HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 121107 ' " ° " ® x
18 s
CITY OF A TASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Redevelopment Agency: 6:30 P.M.
City Council: 7:00 P.M.
City Hall
Council Chambers
6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, California
1%W REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Beraud
ROLL CALL: Mayor Luna
Mayor Pro Tem Brennler
Council Member Beraud
Council Member Clay
Council Member O'Malley
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call
CITY COUNCIL REORGANIZATION:
1. Council Appointment of Mayor — The City Clerk will accept nominations
from the Council Members
2. Council Appointment of Mayor Pro Tem — The new Mayor will accept
nominations from the Council Members
1
COUNCIL REORGANIZATION RECESS
PRESENTATION:
1. Presentation of Distinguished Service Medal to Officer Wyatt Kasfeldt
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 Meeting Minutes — October 23, 2007
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Meeting
Minutes of October 23, 2007. [City Clerk]
2. City Council Continued Hearing Minutes — October 29, 2007
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Continued MOO
Hearing Minutes of October 29, 2007. [City Clerk]
3. City Council Special Meeting Minutes — November 8, 2007
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Special
Meeting Minutes of November 8, 2007. [City Clerk]
4. Assignment of Factory Outlets Agreement to Mission Oaks Annex, LLC
■ Fiscal Impact: No new fiscal impact, however, there is a continued
budgeted impact of approximately $43,200 annually.
■ Recommendation: Council approve assignment of "Agreement by, and
between, the City of Atascadero and Camino Real Fashion Outlets
Center, Ltd., dated July 1, 1994" from Morro Road Homes, LLC and 197
Property Investments, LLC, to Mission Oaks Annex, LLC and 197 Property
Investments, LLC effective August 30, 2006. [Administrative Services]
5. Confirm the Appointment of the Police Chief
■ Fiscal Impact: No new impact.
■ Recommendation: Council confirm the appointment of Jim Mulhall as
Police Chief. [City Manager]
6. PLN 2099-1108 - Planned Development Overlay Zone #31: BMX Facility
Master Plan of Development - 6575 Sycamore Rd (Atascadero BMX
■ Description: Approval of the proposed project would allow a private BMX
facility to be located at 6575 Sycamore Road.
2 -
■ Fiscal Impact: It is staff's understanding that the proposed BMX facility
will not be operated as a public facility, and no staff or operational costs
►' will be incurred. Additionally, all liability will be the responsibility of the
Atascadero BMX Association.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving
Zone Text Change 2005-0108 to establish Planned Development
Overlay Zone #31; and,
2. Adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance B approving
Zone Map Change 2007-0143 based on findings. [Community
Development]
7. PLN 2006-1111 - Condominium Development and Condominium
Conversion Ordinance (Title 9 and Title 11) City of Atascadero
■ Description: Approval of Ordinance will allow for conditional use permit
review for all new condominium development projects, including site
condominiums, and will help to retain the rental housing inventory in
Atascadero by establishing procedures and requirements for residential
condominium conversions.
■ Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact will vary depending upon the methods of
implementation and the effect of the Ordinance on applications. Staff time
and resources are currently used to process project requests; additional
staff time may be required to monitor construction of new rental units and
to administer new inclusionary requirements. However, since few new
rental units are currently being constructed, the Ordinance may have the
effect of reducing the staff workload due to a decrease in applications for
condominium conversions.
■ Recommendation: Council adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft
Ordinance A approving Zone Change 2006-0111 based on findings.
[Community Development]
8. Final Map 2006-0147 (Parcel Map AT 05-0292) 9075 San Diego Road
(TPM 2005-0075) Mumford and Inman
■ Description: Final map of division of 8.1 acres into three lots of 2.6, 2.6
and 2.9 acres.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt and approve Final Parcel Map 2006-0147 (Parcel Map AT 05-
0292), and,
2. Reject the offers of dedication for Roads and Public Utility Easements
without prejudice to future acceptance on behalf of the public, and,
3. Authorize and direct the City Clerk to endorse the Council's approval
on the Map, and,
4. Authorize City Manager to sign a Subdivision Improvement Agreement
for improvements associated with Final Map 2006-0147. [Public
Works]
3
9. Final Map 2007-0159 (Parcel Map AT 05-0230) 8200 Coromar (TPM 2005-
0073) (Gearhart) law
■ Description: Final Map for the division of 1.51 acres into two lots of 0.88
and 0.63 acres.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt and approve Final Parcel Map 2007-0159 (Parcel Map AT 05-
0230), and,
2. Authorize and direct the City Clerk to endorse the Council's approval
on the Map. [Public Works]
10.Santa Cruz Road Slope Stabilization Project Change Order- Bid No.
2007-006
■ Description: Change Order will require appropriation of additional
$202,410.00 for the Santa Cruz Road Slope Stabilization Project.
■ Fiscal Impact: An additional appropriation of $202,410 will be necessary
in order to complete the project. Staff is recommending that Local
Transportation Funds (LTF) be used.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to approve Change Order #2 with Raminha
Construction for $227,096.00 for additional construction work on the
Santa Cruz Road Slope Stabilization Project (Project); and,
2. Authorize the City Manager to approve any additional change orders
with Raminha Construction for a total amount not to exceed *401
$10,000.00; and,
3. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate $202,410
in Local Transportation Funds for the Santa Cruz Road Slope
Stabilization Project. [Public Works]
11.Vehicle Purchases - Public Works Department
■ Fiscal Impact: The combined cost of both vehicles is $36,791 including
sales tax, shipping fees, mandatory tire fee, and $500 / unit discount for
payment within (20) days of receipt of invoice. Funds are provided in the
2007/2008 City budget.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the purchase of two (2) vehicles
through the State of California Department of General Services. [Public
Works]
12.Engineering Design Contract Award for Streetscape Projects
(Contract for Professional Services)
■ Description: Award contract for the design of the City Council approved
Streetscape projects.)
■ Fiscal Impact: $292,164.40.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a
contract with Rick Engineering Company to design various streetscape
improvements for$292,164.40. [Public Works]
4 -
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
VOW
1. Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Audit
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council review and accept the financial audit for the
period ended June 30, 2007. [Administrative Services]
2. Title 9 Planning and Zonina Text Amendment — PLN 2007-1238 (City of
Atascadero)
■ Description: Amendment pertains to processing timeframes, lot size
requirements and accessway setbacks.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Planning Commission Recommends City Council:
Introduce Draft Ordinance A for first reading, by title only, to approve Zone
Change 2007-0138 based on findings. [Community Development]
3. Zoning Text Amendment: Planned Development Overlay District #9 PLN
2007-1248 - 800-955 EI Camino Real - Westar Associates
■ Disclosure of Ex Parte Communications
■ Description- Approval would allow hotels and motels, and eating and
drinking places with drive-through facilities in the PD-9 overlay zone
subject to Conditional Use Permit approval.
`err ■ Fiscal Impact: Hotels typically generate more revenue per square foot
than retail uses because of the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). The
proposed zone change would allow hotels in addition to retail on the
project site. Staff anticipates this change will likely result in a positive
fiscal impact to the City if a hotel is built on the site rather than a retail
commercial building.
■ Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends Council:
Introduce for first reading, by title only, draft Ordinance A approving
amendments to the conditionally allowed use for the PD-9 Overlay Zone
based on findings. [Community Development]
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.)
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: (On their own initiative, Council
Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities.
1%W 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.)
5
C. 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
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)
2. S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA)
3. Finance Committee
4. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC)
5. League of California Cities — Council Liaison and CITI PAC Board Member
D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Clerk
3. City Treasurer
4. City Attorney
5. City Manager
a. Oral Report— Legislative Briefing
E. 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.
6
'�rrr I, Victoria Randall, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the penalty of perjury
that the foregoing agenda for the December 11, 2007 Regular Session of the Atascadero City
Council was posted on December 4, 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 4th day of December, 2007 at Atascadero, California.
Victoria Randall, Deputy City Clerk
City of Atascadero
_ 7
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m., at the City Hall
Council Chambers, 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero. Matters are considered by the Council in the order of the printed
Agenda.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file
in the office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours at the Front Counter of
City Hall and on our website, www.atascadero.org. An agenda packet is also available for public review at the Atascadero
Library, 6850 Morro Road. Contracts, Resolutions and Ordinances will be allocated a number once they are approved by
the City Council. The minutes of this meeting will reflect these numbers. All documents submitted by the public during
Council meetings that are either read into the record or referred to in their statement will be noted in the minutes and
available for review in the City Clerk's office. Council meetings are video taped and audio recorded, and may be reviewed
by the public. Copies of meeting recordings are available for a fee. Contact the City Clerk for more information (470-
3400).
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting
or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager's Office or the City Clerk's Office, both at (805)
470-3400. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in
assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS(from Title 2, Chapter 1 of the Atascadero Municipal Code)
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject, staff will give their
report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is open and
will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding the matter being considered to step up to the podium. If
you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way:
1. You must approach the podium and be recognized by the Mayor
2. Give your name and address (not required) Milo
3. Make your statement
4. All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other
individual, absent or present
6. All comments limited to 5 minutes (unless changed by the Council)
7. No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so, and no one
may speak more than twice on any item.
If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the City Clerk's office at least 24
hours prior to the meeting. Digital presentations brought to the meeting on a USB drive or CD is preferred. Access to
hook up your laptop to the City's projector can also be provided. You are required to submit to the City Clerk a printed
copy of your presentation for the record. Please check in with the City Clerk before the meeting begins to announce your
presence and turn in the printed copy.
The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public comments will be
heard by the Council.
TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, "COMMUNITY FORUM", the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience having business with the
Council to:
• Please approach the podium and be recognized
• Give your name and address (not required)
• State the nature of your business
This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Council's attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will be
allowed for Community Forum (unless changed by the Council).
8 -
ITEM NUMBER: A-1
DATE: 12/11/07
19� CITY OF ATASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT MINUTES
Tuesday, October 23, 2007 — 7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL: 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Luna called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and Council Member Clay led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Beraud, Clay, O'Malley, Brennier and Mayor
Luna
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk / Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson,
Deputy City Clerk Grace Pucci
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis,
Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard, Community
Development Director Warren Frace, Community Services Director
Brady Cherry, Public Works Director Steve Kahn, Police Lt. Jim
Mulhall, Deputy Public Works Director Geoff English, and Interim
City Attorney Robert Schultz.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council
Member Beraud to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 1 of 139—
9
PRESENTATION:
1. Rotary Club of Atascadero — Donation for the Colony Park Community
Center
Atascadero Rotary Club President Joanne Main and past President Will Bateman
presented the city with a $25,000 donation for the Colony Park Community Center.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. City Council Meeting Minutes —September 25, 2007
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Meeting
Minutes of September 25, 2007. [City Clerk]
2. Rental Policies & Procedures and Fee Schedule for the Colony Park
Community Center
■ Description: Council requested td-,adopt Resolution establishing 'these
documents.
■ Fiscal Impact: The rental revenue for the Colony Park Community Center
is anticipated to be approximately $1.0,000 annually.
■ Recommendation: Council adopt Draft Resolution establishing Colony
Park Community Center facility rental policies and fee schedule.
[Community Services]
3. Colony Park Community Center Project Furniture and Equipment
Purchase Authorization
■ Fiscal Impact: The total cost of the equipment purchase is $53,669.24 in
budgeted Community Center project funds.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the purchase of furniture and
equipment listed on the attached quotation from KI in the amount of
$53,669.24. [Community Services]
4. Commercial Grade Dump Truck Purchase
■ Fiscal Impact: $69,657.00 in previously allocated funds from the Vehicle
Replacement account.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to purchase a
replacement dump truck from Valew Welding and Fabrication for
$69,657.00. [Public Works]
5. Resolution Approving the Sewer System Management Plan and
Schedule
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council adopt Draft Resolution to approve the
Development Plan and Schedule for the City's Sewer System
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 2 of 13
10
Management Plan (SSMP) in compliance with the Statewide General
VOW Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for Sanitary Sewer Systems
(Water Quality Order No. 2006-0003). [Public Works]
6. 2007 Sidewalk Barrier Removal Project Award (City Bid No. 2007-007)
■ Description: Project consists of the installation of sidewalks and
wheelchair ramps.
■ Fiscal Impact: $129,621 of budgeted CDBG Grant Funds.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Brinar
Construction for$129,621 to construct the Barrier Removal Project; and
2. Authorize the Public Works Director to file a notice of completion after the
project is finished. [Public Works]
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Brennler and seconded by Council Member
Beraud to approve Items #A-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Item #A-2 Resolution
No. 2007-090, Item #A-5 Resolution No. 2007-091, Item #A-6
Contract No. 2007-027)
B. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Staff Authorization to Process General Plan Amendment Applications
for: Wal-Mart Supercenter PLN 2007-1245 / GPA 2007-0020 (Wal-Mart
Stores, Inc ) and The Annex Shopping Center PLN 2007-1246 / GPA
2007-0021 (Rottman Group/ EDA)
■ Description: Staff is seeking direction from Council on these applications.
■ Fiscal Impact: Typically, commercial projects have a positive fiscal impact
on City revenues. However, at this time, staff is unable to speculate on
the significance of this impact. Part of the project's EIR review will include
a fiscal impact analysis. The purpose of the analysis will be to analyze all
of the project's costs and revenues and provide the Council with a
complete picture of the project's fiscal impacts on both the City of
Atascadero and the local business community.
■ Recommendations: The Council:
1. Direct staff to process one or both of the project applications by
adopting Draft Resolutions A and/or B. This action would include
directing staff to return to the City Council for a Specific Plan project
boundary approval.
OR
2. Withhold authorization for staff to process one or both of the project
applications by adopting draft Resolution C and/or D. Withholding
authorization for staff to process the applications does not deny the
applications.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 3 of 13
11
OR
3. Refer one or both of the applications back to staff for additional
analysis or clarification of specific issues. The Council should provide
clear direction on issues that require additional analysis. [Community
Development]
Ex Parte Communications
■ Council Member Clay: After the May 30, 2006 meeting he visited a Super Wal-Mart
in Iowa, watched the Wal-Mart Video, the Stop Wal-Mart video, and a CNBC Wal-
Mart video. He spoke with Aaron Rios and Amber Johnson of Wal-Mart and Keith
Mathias and Maury Froman of the Rottman Group. He attended a Rotary and
Chamber of Commerce meeting related to Wal-Mart. He has spoken with
associates at Wal-Mart stores, and spoke to all parties at the Just Listening
meeting.
• Council Member O'Malley: He has met with the Rottman Group with Mayor Luna,
attended the Just Listening meeting and spoke with representatives of the Rottman
Group, the Annex and Del Rio, and members of the community on both sides of the
issue. Today he met with staff and representatives of Wal-Mart. He has heard from
many in the community through emails.
■ Mayor Luna: In addition to the ex parte already on the record, he met with Keith
Mathias of the Rottman Group, Aaron Rios and Amber Johnson of Wal-Mart last
Thursday and discussed procedures for this meeting and he questioned if these two ,
010,
applications are joined together, which they are. Last Friday at the opening of the
bridge he met with members of Oppose Wal-Mart and discussed procedures for this
meeting, and attended the Just listening meeting where he spoke to all parties.
■ Mayor Pro Tem Brennler: He has had no substantive conversations with any of the
project developers. He spoke with Keith Mathias and Aaron Rios at the Just
Listening meeting as well as John Pashong the Public Relations representative. He
has had numerous conversations with Atascadero citizens as well as Oppose Wal-
Mart spokesperson Tom Comar.
■ Council Member Beraud: Met with Aaron Rios and members of his team on June
18th with Mayor Luna just to get acquainted and recommended at that time that they
not come in with a store over 150,000 square feet and suggested a two-story store
and incorporating some housing into the project. There was a meeting scheduled
for July 18th which she did not attend as she felt it was more appropriate for staff to
meet with them. She has also received many emails on the subject.
Interim City Attorney Robert Schultz spoke about the process for this meeting and
answered questions of Council.
Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report and answered
questions of Council.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 4 of 13
12
PUBLIC COMMENT
Keith Mathias, Rottman Group, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed Annex
project and answered questions of Council.
Robert Winslow, civil engineer for the Wal-Mart project, gave a PowerPoint presentation
on the proposed Wal-Mart project and answered questions of Council.
Ellen Berkowitz, Wal-Mart representative, spoke about the request before the Council
tonight and answered questions of Council.
Aaron Rios, Wal-Mart representative, gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding the
history of Wal-Mart and its current operations and answered questions of Council.
Tom Comar, spokesperson for Oppose Wal-Mart, gave a PowerPoint presentation in
opposition to the processing of the applications presented tonight.
Mayor Luna recessed the hearing at 9:02 p.m.
Mayor Luna called the meeting back to order at 9:15 p.m.
Mr. Comar answered questions of Council.
�.r George Peche stated Wal-Mart is the key to the survival of the Mission Oaks and Annex
projects as well as to revenue for needed public services for the city.
Gretchen Grey spoke in favor of keeping the rural character of Atascadero and
revitalizing the downtown, which she stated a super center would destroy.
Jay De Cou stated tonight's decision should be predicated on whether or not the city
wants to encourage commerce in Atascadero.
Courtney Lanski and his wife asked the Council to vote against the rezone for this
property as they believe in buying local and moved here for the atmosphere of the town,
which they believe this project would change.
Francesca Baker stated the decisions the Council makes effect whether the
community's young people will stay here. She asked the Council to deny the
processing of this application and develop a vibrant downtown.
Shannon Montechevitz encouraged the Council to withhold authorization for processing
this application. She would like to see the community stay rural.
Julie Dunn spoke about the difficulties of owning ones own business today, in favor of
maintaining the rural atmosphere of Atascadero, and of her opposition to corporations.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 5 of 13
- - 13
Carrie Hamilton stated she moved to Atascadero because they wanted the small town
character and that Wal-Mart does not fit in with that atmosphere.
Bill Garcia explained that local businesses redistribute their income within the
community and expressed concern that Wal-Mart will cause small businesses to close.
Gay Mathew spoke in opposition to a Wal-Mart in Atascadero and asked the Council to
keep the town as it is with small stores.
Marsha Richards commented on the poor condition of the children of Wal-Mart
employees and asked Council to deny the application.
Inga, David, and Maya stated they moved to Atascadero for the small town atmosphere
and would like it to remain that way. They outlined several reasons for denying Wal-
Mart's application.
Lisa Nevel Olsen spoke about shopping at a super Wal-Mart several years ago and that
she did not enjoy the experience.
Melinda Archibald stated she opposed Wal-Mart and the rezone request.
Joanne Main urged the Council, on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce Board, to
accept both project applications to allow for a more informed decision in the future. She
stated the business community would be helped by having this type of commercial
development in Atascadero.
Emma Pense explained her long history in Atascadero and her concern that the town
has not progressed recently as she would have hoped. She stated a large anchor
store would attract more businesses and help established businesses thrive.
Mary Arnold asked the Council to vote to instruct staff to process the Wal-Mart and
Rottman applications so that the information needed to make an informed decision on
this development could be obtained.
Kate Montgomery urged the Council to not start the process for a Wal-Mart as she does
not believe the community would support this type of store in Atascadero.
Dorothy McNeil read a statement from Betty and George Walker who could not attend
the meeting asking Council to deny the application from Wal-Mart. (Exhibit A) Speaking
for herself, Ms. McNeil explained her reasons for opposing a Wal-Mart in Atascadero.
(Exhibit B)
Susan Wilson Lara stated that large stores move the community away from the
character that so many appreciate in Atascadero.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 6 of 13
14
Ian Wood asked the Council to consider what they would like the community to be
before they approve anything.
John Trumball explained that he moved to Atascadero for the small town values it
represented and asked the Council to follow the spirit of the General Plan and deny this
request.
Sherry Schram stated she has worked with the Rottman Group to put this project
together as her family owned one of the properties on which this project will be built.
She explained that her mother started at Wal-Mart as an hourly worker and through the
years was able to purchase this property because of the benefits and wages she earned
there.
Stacey Pointer stated she chose to move to Atascadero for the style of life it offered and
would not like to see that changed.
Ray Jansen explained the reasons he was opposed to a Wal-Mart super store in
Atascadero.
Ernie Porter spoke of the need for industry in Atascadero to encourage its growth and
provide jobs for its citizens. He expressed his support for Wal-Mart.
David Peche stated Atascadero is suffering due to its lack of tax revenue. He explained
the reasons a Wal-Mart would come to a small town when other large businesses would
not.
Elaine Dumond spoke of the good treatment and benefits she receives from the local
business for which she works and her concern that a super Wal-Mart would harm this
business and have a detrimental effect on Atascadero.
John Homan stated Atascadero is a beautiful city with much of its income coming from
the tourism industry. He commended Council for their efforts to create the type of
community tourists want to visit, and spoke against processing Wal-Mart's application.
Lee Perkins read a statement from Barbara Taylor asking that the Council not approve
Wal-Mart's application. Speaking for herself, Ms. Perkins gave examples to show that
Wal-Mart and Rottman were not good neighbors and explained her belief that sales tax
revenue in Atascadero would go up in the future due to the projects now under
development in the city.
Jeff Crandaneti stated his opposition to Wal-Mart's proposal and explained that many
small businesses would be lost if this project is approved.
Mark Phillips explained his reasons for opposing Wal-Mart and gave several statistics
from Consumer Reports regarding low customer satisfaction for specific item sales in
Wal-Mart.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 7 of 13
- 15
Jim Istenes spoke in support of Atascadero and the many positive projects and events 1400,
that make it a special community and stated Wal-Mart would create a negative impact
on the town.
Steve LaSalle explained that the majority of the community spoke in favor of the small
town atmosphere during the last General Plan update and urged Council to stick to that
General Plan.
John Pepley stated that last November's election settled this issue because two of
those elected stated they were opposed to Wal-Mart.
Garth Wilwand explained why Wal-Mart has had a large negative influence on the music
industry.
MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Brennler to go past 11:00 p.m.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
Mayor Luna recessed the hearing at 11:00 p.m.
Mayor Luna called the meeting back to order at 11:07 p.m.
Jeff Wilsusan, President Atascadero Police Association, stated an EIR would provide
with city with the information necessary to make an informed decision.
Geraldine Wiley Brasier Femister spoke against processing the application and against
the behavior of Wal-Mart toward their employees and suppliers.
Glaxy Rivera spoke in favor of the small town atmosphere of Atascadero and against
having a Wal-Mart in the community.
Greg Peterson stated in America free enterprise and competition are encouraged, and
explained that in the past small businesses have closed because the community
decided not to shop there.
George Simmons stated this meeting was about bashing Wal-Mart and not about
approving the processing of an EIR to get the information needed to make an intelligent
decision. He said he supports any commerce that would come into town and
encourage the economy.
Maggie White explained that she went to Wal-Mart and purchased several items most
families would need to buy, then went to K-Mart and purchased the same items and
found that Wal-Mart's prices were better. She urged the Council to move forward and
process the application for the projects.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 8 of 13
16
Elena Reynolds spoke in favor of bringing in more businesses and restaurants to
service the community and allow residents to shop local at the stores they prefer
including Wal-Mart.
Ruth Enriques Mangy asked Council to not process the applications for Rottman and
Wal-Mart, and spoke of how the garment industry was negatively impacted by Wal-Mart.
Craig Bagey gave the reasons he believed Wal-Mart was not good for Atascadero
including the drain on city services.
Sandy Silvera stated Atascadero needs the sales tax revenue and the other businesses
that Wal-Mart will generate.
John Heatherington demanded that Council reject Wal-Mart's attempt to change
Atascadero's General Plan.
Marty Brown commented that the General Plan addresses the community's desire for a
small town with a rural atmosphere. She stated the proposed projects would change
the character of Atascadero forever.
Nora Trentacosta gave a PowerPoint presentation on Wal-Mart promises vs. Wal-Mart
realities. (Exhibit C)
David Broadwater spoke about his experiences with the city since last year and the
changes in the town recently, which are not positive. He stated this comes down to
upholding the General Plan by denying the applications tonight.
Chuck Ward explained that the decision made tonight will determine if the Del Rio land
will remain undeveloped for many years and lead to a sales tax or supplemental
property tax increase to make up for the shortfall of revenue in Atascadero.
Steve Tillman stated he was pro growth and a strong supporter of property rights. He
explained why the Council should vote to retain the General Plan and reject the
proposal presented tonight.
Ron Rothman said he moved to Atascadero to get away from an urban setting and live
in a rural atmosphere. He explained why he believes the proposal as presented is
flawed and does not fit with the lifestyle of this community.
John Logan stated he wants whatever is right and fair for Atascadero and that the city
must work with its unique features to create a destination for tourists and a good
community for its residents.
Tim McCutcheon expressed concern that there is a message being sent to those who
might want invest in this community that businesses are not welcome here. He urged
Council to change Atascadero's reputation and proceed with processing this application.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 9 of 13
17
John Goers stated he was against the Council approving the processing of this General
Plan Amendment. He was supportive of the zoning as it exists at this location.
Tino Santos said Atascadero belongs to all of its citizens and free enterprise should be
encouraged. He asked the Council to vote for what is best for Atascadero and allow the
application to be processed.
Alston Path asked the Council to withhold approving processing of the General Plan
Amendment.
Denise Wills requested Council approve the processing of the General Plan
Amendment and read the names of others who could not be here tonight and also
support processing the application.
Al Bosler urged Council to uphold the General Plan and not process this application.
He stated the citizens voted in the last election for candidates that opposed Wal Mart
and had expressed their will through their votes.
Beverly Aho reported on business centers in Atascadero that have for rent signs in their
windows and urged Council to process the application and discover how to reverse this
trend. She read off names of citizens who could not be here tonight but support the
processing of the application.
Steve Isaacson stated his support for the Wal Mart and Annex projects and addressed
issues raised by those opposed to Wal Mart.
Rebecca Anastasio stated an EIR rarely recommends the no project or a severely
reduced alternative. She indicated the project as proposed is out-scaled for the
neighborhood and should be downsized, and suggested the project be sent back to the
applicants to be compliant with the General Plan.
Brent Rectag stated commerce is needed in this town, especially in the north end, but
won't come without a large anchor store. He said the city is in need of funding for
roads, police and fire and Council should keep that as a priority.
Janice Petco spoke about the improvements to the city in recent years and stated that a
Wal Mart would set that back and not help the community. She also stated the size of
the proposed project is out of scale for the area and against the General Plan.
Tom Birkenfeld, President Atascadero Professional Fire Fighters Association, stated
their association urges Council to vote to approve the processing of the General Plan
Amendment and EIR to determine the impacts to the area.
Lee Ann Brooks said she believes the General Plan should be followed and urged the
Council to uphold it as it stands.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 10 of 13
18
+4%W Scott Hallett, member of the Local Firefighters Association, encouraged Council to
process the application and allow the community an opportunity to look at the EIR.
Shirley Lyons related an experience she had at Wal-Mart a few years ago, and stated
she shops at Wal-Mart which she feels makes an effort to become part of the
community.
Icey Hagedorn spoke in support of a super Wal-Mart and explained Wal-Mart is where
she goes to send items to her son and other soldiers fighting for our rights in Baghdad.
Zoe Duty stated that Atascadero needs to be invigorated with more commerce because
the town is dying. She urged Council to do the EIR and determine what is needed.
Sonya Serra commented that she is a Wal-Mart shopper because of their low prices
and stated there are no shopping opportunities in Atascadero for the items she needs.
Mike Jackson encouraged the Council to move forward with processing the EIR and
ensure that it studies the effects of a large residential development on that property.
Barbie Butz explained that she has been involved in receiving items that are returned or
received damaged from Wal Mart that are distributed to those in need in the community.
Dion Morse stated he has seen a steady decline in the area and expressed support for
Wal Mart.
Jim Shannon said the city should proceed tonight with the EIR but he is concerned that
the decision has already been made on this issue. He is also concerned that there are
many empty stores in town and that the community is divided.
Corinna Jones spoke against Wal Mart and urged Council to oppose the rezone and
turn down the application.
Bill Shafer stated he shops at Wal Mart but does not want to see one in his
neighborhood. He spoke about the criticisms Wal-Mart has received within the financial
community the result of which is Wal-Mart is reducing its super centers.
Mayor Luna closed the Public Comment period.
Mayor Luna explained that one of the Council Norms states that attempts will be made
to get consensus on significant policy issues. He indicated due to the lateness of hour
attempts at consensus may not be successful and suggested continuing the meeting to
do the deliberations.
Council Member Clay stated he is prepared to make a decision tonight and concerned
that there may be further lobbying outside of the public.
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 11 of 13
_ 19
Council Member O'Malley suggested taking a brief break and then continue with the -,,,,,,r
deliberation.
Mayor Pro Tem Brennler stated he prefers to continue the item but not go past
tomorrow.
Council Member Beraud indicated she could go either way.
Mayor Luna recessed the hearing at 1:35 a.m.
Mayor Luna called the meeting back to order at 1:49 p.m.
Interim City Attorney Robert Schultz explained that under the Brown Act the Council has
the ability to continue the public hearing period to a time specific with this being the only
item and no public comment allowed.
There was Council discussion on whether to continue this item for deliberation and
decision. All Council Members pledged to not speak with the media prior to the
continued hearing.
MOTION: By Mayor Luna and seconded by Council Member O'Malley to
continue the item to 7:00 p.m. next Monday (October 29, 2007)
with the clarification that there will be no public comment.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
None
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
None
C. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
None
•400
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 12 of 13
20
D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
City Manager
City Manager Wade McKinney announced that the Council directed
ethics training is in process, has been going well, and a report will be
made at a later time.
E. ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Luna adjourned the meeting at 1:59 p.m. to the continued meeting on Monday
October 29, 2007.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Grace Pucci, Deputy City Clerk
The following exhibits are available for review in the City Clerk's office:
Exhibit A—Betty&George Walker letter, read by Dorothy McNeil
Exhibit B—Dorothy McNeil, prepared statement
Exhibit C—Nora Trentacosta, presentation
CC Draft Minutes 10/23/07
Page 13 of 13
21
22
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 12/11/07
193"U1 1 70 CITY OF A TA SCA DERO
CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT MINUTES
Monday, October 29, 2007 - 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Luna called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and Council Member O'Malley led
the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Beraud, Clay, O'Malley, Brennier 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,
Community Development Director Warren Frace, Public Works
Director Steve Kahn, Community Services Director Brady Cherry,
Police Lt. Jim Mulhall, and Interim City Attorney Robert Schultz.
Mayor Luna made a statement regarding the procedure for tonight's meeting.
ITEM B.1 CONTINUED FROM 10/23/07 MEETING:
Staff Authorization to Process General Plan Amendment Applications for:
Wal-Mart Supercenter PLN 2007-1245 / GPA 2007-0020 (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.)
and The Annex Shopping Center PLN 2007-1246 / GPA 2007-0021 (Rottman
Group/ EDA)
■ Disclosure of Ex Parte Communications
■ Description: Staff is seeking direction from Council on these applications.
23
■ Fiscal Impact: Typically, commercial projects have a positive fiscal impact on
City revenues. However, at this time, staff is unable to speculate on the
significance of this impact. Part of the project's EIR review will include a fiscal
impact analysis. The purpose of the analysis will be to analyze all of the
project's costs and revenues and provide the Council with a complete picture of
the project's fiscal impacts on both the City of Atascadero and the local business
community.
■ Recommendations: The Council:
1. Direct staff to process one or both of the project applications by adopting
Draft Resolutions A and/or B. This action would include directing staff to
return to the City Council for a Specific Plan project boundary approval.
OR
2. Withhold authorization for staff to process one or both of the project
applications by adopting draft Resolution C and/or D. Withholding
authorization for staff to process the applications does not deny the
applications.
OR
3. Refer one or both of the applications back to staff for additional analysis or
clarification of specific issues. The Council should provide clear direction
on issues that require additional analysis. [Community Development]
Ex Parte Communications
■ Council Member Clay stated he talked to Amber Johnson several times, and a
citizen had a request and he took a packet to that person. Several people from the
media called and he told them that the Council was not discussing the issue. He
also received emails and phone calls, and responded to a few of both.
■ Council Member O'Malley stated he received emails and phone calls and tried to
respond to a representative sample. He had spoken with a number of constituents,
and spoke with Mr. Rios tonight.
■ Mayor Luna stated he had received emails as well as messages on his phone
machine, and had not spoken with Oppose Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart, or the Rottman
Group.
■ Mayor Pro Tem Brenner stated he had no further contact with the developers since
the last meeting, and had received emails and phone calls. He further stated he
intended to mass mail a response to both the pro and con emails. He had several
conversations with citizens and spoke with Oppose Wal-Mart spokesperson Tom
Comar.
■ Council Member Beraud stated she had received email and calls, spoke with many
constituents who were upset with the papering of the community with pieces
CC Continued Hearing 10/29/07
Draft Minutes
Page 2 of 7
24
promoting Wal-Mart, received phone calls and was informed about signs posted
illegally on city streets. She spoke with a constituent that was pro Wal-Mart and felt
harassed by frequent calls from Wal-Mart, and received a useful binder from Mr.
Babcock with a lot of research about Wal Mart.
Council Response to Public Comment:
Council Member Clay stated he had done his own research and watched many
programs about Wal-Mart. He commented that it was more important to consider what
was happening in this area rather than in other.states, and therefore focused on the
Paso Robles Wal Mart. He interviewed several employees who did not know who he
was and the one statement that they always made was that they loved working there,
liked their benefit packages, and that their wages were competitive. He indicated he
hears negative stories about Wal-Mart, which he follows up on, but in most cases, do
not check out. He stated he would base his decision on what is best for the community.
Council Member Beraud commented that she kept track of everyone who spoke at the
last meeting: 61% were opposed to the EIR, 39% were in favor. She was hopeful that
Rottman and Wal Mart got the message that alternatives are needed. Responding to
comments made by the Chamber CEO she stated that the subsidy received by the
Paso Robles Main Street when their Wal-Mart opened was not substantial compared to
what the city of Atascadero gives the Chamber and Main Street each year. Regarding
Beverly Aho's concerns about the number of for-rent signs, she stated the city is in the
process of hiring a consultant to do economic development visioning for the community.
Mayor Pro Tem Brennier thanked the audience who took the time to speak last week,
and commented that although many had differing opinions, the Council chamber was
filled showing many have a deep respect and love for the community. He stated the
comments heard both pro and con portray that there are two competing interests; a
need for commercial growth as well as a responsibility for insuring neighborhood and
community compatibility.
Council Member O'Malley explained that the Buxton Report identified prime commercial
sites in the community and the Del Rio area was their top choice for prime commercial
large retail. He complimented the Council and city's efforts in insuring a good process
for this issue, and spoke of the importance of treating all applicants fairly. The questions
to be answered for this site relate to quality of life, and economic impacts. He also
spoke of the value of being self contained, of looking at the project in total, and of the
potential of other projects in the community such as Mission Oaks and Colony Square.
He spoke of the advantages of an EIR for the site which would provide unbiased,
impartial information to assist the Council and community in deciding on alternatives for
the site including the impacts of a full build out under the current General Plan as well
as a third option of a smaller scale lifestyle center and its impacts on the downtown.
Council Member O'Malley commented that if this goes to an election, those options
would be lost.
*40W
CC Continued Hearing 10/29/07
Draft Minutes
Page 3 of 7
25
Mayor Luna spoke about the changes in the last five years from a push for residential,
which resulted in Atascadero becoming a policy leader in the county in affordable
housing, to the current push for commercial development. He stated there is not the
overwhelming support for what is proposed here as there was in the past with other
projects. He does not believe that Wal Mart is either a saint or a savior; however, they
are a property owner and deserve the same respectful treatment as any other property
owner that wishes to develop in Atascadero. Mayor Luna stated that this application far
exceeds the 150,000 square footage maximum allowed in the General Plan, and with
the allowable 150,000 square feet on the north east corner of Del Rio there will be a
substantial impact on the neighborhood. He commented that this proposal is
inconsistent with the General Plan land use map, however if their application had met
the maximum 150,000 square feet he would probably have voted to go forward with the
EIR. He stated it is was not prudent to go forward with such a massive plan, and hopes
to work with Council to come to a compromise on what to do at the site.
Deliberations:
Council Member Beraud:
■ Appreciated all members of the community who came out Tuesday night.
■ Supports the need to study more and get facts, but must think about the wiggle
room in EIR's.
• From what she can see she believes the community is not really behind this.
• This is coming from the wrong starting point, and more analysis is needed that is
specific to Atascadero.
■ This project is putting a square peg in round hole; it doesn't fit into the General
Plan.
■ The project as proposed is 60,000 square feet larger that the city's maximum.
■ Would like to see agreement for the Council to use the General Plan as their
guide, using it as the limit for that corner.
■ The super center era is the end of a trend, and is not innovative and new.
■ Rottman and Wal Mart can come back with something more creative.
■ If the city is to buy into a project it must be something that the majority of the
community can embrace.
■ The Council must come together and think of what it can agree on, and the
General Plan must be the guide.
■ The EIR is premature and there must be continuing dialog with the applicants to
find an innovative approach to come up with something better.
■ The idea that there must be a super center or nothing is not true and she cannot
believe the land will remain vacant.
Council Member O'Malley:
■ The Council must stay involved and negotiate the best deal for the community.
■ It is important to attract business to the community. California is in a tough
economic cycle and Atascadero must be at the table, working in partnership with
the private sector and negotiating for good solutions.
CC Continued Hearing 10/29/07
Draft Minutes
Page 4 of 7
26
■ He disagreed with the idea that Wal Mart would put this on the ballot. Rather the
community would decide whether to send this issue, either for or against, to the
ballot.
■ When on the Planning Commission he was involved in reviewing the current
General Plan, and explained that there is a process to get specific plans.
■ The community must change with current circumstances, and that is why an
economic analysis and EIR is done; to look at the community's options.
Council Member Clay:
■ The General Plan has been changed 12 times, and is a General Plan, not a
Specific Plan.
■ It is important to learn the facts, and an EIR would provide that information.
■ The population in Atascadero is two tiered; those who may be well-off and those on
fixed incomes and working families. It is important to have projects like Colony
Square for those who have the means, and have the shopping experiences for
those who are trying to stretch their dollars.
■ Atascadero citizens are tired of going out of town, gas is more expensive, and the
population is aging. There is tax leakage to other areas and the city's tax dollars
are leaving at a time when they are needed for roads, fire, police, etc.
Mayor Pro Tem Brenner:
■ Is somewhat leery of an EIR, as land use issues are one of his weaknesses.
■ Education is paramount, and he feels strongly that the EIR is not foolproof.
He spoke of a project in another community that lead to a lawsuit from a
neighboring county, and stated he doesn't want Atascadero to be embroiled in
something like that.
■ Prefers to rely on the community's effort five years ago in producing the General
Plan, which he concurs with.
■ This project is massive and causes him great concern.
■ With growth comes responsibility, and thought there is no dispute Atascadero
needs commercial development, growth must be incremental and proportionate
with intelligent planning.
There was further Council discussion.
MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council Member
Clay to adopt Option #1 and accept the applicant proposal to be
studied first and also require that we fully study the alternate plan,
which is the General Plan option of 150,000 square feet maximum,
and research a third option to study the small scale boutique store
option, more of a lifestyle model, and its impact on the downtown.
Also in the city's economic analysis focus, to focus on Atascadero's
tourism assets.
Council Member O'Malley moved to amend his motion to delete the tire and lube
portion, knocking 8,000 square feet off the proposal.
CC Continued Hearing 10/29/07
Draft Minutes
Page 5 of 7
27
There was no second for the amended motion. ,
MOTION: By Council Member O'Malley and seconded by Council
Member Clay to adopt Option #1 and accept the applicant
proposal to be studied first and also require that we fully study
the alternate plan, which is the General Plan option of 150,000
square feet maximum, and research a third option to study the
small scale boutique store option, more of a lifestyle model,
and its impact on the downtown. Also in the city's economic
analysis focus, to focus on Atascadero's tourism assets.
Motion failed 2:3 by a roll-call vote. (Beraud, Brennier, Luna
opposed)
Discussion:
Mayor Pro Tem Brennier stated he has no problem with the Rottman proposal for the
north side of Del Rio, but the Wal-Mart proposal is too large. He is respectful of the
General Plan and supports commercial development and hopes Wal Mart will offer a
project that meets the 150,000 square foot threshold.
Mayor Luna stated the idea of reducing the square footage is what he is after, and the
cleanest way to do that is with Option #3, letting Wal-Mart do the design and something
it can live with. He also has no problem with the Rottman group's proposal.
Council Member Clay stated his disagreement with going to Option #3, and that the
Council should either go with it or deny it; to split it is to try to separate the two and
create a division. This is a total project and he believes the Council should either go
with Option #1 or 2.
Council Member Beraud stated the need to have some kind of unanimous approach
from the Council. She believes Option #3 is an invitation to the Rottman Group and
Wal Mart to come back with something the community can support so there is not this
kind of division.
MOTION: By Council Member Beraud and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Brennler to choose Option #3, which is to refer both projects back
to staff for additional direction and clarification and on the size of
the property. The General Plan says 150,000 square feet for both
corners, so specifically for the Wal-Mart corner that their total
square footage be 150,000 square feet between the main store
and the two outlying pads, and that they include a buffer between
the general commercial and the residential, whether that be open
space or a multi-family housing, to make it an attractive
development that is compatible with our community.
CC Continued Hearing 10/29/07
Draft Minutes
Page 6 of 7
28
Discussion:
�.r Council Member O'Malley spoke of the need to master plan the Del Rio area, and that
this is an opportunity to look at it as a whole and to master plan the entire area and
mitigate all the problems and unintended consequences. This motion is punting to staff
without significant or sufficient direction and is simply a masked Option #2.
Council Member Clay stated this motion was not really making a decision; Council
should either do it or reject it and let the people vote on it.
Mayor Pro Tem Brennler stated he tends to agree with Council Member Clay, and a
decision should be made. For this reason he retracted his second to the motion.
Mayor Luna stated that Council Member Beraud's motion was a compromise and
meant that a Wal-Mart is okay on the site if it is less than 150,000 square feet. There
would still be the General Plan land use map that must be conformed with, and a
General Plan amendment would still be required.
The Motion died for lack of a second.
There was further Council discussion.
Motion: By Mayor Pro Tem Brennler and seconded by Council Member
Beraud to adopt Option 2 withholding the authorization for
staff to process the project applications by adopting draft
Resolutions C and D.
Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (O'Malley opposed)
(Resolution Nos. 2007-0092 and 2007-093)
ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Luna adjourned the meeting at 8:35 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting
of the City Council on November 15, 2007.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Grace Pucci, Deputy City Clerk
CC Continued Hearing 10/29/07
Draft Minutes
Page 7of7
- 29
oogo
30
ITEM NUMBER: A-3
DATE: 12./11/07
SPECIAL MEETING
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, November 8, 2007, 8:00 a.m.
CLOSED SESSION - DRAFT MINUTES
Mayor Luna called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
PRESENT:
Council Members: Beraud, Brennier, Clay, O'Malley, and Mayor Luna
Staff: City Manager Wade McKinney, Interim City Attorney Robert
Schultz, Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis, Assistant to the City
Manager/City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson, Fire Chief Kurt
Stone and Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard.
1. Public Comment - CLOSED SESSION
None.
2. Call to Order
a. Personnel: Interviews and Appointment (Govt.Code Sec. 54957)
Title: City Attorney
3. Adjourn
Mayor Luna adjourned the meeting at 4:00 p.m.
4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
The City Attorney announced that the Council selected Brian Pierik, of the law firm of
Burke, Williams & Sorenson, and directed staff to bring back the contract for legal
services at the November 27, 2007 meeting. In the meantime, Mr. Pierik will serve as the
Interim City Attorney.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
31
32 _
ITEM NUMBER: A-4
DATE: 12111/07
�eia ie e
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report — Administrative Services Department
Assignment of Factory Outlets Agreement
to Mission Oaks Annex, LLC
RECOMMENDATION:
Council approve assignment of "Agreement by, and between, the City of Atascadero
and Camino Real Fashion Outlets Center, Ltd., dated July 1, 1994" from Morro Road
Homes, LLC and 197 Property Investments, LLC, to Mission Oaks Annex, LLC-and 197
Property Investments, LLC effective August 30, 2006.
DISCUSSION:
In August 1993, Council approved an agreement which called for City financial
participation in the construction of public improvements necessary for the development
of the Factory Outlet Center at the corner of Del Rio Road and EI Camino Real. The
City's financial participation includes the annual payment of the lesser of three values:
1) one-half of the special assessment for public improvements; 2) one-half of the sales
tax generated by the property; 3) $92,000. This agreement, dated July 1, 1994, has
been in place and the City has been paying the County Tax Collector twice a year to
contribute its share towards the public improvements special assessment tax for the
Factory Outlet parcel (Parcel # 049-141-056) originally owned by Levon Investments.
On July 2, 2005, Levon Investments sold the Factory Outlet•property to Morro Road
Homes, LLC and 197 Property Investments, LLC. On December 9, 2005, the new
owners requested, (pursuant to Section 13 of the July 1, 1994 Agreement), approval of
the assignment of the agreement from Levon Investments to Morro Road Homes, LLC
and 197 Property Investment, LLC. On February 28, 2006, the Council approved the
assignment of the agreement.
On March 31, 2006, Morro Rd Homes, LLC transferred its portion of ownership to SLO
Garden Partnership, LLC. Five months later, SLO Garden Partnership, LLC transferred
its ownership to Mission Oaks Annex, LLC. On November 19, 2007, pursuant to
Section 13 of the July 1, 1994 Agreement, the new owners requested approval of the
assignment of the agreement from Morro Road Homes, LLC and 197 Property
Investments, LLC to Mission Oaks Annex, LLC and 197 Property Investments, LLC.
33
Section 13B of the Agreement by and between the City of Atascadero and Camino Real
Fashion Outlets Center, Ltd., dated July 1, 1994 states:
"Developer shall not assign or transfer all or any portion of their rights, duties or
obligations under this agreement to a third party, without the prior written
approval of the City, provided however that the City shall not unreasonably
withhold such approval, if such proposed successors have financial abilities and
business experience sufficient, as determined in the sole discretion of the City
Council, to carry out the provisions of this Agreement."
The request for assignment included a brief description of the qualifications of Mr.
Thomas A. Murrell and Mr. John M. Wilson, principals of 197 Property Investments,
LLC and Mission Oaks Annex, LLC respectively.
Mr. Murrell is an owner of the Promenade Shopping Center in San Luis Obispo, SLO
City Storage, and the Visalia Plaza in Visalia. In addition, Mr. Murrell is a Principal in
CenterVest Capital, LLC, which owns and manages four shopping centers in Northern
California.
Mr. Wilson is an owner of the Promenade Shopping Center in San Luis Obispo, SLO
City Storage, the Visalia Plaza in Visalia, and the Rio Linda Shopping Center in Rio
Linda. Mr. Wilson is also a Principal in CenterVest Capital, LLC, which owns and
manages four shopping centers in Northern California.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No new fiscal impact, however, there is a continued budgeted impact of approximately
$43,200 annually.
ALTERNATIVES:
Find that the new owners do not "have financial abilities and business experience
sufficient—to carry out the provisions of this Agreement," and deny the request for
approval of the assignment.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Copy of letter dated November 19, 2007 requesting assignment of the
Agreement by and between the City of Atascadero and Camino Real Fashion
Outlets Center, Ltd., dated July 1, 1994.
2. Agreement by and between the City of Atascadero and Camino Real Fashion
Outlets Center, Ltd., dated July 1, 1994.
34
MISSION OAKS
November 19, 2007
Jeri Rangel
City of Atascadero
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: Assignment of Agreement between the City of Atascadero and Camino Real Fashion
Outlets Center, Ltd, dated July 1, 1994.
Mr. Rangel:
Pursuant to Section 13 of the above referenced Agreement (the Agreement)the
undersigned hereby request the City's approval of Assignment of the Agreement from
Morro Road Homes, LLC and 197 Property Investments, LLC (Developers)to Mission
Oaks Annex,LLC and 197 Property Investments, LLC (Successors).
The owner and manager of 197 Property Investments, LLC is Thomas A. Murrell. Mr.
Murrell has several years experience in real estate investment and ownership. Currently
Mr. Murrell is an owner of the Promenade Shopping Center in San Luis Obispo, SLO
City Storage, a 500 unit self storage facility in San Luis Obispo, and the Visalia Plaza in
Visalia, California. In addition, Mr. Murrell is a Principal in CenterVest Capital, LLC
which owns and manages four shopping centers in Northern California.
Mission Oaks Annex, LLC is owned by John Wilson who has many years experience in
the development,ownership and management of real estate in California. Currently Mr.
Wilson is a Co-Owner in the Promenade Shopping Center in San Luis Obispo,the Visalia
Plaza in Visalia, California,Rio Linda Shopping Center in Rio Linda, California and
SLO City Storage in San Luis Obispo, California. Mr. Wilson is also a Principal in
CenterVest Capital, LLC which owns and manages four shopping centers in Northern
California.
If you require a more complete resume of the Successors we will be happy to provide you
with that information. Please feel free to contact Thomas Murrell at (805) 545-7556 with
any questions or comments.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours truly,
9%Wtt-1J
E
Thomas A. Murrell J hn M. Wilson
197 Property Investments, LLC Missio Oaks Annex, LLC
- _ 35
Recording Requested By
and When Recorded Return to:-1/
X3041
CITY OF ATASCADERO
6500 PALMA AVENUE
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422
ATTN: LEE PRICE CITY CLERK
--------------------------------------------------
AGREEMENT
by and between
THE CITY OF ATASCADERO and
CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLETS CENTER, LTD.
Note: Includes First Amendment
By and Between the City
and Camino Real Fashion Outlet •
Center, Ltd. dated 7/l/94
[►oc NO : 1995-029102 Rec No : )0033420
Official Records ; NF 0 , 00
San Luis Obispo Co. ;
Julie L . Rodewald ;
Recorder
Jul 11 , 1995
Time: 10 : 12
251 : TOTAL 0 . 00
1/ EXEMPT FROM RECORDER' S FEES
Pursuant to Government
Code §§ 6103 , 27383
816193
60659.5 S1 GNAI URE COPY
36
TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR
THE CITY OF ATASCADERO and
CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLETS CENTER LTD
PAGE
I . Recitals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 . Interest of Developer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3 . Binding Effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4 . Negation of Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5 . Development of the Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6 . Acknowledgments, Agreements and Assurances 5
7 . Project Generated City Sales Tax Revenues 5
A. City' s Contingent Obligation to Pay Portions
of Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
B. December Installments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
C. April Annual Installments . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
D. Failure to Deposit by Developer .
Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
E. Costs of Escrow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
F. Reconciliation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8 . Developer' s Obligation to Construct . . . . . . . . . . 8
9 . Modification, Amendment, or Cancellation 8
10 . Term of Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
11 . Administration of Agreement and Resolution of
Disputes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12 , Excused Delays in Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
13 . Prohibition Against Change In Ownership,
Management and Control of Developers . . . . . . . . . 9
A. Qualifications of Developer . . . . . . . . . . . 9
*ftW 8/6/93
60659.5 -1- SIGNATURE COPY
37
B. Assignment, Prohibited without Approval 10
C. Effect of Approved Assignment . . . . . . . 10
D. Definition of "Developer" . . . . . . . . . . . 10
E. Permitted Assignment, without Approval 10
F. Exceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
G. Assignment. Termination. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
14 . Notices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
15 . Binding Effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
16 . Section Headings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
17 . No Presumption Re: Drafter . . . . . . . . . . . 11
18 . Assistance of Counsel lI
19 . Arbitration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
20. Validation. Operative Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
21 . Effective Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
ExhibitA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . 15
ExhibitB. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 16
ExhibitC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • -- . . . . .. 17
22. First Amendment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
816/93 v
60659.5 -11- SI GN A"IURE COPY
38 -
This Agreement (hereafter "Agreement" ) , is made and
entered into by and between the City of Atascadero, a general law
Vftol city ("City") and Camino Real Fashion Outlets Center, Ltd. , a
California limited partnership ( "Developer") .
In consideration of the mutual conditions and covenants
contained herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows :
W I T N E S S E T H:
1 . Recitals . This Agreement is made and entered into
with regard to the following facts each of which are acknowledged
as true and correct by the Parties to this Agreement, and for the
following purposes:
A. Developer is the owner of the real property
commonly known as the "Camino Real Fashion Outlet Site" , which is
located in the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis Obispo,
State of California , and is more particularly described in
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference (the "Property") ; and
B. Developer desires and is willing to construct
certain buildings and structures on the Property therein known as
a "Factory Outlet Center" (the "Project" ) , as hereafter
described; and
C. The Planning Commission and City Council of
City have approved the Project, as to General Plan and zoning
approvals ("Approval") which Approval included compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 21000 et seq. ,
of the Public Resources Code) and the State and Local guidelines
relating thereto (collectively "CEQA") ; and
D. The City desires to obtain the binding
agreement of the Developer for the development of the Project in
accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. Developer
desires to obtain the binding agreement of the City to permit the
Developer to develop the Project in accordance with this
Agreement; and
E. The parties intend that the execution of this
Agreement shall constitute an exercise of rights with respect to
the Approval; and
F. City has heretofore initiated and approved a
special assessment district pursuant to the Municipal Improvement
Act of 1913 , Section 10, 000 et seq. , of the California Streets
and Highways Code, known as Assessment District No. 6" for the
purpose of providing certain of the necessary off site public
improvements required to serve the Project; and
1%W 8/6193
60659.5 -1- SIGNATURE COPY
39
G . In order for the Project to be economically
feasible, it is necessary to reduce all costs of development so
as to render the Project economically competitive with similar "
existing and/or proposed uses in other areas within the County of
San Luis Obispo; and
H . The City Council of City has determined the
public interest requires the assistance of the City to establish
the Project on the Property, for, among others, the following
reasons:
( 1) It is clear that without the City providing
financial assistance, given the stagnant condition
of the local economy, the Property will continue to
be unimproved and a detriment to the City and its
residents; and
(2) It has been determined that without such
financial assistance, neither the Property, nor
other adjacent properties, will be developed as is
contemplated by the City' s General Plan; and
(3) That the financial assistance by the City
authorized pursuant to this Agreement will result in
the Developer completing the Project, within the
time permitted by this Agreement, which will serve
legitimate public purposes of the City, by
energizing the City' s economic base; by promoting
the municipal affairs of the City; by implementing
the City' s General Plan; by expanding the City' s tax
base, and by making available to residents of the
City, goods and services which are now available
only at distant locations; and
(4 ) That the implementation of this Agreement will
promote the economic development of the City by the
creation of new jobs for residents, by causing the
development of the Project on the Property, which
will enhance existing uses of adjacent properties,
and by encouraging the development and/or
redevelopment of adjacent undeveloped properties .
Such development will effectuate the full and
efficient utilization and modernization of existing
commercial and business facilities located in the
City; and
(5) The implementation of this Agreement will cause
the growth of the City' s overall commercial t ax base
through increased property values and consumer
purchases; and
8/6/93
60659.5 -2- Sl GNATURE COPY
40 -
(6) The development of the Project will assist in
the reduction of the cost of welfare and other
VOW remedial governmental programs, including a
reduction in, and/or prevention of , urban blights,
such as crime, which is attributable, in part , to
the existence of inadequate economic opportunities;
and
(7) The completion of the Project will contribute
to the diversification and the stability of the
City' s overall economy; and
(8) The implementation of this Agreement by the
City paying, semi-annually, from its General Fund, a
portion of the sales taxes generated by taxable
transactions occurring on the real properties
included in the Project, and actually received by
the City, will , as hereafter described , assist in
providing for the financing of the construction of
public improvements which will serve the Property,
and the residents of the City; and
(9) This Agreement will provide tax revenues to
replace tax revenues lost to the City this year, and
in recent years, by the passage of State Budget
Legislation, which lost tax revenues must be
expeditiously replaced; and
NOW (10) The determination by the City Council of public
benefits to be received by the execution and
implementation of this Agreement, is based, in part,
on the materials developed for, and included in, the
Environmental Impact Report for the Project,
prepared by SEDES, dated January 1992 , and testimony
and applicable staff studies and reports received
and considered by the City Council of City in the
hearings conducted by it on June 22 , 1993 , and the
personal knowledge and observations of members of
the City Council (collectively "Studies") ; and
(11) The City Council has determined that the City
is in need of additional businesses which will
produce additional tax revenues; that the retail
businesses which would be successful on the Property
and would generate an above average amount of sales
tax revenues, are the type of uses which will be
included in the Project; and
(12) The Studies also demonstrate that the Project
would not have an adverse effect upon existing
retail outlets in the City; and
8/6193
60659.5 -3- SIGNATURE COPY
41
(13) It is anticipated that sales tax receipts from
the Project will annually generate between ONE
HUNDRED THIRTY-TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($132 , 000 . 00)
and TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ( $200 , 000 . 00) in
future years, as well as other tax revenues which be
generated by the Project; and
I . Developer has applied to the City for approval
of this mutually binding Agreement. The City Council of the City
has determined that the provisions of this Agreement are consis-
tent with the City' s adopted zoning regulations , plans and
policies, and the City' s General Plan; and
J . This Agreement is consistent with the public
health, safety, and welfare needs of the residents of the City
and the surrounding region . The City Council has specifically
considered and approved the impact and benefits of this Project
upon the welfare of the City and the region; and
K. This Agreement eliminates uncertainty in
planning and provides for the orderly development of the Property
and generally serves the public interest within the City and the
surrounding region; and
L. The City Council has determined that the public
interest, convenience and necessity require the execution and
implementation of this Agreement.
2 . Interest of Developer. The Developer represents to
the City that as of the date of this Agreement, it owns the
Property in fee, subject to encumbrances, easements , covenants,
conditions, restrictions , and other matters of record.
3 . Binding Effect. This Agreement, and all of the
terms and conditions of this Agreement, shall run with the lands
comprising the Property and shall be binding upon and inure to
the benefit of the City and its successors in interest.
4 . Negation of Agency . The Parties acknowledge that,
in entering into and performing under this Agreement, each is
acting as an independent entity and not as an agent of the other
in any respect . Nothing contained herein or in any document
executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the
City and Developer joint venturers, partners or employ-
er/employee, or any other relationship, except as is expressly
prc;vided in this Agreement .
5 . Development of the Property. The Property shall be
developed as is described on Exhibit B, attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, at Developer's sole
expense .
8/6/93
60659.5 -4- SIGNATURE COPY
42 -
6 . Acknowledgments , Agreements and Assurances. The
Parties acknowledge and agree that:
A. Developer' s faithful performance in developing
the Project on the Property, will fulfill substantial public
needs; and
B. That there is good and valuable consideration
to the City resulting from Developer' s obligations hereunder and
the faithful performance thereof; and that such consideration
received by City is in balance with the benefits conferred on the
Developer by this Agreement; and
C. That the exchanged consideration hereunder is
fair, just and reasonable; and
D. That the parties by execution of this Agreement
shall be deemed to have each accepted all of the conditions of
the Approval imposed upon the Project by City, which conditions
are reasonably required for the development of the Project.
7 . Project Generated City Sales Tax Revenues .
A. City's Contingent Obligation to Pay Portions of
Assessments. Pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, City
shall during each fiscal year occurring during the term of this
Agreement commencing on and after July 1 , 1994 , be obligated, in
the time and manner set forth in this Agreement, to pay, semi-
Aftw annually, portions of the assessments imposed upon the Property
pursuant to Assessment District No. 6 ( "Assessments") . City' s
maximum obligation in any fiscal year during the term of this
Agreement, determined on an annual basis , as hereinafter
described, shall be the lesser of the following, as determined by
the Director of Finance of City ("Director") :
(1) an amount equal to fifty percent (500) of the
sales tax dollars actually received by City,
generated by taxable transactions which take place
on the Property ("Sales Taxes") ; or
(2) an amount equal to one-half ( 1/2) of the total
annual amount of the Assessments imposed on the
Property; or
(3) the sum of NINETY-TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS
($92 , 000 . 00) .
City shall not be obligated to pay any portion of the
Assessments in any such fiscal year, unless Developer, or a
lawfully approved successor in interest, prior to December 8th of
each calendar year occurring during the term of this Agreement,
files with the Director a written certification unqualifiably
r' 9/6/93
60659.5 -5- SIGNATURE COPY
43
representing and warranting that Developer currently is, and has
been during the immediate preceding twelve (12) months, the owner
in fee of all Lots included in the Property. In the event now
Developer, or a lawfully approved successor in interest, is not,
in fact, the owner of each of the Lots included in the Property,
during each such preceding twelve (12) month period, the City
shall have no obligation to pay any portion of said Assessments
for that fiscal year . If , voluntarily or involuntarily,
Developer, or a lawfully approved successor in interest, is no
longer the owner of all Lots included in the Property, this
Agreement shall , as of the effective date of the transfer of
title to all or anyone of the Lots included in the Property , be
terminated, and of no further effect; provided that City shall be
entitled to recover any sums paid hereunder together with
interest thereon, at the then interest rate applicable to moneys
due pursuant to Judgments . Additionally, City shall be entitled
to all costs incurred in such recovery, including, but not
limited to, attorneys' fees. City' s right to recover such sums
shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
B. December Installments. On or before December
1st of each calendar year occurring during the term of this
Agreement, commencing on , 19 , the Director
shall determine the gross amount of Sales Taxes actually received
by the City during the twelve ( 12) month period ending on June
30, immediately preceding each such December 1st ("Period" ) . The
Director shall give notice to the Developer of the amount of
Sales Taxes actually received by City during the Period.
Annually, prior to December 1 of each calendar year
occurring during the term hereof, the Developer shall file with
thO Director a complete true copy of all County Tax Bills
relating to each Lot included in the Property for the current
fiscal year which shows the total sums due on each Lot included
in the Property, as and for special and general ad valorem taxes
and special assessments ( "Tax Bills") . Upon receipt of such Tax
Bills , the Director shall ascertain from said Tax Bills, and/or
any other sources available to the Director, the amount of the
Assessments imposed upon all of the Lots included in the
Property, owned by Developer during the fiscal year to which the
Current Tax Bill relates.
On or before December 8th of each calendar year occurring
during the term of this Agreement, the Director shall pay from
City' s General Fund, to a bank, selected by the Director for that
purpose ("Bank") , in an escrow account, an amount equal to the
one-half (1/2) of the amount determined by the Director to be the
City's obligation pursuant to the provisions of this Section, 7 ,
which shall in no event exceed the sum of FORTY-SIX THOUSAND
DOLLARS ($46 , 000 . 00) .
8/6/93
60659.5 -6- Sl CN A'I URE COPY
44 -
The Director shall give notice to Developer ,
telephonically, with subsequent written confirmation, of the
amount so deposited. Upon receipt of such telephonic notice
given by the Director, of the amount paid to Bank by City, Deve-
loper shall forthwith deposit with the Bank, in said escrow, a
sum equal to the amount shown on the current Tax Bills required
to be paid for the total of the first installment due for all
general and special property taxes, penalties, interest, and any
other assessments or tax liens imposed of record (collectively
"Property Taxes") upon each Lot included in the Property, then
owned by the Developer, for the current fiscal year, less the
amount of the City' s deposit with the Bank.
Pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, Bank shall take
one of the following actions on or before December 9th of each
such calendar year occurring during the term of this Agreement:
(1) If the total sums deposited by City and
Developer equal the full amount due for the
installment of taxes and assessments due and payable
on or before December 10th of each such fiscal year,
on each Lot included in the Property, Bank shall,
not later than 5: 00 p.m. on the December 10th of
such year, make payment of the same to the Tax
Collector of the County of San Luis Obispo; or
(2) If, for any reason, City fails to timely
*ow deposit all of the funds the Director has determined
City is required to pay hereunder, Bank shall ,
forthwith, refund to the party making such deposits,
all sums deposited in the escrow account and
thereafter the Bank shall have no further obligation
to make any payment for and on behalf of City and/or
Developer; or
(3) If Developer, for any reason fails to timely
deposit with Bank a sum equal to all of the funds it
is required to pay as and for the first installment
of Property Taxes and Assessments due for the then
current fiscal year, on all Lots included in the
Property, less the amount paid to Bank by City, Bank
shall forthwith refund to City and/or Developer all
sums deposited by City or Developer and the Bank
shall have no further obligation to make any payment
for or on behalf of City or Developer.
C. April Annual Installments. If the full payment
of the first or December installment of Property Taxes and
Assessments in any fiscal year, as contemplated by subparagraph B
of this Section, 7 , is timely made and evidence of such payment
is transmitted to the Director, then on or before April 8th of
816193
60659.5 -7- Sl GN A'IUKE COPY
45
the next following calendar year, the Director shall deposit, on
behalf of City, from City's General Fund, the same amount
deposited with the Bank in the preceding December . The
provisions of subparagraph B of this Section, 7 , set forth above,
shall be followed by the Parties and the Bank for the purpose
causing the second annual installment of Property Taxes and
Assessments to be paid on each Lot included in the Property .
D. Failure to Deposit by Developer . Termination.
In the event that the Developer fails to make the cash deposit
with Bank as required pursuant to this Section, 7 , so as to meet
Developer' s obligations for the payment of the first and/or
second installments of general or special Property Taxes and
Assessments due on the Property, in any fiscal year occurring
during the term of this Agreement, the Director shall report such
circumstance to the City Council . In such case, the City
council , in its sole discretion, may, forthwith, terminate this
Agreement.
E. Costs of Escrow. All costs of escrow and
related services authorized to be performed by Bank as escrow
holder pursuant to this Agreement, shall be borne equally by the
Parties hereto.
F. Reconciliation. Upon the request of either
party hereto, at any time during the term of this Agreement or as
of the date of an earlier termination of this Agreement, prior to
the expiration of the term hereof, and/or at the expiration of
the term hereof, the Director and representatives of Developer
shall meet and confer for the purpose of reconciling actual sums
City is obligated to pay pursuant to the provisions hereof .
8 . Developer' s Obligation to Construct. The Developer
shall be obligated, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement , to
cor..struct the buildings and structures necessary to permit the
Project to. be operative, in the manner, and within the time
therefor, as set forth in the Scope of Development/Schedule of
Performance as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference marked Exhibit C. All costs of development in
accordance with the Exhibit C, shall be exclusively borne by
Developer.
Failure by Developer to construct the buildings and
structures in accordance with said Exhibit C, or to fail to build
the same within the time permitted pursuant to said Exhibit C,
shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement, for which
City may, forthwith, terminate this Agreement .
9 . Modification Amendment or Cancellation. This
Agreement may be modified, amended or terminated by mutual
consent of the Parties or their successors in interest.
60659.5 816193-8- SIGNATURE COPY
46 -
i
10. Term of Agreement. Unless sooner terminated
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement
shall continue in full force and effect until December 31, 2013 .
11 . Administration of Agreement and Resolution of
Disputes. All decisions by the City staff concerning the
interpretation and administration of this Agreement and the
Project which is the subject hereof are appealable by the
Developer to the City Council . The decision of the City Council
on such matters appealed to it, shall be final and conclusive .
12 . Excused Delays in Performance. Developer shall not
be deemed to be in default of its obligations except for its
obligations pursuant to Paragraph 7 , to this Agreement where a
delay (s) in the timeliness of performance by Developer, occurs,
if Developer has acted diligently and the delay (s) in performance
are due, exclusively, to events beyond the reasonable control of
Developer ("Excused Delays") . Events which constitute Excused
Delays, include, but are not limited to, war ; insurrection;
strikes; lockouts; riots; floods; earthquakes; fires; casualties;
acts of God; acts of a public enemy; epidemics; quarantine
restrictions; freight embargoes; or failure by the City or other
governmental agencies, not, in whole or in part, caused by
Developer, to timely approve plans, or issue permits; or
unusually severe weather which prohibits Development. "Excused
Delays" shall not include delays occasioned by economic factors .
*#M,, Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this
Agreement, an extension of time for Excused Delays shall be for
the period of each Excused Delay and shall run from the time of
commencement of the Excused Delay to the time when the Excused
Delay no longer exists . If any such Excused Delay continues for
a period of One Hundred and Eighty (180) or more consecutive
calendar days, City shall have the right to terminate this
Agreement. Notice of an Excused Delay including the cause or
causes therefor, shall be promptly given by Developer to City.
13 . Prohibition Against Change In Ownership, Management
and Control of Developers.
A. Qualifications of Developer. The
qualifications and identities of principal officers of Developer
are of particular concern to the City as the same relate to the
Project . It is because of their respective qualifications and
idntities, that the City has entered into this Agreement with
Developer. Therefore, no voluntary or involuntary successor in
interest of Developer shall acquire any rights or benefits under
this Agreement except as expressly set forth herein.
1%W 8/6193
60659.5 -9- SIGNATURE COPY
-`47
i
B. Assignment Prohibited without Approval
Developer shall not assign or transfer all or any portion of
th,�:ir rights, duties or obligations under this Agreement to a
third party, without the prior written approval of the City;
provided however that the City shall not unreasonably withhold
such approval, if such proposed successors have financial
abilities and business experience sufficient, as determined in
the sole discretion of the City Council, to carry out the
provisions of this Agreement.
C. Effect of Approved Assignment. All of the
terms , covenants and conditions of this Agreement shall be
binding upon the City, the Developer and any lawfully approved
successor in interest of Developer.
D. Definition of "Developer" Whenever the term
"Developer" is used herein, such term shall include any other
lawfully approved successor in interest of Developer .
E. Permitted Assignment without
ApUroval . Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section, 15,
Developer shall be free to assign or transfer all or any of the
Lots included in the Project Site, without the consent of
approval of the City, to any legal entity in which the current
general partners of Developer, have substantial financial
interests and such general partners continue to be obligated as
primary obligors as to Developer' s obligations pursuant to this
Agreement .
F. Exceptions. The prohibitions against
assignment or transfer shall not apply to any lease, dedication,
grant of easement or license, financing, deeds of trust, or
security interest encumbrance as to any Lot included in the
Property.
G. Assignment. Termination. The City Council
may, in the event of an assignment made contrary to the
prt.,visions hereof, terminate this Agreement, forthwith.
14 . Notices . Whenever notices are required to be given
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, the same shall be
in written form and shall be served upon the party to whom
addressed by personal service as required in judicial proceed-
ings, or by deposit of the same in the custody of the United
States Postal Service or its lawful successor in interest,
postage prepaid, addressed to the Parties as follows:
CITY: City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, California 93422
Attn: City Manager
8/6/93
60659.5 _10- Sl GN ATURE C OPY
48 -
DEVELOPER: Camino •Real Fashion Outlets Center, Ltd .
7627 Morro Road
Atascadero, California 93422
Attn: Richard Shannon
Notices shall be deemed, for all purposes, to have been given on
the date of personal service or three (3) consecutive calendar
days following the deposit of the same in the United States mail.
15. Binding Effect. The provisions of this Agreement
shall be binding upon the Parties hereto and their respective
successors in interest.
16. Section Headings. The section headings contained in
this Agreement are for convenience and identification only and
shall not be deemed to limit or define the contents of the
sections to which they relate.
17 . No Presumption Re: Drafter . The Parties
acknowledge and agree that the terms and provisions of this
Agreement have been negotiated and discussed between the Parties
and their attorneys, and this Agreement reflects their mutual
agreement regarding the same. Due to the nature of such
negotiations and discussions, it would be inappropriate to deem
any party to be the drafter of this Agreement, and therefore no
presumption for or against validity or as to any interpretation
*AW hereof, based upon the identity of the drafter shall be applica-
ble in interpreting or enforcing this Agreement.
18 . Assistance of Counsel . Each party to this Agreement
warrants to each other party, as follows:
A. That each party hereto had the assistance of
counsel in the negotiation for, and execution of, this Agreement,
and all related documents; and
B. That each party hereto has lawfully authorized
the execution of this Agreement.
19 . Arbitration. Except as otherwise expressly provided
herein, the Parties hereto agree that any claim or dispute
between them, arising out of or relating to the terms of this
Agreement, shall be resolved by compulsory binding arbitration
conducted by a retired Superior Court Judge of the State of
California or other qualified person the Parties mutually agree
upon. The claim or dispute being arbitrated shall be resolved in
acr:ordance with California law.
The arbitration proceedings shall be governed by the laws
and procedures governing civil judicial proceedings in this
✓' 816/93
60659.5 -11- Sl GN A7URE COPY
49
State . Each party shall comply with all applicable laws relating
to binding and compulsory arbitration, the directions givers by
the Arbitrator and the provisions of this Agreement. The
determinations made by the Arbitrator, if within the scope of the
Arbitration and the Arbitrator' s function, shall be binding and
cot?clusive on the Parties and shall be enforceable in the manner
provided by law.
The Arbitrator shall be selected in the following manner:
(a) The party initiating the arbitration
("Initiating Party") shall prepare and submit to the
other party a list ("List") containing the names of
not to exceed three (3) retired Superior Court
Judges each of whom the Initiating Party believes
are qualified to serve as Arbitrator . The names of
the judges on the List shall be numbered
consecutively by the Initiating Party .
(b) The party upon whom the List is served , within
ten (10) calendar days after service of the List,
shall either:
(1) select one of the named retired judges to
act as Arbitrator, in which case that retired
judge shall serve as the Arbitrator; or
(2) strike one (1) name from the List.
(c) Upon expiration of said ten ( 10) day period , if
no selection is made, the Arbitrator shall be the
retired judge on the List with the lowest number
next to his name, unless that judge' s name was
stricken during the ten ( 10) day period by the non-
initiating party.
(d) If , for any reason, the retired judge
designated as the Arbitrator is unwilling or unable
to serve as the Arbitrator, the judge on the List
with the next lower number whose name was not
stricken shall be the Arbitrator . In the event that
none of the three retired judges named on a List,
are willing or able to serve as the Arbitrator, the
Initiating Party shall prepare and submit a new
List, containing the names of not to exceed three
(3) different retired judges, and the above
described procedure shall be followed until an
Arbitrator is selected.
Each party hereto hereby agrees to pay one-half of the
compensation to be paid to the Arbitrator, and except as
8/6/93
60659.5 -12- SIGNATURE COPY
50 _
otherwise expressly provided herein, each party shall bear its
own costs and expenses of arbitration, including, but not limited
to, attorneys' fees and related costs .
By way of illustration, if the List served by the
Initiating Party, upon the other party, has the name of three (3)
retired judges, A, B, and C, numbered 1 , 2 and 3 , respectively;
and number 1 is stricken, then B, Number 2 , shall be deemed , for
all purposes , to be the selected Arbitrator .
20 . Validation. Operative Date . This Agreement shall
be validated pursuant to Section 860 et seq . , Code of Civil
Procedure in the State of California and other applicable law, by
a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction.
21 . Effective Date. The effective date of this
Agreement shall be the date that a judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction validating this Agreement becomes final .
The Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed as follows :
CITY OF ATASCADERO
A
By.
gay "
A ,AT
x Ci
"APPROVED AS TO FORM:
1
Ar her Mont ndon, City Attorney
CITY OF ATASCADERO
t '
Attorneys fot Developer
816/93
60659.5 -13- SIGNATURE COPY
51
State of California
County of San Luis Obispo
On / before me, Lee Price, City Clerk, personally appeared
personally known to me -Ear-prn d
t ) to be the person 7;sj whose
name (W is/a-2-e- subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me
t1'at he/shefe-hey executed the same in his/-__ ;-authorized
capacity(.) , and that by his/hit-h-oY signatureC84 m
on the instrument the
person-(F,,�, or the entity upon behalf of which the person�g) acted, executed
the instrument.
WI&(md _ nd of icial seal . LEE PRICE
C:OMM.i 1064431 Z
Y ERK lJ &W LUIS 06010
COUNTY
WIMY Cornm.E;1w APR L 1499
State of California
County of San. Luis Obispo
On bef me, ee Price, City Clerk, personally appeared
r`- personally known to me (o4=—p-xe -ed
t to be the person) whose
name ( is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknow edged to me
teat he/shefti y executed the same in his/her,Ltheir authorized
capacity( , and that by his/he--/6 i.r signature(it�) on the instrument the
person (s>L, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed
the instrument.
77 tyd0offi ia1seal . LEE PRICE
COMM..)OC443
dftmio
LEE PRICE, CITY CLERIC 3AN LUIS OMWO GOUMY
%,My Comm.boba APR L 1999
State of California
County of San Luis Obispo
On before me, �_��� 17
personally appearedCE. l,�;i-i„� personally
known to me (or trasis-of-c�ti frsGoxy�vieler�ee) to be
t1±e person (4) whose name(,t) is/awe subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that ire/she/they executed the same in h4-s/her/t-4e�r
authorized capacity( es) , and that by lia-alher/the3x- signature (d) on the
instrument the person) , or the entity upon behalf of which the person(A)
acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
SHELLY HANSON
F%
NOTARY PUBLIC
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
Nly Com thslon Expires on June 30,1995
52
State of California
County of San Luis Obispo
On �l' /�� b f
personally appeared _ - personally
known to me of to be
the person W whose name W isfare subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/sey executed the same in his/har, t�
authorized capacity(i-� , and that by his/her rha;r- signature'(r�4 on the
instrument the persons , or the entity on behalf of which t e son (s;�
acted, executed t strument.
LEE PRICE
WITy a an fficial seal . comm.#IDS I Z
Notory PubOc—CaNtomfa a
SAN Luis Oa1SPO COUNTY
IPMy
Comm.Expi►w APR 2.1999
53
CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLETS CENTER, LTD.
By: Golden West Development Corp. ,
a corporation, General Partner Now
By: /. r.�.,
Preside t
J
By.
Secret y
State of California
County of San Luis Obispo
Oneore e,
personally appeared personally
known to me � preved to -b��, f Lo27y-_evideneno) to be
the person ((sP whose name (z3 is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/s-h-e t e-y executed the same in his/h-E� ithA
au thori zed capaci ty(� , and tha t by hi s/hes,�*_?�� si gna ture(� on the
instrument the personYW , or the entity upon behalf of which the personls
acted, executed th nstrument.
W� IN S my an and fficial seal . LEE PRICE
COMM.f 1064431 z
~' Notary PutAc-Colton-{o a
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
My Comm.Expkes APR 2.1999
State of California
County o San Luis Obispo
On `e �S b re me
personally appeared personally
known to me ( �1a.ai S of Sa {, * to be
the person @) whose name W is/a�-e subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/shel-t�ey executed the same in his/ham-4hel-
authorized capacity(iebb, and that by his/ha--r th-e-�signature,("q) on the
instrument the person,(sq , or the entity upon behalf of which the person(sl
acted, executed goffi
ent.
W .TNE y h n l seal.
LEE PRICE
xCOMM.#1064431 z
! *,MY
Notory PutAc-CaNtomla a
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
Comm.Expkw APR 2.1999
8/6/93
60659.5 -14- SIGNATURE COPY
54
EXHIBIT A
PARCEL B
That portion of Lots 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 in Block 23 of Atascadero Colony in the City of
Atascadero, County of San Luis Obipso, State of California, as shown on map recorded
October 21, 1914 in Book 3AC, Page 26 of Maps as shown on Map recorded April 14, 1994
in Book 70 of Licensed Surveys at Page 81, filed in the office of the County Recorder of the
County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, being more particularly described as
follows:
Commencing at a 1" iron pipe with plastic cap stamped "CALIF. DOT" at the northwesterly
most corner of said Lot 13 as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence along the southerly right-of-way line of Del Rio Road North 6327'07" East 71.49 feet
to a 3/4" iron pipe with tag stamped "LS 5201" as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence along said right-of-way line as described in Offer of Dedication recorded April 14,
1994 under Recorder's Series Number 1994-023840 of Official Records,North 70°00'26"East
33.38' to a 3/4" iron pipe with tag stamped "LS 5201" as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence leaving said right-of-way line South 25°04131" East 140.76 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe
with tag stamped "LS 5201" as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence North 64°55'29" East 112.04 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe with tag stamped "LS 5201" on
the southwesterly right-of-way line of EI Camino Real as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence along said right-of-way line South 25°04131" East 891.47 feet to a rebar and cap
stamped "LS 5571" as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence leaving said right-of-way line South 6455'06" West 316.95 feet to a rebar and cap
stamped "LS 5571" on the northeasterly right-of-way line of U. S. Highway 101 as shown on
said Licensed Survey;
Thence along said right-of-way line North 28°02'49" West 221.64 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe
with cap stamped "LS 5201" as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence North 22°49'31"West 271.12 feet to a 2"iron pipe with brass cap stamped "CAL DIV
HWYS STA 133+00 120 RT" as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence North 28°10'01"West 199.95 feet to a 1" iron pipe with plastic cap stamped "CALIF.
DOT" as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence North 11°46'52"West 177.13 feet to a 1" iron pipe with plastic cap stamped "CALIF.
DOT^ as shown on said Licensed Survey;
Thence North 216'12" West 183.43 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Contains 6.97 acres.
Alan L. V lbrecht L.S. 5201 (exp. 6-30-99)
stj
1 L aR
vo
• �
�.
ALAN ;
VOLBRECHT •yk
L.S 5201 e:
Of CAIliQ���Q
55
EXHIBIT "B"
CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLET MAP
IS ON FILE WITH THE CITY CLERK, CITY OF ATASCADERO
56
Exhibit C
Scope of Development
The proposed improvements to be constructed consist of an
approximate 89 , 000 square foot Factory Outlet Shopping Center,
together with all on and off-site improvements required for the
operation of the center, and the efficient flow of traffic to and
from the center . The center will be leased to approximately 27-
30 tenants with construction to be of wood frame , stucco and
masonry in the mission style of Architecture , all to be
constructed in accordance with the plans approved by the City
pursuant to conditional use permit 04-91 and the conditions of
approval pertaining there to.
Schedule Of Performance
1 . Construction of Public Improvements to commence on or before
November 15 , 1993 .
2 . Construction of on-site improvements to begin on or before
December 31 , 1993 .
3 . Completion of construction to be on or before June 30, 1994 .
The above schedule may be extended in the event of
circumstances arising that are beyond the control of the
*%mov developer .
57
RESOLUTION NO. 89-93
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN.AGREEMENT WITH
CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLETS CENTER, LTD.
FOR
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FINANCING
The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California hereby resolves as
follows:
1 . The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an agreement with
Camino Real Fashion Outlets Center, Ltd. for public improvement
financing.
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to make minor corrections or
modifications of a mathematical or clerical nature.
3. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to appropriate funds, if
necessary; release and expend funds; and issue warrants to comply with
the terms of this agreement.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Atascadero held on the 10th day of August, 1993.
ATTESZ : CITY OF ATASCADERO
Y
LEE OARA B 0!Nty Clerk A KUDLAC, Mayor
58
RESOLUTION NO. 62-94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT WITH
CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLET CENTER, LTD.
The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California does resolve as follows:
1 . The Mayor or, in the Mayor's absence, the Mayor Pro Tem is
authorized and directed to execute, on behalf of the City of
Atascadero, the attached First Amendment to an Agreement with
Camino Real Fashion Outlet Center, Ltd., and other documents
necessary to effectuate the terms and intent of this First
Amendment.
On motion by Councilmember Carden, seconded by Councilmember Highland,
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Carden, Highland, Johnson and Mayor ProTem Highland
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Bewley
ADOPTED: June 28, 1994
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
By. ZA /
LEE MICE, City Clerk GEORGE= P. HIGHLAND, Mayor ProTem
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER R. MO TA ON, City Attorney
59
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
AND
CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLETS CENTER, LTD.
The Agreement entered into on _August 10, 1993, titled "Agreement by and
between the City of Atascadero and Camino Real Fashion Outlets Center, Ltd.", is
amended as follows:
1 . Exhibit C, sentence #3 is amended to read as follows:
3. Completion of construction to be on or before September 30:
1994.
2. The rights and responsibilities under this Agreement are hereby
transferred from Camino Real Fashion Outlets Center, Ltd., to
Atascadero Factory Outlets Inc , under the terms of Paragraph 13 of
the Agreement. The assignee shall assume all the duties under the terms
of this Agreement as the "Developer".
Dated:
CITY OF ATASCADERO CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLETS, LTD.
GEO GE P. H . LAND, Mayor ProTem By: Charles B. Voorhis, 1z
Title:President, Golden West Development Corp.
ATTEST: General Partner
ASSIGNEE: Atascadero Factory Outlets Inc.
� a
LEE MICE, .City Clerk By: Kennvlaught
Ti e: Vic resident
60 -
-ls-
State of California
County of San Luis Obispo
On ,✓ /�� 'eLore m
personally appeared c� ,o persona y
known to me ( e) to be
the personNO whose name(pry i s/a-rr-e- subscribed to the wi thin instrument and
acknowledg d to me that he/shef-t# - executed the same in his/he- e�
authorized capacity(i-es-) , and that by his/her Lthe4-r- Signa ture-69�) on the
instrument the person(s) , or the enti t bjh rson (,
ected, executed the instrument.
•—•''•
WITN S h TY
nd of 1 C-1 seal . LEE PRICE
COMM.# 1054431 z
Notory Public—Colitc mlo i
1pSAN LUIS OBISPO COUN
My Comm.Expires APR 2.1949
State of California ^ '
Coun t 0f
On -Z-Z tgC1 5 beforee NI L �u�s
personally appeared K'UnruCSG -
personally
known to me (or proved to me on the basis satisfactory evidence) to be
the person (s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies) , and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the
instrument the person(s) , or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
a :ted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal . MARYL NAVA"
OW
COWi Ms"mVAVAk oo�C n s u w coma,600 Ma 11.IMP
State of California
County of S n Luis Obispo
On bef re me, Le _ / rice, City Clerk, personally appeared
lye ' tai 7�/ci,—Persona lly known to me for-T,)- d
t ) to be the person) whose
name ( is/ere subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me
that he/sha�y executed the same in his/h•-= '�sr authorized
capacity(i�, and that by his/:� -ter signature Q*) on the instrument the
person ( , or the entity upon behalf of which the person( acted, executed
t:be instrument.
WI myadtacial seal. LEE PRICE
COMM.#1064431 Z
%,My
Notory Public—CaAtorroa
SAN LUIS OBtSPO COUMY Comm.Expires APR 2.1949
61
State of California
County of San Luis Obispo
On /i'- before mg,
personally appeared Z, .�,� personally
known to me (o he_ba�,� f�a ti sfacte r e b dear ) to be
the person (A) whose name($) is/a-re subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that -hg/she/they executed the same in his/her/th4e-j.r—
authorized capaci ty(i,es) , and that by hi-§/her/t-ie signature( ) on the
instrument the person (�) , or the entity upon behalf of which the person (�s')
acted, executed the instrument.
t -T=SS my hand and official seal . SHELLY HANSON
NOTARY PUBLIC
4 C _ SAN LUIS OBISPO COUM
`— — CALIFORNIA
My Com tsfon bores on June 3Q,1995
62 END OF DOCUMENT
ITEM NUMBER: A-5
DATE: 12/11/07
WIN ! ■
1918
1979
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - City Manager's Office
Confirm the Appointment of the Police Chief
RECOMMENDATION:
Council confirm the appointment of Jim Mulhall as Police Chief.
DISCUSSION:
Chief John Couch announced his retirement effective December 29, 2007 and a
recruitment for his successor has been underway. The City conducted a nationwide
search for a new Police Chief. The process included submitting a resume and City
application. The applications were screened by current police chiefs, and the finalists
participated in an oral interview process that included a professional panel (two Police
Chiefs and a City Manager), a community panel (four local citizens including a youth
representative) and an employee panel of police and fire. The panel recommended two
candidates for final consideration and background. Following final interviews and
backgrounds, Jim Mulhall was selected as the top candidate.
Jim Mulhall is a 42-year resident of San Luis Obispo County. He attended Cuesta
College and Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. Jim began his full-time law enforcement career
with the Kings County Sheriff's Department in 1979, and then began his career with the
San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Department in 1981, leaving there in 2005 with the
rank of Commander. While employed with the Sheriff's Department, Jim Mulhall was the
Bomb Task Force Commander for San Luis Obispo County, retaining that role as a
Lieutenant with the Atascadero Police Department. During his time with the Sheriff's
Department, some of his accomplishments included: being a recipient of the Medal of
Valor, writing successfully funded Homeland Security grants, managing the solving of a
20-year-old homicide investigation, preparation and management of various
departmental budgets, and overseeing a staff in excess of 100 employees.
Mr. Mulhall has been a Consultant Instructor, Lecturer and Featured Guest Speaker at
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, Cuesta College and other conferences and institutions. The
topics he has trained others in range from counter terrorism, emergency services,
political sciences, explosive awareness, chemical safety and bomb squad operations, to
name a few.
63
Consistent with the Municipal Code Section 2-11.01 the appointment of the Police Chief
is subject to confirmation by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No new impact
64
ITEM NUMBER: A-6
DATE: 12/11/07
1918 1 9
E$p/
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Development Department
PLN 2099-1108
Planned Development Overlay Zone #31 :
BMX Facility Master Plan of Development
6575 Sycamore Rd
(Atascadero BMX)
(Approval of the proposed project would allow a private BMX facility to be
located at 6575 Sycamore Road)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council:
1. Adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone Text
Change 2005-0108 to establish Planned Development Overlay Zone #31; and,
2. Adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance B approving Zone Map
Change 2007-0143 based on findings.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed project consists of a Zone Text Change to establish a new site-specific
Planned Development #31 Overlay Zone and Zone Map Amendment to establish a
Planned Development Overlay Zone #31 on the subject site with a corresponding
Master Plan of Development (CUP) that would allow a private BMX facility to be located
at 6575 Sycamore Road. The specific project site is currently owned by the Atascadero
Mutual Water Company and contains adjacent industrial and water facility uses.
On November 27, 2007, the City Council conducted a public hearing and introduced
these ordinances for first reading by title only. On a 4-0 vote, the City Council approved
the first reading.
65
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is staff's understanding that the proposed BMX facility will not be operated as a public
facility, and no staff or operational costs will be incurred. Additionally, all liability will be
the responsibility of the Atascadero BMX Association.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Draft Ordinance A
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance B
66
ATTACHMENT 1: Draft Ordinance A
Approval of Proposed Zoning Text Change to establish a PD-31 Overlay Zone
DRAFT ORDINANCE A
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE
ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE BY APPROVING ZONE CHANGE
2005-0108 TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY #31
(6575 Sycamore Rd. /ABMX)
The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows:
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Atascadero BMX Association—Tom
Jordan, 8255 Graves Creek Rd, Atascadero, CA 93422, (Applicant) and Atascadero Mutual
Water Company 5005 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422, (Property Owner) to consider a
project consisting of a Zone Text Amendment to establish a custom PD Overlay Zone (PD-31)
and a Zone Map Change to apply PD-31 to the subject site with corresponding Master Plan of
Development located at 6575 Sycamore Rd, (APN 028-111-001, 003); and,
WHEREAS, Article 28 of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows for the creation of
Planned Development Overlay Zones to promote orderly and harmonious development and to
enhance the opportunity to best utilize special site characteristics; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0015 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 Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to enact this amendment to the Zoning Code Text to protect the health, safety, and welfare
of its citizens by applying orderly development and expanding housing opportunities within the
City; 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 Zone Text
Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which
hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Zoning Text
Amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing
held on October 16, 2007 studied and considered Zone Change 2005-0108, after first studying
and considering the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and,
67
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing held on
November 27, 2007 studied and considered Zone Change 2005-0108, after first studying and
considering the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and,
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a Zone Text Change Creating a PD-31
Planned Development Overlay District. The City Council finds as follows:
1. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted
to promote orderly and harmonious development.
2. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance
the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a
beneficial effect on the area.
3. Benefits derived from the Overlay Zone cannot be reasonably achieved through
existing development standards or processing requirements.
SECTION 2. Approval. The City Council of the City of Atascadero, in a regular
session assembled on December 11, 2007 resolved to approve on second reading by title only, an
Ordinance that would amend the City Zoning Code Text with the following:
9-3.676 Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone #31
This Planned Development Overlay Zone on APN 028-111-001, 003 in the Industrial Park Zone
for the establishment of a Bicycle Motor Cross track and associated improvements. Uses on
other areas of the site, if listed as an allowed or conditionally allowed use, shall only be subject to
the standards and requirements of the Atascadero Municipal Code. The following development
standards are applicable to the establishment of a BMX facility and shall be met by the entitled
project within the PD-31 Overlay Zone:
a) All site development shall require the approval of a Master Plan of Development. All
construction and development shall conform to the approved Master Plan of Development,
as conditioned.
b) Any subsequent amendments for the site shall be consistent with an approved Master Plan
of Development. All construction and development shall conform to the approved Master
Plan of Development, as conditioned.
c) The facility and all improvements including drainage basins, erosion control measures,
landscaping, signage, structures, and waste water facilities shall be maintained by the
Atascadero BMX Association or their designee(s). If the use is discontinued, all
improvements will be removed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Community
Development Director.
d) The Atascadero BMX Association will ensure that all structures and improvements conform
to the Floodway standards set forth in the Atascadero Municipal Code Title 9, Chapter 11
and as regulated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
68
e) Parking shall be limited to designated areas of the site. Overflow parking shall only be used
for larger events. No parking will be permitted on Sycamore Avenue or any other
001 undeveloped portion of the surrounding Atascadero Mutual Water Company property.
f) The landscape buffer between the historic Anza Trail and the BMX facility shall be
maintained by the Atascadero BMX Association or their designee(s). All buffer landscaping
shall be maintained in a way which screens the BMX facility from the historic trail.
SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together
with the ayes and noes, shall be published twice: at least five days prior to its final passage in
the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero, and;
before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its final passage in the Atascadero News, a
newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero. A copy of the full text of this
ordinance shall be on file in the City Clerk's office on and after the date following introduction
and passage and shall be available to any interested member of the public.
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Dr. George Luna, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Brian Pierik, City Attorney
69
ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Ordinance B
Approval of Proposed Zoning Map Change
DRAFT ORDINANCE B
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE
CHANGE 2007-0143, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION OF APN 028-111-0019 003 FROM IP (INDUSTRIAL PARK)
TO IP/PD-31 (INDUSTRIAL PARK/ PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY #31)
(6575 Sycamore Rd. /ABMX)
The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows:
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Atascadero BMX Association —Tom
Jordan, 8255 Graves Creek Rd., Atascadero, CA 93422, (Applicant), and Atascadero Mutual
Water Company, 5005 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422, (Property Owner) to consider a
project consisting of a Zone Text Amendment to establish a custom PD Overlay Zone (PD-31)
and a Zone Map Change to apply PD-31 to the subject site with corresponding Master Plan of
Development located at 6575 Sycamore Rd, (APN 028-111-001, 003); and,
WHEREAS, the site's General Plan Designation is I (Industrial); and,
WHEREAS, the site's current zoning district is IP (Industrial Park); and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0015 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 Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to enact this amendment to the Official Zoning Map to protect the health, safety, and
welfare of its citizens by applying orderly development of the City; 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 Zone
Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which
hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Zoning amendments;
and,
70
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on October 16, 2007 studied and considered Zone Change 2007-0143, after
first studying and considering the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the
project, and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed Public Hearing
held on November 27, 2007 studied and considered Zone Change 2007-0143, after first studying
and considering the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and,
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a Zone Change to the Official Zoning Map of
Atascadero Changing the existing site zoning to IP/ PD-31. The City Council finds as
follows:
1. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted to
promote orderly and harmonious development.
2. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance the
opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a beneficial
effect on the area.
3. Benefits derived from the Overlay Zone cannot be reasonably achieved through
existing development standards or processing requirements.
4. The proposed project offers certain redeeming features to compensate for the
requested zone change.
SECTION 2. Approval. The City Council of the City of Atascadero, in a regular
session assembled on December 11, 2007, resolved to adopt on second reading by title only, an
Ordinance that would rezone the subject site consistent with the following:
Exhibit A: Location Map/Zone Map Amendment Diagram
SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together
with the ayes and noes, shall be published twice: at least five days prior to its final passage in
the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero, and;
before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its final passage in the Atascadero News, a
newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero. A copy of the full text of this
ordinance shall be on file in the City Clerk's office on and after the date following introduction
and passage and shall be available to any interested member of the public.
71
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Dr. George Luna, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure T orgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Brian Pierik, City Attorney
72-
ffx , it A: Location Map!Zone Map Amendment Diagram
— 1r1 X�Yi r
i
Project site
% ,
l � ,
al t
,
71
/j *y
Existing Designation:
- Industrial
- Industrial Park
Proposed Designation:
- Industrial
-Industrial Park/PD-31
73
74
ITEM NUMBER: A-7
DATE: 12/11/07
..r
1918 1��78
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Development Department
PLN 2006-1111
Condominium Development and Condominium Conversion Ordinance
(Title 9 and Title 11)
City of Atascadero
(Approval of Ordinance will allow for conditional use permit review for all new
condominium development projects, including site condominiums, and will help
to retain the rental housing inventory in Atascadero by establishing procedures
and requirements for residential condominium conversions.)
RECOMMENDATION:
Council adopt on second reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A approving Zone
Change 2006-0111 based on findings.
DISCUSSION:
The project consists of a proposed Ordinance Text Amendment to portions of Title 9,
Planning and Zoning, and Title 11, Subdivisions, of the Atascadero Municipal Code
(AMC). The proposed text places all substantive provisions regarding condominium
development and condominium conversions in Title 9, Planning and Zoning, removes a
portion of current condominium standards from Titie 11 — Subdivisions and includes the
following major amendments:
1. Requires a Conditional Use Permit for all condominium projects, including
commercial, industrial, site, residential, and conversions.
2. Limits residential condominium conversions to 25% of rental housing newly
constructed each year, for conversions of five units or more.
3. Requires that 20% of new residential condominium units or converted
apartments, in projects with five units or more, be included in the City's
inclusionary policy at the rate of 4% affordable to very low income households,
7.5% to lower income households, and 8.5% to moderate income households.
75
4. Provides additional protections to tenants in apartments being converted,
including relocation assistance equal to three months rent and an additional.one-
year occupancy after conversion for seniors and the disabled; also allows
tenants with school-aged children to remain in their homes through the school
year.
5. Adds additional standards for the physical condition of converted buildings.
On November 27, 2007, the City Council conducted a public hearing and introduced
these ordinances for first reading by title only. On a 3=2 vote, the City Council approved
the first reading.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact will vary depending upon the _methods of implementation and the
effect of the Ordinance on applications. Staff time and resources are currently used to
process project requests; additional staff time may be required to monitor construction
of new rental units and to administer new inclusionary requirements. However, since
few new rental units are currently being constructed, the Ordinance may have the effect
of reducing the staff workload due to a decrease in applications for condominium
conversions.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Council may introduce the Condominium Development and Condominium
Conversion Ordinance.
2. The Council may choose to refer the item back to staff for additional analysis.
Clear direction to staff should be provided on additional information or policies
that are desired.
3. The Council may recommend that the Condominium Development and
Condominium Conversion Ordinance not be adopted. In this case, the Council
should provide recommendations on how to proceed under the current
Ordinance and the General Plan policies.
ATTACHMENT:
Attachment 1 Draft Ordinance A
76
Attachment 1
Draft Ordinance A
Goldfarb&Lipman LLP,Attorneys
DRAFT ORDINANCE A
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO ADDING CHAPTER 9-12, REPEALING CHAPTER 11-12,
AND AMENDING SECTIONS 11-2.09 AND 11-4.02 OF THE
ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO CONDOMINIUM
DEVELOPMENTS AND CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS
WHEREAS, an application has been received from the City of Atascadero, 6907 El
Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422 (Applicants) to consider a Municipal Code Amendment
affecting Titles 9 and 11 to establish procedures for condominium development and
condominium conversion of rental apartment to "for sale" condominium units; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code are exempt from review
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)because CEQA Guidelines Section
15061(b)(3) exempts activities which are covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to
*ftwprojects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The
proposed Condominium Development and Condominium Conversion Ordinance does not have
the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. The majority of the conditions
imposed by this ordinance will not result in physical changes in the environment, because they
affect social and economic conditions, such as by requiring additional project review, affordable
housing, relocation payments to tenants, protections against evictions, and similar social
conditions which do not affect the physical environment; and the only change in property
development standards imposed by this Ordinance, in regard to exterior lighting, is categorically
exempt from CEQA as a minor alteration (Class 15301) to an existing facility involving no
expansion of use; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to
enact this Condominium Development and Condominium Conversion Ordinance to protect the
health, safety, and welfare of its citizens by applying orderly development, ensuring adequate
open space, adequate long term maintenance procedures and protecting rental housing units and
expanding affordable housing opportunities within the City; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject
Condominium Development and Condominium Conversion Ordinance was held by the Planning
Commission of the City of Atascadero on October 16, 2007, at which hearing evidence, oral and
documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Text Amendments; and,
77
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of said Ordinance to the
City Council; and
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject
Condominium Development and Condominium Conversion Ordinance was held by the City
Council of the City of Atascadero on November 27, 2007, at which hearing evidence, oral and
documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Text Amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO does ordain
as follows:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the recitals contained above as findings to support the
adoption of an ordinance concerning condominiums and condominium conversions.
Section 2. Chapter 12, Condominiums and Condominium Conversions, is added to Title 9,
Zoning and Planning, of the Atascadero Municipal Code, to read as follows:
Chapter 12 CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT AND CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
9-12.101 Purpose and intent.
9-12.102 Definitions.
ARTICLE 2. REVIEW PROCEDURES
9-12.103 Applicability.
9-12.104 Required approvals.
9-12.105 Application requirements for condominium projects and condominium
conversions.
9-12.106 Special application requirements for residential condominium conversions.
9-12.107 Special noticing requirements for residential condominium conversions.
ARTICLE 3. PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS
9-12.108 Conditions of approval.
9-12.109 Special conditions of approval for residential condominium conversions.
9-12.110 Exceptions to property improvement standards for condominium conversions.
9-12.111 Special findings required for approval of condominium conversions.
ARTICLE 4. TENANT AND BUYER PROTECTIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL
CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS
9-12.112 Tenants' rights.
9-12.113 Reports to be furnished to prospective purchasers.
78
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
r 9-12.101 Purpose and intent.
The purpose of this Chapter is to:
(a) Provide design and property improvement standards for condominium and condominium
conversion projects;
(b) Ensure that a homeowners' association for residential projects or a property owners'
association for commercial/industrial projects is established that is adequately funded and
organized to repair and maintain all common areas, infrastructure and structures;
(c) Ensure that all condominium projects, including condominium conversion projects, provide
necessary and useable easements to, and for, open space, ingress, egress, and utility and structure
repair and maintenance.
(d) Ensure that all condominium projects, including conversion projects, provide inclusionary
housing units under the City's Inclusionary Housing Policy.
(e) Ensure that the City maintains an adequate supply of rental multiple dwelling units affordable
to lower and moderate income persons and a diversity of housing types, in compliance with the
Land Use Element and Housing Element of the City's General Plan;
(f) Reduce the impact of condominium conversions on residents of rental housing who may be
required to relocate;
(g) Ensure that housing converted to condominiums is constructed at a standard that is consistent
with current building codes;
(h)Ensure that all common areas are readily useable and accessible to all residents.
9-12.102 Definitions.
The following definitions are applicable to this Chapter.
Affordable Ownership Cost. A reasonable down payment and an average monthly housing cost
during the first calendar year of occupancy, including mortgage loan principal and interest,
mortgage insurance, property taxes and property assessments, homeowners insurance,
homeowners association dues, if any, and all other dues and fees assessed as a condition of
property ownership, which does not exceed: (A) one-twelfth of 30 percent of 50 percent of area
median income for very low income households; (B) one-twelfth of 30 percent of 80 percent of
area median income for lower income households; or (C) one-twelfth of 30 percent of 120
percent of area median income for moderate-income households. However, within
redevelopment project areas, monthly housing costs shall not exceed: (A) one-twelfth of 30
percent of 50 percent of area median income for very low income households; (B) one-twelfth of
30 percent of 70 percent of area median income for lower income households; or (C) one-twelfth
of 35 percent of 110 percent of area median income for moderate-income households. In
calculating the affordable ownership cost of a unit, area median income shall be adjusted for
assumed household size based on unit size.
Affordable Rent. Monthly rent, including a reasonable utility allowance and all mandatory fees
charged for use of the property, which does not exceed: (A) one-twelfth of 30 percent of 50
percent of area median income for very low income households; (B) one-twelfth of 30 percent of
60 percent of area median income for lower income households; and (C) one-twelfth of 30
percent of 110 percent of area median income for moderate-income households. In calculating
affordable rent for a unit, area median income shall be adjusted for assumed household size
*taw based on unit size.
79
Area Median Income. The annual median income for San Luis Obispo County, adjusted for
household size, as published periodically in the California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Section
6932, or its successor provision, or as established by the City of Atascadero in the event that such
median income figures are no longer published periodically in the California Code of
Regulations.
Assumed Household Size. One person in a studio unit, two persons in a one-bedroom unit, three
persons in a two-bedroom unit, four persons in a three-bedroom unit, and one additional person
for each additional bedroom.
Condominium Project. Any common interest development as defined in Civil Code Section
1351, whether designed for residential, commercial or industrial use, including but not limited to
a condominium, planned development, stock cooperative, or community apartment project.
Condominium Conversion. The conversion of existing dwelling units that have been approved
for occupancy and cannot be sold individually into a common interest development as defined in
Civil Code Section 1351 (including a residential condominium, planned development, stock
cooperative, or community apartment project) or into any other ownership type in which the
dwelling units may be sold individually; or the conversion of existing non-residential space into a
common interest development as defined in Civil Code Section 1351.
Disabled Person. A person who has a physical or mental impairment that limits one or more
major life activities, anyone who is regarded as having such an impairment, or anyone who has a
record of such an impairment, as defined in the federal Fair Housing Act or Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Lower Income Household. A household whose income does not exceed the lower income limits
applicable to San Luis Obispo County, as published and periodically updated by the California
Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50079.5 of the
California Health and Safety Code.
Moderate Income Household. A household whose income does not exceed the moderate
income limits applicable to San Luis Obispo County, as published and periodically updated by
the California Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50079.5
of the California Health and Safety Code.
Residential Development. All dwelling units located on one parcel or on contiguous parcels and
owned, operated, or managed by one entity, or which were constructed as part of one
development project.
Very Low Income Household. A household whose income does not exceed the lower income
limits applicable to San Luis Obispo County, as published and periodically updated by the
California Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50105 of
the California Health and Safety Code.
80
ARTICLE 2. REVIEW PROCEDURES
9-12.103 Applicability.
The procedures and standards contained in this chapter shall apply to all condominium projects
and all condominium conversions, except for condominium conversions for which a complete
application was made prior to March 1, 2006.
No residential condominium conversion may be considered to include four units or less unless it
is contained within a residential development that contains no more than four dwelling units.
9-12.104 Required approvals.
No condominium project or condominium conversion shall be permitted unless a conditional use
permit is approved pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter and Section 9-2.109 of this Code.
Condominium projects and condominium conversions shall also require a tentative and final map
pursuant to Title 11 of this Code, and shall be subject to all applicable provisions of the
Subdivision Map Act, Title 11 of this Code, and all other applicable state and local laws and
ordinances. Provisions for notice, hearing, and appeal shall be as specified in Title 9 and Title 11
of this Code for conditional use permits and tentative maps, respectively, except as modified by
the provisions of this Chapter.
9-12.105 Special application requirements for condominium projects and condominium
conversions.
A conditional use permit application for a condominium project shall be completed and
submitted along with a completed environmental assessment form and all other information as
r described on the checklist attached to the application.
An application for a tentative map or tentative parcel map shall be submitted concurrently with
the conditional use permit application. The tentative map or tentative parcel map shall be
accompanied by all information described in the checklist attached to the application.
Where the information requirements for a conditional use permit and tentative map conflict, the
requirements for the greatest amount of information shall apply.
9-12.106 Application requirements for residential condominium conversions.
The conditional use permit application for a residential condominium conversion shall be
accompanied by an application for a tentative map as required by Title 11 of this Code. The
application shall include all information required by Title 11 and by Section 9-2.109 and the
following additional information:
(a) Housing Impact Report. A report that describes: the number of households that may be
displaced; the numbers of persons residing in all households; the age and income levels of all
tenants; units occupied by persons who are over sixty-two (62) years of age, disabled, or between
five (5) and eighteen (18) years of age; the square footage, number of bedrooms, rental rates, and
vacancy rate of all units for the previous three years; and documentation of the community-wide
number of rental units with similar rental rates. The Housing Impact Report shall also include the
location of the proposed affordable units required by Section 9-12.108(a) and their proposed
affordability level, except for condominium conversions of four units or less.
(b) Property Condition Report. A detailed description of the physical condition of the property,
including:
81
(1) Property and structural compliance with the current building and zoning codes,
including foundations, ventilation, utilities, walls, roofs, windows, mechanical and electrical 14100'
equipment, appliances which will be sold with the units, common areas, roads, paved and
parking areas, utilities, and infrastructure. The report shall state, to the best knowledge of the
applicant, and for each element: the date of construction, the condition, the expected useful life,
the cost of replacement, and any variation from current building and zoning codes. The report
shall identify all defective or unsafe elements or those which may impair use and enjoyment of
the property; corrective measures required to meet current code standards; modifications needed
to meet current sound attenuation and energy conservation standards; estimated costs of needed
repairs and annual maintenance costs, including a sinking fund; and the estimated annual amount
of homeowners' association fees. The report shall be prepared by a registered civil or structural
engineer or architect;
(2) A report from a licensed pest-control operator describing in detail the presence and
effects of any wood destroying organisms; corrective measures; and estimated repair costs;
(3) A report of any known soil or geological problems, prepared by a licensed
geotechnical engineer; required and recommended corrective measures; and estimated repair
costs. Reference shall be made to any previous soils or geotechnical reports prepared for the site.
(4) A report by the Building Official, Fire Marshal, and Planning Services, or designee,
regarding the building's and site's compliance with current building and zoning codes and listing
any code violations found.
(c) Site Plan. A site plan which shall include at least the following:
(1) The location, number of stories, number of dwellings, and proposed use of each
structure to remain and of any proposed new structure;
(2) The location, use, and type of surfacing for all open storage areas;
(3) The location and type of surfacing for all driveways, pedestrian ways, vehicle parking
areas, and curb cuts;
(4)The location and number of all covered and uncovered parking spaces;
(5) The location of all existing and proposed utility lines and meters;
(6) The location, height and type of materials for walls and fences;
(7) The location of all landscaped areas, the type of landscaping, method of irrigation,
exterior lighting, and a statement specifying private or common maintenance;
(8) The location and description of all recreational facilities;
(9) The location, size, and number of parking spaces to be used in conjunction with each
unit;
(10) The location, type, and size of all drainage pipes, structures, and basins;
(11) Existing contours, building pad elevations, and percent slope for all driveways and
parking areas.
(d) Tenant Information Package. A tenant information package that includes at least the
following:
(1) The name and address of developer and/or property owner;
(2) A copy of the Housing Impact Report and Property Condition Report that are
submitted in compliance with subsections (a) and (b) of this Section;
(3) The approximate sales price of each unit;
(4) Provisions for affordable housing in compliance with Section 9-12.108(a), except for
condominium conversions of four units or less; and ,
82
(5) A copy of the Notice of Intent to Convert required by Section 9-12.107(a).
The Tenant Information Package shall be delivered to each tenant within five (5) working days
after the Community Development Director has approved the Tenant Information Package.
(e) Evidence of Delivery of Required Notices.
(1) Signed copies from each tenant acknowledging receipt of the Notice of Intent to
Convert; or, for each tenant for whom a signed acknowledgment is not submitted. satisfactory
evidence that the Notice of Intent to Convert was sent to each tenant in compliance with the legal
requirements for service by mail and was sent by U.S. certified mail, return receipt requested.
(2) Evidence to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director that all tenants
of the proposed condominium conversion have been, or will be, given all written notices required
by this Chapter and by the Subdivision Map Act, and that such notices have, or will, comply with
the legal requirements for service by mail. The applicant shall provide the City with copies of all
affidavits prepared in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure Section 1013a.
(f) Other Information. Any other information which in the opinion of the Community
Development Director will assist in determining whether the findings required by Sections 9-
2.109 and 9-12.111 of this Code can be made. The applicant shall submit to the City a copy of
each application for a public report made to the California Department of Real Estate, including a
copy of the supplemental questionnaire for apartments converted to condominiums.
9-12.107 Special noticing requirements for residential condominium conversions.
In addition to the notices of public hearing required by Section 9-1.110 and Section 11-4.06 of
this Code, the following additional notices shall be given. Notice shall comply with the legal
requirements for service by mail contained in Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1012, 1013, and
r 1013a or as otherwise required by law, or shall be made by personal delivery to each tenant or
other person entitled to receive notice, confirmed by written acknowledgement of receipt of the
notice. In addition, the Notice of Intent to Convert, Right to Purchase and Intention to Convert
Notice, and copies of City staff reports shall be delivered to each occupied dwelling unit included
in the proposed conversion. If a rental agreement was negotiated in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog,
Vietnamese or Korean, all required notices to that tenant shall be issued in that language. The
applicant shall also provide any additional notice required by the Subdivision Map Act or other
state or federal law. It is the City's intent that the provisions of this Section 9-12.107 apply to all
residential condominium conversions, including condominium conversions of four units or less.
(a) Notice of Intent to Convert. The applicant shall give a written Notice of Intent to Convert to
each tenant at least sixty (60) days prior to submittal of the conditional use permit and tentative
map application for the condominium conversion. The notice shall be in the form prescribed by
the Subdivision Map Act and in addition shall include the following:
(1) Name and address of current owner;
(2) Name and address of subdivider;
(3) Approximate date on which the unit is to be vacated by nonpurchasing tenants if the
conditional use permit and tentative map are approved,
(4) The tenant's right to continue to rent the unit for at least one hundred and eighty (180)
days after the date of any approval of the conditional use permit and tentative map, or for up to
one (1) year beyond the one hundred eighty (180)-day termination period if any resident of the
unit is over 62 years of age, disabled, lower income, or has school-age children. The Notice of
Intent to Convert shall describe how the tenant may establish that a resident of the unit is over 62
83
years of age, disabled, or has school-age children, or that the household qualifies as a lower
income household. Iwo 1
(5) The tenant's exclusive right to purchase the unit upon the same terms that the unit will
initially be offered to the general public, or on more favorable terms, for a period of at least
ninety (90) days after a subdivision public report has been issued by the California Department of
Real Estate or after commencement of sales, whichever is later.
(6) Except for condominium conversions of four units or less, provisions for affordable
housing as required by Section 9-12.108(a).
(7) A general description of the relocation assistance to be provided pursuant to Section
9-12.109(a)(1).
(8) The tenant's right to terminate any lease or rental agreement for the unit as provided
by Section 9-12.112(a).
(9) Protection from unjust eviction as required by Section 9-12.112(b).
(10) Limitations on rent increases as required by Section 9-12.112(c).
(11) City contact information (telephone, street address, and e-mail address).
(b) Notice to Prospective Tenants. Commencing not less than sixty (60) days prior to submittal of
the conditional use permit and tentative map application for the condominium conversion, the
applicant shall, before accepting any rent or deposit from any prospective tenant, provide the
prospective tenant with the notice required by Government Code Section 66452.8, a copy of the
Notice of Intent to Convert, and a copy of the Tenant Information Package, if it has been
approved by the Community Development Director.
(c) Tenant Information Package. The applicant shall provide all tenants with a copy of the Tenant
Information Package specified in Section 9-12.106(d) within five (5) working days of its
approval by the Community Development Director.
(d) Public Report Submittal Notice. The applicant shall provide a Public Report Submittal Notice
to each tenant within ten (10) days of the submittal of an application for a public report to the
California Department of Real Estate, in the form prescribed by the Subdivision Map Act. The
notice shall indicate that the public report will be available to the tenant upon request and that the
tenant's exclusive right to purchase commences no earlier than the date of issuance of the final
public report.
(e) Issuance of Public Report Notice. The applicant shall provide an Issuance of Public Report
Notice to each tenant within five (5) days after the date that the applicant receives the public
report from the California Department of Real Estate, in the form prescribed by the Subdivision
Map Act.
(f) Approval Notice. The applicant shall provide an Approval Notice to each tenant within ten
(10) days of any approval of the final map for the condominium conversion, in the form
prescribed by the Subdivision Map Act.
(g) Exclusive Right to Purchase Notice. The applicant shall provide each tenant with an
Exclusive Right to Purchase Notice at the beginning of the tenant's exclusive right for a period of
ninety (90) days to contract for the purchase of the unit upon the same terms that the unit will
initially be offered to the general public, or on more favorable terms. The Right to Purchase
Notice shall state the date that the ninety (90)-day period will commence, describe the terms on
which the unit is being offered, comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, and
include the information for buyers specified in Section 9-12.113 and the subdivision public
report.
84
(h) Continued Right of Occupancy and Intention to Convert Notice. After City approval of the
conditional use permit and tentative map, the applicant shall provide each tenant with a
Continued Right of Occupancy and Intention to Convert Notice stating that each tenant will be
given a minimum period of one hundred eighty (180) days to vacate the unit, unless the period is
extended pursuant to Section 9-12.109(a)(2). This Continued Right of Occupancy Notice is not a
notice to terminate the tenancy as required by Civil Code Section 1946.1. The Notice shall be
consistent with the form prescribed by the Subdivision Map Act.
(i) Notices of Public Hearing and Copies of City Staff Reports. As required by the Subdivision
Map Act, the applicant shall provide each tenant with a copy of any hearing notice and any staff
report on the condominium conversion at least three (3) days prior to any public hearing on the
proposed condominium conversion.
ARTICLE 3. PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS
9-12.108 Conditions of approval. All residential condominium projects and all residential
condominium conversions shall comply with the following provisions prior to recordation of the
final map.
(a) Affordable Housing. Except for residential condominium projects and residential
condominium conversions of four units or less, the applicant shall agree to rent or sell twenty
(20) percent of the total number of residential units or units to be converted to very low, lower,
and moderate-income households, as follows:
(1) Four percent (4%) of the total number of units to be converted shall be rented or sold
at an affordable ownership cost or affordable rent to very low income households.
(2) Seven-and-one-half percent (7.5%) of the total number of units to be converted shall
be rented or sold at an affordable ownership cost or affordable rent to lower income households.
(3) Eight-and-one-half percent (8.5%) of the total number of units to be converted shall
be rented or sold at an affordable ownership cost or affordable rent to moderate income
households.
The units shall remain affordable for thirty (30) years, except that, if the condominium project or
condominium conversion is located within a redevelopment project area, the units shall remain
affordable for forty-five (45) years, if sold to qualifying households, or for fifty-five (55) years, if
rented to qualifying households. The affordable units shall be distributed throughout the project
and not concentrated in one location. Fractions of units of 0.5 or greater shall be rounded up to
the next highest whole number. For fractions of less than 0.5, the applicant may provide an
additional affordable unit or pay in-lieu fees established by the City prior to final map approval.
Tenants of the condominium conversion project who are income-qualified shall be given priority
to acquire the affordable units, and a lottery shall be used if necessary to determine unit
possession. The affordable units required by this section shall be provided in addition to any
existing deed restricted affordable units in the project. If the project is subject to the affordable
housing requirements of other ordinances or agencies, then the most restrictive requirements
shall apply. Prior to approval of the final map, an affordable housing agreement between the
applicant and the City shall be recorded to ensure continued affordability of the required
affordable units.
(b) Association Documents. The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions, articles of
incorporation, bylaws, and contracts for the maintenance, management, or operation of any part
vow
85
of the condominium conversion project shall be submitted to the City for review and approval
prior to approval of the final map, to ensure that the documents comply with all required
conditions of approval. In addition to the requirements of Civil Code Section 1355 and any
requirements which might be imposed by the City consistent with these regulations, the
organizational documents shall include provisions concerning the conveyance of units; the
assignment of parking; an agreement for common area maintenance, including facilities, utilities,
and landscaping; a proposed annual operating budget containing a reserve fund to pay major
anticipated maintenance, repair, or replacement expenses; and an estimate of initial annual
homeowners dues. The declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall also contain
the following specific provisions:
(1) No trailers, boats, or recreational vehicles may be parked on the site.
(2) Vehicles may only be parked in designated parking areas.
(3) A provision establishing the obligation and duty of the governing body of the
homeowners association to continually maintain the common areas in a manner which, at a
minimum, ensures compliance with this Code, any conditions of approval, and all other
applicable laws, regulations, and standards.
(4) A provision for annual assessments for maintenance and for capital improvements.
(5) CC&R provisions required to comply with the City's conditions of approval may not
be modified without the City's consent.
9-12.109 Special conditions of approval for condominium conversions
(a) The following conditions are applicable to residential condominium conversions:
(1) Relocation Assistance. Following approval of the conditional use permit and tentative
map, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to provide each tenant household
that vacates a unit with a relocation payment equal to three months rent for the unit currently
occupied by that household. The relocation payment shall be paid at least thirty (30) days before
the household vacates its unit. The applicant shall also provide active assistance in securing
comparable replacement housing for each tenant who will be displaced.
(2) Extension of Lease or Rental Agreement for Certain Tenants. For tenant households
that include a person over sixty-two (62) years of age or a disabled person, or if the household is
a lower income household, the applicant shall extend the household's rental agreement or lease
for one (1) year beyond the one hundred eighty (180)-day termination period specified in Section
9-12.107(h). For tenant households that include a dependent person attending kindergarten
through Grade 12, if the one hundred eighty (180)-day termination period ends in the middle of a
school year, then the applicant shall extend the household's rental agreement or lease until thirty
(30) days after the end of the school year.
(3) Warranty. The applicant shall provide a warranty for a period of one year from the
date of the sale of the last individual unit free of charge to the homeowners' association for all
project components that are owned or maintained by the association. The warranty shall
guarantee the condition of the common area items, including but not limited to roads, paving,
drainage systems, landscaping, and recreational facilities. The warranty shall also guarantee the
condition of all residential and/or common area structures, roofing, foundations, plumbing,
electrical system, heating and ventilation, mechanical systems, and utilities. The City shall
review and approve the form of the warranty prior to approval of the final map.
86 -
(4) Right to Purchase. In conformance with the Subdivision Map Act, the applicant shall
provide each tenant with an exclusive right for a period of ninety (90) days to contract for the
purchase of the tenant's unit upon the same terms that the unit will initially be offered to the
general public, or on more favorable terms, as further described in Section 9-12.107(g).
(5) Building and Zoning Regulations. To the extent feasible, the residential condominium
conversion shall substantially comply with the City's building and housing codes and zoning
regulations in effect on the date the application for conversion is accepted as complete. All
modifications needed to meet current sound attenuation and energy conservation standards shall
be completed.
(6) Fire Safety. Each living unit shall be provided with approved smoke detectors as
required by the Building Code.
(7) Storage. The project shall provide at least one hundred (100) cubic feet of enclosed,
weatherproof, and lockable private storage space for each unit, exclusive of standard cabinets and
standard closets within the unit and the space normally required for parking a vehicle in a garage.
This space shall be for the sole use of the unit owner. The minimum opening shall be two and
one-half(2.5) feet by four (4) feet and the minimum height shall be four(4) feet.
(8) Laundry Facilities. A laundry area, including space and utility connections for a
washer and dryer, shall be provided in each unit, or laundry facilities shall be provided in
common laundry space. Common facilities shall consist of at least one washer and dryer for each
ten (10) units or fraction thereof.
(9)Private Open Space. Each unit shall have a minimum of one hundred (100)square feet
of qualifying private open space. To qualify, open space must be private and directly accessible
from the unit it serves, and must have a minimum dimension in every direction of ten (10) feet
for open space provided at ground level or six (6) feet for open space provided on a balcony or
elevated deck, and must be located outside the required front yard setback.
(b)The following conditions are applicable to all condominium conversions:
(1) Fire Protection Systems. All fire hydrants, fire alarm systems, portable fire
extinguishers, and other fire protection appliances shall be retained in operable condition at all
times and shall comply with the fire code requirements in place at the time the building was
constructed. Any conversion involving an addition or major renovations of the structure shall
substantially comply with the fire codes in effect on the date the application for conversion is
accepted as complete.
(2) Utility Metering. The consumption of gas, electricity, and water within each unit shall
be separately metered, and there shall be separate circuit breakers and shutoff valves for each
unit.
(3)Parking. The number of parking spaces, including the provision of covered spaces and
spaces for the disabled, shall meet current standards for the number of parking spaces, as
provided in Chapter 4 of Title 9 of this Code. Spaces for the exclusive use of each unit shall be
so marked. Visitor parking and special loading zones, if any, shall also be marked.
(4) Refurbishing and Restoration. All structures, common areas, sidewalks, driveways,
landscaped areas, and facilities, if defective or in poor condition, shall be refurbished and
restored to a safe and usable condition, and as otherwise required by the Planning Commission
pursuant to the findings in the Property Condition Report.
NOW
87
(5) Lighting. Energy-efficient lighting providing adequate light levels as acceptable to the
Police Department shall be installed in all parking areas and adjacent to exterior walkways. All ,
lighting fixtures shall be selected, installed, and oriented to prevent glare.
9-12.110 Exceptions to property improvement standards for condominium conversions.
Upon request by an applicant, the Planning Commission may approve exceptions to the property
improvement standards included in Section 9-12.109(a)(5) — (9) and Section 9-12.109(b) of this
Code. The nature of the exception requested shall be described in public notices for Commission
hearings on the condominium conversion. The Commission may approve exceptions to property
development standards only after a public hearing and if the Commission can make the findings
required by Section 11-9.02 of this Code.
9-12.111 Special findings required for approval of condominium conversions.
A conditional use permit for a condominium conversion may be approved only if the Planning
Commission finds that the condominium conversion conforms to all provisions of this Chapter,
including all conditions of approval required by Sections 9-12.108 and Section 9-12.109.
The following additional findings shall be made for residential condominium conversions:
(a) Prior to approval of the final map, the applicant has provided, or has made adequate
provisions to provide, all notices required by this ordinance and by the Subdivision Map Act.
(b) The proposed conversion will not displace a significant number of lower income or moderate-
income households or senior citizens, unless the same number of rental units, of the same size
and number of bedrooms, at the same rents, and in the same physical condition are offered for
rent in the City.
(c) The total number of residential rental units to be converted to condominiums in any calendar
year does not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the number of newly constructed rental
multiple dwelling units that were approved for occupancy in the City in the previous calendar
year. For purposes of this finding, "rental multiple dwelling units" include only those dwelling
units located in a multifamily structure which cannot be sold individually. This finding need not
be made for residential condominium conversions of four units or less.
ARTICLE 4. TENANT AND BUYER PROTECTIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL
CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS
9-12.112 Tenants' rights.
After the date of issuance of the Notice of Intent to Convert, each tenant in a proposed residential
condominium conversion shall have the following rights with respect to the tenant's unit:
(a) Right to Terminate Lease or Rental Agreement. The tenant may terminate a lease or rental
agreement, without penalty, upon thirty (30) days notice to the owner.
(b) No Unjust Eviction. Tenants who comply with the terms of their rental or lease agreements
and with the written regulations of the rental property may not be evicted until the expiration of
either the one hundred eighty (180)-day period specified in Section 9-12.107(h) or the extension
described in 9-12.109(a)(2), whichever is later.
(c) Limitations on Rent Increases. After the applicant has issued the Notice of Intent to Convert,
the rent for any dwelling unit shall not be increased for a one hundred eighty (180)-day period.
After the expiration of the one hundred eighty (180)-day period, the rent for any tenant may not
88
be increased more than once annually, and such increase shall not exceed the rate of increase in
the consumer price index for the same period.
9-12.113 Reports to be furnished to prospective buvers.
In addition to those reports required by State law and any other provisions of this Code, the
applicant shall furnish each prospective purchaser of a dwelling unit with the following
documents:
(a) Property Condition Report
(b) Approved conditional use permit, including all conditions of approval.
Section 3. Chapter 12, Condominium Conversions, of Title 11, Subdivisions, of the Atascadero
Municipal Code, is hereby repealed.
11 12.01 PttFpose and intent.
11
b ��
11 12.04 Applieation requirements.
11 12.05 05 A eeeptanee of
11 12.07 Tenant pr-Ovi i
11 12.08 08 He . Notifleation.
11 12.09on. D e find
q. ..an
11 12.10 1 n Drt✓ standards
r nt
v
11 12.11 Exeeptions t r,.,,rne.. improvement mstandards
rds
t.✓,
11-12.01 Purpose and4ntent.
b
i
b manab
a a
b
e
f0f-the
These r-eg„l.,tions n intended t.,•
b a
x to
r-esident' 1 lums .l th f f of oe...,„a �,,,
t h �;+ .•
r
(b) D e de fef ;6mplianee with tl+e Land T T El .1 11 a Elo, enl .,f the City's
GeneF l Dlaf, ,
is offer-ed f,, . h(EI) Pfevide tee•
design
housing
incvrri�
11-12.02 APPIin b44y of other laws
89
All eandomi-i—I. shall be subjeet to all applieable pr-ovisions of the Subdivisiaii Map
•
b
following11-12.04 AppliGatio 44S.
The
(a) Pr-epefty Conon RepeA. The applioationrsrn l be aeeampanied en�, cvrimiQa
. -shall be-in-addition to and shall iiat 1=eplaee any publie-fepoi4 r-eq�ed by
Qovemffient Gode Seetioii 66427.1(a) to be submitted to the Depai4fflent of Real Estate. The
pr-opet4y „,-l:tion r ai4 shall eh,.le at least the full. ,,
l..a.�t.va..� v...a.aa.,a va,avj"i�..� .,a.Kaa a..vaKuv u� avu�,� uiv iv�.iv wrnb.
foundations,(1) A r-epoft detailing the oofiElition of all elements of the pr-opefty ineluding
ventilation, utilities, walls, r-oofs, wifidows, meehaniGal equipffient, applianees whieh Will be so!-'
with the units, eommon fr-aeilitie-s -And pafk4ng afeas. The r-epoft shall state, to the best knowledge
of the appli ant, and eaeh element- the Elate of eafistr-uetion, the eendition, the expeeted useful
life, the east of feplaeefnent, and any vafiatian ffofn the
b b
-tilations in effeetwhen the lastbuilding peffiiit was issued for- the subjeet str-tietur-es. The fepoi4 shall inelude evidenee that the
ifitemal walls would fneet eur-fent sound att— ndafds and that all eur-fent
a
eanser-vation standa-FEls are met. in the event the noise a4id b stanElar-ds are not )
the-- -e3�plain proposed-eet+eetive-Hieaa»es-te-be-used. Therepei-' shall enfy-An
defeetiN,e or- unsafe elements or- those v,,hieh may id ef�oyfnent of the pr-apefty, and
eriplaiii the Proposed ea.. ia be used. The fepot4 shall be pt:epar-ed by or-under-the
beneral of )
b
in detail the pr-esenee and effeets o
,lestr
any wood
(3) A fepeft of any known sail of b
eolagieal pr-eblems. Refer-enee shall be made to an
soil r-epef4s foo the site
(b) Site Plan. The applioation shall be aeoompanied by a site plan whieh shall iflolude at least the
following:
dwellings,(1) The loeation, numbef of stories, number- of
fv. Kin and fo3Ze a eh proposed new str„et„re•
(2) Th 1 t' ) use u �,1 type vx .f -f for- all open star-ageareas;
\ / b
(3) The loeation and type of suffaeing for- all driveways, pedestsian wayss, vehiele par-king afeas
.,.1 rh Guts-,
(d) The heat:., and number-of all eover-e,1 a„,-1 uneavere.i p L'
ng )
(5) The le_at_on of all existing and proposed utility 1' rl nesfnet
b )
(6) The beat,. height an type „f r 1 for- all, ,1 f
\..,, Baa., avvK.,a vas, .avasaa� Kaau a.�ry vi uaucv ;
(7) The joeation of all lands6aped areas, the type of
andb, )
statement s Yeef�,iungg ” ate ., „t
;
(9) Th 1 atio 11 ,1 t: f 11 t' 7 f 1't'
^-a�—rcrcroiriTna ac§ErrpixeFrvz-m�zccr�-cnTvrrccracnzcrcT
unit;
1, a`' r e anl1 size o ll 1
(1.,, �'h., .,.,K a.,^, �y'Y., Kull ���.,� �abe pipes .,a tfuetur-es;
b
eontotir-s, building pad elevations and per-eent slope for- all dr-iveways and pafk4n
,areas.
90
,�✓ signed
Gede Seetion 66427.1. The applieant shall submit evidenee tha� a eei4ified letter- of fletifieation
(d) Maps. The appheation for- eenNiffir-si-en Q.14-All be aeeempanied by the ;ed by the
Califamia -Subdivision Map Aet. Maps shall be pr-eeessed in eonfofmanee with 1pl;.eab4e
pot4iens of this title. Th --lie—ion shall be a6eempanied by the deolar-ation o
maintenanee, b ,
whieh would be applied on beha4f of-any and all ownefs ef the eondonainium units within the
the
fnigght , b
bthe eanveyanee of , the biment of parking;
an
b , inoluding,
shall ineluder-efer-efiee r an tr L, d updated.,Fepo,-r.,`ontel:t;o er oFt
the epinien of the Gommunity Development Dir-eetor will assist in del... -hethef the
proposed pfejeetwill be eefisistent with the pofposes of these fegulations.
11-12.05 Ar.GeptaRGe of repGfis-.
fed by this ehapter, A rvapy of y
eightyGemmwiity Development DepaFtfaent for-r-eview by interested per-sons.
1-12.06 COPY Of Fenort to buyers.
RepE)A shall be available at the sales offiee and the pr-ojeet site.
(a) Notiee of Intent to Genvei4. The-appheant shall give eaeh tefia-at a written notiee of ifiten t te
The r' shall eentain t least the fell.,Wi fi
(1) Name and address ef eur-fent owfier-;
(2) Name and address ef Y Y
osed subdivider-,
b tenants;
(n) Tenant's fight to pur-Te.h."se;
(G) Ct.,toment of no r-en
shall give any pr-esent tenant a neotransfef:able f*ht of fifst r-efasal to pur-shase the unit eeeupied
b
91
extend at least ninety (90) Elays ffofn the date of issuanee of the subdivisiofi publie r-epaA a
eemmennement of sales, . hieheye,- .l.,te is l.,ter,
(e) Vaeation of Units. Eaeh b
x tenant not in Elefault under-the f the fentalb
eightyr-eemefit of lease under- whieh he oeeupies his unit, shall have the right itat less thanone htifidFed
tenant's(d) No Iner-ease in Rents. A
b b
xhty
(190) day per-iod pr-ovided in subseetion (e) of this seetieft.
11-12.08 Hearing:
Prior- to aeting on applieations, the Planning b+
whieh shall be given tefiants of the pr-oposeEl eafiver-sion at least ten (10) days befefeh
11-12.09 AnnliratiGn• QequoFerl fineJinr��
following,
fifidings
afe .le
(a) All pr-evisions of these l.,tihb ,net will bmet;
eb„ onsaveoon ! , le ;
(b) The proposed eofiver-sion is eafisistent with the general
(e) That there exists farsts adequate to stippeA the b
66474 of the (`_oye,-,,.nent (-'o e•
(d) The proposed oanvef:sion will not displaee at b
housing,nifioant number- of 10 moder-ateineome households of senior-eitizefis —at —a 6-if-A-ce 40A lent
is r-eadily available in
the City.
2.10 Property improvement standards far a-end-o.m.'- BrRanng
b and Zoning- Regulations. r-ojeets shall with the
Gity
i
building and b eeEles and b
(b) Fire Safety. Eaeh living unit shall be pr-evided with appfoved smoke Eleteetor-s mounted on the
eeilinb
or- wall at a paint oefitfally laeated in th- wea aeeess to feams used for- sleeping
ufp(d) Utility b b
other- f4re proteetion applianees shall be r-etained in aper-able e6fidition at all times and sha!4
b'
The oonsamption of gas, eleetrieity, and water- within eaeh unit shall besepar-ately meter-ed and there shall be eir-ouit bfeakeFs and shutoff valves fof eaGh unit,
Star-age.
star-age
unit, and the spaee iieFmally required for- b gar-age.
sole tise of the unit owner, The mini . b
shall be two and one ha4f (2 1/2) feet by fou
!4l feet and the minimum height shall be four- /4l feet
b
.
Comman faeilities shall eansist of at least ofie (P. ;,vashef and dr-yef fer- eaeh ten (10) units o
f«notion the,-e4
b b'
pr-evided in the zoning regulations. Spaees fer-the exelusive use of eaeh unit shall be so fnaf:!Eed.
b, and speeial stopping, , if ,
shall also be mafked.
92
rti�) RefuFo nd Resterucie All st-uetufeTeermnen areas, sidewalks,squafe feet of
landseaped areas, and faeilities, if defeetive, shall be fefufbished and r-ester-ed to a safe and usable
eendition. All def4eieneies shall be eeffeeted prior-to r-eeofd4ien ef the final map.
(i) Pr-iN,4e Open Spaee. There shall be pfevidedwith eaeh oni i of one handfed (100)
b
aeeessible ffem the unit it ser-ves, a-ad must ha.- dimension in ever-y direetion of teii
(10) feet fer- open spaee pr-evided at b
r-oand level of six (6) feet for- open spaee pr-oN,ided on a
baleony er- elevated deek-, and FAtist be loeated outside the required f+ont yar-d setbaek. (Or-d. 370
§ 2 (...,,-+) 20004
,
Upon r-equest by a subdivider-, the Planning
it stai4dafds for- eonver-sion pfejeets. The nature of the e3Eeeption shall be deser-ibed in
b'
the Planning Qonmission must make the eNeeption findings
Section 4. Section 11-2.09 of the Atascadero Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in full
as follows:
"Condominium conversion" means the eeflver-sian of pfap-A) under- tenaneies E)
estates other- than eend „arm the conversion of existing
dwelling units that have been approved for occupancy and cannot be sold individually into a
common interest development as defined in Civil Code Section 1351 (including a residential
V"""" condominium planned development stock cooperative or community apartment project), or into
any other ownership type in which the dwelling units may be sold individually; or the conversion
of existing non-residential space into a common interest development as defined in Civil Code
Section 1351.
Section 5. Section 11-4.02 of the Atascadero Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in full
as follows:
Section 11-4.02 Filing of Tentative Map; Application; Condominium Conversion
The tentative map application shall be filed with the Community Development Department and
shall be prepared in accordance with these regulations, the Subdivision Map Act and the
Subdivision Guidelines and Standards Manual. The application shall be accompanied as many
copies of the tentative map as may be required by the Community Development Director. Any
application for a tentative map for a condominium conversion or for any condominium project or
other common interest development as defined in Civil Code Section 1351, shall be
accompanied by an application for a conditional use permit as required by Chapter 12 of Title 9,
Planning and Zoning.
Section 6. All other provisions and sections of the Atascadero Municipal Code in effect on the
days preceding the passage of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect upon passage of
this ordinance.
low
93
Section 7.This ordinance shall not be interpreted in any manner in conflict with controlling
provisions of State law, including without limitation, the Constitution of the State of California.
If any section, subsection or clause of this ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or
otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be
affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section,
subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that
any one or more subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases are declared
unconstitutional, invalid or ineffective.
Section 8. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall attest thereto and shall
within fifteen (15) days of its adoption cause it or a summary of it to be published in the
Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero; and thereupon
and thereafter this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force according to law.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on November 27, 2007, and
PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero, State of California, on
December 11, 2007, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk Dr. George Luna, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Brian Pierik, City Attorney
94
ITEM NUMBER: A-8
DATE: 12/11/07
19�Y8 � 1 9
�►9CAD�
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
Final Map 2006-0147 (Parcel Map AT 05-0292)
9075 San Diego Road (TPM 2005-0075)
Mumford and Inman
(Final map of division of 8.1 acres into three lots of
2.6, 2.6 and 2.9 acres.)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council:
1. Adopt and approve Final Parcel Map 2006-0147 (Parcel Map AT 05-0292),
and,
2. Reject the offers of dedication for Roads and Public Utility Easements without
prejudice to future acceptance on behalf of the public, and,
3. Authorize and direct the City Clerk to endorse the Council's approval on the
Map, and,
4. Authorize City Manager to sign a Subdivision Improvement Agreement for
improvements associated with Final Map 2006-0147.
DISCUSSION:
Tentative Parcel Map 2005-0075 was approved by the Planning Commission on
May 2, 2006. The Tentative Parcel Map approved the division of 8.1 acres into
three lots of 2.6, 2.6 and 2.9 acres.
Staff has determined that the Parcel Map is in substantial conformance with
approved Tentative Parcel Map. Pursuant to California Government Code
Section 66474.1 the approving legislative body (City Council) cannot deny a
parcel map that is in substantial conformance with the previously approved
tentative map. Also, Pursuant to California Government Code Section
66477.1(a), at the time the legislative body approves a parcel map, the legislative
body shall also accept, accept subject to improvement, or reject any offer of
dedication.
95
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
ATTACHMENT:
Exhibit A: Final Map 2006-0147 (Parcel Map ATAL 05-0292)
96
Exhibit A
Final Map 2006-0147 (Parcel Map AT 05-0292)
9075 San Diego Road
Mumford, Inman
SS q, $." L• `� °z �'^per $ U
\��zz ;�•85;� '..p j z� nS �� -,z
7OR N
7 V)
K •;�" /�� Y^� ?� Yo �~ O°ALL
m Q
'"
8b R iQRR �Wo 2w'.3 ^¢l5mm ro�sz �'�o`„ tiaoM �`a�o�F hod°�� r3°h2
-f
IS 69fi; 69Ba 6i ��6 ya oa�fio 6960
^fi ..
�n3o.90 oe$ woa, ac,i_ m.-33�m� 3iamo �o¢.mo
n
aZ��\ .vcYrz 3•rescw n 2'R. 00
Qga ` N '��---- g4 an
a 2 S W S o y9 oa J rc aq y
rn a S �e
of ° �ryNS ° � m€.r
' � R _ O 1p W >nWa Uw>: nod2 n�a z�P-' ";'°
^� F
Sn3°ub
d 10Ci hROg U Y>' v0� A�2 v1Y� bti3 NNW �ON 24
(22
N ao
zrh
1- x!-. s. .roec^
YLtl).0r e0f 3.fflClf^ O °y^I: Q 2 2 2 U •� 0 h u
fY Q � O t W ti W �
a aa>
ZC
eao N
:oo s
_ (La).ornGG
3�(LN).rr'BO:YIN).0Dlf Y^).or-60f�" ` h
YLa).Is'ssr 3,6LGr N Yld'),➢V'➢9r 3.dLGf N Y).00DW 3.f�.rflr M 1 5
OdOX 73V-IVH NVS m 24
. 7
98
ITEM NUMBER: A-9
DATE: 12/11/07
n
1918
1979
\Ar�►�CAu�/
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
Final Map 2007-0159 (Parcel Map AT 05-0230)
8200 Coromar (TPM 2005-0073)
(Gearhart)
(Final Map for the division of 1.51 acres into two lots
of 0.88 and 0.63 acres.)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council:
1. Adopt and approve Final Parcel Map 2007-0159 (Parcel Map AT 05-0230),
and,
2. Authorize and direct the City Clerk to endorse the Council's approval on the
Map.
DISCUSSION:
Tentative Parcel Map 2005-0073 was approved by the Planning Commission on
March 6, 2007. The Tentative Parcel Map approved the division of 1.51 acres
into two lots of 0.88 and 0.63 acres.
Staff has determined that the Parcel Map is in substantial conformance with
approved Tentative Parcel Map. Pursuant to California Government Code
Section 66474.1 the approving legislative body (City Council) cannot deny a
parcel map that is in substantial conformance with the previously approved
tentative map. Also, Pursuant to California Government Code Section
66477.1(a), at the time the legislative body approves a parcel map, the legislative
body shall also accept, accept subject to improvement, or reject any offer of
dedication.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENT:
Exhibit A: Final Map 2007-0159 (Parcel Map ATAL 05-0230)
y 99
ITEM NUMBER: A-9
Exhibit A
Final Map 2007-0159 (Parcel Map AT 05-0230)
8200 Coromar v
Gearhart
� S
A11
ae�r iellto3p� _
I1Aq A►9u M.tI.tC 8Z_N "S
o� t b=
�I
Ole P,
Gt 6 d"
Ar—
o
firo �t9g $ F
Smp
J
mra<o oc F06 sC
woro � 5 'W iii �
Q 10
1 s
.� '�6 '
a
6
d; �
Asa
$p g BUZ
,� aqT g,�i!$i:f� ;� y alS-ttt apl�s
4 $o�$o a Rl.6K►t 3^WS
14 06 .$g N a hj �.LLT►t 8.40.►►.SC S
;O-a&�cW.c di16 6
o�r w-obi � �N1.51 LH
100
ITEM NUMBER: A-10
DATE: 12/11/07
MRS 1
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
Santa Cruz Road Slope Stabilization Project
Change Order
Bid No. 2007-006
(Change Order will require appropriation of additional$202,410.00 for the
Santa Cruz Road Slope Stabilization Project.)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to approve Change Order #2 with Raminha Construction for
$227,096.00 for additional construction work on the Santa Cruz Road Slope Stabilization
Project (Project); and,
2. Authorize the City Manager to approve any additional change orders with Raminha
Construction for a total amount not to exceed $10,000.00; and,
3. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate $202,410 in Local
Transportation Funds for the Santa Cruz Road Slope Stabilization Project.
DISCUSSION:
Background: The Project consists of the repair of a failed road slope and replacement of the
existing roadway. The construction work consists of the removal of landslide material down
to competent bedrock, construction of geogrid reinforced slopes, and replacement of the
existing paved roadway.
The City Council initially authorized the expenditure of road slope repair funds on July 24,
2007. A second authorization was made on October, 10, 2007, to approve Change Order
#1. Change Order #1 authorized an additional $200,000 to pay for additional excavation,
material and labor. Staff recommended the extra $200,000 knowing additional funding may
be needed to complete the project. The Project is almost complete and the final costs are
now known. This staff report describes current project conditions and requests authorization
to allocate and expend additional funds.
Analysis: Raminha Construction started the job on September 4, 2007. Excavation
progressed smoothly down to competent bedrock. Unfortunately, the stronger bedrock was
encountered 10 to 12 feet deeper than anticipated. In addition, groundwater was
encountered at the bedrock soil interface and additional drains were needed to remove the
water. The deeper excavation and subdrains, while necessary, have caused a substantial101
increase in the cost of repairing the slope. Therefore, an additional $227,096.00 of 2007-
2009 budgeted and non-budgeted funds will be needed in order to pay for the additional 1.44)
work. In addition, extra survey and design work was needed and an additional $3,200 is
needed to pay for that work.
The contractor has done a good job and the project is complete. The contractor worked 6
days per week, 10 hours per day to complete the project. Staff will continue to work with the
contractor, designer and testing firm to find ways to minimize project impact, reduce costs,
and complete the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
An additional appropriation of $202,410 will be necessary in order to complete the project.
Staff is recommending that Local Transportation Funds (LTF) be used.
Since all available Local Transportation Funds are programmed for use in the 5-year Capital
Improvement Program, this recommendation means either finding a different funding source
for one of the projects budgeted or delaying a project. In order to avoid delaying a project,
staff is recommending that the City apply to use a portion of its Proposition 1 B funding for the
2006/2007 Road Rehabilitation Project, thus freeing LTF Funds for the additional amount
needed for Santa Cruz Road Slope Stabilization Project. In order to comply with State
requirements, staff will be bringing to Council a Proposition 1 B staff report in the near future.
As part of that report, staff will be requesting that Council take the budget action necessary
for the Proposition 1 B/ LTF swap proposed above.
SANTA CRUZ ROAD SLOPE STABILIZATION SOURCES AND USES:
PROJECT EXPENDITURES
Plans, specifications and engineering $ 57,370
Temporary stabilization 26,710
Construction engineering (inspection, administration, survey, and
testing) 52,190
Construction- Original Contract 227,680
Construction- Change Order #1 200,000
Construction- CHANGE ORDER #2 227,096
Contingency 10,000
TOTAL PROJECT EXPEND7URES1 $ 801,046
PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES
Local Transportation Funds $ 598,640
Local Transportation Funds (Additional Budget Request) 202,410
TOTAL PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES $ 801,050
102
ITEM NUMBER: A-11
' DATE: 12/11/07
rpI?•P .r r r..
i
11918 '' 1979
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
Vehicle Purchases
Public Works Department
RECOMMENDATION:
Council authorize the purchase of two (2) vehicles through the State of California
Department of General Services.
DISCUSSION:
The Public Works Inspector currently drives a 1992 Jeep Cherokee originally purchased
new for that purpose and subsequently put into service as a utility vehicle by the Police
Department. When the vehicle was no longer of use to the Police Department, it was
again put into service as the Public Works Inspection vehicle. The vehicle currently has
124,000 miles and is mechanically unsound. The vehicle is proposed to be replaced
with a 2008 Ford Escape.
The second vehicle is an additional service vehicle for the new Community Center. This
purchase is needed for the staff assigned to the new Colony Park Community Center.
Although the City's purchasing policy allows for the purchase of these budgeted
vehicles without Council authorization, the State requires Council action in order to
purchase from the State bid list.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The combined cost of both vehicles is $36,791 including sales tax, shipping fees,
mandatory tire fee, and $500 / unit discount for payment within (20) days of receipt of
invoice. Funds are provided in the 2007/2008 City budget.
103
ALTERNATIVES:
nt of the Public Works
1. Defer replacement Inspection vehicle at this time. Not
recommended as the vehicle is mechanically unsound.
2. Defer purchase of the Community Center vehicle. Not recommended due to the
need for a vehicle in order to provide programming at the Center and
maintenance of the Center.
_ 104 r
ITEM NUMBER: A-12
DATE: 12/11/07
iais � ie e
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
Engineering Design Contract Award for Streetscape Projects
(Contract for Professional Services)
(Award contract for the design of the City Council
approved Streetscape projects.)
RECOMMENDATION:
Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Rick Engineering Company
to design various streetscape improvements for$292,164.40.
DISCUSSION:
The City Council approved the conceptual Streetscape Phase II design elements at the
September 11, 2007 Town Hall Meeting. The conceptual improvements include new
landscaped medians, streetlights, street furniture, paving and storm drainage elements.
Staff solicited design proposals from seven design firms and received five on October 23,
2007. Proposals were received from RRM Design Group, Wallace Group, Rick
Engineering Company, Eikhof Design Group, and Cannon Associates. The proposals
were reviewed and ranked according to relevancy, responsiveness to City needs, prior
experience with streetscape design, cost and other factors. Staff then interviewed the two
highest ranked firms design teams. The two highest ranked firms were Rick Engineering
Company and Wallace Group.
Staff has selected and is recommending that Rick Engineering Company be awarded
the design contract. They provided the best scope with a well qualified team.
In order to maximize efficiency and insure consistency, the contract will be for the
design of the Downtown Streetscape, Phase II project, a portion of the Wayfinding
Project, and the Bus Stop Improvement Project.
_ 1 - 105
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total budget for the streetscape project is shown below:
PROJECT FUNDING ALLOCATION
PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES
Downtown Streetsca e, Phase II $2,867,140
Wayfinding $613,600
Bus Stop Improvements $43,700
TOTAL PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES $3,524,440
All design costs will come from the above noted funding. Rick Engineering Company's
design cost proposal is noted above.
106 _ y
ITEM NUMBER: B-1
DATE: 12/11/07
,ass ■ �a
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Administrative Services Department
Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Audit
RECOMMENDATION:
Council review and accept the financial audit for the period ended June 30, 2007.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF:
The Audit firm of Glenn, Burdette, Phillips and Bryson performed a full audit of the
financial statements and found that the City presented fairly and accurately the City's
financial position, and further that the reporting was in conformity with generally
accepted accounting standards.
DISCUSSION:
The City was well positioned at the end of fiscal year 2006-2007. Though the economy
has not yet regained its former strength, the City was able to maintain its revenues at
expected levels. The General Fund's key revenues exhibited minor favorable variances
when compared to budgeted figures. When combined, General Fund revenues came
in about 7%, or $1.2 million, better than budgeted. General Fund expenses were 2%,
or about $278,000, under budget. These two items, combined with various other small
adjustments, accounted for an increase in General Fund reserves of approximately
$500,000.
Property tax, which represents 38% of the General Fund revenue. came in at $7.1
million, an increase of 12% from the prior year. Sales and use tax was down 9.5% for
the year, however due to a triple flip overpayment, total sales tax revenues of $4 million
were flat compared to the previous year.
The effects of the slowed economy are, however, still evident in the construction
industry. Though most revenues showed a positive variance with budget, the
construction permits showed a negative variance. Construction permit revenues, which
came in at $655,000 for the year, were 33% less than fiscal year 2005-2006 and 24%
(or $206,000) less than budgeted. While Development Revenues were 16% better than
budget this fiscal year, they are still on the decline. Compared to fiscal year 2005-2006,
107
Development Revenues were down 11% during fiscal year 2006-2007. Development
revenues include Planning Review and Plan Check revenues, among others.
There was a 2% favorable variance in General Fund expenditures during the year.
Most of the variance was due to staffing savings. This was largely due to position
vacancies in Police, Community Services, and Public Works. These vacancies have
been, or soon will be, filled. Therefore, the savings realized were one-time savings and
cannot be expected to continue into the future. Other variances stemmed from savings
in special purchases and projects.
There were no significant findings to reporting the City's other funds, though slight
variances to budget did occur due to timing differences.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENT:
1. Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Audited Financial Statements
108 -
ITEM NUMBER: B-2
DATE: 12/11/07
-...' ,e
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Title 9 Planning and Zoning Text Amendment
PLN 2007-1238
(City of Atascadero)
(Amendment pertains to processing timeframes, lot size requirements and
accessway setbacks.)
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission Recommends City Council:
Introduce Draft Ordinance A for first reading, by title only, to approve Zone Change
2007-0138 based on findings.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF:
The project consists of a proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to portions of Title
9, Planning and Zoning, and Title 11, Subdivisions, of the Atascadero Municipal Code
(AMC). The proposed text updates consist of four amendments that encompass the
following:
1.) Amend the processing timeframe for a determination of completeness for Precise
Plan and Conditional Use Permit applications to be consistent with the
requirements of the State of California's Permit Streamlining Act, and amend time
limit for processing application to allow applicant up to one year before application
is deemed withdrawn (AMC 9.2-102, AMC 9.2-121).
2.) Extend the permit approval period for planning entitlements from 12 months to 24
months, so that all planning applications have an approval timeline consistent with
the limitations of Tentative Tract Maps, and additional amendments to substantial
site work definition and what constitutes progress towards work on an entitlement
(AMC 9-1.104, AMC 9-2.113, AMC 9-2.114, AMC 9-2.119).
3.) Change RSF-Y and RSF-Z minimum lot size from net area to gross area in order to
make the Zoning Ordinance consistent with the General Plan (AMC 9-3.154).
109
4.) Change the 10-foot minimum setback from an access way to 5 feet in order to be
consistent with side property line setbacks (AMC 11-6.26, AMC 9-4.107).
DISCUSSION:
Situation and Facts:
1. Applicant: City of Atascadero
2. General Plan Designation: Citywide
3. Zoning District: Citywide
4. Environmental Status: Exempt from CEQA
Background:
Since the adoption of the 2002 General Plan staff has been making periodic updates to
the zoning ordinance to provide consistency with the General Plan and other community
goals.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this project on September 18, 2007
and recommends the text change to the City Council. The Commission voted 7-0 to
recommend sections 1, 3, and 4 of the Code Text Amendment. The Commission voted
6-1 to recommend section 2 of the Code Text Amendment.
Minor typographical errors were also discussed at the Planning Commission meeting.
Those errors have been changed in the attached City Council draft ordinance.
ANALYSIS:
1) Update of Processing Time Limits for Completeness Review
Section 9-2.102 of the Atascadero Municipal Code states specific requirements and
timeframes for the processing and completeness review for planning entitlement
applications. The current code states that for Conditional Use Permits and Precise Plan
applications, staff shall provide the applicant with a determination of completeness
within 15 days of the submittal date (11 working days). Conditional Use Permits and
Tentative Tract Maps are also regulated by the California Permit Streamlining Act,
which requires that a determination of completeness is provided to the applicant within
30 days, as cited below.
In order to create a consistent time frame for the processing of all Planning Applications,
a Code Text Change is proposed which will change the processing time for Precise
110
Plans and Conditional Use Permits to be consistent with the State of California's Permit
`firw Streamlining Act.
Permit Streamlining Act Requirements:
(Source: State of California, Governor's Office of Planning and Research Website)
"Upon receipt of a project application containing a statement identifying the application as being
for a "development permit," an agency has 30 calendar days to notify the applicant, in writing,
of whether or not the project application is complete enough for processing. When rejected as
incomplete, the agency must identify where deficiencies exist and how they can be remedied.
The resubmittal of the application begins a new 30-day review period. If the agency fails to
notify the applicant of completeness within either of the 30-day periods, the application is
deemed to be complete (§65943; Orsi v. City Council (1990) 219 Cal. App. 3d 1576). If rejected
as incomplete a second time, the applicant may appeal the decision to jurisdiction's hearing body
who must make a final written determination within 60 calendar days. Again, failure to meet this
time period constitutes acceptance of the application as complete."
The proposed text change will also improve customer service as multiple applications
are often submitted and reviewed together for a single project, each of which currently
have different processing timeframes. A consistent 30-day processing time will allow all
City Departments, including Planning, Public Works, Building, and Fire, to complete the
first plan check of the total project application in a single timeframe.
In addition, a Zone Text Amendment is proposed which would allow applicant's up to
one year to resubmit the additional required information before the application is
deemed withdrawn. Currently, the code requires that an applicant resubmit within 90-
days of a notice of incomplete application. Many times, this is not sufficient time for the
applicant.
Proposed Text Change:
9-2.102 Determination of completeness.
Within the time periods specified by subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the
Community Development'Director or designee shall determine whether an
application includes the information required by this chapter, and shall notify the applicant
if the application is incomplete f the It f`" ' "'"iefl. The applicant shall be
informed by a letter b that the
application is incomplete and that additional information, specified in the letter, must be
provided to make the application complete.
(a)Plot Plans. A plot plan application shall not be accepted for processing unless it is
determined to be complete at the time of filing.
(b) Precise Plans and Conditional Use Permits. The timeframe for determination of
completeness shall be consistent with the State of California's Permit Streamlining Act.
b
1
apemen. In the event that the PIa gDirector or designee does not make such a
determination, the application shall be considered complete and processing of the
environmental document required by the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)
shall commence.
When an applicant is notified that a submitted application is incomplete, the time used by
the applicant for preparation and submittal of the required additional information shall not
be considered part of the period within which the Director or designee must
complete the determination of completeness. The time available to an applicant for
preparation and submittal of additional information is limited by Section 9-2.121. (Ord. 68
§ 9-2.102, 1983)
9-2.121 Applications deemed withdrawn.
Any application received and processed shall be deemed withdrawn if it has been held in
abeyance or continuance, awaiting the submittal of additional required information by the
applicant, and if the applicant has not submitted such information within 12 months ninety
(90) days of the last written notification to the applicant requesting additional information
in advance of either a decision to accept the application for processing or review by the
Planning Commission or City Council, to which the applicant has not responded.
When an application is deemed withdrawn, or has been withdrawn by the applicant, the
Community Development P-qa*ffifigDirector or designee shall return the entire application
package to the applicant, including accompanying information and any portion of the
filing fee is not used in processing up to the point of withdrawal. The return application
„
shall also be accompanied by a, �i letter explaining Ile requirements for refilling. n
A wltharawn
application may be refiled at any time, provided that it shall be received and processed as a
new application. (Ord. 68 § 9-2.121, 1983)
2) Extension of Approval Time Limit for Planning Entitlements
The second portion of the proposed Code Text Amendment is in regards to the amount of
time an applicant has to begin work on a site after receiving planning entitlement approval
and entitlement expiration timelines.
Conditional Use Permits and Tentative Maps are often processed and approved together
for a project. Tentative Maps, however, are regulated under the Subdivision Map Act,
which allows applicants up to 24 months to obtain a Final Map. In most cases, a Final
Map must be recorded prior to building permit issuance; therefore work cannot begin on-
site until the map is finaled.
Currently, the Atascadero Municipal Code requires that projects authorized through the
approval of Departmental Reviews, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, and
Development Plans shall obtain construction permits and complete substantial site work
within 12 months of the approval date.
112
Time Extensions may be approved in order to allow the applicant additional time to begin
work on the project. However, the differing expiration dates on the separate map and
CUP approvals can create inconsistencies and confusion. The proposed Code Text
Amendment would extend the planning entitlement approval for Conditional Use Permits
from 12 months to 24 months in order to create a consistent approval period for all
planning applications.
Additionally, section 9-2.114 (Substantial Site Work Defined) is proposed to be removed in
order to create new requirements of what constitutes progress towards work on a planning
entitlement. Currently, an applicant is required complete substantial site work, which for
most projects, includes progression of site work beyond grading and completion of
structural foundations and construction above grade. The proposed text change would
amend this section to require that building permits have been applied for and have not
expired.
The last portion of the approval time period which is proposed for amendment relates to
the time limits for partially completed projects. The current code states that when an
approved multiple building project has been partially completed, its entitlement shall
expire if work ceases for a period greater than six months. This requirement has the
potential to leave the City with an unfinished project which no longer has the
entitlements required to sell or compete the project. Staff has proposed to remove this
time limit in order to allow projects with planning entitlement to be completed by not
expiring entitlements when work is already underway.
Proposed Text Change:
9-1.104 Applicability of the zoning regulations.
(a) Proposed Uses. The provisions of this title apply to all lots,buildings, structures and
uses of land created, established, constructed or altered subsequent to the adoption of this
title, unless specifically exempted by this section.
(b)Existing Uses. The provisions of this title are not retroactive in their effect on a use of
land lawfully established before the effective date of this title, unless an alteration,
expansion or modification to an existing use is proposed which requires approval pursuant
to this title. A use lawfully established before the effective date of this title shall become a
nonconforming use subject to all applicable provisions of Chapter 9-7 unless the use is
determined to be in compliance with all applicable provisions of this title.
(c) Completion of Approved Uses. Nothing in this title shall require any change in the
plans, construction or approved use of a building or structure for which a permit has been
issued or a zoning approval has been granted before the effective date of this title, as
follows:
(1) Building Permits. Site work has progressed beyond grading and completion of
structural foundations within one hundred eighty (180) days after building permit issuance.
(2) Zoning Approvals. Projects authorized through the approval of departmental reviews,
conditional use permits, precise plans, variances,and development plans shall e -apply
for construction permits within
113
one-two years of the effective date of the approval of a , conditional
use permit, precise flan, variance, development plan, unless an extension of time
granted such entitlements has been approved as provided under Section 9-2.118. before the
e€€eetive date of this title; Any project that was approved for phased
construction under-the„ rb r Mations-may continue under the approved
phasing schedule. N ntitlem * oa under-the pfior- ng „���iens shall be
b
r-anted an extension E)f tifne a e. 0— et.....ve date E)f this title e�ieept as PFEWided by
Seetion n 2.14-&-
(d) Nonexisting Use. A use of land not completed as provided by Section 9-1.104(c) as of
tD
the effective date of this title shall be prohibited unless the use is determined to be in
compliance with all applicable provisions of this title. (Ord. 68 § 9-1.104, 1983)
9-2.113 Permit time limits.
An approved plot plan is valid for the time limits established by Title 8 governing building
permits. An approved precise plan or conditional use permit is valid for twenty four (24)
*v�� 12) months after its effective date, unless otherwise provided by adopted
conditions. At the end of the twenty four (24)P• Tmonths the approval shall expire
and become null and void unless:
(a) Building_permits have been applied for and have not expired Substantial site work
or
(b)The project is completed (Section 9-2.115); or
(c) An extension has been granted (Section 9-2.118); or
(d) A building moratorium is imposed on the project site.
Nothing in this title shall be construed as affecting any time limits established by Title 8 of
this Code regarding work authorized by a building permit or other construction permit
issued pursuant to Title 8, or time limits relating to the expiration of such permit. (Ord. 68
§ 9-2.113, 1983)
9-2.114 Substantial site work defined
When all f:equir-ed eonst I i its have been obtained and eanstfuetion has begun,
involving,substantial site war-k taw—Ar-d iest-abwishing the authorized use shall be Eleenied to have be
the Gonstfuetion of Buildings.
gr-adingx letion of stfuetur-al foundations and eenstfuetion is b
abovegr-ade within twelve (12) months of the effeetive date of the z a! or-date a
b
pr-a
Dfess and no days,fien Feater-than one hundfed (190) eanseeutive
ed that-
G—st—etion Period Projects. When no extended pr-E�eet phasing SGhedHle has
been auther-ized substantial wer-k shall be pe&fmed for-all pr-apesed buildings-,
(2) Phased Pr-E�eets. Wher-e a pfE�eet phasing sehedule has been approved, eanstfuetion
.ts shall be obtained and substantial A,efk shall be peffeffned on at least one appr-ove
building
114 T
b
F tit r /C do 9 2.'.'.-Q')-
e
when eqitr-aetHen eper-a�ions have been
eemmenee.1 /(1 1 '64 8 9 7 1 14, 1983)
9-2.119 Lapse of entitlement.
In the event that any of the circumstances listed in this section occur, an entitlement shall
be deemed to have lapsed. No use of land or structure, the entitlement for which has lapsed
pursuant to this section, shallh be reactivated, reestablished, or used unless a new
entitlement is first obtained
(a) Completed Projects. When a project has been completed or an authorized use not
involving construction has been established (Section 9-2.115), the entitlement which
authorized the project shall retain valid and in force, including any conditions of approval
adopted in connection therewith, unless:
(1) An approved use or structure authorized through plot plan approval is removed from
the site, and the site remains vacant for a period exceeding six (6) consecutive months, in
which case the plot plan approval shall lapse; or
(2) The circumstance described in Section 9-2.119(c) occurs, in which case conditional use
permit approval shall lapse; or
(3) A use or structure authorized through precise plan or conditional use permit approval
remains vacant and unused for its authorized purpose, or is abandoned or discontinued for
a period greater than twenty-four(12) consecutive months; or
(4) The entitlement is revoked in accordance with Section 9-8.105.
b
ally eampleted (Seetion 9 2.116), its eatitlement sheAl remain valid Hilless weg'&��
v
r1, a..L..�.,
� ...-(aq) Condition Condition Declared Void. The conditional use permit shall cease to be valid in the
event that a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction declares one or more of the
conditions of a conditional use permit approval to be void or ineffective, or enjoining or
otherwise prohibiting the enforcement or operation of one or more of such conditions.
(Ord. 68 § 9-2.119, 1983)
115
3) RSF-Y and RSF-Z Minimum Lot Size
Currently, the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance state that Residential Single
Family-Y zoning requires 1 acre minimum lot size, and Residential Single Family-Z
requires 1 '/2 to 2 '/2 acres, based on performance standards. However, the General
Plan states that gross area shall be used in determining minimum lot sizes, while the
Zoning Ordinance states that net area shall be used. In order to correct this
contradiction, the proposed text amendment will create consistency between the
required minimum lot sizes in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed
amendment would change the text of the Zoning Ordinance to reflect a minimum gross
area requirement.
The zoning designation RSF-X will not be changed and will continue to use the net area
of the lot in determining minimum lot size. Both the General Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance currently state net area in regards to minimum lot size in the Residential
Single Family-X zoning district. The RSF-X requirements are not being changed in
either document.
Proposed text change:
Article 4. RSF (Residential Single Family) Zone
9-3.154 Minimum lot size.
The minimum lot size in the Residential Single Family Zone shall be one-half('/2) acre
and may range up to two and one-half(2'/z) acres. The size of a lot shall be consistent with
the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the
symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the official zoning maps
as provided by Section 9-3.104(d).
Symbol Minimum Lot Size
X One-half (1/2) acre net area (excluding
land needed for street rights of way
whether publicly or privately owned).
Y One (1) acrerg oss get area(exslud+ng
land- Ree-d-ed- for street right6-9f-wa
Z One and one-half (1'/2)to two and one-
half (2'/2) acresrg oss based on
performance standards set forth in this
section.
116
General Plan Land Use, Open Space and Conservation Element:
*MW
D. Land Use Designations
The Land Use Element and Diagram establish distinct residential and non-residential land use
categories that identify where certain types of uses may occur. INIule the General Plan outliner,
overall, development parameters,the Zoning Ordiaumce implements these deersignations through
regulations for specific district.incl allowed uses. Table 11-3 estdblishes the land use
designations of the General Plan and lists maximum potentidl development for each
designation.
Table 11-3: General Plan Land Use-Projected Potential Development
Laud= 1k?axaretvma -Acres -Itmeded_ Xv4ected
.Average f"Minjutum Lot
U
Dvmlft
se, Den
M
IV silt' FI
pe .
nesi
RR I REI SE OA-0.4 univacre gTOSS" 2.5-10 ac 9.340.4 ac 3,5�2'du 8530PP
SFR-7 1.4 unftf'acre eros""' I 17-)Bpp
S 5-LE,ac 6155-2 ac 552 du
SFR-Y 2-0 unksra.cre procs 1.0 a•-_ 1,5710_5 ac 2&31du 7503pp
SFR-X 4.0 unitrvacre rpef 0.5 ac 472-7 as 13E0 du 3658PP
MDR 10 uniislacrs net 0_5 ac 217,1,.at: 1116 du 2059 PP
HDR le,unis4cre net 0_F ac --- 2031 ac 3348 du 91108 PP
GC 16 uniislac.re net 0.3 FAR 2911,ac 199 du 51}1 pp
SC 0.4 FAR, 41-8 ac,
D le,uni-sOazre net 3.0 FAR 82,3 ac 50 du 133 pE
Mu 16 units4cre net Cl.3 FAR 85-6 ac 280 du 53,0 Dp
CPK 0.4 FAR E2-9 ac
W40W CREC 10 uniislaore net C.1 FAR 6.7 ac
IND 0.4 FAR e:5-2 ac
AG C.1-0.4 unitr�;acte gross" 10 aD 4:3.9 ac,
REC 5017 ac
PUB 0.4 FAR 1.174.3 ac
OS 2—ef A ac
Total 15.182.6 ac 13.7p1 .308 pp
"Net"shall mean minimum lot size exclusive of private or publicly owned abuttiltS road rights-of-way while"Gross'shall include
abutting road right-of-way to center line.
FAR(Floor Area Ratio):The FAR expresses the percentage of a site area that could be covered by a building, The FAR is not considered an
absolute cap under this General Pltm but is used as an overall land use designation average to calculate traffic and job generation related to
the uses. Actually site utilization restrictions are determined lit'the zoning ordinances setback,landscaping,parking and height
standards.
Downtown FAR is assumed with an average of OA-Aith a max of 3.0.
The maximum density sets a limit to the number of units that may be developed in each land use designation. The General Plan also set-,
minimum,lob size area,that are allowed through the subdivision process consistent with the"Elbow Room"principle. The minimum bat
sizes are more restrictive than the maximum densities in order to reflect historic small lot development densities and to allow for new
planned development projects that incorporate smaller lot sizes with innovative design concepts.
Densihr is adjusted by performance standards in this land use designation. The maximum density may be lower based all the
application of performance standards.
WOW
117
4) Setbacks From Accessways
Chapter 11 of the Atascadero Municipal Code includes requirements for subdivisions,
including required setbacks from accessways. The code currently requires a 10-foot
minimum setback from accessways such as flag lots and access easements. The
proposed text amendment would change the 10-foot required setback to 5 feet,
consistent with the standard side property line setback. A 5-foot setback would allow
adequate distance from the accessway to any structures on the adjacent property. The
setback would be changed in section 11-6.26 (the Subdivision Ordinance) and would be
added to Title 9, Chapter 4, section 9-4.107 (Side Setbacks).
11-6.26 Flag lots (deep lot subdivisions).
(a) Flag lots may be approved for subdividing deep lots subject to the following findings:
(1) the subdivision is consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood; (2) the
installation of a standard street, either alone or in conjunction with neighboring properties
is not feasible; and (3) the flag lot is justified by topographical conditions. Such
subdivisions shall conform with the following:
(1) The accessway serving the flag lot(s) shall not be included in the determination of
required lot area for any lot.
(2) The original lot shall have frontage on a dedicated street.
(3)The accessway to the rear shall be at least twenty (20) feet wide (developed to City
standards) for residential zones, except where the accessway is more than one hundred
fifty (150)feet long, it shall be at least twenty-four(24) feet wide with twenty(20) feet of
pavement, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. For all other zones,
the accessway shall be at least thirty (30)feet wide with a paved roadway at least twenty-
four(24) feet wide.
(4)Each lot shall have yards as required by the zoning regulations, including a five 5 tt
O.9-}foot setback along any accessway, whether easement or lot line.
(5) The lot farthest from the street shall own the accessway in fee. Other lots using the
accessway shall have an access and utility easement over it, unless otherwise approved by
the advisory agency.
(6) Lots utilizing the accessway of a flag lot may be required to enter into a road
maintenance agreement to insure perpetual maintenance and repair of the accessway.
(7) A reflectorized house number master sign shall be located at the intersection of the
street and accessway and individual reflectorized address signs shall be placed on the
right-hand side of the driveway to each individual lot. (Ord. 370 § 2 (part), 2000)
9-4.107 Side setbacks.
The side setback is measured at right angles to the side property line to form a setback line
parallel to the side property line, which extends between the front and rear setback areas.
The minimum side setback is to be as follows:
(a) A, RS,RSF, LSF and RMF Zones and Residential Uses in Commercial and Industrial
118
Zones. All residential uses except for second story dwellings over commercial and
industrial uses shall have a minimum side setback of five (5) feet, except as follows:
(1) Corner Lots. The side setback on the street side of a corner lot is to be a minimum of
ten (10) feet.
(2) A Corner Lot Adjacent to a Key Lot. A side setback equal to one-half the depth of the
required front setback of the key lot shall be provided, except that:
(i) Where the corner lot is less than fifty (50) feet in width, the setback is to be a minimum
of ten (10) feet.
(ii) Where an alley is between the corner lot and a key lot, the setback on the street side of
the corner lot is to be five (5) feet.
(3) Accessory Buildings. A side yard may be used for an accessory building no greater
than twelve (12) feet in height, provided that it is not used for human habitation or the
keeping of animals and is either:
(i) Located no closer than three (3) feet to any property line; or
(ii) Located on the rear half of the lot; or
(iii)Established on the property line as a common wall structure pursuant to subdivision
(4) of this subsection, or as a zero lot line structure, provided that all applicable Uniform
Building Code requirements are satisfied for a property line wall.
(4) Common Wall Development. Any two dwelling units, and/or their accessory garages,
may be constructed on adjoining lots without setbacks between them provided that:
(i)The setback has been eliminated through subdivision map or conditional use permit
approval; and
(ii) A common wall or party wall agreement, deed restriction or other enforceable
restriction has been recorded; and
(iii) The side setbacks opposite the common wall property line are not less than two times
the minimum width required by this section; and
(iv) Common wall construction is in compliance with the Uniform Building Code.
(5) Zero Lot Line Development. A group of dwelling units on adjoining lots may be
established so that all units abut one side property line, provided that:
(i) The setback has been eliminated for an entire block through subdivision map or
conditional use permit approval; and
(ii)The modified setback requirements for the block are recorded as part of a land division
map, deed restriction, or other enforceable restriction; and
(iii)The side setback shall not be eliminated or reduced on the street side of a corner lot;
and
(iv) Side setbacks opposite the zero setback property line are not less than twice the
minimum required by this section.
(b) CN, CP, CR, CS, CT, CPK, IP, I and P Zones. No side setbacks are required. Ground
floor residential uses are subject to the setback requirements of subsection (a) of this
section.
(c) L and LS Zones. A minimum five (5) foot side setback is required. (Ord. 303 § 2 (Exh.
C), 1996; Ord. 68 § 9-4.107, 1983)
(6) Access easements All access easements shall have a minimum setback of five (5) feet,
measured from the edge of the easement.
119
Proposed Environmental Determination
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 15061.3) Review for
Exemption) exempts activities which are covered by the general rule that CEQA applies
only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the
environment. The proposed text amendment will not have any significant adverse
environmental impacts associated with this project application.
Conclusion
The proposed text amendments are consistent with the General Plan, which is
implemented by the Zoning Ordinance. The first portion of the proposed changes will
change the required processing time for Precise Plan and Conditional Use Permit
applications to be consistent processing time stated in the State of California's Permit
Streamlining Act. The Second portion of the code update will extend the life of planning
entitlements, allowing up to 2 years for work to begin on a site, consistent with the time
limit allowed for maps. The third portion of the proposed text amendment will change
the minimum lot size in the RSF-Y and RSF-Z zoning districts from net area to gross
area, thereby making the Zoning Ordinance consistent with the requirements of the
General Plan. The last portion of the text change would change the required minimum
setback along accessways from 10 feet to 5 feet.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no fiscal impacts associated with the proposed minor code text updates.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The City Council may make modifications to the proposed text amendments.
2. The City Council may determine that more information is needed on some aspect
of the project and may refer the item back to the 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 project. The Council should specify the reasons
for denial of the project and recommend an associated finding with such action.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Notice of Exemption
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance A
120
ATTACHMENT 1: CEQA Exemption; Notice of Determination
s�lr
CITY OFATASCADERO
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
6907 El Camino Real Atascadero,CA 93422 805.461.5000
TO: File Date Received for Filing
FROM: City of Atascadero FionsWla.'DaW&L'
t '�l�"i`f' w j
Community Development Department
6907 EI Camino Real ,
Atascadero,CA 93422
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with CEQA Sec
Proiect Title
ZONING ORDINANCE CODE TEXTAMENDMENT
Proiect Location(Include County)
City Wide,Atascadero,CA 93422(San Luis Obispo Count),
Proiect Description
The project consists of a revision to portions of nae 9 Planning and Zoning,of the Atascadero Municipal
Code(AMC), The proposed text updates consist of three amendments that encompass the following:
1.) Amend the processing timeframe for a determination of completeness for Precise Plan and Conditional
Use Permit applications to be consistent with the requirements of the,State of California's Permit
Streamlining Act. Amend time limit for processing application to allow applicant up to one year,before
application is deemed withdrawn(AMC 9.2-102).
2.) Extend the permit approval period for planning entitlements from 12 months to 24 months,so that all
planning applications have an approval timeline consistent with the approval period of Tentative Tract
Maps. Additionalamendmentsto substantial site work definition and what constitutes progress towards
work on an entitlement. (AMC 9-1.104,AMC 9-2.113,AMC 9-2.114,AMC 9-2.119).
3.) Change RSF-Y and RSF-Z minimum lot size from net area togross area in order make the Zoning
Ordinance consistent with the General Plan requirements(AMC 9-3.154).
4.) Change the 10 foot minimum setback from an access wav to 5 feet in order to be consistent with`a side
property line setback(AMC 11-6.26,AMC 9-4.107).
Name of Public Agency Approving Project
City of Atascadero
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project
Community Development Department,City of Atascadero
Exempt Status:
Reasons why project is exempt
The California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)(Section 15061.(3)Review for Exemption)exempts
activities which are covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects,which have the
potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
Date: August 30,2007
Callie Taylor
Assistant Planner
121
ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Ordinance A-Code Text Amendment
DRAFT ORDINANCE A
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 2006-0117 AMENDING ATASCADERO
MUNICIPAL CODE BY APPROVING PLN 2007-1238
(ZONE CHANGE 2007-0138)
(Citywide/City of Atascadero)
The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows:
WHEREAS, an application has been received from the City of Atascadero (6907 El
Camino Real), to consider Zone Change Text Amendments regarding the review period for a
determination of completeness, the minimum lot size in the RSF-Y and RSF-Z zoning districts,
setbacks from accessways, and the time period to obtain building permits on planning
entitlements; and,
WHEREAS, a Notice of Exemption was prepared for the project and made available for
public review in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act NOW
(CEQA); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to enact this amendment to Title 9 Planning and Zoning of the Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Planning and
Zoning Text Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero
at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Planning and
Zoning Text Amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a Public Hearing
held on September 18, 2007, studied and considered PLN 2007-1238; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed Public Hearing
held on December 11, 2007 studied and considered Zone Change 2007-0138; and,
122
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of a Zone Text Change. The City Council finds
as follows:
1. The Planning and Zoning Text Change is consistent with General Plan policies and
all other applicable ordinances and policies of the City.
2. Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance, Sign Ordinance, and Exterior Lighting
Standards will provide for the orderly and efficient use of lands where such
development standards are applicable.
3. The text change will not,in itself,result in significant environmental impacts.
SECTION 2. Approval. The City Council of the City of Atascadero, in a regular
session assembled on December 11, 2007 resolved to introduce for first reading by title only, an
ordinance that would amend the City Zoning code text as follows:
EXHIBIT A: Text Change Amendments
SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together
with the ayes and noes, shall be published twice: at least five days prior to its final passage in
the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero, and;
before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its final passage in the Atascadero News, a
newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero. A copy of the full text of this
ordinance shall be on file in the City Clerk's office on and after the date following introduction
and passage and shall be available to any interested member of the public.
123
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Dr. George Luna, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Brian Pierik, City Attorney
124
EXHIBIT A, Zoning Ordinance Text Changes
PLN 2007-1238
9-1.104 Applicability of the zoning regulations.
(a) Proposed Uses. The provisions of this title apply to all lots, buildings, structures and
uses of land created, established, constructed or altered subsequent to the adoption of this
title, unless specifically exempted by this section.
(b) Existing Uses. The provisions of this title are not retroactive in their effect on a use of
land lawfully established before the effective date of this title, unless an alteration,
expansion or modification to an existing use is proposed which requires approval pursuant
to this title. A use lawfully established before the effective date of this title shall become a
nonconforming use subject to all applicable provisions of Chapter 9-7 unless the use is
determined to be in compliance with all applicable provisions of this title.
(c) Completion of Approved Uses. Nothing in this title shall require any change in the
plans, construction or approved use of a building or structure for which a permit has been
issued or a zoning approval has been granted before the effective date of this title, as
follows:
(1) Building Permits. Site work has progressed beyond grading and completion of
structural foundations within one hundred eighty (180) days after building permit issuance.
(2) Zoning Approvals. Projects authorized through the approval of departmental reviews,
conditional use permits, precise plans, variances.,and development plans shall -apply
for construction permits afid eemplete substantial site wor4i- 2.114) within
ane two years of the effective date of the approval of a , conditional
use permit, precise plan, variance, development plan, of any unless an extension of time
granted such entitlements has been approved as provided under Section 9-2.118. be
ff +
Elate f this titie; pFevided, that Any project that was approved for phased
construction a the pro ulation may continue under the approved
phasing schedule. No entitlement rr '' "' the r21
Seefien 9 2.118.
(d) Nonexisting Use. A use of land not completed as provided by Section 9-1.104(c) as of
the effective date of this title shall be prohibited unless the use is determined to be in
compliance with all applicable provisions of this title. (Ord. 68 § 9-1.104, 1983)
9-2.102 Determination of completeness.
Within the time periods specified by subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the
Community Development Dib Director or designee shall determine whether an
application includes the information required by this chapter, and shall notify the applicant
if the implication is incomplete of the It f th4 aeteffnin anon. The applicant shall be
informed by a letter that the
application is incomplete and that additional information, specified in the letter, must be
provided to make the application complete.
(a) Plot Plans. A plot plan application shall not be accepted for processing unless it is
125
determined to be complete at the time of filing. ,
(b) Precise Plans and Conditional Use Permits. The timeframe for determination of
completeness shall be consistent with the State of California's Permit Streamlining Act.
oeeur-within 44een (15) days of the filing of a pr-eeise plaii or-eanditional
appheatien-In the event that the Dib Director or designee does not make such a
determination, the application shall be considered complete and processing of the
environmental document required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
shall commence.
When an applicant is notified that a submitted application is incomplete, the time used by
the applicant for preparation and submittal of the required additional information shall not
be considered part of the period within which the Dia Director or designee must
complete the determination of completeness. The time available to an applicant for
preparation and submittal of additional information is limited by Section 9-2.121. (Ord. 68
§ 9-2.102, 1983)
9-2.121 Applications deemed withdrawn.
Any application received and processed shall be deemed withdrawn if it has been held in
abeyance or continuance, awaiting the submittal of additional required information by the
applicant, and if the applicant has not submitted such information within 12 months i
{99}Elays-of the last written notification to the applicant requesting additional information
in advance of either a decision to accept the application for processing or review by the
Planning Commission or City Council, to which the applicant has not responded.
When an application is deemed withdrawn, or has been withdrawn by the applicant, the
Community Development Dib Director or designee shall return the entire application
package to the applicant, including accompanying information and any portion of the
filing fee is not used in processing up to the point of withdrawal. The return application
shall also be accompanied by a letter explaining the requirements for refiling. A withdrawn
application may be refiled at any time, provided that it shall be received and processed as a
new application. (Ord. 68 § 9-2.121, 1983)
9-2.113 Permit time limits.
An approved plot plan is valid for the time limits established by Title 8 governing building
permits. An approved precise plan or conditional use permit is valid for twenty four(24)
twelve (11-11, after its effective date, unless otherwise provided by adopted
conditions. At the end of the twenty four(24)two (12` months the approval shall expire
and become null and void unless:
(a) Building_permits have been applied for and have not expired subs*.,n6a! site w afl*
(b) The project is completed (Section 9-2.115); or
(c) An extension has been granted (Section 9-2.118); or
(d) A building moratorium is imposed on the project site.
Nothing in this title shall be construed as affecting any time limits established by Title 8 of
this Code regarding work authorized by a building permit or other construction permit
126
issued pursuant to Title 8, or time limits relating to the expiration of such permit. (Ord. 68
§ 9-2.113, 1983)
9 114 Suh- tantmal site waFk defined
When all r-eq+&-ed eonstr-aetion pefmits have been obtained and eenstnietion has e
b
involvingx the authefized use shall be deemed to have be
(a) Pfejeets the Gens r-tietion of b
b
b
ar-ade within Months of the effeetive Elate E)f the ze 1 of date o
tiAn
b
b
bval,
pr-ee
b
phasing,k4) Single C;enstnjetion Period Pfojeets. When no jApt
e
b
its sha4l be obtained and stibstantial work shall be peffefmed aii least one appr-av
but
b The pr-qjeet.is eampleted as set fafth in See ion 9 2
twelve (12) Fnenths of the effe d 4.1he
b
of
t'tl t g etio n 2.119);
approved under-Seetions 91 6.1`7
b
l (G-R.J. -�4 9 n 7 1 1 A IOQ'
. , V_1
9-2.119 Lapse of entitlement.
In the event that any of the circumstances listed in this section occur, an entitlement shall
be deemed to have lapsed. No use of land or structure, the entitlement for which has lapsed
pursuant to this section, shallh be reactivated, reestablished, or used unless a new
entitlement is first obtained
(a) Completed Projects. When a project has been completed or an authorized use not
involving construction has been established(Section 9-2.115), the entitlement which
authorized the project shall retain valid and in force, including any conditions of approval
adopted in connection therewith, unless:
(1) An approved use or structure authorized through plot plan approval is removed from
the site, and the site remains vacant for a period exceeding six (6) consecutive months, in
which case the plot plan approval shall lapse; or
(2)The circumstance described in Section 9-2.119(c) occurs, in which case conditional use
permit approval shall lapse; or
(3) A use or structure authorized through precise plan or conditional use permit approval
remains vacant and unused for its authorized purpose, or is abandoned or discontinued for
a period greater than twenty-four(12) consecutive months; or
(4)The entitlement is revoked in accordance with Section 9-8.105.
127
building(b) Paftially Completed Pr-ejeets. When an appr-aved multiple
months,paFtiaPy eaffipleted (Seetion 9 2.116), its entitlement shall remain valid unless wa& eeases
for-a pefied greater-than six, (6)
and no sehedule for-phased eanstf-tietion was
authoi4zed by the enfitlement.
(ae) Condition Declared Void. The conditional use permit shall cease to be valid in the
event that a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction declares one or more of the
conditions of a conditional use permit approval to be void or ineffective, or enjoining or
otherwise prohibiting the enforcement or operation of one or more of such conditions.
(Ord. 68 § 9-2.119, 1983)
Article 4. RSF (Residential Single Family) Zone
9-3.154 Minimum lot size.
The minimum lot size in the Residential Single Family Zone shall be one-half('/2) acre
and may range up to two and one-half(2'/2) acres. The size of a lot shall be consistent with
the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the
symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the official zoning maps
as provided by Section 9-3.104(d).
Symbol Minimum Lot Size
X One-half (1/2) acre net area (excluding
land needed for street rights of way
whether publicly or privately owned).
Y One (1) acrerg oss net area4exGW4k;g
Z One and one-half (11/2)to two and one-
half (2'/2) acres-gross based on
performance standards set forth in this
section.
(a) Performance Standards. The following performance standards shall be evaluated for
each lot which is appended with the "Z" symbol in determining its minimum lot size:
(1) Distance from the Center of the Community. Using the Atascadero Administration
Building as the center of the community, the lot size factor based on this performance
standard shall be:
Distancel Lot Size Factor
0--4000' 0.08
4000'--6000' 0.10
6000'--8000' 0.12
1. To be measured as radial distance using map maintained in the Planning Department.
128 T
(2) Septic Suitability. Using generalized soils data from the Soil Conservation Service
Reports, the lot size factor based on this performance standard shall be:
SCS Ratingl Lot Size Factor
Well suited 0.30
Moderate or slow 0.50
Severe 0.70
1. Refer to map maintained in Community Development Department.
Percolation tests may be substituted for the Soil Conservation Service Reports. These shall
be prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed sanitarian. The following conversion
chart shall be used to determine the appropriate lot size factor:
Percolation Rating Minutes Per Inch
Well suited Less than 20
Moderate 20 to 39
Slow 40 to 59
Severe Greater than 60
(3) Average Slope. Using the Basic, Sectional or Contour Measurement Method, the lot
size factor based on this performance standard shall be:
art..
Slope Lot Size Factor
0--20% 0.30
21--30% 0.50
31%+ 0.70
(4) Condition of Access. Using the road right-of-way with the shortest accessible distance
between a lot and an improved collector road, the lot size factor based on this performance
standard shall be:
Condition Lot Size Factor
paved with slope of less than 15%
or City-accepted 0.15
paved with slope of greater than
15% 0.20
all-weather surface with slope of
less than 15% 0.25
all-weather surface with slope of
greater than 15% 0.30
unimproved surface 0.40
(5) General Neighborhood Character. Using the average lot size of existing lots (except
that lots larger than five (5) acres shall be excluded unless they constitute more than
129
twenty-five percent (25%) of the total number of lots) within a one thousand (1,000) foot
radius, the minimum lot size factor based on this performance standard shall be
determined by multiplying the average lot size by peiPA-zero_oint two (0.2).
(b)Determination of Minimum Lot Size. The minimum lot size shall be determined by the
sum of each of the lot size factors for the performance standards set forth in subsection (a)
of this section.
(1) The most current information shall be used to determine the lot size factor. Where
information is not available, the Planning Director shall determine which lot size factor
shall apply,
(2) If more than one (1) lot size factor can be applied to a lot, the less restrictive factor
shall be used.
(3) Lot size factors shall be based on conditions in existence at the time of filing an
application unless information is included with the application which will alter a lot size
factor. (Ord. 412 § 3, 2003: Ord. 184 § 2, 1989; Ord. 175 § 2 (part), 1988; Ord. 154 § 2,
1987; Ord. 152 § 2, 1987; Ord. 145 § 3 (part), 1987; Ord. 113 § 2 (part), 1985; Ord. 68 §
9-3.154, 1983)
11-6.26 Flag lots (deep lot subdivisions).
(a) Flag lots may be approved for subdividing deep lots subject to the following findings:
(1) the subdivision is consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood; (2) the
installation of a standard street, either alone or in conjunction with neighboring properties
is not feasible, and (3) the flag lot is justified by topographical conditions. Such
subdivisions shall conform with the following:
(1) The accessway serving the flag lot(s) shall not be included in the determination of
required lot area for any lot.
(2) The original lot shall have frontage on a dedicated street.
(3) The accessway to the rear shall be at least twenty (20) feet wide (developed to City
standards) for residential zones, except where the accessway is more than one hundred
fifty (150)feet long, it shall be at least twenty-four (24) feet wide with twenty (20) feet of
pavement, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. For all other zones,
the accessway shall be at least thirty (30) feet wide with a paved roadway at least twenty-
four(24) feet wide.
(4)Each lot shall have yards as required by the zoning regulations, including a five 5 t-e*
444foot setback along any accessway, whether easement or lot line.
(5) The lot farthest from the street shall own the accessway in fee. Other lots using the
accessway shall have an access and utility easement over it, unless otherwise approved by
the advisory agency.
(6) Lots utilizing the accessway of a flag lot may be required to enter into a road
maintenance agreement to insure perpetual maintenance and repair of the accessway.
(7) A reflectorized house number master sign shall be located at the intersection of the
street and accessway and individual reflectorized address signs shall be placed on the
right-hand side of the driveway to each individual lot. (Ord. 370 § 2 (part), 2000)
130
9-4.107 Side setbacks.
The side setback is measured at right angles to the side property line to form a setback line
parallel to the side property line, which extends between the front and rear setback areas.
The minimum side setback is to be as follows:
(a) A, RS, RSF, LSF and RMF Zones and Residential Uses in Commercial and Industrial
Zones. All residential uses except for second story dwellings over commercial and
industrial uses shall have a minimum side setback of five (5) feet, except as follows:
(1) Corner Lots. The side setback on the street side of a corner lot is to be a minimum of
ten (10) feet.
(2) A Corner Lot Adjacent to a Key Lot. A side setback equal to one-half the depth of the
required front setback of the key lot shall be provided, except that:
(i) Where the corner lot is less than fifty (50) feet in width, the setback is to be a minimum
of ten (10) feet.
(ii) Where an alley is between the corner lot and a key lot, the setback on the street side of
the corner lot is to be five (5) feet.
(3) Accessory Buildings. A side yard may be used for an accessory building no greater
than twelve (12) feet in height,provided that it is not used for human habitation or the
keeping of animals and is either:
(i) Located no closer than three (3) feet to any property line; or
(ii) Located on the rear half of the lot; or
(iii)Established on the property line as a common wall structure pursuant to subdivision
(4) of this subsection, or as a zero lot line structure, provided that all applicable Uniform
VOW Building Code requirements are satisfied for a property line wall.
(4) Common Wall Development. Any two dwelling units, and/or their accessory garages,
may be constructed on adjoining lots without setbacks between them provided that:
(i) The setback has been eliminated through subdivision map or conditional use permit
approval; and
(ii) A common wall or party wall agreement, deed restriction or other enforceable
restriction has been recorded; and
(iii)The side setbacks opposite the common wall property line are not less than two times
the minimum width required by this section; and
(iv) Common wall construction is in compliance with the Uniform Building Code.
(5) Zero Lot Line Development. A group of dwelling units on adjoining lots may be
established so that all units abut one side property line, provided that:
(i) The setback has been eliminated for an entire block through subdivision map or
conditional use permit approval; and
(ii) The modified setback requirements for the block are recorded as part of a land division
map, deed restriction, or other enforceable restriction; and
(iii)The side setback shall not be eliminated or reduced on the street side of a corner lot;
and
(iv) Side setbacks opposite the zero setback property line are not less than twice the
minimum required by this section.
(b) CN, CP, CR, CS, CT, CPK, IP, I and P Zones. No side setbacks are required. Ground
floor residential uses are subject to the setback requirements of subsection (a) of this
,: section.
131 y
(c)L and LS Zones. A minimum five (5) foot side setback is required. (Ord. 303 § 2 (Exh. ,
C), 1996; Ord. 68 § 9-4.107, 1983)
(6) Access easements. All access easements shall have a minimum setback of five (5) feet,
measured from the edge of the easement.
132
ITEM NUMBER: B-3
DATE: 12/11/07
Isis Is a
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Zoning Text Amendment: Planned
Development Overlay District #9
PLN 2007-1248
800-955 EI Camino Real
Westar Associates
(Approval would allow hotels and motels, and eating and drinking places with
drive-through facilities in the PD-9 overlay zone subject to Conditional Use Permit
approval)
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission recommends Council:
Introduce for first reading, by title only, draft Ordinance A approving amendments to the
conditionally allowed use for the PD-9 Overlay Zone based on findings.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF:
The proposed project consists of an application for a Zone Text Amendment to add
"Hotels, Motels" to the list of conditionally allowed uses in the Planned Development-
9 Overlay District. The PD-9 Overlay District currently allows for a variety of
commercial retail and commercial service uses to be developed in conjunction with a
Master Plan of Development. The PD-9 Overlay Zoning District is site specific for the
Home Depot Center.
In addition, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that "eating and
drinking places with drive-through facilities" be added to the list of conditionally
allowed uses for PD-9 to provide consistency between the approved Master Plan of
Development for the center and the zoning text.
SAW
133
DISCUSSION:
Situation and Facts:
1. Owner: Atascadero 101 Associates
2925 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
2. Applicant: Peter Koetting, Westar Associates
2925 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
3. General Plan Designation: Commercial Park
4. Zoning District: Commercial Park/ Planned Development
Overlay #9
5. Environmental Status: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
2007-0024
Background
On November 20, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for the
proposed zoning code amendment and recommended that the City Council approve the
proposed project, with the following modifications:
1. Section (f) of the PD-9 zoning text be modified to read: "any new development
shall be served by City sewer".
When the original Home Depot project was approved in 1998, City sewer had not
been extended to the project site and there was an option of serving the
development with an on-site private system. City Sewer was extended to the
project site as part of the development and thus, section (f) is no longer
applicable as currently written.
2. "Eating and drinking places with drive-through facilities" be added to the list of
conditionally allowed uses in the PD-9 overlay zone.
In 1998 when the Home Depot project was approved, the definition for "eating
and drinking places" included both restaurants with and without drive-through
facilities. The approved Master Plan of Development for the site included
approval of a drive-through restaurant. In 2005, the Municipal Code definitions
were updated to make restaurants with drive-through facilities a unique use so
that additional review could be achieved through the Conditional Use Permit
process. The PD-9 text was not updated to be consistent with this change. Staff
and the Planning Commission are recommending that the PD-9 text be amended
to include "eating and drinking places with drive-through facilities" as a
134
conditional use to provide consistency with current codes and the approved
master Plan of Development.
Analysis
The proposed Text Amendment consists of adding hotels and motels as a conditionally
allowable use to the PD-9 Overlay Zone. Planned Development #9 is currently
established as a site specific Planned Development for the existing Home Depot
Center. The Master Plan of Development and current PD-9 designation applies to both
sides of EI Camino Real where currently, only a portion of the center is developed.
Adding "Hotels, Motels" as a conditionally allowable use would allow the currently
vacant portion of the center to the west of EI Camino Real to be developed with a hotel
use through a Conditional Use Permit process.
Adding "Hotels, Motels" as a conditionally allowed use will expand the commercial
development opportunities in an area that is already master planned for larger scale
commercial development. The center has received interest from a hotel developer and
approval of the requested Zone Text Amendment is the first step in the marketing and
development process.
Establishing "Hotels, Motels" as a conditional use will allow future applications to be
analyzed completely for any potential traffic, aesthetic, and noise related impacts
through the Conditional Use Permit process.
General Plan Consistency
Staff finds the proposed Text Amendment to be consistent with the 2002 General Plan's
goals and policies as noted in LOC 3 and 14:
LOC 3.1.5 Develop incentives to attract new businesses to under utilized locations
along El Camino Real.
LOC 14.4 Ensure the City regulations and processes support economic development
opportunities.
Proposed Environmental Determination
A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated to public agencies and interested
members of the public on October 24, 2007. The document identified potential impacts
which are mitigated through the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit prior to any
development of such a use. Based on the approved Master Plan of Development,
traffic related impacts that would necessitate reconfiguration of the intersection are not
anticipated as the number of trips is not expected to be significantly different that the
currently approved retail development.
135
Conclusion
The proposed Text Amendments are consistent with the General Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance, including applicable provisions of the Planned Development #9 Overlay
Zone. The proposed changes will allow hotels and motels to be established with the
approval of a Conditional Use Permit within the Commercial Park/ PD-9 Overlay Zoning
District.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Hotels typically generate more revenue per square foot than retail uses because of the
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). The proposed zone change would allow hotels in
addition to retail on the project site. Staff anticipates this change will likely result in a
positive fiscal impact to the City if a hotel is built on the site rather than a retail
commercial building.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Council may make modifications of the proposed text amendments.
2. The 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 Council may deny the project. The Council should specify the reasons for
denial of the project and make an associated finding with such action.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance A
136
ATTACHMENT 1: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study
err'
137
RECEIVED
CITY OF ATASCADERO ®CT 2 4 200,,
H i9li 1978
IUL:E L. RODEN1,U)
N
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT gy noun perk
Deputy
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT PROPOSED 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:
Owner: Atascadero 101 Associates,2925 Bristol St.,Costa Mesa,CA 92626
Applicant: Peter Koetting,Westar Associates,2925 Bristol Street,Costa Mesa,CA 92626,Phone 714-241-0132
Project Title: PLN 2007-1248,ZCH 2007-0144:Zone Text Amendment PD-9
Project Commercial Park/PD-9 Zoning District
Location: 800 through 955 ECR(049-045-001,002,003,012,013,017,018,019,020,021,022)
San Luis Obispo County
Project The proposed project consists of an application for a Zone Text Amendment to add "Hotels,
Description: Motels" to the list of conditionally allowed uses in the Planned Development-9 Overlay District.
The PD-9 Overlay District currently allows for a variety of commercial retail and commercial
service uses to be developed in conjunction with a Master Plan of Development. The PD-9
Overlay Zoning District is site specific for the Home Depot Center.
Environmental Begins: October 24, 2007
Review Dates: Ends: November 11,2007
Tentative Planning Commission: November 20,2007, 7:00 p.m.
Hearing Dates:
City Council: December 11, 2007,7:00 p.m.
Hearing Atascadero City Hall
Location: 6907 El Camino Real,Atascadero, CA 93422
Proposed Based on the initial study prepared for the project,a Negative Declaration is proposed. The proposed
Environmental Negative Declaration is available for public review from 10/24/07 through 11/11/07 at 6907 El
Determination: Camino Real, Community Development Department, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
Any interested person may review the certified Negative Declaration and project files. Questions should be directed
to Kelly Gle enior er D-3436.
0 24 0"?
Warren M.Frace,Community Development Director Date
10,0
File:PD 9 Amedmmt MND.kgAm
Pant Dmc 10/241071:19 PM
6907 EL CAMINO REAL*ATASCADERO, CA 93422 • (805)461-5000 •FAX 461-7612
138 - -
® o . CITY OF RTAS CADERO
,9�g PROPOSED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION 2007-0024
6907 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 805/461-5000
Owner: Atascadero 101 Associates,2925 Bristol St.,Costa Mesa,CA 92626
Applicant: Peter Koetting,Westar Associates,2925 Bristol Street,Costa Mesa,CA 92626, Phone: 714-241-0132
Project Title: PLN 2007-1248,ZCH 2007-0144:Zone Text Amendment PD-9
ProjectESan
al Park/PD-9 Zoning District
Location: h 955 ECR(049-045-001,002,003,012,013,017,018,019,020,021,022)
bispo County
ProjectThe proposed project consists of an application for a Zone Text Amendment to add"Hotels,Motels"
Description: to the list of conditionally allowed uses in the Planned Development-9 Overlay District.The PD-9
Overlay District currently allows for a variety of commercial retail and commercial service uses to be
developed in conjunction with a Master Plan of Development.The PD-9 Overlay Zoning District is
site specific for the Home Depot Center.
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 2007-0024(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: Kelly Gleason, Senior Planner
Date Posted: October 24,2007
Public Review Ends: November 11,2007
Attachments: Planned Development#9—Current Location Map
Initial Study 2007-0024
Print Due:W24N71:19 PM
File:PD 9 Amed—i MNDYg.d.
6907 EL CAMINO REAL•ATASCADERO,CA 93422 • (805)461-5000 •FAX 461-7612
_ 139
Iola 1979
1 1978
CITY OF RTAS CADER O
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
Environmental Review 2007-0024
Owner: Atascadero 101 Associates,2925 Bristol St.,Costa Mesa,CA 92626
Applicant: Westar Associates,2925 Bristol Street,Costa Mesa, CA 92626,Phone: 714-241-0132
Project Title: PLN 2007-1248,ZCH 2007-0144:Zone Text Amendment PD-9
Project Location: Commercial Park/PD-9 Zoning District
800 through 955 ECR(049-045-001,002,003,012,013,017,018,019,020,021,022)
San Luis Obispo County
Project Description: The proposed project consists of an application for a Zone Text Amendment to add"Hotels,
Motels" to the list of conditionally allowed uses in the Planned Development-9 Overlay
District. The PD-9 Overlay District currently allows for a variety of commercial retail and
commercial service uses to be developed in conjunction with a Master Plan of Development.
The PD-9 Overlay Zoning District is site specific for the Home Depot Center.
Lead Agency Dame City of Atascadero
and Address: 6907 El Camino Real;Atascadero, CA 93422
Contact Person and Kelly Gleason, Senior Planner, 805-470-3436
Phone Number. City of Atascadero, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
General Plan None
Designation:
Zoning: PD-9 (Planned Development-9 Overlay District)
Other public None
agencies whose
approval is required
(e.g.,permits,financing
approval,or participation
agreement)
10/24/07 PD 9 Amedment MND.kg.doc
140 _
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY
Attachment 1
x" tr � Planned Development-
,,• 9 Overlay Zone Area
�^ w
s S
r
V'r x i
�f I
rt�n
�,��
1 I $ k k s
I4 ti rt fi
I ,R "
{ ' b m rrY a r ✓t
'�� r.f.s y.� �.� Y W rn `�4i.�.v� •e,y}' STR3 � .,�.�C"F�f`{w u�u r �� �i.. ...Fx
10/24/07 \1Cityha11\cdv1pmnl\-07 PLNs\PLN 2007-124B PD-9
amendment\PD 9 Amedn ent MND.kp.doc
141
E.o CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITML 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 ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils
❑ Hazards&Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning
Materials
❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise F-1
Population/Housing
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation F-1
Transportation/Traffic
F-1
Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
Z 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.
❑ 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 E1R or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards
and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
includifigiBvisions or mi atio aneasures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
el y Gleaso
enior Planner
10/24/07 \\Cityha111edv1pmntl-07 PLNs\PLN 2007.1248 PD-9
amendment\PD 9 Amedment MND.kg.dac
142 -
/ n
CITY OFATASCADERO
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.
'%W 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.
10/24/07 \%Qtyhall\cdvlpmntl-07 PLNs\PLN 2007-1248 PD-9
amendment\PD 9 Amedment MND.kg.doc
_ 143
` CITY OFATASCADER0
M71AL STUDY
Initial Study 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248, ZCH 07-0144: Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation Impact
Planned.Development-9 Overlay Zone Incorporation
1.AESTHETICS--Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not ❑ 17
limited to,trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ❑ Elquality of the site and its surroundings?
d)Create a new source of substantial light or glare that ❑ ❑ ❑ 17
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
SOURCES: Project Description; General Plan Land Use Element,Appearance Review Manual.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the proposed text amendment is to add"Hotels, Motels"as a conditionally allowed use within the PD-9
Overlay Zone will not, in and of itself, have any aesthetic impacts.All proposed commercial projects require
appearance review per the City's General Plan. In addition, all Conditional Use Permits require appearance review
and approval by the Planning Commission.All future projects will be required to adhere to this process. No significant
visual impacts are associated with the text amendments.
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 ❑ ❑ ❑
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, ❑ ❑ 17
due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of
Farmland,to non-agricultural use?
SOURCES: Land Use Element EIR.
DISCUSSION
Potential future development sites are all currently within the Urban Core area and no agricultural resources are
present. No impacts would occur to agricultural resources.Adding"Hotels, Motels"to the list of conditionally allowed
uses will not expand potential development areas beyond the existing zoning.
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
10124/07 Page 5 PD 9 Amedrrent MND.kg.doc
144 _
r: — CITY OF ATASCADERO
.. INITIAL STUDY
Initial Study 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
rr Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248,ZCH 07-0144: Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation impact
Incorporation
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone
the project:
a)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable El
air quality plan?
b)Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially 171
to 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 pollutant
concentrations?
e)Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
SOURCES:Air Pollution Control District(APCD)CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed Zone Text Amendment will not create any new trip generation or emissions that could affect air quality.
Any potential impacts with future projects will be assessed at the time of entitlement and/or development.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES--Would the project:
a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
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
or 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
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(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 El '17J
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
biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or
70/24!07 Page 6 PD 9 Amedment MND.kg.doc
- 145
` CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY
Initial Study 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248, ZCH 07-0144: Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation Impact
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone Incorporation
ordinance?
f)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
SOURCES: Project description, Land Use Element EIR
DISCUSSION:
The proposed zone text change will not increase development on sites within the Planned Development-9 Overlay
Zoning District.Any sites containing biological resources will be addressed at the time of entitlement and/or
development.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES --Would the project:
a)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of ❑ F-1a historical resource as defined in'15064.5?
b)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of ❑ ❑
an archaeological resource pursuant to'15064.5?
c)Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ ❑
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d)Disturb any human remains, including those interred (
outside of formal cemeteries? ❑ ❑ ❑
SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element EIR.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed zone text change will not increase development on potential sites.Any sites containing potential
cultural resources will be addressed at the time of entitlement and/or development.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS--Would the project:
a)Expose people or structures to potential substantial ❑ Eladverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,or death
involving:
i)Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated ❑ ❑ 171
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?
1024/07 Page 7 PD 9 Amedment MND.kg.doc
146 _
Wme'
CITYOF ATASCADERO
IMTIAL STUDY
Initial Stud 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
y Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248, ZCH 07-0144: Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
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?
17
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ❑ ❑ ❑
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element EIR.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed zone text change does not involve construction. Existing development locations within the PD-9
Overlay Zoning District area are not known to be located in areas of unstable soils.Any future project will require a
soils report to be submitted.
7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS--Would the
i project. i
a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
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 ❑ ❑ ❑
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 ❑ ❑ 171❑
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 ❑ 17❑
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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 1
`40W adopted emergency response plan or emergency
10/24/07
Page 8 PD 9 Aniedment MND.kg.doc
147
r" CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL S=Y
Initial Study 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248,ZCH 07-0144:Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation impact
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone Incorporation
evacuation plan?
h)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, Elinjury or death involving wildland fires, including where 17
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
SOURCES: Project description;General Plan Land Use Element.
DISCUSSION
The project would not involve the use or storage of hazardous materials.
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 17
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 site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a El Z
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 17
or 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
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f)Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? F] ❑ 17
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? ❑ ❑ 0
10/24/07 Page 9 PD 9 Amedment MND.kg.doc
148
rCITY OFATASCADERO
F INITIAL STUDY
Initial Stud 2U07-U�24 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Study Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248, ZCH 07-0144: Zone Text Amendment impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone
SOURCES: Project description;
DISCUSSION:
The project would not create any impacts to water quality or affect any flood hazard conditions.
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING-Would the project:
a)Physically divide an established community? ❑
b)Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,or ❑ ❑ ❑
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 ❑ ❑ ❑
natural community conservation plan? 11/7
SOURCES: Land Use Element; Circulation Element; project description; Land Use Element EIR.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed zone text change will add"Hotels, Motels"to the list of conditionally allowed uses within the PD-9
Overlay Zoning District.The proposed Zone Text Amendment is consistent with the following General Pian policies:
LOC 3.1.5 Develop incentives to attract new businesses to under utilized locations along EI Camino Real.
LOC 14.4 Ensure the City regulations and processes support economic development opportunities.
The PD-9 Overlay Zoning District is a site specific Overlay District for the Home Depot Center where commercial uses
are currently allowed subject to an approved Master Plan of Development.
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
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
SOURCES: Project description.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed zone text change will not affect mineral resources.
F—I,
NOISE–Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in 171
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
10124/07 Page 10 PD 9 Armdrmnt MND.kg.doc
149
CITY OFATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY
Initial Study 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248,ZCH 07-0144: Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation Impact
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone Incorporation
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 ❑ a
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 pian 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 F1the project expose people living or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
SOURCES:Project description; Noise Element; Noise Ordinance
DISCUSSION:
The proposed zoning amendment will not result in the generation of additional noise sources. Any future business or
proposed development will be required to be consistent with the noise ordinance standards set forth in the
Aiascadero Mlunicipal Code.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING —Would the project:
a)Induce substantial population growth in an area,either ❑
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 ❑ ❑ 1771
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
SOURCES: Project description; General Plan Land Use Element.
DISCUSSION:
No housing or persons will be displaced.
13. PUBLIC SERVICES
10/24/07 Page 11 PD 9 Arredment MND.kg.doc
T 150
"" "" CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL S7VDY
Initial Study 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248,ZCH 07-0144: Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone
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? F-1 0 0 z
Police protection? 17
Schools? 1
Parks?
Other public facilities? 17
SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element EIR.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed Zoning Text Amendment will not create a demand for any additional public services or 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 El 7 7
ZJ
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:
The project would not create any demand for recreational facilities.
15.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC--Would the project:
a)Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation
to 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 F-1 Z
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
torzaro7
Page 12 PD 9 Amedment MND.kg.doc
151 -
iy
CITY OF ATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY
Initial Study 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248, ZCH 07-0144:Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation Impact
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone Incorporation
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either ❑ ❑
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
(e.g.,sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or
incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ 17
g)Conflict with adopted policies, plans,or programs ❑ Elsupporting alternative transportation (e.g.,bus turnouts,
LLIJ
bicycle racks)?
SOURCES: Land Use Element; Circulation Element; Project Description.
DISCUSSION:
The project will not generate any new trips or alter existing traffic patterns.The PD-9 Zoning Overlay District is
currently a site specific Overlay Zone for the Home Depot Center which allows for a variety of Commercial Retail and
Commercial Service oriented uses.The addition of"Hotels, Motels"as a conditional use will not create substantial
new impacts. Any potential impacts from a specific development proposal will be reviewed at the time of entitlement.
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS--Would the
project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ❑
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b)Require or result in the construction of new water or El F-1wastewater 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 ❑ Eldrainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
d)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ❑ ❑ 17
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
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 ❑ Elaccommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
El g)Comply with federal,state, and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑ 171
regulations related to solid waste?
1024/07 Page 13 PD 9 Ameament MND.kg.dac
152 -
9
CITY OFATASCADERO
INITIAL STUDY
Initial Study 2007-0024 Potentially Less Than Less Than No
iiIlilwSignificant Significant with Significant Impact
PLN 2007-1248,ZCH 07-0144: Zone Text Amendment Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
Planned Development-9 Overlay Zone
SOURCES: Project description; Land Use Element.
DISCUSSION:
The project would not create new demands on public facilities or utilities.
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 n n n
` cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION: The proposed Zone Text Amendment will add"Hotels, Motels,as a conditionally allowed use in the
existing PD-9 Overlay Zoning District Area. PD-9 is currently established as a site specific Overlay Zone for the
Home Depot Center. The addition of"Hotels, Motels" as a conditional use is consistent with the General Plan Land
Use and Economic Development Policies.The proposed zone text change will not increase the area for potential
development within the PD-9 Overlay District.
SOURCES:
General Plan Land Use Element,City of Atascadero,2002
Zoning Ordinance as amended through 2004.
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
Trip Generation,Institute of Traffic Engineers
PROJECT SOURCES:
Project Description
fir•
torza/o7
Page 14 PD 9 Amedment MND.kg.do--
153
ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Ordinance A
DRAFT ORDINANCE A
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE
CONDITIONALLY ALLOWED USES IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
#9 OVERLAY ZONE BY APPROVING PLN-2007-1248
(Westar)
The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows:
WHEREAS, the General Plan contains Policies and Programs to provide a sound
economic base to sustain the City's unique character by establishing a range of employment and
business opportunities and generate sufficient revenue to support adequate levels of public
services, and environment, social and educational quality and to retain and expand existing
businesses and attract new businesses to improve the availability of goods and services; and,
WHEREAS, the General Plan contains Policies and Programs to provide public and
Planning Commission review of uses which may have potential impacts to surrounding uses and
neighborhoods; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-0024
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 Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to enact this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to protect the health, safety and welfare of
its citizens by applying orderly development of the City; 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 Zone
Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which
hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Zoning amendments;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on November 20, 2007, studied and considered PLN 2007-1248, after first
studying and considering the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project;
and,
154 _
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed Public Hearing
held on December 11, 2007, studied and considered PLN 2007-1248, after first studying and
considering the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project; and,
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings for Certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration 2007-
0024. The City Council finds as follows:
1. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance
with CEQA; and,
2. The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the Planning
Commission, and the information contained therein was considered by the
Planning Commission, 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.
4. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term
environmental goals.
�r
5. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable.
6. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either
directly or indirectly.
SECTION 2. Findings for Approval of PLN 2007-1248. The City Council finds as
follows:
1. The zone change is consistent with General Plan policies and all other applicable
ordinances and policies of the City.
2. Amendment of the zoning ordinance will provide for the orderly and efficient use of
lands where such development standards are applicable.
3. The zone change will not, in itself, result in significant environmental impacts.
SECTION 3. Approval. The City Council of the City of Atascadero, in a regular
session assembled on December 11, 2007 resolved to introduce for first reading by title only, an
Ordinance that would amend the City Zoning Code Text with the following:
155
9-3.653 Establishment of Commercial Park Planned Development Overlay
Zone No. 9: (PD9).
Commercial Park Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 9 is established as shown on
the official zoning maps (Section 9-1.102). The following development standards are
established:
(a) A Master Plan of Development shall be approved prior to approving a plot plan,
precise plan, conditional use permit, tentative parcel map, or tract map. The master plan
shall be applied for and processed in the manner prescribed for a conditional use permit
(Section 9-2.109 of this title).
(b) The proposed master plan of development shall generally incorporate the mitigation
measures as contained in the final supplemental environmental impact report (EIR),
prepared by Site and Environmental Design, February 1992. Depending on the proposed
project, the EIR may need to be modified or expanded to address unforeseen
environmental impacts.
(c) In approving a master plan of development, the level of processing for subsequent
projects or phases may be reduced to a plot plan; provided, that the master plan contains
sufficient detail to support such a determination.
(d)No subsequent plot plan, precise plan, conditional use permit, tentative parcel map or
tract map shall be approved unless found to be consistent with the approved master plan
of development. Any amendment to the master plan, including conditions thereof, shall be
accomplished as set forth in subsection (a) of this section.
(e) In approving a master plan of development for the site, the conditionally allowed land
uses are limited to the following:
(1) Automobile, mobilehome, and vehicle dealers and suppliers (see Section 9-6.163 of
this title);
(2) Accessory storage (see Section 9-6.103 of this title);
(3)Building materials and hardware (see Section 9-6.165 of this title);
(4) Business support services;
(5) Contract construction services;
(6)Eating and drinking places with drive-through facilities
(67)Electronic and scientific instruments;
(78)Farm equipment and supplies;
(89)Furniture and fixtures;
(910)Horticultural specialties (see Section 9-6.116 of this title);
(11) Hotels, Motels
(1812) Sales lots (see Section 9-6.139 of this title);
(11 13) Small scale manufacturing•,
(4214) Temporary events (see Section 9-6.177 of this title);
(I315)Temporary/seasonal sales (see Section 9-6.174 of this title);
(4416) Utility transmission facilities;
(-� 17) Vehicle and equipment storage (see Section 9-6.183 of this title);
(1318) Indoor recreation;
(1319)Pipelines;
(1320)Public assembly and entertainment.
(f) Any development shall be served by an on site seWage Elisposal system, tialess an
156
iextension of the ufba-n sefviees line is granted thr-ough a sepaf ate Gener-al Plan
AmeadmentCity sewer.
SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together
with the ayes and noes, shall be published twice: at least five days prior to its final passage in
the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero, and;
before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its final passage in the Atascadero News, a
newspaper published and circulated in the City of Atascadero. A copy of the full text of this
ordinance shall be on file in the City Clerk's office on and after the date following introduction
and passage and shall be available to any interested member of the public.
157
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Dr. George Luna, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Brian A. Pierik, City Attorney
158 +