Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 08/11/1987
a � • CINDY WILKINS DEPUTY CITY CLERK • NOTE: THERE WILL BE A CLOSED COUNCIL SESSION AT 6 :00 P.M. IN THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOURTH FLOOR CLUB ROOM REGARDING: * Litigation * Labor Negotiations * Personnel Matters A G F N P A ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM AUGUST 11 , 1987 7:30 P. M. J RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION • * Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. * A person may speak for three (3) minutes. If a group has a spokesperson, the spokesperson may speak for five (5) minutes. * No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so. * No one may speak more than twice on any item. * Council members may question any speaker ; the speaker may respond; but after the alloted time has expired, may not initiate further discussion. * The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call City Council Comment (Approximate Time - 30 Minutes) COMMUNITY FORUM The City Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and comments from you the citizen. The public comment period is provided to receive comments from the public on matters other than scheduled • agenda items. To increase the effectiveness of Community Forum, the following rules will be enforced: 1 • * A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum, unless Council authorizes an extension. * All remarks shall be addressed to Council as a whole and not to any individual member thereof. * No questions shall be asked of a Council Member or City staff without permission of the Mayor. * No person shall be allowed to make slanderous, profane, impertinent, or personal remarks against any Council Member. * Any person desiring to submit written statements may do so by forwarding to Council, prior to the Council Meeting, nine (9) copies to the City Clerk by 5 :00 p.m. on the Wednesday preceeding the Council Meeting. A. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar , are considered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed be- low. There will be no separate discussion of these items. A member of the Council or public may, by request, have any item removed from the Consent Agenda, which shall then be added to and taken up at the end of the "New Business" section of the agenda. 1. Approval of Minutes of the City Council Meeting of July 28, 1987 2. Authorization for Late Claim Acceptance for Augustine Hyde by Rosalie Hyde 3. Authorization for Parks and Recreation Department to Solicit Bids - Parks Utility Vehicle 4. Atascadero Police Facility: A. Authorization to Enter into Agreement with Schenberger , Taylor , Mc Cormick, & Jeckner for Real Estate Appraisal Report of Beno' s Property at 5505 El Camino Real - $2, 000 B. Authorization to Enter into Agreement with Ross, Levin, & Mac Intyre Architectural Firm for Inspection/Site Analysis & Report of Existing Beno' s Location for Police Facility Suitability 5. Authorization to Enter into Agreement with Schenberger , Taylor , Mc Cormick, & Jeckner for Real Estate Appraisal Reports on Various City-Owned and Private Properties (Atascadero Lakeside Properties) 6 . Approval of Tentative Tract Map 14-87 - 9505 El Camino Real - Subdivision of four Parcels Totaling 5. 5 Acres into Eight Lots (Two of which will be further divided into commercial condominium units) - Hendrix 2 • 7. Approval of Tentative Lot Line Adjustment 12-87 - 7503 Carmelita/ 7505 Curbaril - Bench/Stanley/Central Coast Engineering 8. Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment 8-87 - 9351-9385 Musselman - Norton/Cuesta Engineering 9. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 13-86 - 7300 San Gregorio Road - Langille/Daniel Stewart B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES/REPORTS (Approximate Time - 5 Minutes) 1. Consideration of Road Abandonment on a Portion of Curbaril Avenue - Gray: A. Public Hearing B. Resolution 81-87 - Vacating a Portion of Curbaril Avenue Right-of-Way (Adjoining Parcel 1, PM 14-80) (9404 Curbaril Ave) (Approximate Time - 15 Minutes) 2. General Plan Amendment 2B-87 and Zone Change 5-87 - • 8430 Santa Rosa Road - Messer/Cuesta Engineering: A. Public Hearing B. Resolution 85-87 - Approving Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map from Suburban Residential Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family (1 Acre Minimum Lot Size) (Including Extension of Urban Services Line) C. Ordinance 156 - Amending Official Zoning Maps from Residential Suburban to Residential Single Family, 1 Acre Minimum (FIRST READING) (Approximate Time - 5 Minutes) 3. General Plan Amendment 2E-87 and Zone Change 10-87 - 5599 Traffic Way - Initiated by City of Atascadero (Parks Recreation Dpt) : A. Public Hearing B. Resolution 84-87 - Approving Amendment to the General Plan Text on Open Space and Conservation Element C. Ordinance 157 - Amending Official Zoning Ordinance Relative to Allowed Uses in the Public Zone • (FIRST READING) 3 • (Approximate Time - 20 Minutes) 4. General Plan Amendment 2F-87 - City-Wide - Initiated by the City of Atascadero A. Public Hearing B. Resolution 83-87 - Approving Amendment to the General Plan Text, Land Use Policy #8 - Determinations of Lot Size for Land Divisions, Allowable Densities & Numbers of Animals (Approximate Time - 20 Minutes) 5. Tentative Parcel Map 5-87 - 8925 Atascadero Avenue - Proposal to Allow Subdivision of 1.72 Acres into Three Lots of 21,805, 21, 788 & 20 ,280 Square Feet Each, or City Requested Alternative of a Two-Way Lot Division of 31,993 and 31,883 Square Feet Each - Fisher (Cont'd from 4/28/87 City Council Agenda - Consent) (Approximate Time - 10 Minutes) 6. Budgeted Road Improvements for 1987/88 - Status Report C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Approximate Time - 5 Minutes) • 1. Ordinance 155 - Amendment of Zoning Map from Residential Single Family to Commercial Retail - Zone Change 7-87 - 9255 E1 Camino Real - Messer/Cuesta Engineering (SECOND AND FINAL READING) (Cont'd from 7/28/87) D. NEW BUSINESS (Approximate Time - 5 Minutes) 1. Resolution 86-87 - Authorization for Purchase of Replacement Paging System Module - Police and Fire Dispatch Console from Contingency Funds (Approximate Time - 10 Minutes) 2. Award of Used Motor Grader Bid - A-Jay Excavating - 1974 John Deere 570 - $28,500 (Approximate Time - 5 Minutes) 3. Santa Ysabel Road Reconstruction - First Phase A. Approval of Plans and Specificatons B. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Road Reconstruction • 4 • E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager ** NOTE: THERE WILL BE A CLOSED SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON MONDAY, AUGUST 17, 1987 AT 5 : 00 P.M. IN THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOURTH FLOOR CLUB ROOM REGARDING: * NEGOTIATIONS REGARDING REAL ESTATE ACQUISITION • 5 +} • CITY COUNCIL CLOSE ESSION ITEM - � JELL-Y- -9, 1987 C 0 U N MEETING TO: City Council Members July 24 , 1987 FROM: Michael Shelton City Manager SUBJECT: CITY MANAGER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION BACKGROUND Last year , in amending my agreement, at my request Section 20 was added, which provides for an annual evaluation by the City Council. The section states, "This evaluation shall be based on the duties of the City Manager , as described in Section 2 and mutually agreed upon City Goals and Objectives" . A copy of last year ' s goals and objectives and Section 2 of the agreement are attached. EVALUATION PURPOSE The purposes of an annual evaluation are as follows: * Systematic and objective mechanism to evaluate the performance of the City Manager . * Means to clarify performance expectations with City Council and focusing the City Manager ' s attention to Council priorities and maxamizing effectiveness of the City Manager . * Conduit of improved communications. * Affirm those performance characteristics that are desired by the City Council and to identify those that are less desirable. PROCESS Attached are handouts of a City Manager ' s evaluation process presented at a recent League of California Cities Channel Counties Division Workshop held in Solvang. The workshop was attended by Council Member Borgeson and myself. The first item proposes an evaluation process format and the second is a prepared evaluation form to be used by the Council. RECOMMENDATION 1. July 28 , 1987 - Meeting with Council for establishment of evaluation process and format. 2. August 11, 1987 ---Review with Council on accomplishments of F.Y. 1986/87 Goals and Objectives - City Council prepares evaluation forms - Mayor aggregates date. 3 3. August 25, 1987 - City Council reviews results, developes consensus, and holds evaluation session with City Manager . ALTERNATIVES 1. Council may engage a consultant to formulate, process, and conduct an evaluation. 2. Council may modify the proposed process and/or evaluation form criteria. MS:kv file: mcmper TO: City Council Members October 30 , 1986 FROM: Mike Shelton, City Manager SUBJECT: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES In an effort to establish a work achievement program and to establish goals and objectives for Council evaluation at the end of the fiscal year , I have compiled a listing of what I believe are the material achievements I will be expending my energy on to accomplish or assist/monitor in the upcoming fiscal year . Though many of the objectives came from the adopted budget work program, Council input and evaluation is sincerely welcome. 1. Complete Phase 1 of comprehensive re-evaluation of the General Plan (refer to attached work program) . 2. In conjunction with Chamber of Commerce and Business Improvement Association, establish an action plan and present to respective authorizing bodies to enhance economic development in the downtown area. 3. Complete zoning amendments by December, 1986: Hillside standards, precise plan findings, architectural standards, sign standards, tree criteria, and density bonus elimination. 4. Complete $5 million capital improvement public works program for current fiscal year in accordance with adopted budget •(Involves 51 projects or major purchases) . 5. Complete agreement with County, select Architect, and issue bids to initiate construction of police facility. 6. Complete Atascadero Lake Feasibility Study by December 31, 1986. Complete plans and specifications for lake improvement by May 1, 1987, and award construction bid by June 30, 1987 . 7. Complete construction of Phase II grant ($50 , 000) for picnic facilities, playground equipment, and additional irrigation by June 1, 1982. Administer and oversee construction of Paloma Creek Park restrooms in accordance with City plans and specifications. 8. Work with School District to explore feasibility of establishing City/School District recreation joint powers authority to enhance availability of recreational facilities for City and School District. 9. Oversee construction of new satellite fire station number 2 - and initiate full operation by May 1, 1987. 10. Prepare wild land fire management program and fire station 1 master plan by May, 1987 . 11. Prepare detailed 5-year C.I.P. budget for Council review by -_ May 1, 1987. Prepare operating budget for Council adoption by July 1, 1987 . 12. Analyze and recommend replacement of Finance Department data processing reporting, budgeting, business license, and fixed assets system by January, 1987 (recommended by independent auditor) . 13. As part of the recreation brochure, enhance communication to the community by submittal of tri-annual community newsletter informing citizens of City happenings, achievements, and other items of interest. 14. Finalize by December , 1986 , and present for City Council adoption, a City Emergency Disaster Response Plan. In accordance with the plan, conduct by March, 1987, a mock disaster exercise. 15. Establish with all Department Heads, individual performance objectives of accomplishments during fiscal year 1986/87. Review with each Department Head quarterly in October , January, April, and July performance progress. 16. Promote Council/staff communication by returning calls to Council Members within 4-hours of receipt, maintaining an open door policy, and preparation of informative Council biweekly newsletter. Maintain objectivity with all Council Members. 17. Continue employee relations management style. Methods include quarterly meetings for all employees, employee newsletter , employee of the month recognition, and semi- annual attendance at department staff meetings and team management. 18. Assist Public Works Director , Bond Counsel, Contract Engineer, and Bond Underwriter in presenting to City Council Assessment District formation proceedings to meet the November 1, 1986 Cease and Desist deadline. MS: kv File: Goalsl 2 Resolution n �l - co AGREEMENT Agreement made this 18th day of March , 1985 , between the City of Atascadero , a Municipal corporation , hereinafter referred to as Employer , and Michael B. Shelton , hereinafter referred to as Employee. TERM OF EMPLOYMENT 1. The Employer hereby employs the Employee and the Employee hereby accepts employment with Employer beginning on the 8th day of April , 1985 , until terminated as herein provided. DUTIES OF EMPLOYEE 2 . The Employee shall serve as the City Manager of the City of Atascadero. He shall do and perform all services , acts or things necessary or advisable to fulfill the duties of the City Manager as set forth in the Atascadero City Code and the laws of the State of California and such other duties and tasks as may be assigned to him by the City Council of Employer. He shall at all times be subject to the direction of and to the policies established by the City Council of the City of Atascadero. 3 . The Employee agrees that to the best of his ability and experience he will at all times loyally and conscientiously perform all of the duties and obligations required of him either expressly or implicitly by the terms of this agreement . CC:•?PENSATION OF EMPLOYEE 4 . As compensation for his services hereunder , the Emplovee shall receive a monthly salary of $4 , 160.20, payable in accordance with pay practices of the City, prorated for any partial employment period. Employee will receive compensation increase equal to that awarded to Management employees on July 1 , 1985 . After July 1 , 1985 , Employee ' s compensation will be renewed annually thereafter. i CITY MANAGER EVALUATION PROCESS Step I: ; Agree on process to be followed Establish evaluation criteria Step II: Prepare evaluation format ` Sten III Councilmembers complete evaluation forms . City Manager prepares list of accomplishments �Y ` and goals for the next year f n / S Step IV: Data. is aggregated by Mayor/consultant Y Step V: Council meets to review results, developconsensus where possible and prepare strategy Step VI: Evaluation session led by Mayor 1 Step VII: Follow up session in 90 - 120 days THE CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE In Local Government 420 Waverley Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 .• (415)327-0350 �1 CITY MANAGER EVALUATION Please fill this out and bring it to the City Council meeting on March 4, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. Purpose: To evaluate the City Manager, whose ,fob it is to provide professional, efficient, and responsive administration of City resources - and department operations, always within policy established by the City Council. (Circle the appropriate response) STAFF SUPPORT FOR COUNCIL, COMMISSION, COMMITTEES t 1. .Does the City Manager plan and organize work that carries out the polici s of the Council? Most� ten .r,'Of� n Somet imes Never 2. Does the City Manager effectively communicate the Council's position - to staff and to the public? Mos 'often Olen Somellmes Never 3. Does the City Manager insure that the Council, Commission and Committees get information in a timely manner, well organized and eas o read? Mos ' ften Of, SomA imes Never 4. Does the City Manager (and his staff) provide sufficient information and analysis of issues which are before the Council? Mo��t¢ften Often Some imes Never 5. Are meetings scheduled well and the ri ht people notified? Mo t often O#n Som imes Never S. Does the Council get information in a timely manner? ;Mo often Offfen SomE#imes Never 7. Is the material produced written clearly with recommendations cle ly articulated? Mcoften Of fin Sometimes Never S. Is the City Manager responsive to the Council's needs? M0111 often Ofn Sometimes Never PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 1. Is the City Manager providing effective leadership and motivation for mployees? Mo often Iten SO4 imes Never 2. Have vacant positions been fillede�xpp�editiously? Molt often Often S��times Never 3. From the Council' s point of view, does the performance of key staff reflect the expectations of the Counc'1? Mo often Often Som imes Never 4. Are any parts of the organization overstaffed, understaffed, or not adequately productiveinthe Council's opinion? ysLS ��t ti+� CA PROBLEM SOLVING 1. Has the City Manager either personally, or through direction to sta�, helped the Co l solve complex City problems? Mo often 0 Sometimes Never 2. Has the City Manager offered creative ideas and solutions? Mos1(¢ften Often Sometimes Never 3. Has the City Manager implemented new ideas of the Council in an eff c ve manner? Mo! ten 04en Sometimes Never 4. Does the City Manager fight for his position and then relent when a Council decision is made? Mos often Of', rl Som irnes Never COMMUNITY AWARENESS 1. Has the City Manager demonstrated a sensitivity to the concerns of community groups who appear before tM Council? M044 often Oft�n Sorn*mes Never 2. Does the staff handle complaints and requests for service appropriately? M041 often ON. Sometimes Never 3. Does the City Manager respond to requests from citizens with whom he is in contact as the Council would like? m4lloften 0f n Sometimes Never MAJOR PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS 1. Are major projects and programs on target for the current year? Yes No If no, which ones are you concerned about? Plc:n ', VI-11 130C-01r1 Colt CLC- t+,,tn G7:.�} Swrvrv�2i ��C�yv� ���C:• ItL . �� sick 2. Has the City Manager kept the Council up-to-date on changing conditions and problems? Motlt kten 04 en Sometimes Never K, -3- • 3. Does the City Manager utilize prudent practices in the preparation and administration of the City' operating budget consistent with guidelines adopted by the Council? MoSuRten Ofien Sometimes Never COMMUNICATIONS r 1. Has the City Manager been effective in helping the Council and the staff communicate wit the community? Mos 'often Of4en Somet�rnes Never 2. Does the City Manager maintain effective communication with the Council and a good systern of reporting on staff plans and active ies? Molten Ofen Sometimes Never 3. Is the City Manager available to the Council, either personally or throe h g � designated su ordinates \ M041 Nten Off . Offen Sometimes Never 4. Is the City Manager energetic, enthusiastic, cooperative and unbiased regarding ac ns and decisi ns concerning the City? Mott often DU Some�imes Never ADDITIONAL AREAS 1. Is the City Manager effective in dealing with other levels of government and neighbo ing communities? Mo 4(often Oft n Sometimes Never 2. Is the City Manager active in professional and personal development activities. Mo ften Often Sometimes Never 3. Does the City Manager handle crises or unexpected situations adequately? Mow often OfW, Sometimes Never FUTURE PLANNING What specific (and hopefully quantifiable) objectives do you wish to propose for the City Manager for the next year? 1110 7 i4Em v) V '8, • ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 28, 1987 Atascadero Administration Building The regular meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Norris followed by the Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Present: Council Members Borgeson, Bourbeau, Handshy, Mackey and Mayor Norris Absent: None COUNCIL COMMENT: Council Members Borgeson, Mackey, and Norris commented on their • attendance 'to the. July League of California Cities Conference in Monterey which emphasized on Council leadership and service to the public. The consideration of direct election of the Mayor position by the voter versus City Council determination was discussed. Council directed that an article be initiated through the newspaper as to the position of Mayor and alternate choices for appointment, fol- lowed by a public survey to determine public input on the alter- natives. PUBLIC COMMENT: No public comment was received. A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Special Council Meeting Minutes - June 30 , 1987 2. Approval of Regular Council Meeting Minutes - July 14 , 1987 3. Approval of City Treasurer ' s Report - June, 1987 4. Approval of Finance Director ' s Report - June, 1987 5. Denial of Claim by Paul Recore for Damages Totaling $2, 666 .77 6. Authorization for Mayor to Enter into Annual Lease Agreement with Richard Oswald for : • A. Duck Hut Concession, Atascadero Lake B. Pop' s Tackle Shop Concession, Atascadero Lake 7. Report on Disposition of Johnie Jordan' s Parcel Description 7905 Carmelita (Cont'd from 7/14/87) 8. Resolution 77-87 - Adoption of Sewer Assessments - Sewer • Sanitation District #4 (Separado/Cayucos Roads) & Placement on 1987/88 Property Tax Rolls 9. City Council to Authorize Administrative Services Director to Enter into Agreement with Cooperative Personnel Services for Personnel Testing Services 10. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 19-87 - 2800 Ardilla Rd Resubdivision of 6 Parcels Totaling 30 .26 Acres into 6 Lots (4 at 3.48 Acres Ea, 1 at 6 .96 Acres and 1 at 9 .38 Acres) Ruskovich/Dovica/Central Coast Engineering 11. Authorization for Time Extension to Tentative Tract Map 820801 :1 —Portion of Lot 46 , Block 40 (between Morro Road & San Marcos Road) - Time Extension to Allow Completion of Tentative Tract Map Conditions - Ibsen/Dan Stewart Engineering 12. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 28-86 - 8500 Corriente Road Dodson/Twin Cities Engineering 13. Acceptance of Final Tract Map 27-86 - 7500 Morro Road Golden West Development/North Coast Engineering MOTION: Council Member Mackey moves to approve Consent Calendar • Items, as presented; Council Member Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries unanimously B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES/REPORTS: B-1. Cayucos Road Maintenance District 1987/88 Assessments Public Hearing - Resolution 79-87 Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director gives staff report stating that the final costs to reconstruct the existing roadway, due to unsuitable soil conditions and resulting mitigating measures caused a cost overrun of 71% over the contractor ' s estimate, or an additional $357. 00 + 10% Administrative Fee totaling $501 per parcel. Sandy Lees, Maintenance District resident, requests Council to waive the City' s administrative fees due to additional costs imposed on property owners. Council Member Bourbeau directed staff to revise future Mainten- ance Agreements, emphasizing that the costs documented are esti- mates only, and that property owners are responsible for any cost overruns. Motion: Council Member Borgeson moves to approve Resolution 79-87 , as amended, deleting the 10% City administrative fee, and that the remaining $357 per property owner assessment be disbursed over a two (2) year period; Council Member Mackey seconds; Motion carries by 3-2 roll call vote, with Council Members Bourbeau and Handshy opposed. B-2. Ordinance 155 - Amendment to Zoning Map from Residential Single Family to Commercial Retail (FIRST READING) - Zone Change 7-87 - 9255 El Camino Real - Messer/Cuesta Engineering - Public Hearing Henry Engen, Community Development Director, gives staff report stating that the applicant is requesting to combine two parcels to create a six acre site and to change the present zoning for commercial development, which would allow a cluster of commercial units. It is clarified that out of the total 400 acres of commercial zoning designations within the City, approximately 30% is pre- sently undeveloped. Mr. John Falkenstein, applicant representative, states that the combination of the proposed sites would allow a more desirable type of development with depth instead of a strip-like project. Mr . George Carla, adjacent property owner , requests a condition be applied to this proposal, if approved, to vacate the right-of- way onto Pino Solo, as previously agreed to by applicant in Planning Commission. Also, that combination of the sites would mitigate development problems existing on the rear piece of property due to its land-locked characteristics. In response to Sarah Gronstad' s (citizen) and Nina Marble' s, (adjacent property owner) concerns, Henry Engen clarified the Negative Declaration document, in that a project on this site could be developed without significant environmental impacts to the area through conditions. Also, the site is surrounded by other development and would not be affected by the Economic Analysis Study. Council discusses the desire to review a specific site plan prior to action on this item versus developer inability to confirm a specific site plan without a confirmed viable site. MOTION: Council Member Handshy moves to approve Ordinance 155 ; Council Member Mackey Seconds; motion carries 3-2 (Council Members Borgeson & Bourbeau opposed) MOTION: Council Member Handshy moves to approve Ordinance 155 to be read by title only; Council Member Mackey seconds; Motion carries unanimously MOTION: Council Member Handshy moves to Require the Deletion of Pino Solo Road Right-of-Way as a condition of approval to the Site Plan; Council Member Mackey Seconds; Motion carries unanimously Meeting is adjourned at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9 :05 p.m. B-3 RESOLUTION 71-87 - CONFIRMING WEED ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS AND PLACEMENT OF ASSESSMENTS ON 1987/88 PROPERTY TAX ROLLS - PUBLIC HEARING Captain Rolland Snow, Fire Department, reviews abatement noticing procedures (through mail only) , and that out of 3 ,200 parcels noticed, there was a 94% compliance. Due to Mr. Doug Lewis' testimony of not receiving a weed abate- ment notice through the mail and subsequent $16 abatement charge, Captain Snow will review distribution lists to determine assess- ment viability. MOTION: Council Member Handshy moves to approve Resolution 71-87 ; Council Member Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries 4-1 (Mayor Norris opposed) MOTION: Council Member Bourbeau moves to Adjourn the City Council Meeting and Reconvene as the Atascadero County Sanitation District; Council Member Borgeson Seconds; Motion carries unanimously. C. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT C-1 RESOLUTION 78-87 - ESTABLISHMENT OF 1987/88 SEWER ASSESSMENTS - SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT #3 (MARCHANT WAY - LOTS 66-87 , BLOCK JC AND PLACEMENT OF ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTY TAX ROLLS - PUBLIC HEARING Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director , states that this item is not a protest hearing, but is required by the County for place- ment of a $428 per property assessment onto the 1987/88 Property Tax Rolls. One letter was received by the Department in protest to the fee . • No public comment given on this item. MOTION: Council Member Bourbeau moves to adopt Resolution 78-87 ; Council Member Borgeson Seconds; Motion carries unanimously C-2 RESOLUTION 72-87 - ESTABLISHMENT OF 1987/88 ATASCADERO SANITATION DISTRICT SEWER SERVICE CHARGES AND PLACEMENT OF ASSESSMENTS ON THE 1987/88 PROPERTY TAX ROLLS - PUBLIC HEARING MOTION: Council Member Handshy moves to Approve Resolution 72-87; Council Member Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries unanimously MOTION: Council Member Bourbeau moves to adjourn from the Atascadero Sanitation District and reconvene as the Atascadero City Council; Council Member Borgeson seconds; Motion carries unanimously D. NEW BUSINESS D-1 RESOLUTION 76-87 - PROPOSED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - ATASCADERO POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION - FISCAL YEAR 1987/88 David Jorgensen, Administrative Services Director , gave a brief review of priority changes to the Memorandum of Understanding. MOTION: Council Member Handshy moves to adopt Resolution 76-87 , Council Member Borgeson seconds; Motion carries unanimously D-2 RESOLUTION 75-87 - MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION —CLERICAL BARGAINING UNIT FISCAL YEAR 1987/88 , 1988789 AND 989/90 MOTION: Council Member Handshy moves. to adopt Resolution 75-87; Council Member Mackey seconds; Motion carries unanimously D-3 RESOLUTION 74-87 - MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION - GENERAL SERVICES BARGAINING UNIT - FISCAL YEAR 1987/88 , 1988/89 & 1989/90 MOTION: Council Member Handshy moves to adopt Resolution 74-87 Council Member Borgeson seconds; Motion carries unanimously D-4 AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH COMMUNITY TRANSIT SERVICES FOR ANNUAL DIAL-A-RIDE CONTRACT Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director , reviews the proposed agreement and that the increase of 5. 5% is due to increased operating hours. Betsy Blank is commended for her management of the Dial-A-Ride service. As a bid process was not performed this year , staff is directed by Council to perform the bid process for Dial-A-Ride services prior to the next contract renewal. MOTION: Council Member Bourbeau moves to authorize annual agreement with Community Transit Services; Council Member Mackey seconds; Motion carries unanimously D-5 AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE THREE POLICE DEPARTMENT PATROL CARS THROUGH STATE COOPERATIVE PURCHASE PLAN Chief Bud Mc Hale states that the cars requested will replace three cars with over 100 ,000 miles. The cars are available presently in a "black and white" color scheme (opposed to the "blue and white" ordered previously) . The total cost for the cars will not exceed $37 , 000. MOTION: Council Member Borgeson moves to approve the purchase of three (3) Patrol Cars through State Cooperative Purchase Plan; Council Member Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries unanimously D-6 DISCUSSION OF PRESENT ZONING CONSTRAINTS TO LOT 2, BLOCK 1 EAGLET #2 (8485 EL CORTE DRIVE) - ROBINSON Henry Engen, Community Development Director , reviews recent authorization for a zone change from RSF-Z 1-1/2 to 2-1/2 acre minimum to RMF-4 (PD6) with development elevation limitations, which encompassed the above property and rendered it undevelop- able. The above property was included in the zone change bound- ary, as the Zone Change applicant had stipulated a desire to pur- chase the Robinson property. Staff suggests alternatives: A) Mr . Robinson submit a develop- ment proposal for a zone change that will allow development of his parcels; or B) Council initiate reverting the zoning to its original zoning. Mr. Engen further suggests that if Council initiates reverting the zoning to its original zoning, that the fees be waived, but if Council authorizes Mr. Robinson to submit a separate zoning proposal, the fees be charged. Mr. Steve Cool, applicant representative, requests direction from Council to address concerns, and requests presenting a proposal to staff rather than reverting back to original zoning. Discussion ensued between City Attorney and Council as to staff' s alternatives. MOTION: Council Member Borgeson moves to direct staff to initiate a Zone Change to revert Parcels 1 and 2 to RSF-Z 1-1/2 to 2-1/2 acre minimum, and to waive City processing fees for this City-Initiated Zone Change; Council Member Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries 3-2 (Council Member Handshy and Mayor Norris opposed) D-7 RESOLUTION 80-87 - ESTABLISHMENT OF ROAD MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 86-1 (FALDA ROAD) ASSESSMENTS AND PLACEMENT OF ASSESSMENTS ON THE 1987/88 PROPERTY TAX ROLLS Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director , states that Falda Road reconstruction costs were less than originally estimated, and that Council may amend the assessments with regards to adminis- trative fees. No public comment was given on this item. MOTION: Council Member Borgeson moves to adopt Resolution 80-87 ; Council Member Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries unanimously E-1 CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Council Member Bourbeau will be absent from the August 11, 1987 Council Meeting. FREEWAY SIGNS Council discusses needs for clarification of freeway sign requirements in the Zoning Ordinance and Conditional Use Permit alternatives . MOTION: Council Member Bourbeau Directs staff to present at a future Council Meeting, alternatives for revising the Sign Ordinance and alternatives on final authority on sign permits; Council Member Mackey seconds; Motion carries unanimously E-3 CITY CLERK Boyd Sharitz, City Clerk, introduces Karen Vaughan, who will replace Deputy City Clerk Cindy Wilkins during her maternity leave. E-5 CITY MANAGER Michael Shelton, City Manager, reviews recent conversations with Mr. Hal Hays, et.al. regarding ownership/maintenance of various roads within the city limits. A meeting is proposed in the near future with Mr. Hays, representatives from the Las Encinas area, and the City Attorney. Jeff Jorgensen, City Attorney, clarifies that he does not know if a "Lewis License Agreement" document exists and that the City staff does not have this document which Mr . Hays requested a copy in conjunction with City road ownership. MOTION: Council Member Borgeson moves to adjourn the City Council Meeting at 10 : 20 p.m. and reconvene into Closed Session in the fourth floor Club Room regarding Personnel and Real Property Negotiations; Council Member Mackey seconds; Motion carries 4-1 (Handshy opposed) A • M E M O R A N D U M To: Mike Shelton, City Manager From: David G. Jorgensen, Admin. Svcs. Director Date:. August 5, 1987 Subject: Claim of Rosalie Hyde for Augustine Hyde RECOMMENDATION City Council approve the Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim submitted on behalf of Augustine Hyde. BACKGROUND Claimant, a minor , was a passenger in a car and injured in a healon collision. Claimant states inadequacy of roadway caused the accident. Our claims adjustors, Carl Warren & Co. • have reviewed the Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim and recommend we accept it as it was properly completed signed and should be considered timely. • 9111/7 14-d • M E M 0 R N D U M August 3 , 1987 To : City Council Via: Mike Shelton , City Manager From: Bob Best , Parks and Recreation Director Subject : Utility Vehicle Bid Authorization BACKGROUND As part of the FY 1987-88 Budget , Council approved a utility vehicle for the Parks and Recreation Department . • RECOMMENDATION Authorize staff to go to bid for a Parks Utility Vehicle. FISCAL IMPACT A total of $9 ,800 was approved in the budget for this vehicle . • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Manager Mike Shelton and City Council Members FROM: Chief of Police SUBJ : Police Facility Site Selection (Beno ' s - 5505 El Camino Real) DATE : August 4, 1987 RECOMMENDATION/COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: By motion, authorize staff to : 1) Enter into an agreement with the firm of Schenberger, Taylor, McCormick and Jecker for real estate appraisal services to include a narrative, in-depth appraisal report of the Beno' s property at 5505 E1 Camino Real . ($2, 000) 2) Enter into an agreement with the architectural firm of Ross , Levin and MacIntyre for services to include : an inspection, analysis and report of the existing Beno ' s building to determine the suitability and potential use for public safety purposes . (Not to exceed $2 , 000 . ) BACKGROUND: • Council will recall that during the closed session at our last City Council Meeting, staff direction was to seek bids for a professional property appraisal of Beno ' s at 5505 El Camino Real . Since that time, three (3) San Luis Obispo county real estate appraisal firms submitted bids for the services indicated. The bid amounts were $4, 000 , $3, 000 and $2, 000 with Schenberger' s firm representing the lowest amount. Mr. Schenberger said he could complete the process in about one month, and based upon his excellent reputation as a professional, I do not hesitate to recommend him as our appraiser on this project . As suggested in the recommendation, it is also proposed that we contract with the firm of Ross, Levin and MacIntyre (R L & M) for a special (outside the scope of the previous contract) analysis and report on the Beno ' s , facility. The purpose of this additional study is to provide assurance that we have not acquired a building which may be unsuitable for public safety use due to structural, design, and possible seismic deficiencies . This service will be offered by R L & M at the same hourly rate as previously agreed to, and the total amount will not exceed $2, 000 . • To further insure that the Beno ' s building (built in 1960) is in good, useable condition, Henry Engen has assigned Bob Fielding to complete a preliminary inspection of the facility plus study the original plans which were recently supplied to us . I believe the steps recommended will serve to assist us in making a determination as to whether or not we should proceed further- in the acquisition of this particular property. It seems to me we should not rule out option #2 (Grinnell/Hempenius property) until we are sure as to our direction with the Beno' s site . FISCAL IMPACT : As indicated, cost of the appraisal will be $2,000 while the architect 's fees are proposed as "not to exceed $2, 000" . Council authorization to expend $4, 000 of the police facility fund is hereby requested. For your consideration. . . RICHARD H. McHALE RHM: sb cc : Henry Engen • SC ENBERCERPI' yL. R, MCCORMICK & JEC. . E 0 n C O R P O R A T E D Real Estate Appraisers. Consultants and Investment Analysts July 30, 1987 Mr . Bud McHale Chief of Police City of Atascadero P . 0. Box 747 Atascadero , CA 93423 RE : Appraisal Proposal Beno ' s - 5505 E1 Camino Real Atascadero, California Dear Chief McHale : As we discussed on the telephone yesterday , I have reviewed my schedule and estimated the amount of time required to complete an appraisal of the above referenced property. Summertime is terrible with vacation schedules among the staff, as well as my own. I would estimate that the best I could do, would be to complete an appraisal would require about 1 month from your authorization to proceed. A detailed inspection of the property, as well as research and analysis of all the factors influencing value , along with the preparation of a narrative style report , would take an esti- mated 2 .5 days of time . Our basic rate of $800 per day would indicate a fee of $2 ,000. Should this proposal for fee and time , meet with your approval, picaSB let iuc kiivW. A preliminary title report , along with the information about any existing leases would be necessary to complete a profes- sional appraisal. Thanks for your consideration. Richard L. Schenberger 1306 HIGUERA STREET • SAN LUIS OBISPO • CALIFORNIA 9 93401 • (805) 544-2472 • • The Atascadero City Council, at their regular Council Meeting of approved the Schenberger , Taylor , Mc Cormick and Jecker July 30 , 1987 Appraisal Proposal as an agreement to perform professional :services . CITY OF ATASCADERO BY : BARBARA NORRIS Mayor ATTEST : BOYD C . SHARITZ CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT : MICHAEL SHELTON City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM : JEFFREY G . JORGENSEN City Attorney M E M O R A N D U M August 13, 1987 To : City Council Via: Mike Shelton , City Manager From: Bob Best , Parks and Recreation Director,. Subject : Property Appraisals RECOMMENDATION Authorize Staff to enter into an agreement with the firm of Schenberger, Taylor, McCormick, and Jecker for real estate services to include a narrative , in-depth appraisal report of the following properties : 1 . APN 31-361-08 , Lot 33 of Block JC , City of Atascadero 2 . APN 31-361-21 , Lots , 1 ,2 , and 32 Block JC , City of Atascadero Owner : Mr. Eugene Mumford 3 . APN 31-361-15 , Lot 31 of Block JC 4 . APN 31-361-03 , Lot 4 of Block JC 5. APN 31-361-18 , Lot 5 of Block JC 6. APN 31-361-12 , Lot 29 of Block JC 7 . APN 31-361-11 , Lot 30 of Block JC Owner of Record (3-7 ) : Phil and Shirley Guidry 8 . APN 31-261-18 , Lot 3 of Block JC Owner of Record: E.L. Brown In addition , appraisal reports on the following properties currently owned by the City of Atascadero : 1 . APN 56-322-10 , Lot 28 - Block 12 2 . APN 56-322-11 , Lot 29 - Block 12 *Lots 1 & 2 are located on Santa Rosa Rd. 3 . APN 28-092-09 , Northern ptn. , Lot 4 , Block H, Atascadero Colony *Sycamore Road property 4 . APN 29-091-06 *Traffic Way Property BACKGROUND The Atascadero Lake Park Property Ad Hoc Committee has been meeting to discuss financing alternatives to acquire property in the 8000 Block of Amapoa Avenue and Morro Road. In the letter from City Manager Mike Shelton to Council dated July 30 , 1987 , a status report regarding the Atascadero Lake Park property was provided. In this report several revenue sources were considered to assist in financing the purchase of the Lake Park properties . With the exception of the Capistrano lot , the properties currently being considered for sale are listed above . The Capistrano property will be considered for appraisal at a later date . -2- � • FISCAL IMPACT A fee estimate was provided earlier this year for appraisal of these properties , with the exception of the Traffic Way and Sycamore lots . Mr0 Schenberger' s firm provided a fee estimate of $5 ,000 for 20 parcels , which was consistant with other estimates received. The Ad Hoc Committee has recommended the firm of Schenberger , Taylor, McCormick, and Jecker due to their excellent reputation as professionals in their field. • ® � N •3nv � ♦= h O O \•J O CX �r ~ � � , ♦�y O i try. OD ! Q Y T � a .0 V D } O N O Z h V f. M ♦ I a � I O • '`j � - 17 a 9L h CO y '/1 ti �0y3p.�5f1� 0 o z Q \N aI +' -00 '7 N 8 03 3 04 � - Z r - E s = y s i O � T Z >z n rrl � 0 -`. -------! AL .-''• �� �: � gig t --o i t qpW —334-, ---------J �pp M D ANO T O r OmD. . r O aon C$ 001 tt n u ATASCADERO CREEK RESERVATION NO 8 i (MORRO - N 0. 41 •6- � HIGHWAY - = d 0 o '4 >E bn f,1 VA 4 c20 530 02W 9746 N - 14526 zpi ` V H IA i o ONI Oo; �.i7 E $ -U m;a H m 153 49 N w 03 a 1!4' - Z-•i to . e a �." - R:fl n� , O O,ZD p u R c f z = e 1 ifs os • AM u T Ar 53902W 600417501 116.40 p 9445 D ` o 36 O ubi J yS30007'30*W' z" !. p co 199.23 .1 ioaoi qje 60 Ile /40j - - 524 ')UW ZOIn aii 5jea=9y/ m O. S4B lea a c is w O yey. �L WO r3o - ymA �;� ' 91.10 •63.21 40 - :0�. 006 ♦g409 •.. •. I D N D Z 7C�0 N D D Lvrid S ,,dossaSSK 69 fz0 s N4�o3 0' S5962Pt� O I17 VI A oo 4 a � N42500E \ o N46 sox o°� •, 10 �� O Z V 120! 0 Cor Roo, 6 0 j'E < < o !o 41 c • �DJZZZ 0� y ro 0 Nv W- sOF rqJ`� cA s ON o� Ob fo to 1 _o N GN 1 V Q ro ro ►v O v ao „ J, N42o00 E $ w /* r a T'o• "i C a O O O �. � O ^1� Zy ` ,A� p �a O •w N ,V� N Q '� ro �T Q (A n;Q a o rn�N N45- t o y m v N55^16' 20" /00= 'A w N st ?*s rc N p a ISO .y e u �' z y4\ �sro 00E ro N640 ad00 qLy• ~O ro �o � � ti W 40 Qw m _6� r- A16 90 O (l ro co os O d: 11 Pss 3s97 v .QTS I sl 6 -q-70 / /2 gg N 61.29 43 ,�e �`ro c0 n T 2 / 124.6.9 F gs �Bs . a _\•, tp Y ? S � 2 d f / N m , z�dr m Z Vl O C7 C D tn/f `�� NTq ROS /°sem 4 0 m 0 ni -71 OD D • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council August 11, 1987 VIA: Michel Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 4c SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map 14-87 LOCATION: 9505 El Camino Real APPLICANT: Rex Hendrix REQUEST: Subdivision of four parcels containing 5.5 acres into eight (8) lots. Two of the lots will be further divided into commercial condominium units. BACKGROUND: • The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter at its July 21, 1987 meeting, and unanimously recommended approval of the request subject to the findings and conditions of approval contained in the attached staff report. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Tentative Tract Map 14-87 per the Planning Commission' s recommendation. HE:ph Enclosure: Staff Report - July 21, 1987 cc: Rex Hendrix Westland Engineering • City of Atascadero Item: B-1 STAFF REPORT • FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: June 16 , 1987 & JULY 211. 1987 BY: Steven L. DeCamp, Senior Planner File No: TTM 14-87 Project Address: 9505 El Camino Real SUBJECT: Subdivision of four parcels containing 5 .5 acres into eight (8) lots. Two of the lots will be further divided into commercial condominium units. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rex Hendrix 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Westland Engineering 3. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5 acres 4. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .CR (Commercial Retail) • 5. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lots 1,2, 3, & 8 - Commercial Lots 4,5,6, & 7 - Vacant 6 . General Plan Designation. . . .Retail Commercial 7. Environmental Status. . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted May 1, 1987 B. ANALYSIS: The application before the Commission proposes the subdivision of four parcels containing 5 . 5 acres into eight (8) parcels con- taining between 0 . 27 acres, and 0 .99 acres. The property pro- posed for subdivision is located in a Commercial Retail (CR) zoning district. There is no minimum lot size specified by the ordinance for parcels in this zone. Minimum lot sizes are deter- mined by market factors and design constraints (e.g. parking re- quirements, site configuration, etc. ) . In addition to the division of the property, this application proposes the creation of twelve commercial condominium units. Lots 1 and 2 contain existing commercial units which will be con- verted to individual ownership. Thus, in each case, the commer- cial units will be individually owned, with parking and other open areas held in common. The size, location and complexity of this project raise various issues of concern. First, because this project involves both the subdivision of real property and the creation of airspace condo- miniums, filing the final map will be relatively complex. For this reason, it is anticipated that multiple final maps will need to be filed. Approval of the tentative map will be conditioned to require submittal of a phasing plan to guide the filing of the final maps. The required phasing plan will also address the phasing of public improvements (or suitable securities) . This will be necessary because of the significant improvements that will be required on this site' s multiple frontages. The project site abuts property zoned for single family residen- tial development on Las Lomas Avenue and Principal Avenue east of Pino Solo. To mitigate the impact of commercial development on these residential areas, a twenty-five (25) foot building setback should be required along the street frontages of proposed Lots 5 and 6 . With this setback, and a landscaped berm or buffer behind the sidewalk, anticipated effects in the residential areas should be minimized. The setback line will be shown on the final map to insure notification of prospective purchasers/developers. The scale of the tentative map makes it difficult to determine the setbacks between existing buildings and proposed property lines. To insure conformance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code, the subdivider will be required to submit a map indicating these proposed setback distances. Minor modifications to proposed lot lines can then be made, if necessary, to avoid costly building modification that might otherwise be required. Finally, the configuration of the proposed lots and access drive- ways requires that reciprocal ingress/egress and parking agree- ments be established between all proposed parcels. This can be accomplished through the CC&R' s established for the condominiums and deed restrictions for the other lots. This will insure that the site' s circulation and parking works in a comprehensive man- ner and not as separate, fragmented units. Each parcel will, how- ever , need to provide adequate on-site parking for the condomin- ium units. Attention to these items, along with the standard road improvement requirements, will result in a project that will function properly and can be developed in an appropriate manner . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Tract Map 14-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit C and Conditions of Approval in Ex- hibit D. ' 0 EXt� 1131T A CIT A .1�. :.. . . Y OF ATASCADERO L oca4con i Zo#1 lK,p r leu'r e r a979- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -rTm 1.4 -87 DEPARTMENT 1 M (PD ' C , p i CR GT T 61 Gztk in o Czc xl r CS � 69- �Co►�►, CLa,-f'A� } � r , M�LIGrR.j ; auaOEgp a „� �_ ,�cl ... . �� CITY -- - A4i , OF ATASCADERO i a�h-4.7.44 C -t-,•a c4 ti. ra!le �CAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MaP DEPARTMENT TTM 1.4 —87 IF P-T r Uri; c JIM n , 1 �/ Ito ijP1 j G N: 114> "�� 2 ml�"ng � � 1••- /�� :'�."/ O"gygyia� �' w �S �C� m n �aFo�: Yr mk esn���a � ~ '� 5:76 r •.� ifq� �� ��� � < ��n n�lll gg �b z gg 4 6cyl $�Y ox ',1 .0 �,�� s`S•,� .fix, r c t,: .p :�a ply ,��(i ^• � 0 EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval Tentative Tract Map 14-87 (Hendrix/Westland Engineering) June 16, 1987 FINDINGS: 1. The creation of these parcels conforms to the zoning ordinance and the general plan. 2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the recommended conditions of approval, will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development pro- posed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed. 5. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvement will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or that substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474. 6 of the State Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge of waste. 9 0 EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval TTM 14-87 (Hendrix/Westland Engineering) June 16, 1987 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel or its public utility easement prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility easements, pipelines and other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are other building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. Prior to recording any final map, a phasing plan for the final map recording sequence shall be submitted for the review and ac- ceptance of the City Engineer and Community Development Director. Said phasing plan shall include the phasing of the construction of the required public improvements. 4. Prior to recording any final map, a map shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Community Development Director ver- ifying that all existing buildings are set back from proposed property lines a distance not less than that required by the le adopted edition of the Uniform Building Code. 5. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions, and Restric- tions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances and architectural control of all buildings. a. These CC&R' s shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and Community Development Department prior to approval of the final map. b. These CC&R' s shall provide for common ingress, egress, and parking on all driveways and designated parking areas. C. These CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium Owners Association. 6. A reciprocal agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each parcel at the time it is first conveyed, and a note to this effect shall be placed on the final map (s) , covering: a. ingress and egress b. parking C. sewer , water, utilities, and storm water facilities. le7 . A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each parcel at the 0 # time it is first conveyed, and a note to this effect shall be placed on the final map (s) . 8. Submit a drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil engineer , providing for mitigating measures relieving any downstream drain- age problems or alternatively a stormwater detention basin. If a detention basin is selected, then the design shall be based upon a 100 year design storm, site developed, with outflow limited to 10 year design storm, undeveloped site, and as required by the Detention Basin Policy adopted August 12, 1985 . The alternate selected must be acceptable to the Director of Public Works. 9. The fire hydrant located at the intersection of Pino Solo and Principal shall be upgraded to City standards prior to recording any final map. 10. Wastewater disposal shall be by connection to the public sewer . 11. Obtain a sewer connection permit from the Public Works Depart- ment prior to hooking up to the sewer . 12. Sewer annexation fees in the amount established by City ordinance shall be paid prior to recording any final map. 13. A twenty-five (25) foot building setback shall be established along the frontage of the property along Las Lomas Avenue and Principal east of Pino Solo Avenue. Said building setback shall be delineated on any final map for parcels 5 and 6 as shown on the tentative tract map. 14. All signage on the site shall be brought into conformance with approved Conditional Use Permits, the Zoning Ordinance, and other approved plans prior to filing any final maps. 15. Prior to recording any final map (s) , a public facility improvement plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Develop- ment and Public Works Directors for the planting of street trees along the entire frontage of the property along E1 Camino Real. Said plans shall be for the installation of trees thirty (30) feet on center with adequate provisions for irrigation. Street trees shall be installed prior to the recordation of the last final map for the site. 16. Enter into an agreement and post securities acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director , to defer the following improvements: a. Traffic signal improvements at the intersection of Santa Rosa and E1 Camino Real. The cost of said improvements shall not exceed 25% of the cost of the traffic signal; and b. Road improvements along the frontage of the undeveloped lots as specified below. 17. Improve the following streets to City standard as approved by the 0 0 Director of Public Works, as indicated: a. Principal Avenue: Install curb, gutter and five (5) foot sidewalk along property frontage. b. Las Lomas Avenue: Install curb, gutter , five (5) foot side- walk and AC paveout along property frontage. C. Montecito: Install curb, gutter , five (5) foot sidewalk and AC paveout along property frontage. 18. The applicant shall acquire and make an irrevocable offer of dedi- cation to the City of Atascadero the following rights-of-way: a. Street Name: Principal Avenue b. Limits: Twenty (20) feet from centerline to curbface on an alignment acceptable to the Director of Public Works to allow centerline radius of 150 feet and corner rounding at inter- section. C. Street Name: Las Lomas Avenue d. Limits: Twenty (20) feet from centerline to curbface on an alignment acceptable to the Director of Public Works to allow for a right angle connection and corner rounding at inter- section. e. Street Name: Montecito f. Limits: Fifteen (15) feet from centerline to curb face and corner rounding at intersection. 19. All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneous with recording any final map (s) . 20. Prior to approval of the improvement plans by the Director of Public Works, either the Subdivider shall acquire sufficient title or interest in the off-site land to allow the improvements to be made as required by these Conditions; or the City Council, upon request by and at the expense of the subdivider , shall have made all appropriate finding and adopted a Resolution of Neces- sity as required by law so that the City may exercise its power of Imminent Domain. 21. Obtain Encroachment Permit from City of Atascadero (Public Works Department) . Sign an Inspection Agreement and a Curb and Gutter Agreement, guaranteeing that the work will be done and inspec- tions paid for , prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, and construct improvements as directed by the Encroachment Permit prior to final building inspection. Improvement Plans prepared by a Registered Engineer shall be submitted and approved byDe- partment of Public Works prior to recordation of any final map (s) . • 0 22. Prior to recording any final map (s) , a soil investigation (as re- quired by the Map Act) shall be submitted, recommending correc- tive action which will prevent structural damage to each struc- ture proposed to be constructed in the area where soil problems may exist. 23. The open space lots on those parcels where condominiums are to be . created shall be designated as Public Utilities Easements and shall be offered for dedication to the public as PUE' s. 24. A final map, ormaps, in compliance with all conditions set forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that cor- ners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be re- traced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit- ted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 25. Approval of this tentative tract map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. Minutes - Planning Commissio - July 21, 1987 P- 'NDA ITEM A-6 14-87 (Hendrix) a The attached Planning Commission minutes excerpt reflects revised conditions of approval agreed to by the applicant at • B. PUBLIC HEARINGS the Commission's 7/21/87 meeting. 1. Tentative Tract Map 14-87 : Request initiated by Rex Hendrix to allow subdivision of four parcels containing 5. 5 acres into 8 lots (two of the lots will be further divided into commercial condominium units) . Subject site is located at 9505 E1 Camino real (CONTINUED FROM 6/1/87 MEETING) Mr. DeCamp presented the staff report on the request and noted the complexity of this subject because it involves the subdivision and creation of a condominium tract map. Mr. DeCamp noted various modifications to some of the conditions which should be incorpo- rated. He then responded to questions from the Commission. Terry Orton, engineer for the applicant, spoke in support of the request and noted that quite a bit of time has been spent in working out the technicalities of the map. He pointed out that the applicant' s intention is to record the map as one map using a form of securities for the improvements (i .e. trust deed, etc. ) . With regard to #12, he expressed concern with the annexation fee and asked for clarification with regard to what fees have already been paid. Mr. Orton commented on #15 noting that the lots which front E1 Camino Real do have quite a bit of existing landscaping and asked that this condition be flexible with regard to the plac- ing of trees. There was brief discussion concerning the clarification on the sewer annexation fees with regard to what the applicant has al- ready been paid. In response to question from Commissioner Nolan, Mr . DeCamp noted that there has been extensive landscaping on the site to date, and that an allowance could be made for taking into account the land- scaping which already exists with regard to modification to con- dition #15. Mr. Engen suggested that the word"average" be incor- porated into #15 for the installation of trees thirty feet on- center . MOTION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, seconded by Commissioner Kidwell and carried unanimously to approve Tentative Tract Map 14-87 subject to the findings and conditions contained in the staff report, with modification to the following: "12. Sewer annexation fees in the amount established by City ordinance shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits and with recognition of prior sewer fees which have already been paid." "15. Prior to recording. . . . . . . .Said plans shall be for • the installation of trees an average of thirty feet on center with adequate provisions. . . . " 1117-a. Principal Avenue: Install curb, gutter , five 2 1 � • Minutes - Planning Commission - July 21, 1987 . (5) foot sidewalk and AC pave-out along property frontage. " 1118-b. (for Principal Avenue) - Limits: Thirty (30) feet from centerline to curbface. . . . " 1118-d. (for Las Lomas Avenue) - Limits: Thirty (30) feet from centerline to curbface. . . . " 1118-f. (for Montecito) - Twenty (20) feet from center- line to curbface. . . . " "21. Obtain encroachment permit from. . . . . . . .Sign an In- spection Agreement and a Curb, Gutter, and Im- provement Agreement, guaranteeing. . . . . . " 2. Road Abandonment 1-87: Request initiated by Charles Gray to allow vacation of a por- tion of Curbaril Avenue. Subject site is located at 9404 Curbaril. Mr. Davidson presented the staff report pointing out that this road vacation was a summary or "short-form" type of vacation in that adoption of a separate resolution of intent is not necessary. Charles Gray, applicant, spoke in support of the request noting his intent to build a storage building on the site if the road vacation is approved. There was some discussion among the Commission concerning the status of the land once the vacation is accomplished, how this surplus property would be sold and that a lot merger could be re- corded simultaneously with the sale of the surplus property. MOTION: Made by Commissioner Nolan, seconded by Commissioner Michielssen and carried on a 6 :0 vote to recommend that Road Abandonment 1-87 is in conformance with the General Plan and not suitable as a non-motorized transportation facility, as well as that the sale of this land as sur- plus City property is also in conformance with the Gen- eral Plan. 3. General Plan Amendment 2C-87/Zone Change 6-87 : Request iitiated by L.D. McCaslin/Richard Hawkins to revise the existing General Plan land use map designation from Low Density Single Family to High Density Multiple Family and coinciding zone change to revise the existing RSF-Z zoning to RMF/16 (PD7) . Subject site is located at 9300 El Bordo Road. Mr. Moses presented the staff report recommending denial of the request as presented. In response to question from Commissioner Michielssen, Mr . Moses 3 M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council August 11, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager U_4 FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Lot Line Adjustment 12-87 LOCATION: 7503 Carmelita/7505 Curbaril APPLICANT: Tom Bench/Don Stanley REQUEST: To adjust the property line between two existing lots of record. BACKGROUND: • On July 21, 1987, the Planning Commission considered the above- referenced matter on its consent calendar. Upon review, the Commis- sion recommended approval of the lot line adjustment request subject to the findings and conditions contained in the attached staff report. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Lot Line Adjustment 12-87 per the Planning Commission' s recommendation. HE:ph Enclosure: Staff Report - July 21, 1987 cc: Tom Bench Don Stanley Central Coast Engineering • City of Atascadero Item: A-3 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: July 21, 1987 BY 4PSteven L. DeCamp, Senior Planner File No: LLA 12-87 Project Address: 7503 Carmelita/7505 Curbaril SUBJECT• Request to adjust the property line between two existing lots of record. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tom Bench/Don Stanley 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Central Coast Engineering 3. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Parcel 1 - 3. 43ac/3. 34ac Parcel 2 - 0. 55ac/0.64ac • 4. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .LS (FH) /LSF-Y 5. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Parcel 1 - Single family dwelling Parcel 2 - Single family dwelling 6 . General Plan Designation. . . . .Moderate Density Single Family 7. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Categorically Exempt (Class 5) B. ANALYSIS: The parcels that are involved in the proposed lot line adjustment are located in two different zoning districts. The larger of the lots, Parcel 1, is located in the LS (FH) zone. The minimum lot size in this zone is 1.0 acres with sewers and 1. 5 acres when sew- ers are not available. Parcel 2 is located in the LSF-Y zone which has the same minimum lot size standards. Parcel 1 is larger than required by its zoning while parcel 2 is an existing noncon- forming lot. • 0 Staff Report - LLA 12-87 (Bench/Stanley) Page Two The proposed lot line adjustment will result in the transfer of approximately 0. 09 acres from Parcel 1 to Parcel 2. This is being proposed to accomodate existing improvements on Parcel 2 which encroach onto Parcel 1. No new construction is planned as a re- sult of the lot line adjustment. The property being transfered from Parcel 1 to Parcel 2 is located in an open space easement acquired by the City of Atascadero in 1982. No development or construction of any type is allowable in the easement area without the consent of the City. This provision will constrain the property owner ' s use of the affected property. The proposed map, as conditioned, complies with City policies and standards. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends approval of Lot Line Adjustment 12-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit C and the Conditions of Approval in Ex- hibit D. SLD:ph Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Site Plan Exhibit C - Findings for Approval Exhibit D - Conditions for Approval �10 � � 1 • f 17 ROW Old MO ♦ . ♦. ���- - iii PAP MEMO' �.� .w. ��. . .. • WINpip s • NN ff Imo - •` '�� `i MRd� v► � _ s �X �tl � l i B CITY OF ATASCADERO v� M 1979-7P situ'' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LLQ 17- -5-7 v e\ EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval Lot Line Adjustment 12-87 (Bench/Stanley) July 21, 1987 FINDINGS• 1. The application, as submitted, has been determined to be categor- ically exempt from the requirements of the California Environ- mental Quality Act. 2. The application as submitted, conforms with all applicable zoning, general plan and subdivision regulations of the City of Atasca dero. iEXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval Lot Line Adjustment 12-87 (Bench/Stanley) July 21, 1987 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The lot line adjustment, as generally shown on the map attachment provided herein, shall be submitted in final map format or reflec- ted in a record of survey to be approved by the Community Develop- ment Department prior to recordation by the County Recorder ' s Office. 2. The proposed adjusted lot lines shall be surveyed and monuments set at the new property corners prior to recordation of the final map or record of survey. 3. If a final map is to be recorded, all existing easements shall be delineated thereon. 4. Any deed transfering the ownership of the affected property from Parcel 1 to Parcel 2 shall include a note regarding the use of the openspace easement as shown on Parcel Map AT 82-83. 5. Approval of this lot line adjustment shall expire two years from the date of approval unless a time extension has been granted pur- suant to a written request prior to the expiration date. MEE '3 AG-klDA OTE U L • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council August ll, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager IU.-, FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director, SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment 8-87 LOCATION: 9351-9385 Musselman APPLICANT: Norman Norton (Cuesta Engineering) • On May 26, 1987 the City Council approved Lot Line Adjustment 8-87 subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. The required condi- tions have been complied with and the final map is recommended for approval. HE:ps cc: Norman Norton Cuesta Engineering • E X N-IBI ( B ��, .,.. ... . �.,� CITY OF ATASCADERO S-tsu.�,� =- � �»lam 1 r �O✓�BJU `W COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT A�jus-4wt�H-� DEPARTMENT . LLAT B -$? '� � (oror o�N►nnn J s�� � i - ♦ - u.ro,<r N.rrfr.ffN � k �t4n j n'7 c agc c 7 H Q X53 v`fit Q?ll � I a Ell, 3 : W wl _ Gp t / L a x `Er�3ys�aJ`� V ;aL�'��1.,1 < Mt i \ Y � o i3iff�EY.zit� � v � 1� .Ker • fJl.Y —_ ��__� w.l:fo, , �< m w L j-j v7N/) yyl 1- :,¢ L__j � •^ `h AIEEi'. hGtDA • DATA: f Al 7,El:1 • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council tp August ll, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager V1�1 FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director . SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 13-86 LOCATION: 7300 San Gregorio Road APPLICANT: Conrad Langille (Daniel J. Stewart) • On October 13, 1986 the City Council approved Parcel Map 13-86 , subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the recom- mendation of the Planning Commission. The required conditions have been complied with and the final map is recommended for approval. HE:ps cc: Conrad Langille Daniel J. Stewart • C h qo '• �hti° "r QN tj � c 1\ V OVA!Ap Q o�Ze� t�hWVlo�c .o � � dye J�VNh dol , uW4�• 3 ° "Sil W It b �• ` 13b ttA&e 200, Z V 1 ,) /ray � � •v'h 5 ,�VCV � a"�Z JA ® Q i �.� _•w '„lam ^. r �Z • � I. wa,�.� ..... ,� •.��;, -, Nom% I.l1w, � i :�•► a � • W v, '.� HIO .r .r• a OHO: •1 irk '10 N �usaa h. R (Oz) % CXII[KIT B •�.�L M Ili' • y S 7 SED 5�N GW.;G/l O 7LL'NC z L f��1•G 6' ' • �T�UJP�Z� ,4 , IEJJE77NDA 61 DAT �I 7 EM# — • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council VIA: Michael Shelton, City. Manager - FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Road Abandonment 1-87 LOCATION: 9404 Curbaril APPLICANT: Charles Gray REQUEST: To vacate a portion of Curbaril Avenue BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter at • its July 21, 1987 meeting, and recommended approval of the request. Road vacations are accomplished by City Council resolution. This is a summary or "short-form" vacation, in that adoption of a separate reso- lution of intent is not necessary. RECOMMENDATION.: Concept approval with Resolution No. 81-87 , brought back by staff after completion of negotiations with the applicant by the Public Works Director. HE:ph Enclosure: Resolution No. 81-87 Staff Report - July 21, 1987 cc: Charles Gray • • RESOLUTION NO. 81-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO SUMMARILY VACATING A PORTION OF A ROAD PURSUANT TO STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE; PART 3 , PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND SERVICE EASEMENTS VACATION LAW; CHAPTER 4 , SUMMARY VACATION; 8333 (BEING THE PORTION OF THE CURBARIL RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJOINING PARCEL 1, PM 14-80) WHEREAS, Streets and Highways Code 8330 permits summary vacation of a street or highway by adoption of a resolution of summary vaca- tion; and WHEREAS, this portion of Curbaril Avenue, as shown on the attached Exhibit A, has been determined to be actually superseded by relocation and has been impassable for vehicular travel for at least five consec- utive years and no public money was expended for its maintenance dur- ing that time; and WHEREAS, the vacation of this portion of Curbaril Avenue, now superseded by relocation will not work to cut off access to any per- son' s property which, prior to relocation, adjoined the street or• highway to be vacated; and WHEREAS, the vacation of this portion of Curbaril Avenue will not affect any in-place, in-use public utility facility or will not terminate a public service easement; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code 65402, the City Planning Commission has recommended to the Council its ' finding that vacation of this portion of Curbaril Avenue is in conformance with the City' s General Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code 2381, the City Planning Commission has recommended to the Council its ' finding- that this portion of Curbaril Avenue is not suitable or useful as a non- motorized transportation facility. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved as follows: 1. Based upon the above findings, the Council now finds and de- clares the above-described road portion superseded by reloca- tion to be unusable as a non-motorized transportation facil- ity. 2. Based upon the above findings, the Council now finds and de- clares the proposed vacation of this road portion superseded. by relocation to be in conformance with the City' s General Plan. • • Resolution No. 81-87 Page Two 3. The Council now summarily vacates, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code, Part 3 , Chapter 4, 8330 , that portion of Cur- baril Avenue as shown on Exhibit A subject to the following conditions of approval: (1) The property owner shall obtain fee title to the portion of Curbaril Avenue to be vacated. (2) The property owner shall seek and obtain the declaration of this portion of Curbaril as City surplus property and purchase accordingly. (3) The property owner shall indemnify and "hold harmless" the City from claims that may arise from the vacation procedure. (4) Utility easements shall be reserved, pursuant to Section 8340 of the Streets and Highways Code for the benefit of Pacific Bell and the U.S. Department of the Navy to maintain and service their facilities. (5) A lot merger shall be recorded prior to recordation of the vacation resolution. (6) A legal description of the portion of the street to be vacated shall be provided prior to recording the vaca- tion resolution. (7) All conditions of approval must be completed prior to or simultaneously with the recording of the vacation resolution_. 4. That from and after the date this resolution is recorded with the County Recorder , the road portion shown on Exhibit A shall no longer be or constitute a street or highway. 5. The City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this Resolu- tion of Summary Vacation, attested by him/her under seal, to be recorded without acknowledgment, certificate _of acknowl- edgment, or further proof in the office of the County Re- corder. On motion by and seconded by the motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Resolution No. 81-87 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager er APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: 49U44 40^�� HE ENGE1101 Community &velopmeraDirector � In 1 CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E X H I S IT A DEPARTMENT PI?D PCS 5 ED VACAT10N _ � I-Ilr• Vl/ r VvIASGAUtKU _28-41 4G •rs rI, 0 J '�,is �� J ,CJ .91f•f'E ..e ,•.\l• • 170' ,1If ••�.�\ I•.too' .., `e 1-79 JA fo 1 1 , r.s fs.ss ` CIN .. ..IS_ It) ;v' �`.._ -'ROA / .i. - 9JAc ° Il X11 ''• ,. ..., �- AD G'� tet / J �Rp ••c cp9A 0- J \SS.�Jt f� too 10 Jf.Je•1 `,rte e s .ssac.� r• Cil :e Im c•+1_ p R A -,f _ AV e 3 PTN. 9 \" 0. ASR...eJ 17E rr> .��• ,rte - 0 •I.J.aCT °1 fro < _ 131 ° 12 \% + 411 i - Yr.6 _ 1TI ne ut !° N \ CG 1� .O.•r .11AC w:F: 6l1At: #2B ..PTN. 9 -� qf °L1.olAC c v 20 II X O K 41 ° C7) 412 .J 12A 6AC AR DA 1J 14 p,• .r• 'O n O Oc III Ji 8 t 13 fc ISA� /�_ J Rrf2 C, 1 H'Pi:z �AVe •('4 •COR7EZ IN 1y .. . . •a5/ 9 ` 7 Se � Bk. Amendment"B"Afascadero Colony,R.M.Bk.AC3,Pg.7A 29 CITY OF ATASCADERO 11"r •` Assessor's Mop Bk.28,Pg-41 County of San Luis Obispo,Calif. City of Atascadero Item: B-2 STAFF REPORT FOR: City Planning Commission Meeting Date: July 21, 1987 BY: 9 Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No: Road Abandon- ment 1-87 Project Address: 9404 Curbaril SUBJECT: Request to vacate a portion of Curbaril Avenue. BACKGROUND: Notice of public hearing was published in the Atascadero News on July 10, 1987 and all owners of property within 300 feet were notified on that date. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Charles Gray 2. Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Curbaril is a City maintained Street. 3. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Adjacent single-family resi- dence 4. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Categorically exempt (Class 5) B. ANALYSIS: Road vacations are accomplished by City Council resolution. This is a summary or "short-form" vacation, in that adoption of a separate reso- lution of intent is not necessary. Under the Streets and Highways Code, the Planning Commission must make two findings: 1. That the vacation is in compliance with the General Plan. 2. That the right-of-way is unsuited for development as a non- motorized transportation facility, i .e. primarily for the use of pedestrians, bicyclists, or equestrians. Staff Report - Road Abandonment 1-87 (Charles Gray) Page Two Both findings can be made. Letters were sent to all the utility agencies notifying them of the application to vacate this right-of-way. Pacific Bell and the U.S. Department of the Navy are requesting permanent easements to be re- served to service their facilities. This right-of-way is unnecessary for road purposes because Curbaril has been constructed outside this area. Thus, the Public Works De- partment has recommended approval of the request. The property be- comes City surplus property after the vacation is complete. The ap- plicant has obtained an appraisal of the property which concludes that the market value is $2, 500 .00 The sale of this land as City surplus property does not frustrate any General Plan goals or policies. C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that Road Abandon- ment 1-87 is in conformance with the City' s General Plan and not suit- able as a non-motorized transportation facility. Furthermore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the sale of this land as surplus City property is in conformance with the General Plan. DD:ph Attachments: Exhibit A: Location Map Exhibit B: Proposed Vacation Exhibit C: Draft Resolution c �� a ��►:• ��, �_ ,���� 1111 Iii' �.� '�, ==�� .► � tl1; e J•J J.'s CI• TY OF ATAS CADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT EX H I9IT E i DEPARTMENT PILO PCS S E D VACAT10N 1-1/4. uil r Ur '1IASGAW-HU \/ 28-41 511 tO Fa,y1�s..\ (40 O J zoo a N 5 X0.79 !A ,IJ !0 1 21 AC \\- 1 \ - 'war JA•N to ROAD` Is- ` ,•.� �C.'- tie'�' / � : ` ��. 'L�R r z C)^ 0-9 h PTN.10 9 9A / 11 IOR p 95 AC. t) ' IOA^ _0 A a3 nE orT 411 C lrs 2 178 l7 fro - JJ.p. ITA O q �1 (6 ' • 'i r� ,2\ bl \ ,�� "' ti�n ` O 1•�J O':� Ite ••PTN.•9 » �� RS �I.01AC • 4 12Ae6AC G484R� a q h 14 OV .j.. + IAA J' CCR TFV (, ` 'yo q ARO pAR,J ,Q e,§� coRrez__ —........ O \NOTE,1-2 p N IA-90` ap Q 1y _ qy o2 - 5� f, � ` �Bk. Amendment"B"Atoscodero Colony,R.M.Bk.AC3,Pg.7A CITY OF ATASCADERO Rev 9-1_,oj rr-r-s Assessor's Mop Bk.28,Pg.41 County of Son Luis Obispo,Calif, C NG AG':NIDA • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council August 11, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager hl�A_ FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director ,. SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 2B-87 and Zone Change 5-87 LOCATION: 8430 Santa Rosa Road APPLICANT: Don Messer REQUEST: To change the General Plan Land Use Map designation from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family with a corresponding zone change request from RS to RSF-Y. The application also involves a request to extend the Ur- ban Services Line. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter at its July 21, 1987 meeting, and recommended approval of General Plan Amendment 2B-87 and Zone Change 5-87 , including the extension of the Urban Services Line. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Approval of Resolution No. 85-87 to amend the General Plan. 2. Approval of Ordinance No. 156 by title only. (lst Reading) 3. Approve Ordinance No. 156 to amend the Zoning Ordinance. HE:ph Enclosures: Staff Report - July 211 1987 Resolution No. 85-87 Ordinance No. 156 cc: Don Messer Cuesta Engineering • City of Atascadero Item: B-4 • STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: July 21, 1987 BY: Dp Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No: GP: 2B-87 ZC: 5-87 ' Project Address: 8430 Santa Rosa Road SUBJECT: A request to change the General Plan Land Use Map designation from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family with a cor- responding zone change request from RS to RSF-Y. The application also involves a request to extend the Urban Services Line. BACKGROUND: In May 1987 , the Planning Commission and City Council considered the proposals for General Plan Amendment Cycle 2 - 1987 . The City Council directed staff to review this request, as proposed, and bring back an� analysis for public hearing. Notice of public hearing was published in the Atascadero News on July 10, 1987, and all property owners within 300 feet were notified on that date. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Don Messer/Cuesta Engineering 2. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6. 5 acres 3. Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Santa Rosa - Collector - 40 foot right-of-way 4. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (Residential Suburban) 5. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Single Family Residences (2) 6. Adjacent Zoning and Use. . . . .North: RSF-Y, Single Family to Entire Study Area South: RS, Single Family East: RSF-Y, Single Family West: RS, Single Family Staff Report - GP: 2B-87/ZC: 5-87 (Messer) Page Two 7. General Plan Designation. . . .Suburban Single Family Resi- dential 8. Terrain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Level to moderately sloping 9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . .Negative Declaration B. ANALYSIS: Staff' s review of this request is twofold: 1. To determine the impact on the surrounding residential area and land use pattern if higher density is allowed, and; 2. To determine the impact on the provision of public services if the Urban Services Line is extended. These two issues are obviously entwined. Neighborhood Character/Land Use Pattern A look at Exhibits A and B reveals that the subject lot lies directly adjacent to a moderate density single family area. This area is char- acterized by lot sizes of approximately one acre or less. Staff agrees that one acre lots, as presented conceptionally in Exhibit E, are consistent with this existing neighborhood. Of equal importance is the effect of this proposal on the land use pattern as envisioned by the General Plan. Residential Policy #5 of the Land Use Element states that "Residential density shall decrease as one moves outward from the core, in order to maintain the rural atmosphere of the community. " As Exhibit B shows, this proposal con- tinues this land use objective. Urban Services Line/Sewer As defined in the General Plan, the Urban Services Line designates the area that will eventually be furnished with major public and quasi- public services. The Urban Services Line essentially corresponds with the sewer improvement district. As shown in Exhibit D, the subject lot is contiguous to the existing Urban Services Line. Likewise, Ex- hibit G depicts the lot as adjoining the sewer improvement district, as well as being within the sewer district boundary. Sewer is avail- able to the site. The annexation and connection fee will be collected prior to recording the tract map. 0 Staff Report - GP: 2B-87/ZC: 5-87 (Messer) Page Three Other Issues Although the development plans will be reviewed in the tract map and building permit process, it is wise to determine if site constraints exist which could prevent higher residential density. In response to these concerns, the applicant has submitted a conceptual plan (Exhibit E) and a development statement (Exhibit C) . This information, along with site checks by several staff members, has verified that the site is physically suitable for the proposed density. The site is located within the Amapoa/Tecorida drainage area which requires review of en- gineered drainage plans and the payment of fees per Ordinance 117. Summary Staff believes that this land use change is a logical extension of this moderate density single family zone. It represents an orderly pattern of growth as dictated by the General Plan. Public services, including sewer, are available which makes for a reasonable extension of the Urban Services Line. Furthermore, the provision of public ser- vices to this one six (6) acre lot will not exceed the capacity of the City' s service system. C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of General Plan Amendment 2B-87 and Zone Change 5-87 , including the extension of the Urban Services Line, based on the findings contained in Exhibits H and I . DD:ph Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit C - Supplementary Development Statement Exhibit D - Urban Services Line Extension Exhibit E - Concept Map (Subdivision) Exhibit F - RS Lots - Less than 1. 5 acres Exhibit G - Sewer District Exhibit H - Draft Resolution Exhibit I - Draft Ordinance • ' . . , . • .ter( 1 • LAW WIN ��►I�� ISI � �� - .. ` etc ��WA`ij��i►I�i�►� ,w 0 r MUM WOOS I t � =a: lilimba ::. rll •��...•..uu.... _ t �4 r •� i� •`moi► - � •�� � - _ - r�� �� � ♦ r� ,o A A � / L � • ♦ m d m ,1 I 1 � L/ @ A ♦ A 9 m A A b m f ♦ A A A f A m ♦ f • f f A ♦ ! 9 �4 6 ♦ ! ! ! m S 4 A f D@@ A 9 b I A A A ♦ b 9@ 4 1 f ♦ A ♦ f`D R`A } � 6 ♦ B f A A A B m 9 • O' ♦ B A A f A 4 \ \ ��t /♦ A A f 9 @ ♦ A A b D mf ♦ A �• A @ A ! ♦ A�9 � b D@ ♦ ♦ ♦ e a A A ! 9 ♦ A A f 9 0 , f 1 �1 ♦ 9 8 @ ^= ♦ I\^A A A@ A 1 f • s A 4 8 @ f ♦ • �• ♦ A 6,! ! R d t O A ! d I 6 A f �\, A • SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT SO t'PiEM EN TRt_ SANTA ROSA AVENUE ZONE CHANGE D E U E1..D P JW E N T- LOT 6, BLOCK 13 S T-A T9 M E iv T ATASCADERO The enclosed application requests a zone change from RS to RSF.Y for a 6.5-acre parcel on Santa Rosa Avenue. The subject property is a moderately hilly site located on the south side of Santa Rosa Avenue between Atascadero Avenue and the Lake. The property is currently .zoned RS and is contiguous with properties zoned RSF.Y to the east and to the north across Santa Rosa. The property is just outside the Urban Services Line which bounds the site on the = : east and along Santa Rosa. The existing Urban Services Line roughly reflects the existing limits of sewer service in the area. The existing sewer main in Santa Rosa actually extends some 300 feet across the frontage of the site. The applicant requests that the Urban Services boundary be extended to include the .site and that connection to sewer service be permitted. Sheet 1 of 3 shows the existing and proposed Urban Services boundaries. A zone change to RSF.Y will undoubtly prompt the maximum development of the site, ie. a subdivision into 1-acre parcels. This ensures some better design of development such as sewer, limited drive access at Santa Rosa, and limited work within the drainage swale for access. Sheet 2 of 3 describes such a possible subdivision of the site according to RSF.Y standards. Access would be provided by a private road with a gravity sewer main provided in that easement road. The existing house on the property would remain on one lot. The five new building sites range from 4% to 10% slope. A project like this proposal would be in keeping with the neighborhood character. The site is immediately adjacent to current RSF.Y zoning where numerous lots are at minimum size. In addition, Sheet 3 of 3 highlights some 22 existing lots in the RS zone which are approximately 1 acre or less. 0 EXHIBIT D TY CI OF ATASCADERO URMN SERVICE yl, .... .. . �•� LINE EXTENSION �tei!�Ip t ts's� ` ►sCAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT G.P. AMENDMENT GP:2 DEPARTMENT ZONE CHANGE ZC: 5-8 8430 Santa Rosa Road (Messer/Cuesta) '-1. ��� \ � �_ lam.`>V��Y - ,'"�1•CA R cSr Al F URBgt/ SERV/CE9 UNE•,• \ � u IV .� / PROPOSED URBAN SERV/CE9 L/NE RS lam-•..,rpt \ � _\ •�(',\ ', ' I If REZDA/E/ URBAN SER!//CES Ea'7EN9/0N CITY OF ATAS CADER - _ EXHIBIT E CONCEPT PLAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT G.P. AMENDMENT GP: 2B-8 DEPARTMENT ZONE CHANGE ZC: 5-87 8430 Santa Rosa Road (Messer/Cuesta) .4 �CE PROPO E� Pxl ow r6 ROA ; / / / '✓EWERI 1466-H rT it 1 a 1 , - qeo .� rp r / `\\9e 9Q \\J I SCAc E: "=ioo' P/ PPSCD DE- Z 0P/7C/VT 60AIC6PT LOr !o, &00 /J -WASCA0ER0 . NE r ACRES -LOT & - G.5 4CRE5 PROP05ED - 6, LOTS •, /AC. MIN. WET// 9Ff1ER EXH 1131T F CITY 1?S LOTS• 1.5 AG. OR LESS OF ATASCADERO ' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT G.P. AMENDMENT GP: -87 DEPARTMENT ZONE CHANGE ZC: 5- 8430 Santa Rosa Roa (Messer/Cuesta) y - - VON n 1 f� ,'CORN ,— _a Z #.(FFA} o �+ -; \I RSF .'E L , 1 \ ' � ` it �x 1 RAP n/E/GHBoR/NG R9 ZONE LOTS CESS THAN /.5 ACRES 0 -I� FXH IB 1T G- CI ,.. . TY OF ATASCADERO SEWER DIST ' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT m RIVER -L-L .� TI G. `r � do•l-.-,.,�' ,�� "�� © - G\\="."� a t �• . ;,�� � �/�• . �il'�•' .;ted �•. � ' 1 ",1"\.w " ---� "��:.i•,• vi'tt-.�+?��o+ab•1 �� \K• ••, F ' riJl) \' - S IT E- uiPRa/LACNT A91R+Ct' ""'� ~ "✓u n. p » �, BOUNDARY (oN XWEh) •I• .� . I y . ' " ■aa.•c SEWCR RlStR1CT Bouuw,Ry RESOLUTION NO. 85-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR 8430 SANTA ROSA ROAD FROM SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY (ONE ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE) INCLUDING THE EXTENSION OF THE URBAN SERVICES LINE. (GP 2B-87 : 8430 SANTA ROSA ROAD) WHEREAS, a request to amend the City of Atascadero General Plan has been received as follows: General Plan Amendment 2B-87 and Zone Change 5-87 - 8430 SANTA ROSA ROAD - Request to revise the existing general plan from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family - One acre lot size WHEREAS, this request was considered by the Planning Commission at a said hearing held on July 21, 1987 and was recommended for approval; and WHEREAS, such amendment to the General Plan was considered by the City Council during a public hearing; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a General Plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows: 1. The revised general plan land use map revision for one acre lot sizes would be consistent with existing policies con- tained in the general plan land use element. 2. The revised land use designation for one acre lot sizes would be consistent with existing land use patterns in the area. 3. The proposed site is contiguous to the existing Urban Ser- vices Area and can be served by urban services, including sewer . 4. The revised general plan amendment will not have a signifi- cant adverse impact upon the environment. A Negative Declar- ation has been prepared and determined to be adequate. • Resolution No. 85-87 Page Two NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to approve General Plan Amendment 2B-87 as follows: 1. Amendments to the General Plan Map as shown on Exhibit A (GP 2B-87 - 8430 Santa Rosa Road) . 2. Amendments to the General Plan as shown on Exhibit B (Urban Services Line) . On motion by and seconded by the motion was approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: A44'v-ti HENRY ENGEN, Community DeTrelopment Director ' ♦ ;�- —� t 1111: ✓i d ® � �► � \ u:�' ':irk'__. 1 u■, pp � 0 rr • E ri fGi • e . w P 111 .�.. _ ....... fi •!!!luau / ia�u■ ev `.� � 1 1w � rli i'■.i S_1111::: 111111611 W_-- 1111: OF ON an i ® P P P g P ■. _ .� e go.111.0111 r ♦ P ro P �n P � P w a � t m .r P P P r P a: �� 1 .�•. P f• � / A P s P s P - � i•ii � /� n a. a. re a, m es .. '�. �y ■. a M b q H � H H . L` �;•.��•: p 1P b H .D B M q H b b b H P °8• tl q P b q b �♦ tl B m tl P n tl •N ® n q q la q ® q ® P q ® �r a• q P P —�� P � P P ► e P � P P r q r m ■- M r P �.- /. P .a m s ,• s• 1c P '®� 0 m m es w w .n w m m m a• _ e // IA tl .A � .o tl R. % R• (A � o � al / a tl q tl b tl' b q tl b q tl q tl I ' B• v. P ' B• tl �i P• @ P• P P B• f• � b � � n � � B s • CITY OF ATASCADERO R ESD L U T! O !V ascAn]Ep� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT G-F 213 - S-i DEPARTMENT UI;�BAN SERU ICES LIN ' 'A�• I ^ I �(rtrr 1; r:.� A,C ,.. lam l sUll1I` d� '+. � . ?� -. \� �. ` �/ ,1�� �I T!� >>�y\��� � , LI/��r�f'�-�� Il 1/ J f. � ••� ,/ 'i;�t `� r �ll,*Nl�:.,. J dd i j I/ Vii,•••.� :li^ \ 11113 h1'` ''� � / .• t.' � :_ . I l� � �'1�?��'>�`� r ��\ meg-• - �_ - �I Jr �r.njifril,�-..l.,j�..�.� •-� 1,r�� .. /. ' ` \a �� \ \` i A .., 89 3O SANTA ROS 14 .I Y 1 , URBAIJ SERVICES LINE • • ORDINANCE NO. 156 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBER 22 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY AT 8430 SANTA ROSA ROAD FROM RS (RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN) TO RSF-Y (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, ONE ACRE MINIMUM) (ZC 5-87 : 8430 SANTA ROSA ROAD) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning reg- ulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant ad- verse impact upon the environment and preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not necessary; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 21, 1987 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 5-87. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Council Findings. 1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use and zoning. 2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan. 3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse envi- ronmental impacts. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. Section 2. Zoning Map. Map Number 22 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atasca- dero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended to reclassify the area shown on the attached Exhibit "A" from RS (Residential Suburban) to RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, one acre minimum) . Ordinance No. 156 Page Two Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef- fect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by the motion was approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager Ordinance No. 156 Page Three APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENR ENGEN, Community De elopment irector �., ��•,♦,� •,�Nom _ u, �� � 1 1 Op MIS 1 � /1ll \ 1 �a► 6_3 • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council August 11, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 2E-87 and Zone Change 10-87 LOCATION: 5599 Traffic Way APPLICANT: City of Atascadero (Parks and Recreation Department) REQUEST: To modify the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan and amend the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the Public (P) Zone. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing of this matter at its July 21, 1987 meeting, and recommended approval of General Plan Amendment 2E-87 and Zone Change 10-87 . Resolution 38-87 was adopted May 26, 1987 , which approved the application for grant funds under the 1986 Community Parklands Act to develop the youth sports complex on Traffic Way. This request for funds is contingent upon the planned park improvements being consistent with. the General Plan. On May 26 , the City Council also directed staff to prepare analysis and bring to public hearing this general plan amendment. The study area was ex- panded to include publicly owned property on Traffic Way from Olmeda to Bajada. RECOMMENDATION• 1. Approval of Resolution No. 84-87 to amend the General Plan. 2. Approval of Ordinance No. 157 by title only. (1st Reading) 3. Approve Ordinance No. 157 to amend the Zoning Ordinance. HE:ph Enclosures: Staff Report - July 21, 1987 Resolution No. 84-87 Ordinance No. 157 • City of Atascadero Item: B-5 • STAFF REPORT FOR: City Planning Commission Meeting Date: July 21, 1987 BY:V, Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No: GP: 2E-87 ZC: 10-87 Project Address: 5599 Traffic Way SUBJECT: A request to modify the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan and amend the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the Public (P) zone. BACKGROUND: Resolution 38-87 was adopted May 26 , 1987 , which approved the appli- cation for grant funds under the 1986 Community Parklands Act to develop the youth sports complex on Traffic Way. This request for funds is contingent upon the planned park improvements being consis- tent with the General Plan. On May 26 , the City Council also di-O rected staff to , prepare analysis and bring to public hearing this general plan amendment. The study area was expanded to include publicly owned property on Traffic Way from Olmeda to Bajada. Notice of public hearing was published in the Atascadero News on June 10, 1987 and all owners of property within 300 feet were noti- fied on that date. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .City of Atascadero (Parks and Recreation Department) 2. Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .P (Public) 3. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Baseball Fields/Old Sewer Treat- ment Plant 4. Adjacent Zoning and Use. . . . .North: RMF16, Residential to Entire Study Area South: L(FH) , Recreation East: IP, SLOCO Beef West: P, Lewis Avenue School 5. General Plan Designation. . . .Public 6. Environmental Status. . . . . . . .Negative Declaration • i B. ANALYSIS• The Atascadero Parks and Recreation Department has requested a modifi- cation to the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan to allow expansion of the existing park facilities. The site is pres- ently developed with two Little League baseball fields and the old sewage treatment plant. The City Council has adopted a resolution approving an application for a grant under the Community Parklands Act to fund these proposed improvements. Public improvements must be found to be consistent with the City's General Plan. However, the 1980 General Plan contains a policy that this area shall be designated for light-industrial uses and the baseball fields relocated. Further- more, the existing use is nonconforming under the Zoning Ordinance. Staff analysis will focus on general plan and zoning ordinance consistency. General Plan Language The Land Use Element contains Light Industrial Policies on Page 74. Policy #1 states that: "Light Industry land use between Traffic Way and Atascadero Creek and from the Armory to the railroad tracks shall be redesignated as a Light Industrial Park , with the specific design and land use criteria as described in Chapter XIII, Community Appearance. " This policy is referred to in the Open Space and Conservation Element. Page 86 states that: "Because the two baseball fields located adjacent to the sewage plant are designated for industrial uses in this plan, another site nearby shall be found to relocate them. " Several problems with this current language come to mind. First, the baseball fields are existing and there is not a site of suitable size with proper zoning (L-Recreation) in the area to accomodate them. Second, current land use designation on the south side of Traffic Way from Bajada to the railroad tracks is for industrial uses. Staff notes that this area is presently not fully developed. Additional va- cant land for light industry also exists along the El Camino/U.S. 101 corridor from Plata Lane to Santa Rosa. Thus, current City policy is to move existing baseball diamonds to create additional industrial land, when the need for such land is questionable. For these reasons, staff is recommending the deletion of these two general plan policies. Staff encourages the continued development of recreational opportuni- ties in Atascadero. This particular site has been underutilized for quite some time and represents several possibilities. A master plan to coordinate recreational and public uses is necessary. Policy language is suggested to ensure this. Zoning Ordinance Language In addition to not being in conformance with the General Plan, the expansion of the existing park facilities is not allowed under the 0 0 Zoning Ordinance. Outdoor recreation services is not an allowed or conditionally allowed use in the Public (P) zone. A nonconforming use may not be enlarged, expanded, or extended to occupy a greater area of land. To change the zoning on the property to L (Recreation) , would limit the potential for a mix of recreational and public uses. The other choice is to add outdoor recreation services to the allowed uses in the P zone. Staff sees no problem with the compatibility between outdoor recreational and public uses. A master plan of development can see to a proper mix. Summary Staff is suggesting that the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance be amended to allow for expansion and upgrading of the youth sports com- plex on Traffic Way. Along with the recent improvements at Atasca- dero Lake Park and the creation of La Paloma Creek Park, this area can contribute to the recreational options of the City. Furthermore, the site contains the Armory building which may be a suitable site for a community center . A master plan of development is the proper method to determine site design. C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of General Plan Amendment 2E-87 and Zone Change 10-87 subject to the findings in Exhibit E and F. DD:ph Attachments: Exhibit A - Loction Map (zoning) Exhibit B - General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit C - Supplemental Development Statement Exhibit D - Land Use Definition - Zoning Ordinance Exhibit E - Draft Resolution Exhibit F - Draft Ordinance 0 ' • � • ' ` 151211019 • IRIAN oil PON low -ate �, �, ` �i► �i � Iii' �� �\/►� , �i�°�� _ � ♦ Iii ♦ �♦ � '� 111/1 /111111/1 111111�,��,, _ =' a. Ind, ��� ��1► Avg �P-An �. • �� IIS � �j������ ��I�t�► r � "`-�- .. 1 .. . �y �i ....:...nu�,� iii''•�1::!�:S ii:: •i.������ � � /---- - -�'��� j�� Q:Sli�fli'tl�w �4w:ii ui.•::�'.....°•.ii:u.. 1 _ J M E M 0 R A N D U M EXH ISIT Ci_ SUPPLEMEN -FAL DEVELOFME*U7- STA T•EM E AJ T April 27 , 1987 To: Community Development Department From: Parks and Recreation Department Subject : Request for General Plan Amendment (Traffic Way Softball/ Baseball Fields) The Atascadero Parks and Recreation. Department is requesting the Planning Commission initiate a General Plan Amendment at 5599 Traffic Way. This area is currently being used for recreation purposes by the youth of Atascadero. s. This area (APN 29-091-07) is currently designated for industrial uses in the General Plan, and these fields should be re-located to meet `" the current language. It is the request of the Parks and Recreation Department to have the current language in the General Plan eliminated, and allow for "Recreational" use of the existing area. - It is our intent to make major improvements in this area in the future , and it is neces- sary that we be able to provide certification to the State of California that the improvements planned for this area are consistant with the park and recreation plan. This -s•.- project is a priority to the department and to the City Council , : and request your assistance in amending the General Plan to allow for continued recreational usage of this area. , ' • JSJs !1 {r t i. Y EXHI9IT D ADOPTED JUNE 27, 1983 LAND U S E. DE FIN IT IDN Includes a building, or portion of a building, used and/or designed as a residence for -two or more families living independently of each �- other (includes duplexes, triplexes and apartments) . Offices: Establishments engaged in performing a service in a profesional office including; engineering, architectural and surveying services; real estate agencies; non-commercial educational, scientific and research organizations; accounting, auditing, and bookkeeping services; auth- ors, writers, artists, etc. ; advertising agencies; photography studios and small commercial art studios; employment agencies and stenographic services; reporting services; data processing and computer services; management, public relations, and consulting services; detective agen- cies and other similar professional services; attorneys; and counsel- ing services (provided by individuals other than licensed psychia- trists, which are included under "Health Care Services") . Organization Houses: Residential lodging houses operated by membership organiations for the benefit of their constituents and not open to the general public. Also includes fraternity and sorority residential houses and religious residential retreats.. Outdoor Recreation Services: Facilities for various outdoor sports and recreation, including: amusement and kiddie parks; golf courses, golf driving ranges and miniature golf courses; skateboard parks; go-cart and miniature auto race tracks; tennis courts, swim and tennis clubs and facilities; play lots, playgrounds and athletic fields; recreation and community centers. Paper Products: Includes the manufacture of pulps from wood, other cellulose fibers, and rags; the manufacture of paper and paperboard; and the manufacture Of paper and paperboard into converted products such as paper coated off the paper machine, paper bags, paper boxes, and envelopes. Also includes building paper and building board mills. Paving Materials: Manufacturing establishments producing various common paving and roof- ing materials, including paving blocks made of asphalt, creosoted wood and various compositions of asphalt and tar. Personal Services: Service establishments primarily engaged in providing services gen- erally involving the care of the person which are not medically rela- ted, including: beauty and barber shops; shoe repair shops; saunas and hot tubs; dry cleaning pick-up stores and small scale dry clean- ers without pick-up and delivery services; clothing rental; dating and escort services; and related facilities'. Pe-troleum Extraction: Resource extraction establishments primarily engaged in: Producing crude petroleum and natural gas; recovering oii from oil sands and shales; producing natural gasoline and cycle condensate. Activities 3-72 RESOLUTION NO. 84-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF THE CITY' S GENERAL PLAN (GP: 2E-87) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero has adopted Resolution 38-87, approving the application for grant funds under the Community Parklands Act of 1986 for the youth sports complex on Traffic Way; and WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation requires certification that the planned recreational improvements are consis- tent with the City' s General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City' s Parks and Recreation Department has initiated a general plan amendment relative to the Open Space and Conservation Element of the general plan; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero conducted a public hearing on subject matter on July 21, 1987; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a general plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows: 1. The proposed general plan amendment recommended by the Plan- ning Commission is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan by providing direction for the location of selected public and recreational uses. 2. The proposed general plan amendment will not have a signifi- cant adverse effect on the environment, and preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not necessary. THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to approve General Plan Amendment GP 2E-87 as follows: 1. Amendments to the text as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" . On motion by and seconded by the resolution was approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: 0 0 Resolution No. 84-87 Page Two ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: A� HENRY ENG1%N1 Community Development Director EP41131T A GP 2F - g7 _Liaht Industrial Policy Proposals _D E L E T E 1. Light Industry land use between Traffic Way and Atas- cadero Creek and from the Armory to the railroad tracks shall be redesignated as a Light Industrial Park, with the specific design and land use criteria as described f in Chapter XIII, COMMUNITY APPEARANCE. The area along the west side of E1 Camino Real from Curbaril Avenue south to the Commercial use at the Santa Rosa overpass shall also be upgraded to the status of Industrial Park. Additional areas for light industrial development near Ferro-carril Avenue should be considered if the Permitted uses would not adversely affect the sur- rounding properties and could not be more appropriately located in existing areas . Light industrial uses outside the Urban Services Line shall be examined and reviewed, on an individual basis, to insure that there is no conflict between the intensity of the land use and minimum parcel sizes. Sewage disposal shall be a prime factor for consideration. M �o. Further review and analysis, including economic studies, should be made concerning industrial needs in order to enhance employment opportunities and to encourage a broad and diversified economy within the City. Potential sites for future industrial devel- opment should be evaluated in conjunction therewith. f� 74 . EXNIEIT A CONT GP ZE -137 landscaping with a ronriate trees and shrubs would PP _ enrich the now barren appearance of the west end of the nark. More (and more attractive) trash receptacles and a stricter maintenance program are desirable. The successful reactiva- tion of the fountain by community groups suggests that further community and service club donation of money, talent and time is the route to follow in restoring this small remaining fragment of what was once one of the glories of Atascadero. The Chalk Mountain Regional Park is a County project with is nearly completed. In 1970 , the State of California declared 200 acres of Atascadero State Hospital to be surplus . The Board of Supervisors directed the Planning Department to explore the feasibility of constructing a golf course and related facilities. In 1973 , a 10-year minimum development plan was approved in principle by the Board of Supervisors. In 1977 , having funded the project, the Board has directed the implementation of Phase I. Maps VI-3 and VI-3A. Of the three Little Leaaue Baseball Fields, two are located in the sewage plant area and one in the Atascadero Lake Park area. The acreages are about 1. 5 and 1. 0 , respectively. DELETE Because the two fields located adjacent to the sewage plant S E N T E MC.E are designated for industrial uses in this Plan, another site near _v shall e found to relocate them. In addition, the northeast octant needs a field. The Wranglerette Arena is an area of 5 acres of bottomland, consisting of a fenced arena, clubhouse and improvements, along with 25 acres of Salinas River bed. In event of dissolution of the organization, this property cannot be sold for profit of the membership and possible would be deeded to the community. Neighborhood Parks provide recreational opportunities not available on private residential land. Tfi_ey can be coor7 dinated in a community recreation program that. meets. the needs of all age groups These parks shall be properly located so they best serve th.e population intended to use them. Examples of recreation facilities that shall be con- sidered include: community rooms , playgrounds and picnic equipment, ball fields and courts, 1. All school grounds shall be avilable for public rec7 reational use when classes are not in session, as shall the High School tennis courts and 50-meter Olympic pool when not in scheduled use. 2. An area of approximatelv five acres shall be acquired adjacent to each new school site wherein playground and recreational facilities could be constructed to supple- ment school facilities. ADD �� FUBLILL-Y OWNED PRDPEPTY ON TRAFFIC WAY FROM OLMEDA TO BASADAr INGLUDINC— THE TWO LITTLE LEAGUE FIELDSTHE ' SEvVAG-E �LAIUT AREA AND THE NAT'IDNAL GUARD ARM62Y SHALL fSE AAASTEIZ PLANAJED FOR A MIX OF PUBLIC AND LFEGRF_A7"I0NAL rrccc n , I ORDINANCE NO. 157 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT RELATIVE TO ALLOWED USES IN THE PUBLIC ZONE (ZC: 10-87) i WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment proposes stand- ards consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800, et. seq. , of the California Government Code concerning Zoning .Regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant ad- verse effect upon the environment and preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not necessary; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 21, 1987 and has recommended approval of Zoning Ordinance Text Change 10-87. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Council Findings. After conducting a public hearing, the City Council finds and determines that: 1. The proposed zoning text amendment would be in compliance with the City of Atascadero' s General Plan. 2. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the Negative Declaration granted the project by the Community Development Director is appropriate. Section 2. Zoning Text Change. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 10-87 is approved to change the text of the Zoning Ordinance to read as follows: 1. Section 9-3. 422 is modified to add subsection (t) Outdoor Recreation Services (see attached Exhibit A) . e Section 3. Publication. ORDINANCE NO. 157 0 0 The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code: shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef- fect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by the motion was approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: A4a.ulwt E:N'0� HENRY ENGEIV Community Developm t Director ADOPTED JM4E 27, 1983 Ex H 1 B IT- A 20N E C WAN GE 10-5 •^ P (Public) zone 9-3. 421. Purpose: This zone is established to provide suitable locations and standards for the maintenance and development of public facilities and services. 9-3.422. Allowable Uses: The following uses shall be allowed in the Public Zone. The establishment of allowable uses shall be as pro- vided by Section 9-2.107 (Plot Plans) and Section 9-2.108 (Precise Plans) : (a) Broadcasting studios (b) Caretaker residence (See Section 9-6.104) (c) Cemeteries (d) Collection station (See Section 9-6.130) (e) Health care services (f) Libraries and museums (g) Offices (h) Temporary offices (See Section 9-6.176) (i) Pipelines (j) Public assembly and entertainment (k) Schools '(See Section. 9-6.125) (1) Skilled nursing facility (See Section 9-6.134) (m) Social and service organizations (n) Temporary events (See Section 9-6 .177) (o) Temporary or seasonal retail sales (See Section 9-6 .174) (p) Transit stations and terminals (q) Utility service centers (r) Utility transmission facilities (s) Accessory storage (See Section 9-6.103) (OUTDOOR REGQEA-F q) <ER6 (CES 9-3. 423. Conditional Uuse ses: The following s• may be allowed in the Public Zone. The establishment of conditional uses shall be as 3-46 • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council August 11, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager V" FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 2F-87 LOCATION: City Wide APPLICANT: City of Atascadero REQUEST: To revise the land use policy regarding determinations of lot size for land divisions, allowable densities, and numbers of animals BACKGROUND: • The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter at its July 21, 1987 meeting, and recommended approval of General Plan Amendment 2F-87 to modify Land Use Policy #8 on a 4 :1: 2 vote. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. 83-87 ALTERNATIVE• Refer the proposed change in the definition of density to the General Plan Update study to be considered in relation to proposed lot sizes. HE:ph Enclosures: Staff Report - July 21, 1987 Resolution No. 83-87 Cit of A a a r • City t sc de o STAFF REPORT Item: B_6 FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: July 21, 1987 BY: Y,S Steven L. Decamp, Senior Planner File No: GP 2F-87 Project Address: City wide SUBJECT: City initiated amendment to the General Plan to revise the land use policy regarding determinations of lot size for land divisions , allowable densities, and numbers of animals. A. ANALYSIS: The General Plan' s Land Use Policies provide direction for the determination of lot sizes for various purposes. Land Use Policy #8 reads as follows: 'In the calculation of lot area for the purposes of • considering land divisions and in determining permitted numbers and types of animals allowed, gross acreage shall be used. However, in determining permitted densities for mutiple family residential developments, net acreage (excluding land area needed for streets rights-of-way) shall be used" Central to an understanding of, and application of this policy, are definitions of the terms "gross acreage" and "net acreage" . The Zoning Ordinance provides definitions for both of these terms in Chapter 9 (General Definitions) . The definitions are: Site Area, Gross. The total area of a legally created parcel (or contiguous parcels of land in single or joint ownership when used in combination for a building or permitted group of buildings) , including any ultimate street right-of-way, existing rights-of-way deeded to the parcel, and all easements (except open space easements) , across the site. Site Area, Net. The gross site area minus any ultimate street rights-of-way and all easements (except open easements) that limit the surface use of the site for building construction. A primary concern with the application of Land Use Policy #8 has 0 0 been the inclusion of road right-of-way in the calculation of gross lot size area in residential zones. In practice, one-half of the right-of-way of any street abutting a parcel has been included in the determination of that parcel ' s area if the right-of-way is owned by the abutting property owner (see Exhibit A) . This right-of-way is not counted if it is not owned by the abutting property owner as shown on his title report. This procedure has led to confusion regarding who owns fee title in the right-of-way of the various streets within the City. A second concern that has been expressed regarding the use of "gross acreage" involves the actual useable area of a parcel. The rights- of way of most roads in residential areas of Atascadero are forty (40) feet wide. Therefore, an area measuring twenty feet deep (one-half of the R-O-W) by the width of the lot may be added to the size of the parcel if the right-of-way is counted as part of the lot. This additional area may be quite significant because of the relatively large lots in most residential areas. Although this area may be large, it is not truely useable for residential purposes because it is, indeed, road right-of-way. This raises the question regarding the intent of the plan. Is the intent to have the minimum lot sizes represent actual useable lot area, or to merely reflect the extent of individual ownership? The City Council recently adopted an urgency ordinance (Ordinance 152) which deletes road right-of-way from lot size calculations in RSF-X (Residential Single Family; 1/2 without sewers, 20, 000 sq. ft. with sewers) zoning districts (see Exhibit B) . This was done to clairfy the Council ' s intent to have lots in that zone actually contain the minimum lot size in useable area. The Council found that the inclusion of road right-of-way, either public or private, in the calculation of lot sizes did not meet the intent of the General Plan or Zoning Ordinance. In the interest of clairity and uniform application, it appears appropriate to apply this same standard to lot size calculations in each of the residential land use designations and zoning districts. A multiplicity of standards within the various residential zones for the calculation of lot sizes does not appear to serve any legitimate purpose. If a standard is to be established that requires that each lot contain its minimum size in useable area, then that standard should apply in all residential zones. The establishment of a lot size calculation standard that is consistent from zone to zone will eliminate confusion and avoid future conflicts. For example, if a street or road separates zone districts, would it be appropriate to count the road right-of-way in the lot size calculation on one side of the street and not on the other? A related issue that has been raised relative to minimum lot sizes 2 0 0 is the question of parcel configuration. Specifically, should the shape of a lot (eg. , "flag lots") be considered at the same time as, or as part of, lot size determinations? There are several factors or characteristics of parcel shape which are legitimate concerns when a subdivision is being considered. These factors include the width to depth ratio, length of road frontage, topographic features, drainage, and means of access. These considerations should be included in the City' s Subdivision Ordinance, however. The General Plan should provide goals and policy direction to guide future decisions and actions of the City. The more specific details of implementation should be included in the City' s various ordinances such as the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. Factors such as flag lots and length of road frontage are discussed and regulated in this City' s existing and proposed new Subdivision Ordinances. B. SUMMARY: The City' s General Plan sets goals and defines policies intended to achieve a desired community appearance and lifestyle. Primary among these goals is the stated desire to maintain a rural quality of life. To achieve this goal, the Plan gives clear policy direction relative to the maintenance of large-lot residential areas. It is appropriate, therefore, for the Plan' s policies to speak to the method used for determining minimum lot area standards for various uses. The Plan should leave the specifics of lot size calculations and subdivision design to more specific ordinances, however. C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of General Plan amendment 2F-87 to modify Land Use Policy #8 to read as follows: "In the calculation of lot area for the purposes of considering land divisions, permitted densities for mutiple family residential developments, and permitted numbers and types of animals allowed, net acreage (area exclusive of road rights-of-way) shall be used. " Findings for Approval are contained in Exhibit C. A draft Resolution of Approval is contained in Exhibit D. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A. Examples Exhibit B. Ordinance 152 Exhibit C. Findings for Approval Exhibit D. Resolution of Approval 3 s i-r A CITY s� OF ATASCADERO �,�a�,p(� e ►-�ys COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VS. ndf XGl-cX14 DEPARTMENT G P 2F- 87 GROSS ACREAGE ATO CENTER OF RIGHT-OF-WAY) NET ACREAGE ATO EDGE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY) RIGHT-OF-WAY REV. 5/11/87 • • 8 5/26/87 cx�+ir3iT 6 ORDINANCE NO. 152 4P Zr- 0-7 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 9 ZONING REGULATIONS BY CLARIFYING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED LOT SIZE IN THE LSF-X AND RSF-X DISTRICT AS REQUIRING A NET MINIMUM LAND AREA OF 20 ,000 SQUARE FEET WITH SEWER (EXCLUDING LAND AREA NEEDED FOR STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY WHETHER PUBLICLY OR PRIVATELY OWNED) WHEREAS, Section 65858 of the Government Code authorizes the adoption by local legislative bodies of interim ordinances as urgency measures to protect the public safety, health and welfare; and WHEREAS, said ordinances may be adopted as urgency measures pro- hibiting actions which may be in conflict with a contemplated zoning proposal which the legislative body, Planning Commission or Community Development Department is considering, or studying, or intends to study within a reasonable time; and WHEREAS, the City is presently studying amendments to the City' s General Plan and zoning regulations to clarify definitions of minimum lot areas required; and WHEREAS, the City Zoning Ordinance Sections 9-3. 154 and 9-3. 164 were recently amended (Ordinance 145) to reduce minimum lot size in the RSF-X and LSF-X districts to 20 ,000 square feet with sewers; and WHEREAS, said revision was a reduction from one-half acre minimum lot size to eliminate disputes as to credit for fee ownership of roads with the objective of setting a minimum net lot area of 20 , 000 square feet in these districts where sewer is available regardless of ownership of said fee title to the roads; and WHEREAS, applications for the subdivisions of land with lot sizes of less than 20, 000 square feet net have been submitted contrary to the City Council' s intent; and WHEREAS, such urgency measures shall require a four-fifths vote of the legislative body for adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the' City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Council Findings. 1. The proposed code amendment is in conformance with Section 65800 et seq of the California Government Code concerning zoning regulations. 2. The proposed zoning text amendment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Preparation of an Environ- mental Impact Report is not necessary. 3. That there are pending applications for subdivisions of land in conflict • .with general plan and zoning changes being studied. 4. That further study is necessary to determine what legislation, if any, is proper for the protection of the public health, safety and welfare. 5. That there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, and that the approval of addition- al subdivisions inconsistent with the zoning text changes pro- vided for herein, would result in a threat to public health, safety, or welfare. Section 2. Zoning Text Change. That the chart in Section 9-3.154 Minimum Lot Size in the Resi- dential Single Family zone and 9-3. 164 Minimum Lot Size in the Lim- ited Residential Single Family Zone shall be changed to read as fol- lows in relation to the Symbol X: SYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE X 20 ,000 square foot net area (excluding land area needed for street rights-of-way whether publicly or privately owned) with sewer ; half acre net area (excluding land area needed for street rights-of-way) whether publicly or privately owned) where sewer is not available. Section 3. All applications for a permit for a subdivision of land which had been pending before the City on May 12, 1987 shall not be affected by or subject to the restraints herein enacted. Section 4. This ordinance is adopted under Government Code Section 65858. Section 5. The City Council hereby declares that this is an urgency ordinance necessary to preserve the public peace, health and safety due to the facts set forth above. Section 6 . This ordinance being an urgency ordinance for the immediate pro- tection of the public safety, health and general welfare, containing a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency and passed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. U Section 7. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance, and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. On motion by COUNCILWOMAN NORRIS and seconded by COUNCIL- WOMAN BORGESON , the foregoing ordinance is hereby adopted in its —en- tirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS BORGESON, BOURBEAU, NORRIS AND MAYOR MACKEY NOES: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMAN HANDSITY DATE ADOPTED: 5/26/87 CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 0 MARJORIE R. MACKEY, Mayor ,ATTEST:;) By: BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor Pro Tempore BOYD . SHARITZ, Cit lerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: (4 M CHA S ELTO , City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: RE G. OR NSEN, City Attorney EPARED HENRY ENGEN, Community De Vlopment Director • • EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval GP 2F-87 (City Wide) July 21, 1987 FINDINGS• 1. The proposed general plan amendment recommended by the Planning Commission is consistent with the goals and policies of the gen- eral plan by providing standards and direction for determination of minimum lot sizes. 2. The proposed general plan amendment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. The Negative Declaration pre- pared for the project is adequate. • 0 RESOLUTION NO. 83-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE CITY' S GENERAL PLAN PERTAINING TO CHAPTER V, LAND USE POLICY #8 REGARDING LOT SIZE DETERMINATIONS (GP 2F-87 : CITY OF ATASCADERO) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has grown considerably since in- corporation; and WHEREAS, the City' s general plan, which was prepared in the 1970 ' s and adopted in 1980 to guide the City' s general growth is in need of updating; and WHEREAS, the City' s Planning Agency has initiated a general plan amendment relative to the Land Use Policies to update that component of the general plan; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero 0 conducted a public hearing on subject matter on July 21, 1987 ; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a general plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows: 1. The proposed general plan amendment recommended by the Plan- ning Commission is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan by providing standards and direction for determination of minimum lot sizes. 2. The proposed general plan amendment will not have a signifi- cant adverse effect on the environment. The Negative Declar- ation prepared for the project is adequate. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to approve General Plan Amendment GP: 2F-87 as follows: 1. Amendments to the text as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" . On motion by and seconded by the resolution was approved by the following roll call vote: • Resolution No. 83-87 Page Two AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor ATTEST: City of Atascadero, California BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGE , Community velopme 4irector EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 83-87 GP 2F-87 Land Use Policy #8 : In the calculation of lot area for the purposes of considering land divisions and is determining permitted members and types of animals allewed; gross aereage shall be Used.. permitted densities for multiple family residential developments and permitted numbers and Wes of animals allowed, net acreage area exclusive ofrow rights-of-way, whether publicly or Rrivate�Y owned) shall used. MeweveFT in determining permitted demainies for multiple family Fesideatial develepmemts; ret aereage jemeluding land area needed for streets Figkts-a€-way3 shall be ased Basked text to be deleted. Underlined text to be added. • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council August 11, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager ' FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Continued Consideration Tentative Parcel Map 5-87 LOCATION: 8925 Atascadero Avenue (Parcel A of CO 76-280) APPLICANT: Robert S. Fisher REQUEST: Consideration of redesign of a subdivision g containing 1.72 acres into 2 lots of . 99 and . 73 acres each, re- spectively. Original request was for division into three lots containing . 5 acres, . 5 acres and . 72 acres. • BACKGROUND: At the City Council ' s April 28th, 1987 meeting this proposed threeway lot split was removed from the Consent Agenda and staff was directed to negotiate with the applicant, with the intent to split the property two ways (refer to attached background materials) . Subsequently, the applicant has submitted a letter in support of the three-way split, together with modified exhibits for two-way and a three-way lot split which show topgraphy and turn around details for emergency vehicles. ANALYSIS• As reflected in the attached minute excerpts, the issues that were raised with this proposed split focused on emergency access, adequacy of turn arounds for fire equipment and drainage. City standards for private roads require 16 foot of paving on a 20 foot base. This condition of approval would apply to either a two-way or three-way split of the property. The exhibits submitted on July 22nd comparing the two-way split with a three-way split have been re- viewed and approved by the Fire Department for turn-around. Note that the turn-around detail would be essentially the same for either de- sign. With respect to drainage, the project is conditioned to submit appro- priate grading, drainage and erosion control plans and appropriate• improvement requirements as approved by the Public Works Department. With respect to the drainage towards Atascadero Avenue, there would be no increase in drainage caused by a three-way split in that the pro- posed third lot drains towards Coromar. STAFF RECOMMENDATION (3 WAY SPLIT) : Approval subject to the Planning Commission' s recommended findings and conditions of approval to accommodate a three-way division as reflec- ted in the Exhibit submitted on July 22,1987 . ALTERNATIVE (2 WAY SPLIT) : If following review and discussion, Council concludes that a two-way split is appropriate, this could be accomplished by approving a re- vised Exhibit D, Findings for Approval with Finding No. 1 changed to read as follows: "l. The creation of a land division re-designed to accommodate two parcels conforms to the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. " In addition, Exhibit E Conditions of Approval (revised) could be modi-• fied to add a new Condition No. 1, and renumbering of subsequent con- ditions, with Condition No. 1 to read as follows: "1. The applicant shall redesign the project consistent with the attached Exhibit submitted July 22, 1987 for a two lot split. " HE:ph Attachments: Two Lot Split - July 22, 1987 Three Lot Split - July 22, 1987 Communication from Robert Fisher , June 11, 1987 City Council Minutes Excerpt - April 28, 1987 Staff Report to City Council - April 28, 1987 Planning Commission Minutes - April 7, 1987 cc: Robert S. Fisher John Falkenstein (1, Z:"O:' n,':.::� co p C m 'r VIF it t 1 04 W �71, •` Q IL 0 PLC II! 3 _• a x •i` a �! d Z -- -_ .on•LY ��Y.Lf n �' � : j '� J V i� Y a C x•- w cc 1 6 � b e I J j 0 n � _ I • LU 8 . 4 s i z A • p� j � r f O� I J 1 • , II Y � ` J U� < G s � is • • 1 H J� c t3ty • `6 • u • 4 4 C 32 : Lor r ,S AZP�.! T •�L js 30N3AV Otl3OtlDSVlV j I 8 _ (t7'W Li 1,7[�IN 5 IW,[C`ul - :L—L nJY.tca (+:,c.t ' O o co � e • - `�_- W • ----- - I J al k; � z �� --------- — --- a N 3z ' ----- _--- - -- --- _ N ic ria}i V ` oc W z s a ii� LjJ Lij UJ cr i ^.P o• J :: LIS .. �G O W Q rte- F < p n t U tl 6 0 LI'�M, i YLL rl.r..4 t• (�i I I I C. T O tll ^I m i 1 J� 1' W � U a e I :_ O •_ , • i c I o • :, i o - c 1^ • •F O - J • • S C n • 0 e • 0 e 1 v 1 • 0 a V i w 1 a V� < IL u ,• 5PLI T 0 I 'eF c� • � 3LIN3AV Otl34vOSV 1V Robert S. Fisher 8925 Atascadero Ave. Tel : 466-7193 543-,6435 June 11 , 1987 City of Atascadero Administration Bldg. Post Office Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 Dear Council Members: Re: Tentative Parcel Map 5-87 Please accept this letter as a formal acknowledgement that I wish to proceed with my tentative parcel map as orginally proposed. I request that the item be placed on the Council agenda for the July 14th meeting. I have second thoughts about going into such detail regarding this matter in a letter, but feel some real clarification of the issues are called for. I feel these are better presented to you in this outline form and thank you in advance for taking the time to read it. The reasons for my decision are as follows: 1 . The project, as submitted, is in total conformance with general plan, zoning, and subdivision requirements. I am not requesting any special considerations. 0 2. I am in total agreement with all the conditions for approval in the Planning Department ' s staff report . 3. There are no real drainage, traffic , or fire access problems and I would urge you to confirm this with the various city departments involved ( fire, planning, public works) . These issues are simply exaggerations raised by one neighbor who is, and has been consistently opposed to the 20, 000 sq. ft . zoning (see item 4) , and is using every method available to stop the lot splits in our neighborhood . 4. I am a licensed architect . I deal with site planning, grading, drainage, and access circulation on a daily basis in my profession. There are no problems on this site. I have retained a civil engineer with additional expertise in these areas. It is also his opinion that there are no Problems with this proposal . Your own professional City Staff (planning, fire, engineering) recommends approval of the three-way split with conditions I am in complete agreement with. Their non-biased input, in my opinion, is the most useful you can receive on this matter. Your Planning Commission, after review of the issues involved, also supported the three-way split . The only objections to the project have come from my neighbor who has and will continue to oppose any lot splits in the area because he simply does not agree with the new zoning classification for the neighborhood. While he is entitled to his opinion 4 to disagree with your unanimous decision (to allow 20,,000 sq . ft . parcels in the area) , he should not be allowed to distort or exaggerate the actual conditions that exist on the site. His expertise in land use planning is limited; he is not a recognized expert in any of the related site Planning fields. 5. The two areas of discussion at the April 28th Council meet- ing which saw this item continued were fire access and drainage. Regarding fire access: dropping to a two-way split will in no way alter driveway, turnaround, and hydrant requirements from that which is needed for the three-way split. The drainage concerns are also moot . There is simply no impact on the drainage patterns due to the third lot as it is entirely beyond the high point of the property and drains completely in the opposite direction from the objecting neighbor. Any concentration of drainage water near this neighbor is due to the improper grading or shelf cut. into his lot when it was developed. Approving my project will alleviate this minor and temporary concentra- tion at the driveway mid-point (see conditions for approval #12, Exhibit E) . Dropping to a two-way split will not change these conditions or requirements in any way. For the reasons stated above, I believe a three-way split is per- fectly reasonable for the site. In closing, the project as presented meets all the requirements of the City of Atascadero . None of the professionals involved have any problem supporting the three-way split, and it was approv- ed by the Planning Commission. Based on the one objecting neigh- bor ' s concerns, there is simply no difference between a two and a three-way split. I will be contacting each of you prior to the Council meeting to discuss the possibility of visiting the site. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding this matter. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Robert S. Fisher Copy to: Community Development Department Steven L. Decamp, Senior Planner T. Cy Cil IL r. Engen, Commun. Devel. Director, gave staff report. Pub 'c Comment sc John F kenstien, representing Mr. Hawkins, reviewed the hi ory o this ap ication. He spoke in support of Council appro 1 of thi map and pr` osed subdivision. Mr. Jorgensen,' City Atty. , stated that he believes the proposed ma does meet the etter of the law as far as the 20, Q,01 sq. ft. minimu being within one operty ownership; however , he asked if it was th Council's desire allow 20,000 sq, ft, lots where a considerable portion of each lot m'\oted ctively unusable because it is withi road right-of-ways. Ht staff will, e bringing a recommen dation before Counci20 ,000 sq,,/kt. standard be amended tinclude those areas exroad right-of-ways, which will solv the problem for the fuFurther related discus ,. )4r. Engen referenced an earlie exhibit which accompanied the General Plan amendment indicating a 10 ' lot development. Council consented`to urge that staff amend the zon ing text, possibly by urgency ordinanbe, to address the issue of gros acreage vs. net acreage. Mr.l-= Engen responded that he would consul with the City Atty. for alternatives and `-report back to Council. MOTION: By Councilwoman N rris to approve TTM 4-87 , seconded by May- or Mackey; Mv� Jorgensen advised that-,the Council direct that specific 1pnguage be included to identity what the contribu- tion for/sidewalks would be, treating thlts item consistent) with th.eprior item. Mayor Mackey withdre her second, an VION: By 'ion died. cilwoman Norris to approve TTM 4-87 , sub ct to nego of a contribution for sidewalks to be bro ht back a 5/12/87 meeting, seconded by Mayor Mackey; p sed 3 :1 uncilwoman Borgeson opposed. cilwoman Norris to continue meeting past 11:00 d by Councilman Bourbeau; passed unanimously. *7. (*Item A-15 , pulled from Consent Calendar) Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 5-87 - 8925 Atascadero Ave. - Subdivision of 1. 66 Acre Parcel into 3 Lots of . 5 , .5 & .66 Acres Each - Fisher Mr. Engen, Commun. Devel. Director, gave staff report. Public Comment Robert Fisher, applicant, disputed neighbors claims of flooding and drainage problems; he thinks the conditions listed in the staff. report address any problems, urging approval of his application. 9 9 ! Dennis Lockridge, 8935 Atascadero Ave. , expressed strong oppositio this project, mainly due to site suitability, drainage deficiency and flag lot development. He expressed concern regarding potential emergency access issues as well as driveway maintenance responsibili- ties. Mr. Engen responded to concerns expressed, reviewing related Conditions of Approval in agenda packet. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson to deny TPM 5-87; motion died for lack of a second. Council discussion ensued regarding whether a two-way split would be acceptable to both Council and the applicant. Mr. Jorgensen, City Atty. , recommended a continuance of this item in order to allow staff to work with the applicant and establish findings for a possible two- way split. MOTION: By Councilman Bourbeau to continue TPM 5-87, directing staff to negotiate with the applicant with the intent to split the property two ways, rather than three, and come up with an acceptable emergency vehicle turnaround. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Norris; passed unanimously, with Councilman Handshy absent. MOTION: an Bourbeau to recess as Co convene a the Atas. Cou s rict, seconded by Council woman Bor e e unan ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT (ACSD) **Mr. . nsibaugh, Pub. Works Director , suggested Items D-2 & e ad dresse rior to Items 1 & 3 in consideration of the plicants represent ves being present; the Board consented. **2. Assessment ' strict #3 (Marchant Way) - Fund_ ' g change Order Re quest for Exca tion (West Coast Tank and Pe Company) Mr. Sensibaugh, Pub. Work irector, gave aff report. He introduce John Falkenstien, the Projec Engineer , resent to respond to ques- tions. Public Comment Gary Carripo, W. Coast Ta & Pipe, addres d reasons for this chang order request, revie ' ng the history of eve s evolving around thei agreement with the y. He noted that what is'ing requested is fair and equit e amount (some compromise betty staff' s propose $5,870 and W. ast s requested $35 , 330 . 50) so W. Coa I can recoup it costs. Discu on between Council and staff ensued on the issue of l idat da es. 10 M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council April 28, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager 0 FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map 5-87 LOCATION: 8925 Atascadero Avenue (Parcel A of CO 76-280) APPLICANT: Robert S. Fisher REQUEST: Subdivision of one parcel containing 1 . 72 acres into three lots containing 0. 5 acres, 0. 5 acres and 0. 72 acres. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 7, 1987 concerning the above-referenced subject, approving the land division request on a 3 : 2 vote subject to the findings and conditions contained in the attached staff report with deletion of Condition #18 (which is already covered by ordinance) . Robert Fisher , applicant, noted he was in agreement with the staff recommendation. Comments were heard by Dennis Lockridge and Dave Crawford opposing the proposed lot split because of potential flooding and drainage problems as well as problems associated with flag lot developments. There was discussion among the Commission relative to fire require- ments, drainage requirements, and road widening. No one else spoke on the matter. RECOMMENDATION: Approval subject to the Planning Commission' s recommended findings and conditions of approval. HE:ps ATTACHMENTS : Staff Report - April 7, 1987 Revised Conditions of Approval cc: Robert Fisher •aTgeTTene aJe siamas aaagm gaa3 ajenbs 000' OZ Pus aTgeTTene 4ou aae sJaMas 8JagM saJoe S •0 ST auoZ sTg4 UT aZTs qoT unUITuTut ags •4oTa4sTp buTUOZ X-dS2d ue UT p94POOT ST uoTsTn -Tpgns joj pasodoid Agaadoid agy •sa.aoe ZL• 0 pue 'saaoe S•O 'sa.aoe S '0 buTuTequoo sTaoied (£) a9zg4 oquT sa.aoe ZL •T buTuTe4uoo Taoied auo 3o uoTsTnTpgns agq sasodoid uoTssTumtoO agq ajojaq uoTgeoTTdde aqL SISx'IvNv •S L86T '£Z Ajenjgad pagsod uoT4eJeT09Q anTgebaN. . . . . . . . .sngegS Te4u9uiuo.zTnud •8 ATTwvd a12UTS A4Tsu9Q g5Tg• • • • •uoT4eu5TsaQ ueTd TeJauaO .L X-asu :gsaM X-asu :-4sed X-asu :ggnoS X-dSH :g4JON. . . . . . . . . . . . . •buTuoZ 4uaoeCPV .9 buTTTemP ATTure J aTbuTs a suTe4uoo T Taoaed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .asn buTPsTxd 'S X-aS2I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .buTuoZ •T7 saloe ZL.T. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ea-Tv a,4TS •£ jags-rd 'S :Ijagog. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .anT-4equasa.zdad •Z lagsTa 'S gjagog. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4ueoTTddV .T :SIDVa UNV NOIIVfllI S *V •94ep 4eg4 uo paT,JT40u osTe ajam Agjadoid goaCgns agq go g99j 00£ uTggTM p94eooT pjooaa go siaumo dgjadoid TTS' * L86T ' LZ gOJeW 'AeP -TJd uo sMaN o.z9peose4V ago UT pagsTTgnd sem BUTJeag oTTgnd go aoT40N :GNn0HDXDVS •s910e ue sa�oe saaoe buTUTe uoo ZL'0 P S '0 S '0 � sgoT (£) aaJg4 04uT saJoe ZL, •T buTuTe4uoo Taoied auo 90 uoTstnTpgnS loaf EMS (08Z-9L-00 30 V Tao.aed) anuaAV oaapeosegV SZ68 :ssa'ppV 40a ojd :o a T Jauue JoTua Id e Wds N d d ut a uana L8 S T . T S 0 Q 'Z SS d� L86T L TTjdv :aqeQ buTqaaW uoTssTutuioO buTuueTd :2103 luod2 2, ddIrss s•D :wa'4I oaapeosegv go AgTO 0 • Staff Report - TPM 5-87 8925 Atascadero Ave. (Fisher) Page Two Analysis - Cont'd The subject property currently contains a single family residence on Parcel 1. Proposed Parcels 2 and 3 are vacant. The new lots being created are located behind the existing dwelling. Access to these rear lots will be by easement crossing the front lot. This easement will also serve as a Public Utilities Easement allowing the rear lots to be connected to existing utilities in Atascadero Avenue. The area surrounding the subject parcel was the subject of recent Gen- eral Plan and Zoning Ordinance amendments allowing for the establish- ment of one-half acre and 20 ,000 square foot lots. The proposal be- fore the Commission is in conformance with the new General Plan and Zoning Ordinance provisions. Staff believes that the type and density of development proposed is apropriate for the neighborhood. C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Parcel Map 5-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit D and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit E. SLD:ph Attachments: Exhibit A - Location and Zoning Map Exhibit B - Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit C - Parcel Map Detail Exhibit D - Findings for Approval Exhibit E - Conditions of Approval E ONE X11517 Q \ � � � _pvF A -`� —f�N►�, ( Y IP�� M LLA0-100 M (PD 0 Av / a f(�C oar JT X946 p / Boob QO S, pNOa , %�/ 10 al� c s6/ NO o i �6 a 1 m t X` oM4s v COq oq, / o �u 3 y� 9s r p oe4tT ll • L / \ / 4 Lf i i s w AS�A?Eao 0P\ p,J r O SIZE Q ,/ 99Z5- AVE ✓� 0P /I SO 4 7AD \ 6L VIEW , J Off" � �VIEW i \ c SF• L(FH) 9rvE—) \ / RSj �•�_ K �'tE \ntw SF-X( ) f 5 NTS O 1 �.� 0 V _ 644151 i 13 UJ nen i PM 5U. - 57 U �zya Via } J � F3 � si da Z i 'mss fl CL WiL WIr > � � l� �r .s { t- � !3 a a a joy z I� I� o $ M m i � ►- o IF , �z I^ I ,l5'o5L a.gi,�ti,Lg'rl(�t,fYaet a,ot,[6d � fa),9gotY aAtoCs� N It'�IL` �l_7_47` Nog pl,• '= d�� 471- r W » ,` _� °� �5 cc -tom �1 J —1 z W Tj cr ° a ! CC ^ a ° r �+ a. I a a� awn— W a � Wm . ii cc _ 1 W k g � Yg ' t F7 Yit o0 oEt I Q o a j� 49'tY s+,oG,St.Lg z a ''s CL'4C9 I ,ti4 tL[ a,aY,6L,L5 N ( )'Y'4'LLI a,at.Cc cc ul U - zn a- a v • gt 3 ui 0 .. r I I ( � • }v c� y ��•1 c F-xrca l Mar Dd4-x4l TPnrt S- e� m x M w v M z n M J � O � n CL -- 1l9•L�� - ppu�cq 19' erhe�er+t w4 Y / � s / ti R C 0 D O Cl) / Or ,4 �o cn r O m G% o N D \R�/ Z \ n O y / Z �\ ,S\06� D - m'-— � y -IDo r \ cP —r Sao•-_ . _ _ �� � s nm �\ \ D — _ I o —o-- - - - - - --- - --- __ z _ moo �b PRELIMINARY MASTER PLAN FOR ROBERT & WENDY FISHER 8925 ATASCADERO AVE. 1 MAR. '87 • • EXHIBIT D - Findings for Approval TPM 5-87 (Fisher) April 7, 1987 FINDINGS: 1. The creation of these parcels conforms to the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. 2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the recommended Conditions of Approval, will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development pro- posed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed. 5. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife of their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvement will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or that substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7 . The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474. 6 of the State Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge of waste. • 0 EXHIBIT E - Conditions of Approval • TPM 5-87 (Fisher) April 7 , 1987 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel or its public utility easement prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility easements, pipelines and other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are other building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans, prepared by a reg- istered civil engineer, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recording the final map. 4. Drainage work and facilities shall be constructed to City of Atas- cadero standards prior to recording a final map. 5. Wastewater disposal shall be by connection to the public sewer. 6. Obtain sewer connection permits from the Public Works Department prior to hooking up to the public sewer . 7. A sewer annexation fee for the newly created parcels shall be paid prior to recording the final map. 8. A sewer connection fee for each single family lot shall be due in addition to usual connection, tap-in, and installation fees prior to issuance of building permits. 9. Provide sanitary sewer easements to the existing sewer easement at a size and location (s) acceptable to the City Engineer. 10. A new fire hydrant shall be installed to City standards at the intersection of the private road and Atascadero Avenue. 11. Obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Atascadero and con- struct a City Standard drive approach as directed by the encroach- ment permit prior to recording the final map. 12. Plan and profile drawings of proposed individual driveways, drive- way easements and private roads shall be submitted for approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments in order to determine average grade and appropriate improvement requirements. • • • Conditions of Approval TPM 5-87 (Fisher) Page Two 13. Road improvements to the private road shall be to the following standard and shall be completed prior to recording the final map: a. 16 foot wide all-weather traveled way. b. 20 foot wide graded road bed. 14. A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each parcel at the time it is first conveyed, and a note to this effect shall be placed on the final map. 15. An irrevocable offer of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following right-of-way for future road purposes shall be made and noted on the final map: Street Name: Atascadero Avenue Limits: Entire frontage of subject property Minimum Width: 30 feet from the centerline 16. An offer of dedication to the public for the Public Utilities Easements shall be made. 17. All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously to recording the final map. 18. Participate in eliminating a portion of the flood hazard to the property by posting a performance security with the City to be used for a drainage improvement project for channelizing the out- flow from Atascadero Lake to Atascadero Creek. In the event that a future assessment district is formed for the area drainage im- provements that include this project, then credit in the amount of the deposit will be applied towards final apportionment of the assessment if allowed by the assessment district proceedings. This shall appear as a note on the final map. 19. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor • shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. 0 Conditions of Approval TPM 5-87 (Fisher) Page Three b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be sub- mitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 20. Approval of this tentative parcel map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. • h EXHIBIT E - Conditions of Approval (R E V I S E D) TPM 5-87 (Fisher) April 7, 1987 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel or its public utility easement prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility easements, pipelines and other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are other building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans, prepared by a reg- istered civil engineer , shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recording the final map. 4. Drainage work and facilities shall be constructed to City of Atas- cadero standards prior to recording a final map. 5. Wastewater disposal shall be by connection to the public sewer . 6 . Obtain sewer connection permits from the Public Works Department prior to hooking up to the public sewer . 7. A sewer annexation fee for the newly created parcels shall be paid prior to recording the final map. 8 . A sewer connection fee for each single family lot shall be due in addition to usual connection, tap-in, and installation fees prior to issuance of building permits. 9. Provide sanitary sewer easements to the existing sewer easement at a size and location(s) acceptable to the City Engineer. 10. A new fire hydrant shall be installed to City standards at the intersection of the private road and Atascadero Avenue. 11. Obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Atascadero and con- struct a City Standard drive approach as directed by the encroach- ment permit prior to recording the final map. 12. Plan and profile drawings of proposed individual driveways, drive- way easements and private roads shall be submitted for approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments in order to determine average grade and appropriate improvement requirements. Conditions of Approval TPM 5-87 (Fisher) Page Two 13. Road improvements to the private road shall be to the following standard and shall be completed prior to recording the final map: a. 16 foot wide all-weather traveled way. b. 20 foot wide graded road bed. 14. A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each parcel at the time it is first conveyed, and a note to this effect shall be placed on the final map. 15. An irrevocable offer of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following right-of-way for future road purposes shall be made and noted on the final map: Street Name: Atascadero Avenue Limits: Entire frontage of subject property Minimum Width: 30 feet from the centerline 16. An offer of dedication to the public for the Public Utilities Easements shall be made. 17. All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously to recording the final map. 18. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. ! • Conditions of Approval TPM 5-87 (Fisher) Page Three b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be sub- mitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 19. Approval of this tentative parcel map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. Minutes - Planning Commission - April 7, 1987 treet being set back at 25 feet, and the fact that ]be e school d ectly across the street, he asked that a condition imposed at w require a 25 foot setback along the frontage and de of L s 5 and 1 along the new street and along Atascadero Avenuend ththat se ack be shown on the final map. Chairman Bo d felt that individual property owners shouof be re- quired to pt in sidewalks until the school puts in aidewalk since the school take' up two-thirds of the frontage on A scadero Avenue and added some additional comments on the sidewalk ' sue. In response to question from Commissioner Nolan •egarding the reword- ing of condition #26, `` r. Sensibaugh stated e applicant should give $500 towards downstream ainage improvement" above and beyond the normal drainage fees for t 's area in lieof a offsite easements. Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin s ted thasidewalks will be needed in that area and there should be so sort of guarantee that the develop- ers will participate in the cost o providing sidewalks. He did not feel that the amended condition ' n 'dewalks in the previous item was adequate. MOTION: By Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin ttv approve Tentative Tract 4-87 subject tQ,-the findings and nditions contained in the staff report w1th the following modifications: - deletior�..of conditions #23 and #24 - additidn of condition #31 (pertaining to ide setbacks) - ame�ndCtent to condition #26 Thi motion passed 3 :1 with a roll call vote; irman Bond i'ssenting. Commi,psioner Michielssen._ took his seat back on the Commission. C ir an Bond called a recess at 11:05 p.m. ; meeting reconvened at :23 p.m. 5. Tentative Parcel Ma 5-87 : Request initiated by Robert S. Fisher to allow subdivision of one parcel containing 1. 66 acres into three lots containing 0 . 5 acres, 0.5 acres, and 0 . 66 acres. Subject property is located at 8925 Atascadero Avenue (Parcel A of CO 76-280) . Mr. DeCamp presented the staff report recommending conditional approv- al, but noting condition #18 should be deleted as it is already cov- ered by ordinance. In response to question from Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin, Mr . DeCamp responded that the 16 foot road width is adequate for Fire Department apparatus. Mr. DeCamp pointed out that the Fire Department has asked for the installation of a new fire hydrant at the intersection of Atascadero Avenue and the new accessway to the proposed lots which will provide them with additional fire protection throughout the area. 9 Minutes - Planning Commission - April 7, 1987 Brief discussion ensued concerning fire requirements. Robert Fisher , applicant, stated his agreement with the recommenda- tions contained in the staff report. Dennis Lockridge stated he shares a driveway with the applicant and pointed out that the flag lot will serve four homes when developed. He expressed his strong opposition to this application due to compati- bility, `flood problems and flag lot development problems. He urged the Commission to -discourage continued development of flag lots. Dave Crawford, 8575 Portola Road, also spoke in opposition to the lot split stating there are severe drainage problems and the road is too narrow. Mr. Fisher stated that the driveway will be repaired and a culvert will be placed under the driveway to help with the drainage. There was some discussion concerning the drainage requirements in the area, as well as discussion concerning road widening. MOTION: By Commissioner Nolan to approve Tentative Parcel Map 5-87 subject to the findings and conditions contained in the staff report with the deletion of condition #18 ; seconded by Com- missioner Lopez-Balbontin. Commissioner Copelan asked Mr . Fisher for clarification on the dis- tance from the driveway line to the front of the property on Parcel 1. She expressed concern on the close proximity of the proposed homes to the driveway due to safety considerations. Motion passed 3 :2 with a roll call vote; Commissioner Copelan and Chairman Bond dissenting. one Change 1-87 : Re'qupst initiated by Robert and Patricia Nimmo (Michael omans) to revere the existing zoning from RSF-Z by adding anned Dev elopment Overlay (PD7) zoning designation. The overlay woul allow for a sma'13..ylot subdivision. Subject�Foperty is located a 9385 Vista Bonita (Lots 6, 7, and 10 thxx>ti'gs'h 15 , Tract 5) . 6b. Tentative Tract Map 2-87: �� Request initiated by Roberti � �tr aicia Nimmo (Michael Yeomans to allow a residentia.l�-resubdivisih..of 8 lots into 9 lots, wit eight of the lots y rI- ng in size from 5,-5-u to 6 ,750 square fee for resident ' ''use and one 4. 94 acre loaf r open space. Th prposal includes a request to establish Tri Garcia Lan aoad name for a proposed private road. Subjec t operty i ed at 9385 Vista Bonita (Lots 6 , 7, and 10 through 15 , rac L5so. 10 ITEJ§ B-5 (Attachment) Dennis V. Lochridge 8935 Atascadero Ave, Atascadero, CA 93422 To: Members of the City Council Subject: Consideration of Tentative Parcel Map 5-87 Location: 8925 Atascadero Ave, Applicant: Robert Fisher In an effort to better communicate my concerns of the above proposal I have decided to address each of you by letter. Please read this letter completely. I feel it will not only help you understand the position I have taken, but also give you additional information to help you make an obviously very difficult decision. I recently learned that Mr. Fisher has ignored the City Council 's instructions to negotiate with Staff and is returning to the Council this week with his original 3-way lot split proposal, (As a back-up, he 's coming with an additional 2- ,ray split proposal, ) I am appalled at this action. I strongly believe the original proposal would have been denied had the applicant not agreed to a compromise. Nevertheless, my reason for opposing this issue has not changed. I am concerned both for a 3-way split and a 2-way split, In brief outline they are as follows: 1, Expanding vertical use on an already burdened "flag lot": Two families currently share this driveway including routine and regular visits of family, friends, and delivery service vehicles. Simply paving the sur ace will only encourage unsafe and uncontrolled saeeds. Add to that two more households and the burdens and risks double, 2. Inaress and egress of vehicles During Emergency Situations: I realize the applicant will be required to make certain driveway improvements. I still have to wonder when dealing with over 700 feet of private driveways, can we possibly expect anythin� but confusion? Will those 'turn outs" shown on the applicant s tentative map be :Wade available for emergency use at all times? I have to suspect, being private property, they are more likely to be used as visitor parking, RV storage, and/or a place to park that extra family car, 3. In reference to the Drainage Problem: There is a drainage problem, and it is REAL, Admittedly I 'm not a grading "expert" or a licensed engineer, but I do live "down slope" from the applicant. I do witness some type of watershed problem every. rainy season. Portions of our common driveway are washed out every year, These are facts about problems that do exist in reality Eut *nay; not show on an arc itect ' s drawing board, Mr. Fisher ' s proposal would not only reduce the areas of natural penetration and increase runoff, it would also encourage additional areas of water pooling, In conclusion I ask that you deny tentative parcel map 5-87. I believe the items discussed above would support such a denial. I 've read the Conditions of Approval. aad feel they don 't completely address all the areas where there should be concern For the record I have never objected t size, M objections J ° t lfi P oject because of lot e y ctions are J strictly related to the ability of the "flag lot", a private drivewaytaccomodate the future speculations of ths applicant, this plan, and esPectf *lly, De-nn-1s--V. Lochri ge • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council August 11, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager tV t FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director JAS SUBJECT: Zone Change 7-87 : Second Reading of Ordinance No. 155 (9255 E1 Camino Real: Don Messer/Cuesta Engineering) BACKGROUND/RECOMMENDATION: This Ordinance had first reading approval on July 28, 1987 . Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 155, second reading. • HE:ph Enclosure: Ordinance No. 155 d ILA?— _� 4 I r M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council July 28, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director �Ie SUBJECT: Zone Change 7-87 - LOCATION: 9255 El Camino Real APPLICANT: Don Messer (Cuesta Engineering) REQUEST: To revise the existing RSF-Y (Residential Single Family - 1 acre with sewer ; 1 1/2 acres without sewer) to CR (Com- mercial Retail) BACKGROUND: At their June 2, 1987 meeting, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the above-referenced request unanimously recommend- ing approval as reflected in the attached staff report. There was discussion and public testimony given as reflected in the attached minutes excerpt. RECOMMENDATION: (1) Read by title only and (2) approval of Ordinance No. 155 approving Zone Change 7-87. HE:ps Enclosure: Staff Report - June 2, 1987 Minutes Excerpt - June 2, 1987 Ordinance No. 155 cc: Don Messer Cuesta Engineering City of Atascadero Item: B.8 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission eeting Date: June 2, 1987 BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: ZC 7-87 Project Address: 9255 El Camino R al (Parcel B of PM 30-64 & Parcel C of PM 27-19 -Ptn. Lots 2 & 3, Blk. 2 of A.D.S. No. 1) SUBJECT: Zone Change 7-87 submitted by Don Messer/Cuesta Engineering to revise the existing RSF-Y (Residential Single Family - 1 acre with sewer; 1 1/2 acres without sewer minimum lot size) to CR (Commercial Retail) on property located at 9255 E1 Camino Real. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .To revise the existing zoning designations from RSF-Y (Resi- dential Single Family) to CR (Commercial Retail) 2. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Don Messer/Cuesta Engineering 3. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.85 acres (two lots) 4. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-Y (Residential Single Fam- ily 1 acre with sewer; 1 1/2 acre without sewer minimum lot size) 5. Existing use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vacant 6. Adjacent Zoning and Use. . . . .North: RSF-Y (Residential Single Family) CR (Commercial Retail) CS (Commercial Service) South: CR (Commercial Retail) Residential East: RSF-Y (Residential Single Family) . West: CR (Commercial Retail) vacant 7. General Plan Designation. . . . .Retail Commercial 0 0 8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . .Proposed Negative Declaration B. ANALYSIS: The applicant proposes to revise the existing zoning on two (2) newly acquired parcels totaling 1. 85 acres from RSF-Y (Residen- tial Single Family) to CR (Commercial Retail) . The applicant owns adjoining CR zoned property totaling 4. 58 acres. The appli- cant intends to develop a retail complex on the combined proper- ties. Exhibit C shows one potential development scheme for the site. The proposed plan is presented only for informational purposes and not for specific approval at this time. The two specific lots were created in 1977 and 1980 by separate parcel maps. The lots were created for residential development with access by way of an easement to Pino Solo. In 1982, the City processed a General Plan Amendment (GP: 820928 :1) submitted by the then owner , John Pryer , and his representative Aime LaLande. The proposal was to revise the existing Moderate Den- sity Single Family Residential designation to Retail Commercial. The amendment was withdrawn by the applicant during the Planning Commission' s public hearing. Mr. Messer submitted a letter in October 1985 seeking staff in- put as to the potential for commercial development on the two parcels. Staff reviewed his request and informed the applicant that the staff could interpret the General Plan to designate the site as Retail Commercial. A zone change would be required to confirm this and allow for the sites commercial development. This was reconfirmed in a letter to Mr . Messer returning a pro- posed General Plan Amendment for the site. The staff' s interpretation of the General Plan' s land use disigna- tion is based on the existing General Plan Land Element Map and policies. The existing Land Use Map is not lot specific and could be interpreted to cover the site as being Retail Commercial. The Land Use Element also contains a policy) (No. 9, Page 58) which notes the use of a "Wavy Line" concept in certain instances. This concept is to allow the retention of zoning for less intensive uses until a demand dictates a change in the zoning to a more in- tensive zoning in an area where different zones interface. The policy notes several factors to be considered in the timing of the change. These factors include existing development, property own- ership, development potential, access, and related physical fea- tures. In relating to the specific site, all of these factors favor the interpretation. In creating a larger commercial area, the site becomes more usable. The site is now irregular in shape and difficult to develop due to angled property lines. The site is presently in a form that would lend itself to a strip type of development. With increase in size, the proposal furthers the policies of the General Plan by encouraging clustering of commer- cial developments and reducing vehicle turning points on E1 Camino Real (GP Policy 2 and 3 , Page 66) . The proposal would also poten- tially correct problems inherent to the normal strip developments (GP Page 66) . 0 0 The prior staff report concerning the General Plan Amendment noted three major concerns as to the potential change in designation. . Of the three, the lack of access to El Camino Real has been elim- inated due to the ownership of adjoining properties by the appli- cant. The owner has noted a willingness to merge the property to assure such access. This would not preclude the resubdivision of the property at a later date in a more appropriate manner. The other items, intrusion into a stable residential area, and no , demonstrated need for additional commercial area have not really changed. The concern with regards to intrusion into a residential area came from the use of access to the site from Pino Solo. The applicant has also noted a desire to eliminate the potential ve- hicle access across the existing easement. The need for addi- tional commercial property is difficult to discuss at this point point due to the on-going General Plan Update. It should be noted, that the proposal is accomplishing several goals of the General Plan by allowing for the larger area at this specific location. Comments have been received from several outside agencies. The overall concerns focus on the potential development of the over- all 6.43 site, not necessarily the change in the zoning. These concerns include increase in traffic, increase in drainage prob- lems, and potential impacts on the adjoining residential areas. Traffic concerns have been evaluated in general terms and an esti- mate of 512 ADT would result from the change in the 1. 85 acres from Residential to Commercial. A much larger ADT would be gener- ated from the existing area zoned for commercial development. A complete evaluation of potential impacts will be needed at the time of specific development. The increase of 512 ADT would not specifically be detrimental, but specific site evaluation of de- sign on uses will be needed at time of development. Drainage potentials have also been evaluated in general terms. An increase in the run-off coefficient from . 25 for residential to .80 for commercial would increase the run-off from the site by 4.07 CFS (320%) . The total of 5.92 CFS would be expected from the site. This amount would certainly be an increase in flow that will have to be accommodated down stream. Improvements will be required at the time of development and will be required at that time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval based on the findings contained in Exhibit D and recommends approval of Zone Change 7-87. JM:ph Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Site Detail Map Exhibit C - Preliminary Site Plan Exhibit D - Draft Ordinance I 0 4 EXHIBIT B SITE DETAIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Zone Change 7-87 (RSF-Y/CF 19 9255 9255 El Camino Real CAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Messer/Cuesta Eng. DEPARTMENT ZONE CNAN6C RCOMAL y // E p IvIANO 1fNLV0+ R9/Y j / W to /,xo'csfv mwNs ea fmwrftuAL.rErAa) 1 /AM 8. fivr. ���� '{�. � � !Ij/I iA'0/O�ED ZONE UNE � \ `,'� `\ !\J\ .•. •r 1 .� I I � � 1 � ,6 ! r _ >llurllw WIVE LINGc IK \ A� _ r N�rY MAi 11N/A MAFIA riff n CUESrA E16INEE9/N(y EC C d M I N O `—'R FLQ L 7401 f, Ca )10 Gu, polr e Ar —11Ci t tl:;AotN aflrt _A27 I CITY OF EXHIBIT C PRE.SITL- PLAN Zone Change 7-87 (RSF-Y/CF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 9255 E1 Camino Real DEPARTMENT Messer/Cuesta Eng. • i i' / %y DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT /�RLF-A," /a•AFAR Yd RO AMO%RLfL 0�x"n:+•/ L C Tf)�^• • A(1/CFNT/AL F �O • •GG d�G�Lk'/O[P IRON//GC lF7MC.0 a REYGKNJT-0L ',/a',REAR YARD IClOdCR � F • �i ` a RCS/nCNIAL 1 0 `,� IIUU" � � lye/'\ �:✓ __ -. \4 •� •l _. "fit �f'�� fCALF./•.Se' " a WFfrA EAWAILrFRlN6 EC C AM I N 0 R 6.4 L 740/ FL CAM/NO REAL Su/rF a ATAIT OERO r,//ORNM 9l9Z1 fV SLV 4Z7 7. Tentative Parcel Map 18-87 : Request initiated by Dave Pollard to allow subdivision of one parcel containing 5 . 38 acres into two lots of 2. 69 acres each. Subject property is located at 8255 Graves Creek Road (Lot 28, Block 16 , A.C. ) . Mr. Decamp, Sr . Planner, gave staff report, recommending approval; he noted the recommendation in staff's report should be corrected to in- dicate this is a parcel map (not a tract map) . Public Comment John Falkenstien, Cuesta Engin. , representing Mr. Pollard, noted no problems with the Conditions of Approval as stated in staff's report. MOTION: By Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin to approve TPM 18-87 based on the Conditions of Approval as outlined in staff report, sec- onded by Commissioner Hatchell; passed unanimously, with Commissioner Copelan absent. 8. Zone Change 7-87 : Request initiated by Don Messer to revise the existing RSF-Y zon- ing to CR (Commercial Retail) . Subject property is located at 9255 El Camino Real (Ptn. Lots 2 and 3 of A.D.S. #1) . Mr. Moses, Assoc. Planner , gave staff report, recommending approval, and responded to questions from the Commission. There was discussion regarding the potential abandonment of the easement adjacent to Pino Solo Ave. & related access issues. Public Comment John Falkenstien, Cuesta Engin. , representing Mr . Messer , expressed agreement with staff' s report and commented on the shapes of subject parcels and the development planned. George Carl, 9120 Pino Solo, who owns Parcel "B" abutting subject property, expressed concern regarding traffic impacts resultant from this proposal (as well as from the Long ' s Drugs proposal) . He noted there is no easement across his property other than for utilities. Chmn. Bond assured Mr. Carl that, should the proposed rezone be ap- proved by the City Council, any possibility for use of subject ease- ment as an access would be eliminated at time of Precise Plan. Nina Marble, 9125 Pino Solo, commented (as did the previous speaker) on a letter from CalTrans, which estimated the traffic impact that may result from the entire site development (at buildout) to be 7 , 000 ADT. Staff responded that that figure is somewhat in question since the current estimate on El Camino Real is 21-22 , 000 ADT; staff also ques- tions the total acreage considered in the CalTrans letter (15 ac. ) as the site is actually approx. 5 acres in size. Mrs. Marble expressed several concerns and urged denial of the proposal in the interest of protecting the adjacent neighborhood from commercial encroachment. 6 Bob Irvin, 8900 Pino Solo, addressed drainage concerns and potential increases from future development, and he spoke in opposition to proposed zone change. Don Messer , applicant, addressed concerns expressed by previous speak- ers (re: access, traffic and drainage issues) , noting his intention to abandon the easement along Pino Solo and that commercial traffic is not intended from that street. He indicated the willingness to tie a future development to protection of the existing residential proper- ties in subject area. The Commission further discussed the issues and concerns expressed. MOTION: By Commissioner Nolan to approve ZC 7-87 based on Findings contained in Exh. D of staff report, seconded by Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin; passed by 6:0 roll-call, with Commissioner Copelan absent. CHAIRMAN BOND CALLED A RECESS AT 11:43 P.M. AND THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER AT 11: 50 P.M. 9. Conditional Use Permit 18-84 - Reconsideration: Request initiated by All American Video (CN Signs) to allow for an increase in the allowed signing to 140 sq. ft. to allow for the installation of a 409 sq. ft. monument sign. Subject site is cated at 3905 E1 Camino Real (Lot 109 , Block 19 , A.C. ) . Is Mr . Moses, Assoc. Planner , gave staff report, recommending approval, and responded to questions from the Commission. Public Comment Al Ingersoll, CN Signs of SLO, spoke in support of this request, not- ing no opposition to the Findings and Conditions outlined in staff' s report. MOTION: By Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin to approve CUP 18-84 , second- ed by Commissioner Hatchell; passed unanimously, with Commis- sioner Copelan absent. 10. Conditional Use Permit 5-86 - Reconsideration: Requested initiated by Johnny Yip (Michael Brady) to allow for the establishment of a caretaker ' s residence as a part of a pro- posed restaurant (China Star) . Subject site is located at 8050 E1 Camino Real (Ptn. Lot 9A, Block 7) . Mr . Moses, Assoc. Planner , gave staff report, recommending approval of revision and responded to questions from the Commission. 0 7 ORDINANCE NO. 155 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBER 19 OF OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY AT 9255 EL CAMINO REAL FROM RSF-Y (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY) TO CR (COMMERCIAL RETAIL) (ZC 7-87: MESSER/CUESTA ENG. ) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Govern- ment Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning reg- ulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant ad- verse effect upon the environment, and preparation of an environmental impact report is not necessary; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 2, 1987, and has recommended approval of Zone Change 7-87 . NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Council Findings. 1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use and zoning. 2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan land use element and other elements contained in the General Plan. 3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse en- vironmental impacts, and preparation of an environmental im- pact report is not necessary. Section 2. Zoning Map Change. Map Number 19 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atasca- dero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended to reclassify Parcel B of PM 30-64 and Parcel C of PM 27-19 Portion Lots 2 & 3, Block 2 of A.D.S. No. 1 as shown on attached Ex- hibit "A" which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in this City in accordance with Government Code Section 36933; shall W 1W certify the adoption of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance and certification to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of this City. . Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef- fect at 12: 01 a.m. on the thirty-first (31st) day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by , the foregoing ordinance is hereby adopted in its en- tirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA_, "BARBARA NORRIS Mayor ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director 18 . ♦r` / i1 r 1` / ,lr..-f `V �e .-'•! 'r�eaP v ,+,���•`�•.AZ 1 '� +�.t•;.7 i ?xavr t .-.s� •�.. 7rterp., yrr 73nh{ =AY 60 �.CS �•. t• 4�c�• ,x :'e 3 ~%sr!',� 4"� 'AT-76-13S E v �.VJ 1 e° ••�� :. .fi =krr •�. . r• c• r a'• .AT-76.143 t. � e+ � •y •'!„P•w ,\ .,+`+ � s ` '? s AT-19'13 12-01' ! • -�' r o � , �, ` by i; '�" � ++ � y +,• eY 'AT-81-183 .12.01 ` J f. `• +' !i pp ti '• ., • �� •� i '✓ ✓' t' AT-81 zu 34fBx ,ar, 1�•C e ' ,° •� ♦2j►( 7 V~ 1•t - .�♦•,,� fS9 s f•�•,.w,, elir • •, fti f'' 2 �W! e+`,., s,• e� k'i AtVISIOY OATF s-., • .,. „.r' �r1' , ,•�2 `'` 6"”' �` REVISE ZONING FROM ++�► .• /. ♦ r�'bje f . 7r ' 3 :'fll i nSb '+ll• = „ RSF—Y TO CR 5/ F• a' S. rf.i.. s R F l�f i•' "+ }.,�. r Z 7 CMESS eJa >'t,� rs'' �� '�, ' C° 7-8 ER) •a • = 9255 EL CAMINO REAL •s. a ,,r� a+� ••s s j. .�. :,. r•:tom J r � yi 'r yet 1 0"y/• .r �- •.��� c�• 1 r♦l � 1�,_•�_ ,t.•a• ''� s,. tx+• tt ti, f • -0 t�I,n C� 7 '• _M' _. •r :..,?i-r:•'•yl 'f �.�a ♦ 1:»� f .• P ti•. ,t .3.a Z 3; F'•. i .q i'. ; Y_ _•a r ,t �. ' �•, ae 3 1•�.• � �` a�;ps� V ,: g x`"413 � � 17. • � �1� 'tti_ f-�b' � a�f r � ,+ 'r ,i-d,¢:;��fl�: ♦ J' e '�s,1 ,Fb;Y .• .q.. .it f ' 1,- + x �'a' 1 t .. •.*f :� �,�i' •�yy •f •'F wv la tseli ._ivy y. y r 3' •A rw r' rs ,� f. .1� �r.. K ,0 ♦�(,�, a -7,fb au .dam f 23.. .• • '�x�!`µ4�: s{ r sti ♦v j,� 1 - � ` ♦:: t '14 .0 :• � ♦♦:: �' +f•�•9�'` , 1 Ir.l i S x 2f If$is S 'r�''3 � P.;'•P 6 t•' ���` o�"y1 z•� r., G .. atQt► o.S.ra+` ., • - '..: ,nr - ,us � 6. • •e `rr'•�'• r;. + - d/ m� l^_+��C(`��'`�t` 'r.v�e t «}s ^� mf !0 •�' ,1, # x r".T \1 n.'' ..:',y;•l t`:`-�i• 1p. '�� it.� Wit, , • '1' -Fz; •+a '�14 ¢ ci R RSF 1O ! �''• % +a �?-' 13 j i -Y 11'�+ r? +� ''•? i +t ,s tIF►39 SIL t M 3x e- _ ' tlDS ,r.'•. 4 1 �' 1 ru�.•P +a+ • 3r`"« ,r w« _ �:.. 16 p05' i. •2 .r0 + �5 16 �;t t aa• •r •. '•OE, �'M• S � ". �, ; '�•� t.)i :. _.•.aa• rr a•r it 1 ,spa. .` ,,\..,.. s •t.v ,. � ♦♦ '}r,• •,."`.'2). t ri ;7, �•� m• ♦4J�•S 'r, �' 2• "r P•+•-�� ♦ •'.SMF/ '�;r':: i •-' , +: -. 1 )�; t sa •4ao $`. •• -°Jai t• r+ •s r••f''�►�-i`� ♦., ' ,•�,f ,♦ i,14 s-. . . \„� ♦ F:\. off' _ r • �� 'a �.*•r•, '}14 J ' - \r♦w`, � i� .s•S. \ � •lo-A 1 - I .tit :� , +ice �-', �\ '�' 1.01 RM .. qll'♦'. {•`f•S� ' \t } -• wly• f,^� , f• 1' !i;- + Jai +"9\ ��•✓• r T to-f •_ � 1• Y ,T-n \.°'1' � ,e; .S� '' ti 1^ •�j . �t��lll •fA .,b ^^ alt.i rl•).si � --_ nu♦ d•s� 7� %•P+J i .:/. _ ,.'•..-1 12 •% ,♦ rY+ • • - f. .,,?"fig•'' •. : c:•,••.. 3 •� P+` `.,'s% l•,. :►,s h�y,(fti.lS'�,:+"t.•i:ls,�,��� 21, F ti. rrSS♦. 22 , it s a e♦l�Yr•.►w+W.1y1.cl •wi.tw .�...'. :��•-.. `'� \ 20 •( 1,5'4 <na o:uoos..o'- :�+�r�I M•nl..r lr.r- • �.: 27.NfJ•i.us1.., li s.°s..•r Iw r t"4 roar• N, Ijt 3 •Q � ,.r.s.aM�y,.rs.� ,tsW\. f•.-ti: 14 ~Yy - •rH• ' J ,Ii ? (, 23 ,'^�Y'"r• Wrci.n i�,l �Tw...rl 1 ♦ '� + '! .yat0.t y f auo•u.0'a.7 y.....i. i.t<. ' a.rr q 1 9�� ''lrivt:i7te i i'•'��'�S r�;K ti' ^,__If_•_ ,f •i, t �.,. EXHIBIT A ORDo 155 �.N.�i•r. �.� s �;. ,r = ZONE CHANGE 7-87 (MESSER) 9255 EL CAMINO REAL RSF—Y TO CR M E M O R A N D U M • TO : City Manager Mike Shelton and Fire Chief Mike Hicks FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: Paging System Module - Police and Fire Dispatch Console DATE: July 21, 1987 PROBLEM/BACKGROUND: We have experienced many problems and breakdowns with our radio/paging system which is incorporated as a module in our police/fire radio console. Our County radio technicians have advised me that this equipment is simply worn out, and at over seven years old, needs replacement. The paging module is used for summoning firemen and police officers (either individually or as a group) in emergency situations. The equipment is used mostly for call-out of off-duty firemen. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of replacing the "unipage" system will be about $1800. plus • installation charges . RECOMMENDATION: As my police budget will not accommodate this unforseen purchase, I recommend Council authorization to allocate $2, 000 from reserves for this emergency equipment. RICHARD H. MCHALE RHM: sb RESOLUTION 86-87 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FROM CITY COUNCIL CONTINGENCY RESERVE FOR PAGING SYSTEM MODULE WHEREAS, City Council has set aside Contingency Funds for unforseen emergencies in the amount of $15, 000 ; and WHEREAS, there is an urgent need to replace a worn out paging system module, which is incorpoated into the Police/ Fire Department' s s radio console; and WHEREAS, the City has been advised by County Radio Technician that the equipment is not cost-effective to continue repair maintenance; and WHEREAS the Police Department budget did not budget this unforseen purchase. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Atascadero City Council appropriate $2, 000 from Council Contingency Reserve for • the acquisition of a new paging system module to be located in the Police and Fire dispatch console. Motion by Councilperson and seconded by Counciperson the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: MEET: 10�410 A • MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Through: Michael Shelton, City Managerl From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Subject : Award of Motor Grader Bids Date: August 5, 1987 Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council accept the bid from A-Jay Excavating for the 1974 used John Deere 570 for $28,500 and to allow the purchase of four new tires and painting for a total of approximately $33, 000 . Backround: • Council authorized staff to advertise for bids for a used motor grader during the last fiscal year. Fourteen (14) bids were received ranging from $28, 000 to $81 ,837 and with varying conditions and components . Although some units were as remotely located as Colorado and Mexico, staff only had to travel as far as Atascadero for a unit that would fit our needs . Discussion: The 1974 John Deere has had an engine overhaul less that 1000 hours ago and should serve our needs for about 10 years if properly serviced. Like any used item there is usually something that needs fixing. In this case the tires are about 70% worn and the unit needs cleaned and painted to extend its life and to project a good public image . The unit most closely identifies with our needs of all those bid in our price range and has been previouly rented by the City for blading alleys . A recent demonstration showed the machine to be in good working condition with little abuse . Fiscal Impact : There has been $40, 000 encumbered from the last fiscal year for the purchase of a used road grader. The $33, 000 needed will leave a • balance of $7, 000 to the general fund. BID SUMMARY USED GRADER ******************w*wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww * YEAR DESCRIPTION COST ******w****w**w****wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww * 1975 770 JOHN DEERE * $28, 000 * * 1974' 570 JOHN DEERE * $28,500 * * 1972 CATERPILLER 12G * $29, 150 * * 1977 670 JOHN DEERE $41 , 314 * * 1977 670A JOHN DEERE $44,450 * * 1981 670A JOHN DEERE $48, 500 * * 1980 772 JOHN DEERE $48, 950 * * 1979 770A JOHN DEERE $49, 500 * * 1974 CATERPILLER 120 $54, 500 * * 1977 CATERPILLER 12G * $55, 650 * * 1981 CATERPILLER 130G* $57, 240 * * 19?? CATERPILLER 12G $67, 800 * * 1975 CATERPILLER .I2G $69,430 * * 1987 670B JOHN DEERE $81,837 * * w * * local company www*wwwwwwwwww*****w*w***www*wwwwwwwwwwwww�rwwwwwww • • MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Through: Michael Shelton, City Manager From: Paul M. S nsibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Subject : Santa Ysabel Reconstruction Phase C (First Phase) Date : August 5, 1987 Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council approve the plans and specifications and authorize advertising for bids for the above project. Backround: The Santa Ysabel Reconstruction Project has been under design by North Coast Engineering for the past 7 months. The project will remove and reconstruct the pavement and widen the street section to 40 feet and install curb and gutter. Since the area is zoned multiple family and is rapidly changing, the sidewalk will be the responsibility of the owners. Discussion: The project has been broken down into four phases for construction and budgeting (Phases A thru D) . Phase C has the poorest structural quality according to soil borings and tests and is in the area of the most development activity. Thus this phase has been selected to be first since funds are not available for the total Project . Other phases are in need of improvement but due to problem driveways, utilities, trees, etc . widening may be premature at this time. The project is in a conjested area and traffic maintenance will be a problem as well as dust and noise . Staff will communicate with the public and try to minimize the inconvenience . The project is badly needed and existing situations can only get worse . Reconstruction is always undesirable while it is happening but usually welcomed when the final touches go on. Fiscal Impact : Approximately $120, 000 is remaining in the SB 300 highway funds allocated for this project . SB 300 funds are windfall monies that can only be used on projects of this nature and which must be spent within a short period of time . Phase C has been sized to utilize the $120,000 available, but if bids come in low the project limits will be stretched to catch the drainage system to the northwest . SANTA YSABEL RECONSTRUCTION PHASE "C" TENTATIVE TIME SCHEDULE August 11, 1987 Plans & Specifications to City Council Sept. 11, 1987 2:00 pm Bid Opening at City Hall Sept. 15, 1987 N.C.E. to prepare bid summary and submit to City Engineer Sept. 22, 1987 City Council Award of Bid Oct. 1, 1987 Estimated Start Date for Contractor