Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 05/12/1986 • NOTE: THE COUNCIL WILL MEET IN CLOSED SESSION BEGINNING AT 7 :00 P.M. REGARDING PROPERTY ACQUISITION ISSUES WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO. AGENDA - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL DEPUTY CITY CLERK Regular Meeting ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDIN( FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM MAY 12, 1986 7 :30 P.M. PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING MAY 14, 1986 AS "DAY OF THE TEACHER" PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING MAY 18-24,1986 AS CALIFORNIA TRAFFIC SAFETY WEEK PROCLAMATION - "NATIONAL POLICE WEEK" , MAY 11-17 ("ATASCADERO LOVES ITS COPS DAY" , THURSDAY, MAY 151 1986) ** 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 April 28, 1986 2. Lot Line Adjustment 1-86 - 8305 Coromar Rd - Molina/Twin Cities Engineering 3. Tentative Tract Map 3-86 - 5550 Traffic Way - Mulholland/Twin Cities Engineering 4. Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 - 8460 Morro Road - Heely/Moore • 1 5. Vacating Public Utilities Easement at 6905 El Camino Real (E1 Camino .Associates) - Proposed Resolution 45-86 6. Vacating Public Utilities Easement at 8793 Plata Lane (Azerkan) - Proposed Resolution 44-86 7. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 34-85 - 10420 San Marcos (Bressler/ Twin Cities Engineering 8. Support of San Luis Obispo County Solid Waste Management Plan - Preliminary Draft B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS 1. Proposed General Plan Amendment 2J-85 and Zone Change 5-85 - City of Atascadero Initiated (Cont'd from 4/28/86) a. Proposed Resolution Number 45-85 - , Amending the General Plan text and General Plan Map Land Use Element pertaining to the establishment of high- density single family (10 ,000 square foot) land use designation b. Proposed Ordinance 110 • Amending the Zoning Ordinance text relative to the establishment 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 Resolution Number 39-86 Amending the General Plan from Moderate Density Single Family to High Density Single Family (10, 000 square foot lot) 2. Proposed Ordinance Number 126 Amending the Zoning Map from LSF-Y (Limited Single Family) to LSF-W (Limited Single Family, 10 , 000 Square Foot Lot) (FIRST READING) b. STUDY AREA "B" (PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREA) : 1. Proposed Resolution Number 40-86 Amending the General Plan from Moderate Density Single Family and High Density Single Family to High Density • Single Family (10 , 000 square foot lot size) 2 • 2. Proposed Ordinance Number 127 Amending the Zoning Map from LSF-X (Limited Single Family) and RSF-Y (Residential Single Family) to LSF-X (Limited Single Family, 10 ,000 Square Foot Lot Size) (FIRST READING) C. STUDY AREA "C" (FRESNO/TUNITAS ROAD AREA) d. STUDY AREA "D" (LAS LOMAS AREA) 1. Proposed Resolution Number 42-86 Amending the General Plan From Low Density Single Family and Moderate Density. Single Family to High Density Single Family (10,000 square Foot Lot Size) 2. Proposed Ordinance 128 Amending the Zoning Map from RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, 1/2 Acre) to LSF-W (Limited Single Family, 10 ,000 Square Foot Lot Size) (FIRST READING) e. 9240 ATASCADERO ROAD 1. Proposed Resolution Number 43-86 Amending the General Plan from Moderate Density Single • Family to High Density Single Family (1/2 Acre Lot Size) 2. Proposed Ordinance Number 129 Amending the Zoning Map from RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, one acre minimum) to RSF-X (Residential Single Family, 1/2 acre minimum lot size) (FIRST READING) 3. Proposed Zone Change ll-A- - 9V55 El Camino Real - Goldie Wilson/ Ron Poulin - Revising Existing Commercial Tourist Zoning to Commercial Retail - Proposed Ordinance Number 131 (FIRST READING) C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Proposed Zone Change 2G-85 - Revising the Zoning Map from RSF-Y, Residential Single Family (a acre minimum with sewer) to RSF-X, REsidential Single Family (1/2 acre minimum with sewer) - Coromar Road Area (City Initiated/Lopus) Proposed Ordinance Number 124 (SECOND READING) (Cont'd from 4/28/86) 2. Mayor to Enter Agreement with Architectural Firm of Ross, Levin, • and Mac Intyre - Police Facility (Cont'd from 4/14/86) 3 • D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Discussion - Reappointment of Recreation Commission Vacant Position (Effective 7/86) 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 4. Proposed Dial-A-Ride Services for 1986-87 by Community Transit Services 5. Proposed Ordinance 130 - Declaring A Need for a Redevelopment Agency (FIRST READING) 6. Proposed Revised Bid Procedures - Uniform Construction Cost Accounting - Proposed Ordinance Number 132 (FIRST READING) and Proposed Resolutin Number 46-86 7. Lewis Avenue Bridge Development Fee - Review by Task Force E. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT (ACSD) • (Council will recess and convene as the Atascadero County Sanitation District Board of Directors) 1. Status Report and Recommendation for the Separado/Cayucos Proposed Assessment Districts 2. Recommendation Regarding the Assessment District Number 3 (Marchant Way Sewer Extension) Bid Proposal (The Board of Directors will adjourn and reconvene as City Council) F. COMMUNITY FORUM G. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager 4 • P R O C L A M A T I O N "DAY OF THE TEACHER" MAY 14, 1986 WHEREAS, the people of Atascadero recognize the debt of gratitude owed those instructing young people in our classrooms; and WHEREAS, the Association of Mexican American Educators, Inc. , (AMAE) brought to our State the custom of a special time to honor teachers, and sponsored 1982 legislation to establish such time yearly throughout California; and WHEREAS, in accord with the law (Education Code 37227.6) and by proclamation of Governor George Deukmejian, May 14, 1986, has been designated as the Fourth Annual Observance of "Day of the Teacher" ; and WHEREAS, the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing and State Department of Education urge that teaching career choices be promoted to young people by honoring those who have served or are serving in that profession; THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council of Atascadero hereby greets and commends teachers for all they mean to our students and community; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council urge all individuals to wish teachers a wonderful "Day of the Teacher" , Wednesday, May 14, 1986; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council request the assistance of the Superintendent of Schools disseminate this proclamation as widely as possible in order that teachers may be reminded of the esteem in which they are held and the appreciation felt for their dedicated service. ROLFE NELSON, Mayor City of Atascadero May 12, 1986 • • P R O C L A M A T I O N California Traffic Safety Week May 18 - 24, 1986 Whereas, traffic collisions are the fourth leading cause of deaths in California; and Whereas, at least 92 percent of all injury-producing collisions are attributed to human error; and Whereas, many of these collisions and the resulting deaths and injuries could have been prevented; and Whereas, public and private institutions, along with concerned individuals, can promote traffic safety by increasing public awareness of safety measures; and . Whereas, the State of California is observing May 18 through 24, 1986, as California Traffic Safety Week; and Whereas, this observance should lead to greater safety on our streets and highways; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT I, Rolfe Nelson, Mayor of the City of Atascadero, jointly with the members of the City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of May 18-24, 1986 to. be Atascadero Traffic Safety Week and urge all citizens to practice the 3 C' s of traffic safety -- courtesy, caution, and common sense - in and effort to reduce deaths and injuries on our roadways. ROLFE NELSON, Mayor • City of Atascadero May I2', 1986 7 MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL • Regular Meeting, April 28, 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 & Mayor Nelson Absent: Councilman Molina (Vacation) STAFF Mike Shelton, City Manager; Dave Jorgensen, Admin. Svcs. Director ; Robert Jones, City Attorney/City Clerk; Bud McHale, Police Chief; Mike Hicks, Fire Chief; Henry Engen, Commun. Develop. Director ; Paul Sensi- baugh, Public Works Director; Steve DeCamp, Senior Planner; Cindy Wil- kins, Deputy City Clerk. COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS Mayor Nelson read two proclamations: - To David Catherina, acknowledging his contributions to Parks & • Recreation and the City of Atascadero (most recently, his exten- sive work in the Phase I development of Paloma Creek Park) , as he leaves employment with the City; - Proclaiming May 4, 1986, Loyalty Day (sponsored by the Veterans of Foreign Wars) A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of April 14, 1986 2. Approval of City Treasurer ' s Report - March 1-31, 1986 3. Approval of City Finance Report - March 1-31,, 1986 4. Council Recognition of City Employee of the Month for March by the Employee Recognition Program Committee - Bill White 5. Approval of Proposed Resolution' 41-85 - Prohibit Parking on San Andreas between Navarette and El Retiro 6. Claim by John L. Gannon for $200 (RECOMMEND DENIAL) 7. Authorization for Expenditure of Funds to the Business Improve • ment Association from Budgeted Appropriation in the Amount of $150 1 i 9 sity Multi-family and including the area within the Urban Ser- vices Line. b. Proposed Ordinance Number 125 Amending the Zoning Map from RS (Suburban Residential) to RMF- 8 and 12, High Density Multi-family, 8 and 12 Units per Acre (FIRST READING) Henry Engen, Commun. Devel. Director, gave staff report. Public Comment Tom Kankiewicz, applicant, spoke in support of request for zone change; with multi-family units going in around their property, it will no longer have its rural appeal, and the requested rezone would make it conducive to the surrounding properties. Terril Graham, 6205 Conejo Rd. , expressed his concern that the City continues to proliferate multi-family housing based on a concept of a domino theory; also, he asked, is this in fact an ex post facto voting for the Urban Services Line (based on the vote that was taken for the new park) , or is this in fact a new and separate proposal? Henry Engen responded to Mr. Graham that there is a rewrite of the Public Services Element (coming to Council at next meeting) of the General Plan which speaks, in part, to the Urban Services Line; there is language legitimatizing the extension of sewer services to the new park, (which is outside City limits) but that would not enable provid- ing sewer services to the two parcels in question, thus their request to be included in the Urban Services Line. In light of Mr . Engen' s response, Mr . Graham asked Council to consider the areas already within the Urban Services Line which are not being served by the treatment plant. Bonita Borgeson, 4780 Del Rio, expressed that, although opposed to 10, 000 sq. ft. lots, she supports the Kankiewicz 's request; the rezone would give them the opportunity to keep their property at fair market value, in view of the developments surrounding it. Bruno Adamoli , 5800 Llano Rd. , expressed concern about the impacts of growth on the capacity of the treatment plant; Mayor Nelson and Paul Sensibaugh, Pub. Works Director , summarized the findings of the recent sewer system study. Tom Kankiewicz spoke again, saying the Planning Dept. did not sug- gest this application, as Mr. Graham related earlier . Mr. Kankiewicz added that if Council would consider down-zoning their property fur- ther , it would be appropriate to him. Council discussion. MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to deny GPA 1D-86 and Zone Change 4-86 without prejudice, seconded by Councilwoman Norris; passed 4:0 by roll-call vote, with Councilman Molina absent. 3 4. Proposed General Plan Amendment 2J-85 and Zone Change 5-85 - Cit of Atascadero-Initiated a. Proposed Resolution 45-85 Amending the General Plan text and General Plan Map Land Use Element pertaining to the establishment of high-density sin- gle-family (10,000 sq. ft. ) land use designation b. Proposed Ordinance 110 Amending the Zoning Ordinance text relative to the establish- ment of a "W" suffix for 10 ,000 sq. ft. minimum residential lots in the LSF and RSF Zoning Districts (FIRST READING) Henry Engen, Commun. Develop. Director , gave staff report, followed by Council discussion. Public Comment Earl Ferguson, 5556 Tunitas (his property runs from Tunitas to Rosar- io) , expressed concern that if more units are built in that area, which is already narrow and windy, it will be increasingly hazardous. Art Jazwiecki , who has owned his lot on Tunitas for 17 years, asked where the multi-family lots in areas A, B, C & D are located, to which Mr. Engen responded. Mr. Jazwiecki expressed his feeling that 10, 000 sq. ft. lots might be acceptable if the majority of property owners in a specific area are in favor of it; he noted that when he first pur chased his property it was zoned for 32 apartments per acre, and ha come through RMF-16 to what it is now at RMF-10; he is concerned with losing the ability to put additional units on the property. Lydia Kellerman, resident, expressed that she feels 10, 000 sq. ft. zoning is most appropriate where there are multi-family units, espec- ially close to town, which gives young families the opportunity to have single-family units relatively close to town. George Highland, 7275 Carmelita, (who clarified that he doesn' t own property in any of the areas under consideration) expressed his con- viction that he believes the General Plan' s basic purpose is to permit the people in the community to set goals for what they visualize as an ideal community for them; he feels these goals can be realistic rather than idealistic, providing the governing body sticks to them. He claimed the maximum population capacity of the Plan has become 42, 000 (from 34, 500 upon its adoption in 1980) . He expressed opposition to 10, 000 sq. ft. lot zoning, feeling it will set a disastrous precedent for the City. Nina Marble, 9125 Pino Solo, expressed opposition to 10 ,000 sq. ft. lots, adding she would support it only with the stipulation that the lot must be zoned for 10 or more per acre before it can become a 10, 000 sq. ft. lot, thereby down-zoning and not increasing population density. 4 Celia Moss, 8040 Coromar and President of Atas. Homeowners' Assn. , spoke in favor of maintaining Atascadero' s rural character; in her efforts to find out how people feel about 'affordable housing' , she did an unofficial survey in front of the Post Office last Thursday, between 9-10 a.m. , which revealed 80-90% of the people she spoke to consistently supported the General Plan, are concerned about the cur- rent amount of growth and basically want to maintain the large lots. Paulette Cooks, expressed that if Council considers rezoning Santa Ynez, both sides of the street should be rezoned to give all owners an opportunity to split their property. Elaine Oglesby, 9195 Santa Lucia Rd. , spoke in opposition to 10,000 ft. lots in order to maintain Atascadero' s distinguishing rural char- acter ; she encourages planned, orderly growth, expressing that growth may change the size of a community, but it doesn' t necessarily have to change its character . She implores Council to reject this proposal and confirm its faith in the uniqueness of Atascadero. Mike Lucas, 8315 Atascadero Ave. , encourages that Council consider alternatives to 10, 000 sq. ft. , as he doesn' t see any areas where it really fits. He feels if the 10,000 sq. ft. lots concept is adopted by Council, there' s a dedicated group who will rise up and oppose it, and the zoning will be changed back in 2-3 years, which would be very bad for long-range planning. Joe Wilmore, 5500 Llano Rd. (resident since 1960) , spoke in opposition to this proposal based on density concerns and in favor of maintaining rural character. John Stettler , 5510 Rosario, feels that, although there may be a prob- lem between the 10 per acre and 2 per acre that the City now faces, 10,000 sq. ft. lots is not the answer , it would set a precedent that the City could not live up to, and we would all be worse for it. Denny Clark, 4585 Viscano .(new resident) , spoke in opposition to large clusters of apartments, such as the 400-unit project, based on his past experience as a law enforcement officer . He feels further time should be taken to study alternatives to 10, 000 sq. ft. lots. Frank Davis, 8920 Curbaril, spoke in favor of 10,000 sq. ft. lots for the benefit of young families who may be able to get into a first home. John Bunyea, 8942 Palomar (5-year resident) , spoke in support of affordable housing, which smaller lots might provide. Richard Shannon, 4820 Obispo Rd. , spoke in favor of 10,000 ft. lots; he recalled areas which were previously zoned multi-family and were changed in 1980 (at time of Gen. Plan adoption) to commercial zoning. He stated, as a realtor , many people are looking for smaller parcels, and there are very few available. 5 Jaime Lopez-Balbontin, resident, spoke in favor of an alternative 10, 000 sq. ft. lots by down-zoning some 2 1/2 to 10-acre lots; favor of preserving rural character . Linda Hardy, 9705 Las Lomas, said that about 3 1/2 years ago, some neighbors initiated a petition in favor of- 10,000 sq. ft. lots, which she and her husband fought all the way; now, however, condominium and apartments surround their once rural property, and they are for the rezone to 10,000 sq. ft. lots only to break even on their property. They are against a City-wide rezone. Bill Poe, 10600 Realito, spoke in favor of 10 ,000 sq. ft. lots, and he offered some statistical (density) comparisons to other cities. Jon Langford, 8755 Junipero, thinks we need a clear definition of ' rural' . He feels it' s a misconception that 10,000 sq. ft. lots would change the character of Atascadero drastically and double the popula- . tion and favors this proposal in his hopes to attain affordable hous- ing. He expressed faith in the City' s Engineering Dept. and their efforts to provide adequate public services. Rich Ashby, 8855 El Centro, spoke in favor of this proposal based on the need to provide affordable housing. Randy Farr , 5940 River Rd. (18-year resident) , spoke in favor - of 10, 000 sq. ft. lots in determined areas so we can progress instead of coming to a standstill. 0 Bonita Borgeson, 4780 Del Rio Rd. , agreed with the comments of Mr. Highland and Mrs. Oglesby; she feels this issue should be put before the people, and that the issue appears to be Rural Atascadero vs. A Freeway City. She asked Council and the audience to ask themselves, "Did you move here for 10,000 sq. ft. lots or for the rural charac-. ter?" . Discussion came back to Council, and each expressed their views. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to deny GPA 2J-85 (Proposed Res. No. 45-85) and Zone Change 5-85 (Proposed Ordinance 110) , second- ed by Mayor Nelson; failed by 2: 2 roll-call vote, with Councilmembers Norris and Handshy voting NO and Councilman Molina absent. MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to provide for a revision to the General Plan Land Use Element text to provide for a new land use designation allowing for 10,000 sq. ft. residential mini- mum lot sizes, and to revise Zoning Ordinance Sections 9-3.154 and 9-3.164- to , ,prov de for 10 ,000 sq. ft. minimum residential lots.,. .�. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to bring this item back ini two weeks for decision by a full Council, seconded by Councilwoma* Norris; passed 3 : 1, with Councilman Handshy voicing NO an Councilman Molina absent. 6 COUNCIL RECESSED FOR A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK. 5. General Plan Amendment 1J-86 and Zoning Map Amendments (Zone Change 10-86) Designating Specific Areas for 10 ,000 Square Foot Lots: 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 1. Proposed Res. No. 43-86 2. Proposed Ord. No. 129 Mayor Nelson announced, as a result of previous motion, public hearing regarding Item B-5 are continued to next meeting, Council would hear testimony from persons wishing to address concerns regarding study areas. Public Comment Lydia Kellerman, resident, addressed the Tunitas area (Study Area "C") and supports 10 , 000 sq. ft. there because the area is becoming very dangerous due to increasing multiple units; increasing the potential number of units would only make things worse there. She read a letter addressed to Council from Robert & Cathryn Beach, who reside on Bajada expressing they favor a zone change on Bajada, Tunitas and Rosario from multi-family to single-family due to density and safety concerns. Jim Neelands, 5615 Bajada (Study Area C) , 27-year resident, expressed traffic safety concerns in that area and believes 10 , 000 sq. ft. lot zoning would help there, and he encourages any zoning revision which would reduce the area' s potential for increased density. Mrs. Kellerman spoke again, announcing that she counted a total of 41 units (15 houses) on Tunitas. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. City Hall Renovation - Bid Tabulation of Phase IIB Structural (Restrooms Deleted) - Award Bid to La Freniere Construction for $104,200 7 0 ! Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director, gave staff report a introduced Mr. Richard Kopecky of Fred Schott & Associates, who a making recommendations on the structural renovation, Phase IIB. No public comment. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to approve acceptance of the bid from La Freniere Construction for $104 , 200, seconded by Council- woman Norris; passed 4:0 by roll-call vote, with Councilman Molina absent. D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Proposed Resolution 27-86 - Declaring Weeds a Public Nuisance & Commencing Proceedings for the Abatement of Said Nuisances Mike Hicks, Fire Chief, gave staff report, noting that parcel owners will be notified of the requirement to abate weeds through a direct mailing (labels provided from County Assessor ' s Ofc. ) this 'year in- stead of posting properties as in the past. Public Comment Doug Lewis, resident, suggested that property owners be reminded of the availability of rental equipment which may encourage them to do the work themselves. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to approve Res. No. 27-86, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed 4:0 , with Councilman Molina absent. 2. Proposed Revised Bid Procedures/Uniform Construction Cost Account- ing Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director, gave staff report, with additional comments from Mike Shelton, City Manager . MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to extend meeting past 11: 00 p.m. , seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed unanimously. Public Comment Art Jazwiecki, resident, asked if the trade journals are local, County or State-wide; Mr . Sensibaugh responded that they are local. Mr . Jazwiecki encourages the use of local contractors. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey to bring back this proposal in ordinance form, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed 4 :0 , with Councilman Molina absent. 8 MOTION: By Councilwoman Norris to recess as Council and convene as Atascadero County Sanitation District Board of Directors, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed unanimously. E. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT (ACSD) 1. Reassign Assessment District #3 Engineer Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director, gave staff report. Public Comment John Faulkenstein, Cuesta Engineering, introduced himself to Council. MOTION: By Director Handshy to accept staff recommendation to termi- nate contract between ACSD and Kennaly Engineering and enter into contract with Cuesta Engineering, seconded by Director Mackey; passed 4:0 by roll-call vote, with Director Molina absent. MOTION: By Director Handshy to adjourn as ACSD Board of Directors and reconvene as City Council, seconded by Director Norris; passed unanimously. F. COMMUNITY FORUM Steve Devencenzi, representing the Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee, gave an update report from the last CTAC meeting. The two main issues discussed were: (1) Expansion of the regional handicapped system, and (2) a commuter bus linking San Luis Obispo and the South County. The next CTAC meeting is scheduled for May 6th. Lydia Kellerman, resident, expressed she appreciates the difficulty of the decision facing Council regarding the 10 ,000 sq. ft. issue; she hopes if they approve, the rezones will be strictly placed where it lends to an area (there should be a separation between multi-family and acreage) . She also inquired as to revitalizing the old downtown area and suggests gardens be placed along the creek for a congregation area. G. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION No comments. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:30 P.M. 9 RECORDED BY: ROBER� R. J ES, City Clerk PREPARED,, BY.- CINDY Y.CINDY WILKINS, Dep. City Clerk 10 i M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 9 SUBJECT: Lot Line Adjustment 1-86 LOCATION: 8305 Coromar Road APPLICANT: George Molina (Twin Cities Engineering) REQUEST: To adjust the lot line between two existing lots. • On April 21, 1986, the Planning Commission considered this request on its consent calendar, unanimously approving the lot line adjustment subject to the findings and conditions contained in the attached staff report. No one appeared on the matter . PS:ps cc: George Molina Twin Cities Engineering 9 0 Lot Line Adjustment 1-86 (Molina/Twin Cities Engineering) 11. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Categorically Exempt (Class 5) C. ANALYSIS: The property which is the subject of this lot line adjustment is zoned RSF-Y. This zoning allows for one (1) acre parcels where sewer is available and one and one-half (1. 5) acre parcels without sewers. The Planning Commission approved a zone change to RSF-X (one-half acre parcels) on April 7, 1986 for this neighborhood. The subject property consists of two (2) lots. Lot 7 contains 0.56 acres and Lot 6A contains 3. 51 acres. Lot 6A contains two houses, a carport and a shop building. The applicant proposes to adjust the lot lines resulting in each "adjusted" lot containing one of the existing dwellings. There are no new lots or building sites being Created. Under the current zoning, Lot 7, at 0.56 acres, is nonconforming. The proposed lot line adjustment will result in one parcel of 0. 57 acres and one parcel of 3.50 acres. Thus, the nonconforming par- cel will be made slightly less nonconforming. Under the recommen- ded new zoning (RSF-X) , neither of the parcels would be nonconforming. D. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Lot Line Adjustment 1-86 based on the Findings in Exhibit A and the Conditions in Exhibit B. SLD:ps ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Findingsf or Approval Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval Exhibit C - Location and Zoning Map Exhibit D - Proposed Lot Line Adjustment Map 2 0 9 Lot Line Adjustment 1-86 (Molina/Twin Cities Engineering) EXHIBIT A - Lot Line Adjustment 1-86 Findings for Approval April 21, 1986 FINDINGS 1. The application as submitted has been determined to be categori- cally exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 2. The application as submitted conforms with all applicable zoning, general plan and subdivision regulations of the City of Atascadero 3 Lot Line Adjustment 1-86 (Molina/Twin Cities Engineering) EXHIBIT B - Lot Line Adjusment 1-86 Conditions of Approval April 21, 1986 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The lot line adjustment as generally shown on the map attachment provided herein shall be submitted in final map format or reflec- ted in a record of survey to be approved by the Community Develop- ment Department prior to recordation by the County Recorder ' s Office. 2. The proposed adjusted lot lines shall be surveyed and monuments set at the new property corners prior to recordation of the final map or record of survey. 3. If a final map is to be recorded, all existing improvements and easements shall be delineated thereon. 4. Approval of this lot line adjustment shall expire two years from the date of approval unless a time extension has been granted pur- suant to a written request prior to the expiration date. 4 L? E Xt-k 13 I T G LOGLI-rION Zom Int ,� Ij y 9-A gv" •<i� s 13-8j00 .. 13-C "4oil ah 1310 0. 6 �''" i[� •X8550 5 �-op Ci oo, IZ 0yy •' �d� \d ,hyo ' m�5- � ,;asbo• a5 5-A, 1 � •\ Q3... 5-c PA e306- K 5 F - Y ' 37 y �i ��' 8q1 oda ��0 �t! v ►s ��� A • a� eye ��i�lt tp T�13' • oaf �� 3 � jbb 34 �I O-A .0 40 aR a � n 4L T- r' �9 t j q 1 tz 10 H Q' RSF to CT a 13 _v ,•°0 0 I �s Ap Ek H I L31 PI`;op05�"�7 LoT C._Il..l� ACOu5 T MEN( ti 7t •h . , i � :�.t> >, c n v I 4 aY A q N a 4 4 I r r 'US :: �i I f p l I I 1 1 / I I / °` /'ss z3' `"•/a.,.s,• a q i l v 1 1 , I I / !�•,aovuoo \ \ \Q -- r rt, c / • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 1 SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map 3-86 LOCATION: 5550 Traffic Way APPLICANT: Gary Mulholland (Twin Cities Engineering) REQUEST: To create. thirty-two residential air-space condominium units (conversion of apartment complex under construction) On April 21, 1986, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this subject unanimously approving the tentative tract map request subject to the findings and conditions contained in the attached staff report. Gary Mulholland, applicant, spoke in support of the request and ques- tioned condition #10 with respect to the requirement for street tree . planting. At that time, clarification was given as to the size, type of tree which would be satisfactory. There was brief discussion among the Commission concerning this same issue. No one else spoke on the matter . PS:ps cc: Gary Mulholland Twin Cities Engineering • r� • Tentative Tract Map 3-86 (Mulholland) C. ANALYSIS• This application proposes the creation of thirty-two residential air-space condominium units. The project consists of the conver- sion of 32 apartment units currently under construction to indi- vidual ownership. This will allow individual ownership of the dwelling units and common ownership of the parking and open space areas. This development was previously reviewed and approved as a condi- tional use permit (CUP 25-84) . A conditional use permit was re- quired prior to issuance of building permits because the project included grading on slopes in excess of 30%. All public improve- ments that would normally be required of a parcel or tract map have already been secured of this project through the conditional use permit and building permit process. However , because it was necessary to remove a greater number of mature trees than origin- ally planned, this tract map will be conditioned on the installa- tion of street trees along the frontage of the property. D. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Tract Map 3-86 based on the Findings in Exhibit A and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B. SLD:ps ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Findings for Approval Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval Exhibit C - Location Map Exhibit D - Site Plan 2 47/ • Tentative Tract Map 3-86 (Mulholland) EXHIBIT A - Tentative Tract Map 3-86 Findings for Approval April 21, 1986 FINDINGS: 1. The creation of these parcels conforms to the zoning ordinance and the general plan. 2. The creation of these parcels is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA (Section 15301. (k) ) . 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed. 5. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife of their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvement will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or le that substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474.6 of the State Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge of waste. 3 9 ! Tentative Tract Map 3-86 (Mulholland) EXHIBIT B - Tentative Tract Map 3-86 Conditions of Approval April 21, 1986 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions, and Restric- tions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances and architectural control of all buildings. a. These CC&Rs shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and Community Development Department prior to approval of the final map. b. These CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium Homeowners Association. 2. A six foot Public Utilities Easement shall be provided along the frontage of the property along Traffic Way. 3. The open space (Lot 1) shall be designated as a Public Utilities Easement. 4. Submit a soils report or engineer ' s certification that existing soils on the site are adequate to support proposed structures per Chapter 70 , subsection (e) of the Uniform Building Code. 5. All conditions of approval herein specified are to be complied with prior to the filing of the final map. 6. A final map, in compliance with all conditions set forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit- ted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 7. An irrevocable offer of dedication shall be made to the City of Atascadero of an easement for drainage purposes along the norther- ly property line. Said easement shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet wide. Said easement shall be consented to but not ac- cepted by the City. 4 i • Tentative Tract Map 3-86 (Mulholland) 8. All conditions imposed on the project by C.U.P. 25-84 and build- ing permits shall be satisfied prior to final building inspection. 9. Improvements required along the frontage of the property along Traffic Way shall be completed or bonded for prior to recording the final map. 10. Revised landscaping plans shall be submitted for review and ap- proval by the Community Development and Public Works Directors. Such plans shall include the planting of street trees thirty (30) feet on-center along the entire frontage of the property along Traffic Way. Such plans shall also include provisions for the perpetual care and maintenance of said street trees. 11. Approval of this tentative tract map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. 5 �' ' f �4�►, i , r cr — 44W ° e LOCA 7—ON I N 4 iM 3 - 8G 145 IL w t�. ItF v o o ��t3 . �f O 14 E ` ° IP Is AL s0> o t� sS o S� IQ �a Pa-w 4r �O 8 F t 5 S2— 16 �,2 � zs. _f •, to ssro 1 ��te #fes ss 3�-2jr:5 534 fa x9� s � to s std ��4f _ szy8 iMl1Asf !y� SSS �d 7 0 • . . S �� t,4t Of t f ;� „ •. y y �° ,. .,gyp U ! 66 2S 510 *MW S s9' s z Sn 1 oti ,b RMF/16 44 -TS 3, a ? rao o !� s ss i AT St 261 ' �� ,, Q►zssso ► ss 5 z5 8Z s �i to �!5%o �O 48 55 p ��Y 4Aj Z7� ISM F _ 16 Nr S s fir .. --�-• ,;� a .j � .��. �., � K , � ,.*�'``' � �-�� c. *•- ..:k s �. s p 2 0 M F/10 IT- a K. P2 opo MAP t : t tr1� Vii= a '� r_ � ° C`�°� '`• `4e3 u4e� F Pa ``•it;3�F�. ?: � a c� a �ekQ Dai °v` v W off.i YQ e --�,'—. - a 4T ;I v y � _ �--J.�I I .-$.. ^'�" q 111 � � II .�- `` x .c•g�—` a i1i . .acres- ;v sr.a,v _ - -- -- w -- F � cl. 0`3 N b IQ 0 9 h ee of 72/4 • M EM O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director IAC SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 LOCATION: 8460 Morro Road APPLICANT: Robert and Margaret Heely (Shirley Moore) REQUEST: Subdivision of one parcel containing 16,938 square feet into two parcels containing 6 ,956 square feet and 9,982 square feet. On April 21, 1986 , the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing above-referenced subject unanimously approving the land division re- quest subject to the findings and conditions contained in the attached staff report, with modification to condition #9 to read: "9. Upon approval by the Director of Public Works, the property owner may enter into a deferral agreement for the construc- tion of the curb, gutter and sidewalk along Morro Road and Amapoa Road. " Shirley Moore, representing the applicant, expressed concern on sev- eral conditions, to which clarification was given to those concerns. Gerald Daniels, Amapoa resident, made some general comments on the proposed project. John Falkenstein with Cuesta Engineering, clarified some of the drain- age issues raised during the course of discussion. No one else appeared on the matter . PS:ps cc: Robert and Margaret Heely Shirley Moore tin, Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 Heely/Moors 8. Adjacent Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . .North: CP (FH) (PD3) South: CP (FH) (PD3) East: RMF/16 (FH) West: RMF/16 9. General Plan Designation. . . . .Commercial Professional 10. Terrain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .Level 11. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration C. ANALYSIS: The property proposed for subdivision is located in the CP (FH) (PD3) zone. There is no minimum lot size for new lots created in this zone. Proposed Parcel A is vacant and will have frontage along Morro Road. Morro Road is a State Highway and will be improved prior to or in conjunction with development of Parcel A. Development on this parcel will be required to meet the standards of both the Flood Hazard (Section 9-3.601) and Planned Development No. 3 (Sec- tion 9-3. 647) sections of the zoning ordinance. Proposed Parcel B has frontage along Amapoa Avenue. This parcel contains an existing four unit apartment which is a nonconforming use in the Commercial Professional zone. The use is, however , consistent with surrounding properties which front on Amapoa Avenue. The subdivision will create lots which are suitable for existing and proposed uses. Improvements which will be required along Amapoa and Morro road will improve the appearance of the property and will improve the safety and convenience of the traveling pub- lic. Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is an appropri- ate action in this area. D. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 based on the Findings in Exhibit A and Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B. SLD:ps ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Findings for Approval Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval Exhibit C - Location Map Exhibit D - Parcel Map 2 Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 Heely/Moore EXHIBIT A - Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 Findings for Approval April 21, 1986 FINDINGS: 1. The creation of these parcels conforms to the zoning ordinance and the general plan. 2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the recommended conditions of approval, will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed. 5. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife of their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvement will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or that substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474.6 of the State Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge of waste. 3 < , • Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 Heely/Moore EXHIBIT B - Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 Conditions of Approval April 21, 1986 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel or its public utility easement prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility easements, pipelines and other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are other building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. Grading, drainage and erosion control plans, prepared by a regis- tered civil engineer , shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to issuance of building permits in conjunction with installation of driveways, access easements or structures. 4. All grading and drainage improvements shall require written certi- fication by a registered civil engineer that all work has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans. 5. Obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans for work within their right-of-way prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. Obtain encroachmbnt permit(s) from the Public Works Department prior to start of construction and construct improvements as di- rected by the encroachment permit(s) prior to final building inspection. 7. An offer of dedication to the City shall be made for the following rights=of-way: a. Street name: Amapoa b. Limits: 3 feet adjacent to the westerly right-of-way line C. Minimum width: 46 feet 8. Construction of road improvements shall be completed (or bonded for) prior to recording the final map. Road improvements shall include: a. Curb, gutter, ten foot sidewalk, and paveout to full width along the Morro Road frontage. b• City standard driveway approach and five foot sidewalk along the Amapoa Avenue frontage. 9. Upon approval by the Director of Public Works, the property owner may enter into a deferral agreement for the construction of the curb, gutter and sidewalk along Morro Road. 4 ''; Tentative Parcel Map 8-86 Heely/Moore 10. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously with recording the final map. 11. Wastewater disposal shall be by connection to the City' s sewer system. 12. A sewer connection permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department prior to connection to the sewer. 13. An in-lieu sewer connection of $26.35 per fixture unit shall be due in addition to usual connection, tap-in, and installation fees, prior to issuance of a building permit. This stipulation shall appear as a note on the final map. 14. The trash enclosure shown on Parcel B shall be relocated and con- structed behind the twenty-five foot front setback prior to re- cording the final map. 15. Participate in eliminating a portion of the flood hazard to the property by posting a performance security in the amount of $10,029 per acre with the City to be used for a drainage improve- ment project for channelizing the outflow from.Atascadero Lake to Atascadero Creek. In the event that a future assessment district is formed for the area drainage improvements that include this project, then credit in the amount of the deposit will be applied towards final apportionment of the assessment if allowed by the assessment district proceedings. This condition shall be satis- fied prior to the issuance of building permits and shall appear as a note on the final map. 16. The property owner shall enter into an agreement with the City, acceptable to the City Attorney, agreeing to participate in an assessment district for drainage and related improvements intended to mitigate flooding in the Amapoa-Tecorida drainage area and in those areas impacted by that drainage prior to recording the final map. 17. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate by certificate on the final map that corners have been set or will be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit- ted for review, in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 18. Approval of this tentative parcel map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. 5 7�0 P f 7yzp 739 E X 4 13 1�f G I C `-'�1 L U GATI 0 lel Z O lel l N 4 =t,75 z 732 S 7590 y�3 A 2G 07607 75TS4 752p 75068755o !2600 757'9,2 S S� - T Z600 .75773 s l 630 �<ly- 7�Co 7 S �5 ` 116 Q� �•� 77,° A 7485 7 S 8o J7 7jzo7s- c t oJ. >6 8' �)670 � lb0$ 1 CNlP03) -7775-6%s 6 0 >c>os '-� E4 ' 7 1� 77oS 7jJ 7 7 3 � 3 1700 33 2l 7Bcb 3 7� 7675 D 77 . 7a �8, '94 776 0 77 .2 +9 i,so 7"5A 7790 {77- t/ 2; ' 7Bso 7805. -.4 �`�-M 76+0 4 1 Y 3 s}S ;gLb , 3r- _ 7_7 7460 ? - YE �S 7g�3_ 76 O ?77529 7p°p 2 3 7775 s s s -- ' 0 7800 j6 A v ?9jq-�_ ,ess ! 25 z79ss� 79oo_ 7g75 r?. n des G s ti. {7 39 / 30 ! '1/ ��' 1 37 m u 7? Jjol r $ r S B� ! /HO t0 i ` s 3 O ?7 7 S4 �� 2 LSF-Y �` -� - 5 15 _: 5d � PARS \gyp g c,5 5 �• 5 - 7 IO g23y Go tJ 1• sy,� STX603 I7 t 3q ao y\ 1� `�5�� 81 6 Z T yyIT 6 �Bsr 5O /ass,80 L5 tho, 6L 'h 1► , • 79 oD o • rAa� rO 19 oo4 r55 43 z\ 831 2) 1420 ' r� ! �J � d � r rs •N �4r� ;fig`;; 2• ro 4 0 a < 5 . 7 If 1pl,�,C, 3B3 �• t 1148�`. O5 RS F—Y ( FFA z� �JB,G" ;,1• • 3st� it 95,5 IZ? 01r 8Z9 mos .> 4 5 -i (C 570 8555 a •/10� BZ32 8Yo c � 3 / 36 6Z's g s, . q,/. N, 8j9's 04 0 M0240 �D .s a e, ��. . P 3) 8' 6' oe\ a B` Bros , 9Z,75 4 e 77s , o rAss 8 s 4 R-Sl 5 ?• `� 860 �*�f`o ,� 5 ayr ° 40 8y 0 r ' /o N 5 c 96.5 S� $? CID" m LA g \ g �brc co� 9 m o kr RMF/16 (FH) s" 10-A N if " FAr- IA its 7 co Go2 r s , R A � f `, _ _ , CITY 4F ATASCAJ Ex 41 al t— ('RoPD5ED PAR GCC_. MA 't W W 1 ZO OO�uoy��T a ( �✓A cgs Q k� jIQ� Qy�yOj2� � Q VU�iJ � QUO � 4Qi<��~V � ,y..•• Vud' Z�Q 3 �JOlQO i J �LKo I W h N z O J O O P Z Q I O � 4 W IW - 1 I! Os I o rl I Z k W I IJ ku N Q ,Ol I j • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager(, , FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Request to vacate a Public Utilities Easement: Century Plaza, 6905 El Camino Real REQUEST• The attached resolution is for the vacation of a portion of a public utility easement on E1 Camino Real. This portion is 20 feet by 200 feet and is located on Parcel I, AT CO 73-06 restricting development of that portion of the lot. ANALYSIS: .As shown on the attached revised Century Plaza site plan, the existing • theaters (Building C) , proposed theaters (Building D) , and the future retail building (Building K) all encroach into a portion of this pub- lic utility easement. The vacation of the public utility easement must be completed before the applicant can build on this part of the lot. Letters were sent to all concerned utilities notifying them of our in- tent to vacate this easement. Their response was in favor of the vacation. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the attached resolution abandoning utility easement. DD:ps Enclosures: Resolution No. 45-86 -� 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 EN EN, Co nity Development Director _ t - � � - Y�t � s fe+`•+.•;�!� � r YA {rt�t i � x �L�wl t is t 'tJ.� � r O '• \i ,�[•f w'Ya Je:���*\.v Tt�♦ ��"� ' � t k��!�'(1���. t t.jAj�ii ��� �Al 'j, ui�l-.,' \ }�,•, ��; Amt � 1`• c - � � ria! i rr . �M I r (� I � �•� 1 t III p � , t Y '�'�^�'•'t • IIS } ,� t', ;, � � •i' iY t\"�,"^ fid\< .t'�� I • i � ,� i S s 1�� ta�,�• ' •• I i s. r '+.tk i • . ;'. t t ` .' � � •.r t, •il •" � � \\\�. ,,•'rte I.� •+.1 n 1 1 fAM/NO ''titfAL I ... • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director , SUBJECT: Request to vacate a Public Utilities Easement: 8793 Plata Lane REQUEST: The attached resolution is for the vacation of a public utility ease- ment on Plata Lane. The site is located at 8793 Plata Lane in the City of Atascadero; legal description being: the southwesterly five feet of Parcel 1 and the northeasterly five feet of Parcel 2, both strips of land designated and delineated as "5" P.U.E. (Public Utili- ties Easements) within Parcel Map AT 80-97 as per map filed for record in Book 32, Page 100 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the San Luis • Obispo County Recorder. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing an industrial building and wants to elimin- ate any setbacks in order to maximize his land use. The vacation of the public utility easement must be completed before he can build on this part of his lot. Letters were sent to all concerned utilities notifying them of our in- tent to vacate this easement. Their response was in favor of the vacation. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the attached resolution abandoning utility easement. DD:ps Enclosures: Resolution No. 44-86 • On motion by and seconded by the foregoing resolution was approved 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: MICHAF SHE�,, CitvyManager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney PREPARED BY: UENAY EN EN, Co unity Development Director J �I� WV'Q' v 4• i iW � ,Q° c�°. Q ��'` aaN`` Q W �� V � �� �V; i�Z h• ?? ��� ° � ��f 24 , N 'k �,v� � tai 1: �I V � W f _r Q � Y N`^.•4 N � �' y� W .�j Qt i JQ�t V•`,s Wn� ^ 4 S� 3 h � y NIA lk 44 wl ovf - I.'lav'r➢ 1 l nl,on r� 't 6f9 i..Yl df.dik i 3 CA � 3) 4 0 ...�,...:ww�.•ramsawa�elC�wfTal:�l9Y}�Or-l ''.".:lY`M'.t.�.Vxi:•m.'Hi+,C:'naYR'.l�-.u:-:Y'.iaaifll6.SV`:t,sL.S.'l�F:''n...15'LG-::--�"_".+-"��P�tS1� 1 f5 M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 4'T� SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 34-85 - LOCATION: 10420 San. Marcos Road APPLICANT: George Bressler (Twin Cities Engineering) . On February 11, 1986, the City Council approved Parcel Map 34-85, subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the recom- mendation of the Planning Commission. The required conditions have been complied with and the final map is recommended for approval. HE:ps cc: George Bressler Twin Cities Engineering - • �3 MEMORANDUM . T0: City Council G"kIl- THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: San Luis Obispo County Solid Waste Management Plan - Preliminary Draft DATE: May 7, 1986 Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council support the above plan in general, but that it take exception to some or all of the issues highlighted by staff to not benefit Atascadero users. Background: The City is in receipt of the above document for official comment to the Advisory Committee. (Staff member Sensibaugh sits on said Committee) . The report is an update of the 1977 plan which was administered through existing county offices. The new plan is intended to be self-supported and the revenues are anti- cipated to come from landfill or collection surcharges, a de- velopment fee, or related methods. A new administrator will be hired to oversee the new division and to implement the plan. It is suggested that one of the priority tasks will be to "determine how the Incorporated Cities will contribute to the system" . Consultant Recommendations: 1) General - Board of Supervisors approve plan and forward to the California Waste Management Board for approval. 2) Waste Collection - Evaluate mandatory collection for the more densely populated areas. 3) Waste Transfer - Evaluate transfer station at Los Osos Landfill and in the Lake Nacimento area, and others identified in the County General Plan. 4) Resource Recovery - Evaluate alternatives to landfill disposal. 5) Waste Disposal - Evaluate expansion of the Chicago Grade Landfill, and a possible replacement for the Cold Canyon Land- fill. • u,j is seen here for us. ; (7) Household Hazardous Wastes. We are very skeptical about any programs of this nature. While the philosophy is ideal, the regulation seems impossible. The sep- eration of household waste (at higher costs for disposal of aerosol cans, chemical containers, etc) may lend to dishonesty, police-state tactics and other off-the-wall administrative night- mares. Voluntary measures are encouraged but not very practical for good results. Time Schedule: Comments to the preliminary draft plan are due May 12. Based on comments from all agencies and the Advisory Committee, the Draft EIR is presented to all of the same, allowing 45 days for comment. The Draft County Solid Waste Management Plan is then revised and the final EIR prepared. A county public hearing is then held where the Board certifies the EIR and approves the Draft Draft County solid Waste Management Plan. The incorporated cities receive the County Solid Waste Management Plan for review and approval. Approval is required by 50% of the incorporated cities, allowing 90 days for response. The approved plan is then submitted to the California Waste Managment Board for review and approval. Fiscal Impact: Funding. The citizens of our City no doubt should share in the general benefit of the plan to the County, including the items objected to above. We question, however , if their con- tribution through their normal taxes to the County General Fund isn' t adequate for that purpose. 3 IDA �f • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager tl. FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2J-85 AND ZONE CHANGE 5-85 (Text changes enabling 10;000 square foot lots) and GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1J-86 AND ZONE CHANGE 10-86 (Planning Commission recommendations regarding specific areas for 10,000 square .foot lots: Study Areas A, B, C, and D and 9240 Atascadero Road) BACKGROUND: On April 28, 1986 , the City Council considered and continued to the meeting of May 12th both the proposed text and map changes which would implement 10,000 square foot lots in the City. • The accompanying agenda materials include only the actions recommended by the Planning Commission in the form of draft resolutions and ordi- nances. (For background material, refer to your agenda packet of April 28, 1986) . SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES: 1. Blanket Denial - Council could deny the text changes to the gen- eral plan and zoning ordinance which would require denial of the map changes. (Except that the change proposed for one half acre lots at 9240 Atascadero Road could be acted upon. ) If it were the desire of the Council to drop the idea of 10, 000 square foot lots as a policy objective, then an amendment to the Housing Element could be initiated. 2. Text Approval/Deferral of Ma2 Changes - Council could approve the amendments to the general plan text and either approve - or defer for additional study - parallel action on the zoning ordi- nance text to enable 10 ,000 square foot lots. General Plan and zoning map changes for 10, 000 square foot lots could be deferred pending area studies as part of the General Plan update. 3. Approval of Planning Commission' s Recommendations - This would reflect acceptance of the resolutions and ordinances attached . hereto. The theoretical number of lots that could be created City wide is 102. 0 RESOLUTION NO. 45-85 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE TEXT AND GENERAL PLAN MAP LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE CITY' S GENERAL PLAN PERTAINING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY (10,000 SQUARE FOOT) LAND USE DESIGNATION (GP 2J-85) WHEREAS, the City' s Planning Agency has initiated said general plan amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero conduc- ted a public hearing on the subject matter on June 17, 1985 and recom- mended approval of the amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero conducted a public hearing on the subject matter on August 12, 1985; 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 City' s Land Use and Housing Elements. 2, . The proposed general plan amendment will not have a signifi- cant adverse effect upon the environment, and preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not necessary. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to approve General Plan Amendment GP 2J-85 as follows: 1. Amendments to the land use element text as shown on the at- tached Exhibit A. On motion by and seconded by vote: the motion was approved by the following roll call AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: •t- 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, Interim City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENG N, Com u ity Development Director 2 EXHIBIT A GP 2J-85 Amendments to the text of the Land Use Element of the General Plan: P. 59 - Change the text following Single Family Residential through and including High Density to read as follows: Sinqle Family Residential: Five classifications of single family residential density are proposed in this Plan. The principal uses found in each classification are proposed as follows: Land uses shall be limited to single-family dwellings, acces- sory buildings and uses, home occupations, public parks and playgrounds, schools, libraries and board and care far-41_i- ties. High Density (10 ,000 square feet) Minimum lot size for creation of new lots shall be 10 ,000 square feet. High Density (1/2 acre) Minimum lot size for the creation of new lots shall be one- half acre. P. 62 - Change Residential Policy No. 4 to read as follows: 4. High density single family residential (10,000 square feet and 1/2 acre) and multifamily residential (high and low density) uses may serve as a buffer between commer- cial and the lower density single family residential where appropriate. P. 64 - Add the following Residential Policy No. 19: 19. High density single family residential (10,000 square foot and 1/2 acre) and multifamily residential (high and low density) designated areas shall be served with sewer . P. 64 - Delete Table V-1 l 3 ORDINANCE NO. 110 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT RELATIVE TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A "W" SUFFIX FOR 10 ,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE LSF (LIMITED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) AND RSF (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICTS (ZC 5-85) WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment proposes stand- ards consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800, et seq. , of the California Government Code concerning Zoning Regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant ad- verse effect upon the environment and preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not necessary; and, WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning commission held a public hearing le and has recommended approval of Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 5-85. 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 Planning Director is appropriate. Section 2. Zoning Text Change: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 5-85 is approved to change the text of the Zoning Ordinance to read as follows: 1. Section 9-3.154 (Minimum Lot Size) (RSF) is approved to read as follows: 9-3. 154. Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size in the Residential Single Family Zone shall be 10 , 000 square feet r . and may range up to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres. The size of a lot shall be consistent with the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the Official Zoning Maps as provided by Section 9-3.104 (d) . SYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE W 10 ,000 square foot minimum lot size X One-half (1/2) acre Y One (1) acre, when sewers are available One and one-half (1 1/2) acres, when sewers are not available Z One and one-half (1 1/2) to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres based on performance standards set forth in this Section. 2. Section 9-3.164 (Minimum Lot Size) (LSF) is approved to read as follows: 9-3.164. Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size in the Limited Residential Single Family Zone shall be 10 ,000 square feet and may range up to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres. The size of a lot shall be consistent with the land use designa- tion set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the Official Zoning Maps as provided by Section 9-3. 104 (d) . SYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE W 10, 000 square foot minimum lot size X One-half (1/2) acre Y One (1) acre, when sewers are available Z One and one-half (1 1/2) to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres based on performance standards set forth in this Section Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordqance 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 August 12, 1985 and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on 1985. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO By ATTEST: ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROBERT M. JONES, Interim City Attorney Pj PARED BY: ,, HENRY ENGIN, Comm ty Development Director Council Mtg. 5/12/0 ITEM B-2-a,b,c d & e 9 , • STUDY AREA "A" (MORRO FLATS AREA (Proposed Resolution Number 39-86) (Proposed Ordinance Number 126) STUDY AREA "B (PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREA) (Proposed Resolution Number 40-86) (Proposed Ordinance Number 127) STUDY AREA "C" (FRESNO/TUNITAS ROAD AREA) STUDY AREA "D" (LAS LOMAS AREA) (Proposed Resolution Number 42-86) (Proposed Ordinance Number 128) STUDY AREA "E" (9240 ATASCADERO ROAD ) (Proposed Resolution Number 43-86) • (Proposed Ordinance Number 129) PLEASE REFER TO COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET OF APRIL 28, 1986 FOR BACKGROUND DOCUMENTATION ( If you need an additional copy of the material, please contact Karen Vaughan at 466-8000 xtn, 126) f RESOLUTION NO. 39-86 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 THE "MORRO FLATS AREA" FROM MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY TO HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (10,000 SQUARE FEET) (GP 1J-86: STUDY AREA A - MORRO FLATS AREA) 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 - MORRO FLATS AREA Request to revise the existing general plan from Moderate Density Single Family to High Density Single Family Residential (10, 00 square feet) 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 proposed general plan land use map revision would be con- sistent with existing and proposed policies contained in the general plan land use element due to the proposed project' s sewer and decreasing density from the center of the community. 2. The proposed land use designation would not be a spot desig- nation and would be consistent with existing land use pat- terns in the area. 3. The site is within the sewer improvement district and sewer services are not available to the site. 4. The proposed amendment, as revised to eliminate creekway en- croachment, will not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. A negative Declaration 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 (MORRO FLATS AREA) to change the 1980 Atascadero General Plan Land Use Map as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" entitled GP 1J-86 - MORRO FLATS AREA. 1j 0 • 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 ment Director 2 Qt r EXHIBIT "A" fr„ `• GP 1J-86--MORRO FLATS AREA �•�a ,,r '> 1:�� From Moderate Density Single •=� Family to High Density: Single Family (10, 000 - ' ,• �• ,•y. �;;~' ;� square foot lot) ;If.; .�,�1♦ l ;f EB••.t •'s :a • 11••J •gi'•ori ,•1. 1 •. ♦'� '8 J9 alt• ;'. A `i ;ty� - +`- .� ;;1`' ,t "'Q 4 �• .• •5. �. +• 'fie°�\. ,;i/• � `'Y� �,1�•� . ^4. ���' ? ~�N �•'�:? � �,C.I. �� ♦ • f J FB yof � •r, `Ya / U�� y�,�f •• �- �•1 '�••iv» "t.•„a �'3.L�Y t- - � ,yt..,�,t•`• •., ♦♦ �++'.•ii •.`•`� .`•''. •V� V- 1 ..y `+• hf.,' � � nfr '•:••' rat �� � -� `'.! -q X^ ..,.r. '�:r �•+ ..�„ ./• �Q 'CB ;:ahs .. '+•• t. .� C , • `� �• �� J•/,C Zy��'1 7w a y 1 i r .. � y 1 J,• � , -,• r 4. .e;..—.` •�; .�_••moi - .•. to rr, , 1 - � a •` '�• •` y, '",+` ~, • h ...,• ..,TTe, 10 �•T *.; J(Ytr; (t PD3 ' Y' "'1' S' s •No �+ LD ti ,•,,�.,• 't t3 �,� •t - •�,�- I Q \ti by i � , r.02 , Nf• ..rr�, ✓tI.N r •t v �1 • t / �h�••••a,• .l' h_ tr• •,IY ••.It •.i; r 1t •t• '• •• .. • • AT 73-L04 • ,�: a, �-.,.• K;;r. �> LSF—Y(FFi? . �, . �aJ • �_ •... .. •+ ,.» t.o. t.f» rta-:. .. - • AT•78•GS �'~ ^a••.�,•.�!;i.. /.I/�+�.. a;� ► e '• ,r.. �"e .'r ,�f . .sc. AT'7d•21i lLl � '.-�;t•l�,� /ter• .l� •.. l• e w • f1 4• L .I� . •ti.,� .r .v wr �'-��„�•n. •-�'rya: r•27 yD ..w�.... )jn :',^,�;. ^i .f:(''4.+Pb T.UGT 1004 �• a t•ro •5�: 3: "` •�i/t�J:j 1 �M.. •..» ala ,•a •�:�'• ,�.�.�' .. .• ... (FH) a'x' .7e Ci 1 ••� •�. AV tot I r 19 _)•'" l,tai{»� \ �'�7-,:' w r 't • •"�• 'bs•� Y•,"�t '"�' 1>0 .. AUX •• a,Jl llG 1 6-•q `\ uCl `'r .:•» ,N,: '.` „ My. 'C- `i': I.t�•l ��``,.. 0� Me'•� ! \ �`� ,w.t r s i "33 C 1'' ♦ 4+^•�•'i• 1 t)\ _�t. r 90 . :. J i tP�i1 Zllvloe •-••Tac '; .: Ll�.,r //1 •Li �"r. ,'+•• �...'� / , 'f r, . }± `�- - �d • ,:„ r, , ,�4, y , ,� "" f 61. �,. EXHIBIT A 41 a ''° ''�'• • '�= - RESOLUTION NO. 39-86 t 1_ ;• FH) • ~_ _ ,t_ General Plan Amendment r , 11 1J-86 - Morro Flats Area ��• t i •t ORDINANCE NO. 126 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBER 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY IN THE "MORRO FLATS AREA" FROM LSF-Y (LIMITED SINGLE FAMILY) TO LSF-W (LIMITED SINGLE FAMILY - 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT) (ZC 10-86: "MORRO FLATS AREA") 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 17 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 LSF-Y (Limited Single Family) to LSF-W (Limited Single Family, 10, 000 square foot lot) . Z .. CHANGE 1 0-86 (MORRO FLAT REA) �f From LSF-Y (Limited Single Family) •I 1.;�� To LSF-W (Limited Single Family, 10, 0QO.. square €oot . lot) .`* tr>r.`a� ,,,,��at•h° ). .4 :'jP• C` r a�,ti+ •,: J,. Q'n I FB 3-'�aa„• ..t. •n,ti !� ...,'\ , ,1• :.y `• %��.- ° q. °.+ ♦ -r l .r, �(� V� 4:" �!f%�`w .,.° i r. ....r f,,, �S.R r, /^' �•• ,�.C,:, \•�. \ a �,�i.•%; � � • °j•. V /"6 � .,y s�°+�i'I,� -w\jie. .nfr .i�.v •I' �,�a � , � `•�. .+..Yu�r.^ .a,.i. '.J•i ..may .T�Q ''CB :. :/.: ;sK,,... ,•„ra • w i� • f F ,s ° , a° �� °ib 1'•\9�, 1 +•� „ °� ., i 1 �l r •—'.f0 ,.q •,a. '' .rt' N M N N rf •,' •i �.. ♦a �i i�{'el J\ \ ..h ';s♦ .a b. />< � J6'... ,,.�" IL. •ri ..Oa •.at ct♦ 'r,,,a • sy�i� .• Yo , • .,+ � ti r � . ,1 t, , , ,«rs !se• '�>d 1rf .*ham lI:• � .sir •Y. i! � .`♦a � ,a1 r�,•a, - �,�' , • ,h ; f9 af+17o . /.• •wy 'i • N ,♦«sr -ea ✓e° � a I` � `'� , . 18 + •' � s y 7aI� 4y�/ ',rr 1,+. r4 .a. , , 'r f• .:,, ".f♦ s,n+• �� �.{° , - °• ,r t fW+• a ,° r' ,af! �• �n'�. �.. 1.,rr.�. �ra ''eO „�! ta°I •p• `'.a' �f As •1 '► '.g V �`f �,fjj '_• �'yf ,:,1" •y,'a `Na n i ;`� ``.. o�'r 1 •���, ,,� r• �-,,. ',�• Q „ �;,. ..o e ,f I. ;": Ln .—fie • • -- a va �,• T u.11' , e ''�C cre`� r, aw I t0T •a�ee .,.l+ r i 'Y,••� �• , `; '•'° +.�: tom[. !� �� •se •o :f.'sw ,tall'll rswsr ...�f .n /• ri.. AT•60•C41 tr ��h - ..a ;~ ,s:, • e •.•+r '•l;.e. r,tt ` �•w p •�}-i♦ • AT-7e•LOS a ;. �JJ: �= �•:w' •'$ ° ,a ,•e "a' `~'ry• :• ^' LSF-Y(FH1° AT-78.45 �.f,ra' yrs.. ^�,r«��� ,+t i.' '� p0 I a ° '� 'ir• r• •t <' •,�� ��'� - 4, T7uLT 10o1 L•(, A_ i �"��1�o•. �='nn: .,=a ,,,a,� ,,TP�f.! •* +., ,..r:... Vii'• 11s '•,'��`..�T: � ,�-°S' ;r:�..:,<.`..;•. �� 1 �'�T�r., 1`.- �{}: }moi • 1 ,s.. - is.o �1�' .a.; LSF-Y FH) II •.f•. « 1 �+r. ,r .. - .ate .1'• ff�I .•� 19 1� �vr Nlt $u '�.t\ t sr�y ��' '•o .� : ,ll ,. 9dv atPOp`' ' f 41FdJ ,.s'y ' G� r' r ss ; a u B f �•�o°� 1{ y siti•ei° . ._'-'> L>'fi ^�- \ y o. r r+ ,• .'. ♦ ."s° ,O -A., i Y1 t7 r Ila .. �_.. 7 •+�\�•�: -�I• as •' °° •r\• ya la•0 TI:'VT STC!: e.v �• .•• • .:�� .+. „ Mar ," ,,`•'H r..r° � :, , I= \ (ti C �:, Msr N4 „ y a, '`- sN l.T •rw , e� o.. est_• es,f FiG 14 .\` ;y•; I, +. „ :a� t ♦� „1. `\�4 • .yh n09 r f:� ! '\ +`• r�,e.. � ' •. r i ` '�� • 4�♦><'+•�• '23 T`\ L`'!lilt O .• ' ,� ..' 16,..Is i Y „r' `�h,,• b i',;�,Y d`d' ''i jcr,Ii 0 T •� I 1 L ° r '• „ , ++• °• it •� -Y 27 �o1�.y,�'r♦ ViV1 /� ar � ��'' a T+ .q,•°• �! T'S.� ••. rs a v,; r,,,/ / ru. '� �,.��♦`•� v + , 104 Y•jl:�l• ' •say ° >_ , � •• Orf ♦ EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO. 126' �F(FH) - - �- Zone Change 10-86 ' KC �';`' 's.' ;'a;' � (Morro Flats Area) •1 a'a • . •a uA — 1 �I•' 7 r /y --�11.a �v R ,/ • i RESOLUTION NO. 40-86 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 THE "PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREAS" FROM MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY AND HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY TO HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (10, 000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE) (GP 1J-86 : STUDY AREA B - PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREAS) WHEREAS, a request to amend the City of Atascadero General Plan has been received as follows: General Plan Amendment 1J-86 and Zone Change 10-85 - PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREA - Request to revise the existing general plan from Moder- ate Density Single Family and High Density Single Family to High Den- sity Single Family - 10,000 square foot 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 proposed general plan land use map revision would be con- sistent with existing and proposed policies contained in the general plan land use element due to the proposed project' s sewer , decreasing density from the center of the community, and existing land use pattern of lot sizes. 2. The proposed land use designation would not be a spot desig- nation and would not be inconsistent with existing land use patterns in the area. 3. The site is within the sewer improvement district and sewer services are available to the site. 4. The proposed amendments will not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. A negative declaration 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 (PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREA) 16 to change the 1980 Atascadero General Plan Land Use Map as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" entitled GP 1J-86 - PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREA) 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 LJA General Plan Amen-dmerit IJ-86 (Palomar/Arcade Road Area) . `.� �o:;'v'' ..r• I ;', ` ) z' From Moderate Density Single 1 ,.= r •• + �•••.�• '• `� ,: L, Family & High Density Sin' ;,�• " ,'� , �'+ � , Q�• Family to High Density + °`�• �,ItiI, ,s„�:� , Single Family(10, 000 sq z.er, �7 p, �r' ysr.° r MQ V o i , ,f• i +>, AT-CI-t83 ti•el I�, '`� S �. .t?lV• •�.• •� -tom i , e► . �.;_ i;» _.` t AT. 81 2SL S•2S:BL - `,A �l�• ,7 •• •t�• 2fl. '� - ��t•• .�: X10, �• •.�! �•:. . •i.w• y. '» •►`••�:.; .Zry �i • , , ,.J � .•,y,• Fri • i� •-.. ,,N 7 S •�. •.•'•• .,�. •ti fid y•+y, t ^ ! i , �• t,... i'•t'•; % .j ,. ••1,•. �. �. ^rigr� "i,I•• rrL' :::)• `••. ., •..•. _ ! •LV7SIOY / DATf. •r'�° ' / •7%�ri'•• fI•wC 1 ••i6: :. •••ti•.i:.i.,..•�� •i� .. •t. •�h° [7'SC tya •�,�:ti� b"'t ll.n 3•'w .,0:•`l, .t 1. :j;wf:•'•r,'.' :>,•''•=� :•,•.:5; ...;� - . •• •. '•r�. 39 Oil •�� _ ,•:.• �•� -(e- � M' �. •, eP•� I .s. tag � •1 t• 1 - ••~ , � :e,�.'.^:::': �:' ►L sty �,.�• �' sa f to ,, A��'Jb GJ �'qi ',,;w1• S.�` ■•►� :. . :.,,�\• � :•••��• rat , '• _ �}•«'.•�;•' r,1 v 'r•• t • spy►; * ti D'�i�' 2�i!toMi■ »„�i ,s• ^ , -7 to-A � •1��1 •: I. :r 3' f�,i...A'/ •; r i ,�� � eri.•'et+'• • +i+ '• .i! �q ��r •:i w .. •.L ,S•t`+' 10 �' .}� 00 ^` nit /70 �• '6 .w •4• a RSFY to CT '� I'' "' ?' F Z '- t N _ _ ;- . • , . ,.,: _. .• •t$ 'z•, �. a _ • • C ; �'� *�.?:RMF/ ;r'":1;:•::''' •• `. •••.l.•i L iii' �'`•: t r` r j� t _'•1' 2EXHIBIT "A" ti ,2 ; •':r. RESOLUTION NO. 40-86 •, r:•,••.. I ]4 1 •-� .•• GP 1J-86 Palomar/Arcade Rd. V. 23 • , ORDINANCE NO. 127 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBERS 17, 18, AND 19 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY IN THE "PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREAS" FROM LSF-X AND RSF-Y TO LSF-W (LIMITED SINGLE FAMILY, 10, 000 SQUARE FOOT LOT) (ZC 10-86 : "PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AREA") 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 Change. Map Numbers 17, 18 , and 19 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended to reclassify the area shown on the attached Exhibit "A" from LSF-X (Limited Single Family) and RSF-Y (Residential Single Family) to LSF-W (Limited Single Family, 10 ,000 square foot lot) . Section 3.' Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated • ! in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef- fect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. 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 2 •-a, `• � �, ,: „+� `6 � ,�• 1 Oma/ ~+ . ••� ?" �� `• +�, raj%•• '�• .. ` �..,, ry ' r�� - a,, •.��`�,• ♦ gyp,.. 1.rll,,• _., ,ti., �« ��.� � ►nr •�•�. _. ' ♦ ••�• PO �.,�,, . ••�' r1 i f mc ._Ji` ' of �• ,{. .;` , earl 4i i^ /� .. Q, „` iV� ,•4.'r `' f ZONE CHANGE 10-86 : PALOMAR/ARCADF '�. ROAD AREA From LSF-X (Limited s`�y �� I�tv 'f •`` 4� y;�� z Single Family) and RSF-Y ✓ �( ;i ,. 1 �, •,• ,a er .� ;� :• • • •����• •� Residential Single Family •Iz�e�.• �• to LSF-W (Limited Single + lN,p• S •y v. ,,ey '�� Family, 10, 000 square 12-e1' ±ate •'fr •::,`. s•',• • C�. J•i1 �:.!�. •, .t2-el '• ��QY ,s foot lot) W47-1:6 • :� .• •'� f ♦ 4 '•''•': ' 'p• •pt 44 .� •✓.,`•y, ��• ,' • .J•♦.•t,.. .:•:T<.°.• •. •:/:.r.•!_ •♦• PN75(OY ! DATA • ati0 RJ!"-7 '� •S • 3••-•• 1::0 ��•'a 1• �.,• _ :i •j..ft .;�•,.. ! .. :iw:. :• .s'rvr s sg y A r:� 4. •'e ,.`t•J.�. N '.:k:l.. :`-.i,:- J.. '..:. ♦, _ :: ' ! N. M }•� w`�!"Y.�.• %,: % •may. Y• k�.F ,•� TL r= if �,.. •. '�' VVV .♦, JF— 1rre+• >"• 21 ► ♦� ,•►p ,,• ,• •,f` to /'sem'• �•r.+ CA. • •n _ r a.. of •.• c w� fD ...N... �'' +i..,. � 1s.^ s ►•► �`•.. • :.`��• •,ar .. +...i:.,tl: ,O `• ry I J':�'r'?- •f't :1 �,� 1 ea,7 7.1 ,•a• rI •'r ,H~iI a. .1•� r. ,ti, { P cry*,: 1{.` [t�''rf/ 0A , 10 ✓',b 2� 25., .;;. •••~. ?'i /o •,lr~ R 1 ,iH«,�.. + f, •♦:,i r♦ :. _rs Crf X11 r p 38 �3.'1 ,Lr, 1•H♦•�.•.r•�,. .•'. , MI ' � .'• )n1+f J/ '�1.�� fuu S=L'�fr.�r , •'.• .` �, ,, nc.i} ••!tR 10 •jtCiIT hif 30 �• �• ti �• t •F `.t�. ASP io CT _ v1 I • "•jam �. .!• ,.r. ,,�`� � �`;� // t• : If;l; -, M ,..•; : r=• J .�t S.`, ; .S� •,`'`; ;O,:'S.• ,••'A t. .�' , :='.,y+S • 4 ^. ,•. .•. ♦ �,,. i 1 'r ,a`, EXHIBIT A 22 : 1y`, ' ti'= ORDINANCE NO. 127 �R/ .t:•_; „ t •' ZONE CHANGE 10-86 •'. . (PALOMAR/ARCADE ROAD AB EA) � Wit,/ ,t•• �' .. �///fin I � •,���', �t.\ RESOLUTION NO. 42-86 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 THE "LAS LOMAS ROAD AREA" FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY AND MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY TO HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (10, 000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE) (GP 1J-86: STUDY AREA D - LAS LOMAS ROAD AREA) WHEREAS, a request to amend the City of Atascadero General Plan has been received as follows: General Plan Amendment 1J-86 and Zone Change 10-85 - LAS LOMAS ROAD AREA - Request to revise the existing general plan from Low Density Single Family and Moderate Density Single Family to High Density Single Family - 10 ,000 square foot 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 proposed general plan land use map revision would be con- sistent with existing and proposed policies contained in the general plan land use element due to the proposed project' s sewer, decreasing density from the center of the community, and existing land use pattern of lot sizes. 2. The proposed land use designation would not be a spot desig- nation and would not be inconsistent with existing land use patterns in the area. 3. The site is within the sewer improvement district and sewer services are available to the site. 4. The proposed amendments will not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. A negative declaration 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 (LAS LOMAS ROAD AREA) to to change the 1980 Atascadero General Plan Land Use Map as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" entitled GP 1J-86 - LAS LOMAS ROAD AREA) . 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,G , Community Development Director 2 t ♦• -• \=�J, •,j� 0 \ n+• .4• •6 i T -� • '�•aJ• ' '\ inti• • ,•• ~ , \� \' �• •' . 'Irl 14• � - , ,,� •` �.. '-r } K ar�•,-I•, til• � � * ��-� r ti \ ,.... i�Q,�' �.a r 'meq •ti^ �+J��'. t'�` •t t �•. + •�� _ • i,• `•, Ste' .1�,. �i• .. �t t • ,. •' e o ��'�%'F 'g I C • • -1 '• 7• � j\�J '.�� � ...f .Y•. t� fir' /•'� -. " /:,* -- - pop • .� •i ''t •1 �j' '� .r ',,`�,f(1 � � '9 `,`'„y � 'f2 ACL. a, r° . ,�t•� J' ', !y .� 1°•>. ,I1 -: :'' .'}. .. 12.01. PDp� \(•1 y,a 1,rin f�nQC `� .•� 'r� .i• +•f 'AT-dl-183 .12-e1 -,r• 'yp •,� ,�?J ` yt�I ti .,' - f•y- -.'» ..t AR 81 2St. S•2T.'ez _ di••�,E Vf► .• V i"...'a • -� .!/ ,,y Ri � d •.' � °JO `; y: . :"' . + M °•til, ';,.�,r,.:. �,. •,.. •f•( �r Z .•Sw!• •`.< •�� Vim\ ", • ••• .' ••:i• •�, h• •{'� -w•.-. �.. •`;'2 -A • .M1�tt. _ •: : :'."'V ;%�ti.,f `'/•.'..t_. PN7S70Y t OA Ir ft' •ta+ RS/�° �.'\ �"` •tl. 3 '-� -a:',\, 1 �',-. rte..• •,`• r +. �\Y�°��r !t K 'tib 'moi 3i.S L. •� ,``ir,�.t r? .�: •+'~ +�::f,. .~•' Yu' -.t;` .. 4'- �• •, � ',',+•p` \fig = 1.z ,2N •s.,r T. a��=..'.S.'� .. .r.. .. - Y.`'• ,�27 °,T "'• •+ , ��'" �� °` ;'•r'y -< `�'' -' .^'' �'` = General• Plan .Amendment• 1J-86 ; � •`.�_;,s• ,: �. `�, ���;'t. SF_p- _h ; s� }: ,','`';�� (Las Lomas Road Area) 2• • �' r"� ' u' r�'� 2. ' �- dy5',.• �-•• ;;. From Low Density Single Fam- :,.�'.�y= ,,• „� """•'• ��+ -: ily & Moderate Density Singlf •T1s' ,+' a .�' ... .('S. .,, �.,,, �s •., ,d,�.,\ w•,.•. Family to High Density Single 34 ,'. • .•. �'�� -.» - mily (10 , 000 sq. ft. ) �`c a\•„0 \s � >7�^. .ti _I• �• ! • Car}_,, ':.::,';, w /•. ,�'- ,t, .,. .° � .a. 1 .di,Yf- 's ., �.� �O•• Co7W7!t •u• fq•Y- .i. .lil .s ' � �,�,..Ja�i ♦; r 'moi �. 47I R f reM•••:'�” . � '\i.f '?' Y-• _,i iiS •�11 i q • ' .CatOl• ,S„lam, '�: ,,'• �` l i, �. �� 2'af` " �N. - - • f • .L• \Jt1-:�'`�i • l.A ••.'.ter 2 2t - 'Ise _ \ ' .,: t • a ASFY IO CT ,+t.; ,� ' '` so " .F s ~ .N,�. V1 f . . 'T. r 0. -/� i' a - - Vel i.` ' '.1' �.I. ':, � \iV � • •l�. ~ , q0 • T}^ ..r�'• • 1�0° �T\I•l��Jl 'J w11 •1M•,fy t . •t•" CIL • '"��'� • :� .•: �\ -'\' .'• \,� 22 EXHIBIT A z RESOLUTION NO. 42-86 GP 1J-86 (Las Lomas Road Area) w w ORDINANCE NO. 128 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 IN THE "LAS LOMAS AREA" FROM RSF-Y (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, ONE ACRE MINIMUM) AND RSF-X (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, ONE-HALF ACRE MINIMUM) TO LSF-W (LIMITED SINGLE FAMILY, 10 ,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT) (ZC 10-86 : LAS LOMAS AREA) 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) and RSF-X (Resi- dential Single Family, one-half acre minimum) to LSF-W (Limited Sin- gle Family, 10, 000 square foot lot) . t Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to - be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef- fect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. 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 2 R � • '_a „/br r s • '• yap• `� '�� '•0i' -�.• .�; t � � ;� S = �, . '.a- ' •. as e. _vS w�. �• • �+ ; I 7 '. U • \� !. •r� ,fit .� ,��• �yY k . .��' i.. �, ... r i „ /tel •ss r; �� \�• '12-er. �'3PDpr \�• ,yi ���, n•Q L. `> 'I•• , ,j' ,i,i 'AT.81-f 8S .12-OI � '`� gtD :Fj, '�•Jv• .t�•�•(��'�y.�-f � � s.. - I.y_ .',• •' ;S AT• 81 SSL S•25:82 !r Jot iiw'•i,N �''�, - � •,V ^°.•.1 � :�,Y •=r!'v.v.I, 'R •`y �. � ,:10 � �,y� , 't'•t 'L -. ` g i•"• .i♦I •:�° •��..� , . epi\ t. ,"` •+ �•:; L7 "; t, � ZONE CHANGE 10-86 : LAS • .•'` �� '.;. -, ;:;-•:''. LOMAS ROAD AREA • •yh' R� pit b"` y 3 -e!'.� 1, : F)'' :�:]s �- ,.-•t ,:• :+. = r• A 4. •.E: :; From RSF-Y (Residential i�y�,er/ e/f /!" :L i �'^ 1 s �' y,�.. ., •,:.:'f�;,.a,'=�• Single Family) & RSF-X '' (gig = = t'2 ?" .• t s (Residential Single Family, Y:= ,,,. :,. ,•,�_ 1/2 acre) to LSF-W �•';,`..�►°� =3f!• - �� �� :'� ; w _� e °.1''=�`'•` (Limited Single Family, " .� SF=Y�•• ;,,,,� �' 10, 000 square foot lot) ° ,1i� 1,.. �� •of •.e �,S •' ,at •.. ; " t ,�•.. • ?(„r .s'\ 6 _r• •�� �,/� CaMn� ':.�S�T. .H `: •R .. , • l•,�' I D-A COT '' +ue •p.Y t. .1 4 ,. •. •'� �, 31 .•.• ,; �. o� ,s% a� R 1 uri«.ia+" . ��:.� �' fit fl i to •. _),• - • , •C•t0 t�t ���f • I• .. t .. .t✓. �ti �/.f � 3 T! 1, 'la ?�' r -20 z`. •:y .S t�`�' 10 -f, r` nif 30 'E 6 rr 13 RSF CT Inv -i u ....•r'r ��; � .it �.. w A- J' G. .• 'O:P _ +'LI`•,L"L r+{"'a' •nwayy I •+ ..'i. :.. - \ f•r=• WN •.., ,^ , .•.V \w•.u• ,\\e a ;, �, •y• .. •...•q a•A ry�.•S •. �' i ,_`.♦tom '`�':a'�,a' .,2• ./• +"••:: �• '• �., t i "'� '�''•, .;RMto F/ .. «�� '-• 'i.. Iia L. ,�f• - 't� ^�1 .•e. ` .•�i,� .� , '• -.� �/'. .. , .. - _ -.LCL 1 u.• �•r'a; ..., .a •.''' •,fir _'.. r :° .'f0 EXHIBIT A 22y,. _ t ' ORDINANCE NO. 128 ZONE CHANGE 10-86 , LAS 34 • •• �_, '" r LOMA S ROAD 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 0 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 i 2 lF ` mak GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENJ-8 E ``, ti �=78:143 Iz-81 •, • ' ; ``` `{,t "' 9240 Atascadero Road ._•� ,� r ,� t r•d,,,s 2-+ r . - AS-TB•w7 tz-81 des,. 1 ♦ ..e.' •s 4" :., 4+< 'S* rr From Moderate Density SingiE ;� �T-�e-12, ,2•ef ,Ctrl tif} k T• ••` r ,.sN n) vt , t, 1 r ` a -��• { :, ra: Family to High Density Single •-; r R AT-7$-1L1 1 �t � Family 1/2 acre lot AT 81 zle� ',..t y ,`"�'�`,�,�� _ ;�:_' :• .' - � ��� ... =...'t ` 5�..._i +•1 , ..s ' ',.,' r Nat , ar 4 �%x�Z��r°;•r t c' a .. Io OR• LA e, • V s a e�Tntµiy�S e i h tV r ' ' •• ' `tr IO-NTE Ct I t a� �d t� � , ••ri "� � �1 t- i stet . <<' s i a� y. r a \ f'`h d•r .�.. fjy♦ H `t . gt'Ip• 2 7 7*A°�iS". w�°f. '.3M..'/ .,'f f� ♦.'�S t ti �' 1z,-• r L •`O d'�` .,0�•, ':,•r n ..,s ,�d �� �e'i�� c 1 - t •�.,� x� ,•�� Y.e } � a� tt,1 .... a•{f .',a• rt ,✓•` ' - it +'• � , �\,;t"1 s ,� '•S:" by•. (/ 1 '.F •za�f.tvr s !f. '°O•• ,_ ? r •• RSF— .t t 1� I ' ' •• a.• r �..f r CI -sit : rl. =.... •' + � C - a •'• •�4e 1'`s.. �2 � - •.1 A`.y,A js;° et, % it % ✓ +: --� ..�..a,.}. � .L 0.$a ,t• .'' ;. �.+'p � it+'d e',r;`, '.Y" �w ztr .S �S r ♦_ \ ro.{n „• t1 ri:• ,. :••� C"• •r1r2:�° }�jrd �er�.trLs r3t•'�. �h�� �.t •. \ s - t. d.- s s• �r'� ,r It o.•o r-ri'h i a - i '� rs .:1� '�- \ ♦ 4 e% a •S a• :g ;,..!r!.J •, . ` yiyrvj : �•t _��, .�., •• � . - .,: a :5. i tm0``13' ,..:.t\`.4.`1 �,,_ !�'- ' 3 ..-•1; i i33` I9 1� •i�P ~� k r Z t: ,., `:s \\\SZ` At� . tc ;p es 1V a _. , .> .:a ''� : f �. 1. .N" :a • ♦ \\ �v� 1ta r•s•tn �. `Zca t� , 20 '�F •...a. e ��� a 1 . \. '*o,_ '� • �� �\' f:� ��a,r - ♦ rJr eti ,"�—�'�ii_f t':i�2r ', Y' a' '` •� ► '1r�,'as rtr `~� �\�;�/ .'` `�. .�•�1 '�'�su•as :y `,' Js'.Yii U` ,` ,/ 2nw..•� 3 i •,�o•e ' IKs , •,a -�,'7 YI qq a t t!r °e 23 .f S '�'•'*• it t. 'i R `• 7•'.Q •.a.ti' ''fD :-:"! 2s• i - U s rr•: a e b'r yew , 28 .4t, a •15A 44 - oa taws lam( x 7 too - _ r • 4• ^`� ti�i $ a>s .:, '•i s'/ 2aA 23 o _ •�,".� _. e.?Si e s '1 1. Y '. e r "•20-_ X3354 a , o ►wW 41 _ `-: /�`1• i' 23A . y '• to r r ra e -to • `�1+•1 32 IP44 2 \t.w•r ,@ r o � e"»• s 1 r n�1p- a ' o; O 1 '�. \ t•M Ni•• r •. - Y/` / S A ,y <r0 `I 1 p ` tat o n i`k' 3 •� - Y .a 8 N-le• .. ter.n 20 M �ti-` a b. O M.»W rY.• Oslo IS 17 f0 / r5 =�• -ser' � •r3� r �„ :.�29 •� t 33 I -_ �- _ its. t / sJ C 33 29 4v 30 •Im E 31 Y�; I.'/�• '.r A`.� - 32 33 ±'� s �:. ••�� 34 35 .10 ]I - .A ff ,✓ .* �` a. 37: r •0 .. •s • tit 39 44 .40 11 es 42 =24 7 µ s.� � � C EXHIBIT A ;s r:, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1J-86 . 9240 Atascadero J �rJ Road _., RESOLUTION NO. 43-86- CITY OF ATASCADERO , Planning Department •l.. .n-,...-_ /.' •.ti`.i` t. .'t 2`i•.�C%�+�:/t�, �r,y._ate.-st .J::. .1.{y :y..•:i 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) . �^t Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef- fect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. 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 AT 7•,128 I2'df r, _� ` > Y• r - - • •t_ Ar-78•147 12-81 a ZONE CHANGE 10-86 : 9240 ;.r ATASCADERO ROAD ' .1 AT-7907 1Z•91 _ '� AT-70•IL1- I °� v'•� ? � ;`''; ',�`` �.�= �' From RSF-Y (Residential Single, 4=. Z•z1 7' 1;:: ` ���2t}2�}"'` } i•t s r -: At-78-11 ( ,y , ,,•` =,: f'�+a«•,: Family) to RSF-X (Residential F AT 61 ve �•Z5-° Single 1/2 acre mininiurii, } _ .. a i e F mily i •� v w. Jr"4f �• N'S,% l�l� iht ` OP to it f� 7 N'1'tY�t 14�'�G c � - '++ I r •''°'e ` • + �- }N �. •z_ a . a s • rte\ et•� oxre + a =f F ,r: ;• ��. N., °�` •,ti4 e 2 . 20 4 `,� �{-r •`�ti� Y, •.y ., • rl `` it •• •` ..RJt —.s: ,, �'. f l / �� m• _ : err aX � . o • ,s ••,r a ,• - i�' , 1vi!. '�j.�r `tray •\. • CS ,r + ,�`• � "{w , ♦•� it 4i � •, .C� >¢ + - r •yrt �.{ . ti q< � ..,. a-'.. •- a --44 .• '7+ ``+ ,° a;�� -Y •int ^� 4/ L z 1 0° jD w \\` j\• t�c�\' Ili • y 1 i �`]fi' . • Ste: I wa i1SJ ! "Rr ea �. r .. w✓ +a i+ • `' \\\ \�� P 1+\ a �� • ti i•-+%':., - 20 a `'3►�1�` e' 1 �. o .�' \ \' s: '' - ♦ �' .at•'f� � s�� Y: •c��� `•__ � • ^;13• ..ii � •,,:9.��1 K,`y. 8 1�1\`� W>• A -,�M. �S �� -r ?rte, \ / rY ,.a ••. 1 - • - - -,�r�t7 '2° • �, ? 4S + Il 7.O ..,..A e_ �_q f 3'.'. "D�pfn > 24'. so �� a • ��"ZS� �-+ - _ :21�:t�;.� •\\ .. .. - amu. -w� f•�•e. ... els• �z• �rr+!gsa `=E °r 1 L ^ .� a �t R aat>'+L+ � 24A 23 ,,�p • � o R /Z• 1 1 :. • - �! \` �.• T :(. .••!,e•tio 34 • .•� � 1 1. - 11 (•33 • .•! o Imeo :�', ��� S{ • • ° of 21l n yr'/ • , s ( 'R • P r i..t.iyJ s^ J S o bb a M� sti Na 3' J' !y 27 N • , O / n+ 33 U t;t 12 IP 11 ° + 33 .� .r` et•4 p ! r 7 30 C .�,. • 31 32 33 a° ' 34 3536 D +. 37 39 f 40 41 45 F1 i _ 6 • 4414 n i L 42 TY L EXHIBIT A LTJ ' ORDINANCE NO. 129 ti= ZONE CHANGE 10-86 : 9240 '-� CITY OF ATASCADERO ATAscADERo ROAD Department CAD 1 S7 i A. • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 'moi SUBJECT: Zone Change 11-86 LOCATION: 9955 El Camino Real (Ptn. Lot 1, Block 7, Eaglet #2) APPLICANT: Goldie Wilson (Ron Poulin) REQUEST: Request to revise the existing CT (Commercial Tourist) ( zoning to CR (Commercial Retail) BACKGROUND: This request was heard by the Planning Commission at its meeting of April 7, 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 zone change as outlined in attached Ordinance No. 131. PSps Enclosures: Planning Commission Staff Report - April 71 1986 Minutes Excerpt - Planning Commission - April 7, 1986 Ordinance No. 131 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 E1 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) . 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: MPCl •-r': � A• '� .r\a� w&L ^J �,, ':3 any:,.7� .� ..<•.t 1. N.t�ray F Y { a•. r J'`•{' �A1=80•Si' '•1Z•E1 ��;CS •.:•�. ���., \1•(,.. � :�c � :��.' �x • I' S' .AT•76•I35 ' • •� � / =kir,'''° ; r ►, ;AT-76•N3 � t2Ar y; . •,e a \� 4 61 r . e >ye v f, \. • cis ' 4ti AT-81-183 12-OI + � r!p°P • � .!� �. •+'a+"' � NT81 2S4 6L ��.. ,a ae 1., i y^•• ♦< :Ot •- 5.25. VIP B 5 µ• Cyd•;��, Or, \ac,, c�(. /� •7,:tl a./�,t , `1. a� Rtv25t0u DATC . •,;iia ,. .. S i• '�.� •;'. t` _ '" •` f'i' it r. R `� • o� M_3' • '` H ' •�: 'd .}, '• 'fir••4•i• N •. � i. t°' •mss^ G '\i .f••y l_ F.c ' _�. _ . "" .'' �' • ' ��55 l:2 C"I N.10 P�f11- 3,•s .G .i. �N 'd ,+ryv .a c i' SF- Lp1�7IS 1g17 L LiT7 /U•r�J�Y�V�Ir,N'N�✓pL�CA�pI.{I L��70LL,/Y[-wl T '`rL yi y •e. C IIXJ�YED UL UGVH.YWULlc.E11LJ EbTktL ; S'34 1e Or34 y„ f9 1w c SOW 4 C07XiJ'�ID0 uv h .,a:•�'1 25;x. .• tit �G✓Y -� !1 t NK• ':)%;• � . 14 T1s 1 . _ ` �•?r pi r \"� ,p E P I of• b9 :t,♦ ?17 �n � • • '.t ^ 5_\' • 70111 20 Ifv S • • ♦�` � .± +2,•i ,. x••.29---_ 30 ��_.. �,♦x top UK4 " r RSF CT. �c �` e ° F Z b'• , . u —Y �. -' .P ►3v f,t. • 7/uoS C. 6 _,J, '•• ,.. ° f• yob+ p � .,•d 7fc' ..• I b eDS� W s\. •i ''04-t(I�I�S 16 r•;M i :.a i � .s:-1• ,-TA =� :� IR :"` C • ;eP; V. '\ry*•9 2 \ .1 ► -10•i i' �1 .! y s• �pi.i ff •.44- ,'' ` ' ` ° . .• ,ra ,rte,' y�''�•�:;! r, eJa \ .- � .. ♦ S10 i 10•A F Ib• g1 y • it if•.0 `,e• 1'. �,bra-,.1.5. a .-f ee,,�-•�'s'••� .t•°s . r 7. o 22 deli_i r 1-,.ti ,d .a.�1 '!' .•`'Y 6 - - a ,yell-t 12 e - •�•y. '•�, FT,k 1♦-�Ti�`'TFS 23♦ ..r».0 sL5 3}^' c''L•� � iF[S i°TY •: �' • i 22 5'Ti�l�`o:.•.r:..1,(tZMs)+ cu w At"" ... ..• 2y t•"•wa•ir'•rt/wlno t�•••1•.v,v.•onruu w 1�..'••— 'i \ 20 +,L i, ✓Ciq�•1..m yrm•oo':t.�.w•1 k•n:.r ,.ars •r =l \/ ^�:� ' 1 23 .••����T��`T�.4c( +.ara. ..a�o_('.r1. -� ?9'. \ •+\ j t all. a It)C 7 ••t;.2�s. { -a➢• ­4 1�l ..rc.�'G is er w,T�'17`=z, ��}�� '•�n�ii(n.��;:�'r::-� 1955 _LC Yi1MINU . :�—{;�►� �'.Ir�� �'�^� r�I Ti C6NtMYV1LY�lIf1L�1�155ht .. 4.,TA l L 5 • co M , ZSa O C\j o- LZ a s Or r a w N O r h r c - � 6 r• P N ��• N m• 6 k r• ay P. s a• o IT aD ^k eS Com` Q r CO ca C1-- C.mwo Q 26 O M m N p Q� v OV \,PPS �� ti �� . 0 ►� NO ►. oo GP�`� oos • �� 1, 3'�� -l7'1���L��«� 1J y�L.W�VCp.C�..)�P CRM\ a 0 X955 - �CA�VIIVJ.D pC;i�t o CGWIG�D�Vkt n /� .0i CISM&MU PL fZ��RIL, 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 El 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 tom. 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, Ron Poulin '�?ECFNED FE 8 i18� E�HINT C, MnDFALNT- 5R{"t'Sl I q91 5 EL CM ai1M,W1 CWL L RDO ROAD_ 222.00'OTEL POLE' \ m o nmmmnmmmnmmmm Z I o 31 I m I � I O 0 m O Z O z _ m m D O m H i l a m (] I i c I I o O I v❑ i m — m _ H I I --------------4 110 m D a O i I I O IT o, $ I I s I M III ( I I I �----- ARCADE ----- � � w I 11c)> 1 m � 1 < > m i r D I O I Z D o� m 0 I 1 y o i m I I �} I m I o m 1 1 O 115.00' I • I i I I 1 m I I In n I ► a e �_ 9 € !a e r 8 I m o o Ii s T m T - F - = m T m u c 707.00' 11 s o m. F-M TRA��NS • NAHON AL I I/I (I�hit 'm NQf FOR CONSTRUCTION C O I V S T R D IE TT D l�ICJJI. 5 1 L -FLAW \\ 1916 CRL.STON RD-P, LJV-� J]1 1 RIC'IIlkROIll I_c6ROS ZDNECHAWE 11 .10 796Y EL CANTINO TZE1K CDMMR-0 AIL TDMIT TD n C.()YvbMk,' U Alf... PSA l L 1 r 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 A 11A A A A A A 11A A A A Agricultura , A A A A Accessory Agricultural A C C A Processing Amusement C C C A A C Services Animal Hospitals— A C C A Apparel and AIF A A- A Finished Products I C* Vehicle Dea ers A A C A and Supplies Auto Repair ! i C A S A A A and Services Bed and Breakfast ; C C C IC JA ' A A A S C A Broadcasting H H H IH A A A A A A I JAI - Studios Building Materials A* A A A jA A ) and Hardware C* Business Support H H JH H A A* A A JA A C Services Caretaker C';iC 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 1C . -C—IC C C Related Activities 11 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 A A tion services . Crop Production A 'C A and Grazing Eating - and it A* A A A A S C C Drinking Places �i 11C* Electronic ah--d—S-6—len A* A JA A tific Instruments C* Farm Animal A i'A JA C A Raising �. Farm Equipment A A A A A and Supplies Farm Labor Quarters A Financial A A A S i Services Fisheries and Ci A C Game Preserves �hNi$(T C ZctNl�l![s ti9NC�1X 7—L KLL C H 4AC-,L 11- (U: �g E EL Lni�I)l�iU -CAL UnQ�" _ COMML�U�TL TZEIAtL. LAND USEA RS RSF LSF RMF CN CP CR CS CT CPK IP I L LS P Food and Beverage A* A* A A S S C Retail Sales C* C* Food and A C A A A A Kindred Products Forestry A C A A Fuel and A A A JA A Ice Dealers Funeral Services A A Furniture and A A IAJ Fixtures C* Furniture, Furn- A* A A S ishings & Equipment IC* lGeneraoMeschandise A* A*A JA IS S iS C C C Glass Products C C C IA Healt Care A A A S A Services P1 11 1 Home Occupation -W-A A A 11A 11 11 1 A Horticultural A A* A A A A IC Specialties CJFF11 Hotels, Motels A A JA 11 C Indoor Recreation C C S I IIA C Services Kennel A C C C A Laundries and A JA JA A Dry Cleaning Plants Libraries, Museums H H H H A A A A 1 A A A Lig nt epair Services Livestock A C Specialties Lum er an I C IC A Wood Products ac finery C C Ai Manufacturing Mail Order I A A A A and Vending Membership A A A Organizations Meta In ustries, C Primary Mining (&Surface) C C Mobilehome C C C C Development i Mobilehome A A JA A Dwelling Mu tiple Family 1� Dwelling Ztfices H 1H H H A A A S S A Organization C C C C Houses 2 LAND USE : A S RSF LSFIRMF CN CP CR CS CT CPKIP I L LS P Outdoor Recreation C C A AIC Paper Products C C Al. Paving Materials C C A Personal H H H H JA* A* A A S S Services C* C* Petroleum C Extraction ~ Petroleum Refining I C & Related Industry Pipelines A* * C C 11C 11C C C C IC C C C CiC A C* Plastics an C C C Rubber Products Primary Fami y A Housing Public Assembly I C C A C C A and Entertainment RecreationalA ICI C Vehicle Parks Recycling and i C C C11 I Scrap Residential A A A A IA ! A _ Accessory Uses I Resi entia -A-1F- IIA Care * C* C* I Retirement Hotel C I JA A Roadside Stands A A A A A A Rural Sports & C C ( A C - Group Facilities Sales Lots A A C A IA A ll Schools - Business H H H IH IA A A IC CIA and Vocational Schools C C C IC 11A A A A A A Service StationsC C C A -Single Family A A A A iA A Dwelling Skilled Nursing * A* A* JA 11 A Facilities C* C* C* Small Scale A A A A A Manufacturing Social & Service A A A �-LF A Organizations Sports Assembly C C A 11C Stone & Cut A* A A A Stone Products C* Storage Yards A A A Structural Clay & C 11C A Related Products Temporary Dwelling A A A A A - — A Temporary Events A_ A A A 1A A A A A A A AIA A Temporary Offices A A A A Temporary or _ A A A A A A A A A A A A A Seasonal Sales 3 LAND USE A RS RSF LSF RMF CN CP CR CS CT CPK IP I L LSnP 1. Textile Mills C C C r Transit Stations C C A C C CIC JA and Terminals Utility Service A A A JA Centers Utility Trans- A A A A JA A A A A A A A A A A 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 A A A Distribution 'M144 ZONING DESCRIPTIONS � £r _ A_=AGRICULTURE ZONE 1� -In rr RS - RF.STDENTTAT SURTIRRAN 70MF %1_2_&_T_.RSF_--_RESIDENTIAL _S-INGLE—FAMILY.—ZONE ?-2 A_LSF -_ LIMITED _RES I_DENTIAL .SINGLE_FAMILY_..RES.IDENTIAL ZONE -/(0°/Ac.RMF, - RESIDENTIAL._MULTIP_LE_XAMI.LY-ZONE Ok Ac. LaT� CN_.- COMMERCIAL __NEIGHBORIi00D ZONE ___SP_ - COMMERCIAL PROPF.SgTnNAL 7.nNE - OMMERCIAL_ RETAIL_ZONE_ CS__-COMMERCIAL. _SERVSCE__ZONE _CT__- COMMERCIALSDURI-ST-ZONE ___CPK_.-__COMMERC _AL PARK 7.nNF. __1P ._-_,.INDUSTRIAL PARK ZDNF INDUSTRIAL-ZONE T—RECREATION_ZONE -__-_LS -._SPECIAL.__RECREA=N__ZONE 'P_ =_P_UBLIC__ZONE_ r' 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. i 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. 10 De p responded. Mr. DeCa 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 issioner 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 E1 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 ,a, Minutes - Planning Commission - April 7, 1986 Commissioner Kennedy stated that this proposed development would be convenient for the residential neighborhoods. 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 low oderate income density bonus increase. Subject roperty is 1 ated 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 t • 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 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICH L SHELTON, ity Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROBERT M. JONES, City Manager PRgP,ARED BY: HENRY ENGEIJ, CommitAity Development Director • r •,• ado 'Y ,►i:•. J � / ' AT•81 1 }_•^^?:.. .•J' `'O°� 'y ,J�Ta �L ^? ;., '.3 'AS �.y.,• _._:c•,t 1, "Kr'r•��V,.r�.•W. rr � �AT=80•St .. •�`(.1/S b°'°`` ,N •'c,°• � ,�•��, ���r gel ..�•�� 3 f •'AT 16.135 e •eon ti CSbr r v ♦ :! t. -77 AT•iD•113 ! •01: •., .f,l� s.A• ';i `+ '°ra •�L..�� ''•�\ •*S, r Ar-79.23� 12•.61. AT-81-183 .12.01 e, r, s�°• •rr A7 81 2SL S•2S$2 4 , a• "o. T s o •tiy�• �40 `e',. �'r.r • '•.as •4'`! . `�. -. PEVSS104 DAT( r '. {.A .•a •'' �7,` 4�°2 j�sF' �S,6o.' r's`-' . 1 •:r.. ! �, a .. _. . ... .L . $ ,.h• ••� ,• ."_ '••• EXHIBIT A RAF 1'' >•'•'�. �; .i;.'�}. •�'` s' %,,. '+ S. 1 •,, ZONE CHANGE 11-86 : WILSON ° a�,,, \cg • 2h` f�.-°' FROM CT (COMMERCIAL TOURIST) TO CR (COMMERCIAL RETAIL) .. ;r2s,F •.� ,• PO ':a ,�,�..- .fit,. $F-;�• iec•f-� S}--- •.i• 36 1 J �'. wit• n N P 1',, fP C 11f°}_rio t ': CO)LT.far u. ,d'M{ 23,• 54 C p _ .-26 FIs - .. 101•► +.• `�':: �'- • _• ♦aW, 'pP7� a',1•r 7 :..2{ ° — 1•°�i'S ~..6\1'.b�°b•ib ' , ' PCn .- �� �• � '� 'KM '' r:p s...}} r fur ib. . . • :\t^�,a�yi 4' { ~•'j• +p;' ,� -ZD---- .3 ,tom r ^ o•��;. y; 'rry 4 "'fie ryi nif 30 •z a`ci• 10CT `'�C < '!'C, 431' F Z RSF 13 Cc 34 .� 4 ~J`�O iif 1 _G•,• j b f05' W '�a\.• A `' .tP •'�,�v��/'6 moi-1 �•a.. jr .- 45 • - w_r :a' :, m "•.. a., -: :.RMF/ .. • 'qao. �• T„•• e�3�S �- t �M1 ^'a)`,;estr•!a `. °fj 4.•�`. 9',( a-\ -I,S, , • 10.4 v•%� 1 .r•.•6 ;.•{'s. \•� •.�J��, __ '\ - 10•A S kif' • ` mac\ r�\ry•! '. + • ,s,s ,f p., ib• gY • ✓ V r� Baa s •s q (V\\ /� ..Je_, r .,.as „y ,;� 4 '�` i O .2 2 -,.. , ti I ,.�,e .' `• � _;.t•••. 3 �\ .,,.0 fs` •"a,. '-\ �7<<•�hx•{~�•I�13;;;(((�,,,y��f''''yi�'D t`a l�l��y 23.o C•*•�1i"' 's11 � 1• ti ZZA ..� •Y A 22 S'n ti•..r.' ,1 Nsa. w...t.,w:.. r.• Rs i, aYn14•°fa••••Ir,u.a,.:Kli,1_..raw ar o—r a 20 : , rGZq•Ly.<m>.+.r�+w' :..w.l 4 w+..r 121 23 'r'...•; 5 r,�_' - ORDINANCE NO. 131 rnin(n' ;:vcrG 9955 EL (AMINO •'s,'. �� I .. REAL • - � ;�---�; �;z��1��--��i. `'lel 4^I ^ 614 • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council May 12, 1986 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Zone Change 2G-85 LOCATION: Coromar Road Area APPLICANT: City-initiated/John and Dorothy Lopus REQUEST: To revise the zoning map from RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, one acre minimum lot size with sewer and one and one half acre without sewer) to RSF-X (Residential Single Family - one half acre minimum lot size) (SECOND READING) • BACKGROUND: The above-referenced request was approved by the City Council at its April 28 , 1986 meeting. A first reading of Ordinance No. 124 was held at that time. RECOMMENDATION: Second reading of Ordinance No. 124 and formal approval. PS: ps • �r 0 Section 3. Zoning Map. Map Numbers 17 and 19 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended as shown on the attached location map which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. 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 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 5. 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: By: ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROBERT M. JONES, City Attorney 2 Co Elf 6 —� —. v s s0 S 7S� JY 6900 .._, 1`� t 2120 �t° EXHIBIT A ZONE CHANGE 2G-85 : Lopus !� >>r `-..; COROMAR ROAD AREA j '��� s a '�. ' RSF-Y to RSF-X24 AT- i b- AT- 7 �39, tiT�t(.~• ti �,: L' Gly A -78- 110 ••// \ �f \� ` \ "' T loc _L 1 \ f i Y (FH) 14 kA jp.r oF7� 15 17 -�>> 1a \ r r`'c (`r :�.3�•C 'Ajt2 15-C 6-A \ RE% l •�' �+,f+",•/t'�. erg° `F�/ T b 25 17 5 / ' 27 p +�'��/Poi g717 X 3 6 ✓� ,� -,\ s J i \1�'5 e '� 28 ��.� �0 34 ol "his /� :r-� /�� •n •�'�.\ %�r�� C _C �S ��i�� G`,�'/ '�}�'� Q'O' ^ v1 34-16 Vel 1,4 / - ; ,�- X0.0 ./ \• ,^ 3 Q G•a,. �;"n �. // . • , � *+ �.1- \ ai�`> � ��� 0.0'x, LA 12" Ur 1, � ��•� J \\`�'�•�\�", oc�\` � \ ': r�• ,: Z.,(j\v+✓\ '> �>] 9 'rr is - �..�. �.� �/ "'- +.-.- ...,. .� :J� Sl..�, � u\n� I)L .• �..y CP \ :"';ice!_ .�- � ,C � �'1�1 •yam 4� ''it. ���.Y :."v.�`�'�- �� r - N... �� ,: w�:-�•..'.Vic.-'c•1 f��]•L�.e 'hf� A 4o y s �t TO: City Council May 12, 1986 FROM: Mike Shelton, City Manager SUBJECT: COSTS FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR POLICE FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATION AS TO FACILITY SIZE AND COSTS RECOMMENDATION• 1. Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a standard A.I.A. agreement with the Architectural Firm of Ross, Levin, and Mac Intyre in the amount of $13,650 for Phase I Site Analysis and Architectural Programming plus 7% of project costs for sche- matics and working drawings. 2. Architect design a Police Facility not to exceed $950 ,000, including Architect, land costs, and debt service cost. DISCUSSION: At the March 24, 1986 Council Meeting, the Architect Selection Committee recommended Council contract with the Architectural • Firm of Ross, Levin, and Mac Intyre to provide architectural services for the proposed new Police Facility. Council concurred with the appointment of the firm, but directed staff to bring back an amended proposal showing an alternative price if only one site analysis is required. The Architect has amended cost requirements. Cost proposal, as initially presented and amended, are as follows: PROJECT AS INITIALLY PRESENTED AS AMENDED Phase I Programming $ 8,797 $ 8 , 797 Site Analysis $ 4 ,853 $ 4,853 (if (Analysis of 3 sites) only 1 site no cost) Total = $13 ,650 $13, 650 Phase II Schematics $18,050 $10 ,990 Total Phase I and II* $31,700 $24 , 640 • * Based on maximum project cost estimated at $785 ,000 1 1. Require the facility to be built on City-owned property. 2. Set a maximum expenditure at a different level. 3. Design a Police Facility within the Administration Building. Other alternatives include: 1. Delay decision until after review of 1986/87 C.I.P. Budget. 2. Delay decision till after receipt of Vanden Burghe funds in the amount of $235,000. FISCAL IMPACT: Available funds for this project are proposed as follows: F/Y 85/86 Budget. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$150,000 Vanden Berghe Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$235,000 Newly Enacted 5-Yr . Police Development Fees. . . . . . . . . .$565, 000 TOTALAVAILABLE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $950 ,000 Construction of the Police Facility during Fiscal Year 1986/87 will require short-term debt financing. In addition to the $150, 000 budgeted, it is assumed that the Vanden Berghe monies of $235,000 will be available upon start of construction. However , estimated development fees in the amount of $565,000 will come in annually at approximately $113 ,000 per year for five years. To obtain a loan with final payoff costs equaling $565, 000 loan in the amount of approximately $400 ,000 would be obtained. The dif- ference between estimated available funds of $565, 000 and the loan of $400,000 is $165,000 required to pay for fees in acquir- ing the loan, loan contingency, and servicing the debt (interest cost) . The payback period for the loan would be five years or less. The interest rate for the loan will be between 5 and 6 percent, which is available through the League of California Cities Financing Corporation (literature attached) . Assumptions used by staff in estimating wive . year revenues to be derived by the newly enacted Police Facility Development Fee assumes a population growth of four percent each year . As a com- parative number, based on data recently released by the Depart- ment of Finance, Atascadero experienced a 6 .27% population increase in calendar year. 1985. MS :kv File : MPOLFAC 3 M E M .O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER MIKE SHELTON FROM: CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: POLICE FACILITY UPDATE DATE: APRIL 4 , 1986 Having completed the process of architectural services selection, it now appears appropriate to address some concerns voiced by Councilmembers regarding the breadth of the police facility request. As you know, I intentionally omitted any specific refer- ence to square footage requirements in our Requests for Proposals ("R.F.P. ") which were sent to architectural firms. Additionally, I did not mention a maximum dollar amount which the project was not to exceed. As mentioned, this was by design on the advice of city officials in other jurisdictions . who had completed similar projects. In my research, I was cautioned against creating artificial benchmarks which are without substantial foundation and which may be based upon preconceived notions having no application to our particular circumstances. In an effort to clarify the parameters of the P.D. project, I gathered some current information from the below sources which recommend standards for law enforcement facilities: 1. National Criminal Justice Reference Service U.S. Dept. of Justice, Wash, D.C. 2. Operational Improvement Service International Association of Chiefs of Police Gaithersburg, Maryland 3. National Council on Crime and Delinquency Paramus, N.J. 4 . Center for Studies of Crime and Delinquency Rockville, Maryland 5. National Clearinghouse for Criminal Justice Planning and Architecture Champaign, Illinois From these sources, general considerations affecting facility cost are: 1. Structures should be designed for a minimum 75 year life span. 2 . Proposed additions for future growth must be planned Efr into original plan and must enhance the design. 3. Seismic design is a critical factor in P.D. facilities. 4. Other factors dictating special construction and detail features: a. Texture of the city including nature of residential, commercial, industrial and schools. b. Location/adjacent to other cities, courts , jails, sheriff and other allied agencies. C. Police criminal records - trends and enforce- ment problems. How handled by staff. d. Size of staffing (actual and needed) . e. Communications center (combined police and fire) . f. Need for emergency operations center. g. Record-keeping system, microfilm, computers, other. Through additional research, I learned that the parameters addressing space needs versus staffing were fairly broad - following are examples: *Recommended square footage for police facilities : 250 square ft. to 330 sq. ft. per full-time police employee. This formula, in our case, would suggest an immediate need of 7,750 sq. ft. to 10,230 sq. ft. without consideration of room for growth over a ten year projection. Assuming our police department will continue to employ a comparable ratio of police employees to the number of city residents as we grow, the minimal needs are seen as follows: Year **Population P.D. Staffing Level Space Needs 1985 19 , 600 31 7, 750 sq. ft. 1990 23, 520 37 9, 250 1995 28 ,224 45 11 , 250 2005 34, 150 54 13,500 It should be noted that the figures quoted are conservative , minimal figures and that should city priorities change in the future, the police staffing level could increase considerably *Source: Criminal Justice Statistics , 1983 edition for Pacific Coast 1 , 578 cities with populations of 10, 000 - 24 , 999 . *'Source: Atascadero Community Development Department and State Department of Finance. placing us within the average staff/resident ratio in San Luis Obispo County (see Police Annual Report —Staffing l Comparison - 1985) . To insure we are dealing with current and valid infor- mation, I again surveyed (March, 1986) city police agencies in S.L.O. County which revealed the following facts: Number of Total Sq. # of Sq. Ft. Police Full-Time Footage Per Full- Agency Personnel Allotment of P.D. Time Employee *Arroyo Grande 20 4 , 400 220 **Grover City 18 5,200 289 Morro Bay 22 4, 920 224 Paso Robles 27 5, 044 187 **San Luis Obispo 76 20 ,800 274 Pismo Beach 20 4,250 212 Atascadero 31 4, 000 129 County-wide average, excluding Atascadero, is 234 square feet per police employee. By way of comparison, it is interesting to note that the S.L.O.P.D. moved into a new 10, 000 sq. ft. facility in 1968 (population 22,000) and during 1985 , with a population of approx. 35 , 000 , that facility was expanded to over 20, 000 square feet of floor space. All these figures can tend to make one dizzy, and it has been said by some that "figures lie and liars figure" ! It is not my intention to overwhelm anyone with statistics, rather, I am attempting to clarify the matter in an effort to assist Council in making a difficult decision! On the basis of all data considered, I offer the following estimated costs for our project alternatives : A. Build P.D. for current, 1936 needs : -7, 750 sq. ft. @ $100 sq. ft. _ $775 , 000 -Built on City-owned land = (0) ***-Purchase land = estimate $65 , 000 to $200 , 000 depending upon location, zoning, etc. office furnishings: 20 ,000 *Now• in planning stages of new police facility. **Recently constructed P.D. /remodel & add-on. ***According to my research, land requirements for a public facility such as a P.D. are generally four times the building square footage as an industry-wide benchmark. irB. Build P.D. for projected population in 1995 of 28 ,224 . -11,250 sq. ft. @ $100 sq. ft. _ $1, 125, 000 -Built on City-owned land = (0) -Purchase land = estimate $65 , 000 to $200 ,000 depending upon, zoning, etc. -Office furnishings $20 ,000 It appears that alternative A comes closest to our current and five-year projected financial means, and while certainly it would seem prudent to build a facility to include (at mini- mum) a ten-year growth factor, a fund could be established to build an addition of approx. 4, 000 sq. ft. to the building in later years. Current available and anticipated funding as seen by City staff is: -Current P.D. "set-aside" : $150 , 000 -VanderBerghe Apartment Project: 235 ,000 -F.Y. 1986-87 Police Dept. Develop- ment Fees : 113 ,000 Actual Funds Available 1986-87 Fiscal Year: $498 , 000 Other: (prioritized development mitigation or R.S. funds) : 37 , 000 -Projected available funds - four years (four year police dept. development fee income @ $113, 000 per year) : 452 ,000 GRAND TOTAL $987 ,000 If facility is constructed during fiscal year 1986/87 , approximately one-half of the total cost must be funded through debit financing. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City direct the architectural firm of Ross, Levin and MacIntyre to evaluate alternative sites and make recommendation to Council as to the most appropriate site and facility which will best serve the needs of the police department (preferably over a ten-year period) at a total construction cost not to exceed $950 ,000 . RICHARD H. McHALE RHM! sb I ' r � rte-. ✓; .vr... ^': � � n, r:. P% CD � —. r� 1r� 4 � J .J �• f � � J• --5 �n Fir / Cv � J f -' i :z CSC ►�' �- =� —J+ "�' v J :: ^• ✓ i �. I rD in 77 ZA CA CA rD ef 44 <, - - _. a ut2l to -'— _1 N rC ^c pw O g 7 2' C w > > > C to O o y •- :t7 coo cn 2 _ tx xv� C •^. '� O `� A w S �� H� IrQ Oil 00 A [ 00 n E;p a '•G CJ p a� 0-4 Vi �1 co O =- N O O C = O v v o o y Cr1 L. V 9 rn � Q M"'r• �. 0 r) O t4-4 4-1 tc C 7-) tC 77 7-- tc tS C L; tc tc X z tt 7� tL c %r 7= EL 2 tcx -,5 r 'N ,..W 77d f, J M7 M E M O R A N D U M • May 6 , 1986 To : City Council Via: Mike Shelton , City Manager From: Bob Best , Parks and Recreation Director'^ r Subject : Parks and Recreation Commission Appointments BACKGROUND On April 7th the resignation of Commissioner Mark Jensen was received, effective July 1986. In researching the Commission it was determined that three other commissioner terms expire June 30th. They are Kim Rizzuto , James Porter , and Ruth Doser. RECOMEMNDATION Direct staff to begin recruitment for four Park and Recreation Commissioners , with terms to begin July 1 , 1986. Advertisement to • be in the local newspaper , posted notices , and announcement by the Commission at their regular meeting. Recommend selection by City Council ' at their July 14, 1986 regular meeting • ORDINANCE NO. 101 Page 3 CHAPTER 13. PARRS AND RECREATION COMMISSION (Reorganized) Sec. 2-13 .01. Established. There is created a Parks and Recreation Commission com- posed of seven (7) members. Sec. 2-13 ,02 . Qualifications. The regular members of the Commission shall be qualified electors of the City. Sec. 2-13 .03 . Members: Appointment- Terms- of-office. The City Council shall appoint the members of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Regular members of the Commission shall serve for a period of four (4) years beginning July 1 of the year of appointment. The terms of three (3) of the regular members shall expire on June 30, 1986, and every four (4) years thereafter; and the terms of four (4) regular members shall expire on June 30, 1988, and every four (4) years thereafter. Vacancies on the Commission occurring other than by expiration of term shall be filled in the manner established for appoint- ments. All members shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council. ,,Sec. 2-13 ,04 . Ex officio member. A me er representing the school district shall be p- pointed by he Mayor as an ex officio member of the Co fis- sion. The app 'ntee shall serve at the pleasure of t Mayor and without comp sation. Sec. 2-13 .05 . Ab en e from meetings-: -Ru i or office o C Council. Absence of a member of t Co sion from three (3) con- secutive meetings, or from four meetings during a calendar year, without formal consent th Commission noted in its official minutes, shall be - ported b the Recreation Director to the City Council for onsideration o removal from office. If a member of the mission files for ection as a member of any elective C ' office, his term as a c missioner shall terminate as o he date of filing. Sec. ' -T3 -.n6 . Organization. As of August 1 annually, or as soon thereafter as is a- le, the members of the Commission shall elect a chairman ��Z MEETING AGENDA DATE IT # .Jr" MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting July 23, 1984 Atascadero Administration Building Interview for the Park and Recreation Advisory Board were conducted at 7 : 00 p.m, before the regular council meeting. Four positions were open. Those interviewed were John Harris, Michael Lara, and LaDona Nolan. The incumbents were Mark Kensen and Ken Meyer. MOTION: By Councilman Molina, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey to reappoint Mark Jensen and Ken Meyer for a term of 4 years. Passed unanimously. MOTION: By Councilman Molina, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey to appoint Michael Lara and LaDona Nolan to the Park and Recreation Advisory Board for a term of 4 years. Passed unanimously. T Regular meeting was called to order at 7 : 30 p.m. by Mayor Ne son. T Ple e of Allegiance was recited. Invocation was given by Bert Young o the Gospel,Chapel. ROLL CA\ Present: Councilman Molina, Handshy, Councilwoman Mackey and Norris and Mayor Nelson X Absent: None STAFF Present: Ralph Dowell, Actinq City Manager; Allen Grimes, City Attorney; Mike Hicks, Fire Chief; Skip Joannes, Recreation Director; Bud McHale, Police Chief; Wayne Loftus, Interim Planning- Director; Georgia Ramirez , Acting City Clerk and Larry McPherson, Public Works Director. PUBLIC COMMENT None COUNCIL COMMENT Councilwoman Mackey said she received a prone call from John Wilson of the Human Resources Commission asking for an endorsement, to establish a County Housing Authority. A meeting concerning this propdsal will be held on August 15, 1984 . Councilman Molina asked if a letter had been sent to the State Division of Highways for the relocation of the bridge and Hiqhway 41. Acting City Manager, Ralph Dowell said that it had not been done as : yet, but would be sure that it was sent this week. Councilwoman Norris asked if budget changes could still be made. This was added to .the agenda as Item D-3 . Mayor Nelson announced that the Atascadero City Council had come to a mutua wasp agreed upon termination of its City Manager effective last Wednesday and- he acting City Manager is Ralph Dowell. j �77 7A MEMORANDUM i May 7, 1986 To: City Council Via: Mike Shelton, City Manager From: Bob Best, Parks and Recreation Director -bu� Subject: Use Permits At Atascadero Lake INTRODUCTION The City currently has two concession businesses operated by independent contractors at Atascadero Lake. These are Pop's Tackle Shop and the food concession stand (Scribners) . Both permittees have decided to sell their interest in the business, and have a buyer who desires to provide these services at Lake Park. BACKGROUND From information supplied by the permittees of both concessions, Rose Taylor and Mr. and Mrs. Scribner, they have been approached by Mr. Richard Oswald and Mr. and Mrs. Rick Robbins concerning the purchase of all supplies materials currently owned by the permittees. An agreement has apparently been reached by these parties to exchange in- terests. The potential operators are residents of Atascadero, and were dealing with the permittees on a cash basis. These facilities, although a definite asset to have at Lake Park for patron convenience, are not high revenue producers to the City. REMME,NDATION Approve Use Permits for Pop's Tackle Shop and "Duck Hut" under the operation of Mr. . Richard Oswald subject to the following conditions: 1. Successful completion of a police backbround check of the applicants. 2. Issuance of a business license for each concession and payment of fees. 3. A Certificate of Insurance is provided, naming the City of Atascadero as additional insured, with a minimum liability coverage of $300,000 for "Duck Hut" and $500,000 for Pop's Tackle Shop. 4. Proof of Workers Compensation insurance. ISSUE STATEMENT An important issue here is whether or not the City of Atascadero should enter into an agreement with Mr. Oswald without first putting these concessions out for bid/proposals. It is the understanding of .staff that all merchandise owned by Rose Taylor and Mr. and Mrs. Scribner have been purchased by Mr. Oswald, and they are now seeking City approval to be the concessionaire at Atascadero Lake Park. • USE PERMIT (Pop's Tackle) The CITY OF ATASCADERO, a political subdivision of the State of California hereinafter called city, having property or space being presently required for use for City purposes, hereby gives permission, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 25536, to Pop's Tackle doing business under the ficticious name of Pop's Tackle Shop, hereinafter called Permittee, to use the following described City property or space for such purposes and upon such terms and conditions as are herein provided; southwest corner of the Pavilion located at Atascadero Lake Park, Atascadero, County of San Luis Obispo, and a portion of storage area under said Pavilion as designated by City. Whereas, it is appropriate that the following contract be entered into for the convenience of the general public and the use and enjoyment of the City Park System. WITNESSETH In consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions, promises, and agreements herein contained, the City and Permittee hereby mutually covenant and agree as follows: 1. Permittee may use the premises for the following purposes: a. Premises shall be used for the purpose of Boat Rental and Tackle concession, 0 and to sell over the counter items such as soft drinks, cigarettes, candy and snacks. b. Furnish and install at his own expense all necessary boats, docks, bouys and equipment required for proper service to the general public. c. The storage and service thereof shall be in an area approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation. d. Furnish and maintain proper facilities, equipment and devices for the con- cession as herein provided. e. Operate the facilities in a business like manner and to the satisfaction of the Director, subject to the maintenance of said areas of conformance with the highest standards of safety for patrons of said operation. The Permittee shall have the right and duty to manage, operate and control all of the above mentioned activities and to do all things necessary in the exercise of such management, operation and control, subject to the terms and conditions of this permit. Permittee shall operate and maintain the premises and facilities together with the non- exclusive right to use access roads. 0 -2- Permittee shall operate the facilities in accordance with the regulations and poli- cies of the Director of Parks and Recreation and in accordance with the terms and condi- tions set forth in this permit. Permittee shall not use or permit the subject premises to be used in whole or part during the term of this permit for any other purpose other than as set forth without first obtaining consent of the City. Permittee expressly agrees at all times during the term of this permit, at its own cost and expense, to maintain and operate said premises in a clean safe, wholesome and sanitary condition, free of trash, garbage or obstruction of any kind, and in compliance with any governmental authority, now or at any time during the term of this permit in force relating to sanitation or public health, safety or welfare; and Permittee shall at all times faithfully obey and comply with all laws, rules and regulations of Federal, State, County or other governmental bodies or departments or office thereof. Permitee shall remedy without delay any defective, dangerous or unsanitary conditions. All servies performed by Permittee relating to the operation and management of the con- cession are intended as considerations supporting this permit. In the event of special celebration or celebrations are held at said Lake (such as the Fourth of July, but not limited thereto) and if proper authority should provide entertainment for the general public (such as a public display of fireworks), but not limited thereto which by its nature and operation would endanger or tend to endanger occupants of boats using said lake at said time. Permittee promises and agrees that he will not directly or indirectly permit the use of his boats at any dangerous location on said lake or location deemed to be dangerous to the City. No rights expressed or implied, other than those expressly given in this Permit are granted, and any other rights are hereby denied Permittee under this agreement. 2. Operating Hours: Permittee shall provide the services under this agreement on such days and such operating hours as are consistent with the demand of such services by visitors to the park and its facilities subject to the requirements of the Director of Parks and Recreation. However, the Director of Parks and Recreation may consent, to the closure of the concession during certain winter months, however, Permittee may be required to pay the City a fee of 520.00 per month for each month closed during such period. 3. Condition of Premises: The taking of possession of the subject premises are in good and tentable condition. Permittee agrees to accept said premises in their presently existing condition "as is" and the City is not obligated to make any alterations, addi- tions or betterments: 4. Term: The term of this permit shall be for a period of one (1) year and shall commence on June 1, 1986 and end of I1ay 31, 1987. \c _3_ 10 both dates inclusive, unles renewed or extended as herein provided. At the expiration or termination of this permit as herein provided, Permittee shall with thirty (30) days thereafter, remove from said premises or otherwise dispose of in a manner satisfactory to 10the City, all personal property belonging to Permittee located on said premises subject to the provison of paragraph 9 of this agreement. Should permittee fail to remove or dispose of his property as herein provided, the City may, at its election, consider such property abandoned or may dispose of same at owner's expense. Also, at the expira- tion or termination of this permit, Permittee shall quit and surrender the said premises including real property improvements in a good state of repair, damage by matters over which Permittee has no control, flood, earthquake, riot, fair wear and tear expected provided that such exculpatory provisions shall not extend to any risk which Permittee is required to insure against has herein provided. Should the Permittee hold over after the expiration of the term of this permit with the expressed or implied consent of the City, such holding over shall be deemed a month to month tenancy at herein stated rent, subject otherwise to all the terms and conditions of this permit. 5. Rental: Permittee shall pay the sum of eight percent (80) of the total gross earnings of Permittee in this operation hereunder. Permitee shall pay the amount which will, if added to all previous months payments for that year equal the prescribed percentage of all accumulated gross earnings to the Ond of such month. The term 'gross earnings' wherever used in this permit shall mean all monies, property or any other things of value received by Permittee from the use of the premises described above without any deduction or deductions provided that the term "gross earnings" shall not include any sales or excise taxes imposed by any governmental entity and col- lected by Permittee. Payments to the City shall be made to the order of the City of Atascadero, Department of Parks and Recreation, P.O. BOX 747, Atascadero, CA 93423. All such payments shall be made the tenth (10) of the month following that in which said earnigns were received by Permittee. Permittee shall keep true and accurate books and records showing all its business transactions in separte records of account for the concession, in a manner acceptable to the City, and the City shall have the right through its representatives, and at all rea- sonable times, to inspect such books and records, including State of California sales tax records; and Permittee hereby agrees that all such records and instruments are available to the City. All Federal tax returns of Permittee insofar as this-permit is concerned shall also be made available to the City for reviewing purposes. -4 i 0 The City further reserves the right to examine all such books and records at any time during the one (1) year period following the termination of this permit. Permittee shall maintain such records and accounts as the City Finance Director shall require. The City may require the Permittee to have his records and accounts audited by an auditor acceptable to the City, and shall present said audit to the City Finance Director within thirty (30) days after the completion of the audit. City may make its own audit of Permittee's records and accounts at or about said time, if it so desires. If Permittee has failed to make the required audit, or said audit is shown by City's audit to be incorrect then Permittee shall pay the costs of City's audit. Time is of the essence in the tendering of payments under this rental agreement. Failure by the Permittee to tender within thirty(30) days of any payment so due, shall be sufficient cause for the City to terminate this permit. 6. Advertising: All advertising matter to be published or circulated by or on behalf of the Permittee shall be submitted to and approved by the City Department of Parks and Recreation prior to publication or circulation. 7. Title to Improvements: Permittee acknowledges that title to all real property is-vest in the City. 8. Personal Property: Title to all personal property provided by the permittee shall remain with the Permittee. 9. Construction or modification of Improvements: Permittee may construct, or make additions or modify with the approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation. Such construction or modifications shall first be obtained prior to such construction, modifications shall be without cost to the City. In the event that the construction modification or additons are desired, the approval, in writing, of the Director of Parks and Recreation shall first be obtained prior to such construction, modification or addition. Additionally, plans and specifications for such changes shall be submitted to the City for approval. 10. Completion of Improvements: upon approval of and in accordance with the working drawings, plans and specificiations as prepared and submitted by Permittee to City for approval, Permittee shall il^::nediately commence construction of the facilities described and prosecute the same for completion e%ill be extended by a fair and reasonable period on account of any delay due to fire, earthquake, wars, strikes or other calamity be- yond the control of the Permittee. 11. Dvnership of Improvements: Title to improvements on the premises at the com- mencement of this permit is retained by the City and this permit is subject to any rights of ownership in the improvements. All improvements constructed on the premises by Permittee as permitted by this contract shall be owned by Permittee until expiration 0 date of the term of this Permit. Permittee shall not however, remove any improvements from the premises nor waste destroy, or modify any improvements on the premises, except as permitted by this permit. C\ -5 s 0 All improvements on the premises at the expiration of the term or sooner termina tion of this permit shall, without compensation to Permittee, become City property free and clear of all claims to or against them by permitte or any third person, and Permittee shall defend and indemnify the City's exercise of the rights conferred by this paragraph. 12. Maintenance and Use of Improvements: Permittee agrees to maintain said facilities, further identified on exhibit "B" on the subject premises in good order and repair during the entire term of this permit. The City may elect to provide materials for repairs if the work is needed to eliminate safety or other types of problems. Permittee shall perform at his own cost and expense, any required custodial service and maintenance. Permittee hereby expressly waives the right to make repairs at the expense of the City. Permittee may employ, pay and supervise personnel to look after the concession, such personnel shall be reponsible to Permittee and cooperate with City personnel. All of Permittee's personnel shall be of good moral character and shall be physically able to handle their duties and must be promptly replaced when derelict in their duties. There shall be no drinking of liquor, or other alcholic beverages in or around the area by Permittee's employees. Permittee shall, at all times and at his own expense do all things reasonably ,necessary to protect the facilities used by Permittee and does hereby volunteer the ervices of this employees in that behalf. The City also reserves the right to do any & all work of any nature necessary for the preservation, maintenance and operation of the Atascadero Lake Park. Permittee shall be given notice when such work may become necessary and will adjust his operations in such a manner that the City may proceed expeditiously. The Permittee shall nto grant, with respect to said premises, easements, rights of way, licenses and permits. It is understood and agreed that Permittee's services shall be provided during hours and days to meet the needs of the Public. Permittee shall, at all times when such concession is open to the public by Permittee, keep a minimum of one (1) person on the premises hereunder. 13. Utilities and Services: Permittee shall be responsible for the payment of all utility charges pertaining to its operation. 14. Equipment: Permittee at its own expenses, shall completely equip the concession and any improvements described herein and shall keep the same equipped in a first class manner and to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks and Receration, throughout the erm of this permit. 16 15. Signs and Approval of Name: No signs, names or placecards shall be inscribed, painted or fixed upon said premises without consent of the City Department of Parks and Recreation. -6- 16. Quality of Service and Controlled Rates and Charges: Permittee agrees that it will operate and manage the services and facilities offered in a first class manner and com- parable to other concessions providing similar facilities and services during the entire term of this permit. Within the term of this description Permittee agrees to maintain a high standard of service at least equal to that of other establishments in the County and/or adjacent communities for similar operations. The City shall have access to, and the right to inspect the schedule of prices and rates for goods sold or services rendered or performed upon the subject premises. If the City determines that any price or prices are unreasonable or inappropriate for the services rendered, or the terms sold, the same shall be modified as directed by the City; provided that Permittee prior to such modification shall be given a reasonable opportunity to confer witht he City and justify such prices. The City reserves the right to prohibit the sale of any item which it deems object- ionable or beyond the scope of merchandise deemed necessary for proper services to the public. 17. Closure.: At any time should an occurance necessitate the closing of the facility to the general public the Permittee shall have no resource by law to the city for losses- incurred. 18. Hold Harmless Agreement: Permittee hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and save harmless the City, their officers, agents and employees in any and every way from any a.* all manner of damages, charges, suits and expenses which they may sustain or be put to by reason of Permittee in connection therewith. 19. Liability Insurance: Permittee agrees to obtain and keep in force during the term of this permit, at Permittee's expense worker's compensation and public liability and property damage insurance in companies authorized to issue such insurance in the State of California. Said insurance policy shall consist of the following: a. Worker's Compensation and Fmployeer's Liability Insurance: Permittee shall main- tain in full force and effect for the period covered by this permit, full worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance with limits of at least statutory re- quirements with an insurance carrier satisfactory to the City. In the event Permittee is self-insured, he shall furnish a certificate of permission of self-insurance signed by the Department of Industrial Relations Administration of Self-Insurance Sacramento. b. Liability Insurance: Permittee shall maintain a full force and effect, for the period covered by this permit, bodily injury, and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any act or occurance occuring in or about th epremises which are subject of this permit, or resulting from Permittee's operations, or from Permittee's use of owned or nonowned automobiles. The amounts of insurance shall not be less than the following: _7_ Single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, including death esulting therefrom, and property damage or a combination of both - 5500,000.00. The following endorsements must be attached to the policy: 1. If the insurance policy covers on an accident basis: it must be changed to "occurrence". 2. The policy must cover personal injury as well as bodily injury. 3. The policy must cover complete contractual liability. Exclusions of contractural liability as to bodily injuries, personal injuries and property damage must be eliminated from the basic policy and endorsements. 4. BROAD FORM property damage liability must be afforded. 5. City of Atascadero, and their officers, employees and agents shall be named as additional insureds under the policy, and the policy shall stipulate this insurance will operate as primary insurance and that no other insurance effected by the City or other named insured will be called upon to contribute to a loss covered thereunder. c. The following requirements apply to all liability insurance to be provided by Permittee: 1. A certified copy of said policy and a certificate of insurance shall be furnished the Parks and Recreation Department within twenty (20) days after execution of this permit. * certificate alone is not acceptable. Certificates and policies shall also state that the City is not liable for the payment of any premiums of assessments on this property. 2. Certificates and policies shall state that the policy shall not be cancelled or reduced in coverage without thirty (30) days written notice to the City. Ten (10) days written notice is not acceptable except in connection with worker's compensation insurance. 3. Insurance required shall be placed in a company or companies acceptalbe to the City and shall have a policy holders surplus of at least ten (10) times the amount of limit of liability afforded by the insurance company. 4. Approval of the insurance by the City shall not releive or decrease the extent to which the Permittee or nay sublesseee may be held responsible for payment of damages resulting from its operation. 5. No policy is acceptable if it contains an exclusion relating to occurances in any manner arising out of the use of alcoholic beverages. 20. Taxes and Licenses: Permittee agrees to pay all lawful taxes, assessments or charges "hich at any time may be levied by the State, County, City or any possessory right .%hick Permittee may have in or to the premises covered hereby or the improvements 0hereon by reason of its use or occupant' therof or other,,vise as well as all taxes, assessments and charges on goods, merchandise, pictures, appliances, equipments and property o,.%,ned by it in or about said premises. Permittee shall and does hereby assume responsiblity for payment of any and all licenses applicable to his operation of said premises. \`,� -8- 21. Inspection of Premises: Permittee agrees that the City, acting through its authorized agents and employees, shall have the right to enter upon the premises at any reasonable time to inspect them. 22. Inspection and :Maintenance: The City reserves the right of ingress and egress to inspect, investigate and survey said premises as deemded necessary to the City. 23. Permit Notice: Any notices herein provided to be given, or which may be given by either party to the other, shall be deemed to have been fully given when made in writing and deposited in the United States Mail, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: to the Permittee at: Pop's Tackle Shop c/o Richard Oswald P.O. BOX 932 Atascadero, CA 93423 To the City at: City of Atascadero P.O. BOX 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 Attn: Parks and Recreation Department The address to which the notice shall or may be mailed as aforesaid by either party shall or may be changed by written notice given by such party to the other as therein before provided, but nothing herein contained shall preclude the giving of any such notio by personal service. 24. Interpretation of Permit: This permit is made under and is subject of the laws of the State of Californi in all respects as to interpretation, construction, operation, effect and performance. 25. Waiver of Permit Terms: No waiver by City at any time of any of the terms, conditions, or covenants of this permit shall be deemed as a waiver at any time thereafter of the same or of any other term, condition, or covenant herein contained, not of the strict and prompt performance thereof. No delay failure or ommission of the City to re- enter the premises or to exercise any right, power or privilege or option arising from any default nor any subsequent acceptance of rent then or thereafter accrued shall impair any such right, power, privilege or option or be constructed as a waiver of such default or a relinquishment of any right or any acquiescence therein. No notice to Permittee shall be required to restore or revive time as of the essence after the waiver by the City of any default. No option, right, power, remedy or privilege of the City shall be constructed as being exhausted by the exercise thereof in one or more instances. The rights, powers, options and remedies given to the City by this permit shall be deemed cumulative. _9_ • 0 26. Mo_dif_ica.tiaz of Permit: Not withstanding any of the provisions of this permit, *the parties may hereafter, by mutual consent, agree to modifications thereof or additions thereto in writing which are not forbidden by law. The City shall have the right to grant reasonable extensions of time to Permitee for any purpsoe for the performance of any obligation of Permittee hereunder. 27. Breach of Contract: This permit is made upon the condition that, if the rents or other stuns which Permittee herein agrees to pay or any part thereof shall be unpaid on the day of which the same shall become due, or if default be made in any of the terms, agreements, conditions or convenants herein contained on the part of the Permittee, or should Permittee become insolvent, or bankrupt, either voluntarily or involuntarily, then and in such even at the option of the City, this permit shall cease and terminate; and the City may enter upon the premises. Permittee's interest hereunder shall not be assignable in bankruptcy. 28. Assignment and Subleases: Permittee shall neither assign, sublease or ther- wise convey any interest of any sort granted by this permit to any person or persons, entity or entities whatsoever without prior written consent and approval by the City. Any document by which an interest is granted, subject to the approval by the City, shall indicate that the person acquiring that interest has been advised of all of the wterms of this permit and takes his interest subject to those terms and conditions, d recognizes that upon termination of the interet of Permittee granted by thisermit P , his interest shall also be terminated. However, in the event of termination of this permit the City at its sole option, may elect to treat any assignee, subtenant, or holder of an interest conveyed by permittee. 29. Waiver of Claims: Permittee hereby waives any claims against the City, its officers, agents or employees for damage or loss caused by any suit or proceeding directly or indirectly attacking the validity of this permit, or any part thereof or by any judge- ment or award in any suit or proceeding declaring this permit null, void or voidable, or delaying the same or any part thereof from being carried out. 30. Actions: in event of any action or suit upon this permit by City, if it shall prevail, shall be entitled to receive reasonable attorney's fees and all costs, disbursements and expenses inclduing administrative expenses. 31. Right of entry as agent; in any case in which provision is made here for the termination of this permit by the City of in the case of abandonment or vacating of the premises by Permittee, the City in leiu of declaring a forfeiture may enter upon the premises. To such end, Permittee hereby irrevocable appoitns the City its agent to remove any and all persons or property on said premises and place any such property in orage for the account of at the expense of Permittee. 32. Duration of Public Facilities: By entering into this permit, the City makes no stipulation as to the type, size, location or duration or public facilities to be maintained at said facility. a -10- 0 0 33. Time of Essence: Time shall be of the essence in the performance of this permit. 34. Eminent Domain: If, during the term of this permit, any property described herein or herafter added hereto is taken in eminent domain, the entire award shall be paid to the City. 35. Hazardous Substances: Not goods, merchandise or materials shall be kept, stored or sold in or on said premises which are in any way explosive or hazardous; and no offensive or dangerous trade, business or occupation shall be carriaion therein or thereon, and nothing shall be done _on said premises, other than is authorized whcih will in any way injure said premises or structures; provided that nothing contained in this paragraph shall preclude Permitte from bringing, keeping or using on or about said premises such materials, supplies, equipment and machinery as are appropriate or customary in carrying on its said business. Gasoline and oils shall be stored, handled and dispenses as required by present, or future regulations and laws. 36. Photography: The City may grant permits to persons or corporations engaged in the production of still and motion picture and related activities, for the use of said premises for such purposes when such permission shall not interfere with the primary business of Permittee. 37. Nondiscrimination: Permittee and his employees shall not discriminate because of race, sex, age, religion, color, national origin or marital status against any person refusing to furnish such person any accomondation, facility, service or privilege offer to or enjoyed by the general public. Nor shall Permittee or its employees publicize the accomodations, facilities, services or privileges in amny manner would directly or inferentially reflect upon or question the acceptability of the patronage of any person because of race, sex, age, relition, color, national origin or marital status. In the performance of this permit, Permittee will not discriminate against any employee because of race, sex, age, religion, color, national origin, or marital status. 38. Independent Contractort. permittee enters into this agreement solely and exlusively as an independent contractor and only in capacity and not as a partner, employee or other agent of the City. 39• Paragraph Titles: The paragraph titles in this permit are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference, and in no way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of this permit or in any way affect this permit. 40. Permit in Counterparts: This permit is executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. 41. Contract documents: the complete permit between the parties hereto shale consist of the identified documents. This permit titled "Use Permit" , Exhibit "A" , 42. Remedies not Exlusive: the use by either party of any remedy specified herein for the enforcement of this permit is not exclusive and shall not deprive j 1� the party using such remedy of or limit the application of, any other remedy provided by law. -11 ! • 43• Termination: This permit maybe terminated by the City at any time and for any reason deemed sufficient by the City Council of said City, by giving thirty (30) days written notice to permittee of its intention to do so. ATTEST: ROBERT M. JOINES, CITY CLERK L RO ',- F.E—L� NELSON, PTAYOR APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: /} MICHAEL SHELTON, CITY ;MANAGER ERiMITTEE APPROVED AS TO FORM: *OBERT M. JONES, CITY ATrOpNEy • -12- Permittee accepts the foregoing use permit subject to all of the terms and conditions contained herein. Permittee acknowledges that the permit will not become operative until complicance is made with paragraph lg relating to insurance. .PER,%IITI'EE USE PERMIT: DUCK HUT The CITY - OF ATASCADERO a municipal corporation of the State of Calif- ornia hereinafter called City, having property or space notresentl A y required for use for City purposes , hereby gives permission , pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 25536 , to Richard Oswald, here- inafter called Permittee , to use the following described property or space for such purposes and upon such terms and conditions as herein provided: Permittee at his own cost , risk and expense , shall maintain a food concession stand at Atascadero Lake Park. It is further understood and agreed that in accordance with the terms of said agreement , the City of Atascadero , acting by and through its Parks and Recreation Department , will administer this permit for and on behalf of the City. WITNESSETH: In consideration of the mutual covenants , conditions , promises and agreements herein contained, the City and Permittee hereby mutually covenant and agree as follow: 1. Grant and Description of Premises : The City , for and in consider- ation of the agreements hereinafter stated, grants to Permittee the non- exclusive right and priviledge to maintain and operate a food concession stand, whcih concession site will be specified by the Director of Parks and Recreation for the City of Atascadero . No concession rights expressed or implied, other than those expressly given in this permit are granted, and any other concession rights are hereby denied Permittee under this agreement . It is understood that the priviledges granted herein are non-exlusive and the City reserves the right to grant other similar or identical concessions . 2 . Condition of Premises : The taking of possession of the subject premises by permittee shall , in itself, constitute acknowledgement that the premises are in good and tentable condition. Permittee agrees to accept said premises in their presently existing condition "as is" ; and the City shall not be obligated to make any alterations , additions or betterments thereto . 3. Term: The term of this permit shall be for a period of one year , and shall commence on June 1 , 1986 and end on May 31 , 1987 . both dates inclusive . At the expiration or termination of this permit as here provided, Permittee shall within thirty ( 30 ) days thereafter , remove from said premises or otherwise dispose of in a manner satisfactory to the City all personal property belonging to Permittee located on said premises subject to the provisions of paragraph 10 of this permit . Should Per- mittee fail to remove or dispose of his property as herein provided , the OSWALD! USE PERMIT City may, at its election, consider such property abandoned or may dispose of same at the Permittee' s expense. Also at the expiration or termination of this permit, Permittee shall quit and surrender the said premises including real property improvements in a good state of repair, damage by matters over which Permittee has no control excepted, provided that such exculpatory provisions shall not extend to any risk which Permittee is required to insure against as herein stated rent, subject otherwise to all the terms and con- ditions of this permit. 4. Quitclaim Deed: Upon termination of the rights hereby granted, Permittee shall execute and deliver to the City within thirty (30) days after service of written demand therefore, a good and sufficient quitclaim deed to the premises described herein, including the improvements thereon. Should Permittee fail or refuse to deliver to the City a quitclaim deed as aforesaid, a written notice by the City reciting the failure of Permittee to execute and deliver said quitclaim deed as herein provided, shall after ten (10) days from the date of recordation of said notice be conclusive evidence against Permittee and all persons claiming under Permittee of the termination of said permit. 5. Rental: Permittee shall pay the sum of $200 .00 upon acceptance of this use permit. Said $200. 00 shall be the annual payment or 5% of the gross receipts, whichever is higher. Permittee shall make his books available and shall make an accounting within 30 days of the termination of this permit. Permittee shall pay without demand the percentage payment less the sum of $200. 00 on said date. Payment shall be made to: City of Atascadero, P.O. Box 747, Atascadero, CA 93423-0747. The term "gross receipts" whereever used in this permit shall mean all monies, property or any other thing of value received by Permittee from the use of the premises described above without any deduction or deductions provided that the term "gross receipts" shall not in- clude any sales or excise taxes imposed by any government entity and collected by Permittee. Permittee shall maintain such records and accounts as the City Finance Department shall require. The City shall have the right through its representative, and at all reasonable times, to inspect such books and records, including State of California sales tax records; and Permittee hereby agrees that all such records and instruments are available to the City. All Federal tax returns of Permittee insofar as this permit is concerned shall be made available to the City. The City further reserves the right to examine all such books and records at any time during the one (1) year period following the termination of this permit. 6. Use of Premises• Permittee may use the premises for the followng purpose only: Operation of- a Food Concession Stand and such other items as may from time to time be approved by the Director of Public Works and said City. Pernittee shall offer 2 �� OSWALD USE PERMIT suchroducts P (exclusing alcoholic beverages) and shall operate in such a manner as shall be approved by the County Health Department and the City Department of Parks and Recreation. The sale of liquor, beer or° other alcoholic beverages on the subject premises is expressly prohibited. The Permittee shall have the right and duty to manage , operate and control all of the above mentioned activities and to do all things nec- essary in the exercise of such management , operation and control subject to the terms and _ conditions of this permit . Permittee shall operate the concession facilities in accordance with the regulations and policies of the Director of Parks and Recreation, and in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this permit . Permittee shall not use or permit the subject premises to be used in whole or inar t p during the term of this permit for any purpose ur ose other than as set forth without the prior consent of the City first had and obtained. Permittee expressly agrees at all times during the term of thisermit at P its own cost and expense , to maintain and P , operate such premises and areas adjacent , in a clean , safe , wholesome and sanitary condition , free of trash, garbage or obstruction of any kind, and in com- pliance with any and all present and future laws , rules , regulation of any governmental authority , now or at any time during the term of this permit in force , relating to sanitation or public health , safety or welfare ; and Permittee shall at all times faithfully obey and comply with all laws , rules and regulations of federal , state , county and city governmental bodies or departments or officers thereof , and this permit is expressly subject to the provisions and requirements of any existing and future agreements between the City and the United States or the State of California or the County of San Luis Obispo relative to the develop- ment , operation or maintenance of the Park. Permittee shall remedy without delay any defective , dangerous or unsanitary condition. 7 . Termination : This permit may be terminated by the City at any time and for any reason deemed sufficient by the City Council of said City, by giving thirty ( 30 ) days written notice to Permittee of its intention to do so . 8 . Title to Improvements : Permittee acknowledges that title to all real property is vested in the City. 9 . Personal Property : Title to all personal property provided by the permittee shall remain in the Permittee . 10 . Construction or Modification of Improvements : Permittee may con- struct or modify with the approval of the Director of parks and Recreatin , any concession improvements . Such construction or modification shall be without cost to the City. OSWALD USE PERMIT In the event that the construction modification or addition to concession improvements are desired, the approval, in writing, of the City shall first be obtained prior to such construction, modification, or addition. Additionally plans and specifications for such changes shall be submitted to the City for approval. 11. Completion of Improvements: The Permittee at his own expense, shall completely equip the concession improvements described herein and shall keep the same equipped in a first class manner and to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks and Recreation throughout the term of this permit . 12. Ownership of Improvements: Title to improvements on tae premises at the commencement of this permit is retained by t7ae City afid this permit is subject to any rights of ownership in the improvements. All improvements constructed on the premises ty Permittee as permitted by this permit shall be owned by Permittee until expiration of the term or sooner termination of this permit. Permittee shall not, however , remove any improvements from the premises nor waste, destroy or modify any improvements on the -premises, except as permitted by this permit. All improvements on the premises at the expiration of the term or sooner termination of this permit shall without compensation to Permittee, become City property free and clear of all claims to or against them by Permittee or any third person and Permittee shall defend and indemnify the City against all liability and loss arising from such claims or from the City' s exercise of the rights conferred by this paragraph. 13. Maintenace and Use of Improvements: Permittee agrees to maintain any and all concession facilities on the subject premiese in good order and repair, at his own cost and expense, during the entire term of the permit. Permittee shall perform at his own cost and expenses, any required maintenance and repairs, and should Permittee fail, neglect or refuse to do so, the City shall have the right to perform such maintenance or repairs for the Permittee ' s account; and the Permittee agrees to promptly reimburse the City for the cost thereof, pro- vided however , that the City shall first give Permittee ten (10) days written notice of its intention to perform such maintenance or repairs for the permittee ' s account for the purpose of enabling permittee to Proceed with such maintenance or repairs at his own expense. Permittee hereby expressly waives the right to make repairs at the expense of the City. Permittee may. employ, pay and supervise personnel to look after the concession. Such personnel shall be responsible to Permittee and cooperate with City personnel. All of Permittee' s personnel shall be of good . moral character and shall be physically able to handle their duties and must be promptly replaced when derelict in their duties. There shall be no drinking of liquor, or other 4 alcoholic beverages in or around the area by Permittee' s employees. Permittee shall, at all times and at his own expense, do all things reasonably necessary for the preservation, maintenance and operation of the concession. The City also reserves the right to do any and all work of any nature necessary for the preservation, maintenance and operation of the park in any areas within the confines of said park. Permittee shall be given notice when such work may become necessary and will adjust concession operations in such a manner that the City may proceed expeditiously. The Permittee shall not grant, with respect to said premises, easements, rights-of-way, license and permits. 14. Utilities and Services: Permittee shall be responsible for the payment of all applicable utility charges. 15. Equipment: Permittee, at its own expense,p se, shall completely equip the concession improvements ement P s described herein and shall keep the same equipped p q pped in a first class manner he throughout t term of this permit. g 16. Signs and Approval of Name: No signs, names or placards shall be inscribed, painted or fixed upon said premises without written consent of the City 17. Quality of Service and Controlled Rates and Charges: Permittee agrees that he will operate and manage the service and facilities offered in a first class manner and comparable to other first class concessions providing similar facilities and services during the entire term of the permit. Within the terms of this description Permittee agrees to maintain a high standard of service at least equal to that of other establishments in the City and/or adjacent communities for similar operations. The City shall have access to, and the right to inspect the schedule of prices and rates for goods sold, rented or services rendered or performed upon the subject premises. If the City determines that any price or prices are unreasonable or inappropriate for the services rendered, or the items sold, the same shall be modified as directed by the City; provided that Permittee, prior to such notification, shall be given a reasonable opportunity to confer with City and justify such prices. The City reserves the right to prohibit the sale of any item which it deems objectionable or beyond the scope of merchandise deemed necessary for proper service to the public. A competent employee shall-..be on the premises at all times while the con- cession is in operation. Permittee shall post rates and prices for all rentals and services in such places as may be designated by the City. 9. 5 18. Closure: At any time should an occurrance necessitate they closing of the park to the general public the Permittee shall have no recourse by law to the City for losses incurred. 19. Hold Harmless Agreement: Permittee hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees in any and every way from any and all manner of damages, charges, suits and expenses which they may sustain or be put to by reason of Permittee' s occupancy or use of the premises , or any activity carried on by Permittee in connection therewith. 20. Liability Insurance: Permittee agrees to obtain and keep in force during the term of this permit, at Permittee' s expense, worker ' s compensation and public liability and property damage insurance in companies authorized to issue such insurance in the State of California. Said insurance policy shall consist of the following: a. Worker ' s Compensation and Employer ' s Liability Insurance: Permittee shall maintain in full force and effect, for the period coverered by this permit, full worker ' s compensation and employer ' s liability insurance with limits of at least statutory requirements with an insurance carrier satisfactory to the City. In the event Permittee is self-insured, he shall furnish a certificate of permission to self-insure signed by the Department of Industrial Relations Administration of Self Insurance, Sacramento. b. Liability Insurance: Permittee shall maintain in full force and effect, for the period covered by this permit, bodily injury, personal injury including death resulting therefrom and property damage insurance with an insurance carrier satisfactory with the City. This liability insurance shall include, but shall not be limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any act or occurrence occurring in or about the premises which are subject to this permit, or resulting from Permittee' s uselof owned or nonowned automobiles. The amounts of insurance shall not be less than the following: Single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and. property damage or a combination of both - S300 ,000 . The following endorsements must be attached to the policy: 1. If: the insurance policy covers on an "accident" basis, it must be changed to read "occurrance" . 2. The policy must cover personal injury as well as bodily injury. 3. The policy must cover complete contractural liability. Exclusions of contractural liability as to bodily injuries, personal injuries and property damage must be eliminated 4 A. 6 it OSWALD USE PERMIT from the basic policy and endoresements . 4 . BROAD FORM property damage liability must be afforded. 5 . The City of Atascadero and their officers , employees and agents , shall be named insured under the policy , and the policy shall stipulate that this insurance will operate as a primary insurance and that no other insurance effected by the City or other named insured will be called upon to contribute to a loss covered thereunder. C . The following requirements apply to all liability insurance to be provided by Permittee : 1. A certified copy of each policy and a certificate of insurance sdhall be furnished Parks and Recreation within twenty ( 20) days after execution of this permit . (A certi- ficate alone is not acceptable) . Certificates and policies shall ) state that the City is not liable for the payment of any premiums or assessments on this property . 2 . Certificates and policies shall state that the policy shall not be canclled or reduced in coverage without thirty ( 30 ) days written notice to City. Ten (10) days written notice is not acceptable , except in connection with worker' s compensation insurance . 3 . Insurance required shall be placed in a company or companies acceptable to City and shall have a policy holder ' s surplus of at least ( 10) times the amount of limit of liability afforded by the insurance company. 4 . Approval of the insurance by the City shall not relieve or decrease the extent to which the Permittee or any sublessee may be held responsible for payment of damages resulting from its operation . 5 . No policy is acceptable if it contains an exclusion relating to occurrences in any manner arising out of the use of alcoholic beverages . Prividing , however , that said policy will be acceptable if it contrains a specific endorsement providing coverage under the limits and provisions set forth hereinabove , for any occurrence arising out of the use of alcoholic beverages . d. If permittee does not keep the insurance required by this full paragraph in full force and effect at all times during the term hereof , this permit shall immediately and automatically terminate , and all rights and privileges granted hereunder to the Permittee shall be extinguished thereby . It is expressly understood that no notice by the City is required to effect the termination specified herein . 7 21., Taxes: Permittee agrees to pay all lawful taxes, assessments or charges which at any time may be levied by the State, County, City or any tax assessment or asssessment governing body upon any interest in this permit or any possessory right which Permittee may have in or to the premises covered hereby or the improvements thereon by reason of its use or occupancy thereof or othewise as well as all taxes, assessments and charges on goods, merchandise, pictures, appliances, equipment and property owned by it in or about said premises. 22. Inspection of Premises: Permittee agrees that the City acting through its authorized agents and employees, shall have the right to enter upon the premises at any reasonable time to inspect them. 23. Inspection and Maintenance: The City reserves the right of ingress and engress to inspect, investigate and survey said premises as deemed necessary by the City, and the right to do any and all work of any nature for the preservation, of maintenance and operation of the park in any areas within the confines of said park. Permittee shall be given reasonable notice when such work may become necessary and will adjust his operation in such a manner that the City may proceed expeditiously. 24. Permit Notice: Any notices herein provided to be given or which may be given by either party to the other , shall be deemed to have been fully given when made in writing and deposited in the United States Mail, Post Age prepaid and addressed as follows: To the Permittee: Richard Oswald, P .O. BOX 932 Atascadero, CA 93422 To the City: P.O. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 The address to which the notices shall or may be mailed as aforesaid by either party shall or may be changed by written notice given by such part to the other as therein before provided, but nothing herein contained shall preclude the giving of any such notice by personal service. 25. Interpretation of Permit: This permit is made under and is subject to the laws of the State of California in all respects as to interpretation construction, operation, effect and performance. 26. Waiver of Permit Terms: No waiver by City at any time of the terms, conditions, or covenants of this permit shall be deemed as a waiver at any time thereafter of the same or of anv other term, condition .or covenant herein contained, not of the strict and prompt performance threof. No delay, failure or omission of the City to re-enter the premises or to exercise any right, power , privilege or option can be construed as a waiver of such default or a re- linquishment of any right or any acquiescense therein. No notice to Permittee shall be required to restore or revive time as of the essence after the waiver by the City of any default. No option, right, power , remedy or privilege of the City shall be construed as being exhausted by the exercise thereof in one or more r 8 instances. The rights, powers, options, and remedies given to the City by this permit shall be deemed cumulative. 27. Modificatoin of Permit: Not withstanding any of the provisions of this permit, the parties may hereafter, by mutual consent, agree to modifications thereof or additions thereto in writing which are not forbidden by law. The City shall have the right to grant exensions of time to Permittee for any purpose for the performance of any obligation of Permittee hereunder. 28. Assignment and Subleases: Permittee shall neither assign, sublease or otherwise convey any interest of any sort granted by this permit to any person or persons, entity or entities whatsoever without prior written consent and approval by the City. Any document by which an interest is granted, subject to the approval of the City, shall indicate that the person acquiring that interest has been advised of all of the terms of this permit and takes his interest subject to those terms and conditions, and recognizes that upon termination of the interest of Permittee granted by this permit, his interest shall also be terminated. However , in the event of termination of this permit, the City at its sole option, may elect to treat any assignee, subtenant, or holder of any interest conveyed -by Permittee as the City' s tenant, subject to the terms and conditions of this permit and that entered into between the assignees, subtenant or holder of an interest conveyed by Permittee. 29 . Breach of Permit: This permit is made upon the condition that, if the rents or other sums which Permittee herein agrees to pay or any part thereof shall be unpaid on the day of which the same shall come due, or if default be made in any of the terms, agreements, conditions or covenants herein contained o n the part of the Permittee, or should Permittee become insolvent, or bankrupt, either voluntarily or involuntarily, then, and in such event at the opgtion of the City, this permit shall cease and terminate; and the City may enter upon the premises. Permittee' s interest hereunder shall not be assignable in bankruptcy. 30. Waiver of Claims: Permittee hereby waives any claims against the City, its officers, agents, or employees for damage or loss caused by any suit or proceeding dirfectly or indirectly attacking the validity� of this permit, or anv part thereof or by any judgment or award in any suit or proceeding declaring this permit null, void or voidable, or delaying the same or any part thereof from being carried out. 31. Actions: In the event of any action or suit upon this permit, the City shall be entitled to receive reasonable attorney' s fees and all costs, disbursements and expenses including administrative expenses. 9 32., Right of Entry as Agent: In anv case in which provision is made herein for the termination of this permit by the City or in case of abandonment or vacating of the premises by Permittee, the City in lieu of declaring a forfeiture may enter upon the premises. To such end, Permittee hereby the City its agent to remove an and all irrevocably appoints Y persons or property on said premises and place any such property in storage for the account of and at the expense of Permittee. In such case, the City may re-let the premises upon such terms as it may deem proper , and if a sufficient sum shall not be realized thereby, after paying expenses of such re-letting, to satisfy the rent and other sums herein agreed to be paid by Permittee, Permittee agrees to save the City harmless from any loss or damage or claim arising out of the action of the City in pursuance of this paragraph. 33. Duration of Public Facilities: By entering into this permit, the City makes no stipulations to type, fixed location or duration of public facilities to be maintained at Atascadero lake park. 34. Time of Essence: Time shall be of essence in the performance of this permit. 35. Eminent Domain: If, during the term of this permit, any- property described herein or hereafter added hereto is taken in eminent domain, the entire award shall be paid to the City. 0 36. Photography: The City may grant permits to persons or corporations engaged in the production of still and motion picture and related activities, for the use of said premises for such purposes when such permission shall not interfere with the primary business of Permittee. 37. Hazardous Substances: No goods, merchandise or material shall be kept, stored or sold in or on said premises which are in any way explosive or hazardous; and no offensive or dangerous trade, business or occupation shall be carried on therein or thereon, and nothing shall be done on said premises, other than is authorized by this permit, and no machinery or apparatus shall be used or operated on said premises which will in any way injure said premises or structures; provided that nothing contained in this paragraph shall preclude Permittee from bringing , keeping or using on or about said premises such materials, supplies, equipment and machinery as are appropriate or customary in carrying on its said business. Gasoline and oils shall be stored, handled and dispensed as required by present, or future regulations and laws. 38 .: Nondiscrimination: Permittee and his employees shall not discriminate because of race, sex, religion, color , material status, ancestry or national origin against any person by refusing to furnish such person accommodation, facility, or his employees publicize the accommodations, facilities, services or privileges in any manner that would directly or inferentially reflect upon or question the acceptability of the patronage of any person because of race, age, sex, religion, color , marital status, ancestry or national origin. 10 n� OSWALD USE PERMIT In the performance of this permit , Permittee will not discrimate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race , sex, age , color , marital status , religion, ancestry or national origin . 39 . Paragraph Titles : The paragraph titles in this permit are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference , and in no way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of this permit or in any way affect this permit . 40 . Permit in Counterparts : This permit is executed in counter- parts , each of which shall be deemed an original . 41 . Permit Documents : The complete Permit between the parties hereto shall consist of the identified documents : This permit titled "City of Atascadero Use Permit" , Exhibit A 42 . Remedies not exclusive : The use by either party of any remedy specified herein for the enforcement of this permit is not exclusive and shall not deprive the party using such remedy of or limit the application of , any other remedy provided by law. 43. Indenpendent Contractor: Permittee enters into this permit solely and exclusively as an independent contractor and only in that capacity and not as a partner, employee or other agent of the City. Further, Permittee acknowledges that this agreement issues and is effecitve only upon execution by the City Council. 44 . Advertising: Permittee shall not advertise or permit any publi- city designed to attract the general public to an activity conducted by Permittee within the confines of said part without the knowledge and permission of the Director of Parks and Recreation . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto havec used these present to be executed the day and year first above written,. ATTEST: ROBERT M. JONES , CITY CLERK PERMITTEE APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 1 i,IIC A L SHELTON , ITY MANAGER ROLFE D. NELSON , Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: DATE : ROBERT M. JONES , CITY ATTORNEY 1r OSWALD USE PERMIT Permittee accepts the foregoing use permit subject to all of the terms and conditions contained herein . permittee acknowledges that the permit will not become operative until compliance is made with paragraph 20 relating to insurance . Permit ee Signature C 'D4 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Dial-A-Ride - Proposed- 1986/87 Contract Renewal and Consideration of Service Expansion DATE: April 14, 1986 Recommendation: - Staff recommends that the 'Dial-A-Ride contract be renewed with Community Transit Services, Inc. of Santa Ana and that a contract be brought back at a future meeting prior to July 1, and that the level of service by maintained equal or better without expanding services. Background and Discussion: Staff has had inquiries from citizens and council regarding the possibility ofexpandingthe Dial-a-Ride Service to Weekends and/or evenings. Michael Moore, Location Supervisor for CTS has addressed these suggestions in the attached memo. The key points to the memo are; (1) DAR programs do better in this size of community than do fixed route systems, (2) There has not been a strong public desire to expand the service, (3) since revenue allocations are anticipated to decline in the near future, expanded services would most likely be short-lived, and (4) the cost would be approximately $10,000 to run one DAR bus for 8 hours on Saturdays. Staff would like to add that the expanded service, while desirable, would (1) reduce the amount of street resurfacing funds, (2) be difficult to pattern congruent with Atascadero' s spaghetti-like street layout, (3) involve a 2-hour trip to traverse El Camino Real North to South and to the Zoo and back, (4) be under utilized to key points of interest since those in the workplace provide their own mode of transportation and do not generally walk , (5) be needed mainly at the lunch break when the people scatter beyond the grasp of any flexible schedule we could conjur up, and (6) not enhance the needs of the handicapped or elderly (which make up over 60% of the ridership) or school children (which, for the most part, make up • the balance) . Mr . Moore ' s memo addressed the need for new buses, saying that three of the five have an excess of 100, 000 miles. Two buses will be replaced in the 1986-87 budget and a third is anticipated in the following fiscal year . The oldest at that time will be a 1984 model. ;i 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Sensibaugh FILE: Atascadero Director of Public, Works DATE: March 20, 1986 City of Atascadero FROM: Michael Moore Location Supervisor Atascadero Dial-A-Ride SUBJECT: 1985-86 Contract S d The tentative estimate for the 1986-87 contract year is 979-00. This reflects the same level of service for the 1985-86 contract period. This estimate includes a raise for all employees of $.25 per hour ($4. 25 starting salary) . Insurance costs have increased more than 50% to $16,175.00. This also is only an estimate, as final insurance costs will not be available until June. If this estimate proves high the balance will be returned to the City. (Community Transit Services underestimated the 85-86 cost by $1,417.00 which was absorbed by the company. ) In figrring the cost of an expansion in service y p an estimated cost of $22.00 per flour should give a reasonably accurate figure (i.e. 5 hours X 52 Saturdays X $22.00 = $5,720.00) to add to the base con- tract price. In expanding service it would be wise to consider the following factors. First, it is almost certain that costs in the future will increase: This year ' s contract has increased 6.7% over last year ' s; also, as the fleet gets older maintenance costs will rise (3 of the 5 buses have in excess of 100,000 miles) Although falling gas prices should ameliorate these costs for now. Second, transit subsidies will be declining. Section 18 funds are anticipated to decline 15% - 30% in fiscal year 1987 and their complete phaseout is expected in the next few years. It would be prudent . to begin now to establish a tran- sit vehicle replacement fund. The cost of a lift-equipt vehicle is currently around $35 , 000. 00. Third, it is now relatively easy to add service; it will be in the future much more difficult to reduce the level of service to which the community has become accustomed. In considering weekend service it should be pointed out that while bus service would be wonderful it has not been declared an unmet need because most stores and services are available Monday through Friday. It could be argued that the need for transportation on Sun- days to and from church should be and is largely being met by the churches themselves. Morro Bay Dial-A-Ride has discontinued Sunday service because of a lack of ridership. r would only operate for nine months starting in September of 1986. would be expensive = 190 days X 5 hours X $22.00 — $20,900. It is evident that while requests for increased -service are infinite the funds available are finite. It would be prudent to begin now to consider long range plans about future costs, funding and the principals that will guide transportation services for the City of Atascadero in the coming years. xc: Mike Shelton Don Leib 3 VEHICLE INSURANCE COST SUMMARY y 1 Type of Vehicle # Va1Lie Total -------------- ---- - - - ------------ -Wa ne Transet t e 1981 _2 �8, 767 $17, 534 y, P1 uebird 1981 1 11, 375 11, 375 r rtiai `` , Chrysler Wide One 1984 t 1 23 188 23 188 _ Chrysler_ Wide One 1979 r =1 9� O�Z►0 9� C�00 , � ------ --- — -- -- ---------------•-------------------------- a.,�Tr�•T C4 "ivrri. L�� yFi ✓t�: TOTAL FLEET VALUE $61, 097 for Pro tYDam Ins 3. 60%,.. 1 P k � .,� TOTAL PROPERTY DAMAGE PREMIUM L: Rate Per mile $0. i per mi le ¢ s.. . . TOTAL LIABILITY PREMIUM $13, c00 DEDUCTIBLE $0. 01 per mi le $1, 100 t TOTAL INSURANCE $16, 499 R PROJECT: Atascadero BUDGET PERIOD 01-Jul-86 to 30-Jun-87 Prepared by: - JLP Date: 17-Mar-86 77 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 ORDINANCE I ANCE N0. 130 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ADDING CHAPTER 18 TO TITLE 2 OF THE ATASCADERO 14UNICIPAL CODE DECLARING A NEED FOR A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO FUNCTION IN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND. DECLARING THAT THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL .WILL ACT AS THE AGENCY WHEREAS, there exists in the City of Atascadero certain blighted areas which constitute physical , social or economic liabilities requiring redevelopment in the interest of the health, safety and general welfare of the people of Atascadero; and WHEREAS , California Health and Safety Code Section 33100 creates in the City of Atascadero a public body corporate and politic , known as the Community Development Agency, for the purpose of exercising those powers granted by the Community Redevelopment law as set out in Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et . seq . ; and , WHEREAS , before the Community Development Agency can transact any business or exercise any powers, the City Council must declare by ordinance that there is a need for such agency to function in the community; and WHEREAS , the City Council has the right at the time of adoption of an ordinance declaring a need for such an agency to declare itself to be the agency; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION 1 . An ordinance of the City of Atascadero declaring a need for a redevelopment agency to function in Atascadero , and establishing that the City Council will function as the agency, by adding Chapter 18 to Title 2 of the Atascadero Municipal Code as follows : CHAPTER 18 SECTIONS TITLE OF SECTION 2-18_ 01 Title 2-18 . 02 Declaration of Need 2-18 . 03 Purpose 2-18. 04 Council as Agency Section 2 . 18. 01 : TITLE : This Chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Community -1- • ! 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 Membert--Fe-- foregoing ordinance is hereby adopted in its entirey on the following roll call vote : Adopted: Ayes : Noes : Absent: ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT : UJ/ ROBERT M. JONES , City lerk MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FOI]�� R OBERT Y1. J ty ttorney ROLFE NELSON, Mayor -2- ;j=- A 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 4Y. Z AGA '7 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: April 23, 1986 Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council direct staff to bring back an ordinance to adopt informal bidding procedures and a resolution to elect to become subject to the uniform public construction cost accounting procedures. Background: The California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Commission was formed to simplify bidding procedures and advertising requirements and to establish competative cost accounting by cities when bidding work against contractors. It has been established that in many cases contractors can do public works projects more cost effectively than can cities or counties if a true cost accounting of all expenses is kept by the gov- ernmental bodies. In order to encourage cities that do construction (vs. mainenance) with their own crews to let out more work to private pra- ctice, the Cities may choose to use alternate bid procedures than the typical $5,000-or-greater law. However, in order to perform work within the new guidelines all non-maintenance work must be documented by an acceptable cost accounting. The new procedures allow force account work , negotiated contract or purchase orders to be used up to $15,000. They also allow for informal bidding up to $50 ,000 which requires 10 days notice to area trade journals and relaxed plans and specifications. All work over $50 ,000 requires the typical formal bid procedures with a 30-day notice to the trade journals. Discussion: The new procedure designates the Director of Public Works or other official to enter into contracts within the guidelines without returning to Council if the funds for such work has been duly appropriated. The higher limits will allow projects to be started sooner and with fewer documents. Few bids are received on projects less than $100,000 and negotiated work seems more practicable in m cases. In the case of Atascadero, the City does essentially ze* capital projects due to the size of the street crew. Therefore, we would not have to even worry about the required cost accounting pro- cedures if we only do maintenance as defined in the proposed ord- inance. If the City does elect to compete for the work or do the work after rejecting all bids, the cost-accounting will be greatly simiplified by the new personal computers. To date smaller cities are the only ones adopting the new procedures mainly because they do very little major . construction projects. Fiscal Impact: It is anticipated that more interest will be shown by con- tractors on small jobs and more competative prices will be given. Prevailing wage still applies, and bonding and insurance requirements are still under the control of the City. The time involved in formal bidding procedures. should be the greatest savings as well as time -on specifications on smaller jobs. 2 J' / • 0 ORDINANCE NO. 132 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 is hereby added to Article of the Municipal Code to read as follows: Chapter -Model Informal Bidding Ordinance Section 100. 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 110. Responsibilities of Director of Public Works. The City Council hereby delegates the - authority to award in- formal contracts, in accordance with this Chapter to the City Director of Public Works. SECTION 120. 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. (b) The list shall be organized in accordance with the license classifications of the Contractor' s State License Board. (c) .The City Director of Public Works shall publish annually, in all those construction trade journals identified- by the Contractors State License Board in Accordance with Public Contract Code Seotion 21206 , notice that the City has elected to become subject to the uniform public construction cost accounting procedures, that it maintains a list of qualified contractors to submit bids on informal contracts, and of the City office to contact for all information necessary for a qualified contractor to be included on the list. (d) Any licensed California contractor may upon request be added to the list at any time. (e) The City Director of Public Works shall develop and provide to contractors applying for inclusion on the list a simplified form requesting the applicant' s name, address, and California contractors license number and classification. SECTION 130. Plans, Specifications .and Working Details. The City Council hereby delegates to the City Director of Public Works authority to prepare and adopt plans, specifications and working details for all informal contracts, and directs the City Director of Public Works to develop plans, specifications and working details necesssary to enable a qualified contractor to perform the work required for each informal contract awarded. SECTION 140. Informal Contract Projects - Identifying and Inviting Bids. (a) The City Director of Public Works shall identify all City public works projects in excess of the monetary limits imposed by law for work performed on projects with the City' s own forces and less than the amount which required performance by contracts awarded after formal bidding, and shall accomplish such identified projects by informal contract. (b) Projects shall not be split to avoid any of the bidding requirements contained in the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, Public Contract Code 21000 et. seq. (c) The City Director of Public Works shall mail notices inviting informal bids to all contractors on the list of qualified contractors, for the category of work being bid, and/or all construction trade journals specified in Section 120. (d) The City Director of Public Works shall complete the mailing of notices inviting informal bids, as required by this Section, not less than 10 calendar days before bids are due. (e) The notice inviting informal bids shall describe the project in general terms, how to obtain more detailed in- formation about the project, and state the time and place for 2 the submission of bids. SECTION 150. 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 160: 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 property. 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 170. 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. 3 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: I 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 .J. 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/l/86 -11- 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 S7. 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- .J '"'` ' ^,.531 /� _.��.____.._.• u _t-�-�L MEMORANDUM • TO: City Council THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Lewis Avenue Bridge Development Fee Review by Task Force DATE: April 16, 1986 Recommendation: The Development Fee Task Force Committee recommends that Council (1) consider appropriating $101,750 , out of the capital improvement bridge fund for the Lewis Avenue Bridge, in the 86-87 budget, (2) begin the required studies and preliminary engi- neering project in the next fiscal year , (3) make appropriate adjustments to the fee resolution if (1) above is approved, (4) tie the collection of the fee to the obtaining of or approval of a loan, to be secured by a letter of credit or other guarantee, and (5) tie the payment of the fee to the final inspection of the foundation. Staff concurs with the above, but suggests that the • City work with the Atascadero Unified School District on item (2) above. Background: The Development Fee Task Force reconvened on Wednesday, April 9 at 7 PM at Council's request to discuss the issue raised on the impact of the Lewis Avenue Bridge Development Fee on a limited number of people. . Also the issues of the additional burden of the Amapoa-Tecorida Drainage Development Fee on the same people and the difficulty of paying fees prior to obtaining financing were discussed. Discussion: The Committee did not feel that it was appropriate to look at other fees, such as the general bridge fee, but did feel that the General Plan. and the City Council have emphasized the need for the bridge prior to the rapid increase in development. Therefore, it was felt that the City may want to show good faith by initiating the bridge design and construction through debt financing and contribute monies from the capital improvement funds for bridges, such as the $73 ,000 to be generated by the general bridge fee, or immediately the $101,750 derived from the Bordeaux project for bridges. • , J ADMINISTRATION BUILDING • CITY ATTORNEY POST OFFICE BOX 747 POST OFFICE BOX 606 ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93423 ATASCADERO..CALIFORNIA 93423 PHONE: (805) 466-8000 PHONE: (805) 466-4422 taseadeiCe _ CITY COUNCIL CITY CLERK POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY TREASURER INCORPORATED JULY 2, 1979 POST OFFICE BOX 747 CITY MANAGER ATASCADERO,CALIFORNIA 93423 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT PHONE: (805) 466-8600 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT --�• PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 93422 PHONE: (805) 466-2141 Development Fee Task Force Ad Hoc Committee Notice of Special Meeting Wednesday, April 9, 1986 Council has requested that the Task Force Committee regroup to entertain the complaint from Don Messer that the Committee did not realize that the Lewis Avenue Bridge Fee affected so few property owners. The questions are: is the burden fair and reasonable; should the boundary be expanded; should the City general fund be used to pay part of the bridge; should an assessment district be the tool to finance the bridge instead of development fees; should the committee be reinstated to respond to complaints about fees; should individuals be a topic of discussion instead of boundaries; and other such matters. Thank you in advance for giving up your time to reconvene. cc: Council • MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Directors, Atascadero County Sanitation District THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City'Manager rl FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Cease and Desist Areas C & E (Seperado & Cayucos) DATE: May 6, 1986 Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board (1) proceed on the basis of the attached schedule to provide a sewer assessment district for the above areas, (2) enter into an agreement with the recommended Bond Counsel, (3) direct staff to bring back a Bond Underwriter Agreement (4) shift subsequent matters relating to this project to the City Council for disposition in anticipation of the dissolution of the ACSD, (5) to not further utilize, FmHA monies, (6) consider attaching the Marchant Sewer Extension to this bond issue, and (7) direct staff on any limitations for the individual assessments. Background: The City of Atascadero is currently under a Cease and Desist Order to provide sanitary sewer service to Areas C and E (Seperado Cayucos, respectively) by November of this year. Several attempts for grants have all been denied, the most recent of which was denied in Marchof this year. The City is forced to use assessment districts for any expanded services. On December 9, 1985 the Board entered into an engineering agreement with John Wallace and Associates of San Luis Obispo to design and inspect the project, including the Engineering report required for bonding. Staff members Jorgensen, Jones and myself as well as Wallace, met on April 24 with the bond counsel recommended by the County. Carlo Fowler of Orrick, Harrington & Stucliffe, a San Francisco firm, was the Bond Counsel for Improvement District No 1 in 1971 and is familiar with the City. Staff found Mr. Fowler and his associate, Antonia Dollar, professional, well versed on 1913 Act proceedings and 1915 Act Bonds and the 1931 Protest Act. Their fee is to be based upon a percentage (approximately 2%) of the bonded amount. The scope of their services will be provided as part of this report by the City Attorney. The fee is contingent upon passage of the formation of the district. Staff has already received about 6 hours of valuable con- sultation in preparation for the financing of this project. ! 0 An option to' the fast paced schedule is to slow the process down and not ask the Regional Water Quality Control Board for a time extension. Fiscal Impact: All incurred costs are chargeable to the assessment district at no expense to the City. Any- work, however , that is completed to - im- prove the system that cannot be shown to benefit the owners within the district boundary shall be the responsibility of the City. The City, however , has indicated in the past that it would pay the engineering costs for the Cease and Desist Areas by using 5% FmHA Financing, and has guaranteed Area F a maximum assessment of $4150 . FmHA Financing: Prior to interest rates dropping the 5% FmHA loan seemed worth extending the present bond indebtedness of the revenue bonds for the treatment plant. The use of these monies how- ever may (a) raise the question of line extension related work being "treatment" , (b) delay the audit process, (c) involve a separate engineer ' s report, (d) mix assessment lien bonds and revenue bonds on the same project, and (e) involve other historic red tape by using FmHA. Staff recommends that the FmHA loan be finalized and that no additional FmHA money be utilized. Marchant Way Sanitary Sewers: Assessment District No. 3 (Cease and Desist Area F) has no recommended financing to this date. The staff has researched borrowing from the Sanitation accounts, but feels that we should not tie the money up for a long term committment. The League of Cities suggested the California Financing Corporation which was discussed earlier and is not recommended. Bond Counsel has suggested that after the project (Marchant) is built that it be "attached" to the bonded amount for Assessment District No. 4 and that Assessment District No. 3 be dissolved. Since the Marchant owners are guaranteed a maximum assessment, this move will have no affect on them except that they may pay a lower interest rate. The cost to the City could increase by about $15,000 for the total bonded amount but the increased amount can have a positive affect on the selling of the bonds and the final interest rates. (Under the statutes governing the formation of Assess- ment District No 3. , the City cannot charge the owners greater than 6% interest and therefore may have to cover the balance if the district is carried through. The interest could, however , possibly be shown as a project cost if alternative financing was received. The attachment concept appears to be the most economically feasible alternative with the least amount of complications and without tying up needed sani- tation funds. Council should direct staff if any upper limitations are to be placed on the individual assessments, and whether there is any change of attitude on paying for the engineering costs for Cease and Desist Areas, since FmHA monies appear not to be a viable alternative. 2 LAW OFFICES ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE 600 MONTGOMERY STREET SAN FRANCISCO,CALIFORNIA 94111 TELEPHONE (415) 392-1122 TELECOPIER (415) 954.3759 TELEX 70.3520 NEW YORK,NEW YORK 10036 SAN JOSE,CALIFORNIA 95113 SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95814 LOS ANGELES,CALIFORNIA 90017 1211 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS 55 ALMADEN BOULEVARD 555 CAPITOL MALL 444 SOUTH FLOWER STREET TELEPHONE(212)704-9660 TELEPHONE(408)298.8800 TELEPHONE (916)447.9200 TELEPHONE(213)824.2470 April 28, 1986 Robert M. Jones, Esq. City Attorney 'City of Atascadero P.O. Box 606 Atascadero, CA 93423 Re: City of Atascadero Special Assessment District Proceedings Dear Grigger: As you requested at our meeting last week, I am enclosing information about our firm, our experience in public finance in general and our experience in assessment district financings in particular. I have also enclosed a draft letter of the - City of Atascadero Health Officer (or the County Health Officer acting in his capacity as City Health Officer) attesting to the need for sewers in the Separado/Cayucas area. I enjoyed meeting you and the other members of the City staff and anticipate working with you on this financing. Very truly yours, Antonia Dolar AD: jh Enclosures RECEIVED i' .. . RECEIVED v'" RECEIVED I-lAy 0 7 1986 . I. .m,_ E-1. Coune2Z Meeting: 5/12/86 t.e (Attachment) (PLEASE INCLUDE THIS DOCUMENT INTO YOUR AGENDA PACKETS) Tentative Schedule Implementation of Improvement District No. 4 May 12 Council Meeting -,Present Schedule - Approve Bond Counsel, Discuss Bond Underwriter May 13 Regional Water Quality Control Board notified of Cease and Desist Progress Schedule May 16 Engineer to submit boundary map to Staff May 4'-10 Neighborhood Meeting - Seperado Area May 2�2 2- Neighborhood Meeting - Cayucos Area May 27 Council Meeting - Adopt Resolution of Intent July Review Design and Engineer ' s Report with Staff August Call for Bids Notice Hearing Sept. 3 Receive Bids Sept. 22 Council - Adjourn to 23rd for Public Hearing Sept. 23 Public Hearing - Protest Hearing —Present Engineer ' s Report - Fix Boundary - Award Bid - Present Underwriter ' s Report - Award Sell of Bonds - Attach Marchant Way Sanitary Sewer (Assessment District No. 3) - 30 day cash payment period begins. October Construction Begins March Construction Completed Oct-March Private systems abandoned - Private laterals run - connection to private plumbing. May 28 - Sept 22 - Additional Neighborhood Meetings as Required. LAW OFFICES ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE 600 MONTGOMERY STREET SAN FRANCISCO,CALIFORNIA 94111 TELEPHONE (415) 392-1122 TELECOPIER (415) 954-3759 TELEX 70-3520 NEW YORK.NEW YORK 10036 SAN JOSE,CALIFORNIA 95113 SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95614 LOS ANGELES,CALIFORNIA 90017 1211 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS SS ALMADEN BOULEVARD S55 CAPITOL MALL 444 SOUTH FLOWER STREET TELEPHONE(212)704.9660 TELEPHONE (406)296.6800 TELEPHONE (916)447.9200 TELEPHONE(213)624-2470 May 2, 1986 ,. Robert M. Jones, Esq, City Attorney City of Atascadero,.. . P.O. Box 606 Y Atascadero, Califorpia 93423 Re: Bond Counsel Services Dear Mr. Jones: This letter is in response to your request for information about our firm and our experience in the area of assessment district financing. This letter first describes Orrick' s general public finance experience-;.and then the firm' s particular assessment financing experience.. The letter then outlines separately personnel assignments, services to be rendered and our fees. I. FIRM DESCRIPTION Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe is engaged in the general practice of, corporate, municipal and commercial law. The origins of the ,,firm can be traced back to 1863 when its earliest predecessor firm was organized to represent the San Francisco Bank, a major bank that was later to become United California Bank (now First Interstate Bank of California) . Historically, the principal specialities of the firm have been in the corporate and public finance areas. The firm' s specialities have developed, however, to include a full range of counseling and litigation services. The firm presently has a staff of over 190 attorneys. The main offices are located in San Francisco y • • ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE with branch offices in Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Jose and New York. The firm' s practice is organized into the following departments Public Finance and Energy and Environmental Municipal Law Regulation Corporate Securities and Governmental Affairs General Business Labor and Employment Real Estate Practices Taxation Personal Estates and Probate Litigation, Antitrust and Trade Regulation While the departments are generally separate, several groups have been formed with attorneys from more than one department in order to more effectively service certain areas, such as the public power and solid waste/privatization groups which are composed of attorneys from the public finance, energy and environmental regulation and antitrust departments and the housing finance group which is composed of public finance, real estate, tax and corporate attorneys. Public Finance Department Orrick is one of relatively few law firms with a national reputation for expertise in public and municipal finance matters, and as such the firm' s legal opinions concerning the validity of the issuance of bonds and the tax-exempt status of interest on bonds are accepted throughout the country. Orrick has practiced in this area for over 80 years. Orrick is the premier bond counsel firm in California and is among the top few in the country. The public finance department presently consists of 49 attorneys and 16 paralegals, the largest such department in the State. Of these attorneys, seven are located in our Los Angeles office, two in Sacramento, thirteen in New York and the balance in San Francisco. Orrick served as bond counsel on approximately 290 completed financings, involving approximately $13 .2 billion in 1985 . According to statistics compiled by the Public Securities Association, Orrick ranked second in the country among bond counsel firms in both number and dollar amount of publicly underwritten financings for which it served as bond counsel in 1984 and 1985. Although 2 ORRICK, HERRINGTON SUTCLIFFE the largest issue for which Orrick served as bond counsel during the past couple of years was $2, 300,000,000 in principal amount, a substantial number were less than $5,000,000. The firm serves as bond counsel for the State of California and California state agencies with the power to issue bonds, numerous cities, redevelopment agencies, housing authorities, parking authorities, industrial development authorities, joint powers authorities, water agencies and a variety of special districts and special purpose nonprofit corporations. Major projects for which Orrick has served as bond counsel include the Golden Gate Bridge, the George Moscone Convention Center, BART, Candlestick Park, Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant and the California State Water Project. Orrick' s public finance attorneys have substantial experience with respect to virtually every type of municipal security, including general obligation bonds, assessment bonds, tax increment bonds, sales tax bonds, revenue bonds (for housing, industrial and commercial development, pollution control, water, wastewater treatment, sewage treatment, solid waste, power, alternative energy, student loans, healthcare, parking, educational, airport, port and other revenue producing projects, programs, loans, leases and installment sales) , refunding bonds, tax, revenue, grant and bond anticipation notes, commercial paper, variable rate demand notes, put bonds, certificates of participation in financing leases or installment sale contracts, leverage leases and sale/leasebacks. Orrick' s public finance attorneys are also credited with creating a number of well-known financing techniques, including California charter city financing for nonpublic improvements, residential rehabilitation financing in California, combining sale/leasebacks of municipal facilities (such as the Oakland Museum) with the issuance of bonds to finance other facilities, certificates of participation in leases or annuity contracts to fund unfunded pension liabilities, the nameplate capacity theory of structuring power revenue bonds involving sale of power to investor owned utilities, variable rental lease financings, use of tender options in connection with single family housing bonds, compound interest bonds, the senior/subordinate bond structure used in connection with single family housing bonds to solve certain arbitrage limitations imposed by the 3 ORRICK, HERRINGTON SUTCLIFFE Mortgage Subsidy Bond Tax Act of 1980 or otherwise to differentiate and improve the rating of the senior bonds, solar home improvement loans, FNMA collateralized multifamily housing bonds and several .other programs and innovations. In addition, Orrick has frequently been called upon to draft or otherwise assist in the enactment of legislation to permit or facilitate particular financing techniques. Several Orrick attorneys are among the very small number of public finance attorneys in the country with a national reputation for expertise in federal tax questions relating to municipal bonds. In addition, they comprise what is probably the largest, most able and highly regarded group of arbitrage lawyers in the country. Recently, their tax work has opened the door to three year unlimited arbitrage investment of the proceeds of tax-exempt commercial paper and to the recovery out of arbitrage profits of fees for letters of credit and similar credit enhancement devices used in connection with a number of different types of tax-exempt debt. They also are able to perform computer arbitrage calculations and to offer certain issuers guidance with respect to arbitrage compliance both for and apart from any particular series .of bonds. In addition to acting as bond counsel, Orrick also acts as underwriters' counsel, issuers' counsel, special tax counsel, trustee' s counsel, company counsel, credit provider counsel and lenders' counsel in connection with the issuance of tax-exempt bonds. During the past two years, for example, Orrick acted as underwriters' counsel on one or more bond issues for virtually every national and many regional investment banking firms and a number of major commercial banks. Although the bulk of Orrick' s public finance practice has traditionally been in California, the firm -regularly (and, especially since the opening of its New York office in August 1984, increasingly) acts as bond counsel or underwriters' counsel outside of California. For example, Orrick has served as bond counsel in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Guam, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Washington, and as underwriters' counsel in almost two-thirds of the states. 4 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE Municipal Law Practice In addition to bond counsel services, Orrick also serves as general counsel to a number of public entities. In connection with its litigation and labor practice, the firm counsels public entities and others in various municipal law matters, including activities presenting eminent domain, redevelopment, real estate, environmental, antitrust, labor, pension, civil rights and constitutional issues. Also, in the face of California' s increasingly complex legislative and regulatory environment, a separate governmental affairs department was formed a couple of years ago and is headquartered at the firm' s Sacramento office. That department advises clients as to current legislative and regulatory developments, drafts and shepherds legislation through the legislative process, counsels on federal and state campaign and election law matters and lobbies on a variety of legislative, administrative and regulatory matters. II. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FINANCING EXPERIENCE We have had extensive experience acting as bond counsel on assessment district financing in California, from San Bernardino County to Del Norte County and from the Bay Area Counties to Inyo County, including among others the Counties of San Bernardino, Kern, Fresno, San Francisco, San Mateo, San Luis Obispo, San Joaquin, Monterey, Santa Cruz, Marin, Humboldt, Del Norte, Placer, E1 Dorado and Inyo and the Cities of Folsom, Modesto, San Jose, Millbrae, and San Leandro (together with numerous projects in Reno and Sparks, Nevada) . . Ongoing bond counsel relationships include the cities of Stockton, Modesto, San Leandro, San Jose, Folsom and Reno and Sparks, Nevada; the Counties of Sacramento, Fresno, Inyo and San Luis Obispo and the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District. As bond counsel, we have been directly involved in numerous policy review sessions concerning the use of assessment district financings of public improvements and the establishment of procedures in connection therewith. We were recently engaged by the Board of Supervisors of Sacramento County to be counsel for all future assessment proceedings to be conducted by the County. On the basis of such experience, we can provide substantial assistance to the City in reviewing and developing overall assessment district financing policies and procedures, in addition to carrying out financings for which policies are already established. 5 ORRICK, HERRINGTON SUTCLIFFE In addition to serving as bond counsel for assessment district financings under the 1911, 1913, 1915 and 1951 Acts, we have served as bond counsel in recent years in connection with warrants secured by assessments issued by irrigations districts, community services districts, county water districts and county water agencies. In addition to numerous parking assessment district financings, we have served as bond counsel in connection with bonds secured by benefit assessments issued by every one of the eight water storage districts in California. We are- intimately familiar with all aspects of securities law disclosure requirements, and thus can assist the City in assuring that any official statements or other publicly distributed documentation concerning assessment bonds comply with such laws. We were among the leaders in organizing the California Assessment Bond Underwriters Association (the only statewide organization relating to assessment financing) , having conducted the negotiations and prepared the articles of incorporation and by-laws for such association. We have maintained our special relationship with this association, being the lead draftsman, in conjunction with the association and the Public Securities Association, for bond legislation concerning the 1911, 1913, and 1915 Acts. In 1970, we approved the issuance of $3,010,869.97 principal amount of Improvement Bonds, County of San Luis Obispo, Atascadero Assessment District No. 1. The validity of these bonds was challenged under the so-called "one-man, one-vote" principle, and the validity of the issue was upheld in the landmark decision of O'Keefe v. Atascadero County Sanitation District, 21 Cal. App. 3d 719 ( 1971) . Finally, it should be noted that our office initiated and handled the two major recent test cases supporting the use of assessment bond financing in California. These cases were County of Fresno v. Malmstrom, 94 Cal. App. 3d 974 ( 1979) and County of Placer v. Corin, 113 Cal. App. 3d 443 (1980) . A list of our recent assessment financing experience is attached hereto as Appendix A. A list of representative references is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 6 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE III. EXPERIENCE IN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND SURROUNDING REGION Our firm has experience working as bond counsel on assessment district financings in the County of San Luis - Obispo as early as 1926. These financings include approximately eight assessment bond transactions issued by either the City of San Luis Obispo or the County of San Luis Obispo going back only as far as 1960. Carlo Fowler worked . as the lead, responsible attorney on nearly all of these assessment issues. Further information about and a detailed list of these assessment transactions can be provided, should you so desire. In addition to assessment transactions, Orrick has worked as bond counsel on other types of financings in San Luis Obispo County including short-term revenue transactions, school district revenue and general obligation bonds and water revenue bonds. IV. PERSONNEL; SERVICES Subject to approval by the City, we would expect to assign the following attorneys to the City' s financing program: Carlo S. Fowler and Antonia Dolar. Primary overall responsibility for the financing program on behalf ofthe firm would be taken by Carlo S. Fowler, who has been a partner in the firm for eighteen years and has practiced exclusively in the area of municipal finance law during that time, with extensive experience in special assessment financing, revenue bond financing, lease financing and water and public power financing. Ms. Dolar is a senior associate in the firm' s public finance department and would be expected to do a substantial portion of the work involved in the program, but would at all times work under the close supervision of Mr. Fowler. Ms. Dolar is located in the firm' s San Francisco office. Brief resumes for these attorneys follow. Carlo S. Fowler, born New York, N.Y. , 1932; admitted to bar, 1960, California. Education: Yale University (B.E. , 1954) ; Harvard University (LL.B. , 1959) . Law Clerk to Hon. Gilbert H. Jertberg, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 1959-1960. Antonia Dolar, born Kelkheim, Germany, 1947; admitted to bar 1983, California. Education: Sonoma State University (B.A. , 1972) ; University of California, Berkeley (M. S.W. , 1975) ; University of San Francisco (J.D. , 1983) . Editor-in-Chief, U. S.F. Law Review. Ms. Dolar has worked on various assessment proceedings for the San Joaquin County 7 r ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE cities of Modesto, Millbrae, San Leandro and other cities. She is currently working on assessment district financings for the City and County of San Francisco and for the County of Sacramento. Our services in the capacity of special bond counsel to the City would include the rendering of all legal services required in the conduct of the special assessment proceedings and the issuance of bonds therein, including: (1) Consultation with appropriate representatives of the City, including the City Attorney, and with the City' s engineers and underwriter and any other special consultants to the City to assist in the formulation of an overall coordinated financial, engineering and legal program in order to accomplish the financing. (2) Preparation of a timetable setting forth the - actions required to accomplish the financing, including allocation of responsibility therefor. (3 ) Preparation of all legal proceedings for the formation of the assessment district and the levy of the assessment therein, including preparation of all necessary resolutions, forms, notices, affidavits and other documents (except those to be prepared by the engineers) required in connection with the levy of the assessment. (4) Review of certain documents to be prepared by the engineers, including the plans and specifications for the project, . the boundary map of the assessment district, the assessment, the assessment diagram and the Engineer' s Report, and advice and assistance in connection therewith. (5) Review of any environmental impact studies, reports or other proceedings, but we would not be responsible for the preparation or content of such documents. (6) Attendance at the public hearing or hearings on the assessment to be levied in said proceedings and the rendering of assistance thereat in the conduct of such hearing or hearings, and attendance at such other meetings or hearings as shall be deemed necessary for the proper conduct of the proceedings; but we would not anticipate general appearances before each meeting of the City Council. (7) Rendering of legal advice to the City and the City Attorney and the City' s consulting engineers and any 8 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE other special consultants to the City throughout the course of the proceedings for the levy of the assessment. (8) Preparation.. of all legal proceedings for the authorization, issuance and sale of the improvement bonds in said proceedings upon the unpaid assessments, including preparation of the resolution authorizing the issuance of such bonds and setting forth the terms and conditions thereof and the resolution providing for the sale of the bonds. (9) Review, as to those matters that are related to the issuance .and sale of the bonds, of the official statement describing the bonds to be prepared by the underwriter, and participation in meetings reviewing the official statement describing the bonds; but we would not be responsible for the preparation or content of such document. (10) Preparation of the documents required in connection with the award of the bid for the construction of the project. (11) Assistance in connection with securing investment ratings for the bonds, including attendance at and participation in meetings with bond rating agencies, if requested. ( 12) Examination of the proofs of the bonds, . preparation of the final closing papers required to effect the delivery of the bonds and organization of and attendance at the bond closing. ( 13) The rendering of a final approving legal opinion on the validity of the bonds and the tax-exempt status of interest thereon, and the rendering of such other legal opinions as may be appropriate in connection with the delivery of and receipt of payment for the bonds. Our services would not include representation of the City in any eminent domain proceedings or in any litigation challenging the validity of the proposed financing or the transactions contemplated by this letter, but if such services are requested should such circumstance arise, we would be pleased to perform them on such terms as might be mutually agreed to at that time. It is understood that we would act as special bond counsel to the City in connection with such proposed financing in consultation with the City Attorney; and that all matters to be submitted to the City Council for 9 ORRICK. HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE consideration would be forwarded by us to the City Attorney for review prior to presentation to the City Council. V. FEES , Our fees for the above outlined services would be computed on the basis of the total assessment levied in each of said proceedings and would be calculated on the basis of two per cent (2%) of the first one million dollars ($1,000,000) of the assessment levied, to be reduced to one per cent (1%) of the next one million dollars ($1,000,000) of the assessment levied and one-half of one per cent (1/2 of 17.) of the assessment levied in excess of two million dollars ($2,000,000) , plus reimbursement for all out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection therewith; provided that all costs of bond printing shall be paid for as an incidental expense in said proceedings and not included within the above compensation. Such compensation would be contingently payable only following receipt of the proceeds of the sale of the improvement bonds issued in said proceedings. VI. CONCLUSION We believe that Orrick, Herrington is uniquely well qualified to act as bond counsel for the City' s assessment proceedings. We feel that we would bring the following distinctive qualities to the program: 1. A national reputation placing us among the top few bond counsel firms in the country and clear recognition as the first-ranking firm in California. Our opinion will be unhesitatingly accepted by underwriters and rating agencies. 2 . The amount and diversity of our experience, as described herein, make it more likely that we would be familiar with a range of financial alternatives and their legal consequences that the City might wish to consider and that we would be able to structure the legal aspects of the financing in the most straightforward and least burdensome fashion to achieve the City' s objective. 3 . A commitment to thorough and innovative legal work, reasonable cost, care that the substance and mechanics of the financing work as intended and that the interests of the City are served and protected. 10 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE We enjoyed the opportunity to meet with you and other members of the City Staff earlier this week and to present our qualifications and to learn more about the project. If there are any matters in this letter which require further amplification, please do not hesitate to . contact us. We would look forward to working with you on this project. Respectfully submitted, ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE By Antonia Dolar 11 APPENDIX A Recent Assessment Bond Issues for which Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe Acted As Bond Counsel and Rendered Approving Legal Opinions Delivery Issue County Amount Date Bel Marin Keys 'Community Marin $ 1, 765,737.30 8/2/85 Services District East Yolo Community Services Yolo 3,069, 792 .88 9/11/84 District Improvement Bonds Riverbend Assessment District City of Folsom Sacramento 19,223, 667.00 3/6/84 Improvement Bonds Folsom South Assessment District City of Folsom Sacramento 1,535, 177.91 11/7/85 Improvement Bonds (Supplemental Assessment) Folsom South Assessment District Foresthill Public Utility Placer 817,250.00 1/3/83 District Improvement Bonds Assessment District No. 1 City of Fresno Fresno 262, 199. 70 2/15/85 Improvement Bonds Assessment District No. 77-B Fresno Metropolitan Flood Fresno 999,257.00 4/2/84 Control District Improvement Bonds Improvement District "CC" Delivery Issue County Amount Date Fresno Metropolitan Flood., Fresno $ 4,064, 466.00 1/3/85 Control District .Improvement Bonds Improvement District "AA-DD" Gravely Ford Water District Madera 2,028, 600.04 1/3/84 Improvement Bonds Assessment District No. 1 City of Millbrae San Mateo 1,522,879.21 7/2/84 Improvement Bonds Plaza Bay Assessment District City of Modesto Stanislaus 459, 116.08 2/2/83 Improvement Bonds Improvement District No. 24 County of San Joaquin San Joaquin 7,035, 996.00 1/9/85 Improvement Bonds Improvement District No. 51 (East Stockton Sanitary Sewer Project) City of San Jose Santa Clara 10,300,000.00 9/18/84 Improvement Bonds Improvement District No. 78- 154SJ (Hellyer-Fontanoso) City of San Leandro Alameda 41, 656.04 1/22/82 Improvement Bonds Carpentier Street Assessment District Assessment District No. 90 City of San Rafael Marin 9, 171, 065.00 9/4/84 Improvement Bonds Peacock Gap Improvement District A-2 c; Delivery Issue County Amount Date City of Stockton San Joaquin $5, 128,000.00 11/15/8 Improvement Bonds The Landing Area Assessment District Project No. 82-1, Series 201 City of Stockton San Joaquin 660, 000.00 6/14/83 Improvement Bonds Venetian Bridges, Unit No. 5 Assessment District Project No. 82-2, Series 204 Westside Water District Colusa 520,000.00 6/29/83 Improvement Bonds Assessment District No. 2 ADDENDUM* City of Gilroy Santa* Clara 4, 600,000.00 5/17/82 Improvement Bonds Las Animas Technology Park Assessment District, Series -82-1 City of Costa Mesa Orange 7,051, 713 .46 3/9/84 Improvement Bonds Assessment District No. 82-2 (South Coast Metro Center) *Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe acted as underwriter' s counsel on these issues. A-3 APPENDIX B REFERENCES County of Sacramento L.B. ..Elam, Esq. County Counsel County of Sacramento 700 H Street, Suite 2650 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 440-5513 City of Sacramento James P. Jackson, Esq. City Attorney City of Sacramento 812 - 10th Street, Suite 201 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 449-5346 City of San Jose Ms. Sandra J. Fox Senior Deputy City Attorney City Attorney' s Office City of San Jose 151 West Mission Street San Jose, California 95110 (415) 277-4454 City of San. Leandro Steven R. Meyers, Esq. City Attorney City of San Leandro Civic Center 835 East 14th Street San Leandro, CA 94577 (415) 577-3361 City of Modesto Elwyn L. Johnson, Esq. City Attorney City of Modesto 801 11th Street P.O. Box 642 Modesto, CA 95353 (209) 577-5284 r l #77. MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Directors, Atascadero County Sanitation District THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Bids for Assessment District No. 3, Marchant Way Sanitary Sewer DATE: May 6, 1986 . Recommendation Reject the lone bid received for the above project and re-bid. Background: The Board authorized staff to advertise for bids for the above project at a previous meeting. Bids were received May-5th at 2:00 p.m. Only one bid was received even though several plans were checked out. The summary follows: R. Baker, Inc. , Arroyo Grande $142,156.00 Engineer 's Estimate 107,000 .00 The bid is 33% above the engineer 's estimate Discussion: Due to the lack of competition and no apparant reason for such high prices, staff feels that a better effort can be-made to attract local contractors. The margin shown is not acceptable and re-bidding is recommended. Fiscal Impact: Although we will incur additional advertising costs, it is anticipated that a re-bid will result in lower costs. n BI y D FORMf PROPOSAL FOR MARCHANT WAY SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 3 To The Honorable City Council City of Atascadero Atascadero, California 93422 Gentlemen: F In accordance with the Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, the undersigned,9 , as bidder, declares that he has carefully examined t the location of the proposed work, the plans and specifications contract and bound forms, and agrees that if this proposal accepted, p posal is i , he will contract y the required form contained in the specifications with the City also, at his own cost and furnish all equipment, materials and labor necessary towork complete the work in the manner and time described in the lans and specifications and agrees to p ce certificates and fulfill following price: all requirementsof the dcontractsfornthe . The price which the bidder quotes is inclusive of the cost all applicable taxes s for licenses ► including but not limited to sales taxes, and permits. The bid shall consist of the bid items listed below. NO. ITEM APPROXIMATE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL 0 1. 8" PVC SEWER 1861 L. F. ©� �j' 2• MANHOLES -- o: 7 EACH L � /-- 1Ol/I S cc 3. 4" PVC 'LATERAL o ° S 22 EACH _S�Q 4. TREN CH RESURFACING 1170 L. F. r7 TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID /yZ 5-6 6