HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 121493 Approved as Submitted
Meeting Date: 1/25/94
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 14, 1993
MINUTES
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Councilmembers Borgeson, Luna and Mayor Nimmo
Absent: Councilmember Bewley (ill), One Seat Vacant
Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Raboin, City
Clerk
Staff Present: Andy Takata, City Manager/Director of Community
Services; Henry Engen, Community Development Director;
Art Montandon, City Attorney; Russ Scotten, Interim
Finance Director; Mike McCain, Fire Chief; Lt. Bill Watton,
Police Department; Gary Kaiser, Assistant City Planner; and
John Neil, Assistant City Engineer
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Councilman Luna congratulated the Atascadero Greyhounds for CIF football
championship win and commended the Paso Robles High School football team for true
sportsmanship. There was Council consensus to issue a proclamation.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Tom Bench, 7503 Carmelita Avenue, voiced frustration relating to a neighborhood
dilemma regarding a barking dog.
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, announced that there would be a presentation of the Draft
Environmental Impact Report and proposal regarding the Salinas River Dam on
Wednesday, December 15, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. at Centennial Park in Paso Robles.
CC 12/14/93
Page 1
George Schroff, 8740 #B EI Camino Real, shared concern regarding the level of
service and increased rates for cable television provided by Falcon Cable. Andy
Takata reported that City staff was monitoring complaints and encouraged Mr. Schroff
to contact Russ Scotten for a complaint form.
Ray Jansen, 6655 Country Club Drive, presented the fifth in a series of testimony and
addressed such topics as community consensus-building, alternatives to force,
influence by reason, cooperation and communication, and unity through faith.
A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing commit-
tees. Informative status reports were given, as follows.):
1. S.L.O. Council of Governments (COG) & the Regional Transit Authority
(SLORTA) - Mayor Nimmo reported on the meeting of Wednesday,
December 8, 1993 and reported that COG has seperated from the
County. He noted that delegates were asked to adopt rules and
regulations governing COG staff and approve salaries and benefits for
same. Mayor Nimmo explained that he did not approve of the proposed
salaries and benefits because they were not in sync with the private
sector and present budget climate. He commented that the delegates
would be submitting to the City Managers' Group the proposals for their
review and comments.
2. Solid/Hazardous Waste Task Force - Henry Engen reported on the
meeting of December 2, 1993. He mentioned that the task force has
recommended that the Household Hazardous Waste Element and the
Source Reduction and Recycling Elements come back to each locality for
hearings. This process, he added, will begin in early 1994. Mr. Engen
also reported that a siting element for new landfills countywide will be
reviewed in January 1994.
3. Traffic Committee - Councilman Luna reported that the committee would
meet on December 15, 1993.
4. County Water Advisory Board -Councilwoman Borgeson announced that
the Board would meet in January 1994.
5. Nacimiento Water Purveyors Advisory Group - Councilman Luna stated
that consideration by the County Board of Supervisors of the Nacimiento
Water Project on December 14, 1993 had been continued to February
1, 1994.
CC 12/14/93
Page 2
B. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Mayor Nimmo announced that the City Clerk had requested the addition of an
emergency item to the Consent Calendar. The item, he noted, was a resolution
regarding the special election in April 1994 to fill a vacancy on the City Council.
MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
make a finding that the item is emergency in nature and place the
matter upon the Consent Calendar; motion passed unanimously.
1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30, 1993 (Adjourned Meeting)
2. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - November, 1993
3. RESOLUTION NO. 138-93 - Authorizing the filing of a claim for Local
Transportation Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds in compliance with
the Transportation Development Act
4. RESOLUTION NO. 139-93 -Authorizing the execution of an agreement with the
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments to receive reimbursement for TDA
Audit
5. RESOLUTION NO. 143-93 - Authorizing a procedure for destruction of police
records
6. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PARCEL MAP 17-89, 7550 CORTEZ - Subdivision of
one parcel containing 6.25 acres into four (4) lots. Two lots will contain 1 .5
acres, one lot will contain 1 .58 acres and one lot will contain 1 .66 acres
(Barrett)
7. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PARCEL MAP 92005 - Adjustment of the lot line
located between Colony lots 15 and 16 at 10940 Portal Rd. and 9660 Laurel
Rd. (Phelps/Sowell/Stewart)
8. RESOLUTION NO. 144-93 - Adopting City's annual investment policy
9. RESOLUTION NO. 115-93 - Adopting Fiscal Element (as revised 11/30/93)
10. CONFIRMING APPOINTMENT OF A PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
MEMBER ON THE CITY/SCHOOL COMMITTEE
CC 12/14/93
Page 3
11. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CITY-OWNED FACILITIES POLICY, PROCE-
DURES & FEES MANUAL
12. RESOLUTION NO. 145-93 - Adopting a salary/classification schedule and
benefits for Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 817
*Added Item:
13. RESOLUTION NO. 142-93 - Officially Requesting the County of San Luis
Obispo to Render Specified Services to the City relating to the Conduct of a
Special Municipal Election on April 12, 1994.
Mayor Nimmo reported that Item #13-5 had not been reviewed by the City Attorney.
By mutual consent, the City Council continued the item.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Luna to
approved Consent Calendar Items #13-1 through 4 and 6 through
13; motion carried unanimously by roll call vote.
C. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, 7406 SANTA YSABEL
A. Ordinance No. 274 - Amending Map 17 of the official zoning maps by
rezoning certain real property at 7406 Santa Ysabel Ave. from RMF/16
to RMF/16 (PD7) (ZC #93005: Gearhart)
(Recommend (1) motion to waive reading in full and read by title only,
and (2) motion to introduce on first reading by title only)
B. Tentative Parcel Map 93002 - Approve, based on Findings contained in
the staff report dated 11/16/93 and subject to the revised Conditions of
Approval
Henry Engen provided the staff report and recommendation to approve both the
ordinance and the tentative parcel map.
Public Comments:
John Faulkenstein, CSD Engineering and on behalf of the applicant, availed himself for
questions.
---End of Public Testimony---
CC 12/14/93
Page 4
Mayor Nimmo commented that the application was consistent with the General Plan
and asked staff if the applicant had agreed to all the conditions of approval. Mr.
Engen responded that he had.
MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
waive the reading in full of Ordinance No. 274; motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Mayor Nimmo to introduce
Ordinance No. 274 on first reading and approve Tentative Parcel
Map 93002 based on Findings contained in the staff report;
motion carried 3:0 by roll call vote.
D. REGULAR BUSINESS:
Mayor Nimmo announced that the City Council would hear Item #D-3 first.
3. SKATEBOARDING - Consideration of BIA request to regulate in the downtown
Andy Takata provided the background and recommendation to direct staff to develop
an ordinance that would permit owners of private commercial property to post "No
Skateboarding Allowed" signs. He explained that this would give needed protection
to the property owner and, in addition, provide them with the opportunity to, or not
to, allow skateboarding. Once posting, he concluded, the Police Department would
then able to respond and enforce. Brief Council questions followed.
Public Comments:
Donna Bishop, 7725 Castano, urged the City Council to not eliminate the opportunity
for youth to skate.
Tom Bench, Parks & Recreation Commissioner, pointed out that there were laws
already on the books making it illegal to damage property and urged their
enforcement.
A.J. Fonzi, 5380 Maleza, stated that the community should provide an alternative
facility for skateboarding.
Joshua Fonzi, 5380 Maleza, contended that skaters are not "taggers" and asked that
they not be given that label.
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, remarked that skateboarding is a means of transportation
CC 12/14/93
Page 5
and recreation. He noted that it is already illegal to deface and damage property.
Richard London, representing the B.I.A., argued that business owners are at risk if a
someone gets hurt on the premises as a result of skateboarding and urged approval
of the recommendation.
Ryan George, Monterey Road resident, also encouraged the City to provide a
skateboard park and pointed out that membership fees could be charged to offset the
costs of insurance. Brief Council questions and comments followed.
Andy Leans, Atascadero skater, asserted that he did not participate in "tagging" or
use drugs. He produced a copy of a waiver form used in association with use of a
skateboard facility maintained by a private corporation in the City of Goleta. He
commented that local skaters would be willing to pay a membership fee and sign a
similar waiver form.
Dennis Bryant, 7410 Sombrilla, spoke in favor of the recommendation and urged the
City Council to adopt a skateboard regulating ordinance.
Vicki Reyborn, Santa Lucia Road resident, advocated the building of a small
skateboard park. She suggested that there may be parents who would be interested
in forming an association to support the effort.
---End of Public Testimony---
Brief Council comments followed. The City Council directed staff to draft the
recommended ordinance and bring it back for consideration in January (1994). In
addition, there was consensus among the Council to take another look at the
possibility of providing a skateboard facility. Andy Takata indicated that he would
have staff research insurance options, recruit interested citizens to serve on a
committee, and present the matter to the Parks & Recreation Commission at their
January 1994 meeting. He stated that a recommendation could come back for City
Council consideration as early as February (1994).
1. AWARD OF BIDS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1992
A. RESOLUTION NO. 140-93 - Awarding the contract for construction of
the 3-F Meadows Assessment District
B. RESOLUTION NO. 141-93 - Awarding the contract for construction of
the Las Encinas Assessment District, bid additives for road improvements
to San Gregorio Road, South EI Camino Real median revisions and street
CC 12/14/93
Page 6
overlay on EI Camino Real
John Neil provided the staff report and recommendations to approve. He responded
to brief questions from Council.
MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
approve Resolution No. 140-93 authorizing the execution of an
agreement with R. Burke Corporation for $214,226.00 to
construct the 3-F Meadows Assessment District road
improvements; motion carried 3:0 by roll call vote.
MOTION: By Mayor Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
approve Resolution No. 141-93 authorizing the execution of a
contract with Madonna Construction Company for $441 ,067.60
to construct the road improvements for the Las Encinas
Assessment District including Additives #1 and #2.
Discussion on the motion: Councilman Luna pointed out that he did not
support the revisions to the median but understood that his "Nay" vote would
result in delays in the construction of the Las Encinas Assessment District. He
stated that he would, therefore, support the motion.
Vote on the motion: Motion to approve Resolution No. 141-93 passed 3:0 by
roll call vote.
2. MILLHOLLIN QUARRY - Consideration of request for additional time to modify
proposed reclamation plan
Henry Engen presented a brief introduction. City Attorney Art Montandon reported
that he had met with legal counsel representing Mr. Glenn Millhollin and explained that
the quarry owner is willing to meet financial assurance requirementss for the mining
operation and to meet with neighbors in an effort to address some of their concerns.
Mr. Montandon reviewed legal implications and produced a revised Condition #2 of
the 5-part recommendation, as outlined in the staff report.
Revised Condition #2 reads, as follows: "That Mr. Millhollin be informed of the
unapproved status of financial assurances and be given sixty (60) days to address
noted deficiencies and return financial assurances for approval by both City and the
State." The City Attorney noted that the amendment reflects notice requirements set
forth in the California Code of Regulations. Mr. Montandon also clarified that Mr.
Millhollin is the property owner, but the quarry operator is San Luis Obispo County.
Lengthy Council questions followed regarding the requested time extension, the
CC 12/14/93
Page 7
reclamation plan and a variety of problems associated with the quarry operations.
Public Comments:
Dale Ikeda, attorney, spoke in behalf of Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Millhollin. He indicated that
the Millhollins were committed to addressing the concerns regarding operations and
the end use of the mine location after closure. He emphasized that the reclamation
plan was not the proper vehicle for addressing problems associated with traffic,
children's safety, noise, dust etc. and spoke in support of the time extension request.
Mr. Ikeda reported that preliminary dialogue had begun with the City and County
about neighborhood concerns and mentioned that Charles Moore, County Engineering
Department, was present. In closing, Mr. Ikeda indicated that his client objects to an
order to terminate operations, supports the revised staff recommendations, has
retained a civil engineer to assist in the preparation of the reclamation plan and has
submitted a new certificate of deposit to the City for financial assurances.
Eric Greening asked the City Attorney if the City still had the option of terminating
mining activities on the subject property. Mr. Montandon indicated that Mr. Millhollin
was willing to rectify financial assurances and because of State Law referenced in his
verbal report, he was not recommending that the City close the mine.
The following citizens spoke and/or read prepared statements voicing concerns about
mining practices at the quarry and encouraging the City Council to close the mine:
Marcia Torgerson, 6200 Llano Road (see Exhibit A).
Rose Flaherty, 203 Templeton Road, Templeton (see Exhibit B).
Chuck Greenberg, 11655 Cenegal Road
Vicki Reyborn, 11705 Santa Lucia Road
Daphne Fahsing, 5105 Llano Road (see Exhibit C)
Barbara Rose, 7200 Llano Road
Jim Reyborn, 11705 Santa Lucia Road
Verna Hokinson, 11255 Santa Lucia Road
Tom Zeulner, 12115 Cenegal Road (see Exhibit D - read by R. Flaherty)
In addition, a citizen petition signed by 98 residents was submitted to the City Clerk
(see Exhibit E).
Charles Moore, County Engineering Department, presented the County's position. He
stated that the Millhollin Mine provides the best material for re-surfacing dirt roads in
the County for approximately one-quarter of the price charged by commercial
suppliers. He reported that the County is aware that truck traffic is a problem in the
area that and County-employed drivers have been instructed to drive no more than 30
CC 12/14/93
Page 8
to 35 m.p.h. Mr. Moore indicated that the County did not, however have any control
over private contractual drivers. The County's representative stated that operations
are in compliance with the City's noise ordinance but recognized that noise does
represent a nuisance to neighbors. Mr. Moore remarked that the County would be
willing to cooperate by modifying hours of operation and reported that although the
County has not been approached to do so, they would be willing to meet with
neighbors in an effort to address their concerns.
Mr. Moore responded to several questions from Councilmembers regarding the amount
of material being mined and hauled out of the quarry, remaining top soil, tree
protection, water quality and safety training programs for drivers.
---End of Public Testimony---
Additional Council questions and comments followed. Mayor Nimmo suggested that
a traffic study be conducted analyzing all traffic in the area.
Councilwoman Borgeson proposed that a letter be sent to the County Board of
Supervisors expressing concerns and requesting the County Engineering Department
be reigned in. She suggested further that it is time for the mine to come to an end
and asserted that the County should cease operations on an interim basis during the
negotiations with Mr. Millhollin.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Luna to
direct staff to prepare a report providing legal options available to
the City to order or otherwise cause the termination of mining
activities at or associated with the subject quarry location
(Recommendation #5).
Discussion on the motion: Councilmembers Borgeson and Luna indicated that
they were disappointed that legal options had not been provided as part of the
staff report. Mayor Nimmo remarked that he would support the motion only
if it was coupled with a motion to grant a sixty-day extension to revise financial
assurances and three months for a revised reclamation plan.
Vote on the motion: Motion to approve Staff Recommendation #5 passed 2:1
(Mayor Nimmo voting in opposition).
MOTION: Mayor Nimmo to adopt the revised staff recommendation [#2] and
allow sixty days for a revised financial assurance and three
months for completion and presentation of a revised reclamation
plan; motion failed for lack of a second.
CC 12/14/93
Page 9
MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to
find existing financial assurances for the subject mining operation
be unapproved based on comments received from the State
Department of Conservation in Attachment A (Staff
Recommendation #1).
Discussion on the motion: Mayor Nimmo stated that, as he understood it, the
City of Atascadero, as the lead agency, need only consider the recommendation
of the Department of Conservation and is not bound thereby. On that basis,
he concluded, he would oppose the motion.
Vote on the motion: Motion to approve Staff Recommendation #1 passed 2:1
(Mayor Nimmo voting in opposition).
Additional discussions ensued regarding revised Staff Recommendation #2. Art
Montandon provided further explanation and read once more the proposed language.
Councilman Luna remarked that if the City Council were to adopt the revised
recommendation, it should also demand that the County cease operations during
negotiations.
Mr. Ikeda responded by stating that the Council does not have the legal authority to
close down the mine. He indicated that his client was willing to cooperate but noted
that he did have obligations to the County. He also revealed that he had some
concerns relating to the legal non-conforming use status on the property. Councilman
Luna suggested that the City may be able to waive provisions specifying that a
discontinued use for six-months would require conformance with current zoning laws
before a permit or other land use entitlement can be issued to use the facility.
Motion to extend the meeting beyond 11:00 p.m. duly made and passed.
Charles Moore remarked that he did not have the authority to make a decision on
behalf of the County regarding a moratorium. Mayor Nimmo asked if there was a
contract between Mr. Millhollin and the County. Mr. Ikeda reported that there was
no formal agreement but noted that the mine has been operating under a letter of
intent; which can be considered a de-facto agreement.
Having conferred with Mr. Millhollin, Mr. Ikeda reported that his client was personally
willing to abide by a moratorium given all reasonable waivers necessary to protect his
rights. He suggested that time frames be kept short and that he be given the
opportunity to meet with staff to negotiate the details.
Councilman Luna stated that he could support Staff Recommendation #2, as revised,
CC 12/14/93
Page 10
as long as the hillside is not removed during the time extension period. He asked the
City Attorney to provide guidance. Mr. Montandon, recognizing Mr. Ikeda's concern
regarding maintaining the legal non-conforming use status, explained that the City
Council could make an administrative determination that because there is a negotiated
settlement, the three-month extension/negotiation period would not be included in the
six-month time frame used to mandate discontinuance of a non-conforming use.
MOTION: By Councilman Luna to direct staff to enter into negotiations with
Mr. Millhollin, his representatives and the County to cease
operations at the mine during the penance of the negotiations and
come back with an overall solution or reclamation plan within
three months and offer a guarantee that during that three-month
period, the mine will not lose it's legal non-conforming use status.
Discussion on the motion: It was emphasized, for purposes of this motion, that
the City Council was agreeing to waive SMARA and all municipal code
provisions relating to legal non-conforming use during the three-month
negotiation period.
Councilman Luna clarified that his motion was to include approval of Staff
Recommendations #2 (revised) and #3.
Second and vote on the motion: Councilwoman Borgeson seconded the
motion; motion passed 3:0 by roll call vote.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: None
At 11:15 p.m., the City Council adjourned to a closed session for purposes of
discussion regarding personnel negotiations, pursuant to Government Code Section
54957.6(a).
MINUTES RECO ED AND PREPARED BY:
LEE PRICE, City Clerk
Attachments: Exhibit A (Torgerson)
Exhibit B (Flaherty)
Exhibit C (Fahsing)
Exhibit D (Zeulner)
Exhibit E (Citizen Petition)
CC 12/14/93
Page 11
MARCIA MCCLURE TORGERSON CC12/14/93
6200 Llano Road EXHISI-T "A"
Atascadero, CA 93422
466-7980
December 14, 1993
Atascadero City Council
Re: Millhollin Quarry
Dear Councilmembers,
I understand that Mr. Millhollin has a Reclamation Plan that was approved by
the County years ago that is vague at best. I agree, that if the City is going
to be allow him to continue operating, he must obtain a new Reclamation
Plan with environmental review.
To get to my home, l turn off Santa Lucia just before the Quarry. However,
that does, not spare me from being impacted by it. On numerous occasions,
while driving on Santa Lucia in either direction, I have encountered County
trucks who routinely straddle the center line on the curves at excessive
speeds. It is only a matter of time before someone will not be able to
swerve out of their way in time and an accident will occur. I understand
from those who drive by the Quarry every day that the County trucks are
entering and exiting the Quarry without flagmen. They also seem to be
making unnecessary runs because they are stockpiling alot of the rock they
remove. It seems to me that the County is blatantly abusing their privilege
to extract rock from the Quarry. With the trucks causing these safety
hazards, maybe the County should be fined or better yet, no longer allowed
to mine this Quarry.
Upon doing some research on mining, I found that proper mining practices
include preserving the removed topsoil for later reclamation of the site. l
have seen no evidence of this taking place. Also, since the mining has
expanded beyond the original boundaries set forth.in the original Reclamation
Plan, l would think that any oak trees impacted outside those boundaries
would be protected by our tree ordinance. l am not aware of that ordinance
being enforced here.
I am also aware that the rock in this Quarry is rich iri iron sulfides. When
these sulfides oxidize, which happens when they are exposed to air and
water (in this case due to mining), sulfuric acid and sulfate minerals are the
(2)
result. When these reach a waterway, such as Graves Creek, they cause
damage to the waterway in the form of "acid drainage" (also called acid
mine drainage because of its frequent occurrence at mines). The acid
waters kill aquatic life and attack man-made structures such as concrete
bridge piers (the Graves Creek/Santa Lucia bridge is just downstream from
this mine). I spoke with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board
about this and was told that Mr. .Millhollin just applied for a Storm Water
Discharge Permit approximately 2 weeks ago. He now has 90 days from the
date of his application to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. However, this is self-regulating plan. They don't even
check to see if the applicant has developed the Pian let alone implemented
it. The Board does not come out and test the creek water for iron sulfides.
They assume that with a Pollution Prevention Plan implemented, there will
be no problems. I feel it is necessary for the City to require a testing,
periodically, of Graves Creek water to insure the creeks protection.
If all the citizen's concerns were addressed and all regulations were
followed, the Quarry could run harmoniously with its neighbors.
All of these concerns I have stated relate to keeping the Quarry open.
However, 1 think the action that would be in the best interest of the
community is to close the Quarry. But, that would mean terminating Mr.
Millhoilin's business. Since Mr. Millhollin owns the 50+ acres behind the
Quarry, I have a feeling that Mr. Millhoilin's ultimate goal is to subdivide this
property, including the Quarry parcel. The mining is doing some of the
grading necessary to make that parcel a buildable lot in the future. if this is
Mr. Millhollin's ultimate goal, couldn't the City attempt to work with Mr.
Millhollin to close the Quarry, allow him to grade the "Quarry area" to
facilitate a residential site, possibly waiving the permit fees, and work with
him on a subdivision development? This would give Mr. Millhollin and his
neighbors what they each really want.
Sincerely,
Mut
�- ----
Marcia McClure Torgerson
/m
CC12/14/93
EXHIBIT "B"
Statement to Atascadero City Council re: The Millhollin Quarry
made by Rose Flaherty, 12/14/93
My name is Rose Flaherty. I am a landscape architect living in
the North County. My mother also lives directly west of the Millhollin
Quarry. So I've come tonite to appeal to you on two levels regarding
the quarry. One as a professional obseerver of issues regarding land
use and the other to appeal to your basic human emotions and morality
regarding this industrial operation occuring in your constituents`
residential neighborhood.
I'm here to ask you if there exists one benefit that the city of
Atascadero gains by allowing this quarry to operate. And if you
tell me its in order to get a reclamation plan together, that only
acknowledges continued operation of the quarry. Continued operation
means larger and larger scars to a set of hills which define an
entire valley that make up a large part of Atascader. s land base.
I have here a petition with pages of people' s signatures who are
affected by this quarry and want to see it closed. I'd like Mr.
Millhollin to know that there are hundreds of real people with real
children living in the vicintiy of this quarry whose lives are daily
and directly affected adversly. I'd like anyone here to step inside
the shoes of the people who live next to this industrial operation
and jig listen and witness this incessant disturbance to their
lives - bulldozers and trucks running from sunup to sundown-indefinetely.
And if you tell me there can be no pity for these folks because
they came to the nuisance, I want everyone to know that these people
were assured b 1_q_ e they bought their land that this quarry was
not in operation. They didn' t buy land and set up their homes with
the knowledge that one day the quarry would reopen with a vengeance.
They bought their homes thinking that had found paradise. And now
that paradise is being destroyed. constant tractors pulling down
the hills that created the Paradise Valley.
It sounds like a bad joke but sadly it' s a living reality. I'm asking
the city to reaffirm the determinations and timeframes established
by the staff in the letter dated to Mr. Millhollin, October 6,1993.
Attachment D of the agenda packet where that letter states clearly:
"If 30 days pass and these materials have not yet been received
we will assume that your application has been withdrawn and that you
wish to have noted health and safety hazards and other public welfare
concerns associated with the mine operation resolved through the
nuisance abatement process.
Now the city has the right, by state law, to close this obscene
industrial operation down because itis a public nuisance. And I
think thecityneeds to act to protect its citizens, its roads,
waterways and most of all the character of this town.
On a seperate rite, I'm aware that Mr. Millhollin owns a large
quantity of land adjacent to the quarry and north up the ridge
and valley. I think it' s safe to assume that he will continue to
develop his land, but if he is using this quarry to access that
land and is threatening to sue the city if the city tries to stop
this quarry operation, than that is no less than environmental
blackmail.
Let Mr. Millhollin come forth with his long term development `
plans so that alternatives can be addressed which allow his access
to his property without disturbing the lives and deval'ueing the
Property of the people who live near this quarry.
CC12/14/93
EXHIBIT !'C"
Atascadero City Council , Tuesday, December 14, 1993
Item D. 2 . MILLHOLLIN QUARRY Daphne Fahsing
5105 Llano Rd.
My name is Daphne Fahsing. I live at 5105 Llano Rd. about
1/4 mile from the Millhollin Quarry.
I 'm really sorry I have to be here tonight to speak against
Staff recommendations for extension of time for a revised
reclamation pian. I might have been willing to compromise - until
I went out to the quarry last Friday and saw what had been done
over the past couple of weeks .
The City would never allow the top to be taken off that
mountain. I think Mr. Millhollin clearly understands that; the
County knows that; and yet that is exactly what is being done ! You
can get a pretty good idea from the picture left with you a few
days ago, but you should really see it in person. It is really
shocking!
I feel the owner has been given enough extensions, and has
deliberately increased quarry activities to the extent that his
original intention to level the mountain is actually being carried
out, illegally, virtually with City sanctions by allowing him to
continue.
As a neighborhood group, we feel we have compromised enough.
If I were the owner and I wanted the neighbors ' cooperation, I
would have tried to work with them. Instead, he has removed, for
ever, a very scenic part of our valley - , a small part of Atascadero
- which can never be replaced or "reclaimed;" and with the extent
of the latest activity it is 'even more apparent that this mine is a
safety and health issue, and must be closed immediately, as totally
incompatible with zoning laws and a residential neighborhood. If
this had been done when ,it was proposed last June, we would still
have our mountain top.
more. . . . . . . . .
Millhollin Mine - page 2 Daphne Fahsing
We are told by Mr. Millhollin's attorney that we have no
stand, because we "came to" , the nuisance (at least he admits it is
a nuisance ! ) But that 's not true; the nuisance came to the
neighborhood, within the past two or three years.
I can' t believe that you could be legally forced to allow
continuation of a strip mine within the City of Atascadero.
Atascadero gains no benefit from this strip mine. Levelling a
mountain would never gain City approval; your Staff Report says so.
If any one of us had done damage to much lesser extent without a
City permit, I 'm sure we would be in a lot of trouble!
The operation of this mine is detrimental to the City of
Atascadero and, I submit, illegal . Please close this mine
immediately, as a public nuisance, before more damage is done.
CC12/14/93
EXHIBIT "D"
December 12, 1993
To Atascadero City Council,
My name is Tom Zeulner, I live at 12115 Cenegal Road, I have been a resident of Atascadero
since 1978 and have lived at my current address since 1984. I am having a neighbor of mine
read this letter to you tonight because I am working down in San Luis Obispo and could not
attend.
I would like to speak on the issue of the Millhollin Quarry. I am speaking as a concerned
Atascadero resident who would like to see the City Council make the right decision in this
matter based on what is the right thing to do for the City of Atascadero, its current residents
and all of the future residents for years to come.
I have been in the Fire Service for over 18 years, it is a sad part of my job to respond to an
emergency where someone is killed or injured. I often wonder if the emergency could have
been prevented by someone or something. After 18 years of attending to lifeless and broken
bodies I am certain, based on my experience, that it is to late to prevent an accident or incident
after it has already occurred. This is a simple lesson, but one that we need reminding of each
day.
I believe the right thing to do for the City of Atascadero is to make the Millhollin Quarry a
safe place. This would include not only the quarry itself but also the roads that carry the heavy
trucks and equipment to the quarry. It is not a question of IF an accident will happen at the
quarry or on the narrow curving road that leads to it, BUT WHEN? As an example, just two
weekends ago I could see two children playing at the top of the quarry. They were rolling large
rocks down the steep slope toward Santa Lucia. If they can get in, then it's not a safe place.
Currently the City of Atascadero is sitting under a huge liability issue based on its allowing the
quarry to be in operation. I would not like to see my City of Atascadero drawn into a legal suit
after an accident involving the quarry or its large trucks, however I believe it would, having
perceived deep pockets and all.
The current residents that live in the area of the quarry have a legal right to be safe as they
drive, walk or jog on any road that services the quarry. This is a big concern these days as
quite a number of yellow trucks have been making many trips to and from the quarry. Last
week I observed a total of six yellow trucks from the quarry at one time on Santa Lucia heading
to Hwy 101, it appeared to be a huge land train that demanded the road for over 100 yards. It
is far to often I see these trucks on my side of the road as we go in opposite directions.
I am not saying this condition has always been this way, from y1984 to approximately 1991 there
was very little action at the quarry with equal truck activity. I live in a location that is within
earshot of the quarry and know by the noise when equipment is being operated. Some years
the quarry sat still and some years saw very little use. There has been a steady increase in the
last two years that has increased the liability issue to the City of Atascadero. This needs to be
dealt with.
Lastly I would like to address the idea that like the Tree Ordinance and the Graffiti laws
something must be done to protect the environment. What is currently going on at the
Millholin Quarry is nothing more than Bulldozer Graffiti. The future residents of Atascadero
will never know how beautiful a mountain they are missing thanks to the dozer that has been
recently carving it up so the County of San Luis Obispo can move it to another location and
stockpile it for another day.
Prior to any decision, please consider the liability issue for the City, the dangerous road
conditions, and the destruction of the beautiful mountainside that will never be the same.
Consider that it is just a matter of-time before someone gets hurt or killed due to the increased
activities at the quarry.
Time for prevention is now, please make if safe, please shut it down!
Sincerly, Tom Zeulner
CC12/14/93
EXHIBIT "E" 0
PETITION
We, the undersigned, believe that the Millhollin Rock Quarry
is a public nuisance in the residential neighborhood of
Paradise Valley for the following reasons:
Environmental damage to hillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy truck traffic
Excessive noise and air pollution
We request the City-of Atascadero declare the quarry a
public nuisance and that further quarry activity cease
immediately.
NME ADDRESS
MA �r
11,4
aa c
r /
r 1
r's'Y
c f
v
ell/
t;
PETITION
We, the undersigned, believe that the Nillhollin Rock Quarry
is a public nuisance in the residential neighborhood of
Paradise Valley for the following reasons:
Environmental damage to hillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy truck traffic
Excessive noise and air pollution
We request the City -of Atascadero declare the quarry a
public nuisance and that further quarry activity cease
immediately.
NAM ADDRESS '
1,`
q0 7 y
q 4-1 L ux.,
Ad,,;
If t06i
--� ,
.5
6'
�1 �
PETITIOR
we the undersigned believe that the MillaoR n Rock 'Quarry
is a public nuisance in this residential neighborhood for
the following reasons :
Environmental damage to hillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy-truck traffic
Excessive noise and dust pollution
We request the city of Atascadero declare the quarry a
public nuisance and that further quarry activity cease immediately.
ADDRESS
V ? 70
/07077
G'U #vr,
4n Z=�a__40
Ott
czrL
7 0 -
r
41-
Ott .
� �
'
PETITION
We the undersigned believe that the MihhoUn Rock Quarry
is a public nuisance .in this residential neighborhood for
the following. reasons:
Euvironmental damage to hillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy—track traffic
Excessive noise and dust pollution
We request the city of Atascadero declare the quarry a
publr'_cnuisance and that further quarry activity cease immediately.
NAIIS ADDRESS
-p7- '/(.f
y
tLk
ZIZ2 -10
Fb�,O fa"4114,-ka,2" ao�
..-
PETITION
We, the undersigned, believe that the Millhollin Rock Quarry
is a public nuisance in the residential neighborhood of
Paradise Valley for the following reasons :
Environmental damage to hillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy truck traffic
Excessive noise and air pollution
We request the City-of Atascadero declare the quarry a
public nuisance and that further quarry activity cease
immediately.
NAME ADDRESS
S17i',' 0
Ll A) .5
a223 a-S
11"14 ��
42� 74-vie"�
rf�
ZA0CAa&A&
i
PETITION
We the undersigned believe that the Ylillhollin Rock Quarry
is a public nuisance in this residential neighborhood for
the following. reasons :
Euvfronmental damage to hillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy—truck traffic
Excessive noise and dust pollution
We request the city of Atascadero declare the quarry a
public nuisance and that further quarry activity cease immediately.
NA3S ADDRE-SS
I—Orz C
- AI
l
GG:M��
PETITION
We the undersigned believe that the `j2hos'lin -lock Quarry
is a public nuisance in this residential neighborhood for
the following, reasons
Euvfronmental damage to hillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy—truck traffic
E=essive noise and dust pollution
We request the city of Atascadero declare the quarry a
puhlt^ nuisance and that further quarry activity cease. immediately.
ITAXE ADDRESS
fIS� / rGt ,GAJ a
PETITION
We the undersigned believe than the ',iso Un Rock Quarry
is a public nuisance in this residential neighborhood for
the following_ reasons
Environmental damage to thillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy-truck traffic
Excessive noise and dust pollution
We request the city of Atascadero declare the quarry a
public nuisance and that further quarry activity cease immediately,
NAME ADDRESS
1 S CENEGAL �3E2a
PETITION
We the undersigned beli_evre that the :bock quarry
is a public nuisance in this residential neighborhood for
the following. reasons
Environmental damage to hillside and watershed
Dangerous, heavy-truck traffic
Excessive noise and dust pollution
We request the city of ktascadero declare the quarry a
pubi=c nuisance and that further quarry activity cease immediately.
LTuF ADDRESS
,Q /Z17 '
v
bin Cros y 12 5 r.cn coo