HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 082598 Approved as Submitted
September 22, 1998
MINUTES
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
TUESDAY,AUGUST 25, 1998
CLOSED SESSION, 6:30 P.M.:
1) Conference with labor negotiator(Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6)
Agency Negotiator: City Manager
Employee organizations: Atascadero Fire Captains
2) Personnel: City Manager
Mayor Carden adjourned the Closed Session at 7:05 p.m. and City Attorney Roy Hanley
announced that there was no reportable action.
REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.:
Mayor Carden called the Regular Session to order at 7:07 p.m. and Council Member Clay led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Johnson, Luna and Mayor Carden
Absent: Council Member Lerno
Others Present: City Clerk Marcia Torgerson
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Police Chief Dennis Hegwood, Fire Chief
Mike McCain, Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard,
Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana, Public
Works Technician Valerie Humphrey and City Attorney Roy Hanley.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Johnson to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 4.0 by a roll-call vote.
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson stated that the Council Members received a letter from American Stars.
He explained that he checked into the issue and found that this was a marketing technique. The
letter implies we have refused their business,however, Atascadero does not provide the services
they suggest in their letter. Council Member Johnson announced that they have been put on the
Atascadero Bid List.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson also wanted to announce that Atascadero is working on solving the
lighting problem at Eagle Creek Golf Course. He felt that the newspaper article inferred that the
City was not addressing the issue.
Council Member Luna asked those in attendance to draw their attention to the general
information section of the agenda. He stated that this information has been changed. It states
that the public can only speak at Public Hearing items and Community Forum. Council Member
Luna said that in the past, the Mayor would open every item on the agenda up to the public for
comment. However, this information section reads that the public will only be allowed to speak
during Public Hearing items and Community Forum. He asked the Mayor to clarify how this
would be handled tonight and asked that the information section be changed back to the way it
was before. City Manager Wade McKinney responded by explaining that it was not staff's
intention to change the previous information section of the agenda. He agreed that the Council's
previous practice has been to take public comment on all items. Mayor Carden announced that
they would be continuing with the method the Council's been using up until now.
Council Member Clay announced that the Atascadero Association of Realtors held their golf
tournament Friday and the funds were to benefit the Fire Department and the REC program.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
George Molina, Atascadero, commended the Council for the excellent staff they have assembled.
He also stated that it is unfortunate that a particular issue in the community has become a
political one.
Dave May, Board President of the Atascadero Education Foundation, noted that Mayor Carden
has given some of his stipend that he receives as a Council Member to the Atascadero Education
Foundation. Mr. May stated that as Mayor Carden is leaving office, he wanted to recognize his
efforts by presenting him with a plaque of appreciation designating him as a benefactor. Mayor
Carden thanked Mr. May and the Foundation and expressed the importance of supporting our
youth.
Robert Huot, 3850 Ardilla Road, said that he disagrees firmly with the first speaker that
addressed the Council
Mayor Carden closed the Community Forum.
CC 08/25/98
Page 2 of 16
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call
1 City Council Minutes—August 11, 1998—(City Clerk recommendation:Approve)
[Marcia Torgerson]
2. June 1998 Accounts Payable and Payroll—Fiscal Impact: $1,206,289.57(Staff
recommendation: Review and approve) [Rachelle Rickard]
3. Atascadero Transit Management Contract—Approval of execution of a contract with
Laidlaw Transit Services for transit management and operations—Fiscal Impact: not to
exceed$218,571 annually (Staff recommendation: Council approve Resolution No.
1998-033 which authorizes execution of a Transit Operations Agreement with Laidlaw
Transit Services) [Brady Cherry]
Rush Kolemaine, a member of the public, asked the Council to pull Item#A-3.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Luna
to approve Items #A-1 & 2.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote.
RE: Item#A-3—Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, asked two questions of the City Manager: 1)
When will the City hire someone with experience in operating a fixed-route transit service, and
2) How will the annual unmet needs survey be conducted. City Manager Wade McKinney
explained that Laidlaw has the experience and expertise with respect to management in operating
a fixed-route transit service. Atascadero can also network with other cities. The unmet needs
survey hearing is conducted through SLOCOG on a county-wide regional basis. Mayor Carden
stated, as being a SLOCOG representative, clarified that the unmet needs survey is a public
hearing process which does occur regularly. It is set up and directed by the State, and
implemented by SLOCOG.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay
to approve Item#A-3.
Motion passed 4.0 by a roll-call vote.
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Consideration of Amendments to Native Tree Ordinance—Fiscal Impact: None (Staff
recommendations: 1) Council introduce for first reading, by title only, Ordinance No.
350, an ordinance of the City of Atascadero amending Chapter 11 of Title 9 of the
Atascadero Municipal Code regarding native trees, and 2) Council adopt Resolution No.
1998-034, adopting Native Tree Guidelines and Standards) [Paul Saldana]
Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana gave the staff report and
answered questions of Council.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked for clarification on the portion of the Tree Ordinance that
exempts a property owner with a single-family residence from needing a tree removal permit.
He asked if that policy would also pertain to trees planted as mitigation for tree removal during
CC 08/25/98
Page 3 of 16
the construction of the home. Mr. Saldana explained that the trees planted as part of a mitigation
measure are protected by the Ordinance. They would not be allowed to be removed. Mayor Pro
Tem Johnson asked that the language in the Ordinance needs to explain that more clearly. He
stressed that we need good strong management of the Tree Ordinance.
Council Member Luna stressed his support of having a Natural Resource Manager or an arborist
on staff. He explained that since there is not money in the City's budget to hire such a person, it
puts the responsibility of enforcement in the hands of the Planning Department. He went on to
say that in the past there has been very lax enforcement. Council Member Luna said that this
revised Ordinance is a better ordinance and easier to understand. He referred to the Atascadero
Native Tree Association's (ANTA's)report that was submitted to the Council at the meeting (see
Exhibit A) and stated that he supported their suggestions. He commended staff on all their work
on this Ordinance.
Council Member Clay said that there were many people who spoke at previous Council meetings
that they liked the Ordinance as it was. He stated that he doesn't know why this Ordinance is
being reviewed. Council Member Clay said that he feels Atascadero has more trees that ever
before and he doesn't understand why Atascadero needs this Ordinance. He stated that he cannot
support this Ordinance.
Mayor Carden read into the record a letter from Council Member Lerno who could not attend the
meeting (see Exhibit B). Council Member Lerno's letter expressed his opinion that the revised
Tree Ordinance is an improvement but does not fully address all of the problems brought to the
Council's attention. He stated he supports the revised Tree Ordinance.
Mayor Carden asked if we are creating a Catch-22 situation requiring a tree permit before all
other permits. Mr. Saldana responded, no, but stated that we could add language such as "except
where a permit is required to implement the tree protection"to clarify that section.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked for clarification on the suggestion of ANTA's concerning the
section pertaining to the pruning of roots. Mr. Saldana responded that ANTA's suggestion
would require a permit just like a tree removal permit.
Mayor Carden asked if we are covering emergencies with this Ordinance, such as a tree that falls
into the street. Mr. Saldana responded that the language in the Ordinance concerning
emergencies has not changed; emergency situations will still remain exempt.
Council Member Luna clarified that there is no Colony Road exemption, there is no exemption
for small lot subdivision and there is no exemption for residential lots under five acres. Mr.
Saldana concurred. Council Member Luna stated that he would not support this Ordinance if it
had any of those exemptions in it.
Mayor Carden congratulated staff on the monumental effort that went into reviewing this
Ordinance.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Carol DeHart, 4305 Lobos Ave., stated that she agrees with Council Member Luna. She read a
prepared statement into the record. (See Exhibit C) Council Member Luna stated that yesterday
CC 08/25/98
Page 4 of 16
he had spoken with Rich Little of the County Agriculture Department about Pine Pitch Canker.
He told Council Member Luna that he had found no Pine Pitch Canker in Atascadero. However,
Mr. Little did say that the pine trees in Atascadero are infested with the Bark Beetle which he
attributes to the Highway 41 fire which stressed the trees and made them susceptible to the Bark
Beetle.
Cory Meyer, 7735 Navajoa Road, President of ANTA,thanked staff and the Council for
involving ANTA in this process. He expressed his view that the new Ordinance is more clear
and user friendly. Mr. Meyer read into the record the ANTA report that was previously given to
Council. (see Exhibit A)
Rick Mathews, 6950 Navarette, expressed his concerns with some of the wording in the
Ordinance. He stated that concerning tree replacement, a contract that runs with the land is an
important change to make to this Ordinance. Mr. Mathews also noted that ANTA recommends
changing four inspections in a seven year period to three inspections in a four year period. He
also stressed the importance of an Arborist on staff.
Joy Greenberg, 11655 Cenegal Road, stated she supported a strong Tree Ordinance with an
arborist on staff. (see Exhibit D)
John Goers, 5200 Delores Ave., commended staff on their work with this Ordinance and stated
he supports ANTA's recommendations.
Joan O'Keefe, 9985 Old Morro Road East, stated that she feels this issue is on the agenda tonight
as a result of the Ardilla Road project. She said that trees were removed before permits were
issued and no one knew how many trees had been removed. An arborist on staff would have
avoided those problems. Ms. O'Keefe stated that she was pleased to hear Council Member
Johnson suggest that the City do enforcement. That means that she will be able to stop doing it.
She also explained the process of root pruning. Ms. O'Keefe also expressed her support of an
arborist on staff.
Craig Dingman, 6620 Atascadero Ave., (a prepared statement was read into the record by Jim
Patterson which supported a strong Tree Ordinance). (see Exhibit E)
Jim Patterson, 9312 No. Santa Margarita Road, expressed his appreciation to Mr. Saldana for
including ANTA in the preparation of this proposed Ordinance. He stated that the major
problems with the previous Tree Ordinance was in the implementation and enforcement of it.
The revised Ordinance proposed tonight clarifies those issues. He also asked the Council to
include ANTA's suggestions in the proposed Ordinance.
Jody Olson& Jay Courtney, Atascadero, (a prepared statement was read into the record by
Nancy Rice, 4245 Arena which supports the proposed Ordinance). (see Exhibit F)
Brian and Letha Musgrave, 7930 Santa Ysabel Ave., (a prepared statement was read into the
record by Kim Deering, 7155 San Gregorio,which supports the proposed Ordinance). (see
Exhibit G)
Fred Frank, 3615 Ardilla, commended staff on their review of this Ordinance. He also
encouraged the Council to consider retaining an arborist.
CC 08/25/98
Page 5 of 16
Ray Jansen, 6655 Country Club Drive, expressed his support of the proposed Ordinance. He also
stated that he felt that former employee Kelly Heffernon was an asset to the City concerning the
preservation of trees and recycling.
Marge Mackey, 5504 Tunitas, endorsed the need for an arborist.
Robert Nimmo, 7375 Bella Vista Road, stated that he has lived in Atascadero for 37 years. He
stated that it is a myth that oak trees are endangered in Atascadero. He showed the Council a
picture of Morro Road approximately 90 years ago. Mr. Nimmo explained that the picture shows
us how many more trees there are in that area. He stated that when the Tree Ordinance was first
adopted, Atascadero had a good number of self-appointed tree policemen that felt free to trespass
on private property and spy on their neighbors. He said that he felt that Ordinance was grossly
over restrictive. He went on to state that we need a tree ordinance that ensures that with any
commercial development, trees are protected and trees are planted. He said that he hopes that
this Tree Ordinance will rid us of the need for neighbor to spy upon neighbor.
Geraldine Brasher, 3202 Monterey Road, stated that she agreed with Mr. Nimmo that we don't
want neighbors to be spying on neighbors. However, she stated that she supports the
recommendation of an arborist.
Phil Ashley, 1586 La Cita Court, San Luis Obispo, stated he supports the hiring of an arborist.
0.W. Smith, 11705 Atascadero Ave., stated that we need to keep government out of our lives.
He stated that he feels we should give private property owners some credit. He said that the
proposed Ordinance should be pared down.
Lindsay Hampton, 8402 Alta Vista, stated that she agreed with Council Member Johnson that the
biggest problem is the management of the Ordinance. That's why we need an arborist.
Livia Kellerman, 5463 Honda,thanked staff for their efforts on this Ordinance. She also stated
that there might be more trees downtown, but they're not native trees. Ms. Kellerman said that
native trees will survive future droughts, non-natives will not.
Ed Cabrera, 9050 Junipero,pointed out that if two people have similar sized lots but their tree
density is different, and they want to remove the same number of trees, should they be held to the
same standards? Council Member Luna stated that the person with the larger number of trees
could provide an agreement to protect many of his trees under a conservation easement.
Mayor Carden closed Public Comment period.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked Jim Patterson to clarify the suggestions made by ANTA
concerning tree root pruning. Mr. Patterson explained the process and stated that ANTA's main
concern is the loss of root systems due to construction.
Council Member Clay clarified his previous comments by saying that many times trees are
scheduled to be removed because of construction, but if they were spared, they very well might
survive even if, for example, a driveway is poured over its roots.
CC 08/25/98
Page 6 of 16
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked if conditions placed on a property would remain with the
property. Mr. Saldana responded, yes.
Council Member Luna suggested that the Council review ANTA's written suggestions.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and Council Member Clay said they had just received ANTA's
suggestions tonight and need time to review them.
Lengthy Council discussion ensued.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson
to amend the proposed Native Tree Regulations (Exhibit A of
Ordinance No. 350) Chapter 11.05 D-4.a to read, "Depending on the
characteristics of the site,the applicant may plant replacement trees
on site. This method shall include payment in advance for three (3)
site inspections during a four(4)year establishment period."
Motion passed 3:1 by a roll-call vote. (Clay opposed)
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Luna
to amend the proposed Native Tree Regulations (Exhibit A of
Ordinance No. 350) Chapter 11.06 C. to read, "The Protection Plan
shall be in place and verified before an applicant receives any City
permits to begin work with the exception of tree protection measures
proposed during construction. Plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the Community Development Department concurrent with the
review of any construction or building permit."
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Luna
to introduce for first reading,by title only, Ordinance No. 350, an
ordinance amending Chapter 11 of Title 9 of the Atascadero
Municipal Code regarding native trees with the amendments as noted.
Motion passed 3:1 by a roll-call vote. (Clay opposed)
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Luna
to adopt Resolution No. 1998-034 adopting Native Tree Guidelines
and Standards with the amendments as noted.
Motion passed 3:1 by a roll-call vote. (Clay opposed)
Mayor Carden called for a 10-minute recess at 9:15 p.m.
Mayor Carden called the Regular Session back to order at 9:25 p.m. He announced that he
would be changing the order of the items to be reviewed by Council. The order would be: C-2,
D-1, C-1 and C-3.
CC 08/25/98
Page 7 of 16
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
2. Atascadero Police K-9 Purchase—Fiscal Impact: None for purchase, $1,5 75 annually
for maintenance (Staff recommendation: Council authorize the purchase of a full service
K-9 using donated funds) [Dennis Hegwood]
Sergeant Robert Eckrote gave the staff report and introduced Terry Davis of the Atascadero
Quota Club who will give the Council information on the fundraising efforts that raised the
money for this program.
Terry Davis, President of the Atascadero Quota Club, which is an international service
organization. She explained that they have raised over$11,000 towards the purchase and care of
the Police K-9. Ms. Davis said that the Quota Club has decided to make "K-9 in the Park" an
annual event to support and possibly obtain more dogs for the future.
Chief of Police Dennis Hegwood apologized to the Council for a presentation which makes it
hard for them to deny this request. He explained that this issue took on a life of its own; the
contributions came in, and the department got mobilized. Chief Hegwood stated that the Council
does have the option to either go with the K-9 that is narcotics trained with low liability versus a
full-service protection police dog. He recommended that the Council choose the full-service
protection police dog. He complimented Sergeant Eckrote on his work with this program.
Mayor Carden asked for a policy to allow the officer to have first choice to be given the dog
Upon the dog's retirement. Chief Hegwood stated he has a policy that he will have the City
Attorney review and will bring it to the Council next meeting.
Sergeant Eckrote answered questions of the Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT—None
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Luna
to authorize the purchase of a full service K-9 using donated funds.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote.
D. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
1. Zone Change#97012—Amending text of zoning ordinance relative to access
requirements at the Eagle Creek Golf Course (9100 Santa Barbara Road: Gearhart)—
Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation: Council give final approval to Zone
Change 497012 by adopting Ordinance No. 338 by title only on second reading) [Roy
Hanley]
City Attorney Roy Hanley gave the staff report. He explained that the Council already adopted
this Ordinance, with an amendment to sub-section#e of the Municipal Code Section 9-3.652., on
January 13, 1998. However, when the Ordinance came back to Council for second reading on
January 27, 1998,the language in sub-section#e was different than what the Council had
approved at the first reading. Mr. Hanley stated that this fact was not noticed and the Council
approved the Ordinance. Since the Ordinance was not read at second reading exactly as voted on
CC 08/25/98
Page 8 of 16
at the first reading, Mr. Hanley recommended to Council that they adopt Ordinance No. 338, as
amended, by title only on second reading at this meeting.
Mayor Carden asked City Manager Wade McKinney to review the issue of the driving range
lights. Mr. McKinney gave a history of the development of this site. He explained that he has
asked the owner to turn off the lights until a solution to the problem can be found.
Council Member Luna expressed his concerns about the way this project has been handled. With
the use of overhead projections, he showed maps of the original project(see Exhibit H) and the
current project(see Exhibit I) on the agenda. He stated that there was never any mention of a
driving range for this project. Council Member Luna explained that this is a PDB, a Master Plan
of Development. That means that the developer has to make the driving range consistent with
the Master Plan of Development. He went on to explain that in the staff report to Council (see
Exhibit J) it states, "Moreover,the change would improve the appearance of the site in that paved
access and parking areas visible from public streets would be replaced with greenery associated
with the golf course." Council Member Luna stated how was he to know they meant a driving
range with ugly poles, netting and lights. He offered another example in the developer's
statement to staff(see Exhibit K) which states, "I think you will agree that the revised design of
the golf course is considerably better than the original version, due to the additional space created
by eliminating the tennis club." Council Member Luna repeated the motion made by him on
January 27, 1998 which shows that he was only aware of a 9-hold golf course, not a driving
range (see Exhibit L). He also read from the Atascadero Municipal Code concerning exterior
lighting, "Light Directed onto Lot. Light sources shall be designed and adjusted to direct light
away from any road or street and away from any dwelling outside the ownership of the
applicant." (see Exhibit M) He stated that the lights at this golf course do not comply. He went
on to read, "Minimization of Light Intensity. No light or glare shall be transmitted or reflected in
such concentration or intensity as to be detrimental or harmful to persons or to interfere with the
use of surrounding properties or streets." (see Exhibit M) He said that Highway 101 and San
Antonio Road were two examples where this site is not in compliance with our Code. Council
Member Luna went on to state that the Master Plan of Development for this site does not include
a bar or restaurant. He then showed an advertisement from the Atascadero News (see Exhibit N).
In conclusion, Council Member Luna stated that to be consistent with the Master Plan of
Development, this project should have no driving range, no lights and no bar/restaurant(see
Exhibit O). He asked the Council to attach conditions to make this project consistent with the
Master Plan of Development.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson stated that netting was discussed in 1991 in connection with this
project. He also stated that a driving range was discussed at the Planning Commission. He
asked what the ruling is on the inclusion of a driving range with a golf course. Mr. Saldana
responded that the project as it has been built has eliminated much of the pavement area for
parking, the ten lighted tennis courts,the 25 yards of swimming area and reduced the size of the
club house from 8,000 sq. ft. to 2,000 sq. ft. He explained that from the planning staff's review
at the time,they found that the proposal was in substantial conformance to the original Master
Plan of Development.
Council Member Clay stated that he is concerned that this has become a political issue. He said
that he felt this was a good project. He agreed that the lights are a problem and stated that he felt
this issue can be solved. Council Member Clay said that this project is an asset to Atascadero.
CC 08/25/98
Page 9 of 16
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked what type of liquor license was issued for this project. Mr.
Saldana responded that they have a beer and wine license only. He also stated that the original
proposal of 1991 did include a club house which housed a bar and snack bar.
Council Member Luna stated that the Council has abdicated its responsibility to the staff. He
then read from the establishment of the Planned Development Overlay which stated, "In
approving a Master Plan of Development for the site,the uses allowed shall be limited to:
Single-family dwellings, residential accessory uses, crop production and grazing, farm animal
raising, home occupation, temporary dwelling, agricultural accessory use, outdoor recreation
services limited to a golf course and/or a swim club or pipelines." Council Member Luna said he
does not understand the comment from staff that a driving range was on the original Master Plan
of Development as it is not listed.
Council Member Clay stated that the problem of the lighting needs to be worked out between our
competent staff, the property owner and the neighbors that are being impacted.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked Mr. Hanley if the original approval in 1991 was valid. Mr.
Hanley responded that he and staff feel that the original approved use was in compliance with
existing codes. Mr. Saldana stated that the PD Overlay provided the opportunity for the
expansion of uses subject to the review and approval of a Master Plan. Between the Master Plan
review and approval originally and the ability to allow for accessory uses, the snack bar and beer
and wine establishment would have been approved.
Council Member Luna stated in response to Mr. Saldana's comments that the Municipal Code
reads, "A Master Plan of Development shall be approved prior to any development of the site.
Said Master Plan shall be processed in the same manner as a Conditional Use Permit except the
Master Plan may be submitted and processed in the same manner set forth for the processing of a
Tentative Map." Council Member Luna said that this means that if you are going to change this,
it is processed like a Conditional Use Permit and must go back to the Planning Commission, and
it never did that.
Council Member Clay said that he would have preferred that the driving range would have been
on the original document where they approved the road. But, we are to this point now. The
facility is there. He told those in attendance that they should go out to the golf course and see
this project. There are a lot of people enjoying the facility. He stated that we need recreational
facilities. We need to work out this lighting problem. We can do that.
PUBLIC COMMENT
O.W. Smith, 11705 Atascadero Ave., 500 yards west of this project. He stated that he was
angry at himself for not following this project. But after hearing the discussion tonight, he
realizes that the Council blinked, and the Council needs to correct it. He expressed his
displeasure of the City's handling of this project.
George Molina, Atascadero, stated that he commends the new staff. He also stated that he is
concerned because Council Member Luna seems to not have confidence in the City's staff. Mr.
Molina stated that he supports Mr. Gearhart as he has accomplished numerous projects that
benefit the City and the youth.
CC 08/25/98
Page 10 of 16
Jay Miller, Atascadero, congratulated Kelly Gearhart for a fine project. He welcomes the tax
revenue and stated it's a fine asset to the community.
John Falkenstien, 4600 Viscano, stated he works for Cannon Associates and is the author of the
letter Council Member Luna referred to earlier(see Exhibit K). He stated that the PD8 zoning
has specific language that requires that the project take access from Santa Barbara Road. He said
that he supports the project.
Scott Young, Administrative Assistant to Mike Ryan, stated that his office has received several
complaints from individuals in the unincorporated area near the golf course. He said that Mr.
Ryan supports the project but feels the lights need to be addressed.
Tina Salter, San Antonio Road, stated that she is the one who invited Council Member Luna and
Planning Commissioner Hageman to the neighborhood meeting because she knew them. She
said that the lights are intolerable. Ms. Salter read a prepared statement into the record (see
Exhibit P). She also distributed to the Council information she acquired from the Internet about
outdoor lighting (see Exhibits Q & R).
Mary Froggatt, 9330 Santa Clara Road, stated she wanted the Council to address the problem of
the lights.
Robert Hewitt, 3850 Ardilla Road, thanked Council Member Luna for his presentation of many
facts that he was unaware of. He stated that he doesn't understand why a driving range needs to
lit at all. He asked the Council to have the lights removed.
Mike Rake, 10850 Zapata Road, stated he supports the golf course and that he feels that Kelly
Gearhart will solve the lighting problem.
Jennifer Hageman, 8005 Santa Lucia, referred to the map shown earlier(see Exhibit I). She
stated that on July 21, 1998 she was told by staff that they had, "determined that the lighting
associated with the driving range would be less intrusive than the light proposed for the original
tennis court development." This indicated to her that a lighting plan for the driving range had
been submitted by the Applicant, reviewed and approved.
Art Pinado, 14060 San Antonio Road, supports the golf course but agrees that the lighting
problem needs to be addressed.
Phil Ashley, 1586 La Cita Court, San Luis Obispo, stated he's a fish&wildlife biologist and
he's concerned with the affect of these lights on wildlife. He said that he supports this kind of
project, but feels the lighting needs to be addressed.
Marsha Kerschen, 13320 San Antonio Road, expressed her displeasure with the lights from the
golf course. They affect his ability to sleep as the lights do not get turned off until anytime
between 10:00 p.m. and 12:00 p.m. She asked the Council to address this problem.
Henry Engen, 9575 Lake View Drive, stated he supported the original proposal in 1991 but not
the current project. He said he felt the light should be turned off until a solution is found. He
read a prepared statement into the record(see Exhibit S).
CC 08/25/98
Page 11 of 16
Pat Kerschen, 13320 San Antonio Road, stated that he supports the golf course but the lights are
a problem that need to be addressed.
Mayor Carden asked, since it is now 10:55 p.m.,for a motion to extend beyond 11:00 p.m.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay
to extend this Regular Session of the City Council past 11:00 p.m.
Motion passed 4:0 by a voice vote.
Noel Shutt, 9325 W. Santa Clara Road, said that the lights at the golf course are a problem that
needs to be addressed.
Mike Molina, 7165 Pinal, commended Kelly Gearhart for a good project. He stated that the golf
course is good for the kids. We should be helping the situation, not trying to regulate it.
Robert Nimmo, 7375 Bella Vista, stated that obviously there's a lighting problem. He supports
the project and feels it's a good addition to Atascadero. It fills a need for younger and older
people. He stated that he supports the City solving the lighting problem.
Mary Chastain, stated that she has lived in this area since 1950. She said that lights were
included in the original plan but no one seemed to be concerned. She stated she supports Kelly
Gearhart and the project.
Rick Chastain, Templeton, said that he supports the golf course and Kelly Gearhart.
Nick Ruth, 9320 No. Santa Margarita Road, stated that the lights are a problem. The lights need
to be turned off until the problem can be solved.
Mike Murphy, 9320 Santa Clara Road, said that his house is lit up by these lights. He explained
that he was the one who called the Telegram Tribune because he wasn't getting any satisfaction
from the City. He is concerned with the attitude that now that the project is in, let's let it go. Mr.
Murphy referred to a letter he submitted to Council (see Exhibit T).
Robert Hewitt, 3850 Ardilla Road, stated that if some are suffering from these lights then we
should be considerate of them.
Barbara Schinike, 7505 Marchant, stated that she is upset by the praising of a developer who is
not abiding by the City rules.
Bill Bowman, 13105 Atascadero Ave., stated he lives right next to the driving range. He asked
where do we go from here. We need to solve the problems created by this project.
O.W. Smith, 11705 Atascadero Ave., apologized for his anger earlier. He is amazed that this
project passed this Council as it is. He supported the project, but expected the Council to make
sure the rules were followed.
Mayor Carden closed the Public Comment period.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson stated that the lighting problem should be top priority.
CC 08/25/98
Page 12 of 16
Council Member Clay stated that this golf course is good for the community. It attracts the
youth, women and senior citizens. He agreed that we have a lighting problem that needs to be
addressed.
Council Member Luna stated that if the Council supports the driving range,the way to solve
these problems is to include the language"lighted driving range" in the Ordinance and approve
it. He said that he would not support such wording. But, he stated,the Council still has a
problem with making this consistent with the Master Plan of Development.
Mayor Carden asked for clarification on the issue of setbacks. Mr. Saldana stated that the PD
overlay showed no setbacks along the driving range. Mayor Carden asked for clarification of the
approval of the lighting. Mr. Saldana stated that staff concluded that the lighting that was
proposed was either equal to or less intensive as the lighting that was proposed for the tennis and
pool facilities. Mayor Carden explained that he has driven the area in question around the golf
course and he thought that the lights were shut off until he was right at the golf course. Mayor
Carden stated that the issue of potential discrimination should be discussed. He explained that he
drove past other lit areas and the lights at Paloma Creek Park were the same if not more intense
than the golf course lights. Also, he stated that anyone who has driven Santa Lucia during a
nighttime football game at the High School has experienced a blinding situation. He went on to
say that if we are going to impose limitations to the golf course lighting, then we will also have
to do the same to the Lake Park ball field, Paloma Creek Park and the Atascadero High School.
He stated that he cannot support discriminating against one facility whose lights are less intense
than other facilities already in existence.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked the City Attorney if the Council were to require new conditions
would the property owner have a takings case. Mr. Hanley responded that he would have a very
low comfort level with defending the City against a takings case. He also stated that the Council
cannot take action on the lighting issue as it was not on the agenda.
Council Member Luna stated that if the Council approves the Ordinance as it is proposed tonight,
there's a de facto approval of the driving range. Mr. Hanley responded by saying that a de facto
approval of the driving range already exists as far as a takings case would go. Council Member
Luna asked Mr. Hanley if the deletion of the lights could be a condition of approval. Mr. Hanley
stated that yes, that could be added, but it would have to come back for another reading.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked staff to clarify how they approve lighting on other projects. Mr.
Saldana responded that lighting plans are usually submitted with the on-site improvements. He
said that in this case,the lighting plans were submitted with the golf course, pro shop and club
house. The lighting plans addressed the lighting for parking lot, driving range and other
electrical portions of the project. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson asked if the Planning Commission
minutes are considered part of the record in regard to the mention of a driving range. Mr. Hanley
responded, yes.
Council Member Clay stressed the need to address the lighting problem and asked if there is a
time the lights are to be off. Mr. Saldana stated that the business license indicates 10:00 p.m.
CC 08/25/98
Page 13 of 16
Council Member Luna said that, based on the Mayor's previous comments, if the Mayor knows
that the City and the School District are in violation of our zoning ordinance,then he's got to
make sure that it either gets fixed or he changes the ordinance.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay
to approve Zone Change#97012 by adopting Ordinance No. 338 by
title only on second reading.
Motion passed 3:1 by a roll-call vote. (Luna opposed)
Mayor Carden directed Mr. McKinney to give the Council a report on the lighting within one
week.
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Request for Funds from the Fire Impact Fees—To be allocated towards the Station One
Hazard Reduction Project—Fiscal Impact: $10,000 from the Fire Impact Fund (Staff
recommendation: Council authorize the allocation of$10,000 from the Fire Impact Fees
Fund towards the Station One Hazard Reduction Project) [Mike McCain]
Fire Chief Mike McCain gave the staff report.
PUBLIC COMMENT - None.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson
to authorize the allocation of$10,000 from the Fire Impact Fees Fund
towards the Station One Hazard Reduction Project.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote.
3. Urgency Ordinance Prohibiting Medical Marijuana Clubs—Fiscal Impact: None (Staff
recommendation: Council adopt an urgency ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana
clubs by introducing Ordinance No. 351 for first reading, by title only.) [Dennis
Hegwood/
Police Chief Dennis Hegwood gave the staff report and Mr. Hanley clarified the legal aspects of
this item.
Mayor Carden asked for clarification on the timing involved with this Ordinance. Mr. Hanley
stated that if the Council adopts this Ordinance tonight, it will go into effect immediately.
Within 45 days, he and Chief Hegwood will come back to Council with a report on how they
plan on addressing the issue. This report will have to go through the Planning Commission. At
that time,the Council can extend the life of the Ordinance for up to another 10 months.
Council Member Clay asked if bringing this issue to the Council might be giving people ideas.
Mr. Hanley stated that other cities in the area have already been approached by individuals
interested in opening such establishments, so the timing is right.
PUBLIC COMMENT—None.
CC 08/25/98
Page 14 of 16
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay
to adopt an urgency ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana clubs
by introducing Ordinance No. 351 by title only.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote.
4. Information Bulletin
Sgt. John Rodgers gave the staff report on the Community Oriented Policing Program.
E. COMMITTEE REPORTS
S.L.O. Council of Governments/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority
Mayor Carden stated that they will be meeting next Wednesday.
County Mayor's Round Table
Mayor Carden stated that they met last week and discussed their appointment process. They are
going to lobby the League of California Cities to move their annual conference to April for
legislative benefits and to move the annual conference to Sacramento.
City/ Schools Committee
Mayor Carden said that the next meeting was moved to September 14th.
F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
City Council
Council Member Clay stated that Council Member Lerno was misquoted tonight and he wasn't
here to respond. He said that he didn't agree with that.
G. ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Carden adjourned the Regular Session at 12:05 a.m. to the Redevelopment Agency
Meeting immediately following this meeting.
MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY:
Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A— Prepared Statement by Cory Meyer
CC 08/25/98
Page 15 of 16
Exhibit B— Prepared Statement by Council Member Lerno
Exhibit C— Prepared Statement by Carol DeHart
Exhibit D— Prepared Statement by Joy Greenberg
Exhibit E— Prepared Statement by Craig Dingman
Exhibit F— Prepared Statement by Jody Olson& Jay Courtney
Exhibit G— Prepared Statement by Brian& Letha Musgrave
Exhibit H— Tentative Tract Map 2049—Eagle Creek 1991
Exhibit I— Eagle Creek Golf Course Map— 1997
Exhibit J— Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes
Exhibit K— Letter from John Falkenstien, received 11/03/97
Exhibit L— Excerpt of City Council Minutes 01/27/98
Exhibit M— Excerpt of AMC, Sec. 9-4.137
Exhibit N— Newspaper advertisement of Eagle Creek
Exhibit O - Overhead projection statement—Councilman Luna
Exhibit P - Prepared Statement by Tina Salter
Exhibit Q - Information on lighting from Tina Salter
Exhibit R- Information on lighting from Tina Salter
Exhibit S - Prepared Statement by Henry Engen
Exhibit T - Handout of Mr. Mike Murphy, dated 8/25/98
CC 08/25/98
Page 16 of 16
ATASCADERo. NATIVE TRFE* . .ASSOCIATIOIV
Dedicated to the preservation sof Ataecadero's native forest,
Exhibit: A
August 24, 1998 Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98.
Atascadero City Council
Dear Mayor Carden and _ il Members:
ANTA would like to- hank ryc#r involving members of the organization in the process
of revising the:Crty S'Nativ tection Ordinance: We applaud the work that staff has
put into this document and the s uit cooperation that been exhibited in eliciting input
from ANTA,In-manNbays, the Ordi l orer d ore`user-friendly."
Ma of the su estio made b indiv ` o TA have.alread been
Py ,.gg $ y i 1 y
incorporated:intgt he "4,7 t. A co eve he anal draft and after considerable
discussion and-co" proriu'sreu
� �1 came u t�"t thjs short�ut very important list of three
recommended changes�Tect-chas haveto do with(1) retention of a contract
arborist, (2)pruning withiot zone, and (3) ip ati(nmonitoring.with regard to on-site
tree replacement. .�/�-
F NAY/ ' r
(1) Arborist: ANTA strongly recomme ds that1he'angua in the°ordinance reflect input
and rno�itoring f�om`apty-retmeed arb. 'atm e*uently,tree I r'tection lans are no more
than sketches,ofthe corist�uction f ' 1e sr ictrssq oity Arborist seems to
`� `c y
9_�_ 1 .reflect the needfbt,ar�or sr se,p
le, o , th n �t gin t e ordinance is not as
clear as staff's discussion. Theref �QjT�T1end t e fo wing changes and/or additions
to the ordinance: ,'
Page 3. Sec: 1.1.04 Tit the=definition orf:>rte Y��nner `;iruding,tree protection
�} plans" from job description. Architects and engineers o, of ave the-expe tise.toidentify the
health and species ofindiv:241 tree 'o pro RRosll ��,,P e pro ct* measures like root
aeration; installation of.tree wells,retc.a,. tree protect n pla musfbe,more than`a graphic
1 t --
rendering of the site.
Page 7. Sec. 11.06. Tree Prote.6fi n.`Rlas.� iE2e�ievya'p¢Approval. Change '"Plans
shall be reviewed and approved. mr u it�D v op gyp...-e,rrt to"Plans shall
�.
be reviewed by a city4etainedkar ~ ' Tapp ve r: e mmtjnz Development
Department..." Planners and inspe t -q are not a' a to or-defer d the quality of a
Y
tree protection plan. `�
Page 10. See. 11.14 Enfore merrt� ., hir h urpose of this
chapter, the Director> consu, � � emp oy r r �`�t t �Drrector shall
consult with and employ an Arbo
(2) Pruning. Page 3. The definition of ee Pruning is, "Th cutti g�detachment or separation of
anylimb branch or roots em hasis added from a native ted.""Seer: 11.05 Tree
( P )
Removal. A. Permit Required, A permit is requiredfor pruning of more than twenty
frve percent(25%)of the live canopy in native trees. ANTA recommends that be changed
to"pruning of more than twenty five.per cent(25%) of the hye canopy and twenu eve per
cent(25%) othe root system." This is consistent with the definition of pruning and
recognizes that root pruning impacts the vigor of trees as much or more than canopy
P.O. box 1432 Atascadero, CA 93423 (805) 461-7610 000020
6)printed on.ecycled paper.
.. ATA CAE3RO NATIVE TPEE, AssOCIATION
Dedicated to the proeervition of.Atascadero's native forest,
pruning. See attached document from the Department of Forestry;"OAK ROOT
DISORDERS ASSOCIATED WITH INCOMPATIBLE LANDSCAPING."
(3)Tree Replacement and Monitoring. Page 6. Sec. 11.05,Tree Remo*al. DA. Conditions
.of Approval(a). ANTAIre " "' s the wording be changed as follows: ."Defending on
the characteristics of the si ant may plant replacement trees ori site. .This method
shall include paymeni in a , ree (3)site inspections during a four-(4)year
establishment perio4l,
-In the Native-Tree.Guideline ' p. 3", ree ReplacemeConditions of Approval A. 4.,we
are recommefiding th "maintenance' '' f/be c a n� d to.'maintenance contract, 'and
add this sentence at th end of that secti e at die during the first year may be
replanted If the tree rSlnot replanted, 1 r l be p ment into the tree firltd.
Subsequent losses rltusi<be litigated by i' o t e tree; und. "
< l f
These.recommended changes-are important for en�rzuringA4 protection of Atascadero s Oak
Forest but they do not epr, gen t.significant chan t6`thoverall content and certainly the
intent of the revised Ordinance:-� � TA urgesyo to adopt'these.changes into the Tree
Ordnanii ce l
Sincerely,
=a
Cory Meyer, ANTA President ,� r
lit
V�Y
rZ
P.O. Box 1432 • Atascadero, CA 93423 . • (805) 461-7610 000021
. `�rrintcd OA rccycled-paper.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON,Governor.
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION
AST-CASCADE REGION
Ridgway Avenue
t5�ta
Rosa, CA 95401
(707) 576-2936
OAK ROOT DISORDERS ASSOCIATED WITH INCOMPATIBLE LANDSCAPING
Bruce W. Hagen
The distinctive and enduring oak. trees need. Foots support and anchor the tree,
scattered across the state's valleys,woodlands absorb water and minerals, store energy and
and .foothills have come -to . symbolize produce chemicals that help to regulate
California's native landscape.,These trees are growth. They grow where oxygen, water and
admired for their natural beauty, longevity and minerals are most abundant. However, when
value to wildlife and the environment. Despite any of these factors are deficient or in excess,
this .admiration and concern for. preserving root function and, ultimately, tree health may
oaks, developers .and ; homeowners often suffer.
inadvertently damage trees as they build homes
and install landscaping around them. Although The roots of mature oaks grow predominantly
tough and resilient,oak trees can be decimated within the upper three feet of soil. Most of the
by construction-related injuries and by changes roots responsible for the uptake of water and It
in soil aeration and moisture levels. mineralsare concentrated within 12 inches of
the surface. Few roots grow deeper than three
The growing requirements and environmental feet, although some can be found growing
tolerances of.California native oaks must be , much deeper in areas with deep medium to
recognized to incorporate existing oaks into coarse soils, and in fractured rock. Much of
the landscape without jeopardizing their the root system is contained within the drip
a
health. Favorable growing conditions must be line, although roots typically radiate well
maintained through careful plant selection, beyond it (Figure l).
minimal disturbance, and judicious irrigation.
A list of plants .,compatible, .,with the Oak roots, like those of most trees, are
environmental requirements of native oaks can extremely sensitive to environmental change
be found in`the California Oak Foundation's (soil compaction, raised soil grade, increased
publication 'Compatible.,Plants Under and moisture, paving, etc.). These changes reduce
Around Oaks'. the soil`oxygen, impair- root function and.
create conditions. more favorable to root .
OAK ROOTS To properly plant.and manage pathogens(disease organisms).
landscaping around trees,., especially native +" '
oaks, it is important to understand what tree OAKS AND SUMMER WATER Once
roots do, where they grow, and what they . established, native oaks seldom require
1 .
000022
Exhibit: B
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
August 20, 1998
Council Members and Community Members
Unfortunately I have personal commitments and am unable to attend tonight's meeting.
The Tree Ordinance is important to me and to Atascadero so I want to pass on my
comments.
I asked that the Tree Ordinance be reviewed because it is difficult to understand and it is
not protecting our tree assets. The Ordinance needed to be clarified so that we all
understand the rules and they make sense. Many people have expressed concerns to me
and want to insure that the Ordinance meets the needs of the entire community. While
there has been much said about my "motives", I think it is clear from the discussions we
have had that this Ordinance needs our attention. I want to insure that our urban forest
deserves is protected and that individual families can enjoy their property in concert with
the environment.
While I don't think the proposed Ordinance fully deals with all of the problems brought
to our attention, I do believe this Ordinance is an improvement over our existing code.
As I have stated before, our urban forest is a valuable asset worth protecting. The
proposed Ordinance more clearly sets forth the requirements and is easier to follow.
I encourage my fellow Council Members to support the revised Ordinance and direct
staff to continue to upgrading this and other City codes to insure that the community and
environment compliment one another.
000023
Exhibit: C
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
August 25, 1998
Carol DeHart
4305 Lobos Ave.
Atascadero,CA. 93422
Council Members, City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Ave.
Atascadero,CA. 93422
This letter is to express my continued strong support for the existing Native Tree
Ordinance in Atascadero. i strongly oppose the elimination of references to a City
Arborist,thereby placing responsibility on the community development department.
Atascadero has recently been recognized as the best"tree city" in the United States,
it is only appropriate to retain an arborist for our city.
In light of the current devastation occurring with existing conifers in the entire state of
California due to the pitch canker, now it is especially important to be vigilant,and plan
how to deal with the impending loss of many conifers. I spoke with my friend and.
colleague,Dr. Donald Dahlsten,Assoc. Dean of Students at U.C. Berkeley in the Dept. of
Forestry,yesterday. He has been responsible for conducting biological control projects in
Santa Margarita and San Miguel on the Elm Leaf Beetle for the County of San Luis
i Obispo in the recent past. Regarding the pitch canker which is affecting many of the
conifers in the state and our county,he said, and I quote,`Begin active planning,plant
other native trees. The prognosis is not good. There is no known solution for the pitch
canker, therefore many pines will be lost. There are some resistant trees,so therapeutic
pruning should take place. Plant no conifer that is susceptible,only native trees." We
must have an expert to advise citizens about which native trees to plant that will survive.
Now more than ever,it is imperative that this city retain the integrity of the Tree
Ordinance. We must allow the Atascadero Native Tree Association to oversee tree fund
expenditures,and maintain the current fee schedule that developers are required to
pay. Now more than ever,we must have an arborist who can advise us about the pitch
canker and how to manage the replacement of affected conifers with native-trees. We
have lived here too.long for our quality of life to be diminished by an amendment that
will weaken the Tree Ordinance at a time when it is most necessary.
Sincerely,
Carol Deliart
000024
Exhibit:. D
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
Joy Greenberg
11655 Cenegal Road
Atascadero, CA 93422
August 25, 1998
Atascadero City Council
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Dear City Council Members,
I have lived in Atascadero eleven years. The most important reason my family chose to
live here is the breathtaking natural beauty, specifically the plenitude of native oak trees.
Before building here, we looked at property in Paso Robles and Templeton,
commenting that they were nice, but wondering if there weren't someplace with more
trees that would mesh with our idea of a"dream home." When a friend showed us
Paradise Valley, it was love at first sight. We were thrilled when the tree ordinance was
adopted because we believed that the city felt as we did regarding the importance of
preserving this invaluable natural resource.
Implementing and enforcing a tree ordinance is critical, I believe, for the continuing
! ability of Atascadero to attract potential home buyers and for maintaining property
values. Without our spectacular oak forests,.there is nothing to separate us from any
other suburban California area, i.e. no reason for anyone to select beautiful Atascadero
over any other place. But just having a tree ordinance alone is not enough. There
needs to be an impartial person responsible for overseeing its standards. That is why I
urge the Council to retain a professional arborist or someone with similar expertise in
the field of tree conservation. We simply cannot afford to jeopardize the future of our
greatest natural resource, our heritage oaks.
Sincerely,
000025
Exhibit: E
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
Atigust 24, 1998
Dear Atascadero City Cou.-LICU Oe-ftber3:
When I moved to town and purchased a home just a little over
ten years ago, my Realtor told me that Atascadero was a city
that protected its trees. This was a selling point, as far
as I was concerned. It still is.
It is possible to put an economic value on one mature tree.
That is the cost of transplanting one. It has been done, and
it costs a lot to do it. If the value of all of our trees is
the sum of the cost to transplant each one, then the value is
astronomical. If the sum is greater than the total of the parts,
as I believe it is, then the value is immeasurable.
In the decade that I have been here I have observed a struggle
in the development of Atascadero. It is not a struggle between
growth and no-growth, or between rapid growth and slow growth.
It is a struggle between smart growth and growth as usual .
I call it the struggle between progress and deterioration.
Progress means growing in a way that preserves our greatest
existing assets, one of which is surely our urban/suburban
forest. Deterioration means continuing to allow the convenience
of developers to weigh too heavily in the balance, which leads
to growth out of character with what Atascadero has been and
has stood for in the past.
I have seen evidence of both the forces of deterioration and
the forces of progress at work over the past ten years.
Deterioration can be seen in the sprouting up of postage-stamp
housing, shopping malls and fast-food establishments which
increase the concentration of traffic and do little to
a distinguish Atascadero from many other towns. Progress can
be seen in our development of community facilities and
activities, public transportation and our pace setting waste
reduction efforts.
There are developers in this town who are commited to progress.
Let them lead' the way in growth. Reaffirm our committment to
what Atascadero is, a lovely wooded community with a semi-rural
sensibility. Let's not try to make Atascadero into something
it is not; it is not like any other town up and down the Coast.
Let us maintain the spiritual, emotional and gigantic economic
benefits of our trees Vote for progress. Thank you for
listening.
Sincerely,
L
`� f
Craig Dingman TA "
6620 Atascadero Ave.
466-4547
000026
Exhibit: F
c Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
25 August 1998
Dear Councilmen,
Atascadero is truely fortunate to be located within a beautiful oak woodland. These oaks provide
residents with shade and beauty not to mention great tree house sites and increased property
values. They also provide habitat and food for a diverse wildlife population. in short, they are
what makes Atascadero unique from other communities throughout California. In turn it is our
and, as our elected officials,your responsibility oto protect them. We would be wise to learn from
communities who having lost much of their urban forest are now burdened with both extreemly
restrictive regulations and the high cost of tree replacement. With this in mind,we urge you to
adopt the ANTA recomended revisions to our local tree ordinance. Let Atascadero be know for
its forsight, not hindsight.
Sincerely,
Jody Olson& Jay Courtney(Atascadero residents and property owners for 15 years)
a
00002'7
Exhibit: G
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
August 22,. 1998
To: ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
We are writing this letter to request that you make every
effort to preserve our trees. They make Atascadero uniquely
beautiful among the cities of the beautiful Central Coast.
Besides their aesthetic .value, trees have practical functions
as well. They improve air quality, reduce soil erosion,
and provide living. space for birds and other important wild
life. Thus .trees are vital to human wellbeing. In order
to prevent their destruction by greedy, unappreciative or
simply thoughtless people, it is necessary to have a strong
ordinance against tree destruction. Loopholes and exceptions
must be kept to an absolute minimum. We feel sure you appreciate
the aesthetic and practical value of trees to our community
and are counting on you to do all in your power to preserve
them for us and for future generations.
Respectfully yours,
Brian and Letha Musgrave
7930 Santa Ysabel Ave.
Atascadero, CA 93422
00002£3
Atascadero City Council ~� _
Meeting Date: 8/25/98Ec
z ~20
j! N
aiq
CQ d n o e"
to E.
.�. � o
Y/
h �
' I �o • •; �:�` .ass .
log �! w
« •i ��
► s-
' s V {:
cc vs
• f
,�x C42
W
l
I�♦ I •
t,/
m
� o
r
Oy r �40 ' .c
vi
At
x
o k
r�<� : ctcse�tcctttt,ctt�cct • gs
ISn37s.ts1--•.3
000029
;t:�,
'Exhibit: I
zy Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
fit
MAPS
� •wCi � I � { ..
01
rI
�Of�' i• t y
YI
LLI
/moi'•_ .. ♦ +1t 1 U
Ile
�/:.y!//�� / l f��•. � tit• , �+ 1 : �
_ • i' ., ! t / t \ qw
!� 't•s { L i : \ ski, 1 s
1 �� �l�fitL. ^'J• : t � � .=t.J;s .• ,% i ti,•.— t s 1
X i I
jr�• /l t ,
�./� •�. .../• _w, Ire/ _ t' �`�. � •'moi ` ���' o
i / � / . �• .•�, ,%�} �, ;is• �•.. � { 1; ► ?, _
••,•���ice'� / /'. ���. .�•�,�;'.i y •• r��Y�/ '..� F�,/
, -_ ��/ + / Vii' i-.)'��♦♦ •ii � `•�.. •�� f /,r ,,,•��
t• L
� /r � , l i•tJf 1 � � � i Ir/
1 i t
7. loit
Iv
VA i
z V4
JI
oo
C '•� � '�
~'
1` •121c t �`
C'�u LSCS arx.E�g LV - •.`c4pjc
000030
Exhibit: . J
A
tascadero.City Council,
Meeting Date; 8/25/98
In:`:response to the,current' application,-:North Coast Engineering
has reviewed the situation and agrees with the -'applicant.that' the
number ofencroachments; onto Santa Barbara. Road should .be
minimized for 'isafety and 'for circulation, in `general:=
CONCLUBIONB•
-The 'Zon3.ng Ordinafide change requested by the applicant and :
supported by North Coast Engineering. would improve traffic , safety
and-circulation in •general. oreover the Change would im rove
p
the agpearahce of the site in th'at paved access . and-pa rkfn areas
vis ble from Oubl c streets would be replaced withgreenery
assoc ated with the golf course. Although the change will
increase commercial traffic on a local .residential street
(Atascadero Road) , that increase will not be as great as.
Previously feared because of reductions in the planned number and
intensity of commercial uses. Indeed, . it appears the benefits of
the propoped change outweighi the costs and, upon approval .of the
change, a .great project for. the community: can become even:better.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Original Access and Parking for Eagle Creek
Project
Attachment B - Revised Access and Parking for Eagle Creek
Project
Attachment C -- Applicant's statement '
Attachment D -- Ordinance 338
000031
• Exhibit: K '
Atascadero City.Council
Meeting Date; 9f25/98 MICHAEi F.caitiJov.PE
ANDREW G.MERRIAM.AIA.AICP
D.MIEL $ HUTCHINS0' •LS
Jr * - .C '-n- Steve DeCatnp. .:
ASSOCIATES .•. ,:.
Duector of Community Development
City'of Atascadero <,.. :•.
6650 Palma Avenue
Atascadero,CA 93422
ENGINEERS
Subject: Zone Text Amendment,Eagle Creek Golf Course
PLANNERS 9-3.652(e) Planned Development Overlay Zone No.8
SURVEYORS Dear Steve:
As you are aware,Mr.Gearhart has obtained a grading permit and has begun the
earthwork operations at the Eagle Creek Golf Course. I think you will agree that,
the revised design of the golf course is considerably better than the original
version, ue to the aagritional space created by eliminating the tennis cab.
In accordance with these revisions,Mr. Gearhart is hereby requesting that the
Planning Cornmission reconsider the language established in Planned
Development Overlay Zone No. 8. More specifically,he requests that item"e"of
9-3.652,Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 8,which
requires access for non-residential use from Santa Barbara Road,be eliminated.
It is readily apparent that a driveway from Santa Barbara Road would be
detrimental to the enjoyment of the course by golfers. Access to the clubhouse
via Atascadero Road is a much safer entrance for the golf course than Santa
Barbara Road. Vehicles stopped in Santa Barbara Road waiting to make left turns
i` into the golf course present congestion and are a hazard to through traffic in both
directions.
In the original hearings for the golf course in 1991,there was discussion regarding
the potential of residential traffic in the Eagle Ranch area conflicting with the
users of the course. Though the agricultural preserve contract on the ranch has
many years remaining,when and if this area is developed,we believe that the
owners of these lots will welcome the convenience of a recreational opportunity
such as the Eagle Creek Golf Course. .
We believe that the Eagle Creek Golf Course will be a welcome attraction to the
community and a wonderful recreational benefit to young and old alike. Thank
you for your consideration.
364 PACIFIC STREET cer y,
SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA
93401 ''1r =�"�.• .. .1 '
CUMATING
8a . ohn Falkenstien
9707091zonetext 1 �1f111
5 544.7407 •,•"'29 •,•.
rix 805.544.3863
.r%
w•«x.vct
mar
000032.
Exhibit: L
Atascadero City Council. ., ,
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Meeting Date.,82 /98
Zone Chance #97012 frotl —9100 Santa Barbara(Gearhart) Fiscal Impact."None;
reco»unendation:•'I)Find Negative Declaration adequate.-
and 2)Adopt Ordina�iee
No:°338,:waiving the reading in full and intxoduee for first reading by tz'tle only.)
Council Member Lean stepped down on this item due to a conflict of interest... .
Associate Planner Gary Kaiser gave the staff report. He explained the changes in the approved
use that the new owner was proposing.
Council Member Luna stated that he has no problem with this proposal, however, he would like
staff reassurance that sedimentation and erosion control that is required by Atascade.rots
ordinances is being fulfilled.
Council discussed the issue of changing the access route. Assistant City Engineer John Neil
stated that the greater distance between intersectitons the better they will function.
There was also Council di
'cuss ion'concerning a swim club/tennis courts vs: only a golf course
Mr. Kaiser suggested amending Section(e) to read: "Access is allowed from Atascadero Ave.
for golf course use only. Any subsequent proposals to expand recreational uses shall require
conditional use permit approval."
No PUBLIC COMMEM—
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and secoisded by Council Member Clay to
find that the project would not have significant environmental effects
and that the Negative Declaration prepared for the project is
therefore adequate.
Motion passed 3:0 by a roll-call vote. (Lerno abstained)
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to
approve Zone Change#97012 by adopting Ordinance No. 338,
waiving the reading in full and introducing for first reading by title
only with the following amendment:
Section (e)to read, "Any substantial expansion of recreational.uses
be and a 9-hole elf course shall require prew�ration of s traffic
stud . The result of that traffic study and recommendation shall
appear on the Consent Calendar of the City Council."
Motion passed 3:0 by a roll-call vote (Lerno abstained)
2. Sidewalk Maintena .and Renair—Fiscal Impact: None
(City Attorney recommendation: Adopt Ordinance No. 342, waiving the reading in full
and introducing for first reading by title only.)
City Attorney Roy Hanley gave the report.
No PUBLIC COMMENT—
CC 01127198 . 000.033
Page 5 of 6 i:
Exhibit: M
Atascadero City Council.
See. 9=4.137,Exterior lighting. Meefing Date: 8/25/98
The standards of this section are applicable to all outdoor night-lighting sources installed after the.°
effective date of this title,`except"for street lights located within public rights=of-way and all uses established m
the.Agnculture zone An electrical permit may be required by Title 8
(a)Illumination only. Outdoor lighting shall be used for the purpose of illumination only and shall not be .
designed for or used as an advertising display, exceptas provided by Sections 9-4.130 et seq.
(b) Light Directed onto Lot. Light sources shall be designed
and adjusted to direct light away from any road or street and away
from any dwelling outside the ownership of the applicant.
(c) Minimization of Light Intensity. No: light or glare shall be
transmitted or reflected in such concentration or intensity as to be
detrimental or harmful to persons or to interfere with the use of
surrounding properties or streets.
(d) Light Sources to be Shielded.
(1 ) Ground Illuminating Lights. Any light source used for ground area illumination except
incandescent lamps of one hundred fifty(150)-:watts or less and light produced directly by the
combustion of natural gas or other fuels, shall be shielded from above in such a mariner that the
edge of the shield is level with or below the lowest edge of the light source. Where any light
' source intended for ground illumination is located at a height greater than eight (8)
feet. the required shielding is to extend below the lowest edge of the light source a
distance sufficient to block the light source from the view of any residential use
within one thousand (1000) feet of the light fixture.
(2)Elevated Feature Illumination. Where lights are used for the purpose of
illuminating or accenting building walls, signs, flags, architectural features, or
landscaping, the light source is to be shielded so as not to be directly visible from
off--site:
(e) Height of Light Fixtures. Freestanding outdoor lighting:
fixtures shall not exceed the allowed height of the tallest building
on the site, pursuant to Section 94.111.
(Ord. 68 § 94.137, 1983)
:;: , 00003.4..
Exhibit: N
,,,fir/► asca ero i y UM
r 16Cr 4C& QU/f Meet' 8/25/9
_ .. ....�•�� � EEK � •
F
Yy
r,4Y l� 7P.M.
y S ,
Aug 15
allabie one week In advance
only $10.00 for 9-holes
$17.00 for 18 holes
dust ONE HOUR!
championship golf course
challenging golf experience-featuring
,rEN - Hole #6
ckages available - you name it, we can
Rti'
1
�J jW�(y'tyWi R 10 P.M.
7111
ng bails under.-the stars - It's awesamei
`i
E ` of the game and our qualified
,name' to h9lp you learn to control both
rection Wfth•an of our clubs:
if club fittingby appointment:
sxuhigh-tech video analysis equipment.
I ::-�Ikc Clk
=� 1�'
Y ��� •� � ,����, �cxurant open to the public.
�. 1P Op1tast from 6 a.m.to 11 a.m. daily,
11 a.m. to 9 P.M.
4Y• >�..
M � s
; � ,• . >as ,y Hour 3 p.m. to 6 p.m: daily
se from
onour
4,000 sq. ft. pctlo overlooking jhe�T r n
nothing but the best!
'� � ter.>r� ` .:� � • •.:<
at service, great atmosphere at the start of
L30oo aseadero R.d.(*x ad off01wrbcK0 AS OO
035
-Exhibit: :0
Aj ie: 8/25M
Make the Eagle Creek
' project consistent with
the .-M-as ter Plan .. of
Development
No Driving Range
� No Lights
No Bar/Restaurant,
000036
Exhibit: P
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
August 25, 1998
Hal Carden
Atascadero City Councilman/Mayor
Rotunda Building
Atascadero CA 93422
Dear Mr. Carden
As you no doubt know by now, the lights at the Eagle Creek Golf Course driving range are
causing several problems in the neighborhood. Foremost is the safely issue for those driving on
San Antonio Road and/or Santa Clara Road. The lights are blinding as they are aimed directly
at that area. Secondly, the lighting as presently set up-violates almost every one of your own
Atascadero City ordinances regarding lighting. Thirdly,those whose houses are in the direct
glare of the floodlights as presently set up are unable to enjoy their yards or even the insides of
their houses due to this intolerable glare. Last, but definitely not lease, the beam lights up the
trees and vegetation up to one half mile away which can cause great detriment to the life of
animals and birds that depend on darkness for their life cycle.
I find it hard to believe that you and your fellow City Councilmen have not already directed staff
to have the owner of the lights turn them off until the problem is resolved. I also find it hard to
believe that Kelly Gearhart would wish to continue to foul his own nest—the city of Atascadero
and surrounding environs—by allowing this to continue. I understand that he will be hiring a
lighting engineer to try to mitigate the situation but 1 see now reason why we citizens should have
to suffer in the meantime. Not to mention the legal liability that Mr. Gearhart and the
City of Atascadero are exposed to if an accident should occur due to the lights.
Land the rest of the neighborhood will await your decision regarding this matter but our patience
is rapidly running out—one person's business should not be allowed to adversely affect an entire
neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Tina Salter
14080 San Antonio Road
Atascadero CA 93422
cc: Jerry Clay
Ray Johnson
Ken Lerno
George Luna
Kelly Gearhart
City Clerk
Atascadero News
000037
Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting
http://www.gnat.org/—ida/gnol.html
Exhibit: Q
Atascadero City Council
Good Nei hbor Meeting Date: 8/25/98
g
Outdoor Lighting
A GUIDE TO SELECTING AND INSTALLING EFFICIENT,
COST-EFFECTIVE,
AND UNOBTRUSIVE OUTDOOR LIGHTING FIXTURES
` a
Compiled by the
New England Light Pollution Advisory Group(NELPAG)
i
i and the International Dark-Sky Association
May 1995
Why is there outdoor lighting?
Outdoor lighting is used to illuminate roadways,parking lots,yards, sidewalks,public meeting areas,
signs,work sites,and buildings. It provides us with better visibility and a sense of security.
• When well-designed and properly installed, outdoor lighting can be and is very useful in
improving visibility and safety and a sense of security,while at the same time minimizing energy
use and operating costs.
Why should we be concerned?
if outdoor lighting is not well-designed and properly installed, it can be costly,inefficient, glary,and
harmful to the nighttime environment. These are the issues:
• Glare:Poorly-designed or poorly installed lighting can cause a great deal of glare that can
000038
1 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
Good Neighbor outdoor Lighting httpJ/www.gpatorgl4da/gnoLhbW
severely hamper the vision of pedestrians,cyclists,and drivers,creating a hazard rather than
increasing safety. Glare occurs when you can see light directly from the fixture(or bulb).
• Light Trespass: Poor outdoor lighting shines onto neighborhood properties and into bedroom
windows,reducing privacy,hindering sleep, and creating an unattractive look to the area.
• Energy Waste:-Much-of our outdoor lighting wastes energy because it is not well-designed. This
waste results in high operating costs and increased environmental pollution from the extra power
generation needs: We waste over"a billion-dollars a year in the United States alone lighting up the
sky at night.
• Sky Glow:A large fraction of poor lighting shines directly upwards,creating the adverse sky glow
above our cities that washes our view of the dark night sky,taking away an important natural
resource. In addition to the cost savings,less sky glow will allow future generations to enjoy the
beauty of the stars, and children will be inspired to learn and perhaps to enter fields of science.
What is Good Lighting?
Good lighting does its intended job well and with minimum adverse impact to the environment. Good
lighting has four distinct characteristics:
1. It provides adequate light for the intended task,but never over-lights.
Specifying sufficient light for a job is sometimes hard to do on paper.Remember that a full moon
can make an area seem quite bright. Some modern lighting systems illuminate areas to a level 100
times as bright as does the full moon! Brighter is not always better, so try to choose lights that will
meet your needs without illuminating the neighborhood. If you can't decide what to do, consulting
a good lighting designer is usually your best bet.
2. It uses "fully-shielded" lighting fixtures,fixtures that control the light output in order to
keep the light in the intended area.
Such fixtures have minimum glare from the light-producing source. "Fully-shielded" means that
a no light is emitted above the horizontal. (High-angle light output from ill-designed fixtures is
mostly wasted,doing no good in lighting the ground,but still capable of causing a great deal of
glare. Of course,all the light going directly up is totally wasted.)
Fully-shielded light fixtures are more effective and actually increase safety,since they have very
little glare. Glare can dazzle and considerably reduce the effectiveness of the emitted light.
3. It has the lighting fixtures carefully installed to maximize their effectiveness on the targeted
property and minimize their adverse impact beyond the property borders.
Positioning of fixtures is very important. Even well-shielded fixtures placed on tall poles at a
property boundary can cast a lot of light onto neighboring properties: This"light trespass"greatly
reduces and invades privacy,and is difficulty to resolve after the installation is complete.
Fixtures should be positioned to give adequate uniformity of the illuminated area. A few bright
000039
2 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting http://www.gnatorg/:ida/gnol.htmi
fixtures(or ones that are too low to the ground)can often create bright"hot spots"that make the
less-lit areas in-between seem dark. This can create a safety problem. When lighting signs,
position the lights above and in front of the sign, and keep the light restricted to the sign area;
overlit signs are actually harder to read. Buildings ought to be similarly lit in a way to offer an
attractive,safe environment without overkill.
4. It uses fixtures with high-efficiency lamps,while still considering the color and quality as
essential design criteria.
High-efficiency lamps used for lighting not only save energy-which is good for a cleaner
environment-but reduce operating costs.-Most high-efficiency lamps last a long time,reducing
costly maintenance.Highly-efficient fixtures usually cost more initially,but the payback time is
very short,and such fixtures will save you lots of money in a short time.
Balancing against high-efficiency,though, is the quality of the light emitted. In some applications,
the yellow light cast by low-pressure(LPS)or high-pressure(BPS)sodium lamps may not be as
desirable as a less-efficient,but much whiter,compact-fluorescent,metal-halide,or even
incandescent light source. In other applications,color is not of importance,and LPS or HPS lamps
do a very good Job at very low cost. Well-designed shielded tights can usually be lower in
wattage,saving even more energy and money. They will actually light an area better than
unshielded lights of higher output,because they make use of all the light rather than wasting some
(or much)of it.
Why are these characteristics so important? How do they factor into a design?
Good lighting means that we save energy and money, and we avoid hassles. A quality lighting job makes
a"good neighbor."And we have a safer and more secure nighttime environment.
,Always remember that lighting should benefit people. Controlled, effective, efficient lighting at a home
or business will enhance the beauty,while providing visibility,safety,and security. Poorly-installed,
bright lighting is offensive and gives a very poor image.
v
000040
3 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting
http://www.gaatorg/—idalpoLhmd
...,
.y,eeNxavx:rfwxmroeo::xx<.a.,,..x<,naxati.•aa>xttuaaxawaov,:n:c:::,..cx�::w.:m:•`uuttaa:«e:,.:.xxuu.•a?:.:�rccuenatt,;;axc:.:w••,::cfx:;,,.xu.«r..:o>:.n.ca,•.e:.>:,,,;,,x<
EXAMPLES OF SOME
COMM-ON LIGHTING FIXTURES
z
k
POOR - GOOD
1 I
3 t 1 + + � t I 1 ♦ 11
1
$ ...- .y........ ..... +.
Gxarnd-maunied Top-mounfed
Billboard Floodligl-& Ba7lb oard Flooftlau
(carefullyfocused onto billboard)
Ark
J a
r�MY � f ♦
L ,Posts tyle Lamp +
(rmre thaw ,800 bimerc) (kmp setin opaque top)
1
a
1000041
4 of 13 (r �� W 1�.s AJC
v 8/25/98 9:01 AM
Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting httpJ/www.patorgl-ida/politid
�stt•>xsa<oc:aa:.>:;,.x...:v:;;.>:;.x.:.:»•;o::ss,.;;.;.>.::;.:as/ �..yxs.:nxssoayr:7�,�s�n,:ss.::;.;::•:<:.sno:..:s+:,.�.�sso;s�;e^.y:+:tie:.::e:s.::.:,..x.::r.>:;.s.::.:sss••:ss.:
FIXTURES
s
OUNCE Ini.IS.... TU'1 IS
Aim DOWNWARDS
TO
vim= hwun VISOR
a:
S?l+A1:LPACK
s To HIS...
�! t
F:1.4ED.7At.Ti'T •Li.l'(tta UE,RE—I EK I T♦' R >YHS.FEBOX
I
Some Thoughts on Cost: Money Talks!
There are many cheap lighting fixtures available from most discount warehouse stores and from
electrical suppliers.Are these good deals?
• Most cheap fixtures have poor control of the light output, and they produce a lot of glare. It
usually takes better and more-costly internal reflectors to get light out without glare and to give
better light distribution. Modifying installed fixtures to reduce glare,or installing more fixtures to
better coverage can be expensive.
• Cheap fixtures often have inefficient lamps and short lamp life,so they use far more energy than
needed. Paying for more electricity than needed is expensive,as is the higher maintenance costs
of these so-called"cheap" fixtures.
Some coat comparisons
000042
6 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
Good,Neighbor Outdoor Lighting httpJ/www.pat.org/—ida/poLhtml
YCCh':MYM.tJ:!K?:MrivWitK:A:4SHAY:C•3:Y.MGt40:iS4.3IW'::::y:S4it+.:ryvvgiM3:iN.i�i3:tpy:{atii^3:ttt+nvii i3!4tip:t!i4ittitnisi.AKtii<+.CitmY/wKSi4.3:ti0Y4:it:iiifp:!•3>:itp3�t tnptry:0333:t::..:te.;;isii::h:titryn3:M333ti.3'/.•:i+.3:a%t�Hv.!.yrp:n3%.,vp:.:gl.:N.:inY:ii!tt4:.,vtn
.5 TE"OPHSATING
COST
FIYTQPE COS? sS7d
TOTAL
t f#3Z .
TOTAL
$260
SAVKD
TOTAL
ai r a `R:
e $307 0 1
A SAVED fr'
:'•.
" - •Ells `�� yzt�.•,,:r�r^u`':.
TOTAL f"``�c•3k+ts.':4". :
. # yz�rt fir• s, :
x
#� ?EmopX
3' q
f 10 x 'rye 1,01 3.
k 300 WATT QUARTZ 28 WATT COMPACT 175 WAVY IDTBCURY 76 WATI HIGH PBffi.
HALOGSH FLUOBIMCIM VAPOR SODIM CITE--OFF
FLOODLIGHT FLOODLIGHT SECUR=LIGHT SHCURMLIGHT
SIGN LIGHT AREA LIGHT
--------------
Some Basic Considerations
• Always remember that lighting should benefit people. Controlled, effective,efficient lighting at
your home or business will enhance the surroundings and give a sense of safety and security.
People don't appreciate poorly-installed,overly-bright lighting.
• Check your site at night before installing lighting and note the existing light levels. If the area has
low levels of lighting,then modest levels of light will work well for you and will fit more
hospitably in the neighborhood
a ,
• Try to keep the lighting uniform and reduce glare as much as possible. Lights that make bright
"hot spots" and ones that have glare make it hard to see well-especially for older people.
• Be aware that light fixtures can have different lighting patterns. (Some patterns are long and
narrow light cones,while others are more symmetrical.) Some fixtures have internal adjustments
that can change the lighting pattern to a modest extent.Pick the right pattern for your job.
• Consider using lights that turn on by motion detection.Not only will you reap big savings in
operating costs,but you will have afar more effective security light due to its "instant-on
characteristics.Note that these lights can also be turned on manually. These light fixtures are not
expensive,and they use very little energy.Higher-priced motion-detection units will prove more
reliable.
000043
7 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
Manufacturers and Suppliers
A'Selection of Manufacturers and Suppliers of Good Lighting Equipment
• Any lamp-no matter how faint-can be annoying in certain circumstances, so it is encouraged
that all outdoor lights be fully shielded. However,with fixtures that use dazzling lamps(typically
all BPS,mercury vapor,and metal-halide lamps,and clear incandescent lamps of 150 watts or
greater),the requirement for shielding is imperative. Here is a list of some good lighting fixtures,
with manufacturers or suppliers names,product numbers,and addresses(with telephone numbers
in parentheses).
Please note that this is not a comprehensive list of all good lighting fixtures;these are a sample of
those fixtures that have come to the attention of NELPAG as of the winter of 1995. As other
quality fixtures are brought to our attention,they will be included in future updates.Please do
give us your suggestions.
ABOLITE: 10000 Alliance Road;Cincinnati,OH 45242 (513-793-8875)
GENERAL ELECTRIC:'Hendersonville,NC 28739 (800-626-2000)
GUTH LIGHTING:2615 Washington Blvd.; St. Louis,MO 63103 (314-533-3200)
HADCO: P.O. Box 128;Littlestown;PA 17340(717-359-7131)
HUBBELL LIGHTING: 2000 Electric Way; Christiansburg,VA 24073 (703-382-6111)
KIM LIGHTING:P.O. Box 1275; City of Industry,'CA'91749(818-968-5666)
LUMINAIRE TECHNOLOGIES,INC.: 212 West Main St.; Gibsonville,NC 27249
(910-449-6310)
THOMAS&BETTS LIGHTING DIV.: 1555 Lynnfield Rd.;Memphis,TN 38119
i (901-682-7766)
THOMAS OUTDOOR LIGHTING(formerly McPhilben Outdoor Lighting): 2661 Alvarado
St.; San Leandro, CA
PEMCO LIGHTING PRODUCTS: 150 Pemco Way;Wilmington,DE 19804(302-892-9003)
RUUD LIGHTING: 9201 Washington Ave:;Racine,WI 53406(414-886-1900)
SPERO LIGHTING: 1705 Noble Rd.;Cleveland,OH 44112(216-851-3300)
STONCO: P.O. Box 129;Union,NJ 07605 (908-964-7000)
VOIGHT LIGHTING: 135 Fort Lee Rd.;Leonia,NJ 07605 (201461-2493)
MSTERFIELD: 770 Gateway Center Dr.; Sari Diego,CA 92102-(619-263-6672)
8 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
000044
Good Igeighbor outdoor Lighting httpJ/www.pat.orgl ida/gnol.hoW
In the diagrams,the following abbreviations are used: INC=incandescent;BPS=
high-pressure sodium; CF=compact fluorescent;MH=metal-halide;MV=mercury vapor
»Y:nX<MS.TT:v'.Y::M YT:A'O:vY.?.i::+M.?NY:_.TY:iJ:JTY,v,.:CT:.T:trY4iTvi. .. .o:TTYT:::iY:t?:.iT}i::<.t..TYi TYYi: •.•:i YYi.:ri<!nT:.T:Y..Y.u4Ci T:.>•..:�: .Y':':T:yN�:i%:.?T:.?Tii:iiT:.oYn�:T»:«.?:.<::.T:i:..t
AREA LIGHTS-POLE or BUILDING MOUNTED
THOMAS&BETTS KIM LIGHTING
American Electric Lighting Series SAR
Package °C" (Cutoff) .BPS MH MV
(BPS,MV) High Cost
Low Cost
{
z:
PEMCO RUDD LIGHTING
Model 8908X-211-CO PR Series
(BPS,MH,CF,INC) (BPS,MH, CF, INC)
Medium Cost Medium Cost
HUBBELL LIGHTING
STONCO Model NPU-BI
Series RLM3000 &RMS3000tm
NITE-TO-LITE
(BPS,MH) (BPS,MV)
Medium Cost Low Cost
f
}
z -
000045
9 of 13 8/23/98 9:01 AM
Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting httpJ/www.pat.orgt—ida/pol.html
. . . ........ ... .
T< AREA LIGHTS-BUILDING MOUNTED ONLY
x GUTH LIGHTING
4 SUNDOWNER Series B 1870
(CF BPS MV) - iVi LIGHTING
Medium Cost Series WD 14D
{ (HPS,MH)
High Cost
5
4
RUDD LIGHTING
McPHILBEN OUTDOOR E8 Series
Series 101 & 102 (HPS,MR)
(BPS,MH) Low Cost
High Cost
:i.
t•
K at z 40
Kdi�F5i%5£".;3F3:ir • • n
VOIGT LIGHTING
PRAGMATIC Series 221 &222
(HPS,MH;MV;CF,INC)
<`Low to Medium Cost COST:
LOW COST: under$100
MEDIUM COST: $100-$200
HIGH COST: over$200
ti
S:
000046
10 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting http://www. or ida/ l.html
8� S�� 8�
—FLOODLIGHTS
SIGN-LIGHTS
ABOLITE HADCO
k Series RLM model DWB-1 Series HF4000 with MGS-3H shield
` (INC) (BPS,MV)
>!Low Cost Medium Cost
z
SPERO LIGHTING
HUBBELL LIGHTING Model 705 reflectorl
Series 308 bullet with 309-S shield (INC)
(INC) Low Cost
Low Cost -
>'STONCO WESTERFIELD
Series 940 with 9455E shield Series 500 with Glare shield
(INC) (CF)
Low Cost Low Cost
00004'7
11 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting http:Uwww.patorg/ida/gno1.htm1
K
IisiKtk%F'+Stikk%.n••\'•.ik.kF):'N.<k:'ii•>;.i;;;<.%f.Y.kaf�k::nYrt'i:'F.i.?W..i<9tr,!+Ain..}:tuituH.N!C<k%iitK^*>:k:W.d:iJM%iiA:i:Mkii ttittiUq`:kin>:tittM E%i.'I.y :At;v...y.'ynY.
ROADWA 1G1rTINGAN
GENERAL ELECTRIC
x Model M-25082 with CUTOFF OPTICS
CROUSE BINDS (HPS;MV)
Model Series Series Medium Cost
M /�
3(HIS, )
Medium Cost
PEMCO LIGHTING
HUBBELL LIGHTING Model Admiral Hat
Model RMC series (BPS,MH,CF,INC)
`<(HPS,MH) Medium Cost
Medium Cost
THOMAS &BETTS
American Electric Lighting
Roadway Cutoff Series 113 & 125
(BPS,MH,MV)
Medium Cost
000048
12 of 13 8/25/98 9:01 AM
information Sheet 76(Edit on No.1,September 1993) http://www.gnat.org/—i"into76.htmt
Exterior Lighting: Glare And Light"TreMa
t R
by Andrew S. isosiorek,Centenor P-nergy,Cieveiand,0tascadero City Council
tCting Date: 8/25/98
Information Sheet ion,September ii93
International Dark-Sky Association,3225 N.First Ave.,Tucson,AZ 85719 U.S.A.
E-mail:idaWarksky.mg
w vv W,.Mtp:f/www.darksky.-org
R.f T 1 1
ABC r t uuiCut
i he increasing desires to fight exterior areas Tor sarety,security,amenities,commercial activities,ana
sports Events makes the problem of fight trespass more frequent and zompiex. t he muitituae or iignting
products,very often misappiied, badly aimed,or pooriy designed,results in many compiaints. Dare may
be visibie from nearby or distant areas. rrequenty the righting is not confined to the originating
property. Spiii fight raiiing over property imes can inuminate adjacent grounds or bundings in an
objectionabie manner. i nese are probabiy the most frequent dight trespass compiaints.
i he graduai increase or orainances indicate that communities reei that sign' t trespass is a problem that
must be addressed. i his can and has resuitea in the creation of iaws and penaities which are often
subjective and even overiy restrictive. i his fact may weii hinder the process or getting arrordabie quality
fighting instanatons in the regulated areas due to fear of iiabirity andior the time and cost to research
the design of an instaiiation.
,'i ne iliuminating bngineenng society or North America tltbNA, or ltb j nas estamishea a committee to
research the probiems of right trespass,giare,and sky glow,and,hopetuiiy, whi set guiaerines that the
fighting industry and communities can rollow. As of 093,there is not yet a published report. beverar
other iLa committees are aiso aaciressing the issues.
aomtions uecause right trespass and giare are quite subjective,they are difricuit to eiiminate, but they
can be minimized through good design practices. in many cases;aii treat is required is the proper
placement or poles, selection of iuminaire optics, and siiieiaing accessories. i he tact that iignt trespass
is a concern.can be reasonably stated in municipai codes. i-iowever,overiy rigid reguiations are just as
unaesirabie as right trespass itseif. Codes must ariow for design riexibinty through a reasonable review
requirements should be written using avaiiabie measurabie.parameters. i erms such as `'giare," "eye
discomfort," and "excessive brightness,"-are subjective terms without-scientific backup or guiaeiines.
Luminaire optic restrictions shouid be detinea wrougn mathematical criteria,not the generalized term
"cutoff."mounting heights-and righting ieveis snoula follow reeognizea industry practices,but they
snouid have provisions to arrow a review body to impose restrictions or allow exceptions for special
circumstances.
Recommended Criteria for Exterior Lighting Ordinances:
000050
i of 3 6ii�iyd y:ii tuvi
Information Shat 76(Edition No.1,September 1993) http://www.pat.org(idarmfo76.htm1
• Direct Glare:Direct glare is defined as the visual discomfort resulting from insufficiently shielded
light sources in the field of view. One should"see the effect,not the light source."
Use of the term'direct glare'is recommended in lieu of the word'glare'alone. The direct glare
definition means if you can see an unshielded lamp, or the luminaire maximum candlepower
zone,you may well have glare.However,-usually when you are near a luminaire,you will.see
these parameters,of course. So a reasonable definition limiting the field of view is required.
• Limitation of Observation of Direct Glare:Direct glare-shall not be observable(outside the
originating property limits)at an angle greater than 85 degrees from the nadir of the vertical axis
of the light source.
This definition is a reasonable one. In practice,it will result in limiting the distance from the light
source that you see direct glare to less than ten times the mounting height of the light source. In
many cases, it would be approximately six times the mounting height. There are many cutoff
luminaire types that can meeting this requirement easily. Also many floodlight luminaires and
other area luminaire types with proper installation and shielding can also meet this requirement.
• Light Trespass: Limit the exterior lighting originating on a property to a maximum of 0.5
horizontal foot candles(HFC)at a distance of 25 feet beyond the property lines.
This specification will allow the controlled placement of lighting poles and luminaires adjacent to
the property lines. With many outdoor luminaires, it is difficult to comply with low level foot
candle requirements at the property line. And example: A typical 250 watt high pressure(BPS)
luminaire at the property line would have about a 5 HFC below the light fixture,but it could be
shielded so that there is no more than 0.5 HFC at 25 feet from the property line.
• Luminaire Mounting Height: A mounting height of 30 feet allows the use of a variety of
i' luminaires in an energy efficient manner. There should be provisions in any code for needed
exceptions, such as for sport lighting installations or other high mast designs.
• Illumination Levels:Use the terms horizontal foot candle(HFC)or vertical foot candle(VFC)to
define the type of illumination levels and measurements. Recommended illumination levels are
published in various IES publications and many luminaire manufacturers. These levels should be
followed unless there are adequate design reasons not to do so.
Summary
These recommendations are far from perfect. Indeed,it is probably impossible to produce an outdoor
lighting ordinance that would be perfect for all applications and locales. However,'using the
combination of these lighting design factors will greatly alleviate many complaints and will certainly
improve the quality and effectiveness of.most all outdoor area lighting applications. Any lighting control
code should contain provisions for a Wiling body to grant essential exceptions to the code provisions if it
is clear that the-intent of the code will still be met. One wants to maximize the creativity-of the.designer
to produce quality lighting,while at same time limiting greatly the amount of poor lighting so
commonly seen today.
Sources: Various IESNA_lightina.industry,and IDA documents. Contact any of these for further
information;especially-note the various other IDA Information Sheets.
This material is copyrighted(0)by the IDA,or others as noted. It may be reproduced for 51
non-commercial usage provided that credit is given to IDA.
Exhibit: S
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
Agenda Item D.1.
Zone Change 97012: Eagle Creek (Ord. 338)
Atascadero City Council Meeting
August 25, 1998
My name is Henry Engen and I live at 9575 Lake View Drive.
In 1991 1 was the City's Community Development Director and I strongly
supported this project, which changed the land use designation of this
property from Highway Commercial to a Recreational/Residential Planned
Development comprised of a cluster of single family homes and the golf
course and tennis complex. Clearly, this was a project much more
compatible with the adjoining residential neighborhood and Eagle Ranch
agricultural preserve.
Between then and now, however, something has gone terribly awry. The
housing looks pretty much as expected, as does the executive golf course.
However, the driving range is visually offensive during the day and a
highway safety hazard at night. In reviewing the history of revisions to the
project, it is clear that the actions of the City Council in passing Ordinance
338 on first reading were dramatically altered in the consent agenda follow-
up for second reading on February 10, 1998. As we know now, the driving
range was then slipped into the project for the first time, leading to this
evenings attempt to repair the record. However, the action proposed is
silent on the key question of the legality of the driving range. Atx-cJsso j �-��t6\AL
�} The site's Master Plan of Development limits recreational uses to " a golf
course and/or Tennis and Swim Club". Further, it requires that, "No uses
shall be established, or expanded, unless approved pursuant to a Master V E
I
Plan, following a public hearing. I would note at this point that I spoke with is
the project's original designer, Joe Boud, and he can't believe that the City ° `
a would permit a driving range on this site, let alone a night-lit one. And it's
simply not true that the unplanned project that we have today emits the
same amount of light as the tennis court would have.
So what to do? If the City wants to legitimize this land use mistake, there
has to be an amendment to the Master Plan, accompanied by
environmental review, and a public hearing, which we don't have this
evening. In the meantime, the City Council should lookout for the concerns
of the neighborhood by:
1. Turning Off the Lights. This is a public safety imperative; there is
no need for a study.
2. Reauirina Submission of a Master Plan Amendment. That shows
the driving range as a land use with appropriate environmental
evaluation.
000052
Exhibit: T
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 8/25/98
Date_: August 25, 1998
To: Atascadero city council
From: .Mike and Judy Murphy
9320 Santa Clara Road
Atascadero, Ca 93401
Re: Problems with Eagle Creek Golf Course Project
Dear councilmen:
This is to inform you of current and potential problems with the
Eagle Creek Golf development. These problems have already been
outlined to the developments owner, city planning department,
city manager, and other governmental agencies. They have had over
three weeks to correct the problems . It is imperative that
immediate action is taken to solve these problems.
Current Problems:
1) Light from the driving range is trespassing onto my
propert)Y. The light is so bright and intense on my property that
I can read and write by the light. The light inundates my home
shines on the walls, furniture, doors, refrigerator, and cabinets
throughout the house. As the lights stay on until 10: 00 - 12: 00
PM each night we have been experiencing sleep deprivation. The
intensity of the light shining through our windows is so bright
my wife has suffered migraine headaches.
r
2) The ' light from the driving range is causing a public
endangerment. The light is blinding motorists traveling on both
San Antonio and Santa Clara roads. This intersection also has two
driveways just to the north that are also blinded and further
complicates the situation. The blinding light combined with no
sidewalks also makes the situation extremely dangerous for
pedestrians. This is a case of a fatal accident waiting to
happen
3) Driving range lighting is causing a public nuisance. The
light shines intensely on several properties across the 101
highway from the project. The light is so intense it shines into
mine and my neighbors windows. This lights up trees, bushes,
pastures, yards, as well as, the interiors and exteriors of
homes .
4) The lights are not in compliance with city lighting
standards. After reviewing the cities lighting standards provided
to me by the city planning and building department it has become
evident that the lights are not in compliance with any of the
standard for outdoor non-sign lighting. This blatant disregard of
1 .
000053
the standards includes shining light on residences and roadways,
insufficient shielding, visible light sources, and light
standards in excess of building height, as well as other
standards.
5) The project is in violation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . This .project was given a
negative declaration by the city planning department yet the
impact of the lighted driving range has been extreme on both
human and wild life in the area.
6) The lights shining on my property is causing devaluation
and damage. With the lights so bright on my property and in'my
house my property would bring significantly less on the open
market, if it is saleable at all, in this condition. This
condition constitutes monetary damages should the problem be
allowed to continue.
Potential problems:
1) The planning department is making negative declarations
that are obviously false or incorrect. For example, the light is
a major environmental impact. This leaves the question of what
other environmental impacts are falsely being given negative
declarations. This brings the whole planning and review process
into question as to its accuracy and honesty.
2) The public review process for the driving range and
driving range lights was completely skipped. Neither of these
were brought before the city planning commission or city council
for review and discussion. This leaves the question of what else
has skipped these review processes and gone straight to the
building phase?
3) The question is, has the impact on surrounding wells been
adequately addressed? In light of the planning departments
inaccuracies and lack of review I question if the project is in
compliance with the 1991 hydrologist report. This report outlines
guidelines for mitigating the golf courses need for water through
a grey water system and other systems.
4) Another potential problem, has the drainage and fish and
game impact been dealt with correctly. The creek running through
the development is a blue line. This means special care must be
taken when developing the project especially during grading. This
project was graded during the heavy rains of the 97-98 winter,
while the creek was running. Also it is very obvious that native
habitat has been removed and modified in and around the creek.
2
000054