffiti unless it is quickly removed from public and private property. (2) Graffiti results in visual pollution and is a public nuisance. Graffiti must be abated as quickly as possible to avoid detrimental impacts on the City and its residents, and to prevent the further spread of graffiti. (B) It is the purpose of this ordinance to provide: (1) A program to restrict the possession of graffiti implements; and (2) To encourage the prompt removal of graffiti from walls, pavement, structures, and other improvements on both public and private property. Section 2. Chapter 14 of Title 5 of the Atascadero Municipal Code is added to read as follows: Sections: 5-14.101 5-14.102 5-14.103 5-14.104 5-14.105 5-14.106 Chapter 14 GRAFFITI ABATEMENT Purpose Definitions. Nuisance. Prohibition of Graffiti. Possession of Graffiti Implements. Duty to Remove Graffiti. 91 5-14.107 Graffiti Removal Required • 5-14.108 Notice 5-14.109 Service of Notice 5-14.110 Removal of Graffiti 5-14.111 Parental responsibility. 5-14.112 Penalty for violation. 5-14.113 Standards for graffiti removal. 5-14.114 Community education. 5-14.115 Provisions not exclusive. 5-14.101 Purpose. The City Council of Atascadero is enacting this Ordinance to help prevent the spread of graffiti vandalism and to establish a program for the removal of graffiti from public and private property. The council is authorized to enact this ordinance pursuant to its police powers, as specified in Article 11, Section 7 of the California Constitution. The Council finds that graffiti is a public nuisance and destructive of the rights and values of property owners as well as the entire community. Unless the City acts to remove graffiti from public and private property, the graffiti tends to remain. Other property then becomes the target of graffiti, and entire neighbors or districts are affected and become less desirable places in which to be, all to the detriment of the City. The City Council intends, through the adoption of this Ordinance to provide additional enforcement tools to protect public and private property from acts of graffiti vandalism and defacement. The Council does not intend for this Ordinance to conflict with any existing anti - graffiti state laws. 5-14.102 Definitions. (A) Abate means to remove the graffiti by such means in such manner and to such an extent as the City Manager, or his/her designee, reasonably determines is necessary to remove the graffiti from public view. (B) Adult means any person eighteen (18) years of age or older. (C) Aerosol Containers means any aerosol based container which is capable of spraying paint, ink, dye, or similar substance and leaving a visible mark on any natural or manmade surface. (D) Etching Materials means any etching tool, chemical, paste, or similar material which is capable of being used to etch glass. (E) Felt-tip Markers means any indelible marker or similar device with a tip containing ink, dye, or similar substance which, when used or applied to a surface, is capable of resulting in a mark at least 3/8" of an inch wide at its widest point. 0 (F) Graffiti means any unauthorized inscription, word, figure, mark, adhesive label, patch, or • design that is written, marked, etched, scratched, drawn, painted or engraved on or otherwise affixed to any surface of public or private property, which is visible from a public right of way or any neighboring property, by any graffiti implement, to the extent that the graffiti was not authorize in advance by the owner or occupant of the property, or, despite advance authorization, is otherwise deemed a public nuisance by the City Council. (G) Graffiti Implement means any felt tip marker, etching material, or aerosol container which contains paint, ink, dye, or any similar substance and which is capable of resulting in the placement of graffiti upon any surface or substance, including but not limited to glass, metal, concrete, wood, and plastic. (H) Minor means any person under the age of eighteen (18) years. (I) - Owner means the owner of record of the property as set forth in the records of the Tax Assessor. (J) Premises Open to the Public means all public spaces, including but not limited to streets, alleys, sidewalks, parks, and public open space, as well as private property on or to which the public is regularly invited or permitted to enter for any purpose. (K) Property means any real or personal property and that which is affixed incident or appurtenant to real property, including but not limited to any premise, house, building, tree, rock, • fence, structure or separate part thereof, whether permanent or not. (L) Responsible Party means an owner, or an entity or person acting as an agent for owner by agreement, who has authority over the property or is responsible for the property's maintenance or management, irrespective of any arrangement to the contrary with any other party, each owner shall always, be a responsible party for the purposes of this chapter. There may be more than one responsible party for a particular property. 5-14.103 Nuisance. Graffiti on public or private property, either real or personal, constitutes a public nuisance. 5-14.104 Prohibition of Graffiti. It is hereby declared a nuisance and to be unlawful for any person to place or put, by any means, any drawing, inscription, figure, symbol, or mark or any type commonly known as graffiti to any private or public property without the permission of the owner for the premises on which the surface is located, or upon any natural surfaces such as rocks and trees, or any other surface whatsoever. It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or command another person to apply graffiti. It shall be unlawful for any person to aid or abet or agree to aid or abet another person to plan to apply or apply graffiti. • 5-14.105 Possession of Graffiti Implements F•30 (A) By Minors at or Near School Facilities. It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of eighteen (18) years to possess any graffiti implement while on any school property, grounds, facilities, buildings, or structures, or in areas immediately adjacent to those specific locations upon public property, or upon private property without the prior written consent of the owner or occupant of such private property. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the possession of broad -tipped markers by a minor attending or traveling to or from a school at which the minor is enrolled if the minor is participating in a class at the school that formally requires the possession of broad -tipped markers. The burden of proof in any prosecution for violation of this Section shall be upon the minor student to establish the need to possess a broad - tipped marker. (B) In Designated Public Places. It shall be unlawful for any person to possess any graffiti implement while in or upon any public facility, school facilities, park, playground, swimming pool, recreational facility, or other public building or structure owned or operated by the City or while in or within fifty (50) feet of an underpass, bridge abutment, storm drain, or similar types of infrastructure unless otherwise authorized by the City. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the possession of graffiti implements by an adult who requires possession of graffiti implements for his residence or work. The burden of proof in any prosecution for violation of this Section shall be upon the adult to establish the need to possess the graffiti implement. 5-14.106 Duty to Remove Graffiti. It is unlawful for any owner of real property located in the City of Atascadero, and for any tenant, occupant, or user of any property therein, to maintain, permit, or allow graffiti to exist • thereon, for longer than 48 hours. 5-14.107 Graffiti Removal Required Any person found to be in violation of Section 5-14.104 shall be required to remove or cause to be removed the graffiti from the surface on which it was placed. Inasmuch as it is often not possible to determine the identity of the person who applied the graffiti, it shall be the duty of the Responsible Party of the Premises on which the graffiti has been applied to promptly remove the graffiti after notice as hereinafter set forth. If, after notice as hereinafter provided, the graffiti nuisance is not abated, the City shall proceed to abate the graffiti nuisance and the costs of same shall be assessable against the property. 5-14.108 Notice Whenever the City Manager or his/her designee determines that graffiti has existed for over 48 hours on any public or private property in the City which is visible from a public right of way or any neighboring property, the City Manager or his/her designee shall cause a notice to abate the nuisance to be issued to the Responsible Party on which the graffiti was placed. U] • 5-14.109 Service of Notice The notice to abate8r affiti shall be served upon the Responsible Party of the affected property, as such owner's name and address appears on the last equalized property tax assessment rolls of the County. A courtesy copy of the notice shall also be served on tenants using the premises. If there is no known address for the owner, the notice shall be sent in care of the property address. The notice required by this Chapter may be served in any one of the following manners: (A) By personal service on the Responsible Party; (B) By registered or certified mail addressed to the owner at the last known address of said owner. If this address is unknown, the notice will be sent to the property address. In addition, whenever the property is occupied, a courtesy copy of the notice shall be delivered to the occupant. 5-14.110 Removal of Graffiti The Responsible Party to whom a notice has been sent or delivered pursuant to Section 5-14.109 of this Chapter shall remove the graffiti within forty-eight (48) hours from the date of the notice. If the Responsible Party has a graffiti removal program that has been filed with the City for the removal of graffiti and the Responsible Party has scheduled the removal of the graffiti as part of that program, the Responsible Party shall have fifteen (15) days after service of notice as provided in Section 5-14.109 to remove the graffiti in accordance with this Chapter. 5-14.111 Parental responsibility. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1714.1(b), where graffiti is applied by a minor, the parents or legal guardian of the minor shall be jointly and severally liable for the payment of civil damages resulting from the minor's misconduct in an amount not to exceed Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000) for each offense. 5-14.112 Penalty for violation. (A) It is unlawful for any person, firm, partnership, or corporation to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Chapter. Each act prohibited and declared unlawful of this Chapter shall constitute a misdemeanor. In the alternative, and at the sole discretion of the City, each violation of any provision or the failure to comply with any of the requirements of this Title may be enforced as a violation in accordance with Title 12 of the City Municipal Code. (B) Additional penalties available: Whenever deemed appropriate, it is the City's intent to petition a sentencing court to impose the following additional penalties upon conviction: (1) Performance of a minimum of 48 hours of community service not to exceed 200 hours over a period up to 180 days. Community service includes graffiti removal service. i (2) That the defendant personally clean up, repair, or replace the damaged property. Or that the defendant, and his parents or guardians if the defendant is a minor, keep the damaged property or other specified property in the City free of graffiti for up to one year. This clean-up, repair, or replacement shall be at the defendant's expense or at the expense of his/her parents if the defendant is a minor. (3) For each conviction of a person aged 13 to 21 for violating section 5-14.104 of this ordinance, the City may petition the court to suspend existing driving privileges or delay the issuance of driving privileges in accordance with California Vehicle Code section 13202.6. 5-14.113 Standards for graffiti removal. Graffiti shall be removed or completely covered in a manner that renders it inconspicuous. When graffiti is painted out, the color used to paint it out shall match the original color of the surface, or the surface shall be completely repainted with a new color that is aesthetically compatible with existing colors and architecture. The removal shall not leave shadows and shall not follow the pattern of the graffiti such that letters or similar shapes remain apparent on the surface after graffiti markings have been removed. If the area is heavily covered with graffiti, the entire surface shall be repainted. 5-14.114 Community education. The City Manager, or his/her designee, may conduct regular programs to provide community education regarding the prevention of graffiti in coordination with local businesses. • 5-14.115 Provisions not exclusive. This chapter is not the exclusive regulation of graffiti as a nuisance within the City. It supplements and is in addition to any other applicable law. Section 3. Environmental Determination. The Council finds that the adoption and implementation of this ordinance are exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act in that the Council finds there is no possibility that the implementation of this ordinance may have significant effects on the environment. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this chapter is for any reason held to be invalid and/or unconstitutional by a final decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. Section 5. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect on the 31st day following its adoption. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on , and PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero, State of California, on , by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., Dr. George Luna, Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney 0 • • -O Atascadero City Council Staff Report - City Manager's Office ITEM NUMBER: A-10 DATE: 07/24/07 City Manager Salary Review and Amendment to Management/Non-Represented Employment Resolution RECOMMENDATIONS: Council: 1. Adopt the facilitator's recommendation to increase the City Manager's salary by 5% for a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) and 5% for a merit increase, and; 2. Adopt the Draft Resolution amending Resolution 2007-066 establishing the compensation and benefit plan for non -represented professional and management workers and confidential employees effective July 1, 2007 — June 30, 2009. DISCUSSION: On June 28, 2007, the City Council provided the City Manager with his annual performance review. The review was facilitated by Dr. Bill Mathis, of Mathis Associates. Based on the review provided by the Council, the facilitator is recommending the City Manager's salary be increased by 10%. This recommendation is based on awarding a cost of living adjustment (COLA) of 5%, consistent with the COLA all City employees received on July 1, 2007, and a merit increase of 5% based on the City Manager's successful job performance. Additionally, on July 1, 2007, consistent with previous employee negotiations, all miscellaneous employees moved to the 2.5% @ 55 retirement plan. Per negotiations, all employees are required to pay 2.15% of salary towards this plan. On June 26, 2007, the Council adopted Resolution 2007-066, updating the salaries and benefits for the manage ment/non-represented employees. This Resolution needs to be replaced to reflect the changes to the City Manager's salary and the change in pension plans for management, confidential and non -represented employees. The attached Draft Resolution will make the changes recommended in this report. ITEM NUMBER: A-10 DATE: 07/24/07 FISCAL IMPACT: The additional cost of the City Manager's salary and the retirement plan has been budgeted for in the 2007-09 budget. ALTERNATIVES: Increase the City Manager's salary by a different amount. ATTACHMENT: Draft Resolution .11 • • • • DRAFT RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION AND BENEFIT PLAN FOR NON -REPRESENTED PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT WORKERS AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES, EFFECTIVE JULY 19 2007 - JUNE 309 2009 WHEREAS, the Government Code of the State of California prescribes a procedure for discussing and resolving matters regarding wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment; and WHEREAS, the City Personnel Rules and Regulations provided for a Compensation Plan; and WHEREAS, the City desires to set forth salaries and benefits for Non -Represented Professional and Management workers and Confidential Employees; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2007-066 on June 26, 2007 establishing the compensation and benefit plan for non -represented professional and management workers and confidential employees, and this resolution needs to be amended to include changes to the salary schedule and retirement plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero that all prior Resolutions for non -represented employees are repealed; and the Professional and Management Staff and Confidential Staff Compensation and Benefit Plan is hereby established as follows: Positions The following positions are included in this Resolution. The City Manager and Department Heads have individual employment agreements defining other terms and conditions of employment not described herein. Executive Management Positions Administrative Services Director Assistant City Manager Assistant to the City Manager City Manager Community Development Director Community Services Director Fire Chief Police Chief Public Works Director 91 Management Positions Deputy Administrative Services Director Deputy Community Development Director Deputy Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency Deputy Public Works Director Police Lieutenant Zoo Director Confidential (Includes only designated positions within the classifications) Accounting Specialist Administrative Assistant Finance Technician Personnel Analyst Salaries The following monthly salaries become effective July 1, 2007: • Five percent (5%) COLA plus an additional inequity adjustment of three percent (3%) for Executive Management and Management positions. • Five percent (5%) COLA plus an additional inequity adjustment of eight percent (8%) for Fire Chief, Police Chief, and Lieutenant positions. • Five percent (5%) COLA for Confidential positions. salaries become effective July 1 • The following monthly s , 2008: • Three percent (3%) COLA plus an additional inequity adjustment of one percent (1%) for Executive Management and Management positions. • Three percent (3%) COLA plus an additional inequity adjustment of one percent (1%) for Fire Chief, Police Chief, and Lieutenant positions. • Three percent (3%) COLA for Confidential positions. 92 • • Administrative Assistant - Confidential 3,659.80 3,842. 79 4,034.93 4,236.68 4,448.51 Finance Technician - Confidential 3,659.80 3;842.79 4,034.93 4,236.68 4,448.51 Accounting Specialist 4,034.92 4,236.67 4,448.50 4,670.93 4,904.48 Personnel Analyst 5,027.09 5,278.44 5,542.36 5,819.48 6,110.45 Zoo Director 5,700.72 5,985.76 6,285.05 6,599.30 6,929.27 Assistant to the City Manager 6,438.33 6,760.25 7,098.26 7,453.17 7,825.83 Deputy Administrative Services Director 6,438.33 6,760.25 7,098.26 7.453.17 7,825.83 Deputy Community Development Director 6,438.33 6.760.25 7,098.26 7,453.17 7,825.83 Deputy Executive Director of the Redevelopment 6,438.33 6,760.25 7,098.26 7,453.17 7,825.83 Deputy Public Works Director 6,438.33 6.760.25 7,098.26 7,453.17 7,825.83 Police Lieutenant 7,073.22 7,426.88 7,798.22 8,188.13 8,597.54 Administrative Services Director 8,217.12 8,627.98 9.059.38 9,512.35 9,987.97 Community Development Director 8,217.12 8,627.98 9,059.38 9,512.35 9,987.97 Community Services Director 8,217.12 8,627.98 9.059.38 9,512.35 9,987.97 Public Works Director 8,217.12 8,627.98 9,059.38 9.512.35 9,987.97 Assistant City Manager 8,627.98 9,059.38 9,512.35 9.987.97 10,487.37 Fire Chief 9,027.42 9,478.79 9,952.73 10,450.37 10,972.89 Police Chief 9,027.42 9,478.79 9,952.73 10,450.37 10,972.89 City Manager 10,681.57 11.215.65 11,776.43 12,365.25 12,983.51 Work Period • The normal work period for non-exempt employees shall be seven (7) days with a maximum non -overtime of forty (40) hours. Overtime Rate Overtime for non-exempt employees; shall be compensated at the rate of time and one-half the regular rate of pay. All overtime shall be recorded and paid in the following manner: 1 to 15 minutes, overtime compensation — i/4 hour 16 to 30 minutes, overtime compensation — 1/2 hour 31 to 45 minutes, overtime compensation — 3/4 hour 46 to 60 minutes, overtime compensation — 1 hour Overtime Hours Paid Overtime for non-exempt employees shall be paid after forty (40) hours worked in a work period. Paid time off shall be considered time worked for overtime purposes. Schools/Training/Conferences Hours traveling, studying, or evening classes, etc., when a non-exempt employee is attending an out-of-town school shall not constitute overtime hours worked. • 93 Compensatory Time (CT) • Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, non-exempt employees may be granted CT for overtime credit computed at time and one-half at the mutual convenience of the City and the employee. Non-exempt employees may accumulate a maximum of eighty (80) hours in their CT account. Scheduling Compensatory Time Requests to use CT shall be granted with due regard for operational necessity such as staffing levels. Deferred Compensation The City will match an eligible employee's contribution to a deferred compensation program. The match will be up to a maximum of $1,000 annually for executive management employees and $500 annually for management employees. All deferred compensation contributions are fully vested in the employee and shall not be available to the City. Health Benefits 1. For unit members who elect to have "Family" coverage, the City shall pay a total of $891.72 per month toward the cost of all medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee and dependents for the term of this agreement. City shall pay for increased costs to medical, dental, vision and life insurance premiums for the employee and fifty percent (50%) of increased costs for dependents based upon HMO plan costs. 2. For unit members who elect to have `Employee +1" coverage, the City shall pay a total of $783.89 per month toward the cost of all medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee and dependent for the term of this agreement. City shall pay for increased costs to medical, dental, vision and life insurance premiums for the employee and fifty percent (50%) of increased costs for the dependent based upon HMO plan costs. Available funds remaining from the City's contribution toward insurance coverage shall be paid to an employee hired on or before September 1, 2000 as additional compensation. Available funds remaining from the City's contribution toward insurance coverage shall be paid to an employee hired on or before September 1, 2000 as additional compensation. 3. For unit members who elect to have "Employee Only" coverage, the City shall pay amount not to exceed $657.92 per month toward the cost of all medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefit premiums for the unit member employee for the term of this agreement. City shall pay for increased costs to medical, dental, vision and life insurance premiums for the employee based upon the HMO plan costs. Available funds remaining from the City's contribution toward insurance coverage shall be paid to an employee hired on or before September 1, 2000 as additional compensation. This amount shall not exceed $246.76 per month. 4. The City of Atascadero has established a Post Retirement Health Benefit for Executive Management (City Council, City Manager and Department Heads). The City agrees to reimburse the retiree for retiree and/or retiree's dependent health (medical/dental/ vision) insurance premiums, disability insurance, long-term health care or life insurance premiums in a method determined by the Administrative Services Director following retirement. The program parameters are: ❑ The benefit is available upon retirement from PERS or other similar retirement program after age 50; ❑ The employee must have served for 8 years with the City of Atascadero; ❑ The benefit extends between the date of retirement and age 65; ❑ The current benefit is $200.00 monthly. Life Insurance The City shall provide a term life insurance policy on each employee in the amount of Fifty - Thousand Dollars ($50,000). • The City shall provide a term life insurance policy for each eligible dependent enrolled in health coverage in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) per dependent. Long -Term Disability Insurance The City shall provide a City -paid program to provide Long -Term Disability Insurance for Executive Management and Management employees. Leave Administrative Leave. Executive Management Employees, Management Employees and the Personnel Analyst will receive Administrative Leave, which will vest as of July 1 annually. Except as provided below, Administrative Leave will not be carried over or accrue from one fiscal year to the next. If an employee is unable to use his/her Administrative Leave prior to the end of the fiscal year for work related reasons beyond his/her control, said leave will be carried over into the next fiscal year for a period not to exceed three (3) months. Said time will be available to the employee for use during that period, but will not be accrued for the purpose of payoff in the event of termination. In the event an employee covered by this Agreement is employed after January 1 of the fiscal year, the employee shall be eligible for one half of their annual allotment of Administrative Leave. Employees shall receive Administrative Leave at the following annual rates: • Executive Management shall receive 80 hours. • Management Employees and the Personnel Analyst shall receive 48 hours. W Vacation Leave. Employees shall receive vacation leave consistent with the Personnel Rules and Regulations. Holidays. Employees shall receive vacation leave consistent with the Personnel Rules and Regulations. Sick Leave. 1. Sick leave accumulates at a rate of eight (8) hours (one day) per month. There is no limit to the accumulation. 2. Stay Well Bonus. Employees with forty-eight (48) or more days of accumulated sick leave shall be eligible for the Stay Well Bonus. The Stay Well Bonus will be implemented as follows: a. The sick leave pay-off will occur during the twelve- (12) month period beginning the first day after the second pay period in October and ending on the last day of the second pay period in October of the following year after an employee has accumulated and maintained 48 days sick leave. b. Once the eligibility requirements have been met, an employee may opt to receive a pay- off equal to one-third (1/3) of the unused annual allotment of sick leave. (The annual allotment is 95.94 hours) c. Checks will be prepared by December 15 of each year. 3. Sick Leave Payback. When an executive management employee, a management employee or confidential employee terminates employment in good standing, after five (5) years of continuous service, he/she shall be paid one-half of his/her accumulated Sick Leave. Bereavement Leave Employees shall be granted bereavement leave pursuant to the City Personnel Rules and Regulations in the event of death of his/her spouse, child, stepchild, grandchild, parent, grandparent, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother, sister, brother- in-law, sister-in-law or significant other. Retirement Employees will be provided retirement benefits through the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) pursuant to the 2-%2.5% @ 55 formula including the e highest yeaf:uone Year Final Compensation (Section 20042) and Credit for Unused Sick Leave (Section 20965) benefits. afld the The City will pay 5.85% of the employee contribution of sevm eight percent (8%). Employees will pay the remaining 2.15% of the ernployee contribution. �SU • Education Incentive Pay Employees shall be reimbursed up to $1,600.00 per fiscal year for books, tuition and related educational expenses for attending college or other professional training, providing the coursework is job-related, and the employee received a passing grade. Uniform/Safety Equipment Allowance a. The City shall provide an annual uniform allowance of eight hundred dollars ($800) for Police Chief and Lieutenants, and eight hundred fifty dollars ($850) for the Fire Chief. Upon initial hire the employee will receive $800/ 850. In the second year the amount will be prorated based upon the actual number of months employed in the prior year. When an employee separates from the City the Uniform Allowance will be prorated based upon the number of months worked in the then current fiscal year. b. The City will make a lump sum payment of the uniform allowance no later than the second payday in July. c. Uniforms damaged on duty shall be replaced as prorated by the Police Chief. Employees are required to seek reimbursement through the courts with all practical diligence. d. The City shall make available a bulletproof vest. Employees requesting a vest shall certify that they will wear the vest at all times, except in extreme climatic conditions. Vests shall be replaced or refurbished on an as needed basis as determined by the Chief of Police. Employees already owning a vest shall continue to use them until repair or refurbishment becomes necessary, as determined by the Chief of Police. e. Rain boots - The City shall comply with the requirements of CAUOSHA as it relates to providing rain gear including rain boots. • 97 On motion by, and seconded by, the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: 0 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO Dr. George Luna, Mayor ATTEST Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney 0 • Atascadero City Council Staff Report — Public Works Department ITEM NUMBER: A-11 DATE: 07/24/07 Consultant Selection Transit Center Site Selection Study (Approval authorizes RRM Design Group to proceed with the study to locate and recommend a site for a transit center in Atascadero.) RECOMMENDATION: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with RRM Design Group in the amount of $86,000.00, for a Transit Center Site Selection Study. 9 DISCUSSION: The current Atascadero Transit Short Range Transit Plan and the SLOCOG Regional Transportation Plan recognize the need for a Transit Center in Atascadero to provide a connection between local, regional and statewide transit services and convenient access for pedestrians, bicycles and motor vehicles. SLOCOG solicited applications, to be awarded on a competitive basis, for State Transit Assistance (STA) funds. The City Council approved the submission of an application to the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) for funds to conduct a Transit Center Site Selection Study on January 9th, 2007. Staff submitted an application for $70,000 to be matched with $30,000 of currently available transit funds. The application was ranked #1 among all the applications and the grant was awarded. The objective of the study is to locate a recommended site for a transit center which will best serve the community. The consultant will create a preliminary layout of transit center improvements on the recommended site. Key to the process will be extensive outreach to stake holders and the public through a series of meetings and interactive workshops. A Request for Proposal was issued and four (4) proposals were received. The proposals were ranked by City staff as well as a representative from SLOCOG and the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority. RRM Design Group received the highest ranking. e ITEM NUMBER: A-11 DATE: 07/24/07 RRM Design Group is headquartered in San Luis Obispo and is uniquely qualified for this project through their experience as designers of the Downtown Atascadero Streetscape, knowledge of Atascadero and their ability to gain public input on projects. Partnering with RRM is Fehr and Peers, a highly regarded transit and transportation firm. FISCAL IMPACT: There are currently budgeted funds in the amount of $100,000 for this study. The proposed contract with RRM Design Group is $86,000. 100 9 • • ITEM NUMBER: A - 12 DATE: 07/24/07 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Public Works Department Santa Cruz Road Landslide Repair Award (City Bid No. 2007-006) (Repair of the existing landslide under and along the west end of Santa Cruz Road, near San Gregorio.) RECOMMENDATIONS: Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Raminha Construction to construct the Santa Cruz Road Landslide Repair; and 2. Authorize the Public Works Director to file a notice of completion after the project is finished; and 3. Authorize the closure of Santa Cruz Road between Lenosa Lane and San Gregorio Road. DISCUSSION: There is a landslide under and along the west end of Santa Cruz Road, near San Gregorio. Last winter the slide moved and caused damage to the utilities and the side of Santa Cruz Road. A geotechnical evaluation was performed to determine the cause of the landslide and the best method of repair. The evaluation found a landslide existed from the south side of Santa Cruz Road to several hundred feet below the north side of the road. The proposed method of repair is removal of landslide material down to competent bedrock, construction of geogrid reinforced slopes, and replacement of the existing paved roadway. The project will require the closure of Santa Cruz Road between San Gregorio and Lenosa Lane for a period of approximately 45 to 50 days. There are no properties that will be denied access during the closure. Some residences will be inconvenienced by the closure due to longer drive times to their destination. Staff has also been working with the property • owners to keep them apprised of design and construction issues. Before and during construction, staff will notify the public and nearby residences of the closure. Public Works Staff has been working closely with the Fire and Police Departments regarding the road closure. 101 ITEM NUMBER: A - 12 DATE: 07/24/07 I environmental reviews and permits have been obtained and the necessary AI en ironme p permanent and temporary construction easements have been obtained by City staff. The bids were opened on July 11, 2007, and were reviewed for accuracy and compliance with the City of Atascadero Procurement Policy. The responsible low bidder was Rhamina Construction with a bid of $227,678.00. The bid summary is attached to this staff report. FISCAL IMPACT: AVAILABLE REVENUES LTF Fund $ 518,500 $ 518,500 PROJECTED EXPENDITURES Design $ 29,646 Staff Support and Other Costs 44,469 Survey and Inspection 44,469 Construction 227,678 Contingency 59,292 Total Project Expenditures $ 405,554 ATTACHMENT: 1. Bid summary sheet 102 .7 • ITEM NUMBER: A - 12 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 1 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.: 2007-006 OPENED: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 -- 2:00 p.m. is PROJECT: Santa Cruz Road Landslide Repair Ten (1.0) bids were received and opened today, as follows: Bidder Total Bid Price I . Union Asphalt $438,11.5.00 2. Raminha Construction $227,678.00 3. Arthurs Contracting $361,974.00 4. V. Lopez & Sons $496,016.50 5. Granite Construction Co. $349,702.00 6. Whitaker Contractors $337,337.00 7. MGE Underground $31.5,914.00 8. R. Burke Corp. $408,746.00 9. Souza and Petersen Construction Co. $367,8.53.00 10. Rockwood General Contractors $234,676.00 103 • • 104 • ITEM NUMBER: A - 13 DATE: 07/24/07 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Public Works Department Atascadero Lake Park Restroom Replacement Project Award (City Bid No. 2007-001) (Project will modify the Lake Park restroom facilities to meet all of the ADA compliance requirements.) RECOMMENDATIONS: Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Wysong Construction in the amount of $247,800.00 for the Restroom Replacement Project; and 2. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate an additional $66,710.00 in CDBG Funds for the Restroom Replacement Project. DISCUSSION: Background: This project consists of furnishing and installing a pre -fabricated restroom facility to replace the existing structure; also included is site preparation, foundation and pad construction, utility connections and site safety. Currently, the existing restroom facility is not ADA Compliant. The proposed project is in the Atascadero Lake Park Master Plan. When finished, this restroom facility will meet all of the ADA compliance requirements. This project is financed by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and is subject to all requirements of that grant. All environmental reviews have been completed and NEPA and CEQA certification was obtained on April 27, 2007. A building permit for the structure will be obtained by the contractor. Analysis: The project was advertised from May 16, 2007 through June 19, 2007. A total of three (3) bids were received for this project. The bids were reviewed for accuracy 105 ITEM NUMBER DATE: and compliance with the City of Atascadero bidding requirements Construction is the apparent, qualified low -bidder at $247,800.00. *A-13 07/24/07 Wysong The bids for this project were above the engineers estimate and an additional $66,710.00 in funding will be needed to be allocated to the Project for it to move forward. Staff is recommending that at this time Council appropriate the shortfall from CDBG Funds. Council could hold a public hearing on August 28t , to formally re -allocate CDBG funds from CDBG Administration to this project. If the Council approves this project tonight and chooses not to re -allocate CDBG Funds to this project at its August 28th meeting, Council would have to determine another funding source for the shortfall at that time. Redevelopment Agency Funds, Park Facilities Impact Fee Funds, and General Funds are all potential funding sources; however, CDBG funding is recommended. This is consistent with the City's policy to spend the most restrictive funds first and will assist the City in coming into compliance with CDBG requirements by expending the money quickly. FISCAL IMPACT: PROJECT EXPENDITURES Design & Administrative Support $20,000 Construction - Wysong Construction $247,800 Construction - Demo & Site Preparation $10,000 Construction inspection $5,000 Contingency (20% of Construction) $51,560 TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES $334,360 PROJECT REVENUES CDBG Funds $334,360 TOTAL PROJECT REVENUES $334,360 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Provide the additional funding of $66,710.00 from the General Fund, Park Facilities Impact Fees, or Redevelopment Agency funds. 2. Do not award the project. ATTACHMENT: Bid Summary 106 • • • City of Atascadero Office of the City cte,z � 0 I0 BID SUMMARY TO: Public Works Department FROM: Marcia McClure Togerson, C.M.C., City Clerk BID NO.: 2007-001 OPENED: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 -- 2:00 p.m. PROJECT: Atascadero Lake Park Restroom Replacement Project Three (3) bids were received and opened today, as follows: Bidder Total Bid Price 1. Wysong Construction $ 247,800.00 8720-B El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 2. Santa Margarita Construction $ 276,499.00 P.O. Box 357 Templeton, CA 93465 3. McNabb Construction $ 294,000.00 3286 Gloria Terrace Lafayette, CA 94549 107 • • • 108 • • • Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Public Works Department ITEM NUMBER: A - 14 DATE: 07/24/07 2006/2007 Road Rehabilitation Traffic Way Project Award (City Bid No. 2007-004) (Project will widen and repave Traffic Way from O/meda Ave. to Via Ave.) RECOMMENDATION: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Union Asphalt, Inc. in the amount of $347,645.15 for construction of the Traffic Way Road Rehabilitation Project. DISCUSSION: Backaround: The City Council has made a commitment to improve the roads of Atascadero through the Atascadero Road Program. The Traffic Way Road Rehabilitation Project is another project within the Program. This project will widen and repave Traffic Way from Olmeda Ave to Via Ave. Traffic Way is an Arterial Road with high traffic volumes that accesses industrial and residential uses. This project is being done in conjunction the placement of curb, gutter and sidewalk for Olmeda Ave to the Skate Park entrance road. Analysis: The project was advertised from Monday, May 29, 2007 through Wednesday, June 27, 2007. A total of six (6) bids were received for this project. The bids were reviewed for accuracy and compliance with the City of Atascadero bidding requirements. Union Asphalt, Inc. is the apparent, qualified low -bidder at $347,645.15. 109 ITEM NUMBER: A - 14 DATE: 07/24/07 FISCAL IMPACT: EXPENDITURES Design $ 53,670.00 Construction $ 347,645.00 Inspection / Testing / Construction Administration $15,00 . Contingency @ 20% $ 69,529.00 Total Estimated Expenditure: $ 485,844.00 REVENUE Local Transportation Funds LTF $ 332,670.00 Urban State Highway Account Funds USHA $ 306,000.00 Total Allocated Revenue: $ 638,670.00 ATTACHMENT: Bid Summary 110 • ob • e it of A Office of the City Clerk BID SUMMARY TO: Public Works Department FROM: Marcia McClure Togerson, C.M.C., City Clerk BID NO.: 2007-004 OPENED: Tuesday, July 2, 2007 -- 2:00 p.m. PROJECT: 2006/07 Pavement Rehabilitation Project-Traffic Way 6 bids were received and opened today, as follows: Bidder Total Bid Price Total Bid Alternate 111 1. Granite Construction Company P.O. Box 50085 $362,873.00 < $22,216.25 > Watsonville, CA 95077 2. Michael Frederick $428,139.20 < $15,107.05 > P.O. Box 573 Atascadero, CA 93423 3. Papich Construction $508,792.25 < $15,868.75 > P.O. Box 2210 Pismo Beach, CA 93448 4. R. Burke Corporation $386,586.50 < $ 1,295.50 > P.O. Box 957 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406-0957 5. Souza Engineering Contracting, Inc. $404,670.50 < $11,425.50 > P.O. Box 3810 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-3810 6. Union Asphalt, Inc. $347,645.15 < $18,026.90 > P.O. Box 1280 Santa Maria, CA 93456 111 • 112 • Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Public Works Department ITEM NUMBER: A - 15 DATE: 07/24/07 Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement (Apple Valley) (Approval of a sewer extension reimbursement agreement for Apple Valley.) RECOMMENDATION: Council approve a Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement for the Apple Valley Residential Development. DISCUSSION: A sewer force main and pump station were constructed to serve the Apple Valley Residential Development off Dei Rio Road. The sewer facilities are described as follows: 1. A sewer pump station designed to accept and convey 90 gallons per minute of sewage effluent. 2. PVC sewer force main constructed from the lift station on San Ramon Road to Del Rio Road and east to EI Camino Real connecting with the existing sewer system. Staff has reviewed the construction of the improvements and found them to be in substantial conformance with the plans approved by the City Engineer, and the Council has accepted the improvements as complete. These sewer facilities may be used by properties in the tributary area of the sewer pump station if they pay their prorate share of the construction costs of the facilities. Staff has also reviewed the proposed method of reimbursement and found that fees will be fairly apportioned on the basis of benefit. FISCAL IMPACT: The City will collect a 2% Administrative Charge from all reimbursements. This charge will be deducted from the total amount refunded. • ATTACHMENT: Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement 113 PUBLIC EXTENSION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT 0 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND MIDLAND PACIFIC BUILDING CORPORATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUMP STATION NO. 14 AND GRAVITY SEWER THIS PUBLIC EXTENSION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made this day of 2007, in San Luis Obispo County, California, by and among the City of Atascadero, a public body corporate and politic ("City"), Midland Pacific Building Corporation, with reference to the following recitals. A. Midland Pacific Building Corporation has developed certain property within the boundaries of the City, as shown on Exhibit A ("Property"). B. In order to develop the Property, Midland Pacific Building Corporation has constructed a public sewer lift station and gravity sewer main ("Sewer Facilities") to serve the Property as well as other landowners of property in the City adjacent to the Sewer Facilities ("Adjacent Landowners"). The Sewer Facilities are described as follows: 1. A sewer lift station designed to accept and convey 90 gallons per minute of sewage effluent and constructed in accordance with all City standards and specifications. 2. PVC sewer force main constructed from the lift station on San Ramon Road to Del Rio Road and then east to El Camino Real to the existing sewer system. C. The Sewer Facilities are depicted on a map attached hereto as Exhibit B. D. Midland Pacific Building Corporation's costs for designing, permitting and constructing the Sewer Facilities ("Sewer Facilities Costs") are described as follows: 114 is DescriRtion Total Gravity Sewer Main — Del Rio Road $238,023.73 Gravity Sewer Main — El Camino Real 117,535.00 Design, Testing, Inspection 11,243.73 GRAVITY SUBTOTAL $238,023.73 Lift Station and Force Main 366,574.26 Design, Testing Inspection 29,013.23 LIFT STATION & FORCE MAIN SUBTOTAL $395,587.49 REIMBURSEMENT SUBTOTAL $633,611.20 LESS BENEFIT TO APPLICANT ($246,404.20) REMAINING REIMBURSEMENT $387,339.80 E. Midland Pacific Building Corporation has agreed to dedicate the Sewer Facilities to the City. F. The Sewer Facilities will serve Adjacent Landowners within the City of Atascadero as provided in the rules and regulations of the City. 0NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual conveyance contained herein, Midland Pacific Building Corporation and the City agree as follows: 1. Term The term of this Agreement shall be for fifteen (15) years from the date that this Agreement is approved by the City Council of the City. 2. Reimbursement The City will reimburse Midland Pacific Building Corporation for part of the Sewer Facilities Costs from fees ("Reimbursement Fees") that the City collects from Adjacent Landowners upon issuance of a Sewer Connection Permit. The total reimbursement to Midland Pacific Building Corporation shall not exceed $379,593.00 (Midland Pacific Building Corporation's Maximum Reimbursement Amount"), which represents Midland Pacific Building Corporation's reimbursement reduced by the applicable Administrative Fee of 2%. • 115 93 a 5 116 Rate of Reimbursement . The City agrees to reimburse Midland Pacific Building Corporation for a portion of the Sewer Facilities Costs from Reimbursement Fees received by the City from Adjacent Landowners during the term of this Agreement. The methodology for calculating each Adjacent Landowner's Reimbursement Fee is described in Exhibit C. The City will collect Reimbursement Fees from each Adjacent Landowner prior to permitting said owner to connect to the Sewer Facilities. All Reimbursement Fees received by the City, less the applicable Administrative Fee, shall be payable to Midland Pacific Building Corporation, within thirty (30) days of receipt thereof by the City ("Reimbursement Payments"). Reimbursement Payments shall continue to be paid to Midland Pacific Building Corporation for the duration of the term of this Agreement or until Midland Pacific Building Corporation has received the Maximum Reimbursement Amount. Administrative Fee Two percent (2%) of all Reimbursement Fees collected pursuant to this Agreement shall accrue to the City as an administrative fee ("Administrative Fee"). Conditions of Reimbursement • City's obligation to make Reimbursement Payments under this Agreement is conditioned on the following: 5.1 Midland Pacific Building Corporation shall have provided City with an engineer's certification that the Sewer Facilities are constructed in substantial conformance with the plans and standard improvement drawings submitted to the City. 5.2 The Sewer Facilities shall have been inspected and approved by City. 5.3 Applicable dedications of the Sewer Facilities shall have been offered and accepted by the City. 5.4 Midland Pacific Building Corporation shall have provided the City with a maintenance bond, letter of credit or other financial security satisfactory to the City in a sum equal to ten percent (10%) of the Sewer Facilities Costs, or such agreement satisfactory to the City, whereby Midland Pacific Building Corporation's contractor and/or it's surety will repair or replace to the satisfaction of the City any and all such work that may prove defective in workmanship or materials for a period of one year following substantial completion of the Sewer Facilities, ordinary wear and tear excepted, together with any other work which may be damaged or displaced in so doing. 7. Obligation of City If, for any reason, the Reimbursement Fees are or become legally uncollectible, the City shall not be responsible in any way for collecting the Reimbursement Fees and/or making Reimbursement Payments for the Sewer Facilities Costs. Except as provided in Section 7 above with respect to the City Reimbursement Fee, Reimbursement Payments shall be made only when the City collects Reimbursement Fees from the owners of properties whose buildings are to be connected to the Public Gravity Sewer or will contribute flow to the Sewer Facilities, notwithstanding any provision of any law, the code or this Agreement. 8. Place of Payment The City shall make payment to Midland Pacific Building Corporation at: Midland Pacific Building Corporation Is 7305 Morro Road, Suite 200 Atascadero, CA 93422 The above addresses may be changed at any time by Midland Pacific Building Corporation by delivery of written notice to the City. 10. Successors and Assigns This Agreement shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto, but nothing in this Section shall be construed as consent by the City to any assignment of this Agreement or any interest herein by Midland Pacific Building Corporation. 11. Severability If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be either invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unimpaired by the court ruling. 117 12. Sole Agreement 0 This Agreement constitutes the sole and only agreement among the City, Midland Pacific Building Corporation respecting reimbursement for the Sewer Facilities and correctly sets forth the obligations of City and Midland Pacific Building Corporation to each other as if its date. Any agreements or representations respecting said reimbursement or any other matters discussed in this agreement not expressly set forth in this Agreement are null and void. 13. Governing Law The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement, and all matters relating to the Agreement, at the time any need for interpretation of this Agreement or any decision or holding concerning this Agreement arises. 14. Captions The captions of the Sections of the Agreement are for convenience and reference only. They shall not be construed to define or limit the provisions to which they relate. 15. Indemnity • Midland Pacific Building Corporation agree to save, indemnify and hold harmless, the City, its officers, employees and agents, from all liabilities, judgments, costs and expenses, due to any and all activities related to the implementation of the rights and privileges granted in this Agreement, except for liabilities, judgments, costs and expenses due to the City's negligence or willful misconduct or breach of this Agreement. 16. Time Time is expressly declared to be the essence of this Agreement. 17. Authorization to Execute The parties hereby represent that the parties executing this Agreement are expressly authorized to do so for and on behalf of the parties. 118 • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement effective as of the day approved by the City Council of the City of Atascadero. Approved by the Council of the City of Atascadero on this day of , 2007. CITY OF ATASCADERO Midland Pacific Building Bv: Dr. George Luna, Mayor By: ATTEST: By: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: • By: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney 17J 119 EXHIBIT C REIMBURSEMENT FEE TABLE Sewer Facilities Costs Flow Capacity Total project costs by flow rate Estimated effluent from Apple Valley Apple Valley Share (70 units X 240 gpd) Reimbursement Remaining to Midland Pacific 120 $633,611.20 43,200 gallons per day $14.67 per gallon, per day 16,800 gallons per day $246,40420 $387,339.80 • • • • Atascadero City Council Staff Report — Public Works Department ITEM NUMBER: A - 16 DATE: 07/24/07 Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement (Violeta Ave.) (Approval of a sewer extension reimbursement agreement for Violeta Ave.) RECOMMENDATIONS: Council: 1. Accept the Violeta Ave. Sewer Extension as complete and accept the improvements into the City sewer system; and 2. Approve the attached Public Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement. DISCUSSION: Mr. Rampone has extended the public sewer main on Violeta Avenue to serve his residence and has provided sewer access to adjacent properties. Government Code allows application for reimbursement from future sewer connections to these extensions as indicated by the following: 7-5.002 Reimbursement when. The City may approve a reimbursement agreement with persons who have paid for public sewer extensions. Application for reimbursement must be submitted within six (6) months of acceptance of sewer extension. Said agreements shall provide for reimbursement of the excess cost borne by said persons, at such time within fifteen (15) years as money is paid to the City for service from said sewer extension. The City shall require the applicant to file and have approved by the City Engineer a reimbursement map showing the method and amount of cost spread to each future connection to the sewer extension. (Ord. 438 § 2 (part), 2004) FISCAL IMPACT: The City will collect a 2% Administrative Charge from all reimbursements. This charge will be deducted from the total amount refunded. ATTACHMENTS: Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement 121 PUBLIC SEWER EXTENSION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND ALEX RAMPONE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE VIOLETA AVENUE SEWER EXTENSION THIS AGREEMENT is made this day of , 2007, in San Luis Obispo County, California, by and between the City of Atascadero, California, hereinafter referred to as "City", and ALEX RAMPONE, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant" with reference to the following recitals. A. Applicant has developed certain property on VIOLETA AVENUE; and B. In order to develop The Property, Applicant opted to construct a public sewer extension along VIOLETA AVENUE to serve the property. C. The public sewer extension will serve adjacent landowners as shown in Exhibit A, as provided in the rules and regulations of the City. D. Said public sewer extension is to be shown on a map attached hereto as Exhibit B. E. The Applicant's cost descriptions in construction of the public sewer extension are described as follows: Description Total Construction $6,980.00 Applicant Benefit ($2,326.66) $4,653.34 F. Applicant has agreed to dedicate the public sewer extension to the City. G. The City will reimburse Applicant for part of Applicant's costs in constructing the public sewer extension from adjacent landowners as herein provided. The total reimbursement to the Applicant shall not exceed $4,560.27, which represents total project expenses less Applicant Benefit and Administrative Fee. NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the mutual conveyance contained herein, applicant and City Agree as follows: 122 1. Term iThe term of this agreement shall be for 15 years from the date it is approved by the City Council from July 24, 2007. 2. Rate of Reimbursement During the term of this Agreement, the City will reimburse Applicant for his costs in constructing the public sewer extension from adjacent landowners pursuant to Exhibit A. The City will collect said amount from each adjacent landowner before permitting said owner to connect to the public sewer extension. 3. Administrative Costs Two percent (2%) of all monies collected pursuant to this agreement shall be collected by the City as administrative fees. 4. Conditions of Reimbursement City's obligation to reimburse Applicant is conditioned on the following: 4.1 Applicant providing City with an engineer's certification that extensions are constructed in substantial conformance with the plans and standard improvement drawings submitted to the City. 4.2 The sewer line extension has been inspected and approved by City. 4.3 Applicable easements have been offered and accepted by the City. 4.4 Applicant providing the City with a detailed accounting, satisfactory to the City of the amounts expended for the construction and installation of the public sewer extension. 4.5 Applicant has provided the City with a maintenance bond, letter of credit or other financial security satisfactory to the City in a sum equal to ten percent (10%) of the cost of constructing the public service extension, or such agreement satisfactory to the City whereby the Contractor and/or it's surety will repair or replace to the satisfaction of the City, any and all such work that may prove defective in workmanship or materials for a one year period, ordinary wear and tear excepted, together with any other work which may be damaged or displaced in so doing. 5. ObIlEation of City 123 If, for any reason, the reimbursement fee is or becomes legally uncollectable, the City shall not be responsible in any way for collecting the reimbursement fee and/or reimbursing the Applicant for the costs of the public sewer extension. Reimbursement shall be made only when the City collects money from the owners of properties whose buildings are to be connected to the public sewer along VIOLETA AVENUE notwithstanding any provision of any law, this code, or the Reimbursement Agreement. 6. Place of Payment The City shall make payment to Applicant at: ALEX RAMPONE 6555 VIOLETA AVENUE ATASCADERO, CA 93422 7. Successors and Heirs This Agreement shall be binding on and shall ensure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the parties hereto. 8. Severability Shall any provision of this Agreement be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be either invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unimpaired by the court ruling. 9. Captions The captions of the Sections of the Agreement are for convenience and reference only. They shall not be construed to define or limit the provisions to which they relate. 10. Indemnity Applicant agrees to save, indemnify and hold harmless, the City of Atascadero, its officers, employees and agents, from all liabilities, judgements, costs and expenses, due to any and all activities related to the implementation of the rights and privileges granted in this agreement, except for liabilities, judgements, costs and expenses due to the City's negligence. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement effective as of the day approved by the City Council of the City of Atascadero. 124 • C, C AGREED. Date: ALEX RAMPONE Approved by the Council of the City of Atascadero on this day of , 2007. Attest: By: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to Form: By: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney City of Atascadero By: George Luna, Mayor 125 EXHIBIT A VIOLETA AVENUE SEWER REIMBURSEMENT AREA PROPERTY OWNER REIMBURSEMENT AMOUNT 031-013-027 $2326.66 ALEX RAMPONE 6555 VIOLETTA ATASCADERO, CA 93422 031-012-009 $2326.66 MICHAEL WALSH 5 840 CORTA ATASCADERO, CA 93422 0314-012-007 $2326.66 GARY & SHARREN BRAZELL 5490 VIOLETTA ATASCADERO, CA 93422 126 • � ]l • • 171 • 128 • Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Fire Department ITEM NUMBER: A - 17 DATE: 07/24/07 Authorization to Purchase Aerial Ladder Truck RECOMMENDATION: Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Pierce Manufacturing Co. to build and deliver a model year 2007 aerial ladder truck for $871,167.00. DISCUSSION: Background: Since 2003 the Fire Department has been pursuing National Accreditation. The initial step was to develop a "Standards of Cover" (SOC) study of the City. SOC provides an overview and analysis of the Fire Department's performance in meeting service level objectives. The following four major factors needed to be evaluated to effectively study the department's response performance: o Community Emergency Risk Analysis — Potential emergency risks in the City of Atascadero c Time Impacts — How quickly fire engine companies respond to emergencies and its importance o Weight — The engine staffing to deliver service based on tasks for which engine companies are responsible for and how they are performed © Effective Response Force - Location of fire companies, staffing, training, and available equipment In the spring of 2004, the Fire Department conducted a citywide hazard analysis of all commercial and multi -family buildings as part of the SOC study. Staff used a computer modeling program called RHAVE and the Geographic Information System (GIS) to evaluate and assess the threat level for each of these buildings. As the study progressed, a number of issues immerged including the need for an aerial ladder truck. As an interim solution to address the immediate need for a ladder truck, staff negotiated an auto -aid contract with the City of Paso Robles. The auto -aid contract provides the automatic dispatch of the Paso Robles truck to Atascadero for commercial and multi- family building fires. In return, Atascadero sends a structure engine to all commercial and multi -family building fires and a wildland engine to all vegetation fires in Paso Robles. 129 ITEM NUMBER: A - 17 DATE: 07/24/07 Currently, fire personnel cannot access heights above 19'. Nineteen feet is usually within reach of a standard 24' ground ladder. The ability to quickly rescue trapped occupants, gain access and cut off the fire are top tactical priorities. Ladder trucks are specialized pieces of fire equipment. These trucks carry 163' of ground ladders, forcible entry and ventilation tools, hose, a fire pump and water. Trucks can be used as a large tool box, fire engine, a ladder truck or all three. Atascadero currently maintains an ISO insurance rating of 5.24. Insurance ratings are used by the insurance industry to set rates on a scale of one to ten, the best being a one. The rating is rounded down, so Atascadero is a Class 5 City. If the City's class rating drops to a Class 4, commercial fire insurance rates would drop by millions of dollars. An improvement of .25 points is needed to drop or improve to a Class 4. ISO has stated the two areas the City stands to make the most improvement on, is staffing and placing in service an aerial ladder truck. Lastly, a ladder truck is less versatile than a typical fire engine. Turning radius, angle of approach, angle of departure and height severely restrict the travel route of a ladder truck. Staff raised concerns regarding the location of three and four story buildings and the departments' ability to respond with a ladder truck. A Truck Use Zone was drafted. Development impact fees are applied to multi -family and commercial buildings located with in this zone. In January 2006 the City Council updated the development impact fees and created an Aerial Fire Truck Fees Fund to help pay for the new truck. Conclusion: The City contracted with Pierce Manufacturing Co. to supply the last two fire engines. Staff has followed the City of Atascadero's Purchasing Policy for purchasing proprietary equipment. A selection committee of fire department staff was created in preparation for this large purchase. The committee, consisting of four members, conducted a site visit of the Pierce plant and assembly lines and on a different trip toured the next largest ladder truck builder, Seagrave Manufacturing. The committee recommends the City contract with Pierce. By purchasing a ladder truck from Pierce, the City will receive a truck with a cab, chassis, motor, transmission, pump and water valves that are identical to the last two engines purchased by the City. Maintenance on three identical vehicles is more cost effective than maintaining filters, replacement valve kits belts and hoses on different and assorted vehicles. It is selection committees' opinion that Pierce produces the highest quality, longest lasting and best provides the best warrantee for fire apparatus. FISCAL IMPACT: $871,167.00 from the Aerial Fire Truck Fees Fund ALTERNATIVES: Reject purchase and reallocate budgeted funds. 130 • • ITEM NUMBER: A - 18 DATE: 07/24/07 Atascadero City Council Staff Report — Community Services Department Temporary Road Closure Hot EI Camino Cruise Nite 2007 RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the Draft Resolution authorizing the closure of EI Camino Real, from Curbaril to Traffic Way, on Friday, August 17, 2007 from 5:00 - 8:30 p.m. and the closure of East Mall, Palma and West Mall from 1:00 -8:30 pm. DISCUSSION: Qn Friday, August 17, 2007, City staff is proposing to close EI Camino Real from Curbaril to Traffic Way, including East and West Mall to Palma; and Palma from East Mall to Traffic Way, from 5:00 p.m. until 8:30 p.m. to conduct the annual Hot EI Camino Cruise Nite, which starts at 6:30 p.m. Additionally, to provide display parking for the "Show and Shine" portion of the event, East and West Mall between EI Camino Real and Palma Avenue, and Palma Avenue between East Mall and West Mall, is to be designated as a tow -away zone from 1:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., August 17, 2007, The Hot EI Camino Cruise Nite event, coordinated by the Atascadero Community Services Department, attracts thousands of tourists and spectators who line EI Camino Real to view the vehicles that participate in this growing event. Last year, there were over 400 vehicles registered. The route for this year's "Cruise" is proposed to begin at Curbaril and end at Traffic Way. The route requires that Cal Trans or a Contractor close the northbound Highway 41 exit and the detouring of Highway 41 East. Cal Trans has requested a resolution from the Atascadero City Council authorizing the closure of EI Camino Real along the proposed "Cruise" route. In addition to the Hot EI Camino Cruise Nite, the Atascadero Main Street will be hosting a Show and Shine daytime event around the Sunken Gardens Park from 3 pm — 6 pm. ITEM NUMBER: A - 18 DATE: 07/24/07 During, as well as after the Show and Shine event, other activities will be conducted in the Sunken Gardens Park until 10 pm. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The cost of putting on the event is approximately $13,750. It is anticipated that these costs will be fully recovered through sponsorships and entry fees. ALTERNATIVES: None proposed. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Map of the proposed Hot EI Camino Nite Cruise route 3. Map of the proposed Detour route 4. Street Closure Request Form 0 DRAFT RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA CREATING A TEMPORARY CRUISE ROUTE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero that the Hot El Camino Cruise Nite route is hereby established as El Camino Real from Curbaril Avenue to East Mall to Palma Avenue to Traffic Way to El Camino Real; San Luis Avenue from Curbaril Avenue to Pueblo Avenue; Pueblo Avenue from San Luis Avenue to El Camino Real; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in order to provide a reserved route for the cruise, the area described above is designated as a tow -away zone from 5:00 p.m. until 8:30 p.m., August 17, 2007; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero that the location for the Hot El Camino Cruise Nite "Show and Shine" daytime event is hereby established as East Mall between El Camino Real and Palma Avenue, Palma Avenue between East Mall and West Mall, and West Mall between Palma Avenue and El Camino Real; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in order to provide display parking for the "Show and Shine" event described above, East Mall between El Camino Real and Palma Avenue, Palma Avenue between East Mall and West Mall, and West Mall between Palma Avenue and El Camino Real is additionally designated as a tow -away zone from 1:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., August 17, 2007. On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk • APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney CITY OF ATASCADERO Dr. George Luna, Mayor Cruise Nite 2007 Cruise Route �ro�,a DSD Traffic Way Exit NOT recommended No cruise access! w� % LEGEND © Cruise Pass Registration * Participant Entrance ..............Registration Line-up (Cruise Route I 1Q 1 Northbound \\ Hwy. 41 Exit Closed ►\ W�-eb`o Cutb�'1 Pre -Registered & New Registrars may enter here using San Luis Ave. from Curbaril 2007 Hot El Camino Cruise Nite Route "Cruisin the Night Away" Friday, August 17, 2007 6:30 - 8:30 pm For more information, please call (805) 461-5000 or visit our website at www.atascadero.org v d d • • os P 5,o Rosa°o #2 Traffic Way Closed to thru traffic from ECR to Lewis Ave. Traffic Way Exit NOT recommended jfcuise 0/Mte 4007 aDetottt �otc#e �Trafficway * �y V+a #1 Hwy 41 East EXIT CLOSED (2000 Ft prior to SB San Anselmo Exit) #2 Hwy 41 East USE SAN ANSELMO (1000 Ft prior to SB San Anselmo Exit) aro � ro Vro4` #3 Hwy 41 East & West USE CURBARIL AVE • (1000 Ft prior to NB Curbaril) Baiba's Safety Service to turn on CMS at 5:00 pm and turn off at 10:00 pm 1P I �o 0 1101 Northboun k Hwy. 41 Exit Closed 7� ab�o do. 1 O 7 Ensenada Curblwl �► �r ti --► 430 o. LEGEND Road Closed Ahead Sign * 41 East Detour Sign 4 41 East Detour Route * 41 West Detour Sign <— 41 West Detour Route Cruise Route Changeable Message Sign 4 El Camino Real /Hwy 101 Detour Route El Camino Real /Hwy 101 Detour Sign #1 Hwy 41 East EXIT CLOSED (2000 Ft prior to SB San Anselmo Exit) #2 Hwy 41 East USE SAN ANSELMO (1000 Ft prior to SB San Anselmo Exit) aro � ro Vro4` #3 Hwy 41 East & West USE CURBARIL AVE • (1000 Ft prior to NB Curbaril) Baiba's Safety Service to turn on CMS at 5:00 pm and turn off at 10:00 pm 1P I �o 0 1101 Northboun k Hwy. 41 Exit Closed 7� ab�o do. 1 O 7 Ensenada Curblwl �► �r ti --► 430 o. CITY OF ATASCADERO STREET CLOSURE REQUEST FORM FULL NAME OF ORGANIZATION: City of Atascadero, Community Services Department & Atascadero Main Street NAME OF PERSON MAKING APPLICATION: Ashley Lieser, Recreation Coordinator ADDRESS: 6907 El Camino Real CITY: Atascadero ZIP: 93422 PHONE: DAY 470-3178 EVENING DATE (S) OF REOUESTED ROAD CLOSURE: Friday August 17, 2007 NAME OF STREET: 1. El Camino Real 2. San Luis Ave 3. Pueblo 4. East Mall 5. Palma 6. West Mall 7. Entrada 8. Traffic Way FROM (ADDRESS OR STREET): 1. Curbaril TO Traffic Way 2. Curbaril TO Pueblo 3. ECR TO San Luis Ave 4. ECR TO Palma 5. East Mall TO Traffic Way 6. ECR TO Palma 7. ECR TO Palma 8. ECR TO Lewis TIME OF CLOSURE: FROM: 1:00 pm TO: 8:30 pm Show'N'Shine — East Mall, Palma, & West Mall FROM: 5:30 pm TO: 8:30 pm Cruise Route — map attached PURPOSE FOR CLOSURE: Hot El Camino Cruise Nite a City of Atascadero Special Event (Closed cruise on El Camino Real from Curbaril to East Mall to Palma to Traffic Way) PROPOSED ALTERNATE ROUTE: See attached detour map PROPOSED EMERGENCY ACCESS PLAN: Emergency vehicles and Transit Busses will be allowed to pass through the cruise route; City staff & volunteers will be at all barricades and will be notified to let emergency vehicles pass through; AFD will have 3 on -duty fire engines located on the cruise route available, if not on a call. PROPOSED TRAFFIC CONTROLS (SIGNS, POLICE, ETC.): Barricades, traffic signs, staff, and volunteers will be at all intersections along the cruise route; Traffic signals adjusted for traffic flow; detour route signs to follow attached map; Cal —Trans/Baiba's Safety Service notified to direct freeway traffic with Special Event signs on Hwy 101 directing NB traffic to exit at Curbaril and SB traffic to exit at San Anselmo; APD at Curbaril, Morro Rd., and Traffic Way; Amtrak/Orange Belt, CCAT, will be notified of the Cruise. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT: DATE: (Request must be made a minimum of 20 working days prior to event) • .1 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date Received: Approved by (all departments must approve): Fire Department Police Department Approved Denied Refer to Council Signature: Date: _ Approved Denied Refer to Council Signature: Date: Reason for denial or comments: � 0 (Use additional page if necessary) City Manager's action: Signature: City Council action (If applicable): 0 Public Works Approved Denied Refer to Council Signature: Date: Date: ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Development Department PLN 2007-1205 / APL 2007-0012 PLN 2099-0183 / APL 2007-0013 Appeal of the Planning Commission's Conditions of Approval for Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 (5105 and 5305 Chauplin Lane) Finch/Messer (Request to reverse the Planning Commission's approval of Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 for the removal of 62 native trees subject to mitigation measures.) RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt Draft Resolution B thereby denying the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval of Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 for the removal of sixty-two (62) native trees subject to mitigation measures. REPORT -IN -BRIEF: Two appeals have been received regarding the Planning Commission's action to approve a tree removal request subject to mitigation measures. The appeal letters are attached hereto as Attachments 1 and 2. The following issues were raised in the appeal letters: 1. The Planning Commission has exceeded its authority in conditioning the development (see Attachment 1, Messer). 2. The absence of fair and equal treatment for these two colony lot owners (see Attachment 2, Clay). The original project was a request for 62 native tree removals on two (2) existing lots of record. The lots were originally created with the original 1913 Atascadero Colony Map and are moderately to steeply sloping with heavy tree cover. A deep drainage swale fronts the property and runs along Chauplin Lane. 131 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 The applicant has also applied for Precise Plan to allow the construction of two single family houses. The Precise Plan included a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The two lots (Lots 14 and 15) are proposed to be developed with a shared driveway from Chauplin serving both houses. DISCUSSION: Background: This project was heard before the Planning Commission on April 3, 2007. The Planning Commission approved the request to remove 62 native oak trees with a total dbh of 855 inches, based on Finding No. 5 of the Atascadero Tree Ordinance (Ordinance No. 214) below. 0 5. The tree is obstructing proposed improvements that cannot be reasonably designed to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified by a report from the site planner and determined by the Community Development Department based on the following factors: a. Early consultation with the City, . b. Consideration of practical design alternatives, 132 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 C. Provision of cost comparisons (from applicant) for practical design . alternatives, d. If saving tree eliminates all reasonable use of the property, or e. If saving the tree requires the removal of more desirable trees. In approving the tree removal application, the Planning Commission adopted the following conditions and mitigation measures. Tree Removal Condition 2: The applicant shall pay all required mitigation fees prior to any tree removal as shown on exhibit B ($8,675). Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: An open space and tree preservation easement shall be placed over the Coastal Oak woodland areas to insure the trees are not removed in the future. Mitigation Measure 4.c.d.1: An open space easement shall be placed over the drainage swale area prior to building permit issuance to insure buildings and other structures are not placed with the drainage way, the drainage way is not filled in, and there will not be impacts to any riparian resources. This open space easement will also facilitate current wildlife movement patterns and ensure retention of wildlife nursery sites. The site plans with the conditioned easements are shown on the following page. Both • appellants are appealing whether the Commission exceeded its authority when it required both the payment of tree mitigation fees and dedication of open space easements. Under the Tree Ordinance, the Commission is permitted to require both fees and easements as mitigation for tree removals. (4) Conditions of Approval. Tree removal permits shall be conditioned by one or more of the following methods: (i) Depending on the characteristics of the site the applicant may plant replacement trees on site. This method shall include payment in advance for three (3) site inspections during a four (4) year establishment period; (ii) Payment of fee to the Tree Replacement Fund; (iii) Establishment of conservation easements, which will restrict removal of any tree within a designated area of the property. Based on the relatively high number of trees to be removed on a small site and the steep wooded character of the undisturbed portions of the site, staff originally recommended that both mitigation fees and conservation easements be required. The conservation easements were also identified as mitigation measures in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration to offset grading and biological impacts of the project. The applicant, Mr. Messer agreed early on in the process to provide easements over the lower drainage swale (easements #1 and #2 on map). However, Mr. Messer was not in agreement with providing the uphill easement (easement #3 on map). Based on . information from the applicant, the public and discussion among the Commissioners, the Commissioners reduced proposed conservation easements #3 by nearly half. 133 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 134 Easement 3 as reduced by Planning Commission. • • • SI u q 1 e} '�� i''il' �� .W , 111 ; �• 134 Easement 3 as reduced by Planning Commission. • • • ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Mr. Messer has also raised concerns that the wording of the proposed easement is too restrictive and creates unfair burdens and hardships for future owners. Staff has agreed to work with Mr. Messer to revise the City's conservation easement language to address these concerns. Mr. Messer also states that staff miscalculated the diameter of multi - trunk trees. The diameter of all trees was provided by Mr. Messer's arborist and any miscalculation would have been the applicant's arborist's responsibility. Conclusion: It appears that the Planning Commission acted within its authority when it required both the payment of tree impact fees and dedication of conservation easements as mitigation for tree removals. The Commission's decision was based on the topography and density of woodlands that are present on the site. A majority of the Commission toured the site with staff and the applicant prior to the hearing. FISCAL IMPACT: Upholding the Planning Commission's decision to approve the tree removal will not result in fiscal impacts to the City. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The City Council may adopt Draft Resolution A thereby granting the appeal, certifying Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 and modify/remove mitigation measures which are in dispute. The Council should direct staff as to which mitigations to modify. 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 applicant 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 Tree Removal Permit based on findings. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Letter from Appellant 1 Messer, dated April 17, 2007 Attachment 2: Letter from Appellant 2 Clay, dated April 16, 2007 Attachment 3: Pertinent Planning Commission Minutes of April 3, 2007 Attachment 4: Draft Resolution Granting the Appeals and Certifying Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 Attachment 5: Draft Resolution denying the appeals and upholding the decision of the Planning Commission's April 3, 2007 action Attachment 6: Planning Commission Staff Report April 3, 2007 135 Attachment 1: Letter from Appellant 1 (Messer), dated April 17, 2007 Page 1 POST OFFICE. BOX 3835 SAN LuisOBISPo.CA 93403-3835 Atascadero City Council 6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 ADAMSKI MOROSKI MADDEN & GREEN LLP ATTOBNEYs AT LAW www.ammglaw.com info@ammglaw.com April 17, 2007 ITEM NUMBER: B -1 DATE: 07/24/07 TELEPHONE: (805) 543-0990 FACSIMILE, (805)543-0980 RECEIVED :' t. 2007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HAND -DELIVERED Re: 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane — Application for Development of Two Single - Family Residences by Messer/Polm/Finch Councilmembers: This firm represents Don Messer and hereby offers this appeal of the Planning Commission's April 3, 2007 decision on his behalf. Don Messer proposes to construct two single-family residences on two legal lots, which were created with the original 1913 Atascadero Colony Map. Mr. Messer has not sought any density bonus for the development of the two parcels and has worked with the Planning Department for nearly two years to redesign the development to minimize and mitigate the environmental impacts of the project. On April 3, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed staff recommendations regarding the Precise Plan approval for the project' and voted to adopt a resolution, which includes a "Declaration of Covenants for Tree Protection", regarding its development. The subjects of this appeal are: (1) the Planning Commission's actions and authority to create a wildlife corridor on the subject property and restrict the erection of fences, landscaping and keeping of horses or other grazing animal; (2) the Planning Commission's authority to require all owners and future owners of the properties to conduct costly maintenance to native trees on the property pursuant to the requirements of City -approved arborists; (3) the Planning Commission's authority to condition project development on the City's right to enter the subject properties at any time and without notice to the property owners; and (4) the City's calculation of the tree mitigation fees. It is Mr. Messer's position that the Planning Commission has grossly exceeded its authority in these manners. ' The project has been made subject to a Precise Plan due to the steep grade of the parcels. PASO ROH12:s OFFICE: 1200 VINE STREET S• PAso ROBLEs. CA 93446-2268 + TELEPHONE (805) 238-2300 V FACSIMILE (805) 238-2322 136 • • • 0 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 1: Letter from Appellant 1, dated April 17, 2007 Page 2 Atascadero City Council April 17, 2007 Page 2 The Planning Commission Has Exceeded The Authority Granted By The Native Tree Ordinance. Atascadero Municipal Code section 9-11.105(dx4) provides the sole authority for the City to condition approval of a project by mitigatingany impacts to native trees. That ordinance provides only tbree possible mitigation conditions: (1) planting of replacement trees; (2) payment of a fee into the Tree Replacement Fund; and (3) establishment of conservation easements, which will restrict the removal of any tree within a designated area of the property. The City can impose any combination of the three listed options. Historically, however, the City has accepted the designation of permanently protected conservation areas in lieu of imposing costly fees. The calculation of fees the Planning. Commission seeks to impose here is discussed at length below. Regarding Don Messer's Chauplin project, the Planning Commission not only sought to protect the project site from future tree removal, but went beyond its authority and imposed additional conditions not authorized by the Native Tree Ordinance, which significantly burden the subject property and greatly reduce its value and marketability. These conditions include: A. Protection of All New Growth. In addition to the protection of designated protected native trees, as authorized by the Native Tree Ordinance, the property owners are not permitted to "trim or in any manner damage ... any naturally occurring new growth within the easement area," Declaration of Covenants for Tree Protection, Paragraph 3.1. However, the Planning Commission's authority is limited by the Native Tree Ordinance as follows: The Native Tree Ordinance applies to "all native trees ... two (2) inches dbh or greater for deciduous native oaks, California sycamore ... and madrones ... and four (4) inches dbh or greater for all other protected native trees.... This restriction that the Planning Commission has imposed will prohibit all owners of the subject properties from trimming, removing or damaging any and all new growth whatsoever occurring on the approximately 50% of area of each property encumbered by the easements. This provision will restrict owners from removing poison oak, weeds and literally any natural growth. Moreover, this requirement almost certainly prohibits the property owner from maintaining the property in a manner necessary to minimize fire danger. This restriction far exceeds the authority granted to the Planning Commission by the Native Tree Ordinance. B. Maintenance. All property owners, in perpetuity, must maintain the protected trees "in accordance with maintenance specifications prepared by a certified arborist." Declaration of Covenants for Tree Protection, Paragraph 3.2. The property owners 137 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 1: Letter from Appellant 1, dated April 17, 2007 Page 3 Atascadero City Council April 17, 2007 Page 3 must pay for the cost of the maintenance no matter what the expense or the recommendation of the arborist. Again, -the Planning Commission's authority under the Native Tree Ordinance is limited to protecting native tress from removal. The Planning Commission is not authorized to mandate future maintenance of trees within the easement areas. C. Prohibited Activities. Beyond the expected restrictions against construction, grading, paving or parking within the easement area, this Planning Commission has also restricted fencing, grazing or keeping of livestock on the properties. The property owners are further restricted from planting anything within ten {10} feet of tree trunks and from regularly watering any planting within the drip lines of the trees, Any planting within the drip line must be on an approved species list. By limiting the uses permitted on the property, the Planning Commission is effectively changing the City's zoning ordinance without any authority and simultaneously engaging in impermissible spot zoning. D. City's Right of Inspection. The Planning Commission further conditions the project approval by requiring the applicant to give up the fundamental property right to exclude others from the property. This violation of fundamental property rights is accomplished by the requirement that the City, without any notice whatsoever to the owner, may enter the property. This condition reads more like a term of parole than a reasonable and legitimate exercise of the City's police power. Allowing the Planning Commission to exercise this degree of control, particularly when the project is the construction of two single-family dwellings, is both beyond the City's authority and a dangerous precedent for the erosion of fundamental private property rights. If the Planning Commission's project conditions are upheld, Mr. Messer has determined that the project will not be economically viable. He could not effectively and economically market homes that are encumbered by a costly requirement for tree maintenance on approximately 50% of the lot area, the right of the City to enter the property at any time and the restriction on making any use or improvement, by landscaping or fencing, to almost the entire open area of the lots. In short, the Planning Commission is attempting to create a wildlife preserve on 50% of the project area for the benefit of the City, while requiring the property owners to pay for all maintenance and taxes on property they cannot use or enjoy. The Native Tree Ordinance provides simply that conservation easements may mitigate the loss of trees by restricting the removal of any tree within a designated area of the property. The Native Tree Ordinance does not allow for the creation of a wildlife habitat or restrict property owners from making any use of their property. 138 • • • ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 1: Letter from Appellant 1, dated April 17, 2007 Page 4 Atascadero City Council April 17, 2047 Page 4 2. The Project Mitigation Measures Impose A Restriction On Activities Within The Drainage Swale And The Imposition Of A Tree Conservation Easement But Nothing Else. During the two years this project has been under City review, Mr. Messer has made numerous adjustments to the project design in order to minimize the impacts on native trees, drainage and the natural grade of the property. The homes have been changed to split-level homes with the garages underneath upstairs bedrooms, a shared driveway was utilized and retaining walls have been designed to limit impacts. The Initial Study of the environmental impacts of the project prepared by the City did not note any impacts to biological resources on the project site other than to native trees, which impact could be mitigated by the provisions of the City's Native Tree Ordinance. See Section 4 - Biological Resources, to City of Atascadero Initial Study. The mitigation measures proposed for the project included the provision of an open space easement over the drainage swale area and an open space and tree preservation easement to "insure [sic] the trees are not removed in the future." The Initial Study went on to provide that an arborist shall be employed to monitor the construction process and its impact on native trees. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration includes two mitigation measures that speak to the perpetual preservation of oak trees and the maintenance of a drainage Swale. Mitigation Measure 4.c.d.1 describes the drainage easement as necessary to "insure [sic] buildings and other structures are not placed with[in] the drainage way, the drainage way is not filled in, and there will not be impacts to any riparian resources." Mitigation Measure 4.c.d.1 goes on to state that the easement will facilitate current wildlife movement patterns and ensure retention of wildlife nursery sites. The drainage Swale on the subject properties is on the west sides of the lots, the sides bordering Chauplin. Mitigation Measure 4.e.1 provides that "[a]n open space and tree preservation easement shall be placed over the Coastal Oak woodland areas to insure [sic] the trees are not removed in the future." The mitigation measures, as provided by the Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, do not seek to restrict grazing, the keeping of livestock, or fencing, landscaping and irrigation as described at length above. In addition, the Coastal Oak woodland area is located in the same area as the drainage way. Both resources are protected by the imposition of Chauplin-facing easements. As had been discussed between Mr. Messer and City staff, the drainage swale protection area and the tree preservation easements would be one in the same. Both would lie on the front of the property or the Chauplin-facing side of the project. Mr. Messer had no objection to the imposition of these easements and their restrictions, i.e., the restrictions against filling in the drainage area and 139 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 1: Letter from Appellant 1, dated April 17, 2007 Page 5 Atascadero City Council April 17, 2007 Page 5 removing or damaging native trees. These easements had been discussed at the staff level for almost two years. The day before the April 3, 2007 Planning Commission hearing, however, Mr. Messer received a copy of the staff report, which sought to impose easements on the front and back of the properties. The two easement areas would encumber approximately 50% of the parcel areas. As stated above, the easements not only sought to prevent construction in the drainage swale and removal of native trees, but also, the easements would encumber the properties with numerous restrictions and obligations. Planning Commission staff described the new easements in their report as "tree preservation/conservation and wildlife corridor easements." The wildlife corridor was purportedly imposed to allow animals, and specifically deer, clear passage and undisturbed sanctuary over and on the subject properties. But there is no reference in the environmental review of the project to any impact to biological resource other than native trees. The Planning Commission appears to have created this restriction without any findings or showing of necessity. In addition, deer are not a protected species and are considered by most in the community to be a pest and hazard. The Planning Commission cannot impose eleventh -hour restrictions on the property for the benefit of deer habitat when no impact to deer or need to protect deer has been established. Finally, neither the Initial Study nor any proposed mitigation measures for the project state that the property owner shall be required to maintain the property according to a City - approved arborist's recommendations or that the City maintains the right to enter the property, at any time and without notice, to inspect the property owner's tree maintenance efforts. 3. The Proposed Tree Mitigation Fee is Excessive Under the Native Tree Ordinance. First, it has been the City's past practice to accept conservation easements in lieu of imposing tree mitigation fees. The policy is logical and serves the intent of the Native Tree Ordinance, which states, "[iln establishing these regulations, it is the City's intent to encourage the preservation, maintenance and regeneration of a healthy urban forest. This enhances other values that Atascadero holds for its community including clean air and water, soil conservation, aesthetics, property values and an ecological diversity that will ensure that Atascadero will continue to be a healthy and desirable place to live." The imposition of conservation easements permanently protects these stated values and goals. On the other hand, the imposition of fees to be paid into the Tree Replacement Fund only provides for the possibility of planting new trees in the future in some unknown location and at an unknown time. The payment of fees does not protect the resources that the Native Tree Ordinance seeks to protect. 140 0 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 1: Letter from Appellant 1, dated April 17, 2007 Page 6 Atascadero City Council April 17, 2007 Page 6 In calculating the tree mitigation fees, the City relies on the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). The ISA fees have been made a part of the City's Native Tree Guidelines and Standards. The fees are based upon the diameter at breast height or dbh. In calculating the value of each tree to be removed from the two properties in question here, however, the Planning Department has deviated from the ISA guidelines for measuring trees. The ISA requires that for trees that split into multiple trunks close to ground level, the dbh for the tree is found by taking the square root of the sum of all squared stem dbh's. The Planning Department has, instead, calculated each trunk stemming from the same base and root structure as separate trees, each subject to their own fee. The result has been a significant increase in the fees that have been imposed for this project. 4. Conclusion. In sum, the Planning Commission has grossly exceeded its authority by attempting to impose unauthorized and illegal conditions on this project, which seeks the development of two single-family residential lots with two single-family residences. The Commission encumbers approximately 50% of the total property area with easements that will prohibit the property owners from making any use of those areas. The Commission further places maintenance requirements to run with the land in perpetuity. The Commission conditions approval of the development on the City's right to enter the property at any time and without notice in order to monitor the owner's compliance with the obligations and restrictions that have been imposed on the property. The Commission states that the City is the intended beneficiary of the obligations and restrictions while requiring the property owners to pay for all maintenance of the easement areas and to give up almost all use and enjoyment of the property. Finally, the Commission has deviated from its stated authority on tree ordinance procedures, the ISA, in order to greatly increase fees that appear only to penalize Mr. Messer for improving the property as contemplated by the City's own zoning designations. The City Council is obligated to check the Planning Commission when it exceeds its authority, as is the case here, TDG:tlg G:Wesser\ChauphnAvc\CwkAtu City Council 041707.doc Very truly yours, ADAMSKI MOROSKI MADDE'& GREEN LLP THOMAS D. GREEN 141 Attachment 2: Letter from Appellant 2 (Clay), dated April 16, 2007 I SLA Jr'1rs,U . ��}i r ,-Alw ?AL APPLICATION ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 City of A=cadero Planning Division ARECOVED APR 16 2007 CITY CLERKS AAE -1-4 /O/� PHONE #: TAX #: f i CONTACT: YKOJECT ADDRESS: 5 , / i -' oa f- " -% ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) (APN): PROJECT OR DECISION TO BE APPEALED: - 0 REASON FOI} YPEAL (ATTACH ¢pDITIONAL INFORMATIO AS NEEDED): ` 11WE consent to the filing of t t and declare that this application and related docutnentslare wean (Note: the signature of the property owners) is require o accepted. Wet signature required. Fazed signatures wW not be accepted.) i licant J Origin gnature required Date -Rptob� -Ooq /qt For staff use only f t„{7L Fee: VJD Fsia •O MlTt �nnlieatim Farn.doc Receipt C e�r.h 142 �1 • J ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 3: Pertinent Minutes of the Planning Commission Hearing of April 3, 2007 2. PLN 2099-0183, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2006-0094 FOR 5105 & 5305 CHAUPLIN LANE Applicant: Don Messer, P O Box 1958, Atascadero, CA 93423 Owners: Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, SLO, CA 93405 Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Ave. #101, Fresno, CA 93704 Project Title: Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 Precise Plan 2005-0172, 2 Single -Family Residences on slopes greater than 10% Project Location: 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane, Atascadero, CA 93422 (San Luis Obispo County) APN 030-311-005, 030-311-002 Project Description: THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF AN APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT 2 SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES ON 2 EXISTING LOTS OF RECORD. BOTH OF THE RESIDENCES EACH TOTAL 1,928 SQ. FT. WITH A 744 SQ. FT. GARAGE AND A 120 SQ. FT. DECK. THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL REQUIRE APPROX. 1,300 CUBIC YARDS OF CUT AND APPROXIMATELY 700 CUBIC YARDS OF FILL ON MODERATE TO STEEP SLOPES AND WILL INCORPORATE RETAINING WALLS. APPROXIMATELY 62 NATIVE TREES ARE PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL AND THE RESIDENCES WILL GAIN ACCESS THROUGH A SHARED DRIVEWAY FROM CHAUPLIN LANE. THIS IS A REVISED PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND REPLACES THE DOCUMENT PREVIOUSLY POSED ON JUNE 5, 2006. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SFR -Z ZONING DISTRICT: RSF-Z Proposed BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT, A MITIGATED Environmental NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS PROPOSED. THE PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE Determination: 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. Associate Planner Kerry Margason gave the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Gobler, applicant's representative, spoke about the project, and made several corrections to the plans the Commission had received. He requested the applicant's • original tree preservation easement be considered in lieu of fees and if fees are proposed 143 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 instead of the preservation easement that the applicant be given the opportunity to discuss the amount with city staff. Mr. Gobler answered questions of the Commission. Henry Curtis, project arborist, answered questions of the Commission. Don Messer, applicant, gave a brief history of the project. Eric Greening explained why some of the assumptions previously used for projects on lots like this must be questioned, and suggested a fresh look at the tree ordinance is in order. Chuck Green suggested transplanting the larger trees or digging them up temporarily and then placing them back on the lot. Ann Colby, neighbor to this property, expressed concern with the amount of trees to be removed and impacted, and the amount of canopy to be lost. She would like the project sent back for re -consideration of the clustering arrangement or to follow staff recommendations with careful monitoring. Sid Bollen spoke about the tree canopy on this lot, the amount of new tree growth and his concerns for fire issues with a canopy of this density. Eric Gobler addressed issues raised by the previous speakers. Chairperson O'Keefe closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner Slane to adopt Resolution PC 2007-0023 to approve the request to remove sixty-two (62) native oak trees subject to the guidelines and mitigation required by the Atascadero Municipal Code and Native Tree Ordinance, and that the applicant meet with staff to decide on the area up above and that it would be at least 50% of the area shown in there and it to be concentrated on the left hand side of the map, and have the fees waived because the applicant is putting in a larger conservation easement. Motion failed 3:4 by a roll -call vote (Heatherington, O'Grady, Marks, O'Keefe opposed) • MOTION: By Chairperson O'Keefe and seconded by Commissioner Marks to adopt Resolution PC 2007-0023 to approve the request to remove sixty-two (62) native oak trees subject to the guidelines and mitigation required by the Atascadero Municipal Code and Native Tree Ordinance, and that the applicant will pay tree mitigation fees and that an open space easement will be created . on the bottom half per the maps by staff and that the triangular 144 • • ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 section on lot 14 be removed and 50% of upper area be removed and the part that stays in would be where the wildlife is. Motion passed 4:3 by a roll -call vote. (Slane, Jack, Fonzi opposed) Commissioner Slane stated for the record that he voted against the motion because this is too intrusive of the property owner and is a burden on him. Commissioner Jack stated he needed more clarification on where the actual line would be drawn. Vice Chairperson Fonzi stated for the record that she voted against the motion because she believes it is punitive to have both the easement and the fees. WE PNOTECT!ON PLAN Easement Areas, LLot Ifctxr LO 7 14 Easement Area, Lot 14 .•�• •• r LGT. 15 .. r n LOT 13 LOT 145 et F - -- ____. —T- -- �_-- � 'CNAUPLIN'AVENUE y 145 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 4: Draft Resolution A Granting the Appeal of the Planning Commission Action Approving TRP 2006-0094 DRAFT RESOLUTION A A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO GRANTING APPEAL 2007-0012 AND APPEAL 2007-0013 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT LOCATED AT 5105 AND 5305 CHAUPLIN LANE AND CERTIFICATION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2006-0020 (APL 2007-0012 & APL 2007-0013: Clay/Messer/Finch/Polin) WHEREAS, an appeal (APL 2007-0012) of the Planning Commission's action to approve an application for Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to mitigation measures has been received from Jerry Clay, Sr., Council member 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero California 93422; and, WHEREAS, an appeal (APL 2007-0013) of the Planning Commission's action to approve0 an application for Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to mitigation measures has been received from Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero, California 93423, Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue, No. 101, Fresno, California 93704 and Burt Polin, 147 Los Cetros Drive, San Luis Obispo, California 93405; and, WHEREAS, Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 requested the removal of sixty-two (62) native trees located at 5105 and 5305 Chauplin Lane; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project site is located within the Single Family Residential land use designation of the City of Atascadero's General Plan Land Use Diagram; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project site is located in the Residential Single Family — Z zoning district; and, WHEREAS; the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Tree Removal application on April 3, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall located at 6907 El Camino Real and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicant, and the public; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the necessary findings for native tree removal could be made as the project was designed and approved the tree removal request subject to mitigation measures, as stated in the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance; and, 146 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 WHEREAS, the City Council heard the appeals, as filed by Mr. Clay, Mr. Messer, Mr. Finch and Mr. Polin on July 24, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicant, and the public; and, WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the necessary findings for native tree removal could be made based on the project design with modified mitigation measures; and,: WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0020 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 the project will have no significant impacts with project specific mitigation measures as modified and incorporated; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing on July 24, 2007, following the close of the review period, to consider the Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration; and, NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, hereby resolves to certify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 based on the following Findings, and as shown in Exhibit A: 1. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with 0 CEQA; and, 2. The Proposed Mitigated 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, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council takes the following actions: SECTION 1. Grant of Appeal. The City Council grants the appeals of Mr. Clay, Sr., Mr. Messer and Mr. Finch, approving Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 and finds as follows: 147 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 1. Modified mitigation measures are warranted to ensure the mitigation measures are in • keeping with the spirit and intent of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. 2. The open space areas, as modified by the Planning Commission in its April 3, 2006 action, are sufficient to mitigate for the removal of 62 native trees and protect the wildlife in the area. 3. The necessary findings, as outlined in the City of Atascadero's Native Tree Ordinance and listed below, are now made. Finding #5 The trees are obstructing proposed improvements that cannot be reasonably designed'to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified by a report from the Site Planner and determined by the Community Development Department based on the following factors: • Early consultation with the City; • Consideration of practical design alternatives; • Provision of cost comparisons (from applicant) for practical design alternatives; • If saving tree eliminates all reasonable uses of the property; or • If saving the tree requires the removal of more desirable trees. SECTION 2. Certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020. The City Council certifies Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 subject to findings and mitigation measures. SECTION 3. Approval. The City Council hereby approves Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to the following Conditions and Exhibits: Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval, Mitigation Measures Exhibit C: Tree Mitigation Fee Table Exhibit D: Tree Preservation/Conservation/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement 148 • ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: • Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney • CITY OF ATASCADERO Dr. George Luna, Mayor 149 Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration Tree Removal - TRP 2006-0094 150 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 • • 0 CITY OF ATASCADER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECEIVED FEB I9 ?00 JULT .800LWALC county Clerk DepuV NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Environmental Coordinator of the City of Atascadero has completed a review of the following project and is proposing the following environmental determination: Owners: Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Phone: 805-543-3679 Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue, #101, Fresno, CA 93704 Phone: 559-439-9300 Applicant: Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero,,CA 93423 Project Title: Precise Plan 2005-0172, Two Single -Family Residences on slopes greater than 10%. • Project PPN 2005-0172, 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane, Atascadero,CA 93422 Location: (San Luis Obispo County) APN 030-311-005 &03.O-311-002 Project The project consists of an application to construct two single-family houses on two existing lots of Description: record. Both of the residences each total 1,928 square feet with a 744 square foot garage and a 120 square foot deck. The proposed project will require approximately 1,300 cubic yards of cut and approximately 700 cubic yards of fill on moderate to steep slopes and will incorporate retaining walls. Approximately 62 native trees are proposed for removal and the residences will gain access through a shared driveway from Chauplin Lane. This is a revised proposed mitigated negative declaration and replaces the document previously posted on June 5, 2006. General Plan Designation: SFR -Z Zoning District: RSF-Z Environmental Review Dates: Begins: February 28, 2007 Ends: March 19, 2007 Hearing Date: Tree Removal Request is tentatively scheduled before the Planning Commission on March 19, 2007 Proposed Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental is proposed. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public Determination: review from 02/28/07 through 03/19/07 at 6907 El Camino Real, Community Development Department from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Any interested person may review the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and project files. Questions should be directed to _Ker7y Margaociate Planner at 461-5000, ext. 3442. . Warren Frace, Director of Community Development Date Fik: 2005-0172 WWJ.,doc Print Dm 021291071:16 PM 6907 EL CAMINO REAL* ATASCADERO, CA 93422 • (805) 461-5000 • FAX 461-7612 151 152 CITY OF ATASCADERO PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION #2006-0020 6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 805/461-5000 Owners: Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Phone: 805-543-3679 Date Posted: Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue, #101, Fresno, CA 93704 Phone: 559-439-9300 Applicant: Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero, CA 93423 Project Title: Precise Plan 2005-0172, Two Single -Family Residences on slopes greater than 10%. Project PPN 2005-0172, 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane, Atascadero, CA 93422 Location: (San Luis Obispo County) APN 030-311-005 & 030-311-002 Project The project consists of an application to construct two single-family houses on two existing lots of Description: record. Both of the residences each total 1,928 square feet with a 744 square foot garage and a 120 Site Plan, Lot 14 square foot deck. The proposed project wilj require approximately 1,300 cubic yards of cut and Attachment 4 - approximately 700 cubic yards of fill on moderate to steep slopes and will incorporate retaining walls. Approximately 62 native trees are proposed for removal and the residences will gain access through a Tree Protection Plan , Lot 14 shared driveway from Chauplin Lane. Attachment 6 - This is a revised proposed mitigated negative declaration and replaces the document previously posted on June 5, 2006. Tree Protection Spreadsheet, Lot 14 General Plan Designation: SFR -Z Attachment 8 - Zoning District: RSF-Z Findings: 1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment. 2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. 3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. 4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. Determination: Based on the above findings, and the information contained in the initial study 2006-0020 (made a part hereof by reference and on file in the Community Development Department), it has been determined that the above project will not have an adverse impact on the environment when the following mitigation measures are incorporated into the project (see attachment). Prepared By: Kerry Margason, Associate Planner Date Posted: February 27, 2007 Public Review Ends: March 18, 2007 Attachments: Attachment 1- Location Map. Attachment 2 - Aerial Attachment 3 - Site Plan, Lot 14 Attachment 4 - Site Plan, Lot 15 Attachment 5 - Tree Protection Plan , Lot 14 Attachment 6 - Tree Protection Plan, Lot 15 Attachment 7 - Tree Protection Spreadsheet, Lot 14 Attachment 8 - Tree Protection Spreadsheet, Lot 15 Attachment 9 - Open Space/Preservation Areas, Lot 14 Attachment 10 - Open Space/Preservation Areas, Lot 15 Attachment 11 — Exhibit A — Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Attachment 12 - Initial Study 2006-0020 File: 2005-0172 ALNDAmd. P= Due: 02R8/0T2:07 PM 6907 EL CAMINO REAL• ATASCADERO, CA 93422 - (805) 461-5000 - FAA 461-7612 • • • C, CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Environmental Review 2006-0020 Owners: Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Phone: 805-543-3679 Address: Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue, #101, Fresno, CA 93704 Phone: 559-439-9300 Applicant: Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero, CA 93423 Project Title: Precise Plan 2005-0172, Two Single -Family Residences on slopes greater than 10°b. Project PPN 2005-0172, 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane, Atascadero, CA 93422 Location: (San Luis Obispo County) APN 030-311-005 & 030-311-002 Project The project consists of an application to co6struct two single-family houses on two existing lots of Description: record. Both of the residences each total 1,928 square feet with a 744 square foot garage and a 120 Surrounding Land Uses and square foot deck. The proposed project will require approximately 1,300 cubic yards of cut and Setting: approximately 700 cubic yards of fill on moderate to steep slopes and will incorporate retaining walls. Approximately 62 native trees are proposed for removal and the residences will gain access through a shared driveway from Chauplin Lane. This is a revised proposed mitigated negative declaration and replaces the document previously Other public agencies posted on .tune S, 2006. whose approval is required General Plan Designation: SFR -Z (e.g., permits, financing approval, or Zoning District: RSF-Z Lead Agency Name and City of Atascadero Address: 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422 Contact Person and Phone Kerry Margason, Associate Planner Number: City of Atascadero 6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 General Plan Designation: Single Family Residential -Z Zoning: Residential Single Family -Z Surrounding Land Uses and North: RSF-Z Setting: South: RSF-Z West: RSF-Z East: RSF-Z Other public agencies None whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) 02/28107 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 153 Attachment 1 Location Map 5225 and 5205 Chauplin Lane Atascadero, CA CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Project Sites J 1 \'� Lot 15 t , ; r r 1 •..,, �< `•� tt f ,l t . r �� Lot 14 •1 !� .. ` � '�� Lot 13 -'' '�,�=`� / / 1 'A 02!28107 154 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MNO.km • 0 Attachment 3 Site Plan - Lot 14 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY 030-311-005 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.KM 02/28/07 156 • • • • 0 L_ J Attachment 4 Site Plan - Lot 15 CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY 030-311-002 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MNO.Kr, 02/NW 157 Attachment 5 Tree Protection Plan Lot 14 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY TREE PROTECT/ON PLAN i� LOT 13 X„/ �V Imo.. - _�i•'� _ Y.. • \ 1'1 •\ � ��A" 1 �.' •e � �/. 1 _ i � 1y. •T t \_�L}�1.-.+� t t` ,mss' CHAUPUN 'AVENUE PPN 2005-0172 Rev,sea and Reposted MND.um 07128/07 158 • • r� • Attachment 6 Tree Protection Plan Lot 15 CITY OFATASCADER0 INITIAL STUDY WE PROTPCROM PLAN p• LEGEND rw W -L- � � ori � - �-7L. � � .. t •` y - ��-e'... : '--•-- � - .✓"rte -,►s' y_Ic-- Y - _..'�'• WZ ,.r 14 � .r �-:.'�"S .a.L r._.� _. � fK= f. �j� aF•...JM%; >�� - r .fit � •y. ��'' / "iQ`_. 'i-r'S- a-, �` t - `^'•_'`� _ ^-j•�1'f �� -� � �` Ips � I}I . �.�' . ..._.:: _-�ti _ '�,•� �.. :. ��i+� +R',K �'rf ..--` - 3_: -� •moi- _ _.._�f: - ,.--L Y.5 tel- i _ _ -� � .�, tl �•- l � �-' ; .1 � M7, � � "� t_�� L �� j , CHAUPUN"AVENUE- PPN 2005-0172 Revisea and Reposted MND.km 0=8/07 159 Attachment 7 Open Space/Preservation Areas Lot 14 CITY OF ATAS CADER O INITIAL STUDY 02!28/07 160 2008-0172 Revised and Reposed MND.Km 0 �J • I* lu • Yfuomr`® a� LEGCN✓ G CITY OF ATASCADERO INMAL STUDY Attachment 8 Open Space/Preservation Areas Lot 15 Open Space Areas TREE PROTECTION PLAN EHAUPUN 1ENUC-NI ' PPN 2005-0172 Rem and Reposted MNO.km 0228107 161 Attachment 9 Tree Protection Plan Spreadsheet Lot 14 02/28/07 162 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY TREE PRO7EC770N AND PRESERVATION PLAN _ ��„®r•r-� TREE LEGEND: Lot 14 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km • • E • • 164 • • • iuta'v� .n Attachment 11 Mitigation Monitoring Proqram CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Exhibit A Timing Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring Program /Monitoring PPN 20Q5-0172 cR.cradrgPa�t BP. &uidrg Peand PS: PiannvVseym BS: Buidkg Semoes TOr Temporary FD: Fn: Depa u nl Ommaq PD: Police Depannent 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Fl: Fnairapecbon CE: CnyEngrieer F0: Final 0mipany W Wastewater CA Cdy AMr-y AMWC: Water Comp. Mitigation Measure 1.c.1: The project shall be conditioned to provide tree preservation easements to ensure that all native trees remaining after construction/development of the sites are not removed/impacted by future property owners and that ample area remains for natural regeneration of the native trees. Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to cpmply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM -10) as contained in sections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the April 2003 Air Quality Handbook. Mitigation Measure 3.b.2: All of the following regulations shall be placed on all grading and construction plans. ` Section 6.3: Construction Equipment • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (Non -taxed version suitable for use off-road). • Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting the ARB's 1996 or newer certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines. Section 6.4: Activity Management Techniques • Develop a comprehensive construction activity management plan designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment operating during any given time period. • Schedule of construction truck trips during non -peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. • Limit the length of the construction workday period, if necessary. • Phase construction activities, if appropriate. Section 6.5: Fugitive PM10 All of the following measures shall be included on grading, demolition and building plan notes: • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. • Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non -potable) water should be used whenever possible. • All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. • Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project re - vegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. • Exposed ground areas that are plann4ed to be reworked at dates greater than PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 02128/07 165 0228/07 166 PPN 2005.0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL S=Y Timing Responsibility Exhibit A /Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Program PPN 2005-0172 GP: Gtt>dirg PerttYM BR &AdM Pertm PS: Plannig Services BS: auidraServces To: Temporary Ory FD: Fire Deponent PD: Poke Depatn ent 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane FI: FF W 9 WK. iryEnyner ww: wastewater cA Ciy A-ey AMWC: Water Cane one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast -germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. • All disturbed soil areas not subject to re -vegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binder, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc, to be paved should be complete as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed_ 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. i • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. • The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and land use clearance for finish grading of any structure. Mitigation Measure 4.c.d.1: An open space easement shall be placed over the drainage swale area prior to building permit issuance to insure buildings and other structures are not placed with the drainage way, the drainage way is not filled in, and there will not be impacts to any riparian resources. This open space easement will also facilitate current wildlife movement patterns and ensure retention of wildlife nursery sites. Mitigation Measure 4.c.2: There shall be no construction within the drainage swale area other than the placement of the culvert under the proposed driveway. All construction in this area shall be on Lot 15 and all activities shall be limited in scope as much as practicable in order to minimize disturbance of the drainage area. Mitigation 4.c.3: All construction activities shall be conducted outside of the rainy season (October 15 to March 15). Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: An open space and tree preservation easement shall be placed over the Coastal Oak woodland areas to insure the trees are not removed in the future. Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: The developer shall have all trees clearly marked in the field and shall call for a field inspection by Community Development staff prior to issuance of any building permits. The developer, construction supervisor, arborist and Community Development staff shall be present during the field inspection. 0228/07 166 PPN 2005.0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km • • (<rnZsoo CITY OF ATASCADERO IMTIAL STUDY Exhibit A Mitigation Monitoring Program PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Timing BP: akrgPmTut TO: Tempwary Ocawq r04peclion Responsibility /Monitoring BS: Buldrog Servm FD: Fre Depatrrenl PD Pda Deparaiwt WJV: Wastevraler WWastenta CA CAyAM ey PMWC: water Camp. Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: The certified arborist shall be responsible for monitoring the project during all phases of construction through project completion, as follows: (a) A written agreement between the arborist and the developer outlining an arborist monitoring schedule for each construction phase through final inspection shall be submitted to and approved by planning staff prior to the issuance of building/grading permits. (b) Arborist shall schedule a pre -construction meeting with engineering /planning staff, grading equipment operators, project superintendent to review the project conditions and requirements prior to any grubbing or earth work for any portion of the project site. All tree protection fencing and trunk protection shall be, installed for inspection during the meeting. Tree protection fencing shall be installed at the line of encroachment into the tree's root zone area. (c) All mitigation measures, as outlined in any updated report shall be closely followed. Mitigation should include the following: ■ Prune all trees in active development areas for structural strength and crown cleaning by a licensed and certified arborist; • Remove all debris and spoils from the lot cleaning and tree pruning. ■ Unless the arborist recommends other mitigation, in locations where paving is to occur within the tree canopy, grub only and do not grade nor compact. Install porous pavers over a three-inch bed of/. inch granite covered with one -inch pea gravel for screeding. If curbs are required, use pegged curbs to secure the porous pavers. Pegged curbs are reinforced six to eight curbs poured at grade with a one -foot by one -foot pothole every four to six linear feet. ■ All trenching or grading within the protected root zone area, outside of the tree protection fence shall require hand trenching to preserve and protect roots that are larger than 2 inches in diameter. • No grading or trenching is allowed within the fenced protected area. ■ Any roots that are 4 inches in diameter or larger are not to be cut until inspected and approved by the on-site arborist. (d) Upon project completion and prior to final occupancy a final status report shall be prepared by the project arborist certifying that the tree protection plan was implemented, the trees designated for protection were protected during construction, and the construction -related tree protection measures are no longer required for tree protection. Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: • All existing trees outside of the limits of work shall remain. • Earthwork shall not exceed the limits of the project area. • Low branches in danger of being tom from trees shall be pruned prior to any heavy equipment work being done. • Vehicles and stockpiled material shall be stored outside the drip line of all trees. • All trees within twenty feet of construction work shall be fenced for protection with 4 -foot chain link, snow or safety fencing placed per the approved tree protection plan. Tree protection fencing shall be in place prior to any site PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 02/28/07 167 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Exhibit A Timing Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring Program /Monitoring PPN 2005-0172 GP: M'`gPwM BuidYg Pertrvl Ps. Pam sem BS: Mcins services TO: Tenor FOr. Fre DePartrnent Opcu y PD: Poke Depar nest 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Fl: Fnal inspection F0 FnalO=Vaxy CE Qi Bgineer WW: Wastewater CA City Atwmey AMWC: Water Comp. excavation or grading. Fencing shall remain in place until completion of all construction activities. • Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be clean cut by hand and sealed with an approved tree seal. • Utilities such as water, gas, power, cable, storm drainage, and sewer should be redirected from under the canopy of any trees that are to remain. • Where a building is placed within the canopy of a tree the foundation should be redesigned so that it bridges across any root systems. • Any foundation or other structure that encroaches within the drip line of trees to be saved shall be dug by hand. At no time shall tree roots be ripped with construction equipment. Mitigation Measure 5.d.1: Should any cultural resources be unearthed during site development work, the provisions of CERA -Section 15064.5, will be followed to reduce impacts to a non-significant level. Mitigation Measure 5.d.2: In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has been contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and to determine if the remains are of Native American heritage. If the remains are of Native American Heritage, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. Mitigation Measure 6.a.1: All construction on site shall comply with the seismic construction standards for Seismic Construction Zone 4 per the California 2001 Building Code. Mitigation Measure 6.b.1: All cut and fill slopes shall be hydro seeded with an appropriate erosion control method (erosion control blanket, hydro -mulch, or straw mulch appropriately anchored) immediately after completion of earthwork between the months of October 15 through April 15. All disturbed slopes shall have appropriate erosion control methods in place. Duration of the project: The contractor will be responsible for the clean up of any mud or debris that is tracked onto public streets by construction vehicles. Mitigation Measure 6.c.d.1: A soils report shall be required to be submitted with a building permit by the building department. The building plans will be required to follow the recommendations of the soils report to assure safety for residents and buildings. Mitigation Measure 11.d.1: All construction activities shall comply with the City of Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation. PPN 20050172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 02128/07 • • • . Attachment 12 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics F-1Agriculture Resources F-1Air Quality F-1 Biological Resources ❑Cultural Resources Geology /Soils F ❑Hazards & Hazardous ❑Hydrology /Water ❑ Land Use /Planning Materials Quality ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. is ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant effect" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. 02/28/07 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposled MND.km MR] CITY OF ATAS CADER O INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: • 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a Lead Agency cites following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached. Other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 02!28!07 170 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km • • • I'auvzo� m' Initial Study 2005-0009 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane 1. AESTHETICS — Would the project: CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? F-1 ❑17 of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not ❑17 prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or agricultural use? F-1quality 17 of the site and its surroundings? El Williamson Act contract? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that ❑ c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of SOURCES: Project Description; Site Pian, Eric J. Gobler Civil Engineering DISCUSSION: 1.a. The proposed project does not obscure a scenic vista. 1.b. The proposed project will not substantially damage scenic resources. Impacts to native trees in the construction area will be mitigated according to the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. The project site is not near a state scenic highway and does not contain a historic structure. The project site will not disturb any rock outcroppings. 1.c. The proposed residences are an infill development and will remain within the character of the surrounding area. However, several native trees will be removed and/or impacted. Open space easements will be required. 1.d. New single-family residences at these two adjoining locations are not expected to generate substantial light or glare. All lighting will be residential in nature. Mitigation Measure 1.c.1: The project shall be conditioned to provide tree preservation easements to ensure that all native trees remaining after construction/development of the sites are not removed/impacted by future property owners and that ample area remains for natural regeneration of the native trees. 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a F-1 El Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? SOURCES: Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION 0228/07 Page 19 PPN 20050172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 171 i 'araav� Initial Study 2005-0009 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No ❑ Significant Significant with Significant Impact ❑ Impact Mitigation Impact air quality plan? Incorporation 2.a. The property is not shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency as prime farmland. 2.b. The property is not under a Williamson Act contract. 2.c. The project will not result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. 3. AIR QUALITY -- The significance criteria established by the Air Quality Control District in its CEQA Guidelines may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable a ❑ ❑ ❑ air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially 1:1to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any ❑ ❑ ❑17 criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutantf-1 L�_Jj Ln_ J f-1 �j F7 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ❑ ❑ of people? SOURCES: Air Pollution Control District (APCD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook DISCUSSION: 3.a.c.) The Air Quality Handbook finds that a project that produces 10 pounds a day of emissions will have a significant effect on air quality. The construction of 35 homes would result in the production of 10 pounds of emissions per day. Therefore, the project's 2 new homes will produce less than ten pounds a day and air quality impacts are considered to be less than significant. 3.b.) Construction activities, including site grading may produce small quantities of air pollution, including dust and equipment exhaust. Any air quality impacts will be temporary and short term. The project shall be conditioned to comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM -10) as contained in sections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the April 2003 Air Quality Handbook. 3.d.e) The construction of single -family -residences and the associated public improvements will not concentrate pollutants. Mitigation Measure 3.b.1: The project shall be conditioned to comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM -10) as contained in sections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the April 2003 Air Quality Handbook. Mitigation Measure 3.b.2: All of the following regulations shall be placed on all grading and construction plans. Section 6.3: Construction Equipment • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (Non -taxed version suitable for use off-road). • Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting the ARB's 1996 or newer certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines. 02!28/07 172 Page 20 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km I� • i awn�o . 0 Initial Study 2005-0009 Potentially Significant PPN 2005-0172 Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane • • CITY OF RTAS CADER 0 INITIAL STUDY Less Than Less Than No Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation Section 6.4: Activity Management Techniques • Develop a comprehensive construction activity management plan designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment operating during any given time period. • Schedule of construction truck trips during non -peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. • Limit the length of the construction workday period, if necessary. • Phase construction activities, if appropriate. Section 6.5: Fugitive PM10 All of the following measures shall be included on grading, demolition and building plan notes: • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. • Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non -potable) water should be used whenever possible. • All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. • Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project re -vegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast -germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. • All disturbed soil areas not subject to re -vegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binder, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc, to be paved should be complete as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. • The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and land use clearance for finish grading of any structure. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ❑ ❑17 through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat F-1 El Elor other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected El wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 02128/07 Page 21 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 173 CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2005-0009 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting F-1 ® 1-1 E biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat17 Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat , conservation plan? SOURCES: Project description, Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Eric Gobler, dated September 2006; Land Use Element EIR; Atascadero Tree Ordinance; Arborist Report prepared by Henry Curtis, dated September 2006; Site Visit 5/22/06. DISCUSSION: 4.a. No sensitive species have been found near the site. 4.b. The project is located near a large, intermittent drainage Swale. However, as designed, construction will not take place within a riparian zone. It will be necessary to place a culvert within the drainage Swale under the driveway in order to provide access to the lots. This is the only area of disturbance in the Swale and it does not appear that riparian vegetation will be impacted. 4.c. There are potential wetlands on the project site in and surrounding the drainage Swale area. As designed, with the shared driveway and placement of the structures, there will be no construction in any areas showing signs of riparian vegetation. 4.d. The Land Use Element EIR concludes that development within the city limits will not have a significant impact on wildlife or wildlife corridors. However, it has been noted that areas of this site do provide a "nursery" for local wildlife. 4.e.f An aborist report and tree protection plan have been submitted. An updated report and field identification shall be conducted prior to issuance of any building permits. Special precautions have been made regarding tree removals and construction around native tree. Mitigation Measure 4.c.d.1: An open space easement shall be placed over the drainage Swale area prior to building permit issuance to insure buildings and other structures are not placed with the drainage way, the drainage way is not filled in, and there will not be impacts to any riparian resources. This open space easement will also facilitate current wildlife movement patterns. Mitigation Measure 4.c.2: There shall be no construction within the drainage Swale area other than the placement of the culvert under the proposed driveway. All construction in this area shall be on Lot 15 and all activities shall be limited in scope as much as practicable in order to minimize disturbance of the drainage area. Mitigation 4.c.3: All construction activities shall be conducted outside of the rainy season (October 15 to March 15). Mitigation Measure 4.e.1: An open space and tree preservation easement shall be placed over the Coastal Oak woodland areas to insure the trees are not removed in the future. Mitigation Measure 4.e.2: The developer shall have all trees clearly marked in the field and shall call for a field inspection by Community Development staff prior to issuance of any building permits. The developer, construction supervisor, arborist and Community Development staff shall be present during the field inspection. Mitigation Measure 4.e.3: The certified arborist shall be responsible for monitoring the project during all phases of 02/26/07 Page 22 PPN 2006.0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 174 • L • CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2005-0009 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane construction through project completion, as follows: (a) A written agreement between the arborist and the developer outlining an arborist monitoring schedule for each construction phase through final inspection shall be submitted to and approved by planning staff prior to the issuance of building/grading permits. (b) Arborist shall schedule a pre -construction meeting with engineering /planning staff, grading equipment operators, project superintendent to review the project conditions and requirements prior to any grubbing or earth work for any portion of the project site. All tree protection fencing and trunk protection shall be installed for inspection during the meeting. Tree.protection fencing shall be installed at the line of encroachment into the tree's root zone area. (c) All mitigation measures, as outlined in any updated report shall be closely followed. Mitigation should include the following: 7* ■ Prune all trees in active development areas for structural strength and crown cleaning by a licensed and certified arborist; • Remove all debris and spoils from the lot cleaning and tree pruning. ` ■ Unless the arborist recommends other mitigation, in locations where paving is to occur within the tree canopy, grub only and do not grade nor compact. Install porous pavers over a three-inch bed of/. inch granite covered with one -inch pea gravel for screeding. If curbs are required, use pegged curbs to secure the porous pavers. Pegged curbs are reinforced six to eight curbs poured at grade with a one -foot by one -foot pothole every four to six linear feet. • All trenching or grading within the protected root zone area, outside of the tree protection fence shall require hand trenching to preserve and protect roots that are larger than 2 inches in diameter. • No grading or trenching is allowed within the fenced protected area. • Any roots that are 4 inches in diameter or larger are not to be cut until inspected and approved by the on-site arborist. (d) Upon project completion and prior to final occupancy a final status report shall be prepared by the project arborist certifying that the tree protection plan was implemented, the trees designated for protection were protected during construction, and the construction -related tree protection measures are no longer required for tree protection. Mitigation Measure 4.e.4: • All existing trees outside of the limits of work shall remain. • Earthwork shall not exceed the limits of the project area. • Low branches in danger of being torn from trees shall be pruned prior to any heavy equipment work being done. • Vehicles and stockpiled material shall be stored outside the drip line of all trees. • All trees within twenty feet of construction work shall be fenced for protection with 4 -foot chain link, snow or safety fencing placed per the approved tree protection plan. Tree protection fencing shall be in place prior to any site excavation or grading. Fencing shall remain in place until completion of all construction activities. • Any roots that are encountered during excavation shall be clean cut by hand and sealed with an approved tree seal. • Utilities such as water, gas, power, cable, storm drainage, and sewer should be redirected from under the canopy of any trees that are to remain. • Where a building is placed within the canopy of a tree the foundation should be redesigned so that it bridges across any root systems. • Any foundation or other structure that encroaches within the drip line of trees to be saved shall be dug by hand. • At no time shall tree roots be ripped with construction equipment. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of 02128/07 Page 23 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 175 Initial Study 2005-0009 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane an archaeological resource pursuant to "15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred 1:1 ❑ ❑ outside of formal cemeteries? SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION: 5.a.b.c.d. No known historical, archeological or cultural sites have been found or documented in the vicinity of the project. Mitigation Measure 5.d.1: Should any cultural resources be unearthed during site development work, the provisions of CEQA -Section 15064.5, will be followed to reduce impacts to a non-significant level. Mitigation Measure 5.d.2: In the event of the accidental discovery or recogniti6n of any human remains, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered ha`s been contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and to determine if the remains are of Native American heritage. If the remains are of Native American Heritage, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems 02/28/07 176 Page 24 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 17 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km Initial Study 2005-0009 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane CITY OFATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element EIR; Site Plan, Eric J. Gobler Civil Engineering DISCUSSION: 6.a. The City of Atascadero is located in the Salinian domain of the Coast Range geomorphic province of California. This domain is relatively quiet in terms of seismic activity. The San Andreas Fault zone lies approximately 30 miles to the west of the City, with the San Simeon-Hosgri Fault about 19 miles to the east. These faults are considered active. In addition, the Rinconada Fault which is considered "potentially active" lies to the southeast and the Nacimiento Fault zone is approximately 3 miles to the west of the City. The Nacimiento Fault is considered inactive. This places the Atascadero community in a "moderate" hazard zone for seismic activity. The project site is not located in an area subject to liquefaction or landslide. 6.b. Construction activities on the site will be required to comply with sedimentation and erosion control measures prescrib by the City Engineer. 6.c.d.e Soil conditions will be reviewed during building permit review in accordance with the municipal code. The property contains no unusual geological formations. Percolation tests are required in the City of Atascadero before building permits for residences can be issued. Mitigation Measure 6.a.1: All construction on site shall comply with the seismic construction standards for Seismic Construction Zone 4 per the California 2001 Building Code. Mitigation Measure 6.b.1: All cut and fill slopes shall be hydro seeded with an appropriate erosion control method (erosion control blanket, hydro -mulch, or straw mulch appropriately anchored) immediately after completion of earthwork between the months of October 15 through April 15. All disturbed slopes shall have appropriate erosion control methods in place. Duration of the project: The contractor will be responsible for the clean up of any mud or debris that is tracked onto public streets by construction vehicles. Mitigation Measure 6.c.d.1: A soils report shall be required to be submitted with a building permit by the building department. The building plans will be required to follow the recommendations of the soils report to assure safety for residents and buildings. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 17 environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely El F-1 El hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan area 02!28107 Page 25 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 177 Initial Study 2005-0009 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, { injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? CITY OFATASCADERO ❑ INITIAL STUDY ❑ Potentially Less Than Less Than No requirements? Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ SOURCES: Project description; General Plan Land Use Element. ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DISCUSSION 7a.b.c. Homes do not generate or involve use of significant amounts of hazardous materials. There are no known hazardous materials on the site or nearby. 7.d. The properties are not a listed hazardous material site. 7e.f. The properties are not near an airport. 7g.h. The site is within the Fire Department's 5 minute or less response area. During building permit review, the fire department will verify appropriate fire hydrant locations. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ ❑ requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ❑ ❑ ❑ substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of previously -existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the siteEl ❑ ❑17 or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site ❑ El Elor area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on - or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the ❑ ❑ ❑ IL, Ell capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems 02128107 178 Page 26 PPN 20050172 Revised and Reposted MND.km • 11 • • Initial Study 2005-0009 PPN 2005-0172 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? I) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ SOURCES: Project description; Flood Insurance Rate Map 060700 0.004; DISCUSSION: 8a. The construction will not violate water quality standards. 8b. The project will not deplete ground water supplies. Water will be provided by Atascadero Mutual Water Company. 8c.d.e.f. All cut and fill during construction shall be subject to review for compliance with City drainage and grading regulations. Drainage will not be permitted to create or intensify any hazards for persons or property in the vicinity. 8.g.h.i. Future housing will be outside of the 100 -year flood hazard area. 8.j. The project area is not subject to inundation by a tsunami. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ❑ 17❑ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or El El ❑ natural community conservation plan? SOURCES: Land Use Element; Circulation Element; project description; Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION: 9.a. The project will not physically divide an established community. The two single-family residences are consistent and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 9.b. The General Plan identifies single-family residential uses as an appropriate use in the Rural Estates land use designation. 9.c. The project is consistent with the open space and conservation policies identified in the General Plan. 02!28/07 Page 27 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 179 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2005-0009 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact ❑ Incorporation 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane ❑ 10. MINERAL RESOURCES —Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important ❑ ❑ 117❑ mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? SOURCES: Project description. DISCUSSION: i 10.a.b. No mining is proposed as a part of this project. No known mineral resources have been identified in the area. 11. NOISE — Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ❑ ❑ ❑1771 excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑17 ground -borne vibration or ground -borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels ❑ ❑ ❑ in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or ❑ where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ❑ ❑ ❑ the project expose people living or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? SOURCES: Project description; Noise Element; Noise Ordinance; Acoustical Design Manual. DISCUSSION: 11a.b.c.d.) Construction is expected to involve some heavy machinery and use of impact tools that make noise. Noise levels on the site are thus expected to be raised temporarily. The future home is not expected to generate unacceptable levels of noise. 11.e.f.) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or private airstrip. Mitigation Measure 11.d.1: All construction activities shall comply with the City of Atascadero Noise Ordinance for hours of operation. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: 02/28/07 Page 28 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km • �J • CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY • Initial Study 2005-0009 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either F-1 7 El directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the El E NJ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? SOURCES: Project description; General Plan Land Use Element. DISCUSSION: 12.a.) Two homes will be built where the general plan projection anticipates approximately two additional houses. 12.b.c.) No housing or persons will be displaced. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically • altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? D Police protection? 0 Schools? El F-1® 71 Parks? El 7 ® F1 Other public facilities? 7 F1 SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION: Development Impact Fees: Development Impact Fees will be required of any new project for which a building permit is issued. The concept of the impact fee program is to fund and sustain improvements which are needed as a result of new development as stated in the General Plan and other policy documents within the fee program. Development Impact Fees fall into the following categories: Drainage; Streets, Roads, Bridges; Sewer, Public Safety; Park, and Miscellaneous Fees. In addition, school fees are collected by the Atascadero Unified School District. The amount of impact fees to be paid will be determined at the time of issuance of building permit. • Fire and Police: Impact fees are charged for new development, to help pay the cost of providing new facilities to serve the expanding City. The Fire Department of the City of Atascadero has indicated that it will be able to adequately service the proposed project. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Fire Department. The City of Atascadero 02128107 Page 29 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km ff-11 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2005-0009 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation Police Department has also indicated that the proposed project poses no problems to the police to adequately service it. Schools: At buildout, the city's population will overburden the existing school system unless additional classroom space is added. The Atascadero Unified School District charges impact fees to fund additional schools as needed. State law restricts mitigation of school impacts to the levying of these fees and other measures adopted by the school district. Provision of adequate facilities for the population is the responsibility of the school district. Fees will be required through construction permits for the residences. Parks: New residences will increase demand on parks and recreation facilities. The City's Parks & Recreation Commission is committed to finding ways to continue to provide parks and other recreational opportunities to City residents as the City expands, thereby addressing cumulative impacts. Other public facilities: The construction is not expected to have, significant impacts on any other public facilities. 14. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of existing 17 neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that . might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? SOURCES: Project description; Parks and Recreation Element. DISCUSSION: 14.a.) Residents are expected to use existing parks and recreational facilities, but the numbers are not expected to result in substantial physical deterioration of any facilities. 14.b.) The project does not involve construction of recreational facilities. 15. TRANS PORTATIONITRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to F-1 D D the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either El El an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature 17 LLI (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? • e) Result in inadequate emergency access? F-1 F� ® 02/28/07 182 Page 30 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MNO.km • r -, CITY OF ATASCADERO INITL4L STUDY Initial Study 2005-0009 Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Less Than Significant No Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation 17 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? F-1 ZXJ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? SOURCES: Land Use Element; Circulation Element; Project Description. DISCUSSION: 15a.b. The Circulation Element (CE) anticipates an increase in development in this area. The CE incorporates mitigation for effects from increased traffic. 15.c. No changes will occur to the air traffic patterns. 15.d. There are no sharp curves or major intersections within the vicinity. 15.e. The project will have adequate emergency access from'Chauplin Road. 151 Adequate parking will be provided on-site for the future residences. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS --Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the El applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 17 wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the F-1 El ❑ Z project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has 1,7 adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? SOURCES: Project description: Land Use Element. DISCUSSION: Water. The Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC) will provide water. All property within the city limits is entitled to water from the AMWC. The project is not expected to require significant quantities of water for the proposed uses. Water is pumped from two portions of the largest underground basin in the county, the Paso Robles Formation, using a series of shallow and deep wells. The water company anticipates that it will be able to meet the city's needs through buildout and beyond: 02128/07 Page 31 PPN 20050172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 183 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY Initial Study 2005-0009 Potentially Less Than Less Than No . Significant Significant with Significant Impact PPN 2005-0172 Impact Mitigation Impact 5225 & 5205 Chauplin Lane Incorporation Water demand at buildout under the LUE is estimated at about 8,500 acre-feet per year (AFY). The total available groundwater supply greatly exceeds demand, according to the findings of the Long -Term Viability of Water study. However, the water company does not currently have the deep wells needed to tap into the total amount needed at buildout. The water company is currently developing plans for installing wells where they will be most effective and will not conflict with water rights of others. According to the Water Company, development of additional wells is expected to keep pace with construction in the City, so that water supply will not be interrupted. Sewer. Both residence will be required to hook up to the City's wastewater facilities. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE — a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, ® • but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects that will ❑ ❑17 cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? DISCUSSION: The project site is an undeveloped residential infill site which is currently being proposed as two single-family residences, consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project has been analyzed as required by CEQA and the Atascadero Municipal Code. Project -related impacts have been identified and mitigation measures have been included within the proposal to reduce the effect of the proposed project as described herein. SOURCES: General Plan Land Use Element, City of Atascadero, 2002 Zoning Ordinance, part of Municipal Code, City of Atascadero, as amended through 1999. Land Use Element Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Crawford, Multari, & Clark, adopted 2002 CEQA Handbook, Air Quality Control District, August 1995 General Plan Safety Element, City of Atascadero, 2002 General Plan Circulation Element, 2002 General Plan Noise Element, adopted 2002 Acoustical Design Manual, Brown-Buntin Associates, 1991 Noise Ordinance, City of Atascadero, 1992 Flood Insurance Rate Map, community -panel number 060700 0004 Trip Generation, Institute of Traffic Engineers PROJECT SOURCES: Project Description Project Plans, Eric J. Gobler Civil Engineering 02/28/07 Page 32 PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km • • • Grading and Drainage Plan, Eric J. Gobler Civil Engineering Tree Protection Plan, Henry Curtis 02128107 Page 33 CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIAL STUDY PPN 2005-0172 Revised and Reposted MND.km 185 • • • 186 is • • ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval Tree Removal - TRP 2006-0094 Conditions of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TRP 2006-0094 /Monitoring Measure PR: P- to PWm l PS: Planning Services BL Business License BS: Building Services BP: Building Permit FD: Fire Department TO: Temporary Occupancy PD: Police Department FO: Final Occupancy CE: City Engineer WW: Wastewater CA., City Momey Planning Services 1. The applicant shall mitigate the removal or impact of PR PS the trees in accordance with the requirements of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. 2. The applicant shall pay all required mitigation fees prior PR/BP PS to any tree removal as shown on exhibit B. 3. During the lot clearing and tree removal period, the Ongoing PS project arborist shall provide weekly reports detailing the project's compliance with the arborist"s recommendations and the conditions of this tree removal permit. If the project is not in compliance, a stop work notice shall immediately be issued and the applicant shall immediately contact staff to discuss bringing the project into compliance. 4. After the lot clearing and tree removal period, the Ongoing PS project arborist shall submit bi-weekly reports discussing the project's compliance with the arborist's recommendations and the conditions of this tree removal permit. 5. Prior to building permit final, an arborist letter and BP/FO PS photographic proof shall be submitted which documents that all root systems for trees #14 and #15 are intact and that all proper mitigation was adhered to during construction. 187 Exhibit C: Native Tree Removal Mitigation Tree Removal - TRP 2006-0094 Date: December 28, 2006 Address: 5105 and 5305 Chauplin Applicant: Don Messer Owner: Burt Polin ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Prepared by: KM Permit #: TRP 2006-0094 (PPN 2005-0172) Telephone: 466-0549 Telephone: (559) 439-9300 NATIVE TREE REMOVAL MiTIGATION Tree protection required? YES Arborist review required? YES Total number of trees impacted: 34 (Lots 13 and 14) not including removals which are listed below 40 (Lot 15) not including removals which are listed below Removals: Number greater than 24"DBH: 0 (Lots 13 and 14) 8 (Lot 15) Number less than 24" DBH: 20 (Lots 13 & 14) 34 (Lot 15) PC Permit Required? Yes Replacements Required: 6.0 Status: in process • • ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 40 Evergreen Native Trees (inches) Deciduous Native Trees (inches) C7 B-1 07/24/07 Totals 855 -inches $ 8,675.00 .0 dbh notes dbh notes 1 14 -inches Tree R-1 (Lots 13&14) 1 16 -inches Tree R-3 (Lots 13&14) 2 14 -inches Tree R-2 (Lots 13&14) 2 16 -inches Tree R-4 (Lots 13&14) 3 8 -inches Tree R-9 (Lots 13&14) 3 14 -inches Tree R-5 (Lots 13&14) 4 5 -inches Tree R-10 (Lots 13&14) 4 5 -inches Tree R-6 (Lots 13&14) 5 15 -inches Tree R-16 (Lots 13&14) 5 5 -inches Tree R-7 (Lots 13&14) 6 18 -inches Tree R-17 (Lots 13&14) 6 5 -inches Tree R-8 (Lots 13&14) 7 4 -inches Tree R-18 (Lots 13&14) 7 12 -inches Tree R-11 (Lots 13&14 8 6 -inches Tree R-12 (Lots 13&14 8 7 -inches Tree R-1 (Lot 15) 9 7 -inches Tree R-13 (Lots 13&14 9 10 -inches Tree R-2 (Lot 15) 10 10 -inches Tree R-14 (Lots 13&14 10 20 -inches Tree R-3 (Lot 15) 11 12 -inches Tree R-15 (Lots 13&14 11 12 -inches Tree R-4 (Lot 15) 12 4 -inches Tree R-19 (Lots 13&14 12 8 -inches Tree R-5 (Lot 15) 13 7 -inches Tree R-20 (Lots 13&14 13 29 -inches Tree R-6 (Lot 15) 14 12 -inches Tree R-7 (Lot 15) 14 6 -inches Tree R-20 (Lot 15) 15 22 -inches Tree R-8 (Lot 15) 15 11 -inches Tree R-21 (Lot 15) 16 26 -inches Tree R-9 (Lot 15) 16 6 -inches Tree R-24 (Lot 15) 17 19 -inches Tree R-10 (Lot 15) 17 5 -inches Tree R-25 (Lot 15) 18 10 -inches Tree R-11 (Lot 15) 18 10 -inches Tree R-26 (Lot 15) 19 6 -inches Tree R-12 (Lot 15) 19 13 -inches Tree R-28 (Lot 15) 20 15 -inches Tree R-13 (Lot 15) 20 6 -inches Tree R-29 (Lot 15) 21 14 -inches Tree R-14 (Lot 15) 21 4 -inches Tree R-38 (Lot 15) 22 14 -inches Tree R-15 (Lot 15) 22 6 -inches Tree R-41 (Lot 15) 23 31 -inches Tree R-16 (Lot 15) 24 20 -inches Tree R-17 (Lot 15) 25 42 -inches Tree R-18 (Lot 15) 26 34 -inches Tree R-19 (Lot 15) 27 16 -inches Tree R-22 (Lot 15) 28 8 -inches Tree R-23 (Lot 15) 29 22 -inches Tree R-27 (Lot 15) 30 36 -inches Tree R-30 (Lot 15) 31 10 -inches Tree R-31 (Lot 15) 32 30 -inches Tree R-32 (Lot 15) 33 18 -inches Tree R-33 (Lot 15) 34 14 -inches Tree R-34 (Lot 15) 35 10 -inches Tree R-35 (Lot 15) 36 34 -inches Tree R-36 (Lot 15) 37 12 -inches Tree R-37 (Lot 15) 38 10 -inches Tree R-39 (Lot 15) 39 4 -inches Tree R-40 (Lot 15) 40 16 -inches Tree R-42 (Lot 15) Total 669 -inches Total 186 -inches Mitigation Requirement Tree Fund Payment: $ 5,575.00 Tree Fund Payment: $ 3,100.00 C7 B-1 07/24/07 Totals 855 -inches $ 8,675.00 .0 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Exhibit D: Tree Preservation/Conservation/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement TRP 2006-0094 Chauplin Lane, Lot 14 Easement 1 Lot 14 TRU PRQrECT10N PLAN LOT ? ,mom LOT 13 LOT'14 c, • UGEND 190 I—] • • ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Exhibit D: Tree Preservation/Conservation/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement TRP 2006-0094 Chauplin Lane, Lot 15 Easement 3 Lot 15 TREE PROTECTION PLAN 191 ITEM NUMBER: B -1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 5: Draft Resolution B - Denying the Appeal of the Planning Commission DRAFT RESOLUTION B A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DENYING APPEAL 2007-0012 AND APPEAL 2007-0013 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT LOCATED AT 5105 AND 5305 CHAUPLIN LANE AND CERTIFICATION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2006-0020 (APL 2007-0012 & APL 2007-0013: Clay/Messer/Finch/Polin) WHEREAS, an appeal (APL 2007-0012) of the Planning Commission's action to approve an application for Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to mitigation measures has been received from Jerry Clay, Sr., Council member 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero California 93422; and, • WHEREAS, an appeal (APL 2007-0013) of the Planning Commission's action to approve • an application for Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to mitigation measures has been received from Don Messer, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero, California 93423, Michael Finch, 6445 N. Palm Avenue, No. 101, Fresno, California 93704 and Burt Polin, 147 Los Cerros Drive, San Luis Obispo, California 93405; and, WHEREAS, Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 requested the removal of sixty-two (62) native trees located at 5105 and 5305 Chauplin Lane; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project site is located within the Single Family Residential land use designation of the City of Atascadero's General Plan Land Use Diagram; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project site is located in the Residential Single Family — Z zoning district; and, WHEREAS; the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Tree Removal application on April 3, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall located at 6907 El Camino Real and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicant, and the public; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the necessary findings for native tree removal could be made as the project was designed and approved the tree removal request subject to mitigation measures, as stated in the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance; and, • 192 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 WHEREAS, the City Council heard the appeals, as filed by Mr. Clay, Mr. Messer, Mr. • Finch and Mr. Polin on July 24, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicant, and the public; and, WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the necessary findings for native tree removal could be made based on the project design with modified mitigation measures as follows: WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0020 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 the project will have no significant impacts with project specific mitigation measures as modified and incorporated; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing on July 24, 2007, following the close of the review period, to consider the Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration; and, NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, hereby resolves to certify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 based on the following Findings, and as shown in Exhibit A: 0 1. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and, 2. The Proposed Mitigated 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, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council takes the following actions: 193 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 SECTION 1. Denial of Appeal. The City Council denies the appeals of Mr. Clay, Sr., Mr. Messer and Mr. Finch, and upholds the Planning Commission's approval of Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 and finds as follows: The trees are obstructing proposed improvements that cannot be reasonably designed to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified by a report from the Site Planner and determined by the Community Development Department based on the following factors: • Early consultation with the City; • Consideration of practical design alternatives; • Provision of cost comparisons (from applicant) for practical design alternatives; • If saving tree eliminates all reasonable uses of the property; or • If saving the tree requires the removal of more desirable trees. SECTION 2. Certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0020. The City Council hereby certifies Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 based on Findings and subject to mitigation measures. SECTION 2. Approval. The City Council hereby approves Tree Removal Permit 2006-0094 subject to the following Conditions and Exhibits: Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0020 Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval, Mitigation Measures Exhibit C: Tree Fee Table Exhibit D: Tree Preservation/Conservation/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement 194 u ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 1�1 Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney • CITY OF ATASCADERO Dr. George Luna, Mayor 195 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0020 Refer to Mitigated Negative Declaration attached to Draft Resolution A. 196 r� • • • ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval Tree Removal - TRP 2006-0094 Conditions of Approval Timing Responsibility Mitigation TRP 2006-0094 (Monitoring Measure PR:P—to Removal PS: Planning Services BL: Business License BS: Building Services BP: Building Pemdt FD: Fire Department TO: Tenparary Occupancy PD: Police Department F0: Final Occupancy CE: City Engineer WW: Wastewater CA City Attorney Planning Services 1. The applicant shall mitigate the removal or impact of PR PS the trees in accordance with the requirements of the Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. 2. The applicant shall pay all required mitigation fees prior PR/BP PS to any tree removal as shown on exhibit B. 3. During the lot clearing and tree removal period, the Ongoing PS project arborist shall provide weekly reports detailing the project's compliance with the arborist"s recommendations and the conditions of this tree removal permit. If the project is not in compliance, a stop work notice shall immediately be issued and the applicant shall immediately contact staff to discuss bringing the project into compliance. 4. After the lot clearing and tree removal period, the Ongoing PS project arborist shall submit bi-weekly reports discussing the project's compliance with the arborist's recommendations and the conditions of this tree removal permit. 5. Prior to building permit final, an arborist letter and BP/FO PS photographic proof shall be submitted which documents that all root systems for trees #14 and #15 are intact and that all proper mitigation was adhered to during construction. 197 Exhibit C: Native Tree Removal Mitigation Tree Removal - TRP 2006-0094 Date: December 28, 2006 Address: 5105 and 5305 Chauplin Applicant: Don Messer Owner: Burt Polin ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Prepared by: KM Permit #: TRP 2006-0094 (PPN 2005-0172) Telephone: 466-0549 Telephone: (559) 439-9300 NATIVE TREE REMOVAL MITIGATION Tree protection required? YES Arborist review required? YES Total number of trees impacted: 34 (Lots 13 and 14) not including removals which are listed below 40 (Lot 15) not including removals which are listed below Removals: Number greater than 24"DBH: 0 (Lots 13 and 14) 8 (Lot 15) Number less than 24" DBH: 20 (Lots 13 & 14) 34 (Lot 15) PC Permit Required? Yes Status: in process Replacements Required: 198 • I� �1 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 0 Evergreen Native Trees (inches) Deciduous Native Trees (inches) • B-1 07/24/07 Totals 855 -inches $ 8,675.00 199 dbh notes dbh notes 1 14 -inches Tree R-1 (Lots 13&14) 1 16 -inches Tree R-3 (Lots 13&14) 2 14 -inches Tree R-2 (Lots 13&14) 2 16 -inches Tree R-4 (Lots 13&14) 3 8 -inches Tree R-9 (Lots 13&14) 3 14 -inches Tree R-5 (Lots 13&14) 4 5 -inches Tree R-10 (Lots 13&14) 4 5 -inches Tree R-6 (Lots 13&14) 5 15 -inches Tree R-16 (Lots 13&14) 5 5 -inches Tree R-7 (Lots 13&14) 6 18 -inches Tree R-17 (Lots 13&14) 6 5 -inches Tree R-8 (Lots 13&14) 7 4 -inches Tree R-18 (Lots 13&14) 7 12 -inches Tree R-11 (Lots 13&14 8 6 -inches Tree R-12 (Lots 13&14 8 7 -inches Tree R-1 (Lot 15) 9 7 -inches Tree R-13 (Lots 13&14 9 10 -inches Tree R-2 (Lot 15) 10 10 -inches Tree R-14 (Lots 13&14 10 20 -inches Tree R-3 (Lot 15) 11 12 -inches Tree R-15 (Lots 13&14 11 12 -inches Tree R-4 (Lot 15) 12 4 -inches Tree R-19 (Lots 13&14 12 8 -inches Tree R-5 (Lot 15) 13 7 -inches Tree R-20 (Lots 13&14 13 29 -inches Tree R-6 (Lot 15) 14 12 -inches Tree R-7 (Lot 15) 14 6 -inches Tree R-20 (Lot 15) 15 22 -inches Tree R-8 (Lot 15) 15 11 -inches Tree R-21 (Lot 15) 16 26 -inches Tree R-9 (Lot 15) 16 6 -inches Tree R-24 (Lot 15) 17 19 -inches Tree R-10 (Lot 15) 17 5 -inches Tree R-25 (Lot 15) 18 10 -inches Tree R-11 (Lot 15) 18 10 -inches Tree R-26 (Lot 15) 19 6 -inches Tree R-12 (Lot 15) 19 13 -inches Tree R-28 (Lot 15) 20 15 -inches Tree R-13 (Lot 15) 20 6 -inches Tree R-29 (Lot 15) • 21 14 -inches Tree R-14 (Lot 15) 21 4 -inches Tree R-38 (Lot 15) 22 14 -inches Tree R-15 (Lot 15) 22 6 -inches Tree R-41 (Lot 15) 23 31 -inches Tree R-16 (Lot 15) 24 20 -inches Tree R-17 (Lot 15) 25 42 -inches Tree R-18 (Lot 15) 26 34 -inches Tree R-19 (Lot 15) 27 16 -inches Tree R-22 (Lot 15) 28 8 -inches Tree R-23 (Lot 15) 29 22 -inches Tree R-27 (Lot 15) 30 36 -inches Tree R-30 (Lot 15) 31 10 -inches Tree R-31 (Lot 15) 32 30 -inches Tree R-32 (Lot 15) 33 18 -inches Tree R-33 (Lot 15) 34 14 -inches Tree R-34 (Lot 15) 35 10 -inches Tree R-35 (Lot 15) 36 34 -inches Tree R-36 (Lot 15) 37 12 -inches Tree R-37 (Lot 15) 38 10 -inches Tree R-39 (Lot 15) 39 4 -inches Tree R-40 (Lot 15) 40 16 -inches Tree R-42 (Lot 15) Total 669 -inches Total 186 -inches Mitigation Requirement Tree Fund Payment: $ 5,575.00 Tree Fund Payment: $ 3,100.00 • B-1 07/24/07 Totals 855 -inches $ 8,675.00 199 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Exhibit D: Tree Preservation/Conservation/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement TRP 2006-0094 Chauplin Lane, Lot 14 7Eif_E PROTECTION PLAN Easement 1 Lot 14 tGf ND LO 1 L07 13 .. o s w CHAUPLIN AVENU . 200 lei ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Exhibit Q: Tree Preservation/Conservation/Wildlife Corridor Open Space Easement TRP 200"094 Chauplin Lane, Lot 15 Easement 3 Lot 15 .7 ----- - - - - -- -- 'HAUF-1P. ti/Lr,:uH �J 555 201 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 6 Planning Commission Staff Report April 3, 2007 Atascadero Planning Commission Staff Report - Community Development Department Tree Removal Permit TRP 2006-0094 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane Messer/Polin/Finch (030-311-005 & 030-311-002) SUBJECT: A request to remove sixty-two (62) existing native trees totaling 855 inches dbh for the construction of two single-family residence and a shared driveway. RECOMMENDATION: Staff Recommends: The Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC 2007-0023 to approve the request to remove sixty-two (62) native oak trees subject to the guidelines and mitigation required by the Atascadero Municipal Code and Native Tree Ordinance. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant Don Messer Construction, P.O. Box 1958, Atascadero, CA 93423 Owners: Burt Polin, 147 Los Ceritos Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 J. Michael Finch, 6445 No Palm Ave. #101 Fresno, CA 93704 202 • is • ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 2. Certified Arborist: Henry Curtis, Consulting Arborist, 5456 Bolsa, Atascadero 3. Project Address: 5105 & 5305 Chauplin Lane, Atascadero, CA 93422 APN: 030-311-002 & 030-311-005 4. General Plan Designation: Single Family Residential (SFR -Z) 5. Zoning District: Residential Single Family (RSF-Z) 6. Site Area: 4.042 Acres 7. Existing Use: Vacant Land 8. Environmental Status: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2006-0020 Background: The project is a request for native tree removal on two (2) existing lots of record. The lots were originally created with the original 1913 Atascadero Colony Map and are moderately to steeply sloping with heavy tree cover. A large drainage swale fronts the property and runs along Chauplin Lane. The applicant has applied for Precise Plan approval which includes a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Two lots will have a shared driveway from Chauplin and a three bedroom two bath house will be built on each lot. Analysis: The applicant has discussed alternative designs with staff for this property, which included developing the lots with individual access driveways. It was determined that individual access to the lots would result in greater impacts to the drainage swale, native vegetation, and wildlife corridors. The possibility of moving the houses down the hill and closer to the road was explored by dropped due to the impacts to the drainage course. NATIVE TREES REMOVALS The project is proposing the removal of forty blue oak and twenty-two live oak trees are proposed for removal totaling 855 inches dbh (669 inches of evergreen Live Oak trees and 186 inches of deciduous Blue Oak trees). Another seventy-four trees will be impacted. Impacts range from 5% to 40% of the protected drip line zone. Tree protection fencing will be installed, and City Staff requires a preconstruction meeting between the project applicant, arborist, and site grading contractor. The project arborist will be required to be present when grading is being done within the drip line of the oak trees to ensure that all roots are carefully dug, clean cut, and sealed properly. • 203 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 MITIGATION As mitigation for tree removal and environmental impacts, Staff is recommending that portions of the property will be placed in tree preservation/conservation and wildlife corridor easements as shown on Exhibit C attached to the draft resolution. The applicant will be required to pay tree mitigation fees according to the Native Tree Mitigation Table shown in Exhibit B attached to the draft resolution. Fee payment will be required prior to issuance of building permits, however the applicant may plant native trees after construction and receive a refund of a portion of the mitigation fees. findings: Pursuant to the Tree Ordinance (Ordinance No. 214), "...decisions on native tree removals of 24 -inch dbh-size or larger shall be made by the Planning Commission." In considering any Tree Removal Permit request, at least one of the findings must be made. Staff has identified finding (v) as appropriate for the application request: (v). Trees proposed for removal are obstructing proposed improvements that could not be reasonably designed to avoid the need for tree removal, as certified by a report from the Site Planner and determined by the Community Development Department based on the following factors: • Early consultation with the City; • • Consideration of practical design alternatives; • Provision of cost comparisons (from applicant) for practical design alternatives; • If saving tree eliminates all reasonable uses of the property, or • If saving the tree requires the removal of more desirable trees. 0 204 • • • ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Easement Areas GHAUVut-1 AVLNU 111 4 6 205 TRCC FR'CTIDN P N g FA Cp}I el APF / t i1Cfh'P , a A. S 7F LOT 13 y ?Esi GHAUVut-1 AVLNU 111 4 6 205 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 07/24/07 1: • • • ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Conclusion: The Planning Commission has final authority on the Tree Removal Permit. The Commission may require the applicant to replant native trees, pay mitigation fees or a combination of replanting and payment. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Refer back to staff for additional options & review. 2. Deny request. 3. Approve project with modifications. PREPARED BY: Kerry Margason, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Aerial Photo Attachment 2: Site Plan Attachment 3: Tree Protection Spreadsheets Attachment 4: Draft Resolution PC 2007-0023 Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval & Tree Fee Table Exhibit B: Tree Protection Plan & Tree Index Exhibit C: Tree Preservation/Conservation, Wildlife Corridor Easement Areas 0 U iOT, '14 b y . ?4 ' y :v' ✓' -q—ohl �p�''.` e„t, ,' • g ,•y�✓m�ap. ar � l 'p'.IitS I eA'Sorojec k''Y'T," �. f. Sites.fir,` ` Hyl krhCttin? :.�. Cf.:f�'., �'. 1� ,... •~•-,.j� l�.n,.4 �i:+i!� A..)Ar Rt!1S7 L•4>M1' A.�.'.Dk f � i�k�"'p �, H t k" gip. •, a�",n�"'�pyr a h i irikrr-, yr z."ygvcly �g y q, �54 d ? ibF+�37:"ti_ h t W`.f , _ x�sr. ,, •i'Y11,-+4 ILL 1W f� . R-awa a L�Oy�$'Tpr y�rN ..aR K'- y�l,. p4 ,. -1 + JaAh {y T ,Jf' tilAN c-] Attachment 2: Site Plan - Entire Site 4 t t i !. .W, OUR, WMW7 i dOWU !UM Ell-' J 9[7114.ER w w. asw • ww r.�...•.� ��� yyyy,,�d„y�,i y.. w ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 V7: 209 II � r 1 e ■ 0.1 1{ Iii. I i t..- � r � 14 ,I • k1 4 V7: 209 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Attachment 2: Site Plan — Lot 14 TMa r, Ilk 11 I � I '4 • "• � I lily oE'��, �; �� �? �� �g r4 I � + •� ��Ilk Iii Ii� 'i � i c„ .� a�, Lp I A4 4 1w • � � P I i 1�: � I � r� � • "?iii .' �5� � ; PoI Q „ litr 3 •�v o' 0 p"t' i ua t a t. or k_ ev 4. w d x wmurf.,w+w+w, * mow MA � I d�3�£R CIJI�STP.II['i1�FJ Ri��'s � -•- m`m.- ry L`TjT. •f r4MRi31f d"f'MRi: +,T.Yi41�9k>FV�YMiI� 210 • is • • • • Attachment 2: Site Plan - Lot 15 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 211 I log >� I 211 Attachment 3: Tree Protection Spreadsheets f197 7J-76'+�Py' .iiulR4'�tEt'� 7�t` �i41Ii2:1_,Z,9(�„',r it wu.e w. 4.......".a€... 212 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 w,. d ww r YID"SWR' '+Y .. -u�s9n M/+q wHL.r Ilr -- yrlr Yw� .n a..<. v i-( �a4vrt6A. wIt rniu. M iM 1�YI�i1M5iw iT.w Nv. lug +I¢. ,K4Yri"�7 8 ��.CFCrti TR'fr 'N9vY fi'�f F r 101 01 * I f Y j =11-M1.5 R.R+"ILP TFFF 6AWA F,ftl V TO .20 AIV r.. r ...° �"w♦ � .� u"a°" `�.' . M j �, � "",'""' f f ��, m::� way •. f197 7J-76'+�Py' .iiulR4'�tEt'� 7�t` �i41Ii2:1_,Z,9(�„',r it wu.e w. 4.......".a€... 212 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 w,. d ww r YID"SWR' '+Y .. -u�s9n M/+q wHL.r Ilr -- yrlr Yw� .n a..<. v i-( �a4vrt6A. wIt rniu. M iM 1�YI�i1M5iw iT.w Nv. lug +I¢. ,K4Yri"�7 8 ��.CFCrti TR'fr 'N9vY fi'�f F r 101 01 * I 0 40 Attachment 3: Tree Protection Spreadsheets ITEM NUMBER: B -1 DATE: 07124/07 .. ....... ..... . ....... .. T nT— Pt E==- ITEM NUMBER: B -1 DATE: 07124/07 213 .. ....... ..... . ....... .. T nT— 213 .. ....... ..... . ....... .. 213 • • 214 • Atascadero City Council Staff Report — Fire Department ITEM NUMBER: B - 2 DATE: 07/24/07 Confirming the Cost of Vegetative Growth and/or Refuse Abatement (Request confirmation of abatement costs.) RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt of the Draft Resolution, confirming the cost of vegetative growth (weeds) and/or refuse (rubbish) abatement. DISCUSSION: On April 24, 2007 Council adopted Resolution No. 2007-015, declaring vegetative growth and/or refuse a public nuisance, and authorized the Fire Chief to proceed with the abatement process. On April 24, 2007 notices were mailed to property owners, informing them of the City's abatement requirements. On May 8, 2007 a Public Hearing was held and Jack R. Bridwell was awarded the contract for abatement of parcels which are not in compliance upon arrival following the June 1, 2007 deadline. An itemized list of the abatement assessments were, by fiscal year, posted with the City Clerk and at the Fire Department — Station #1 on April 11, 2007. A total of 84 parcels were abated. FISCAL IMPACT: No direct fiscal impact. The contractor costs for the 2007 weed abatement / refuse abatement totals are $23,125.00 with $15,637.50 recovered through assessments placed on the 2007-2008 property tax bills. ALTERNATIVES: No alternative recommended. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution Abatement Assessments FY 06/07 215 DRAFT RESOLUTION • RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE COST OF VEGETATIVE GROWTH/REFUSE ABATEMENT WHEREAS, the Government Code of the State of California, Section 39500, et seq., provides that cities may declare vegetative growth (weeds) and refuse (rubbish) a public nuisance for the purpose of vegetative growth (weeds) and refuse (rubbish) abatement; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero City Fire Department did abate said nuisances within the provision of the Government Code, Section 39500, et seq.; and WHEREAS, the cost of the work of abatement, including a 150% administrative fee, as shown on the Preliminary Special Tax Listing for 2007/2008 Tax Roll was submitted in accordance with Government Code Section 39574; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero received the cost report and held a hearing to receive objections of any property owners liable to be assessed for the work of abatement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Atascadero SECTION 1. That the report of abatement costs is confirmed as presented; and SECTION 2. That the costs of abatement constitutes a special assessment against the described parcels and shall be a lien on the property in accordance with Government Code Section 39577; and SECTION 3. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit to the proper officials of the County, a copy of the report for filing. 216 • On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., 40 City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney • Dr. George Luna, Mayor 217 ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS FY 2006-07 Book 29 06/15/07 029-024-014 150.00 225.00 375.00 2.00 377.00 Date of 029-131-033 Contractor Admin Total Cost of County tal "NoP =Abatement APN Cost Fee Abatement Fee Assessment Book 29 06/15/07 029-024-014 150.00 225.00 375.00 2.00 377.00 06/10/07 029-131-033 325.00 487.50 812.50 2.00 814.50 06/10/07 029-161-012 325.00 487.50 812.50 2.00 814.50 06/10/07 029-171-003 325.00 487.50 812.50 2.00 814.50 06/15/07 029-222-018 150.00 225.00 375.00 2.00 377.00 06/11/07 029-322-012 250.00 375.00 625.00 2.00 627.00 Total (Book 29 $ 1,525.00 $ 2,287.50 1 $ 3,812.50 1 $ 12.00 $ 3,824.50 Book 30 06/09/07 030-061-055 325.00 487.50 812.50 2.00 814.50 06/09/07 030-511-001 325.00 487.50 812.50 2.00 814.50 06/09/07 030-512-002 200.00 300.00 500.00 2.00 502.00 06/09/07 030-512-008 275.00 412.50 687.50 2.00 689.50 6.00 $ 2,256.00 Total (Book 30 $ 1,125.00 $ 1,687.50 $ 2,812.50 $ 8.00 1 $ 2,820.50 Book 31 06/14/07 031-062-006 75.00 1 12.50 187.50 2.00 189.50 06/14/07 031-062-021 75.00 112.50 187.50 2.00 189.50 06/14/07 031-062-022 75.00 112.50 187.50 2.00 189.50 06/13/07 031-124-001 225.00 337.501 562.501 2.00 564.50 06/14/07 031-241-019 250.00 375.00 625.00 2.00 627.00 Total (Book 31 $ 700.00 1 $ 1,050.00 1 $ 1,750.00 1 $ 10.00 1 $ 17760.00 Book 49 06/13/07 049-112-018 350.00 525.00 875.00 2.00 877.00 06/13/07 049-112-019 400.00 600.00 1,000.00 2.00 1,002.00 06/15/07 049-122-028 150.00 225.00 375.00 2.00 377.00 Total (Book 49 $ 900.00 $ 1,350.00 $ 2,250.00 $ 6.00 $ 2,256.00 Book 50 06/07/07 06/07/07 218 050-021-037 $ 325.00 $ 487.50 $ 812.50 $ 2.00 $ 814.50 050-021-039 $ 200.00 $ 300.00 $ 500.00 $ 2.00 $ 502.00 • E • • • ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS FY 2006-07 Date of 050-031-051 Contractor Admin Total Cost of County Total Abatement APN Cost Fee Abatement Fee Assessment 06/08/07 050-031-051 $ 75.00 $ 112.50 $ 187.50 $ 2.00 $ 189.50 06/07/07 050-091-021 $ 325.00 $ 487.50 $ 812.50 $ 2.00 $ 814.50 06/07/07 050-101-001 $ 325.00 $ 487.50 $ 812.50 $ 2.00 $ 814.50 06/08/07 050-151-011 $ 200.00 $ 300.00 $ 500.00 $ 2.00 $ 502.00 06/07/07 050-162-011 $ 200.00 $ 300.00 $ 500.00 $ 2.00 $ 502.00 06/07/07 050-162-016 $ 200.00 $ 300.00 $ 500.00 $ 2.00 $ 502.00 06/08/07 050-191-004 $ 625.00 $ 937.50 $ 1,562.50 $ 2.00 $ 1,564.50 06/14/07 050-262-020 $ 200.00 $ 300.00 $ 500.00 $ 2.00 $ 502.00 06/07/07 050-312-009 $ 275.00 $ 412.50 $ 687.50 $ 2.00 $ 689.50 06/07/07 050-312-013 $ 250.00 $ 375.00 $ 625.00 $ 2.00 $ 627.00 06/07/07 050-312-017 $ 250.00 $ 375.00 $ 625.00 $ 2.00 $ 627.00 06/08/07 050-341-006 $ 250.00 $ 375.00 $ 625.00 $ 2.00 $ 627.00 06/07/07 050-361-005 $ 250.00 $ 375.00 $ 625.00 $ 2.00 $ 627.00 06/07/07 050-362-006 $ 275.00 $ 412.50 $ 687.50 $ 2.00 $ 689.50 Book 54 06/15/07 06/12/07 Total (Book 50 $ 4,225.00 1 $ 6,337.50 1 $ 10,562.50 1 $ 32.00 1 $ 10,594.50 054-231-039 $ 250.00 $ 375.00 $ 625.00 $ 2.00 $ 627.00 054-334-001 $ 375.00 $ 562.50 $ 937.50 $ 2.00 $ 939.50 Total (Book 54 $ 625.00 1 $ 937.50 1 $ 1,562.50 1 $ 4.00 1 $ 1,566.50 Book 55 200.00 300.00 500.00 2.00 502.00 06/12/07 055-181-008 $ 200.00 $ 300.00 $ 500.00 $ 2.00 $ 502.00 06/12/07 055-252-005 $ 400.00 $ 600.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 2.00 $ 1,002.00 06/12/07 055-341-002 $ 150.00 $ 225.00 $ 375.00 $ 2.00 $ 377.00 Total (Book 55 $ 750.00 1 $ 1,125.00 1 $ 1,875.00 1 $ 6.00 1 $ 1,881.00 Book 56 06/07/07 056-312-007 200.00 300.00 500.00 2.00 502.00 06/12/07 056-322-024 225.00 337.50 562.50 2.00 564.50 06/15/07 056-402-014 150.00 225.00 375.00 2.00 377.00 Total (Book 56 $ 575.00 $ 862.50 S 1,437.50 $ 6.00 $ 1,443.50 Grand Total $ 10,425.00 $ 15,637.50 S 26,062.50 $ 84.00 S 26,146.50 219 • • • 220 ITEM NUMBER: C - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - City Clerk Referendum Petition Concerning Creek Setbacks Resolution No. 2007-022 General Plan Amendment #2006-0017 (Council to decide whether to repeal General Plan Amendment or call for an election.) RECOMMENDATIONS: Council: 1. Receive the Certificate of Sufficiency from the City Clerk, certifying the "Referendum Against a Resolution Passed by the City Council, Resolution #2007-022," that was filed with the City Clerk on June 7, 2007; and, 2. Take one of the following actions: a. Adopt Draft Resolution A, to repeal Resolution No. 2007-022, removing the General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, which amended the Land Use, Open Space, and Conservation Element of the Atascadero General Plan; and give staff direction on how the City Council wants to proceed on a permanent creek setback ordinance; or, b. Adopt Draft Resolution B, to call for an election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the ballot measure election with the next general municipal election on November 4, 2008; or, c. Adopt Draft Resolution B, to call for a Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the Special Election with the February 5, 2008 Presidential Primary; or, d. Adopt Draft Resolution B, to call for a Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the Special Election with the June 3, 2008 Statewide Direct Primary; or, e. Adopt Draft Resolution C, to call for a stand-alone Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to schedule the stand-alone Special Election on a date specific, not less than 88 days from July 24, 2007 (October 21, 2007 and beyond), and on a Tuesday. 221 ITEM NUMBER: C - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 DISCUSSION: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2007-022, approving General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, amending the Land Use, Open Space, and Conservation Element of the Atascadero General Plan. This General Plan Amendment consisted of text amendments to the portions of the General Plan concerning setbacks along creek reservations, blueline creeks, and the Salinas River. Referendum is defined as the power of the voters to nullify an ordinance or resolution adopted by a legislative body. Proponents of a referendum must circulate the petition protesting the adoption of the ordinance or resolution within 30 days of the adoption. The referendum petition must be signed by not less than 10 percent of the registered voters of the City. The number of registered voters is determined by the San Luis Obispo County Clerk/Recorder's last official report of registration to the Secretary of State. The number of registered voters for the City of Atascadero, as per the report of registration to the Secretary of State, is 16,108. Therefore, a referendum petition needs 1,611 (10%) valid signatures to be sufficient. Proponents circulated the "Referendum Against a Resolution Passed by the City Council, Resolution #2007-022" (Creek Setback Petition) and submitted it to the City Clerk on June 7, 2007. The California Elections Code (CEC) reauires that the signatures be verified. The Petition contained an unofficial prima facie count of 2,505 signatures. Due to a few invalid circulators, the count was reduced to 2,424. The number of signatures reviewed was 2,106. The number of signatures found to be insufficient was 478, and the number of signatures found to be sufficient was 1,628. The CEC states that if the City Clerk finds the petition to be sufficient, she shall certify the results to the City Council. The City Council is to accept the Certificate of Sufficiency and take one of the following two actions: ■ Repeal the Resolution o Repeal of the Resolution prevents the amended language from taking effect in the General Plan. The City Council cannot adopt the same Resolution for a period of one year after the date of its repeal. o If the proposed General Plan Amendment does not go into effect then the existing General Plan Policy 8.2 will remain. Since the existing policy included a sunset date that has expired, General Policy 8.2.2. will revert back to the original 2002 standard (see policy below). The 2002 policy provided for an interim 20foot setback along Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek measured from the creek reservation. Boulder Creek will be considered a fork of Graves Creek and subject to the 20foot setback consistent with the 2002 General Plan Land Use Diagram. The General Plan language after the sunset clause expires is listed below: 222 C7 • ITEM NUMBER DATE: 2007 General Plan Language after Sunset Clause Expires C-1 07/24107 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 Atascadero 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. 2. Prior to adoption of a creek setback ordinance an interim 35 2Q -foot creek setback shall be in effect along Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek . All other 7.5 min USGS quadrangle blue line creeks shall have an interim 20 -foot setback. The interim setbacks shall be subject to the following: a) On Atascadero Creek and Graves Creek setbacks shall be measured from the edge of the creek reservation. b) All other blue line 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. If the City Council decides to repeal the Resolution, staff will ask for direction on how the Council wants to proceed on a permanent creek setback ordinance. Call for an election o Any election must be not less than 88 days after the call for an election by the City Council, and must be scheduled on a Tuesday. o The City Council has four options if they call for an election: 1. Call for an election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the ballot measure election with the next general municipal election on November 4, 2008; or, 2. Call for a Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the Special Election with the February 5, 2008 Presidential Primary; or, 3. Call for a Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007-022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to consolidate the Special Election with the June 3, 2008 Statewide Direct Primary; or, 4. Call for a stand-alone Special Election to submit Resolution No. 2007- 022 to the voters, and direct the City Clerk to schedule the stand-alone Special Election on a date specific, not less than 88 days from July 24, 2007 (October 21, 2007 and beyond), and on a Tuesday. 223 ITEM NUMBER: C - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 If the City Council calls for an election, a ballot measure will be placed on the ballot, asking the voters (approximate wording): "Shall Resolution No. 2007-022, which approved General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, amending the Land Use, Open Space, and YES Conservation Elements of the Atascadero General Plan, concerning setting creek setbacks, be adopted?" NO The CEC allows for the City Council to direct the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the measure to the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure. Also, the proponents may file a written argument opposing the Resolution and the City Council may submit a written argument in favor of the Resolution. The impartial analysis and the arguments would be included in the sample ballot. Except for the impartial analysis and arguments, the City, including City Council and employees, must remain neutral concerning this issue until after the election. Public funds must not be used to advocate for or against the ballot measure. The City Clerk recommends that the City Council seek legal advice on the City holding workshops and distributing printed information on this issue. FISCAL IMPACT: OPTIONS ESTIMATES Repeal Resolution $ 0 Regular municipal election of November 4, 2008 $ 2,000.00 Special election consolidated with County on February 5, 2008 $50,000.00 Special election consolidated with County on June 3, 2008 $35,000.00 Special stand-alone election on a date specific $70,000.00 These are estimates received from the County Clerk/Recorder and election consultants. These estimates do not include the hiring of temporary employees to assist with election duties and other miscellaneous costs. Please note that the consolidation with the County in February 2008 is more expensive that the consolidation with the County in June 2008. This is because the February election is only a Presidential Primary, paid for by the State, and the City would have to split the costs with the State. The June election is a Direct Primary and would be split among the City, County and State. ALTERNATIVES: The Council must repeal the Resolution or call for an election. 224 0 • • • • • ATTACHMENTS: 1. Certificate of Sufficiency 2. Resolution No. 2007-022, 3. Draft Resolution A 4. Draft Resolution B 5. Draft Resolution C ITEM NUMBER: C - 1 DATE: 07/24/07 amending General Plan 225 CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY REFERENDUM PETITION AGAINST A RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION #2007-022 I, MARCIA MCCLURE TORGERSON, C.M.C., City Clerk of the City of Atascadero hereby certify that: 1. A petition for a REFERENDUM AGAINST A RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, RESOLUTION #2007-022, was filed with my office on June 7, 2007; and, 2. Said petition consists of 77 sections with an unofficial prima facie count of 2,505 signatures; and, 3. Each petition section contains signatures purporting to be the signatures of qualified electors of this City; and, 4. Each petition section contains a Declaration of Circulator purporting to be the declaration of the person who solicited the signatures, and containing the dates between which the purported qualified electors signed this petition; and, 5. The declarant stated that he or she had solicited the signatures upon that section, and that all of the signatures were made in his or her presence, and that to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, each signature to that section was the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be; and, 6. After the proponent filed this petition, the signatures were verified pursuant to Elections Code Section 9115 by examining the records of registration in this County, current and in effect at the respective purported dates of such signing, to determine what number of qualified electors signed the petition, and from that examination I have determined the following facts regarding this petition: a. Number of unverified signatures filed by the proponent 2,505 b. Number of signatures reviewed per Election Code Section 9115 2,106 c. Number of signatures found SUFFICIENT 1,628 d. Number of signatures found INSUFFICIENT 478 In accordance with Elections Code Section 2187, it has been determined that the County Clerk's last official report of registration to the Secretary of State was 16,108 registered voters and that 10% of said registration would require 1,611 valid signatures to qualify the referendum petition. THEREFORE, I hereby find this Referendum Petition to be sufficient. Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C. DATE City Clerk 0 226 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-022 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 E1 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 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 May 8, 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 ifollowing actions: 227 City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-022 Page 2 of 4 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 May 8, 2007, hereby resolves to approve General Plan Amendment 2006-0017 consistent with the following: 1. Exhibit A: General Plan LOC Policy 8.2. Text Amendment 228 • • City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-022 Page 3 of 4 On motion by Council Member Beraud and seconded by Major Luna the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Beraud, , Brenrnler and Mayor Luna NOES: Council Members Clay and O'Malley ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ADOPTED: May 8, 2007 . ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C." ity Clerk APPROVEDAS TQ; ,Rdv1: Patrick Enrig:tx ity Attorney • C Y OF ATA ADERO, CA , Dr. G orge Luna, Mayor 229 City of Atascadero Resolution No. 2007-022 Page 4 of 4 Exhibit A: General Plan LOC Policy 8.2. Text Amendment 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. Maintain a creek setback ordinance which establishes building setbacks and development standards along the banks of Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, Boulder 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. 2. Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, and Boulder Creek shall have a 35 -foot setback. All other 7.5 min USGS quadrangle blue line creeks shall have a 20 -foot setback. The Salinas River shall have a 35 -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 and the Salinas River shall have setbacks measured from the ordinary high water mark. c) The Planning Commission may approve exceptions to the creek 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 hydrogeomorphology, and an Archaeological Phase 1 study. 230 • • • DRAFT RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2007-0229 AMENDING THE LAND USE, OPEN SPACE, AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF THE ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2007-022 on May 8, 2007 amending the City of Atascadero's General Plan Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Element to establish certain building setbacks and development standards along the banks of the Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek, Boulder Creek, Blue Line Creek and the Salinas River; and WHEREAS, a referendum petition was circulated to place the General Plan Amendment on the ballot; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has certified that the referendum petition has qualified for placement of such referendum on the ballot; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero City Council desires to repeal Resolution 2007-022 in its entirety. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero as follows: 1. Repeal. In accordance with Elections Code Section 9241, Resolution 2007-022, which amended the City of Atascadero's General Plan Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Element, is hereby repealed in light of the referendum measure protesting the passage of such Resolution which has qualified for placement of such referendum on the ballot. 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its passage. On motion by and seconded by foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: 0 ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO: 867393.1 the 231 City of Ataseadero Resolution No. _ Page 2 of 2 Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.City Clerk Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney 232 867393.1 Dr. George Luna, Mayor • • • DRAFT RESOLUTION B A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO CONSOLIDATE A [General] [Special] MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON , 2 , WITH THE (STATEWIDE PRIMARY) (STATEWIDE GENERAL) ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO § 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero called a Municipal Election to be held on , 2 , for the purpose of submitting to the voters the questions relating to the adoption of General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, concerning creek setbacks; and WHEREAS, it is desirable that the [General] [Special] Municipal Election be consolidated with the (Statewide Primary) (Statewide General) election to be held on the same date and that within the city the precincts, polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the county election department of the County of San Luis Obispo canvass the returns of the [General] [Special] Municipal election and that the election be held in all respects as if there were only one election; • NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of § 10403 of the Elections Code, the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo is hereby requested to consent and agree to the consolidation of a [General] [Special] Municipal Election with the (Statewide Primary) (Statewide General) election on Tuesday, , 2 SECTION 2. That a measure is to appear on the ballot as follows: "Shall Resolution No. 2007-022, which approved General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, amending the Land Use, Open Space, and YES Conservation Elements of the Atascadero General Plan, concerning setting creek setbacks, be adopted?" NO SECTION 3. That the county election department is authorized to canvass the returns of the [General] [Special] Municipal Election. The election shall be held in all respects as if there were only one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used. SECTION 4. That the Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the county election department to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated election. • 233 SECTION 5. That the City of Atascadero recognized that additional costs will be incurred by the County by reason of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the County for any costs. SECTION 6. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of the resolution with the Board of Supervisors and the county election department of the County of San Luis Obispo. SECTION 7. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON , 2 ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk 234 Dr. George Luna, Mayor • • • DRAFT RESOLUTION C A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, , 2 , FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE VOTERS OF A QUESTION RELATING TO THE ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006- 0017, CONCERNING CREEK SETBACKS. WHEREAS, under the provisions of the laws relating to General Law Cities in the State of California, a Special Municipal Election shall be held on , 2 , for the purpose of submitting to the voters at the election a question relating to the adoption of General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, concerning creek setbacks. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California relating to General Law Cities, there is called and ordered to be held in the • City of Atascadero, California, on Tuesday, , 2 , a Special Municipal Election for the purpose of submitting to the voters at the Special Municipal Election the following question: "Shall Resolution No. 2007-022, which approved General Plan Amendment 2006-0017, amending the Land Use, Open Space, and YES Conservation Elements of the Atascadero General Plan, concerning setting creek setbacks, be adopted?" NO SECTION 3: That the proposed complete text of the measure (Resolution No. 2007-022) submitted to the voters is attached as Exhibit A. SECTION 4: That the ballots to be used at the election shall be in form and content as required by law. SECTION 5: That the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to procure and furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies, equipment and paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election. SECTION 6: That the polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a.m. of the day of the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p.m. of the same day when the polls shall be closed, except as provided in § 14401 of the Elections Code of the State of California. SECTION 7: That pursuant to Elections Code § 12310, a stipend for services for the persons named as precinct board members is fixed at the sum of $ for each 235 Inspector and $ for each Clerk for the election. [In addition, the sum of . $ will be given to each precinct board member to attend a training class and the sum of $ to be given to each inspector to pick up the precinct supplies.] The rental for each polling place, where a charge is made, shall be the sum of $ for the election. When required, the compensation of the Custodian of a building shall be $ for the election. SECTION 8: That in all particulars not recited in this resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections. SECTION 9: That notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in time, form and manner as required by law. SECTION 10: That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. On motion by, and seconded by, the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney 236 CITY OF ATASCADERO Dr. George Luna, Mayor • is • 11 ITEM NUMBER: C - 2 DATE: 07/24/07 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - City Manager's Office Human Services Grants (Approval of the distribution of $20,000 in grant funds to assist local service providers that have a profound impact on the community.) RECOMMENDATION: Council approve Human Services Grants to the Agencies and in the amounts recommended by the Finance Committee in Attachment A. DISCUSSION: Backaround: The City of Atascadero has a Human Services Grant program, where annually $20,000 has been available to assist local service providers that have a profound impact on the community. The providers must meet a series of eligibility criteria in the competitive process. The Finance Committee has reviewed the applications and has made the attached recommendations. Twenty-two applications were received requesting $53,216.00. All of the applications complied with the City's criteria and all were worthy of funding. Eleven applications are recommended for full or partial funding as can be seen on Attachment A. The complete applications are available for review in the City Clerk's office. FISCAL IMPACT: The program is budgeted at $20,000. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment A - Recommendations 237 Attachment A ITEM NUMBER: C-2 DATE: 07/24/07 CITY OF ATASCADERO Human Services Grants - 2007 Finance Committee's Recommendations Agency Name Prior Year Award Request for Current Year Recommendation AIDS Support Network 0 $1,050.00 $ 0 American Red Cross $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $ 1,500.00 Assistance League of SLO New $2,000.00 $ 0 Atascadero Community Link $1,000.00 $1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 Atascadero Loaves & Fishes $4,500.00 $7,500.00 $ 4,500.00 Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) New $1,560.00 $ 0 Creative Alternative for Living & Learning CALL' New $2000.001 $ 0' Community Counseling Center (CCC) 0 $700.00 $ 0 ECHO 0 $4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 EOC (Adult Day Services) 0 $2,000.00 $ 0 EOC (Senior Health Screening Svcs) New $1,889.00 $ 0 EOC (Teen Academic Parenting Plan) New $1,982.00 $ 0 Food Bank Coalition 0 $2,000.00 $ 1,000.00 Hospice $500.00 $2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 Hotline $500.00 $2,000.001 $ 300.00 Mozart Festival of SLO 0 $2,000.00 $ 0 North County Connection 0 $2,600.00 $ 0 North County Women's Shelter $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 Partnership for the Children of SLO County New $6,000.00 $ 1,000.00 Senior Legal Services $500.00 $1,000.00 $ 500.00 Sr. Nutrition Program (Golden Meals Network) $1,000.00 $2.000.00 $ 1,000.00 Sexual Assault Recovery & Prevention Center New $1,735.00 $ 0 TOTAL $53,216.00 $20,000.00 M • • C • • lJ Atascadero City Council Staff Report - City Clerk ITEM NUMBER: C - 3 DATE: 07/24/07 Designation of Voting Delegate - League of California Cities' Annual Conference (Designation of voting delegate to attend the League's Annual Business Meeting and take action on conference resolutions that guide cities and the League in their efforts to improve the quality of local government in California.) RECOMMENDATION: Council designate a voting representative and an alternate who will be present at the Annual Business Meeting of the League of California Cities' Annual Conference in September 2007, and direct the City Clerk to inform the League of the designation. DISCUSSION: This year's League of California Cities' Annual Conference is scheduled for Wednesday, September Sth through Saturday, September 8th, in San Diego. One very important aspect of the Annual Conference is the Annual Business Meeting when the membership takes action on conference resolutions. Annual Conference resolutions guide cities and the League in their efforts to improve the quality, responsiveness and vitality of local government in California. Each City Council is asked to designate a voting representative and an alternate who will be present at the Annual Business Meeting. League bylaws provide that each city is entitled to one vote in matters affecting municipal or League policy. FISCAL IMPACT: None 239 • • • I