Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 071190 - Special Mtng M� AGENDA VA ( MINUTES APPROVED, AS WRITTEN, 8/14/90) ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SPECIAL MEETING July 11, 1990 The special meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to order at 3 : 00 p.m. by Mayor Lilley. ROLL CALL City Council : Councilmembers Dexter, Shiers, Nimmo and Mayor Lilley; Councilwoman Borgeson arrived at 3 : 20 p.m. Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Henry Engen, Dir. of Community Development; Greg Luke, Dir. of Public Works; Gary Sims, Sr. Civil Engineer; Art Mon- tandon, City Attorney; Mark Joseph, Dir. of Administrative Services; Andy Takata, Dir. of Parks, Recreation & Zoo Introductory Comments: Mayor Lilley noted that this meeting is the continuation of a drive-around over the roads in Atascadero and is intended as a working session to discuss the issue pertaining to minimum road standards from an engineering standpoint, whether the standard which the City has adopted is going to be retroactive ( applying to existing roadways or not) , if not, what exceptions will be made and what can be done with regards to existing roads . The discussion will be within the context of addressing the long- standing and complex dilemma of the overall road system within the City and, specifically, those where underlying fee title is held by Wells Fargo Bank--roads reserved in the Colony system for the Colony Corporation that became assets in the receivership when it went bankrupt and, ultimately, went within the jurisdic- tion of Wells Fargo, which inherited those assets as part of their trusteeship for the Colony; there are approx. 40-50 miles of roadway within the City limits in this category. Inventory of said roads has been under way for the past year; the Public Works Department has been endeavoring to classify the roads with re- spect to the amount of work which would be necessary before they would be formally accepted into the City-maintained system and which roads may not be amenable to acceptable standards due to inherent costs or engineering problems . Negotiations are in process in efforts to transfer the title from Wells Fargo to the City of Atascadero, determining which 1 0 i roads that will affect and determining how we will plan and schedule the improvements on those roads within the confines of our Public Works budget. The Mayor called the transfer of legal title "a colossal undertaking" , citing, for example, that Wells Fargo has conveyed title for half of sections of roadways to property owners in the past, and there may or may not be records determining ownership. There is a separate matter relative to the Atascadero Highlands area and Las Encinas involving the Gordon Davis roads, which has a long history and concerns legal issues . Negotiations are in process with the objective of reaching an agreement with Mr. Davis for the upgrading and acceptance of the roads within that area, possible abandonment by him and turning them into private driveways or the continuation of a private assessment district . A. Discussion of road ownership and road maintenance Greg Luke reviewed the agenda background items prepared for this topic . He noted that, before the subject of road construction and maintenance can be addressed, the dilemma of securing un- derlying legal title must, be recognized, which he briefly summarized, reiterating some of Mayor Lilley' s comments . He noted that the records indicating which roads the City formally accepted from the County at incorporation are indeterminate and that, if the City has not accepted the roads, it may have a choice of which roads to take over. Art Montandon commented on the County roads acceptance issue, saying that he hopes to attempt, with County and Wells Fargo agreement, to obtain a judicial determination that the City of Atascadero does, in fact, own street easements; then, the issue would be how to serve proper public notice of such in order to effect them. He explained that the roads the County owned at the time the City incorporated were to be conveyed to the City, pur- suant to the County' s resolution of intent; however, that was deleted for some reason from the deed, and the issue of how much ownership the City obtained through the municipal reorganization act in effect at that time remains . [* Note: Councilwoman Borgeson arrived and she was briefed on the progress of the meeting thus far. ] B. Discussion of the City's general road goals and policies Greg Luke reviewed the staff report, pointing out that the City is lacking several major documents which would provide guidance, e.g. , the Circulation Element needs to be updated, and staff 2 would like to develop road construction permit and encroachment permit review process ordinances . Councilmember Borgeson suggested, and there was concurrence, that the term "non-maintained City roads" replace "private roads" . On that note, Mr. Luke indicated the four road categories would then be: "City-maintained" , "non-City-maintained" , "private" and "driveways" . Mayor Lilley reminded staff that any documents generated relative to the roads issues need to be evolved with the aide of the City Attorney so as to avoid misinterpretation. It was noted that the main questions facing the Council and staff on this subject are: ( 1 ) To what degree is the City going to be involved in expanding and upgrading the road system? ( 2 ) Where is the balance to be placed between safety and community charac- ter? It was suggested by Councilmember Borgeson that the term "local road standards" replace "minimum road standards" in City docu- ments, which Mr. Luke noted is a standard term which refers to local roads . Discussion relative to nationally-recognized stan- dards followed and encompassed liability concerns . Mr. Montandon indicated that an updated Circulation Element would allow for well-informed future road planning ( i .e. , road location, size) and could assist in the possible adoption of a circulation impact fee for building permits, the monies which could perhaps be pooled and used to solve current substandard problems . He added that road signs, markings and signals are significant factors in liability cases and should be seriously considered. There was discussion regarding the mitigation of present liabi- lity concerns until long-term policy issues are addressed. Mr. Montandon recommended that those concerns be dove-tailed in with the Wells Fargo negotiations . Mr. Luke recommended that CIP monies be used to retain a traffic engineer to do a comprehensive traffic study of the downtown core area while staff concurrently works on developing local standards for Council consideration, which could be reviewed by the traffic engineer; staff feels such standards could be brought before the Council within a 3-month period of time. C. Discussion of specific policies associated with road issues The subject of drainage with regard to road construction policy was briefly discussed. Mr. Luke indicated that staff generally uses the County' s standards in this regard. 3 Councilman Nimmo suggested that the Council clarify its intent at the May 22nd meeting when it adopted the new minimum road stan- dards, ( 1 ) with respect to the Gordon Davis agreement for development of a checklist of items to be corrected and, subse- quently, the newly-adopted standards were being imposed on precise plan applications in that road area; and ( 2) on lot split or lot access matters, applicants may be required to meet the new road standards in excessive amounts . Each Councilperson and the City Engineer shared his/her recollection of that discussion. Mr. Luke stated that the Public Works Dept. will stick to estab- lished standards and that staff could present an exemption or waiver procedure to the Council for their consideration to be applied in situations where the existing roads are substandard. Lengthy discussion between Council and staff then focused on whether or not the new standards should be retroactively applied to existing roads and the issues to consider in making that determination. Gary Sims commented on the review process, emphasizing that building permit and precise plan conditioning is a separate pro- cess than the City' s agreement with Gordon Davis . The topic of an exemption procedure was further discussed. Mr. Montandon noted that all roads proposed to be accepted into the City system must come before the Council in the form of a resolution with an accompanying staff report. Councilman Nimmo asked if his understanding of staff' s intention is, in addition to the road agreement with Mr. Davis, to continue through the precise plan process, at staff' s discretion, to re- quire application of the new City standards in those areas that are also subject to the Davis road agreement. Mr. Luke respond- ed yes, until the Davis agreement has been consummated, staff has no alternative than to apply the same criteria as is applied to any other homes located on non-City-maintained streets with re- spect to the requirement of improved frontage to City standards . Mr. Windsor expressed the importance of noting that staff is sensitive to the history of this issue, because of the past agreement, so there' s got to be the element of flexibility. Public Comment Harold Hayes, 2505 Alturas, expressed that he feels Mr. Nimmo' s concerns are being taken much too lightly, and the standards being fashioned may well become as volatile as the Tree ordi- nance. He cautioned against retroactive applications . 4 • 0 Bill Barnes indicated that he has been unable to get the punch- list from the Public Works Director and spoke in opposition to retroactive application of the new road standards; he added that he would' ve protested such application at the time the standards were adopted, but it was not discussed. His understanding of the 5/22 meeting was that the roads [constructed under the Davis agmt. ] would be accepted under the Gordon Davis agreement. He has requested that any correspondence to him relative to this issue also be addressed to Gordon Davis, so they may determine where they stand on this issue. Mr. Hayes spoke again, concurring with Mr. Barnes ' s understanding that the roads would be inspected vis-a-vis the agreement between former P.W. Director Sensibaugh and Mr. Davis, not subject to the new standards, but that there would be a list of variances devel- oped. He added, however, that the dialogue at the 5/22 meeting was confusing. Mayor Lilley suggested that Council discuss, as soon as possible, in closed session, the legal issue involving this matter before giving specific direction to staff, and further Council discus- sion followed. Mr. Windsor asked about the status of the punchlist, and Mr. Luke responded that the punchlist is drafted and hasn' t yet been re- leased, pending Council' s review of the roads situation at this meeting; he added that, having heard Council ' s dialogue today, he is comfortable with releasing that document. In summary, Mayor Lilley indicated that direction has been given to staff to proceed with a circulation master plan that addresses certain specific issues as far as rural roads; secondly, some direction has been given with regard to an interim traffic engi- neering study to identify unsafe areas and make recommendations for posting and guardrails that can be implemented in the mean- time for the protection of the public . Councilman Nimmo asked Mr. Luke to clarify the guidance he has received from the City Council as it relates to the Gordon Davis checklist issue and the requirements resulting from the submis- sion of precise plans . Mr. Luke responded that a uniform criteria will be applied to all existing roads which are not taken into the City-maintained system. The same policy will be applied to both precise plan roads and to Mr. Davis' s roads . That policy is : Staff will try to meet the minimum City stan- dards . But, the Public Works Director is authorized to use some discretion in meeting the standard criteria where physical condi- tions of the road would cause exceptionally onerous requirements on any party. 5 Councilman Nimmo asked the record to show that the guidance Mr. Luke feels he has received from Council does not reflect his views . Following further Council discussion regarding the sub- ject of discretion in applying the standards, Mr. Nimmo expressed opposition to retroactive application until the Council has had closed session discussion on the matter. Mr. Montandon indicated he would gather information to determine if there are grounds for a closed session on this subject. Motion: To adjourn by Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson; passed unanimously. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5 : 25 P.M. MINUTES RECORDED BY: Cindy Wilkins Admin. Secy. /Dep. City Clerk 6