HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 03/26/1991 # PUBLIC REVIEW COPY
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
FROM COUNTER
AGENDA
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR. MEETING
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6500 PALMA
FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM
MARCH 26, 1991
7:00 P.M.
This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the require-
ments of Government Code Section 54954.2. By listing a topic on
this agenda, the City Council has expressed its intent to discuss
and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in the
brief general description of each item, the action that may be tak-
en shall includes A referral to staff with specific requests for
information; continuance; specific direction; to staff concerning
the policy or mission of the item; discontinuance of consideration;
authorization to enter into negotiations and execute agreements
pertaining to the item; adoption or approval; and, disapproval.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to
each item of business referred to on the agenda are on file in the
office of the City Clerk, available for public inspection during
City Hall business hours. The City Clerk will answer any questions
regarding the agenda.
RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
* Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda.
* A person may speak for five (5) minutes.
* No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to
speak has had an opportunity to do so.
* No one may speak more than twice on any item.
* Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may
respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not
initiate further discussion.
* The floor will then be closed to public participation and
open for Council discussion.
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
City Council Comment:
Proclamation: "Earth Day Celebration", April 5-21, 1991
1
COMMUNITY FORUM:
The City Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and
g g
comments from you, the citizen. The Community Forum period is
provided to receive comments from the public on matters other than
scheduled agenda items. To increase the effectiveness of Community
Forum, the following rules will be enforced:
* A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum,
unless Council authorizes an extension.
* All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and
not to any individual member thereof.
* No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or
personal remarks against any Council Member, commissions &
staff.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are consid-
ered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form
listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these items.
A member of the Council or public may, by request, have any item
removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then be reviewed and
acted upon separately after the adoption of the Consent Calendar.
1. FEBRUARY 26, 1991 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
2. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT'- FEBRUARY, 1991
3. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT - FEBRUARY, 1991
4 NOTICE OF RESIGNATION OF JOHN ' EDENS, JR. FRO14 BUILDING &
CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS and REQUEST OF CITY CLERK TO
RECRUIT FOR REPLACEMENT
5. RESOLUTION NO. 25-91 - AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR STATE HIS-
TORICAL PRESERVATION GRANT
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES:
1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 18-90, 7970 SINALOA AVE. Consideration
of Conditions of Approval (Best/Cuesta Engineering)
2. ZONE CHANGE 6-90/TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30-90, 5160/5180 PALMA.
AVENUE - Request to establish a Planned Development Overlay
Zone (PD) and to allow subdivision of two Colony lots into six
lots ranging in sire from 51194 square feet to 6,958 square
feet each. (Hazard/Tartaglia-Hughes)
(continued next page. . . )
2
A. Ordinance No. 219 - Amending Map 16 of the official zon-
ing maps by rezoning certain real property at 5160 and
5180 Palma Ave. from RMF/10 to (PD7) (Recommend
motion to waive reading in full and approve on first
reading by title only)
B. TTM 30-90 - Approve, subject to the Planning Commission' s
Findings and Conditions of Approval
C. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1. DRAFT SIGN ORDINANCE - CHAMBER OF COMMERCEREQUEST FOR CITY TO
CONSIDER PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE
2. WATER ISSUES
A. Informational Memos
B. Cooperative Agreements with Water Company
3. TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATIONS ON MORRO ROAD
A. Authorization to borrow Federal Aide Urban (FAU) funds
from Grover City, Paso Robles and, possibly, Morro Bay to
provide local match for three signals on Morro Road
B. Resolution No. 26-91 Approving and authorizing execu-
tion of a Cooperative Agreement between the City and the
State of California for the installation of (3) traffic
control devices (Hwy. 41 @ Ataacadero Ave. , Hwy. 41 @
Portola Rd. ,_ and Hwy. 41 @ Curbaril Ave.)'
D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: `
1. City Council:
A. Committee Reports (The following represents ad hoc or
standing committees. Informative status reports will be
given, as felt necessary. ) :
1. City/School Committee
2. North Coastal Transit/S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council
3. Traffic Committee
4 Solid/Hazardous Waste 'Mgmt. Committee
5. Recycling Committee
6. Economic Opportunity Commission
7. B.T.A.
8. Downtown Interim Sign Committee
3
2.- City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
5. City Manager
* NOTICE: THE COUNCIL ;WILL ADJOURN TO 3:00 P.M. , FRIDAY,
APRIL 5, 1991, 4TH FLOOR CLUB ROOM, FOR CLOSED
SESSION DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPERTY PURCHASE,
PERSONNEL AND POTENTIAL' 'LITIGATION MATTERS. AT
APPROXIMATELY 4:30 P.M. , THE COUNCIL WILL CONVENE
IN OPEN SESSION FOR A WORKSHOP TO INCLUDE DISCUS-
SION ON THE FIVE-YEAR CITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM, THE STATUS OF SS' 169; AND POSSIBLE STRAT-
EGIES, AND AN UPDATE ON THE CITY'S ROADS POLICY.
4
P R O C L A M A T I O N
EARTH DAY CELEBRATION IN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
April 6 - 21, 1991
WHEREAS, The people of San Luis Obispo County will celebrate
Earth Day with a full week of events, culminating in the Earth Day
Faire; and
WHEREAS, Events throughout the County will begin on April 6th
and go through April 21st, and an Earth Day Faire will be held on
April 21st at E1 Chorro Regional Park from 10: 00 a.m. to 5: 00 p.m. ;
and
WHEREAS, Earth Day 1991 activities and events will educate all
citizens on the importance of their environment and promote an
environmental awareness; and
WHEREAS, Earth Day 1991 will be the result of local citizens
that include business, media, religious, political, labor, academ-
ic, cultural and environmental leaders reaching beyond existing
environmental constituencies; and
WHEREAS, Cities and counties have an important roll to play in
Earth Day to help solve the environmental and natural resource
problems, because they make many important decisions that shape our
environmental future; and
WHEREAS, Local governments can make an enormous contribution
towards building understanding of programs such as ride-sharing,
recycling, energy and water conservation, and hazardous waste
reduction by supporting Earth Day 1991.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that Earth Day, 1991, shall
be observed during the period April 6th through April 22nd in the
City of Atascadero, and the City Council hereby urges the citizens
of our community to observe this period as a time for environmental
awareness and action through participation in community programs,
events and activities.
ROBERT B. LILLEY, Mayor
City of Atascadero, CA
Dated: March 26, 1991
MEETiN� AGENDA
OA 3T91ITEM
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 26, 1991
At 6: 10 p .m. , Mayor Lilley called to order an open session for-
the purpose of mid--year budget review. The Pledge of Allegiance
was deferred -1ntil commencement of the regular session at 7:00
p .m.
ROLL CALL:
Present : CoUncilmembers Borgeson, Shiers, Dexter and
Mayor Lilley
Absent : Councilman Nimmo ( arrived e:40 p .m. )
Also Present : Muriel Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Dayka,
City Clerk
Staff Present : Ray Windsor , City Manager ; Art Montandon,
• City Attorney ; Mark Joseph , Administrative
Services Director ; Henry Engen, Community
Development Director ; Greg Luke, Public Works
Director ; Andy Takata, Director of Parks,
Recreation & `oo ; Bud McHale, Police Chief;
Mike Hicks , Fire Chief and Kathy Stewart ,
Eng . Tech . II
MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW:
The City Manager presented the Mid-Year Budget status report and
noted that no major modifications were being requested . He
explained that certain overall adjustments were recommended and
summarized them as salary adjustments, added costs to fund a
water study and supplement General Plan Update E. I .R. costs ,
monies to be set aside for public education on recycling and the
reappropriation of encumbrances. Mr . Windsor asked Council to
review these adjustments and give staff direction to prepare the
necessary resolution for adoption.
In addition, the City Manager noted that in March of 1991 , the
County would be holding public hearings relating to potential
implementation of S92557 , The City, Mr . Windsor reported , could
be faced with approximately $140,000 in County Jail Booking fees
CC2i26/91
• Page 1
and Property Tax Administrative fees . He added that County staff
are recommending that the Board of Supervisors adopt theGe new
charges retroactive to July 1 , 1990.
The Administrative Services Director , Mark Joseph , availed
Himself for questions. Council inquiries followed egarding
revenues , salary negotiations, expenditures for risk management
and reappropriatlon of encumbrances. He explained that the
latter were monies charged to the current year which were
actually incurred the previous fiscal year .
By common consensus, Council directed staff to bring back
the necessary resolution approving the mid-year budget at
the next regular meeting.
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (C.I .P. ) :
The City Manager introduced the topic for discussion explaining
that the five-year C. I .P. is a guideline which allows the Council
and community to see what kinds of projects or programs are being
proposed for the future. At this time, Mr . Windsor referred to a
portion of the staff report ( print-out prioritizing projects) and
asked the Public Works Director to present an overview of the
recommendations . He clarified that the projects only become a
fiscal commitment when Council decides, as part of the budget , to •
incorporate any or all of the listed items . The City Manager
added that some of the items had already been included ! and in
some cases, completed ) as part of the existing fiscal year
budget .
Greg Luke , Public Works Director , gave an overview of recommended
projects and noted that there had not been any new projects added
to the current year ' s budget . He explained that under the C. I .P.
for his department, there is available a large sum of gas tax
revenue designated for Public Works projects . Mr . Luke clarified
that although the money has been allocated , the actual projects
have not been chosen and indicated that he was looking for
Council direction in making the selection.
The City Manager interjected that historically staff has asked
Council to authorize certain monies in the bud9et based on the
amount of gas tax expected supplemented by Local Tr-ansportation
Funds (L.T.F. ) or other sources; once this has been done, staff
then asks Council to approve making the expenditures. He
continued tnat this has not yet been done for the current fiscal
year and recommended that , because of the amount of money being
bu L 1 t up , Counc i i take a look at the area of gas t. >: al '.o,_ation
and determine project
CC2i26/91
Page 2 •
•
Councilwoman Borgeson referred to the Public Works Director ' s
staff report !2/19/91 Possible use of Gas Tax Funds to Supplement
Assessment Districts; and indicated that she was in support of
Recommendation #1 ( to closely examine regulations on the use of
Gas Tax funds ) . The City Manager added that all three
recommendations were of merit and stated that •he was looking for
approval from Council to begin working on them.
Responding to the mayor , Mr . Luke clarified the first three
projects listed under "Bridge Projects" , noting that each should
be read as follows : " the bridge on Monterey Road that crosses
Graves Creek Road ; the Garcia Road bridge that crosses Graves
Creek ; and the Santa Cruz bridge that crosses Graves Creek Road
Mr . Windsor added that these projects were at one point high
priority, even with the State who was putting in the bulk of the
funds. Since the earthquake in Santa Cruz , he explained , the
State has removed the funding and it is not known at what point
it will be replaced into the budget
Mayor Lilley protested that Public Works was asking for policy
direction without giving Council enough data to support the
request . The City Manager proposed conducting a study session in
which the Council could take a look at the C. I .P. and the future
• of the community . He added that there were additional matters of
importance Council may wish to address during this session.
Mayor Lilley and Councilwoman Borgeson both expressed support for
a work session, to study the C. I .P. Councilwoman Borgeson added
that although she had no problem with the list of project
priorities recommended by the Public Works Director , she would
like to have input regarding specifics, i .e. , types of bridges
constructed , etc .
Mr . Lube explained the process of priority ranking and indicated
that staff could provide more detail on each project during a
workshop .
Councilman Dexter remarked that he was agreeable to a study
session. The City Manager asked that the matter- be continued
until Councilman Nimmo arrived later in the evening . Council
concurred with the request .
Mr . Windsor also requested that Council add to the scheduled
closed session following the regular meeting an urgency item
relating to the Pavilion bid award .
CC2/26/91
• Page 3
At 7:00 p .m. , Mayor Lilley convened the regular session. At this •
time, he recognized and welcomed Kent Lowe, Scout Master , and his
local Boy Scout Troop #104 , who had come to observe. -
Mayor Lilley noted that the roll call would remain the same and
asked Councilman Dexter to lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
All present joined in silent prayer and recognition of
sacrifices made by armed forces in the Middle East .
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Mayor Lilley acknowledged a letter of appreciation addressed to
the City of Atascadero from Gary J. Bridges, LTC, Department of
the Army , 3rd Battalion stationed in Saudi Arabia. The mayor
read out loud the letter which was written on December b, 1990
thanking the City staff for the care packages sent to the troops
during the Christmas Holiday season.
Councilwoman Borgeson reported that she had been asked by a
member of the public if the City has a water conservation
program. She announced that there is, in place, a Water
Conservation Task Force and asked the City Manager to give more
information about this group .
Mr . Windsor replied that staff has taken the initiative to begin •
gathering data preliminary to making conservation recommendations
to Council . The committee, he reported, is headed by Fire Chief
Mike Hicks and would be working hard to get the information to
Council as quickly as possible. in addition, the City Manager
announced that Atascadero Mutual Water Company is going to
participate and share information with the City , and that they
would be conducting an open public hearing early in March .
Councilwoman Borgeson reported that she had r-eceived calls from
the community expressing dissatisfaction with the recently
approved rate increase for Wil-Mar Disposal ; and in addition,
concerns relating to the proposed collection bag . Ms . Borgeson
indicated that she would like to accelerate the review of the
rate structure.. The City Manager responded that this could be
done and to the benefit of all concerned .
Mayor Lilley commented that when he approved the Paste collection
rate increase, he expected that Wil-Mar would handle it gently
and revealed that he had received many calls himself . He
stressed that good communication with the public is necessary.
Both Councilman Dexter and Councilman Shiers reported that they,
Page 4 •
• too , had received similar complaints from the community.
Mr . Windsor acknowledged the presence of Bill Gibbs (Wil-Mar
Disposal ) and remarked that the garbage company would be
extending their office hours to better facilitate services and
added that the City was endeavoring to work closely with Wil
Mar .
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Doug Lewis , 5589 Tunitas , recounted a recent incident involving
an anonymous complaint made against him to the Fire Department
regarding a controlled burn. Mr . Lewis explained that he had
phoned ahead to ensure that he would be burning on an allowable
day and believed himself to be following the regulations for
backyard burning . He asserted that he was upset that the caller
did not identify him/herself and that the caller was not told
that Mr . Lewis was burning as allowed .
Henry Hank Adams, President of the Atascadero Democratic Club ,
announced that the group would be participating in the local
celebration of Arbor Day by planting a native oak in memory of
Ian McMillian at the Traffic Way Ballfield . Mr . Adams asked if
Council would designate the tree as a heritage tree. The City
Manager assured him that staff would do the right thing .
• Whitey Thorpe, Santa Ynez resident , congratulated the Boy Scout
Troop for observing the City Council meeting .
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Mayor Lilley read the Consent Calendar , as follows:
1 . FEBRUARY 12, 1991 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
2. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT —JANUARY, 1991
3. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT - JANUARY, 1991
4. ORDINANCE NO. 218 - Amending Map 7 of the official zoning
maps by rezoning that certain real property described as Lot
3, Pine Mtn. Park of Atascadero , recorded in Book 4 at Page
76, S.L .O. County official records, from LS (Special
Recreation) to LS(PD7) (Planned Development No . 7 )
(Noakes/RRM Design Group ) ( Second reading and adoption)
5. ORDINANCE NO. 214 - REVISED TREE ORDINANCE - Repealing
Chapter 19 of Title 2 and Section 9-4 . 155, and adding
CC2/26/91
• Page 5
Chapters 11 , 12 and 13 to Title 9 of the Atascadero •
Municipal Code regarding tree protection (Second reading &
adoption)
6. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 25-90, 9755 ENCHANTO ROAD - Division of
9. 14 acres into two parcels of 4 .99 and 4 . 16 acres (Render-
son/Vaughan Surveys )
Brief Council discussion followed regarding the current policy of
placing the second reading of ordinances on the Consent Calendar .
The City Manager pointed out that the matter was on the agenda
under regular business ( see Item #C-2) .
At this time, the mayor asked if there were any requests to pull
any of the items from the Consent Calendar . Councilwoman
Borgeson requested that Item #A-4 be pulled . Councilman Shiers
noted that the description of Item #A-6 should be amended to
include the following : "TentativeParcel Map _ 25-90, 9755
Enchanto Road Acceptance of Final Map" .
MOTION: By Councilman Shiers and seconded by Councilman Dexter
to amend Item #A-6; motion carried .
The City Clerk asked that Item #A-1 be continued until the next
regular meeting . •
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilwoman
Borgeson to continue Item #A-l ; motion carried .
Doug Lewis , of Atascadero , asked that Item #A-5 be pulled for a
separate vote.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman Shiers
to approve Items A-2, A-3 and A-6 as amended ; motion
unanimously passed by roll call vote.
Discussion of Items pulled from the Consent Calendar :
4. ORDINANCE NO. 218 - Amending Map 7 of the official zoning
maps by rezoning that certain real property described as Lot
3, Pine Mtn. Park of Atascadero , recorded in Book 4 at Page
76, S.L.O. County official records, from LS (Special
Recreation) to LS(PD7) (Planned Development No . 7)
( Noakes/RRM Design Group ) ( Second reading and adoption)
Councilwoman Borgeson asked that Ordinance No . 218 be read by
title only and stated that she wanted it on the record that she
was in opposition to the rezoning . Councilman Shiers indicated
CC2/26/91
Page 6 •
• that he, too , was not in favor of the ordinance.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Mayor Lilley to
approve Item #A-4 , adoption of Ordinance #218, on
second reading . The voice vote on the motion resulted
in a 2:2 vote; with Councilmembers Borgeson and Shiers
opposing . '
The City Attorney advised that on a split vote no action could
be taken; Council could , he remarked , continue the matter until _
later in the meeting when Councilman Nimmo would be present .
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Mayor Lilley to
remove Item #A-4 and resubmit it later in the agenda;
motion carried 3: 1 with Councilwoman Borgeson voting
against the continuance.
5. ORDINANCE NO. 214 REVISED TREE ORDINANCE - Repealing
Chapter 19 of Title 2 and Section 9-4. 155, and adding
Chapters ll , 12 and 13 to Title 9 of the Atascadero
Municipal Code regarding tree protection (Second reading &
adoption )
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman Shiers
to approve Ordinance No . 214 on second reading ; motion
carried 4 :0, with Councilman Nimmo absent .
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES:
1 . SAN MARCOS ROAD EXTENSION - TREE REMOVAL REQUEST (Cont ' d
from 1 /8/91 meeting - Applicant requests a 90-day extension)
A. Appeal of Negative Declaration ( Joan O ' Keefe)
B. Tree removal request
Henry Engen reported that the applicants had ,made a request for a
90-day continuance with the understanding that they would waive
any statutory response time deadlines. He acknowledged the
presence of Glen Lewis, attorney for the applicants .
Mayor Lilley asked the appellant , Joan O ' Keefe, if she had any
objection to the continuance. Ms. O ' Keefe indicated that she did
not . Mr . Lewis , in response to the mayor ' s inquiry , confirmed
that the request for continuance had been requested by him on
behalf of the Davis Family Trust .
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman Shiers
to continue the matter for ninety days ; motion carried .
CC2/26/91
• Page
The City Manager advised Council to announce a meeting date. Mr . •
Engen suggested May 14 , 1991 .
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman Shiers
to continue the matter until May 149 1991 ; motion
carried .
C. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1 . PAVILION — PHASE II BID AWARD
The City Manager suggested continuing this agenda item until
later in the evening when Councilman Nimmo would be present .
MOTIONS By Councilwoman Borgeson and seconded by Mayor Lilley
to continue this matter as Regular Business Item #6;
motion unanimously passed .
2. COUNCIL AGENDA FORMAT — ORDINANCE ADOPTIONS
The City Manager requested , in light of comments from the Council
and public , direction be given regarding the placement of second
readings on the agenda , He asked that Council acknowledge
whether or not they wanted to continue placing these matters on
the Consent Calendar or whether they would prefer to hear them
under Regular Business .
Councilman Dexter stated that he had no objection to the present
format , but recognized the confusion associated with split votes
on ordinances. Councilwoman Borgeson reiterated that she did not
want second readings of ordinances on the Consent Calendar and
stated that was in favor of hearing them under Regular Business.
Councilman Shiers concurred .
There was no public comment .
By common consensus, staff was directed to place second
readings of all ordinances on the agenda under Regular
Business.
3. RESOLUTION NO. 12-91 - ESTABLISHING ATASCADERO ECONOMIC
ROUND TABLE
Mayor Lilley introduced the item and announced that appointee,
Richard Shannon, had advised him that he would not be able to
serve on the Pound Table and wished to have his name removed from
the proposed resolution.
CC2/26/91
Page 3 •
• The City Manager reported that Mr . Shannon ' s withdrawal would
result in a membership of twelve and explained that the format of
the resolution was to provide guidance for the committee. ,
Councilwoman Ber-geson thanked staff for using great care acid
craftsmanship in preparing the resolution, and stated that she
was supportive of formirig the Round Table. She indicated .
however , that s`-ie had a problem with putting the committee in
place by resolution because it may appear to be of similar
standing to the Planning Commission .
Mr . Windsor noted that the Round Table would be unique in that it
would meet only as necessary to address issues. Henry Engen
clarified that the Planning Commission and other formal advisory
bodies are established by ordinance and specific appointments
are made by resolution.
Councilwoman Sorgeson asserted that she could support a motion to
put the Round Table into place, but strongly opposed establishing
it by resolution. Councilman Dexter remarked that it would be
sufficient to simply establish - the committee by action of the
Council . Councilman Shiers agreed .
There were no public comments.
• MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman, Shiers
that the City Council of At:ascadero establish the
Economic Round Table and define its ' purposes and
specific membership as outlined in proposed Resolution
No . 12-91 ; motion carried 4:0.
4. BUDGET REVIEW — 5—YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman Shiers
to zontinue this matter as Item #C-7 under Regular
Susiness ; motion carried .
The City Manager noted , for the public , that in light of earlier
discussion, this matter may be put over to a City Council study
session.
5. COUNTY SATELLITE FACILITIES
Councilwoman Borgeson submitted her February 19, 1991 statement
to the Board of Supervisors ( see Exhibit A) requesti .-ig satellite
offices in the North County. She asked that the Council back her
request by adopting a resolution of support .
CC2/26/91
• Page 9
Brief Council discussion followed regarding possible locations of •
office space.
By common consensus, Council directed staff to bring back a
resolution endorsing the efforts of Supervisor Ovitt 's
initiative to obtain satellite facilities for ' County
services in the North County.
Mayor Lilley called a recess at 8:08 p.m. The meeting was
reconvened at 8:22 p.m.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter- and seconded by Councilman Shiers
to move on to Individual Determination and Actions;
motion carried .
D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1 • City Council :
A. Committee Reports - The following represents status
reports on the following committees:
1 . City/School Committee - Councilman Dexter reported that
the committee had met and discussed funding cooperation
between County./Cities & Schools . Mr . Windsor reported •
that he had shared with the School District the
resolution of opposition to S32557 (Resolution No . 1-
91 ) , adding that the School District was in support .
He noted that the committee would be meeting again on
Thursday, February 29, 1991 .
The City Manager also announced that there would be a
meeting in San Luis Obispo also on Thursday, February
28, 1991 called by the City of San Luis Obispo inviting
all the City Managers, Police Chiefs and School
Superintendents. He explained that the meeting would
be for the purposes of planning possible strategies
relating to SB2557 and SB169 and would not open to the
public . Mr . Windsor further indicated that he would
share with Council the outcome.
2. North Coastal Transit/S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council
Councilwoman Borgeson reported that the next meeting
would be on March 12, 1991 .
3. Traffic Committee - The Public Works Director reported
that there would be action items on the next agenda.
CC2/2b/91
Page 10 •
• 4. Recycling Committee Councilman Shiers reported that
the committee had met on February 21 , 1991 and
discussed implementation of free yard waste picF -up ;
which is scheduled to begin on April t , 1991 . In
addition, he reported that Sharon Morin had resigned as
member-at-large. Councilman Shiers noted that because
cf the large size of the committee and the committee ' s
appointment policy , no recruitment would be necessary.
5. Economic Opportunity Commission - Councilman Dexter
briefly explained the services offered by the E.O.C.
6. Interim Sign Committee - Mayor Lilley reported that a
meeting was scheduled with the Chamber of Commerce for
Monday, March 4 , 1991 and would be for the purpose of
hearing the Chamber of Commerce ' s proposed sign
ordinance.
2. City Attorney
Mr . Montandon reported that he and another attorney from Burke,
Williams and Sorenson ( firm representing the City of Atascadero)
met with the attorney from Wells Fargo Bank in an attempt to
resolve in a legal manner the issues surrounding the Colony
Roads . He explained that the meeting had been very productive
• and another meeting was scheduled for the coming week . The City
Attorney indicated that he hoped to be able to convene a meeting
of the Road Committee sometime during the month of March to
discuss the matter .
3. City Clerk
The Clerk gave a brief report on her recent attendance at a
session of C.E.P.O. (Continuing Education for Public Officials)
and announced that she had been appointed by the Secretary of
State as a Notary Public . In addition, she reported that she was
currently doing research on records retention requirements and
would be coming back later in the year with recommendations for
implementing a records management plan for the City of
Atascadero .
4. City Treasurer
Micki Kor-ba made a minor correction to the January Treasurer ' s
Report (under Miscellaneous - the percentage should be 645;:) . In
addition, she reported that approximately $20, 000 far- Garcia Road
Extension tree removal fines was owed to the Tree Fuad .
CC2/26/91
• Page 11
Brief discussion followed regarding the Treasurer ' s Report format •
and graphic illustrations of revenues and expenditures provided
by the Treasurer ,
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman Shiers
to adjourn to closed session for the purposes of
discussions relating to property acquisition and
potential litigation; motion carried .
The City Attorney read into the record the items for discussion
in the closed session , as follows:
"To discuss with the City ' s property negotiator the
acquisition of certain properties, which are as follows:
The five lots owned by Mr . Guidry at approximately 9080
Amapoa Street , one lot owned by Mr . Porter at 9420
Marchant Avenue, two parcels comprising of the
Davis/King property located on Capistrano ; which is
legally described as portion of Lot 3, Life Residence
Park , Atascadero Colony and a 26-acre parcel known as
Stadium Park currently owned by Mr . Fluet .
Additionally, Council is adjourning to discuss a matter of
potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section •
54956.9 . "
(Councilman Nimmo arrived at 8:40 p .m. )
The open session was adjourned to closed session at 8:44 p.m. On
a motion by Councilman Dexter , seconded by Councilman Nimmo and
by unanimous vote, the closed session was adjourned at 9:20 p .m.
At 9:21 p.m. the open session reconvened and continued items of
regular business were heard, as follows:
* PAVILION - PHASE II BID AWARD
The mayor advised that all bidders reportedly were responsible
and read proposed Resolution No . 13-91 awarding the contract to
Darren Shetler Construction Company of San Luis Obispo .
Darren Shetler , 1000 Garcia Road and owner of Darren Shetler
Construction, provided background on his education and
experience. He asked that Council award the contract to him
based on his gUalifications .
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Dexter
to adopt Resolution No . 13-91 ( authorizing the
CC2/26/91
Page 12 •
execution of an agreement g ement with Shetler Construction for
construction of the Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion) ;
motion unanimously carried by roll call vote.
The mayor Clarified that- Council was approving the base bid in
the amount of $1 ,261 ,418.00.
BUDGET REVIEW - 5-YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM
Mayor Lilley summarized the earlier discussions and indicated
that the Council was considering a work session to review not
only the 5-Year C. I .P. , but also strategies in making decisions
regarding implementation of S32557, road policies, organization
of city hall and matters relating circulation and traffic .
Councilwoman Borgeson asked that at least four hours be scheduled
for such a workshop .
By Council consensus, the City Manager was asked to schedule
a study session on a date prior to April 1 , 1991 . The City
Manager indicated that he would come back to Council on the
final selection of a date.
( The following matter was pulled from the Consent Calendar and
• continued for- further action by full Council . )
* ORDINANCE NO. 218 - Amending Map 7 of the official zoning
maps by rezoning that certain real property described as Lot
3, Pine Mtn. Park of Atascadero , recorded in Book 4 at Page
76, S.L .O. County official records , from LS ( Special
Recreation) to LS(PD7) (Planned Development No . 7)
(Noakes/RPM Design Group ) ( Second reading and adoption )
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter 'and seconded by Councilman Nimmo
to adopt Ordinance No . 218 on second reading ; motion
carried on a 3:2 with Councilmembers Shiers and
Borgeson voting in opposition.
( The following Regular Business matter was reopened to receive
public input ) :
* BUDGET REVIEW - 5-YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM
Mayor Lilley recognized that the public had nct been given a
chance to comment on this matter and reopened the discussion.
Judge Michael Duffy, 7820 Graves Creek Road , explained that he
and number of parents in the Monterey Road School District had
CC2/26/91
• Page 13
come to make a formal request that the City Council , as part of
the City ' s budget , give consideration to improving Graves Creek
Road .
Lori Krivacsy, 3280 San Fernando , submitted a petition ( see
Exhibit B ) signed by parents and neighbors of children who travel
to and from Monterey Road School along Graves Creek Road urging
Council action.
Councilwoman Borgeson indicated that she had received a phone
call from Barbara Butz , of Atascadero , who had asked that the
City Council make this project a priority.
Trudy Houghtaling , 3285 San Fernando Road , announced that she
represented other concerned parents and stressed the need to take
a look at this matter .
Charles Walden, 7105 Graves Creek Road , reported that he had
witnessed a number of accidents on the road and urged Council to
widen it .
Mayor Lilley thanked the citizens for coming to the meeting and
emphasized that the Council needs the community ' s input to
prioritize projects.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter- and seconded by Councilman Shiers •
to adjourn the meeting ; motion carried .
The meeting was adjourned at 10:01 p.m. until the next regularly
scheduled meeting of the City Council on March 12, 1991 at 7:00
p.m.
MIND E5 RECORIZED. AND PREPARED BY:
Ctt IDAYKA, City erk
Attachments: Exhibit A ( Borgeson)
Exhibit B (Citizens for Graves Creek Road
Improvements)
CC2/2b/91
Page 14 •
CC 2/26/91
EXHIBIT A
STATEMENT TO S.L.O. COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
February 19, 1992
MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD:
I SPEAK TO YOU TODAY AS A RESIDENT OF THE NORTH COUNTY AND,
SPECIFICALLY, THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND AS SOMEONE WHO HAS
WORKED VERY HARD DURING MY TENURE AS A MEMBER OF THE ATASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL TO OBTAIN THE NORTH COUNTY CENTER IN MY COMMUNITY.
I HAVE FOLLOWED THIS ISSUE CLOSELY AND AM AWARE OF THE INCREASING
BUDGETARY PROBLEMS THAT HAVE FRAUGHT THIS PROJECT. HOWEVER, AS
ONE WHO FIRMLY BELIEVES THAT THERE SHOULD BE MORE SERVICES
AVAILABLE TO THE NORTH COUNTY RESIDENTS WITHOUT HAVING TO
NEGOTIATE THE GRADE TO DO SO, I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT ANY EFFORT
THAT CAN BE MADE AT THIS TIME TO PROVIDE SATELLITE COUNTY
• SERVICES IN THE NORTH COUNTY. QUITE APART FROM THIS ADDED
CONVENIENCE TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS, YOU WILL BE TAKING A MAJOR STEP
TOWARD ALLOWING NORTH COUNTY RESIDENTS TO BETTER IDENTIFY WITH
THE COUNTY WITHOUT THE NECESSITY OF INCREASING THE CONGESTION ON
HIGHWAY 101 AND WITHIN DOWNTOWN SAN LUIS OBISPO.
AT THIS TIME, I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I STAND READY TO
ASSIST IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE TO HELP THE BOARD SECURE REASONABLE
OFFICE SPACE CONVENIENT TO THE PUBLIC, AND, TO THIS END, I WILL
BE HAPPY TO APPROACH MY COLLEAGUES ON THE CITY COUNCIL TO ASSIST
IN THIS ENDEAVOR.
THANK YOU.
BONITA BORGESON
X CC26/91
.-. \ EXASIT B
�- T
CREEK ROAD
WARNING: WALKING AND BIKING ALONG GRAVES
IS LIKELY TO BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH-
Aslparents and neighbors of school children who travel to
and from Monterey Road School along Graves Creek Road, we
`• l�
share a serious concern for the dangerous lack of adequate
walking lanes and posted safe speed limits . The poor condition •
of the road itself poses safety hazards for vehicular traffic
and is completely lacking any provisions for children- who
walk or ride their bicycles to school.
Most of us have witnessed "close calls" on Graves Creek
Road and in the interests of protecting our children many
of us drive them to and from school. ,This creates a tremen-
dous amount of traffic congestion which when added to the
great amount of commercial traffic aggravates the problem
further.
There are many`children who live on Graves Creek Road,.=Balboa
Road, Santa .
Ana, and San Fernando Road who would benefit p
by your attention to this matter. Their safety would be.`
enhanced as well as significantly decreasing traffic.congestion
in the area. Most importantly, the potential tragedy of
a serious accident involving innocent children could be
—rerted . •
m r,k Y,-311 for ycur tl^au�htful consideration of this mat :er
--/Y'?�z.Q.Q- +E��_ _ - ---cam�-o__� --�--�-�?•e-.�.,�o--- - -
7.75
Rk_.
21a-
72 d
- r
At 6�awzt,
_
Ala
_ -----2� pFr-,tel l_
_ tom"` ------------ �----___ ----
too
QL 7q:50'
VC
43o��� , � ►� << ,� Iii
zlsa f
�� -z
77 z3
1
Yi. ^. �- /,Z,
3c35Z:� , , —5.z uvwala 4
010
IS
,57
clote-3 ce_v_ 4w
-C'a n_c ( ,•0
1 . Cr
•
------------------
DETItYC26/91 AGENDA
33E--- ITEM# A-2
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CASH ACTIVITY SUMMARY
TREASURER'S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1991
BEGINNING CASH RESOURCES $7,445,596.86
ADD:
RECEIPTS $464,174.35
OTHER TRANSFERS/MISC. ADJUSTMENTS $187,100.21
LESS:
DISBURSEMENTS $647,366.83
ENDING CASH RCSOURCCS $7,389,504.61
FUND 501-CONSTRUCTION FUND
(A) (H) REMAINING
TYPE OF REVENUE OR EXPENSE COUNCIL ACTUAL REVENUE ENCUMBRANCES TOTAL (A+B) FUND
AUTHORIZED OR (EXPENSE) BALANCE
ND PROCEEDS 2,000,008.00 2,008,000.80 6.00 2000,000.00 2,000,000.00
TEREST EARNINGS 80,000.80 85,000.00 0.00 C5,000.00 2,b, 85,000.00
CLOSING COSTS (110,000.00) (109,878.00) 0.00 (109,078.00) 1,975,422.08
FUND RESERVE (194,000.00) (194,600.00) 0.00 (194,000.80) 1,781,922.00
POLICE FACILITY (1,350,000.00) (1,345,472.00) (11,000.00) (1,356,472.00) 425,450.06
PAVILLION-PHASE I (218,900.00) (213,753.40) (5,146.60) (21 C,900.00) 206,550.00
------------ -------------- ------------ ------------- -------------
BALANCE AVAILABLE-PAVILLION PHASE 1I 267,100.00 222,696.60 (16,146.60) 206,550.00 266,556.00
FUND 301-TREE PLANTING TRUST
BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 13,390.95 13,390.95 0.00 13,390.95 13,390.95
ADDS REVENUES-YEAR TO DATE 0.00 22.15 0.00 22.15 13,413.10
LESS: EXPENDITURES-YEAR TO DATE (6,248.00) (8,248.08) 0.00 (89248.00) 5,165.10
---------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
BALANCE AVAILABLE-TREE PLANTING TRUST 5,142.95 5,165.10 0.00 5,165.18 5,165.10
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
SCHEDULE OF CASH AND INVESTMENTS
AS OF FEBRUARY 1991
Origination Maturity Interest Month's -� Interest �.
Name Amount Date Date Rate Interest Yr-to-Date
L.A.I.F. 80 8.00X 0.00
------7,070,000 ----------N/A -----------N/A—------------------------
~--------
267,325.64
Century Federal Savings 99,000.00 10/16/90 16/11/91 8.45X 6.06 2,509.64
Bank of New England 0.00 10/25/90 62/21/91 8.63X 616.00 2,002.00
Mid State Bank 219,654.61 N/A N/A 5.47X 884.06 5,645.45
Petty Cash 850.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
------------- ------ --� ---
TOTALS 7,385,504.61 1,500.06 2771,4
Keys: N/A (Not APpicable)
L.A.I.F Interset Paid Quarterly
I certify that this report reflects all Governmental Agency pooled
investments and is in conformity with the Investment Policy of
the City of Atascadero as stated in Resolution No. 126-90 dated
12/11/90. A copy of this Resolution is available at the Office
of the City Clerk. The Investment Program herein shown provides
sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet next month's estimated
expenditures.
SIGNED:
Muriel Korba, City Treasurer
•
M E M •
U RAN D U M
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director ;
*',,?/
THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager
SUBJECT: Notes to City Treasurer's Report
DATE: March 20, 1991
The Certificate of Deposit with the Bank of New England
matured on February 21, 1991. On February 22 , 1991, the
City received $99, 792. 00 from the Bank of New England,
representing $99,000. 00 principal and $792.00 in interest
earnings.
The $616.00 interest earnings shown on the Treasurer' s
Report represents interest earnings for January 1991.
The $792. 00 is interest earnings for February 1991.
The City received $650. 65 on March 4, 1991 from Century
Savings for February 1991 interest earnings. These interest
earnings will appear on next month' s Treasurer' s Report.
MEETING AGENDA
DATE--1/26L91 ITEM/ _3
CITY OF ATARCADE RO
SCHEDULE OF DISBURSEMENTS
FINANCE DIRECTOR' S REPORT
FOP THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1.99:1.
DIST3URSEME.•NTS.
Hand Warrant Register for February, 1991 $35, 025- 29
2/57/91 Accounts Payable Warrants 1.06, 551. 58
2/21/91 Accounts Payable Warrants 114, 627. 08
2/29/91 Accounts Payable Warrants 10, 024. 99
Dank Service Charge 30. 00
2/13/91 Payroll Warrants 169, 380.44
2/28/91 Payroll Warrants 215, 203. 59
TOTAL: `$651, 082. 97
LESS:
Voided Check 430423 $529. 14
Voided Checks 030690 and 03070-7! 684. 00
'voided Check *30726 50. 00
Voided Check (30739 11... 30
Voided Check 049169 2, 141. 70
M
SUBTOTAL VOIDED CHECKS: $3, 716. 14
j
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS,, $647, 366. 03
1 Mark A. jo ;eph, do hereby certify and declare that demands enumerated
d
and r e'F,a„-f-;=•d i. r'+ ::.i i t h E1 foregoing 1”r f:I Y r.t p 1` ci r e accurate A 1'}d just claims
;.:g 1a 7.1'?��t t h e City c3 7"1 d that ti i 1"_ a 7"E? funds available f q 1' payment :.herF.iof
., ..
_ the Treasury. The breakdown detail on all accounts is available
"'or your viewing in the Pi;:%+ce Office.
rir`riK A. JOSEPH,PH, A( ministrative Servicc
Director
3
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE OF CASH RECEIPTS AND TRANSFERS
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1991
CASH RECEIPTS: CURRENT MONTH YEAR TO DATE ANNUAL BUDGET X RECEIVED
BED TAX 6.00 .53,109.58 110,000.00 48
CIGARETTE TAX 2,073.41 28,649.07 35,800.80 81
GAS TAX RECEIPTS 7,899.89 231,411.65 393,196.80 58
MOTOR VEHICLE IN-LIEU 88,542.34 563,992.80 869,000.99 65
PROPERTY TAXES (4,939.88) 1,317,748.74 2,112,136.80 62
PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX 8.00 24,434.99 60.000.89 49
SALES TAX 123,606.69 1,157,726.79 1,859.808.99 62
A.D. t3-ATAS. LAKE-MARCHANT (643.56) 3,417.90 6,429.90 53
A.D. 04-SEPARADO/CAYUCOS (1,126.62) 51.192.81 102,233.90 50
A.D. t5-CHANDLER RANCH 576.22 24,431.76 41,996.96 59
B.I.A DUES 0.08 3,139.80 6.00 --
DEVELOPER FEES 41,926.79 336,189.39 675,606.80 49
DIAL-A-RIDE 2.823.61 85,385.19 34,008.90 251
FINES/PENALTIES/OVERAGES (1,600.46) 6,230.79 11,550.00 53
FRANCHISE FEES 646.61 37,431.66 330,909.00 11
INVESTMENT EARNINGS 1,500.06 402,398.62 365,150.00 110
LICENSE/PERMIT/FEES 53,897.48 388,044.56 668.197.89 56
MISCELLANEOUS 1,509.41 7,966.49 1,068.90 796
PARK PAVILLION DONATION 1,018.89 1,616.80 8.08 --
PARKS AND RECREATION FEES 33,871.514 198,699.34 272,490.80 72
POLICE SERVICES (7,262.74) 65,198.53 118,290.08 55
POST REIMBURSEMENT (6,618.48) 4,066.92 30,990.89 13
RENTS/CONCESSIONS 92.66 26,757.37 52,659.08 48
SALES-MAPS/PUBS/REPORTS 2,784.12 3,689.52 3,096.69 122
SANITATION FEES 10,466.33 458.927.58 666,629.00 68
STREET MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS (10.50) 5,904.31 11,796.89 42
TDA RECEIPTS 0.80 108,595.75 46-',Z21.09 25
TREE TRUST FUND 6.09 22.15 706.89 3 •
WEED ABATEMENT (21.29) 43,588.45 39,096.00 145
ZOO RECEIPTS 16.979.72 47,752.54 71.906.08 67
TOTAL 367 975.33 S,664,619.16 9,314,171.00 61
OTHER CASH RECEIPTS:
PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF LAND 0.69 114,587.46 63,586.89 ISO
PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF FIXED ASSETS 0.89 2,600.98 0.00 --
REIMBURSEMENT TO EXPENSE 9,545.54 17,811.68 16,506.88 186
PERS SURPLUS 26,653.48 39,149.94 277,380.99 14
TOTAL OTHER CASH RECEIPTS ~36,199.02 174,149.02 357,300.00 48
_ TOTAL REVENUE: 444,174.35 5,838,759.29 9,671,471.09 60
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 3/26/91
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Agenda Item• A-4
Through : Ray Windsor , City Manager
From Lee Dayka , City Clerk
SUBJECT•
Vacancy created on the Building and Construction Board of
Appeals by resignation of John Edens, Jr .
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the City Clerk to initiate the recruitment process
to fill one un-expired term on the Building and Construction
Board of Appeals.
BACKGROUND:
• The Building and Construction Board �f Appeals was set forth
by Ordinance No . 44 and specific appointments have been made by
Resolution .
On March 14 , 1991 , I received a ccpy of a letter of
resignation sent to David Grummitt , Chairman of the Building and
Construction Board of Appeals . John Edens , Jr . , one of two
General Contractor members on the Board, is resigning his post
effective April 15, 1991 . His - term is not due to expire until
April of 1994 and another routine recruitment is not planned
until Spring of 1992.
As an added note: Mr . Edens has served on the Appeals Board
from its ' conception in 1982.
DISCUSSION:
The City Clerk , if =_o directed , will r<`cruit for interested
applicants . Once this is done, Council will be asked tc schedule
appointments fcr interviews and make the fer-mai appointment by
resolution.
Attachments: Ordinance No . 44
Letter of Resignation — John Edens , Jr .
C �
QRDINANCE NO. 44
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING
SECTIONS 8.0.4. 230 AND 8.04. 130 OF TITLE 8 OF THE
ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUILDINGS AND
CONSTRUCTION AND ESTABLISHING A BOARD OF APPEALS
The Council of the City of Atascadero ordains as follows :
Section 1. Section 8.04.120 and 8.04.130 of Title 8 of the
Atascadero Municipal Code are amended to read as follows :
Section 8. 04. 120 . Board of appeals established.
In order to conduct hearings to determine the suitability of al-
ternate materials and methods of installation, (and to provide for rea-
sonable interpretations of the provisions of this Code,) there is here-
by established a Board of Appeals. The Board shall consist of five
(5) members, two (2) of whom shall be general contractors, one (1) one
whom shall be an architect or structural engineer , 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 appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City
Council. The Building Official of the City shall serve as secretary
ex-officio to the Board.
In order to be eligible for appointment to the Board, the person •
shall live within the City. Terms of initial appointment shall be for
a term of two (2) years for two (2) members , for a term of four (4)
years for three (3) members with four (4) year terms for subsequent
appointments . Each member of the Board shall be required to comply
with the applicable provisions of the Political Reform Act of 1974,
California Government Code Section 81000, et seq.
The .Board shall adopt reasonable rulbs and regulations , subject to
approval and adoption by the City Council, for conducting its business
which shall conform to the requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act,
California Government Code Section 54950, et. seq. , and shall render
all decisions and findings in writing with a copy to the appellant.
Section 8. 04. 130 . Appeal procedure.
Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Planning Department re-
lated to any manner within the purview of this title, shall have the
right to appeal the decision. The appeal shall be filed with the
Building official within fifteen (15) business days after the render-
ing of the decision affecting the aggrieved person. Grounds for the
appeal shall beset forth in writing.
SECTION 4 . That Section 4 . 11 of the Atascadero County Sanitation
District Ordinance Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
4
"4 . 11 When an entire lot to which connection is proposed
has been charged only a 'rear area' rate under the Assessment
District No. l assessment proceedings by virtue of its
remote location from the proposed public sewers, 'then Section
4 . 10 shall not apply. The connection fee for said lot, or
additional lots created from said lots by subsequent lot
divisions, shall be two hundred fifty dollars ($250 . 00) for
each connection, except that if public sewers are extended
in the future in such a manner as to provide sewer service
requiring substantially shorter building sewers, then the
connection fee may be increased as provided in Section 4,13 . "
SECTION 5 . That Sections 5. 1 (2) , (3) , and (4) of the Atascadero
County Sanitation District Ordinance Code is hereby amended to
read as follows:
(2) Requestor shall submit improvement plans of the pro-
posed extension, prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer
in the State of California, for approval by the City
Engineer.
(3) The person requesting said extension shall execute a-Is
file a written agreement with the District whereby ,he
agrees to complete all required improvements at his
expense and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,
within the time period specified in the agreement. He
further agrees to provide the City Engineer with a
detailed cost breakdown of his actual expenditures for
any improvements authorized in the agreement. The
agreement shall also provide for inspection of .all
improvements by the City Engineer, or his designated
representative, and reimbursement of the District, by
the requestor, for the cost of the inspection. The
District will invoice the requestor for such inspection
costs and any amount unpaid thirty (30) days from the
date of the District' s invoice shall bear interest at
ten (10) percent per year beginning from thirty (30)
days after the date of the invoice.
The improvements agreement may also provide (1) for
the construction of the improvements in units, and
(2) for an extension of the time under conditions
therein specified. No extension of time shall be
granted except upon certification by the City Engineer
that such extension is justified, and upon approval
by the Board of Directors.
i
(4) No hookup to the public sewer will be permitted until
all improvement work has been completed to the satis-
faction of the City Engineer and all charges have bee
(� paid by the requestor in accordance with the provisi4
of this Ordinance Code.
SECTION 6 . That Section 7. 2 of the Atascadero County Sanitation
District Ordinance Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
7 . 2 The requirements for building sewers as set forth in
the latest adopted versions of the Uniform Plumbing
code shall apply in the District and are incorporated
herein by reference. However, where the regulations
of this Ordinance Code are more restrictive than said
Plumbing Code, this Code shall apply.
SECTION 7. That Section 7. 9 be added to the Atascadero County
Sanitation District Ordinance Code to read as follows:
7. 9 Drainage piping serving fixtures located ,at an elevation
of less than one foot above the nearest upstream man-
hole cover in the main sewer serving said fixtures shall
drain by gravity into the main sewer, and shall be pro-
tected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved
type back water valve, and each such back water valve
shall be installed only in that branch or section of the
( drainage system which receives the discharge from fi.xtur .s
located less than one foot above the nearest upstream
manhole cover.
SECTION 8. That Section 8 . 1 of the Atascadero County Sanitation
District Ordinance Code is hereby deleted.
SECTION 9 . That Section 8 .2 (1) , (2) and (4) , of the Atascadero
County Sanitation District Ordinance Code is hereby amended to
read as follows:
8 . 2 (1) When an area is annexed to Improvement District No. 1,
the requestor shall have an estimate of the cost of extending
sewer lines and otherwise providing sewed service to the lots
within said annexation prepared by a Civil Engineer registered
in the State of California. Said estimate shall not include
the cost of lateral sewers . This estimate and the proportional
share to be borne by each lot shall be furnished to the owners
of the annexed property.
(2) Requestor shall submit improvement Plans of the
proposed extension, prepared by a Civil Engineer
registered in the State of California, for approval
by the City Engineer
C- (4) No hookup to the public sewer will be permitted
•
until all improvement work has been completed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
all charges have been paid by the requestor in
accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance
Code. Inspection costs shall be paid by the
requestor as set forth in Section 5 . 1 (3) of
this Ordinance Code.
SECTION 10 . That Section 11. 1 of the Atascadero County Sanitation
District Ordinance Code is hereby amended to read as follows :
11. 1 There is- hereby levied and imposed upon any occupied
premises within the Atascadero County Sanitation District,
having any sewer connection with the sewerage system of
the District, or otherwise discharging waste water which
ultimately passes through the District' s sewerage system
or to which a public sewer is available according to Article
3 . 1 of this Ordinance Code, and upon the owner or occupant
thereof, a monthly service or standby charge 'as hereinafter
provided.
Charge
(a) Single Family Residential Unit $ 10. 54
(b) Apartment Building (per dwelling unit) 9 . 86
(c) Mobile Home Spaces (per space) 8 .24
(d) Hotel/Motel (per dwelling unit) 2 . 62
(e) Rest Homes/Hospitals (per bed) 8 . 26 '
(f) Commercial Unit 3 . 23
(g) Office Buildings (per office unit) 3 . 21
(h) Restaurants - 40 or less seats 74 . 58
(i) Restaurants - more than 40 seats 178 . 89
(j) Churches/Meeting Halls s 92 .10
(k) Schools (per student average daily
attendance as of March 31 preceding
each fiscal year) 0 . 805
(1) Service Stations 23 . 28
(m) Laundry/Laundromat/Cleaners 145 . 85
C_
r, . Charge
(n) Car Wash $78 . 17
to (o) Fire Station 99 . 26
(p) Ware houses/Storage Facility 17 . 09
(q) Theatre 44 .42
(r) Any Occupied Premises not
Connected to an Available Sewer 7 . 00
SECTION 11. Section 11. 5 of the Atascadero County Sanitation
District Ordinance Code is hereby amended to read as follows :
11. 5 Truck disposal of sanitary wastes may be accepted by
the District at the treatment plant during normal daytime
working hours, or at such other times as the District may
elect, for a service charge of $20 . 00 per load or portion
thereof.
SECTION 12 . If any portion of this Ordinance or the application
thereof is held to be invalid for any reasons, the validity of all
remaining portions and applications shall be unaffected and shall
remain in final force and effect.
SECTION 13 . This Ordinance is an urgency ordinance and is for
the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.
The facts constituting the urgency are these: The Atascadero
County Sanitation District is the beneficiary of a loan from the
United States Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration,
and in order to become eligible for the funds comprising said
loan, the District must immediately adopt new rates and charges.
Thus, it is necessary that this Ordinance take effect immediately
in order to assure the granting, implementation, and administration
of the loan from the FmHA.
SECTION 14 . This Ordinance, being an urgency ordinance for the
immediate protection of the public health, safety, and general
welfare, containing a declaration of the facts constituting the
r.
urgency, and passed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the District
Board of Directors, shall take effect immediately upon its adoptio(--.
provided, however, that this Ordinance shall not become operative le
until one hundred eighty (180) days after its passage, or on
January 1, 1983 , whichever occurs first.
SECTION 15 . The District Secretary shall cause this Ordinance
to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage
in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation,
printed, published, and circulated in this District; shall
certify to the adoption and publication of this Ordinance; and
shall cause this Ordinance and its certification, together with
proof of publication, to be entered in the Book of-,' ordinances
of this District.
The foregoing Ordinance was introduced, adopted,and ordered
published at a meeting of the District Board of Directors held C.
on May 24, 1982 , by the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Highland, Mackey, Nelson, Stover .and
President Wilkins
Noes: None
Absent: None
-----------
Robert
Robert J. Wilkins, Jr. , Chairman
4
APPROVED AS TO r RIM:
ATTEST: n
ALLEN GRIMES, Attorney
M ray/L. Warden, Secretary
EGEI v L:. :
M a r c h 1 3 , 1 9 9 1 ArfsCADeao
"!-ER A
City of Atascadero
Atascadero Building and Construction Board of Appeals
6500 Palma Ave.
Atascadero , Calif . 93422
Attn : Mr , David Grummitt , Chairman
Please accept this letter of resignation effective
April 15 , 1991 . Since I will be relocating out of the
area , I feel it is necessary to resign my position on
the board at this time . I have enjoyed serving on the
board since its conception .
Please notify me in the event more time is required to
find a replacement .
Sincerely ,
G
H . John Edens
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-5
Through : Ray Windsor , City Manager Date: 3/26/91
From: Marl: Joseph , Administrative Services Directo
SUBJECT_ Application for Historical Preservation Grant
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Resolution 25-91 ,
approving a grant application to the State Office of Historic
Preservation.
BACKGROUND
The State Office of Historic Preservation (California
Department of Parks and Recreation) has a total of $60,000
available for historic preservation/seismic safety projects.
Only one award will be made statewide and a successful applicant
mL:st match the grant dollar-for-dollar . Thus, the project would
• be $120,000: $61 ,000 from the State and $60,000 from local
sources ( including certain " in-kind" matches) .
The specific project being proposed involves repairs to the
Fcurth Floor of the City Administration Building . Currently ,
$20 ,000 was budgeted for the design and working drawings. If the
City is successful , that $20,000 would be credited towards our
local match . The remaining $40,000 could come from the General
Fund or other " in-kind" services (e.g . , donations, volunteers,
etc . ) This project has been identified in the 5 year C. I .P. plan.
Realistically , the City ' s chances for success are not great ,
and , even if we were successful , total repairs to the Fourth
Floor will most likely exceed the $120 ,000. Howe•, er , it is
important for the City to apply , if for no other reason than to
make our needs known at the State level .
The successful applicant will be notified by May 1 , 1991 ;
all project funds must be expended by August , 1992.
RESOLUTION NO. 25-91
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
APPROVING THE APPLICATION AND THE PROJECT AGREEMENT
FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANTS-IN-AID FUNDS FOR
THE 1991 CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Congress under Public Law 89-665 has authorized
the establishment of a National Historic Preservation Grants-in-
Aid Program providing matching funds to the State of California
and its political subdi,:isions and eligible nonprofit
organizations for historic preservation predevelopment and
development projects ; and
WHEREAS , the Office of Historic Preservation, California
Department of Parks and Recreation, is responsible for the
administration of the program within the state, setting up
necessary rules and procedures governing application under the
program; and
WHEREAS, said adopted procedures established by the
California Office of Historic Preservation require the applicant
to certify by resolution the approval of applications and the
availability of local matchino funds prior to submission of said
applications to the State;
D10W, THEREFORE , HE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Atascadero hereby :
1 Approves the filing of an application `or the National
Historic Preservation Grants-in-Aid assistance for
project ; and
2. Appoints the Mayor or his/her authorized deputy as
agent of the City to coordinate, process and execute
all contracts , agreements, amendments and ancillary
documents within the scope of the attached application;
and
3 . Agrees that all required 1-ocal matching funds will be
provided for the project .
On motion by Councilperson and seconded by
Councilperson the foregoing resolution is hereby
adopted in its entirety , by the followiniq Roll Call `v'cte:
•
•
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT :
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
By
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk ROBERT B. LILL.EY , Mayor
APPRO','ED AS TO FORM
4
ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney MARK JOS PH, Director of
Administrative Services
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
• CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-1
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 3/26 91
From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. PVC File No: TPM 18-90
SUBJECT:
Consideration of Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map
18-90 at 7970 Sinaloa Avenue - Russel Best (Cuesta Engineering)
RECOMMENDATION:
Per the Planning Commission' s recommendation, adopt the revised
Conditions of Approval for TPM 18-90.
BACKGROUND:
This application came to the City Council on January 22, 1991 with
a planned development rezoning, request. Because the Planning Com-
mission had recommended denial of the zoning change, the map was
also recommended for denial. Council action was to approve the PD
rezoning and to refer the map back for consideration of Conditions
• of Approval.
On March 5, 1991, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing for consideration of the Conditions of Approval. On a 4:3
vote, the Commission recommended approval of the proposed Condi-
tions of Approval, as revised. There was discussion and public
testimony considered, as reflected in the attached minutes excerpt.
HE:ps
Attachments: Staff Report dated March 5, 1991
Minutes Excerpt - March 5, 1991
Revised Conditions of Approval - March 5, 1991
cc: Russel Best
Cuesta Engineering
METING. AGENDA
DAT! J q/ ITEM
MEMORANDUM •
DATE: March 5, 1991
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Gary V. Kaiser, Assistant PlannerGy,
SUBJECT: TPM #18-90
7970 Sinaloa Avenue
(Russel Best/Cuesta Engineering)
The above-referenced project was considered by the Planning
Commission at their November 20, 1990 and December 18, 1990
meetings. Attached please find the staff reports prepared for
these meetings.
The Commission will recall that the above tentative parcel map
application was filed in conjunction with a Zone Change request
to supplement the existing RMF-16 (Residential Multiple Family,
High Density) zoning with a PD7 (Planned Development No. 7)
overlay zone (Zone Change #03-90) . The Commission may also
recall recommending denial of both of these applications. •
On January 22, 1991, these items were considered by the City
Council. The Zone Change request was approved as reflected in
Ordinance No. 217. The Council forwarded the tentative parcel
map to the Planning Commission for a reconsideration of the
conditions of approval.
The tentative parcel map conforms to the approved Master Plan of
Development for the site. Therefore, staff recommends that the
tentative map be approved based on the Findings for Approval
contained in Exhibit C and subject to the conditions of approval
included as Exhibit B of the staff report dated December 18, 1991
and attached hereto as Exhibit D.
Attachments:
Exhibit A -- Ordinance No. 217
Exhibit B -- Tentative Parcel Map
Exhibit C -- Findings for Approval
Exhibit D -- Conditions of Approval
Exhibit E -- November 20, 1990 staff report
Exhibit F -- December 18, 1990 staff report
EXHIBIT A
Ordinance No. 217
TPM #18-90
• ORDINANCE NO. 217
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 7970
SINALOA .AVENUE FROM RMF/16 TO RMF/16 (PD7)
(ZC 03-90 : BEST/CUESTA)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on November 20, 1990 and has recommended approval of
Zone Change 03-90.
• NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonious development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be
reasonably achieved through existing development
standards or processing requirements.
Ordinance No. 217 .
7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to •
compensate for requested modifications.
Section 2. Zoning Map.
Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcel listed below, and
shown on the attached Exhibit A, which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Lot 31; Block HA; Atascadero Colony
Development of said parcel shall be in accordance with the
standards of the Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 7, and
consistent with the attached Exhibit B.
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this •
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4. 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.
On motion by rnuNr.TT MAN nF.XTFR and seconded by
cnTINCTrdMAN NTMMO , the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS BORGESON, DEXTER, NIMMO, SHIERS AND MAYOR LILLEY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
DATE ADOPTED: 2/12/91
By:
ROBERT LILLEY, Mayor
City of Atascadero,. California
REVISED •
1/22/91
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
•
•
- CITY OF ATASCADERO ORDINANCE NO. 217
��. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT EXHIBIT A
D EPARTIMENT
L E " wE
14
t �
-d v- R F.Z
� l ( ( � V
11 i� MF-4 ,
r
UA
4yE o z
�,• _ 1�T��77 n C
i
�08
. J
c
`�.� i N f -CT
�a 4
CITY OF ATASCADERO ORDINANCE NO. 217
CI
EXHIBITq5
COWNI NITY OEVELOPMEVT REVISED -MASTER PLAN
• D EPARTMEYT
E;
WI
^' L 4 2'2 O
vi
Ul
F� UI
Haat a'S: zY: Bs Ln
i G16
CL 5k
Wir
vi
� � I
o � 1
vr
• 20.00. ^w J/��• -'1���( �.
c• is
.Sft CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT B
Tentative Parcel Map
!. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TPM #18-90
DEPARTMENT •
!MESON LAND 41RVEYS TOPO..'RAPMC SURVEY ....'
LOT 31 BLOCK N-A OMNERY STATEMENT
.�..!yr•.4�.,y. S.IST.'ti'1111!TT�'���_. �tr-_r.;-.'ti r.p...'•'!�Ys.��.r.•.�d L mt. .Y
i�!fit.' T/•�.w3 4..•>.t Y+r.FYI,r!NC .i rs•4a M.!�[S.e•M.r.iO.�lt'T�l Rt.�.wslOt
..L MLO s. ���'x..ew..w�.yw'•w
`I
•!rfw�. ��.1..-i-U � .` 1'!\ a r..{>M 41 Lti O.♦M MtC..
---—----—- \ a \
937
r SM•I - ,
_______
--———————
. __ ---•— _ ————e-
r
- - - -- - - - - --_ _ -_� J-� e,n.°Oemu� i\ �• V y V/-
1.11 tLK t Llrt 7
11
y
w `� 1 1• TENTATNE
PARCEL YAP AT 90-241.
s.m"0i r^•
U utli e.r 1 ! 1 I �I
I 1
027_\, —
• tr>rs1 � wn I. 1
s'
cUunec fc.Mt .'./ CUESTA ENdHEEi-
1 '
EXHIBIT C
Findings for Approval
TPM #18-90
EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval
• Tentative Parcel Map 18-90
7970 Sinaloa Avenue
(Best/Cuesta)
March 5, 1991
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project
is adequate.
MAP FINDINGS•
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable
General and Specific Plans.
2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed
improvements, will not cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and
wildlife or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by .
the public at large for access through or the use of
property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially
equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision design, and/or the type of
improvements proposed, will not cause serious public health
problems.
TPM-18-90.fin
•
EXHIBIT D
Conditions of Approval
TPM #18-90
EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval •
Tentative Parcel Map #18-90
7970 Sinaloa Avenue (Best/Cuesta)
March 5, 1991
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel, prior to the paving of the road and the
recordation of the Final Map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the Final Map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the Final Map.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer, and shall be placed
underground.
4. The newly formed lots shall be connected to the public
sewer. All annexation permit fees in effect at the time of
recordation shall be paid for the newly created lots prior
to the recordation of the Final Map. Sewer laterals shall
be installed to each lot prior to paving the road.
5.
In addition to the installation of water and sewer services,
the developer shall install gas, electricity, telephone, and
cable television services to each lot prior to paving the
road and the recordation of the Final Map.
6. A grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by both the Community
Development and Public Works departments, prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
7. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City
Public Works Department prior to the commencement of
construction activities. In addition, an Inspection
Agreement shall be signed guaranteeing that the work will be
done and the inspections will be paid for.
8. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic
delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs,
gaurdrails, barricades, and other similar devices where
required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in
conformance with the current State of California uniform
sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be
subject to review and modification after construction.
9. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Public Works
Department, prior to the construction of the improvements.
Plans shall include, but shall not be limited to:
Sinaloa Avenue: Pavement shall be widened to a width
of twenty (20) feet from the centerline of the right-
of-way to the curb face. A curb, gutter, and five (5)
foot sidewalk shall be installed. A concrete cross
gutter shall be installed to match the cross gutter to
be built by the project across the street on Sinaloa.
The recommended minimum slope of the concrete gutter is
0.005. The minimum curb return radius at the property
line shall be twenty-five (25) feet.
Curbaril Avenue: Pavement shall be widened to a width
of twenty (20) feet from centerline of right-of-way to
curb face. Curb, gutter, and a five (5) foot sidewalk
shall be installed, designed to match the existing
improvements to the south. An asphalt berm shall be
installed from the end of the concrete curb to the
existing curb to the south. An asphalt drive approach
shall be installed to serve the property between the
existing improvements and the new improvements.
10. Construction of all public improvements shall be completed
• prior to the recordation of the Final Map.
11. All public improvements shall be covered by a 100%
Performance Guarantee and a 100% Labor and Material
Guarantee until construction is deemed substantially
complete, and by a 10% Maintenance Guarantee until one year
after substantial completion.
12. Public improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Fire Department, prior to the recordation of the
Final Map. Plans shall include the necessary fire hydrant
upgrade of the existing fire hydrant at the corner of
Sinaloa Avenue and Curbaril Avenue.
13. All lot grading and drainage improvements shall require a
written statement from a registered civil engineer that all
work has been completed and is in full compliance with the
approved plans.
14. The following right-of-way shall be offered for dedication
to the City of Atascadero:
Street Name: Sinaloa Avenue
Limits: 25 feet from the centerline of the right-of-
way to the property line.
•
Street Name: Curbaril Avenue
Limits: 25 feet from the centerline of the right-of-
way to the property line.
Corner Rounding: A minimum radius of 25 feet at
property line at the intersection of Curbaril and
Sinaloa.
All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to, or in conjunction with, the recordation of the Final Map.
15. Landscape plans, including means of irrigation, shall be
submitted along with other materials required for the filing
of a building permit application. This information may be
shown on the grading plan. Said landscape plans shall
substantially conform to the landscaping shown on the site
plan, and shall include a minimum of two (2) 15 gallon
native trees to serve as replacements for the 12" Elm tree
proposed to be removed. All landscaping shall be completed,
or agreements shall be made for its completion, prior to the
final building inspections.
16. All development shall be in conformance with information
contained in the application, including but not limited to
grading, driveway and utility locations, house plans,
building setbacks, fencing, and landscaping.
17. Codes, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R' s) shall be
recorded, prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map, and
shall address the fencing, landscaping, and storage of solid
waste containers (trash cans) . Said CC&R' s, prior to being
recorded, shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Community Development Department for conformance to the
approved Master Plan of Development.
18. A Final Map, in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance, prior to the recordation of the Final
Map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
by a registered civil engineer or licensed land
surveyor, as required by the Land Surveyor' s Act
and Subdivision Map Act. . Monuments set within any
road right-of-way shall conform to City Standard
drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to Section 66497 of the Subdivision Map
Acta the engineer or surveyor shall notice the
City Engineer in writing that the monuments have •
been set
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall
• be submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the Final Map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the Final Map.
19. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two (2) years
from the date of final approval, unless an extension of time
is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to
the expiration date.
TPM-18-90.co2
•
EXHIBIT E
Nov. 20, 1990 staff rpt
TPM #18-90
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B-2
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: November 20, 1990
BY: Gary V. Kaiser, Assistant Planner File: TPM 18-90/ZC 03-90
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a request to establish a Planned Development
Overlay zone (PD7) in conjunction with a tentative parcel map
application to divide one existing parcel of approximately one-
quarter acre into three (3) parcels of 3, 426, 3,435, and 4, 066
square feet for single-family residential use.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map #18-90 based on
the Findings contained in Exhibit H and subject to the Conditions
of Approval contained in Exhibit I. Likewise, staff recommends
approval of Zone Change #03-90, based on the Findings for •
Approval contained in the Draft Ordinance (Exhibit J) .
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Russel L. Best
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cuesta Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7970 Sinaloa Avenue
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Lot 31 , Blk HA, AC
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 927 ft (0. 25 acres +/-)
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF-16
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Multiple Family
8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vacant lot
9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
October 30, 1990
• ANALYSIS:
The project is essentially a proposal to establish three (3)
single-family dwellings, each on separate parcels, on what is
currently one original Colony lot. Although the gross area of
the site is 10, 927 square feet, the net area of the site is
approximately 10, 427 square feet. This net site area has been
arrived at by subtracting from the gross site area a five (5)
foot strip running the entire length of the Sinaloa Avenue
frontage that will be offered for dedication to the City for
public road purposes. This net area figure, however, allows for
three (3) two-bedroom units on this site, pursuant to the density
standards established in the RMF-16 zone (Section 9-3. 175) .
A project of this size would normally be processed as a Precise
Plan application; however, this project proposes the creation of
individual small lots. Smaller lots such as these, besides being
subject to the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, can only
be approved through establishment of a Planned Development
Overlay Zone (PD) . The City has created a generic overlay zone
(PD7) for small lot residential subdivisions such as the one
currently proposed. Approval of this project hinges on the
establishment of the PD Overlay Zone.
• Minimum Lot Size Standards
The City General Plan (page 55) and Zoning Ordinance (Section 9-
3. 174) set a minimum lot size of one-half acre in the multiple
family zones. Residential Policy #6 of the General Plan (page
57) provides for the creation of smaller lots in the multiple
family zones "in conjunction with planned residential
developments, provided that the overall density within the
project is consistent with other density standards contained
herein. " There is similar language in the Zoning Ordinance,
regarding the allowance of smaller lots through the planned
development process, provided the overall density within the
project conforms with the density standards normally applied
under the underlying zoning of the site. As stated above, the
proposed density conforms to the density standards established
for the RMF-16 zone.
Planned Development Overlay Zone
The purpose of the Planned Development Overlay Zones, and the
findings that must be made to approve the establishment of a
Planned Development Overlay Zone, are contained within the Zoning
Ordinance. The purpose of the PD Zones, as found in Section 9-
3. 641 of the City Zoning Ordinance, is as follows:
"The Planned Development Overlay Zone identifies areas where
• development standards or processing requirements different
from those established by the underlying zoning district are
2
deemed necessary to promote orderly and harmonious
development and to enhance the opportunity to best utilize
special characteristics of an area. "
Pursuant to Section 9-3. 644 of the City Zoning Ordinance, the
following findings must be made to approve the establishment of a
PD Overlay Zone:
1. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and harmonious
development.
2. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best utilize
special characteristics of an area and will have a
beneficial effect on the area.
3. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably
achieved through existing development standards or
processing requirements.
4. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for the requested modifications.
The developer' s statement (Exhibit F) presents a valid argument •
for allowing the proposed smaller lot sizes. Although the lots
are small (ranging from 3, 426 to 4,066 square feet) , the
identical project could be approved by Precise Plan, minus the
creation of separate lots. Staff agrees with the applicant that
the ability to provide small lots for single family home
ownership, and the resulting increase in housing alternatives
available in the City, would be a benefit to the community.
Site Development Standards
As quoted in its entirety above, the purpose of the Planned
Development Overlay zones is to "identify ares where development
standards. . . different from those established by the underlying
zoning district. . .are deemed necessary to promote orderly and
harmonious development. . . (City Zoning Ordinance Section 9-
3. 641) . " In the case of the application in question, the use of
the subject site, if the application is approved, would change
from multiple family to single family residential use, because of
the creation of individual lots for each proposed dwelling unit.
Hence, some development standards set forth in the RMF zone,
intended primarily for multiple family uses, may not be
considered appropriate for the proposed single family uses.
The PD7 Overlay Zone, therefore, sets forth its own development
standards. A Master Plan of Development is required for all
properties in the PD7 zone; this Master Plan, then, serves as the .
development standard for subsequent development of the property.
3
• The Master Plan of Development for the r
p project in question
includes all information contained in the application, including
but not limited to: a tentative parcel map (Exhibit B) ; a grading
and drainage plan (Exhibit C) ; a site plan (Exhibit D) ; and
building elevations/floor plans (Exhibit E) . Upon review of
these items, staff has found all applicable standards for
building setbacks and height limits would be complied with.
Development standards for the multiple family zones, as set forth
within City Zoning Ordinance, which staff feels are intended for
multiple family uses and would be inappropriate for the project
in question, are as follows:
1. ENCLOSED STORAGE -- The RMF zone requires that each dwelling
unit be provided with a minimum of 100 square feet of
enclosed storage space, exclusive of closets, which may be
included in either a principal or accessory building
(Section (9-3. 176 (b) ) . Staff feels that excess areas shown
on the proposed floor plans, which include a two-car garage
and library for each unit, would suffice. Moreover, to
require separate accessory structures for storage, whether
attached or detached, would compromise the otherwise
appropriate architectural appearance of the buildings.
2. PARKING -- One (1) handicapped parking space, and one (1)
• guest parking space would be required for the proposed use,
if separate lots were not proposed (City Zoning Ordinance
Sections 9-4. 115 (c) and 9-4. 118 (c) (5) , respectively) .
Separate lots are proposed, however, and the applicant does
propose to meet the required parking for singly family
residential use. Furthermore, the interior floor plans for
the proposed two-story units are not accessible for
handicapped persons.
3. SOLID WASTE -- Solid waste collection areas that use
dumpsters or other containers with a total capacity greater
than two (2) 33 gallon containers must be enclosed within a
solid wall or fence (City Zoning Ordinance Section 9-
4. 129 (b) ) . If this was a three-unit multiple family
development, this standard would clearly apply. Given this
particular project, however, with three single family units
each generating their own waste and individually responsible
for the disposal of their own waste, this standard is not
considered appropriate.
4. SCREENING WALL -- A solid wall or fence not less than six
(6) feet in height shall
g be placed and maintained on
interior lot lines abutting property zoned for single family
residential u -
use .(Cit Zoning Ordinance Section 1
y 9 3. 76) .
g
The project site does not abut any properties zoned for
single g family residential use.
•
4
•
Other development standards required for multiple family uses
and/or multiple family zones, which staff feels are appropriate
for the project in question, are as follows:
1. COVERED PARKING -- The RMF zone requires that one (1)
covered parking space (carport or garage) be required for
each dwelling unit (City Zoning Ordinance Section 9-
3. 176 (e) ) . The applicant proposes a two-car garage for each
unit, thus exceeding the requirement for covered parking
spaces.
2. LANDSCAPING -- A landscaping plan is required for
essentially all uses other than single family residential
uses (City Zoning Ordinance Section 9-4. 125) . Although the
uses proposed are single family residential, staff feels
that a suitable landscaping plan should be required and
implemented as part of this project (see attached Conditions
of Approval) .
Review by Other Agencies
Since the City Public Works Department had expressed concerns
related to drainage in the project area, an engineered drainage
plan, and supplemental drainage calculations, have been submitted
as part of this application. The comments received from the •
Public Works Department are included in the attached Conditions
of Approval. No other public agencies reviewing the project have
expressed serious concerns regarding the project. Any comments
received from other agencies, including a requirement of the City
Fire Department for a new fire hydrant at the corner of Sinaloa
and Curbaril, have been incorporated into the attached Conditions
of Approval.
CONCLUSIONS:
Staff believes that the necessary findings can be made for the
establishment of a Planned Development Overlay Zone, and that the
proposed project, including the creation of three individual
small lots, would be a benefit to the community.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Parcel Map
Exhibit C - Grading and Drainage Plan
Exhibit D - Site Plan
Exhibit E —Proposed House Plans
Exhibit F - Supplemental Development Statement
Exhibit G - Negative Declaration
Exhibit H - Findings for Approval
Exhibit I - Conditions of Approval
Exhibit J - Draft Ordinance
TPM-18-90. sr
5
-1 CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT A
LOCATION MAp
n;, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
iDIN �
��. SON
W r�► 9
uo
fid'•, i
E
�E RS, F
R LL4
Y A
No rl I F-11
n �N CO
A- -
---------------
s
CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT B
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
y..w
TALSON LAW SURKTS TOPOMAPNC SURYU
e.. LOT]i KM N-A ? OMMWS STATELBNT
sfL N.w.O.,r•nC.'
^�weaz.s..t•_•t r •t:t,-.•<.ea ttr Iw••-t. -Hn•.+.••-•��•w•e....•••-nw ••�
YNH...•ice..•3-r�rrw2 K IJ..•fJ ta.<wY rt Mt t'r' w, !•.P w..•MS•IwT•.a:H v:e..ti.
w.i�•/�•.,t�Nt 1�•••'Tf.: .t :.H:•y+.pY`i' Y 1r! �t i.wrr.••�•�Ht!•.V rt u.Yt'<♦t iltf H..wJri��.
tlY.Y•N f•. 1 YO>• O.R•Ji v w.Sq'IJw•� t
' � 1 P r•M♦4i yy tw wM Y1C
11
____
9].'-- SinAZtx— ►�--_ —_-- �`
^ P -------- -----�----
a__-- - ---- - - ---------- -- -- --. _-- \------r �� �•f�::i ; °c` ,1 .1. �;-
r •
Lot LM 3
ep
T7TM
�� ! � \ �♦ .\1l ' 1 1 ,` PMCEL YAP AT 90-243. III
-. � •n uR \ i � 1 \1 1 1 s.w.�.ra.a�..►.ne.ae..••a:
30
\ 1 1 +
`��r 1'1 •1 d1ESTA
fCAlt I
CITY OF ATASCADEROEXHIBIT c
GRADING AND DRAINAGE PI
Nit COMMUNI'T'Y DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
w.L.sm Wo suttwys 't ;;\ It w• ,` it
� _. TOPpQgApm st+ertr, \
LAT 31 tY00t H-A
� .ol.�:ui'"`rr=�.• •(404 Wrylfi w \ tom\ \\ \
-141
Of I AP
l t\
• a ....ti. I ij ���.\ J It �1 aysr
1 y ,
\(/AIT t yM/T! L t 1
acct.aa rwvua : \t 1
\ w
I lOT 30
� t
. `� fJ�ROL r•,• ,tlt -_ w '=''�:flv r calw,.v •.M
CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT D
SITE PLAN
Nil �.�.—n1-t COMMUNM DEVELOPMENT
D EPARTIMENT
57
ljfY _ Tzo
-:..}--_:_� • Iii-� II `�ti
hEW FROM SMALOA
SMAC OA AVE
in
SLA
t�
►+oatH
IT
CITY OF ATASCADERO PROPOSEDBHOUSE PLANS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
• DEPARTMENT
_ w
t
wwr '
FIRST FLOOR PLAN ;L OOR}LNI
«aM k
SOUTN ELEVATION
� �—
�v ms '
Ica
- EAST_ELEVATIOM
•
- CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT >+
. " DEVELOPER' S STATEMENT
sr COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
Russel Best 8-21-90
1350 Bolton
Morro Bay, CA 93442
REU
City of Atascadero .
Planning Department SEP 6- 1999
Supplemental Developer's StatementCQMMUNITY DE`IELOPMEN]
Project: Application for planned development overlay and tentative map
for 7970 Sinaloa . (APN #30-132-39)
We propose to develop the above property under the provisions of the
'Planned Development Overlay' provision of the Atascadero City Zoning
Ordinance (Sections 9-3.641 - 9-3.644):
We will create 3 parcels from an existing .25 acre RMF-16 lot. New lots •
vary in size from 3,426 to 4,016 square feet. The proposed project of 3
units is allowable under current density standards for RMF 16 zoning.
Newly created parcels will require switching front yard setbacks from
Curbaril to Sinaloa. This is permitted since all access is from Sinaloa.
New parcels meet or exceed existing setback requirements. We propose
the following minimum setbacks:
Front/East Side/North Rear/West Side/South
Lot 1 25 feet 10 feet 10 feet 5 feet
Lot 2 25 " 5 10 ' S
Lot 3 25 " 5 10 15 "
In many cases actual Building setbacks will exceed minimums: on
Curbaril (10 feet required, 15 feet minimum furnished), and on the North
boundary of Lott (5 feet required, 10 feet furnished).
Gravity sewer is available. Sewer easement will be recorded on Final map
to provide for access to Lots 1 and 2. Sewer easement is angled to
preserve the Oak tree on the Southwest corner.
Covenants, Codes and Restrictions shall be recorded to preserve building
colors, landscaped area at Curbaril, and fence configuration.
The two car garage provided for each house meets the requirements of 2
parking spaces per unit. Distance between garages and sidewalk is 25
feet, therefore cars parked in the driveway will be clear of the sidewalk.
CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT F
DEVELOPER'S STATEMENT
CONLMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (pg•2)
. DEPARTMENT
PROJECT OESCRIPT(',14: ( 2.
Architecture can be described as contemporary country. Stucco and
hardboard siding are combined in pleasant earth tones. Rooflines are
pitched to minimize height on Curbaril. Units are stepped down in the rear
to accomodate split level dining rooms. The homes will offer a large living
- dining area downstairs, with adjoining kitchen and powder room.
Upstairs, the two bedrooms have common access to the main bathroom.
The development will fit within the current context of the neighborhood,
giving a pleasant upbeat flair to the corner on which it is situated. The
landscaped area along Curbaril, with fencing restricted to the rear of Lot
3, will preserve a parklike atmosphere. The removal of the single elm
tree which is situated in the sidewalk on Sinaloa will be mitigated by' the
planting of numerous trees in the landscaped area
Construction of roadway, curb, and sidewalk improvements will
substantially improve the appearance of the corner, while achieving
control of local flooding hazards. Construction of similar improvements
• on the opposite side of Sinaloa by the recently approved Voorhis PO
project will combine to give the corner a refurrbished appearance.
The creation of 3 separate parcels will allow for sale of individual units
with land as opposed to condominium units. Many local residents and other
potential buyers prefer to "own the land', and financial institutions are
better able to lend money on separately held lots rather than airspace
condominiums in this area The pride generated by individual ownership
will result in better upkeep of the properties as opposed to condominium
and apartment projects.
Our project will offer moderately priced housing, with attractive
landscaping. Target market is first time or small family buyers who
desire the amenities of basic, well constructed housing. These units will
also offer the opportunity for senior citizens to purchase new housing
which is close enough to walk to the downtown area
In conclusion, we believe that this development will serve the community
on several accounts: It will provide an attractive, finished project which
will complete the public improvements on the comer of Sinaloa and
Curbaril. It will also provide moderately priced housing, for buyers who
desire new housing which is Gose to the downtown area. To the best of
our knowledge, the project design will not have any unmitigated impacts.
• Respectfull submitted
Russel Best
Owner- Developer
.Sft CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT G
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT1, I Ism
(copy)
DEPARTMENT
CITY OF ATASCADERO
�y �• ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR
°�'° NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CONW-WIY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 6500 PALMA AVE. ATASGADERO.CA 93422 (805)461-5035
APPLICANT: R.jss,,_ aes'r
V3SO QeLTON
PADeaft B", CR. g344Z
PROJECT TITLE: -T?M 4 t8-9 0
PROJECT LOCATIONS cwt�6E 4-03-gO
'797o %Np.L.OA
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: p�vis►oer
T�� Qr►R�E'l.5 of 3,`t'26 �•r2� ;,435 �r2, �+►0 4,066 -S-rZ Foe su+E,�
fv«v►i��{ �� r�+41. vsE, E i*%CWWS Xte;moav aF 4p � 6U
FINDINGS: p�" T� &-40 -t '[o eYa�r�Kb, i�Mt`--t(o sov+%e4G.
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the e-vironmerrL
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals.
3. The project does not have Impacts which are individually limited.but comulatively considerable.
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on bums-beings either directly or indirectly.
DETERBONATION:
Based on the above Sndlags.and the information contained in the initial study(made a part hereof by refer-
ence and on file in the Communtty Development Department).it has been determined that the above project
will not have an adverse impact on the environment.
H ge
Community evelopm ector
Date Posted: OCTOBER 30, 1990
Date Adopted:
•
CW 11.0
EXHIBIT H - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 18-90
7970 Sinaloa Avenue
(Best/Cuesta)
November 20, 1990
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project
is adequate.
MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable
General and Specific Plans.
2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
• proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed
improvements, will not cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and
wildlife or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by
the public at large for access through or the use of
property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially
equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision design, and/or the type of
improvements proposed, will not cause serious public health
problems.
TPM-18-90. fin
•
EXHIBIT I - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map #18-90
7970 Sinaloa Avenue (Best/Cuesta)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel, prior to the paving of the road and the
recordation of the Final Map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the Final Map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the Final Map.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer, and shall be placed
underground.
4. The newly formed lots shall be connected to the public
sewer. All annexation permit fees in effect at the time of
recordation shall be paid for the newly created lots prior
to the recordation of the Final Map. Sewer laterals shall
be installed to each lot prior to paving the road.
5. In addition to the installation of water and sewer services,
the developer shall install gas, electricity, telephone, and
cable television services to each lot prior to paving the
road and the recordation of the Final Map.
6. A grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by both the Community
Development and Public Works departments, prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
7. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City
Public Works Department prior to the commencement of
construction activities. In addition, an Inspection
Agreement shall be signed guaranteeing that the work will be
done and the inspections will be paid for.
8. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic
delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs,
gaurdrails, barricades, and other similar devices where
required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in
conformance with the current State of California uniform
sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be
subject to review and modification after construction. •
•
9. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Public Works
Department, prior to the construction of the improvements.
Plans shall include, but shall not' be limited to:
Sinaloa Avenue: Pavement shall be widened to a width
of twenty (20) feet from the centerline of the right-
of-way to the curb face. A curb, gutter, and five (5)
foot sidewalk shall be installed. A concrete cross
gutter shall be installed to match the cross gutter to
be built by the project across the street on Sinaloa.
The recommended minimum slope of the concrete gutter is
0. 005. The minimum curb return radius at the property
line shall be twenty-five (25) feet.
Curbaril Avenue: Pavement shall be widened to a width
of twenty (20) feet from centerline of right-of-way to
curb face. Curb, gutter, and a five (5) foot sidewalk
shall be installed, designed to match the existing
improvements to the south. An asphalt berm shall be
installed from the end of the concrete curb to the
existing curb to the south. An asphalt drive approach
shall be installed to serve the property between the
• existing improvements and the new improvements.
10. Construction of all public improvements shall be completed
prior to the recordation of the Final Map.
11. All public improvements shall be covered by a 100%
Performance Guarantee and a 100% Labor and Material
Guarantee until construction is deemed substantially
complete, and by a 10% Maintenance Guarantee until one year
after substantial completion.
12. Public improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Fire Department, prior to the recordation of the
Final Map. Plans shall include the necessary fire hydrant
upgrade of the existing fire hydrant at the corner of
Sinaloa Avenue and Curbaril Avenue.
13. All lot grading and drainage improvements shall require a
written statement from a registered civil engineer that all
work has been completed and is in full compliance with the
approved plans.
14. The following right-of-way shall be offered for dedication
to the City of Atascadero:
Street Name: Sinaloa Avenue
Limits: 25 feet from the centerline of the right-of-
way to the property line.
•
Street Name: Curbaril Avenue
Limits: 25 feet from the centerline of the right-of-
way to the property line.
Corner Rounding: A minimum radius of 25 feet at
property line at the intersection of Curbaril and
Sinaloa.
All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to, or in conjunction with, the recordation of the Final Map.
15. Landscape plans, including means of irrigation, shall be
submitted along with other materials required for the filing
of a building permit application. This information may be
shown on the grading plan. Said landscape plans shall
substantially conform to the landscaping shown on the site
plan, and shall include a minimum of two (2) 15 gallon
native trees to serve as replacements for the 12" Elm tree
proposed to be removed. All landscaping shall be completed,
or agreements shall be made for its completion, prior to the
final building inspections.
16. All development shall be in conformance with information
contained in the application, including but not limited to
grading, driveway and utility locations, house plans, •
building setbacks, and landscaping.
17. A Final Map, in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance, prior to the recordation of the Final
Map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
by a registered civil engineer or licensed land
surveyor, as required by the Land Surveyor' s Act
and Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within any
road right-of-way shall conform to City Standard
drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to Section 66497 of the Subdivision Map
Act, the engineer or surveyor shall notice the
City Engineer in writing that the monuments have
been set.
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall
be submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the Final Map.
i
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the Final Map.
•
18. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two (2) years
from the date of final approval, unless an extension of time
is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to
the expiration date.
TPM-18-90.con
•
•
EXHIBIT J
DRAFT ORDINANCE
•
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 7970
SINALOA AVENUE FROM RMF/16 TO RMF/16 (PD7)
(ZC 03-90 : BEST/CUESTA)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on November 20, 1990 and has recommended approval of
Zone Change 03-90. •
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonious development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be •
reasonably achieved through existing development
standards or processing requirements.
Ordinance No.
•
7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for requested modifications.
Section 2. Zoning Map.
Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcel listed below, and
shown on the attached Exhibit A, which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Lot 31; Block HA; Atascadero Colony
Development of said parcel shall be in accordance with the
standards of the Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 7, and
consistent with the attached Exhibit B.
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
• circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4. 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.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
ROBERT LILLEY, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
•
REVISED
1/22/91
•
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
•
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO DRAFT ORDINANCE
(EXHIBIT A)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
• DEPARTMENT
AVE •
� 1
•
M.
R F.Z
i
MF•
ui
4VE Z
- 446q
r�
1
W
! 4l�
- r v
AL
'O -
e CITY OF ATASCADERO
EXHIBIT
CONDIUNM DEVELOPMLNT REVI SED MASTER PLAN
DEPARTMENT
Q_ C
C S
og4i �YTI' f' ¢ 's 0
< crZ w
LA
3 �
W•41
_ V) U c
N �8�� Qui xzs5 UU1
Q N N W Li!Ln
Q
N E j'
O a , L PSE U _ f WI
CL 4" r P 0 p
C U /�.
L
I
46
;
,ivr
rho
uj
s
I
o I i
Ur r
,b •
rn �
C!
I ~ v
U
EXHIBIT F
Dec. 18, 1990 staff r-
TPM #18-90
MEMORANDUM
•
DATE: December 18, 1990
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Gary V. Kaiser, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: TPM #18-90/Zone Change #03-90
7970 Sinaloa Avenue
(Russel Best/Cuesta Engineering)
The above-referenced project was considered by this Commission at
its November 20, 1990 meeting. After considering public
testimony, it was determined by the Commission that the item
should be continued until their December 18, 1990 meeting.
It should be noted that considerable time was allocated to the
topic of minimum lot sizes. A motion was even made to deny the
map on the premise that, because of prior Council actions, the
original 0. 25-acre site was not suitable for the type of
development proposed. Finally, it was established by the
Commission that the Commission's primary purpose was to make
recommendations to the Council, based on the General Plan and
• implementing standards in effect at that time, rather than
attempting to guess what the Council' s action on the project
might be. At present, there is no established minimum lot size
for Planned Residential Developments. The majority of the
Commission concurred that the subject of minimum lot sizes,
lacking any guidance from the General Plan, Subdivision
Ordinance, or Zoning Ordinance, should not dictate their, action
on the project.
The purpose of continuing the item was to allow the applicant
ample time to provide more details related to the proposed
landscaping, fencing, and trash enclosure areas. At the same
time, staff was directed to draft an additional condition of
approval requiring that Codes, Covenants and Restrictions
(CC&R' s) be recorded. The CC&R' s, which were originally proposed
but were not addressed in the conditions of approval, are to
address the maintenance of building design, fencing, landscaping,
and the storage of solid waste. This condition will be somewhat
redundant, since all future development of the site must be in
conformance to the approved Master Plan of Development. The
CC&R' s, however, will provide the future owners of the proposed
parcels with additional leverage in the case that compliance with
the Master Plan provisions is not maintained over time.
Attached is the revised Master Plan of Development (Exhibit A) ,
the revised conditions of approval (Exhibit B) , and the November
20, 1990 staff report (Exhibit C) . Note that condition #17 has
been added to the original list of conditions, and that a minor •
amendment to condition #16 has been made so that the topic of
fencing is included. Staff' s recommendation has not changed
since the drafting of this original staff report.
•
414oft , CITY OF ATASCADEROEXHIBIT A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVISED MASTER PLAN
i
DEPARTMENT
yy
a. mks UJI I Y
H W�Ca.O M1
N 0 Z C"r
v=i� tl o Yr stip' ¢z 2
4 9�S2 ms =
W
Z5, F— v
Edi[ an.
Vhf N
2 a
CL
C ' �
`t
►I � � i o
. r
W
< ►. •►
o
J
tA
I :c.ow
J i
EXHIBIT B - Amended Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT BREVISED CONDITIONS
Tentative Parcel Map #18-90
7970 Sinaloa Avenue (Best/Cuesta)
(Revised 12-18-90) •
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage .of
each parcel, prior to the paving of the road and the
recordation of the Final Map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the Final Map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the Final Map.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer, and shall be placed
underground.
4. The newly formed lots shall be connected to the public
sewer. All annexation permit fees in effect at the time of
recordation shall be paid for the newly created lots prior
to the recordation of the Final Map. Sewer laterals shall
be installed to each lot prior to paving the road.
5. In addition to the installation of water and sewer services,
.the developer shall install gas, electricity, telephone, and •
cable television services to each lot prior to paving the
road and the recordation of the Final Map.
6. A grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by both the Community
Development and Public Works departments, prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
7. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City
Public Works Department prior to the commencement of
construction activities. In addition, an Inspection
Agreement shall be signed guaranteeing that the work will be
done and the inspections will be paid for.
8. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic
delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs,
gaurdrails, barricades, and other similar devices where
required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in
conformance with the current State of California uniform
sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be
subject to review and modification after construction.
•
9. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Public Works
• Department, prior to the construction of the improvements.
Plans shall include, but shall not be limited to:
Sinaloa Avenue: Pavement shall be widened to a width
of twenty (20) feet from the centerline of the right-
of-way to the curb face. A curb, gutter, and five (5)
foot sidewalk shall be installed. A concrete cross
gutter shall be installed to match the cross gutter to
be built by the project across the street on Sinaloa.
The recommended minimum slope of the concrete gutter is
0. 005. The minimum curb return radius at the property
dine shall be twenty-five (25) feet.
Curbaril Avenue: Pavement shall be widened to a width
of twenty (20) feet from centerline of right-of-way to
curb face. Curb, gutter, and a five (5) foot sidewalk
shall be installed, designed to match the existing
improvements to the south. An asphalt berm shall be
installed from the end of the concrete curb to the
existing curb to the south. An asphalt drive approach
shall be installed to serve the property between the
existing improvements and the new improvements.
10. Construction of all public improvements shall be completed
prior to the recordation of the Final Map.
• 11 . All public improvements shall be covered by a 100%
Performance Guarantee and a 100% Labor and Material
Guarantee until construction is deemed substantially
complete, and by a 10% Maintenance Guarantee until one year
after substantial completion.
12. Public improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Fire Department, prior to the recordation of the
Final Map. Plans shall include the necessary fire hydrant
upgrade of the existing fire hydrant at the corner of
Sinaloa Avenue and Curbaril Avenue.
13. All lot grading and drainage improvements shall require a
written statement from a registered civil engineer that all
work has been completed and is in full compliance with the
approved plans.
14. The following right-of-way shall be offered for dedication
to the City of Atascadero:
Street Name: Sinaloa Avenue
Limits: 25 feet from the centerline of the right-of-
way to the property line.
•
Street Name: Curbaril Avenue
Limits: 25 feet from the centerline of the right-of-
way to the property line.
Corner Rounding: A minimum radius of 25 feet at •
property line at the intersection of Curbaril and
Sinaloa.
All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to, or in conjunction with, the recordation of the Final Map.
15. Landscape plans, including means of irrigation, shall be
submitted along with other materials required for the filing
of a building permit application. This information may be
shown on the grading plan. Said landscape plans shall
substantially conform to the landscaping shown on the site
plan, and shall include a minimum of two (2) 15 gallon
native trees to serve as replacements for the 12" Elm tree
proposed to be removed. All landscaping shall be completed,
or agreements shall be made for its completion, prior to the
final building inspections.
16. All development shall be in conformance with information
contained in the application, including but not limited to
grading, driveway and utility locations, house plans,
building setbacks, fencing, and landscaping.
17. Codes, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R' s) shall be
recorded, prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map, and
shall address the fencing, landscaping, and storage of solid •
waste containers (trash cans) . Said CC&R' s, prior to being
recorded, shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Community Development Department for conformance to the
approved Master Plan of Development.
18. A Final Map, in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance, prior to the recordation of the Final
Map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
by a registered civil engineer or licensed land
surveyor, as required by the Land Surveyor' s Act
and Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within any
road right-of-way shall conform to City Standard
drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to Section 66497 of the Subdivision Map
Act, the engineer or surveyor shall notice the
City Engineer in writing that the monuments have
been set.
•
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall
be submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the Final Map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the Final Map.
19. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two (2) Years
from the date of final approval, unless an extension of time
is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to
the expiration date.
TPM-18-90.co2
•
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 5 , 1991
19. (new) CC&Rs shall address the subject of building
locations on the lots intended for residential use
and shall include language addressing the
preservation of the grove of oak trees affecting
the lots on the west side of the proposed private
road. Said CC&Rs shall also include language
adequate for precluding construction of buildings
on the steeper portions of the residential lots,
and shall preclude any extensive grading and
exposed foundations in excess of eighteen (18)
inches on said residential lots. This portion of
the CC&Rs shall be subject to the review and
approval of the Community Development Department
prior to their recordation.
22. (new) The final map shall include an access denial
strip, one (1) foot in width, on each residential
parcel which abuts the public road right-of-way of
Santa Barbara and/or Atascadero Roads.
23. (new) All new buildings on the site shall be
equipped with low-flow water conservation devices
on all toilets and shower heads.
Chairperson Luna declared a recess at 9 : 17 p.m. ; meeting •
reconvened at 9 : 30 p.m.
2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 18-90 - Conditions of Approval:
Application filed by Russel Best (Cuesta Engineering) to
consider conditions of approval for the creation of a
three lot residential subdivision. Project would result
in the division of 0. 25 acres into three parcels of
approximately 3, 426, 3, 435, and 4, 016 square feet each.
Subject site is located at 7970 Sinaloa Avenue.
Mr. Kaiser presented the staff report and provided a
background on the Commission and Council actions concerning
this application in conjunction with Zone Change 3-90
(establishment of planned unit development) .
Commission Waage requested that a condition be added to
require low flow water conservation devices.
Deborah Hollowell with Cuesta Engineering, stated that the
applicant is in concurrence with staff' s recommendation and
would have no problem with Commissioner Waage' s request.
MOTION: By Commissioner Highland and seconded by
.Commissioner Lochridge to recommend approval of the •
Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map 18-
90 as modified:
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 5 1991
20. All three (3
) residential ti 1 buildings shall be
equipped with low-flow water conservation devices
on each toilet and shower.
Commissioner Johnson noted his opposition to the project
stating that the lot is already substandard and will become
more so if request is approved. He added that to impact the
area with single family residences was not the intent of the
planned development overlay.
Commissioners Waage and Kudlac concurred noting that they,
too, could not support the project.
Commissioner Highland stated that the City Council's reversal
of the Planning Commission' s denial of this project is a clear
message to the Commission concerning minimum lot sizes. All
the Commission is being asked to do in this case is act on
conditions of approval by direction of the Council. .
Commissioner Hanauer commented on the Council' s direction and
referenced the recent memo concerning Council reversing
Commission decisions.
Chairperson Luna stressed that this particular planned
development is an abuse of the process, yet it is the Council
who sets policy. He added he has an obligation to try and
implement their policies. He said he is torn between voting
for or against the project, so he will abstain from voting.
The motion carried 3: 3: 1 with the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Highland, Lochridge, and
Hanauer
NOES: Commissioners Kudlac, Johnson, and Waage
ABSTAIN: Chairperson Luna (counted as "aye vote)
3. ZONE CHANGE 6-90/TENTATIVE TRACT 6-90:
Applications filed by Jim and ris Hazard (Tartaglia-
Hughes) to establish a Plan Development Overlay Zone
(PD) and to allow subdivis ' n of two colony lots into six
lots ranging in sizeom 5, 194 square feet to 6, 958
square feet each. Spbject site is located at 5160/5180
Palma Avenue.
Doug Davidson pre 'nted, the staff report which focused on
issues includi minimum lot size standards, the planned
development erlay zone, housing policies, multiple family
zones, et . The development standards were addressed
previou y. during the precise plan process. Mr. Davidson
pointed out that a redeeming factor for this planned
EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval •
Tentative Parcel Map #18-90
7970 Sinaloa Avenue (Best/Cuesta)
March 5, 1991 - Revised at Planning Commission Hearing
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel, prior to the paving of the road and the
recordation of the Final Map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the Final Map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the Final Map.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer, and shall be placed
underground.
4. The newly formed lots shall be connected to the public
sewer. All annexation permit fees in effect at the time of
recordation shall be paid for the newly created lots prior
to the recordation of the Final Map. Sewer laterals shall
be installed to each lot prior to paving the road.
5. In addition to the installation of water and sewer services, '
the developer shall install gas, electricity, telephone, and
cable television services to each lot prior to paving the
road and the recordation of the Final Map.
6. A grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by both the Community
Development and Public Works departments, prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
7. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City
Public Works Department prior to the commencement of
construction activities. In addition, an Inspection
Agreement shall be signed guaranteeing that the work will be
done and the inspections will be paid for.
8. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic
delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs,
gaurdrails, barricades, and other similar devices where
required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in
conformance with the current State of California uniform
sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be
subject to review and modification after construction.
9. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered civil
• engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Public Works
Department, prior to the construction of the improvements.
Plans shall include, but shall not be limited to:
Sinaloa Avenue: Pavement shall be widened to a width
of twenty (20) feet from the centerline of the right-
of-way to the curb face. A curb, gutter, and five (5)
foot sidewalk shall be installed. A concrete cross
gutter shall be installed to match the cross gutter to
be built by the project across the street on Sinaloa.
The recommended minimum slope of the concrete gutter is
0. 005. The minimum curb return radius at the property
line shall be twenty-five (25) feet.
Curbaril Avenue: Pavement shall be widened to a width
of twenty (20) feet from centerline of right-of-way to
curb face. Curb, gutter, and a five (5) foot sidewalk
shall be installed, designed to match the existing
improvements to the south. An asphalt berm shall be
installed from the end of the concrete curb to the
existing curb to the south. An asphalt drive approach
shall be installed to serve the property between the
existing improvements and the new improvements.
• 10. Construction of all public improvements shall be completed
prior to the recordation of the Final Map.
11. All public improvements shall be covered by a 100%
Performance Guarantee and a 100% Labor and Material
Guarantee until construction is deemed substantially
complete, and by a 10% Maintenance Guarantee until one year
after substantial completion.
12. Public improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by-
the City Fire Department, prior to the recordation of the-
Final Map. Plans shall include the necessary fire hydrant
upgrade of the existing fire hydrant at the corner of
Sinaloa Avenue and Curbaril Avenue.
13. All lot grading and drainage improvements shall require a
written statement from a registered civil engineer that all
work has been completed and is in full compliance with the
approved plans.
14 . The following right-of-way shall be offered for dedication
to the City of Atascadero:
Street Name: Sinaloa Avenue
Limits: 25 feet from the centerline of the right-of-
way to the property line.
Street Name: Curbaril Avenue
Limits: 25 feet from the centerline of the right-of-
way to the property line.
Corner Rounding: A minimum radius of 25 feet at
property line at the intersection of Curbaril and
Sinaloa.
All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to, or in conjunction with, the recordation of the Final Map.
15. Landscape plans, including means of irrigation, shall be
submitted along with other materials required for the filing
of a building permit application. This information may be
shown on the grading plan. Said landscape plans shall
substantially conform to the landscaping shown on the site
plan, and shall include a minimum of two (2) 15 gallon
native trees to serve as replacements for the 12" Elm tree
proposed to be removed. All landscaping shall be completed,
or agreements shall be made for its completion, prior to the
final building inspections.
16. All development shall be in conformance with information
contained in the application, including but not limited to
grading, driveway and utility locations, house plans,
building setbacks, fencing, and landscaping.
17. Codes, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R' s) shall be •
recorded, prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map, and
shall address the fencing, landscaping, and storage of solid
waste containers (trash cans) . Said CC&R' s, prior to being
recorded, shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Community Development Department for conformance to the
approved Master Plan of Development.
18. A Final Map, in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance, prior to the recordation of the Final
Map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
by a registered civil engineer or licensed land
surveyor, as required by the Land Surveyor' s Act
and Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within any
road right-of-way shall conform to City Standard
drawing M-1.
b. Pursuant to Section 66497 of the Subdivision Map
Act, the engineer or surveyor shall notice the
City Engineer in writing that the monuments have
been set. •
c• A recently- updated preliminary title report shall
. be submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the Final Map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the
processing of the Final Map.
19. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two (2) years
from the date of final approval, unless an extension of time
is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to
the expiration date.
20. All three (3) residential buildings shall be equipped with
low-flow water conservation devices on each toilet and
shower.
TPM-18-90.co3
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
• CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B_2
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 3/26/91
From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. File No: ZC 06-90/
TTM 30-90
SUBJECT:
Request to establish a Planned Development Overlay zone (PD7) to
allow a subdivision of 'two Colony lots into six lots ranging in
size from 5, 194 square feet to 6, 958 square feet at 5160/5180 Palma
Avenue - Jim & Kris Hazard/Tartaglia-Hughes.
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Waive reading of Ordinance No. 219 in full and approve by
title only; and
2) Approve Ordinance No. 219 on first reading
3) Approve Tentative Tract Map 30-90 subject to the Planning
Commission' s Findings and Conditions of Approval
• BACKGROUND:
On March 5, 1991 , the Atascadero Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing on the above referenced subject. On a 4:3 vote, the
Commission recommended approval of the Zone Change and Tract Map
requests based on the Findings and Conditions of Approval contained
in the attached staff report. There was discussion and public
testimony as referenced in the attached minutes excerpt.
HE:ps
Attachments: Staff Report - March 5, 1991
Minutes Excerpt - March 5, 1991
Ordinance No. 219
cc: James & Kris Hazard
Tartaglia-Hughes Engineering
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: 4j, •
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: March 5, 1991
BY: Doug Davidson, Senior Planner File No: TTM 30-90/ZC 06-90
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a request to establish a Planned Development
Overlay zone (PD7) and the corresponding creation of a six lot
residential subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 06-90 based on the
Findings for Approval contained in the Draft Ordinance (Exhibit
J) . Also, staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map 30-90
based on the Findings for Approval in Exhibit K and the
Conditions of Approval in Exhibit L.
•
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Owner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jim & Kris Hazard
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tartaglia-Hughes
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . .5160/5180 Palma Ave.
4. General Plan Designation. . . . .Low Density Multiple Family
5. Zoning District. . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF/10
6. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.79 acre
7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Six-unit Project (under
construction)
8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
on February 12, 1991.
•
BACKGROUND:
Precise Plan 74-89 became effective on May 15, 1990. This
environmental review established Conditions of Approval for
the development of two new single family residences on a lot
containing one single family dwelling. Subsequently, the
applicant appealed the requirement for curb, gutter, and sidewalk
along the property frontage. The Planning Commission denied the
appeal at their July 3, 1990 meeting. Ultimately on appeal at
the City Council on August 14, 1990, the street improvements were
modified to require additional paveout and an in-lieu
contribution to the City Sidewalk Fund. This revised Condition
also was applied to the adjacent lot under Precise Plan 59-90, a
similar development of two new single family dwellings with one
existing unit.
A preliminary review of the proposed Tract Map was submitted on
October 29, 1990, resulting in the formal application being
received on December 11, 1990.
ANALYSIS:
The current request is a small lot subdivision of two existing
Colony lots into six separate lots ranging in size from 5, 194
square feet to 6,958 square feet. Each existing lot is
approximately 0.40 acres in size, allowing for a maximum of three
two-bedroom units on each site. Although, separate Precise Plans
were processed, the site is being developed as a single
development with shared access and consistent architecture. The
site development also dictates that the subdivision be analyzed
comprehensively. With a minimum lot size of one-half acre in the
RMF zones, small lot subdivisions require the establishment of a
Planned Development Overlay Zone (PD) . The City has created an
generic overlay zone of PD7 for small lot residential
subdivisions. Since the proposal hinges on the establishment of
a PD Overlay, the analysis will start with the Zone Change
request.
Minimum Lot Size Standards
The Zoning Ordinance and General Plan set a minimum lot size of
one-half acre in multiple family zones. Residential Policy #6 of
the General Plan (Page 57) allows smaller lot sizes "in
conjunction withlanned residential developments,P p nts, provided that
the overall density within the project is consistent with other
density standards contained herein. As stated above, the
proposed density conforms to the density standards of the Zoning
Ordinance and General Plan. Six (6) two-bedroom units are the
maximum allowed for a 0.79 acre site in the RMF/10 zone.
Planned Development Overlay Zone
The Zoning Ordinance contains the purpose and required findings
for PD zones. The purpose statement (Section 9-3.641) reads as
follows:
"The Planned Development Overlay Zone identifies areas where
development standards or processing requirements different
from those established by the underlying zoning district are
deemed necessary to promote orderly and harmonius
development and to enhance the opportunity to best utilize
special characteristics of an area. "
To implement the purpose statement, the following four findings
(Section 9-3.644) must be made:
1. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and harmonius
development.
2. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best utilize
special characteristics of an area and will have a
beneficial effect on the area.
3. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably
achieved through existing development standards or
processing requirements.
4 . The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for the requested modifications.
Housing Policies
The goal of providing a full range of housing opportunities is
difficult to realize with a City-wide minimum lot size of one-
half acre. One of the fundamental goals of the General Plan
(Page 130) is "a desire to encourage residential projects to
provide housing units affordable to persons with low and moderate
incomes by offering developers either a density bonus or other
bonus incentives. " While a density bonus is a worthwhile
objective, the result is development in excess of what community
density standards have established as a maximum. A Planned
Development Overlay zone, on the other hand, cannot be used to
provide more units than is otherwise allowed. (This is despite
the fact that Zoning Ordinance section 9-3.643 (d) states that
permitted density may be modified with a PD - This phrase is
currently ignored and will be struck in the Zoning Ordinance re-
write, for allowing PDs to exceed the density standards violates
the General Plan) . Thus density is not an issue - the site will
either be developed as rental units in accordance with the
approved Precise Plans, or as single family dwellings available
for purchase.
Recent ,Planning Commission discussion has questioned what the
City gains by granting these small lot subdivisions in multiple
family zones. Current City standards do not require the
provision of low or moderate income housing for creating a PD7
zone, nor are additional amenities deemed necessary by the
Ordinance. Staff is presently working on revised standards that
strengthen the advantages to the City of PD7 zones. In the
meantime, however, staff continues to support the creation of
home ownership opportunities as a benefit to the City. The
following City policies illustrate that the provision of housing
on small lots available for ownership is a primary feature of
City' s Housing Element:
"Promote the development and construction of new housing units
for low and moderate income persons.
"Promote and encourage the development and construction of new
housing units for first time homebuyers. "
"Provide flexibility in development standards as a means to lower
overall costs of low and moderate income housing units. "
Furthermore, Section 11 of the Housing Element identifies a
problem area of Special Needs and Variety in Housing
• Opportunities. The adopted policy to counter this problem
encourages a wide range of housing opportunities. The programs
to implement this policy all stress maintaining flexibilty in
zoning standards. The mechanism to enable flexibility is the PD
zone.
The recent PD requests, including the subject project, do not
represent "affordable" housing units. Although difficult to
define, the term usually relates to low and moderate income
housing as defined by State law. Small lot subdivisions do,
however, provide an different form of housing. A brief look at
residential zoning in Atascadero shows why various options should
be encouraged.
Single family residential land in Atascadero is dominated (70%)
by a zone where the minimum lot size ranges from 2 1/2 to 10
acres. This yields the rural nature with large lots and "elbow
room" that forms the community' s image and basic purpose. This
unique rural lifestyle must be protected, but as the above
Housing Element policies recognize, it limits the number of
available housing options. Since the density principles of the
General Plan cannot be exceeded, the viable location for the PD7
zone is multiple family areas. For instance, a PD7 Overlay in
the RSF-Y zone cannot exceed a density of one home per acre.
Notwithstanding the recent Pine Mountain subdivision (Noakes) ,
• feasible PD7 Overlays in single family zones are rare.
Multiple Family Zones
Multiple family zones are designated for apartments,
condominiums, as well as single family dwellings where
appropriate. These land uses have all been subject to revised
development standards in the last few years. These revised
standards recognize site constraints, intensity of land use, and
ensure adequate amenities.
In May, 1987 the Hillside Density Standards were adopted for
multiple family zones. This sliding scale results in a
development pattern of - the steeper the land and greater the
number of bedrooms, the less number of allowed units. Also
included in this Ordinance were minimum requirements for
coverage, storage, recreation areas, parking, and fencing.
Furthermore, the Condominium Conversion Ordinance was recently
adopted to provide a greater level of amenities and quality of
improvements for conversion of apartments to condominiums.
Similarly, the impending revision to the Planned Development
Overlay section of the Zoning Ordinance intends to demand a high
quality of design and community benefits for small lot
subdivisions. This should complete the upgrade of multiple
family development by having standards that recognize site
constraints and insist that projects intended for ownership are
of a higher caliber. Until then, however, the staff has tried to
prove that supplying a small lot for single family home ownership
is indeed a valuable asset to the City.
Other Issues
This report has focused on the merits of creating a small lot
subdivision, for the development issues have been addressed in
the Precise Plan approvals. Precise Plan conditions, such as
assuring adequate access, parking, and storage were satisfied in
the plan check for building permits. As of this writing,
building permits for the entire project have been approved and
are ready for issuance.
Although the proposed lot lines are somewhat irregular, staff
agrees with the applicant' s engineer that the proposed design
takes the site layout into account. In this manner, the parking
and open space areas for each unit are contained within its own
property lines. Access and utility easements will be recorded as
a part of the map.
CONCLUSIONS:
The staff is aware that small lot residential subdivisions via
the creation of a PD7 zone are one of the more controversial •
topics facing the City. The debate centers on what benefit the
City is receiving in return for allowing small lots. In light of
• the City' s housing policies it seems that a variety of home
ownership opportunities should be promoted. The City will have
to provide evidence in the Housing Element Update of programs
intended to carry out these policies. The small lot subdivision
is one such method and provides a benefit to the City, even if
ownership is the only true advantage. The upcoming revision to
the PD standards will only increase this benefit.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Zoning Map
Exhibit B - General Plan Land Use Map
Exhibit C - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit D - Elevations
Exhibit E - Floor Plan
Exhibit F - Development Statement
Exhibit G - Precise Plan 74-89
Exhibit H - Precise Plan 59-90
Exhibit I - Negative Declaration
Exhibit J - Draft Ordinance (PD7)
Exhibit K - Findings for Approval (Tract Map)
Exhibit L - Conditions of Approval (Tract Map)
•
•
- —i� �I � /.� � , rte. ►
PIP
wo- joew
INN —
.• .oilwas
on
.
Evil11111
I�� ,1111 ��/11■//t �� -_ _ - =�_= ` _
oil IN
Ma �� ■
1 ■ �� . •• w
r ��
I r ► ,�
tai�a� `�• ��� i' ���.. 'moi,,.:
♦ • ♦
� 111 '��� `► �•� ..,�
— ����� �� to ♦� r `'"
e
�� .R�,
EXHIBIT C
,,K(L-4: �; CITY OF TENTATIVE MAP
,I .. ATASCADERO TRACT MAP 30-90
4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE CHANGE 06-90
Q11, DEPARTMENT i
TarArlw Truer N..NR. Joss
IM 1111 CITY OF ATAMAMRo. COONTI OF DAN Wit DDIMo, CA.. ![t,q j
A DIVISION OF II
ATASCAO97O COLONT AS SAID LOTS AM SHOWN ON TW MAF 111.60 iN MAF
DOOR♦ FAD/ NA"Done ON
SAID JeLCOUNTY.
3 ; `3 !lNtMlHI'D eMTlrreATi
s fOP07 w -
\ I WHOM CS CO PV MID I,A►rU FON►DID w we AND re THE Din OF NII
ORDINANCE CdPLiu rIM TW NIDOtrrslar NAF ACT AND Lawl
aatNANeu.
_ OARADf / p I ROMRi C. TMTAOL A MR. 1A0U
AOCMM• O dOY /930
• nf[,owe[ I E-'f-3.Tdlff.
...`ash ,
••
LOT f arra•D ewnrieAn
/ f
IS / ; LOi'J qto
/RlJ/DfI�G I"[Ailey APKY PMR APPROVAL OP THE o1111S1a,a NUL NIOPIRTM SININN
3 1 ON rHA"IS KAT AND CIATIFY TINT r AN TNI LIOAL DrNM aF UID PROPS IT
7 I ? I J ANO TT TIN IMMOLATION N/ROM II TAW AND OOMECT r0 rrI MST Or
Access NY RNORIOOI uo
OI �'AfJ/QFUL•G\ r.TNI•_, UrrL,1Y r a O SIOMSO, !mss �I
0,340,11
O ] 7
d a
wl.Or d I iaCesr qR f,aTo d I I I L
/• ,LLarS.,� are Q 1
! \ sire
�� T r� ` �� • AlesodA:cC �� � � a. ♦ 1w.
A`
4.20
t `w
-ILA, "...A 1. -- T.t.. - I VICINITY MAP+
.>F Air,&
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 2055 i
BEING A SIX LOT SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 32
j AND 33, BLOCK RA, TOWN OF ATASCADERO,CA.
EXHIBIT D
:..' CITY OF ATASCADERO ELEVATIONS
-,:,■�!.,� - TRACT MAP 30-90
' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE CHANGE 06-90
• DEPARTMENT
COUP.s mamas' 7 A
NrAsm son"
ice : i - _ -_
OD
FRONT ELEVATION lg r^••� - _ �-r�o h
COUP.SHRK"s 1fr
41)
C ++..
al 1 A. eo®m CEMENT
SIDE ELEVATION vl r^-•�— �.,.r �F
COUP.smmm Es /f)
�e
I _ `It
4I ill �✓ �'� °
t
1 k
a.
CEMENT PIASTER
SIDE ELEVATION +►�rr•-�__. r,•.,•-v n
K
,j
cow.sH94mEs
i
ar
*Ji CEMENT PIASTER 07, - -
REAR ELEVATION �'rn•... b ,•, Io
EXHIBIT E
CITY OF ATASCADERO FLOOR PLAN
TRACT MAP 30-90
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
can ZONE CHANGE 06-90
�� DEPARTMENT •
w am&
III G
Pip1
Sig,
ti
s•-e
UPPER FLOOR PIAN '•f'•,' 1
D 14 v -
y1 v _
` OHO f) OO TC"on I s
1 - OYOAO{ a
i 1
{ ------ 4— .l I ,J#
1 .
J i g
1 aeon 1
L4 stoR+w"Nurv.olm
Pon
a
L
1J h.
UY/1O ((cis w'
-•3, bR11� �! POOCH .�
� I I
i r1 I"
K r
LOWER FLOOR PLAN
EXHIBIT F
DEVELOPMENT STATEMENT
TRACT MAP 30-90
• ZONE CHANGE 06-90
Proposed Development:
Tract No. 2055 , is a proposed sma l l lot subdivision located at 5160
3 5120 Palma Avenue , between Rosario and San Jacinto Road . The
project devalcpment will :onsist Oftheresubdivision of moots 32
RA it the City of Atascaderc. Lots 32 3 32 are
approximately 17 . 170 square feet each .
The new l is at are proposed fcr the project will consist Of a
total :Df si 1-is that range in size from 5 . 194 square feet to
27; seuare feet. -he cropcsed lot numbers and sizes are as
f�llcws .
_c* Nc . Area
1 519 :
'? - ' 04
5 f JU . ft .
.J J,.li 5O so . v .
1 1 t
Method of Development-
The Ce v e l ccment Of this p r0 j ec Z X0;15' 3tS of Creat' ng s"<
nd1 '. 1c:Ual 17,ts 1n 1 ieU v' ,etwo e:- ing colcry lots . Each lot
wi i l provide a site for a5"1g is f;m1 i _,` resi -enOe . Presentl ., there
,.
are 'NC a.. 3 t I ng es I de^c-2s t r.at N l ! �_Ocucy two OF tre new lots .
The rema tl 1 rig four i J 7�s V 1 1 , Ge e' a i oce.1 w'. ,?',J resder'ces .
P I _r S ,:r ..,e fsur new resz, es are urrer t1y ^,e1 n •-ev 1-awed by
t^a ,; y uraer cr-3cise pian ' rcc=ss . all cOrdi .� ,ns set orth in
the precise plan procass nave teen s-atisfied by the applicant
Summary :
-rte ..�rer s requast , na �r�val cf a sma' l 1ct sued,/ Sion , rezone
,no tract map for '_he~ crb�ect in accordance vith the City
guidelines .
r, i t i al i y the project started as the development Of four ( 4 ) single
=amity , individual rental units . Precise olan aoQrovai has been
granted by the City for the rental units . The owers , being in real
estate , are well aware ;;T the i ,lcreas ing C=mand fcr affordable
EXHIBIT F (cont.
•
ncmes . There is a limited number of homes for sale in the City of
atascadero that are within an affordable range without being
condominiums or mobile homes . It is the desire of a substantial
segment )f the cit ' s population to own their own home but whom
cannot afford the added expense of an association fee along with
tneir mor-.gage payment. There is also the attraction of owning a
free-stand-, ng" name of the 1 r 3,,vri that is not a mob I l e home in a
The owners feel that a project of this small scale will maximize
the land use O t,�-,cut changing the general character of the
neignbornood arid .4ill in fact imcrove the overall appearance of the
area.
after consideration of several options the final lot configuration
Nas determined tc provide the most logical use of the property . The
rear units ha,�e been divided so that each unit ' s guest parking Ind
yard space lie within its own property lines . While the lots are
not rectangular in share they do provide the necessary
::haractar7stics „,-:e highest and tes- use o; the property .
EXHIBIT G
TTM 30-90/ZC 06-90
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6500 PALMA AVENUE
114aseadets POLICE DEPARTMENT
• ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93422
PHONE: (805) 466.6000 NCORPORATED JULY 2. 1979 5500 PALMA.AVENUE
ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93422
CITY COUNCIL
CITY CLERK 66PHONE: (805) 466- 00
CITY TREASURER
CITY MANAGER
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT - FIRE DEPARTMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT _:ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93422
' PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
PHONE: (805) 466.2141
April 24, 1990
Robert Fisher
8550-D E1 Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
RE: PRECISE PLAN 74-89
5160 Palma Ave.
Dear Mr. Fisher:
The City of Atascadero has received and reviewed your application
for a Precise Plan and Environmental Determination for the
• construction of two (2) single family residences, each containing
two-bedrooms. The site contains an existing single family
dwelling which is to remain.
The proposed site is zoned RMF/10 (Residential Multiple Family
Low Density) and the proposed use is allowed as defined as a
single family dwellings (Section 9-3.172 (a) . The surrounding
properties are zoned the same as the subject site, with the
exception of property to the south which is zoned CR (Commercial
Retail) .
A review by the Community Development Director of the
environmental description form and application, along with other
background information, shows that the project will have no
detrimental effect upon the environment; therefore, a Negative
Declaration has been prepared. The Director has also found the
project, as conditioned, to be in compliance with the provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance.
The proposed Precise Plan is approved as shown on attached
Exhibit B (site plan) , Exhibit C (grading plan) and subject to
the conditions of approval in Exhibit E. Final approval becomes
effective on May 15, 1990, unless appealed. (NOTE: THIS DOES
NOT CONSTITUTE A GRADING OR BUILDING PERMIT. )
•
•
In the event you intend to appeal any of the conditions, your
appeal should be in writing and should state the reasons for the
appeal. Any appeal would be scheduled for Planning Commission
consideration as a public hearing. You should, however, discuss
• any objections to the conditions with planning staff as it may be
possible to alter conditions after such discussion.
If you should have any questions concerning this project, you are
welcome to contact the Community Development Department for
assistance.
Sincerely, _
Doug Davidson
Senior Planner
DD/dd
cc: Paul Washburn
James Hazard
Attachments: Exhibit A - Zoning Map
Exhibit B - Site Plan
Exhibit C - Grading Plan
Exhibit D - Tree Removal/Protection
Exhibit E - Findings for Approval
Exhibit F - Conditions of Approval
I
i � ►
100
I
'•wwwo-ow:•f►
IANCR �,e�► ��,�±*�
�11I/ 0 umna mnnn
EXHIBIT B
�i� `\ SITE PLAN
4 CITY OF ATASCADEI4 PRECISE PLAN 74-89
r���• Ma a��. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT------------------
i
_ ...»r.
17
Ism•.e• • • -----------♦ -----
SLO(L
.•rrw PROPOSED
I { fi•
SITE LATA 1 _ �-..�~ — -- -✓.
-� .-
_ noo.a .r.+.�
PROPOSED
It 0
'--TY MAP s I .`_,-•--�: o...� .____..._ .. _
•� I �v. 1.� _ ,_—__---__ ---.
so OLD(L Is
r EXISTM '.OLDO:A,
RELOCATW t
o
iJ.
Y
PALMA AVENUE ' .. .•..•.
.. ...- _. _ u.o.c••.�-r•wu wor vorr•.•.no ww..c.rn _._ �
..o+eoee.s rvr w •.t•.wrcr•.c..nunw.....r I n
SITE PL AN LOT i7 m Of.K AA
EXHIBIT C
CITY PLAN
y TY OF ATASCADERO
�� ea PRECISE PLAN 74-89
• � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
�..;� DEPARTMENT
I
I� ,� ✓Y*� �— — SLOG. e I 1 _._. 4I u•' �.
Ir t
�_
i I t A
eros.
O�.-'W Z
a.em•r"` I4
LEGEND
i P77cr'.1k
.a1G
KRIS 9,11M H47ADp t t,�� j.•` t
VICINITY MAP
+r
I
GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN
I LOT 32 BLK, RA - 5160 PALMA AVE. ATASCADERO
•
I Mc= 1"1fCr"''�.11"i � I� EXHIBIT D
SITE DESCRIPTION
Tulti NTB Iy AetJTLY o2L0r ly FW"Fws�&ev nY rµhA- p,13 To Tura POP-TW OA-T,
1)wjt9 &1 rr-Iv,LTo r�wrl3r•rf TO T142• toouTl{e)-4,T , 47ouT -it-leh' ,A00 HalINuL'fir. Nur1ep'll.
191.14 rIrV rFeat5o NAP-om "erl r-.Awrst9 LT 140 rV�1111TNf• c TNI, youTHmizplo4r •
fAt"I- . PL" TFeg WILL Isr Itl01v1cpw'&LL7 ,WITH T�eg I�ZOTe.:11v� jeA.
yul2ay -TgAr wILV }t.t.ow TIII?Ip. Pl2g`ep-v,LTIVFI wlrk TIAs' rf4f^vt,eb Ia�vf✓L�l'rlstir
of tulh yITO . eNr3 TFBe , � �.q' ��rr�a� plt`e Imo' r�orospr� P°�- Qarlov�L.
TREE INVENTORY
I. �4' rlOr'Tefb'r rNZ l;For) Bb/.,D Cf VyISTIN(l fHA-IHej
�• IV" 1'lOr'rp�el rw6 FF°fl 13t-114 ap ID,15T IAL rA1j114 l aTA-IrI
i'6-fz: T�60 FrOf-I r0VHvATIOFI Of� 0I-01 'ems' �Z6r�Ir'
MctJTD�s'( rlrg fpL°'I Favtat'xTIvtl or- ts,.vtr 'r.,' �s31�I.11J
0/•�• I'3' f lutrl wur+r-vA rIo11 'v' �v r.►II-I
�• 11-'' jar forwf roo bo Fah oew rAwlrl� er'`1�
]. IO' hoNleIZST rlro 1' ��S.or) Dew rAy,0 I �0rAlF�
�• I V' r�ONtl3�8'T i'I fJ� ,pt. r I rI I'bpla rev I N!1 ( 9 TAI!-I
9• I$'' hoNTs�-a� Plras Io� I`�.°r� Now rAvIN I �eTSIr�
Io. WfO* 64vof-v, I,% ��or� psw ruvIP,4i 0TAI I"'
11- 14 " _ION1L Fa'( rttb Ire Fri.orl PeW rxvlH i l �a rAirl
Ij. lo" hooTerq rt-6 7! r�oII rzv0r.P*TIa1 N-Mer'a' rat'Llo
13• 10" r,oE I3s Fpol F°UrJ�:PAr,OI-4 Gls N-IVI'A' (,I°- In f") �FT %II-I
I�• 1'(." L4r(Lbh+o 7s Atjw IV' Mori "HlvATI-0 l q+ t" I, '��A'�' rOf w P
15, IV I.Ivro OAi - 6 t Fp-orl r Lmj. '1?,' , 13" fporl tbl.,o�i '�' 26TAI,a
I{.. ly'' uwo OA. °- (r-M ftinCl. , r o= rpoq P--Wtl1. 'Is' ills r Ll F�
►.Iver o.&I&- rrerl ALby'6' , 16' l<v i R1.vlt. rm
'LIv6 OA.I�- l�" Fr°� I3Lb/.'I�' / I� " �S�ori picw,�. 'F' it�rf.l�
II" (.Iver OA t4 15! Fpdrl t31,h,�.'Pi' t 10- �I�-Irl I�LDI�.'�� �i.8r�111
por) psLh.�.'tr' t Iy= rr l �„. r16 ell. '(�' FBT,LI
'11• '�j Jl3�Fi7.6� P�� I� Ger'Ti3is- of I I _ I os8n t ��t3taJ•Y �t0►�4�er
}. �o• 1101•:Td�07 reo 7-1 rP--rl
I ooriapel r14 7% rparl rlsol'o<Dr� P�t.�vE1.�1Y iZd�',1I►�
�.�. 1�00 JCIPTZ✓ 51 rNE e rl%'ri r�r•-.dam p�ivraNl�`f �ZoTN�
/��!. (/• PV10bI.1 fuel r1101 r11xpr17+d v 171211i6WAT �f3��•I�
•
'TREE'PROTECTION REOUIREMENTS
Doom- iA4,.tH ANI-J APO o-ArOA113� Ir' I-nvr-
. ,Lr'c8 rrol A441 p"royl31V Gor'hT 12uG1'10d A 1tP WILL HDr MDQ IHr 4'r IV 9 t TWS pt,-
.JPL.OrjllteT . To INhV9z6 THFI12- Mzo-Bo .vAriPO ) A. rpoTBGrtoIJ rz,P,4ir SNALI- (st': W!' r-
�"I•sm? I.r T�aO *+ P'LiwiJ 1 TWO (fi°rvhelz, Got�6r�'lIJGT'IOh)
TRau; w5 1,:�, Iia avow Np,,LL-rH J.tjr7 WILL KAVIS fiJ ,y�rPoxli1�1B-
► Y 7.9 1/01 op Two rFrrt-IN1 ro s.Gconricn,�1� r -nti. �d' . ?wo 1"I 'Lori 1 -74 (7pLr-. WILL.
I• tmty To rso �L314NL3tp LHty r('�'r,o`'j3to GUr'htrlVGttOrl WILL. 156 IalaLb A. glHl lul pf
15'-0" Fpv7 TRO TFLIH* . ,L T�" WIPollv*I FaNPI; Is, To tsro l-r tl+c otl
OF CS r'G�O�GLt h�r'T'
T�'t%DS I,,-) lb, , 10,Ar+b I f ,L�a 1H tloolo I413,<H AHry j.►ILI— t'er g6 IttrALrov mY
rials eaVOL�110HT. I.I.. rxvPtp A-Fe, &; ,tWxI.L. ForlA41-1 < jINlr1uh or,
T140 T�ur!I<-'v .F T146tpo TFr31&y - q,HI1,,L- A A-rmH j Tlh A13X 13WAL. t:►�.LIh� , �J��$
b19f.l ke, rFoI rH2 04A-�Ptg Or THP 1F13e7 Arla r`OT✓GtlDfa FIzHGt35 Ric frivIYA-
ea AT LI H e of BHG�'�cµrir3 Nr
T�IaBy 1?-,13, 'IHp I'+ A'2e: Irl 1401:0 14VALTH .4'V WILL Nor M15 IrlrA6rl3b NJ Tl+lh t7E4DL'
0 1L'+I"Ir. A Tpa6 PP'oTCGtlo0 Fl:h`Lf: Ih To Pets Itj6,rA.►.Lr✓p Ar TNg LIpjs Of �r'G�oAGH-
• r1aHT
j?4166, Iq ,f6 Irl 40in I-4BALTH .Lrlb HAl4f, AP
0F� A'I fL^lJ►tt3�j rJ TO 10°f• of T140 r; 1!r . Hl ro �GGOr,f1017�f8 PI.014h, 'p ,A0t7IF' .
gohl3 hlNop- ipirujit l or,. tI arolWTH WILL- Ifvo,-,o: TI{Iz �►rP> ��ANG13 v�
TN�B I-F000 AHkJ I.000r1110VLTO Tits GoNG�r131JGrldrJ,�t j rolovAt_ Or- iN>✓.6r-
Itif1t�l� r,L�Ay Wll.t- GI��.LTLY L'F'rIAp4o Tlae AZRArlop 40 �vaTg I-Htvt-or'lT TBFj
I46Le.r14 OF lWMt'0 T�ee� A Tre15 r'f%'T C4 rl,9l"I r0e;l3 10-TO r'se, INST•LLLISp kr rko 1.iHe
OF aNG¢O�GHr�BNt•
T BB * 'l0 Iy I� �1g0b. HD,4TH',4rlr> uIL.HorldIHFAGTPt:7 ?bj TIIO tl0'V0I-VrjBNr . Tµepi
WILL. 00 Arl aNGpo�GNharT or �rr�oxlr1tiTir�-Y I5'/vof T118 r pint-114o To AaAoMj0pArS
h0LEI,TivP 1pl j 11 N„ Of;- T14r- v"toNoer11 GiroWO WILT_ A"41hoti,.TP, TH6
Gor'hrizuGTIIr1 . PeLI �wt4ffiJ MOIL WILL F&JA-11-1 A hIH• oI IS''0' PI Orl rH6 TputJ14 AtJr7*11V4
prlrita�rl„a r> t,GB IhTa �� (H'HT/►LLf'il� ,Lt THIS UVti OF �rGP.O.�6kr16NT'.
TrzO 4' Zr 1--lTo *0 fL0govet2 owe ry rl4e I-v xvot-1 or rl,a rr"rAnar7 cjZIVvWAT,THIt,
TF*6 it, Hor A.rLa.&.L. Tv TNIS veval•orjap-r /-r'� Ho Gcr+�9r�5�LtlOr) I-, riozoll
Pt"P3D. op rwev TPM: L04ATlor-1 Ir' T14e r1Nr� PO4"rr, TO TuP
• l�soPo�i8t9 bu..,B''"Pr�ar+r , �t.hn�.I_ I� NeGcs�,L�.Y.
1'I a`' • 1 b�z.},_,Lr'ta 15 J-�E IH �OOV b ur Ll_Nor rld I rP.%W rl3n My rwi 7 rxveL-
�riar+r. TH EY .►p E .► vulr>.,el-Y 9'-0., "rl TH18-0,MtZ ofO V►e f,-10J� Ar rl{z ri�.roAt!ty
1 4v&WAJ Arato -101-01 F�ir� A uTILI rl Wt'E TFiStiGH • TILGr3 r[orinwr I ota ra?,6e '
714AL4- MlrF. 1-f! AT 1IIB t-IF': Or r-`*='F:-OA/,14ji3t}'• tri 414AIti w-?.- pet'LE G►'i•r c
TREE PROTECTION ('9�ASURES
���- DxIStIt1t� Tl:elas ,tfr, ro I56 ' t'TIFlOV Ar11' �Pfll-1 0 UNLOh-tp pTKklrWllW POTW
NJ►Tu�i.L p�.A.b6 AroV1'ro AI.I- TPBBS -0AIA66 Mg. JA 14rAIr13p Tv' 111E q�ilAjpsT DxTBIJT
�Oh�a14L0 At1b No GOM�,"11�(� vf- SIL•►- r1.te�-1�►- WITula tilt' fear IJPLI35y 0rWOR-
'w1rJA. Notel�.
Ho 6uT�� �ILI.GJ, Got'yT�Su�rlvl� t1ATt3�S.1.►L. off• t3Kulrh®�T ly �I.►-uw�ra WITNIP rNe
15�+rLlt+l3 op 1�9By To rs6 �91,,-WB V UIJLess oTILbf%.WISe �oTrbtg
laa 1 •r+Gub� hix '1'614641 DIs• LAfLel1a!A. IP hIAVTD�-,oNa f~r Fporl TI40 lrklg TP044--
g;IIA{.1.• bG (,ur WIT4oUr MIT- Arrl,�O.AL pf�, 11115 UTT
1f80;- rF4f0 *&Lv TO r5O �ajt,-vc3h ti1U.a.I— 1�0 It70hirlrIwr-7 0I114 A SI4rI 1 I l tvetq 11.1 TIDE
GITf Arlt? P40,I6v WITH A+F'o' I,,5 of 105 �2dflu/,�L PP.plm r v15tn1.8 rfwl TH2 SrFzsr
Tsmrvo *f y T�013 rp.vrtPorlo►J Fspel3ti yuALL r-be ip4Txt.L w tr T11a opiri-lop of AL-
I--IF""' TWBNT•I rear ap. Gl.oyail- To kpY an•�1BL.�Pr��r'r•
1.1140 6 1`20\1eLPrirr4r BO,�FoA•61+86, W1T1111•I 111E Tpat34 Crt-1-1115 ,ATI sra rizv-rr.4tlod
f Dtjz,3 t7iAJLL me I�hrtLLCp Al The wt,e of DNG�dJ�G:+1�9rIT'
At.l_ raw r' 4-ru-r or Fervt3y '211AL-1- *6 IIJwA .L.etv� &Vfo�o TH13 LortrlBr166lOr of'4107
H°f' - ot1 THD 51'113 At'b 514L1�1- �1Brlxjo IIJ rI.,&ce uoT1W Inje t71�,eLelsr)1ah+T I�J•5 rIPAL
awl.. Tp•eg WTef nlrj,*-11.04. At+r7 rF0l5crlAd JOA4U�139 A.t✓ To 1•� 'APr1� skv sl TI{6 ally
rplt- To &-wil3Nrit3ir,t4' CI• Pr'( NGts�c• o� t11t-� SIT'!
AI-F• "15 4+I1flild 11irr �IZtPLtr'8 fetlen
TAIA�13 10 M I4tf•i1D
,Ltjh A61- p.aaTs sr'coul-'flex®r_+ Two INGI4B-5 IN hlArlarPr- •� L�ixsjaf'' /ate To 168 GVT IST
14AOto I. Q• , '14AI8 / orG. A-r1tv s0J11•0b V1 Irk AIJ 1.rrpevow TPe15 1: 1OAL-,
:SUMMARY
Tws of Tut I-A4 "Tor r1+2 ryes Ar THS MJISTA - Cr TWO hourHapw�r wr
Ar 17 furs verl1IIIIhAl- 1A.Mt'i( �Oqu?-60:p F6r- TI4Iyn6val.oriver ulL.L- vr610% Tv s.*04r
o D
A►rrNNANG15 TI+Iz HTFL':
eAI.tH Or • T� s)a10 TWItp IIS%iErio�T . 7$TBNhpRio
lvhf I r 56TIOra F0$ 9h
WILL l.,OHri-areo rae porn. TIB t7FwcL.or-af2-;, 13AwO pfr+ro,0r-V To 4,1.10 A- t7 rrAOTBoT AI-L
T�gdt? Ootullo 611CS IaYcorr PtJ6 -Jerf-:ST riHS. WItH TIlB 401aalrb0y •- fNro, p•GpoF•TAtjV
TI16 ,ITtA�Ldbt7�T�BIL r�1P�Tiofi r�d�`K��yyl, L peGvlftl�P 1'111�i PLAt1 rxi ,� -o�t3r�
ol
•
A�T
r"
• Exhibit E - Findings for Approval
Precise Plan 74-89
5160 Palma Ave.
(Hazard/Fisher/Washburn)
1. The proposed project or use is consistent with the General
Plan.
2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the
use will not, because of the circumstances and conditions
applied in the particular case, be detrimental to the health,
safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing
or working in the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental
or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of
the use.
4. The proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the
character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its
orderly development.
• 5. The proposed use or project will not generate a volume of
traffic beyond the safe capacity of all roads providing
access to the project, either existing or to be improved
in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic
volume of the surrounding neighborhood that would result from
full development in accordance with the Land Use Element.
6. The proposed project is in compliance with the City' s
Appearance Review Guidelines.
•
r �
r
EXHIBIT B - Conditions of Approval
Precise Plan 74-89 •
5160 Palma Ave.
(Fisher/Washburn/Hazard)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. All construction shall be in conformance with Exhibit B
(Site Plan) , Exhibit C (Grading Plan) , Exhibit E (Conditions
of Approval) , and shall comply with all City Codes and
Ordinances. Any modification to this approval requires
approval by the Community Development Department prior to
implementing any changes.
2. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
3. Grading and drainage plans, prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer, shall be resubmitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments prior to the
issuance of any building permits. Drainage calculations
shall be submitted to justify the proposed detention basin.
All required drainage work shall be constructed to City
standards and completed prior to final building inspection.
4. The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the
City of Atascadero Public Works Department. Plans shall be
prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and be submitted to
the Community Development Department for review and
approval by the Community Development and Public Works
Departments, prior to issuance of any building permit.
Plans shall include, but not be limited to:
a. Curb, gutter, sidewalk and paveout 15 feet from
centerline of the right-of-way along entire property
frontage.
b. Signing an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the
work will be done in conformance with approved plans
and that inspection fees shall be paid.
C. Construction of the public road improvements shall be
completed prior to the final inspection.
5. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100%
Performance Bond and a 100% Labor and Material Bond until
construction is approved and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until
one year after construction approval.
1 •
/ C
• 6. Plans shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to
issuance of building permits, particulary the widening of
the access driveway to 20 feet from Palma Ave. to the point
where the driveway veers to the right.
7. No parking shall be permitted along the street frontage of
the project.
8. Each unit shall contain 100 square feet of storage space,
exclusive of closets. The proposed new units comply with
this requirement, however, this pertains to the existing
unit as well.
9. The handicapped parking space shall be redesigned to avoid
backing directly out into the street. The driveway shall be
widened and an adequate turn-around area provided.
10. Landscape plans shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.
These plans shall incorporate the recommendations of the
certified arborist (Exhibit D)
11. This Precise Plan shall expire one year from the date of
final approval (May 15, 1990) . A one year time extension
may be granted pursuant to a written request filed prior to
the expiration date as per Section (9-2. 118) of the Zoning
Ordinance. Any further one year time extensions may be
approved by the Planning Commission.
2
i
EXHIBIT H
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING TTM 30-90/ZC 06-90
POST OFFICE BOX 747
ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93423
PHONE: (805) 466-8000 POLICE DEPARTMENT
POST OFFICE BOX 717
ATASCAOERO. CALIFORNIA.93423
CITY COUNCIL
tasea del'® PHONE. (606) 466.6600
CITY CLERK •
CITY TREASURER INCORPORATED JULY 2. 1979 ~�
CITY MANAGER
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ATASCAOERO. CALIFORNIA 93422
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT PHONE: (805) 466.2141
August 31, 1990
Robert Fisher
8550-D E1 Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
RE: PRECISE PLAN 59-90
5180 Palma Ave.
Dear Mr. Fisher: •
The City of Atascadero has received and reviewed your application
for a Precise Plan and Environmental Determination for the
construction of two (2) single family residences, each containing
two-bedrooms. The site contains an existing single family
dwelling which is to remain.
The proposed site is zoned RMF/10 (Residential Multiple Family
Low Density) and the proposed use is allowed as defined as a
single family dwellings (Section 9-3.172 (a) . The surrounding
properties are zoned the same as the subject site, with the
exception of property to the south which is zoned CR (Commercial
Retail) .
A review by the Community Development Director of the
environmental description form and application, along with other
background information, shows that the project will have no
detrimental effect upon the environment; therefore, a Negative
Declaration has been prepared. The Director has also found the
project, as conditioned, to be in compliance with the provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance.
The proposed Precise Plan is approved as shown on attached
Exhibit B (site plan) , Exhibit C (grading plan) and subject to
the conditions of approval in Exhibit F. Final approval becomes
effective on September 21, 1990, unless appealed. (NOTE: THIS
DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A GRADING OR BUILDING PERMIT. )
• In the eventou intend to appeal of the conditions, your
Y PP any
appeal should be in writing and should state the reasons for the
appeal. Any appeal would be scheduled for Planning Commission
consideration as a public hearing. You should, however, discuss
any objections to the conditions with planning staff as it may be
possible to alter conditions after such discussion.
If you should have any questions concerning this project, you are
welcome to contact the Community Development Department for
assistance.
Sincerely,
Doug y Davidson
Senior Planner
DD/dd
cc: Paul Washburn
James Hazard
• Attachments: Exhibit A - Zoning Map
Exhibit B - Site Plan
Exhibit C - Grading Plan
Exhibit D - Elevations
Exhibit E - Findings for Approval
Exhibit F - Conditions of Approval
ile�l�rs... did6 • • • . .
�, ��� ���i IIIA � •�„ __ =: ,,=
111 � ,� � •..---
1
1 �
( :HIBIT B
CITY OF ATASCADERO SITE PLAN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PRECISE PLAN 59-90
• DEPARTMENT
} IF
_�� .•,— �..::w ,. NII :-•rte
!f In
vnO.osm
PWWW
EXmTwa
I
-.rte-•..�-t"" —K^
1 1 tw.ef s uy +•ice c
... I l
Ao
PMMA AVENUE ••-..- - I
r,
i L Y~'~+ u.ww •...11 rrY 4I YiOrr Y,wff1 OWL MCD.f
nr�orffn„wr.rtr,uta..r+arae..rne.fn,fr �- -
SITE PIAN
LOT 77 BIOCX RA t•r+. ,
( -EXHIBIT C
CITY OF ATASCADERO GRADING/DRAINAGE PLAN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PRECISE PLAN 59-90
DEPARTMENT •
GENERAL MOTES,
nor wax RA
11 1 V 1 U\1
an 0
IN
LOT 34 Ax R4
YKI•TT•Y ( "'�"'
GRADING 8 DRAINAGE PLAN -
LOT 33, BLK. RA, ATASCADERO Oos it xm Neznne
i
•
1XHIBIT D
CITY OF ATASCADERO ELEVATIONS
II -
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PRECISE PLAN 59-90
• DEPARTMENT
ELEVATION NOTES
•20�
T.
QTY—pr�r-�'rm.ere�
I'
�.
Ff10NT Ei.EW1'11pN +�r!'•r— :�•r_ H _ � �,
ea,w
r r
� r
p
SOE ELEVATION _
coup.uwwn � ...�
e n
--
u
Si ELEVATION 4P)T4--r_ ♦�..•y w t'� �
�f Q
aanwaft-_ iy iy +ij y :I.
REAR ELEVATION II NOTES o
Exhibit E - Findings for Approval
Precise Plan 59-90
5180 Palma Ave.
(Washburn/Fisher/Hazard)
1. The proposed project or use is consistent with the General
Plan.
2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the
use will not, because of the circumstances and conditions
applied in the particular case, be detrimental to the health,
safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing
or working in the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental
or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of
the use.
• 4. The proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the
character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its
orderly development.
5. The proposed use or project, as conditioned, will not
generate a volume of traffic beyond the safe capacity of all
roads providing access to the project, either existing or to
be improved in conjunction with the project, or beyond the
normal traffic volume of the surrounding neighborhood that
would result from full development in accordance with the
Land Use Element.
6. The proposed project is in compliance with the City' s
Appearance Review Guidelines.
•
•
EXHIBIT F - Conditions of Approval
Precise Plan 59-90
5180 Palma Ave.
(Fisher/Washburn/Hazard)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. All construction shall be in conformance with Exhibit B
(Site Plan) , Exhibit C (Grading Plan), Exhibit F (Conditions
of Approval) , and shall comply with all City Codes and
Ordinances. Any modification to this approval requires
approval by the Community Development Department prior to
implementing any changes.
2. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
3. Grading and drainage plans, prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer, shall be resubmitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments prior to the •
issuance of any building permits. Drainage calculations
shall be submitted to justify the proposed detention basin.
Design shall include temporary measures to drain the runoff
from the street into the detention basin. All required
drainage work shall be constructed to City standards and
completed prior to final building inspection.
4. The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the
City of Atascadero Public Works Department prior to start of
construction within the right-of-way. The required public
improvements are as follows:
a. Developer shall grade the right-of-way to provide a
clear and level 20 foot graded half-width and to
provide a 14 foot half-width paved road with adequate
drainage control facilities.
b. The developer is required to make an in-lieu
contribution of $25. 00 per linear foot of frontage to
the City Sidewalk Fund. Thus, the total contribution
is $2450. 00 ($25. 00 X 98 linear feet) . The standard
requirement of granting an additional five foot wide
sidewalk easement shall be waived in this case,
provided that the utilities are relocated to the
property line.
(Note: Conditions #4a. and #4b. are per the City
Council -direction of August 14, 1990) .
1
C. Construction of these improvements shall be completed
prior to the final inspection.
5. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100%
Performance Bond and a 100% Labor and Material Bond until
construction is approved and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until
one year after construction approval.
6. No parking shall be permitted along the street frontage of
the project.
7. Each unit shall contain 100 square feet of storage space,
exclusive of closets. The proposed new units comply with
this requirement, however, this pertains to the existing
unit as well.
8. The outside parking spaces for Buildings D and E shall be
redesigned to provide adequate turning radius and turn
• around.
9. Landscape plans shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.
These plans shall incorporate the recommendations of the
certified arborist) .
10. An access amd utility easement shall be recorded prior to
issuance of building permits.
11. This Precise Plan shall expire one year from the date of
final approval (September 21, 1990) . A one year time
extension may be granted pursuant to a written request filed
prior to the expiration date as per Section (9-2. 118) of
the Zoning Ordinance. Any further one year time extensions
may be approved by the Planning Commission.
•
EXHIBIT I
CITY OF ATASCADERO
U4
ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 6500 PALMA AVE. ATASCADERO, CA 93422 (805) 461-5035
APPLICANT: ' M JL f< K(5 i+4 Z 4 R b
loo/cc
A trl S, C v4 "13 y Z 2- , C �4 '13 -t 2.3
PROJECT TITLE: -r-> N t o fi I v E r R A C y- Nt 44;2 ,o - iv/2 =,u r c6-
PROJECT LOCATION: 5160 150 P4Ltii r+
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: c.K E Y-�-t t o ff 0 1= 5 1,Y 1.o y' S 6 v i U 5 r 0 N
SP7(Z S �� y SQ. Fr-. Y-0 roj 95b sq r=r.
FINDINGS:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment.
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. •
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but comulatively considerable.
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly.
DETERMINATION:
Based on the above findings. and the information contained in the initial study(made a part hereof by refer-
ence and on We in the Community Development Department). it has been determined that the above project
will not have an adverse impact on the environment.
Henry Engen
Community Development Director
Date Posted:
Date Adopted:
•
CDD I I-"
EXHIBIT J
ZONE CHANGE 06-90
ORDINANCE NO.
• AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 16 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 5160 AND 5180 PALMA
AVE. FROM RMF/10 TO RMF/10 (PD7)
(ZC 06-90: Hazard/Tartaglia-Hughes)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on March 5, 1991 and has recommended approval of Zone
Change 06-90.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
• ordain as follows
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonius development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be
reasonably achieved through existing development
• standards or processing requirements.
Ordinance No.
7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for requested modifications.
Section 2. Zoning Map.
Map number 16 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as
shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Lots 32 and 33 of Block RA; Atascadero Colony
Development of said parcels shall be in accordance with the
standards of the Planned Development Overlay No. 7, and
consistent with attached Exhibit B.
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published •
once within fifteen ( 15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4. 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.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT: --
DATE ADOPTED:
By: 0ROBERT LILLEY, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
•
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
•
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
•
w . .
�`jIII
71 1
110—0
' �I� ' • � �� � �ium unntn _
Monson
'mn�• 11 1111/ Alva11"�dnu•: -
11
0
EXHIBIT B
`''' CITY OF ORDINANCE NO.
,MI : . . �;� ATASCADERO
EA!Ele_E SITE PLAN/TRACT MAP
• SITE
DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
LEDIdL,LyL1I1leT Nlo H21- to SS
' IN THE CITY 00 A7AAC109". COI TY OF SAw LY13 09t SPO. C... WHO
A 01V1310P OF LOT.T �t G.T
A,13CAOEPO CMOHI AS SAID LOT{R APE SNONG2 ON 1N9 HAP G[LED [N Nu
SOCK 6 • FAOE IRi PfCOPOS OF -To CONNTY,
3 • . \
' s ao°or"w. /75./S' � '. .. EM01DtFP•° .___-S E�rFt�T.
I
_ I NEPEEY curIPS'THIS HAP HAS MEFAPED 91 NE AHO 10 THE BEST OF NY
6. -- 1 99" \ -- , �.� KNOWLEDGE COWLI13 MIT% THE 3USGIVISIO, HAF ACT ANO LOCAL�� � 0110!MANGES. L
Sim
G.•la( p 1 P09EPT C. fAPt AOI IA N .E. 21OA1
A00DE5E:ao:BOY /930
• .:.,.:.;� nEmoeF.ce I t en.fcw / ea ��azr—
1107--I!• �c .._ Lpr r
Cor '+ nHwFP•9 ..� Tt�rT 1_r�
J
t HEPESY APPLY FOR.FW10vAL OF THE OIVtSION OF afAL FfOFERTY SHIHw
1 \ Ip } RCSIOt/uCC 7 V ON TNIS PLAT Alp CEPT1fY THAT t AN TME LEGAL OYNEP OF Llp POOP P11
~L \\ u.0 Tmr THE INFOpmArICN NEPEOI IE Tftf AHO CORRECT TO THE 9937 OF
K'CCi3+ ? ' MY K WtfDOOl/AND
//SALI EF.
• T I RGSTOf/✓Cf\ \ 'T� _ 1 .A W -' ` Ur,&:Y 1 1 _, 1 3IOwE0: //1 pYw<�
I ° 1 ? I AD011ESSafC OSCIL
e o•E"ATAICA OCRO avS.
- �"�;•`ARCA J)' •r.1-rr•.�3cRp rw .� z
(' •= F.# BO' ^•.y.17 7 ti_ 1 59./s O\I. 7 ,O ..r r _
n 'a coram I frzsr IR•• 6.z70ri
I . ® _ cors 1� 7 1 I ay<• . J f d`• / 1
RCJIC[Ncf i - 1 R(s/oa-cf
11 s,o —tel, r h \ t Z` ao.00'� r ,•'1oea s,�o ' - wn A� rA-,• woaL -
_W �,." -- -- L s- VICINITY ,NAP
t
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 2055
sir
BEING A SIX LOT SUBOIVISION OF LOTS 32
AND 33, BLOCK RA, TOWN OF ATASCADERO,CA.
•
EXHIBIT R - Findings for Approval •
Tentative Tract Map 30-90
5160/5180 Palma Ave. (Hazard/Tartaglia-Hughes)
March 5, 1991
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project
is adequate.
MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed map is consistent with the applicable
General or Specific Plan.
2. The design and/or improvements of the proposed subdivision
is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of
development.
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of
development. •
5. The design of the subdivision, as conditioned, and the
proposed improvements, will not cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish and wildlife or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by
the public at large for access through or the use of
property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially
equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The design of the subdivision and/or the type of proposed
improvements will not cause serious health problems.
•
• EXHIBIT L - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 30-90
5160/5180 Palma Ave. (Hazard/Tartaglia-Hughes)
March 5, 1991
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Co.
Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of each parcel
prior to the recording of the final map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map. All relocation and/or
alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility
of the developer at his sole expense.
3. All grading, drainage, and erosion control measures shall be
designed by a registered civil engineer and constructed to
City standards. Prior to final building inspection of the
first new building, the project engineer shall certify in
writing that the grading and drainage measures are in
• conformance with City standards.
4. A maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the City
Attorney, shall be recorded prior to recording of the map.
The agreement shall include maintenance of the private road
and drainage facilities.
5. Sewer improvement plans shall require approval from the
Public Works Department prior to recording of the final map.
All newly created lots shall be connected to public sewer.
All annexation fees in effect at the time of recordation
shall be paid for the newly formed lots prior to recording
the map.
6. An access and utility easement shall be recorded prior to
the recording of the final map.
7. All conditions of Precise Plan 74-89 and Precise Plan 59-90
shall be completed, including construction of all required
improvements, prior to recording of the map.
8. Prior to recording of the final map, a soils investigation
as required by the Map Act shall be submitted, verifying
that the soils of the site are adequate the support the
proposed structures. The date of report, name of engineer,
• and location where the report is on file shall be noted on
the final map.
9. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the •
approved tentative map and compliance with all conditions
set forth herein shall be submitted for' review and approval
in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot
Division Ordinance prior to recordation.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
created by a registered civil engineer or licensed
land surveyor as required by the Land Surveyor' s Act and
the Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within any road
right-of-way shall conform to City standard M-1.
b. Pursuant to Section 66497 of the Subdivision Map Act the
engineer or surveyor shall notify the City Engineer in
writing that the monuments have been set.
c. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
10. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from
the date of final approval unless an extension of time is
granted pursuant to a written request prior to the
expiration date.
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 5, 1991
20. All three (3) residential buildings sha be
equipped with low-flow water conservation evices
on each toilet and shower.
Commissioner Johnson noted his opposition to a project
stating that the lot is already substandard a will become
more so if request is approved. He added tha to impact the
area with single family residences was not a intent of the
planned development overlay.
Commissioners Waage and Kudlac concur d noting that they,
too, could not support the project.
Commissioner Highland stated that e City Council' s reversal
of the Planning Commission' s den' 1 of this project is a clear
message to the Commission conc ning minimum lot sizes. All
the Commission is being aske to do in this case is act on
conditions of approval by d' ection of the Council.
Commissioner Hanauer cc ented on the Council' s direction and
referenced the recen memo concerning Council reversing
Commission decisions
Chairperson Luna stressed that this particular planned
development is abuse of the process, yet it is the Council
who sets poli c He added he has an obligation to try and
implement th r policies. He said he is torn between voting
for or agai st the project, so he will abstain from voting.
The motion carried 3:3: 1 with the following roll
call vote
AYES: Commissioners Highland, Lochridge, and
Hanauer
NOES: Commissioners Kudlac, Johnson, and Waage
ABSTAIN: Chairperson Luna (counted as "aye" vote)
3. ZONE CHANGE 6-90/TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 6-90:
Applications filed by Jim and Kris Hazard (Tartaglia
Hughes) to establish a Planned Development Overlay Zone
(PD) and to allow subdivision of two colony lots into six
lots ranging in size from 5, 194 square feet to 6, 958
square feet each. Subject site is located at 5160/5180
Palma Avenue.
Doug Davidson presented the staff report which focused on
issues including minimum lot size standards, the planned
development overlay zone, housing policies, multiple family
zones, etc. The development standards were addressed
previously during the precise plan process. Mr. Davidson
pointed out that a redeeming factor for this planned
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 5,__ 1991
• development the opportunity for single family ownership, and
added that supplying small lots for single family ownership is
a benefit to the City. Staff is recommending approval of the
applications.
Commission discussions and questions followed.
In response to query by Commissioner Johnson, Mr. Davidson
replied that these lots are technically flag lots since one
lot is behind the other, and explained why no flag lot
findings were required.
Commissioner Johnson questioned what the general lot sizes in
the area are, and expressed concern that since these are flag
dots, what benefits to the City will be derived. Discussion
ensued.
Kris Hazard, applicant, noted her agreement with the recommen-
dation and asked the Commission to approve the project. She
pointed out that the project has been designed to incorporate
preservation of the trees and will be compatible with the rest
of the neighborhood.
In response to questions, Ms. Hazard stated that she is
opposed to block style apartments. This project is attempting
. to produce a cottage type atmosphere with free standing units.
Commissioner Lochridge expressed concern with flag lot
standards, and asked how the driveway standards differ from
what should be required in a single family zone.
Commissioner Waage voiced his feeling that this project may
have initially begun as a condominium project.
Commissioner Hanauer referenced the Jones planned development
on Sinaloa that has turned out nicely adding that this project
will benefit the Palma Avenue neighborhood.
Commissioner Johnson debated how six houses on these lots
could look better or be of benefit to the City.
Commissioner Hanauer asserted that this type of project
affords an opportunity for single family ownership. He
expressed his feeling that there are many people who would
like to purchase this type of housing.
Commissioner Highland pointed out that what is being
overlooked is that the whole general area is zoned low density
multiple family - even though most lots on Palma have single
family residences. The original intent of the General Plan
was to provide a buffer between commercial zones and single
family zones. However, properties on Palma and Olmeda have
slowly been developed as apartments, condominiums, etc. He
stressed that this does not destroy the density or intent of
MINUTES EXCERPT- PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 5, 1991
multi-family, and that he would like to see a healthy mix. •
Commissioner Lochridge expressed apprehensiveness with the
driveway but noted that the Council has set policy on planned
developments, so he will vote for the project.
Commissioner Kudlac noted his concurrence with Commissioners
Hanauer, Lochridge and Highland. He added that he is amenable
to this project in that it proposes larger lot sizes than
other planned developments.
Chairperson Luna stated he shares Commissioner Waage and
Johnson' s concerns adding that most planned developments are
planned up front and this project has already gotten under-
way.
Commissioner Johnson reiterated that the Council has made
there position clear in being opposed to flag lots. In his
opinion, this project represents flag lots.
Commissioner Waage asked if water conservation methods could
be employed with this project. Mr. DeCamp replied that adding
a condition in this case would be inappropriate since building
permits are ready for issuance.
MOTION: By Commissioner Highland, seconded by Commissioner
Kudlac to recommend to the City Council approval of
Zone Change 6-90 as reflected in the draft
ordinance and approval of Tentative Tract Map 30-90
subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval.
The motion carried 4: 3 with the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Highland, Kudlac, Hanauer, and
Lochridge
NOES: Commissioners Waage, Johnson, Chairperson
Luna
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 6-90:
Public hearing for a six month re ew to verify compli-
ance with said Conditional Use rmit. Approval allowed
the expansion of a school the developmentally dis-
abled from 18 to 27 s ents (applicant - Creative
Alternative for Learni and Living, Inc. ) Subject site
is located at 9148 Omar Avenue.
Mr. DeCamp excused imself from this item since he resides
within a 300 foo radius of the subject property.
Mr. Davids presented the staff report on this review and
provided background on the school' s prior approval. He
noted at all conditions contained in the use permit have
ORDINANCE NO. 219
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 16 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 5160 AND 5180 PALMA
AVE. FROM RMF/10 TO RMF/10 (PD7)
(ZC 06-90: Hazard/Tartaglia-Hughes)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the .environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on March 5, 1991 and has recommended approval of Zone
Change 06-90.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonius development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be
reasonably achieved through existing development
standards or processing requirements. •
. Ordinance No.
7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for requested modifications.
Section 2. Zoning Map.
Map number 16 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as
shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Lots 32 and 33 of Block RA; Atascadero Colony
Development of said parcels shall be in accordance with the
standards of the Planned Development Overlay No. 7, and
consistent with attached Exhibit B.
Section 3. Publication.
• The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen ( 15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4. 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.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:,
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
• ROBERT LILLEY, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
•
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
•
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
I
•
r
ME
ON �,WON
' . � ranni umun
owns
mn n�ni�• - -_ _
i
♦ moo . _� �♦
. � EXHIBIT B
; CITY OF A -ASCADERO ORDINANCE NO.
��: .I.. : .. . t
r� Ii1e SITE PLAN/TRACT MAP
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
UNTATIVLJJtAGT Nu MO. roS!
IN TNI CITY OF ATASCACIND. CONMTV OF GAN LUIS 0.1..0• CA.. BEING
A G1vc SION O1
ATASCAOfNO COLONY AS E41D LO/ ME NMON11 a A Nu FILED 1N MAP
SOON f . PAGE 1fLIDM RGCODS OF SAID COMTV.
! 'r-T Z
L 1\. [tl03yt(G•• .fr T�..�/te•.T[
J
40 Or'W /7S•/S' �1
I Mf11IDT C[OT[.T rNit Nu NAD All/M[O Ov N[A.TO TMD S[Di OF NT
/ 6 — 99' \` \ 1 70./S �1 KPO1 SOsWLCOMPLIES WIT" MING fRBRIVIDIDM NA. ACT AND LOCAL
•- erg.. I 'p I .c uaMle:
I' '.r �•o I cAwAet I p 1 NODINr C. ru1TA0LLD .4 I� AOY
1
'p ~����: AOd1tfD;GO BDY /9J0
-"lOTT' R �••�•' _ LOS �. s.fJl d "f 1 e1wNR•f S�Tt►te.rN
LOf J
(V I NERISV APPY FOR APPROVAL OR INS DIVISION OR REAL PROPERTY SNGW
ON r"IS PLAT AID CERTIFY TIIAT I AN INS LEGAL OMSR W SAID--WIRT'
3 \ 4 Ip J AKJIOwe[ 0
AND TWAT TNS IWDDMTIOM"RGON IG TWA AND CORRECT TO THE SIST OR
Z, I` MY ANDILIM AND S[LIGF.
S10NI0:
s l \ `• 1 I I .T M AI
2 _ JAMOED _ AOWIY: MO O' ATAJCA OG/DO •
11 "ter r•� do' l• � 7—�.r \ EJ./Si o•.i O 1. O f I t
s,sef d ( RIFs,¢[ E.trO d%
car • _ I. c�Orr
•� LOP e
alJ.."cc `l ••i"jtc / 4 t t�f ~ D�- y�Tf
01
'` ' - `` I ' � �.urtA• r RYA eeeR � '�S
_W Z_k- o
'� .,U -- L L.._
`e Z t-'1 fo'ofw' w /is./S'•' e VICINITY MAP L I
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 2055
BEING A SIX LOT SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 32
AND 33, BLOCK RA, TOWN OF ATASCADERO,CA.
I
• it
i
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO AGENDA ITEM: C-1
Through: Ray Windsor City Manager Mtg. Date: 3/26/91
From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. � File No: Sign Ord.
SUBJECT:
Chamber of Commerce Draft Sign Ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
As indicated in the attached transmittal from the Atascadero
Chamber of Commerce Sign Ordinance Committee, that group has
prepared for City Council consideration, a 26 page comprehensive
rewrite of the City' s Sign Regulations.
They are proposing to present their product to the Council for
consideration as an initial step in the public review process with
a view to amending the City' s current ordinances.
ZONING AMENDMENT PROCEDURES:
The Zoning Ordinance provides that a text amendment may be initia-
ted by:
" (1) The City Council or Planning Commission on its own
motion; or
(2) The City Council or Planning Commission upon acceptance
of a request from any interested party, including the
Planning Director. Request (s) shall be in writing and
shall include a description of the benefit to be derived
as a result of the text amendment.
(i) The City Council may refer a proposed text
amendment to the Planning Director and/or Planning
Commission for response prior to deciding whether
to initiate the text amendment. "
ANALYSIS:
As the Chamber' s transmittal attests, this has been a major piece
of work for them and would represent a major special project for
staff. It would require revisions to the Zoning Ordinance,
possibly to the Downtown Plan and zoning, possibly to the
Appearance Review Guidelines, and to the building code and imple-
menting fee resolutions. Hence, it would require Council approval
to bring the matter to the Planning Commission and, ultimately
through public hearings and back to the City Council for final
action.
•
ALTERNATIVES:
Based on the Zoning Ordinance' s procedures, the City Council could
direct any of the following:
1) Direct staff to prepare a straight forward comparison of this
document with the existing ordinance for Council consideration
before directing follow-up actions for a comprehensive
revision to the sign ordinance.
2) Direct staff to take the draft to the Planning Commission for
recommendation as to whether to initiate a text amendment.
3) Initiate consideration of a zoning text amendment by directing
staff to incorporate this work item in the FY 91-92 work
program, and prepare analyses for the Planning Commission
leading to public hearings and recommendation back to the City
Council.
HE:ps
cc: Bill Mazzacane, Atascadero Chamber of Commerce
Enclosure: March 19, 1991 Chamber of Commerce Transmittal: Draft •
Sign Ordinance
•
fast o kam6er of m
r c co merce
6550 EL CAMINO REAL • ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422
TELEPHONE: (805)466-2044
19 March 1991
TO: Hon . Mayor & City Council of Atascadero
FROM: Atascadero Chamber of Commerce Sign Ordinance
Committee
SUBJECT : TRANSMITTAL OF DRAFT SIGN ORDINANCE FOR PUBLIC
REVIEW
The Committee herewith submits its proposal for a completely
• revised and rewritten ordinance to govern the City ' s Signage .
We respectfully request that the Council agendize the
proposal for its earliest consideration, as an initial step
in the public review process .
We believe the proposed draft ordinance has provisions and
controls attractive to each of the several parties with an
interest in its administration : City Council and staff ,
Planning Commission , the business community , and the public .
The task before us is simply to retain as many of those
positive features as we possibly can , while discussing the
relatively few points of substantive disagreement .
We include here a brief summary of how the Chamber committee
came to be formed , the goals it set , and the process by which
it undertook to attain those goals .
•
•
Committee Formation : The committee was formed in early
August 1990 in response to growing dissatisfaction with the
present ordinance , its sporadic enforcement and its
significant contribution to an unfavorable business climate
in the city . An attempt was made to enlist members
representing a crosssection of the local business community .
In some cases , they were business owners with firsthand
knowledge of the cost , delays , inequity , and competitive
disadvantage often characteristic of the present ordinance .
In other cases they were merely concerned citizens with no
personal axes to grind other than a desire to help foster a
healthier economic climate in the city . The common
denominator of all the members was a sincere desire to keep
Atascadero an attractive place to live .
Committee Goals : The goals the committee set for itself in
its first two meetings are summarized in the first paragraph
of the draft ordinance under PURPOSE . Implied in that
statement of purpose is the committee ' s desire to make the
new ordinance clear , coherent , comprehensive and flexible .
None of those can be claimed as singular virtues of the
present ordinance .
Committee Process : When the eleven committee members first •
convened , they could not have anticipated the protracted six
month series of biweekly and then weekly meetings which have
culminated in this document . However , it became apparent
from the start that a comprehensive rather than piecemeal
approach was called for .
Advice and materials from several sources contributed
significantly to the draft ordinance before you . For the
legal framework , two trade organizations , one representing
sign manufacturers nationally and one representing California
sign users , were consulted . Each lent their experience with
ordinances in hundreds of communities which have wrestled
with these same issues .
Source material was also requested from eight California
communities which had updated their Sign Ordinances recently .
Each was assigned to a committee member so as to incorporate
the best features of each into our ordinance .
•
•
Thirdly, actual experience with the present ordinance was
solicited in terms of specific case histories from which
lessons could be learned . Even city staff , we found ,
sometimes had difficulty communicating certain provisions
( for example on Temporary Signage) simply because it was
organized so poorly in the present ordinance .
Lastly , this led us to informally solicit city staff input on
any shortcomings they wanted to see improved in any new
ordinance that might result from our efforts .
Conclusion : The Committee believes the draft ordinance you
will be reading is their best good faith effort to achieve a
law that is tailored to local realities , is adequate in terms
of control , is consistent and fair , is enforceable , and is
designed to enhance the city ' s economic viability and future
vitality .
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Jim Berger Ted Miles
Stan Cherry Debbie Mueller
Roger Grant Richard Shannon
• John Himes Maggie Vandergon
Carol Hull McColley Sylvia Vickers
Bill Mazzacane (staff)
•
(i)
fasca&rofijqm er of Cotnmerce c �
PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE FOR CITY OF ATASCADERO
By-. ATASCADERO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SIGN
ORDINANCE COMMITTEE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section/Title Page No .
SECTION ONE PURPOSE & SCOPE 1
Sec . 1 . 01 PURPOSE 1
Sec . 1 . 02 SCOPE 1
Sec . 1 . 03 COMPATIBILITY 2
SECTION TWO DEFINITIONS 2-9
SECTION THREE GENERAL PROVISIONS 9
Sec . 3 . 01 SIGNS PROHIBITED 9
Sec . 3 . 02 PERMITS REQUIRED 9 •
Sec . 3 . 03 SIGNS NOT REQUIRING PERMITS 10
Sec . 3 . 04 MAINTENANCE 11
Sec . 3 . 05 SIGN LIGHTING 11
Sec . 3 . 06 CHANGEABLE COPY 11
Sec . 3 . 07 SIGN AREA COMPUTATION 12
SECTION FOUR REGULATION OF ON-PREMISE
SIGNS BY ZONE 14
Sec . 4 . 01 SIGNS PERMITTED IN ALL ZONES 14
Sec . 4 . 02 SIGNS PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL
-ZONES 15
I
Sec . 4 . 03 SIGNS PERMITTED IN LIGHT
COMMERCIAL & PROFESSIONAL ZONES 15
Sec . 4 . 04 SIGNS PERMITTED IN COMMERICAL &
INDUSTRIAL ZONES 16 •
Sec . 4 . 05 SIGNS PERMITTED IN HIGHWAY
COMMERICAL ZONES; FREEWAY SIGNS 18
•
Sec . 4 . 06 - TEMPORARY SIGNS ; BANNERS 19
SECTION FIVE NONCONFORMING SIGNS 19
Sec . 5 . 01 DETERMINATION OF LEGAL NON-
CONFORMITY 19
Sec . 5 . 02 LOSS OF LEGAL NONCOMFORMING 19
STATUS
Sec . 5 . 03 MAINTENANCE & REPAIR OF NON-
CONFORMING SIGNS 20
SECTION SIX CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS 20
Sec . 6 . 01 COMPLIANCE WITH BUILDING &
ELECTRICAL CODES 20
Sec . 6 . 02 ANCHORING 20
Sec . 6 . 03 WIND LOADS 20
• Sec . 6 . 04 ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION
SPECIFICATIONS 20
SECTION SEVEN ADMINISTRATION & ENFORCEMENT 21
Sec . 7 . 01 CODE ADMINISTRATION 21
Sec 7 . 02 APPLICATION FOR PERMITS 21
Sec . 7 . 03 PERMIT FEES 22
Sec . 7 . 04 ISSUANCE & DENIAL 22
Sec . 7. 05 PERMIT CONDITIONS , REFUNDS
& PENALTIES 22
Sec . 7 . 06 INSPECTION UPON COMPLETION 23
Sec . 7 . 07 VARIANCES 23
Sec . 7 . 08 VIOLATIONS 23
Sec . 7 . 09 REMOVAL OF SIGNS BY CITY 24
• Sec . 7 . 10 PENALTIES 25
•
Sec . 7 . 11 APPEALS 25
SECTION EIGHT CONFLICT , SEVERABILITY &
EFFECTIVE DATE 25
Sec . 8 . 01 CONFLICT 25
Sec . 8 . 02 SEVERABILITY 26
Sec . 8 . 03 EFFECTIVE DATE 26
INDEX 27-31
•
•
• jibAlasca&roo cam er f commerce
6550 EL CAMINO REAL • ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422
TELEPHONE: (805) 466-2044
( 1 )
PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE FOR CITY OF ATASCADERO
BY : ATASCADERO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SIGN ORDINANCE COMMITTEE
(6th Draft 2/26/91 )
SECTION ONE -- PURPOSE AND SCOPE
SEC . 1 . 01 -- PURPOSE
The purpose of this Ordinance shall be to coordinate the
type , placement , and physical dimensions of signs within the
different land-use zones ; to recognize the commercial
communication requirements of all sectors of the business
community ; to encourage the innovative use of design ; to
promote both renovation and proper maintenance ; to allow for
special circumstances ; and to guarantee equal treatment under
the law through accurate record keeping and consistent
enforcement . These shall be accomplished by regulation of
the display , erection , use , and maintenance of signs . The
use of signs is regulated according to zone . The placement
and physical dimensions of signs are regulated primarily by
type and length of street frontage. No sign shall be
permitted as a main or accessory use except in accordance
with the provisions of this Ordinance .
SEC. 1 . 02 -- SCOPE
This Ordinance shall not relate to building design . Nor
shall the Ordinance regulate official traffic or government
signs ; the copy and message of signs ; signs not intended to
be viewed from a public right-of-way ; window displays ;
product dispensers and point of purchase displays ;
scoreboards on athletic fields ; flags of any nation ,
government , or noncommercial organization; barber poles ;
•
•
(2)
religious symbols , commemorative plaques , the display of
street numbers ; or any display or construction not defined
herein as a sign .
Thus , the primary intent of this Ordinance shall be to
regulate signs of a commercial nature intended to be viewed
from any vehicular public right-of-way . Freestanding
monument signs and wall mounted tenant signs are encouraged ;
roof-top signs are discouraged .
SEC. 1 . 03 -- COMPATIBILITY
a) Design , color , and location will be compatible with
architectural surroundings and premises .
b) In multi -tenant complexes , each tenant sign shall
relate well to other signs in the complex in a
least 4 of the following 6 categories :
1 . Materials
2 . Illumination •
3 . Letter style
4 . Shape of sign and sign components
5 . Method of attachment
6 . Color
SECTION TWO -- DEFINITIONS
Certain terms are defined for the purposes of this Ordinance
as follows :
ABANDONED SIGN A sign which no longer identifies or
advertises a bona fide business , lessor , service , owner ,
product , or activity , and/or for which no legal owner can be
found .
AGRICULTURAL SIGN A sign on a property advertising produce
grown on said property .
ANIMATED SIGN Any sign which uses movement or change of
lighting to depict action or to create a special effect or
scene (compare "Flashing Sign" ) .
AREA (see Sign Area Computation Sec . 3 . 07)
•
•
(3)
AWNING A shelter projecting from and supported by the
exterior wall of a building constructed of nonrigid materials
on a supporting framework (compare "Marquee" )
AWNING SIGN A sign painted on , printed on , or attached flat
against the surface of an awning .
BANNER SIGN A sign made of fabric or any nonrigid material
with no enclosing framework .
BILLBOARD (see "Off-Premise Sign" )
BUILDING As defined in the Uniform Building Code .
CHANGEABLE COPY SIGN (AUTOMATIC) A sign on which the copy
changes automatically on a lampbank or through mechanical
means , e . g . , electrical or electronic time and temperature
units .
• . CHANGEABLE COPY SIGN (MANUAL) A sign on which copy is
changed manually in the field , e . g . , readerboards with
changeable letters .
CITY Unless the context clearly discloses a contrary intent ,
the word "City" shall mean the City of Atascadero .
CIVIC ORGANIZATION To include the following :
1 ) Atascadero Colony Days Committee
2) Atascadero Chamber of Commerce
3) Zoological Society
4) Atascadero Historical Society
CLEARANCE (of a sign) The smallest vertical distance between
the grade of the adjacent street or surface grade beneath the
sign and the lowest point of any sign , including framework
and embellishments, extending over that grade.
CONSTRUCTION SIGN A temporary sign identifying an architect ,
contractor , subcontractor , and/or material supplier
participating in construction on the property on which the
sign is located
COPY The wording on a sign surface in either permanent or
removable letter form.
•
•
(4)
DIRECTIONAL/INFORMATION SIGN An on-premise sign giving
directions , instructions , or facility information and which
may contain the name or logo of an establishment but no
advertising copy , e . g . , parking or exit and entrance signs .
DIRECTORY SIGN Wall -mounted building directory sign for
pedestrian use within a project .
DISPLAY AREA The area including all letters , symbols , and
graphics including borders and free space between them. .
DOUBLE-FACED SIGN A sign with two faces .
ELECTRICAL SIGN A sign or sign structure in which electrical
wiring , connections , or fixtures are used .
ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTER (see "Changeable Copy Sign ,
Automatic" )
FACADE The entire building front including the parapet . •
FACE OF SIGN The area of a sign on which the copy is placed .
FESTOONS A string of ribbons , tinsel , small flags , balloons ,
or pinwheels .
FLASHING SIGN A sign which contains an intermittent or
sequential flashing light source used primarily to attract
attention . Does not include changeable copy signs , animated
signs , or signs which , through reflection or other means,
create an illusion of flashing of intermittent light (compare
"Animated Sign , " "Changeable Copy Sign")
FREESTANDING SIGN A sign supported upon the ground by poles
or braces and not attached to any building . It may be single
or double faced .
FRONTAGE The length of the property line of any one premise
along a public right-of-way on which it borders .
FRONTAGE , BUILDING The length of an outside building wall on
a public right-of-way .
•
•
(5)
GOVERNMENT SIGN Any temporary or permanent sign erected and
maintained by the city , county , state , or federal government
for traffic direction or for designation of or direction to
any school , hospital , historical site , or public service ,
property , or facility .
HAZARD SIGN Sign warning of construction , excavation , or
similar hazards as long as the hazard exists .
HEIGHT (of a Sign) The vertical distance measured from the
highest point of the sign , excluding decorative
embellishments , to the. grade of the adjacent street or the
surface grade beneath the sign , whichever is less (compare
"Clearance" ) .
IDENTIFICATION SIGN A sign whose copy is limited to the name
and address of a building , institution , or person and/or to
the activity or occupation being identified .
• ILLEGAL SIGN A sign which does not meet the requirements of
this code and which has not received legal nonconforming
status .
ILLUMINATED SIGN A sign with an artificial light source
incorporated internally or externally for the purpose of
illuminating the sign .
INCIDENTAL SIGN A small sign , emblem, or decal informing the
public of goods , facilities , or services available on the
premises , e . g . , a credit card sign or a sign indicating hours
of business .
LANDSCAPED SIGNS Signs created 100% by living vegetation .
LOT A parcel of land legally defined on a subdivision map
recorded with the assessment department or land registry
office , or a parcel of land defined by a legal record of
survey map .
MAINTENANCE For the purposes of this- Ordinance , the
cleaning , painting , repair , or replacement of defective parts
of a sign in a manner that does not alter the basic copy,
design , or structure of the sign .
•
•
(6)
MAJOR TENANT(S) Tenants having more than twice the average
square footage of other non-major tenants in that complex .
MANSARD A sloped roof or roof-like facade architecturally
comparable to a building wall .
MARQUEE A permanent goof-like structure or canopy of rigid
materials supported by and extending from the facade of a
building (compare "Awning" ) .
NAMEPLATE A nonelectric on-premise identification sign
giving only the name , address , and/or occupation of an
occupant or group of occupants .
NONCONFORMING SIGN ( 1 ) A sign which was erected legally but
which does not comply with subsequently enacted sign
restrictions and regulations . (2) A sign which does not
conform to the sign code requirements but for which a special
permit has been issued .
OCCUPANCY The portion of a building or premises owned ,
leased , rented , or otherwise occupied for a given use .
OFFICIAL FLAGS Official federal , state or local government
flags , emblems and historical markers .
OFFICIAL SIGNS Official federal , state or local government
traffic , directional and informational signs and notices
issued by any court , person or officer in performance of a
public duty .
OFF-PREMISE SIGN A sign structure advertising an
establishment , merchandise , service , or entertainment , which
is not sold , produced , manufactured , or furnished at the
property on which said sign is located , e . g . , "billboards" or
"outdoor advertising .
ON-PREMISE SIGN A sign which pertains to the use of the
premises on which it is located .
OWNER A person recorded as such on official records . For
the purposes of this Ordinance , the owner of property on
which a sign is located is presumed to be the owner of the
sign unless facts to the contrary are officially recorded or
•
(7)
otherwise brought to the attention of the City . (e . g . , a sign
leased from a sign company) .
PAINTED WALL SIGN Any sign which is applied with paint or
similar substance on the face of a wall .
PARAPET The extension of a false front or wall above a
roof 1ine .
PERSON For the purposes of this Ordinance, any individual ,
corporation , firm, partnership , or similarly defined
interest .
POINT OF PURCHASE DISPLAY Advertising of a retail item
accompanying its display , e . g . , an advertisement on a product
dispenser .
POLE COVER Covers enclosing or decorating poles or other
structural supports of a sign .
• POLYGON A plane figure with several angles or sides; usually
4 or more .
POLITICAL SIGN For the purposes of this Ordinance , a
temporary sign used in connection with a local , state , or
national election or referendum.
PORTABLE SIGN Any sign designed to be moved easily and not
permanently affixed to the ground or to a structure or
building .
PREMISES A parcel of land with its appurtenances and
buildings which , because of its unity of use , may be regarded
as the smallest conveyable unit of real estate .
PROJECTING SIGN A sign , other than a flat wall sign , which
is attached to and projects from a building wall or other
structure not specifically designed to support the sign .
REAL ESTATE SIGN A temporary sign advertising the real
estate upon which the sign is located as being for rent ,
lease , sale , or trade .
•
•
(g)
RESIDENTIAL IDENTIFICATION SIGN Identifying the names of
occupants and permitted home occupations .
ROOFLINE The top edge of a roof or building parapet ,
whichever is higher , excluding any cupolas , pylons , chimneys ,
or minor projections .
ROOF SIGN Any sign erected over or on the roof of a building
(compare "Mansard , " "Wall Signs" ) .
ROTATING SIGN A sign in which the sign itself or any portion
of the sign moves in a revolving or similar manner . Such
motion does not refer to methods of changing copy .
SIGN Any device , structure , fixture , or placard using
graphics , symbols , and/or written copy designed specifically
for the purpose of advertising or identifying any
establishment , product , goods , or services (compare Sec .
1 . 02)
SIGN AREA See method of computation Sec . 3 . 07 .
SNIPE SIGN A temporary sign or poster affixed to a tree ,
fence , etc .
SUBDIVISION IDENTIFICATION SIGN A freestanding or wall sign
identifying a recognized subdivision, condominium complex ,
residential development , or planned unit development .
TEMPORARY SIGN A sign used for promotional purposes only ,
not constructed or intended for long term use .
UNDER-CANOPY SIGN A sign suspended beneath a canopy ,
ceiling , roof , or marquee .
USE. The purpose for which a building , lot , sign , or
structure is intended , designed , occupied , or maintained .
I
VEHICLE SIGNS Signs on public transportation vehicles and
commercial vehicles to include both permanent and magnetic
signs .
•
•
(g)
WALL SIGN A sign attached parallel to and extending not more
than 20" inches from the wall of a building . This definition
includes painted , individual letter , cabinet signs , and signs
on a mansard .
WINDOW SIGN A sign installed flush on the window surface
inside or outside and intended to be viewed from the outside .
SECTION THREE---GENERAL PROVISIONS
It shall hereafter be unlawful for any person to erect ,
place , or maintain a sign in the City of Atascadero except
in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance.
SEC . 3 . 01 -- SIGNS PROHIBITED
The following types of signs are prohibited in all districts :
a) Abandoned signs
b) Signs imitating or resembling official traffic or
government signs or signals .
c) Snipe signs or signs attached to trees , telephone
poles , public benches , streetlights , or placed on any
public property or public right-of-way .
d) Signs placed on vehicles or trailers which are parked
or located for the primary purpose of displaying said
sign (This does not apply to allowed portable signs
or to signs or lettering on buses , taxis , or vehicles
operating during the normal course of business)
e) Flashing signs containing an intermittent or
sequential flashing light to attract attention . Does
not include animated copy signs or changeable copy
signs .
f) Any portable sign that is not permanently affixed to
the ground or building and that is not otherwise
allowed in this ordinance .
SEC . 3 . 02 -- PERMITS REQUIRED
Unless otherwise provided by this Ordinance , all signs shall
require permits and payment of fees as described in Section
7 of this Ordinance . No permit is required for the
maintenance of a sign or for a change of copy on painted ,
printed , or changeable copy signs .
•
•
( 10)
SEC . 3 . 03 -- SIGNS NOT REQUIRING PERMITS
The following types of signs are exempted from permit
requirements but must be in conformance with all other
requirements of this Ordinance :
a) Signs used by civic organizations .
b) Construction signs of 40 aggregate square feet or
less , not exceeding 8 ' in height .
c) Directional /information signs of 20 aggregate square
feet or less , not exceeding 8 ' in height
d) Holiday or special city events decorations
e) Nameplates of 4 square feet or less .
f ) Political signs ( there are size guidelines but no
permit required)
g) Public signs or notices , or any sign relating to an
emergency
h) Real estate signs (see Section 4. 01 Item C and D)
i ) Window signs (using 50% or less of window area)
j ) Incidental signs •
k) Agricultural signs
1 ) Landscaped signs
m) Official flags
n ) Official signs
o) Vehicle signs
p) Directory signs
q) Hazard Signs
r) Residential Identification Signs
Special regulations and allowances for signs not requiring
permits :
s) Community Identification signs are allowed on
arterial streets entering the City , with a maximum
area of 160 square feet and a maximum height of 20
feet . Such signing may include the name of the
community , slogans or mottos , names of civic or
religious organizations , but no names of businesses
or commercial products .
SEC. 3 . 04 -- MAINTENANCE
All signs shall be properly maintained . Exposed surfaces
shall be clean and painted if paint is required . Defective
parts shall be replaced . The City shall have the right under
Sec . 7 . 09 to order the repair or removal of any sign which is
defective , damaged , or substantially deteriorated , 50% or
more .
SEC. 3 . 05 -- LIGHTING
Unless otherwise specified by this Ordinance, all signs may
be illuminated . However , no sign regulated by this Ordinance
may utilize :
a) An exposed incandescent lamp with an external
reflector without a sunscreen or comparable
diffusion .
b) Any exposed incandescent lamp in excess of 150 watts
• unless a screen is attached or unless the sign is
placed over 8 feet above the ground
c) Any revolving beacon light or flashing light , or
light strings utilizing larger than miniature 3 . 5
volt bulbs .
Special regulations pertaining to sign-related light sources
are as follows :
d ) Light sources shall be designed and adjusted to
direct light away from any road or street and away
from any dwelling outside the ownership of the
applicant .
e) No light or glare shall be transmitted or reflected
in such concentration or intensity as to be
detrimental or harmful to persons or to interfere
with the use of surrounding properties or streets .
SEC. 3 . 06 ---CHANGEABLE COPY
Unless otherwise specified by this Ordinance , any sign herein
allowed may use manual or automatic changeable copy .
•
( 12)
SEC. 3 . 07 --- SIGN AREA COMPUTATION
a) Individual mounted letters and/or graphic symbols
wall mounted with no added decoration : compute by
calculating the area of the individual figures and
combining the. total of those calculations . (See
Sample A attached next page)
b) Wall signs confined within a cabinet or frame or
painted on a wall or awning : compute by calculating
the surface area of a right angled polygon containing
all elements of the graphic area . (See Sample B
attached next -page)
c) Freestanding and Projecting signs : Single or double
faced signs : compute by calculating the surface area
of a right angled polygon which contain all elements
of the display area . Doublesided signs can have a
depth no greater than 24" to be computed on a basis
of one surface . Sides must be of identical shape .
The perimeter of measurable area shall not include
embellishments such as pole covers , framing , •
decorative roofing , etc . , provided that there is not
written advertising copy on such embellishments .
(See Sample C attached next page)
(13)
SAMPLE A Individual mounted letters &/or graphic symbols wall mounted
v dua le#
°
6iOW CAA
EnG v5u�
Area A
+ 6
+ C
+ logo area
+ area of cuttinq
Total sq. footage
SAMPLE B Wall signs in a cabinet or framed; wall painted signs & awnings
fi T
F � [�
° Q E
r--,"
Area F x G
+ D x E
Total sq
footage
SAMPLE C Freestanding signs & projecting signs
� E
D F
a FLe SO H 60!- Cf Hr
� o
P1
Area
E x F
_ Total sq. F
•
- ( 14)
SECTION FOUR --- REGULATION OF ON-PREMISE SIGNS BY ZONE
Sec . 4 . 01 -- SIGNS PERMITTED IN ALL ZONES
The following signs are allowed in all zones :
a) All signs not requiring permits (Sec . 3 . 03)
b) 2 construction signs for each street frontage of a
construction project , each sign not to exceed 12
square feet in sign area in residential zones or 40
square feet in sign area in all other zones . Such
signs may be -erected prior to beginning of
construction and shall be removed 14 days following
completion of construction , i . e . final inspection
completion .
c) 1 nonilluminated real estate sign per street
frontage , not to exceed 6 square feet in sign area .
Such signs must be removed 10 days following sale ,
(close of escrow) rental , or lease . Directional
signs may only be used on unmarked roads and
easements .
d) Open house and open house directional signs , not to
exceed 6 square feet in area per sign , are only to be
allowed on weekends (Sat . & Sun . ) or holidays , and
shall not be placed more than 2 hours prior to the
published open house hours , nor removed later than 2
hours after .
e) 1 attached nameplate per occupancy , not to exceed 4
square feet in sign area .
f ) Political signs shall not exceed 32 square feet each
in sign area . Such signs shall not be erected more
that 60 days prior to the election or referendum
concerned and shall be removed 7 days following such
election or referendum. Political signs may be
placed only on private property and only with the
permission of the property owner .
g) 2 directional /information signs per street frontage
not to exceed 20 aggregate square feet per street
frontage in sign area or 8 feet in height .
•
( 15)
SEC . 4 . 02--SIGNS PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES
Signs are allowed as follows in residential zones : ( RS , RF,
LSF, RMF, LS )
a) All signs as permitted in Sec 4 . 01 .
b) 2 subdivision identification signs (see def . ) per
neighborhood , subdivision , or development , not to
exceed 64 aggregate square feet in sign area and 32
sq . ft . per sign .
c) 1 identification sign perapartmentor condominium
complex , per street frontage not to exceed 32 square
feet in sign area per sign .
d) For permitted nonresidential uses , including churches
and synagogues , 1 freestanding sign per street
frontage not to exceed 32 square feet in sign area ,
and 1 wall sign per street frontage not to exceed 32
square feet in sign area .
• Special regulations for residential zones are as follows :
e) All allowed freestanding signs shall have a maximum
height limit of 8 feet and shall have a minimum
setback of 2 feet from any public right-of-way .
SEC. 4 . 03--SIGNS PERMITTED IN LIGHT COMMERCIAL & PROFESSIONAL
ZONES
Signs are allowed as follows in commercial and professional
zones CP :
a) All signs as permitted in Sec . 4 . 01 and 4 . 02 .
b) 1 freestanding sign per premises , not to exceed 1/2
square foot in sign area for each linear foot of main
street building frontage up to a maximum of 60 square
feet . Such signs may not exceed a height 12 feet .
c) 1 wall sign or awning sign per occupancy , not to
exceed 1 square foot in sign area for each linear
foot of that occupancy ' s buil"ding frontage up to a
maximum of 40 square feet . (See Sect 6 . 04 c)
•
( 16)
d) 1 under-canopy sign per occupancy , not to exceed 8
square feet in sign area, clearing the pedestrian
right-of-way by 7 feet .
e) Incidental signs , not to exceed 4 square feet in
aggregate sign area per occupancy .
f ) 1 nonilluminated real estate sign per street frontage
not to exceed• 32 square feet in sign area . Such sign
must be removed 1-0 days following the sale , rental ,
or lease .
g) A Projecting Sign may be used instead of any allowed
wall or freestanding sign , not to exceed a sign area
of 1 square foot for each linear foot of occupancy ' s
building frontage up to a maximum of 24 square feet ,
and a minimum of 8 square feet . (See Section 6 . 04 c)
Special regulations and allowances for light commercial and
professional zones are as follows :
h) The Major Tenant sign option is available to the
major tenants of complexes having 6 or more tenants . .
The major tenants wall sign may be an additional 100%
of the allowed wall sign size for a tenant . The sign
must conform to 4 of the 6 categories for
compatibility in Sec . 1 . 03 .
i ) Where an occupancy is on a corner or has more than
one main street frontage, 1 wall sign will be allowed
on the additional frontage , not to exceed the size of
the other allowed wall sign (4. 03c) .
j ) Where a lot has in excess of 200 feet of main street
frontage , one additional freestanding sign will be
allowed for each additional 200 feet of main street
frontage . Such signs shall be subject to the size
and height limitations of the first allowed
freestanding sign and may be placed no closer than
200 feet to any other free standing sign on the same
premises .
SEC. 4 . 04 -- SIGNS PERMITTED IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
ZONES
Signs are allowed as follows in commercial and industrial
zones: CR, CP, CN , CT , CS , CPK, IP, I
•
•
( 17)
a) All signs as permitted in Sec . 4 . 01 and 4 . 02 .
b) 1 freestanding sign per premises , not to exceed 1 /2
square foot in sign area for each linear foot of main
street building frontage up to a maximum of 60 square
feet . Such signs shall not exceed a height of 12
feet .
c) 1 wall sign or awning sign per occupancy , not to
exceed 1 square foot in sign area for each linear
foot of that occupancy ' s building frontage , up to a
maximum of 40 square feet . An additional 25%
increase in sign area is available for building
occupant ' s sign area when the building frontage is
adjacent to a vehicular public right of way and set
back more than 100 ' from the right -of -way . (See
Sec 6 . 04 c)
d) 1 under-canopy sign per occupancy , not to exceed 8
square feet in sign area, clearing the pedestrian
right-of-way by 7 feet .
e) Incidental signs not to exceed 4 square feet in
• aggregate sign area per occupancy .
Special regulations and allowances for commercial and
industrial zones are as follows :
f) The Major Tenant sign option is available to the major
tenants of complexes having 6 or more tenants . The
major tenants wall sign may be an additional 100% of
the allowed wall sign size for a tenant . The sign
must conform to 4 of the 6 categories for
compatibility in Sec . 1 . 03 .
g) Where an occupancy is on a corner or has more than one
main street frontage , 1 wall sign will be allowed on
the additional frontage , not to exceed the size of the
other allowed wall sign . (4 . 03c)
•
( 18)
SEC . 4 . 05 -- SIGNS PERMITTED IN HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONES;
FREEWAY SIGNS
Signs are allowed as follows in highway commercial zones
a) All signs as permitted in Sec . 4 . 01 and Sec . 4 . 04 .
b) Each freeway frontage business with the exception of
those covered below in 4 . 05 c , will be allowed either
one freestanding sign or one wall sign facing the
freeway . The sign shall be calculated based upon one
square foot of sign for each linear foot of building
freeway frontage , or 60% of the freeway lot frontage ,
whichever is the greater . A freestanding sign shall
have a height limitation of 45 feet maximum above
property grade . Notwithstanding the above
limitations , no business shall be restricted to less
than 32 square feet of sign area and the maximum size _
of freeway oriented signs for a business shall not
exceed 200 square feet .
c) Each freeway frontage commercial and industrial •
center having 2 or more tenants, will be allowed
one center identification freeway oriented sign in
place of a tenant freestanding freeway oriented sign .
The center identification sign may take the form of
either one wall sign or one freestanding sign
calculated at one square foot for each 10 feet of
linear freeway frontage , not to exceed 200 square
feet of sign area. Maximum height for a freestanding
sign is not to exceed 45 feet .
d ) Tenants of a building or center having a freeway
frontage which is set back from the freeway more than
100 feet , may increase the wall sign area permitted
to face the freeway by 25% providing that the total
sign area does not exceed 250 square feet .
Special Regulations and Allowances for Highway Commercial
Zones Are As Follows :
e) Franchises compelled to have a parent-company-
provided freeway ( freestanding) sign not identifying
the local business name will be allowed an additional
freeway wall sign to identify the local business name
only . This is in addition to the franchise-provided
freestanding sign .
•
•
( 19)
SEC . 4 . 06 TEMPORARY SIGNS ( For promotional purposes only)
a) All businesses having a city license and commercial
address are allowed the use of banners .
b) Same size regulations as Signs ( 15% of building face ,
60 sq . ft . maximum area , etc . ) .
c) Banners shall be of 8 oz . vinyl or heavier material ,
attached securely for safety purposes .
d ) Registration required for each use .
e) Registration duration is maximum of 120 days per year
with a 20 day maximum per permitted use or i . e . , 6
permits per year .
f) Registration form to be attached to the banner
indicating prior approval and allowed duration . -
SECTION FIVE-NONCONFORMING SIGNS
SEC. 5 . 01 -- DETERMINATION OF LEGAL NONCONFORMITY
• Existing signs which do not conform to the specific
provisions of the Ordinance may- be eligible for the
designation9
le al nonconforming" provided that :
9
a) The City determines that such signs are properly
maintained and do not in any way endanger the public .
b) The sign was covered by a valid permit or variance or
complied with all applicable laws on the date of
adoption of this Ordinance .
SEC . 5 . 02 -- LOSS OF LEGAL NONCONFORMING STATUS
A legal nonconforming sign may lose this designation if :
a) The sign is relocated or replaced
b) The structure or size of the sign is altered in any
way except towards compliance with this Ordinance .
This does not refer to change of copy or normal
maintenance .
•
•
(20)
SEC . 5 . 03 -- MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF NONCONFORMING SIGNS
The legal nonconforming sign is subject to all requirements
of this code regarding safety , maintenance , and repair .
However , if the sign suffers more than 50 percent appraised
damage or deterioration , it must be brought into conformance
with this code or removed .
SECTION SIX-- CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS
Sec . 6. 01 -- COMPLIANCE WITH BUILDING AND ELECTRICAL CODES
All signs shall be constructed in accordance with the
requirements of the Building Code and the Electrical Code .
SEC. 6 . 02 -- ANCHORING
a) No sign over 20 sq . ft . shall be suspended by nonrigid
attachments that will allow the sign to swing in a •
wind .
b) All freestanding signs shall have self-supporting
structures erected on or permanently attached to
concrete foundations .
SEC. 6. 03 --. WIND LOADS
a) Any sign shall comply with the Uniform Building Code
for wind load factors .
SEC . 6 . 04 -- ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS
a) No signs shall be erected , constructed or maintained
so as to obstruct any fire escape , required exit ,
window or door opening used as a means of egress .
b) No sign shall be attached in any form, shape, or
manner which will interfere with any opening required
for ventilation , except that signs may be erected in
front of and may cover transom windows when not in
violation of the provisions of the Atascadero
Building or Fire .Prevention Codes .
•
•
(21 )
c) Awning signs and projecting signs require a licensed
architect ' s or civil engineer' s letter attesting to
the sign ' s structural integrity and its ability , with
attaching hardware , to adequately support the
proposed sign .
SECTION SEVEN- ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
SEC . 7 . 01 -- CODE ADMINISTRATION
The City Planning Staff is authorized to process applications
for permit's and variances , hold public hearings as required ,
and enforce and carry out all provisions of this code , both
in letter and in spirit . The City Planning staff is
authorized to promulgate regulations and procedures
consistent with this function .
The Compliance Officer is empowered , upon presentation of
proper credentials , to enter or inspect any building ,
• structure , or premises in the City for the purpose of
inspection of a sign and its structural and electrical
connections to ensure compliance with all applicable codes
and ordinances . Such inspections shall be carried out during
business hours unless an emergency exists .
SEC . 7 . 02 -- APPLICATION FOR PERMITS
Application for a permit for the erection , alteration , or
relocation of a sign shall be made to the City upon a form
provided by the City Planning Staff and shall include the
following information :
a) An application form showing name , address , legal
description , type of sign , cost of sign , and
signature .
b) A site plan showing the proposed location of the sign
along with the locations and square footage areas of
all existing signs on the same premises .
c) Specifications and scale drawings showing the
materials , colors , design , dimensions , structural
supports , and electrical components of the proposed
sign
•
•
(22)
SEC. 7 . 03 -- PERMIT FEES
All applications for permits filed with the City shall be
accompanied by a payment of the initial permit fee for each
sign application according to the following formula :
a) On-Premise Signs 1% of the sign ' s valuation , $30 . 00
minimum.
b) Temporary Signs $10 . 00 registration fee .
SEC. 7 . 04 -- ISSUANCE AND DENIAL
The City shall issue a permit and permit sticker for the
erection , alteration , or relocation of a sign within 5
working days of receipt of a valid application , provided that
the sign complies with all applicable laws and regulations of
the City . In all applications , where a matter of
interpretation arises , the more specific definition or higher
standard shall prevail . When a permit is denied by the City ,
it will give a written notice to the applicant along with a •
brief statement of the reasons for denial . The City may
suspend or revoke an issued permit for any false statement or
misrepresentation of fact in the application .
SEC. 7 . 05 -- PERMIT CONDITIONS, REFUNDS , AND PENALTIES
If a permit is denied , the permit fee will be refunded to the
applicant .
If no inspections have been made and no work authorized by
the permit has been performed , the permit fee , except for
$30 . 00 will be refunded to the applicant upon request ,
provided that the permit and permit sticker are returned to
the City within 30 days of issuance .
A permit issued by the City becomes null and void if work is
not commenced within 180 days of issuance . If work
authorized by the permit is suspended or abandoned for 180
days , the permit must be renewed with an additional payment
of one-half of the original fee .
•
(23)
If any sign is installed or placed on any property prior to
receipt of a permit , the specified permit fee shall be
doubled However, payment of the doubled fee shall not
relieve any person of any other requirements or penalties
prescribed in this Ordinance .
SEC. 7 . 06 -- INSPECTION UPON COMPLETION
Any person installing , altering , or relocating a sign for
which a permit has been issued shall notify the City upon
completion of the work . The City may require a final
inspection , including- an electrical inspection and inspection
of footings on freestanding signs .
SEC. 7 . 07 -- VARIANCES
In obtaining a permit , the applicant may apply to the City
for a variance from certain requirements of this code . A
variance may be granted by the planning commission where the
• literal application of the code would create a particular
hardship for the sign user and the following criteria are
met :
a) A literal application of the code would not allow the
property to be used at its highest and best use as
zoned .
b) The granting of the requested variance would not be
materially detrimental to the property owners in the
vicinity .
c) Hardship caused to the sign user under a literal
interpretation of the code is due to conditions
unique to that property and does not apply generally
to the City .
d) The granting of the variance would not be contrary to
the general objectives of this code .
SEC. 7 . 08 -- VIOLATIONS
When , in the opinion of the City , a violation of the code
exists , the City shall issue a notification to the alleged
violator . The order shall specify those sections of the code
of which the individual has 45 days from the date of the
order in which to correct the alleged violation or to appeal
to the sign council or board .
•
•
(24)
If , upon inspection , the City finds that a sign is abandoned
or structurally , materially or electrically defective , or in
any way endangers the public , the City shall issue a written
order to the owner of the sign and occupant of the premises
stating the nature of the violation and requiring them to
repair or remove the sign within 45 days of the date of the
order .
In cases of emergency , the City may cause the immediate
removal of a dangerous or defective sign without notice .
Signs removed in this manner must present a hazard to the
public safety as defined in the Uniform Building Code .
SEC . 7 . 09 -- REMOVAL OF SIGNS BY THE CITY
The City may cause the removal of an illegal sign in cases of
emergency , or for failure to comply with the written orders
of removal or repair . After removal or demolition of the
sign , a notice shall be mailed to the sign owner stating the
nature of the work and the date on which it was performed and .
demanding payment of the costs as certified by the City
together with an additional 30 percent for inspection and
incidental costs .
If the amount specified in the notice is not paid within 60
days of the notice , it shall become an assessment or lien or
judgement against the property of the sign owner , and will be
certified as an assessment against the property together with
a 50 percent penalty for collection in the same manner as the.
real estate taxes .
The owner of the property upon which the sign is located
shall be presumed to be the owner of all signs thereon unless
facts to the contrary are brought to the attention of the
City , as in the case of a leased sign .
For purposes of removal , the definition of sign shall include
all sign embellishments and structures designed specifically
to support the sign .
•
•
(25)
SEC. 7 . 10 -- PENALTIES
Any person who fails to comply with the provisions of this
Ordinance may be subject to a fine of $50 . 00 for each week or
portion thereof that the violation continues up to a $500 . 00
limit .
SEC . 7 . 11 -- APPEALS
Any failure to respond to an application within 5 days of
receipt or any decision rendered by the City in denying a
permit or variance or in alleging a violation of this
Ordinance may be appealed to the City Planning Commission
within 60 days of the City ' s receipt of application .
The action being appealed shall be held in abeyance pending
the decision of the commission or ( if appealed further) of
the Council .
SECTION EIGHT -- CONFLICT , SEVERABILITY , AND EFFECTIVE DATE
• SEC, 8 , 01 -- CONFLICT
If any portion of this code is found to be in conflict with
any other provision of any zoning , building , fire , safety , or
health ordinance of the city code , the provision which
establishes the higher standard shall prevail .
•
•
(26)
SEC . 8 . 02 -- SEVERABILITY
If any section , subsection , sentence , clause , or phrase of
this code or its application to any person or circumstance is
held invalid by the decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction , the remainder of this code , or the application
of the provision to other persons or circumstances is in
effect and shall remain in full force and effect .
SEC. 8 . 03 -- EFFECTIVE DATE
This code shall take effect and be in force on 19
Approved by the City Council this day of
19 and signed in authentication of its passage this
day of 19
•
•
RiAlascaderockatnger of mLo mercE
6550 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422
TELEPHONE: (805) 466-2044
(27)
SIGN ORDINANCE INDEX .
KEY WORD SECTION PAGE
Abandoned Sign 2 . 00 2
• Administration & Enforcement 7 . 00 21
Agricultural Sign & 2 . 00 2
3 . 03 k ) 10
Anchoring 6 . 02 20
Animated Sign 2 . 00 2
Appeals 7 . 11 25
Area 2 . 00 2
Awning 2 . 00 3
Awning Sign 2 . 00 3
4 . 03 c) 15
4 . 04 c ) 17
6 . 04 c ) 21
Banners 4 . 06 19
Banner Sign 2 . 00 3
3 . 01 f ) 9
Billboard 2 . 00 3
Building 2 . 00 3
Center I . D. Freeway Oriented Sign 4 . 05 c ) 18
Changeable Copy Sign (Automatic) 2 . 00 3
Changeable Copy Sign (Manual ) 2 . 00 3
Changeable Copy Sign 3 . 06 11
City 2 . 00 3
Civic Organization 2 . 00 3
3 . 03 a) 10
Clearance 2 . 00 3
•
(28)
Code Administration 7 . 01 21
Community Identification Sign 3 . 03 s) 10
Compatibility 1 . 03 2
Conflict 8 . 01 25
Construction Sign 2 . 00 3
3 . 03 b) 10
4 . 01 b) 14
Construction Specifications 6 . 00 20
6 . 04 20
Copy 2 . 00 3
Corner Business 4 . 03 i ) 16
4 . 04 a) 17
Definitions 2 .00 2
Thru 2 . 00 9
Directional /Information Sign 2 . 00 4
3 . 03 c) 10
4 . 01 c&d ) 14
4 . 01 g) 14
Directory Sign 2 . 00 4
3 . 03 p) 10
Display Area 2 . 00 4
Double Faced Sign 2 . 00 4
Effective Date 8 . 03 26
Electrical Sign 2 . 00 4
Electronic Message Center 2 . 00 4
Events Decorations 3 . 03 d ) 10
Facade 2 . 00 4
Face of Sign 2 . 00 4
Festoons 2 . 00 4
Flashing Sign 2 . 00 4
3 . 01 e) 9
Franchisee Signs 4 . 05 e) 18
Freestanding Sign 2 . 00 4
3 . 07 c) 12
4 . 02 d) 15
4 . 02 e) 15
4 . 03 b) 15
4 . 03 j ) 16
4 . 04 b) 17
4 . 05 b) 18
4 . 05 d ) 18
Freeway Signs 4 . 05 18
Frontage 2 . 00 4
Frontage Building 2 . 00 4
(29)
General Provisions 3 . 00 9
Government Sign 2 . 00 5
Hazard Sign 2 . 00 5
3 . 03 q ) 10
Height 2 . 00 5
Identification Sign 2 . 00 5
4 . 02 c) 15
Illegal Sign 2 . 00 5
Illuminated Sign 2 . 00 5
Incidental Sign 2 . 00 5
3 . 03 j ) 10
4 .03 e) 16
4 . 04 e) 17
Individual Mounted Letters 3 . 07 a) 12
Inspections 7 . 01 21
7 . 08 23
Inspection Upon Completion 7 . 06 23
Lighting 3 . 05 11
3 . 05 d&e) 11
• Lot 2 . 00 5
Maintenance 2 . 00 5
3 . 04 11
5 . 03 20
Major Tenant 2 . 00 6
4 . 03 h) 16
4 . 04 f ) 17
Mansard 2 . 00 6
Marquee 2 . 00 6
Nameplate 2 . 00 6
3 . 03 e) 10
4 . 01 e) 14
Nonconforming Sign 2 . 00 6
5 . 01 19
5 . 02 19
Occupancy 2 . 00 6
Official Flags 2 . 00 6
3 . 03 m) 10
Official Signs 2 . 00 6
3 . 03 n) 10
Off-Premise Sign 2 . 00 6
On-Premise Sign 2 . 00 6
Open House Signs 4 . 01 d ) 14
Owner 2 . 00 6
Painted Wall Sign 2 . 00 7
•
_ (30)
Parapet 2 . 00 7
Penalties 7 . 10 25
Permits 7 . 01 21
Permit Application 7 . 02 21
Permit Conditions , Refunds & Penalties 7 . 05 22
Permit Fees 7 . 03 22
Permit Issuance & Denial 7 . 04 22
Permits Not Required 3 . 03 10
4 . 01 a) 14
Permits Required 3 . 02 9
Person 2 . 00 7
Point of Purchase Displ.ay 2 . 00 7
Pole Cover 2 . 00 7
Political Sign 2 . 00 7
3 . 03 f) 10
4 . 01 f ) 14
Polygon 2 . 00 7
Portable Sign 2 . 00 7
3 . 01 f) 9
Premises 2 . 00 7 •
Prohibited Signs 3 . 01 9
Projecting Sign 2 . 00 7
3 . 07 c) 12
4 . 03 g) 16
6 . 04 c) 21
Purpose of Ordinance 1 . 01 1
Real Estate Sign 2 . 00 7
3 . 03 h) 10
4 . 01 c&d) 14
4 . 03 f ) 16
Removal of Signs By City 7 . 09 24
Residential Identification Sign 2 . 00 8
Roofline 2 . 00 8
Roof Sign 2 .00 8
Rotating Sian 2 . 00 8
Scope of Ordinance 1 . 02 1
Set Backs 4 . 04 c) 17
Severability 8 . 02 26
Sign 2 . 00 8
Sign Area 2 . 00 8
3 . 07 12
Sign Area Computation 3 . 07 12
Sign Area Graphic 3 . 07 13
Signs In All Zones 4 . 01 14
(31)
Signs In Commercial & Industrial Zones 4 . 04 16
Signs In Highway Commercial Zones 4 . 05 18
Signs In Light, Commercial , & Prof . Zones 4 . 03 15
Signs In Residential Zones 4 . 02 15
Signs Prohibited 3 . 01 9
Site Plan Required 7 . 02 21
Snipe Sign 2 . 00 8
3 . 01 c) 9
Subdivision I . D . Sign 4 . 02 b) 15
Temporary Sign 2 . 00 8
3 . 01 f) 9
4 . 06 19
Tenant Freeway Signs 4 . 05 c&d) 18
Under-Canopy Sign 2 . 00 8
4 . 03 d) 16
4 . 04 c) 17
Use 2 . 00 8
Variances 7 . 01 21
• 7 . 07 23
Vehicle Signs 3 . 01 d) 9
3 . 03 o) 10
2 . 00 8
Violations 7 . 08 23
Wall Sign 2 . 00 9
3 . 07 b) 12
4 . 02 d) 15
4 . 03 c) 15
4 . 03 a) 15
4 . 04 c) 17
4 . 05 b) 18
4 . 05 d) 18
4 . 05 e) 18
Windloads 6 . 03 20
Window Sign 2 . 00 9
3 . 03 i ) 10
•
MEETING AGENDA
ATASCADERO CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE—aZ26.L2 ITEM# C-2(A
MEMORANDUM
• DATE: MARCH 14 1991
q
w�iyr� 1
' 19��11
TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager
CITY MGR.
FROM: Mike Hicks, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: WATER CONSERVATION TASK FORCE
BACKGROUND
A Water Conservation Task Force was appointed by the City Manager. The Task Force
members are:
Chairman - Mike Hicks, Fire Chief
Henry Engen, Community Development Director
Andy Takata, Community Services Director
Greg Luke, Public Works Director
Art Montandon, City Attorney
On March 4, 1991 Bob Hamilton, representing Atascadero Mutual Water Company, joined
the Task Force.
• The
p P ose ur of the Task Force is to identifyproblem areas and make recommendations to
the City Council for the purposes of water conservation which would ensure the
availability of adequate water supplies for essential services such as drinking, Fire
Protection, public facilities, etc. The Task Force has met three times, February 4, 1991,
February 21, 1991 and March 4, 1991, with out next meeting scheduled for March 18, 1991 at
Fire Station #1 at 2:00 p.m.
At our first meeting it was agreed this committee would stay non-political and work
towards establishing goals that would be recommended to the City Council for adoption.
It was also agreed that since the Water Company was privately owned we needed their
participation in this committee, which has been accomplished.
We also agreed to do a survey of other cities in the County for the purposes of acquiring
information as to what has already been done in other areas. This has been accomplished
and we received an outstanding response from the cities. The documentation is available
at this time at Fire Station #l.
Don Asquith, of the Morro Group, attended our February 21, 1991 meeting. However, it
would be inappropriate for me to address Don's discussions with our group since his
report is due out so soon.
WATER CONSERVATION TASK FORCE MEMO- PAGE 2
•
PRESENT
The committee is continuing to obtain information and to research conservation methods.
Current areas of focus are code adoptions regarding the plumbing codes, grey water usage,
landscaping requirements, public education, usage for reclaimed water and water for public
safety.
I have presented my concerns regarding water for firefighting to the San Luis Obispo
County Fire Chief's Association on March 6, 1991. It was agreed that this subject would be
included on our next agenda at which time we will discuss the use of water tankers and
reclaimed water, a public education program and the use of foam for wildland fires.
FUTURE
Greg Luke will be discussing with the Council the possibility of the Water Company
drilling a test well on the city's lot on Sycamore in the River Gardens area.
We will continue researching for the uses of sewer treatment plant water.
Henry Engen will be reporting back on code adoptions (plumbing) regarding landscaping.
We will continue research into establishing public education programs. •
We are looking forward to receiving the consultant's report which will help to set our
future goals.
We see this Task Force as an ongoing committee that will often be bringing
recommendations to the Council for their direction.
Submitted by:
Mike Hicks, Fire Chief
Committee Chairman
cc: H. Engen
A. Takata
G. Luke
A. Montandon
• MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Water Study Status Report
Mr. Don Asquith of The Morro Group has been actively working
on the study for approximately one month. He has collected all
relevant geological/water well data from available sources,
including the County of San Luis Obispo and the Atascadero Mutual
Water Company. He as been supplied with the City's Updated General
Plan.
We have had an informative meeting with Bob Hamilton of the
Atascadero Mutual Water Company besides providing a considerable
amount of raw data he also discussed some of his personal ideas on
how water moves into and out of the groundwater basin.
In summary, the consultant now has all of the data necessary
to perform his analysis. our contract with him calls for a
completed draft report to be submitted to the City by April 1,
1991. Don has indicated he expects to meet this deadline.
Once staff receives the draft report, it will be reviewed for
completeness. By the second week in April the final report will be
ready for distribution. Assuming everything is in order, Council
can formally consider the matter at the April 23, 1991 Council
meeting.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to
contact me.
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-2 (B)
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 03/26/91
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS WITH THE
ATASCADERO MUTUAL WATER COMPANY
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with
the Atascadero Mutual Water Company to permit the Company
to drill a test well on the City's Sycamore Road lot.
2. Direct Staff to prepare a draft agreement with Atascadero
Mutual Water Company to distribute reclaimed water. The
draft Agreement would be brought back to the Council for
final consideration.
BACKGROUND:
The drought conditions have brought the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company and the City into closer contact to seek ways we can
mutually help ameliorate the water shortage. In this regard, Mr.
Bob Hamilton has requested permission to drill a test well on the
• lot the City owns on Sycamore Rd. in River Gardens. He believes
this location may yield usable quantities of potable water.
If the test well proves successful, the City would work out an
arrangement to sell or lease the property to the Water Company.
DISCUSSION:
Prior to the test drilling the City and Atascadero Mutual Water
Company must execute an agreement setting forth routine matters,
such as insurance, damage, ,post-drilling clean up, permits, etc.
Staff proposes the Council authorize the City Manager to prepare,
review and sign this initial agreement to drill a test well. The
agreement will not address any conditions pertaining to the use of
the property if the test well proves productive. This matter will
be brought back to Council for further consideration at a later
date.
In a separate matter, Bob Hamilton has expressed an interest in
cooperating with the City to formulate a reclaimed water program.
Traditionally, in other cities with separate sanitation and water
agencies, the Sanitation Department is responsible for producing
the proper quality water and the Water Company is responsible for
the distribution and sales of the reclaimed water. Expenses and
revenues are shared on an equitable basis.
•
If Council concurs, staff will prepare a Cooperative Agreement with
the Atascadero Mutual Water Company to establish terms for working
together to develop a Reclaimed Water System for the City. The
Draft Agreement will be brought back to the Council for
consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No direct costs will be incurred. Staff time will be required to
prepare the necessary documents.
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
• CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-3(A)
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Date: 3-26-91
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
Subject•
Transfer of Federal Aid Urban (FAU) Funds from Grover City,
Paso Robles and, possibly, Morro Bay.
Recommendation:
Grant conceptual approval to the transfer of FAU Funds and
authorize staff to formulate the necessary agreement document.
Background•
FAU Funds are allocated to local governments for use on local
transportation projects. The money is not distributed directly to
the City, rather Caltrans holds the funds and acts as their
• custodian. Money not spent can be reallocated by the State.
To spend FAU Funds the lead agency must comply with a myriad
of Federal Regulations. Most small cities are not staffed to
handle the compliance paperwork. Consequently, FAU Funds are often
used as the City's "matching Share" on Caltrans projects. The
responsibility for meeting all Federal regulations then falls on
Caltrans, relieving the City of this onerous responsibility.
The joint City/Caltrans project to install traffic signals on
Highway 41 at Portola, Curbaril and Atascadero anticipates a City
contribution of $141, 000. Our current balance of FAU Funds is
$96, 000. To make up the $45, 000 difference the City could draw
from the Gas Tax Funds, the General Fund or possibly developer
impact fund.
Fortunately an alternative source of funding is available.
The Cities of Grover City, Paso Robles, and Morro Bay have offered
to lend Atascadero their excess FAU Funds ($64,639. 00, $7, 181. 00,
and $140, 000, respectively) . This charitable act is prompted by a
recent announcement by the State that all unencumbered FAU Funds
will be reverted back to the State effective December 1, 1991.
That is, Grover City, Paso Robles and Morro Bay must find a project
for their FAU Funds by December 1, 1991 or the money will be lost.
Atascadero is one of the few cities that has a Caltran's
project ready to be funded. These neighboring cities are willing •
to lend us their FAU Funds to prevent their reallocation. The loan
would be interest free and would not have a fixed duration.
Discussion•
Staff is seeking conceptual approval for the transfer of FAU
Funds from Paso Robles, Grover City and/or Morro Bay to help fund
the Traffic Signals on Highway 41. If the Council concurs with the
concept staff will prepare the necessary agreements. It should be
noted that only the exact amount of money needed would be
transferred. While Grover City, Paso Robles and Morro Bay together
may appear to have more funds that we need, it is prudent to have
some flexibility if circumstances change.
•
•
O� (', RpV�
4 �p
VA
• CITY
OF GROVER CITY
_
MAYOR-CHUCK COMSTOCK
MAYOR PRO TEM-LOWELL FORISTER COUNCILMAN-HENRY"GENE"GATES
C `P r COUNCILMAN-PETER KEITH COUNCILMAN-FRED MUNROE
9 L I F O R N CITY ADMINISTRATOR-ARNOLD DOWDY
January 31 , 1991
Greg Luke
Public Works Director
City of Atascadero
- _ 6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Dear Mr. Luke:
At their regular meeting of January 21 , 1991 , the City Council of
the City of Grover City authorized the City of Atascadero to borrow
Grover City's $64, 639.00 in Federal Aid Urban Funds .
• A certified copy of the Council 's resolution reflecting this action
is enclosed for your information. John Ritter of Cal Trans has
been notified of this action as well .
I hope this action will help you in your approved project .
Sincerely,
Patricia A. Risoldi
City Clerk
Enclosure
154 S. STH STREET • P.O. BOX 365 GROVER CTTY, CA 93483 (805)473-4567 FAX(805)489-9657
RESOLUTION NO. 91-13
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER CITY •
AUTHORIZING THE LENDING OF FEDERAL AID URBAN FUNDS TO
THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
WHEREAS, the City of Grover City currently has an unexpended
balance of Federal Aid Urban Funds of $64, 639.00; and
WHEREAS, the City of Grover City has no current projects
approved in which to expend said fvnds; and
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has expressed a desire to
borrow the FAU funds for an approved project; and
WHEREAS, if said funds are not appropriated for a specific
approved project by September of 1991, they will be redistributed
- among other agencies;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Grover City
does hereby authorize the lending of Grover City's unexpended
Federal Aid Urban Funds in the amount of $64, 639.00 to the City of
Atascadero with the understanding that the City of Atascadero will
return said funds in equal amount within a five-year period.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 21st day of January, 1991 .A2
•
i
MAY R C CK COMSTOCK
ATTEST: ,
PATRICIA 'A. RISOLDI , CITY CLERK
-- I, Patricia A. Risoldi , City Clerk for
the City of Grover City, do hereby
certify that this is a true and correct _
copy of Resolution No. 91-13 which was
adopted by the City Council at their
regular meeting of January 21, 1991.
PATRICIA A. ISOLOI, TY CLERK
.��ow°°p4rFo City of EI Paso de Robles
�4RCH 11.`%
a
February 5, 1991
Mr. Greg Luke, Director
Public Works Department
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: FAU Funds
Dear Greg,
I have recently received a letter from John Ritter of Caltrans
regarding the FAU funds for our cities. I noted that the City of
Paso Robles has . an unexpended balance of $7, 181. 00. Mr. Ritter
mentioned that the City of Atascadero was going to be doing a _
fairly large project and may be in need of FAU funds.
I wanted to suggest to you that by informal agreement the City of
Paso Robles would "loan" to the City of Atascadero our $7, 181. 00.
These funds would be reallocated back to the City of Paso Robles
at some time in the future when the City of Paso Robles has a
viable FAU project. I find this "borrowing" method to a desirable
way to enable cities to accomplish the projects with FAU funds.
After talking with Caltrans, this could be done on a very informal
basis with letters of intent developed between City Managers.
Please call me at your earliest convenience to let me know if you
would likJ
ceed in this direction.
Sincerely
JDirR. MP.E.
ctor c Works
JerryBankston
dpwcorsp\atasfau. fnd
•
Public Works P.O. Box 307, Paso Robles, CA 93447-0307 (805) 239-0210'
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO AGENDA ITEM: C-3(B)
THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager Date: 3-26-91
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT•
Adoption of Resolution 26-91 approving and authorizing execution of
a Cooperative Agreement' between the City of Atascadero and the
State of California for the installation of traffic control
devices.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 26-91.
BACKGROUND:
This resolution is required by Caltrans as a part of the contract
documents for the installation of the following traffic control
devices:
* Traffic Signals Highway 41 at Atascadero Ave
Highway 41 at Portola Rd
Highway 41 at Curbaril Avenue
* Includes Signal Emergency Preempt at the above locations
as well as the existing signal at Highway 41 and El Camino
Real.
FISCAL IMPACT:
By law, the City and State share 50/50 of the cost of the signal
installation with the City paying 100% of the emergency preempt
costs. The City's total portion of this contract is estimated to
be $210,750. , of which $141, 000 (Our share of the construction
cost) will be paid by FAU funds. The remaining funds will be paid
for out of Gas Tax money.
•
RESOLUTION NO. 26-91
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND THE '
CITY OF ATASCADERO PERTAINING TO THE INSTALLATION
OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING, MODIFICATION
OF EXISTING SIGNAL, AND INSTALLATION OF AN EMERGENCY
VEHICLE PREEMPTION SYSTEM ON STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE 41
AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF PORTOLA ROAD, CURBARIL AVENUE,
ATASCADERO AVENUE AND EL CAMINO REAL AT SANTA YSABEL
A. WHEREAS, the State and the City desire to install and
modify traffic signals at the intersections of State Highway Route
41 and Portola Road, Curbaril Avenue, Atascadero Avenue and E1
Camino Real; and
B. WHEREAS, the State and the City desire to enter into a
Cooperative Agreement which establishes the respective obligations
for the completion of the above mentioned traffic work.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Council of the City of
Atascadero as follows:
1. The City Council approves the Cooperative Agreement
(District Agreement No. 5CA9103) between the State of California
and the City.
2. The Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized and
directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of
Atascadero.
ADOPTED: March 26, 1991
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk ROBERT B. LILLEY, Mayor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Govemor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 8114
• SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403-8114
TDD (805) 5493259
February 20, 1991
05-SLO-41-14.7/16. 0
05-253-372701
DESIGN SIGNALS/LIGHTING
05-253-342300
INSTALL SIGNALS/LIGHTING
District Agreement #5CA9103
Mr. Glen Luke
Public Works Director
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Street
Atascadero, CA 93422
Dear Mr. Luke:
Attached for execution are the original and four (4) copies
of the Cooperative Agreement between the State and the City
of Atascadero for the installation of traffic signals and
safety lighting, modification of existing signal, and
installation of an emergency vehicle preemption system on
State Highway Route 41 at the intersections of Portola Road,
Curbaril Avenue, Atascadero Avenue and E1 Camino/Santa
Ysabel.
Please note the Cooperative Agreement states that City's
share may be financed 100% by Federal-aid Funds. These funds
do not cover administrative overhead costs, therefore, the
City would be required to finance these costs. If there are
question in regards to what costs and/or charges are covered
by the Federal monies please contact John Ritter, Local
Streets and Roads, at 549-3213.
After execution by authorized City officials, please return
the original and three (3) copies with a copy of the
authorizing resolution attached to each copy for execution by
the State no later than March 22, 1991.
Sincerely,
Ranell G. Bailey
Cooperative Agreement Section
Attachment
05-SLO-41-14.7/16.0
05-253-372701
DESIGN SIGNALS/LIGHTING
05-253-342300
INSTALL SIGNALS/LIGHTING •
District Agreement #5CA9103
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, ENTERED INTO ON
is between the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its
Department of Transportation, referred to herein as "STATE, " and
CITY OF ATASCADERO
a body politic and a municipal
corporation of the State of
California, referred to herein
as "CITY"
RECITALS
(1) STATE and CITY contemplate installing traffic
control signals and lighting (on State Route 41 at the
intersections of Portola Road, Curbaril Avenue and Atascadero
Avenue) , and modify the existing signal and install an emergency
vehicle preemption system (at the intersection of State Route 41
at El Camino/Santa Ysabel) ; referred to herein as "PROJECT", and
desire to specify the terms and conditions under which PROJECT is
to be engineered, constructed, financed, and maintained.
(2) It is anticipated that Federal-aid Funds will be
allocated for financing 92.8%, 100% of CITY's share/85.6% of
STATE's share, of the (construction, construction engineering and
preliminary engineering) costs which are eligible for Federal-aid
participation, and STATE and CITY will bear the remainder of the
costs as set forth herein.
SECTION I
STATE AGREES:
(1) To provide all necessary preliminary engineering,
including plans and specifications, and all necessary
construction engineering services for the PROJECT and to bear
STATE's share of the expense thereof, as shown on Exhibit A
attached and made a part of this Agreement.
(2) To construct the PROJECT by contract in accordance
with the plans and specifications of STATE.
PAGE 1 OF 7
(3) To pay an amount equal to 50% of the PROJECT
construction costs for installation of the three(3) new signals
and lighting, and modification of signal as shown on Exhibit A
but in no event shall STATE's total obligation for PROJECT
construction costs, under this Agreement, excluding costs
referred to in Section III, Article (9) , exceed the amount of
$135, 500; provided that STATE may, at its sole discretion, in
writing, authorize a greater amount.
(4) To pay an amount equal to 0% of the new emergency
vehicle preemption system related construction costs as shown on
Exhibit A.
(5) Upon completion of PROJECT and all work incidental
thereto, to furnish CITY, with a detailed statement of the
portion of the engineering and construction costs to be borne by
CITY, including resolution of any claims which may be filed by
STATE's contractor, and to refund to CITY promptly after
completion of STATE's audit any amount of CITY's deposit(s)
required in Section II, Article (1) remaining after actual costs
to be borne by CITY have been deducted, or to bill CITY for any
additional amount required to complete CITY's financial
obligations pursuant to this Agreement.
(6) To maintain the entire traffic control signal (s)
and safety lighting as installed and pay an amount equal to 50%
of the total maintenance costs, including electrical energy
costs.
(7) To operate the traffic control signal (s) as
installed and pay 100% of the operation cost.
SECTION II
CITY AGREES•
(1) To deposit with STATE within 30 days of receipt of
billing therefor (which billing will be forwarded immediately
following STATE's bid advertising date of a construction contract
for PROJECT) , the amount of $210,750, which figure represents
CITY's estimated share of the expense of preliminary engineering,
construction engineering, and construction costs required to
complete the PROJECT, as shown on Exhibit A. CITY's total
obligation for said anticipated project costs, exclusive of
claims and excluding costs referred to in Section III, Article
(9) , under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of
$231,825; provided that CITY may, at its sole discretion, in
writing, authorize a greater amount.
(2) CITY's share of the construction cost (estimated
to be $140,500) , shall be an amount equal to 50% of the ,total
actual signal and lighting related construction costs, and be an
amount equal to 100% of the total actual emergency vehicle
preemption equipment related construction costs; including the
cost of claims, the cost of STATE defense of any claims and the
cost of STATE-furnished material, if any, as determined after
completion of work and upon final accounting .of costs.
PAGE 2 OF 7
(3) CITY's share of the expense of preliminary
engineering shall be an amount equal to 25% of CITY's share of
the actual final construction cost, for the three (3) new
signals, signal interconnect and modification of signal, •
calculated prior to any Federal-aid payment; however, CITY's cost
will be reduced by CITY's share of Federal-aid payment.
(4) CITY's share of the expense of preliminary
engineering shall be an amount equal to 25% of CITY's share of
the actual final construction cost, for emergency vehicle
preemption system, calculated prior to any Federal-aid payment;
however, CITY's cost will be reduced by CITY's share of Federal-
aid payment.
(5) CITY's share of the expense of construction
engineering shall be an amount equal to 25% of CITY's share of
the actual final construction cost, for the three (3) new
signals, signal interconect and modification of signal,
-- calculated prior to any Federal-aid payment; however, CITY's cost
will then be reduced by CITY's share of Federal-aid payment.
(6) CITY's share of the expense of construction
engineering shall be an amount equal to 25% of CITY's share- of
the actual final construction cost, for emergency vehicle
preemption system, calculated prior to any Federal-aid payment;
however, CITY's cost will then be reduced by CITY's share of
Federal-aid payment.
(7) To pay STATE upon completion of all work within 20
days of receipt of a detailed statement made upon final
accounting of costs therefor, any amount over and above the
aforesaid advance deposit required to complete CITY's financial
obligation pursuant to this Agreement.
(8) To reimburse STATE for CITY's proportionate share
of the cost of maintenance of said traffic control signals and
safety lighting for the three (3) new signals, signal interconect
and modification of signal, such share to be an amount equal to
50% of the total maintenance costs, including electrical energy.
costs.
(9) To reimburse STATE for CITY's proportionate share
of the cost of maintenance of said traffic control signal(s) and
,F ,afety lighting for emergency vehicle preemption system, such
- share to be an amount equal to 100% of the total maintenance
costs, including electrical energy costs.
{
(10) To pay 50% of the electrical energy costs for the
traffic control signal(s) and safety lighting.
(11) To furnish the necessary right-of-way unless
otherwise provided for.
(12) To certify to STATE that the right-of-way is
owned by CITY or that CITY had Right of Entry to do work, prior
to June 1, 1991.
PAGE 3 OF 7
(13) To provide STATE with the following parts upon
STATE's notifying CITY of their need: discriminator module and
optical detector.
SECTION III
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
(1) All obligations of STATE under the terms of this
Agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the
Legislature and the allocation of resources by the California
Transportation Commission.
(2) STATE shall not award a contract for the work
until after receipt of CITY's deposit required in Section II,
Article (1) .
(3) Should any portion of the PROJECT be financed with
Federal funds or State gas tax funds all applicable procedures
and policies relating to the use of such funds shall apply
notwithstanding other provisions of this Agreement.
(4) After opening of bids CITY's estimate of cost will
be revised based on actual bid prices. CITY's required deposit
under Section II, Article (1) above will be increased or
decreased to match said revised estimate. If deposit increase or
decrease is less than $1,000 no refund or demand for additional
deposit will be made until final accounting.
(5) After opening bids for the PROJECT and if bids
indicate a cost overrun of no more than 10% of the estimate will
occur, STATE may award the contract.
(6) If, upon opening of bids, it is found that a cost
overrun exceeding 10% of the estimate will occur, STATE and CITY
shall endeavor to agree upon an alternative course of action.
If, after 30 days, an alternative course of action is not agreed
upon, this Agreement shall be deemed to 'be terminated by mutual
consent pursuant to Article (8) of this'`Section III.
(7) Prior to award of the construction contract for
the PROJECT, CITY may terminate this Agreement by written notice,
provided that CITY pays STATE for all costs incurred by STATE.
C,
(8) If termination of this Agreement is by mutual
consent, STATE will bear 50% and CITY will bear 50% of all costs
incurred prior to termination,; except"that any utility relocation
costs shall be prorated in accordance with STATE's/CITY'S
responsibility for utility relocation costs.
PAGE 4 OF 7
05-SLO-41---I+.7/16.0
05-253-372701 - .
DESIGN 'SIGNALS/LIGHTING
05-253-342300
INSTALL SIGNALS/LIGHTING
District Agreement ' #5CA0103
EXHIBIT A
ESTIMATE OF COST
Total' Est. City's State's
DescriRtion Cost Share Share
Construction Cost - State's share 50%/City's share 50%
teni=S, gna and Lighting
Location 1
Route 41/Portola Rd $ 80,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000
'Location '2
Route 41/Curbaril .Ave $ '80,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000
Location 3
Route 41/Atascadero Ave $ 80, 000 ; $40,000 $ 40, 000
Signal 'Interconnect $ 30,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000
Modify Signal, X000 500 _$ 500
Total $271,000 $135,500 $135,500
-'Construction Qgst State's share 0I/City's share 100%
Emergency vehicle
Preemption Equipment S 5.000 $ 5. 000 �0-
TQtal Items $2700,090 $140®500 $135,500
Engineering Cost - Signals_
Mate-'s share 0City1s share 50$
*25% of Constrnction'.Cost $ 67,750 $ 33,875, $ 33,875
Est. of Const. Engineering
*25$ of Constructian .Cost $ 6't,7.50 $ 33,875 $ 33,875
Engineering Cost Preemption Equipment ,
State's sharp, Q% C tv'`s'share jQ0$
Est. of. Prel. . Engineering
*25% of Construction Cost. $ - 1,250 $ 1,250 $ -0-
Est. of Const. Engineering
*25% of Construction Cost $,- 1,250 S .. 1,?50 $ -0-
Total Engr. Cost $138, 000 $ 70,250 $ 67,750
PROJECT TOTAL $414,000 $2101750 $203,250
*Percentage Includes 'Overhead
PAGE 7 OF 7