HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 082801 Approved as submitted September 11,2001
no no
MINUTES
1918 4 11 9
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, August 28, 2001
7:00 P.M.
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue, 4t" Floor
Atascadero, California
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT - CLOSED SESSION
Terrill Graham, 6205 Conejo, stated that he appreciates the fact that the Council does evaluate
the performance of the City Manager.
CLOSED SESSION:
A. Call to Order
1) Performance Review: City Manager(Govt. Code § 54957.6)
2) Conference with labor negotiator(Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6)
Agency Negotiator: Mayor Mike Arrambide
Position: City Manager
B. Adjourn to Regular Session
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Mayor Arrambide announced the Council would continue the Closed Session to the end of the
Council meeting.
CC 08/28/01
Page i
REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.:
Mayor Arrambide called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. and Council Member Johnson led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Johnson, Luna, Scalise and Mayor Arrambide
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson and City Treasurer David Graham
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Assistant City Manager Brady Cherry,
Community Development Director Lori Parcells, Administrative Services
Director Rachelle Rickard, Police Chief Dennis Hegwood, Public Works
Director Steve Kahn, Community Services Manager Geoff English,
Planning Services Manager Warren Frace, Police Lt. John Couch, Fire
Captain Fred Motlo, and City Attorney Roy Hanley.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Mayor Arrambide proposed moving Public Hearing Item#13-3 ahead of Item#B-2.
Mayor Arrambide also announced that he is now the Chief Executive Officer of one of the
agencies to be considered for the Human Services Grant and will be stepping down from Item
#B- 3.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to
approve the Agenda with the revised order of Items #B-2 and #B-3 as
proposed.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Eric Greening, 7365Valle, asked who is representing the City at the California Transportation
Plan Forum.
Richard Rue, 4200 Portola Road, expressed his concern for the activity of dirt bike riding in his
neighborhood. In particular, he is unhappy with the dirt bike tracks on private property and the
noise they create and would like to see restrictions on their noise level within the City limits.
Terrill Graham, 6205 Conejo Road, stated he thinks Mayor Arrambide and Council Member
Johnson should step down from voting on the General Plan update.
Alan Thomas 9520 Marchant Way, asked if there would be public comment on the General Plan
Update item. Mayor Arrambide responded that the public comment period was closed at the last
meeting and there is no public comment period scheduled tonight. Mr. Thomas expressed his
CC 08/28/01
Page 2
concern that the public not be allowed to comment as the staff report for tonight's meeting
contains new information. He asked the Council, in a prepared statement, to consider allowing
the public to speak on this issue tonight. Mayor Arrambide indicated that the build out estimate
referred to by Mr. Thomas in his comments is unrelated to the broad policies for the General
Plan Update to be considered at tonight's meeting and which the public had opportunity to
comment on at the last meeting. The issues to be considered at this meeting are the broad
parameters and policy statements under consideration for the environmental impact. There will
be more time for public comment as staff forms more specific recommendations. (Attachment
A)
Becky Pacas, 4305 San Benito Road, expressed her concerns over the speed with which the
Council is approving staff's policy recommendations for the General Plan Update. She is
specifically concerned with Policy Option No. 9., which eases parking requirements for the
downtown.
Dorothy McNeil, 8765 Sierra Vista, stated that the newspaper had reported that the public would
be able to speak on the General Plan Update at tonight's meeting. Ms. McNeil read from a
prepared statement expressing her concerns with build-out figures in the staff report and what
she perceives as explosive growth in Atascadero. She felt the public should be able to respond to
the new information presented in tonight's staff report on the General Plan Update. (Attachment
B)
Mayor Arrambide asked the City Attorney to state his opinion about the public comment issue.
City Attorney Roy Hanley stated that the Brown Act requires that public comment be allowed
before the Council's consideration of an item. Public comment was allowed at the last City
Council meeting and when all public speakers were accommodated the item was continued to
this Council meeting. It is therefore proper to disallow further public comment. The only
circumstance under which the Council would be required to take further public comment is if the
agenda item had been substantially changed.
Betty Scanlin, 6390 Flores Road, stated the staff report concerning the General Plan is an
entirely new report and for this reason the public should be permitted to comment. She feels the
report is another rationalization for scrapping the current General Plan.
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, stated that since the City has told many people that there would not
be an opportunity to speak the issue could be easily dealt with by continuing the General Plan
Update item to the next noticed meeting.
Julie Gorman, 5560 San Benito Road, read from a petition outlining the signers' concern
regarding public health and safety issues and the need for better public notification of the
changes to be made in the proposed General Plan Update. (Attachment C)
Carmen Barnett, submitted petitions opposing the General Plan update. (Attachment D)
City Attorney Roy Hanley stated that legally the Council is not approving any of the proposed
land use amendments tonight, the Council can only propose the scope of the EIR and then the
EIR will study all of the impacts on not only the individual projects but also the cumulative
impacts of all the projects to be included in the report. When the report is completed, and when
the draft General Plan document has gone through extensive public review, approval or
CC 08/28/01
Page 3
disapproval of any or all of the items will come back before the Council and only at that time
will the proposed land use amendments be considered.
Gary Pellett, 4355 San Benito Road, stated that in his opinion a decision of this magnitude
should not be decided by the Council, but rather placed on the ballot for a vote of the people.
Henry Skibo, Traffic Way, thanked the Council and the Planning Department staff for their
efforts and stated that there are many people in Atascadero who agree that the town needs a shot
in the arm, more housing and who support the General Plan Update.
Robert Nimmo, 7375 Bella Vista Road, stated that by the end of September it would be 3 years
since the City stopped accepting General Plan amendment applications for the purpose of giving
the Planning Staff and Council time to develop an updated general plan. He feels it is time to
close public comment and get on with the update process.
Beth Dodson, commended the Council for their patience. She stated this City needs affordable
housing and the Council needs to provide for it.
Livia Kellerman, 5463 Honda, stated her concerns with the property across Atascadero Ave.
from the library which she would like to see become a park.
Alan Thomas, 9520 Marchant Way, asked if an EIR would cover the policy option changes as
suggested. City Attorney Hanley responded, yes. Mr. Thomas also stated he supports the
creation of affordable housing, such as town homes.
Jerry Johnson, Traffic Way, is concerned with the price of housing and property in Atascadero
and would like to see the update move forward at a faster pace.
Becky Pacas, 4305 San Benito Road, stated that in her opinion the people supporting the update
are those who will make a profit from it. She feels those opposed to the update are looking out
for the best interests of Atascadero.
Mayor Arrambide stated that there would be no more public comment on the General Plan
Update during this meeting.
Bonita Borgeson, 4780 Del Rio Road, stated elected officials have a duty to their community to
allow it to catch up with the anticipated growth and she would like to see the process slowed
down.
Mike Wasley, San Benito Road, thanked the Council for their hard work and took exception to
the false comments directed toward himself, the Council and staff regarding the General Plan
Update process.
Geraldine Brasher, Monterey Road, said that she commends those who appear before the
Council to express their concerns regarding their community.
Mayor Arrambide closed the Community Forum period.
CC 08/28/01
Page 4
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
Public Works Director Steve Kahn introduced the new Associate Civil Engineer Jeff van den
Eikhof.
Mayor Arrambide and the Council wished Police Chief Dennis Hegwood a happy birthday.
Mayor Pro Tem Scalise shared with those present that everyone at Camp San Luis (Cadets,
Officers, State and Federal representatives), from the Air National Guard, all took the time to
thank her for being there and representing Atascadero. A resolution was presented on behalf of
the City.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call
1. City Council Minutes—July 24, 2001
■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of July 24,
2001. [City Clerk]
2. City Treasurgr's Agenda Report- April, May and June 2001
■ City Treasurer recommendation: Council review and accept the April, May and June
2001 Treasurer's Report. [City Treasurer]
3. July 2001 - Accounts Payable and Pamoll
■ Fiscal Impact: $1,115,010.76
■ Staff recommendation: Council approve certified City accounts payable, payroll and
payroll vendor checks for July 2001. [Administrative Services]
4. Police Vehicle Purchase
■ Fiscal Impact: $72,950.46 (in FY 2001-02 budget)
■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the purchase of three police cars from
Wondries Fleet Group. [Police]
5. Memorandums of Understandina - for Local 620 Service Employees International Union
(SEIU), Atascadero Firefighters Bargaining Unit, Atascadero Police Association, Mid
Management/Professional Employees, and Resolution for Non-Represented Professional
and Management Workers and Confidential Employees
■ Fiscal Impact: Total increased costs for the units is approximately 5% of salary for
this fiscal year. These costs are contained within the Annual Operating Budget.
■ Staff recommendation: Council approve:
1. Memorandums of Understanding and draft Resolution, authorizing salaries and
benefits for the above-named employee groups; and
2. The Salary Schedule, effective July 1, 2001. [City Manager]
The City Clerk pulled Item#A-1, Mayor Pro Tem Scalise pulled Item#A-2 and Council Member
Luna pulled Item#A-5.
MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Luna to
accept Consebt Calendar Items No. 3. and 4.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
CC 08/28/01
Page 5
ITEM A-1: City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson pointed out that pages 66 - 73 should be
removed as they are duplicate attachments.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Johnson
to approve Consent Calendar Item#A-l.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
ITEM #A-2: Mayor Pro Tem Scalise thanked the City Treasurer for his report and requested
Treasurer's reports monthly as well as a tracking report to reflect the total yield earned per
month.
MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Johnson
to approve Consent Calendar Item #A-2.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
ITEM #A-5: Council Member Luna stated his concern with the current financial atmosphere
and asked if there were a plan in place in case of a financial downturn in the City. City Manager
Wade McKinney indicated that the City is financially solvent and the City has considered a
potential downturn in the economy in its future projections.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Johnson
to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 5.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (SEIU Contract No. 2001-025,
AFBU Contract No. 2001-026, APA Contract No. 2001-027, Mid-
Management Professional Employees Contract No. 2001-028, Non-
Represented Employees Resolution No. 2001-030.)
B. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Ensenada Ave. Traffic Volumes and Speed
■ Fiscal Impact: $6,000 plus 3 days of Public Works maintenance crew and
equipment. These funds are available in the Capital Projects Budget under
Miscellaneous Road Repairs Account.
■ Staff recommendations: Council approve the following actions:
1. Closure of Ensenada Avenue, west of Via Avenue Bridge; and
2. Installation of a barricade, turn around improvements, and the necessary signage
for the closure; and
3. Installation of 5-way stop signs at the intersection of Ensenada Ave., Capistrano
Ave., Mercedes Ave., and Cabrillo Ave. [Public Works]
Public Works Director Steve Kahn gave the staff report and answered questions of Council.
Council Member Luna stated his support for this proposal using overhead documents.
(Attachment E)
PUBLIC COMMENT
Yolanda Buchanan, 5425 Ensenada Ave., stated the neighborhood has expressed overwhelming
support for this proposal. She asked the Council to approve this action.
CC 08/28/01
Page 6
Mike Jackson, 5502 Ensenada Ave., felt that the public should be made aware of the penalties
for speeding in the Capistrano Avenue area.
Steve Allan, 5330 Ensenada Ave., urged the Council to approve this proposal and direct staff to
make these changes as soon as possible before another child is injured.
Mayor Arrambide closed the Public Comment period.
Mayor Pro Tem Scalise commended Police Chief Dennis Hegwood and Public Works Director
Steve Kahn for the speed with which they responded to the Ensenada Avenue residents'
concerns.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Scalise and seconded by Council Member Clay to
close Ensenada Avenue, west of Via Avenue Bridge, and install a
barricade, turn around improvements and the five-way stop sign at
the intersection of Ensenada Ave., Capistrano Ave., Mercedes Ave.,
and Cabrillo Ave.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
2. Human Services Grants
■ Fiscal Impact: $20,000 (in FY 2001-02 budget)
■ Staff recommendation: Council approve Human Services Grants to the Agency's and
in the amounts recommended by the Finance Committee in Attachment A. [City
Manager]
Mayor Arrambide stated that he would like the Council to consider the funding for Creative
Alternative for Learning and Living (C.A.L.L.) separately from the balance of the applicants as
he is now the Chief Executive Officer of C.A.L.L. and would need to step down on that decision.
There was consensus of the Council to consider the funding for C.A.L.L. separately from the
balance of the applicants.
Mayor Arrambide announced that he will disqualify himself from consideration of funds for
C.A.L.L.
MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay
to approve the recommended amount of$1,700 to C.A.L.L.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. (Arrambide abstained)
City Manager Wade McKinney provided the staff report and answered questions of the Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Eileen Allan, Executive Director North County Women's Resource Center, thanked staff for
recommending funding for the Center and thanked the Council for increasing the amount of
funds available.
Pearl Munak, 3850 Ramada Drive, Paso Robles, President of the Homeless Housing Project,
expressed appreciation for staff's recommendation of funds for the Project. She requested that
Council increase the amount recommended.
CC 08/28/01
Page 7
Frank Farkschneider, 7600 Santa Ynez, spoke on behalf of Atascadero Loaves and Fishes and
thanked the Council for the amount of funding that was being recommended.
Jody Smith, Supervisor/Case Manager for EOC Homeless Services, 5411 El Camino Real,
thanked the Council for their past support.
Lana Adams, Mentor Services Program—EOC Mentor Alliance, expressed her appreciation of the
Council's consideration for funding of the Alliance through a prepared statement read by Jody
Smith.
Geraldine Brasher asked if the list of Human Services Grant recipients represents all of the
organizations that requested funding. Mayor Arrambide responded, yes.
Terrill Graham, 6205 Conejo Road, expressed his disappointment that North County Connection
was not recommended for funding.
Mayor Arrambide closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Council Member Luna
to approve the Human Services Grants to the agencies and in the
amounts as recommended by the Finance Committee.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
Mayor Arrambide called for a recess at 8:54 p.m.
Mayor Arrambide reopened the Council Meeting at 9:08 p.m.
3. GPA 2000-0001 General Plan Update - Review of Draft Land Use Plan
(CONTINUED FROM JULY 24, 2001 MEETING)
■ Fiscal Impact: None
■ Planning Commission recommendations:
1. Council adopt the draft Resolution, thereby endorsing the Draft Land Use Plan as
the Preferred Plan for use in the Draft General Plan policy document and Draft
Environmental Impact Report; and
2. Council direct staff to incorporate Policy Issues I through 10 into the Draft
General Plan. [Community Development]
Mayor Arrambide announced that after reviewing the City's public notice for tonight's City
Council Meeting it was determined that the notice gives the impression that there will be a
continued public hearing in which public comment would be permitted. In order to
accommodate those from the public who may have been misinformed about issues to be
considered at tonight's meeting, it was decided that a Special Meeting would be held on
Wednesday, September 5, 2001.
City Manager Wade McKinney stated that staff hopes to collect Council's comments with
respect to the questions raised and the General Plan Options outlined in the staff report. Due to
the confusion in the noticing of the meeting, a special meeting on September 5th would be held to
hear only the General Plan issue.
CC 08/28/01
Page 8
Council Member Luna made suggestions to staff concerning the proposed policies and EIR.
Specifically, he explained his concerns with population growth, second unit housing, zoning
inconsistencies, parkland, open space, affordable housing, and creek setbacks. (Attachment F)
Council Member Johnson suggested that the PD-7 overlay be structured with tightly controlled
rules as to where and how it would work.
Mayor Arrambide stated that he would like to see pedestrian, equestrian and bike pathways at a
reasonable distance from the creek as well as having these incorporated into new planned
developments.
Council Member Clay expressed his concern with the lack of affordable housing in the
community and the long-term effects of this problem. Additionally, he felt the SFR-X zone did
not need to be included in the PD process while the SFR-Z should be included into the PD
process. The SSF zone should be included within the Urban Service Line. He would like to see
staff work with the owner of lot number 283 to reach a compromise wherein half of it would
become a park and the other half a PD project.
Mayor Pro Tem Scalise asked staff to look at including the SFR-X, Y and Z zones into the PD
overlay process covered in Policy Option #8—Lot Size Inconsistencies. Additionally, under
Policy Option #9, she requested staff to include language regarding allowing off-site parking in
the downtown.
Council Member Johnson strongly stated that he accepts the fact that as an elected official, the
public can make negative comments about you but he takes offense when the public attacks staff
as they have at the last meeting and this one tonight.
City Manager asked the Council to re-consider the date of the Special Meeting, as with the
suggestions of Council, Staff will need additional time to prepare the report. He asked for the
Special Meeting to be scheduled for Monday, September 17, 2001.
There was Council consensus to continue this item to
a Special Meeting on September 17, 2001.
4. Information Bulletin
a. Atascadero Lake Park Master Plan Update
b. Parks and Recreation Commission Action
C. Lewis Ave. Bridge
C. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Confirming the Cost of Vegetative Growth and/or Refuse Abatement
■ Fiscal Impact: $15,018 - cost of contractor. $30,036 - to be recovered through
assessments placed on property tax bills
■ Staff recommendation: Council adopt draft Resolution, confirming the cost of
vegetative growth (weeds) and/or refuse (rubbish) abatement. [Fire]
City Manager Wade McKinney gave the staff report.
CC 08/28/01
Page 9
PUBLIC COMMENT -None
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Johnson
to adopt the draft Resolution, confirming the cost of vegetative growth
and rubbish abatement.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution No. 2001-031)
2. Zone Change 2001-0011 / Conditional Use Permit 2001-0041 / Tentative Tract Map
2001-0005 (Tract 2417) - 9351-9353 Musselman Drive (Shannon/Roberts Engineering)
■ Fiscal Impact: Negligible
■ Planning Commission recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt the draft Resolution certifying the proposed Negative Declaration 2001-
0020; and
2. Introduce for first reading by title only the draft Ordinance approving Zone
Change 2001-0011; and
3. Adopt the draft Resolution approving the Master Plan of Development for PD-7
(CUP 2001-0041) subject to findings and conditions of approval; and
4. Adopt the draft Resolution approving Tentative Tract Map 2001-0005 subject to
findings and conditions of approval. [Community Development]
Planning Services Manager Warren Frace gave the staff report, Public Works Director Steve
Kahn gave his report, and both Mr. Frace and Mr. Kahn answered questions of Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Richard Shannon, 5070 San Benito Road, thanked staff for the time and effort they have spent on
this project. He asked the Council to approve the Planning Commission's recommendations. He
explained that staff has added language that he does not agree with. In particular, he does not
think it is fair for him to be required to pay off-site improvements.
Joan O'Keefe, 9950 Old Morro Road East, said that Mr. Shannon brings up some good points.
She stated she feels the issue of who fixes what is a policy decision. She indicated her concerns
with the lack of sidewalks,traffic and parking issues.
Richard Shannon, answered questions of Council.
Mayor Arrambide closed the Public Comment period.
Council Member Luna expressed his concern with the deletion of conditions that place the
burden of improvements on the taxpayers. He would like to see projects conditioned so that they
pay for themselves.
CC 08/28/01
Page 10
MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Johnson
to:
1. Adopt the draft Resolution certifying the proposed Negative
Declaration 2001-0020; and
2. Introduce for first reading by title only the draft Ordinance
approving Zone Change 2001-0011; and
3. Adopt the draft Resolution approving the Master Plan of
Development for PD-7 (CUP 2001-0041) subject to findings
and conditions of approval and adding a condition requiring
the developer do the safety fix on the two front parcels,
deducting the cost from his development fees, and that the City
Engineer will do the engineering work for the project, and
deleting Condition 8.C. on page 307.
Motion failed 1:4 by a roll-call vote. (Council Members Johnson, Luna,
Scalise and Mayor Arrambide opposed)
MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Scalise to adopt the draft Resolution certifying the proposed Negative
Declaration 2001-0020.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution No. 2001-032)
MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Scalise to introduce for first reading by title only the draft Ordinance
approving Zone Change 2001-0011.
Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Council Member Luna opposed)
MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Mayor Pro-Tem
Scalise to adopt the draft Resolution approving the Master Plan of
Development for PD-7 (CUP 2001-0041) subject to findings and
conditions of approval.
Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Council Member Luna opposed)
(Resolution No. 2001-033)
MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Scalise to adopt draft Resolution approving Tentative Tract Map
2001-0005 subject to findings and the following amendment to the
Conditions of Approval: Deletion of Condition #8 c. on page 307; and
add language to the file that the City does the off-site improvements.
Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Council Member Luna opposed)
(Resolution No. 2001-034)
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Mayor Pro Tem Scalise
1. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Board: Recently attended a joint meeting with the
CMC Advisory Board,transportation issues were discussed.
CC 08/28/01
Page 11
Council Member Luna
1. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA): Received a diversion rate for last
year of 52%.
Council Member Johnson
1. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC): Will be attending the League
of Cities meeting. Corporation members spoke with 81 different businesses in July.
Council Member Clay
1. Air Pollution Control District (APCD): Will continue to support burns on a limited basis.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
City Council
Council Member Clay indicated that there have been letters in support of the Council and their
work on the General Plan update.
City Clerk
The City Clerk announced that Kim Jeanes has resigned from the Planning Commission and
requested direction from the Council regarding advertising for the vacancy. The Council
directed the City Clerk to advertise for the'vacancy and schedule interviews.
F. ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Arrambide adjourned the meeting at 11:32 p.m. to the Closed Session.
MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Cler
Attachment A—Alan Thomas 9520 Marchant Way
Attachment B—Dorothy F. McNeil
Attachment C—Julie Gorman, 5560 San Benito Road(Petition)
Attachment D—Carmen Barnett(Petition)
Attachment E—Council Member Luna(Overheads)
Attachment F—Council Member Luna(Overheads)
CC 08/28/01
Page 12
Page 1 of 1
Attachment: A
Atascadero City Council
Alan Thomas August 28, 2001
From: Alan Thomas<ajt2002@pacbell.net>
To: ' Jerry Clay<JClay@atascadero.org>; Ray Johnson <Rjohnson@fix.net>; George Luna
<gluna@calpoly.edu>; Mike Arrambide<marrambide@thegrid.net>; Wendy Scalise
<wscalise@atascadero.org>
Cc: Wade McKinney<wmckinney@cityhall.atascadero.org>
Sent: Tuesday,August 28, 2001 2:50 PM
Subject: Need for additional public comment on proposed policy changes
The questions and answers that are in the updated staff report for this evenings city council meeting (page
171-181) provide some very good information about the General Plan re-write and related land use policy
issues.
Some of this information is new and has not been seen or heard by the public before(such as the additional
population projections, explanation of the PD expansion approach to handling lot inconsistencies, new
proposed park land, etc). Therefore, I think it would be appropriate to allow additional public comment on
these items at tonight's meeting.
The policy changes being considered will have a major impact on the future of Atascadero. In terms of
population growth and density, they will probably have even more long term impact than the changes in
the Land Use Map. As such, they deserve a thorough and complete discussion and public debate.
Unfortunately, the many proposed changes are complex, hard to understand in terms of impact, and have not
been communicated to the public very well, if at all.
I suggest that each of the 10 proposed policy changes be presented one at a time,explained by staff
with questions by the council, and a public comment period allowed. It will take a little while, but will
provide a much more focused and complete hearing on these extremely important changes in which
the public needs a chance to participate.
Up to now, there have been no workshops or public meetings about these proposed policy changes. They
have never been posted at City Hall. Not many people have any idea what they are about.
Please make sure you don't short change the public on something this important. Open the floor to additional
public comment.
Thank you,
Alan Thomas
9520 Marchant Way
462-8444
013
8/28/2001
Attachment: B
Atascadero City Council
August 28, 2001 - August 28, 2001
To:
Atascadero City Council
From:
Dorothy F. McNeil
Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers :
How can the Council possibly vote on policies the public has
never seen? A public hearing means the public has knowledge of
what Council is proposing. You conducted a hearing July 24th,
2001, allowed public comment and questions, then closed the hearing.
Now you have come up with some answers to some of the questions
that were asked, but these answers have not been available to the
public. I knout because I tried to get the answers and am probably
one of two or three people who have obtained them.
The answers show that your maps are meaningless. The so-called grey
or Outside Study areas are affected,as is the entire city by these
policies you are not exposing. Second units, lot splits everywhere
to make all lots "consistent" with the smallest lots in the area,
and changing multifamily from 16 bedrooms to 22 units which could
have several bedrooms.
In this new information you admit to adding about 1 ,600 people , but
that is a false figure because you are guessing that only 20% of
the residents will split or add a second unit. You always say the
build-out figure is a theoretical nmmber -that assumes all land with-
in the city is built to its highest and best use . Where does that
20;61 figure fit into such a statement?
Why should we trust your maps, slides, staff reports and now these
"answers" when nothing seems to ring true? Everything seems to be
slyly planned to accomodate developer friends.
For the first time I am reading a John D, MacDonald novel. (There
are about 35 million of them in print . )The hero, Travis McGee,
cries out against the exploitation of his beloved Florida. His
customary targets are"greedhead developers, crooked politicians,
chamber of commerce flacks, and the cold-hearted stammers who
flock like buzzards to the SunsIgine State . " To the author, John
MacDonald, these are not just fictional villians--they are the
villians of real life.
The only solution I see to protect this precious town and to keep
it growing gently, not explosively, is to remove the current
council majority(and its city manager)when election time rolls
around.
orothy F. McNeil
014
Attachment: C
Atascadero City Council
August 28, .2001
We the residents listed below would like the foliowing'to be taken into account by the
Atascadero City Council.
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of our General Plan which we are opposed to for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safety issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
include but are not limited to: changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to
High Density Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and
16 Bedrooms per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre,
and changing the Commercial properties'to include High Density Multi-Family
Housing.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a*few
while having an adverse effect on the maiorV of Atascadero residents.
3. if the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals-and they have not been.
� ` /� o/
Print Name Signature Date
-��7o Ste' ��.V�O �r� �Z '/Address 6 Telephone Optional
ot Ci L'I /(11'
Print Name`'� Signa re 1 rr 1 Date
. V � c O GI �S C� L(L ' 'Ic
Address
Telephone Optional
TO k k) —"j k e.'o (
Print Name Signature Date
S�
'100 ��-
Address Telephone p Optional
Pria Sig a Date
n
4 LA
Address Telephone Optional
015
Print Name Signature Date
ell
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name `� Signa Date
R' 16 f 1' /3.2 -� 1+ 4-SC"FJ4a oG 8-
Address Telephone Optional'
�Pidi;Name ig ature
AddressTele hone
p Optional
Print Name i natu Date
Address ;7 Telephone Optional
c � Q ot���ceds -lf�Ol
Print Name Sl nature `
Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name ignature " Date
oh
Address Telephone Optional
8-( a-cif
CIC.-l L �vin M e,
Print Name Signature Date
SY.SS _S C_ a--�
Address Telephone Optional
Ce t
qXhxWIl, f, 2 0 , 2001
Print Name Signature Date
3oo , A Sod, G 34s-i
Address Telephone p Optional
T• Q ir
/v,50N
Print Name
Signature Date
3-5
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name SignatureDate
4Adress-
Telephone Optional
Printam
_ e igna Date
-A-A-
Address
t,A���� � �� Telephone Optional
6vA�—i int - _
Print Name Signature Date
9 42
Address Telephone p Optional .
L _ - ( • l
Print Name Signature ^�
Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Printam s S' nature Date
Address Telephone p Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
01
Page 1 of 1
Attachment: A
Atascadero City Council
Alan Thomas
August 28, 2001
From: Alan Thomas<ajt2002@pacbell.net>
To: Jerry Clay<JCiay@atascadero.org>;Ray Johnson <Rjohnson@fix.net>; George Luna
<gluna@calpoly.edu>; Mike Arrambide<marrambide@thegrid.net>; Wendy Scalise
<wscalise@atascadero.org>
Cc: Wade McKinney<wmckinney@cityhall.atascadero.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 20012:50 PM
Subject: Need for additional public comment on proposed policy changes
The questions and answers that are in the updated staff report for this evenings city council meeting (page
171-181) provide some very good information about the General Plan re-write and related land use policy
issues.
Some of this information is new and has not been seen or heard by the public before(such as the additional
population projections, explanation of the PD expansion approach to handling lot inconsistencies, new
proposed park land, etc). Therefore, I think it would be appropriate to allow additional public comment on
these items at tonights meeting.
The policy changes being considered will have a major impact on the future of Atascadero. In terms of
population growth and density, they will probably have even more long term impact than the changes in
the Land Use Map. As such, they deserve a thorough and complete discussion and public debate.
Unfortunately, the many proposed changes are complex, hard to understand in terms of impact, and have not
been communicated to the public very well, if at all.
I suggest that each of the 10 proposed policy changes be presented one at a time,explained by staff
with questions by the council,and a public comment period allowed. It will take a little while, but will
provide a much more focused and complete hearing on these extremely important changes in which
the public needs a chance to participate.
Up to now, there have been no workshops or public meetings about these proposed policy changes. They
have never been posted at City Hall. Not many people have any idea what they are about.
Please make sure you don't short change the public on something this important. Open the floor to additional
public comment.
Thank you,
Alan Thomas
9520 Marchant Way
462-8444
013
Attachment: B
Atascadero City Council
Au-ust 28, 2001 August 28, 2001
To :
xtascadero City Council
Frog::
Doroth- F. :,:c`?eil
Nr. Mayor and Councilmembers :
=ion,► can the Council nossiblyl vote on policies the ;public _aS
never seer.? A public hearing means the pu::-lic has knot:Ylea,:: of
what Co-..,ncil is pr000sinr7. `:ou conducted a hears ns daly 24th,
20C1, allowed public comment- and questions, then closed t, .e '_.ear ns..
*ow you hsave CO'.T'ie up with some answers to some of the questions
that were as .ea, but these ans•:•:ers have not been available to tine
rublic . I knol., because I tried to `et the answers and am probably
one of t..jo or three Deo-)le :•,ho nave obtained them.
The ans-o,,-ers shout that your mans are meanin ,less. The so-called `reg
or Outside Study areas are aT erected,as is the entire city by these
policies you are not exposing. 'Second units, lot splits everywhere
to �:.ake all lots "consistent" with the smallest lots in the area,
and chanl-inc multifamily from 1S be rooms to 22 units could
have several bedrooms.
In this new in-ormation you admit to adding, about 1 ,600 people , but
that is a false figure because you are guessing, that only 20:.0' of
th.e re...iuents :till solit or add a second unit . You always say the
build-out fi:Ture is a theoretical number that assumes all la-ad with-
in t_.e city is built to its his'aest and best use. '; zere does that
20 fi..-ure fit into sucIa a statement; .
;;� s : �:: r.1
e trust your a�s, slides, staff reports and now oul
ttans .ers when nothin` seems to '_'� n ; true? :.v- uliin: see%is to be
slyly T.lanneu to accomodate developer friends.
For ti,e fist time I am readi:_ a D 7`� acDonald novel . (T:iere
are about :pillion of them it hero, Travis cCee,
cries Out a-ainst the exploitation of 'pis beloved Florida . .:is
customary tar:=:ets are"s;reedhead developers , croo'ced -politicians,
cha:rb
_ e_ of commerce flat'.-:s, and the col::-._.,arted scemr,aer.s w.ao
to l li_-- buzzards �o the Sunshine ��..�e . to „_ie aat..or, John
i`.acDonald , . these are hot just fict'- oral villians--uhey are tae
villians of real life .
The only solution I see to ;protect �_ is precious town and to 1.eep
it fro.;-in- gently, not explosively-, is to remove the current
council majority(and its city manager)when election time rolls
arounci.
orot-h„ F, i:c :eil
2 �
014
Attachment: C
Atascadero City Council
August 28, 2001
We the residents listed below would like the following to be taken into account by the
Atascadero City Council.
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of our General Plan which we are oD oD sed to for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safety issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
include but are not limited to: changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to
High Density Mufti-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and
16 Bedrooms per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre,
and changing the Commercial properties*to include High Density Multi-Family
Housing.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a*few
while having an adverse effect on the majority of Atascadero residents.
3. If the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals and they have not been.
Print Name Signature Date
-5�5770 sem' 7-7
%v�06z
Address
Telephone Optional
I MIC ?- /�Print Name 'v
1 1 Signature r DWe
l l b J' til �c h ; 1 o �GI :� C'S CPL
Address Telephone P Optional
0 TO k 0 a ; /F-0 (
Print Name Signature Date
SNoo CA)4r-A)Ad
Address - Telephone p Optlonal
Pt4 Ae Sig a Date
Address
Telephone ep Optlonal
015
Print Name Signature Date
SAS �r�Lj,� R�
Address
Telephone Optional
S7/e,vr: T -Print NameJ- Ag��g
Sign Date
104a '60"43 Aa`�-SC/ F./�a 19/d 6 oc 8-
Address Telephone Optional
Ll
Pri Name ig ature Date
3a AT
Address
Telephone p Optional
Print Namenatu Date
8165 „r s.�.
Address Telephone Optional
c i 4 Gt��tErS
-lr�Ol
Print Name Signature Date
--A54,51- 41
Address
Telephone Optional
Prins Name A0 A Zre, Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
SYss 5 .. C �,: R�� l �sC-� C i4
Address Tei hone
eP Optional
Ce
Print Name Signature Date
3 oo.-,
Address
Telephone p option!
Ur
/m, vis - eo16se'✓
Print Name Signature Date
35 '
-� -76
Address Telephone Optional
v �2/EJ�o/3�A/ D_ d /
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone ep Optional
U&az.
Print Mime ign Date
Address
dd ^ �� ^ Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address
Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
.5-4�57 �>I/ f3 ire
Address
Telephone Optional
Print S. nature Date
Address
Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
• Attachment: D
,,es Atascadero City Council
August 28, 2001
We the residents listed below would like the following to be taken into account by the
Atascadero City Council.
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of our General Plan, which we are opposed to, for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safety issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
include but are not limited to: changing suburban Residential areas to High Density
Residential, changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to High Density
Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and 16 Bedrooms
per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre, changing the
Commercial properties to include High Density Multi-Family Housing, and changing
Public Properties such as Southern Pacific Rail Road easements to accommodate
housing.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a few
while having an adverse effect on the majority of Atascadero residents.
3. If the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals and they have not been.
Print Name Signature D to
40c'< DCL ►u (2 ) , Cry
Address Telephone Optional
r I�
Print Name I Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
ZsQk I rs . cs 19' ') 0
1
Print Namenn Signature Dale
It 51�
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name < Signa,W.0 Date
A8dress Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
—��—,4rertn
Address Telephone Optional
A,
Print Name e ignature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
p a'l't' SVit' 1�Jt::� c
Address Telephone Optional -
Print Name Si iiatifire-- Date
,e 1'(.,A.r-el 0--, Wt(w
Address __i Telephone Op ional
Print Name Signature �7 y C�(Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name — Sig Lure Date
Address Telephone Optional
FL
1 T/
Print ame Signature D eI LAI N) --D
i
Address Telephone Optional
i� fa
Print Name Signature ate
Address Telephone Optional
M q
A
i
i
L IZG�-I�=- ' '—2c....�t._t,��K� ,rte•' G �/
Print Name Si atu ate
17
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signatt re ; / Date
� r=.) jai' /��'•;- .�/;.:��i �. .•��',�
Address - Telephone Optional..:
6SU'y
Print Name Signature Date
112
Address Telephone Optional
bA.
U�,
Print Name Signature 110,
Da(e
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Vg"nature Date
c
12
Lc
Address --J Telephone Optional
On ` � t
Print Name Si nature Date
GYM
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Ln7
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
w5s:
Address Telephone Optlona
n9i"1
j
0 OAK-
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
L,
Print Name Signature Date
17)
Address l Telephone Opti al
Pri ame Signature Date /
� H 0 1) --Ra
Address Telephone p Optional
6 11)V
Ilf/l/
Print Name Signature V Date
Address Telephone Optional
_ L t •i. o _ 1. s L
Print Name f
Signature date
Address - Telephone Optional
Print Name -, Signature ' Date
Address -Telephone Optional
�'' u� �l •GZZLf�`..�-••
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
\
Print Name •' +(� �`
Signature Date
Z�� 7 � A 1) -4 Cot 3 1
Address Telephone Optional
• tl h i
6�.�CLd_` �� osJ l• 7
Print Nam 38 r ate
Address Telephone Optional
letPe&,,e,
Print Name Signature date
Address Telephone Optional
LI
Printf Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional -
� I1 k�
CiG1 00//-7C
Print Name ^l ( Signature Date
VI
Address Telephone Optional
T P
Print Name L. Signa ure Date
,?��•7C�� ��' /1_!i•-•` `,/li?t7� t_. �,?�� /►. i n�t./r•�>;'%-r1 �/;:�/ C�,�
Address - Telephone Optional
I
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Sig re ate
4'1ct r E��YL'. ��zfr (',f
Address Telephone Optional
tr:
hC C► o N ' lerxo
Print Name c
Sign ture Date
_•�/r2Q�' E'G �/o
/C- c, b 1716
Address Telephone Optional
R PE t-
Print Name Signature Date
L 6i ;c7/
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name ignature Date
Address Telephone Optional
J9-11
Print Name r— Signature Date
1(3
Address 1
Telephone Optional
Printame Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name 11
gnature /
•7 � �� Date
Address Z�GZ-
Telephone Optional '
W >t?1<,. L W1D0
t Name c
Prin �('I ,� f
Signature Date
�-� 1 1 S `.y,..,,,,,��-•.:�•.� IIZ.�n . Cox�,� c'
Address
Telephone Optional
M Acs N- OD
taPrint Name Signaturete
<A AJ L ut
Address
Telephone Optional
G23
Print Name ig ture Date
(5f2e3i?- aa- v,;5i,., AV�� a,- a
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name y� Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Ila Lu �jP� s y�i--��v 7
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
I
Address - Tel p one Optional
Print Name Signa ure Date
Address T one Optional
as
Print Name ig iur Date
9 ' av%*-1 C cAaC
Address Telephone Optional
rem C;
Print Nam Si ature Date
57
Address Telephone Optional
024
t
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name ignature Date
Address ` '
^ 1 Telephone Options
Print Nam \ \ i)'
� •
r'
\. -`�Signature Date!
Address
Telephone Optional
Print Nam �� D (l � � �t •'�
Signature Date
Y,r(
Address
Telephone Optional
LLVfPrint Name PL-
Signature
Date
Address
Telephone Optional
III A Print Name S gnature
Date
Address
Telephone Option i
----------------------
Print Name Signatur
Date
Addr SCJ�� /C�• �`���.., ��� l� 7'�t%'/'���G' (ll? �a ��r1t��� �
t
Telephone Optional
Print Name Sina re " (�
g Date
Address
Telephone Optional
o25
Print Name Signature ate
Address Telephone Optional
tz
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
U c
Print Name Signal:u Date
I l o
Address Telephone Optional -
Liar , n ,Ale- 1, 11 0/2 �' �)
iirin(Nam'e -- Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional .
i L 'l� ✓.
Print Name Signature Date
T() C501\ C2
Address _ Telephone Optional
Print NameSignat re Date
Atum
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature l Date
r
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
- 17
Addresh' Tele hon
p e phonal
0,11.16
We the residents listed below would like the following to be taken Into account by the
Atascadero City Council.
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned Into a rewrite of our General Plan which we are opposed to, for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safety issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes .
include but are not limited to: changing suburban Residential areas to High Density .
Residential, changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to High Density
Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and 16 Bedrooms
per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre, changing the
Commercial properties to include High Density Multi-Family Housing, and changing
Public Properties such as Southern Pacific Rail Road easements to accommodate
housing.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a few
while having an adverse effect on the majority of Atascadero residents.
3. If the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better_notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals and they have not been.
�r
Print Name' �^ nature j Date
Address - Telephone Optional
Lrl
Marne Signature Date
C. �tR/� Ic_ �
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name _ Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
K'
Print Name Signature Date
�•�� f'�°.E,�v �Q7c?1�,Z. _/ i'✓� fit'
- �'l • of-i�'a.�• �1 J�-
Addrt,ss Telephone Optional
q)I
Print Name Sig ature Date
Zo
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name /Z/w-,Siignature'23 i Date
Address Telephone Optional
Z,V
Paint Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional -
--��,.. �- -t.c. . .. ��-� •�. .. . 4; 11 c��
Print Name Com__ Signature, _......__ Date
- (
v RD
Address Telephone Optional
L
Print Nam}�,e r Sig ature Date
6 u U
Address - Telephone Optional
r
Print Name Signature Date
35- 70 q V() -6)5.�
Address Telephone Optional
JAK
Print Name Signature Date
Address Teleplione Optional
C
Print Name ignature Date
Address V Telephone Optional
_vlvow
Print Name _ Signature D e
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Ob . 25.jb
--I raAan
Prin Nam Sign re Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Na e �, Signa e Date
H 6
v
Address Telephone Optional
tic �• �w � �, � �
Print Na Sign ture Date
Address _ Telepho a Optional
VINL_� e/,�7
int me Signature Date
AAf. yec)
t � G o - _
Address� � / �-� Tom- ( Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Da
Address Telephone Optional
X,
Print Name/— §kfnafure Date
Address Telephone Optional
��J
L 1 C 1 a. UYC v.) rt
Print Name Signature Date
//
C,-ro -Y 1 I o �d ('� QScJP_ra 'cl3t129 �/bC) `//crs',J�
Address Telephone Optional
� r
Print Name r� Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
V// I1 G
Print la amSignatoe
ate
Address Telephone Optional
-tel DARD
jt� D�.
Print Name ignature Date
Address Telephone Optional
511s0n boj.)k —— /_..
.` S a
Print Name Signature Date
--�3� ZOs 6�& V .
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
� � D
Address Telephone Optional
PrinName i ature
D to
JU& Al Ez_ 1�cs{z c
Address Telephone Optional
4na e Signatur ate
Address Telephone Optional
030 .
we the residents listed below would like the following to be taken into account by the
Atascadero City Council.
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of our General Plan, which we are opposed to, for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safety issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
include but are not limited to: changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to
High Density Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and
16 Bedrooms per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre,
changing the Commercial properties to include High Density Multi-Family Housing,
and changing Public Properties such as Southern Pacific Rail Road easements to
accommodate housing.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a few
while having an adverse effect on the majority of Atascadero residents.
3. if the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals and they have not been.
Zx A/
Prin�Np(n Si ur r Date'
9
Address Teliephone Optional
FlAnt Name Signature Date'
re
' �_,��� lCrscr�c�� Z� iEI Cly/
Add Telephone Optional
L LLY
"Print Name Signature - Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
031
,�,•�--��_�'4_�'•f,c-!1 ,�Q�, .1S,17 Wry .�1�/-�7�1.•7.�+L�L i' /V j ,
Print Name itignaiure ,Date
Address Telephone Optional
-c-
Print N me igna4ire D to,
Address i Telephone Optional
_11.�1��1= I��17 "7 �����%;�•_`�.Jt� J � '41 `�C•l:�-c>''� ODD'ate/PrintName Sig ure•
1 •� � 7
1 , � - , n fR f
Address � T Cup Of Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional - .
Print Name pp ��( LSignat�r ` c `/ ate'
V�%�1 1°rS[��f��L J f�b VS) T Z —U .S �2.
Address _ Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional `
' ,�L� .•iC/ I �(�[f '!l.I. � (moi- O t �
_— Signature _ D t _....
Address ` Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional _
032
we the residents listed below would like the following to,be taken into account by the
Atascadero City Council
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of our General Pian which we are opposed to, for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safety issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
include but are not limited to: changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to
High Density Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and
16 Bedrooms per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre,
and changing the Commercial properties to include High Density Multi-Family
Housing.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a few
while having an adverse effect on the majority of Atascadero residents.
3. If the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals and they have not been.
.. -Let CeL� �.4 41 1�'
f
Print NarneI
Signature ate
Address Telephone Optional
o /
P t Name ' ature Date
Address Telephone Optio al
M ) 0?0n
Print Name signature Date
A TA S ( -- i
di
Address Telephone Optional
PEitName Signature Date
Address
quo-
Telephone Optional
033
f--I4jL
� 1
Print Name Signature bate
7Z37 Ilu!/e Ave—
Address Telephone Optional
Print NameI �—
gn t re Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name i Slgn�urer Date
t"Jiz. Ma
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name E Signature Date
:26T-T) Las_AvIv Ct, 1 ,c 1wels 614c I t c 0
Address _ Telephone Optional
�- � elf, La �
rine Name Signa re Date
Address Tele one'Optional
rint NameSi nature
Date
C'i�Z a� :- Z •� r,,� ri
Address Telephone Optional
/I W,
Print Name Signature Date 1
Address
Telephone Optional
034
Print N6e ' XSlaljp-� IA Date
A.4
Address T Telephone Optional
S� 31�c, a i
Print Name Signature Date
67 a os ,�_ . AAA. 2-:f2----
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
( -I JV Ah-S 64-40 Ate- A 145 e4 4(A yy3`fy L Lf 6 d ',,?yY4-
Address Telephone Optional
P"Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
'
Print Name Sig t ire Date
AflaresS 17 Yelephone Optional
(/D,4 C/ JJ 91,4fle.4 nCP -5-276-01
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
R/A/ .-AffWffd ylr,�I(J
7
int Name Signature Dat
Atz
Address Telephone Optional
lel
Print ame ignature Da
00
Address Telephone Optional
035
Print
Sign at re ate
Address
Telephone Optional
Print Nam Sig ture
Date
_
Ad ess
T lephone Optional
00
Print Name Signature L"( ��...
g ature Date
ao
Address
Telephone Optional
ri Nam
Sig a u Date
ddress
Telephone Optional
��Ltrs�lti� 4�
Print Name
f�
�. S� nature Date
/Avc,
Address —J •CI� L
_ Telephone Optional
c-N i (� Le.V FU-15 � r
Print Name cc Signature
�� U !V
Address
Telephone Optional
7 •
Print►vame Signature
7-5-8.O N /uo T Date
Address J
Telephone Optional
rint Name d 1
Signature Date
Address r C 4 N-7
Telephone Optional
036
y�AIe v2 5,�/�t�s.res
We the residents listed below would like the following to be taken into account by the
Atascadero City Council
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of our General Plan, which we are opposed to, for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safe1/ issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
include but are not limited to: changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to
High Density Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and
16 Bedrooms per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre,
and changing the Commercial properties to include High Density Multi-Family
Housing.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a few
while having an adverse effect on the majority of Atascadero residents.
3. If the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals and they have not been.
Print Name Signature Date
5"ter:4 N�--,�,�- �}v,=
Address Telephone Optional
Print NAme Sighfiture Date
(7? 2v vim .,-��:-
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature bate
Address Telephone Optional
v t
Print Name _f G Signature VDate
Address CLZ3.2 ,� Telephone Optional
037
�' �'�/`I �N E S ,1
Print Name Signature Date
1(ll&s C C7,a M/,s, rl (IFA
Address Telephone Optional
°1 �' 1 I O
Print Name t Signature Date
` G 16 '; s 1u. 1 7•�
Address Telephone Optional
Print Named Signal a Date
iL `.aiz.GyLO ( � A [ Yc'
Address r Telephone Optional
1 bf) L T 0 lV/
Print Name SignatureDate
e es
Address Telephone Optional
r
Print Name Signature
/✓ Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name gign"atufe /
Date
Address Telephone Optional
.�
Print ame Signature Date
address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature
_ 1 r•r Date
�Teleph0p�rlonal Address
033
r
—JUS f� J/z-LA ,Z,4
Print Name ` Signature
Date
Address Telephone Optional
I
Print Name SignatOre Date
Address Telephone Optional
,C—L i211
Print Name skfnature
Date
4 Z/,e. —�.y/D 7--
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature 44 Date
Address _ Telephone Optional
Print Namel c�
Signature Date
Address '
Telephone Optional
QL
Print Name Signature Date
l-)C) s 1 �� �a -6cac,
Address Telephone Optional
1
2 --vl
Print Name Signature Date
A &z.1cadevo /*
Address Telephone Optional
039
P
Print Name Signature Date
I% IZ t L,
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name , Signature �+ J Date
Address
Telephone Optional
Print Nam/eSi nature Date
Address Telephone Optional
C
_�-�� �.�.cam ��-• C� �a�L.. ��x?(.l�•C L � � �L��. g,.-�., .� 1
Pri►rt Name Signature Date
--T;a co C P (,VA L Iii
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature I Date
Co ty.S.S �J Esc c Z.e c` 1 q
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signa
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
1014-1, �:/�r�4 ot.G� ,�;�•� .-mss o e C�-- 4CG/-����
Address elephone Optional
ah J.� Nei T1s L
Print Name Linure Date
Address 411A LZ7-1
Telephone Optional
040
ayes -7
We the residents listed below would like the following to be taken into account by the
Atascadero City Council.
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of our General Plan which we are opposed to, for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safety issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
include but are not limited to: changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to
High Density Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and
16 Bedrooms per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre,
and changing the Commercial properties to include High Density Multi-Family
Housing.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a few
while having an adverse effect on the majority of Atascadero residents.
3. If the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals and they have not been.
�yLl� �LS�T1r /d7 O/
Print Name ignature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Sign 16re Date
A dress Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature �- T--
Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
041
0 A tzz-)
/-Print Name vSig ature Date
A dress Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
AIL,, �mACCo 6vIz,
Print Name iigna ure Date
J0( �' c G�
Ad cess Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Dale
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address - Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
042
We the residents listed below would like the following to be taken into account b the
Atascadero City Council. Y
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of o r General Plan which we are oonosed to, for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safejy issues are not bei n taken into ccount. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility _
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Communi Goals of our Generai Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
Include but are not limited to: changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to
High Density Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and
16 Bedrooms per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre,
and changing the Commercial properties to include High Density Multi-Family
Housing. _.
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to onl
while having an adverse effect on the ma'ori of Atascade o residentsy a few
3. if the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the change'
bein
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notificati n of th Public needs to take lace.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the ci of
the proposals and they have not been. tY
CrQ� 1.Di rt '
Print Name
Si nature
66W -�a �v� ate
Address
Telephone Optional
Print Name
gnature —
rZ Date
Address -::6 , 31
Telephone Optional
rint me
Sign ure
Date
Address o 3
Te ephorie Optional
fiwc
Print Name
Signature
Date
Address
Telephone Optional 043
V,
8l �
Print Name Signature Date
A;6/- a q70
Address Telephone Optional
A.
Print Name Signature Date
syYf Say 3 C,17 -1�0
Address Telephone Optional
/?GL
Print Name Signature Date
S fS Sart lie rl 4-0 cc e)o
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print NameSignature Date
`((0( 1
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date .
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature
Date �
Address Telephone Optional
n .i d
We the residents listed below would like the following to be taken into account by the
Atascadero City Council.
It is our opinion that what may have started as an update of our General Plan has
turned into a rewrite of our General Plan, which we are opposed to, for the following
reasons:
1. Public Health and Safety issues are not being taken into account. The
proposed plan will create traffic problems, and stress on our sewer treatment facility
and water supply that the city is not addressing.
2. The land use changes proposed appear to directly undermine the Basic
Community Goals of our General Plan. Some examples of those proposed changes
include but are not limited to: changing Recreation and Suburban Residential Land to
High Density Multi-Family Housing; changing the Multi-Family housing from 10 and
16 Bedrooms per acre to Units per acre, or even 16 and 22 housing units per acre,
and changing the Commercial properties to include High Density Multi-Family
Housing. _
4. Changes being proposed appear to provide a financial benefit to only a few
while having an adverse effect on the majority of Atascadero residents.
3. If the city has made an effort to inform us residents of the changes being
proposed we somehow missed it. Better notification of the Public needs to take place.
Residents in and around areas being impacted should have been notified by the city of
the proposals and they have not been.
Print Name , i nature ate
Address _ Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
c�
Address Telephone Optional
/� Z'
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name /1 Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
045
Print Name / Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Si nature Date
Address Telephone Optional
rint Name *natdre Date
SA.L) -U e p 7
Address Telephone Optional
rint Name
nature Date
Ukld"�k,
([
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional
Print Name Signature Date
Address Telephone Optional 046
Attachment: E
Atascadero City Council
August 28, 2001
0
a�
U U V
Cd W
0 0 ti 0
o 8 >
M 0 0 0
0
PROW
o
� o
Ed
a•� � 30
U V ,0 p ;d Obp
cid rO 0 .. Lp 44..1
0 0 0 U � cd v r.
4 to cC0d" V i•r O
F-—1 (.� U aJ ."r 00
0 C41 ' '.y N
00
_ cd
CO as
p p
a 3 Q. =1 cd 8 ~
f--� o 00 0 3 �, bA •� O
..
0 Cd
UO 1 �
l� U 0 0 c > v °��' • CCS •
047
N •
0 POO
Cd 4-4
tom., "C3 cd '"'" �' pm"
O Cj U = 4*
4--+ W P-*
vi �n O •
RS 't 0 U crd
p ci vs
C,
•
.PO4
>-404 0 "� 0 1 U V
O c1, ,bA > >
0 0 00
-W
O .�
cd PNOO
Cd O 0 O
• cd Cd >, Pt
O �
N UC4
= p
•
048
Attachment: F
Atascadero City Council
August 28, 2001
0
�, Cn
0 A '' > 0
o >
b
00
t. Ej -F
� chi O *--, 1
o y ° H � O ,UM4
�o " N ► 4--+ .O
0M
Cd Q
CdasM a a N O
Na
a� �� W
>O 4-4
C19 C14
v y f� 0 bA
� •.41�0 O
con
Cd
4-1
04
a. a0i •�' � � � � O e� RS o
Cd
a
0 o •
Cd 03 0 41
W
to O o O zs zs
0. H U O U
o d <C
0 0 C
co" o 040,
0
N
� � oo U
Ed > —
v� 0 z
3aa� o3 .
�' (DO O O O
>
W N •v o [� r--i r..4 N r1Cd w
�
Cd w
•,-0
049
O
rn
Ol�
o r-+
00
N
cT W o
'}, 0 . -9� 0 0 0 e o o
r--+ o 0 CN M 04 'd' CT N O C�
N `O CT O O O
.� 'd' 00
d Z U i N M N cV d' tri vi \O N �+
o ° w
CdCd
M O N Cao O Wn O C1 01 N M
ON CT oo r
Cd
U
CT O
Cao 00 00 00 Cao 00 00 00 00 00 01
CT CN 01 O*N CT 01 01 CT CT 01 CT
• • . • • • • • • • •
050
.,�
4O, bA� O O
Q
ct
ct
o
cl
r--� O C�
ctQ .
cd
o
ct
o opml
p
'I
UCTS °
� U �
v 0 O
CC3 ►�-� o
051
*Pon( PPZ
cl
v Rtcl
? p bD
•�
..O"
cl
P •~ci
v
Cl cl
cl
W2 cn
rA
rA
PMUO
CC la)
a� a� '� �+ e� el: ci
rA .~ Cl .� p ani
A�clQ� ,.C� _ y.., •
= 0 '
o c o o �rA
c
C14 v
•�
rA
Cil Cl
rA
pong
...4
052
EDciO
M
t3 t� co : CIO) :
_ : O N N
O V N € N � O O
U CIO :
�
X nEO € O ' NM
L9 O
V M N
r--� M
r U
x O4 € co O M ' N O € 5
MOE
0Cd
Din
>%i X : O
LICO
......................... ..a................................................................................................................
. 053
aoi cl cl oq
'C4,
o
.EA 3 .
c°
4-o
T�-//�� •y V � �F•i ^„r bq
•O
:�c, 4.4
� CCS est o
cl 00
4-4
4-4 04
CIS 0 y0 00
ti cd *xm"Zm UCCS 4
'� r.
to 0 45
lu bo
56.6
4-4
cl
'� ami O •� O r= o O
4-4
00
r-1
vi
cc
C ami o po
PC
IZ► o -'
•�-� 0vii s •0.. 0
Q� w, rn CCS it it
„O
el 0O
Cd o o o � '�, w1 v •� O o
P-0 oo [ C v
to
-1 V-4 -� 4. NEW Q
054
N 4-4
its ►� 42 0 ,�°�,, •� � � � ,O
En 0
� ,,.,, c� U b c`� a� by •r•+ �
•� �3 0 cd
Cd
4.4
Cd ev.4 Cd
spo Poo
Cd Cd W
tD
CIS cd bD
C13a U) �
CC3
Cl
cn
o� o� o = CIS
o 0 � v U v
, ° U �, V
p cl Cd
N �+to bD E ,E CCS .� V)
0
. .
O
4-4
Cd
PEA CIS cl
Cd
. . U
4-4
U .� x
Cl
4-' O v�
O �
x
cl •d '
P..r S�
Cd
U O o y .P
055
Cd
U 42) (U
co ;Zo
• cd
v� • .� O
, El-
T
rd
ON bD
C111- Cd
Cd cdo
cd r--, cd .�
ct3 cti v� o
v�CdU
Cld
= .U) by
cd bA $ .r � p
Cid
ci
OAl
+, C;s > �
cri
-� •�
CIA
•
056
r
T.S .Q Z
g 'LS
cl .�
CC! v
Cl v
Ina
CrA 4.a
co
Eh
c� rA � ' o
.�
rA
PUNA P=
•� •~
.� PC
rA P. � •P �
0 � =0 PON
�
C � rA
P= •~
rA
po C19 .0
Cl CII
057
O O
O O
O O
r. N
0
= O 000000 � Lo OMr- CCON0
O 000000 LL 0 V' (OI-- O (Ot0
tt_ r. � 'ctf� � 0e- M
NN rN � NNN M U6N9N ��6�7��6N9
�a) C 69 � 69 69 fH 69 69 tf3 O (D
.O
a. a
0 c co ca v
�1Q CLD
� 4) O -0 ami
4� O `� = �
C4
J Co >
bi�� �n C O
J O
0 0) 0) 0
.� .6 0
0
a co N o
� -
Cd •c m O 0 o p rn _� z
a .0 i cc U) c o y O o 00
O C m m y to to ro U-) a L' N N tCL
O c d 0 a� v vi v,
p C y
(� '�L v =�co �viL •tAC9 .�v ., mot (YO - �o 3: vmc
0 •503o NUOoEC .aUo
aJOEaW ( MOco CO
Qn
40- c U U) o
CO
U
. U C6 CL cu C7 0
CL C
o cu
cu rn
N
0
0
co
a��
co
E .� .Q O O
N •� 0. ca O O" O
W () L C. �.L p - Q
's. O cu Rf ([S
to Q.
O •� c Q N E
L C N •O O E },
d U 0 4- L � 'L- O O +
to CL 0
a) CU ,� O CO U O CL i s
_
CU 4- cn N CU
U5.
OO O vi
CU
V L co
to :3U .4.,
cu C O 0�_ CO � N
N Ocn
Co cn ca
O O Q U Y
cm =C:
E -0 O � RS O O'
0 O N O � O O
O O C -C t/) ,1
� � > CO O 4- O
• • O U O cu U C Q .
O Cu y.- O — O `- U O U
�. N w 0 O Q N U
taiN O co 'O 0 .� •N
i. C: N � � O co 0 � i'2. U Q
U O co -� RS ) CO 0
a) CUQ. N ¢ N ~ � 0
> " 0 Q. N 0 :_. O Q
EU (' cu >
L
052
i
�L
i
, i
, I
i
e
AGENDA
1918 , 11 8
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2001
7:00 P.M.
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue, 4t" Floor
Atascadero, California
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT - CLOSED SESSION
CLOSED SESSION:
1) Conference with labor negotiator(Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6)
Agency Negotiator: Mayor Mike Arrambide
Position: City Manager
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Luna
ROLL CALL: Mayor Arrambide
Mayor Pro Tem Scalise
Council Member Clay
Council Member Johnson
Council Member Luna
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call
PRESENTATIONS:
1. Employee Service Awards
COMMUNITY FORUM:
(This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the Council on any
matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to
five minutes. Please state your name and address for the record before making your
presentation. The Council may take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a
future agenda.)
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
(On their own initiative, Council Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on
their own activities. Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to
staff or take action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Council may
take action on items listed on the Agenda.)
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call
(All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non-controversial by
City staff and will be approved by one motion if no member of the Council or public
wishes to comment or ask questions. If comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the
item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered in the listed
sequence with an opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council
concerning the item before action is taken.)
1. City Council Minutes—August 28, 2001
■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of August 28,
2001. [City Clerk]
2. Zone Change 2001-0011 9351-9353 Musselman Drive (Shannon/Roberts Engineering)
■
Fiscal Impact: Negligible
■ Planning Commission recommendations: Council introduce for second reading by
title only, and adopt the draft Ordinance approving Zone Change 2001-0011
[Community Development]
3. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 2000-0013 / AT 00-225 - 4580 Potrero (Beckwith /
Cannon)
■ Fiscallmpact: None
■ Staff recommendations: Council.
1. Accept the Final Parcel Map 2000-0013 (AT 00-225); and
2. Reject without prejudice, the public utility easement (P.U.E.) shown on Final
Parcel Map 2000-0013. [Community Development]
4. Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement -Home Depot
■
FiscalImpact.- $257,400 (in FY 2002-03 Budget)
■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute a Sewer Extension
Reimbursement Agreement with Home Depot U.S.A., Atascadero 101 Associates and
the City of Atascadero [Public Works]
2
5. Award Wastewater Pump Project
■ Fiscal Impact: $40,763.85 (in FY 2001-02 budget)
■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize a Public Works Project for the purchase of
one Fairbanks Morse 10" VTSH, 50 Horsepower Pump for Wastewater Pumping
Station No. 5,from Flo Systems Inc. and installation of the same. [Public Works]
6. Azucena Avenue Drainage Improvements - Bid No. 2001-003
■ Fiscal Impact: $155,040.10 (in FY 2001-02 Budget)
■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement
with Arthurs Contracting, Inc. in the amount of$124,032.10 for construction of the
Azucena Avenue Drainage Improvements Project. [Public Works]
7. Traffic Way Storm Drain Project
■ Fiscal Impact: $85,000.00 (in FY 2001-02 Budget)
■ Staff recommendation: Council:
1. Approve the Change Order for $91,289.22 with Souza Construction, Inc. for the
Traffic Way Storm Drain Project; and
2. Authorize the Director of Administrative Services to allocate $85,000.00 from the
Drainage Impact Fee Fund for this project. [Public Works[
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Purchasing Policy
Fiscal Impact: None. The proposed policy is expected to generate a savings of staff
time.
■ Staff recommendation: Council:
1. Introduce for first reading by title only, Ordinance No. 386, amending sections 2-
3.01, 2-3.04, and 2-3.05 of the Atascadero Municipal Code and deleting Sections
2-3.08 and 2-3.09, and Section 2-3A.01 through 2-3A.09, inclusive of the
Atascadero Municipal Code; and
2. Approve the draft Resolution adopting a Citywide Purchasing Policy.
[Administrative Services]
C. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
(The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given,
as felt necessary.):
Mayor Arrambide
1. S.L.O. Council of Governments(SLOCOG)/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority(SLORTA)
2. Water Committees
3. County Mayor's Round Table
Mayor Pro Tem Scalise
1. Finance Committee
2. City/ Schools Committee
3. Economic Opportunity Commission(EOC)
4. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Board
3
Council Member Luna
1. Finance Committee
2. Integrated Waste Management Authority(IWMA)
3. North County Homeless Coalition
Council Member Johnson
1. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC)
2. Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO)
Council Member Clay
1. Air Pollution Control District(APCD)
2. City/ Schools Committee
D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
E. ADJOURNMENT:
Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this
Agenda in court, that person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public
hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or
prior to this public hearing.
1, Marcia McClure Torgerson, the City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the
penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda for the September 11, 2001 Regular Session of
the Atascadero City Council was posted on September 5, 2001 at Atascadero City Hall, 6500
Palma Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 and was available for public review in the City Clerk's
office at that location.
Signed this 5h day of September, 2001 at Atascadero, California.
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk
City of Atascadero
4