Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 09/26/1983
• AGENDA - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting September 26, 1983 7 :30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Invocation Roll Call Public Comment City Council Comments A. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC 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 dis- cussion is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Calen- dar and will be considered separately. Vote may be by roll call. 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of September: 12, 1983 (RECOM- MEND APPROVAL) • 2. Resolution No. 43-83 approving acceptance of Federal Land and Water Grant funds for South Atascadero Park (RECOMMEND ADOP- TION) 3. Tentative Tract Map AT 2-83, 10510 San Marcos Road, John White (Twin Cities Engineering) to divide 9.93 acres into three parcels employing the minimum lot size reduction (REC- OMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 4. Tentative Tract Map AT 7-83, 9290 E1 Bordo Avenue, Wallace E. Dunn (McCarthy & Associates/Associated Professions) to create a 10 unit condominium project (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 5. Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83, 10800 San Marcos Road, Jennie Lee (Twin Cities Engineering) to allow resubdivision of a previously created parcel containing 15.14 acres of land into four parcels employing the minimum lot size reduction adjust- ment (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA- TION) 6. Certificate of Compliance CC 2-83, 6720 ' Los Gatos Road, Connie Latham, for legalization of a lot split that occurred in 1977 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEN- DATION) ECOMMEN- DATION) AGENDA - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 26, 1983 7. Certificate of Compliance CC 3-83, 6698 Los Gatos Road, Marie Washabaugh, for legalization of a lot split that occurred in 1977 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA- TION) 8. Acceptance of Lot Line Adjustment LA 830517 :1, 10210 Atasca- dero Avenue, George and Christine French (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. City Attorney Report No. 25 C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Resolution No. 41-83 adopting Budget for Fiscal Year 1983-84 2. Resolution No. 42-83 adopting a salary/classification sched- ule for the 1983-84 Fiscal Year 3. Policy statement regarding the General Plan D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of Elliott Stephenson' s report regarding seis- mic concerns for theAdministrationBuilding to include con- sideration of developing options for alternative facilities • 2. Ordinance No. 70 adopting the 1982 Uniform Codes (Building Regulations) - introduction, set hearing date for October 10, 1983 3. Resolution No. 40-83 adopting fee schedule for permits, plan review and associated activities 4. Consideration of San Luis Obispo County Mayors and Council- members resolution urging the League of California Cities to develop and sponsor a California Constitutional Initiative restoring a guaranteeing local control of all final land use, subdivision, and annexation approvals for privately owned property E. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT None F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer • 5. City Manager 2 MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 12, 1983 AYES: Councilmen Molina, Nelson and Stover NOES: Mayor Mackey D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Chamber of Commerce request for General Plan change Mr. Warden stated that the Chamber of Commerce is asking that the city initiate a General Plan amendment and policy statement concerning industrial/commercial development. He noted that the Council had deleted $9, 000 from the FY 1983/84 budget which was intended to provide economic, demographic, land use, and other information needed to develop our economic element of the General Plan. This was to be a follow-on to the Chamber of Commerce survey and would provide the necessary date to develop and implement an economic development policy. Hank Hohenstein, Chamber of Commerce Director, ; stated that the Chamber is concerned with broadening the economic base in Atascadero and indicated a desire to develop opportunities for clean light industry locating here. He requested (1) that the Council formulate a commercial and industrial policy for the city; (2) that Council direct staff to undertake a study of the industrial needs and sites; and (3) direct staff to evaluate the land within the boundaries of Santa Barbara Road, the freeway, El Camino Real and the San Diego off-ramp as a potential site for an industrial park and/or commercial tourist designation. Gary Larson of the Chamber of Commerce requested that staff evaluate the land for commercial use. Doug Lewis requested clarification and implementation of the policy statement. Council formed a committee with Councilman Molina, Gary Larson, Hank Hohenstein, and Larry Stevens to meet and draft a policy state- ment before the next Council meeting. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved for the Planning Commission to initiate the General. Plan amendment process. The motion was seconded by Councilman Molina and carried with Councilman Stover voting no. -3- MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 12 , 1983 2. Consideration of use permits at Atascadero Lake Park Mr. Warden stated that the lease for Pop' s Tackle Shop has expired and that there is now a question regarding a new lease proposal by persons other than the present lessee. He felt that it would be advantageous for the city to seek proposals in order to provide a wide range of potential operators. But that in view of time constraints and that the city had not yet developed a comprehensive lease policy for the lake park concessions, he felt that consideration should be given to granting a lease for no more than one year to Mr. McNamara' s sister. Tom McNamara, speaking on behalf of his sister, stated that she is interested in taking over Pop's Tackle Shop on a similar lease for one year terminating October, 1984 . MOTION: Councilman Molina moved to grant a lease subject to working out a satisfactory lease agreement in writing by both parties and for the one year period ending October, 1984 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried. Goldie Carminati stated that she had misunderstood that the zoo would be relocated. 3. Consideration of authorizing $1,000 expenditure for struc- tural evaluation of Administration Building Mr. Warden stated that in discussions with the County General Services Office, consideration is being given to relocating the library to the Rotunda area, assuring that to be a possible alter- native site. The General Services Office has indicated its will- ingness to pay for half the costs of a structural study. Mr. Warden recommended Council approval in order to assure the city of informa- tion needed to evaluate the safety and potential for continued use and occupancy of the Administration Building. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved to approve the expenditure of $1,000 for a structural evaluation of the Administration Building. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried by roll call vote. F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council a. Councilman Molina commended the Fire Department for their work this fire season. -4- MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 12, 1983 • 6. Bid No. 83-7, Street Sweeping (RECOMMEND B'ID BE AWARDED TO ADCO SERVICE CO. IN THE AMOUNT OF $21, 600 AND UNDER CONDI- TIONS OUTLINED IN PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR'S MEMO DATED SEPT- EMBER 7, 1983) 7. Acceptance of Tract Map AT 830307: 1, 7350 E1 Camino Real, Wally Dunn (Associated Professions) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) Mayor Mackey reviewed all items on the Consent Calendar. Council- man Molina corrected the Minutes of August 22, 1983, under Item l (a) of Council Comments to change Clerk' s office to Finance office. Mayor Mackey corrected the Minutes of August 22, 1983 , Item Fl (a) of Indiv- idual Determination to change Vinado to El Descanso. Councilman Molina requested that Item A-6 be pulled. MOTION: Councilman Molina moved to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item A-6. The motion was; seconded by Council- man Nelson and unanimously carried. A-6 Bid No. 83-7, Street Sweeping (RECOMMEND BID BE AWARDED TO ADCO SERVICE CO. IN THE AMOUNT OF $21, 600 AND UNDER CONDITIONS OUT- LINED IN PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR'S MEMO DATED SEPTEMBER 7, 1983) Councilman Molina asked if the bid would be awarded with con- • tingencies. Mr. Warden explained that this bid isnot a normal bid item since it is for services, but is brought to Council for informa- tion. MOTION: Councilman Molina moved to approve Item A-6 of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. B. HEARINGS,_ APPEARANCES AND REPORTS None C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Resolution No. 35-83 fixing rates of CATV installation and service charges MOTION: Councilman Molina moved to adopt Resolution No. 35-83. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and carried on the following roll call vote: -2- 0 ASTING / AGENDA • TE REM • MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting September 12, 1983 Atascadero Administration Building The meeting was called to order at 7 : 30 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance. Reverend Rollin Dexter of the Methodist Church gave the invocation. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Molina, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Mackey Absent: Councilman Wilkins STAFF Present: Murray Warden, City Manager; Ralph Dowell, Finance Director; Allen Grimes, City Attorney; Patsy Hester, Deputy City Clerk; Skip Joannes, Recreation- Director; Bud McHale, Police Chief; Larry McPherson, Public Works Director; Barbara Norris, City I Clerk; and Larry Stevens, Planning Director. • PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Goldie Carminati of the San Luis Obispo County Zoological Society presented the City. of Atascadero with a check for $25, 000 for the renovation projects at the Atascadero Zoo. COUNCIL COMMENTS 1. Mayor Mackey expressed sympathy to the family of Norman Ted Monson. Mr. Monson had regularly attended Council meetings. A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of August 22, 1983 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2. Treasurer' s Report, August 1, 1983 to August 31, 1983 (RECOM- MEND APPROVAL) 3. Finance. Director' s Report, August 1, 1983 to August 31, 1983 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 4 . Memorandum of Understanding, Police Sergeants ' Bargaining Unit (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) • 5. Memorandum of Understanding, Police Officers' Bargaining Unit (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 12 , 1983 b. Mayor Mackey stated that she had received phone calls regarding the drainage problems on Santa Ysabel. Mr. McPherson stated that they are looking into the matter. Mr. Warden stated that this is a capital expenditure and requested that funds be released for the FY 1983/84 drainage projects as proposed for this year' s budget. MOTION: Councilman Molina moved that drainage funds be released for the budgeted drainage projects. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried by roll call vote. c. Mayor Mackey asked why the grass on Rose Hill had been cut so much. Mr. Stevens stated that this is a fire break in order to eliminate a fire hazard. 2. City Attorney Nothing. 3. City Clerk Nothing. 4 . City Treasurer Nothing. 5. City Manager a. Mr. Warden requested a closed session to discuss potential litigation and did not anticipate any announcements afterward. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. to closed session and returned to regular session at 9 :50 p.m.., at which time they adjourned. Recorded by: BARBARA NORRIS, City Clerk By: Patsy A. Hester Deputy City Clerk -5- f iN' AGEINDA e g3 1 i EM Resolution No. 43-83 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING AND PROVIDING FOR THE EXECUTION OF A` PROJECT AGREEMENT FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND PROJECT NO. 06-01002 , SOUTH ATASCADERO PARK DEVELOPMENT, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESOURCES AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION. The City Council of City of Atascadero resolves as follows : Section 1. The Project Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A between the City of Atascadero and the State of California, the terms of which provision is made for federal reimbursement of an amount not to exceed $34 ,403 under provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 for the development of Project No. 06-01002 , South Atascadero Park Development Project, as described below, South Atascadero Park Development Project - Install overhead lighting, backstops , fencing, and dug-out benches for two softball/multi- purpose fields is hereby approved in all respects . • Section 2 . The City Manager of the City of Atascadero is hereby authorized and directed to execute five copies of said Project Agreement. Section 3. The City clerk shall certify to the passage of this resolution by the City of Atascadero and it -shall thereupon take effect. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: MARJORIE R. MACKEY, Mayor ATTEST: • BARBARA NORRIS, City Clerk APPROVED A TO FORM: It ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MU Y L. WARDEN, City Manager I • -2- • STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Parks and Recreation PROJECT AGREEMENT Land and Water Conservation Fund Program 'Project Title South Atascadero Park Development Participant City of Atascadero Project Period 8/31/83 to 6/30/88 Project Number 06-01002 Project Scope: Project will consist of sports and playfields and support facilities. •The City agrees to submit plans and specifications for review and approval to this Department by January 1, 1984. Stage Covered by this Agreement Complete Project Cost: Total Estimated Direct Project Cost (as shown in $ 68,000 (1) project proposal) Amount of Line (1) subject to surcharge $ 68,000 (2) Surcharge--State Administrative Assessment 0.8 % of Line (2) (subject to adjustment, see Paragraph 2, Page 4) $ 806 (3) Total Project Costs Eligible for Federal Funding (Line 1 plus Line 3) $-68,806 (4) Federal Participation--up to 50.1 of Line (4), or up to 509/6 of actual costs, whichever is the lesser, not to exceed: $ 34,403 (5) Continued on are 6 pages numbered 2 through 7 inclusively. City of Atascadero PARTICIPANT By Title City Manager STATE DEPART11ENT OF PARKS AND Date RECREATION By By Date Title Date LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND PROJECT AGREEMENT 1. Definitions A. The term "NPS" as used herein means the Notional Park Serivice, United States Department of the Interior. B. The term"Director"as used herein means the Director of the National Park Service,or any representative lawfully delegated the authority to act for such Director. C. The term"Liaison Officer"as used herein means the California Director of Parks and Recreation,or other State officer as designated by the Governor from time to time and authorized by the State Legislature. D. The term "Manual' as used herein means the Notional Park Service Manual, formerly the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Manual (Outdoor Recreation Grants-in-Aid Manual). E. The term "Project" as used herein means the project or project segment which is the subject of this agreement as defined in the Project Proposal. F. The tern"Project Proposal"as used herein means the form and all supplemental attachments used to describe and estimate the cost of a planning,acquisition, or development project filed with the Liaison Officer in support of an applicatiom for federal financial assistance. G. The term "State" as used herein means the State of California,and/or its official representative,the Department of Parks and Recreation. H. The term "Participant"as used herein means the recipient of the federal funds to be disbursed in accordance with the terms of this agreement. 1. The term"State Funds"as used herein means those moneys made available by the State as matching money for projects under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965,78 Stat.897 (1964). 11. Continuing Assurances The parties to the project agreement specifically recognize that the Land and Water Conservation Fund assistance project creates an obligation to maintain the property described in the project agreement consistent with the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act and the following requirements. Further, it is acknowledged intent of the parties hereto that recipients of assistance will use moneys granted hereunder for the purposes of this program, and that assistance granted from the Fund will result in a net increase, commensurate at least with the State cost-share, in a participant's outdoor recreation. It is intended by both parties hereto that assistance from the Fund will be added to, rather than replace or be substituted for, State and local outdoor recreation funds. A. The participant agrees,as recipient of this assistance, that it will meet the following specific requirements and the terms of the project agreement. B. The participant agrees that the property described in the project agreement and the dated project boundary mop made part of that agreement is being aced or developed with Land and Water Conservation Fund assistance or is integral so such acquisition or development,and that,without the approval of the Liaison Officer,the Director,and/or the Secretary of the Interior,it shall not be converted to other than public outdoor recreation use but shall be maintained in public outdoor recreation in perpetuity or for the term of the lease in the case of loosed property.The Secretary shall approve such conversion only if he finds it to be in accord with the then existing comprehensive statewide outdoor recreation plan and only upon such conditions as he deems necessary to assure the substitution of other recreation properties of at least equal fair market value and of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location.This replacement land becomes subject to Section 6(f)(3)protection.The approval of conversion shall be at the sole discretion of the Secretary,or his designee.Prior to the completion of this project,the participant,the Liaison Officer,and the Director may mutually alter the area described in the project agreement and the dated project boundary map to provide the most satisfactory public outdoor recreation unit,except that acquired parcels are afforded Section 6(f)(3) protection as Fund reimbursement is provided. In the event the National Park Service provides Land and Water Conservation Fund assistance for the acquisition and/or development of property subject to reversionary interests with full knowledge of those reversionary interests,conversion of said property to other public outdoor recreation uses as a result of such reversionary interest being exercised is approved.In receipt of this approval,the participant agrees to notify the State of the conversion as soon as possible and to seek approval of replacement property in accord with the conditions set forth in these provisions.The participant further agrees to effectuate such replacement within a reasonable period of time,acceptable to the State,after the conversion of property takes place.The provisions of this paragraph are also applicable to:leased properties acquired and/or developed with Fund assistance where such lease is terminated prior to its full term due to the existence of provisions in such lease known and agreed to by the State;and properties subject to other outstanding rights and interests that may result in a conversion when known and agreed to by the State. C. The participant agrees that the benefit to be derived by the State from the full compliance by the participant with the terms of this agreement is the preservation, protection,and the net increase in the quality of public outdoor recreation facilities and resources with are available to the people of the State and of the United States,and subh benefit exceeds to on immeasurable and unascertainable extent the amount of money furnished by the State by way of assistance under the terms of this agreement.The participant agrees that payment by the participant to the State of an amount equal to the amount of assistance extended under this agreement by the State would be inadequate compensation to the State for any breach by the participant of this agreement.The participant further agrees,that the appropriate remedy in the event of a breach by the participant of this agreement shall be the specific performance of this agreement. D. The participant agrees to comply with the policies and procedures set forth in the National Park Service Grants-in-Aid Manual.Provisions of said Manual are incorporated into and made a part of the project agreement. E. The participant agrees that the property and facilities described in the project agreement shall be operated and maintained as prescribed by Manual requirements. F. The participant agrees that a permanent record shall be kept in the participant's public property records and available for public inspection to the effect that the property described in the scope of the project agreement,and the dated project boundary map made part of that agreement,has been acquired or developed with Land and Water Conservation Fund assistance and that it cannot be converted to other than public outdoor recreation use without the written op`,- a of the Liaison Officer,the Director,and/or the Secretary of the Interior. 2 G. Nondiscrimination 1. The participant shall comply with Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L.88-352) and in accordance with Title VI of that Act,no person in the United States shall,on the ground of race,religion,color,or national origin,be excluded from participation in,be denied the benefits of,or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the use of any property or facility acquired or developed pursuant to the project':agreement.The participant shall immediately tyke any measures necessary to effectuate this provision.This assurance shall be binding on the participant or any political subdivision or other appropriate public agency to which Fund assistance or property acquired or developed with Fund assistance hos been transferred for public recreation purposes. 2. The participant shall comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.2000d) prohibiting employment discrimination where (1) the primary purpose of a grant is to provide employment or (2) discriminatory employment practices will result in unequal treatment of persons who are or should be benefitting from the grant-aided activity. 3. The participant shall comply with the regulations and guidelines promulgated pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by the Secretary of the Interior and the National Park Service. 4. The provisions of the first three paragraphs apply to any part of the recrea?ion system within which the assisted facility or property exists. 5. The participant shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of residence,except to the extent that reasonable differences in admission or other fees may be maintained on the basis of residence as set forth in the Manual. 111. Project Assurances A. Applicable Federal Circulars The participant shall comply with applicable regulations,policies,guidelines and requirements including Office of Management and Budget Circulars No.A-95 (Evaluation,review,and coordination of federal assistance programs and projects) and A-102 (Uniform administrative requirements for grants-in-aid to state and local governments) and FMC 74.4 (Cost primciples applicable to grants and contracts with state and local governments) as they relate to the application, acceptance and use of federal funds for this federally assisted project. B. Project Proposal 1. The project proposal for State assistance bearing the same project number as the agreement and associated documents is by this reference made a part of the agreement. 2. The participant possesses legal authority to apply for the grant,and to finance and construct the proposed facilities.A resolution,motion or similar action has been duly adopted or passed authorizing the filing of the project proposal,including all understandings and assurances contained therein,and directing and authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the participant to act in connection with the project proposal and to provide such additional information as may be required. 3. The participant has the ability and intention to finance the non-state share of the costs for the project."Sufficient funds will be available to assure effective operation and maintenance of the facilities acquired or developed by the project. C. Project Execution 1. It is understood by the parties hereto that this agreement shall not obligate State of California funds for the project costs described herein.The participant hereby promises,in consideration of the promises made by the Liaison Officer herein,to execute the project stage described herein,in accordance with the terms of this agreement.Any disbursement hereunder shall not be made unless and until funds therefor are received by the Liaison Officer from the National Park Service.This item shall not apply when the participant is an agency of the State of California. 2. The Liaison Officer hereby promises,in consideration of the promises made by the participant herein,to accept appropriated federal funds for the purposes of the project and disburse the same to reimburse the participant up to 50 percent of the eligible project cost not to exceed 50 percent of the direct project cost shown in this agreement;except for a surcharge for administrative costs to be applied to twice the federal share of direct eligible project costs.The surcharge is to be deducted from the reimbursements received from the Federal Governments applicable to this project and will be computed at the federally approved surcharge rate in effect at the time the billing is submitted to the Federal Government. 3. The project period shall begin with the date of approval of the project agreement or the effective date of a waiver of retroactivity and shall terminate at the end of the stated or amended project period unless the project is completed or terminated sooner in which event the project period shall end on the date of completion or termination.For project elements added to a consolidated project,the project period will begin on the date the project element is approved. 4. The participant will cause work an the project to be commenced within a reasonable time after receipt of notification that funds have been approved and assure that the project will be prosecuted to completion with reasonable diligence. 5. The participant will require the facility to be designed to comply with the"American Standard Specifications for Making Buildings and Facilities Accessible to,and Usable by,the Physically Handicapped," Number Al 17.1-161,as modified (41 CFR 101-171703).The State will be responsible for conducting inspections to insuro compliance with these specifications by the contractor. 6. The participant shall secure completion of the work in accordance with approved construction plans and specifications,and shall secure compliance with all applicable federal,state,local laws and regulations. 7. In the event the project covered by the project agreement,including future stages of the project,cannot be completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the project;the participant shall bring the project to a point of recreational usefulness agreed upon by the participant and,the Director • or his designee, and the Uoison Officer. 3 8. The participant will provide for and maintain competent and adequate architectural engineering supervision and inspection at the construction site to insure that the completed work conforms with the approved plans and specifications;that it will furnish progress reports and such other informati-n as the NPS may require. 9. The participant will comply with the terms of Title II and Title III,the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act o0170 (P.L.91-646),94 Stat.1894 (1970),and the applicable regulations and procedures implementing such Act for all real property acquisitions and where applicable shall assure that the Act has been complied with for property to be developed with assistance under the project agreement. 10. The participant will comply with the provisions of:Executive Order 11988,relating to evaluation of flood hazards;Executive Order 11288,relating to the prevention,control,and abatement or water pollution,and Executive Order 11990, relating to the protection of wetlands. 11. The participant will comply with the flood insurance purchase requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973,Public Law 93-234,87 Stat.975,approved December 31,1976.Section 102(a) requires,on and after March 2,1975,the purchase of flood insurance in communities where such insurance is available as a condition for the receipt of any federal financial assistance for construction or acquisition pruposes for use in any area that has been identified by the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development as an area having special flood hazards.The phrase"federal financial assistance"includes any form of loan,grant,guaranty,insurance payment,rebate,subsidy,disaster assistance loan or grant, or any other form of direct or indirect federal assistance. 12. The participant will insure that the facilities under its ownership,lease or supervision which shall be utilized in the accomplishment of the project are not listed on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) list of Violating Facilities,pursuant to 40 CFR, Part 15.20 and that it will notify the State and NPS of the receipt of any communication from the Director of the EPA Office of Federal Activities indicating that a facility to be utilized in the project is under consideration for listing by the EPA.The participant agrees to comply with all applicable standards,orders,or regulations issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act of 1970.The participant further agrees to insert this clause into any contract or subcontract in excess of$100,000. 13. The participant will assist the State and NPS in its compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended (16 U.S.C. 470),Executive Order 11593,and the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C.469a-1 et seq) by (a) consulting with the State Historic Preservation Officer on the conduct of investigations,as necessary,to identify properties listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places that are subject to effects (see CFR Part 800.8) by the activity,and notifying the federal grantor agency of the existence of any such properties,and by(b)complying with all requirements established by the federal grantor agency to avoid or mitigate adverse effects upon such properties. D. Construction Contracted for by the Participant Shall Meet the Following Requirements: 1. Contracts for construction in excess of$10,000 shall be awarded through a process of competitive bidding involving formol advertising,with adequate purchase description,sealed bids,and public openings.Copies of all advertisements,bids,and a copy of the contract shall be retained for inspection by the Director and the State. 2. The participant shall inform all bidden on contracts for construction that federal funds are being used to assist in construction. 3. Written change orders shall be issued for all necessary changes in the facility being constructed under contracts of$10,000 or more.Such chong shall be made a part of the project file and should be kept available for audit. 0 4. Contracts for construction shall include a provision for compliance with the Copeland"Anti-Kickback"Act(18 U.S.C.874) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR,Part 3). 5. The participant will comply with other procurement standards of OMB Circular A-102,Attachment O,except for provisions related to compliance with Davis Bacon Ad requirements (unless required by o program providing supplemental funding).Should supplemental funding be provided which requires compliance with Davis Bacon Act requirements,all construction contracts awarded by the grantee and subgrantee in excess of$2,000 shall include a provision for compliance with such Act (40 U.S.C.276a to a-7) and as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 GFR, Part 5). 6. The participant shall incorporate,or cause to be incorporated,into all construction contracts exceeding$10,000 (ten-thousand),the following provisions: "During the performance of this contract the contractor agrees as follows: "(1) The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race,religion,color,sex,or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed,and that employees are treated during employment,without regard to their race,creed,color or national origin.Such action shall include,but not be limited to,the following:Employment;upgrading;demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising;layorr or termination;rates of pay or other forms of compensation;and selection for training,including apprentice- ship.The contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places,available to employees and applicants for employment,notices to be provided by the contracting officer setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination douse. "(2) The contractor will,in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor,state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race,religion, color,sex,or national origin. "(3) The contractor will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding,a notice,to be provided by the agency contracting officer,advising the labor union or workers' representative of the contractor's commitments under Section 202 of Executive.Order No. 11246 as amended (3 CFR 169 (1974)),and shall post copies of notices in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. "(4) The contractor will comply with all provisions of Executive Order No. 11246,as amended,and the rules,regulations,and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. "(5) The contractor will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order No. 11246,as amended,and by the rules,regulations d orders of the Secretary of Labor,or pursuant thereto,and will permit access to his books,records,and accounts by the contracting agency, the and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. 4 "(6) In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of such rules,regulations,or orders, this contract may be canceled,terminated,or suspended in whole or in part and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further government contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Executive Order No. 11246,as amended,and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order No. 11246,as amended,or by rules,regulations,or orders of the Secretary of Labor,or as otherwise provided by low. "(7) The contractor will include the provisions of Paragraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations,or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246,as amended,so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor.The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the contracting agency may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance:Provided,however,that in the event the contractor becomes involved in,or is threatened with,litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the contracting agency,the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United Slates. 7. The participant shall (1) comply with the above provisions in construction work carried out by itself, (2) assist and cooperate actively with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Labor in obtaining the compliance of contractors and subcontractors with the above contract provisions and with the rules,regulations,and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor, (3) obtgin and furnish to the Secretary of the Interior and to the Secretary of Labor such information as they may require for the supervision of such compliance, (4) enforce the obligation of contractors and subcontractors under such provisions, rules, regulations, and orders, (5) cony out sanctions and penalties for violation of such obligations imposed upon contractors and subcontractors by the State,or the Secretary of Labor,or the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to Part II, Subpart D,of Executive Order No. 11246, as amended,and (6) refrain from entering into any contract with a contractor debarred from government contracts under Part II,Subpart D,of Executive Order No. 11246,as amended.In addition,the participant agrees that if it fails or refuses to comply with these undertakings,the NPS may take any or all of the following actions:Cancel,terminate,or suspend in whole or in part this grant;refrain from extending any further assistance to the applicant under the program with respect to which the failure or refusal occurred until satisfactory assurance of future compliance has been received from such applicant;and refer the case to the Department of Justice for appropriate legal proceedings. E. Conflict of Interests 1. No official or employee of the participant,State,or Federal Government who is authorized in his official capacity to negotiate,make,accept,or approve, or to take part in such decisions regarding a contract or subcontract in connection with this project shall hove any financial or other personal interest in any such contract or subcontract. 2. No person performing services for the participant in connection with this project shall have a financial or other personal interest other than his employment or retention by the participant,in any contract or subcontract in connection with this project. No officer or employee of such person retained by the porticipant shall have any financial or other personal interest in any real property acquired for this project unless such interest in openly disclosed upon the public records of the participant,and such officer,employee or person has not participated in the acquisition for or on behalf of the participant. 3. No member of or delegate to Congress shall be admitted to any share or part of this agreement,or to any benefit to arise hereupon,unless such benefit shall be in the form of an agreement made with a corporation for its general benefit. 4. The participant, State,and the Director shall be responsible for enforcing the above conflict of interest provisions. F. Hatch Act The participant will comply with the provisions of the Hatch Act which provides that no officer or employee of the participant whose principal employment is in connection with any activity which is financed in whole or in part pursuant to this agreement shall take part in any of the political activity prescribed in the Hatch Political Activity Act,5 U.S.C. Sec. 118k (1964),with the exceptions therein enumerated. G. Project Costs 1. Project cosh eligible for assistance shall be determined upon the basis of the criteria set forth in the Manual and FMC 74.4. 2. The agreement may include the use of the indirect cost rate currently approved,in accordance with FMC 74-4,for the participant that is a party to this agreement. H. Project Administration 1. The participant shall promptly submit such reports and documentation as the Director or Liaison Officer may request. 2. Any moneys advanced to the participant are"public moneys"and shall be deposited in a bank with FDIC insurance coverage and the balances exceeding the FDIC coverage shall be collaterally secured as provided for in 12 U.S.C.265. 3. The participant shall use any funds received by way of advance payment from the State under the terms of this agreement solely for the project or project stage described in the agreement. 4. Properties and facilities acquired or developed with Fund assistance shall be available for inspection by the State or the NPS at such intervals as the liaison Officer or the Director shall require. I. Retention and Custodial Requirements for Records 1. Financial records,supporting documents,statistical records,and all other records pertinent to this grant shall be retained for a period of three years; except the records shall be retained beyond the three-yeor period if audit findings have not been resolved. 2. The retention period starts from the date of the final expenditure report for the project or the consolidated project element. 3. State and local governments are authorized to subsittute microfilm copies in lieu of original records,. 4. The liaison Officer,Secretary of the Interior,and the Comptroller General of the United States,or any of their duly authorized representatives, shoil have access to any books,documents,papers,and records of the participant and their subgrontees which are pertinent to a specific project for the purpose 5 of making audit, examination, excerpts and transcripts. J. Project Termination 1. The Liaison Officer of the Director may temporarily suspend State assistance under the project pending corrective action by the participant or lei a decision to terminate the grant by the NPS or the State. 2. The participant may unilaterally terminate the project or consolidated project element at any time prior to the first payment on the project or consolidated project element.After the initial payment, the project may be terminated, modified,or amended by the participant only by mutual agreement. 3. The Liaison Officer or the Director may terminate the project in whole,or in part,of any time before the date of completion,whenever it is determined that the grantee has failed to comply with the conditions of the grant.The Liaison Officer or Director will promptly notify the participant in writing of the determination and the reasons for the termination,together with the effective date.Payments made to the participant or recoveries by the State under projects terminated for cause shall be in accord with the legal rights and liabilities of the parties. 4. The Director,State,or participant,may terminate grants in whole,or in part at any time before the date of completion,when both parties agree that the continuation of the project would not produce beneficial results commensurate with the further expenditure of funds.The two parties shall agree upon the termination conditions,including the effective date and,in the case of partial termination conditions,including the effective date and,in the case of partial termination,the portion after the effective date,and shall cancel as many outstanding obligations as possible.The State may allow full credit to the participant for the state share of the nonconcellable obligations, properly incurred by the grantee prior to termination. 5. Terminations either for cause or for convenience requires that the project in question be brought to a state of recreational usefulness agreed upon by the participant, the liaison Officer,or the Director,or that all funds provided by the National Park Service be returned. K. Fund Acknowledgment The participant will permanently display in a conspicuous place a bronze plaque which acknowledges Land and Water Conservation Fund assistance.The plaque will be provided by the State Department of Parks and Recreation and its installation by the participant will be required upon initial development of the property. L Hold Harmless the participant shall indemnify the State of California and its officers,agents and employees against and hold the some free and harmless from any and all claims,demands,damages,losses,costs,and/or expenses of liability due to,or arising out of,either in whole or in part,whether directly or indirectly,the organization,development,construction,operation,or maintenance of the project. 6 • r*,:� AG�lOA M E M O R A N D U M T0: IT C Y MANAGER September 20 , 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AT 2-83 LOCATION: 10510 San Marcos Road (Lot 22 , Block 30) ' APPLICANT: John White (Twin Cities Engineering) REQUEST: To divide 9.93 acres into three parcels of 3. 2, 3. 2 and 3. 4 acres, employing the minimum lot size reduction adjustment. On September 6 and September 19 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the subject matter unanimously denying the requested adjustment and approving a two way land division subject to Conditions 1-14 as listed in the attached Staff Report, with the addition of Con- dition #15 to read: "15. This Final Map shall not be recorded until San Marcos/Los • Altos Roads have been fully improved to Highway 41. " The Planning Commission also recommends that the processing of parcel maps in the 3-F Meadows area be allowed provided that such maps not be allowed to record until the road is paved to Highway 41. It was the consensus of the Commission that there was substantial progress to- wards achieving this goal and that lifting the processing halt now would allow applicants to begin the process with the City still re- taining some control to assure needed circulation improvements. There was discussion among the Commission concerning the grading of the site and the common driveway easement, as well as application of the necessary criteria for the requested reduction in lot size. Allen Campbell, representing the applicant, spoke in support of ap- proving the three lot land division stating that he, did not feel that excessive grading would occur on the site, but did concur with the recommended conditions for approving two parcels. John White, applicant, spoke in support of approving the request. Donald Auten, adjacent property owner, felt there was not a large grade difference on the property. • Re: Tentative Parc Map AT 2-83 (White) No one else appeared on the matter. LAWRENCE STEVENS IMURIZAY L ARDEN Planning Director r9ity Ma ager • 2 13 nil ,F r 1918 9178 CITY OF ATASCADERO [ � f; CADERp� Planning Department September 19, 1983 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 2-83 LOCATION: 10510 San Marcos Road (Lot 22, Block 30), APPLICANT: John White (Twin Cities Engineering) REQUEST: To divide 9 .93 acres of land into three parcels of 3. 2, 3.2 and 3. 4 acres, employing the minimum lot size reduc- tion adjustment. PAST ACTION At their September 6, 1983 meeting, the Planning Commission denied the applicant' s request for an Adjustment that would have allowed creation of three lots on this site. In so doing, however, they recommended approval of the creation of two lots at the minimum ,lot size permitted by the performance criteria (3. 97 acres) . The Planning Commission also recommended lifting the imposed processing halt'; for the 3-F Mead- ows region in view of the impending completion of San Marcos Road and Los Altos Road through to Highway 41 (Morro Road) . BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: RS (Residential Suburban) 2. General Plan: Suburban Single Family Residential 3. Environmental Determination: An initial study environmental de- scription form has been completed by the applicant. The Planning Director has prepared a Draft Conditional Negative Declaration indicating the project will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment if certain mitigation measures are incorpora- ted into the project. 4. Site Conditions: This is a wedge-shaped parcel of land located off a sharp bend of San Marcos Road. The lot slopes down and away from the road creating a peninsular bench of land on which the applicant proposes building sites. A gas pipeline and an oil pipeline each crosses the central part of the lot (parallel to each other) running west southwest. Vegetation consists mainly of natural grasses with trees scattered across the 'parcel. A rough driveway exists from San Marcos Road down to the central part of the lot. A grading permit for the driveway has been granted but TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 2-83 (White) not yet developed. 5. Project Description: The applicant requests permission to divide 9 .93 acres of land into three parcels. Two of the parcels would be 3.2 acres in size and the third parcel would be 3.4 acres. The proposed parcel arrangement places Parcel 3 close to the road, Parcel 2 half way down the hill and Parcel 1 at the toe of the slope farthest from the road. A common easement of unspecified width, for access and utilities, runs through the middle of Par- cels 2 and 3 from San Marcos Road to the frontage of Parcel 1. 6. Determination of Minimum Lot Size: The review of the five gener- alized performance criteria (Section 9-3.144) for this specific parcel establishes a minimum lot size as follows: Lot Size Factor Average slope (25.71%) 1.00 Distance from center (10 ,000 - 12,000 feet) .30 Access (paved 15% slope) .40 Septic suitability (severe) 1.50 General neighborhood character (3.87 acres) .77 Required minimum lot size: 3.97 acres Since this minimum lot size will not permit creation of three par- cels on 9.93 acres of land, the applicant has submitted additional required information for an adjustment. An adjustment, if granted would permit up to a 20% reduction in the minimum lot size to 3.17 acres, allowing the applicant to create three parcels. 7. Subdivision Review Board: On August 4, 1983 the Subdivision Review Board met to review the project with the applicant, John White and associate Donald Auten, and his engineer, John Kennaly. Members of the Board in attendance were: Larry Stevens, Planning Director; Larry McPherson, Public Works Director; Mike Sherer, Planning Commissioner; and Fred Buss, Associate Planner. Discus- sion centered around the adjustment process and the need for the following additional material: a) plans indicating the proposed building sites including the average slope of the building sites b) proposed location of the septic systems c) preliminary plan and profile drawings of driveways including slope d) preliminary grading plan for building sites and driveways e) additionally, the nearest fire hydrant will need to be upgraded 8. Information for Adjustment to Minimum Lot Size: The additional information supplied indicates that the driveway connecting the 2 ! i TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 2-83 (White) three proposed buildng sites will be 545 feet long, require a cut of 105 cubic yards of dirt, require 105 cubic yards of fill dirt, and have an overall average grade of approximately 16%. The building site for proposed Parcel 1 will require 450 cubic yards of cut and fill on an 8% slope to create a 9000 square foot building pad. The building site for proposed Parcel 2 will re- quire 600 cubic yards of cut and fill on a 16% slope to create a 4800 square foot building pad. The building site for proposed Parcel 3 will require 220 cubic yards of cut and fill on a 20% slope for a 900 square foot building pad for the garage only. The house, as proposed, would have some form of raised or stepped foundation. The septic leach field for Parcel 1 is proposed on a 9% slope and located within 20 feet of the building pad. The septic field for Parcel 2 is proposed on a 16% slope and located within 35 feet of the pad. The septic field for Parcel 3 is proposed on a 20% slope 130 feet from the proposed construction site. ANALYSIS Before an adjustment can be granted, Section 9-3. 144 (c) (2) requires that certain specified Findings be made by the Planning Commission. Since creation of three lots is dependent upon the adjustment, Staff' s review of the project must consider each Finding. Information submitted indicates a site with steep terrain (25% average slope) . The driveway takes the least steep route to reach Parcel 1 and has a 16% slope. Proposed Parcel 3 indicates a building site on 20% slope and placement of the leach field 130 feet away in order to find another area at or under 20% slope. In all, 1375 cubic yards of cut and 1375 cubic yards of fill are pro- posed for the site. Even more substantial grading, on steeper slopes would be required if Parcel 3 was developed with a building pad rather than trying to follow the contours. Since hillside development has an obviously greater potential for en- vironmental impacts (slope failure, erosion, septic problems, etc. ) than flat land development, densities are usually decreased as a miti- gation measure, not increased. These impacts can be deleterious not only to the property in question, but also to surrounding properties ro ertes and improvements. General Plan residential policies' indicate a desire to grade lot sizes and thus density to preserve open': space and stay within the range of the population goals for the community. Other policies strive to minimize disruption of native vegetation and water- sheds, and encourage efficient layout of access (the driveway is over 500 feet long here) and utilities. Another policy encourages preser- vation of trees, watersheds, natural slopes and other natur-al ameni- ties from abuse and destruction resulting from poor design and devel- opment practices. 3 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 2-83 (White) To summarize, this project does not present any significant circum- stances relating to shape, topography, location and surroundings that would warrant an increase in the density by granting the adjustment. Staff feels that the specific information presented indicates that only two lots should be created. The sizes of two lots (4. 95 acres) would not be significantly greater than existing lot sizes in the area. It should also be pointed out that parcel maps in the 3-F Meadows area have not been processed until certain access problems are corrected. The only two maps to be processed involve a 31 lot subdivision (Lang- ford) and a four lot land division for the owner of the majority of the undeveloped land in the area (Davis) . Both include conditions requiring road improvements to Highway 41. The Davis Map has been re- corded and an agreement with performance guarantees has been entered into. The Langford Map has not been recorded. It is Staff' s under- standing that the processing halt remain in effect until the road is completed. At the present time, the road is graded nearly to Highway 41, where access is still restricted. There is the possibility that paving will begin in a week or two, but there is some question about whether or not the entire road will be improved this year. Since it is impractical to require major off-site improvements on smaller land dividers such as this, the processing halt should remain in effect until road improvements required for the Davis and Langford Maps are completed. FINDINGS 1. There are no circumstances applicable to the property including shape, topography, location and surroundings which warrant use of specific site information rather than generalized area information in determining lot size. 2. The specific site information submitted clearly demonstrates that the Adjustment in lot size is not warranted. 3. The granting of the Adjustment will not result in better utiliza- tion of the affected property. 4. The granting of the Adjustment is not consistent with certain policies set forth in the General Plan. 5. The creation of two lots with a minimum lot size of 3.97 acres on this parcel conforms to all applicable zoning and subdivision regulations and is consistent with the General Plan. 6. The creation of two lots in conformance with the recommended con- ditions of approval will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment, and the preparation of an Environmental Im- pact Report isnot necessary. 4 0 0 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 2-83 (White) RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above Findings, the Planning Department recommends: A) Issuance of a Conditional Negative Declaration as follows: 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for drainage and erosion control and protection in conjunction with site development. 2. Adequate provision shall be made in the design of the private sewage disposal systems to minimize effects on natural water- courses. 3. Adequate and sufficient tests shall be performed on each lot to ensure septic suitability at each building site. 4. Grading and tree removal shall be minimized during all phases of site development. 5. Adequate provisions shall be made to minimize fire hazards in conjunction with site development; and, B) Denial of the Adjustment of the minimum lot size and approval of Tentative Parcel Map AT 2-83 subject to the following conditions: 1. The Final Map shall be revised to allow a maximum of two lots with neither lot to be smaller than 3. 97 acres. 2. Private sewage disposal systems will be an acceptable method of sewage disposal if reports and designs are acceptable. All tests, reports and designs shall conform to methods and guidelines prescribed by the Manual of Septic Tank Practice and other applicable City Ordinances. The following Note shall appear on the Final Map: "Appropriate soils reports including a percolation test, a test to determine the presence of ground water, and a log of a soil boring to a minimum depth of ten (10) feet shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Where soils reports indicate the conven- tional soil absorption systems are not acceptable, City ap- proval of plans for an alternative private sewage disposal system, designed by a Registered Civil Engineer , shall be required. Depending upon the system, more; restrictive re- quirements may be imposed. " 3. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Com- pany and water lines shall exist at the frontage of all par- cels prior to filing of the Final Map. 4. All other available utilities not already in place shall be extended underground to each parcel frontage at the time of building permit. Any utility easements are to be shown on the Final Map. 5 • • TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 2-83 (White) 5. Efforts shall be made to minimize grading that would be dis- ruptive to the natural topography and removal of existing, mature trees. The following shall appear as a Note on the Final Map: "No trees shall be removed without compliance with applicable City ordinances. No grading shall commence without an appro- priate permit and compliance with applicable City ordinances. 6. Drainage and erosion control plans, prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer , shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits in conjunction with installation of private - driveways, ac- cess easement or buildings. 7. Roof materials for all structures shall be Class C rating or better and a Note to that effect shall appear on the Final Map. S. The existing fire hydrant nearest the property shall be up- graded from a wharfhead to a steamer if required by the Fire Chief after a review of hydrant standards with the Planning Director. 9 . Plan and profile drawings of proposed individual driveway(s) and driveway easements shall be submitted for approval by the Public Works and Planning Departments in order to determine average grade and appropriate improvement requirements. If average slope exceeds 12%, paved improvement would be a re- quirement at the -time of application for a building permit. Otherwise, an all-weather surface would be required similarly In no event will driveways be allowed which exceed 20% in slope. The driveway access shall be improved to a minimum width of twelve (12) feet and shall have a minimun unobstruc- ted vertical clearance of fourteen (14) feet. Notes to these effects shall appear on the Final Map. 10. All pipelines and other easements of record shall be shown on the Final Map. A letter shall be submitted from each utility company indicating the nature and extent of any building re- strictions. A Note stating any such restrictions shall appear on the Final Map. 11. Drainage swales shall be indicated on the Final Map and a Note shall appear on the Final Map which states: "Any modification of the ground during site development with- in fifty (50) feet of the drainage swales shall be subject to approval by the Planning and Public Works Departments. " 12. All conditions herein specified shall be complied with prior to filing of the Final Map. 13. A Final Map in with all conditions set forth here- in shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance 6 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 2-83 (White) with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordi- nance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners cre- ated and a Registered Civil Engineer or licensed land surveyor shall submit a letter certifying that the mon- uments have been set prior to recordation of the Final Map. b. A recently updated preliminary titlereport shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the Final Map. 14. 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 expira- tion date. ACTION The Planning Commission should, by motion, direct Staff as deemed appropriate. REPORT PREPARED BY: � FRED BUSS Associate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director Ps 7 15 _ 1 ° �; ' M N 1p G S i !4 0 0 ° 7 J � i2 11 Q o_ S 16 17PA es ca p L`�c',��y �`,•� B PAX I \,71-10 n� \ l➢ 2223 3� 26 0 27�. o-28 aaK 24 G� c� q0o 25 z o fog.,40 4 V 29 e o 21 k �� �o0 30 o Ni'y1 m , ry4p 31 \0 { to to43 LO 0 S � g - s 7 6 4ti + z 10 Oslo 33 i C 9 g 3 15 l 0 2 (Ory � 34 CIS 10 Z I P s � p P $ II I�ipO 1015 �� e-- j4 -� i 12 18 19 r /�� Go 3S 4 1059m ia� 20 ao '2t t c i 0 20 levo° a 12 A !9 lots 33 1 �!'AK-2 l 1 qti� �2 lo,c7 ,o% i0G35 3 17 3 Z� { /v�3 q3 RZ 101-5- /0635 34 u for 1 5,.21 ?ur3 HSR.I �0 1rj2N0 141 1 0 ��10640 �s 15 16 row ys 11 gg35 t g 3o i PAR.p J 15 A o 35 a5 � XJ MA \0� \v a"1 29 20 i AN 9 i � p /a 725 39 •2Ah �o7ss 011, J J,M\` roTSO �./ ay 42 A 40 oy� �� / 27 _p \ 1078c 10706- �i I qti / l ti �/ \ Qp 41 6 I ati\ 24 h _(l/ 25.'�r Le;77e^t A/vo zoMIA/G— � /D S/U S,7A//gZgg CC$ -4211A40 9930 RS li✓MIT��w/nf C/ne 3 r PD2 L (FH) � o 1 40 i �.s _ R - • .,. ti 11 HINT; Nil IN • t L � n pn. �S 4 ZI7. PAY loco I :1110111 All 1 � � A � - < s Z Y ~ I 9 / 7;3 \ `\ I 1 \\ i I I J k�•,r.•sei'ara�c'�ta.�+s�`�s�' +?�W'i� „e�':��'8�`,� _ '�z r? .z-:xc<-"3."`_' �,^ ti'"' �e `r�'?J• s. .s .r "';^' S. v.T, `...:. _ .a � 16 i z } r y � FCYIi✓b1JPOM CO Cz i 1�799- 031 -Sr �''S o-��`ai�+, +��.t-yt>';"...'y�:.'r"=.�F.�'_•..�-r.-;�??a�'� �.�'�'� �: � ^�c..^.�,..�_.s.',-S`�-�...;.�,:-�.c1_""....-�,. 1 J� /}� f L ;�,�-y:r__ rte. � :r co 0 \ moo _ s,4 SON 15 WO Thi y f� t s C tot \ \ M`s 3 s•.c \ \ h r on ---------------- c NIA 2 \ 4 rz loon, CIITv F/� UJI L r 9 .-. .... . .;%�'`��s.:':N=n �''�y""��-��'n`:" -�3f.'n�`'.Y; 7��"�"'"F.:�L?3�.•aGt�Z`r5. * :.�Y'4�.Y�.=.�-•a•.s-.cR:-•,-.y,-sw�-�+�.,�.:::�->z-1��•..;--..d..ps.r.. ,'f.'�. .<<, f -r_, ZZ �-rv..ccv��.; r�i •-mow.-. --\ �_, r ,...•c \ G \�\ iA 3 s " \9000 S,�o �•.� �`: r C la.•s'"'Fs'�-'.'gyp:g�. ""']�'. ....."ii'Mv '��' C i"4a• i'•n � ';� x +-." � `"'. � t"�°�r" 't`a`r-• !?+1 S`N�d�"3.�.a�%y� itis.-' .aifF -�'.�^�4•`:. 450 c y Cal Scc,le, . ..Nrs-��.-.-,�-.�-*.",.=x,-..:..;.c,�.,q<•s-••r..�.�,....-,c.-.z. .Fa:-s_.�.±..-.w.M1.---'^�^^�.•.�........+a-.'.,..-.ter.. ,;,�..,... ._�_-•.. =NDA 1 q� !?ESA M E M O R A N D U M • TO: CITY MANAGER September 21, 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AT 7-83 LOCATION: 9290 E1 Bordo Avenue (Ptn. Lot 1, Block 7 , Eaglet #2) APPLICANT: Wallace E. Dunn (McCarthy & Associates/Associated Professions) REQUEST: To create a 10 unit condominium project.. On September 19, 1983 , the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing concerning the subject matter unanimously recommending ap- proval of the Tract Map subject to Conditions 1-13 as set forth in the attached Staff Report. You should be aware that even though discussion and conditions for Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 are included in the attached Staff Report, they are not part of the review required of the City Council since the Zoning Regulations gives authority for such decisions to the Planning Commission unless appealed. You will receive a separate notice on the Commission' s approval of that Conditional Use Permit. Wally Dunn, applicant, appeared and indicated his agreement with the recommendation. No one else appeared on the matter . LAWRENCE STEVENS `M"RAY JA.WARDEN Planning Director alty manager Ps M. I CITY OF ATASCADERO C i f 197 1979 • ]918 9 Planning Department September 19, 1983 CARE STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AT 7-83 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 1-83 LOCATION: 9290 El Bordo Avenue (Ptn. Lot 1, Block 7, Eaglet #2) APPLICANT: Wallace E. Dunn (McCarthy & Associates/Associated Professions) REQUEST: To allow a 10 unit residential condominium project in- cluding a density bonus of 25% (two units) with provisions for low and moderate income persons. BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: RMF/16 (Residential Multiple Family, 16 units/ acre) . 2. General Plan: High Density Multiple Family • 3. Environmental Determination: An initial study environmental de- scription form has been completed by the applicant. The Planning Director has prepared a Draft Conditional Negative Declaration indicating the project will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment if certain mitigation measures are incorpora- ted into the project for Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83, and has determined Tentative Tract Map AT 7-83 to be a Class 1 Categorical Exemption according to the provisions of the California Environ- mental Quality Act (CEQA) . 4. Site Conditions: The lot is located on El Bordo Avenue between E1 Camino Real and Las Lomas on the southeast side of the street. The parcel contains 0. 5 acres of land. The topography is general- ly flat with vegetation consisting of several oak and elm trees. The site is presently vacant. Surrounding land uses are generally multiple family residential in nature. 5. Project Description: The applicant proposes to construct a 10 unit multiple family condominium project. The project will con- sist of 10 "foot print" lots with the remainder of the parcel com- monly owned by a homeowners' association. Two of the units are part of a 25% density bonus the applicant is requesting. The units would be occupied by low or moderate income persons. The • 10 units will be contained in five two-story buildings. The units will be 1,109 square feet with one bedroom and a day room that could be converted to a second bedroom. Twenty parking spaces Tract Map AT 7-83/Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 (Dunn) will be provided at 1. 5 spaces per unit plus one space plus one space per four units or fraction thereof (19 equired) , and will be located along the front of the units. All spaces will be cov- ered carports. Exterior elevations indicate the use of stucco siding and wood trim, with the roof being composition shingle. Landscaping will be designed to integrate with the adjacent 44 unit apartment project presently being developed. Access is to be provided through the adjacent project. A trash enclosure is also to be provided on the adjacent property opening only to this site. Grading will consist of a 25 cubic yard cut, and; a 450 cubic yard fill. Most of the fill will be obtained from the adjacent pro- ject. Curb, gutter and sidewalk along the E1 Bordo frontage is being installed as a requirement of the adjacent 44 unit project. 6. Subdivision Review Board: On Thursday, August 4, 1983, the Sub- division Review Board met to review the above-referenced projects. The applicant' s engineer, Toby Osgood of Associated Professions, and the applicant' s architect, Rick Hubbard of McCarthy and Asso- ciates, were present. Members of the Board attending were: Larry McPherson, Public Works Director; Larry Stevens, Planning Director Fred Buss, Associate Planner ; and Mike Sherer, Planning Commis- sioner. The following items were discussed: 1. Documentation needed for the means of preserving low-income occupancy for 15 years (Conditional Use Permit) . 2. Modify the lot line to indicate where the true property line is (Tentative Tract Map) . 7. Supplemental Information for Density Bonus: Section 9-3.175 (c) provides for a density bonus through the Conditional Use Permit process where adequate provisions are made to provide dwelling units which are affordable to low and/or moderate income persons. A bonus of a 25% increase in the density is subject to four spe- cified Findings outlined in the above Section. In essence, these Findings require: a) The project, prior to the density bonus, must consist of at least four units. b) The bonus units must be available for 15 years. c) Performance and management guarantees are adequate to provide for (b) above. d) the density bonus will support the goals and objectives of the Housing Element. The applicant has provided a copy of proposed '' Conditions, Cov- enants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) in which the City Planning Direc- tor has been named as the determiner of eligibility for the units. The CC&Rs require that the two units (to be specified) be avail- able to persons certified as having an income of 120% or less of 2 Tract Map AT 7-83/Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 (Dunn) the County median income for 15 years. Certification would be made by the Planning Director in writing in a recordable form in order for the unit to be purchased. ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the project and finds that it generally conforms with applicable development standards with the exception of the lack of the one required handicapped space. There are also concerns with regard to access to the project and the trash enclosure located on the adjacent site. An agreement binding to the land will need to be writ- ten and recorded that allows for access across the adjacent property to the proposed project, and allows the trash enclosure to be located on the adjacent site. Development of the site as an eleven lot sub- division is permitted by Section 9-3. 174 (Lot Size) which allows for smaller than half acre lot sizes when developed as a planned residen- tial development (condominiums) , provided that the overall density within the project conforms with Section 9-3.175 (density) . The pro- posal generally meets the specified Findings for the density bonus if the Planning Commission approves of CC&Rs as a method that will not be abused. FINDINGS (Tentative Tract Map) 1. The application as submitted conforms to zoning and Subdivision regulations and is consistent with the Atascadero General Plan. 2. The application has been determined to be categorically exempt from the requirements of C.E.Q.A. FINDINGS (Conditional Use Permit) 1. The application together with the recommended conditions conforms to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. 2. The application as presented will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment and the preparation of an Environmen- tal Impact Report is not necessary. 3. The project consists of the minimum number of units for a density bonus and performance and management guarantees have been provided to demonstrate that the bonus dwelling units will be available to the targeted income group for a minimum of 15 years. 4. The granting of this density bonus serves to support goals and objectives set forth in the Housing Element of the General Plan. 5. The establishment and conduct of a multiple family residential use which includes_a density bonus will not be detrimental to the 3 0 Tract Map AT 7-83/Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 (Dunn) health, safety or welfare of the general public or persons resid- ing in the neighborhood, nor will it be detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity. 6. The proposed multiple family project will not generate traffic beyond the safe capacity f roads in the vicinity or beyond the full development capacity of the area. 7. The proposed use will not be inconsistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood nor be contrary to its orderly development. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above Findings, the Planning Department recommends issuance of a Conditional Negative Declaration and approval of Ten- tative Tract Map AT 7-83 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for drainage and erosion con- trol and protection in conjunction with site development. 2. Grading and tree removal shall be minimized during all phases of site development. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CONDITIONS 1. Provision shall be made for connection of the parcel to the City sewer system at time of development, and a Note so stating shall appear on the Final Map. 2. Water shall be obtained from Atascadero Mutual Water Company. A letter shall be submitted from the Water Company indicating they are willing and able to serve the project, and water lines shall exist at the parcel frontage prior to the filing of the Final Map. 3. All other utilities not already in place shall be extended under- ground to each parcel frontage at the time of building permits. Any utility easements are to be shown on the Final Map. 4. Efforts shall be made to minimize grading that would be disruptive to the natural topography. All grading shall conform with Section 9-4.138 through 9-4. 145 in Title 9. 5. No trees shall be removed without compliance sith Section 9-4. 155 et seq. in Title 9. 6. Drainage plans shall comply with Section 9-4. 151 through 9-4.154 of Title 9. 4 ! 0 Tract Map AT 7-83/Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 (Dunn) 7. Roof materials for all structures shall be Class C rating or bet- ter and a Note to that effect shall appear on the Final Map. 8. All pipelines and other easements of record shall be shown on the Final Map. A letter shall be submitted from each utility company indicating the nature and extent of any building restrictions. A Note stating any such restrictions shall appear on the Final Map. 9. All conditions herein specified shall be complied with prior to filing of the Final Map. 10. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions and Restric- tions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nui- sances, and occupancy of density bonus units. a. These CC&Rs shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney and Planning Department prior to approval of the Final Map. b. These CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium Home- owners' Association. C. The City of Atascadero shall be a party to these CC&Rs for the duration of the density bonus provisions and shall hold final approval for prospective buyers meeting the income requirements for the two bonus units. 11. Approval of a ten-unit condominium is contingent upon approval of the density bonus. 12. 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, City Lot Division Ordinance, and the City of Atascadero Zoning Regulations prior to recordation of the Final Map. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners and a Registered Civil Engineer or licensed land surveyor shall submit a letter certifying the setting of monuments prior to recordation of the Final Map. b. A recently updated preliminary Title Report shall be submit- ted for review in conjunction with processing of the Final Map. 13. 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 submitted prior to the expiration date. 5 Tract Map AT 7-83/Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 (Dunn) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS 1. Site development including buildings, driveways, parking, land- scaping and other features shall be consistent with plans submit- ted including modifications required herein and all provisions of Title 9. 2. Submit four (4) copies of landscape plans in conformance with Sec- tion 9-4.124 et seq. of Title 9 prior to issuance of building permits. 3. In the event that archeological resources are discovered on the subject site, Section 9-4.162 of Title 9 shall be -complied with. 4. Building architecture shall be consistent with the elevations submitted. Any mechanical equipment used shall be screened in accordance with Section 9-4.128 of Title 9. 5. Provision shall be made for one paved enclosed trash storage area conforming to Section 9-4. 129 of Title 9. 6. Interior lighting fixtures shall comply with Section 9-4.137 of Title 9. 7. Fencing and screening shall comply with Section 9-4. 128 ' of Title 9. 8. Onsite signing shall comply with Sections 9-4.130 through 9-4.136 of Title 9. 9 . Parking shall be provided as set forth in Sections 9-4. 114 through 9-4.119 of Title 9 including provision for one handicapped space. 10. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions and Restric- tions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances and occupancy of density bonus units. a. These CC&Rs shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney and Planning Department prior to approval of the Final Map. b. These CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium Home- owners' Association. C. The City of- Atascadero shall be a party to these CC&Rs for the duration of the density bonus provisions and shall hold final approval for prospective buyers meeting the income re- quirements for the two bonus units. 11. Bonus units shall be conveyed only to persons who have been cer- tified as having household incomes which are 120% or less of the median income of San Luis Obispo County, as such income is deter- mined from time to time by the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo County. The Planning Director shall certify eligibility with this criteria upon application by a prospective purchaser . 6 Tract Map AT 7-83/Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 (Dunn) CC&Rs shall specify the application procedure and all eligibility requirements, which shall not be modified or revised without approval by the City of Atascadero. 12. Provision shall be made for this project to connect to community water and sewer facilities. A letter shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company stating that they are willing and able to serve this project and submit same to the Planning Department. 13. All other utilities not already in place shall be extended under- ground at the time of building permit. 14. Efforts shall be made to minimize grading that would be disrup- tive to the natural topography. All grading and drainage shall conform with Sections 9-4.138 through 9-4. 154 of Title 9 . 15. Tree removal shall comply with Section 9-4.155 et seq. of Title 9 . 16. Roof materials for all structures shall be Class C rating or better. 17. A reciprocal access agreement shall be recorded between this site and the northwesterly adjacent site to provide access through the adjacent parcel for driveway purposes and allow placement of the trash enclosure on the adjacent site. 18. All conditions of approval herein shall be complied with prior to occupancy of any structure. 19. This Conditional Use Permit approval is granted for a maximum period of one year from the date of final approval unless an ex- tension is granted pursuant to Section 9-2.118 of Title 9. ACTION The Planning Commission should, by motion on each item, direct Staff as deemed appropriate. A) Tentative Tract Map AT 7-83 To approve: Motion to adopt findings and set conditions. To deny: Motion setting findings for denial. B) Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 To Approve: Motion to adopt findings and set conditions. 7 Tract Map AT 7-83/Conditional Use Permit CUP 1-83 (Dunn) To deny: Motion setting findings for denial of density bonus and adopt findings and set onditions for approval of eight units. REPORT PREPARED BY: KAMI GR Planning Inter REPORT APPROVED BY: �iZG(✓(�,tRcs2 Phu' LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director Ps 8 CUP 1-83 PARKVIEW GARDENS 9290 EL BORDO PROPOSED CCSR PROVISIONS RELATING TO ELIGIBILITY LIMITS FOR THE PURCHASE OF DENSITY BONUS UNITS For the purpose of this section, Density Bonus Units shall refer to Units and of the Project. For a period of 15 years after the date of recording of this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, Density Bonus Units may be conveyed only to persons who have been certified as having household incomes which are 120% or less of the median household income within the County of San Luis Obispo, as such median income is determined from time to time by the Housing Authority of the County of San Luis Obispo. Eligibililty according to the above criteria shall be determined 'py the Planning Director of the City of Atascadero, California upon application by any prospective purchaser and the director shall certify such eligibility in writing and in recordable form, referring to this section of this Declaration. . . . 33 5e5o 5805 1 \,;`oJr p° P 34 !" - 37 eo-7q-r56 35 1 o a T1�Z 42 Q 23 `138 t, 40 41 22 / y 0 39 J /tA K i t�311 -D 21 a ��'� p 0�, � O � 5 20 26 19 r it ;. d n 52 m 26-A -t X 16 yy0 16 A t GS )8_ mac° v1 27 lc\ y13� ` N _ - _ 55 2a0 28 r �PIr3 50 by 56 u`L�� o 16 9 (,30° ��d� '7".o lc" / 29 48 N 30 46 yam,'. Op"'45.45 31 6 C? 32 �� X50 r 33 � ^N &eo0 24 Lo 43 3 7y\-lam J�� \ &Roo 25 155 ti° l0 5 4 i 42 c o ON z cid' Oso 3�o, \ 2 5 65 $9 50 Q \0a bto''v 40 27 1 r� t �a38S 2`oZ.s qo 0o �1o5 36 eo3�sz t\��! o5 s4 P t zs, 12 \ g 39-A O 1 ��0 37 9yoo Q �s3 o 35-8 E ONDID� 0 ROAD 37-A 4550 Rs ln�y 9'Too 38-6 20 38-A L� s 14 AIIA;6- /fW Zoe.4-Trent Qac, y C,�,eTiFit�3TG OF�mDC��4.UCE CC-? 38 G(JAs /�4u a� 6905 PAM Las k7VY AW rr y,�s � nJ iAme Nv ' ig M v i.St l�Mripy'c�cti,[I!d�CorcjhL srP,.4ep�cttaq-►arinw 3onl�,� �- •42ass1TlaaClon*a!!Ms2i 3Go'•f S.`,ie_,a:ltttM ot l+NAty+Rw �y"� ",-MS�S,iR itt+lli s�f'.r�t4'.Qsys6i3iaca,'t)re AFt2CZN,-t.ON1HG lQiT.-`e�`�:-�`.. :�ar asr CSYY or ArAic�wrncr:.�cl��Y oaatsanes ao i��pepc�F; <a� no Tr«ti 1714R!� tn�2ndsba�13;4wengwiq�i�;tDeztb,�'pusswan 1✓�y a e_ • A; �P _ ` I L Ziff Plu fib+ � � �j ( J-�-� �+`-'�---/�-_ -;,..�._ � :;.ti' � f • S 11 F �� �� � 1 ° F' �( ' s 1t ,• ._ � r f �V s',,,J� 1, I ;1 - �- :t tF f"� �-i �._._..Vis.u 2�... .�•3"- � ,_ a 1 r t 1 8 � I,i, a (��.� ��� 8� `�j��;y4 _ ii,, F •y2 r r':j I . d I C�� ��'',��wif {{ t 'S '; ,-• t�:a -� � c C 'pt1CS �t I�f� 1 1 tf`€ ' 11 • Fp , {j 71771 )LL gypp° -� (' 1," it 0 '`' i +♦ Lz� 1��ff-r',�` ����� 7 i0 ��! �.i'i-1 � ..• ,. � a� �,,,1 1 t. f L,`�..' � J � I ~�j � I' 1 ..i 74 41 17 � ,> �S�s � �: 1 a "� ars } � t� ; � ', � � tea• °� � r 1 1 yrA: n'i' 7-,T, 1 � � ��+i5 � .c � .S •g } +� Ion �,� � 111 po �i j, y Ili 7 f C7 1 �, L-77 '� g � � "y r i €F fi i ! �� IJ .10 p} �I - .a r A� ''>U' "C.J :1\).._ C.e..t •8�' �. y,�z ,� r �'�� � 1` (� ^; J ^� C�,�. t✓"'1a4. \ �. - a — €` `# T�.� z �}�'��' i�i�u�IJ_;�t>�� .L I. •---- --•'�"--,—^,�.,�T 1.� r.~�'' , �oi -'.,M ����s��n�nnr..Ml�a�i �1= s � 3 ,,•. �,,._,M _/µif-. ��.,.._-�,�(_• • 3{�� ;.r; __•�-_ '°•' i } ..t l/i• � i >n vim.{- I ;fl 'fin tl a '�n�� rR �"I� o 11}}Iil ' • �I +_�� � ' I � �11t"f ;ate �� °,•' � ���� � �sl�� � 3 i Iv i� if rr �. ` ;1;! . } •� 1 i{ f I csc sof imf r7 631aJut)SW lsa+was/lf '/YY AVN/V?!O• '.9NlOYb9 ;t r1tT 0u • Abea Y1 iUpYtl3All • DAY 4SV3 002• .. (� �.•.�-.. i i .. . .... _ I whit/ OY�OYDS UV a ■ "O t -4... _.____ - .. _ -. 3eMnb•ftlJe3.4uh 510331>+;Rm•tw33AMW3 'q fYm"soap OYN'OOXOo 71 4 K ei M i 3: WR WTYROV RO�9�S� i y' • • r w Ztl it ✓ � jl ;t Q ;� 1 , Q+ 507 41 1 'I I �,1 �� '- i..: � � I• '/ s- N, .� , -0, 5J �s a� ,j li...i' � .. pl"T- 1 i f it q e g'N�S •f <,- t i .�� + S ii r_�- li 4i�Y�>3� i � � 1��L� �}•p. „ _ ias la � ,Ir� \' � n€ \ / 1 ' � 1y o I • • '7.• - I '•a=te '� << .. . ` 1 t �•- WL ;Y�_/- _- 'i 1. C ---- ski-.r�' ``I �`��__ � s 4 r.� c�"r�„� ���;� � , •� flsj •+:�j� i ;• I�x• i ?f\t� <�a`.i c �.SA`,i r �. ;�1 / � fit =� i NY I • t 3 fL >• f�0• \ F /k f 2. I i 44 5 •`, / ifs •t ly /• � �1 it ' yl. �l_ Y �., �c t� a* �1�. .,4. 4� ,..t , i ' 4�`y I.�t\ I `�^ Sem' a'�E� �.s 14w j 'fir„ �t�e•, .• +!� a"SCp - f:�'• burl I ,,��iFY �I it l�• 1 ry ,,13 kl �In S �j .{ �t�� : �1� �f3p LIZ- _ ' ( � w�` •jam �C ��` N � \kfti• 3 i p . u • �/ ;��. .I I ♦f. MEMORANDUMAGNDA VA TO: CITY MANAGER September 20, 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AT 1-83 LOCATION: 10800 San Marcos Road (Ptn. Lot 3 , Block41) APPLICANT: Jennie Lee (Twin Cities Engineering) REQUEST: To allow resubdivision of a previously created parcel con- taining 15 .14 acres of land into four parcels of 3.8 acres each, employing the minimum lot size reduction adjustment. on Lot 12 On September 6 and September 19 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the subject matter unanimously approving the four • way land division request subject to conditions 1-13' as listed in the attached Staff Report, with the addition of Condition #14 to read: "14. This Final Map shall not be recorded until San Marcos/Los Altos Roads have been fully improved to Highway 41. " The Planning Commission also recommends that the processing of parcel maps in the 3-F Meadows area be allowed provided that such maps not be allowed to record until the road is paved to Highway 41. It was the consensus of the Commission that there was substantial progress to- wards achieving this goal and that lifting the processing halt now would allow applicants to begin the process with the City still re- taining some control to assure needed circulation improvements. There was discussion among the Commission concerning the adjustment criteria applied in determining the reduction of minimum lot size, the progress of the road to date, and the feasibility of lifting the pro- cessing halt in the 3-F Meadows area. Allen Campbell, representing the applicant, spoke in support of ap- proving the request and noted his concurrence with the recommended conditions. Jennie Lee, applicant, also spoke in support of approving the land division. • Re: Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83 (Lee) Dick Davis, area property owner, commented on the progress of the road and indicated his intention to pave the road prior to the upcom- ing winter. No one else appeared on the matter. LAWRENCE STEVENSRAY L. ARDEN Planning Director C ' ty Ma ger • 2 Fn CITY OF ATASCADERO 1918 ril°" P 19?g Planning Department September 19, 1983 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AT 1-83 LOCATION: 10800 San Marcos Road (Ptn. Lot 3 , Block 41) APPLICANT: Jennie Lee (Twin Cities Engineering) - REQUEST: To allow resubdivision of a previously created parcel con- taining 15.14 acres of land into four parcels of 3.8 acres each, employing the minimum lot size reduction adjustment. PAST ACTION At their September 6, 1983 meeting, the Planning Commission tentative- ly recommended approval of this project, including a requested Adjust- ment to the minimum lot size, pending a recommendation to lift the processing halt for the 3-F Meadows region. Findings and Conditions of approval have been prepared to implement that recommendation. BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: RS (Residential Suburban) 2. General Plan: Suburban Single Family Residential 3. Environmental Determination: An Initial Study Environmental De- scription form has been completed by the applicant. The Planning Director has prepared a draft Conditional Negative Declaration indicating the project will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment if certain mitigation measures are incorpora- ted into the project. 4. Site Conditions: The lot is generally rectangularly shaped and located on San Marcos Road. The topography is varied with slight- ly hilly terrain along the road frontage of the lot changing to steep slope farthest from the road. Vegetation consists of chap- paral and chemise. Some of the vegetation has been removed by the applicant to investigate the possibility of four building sites. San Marcos Road is improved along the frontage of this site but not completed down to Highway 41. Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83 (Lee) 5. Project Description: The applicant requests permission to divide a previously created parcel containing 15.14 acres of land into four parcels of 3.8 acres each. The proposed- lot design would create four rectangular parcels approximately 750 feet deep each with approximately 220 feet of frontage on San Marcos Road. Each lot proposed would have access by a driveway directly onto the road. 6. Determination of Minimum Lot Size: The review of the five gener- alized performance criteria (Section 9-3.144) for this specific parcel establishes a minimum lot size as follows: Lot Size Factor Average slope (27.34%) 1. 25 Distance from center (14 - 16,000) . 50 Access (paved, 15% slope) .40 Septic suitability (severe) 1. 50 General neighborhood character (4.06 acres) . 80 required minimum lot size: 4.45 acres Since this minimum lot size will not permit creation of four par- cels on 15.14 acres of land, the applicant has submitted addition- al required information for an adjustment. An adjustment, if granted, would permit up to a 20% reduction in the minimum lot size to 3 . 56 acres allowing the applicant to create four parcels. 7. Subdivision Review Board: On August 4, 1983 the Subdivision Re- view Board met with the applicant, Jennie Lee, and her engineer, John Kennaly, to review this project. Members of the Board in attendance were: Larry Stevens, Planning Director; Larry McPher- son, Public Works Director; Mike Sherer, Planning Commissioner ; and Fred Buss, Associate Planner. Discussion centered around the adjustment process and the need for the following additional material: a) plans indicating the proposed building sites including the average slope of the building sites b) proposed location of the septic systems c) preliminary plan and profile drawings of driveways including slope d) preliminary grading plan for building sites and driveways e) additionally, the fire hydrant to the north will be required to be upgraded 8. Information for Adjustment to Minimum Lot Size: The additional information supplied indicates that the four proposed building pads are on the highest points of each of the proposed lots. Proposed Parcel A presents the least amount of earthwork and 2 Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83 (Lee) shortest driveway and, therefore, the least disturbance of all the parcels. The building site for Parcel A will require 30 cubic yards of cut and 30 cubic yards of fill on an 8% slope to create a 9000 square foot building pad. Parcel B will require 150 cubic yards of cut and 150 cubic yards of fill on a 10% slope to create a 10,000 square foot building pad. Parcel C will require 250 cubic yards of cut and 500 cubic yards of fill on a 10% slope to create a 9000 square foot building pad. Parcel D will require 525 cubic yards of cut and 525 cubic yards of fill on a 14% slope to create a 9000 square foot building pad. The driveway for Parcel A is 100 feet long requiring 95 cubic yards of cut and 95 cubic yards of fill for a maximum slope of 11%. Parcel B' s driveway is 270 feet long requiring 350 cubic yards of cut and 350 cubic yards of fill for a maximum slope of 12%. Parcel C' s driveway is 350 feet long requiring 500 cubic yards of cut and 250 cubic yards of fill for 'a maximum slope of 9%. Parcel D' s driveway is 320 feet long requiring 300 cubic yards of cut and 300 cubic yards of fill for ',a maximum slope of 15%. Each parcel has 1600 square feet of leach field area proposed with a 100% expansion area. The leach field for Parcel A is proposed 30 feet away from the building pad on an 8% slope. For Parcel B, the field is 20 feet away from the pad on a 10% slope. Parcel C proposes 30 feet away on a 10% slope, and Parcel D proposes 105 feet away on an 11% slope. The expansion fields for these systems are all located farther -away and Parcel B' s is located in a dif- ferent direction. ANALYSIS Before an Adjustment can be granted, Section 9-3.144 (c) (2) requires that certain specified Findings be made by the Planning Commission. Since creation of four lots is dependent upon the adjustment, Staff' s review of the project must consider each Findings. Review of the specific data submitted indicates a lot with varied topography. The front half of the lot contains moderate terrain with slopes ranging from 8% to upwards of 20%. The rear half of the lot drops over the side of the hill with slopes in excess of 40%. Each proposed parcel offers a 9000 square foot graded building pad on slopes between 8% and 14%. Space appears to be provided in areas with less than 20% slope for large conventional leach field septic systems for each parcel. Driveways to Parcels B,', C and D, however, will require a total of 2050 cubic yards of earthwork (this includes total cut and total fill) . Total earthwork for the proposed project (all driveways and building pads) will entail 4400 cubic yards of grading, which is an average of 1100 cubic yards per proposed lot. Proposed Parcel D requires the most earthwork and has the second long- est and steepest driveway. 3 Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83 (Lee) General Plan residential policies encourage minimizing disruption to native vegetation and watersheds; efficient layout of access and utilities; and preservation of trees, watersheds, natural slopes and other natural amenities from abuse and destruction resulting from poor design and development practices. It appears that the specific information submitted demonstrates large, relatively flat building sites and areas for leach fields on this par- cel. The neighboring lots (under 25 acres) within a 1500 foot radius average approximately 4. 06 acres making the request for 3. 8 acre lots within the realm of reason (6% smaller than the average neighboring lots and equivalent to a 15% reduction adjustment) . Staff' s major concern is the amount of grading required. Most of the grading is the result of the driveways. It may be advantageous to reassess the loca- tion of the building sites or the alignment of the individual drive- ways (by sharing common driveways) . It should be recognized that the applicant is not limited to these grading and driveway plans which should be viewed as a feasibility analysis. This project does present significant circumstances relating to shape, topography and surroundings that would warrant an adjustment. Staff feels that the specific information submitted indicates that four lots can be created with some minor modifications without adversely impact- ing the site. It should also be pointed out that parcel maps in the 3-F Meadows area are not being processed until certain access problems are corrected. The only two maps to be processed involve a 31 lot subdivision (Lang- ford) and a four lot land division for the owner of the majority of the undeveloped land in -the area (Davis) . Both include conditions requiring road improvements to Highway 41. The Davis Map has been recorded and an agreement with performance guarantees has been entered into. The Langford Map has not been recorded. It is Staff' s under- standing that the processing halt remain in effect until the road is completed. At the present time the road is graded nearly to Highway 41, where access is still restricted. There is the possibility that paving will begin in a week or two, but there is some question about whether or not the entire road will be improved this year. Since it is impractical to require major off-site improvements on smaller land dividers such as this, the processing halt should remain in effect until road improvements required for the Davis and Langford Maps are completed. FINDINGS 1. There are circumstances applicable to the property including shape, topography and surroundings which warrant use of specific site information rather than generalized area information in determining lot size. 4 Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83 (Lee) 2. The specific site information submitted clearly demonstrates that the Adjustment in lot size is warranted. 3. The granting of the Adjustment will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons, be materially detrimental to the pub- lic welfare, or be injurious to nearby property or improvements. 4. The granting of the Adjustment and approval of the Tentative Par- cel Map is consistent with the General Plan and with applicable zoning regulations. 5. The application, together with the recommendedconditions, will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not necessary. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above Findings, the Planning Department recommends: A) Issuance of a Conditional Negative Declaration as follows: 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for drainage and erosion control and protection in conjunction with site development. 2. Adequate provision shall be made in the design of the pri- vate sewage disposal systems to minimize effects on natural water courses. 3. Adequate and sufficient tests shall be performed on each lot to ensure septic suitability at each building site. 4. Grading and tree removal shall be minimized during all phases of site development. 5. Adequate provisions shall be made to minimize fire hazards in conjunction with site development; and, B) Approval of an Adjustment to the minimum lot size and of Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83 as submitted, subject to the following conditions: 1. Private sewage disposal systems will be an acceptable method of sewage disposal if reports and designs are acceptable. All tests, reports and designs shall conform to methods and guidelines prescribed by the Manual of Septic Tank Practice and other applicable City ordinances. The following Note shall appear on the Final Map: "Appropriate soils reports including a percolation test, a test to determine the presence of ground water , and a log of a soil boring to a minimum depth of ten (10) feet shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Where soils reports indicate that conven- 5 i • Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83 (Lee) tional soil absorption systems are not acceptable, City ap- proval of plans for an alternative private sewage disposal 10 system, designed by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be re- quired. Depending upon the system, more restrictive require- ments may be imposed. " 2. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Com- pany and water lines shall exist at the frontage of all par- cels prior to filing of the Final Map. 3. All other available utilities not already in place shall be extended underground to each parcel frontage at the time of building permit. Any utility easements are to be shown on the Final Map. 4. Efforts shall be made to minimize grading that would be dis- ruptive to the natural topography and removal of existing, mature trees. The following shall appear as a Note on the Final Map: "No trees shall be removed without compliance with applicable City ordinances. No grading shall commence without an appro- priate permit and compliance with applicable City ordinances. 5. Drainage and erosion control plans, prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits in conjunction with installation of private driveways, access easement or buildings. 6 . Plan and profile drawings of proposed individual driveway(s) and driveway easements shall be submitted for approval by the Public Works and Planning Departments in order to determine average grade and appropriate improvement requirements. If average slope exceeds 12%, paved improvement would be a re- quirement at the time of application for a building permit. Otherwise, an all-weather surface would be required similar- ly. In no event will driveways be allowed which exceed 20% in slope. The driveway access shall be improved to a minimum width of twelve (12) feet and shall have a minimum unobstruc- ted vertical clearance of fourteen (14) feet. Notes to these effects shall appear on the Final Map. 7. Roof materials for all structures shall be Class C rating or better and a Note to that effect shall appear on the Final Map. B. All pipelines and other easements of record shall be shown on the Final Map. A letter shall be submitted from each utility company indicating the nature and extent of any building re- strictions. A Note stating any such restrictions shall ap- pear on the Final Map. 6 0 • Tentative Tract Map AT 1-83 (Lee) 9. Drainage swales shall be indicated on the Final Map and a Note shall appear on the Final Map which states: "Any modification of the ground during site development with- in fifty (50) feet of the drainage swales shall be subject to approval by the Planning and Public Works Departments." 10. The existing fire hydrant nearest the property shall be up- graded from a wharfhead to a steamer if required by the Fire Chief after a review of hydrant standards with the Planning Director. 11. All conditions herein specified shall be complied with prior to filing of the Final Map. 12. A Final Map in compliance with all conditions set forth here- in shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordi- nance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners cre- ated and a Registered Civil Engineer or licensed land surveyor shall submit a letter certifying that the mon- uments have been set prior to recordation of the Final Map. b. A recently updated preliminary title '" report shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the Final Map. 13. 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 expira- tion date. ACTION The Planning Commission should, by motion, directStaff as deemed appropriate. REPORT PREPARED BY: RED BUS Associate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: Atf� . LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director 7 7 6 c 9 RJ 40 OS sp to I I + le 19 12 i J 20 p,�00 �S w 4.1 12 q (0� J /06/5 19 Tows 33 13 3 "ski /oG35 17 �O6SS /4635 34 0 7 14 16 loc. vs /OG�p S 15 A '0 35 c �o G 6 44 jOb9'� A vy SS /'O&fo /0700 38A 3 43 38 37 36 3 10-705 ' 41 /0725 a, O /0720 A 39 I .5 .2A /071 10150 0755 4 45 A _ /O i07SJt 42 A 40 �� B .018C i (020° ep�.l B 25 3 10805, ... 3 1 Ti . � R5 SPD 2 .. D 10855 _ 2 , or 4 •r ta'h.tebx tsrti:iea.FAtc aip.iNpicctnq talay.zont»yl 00 - '1o`� /� .6 {itl1CB 3..j}.t�lf tACir.ty Gpl.t32,lf.lM.!'E'YSGSJdi:iOltrHO tWQ :"� OS 47 t yr Yx+cz"AX AscA.x�a as:aceto>»-'Dra m".no ftaeapssaz m.TirAr(27 Ml8 tDt yes.f.ii 3waw.aau sitr+tOn 'hv,3sfgil+xae s.crloa ftF:7�7..a - Ci'� z ' 64wz. Fsr�ci.�t ;ra e3.ao Di:we+r : '' /v�C(D �Y�N /y/A�cvs �z•�o Si.i�t .t����„Y- w�• ss�.-��:#�'�tY.az�� `2-E,CI Y OF ATASI DERO A�j/ , r tanning �e ar �ner� FO.3 �3x`}79; CAD �-� _ Map No. 1 4 2U11 400 wan _ o ti Ilqu 1130 S 9090' - 2tQ p5 5443'• S y y IN Z � w �p �OoO�yaIN •A�I� A\ 10�1��� ic` `c�� o � r i Cl) f - �1 i s i i W r 4 I _ it 1 I p o j / v I I I i \J � i a a o j v j J o c a y NZ I a d i { tc 1f V L-- I 1 i I `V I '\ 430 ¢90 \ _ /mss mg s t /s/p 4� t k' L 8% r v s 9000 + .; Sit/ ' JY ?CoS W' - .: .:6+ iHi -7.1S.j 1 � /vPe qa CN •yd. ct�t, }alt ! Ily 9000 sf b'1//,711>;y 250 c.y. eu rfhr work Y . _ ��� i 5z tl z 9890' 544 ' ZlJ - ' All! Coif Fi'// a70 't PAP,L - B Ulm/Q//7 T� ' =l�� 3$O Cc(. yd S/ ,, Fitt 16005, /each /,nPs /G 000 /000 c,y.SCALE 1001= fG01 .ate .. '£• - ..:row.eery.-,e�.�a.•_:-raco'.�.-+.�...,.�-3.�� .-+��:.:�a..�«;�..._.- ._. .� .:r>-..^.+..r�c,...�.,._.s ..-,yam:,.. . c -�>-w f t,r -- �� � � . ;905� � .�,�, -�.•��-., clz?00 Y wo r �-..5 ��# X kV..t. /'^,-_: � ` , -r4Y+?'• f SCP`.- 1590 J 98.90' Yo4 CO C-C4 +��'',��"ray .,w�� f••^-.r - -� ,t•n ,� ,T^��' - t _ 1 '.,, �s>>.,•c„ .2.50 c..tt A.1 +`' _'�- ` boc Ccs. yol. cul' s7`e /OZ _ r 9000 /50 0 c c�, earfh�or E Y,.* 'F�. - �'S;,•crit -w ' ^...-"*.>._; :a-.ur.. ,,.• .. ; .^?• _.,yrs' ' •�..t?P.r?�'Sd"ss3' ;Cva' 1q�" _ •'Ss.-f ''-'`fiver wr:RRSC;-ns.*� .r 13rs ; bio � \�—� \ \ \•, �_ _ v i rN ail 98 �- cif �F•/i 3.2-a ± sr•'2.'p �//1 /n/r/ �I /�/�/�l� C� L ,D RcLISc PA4 00 /1 0 .57 bUi/din y Sif� /65C� C,� 2firfhU.1�r� sAcr 4 �3 'Em MEMORANDUM • TO: CITY MANAGER September 20 , 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CC 2-83 LOCATION: 6720 Los Gatos Road (Ptn. Lot 35, Block 15) APPLICANT: Connie Latham REQUEST: Legalization of a lot split that occurred in 1977 through the Certificate of Compliance process. On September 19, 1983, the Planning Commission reviewed the subject matter unanimously approving a conditional certificate of compliance subject to Conditions 1-12 as set forth in the attached Staff Report. • There was only brief discussion among the Commission . No one appeared on the matter. LAWRENCE STEVENS MU Y L/WARDEN Planning Director C' ty Ma ger; Ps • r����.A'� rah r• CITY OF ATASCADERO isis Planning Department September 19, 1983 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CC 2-83- LOCATION: 6720 Los Gatos Road (Ptn. Lot 35, Block 15) APPLICANT: Connie Latham - REQUEST: Legalization of a lot split that occurred in 1977 through the Certificate of Compliance process. BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: RS (Residential Suburban) 2. General Plan: Suburban Single Family Residential 3. Environmental Determination: The Planning Director has determined that this project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . 4. Site Conditions: Site topography is generally a moderately (ap- proximately 5% slope) sloping hillside covered with natural grasses. A "fence" of trees and shrubs crosses the width of the lot. A large swale is parallel to and near the front property line. A shed with a raised deck and a motorhome currently exist on the site illegally. There is also an easement across Lot 44 which serves as access to the site. 5. Project Description: The applicant desires to legalize a lot div- ision that occurred in 1977. The lot was split by deed action only and sold to a party who in turn sold it to another party who sold it to the applicant (Huffman Sr. to Huffman Jr. to Gordon to Latham) . The applicant acquired this property in 1980. 6. Subdivision Review Board: On September 1, 1983 the Subdivision Review Board met with the applicant, Connie Latham and her hus- band, Terry Latham, to review the project. Members of the Board in attendance were: Larry McPherson, Public Works Director; Fred Buss, Associate Planner; Michele Reynolds, Assistant Civil Engin- eer; Mike McCain, Fire Captain; and Shirley Moore, Planning Com- missioner. Discussion centered around the types of general re- quirements that would be placed on this Conditional Certificate of Compliance: • Certificate of Compliance CC 2-83 (Latham) a) Conditions would be applicable at time of building permit only. b) Private sewage disposal systems may require design by a Registered Civil Engineer if conventional soil absorption systems are not acceptable. c) Drainage and erosion control plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer may be required in conjunction with driveway improvements. d) The driveway may need to be upgraded to a minimum 12 foot width and 14 foot vertical clearance - plan and profile draw- ings shall be submitted for approval and paving will be re- quired if average grade exceeds 12%, otherwise, an all-weath- er surface would be required. e) Roof materials for any structures shall be Class C rating or better. f) Any easements of record shall be recorded. ' ANALYSIS Section 66499.35 (b) of the California Government Code requires a City to issue a Certificate of Compliance or Conditional Certificate of Compliance when it finds that a property has been divided without compliance to the Subdivision Map Act and/or local ordinances. This section also permits the local agency (the City) to ''impose such condi- tions as would have been applicable to the division of the property at the time the applicant acquired her interest therein, and which had been established at such time by the Map Act or local ordinance. Since the City Lot Division Ordinance is the same now as it was in 1977, most of the conditions required of today' s '';lot splits are the same as would have been required at that time. Therefore, Staff has used some of the standard conditions in conditioning the certificate. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends approval of a Conditional Certifi- cate of Compliance, subject to the following conditions: 1. Private sewage disposal systems will be an acceptable method of sewage disposal if reports and designs are acceptable. All tests, reports and designs shall conform to methods and guidelines pre- scribed by the Manual of Septic Tank Practice and other applicable City ordinances. The following Note shall apply to any develop- ment on the site: 2 • 0 Certificate of Compliance CC 2-83 (Latham) "Appropriate soils reports including a percolation test, a test to determine the presence of ground water, and a log of a soil boring to a minimum depth of ten (10) feet shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a buildng permit. Where soils reports indicate that conventional soil absorption systems are not acceptable, City approval of plans for an alter- native private sewage disposal system, designed by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be required. Depending upon the system, more restrictive requirements may be imposed. " 2. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and all other utilities not already in place shall be extended underground at time of building permit. 3. No trees shall be removed without compliance with applicable City ordinances and no grading shall commence without an appropriate permit and compliance with all applicable City ordinances. 4. Drainage and erosion control plans, prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Plan- ning Department prior to issuance of building permits in conjunc- tion with installation of private driveways, access easement or buildings. 5. Plan and profile drawings of the existing driveway and driveway easements shall be submitted for approval by the Public Works and Planning Departments in order to determine average grade and ap- propriate improvement requirements. If average slope exceeds 12%, paved improvement would be a requirement at the time of applica- tion for a building -permit. Otherwise, an all-weather surface would be required similarly. In no event will driveways be allowed which exceed 20% in slope. The driveway access shall be improved to a minimum width of twelve (12) feet and shall have a minimum unobstructed vertical clearance of fourteen (14) feet. 6 . Roof materials for all structures shall be Class C rating or better. 7. All pipelines and other easements of record shall be recorded with the Certificate of Compliance. Any building restrictions appli- cable to these easements shall also be noted on the Certificate. 8. Any modification of the ground during site development within fifty (50) feet of the drainage swales shall be subject to approval by the Planning and Public Works Departments. 9. The Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall not be approved for recordation until existing building and zoning violations have been corrected. 10 . All conditions herein specified shall be specified on the Condi- tional Certificate of Compliance and all development related con- ditions shall be complied with at time of development of the parcel. 3 • 0 Certificate of Compliance CC 2-83 (Latham) 11. The Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall be submitted for review and approval prior to recordation. a. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit- ted for review in conjunction with processing the Condition- al Certificate of Compliance. b. Monuments shall be set at all property corners and a Regis- tered Civil Engineer or licensed land surveyor shall submit a letter certifying that the monuments have been set prior to recordation of the Conditional Certificate of Compliance. 12. Approval of this Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall ex- pire one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. ACTION The Planning Commission should, by motion, direct Staff as deemed appropriate. REPORT PREPARED BY: FRED BUSS Associate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: '`!`" LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director Ps 4 33 5S5o 5905 \ v 34 ° 37_ m 35 0 -4 o nil , 40 41 23 38 22 �� o 39 si \ 21 w o�� s u 5 ` 20 a i 9,,\45 q 1 `0 ,025 26 ' 19 P _019 26-A _ / 1-p e 18 01 52 lathy 27i 1f7 ` m ,` X55 lv (i13h In, a - %0 28 / cP1r3 50 b 56 Z pyo 0 ;a ,u 10� (y22� l49 �3� Vico 37 000 29 48 ♦... ,SITE 7 10'��f7 30 8c�s 46 , l0 31 45 o - 3 rfe 5 032 ' / - 4 (0750 Oz , , cv o L9 33 9 � ��_�' 24 t 43 6�jC)5 Prot z 25 yaq `OV 15 Ap in 5 41 42 0 0 N 2 (PIP so 3�o, 26 0 (oCO�� 895 40 27 1 2`OY 0 ,o_ X705 36 g Pv s '4 29 QOR 9 : 12 \ g 39-A O I° 37 ggoo a \13 Q 39-8 E IN 37-A asso ' RJ y70O38-A VVV n 38-8 20 i j�v/N!r yNO� L/'ncvtrrcti' `� 2 T7r CI- clow04,ow,Czv"i 38 /` 6905 &7.010 &s C-A7DS /Qat ►� e t _i.lg Departmen t $TyJ, �_f+tAby'cszatlaa�6at wpiettoq.t�rlouafatiwK e tiuuYlyatio�a is Mon xq .ie',,:sesiN.e[t%,G4"4sirw ?x�wv7a�ssr<ci1stYP.4 t0t416 i.lii►rau,:oluHc euvs i 2Z IM statl es,.;.t - - ti 1A1l1{gRA t9 'A .0• ma SCADERO (o 6; QP \ 42 O �Q 43 a d 2.20AG \` 1.54 AC m\ V E PARK RES. � � Z7�1.o8 2 �Ac z5 I2 3A Ta © � ® 258.09-~ 3� v f O a 6 45 N K �,9, 41 REA 1.39 AC Nm F a'_.o 4.81 AC D�0 r o M 27 23 P7 5 46 X22- 1.25 AC �O i \ 24gag m N 55\ A 5 z9) N, 9° 13 _22 tUN 4 4 7�\ Z I 2.43 AC. p ,N a FR .SAO � 2.30 AC. 31 a. 15 30 a Oro � -fa 34 2 32 I4 35 m 4.0 A C. ID o.No oo O A 0 33 3 6.45 AG h'n e� • � 9 9 O 32 8.46 AC 6.4r \2 � �.�o Los ,r Lar35, Br..o� %5 PM.6-82 q�•55 ROAD SAN �ABRIE� �847 5 ^ THIS MAP IS FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY. 0 EE TH.__ X13 M E M O R A N D U M • ` TO: CITY MANAGER September 20 , 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CC 3-83 LOCATION: 6698 Los Gatos Road (Ptn. Lot 44 , Block 15) APPLICANT: Marie Washabaugh REQUEST: Legalization of a lot split that occurred in 1977 through the Certificate of Compliance process. On September 19 , 1983, the Planning Commission reviewed the subject matter unanimously approving a conditional certificate of compliance subject to Conditions 1-3 as set forth in the attached Staff Report. • There was only brief discussion among the Commission . No one appeared on the matter . Z4U464 Zkf'- 5�7 LAWRENCE STEVENS 4MURY L. ARDENPlanning Director ana�er Ps • 1918 CITY OF ATASCADERO r c ia�a Planning .Department September 19, 1983 • STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CC 3-83 LOCATION: 6698 Los Gatos Road (Ptn. Lot 44 , Block 15) APPLICANT: Marie Washabaugh - REQUEST: Legalization of a lot split that occurred in 1977 through the Certificate of Compliance process. BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: RS (Residential Suburban) 2. General Plan: Suburban Single Family Residential 3. Environmental Determination: The Planning Director has determined that this project is categorically exempt from the requirements of • the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . 4. Site Conditions: This lot is fully developed with a single family residence. Vegetation consists of residential landscaping. Topo- graphy is a moderately sloping lot that has a large swale parallel to and near the rear property line. 5. Project Description: The applicant desires to legalize a lot div- ision that occurred in 1977. The lot was split by deed action only and then sold to the applicant (Huffman to Washabaugh) . The applicant acquired the property in 1979 and received a building permit for the house in the same year. 6. Subdivision Review Board: On September 1, 1983 the Subdivision Review Board met with the applicant, Marie Washabaugh, to review the project. Members of the Board in attendance were: Larry Mc- Pherson, Public Works Director; Fred Buss, Associate Planner; Michele Reynolds, Assistant Civil Engineer ; Mike McCain, Fire Captain; and Shirley Moore, Planning Commissioner. Discussion by the Board indicated no requirements would be placed on the Certi- ficate since this was a fully developed lot. • Certificate of Compliance CC 3-83 (Washabaugh) ANALYSIS Section 66499.35 (b) of the California Government Code requires a City to issue a Certificate of Compliance or Conditional Certificate of Compliance when it finds that a property has been divided without com- pliance to the Subdivision Map Act and/or local ordinances. Since Staff has determined that this site is already fully developed, no conditions have been applied to this Certificate of Compliance. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends approval of a Conditional Certifi- cate of Compliance, subject to the following conditions: 1. All pipelines and other easements of record shall be recorded with the Certificate of Compliance. Any building restrictions appli- cable to these easements shall also be noted on the Certificate. 2. The Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall be submitted for review and approval prior to recordation. a. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit- ted for review in conjunction with processing the Conditional Certificate of Compliance. b. Monuments shall be set at all property corners and a Regis- tered Civil Engineer or licensed land surveyor shall submit a letter certifying that the monuments have been set prior to recordation of the Conditional Certificate of Compliance. 3. Approval of this Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall ex- pire one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. ACTION The Planning Commission should, by motion, direct Staff as deemed appropriate. REPORT PREPARED FRED BUSS sociate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: ►'^� /JLV' LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director 2 ;SCADERO (04 p4 Tel - r •� 43 C x.54 Qri'.� 2.20AG s�° m ,E PARK RES. Z7 08 A ,.8., 1 / 4 lcbAC z5 12 05 16 0 w � y 0 45 \3 N �`9 41 REA 1.39 Ac off: F.., 4.81 AC 6�$q N c �� 27 h 23 3. 9 �s B P 7 !� 46 ��2_ L25AC0E t• w � � � N 5� Z �\\ 24 ,0 4 22 4 2.43 AC. 000.8 3 FR ,Z� 2 2.30 AC. 15 31 05 26 30 Sze aA N h° O ° 'a \.034 32 I4 35 Q 2 4.0 A C. o 4- 33 e�2 53• �' 6.45 AG A'�45.ti' e� 9 0 32 8.46 AC 6.4rC.,rM Of CcM iAM`.E CC 3-83 2 �� GA's ��rvs- v IPN 407 41 Leek- PM.6"82 ,Ori,5S ROAD (2p) c - ��- �AORIEL 1 ; SAN 28,47 S �19 THIS MAP IS FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY. *! ANDA Ta ► • MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL September 20 , 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Acceptance of LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LA 830517 :1 LOCATION: 10210 Atascadero Avenue (Ptn. Lot 3 , Block 33) APPLICANT: George and Christine French On June 27, 1983 , the City Council approved Lot Line Adjustment LA 830517 :1 which adjusted existing lot lines to add property to the lot and subtract property from the adjacent lot, subject to certain condi- tions and in concurrence with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. The zoning is RS and the General Plan designation is Suburban Single Family Residential. Staff review has determined that all conditions of approval have been met. On September 19, 1983 , the Planning Com- mission reviewed the matter on its consent calendar and recommended acceptance of the Final Map. ciowlKlc /J&_1 LAWRENCE STEVENS MURRAY L. WARDEN Planning Director City Manager Ps • 55 . N B•20 00 VV 300.00• 0 m Z �� . o `1 �j n 00 U o m -<< \ I\ V M o n o o 0 0 °oI io m O 0 T > p Np D m O D y JN❑ r v o L 0 0 ID 'aa n 0.. f N B'20'0(YW 197.95' FDo J 22f- 80.05 2 BooZ 10 m 3. � o Coll - N J O K SZ tX- o,tom, N N 0.D i} \ r _�O N \ Oa N O f ntnU N ` �-�, .6, In I (n ru A ° m _ _ NO v 3n co nor ` D m A J f N mo ZZ y m n =n�r 7 D D Z5 0 0 0° PI c = Y Z v m n y m n O R - v n 0 0^ n so Ov m 0 0 G, Amnon O � n0' moo m �0 vwOOOO in ��u. ODW JN rJry OO1° O O t.] ° n?0�� m • m _ m ^i a o 3 o J o anon° v� 3. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING MrFING AG—_NDA POST OFFICE BOX 747 HEM ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93423 ��e��+. PHONE: (805) 466.6000 CITY COUNCIL CITY CLERK CITY TREASURER CITY MANAGER INCORPORATED JULY 2, 1979 FINANCE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT RECREATION DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422 PHONE: (805) 466-2141 REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY For the Council Meeting of September 26, 1983 No. 25 1. REPORT OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES LEGAL ADVOCACY COMMITTEE • At its regular meeting on July 8, the Legal Advocacy Committee reviewed some 40 cases of significance to cities. The Committee urged city attor- neys to consider joining as amici in the following noted cases: a. Kershaw v. City of Berkeley This case is now pending in the State Court of Appeal and involves the question of whether cities may bring an action for attorneys' fees to recover the cost of defending frivolous lawsuits:. The League has adopted a policy position in favor of such a result] and legislation is pending. The number of frivolous lawsuits filed against public agencies is a growing concern. b. Yost v. Thomas This case is now pending before the State Supreme Court and involves the question of whether land use designations adopted in the coastal zone are subject to referendum. The Court of Appeal held that a gen- eral plan amendment, a specific plan, and a zoning ordinance adopted by the Santa Barbara City Council in connection with the development of a proposed hotel and conference center in the protected coastal zone were not subject to local referendum. The League Board has recommended that consenting cities participate as amici in support of Santa Barbara in upholding the appellate decision. • REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY No. 25 - Page 2 • Other cases called to our attention by the Legal Advocacy Committee include: C. Pasadena Police Officers Association v. City of Pasadena In this case the trial court upheld the validity of certain amendments of the Pasadena charter which modified how the cost of living increases applicable to pension benefits are paid to retired police officers and firefighters. The case is now pending in the Appellate Court. The case involves the validity of charter amendments altering the retire- ment system and the cost of living increases, and whether these amend- ments deprive any member of the system of any earned benefits or of any vested contract or pension rights. d. Ad Hoc Committee for Nuclear Disarmament v. City of Novato This is a summary judgment action now pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The suit challenges the constitutionality under the First Amendment of the Novato city code 's special events permit ordinances. These ordinances require that a permit be obtained from the city for special events which encroach on the street right-of-way; e.g. parades. These ordinances specify that a designated city official impose as a permit requirement that the permittee obtain liability insurance indemnifying the city, and pay the actual cost of police and traffic control. • e. Watson v. City of Redding This case is now pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. It involves the issue of locational require- ments for adult entertainment establishments. The City of Redding regulates adult entertainment businesses by restricting locations to C-3 districts. Within C-3 districts, an adult entertainment business may not be located closer than 400 feet to any residential district or occupied residential structure, nor closer than 600 feet to any hospital, school, church, etc. , nor closer than 1,000 feet to any other adult entertainment business. The court found these seemingly standard locational requirements of doubtful validity and granted plaintiff 's preliminary injunction. The court held that the four or five possible areas within the City of Redding in which an adult en- tertainment business might locate were not a sufficient number and constituted a suppression or at least a great restriction of access to lawful speech. f. Figuera v. Board of Public Employees Retirement System This case is now pending in the Superior Court of San Francisco. It involves a determination of the manner in which "final compensation" is to be calculated under 5 20022 of the Government Code for purposes of calculating retirement benefits. These controversies involve uni- form allowances and other related benefits. • i REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY No. 25 - Page 3 g. Claremont Communications, Inc. v. City of Claremont This action is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central Dis- trict of California. The issue involved is whether cities have any power whatsoever to regulate or franchise cable television companies, except as necessary to assure adequacy of the repatching job on city streets. Plaintiffs charge that Claremont's regulations on franchises violate the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution, as well as the Supremacy Clause and the Civil Rights Act. h. Cinevision Corp. v. City of Burbank This is a U.S. District Court case for the Central District of Cali- fornia, which awarded actual and punitive damages for violation of First Amendment rights against the City of Burbank and a former city councilman as a result of the city's refusal to permit rock perfor- mances by certain groups. The case has been appealed by both sides to the Circuit Court of Appeal. i. City of Rialto v. San Bernardino Superior Court This case is now pending on appeal before the State Court of Appeal. The issues considered by the Superior Court concerned allegations by the real parties in interest that they should be relieved of their obligations to pay any and all assessments levied upon their real property in the city pursuant to the City of Rialto's sewer improve- ment district. They contended that these assessments violate the one percent limitation imposed by Proposition 13. 2. RECENT DECISIONS OF INTEREST a. State Law Preempts County Pesticide Ordinance The C.A. 1st has held that state law preempted a county ordinance ban- ning aerial spraying of phenoxy herbicides. The voters of the County of Mendocino had passed an initiative measure banning the aerial spray- ing of any substance containing the chemical dioxin. The Appellate Court declared the law invalid. (People v. County of Mendocino, C.A. 1st, May 20, 1983.) b. Court Permits Holding of City Organization Election The C.A. 1st has held that the District Reorganization Act permits holding an election on the organization of a new city upon the petition of five percent of the area's voters despite the 25 'percent requirement of the Municipal Organization Act. (Horwath v. LAFCO, C.A. 1st, May 20, 1983.) REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY No. 25 - Page 4 c. City Sign Ordinance Held Unconstitutional The C.A. 4th has held a city ordinance regulating the size and location of signs to be unconstitutional on its face. The ordinance would have prohibited an Aztec Indian mural on a building wall. (City of Indio v. Arroyo, C.A. 4th, May 19, 1983.) d. Age Limitation for Deputy Sheriffs Struck Down The U.S.C.A. 9th has held that a county policy that all new deputy sheriffs be under 35 years of age violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. (EEOC v. County of Los Angeles, U.S.C.A. 9th, May 26, 1983.) e. City Demolition Law Held Unconstitutional The C.A. 2nd has held the demolition permit provisions of Santa Monica's rent control law unconstitutional. The ordinance required a landlord to obtain a permit before demolishing a rental building. The court said that the landlord had a right to go out of business if he wanted to do so. (Nash v. City of Santa Monica, C.A. 2nd, May 25, 1983.) f. Sports Events License Tax Held Proper The C.A. lst has upheld the sports events license tax imposed by the City of Berkeley on professional sporting events. It would be appli- cable to the Raiders--an annual license tax of 10 percent of gross receipts. (City of Berkeley v. Oakland Raiders, C.A. 1st, June 3, 1983.) g. Cities Have the Right to Regulate Pawnshops The C.A. 1st has held that state law did not preempt further municipal regulation of pawnshops. Such regulation must be supplementary to and not in conflict with state law. (Miller v. Murphy, C.A. 1st, May 26, 1983. ) h. Child Molester Allowed to Retain His Navy Job The U.S.C.A. 9th has held that a convicted child molester was improp- erly fired from his job with the U.S. Navy, as it had not been shown that his off-work activities would interfere with his efficiency on the job. The official who presided at a Merit Systems Protection Board hearing ordered him reinstated, as there was "not a scintilla of evidence" that his misconduct had affected his work. The board reviewed the ruling and sustained his removal. The court reversed and noted that federal law permits removal only for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service, and it bars discrimination against errant employees on the basis of conduct that does not adversely affect REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY No. 25 - Page 5 their job performance or that of other employees. (D.E. v. Department of the Navy, U.S.C.A. 9th, June 7, 1983.) i. City Had a Duty to Disclose Company's Financial Reports The C.A. 2nd has held that a city has a duty to disclose financial reports on which it based a grant of a rate increase requested by a waste disposal company. (San Gabriel Tribune v. Superior Court, C.A. 2nd, June 9, 1983.) j. Civil Rights Action Based on County "Custom" is OK The C.A. 5th has held that a civil rights action against the county could be based on its allegedly customary practices'. Claimant claimed that the county had a "policy and custom" of encouraging its agents "to harass and annoy certain citizens labeled as undesirable by it," of which she was apparently one. The trial court sustained a demurrer without leave to amend. The Appellate Court reversed. (Heffington v. County of Stanislaus, C.A. 5th, June 10, 1983.) k. Age Discrimination Statute Governs Civil Action Right The C.A. 2nd has held that the right to bring a civil action for age discrimination is governed by the administrative remedy procedures of the California Fair Employment Practices Act. (Strauss v. A.L. Randall Co. , Inc. , C.A. 2nd, June 16, 1983.) 1. Harmless Error Not Allowed in CEQA Matters The C.A. 3rd has held that a reviewing court may not apply a "harmless error" standard to failures to comply with procedures under the Cali- fornia Environmental Quality Act. The report did not consider appel- lant's proposal nor an involved annexation question'. (Rural Land Owners Association v. Lodi City Council, C.A. 3rd, June 16, 1983.) m. Administrative Exhaustion Unnecessary in Federal Suit The U.S.C.A. 9th has held that exhaustion of administrative remedies is not a prerequisite to a federal civil rights suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983. (Heath v. Cleary, U.S.C.A. 9th, June 17, 1983. ) n. City Properly Revoked Employee's Disability Retirement The State Supreme Court has held that a city properly revoked an em- ployee 's disability retirement when he became physically capable of performing the duties of a currently available position. After plain- tiff's retirement, the city created some light duty jobs in the Police Department. They then reexamined plaintiff and the doctor concluded that he could perform duties of a desk officer. The city retirement REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY No. 25 - Page 6 board then revoked his disability retirement on the ground that he was capable of performing the duties of a currently available position. He protested. The State Supreme Court said the city had the authority to do what it did. (Winslow v. City of Pasadena, Cal.Sup.Ct. , June 30, 1983. ) o. City and County Fire Departments are Immune From Negligence Liability The C.A. 5th has held that a city and county were immune from liability for fire amage to a building resulting from an improperly-closed water valve. This case relied on a prior case of Heieck & Moran v. City of Modesto, decided in the late 1950's, which this City Attorney handled. (New Hampshire Insurance Co. v. City of Madera, C.A. 5th, June 23, 1983. ) p. Improper Notice Given With Respect to Variance The C.A. 5th has held that a county public works department properly issued an order to stop work after issuing a building permit for a garage because the builder's neighbors had not been notified that the garage was going to be two stories high. Petitioners had obtained a building permit and a zoning variance to begin building a two-story addition to their home. The variance application and notice were sent to neighbors within 600 feet of them, but it described the addition as a garage. The planning commission's staff report referred only to the necessity for the proposed garage within side yard and front yard setbacks. At the. hearing before the planning commission, no one appeared in opposition to the variance and it was granted. The neigh- bors complained after they saw was was afoot. The trial court found in favor of petitioners and issued an order directing the county to withdraw the stop work order. The Appellate Court reversed, laying its whole decision on improper notice, saying "wholly inaccurate no- tice is no notice at all." From this conclusion, the court reached the conclusion that the variance and building permit were invalid and petitioners were without lawful right to construct their building. (It would look like an appeal to the Supreme Court might have been in order. The governmental agency gives the notice, not the appli- cant. It looks like the governmental agency is the one who erred.) (Drum v. Fresno County Department of Public Works, C.A. 5th, July 8, 1983. ) q. Minister Allowed at Legislative Sessions The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a state could pay a chaplain out of public funds to open its legislative sessions with prayer without violating the Establishment Clause of the Federal Constitution. (Marsh v. Chapters, U.S. Sup-Ct. , July 5, 1983.) REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY No. 25 - Page 7 r. Employees Must be Told the Subject of Proposed Disciplinary Interviews The U.S.C.A. 9th has held that the National Labor Relations Act requires employers to give employees advance notice of the topic of disciplinary interviews, so that the employees can have a pre-interview conference with union representatives. (Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. NLRM, U.S.C.A. 9th, July 9,1983.) s. Overtime Properly Excluded From Retirement Calculations The C.A. 1st has held that a county retirement association properly excluded uniform allowances, education incentive pay, and overtime from the compensation used to calculate a retired employee's benefits. (Guelfi v. Marin County Employees Retirement Association, C.A. 1st, July 22, 1983. ) t. Women 's Group Allowed to Canvass for Funds After Dark The C.A. 1st has held that a county ordinance prohibiting door-to-door soliciting after dark unconstitutionally infringed upon the First Amend- ment rights of a group involved with aiding battered wives. The county had passed an ordinance prohibiting soliciting or peddling after dark and included seeking donations for charitable causes in its definition of soliciting. (Alternatives for California Women,', Inc. v. County of Contra Costa, C.A. 1st, July 27, 1983. ) u. Damages Allowed for Inverse Condemnation The U.S.C.A. 9th has held that a landowner may bring an action in inverse condemnation and seek damages even though he or she has not submitted a development plan In its opinion, the court stated that appellants could conceivably recover damages for inverse condemnation. The court did not interpret the case of San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. City of San Diego (1981) 450 U.S. 621, as prohibiting damages for inverse condemnation, nor did it interpret the Agins case in that manner. The court found that appellants could recover damages also resulting from violations claimed under the Federal Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1983, 85-86, for overregulation of land. ' (Martino v. Santa Clara Water District, 83 D.J. D.A.R. 1067, U.S.C.A. 9th, April 14, 1983. ) V. Zoning Ordinance Held Unconstitutional as Applied The Court of Appeal has held that a zoning ordinance which deprives a property owner of substantially all reasonable use of his property is invalid. (North Sacramento Land Co. v. City of Sacramento, 140 C.A.3d 576, March 7, 1983.) REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY No. 25 - Page 8 3. PENDING LITIGATION a. Larrison v. City of Atascadero This is the third amended petition for writ of mandate filed by nine police officers to obtain merit increases in their salaries since completion of their probationary periods. The City has demurred to the previous petitions three times and has been successful each time. Petitioners' third amended petition is set for hearing on October 27, 1983. b. Gearhart v. City of Atascadero Kelly Gearhart has filed his third amended petition to force the City to grant him a permit to collect solid waste. The City's demurrers to two previous petitioners were successful. A hearing date has been set for October 28, 1983. 4. PENDING PROSECUTIONS a. People v. Brimage This prosecution for violation of zoning regulations and the building code was dismissed on August 23, 1983, after defendant had sold the property in question and the buildings on it had been demolished. b. People v. Russell This prosecution for violation of grading without a permit and cutting trees without a permit resulted in a court order for defendant to pay to the City a fine of $300 in lieu of 10 days in jail. As of September 12, 1L�efendart had complied with the order and the case is com- plete Respectfully LJ ALLEN GRIMES City Attorney AG:fr QET;N:� AG7yaA EM _M E_M O R A N_D_U_M i TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Adoption of Fiscal Year 1983-84 Budget DATE: September 22, 1983 Now that the State Legislature has resolved its differences with the Governor in providing subventions to 'cities for this year , your concerns about adopting a final budget :would appear to have been removed. Accordingly, I am submitting to you for your final approval our budget for Fiscal Year 1983-84.'; There are a couple of points that need your consideration, however. This year the State is correcting a previous removal of $25, 000 in three different subventions resulting in the adjusted Revenue Summary found on page one of the Budget Summary tagged as Revenue Bail-Out Reimbursement. This, in effect, restores the three small subventions previously removed. I have also added to the budget the difference between the past and present cost of annotating our legal codes ($275) and the cost of the annual up- date for the donated codes ($475) . The increased 'cost per year for maintaining the codes is now $200 .00. The third item is that during discussions at the last Council meeting on the Chamber General Plan policy, it appeared from the Staff' s standpoint, that some degree of confusion existed as to the purposes for the $9 ,000 which you had tentatively identified for removal during the budget study sessions. Because that $9,000 is to be used for providing an economic study and economic element program plan (previously considered as a part of the overall City/Chamber of Commerce effort) , I feel that it is a valuable adjunct to our planning base, therefore, am recommending that you reconsider your previous action and include the $9 ,000 in the Fiscal Year 1983-84 Budget. With these exceptions, I believe the final budget represents your viewpoints as previously expressed and I would, therefore, recommend its approval with the modifications noted above. RRA7Y . WARDEN MLW:ad • RESOLUTION NO. 41-83 RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL • APPROVING THE BUDGET FOR THE 1983-84 FISCAL YEAR AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED by the Atascadero City Council as follows : Section 1. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 37208 of the Government Code, that certain document entitled "Final Budget for the City of Atascadero for the Fiscal Year 1983-84" , dated September 26 , 1983, on file in the office of the Finance Director, is hereby approved as the final budget for the City of Atascadero for the fiscal year 1983-84 to the extent of the totals set forth for each function in the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Enterprise Fund, Reserves and totals set forth for each capital project and such shall constitute a preaudited register of demands. Section 2 . The City Manager, upon recommendation of the Finance Director, may transfer funds within, but not between, each of the functional appropriations of the General Funds as required to achieve the purpose of this function. Section 3. The Council, from time to time, by motion, may approve and authorize the payment of non-budgeted demands from appropriated funds; and may appropriate funds for budgeted or non- budgeted items, and any such appropriation for a non-budgeted item shall constitute an approval to issue a warrant in payment of a property demand or demands therefor. Section 4 . This resolution shall become effective and in full force immediately upon its passage. On motion by Councilman , and seconded by Councilman the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following vote: AYES: NOES : ABSENT: ADOPTED: MARJORIE R. MACKEY, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Manager • APPROVED AS TO FORM: ALLAN GRIMES, City Attorney • _M_E_M_0_R A_N_D_U_M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Resolution adopting a salary classification plan DATE: September 22, 1983 The attached resolution adopting a salary classification schedule for Fiscal Year 1983-84 includes those changes necessary to implement the agreed to various Memoranda of Understanding. In addition, it makes certain changes to our personnel rules and regulations brought about as a consequence of adopting the MOU' s. Furthermore, it adopts a salary schedule which reflects the change from the old merit system to the Qualified/Fully Qualified system and reflects those changes in the budget resulting from reclassifications or salary adjustments. Recommend your approval. 4RRAY WARDEN MLW:ad • RESOLUTION NO. 42-83 RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL • ADOPTING A SALARY/CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE FOR THE 1983-84 FISCAL YEAR The Atascadero City Council resolves as follows: Section 1. The Salary/Classification Plan, attached as Exhibit I, for Fiscal Year 1983-84 is hereby adopted. Section 2. For employees who are not members of a recognized em- ployee association or union and who are not represented by a recog- nized bargaining unit, including department heads and the City Mana- ger, the following provisions for Fiscal Year 1983-84 will apply: a. Continue to pay the employee' s contribution to the Public Em- ployees Retirement System (PERS) . b. Pay all medical and dental benefit premiums for employees at the rate and coverage prevailing under the City' s medical and dental program as now exists through City' s participation in the Central Coast Cities Self-Insurance Fund, known as the Self-Insurance JPA. The City shall pay, for Fiscal Year 1983- 84 , dependent medical/dental premiums up to $49.75 per month. C. For those employees without dependents or who do not choose to enroll their dependents in the City plan, the $49.75 shall be paid to the employee as an addition to his/her regular Pay d. City shall maintain a term life insurance policy for each employee in a total amount of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15 ,000 .00) and shall pay all premiums for such policy for the 1983-84 Fiscal Year. Section 3. Section 10.3. 3 , Definition of Steps, Resolution No. 12-80 , is hereby rescinded. Until such time as the Personnel Rules and Regulations, Resolution No. 12-80, can be amended, the following provisions entitled "Definition of Trainee, Qualified and Fully Quali- fied Designations" shall apply: a. Effective as soon as possible, and retroactive to July 1, 1983, the City will implement a new salary plan. The plan will have three designations: Trainee, Qualified and Fully Qualified. Salary rates for the Qualified and Fully Qualified designations shall be 10% apart, with the Trainee position up to 10% less than the Qualified rate depending upon the qualifications of the applicant. Initial ap- pointments to a classified position for those meeting all of the basic qualifications for that position will be at the Qualified level. Eli- gibility for advancement to the Fully Qualified level will be after the completion of three years of uninterrupted satisfactory service at the Qualified rate in the classification. Advancement to the Fully Qualified level requires that the employee' s overall performance is Resolution No. 42-33 fully satisfactory, as evidenced by the recommendation of the Depart- ment Head. Appointees not meeting the basic qualifications for a position at time of hire or upon promotion to a higher classification will be des- ignated as Trainees and paid at the Trainee rate. Advancement to the Qualified designation and pay rate may take place whenever the em- ployee meets the basic qualfications for the position as evidenced by the recommendation of the Department Head, but must take place by the end of the employee' s probationary period. Thereafter , advancement from the Qualified designation and pay rate shall be as set forth above. If, upon promotion to a higher classification at the Qualified pay rate, the new classification would result in an employee receiving less than a 5% gross wage increase, the employee will be placed at that exact salary level which will provide for a 5% gross increase over his/her previous gross salary level. Additional adjustments will be made, if necessary, to maintain the minimum 5% gross pay differen- tial over the employee' s gross pay if he/she had remained in his/her old classification. Such adjustments, however, cannot exceed the Fully Qualified pay rate for the new classification. b. Effective June 30, 1983 , the Merit Salary Program is termin- ated, and all merit pay shall cease. Any employee, however, who would receive a decrease in their gross salary on that date as a result of changing to the new salary plan will continue to receive the equiva- lent of their Fiscal Year 1982-83 merit adjustment until such time as rate adjustments under the new salary program result in gross pay equal to or greater than the merit pay. Thereafter, the equivalent payment shall cease. Section 4. Sections 4. 1 and Section 10 .4 , Resolution No. 12-80 , are hereby amended so that all reference to six (6) months probation period shall read twelve (12) months and all reference to one (1) year probation period shall read eighteen (18) months. The probationary period for non-safety employees who are promoted to 'a higher classifi- cation shall be six months in the new classification. The probation- ary period for safety employees who are promoted to a higher classifi- cation shall be twelve months in the new classification. Extension of the probationary period shall remain limited to six (6) months. Section 5. Section 10 . 21, Resoution No. 12-80, Special Salary Adjustments, is hereby deleted. Section 6. All references to steps, Step I, Step II or merit in Resolution No. 12-80 are hereby deleted and the meaning and substance of Section 3 above shall be substituted therefor . On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its en- tirety on the following vote: 2 Resolution No. 42-83r AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: MARJORIE R. MACKEY, Mayor ATTEST: BARBARA NORRIS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO ORM: ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MUR Y L. WARDEN, City Manager 3. • CITY OF ATASCADER0• Salary Plan Fiscal Year 1983/84 - 1 EXHIBIT I • MONTHLY Range Trainee Qualified Fully Qualified Salary Salary Salary 1 786. 86 874 . 29 961. 72 2 806. 54 896 . 15 985 . 76 3 826. 20 91,8 . 00 1009. 81 4 845. 87 93'19. 86 1033 . 85 5 Clerical Assistant I . . . . 865. 55 961. 72 1057 . 89 6 887 . 18 985 . 76 1084 .34 7 Custodian I . . . . . . . 908 . 83 1009 . 81 1110 . 78 8 930 . 47 1033 . 85 1137 . 24 9 Account Clerk I/Clerical Ass t. II 952 . 10 105`7 . 89 1163. 68 10 957. 91 108`4 . 34 1192 . 77 11 Dispatcher-Clerk/Community Service Aide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 . 70 1110 . 78 1221. 86 12 1023 . 52 1137 . 24 1230 . 96 13 Maint. Worker I/Account Clerk II/ Clerical Assistant III . . . . 1047. 31 1163 . 68 1280 . 05 14 1073 . 49 1192 . 77 1312 . 05 15 1099 . 67 1221. 86 1344 . 05 16 Personnel Analyst . . . . . . 1125 . 86 1250 . 96 1376 . 06 17 Maint. Worker II/Blc?.c,. Maint. Worker I/Eng. Aide/Records • & Dispatch Supervisor . . . . . . 1152 . 05 1280 . 05 1408 . 06 18 1180 . 85 1312 . 05 1443 . 26 19 City Mar. Sec. /Maint. Worker III/ Recreation Coordinator _. . . . . . 1209 . 65 1344 . 05 1478 . 46 20 1238 . 45 1376 . 06 1513 . 67 21 Bldg. Maint. Worker II/Maint. Worker IV . . . . . . . . . . . 1267 . 25 1408 . 06 1548 . 87 22 1298. 93 1443. 26 1587. 59 23 Firefighter . . . . . . . . . . . 1330. 61 1478 . 46 1626 . 31 24 Senior Engineering Technician . 1362. 30 1513 . 67 1665.04 25 1393 . 98 1548 . 87 1703 . 76 26 Bldg. Inspector/Treatment Plant " Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . 1428 . 83 1587 . 59 1746 . 35 27 Police Officer/Fire Engineer . . . 1463. 68 1626 . 31 1788 . 95 28 1498 .54 1665. 04 1831. 54 29 1533 . 38 1703 . 76 1574 . 14 30 Associate Planner/Assisant Civil Engineer . . . . . . . . . 1571. 72 1746. 35 1920 . 99 31 Chief Treatment Plant Operator . . 1610 . 06 1788 .95 1967 . 85 32 Police Sergeant/Fire Captain . . . 1648 . 39 1831. 54 2014 . 70 33 Chief Building Inspector . . . . . 1686 . 73 187.4 . 14 2061. 55 34 Associate Civil Engineer . . . . . 1728. 89 1920 . 99 2113 . 09 35 1771. 07 1967 . 85 2164 . 63 36 Public Works Suoerintendent/ Plan Check Engineer . . . . . . . 1813 . 23 2014 . 70 2216 . 17 37 1855. 40 2061. 55 2267 . 71 • 38 1901. 78 2113 . 09 2324 . 40 39 1948 . 17 2164 . 63 2381. 10 40 1994 . 55 2216.17 2437 . 79 Salary Plan Fiscal Year 1983/84 - 1 CITY OF ATASCADERO MANAGEMENT Range Monthly Salary M-1 2015. 11 M-2 2094 .60 M-3 Recreation Director 2187. 00 M-4 2200 . 94 M-5 2256. 92 m-6 2291. 74 M-7 2372 . 23 M-8 2431. 56 M-9 2493 . 14 M-10 2555. 83 M-11 2619 . 64 M-12 Finance Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2684 . 57 M-13 Planning Director 2751. 74 M-14 2821. 15 M-15 Police Chief/Fire Chief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2891. 68 M-16 2963. 33 M-17 3037 .22 M-18 3113 . 34 M-19 Public Works Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3191. 71 M-20 3271.19 M-21 3350 . 68 M-22 3436 . 87 M-23 City Manager . . . . . . 3523 . 08 M-24 3610 . 40 M-25 3701. 08 M-26 3794 .00 M-27 3888 . 04 M-28 3985. 43 M-29 4085. 07 M-30 4186 . 94 M-31 4292 . 17 MEMORANDUM0 'Ar"n EM TO: CITY COUNCIL September 21, 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Policy Statement Requested by Chamber of Commerce On September 12, 1983 the City Council established a committee consis- ting of Gary Larsen and Hank Hohenstein (representing the Chamber of Commerce) , Councilman Molina and Larry Stevens (Planning Director) to prepare a draft of a policy statement concerning industrial and com- mercial development. The committee met and has prepared the following for consideration: "The General Plan proposes a community of unique character with an atmosphere for rural living but also recognizes that economic dev- elopment of the community is both necessary and appropriate to further established goals of the General Plan for a balanced econ- omy and for additional jobs creation. Opportunities for such dev- elopment should be encouraged. The establishment of additional retail and tourist-oriented commercial activity shall be encour- aged on suitable sites. ' New light and clean industrial uses shall also be encouraged on sites which are determined to be appropriate for such activity. It is desirable that all uses be blended into the community in a manner which will not detract from our unique character. " It was the consensus of the committee that this statement represent a clear and concise restatement from the General Plan. Since this statement reflects on land use and development policy, it should be referred to the Planning Commission for input and could be considered for inclusion in the General Plan in the upcoming cycle. The Council may desire to endorse or otherwise support this position pending such reviews. /`GSL LAWRENCE STEVENS MqARAYWARDEN Planning Director ity Ma ager Ps • M E_M O_R A_N_D_U_M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Seismic Report for Administration Building DATE: September 22, 1983 You have previously received Elliott Stephenson''s - report on the seismic safety condition of the Administration Building. The report raises several significant questions for which answers are not readily available and impacts upon space for City functions, as well as in- volving the question of a separate police facility. ' As is generally the case, the issue involves allocation of money which creates the need for information upon which to make prudent and considered judgments as to the best course of action. As a result of Mr. Stephenson' s study, we need to proceed with securing an analysis by a qualified engineering firm, as to remedial action which might be available, if any, to determine precisely what needs to be fixed and to provide an estimate as to the costs involved as well as a recommen- dation as to the feasibility, from a structural as well as financial • standpoint, of fixing any deficiencies. As you may recall, because of the necessity for moving quickly to resolve the problems identified by Mr. Stephenson, I have authorized the Public Works Director to secure professional services to -provide this evaluation. The foregoing is one phase of the problem. Another is that, although we do not know the exact impact of the repair problem, we do know that it will have significant fiscal impacts, particularly in consideration of the re- modeling project and police facility question. In order to provide us with definitive information, I suggest that we procure, through re- quest for proposals, the services of a fully qualified and experienced firm who is experienced in providing public facilities and who are not only design experienced, but who also have the experience to analyze site problems as well as the statutory, marketing and election aspects of public financing. I feel that this is necessary in order to pro- vide the Council with a definitive analysis upon 'which to base your decisions and to provide the electorate with accurate projections as to the scope and costs involved in the questions ,of separate police facilities, the possibility of having to look to alternate general administration facilities and the possibility of providing a satellite fire facility. We have, in the current budget, $50 ,000 which was intended to pay for the financial plan and preliminary cost estimates for the separate police facilities. I am reasonably certain that we can address all our concerns for considerably less than this. I feel, however , that • we have now reached the point where we must seek qualified, profes- sional help in reaching a solution to our facilities problems, partic- ularly in light of the Stephenson report. i • Memorandum - Seismic Report for Administration Building I am, therefore, requesting your approval to proceed with solicit- • ing requests for proposals to include an analysis for our general gov- ernment facilities needs and to have alternatives available to us in considering the Administration Building problem. At the moment, I do not feel we have the capacity in house to de- velop the definitive numbers needed to make informed and considered judgments as to the best route to take in addressing these problems. As a general thought and in considering our response to the Stephenson analysis, we should keep in mind that if a decision is made to seek alternative facilities, the question must be addressed as to what hap- pens to the Administration Building. With this in mind, it may mean that cost effectiveness could dictate repairing the building. If that, however , is infeasible, then we must face tha& reality of what to do with an old building. I have, as you are aware, instructed Staff to no longer schedule large gatherings in the Rotunda Room. I have also, because of the number of participants and vigorousness of their activity, requested that the Jazzercise classes be held elsewhere. There are, however, several functions which are already scheduled which are impacted in Eight of the Stephenson report. In examining the Rotunda Room sched- ule and in considering the impact upon the building, Larry McPherson and I feel and recommend to you that we limit our occupancy of the fourth floor to no more than twenty persons as a general rule. An exception to this could be made for activities which are relatively static in nature anddo not create dynamic loads in those areas men tioned by Mr. Stephenson. It is our ]u gmen and recommendation to you that we limit scheduling the Rotunda Room so as to exclude dances, receptions and/or other occupancies which can create large and dynamic loads. In making this suggestion, I am aware of the inconvenience that can be caused for people who have planned months in advance and have made their arrangements accordingly. However, until the City has received further information which may qualify Mr. Stephenson' s re- port, I think we would be less than prudent if we did not follow these suggestions. I am, therefore, requesting your approval for implement- ing the policies I have suggested. Of course, your discussion may well develop other policies which may be more acceptable alternatives. In any event, I believe we need to address the problems of Mr. Ste phenson' s report and be prudent, but reasonable, in our immediate re- action to his information. IUrR �Y4WARtDEZNF_ MLW:ad 2 ITEM # M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY COUNCIL September 21, 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: TITLE 8 (Building Regulations) Attached Ordinance No. 70 proposes adoption of the 1982 Uniform Codes to replace Title 19 of the County Code which was adopted by the City in 1979. For the most part, the proposed ordinance adopts the Uniform Codes by reference with only minor changes. These include: 1) Removing all fee schedules from the various Uniform Codes making provision to adopt them by Resolution. 2) Incorporating the more detailed provisions of Ordinance No. 44 (establishing the Appeals Board) in place of the general • provisions of the Uniform Administrative Cade (Section 8-1. 103) . 3) Establishment of a requirement for minimum 'Class C fire re- tardant roofing material. This is consistent with conditions now being placed on parcel maps and is the standard recommen- ded by the Fire Department (Section 8-2.1031) . 4) Clarifying standards for fills on large lots (Section 8-2. 104) . 5) Reorganization of standards applicable to private sewage dis- posal systems to minimize confusion between various documents now used because of conflicting standards (Section 8-4.105) . 6) Prohibition of plastic pipe in water systems to be consistent with a Court directive on the use of plastic pipes (Section 8-4.103) . 7) Modification of building sewer requirements to be consistent with the Sanitation District requirements (8-4 . 104) . 8) Adding a provision to drain LPG appliances in attic or under- floor areas (Section 8-5 .103) . 9) Revising the definition of a swimming pool to be consistent • with State Administrative Code regulations ';(Section 8-6 .103) . Re: Title 8 (Building Regulations) 10) Revising the definition of alarm signals to preclude problems • with emergency vehicles (Section 8-8 .104) . In addition to the above, several technical and procedural changes are recommended in Ordinance No. 70 to assure internal consistency and eliminate conflicts. Since this ordinance proposes to adopt rules, regulations and stand- ards prepared by nationally recognized private organizations by ref- erence, the Government Code requires a slightly different procedure than that which is normally followed. In conjunction with first read- ing of the ordinance, the matter is to be set at a date for a noticed public hearing at which time the ordinance may be adopted. It is rec- ommended that first reading by approved and the hearing be set for October 10, 1983. law.. &-t, LAWRENCE STEVENS M RRAY WARDEN Planning Director Tity M nager ps • • 2 . ORDINANCE NO. 70 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ADDING TITLE 8 (BUILDING REGULATIONS) TO THE ATASCADERO MUNICI- PAL CODE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, 1982 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, INCLUDING APPENDIX CHAPTERS 1, 7, 32, 38 , 57 AND 70 , 1982 EDITION, AND THE UNI- FORM BUILDING CODE STANDARDS, ALL PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS; THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, 1981 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION; THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, INCLUDING ALL APPENDICES, 1982 EDI- TION, AND THE IAPMO INSTALLATION STANDARDS, 1982 EDITION, ALL PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCI- ATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS; THE UNI- FORM MECHANICAL CODE, INCLUDING ALL APPENDICES, 1982 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE, 1982 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM SIGN CODE, 1982 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS; :THE UNI- FORM FIRE CODE, INCLUDING APPENDIX CHAPTERS I-A, I-B, II-A, II-B, II-D, III-A, III-C, IV-A, V-A AND VI-A, 1982 EDITION, AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS, 1982 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE WESTERN FIRE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION AND THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS ; THE UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, 1982 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, 1982 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS, ALL AS AMENDED, AND REPEALING TITLE 19 (BUILDING REGULATIONS) OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY CODE AS ADOPTED BY CITY OF ATASCADERO ORDINANCE NO. 2 ON JULY 2, 1979 . The Atascadero City Council ordains as follows: Section 1. The Atascadero Municipal Code is amended by repeal- ing Title 19 entitled "Building and Construction" of the San Luis Obispo County Code as adopted by City of Atascadero Ordinance No. 2 on July 2, 1979 . Section 2. Title 8 (Building Regulations) is added to the Atas- cadero Municipal Code to read as follows: TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Chapter 1. Administrative Code 8-1. 101. Adoption of Uniform Administrative Code. Certain doc- uments marked and designated as the "Uniform Administrative Code" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, are hereby adopted for establishing administrative, organ- izational and enforcement rules and regulations for technical codes which regulate site preparation and construction, alteration, moving, demolition, repair, use and occupancy of buildings, structures and building service equipment. Each and all of the regulations, provi- sions, conditions and terms of such "Uniform Administrative Code" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, on file in the Planning Department, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter , except as otherwise provided in this Chapter. 8-1.102. Modification of Certain Parts of the Uniform Adminis- trative Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Administrative Code" , 1982 Edition, are hereby deleted: (a) Section 204 (Board of Appeals) i (b) Section 304 (a) (Permit Fees) (c) Section 304 (b) (Plan Review Fees) (d) Section 304 (d) (2) (Fee) Change reference to .. . . . .Tables Nos. 3-A through 3-F" to read " . . . the resolution of the City Coun- cil establishing fees." (e) Section 305 (h) (Reinspections) Change reference to " . . . . Tables Nos. 3-A through 3-E" to read " . . . . the resolution of the City Council establishing fees. " (f) Table No. 3-A (Building Permit Fees) (g) Table No. 3-B (Electrical Permit Fees) (h) Table No. 3-C (Mechanical Permit Fees) (i) Table No. 3-D (Plumbing Permit Fees) (j) Table No. 3-E (Grading Permit Fees) (k) Table No. 3-F (Grading Plan Review Fees) 0 8-1. 103. Establishment of Board of Appeals. In order to conduct hearings to determine the suitability of alternate materials and meth- 2 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS ods of installation and to provide for reasonable interpretations of the provisions of this Title, a Board of Appeals is hereby estab- lished. The Board of Appeals shall also make interpretations of and hear appeals pursuant to the Housing and Dangerous Building Codes. (a) Membership. The Board of Appeals shall consist of five (5) members, two (2) of whom shall be general contractors, one (1) of whom shall be a structural engineer or architect, one (1) of whom shall be a specialty contractor, all of whom shall be qualified by experience and training, and one (1) of whom shall be a member of the public who is not one of the foregoing. Members of the Board of Appeals shall be appoint- ed by and serve at the pleasure of the City- Council. Each member shall comply with applicable provisions of the Polit- ical Reform Act of 1974 , California Government Section 81000, et seq. The Building Official shall serve as Secretary to the Board of Appeals. (b) Eligibility. A person shall live within the City to be eligible for appointment to the Board of Appeals. (c) Term. Terms of initial appointment shall be a term of two (2) years for two (2) members and four (4) years for three (3) members. Subsequent appointments shall be for a term of four (4) years. (d) Rules and Regulations. The Board of Appeals shall adopt reasonable rules and regulations, subject to approval by the City Council, for conducting its business. The Board shall render all decisions and findings in writing with a copy to the appellant. (e) Appeal Procedure. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Planning Department related to any manner within the pur- view of this Title shall have the right to appeal the deci- sion. The appeal shall be filed with the Building Official within fourteen (14) days after the rendering of the decision affecting the aggrieved person. Grounds for the appeal shall be set forth in writing. The Secretary of the Board shall set the time and place for a hearing on the appeal, and notice of the "hearing shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation and shall be given to the appellant by mailing it to him, postage prepaid, at his last known address, at least ten (10) calendar days prior to the date set for hearing. Any written reports to be made to the Board shall be filed with the Secretary of the Board and shall be made available to the Board and to the public no less than three (3) working days prior to the date set for the hearing. Any Department Head shall have the right to be heard on any matter coming before the Board. 3 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS The decision of the Board on the appeal shall not become fin- al until fourteen (14) days after the Board has made its de- termination in order to allow time for an appeal to be made to the Council from the Board' s decision. Any party aggrieved by the determination of the Board shall have the right to appeal its determination to the Council. Such appeals must be filed with the City Clerk within four- teen (14) days after the Board has made its determination. The Council shall set appeal fees by resolution. There shall be no charge for city-initiated appeals. 8-1.104. Fees. Fees for permits, plan review, reinspections, special inspections, appeals and other activities of this Title shall be established by resolution of the City Council. The determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of this Title shall be made by the Building Official. The value to be used in computing the building permit and building permit plan review fees shall be the total value of all construction work for which the permit is issued as well as all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air-conditioning, elevators, fire-extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment. 8-1.105. Exempted Work. The following shall be added to Section 301 (b) : "5. Sign Permits. The -following signs shall not require a sign permit. These exemptions shall not be construed as relieving the owner of the sign from the responsibility of its erection and maintenance, and its compliance with the provisions of this code or any other law or ordinance regulating the same. A. The changing of the advertising copy or message on a painted or printed sign only. Except for theater mar- quees and similar signs specifically designed for the use of replaceable copy, electric signs shall not be included in this exception. B. Painting, repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure or the changing of the advertising copy or message thereon shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless a struc- tural change is made. C. Signs less than six (6) feet above grade. 6. Swimming Pool, Spa, and Hot Tub Permits. No permit shall be required in the case of any repair work including: The stopping of leaks in drains, soil, waste or vent pipe, pro- vided, however , that should any trap; drainpipe; or soil, waste or vent pipe be or become defective and it becomes nec- essary to remove and replace the same with new material in 4 0 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS any part or parts, the same shall be considered as such new work and a permit shall be procured and 'inspection made as hereinbefore provided. No permit shall be required for the clearing of stoppages or the repairing of leaks in pipes, valves or fixtures, when such repairs do not involve or re- quire the replacement or rearrangement of valves, pipes or fixtures. " 8-1. 106 . Permits Required. Section 301 (a) shall be revised to read as follows: "Permits Required. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect, construct, enlarge, alter , repair , move, im- prove, remove, convert or demolish any building ,or structure, in- cluding a swimming pool, spa or hot tub, or make any installation, alteration, repair , replacement, or remodel any building service equipment, including swimming pool, spa and hot tub equipment, regulated by this Title, except as specified in Subsection (b) of this Section, or cause the same to be done without first obtaining a separate, appropriate permit for each building, structure or service equipment from the Building Official. " TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS , Chapter 2. Building Code 8-2.101. Adoption of Uniform Building Code. Certain documents marked and designated as the "Uniform Building Cade" , including Ap- pendix Chapter 1 (Life Safety Requirements for Existing Buildings) , Chapter 7 - Part 1 (Covered Mall Buildings) , Chapter 32 (Re-roofing) , Chapter 38 (Basement Pipe Inlets) , Chapter 57 (Regulations Governing Fallout Shelters) and Chapter 70 (Excavation and Grading) , 1982 Edi- tion, and as the "Uniform Building Code Standards" , 1982 Edition,pub- lished by the International Conference of Building Officials, are hereby adopted for regulating the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, moving, removal, demolition, conversion, occu- pancy, equipment, use, height, area and maintenance of all buildings or structures. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, condi- tions, and terms of such "Uniform Building Code" ,; 1982 Edition, and the "Uniform Building Code Standards" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, on file in the Plan- ning Department, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter , except as otherwise provided in this Chapter. 8-2. 102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Building Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Building Code, " 1982 Edition, are hereby deleted: 5 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS (a) Chapter 1 (Title, Scope and General) , including Sections 101-107 (b) Chapter 2 (Organization and Enforcement) , including Sections 201-205 (c) Chapter 3 (Permits and Inspections) , including Sections 301- 307 and Table No. 3-A 8-2.103. Fire Retardant Roofing Materials Required. Roof cover- ings for all new buildings and for any re-roofing of existing build- ings shall be no less than Class C, regardless of building type or occupancy. Skylights and similar roofing materials shall be construc- ted of noncombustible materials. Any reference to the approved use of roofing materials with less than a Class C rating is hereby deleted. 8-2. 104. Grading. Section 7010 (a) is hereby amended to read as follows: "General. Unless otherwise recommended in an approved soils engineering report, fills shall conform to the provisions of this Section, except that lots located outside the Urban Services Line may exceed the 50 cubic yard limitation for a fill when approved by the Building Official and when in compliance with the following (1) All other limitations established by Subsection 9 of Section 7003; and (2) The lot is a minimum of 2 1/2 acres; and (3) The location and extent of the fill is clearly delinea- ted on grading plans. " TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Chapter 3. Electrical Code 8-3.101. Adoption of National Electrical Code. Certain documents marked and designated as the "National Electrical Code" , 1981 Edition, published by the National Fire Protection Association, are hereby adopted for safeguarding persons and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity. Each and all of the regulations, provi- sions, conditions, and terms of such "National Electrical Code" , 1981 Edition, published by the National Fire Protection Association, on file in the Planning Department, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter . 6 i TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS ' Chapter 4. Plumbing Code 8-4 . 101. Adoption of Uniform Plumbing Code. Certain documents marked and designated as the "Uniform Plumbing Code" , including all appendices, 1982 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, and as "IAPMO Installation Standards" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, are hereby adopted for regu- lating the erection, installation, alteration, addition, repair , re- location, replacement, maintenance or use of any plumbing system. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions, and terms of such "Uniform Plumbing Code" , 1982 Edition, and "IAPMO Installation Standards" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, on file in the Planning Depart- ment, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof 'as if fully set out in this Chapter, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter. 8-4.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Plumbing Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Plumbing Code, " 1982 Edition, are hereby deleted: (a) Part 1 (Administration) , including Sections 10 .1-10 . 5 and 20 .1-20.14 (b) Table 1-1, entitled "Location of Sewage Disposal System" (c) Section I-4 (Percolation Tests) (d) Section I-8 (Cesspools) (e) Table I-4 , entitled "Design Criteria of 5 Typical Soils" (f) Table I-5 8-4. 103. Use of Plastic Pipe in Water Systems. PB, PVC and CPVC, as well as any other plastic pipe, shall not be used for hot and cold water distribution systems. Any reference to the approved use of such materials is hereby deleted. 8-4.104. Building Sewers. The following requirements shall apply to building sewers and related drainage piping. Any reference to different standards in Table 4-3 or Chapter 11 of the Uniform Plumbing Code is hereby deleted. 7 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS (a) All building sewers shall be constructed with pipe of inter- nal diameter not less than four (4) inches. (b) A clean-out shall be placed in every building sewer within five (5) feet of each building, at all changes in alignment or grade in excess of twenty-two and one-half (22 1/2) de- grees, within five (5) feet of the junction with the public sewer, and at intervals not to exceed one hundred (100) feet in straight runs. The clean-out shall be made by inserting a "Y" fitting in the line and fitting the clean-out in the "Y" branch in an approved manner. In the case of a clean-out near the junction of the public sewer , the "Y" branch shall be extended to a depth of not more than two (2) feet, nor less than one foot below the surface of the ground before the clean-out is installed. (c) Drainage piping serving fixtures located at an elevation of less than one foot above the nearest upstream manhole cover in the main sewer serving said fixtures shall drain by grav- ity into the main sewer, and shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved type backwater valve, and each such backwater valve shall be installed only in that branch or section of the drainage system which receives the discharge from fixtures located less than one foot above the nearest upstream manhole cover. 8-4.105. Private Sewage Disposal Systems. The design, installa- tion, operation and maintenance of private sewage disposal systems shall be in conformance with Appendix I of the Uniform Plumbing Code and with standards specified in this Section. Where specific stand- ards are not provided within this Title or where the Administrative Authority determines that higher requirements are necessary to main- tain a safe and sanitary condition, the "Manual of Septic Tank Prac- tice" (published by the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare) , the "Design Manual - Onsite Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems" (published by the United States Environmental Pro- tection Agency) , "Guidelines for Mound Systems" (State Water Resources Control Board) , "Guidelines for Evapotranspiration Systems (State Water Resources Control Board) , and the "Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin" (adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board of the Central Coast Region) shall be used as guidelines by the Administrative Authority. (a) Percolation Test. An on-site investigation shall be made in order to determine the suitability of a particular site for a private sewage disposal system and to provide the data necessary to design a private sewage disposal system. A percolation test shall be required prior to issuance of a permit for all new or enlarged private sewage disposal sys- tems. The following percolation test procedure shall be used in performing percolation tests, except that other accepted test procedures may be used when approved by the Administra- tive Authority. 8 i TITLE 8 BUILDING REGULATIONS • (1) Number and Location of Test Holes: A minimum of three separate test holes spaced uniformly through and located in the immediate vicinity of the proposed leach field site shall be made. (2) Type of Test Holes: The test hole shall have horizon- tal dimensions between 4 and 12 inches and vertical sides to the depth of the absorption trench. (3) Preparation of Test Hole: Smeared soil surfaces shall be removed from the sides and bottom of the test hole to provide a natural soil interface. All loose material shall be removed from the test hole.. Two inches of coarse sand or fine gravel shall be added to the test hole to protect the bottom from scouring and sediment. (4) Soil Saturation and Swelling: The test hole is to be carefully filled to a depth of one foot above the gravel or sand with clear water which is to be kept in the hole for at least four hours but preferably overnight. This step may be omitted in sandy soils containing little or no clay. (5) Measurement of Percolation Rate: The percolation rate shall be determined twenty-four hours after water is first added to the test holes; except, in sandy soils containing little or no clay, the percolation rate shall be determined after the water from one filling of the test hole has completely seeped away. '; (i) If water remains in the test hole after the over- night swelling period, adjust the depth to approxi- mately six inches over the gravel or sand and, from a fixed reference point, measure the drop in water level over a thirty minute period to calculate the percolation rate. (ii) If no water remains in the test hole after the overnight swelling period, add clear water to bring the depth of water in the test hole to approximate- ly six inches over the gravel or sand. From a fixed reference point, measure the drop in water level at approximately thirty minute intervals over four hours refilling six inches over the gravel or sand as necessary. The drop that occurs during the final thirty minute period is used to calculate the percolation rate. The drops during prior periods provide information for possible modification of the test procedure to suit local conditions. ( iii) In sandy soils (or in other soils in which the first six inches of water seeps away in less than thirty minutes after the overnight swelling peri- od) , the time interval between measurements shall be taken as ten minutes and the test shall run for 9 i TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS one hour with the drop during the final ten minutes being used to calculate the percolation rate. (6) Deep Boring: A soil boring, to a minimum depth of ten (10) feet below the bottom of the absorption trench, shall be made in order to determine the presence of bedrock and/or ground water. (b) General Design Standards: The following standards shall be used in the design of new or enlarged private sewage disposal systems where the percolation rate does not exceed 60 min- utes per inch. (1) Determination of Size of Absorption Area: The absorp- tion area, measured in lineal feet of absorption trench, shall be calculated as set forth in this Section. Tables 4-1 (Absorption Area Requirements) and 4-2 (Standard Trench Adjustment Factors) , included in this Subsection, shall be referred to as necessary. (absorption area per bedroom) X no. of bedrooms) X (standard (width of trench, in inches) trench adjust- ment factor) factor) TABLE 4-1. Absorption Area Requirements. Percolation Rate Absorption Area Per Bedroom (Minutes/Inch) (Square Feet) 0- 9 150 10 165 11-15 190 16-20 215 21-25 230 26-30 250 31-35 270 36-40 285 41-45 300 46-50 315 51-60 330 10 0 • TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS 1 TABLE 4-2. Standard Trench Adjustment Factor Depth of Gravel Below Pipe Trench Width (in inches) (in Inches) 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 12 75 78 80 82 83 85 86 87 87 18 60 64 66 69 71 73 75 77 78 24 50 54 57 60 62 64 66 68 70 30 43 47 50 53 55 58 60 62 64 36 37 41 44 47 50 52 54 56 58 42 33 37 40 43 45 48 50 52 54 48 30 33 36 39 42 ' 44 46 48 50 1. For trenches not shown in Table 4-2, the standard trench adjust- ment factor may be computed as follows: W + 2 X 100 W + 1 + 2D Where W = width of trench (in feet) D = depth of gravel below pipe (in feet) (2) Location of Private Sewage Disposal Systems: The min- imum distance between components of a private sewage disposal system and other site features shall be as set forth in Table 4-3 (Horizontal Distance Separation) and and Table 4-4 (Vertical Distance Separation) . Where physical limitations on a site preclude conformance with distance separation requirements, the Administrative Authority may approve a lesser separation when the de- sign is prepared by a registered engineer competent in sanitary engineering and when adequate substantiating data is submitted with the design. The Administrative Authority shall not approve a separation less than that set forth in the "Water Quality Control Plan - Central Coast Region" unless the Regional Water Quality Control Board or its designated representatives have previously approved the design. 11 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS TABLE 4-3. Horizontal Distance Separation (in feet) Building Septic Leach Field Seepage Sewer Tank or Seepage Pit Bed 1 1 Buildings or structures, in- 2 5 10 10 cluding porches, steps, breeze- ways, patios, and carports whether covered or not 2 Property Line Clear 5 5 10 3 Water Supply Well 50 50 100 150 Streams, when shown on 7 1/2 50 50 100 100 minute USGS Map Swales, ephemeral draws, or 50 50 50 50 other natural watercourses with drainage areas larger than 10 acres Trees -- 10 -- 10 Seepage Pits -- 5 5 12 Leach Field or Seepage Bed -- 5 6 5 4 On-site domestic water service 1 5 5 5 line Distribution Box -- -- 5 5 5 Pressure Public Water Main 10 10 10 10 6 6 Sloping ground, cuts, or other -- -- 15 15 embankments 7 7 Reservoirs, including ponds, 200 200 200 200 lakes, tanks, basins, etc. for storage, regulation and con- trol of water , recreation, power, flood control or drinking Springs 100 100 100 100 1. Distance separation shall be increased to twenty (20) feet when building or structure is located on a downward slope below a leach field, seepage bed or seepage pit. 2. See Section 315 (c) of Uniform Plumbing Code. 3. Distance separation may be reduced to twenty-five (25) feet when the drainage piping is constructed of materials approved for use within a building. 12 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS 4 . See Section 1108 of Uniform Plumbing Code. 5. For parallel construction or crossings, approval by the Health Department shall be required. 6. Distance is measured as horizontal distance to daylight. 7. Distance is measured at spillway elevation. 1 TABLE 4-4. Vertical Distance Separation (in feet) Leach Field or Seepage Seepage bed Pit Ground water 5 10 edrock 4 4 1. Distance is measured from bottom of trench or pit. (3) Additional Standards: (i) Existing legal building sites which are served by an individual on-site well may be approved for a private sewage disposal system only if the site is one acre or larger in size. (ii) Private sewage disposal systems proposed to be in- stalled -on slopes of 20% or more shall be designed by and have their installation inspected and certi- fied by a registered civil engineer. The design shall minimize grading disruption associated with access for installation and maintenance. Such systems shall be prohibited on slopes of 30% or more. (iii) When the percolation rate exceeds 30 minutes/inch, a private sewage disposal system shall be designed, inspected, and certified to work by a registered civil engineer. (iv) When the percolation rate exceeds 60 minutes/inch, a private sewage disposal system using soil absorp- tion shall not be allowed. (v) When the percolation rate exceeds 30 minutes/inch, a private sewage disposal system using a seepage pit shall not be allowed. (vi) Expansion area shall be provided on all building sites, shall be identified on all plans submitted for private sewage disposal systems, and shall re- main available for system expansion. If areas re- served for system expansion are not accessible for 13 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS future installation, then the expansion area shall be installed with the original system. (c) Special Design Standards. The following standards shall be used in the design of new or enlarged private sewage disposal systems where the percolation rate exceeds 60 minutes per inch. Designs for alternate types of private sewage disposal systems shall be by registered engineers competent in sani- tary engineering and may be approved by the Administrative Authority when the design engineer submits adequate substan- tiation data with the design. (1) Determination of Size of Disposal Field: The size of the disposal field shall be determined by the design engineer using methods of accepted engineering practice including manuals and documents specified in this Chapter. (2) Location of Private Sewage Disposal Systems: The min- imum distance between components of a private sewage disposal system and other site features shall be as set forth in Table 4-3 (Horizontal Distance Separation) and Table 4-4 (Vertical Distance Separation) using the col- umn entitled "Leach Field or Seepage Bed. " (3) Additional Standards: ( i) When private sewage disposal systems are designed pursuant to Subsection (c) of the Section, the de- sign engineer shall provide the owner with infor- mation on the location, design, operation and maintenance of the private sewage disposal system. A covenant shall also be recorded prior to final approval of the system indicating the name and location of the design engineer and indicating where the above information can be secured. (ii) Existing legal building sites which are served by an individual on-site well may be approved for a private sewage disposal system only if the site is one acre or larger in size. (iii) Expansion area shall be provided on all building sites, shall be identified on all plans submitted for private sewage disposal systems, and shall re- main available for system expansion. If areas reserved for system expansion are not accessible for future installation, then the expansion area shall be installed with the original system. (d) Replacement of Existing Private Sewage Disposal Systems. Where an existing private sewage disposal system has failed, the replacement system shall be designed in conformance with this Chapter and shall be designed by a registered engineer competent in sanitary engineering. In the event that the 14 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS . replacement system cannot be designed to conform with this Chapter, the Administrative Authority may approve a system designed to lesser standards when it is designed, inspected, and certified to work by a registered engineer competent in sanitary engineering. (1) A private sewage disposal system shall not be replaced by another system if sewers are available. (2) The Administrative Authority shall not approve a re- placement system which does not conform with prohibi- tions set forth in the "Water Quality Control Plan - Central Coast Basin" unless the Regional Water Quality Control Board or its designated representatives has previously approved the design. The Administrative Authority may authorize a temporary means of sewage disposal pending such approval. TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Chapter 5. Mechanical Code 8-5.101. Adoption of Uniform Mechanical Code. Certaindocuments marked and designated as the "Uniform Mechanical Code" , including all appendices, 1982 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, are hereby adopted for regula- ting and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation and maintenance or use of heating, ventilating, cooling, refrigeration systems, incinerators and other miscellaneous heat-producing appliances. Each and :all of the regula- tions, provisions, conditions and terms of such "Uniform Mechanical Code" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, on file in the Planning Department, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof, as if fully set out in this Chapter, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter. 8-5.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Mechanical Code The following portions of the "Uniform Mechanical Code, " 1982 Edition, are hereby deleted: (a) Chapter 1 (Title, Scope and General) , including Sections 101-107 (b) Chapter 2 (Organization and Enforcement) , including Sections 201-204 15 • TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS (c) Chapter 3 (Permits and Inspections) , including Sections 301- 306 and Table No. 3-A 8-5.103. Installation of Liquefied Petroleum Gas-burning Appli- ances. The following shall be added to the last paragraph of Sec- tion 504 (Installation) : . . . . "When appliances so fueled are located in underfloor or attic areas, provision shall be made to drain the appliance to the out- side of the building. " TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Chapter 6. Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code 8-6 .101. Adoption of Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code Certain documents marked and designated as the "Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, are hereby adopted for regulating the erection, installation, alteration, addition, re- pair, relocation, replacement, maintenance or use of any swimming pool, spa or hot tub plumbing system. Each and all of the regula- tions, provisions, conditions, and terms of such "Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code"; 1982 Edition, published by the Interna- tional Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, on file in the Planning Department, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter. 8-6. 102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Swim- ming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code, " 1982 Edition, are hereby deleted: (a) Part 1 (Administration) including Section 1.0-1.9 and 1. 11-1. 18 8-6 .103. Swimming Pool Defined. The definition of a swimming pool in Section 102 of the "Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code, " 1982 Edition, shall be revised to read as follows: "Swimming Pool - Any constructed or prefabricated pool used for swimming or bathing. " 16 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Chapter 7. Sign Code 8-7.101. Adoption of Uniform Sign Code. Certain documents marked and designated as the "Uniform Sign Code, " 1982 Edition, published by the International Conference of Buildng Officials, are hereby adopted for regulating the design, quality of materials, construction, loca- tion, electrification, and maintenance of all signs and sign struc- tures. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, - conditions and terms of such "Uniform Sign Code" , 1982 Edition, published by the In- ternational Conference of Building Officials, on file in the Planning Department, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter. 8-7 .102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Sign Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Sign Code" , 1982 'Edition, are here- by deleted: (a) Chapter 1 (Title, Scope and Enforcement) , including Sections 101-103 (b) Chapter 3 (Permits, Fees and Inspections) , including Sections 301-306 (c) Section 1401 (Temporary Signs - General) TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Chapter 8. Fire Code 8-8 . 101. Adoption of Uniform Fire Code. Certain documents marked and designated as the "Uniform Fire Code" , including Appendix Chapter I-A (Life Safety Requirements for Existing Buildings) , Chapter I-B (Stairway Identification) , Chapter II-A (Suppression and control of Hazardous Fire Areas) , Chapter II-B (Protection of Flammable or Com- bustible Liquids in Tanks in Locations That May Be Flooded) , Chapter II-D (Rifle Ranges) , Chapter III-A (Test Procedures for Fire Extin- guishing Systems) , Chapter III-B (Basement Pipe Inlets) , Chapter III-C (Fire Alarm Systems) , Chapter IV-A (Interior Floor Finish) , Chapter V-A (Nationally Recognized Standards of Good Practice) , and Chapter VI-A (Emergency Relief Venting for Fire Exposure for Aboveground Tanks) , 1982 Edition, and the "Uniform Fire Code Standards" , 1982 Edition, are hereby adopted for the purpose of prescribing regulations governing conditions hazardous to life and property from fire or ex- plosion. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions, and 17 ! 0 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS terms of such "Uniform Fire Code" , 1982 Edition, and the "Uniform Fire Code Standards", 1982 Edition, published by the Western Fire Chiefs Association and the International Conference of Building Officials, on file in the Planning Department are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter, except as otherwise pro- vided in this Chapter. 8-8.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Fire Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Fire Code" , 1982 Edition, are here- by deleted: (a) Section 2.302 (Board of Appeals) 8-8 . 103. Board of Appeals. In order to provide for interpreta- tion of the provisions of the Chapter and to hear approvals provided for hereunder , the Board of Appeals established pursuant to Section 8-1.103 shall govern. Procedures specified by Section 8-1. 103 (c) shall be followed. 8-8.104 . Alarm Signal Defined. The definition of an alarm signal in Section 4 of Appendix III-C, shall be revised as follows: " (c) Alarm Signal. Audible devices may be bells, horns, chimes speakers or similar devices but no audible alarm shall con- flict with the response of emergency vehicles or civil de- fense systems. Under no circumstances shall sirens of wail, yelp or hi-lo soundings be used. All devices shall be ap- proved by the Police and Fire Chiefs. " TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Chapter 9. Housing Code 8-9 . 101. Adoption of Uniform Housing Code. Certain documents marked and designated as the "Uniform Housing Code", 1982 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, are hereby adopted for regulating the use and occupancy, location and maintenance of residential buildings and structures. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and terms of such "Uniform Housing Code" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building officials, on file in the Planning Department, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chap- ter, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter . 18 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS 8-9 .102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Housing Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Housing Code" , 1982 Edition, are hereby deleted: (a) Section 203 (Housing Advisory and Appeals Board) 8-9 .103. References to Building Code. References made in Chap- ters 1, 2 and 3 of the "Uniform Housing Code", 1982 Edition, to vari- ous administrative sections and chapters of the Buildng Code shall mean the corresponding sections and chapters of Chapter l of this Title. 8-9.104. Appeals Board. In order to provide for interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter and to hear appeals provided for hereunder, the Board of Appeals established pursuant to Section 8-1. 103 shall govern. References to the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board in the Uniform Housing Code shall mean the Board of Appeals es- tablished pursuant to Section 8-1.103. Procedures specified by Sec- tion 8-1. 103 (c) shall be followed except where additional procedures are required by this Chapter. 8-9.105. Time Limits for Appeals. The following portions of the "Uniform Housing Code" , 1982 Edition, are modified as specified: (a) Section 1101 (b) (5) is amended to change the appeal time from "30 days" to "14 days. " (b) The last paragraph of Section 1201 (a) is amended to read as follows: "The appeal shall be filed within 14 days from the date of service of such notice or action of the Building Official. " TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Chapter 10. Dangerous Buildings Code 8-10 .101. Adoption of Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings. Certain documents marked and designated ;as the "Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings 1982 Edition, pub- lished by the International Conference of Building Officials, are hereby adopted for regulating the repair, vacation or demolition of buildings or structures which may endanger the life, limb, health, morals, property, safety or welfare of the general public or their occupants. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and terms of such "Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Build- ings" , 1982 Edition, published by the International Conference of 19 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS Building Officials, on file in the Planning Department, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter. 8-10 .102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings. The following portions of the "Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings" , 1982 Edition, are hereby deleted: (a) Section 205 (Appeals Board) 8-10 .103. References to Building Code. References made in Chap- ters 1 and 2 of the "Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings" , 1982 Edition, to various administrative sections and chap- ters of the Building Code shall mean the corresponding sections and chapters of Chapter 1 of this Title. 8-10 .104. Appeals Board. In order to provide for interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter and to hear appeals provided for hereunder, the Board of Appeals established pursuant to Section 8-1. 103 shall govern. Procedures specified by Section 8-1. 103 (c) shall be followed except where additional procedures are required by this Chapter. 8-10 .105. Time Limit for Appeals. The following portions of the "Un m Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings" , 1982 Edition, are modified as specified: (a) Section 401 (b) (5) is amended to change the appeal time from "30 days" to "14 days. (b) The last paragraph of Section 501 (a) is amended to read as follows: "The appeal shall be filed within 14 days from the date of service of such notice or action of the Building Official. " Section 3. Penalty Provisions. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building, structure or building service equipment or cause or permit the same to be done in violation of this Title and the technical codes. Penalties for violation of this Title shall be as set forth in Chapter 3 of Ordinance No. 10 of the City of Atascadero. 20 0 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS 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 effect 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 Council on AYES : NOES : ABSENT: MARJORIE M. MACKEY, Mayor ATTEST: BARBARA NORRIS, ity Clerk APP,RQVED AS TO F ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Manager 21 HEM • M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY COUNCIL September 21, 1983 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Resolution Establishing Fees for Building Activities Attached Resolution No. 40-83 proposes adoption of fee schedules set forth in the 1982 Uniform Codes with those fees to 'take effect on the effective date of Ordinance No. 70 (which adopts the 82 Codes) . It should be pointed out that Table II includes some 'fees which are not in the Uniform Codes. These fees (i.e. demolition, compliance survey, building relocation, mobilehomes, temporary dwellings, cross-connec- tion, replacement of plans/inspection card, appeals, driveway en- croachment) are based on a review of actual average costs for those activities in the past. • '1, " - z LAWRENCE STEVENS U YL. ARDEN ' Planning Director C' y Ma ger Ps • RESOLUTION NO. 40-83 • A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING FEES FOR PERMITS, PLAN REVIEWS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN PURSUANT TO BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION REGULATIONS WHEREAS, the Government Code provides that fees may be collected to cover the costs of administering permit, plan review and inspection activities; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate to establish fees and deposits which provide for the user of services to pay for the cost of providing the services; and WHEREAS, the International Conference of Building Officials has prepared standardized fee schedules which are in widespread use, based on their experience with permit, plan review and inspection activi- ties; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department has prepared estimates based on its own experience for activities not included in the standardized fee schedules. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Atascadero City Council does hereby establish the following fees, for permits, plan reviews, and other activities undertaken pursuant to building and construction regulations: TABLE NO. 1 - BUILDING PERMITS VALUATION PERMIT FEE $1. 00 to $500.00 $10 .00 $501.00 to $2,000.00 $10 .00 for the first $500. 00 plus $1. 50 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and includ- ing $2, 000 .00 $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $32.50 for the first $2, 000. 00 plus $6.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and includ- ing $25,000 . 00 $25, 001.00 to $50,000.00 $170. 50 for the first $25,000. 00 plus $4. 50 for each additional • $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50 ,000. 00 • • Resolution No. 40-83 $50 ,001.00 to $100 ,000. 00 $283. 00 for the first $50 ,000.00 plus $3.00 for each additional $1,000 .00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100 ,001. 00 and up $433. 00 for the first $100 ,000.00 plus $2. 50 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof TABLE NO. 2 - ELECTRICAL PERMITS ' System Fee Schedule New Residential Buildings The following fees shall inlcude all wiring and elec- trical equipment in or on each building, or other electrical equipment on the same premises constructed at the same time. For new multifamily residential buildings (apartments and condominiums) having three or more living units not including the area of garages, carports and other noncommercial automobile storage areas con- structed at the same time, per square foot . . . . . . . .02 For new single and two-family residential buildings not including the area of garages, carports and other noncommercial automobile storage areas con- structed at the same time, per square foot . . . . . . . .025 For other types of residential occupancies and altera- tions, additions and modifications to existing residential buildings, use the UNIT FEE SCHEDULE. Private Swimming Pools For new private, residential, in-ground swimming pools for single-family and multi-family occupancies including a complete system of necessary branch circuit wiring, bonding, grounding, underwater lighting, water pumping and other similar electri- cal equipment directly related to the operation of a swimming pool, each 20 .00 For other types of swimming pools, therapeutic whirl- pools, spas and alterations to existing swimming pools, use the UNIT FEE SCHEDULE. 2 • i Resolution No. 40-83 Carnivals and Circuses Carnivals, circuses, or other traveling shows or exhi- bitions utilizing transportable-type rides, booths, displays and attractions: For electric generators and electrically driven rides, each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.00 For mechanically driven rides and walk-through attrac- tions or displays having electric lighting, each 3. 00 For a system of area and booth lighting, each . . . . . . . . . 3.00 For permanently installed rides, booths, displays and attractions, use the UNIT FEE SCHEDULE. Temporary Power Services For a temporary service power pole or pedestal including all pole or pedestal-mounted receptacle outlets and appurtenances, each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.00 For a temporary distribution system and temporary light- ing and receptacle outlets for construction sites, decorative light, Christmas tree sales lots, fire- work stands, etc. , each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.00 Unit Fee Schedule Receptacle, Switch and Lighting Outlets For receptacle, switch, lighting or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except ser- vices, feeders and meters: First 20 , each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Additional outlets, each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 NOTE: For multi-outlet assemblies, each 5 feet or frac- tion thereof may be considered as one outlet. Lighting Fixtures For lighting fixtures, sockets or other lamp-holding devices: First 20 , each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 Additional fixtures, each. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 For pole or platform-mounted lighting fixtures, each . . . 50 3 Resolution No. 40-83 For theatrical-type lighting fixtures or assemblies, each .50 Residential Appliances For fixed residential applicances or receptacle outlets for same, including wall-mounted electric ovens; counter-mounted cooking tops; electric ranges; self- contained room, console, or through-wall air condi- tioners; space heaters; food waste grinders; dish- washers; washing machines; water heaters, clothes dryers; or other motor-operated appliances not ex- ceeding one horsepower (HP) in rating, each . . . . . . 2.00 NOTE: For other types of air conditioners and other motor-driven appliances having larger electrical ratings, see Power Apparatus. Nonresidential Appliances For residential applicances and self-contained factory- wired, nonresidential appliances not exceeding one horsepower (HP) , kilowatt (KW) , or kilovoltampere (KVA) , in rating including medical and dental de- vices; food, beverage, and ice cream cabinets; illuminated show cases; drinking fountains vending machines; laundry machines; or other similar types of equipment, each . . . . . . 2.00 NOTE: For other types of air conditions and other motor- driven applicances having larger electrical ratings, see Power Apparatus. Power Apparatus For motors, generators, transformers, rectifiers, syn- chronous converters, capacitors, industrial heat- ing, air conditioners and heat pumps, cooking or baking equipment and other apparatus, as follows: Rating in horsepower (HP) , kilowatts (KW) , kilo- volt-amperes (KVA) , or kilovolt-amperesreactive (KVAR) : Up to and including 1, each . . . . . 2.00 Over 1 and not over 10 , each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.00 Over 10 and not over 50, each . . . . . . 10 .00 Over 50 and not over 100 , each . . 20.00 Over 100 , each . . . . . . 30 .00 NOTE: 1. For equipment or appliances having more than one motor, transformer, heater, etc. , the sum of the combined ratings may be used. 4 • Resolution No. 40-83 2. These fees include all switches, circuit breakers, contactors, thermostats, relays and other directly related control equipment. Signs, Outline Lighting and Marquees For signs, outline lighting systems or marquees supplied from one branch circuit, each 10.00 For additional branch circuits within the same sign, outline lighting system or marquee, each . . . . . . . . . 2.00 Services - For services of 600 volts or less and not over 200 amperes in rating, each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.50 For services of 600 volts or less and over 200 amperes to 1000 amperes in rating, each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.00 For services over 600 volts or over 1000 amperes in rating, each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50.00 Miscellaneous Apparatus, Conduits and Conductors For electrical apparatus, conduits and conductors for which a permit is required but for which no fee is herein set forth 7.50 NOTE: This fee is not applicable when a fee is paid for one or more services, outlets, fixtures, appliances, power apparatus, busways, signs or other equipment. TABLE NO. 3 - MECHANICAL PERMITS 1. For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type furnance or burner , including ducts and vents attached to such appliance, up to and including 100, 000 Btu/h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.00 2. For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type furnance or burner , including ducts and vents attached to such appliance over 100,000 Btu/h . . . 7. 50 3. For the installation or relocation of each floor furnace, including vent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.00 4. For the installation or relocation of each suspended heater , recessed wall heater , or floor-mounted unit heater 6.00 5. For the installation, relocation or replacement of each appliance vent installed and not included in an appliance permit . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.00 5 Resolution No. 40-83 6. For the repair of, alteration of, or addition to each heating appliance, refrigeration unit, cooling unit, absorption unit, or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of con- trols regulated by the UMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.00 7. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or com- pressor to and including three horsepower , or each absorp- tion system to and including 100,000 Btu/h . . . . . . . . . . . 6.00 8. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or com- pressor over three horsepower to and including 15 horse- power, or each absorption system over 100 ,000 Btu/h and including 500,000 Btu/h . . . . . . . . . . 11.00 9 . For the installation or relocation of each boiler or com- pressor over 15 horsepower to and including 30 horsepower, or each absorption system over 500,000 Btu/h to and in- cluding 1,000,000 Btu/h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.00 10. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or com- pressor over 30 horsepower to and including 50 horsepower, or for each absorption system over 1,000,000 Btu/h to and including, 1, 750,000 Btu/h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22. 50 11. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or refrigeration compressor over 50 horsepower , or each absorption system over 1,750 ,000 Btu/h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 .50 12. For each air-handling unit to and including 10,000 cubic feet per minute, including ducts attached thereto . . . . . 4.50 NOTE: This fee shall not apply to an air-handling unit which is a portion of a factory-assembled appliance, cooling unit, evaporative cooler or absorption unit for which a permit is required elsewhere in the UMC. 13. For each air-handling unit over 10,000 cfm 7.50 14. For each evaporative cooler other than portable type . . 4. 50 15. For each ventilation fan connected to a single duct . . . 4. 50 16. For each ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air-conditioning system authorized by a permit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 50 17. For the installation of each hood which is served by me- chanical exhaust, including the ducts for such hood . . . 4. 50 18. For the installation or relocation of each domestic-type incinerator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. 50 19. For the installation or relocation of each commercial or industrial-type incinerator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 .00 6 Resolution No. 40-83 20 . For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by this code but not classed in other appliance categories, 0 or for which no other fee is listed herein . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 50 TABLE NO. 4 - PLUMBING PERMITS 1. For each plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap (including water, drainage piping, and backflow protection therefor) . . . 4.00 2. For each building sewer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.00 3. Rainwater systems-per drain (inside building) . . . . . . . . . 4.00 4. For each private sewage disposal system 30 .00 5. For each water heater and/or vent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.00 6. For each industrial waste pretreatment interceptor in- cluding its trap and vent, excepting kitchen-type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps 8.00 7. For installation, alteration, or repair of water piping and/or water-treating equipment, each 2.00 8. For repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping, each fixture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 00 9. For each lawn sprinkler -system on any one meter, including backflow protection devices therefor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.00 10. For atmospheric-type vacuum breakers not included in Item 2: 1 to 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.00 Over 5, each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.00 11. For each backflow protective device other than atmos- pheric-type vacuum breakers: 2 inches and smaller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.00 Over 2 inches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. 00 12. For each gas piping system of one to four outlets . . . . . 2. 00 13. For each gas piping system of five or more outlets, per outlet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 14. For each gas meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12. 50 7 Resolution No. 40-83 TABLE NO. 5 - GRADING PERMITS 50 cubic yards or less . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.00 51 to 100 cubic yards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.00 101 to 1000 cubic yards - $15.00 for the first 100 cubic yards plus $7. 00 for each additional 100 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 1001 to 10,000 cubic yards - $78.00 for the first 1,000 cubic yards, plus $6 .00 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards or, fraction thereof. 10, 001 to 100,000 cubic yards - $132.00 for the first 10 ,000 cubic yards, plus $27.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 100 ,001 cubic yards or more - $375 .00 for the first 100 ,000 cubic yards, plus $15.00 for each additional 10, 000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. TABLE NO. 6 - SOLAR PERMITS For Collectors (including related piping and regulating devices) - Up to 1000 sq. ft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 00 Between 1,001 and 2, 000 sq. ft. . . . . . . 5.00 More than 2, 000 sq. ft. , $5. 00 plus $1. 00 per 1000 sq. ft. or fraction thereof over 2,000 sq. ft. For Storage Tanks (including related piping and ;regulating devices) - Up to 750 gallons . . . . . . 2.00 Between 751 and 2, 000 gallons . . . . . . 3. 00 More than 2,000 gallons, $3. 00 plus $1. 00 per 1, 000 or fraction thereof over 2,000 gallons For Rock Storage - Up to 1500 cu. ft. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 00 Between 1501 and 3000 cu. ft. . . . . . . 3.00 More than 3000 cu. ft. , $3. 00 plus $1. 00 per 1000 cu. ft. or fraction thereof over 3000 cu. ft. For each appliance or piece of equipment for which no fee is listed . . . . . . . . . 2.00 8 0 s Resolution No. 40-83 TABLE NO. 7 - SIGN PERMITS VALUATION PERMIT FEE $1.00 to $500.00 $10.00 $50.1.00 to $2,000.00 $10.00 for the first $500. 00 plus $1. 50 for each additional $100 .00 or fraction thereof, to and includ- ing $2, 000 .00 $2,001.00 to $25,000 .00 $32. 50 for the first $2,000.00 plus $6. 00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and includ- ing $25,000.00 $25, 001.00 to $50,000.00 $170 . 50 for the first $25,000.00 plus $4. 50 for each additional $1,000 .00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50 ,000 .00 $50,001.00 to $100 , 000 .00 $283. 00 for the first $50,000.00 plus $3. 00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100 ,000.00 $100,001.00 and up $433.00 for the first $100 ,000.00 plus $2. 50 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof TABLE NO. 8 - SWIMMING POOL PERMITS For swimming pools and for spas and hot tubs not installed at the same time as a building or building addition: VALUATION PERMIT FEE $1. 00 to $500.00 $10. 00 $501.00 to $2, 000 . 00 $10.00 for the first $500.00 plus $1. 50 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and includ- ing $2,000.00 $2,001. 00 to $25,000 . 00 $32. 50 for the first $2,000 .00 plus $6 .00 for each additional $1,000 .00 or fraction thereof, to and includ- ing $25,000.00 $25,001.00 to $50 ,000 .00 $170. 50 for the first $25,000.00 plus $4. 50 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000. 00 9 � s Resolution No. 40-83 $50 ,001. 00 to $100,000 .00 $283.00 for the first $50 ,000.00 plus $3. 00 for each additional $1,000 .00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000. 00 $100,001.00 and up $433. 00 for the first $100,000 . 00 plus $2. 50 for each additional $1, 000 .00 or fraction thereof For spas and hot tubs installed at the same time as a building or building addition . . . . . . 20.00 For swimming pool, spa and hot tub equipment, use Table Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 6 as appropriate. TABLE NO. 9 - RETAINING WALL PERMITS VALUATION PERMIT FEE $1. 00 to $500. 00 $10.00 $501. 00 to $2,000 .00 $10 . 00 for the first $500 .00 plus $1. 50 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and includ- is ing $2,000. 00 $2,001. 00 to $25 ,000. 00 $32. 50 for the first $2,000 .00 plus $6. 00 for each additional $1,000. 00 or fraction thereof, to and includ- ing $25,000.00 $25,001. 00 to $50 ,000. 00 $170 .50 for the first $25 ,000 .00 plus $4.50 for each additional $1,000 .00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000. 00 $50, 001. 00 to $100 ,000 . 00 $283. 00 for the first $50 ,000.00 plus $3. 00 for each additional $1,000 .00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100 ,001. 00 and up $433 . 00 for the first $100 ,000 .00 plus $2.50 for each additional $1,000 .00 or fraction thereof TABLE NO. 10 - PLAN CHECKING For buildings or structures, signs, swimming pools or spas or hot tubs, and retaining walls: 65% of the permit fee as set forth in the appropriate Table 10 0 Resolution No. 40-83 For buildings or structures, signs, swimming pools or spas or hot tubs, and retaining walls, which have standard plan approvals or approvals from other authorized agencies: $20. 00 or 65% of the permit fee as set forth in the appropriate Table, whichever is less For electrical, mechanical, plumbing and solar if plans are not checked in conjuction with buildings or structures to be constructed at the same time: 25% of the permit fees as set forth in the appropriate Table For grading plan checking: 50 cubic yards or less . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No fee 51 to 100 cubic yards 10.00 101 to 1000 cubic yards 15.00 1001 to 10, 000 cubic yards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20. 00 10 ,001 to 100 ,000 cubic yards - $20 ,00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards, plus $10,00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 100 ,001 to 200,000 cubic yards - $110. 00 for the first 100 , 000 cubic yards, plus $6 .00 for each additional 10, 000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 200 ,001 cubic yards or more - $170 .00 for the first 200 ,000 cubic yards, plus $3.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. For additional plan checking required by changes, additions, or revisions to approved plans: $15. 00 per hour , with a half-hour minimum charge TABLE NO. 11 - MISCELLANEOUS FEES Demolition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30.00 NOTE: Fee shall be waived by building official if building to be demolished is used for practice drills by Fire Department. Compliance Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .00 Building Relocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350. 00 Mobilehome (other than temporary dwelling) 200.00 Temporary Dwelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.00 11 • • Resolution No. 40-83 Permit Issuance • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . Each permit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.00 Each supplemental permit. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.00 Inspections outside of normal business hours (two hour minimum charge) 15.00/hr Reinspection (per Administrative Code Section) . . . . . . . 15.00/ea Inspections for which no fee is indicated (one-half hour minimum charge) . . . . . . 15.00/hr Replacement of inspection record card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.00 Replacement of job copy of approved plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. 00 Cross-connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (225. 00 deposit with unused portion, less 25.00 , to to be retained by City for its cost, based on ,actual cost billing by Health Department to be returned to the permittee) Driveway Encroachment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20. 00 Appeal To Board of Appeals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250.00 To City Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 .00 Investigation Fee (for work commenced without permit. . . Equal to permit fee re- quired by this Res- olution NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 'fees set forth in this Resolution shall take effect on the effective date of Ordinance No. 70. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: 12 r • Resolution No. 40-83 MARJORIE R. MACKEY, Mayor ATTEST: BARBARA NORRIS, City Clerk APPROVED AS T ORM: _ A ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Manager 13 iEETING AGENDA TES ITEM#� LUIS ONSP(lo)" S;an i I i • OFFICE OF THE MAYOR• 990 PALM STREET Post Office Box 321 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93406-0321 • 8051541-1000 September 20, 1983 Marjorie Mackey, Mayor City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Marge: Enclosed is the resolution we have drafted up following the mayors' meeting last week. I hope that this reflects all our collective concerns. We tried to be specific so as to appeal to the broadest number of cities at the annual meeting. Let us know any additional thoughts that you might have as well as what your City Council's direction is. Just as an aside, our Council is unanimously supporting the resolution. • Time is an urgent factor, so I need to hear from you in the next day or SO. If you do not have meetings, perhaps you could contact your members individually as to their feelings about bringing this to the annual conference for action. Please call Kim or Marilyn at 541-1000, ext. 11 or 12, with the recommendation of your city. Many thanks for all of your cooperation, and I'll see you at the League meeting! Best regards, �p - Me�CBillig Mayor MCB:mkh Encl. • A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYORS AND COUNCILMEMBERS OF ALL CITIES IN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY • URGING THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES TO DEVELOP AND SPONSOR A CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTIONAL INITIATIVE RESTORING AND GUARANTEEING LOCAL CONTROL OF ALL FINAL LAND USE, SUBDIVISION, AND ANNEXATION APPROVALS FOR PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTY WHEREAS, a traditional and fundamental "municipal affair" of all local government is "local control" of all final land use, subdivision, and annexation approvals for privately owned real property; and WHEREAS, the California Legislature and state agencies have become more and more involved in usurping local control of all such matters including, without limitation: 1. Special state land use bills for developers lobbying at the state level; 2. Annexation statutes purporting to give final . annexation decisions to officials outside the local agency; • 3. The establishment of various housing mandates which (a) require local agencies to respond to nebulous area-wide housing needs; and (b) interfere with local governmental attempts to provide safe, quiet, pleasant, and economically sound residential areas for its citizens; 4. Requiring multiple-family occupancies in single-family neighborhoods; 5. Enacting extensive condominium conversion regulations, most of which are unrelated to any valid state purpose or concern; 6. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , Local Coastal Plan (LCP) , and similar state regulations, ad infinitum, which far exceed any valid state purpose or concern; and • Page 1 . WHEREAS, California state courts have long claimed the sole power to determine those matters which are municipal affairs free from inter- ference by the state, but said courts have recently tended more and more to uphold the "preemption" power of the state and its agencies to interfere with and negate local control of such matters; and WHEREAS, we believe that the proper role of the state in such matters is to promulgate uniform statewide procedures and guidelines so that owners of private property subject to regulation of local agencies will be assured of due process and equal treatment, but that the sub- stantive provisions and the final decisions of approval for all such matters would be retained exclusively by the local agency in which the real property will be situated after the final decision; and WHEREAS, the aforesaid state preemption and interference in such local matters is destroying the ability of local government to effec- tively assert local control in responding to the needs and desires of its citizens for a safe, quiet, attractive, and pleasant community in which to live and provide for their families, and it is long past time for local elected officials to stop acquiescing and to, boldly reassert the local agency's role as the first bastion of democracy; and WHEREAS, the political realities are such that it would obviously be a further waste of time, money, and resources for local agencies to seek assistance from the Legislature or the courts to correct this situation, and the only practical and effective long-term solution is through a California constitutional amendment which returns the final approval authority on all land use, subdivision, and annexation matters to the control of local agencies as a local legislative act and imunicipal affair; Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE. TT RESOLVED by the Mayors of all cities in San Luis Obispo County (Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover City, Morro Bay, • Paso Robles, Pismo Beach, San Luis Obispo) as follows: 1. That the League of California Cities develop and sponsor a California constitutional initiative restoring and guarantee- ing the authority for final approval of all land use, subdivi- sion, and annexation of territory matters for privately owned real property to the local agency in which the property will be situated subsequent to such approval as municipal affairs and local legislative acts; and 2. That the proper function of the state, including state courts and all state agencies, shall be merely to promulgate uniform statewide procedures and guidelines for local agencies consi- dering annexation, land use and subdivision matters; provided that no such procedure or guideline, nor any other state action or policy, real or imagined, shall ever be interpreted or applied either to require local agency approval of any such matter, or to authorize or permit the state to delegate the final approval power in such matters. The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 1983. CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CITY OF ATASCADERO By: Bv: B'ANN SMITH, Mayor MARJORIE MACKEY, Mayor CITY OF GROVER CITY CITY OF MORRO BAY Bv: By: JUANITA QUALLS, Mayor EUGENE R. SHELTON, Mayor CITY OF PASO ROBLES CITY OF PISMO BEACH Bv: By: GARY E. STEMPE.R, Mayor BILL RICHARDSON, Mayor CITY OF SAN LULS c_,BTSP� By: MELANIE C. BILI,TG, Mayor Page 3