HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 05/27/1986 DEPUTY CITY CLERK
• AGENDA - ATASCADERO CITY
Regular Meeting
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM
MAY 27, 1986
7: 30 P.M.
** ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS, STAFF MEMBERS AND CITIZENS ARE REMINDED **
PLEASE SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Invocation
Roll Call
City Council Comments
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under Item A. Consent Calendar , are considered
to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed
below. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If
discussion is required, that item will be removed from the Consent
Calendar and considered separately. Vote may be roll call.
1. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of May 12,
1986
2. Approval of City Treasurer ' s Report - April 1-30, 1986
3. Approval of City Finance Report - April 1-30, 1986
4. Recognition of City Employee of the Month for April by the
Employee Recognition Program Committee - Steve Sandeffer
5 Proposed Resolution 53-86 - Supporting State Proposition
46 - Local Control Act (General Obligation Bond)
6. Proposed Resolution 54-86 - Supporting State Proposition
47 - Motor Vehicle License Fee Guarantee
7. Proposed Resolution 55-86 - Supporting State Proposition
49 - Non-Partisanship Local Elections
8. Proposed Resolution 56-86 - Supporting State Proposition
• 51 - Fair Responsibility Act (Court Reform)
1
0 0
• 9. Proposed Resolution 51-86 - Supporting State Proposition
43 - Community Park Lands Act of 1986
10. Approval of Golden California Card Room Business License
Subject to Police Department Approval of Fingerprint
Investigation
11. Approval to Award Bid # 86-38 - Weed Abatement - to Jay' s Tractor
Service
12 . Proposed Resolution 57-86 - Appointment of Alternate
(Administrative Services Director) to the Joint Powers Authority
11 . Proposed Resolution 52-86 - Authorization for Mayor to Enter
into Agreement for Services with Security Pacific Capital Markets
Group as the Bond Underwriter for the Seperado/Cayucos Sewer
Assessment District
-14 . Approval of B.I.A. Request for Funds from 1985/86 Budget
Appropriation
1S . Acknowledge Notice of Completion - Fire Station Office Addition -
La Freniere Construction
• B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
1. Proposed General Plan Amendment 1J-86 and Zone Change 10-86 -
9240 Atascadero Road - Hawkins
A. Proposed Resolution 43-86 - Amendment of the General
Plan from Moderate Density Single Family to High Density
Single Family (1/2 Acre Lot Size) (Cont'd from 5/12/86
& 4/28/86)
B. Proposed Ordinance 129 - Amending the Zoning Map from
RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, 1 acre minimum) to
RSF-X (Residential Single Family 1/2 acre minimum)
(FIRST READING) (Cont'd from 5/12/86 & 4/28/86)
2. Proposed General Plan Amendment 1C-85 &Zone Change 3-85 -
8555 El Corte (Lots 1-10 , Block 1, Eaglet 2) - ACOMA Corp./Poe
A. Proposed Resolution 47-86 - Amendment to the General
Plan from Low Density Single Family to Low Density
Multiple Family
• li
2
6 6
• B. Proposed Ordinance 133 - Amending the Zoning Map
from Residential Single Family Medium Density to
Residential Multiple Family, Four (4) Units per Acre
(FIRST READING)
3. Proposed General Plan Amendment 1K-86 and Zone Change 12-86
Initiated by the City of Atascadero
A. Proposed Resolution 48-86 - Amending the General Plan to
Provide for Lot Line Adjustment Resulting in the Reduction
in Size of Existing Non-Conforming Lots
B. Proposed Ordinance 134 - Amending Zoning Text to
Establish Procedures for Lot Line Adjustments Which
Result in a Reduction of Lot Size for Existing Non-
Conforming Lots (FIRST READING)
4. Proposed General Plan Amendment 1M-86 - Amending the Public
and Quasi-Public Services Element - Initiated by the City of
Atascadero
A. Proposed Resolution 49-86 - Amendment of the General
Plan Land Use Element, Chapter VII "Public Quasi-Public
Services"
5. Proposed General Plan Amendment 1L-86 —Amending the Urban Service
• Line to Include Areas Outside Existing Boundary - Initiated by the
City of Atascadero
A. Proposed Resolution 50-86 - Amending the Urban Service
Line to Reconcile with the Sewer Improvement District
6. Public Hearing - Weed Abatement Posting
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Ordinance Number 130 - Declaring a Need for a Redevelopment
Agency in Atascadero & Council to Act as Agency (SECOND READING)
(Cont'd from 5/12/86)
2. Proposed Zone Change 11-196 - 9955 El Camino (Portion of Lot 1,
Block 7, Eaglet 2) - Wilson/Poulin
A. Ordinance Number 131 - Amendment of Zoning Maps from CT
(Commercial Tourist) to CR (Commercial Retail)
(SECOND READING) (Cont'd from 5/12/86)
3. Proposed Revised Bid Procedures - Uniform Construction
Cost Accounting:
3
• A. Ordinance Number 132 - Amending Municipal Code by
Adding Chapter "Informal Public Construction Bidding
Ordinance" (SECOND READING) (Cont'd from 5/12/86)
B. Proposed Resolution 46-86 - Establishment of a
Uniform Cost Accounting Standard (Cont'd from 5/12/86)
D. COMMUNITY FORUM
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION
1. City Council
2. City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
5. City Manager
NOTE: MEETING IS ADJOURNED TO A CLOSED SESSION REGARDING
NEGOTIATIONS
•
4
• MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting, May 12, 1986, 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.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Handshy, Mackey, Norris and Mayor Nelson
Absent: Councilman Molina (Unavoidable business reasons)
STAFF
Mike Shelton, City Manager ; David Jorgensen, Administrative Services
Director; Robert Jones, City Attorney/City Clerk; Henry Engen, Commun-
ity Development Director ; Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director; Bob
Best, Recreation Director; Lt. Chuck Hazelton, Police Department;
Cindy Wilkins, Deputy City Clerk.
COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS
Councilwoman Mackey asked that the Kankiewicz request (11145 Viejo
Camino, GPA 1D-86 & Zone Change 4-86) be reconsidered sometime,
• feeling that the zoning and how large the sewer needs would be should
be determined before the Bordeaux Project gets on line. Mr. Engen
proposed that the Kankiewicz property be included in a study area cov-
ering current Gen. Plan applications, between the Urban Service Line
and the City Limits, and there could be a future public hearing after
an EIR is prepared to review possibilities for other uses.
Mayor Nelson announced that Council met in closed session prior to
tonight' s meeting to discuss property acquisition.
Mayor Nelson read three proclamations:
- Proclaiming May 14, 1986, as "Day of the Teacher"
- Proclaiming May 18-24, 1986, as "California Traffic Safety Week"
- Proclaiming May 11-17, .1986 , as "National Police Week" and Thurs-
day, May 15th, as "Atascadero Loves its Cops Day"
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
* Mayor Nelson announced that Items A-5 & A-6 are moved to Public
Hearing, Items B-4 & B-5; also, A-8 should read: "Support Staff
Recommendations Regarding San Luis Obispo County Solid Waste Manage-
ment Plan - Preliminary Draft"
1
! 0
b. Proposed Ordinance 110
Amending the Zoning Ordinance text relative to the establish-
ment of a "W" suffix for 10,000 square foot minimum residential
lots in the LSF and RSF Zoning Districts (FIRST READING)
2. General Plan Amendment 1J-86 and Zoning Map Amendments (Zone
Change 10-86) Designating Specific Areas for 10,000 Square Foot
Lots (Cont'd from 4/28/86)
a. STUDY AREA "A" (MORRO FLATS AREA) :
1. Proposed Res. No. 39-86
2. Proposed Ord. No. 126
b. STUDY AREA "B" (PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREA) :
1. Proposed Res. No. 40-86
2. Proposed Ord. No. 127
c. STUDY AREA "C" (FRESNO/TUNITAS ROAD AREA)
d. STUDY AREA "D" (LAS LOMAS AREA) :
1. Proposed Res. No. 42-86
2. Proposed Ord. No. 128
e. 9240 ATASCADERO ROAD (Mayor Nelson announced this item post-
poned to meeting of 5/27 at applicant's request) :
1. Proposed Res. No. 43-86
2. Proposed Ord. No. 129
City Attorney, Robert Jones, explained the effect of the voting on
this issue from the last Council meeting and summarized the alterna-
tives before Council: (1) Do nothing, which would let the prior deci-
sion of denial stand; (2) approve another continuance to the meeting
of 5/27 for full Council consideration, and (3) approve reconsidera-
tion of the matter , which would require another fully noticed public
hearing. Mr. Jones recommended that Council concur with recommenda-
tion #1, based on Council' s previous suggestion (s) for an over-all
General Plan review.
Each Councilmember expressed opinion on the matter at Mayor Nelson' s
request. Mayor Nelson announced that this appears to be a dead issue
at this time; however , he offered to take public testimony.
Public Comment
Steve Devencenzi, representing one of the applicants (Petersons/Study
Area B) , asked what happens to his client' s funds and efforts related
to this request. Mr. Engen responded that applications affected by
Council' s decision would fall into the category of "denied without
prejudice" and would be included in the General Plan update process;
applicants would not be required to pay fees again for reconsidera-
tion. Mr. Devencenzi favors a continuance on this issue by Council.
3
Bob Clark, resident in Study Area C, suggested the issue be put on t
ballot for decision by the people. Council responded its possible to
include it on the ballot for the November General Election.
John Bunyea, 8942 Palomar, expressed dissent at the way this issue has
been "dragged out
Brad Davis, 4470 Sycamore, expressed concern for the provision of
affordable housing and asked Council to consider the young people of
Atascadero; he' s concerned his employees may be forced to move.
Lydia Kellerman, resident on Honda (Study Area C) , spoke in opposition
to allowing for additional units in the Tunitas/Bajada area; she ex-
pressed the residents' dissent with the minimal landscaping around a
large apartment building located on lot 7-7a. Mr. Engen was requested
by Council to review the CC & R' s on that project to verify compliance
with .the landscaping requirements.
Bob Clark spoke again, noting that he counted 50 mailboxes on Tunitas
tonight (claims that equals approx. 150 people living in the 3.2 mi.
area) ; he spoke in opposition to more density on Tunitas or Bajada.
Art .Jazwiecki expressed disagreement with some of the zoning informa-
tion relayed by Mrs. Kellerman.
Mayor Nelson clarified, at Mr. Bunyea' s request, that the 10,000 sq
ft. zoning designation was included in the Housing Element of th
General Plan to provide affordable (or optional) housing to all seg-
ments of income in different areas of the community.
Michael Lane, Fresno St. , spoke in favor of increasing housing lots by
looking at the multiple unit zones in the City and not considering
breaking down existing neighborhoods further .
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy that Council accept City Attorney' s
recommendation (to let prior decision stand) , seconded by
Councilwoman Mackey; passed unanimously, with Councilman Mo-
lina absent.
3. Proposed Zone Change 11-86 - 9955 El Camino Real - Goldie Wilson/
Ron Poulin - Revising Existing Commercial Tourist Zoning to Com-
mercial Retail - Proposed Ord. No. 131 (FIRST READING)
Henry Engen, Commun. Devel. Dir. , gave staff report.
Public Comment
Ron Poulin, 1916 Creston Rd. , Paso Robles, urged Council support of
this request based on unanimous favorable decision by Planning Commis-
sion.
Maggie Rice, Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of this requestle
although she shares concerns expressed by Councilman Handshy relating
to the need for maintaining the central business district.
4
Mayor Nelson expressed the necessity for traffic study in the area.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to read Ord. 131 by title only,
seconded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed unanimously, with
Councilman Molina absent. Mayor Nelson read Ord. 131 by
title.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy that this constitutes the first reading
of Ord. 131, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed unani-
mously, with Councilman Molina absent. Second reading will
be at Council meeting of 5/27/86.
(* Note: The following two items, B-4 & B-5, were moved from the
Consent Calendar to this portion of the agenda. )
4. Vacating Public Utilities Easement at 6905 E1 Camino Real (E1
Camino Associates ) - Proposed Resolution 45-86
-Henry Engen, Commun. Devel. Director , gave staff report.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to approve Res. No. 45-86, seconded by
Councilwoman Norris; passed 4:O by roll-call vote, with Coun-
cilman Molina absent.
5. Vacating Public Utilities Easement at 8793 Plata Lane (Azerkan) -
Proposed Resolution 44-86
Henry Engen, Commun. Devel. Director, gave staff report.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Norris to approve Res. No. 44-86 , seconded by
Councilman Handshy; passed 4:0 by roll-call vote, with Coun-
cilman Molina absent.
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Proposed Zone Change 2G-85 - Revising the Zoning Map from RSF-Y,
Residential Single Family (one acre minimum with sewer) to RSF-X,
Residential Single Family (1/2 acre minimum with sewer) - Coromar
Road Area (City-Initiated/Lopus) - Proposed Ordinance No. 124
(SECOND READING) (Cont'd from 4/28/86)
Henry Engen, Commun. Devel. Director , gave staff report.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Norris to read Ord. No. 124 by title only,
seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed unanimously, with
Councilman Molina absent. Mayor Nelson read Ord. 124 by
5
title.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Norris that this constitutes the second
reading and adoption of Ord. 124, seconded by Councilman
Handshy; passed 3:1 by roll-call vote, with Councilwoman
Mackey voting NO and Councilman Molina absent.
2. Mayor to Enter Agreement with Architectural Firm of Ross, Levin
and MacIntyre - Police Facility (Cont'd from 4/14/86)
Mike Shelton, City Manager, gave staff report (Chief McHale out of
town) . Mr. Rod Levin, representing Ross, Levin & MacIntyre, responded
to Council questions relating to the programming for the project
(i.e. , setting the criteria as to how the building is designed to meet
the needs and design of the community) .
Public Comment
Debra Kankiewicz, 11455 Viejo Camino, asked Mr . Levin what the esti
mated cost of blueprints for the facility is; Mr. Shelton responded
that it will be 7% of the value of the project, as indicated in the
architect' s proposal, which is a standard fee.
In response to concerns expressed by Councilman Handshy relating to
deficit spending, David Jorgensen, Admin. Services Director , review
some of the financing plans for the police facility, in addition t
comments by Mr. Shelton.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to enter into agreement with Ross,
Levin & MacIntyre in the amount of $13, 650 for Phase I, sec-
onded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed 3 :1, with Councilwoman
Norris voicing NO and Councilman Molina absent.
Robert Jones, City Clerk, requested the vote be by roll-call.
Councilman Handshy withdrew his motion.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to adopt the funding for Phase I ,
$13,650 , for Programming & Site Analysis, seconded by Mayor
Nelson; failed 2: 2 by roll-call vote, with Councilmembers
Handshy and Norris voting NO and Councilman Molina absent.
Councilman Handshy expressed his desire for Council to hold a special
work study session on this project and its relation to other budget
issues.
D. NEW BUSINESS
1. Discussion - Reappointment of Recreation Commission Vacant
Positions (Effective 7/86) is
6
• 0
Bob Best, Director of Parks & Recreation, gave staff report.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to accept staff recommendations,
seconded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed unanimously, with
Councilman Molina absent.
2. Proposed Lease Agreement with Richard Oswald for:
A. City Concession - Scribner ' s Snack Bar - Atascadero Lake Park
B. City Concession - Pop' s Tackle Shop - Atascadero Lake Park
Bob Best, Director of Parks & Recreation, gave staff report.
Councilwoman Mackey expressed that she feels it would be in the City' s
best interest to require $1 million liability insurance for lakeside
facilities; Robert Jones, City Attorney, made comments in response to
those concerns.
Public Comment
Bob Clark, resident, asked if it' s possible for the lessee to operate
under one policy combining both concessions; staff responded no.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to approve staff recommendation to
approve both use permits, seconded by Councilwoman Norris;
passed unanimously, with Councilman Molina absent.
(Note: There is no Item D-3. )
4. Proposed Dial-A-Ride Services for 1986-87 by Community Transit
Services
Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director, gave staff report.
Council consented to ask Mr. Sensibaugh to bring back a report propos-
ing a taxi service for review of options.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to accept staff recommendations and
renew Dial-A-Ride Contract, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey;
passed unanimously, with Councilman Molina absent.
5. Proposed Ordinance 130 - Declaring a Need for a Redevelopment
Agency (FIRST READING)
Mike Shelton, City Manager, gave staff report.
7
Public Comment
Maggie Rice, Exec. Mgr. of Atas. Chamber of Commerce, spoke of the
Chamber ' s Board of Directors having voted in unanimous support of the
concept of a redevelopment agency, making note of the recent formation
of the BIA as an "important first step".
Bonita Borgeson, 4780 Del Rio Rd. , spoke in opposition to this propos-
al and feels such a large decision warrants further study, encouraging
Council to keep the public fully informed of the process.
Jaime Lopez-Balbontin, downtown businessperson, spoke in support of
this concept with the understanding that its purpose is to fund im-
provements that the business owners cannot themselves afford to make.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to read Ord. 130 by title only,
seconded by Councilwoman Norris; passed unanimously, with
Councilman Molina absent. Mayor Nelson read Ord. 130 by
title.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy that this constitutes the first reading
of Ord. 130 , seconded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed unani-
mously, with Councilman Molina absent. Second reading will
be at the Council meeting of 5/27/86.
6. Proposed Revised Bid Procedures - Uniform Construction Cost A�
counting - Proposed Ord. No. 132 (FIRST READING) and Proposed
Res. No. 46-86
Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director, gave staff report.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to read Ord. 132 by title only,
seconded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed unanimously, with
Councilman Molina absent. Mayor Nelson read Ord. 132 by ti-
tle.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey that this constitutes the first
reading of Ord. 132, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed
unanimously, with Councilman Molina absent. Second reading
and consideration of Res. No. 46-86 will be at the Council
meeting of 5/27/86 .
7. Lewis Avenue Bridge Development Fee - Review by Task Force
Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director , gave staff report.
Councilman Handshy spoke in favor of discussion of this issue in a
budget study session prior to decision by Council.
8
• i
• Public Comment
Gaylan Little, one of the developers of Century Plaza, spoke in favor
of the bridge project; however, he favors a more equitable reassess-
ment of the fees which are heavy both at $1. 93 or $1. 63 per sq. ft.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to agree with staff recommendations,
seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed 3:1, with Councilwoman
Norris voicing NO and Councilman Molina absent.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey that Council recess and convene as the
Atas. County Sanitation District Board of Directors, seconded
by Councilman Handshy; passed unanimously.
E. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT (ACSD)
1. Status Report and Recommendation for the Seperado/Cayucos Proposed
Assessment Districts
Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director, gave staff report, noting
corrections to the Tentative Schedule in agenda packet: The two
Neighborhood Meeting dates should be changed to May 20 & 22, 1986.
Robert Jones, City Attorney, reported on the Bond Counsel recommenda-
tion of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Director Handshy to approve staff recommendations 1-4,
seconded by Director Mackey; passed unanimously, with
Director Molina absent. (Staff recommendations 5-7 to be
decided at a later date)
2. Recommendation Regarding the Assessment District No. 3 (Marchant
Way Sewer Extension) Bid Proposal
Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director, gave staff report, suggesting
staff re-advertise for bids on May 14 , 21 and 28, receive bids on June
3, and award on June 9, 1986.
No public comment.
MOTION: By Director Handshy to accept staff recommendations, seconded
by Director Norris; passed unanimously, with Director Molina
absent.
MOTION: By Director Mackey to adjourn as ACSD Board of Directors and
reconvene as City Council, seconded by Director Norris;
passed unanimously, with Director Molina absent.
-J
9
• i
F. COMMUNITY FORUM .
Lydia Kellerman, resident, suggests Council offer persons a choice to
respond to comments made related to them by other persons.
John Befumo, 7420 Atascadero Ave. , expressed his feeling relating to
Planning Commission Public Hearing noticing procedures.
Judy Maseus, 9080 Amapoa, expressed comments relating to the delay of
issuance of her business license, as Atas. Police Dept. awaiting the
return of the set of fingerprints submitted to the Dept. of Justice.
Mayor Nelson director Ms. Maseus to contact the City Manager to dis-
cuss the issue.
Council recommended staff bring back necessary resolutions in support
of various ballot propositions affecting cities.
G. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION
City Council - Councilwoman Norris announced that Nurse of the Year
for SLO County will be announced May 30th, and she hopes Council
will invite that individual here to receive recognition.
City Clerk - Robert Jones announced the next Council meeting will be
held on Tues. , 5/27/86, due to Memorial Day Holiday on Mon. , 5/26.
City Manager - Mike Shelton reminded Council of scheduled breakfast 0
with State Assemblyman Eric Seastrand at Hoover ' s Hacienda, 8:00
a.m.
Mr. Shelton reported briefly on the status of the City Council sub-
committee meeting with the School District sub-committee regarding
the Lewis Ave. Bridge fees.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10 :55 P.M. TO TUESDAY, MAY 27, 1986.
RECORDED BY:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
PREPARED BY:
CINDY WILK-INS, Deputy City Clerk
10
F.
r
u, f
CITY OF ATASCADERO
• TREASURER' S REPORT
APRIL 1, 1986 TO APRIL 30 , 1986
RECEIPTS
TAXES
Property Tax 293,601. 02
Cigarette Tax 5,892. 66
Motor Vehicle "In Lieu" 31,400.80
Sales Tax 82, 500. 00
Franchise Tax 231,991.74
Livestock-Head Day Tax 38. 64
Occupancy Tax 8,817. 58
Development Impact Tax 12,990 .00
LICENSES/PERMITS/FEES 32,327.11
GAS TAX 18,855.66
PARKS & RECREATION FEES 29,945.75
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND 30,000 .00
REVENUE SHARING 48, 428.00
TRANSPORTATION SB-325 3,219.70
• MISCELLANEOUS
Investment Earnings 32,322.51
Overages and Shortages 2.00
Rents/Concessions (50.00)
Sale Maps/Publications/Reports 309. 60
Special Police Services 188.00
Fines & Penalties 860. 63
Planning Permit Deposits 6,136.00
Bails/Bonds 280.00
Traffic Safety 2,806.74
Reimbursement to Expense 3 ,138.02
P.O.S.T. 291.24
Traffic Safety Officer 3, 412.72
Narcotic' s Officer 6,584. 38
Sale of Property 454.10
Weed Abatement 3,476 .83
Use of City Crews/Equip. 389.39
Storm Damage-Enver. Svcs. 4. 80
Performance Bonds 2, 000.00
Candidates Statements (150 .00)
Refunds 1,915 .00
JPA-Mist. 63,202.39
Appeals 100.00
Sanitation Reimbursement 30,708. 30
TOTAL 988 ,391.31
1
MAY 20, 1986
•
To All Council Members:
The breakdown detail on all accounts is available
for your viewing in the Finance Department.
David o gensen
Admin., S rvices Director
3
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO
FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
APRIL 1, 1986 TO APRIL 30 , 1986
EXPENSE LISTING
PAYROLL DATED 04/02/86 CHECKS 036003-36126 70 ,976. 68
PAYROLL DATED 04/16/86 CHECKS #36127-36228 71,398.76
PAYROLL DATED 04/30/86 CHECKS #36229-36329 71,354.31
VOID CK#28817 CK. REG. DATED 03/28/86 (404.99)
VOID CK#28738 CK. REG. DATED 03/21/86 (130 .00)
VOID CK#28746 CK. REG. DATED 03/21/86 (70.00)
TOTAL 213 ,124. 76
I "Ilk
M E M O R A N D U M
•
TO: City Council Members May 27, 1986
FROM: Mike Shelton, City Manager
SUBJECT: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH NOMINATION - APRIL
RECOMMENDATION:
Council recognize Steve Sandeffer, Maintenance Worker II of the
Parks and Recreation Department as "Employee of the Month" for
April, 1986 , as designated by the Employee Recognition Program
Committee.
BACKGROUND:
.Steve was chosen by the Employee Recognition Committee due to his
leadership, initiative, and commitment to his position which made
a significant contribution to the timely grand opening of Paloma
Creek Park.
Steve has been employed with the City since August, 1984 , and has
• proven himself as an employee the City is proud to have on the
staff.
MS:kv
cc: Steve Sandeffer
Personnel File
Recreation Department
a
• RESOLUTION NUMBER 53-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERD
SUPPORTING JUNE 3, 1986 STATE BALLOT,
PROPOSITON 46 — LOCAL CONTROL ACT
(GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND)
WHEREAS, Proposition 46 is a State Constitutional Amendment
to allow local governments, with local voter approval, to use
lower cost General Obligation Bonds; and
WHEREAS, use of General Obligation Bond savings amounts to
16.5% over the 20-year life of a loan, in comparison with recent
lease revenue and revenue bond financing; and
WHEREAS, the intent of Proposition 13 was to reduce govern-
ment spending and give voters more control over that spending,
but the ban on General Obligation Bonds have had exactly the
opposit effect; and
WHEREAS, the use of General Obligation Bonds would be
restricted to capital improvements (such as fire, police and
school facilities) inwhich 2/3 of the voters must approve the use
• of General Obligation Bonds, which is the same 2/3 standard re-
quirement of Propositon 13 for new taxes or other tax increases;
and
WHEREAS, many persons and organizations that supported
Proposition 13 favor Proposition 46, and Proposition 46 has the
support of the California Tax Payers Association, the State
Chamber of Commerce, the League of California Cities, and dozens
of other groups and individuals who believe in good government;
and
WHEREAS, the ballot measure does not mean that any new
bonds will be issued. It only means that, where a need exists,
the governing body can seek 2/3 voter approval for new bond
issues.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Council of the City
Atascadero hereby endorses Proposition 46, (Local Control Act
General Obligation Bond) , and encourages all voters to exercise
their right to vote in the June 3, 1986 Primary in support of
this measure.
On motion by and seconded by
the motion is approved by the
following roll call vote:
• AYES:
RESOLUTION NUMBER 54-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SUPPORTING JUNE 3, 1986 STATE BALLOT,
PROPOSITION 47 - MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE FEE GUARANTEE
WHEREAS, on June 3, 1986, California voters will have an
opportunity to improve the financial stability of City and
County budgets without adding money to State or Local taxes; and
WHEREAS, voters will also gain a great deal more control over
how their tax money is spent; and
WHEREAS, a "Yes" vote on Proposition 47 will permanently
designate the Vehicle License Fee as a source of revenue
exclusively for Cities and Counties; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 46 will make it easier to plan local
budgets as a result of making Local Government finances more
stable and secure; and
• WHEREAS, this local fee, collected and distributed by
Sacramento since 1935, in recent years, has been used to balance
the State budget - at a loss of more than $725 million to Local
Government; and
WHEREAS, Motor Vehicle License Fee Guarantee will insure that
Vehicle License Fees, a long time Local Government revenue, is
returned to Cities and Counties; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 47 does not change the current revenue
distribution between State and local government, but only
guarantees the current distribution formula into the future;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Council of the City
of Atascadero hereby endorses Proposition 47 (Motor Vehicle
License Fee) and encourages all citizens to exercise their right
to vote in the June 3, 1986 Primary in favor of Proposition 47.
On motion by and seconded by
and motion is approved by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOWES:
• ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
• RESOLUTION NUMBER 55-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PPORTING JUNE 3, 1986 STATE BALLOT,
PROPOSITION 49 - NON-PARTISAN LOCAL ELECTION
WHEREAS, non-partisanship has played an important role
in preserving California' s reputation for "clean" government;
and
WHEREAS, partisan government will result in fewer voter
choices of local candidates who can best serve their interests;
and
WHEREAS, local decisions are better made on the merits of an
issue than on the basis of which party holds the most votes; and
WHEREAS, non-partisan elections would remove the necessity
of subservience to a party hierarchy and allow the candidate
the freedom of independent decision making vital to responsible
public policy formation; and
WHEREAS, non-partisan election laws focus the attention of
campaigns away from the merits of the political party' s ideo-
logical platform and towards the candidates themselves and their
position on local issues; and
WHEREAS, non-partisan politics eliminates internal politicing
in government by forcing candidates to make decisions based on
what is good for the people and not the parties; and
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved the Council of the City of
Atascadero endorses Proposition 49, Non-Partisan Local Election,
and encourages all voters in the City of Atascadero to exercise
their right to vote on June 3, 1986, in support of Proposition
49.
On motion by and seconded by
following roll call vote: the motion is approved by the
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
•
NUMBER RESOLUTION N ER 56-86
U
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SUPPORTING JUNE 3 ,1986 STATE BALLOT,
` PROPOSITION 51 - FAIR RESPONSIBILITY ACT
(COURT REFORM)
WHEREAS, current court laws require that if local government
is only 1% responsible for harm and the other responsible par-
ties, including the victim, have no money then the city, with the
greater ability to pay ("Deep Pocket") , is required to pay the
entire claim; and
WHEREAS, the payout of this money denies the availability of
local revenues for City services such as keeping Police Officers
on the beat, providing fire and medical services, and building
and repairing streets; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 51 would continue to protect victims by
keeping current joint and several liability low practice laws for
actual losses such as medical expenses, loss of earnings, burial
costs, loss and use of property, cost of repair or replacement,
cost of obtaining substitute domestic services, loss of employ-
ment, and loss of business or employment opportunities; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 51 would change the law regarding non-
economic losses, including such unmeasurable rewards as pain,
suffering, and emotional distress inwhich local government' s
"Deep Pocket" would pay only according to the actual degree of
fault; and
WHEREAS, where Cities and Counties are proven largely
responsible for injuries or actions, they will continue to be
responsible for non-economic losses; and
WHEREAS, with over 50 uninsured cities in California, who are
unable to obtain liability insurance, the need for reform may be
vital to the continued financial protection of local government;
and
WHEREAS, the cost of liability insurance has risen so high
over recent months that local government agencies can no longer
afford to purchase it; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 51 is supported by a broad coalition of
California business, labor, and government organizations includ-
ing cities, counties, P.T.A. , school boards, District Attorneys,
hospitals, and a host of others; and
•
DSSV 7
RESOLUTION N0. 51-8-6 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ATASCADERO SUPPORTING THE COMMUNITY
• PARKLAND ACT OF 1986 (PROPOSITON 43)
WHEREAS , due to existing local funding problems , many city,
county and district park facilities are deteriorating or remain
undeveloped for full public use .
WHEREAS, many new projects that have been in the planning
stages for years have not been built .
WHEREAS , local park systems cannot keep up with accelerating
population growth.
WHEREAS, parklands operated by local governments receive an
average of 1 ,000 annual recreation visits per acre .
WHEREAS, the "Community Parklands Act of 1986" authorizes
the issue of $100 million in state bonds to provide for develop-
ment , rehabilitation, improvement or resortation of recreation ,
historic , or park facilities.
WHEREAS , funds will be distributed according to a formula
bases on population and each community will decide on its own
funding priorities .
WHEREAS, the "Community Parklands Act of 1986" is an
initiative that helps met the shortfalls in funding local park
and recreation projects and provides a reliable funding source
for future recreation needs . The preliminary allocation esti-
mate for the City of Atascadero is $49 ,722 .
BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Atascadero
endorse the "Community Parklands Act of 1986" and urge its
support and passage to help eliminate the existing demands on our
local park system.
On motion by and seconded
by the foregoing resolution is hereby
adopted on the following roll call vote :
AYES:
NOES :
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ROLFE NELSON, MAYOR
• ME M O RAN D U M
TO: City Council uA_ May 27, 1986
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development DirectorVk
Bud McHale, Police Chief
SUBJECT: Card Room Business License
LOCATION: 7383 E1 Camino Real
APPLICANT: Judy Ann Macias
REQUEST: Consideration for approval of Golden California Card Room
Business License subject to Police Department approval of
fingerprint investigation.
BACKGROUND:
® At the City Council' s May 12th meeting, Judy Macias complained of the
time it was taking to obtain a business license for a card room in the
Adobe Plaza.
Chapter 6.36 of the Atascadero Business License Ordinance requires
that all card room license applications be reviewed by the Police
Chief and, with his finding and recommendation, be forwarded to the
City Council for action.
The Police Department' s standard background investigation includes a
fingerprint check by the State of California. The applicant's finger-
prints were taken on March 17, 1986 and submitted to the Department of
Justice. The Police Chief has not received a response from the State
as of May 20, 1986.
This application is being brought before the Council at this time in
an effort to expedite the process of issuing the business license upon
receipt of the clearance from the Police Chief ' s background
investigation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the issuance of a busi-
ness license to Judy Ann Macias (DBA: Golden California Card Room)
upon clearance of the applicant by the Police Chief' s background
investigation.
SLD:ps
Attachment : Business License Application
S
• _M_E_M O_R_A_N_D_U_M
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Man-ager
FROM: Mike Hicks, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Weed abatement contract- bid #86-38
DATE: May 20 , 1986
Recommendation
It is my recommendation that bid #86-38 be awarded to Jay's
Tractor Service for the city weed abatement contract.
Background
Bids for the weed abatement contract were opened on 5-5-86. As
• shown on the attached bid summary sheet, five bids were submitted,
with bids ranging from $35 .00 to $20 .00 per hour for mowing.
This year the city was divided into two bid areas , Area I and Area
II.
The low bidder for both bid areas was Jay' s Tractor Service, with
a bid of $30 .00 per hour and $18 .00 per half hour for mowing, and
hand work at $20 .00 per hour and $10 .00 per half hour.
Due to past experience with Jay' s Tractor Service , who was the
contractor last year, and the advantage of working with one
contractor, I recommend he be awarded the bid.
Fiscal Impact
None.
MIKE HICKS
FIRE CHIEF
• MH:pg
`al
RESOLUTION NUMBER 57-86
•
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADEP.O
AMENDING RESOLUTIONS 79-85 AND 2-79
APPOINTMENT OF AN ALTERNATE REPRESENTATIVE TO THE
CENTRAL COAST CITIES JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
WHEREAS, the Central Coast Cities Joint Powers Authority
requires the City Council to authorize the City Manager to
appoint a representative to serve as Alternate to the Central
Coast Cities Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council
authorizes the City Manager to appoint the Administrative Services
Director as the City' s Alternate to the Central Coast Cities
Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors.
On motion by , and seconded by
the foregoing resolutionis hereby
adopted in its entirety on the following vote:
• AYES :
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
ROBERT M. JONES ROLFE NELSON
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
• MICHAEL SHELTON
City Manager
M E M O R A N D U M
•
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager t;4—
FROM: David G. Jorgensen
SUBJECT: Appointment of Bon Underwriter for Sewer Assessment
District
DATE: May 27 , 1986
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council appoint Security Pacific
Capital Markets Group as the bond underwriter for the Seperado/
.Cayucos Sewer Assessment District.
DISCUSSION
Upon the recommendation of bond legal council, City staff inter-
viewed the top two firms with experience in placing municipal
• bond issues. jt was unanimously agreed that Security Pacific
were most compatible with the size and type of bond offering the
City is contemplating.
FISCAL IMPACT
Nothing is charged by the underwriter unless the City actually
chooses to bond to pay for the district. The bond underwriter is
then paid from the proceeds of the bond. This cost is estimated
as part of the total costs for the assessment district.
DGJ/cw
1
n
Security Pacific Capital Markets Group
Public Finance
300 South Grand Avenue,8-211•21st Floor
Los Angeles,California 90071•Telephone(213)229-1440
May 9, 1986
Mr. David Jorgenson
Finance Director
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
.Atascadero, California 93423
Dear Mr. Jorgenson:
Security Pacific Capital Markets Group proposes to provide
investment banking services for the City of Atascadero in connection with
the financing of sewer improvements for two or possibly three
non -contiguous areas of the City. It is our understanding that the
aggregate size of this financing will be approximately $1.5 million.
Security Pacific Capital Markets Group will provide all
investment banking services to the City of Atascadero, including, but not
limited to financial analysis and feasibility review of the sewer
improvement project , preparation of debt service schedules and
determination of the components of the issue size, preparation of the
disclosure statement , coordination of all parties involved in the
financing , including bond counsel and other outside consultants,
arrangement for trust or paying agent services, and the sale of bonds and
delivery of the funds.
Our fee for these services is contingent upon the successful sale
of the bond issue. Our fees will be paid out of the proceeds of the issue
and will be represented by a discount. These fees will not exceed 3% of
the issue size . We currently anticipate, based on our discussion, that
our fee will be 2 . 75%. We will commit to this fee provided that the
financing does not become more complicated than we currently anticipate.
In addition, the discount includes the cost of travel for Security Pacific
professionals to Atascadero for meetings as requested by the City, and
travel expenses to San Francisco as required for the closing of the issue
and other document review sessions which may be held in bond counsel
offices . We will also evaluate the benefits and costs of credit
enhancement or other approaches to the financing and provide appropriate
computer support.
C SECURITY
BAN
OO �/BANK
Mr. David Jorgenson
May 9, 1986
continued
Other expenses which will be incurred by the City but are not
included in the above discount include the cost of bond counsel , the cost
of trustee or paying agent services, the cost of printing the official
statement and the bonds , the reporting fee for the California Debt
Advisory Commission , the cost of hiring other outside consultants,
including engineering consultants , and any costs the City incurs in
connection with holding public hearings and providing property owners with
notices.
We look forward to serving the City of Atascadero. If you desire
to begin work on this assessment bond project as proposed by Security
Pacific Capital Markets Group, please so indicate by your endorsement
below.
Sincerely,
I
William E. Straw
Vice President
Mav 27, 1986
City of Atascadero
RUIXE NELSON
Mayor
TO: City Council May 27, 1986
• FROM: Mike Shelton, City Manager
SUBJECT: B.I.A. REQUEST FOR FUNDS
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council approve expenditures of:
A. $500.00 to be used to hire a graphic designer to create a
logo
B. $500 as operating account funds to meet operational expenses
until B.I.A. funds are generated.
BACKGROUND:
..In adopting Fiscal Year 1985-86 Budget, Council appropriated
$5,000 to be used by the B.I.A. as formation money. Interim
Chairman Kirk Pearson has requested these funds.
FISCAL IMPACT:
• Funds are available within the $5,000 Council appropriatrion.
MS:kv
File: MBIAl
•
1
/r
• M_E M_O_R A_N—D_U M_
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Mike Hicks, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Fire station office addition - Notice of Completion
DATE: May 21 , 1986
Recommendation
It is my recommendation that Council approve a Notice of Completion
to be filed by the City Clerk in the manner provided by law.
i
Background
• As shown on the attached Notice o Contract Completion, the office
addition construction commenced o3-12-86 and was completed on
7-86 . Final inspection indicat s work is satisfactory.
MIKE HICKS
FIRE CHIEF
• I
n`
M E M O R A N D U M
•
TO: City Council May 27, 1986
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 1J-85 and Zone Change 10-86
LOCATION: 9240 Atascadero Road
APPLICANT: Mike Hawkins
REQUEST: To revise the General Plan land use designation from Mod-
erate Density Single Family to High Density Single Family
and to revise the zoning map from RSF-Y (Residential
Single Family, one acre minimum) to RSF-X (Residential
Single Family, one-half acre minimum)
BACKGROUND:
• This request was considered by the Planning Commission at their meet-
ing of March 17, 1986 . There was public testimony given and discus-
sion among the Commission concerning this matter as referenced in the
attached minutes excerpt. The Council, on May 12, 1986, approved a
continuance of this matter to the May 27th meeting.
RECOMMENDATION (Planninq Commission) :
On a 6:0 vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of a one
half acre minimum lot size based on a conceptual development plan pre-
sented by the applicant at the meeting, and as reflected in Resolution
No. 43-86 and Ordinance No. 129, respectively.
RECOMMENDATION (Staff) :
Staff had recommended denial of a redesignation to allow 10,000 square
foot lot sizes for this property and felt that consideration of one-
half acre lots should be done
for a large study area.
/ps
ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Staff Report - 119240 Atascadero
Road" - March 17, 1986
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - March 17, 1986
Resolution No. 43-86
• Ordinance No. 129
. text amendment (General Plan Amendment 2D-85) . During the review
of possible expansion of study areas, the proposed application
was not proposed for expansion but was included in the overall
10,000 square foot lot general plan amendment.
The site is located within the Urban Services Area and sewer - is
available at the rear of the site. Attached is a memo from the
City Engineer noting the policy of sewer facilities being paid for
by newly established fees. Other concerns about the area contrib-
uting to the Amapoa=Tecorida flood area have also been addressed
per the newly established fees for public improvements. The ad-
joining section of Atascadero Road is designated as an arterial
undivided.
The proposed 5.18 acres could be divided into a maximum of 21
lots. Due to the need for access roads, this number would be
lower. A separate public hearing after a change in the general
plan and zoning ordinance would be required to approve a tentative
tract map (subdivision) for the project. At that time, the Plan-
ning Commission would review a specific design for lot layout
and public improvements.
The general plan notes several policies that are applicable to the
proposed amendment. These policies include: "residential density
shall decrease as one moves outward from the core.. . " (Policy No.
5, page 62) ; "lot splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and be in
accordance with community plans and principals. . . " (Policy No. 10,
page 62) . In both cases, the proposal would not conform to ex-
isting policies of the general plan.
The proposal would be an island of higher density within a lower
density designation. The general plan and zoning ordinance pro-
vide for one intervening designation of high density single family
(1/2 acre minimum lot size/RSF-X) . Even with these designations,
the proposed designation would be island designations.
D. FINDINGS:
1. The proposed general plan land use map revision would not be
consistent with existing policies contained in the general
Plan land use element noting the decreasing density- from the
center of the community.
2. The proposed land use designation would be a spot designation
and would be inconsistent with existing land use patterns in
the area.
3. The proposed amendment will not have a significant adverse
impact upon the environment. A negative Declaration has been
prepared and determined to be adequate.
E. RECOMMENDATION:
• •
Staff recommends denial of the proposed redesignations for 9240
Atascadero Road.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit U - General Plan Map
Exhibit V - Zoning Map
Exhibit W - Applicant' s Statement
� O
M
MUM
1 L4 '' '•�.I
OU' ♦ 0 :�i:� j'
• `[
1. 0
INt■
/ 1 •••411:-
• ttu.oau•
� nu�tuo
-•.... .u•
mq 3N
1 it•
PC
.::::
some
Doi
� r
1� • � `ff i � --
'••/
• I !
_ e � SM
♦ � it t+,� I
j
ji kms`
it
. 1
r y T '' N tJY r.. s r<` . � ILlTj Zj
. a 1 O• `.'t r� 4
Ln
xv-
�-. ,.,, N" � n = ,c _rte ._ t♦i;i'�i_ � � � ��� v
t.:70,
_
'flit t
T
`SF-T N ,. Nf/i ` SOF
c N
•� a �, tJl
f� is �.r
y r
r
LSF-X `.
+�
T .,
/
LA
_L t D
s
10 OCQ c# LDT'�)
r •�. 1 s. .�. �� W qD AM5LA EO QDAD
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST
INTRODUCTION:
The Applicant is requesting a General Plan text amendment that will provide
for a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet (net), if full urban services are
already installed and available to the properties. The most noteable urban
service Which must be available is sewer. At the present time the minimum lot
size in Atascadero is one-half acre in the RSF(x) zone, when city sewer is
aVailable to the ` particular property. The applicant is not suggesting any
particular language, but is requestingstaff to prepare acceptable language
that Will- create areas withih the City of Atascadero, that will have a 10,000
=square foot miniMUM lot size.
'-'-The='"Applicant- is ' also -requesting that a -particular parcel of property be
de6i2 hated "in accordance with the above paragraph, thus allowing said parcel
to be approved for a Minimum parcel size of 10,000 square feet (net). The
applicaht intends to also apply for a zoning change that will ,establish a new
zoning designation for the property allowing a 10,000 square foot minimum
parcel size.
'DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY.,
ThE parcel of property in-question is a 5.18 acre lot described as Lot 2, Block
12, City of Atascadero. It is located on the south side of Atascadero Avenue
midway betWegn Sahta Rosa and Portola. It has approximately 400 feet of
frontage on Atascadero Avenue .and is roughly 520 feet deep, At the present
time the parcel is serviced by eight-(8) inch sewer lines on both the front and
rear property'lines, Water service is available from the Atascadero Municipal
Water Company, Natural gas, electricity, telephone and cable television service
are also available. The property is nearly level with a slight slope toward the
rear, Four large live oak trees dot the grass-covered ground.
The properties within three hundred feet (300) of the subject property range in
size from approximately 9500 square feet to three (3) acres, not including the
Santa Rosa Elementary School site which is around ten (10) acres, This
Particular area of Atascadero Avenue features many single family residences
-With narrow street frontages, which give a feeling of a much more densely
IdeVeloped area. t"
The !property is served by a major arterial connector street in Atascadero
Avenue with two major Cross-streets--Portola Road and Santa Rosa Avenue. It
Is roughly one to two miles from the center of town.
r . .
SUITABILITY OF PROPERTY:
The subject property `is well-suited for the increased density that this
General Plan Amendment would allow. It has the urban services, such as sewer
and water that are necessary to support the potential density of development.
Two separate sewer mains now serve the subject property, An eight (8") line
can be found on both the front and rear property lines. The applicant intends
to connect one-half,approximately,of the homes to be built to each sewer main.
The area is currently developed with numerous lots of approximately.
CXV i r3r r UJ
Cr7:u : f, { - L ID:E-6
1 D.050 6 LOTS
ZqO ATAy KIT-VO VM"M
1J__VL1 P VCJ 15MTEMWT,
• 0
one-quarter acre, or 10,000 square feet. It is close to the heart of the
community and is located on one of the key streets and adjacent to two others.
If the City of Atascadero so desired to provide smaller, affordable building
sites, it would have a tough time finding a more suitable property.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
The applicant intends to have the property properly zoned should this request
be approved by the City of Atascadero. The next step would be to prepare a
parcel 'map for a division of the property into seventeen (17) building lots and
one (1) internal park to be maintained by an association of property owners.
Present plans Would provide a main internal street with two cut-de-sacs, The
existing live oak trees would be incorporated into .about six or seven of the
building sites.
Ah architectural review committee will be established, first consisting of the
developers and later of the property owners. This committee would review the
Plans submitted for construction on the lots for conformity to established
conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&R's). The CC&R's would be
established at the time of recording of the final parcel map for the property.
The applicant intends that the homes constructed on the property will blend-in
with those already constructed in the area.
The applicant hopes to be able to offer quality homes on goad, useable lots
for prices in'the $95,000 .price range. Currently, in Atascadero there are very
few, if any homes, that are available, and new, for under $100,000 with 3
bedrooms, 2 baths of around 1500-1800 square feet. The homes will not be
low-income properties, but moderately-priced, which is what the neighboorhood
warrants.
SUMMARY:
The applicant is aware that at the present time there is no General Plan
Provision for lots under one-half acre. However, the Planning Commission has
recently approved a Housing Element for the General Plan that addresses the
need for the creation of smaller lots of approximately 10,000 square feet. The
Housing Element has been prepared and presented to the State of California
'for review. If approved at that level and returned to the City of Atascadero,
the City Council.will review the Housing Element'and make some decision, This
request is being made. hand-in-hand with the" planning work currently in
Progress in the City of Atascadero. The applicant is aware that the City
Council may not want to consider the question of 10,000 square foot lots, but if
so, this request is being made to facilitate the future planning decisions that
may necessarily be made. This request will facilitate the City of Atascadero's
Plans, if so approved by the City Council, to amend the General Plan to allow
the creation of 10,000 square foot lots. The applicant has tried to make this
request within the present statutory requirements for General Plan
amendments. The deadline for General Plan amendment requests is March 1 of
each year. The next phase will not begin for another six months. Though this
request may appear a bit pre-mature, it will not be acted upon until the
question of the Planning Commission's recommendations in the Housing Element
have been thoroughly discussed by the City Council.
_ Minutes - Planning Commission - March 17, 1986
would be "down zoning" .
Co issioner Bond felt the area should be left a it is. Commis-
sione,r Nolan noted that the majority of people hat spoke for this
study ea were in support of staff' s recomme dation. Commission-
er Ken offered some comments concerning he potential traffic
impacts in �his area.
MOTION: Made Commissioner Michielss n and seconded by Com-
mission Bond to leave th entire Study Area "C" as it
is Curren y desi
gnated. a motion was carried with a
roll call v e, as follow
AYES: Commissi ers 'chielssen, Bond, Hatchell, and
Chairman L r de
NOES: Commission rs nnedy and Nolan
STUDY AREA "D" :
In presenting the s ff report, Mr. Mo s summarized a previous
general plan amend ent for this area whi was subsequently denied
at the time beca a of the lack of sewer i this area. He did
point out t� he has just received infor tion from the Public
Works Departm nt that the lots in question hav now been annexed
into the se r system and noted that staff would,\. therefore, rec-
ommend app oval of Study Area "D" . �.
Guy Gr ne, representing the applicants, noted his concurrence
with staff' s recommendation and commented on the site`',S general
cha cteristics and surrounding uses. \
TION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, seconded by Commission
Bond and carried unanimously with a roll call vote
recommend approval of Study Area "D" as outlined.
9240 ATASCADERO ROAD:
Mr. Moses presented the staff report noting the recommendation to
deny the requested 10,000 square foot lot designation change.
Guy Green, representing the applicant, exhibited an overhead which
showed a preliminary site plan utilizing the 10, 000 square foot
lot designation which proposed 14 lots on the property. He noted
this plan was not conducive to the site and then he showed another
site plan which proposed 10 one-half acre lot sizes. He explained
the proposed development which would consist of permanent open
space with 20 foot setbacks along the perimeter of the property.
There was. discussion concerning the. one-half acre lot size desig-
nation which were recently approved in the Coromar area. Mr.
Engen expressed concern that this was an island which should be
reviewed with respect to the overall neighborhood.
11
Minutes - Planning Commission - March 17, 1986
Commissioner Hatchell felt the one-half acre designation is more
compatible than the 10 ,000 square foot lot one.
Commissioner Nolan asked if the applicant would consent to a con-
tinuance to allow staff to make a recommendation to the Commis-
sion regarding the specific plan proposed Mr. Greene. Mr. Greene
stated he, is not clear as to what elements need that much study,
and would not like to see a continuance.
Commissioner Bond felt the new proposal is in conformity with the
surrounding area.
Discussion ensued on spot zoning in the area especially as it re-
lates to neighborhood density.
Art Jazwiecki stated this proposed development is similar in
nature to the development on Monterey Court which is a beautiful
one.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissioner
Hatchell and carried unanimously with a roll call vote to
recommend approval of the general plan amendment for
9240 Atascadero Avenue for a change of zoning to allow
one-half acre lot sizes.
C. BLIC COMMENT: �!
Ther was no public comment at this time.
D. INDIVIDUAL TION AND/OR DETERMINATION:
1. Planning C mission
Commissioner Nolan n ted there is no lan caping present at the
new mobile home park o San Diego Road nd asked staff to respond.
Mr. Moses explained the pr 'ect is eing approved by the State;
however, the applicant has b nd for the landscaping requirement
and that he is aware that the dscaping is required. He also
noted the zoning ordinanc co tains a provisions for such a
bonding.
Commissioner Michielss presented a pr osal to the . Commission
concerning a City- de study of multi e family zoning and the
possible redesigna on to single family rest ential _ with density
ranges from 4-8 is per acre.
Discussion a ued on this matter . Mr . Engen sugge ed that this
item coul be raised at the upcoming joint City Cou cii/Planning
Commissi meeting to be held March 27th. He also ted this
could placed on the Commission' s next agenda under I ividual
Acti and/or Determinations.
12
RESOLUTION NO. 43-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL
PLAN LAND USE MAP CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION
FOR 9240 ATASCADERO ROAD FROM MODERATE DENSITY
SINGLE FAMILY TO HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY (ONE-HALF
ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE) (GP 1J-86 : 9240 ATASCADERO ROAD)
WHEREAS, a request to amend the City of Atascadero General Plan
has been received as follows:
General Plan Amendment 1J-86 and Zone Change 10-86 - 9240 ATASCADERO
ROAD - Request to revise the existing general plan from Moderate Den-
sity Single Family to High Density Single Family - 10, 000 square foot
Lot) (revised to a one-half acre lot size) .
WHEREAS, this request was considered by the Planning Commission at
a said hearing held on March 17, 1986 and was recommended for approv-
al; and
WHEREAS, such amendment to the General Plan was considered by the
City Council during a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a General
Plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and
WHEREAS, The Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
1. The revised general plan land use map revision for one-half
acre lot size would be consistent with existing policies con-
tained in the general plan land use element.
2. The revised land use designation for one-half acre lot sizes
would be consistent with existing land use patterns in the
area.
3. The revised general plan amendment will not have a signifi-
cant adverse impact upon the environment. A negative decla-
ration has been prepared and determined to be adequate.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve
to approve General Plan Amendment 1J-86 (9240 ATASCADERO ROAD) to
change the 1980 Atascadero General Plan Land Use Map as shown on the
attached Exhibit "A" entitled GP 1J-86 - 9240 ATASCADERO ROAD.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Council of the City
of Atascadero, California, held on the day of
1986.
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
BY:
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
2
AT-T7-f2s R-ai-ai
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT J-8E 4T,e.N:
r A
9240 Atascadero Road Ar_7e-107 Iz 91
/:;• , , k = s z '.' From Moderate Density Sing 1E a AT-79-IL1' u•el
tet,.-1W�.•�`)
i 4 » , _ , t" ; r. Family to High Density Single ', �aV AT-7s ,�, ,L•8,
a A a
Family - 1/2 acre lot AT s, BE s.ZS
AAz
Qr L3
3 -: 2{• 7' E' '�r�t,'�.�-�.G � J a aS/ , t- =ri � e , p q � ,•
a" n �^iN�+�l� S `I i. •� r_w,`°- ?�, `, S o __�'s•.� '•RCI.Ct..•.V 0\TE
y � +c I Rai3. < � `i ..� L. _ °ta' ♦u 2 T /`�,� e - ti�r4d ''� '+�
4 S.-... �i,r d\. �.� 1 ' ��• rt •• 1 sJr •�♦• .�.yD �r:,
y ' f_�� ! �M'�. • .� ` ••• � � '♦F � , i a`. l f r� •�j� tea'.
a• _ ...�.•i.= at1
4eg '�� •: •! • ;; .• f. a I 1 1.: Yh
+'" � ti ' r-' T �C i' rr �, - �,e+ •.lae \ • �•1 r• `♦ .I•�, T
�� zt`n:7 ti • [ 7 ♦ 'yam ti•• \
VI%
- s r 3' N -. , ' y 1� ,C ;. •e s • •` �.;• ,u•/ ";?lZr.Xe� ,:
''� �.•Fr�'ra`u 13f'r:� q�1'. ie,r•% •. \ ;.p >• • eO 1 . � �♦ •'P�• -'•r•..r�- �e
f.-�i'4 � � ': r+ �i .•;fix. :� � i . '� o�:o �.g � .�' o -c Mr�4tY�..
�. I,nr ,Ys f� '"` ":o .. ,.�... •M a s. $ ../ ' _; I •o •��:;' t; .a„�w Al Y I�
rye• �� , » •3; _?,i k'r`aa z •: ' ;.,� ��:• `�I ftl�• ,� :_ e+�.`
5.xr'- � rt.ra ��.� � a.. \ ,• eN' as • `.� I♦ .�_t It a r.••s+ 1(.� � ` -_...
.3z -'S' _� :.a• �4 e 8 ' 1 \:,` '!o ,,Y \_\ ao a'P ; \� !: rt',i '_,, ♦ ” R'4
-..r•� r.':yl•2M ','-d a'y: �,,�`f•aP �'`o/. �`� J ''e .•+9♦` t �-� fl♦ � � 4 ��:'� }�•.
YJ�, { .4�/a,� 22 • ^;1�• .at `. . Y K' 1�Ila;�fiU A .`1•A
23 f -hww. i i 7.' Q w .•y. S a
:fir�:1.: '2r p• '' 24 11 1.0 ;.-• , • waa r� ,v,3.gf-
10
_. •tsA 2• „�rn•/nsa `Zj °r _ 1-. • .: 4i �. s g r ;-`Z
:J • / d' 'o It a� f,r' 1' r }a . I, i`. F•-
=`•} . 2+A •i' '' _� 0/ dt* t;. �. a ow+ •, 34r
73A -2
,� rr s ♦ a
• s •lei i// 21 -:1 : 32
� 41.If blp • ' � �• e:` � 1 'G a♦ � � x^: »s•• /,..3
-20 14 ILI
21
le $ ^rr . 2
Is /14
33 C
'z! u e + 33 N s
30
�r� J �•'- 3'
32
Y 33
24 35
:yr - J6 3T -
u 4.•„ ti
.Ip 41 45
42 a,• .
CITY 1.►�A EXHIBIT A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
1J-86. 9240 Atascadero
Road
- RESOLUTION NO. 43-86
j . CITY OF ATASCADERO
Planning Department
'iia� r � .��, �, � �a�;•n -• . i .{...�� .} 1 -
..)AC 2�
ORDINANCE NO. 129
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBER 22 OF THE
OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY
REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY AT 9240 ATSACADERO ROAD FROM
RSF-Y (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, ONE ACRE MINIMUM) TO RSF-X
(RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, ONE-HALF ACRE MINIMUM)
(ZC 10-86 : 9240 ATASCADERO ROAD)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the
General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government
Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section
65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning reg-
ulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant ad-
verse impact upon the environment and preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report is not necessary; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing
on March 17, 1986 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 10-86.
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. The Negative Declaration prepared for
the project is adequate.
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 the area shown on the attached Exhibit "A" from
RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, one acre minimum) to RSF-X (Residen-
dential Single Family, one-half acre minimum) .
i 0
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance
to be published once
within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the A
tascadero News, a
newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated
in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code;
shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall
cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of
posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City.
Section 4. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef-
fect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced on
and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
BY:
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
1-
us
- w'C •
c•, �'' �� ,'
'?-81
ZONE CHANGE 10-86 : p9240
ATASCADERO ROAD
�Z i•! k -T� w ,-s"6 r..-f I f Z' .• .Yl..,`a. AT-7'!!•ILf- �.gl
From RSF-Y (Residential Single i,4 .
`' ' "� �"• �; ' •.
Family) to RSF-X (Residential � '`�;"
` ''' ' ,.• t4y.�l �� .- c:..�:: y � AT Sl LIC •e:
"- Single Family 1/2 acre minimum} .x
ar�4 j e �,t'�1;a.'crry\l�' � �� .. w OR,nta.�' ;• p: '.:.. s •
rxtly r� a v +l'� L ,z , •i� g �'a'� rtn:et�r DATE
.}J �. i .'N + •' Hasa• 2 ' �q+'?• „•G� `.3:� / x � :s -•, 7<
sji`°� II//'�� t ..+.eOr, � :b• �j' n .. sa •a + u..t«z •• ••E'er' / S . n• i'* c
` []c by •' \ �1. � 1 �� II ' QPis -
a M _
I Nw, � i,••'. • • :.1, r ...
:�• D p- a 2, - C Air ••_ G r o •�yP \ .. .
j `n .,. Yr
�.�`;s• R� trr I r •t! � t � a•• ♦ ♦• al � -� ►' � � .,.,Sy ..e'}i9-�,�.
+ '•.,•1s'i •Y' A;1}. t `tiT s a �:w. A... • +, O••o -•• •,•rf`': p R1
x'�.y.j �it �•1.� ���". • .,,�a/ ,q •i: ., - �,. l• w •7. rS ' - .\ e.\O ••'r � �•t'• : -aa•/ fi
-,�_ l�l� �• 13. i 7 .� a S. Z 1 m ap ..: `\ ! \' c+''�'sl. '� r !'
ice'' � Lif• -' •-•r.ia - ..�� ",tr !•. .�• \\ .♦ � ► 1 ` /r
- t I ,(}• sr�dr•�i�. ..1 \ P,•o .�✓ :a ' �: \\ .-'sv .+ �.,h hep r�• `
; � a" s. .:-j,f :.- ♦ w,.•�fl'
az
.n :af l:.r. �2M •• 'y , -J r�� •,�a'i.: `� 9:�;•�'a t ? �� � '•r'♦'..� ,�` � •b 4•-_a� C_
-'r',•' lr '26 1 A r,'• 2a •�-wa/ t' 11 0 _• ' t wt:4 R�`'• e!N'D ...
40
�. 4. .3T •
. •t$A 24 -p•,�f,/+�//ast `�l lf"'•'• / . •. St ^• '•pit 6 R Z,�.y.,yz.+.
23
ZAA
�'� ,y • ; •"•�r 1f .a s,• Z�f r •»• s 3430-- 143 wea
�'\• a••'•a.
23A •s•
\�' /I• { 2 8 ? + -: ►•, , � '1 32 as..•.•+• -r '='AtH. a-�
20
7?: s27 ps"
17 A
33
Lege•`• ` ♦4 ` ,2• 11 • A'"' 33 • N
10 2
30
» / t•
S la 35 36
41 45
44
j z - 4 '43 '
ca
;y •. EXHIBIT A
t ter,• ORDINANCE NO. 129
ZONE CHANGE 10-86 : 9240
-`-��
CITY OF i ATASCADERO ROAD
ATASCADERO
- ;,{1 Planning Department
\��I r. r rig, ,; iR loci�
44
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council May 27, 1986
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager`y
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 1C-85 and Zone Change 3-85
LOCATION: 8555 El Corte
APPLICANT: ACOMA Corporation (Bill Poe)
REQUEST: To revise the existing General Plan land use map from Low
Density Single Family to Low Density Multiple Family and
the zoning map from RSF-Z (Residential Single Family) to
RMF-4 (PD) (Residential Multiple Family, 4 units per acre,
. with a planned development overlay) .
BACKGROUND:
• This matter was heard by the Planning Commission at their meeting of
March 31, 1986 . There was public testimony and discussion by the Com-
mission concerning this matter as referenced in the attached minutes
excerpt.
RECOMMENDATION - Planning Commission and Staff:
On a 6:0 vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
amendments to the general plan text and zoning ordinance text, as out-
lined in attached Resolution No. 47-86 and Ordinance No. 135, respec-
tively. The planned development zoning requires that a master plan of
development be approved by the Planning Commission through a condi-
tional use permit process. A traffic study would be required together
with contributions to mitigate off-site drainage, sewage, and circula-
tion impacts.
/p s
ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Staff Report - March 31, 1986
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - March 31, 1986
Resolution No. 47-86
Ordinance No. 133
•
General Plan Amendment 1C-85/Zone Change 3-85 (ACOMA/Poe)
7. Adjacent Zoning and Use to. . .North: RSF-Y
is Entire Study Area South: Golf course (San Luis
County)
East: Golf course (SLO County)
West: RSF-Y
8. General Plan Designation. . . . .Low Density Single Family
9. Terrain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Flat at the lower elevations to
steep at higher elevations
10. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration
C. ANALYSIS:
The minimum lot size in the RSF-Z zoning district is 1.5 to 2. 5
acres depending upon the site's "score" based on various perfor-
mance standards. This zone does not envision the availability of
sanitary sewer service. The proposal for low density multiple
family zoning would more than quadruple allowed densities in the
area. There are, however, factors that tend to mitigate the ef-
fects of this increased level of density.
Surrounding Uses:
The property to the south and to the east of the subject parcels
is the Chalk Mountain Golf Course. This large expanse of open
space will lessen the impact of higher densities on the adjacent
parcels by maintaining low overall area densities.
The parcels to the west of the subject site have been recommended
by the Planning Commission for redesignation to RSF-W (10,000
square foot lots) . Although the RSF-W zone is for single family
lots, the applicant' s proposed RMF-4 zoning designation would
result in similar overall densities (4 units/acre) . The property
would not, therefore, be an island of higher density surrounded
by low density uses.
Site Design:
The applicant is proposing a planned residential development em-
bodying significant areas of open space. The applicant has pro-
posed, and an open space easement will assure, that the upper por-
tion of the slopes on the site will remain open. Building heights
and location on the site will be controlled to the same end. Each
of these considerations will lessen the visual impacts.
Public Services:
Sanitary sewer service is currently available to only one of the
parcels proposed for redesignation. the entire site .is, however,
within the Urban Service Line and could be annexed to the sewer
district. Because of the terrain on and surrounding the site, and
the number of dwelling units possible, the developer will be re-
quired to provide off-site sewer system improvements. These im-
provements will be designed as part of the master plan of develop-
ment for the site.
2
General Plan Amendment 1C-85/Zone Change 3-85 (ACOMA/Poe)
Access to the site from E1 Camino Real via La Linia Avenue, Cas-
cada Road and/or Arcade Road is of concern to staff. Each of
these roads is paved but narrow. Traffic flows are currently
light and adequate capacity exits for some additional development.
The cumulative impact of this project and others approved in sur-
rounding areas must be considered, however. The recommended re-
designation of adjacent areas for 10,000 square foot lots could
result in an excess of eighty-five (85) new lots. Not all of,
these potential new lots would impact the roads mentioned here,
but when added to the seventy-two (72) dwelling units proposed by
the applicant in the RMF-4 zone, impacts could be of concern.
This issue could be addressed by requiring a master plan of devel-
opment with appropriate offsite improvement requirements identi-
fied and imposed. These may include, but not be limited to,
street, drainage, and sewer system improvements.
A related issue to that discussed above is the question of access
from this site and surrounding areas onto El Camino Real. Traffic
generated by build-out of the area between E1 Camino Real and the
golf course could trigger the need for a traffic signal at one of
the side streets and El Camino Real. This site' s contribution to
future traffic loads will be identified in a circulation proposed
to be completed as part of the master plan of development prior to
building permit applications. Appropriate fees will be levied
prior to the eventual issuance of building permits.
A redesignation of the affected property to low density multiple
family would allow for development that appears to be appropriate
for the site. The preparation of a master plan of development
will provide an opportunity to assure design which is suitable for
the neighborhood and which assures that the development contrib-
utes its fair share to necessary neighborhood improvements.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of General Plan Amendment 1C-85 and Zone
Change 3-85 based on the findings contained in Exhibits E and F.
SLD:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A —Location Map
Exhibit B - Existing General Plan Map
Exhibit C - Existing Zoning Map
Exhibit D - Site Plan
Exhibit E - Draft Resolution
Exhibit F - Draft Ordinance
Exhibit G - Supplemental Statement
3
, 1 Ix
r
y'
Jul WAIR
����� ��`•'
mg
��,■11 1��4
�. 1 N �+� .�... Iii�i►•. ��I � �l
.1 r>�1.��•q'�++•iii�i���y� �® �'b. �y� ,, ®®i 1®
O♦ • ♦ M , i
PEP ��I�•��I���I�j��,,'\����1,,, _. ,t ',�
ME
Lill
PAN
WC WE
Wasr
,, ri•
ME j
r
EXHIBIT C
y'•' C '�
:.' EXISTING ZONING MIP
,• as a�.�,
na '
•• l.Cr hr � +�
SITE
mc
ZC 3-85
8555 EL CORTE
�� .tea.by`�.�t a �r.• �V •�° `O 1� /�.
.TC�� 1
.t L' .? �'��v�':N 'r•wi••. ,�� fy:.rye.w. 1' 1[-1:771.
yes 1 rya° �� • ; :�,' :; «/ t
.:JO
s`0A 7 • s •y� � `tv, � Y,o 7 t
06
Nell
.d
)fes s .)� , ,... .<.:rr!. a+'•' ia°
tic'. .�•�,� \0.` °• /_`ttr.-! > '•ty s`!
S•6.
1'
i•
J 1•
♦ ,e,1.. ,
�, •,.• �.• •ms's- ��•t,
'�• e' b,4s s
>� '�., ., • r:.i�~r•s a '- . ..- ..
f �4$
uu
.ro-• C077�
°�°./v .ap I xn'--•.�' '+. 27 n•, SIA .IS
Alf
. •�,: �•. •�w•'°F� •q, r } •_ze .•� 1{ rla� \s •'a+�;.s '
't .. - Qiot.► •g`+•" .. t ,� � .,,I,r.,. M ,ice w+ � .},6, y
so
a .Lia CT 6 t''•. ' '� r4
a �>•' CD
• .�„oS ' x•16 W' s..•a �° 3C`� �''
P..• ; S POS q ,r>° •N 4y ,�/'sy 1 �r<•.. /
• i •7• :�� • •�:..�°'4•�"• ., ,�'� 2 � �.+ .tea t♦ ,� �
14.
o,a.. ��'�� �+`.rt s _ w,J !!` -,R � .,,?. ♦. .a•� ..,9 •�' �� �
.•-'t :• ° ; s, \ 'w.''; • may` ` ...�
if 1111*
n
vl•S.•,rK e. r ' rr S•>r' • �� c~'di'.e .\�5. 7
I
`f
wt
•' � a
P4
vJr. f W U)
� f
too, I
� �
;- N
1�
Exhibit G
L
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change RSY-Z to RSY POD 4
8555 E1 Corte Road
Adult Plan Unit Development: The idea of this project is to provide
an alternative environment for active adults.
Designed by Barry Berkus AIA, founder and president of Berkus Group
Architects, a national firm of architects and planners with headquarters
in Santa Barbara, Newport Beach, and Washington D.C.
Lifestyle is the key word for this planned unit development,,-a
retiree who doesn't feel like retiring. The idea for this projIect was
taken from his Leisure Village Ocean Hills, the 1985 Gold Nugget Award
of Merit for the best low density development. The site plan was
cautiously laid out to take advantage-of the views of -Chalk Mountain
Golf Course and the distant Santa Lucia Range, yet it doesn't impose
on the hillside. Using open space and a height limitation (approximately
960') means almost 65% of this development will be landscaped, common
area or open space.
With the abandonment of La Linia and a stucco wall along E1 Corte,
the development creates its own environment within. One entrance and
cart access to the golf course helps to accentuate this. This is the
same effect Berkus created with Leisure Village. The Spanish style
stucco and tile roofs make one think of a small Mediterranean hillside
village.
This project- will be a compliment to the neighborhood and a welcome
addition to one of Atascadero's most beautiful assets, Chalk Mountain
Golf Course.
THIS PROJECT IS PRESENTED BY
ACOMA CORPORATION
Bill Poe
President
Minutes - Planning Commission<-7n--March 31, 1986
n d for nursing homes and explained the procedures in app ing
is to he State Office of Health, Planning, and Developmen which
contr the amount of certificates which will be issu She
explain d an application she. has submitted to the Cit and would
hope that each nursing home could be judged on its ow merits and
compatibili with the neighborhood. She furthe explained the
difficulties he would encounter with the update language pro-
posed. Mr. En n elaborated on this.
There was discuss' concerning institution ized uses and the
appropriate locatio s for these. It was oted that this section
should be looked at f future long-rang nursing requests.
Mrs. Young felt that if t ' smore re ricted wording is adopted
and another project is su fitted or senior citizen housing, how
can one refer back to the nu si home section and justify a
different recommendation sin c this specifically says "nursing
homes. "
Mr. Engen felt that a ."pe sons-per-a e" language is a good way of
establishing impact on e land for sp ial kinds of uses which
would include nursing omes. Further di cussion ensued.
Mr. Engen suggested hat in the last sente ce of the "Nursing
Homes" section, t t reference to "single fa ily" be deleted from
the proposed la uage in the last sentence.
MOTION: Ma by Chairman LaPrade, seconded by Co issioner Bond
d carried unanimously with a roll 11 vote to
recommend approval of General Plan Amendme t 1M-86 with
the suggested amendment to the section on nu ing homes
and institutional uses.
airman Laprade called a recess at 9:01 p.m. Meeting reco vened
at 9 :11 p.m.
4. General Plan Amendment 1C-85 and Zone Change 3-85 :
Request initiated by ACOMA Corporation (Bill Poe, represen-
tative) to revise the existing General Plan land use map and
zoning map from Low Density Single Family (RSF-Z) to Low Den-
sity Multiple Family (RMF-4) with a Planned Development (PD)
overlay. Subject property is located at 8555 El Corte, also
known as Lots 1-10 , Block 1, Eaglet No. 2.
Mr. DeCamp presented the staff report and noted a copy of the pro-
ject' s site plan and elevations which was distributed to the Com-
mission, and proceeded to summarize the background involved with
this application, which had been continued from the previous gen-
eral plan cycle at the applicant ' s request. Items addressed in-
cluded surrounding uses, site design, and public services. It was
also pointed out that a significant portion of the site would
remain in open space, and the proposed master plan of development
was explained.
5
Minutes - Planning Commission-,- -march 31, 1986
Commissioner Bond asked for clarification on how access would be
provided for the project.
Bill Poe, applicant, thanked staff for the recommendation on this
project, and spoke in support of approval. He stated he was aware
of the restrictions that will be imposed during the development
process. With regard to Solano Road, Mr . Poe stated it was his
understanding that the abandonment of Solano would hinge on the
improvement of La Linia between the Peterson property (on El Dor-
ado) and DeCou Lumber- and noted that it was not really a closing
of an access for his project to E1 Camino Real.
Bill Remple, 8475 E1 Dorado, expressed his opposition to the pro-
posed project because of the large scale and the poor roadways
leading to the site. Mr. Remple cited the previous Commission
recommendations for approval of the Peterson and Lindsey general
plan and zone change amendments which would result in large pro-
jects as well, and felt that all three of these are to be devel-
oped, a very large impact will result on the neighborhood. He
felt that if the density is going to be changed, then the neigh-
borhood aspects should be upgraded along with the increased
density.
William Anderson, Palomar resident, stated his residence adjoins
the back of the subject site, and felt that this proposal along
with the Lindsey and Peterson proposals are in opposition to the
rural nature as set forth in the general plan.
Mr. Poe pointed out that this particular application was submitted
well over a year ago, and before the other two proposals were
applied for .
Barbara Reiter noted she likes the idea of planned unit develop-
ments but does not agree with the proposed density. She felt that
the City does not need to rezone any more property from single
family to multiple family.
Chairman LaPrade clarified the reasoning for the proposed RMF-4
zoning.
Commissioner Bond stated he had viewed the site and had discovered
that no oak trees were proposed for removal during the development
of the site.
Mr . Poe showed an overhead exhibit of the proposed development and
proceeded to explain the phasing of the project, and explained the
purpose that the planned unit development would serve.
Commissioner Hatchell noted staff has done a good job in analyzing
the needs of the neighborhood and addressed some general comments
about the project.
6
0'
Minutes - Planning Commissiohi--,Marsh 31, 1986
Chairman LaPrade commented on the planned unit development concept
and felt the project has merit and will be an asset to the
community.
Commissioner Michielssen talked about the improvements that will
be required in order to mitigate traffic problems in the area.
In response to question from Commissioner Michielssen, Mr . DeCamp
responded to questions concerning the types of conditions which
will be placed on the development of the project.
There was some discussion concerning the site' s existing use.
Commissioner Michielssen inquired about Lots 1 and 2 which adjoin
the subject property and asked if these lots would be added to the
project. Mr. DeCamp noted that eventual development of the lots
should occur, following public hearing, under the same master plan
of development for the entire site and stated the applicant has
been in contact with the owners of those properties with the po-
tential of purchasing them to add to the rest of the project.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissioner
Nolan and carried unanimously with a roll call vote to
recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 1C-85 and
Zone Change 3-85 as recommended in the staff report.
C. PUBLI COMMENT
There was public comment at this time.
D. INDIVIDUAL ACTIO_ D OR DETERMINATION
1. Planning Commissi n
Commissioner Bond pointed t that Ata adero Ford is again park-
ing their display cars alo the s pe to the rear of their site
which was supposed to be for la ds ping only. Mr. Moses respon-
ded that several inquiries hav een received to this regard and
that staff is working with the gen to correct this problem.
Commissioner Bond also com nted on a noise generated from the
loud speakers and asked if nything has een done to alleviate
this. Mr. Moses expl ned that the zon g ordinance contains a
standard with regard t noise set per decibe er a time period
during the day. Ho ever , the City does not ha at this time, a
decibel meter .
a. Considera ion of City-wide study of multi-family oning and
possib redesignation to single family residential ith den-
sity anges from 4-8 parcels per acre (Michielssen)
Mr . E en addressed the joint City Council/Planning Commiss ' n
7
RESOLUTION NO. 47-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL
PLAN LAND USE MAP CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION
OF LOTS 1-10, BLOCK 1, EAGLET 2 FROM LOW DENSITY
SINGLE FAMILY TO LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE' FAMILY
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1C-85: ACOMA CORPORATION)
WHEREAS, a request to amend the City of Atascadero General Plan
has been received as follows:
General Plan Amendment 1C-85:
Request submitted by ACOMA Corporation to change the General Plan
Land Use map designation from Low Density Single Family Residen-
tial to Low Density Multiple Family. Subject property is Lots
1-10, Block 1, Eaglet 2. Negative Declaration to the provisions
of CEQA is to be certified.
WHEREAS, this request was considered by the Planning Commission at
a hearing held on March 31, 1986 and was recommended for approval; and 0
WHEREAS, such amendment to the General Plan was considered by the
City Council during a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a General
Plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
1. A general plan land use designation of Low Density Multiple
Family is consistent with the policies of the General Plan.
2. The proposed general plan amendment will not have a signifi-
cant adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Dec-
laration prepared for the project is adequate.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve
to approve General Plan Amendment 1C-85 (Acoma Corporation) to change
the 1980 Atscadero General Plan Land Use Map as shown on the attached
Exhibit A entitled GP 1C-85, Lots 1-10 , Block 1, Eaglet 2.
On motion by and seconded by
, the resolution was approved by the following roll
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGE , Com ity Development Director
... it �, �, —�—�"`�"� �►
♦M 1
fi♦ `
i• 111
:N• 4 r
r }.
,.fit t.S1,`' S ���f� ■
like
■�a � � 1 "/ �'1
1
/ � 7 '♦�. •
1
f
�I
v
6 114 m mea ® m o e ®
_ � .b d ® as ® ® ® m ® a ® m m m • m
i ATASCA , • •
GENERAL PLAN MAP
T kND USE AND CIRCULATION
_ RETA
LOW DENS. MULT FAM. IL COMMERCIAL RECREATION
HIGH DENS. SNGL. FAM. COMMERCIAL PARK SPECIAL RECREATION
HEAVYI COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE
DIVIDED
�� •
ARTERIAL UNDIVIDED
• PROFESSIONAL OFFICE
SUBURBAN SNGL. FAM. INDUSTRIAL
f; PUBLIC ///, INDUSTRIAL URBAN RESERVE LINe,-,,CITY BOUNDARY
1
ORDINANCE NO. 133
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 KNOWN AS LOTS 1-10; BLOCK
1, EAGLET 2, FROM RSF-Y (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY -
MEDIUM DENSITY) TO RMF-4 (PD6) (RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE
FAMILY - FOUR UNITS PER ACRE - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO.
6) (ZC 3-85: ACOMA CORPORATION)
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. A Negative Declaration has been
prepared on the project.
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing
on March 31, 1986 and has recommended approval of Zoning Ordinance
Change 3-85.
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. The Negative Declaration prepared for
the project is adequate.
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 1-10, Block 1; Eaglet 2 as shown on at-
tached Exhibit "A" which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by
reference.
Section 3. Zoning Text Change.
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 3-85 is approved to change the
text of the Zoning Ordinance to read as follows:
1. Section 9-3. 650 is added to the Planned Development Overlay
Zones to read as follows:
9-3.650. Establishment of Planned Development Overlay
Zone No. 6 (PD6) . The Planned Development Overlay Zone No.
6 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 residential development and
related uses shall be required prior to approving a
grading permit, or tentative parcel or tract map. The
master plan of development shall be applied for and pro-
cessed as a conditional 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 height shall be limited to thirty (30) feet
(not to exceed two stories) .
e) An open space easement shall be provided for those areas ,
above the 960 foot contour line as shown on the 1965
Atascadero, California USGS Quadrangle (15 minute
series) .
f) No portion of any structure, excepted as provided in
Section 9-4.113 of the Zoning Ordinance, shall be exten-
ded above the 960 foot contour line as shown on the 1965
Atascadero, California USGS Quadrangle (15 minutes
series) .
g) A master plan of development prepared pursuant to this
Section shall include a traffic analysis and circulation
study, including analysis of ingress and egress to the
area originating/terminating at El Camino Real.
0 0
h) No development shall occur prior to the extension of
sewer service to each lot, parcel, or building site pro-
posed for development.
i) The developer or applicant for development entitlement
shall contribute a fair share of the cost of required
off-site drainage, sewage, and circulation improvements
as identified in the master plan of development and as
required by the -City Engineer.
Section 4. 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 5. 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
BY:
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
ORDINANCE NO. 33 Ex�FI6)i A
ZONE CHMGC 3-85
Zones GGt avl�y 3-85
A GO M A Gor)oo v at'I o n
95-5-s
Lc�� t—lo•
-.?iT• ��a4 .
„-�t.�. as �'• 0!5 Ar Z -� 'Jry d' _ ♦h 9�\♦ G��
t 1
31
.. b 'mow •y+� t d
Tcaf
l
a+ e \
0971 1,
�� 4�g+� �`�. �Y4.• ;y :+• �77C�G:'>G��NT12.t 'SlitC� (<G
'F, •✓ yS° , Y o++°' •- �M F:' -7 (,I V (O> \IL W�I �zii La
e •.a s ' •Sr O ,A r
ul
i
p.+ ��� + r 4 ?.•., • +•rs'�r e T s V N I S Pkv A("-(Z, —
fs°°' --�: �•�e c " r+ a+ •'`* Z1 Vbl2�(.G� �dVd,
-j. • {C/yam •�J:. 1f r�Y' 3, •:�•''c� n�• 1•
RJr-I fes"' '�S it. =i 3c-t j`•''� 1;y' id.•S•.6.
Lo
• L� •0 •� �, ,s i...�, • r. r•v, ~t
. may► +•e• G3 � ..�,..,
(3
- .�•.• ,S $ 10-. ao _• ,! - ..X26`, j .11 Wil! +11 i 10
•`;:: �' ,�y•9�` ea,. P i3 .2f _ IfyJS r..6�S brS ° ,
. J
A737'DA
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council May 26, 1986
k ,
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director U2
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 1K-86 and Zone Change 12-86
LOCATION: City-Wide
APPLICANT: City of Atascadero
REQUEST: To revise the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance texts to
allow for a reduction in the size of existing substandard
lots as a result of lot line adjustments.
BACKGROUND:
On March 3 , 1986 , March 31, 1986 and April 7, 1986 , public hearings
were conducted by the Planning Commission on this matter . There was
public testimony and discussion by the Commission concerning this mat-
ter as referenced in the attached minutes excerpt.
RECOMMENDATION - Planning Commission and Staff:
On a 6 :0 vote, the Planning Commission, on April 7, 1986, recommended
approval of the amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
texts as outlined in attached Resolution No. 48-86 and Ordinance No.
134, respectively.
/Ps
ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Staff Report - March 31, 1986
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - March 3, 1986
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - March 31, 1986
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - April 7, 1986
Resolution No. 48-86
Ordinance No. 134
r
• ITEM: B-1
• M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Planning Commission March 31, 1986
FROM: Steven L. DeCamp, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 1K-86 and Zoning Text Change ZC12-85 :
Lot Line Adjustment Policies
BACKGROUND:
On March 3, 1986, the Commission received a staff report recommending
denial of the City-initiated general plan and zoning ordinance text
amendment regarding lot line adjustment policies for substandard lots.
The Commission referred this matter to the City Attorney for review
and preparation of appropriate language for general plan and zoning
ordinance text amendments. The item has now been rescheduled for your
further consideration.
Attached for you review and consideration are the following items:
1. Staff report dated March 3, 1986 recommending denial of General
Plan Amendment 1K-86.
2. Memorandum dated March 11, 1986 from Robert Jones, City Attorney,
to Henry Engen providing justification for amended General Plan
Language regarding lot line adjustments.
3. Recommended language for a general plan amendment allowing for lot
line adjustments whereby existing substandard lots can be made
smaller.
4. Recommended language for a zoning ordinance text amendment to im-
plement the proposed general plan amendment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the attached resolution and draft ordinance.
SLD:ps
Enclosures
cc: Robert Jones, City Attorney
•
0 0
General Plan Amendment 1K-86
Substandard lots, like nonconforming uses, exist as a result of
changes in land use policies and minimum lot size requirements.
Early plat maps often created lots that are very small by today's
standards. These are, however, legal lots because they were prop-
erly created prior to the enactment of modern ordinances that made
the small lots "nonconforming. " The general plan recognizes the
existence of such lots and the difficulties in herent in their
development (see Exhibit B) . In this same section, the general
plan cautions against creation of additional lots that will exhi-
bit these development difficulties.
The City' s zoning ordinance discusses nonconforming lots in Chap-
ter 7. Here again, the zoning ordinance' s minimum lot size re-
quirements were adopted after the creation of the small parcels.
Thus, substandard lots are "legally nonconforming" if they were
legally created prior to the enactment of the ordinance. Such
lots can be developed and used provided that minimum site require-
ments (setbacks, etc. ) can be satisfied (Exhibit C) .
The City's general plan and implementing ordinances (specifically,
the zoning ordinance) articulate community goals and standards for
land development. The general plan' s residential policies speak
to the question of substandard lots in Policy No. 13:
"Lot splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and be in accor-
dance with community plans and principles. Strict adherence
to the lot sizes defined in this Plan is essential in order
to retain the desired character of the community. Creation
of lots smaller than those recommended must not be permitted
if the maximum population of approximately 30,000 is to be
maintained. "
This policy can be extended, by inference, to the question of al-
lowing substandard lots to become "less conforming. "
The City' s zoning ordinance does not speak directly to the issue
of reducing lot sizes for existing nonconforming lots. This sub-
ject is closely related to that of nonconforming uses; however ,
inferences can logically be made from the discussion relative to
those uses. Generally, nonconforming uses are allowed to continue
but not to expand or enlarge. Applying this concept to noncon-
forming lots would imply that such lots can be used, but should
not be made more nonconforming. Such and interpretation is in
conformance with the general plan' s language.
The general plan and zoning ordinance set minimum standards for
the development of the community. It is the intent of these doc-
uments that all uses, both new and existing, be brought into con-
formance with these community standards and goals. Recognizing
the impracticality (and illegality) of imposing all such stand-
ards retroactively, provisions are made for the continuation of
existing nonconforming lots or uses. Creation of new, or exasper-
ation of existing nonconforming uses or lots is not good planning
planning practice and is not allowed by the general plan or zoning
ordinance.
2
•
General Plan Amendment 1K-86
As part of this general plan revision analysis, a thorough review
of the planning literature was undertaken. This research did not
locate any reference to or discussion of, ordinance language per-
mitting a reduction in lot size for existing nonconforming lots.
Finally, numerous city and county planning agencies throughout the
state were contacted. Their response to the idea of reducing the
size of nonconforming lots was universally negative. Indeed, sev-
eral of these agencies actively seek lot mergers to eliminate
nonconforming lots where practical.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the findings contained in Exhibit A, staff recommends
denial of General Plan Amendment 1K-86.
SLD:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Findings
Exhibit B - General Plan References
Exhibit C - Zoning Ordinance References
Exhibit D - Lot Line Adjustment Examples
3
• 0
General Plan Amendment 1K-86
EXHIBIT A General Plan Amendment 1K-86
Findings
March 3, 1986
FINDINGS:
1. The proposed general plan text change is not consistent with the
policies of the general plan.
2. the proposed general plan text change is not consistent with the
intent of the general plan.
3. The proposed general plan text change would result in the crea-
tion of substandard lots and the reduction in size of existing
substandard lots.
4
EXHIBIT B
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
1K-86
In much of Atascadero Colony, the original subdivision created
lots which are excessively long and narrow, as much as five
times longer than wide. Many of these lots are rather small
P s 9 and located in areas destined for urban development . These
lots are particularly difficult to maintain in their present
form, and taking them down to more usable sizes is sometimes
even more difficult. Special studies related to these areas
must explore the most practical approach to their highest
use, including the need for more stringent standards for re-
view of lot splits .
10. Lot splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and be in
accordance with community plans and principles. Strict
adherence to the lot sizes defined in this Plan is
essential in order to retain the desired character of
the community. Creation of lots smaller than those
recommended must not be permitted if the maximum popu-
lation of approximately 30 , 000 is to be maintained.
EXHIBIT C
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
1K-86
9-7.113. Nonconforming Lot Defined: Any lot having an area less
than the smallest minimumar
p cel size re uired by this Ti
tle or other
ordinances, is a nonconforming lot if:
(a) The lot is shown on a duly approved and recorded subdivision
or parcel map; or
P9. 7.4 (b) The lot has, or is eligible for, a certificate of compliance
or a conditional certificate of compliance.
9-7.114. Use of Nonconforming Lots: A nonconforming lot may be
used for any use identified as an allowable or conditional use by
Chapter 9-3 (Zoning Districts) provided the minimum site area require-
ments established in Chapters 9-3 and 9-6 for particular uses are
satisfied.
■ SEEN 0 a Sm ■ SSSS■■ SCC■■ ■
MIC:■■■■■■■■ H =M■f is SSSS■ ■■MMI■■■■■■N■■
■N■■H■ /■■■NMEN■■'■t_JMI ■■ME CMI■■E■■mSN■■EE
MC
Now�m ■■■NN:�■■■NMK/SSSS■■■
OONCCC ■ ■CCri CEM : CCCCEESEMNSO ■ ■pME s : SME
MUMMA loom
HBO
I[tlih�lirSMS■1EMONSESSi r r No"wwwwiiii
i
■ ■■■■MIMIMI■■N■■■■■n/■■n■ ■■■r■■C■■■■■■t■■■
N ■■■MEN■■■f■■Hn■■■■■=■■■N!■■■N■■ tM■M■■Mq■Mom SE■■■M■!S■■■■■■■■■■■■r
MIN
SEMEN as:C:�■■n■■�son NESEMEN imm C:CCCC:■CCCCCCCCCC�■C■�:.,r..
■ MBonn
■son
CMEMNN■NnCCH■NC ■H. " mossiom mCCCCiCE:■CCCn�:UiS■:MICCCMIitMCCCCCCC
ON■■!.■■N ■ ■=■Hn■ C■■■■■E ■H■■■C■■■■■■■t■■■N■■■■E■■■H■■
■1■N■E■■NMNN N■1 MEHH/MI■=■■ENE ■m■■■■■S■�■■■■nCNONE tBEEN
MEMBERS
S■■
iEMESNEN� NNE■EE■f■■ES �llolloll[M NONE IN MESHES
MM■■nMI■H■H■■H■■■■'■■■N■■■NSNEMH ■■n■■ MEN C■■■■S■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■
■EES■■EE■SEE■■■NENS■■■■St■■m!■N ■■■■■N■NEN ■ N= =E■;■N■S■■■S ■S■■■■N
n■M■■■E■E■E■=■■■E■■S■.H■NNN m■H■H■■NN■n■■CNn■EH!■■■H■■orm
SEEMS ■
■M■nEMEEM■on SHOW ■ =■■■HNE■■■■■■■■■■ntiMI/HNMIEC
=t■■=■■N■■■■'nEH m Mn■■H 'MI■ H=■■■H■H SS■M SH'IPAREfI9#lfvEE■
ENMESHES= NE■■N■■■■/■■9HS■ ,fi I■i=�N■NH■■ SE■■■N■f/■EME N
M■■EME■■■■■■■NMNHMu■HH ■■MIHMI■MIH■MIMIHMIMIS■MI■■MIMIMIMIHMI■MMIMIMIM■H
S■■Hm■■■H■■H■H■■■ m■■■n■ ■■■Hm■■■■■■! ■E■■N■■■■■■■■■
MUSS■■■SN■■NS■NE■Mn ■MIS■ BENMI It■man CSS■■nf ■■■■■MI
all NONE Si H S SSiwiirii mi ■ . /rim
■■tM■N■■■N■■■N■ ■M■n■%1■■!! S ■■ ■ ■■H soon tN■■E■SS�� q�►S/Mst]lf ■� �■■mom
mom■■N■■m■NNENH■■EH■■EM■■.■■nH■N!■■HMM■■SSMMEEE■N■ ■■M■E■M■ ■■■■E■
nE■MIN■HH■ ■■■■l■■nHMIN■■■HMMH■NMMIMIMIHMIMIMIM■■nMI■MI■MI■MIn■MI■■
■■■■■■=■M■HMA'ilr�dd't■MN■N!!/■■N■■MMM/SSSS■ ■HM N■NENM/M■■■MM■NNMN■EMM
■■■E■■S■N■■■SNN■■■M■H■M!Mmom
N■E■E■M■■■■■■■CC■ ■CNS■;■■H■■MInt■■■■■■■
t■■N■■n■■NNH■■■■'.■■NEN! ■n■■■■■■MI■MIH■■■ No ■ !■■■■■■H■t■■■■■■■
MEMO 0 t■■N■Em■HNMINH■ OWN
CMI:n■NH■C■m■■samm CCCUCi■moC m■mosm
■ ■■EH■ ■ NN■■S■ ■�■S■SNS■NS■■SMMI■NEN ■■
1E �S �rrihf rirSiE rEiEiESi HC■om
MMMI■HMIHIN ■SCM•■ MIHMEME■■■MI■M■■EM■■■EMIH■MEi ONES
SON
t■■mNN■:■ SMHSS HH■NNH SSSS■Mn■t■■n■N■SMn■■■■
S■ ■■■■■mE■;■■�oMM fl■S■■■�■■n■■■mtSS■\■N■■M■n■■■NM■■■■EEE
N ■=■■■N/■ m � N■H■M■■■MENt■■EN■■■Nf■N■■■■■Stn■NH
MOM -EnNNHM'm■ ■n■■SE■■=■Et■■N■EE ■■■m■Hf■n=E■
■ME=MIn■■! H■■■ MI■HMIs■HH■■■ MI�■■■■H■■■■■■■HMMIMEMOS
NINM
� �■HmmHl �MEMN
■■N■■m■ ■m■NES/N�S�CE■No
IH Um■aE■om■NC■■C■C■ECCCC■:■■C■CMCiHM�MNC\ mnENO =MI *
MNNE ■- N■ ■ ■■m■■HtCmMI
■E fCCC
N!■■■■■SNi N! ■MN■ mM■■■■t■■N■NE■ ■S■■■■■■Nt■■■r.
■SERER■ >EN■ ■n■E■/■■■nH f■ MEMNO■E■■■rlrl■
!H=H■n ■n MI■NE HmNMS■N■■M■CI0NNNSN■slNMCNEEM=!H ■NCi■ CS/ riCNN■�■
SANNH■■S■
_
C ■ ■ wool ■ C■■■■ ■ ■ CC
fiN ■■n■■N■H■■CC:N■■■ME�nM■C■CC ■■Eft■CCNU
■ ■=MIM NH■Hn■ mom�CEmE= ■■
m�
a ■ _ �MIMrMi ■�MI■�i�MI � im■uu�■ CMIn■■■■ EHiHNo
■MI■■
WE
■ ■ M �SSr MUSEUM
MEN
■■HM m i n HH! HmC m n 0 USSR MEMO ■MI ��HCCCi NMI
MIH=■ H■■■
MEIN ■=MIMIH H /H
N■ ■HIS■H■■N
ME WHOM
--=momNME
=H■■■ ■■■MI ■ MNN■CHH■NE
■= H
_ ME �■N
TO Henry Engan, Community Development Director
FROM : Robert M. Jones , City Attorney
DATE March 11 , 1986
RE General Plan Amendment , IK-86
Subject : Revision of General Plan Text to -allow for a
reduction of the size of existing sub-standard lots as
a result of lot-line adjustments .
On March 3 , 1986 , the Atascadero Planning Commission reviewed a
General Plan text change pertaining to lot lire adjustments affect-
ing existing substandard lots. The matter was referred to this
office for an opinion before the Planning Commission would make a
decision.
I have reviewed the staff report , general plan, and Atascadero Zon-
ing Ordinance as well as the Subdivision Map Act and I am giving you
my opinion relative to this matter.
Historically, Atascadero' s policy regarding lot line adjustments has
been to require an equal exchange of lard between two affected par-
cels . Where there are two substandard parcels, lot line adjustments
are not allowed. This has created a great hardship on applicants who ,
due to longstanding uses of adjoining property, have sought to "remedy"
these use problems through lot line adjustments . Their solution has
taken the form of creation of easements between the parcels so that
each parcel may have the full historical utilization of that parcel.
The creation of an easement is an inadequate remedy but avoids a
violation of the Subdivision Map Act which prohibits lot line adjust-
ments which do not meet the approval of local agencies .
Staff has expressed its concern that the Atascadero General Plan would
not allow for a text change for lot line adjustments affecting sub-
standard lots .
Specifically, the Atascadero General Plan' s Residential Policy r?umber
13 speaks to the question of sub-standard lots as follows :
1 . "Lot-splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and be in
accordance with community plans and principles .
Strict adherence to the lot sizes defined in this
plan is essential in order to retain the desired char-
acter of the community. Creation of lots smaller
than those recommended must not be permitted if the
maximum population of approximately 30 ,000 is to be
maintained. "
M
Memorandum to Henry Engan
March 11 , 1986
Page 2/
I disagree with Staff that the General Plan' s Policy Number 13
speaks to the text change in question, in that Policy Number 13
relates to lot divisions and the General Plan' s desire to place a
"cap" on population at 30 ,000 . I do agree that there is some
language which mandates the retention of smaller lots and I would
submit that specific language "Creation of lots smaller than those
recommended must not be permitted. . . " should be modified to allow
for exceptions where there are historical and geographic use pro-
blems such that the creation of smaller lots would be allowable only
. to resolve these historical and geographic use problems . In addi-
tion, this should only apply to non-conforming lots and not to con-
forming lots which by a lot line adjustment would be made non-con-
forming.
The Subdivision Map Act , Government Code §66412(d) is instructive
on this point in the following language:
"Government Code §66412 , this division shall be inapplicable
to: . . . (d) a lot line adjustment between two or more existing,
adjacent parcels where the land taken from one parcel is added
to an adjacent parcel, and where a greater number of parcels
than originally existed is not thereby created, provided the
lot line adjustment is approved by the local agency. or advisory
agency. A local agency or advisory agency shall limit its re-
view and approval to determination of whether or not the par-
cel resulting from the lot line adjustment will conform to
local zoning and building ordinances . An advisory agency or
local agency shall not impose conditions or exactions on its
approval of a lot line adjustment except to conform to local
zoning and building ordinances , or except to facilitate the
relocation of existing utilities , infrastructure, or easements .
No tentative map , parcel map , or final map shall be required
as a condition to the approval of a lot line adjustment. The
lot line adjustment shall be reflected in a deed or record of
survey which shall be recorded. "
In order to make a General Plan text change consistent with tle
policies of the General Plan, I would recommend adopting specific
language which grants exceptions to existing lot sizes in a very
limited and narrow area; for example ,"facilitating the relocating
of existing utilities , infrastructure or easements , or historical
or geographic uses ." In addition, I would recommend that once the
General Plan text change has been adopted, the zoning ordinance
0
! •
Memorandum to Henry Engan
March 6 , 1986
Page 3/
be amended to require all lot-line adjustments to be treated as
variances to allow a review process to be undertaken so that the
Planning Commission has an opportunity to review all lot-line ad-
justments that affect sub-standard lots . The specific language
that may be adopted as a General Plan text change is as follows :
"Exceptions to existing lot sizes shall only be allowed.
with lot-line adjustments to correct historical and geo-
graphical use problems and to facilitate the relocation
of existing utilities , infrastructures or easements . "
Careful attention should, be directed to the drafting of the zoning
text change relating to lot-line adjustments being treated as vari-
ances. Obviously, most lot-line adjustments will not involve sub-
standard lots , but the local agency should have some flexibility in
.granting equitable relief to adjoining sub-standard lots with his-
torical use problems , and at the same time maintaining the overall
integrity of the zoning ordinance, General Plan , and use consistency
of lots in the neighborhood.
RMJ/mdw
• 0 _
Minutes - Atascadero Planning Commission March 3 1986
1I-86 and Zone Change 9-86 . - The mot' carried with a
(&
call vote, as follows:
AYES: Commi ers ielssen, Nolan, Bond, Kennedy
and Chai Prade
NOES- ommissioner Hatchell
Mr. gen stated that hearings would be scheduled the City
ouncil on the Commission' s recommendations.
7. General Plan Amendment 1K-86:
Request initiated by the City of Atascadero to revise the
general plan to allow for a reduction in the size of existing
substandard lots as a result of lot line adjustments.
Steve DeCamp presented the staff report on this matter. He noted
that a review of planning literature was undertaken and contact
was made with various city and county agencies with respect to
the allowing a reduction in lot size for existing nonconforming
lots. The response to these contacts was universally negative.
Commissioner LaPrade stated that there is a majority of lots in
the city which do not conform to the zoning, and he would be in
favor of having an ordinance such as this proposal.
Commissioner Hatchell asked how this proposal was initiated
originally. Mr. DeCamp explained the background involved and
pointed out that the City Attorney has not had an opportunity to
respond to the staff report.
Doug Lewis, area resident, suggested that perhaps there could be
some limitations on how much reduction could be permissible and
set some sort of standards to this regard.
Ed Jewell, 4370 Rosita, spoke in favor of approving this proposal
and proceeded to explain his efforts and frustrations with noncon-
forming lot lines on property he owns in an effort to resolve the
lot line situation with his and his neighbors' properties.
Discussion ensued on this issue with the possibility of handling
as a sort of variance type situation, and there was discussion on
prescriptive rights.
Debra Kankiewicz, 11455 Viejo Camino, stated that when she lived
in Oregon, there was a law that if a fence line was changed after
seven years and that fence was there, then that is where the new
line was.
Mr. Engen suggested that the Commission continue the matter for
recommendations from the City Attorney.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, seconded by Commissioner
Bond and carried unanimously to continue the hearing on
9
r1~
--Minutes - Atascadero Planning Commission - ' March 3 , 1986_
on General Plan Amendment 1K-86.
Mr. Engen asked what the Commission's consensus would be to re-
serving March 31st (fifth Monday) as a possible meeting date for
general plan hearings. The Commission agreed.
C. UBLIC COMMENT:
De a Kankiewicz referenced the February 18, 1986 Plann 'ng Commis-
sion meeting concerning the signage requests and aske for some
clari ications regarding this.
D. INDIVIDU ACTION AND/OR DETERMINATION
1. Plannin Commission
Commissioner Ha hell expressed concern ove the visual effects on
the lot north of he Wil-Mar truck area o San Luis Avenue and
asked staff to loo into this and report ack.
Commissioner Bond sta ed that he and C mmissioner Kennedy had been
talking about the lan caping a1n the Highway 101 corridor
through Atascadero. � would lik to, as individuals, look into
the possibility of commun ' ty contr ' utions to the landscaping and
work in conjunction with 1Tra to properly landscape this cor-
ridor. Discussion ensued wi h e possibility of the private sec-
tor, (i.e. community groups) coming involved with this effort.
Comments in support of such pr ram were heard by Marge Mackey
and Maggie Rice.
2. Community Developm t Director
Mr. Engen stated tha registration and tel reservations for the
Planning Commissio rs Institute have been taken care of and
everything is read to go.
Meeting adjourned a 10:55 p.m.
MINUTES RECORD BY:
PATRICIA SHEPPHARD
Administrative Secretary I
MINUTES A ROVED BY:
HENRY ENGEN
Community Development Director
10
*.Item: A-1
Meeting Date : 5/5/86
MINUTES - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION
Special Meeting
Monday, March 31, 1986 7:30 p.m.
Atascadero Administration Building
The special meeting of the Atascadero Planning Commiss ' n was
call to order at 7 :35 p.m. by Chairman LaPrade. Commiss ' her Mich-
ielssen ed the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Commiss ' ers Hatchell, Michielssen, olan, Bond, and Chair-
man LaPrad
ABSENT: Commissioner Ken dy (excused)
. VACANCIES: One
STAFF PRESENT: Henry Engen, Co u ' ty Development Director ; Steve De-
Camp, Senior anner, Joel Moses, Associate Planner;
and Patric ' he hard, Administrative Secretary I
A. CONSENT CALEND
1. Cons ' eration of staff report concerning ap oval of parking
pr isions for Fire Station No. 2.
MO N: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Co issioner
Hatchell and carried unanimously to approve th Consent
Calendar as presented.
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. General Plan Amendment 1K-86 :
Request initiated by the City of Atascadero to revise the
general plan to allow for a reduction in the size of existing
substandard lots as a result of lot line adjustments. (Con-
tinued from March 3, 1986)
Steve DeCamp presented the staff report summarizing the points
raised at the previous hearing on this matter . He noted that con-
tact was made with the City Attorney concerning an opinion for
appropriate language which would allow an adjustment of the lot
lines of existing substandard or nonconforming lots. The City
Attorney' s language has been included in the staff report. It was
pointed out that this language would serve only to correct prob0
-
lems with substandard or nonconforming lots, and that the policy
is very specific in its intent.
Minutes - Planning Commission - March 31, 1986
Chairman LaPrade stated he has spoken with the City Attorney and
it was not his understanding that Mr. Jones felt that this should
be for existing uses only. He felt that this could also be ap-
plied to improve a building site provided there was no major
change done to either parcel and with no new parcels being
created.
Mr. Decamp referenced the City Attorney' s memo and noted that the
purpose of this text change would be to correct historical and
geographical use problems and to facilitate the relocation of ex-
isting utilities, infrastructures or easements.
Discussion ensued on this.
Commissioner Nolan asked approximately how many nonconforming lots
exist in Atascadero. It was noted that there are well over 100
of these lots.
Ed Jewell, 4370 Rosita, spoke in support of approving the request
and noted his difficulties in trying to get a lot line adjustment
approved for his property.
Chairman LaPrade stated his reservations with this text change
having to be tied into a "problem" . He felt it would make sense
to be able to make a minor adjustment in a lot Tine between two
parcels wherein a definite improvement would occur . Commissioner
Hatchell concurred, and stated he would agree with the City Attor-
ney' s opinion on this matter.
Discussion continued with the general consensus being that further
clarification frm the City Attorney would be appropriate.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissioner
Nolan and carried unanimously to continue the hearing on
General Plan Amendment 1K-86 to the meeting of April 7 ,
1986.
General Plan Amendment 1L-86 :
equest initiated by the City of Atascadero to ise the
ex ' ting Urban Services Line to include new are outside the
exists Urban Services Area to reconcile wi the sewer im-
provement ' strict line. (Continued fro arch 17, 1986)
Joel Moses presented staff report on is matter recommending
approval of the general an amend t, and noted the purpose of
the amendment is to reconcile he isting situation where sewer
services have already been ap d beyond the Urban Services
Line.
In response to questi from Commissioner M ielssen, Mr . Moses
explained what the rpose of an "urban service rea" is.
Terrill Grah , 6205 Conejo Road, asked if the extensi of this
service uld, in any way, enhance the capability of th ewage
syste o serve the ceast and desist areas in the City. Mr . s
2
- Otem: A-2
Meeting Date : 5/5/86
MINUTES - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
. Monday.-April 7 . 1986_ 7:30 p.m.
Atascadero Administration Building
regular meeting of the Atascadero Planning Commi ion was
called o order at 7: 30 p.m. Commissioner Kennedy led a Pledge of
Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commissioner atchell, Michiels , Nolan, Bond, Kennedy,
and Chairman La ade
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Steve DeCamp, nio Planner ; Doug Davidson, Assistant
Planner; Pa 1 i Shep ard, Administrative Secretary
A. CONSENT CALEND
1. Appr al of minutes for the meeting of March 7, 1986
MOTI Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Co issioner
Michielssen and carried unanimously to approve the Con-
sent Calendar as presented.
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. General Plan Amendment 1K-86 :
Request initiated by the City of Atascadero to revise the
general plan to allow for a reduction in the size of existing
substandard lots as a result of lot line adjustments (contin-
ued from March 31, 1986) . '
Chairman LaPrade commented that the misunderstanding associated
with this amendment may have been resolved.
Steve DeCamp gave the background involved and summarized the
actions taken at the previous hearing for this matter .
Chairman LaPrade noted he was satisfied with staff ' s recommenda-
tion along with the City Attorney' s recommended language for the
text amendment.
Commissioner Bond stated he would be more comfortable if the City 0
Attorney could be present to answer any questions the Commission
may have.
Minutes - Planning Commissiom<=,April -7; 1986
Commissioner Michielssen asked for a clarification of the "geo-
graphic" factors involved in the proposed language, to which Mr.
DeCamp responded.
Mr. DeCamp pointed out that the City Attorney was out of town un-
til April 21st and suggested that the hearing could be continued
to the first meeting in May.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Bond, and seconded by Commissioner
Nolan to continue the hearing on General Plan Amendment
1K-86.
Chairman LaPrade noted he did not think it would make any differ-
ence with regard to the recommendation on this matter if it were
to be continued and stated he is willing to accept the
recommendation.
Commissioner Bond asked if this issue could be brought up at a
later date. Mr. DeCamp stated that the City Council would be
hearing this and would make the final decision.
After further discussion, Commissioner Bond withdrew his motion
and Commissioner Nolan withdrew his second.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissioner
Michielssen and carried unanimously with a roll call vote
to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 1K-86.
2. Zone Change 11-86 :
equest submitted by Goldie Wilson (Ron Poulin, representa-
ti ) to revise the existing commercial (C zoning to CR
(Com cial Retail) . Subject property is 1 ated at 9955 E1
Camino eal, also known as a portion of t 1, Block 7, Eag-
let Tract 2.
Doug Davidson presen ed the staff repor on this request recom-
mending approval, an noted that a reliminary development pro-
posal for the site has be submitt for consideration.
Ron Poulin, representing the a licant, spoke in support of the
request and explained the pr osed development. He felt this
project will benefit the C ' y, espe ' ally with regard to residen-
tial areas in south Ata adero.
There was some disc sion concerning the a 'acent zoning designa-
tions and uses in he area.
Commissioner ichielssen felt the site was commer ' al in nature
and was t appropriate for a commercial touris designation.
Chairman aPrade noted that in previous discussions, i was the
Commi ion' s general consensus that either CR or CT zo ng was
sui ble.
2
• s
RESOLUTION NO. 48-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ATASCADERO APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
GENERAL PLAN PROVIDING FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS
RESULTING IN THE REDUCTION IN SIZE OF EXISTING
NONCONFORMING LOTS
WHEREAS, a request to amend the City of Atascadero General Plan
has been received as follows:
General Plan Amendment 1K-86 :
Request initiated by the City Council to add policy language to
the General Plan to allow for lot line adjustments which will re-
sult in the reduction in size of existing nonconforming (substand-
ard) lots.
WHEREAS, this request was considered by the Planning Commission at
a hearing held on March 3, 1986 and March 31, 1986 and was recommended
for approval; and
WHEREAS, such amendment to the General Plan was considered by the
City Council during a public hearing held on ; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a General
Plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
1. Policy No. 10 (p. 62) of the General Plan Land Use Element
shall be amended by the addition of the following language:
"Reduction in size of existing nonconforming lots shall, how-
ever, only be allowed with lot line adjustments to correct
historical and geographical use problems and to facilitate
the relocation of existing utilities, infrastructures or
easements where no increase in overall density will result. "
2. The proposed General Plan amendment will not have a signifi-
cant adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Dec-
laration prepared for the project is adequate.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve
to approve General Plan Amendment 1K-86 to change the 1980 Atascadero
General Plan text as specified above.
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENG N, Co unity Development Director
ORDINANCE NO. 134
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING TEXT RELATIVE
TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PROCEDURES FOR LOT
LINE ADJUSTMENTS WHICH WILL RESULT IN A
REDUCTION OF LOT SIZE FOR EXISTING NONCONFORMING
LOTS (ZC 12-86 : CITY OF ATASQADERO)
WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment proposes stand-
ards consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of
the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section
65800, et seq. , of the California Government Code concerning Zoning
Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant ad-
verse effect upon the environment and a Negative Declaration has been
prepared for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing
on March 3, 1986 and March 31, 1986 and has recommended approval of
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 12-86.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain
as follows:
Section 1. Council Findings:
After conducting a public hearing, the City Council finds and
determines that:
1. The proposed zoning text amendment would be in compliance
with the City of Atascadero' s General Plan Housing and Land
Use Elements.
2. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the
negative declaration granted the project by the Community
Development Director is appropriate.
Section 2. Zoning Text Change:
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 12-86 is approved to change the
text of the Zoning Ordinance to read as follows:
1. Section 9-7.115 (Reduction In Size of Nonconforming Lots) is
added to read:
9-7.115. Reduction In Size of Nonconforming Lots: Reduc-
tions in the size of existing nonconforming lots shall only
be allowed with lot line adjustments to correct historical
0 •
and geographical use problems and to facilitate the reloca-
tion of existing utilities, infrastructure or easements.
Under no circumstances shall lots conforming to minimum lot
sizes be reduced in size to a nonconforming status.
2. Section 9-7.116 (Procedures for Lot Line Adjustments) is
added to read:
9-7.116. Procedures for Lot Line Adjustments: Application
for a lot line adjustment affecting a nonconforming lot (s)
shall be in a form approved by the Community Development Dir-
ector. Procedures for Planning commision consideration and
action on such lot line adjustments shall be as provided for
variances in Section 9-1.113 of this part.
Section 2. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once
within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a
newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated
in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code;
shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall
cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of
posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City.
Section 3. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall9 o into effect and be in full force and ef-
fect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced on
and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By:
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
,
�. a4
M E M O R A N D U M
•
TO: City Council May 27, 1986
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director tAe
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 1M-86
LOCATION: City-Wide
APPLICANT: City of Atascadero
REQUEST: To update the General Plan text pertaining to Chapter VII
"Public and Quasi-Public Services"
BACKGROUND:
This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at its meeting
of March 31, 1986 . There was public testimony given and discussion
among the Commission concerning this matter as referenced in the at-
tached minutes excerpt.
RECOMMENDATION - Planning Commission and Staff:
On a 6 :0 vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
general plan amendment as referenced in attached Resolution No. 49-86.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS FOR CONSIDERATION:
Since the Planning Commission' s recommendation, we have received the
accompanying letter from the Atascadero Unified School District. The
School District is requesting that the City provide them with sewer
service to their San Gabriel Road site (see attached map) . This area
is designated as being surrounded by suburban residential land use
which is a 2 1/2 to 10 acre minimum lot size outside of the City' s
Urban Services Line. Hence, they are requesting that consideration be
given to providing an exception in the Public and Quasi-Public Ser-
vices Element of the plan to enable extending sewer service to the
school site.
Should the Council wish to give consideration to this request, it
would have to be referred back to the Planning Commission pursuant to
Section 65353 of the Government Code which states, "Any modification
of the proposed plan, part, element, or amendment thereof by the leg-
islative body not previously considered by the Planning Commission
during its hearing , shall first be referred to the Planning Commission
• for a report and recommendation, but the Planning Commission shall not
be required to hold a public hearing thereon. "
A.Aftilh SLAW,
•
Atascadero unified School District
"Where students and their education are paramount"
6800 LEWIS AVENUE
ANTHONY AVINA, Ed.D. ATASCADERO, CA 93422
District Superintendent PHONE: (805) 466-0393
May 6, 1986 RECEIVED MAY - 1286
Henry Engen
Community Development Director
City of Atascadero
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
Dear Mr. Engen:
It is our understanding that at the June 9, 1986, City Council meeting the
Council will be considering a General Plan Amendment 1L-86. We understand
that a request will be made to revise the existing urban service line to
include new areas outside the existing urban service area to reconcile with
the sewer improvement district line.
Further it is our understanding that an exception to this policy would be
the extension of sewer service to the Paloma Creek Park which has been
developed on leased state land outside of the city limits.
The School District would like to ask the City to give special consideration
to a similar request to the urban and suburban services. We would like to
request that the City Council and Planning Commission consider a request to
allow the School District to obtain sewer service for the San Gabriel Road
Elementary School.
The District has explored the feasibility of installing its own septic system
and leach lines. Soils investigations indicate dense, compact, non-permeable
siltstone and sandstone approximately five feet below the ground level. In
order to develop an adequate drainage system, it would be necessary to import
a significant amount of fill material in order to provide an adequate leach
field. Conversations with a representative of the Environmental Quality Board
indicate that they still have reservations about the proposed system in that
they feel that there is a possibility that the effluents might surface wherever
the sandstone finally surfaces. As additional homes are built on the hillsides
adjacent to the school site this possibility may be further aggravated.
The District has been working with Contract Survey Design, Surveyors - Engineers
of San Luis Obispo regarding the design of a septic system vs. the connection
of a sewer line to the City system. A preliminary profile study of the area
Carrisa Plains Elementary • Creston Elementary • Lewis Avenue Elementary • Monterey Road Elementary
Santa Margarita Elementary Santa Rosa Road Elementary • Atascadero Junior High School
Atascadero Senior High School • Atascadero Adult School • Oak Hills Continuation High School
(Henry Engen)
page 2 0 •
indicates that the school could be serviced by installing an eight (8) inch
line along San Gabriel Road to Morro Road and along Morro Road to Santa Rosa.
Preliminary investigations indicate that a lift station would be necessary.
If the City were to consider granting the District the hook-up of a dedicated
line, the size of the line and the lift station would be designed by the
engineers only to provide for the needs of the school. Should the City wish
to consider the possibility of future hook-ups in the area, it might be nec-
essary to consider an up-grading of the line and the lift station. Should
this be the decision, it sould be noted that the State of California will
wish to enter into a right of recovery agreement since they would be paying for
the sewer line initially.
We realize that this request is an "eleventh hour" situation that has not
been previously brought to the City Council and Planning Commission. The
District feels that the potential for problems is significant enough to re-
quest this special consideration from the City.
Should you wish further information or if I can supply clarification on the
.. matter please don't hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ernest W. Taylor
Business Manager
EWT:rr
cc: Anthony Avina, Ed.D., Superintendent
Board of Education
Robert F. Stuhr, AIA & Associates
ATASCADEffo- -- -
GENERAL PLAN MAP
LAND USE AND CIRCULATION
HIGH ����� ��
Qs1iillEl! AGRICULTURE
MULT
............ . .
........... . .
HIGH DENS. SNGL. FAM. COMMERCIAL PARK SPECIAL RECREATION
—�::. PROFESSIONAL$$888$
ANN ARTERIAL DIVIDED
ARTERIAL . .
"'— -' E \\\\
,.
PUBLIC ////. INDUSTRIAL
.� CITY BOUNDARY
..,....& we. ..n.
... a
Ni
A.
f��— rSN•..
got
IN,
�N...N
.....Nt........•....../-•... ,N
`.�
•.......�.=�..-=-.-•-=i..--....j its" i.NNNI. N.NN
a».�1 ••...:....: —
ME7
XPi— ;;s � '•'
!monis+ �`r _ ,� ` • T� > > �
4 _
,� ! 9Zi0 9 .IY.•
4.
la
f
K
a
�
� � ! aA dip,
( • �'i 4 n 'Y. .rte t. FY ,� \�
o "' •, s f'. h: ~31 r�i� zs ter•
,'� ' �•. �S( �� / yd's �, � `�`�` 'cs _.a7
_ - IaA §'r 29 <• 9 IS �i � + \ �y. Paz
20 _ -.L y'y'M� t
„ go23ii .0 10 z•" t7:. e� a.I?
L / z3 '? 11 -'}••fi 22 • :J ,r% —J e�`s
s_mk
a3 23 8 s--: i f
2- v13
54 qdl S ? _ �" A .i.• ,g $ z `�• to 9
5^" _s �La' ,rFirf:r.r:^/:�E•a�A 1
` a 2a s
r► a �Ai" 44fsi. so s m m: i • 4 '
Z61.
� \ •\� 'b.�` - 6 A -4: 70•-y
1y� 'b� b e ` Tyf a0
,p pl-
It s
F \ /�'.z \ � E .N `!\,X� •` O 1- e 0/ r Y;� `
O ' ,• -�,y;o_ / \j�2�\ tyro 1W p `3 y ze �! / :• 16 ! IS 1. L;:.r1 s
fpoL
33
.. -`.,`\`n+i `' \tea°''•_'- �� i ... .i �O���aq ` '4 ✓Ir�t'} / R ij C
291� la
% $ /2¢
o21, 30
� 1
1\03 o ./ / /r j4,J s j/
32 36 37
19 ft
35
31 12
9- /1 �1 2J BZi JC\l-5 9ri5o � .. •. r rlo 41
i, 1
o- m
1 sz1 'qr=g _s7m 8'1 \ a
4,tic vs
•z
oaR 6 { r e17 14
z4i 21 gym d M'�. I28
�_ .q'I.• i _ �'
iYate' 27S
17li: fl -__2J g=am ' 2• �l ?fo /
` f"
8
ti
Z2 Cl��
{
City of Atascadero Item: B-3
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: 3/31/86
BY: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Director File No: GP 1M-86
Project Address: City-Wide
SUBJECT:
City-initiated request to update the General Plan text pertaining to
Chapter VII "Public and Quasi-Public Services".
BACKGROUND:
Much of the information contained in the Public and Quasi-Public Ser-
vices Chapter of the General Plan is dated and in need of an update
(see attached existing plan language) .
Various City and County departments together with the U.S. Post Of-
fice, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, Pacific Bell, Southern Califor-
nia Gas Company, Pacific Gas and Electric, Atascadero State Hospital,
Falcon Cable Corporation, and Wil-Mar Disposal were contacted for sug-
gestions toward updating this important element of the plan. The at-
tached draft resolution contains a recommended revised language from
contacts received and staff analysis.
ANALYSIS:
The following summarizes some of the policies recommended for the
Atascadero General Plan with respect to Public and Quasi-Public
Services:
Water Supply:
New language provided by the Mutual Water Company is proposed to be
incorporated. It leaves open the means by which supplementary water
may some day be obtained to some four alternatives (State water , en-
large Santa Margarita Lake, participate in npw Salinas River impound-
ment facility, or participate in Nacimiento water project) .
Sewage Collection and Disposal:
Data contained in the recent sewer study by John Wallace and Associ-
ates is summarized in the proposed language. In addition, priorities
for extending service within the City and within the Urban Services
Line are suggested.
Police Protection:
On March 24th, the City Council authorized retention of an architec-
tural firm to do a site location study and prepare schematics for a
new police station. The language proposed in the general plan encour-
ages proximity to the central business area.
Fire Protection:
The current general plan calls for a satellite fire station location*
near Palomar and Highway 101. That site has been sold and the City's
Fire Department site is on West Frontage Road between Santa Rosa and
San Gabriel. This section also calls for ultimately a third station
in the north portion of the City.
Nursing Homes:
Proposed language would call for siting of nursing homes on a persons-
per-acre density compatible with the setting proposed.
Library:
The library site which has been selected at Highway 41 and Atascadero
Avenue is recognized in the proposed amendment.
Institutional Uses:
Atascadero State Hospital is called upon to provide for street im-
provements along El Camino Real in the proposed plan amendment.
Implementation:
The plan acknowledges the use of fees and taxes to provide for the
planned public service needs of the community and also calls for
public agencies developing land in the city to conform to the site
improvement standards of the city.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend to the City Council that the attached draft resolution, with
any changes made by the Planning Commission, be adopted.
HE:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Existing General Plan Text
Draft Resolution amending "Public and Quasi-Public
Services" Chapter of the General Plan
2
T---
VII PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC SERVICES
This section deals with a broad range of public and auasi-
public uses that are essential to a growing community.
These facilities are closely related-to the land uses and
population they serve. Some of them appear on Pap VII-3.
Urban and Suburban Services
The creation of Urban and Suburban Services Areas as dis-
cussed in Chapter V, LAND USE, distinguishes between the
area that should ultimately receive full urban services and
the area that should receive only partial services . The
Urban Services Line, or the boundary between the urban and
suburban areas, relates closely to the County Sanitation
District. A further discussion of this problem occurs in
the section on Sewage Collection and Disposal.
Water Supply
The development of an adequate water supply system is
probably the most important service needed by a community.
Water is supplied by the Atascadero .Mutual Water Company.
With one exception, lot owners in the Colony own shares
or fractional shares in the company and are entitled to
its services. The exception is that portion of the Eagle
Ranch lying within the Colony but west of the Peabody Line.
As described in Chapter II, PHYSICAL SETTING, the Atascadero
Mutual Water Company draws about 3 , 000 acre-feet a vear
from the 25 million acre-foot aquifer called the Paso Robles
Basin, by means of four deep wells in the flood-plains of
the Salinas River. Five more shallow wells draw from the
Salinas River gravel deposits . The State Water Resources
Board (1976) estimates the total safe yield of the Basin
at 47, 000 acre-feet a year. Actual withdrawals, including_
those of the Atascadero Mutual Water Company, total about
45, 000 acre-feet.
If the demand in Atascadero should triple , to 7, 400 acre-
.feet when the population reaches saturation at about 30 , 000 ,
and if demand by the other users should double in the same
period, total demand would become about 90 , 000 acre-feet,
amounting to an overdraft of some 43 , 000 acre-feet a vear.
At this rate, within 50 years of our having reached satura-
tion, possibly by 2035 , there would have been mined out
about 10 per cent of the reserves in the Basin. In short,
despite rapid growth, reserves of water are adequate to
permit orderly planning for supplemental sources.
99 .
Planning by the Atascadero Mutual Nater Company includes
the following:
a. Well Number 9 having proven adequate at 1, 350 gpm,
June, 1977 , the next step_ would be to drill Number 10
downstream.
b. If Number 10 proves ,inadequate, drill one or more wells
to the east of the Salinas River, but west of the
Rinconada fault.
C. If these should prove inadeauate, drill one or more
wells to the east of the Rinconada fault.
d. Even if these first three steps, either singly or
collectively, should prove successful, they would not
be acceptable long-term solutions because they would
presumably be part of a general mining of the aquifer
above .its safe yield. Therefore, the management is
looking to one or more of 7 permanent solutions:
1. Participate in the Santa Rita Project.
2 . Participate in the Jack Creek Project.
3. Participate in the impoundment of the Salinas
River behind a second dam downstream from the
Santa Margarita dam, on a site owned by the
Atascadero Mutual Water Company, thanks to the
foresight of E. r_. Lewis.
4. Participate in the impoundment of additional water
in Santa Margarita Lake by raising the height of
the present dam. This Project is being studied
by the Corps of Engineers.
5. Participate in the State Water Project, if and
when it becomes a reality.
6. Participate in the Nacimiento Plater Project, if
and when it becomes a realitv.
7. Construct a dam on Atascadero Creek.
Thus , the management of the Atascadero `4utual [later Company
believes it will be able to meet Atascadero ' s needs for
water in one or more of several ways , whatever the rate of
growth.
The present system consists of four recent 300- to 500-foot
wells and five older wells of less than 100-foot death .
Pumping power is electrical for one of the deeper wells and
gas for the others. One of the deep wells went on-stream in
100 .
1970 , the second in 1972 , the third in 1976 and the fourth
in 1977. The older wells have electrical pumping systems,
with the exception of one on natural gas . The first of
these went on-stream in 1928.
The water table at the shallow wells is sensitive to seasonal
rainfall, and the hardness , primarily due to the calcium
and magnesium content, also varies. The hardness runs from
400 ppm in winter to 600 ppm in summer. To date, in the ,
deeper wells there has been little seasonal fluctuation in
water level or water quality, the hardness remaining constant
at about 244 ppm,.
Peak dailv demand increased about 17 per cent from 1975 to
1976: from about 5. 0 million gallons to about 5. 8 million.
Current storage in two tanks of 1. 5 million gallons was
supplemented in 1976 by a third tank, of 3. 0 million gallon
capacity, on Chalk Mountain.
Although the annual total of gallons metered has increased
about 60 per cent since 1960 , the yearly demand per meter
has tended to drop about 8 per cent, from 240 to about 218
thousand gallons. This slight decrease in unit demand
doubtless reflects a slow shift in the mix of the demand,
as population increases faster than large-scale irrigation.
Sewage Collection and Disposal
Voter annroval of a sewage collection, treatment and disposal .
system was given in 1969, and first-stage construction was
completed in 1972. The sewage treatment plant was designed
to be built in three 833 , 000 gallons-per-dav increments ,
giving a final treatment capacity of 2. 5 million gallons-
Der-day. Construction of the second stage of the treatment
plant is scheduled to begin in 1977, usina funds accumulated
by the District. An outfall line has been constructed from
the treatment plant to bonding areas near the Chalk Mountain
Regional Park. The ponding area will be sufficient to handle
ponding requirements when the treatment plant is built and
operating at its planned capacity.
Initial design of the collection system was based on full
development of all. lots in the Sanitation District, as zoned
at that time ( tap VII-1) . This would serve a population of
25 , 000. There have been some zoning changes since the design
of the system, some of which may put additional burdens on
the collection system. There is little doubt that annexations
to the Sewer Imn_ rovement District No. 1 will become necessary
as land *parcels are broken down and develobed. Construction
of a larger capacity sewage system will be necessary if a
major extension of services is n_ ronosed. The establishment
of a "zone of benefit" , wherein the cost of extending lines
would be borne by the property owners benefiting from the
improvements , could be used. j
101 .
Bevond the Urban Services Area, users would not be served.
The design, installation and maintenance of individual waste
disposal systems should be managed to avoid the contamination
of water tables or the creation of other health and nuisance
problems as they increase in numbers.
Police Protection
Atascadero is currently served by the County Sheriff and the
California Highway Patrol. Although the crime rate in Atas-
cadero does not appear to have increased, the number of crimes
has because of the increase in population. Although a 1972
questionnaire circulated by the Chamber of Commerce showed
police protection to be the number one concern of residents,
there is general resistance to higher property taxes to support
additional services. The City of Atascadero is in the process
of establishing its own Police services.
Fire Protection
Fire protection within the Atascadero Fire District shown in
Map VII-lA is provided by the Atascadero Volunteer Fire
Department and, under Mutual Aid Agreements, by the Atascadero
State Hospital, the State Division of Forestry, and the
Templeton Fire Protection District.
Protection within the Colonv but outside the Fire District is
provided by the Division of Forestry under cooperative agree-
ment with the Atascadero Fire Denart-ment.
The Atascadero Volunteer Fire Department provides excellent
protection within the Fire District, as evidenced by favorable
fire insurance rates. A drop in rating classification from
the present Class 5 to Class 6 would result in an increase in
fire insurance rates of 9 to 21 Der cent.
Fire Protection Policv Proposals
1. Two additional fire stations are needed. The District
now owns property on Portola ?toad near Coromar Road, on
the west side of Freewav 101 . It shall be developed.
A second site ::lust be ac^uired and developed on the east
side of Freeway 101 near Del Rio Road.
2. The administration of the Atascadero Volunteer ^ire
Department has rade several recommendations to the fire
Board. Arnona the recommendations are:
a. That a program be instituted to standardize house
and building numbering. Such numbering is needed
to provide easy identification of all buildings
from the street. It is suggested that such numbering
be located at the edqe of the right-of-way , adjacent
lick
to the vehicular entrance to the building.
102 .
1
�I
b. That a comprehensive Fire Protection Plan be written
and become part of the Department' s standard opera-
ting procedures.
c. That hydrants be located on both sides of major
arterials. This is needed to reduce traffic blockage
in the event of a fire in a building fronting on such
an arterial.
d. That plans be made to provide fire protection in the
event of blockage of Freeway 101 or destruction of
its overpasses.
Public Utilities
The extent of major utility service outside the Urban Services
District is depicted on Map VII-2 and Map VII-2A. A brief
description of these services may be summarized as follows :
a. Natural Gas
Natural gas service is supplied by the Southern
California Gas Company and is generally available
throughout the Colony. Liquefied gas is available
from private distributors.
b. Electricitv
Electricity is supplied by the Pacific Gas and
Electric Company and is generally available through-
out the Colony. A program has been initiated to put
lines underground in a portion of the Central Busi-
ness District.
C. Telephone
Telephone service is supplied by Pacific Telephone
and is generally available throughout the Colony.
d. Cable Television
Cable television service is supplied in parts of
the Colon-,;, by a City-granted franchise.
Health Care Services
Available health care services are a critical concern parti-
cularly to elderly persons. These services are normallv
provided as a community grows. However, if the community"
has as high a proportion of elderly people as Atascadero does ,
the need may be more urgent. The major services available
or needed in the future are discussed as follows :
a. Hosnitals
The establishment of a privately-owned hospital
near Templeton has allowed the CountvHealth Denart-
ment to occupy the old Atascadero General Hospital
103 .
A non-profit physicians ' clinic continues at the
old hospital. The French Medical Clinic, located
on the south end of El Camino Real, also provides
medical services to the community.
Although the Twin Cities Hospital will provide
adequate hospitalization, travel requirements will
present problems to some of the residents in its
service area. There should be transportation ser-
vices provided by public or private agencies, as
part of the implementation of the Regional Trans-
portation Plan. A Dial-A-Ride program is in opera-
tion. Ambulance service is available in the Colony.
b. Nursing Homes
Particular concern has been expressed over the
future placement of nursing homes within the
community. Locational factors related to intensive
care agencies, sanitoriums and nursing homes shall
include consideration of the character of the
surrounding area. These might be better located
outside of single family_ residential areas , perhaps
in a more rural setting or in professional high
density areas and near important thoroughfares.
Solid TKaste Collection and Disposal
Solid waste collection and disposal is carried ied out through
a County-granted franchise. Participation in garbage col-
lection is voluntary, and there are periodic episodes of
. garbage and trash dumping along roadsides. Mandatory garbaae
. collection is a possibility and could be financed by an addi-
tion to the property tax bill.
. Libraries
The largest branch of the Counter Library is located in the
Veterans ' Memorial Building. As the community grows in
population, an expanded library service, both in physical
size and in materials available, will be necessary.
Institutional Use
1. Atascadero State Hospital
The Atascadero State Hosnital is the major medical facility
in the Planning Area. It is also the major emnlover in
the community. It occupies 1 , 017 acres , within which
buildincs are centrally located, and does not affect the
character of surrounding neichborhood residential uses.
Anproximately 200 acres have been sold to the County for
the new Chalk ?ountain Regional County Park site. The
preservation or the State Hospital as a permanent land
104 .
use is most important to community stability. Factors
relating to development of facilities within the hos-
pital complex shall be carefully coordinated with local
officials so that additions will not adverselv affect
surrounding properties.
2. Other Institutional Uses
Other types of institutions important to the physical
and economic structure of Atascadero include those
which relate to religious and social establishments
and senior citizen accommodations. Somewhat greater
latitude about the placement of these uses in the
Planning Area can be considered. Several rest homes
and churches have already been situated in single
family residential areas and seem to be comnatible.
However, anticipated density increases within certain
sections of Atascadero may give cause for conflicts
between single family home owners and these institutions .
Multi-family and professional office districts are considered
to be the most suitable areas for churches and accommodations
for the aaed where community services, traffic conditions
and surrounding land uses are best related. Senior citizen
hopes may be located on the more auiet streets and picturesaue
property and a little more removed from business activity.
On the other hand, churches, clubs and places of assembly
are best situated on main streets and intersections , on level
property, and closer to business centers .
Education Facilities — -
Three elementary schools, one junior high and one hiah sc 11
are now located within the Planning Area. As the commu ' ty
grows in population, additional school facilities wi be
needed. The local school district extends to the outheast
corner of the County: hence, local facilities rve more
than the existing or anticipated local popu ion. Moreover,
the sprawling nature of the residential eas does not facili-
tate school locations based on "walk students.
The stated capacities of existi schools are:
Monterev Road Elemen v 420
Santa Rosa Road E entary 600
Lewis Avenue E entary 450
Total Elementary 1 , 470
Atasc ero Junior High 600
At cadero High 1 , 400
2 , 000
Total Capacity 3 , 470
105 ,
It is estimated, in Chapter III , POPULATION, that when the
long has filled up to some 30 ,000 people, perhaps in the
ea ly 1980 ' s, school population will have increased to about
8, 2 , distributed as follows :
E mentary 4 ,136
Ju or High 1, 338
Seni High 2 , 737
Total 8 , 211
This clearly i icates an increasing need for school facili-
ties. The Atasc ero Unified School District must make
long-term populate n projections and long-term plans for
classroom space. A ions to be considered shall include:
Acquisition of ditional school sites
- Development of a itional school sites
- Methods of financi classroom construction
- Alternative systems f school operation:
Year-round classes
Double sessions
Within ten years, at present grow rates , there will be a
need for four additional elementar schools , an additional
junior high and an additional high s ool. Elementary
schools shall be located in residentia areas. Priority
for their development shall be based on the population
densities of the respective octants (Map -2) . Elementary
schools will first be needed in the northe t and southeast
inner octants of the Colonv.
Long-term planning shall consider the abandonme t of the
Lewis Avenue Elementary and the Junior High Scho sites.
Both are located within the commercial-municipal s vices
area. Their present location contributes to severe ra`fic
congestion and also roses problems of administration d
oreration. The bridging of Atascadero Creek between Sa to
Ysabel and Lewis Avenues and conversion of this route to
primary arterial paralleling E1 Camino Real shall further
aggravate the problem.
Postal Services
The Atascadero Post Office is located in the Central Business
District and is a major contributor to traffic congestion.
If the Population continues to grow at its present rate,
the current Post Office building space will' be insufficient
in 5 years or less (Postmaster, 1976) . The drive-up mail
box, currently located on Palma Avenue, is in a poor loca-
tion. A location is needed which will permit mailing from
the driver' s side of an automobile . Other drive-up deposit
boxes are needed, especially on E1 Camino Real .
106 .
Cultural Facilities
Other than the Historical Museum in the Rotunda Room of
the Veterans ' Memorial Building, cultural facilities within
the Colonv are lacking. They are, however, readily available
in the surrounding communities. The new Fine Arts Building,
located at the high school, has a small auditorium. Although
it is of limited seating capacity, it can be used for some
cultural events. Development of the natural amphitheater on
Pine Mountain would restore a facility that was used in the
early days of the Colony.
Welfare
The Atascadero branch office of the Social Services Department
carries out that agency' s responsibilities for the North
County region. Currently there are three eligibility workers
responsible for processing new Aid for Depending Children
applications and four eligibility workers responsible for
determining the continued eligibility of Aid for Dependent
Children recipients. There is one service worker who provides
general services to applicants and recipients. Child welfare
and other intensive service needs are handled through the
San Luis Obispo office., Food stamps and medically indigent
eliqibilitv is handled through the Atascadero office by eli-
gibility workers who are based in San Luis Obispo and are
stationed in Atascadero on a rotational basis .
Child welfare and intensive services shall be provided
through the Atascadero branch office.
Street Sweeping
The Countv operates a minimal program of street sweeping
in the Central Business District. Private enterprise also
operates a business of gutter cleaning in the Central Business
District, but there is not universal participation. Forma-
tion of a multi-purpose Improvement District in the Central
Business District could include street sweeping in the scope
of its activities.
Public and Ouasi-Public Services Policv proposals
1. Public facilities and services shall be closely coor-
dinated with the Land Use Element of the General Plan
as a means of encouraging orderlv growth.
2. The optimum use of local water resources shall be
encouraged, including water conservation practices that
would make maximum use of reclaimed water for irri-
gation, recreation and other non-domestic uses .
107 .
3. The Atascadero Mutual Water Company shall continue to
explore various avenues to supplement its present
water supply sources for future growth.
4. The Atascadero Mutual Water Company plans for the
extension or enlargement of water system facilities
shall be coordinated with the planning agency having
jurisdiction within the Planning Area. Moreover,
street improvements and other public works projects
shall be coordinated with the water company.
5. Additional individual wastewater treatment systems shall
be prohibited within the sanitary district, and the
continued operation of individual systems shall be
terminated eventually.
6. Sources of sewage effluent that endanger the Atascadero
water supply shall be eliminated.
7. A specific plan showing needed corrections to prevent
storm water damage shall be formulated. Projects
which would eliminate storm hazard to private properties
shall be progressively completed. Flood control speci-
fications are needed on individual homesites, tract
developments and hillside building. Provisions shall
be made to retain natural drainage routes.
8. A planned program to establish adequate fire protection
services and the extension of fire fighting facilities
into other parts of the community shall be predicated
upon demands for such services. A study shall be
initiated to evaluate present and future fire protection
facilities in regard to land use.
9. Additional branch library Brace shall be programmed as
the communitv grows . Determination shall be made about
regional library facilities in Atascadero if such a
program is instituted.
10. School facility acc_uisition shall be programmed and
implemented before the needs arise. School locations
shall be acquired generally in compliance with proposals
in this Plan.
11. Agencies administering schools and parks shall formulate
a program for joint use of facilities and work together
to attain school-park complexes with each new school
plant acquisition.
108 .
Minutes - Planning Commissioh�—_March 31, 1986
MOTION: Made by Commi`st44zner Hatc 1, seconded by Commissioner
Bond and carried un usly with a roll call vote to
recommend approva of eral Plan Amendment 1L-86 as
recommended by aff.
3. General Plan Amendment 1M-86 :
Request initiated by the City of Atascadero to revise and up-
date the Public and Quasi-Public Services Element of the
City' s General Plan.
Henry Engen presented the staff report and noted that a segment of
the Educational Facilities section that identified potential
future long range school needs was updated with respect to schools
last year and would be retained. He noted that this amendment is
proposing to comprehensively rewrite the remainder of that section
to reflect the data changes and the fact and philosophy changes
that have occurred since the general plan was first drafted in the
late 19701s.
Commissioner Bond asked about the new location for the post office
with regard to needing an environmental impact report and conform-
ing to additional standards such as channelization and signals as
required by other developers. Mr. Engen explained that as a fed-
eral agency, they will have to go through an E.I .S. process, and
that they have been asked by the City to contribute towards traf-
fic lights and signalizations, and to do a traffic study which
will help the City in its planning. Discussion ensued on this
matter , and it was pointed out that since the post office is a
governmental agency, it is their discretion as to whether they
will comply with the City' s requirements.
Commissioner Michielssen commented on the State Hospital and felt
they should contribute towards the traffic signalization along
south E1 Camino Real.
Barbara Reiter , 10150 San Marcos Road, expressed concern with the
location for the new library and felt the site should be a cen-
trally located one. She stated that this library will be a beau-
tiful building and should be adequately sited. It was pointed out
that this building is under County jurisdiction.
Terrill Graham asked if the people in the ceast and desist areas
have to pay the new sewage hook-up fees or will they be able to
be admitted to the sewage systems under the old hook-up fees.
Mr. Engen responded that these areas are being studied now and
assessment hearings will be held to determine the costs involved
to have services provided.
Marge Mackey further explained that according to the report she
received, the ceast and desist areas would be assessed the old
fees.
Judy Young expressed concern with the section on nursing facili-
ties and had asked that the Commission leave this section as it is
stated in the 1980 General Plan. She stated that there is a great
4
Minutes - Planning Commission--- --_March 31, 1986
need for nursing homes and explained the procedures in applying
to the State Office of Health, Planning, and Development which le
control the amount of certificates which will be issued. She
explained an application she has submitted to the City and would
hope that each nursing home could be judged on its own merits and
compatibility with the neighborhood. She further explained the
difficulties she would encounter with the updated language pro-
posed. Mr. Engen elaborated on this.
There was discussion concerning institutionalized uses and the
appropriate locations for these. It was noted that this section
should be looked at for future long-range nursing requests.
Mrs. Young felt that if this more restricted wording is adopted
and another project is submitted for senior citizen housing, how
can one refer back to the nursing home section and justify a
different recommendation since this specifically says "nursing
homes. "
Mr. Engen felt that a "persons-per-acre" language is a good way of
establishing impact on the land for special kinds of uses which
would include nursing homes. Further discussion ensued.
Mr. Engen suggested that in the last sentence of the "Nursing
Homes" section, that reference to "single family" be deleted from
the proposed language in the last sentence.
MOTION: Made by Chairman LaPrade, seconded by Commissioner Bond
and carried unanimously with a roll call vote to
recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 1M-86 with
the suggested amendment to the section on nursing homes
and institutional uses.
hairman Laprade called a recess at 9 :01 p.m. Meeting convened
at :11 P.M.
4. Gen al Plan Amendment 1C-85 and Zone Chan 3-85 :
Reques initiated by ACOMA Corporation1pK11 Poe, represen-
tative) revise the existing Gener Plan land use map and
zoning map m Low Density Single amily (RSF-Z) to Low Den-
sity Multiple ily (RMF 4) wi a Planned Development (PD)
overlay. Subjec roperty Islocated at 8555 El Corte, also
known as Lots 1-10 , ck Eaglet No. 2.
Mr . DeCamp presented the affort and noted a copy of the pro-
ject' s site plan and a vations wh h was distributed to the Com-
mission, and proc ded to summarize he background involved with
this application which had been continu from the previous gen-
eral plan c e at the applicant' s reques Items addressed in-
cluded sur nding uses, site design, and pub l services. It was
also po ' ed out that a significant portion of he site would
rema ' in open space, and the proposed master plan development
w explained.
5 ,
RESOLUTION NO. 49 -86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF
THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN PERTAINING TO CHAPTER
VII "PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC SERVICES"
(GP 1M-86 : CITY OF ATASCADERO)
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has grown considerably since in-
corporation; and
WHEREAS, the City' s general plan, which was prepared in the 1970 ' s
and adopted in 1980 to guide the City' s general growth is in need of
updating; and
WHEREAS, the City' s Planning Agency has initiated a general plan
amendment relative to public and quasi-public service facilities to
update that component of the general plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero
conducted a public hearing on subject matter on March 31, 1986 ; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a general
plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
1. The proposed general plan amendment recommended by the Plan-
ning Commission is consistent with the goals and policies of
the general plan by providing standards and direction for
the extent and location of selected public and quasi-public
uses.
2. The proposed general plan amendment will not have a signifi-
cant adverse effect on the environment, and preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report is not necessary.
Therefore, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to
approve General Plan Amendment GP 1M-86 as follows:
1. Amendments to the text as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" .
On motion by and seconded by
the resolution was approved by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENG4N, Com ity Development Director
EXHIBIT A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1M-86
AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF THE 1980 ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN AS FOLLOWS
Delete Chapter VII (Pages 99 through 108) except for the "Education
Facilities" section which was adopted by Amendment GP 21-85 on August
12, 1985.
Amend the remaining text of Chapter VII to read as follows:
PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC SERVICES
INTRODUCTION:
One of the most important components of a community is the public and
semipublic uses which serve the community. Public facilities consume
large amounts of land and many have specialized site location require-
ments and involve large capital investments. Thoughtful planning is
needed to assure efficient and effective provision of public services
and provision for quasi-public facilities. The extension of public
facilities and services should be closely coordinated with the land
use element of the general plan to assure and implement orderly growth
patterns.
URBAN AND SUBURBAN SERVICES:
Chapter V, land use, includes a description of the Urban and Suburban
Services Areas within the City. Their creation distinguishes between
areas that should ultimately receive full urban services and areas
that should receive only partial services. The Urban Services Line
(USL) is the boundary between urban and suburban areas and closely
correlates with the former County Sanitation District. An exception
to this policy is the extension of sewer service to the Paloma Creek
Park which has been developed on leased State land outside of the City
limits. -
WATER SUPPLY:
The development of an adequate water supply system is basic to a com-
munity. Water is supplied by Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Lot
owners within the Colony own shares of company stock and are entitled
to its services.
As described in Chapter II, Physical Setting, Atascadero Mutual
Water Company draws approximately 3000 acre feet per year from the 25
million acre foot aquifer known as the Paso Robles Basin, by means of
five deep wells within the Salinas River alluvium. Five more shallow
wells draw from the Salinas River gravel deposits, to a State appro-
priation of 3040 acre feet per year . The State Water Resources Board
(1976) estimates the total safe yield of the Paso Robles Basin at
47,000 acre feet per year . Actual withdrawals, including those byle
Atascadero Mutual Water Company, total about 45, 000 acre feet.
Projected water use at total population of 34,150 people will approxi-
mate 8200 acre feet per year . This will increase the demand on the
Paso Robles Basin by about 1500 acre feet per year . If this and de-
mands by other users doubled, the overdraft would approximate 90, 000
acre feet, an annual overdraft of 43,000 acre feet per year . At this
rate, we would be mining the basin of about .0017% yearly, resulting
in an 8 1/2% reduction in reserves in 50 years. In short, despite
rapid growth, reserves are adequate to permit orderly planning for
supplemental sources.
The present system (1986) consists of five recent 300 - 500 foot wells
and five older wells of 100 foot depth. The water table at the shal-
low wells is sensitive to seasonal rainfall, and the hardness, primar-
ily due to the calcium and magnesium content, also varies. The hard-
ness runs from 400 ppm in winter to 600 ppm in summer. To date, in
the deeper wells there has been little seasonal fluctuation in water
level or water quality, the hardness remains constant at about 244
PPM-
Peak demand during summer months has averaged 7 .5 millon gallons
daily. Current storage capacity of 13 million gallons was met by
construction in 1980 of three new reservoirs totaling 7 million gal-
lons, in outlying areas of the City. 0
Source planning by Atascadero Mutual Water Company includes the
following:
1. Drill and develop deep well no. 10, tested at 1200 gpm.
2. Drill and develop deep well no. 11.
3. Consideration of one or more of the following:
a. Participation in the State Water Project.
b. Participation in additional storage at Santa Margarita Lake
by enlargement of the Salinas Dam.
C. Participation in a Salinas River impoundment facility on
Company property downstream from Salinas Dam.
d. Participation in Nacimiento Water Project.
SEWAGE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL:
The Atascadero County Sanitation District comprises a land area of
approximately 3, 620 acres of the City' s 23, 000 acres. Within the San-
itation District, there are several improvement districts totaling 0
about 2100 acres wherein sanitary sewers have been constructed. In
1986, the Sanitation District served a sewered population of approxi-
! 0
mately 8500 out of a total City population of 19,600 . Total hook-ups
as of November, 1985 were tabulated to be 3 ,634. The average daily
dry weather flow was 857 ,000 gallons per day and the average daily wet
weather flow was 1, 029, 000 gallons per day. The treatment plant was
designed to process 1. 4 million gallons per day (mgd) and can be ex-
panded to 1.8 mgd with relatively minor improvements. (Source:
Capacity Analysis and Evaluation of the ACSD Wastewater Treatment and
Collection system, " John John Wallace and Associates and Lawrance,
Fisk, McFarland, Inc. Consulting Engineers, November, 1985)
The Atascadero County Sanitation District (ACSD) was formed in 1956.
The original sewage treatment plant is located at Traffic Way north
of the Highway 41 bridge across Atascadero Creek. This plant is now
the site of the raw sewage pump station and is at the base of the
City' s gravity sewer collection system. The site also serves as the
City' s incorporation yard.
In 1978, the area voters approved $1.3 million revenue bond as securi-
ty for the local share of a new treatment plant on an 80 acre site
adjoining the Salinas River south of Curbaril and east of the railroad
tracks. This plant was completed in November, 1983 and dissolution of
the ACSD is anticipated following completion of audits and reviews of
the project by the State. At that time, the Urban Services Line will
supplant and become the equivalent of the improvement district limit.
Any extension of that boundary line will require a general plan amend-
ment and, where major extensions are proposed, an Environmental Impact
Report.
The new sewage treatment plant began operation in November , 1983 with
treated effluent being pumped to either the Chalk Mountain Golf
Course for irrigation or to infiltration basins.
The City shall require adequate fees to provide for the orderly expan-
sion of the treatment plant and collection system. Priority for pro-
vision of sewer service shall be as follows:
A. Areas Not Requiring Amendment of the General Plan:
1. Cease and desist areas
2. Septic problem areas within the improvement district
3. Other areas within the improvement district.
B. Areas Requiring General Plan Amendment:
4. Septic problem areas beyond the improvement district but
within the Urban Services Line.
5. Other areas beyond the improvement district but within the
Urban Services Line.
0 !
6. Septic problem areas beyond the Urban Services Line which do
not require a more intensive general plan map land use desig-
nation and/or service to an urban density land use. is
7. Other areas beyond the Urban Services Line which do not re-
quire a more intensive general plan map land use designation
change and/or service to an urban density land use.
8. Other areas beyond the Urban Services Line requiring a more
intensive general plan map land use designation provided that
the following necessary findings are made:
a. Extension of sewer service to the area will not overbur-
den the City's sewer plant or collection system.
b. Extension of sewer service to the area will not affect
service to priority areas 1 through 7.
A majority of the City' s developed area will continue to be served by
private sewage disposal. The Soil Conservation Service ranks much of
the suburban residential and agricultural designated lands in the City
of Atascadero as severe for septic systems and most systems require
engineered plans. Percolation tests shall be performed for each such
lot prior to issuance of building permits. Percolation tests shall be
required prior to the processing of applications for parcel or tract
maps where private sewage disposal systems are proposed.
POLICE PROTECTION: !
Prior to incorporation, the City' s police services were provided by a
sheriff' s substation facility located in the Masonic Temple Building
in the civic center area. Upon incorporation, police services were
located in the City Administration Building. The configuration of the
building does not lend itself to an appropriate police facility. A
study should be made of the optimum location for a police facility to
serve the City' s needs at full build-out. It would be desirable to
locate such facilities in or near the central business area.
Optimum location for a police facility is not as conditioned on dis-
tribution of population as is the case for fire stations. Police ser-
vices are mobile and, therefore, the location is more flexible. It
would be desirable to have the new police facility located in relation
to other public facilities as noted above. Ready access to the arter-
ial road system, however, is necessary.
FIRE PROTECTION:
Fire protection within the City limits is provided by the Atascadero
City Fire Department which has mutual aid agreements with the San Luis
Obispo County Fire Department and the California Department of Forest-
ry. The Atascadero City Fire Department operates out of two fire sta-
tions providing structure and wildland fire protection, as well as
emergency medical and fire prevention services to the public.
The central station is located at Traffic Way and Lewis Avenue. A
second satellite station is being developed on West Frontage Road be-
tween Santa Rosa and San Gabriel. Careful location for such facili-
ties is called for by the Insurance Services Office (ISO) who analyze
the .City' s fire protection capabilities and issues ratings for insur-
ance that affect all residents and enterprises within the community.
Factors that are evaluated include station location, water flow capa-
bility, water storage capability, and hydrant location. In order to
achieve adequate fire protection, the following should occur :
1. To keep up with added demands for services, a third fire station
will be needed and should be located in the northern portion of
the City.
2. Building regulations addressing fire safety will need to be imple-
mented. Included are ordinances to deal with the need for fire
sprinkler systems in certain buildings and the spacing, accessi-
bility and required gallons per minute flow of fire hydrants. Hy-
drants must continue to be located on both sides of major arteri-
als in the City to reduce traffic blockage in the event of a fire
in a building fronting on such an arterial.
3. Provisions must be made for expansion of fire suppression ser-
vices, emergency medical services, and fire prevention functions
through manpower and equipment allocations.
4. Institute standardized house and building numbering system to
provide ready identification for all buildings from the street.
Numbers should be located at the edge of the right of way adjacent
to the vehicular entrance of the building.
PUBLIC UTILITIES:
A brief description of the major utility services' is as follows:
Natural Gas:
Natural gas service is supplied by the Southern California Gas Company
and generally available throughout the city. Liquified gas is avail-
able from private distributors.
Electricity
Electricity is supplied by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company and is
generally available throughout the city. A fund has been established
pursuant to state law to be put towards the undergrounding of utility
lines in the business districts. The Central Business District should
be the next area to have utility lines placed underground.
Telephone:
Telephone service is supplied by Pacific Bell and' is generally avail-
able throughout the city.
Cable Television:
Cable television is supplied in the urbanized portion of the City by
Falcon Cable Television, a City-granted franchise.
HEALTH CARE SERVICES:
Convenient health care services are basic to a community. Future
service needs are as follows:
Hospitals - Owing to the constraints of federal programs to assist
in hospital construction, the North County was limited to one new fac-
ility, Twin Cities Hospital, located in Templeton. The former Atasca-
dero General Hospital was occupied by the County Health Department.
Ambulance service is available in the Colony and the Fire Department
is rated for EMT-II service.
Nursing Homes - Proper placement and availability of nursing homes
is important. Siting of intensive care agencies, sanitariums, and
nursing homes must consider the character of the area in which they
are proposed. The density proposed should be compatible with the
abutting neighborhood. High density projects would be most appropri-
ate in multi-family or professional office settings while projects
with a low persons per acre ratio would be appropriate for rural set-
tings. Single family residential areas would only be appropriate for
these uses where the persons-per-acre ratio proposed is compatible
with that of the surrounding area.
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL:
Solid waste collection and disposal is carried on by Wil-Mar Disposal,
a City-granted franchise. Participation in garbage collection is
voluntary and there are cases of garbage and trash dumping along road-
sides. Mandatory garbage collection should be considered.
LIBRARY:
The County library is operated out of the Administration Building. A
new location for the County branch library is being developed at the
northwest corner of Highway 41 and Atascadero Avenue.
INSTITUTIONAL USES:
Atascadero State Hospital is the major employer in the planning area.
Former surplus lands from the site were used to develop the Chalk
Mountain Regional County Park and under terms of a lease, the City' s
new South Paloma Creek Park. Coordination between the City and State
on any future development should be maintained, and the State should
fund street improvements along El Camino Real to bring the frontage up
to City standards.
OTHER INSTITUTIONAL USES:
Religious and social establishments, including senior citizens facili-
ties, are important in the community. Their proper placement is sub-
ject to zoning standards and findings of compatibility with adjoining
uses.
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES: (No change; GP 2I-85 - August 12, 1985)
0
POSTAL SERVICES :
The U.S. Postal Service has announced plans for construction of a
major facility in the City and has acquired a site on East Frontage
Road south of Santa Rosa. Retail services and postal box pick-up
should be retained in the Central Business District.
CIVIC CENTER:
With the Administration Building as a focal point, Atascadero has a
well-defined nucleus for a civic center. The formal Italian Renais-
sance Revival features of the building and grounds provide a sharp
contrast to the informal nature of the community. Vehicular and
pedestrian circulation between adjoining retail districts should be
facilitated by a network of streets to protect pedestrian walkways
through the public complex and across Atascadero Creek. Architectural
treatment, signing, parking and circulation should be carefully
planned for structures and uses in the vicinity of the Administration
Building to assure compatibility. Future facilities for federal,
state, county, and other local governmental agencies should be concen-
trated within the civic center. This may includecultural facilities
such as museum exhibition galleries and civic auditorium. Redevelop-
ment of the nearby Pine Mountain Amphitheater would restore an attrac-
tive feature of the early Colony days.
IMPLEMENTATION:
Public facilities and services should be closely coordinated with the
land use element of the general plan and be used to plan for orderly
growth. The city should continue to implement capital improvement
projects through a five year planning process'. Development impact
mitigation taxes and fees should be utilized to provide for the
planned growth of the community. Agencies administering schools and
parks should formulate a program for joint use offacilities to attain
a system of school park complexes. Public agencies developing land in
the City should conform to site improvement standards required of pri-
vate developers.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council May 27, 1986
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager 4 .
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director WK
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 1L-86
LOCATION: City-Wide
APPLICANT: City of Atascadero
REQUEST: To revise the existing Urban Services Line to include new
areas outside the existing Urban Services Area to recon-
cile with the sewer improvement district line.
BACKGROUND:
This matter was heard by the Planning Commission at their meeting of
March 31, 1986 . There was public testimony and discussion by the Com-
mission concerning this matter as referenced in the attached minutes
excerpt.
RECOMMENDATION - Planning Commission and Staff:
On a 6:0 vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this _
amendment as outlined in attached Resolution No. 50-86.
/Ps
ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Staff Report - March 31, 1986
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - March 31, 1986
Resolution No. 50-86 .
• City of Atascadero Item: B-2
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: 3/31/86
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: GP 1L-86
Project Address: City-wide
SUBJECT:
.General Plan amendment initiated by the City of Atascadero to revise
the existing Urban Services Line to include new areas outside the ex-
isting Urban Services Area to reconcile with the sewer improvement
district line (continued from March 17, 1986) .
BACKGROUND:
Within the City there are areas where sewer services have been expan-
ded outside the Urban Services Line. The general plan notes that such
service is to be provided inside the Urban Services Line. These ex-
tensions have been done by the County prior to incorporation and by
the City inadvertently. Several other problems are noted on Exhibit D
of areas within the Sewer Assessment District not being within the
• Urban Services Line, as well as several requests for services by own-
ers desiring sewer service not now envisioned to be served.
ANALYSIS:
The existing general plan notes the creation of an Urban Services area
(Page 54 - Land Use Element) to delineate areas that will be served
with full urban services and those that will be provided only partial
services. The line is delineated on both the general plan land use
and circulation map and on Maps V-1 (page. 55) and III-1 (page 52) .
Essentially, the Urban Service Area relates closely to the boundaries
of the County Sanitation District (now the sewer improvement district
boundary) .
The general plan also contains a public and quasi-public services
element outlining the provision of services throughout the entire
city. This element of the general plan is presently under revision
(GP 1M-86) . The proposed draft makes recommendations on priorities'
for expansion of urban services.
This general plan amendment has been necessitated by several previous
actions of the expansion of sewer services outside the present ser-
vices line. Exhibit A identifies 10 areas that show as areas receiv-
ing sewer services but not contained within the Urban Services area.
City of Atascadero Item: B-2
iSTAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: 3/31/86
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: GP 1L-86
Project Address: City-wide
SUBJECT:
General Plan amendment initiated by the City of Atascadero to revise
the existing Urban Services Line to include new areas outside the ex-
isting Urban Services Area to reconcile with the sewer improvement
district line (continued from March 17, 1986) .
BACKGROUND:
Within the City there are areas where sewer services have been expan-
ded outside the Urban Services Line. The general plan notes that such
service is to be provided inside the Urban Services Line. These ex-
tensions have been done by the County prior to incorporation and by
the City inadvertently. Several other problems are noted on Exhibit D
of areas within the Sewer Assessment District not being within the
• Urban Services Line, as well as several requests for services by own-
ers desiring sewer service not now envisioned to be served.
ANALYSIS:
The existing general plan notes the creation of an Urban Services area .
(Page 54 - Land Use Element) to delineate areas that will be served
with full urban services and those that will be provided only partial
services. The line is delineated on both the general plan land use
and circulation map and on Maps V-1 (page, 55) and III-1 (page 52) .
Essentially, the Urban Service Area relates closely to the boundaries
of the County Sanitation District (now the sewer improvement district
boundary) .
The general plan also contains a public and quasi-public services
element outlining the provision of services throughout the entire
city. This element of the general plan is presently under revision
(GP 1M-86) . The proposed draft makes recommendations on priorities
for expansion of urban services.
This general plan amendment has been necessitated by several previous
actions of the expansion of sewer services outside the present ser-
vices line. Exhibit A identifies 10 areas that show as areas receiv-
ing sewer services but not contained within the Urban Services area.
•
General Plan Amendment 1L-86
AREA 1: 3755 Monterey Road
Th ban Services Line is shown adjoining the site but the property
is shown within the sewer improvement district.
AREA 2: 3555 E1 Camino Real
The site was extended sewer services but is not within the Urban Ser-
vices Line. The property is presently owned by the Pentecostal Church
who are in the process of trying to develop the proPerty.
AREAS 3, 4, 5, 6: South E1 Camino Real
These sites contain the Danish Convalescent Hospital, Villa - Margarita
Mobile Home Park and the Mira Vista apartments which are all fully
developed, along with the Bordeaux House apartments site.
AREA 7: 11455 Viejo Camino
This area covers the previously considered General Plan Amendment
1D-86 for Tom and Debra Rankiewicz which is recommended for approval.
AREA 8: 9685 Morro Road
This area is the existing Atascadero Christian Church and was extended
sewer services some time ago.
AREA 9: Gabarda (sewer treatment plant)
This is the existing sewer treatment plant within the City of
Atascadero.
AREA 10: 11715 Viejo Camino
This is the existing South Paloma Creek Park that is located outside
the City.
Of these areas, the first eight areas already have sewer service, are
privately owned, and are within the City of Atascadero. These eight
are all adjacent to or can be made adjacent to the existing Urban
Urban Services area.
The last two are City-owned or operated. The sewer treatment plant is
wholly contained within the City limits and is connected t6 the exist-
ing Urban Services Line. The new City park is being extended, sewer
services via the Bordeaux House apartments. The park itself is loca-
ted outside the City on State-owned property. The proposed general
plan amendment revising the Public and Quasi-Public Element provides a
Policy that would provide for service to the site. It is quite appar-
ent that these sites are already receiving the services listed as
being provided within the Urban Services area. The proposed amendment
would only bring the general plan into conformance with the prior
actions extending urban type services.
Additional areas of concern are noted (Exhibit D) . These areas are
presently noted as being septic problem areas or are within the sewer
assessment district, but not within the Urban Services line. The City
has also been in receipt of several requests to expand sewer services
to areas south of El Camino Real and Viejo Camino Real. Some of this
area was considered as part of an earlier amendment to the general 0
Plan proposed by the Chamber of Commerce and initiated by the City
Council. At that time, a determination was made that an environmental
2
c
�� `' ='• FJ • �,,i }L�/•� •�}�..'q-,-'';r'� '•� ��• }' L–�.
Azcf\ 755 ZILS 1 I LD
i `•� a-Z•r °N t ;'��. •s..s. r��1' \� �' �`^.r ' 3Md'I�.II
A -A 2 3555 CL CAiM I tU0
EDL
\
•�-Si� C
s
�• \ ��/� '—_'�k �- �;_�� may:; �� .,1"'?`�'��(�� _`� i� ,r--�
CL
MAP I11-1
n5017LJr'r�y1J�
C C m , •• I fJn '
'" `� m o _ / / \\ AICA 7 11/455 ULC-JD GfMIIUD
to .� 13m N ® � •'\ - _ � � ' _ � x � TA-EL
D ° 33
n
V.
-
EXHIBIT A
R_fN WOULtiY1EU
GY-- 1L' bl,
KJ51 N DR
General Plan Amendment 1L-86
impact report would be required. If the applications are submitted
requesting a general plan amendment to extend Urban Services to this
area, an Environmental Impact Report would be an appropriate
prerequisite.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the analysis and findings contained herein, staff recommends
approval of General Plan Amendment GP 1L-86 modifying the Urban Ser-
vices Area as shown on Exhibit F and removing Map V-1 and Map III-1
from the General Plan Land Use Element.
JM:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Expansion of Urban Services Area - Areas of
Concern
Exhibit B - Existing General Plan Map III-1
Exhibit C - Map V-1
Exhibit D - Problem Areas
Exhibit E - Findings
Exhibit F - Urban Service Area Expansion - staff
recommendation
3
max_�l �� l,, -�: '+, ,� � �I �• -'. ♦ r. � ,� +:�. .z \\\ -
\ ♦ .t�" 'yam �� ��\
1
�If
^ �a
� � �/ �" ,/Ply'-.-✓�/r ���'`( yl
LLF-:J..��'�. �V�1' •1 ��--�\\
NX
MAP 111-7
C Cin
m
Z C. _.
31 c En
• j~
m D L1 N
33
M13At
0 m N
77,��' �/ A
GCNL�DiY�LJ PLA1J P�WtLI'V�DII,EM
CT 1 I L : i;,
ExLSTI YVL CO\JcUL, PLS
mr° 7 N •1
XG7:7:
s •
' �x :BEY � •'•1�- �'� `y ��''�;" �._�+e�rS.�� .j�. .�� �--�__y+/�' ••• .��
�" 1 '}�'.�'�:..:." �.. � � •sem•.�_ -i"' i �.. ` �-:'�.,.`` / _. �,
_ —�� �n.. .srte, - •: l i�.c� r -r % x e � ,
.� ",� `lam y� •• � •= � � � 7i�� � �? �'�. r
• / �\' �� ' ';.�1 ..1�.� .�.\�•-;�:mac°.'�.�� ��,
S 1�- St_.,^��yam\ r•�..�. c�^ 1',1 1`�
� yff ,•; ` _ �\�, ME -��
41
\�.:,� a" l •:'�.FT-,. ��"yf�-�" moi s ,,�,a '�.�
r.
C
m D `e , � a� r •��i �YYY
rn
In
Lo LO
2 D m rrr c " �.� �!• r Vt
031 oN
D D m r "'
0
2233
33
as m n m
m m 13 L.
m m
<<0 < m
mm0 to33
rr2 o m
mma
`• h
i •> .�- �. ?`�. E7CN-f SIT C
G.GtJE'�1�1., �L�P(UJ PcINi.C)tJ0 Y�.I�T'C
CXI�ZIYU� C�LNLfLYCL ��IYVv
Nllffl V I
C>1 `
` r
.. . .. .....
n
j
/ t
/Y. :... iii► .' i �.i - i. z7 �\_. /�`\
..... .... .. .. .. ... ., ::
� r
t� tt
f
r
i
\Ibw. ...
NAV�.
-\ l r • `,`. J �' J J t t
' I _
_
• mn.w '" off z � �, -.✓
y021
t t � r +J{ . yyou ymm �� r • �_ � y \ /
m
370.
commm
r
m Q\
nZZZzz Y� io
ZZ ZZ a
Z N In N N V 1 1y S. ., V '>r� m m '/ /� • /\ \` �,� H 2 C /
_ ✓ Glp / \ ��-
rrr�� o
:
o � ) >n
t LTMJ � •' '� � � V N � �=/�
C�O m � Hu � •T - � jj� \/
r n J
r>on>o3
zo9>S.SmJn ` H > Y .Hz
'-ivm nn,o A DoH
Im
t
IN D CD'1 \< \
QV4 16Ir D
z
G SIN EV/M, RAJ lk MENDIM EAF
Q L-7IL' 8�
T'fZE1�lL-`M W17�1,�AS
0 •
General Plan Amendment 1L-86
EXHIBIT E - General Plan Amendment 1L-86
Findings
March 31, 1986
FINDINGS:
1. The proposed sites to be included within the Urban Services Area
are presently served by Urban Services including sewer.
2. The proposed expansion will be consistent with the existing and
proposed modification to the general plan land use element and
public and quasi-public services element.
3. The proposed sites, if taken together, would create areas that are
essentially contiguous to the existing Urban Services area.
4. The existing general plan has three diagrams showing the Urban
Services area. The general plan land use and circulation map V-1
and Map III-1.
5. The proposed general plan amendment will not have a significant
adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4
• a a a • , 1
}` :::�_9 f:', �}:ter" •;:<� , ' � '�
�: ,_� .'�`_' �����• .�'�V*y:.�a• ._ti,/.';�.-w�*`(r '((: r, It
may.�� �! ,�.Z� ,`'''"P. 7�.,�`•s1'� 7��.\��%���� ' ��
111... � .•„ __. �� ,t � •�-� �\•� ^nt 4 , r `� ` �,'`'` ,`'� \ IL\�•` AV-L I 3755 Md1J1Z12�`!.LD
A -A E - SSSS CL CAM IUD (ZEAL
` � '�` � �<.•;�-�•\� �� T 't/fit r �`��` � \,S.t-���'���-�;,.,�• �� \
-�
5OUq EZ..
41/
'•�• ;� ; •` - •�' •'. %yam
Y
EXAl6ITF
6L NETflL RAIJ AWICI�DUUE
GYF: IL: U
UPM<A'i\J SCUACE MYEA aMlik-StOU
9FP(TF 177, DMI AFYy PATI/7�\
Minutes - Planning Commission - March 31, 1986
Chairman LaPrade stated he has spoken with the City Attorn and
't was not his understanding that Mr. Jones felt that th ' should
le
b for existing uses only. He felt that this could al be ap-
pli to improve a building site provided there as no major
chang done to either parcel and with no new arcels being
create
Mr. DeCamp eferenced the City Attorney' s memo nd noted that the
purpose of this text change would be to c rrect historical and
geographical a problems and to facilitate he relocation of ex-
isting utilitie infrastructures or ease nts.
Discussion ensued o this.
Commissioner Nolan ask approxima ly how many nonconforming lots
exist in Atascadero. It as not that there are well over 100
of these lots.
Ed Jewell, 4370 Rosita, spo 'n support of approving the request
and noted his difficulti in ying to get a lot line adjustment
approved for his proper .
Chairman LaPrade sta ed his reservat ns with this text change
having to be tie into a "problem" . e felt it would make sense
to be able to ma a minor adjustment in a lot line between two
parcels where ' a definite improvement wo ld occur . Commissioner
Hatchell conc rred, and stated he would agr with the City Attor-
ney' s opini on this matter.
Discuss ' n continued with the general consensus b ing that further
clari 'cation frm the City Attorney would be appro iate.
MOT ON: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Co issioner
Nolan and carried unanimously to continue the earing on
General Plan Amendment 1K-86 to the meeting of ril 7,
1986.
2. General Plan Amendment 1L-86 :
Request initiated by the City of Atascadero to revise the
existing Urban Services Line to include new areas outside the
existing Urban Services Area to reconcile with the sewer im-
provement district line. (Continued from March 17, 1986)
Joel Moses presented the staff report on this matter recommending
approval of the general plan amendment, and noted the purpose of
the amendment is to reconcile the existing situation where sewer
services have already been approved beyond the Urban Services
Line.
In response to question from Commissioner Michielssen, Mr . Moses
explained what the purpose of an "urban services area" is.
Terrill Graham, 6205 Conejo Road, asked if the extension of this le
service would, in any way, enhance the capability of the sewage
system to serve the ceast and desist areas in the City. Mr . Moses
i
2
Minutes - Planning Commission- _,_March 31, 1986___
stated that the areas that the urban services line is being
extended around are sites that already have existing or will have
services.
Jerry Frederick, 9350 Santa Barbara Road, asked for clarification
of this extension to the new South Paloma Creek Park. He stated
that there other property owners in this area which which have
made an official request to be included in these services, and
expressed concern that these properties be given consideration for
extension.
Mr. Moses explained that these general plan amendment requests may
require an environmental impact report.
Bonita Borgensen, 4780 Del Rio Road, also felt that properties in
that area have asked to be included in the expansion of the line,
and expressed concern over the new park and the Bordeaux House
complex receiving these services, and asked for assurance that
special consideration is not being given to certain large firms or
projects and leaving out the small property owners.
Mr. Moses responded noting the additional requests and the reasons
for not including those requests.
Mr. Moses explained the City expansion of sewer services to the
new City park.
Chairman LaPrade referenced the Public Works Director ' s memorandum
concerning a new policy established for annexing into the sewer
district would be one that any one who chose to and was willing to
pay the charge could do so.
Mr. Moses noted the need to be included within the Urban Services
Area as well.
Judy Young, 9010 San Diego Road, asked for clarification on this
amendment with regard to staff' s intent of extending the USL line
to some properties while other property owners have to apply. Mr .
Moses noted that the amendment was an effort to clean up past er-
rors by the City and County in expansion of sewer services beyond
the limits established in the general plan.
In response to question from Commissioner Hatchell, Mr . Moses ex-
plained that the Bordeaux House project is included in the area
south of E1 Camino Real with the adjacent properties of the Danish
Convalescent Hospital and mobile home park which both have sewer
facilities.
There was discussion concerning the fee that the Bordeaux House
project would be paying for the availability of sewer services.
Commissioner Michielssen stated that this is a type of philosophi-
cal line with regard to the types of uses involved.
3
• i
Minutes - Planning Commission - March 31, 1986
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, seconded by Commissioner
Bond and carried unanimously with a roll call vote to le
recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 1L-86 as
recommended by staff.
3. General Plan Amendment 1M-86 :
Request initiated by the City of Atascadero to revise and up-
date the Public and Quasi-Public Services Element of the
City' s General Plan.
Henry Engen presented the staff report and noted that segment of
the E cational Facilities section that identif ' ed potential
future 1 ng range school needs was updated with res ect to schools
last year nd would be retained. He noted that th s amendment is
proposing t comprehensively rewrite the remainde of that section
to' reflect t e data changes and the fact and ilosophy changes
that have occ red since the general plan was rst drafted in the
late 19701s.
Commissioner Bond sked about the new locat on for the post office
with regard to need ' g an environmental i act report and conform-
ing to additional st dards such as chan lization and signals as
required by other dev lopers. Mr. Eng explained that as a fed-
eral agency, they will ve to go thro gh an E.I.S. process, and
that they have been ask- by the Cit to contribute towards traf-
fic lights and signalizaa i ns, and do a traffic study which
will help the City in i plan ng. Discussion ensued on this
matter, and it was pointed ou th since the post office is a
governmental agency, it is t eir discretion as to whether they
will comply with the City' s re rements.
Commissioner Michielssen com nted n the State Hospital and felt
they should contribute t ards t e traffic signalization along
south El Camino Real.
Barbara Reiter , 10150 Sa Marcos Road, a ressed concern with the
location for the new library and felt e site should be a cen-
trally located one. he stated that this ibrary will be a beau-
tiful building and s uld be adequately site It was pointed out
that this building ' s under County jurisdicti
Terrill Graham as ed if the people in the ceast d desist areas
have to pay e new sewage hook-up fees or will they be able to
be admitted to he sewage systems under the oldok-up fees.
o
Mr. Engen r ponded that these areas are being s died now and
assessment h arings will be held to determine the cos s involved
to have ser ices provided.
Marge Ma ey further explained that according to the rep t she
receive , the ceast and desist areas would be assessed t e old
fees.
Judy Young expressed concern with the section on nursing facil ' -
tie and had asked that the Commission leave this section as it i
stated in the 1980 General Plan. She stated that there is a great
4
r �
�`" .�., - •rt--�'�l'—�j'-'���••• i,• :._��'%�:,�y"_'Y�:7: 'lig .,ti 1 v
VT
I 3755 M6tJCLl2EI ED
--1 2 ' 3555 CL C W IUD ED
bk
Y«i-7..J-�Pte" "ss� _ —.• �: � �. .;� 'r.��-�-, r...t
Ile
EL
I UD
_1 e-e•.+ � y+-.���/i. _-IAC•�.
,
EXHIBIT A
GP 1L-86
URBAN SERVICE LINE
EXPANSION
0 �
RESOLUTION NO. 50-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT
TO AMEND THE URBAN SERVICES LINE TO RECONCILE
WITH THE SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (GP 1L-86)
CITY OF ATASCADERO)
WHEREAS, the City' s General Plan, which was prepared in the 1970 ' s
and adopted in 1980 to guide the City' s general growth is in need of
updating; and
WHEREAS, the City' s Planning Agency has initiated a general plan
amendment relative to public and quasi-public service facilities to
update that component of the general plan; and
WHEREAS, there are areas receiving urban services beyond the Urban
Services Line which should be designated within the Urban Services
Line; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on
March 31, 1986 ; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a general
plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
1. The proposed sites to be included within the Urban Services
Area are presently served by urban services including sewer.
2. The proposed expansion will be consistent with the existing
and proposed modification to the General Plan land use ele-
ment and Public and Quasi-Public services element.
3. The proposed sites, if taken together , would create areas
that are essentially contiguous to the existing Urban Ser-
vices area.
4. The existing General Plan has three diagrams showing the Ur-
ban Services area - the General Plan Land Use and Circulation
Map, Map III-1, and Map V-1.
5. The proposed general plan amendment will not have a signifi-
cant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Dec-
claration prepared for the project is adequate.
Therefore, the Council of
the City of Atascadero does resolve to
approve General Plan Amendment 1L-86 as follows:
1. Amendments to the General Plan map as shown on the attached
Exhibit "A" .
2. Deletion of Map III-1 and Map V-1.
On motion by and seconded by
the resolution was approved by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
Lr►i��� ` ill ,� �
•
TO: City Council May 27, 1986
FROM: Michael Shelton
City Manager
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NUMBER 130 — FORMATION OF A REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council conduct the second reading and adoption of
Ordinance Number 130 Declaring a Need For A Redevelopment
Agency To Function In The City of Atascadero and Declaring
that the Atascad.ero City Council will act as the Agency.
BACKGROUND:
On a 4/1 vote, the City Council introduced this Ordinance at
the May 12, 1986 Council Meeting. Formation of an Agency is
prerequisit to considering the feasibility of formation of a
Central Business District Redevelopment Project.
• FISCAL IMPACT:
None, fiscal impact comes with the formation of a project.
MS:kv
•
! !
Redevelopment Agency of Atascadero Ordinance.
Section 2-18. 02 : DECLARATION OF NEED :
It is hereby found and declared pursuant to Section 33101 of
the California Health and Safety Code that there is a need for a
community redevelopment agency created by Section 33100 of said law
to function in the City of Atascadero , California. Said agency is
hereby authorized to transact business and exercise its powers on the
Community Redevelopment Law pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section
33000 et . seq.
Section 2-18. 03 : PURPOSE:
The purpose of the Community Redevelopment Agency of Atascadero
shall include the planning, development, replanning, redesign,
clearance , reconstruction, or rehabilitation or any combination of
the above and the provision of such commercial , industrial , public,
or other structures or spaces as may be appropriate or necessary in
the interest of the general welfare , including recreational and other
facilities incidental or pertinent to them.
Section 2-18 . 04 : COUNCIL AS AGENCY:
Pursuant to Section 33200 of the California Health and Safety
Code, the City Council of the City of Atascadero does hereby declare
itself to be the Community Redevelopment Agency, and all the rights ,
powers , duties , privileges and immunities , vested by law .in a
redevelopment agency, shall be vested in the City Council of the City
of Atascadero except as otherwise provided by law.
SECTION 2.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published in
the Atascadero News , a newspaper of general circulation, printed,
published, and circulated in this City, once within fifteen (15) days
after its passage, in accordance with Government Code Section 36933 ;
shall certify the adoption of this ordinance ; and shall cause this
ordinance and certification to be entered into the Book of Ordinances
of this City.
On motion by Council Member seconded by
Council Member t eoregoing ordinance is
hereby adopted in its entirey on the following roll call vote :
Adopted:
Ayes :
Noes :
Absent :
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
.�( �L r 1
ROBERT . JONES , Ci.ty\,,Clerk MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FOF]��
-Z #•
R BERT 1. S , ty Attorney ROLFE NELSON, Mayor
-2-
TO: City Council Members May 12, 1986
FROM: Mike Shelton, City Manager
SUBJECT: FORMATION OF A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Council approve first reading of , and introduce attached
Ordinance Number 130 declaring a need for a Redevelopment
Agency, and declaring that Council will act as the Agency.
2. Direct staff to review background and qualifications of
redevelopment consultants and legal council.
DISCUSSION:
At the March 27, 1986 Joint City Council/Planning Commission
Meeting, Council received an informational presentation by Mr.
Milton Farrell, Executive Director of the California Redevelop-
ment Association and myself on the need for, purposes of,
advantages of, and implementation process of the formation of a
Central Business District Redevelopment Project. As was pointed
out at your meeting, before a Central Business District
Redevelopment Agency Project can be considered, the City must
activate an Agency. The Agency then becomes the body to
conduct business and consider specific project formation.
Assuming introduction, a second reading will be scheduled for the
May 26 , 1986 Council Meeting, which if adopted, will go into
effect 60 days thereafter. Upon the effective date of the
Redevelopment Agency, in late July, it is anticipated that
Council will have adopted the 1986-87 Budget, which you will con-
sider loaning funds to the Redevelopment Agency to acquire nec-
essary legal council and consultants to proceed in the formation
of a Central Business District Project.
California Redevelopment Association will provide names of con-
sultants and legal council who have redevelopment experience.
Staff will review the backgrounds and qualifications of these
individuals and be prepared to recommend both to the Agency
(City Council Members) after Council budgets funds for same.
After entering into agreement with the consultant and legal
council, remaining action to complete the formation of the
Agency follows:
1. Organize Agency, naming Chairman and Vice Chairman
2. Adopt By-Laws, appointing officers (Executive Director ,
Secretary, Controller , other personnel - appointments to
be made from existing City staff. )
4. Adopt Personnel Rules
0 •
5. Authorize execution of contract with Agency to repay City
for staff services provided to Agency and to establish
that Agency operations are covered by City insurance.
6. Designate newspaper of general circulation for official
notices.
7. Adopt Conflict-of-Interest Code.
Upon completion of the above items, the Agency will be fully
established and in position to pursue the feasibility of a pro-
ject. In formulating a Central Business District Project, over
50 steps will be required with numerous action steps and public
hearings required of both the Planning Commission and City
Council. The City is required to meet with the County and other
taxing agencies affected by the project to review potential fis-
cal impacts. A full Environmental Impact Report will be required
for the project plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
Council can postpone adopting ordinances until after budget
adoption. Delaying Agency formation will delay eventual
formation of a project.
Not adopt ordinance and disregard use of redevelopment.
FISCAL IMPACT
None, Fiscal impact comes with formation of a project.
MS:kv
File MRedev
AA �.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council \ May 27, 1986
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Directorf�
SUBJECT: Zone Change 11-86
LOCATION: 9955 El Camino Real (Ptn. Lot 1, Block 7)
APPLICANT: Goldie Wilson (Ron Poulin)
REQUEST: To revise the existing CT (Commercial Tourist)
zoning to CR (Commercial Retail)
BACKGROUND:
• The above-referenced request was approved by the City
Council at its May 12 , 1986 meeting. A first reading
of Ordinance No. 131 was held at that time.
RECOMMENDATION:
Second reading of Ordinance No. 131 and formal ap-proval .
PS:ps
City of Atascadero Item: B-2
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission MEETING DATE: 4/7/86
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner FILE NO. : ZC 11/86
PROJECT ADDRESS: 9955 El Camino Real
SUBJECT:
Request to revise the existing CT (Commercial Tourist) zoning to CR
(Commercial Retail) .
BACKGROUND:
Under the original general plan adopted by the City, this site was
designated for High Density Multifamily Residential. In 1984 , the
owner applied for a general plan amendment to revise the designation
to Retail Commercial (GP 2A-84) . The amendment was approved. The
applicant then submitted a rezoning application for the site for CR.
The application was reviewed and approved for CT (Commercial Tourist)
(ZC 5-84) . The applicant has now submitted an application to revise
the zoning to CR. In conjunction with this, the applicant has also
submitted a plan reflecting possible development.
Notice of public hearing was published in the Atascadero News on Fri-
day, March 28 , 1986 and all property owners of record located within
300 feet of the site were notified that date.
A. LOCATION: 9955 E1 Camino Real (Ptn. Lot 1, Block 7 , Eaglet #2)
B. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Revise zoning designation from
CT to CR.
2. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Goldie Wilson
3. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ron Poulin
4. Site Area. , . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . .1. 21 acres
5. Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .El Camino Real and El Bordo
6. Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CT (Commercial Tourist)
7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Motel (19th Hole)
8. Adjacent Zoning and Use. . . . . .North: RMF/16, multifamily
South: CT, restaurant
RMF/16 , mobile home park
East: RMF/16, multifamily
West: RMF/16, multifamily
9. General Plan Designation. . . . .Retail Commercial
10. Terrain. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Level sloping to E1 Camino Real
11. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration
C. ANALYSIS
As noted, the proposed site was reviewed in 1984 for a General Plan
and Zoning Map Amendment (GP: 2A:84) (ZC 5-84) . At that time, the
applicant requested CR (Commercial Retail) Zoning. The applicant was
proposing to use the site for a new motel/restaurant complex. The
discussion at that time noted that the site would be more approp-
riately zoned CT (Commercial Tourist) .
The applicant has now made the request to go to CR (Commercial
Retail) . To support the proposal, the applicant has submitted a
Preliminary Development Plan for the site and a Development
Statement (Exhibits C & D) . The Site Plan is not presented for
approval at this time, but represents what could be developed on
the site. Future development will have to conform to the Zoning
Ordinance Development Standards and approval process.
The revision of the site from CT to CR will have no major effect on
the potential development, as the site will still be Commercial in
nature. The basic difference is in the type of uses allowed in the
zones. The CT Zone is meant to provide services to the traveling pub-
lic (Section 93.241) . The CR Zone is meant to provide a wide-range of
commercial uses, to accomodate residents of the City as a whole, and
the surrounding area. This is carried through in the Zoning Ordinance
List of Uses permitted in the two zones. Approximately 26 uses are
listed in the CR Zone that are not lsted in the CT Zone, while no uses
listed in the CT Zone are excluded from the CR Zone. The majority of
the 26 uses not listed in the CT Zone are large lot or retail oriented
type uses (animal hospitals, financial services, vehicle and equipment
storage, light repair services, etc. ) It should be noted that there
are 8 uses listed in the CT Zone, as allowed, that require Conditional
Use Permit approval. (See Exhibit E. )
The change in designation, based on uses, looks formidable, but closer
examination of the site location and potential for development, and no
major impacts are foreseen from these uses. The site is located on El
Camino Real, which is the major north/south arterial for the City and
designated as a divided arterial. El Bordo, adjoining the site to the
north, is a collector roadway. This designation is based primarily on
the street providing access to a multi-family residential area and the
recreational area to the east (golf course, Regional Park, and future
water slide) .
• 0
The General Plan sets some specific policies as to commercial
development. Provision is made for several categories of Com-
mercial Zoning designations_ within the Retail Commercial General
Plan designation on the site. This would include both CT and CR
Zone designations. The Land Use Element notes the existing situation
as strip commercial development and related problems (page 65) .
Policies provided try to address these problems by supporting limited
curb cuts, cluster development, and providing sewer service to uses.
The applicant' s Preliminary Proposal shows a cluster of smaller uses
on the site with one access to E1 Camino Real and one access to El
Bordo. The proposed conceptual plan would meet the General Plan Land
Use Policies. The Development Plan shown can not be specified as a
part of this zoning application, so it can not be assumed as what is
approved for development on the site. The site is provided with sewer
at the present time. The proposal, as requested, would conform to the
City General Plan as to services needed for commercial development,
but further development would require further review.
It- should be noted that the existing proposal covers only 1.21 acres
of the existing 1.47 acres of land presently designated CT. The re-
maining .26 acres is occupied by Hoovers Hacienda, and is not being
considered for redesignation.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 11-86 based on the find-
ings contained in Exhibit F.
Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Ownership Map
Exhibit C - Development Statement
Exhibit D - Proposed Site Plan
Exhibit E - Zoning Matrix
Exhibit F - Findings
Exhibit G - Draft Ordinance
Exhibit F - Draft Ordinance
JM:kv
File: MPC1
r••r�:'
Ai Al.
-�., - �' -.•�`•`�O v , ,�e�. ��•�1 �•.;,7,4= s:.<-ft t .t< <pi+Rt Sy-Ife+,. t t;aXj' AT'8o•S7 '7 1
+ }'�`-, .`'o lof'�t�,• '••\o fit^ %�,,yL• , , a 3• -
/�, r ° �•�,.,' .•v 1.a'. ;,: x . i •'AT-76.135
., `.`•'� 1 •`A ••n�, , c� , i / .. ,t t AT-76-N3
e: '• !, "s d` ma AT-19-13
IP-el
�s . ,5
•� '�•}••+ • m✓ •e � `, �•ti „ �. ,+ � 6- ` AT-HI-183
.fr: a t•P �4 v .!• '� �, ••�+"'• "� AT 81 M. 32Y 82
ti3+ 1p ff LT: G ;.... S, •'ya SSSS
-,• •d 13{ 4'f a�' •��r^ 3 v• •'�, rA+,.A ° '' ,.�� i IC � - ..
•t,A .1�' •410 f . / 4 ,efr'f° d'/ • •4''1'C
.. •,`° , • ,.: �:�!. .+�:� :tee j
yS•.• �,f'• \•d+� p /:t_•f a 'tilt ice•+! ' PEV ISIOY DATi:
' 1 .
iA• �., i•A r.n r3� !11'f• a.r\ •� qq�4' �. `, '
,g •�• ;N,. i a. } t
yf'm a e'°'�' \6 i '�` t'2 '�, !40` •'aS•v'••-�•• y +r C. -c —7 Cy.M UD
j
P err .r' �• v"� c ;.•• 1 b Si �f f 6-;M A t•
oc�r�s�noyr��y,Y✓•�C— c/ra����u��tM��w(-t.(�77(�,�••�� r
r fr e, .� Se9g • U ���IXJQLJAkJ C(L lJ(iVY6YWUlSAL� IL ML
, �� 3e 3 t•e. �+ 2, sa��ps�8
14.
• ''e41...' ;' • 'S¢ .A +eft
yo
rv *!' re Caa} ,'e ;Sr. eu i• •la1
: CO 2XY,,lro fat .A:'� 237 -
.Y '►��� '10•A 16 ✓•+'i�26 to
le,/ °s
�► ,• i• • /• 1� p.,,+Irl •i 3 :'' — fuf� .,6�5. ••
POe,O e• +sem+ • 4' /y t
- e ,�Z�, is m ':�+ rZ•Pr• a7D---- LS'• �•� r .
w 30
�'• 9„`� •+ >. :'. -epi-ni �f� .a2 .¢•fi • .• q
f �f:: �:•. to T �C�? •''C1 31RSF 0:
F Z
ry �.af fo
:ti i - 15 1 ao ,r V rfe�'•P .`.► '' ~+ + 3w
7.1
• JC•f F^ PDS C q, - .+rP • 5 I6vy
./ ;-1 „<` �.•
w"� a,.t m `�s"-+�° •• ?�. 'Cq -.RMF/ ;
k 'e fSS �'! f _ vpo vo• y q �� � ,A'�+. •+rr \ >!fCS'
''* i 1� qq 8 `e Q(\\�°P i♦• 7�o,,f i''�+°6.,1 e,stf Sb` ,p,yor,'+,; ��. ,7
3
10•A fib• g�R1t�y • u yr<1 p.• �1•I/ -�� .. t ''�+ 4^• ��
' p. era-l•I.S. �T° %S •p "'•,,e-- i-�- r, .
• CP
a 7
22
. ,..f t�1 12,s.•a, 3 - '�yty. hV •.f�/..¢ ���MVY-
23 i+a
- ! •• -,,.0 st3- - �t 'y+.0j'(,?,�, F 'S��yY
.r :� + • - ..✓ 3'} i t+, ��^ � •tS`i"fel,.'
• ..•.��' • } 22' ' 4�'`rri�f f.r•fr•..<<.�SMs>r w.-!I.fw...
_ RS Y-2
- ..♦ - �,+.U•La•ai,wti e.+)wo fa••ts.uv.-onruum
20 +� %rQ.-J..•!<r.+e:.rno,w•.e_•.+.w.l f.enr.�.
5.�2714/A7W:•iN a.:f.:e...•.,r•...
Ile T
23�5 S w•g. jF..^\moi • . rrr,�,t�;';'�;, •'N�Z�Z
QCO(S1T A 71�ADlUJI, wl l'YP
..,f•, �•; 5 'il�! �� -=` ZONE U RICE {1 ao
• � J���--� �� fL Ymq �N1lG 1VCL
:�-�; ►_�` �I;.�:��i rill,,
ZETAl L 1`'�
CC)nto
ZSD
� O
N
0
r
9 �
a
tc) �km
r y
6
r.
e
Nt ��• N ren
F py P.
� p A
R
\4% 1A
co
ZUV�1L" _
� JGE
c
i
6
►n c 26
• m
c1 C j
VP P (`
/
.o.
0I.
l
"0s V�
y �Q1y5�0� �7Mp�y�y-�
_
-L7L��yL I«I JJ y U IIJiVCgWclll" IYV11 Y
Q CD
�
00 O IV 9 � l l�1 C.1 y9�55WCA�`V�IV ��
ryJil�D7
_
C_Gl'MYI�I,C.�.I Vit, 1Z��lt.,� i
T is
February 26, 1986
FROM: Ron Poulin
1916 Creston Rd.
Paso Robles, CA.
TO: The Planning Commission and City Council
Atascadero, CA.
In regards to the Rezone Application of the corner of E1 Camino
Real and E1 Bordo (Lot 1, Block 7, Eaglet #7) , it is our intention to
change the existing C.T. zoning to C.R. zoning. In this proposed C.R.
zone we have tenants as follows: Convenience Food Store, Video Store,
Laundromat and Retail Sales.
It is our belief this project would be a benefit to the city and a
great service to the South side community. It is our opinion that a
new shopping plaza would be more beneficial and attractive to the city
and community than the existing 'Nineteenth Hole Motel' . We believe
the proposed project would generate more revenues for the city and
would serve the South side community which is in need of such a
shopping plaza, especially with the growth of residential population
we are experiencing at that end of town.
We hope the City of Atascadero will see the need and benefits
of this proposed project. If the project is met with approval, it
would be our upmost concern to use sensitivity in the design of
the project and make it a project that we could all be proud of.
Sincerely,
X��
Ron Poulin
°ECEI�If F 3 2 8 ,�56
ED
[�(N l6lT C, T��l�1PWlGNT- �T�f�fitl
SUE CMM bl-M
99 55 LL CM%U4T,-
C(-1Nl► ilu nL N
EL JMDO ROAD
222.00'OTEL VOLE
r -- O
z I o
� I m
I
I
O I z
r ry i-----—------—i I. z
D o m
Z z
NQ I s m
c I I > -4
3❑ I I m m.
I 9 I -. m -- -- _
rn I I
--------------
I 1 I
I �D
I m
r I m
M
a
I m
r CD
I I
� j I
I I -
Ili
Zf $
rn
r III Fill m
o
ARCADE I D
m
< z I s I
E r c s
C ; a { z D I
r I m I
m I
0 I 0 I
1 y I m I !
A I m
I
o
O I
175.00' I
I
I
I
I
I
z
Is FIT T
� - F • �' �^ rn � r I
- - I� • 3 '> Cn i m
M 3 • N .
u o • ___- - _ 107.00'
l
II
o Q
TRANS • NAFIONAL
lilllll
m NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CO N ST R I DWI E IT D VVff.SITE PLA N
1916 CRESTON RD-R 7-DME
]/� /' �(E
Tri 9)446 LLI� HAK1 u 11-5/
RICH- -C\RD B I.c GROS
996YEL CANTINO TLE,
COWMAL,AL T7XJ (T TD
C.(1Wl-KZU AL VETA IL ^`
1
CITY OF ATASCADERO A-ALLOWABLE C-CONDITIONAL
} ZONING MATRIX JUNE 27, 1983 -S-SUBORDINATE H-HISTORICAL
*SPECIAL CONDITION
LAND USE A RS RSF LSF RMF CN CP CR CS CT CPK IP I L LS 1PI
Accessory, Storage A A A A JJA A A A A A A 11A A A A
Agricultura , A A A A
Accessory
Agricultural A C C A
Processing
Amusement C C IC A A C
Services
Animal Hospitals- - - A C C A
Apparel and A A JA A
Finished Products I C*
Vehicle Dea ers A A C A
and Supplies
Auto Repair iI I� C A S A A A
and Services
Bed and Breakfast ; C C C C A ' A A A S C A
Broadcasting H H H 11H I A A A A JA A ( A .
Studios
Building Materials A* A A A A . A
and Hardware C*
Business Support 11H H JH H A A* -A__3kF A A A C
Services
Caretaker C!!C C C C C C C C C C C C C A
Residence I�
Cemetaries C C A
Chemical Products C C C
Churches and C C C . C C C C
Related Activities
Collection A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
Stations
-Concrete, Gypsum, & C C A
Plaster Products 1
Contract Constr- A A JA JAI
tion services
Crop Production A !C A
and Grazing
Eating - and JjA* A A A JA S C C
Drinkina -Places �� C*
Electronic and Scienj. A* A JA A
tific Instruments C*
Farm Animal A iiA A C A
Raising ,
Farm Equipment I A A A JA A
and Supplies
Farm Labor Quarters
Financial I I A A A S
Services
Fisheries and C A C
Game Preserves I �XHI$(T C ZttN�Al�r ti'iNC�1X
7_D KLL" GH A f`1CxL-. I I • t-L,
Co N�r�1,1'LI rl"t, r��U(Z.1ST 1�
OOM M L PL!/�L �1 A i L.
0 - •
LAND USE A RS RSF LSF FRMFICN CP CR CS CT CPK IP I L LS P
> Food and BeverageA* A* A A S S C
Retail Sales C* C*
Food and A C A A IIA A
Kindred Products 1 11
ForestryA C A A
Fuel and A A A A A
Ice Dealers1 .
Funeral Services A A
Furniture and A A
Fixtures C*
Furniture, Furn- A* A A S
ishings & Equipment C*
GeneraloMerchandise A* AA A IS S iS C
IIC* IC*
Glass Products C C IC IAJ
Health Care A A A S A
Services
Home Occupation - A A JA A 11A 11 A
Horticultural A A* A A A A C
Specialties C
Hotels, Motels A A A C
Indoor Recreation C C S A C
Services
Kennel A C C C A
Laundries and A A A A
Dry Cleaninq Plants
Libraries, Museums H---H- H H A A A A I A A A
iLiggnt Repair
Services
Livestock IA C
Specialties
Lumber an I C C A
Wood Products
ac finery C C All
Manufacturing
Mail order I A A A A
and Vending
Membership I A A A
Organizations
metal Industries, I c
Primary
Mining (&Surface) C C
Mobilehome C C C C
Development
Mobilehome A A A A
Dwelling j
.. Multiple Family A
Dwelling
Uttices H H H H A A A S S A
OrganizationC C C C
Houses Ir I
-
2
LAND USE . A RS RSF LSFIRMF CN CPCR CS CT CPK IP I L LS P
Outdoor Recreation C 1C AA' C
-`
Paper Products C C Al
Paving Materials C C All I
Personal H H IH IIA* A* A A S S
Services C* C*
Petroleum C
Extraction
Petroleum Refining iC
& Related Industry
Pipelines A* * C C 11C C C C C C C C C `C. 0 IA
C* * I
Plastics an i C C C
Rubber Products 1.
Primary Family A
Housing
Public Assembly I C C A C C A
and Entertainment
Recreational A CIC
Vehicle Parks
Recycling and---- I C IC
C
Scrap
Residential A A A A IA ! JA I-
Accessor
y Uses iI
Residential A A JA
Care * C* C*
Retirement Hotel
='� I C A A
Roadside Stands A A JA A A A A
Rural Sports & C C I A C
Group Facilities
Sales Lots I ! A A C A A I All
Schools - Business H H IIH A A A C CIA
and Vocational
Schools C C C 1C IIA JA A A JA I I A
Service Stations I 11C I C C A -
-Single Family A A A A IIA I I A
Dwelling
Skilled Nursing * A* A* IIA I A A A
Facilities C* C* C*
Small Scale A A A A A
Manufacturing
Social & Service i A A A I A
Organizations
Sports Assembly ! C C A C
Stone & Cut A* A A A
Stone Products I C*
Storage Yards JA A Al I
. Structural Clay & C C Al I
Related Products
Temporary Dwelling A A A A--I A A
Temporary Events A A A A IA A A A A PA A A A A
Temporary Offices A A A A
I!, Temporary or A A II I A A A A A A A A A A A
Seasonal Sales
3
LAND USE A RS RSF LSF [RMFIFN CP CR CS CT CPK IP TIL
LS P
Textile Mills C Ic C
Transit Stations C C A C C C C A
and Terminals
Utility Service A A A A
Centers
UtilityTrans- A
A A JA JA A A A A
A A AAA A
mission Facilities _ _ _
Vehicle and C C C C
Freight Terminals
Vehicle and A A A A A
Equipment Storage
Warehousing C C A A
Wholesaling and A JA A JAII
Distribution
girl-_- ZONING DESCRIPTIONS
A_ =AGRICULTURE ZONA
RFSTDENJTAT. STIRTIRRAN 70NF&AWAL4 56�1/�CEI LNE
YY-�___.RSF_.=_RES ZDENTIAL_S.INGLE-EAMILY.sIJNE
%-2%2 LSF __ LIMITED _RES I. DENTIAL _SINGLE_EAMII,Y-RESIDENTIAL ZONE
RESIDENTIAL.-MULTIPLE_ FAMILY-ZONE Ok ac. LeT�
--_ CN -_COMMERCIAL__NEIGHBOBIi09D 7.DNF. _..
SP__=COMMERCIAL p ZO-ZESSIO NAT. ZONE
__CR _- COMI"iERCIAL_...RETAIL_.ZONE_
CS_=COMMERCIAL -SERV-ICE-ZONE
^_ .CT__—COMMERCIALSDIIRIST ZONE -
_CPK_-__COMMERCIAL PARK ZONE
__IP ._-_..INDUSTRIAL-PARK-ZONE
_INDUSTRIAL-ZONE
T•—RECREATION_ZONE
...... _._._LS -.-SPECIAL__RECREATLON-ZONE
'P. .-_P_UBLICSONE_
4
EXHIBIT F - Zone Change 11-86
Findings for Approval
April 7 , 1986
FINDINGS-
1. The proposed Zone Change would be consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Element Diagram and designation of Retail Commercial pol-
icies related to retail commercial development.
2. Any development of the site willrequire further review and approv-
al in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance Development Standards
and Procedures.
3. The proposed revision is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance Pol-
icies and Procedures. The proposal is needed for the public nec-
essity, public convenience, and public welfare.
_Minutes - Planning Commission - April 7, 1986_
Commissioner Michielssen asked for a clarification of the "geo-
aphic" factors involved in the proposed language, to ich Mr.
De mp responded.
Mr. D\ pointed out that the City Attorney was ut of town un-
til April st and suggested that the hearing c ld be continued
to the first eting in May.
MOTION: Made by missioner Bond, and conded by Commissioner
Nolan to con ' nue the hearin on General Plan Amendment
1K-86.
Chairman LaPrade noted he di t think it would make any differ-
ence with regard to the re m ndation on this matter if it were
to be continued and state a is ling to accept the
recommendation.
Commissioner Bond ed if this issue cou be brought up at a
later date. DeCamp stated that the ity Council would be
hearing this would make the final decision.
After fur er discussion, Commissioner Bond withdre his motion
and Co i.ssioner Nolan withdrew his second.
MO ON: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissi er
Michielssen and carried unanimously with a roll call to
to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 1K-86.
2. Zone Change 11-86 :
Request submitted by Goldie Wilson (Ron Poulin, representa-
tive) to revise the existing commercial (CT) zoning to CR
(Commercial Retail) . Subject property is located at 9955 El
Camino Real, also known as a portion of Lot 1, Block 7, Eag-
let Tract #2.
Doug Davidson presented the staff report on this request recom-
mending approval, and noted that a preliminary development pro-
posal for the site has been submitted for consideration.
Ron Poulin, representing the applicant, spoke in support of the
request and explained the proposed development. He felt this
project will benefit the City, especially with regard to residen-
tial areas in south Atascadero.
There was some discussion concerning the adjacent zoning designa-
tions and uses in the area.
Commissioner Michielssen felt the site was commercial in nature
and was not appropriate for a commercial tourist designation.
Chairman LaPrade noted that in previous discussions, it was the
Commission ' s general consensus that either CR or CT zoning was
suitable.
2
e
Minutes - Planning Commission - April 7, 1986
Commissioner Kennedy stated that this proposed development would
be convenient for the residential neighborhoods. 0
In response to questions from Commissioner Michielssen, Mr. David-
son stated that when a formal proposal is submitted for approval,
either a conditional use. permit or precise plan process could be
utilized.
Commissioner Hatchell hoped the applicant would proceed with the
development plan.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, seconded by Commissioner
Bond and carried unanimously with a roll call vote to
recommend approval of Zone Change 11-86.
3. Conditional Use Permit 5-83 - Reconsideration:
Request submitted by John Yocum (Sawyer Construction, repr
sentative) to construct a 3 ,177 square foot veterinarian s-
pital and caretaker residence within the CR zone. Su ect
property is located at 4700 E1 Camino Real, also kno as a
portion of Lot 2 of Block 2.
Mr. Da 'dson presented the staff report and provid a brief
synopsis on the original conditional use permit app val. It was
pointed ou that the reconsideration was warranted ue to a sub-
stantial cha a in the site plan which involved rking.
Duke Semchenko, epresenting the applicant, c curred with staff ' s
recommendation.
MOTION: Made by Comm sioner Bond, se onded by Commissioner
Hatchell and arried unanim usly to approve Conditional
Use Permit 5-83 econsider ion) subject to the findings
and conditions con ined the staff report.
4. Conditional Use Permit 7-
Request submitted by Edg ahan (Vladimir Milosevic, repre-
sentative) to construc a 36 unit multifamily residential
project with a fi unit lowoderate income density bonus
increase. Subject roperty is 1ated at 9333 Musselman,
also known as a p rtion of Lot 4 of lock 7 , Eaglet Tract.
In presenting the aff report, Mr. DeCamp oted the applicant
has been workin with staff for the last seve 1 months in an at-
tempt to provi a development that will maximiz the use of the
site, and n ted staff' s recommendation for app oval. He noted
a recommend ion for a change in conditions #11 and 12.
Commiss ' ner Bond questioned the parking spaces propose and what
the b eakdown of these spaces would be. Mr . DeCamp st ed that
the oning ordinance provides for an equivalency factor the
pa ing requirements. Commissioner Bond felt that two space per
it should be required. Discussion ensued.
3 ,✓\'
ORDINANCE NO. 131
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBER 19 OF
THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY
NOWN AS A PORTION OF 10T 1, BLOCK 7, EAGLET 2
FROM CT (COMMERCIAL TOURIST) TO CR (COMMERCIAL
RETAIL) (ZONE CHANGE 11-86 : GOLDIE WILSON/RON POULIN)
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. A negative declaration has been
prepared for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing
on april 7, 1986 and has recommended approval of Zoning Ordinance
11-86.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain
as follows:
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposed zone change is consistent with the general plan
land use element diagram and designation of retail commercial
policies related to retail commercial development.
2. Any development of the site will require further review and
approval in conformance with the zoning ordinance development
standards and procedures.
3. The proposed revision is consistent with the zoning ordinance
policies and procedures. The proposal is needed for the
public necessity, public convenience, and public welfare.
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 a portion of Lot 1, Block 7, Eaglet No. 2 Tract
as shown on attached Exhibit "A" which is hereby made a part of this
ordinance by reference.
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once
within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a
newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in
this City in accordance with Government Code Section 36933; shall 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 ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By:
ROLFE D. NELSON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk ry
APPROVE,p AS TO CONTENT:
MICH L SHELTON, ity Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Manager
P P RED BY:
HENRY ENGE , CommifAity Development Director
li
• 18
1 ~AI�tY•
,L .'Q4(•� wA '•.V'.•e'�.•+ ? / Y L •° t171�11 iI ;}x.=• .--
-r;• •• „• ."] -�� ��.,�, �,• .�� ��5,':.'rf}?.. 7.< t rs, : 3 v, n• < 'nT'-�•St '' ''1Z•P.1
}/'.'• .:•� .Iota. .. "�V ((• ;� ♦ � ] � . {
'CS ewe N' ,t.�••• ^ •?\►�` `♦ 1' AT•76 135 12-EI.
1 e° .;` ..t• '� l 1. AT-To.113 1Z•01:
,, 3•A •, •� •yS > > •�° .. _ Ar-19-23. 12-61
���✓ �. S'+. ��' ` �,. (* .� ♦° y �' 'AT'81-185 '.12.6I
Y
• 0, •p'p ,ti , ` !•- _ a•i+^• •'�. AT 81 ZS& sQS-92
• c•.' �, /1� ,'r♦ .s•` • �� PtV 23209 DATE:
iVA/ • n q,. + rt,
�, [ '�,, >.,_, .�;,'.�. r• ..[ a EXHIBIT A
•'g _' :,,. �: t ZONE CHANGE 11-86 : WILSON
` "� v' ��t✓Z:• L z �,• • :, FROM CT (COMMERCIAL TOURIST)
' ° ,� r' ?r j `' - 1 '. , • ` TO CR (COMMERCIAL RETAIL
At
34
J C` •b.. • ,n• C
S ,e.. 7.
: 1.7
34+o l�. rn c xwff� s •. •1 h
110 4L •tl
C07/l.Y T.Iy `.♦ 25,y. .
.sem. A 10a. . 1• ! �2• :t 11 i w
• i[
♦ �. i ° 4 nt: Ir +vF + .•♦ a 01328
- .. Og10t• \'-+.`sem 'i • `' f C w l .. — r,t„ '.S � • '
• • F ��Z o i.'� ', 111 `•�a�•.,2.'f ,� +'�p��- •'S S' ,.� •
�j,ai'.Y:':. S♦„`^ ,�',„•$ .�. :7FI`nl nit 30 ' �• b ,,� ':
CR
L t10
10 Cr 3 ]'
41
7 ; � ... ' :�'�. • i =- , =.RMF/
;. t -y_�_ ('� o- _ ”+�'• � ,i' y •`''fir ♦ •a'I�
c Tf., ji
a t • ,....
.44
_
1,0
4 • 9� \�
" < \ v
`• 1�0�•� RM
1o•i f1b f k�Z' • :.�•r. `,, L �. \s' 's' q �'\_ _
O ,
22
34 1
<., ,n' Y• + •• RSA-2Y 22 ^•� `�xra 11`...-..r - tv✓��.�.n.-siww...
-• _. • •,...1 n•.u�.lam•••r.:KL:.%wa..<r s.•
r • \ 20 :�, <'t2y.k<m t.•.00.ec'.i�•..-1•t .r...
23
WOO# M
ORDINANCE NO. 131
r'n(fi(n 4,��:vrrG, 9955 EL CAMINO REAL
H> /
'• w
ORDINANCE NO. 132
i
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ATASCADERO ADDING CHAPTER
ENTITLED INFORMAL PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION BIDDING ORDINANCE
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 13 of Title 2 is hereby amended to add
Section 2-3.14 to 2-3. 22 of the Municipal Code to read as
follows:
Section 2-3.14 This Section hereinafter should read as follows:
"Informal Bidding Ordinance".
Section 2-3.15 Findings and Purpose. The City Council
finds and declares:
(A) It is in the public interest for the City to elect to
become subject to the uniform public construction cost accounting
procedures adopted by the California Uniform Cost Accounting
Commission pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 21000 et.
seq. (Part 3, Chapter 2) .
• (b) Performance of City public works projects in accordance
with the procedures will enable the City to perform public
works projects with its own forces and/or by contracts awarded
through informal bidding procedures when it is in the best
interests of the City to do so.
(c) It is the intent of the City Council that this Chapter
govern the selection of contractors by the City through informal
bidding procedures, in accordance with Public Contract Code
Section 21204.
SECTION 2-3.16. Responsibilities of Director of Public
Works. The City Council hereby delegates the authority to award
informal contracts, in accordance with this Chapter to the City
Director of Public Works.
SECTION 2-3.17. Development, Maintenance and Use of List of
Qualified Contractors.
(a) The City Director of Public Works shall develop a list
of qualified contractors eligible to submit bids on informal
contracts awarded by the City. In developing the list, the
City Director of Public Works shall obtain from the Contractors
State License Board, and from construction trade associations in
the county, names and addresses of qualified contractors located
in the county.
1
0 0
the submission of bids.
0 SECTION 2-3. 20. Opening of Bids and Award of Contract. At
the time provided in the notice inviting informal bids, the City
Director of Public Works shall open all bids timely received and
shall award a contract to the lowest responsible bidder. If two
or more bids are the same and lowest, the City Director of Public
Works shall award the contract by drawing lots. If no
bids are received, the City Director of Public Works may solicit
informal bids again, or perform the work by City forces, as
he/she determines to be in the best interest of the City.
SECTION 2-3. 21. Procedure for Emergencies. The City
Council hereby delegates to the City Director of Pubic Works the
power to declare a public emergency, as defined in Public
Contract Code Section 21205, and to accomplish repairs and/or
replacements as permitted by the said section. Work shall be
performed without the benefit of informal or formal bidding only
so long as necessary to permit the continued conduct of essential
City operations or services or to avoid danger to life or prop-
.erty. The City Director of Public Works shall provide a full
report on the emergency and work peformed, at the next, meeting of
the City Council, at which time the City Council will determine
appropriate action in accordance with Public Contract Code
Section 21205, including but not limited to, whether work should
continue without the benefit of informal or formal bidding.
SECTION 2-3. 22. Severability. If any section, subsection,
sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance
and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause or
phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard
to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently
declared invalid or unconstitutional.
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:
3
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
ROBERT M. JONES ROLFE NELSON
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
PAUL SENSIBAUGH
Public Works Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES
City Attorney
4
RESOLUTION NO. 46-86
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO, COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF: UNIFORM PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION
COST ACCOUNTING PROCEDURES
WHEREAS, prior to the passage of Assembly Bill No. 1666,
Chapter 1054 Stats. 1983, which added Chapter 2 commencing
with Section 21000 to Part 3 of Division 2 of the Public Con-
tract Code, existing law did not provide a uniform cost
accounting standard for construction work performed or con-
tracted by local public agencies; and
WHEREAS, Public Contract Code Seciton 21000 et seq. , the
Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, establishes
such a uniform cost accounting standard; and
WHEREAS, the Commission established under the Act has
developed uniform public construction cost accounting procedures
for implementation by local public agencies in the performance
of or in the contracting for construction of public projects;
and
WHEREAS, the alterntaive bidding procedures provided for
under the Act allow local public agencies to perform work by
force account costing up to Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15 ,000. 00)
and to let to contract by informal procedures public projects
of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50 ,000.00) or less:
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadreo
hereby elects under Public Contract Code Section 21200 to
become subject to the uniform public construction cost accounting
procedures set forth in the Act and to the Commission' s policies
and procedures manual and cost accounting review procedures, as
they may each from time to time be amended, and directs that the
City Clerk notify the State Controller forthwith of this
election.
On motion by Councilman and seconded by
Councilman the foregoing resolution is
adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE:
ATTEST: ROLFE NELSON, Mayor
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH
Director of Public Works
2
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: New Bid Procedures - Uniform Construction Cost
Accounting
DATE: May 7, 1986
Recommendation:
Adopt Ordinance 132 _ and Resolution 46-86 to adopt informal
bidding procedures and to elect to become subject to the uniform
public construction cost accounting procedures.
Background:
At the last regular meeting Council approved staff
recommendation to bring back the above ordinance and resolution.
(See attached memo from April 28)
The law provides for : a) Public projects of $15,000 or less
to be performed by the employees by force account, by negotiated
contract, or by purchased order ; (b) Public projects of $50 ,000
or less to be let to contract by informal procedures; and (c)
Public projects of more than $50 ,000 be let to contract by formal
bidding procedures.
Discussion:
The following is a comparison of the existing and proposed
processes:
Construction Contract Process Bid Procedures
($5,000 to $50, 000)
Old New
Budget Authorization Required Required
Council Permission to Exceed
Budget Required Required
Bid Documents Required Relaxed
Council Authority to
Advertise Required Not Necessary*
Council Awards Bids Required No*
Agreement Necessary Required Relaxed
Council Authorized Agreement Yes No*
Prevailing Wage Yes Yes
Liability Insurance Yes Yes
Workers Comp. Yes Yes
i',
0
Council can Reduce
Bid Limits Yes Yes
Advertise for Bids Yes No*
Negotiate Contracts No $15,000 or
Less, Yes*
Do Force Account Work No $15, 000 or
With City Crews Less, Yes*
Professional Services N/A N/A
Council Control Rigid Relaxed*
Cost Account Required No Yes**
Less, Yes
Notify Trade Journals No Yes**
Advantages and Disadvantages: The astericks above (*) in-
dicate advantages of the new system. The main advantage will be
the shortening of the time element to ready a job for actual
construction and the capability of using less detailed speci-
fications on negotiated work , and the ability to negotiate con-
tracts less than $15,000. Relaxed procedures for jobs costing
between $15,000 and $50 ,000 will also have positive affects.
Jobs which exceed $50 , 000 will require formal bidding procedures
as we know them and .also require a 30 day notice to the trade
journals.
The disadvantages are shown by a double asterick (**) and
are not considered to be a problem administratively.
Fiscal Impact:
It is anticipated that work can be accomplished somewhat
faster and less staff or consultant cost, and that bids can be
successfully negotiated to lower construction costs.
Conclusion:
Staff recommends approval of the two pieces of legislation
presented. City Council has the option to return to the present
bid procedures at any time in the future by passing another
resolution to do so.
2
ORGANIZATION AREAS OF MEMBERS OR SUBSCRIBERS
BY COUNTY
1. Mr. William B. Wallace, Jr. Counties north of and
Daily Construction Service including Inyo, Kern
P. 0. Box 3019 and San Luis Obispo
San Francisco, CA 94119
415-781-8088
2. Ms. Beverly Lamming Counties south of and
Daily Construction Service including Inyo, Kings,
448 South Hill Street San Luis Obispo, and
Los Angeles, CA 90013 Tulare
213-623-1477
3. Mr. J. A. Mullinax Counties north of and
F. W. Dodge Division including Monterey,
P. 0. Box 7878, Rincon Annex Kings, Tulare and Inyo
San Francisco, CA 94120
415-864-8600
4. . F. W. Dodge Division Los Angeles
2 Coral Circle
Monterey Park, CA 91754 R
213-727-0120
S. Mr. Charlie Barr Orange
F. W. Dodge Division
1835 W. Orangewood, Suite 101
Orange, CA 92688
6. F. W. Dodge Division San Bernardino and
202 E. Airport, Suite 130 Riverside
San Bernardino, CA 92408
7. F. W. Dodge Division San Diego and Imperial
8825 Aero Drive - Suite A-120
San Diego, CA 92138
8. F. W. Dodge Division San Luis Obispo, Ventura
674 County Square Drive Santa Barbara, and
Ventura, CA 93303 Northern Los Angeles
9. F. W. Dodge Division Kern
6713 Hooper Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93308
3/1/86
-11-
1��
! ► 0
ORGANIZATION AREAS OF MEMBERS OR SUBSCRIBERS
BY COUNTY
53. Mr. Phil Field
Kern County Builders Exchange .
711 - 24th Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301
805-324-4921
54. Mr. Bunn Turnbow San Luis Obispo, Monterey,
North County Contractors Assn. and Santa Barbara
527 Pine Street, Unit B
Paso Robles, CA 93446
805-239-0121
55. Mr. Al Doutel San Luis Obispo County
San Luis Obispo Contractors Assn.
P. 0. Box 1222
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
805-543-7330
56. Mr. Ron Ratzlaff Santa Barbara and
Santa Maria Valley Contractors Assn. San Luis Obispo
714 South Miller Street
Santa Maria, CA 93454
805-925-1191
57. Mr. Frank Signorelli Santa Barbara
Lompoc Valley Contractors Assn.
432 North Eighth Street, Suite B
Lompoc, CA 93436
805-736-3845
58. Ms. June Chovan
Santa Barbara Contractors Assn.
P. 0. Box 4263
Santa Barbara, CA 93103
805-962-9775
59. Mr. Joseph Herrera Santa Barbara and Ventura
Plan Service of Southern California
427 N. Salsipuedes Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93103
805-965-6189
3/1/86
-17-