HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 12/09/1985 DEPUTY CITY CLERK
• AGENDA
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
FOURTH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM
December 9, 1985
*** Proclamation - FFA Weeks - December 9 - 22
Call to Order
Pledge of Alligiance
Invocation
Roll Call
City Council Comments
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed below under Item A, Consent Calendar, are
considered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in
• the form listed below. There will be no seperate discussion of
these items. If discussion is required, that item will be
removed from the Consent Calendar and considered seperately.
Vote may be by roll call.
1. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 25 , 1985
2. Proposed Resolution 130 - 85 Endorsing Bottle Bill
3. Tentative Tract Map 28-85 - Request submitted by Ralph and
Gale Day (Kennaly Engineering) to create a six unit
commercial condominium tract - 8935 Morro Road (Lot 2,
Block EC)
4. Authorization to solicit proposals for Atascadero Lake
Feasibility Study
5. Proposed Resolution No. 129-85 - Authorizing City Manager to
execute amendments to City' s Community Development Block
Grant (Young: 95-unit congregate senior citizens project)
6. Motion reaffirming the City' s commitment to the Mercedes
alignment for the extension of Highway 41
7. Motion Authorizing Public Works Director to enter into an
• agreement for Aerial Mapping Services
S8. Final Lot Line Adjustment 5-85 — 5430/5440 Olmeda
B. HEARINGS, APPEARENCES, AND REPORTS
1. Public Hearing - Zone Change 7-85 — Urban Sciences Inc./
Dodson 8425 El Bordo (Lot 27,28,29 Block 442) - Zone Change
from RSF-Z to L (PD5) (Second Reading)
2. Public Hearing - Zone Change 8-85 - Urban Sciences, Inc. /
Dodson - 9425 El Bordo (Lot 30,31 Tract 5) Change zone from
RSF-Z to L (PD5) (First Reading)
C. NEW BUSINESS
1. Proposed Resolution 128-85 - Designating a No Parking Zone on
Solano Road at El Camino Real
2. Proposed Resolution 132-85 -Establishing left turn lanes on
Curbaril Avenue at E1 Camino Real and eliminating parking
within 50 feet of the intersection on Curbaril
3. Proposed Resolution 133-85 - To Prohibit Parking on Palomar
Ave. (Front of Mini-Storage)
4. Proposed Resolution 131-85 - Reducing Speed on Atascadero
Avenue
D. OLD BUSINESS
1. Proposed Resolution 134-85 - Authorizing Community
Development Director to enter into agreement for
electrical service prior to final inspection
E. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
(Council will recess and convene as the Atascadero County
Sanitation District Board of Directors)
1. Status Report on a Sanitary Sewer Draft Report (Verbal
Wallace Associates)
2. Authorization to enter into agreement and expend district
funds for engineering services for Cease and Desist areas "C"
and "E" (Seperado & Cayucos)
(The Board of Directors will adjourn and reconvene as the City
Council)
• F. COMMUNITY FORUM
G. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION
• 1. City Council
2. City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
5. City Manager
NOTE: MEETING WILL ADJOURN TO A SPECIAL MEETING ON JANUARY 13,
1986 AT 7 :15 P.M. (PRIOR TO REGULAR MEETING) FOR THE PURPOSE OF
INTERVIEWING APPLICANTS) FOR CITIZENS TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE , OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
•
0 , A G77RDA
MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL -' Pa ;tisC�
Regular Meeting, November 25 , 1985 , 7 ; 30 p.m.
•Atascadero Administration Building
The Regular Meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to order at
7: 30 p.m. by Mayor Nelson, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. An invo-
cation was given by John Cole.
ROLL CALL
M-
Present: Councilmembers Mackey, Molina, Norris , Handshy .and Mayor Nelson
Absent: None
STAFF
Mike Shelton, City Manager; Robert Jones, City Attorney/City Clerk; Paul
Sensibaugh, Public Works Director; Henry Engen, Community Development
Director; Bud :McHale , Police Chief; Steve DeCamp, Senior Planner; Cindy
Wilkins, Dep. City Clerk.
COUNCIL COMMENT
Mayor Nelson thanked Maggie Rice of the Chamber of Commerce for bringing
coffee and cookies for tonight ' s meeting.
STAFF COMMENT
*Henry Engen, Comm. Develop. Director, introduced Steve DeCamp, new Senior
Planner as of last Monday, Nov. 18th; Steve' s most recent experience was
with the County of Humboldt. Bud McHale, Police Chief, introduced William
Tilley, new Police Officer; Officer Tilley has resided in Atascadero for
about 8 years and has served as a reserve deputy for a few years.
a
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 12 , 1985
2 . Approval of Treasurers Report, October 1-31 , 1985
3. Approval of Finance Director ' s Report , October 1-31 , 1985
4. Authorization Requested for Mayor to Enter into Agreement with Neal
Feaver for Computer Consultation Services
5. Approval of 1985-86 Library Agreement Renewal
6. Tentative Parcel Map 27-85 - Ellison/Twin Cities Engineering - 10390
Santa Ana Road (Lot 34 , Block 26) (Division of 10 . 11 acres into two
4. 00 and 6. 11 acre parcels)
7 . Zoning Enforcement Status Report
8. Ordinance No. 113 - Zone Change 6-85 - Planning Commission Request to
Revise Minimum Lot Size Performance Standards Formula in the RS , RSF-
Z and LSF-Z Zones (Cont'd from 11/12/85) (SECOND READING)
•9. Authorization for Public Works Director to enter into an agreement
with Fred Schott Associates for engineering and architectural ser-
vices for Phase IIA - Renovation of Administration Building
•
COUNCIL MINUTES - 11/25/85
PAGE THREE
to the property owners; an cost in excess of $5 ,000 would be picked up
P P Y Y
by the City through the FmHA program.
Public Comment
Mr. Carl Lownes thanked the VFW for the use of their facility for the
neighborhood meeting, and he thanked the Atascadero Police Dept. for mak-
ing extra patrols of their neighborhood while most were in attendance at
that meeting. Additionally, he thanked Mr. Shelton and Mr. Sensibaugh
for their attendance at the meeting, as well as John Falkenstein of Ken-
naly Engrg. and those members of the City Council who stopped in. Mr.
Lownes relayed the last few paragraphs of the minutes which were taken
at the neighborhood meeting, particularly bringing to the Board' s atten-
tion that, after City personnel left, the property owners concurred in
favor of Alternate #6 (because it would encompass the lots on both sides
of Santa Rosa) . Although unable to speak for the majority at this point,
Mr. Lownes spoke in favor of the new alternative , 2-A, introduced tonight
due to it being the best , so far, in terms of cost.
Roy Hill spoke in favor of Alternative 2-A based on the cost savings , how-
ever expressed concern for the vacant lot he owns which, according to the
drawing shown tonight, shows 3 sewer lines running through it , and ease-
ments may be needed in the future for problem lots , adding more lines
running through his lot. Mr. Sensibaugh responded that the sketches shown
tonight are preliminary, and the final design will be carefully drawn up
with Mr. Hill ' s concern in mind.
MOTION: By Director Molina that the Board rescind proposed Res . # ' s 118
& 123-85 and go along with staff recommendations to renotify the
property owners of a new proposed resolution to be introduced at
a public hearing at the January 13th meeting when the cost and
conditions will be discussed, seconded by Director Mackey;
passed unanimously by roll-call vote.
2 . Report on Seperado & Cayucos Proposed Sewer Assessment District
(Cease and Desist Area)
Paul Sensibaugh, Pub. Works Director , gave staff report. Director
Molina expressed his feeling that it would be considerate to give
the people in the cease & desist areas some idea of the City ' s antici-
pated time schedule in accomplishing the 12 items outlined in the
staff report. Mr. Sensibaugh responded that the people affected will
be kept advised of the progress throughout the process , adding that
staff will be open to their questions. Director Mackey expressed con-
cern about cleaning up the Seperado area, which Mr. Sensibaugh advised
is planned to be brought into the assessment district.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Director Mackey urging staff to proceed with the schedule as
outlined in the agenda packet , seconded by Director Norris;
passed unanimously.
J
COUNCIL MINUTES - 11/085
PAGE FOUR
3. Motion Accepting Atascadero County Sanitation District Audit Report
for Fiscal Year 84-85 ending June 30 , 1985
Mike Shelton, City Manager, gave brief summary of this item.
MOTION: By Director Handshy to accept ACSD Audit , seconded by Director
Molina; passed unanimously.
MOTION: By Director Handshy to recess as ACSD Board of Directors and re-
convene as the City Council, seconded by Director Mackey; passed
unanimously.
C. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS
1. Public Hearing - Zone Change 7-85 - Urban Sciences Inc./Dodson - 8425
El Bordo (Lot 27 , Block 442) - Zone Change from RSF-Z to L (PD5)
Henry Engen, Community Development Director, gave staff report. He
noted that staff had had some discussion with the County over the
thought of having a shared parking arrangement with them; a letter
was received late today from the General Services Director for the
County, expressing some concern over noise, traffic & increased usage
of the roadway and parking facilities and suggesting a continuance
to allow them to further study these concerns.
Public Comment
George Beatty, resident of Rancho del Bordo , spoke on behalf of the
Park Mgr. , Jack Stroup, indicating they aren't opposed to the con-
cept of constructing a water slide, as they feel it ' s in keeping with
the use of the adjoining property (Heilmann Regional Park) ; however ,
they are concerned about the related activities (hot tubs, restaurant ,
beer , wine , etc. ) . They are opposed to the hot tub concept, as the
surrounding area encompasses apartments where they are many young
children, and mainly senior citizens reside in the mobilehome park.
They are also concerned about problems from any increase in traffic.
Curt Sorg, Property Mgr. for SLO County, expressed that the County
would like to secure a written agreement with Mr. Dodson that he will,
in fact, negotiate with them on their concerns relating to the project,
mainly, (1) the use of Heilmann Park changing from passive to very ac-
tive, and (2) traffic concerns; the County desires to see this stipu-
lation that Mr. Dodson intends to negotiate with them written into
the City' s ordinance. Mr . Engen questioned the inclusion of a condi-
tion in the City' s ordinance stating that a zoning will be conditioned
on the County approving something, although he thinks the two should
definitely work together to come up with a mutually agreeable program.
Bruce Dodson, the project advocate, spoke in support of his proposal,
thanking the Planning Commission and Atas. Mutual Water Co. for their
support so far. He showed slides , reviewing the history of the uses
in the area under consideration and his proposed plans for the water
slide facility.
Betty Sanders, Attorney who has been involved with this project, urge
the Council to take the first step to allow the project to go forward
Y
COUNCIL MINUTES - 11/25/85 •
PAGE FIVE
to allow the Planning staff and both the City and County as well as
Mr. Dodson to proceed.
Nancy Harvey, an Atas. High School student , spoke in support of the
water slide , feeling it will be a great contribution to Atascadero
and will help keep kids out of trouble. She feels the hot tubs will
be used all year long -- even in August -- and that any concerns re-
garding alcohol on the premises can be handled as they come up.
Gordon Davis , speaking for Atas. Mutual Water Co. Board of Directors,
related that they are very enthusiastic about this project and feel
it would be a great contribution to the community' s recreational
needs , in addition to making the property more appealing to the eye.
Whether the project goes or not, they are in favor of the zone change.
Councilwoman Mackey stated she feels, if Dial-A-Ride service is con-
sidered (so less parking spaces have to be provided) , a subsidy should
somehow be paid to Dial-A-Ride as it ' s costly to the City to operate .,
that system.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to read Ord. 114 by title only, seconded
by Councilwoman Mackey; passed unanimously. Mayor Nelson read
Ord. 114 by title only.
,MOTION: By Councilman Handshy that this constitutes the first reading
of Ord. 114 , seconded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed unanimous-
ly. Second reading will be the first meeting in December.
2. Appeal by Gifford of Planning Commission Denial of Conditional Use
Permit 16-85 , 6455 Santa Lucia (23-Unit Elderly Facility)
Henry Engen, Commun. Develop. Director, gave staff report and res-
ponded to Council questions regarding project density.
Public Comment
David Brannon, project architect, spoke in support of the project ,
explaining that it is intended to serve the needs of the low-income
elderly in the community, and it will be a subsidized housing pro-
ject to be administered by the Housing Authority. He noted that ,
even with a 25% density bonus, only 11 units would be allowed, which
would not make construction economically feasible, thus the need to
appeal. Mr. Brannon provided copies of a letter of support for the
project (from Mr. Chubon, Administrator of the San Luis Obispo Hous-
ing Authority) to Council.
Mary Middlecamp , resident on Venado , expressed her concern for the
provision of recreational facilities for the residents; as a consul-
tant for the Tri-Counties Regional Senior Citizens Center, she spoke
of the social needs of the elderly. She also hopes the traffic safety
issues are carefully studied.
Mr. Eldridge Hughes , an elderly citizen, stated he feels the project
proposed is too large; he agreed with the previous speaker regarding
COUNCIL MINUTES - 11/25/85
PAGE SIX
the need for congregational facilities as well as plenty of landscap 0
ing: "People need space; that' s what Atascadero is about" .
Al Wright asked Council to think about giving 19 old people a place
to live instead of kicking them out into the street.
Mr. Engen stated he had received a letter this afternoon from Norma
Boneso, a property owner of 6603 Santa Lucia (duplex adjoining the
subject property) , supporting Mr. Gifford' s project.
David Brannon_ spoke again, rebutting Mrs. Middlecamp ' s "total mis-
representation" of the project. He pointed out that an indoor
recreation room is in the plans, as well as an enclosed, sheltered
exterior patio; there is space for another exterior patio. He in-
vited Council to visit a similar facility in San Luis Obispo whose
residents express they're very happy with their living quarters and
situation and would probably express support for this project.
Councilman Handshy read excerpts from a publication which addressed
the issue of planning for retirement and the nation' s need to provide
independence and security for its elderly population.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to continue this item to Jan. 13th in or-
der to allow staff to write up a very discreet set of findings
for approval (with respect to density issues) so that inappro-
priate future proposals can be avoided, seconded by Councilwoman
Mackey; passed unanimously.
COUNCIL RECESSED FOR A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK AT 10 :00 P.M.
3. Appeal of Planning Commission action allowing removal of the Sycamore
tree at 7040 E1 Camino to allow expansion of a Kentucky Fried Chick-
en (KFC) Restaurant
Henry Engen gave staff report.
Councilman Molina asked for clarification of whether or not a conflict
of interest exists due to Councilwoman Mackey' s request for Council
support of the subject appeal and her filing a letter of intent to
initiate it. Robert Jones, City Atty. , responded that, in his opin-
ion, since the filing fee didn't accompany the letter and Council-
woman Mackey subsequently removed the letter because another group
took the action of filing the appeal , there is no conflict of inter-
est.
Public Comment
Marion Young, Young Bros. Construction, representing the franchise-
owners of the KFC, spoke in support of the Planning Commission' s
recommendations and decision. to allow for the tree removal. He noted
that, to his knowledge, a governing committee has not made a formal
determination that the Sycamore is a heritage tree. He also noted
that every means of remodeling the structure without harming the tree
•
COUNCIL MINUTES - 11/25/$5
PAGE SEVEN
has been explored, and there appears to be no alternative; the tree
is causing extensive plumbing problems and some structural problems.
Charlie Vest, whose family owns the KFC franchise, spoke in support
of the tree removal in order to expand and upgrade the facility as
an alternative to rebuilding.
Steve LaSalle, resident, indicated he had about 35 people to add to
the list of persons appealing the tree removal , bringing the total
to about 50 . He spoke in support of leaving the tree and "shooting
for as much quality as can be obtained" . He noted that a licensed
landscape architect and professor from Cal Poly came and assessed
the tree ' s value at approximately $16 ,000 . He read excerpts from
this Dec. ' s Atlantic Monthly addressing the subject of chain res-
taurant planning.
John Cole , resident, read a prepared statement on behalf of the 100-
year-old, healthy Sycamore tree , and he supports the appeal. He
added that he trusts that , should Council approve the appeal , a stiff
penalty will be assessed if someone deliberately kills or poisons the
tree.
Ted Elder , landscape architect, spoke in support of the previous speak-
er' s comments, feeling it ' s a shame even considering cutting down such
a tree.
Barbara Schinicke , resident, expressed concerns about the possibility
of future problems from the 3 replacement oaks; she favors the appeal.
Stubby Fasig, resident , spoke in support of the appeal , noting some
of the many trees which have been lost to growth.
Betsy Collins , resident , expressed that more tree-lovers would be
present tonight except there is an Audubon meeting tonight. She re-
layed a quote from Thomas Jefferson (bemoaning the fact that he had
no power to save the trees in Washington) that he felt the lack of
consideration for trees is akin to murder. She supports the appeal.
Mike Minden spoke in defense of the tree, supporting the appeal.
Ray Gordon, local business owner near KFC and engineer , spoke in sup-
port of the appeal, expressing the 100-year-old tree is a treasure to
be saved.
Marion Young spoke again, noting that it has taken 4 months for the
business-owner to proceed to this point to repair and modernize his
failing business which employs 12 people , another important factor.
George Beatty, resident, agreed with the comments of Mr. Gordon and
asked why can't the design be accomplished around the tree.
John Cole spoke again in support of creative design to alleviate the
problems the present structure has.
COUNCIL MINUTES - 11/25/85
PAGE EIGHT
Mr. Engen noted the receipt of a letter to Council from Kirk & Chris*
tine Shultz supporting the effort to save the Sycamore tree.
Eldridge Hughes, resident for nearly half a century in Atascadero,
noted that some of the trees have been marked not to be destroyed,
and he wonders if either the State or County has applied such a
stipulation to the tree at KFC.
Harry Sachrider noted that there is a Sizzler ' s Restaurant in Goleta
where there ' s a Sycamore tree in the middle of the restaurant with
an atrium built around it , and he thinks this could be considered.
Norm Canfield feels the Council has a unique .opportunity to redefine
the nature of how Atascadero ' s business area is going to grow; maybe
now' s the time to say we 're not with cutting down 100-year-old trees
but are , instead, interested in creative methods with which to save
them.
Betsy Collins asked what considerations have been made with respect
to an ordinance mandating how to handle the trees, or having a mem-
ber on the Planning Commission knowledgeable of trees.
One lady (didn't state name) spoke in support of the appeal and feels
KFC should redesign their plans taking into consideration the "jewel"
of a tree on their property. 0
MOTION: By Councilman Molina that Council uphold the Planning Commis-
sion recommendations, seconded by Councilman Handshy; motion
failed by 3:2 roll call vote , upholding the appeal, with Coun-
cilmembers Mackey, Norris and Mayor Nelson dissenting.
MOTION: By Councilman Molina to extend meeting past 11 p.m. , seconded by
Councilman Handshy; passed unanimously.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey that Council concur with the Planning De-
partment ' s original recommendations (that the site plan be re-
designed to save the existing 30-inch Sycamore tree) and that
staff investigate alternative plans for parking, seconded by
Councilwoman Norris; motion passed by 3 :2 voice vote , with
Councilmembers Handshy and Molina dissenting.
4. Appeal by Sherer of City procedures, which do not allow installation
of permanent electrical power until final inspection
Henry Engen, Commun. Develop. Director , gave staff report.
Mayor Nelson asked if this subject matter is appropriate for the
Board of Appeals . Mr. Engen and Mr. Jones, City Atty. , clarified
that it is a procedural issue, not a Building Code issue , to be de-
cided by Planning staff in their discretion and, as such, the Atas.
Municipal Code requires the matter be brought before the City Coun-
cil. 0
COUNCIL MINUTES - 11/2085
PAGE NINE
Public Comment
Mike Sherer, appellant, spoke in support of the appeal. He stated
the former City Manager had revised the wording that proposed refer-
ring certain issues to the Board of Appeals ; Mr. Sherer contends that
this issue should have gone to the Board of Appeals , and he disagrees
with Mr. Engen' s administration of Building Dept. procedures. He
stated that , if Council upholds his appeal, it will (in some cases)
reduce the costs of construction. He stated the County, Paso Robles
and Morro Bay permit permanent electric service prior to final inspec-
tion.
Don Smith, representing PG&E , stated the piggyback hook-ups are a
"pain in the neck" for them and they would rather hook up permanent
electricity wherever possible; however , PG&E will go along with what-
ever policy the City adopts and continue to enforce it.
Mr. Engen noted that, since the staff report, he investigated a prac-
tice called "Notice of Pendency" used by Monterey County in unique
situations; individuals agree to pay for the recording (with the
County) of an agreement stating they won't move into the house until
final inspection occurs. This might be an alternative for Atascadero
to mitigate similar problems.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Norris to allow the extension of permanent elec-
trical power on the basis of performance agreement (s) between
the City and contractor (s) , in general, and to direct staff to
look into changing the policy of which cases should go before
the Board of Appeals , seconded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed
unanimously.
D. NEW BUSINESS
1. Proposed Resolution 127-85 - Setting Public Hearing date regarding
possible establishment of a Business Improvement Association
Mike Shelton, City Manager , reported that the committee has requested
a few changes to the proposed resolution:
1) On page 2 , item 5: Instead of first year , second year, etc. , the
first year would be stated 1986 , second year 1987 , etc. , with the
intent to be specific instead of general as to the years;
2) On page 2 , item 5, first paragraph: " . . . for the area shall be
levied on ' all ' (replacing 'the ' ) business in the area in amounts
equal to the business license charge (exempt business categorized
as general fee) on such business. . . " (words in parenthesis added) .
The intent of this change is to insure that exempt businesses who
do not , now, pay a business license fee will be responsible for
a fee under this proposed resolution, Mr. Shelton noted.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to adopt the attached proposed resolution
of intention to establish a Business Improvement Association area
(Res. 127-85) , seconded by Councilwoman Norris ; passed unanimous-
ly with changes as mentioned by Mr. Shelton.
9
COUNCIL MINUTES - 11/0/85
PAGE TEN
2 . General Plan Conformity Report - Request to offer Graves Creek Reser-
vation No. 8 to City - 11725 Santa Lucia
Mayor Nelson announced the above offer was withdrawn, making this a
non-item.
F. COMMUNITY FORUM
Jerry Bond, Planning Commissioner, clarified his understanding of the
voting policy as a Commissioner (that, even if his vote was the mino-
rity vote and the majority vote carried, he then goes along with the
majority after the vote) ; Mayor Nelson responded that that is correct.
G. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION
City Council - Councilman Molina asked to direct Mr. Engen to look
into the tree ordinance, specifically as it relates to industrial ,
commercial and high-density residential areas; Council consented
to that suggestion.
Mayor Nelson announced there will be a closed session after the meet-
ing adjourns tonight regarding litigation in the case of Barrett vs.
City of Atascadero.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12 : 00 MIDNIGHT TO THE CLOSED SESSION, STATED ABOVE .
RECORDED BY:
ROBERT M. JONES-,- City Clerk
PREPARED BY:
CINDY WILRING, Dep. City Clerk
V
. ..-
• RESOLUTION NO. 130 -85
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
SUPPORTING ASSEMBLY BILL 2020 (Bottle Bill)
WHEREAS, for years local government has been plagued with
the enormous and growing cost of dealing with litter and solid
waste, and
WHEREAS, for years, the League of California Cities, the
County Supervisors Association of California and hundreds of
local officials have urged legislation to reduce this burden by
passing a state beverage container deposit law, or bottle bill,
and
WHEREAS, despite recent polls that show 80% public support
for the bottle bill, the state legislature has still not acted,
and
WHEREAS, a California bottle bill would be of enormous
benefit to local government by:
* Reducing litter - total litter would be reduced by 30%
* Reducing solid waste
i * Saving tax dollars - litter clean up costs local and state
government $100 million a year, and solid waste disposal
cost $1. 6 billion
* Saving natural resources
* Creating jobs
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 2020 , by Assemblyman Burt Margolin
and Senator Becky Morgan is now on the Assembly floor.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Atascadero City Council
endorses AB 2020 and urges the support of this bill by local
legislative representatives, Assemblyman Eric Seastrand and
Senator Ken Maddy.
On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman
, the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in
its entirety on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
• ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ROLFE NELSON, Mayor
• M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 9, 1985
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager �.ILA-'
FROM:
Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map 28-85
LOCATION: 8935 Morro Road
APPLICANT: Ralph and Gale Day (Kennaly Engineering)
REQUEST: Approval to create a six unit commercial condominium tract
map.
On November 18, 1985 the Planning Commission conducted a public hear-
ing unanimously approving the request subject to the findings and con-
ditions contained in the attached staff report.
There was some discussion concerning an assessment district being
formed in this potential flood hazard area, as well as recovery pay-
ments being assessed for those who have made deposits with regard to
projects along Morro road.
It was pointed out that CalTrans has been formally asked to include
the spillway project as one of their state-wide projects.
John Kennaly, representing the applicant, appeared and indicated his
agreement with the recommendation.
No one else spoke on the matter.
HE:ps
ATTACHMENT: Staff Report - November 18, 1985
•
Tentative Tract Map 28-85 (Day/Kennaly Engineering)
9. General Plan Designation. . . . .Commercial Professional
10. Terrain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Flat lot with few trees, located
in a flood hazard zone.
11. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Categorically exempt, but a
Negative Declaration was filed
for Precise Plan 10-85.
C. ANALYSIS:
This project was reviewed by staff and subsequently received pre-
cise plan approval for a six unit office building (6,774 square
feet) . The applicant has been issued building permits and the
project is now under construction.
The applicant now desires to convert the building to a six unit
commercial condominium tract which will allow individual ownership
of a commercial unit and common ownership of the parking and open
space areas. Since this project has been reviewed and approved
under Precise Plan 10-85, particularly for the necessary drainage
improvements, this change of ownership appears to be of little
consequence.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map 28-85 based upon
the findings and conditions of approval contained in Exhibit A.
DGD:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Findings/Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B - Location Map
Exhibit C - Tract Map
Exhibit D - Precise Plan 10-85
Exhibit E - Memo from John Wallace
Exhibit F - Additional conditions of approval
Id
2
Tentative Tract Map 28-85 (Day/Kennaly Engineering)
EXHIBIT A Tentative Tract Map 28-85
Findings/Conditions of Approval
November 18, 1985
FINDINGS:
1. - The application as submitted conforms to all applicable zoning and
subdivision regulations and is consistent with the General Plan.
2. The application as submitted is exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15301, Class 1 (a) ) .
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. 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&Rs 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&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium
Association.
2. All conditions of approval herein specified are to be complied
with prior to filing of the final map.
3. Each unit created shall be required to contain a separate water
meter.
4. A final map, in compliance with all conditions set forth herein,
shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and 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.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit-
ted for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
5. 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.
EB
RMF/16:r t -�E ,, sA�:a�
E. •i ,p ` j♦'''� ;
RMF/16 y�
• J C•. - ` `` h .! 7
•�• -�`��' 4••r'sa •I ' `:'i V.° i t,.R J, rr J`, -?a � '•''� y �•
.. :•LSF-Y '�' ''-'���.; .t ,° ._,a .. F �b. .�'. Y ��''.
CE t.�•r..' s�.' 4 n)'• .:i,y s. ��py,�� 'ice t �'e .4 . ,
�+ ,• v y4 �+ a ..•itis.^ .moi{\ r
W ii •.e --l::.` A r 0 ,,' „w �'F 1 - 1 U�-a s., o P 'ar,` - .+4 t` ts•,
RMF/16
_ mer ie,: � , t;.` �t � �- , ] . •♦• Y \i a+++, � ei,,
18
74
-...�..r - `')i'„ r ar )r b s • .e mss° • t+ •'; -
LSF-Yti a .,__ 1, °,a , ,.• °.e° _f,
a . ' >is . 0 3d N• -�. ,r-r'xe 'y�? a.K.,'.,r ;. ,••.• . AT-80-041 12.31 L'C
1 �- °a-I,+a s,t. ,r,e "s°„so a >+.!��• •__ ,aa° ,• „•. .y}.L6 • AT-7B-Lo9
]I - ;�. •• ;1;j , >•,�a >*.e ,. .._;'.; �'., LSF-Y(FH) AT-78-65 1z-81 s
i CN(POJ1 :°`1 `'-•�(D ) J-f a •° -� ",'a, • to�' < _ ::y' .y;:%4�. AT-78-It! IL•3.
! VJ
- .i:,_.AS'• }i -<� "�Y�� ��b x a„r >�ia »a '4LL�'�` + I n t � TR4CT 10°'F
.;,�r�P ' �, "°x • LSF-Y(FH)
,,, � •�'�tt`�'�y�t� , ,.,. r �,. �Ir 14-A
• •tea.�
•:•. � h•11 +fi--`�`. :'� 30� 4� ./ • m � y� ���114°
.19` '- li 8' 4 a, •!_)_,3 „rr, _ 9D �'PDw' .
LSF-Y rU _, a - �•,, ec,o� ,. ^•,,- 1s Is-t:•;�
_ � �- _ r°4 4.+ ..:.` ,°` 1s :..ee nevlsicr: ,t;e �•,
N'y(�: t r r' •'_ ;y, I '`C, fit''. `=� •'•w � �' O.� . .
0 �' C♦ •.l. t •!•, q& ♦ �,-`eY\ i, 2, �i� Il4ar 9G �X I. :/
. 41
==s•.. �• •'-" !`• • X ' r.�, °,,, ♦' sed' A
o TT
. �' �- ,'h 'fie ,_,a ! .y ,�. �•.� _ •et°
.. ,tea e° . ;` ,� � g °����.• e ,je,i L+ �s o�
Of
RMF/16( " `+ ,
_
1
e
CITY OF ATASCADERO
;�Planning• Department p .Sf �, �>, �,� ";��r►
f � i � i - :'.'G jG:IlLy1'I� 1 ;;'u.....�.�..� .a�u.°w:u.wie• I
}J S It a 1l� - �Z..i."!7 o.+.....u.►L°+:+ sl
max_...
Map No. T7
.;i
CJ W�cy Q
wnU
o�� V � �' s w � v � ✓� �.
l c1 � S M1 v X�9g9 \�I{�'
Q W Cyh Q'-'R " Q �lb
ti L
IVj
J
yj
I
ce
1 � �
1
i
� V W
2
\l
2 I Q
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING CITY ATTORNEY
POST OFFICE BOX 747 POST OFFICE BOX 749
ATASCA'DERO,CALIFORNIA 93423 ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA.93423
PHONE: (805) 466.8000 - PHONE: (805) 466-5678
CITY COUNCIL
CITY CLERK 'IL,
I" -�-.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CITY TREASURER POST OFFICE BOX 747
CITY MANAGER INCORPORATED JULY 2, 1979 ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93423
FINANCE DEPARTMENT PHONE: (805) 466-8600
PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
-a.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT
RECREATION DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE
ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 93422
PHONE: (805) 466-2141
March 1, 1985
Gale Supply Co.
C/o 8205 San Rafael
Atascadero, CA 93422
RE: PRECISE PLAN 10-85
8935 Morro Road (Gale Supply/Day) - 3868 sq. ft. office
buildings with six units.
Dear Gale Supply:
The City of Atascadero has received and reviewed your application
for a Precise Plan and Environmental Determination for construction
of 3868 sq. ft, office buildings -Csix units) on a vacant 17,952
square foot lot at 8935 Morro Road..
The surrounding property to the north is zoned the same as the- sub-
ject site. Property to the west is presently CR ('PD3) , while adja-
cent land to the east is zoned RMF (16) . To the south is a recrea-
tional area with a Flood Hazard overlay.
The proposed project is zoned CP (PD3) (FH) and the proposed use
would be an allowed use as defined as offices (Section 9-3.212 (v) ) .
The proposed project is in compliance with the provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance.
A review by the Planning Director of the Environmental Description
Form and application along with other background information shows
that the project will have no detrimental effect upon the environment,
therefore, a. Negative Declaration has- been prepared. The Director has
also found the project to be in compliance with the provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance. The proposed Precise Plan is approved as shown on
attached Exhibit B (site plan) , Exhibit C (elevation) , subject to the
conditions of approval listed in Exhibit D. Final approval of the
Precise Plan will become effective at 5 : 00 p.m. on March 15, 1985,
unless appealed.
-Pk6C1S E PL4N /O-
1�
Gale Supply Co.
Page 2
In the event you intend to appeal any of the conditions, your
appeal should be in writing and should state the reasons for the
appeal. Any appeal would be scheduled for Planning Commission
consideration as a public hearing. You should, however, discuss
any objections to the conditions with the Planning Staff as it may
be possible to alter conditions after such discussion.
If you should have any questions concerning this project, you are
welcome to contact this office for assistance.
Sincerely,
Doug kvidson
Associate Planner Trainee
DD:mm
Attachment: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Site Plan
Exhibit C - Elevations
Exhibit D Conditions of Approval
l�'
EB
w.
RMF/16,,� � `� °h �A "����� - �• ' , - . . .
lip q C r r • +, Fh
'RMF�1S c,,• t r 1
f
1 x/ T i 1 C •w�-- �� c r�:'t' �� ^f• �''''• t 1 t"7••,v
" ... �`. -'r•` _ ..�", G ,t l+ of• t •4 •1
:":'LSF—Y 'l'`3/>r.�' = :• {��' .t �w . 4� ♦, •.* • a } • `
_ !�'- -} :i. —, :r �B} "}'Ga _ u` �1�• O r 8 .rs S, O. .-.�yS;n '. s.�•"��•' � P 'a
- ';'; -.. a .`. f.'„ "J!o � 'i azs•a - • (' `o tp' ' `♦. 'l. �' �i\ ter-'
-RI�1F/16 `,. ? . J "J` N F 1 ) lfb o ,a A �r �t •�• . ^+�.m `•3�., Aery+ ��
':Ir.73:'_ ,��. i x ��'h♦ .,Ti,+ s,1: tt, 1a ',e^ ,yh:� `_-Vii'
18
lJ •' ) '.� ril ,.>'-� ...z ,. �`.�_ + ••♦ � gar• ,Y� es_
rvb >•-, > W s• 1\ay° IS ufi r.1d ,.•�-1a• ,t. }. L Nl. �l: w,\
T:i'^ i'`[ .#;.P-�3 ,b10 lr r' = n tS '� lni• ♦� d'� ' .Jt� d.j, , / .,', ' a
. - =.:q, ,''.` rl „ f,-a„ ,� ='}o ..,+•• o- ,., 'ros9 1 � ,e sX .. '•' P ,'`a,,, as a�J
_p � �� - a ,. ,oe , „a, ,., LII = - ,,.♦. ,•
LSF—Y ;° a ,'r\,• e_ 1, r°{ o�.l° e.•. �ys1Zn
_� ,. y'`IQ, a s/4' '�O r'.° dst •7 r: +� •t. �� µ�}ee AT-80-C41 I2•31
. . . 4..-!- " _ •,.tea• ..h,.a Amo
�,?- �4ra •'sem ° J• '>7, s.; i;11 • • 'Tti-L09
ly.yl
CN(PO71 �. ;: cP •, a.., LSF—Y(FH)' '•�. J, (FH) AT-78-65 12-81
=,i .,• F ': J >7ry�r �� may.... 's t7� - y I+;.•`v
AT-
::•;y '•.l - �. �'�•• l�fzP3 * " ;,-. 7;>v :*`�'_�: - ._\�.� .,. 7a-zr_
!I•• r.�-(, vfyy ,)a. ,n T jY! 1~,, A k .M• ry w.� _Vr
i , ;t, `' � _��-_. . ++� 7\a• -T iti, 'i-•" •�� ' �. •• �•��. _ T74CT 1004
�` ` '� :.r _',�• ',... LSF—Y(FH)
LSF-Y 19
•rGA °' _ n1• w .
_ +r ,• . moi., BG'
'c' _ •:» i• �3. =J ,• a• s ,r.,l• '°� •• •n'.ds, 16 t �ia=i:e
.a f.♦ _ .t• r. a° .r'� 111 rr � �11 IYL 1}t1 a _
�••�D. i•i:• ,.t•4 /f ,r,.. ••��., �'•If p,,• a 4[1 IS-0
1 ] t• ,y :�: �' ,r•.. yJr° u
- - _- •-LO ( r� � ' .•, '• L,• �!� q9 ,fes'' ,�«,'¢i.,.�y e , • . - -
�'� `a, ,r err -� r, �'I r <r`` zS c �w\.•��a orf L'� - i , X H 15 1. l
-Y �- •1 CAT)ON M �
PP. 10
_ -• crit- c , J. r, �`x-„ r•�'2: =JS , /a''4i , �y oy°
_ \ ,� � (( „ •,S - •g'e
• r+v i!\ rh�' 984, i ,4 � 6 y ���' ear:.� ,. S �
9 MLA , • '• , '-1 e-fi 1i0•0 L, • •,l O•.•
'RMF/16(FH) = Ina . „ � "e <<, sa
41
31 .
UA Q
22
CITY OF ATASCADERO ra•--�` -.� -�•�,.. •.�-5--
\
Planningb Department
�'~Q �`�^�--_ ��' /� )l! •••+•s wRV\V-.a.• •..,a•T�11 moi-~. —.
.—J 77l.1 / t
1` t ♦' r F_ I•-II •.. _ • L!� y_t�,,=w=t m��t'K aa'� w
'(mss � L��1•�i!}ice -i• 1 17/fIJ .s.wM•rw '
CCAD
Map No. 17
. �� � '" �W 1•]4, It')r.} ! L :T Ct�^,1.1 _,(•_'"1.Yt•'�t.S l_
—, sl y,LL•'�•• t _ 1. / C.:. hi �e�':.�r1..•:z-}:r' >", ,.- -i
� o
—�—lftroJ 1JJXC.0—J - y11�•I�1J ~
rc
N4
lk
0 Cz
lj
Lj)
`�� +— ..,._�� `rUcr7�.J(�• 1� '.moi-�J�tS-t 1 �
I _
I
O��01, -
�a
.. .„ ,fir;, \\\•i I F� 11 I\ `\� �I`I 111
t
777.71
risi 4,
r-2
s
In �.. i
J ��•o o,t,,;�, I i � v'
EXHIBIT D
Conditions of Approval
Precise Plan 10-85
8935 Morro Road
1. All construction should be in conformance with Exhibit B (site
plan) , Exhibit C (elevations) , Exhibit D (-Conditions of Approval)
and all other applicable codes and ordinances of the City of
Atascadero.
2. A complete set of landscape plans shall be submitted to, and sub-
sequently approved by the Planning Department,' prior to the is-
suance of any building permits, (Section 9-4 .125) . These.;shall:_
include:
a. 10% of the parking area (Section 9-4.119 (f) )
b. Shade trees 30 ' on center (Section 9-4 .119 ("f) )
C. Parking lots abutting a public street shall be separated
from the street right of way by landscaping strip of a
minimum of five feet.
3. Drainage and erosion control plans shall be reviewed and approve
by the Public Works Department, prior to the issuance of any
building permits. These shall include:
a. Provide design, details, and calculations for stormwater
detention basin and any on-site drainage structures shall
be certified by the designing engineer prior to final in-
spection. Additionally, all provisions of Flood Hazard
(Section 9-3. 601) shall be complied with.
4. Public improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Public Works Department prior to issuance of any building permits.
These shall include:
a. Install curb, gutter, and sidewalk, and reconstruct Amapoa to
the centerline of the road right-of-way along the property
frontage. Submit road improvement plans designed by a regis-
tered Civil Engineer for review and approval by the Public
Works Department.
b. Any public utility facility that may conflict with the approv-
ed road improvement plans shall be removed, raised or lowered
accordingly.
0 •
EXHIBIT D
Conditions of Approval (Cont. )
Precise Plan 10-85
5. One fire hydrant is required, to be located in front of 8485
Amapoa.
6 . Signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Depart-
ment prior to issuing of sign permits.
7. A letter shall be submitted from Cal Trans granting access ap-
proval on Highway 41.
8. This Precise Plan is approved for a period' of one year from
the date of final approval, March 15, 1985.
i• MEMORANDUM
_ _ _
TO: Mike Shelton
FROM: John Wallace
SUBJECT: Ralph Day Project, Morro Road
DATE: May 14, 1985
This is to confirm the outcome of the meeting of May 9, 1985 regarding
the subject property and development of the Day project within the Amapoa-
Tecorida flood hazard zone.
As outlined at our meeting, more precise cross sections as necessary
to determine water surface profiles both up and down stream shall be in-
corporated into the engineer's calculations. Revised calculations shall
show to the City Engineer's satisfaction that there will be no incremental
rise in water surface elevation for a 100 year frequency design storm as a
result of the project's construction. Further, engineering calculations
should be integrated with adjacent projects whereever possible and all
purvey information referenced to a common datum:
ff It was further agreed that the building permit can be issued prior to
1 this study being approved with the understanding that the final occupancy
permit will not be issued until the study has been accepted by the City. If
revisions to the project are necessary as a result of the outcome of this
stud., these revisions ?could be required before a certificate of occupancy
is granted.
It was also recognized that certain major drainage improvements to take
spillway flows from Atascadero Lake to Atascadero Creek will be needed in
the near future to alleviate a portion of the flood hazard. To help fund
these necessary future drainage improvements a development fee deposit of
$12, 500 will be deposited with the City before the issuance of a building
permit with a provision that this fee will not exceed $25,000.
In order to insure that other areawide drainage improvements can be
constructed at a future time, the developer will also enter into an agree-
ment with the City agreeing to participate in a future assessment district
for other drainage improvements. The costs of these improvements will be
distributed on the basis of benefit as required by State law.
Because road improvements on Amapoa Street might not be possible at
this time without adjacent properties being developed, the developer will
enter into ana. reement, with the City, deferring these improvements but
proviue engineered pians accepcable to the City Enincer for future road
improvements to Amapoa Road as a basis for estimating the cost and future
grads of these improvements. From thesca plaits approved Engineer's cost
estimate will be derived and appropriate bonds posted, to guarantee the
required improvements.
EXNlBIT E
GK
0 M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Planning Department
FROM: Public Works
REcommended Conditions for approval of the DAX P'QR7"r7c r
1. The property owner shall enter into an agreement with the city to waive their
right to protest to.the formation of an assessment district for drainage and relatec
improvements intended to mitigate flooding in the Amapoa /Tecorida drainage area anc
in those areas impacted by that drainage.
2. Enter into an agreement with the City to defer road and drainage improvements al(
frontage of Amapoa Ave. , post securities acceptable to the City Engineer to guarant(
these improvements. Submit a conceptual engineering design and post security for f
engineering drawings for these improvements.
3. Participate in eliminating a portion of flood hazard to the property by posting
performance securities in the amount of $12,500 with the City to be used for a drai
improvement project for channelizing the outflow from Atascadero Lake to Atascadero
Creek. In the event that a future assessment district is formed for area drainage
improvements that include this project then credit•in the amount of the deposit wil
applied toward final apportionment of the assessment if allowed by assessmnet distz
proceedings.
4. Submit engineering calculations elevations, and cross-sections to the satisfac
of the City Engineer which locate the limits and depths of flooding on the subject
property considering the effects of potential improvements on neighboring properti,
This cooperative effort has been brought to you by,
John Wallace and George Wolfrank
R E C i V cL
EX H t B f-r P
1
M E M O R A N D U M
•
December 3, 1985
To: City Council
Via: Mike Shelton, City Manager `
�1
From: Bob Best, Director
Parks & Recreation De art en
Subject: Lake Feasibility Study
INTRODUCTION
As you are aware, a Lake Feasibility Study was approved as part of the
CIP budget for work at Atascadero Lake.
RECOMMENDATION
• Authorize the Parks & Recreation Director to prepare Request for Proposals
for the Atascadero Lake Feasibility Study.
SCOPE OF STUDY
The Study would identify existing problems as they relate to water clarity,
and quality at Atascadero Lake, recommend the most feasible solutions, and identi-
fy cost factors as they relate to the recommended solutions. It is important
that this study provides the City with the information necessary to initiate
cleanup efforts at the lake.
FISCAL IMPACT
It is unknown what the study will cost, but a total of $7,500 was approved
in the budget.
•
�. t
M E M O R A
N D U M
•
TO: City Council December 9, 1985
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager Q
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 44
SUBJECT: Resolution to authorize City Manager to execute amendments
to City' s Community Development Block Grant (Young: 95
unit congregate senior citizens project)
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of Resolution No. 129-85.
BACKGROUND:
At the City Council' s meeting of September 9th, the Council requested
a six month time extension for completion of the Block Grant Program
• which would change the close-out time to March 31, 1986 instead of
September 30th. Thereafter, at the October 14, 1985 meeting, the City
Council approved a request to amend the grant project description to
allow for installation of water service lines, hydrants, etc. out of
unexpended grant monies for the purpose of reducing the cost of the
project to enable lower rents.
The State Department of Housing and Community Development has forward-
ed the attached contract amendments and requested that a resolution be
passed by the City Council authorizing the City Manager to execute
said revisions.
HE:ps
Enclosure: Draft Resolution No. 129-85
November 15, 1985 H.C.D. communication
cc: Judy Young
•
RESOLUTION NO. 129-85
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT
AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT: 95 UNIT SENIOR CITIZENS CONGREGATE
HOUSING PROJECT (YOUNG)
WHEREAS, on September 9, 1985 the City Council requested a six
month time extension for completion of the Community Development Block
Grant Program; and
WHEREAS, on October 14, 1985 the Council further approved a re-
quest to amend the program to allow for expenditures toward water ser-
vice improvements; and
WHEREAS, the State Department of Housing and Community Development
have concurred in said amendments and have forwarded documents imple-
menting those requests for execution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of
Atascadero does hereby authorize Michael Shelton, City Manager , to
execute the grant amendment identified as Exhibit "A" attached hereto
to assist in the funding of the senior citizens congregate housing.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing resolution is adopted in its entirety by
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ROLFE NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
c1
i •
1
MICHAEL nE TON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY EN EN, Co nity Development Director
1
�ztata cf California
^^VG'r .ent of H;u�ing and
r� -;"1ni .,j uevelicment,
7enth Street .
n^"n nen n ��f� �'.,[
sacra-.e r: ''A 95814 �� �:;T �,t�-,tD,,-�;I rGRt' 7/84
r L v V
GRANT AMEEIND"IGi,T
Grantee: City of Atascadero
Programm Title: Senior Congregate Rental Units
Grant NIumber: 83-STBG-073 Amendment No.
Grant Per=.od: June 30, 1984 to September 30, 1986
7,ate of Amendment: September 30, 1985
Grant Nu :,ber83-STBG-073 entered into by and between the Department of Housing
and Community Development and the 'Grantee on June 30, 1984 is hereby
amended as follows:
Page 1 :
The grant period is amended to read:
June 30, 1984 to September 30, 1986
The original Attachment A is deleted in its entirety and replaced by the
new Attachment A as attached hereto and made part of this agreement.
x.11 other terms and conditions remain as stated in the original agreement.
',.ffix signatures on the following page. If additional pages are needed, indicate
1
t'ne nu iter of pages which have been attache 1
�.1
City of Atascadero
i • 83-STBG-073
Amendment No. 1
Page Two
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement
to be executed by their duly authorized officers.
California Department of Housing Grantee:
and Community Development City of Atascadero
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
BY: BY:
Title: Title:
Date: Date:
AMOUNT ENCUMBERED PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE) FUND TITLE
Deparc.menr of General Services S 20 Community Affairs I Federal Trust
USE Only UNENCUMBERED BALANCE -moi(OPTIONAL USE)
S 2620-25212
ADJ.INCREASING ENCUMBRANCE ITEM CHARTER STATUTE FISCAL YEAR
-0- 11 2240-101-890 1326 11982 1982-83
rS
DJ.DECREASING ENCUMBRANCE'!OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE)
i Local Assistance
1 hereby certify upon my own personal knowledge that budgeted funds are 1 T.B.A. NO. B.R. NO.
azailable for the period and purpose of the expenditure stated above.
SIGNATURE OF ACCOUNTING OFFICER 1 DATE
II
1 hereby certify that all conditions for exemption set forth in State Administrative Manual Section 1209 have
been complied with and this document is exemp!from review:by the Department of Finance.
SIGNATURE OF OFFICER SIGNING ON BEHALF OF THE AGENCY DATE
City of Atascadero
83-STBG-073, Amend. No. 1
ATTACHMENT A
Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT A
Section 1 - Work Description
A. Grantee shall perform the Work as described in the approved Application,
which is on file at the Department of Housing and Community Development,
Division of Community Affairs, 921 10th Street, Sacramento, California.
All written materials or alterations submitted from time to time as addenda
to the original Application and which are approved by the State prior to
the award are hereby incorporated as part of the Application.
B. The work shall consist of:
The purchase of property and the construction of off-site public improvements to
lower the cost of the development of a 95-unit senior citizens' congregate
housing project.
Section 2 - Completion Dates
A. All Work shall be completed by March 31, 1986 in accordance with
the approved milestones in the Application. Milestones may be adjusted
by written consent of the State and do not require amendment of this Agreement.
B. The final audit contract shall commence by June 30, 1986
C. This Agreement shall expire on September 30, 1986
Section 3 - Grant Amount and Operating Budget
A. Specifics of the operating budget shall be agreed upon by the State
and Grantee prior to drawdown of any funds.
B. The grant of $600,000 •consists of:
$533,500 Site Acquisition
45,500 Off-Site Improvements
21,000 General Administration
�;J
•
PA`371"DA
• MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council December 9, 1985
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director ..
SUBJECT: Highway 41 Alignment alternatives proposed by CalTrans
RECOMMENDATION:
Reaffirm the City' s commitment to the Mercedes alignment for the ex-
tension of Highway 41.
BACKGROUND:
On November 18, 1985, the Planning Commission considered the above-
referenced subject unanimously recommending approval of staff' s rec-
ommendation as reflected in the attached staff report, with additional
language to read: .. . . . . . . .and suggesting that truck traffic signage
urging use of Highway 46 be retained. "
There was brief discussion on this matter as reflected in the attached
Planning Commission minutes excerpt.
HE:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report - November 18, 1985
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - November 18, 1985
L
3 ��
#ECEIVED OCT 1 1985
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Govemor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
0. BM 8114, SAN LUIS CBIS80, CA 93403-8114
LEPHONE: (805) 549-3111
September 30, 1985
5-SLO-41-18. 4
Salinas River Bridge
5-309000
Mr. Paul Sensibaugh
Public Works Director
City of Atascadero
P. 0. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
Dear Mr. Sensibaugh:
Re: Route 41 Bridge Over Salinas River
The existing bridge on Route 41 crossing the Salinas River
(easterly edge of Atascadero) will soon need replacement. We
are studying various alternatives (enclosed) as possible
improvements.
We would appreciate comments concerning your needs in the
Sycamore Road area as it might help select the best overall
design.
Sincerely, /
R. W. Jones
Project Studies/Reports Engr.
Enclosures
SLO-41-16 . 0/19 . 7
ALTEf2NATE A: $7 , 650, 000
Bypass of existing Route 41 with
replacement of Salinas River Bridge
to the bypass alignment.
ALTERNATE B: $5, C00, 000
New alignment east of Cemetery Road
with replacement of Salinas River
Bridge to the new alignment .
ALTERNATE C: $1 , 000, 000
Replacement of Salinas River Bridge
on the existing alignment .
,r
ALTERNATE D: $ 6111800
Widen Atascadero Creek Bridge and
widen the existing route east of
railroad underpass .
ALTERNATE E: $9 , 430, 000
Replacement of Salinas River Bridge
on a new alignment extending east of
Capistrano Avenue to the existing .
ALTERNATE F: $2 , 207 , 000
Replacement of Salinas River Bridge
on a new alignment extending west of
Creston-Eureka Road to the existing
Route. Estimate does not include any
funds for improvement of the RR under-
pass or any other bridges along the
existing route.
U
W:OI
O
10
=;w
LL
OI
I'
o:0
zO
wa
/
x/00
W c
w
u m
W
_\ �y ` oy
,ply v O MppN Jy
co
pg66i6 W
LLJ
oN
_ � J
o
Jw I
w
x z
o
W
j Q 3nV
vii aawos
d
'd � 9' �3BrSA M1Nrs
1,
Q _ SND E
U
O r\
0:O
ate_
u-
0 w
i�
z �
O;N
wo
m a
VIII CIRCULATION
This Plan discusses the requirements of all the current
ethods
methods of transpereractical withintion in dthe. terms sofnthis Plan,
are presumed to b _ growth of
and circulation improvements are scaled to the
all types of transportation uses that are assessed.
ust
Policies related to teaestimated costaOflimprng �ovementstto such
to feasibility and th motorists ,to convenience
intangible variables as the costs and accidents and deaths .
between origins and destinations ,
The original Atascadero Colony road system was designed for
the automobile as the primarymode
afwtransp natihe on. The
system was laid out in the form
the Administration Park and the Central Business District,
r ri
and the spokes being Principal arttrier csroadsewereealsom °f
the wheel and several inner
principal arterials , designed to carry traffic from point
to point without entering the downtown area.
Thave he original streets were laid out with h 40-f000ntribt-of
way. There are three major Factors whicarts of the circulation system.
to the present inadequacy of p
The first of these is the failure w develop ldedrsmeithern
all roads to their full -rig
have not been developed ors have
becom
have built
and
own tweeds
or
and eroded by weather. Re _
planted trees and shreSs17aJehbeenhlocatedstoo close to the
instances utility pol
pavement.
s being
These occurrences have resneted in some facilities ford pedestriansro�aer
than planned, with few a A second factor is the
bicyclists and equestrian traffic.
failure of the Central Businian.ss D1Due lto lct ackeoflplanning e
areas envisioned in Lewis p Cam
in the past, the commercial aremarcias alydevelopmenthl
has created
Real corridors. This strip COmeThe third .factor was the
traffic and parking problems . The introduction
bisection of the town in 1954 by Freeway 101. and too few
of the freeway interrupted Were addedttoffic compensate for the
grade-separation crossings
traffic interruption.
six components Freeway
The 200-mile Colony road system has
and Highways, Arterials Divided, Arterials Undivided,
. Road
Collectors , Local Streets anaper USE ANDeCIRCULATIONC psi-
- fications are indicated on LAND
121. ^�
Road System
1. Freeways and Highways
The major highways are Freeway 101 (7 . 0 miles) and
Highway 41. Freeway 101 bisects the Colonv from San
Ramon Road to south of Santa Barbara Road. There are
eight freeway exits, four of which are poorly designed
and contribute to traffic congestion (Traffic Way
southbound on-ramp, Morro Road northbound off-ramp
and Santa Rosa Road both north and southbound off-
ramps) .
The appearance of the community along U. S . 101 from
Santa Barbara Road to San Ramon Road and along the
Morro Road section of Highwav 41 needs to be improved.
This can be accomplished by:
a. Effective landscaping, using native shrubs , to
screen land uses from the highway.
b. Banning off-premises outdoor advertising signs
along these corridors.
The completion of Freeway 101 eliminated a vital
traffic route which served the Central Business District �
when access to Atascadero Avenue was interrupted by the
Freeway. CalTrans should initiate a Project to raise
the Freeway at the present Mall pedestrian tunnel to
permit vehicular traffic on Atascadero Mall from E1
Camino Real to Atascadero Avenue,
Highway 41 bisects the community at right angles to
Freeway 101. The Eastern half runs through part of
the CBD,, directly between two schools and through a
densely populated residential area. Proposed plans
to realign and improve Highway 41 along the Mercedes
routewould•
a. Eliminate the truck traffic hazard on West Mall
in the area of the Atascadero Junior High and
Lewis Avenue Elementary School campuses.
b. Eliminate truck traffic at the very narrow bridge
and dogleg over Atascadero Creek.
C. Prevent trucks reaching the Southern Pacific under-
pass on Capistrano Avenue with its impaired vertical
clearance of 13 '-6 . "
Design of Highway 41 along the Mercedes alignment
should attempt to minimize the visual impacts on _
Pine Mountain and should, with regard to the roadway
width and residential driveway access , be similar to
122 . �0
• •
that of surrounding City streets to minimize any _
appearance of bisecting the community. When rerouting
of Highway 41 does take place, adequate pedestrian and
icyc e pathways shall be provided.
2. Divided Arterials
The two arterials are El Camino Real and Morro Road.
They serve as major highways linking Atascadero with
other communities, and they channel traffic to different
parts of town.
Divided arterials shall be developed in two lengths: on
E1 Camino Real from Rosario to San Diego Road and on
Morro Road from El Camino Real to San Gabriel Road.
The divided arterials shall also have a paving width
that will accommodate four traffic lanes, parallel
parking strips, bicycle lanes and curbs and sidewalks .
3. Undivided Arterials
These roads serve as major access routes betwen resi-
dential areas , shopping centers, employment centers and
primary recreation areas. Roads in this classification
must have shoulders vide enough to accommodate multi-
use paths and emergency parking.
There are fourteen segments of undivided arterials :
a. Atascadero Avenue from Morro Road to Freeway 101
provides major access to Santa Rosa Road Elementary
School. It is noted for heavy traffic and lack of
shoulders .
b. Traffic Way from El Camino Real to Potrero Road and
a future extension of Traffic Way beyond Potrero
Road to El Camino Real as a truck route. The portion
of Traffic Way between El Camino Real and Olmeda
Avenue is also designated to have 40 feet of paving
to allow for two 8-foot parking strips on both sides
of the arterial.
C. Curbaril Avenue from Morro Road to the Salinas River
crossing is a major local traffic route and is also
characterized by lack of adequate shoulders for non-
automobile traffic.
123 . \�
5. Pedestrians
Pathways shall be incorporated in some bikeways and
equestrian trails. Busy areas magnify the importance
of providing space for the pedestrian. Of special
importance is a pedestrian-oriented Central Business
District.
TABLE VIII-2
RECAPITULATION OF PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE COLONY UNDER VARIOUS FISCAL JURISDICTIONS
1. Primary arterial (2. 1 miles) parallel to El Camino Real,
with a heavy-duty bridge over Atascadero Creek.
2 . A bridge over Graves Creek to connect San Gabriel Road
with Graves Creek Road
3. Multi-purpose bikeways .
4. A new fire house.
5. New schools.
6. Acquisition of Stadium Park.
7 . Development of Chalk Mountain Regional Park.
8. Development of SEDES Creekways Plan.
9. New. Post Office.
10 . Landscaping of Freeway 101 to San Luis Obispo standards.
11. Freeway 101 overcrossing at the Mall.
12. Reacquisition of that part of the Sunken Gardens now
occupied by the Junior Hiah School campus .
13. Acquisition of Graves Creek Reserve.
14 . Acquisition of Wranglerette Arena.
15. Acquisition of Chandler Parkland.
Circulation Policy Proposals
1. Freeways and major highways shall be effectively land--
appeadance. Referurban
Chanland
teruses
XIIII,dCOMMUNITYcommunity
APPEARANCE.
appearance.
129 .
s �
2. Outdoor advertising signs shall be eliminated along
freeways and major highways.
3. Highway 41 shall be realigned and improved. northerly
of Freeway 101 along the adopted Mercedes a ignmen .
4. Design of the roadway along the Mercedes alignment
should minimize visual impacts to Pine Mountain an
should mitigate concerns associated with isection
of the community.
5. In the rerouting of Highway 41, adequate pedestrian and
bicycle paths shall be provided.
6. Construction of a heavy-duty bridge across Atascadero
Creek linking Lewis Avenue with Santa Ysabel. shall be
programmed immediately.
7. Pathways on streets near schools shall be constructed
as soon as practical.
8. Elevation of U. S. 101 to permit vehicular traffic on
Atascadero Mall from E1 Camino Real to Atascadero Avenue
shall be programmed by CalTrans and the Division of
Highways.
9. New street extensions on unimproved rights-of-way shall
be developed to reasonable ' improvement standards .
10. Greyhound Bus- Lines shall be encouraged to acquire a new
permanent terminal site near the Central Business District,
close to freeway access.
11. Plan lines shall be established for all urban arterials
and local collectors and appropriate set backs instituted.
12. A more complete and adequate directional signing program
shall be initiated.
13 . A high priority shall be given to projects which are
designed to improve the safety of existing transportation
facilities .
14 . The potential for inter- and intra-community public transit
shall periodically be investigated.
15. Any transportation improvements system shall be compatible
with the environment. There shall be a wise use of avail-
able resources, avoidance of despoiling irreplaceable
resources, promotion of the aesthetic quality of the area
and minimization of environmental change.
16 . The Countv' s curb and gutter ordinance shall be amended to
include multiple residential districts and professional
office districts.
130 . LO
Minutes - Planning COMission - November 18, 1980
NEW BUSINESS
1. Consideration of General Plan conformityreport to onve
P Y
eek reservation land at 11725 Santa Lucia to e City -
Lar McPherson
Mr. Engen prese ed the staff report and note that the Public
Works Department as some liability conce s with regard to this
property. In present the report, Mr. gen explained that ac-
cepting this offer would eate nonco orming parcels.
Chairman LaPrade spoke about list of capital projects that
included acquisition of d al Graves Creek Reservation and
stated that if this is t case, th consideration should be
given to approving th ' request.
Herb LaPrade, S a Ynez resident, stated that lot of creek res-
ervation lan was already bought up before the Gen 1 Plan ever
came into xistence.
MO N: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissi _ er
Michielssen and carried unanimously to recommend den
of the offer of the land being offered in fee to the
City.
2. Consideration of staff report for alternatives proposed by
Caltrans for the Highway 41 realignment.
Mr. Engen presented the staff report on this matter .
Chairman LaPrade offered some comments about the original recom-
mendation of realignment being tied into several project
approvals.
There was brief discussion among the Commission on this matter.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissioner
Nolan and carried unanimously to reaffirm support for
the Mercedes alignment for the new Salinas Bridge
crossing subject to addressing the design concerns re-
flected in the City' s General Plan, and suggesting that
truck traffic signage urging use of Highway 46 be
retained.
UBLIC COMMENT
Jane Cli Venado resident, stated it had beee r understand-
ing that the ge 1 plan amendments were t e considered this
evening. Mr . Engen sponded that t mendments had originally
been scheduled for this agtr b ue to the Department' s mov-
ing and other setbacks, t a would not be considered until
the December 2nd meeti
5 � ,
Ac MA
• MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Aerial Mapping
DATE: November 7, 1985
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council authorize the Public Works Director
to enter into an agreement for mapping and survey services as out-
lined in the 1985-86 Budget and as discussed below and as a semi-
joint venture with Paso Robles.
Background:
Council appropriated $60 ,000 for aerial mapping and a storm
sewer study. Based on the Sanitary Sewer Study costs staff assumed
that a storm sewer study could cost up to $25,000 thus leaving $35,00(1
to accomplish the mapping. The major tool for a drainage study, as we
have discussed previously, is aerial contour topographic mapping,
a sample copy of which is attached.
At the Budget Hearings it was suggested that we check with Paso Robles
to see if there would be any economic benefit of flying the two pro-
jects at the same time. After two meetings and several phone calls
John Mc Carthy and I have decided to recommend Pacific Western
Aerial Surveys of Santa Barbara to our respective Councils to provide
professional services for aerial mapping. There is only one area of
savings in a joint venture - the flight - and that savings will be
minimal. The value of the joint venture in this case was to put our
heads together for what was appropriate for each town. Paso as you
may know has had aerial work done in the past (by Pacific Western)
but lacks contour mapping. They are further along with data base
mapping and thus have different needs than Atascadero.
Discussion:
The Control Survey is of course the first and most important
aspect of aerial mapping versus aerial photos. Staff has
solicited proposals from Volbrecht Surveys, Twin Cities Engineers,
North Coast Engineering, Kennaly Engineering, and Tartaglia-Hughes
based on the attached Scope of Services.
• The following is a summary of the proposals received:
Volbrecht Surveys $12, 000
Twin Cities 49, 000
The appropriation for 1985-86 is $60 ,000 , which if the above
mapping is approved will leave over $5, 000 to aid our division in the
study and allow special consultation if deemed necessary. We may want
to have a consultant check some of our work as a precaution in some
areas.
I strongly recommend that Council approve the above mapping
package. I have reviewed the proposal with Henry Engen, Director
of Community Development and he will benefit greatly from the package.
Police and Fire have also expressed excitement for obtaining the
service. The public will be able to purchase the mapping at a set
charge which should show a slight reduction to development costs and
provide some reimbursement to the general fund.
PMS/vjh
77
T1A
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 9, 1985
9
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment 5-85
LOCATION: 5430/5440 Olmeda
APPLICANT: Milton Baer (Kennaly Engineering)
• On July 22, 1985 , the City Council approved Lot Line Adjustment
5-85 subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the
recommendation of the Planning Commission. The required condi-
ditions have been complied with and the final map is recommended
for approval.
HE:ps
cc: Milton Baer
Kennaly Engineering
�.AL
Lr
r
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council November 25, 1985
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 4t
SUBJECT: Zone Change 7-85
LOCATION: 8425 El Bordo Road
APPLICANT: Urban Sciences, Inc. (Dodson)
REQUEST: To change the zoning map from RSF-Z (Residential Single
Family - Low Density) to L (PD5) (Recreation - Planned
Development Overlay) in order to allow the development of
an outdoor recreation use (waterslide) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Adoption of Ordinance No. 114.
BACKGROUND:
On November 4, 1985, the Planning Commission conducted a public hear-
ing on the above-referenced subject unanimously (with Chairman LaPrade
abstaining) approving the zone change request as outlined in attached
Ordinance No. 114.
Bruce Dodson, representing the applicant, spoke in support of the pro-
ject and explained that he had been involved in the original planning
of the regional park. He commented on the timing of this project so
that it can be operational by next summer, and explained that he had
just entered into an agreement to acquire the adjoining Jensen prop-
erty which would provide for an additional 75 parking spaces needed
for the project, which responds to a major staff concern. He was ad-
vised to file a second application for rezoning to tie this project
into an overall development plan.
A conditional use permit process will be utilized when actual devel-
opment plans are submitted.
There was public testimony from various individuals as reflected in
the attached minutes excerpt.
A—
Minutes - Planning Commission - November 4, 1985
The m i arried with a roll c e as follows:
AYES: Commiss ' is n, Hatchell, Nolan, and
rman LaPrade
NOES : Commissioners Kennedy, Sanders, and Bond
4. Zone Change 7-85:
Request submitted by Urban Sciences, Inc. (Bruce Dodson) to
change the zoning map from RSF-Z (Residential Single Family -
Low Density) to L(PD5) (Recreation - Planned Development Over
lay No. 5) in order to allow the development of an outdoor
recreational use (waterslide) . Subject property is located
at 8425 El Bordo, also known as Lot 27 of Block 442.
Chairman LaPrade stepped down from the Commission due to a possi-
ble conflict of interest.
Mr. Davidson presented the staff report and pointed out that the
site plan for this project is conceptual only.
Commissioner Hatchell inquired about the gates to gain access to
the subject site. Commissioner Bond asked if this site could be
annexed into the sewer system. Mr . Davidson responded that the
site is within the Urban Services Line but just outside the sewer
district.
Bruce Dodson, representing the applicant, talked in support of the
project and noted that he was involved in the original planning of
the regional park. He then gave a presentation on the project
using slides. Mr. Dodson addressed several of the issues raised
in the staff report. He stated that he would like to see a coop-
erative effort with various affected agencies and spoke about
safety provisions, noise factors. Mr . Dodson further pointed out
that he is attempting to have everything worked out so that the
waterslide facility could be operational by next summer . Also
raised was the fact that an agreement to acquire the adjoining
Jensen property had just been entered into which would provide for
an additional 75 parking spaces needed for the project, which re-
sponds to a major staff concern.
There was discussion concerning the increase of traffic along El
Bordo which would be generated from the project. Also discussed
was the proposed restaurant which would serve beer and wine and
the concern involved to which Mr . Dodson replied that this use is
not primary to the main activity.
Mr. Engen explained that planned development zoning is proposed to
keep a tight control on the design and subject final approval to a
a precise plan or conditional use permit process which reflects
the zoning concept. "L" zoning without the planned development
would open the way to too many types of uses. Discussion ensued
with regard to the utilization of a conditional use permit process
when proposed plans for development are submitted.
�i�
Minutes - Planning Commission - November 4, 1985
Mr . Dodson spoke about the buffers that would be designed to
buffer the project between the Jensen' s house and property.
Nancy Harvey, representing the Atascadero High School, noted her
support and felt this type of activity would be beneficial for
Atascadero' s youth.
Gordon T. Davis, Board of Directors of the Water Company, stated
he was delighted that something this useful could be built on the
site and noted he had been surprised that this property had been
zoned residential all these years.
Betty Sanders, local resident, commented on the project and added
her support of this use.
Harold Jensen, 9425 E1 Bordo, explained why he had sold his prop-
erty to the applicant and spoke in support of the project.
Jayne Sacks, local resident, asked various questions about the
project and inquired as to what months would this operation be
open. Mr. Dodson replied that the facility would be open from
May through September.
It was the Commission' s general consensus that this project will
be beneficial to Atascadero and provide a much needed recreational
facility.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Michielssen, seconded by Commis-
sioner Nolan and carried unanimously to approve Zone
Change 6-85 with the provision that a conditional use
permit process be applied when development plans are
submitted.
Staff advised that Mr. Phil Gudry, an out of town owner of "L"
property on Morro Road, had called to protest "L" zoning provi-
sions and expansion of "L" zoning.
With regard to the issue of conditional use permits versus precise
plans, Commissioner Sanders felt that use permits are more de-
tailed and talked abouithe need for strengthening precise plan
findings.
Mr . Engen noted that rezoning of the Jensen property would have to
be accomplished as a future application to tie into this planned
development.
C an LaPrade took his seat back on the Commission. e then
called a inute recess at 9 : 25 p.m.
5. Draft Environmental Impac ort - Bordeaux House:
Public hearing for i.c commen the draft Environmental
Impac t Re for Precise Plan 9-85aux House apart-
ments unit housing complex) . Subject prope is loca-
at 11300 Viejo Camino, also known as Assessor ' s el
w •
0 City of Atascadero ITEM: B-4
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: 11/4/85
BY: Doug Davidson, Assistant Planner File No: ZC 7-85
Project Address: 8425 E1 Bordo
SUBJECT:
To change the zoning map from RSF-Z (Residential Single Family - Low
Density) to L (PD5) (Recreation - Planned Development Overlay) in order
to allow the development of an outdoor recreation use (waterslide) .
BACKGROUND:
Notice of public hearing was published in the Atascadero News on Fri-
day, October 25, 1985 and all owers of record property located within
300 feet were notified on that date.
The Hans Heilmann Regional Park and Chalk Mountain Golf Course was
developed under County jurisdiction in phases from 1976-80. This 200
acre park is comprised of an 18 hole golf course, playfields, picnic
areas, and trails for hiking and horseback riding. The Atascadero
Waterslide project proposes to offer a new recreational use to the
existing park facilities. The design of the wateslide and its related
activities is being proposed by the same designer as the original
park. This fact and the location of the waterslide adjacent to the
existing park , seeks to give the appearance of an integrated recrea-
tional area with a number of recreational pursuits available.
This application is being processed solely as a zone change with a
planned development overlay. Although this land is designated Low
Density Single Family Residential on the general plan land use map,
this application is not being processed as a general plan amendment.
Planning staff determined that given the properties' contiguous nature
to public recreational lands, that this could be processed as a re-
quest to rezone to recreational use based on General Plan language
which permits flexibility in such cases. Land Use Policy #9 of the
General Plan states that the General Plan is not a specific diagram,
especially in areas where there is a transition between different
types of land uses. This "wavy line" concept encourages retention of
the zoning for the less intensive use until demand dictates a change
in zoning for the more intensive use. Factors to consider in the tim-
ing of these changes will include existing development, property own-
ership, development potential, access and related physical features
and compliance with zoning and General Plan standards and policies.
This zone change application is an attempt to justify the use in
this area; the planned development overlay zone will establish the
development standards and processing procedures.
r
�l
Zone Change 7-85 (UrT an Sciences, Inc. )
A. LOCATION: 8425 E1 Bordo (also known as APN: 30-442-01)
B. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .To change the zoning map from
RSF-Z to L (PD5) to allow the
development of an outdoor rec-
reational use.
2. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Urban Sciences, Inc.
3. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bruce H. Dodson
4. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Approximately 3.15 acres
5. Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .El Bordo is a City-accepted
street with a 45 foot wide right
-of-way.
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-Z (Residential Single Family
- Low Density)
7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant
8. Adjacent Zoning and Use. . . . . .North: RSF-Z, vacant
South: Hans Heilmann Regional
Park
East: Hans Heilmann Park
West: RSF-Z, single family
residential
9. General Plan Designation. . . . .Low Density Single Family
10. Terrain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Varies from level to extremely
steep with a large number of oak
trees.
C. ANALYSIS:
This section will analyze the many issues raised by this project
as well as raise several questions. Some of these questions will
remain unanswered at this time because the siteP lan submitted to
staff (see Exhibit B) is conceptual in nature. The Planned Devel-
opment Overlay will establish the procedure for establishing spe-
cific development standards. Staff feels that a detailed master
plan of development could be approved by a conditional use permit
or precise plan process, much like applications are now approved
in Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 1 for Commercial Park
development.
The key issues identified by staff are as follows:
Access and Traffic Generation:
The access roadway to the site from E1 Bordo is a concern due to
2 r '
Zone Change 7-85 (Urban Sciences, Inc. )
its steepness and present condition. However , staff, and partic-
ularly the Fire and Public Works Departments, could not evaluate
the circulation or improvements needed from the site plan submit-
ted. Minimum requirements would include a paved 20 foot wide
access roadway from E1 Bordo to the employee parking area. Access
will need to extend to within 150 feet of all structures, as well
as providing the minimum turning radius of 28 feet inside and 48
feet outside for Fire Department purposes. The effect of the pro-
ject on E1 Bordo is substantial with the pedestrian and auto traf-
fic the project will generate. Pedestrian traffic, particularly
the young people that will surely patronize the waterslide, dic-
tate the need for sidewalk improvements or street widening. The
zoning ordinance (Section 9-6 .123) requires outdoor amusement
parks to be located on a collector or arterial. El Bordo is des-
ignated as a collector street; however, these improvements, such
as widening or sidewalks, are necessary to accommodate the in-
creased traffic. Undoubtedly, participation in the future traffic
signal at Santa Rosa and El Camino Real will be required. Engin-
eering and planning staff will have to determine if a traffic
light is needed at the intersection of El Bordo and E1 Camino
Real.
Parking:
The project anticipates 800 patrons per 1/2 day, with 60% of those
to be drop-offs. Based on industry standards, this parking demand
is 60 spaces. Thirty-nine on-site spaces will be provided, 30 for
the public and 9 for employee parking. The rest of the parking
needs are proposed to be met by available surplus parking of the
county parking lot. Generally, staff is in agreement with a
shared parking situation. However , questions arise when the other
uses and activities associated with the waterslide are included.
As stated in Exhibit D, the proposal includes ten hot springs and
a restaurant capable of seating 120 patrons. Beer and wine are
proposed to be served. When these uses are included, the parking
demand of 60 spaces seems inadequate. The specific off-site park-
ing agreement will be approved in the development review phas of
the project. The impact of serving alcoholic beverages will also
need to be closely examined.
Visual Effect:
The waterslide will be constructed in a self-supporting manner and
will be 45 feet in height above grade. The applicant is attempt-
ing to soften the impact through the placement of the slide and
landscaping. The zoning ordinance requires that 25% of an amuse-
ment park site be landscaped, including all required setbacks,
which are to be provided with screening plant materials. Further-
more, the ordinance requires complete enclosure with a six foot
high fence. In this case, staff would recommend extra landscap-
ing, particularly along the south and west property lines where a
single family residence and vacant property zoned residential now
exists. This will provide a buffer between the recreational and
residential uses. Due to the conflicting nature of these two land
uses, the zoning ordinance requires that a facility of this kind
be located no closer than 1, 000 feet to a residential zone. This
requirement will need to be altered under the Planned Development
3 �b
Zone Change 7-85 (Ur an Sciences, Inc. )
Overlay zone.
Noise
Closely related to the visual impact is the noise generated by the
project. This will be quite an active recreational area with both
voice and rushing water systems, contributing to noise. The
screening and landscaping associated with visual screening will
help somewhat in this regard, but not to a great degree. The
applicant is trying to temper the sound of the waterslide by plac-
ing it within a large excavation pit.
A case can be made that this sound, quite like a waterfall, is not
necessarily negative. While noise effects people differently, in
general the effects vary with the duration and with the time of
day. The Planning Commission may wish to consider a limitation on
the hours of operation as has occurred with other recreational use
approvals.
Signage:
Signage and lighting are not detailed at this time. Proposed
signs are to be placed on E1 Camino Real and at the entrance to
the facility. Signs will be lit at night. Staff notes that under
Zoning Ordinance Section 9-4.132 (c) (3) , off-premise signs that
direct attention to a business service, product, or entertainment
not sold or offered on the premises on which the sign is located,
are prohibited.
Sewage Disposal:
There are several soil types contained on this property. All of
them are designated as sevene soils for septic tank systems on the
Soil Conservation System Maps. The project is planning on using
an on-site septic system. Staff would consider percolation tests,
soils reports, and a geology report necessary for review of the
feasibility of septic systems. During the development review
process, the Public Works Department will examine the feasibility
of annexing these lots to the sewer district and the possibility
of extending sewer lines to this area. The site is within the
the General Plan' s Urban Services Line.
Grading and Drainage:
The applicant' s supplemental development statement asserts that
minimal grading and tree removal is anticipated. Grading will
total approximately 15,000 cubic yards, mainly in the parking lot
area, the slope under the waterslide, and the sidewalk access to
the top of the slide. Drainage is expected to be contained on-
site. Drainage and erosion control plans will be required to en-
sure that these intentions are carried out. The soils and geology
reports will also aid in this analysis. Grading on these slopes
over 20% will require a precise plan approval by the Community
Development Department to see that the proposed grading is appro-
priate for the use and not excessive.
4 ��
0 •
Zone Change 7-85 (Urban Sciences, Inc. )
Other Issues:
The waterslide is being installed to appear as an extension of the
existing park and, thus, become an integrated recreational area.
With this in mind, staff felt it might be wise to prezone the ex-
isting park consistent with the waterslide, in the event of annex-
ation of the County park to the City.
Water parks are large users of water. This park will be smaller
than many others, but will still use between 8,000 and 15,000 gal-
lons of water per day. The Atascadero Mutual Water Company has
indicated to the applicants that an adequate water supply exists.
Summary:
Staff agrees that this project can be a compatible one in this
area if the proper mitigation measures and development standards
are applied.
Review of access to the site, as well as on-site circulation, will
center on improvements to the access road (El Dorado area) , im-
provements to El Bordo Avenue, and participation in traffic sig-
nalization. Parking demand wil be addressed through a shared
parking agreement with the County park parking area. Visual
effect and noise control will be softened through screening tech-
niques and noise standards available under the ordinance, in addi-
tion to careful placement of the facility on the hillside. Al-
though the feasibility of sewer will be examined, septic systems
will be the probable method of sewage disposal. Percolation tests
and soils reports will help in determining the adequacy of such
systems. Drainage and erosion control plans will be reviewed to
insure that the proposed grading will not cause erosion or adverse
visual effects and to protect neighboring properties from drainage
caused by this development. A prime focus of all these concerns
will be to shield the existing single family residence and the
properties zoned residential that abut the site, from any unfavor-
able results that the project could cause.
It is clearly evident that many issues and questions remain to be
answered before building permits are issued for this project.
Staff is in agreement, however , that these issues can be resolved
in a manner that will present an enjoyable and unique recreational
pursuit for the City and the North County.
In fact, this site is uniquely suitable in the City for this type
of activity, because it contains the proper terrain and is adja-
cent to an existing County park.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 7-85 with a Planned Dev-
elopment Overlay Zone. Additionally, staff recommends that the
specific conditions of approval be applied by conditional use
permit or precise plan process when a master plan of development
is submitted.
5 y�
Zone Change 7-85 (Urban Sciences, Inc. )
i
DGD:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Site Plan
Exhibit C - Topographical Map
Exhibit D - Project Description
Exhibit E - Supplemental Development Statement
Exhibit F - Environmental Description Form
Exhibit G - Draft Ordinance
6
R
1 Vi.
2 77
7.
I J
CS x
-/ PIT-T6-N3 12•ef. �9,
' +� > fa •[ ' '44 AT-19'23 12•dt ' :�,
f'�' a l+, --` ' \ ♦ .S �+\', 3 .'AT-81-183 12•el 1D.
� .. r• I]a pf r•r0_G S^•+o.'' A� t •�I ,>r •'' ';vr / e5s5R s ''
IRS°
w T e
a r1
ese ,YO' y o 'm y 4 'v.• , • 3C�♦
a�/s ♦5y4P ( /•, . -• e`'tise ,,s
'-Pti • ♦ \e .. .•:,s;'" s', aS•° PCVI5f0:i DATT: 0!
' S•A, q 7 r ..
S�.'`•�fy+�•� a.,.\ � - >
4''
RSF 'r
3'� SC 1�V+': .�'- .Y..1,�-. ;u•+ :b '��[ `-wi- � li `1 ..
4 `.'..'0' `G s .z ,� •* .,'.^°'. p X/H flam't T
r ��rr '�''" +�% ��';'' � b��:,�''b� •' •6-n.e ��`� rbg55 �,. ` ' !—��A,�.1 - 'Q - - _ .
e.
[' �a •_;° of SF= - :ae•' L }-- 1
_ '^n�F ] r�`7• f� ��" ype P17
sf 9x11.
GGS •Ia---' ,
34 f0 CO 7F.317�tb ttss .� 23�. G-OL'F
10'AAf,
\ AVf r e> 313 s -
28
• • PCa,O��i\''��`�- + a �''r',� ,�+�;r12,•r�' •sd a.7➢:-- 7sx:a .3rOre .•\ $
8 lift B D
CT T c '°� >m'
sfi FZ f� �O•f A.4-
to
'RS10 '
F40 �t'•..� +l32., fi
IS —Y �'`• .`e f. ;�. 0 F, eaL` PARK.
A•� lD
34,
'�~'rC1V..e• 1
A�6
e"0 Y b rP 'fie'" '���V •''t`,'��t i«n[••'�' .
.0 ga" .,.+sr. m _ y7Y 4, c•s•-u> ,�S 4 r`` O s.
a •7 � ,. ' '`�F�. ., 2 ",�/` '^,° •," .RMF/ _ '
- �,•• �S11 _ �)n•A al�fe I y •^� 1... � •� ti ` ;j f -.
- .' - � oa '4. C.. �' � ,nJ7i 8-' '>4s h[! cy'�ry \-. ,•r'J ':
• - sSS - 1 Cam ^ !:_ - •, \_
_•J]`.` 'b fir' 3 '1 r• \ 1['A
` \,..
t..� \ ice.\ \ (A' - c • �.a.r.• 43.
,f - l•`\r`. 9 2`0.„\ 1 JY° \ 4 10-/1 '"S'�r• I • e ,,••is�,'. .e``i�, C\\.
m•�f_ 11_ 9 ..
22
..sis 12 ,•s`t %e ♦ sn�l ••,.T.•TIF"r _T3. ��°•sr� .
.:-7•-+. 34 �� '� m> =I' ,ifv>st{-` y 13513,,//�'7.rD �•-a 11 ..
23 'y.,s.0 Jf3• hC.tr'•.lt.vi iii• ^ M,• S.
Y �u.`�, :,[:;:�twL,.:>....«__.,_
21 i` ZS•:..yaa eru...sn�..A.us..',..-.xr m+c ro[,u
14
23
- �..��_...-- � l � • C` - V[�q-Lr.<TfY`\tYOxAI'Y�dNr•�MP•.V.�.«M.(
r� 20 ...V•++c 27 NlJ•}..1wn.iss..«r•�n. s•+
�• ` - asr•.[+ cs.r cY ua moor rs
t
� [1 ,i 1•}. xua w..c arY•.^rs =►•.4-� cs.s-....
'0-1,.:( � �� __ • 2 \ '2'c�
J\
- CITY OF ATASCADTr
lanning D epartmer.P
• �' t.
��
�',�
��� "�' h
�I►
�� � � ,
" . ,
� �l ,� � �
,��� , � ,.
� � , , � � �:
'�' • � ::
_ +�� _ � ,
�� ��
I / ��
,�Y\``
�*!
f
�J
;�
K
1
.� �
�•
�-
t � 'i:ir�
i�
��
a���
,Ara
1 1 •-
to
1p
`=- U
Ow 3i
:1 9950 J
-I'
Ift
TOPOGRAPHY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Urban Sciences proposes to construct and operate a water
recreation park adjacent to Chalk Mountain County Park on land leased
from the Atascadero Community Water District . This project is
stimulated by the strong need to provide water recreation activities
in the North County and Atascadero particularly.
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
The site selected was done so to make this recreation
�-� service an integral part of an existing park and thus a component of
a larger variety of recreational activities originating at an already
established regional location . The architectural design for
structures will be done by the same designer as the original park .
This will give the appearance of the new facilities being an
extension of the first park .
The integration of site and design will enchance the overall
utilization of the existing park by stimulating a wider -range of
people to come and use its facilities . The precise location next to
the larger park is strategic to parking because it is close and
apparent to both the golf parking lot and the main parking lot .
WATER PARK ACTIVITIES & FEATURES
THREE FLUME WATER SLIDE
This slide represents an advancement in technology and is
buildable in less space with less alteration of the existing
landscape .
HOT SPRINGS
Ten springs will be built adjacent to an oak grove . These
soaking wells will appear natural with river rock and flagstone
borders . Each spring will have a shower , screen , locker and sitting
area .
KIDDIE POOL
This shallow pool will have a standpipe foundation at its
center and a small slide on one side . Other play equipment will be
nearby .
BEACH AREA
20,000 square feet of turf area will be dedicated to sun
bathing and parental observation . This area will have lawn seating
furniture and sun bathing equipment .
RESTAURANT CONCESSION
A short order facility with beer and wine service will seat
120 patrons on its patio . This concession will offer service in the
beach area as well .
URBAN SCIENCES, INC. BRUCE H DODSON
PO. BOX 1244
PRESIDENT
SAN LUIS OBiSPO, CA 93406
(805) 544-5665
SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STATEMENT
The Atascadero Waterslide Project will be built adjacent to the
Hans Heilman Regional Park in Atascadero, California. This project
is conceived to be an augmentation to existing recreational facilities
and will provide a substantial portion of water recreation needs
for the community and surrounding region .
The development of the project will have an effect upon many
aspects of community services and facilities. This activity
will also effect visual and to a lesser degree the audio environment
adjacent to the park. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared
in November, 1976 regarding the original park development and
is hereto attached. The following subject areas have been considered
in the design of this new facility:
( 1 ) TRAFFIC- Additional traffic will be generated
by proposed use industry standards indicate that
a car utilization factor of 4 .5 people it typical
for waterslide usage . Daily maximum activity of
water park is anticipated to be 800 per half day
with approximately 60% of those as drop-offs .
The demand for nearby parking will then be 60
parking spaces total of which 30 will be provided
on site and the remainder will be located in parking
lots already constructed in the county park.
Additional parking ( 10 spaces ) will be provided,
inside the waterslide grounds .
EXHIBIT IT F_
ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN LAND PLANNING DEVE!-CPV7W CC NSG
V
( 2) WATER CONSERVATION- The water recreation park
is an intense commercial user of the potable water
supply. Although this park is anticipated to
be smaller in scale than the standard park it
still may use between 8,000 to 15 ,000 gallons
of water per day. The Atascadero Mutual Water
Company has indicated that an adequate water supply
exist to easily serve this need.
(3) SEWERAGE- Sewerage impact from this use is minimal
and is generated by usage of public toilets ,
an on-site consession stand and shower facilities.
The minimal sewer output will be handled by on-site
septic systems and will not need access to public
sewer system.
(4) NOISE- Water recreational parks are extremely
active public areas. Noise generated is by voice
and rushing water systems. The latter largely
mask the former and overall audio impact is similar
to that of a large waterfall . This accumulated
sound is not considered negative and will be tempered
largely by its location within a largg excavation
pit .
(5 ) VISUAL- Waterslides are constructed in a self
supporting fashion and rise to a maximum height
of 45 feet above origination point. This slide
will be constructed within the existing barrow
pit and will have little or no visibility from
any angle other than the water tank above the
property. Architectural features associated
with the operation of the park will be designed
to compliment existing park structures .
(6) ACCESS- The proposed park is located near the terminus
of E1 Bordo Drive which is classified as a collector
street in the Atascadero Circulation Plan. Easy
access is available for all types of rescue equipment.
Crash gates will be installed for service area
so fire equipment can move easily within the entire
side.
(7) PHYSIOGRAPHY- Little grading or alteration of the
existing typography is anticipated. All existing
oak trees will be preserved principle alterations
to the property will occur by landscaping of the
existing pit and grading of the 30 car parking lot.
The visual effect will be positive and an improvement
on the neglected state of land at present.
(7 ) SIGNAGE AND LIGHTING- Signs will be placed on E1
Camino Real and at the entrance to the facility.
These will be lit at night as well as the activity
areas within the park. The signage will be consistent
park signage already in place and will not have
an advertising flavor.
8 ) GRADING AND DRAINAGE- Total grading will amount
to approximately 15 ,000 cubic yards . This 'will
occur in the parking lot and in the gradient slope
under the waterslide itself and sidewalk access
to the top. This will be non-structural and for
visual purposes. Drainage will be contained
within the park site and in strategically located
cache basins. No drainage impact is anticipated
beyond the perimeter of the property.
M
INCORPORATED JULY 2, 1979 r V t 1 , 3 1 T F
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIR014DIENTAL DESCRIPTION
(To be completed by
applicant)
This form is being used to obtain information concerning your project.
The information you supply will be used to make a determination as to
whether any significant adverse environmental impacts may result from
the proposed project. This form should be submitted to the Planning
Department for evaluation in conjunction with your application. It
is to your advantage to see that all the necessary information is
supplied and is accurate. If the information is inaccurate or not
sufficient, you will be required to submit additional information
upon request.
Applicant Name URBAN SCIENCES, INC. For Office Use Only:
File No./Primary
Address P.O. BOX 1244, S.L.O. Entitlement:
Phone (805) 544-5665
Contact Person
Name BRUCE H. DODSON
Address SAME AS ABOVE Proposal Title:
Phone SAME AS ABOVE
Description of Project: WATER RECREATION PARK (COMMERCIAL)
WATER SLIDE; HOT TUBS , SWIMMING t '
Legal Description of Property: LOTS 27 , 28, AND 29 OF TRACT
NO. 5 , CITY OF ATASCADERO, COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, RECORDED IN BOOK 5 , PAGE 24 OF MAPS,...
Assessor' s Parcel Number: 30-442-01
A. GENERAL INFOPIIATION:
1. 11ill this project produce odors , steam, vapors , or Yes No X
waste?
2 . Is the project to utilize an individual subsurface Yes X No
sewage system? (if yes , complete Section C of this 1
form) '
Initial Study Env10 nmental Description -2
3. Is the project to be connected to existing sewer Yes No X .
lines? (if yes, complete Section D of this form)
4. Do you contemplate constructing sewage treatment Yes Not
facilities?
5. Will industrial waste be discharged? (if yes , com Yes No X
plete Sections D and F of this form)
6. Will this project have onsite water softening Yes No X
regeneration?
7. Site Information: If more detail is needed, attach sheet.
a. Terrain: Level to gently rolling,
0-10% slopes .75 Acres
slopes of 10-30% —6-Acres
steep slopes over 300 --.IZ-Acres
b. Hydrology: springs, streams, lakes, or marshes Yes No X
on the site
Describe:
C. Proposed grading and land changes PARKING AREA FOR 30
CARS AND STEPPED FILL FOR WATERSLIDE.
d. Vegetation: All natural vegetation already re- Yes X No
moved or altered
Natural vegetation will be Yes No
undisturbed
Significant tree-cutting or Yes NoX
vegetation removal proposed
(describe number of trees , area
affected, etc. )
M
e. Are uses on adjacent properties similar to those YesX No
proposed on the project site? —'
Different use. Describe
f. Describe any other unique or significant features of the
site: FORMER EXCAVATION SITE FOR GRAVEL OPERATION.
"Imitial Study Envitunental Description -3-00
•f
8. If you think the project will not or cannot have any signifi-
cant environmental effects , indicate your reasons below:
THE USES ARE CONSISTANT WITH SURROUNDING COUNTY PARK.
9 . Are any of the following being submitted with this environmental
description?
a. Grading Plan Yes No
b. Drainage Plan Yes No
1. Slope map Yes No
2 . Contour map Yes X No
c. Vegetation Map Yes X No
1. Trees to be removed Yes No
2 . Trees to be replaced Yes No
3. Trees to be planted Yes No
If yes to c. (1) , (2) , or (3) describe: NO TREES TO
BE REMOVED.
d. Landscaping plan Yes No —
e. Building plan Yes X No
10. Amenities in project, such as park areas , open space, common
recreation facilities, natural area. Describe: ALL
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE.
11. Are there any proposed signs and/or lighting? Describe: YES ,
PARKING AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT PARK SIGNAGE.
12. Are there any proposed or existing deed restrictions? Yes No X
If yes, describe:
a. nature of restrictions
b. administrative responsibility URBAN SCIENCES, INC.
c. maintenance responsibility URBAN SCIENCES, INC.
Initial Study En* amental Description -4*
13. Potential impact on community services :
a. Number of school children in project NONE
School district ATASCADERO � •
b. Need for police service YES, TRAFFIC AND GROUP ACTIVITY
Location of nearest station DOWNTOWN ATASCADERO
Response time (in minutes) 5 MINUTES
C. Need for fire protection NONE
Location of nearest station DOWNTOWN ATASCADERO
Response time (in minutes) 5 MINUTES
B. WATER:
1. Water Supply
Existing system Yes_X_No
New system with permit required Yes No
2 . Source 0
Well Yes No
Surface Yes No
Imported Yes-.,X--Yo
3. What is the use of the water?
Domestic ,
Residential Yes No
Type: (Homes , apartments , trailer park)
Commercial Yes No
Type: (Food estab. , shop, etc. )
Industrial Non-Domestic Yes_X_No
Type: (Agricultural, processing, recreational) RECREATTONAL
4 . Is there sufficient water available for this use? Yes
�-
Present Maximum Capability 15100q.p.d.
Maximum pressures at maximum demand
150 psi .
5. Number of service connections required for the project. ONE
6 . Population served 00
7 . Does water meet Health Department quality requirements? YES
Bacteriological Yes No
Chemical Yes No
Physical Yes No
Water Analysis Report submitted Yes No 111,
Ihitial Study Envilfmental Description -5-
C, SUBSURFACE SEWAGE TREATMENT:
1. Has an engineered percolation test been accomplished? Yes NO X
2. Has a conclusion been stated as to the suitability of Yes No ' X
individual systems?
3. Has a conclusion been stated as to the amount of re- Yes No X
quired sq. ft. of bottom area of leaching lines per
100 gallons of septic tank capacity?
4. Has a conclusion been stated as to the amount of re- Yes No X
quired sq. ft. of sidewalk of seepage pits per 100
gallons of septic tank capacity?
5. Is the area (parcel, lot, etc.) of sufficient size to YesX No
provide an area equal to 1000 of original installa-
tion to provide for expansion?
6. What is the depth of the water table? UNKNOWN
7. What is the quality of any shallow (in relation to
existing ground evaluations) water table? Explain: UNKNOWN
3 . Is there a portion of the lot(s) that is unsuitable for individual
installations due to soil or geologic conditions, slope,
etc? Yes X No
If yes , please explain: STEEP FACES OF SITE EXCAVATION.
9 . What is the distance to the nearest sewer line? 2000 ft.
10 . What is the distance to any neighboring water wells? 0 ft.
11. Will subsurface drainage result in the effluent re- Yes No X
appearing on adjacent lands?
X12 . Will subsurface drainage result in the possibility Yes No X
'''R of effluent reappearing in surface water?
D. SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITY (WASTE TREATMENT) :
1. What is the capacity of existing (or new) sewage 0 _9.p.d.
treatment facilities?
Initial Study Env# amental Description -6-40
2. What is the present maximum flow of existing sewage x g.p.d.
treatment facilities? 0
3. What is the amaunt of the proposed flow? d. f
_X,g•p• ,
4 . Describe the type of treatment and disposal: PUMPED PUBLIC
E°
RESTROOM AND SHOWER FACILITIES FROM SUBSURFACE STORAGE TANKS.
5. Does the existing collection, treatment and disposal Yes X No
system have adequate additional capacity to accept
the proposed flow?
6 . Do you have letters or documents from the facility Yes X No
operator verifying all of the above?
E. SOLID WASTE:
1. What is the type of solid waste? Domestic
Industrial Agricultural
Other COMMERCIAL PUBLIC TOILETS & PAPER PRODUCTS
2 . What is yardage per capita per day? 12 YARDS
3. What type of storage? DumpsterX Single Containers X
Other
4. Do you have a -storage site? Yes X No
5 . Where is the waste" disposal storage in relation to
buildings? AT REAR AND IN FENCED AREAS. I
6 . Have you made arrangements for collection? v Yes X No
T. COM2,IERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS :
Describe project: WATER RECREATION AMUSEMENTS WITHIN
4
PERIPHEA OF LARGER COUNTY PARK.
' Initial Study EnviPmental Description -7-10
1. Are there any emissions (gases, smoke, odors, fumes, Yes No X
vapors) ?
2. Do you anticipate that this project will increase the YesX No
noise level in the immediate vicinity?
3. Anticipated sources of noise: 800 UStRS PER DAY AT PEAK.
4 . Will shielding be provided for potentially hazardous Yes X No
operations (including heat, radiation, light &noise).
If yes, describe: LANDSCAPE AND SOUND BARRIER FENCING.
5. Will protection be provided for storage of hazardous Yes X No
materials?
6 . What specific wastes are produced? NONE
G. VECTOR CONTROL: (insects , rodents , etc.)
(POOL)
1. Are recreationallJUMNEU being planned for the project? Yes X No
2 . Are there adequate facilities for cleaning and dispo- Yes No X
sal of fish parts?
3. Are there any swamps , wet lands, salt marshes, spri.ngs ,Yes No X
or wilderness areas adjacent to the project?
4 . Are there any irrigated pastures on or adjacent to Yes X No
the project? GOLF COURSE
5. Are there any sewer ponds on or adjacent to the pro- Yes No X
ject?
1�6 . Are there any waste disposal sites on or adjacent to Yes No X
:=.�y the project?
7 . Are there any plans for drainage on and from the Yes No X
project?
4
8. Are there any plans for controlling standing water Yes No X
in borrow pits , drainage ditches , curb drains , etc?
9 . Are there any Flood Control Projects on or adjacent Yes No X
to the project?
Initial Study En nmental Description
10. Are there any feed lots., poultry operations, dairies Yes X No—
horse stables, hog ranches, rabbitries, or other
animal operations adjacent to or within a mile of
the project?
11. Are there any animal manure stockpiles on or near the Yes X No
project?
12. Is there any extensive fruit and/or vegetable harvest- Yes No X
ing near the project?
13. Are there any food producing plants near the project? Yes No X
If you answered "yes" to any of the above questions,
please explain:
GOLF AND RANCHING ACTIVITIES EXIST WITHIN ONE (1) MILE.
14 . Are there plans for weed abatement? Yes No X
'If yes, what materials are to be used?
15. Are there special plans for handling refuse? Yes No X
If yes, describe:
I have completed this Initial Study and the information contained is
accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Date Signature
Name (Printed)
Address
Phone
ORDINANCE NO. 114
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBER 19 OF
OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT
BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY AT 8425 EL BORDO
FROM RSF-Z (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, LOW DENSITY)
TO L (PD5) (RECREATION - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY
NO. 5) (ZC 7-85: URBAN SCIENCES, INC. )
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 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 November 4, 1985 and has recommended approval of Zoning Ordinance
Text Change 7-85.
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 en-
vironmental impacts and preparation of an environmental
impact report is not necessary.
4. The site ' s relationship to the existing County park, as well
as the placement of the facility in a gravel pit, with an
extensive landscape buffer around it, make the proposal com-
patible with the surrounding residential property and the re-
quirement to be 1, 000 feet from a residential zone (Section
9-6 .123 (a) (i) is inappropriate and is hereby waived.
• •
Section 2. Zoning Map.
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 lots 27, 28 , 29 of Tract No. 5 (APN: 30-442-01)
as shown on attached Exhibit "A" which is hereby made a part of this
ordinance by reference.
Section 3. Zoning Text Change.
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 7-85 is approved to change the
text of the Zoning Ordinance to read as follows:
1. Section 9-3. 649 is added to the Planned Development Overlay
Zones to read as follows:
9-3. 649. Establishment of Planned Development Overlay
Zone No. 5 (PD5) . The Planned Development Overlay Zone No.
5 is established as shown on the official zoning maps (Sec-
tion 9-1.102) . The following development standards are
established:
a) Approval of a conditional use permit reflecting a master
plan of development for a waterslide and related uses
shall be required prior to approving a grading permit,
or tentative parcel or tract map. The master plan of 0
development shall be applied for and processed as a con-
ditional use permit (Section 9-2. 109) .
b) In approving a master plan of development, the level of
processing for subsequent projects or phases may be re-
duced to a plot plan provided that the master plan con-
tains sufficient detail to support such a determination.
c) No subsequent plot plan, precise plan, conditional use
permit, or tentative parcel or tract map shall be ap-
proved unless found to be consistent with the approved
master plan of development. Any amendment to a master
plan of development, including conditions thereof, shall
be accomplished as set forth in Subsection (a) of this
Section.
d) Building architecture shall be compatible with the arch-
itecture of Hans Heilmann Regional Park.
e) Landscape plans shall make provision to develop a dis-
tinct buffer zone between the outdoor recreation use and
adjacent residential property.
Section 4. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this or-
dinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its pas-
sage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, prin-
ted, published and circulated in this City in accordance with Govern0
-
ment Code Section 36933; shall certify the adoption of this ordinance;
and shall cause this ordinance and certification to be entered in the
2
Book of Ordinances of this City.
Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into ef-
fect and be in full force and effect 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 entirety
by the following roll call vote :
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTES •
ROBERT M. 'JONES: City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
`.1t _''.
MICHA L SHELT N, City Manager
APPROVEDVE(DAA,S/T CONTENT:
ROBERT-M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
Un"',
HENRY ENGEN
Community D velopmen Director
3 ��
• M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 9, 1985
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 44&-
SUBJECT: Zone Change 8-85
LOCATION: 9425 E1 Bordo Road
APPLICANT: Urban Sciences, Inc. (Dodson)
REQUEST: To change the zoning map from RSF-Z (Residential Single
Family - Low Density) to L (PD5) (Recreation - Planned
Development Overlay) in order to allow the development of
a parking and administration area for an outdoor recrea-
tion use (waterslide) .
• RECOMMENDATION:
Adoption of Ordinance No. 115 (first reading) .
BACKGROUND:
On November 18, 1985 , the Planning Commission conducted a public hear-
ing on the above-referenced subject unanimously (with Chairman LaPrade
abstaining) approving the zone change request as outlined in attached
Ordinance No. 115.
In presentation of the report, it was pointed out that this applica-
tion was in conjunction with Zone Change 7-85 which was recommended
for approval by the Commission at its November 4, 1985 meeting.
Bruce Dodson, applicant, explained how the two subject properties tied
together with the proposed project and noted that revised conceptual
plans will be submitted for further consideration (refer to Exhibi+- F)
Comments were heard by Michael Yeomans and Harold Jensen as reflected
in the attached Planning Commision minutes excerpt.
No one else spoke on the matter .
ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report - November 18, 1985
• Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - November 18 , 1985
Ordinance No. 115
cc: Bruce Dodson
•
Zone Change 8-85 (Urban Sciences/Dodson)
This application is being processed solely as a zone change with a
planned development overlay. Although this land is designated Low
Density Single Family Residential on the General Plan land use map,
this application is not being processed as a General Plan amendment.
lanning staff determined that given the properties' contiguous nature
to public recreational lands, that this could be processed as a re-
quest to rezone to recreational use based on General Plan language
which permits flexibility in such cases. Land Use Policy #9 of the
General Plan states that the General Plan is not a specific diagram,
especially in areas where there is a transition between different
types of land uses. This "wavy line" concept encourages retention of
the zoning for the less intensive use until demand dictates a change
in zoning for the more intensive use. Factors to consider in the
timing of these changes will include existing development, property
ownership, development potential, access and related physical features
and compliance with zoning and General Plan standards and policies.
A. LOCATION: 9425 El Bordo (Lots 30, 31 of Tract 5, also known as
APN: 30-442-02)
B. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .To change the zoning map from
RSF-Z to L(PD5) to allow for the
development of a parking area
for an outdoor recreational use.
2. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Urban Sciences, Inc.
3. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bruce H. Dodson
4. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Two acres
5. Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .El Brdo is a City-accepted
street with a 45 foot wide
right-of-way.
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-Z (Residential Single Family
- Low Density)
7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Single family residence and
maintenance yard
8. Adjacent Zoning and Use. . . . . .North: RSF-Z, vacant
South: Regional Park
East: Regional park
West: RSF-Z, single family res.
9. General Plan Designation. . . . .Low Density Single Family
10. Terrain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Varies from level to extremely
steep with a large number of oak
trees
2
Zone Change 8-85 (Urban Sciencet/Dodson)
11. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration
C. ANALYSIS:
This request is in response to the concerns over the shortage of
parking spaces provided on the original site plan. The project
anticipates 800 patrons per 1/2 day, with 60% of those to be drop-
offs. Based on industry standards, this parking demand is 60
spaces. Thirty-nine on-site spaces are provided on the original
site plan, 30 for public and 9 for employee parking. The rest of
the parking needs are proposed to be met by available surplus
parking of the county parking lot. Generally, staff is in agree-
ment with a shared parking situation. However, questions arise
when the other uses and activities associated with the waterslide
are included. As stated in Exhibit E, the proposal includes ten
hot springs and a restaurant capable of seating 120 patrons. When
these uses are included the parking demand of 60 spaces is
• Pa 9 P
inadequate.
The proposed layout of the additional parking spaces provided in
these two lots is not detailed at this time; however, approxi-
mately 75 spaces will be available. This will provide a total of
105 parking spaces for the public while maintaining the nine space
employee parking area. This land acquisition will overcome what
was a shortcoming in the project' s original site design.
The applicant' s intention is for the existing single family resi-
dence to remain and be used as an administration facility. This
will replace the administration area shown next to the concession
stand in the original site plan (Exhibit C) . There is also a
small barn which will be used as a storage area. The rest of the
existing yard area will be cleaned up.
In sum, staff agrees that the acquisition of these two lots for a
parking and administration area will greatly improve on-site cir-
culation and parking. Several other questions remain to be an-
swered before building permits are issued for this project. The
Planned Development Overlay will establish the procedure for es-
tablishing specific development standards. Staff and the Planning
Commission have recommended to the City Council that a detailed
master plan of development be approved by a conditional use
process.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends apprval of Zone Change 8-85 with a Planned Dev-
elopment Overlay Zone. Additionally, staff recommends that the
specific conditions of approval be applied by a conditional use
permit when a master plan of development is submitted.
DGD:ps
3 ��
Zone Change 8-85 (Urban Sciences/Dodson)
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Area Map
Exhibit C - Site plan for water recreation project
Exhibit D - Topographical map
Exhibit E - Project description
Exhibit F - Draft Ordinance
4
•• 18 �
,,, ���'`���-tip� •k���� .,>.'•n�,ip �. .F-,_ �. -�r-so•sr 1t�et
SCS .J 1o4a'f \ "�,'•\. '�.�[\• S AT•7G-135 12-81.
-- f•?r` e .t,,,o •s,' \ ,(�•,<y``��J� .'�� 'hti' S \ AT-81-183 12-01
.n r•�`r \:fps z1 �,�`\ �'•' \ ^T 81 2S6 SIS-6z
ria itf ��G ,•�' ,��r�. �� •�'%4•' e45RR
,_
edy Ui S�4P .±j r; v 4"ic r �(��}- i S to \
^ �.? •^ e O IRS
' IYDr y ' TY•I- ./ 3 f1 P41 .'nh�.• 1 ► •'•(C•,.S S S .:
a,� 9\�0 t• �4>° �''; f nh`I4 4444. G
vyd 6 e 'Zol-
:V'. yh �r AEV ISf C•': DAT
F l}° ''' 'fes �" i' � � •%""-'r-.lm- � r•�
S•C 1�]s t
r �,� .+ •'C .7�i o'x,44 F j r?I s •6-"-
-1f—
�<< Ss re> 2. •�� o����.r U
' 'e,�H 3 w. •4:4 ''Sy' , ?4tf Som
17 r��, ot4
sOse5 �S --1°-....
44• ,e q� ! :� lots
o �u':. .444,.s .4. raw .Ly.
34 ro 4r� CO 7k'JI,',' •uss .,4 23 ..
4��r,� �oA 4 18 v •.' `26` I„= Mn s to -
r
27
O 4 9 i PI d✓E rOh .` ?I! �4f ♦ �0 l
4hp. ;C ,4�M � 3 x.,29 — la 1s 5. '�o � .6•
oD 30
r'i'• 9\\�.. •r'c , - <,rns s Isis b� �'./
CP
m m x ea
F Z
I FE
to +a+ /3 *ht .� e• •�'••
RSFY � '�' '3e,,'SsL4
13 1✓ 1 �4h\ �i ;+ co
1�4
-�- C�;l°'.j '� moo" t/ aI :a4t •A�'
is
F9 moi•• r �q 4 <`� 7
_ .'4` o• �'�\,9\%tet. S i� ` 2 O
4 r,
:;: •��� .. °. z `^C ;-' ;.RMF/ {
.. .. ' p Q •q, �; � of l,•i. g-°' D'`4J 1 . ',:! -
'
r \t,ct ~•9`F4 z`0.\ .r Yn a 104 -_:,SL - T ' 't •• .•y r.p•i« `.,J)-Y ^\
�/ _ _+�-•4 rT ., •' e a 4 y`+ , ooh \
,^;9i - f $•8 4P.\c ,' • aRM
.1 t �
• - • _��0-3 � io-:i ib e o- 0 11 a 4.,4. 0.7, � P•� �h ,,4°• •
it
D
_22 .6
;Zs,..,.. 34 \ p4 +� _ J\;� ; '`i7-1 a rk
o s. s
RSF—Z Y �ha�.,...�,,...:,I .e.;..,�v.;..-.-slew..ynl. w ir..1 Y..Mti 4.w4^•I 4..
_
-�sf_ - r • - (i q-�.l t (t~ivu.uJ _A.p4•�N P,•.,�r•
20 'rQ s �{'...,+c 27:NfJ.t..s.uv.s.s...�..•s
s t,l �`Y9i�� � _ �,N�i t^4�..
23 c��.
CITY OF ATASC.P
�,.r.; . ST• � Planning Departml
P.
1-7
-,r Q
D ' X14 ~
w < �
Ix�• � Q fO .. � ���JJJ
O
--------- - - ----
1-
P
-------------------------- ---- O
0
ca
�.� --- -------------
-------
-
N -'
w
property ownership a �'
Ji
� � � ��� �� � .•sir
'rte - .•►� � -�4 1 41
I
' ANO ! p
41
,orae
eff
940
r!- i
o
EXHI !3IT
TOPOGRAPHY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Urban Sciences proposes to construct and operate a water
recreation park adjacent to Chalk Mountain County Park on land leased
from the Atascadero Community Water District . This project is
stimulated by the strong need to provide water recreation activities
in the North County and Atascadero particularly .
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
The site selected was done so to make this recreation
�-� service an integral part of an existing park and thus a component of
a larger variety of recreational activities originating at an already
established regional location . The architectural design for
structures will be done by the same designer as the original park .
This will give the appearance of the new facilities being an
extension of the first park .
The integration of site and design will enchance the overall
utilization of the existing park by stimulating a wider -range of
people to come and use its facilities . The precise location next to
the larger park is strategic to parking because it is close and
apparent to both the golf parking lot and the main parking lot .
EX 14 ► L-7) iT E ;
WATER PARK ACTIVITIES & FEATURES
THREE FLUME WATER SLIDE
This slide represents an advancement in technology and is
buildable in less space with less alteration of the existing
landscape .
HOT SPRINGS
Ten springs will be built adjacent to an oak grove . These
soaking wells will appear natural with river rock and flagstone
borders . Each spring will have a shower , screen , locker and sitting
area .
KIDDIE POOL
This shallow pool will have a standpipe foundation at its
center and a small slide on one side . Other play equipment will be
nearby .
BEACH AREA
20 ,000 square feet of turf area wi11 be dedicated to sun
bathing and parental observation . This area will have lawn seating
furniture and sun bathing equipment .
RESTAURANT CONCESSION
A short order facility with beer and wine service will seat
120 patrons on its patio . This concession will offer service in the
beach area as well .
EX 1131 "F' " �
?
.001•st rM•11
/ 0.
f •
10 `
O �
a;
=*memogo
uAl 77
• - 6
CD
`4
I .
i fy; • W
!_ F t
• � i
f = Ar�N�ra��ra�ra• �������is ; .,=0 99 raf 66
a s e
es cp
tv cy C.P. 4 a
Ci
OF cw as •\® � a
G C5- rZ
Q ►.A ur ox Uf •
O m°OG CIP 6 CV V Cl!
SC&�Z: y
Q► C&g� O
d svLLJ
s1
V cisof.N*0x cv cS r- U os.4 g
W s a Jaa
..J ck
M
rt a �
! ORDINANCE NO. 115
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 9425 EL BORDO
FROM RSF-Z (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY - LOW DENSITY)
TO L (PD5) (RECREATION - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY
NO. 5) (ZC 8-85 : URBAN SCIENCES, INC. )
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 November 18, 1985 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 8-85.
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 en-
vironmental impacts and preparation of an environmental im-
pact report is not necessary.
4. The addition of these two lots to the project area would al-
low approximately 75 parking spaces, which improves the inad-
equacy of the original parking plan.
Section 2. Zoning Map.
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 Lots 30 and 31 of Tract No. 5 (APN: 30-442-02)
as shown on attached Exhibit "A" which is hereby made a part of this
ordinance by reference.
r%
• i
Zone Change 8-85 (Urban Sciences/Dodson)
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 cer-
tify 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
entirety by the following roll call vote :
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
_4� '�_
HENRY E GEN,
Community Development Director
2 ��
Minutes - Planning Covission - November 18, 1980
Mrs. Jacobson explained the operating hours would be 7 :00 a.m.
:00 p.m. and the age rangeofthe children will be 3-5 year o s,
an spoke about the quality of a day care center . She also anted
out t the state requirements in order to open a day c e center
are ver strict and stated that she intends to have a teacher
for every ' ht children instead of twelve children
There was some cussion on the state req ' ements for these
facilities. Comma Toner Bond stated thatday care center such
as this proposed one very much needed 'n this area. Commis-
sioner Kennedy concurr and noted a is in favor of the philo-
sophy behind this project. ommiss ' ner Sanders talked about the
quality of a day care cente ut addressed the concerns of the
condominium owners. She aske 1 here would be avenues open to
bring this matter back ffic, ' se and other related factors
were to cause a problem ' the neighbo ood.
MOTION: Made by C issioner Kennedy, secon d by Commissioner
Commiss ' ner Bond and carried unan ' ously to approve
Cond ' ional Use Permit 22-85 subject to t findings and
c ditions contained in the staff report th modifica-
ion to the following:
Condition #2 to reflect seven (7) off-street parking
spaces instead of five (5) listed in the report.
Deletion of Condition #5.
3. Zone Change 8-85:
Request submitted by Urban Sciences, Inc. (Bruce Dodson) to
change the zoning map from RSF-Z (Residential Single Family
Low Density) to L (PD5) (Recreation - Planned Development
Overlay No. 5) in order to allow for the development of a
parking and administration area for an outdoor recreation use
(waterslide) . Subject property is located at 9425 E1 Bordo,
also known as Lots 30 and 31 of Tract 5.
Chairman LaPrade stepped down from the Commission due to a possi-
ble conflict of interest.
Mr. Davidson presented the staff report and noted that this re-
quest was in conjunction with Zone Change 7-85 which had been ap-
proved by the Commission at the last meeting. He explained that
the property involved with this request would be utilized for a
parking area to provide a much needed 75 spaces, and pointed out
that since the site plan is conceptual in nature only, there are
still issues and questions which will remain unanswered until such
time as development plans are submitted for a conditional use per-
mit process.
Commissioner Sanders asked why this application was not being pro-
cessed as a general plan amendment. Mr. Davidson explained the
"wavy line" concept involved in making this determination.
3 ��.
Minutes - Planning Ctission - November 18, 1980
Commissioner Hatchell expressed concern that this zone change
request did not have a conceptual site plan for the parking area.
Commissioner Michielssen stated that this is only a zoning change
so the project should be looked at as to whether the proposed rec-
reational use is a good one.
There was continued discussion concerning the fact that there are
no detailed plans yet for the project.
Bruce Dodson, applicant, explained how the two applications tied
together and noted that detailed plans will be brought back to the
Commission for their consideration.
Harold Jensen, 9425 El Bordo, stated that the property between his
house and the other property is very level and will be adequate
for parking uses.
Mike Yeomans, San Gabriel resident, spoke about property he owns
on Chalk Mountain and questioned whether the subject property is
contiguous to recreation uses. He felt that most of the property
is more contiguous to residential suburban zoning. Mr . Yeomans
further stated that the development plans should be reviewed in
its entirety before a final vote is made and asked for considera-
tion in expanding this area to include his property in a study
area. He also requested a 30 day extension to study the matter
further.
Mr. Engen explained why this property - with a PD limiting it to
the facility proposed - would be compatible with recreational zon-
ing and explained the reasoning for having a planned development
as part of the requested zoning. He further stated that Mr. Yeo-
mans ' property would have a "leap frog" effect from a contiguous
use.
Commissioner Michielssen pointed out that one of the major con-
cerns with the other zone change request involved parking and that
the applicant has now supplied adequate land for this use, and
felt that this application is an extension of the previous one.
Commissioner Hatchell stated he would still like to see some type
of site plan drawing for the parking layout and felt the issues
will be addressed in consideration of the conditional use permit.
Commissioner Bond felt the Commission voiced concerns at the last
meeting that will be addressed at the time of development plan
review.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner
Nolan and carried unanimously to recommend approval of
Zone Change 8-85, as reflected in the staff report.
Chairman LaPrade took his seat back on the Commission.
4
ytl,
.� o� �•'`` kj��� �4a' �.>' .. _ nY S�•Sr IL•B1
AT F
A--15-23
\J
s� �,�" .��>�'.��:,,• �, AT-81_,83
. 2"''" •. r y� `b, ,\��,� •�3• \./_ r .>`.0 �•\' � � ni 81 aL I s aBi
' ,d•G ut ��',Jo y;, y6�.^ •�v•,.���tGi�\�.�;,y �iy'-c{���•/ i e4,ti R ..
i0
9 \\
.h ,iron r •� '"~,.`•.� .i \' �KJD— , .'•'�s s 6 r
.. �. pG', r to A• 1�> G
I1P ),I •»s �•! s SEVISIC•'t DATt:
G, ..
RSF
a� '` lit i.. y�g • .� s a' t
\ Z� fc ` .'lr.F ,,;�,sJ�\ "�•:- SF—�w eel_'-e_�F-- , /� f� J
I-e.- 'e; V \� s<o rsov ,.o .. L V'1�TI .•1 O •�
F � 2. ;_��a>>., I U
17
•^,F,F 5 S • c,s .,6.... R S:F.-Z:'ro L (PD5 ;j
O _, •c vcf
34
�CO 7,-1i"' ass ' 1'd,
{!W'� SOA s'.�2610
'
a oP X`Y a")P s R 27`:. 1 ii
/✓F 28' larJ.'e •b.\b Y� `1 ,
-
Cow-, • , >.. 6 � .I w � sus ' b"
p .4�L\moo.o .' ,1''4•to ,\ .. ) �- ,\. �9
r'i' -' ,•� 94 \F•�,•.v 4 .9 I`as'b sis SO •{so, 4;"
3i m2 44 a 10 fl + hCfY/ns 4 31 �.. �
E x c /
1O CT r?� / *. w^^ aa' F�"e. 5+�i 1 -E
13 y
ff
T ..I
tie I � :�", „a �,,,� �.• >
•
I6
p05' £•\ • 4s .crP �516 ''�;�'•�I
.. X90• 'S��,.,;. sr — ,y 4. .. o'AS •<" O ..
i A,• Via_ ��'. C R M F/
'" >SS•. - aim .g, ti L ods..a '& `>> 4"Y`,•'e `` .'j ' _
\\'v>a F9`T.2`"\ Iv P� 0 s0-A _ � T ••b•Y ) �• •.1.j �C-) \1.
�o.• s ='Fief g''4' aa->\` "'moi,
RM
. '.> •;',� •y:f".S`°t '+� ,� .,. y
o..l ..y o•7 �\
.,ods.
2Z
23.__ � �-� .J \ •-'`Q' �. ,.,�27 /til ,.�
1 F
77
- _'•- CITY OF ATASCAD-
-'l,,,Tl l�PlanningDepartml
�I�
• 07
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution Prohibiting Parking on North Side of Solano
and Within 20 ' of El Camino Real on the South Side
DATE: November 2.6 , 1985
Recommendation:
The Traffic Committee recommends that Council pass Resolution
No. 128-85 to establish a no parking zone on the North Side of
Solano Road from E1 Camino Real to La Linia and 20 ' from radius on
South side. Staff supports the findings of the Traffic Committee.
.Background:
It has been determined that Solano Avenue is of insufficient
• width to accommodate parking on both sides and still provide for
adequate travel lanes.
Additionally, parking on the south side of Solano near the
corner restricts traffic turning onto Solano from E1 Camino. By
eliminating parking within 20 ' of the corner we would be providing
additional space for vehicles turning onto Solano. And would improve
sight distance for Solano traffic entering ECR.
Discussion:
Committee and Staff members have visited the site and have
based their approvals on observations and the fact that there have
been numerous traffic accidents at that location in the past eleven
months.
Fiscal Impact:
The cost for this improvement will be approximately $150
to be paid out of the street budget.
PMS/vjh
resl28-85
•
G' 1})A
• MEMORANDUM
TO: Council AA
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager �4
FROM: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 132 -85 Establishing Left Turn Lanes on
Curbaril Avenue, and Prohibiting Parking within 50 ' of
El Camino Real
DATE: November 26, 1985
Recomendation:
The Traffic Committee recommends that Council approve Resolution
No. 130-85 allowing the marking of left turn lanes on both eastbound
and westbound sides of Curbaril Avenue at E1 Camino Real and that a
No Parking zone be designated 50 ' back from El Camino Real on Curbaril
at all directions.
Background:
• There currently exists a congested situation at the Curbaril
legs of this intersection due to on-street parking and no clear
P 5
designation _
of lane purpose. Eliminating on street parking within
50 ' of the intersection would enable the Public Works Department to
provide left turn lane designations to relieve the congestion.
Discussion:
Committee and staff members have visited the site and have
based their approval on personal observations.
Fiscal Impact:
The cost for this improvement including paint, labor and
equipment will be approximately $500 . 00 to be paid out of the
street budget.
PMS/vjh
•
00
• MEMORANDUM
TO: Council
THROUGH: "dike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 133 -85 to Prohibit Parking on Palomar Av
in Front on Mini-Storage
DATE: December 2, 1985
Recommendation:
The Traffic Committee recommends establishing a No Parking area
at the curb in front of the new Mini-Storage facility on Palomar
Avenue. Staff recommends passage of Resolution No. 131-85.
Background:
When the Mini-Storage was constructed they were required to
install road improvements which included curb, gutter and sidewalk.
Due to the fact that similar road improvements have not been con-
structed on the other lots in that area the road width is such that
there is insufficient width at this time to allow on-street parking
in front of the Mini-Storage. When, at a future date, the Commercial
area of Palomar Avenue is -fully developed, there will be adequate
street width to permit on-street parking.
Discussion:
The Committee, upon a citizen request, visited the site and
have based their approval on personal observations.
Fiscal Impact:
The cost for this improvement will be approximately $150.00
to be paid out of the street budget.
PMS/vjh
•
DD
MEMORANDUM
TO: Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 131 -85 Reducing Speed Limit on
Atascadero Avenue
DATE: November 26 , 1985
Recommendation:
The Traffic Committee recommends that Council pass Resolution
No. 129-85 reducing the speed limit on Atascadero Avenue between
Highway 41 and Atascadero Mall to 25 MPH from the current 30 MPH.
Background:
This item was included on the Traffic Committee Agenda at the
request of the Traffic Division of the Atascadero Police Department.
The request cites the following criteria for reducing the speed
limit:
1) The location has been identified as a "Residence District"
which, according to the Vehicle Code, carries a statute
speed of 25 MPH.
2) The location was monitored by the Traffic Division for 60
days and it was determined that a 25 MPH speed limit is
reasonable and prudent for that location.
Discussion:
Committee and staff members visited the location and have based
their approval on observations as well as the Police Department
report.
Fiscal Impact:
The cost for this improvement including signs, paint, labor
and equipment will be approximately $350 to be paid out of the
street budget.
•
11 E L4 O R A N D U r
• December 5 , 1985
TO : Honorable Rolfe Nelson, and
members of the Atascadero City Council
FROM: Robert M. Jones , City Attorney
RE: Resolution No. 134-85
Resolution to authorize Community Development
Director to enter into agreement for electrical_
service to structures prior to final inspection.
Attached to this i-emorand.um is a Performance Agreement between an
Applicant/Builder of a work of improvement in the City of Atascadero
who seeks to have electrical service provided to the job site prior
to final inspection and occupancy permit as issues' by the Building
Department, andthe City of Atascadero . At the November 25 meeting,
'-'icr.ael Sherer appealed the decision of the Building Department deny-
ing him the right of electrical power to the job site , and this Cour_cil
unanimously agreed that the Community Develop lent Agency Director
assist Hr. Sherer in obtaining electrical service during the course
• of construction.
The attached Resolution and Agreement is proposed by Legal Counsel and
the Community Development Agency Director to be used by the City when
application for electrical service is requested. You will note from
the Agreement that the Applicant specifically agrees that there shall
be no human occupancy of the improvements being constructed and t'-Iat in
the event that there is a breach of the Agreement , the Building Depart-
ment has the right to discontinue the electrical service at the job site.
In my opinion, this Agreement should satisfy the Applicant as wel. 1 as
protecting the City.
ROE-ERT ii. JONES , City Attorney
•
0
RESOLUTION 134-85
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ATASCADERO
TO EMPL M,,TER THE DIRECTOR OF THE ATASCADERO
CONI�iUNITY DEVELOPIMENT AGENCY TO K17ECUTE AN
AGP_EEl`1= ALLOWING ELECTRICAL SERVICE TO
PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO
FINAL INSPECTION AND OCCUPANCY
WIEREAS , the Council_ of ti-,-e City of Atascadero received an appeal
from a contractor desiring electrical service to a project under con-
struction prior to final inspection and approval of occupancy; and
WHEREAS , this City Council finds that it is in the best interest
of the City of Atascadero to allow electrical service to projects prior
to final inspection so long as there is no occupancy of the improvements
being constructed prior to final inspection; and
WHEREAS , the 1982 Uniform Building Code has been adopted in Title 8
of the Atascadero Municipal Code , and incorporate;l therein by reference ,
which grants to the Chief Building official of the City of Atascadero
power to enforce the terms of the Uniform Building Code;
NOW, THEREFORE , be it resolved as follows :
1 . The Director of the Atascadero Community Development Agency ,
in his position as the Chief Building Official of the City of Atascadero
is .ereby empowered as part of his duties pursuant to Title 8 of the
Atascadero Municipal Ordinance to execute such agreements , as shall be
approved by him to allow for electrical_ service to be urovided to �-,7orks
of improvement prior to final inspection and permission for occupancy.
`' Any such agreements to be executed by the Chief Buil.din.g
Official shall Qrant to the City the right to discontinue electrical
service in the event the Applicant for said service is in breach of the
specific agreement for electrical service , or any other act in violation
of Title 8 of Atascadero I,.unicipal Code;
3 . The agreement as approved by this Resolution, shall be in the
substantial same form and content as the a?reement attache) hereto , and
marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof.
On motion by Councilmember , and seconded by Council-
member the following Resolution 85- was duly adopted.
AYES
:10E S :
ABSTENTIONS :
ADOPTED:
ATTEST :
ROLFE i1ELSO^� Mayor
RES . NO. 85-
Page 2
ROBERT M. JONES , City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL B. SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORri:
ROBERT M. JONES , City Attorney
i
PERFOR:�'ANCE AGREE]HEN i
FOR ELECTRICAL SERVICE P. .IOR TO
Y
ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCPERM IT
PERMIT NU' BER
This agreement entered into this day of ,
19 , by and between hereinafter
caped "Applicant" whose address is ,
and the City of Atascadero , a political subdivision in the State of
California hereinafter _referred to as "City" .
1 . The Applicant agrees that the City be empowered to act as agent
for the Applicant and hereby appointed the Applicant ' s agent for the
purpose of accomplishing the discontinuance of electric power at the
ollowing location:
2 . The Applicant agrees further that no occupancy of the inprove-
.vents being constructed at or on the afore-Riention.ed 'location will- take
place without first receiving permission of the City.
3 . The Applicant additionally agrees to satisfactorily complete
all improvements as required by Title S of the Atascadero Municipal Code
and any other applicable codes administered by the Community Development
Agency of tl�e City of Atascadero .
4 . In case of failure to accomplish satisfactory completion or
the improvement being constructed, within days from the date of
this agreement , Applicant agrees that the City acting as agent for
Applicant may authorize an accomplish the discontinuance of all elec-
tric power at the location stipulated a';ove and permission is hereby
�C
granted to the City or its authorized agent to enter upon the land
which is the subject to this agreement for purposes of accomplishing
the said discontinuance of all electric power.
S . Applicant shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the City
of Atascadero , its officers , agents and employees from any and all
claims , demands , damages , costs , expenses or liability occasioned by
the performance or attempted performance of the provisions hereof , or
in. any way arising out-of-this agreement , including but not limited to ,
inverse condemnation, equitable relies , or any wrongful act or any
negligent act or omission to act on the part of Applicant or of agents ,
employees or independent contractors directly responsible to the Applicant ,
providing further that the foregoing small apply to any actively or
passively negligent acts or omissions to act , committed jointly or con-
currently by Applicant , the Applicant 's agents , employees or independent
contractors . clothing contained in the foregoing, indemnity provisions shall
be construed to require the Applicant to indermnir-y the City against any
responsibility or liability in contravention of Section 2782 of the
Civil Code.
6 . 14o waiver by the City at any time of any of the terms , con-
ditions or covenants at this agreement shall be deemed as a waiver at
any time thereafter of the same or of any other term, condition or
covenant ;merein contained.
7 . It is understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto
that this agreement shall bind the heirs , executors , administrators ,
successors and assigns of the respective parties to this agreement .
8. In reliance of the terms and conditions herein agreed, the
City shall permit the energizing of the electrical service facilities
at the aforementioned location
9. Pursuant to the City Council of Atascadero' s Tesolutio_n
''dumber 85- the Community Development Agency Director of the
City of Atascadero or his duly authorized represer_tative may execute
this agreement on behalf of the City.
Applicant
AC.'ures s
CITY OF Al'ASCADERO
HE',!P-Y E,CEN!
Community Development Agency Director
BY:
J
A -MDA
• MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Directors
Atascadero County Sanitation District
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager ti .
FROM: Paul M.__,Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Study
DATE: December 3, 1985
Status Report:
Staff has received a Draft copy of the Sanitary Sewer Study
requested by the Board in September . The report is 90% complete
and lacks answers to necessary General Plan Amendment questions
undecided at this writing. Therefore, conclusions cannot be
finaled until the Planning Commission and/or Council resolve
certain issues.
Although it would not be appropriate to submit the report
• to the Board until staff has made its review, John Wallace,
representing John L. Wallace and Associates, as well as Lawrance,
Fisk and McFarland, Inc. , will give a verbal report at the
December 9th meeting.
PMS:vjh
•
�V
1
s r ,T1
• MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Directors
Atascadero County Sanitation District
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Proposals for Engineering Services for Cease And
Desist Areas "C" and "E" (Cayucos and Separado)
DATE: December 4, 1985
Recommendation:
Staff will make a specific verbal recommendation at the
December 9th meeting.
Background:
At the last regular meeting the Board authorized staff to
• proceed with the formation of sewer districts for the above
areas. As a part of that direction a request for proposals was
sent to James M. Montgomery, Inc. , John L. Wallace and Assoc. ,
Tartaglia-Hughes, Kennaly Engineering and Lawrance, Fisk and
McFarland.
Discussion:
Proposals have been received by staff from Wallace in con-
junction with LFM, and Tartaglia-Hughes. Montgomery did not submit
a proposal directly but is shown as a backup for a proposal sub-
mitted by Terry Maughmer who presently works for Montgomery but is
starting his own firm. A proposal is expected from Kennaly Eng.
but has not as yet been received.
Due to the nature of the project the proposals received were
somewhat varied in scope. Staff is requesting some additional
description of work and associated fees in order to arrive at a
fair comparison of the proposals.
Summary:
A summary of the proposals and a recommendation will be given
at the December 9th meeting.
• Fiscal Impact:
The engineering costs up to the construction stage will be re-
quested for appropriation based on the result of the above proposals.
, i
I' '
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Directors
Atascadero County Sanitation District
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Proposals for Engineering for Cease and Desist Areas
"C" and "E" - Supplemental.
DATE: December 5, 1985
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Public Works
Director to enter into an agreement with John L. Wallace and
Associates in conjunction with Lawrence, Fisk and McFarland, for
engineering services for the above project for $59, 850 through
the bidding phase and to negotiate at a later date construction
administration and inspection. Any additional work required by
Bond Counsel for reports to waive the 1931 Act proceedings or other
work will require negotiations at a later date.
Attached is an analysis comparing the firms presenting pro-
posals, and a copy of their quotation for services. A detailed copy
of their proposal is on file in the office of the Director of
Public Works.
Attachments:
Comparison of Engineering Proposals
Quotations from the Proposals
State Statute regarding the selection of Engineering Firms
PMS/vjh
�7;
Proposed Seperado - Cayucos Area -Sewer District
Cease and Desist Areas "C" and "E"
Comparison of Engineering Proposals
(by Similarity and Scope of Project)
JLW - John L. Wallace Assoc. S = Strong
LFM - Lawrence, Fisk & McFarland
A = Average
TNM - Terry N. Maughmer
JMM - James M. Montgomery W = Weak
T-H - Tartaglia-Hughes
KE - Kennaly Engineering
Category JLW T-H TNM KE
LFM JMM
Experience in Sewer and
Lift Station Design S S S S
Direct Involvement in
Assessment Districts S S S S
Direct Involvement in
Bond Proceedings S S S W
Construction Engineering
Experience S S S A
Public Hearings & Meetings S S A A
Public Relations W A A A
Reference Opinions S S W A
Experience as a Firm A A W A
Familarity w/ACSD S W S A
Experience in Atascadero S S S S
Quantity of Team Members S S A S
Stability of Firm S S W S
Resources S A S A
Approach to Problem S S S S
Proposal through Bidding Phase $59,850 $82, 025 $80 ,250 $48 , 000
John Wallace & Assoc.
SECTION V
CONSULTANT 'FEES AND PROJECTED BUDGET
(Expanded to Include Additional Areas - Separado Avenue)
Fee Schedule and Related Costs
The following is an integrated fee schedule for John L. Wallace
and Associates and the contract consultants for the level of
personnel anticipated to be used on the study.
Classification Hourly Rate
_ Technical Consultant $60.00
Principal 45.00
Registered Civil Engineer 37.50
Associate Civil Engineer 32.50
Inspector 27.50
Draftsman 25.00
Engineering Aide 20.00
Survey Crew - Two Man Party 75.00
Survey Office - Calculations & Mapping 35.00
Secretarial 15.00
In addition to the hourly rates shown above, direct expenses
incurred for work and services provided will be billed at actual
costs plus 15%. Such items include, but are not limited to:
- additional insurance coverage if required by the client
or other agencies,
- automobile at $0.25 per mile,
- lodging and meals,
- postage,
- cost for outside consultant contracts when administered
through JLWA,
- materials required for the fob and used in drafting and
allied activities, including printing and reproduction
costs.
Project Budget
. Based upon the tasks identified in Section 3 and the level of
personnel anticipated to be assigned to the project, the
following preliminary amounts are recommended to be budgeted for
this project. This cost estimate may be revised at the time of
consultant selection and contract negotiations for outside
services to be furnished by the consultant. Other items to be
clarified at that time would include the City furnished services,
mentioned in the preceding section dealing with the Scope of
Work. In addition, the City may want to revise the scope of work
to include a broader area within the proposed assessment
districts because of the present situation with the proposed(
boundaries lying along street center lines.
Design Phase
1. Sanitary sewer and lift station design
for areas "C" and "E" (including Separado Ave. ) 27,000
2. Assessment District Engineering including:
-assessment district legal .descriptions
-boundary maps
_-assessment diagrams
-preliminary and final cost estimates
-engineer's report
-public hearings 9,100
3. Project Specifications and Contract Documents 4,700
4. Soils Engineering borings 5,500
5. Aerial topographic mapping including ground
control 11,250
6. Direct costs including reproduction and mapping
costs __-1,050
TOTAL $58,600
Cost Estimate Bidding and Negotiations Phase
1 . Prebid activities including:
-distribution of plans and specs
-answer questions during bid period 850
2. Receive bids and prepare for award including:
-bid analysis
-review bidders background
-review insurance, bond forms 400
TOTAL 1,250
Construction Phase Costs - Contract Administration*
Because the extent of the project is unknown at this time,
contract administration costs and construction staking would be
based on time and materials charges in accordance with the
Consultant's fee schedule.
Construction Phase Costs - Inspection*
Because the extent of the project is unknown at this time an
because the City may wish to provide some inspection and soils
testing services, the consultant's services would be charged in
accordance with the Consultant's fee schedule. A preliminary
estimate for compaction testing of trench backfill is estimated
r
to be $1700.
*A firm proposal for a not to exceed fee could be provided at the
time the projects' boundaries are determined, and will be
included in the summary of costs in the Engineer's Report for the
purposes of levying assessments.
SUMMARY
Design Phase
Design Costs 27,000
Assessment District Engineering 9, 100
Specifications 4,700
Direct Costs 1,050
41,50
Soil Borings 5,500
Aerial Mapping and Ground Control 11,250
58,600
Bid Phase 1,250
TOTAL 59,550 fir
Construction Phase
To be determined when boundries
of Districts are known.
Tartaglia-Hughes
SECTION 5 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEES
Tartaglia-Hughes Consulting Engineers will provide professional
services as identified in Phases 1 through 5 of the work pro-
gram for the estimated fees which are detailed below.
The amounts that are shown have been derived from a thorough
analysis of the project and are based on the estimated number
of man hours required to complete each task which is multiplied
by the hourly charge for each employee.
The hourly g employee charge for each em to ee has been determined in
accordance with the requirements as set forth by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency of the United States Government.
Basically the hourly charge rate is determined as follows :
Rate = hourly salary + overhead + profit.
For Tartaglia-Hughes the factors are :
Hourly salary= monthly salary : 173 .3 hrs ./mo.
Overhead factor = 0 .86
Profit factor = 0 .15 (15%)
To determine the hourly charge for an employee earning $1900 .
per month, the following calculation would be used:
$1900 = 173 .3 = $10 . 96/hr.
Charge Rate = $10 .96 x 1 . 86 x 1 . 15 = $23 . 44/hr.
The costs for each phase combined into the categories as
listed in the Request for Proposal are as follows :
A. Preparation of Plans and Specifications
1. Assessment district engineer' s report,
preliminary assessment spread, final
assessment spread, public hearings . $12 , 530
2. Project design . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 , 595
3 . Aerial photography . . . . . . . . . . $ 3 ,500
4. Field surveying for aerial photo-
graphy and design . . . . . . . . . . 15 ,345
5 . Soil boring for design . . . . . . . . 2, 000
6 . Farmers Home Administration
engineer' s report . . . . . . . . . . 825
Total : $79 ,795
B. Bidding and Negotiating
1. Project advertisement, prepare
addenda as required, answer bid
time questions . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,780
2 . Bid opening, review bids and
recommendation to City . 450
Total : $ 2 , 230
It is estimated at this time that the required
time to construct the two assessment districts
would be 75 working days.
C. Contract Administration
Since the contract time at this point can
only be estimated, it is assumed that the
Project Engineer would spend an average
of 10 hours per week on the project;
therefore, the estimated cost for contract
administration for 75 working days is . . . $ 6 , 665
D. Resident Inspector
Full time resident inspection would be
strictly on an hourly basis, plus mileage.
This assumption has to be made due to the
fact that the construction time is unknown
and the contractor' s work hours are un-
known. The resident inspection cost for
the 75 working day period is estimated as
follows : -
75 days x 8 hrs . /day x $30 . 18/hr. $18 , 108 ° L�4_
plus mileage a $0 . 30 per mile .
-17- i;CN
Terry Mauahmer
SECTION 3
FEE ESTIMATE
Based on our experience on similar projects as reflected in the Scope of Work,
our estimated upper limit for providing the necessary services is as follows:
A. Prepare plans and specifications
1. Assessment Engineering $ 13,200
U2. Design Engineering, draft plans and
prepare bid documents and specifications $ 64,750
UB. Bidding and negotiating $ 2,300
C. Contract Administration and construction w f'
management $ 18,500
D. Resident Inspection $ 22.50/HR.
LlE. Outside Services and other direct costs $ Z7,700
TOTAL: A, B, C (Includes E) $ 98,750
3-1
Kennaly Engineerina
COST ESTIMATE
FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
Preliminary Engineer's Report
Includes construction cost estimate and preliminary
assessments for each parcel in boundary and
boundary definition.
Area E 1,000
Area C 1,000
Meetings and coordination 1,000
Aerial field control survey 2,000
Aerial photographs 15,000
Construction plan preparation
Area E 12,000
Area C 7,000
Specifications 1,500
Bid opening and tabulation 500
Contract administration 2,000
Construction staking 3,000
Construction inspection 40/HR
Soils testing 4,000
Final Engineer's report
Includes total of final costs,
final assessments 1,000
Record drawings 1,000
Contingency (10%) 5,000
Total not to exceed 57,000
Does not include construction inspection.
Does include all printing and reproduction
costs, and all clerical work.
' -3-
i
§ 4500 PUBLIC WORK AND PURCHASES Title 1
Notes of Decisions
1, in general ldicahle sections of the Civil and Govern-
Pedestrian overcrossings constructed ment Codes and must be made accessible
with public funds are "sidewalks" and to and usable by the physically handi-
public facilities within the meaning of ap- capped. 58 Ops.Atty.Gen. 512, 7-30-75.
Chapter 10
CONTRACTS WITH PRIVATE ARCHITECTS
AND ENGINEERING FIRMS
SM
4525. Definitions.
4526. Public policy.
4427. Annual statements of qualifications and performance data; an-
nouncement of projects.
4528. Negotiation of contracts.
4529. Technical contracts not requiring professional judgments.
Chapter 10 was added by Stats.1974, C. 1434, P. 3137,
§ 1.
Administrative Code References
Rules and regulations,see 23 Cal.Adm.Code 380 et seq.
Selection procedures,see 21 Cal.Adm.Code 1301 et seq., 1520 et seq.
§ 4525. Definitions
For purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall have the
following meanings:
(1) The term "firm" means any individual, firm, partnership,
corporation, association, or other legal entity permitted by law to
practice the profession of architecture or engineering.
(2) The term "agency head" means the secretary, administrator,
or head of a department, agency, or bureau of the State of California
authorized under the State Contract Act to contract for architectural
and engineering services.
(3) The term "architectural and engineering services" includes
those professional services of an architectural or engineering nature
as well as incidental services that members of these professions and
those in their employ may logically or justifiably perform.
(Added by Stats.1974,c. 1434,p.3137, § 1.)
Library References
Public Contracts G-6. Words and Phrases (Perm.Ed.)
C.J.B. Public Contracts H 8.9.
444
3±'*
Q`
S
Div. 5 CONTRACTS WITH ARCHITECTS, ETC. § 4528
§ 45526. Public policy
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it shall be consid-
ered to be the public policy of the State of California and any politi-
cal subdivision thereof that selecting by an agency head for profes-
sional services of private architect or engineering firms shall be on
the basis of demonstrated competence and on the professional qualifi-
cations necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services re-
quired. Agency heads contracting for private architectural and pro-
fessional engineering services shall adopt by regulation procedures
which assure that such services are engaged on the basis of demon-
strated competence and qualifications for the types of services to be
performed and at fair and reasonable prices to the public agencies.
Furthermore, such procedures shall assure maximum participation of
small business firms, as defined by the Director of General Services
pursuant to Section 14537 of this code.
(Added by Stats.1974, c. 1434, p. 3137, § 1.)
Library References
Public Contructs C-f). C.J.S. Public Contracts H 8,9.
§ 4527. Annual statements of qualifications and performance
data; announcement of projects
In the procurement of architectural and engineering services, the
agency head shall encourage firms engaged in the lawful practice of
their profession to submit annually a statement of qualifications and
performance data.
Statewide announcement of all projects requiring architectural
or engineering services shall be made by the agency head through
publications of the respective professional societies. The agency
head, for each proposed project, shall evaluate current statements of
qualifications and performance data on file with the agency, together
with those that may be submitted by other firms regarding the.pro-
posed project, and shall conduct discussions with no less than three
firms regarding anticipated concepts and the relative utility of alter-
native methods of approach for furnishing the required services and
then shall select therefrom, in order of preference, based upon crite-
ria established and published by him, no less than three of the firms
deemed to be the most highly qualified to provide the services re-
quired.
(Added by Stats.1974,c. 1434, p. 3137, § 1.)
§ 4528. Negotiation of contracts
(a) The agency head shall negotiate a contract with the best
qualified firm for architectural and engineering services at compensa-
445
§ 4528 PUBLIC WORK AND PURCHASES Title 1
tion which the agency head determines is fair and reasonable to the
State of California or the political subdivision involved.
(b) Should the agency head be unable to negotiate a satisfactory
contract with the firm considered to be the most qualified, at a price
he determines to be fair and reasonable to the State of California or
the political subdivision involved, negotiations with that firm shall be
formally terminated. The agency head shall then undertake negotia-
tions with the second most qualified firm. Failing accord with the
second most qualified firm, the agency head shall terminate negotia-
tions. The agency head shall then undertake negotiations with the
third most qualified firm.
(c) Should the agency head be unable to negotiate a satisfactory
contract with any of the selected firms, he shall select additional
firms in order of their competence and qualification and continue ne-
gotiations in accordance with this chapter until an agreement is
reached.
(Added by Stats.1974,c. 1434,p.3138, § 1.)
§ 4529. Technical contracts not requiring professional judgments
This chapter shall not apply where the agency head determines
that the services needed are more of a technical nature and involve
little professional judgment and that requiring bids would be in the
public interest.
(Added by Stats.1974,c. 1434,p.3138, § 1.)
446