HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 09/26/1989 v ,
v ail Lee Mudgett
s 3125 Ardillaa Road
Atascadero, Calif
93422
September 26, 1989
Mr. Chairman andMembers of the Atascadero City Council
This statement is regarding Drainage, r'jr-osion, and Seismic Hazard. =,
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to hear of my anger and deep concern
about two components of our State required Safety Element,- the nine year lack
of a City-wide Drainage Plan, and the lack of heeding the excellent Seismic,
Landslide, and Geological component in our Safety Element.
Only having the General Plan for one day previous to my August 24th Statement
I did not spot that one inch, powerful paragraph on page 116, mandating a
comprehensive flood control and drainage system for the Colony of Atascadero,
which was to be combined with the street and sewer improvements. On August
24th I spoke only from my sense of what-a city drainage system should be. In
my 19th Statement to the Planning Commission I emphasized the nine year lack of
that component of the Safety Element.
Mrs. Karen Caniarlio, a neighbor on our Block, and I spent two hours with Mr.
Sensebauath on the 15th, during which he said that the City was too poor for a ---
combination of City wide Drainage with the Street and Sewer Improvements. In
fact, he said that neither the City Council nor the Planning Commission had
authority over his work, - that the only relationship was with the budget. Is
that true? Do you have only the power of the purse strings over Mr. Sensebaugh?
It j,-as not drainage that aroused my anger before our meeting on August 24th
with :qtr. Windsor, Mrs. Bora=eson, and Mr. Sensebaugh with my Block neiaghbors.
It was what I had read about seismic activity on the hill above me BEFCRE my
Purchase of the General Plan. I read/in a copy of the 1977 Advisory Report,
loaned to me by my neighbor Dolores Berry. After my purchase of the General
Plan, for twenty dollars, she and I compared the 1977 Report with the General
Plan and found that the scientific Advisory Report had been incorporated into
i
2
the General Plan, with its maps and tables.
When I read what then became Faze 139 of the General Plan, I was truly alarmed.
I quote: "Thouarhtful Land Use decisions are fundamental to seismic safety. We
should not erect a structure or carry out_-;grading on ground that is subject to
high levels of seismic activity, or other geologic hazards until the conse-
quences have been evaluated and the work approved by competent professionals.
To this end no structure should be built unless geologists, architects, soil
engineers, and builders, AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY ARE SATISFIED THAT ADEQUATE
STANDARDS DESIGNED TO PREVENT LIFE THREATENING COLLAPSE OR DAMAGE IN FUTURE
EARTHQUAKES." Unquote. The emphasis is mine. See �!�
pages;22,24,and 141.
The Table of Contents in the General Plan indicates in Chaters X and XJ, from
pante 133 to 14 6, thirteen pages no less, that THAT portion of our Safety
Element was well researched and made a part of the General Plan. WHY has it
not been heeded? WHY are lots being sold on that unstable hill despite the
great safety warning of our General Plan? Is it not exposing people and
structures to geologic hazards? CES covers that: . See page 299 for the list
of Significant Effects!
I have also read in my own search that development is not a right, but a
priviledare. Much knowledge has come to light and many laws have been enacted
since 1914, when Mx. Lewis plotted those beautiful lots on that hill above us.
When Mr. Sensebaugh in his response to my August 24th Statement stated, "I do
not read the General Plan." I was deeply shocked and I said as much that day
to him and the group. I have not gotten over being shocked that our City
Engineer would contemptiously dismiss my quotes from the General Plan, this
City's Constitution:
I shall briefly go over my Statements and Letters for the main points: When I
first called the City a-, ia*ineer I asked for a copy of the State Law on Grading
and Bulldozing_ . I knew one existed. Mr. Sensebaugh came out without a copy
11 of either the State Law or the City Ordinance. When I complained, Mr. Barnes
the engineer/Owner in chaste of the bulldozing said, "Mrs. Mudgett, I don't
have to have a copy of the law. I just go to the city." To which I responded,
"I like to do my own reading."
3
Two or three days later I received from Mr. De Camp a copy of Page 763 of the
Uniform Building Code with the yellow pencil underlining u Section 7003
and Point 8, Which allowed the bulldozing with no permit if the cuts were under
two feet. HOWEVER, I read Point 1, which in effect says a permit IS required
if damage is apparent to private property. Pulverizing alluvial soil above
my property just before the rainy season invites a sea of mud down on my property.
QUESTIONS: Why was Point One skipped? Why also did he skip the deep grading
being done south of me on the side of that steep hill, to dig out a road? There
was NO permit for that? See pages 21 and 141 of the General Plan.
K N
I go to Page One of �.r. Windsors August 31st reply to my August 24 Statement. `
I'll mention the 3rd line in Paragraph 3. I quote: "The zoning ordinance con-
tains Section, etc.,, which declare as categorically exempt from CEQA proposed
grading on terrain with slope$ LESS than 20%, that will involve less than 5,000
cubic yards of earth _moving." Unquote. I turned to Page 21 of the General Plan!
The part of the map in gray indicates $orpes GREATER THAN 30%, and: I found that
the hill above us was all in gray! SO, CEQA is NOT categorically- exempt! Was
this pure deceit to agreyhead, who could not possibly know the percentages of
grades? Or know where to find the State and City law for its application? Or is
it just that ASr aosn t read or study our General Plan either?
On page 2 of his letter he indicates ONLY a Drainage Plan is needed to go ahead
on that major grading for a road on that unstable hill! See pages 22 and 24.
On August 31st, Mr. Windsor included a copy of the 1986 Contract on Atascadero
y� Road Construction with Mr. Gordon Davis with Mr. Btl Sensebaugh, signing. I
i` have asked for the files on that contract on that high risk hill project. See
my September 4th letter to Mr. Windsor about our City daring to approve building
and grading on that unstable hill. I wrote to him that our City Council should
not deceive buyers of lots on that beautiful hill, when our General Plan calls
►' it a po6tential seismic hazard.
YY September 9th letter: No response has been made to correct bulldozing and
fill-in of an old ddep, natural ditch, whidh has been the result of years of
4
drainage from the high curve in the hill above, with the run-off converging
into that natural drain. Nor has anything been planted on the hill above us,
which the City allowed to be cleared and pulverized. And the rainy season
approaches.
This City faces law suits as a result of its ignoring the safety rights of its
citizens, simply because two components of our Safety Element haYtbeen ignored.
Finally in desparation, because my questions and requests to see the files were
not being answered, I sent a certified letter to Mayor Rollin Dexter, on
September 13. I have not received a reply as yet. I, as a citizen of this
City have the right to the public information of our City Government.
Since now I address my complaints to you, the City Council, I shall quote a
portion of my letter to Mayor Dexter:
"Did the Sensebauah/Davis Contract ignore the advice and strictcures of the 1969
California Environmental (Ality Act and of our own 1980 General Plan? And did
the City Council ignore the General Plan, too, when they approved that 1986
Road Contract? Do you not have the power of the budget over our City Engineer?
Mr. Sensebaugh said to me on the 15th, that the Budget items are directly
related to you, and I assume that the Budget requires your approval of the
f Contract of 1986.
Thank you very nch,
1 '
Gail Lee Mudgett
BOYD C. SHARITZ
CITY CLERK
A G E N D A
ATASCADERO. CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6500 PALMA
FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM
SEPTEMBER 26, 1989
7:00 P.M.
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, -a'
City Council Comment: 0-°A"` �$
Introduction of Assistant Finance Director, Rudy Hernandez
- Proclamation: "Mental Illness Awareness Week" , October 1-7, ,
1989
COMMUNITY FORUM:
The City Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and
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, �Jv
unless Council authorizes an extension. g � Rs
* 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 CouncilMember, commissions &
staff.
1. . PRESENTATION BY WARNER BROS., RE FILMING SCHEDULE '
� f
H A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are considered
to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form
listed below. There will be no separate discussion 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 Con-
sent Calendar.
1. SEPTEMBER 12, 1989 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
2. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT - JULY 1989
}
3. FINANCE DIRECTOR' S REPORT - AUGUST 1989
4. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - JULY 1989
5. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - AUGUST 1989
'_x s 6. REQUEST BY THE CITYOFSAN LUIS OBISPO FOR SUPPORT IN ASKING `
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES TO SPONSOR LEGISLATION ENABLING
CITY-SPONSORED BUSINESS SIGN PROGRAMS ALONG STATE HIGHWAYS
7. RESOLUTION NO. 71-89 PROCLAIMING THE MONTHS OF SEPTEMBER,
OCTOBER, NOVEMBER & `DECEMBER AS "GOOD NEIGHBOR" MONTHS
(United Way/Neighbors Helping Neighbors)
8. FIRE, EMERGENCY MEDICAL AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL MASTER PLAN
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
9. AWARD OF BIDS - RESURFACING PROJECT
10. ELIMINATION OF CROSSWALK AT ARCADE & EL CAMINO REAL
11. AUTHORIZE AMENDMENT TO AUDITOR' S CONTRACT TO REFLECT IN-
>G/ CREASED COMPENSATION ($2,000) FOR SANITATION DISTRICT AUDIT
e12. RESOLUTION NO. 72-89 APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT
FUNDS UNDER THE ROBERTI-Z'BERG-HARRIS URBAN OPEN SPACE AND
RECREATION PROGRAM FOR THE ATASCADERO' LAKE PAVILION.
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES:
1. APPEAL BY TOM VAUGHAN OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF TEN-
TATIVE PARCEL MAP 23-88 - PROPOSED DIVISIONOFTWO LOTS OF
18.78 ACRES INTO 4 PARCELS OF 4 .5 ACRES EACH ( 10750 Santa
Ana Rd.;)
2
r
n
•
C. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1. DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT AGREEMENTS (3) (City of Atascadero w/:
B.I.A./J. Stinchfield/D. Smith) (Cont'd from 8/22/89 &
9/12/89)
2. CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION FINANCING:
A. RESOLUTION NO. 68-89 - AUTHORIZATING'THE ISSUANCE OF
$2,000,000 IN CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION
B. RESOLUTION NO. 70-89 AMENDING THE BUDGET TO RECEIVE
THE PROCEEDS FROM THE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION
3.. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
D. INDIVIDUAL;DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION;
1. City Council:
A. Committee Reports (The following represents ad hoc or
standing commitees . Informative status reports will be
given, as felt ,necessary. ) :
1 . City/School Committee (Nothing to report)
2 . North Coastal Transit (Nothing to report)
3 . S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council (Nothing to re-
port
4 . Traffic Committee (See Item A-10)
5. Solid/Hazardous Waste 'Mgmt. Committee (Nothing to
report)
6 . Recycling Committee (Nothing to report)
7 . Economic Opportunity Commission (Nothing
to re-
port)port)
8 . Finance Committee (See Item C-2)
9 . B.I .A. _ (See Item C-1)
10. Downtown Steering Committee (Nothing to report)
11 . Interim Growth Management Committee (Nothing to
report)
12 General Plan Subcommittee (Nothing to report)
2 City,Attorney
3. City Clerk
4.. City Treasurer
5. City Manager
** COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO A-CLOSED SESSION IN THE 4TH FLOOR
CLUB ROOM FOR DISCUSSION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9(b) , SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION; SAID MEETING
WILL ADJOURN TO A CLOSED SESSION ON WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27,
3
0
1989 AT 3:00 P.M. , ROOM 207, FOR DISCUSSION CONCERNING' EM-
PLOYEE SALARIES AND BENEFITS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54957.6.
I
4
P R O C L A M A T I O N
"MENTAL ILLNESS AWARENESS WEEK"
October 1-7, 1989
WHEREAS, Mental illness is a problem of grave concern and
consequence in American society and is widely, but unnecessarily,
feared and misunderstood;
WHEREAS, More than 10,000,000 people in the United States
are disabled for long periods of time by schizophrenia, manic
depressive disorders and major depression;
WHEREAS, Between 30 and 50 percent of homeless people suffer
serious and chronic forms of mental illness;
WHEREAS, Mental disorders result in staggering economic
costs to society, which are estimated to be in excess of $40
billion annually and include direct treatment and support costs,
as well as indirect costs, such as lost productivity;
WHEREAS, Mental illness is an increasingly treatable disa-
bility with excellent prospects for remedy and recovery when
properly recognized;
WHEREAS, Appropriate treatment of mental illness is cost
effective because it restores productivity, reduces utilization
of other health services and lessens social dependence;
WHEREAS, Individuals with mental illnesses and their fami-
lies have begun to join self-help groups to combat the unfair
stigma of the diseases, support greater investment in research
and advocate an adequate continuum of care from hospital to
community;
WHEREAS, Unprecedented major research developments in recent
years have added new methods and technology to the sophisticated
and objective study of the functioning of the brain and its link-
ages to normal and abnormal behavior;
WHEREAS, Research in recent decades has led to a wide array
of new and more effective somatic and psychosocial methods of
treatment for some of the most incapacitating forms of mental
illness, including schizophrenia, major affective disorders,
phobias, and phobic disorders;
WHEREAS, Recent and unparalleled growth in scientific know-
ledge about mental illness has generated the current emergence of
a new threshold of opportunity for future research advances and
fruitful application to specific clinical problems;
WHEREAS, Serious mental illnesses such as schizophrenia and
the major depressions are now known to be diseases of the brain
and not caused by individual weaknesses or poor family life;
WHEREAS, Persons with mental illnesses and their families
are stigmatized by the myths and prejudices surrounding mental
illness and are thereby doubly victimized by the illness;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, that the Council of the
City of Atascadero is pleased to recognize National Mental
Illness Awareness Week as a way to reduce stigma and promote
understanding of the mentally ill and their families; and
BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED, that the City Council commends the
70,000 member families of the National Alliance for the Mentally
Ill (NAMI) who have joined together to support each other and
their loved ones and to educate the American people on the plight
of the mentally ill; and
BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED, that the City of Atascadero joins
NAMI in urging the Federal Government to increase appropriations
of the National Institute for Mental Health for research on ser-
ious mental illnesses.
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
City of Atascadero, CA
September 26, 1989
MEETINGAGENDA
DATE L226/89 ITEM! --A A-1
•
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 12, 1989
The regular meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to
order at 7:00 p .m. by Mayor Dexter , followed by the Pledge of
Allegiance lead by City Manager , Ray Windsor .
ROLL CALL:
All Present : Councilmembers Shiers , Lilley, Borgeson, Mackey and
Mayor Dexter
Staff: Ray Windsor , City Manager ; Henry ' Engen, Community
Development Director ; Paul Sensibaugh , Public Works
Director ; Chief Bud McHale, Police Department ; Jeff
Jorgensen, City Attorney; Andy Takata, Director of
Parks, Recreation and zoo ; Mark Joseph , Director of
Administrative Services; Chief Mike Hicks, Fire
Department ; and Boyd Sharitz , City Clerk .
Maggie Rice from the Chamber of Commerce Office presented City
Manager , Ray Windsor , with a bouquet of balloons in honor of his
one year anniversary with the City of Atascadero .
CITY COUNCIL COMMENT:
Mayor Dexter said he had received a letter regarding MIA 's and
POW ' s. Beginning on the 15th of September time is to be
dedicated in their honor and remembrance.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Maggie Rice representing the Colony Days Committee stated that
the annual celebration founding of the City of Atascadero 76
years ago will take place 5 weeks from now. She asked for
support of this event by the purchase of a Colony Day Button.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
1 . AUGUST 22, 1989 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10-89, 12500 SANTA ANA ROAD — Request
to allow the subdivision of 10.51 acres into two lots of
• approximately 5.26 ac. each. (Master Mortgage Co./Volbrecht
Surveys) .
3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 11-89, 905 EL CAMINO REAL — Request to
divide one parcel containing 102.9 ac. into two lots
containing 10.3 ac. and 92.6 ac. (Rochelle/Webb)
•
4. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-87, 9505 EL CAMINO REAL- Request for
a one year time extension for TTM 14-87 to August 11 , 1990
(Hendrix/Westland Engineering)
5. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15-89, 5900 BAJADA- Request to consider
amendment to a previously approved condominium tract map to
allow an addition to Unit #1 (Low/Cuesta Engineering)
6. FINAL PARCEL MAP 17-88, 11200 SANTA ANA ROAD —Acceptance
of Final Parcel Map 17-88, subdividing three parcels
totaling 17.20 acres into four parcels of 4.3 ac. each (Kamm
& Dohan Partnership)
7. RESOLUTION NO 63-89 - INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGN ON AMAPOA
AVE. AT PORTOLA ROAD
8. RESOLUTION NO. 64-89 - ACCEPTANCE OF ALEGRE AVE. INTO THE
CITY MAINTAINED SYSTEM
9. PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS FOR THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
ANNUAL CONFERENCE:
A. RESOLUTION NO. 65-89 - PETITIONING THE LEAGUE OF CA. •
CITIES FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF STATE LEGISLATION TO
ALLOW STATUTE CITIES TO DETERMINE AND ESTABLISH SPEED
LIMITS ON ROADWAYS WITHIN 'THEIR CITY LIMITS.
B. RESOLUTION NO. 66-89 - PETITIONING THE LEAGUE OF CA.
CITIES FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF STATE LEGISLATION TO
REQUIRE THE CALIFORNIA DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION TO
PROVIDE CERTAIN MINIMUM PARTICIPATION FOR THE COSTS OF
STATE HIGHWAY INTERCHANGES
10. AWARD LAND APPRAISAL CONTRACT TO DENNIS GREENE, M.A. I .
(Formerly awarded to Robert Harrison, M.A. I . )
11 . AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE (3) POLICE CARS AS PER F.Y. 1989-
90 BUDGET.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 69-89 - RENEWAL OF ANNUAL CONTRACT WITH
COOPERATIVE PERSONNEL SERVICES.
City Manager , Ray Windsor , asked that items A-8 and A-11 be
pulled from the Consent Calendar .
Councilwoman Borgeson asked that item A-7 be pulled from the
Consent Calendar .
Councilman Lilley asked that item A-9 (b ) be pulled from the •
Consent Calendar .
Item A-7:
Staff report was given by Paul Sensibaugh', Public Works Director .
Council discussion followed . Mr . Sensibaugh said he would be
billing the developer for the cost of the stop sign.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey
to approve Resolution No . 63-89. Passed unanimously by
roll call vote.
Item A-8 & A-11 :
City Manager , Ray Windsor , asked for a continuance of Items A-8
and A-11 .
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey
to continue Items A-8 and A-11 until the next council
meeting. Passed unanimously.
Item A-9 B:
City Manager , Ray Windsor , stated he would like to make a
modification to the actual recommendation. Instead of splitting
it out showing 100% of State involvement in interchanges that
involve two state highways, and 50'% where a state highway
intersects with a local highway, we would like to ask for 100%
wherever a state highway is involved in any improvement
involving state facilities. The next to the last paragraph in
Resolution 66-89 will now read : 100% of the cost of future
improvements to State Highway interchanges and appurtenances
within the State right of way. The last paragraph will be
deleted .
Motion: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson
for approval of Resolution 66-89 with the above
amendment . Passed unanimously by roll call vote.
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES:
1 . CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO REMOVE A HERITAGE TREE, 7100
CRISTOBAL (Mayhew - Digger Pine)
Staff report was given by Henry Engen, Community Development
Director with the recommendation for approval of the tree removal
as recommended by the Arborist , Art Tonneson.
Councilmembers Lilley, Borgeson and Shiers complimented Lisa
Schicker , City Arborist for fine report done on this item.
Mayor Dexter asked for Public Comment .
Ann Valentine-Acrey asked where these replacement trees would be
placed . Mr . Engen responded that they will be placed at the rear
of the property, not where the present trees are.
Kenneth Mayhew, applicant , said the new trees will be replaced 90
feet from the house, the present trees are 15 and 20 feet from
the house.
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey
to approve the tree removal permit request at 7100
Cristobal in accord with staff recommendations .
Passed unanimously.
2. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO REMOVE A HERITAGE TREE, 9210
LAS LOMAS (Brown - Digger Pine)
Staff report was given by Henry Engen, Community Development
Director with the recommendation for approval of the tree removal
as recommended by the arborist , Chuck Scovill .
Councilwoman Borgeson stated that when she visited the site the
tree was not marked with a ribbon. A ribbon isn ' t only for the
benefit of the Council , but for the community as well so that
they are aware that a tree could be removed .
Ann Valentine-Acrey commented asked what type of replacement tree
will be used and where will it be planted . Mr . Engen responded
that it would be a Digger Pine that would be replaced on the rear
of the property away from the structure.
MOTION: By Councilman Shiers, seconded by Councilman Lilley to 0
approve the request to remove a Heritage Digger Pine at
9210 Las Lomas as recommended by the Arborist . Passed
unanimously.
C. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1 . RESPONSE TO GEORGE HIGHLAND'S QUESTIONS OF 8/22/89 RE: THE
HIRING OF A CITY FORESTER/ARBORIST
Staff report was given by Henry Engen, Community Development
Director .
Council discussion followed .
George Highland commented that what he has brought up has nothing
to do with his position as a Planning Commissioner . He could be
identified as something else, possibly former Councilman or a
long time resident , or "gadfly" . This has nothing to do with his
position as a Planning Commissioner . He has a real problem with
the interpretation of the Brown Act . It says in the Public
Comment Section that Council is prohibited from taking action on
anything that is not an agenda item. He feels that this does not
preclude a discussion or explanation, etc . As soon as the
meeting was over three weeks ago , the City Manager and City
Attorney answered the questions of the press and they appeared in
the newspaper the next day. He feels that it should have been
answered at the Council meeting . He does not agree with the City
Manager ' s statement regarding the tree replacement fund as far as
4
the City being between Ordinances at this time. There is an
ordinance on the books at this time, and it is in effect . We are
going through revisions of the General Plan now, are we between
General Plans? The Tree Ordinance contains a specific exemption
where the property is too heavily covered with trees. He has a
problem with the way that this is being done. The City can
continue on the way it has or you can stop collecting the
donations until there is proper authorization or you could stop
accepting these "donations" and even go so far as to refund the
donations that have been collected . " Or you could pass an urgency
ordinance and make it retroactive. The way it has been done,
'some of the credibility of the Council may have been destroyed .
Mildred Coplan representing Atascadero 2000 said the Tree
Replacement Fund in the Tree Ordinance has merit and few would
argue against the idea but it is alleged that money is being
collected and placed in a tree replacement ' fund without the
benefit of any rule or ordinance. She does not feel it is
important to know how much money is in that fund , but the
requirement be made legal and open by enacting an ordinance for
such or that the practice cease. Those elected and hired
officials can make the determination as to what to do with the
money that is in the fund that was collected without benefit of .
an ordinance requiring it , and or , the elected officials can do
whatever is required to form the ordinance as soon as possible.
Dave Baker , North County Contractors Association, stated that
this fund brings concerns from his constituency. Those in the
building industry have been subject to many different kinds of
fees in lieu of taxation authorization that was preempted by
Prop . 13. They as a group are not opposed to the concept of the
replacement fund . They are concerned that these fees are being
collected without the basis of an ordinance.
Anne Valentine-Acrey, 3518 E1 Camino Real , #221 , Atascadero will
be sent provisions of the Municipal Code dealing with rules of
conduct at meetings by City Attorney, Jeff Jorgensen.
Mr . Highland responded that he is in full support of tree
ordinance, and he can support the tree replacement fund . He has
no problems with it at all , he is only questioning the
methodology.
Mayor Dexter asked that this be referred back to staff. He said
he would appreciate Mr . Highland ' s and Mr . Baker ' s participation
in the items they raised .
Council discussion followed .
City Attorney, Jeff Jorgenson, said the City established a Tree
Replacement Fund and has the authority to do so' and has lawfully
establish a fund and that fund was initially established in
5
response to mitigation measures required as part of a County
project . There was a donation to the City of $1 ,500 for a County
project and that is what initiate the creation of the replacement
fund . He believes the City has the flexibility administratively
to allow an applicant -- where they would otherwise be required
to put in a replacement tree -- to make a contribution in lieu of
actually planting that replacement tree if they so wish . To the
extent that the City wishes to continue with that policy, that is
supportable. Mr . Highland is raising one question that has
validity, and that is where the arborist has made a specific
finding that the lot is so covered with trees that tree
replacement would not be warranted , then he would agree with Mr .
Highland that there is no current authority to do that . In some
of the instances where there have been contributions made to the
fund, where there have been multiple trees removed , if the City
wishes you have independent authority outside of the tree
ordinance to require mitigation measures when multiple trees are
removed and one of them could be a contribution to the fund . Mr .
Highland has a good point that we ought to clarify the ordinance.
Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director , responded that
approximately $3,700 is in this fund as of two months ago .
2. STATUS REPORT ON CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION FINANCING
IMPLEMENTATION (Finance Committee)
Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director , gave the staff
report . He then introduced Jerry Laster who answered questions
from the Council .
Council discussion followed .
There was no public comment .
It was the consensus of the Council to have the Administrative
Services Director and City Attorney to make modifications to the
proposal and bring this item back at the next Council meeting .
MAYOR DEXTER CALLED FOR A 10 MINUTE RECESS AT 8:40 P.M. MEETING
RECONVENED AT 8:50 P.M.
3. GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE:
Staff report was given by Henry Engen, Community Development
Director with the recommendation to approve Resolution No . 67-89
for the City Manager to convey to the County Board of
Supervisors.
Council discussion followed .
6
Henry Engen will give Council a quarterly monitoring report .
A. RESOLUTION NO. 67-89 - CONCERNING THE IMPACT OF THE
PROPOSED S.L.O. COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ON THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey
to approve Resolution No . 67-89. Passed unanimously by
roll call vote.
B. FISCAL ANALYSIS STUDY/PLANNING MODEL
Staff report was given by Ray Windsor , City Manager .
Council questions and discussion followed .
There was no public comment .
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Lilley
to authorize staff to develop requests for proposals in
order to obtain input on the cost to undertake the
fiscal planning model . Passed unanimously.
4. AWARD BIDS FOR SAN ANDRES STORM SEWER PROJECT
Staff report was given by Paul Sensibaugh , Public Works Director
with the recommendation to award the bid to R. Baker in the
amount of $94 ,248.50.
MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey, seconded by Councilman Lilley to
award the bid to R. Baker from Arroyo Grande in the
amount of $94 ,248.50. Passed by roll call vote 4: 1
with Councilwoman Borgeson voting no .
5. RESOLUTION NO. 62-69 - REDUCTION OF SPEED LIMIT ON A PORTION
OF SANTA LUCIA AVENUE
Staff report was given by Paul Sensibaugh , Public Works Director
with the recommendation that the speed limit be reduced to 25 MPH
on Santa Lucia from Ardilla to San Andres.
Council discussion followed .
MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilwoman
Mackey to approve Resolution No . 62-89. Passed
unanimously by roll call vote.
6. STATUS ON AIR POLLUTION POLICY - MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION
• PROGRAM
Staff report was given by Paul Sensibaugh , Public Works Director
with the recommendation that Council request the APCB to obtain
7
more information on the MVIP considering more refined locations
for determining non-attainment , atmospheric and geographic
conditions for different localities, the target vehicles , a
cost/benefit analysis, and alternatives to the plan.
Council discussion followed with Councilmembers Lilley and Mackey
expressing their concerns that this might have been rushed
through because of a time limit . Councilman Lilley said he is
not convinced that this is the most cost efficient alternative.
MOTION: By Mayor Dexter , seconded by Councilman Shiers to
authorize the City Manager to write a letter indicating
Council has considered the MVIP and gave approval and
express the concerns of the Council regarding cost
effectiveness of this program. Passed by 3:2 vote with
Councilmembers Lilley and Mackey voting no .
7. DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT AGREEMENTS (3) (City of Atascadero w/:
H. I .A./J. Stinchfield/D. Smith)
City Manager , Ray Windsor , asked that this item be continued
until the next Council meeting
8. ATASCADERO LAKE PAVILION REPLACEMENT - STEERING COMMITTEE
SELECTION
The following fifteen members will be serving on the Atascadero
Lake and Pavilion Steering Committee:
Councilmember Alden Shiers
Councilmember Bob Lilley
Chairman Tom Bench , Parks and Recreation Commission
Diana Cooper , Parks and Recreation Commissioner
Anne Marie Kirkpatrick - Member at Large
James Herman - Member at Large
Steve La Salle - Member at Large
Will Lewis - Member at Large
Lynn Lochridge - Member at Large
Barbara Combs - Member at Large
A member of the Zoological Society or Zoo Advisory Committee
Recreation Systems, Inc . Representative (Chairman)
A member of the Parks, Recreation and Zoo Staff
Maggie Rice, Chamber of Commerce
Shirley Summers - Member at Large
D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION:
Mayor Dexter reported that he had attended the last board meeting
and also the ground breaking for the Homeless Shelter .
DOWNTOWN STEERING COMMITTEE:
8
Henry Engen, Community Development Director , reported that the
group had met last week .
GENERAL PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE:
Henry Engen, Community Development Director , said the
subcommittee met on August 24.
John Himes of the BIA said they are interested in earning money
at the Colony Days for the Street Lighting Project by having a
dunk tank .
"INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
CITY COUNCIL:
Mayor Dexter expressed concern of the misspelling of Spanish
names that are being used for street names and said he would be
willing to assist staff with this.
CITY ATTORNEY:
Jeff Jorgensen said he had accepted a position with the City of
San Luis Obispo as their City Attorney effective 11/10/89. He
appreciated the opportunity of having served the City of
Atascadero as the City Attorney.
Councilwoman Borgeson thanked Mr . Jorgensen for his past work and
direction to the City Council . She asked that staff prepare
something that is appropriate for his leaving the City of
Atascadero .
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:25 P.M. TO A CLOSED SESSION ON WEDNESDAY
SEPTEMBER 13, 1989 AT 3:00 P.M. IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE,
ROOM 207, FOR DISCUSSION CONCERNING EMPLOYEE SALARIES AND
BENEFITS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6.
MINUTES RECORDED BY:
BOYD SHARITZ, CITY CLERK
PREPARED BY
GIA ftAMIREZt, ACTING PUTY CITY CLERK
9
p AGENDA
j 926/89 ITE -
• CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE OF DISBURSEMENTS
FINANCE DIRECTOR' S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF JULY, 1989
DISBURSEMENTS
Hand Warrant Register for July, 1989 62 ,838.72
07/07/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 104 ,695.20
07/21/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 460 ,316.05
Service Charge-Mastercard/Visa 5.00
Wires for June 365,000.00
07/05/89 Payroll Checks #46563-46725 112 ,604. 49
07/19/89 Payroll Checks #46726-46868 108,882.66
Total 1,214,342. 12
LESS:
Voided Check #46737 32.00
Voided Check #46918 130. 00
Voided Check #46919 200. 00
Voided Check #46920 89. 96
Voided Check #46921 2 ,647. 75
Voided Check #46922 97.50
• Voided Check #46923 95.00
Voided Check #46934 8.20
Voided Check #47045 461. 84
Voided Check #47084 3,491. 00
Voided Check #47130 1,455. 71
Voided Check #47116 1,200.00
Voided Check #44013 162. 45
Voided Check #46764 75.00
Voided Check #44363 50 ,707.22
Total Disbursements 1,153,488. 49
I, MARK A. JOSEPH, do hereby certify and declare that
demands enumerated and referred to in the foregoing register
are accurate and just claims against the City and that there
are funds available for payment thereof in the City Treasury.
The breakdown detail on all accounts is available for your
viewing in the Finance office.
MARK A. JOSE
Administrat ' e Services Director
MEET! AGENDADAT 9E ,_26/ 9 ITEM#
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE OF DISBURSEMENTS
FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST, 1989
DISBURSEMENTS
Hand Warrant Register for August, 1989 4,730. 84
08/04/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 145 ,796.12
08/11/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 74,013.24
08/18/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 242,454.44
Service Charge-Mastercard/Visa 5.00
Wires for August 1,000,000.00
08/02/89 Payroll Checks #46869-47015 110,502. 39
08/16/89 Payroll Checks #47016-47164 110 ,396.00
08/30/89 Payroll Checks #47165-47355 111,759.27
Total 1,799,657. 30
LESS:
Voided Check #47307 21. 00
Voided Check #47101 200. 00
Voided Check #44373 3.00
• Total Disbursements 1,799 ,433. 30
I, MARK A. JOSEPH, do hereby certify and declare that
demands enumerated and referred to in the foregoing register
are accurate and just claims against the City and that there
are funds available for payment thereof in the City Treasury.
The breakdown detail on all accounts is available for your
viewing in the Finance office.
MARK A. JOSEPH
• Administrative Serv' es Director
MEETING AGENDA
i DATE 9//26/89 1TEM#i AAS_
• CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE OF CASH RECEIPTS AND TRANSFERS IN
TREASURER' S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF JULY, 1989
CASH RECEIPTS :
Taxes :
Development Impact Tax 160. 00
Occupancy Tax 13,437. 77
Sales Tax 106 ,400.00
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 79 ,266.58
Cigarette Tax 3,341.24
Off-Highway Vehicles 234. 37
Administration Building State Grant 87,048. 53
Sanitation Fees 8,632.00
Licenses/Permits/Fees 45 ,850. 75
Tree Replacement 5 ,100.00
Fines/Penalties/Overages 116. 99
Investment Earnings 807. 82
Recycling Program 19. 51
Sales-Maps/Publications/Reports 350. 30
Rents/Concessions 117. 98
Police Services 132. 00
• Parks and Recreations Fees 13,412.12
Local Transportation 2 ,416. 20
Development Fees 26 ,503. 00
Zoo Reserve 75. 00
Zoo Receipts 7,240.51
Miscellaneous 1, 889. 62
TOTAL CASH RECEIPTS 402 ,552.29
OTHER CASH RECEIPTS:
Prepaid Insurance-Sanitation 32 ,000.00
Refunds 356. 32
Bail/Refundable Bonds 5,132.00
Reimbursement to Expense 918. 14
TOTAL OTHER CASH RECEIPTS 38 ,406. 46
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO •
CASH ACTIVITY SUMMARY
TREASURER' S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF JULY, 1989
BEGINNING CASH RESOURCES 7,213,027. 82
ADD:
PRIOR YEAR REVENUE RECEIVED JULY 274 ,717 . 94
RECEIPTS 440,958. 75
LESS:FUND TRANSFERS 400,000. 00
DISBURSEMENTS 788,488. 49
FUND TRANSFERS 400 ,000. 00
ENDING CASH RESOURCES 7,140 ,216.02
SCHEDULE OF CASH RESOURCES 'Int. Due
AS OF JULY 31, 1989 Rate Date
Checking Account:
Mid-State Bank 159 ,619. 08
Certificates of Deposit:
Butterfield Savings 99 ,000. 00 9.25 12/12/89
First Cal Savings 99 ,000. 00 10. 38 08/22/89 •
Other Investments :
Local Agency Inv Fund 3,865 ,000. 00 9.06 N/A
Fed Home Loan Bank
Discount Note-City 488,947.22 8. 97 09/29/89
Fed Home Loan Bank
Discount Note-Sanit. 937,537. 50 9.12 10/24/89
Fed Farm Credit Note 502 ,263. 89 10.16 09/01/89
Banker's Acceptance-City 988 ,308.33 9. 39 08/08/89
Other Cash Resources :
Petty Cash 540.00
TOTAL CASH RESOURCES 7 ,140 ,216.02
GERE SIBBACH 1.4
City Treasurer
•
AGEND
• OATT'9E� 26/89 ITEM �-5
• CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE OF CASH RECEIPTS AND TRANSFERS IN
TREASURER'S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST, 1989
CASH RECEIPTS:
Taxes :
Property Taxes 40,955.05
Occupancy Tax 18,622.11
Sales Tax 141,900.00
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 61,327.22
Cigarette Tax 3,692. 86
Miscellaneous Taxes 123.61
Gas Tax 54,404. 75
Weed Abatement 389. 73
Sanitation Fees 12 ,847. 46
Licenses/Permits/Fees 67,033. 75
Franchise Fees 4,413. 30
Fines/Penalties/Overages 885. 07
Investment Earnings 14 ,033. 52
P.O.S.T. Reimbursement 766.20
Sale of Property 1,687. 50
• Sales-Maps/Publications/Reports 577. 37
Rents/Concessions '130.10
Police Services 154.00
Parks and Recreation Fees 27,341.19
Traffic Safety 7,795. 34
Local Transportation 3,039. 45
Development Fees 57,359. 00
Lake/Park Concessions 3,819.46
Assessments (Districts 3, 4 & 5) 1,497.62
Zoo Receipts 8,076. 72
Amapoa-Tecorida 930. 32
Miscellaneous 2 ,444.27
Federal Aid Urban (FAU) 89 ,709. 97
TOTAL CASH RECEIPTS 625 ,956. 94
OTHER CASH RECEIPTS:
Refunds 5,350.96
Bail/Refundable Bonds 3,173.00
Reimbursement to Expense 2 ,156. 90
TOTAL OTHER CASH RECEIPTS 10,680. 86
CITY OF ATASCADERO •
CASH ACTIVITY SUMMARY
TREASURER' S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST, 1989
BEGINNING CASH RESOURCES 71140 ,216. 02
ADD:
PRIOR YEAR REVENUE RECEIVED AUGUST 4,202.01
RECEIPTS 636 ,637. 80
FUND TRANSFERS 1,050 ,000.00
LESS:
DISBURSEMENTS 799,433. 30
FUND TRANSFERS 1,038,308. 33
ENDING CASH RESOURCES 6,993,314.20
SCHEDULE OF CASH RESOURCES Int. Due
AS OF AUGUST 31, 1989 Rate Date
Checking Account:
Mid-State Bank 51,025.59
Certificates of Deposit:
Butterfield Savings 99 ,000.00 9.25 12/12/89
First Cal Savings 99,000.00 9. 00 02/21/90
Other Investments: •
Local Agency Inv Fund 4 , 815 ,000.00 8. 83 N/A
Fed Home Loan Bank
Discount Note-City 488,947.22 8. 97 09/29/89
Fed Home Loan Bank
Discount Note-Sanit. 937,537.50 9.12 10/24/89
Fed Farm Credit Note 502 ,263.89 10.16 09/01/89
Other Cash Resources :
Petty Cash 540. 00
TOTAL CASH RESOURCES 6 ,993,314.20
GERE SIBBACH
City Treasurer
•
M MEET:;:G AGENDA
DATE942W. 2- ITEM• _
7
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item:
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 9/26/89
From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:
Request by the City of San Luis Obispo for support for proposed
freeway business directory sign program.
RECOMMENDATION:
Support the City of San Luis Obispo' s draft resolution.
BACKGROUND:
As indicated in the attached staff report packet from the City of
• San Luis Obispo, they are seeking revisions to CalTrans' policies
to enable them to allow for City-sponsored business signage
similar to that along I-5 through their city. They are seeking
to provide for tasteful signage to direct travelers to local
businesses . Moreover, pressure for such signage is undoubtedly
occurring in response to their sign amortization program removing
signage that may have been visible from the freeway.
ISSUE :
under Section 2, item 1 of San Luis Obispo' s draft resolution,
they speak to a prerequisite for such a program that "the City or
County is actively pursuing a sign amortization program. . . " In
the case of Atascadero, it would be more beneficial to change the
language in that item to "a sign abatement program" in that we do .
not have an amortization schedule in our sign ordinance. Absent
the amortization program, Atascadero would not be able to pursue
this type of signage program were it to be enabled.
HE :ps
Attachment: City of San Luis Obispo Council Agenda Report and
Draft Resolution
•
411alig111U1101X11 city of san Luis OBISPO
ni;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
FROM: Randy Rossi, Interim Community Development Director; By: Gary Price ��
SUBJECT: Freeway Business Directory Sign Program
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a resolution asking the League of California Cities to sponsor enabling legislation
to allow city-sponsored business sign programs along state highways.
BACKGROUND
In concert with council direction, an ARC Subcommittee and staff are pursuing ways to
develop a directory sign program for freeway-oriented businesses. One of the main goals
has been to develop a uniform signing program in the freeway right-of-way. With the
exception of the logo identification sign program along rural Interstate 5, staff found
that the the California Department of Transportation (Cal Trans) restricts advertising
within freeway right-of-ways.
During several meetings with Cal Trans, representatives indicated that that agency would
be opposed to a logo sign program in urban areas where there is an abundance of
freeway-oriented signs and numerous freeway access ramps. A key element in their
opposition has been the concern for motorist safety due to distraction of advertising
signs. Cal Trans has also noted a concern that administering privately-sponsored sign
programs could lead to subjective judgements about appropriate sign design and
placement.
The subcommittee recognizes the validity of Cal Trans' concerns. We have designed a
freeway identification program which, we believe, responds to those concerns. The
program would require a change to the Streets and Highways Code, allowing cities or
counties to develop sign programs that would be reviewed and approved by Cal Trans.
Since Cal Trans personnel are reluctant to lend their support to such a change, it may be
difficult to get approval from the state legislature. The subcommittee is therefore
recommending that the city obtain support and sponsorship from the League of California
Cities for this legislation.
Attached are:
* A resolution to be adopted by the council, asking the League of California Cities to
sponsor enabling legislation to allow city- or county-sponsored business sign
programs along state highways.
* A resolution to be adopted by the League at its annual conference October 22 - 24,
1989, if recommended by its Transportation and Public Works Policy Committee. This
resolution says that the league will sponsor the legislation.
To address concerns of Cal Trans, the program would only apply to cities or counties
actively pursuing sign amortization programs which have demonstrated removal of larger
freeway-orientedbusiness identification and directional signs and billboards. To build
more objectivity into the program, Cal Trans would set standards and be responsible for
the administration of the program. Cal Trans could then standardize criteria for
Placement, number and size of signs. The participating city or county would be
responsible for the cost, design, installation and maintenance of freeway signing.
��hlllllll�A� city of san tins OBIspo
47 We
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Freeway signing
LEAGUE CONFERENCE PROCEDURES
To allow action at this year's League conference, the League resolution must be received
by the League by September 7, 1989. It would then be referred to the League's
Transportation and Public Works Policy Committee for review and recommendation. The
Policy committee will meet on September 21 or 22, 1989, to make preliminary
recommendations on resolutions. The committee will also meet Sunday afternoon, October
22, 1989, to finalize their recommendations to the General Resolutions Committee.
Council members are encouraged to attend these meetings to represent city support of the
resolution. During the general business session of the League Conference on October 24,
1989, the resolution would be finally considered by the General Assembly.
SUBCOMMITTEE COMMENTS
The Freeway Signing Subcommittee members have reviewed the league resolution and are
recommending the council forward it to the league as written, except that one member
wants to point out that the resolution says the signs will be paid for by cities or
counties. She felt the ultimate legislation should allow for the signs being paid for by
private groups, such as the Chamber of Commerce. Staff feels the resolution does not
preclude cities or counties from negotiating with business interest groups for the
production of signs.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING AN ACTION
• If the council does not support forwardingthe resolution the e subcommittee would not
pursue approaching the League of California Cities for sponsorship. Other means for
introducing legislation (such as through local representatives) may be attempted. If the
council no longer finds freeway right-of-way signing for businesses an appropriate method
to address these businesses' concerns, the subcommittee will consider other options, such
as allowing larger signs for businesses near the highway or providing limited signing on
private property that is visible from the highway.
Since the deadline for resolution submittal for the 1989 League Conference is September
7, 1989, the council should consider this item at tonight's meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution asking for the League of California Cities' sponsorship of
enabling legislation to allow city- or county-sponsored business sign programs along
state highways.
Attachments: draft resolutions
draft cover letter from the Mayor
excerpt from the California Strcct and Highways Code
•
RESOLUTION NO. (1989 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO ASKING THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
TO SPONSOR ENABLING LEGISLATION TO ALLOW CITY- OR COUNTY-
SPONSORED BUSINESS SIGN PROGRAMS ALONG STATE HIGHWAYS
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of the
subcommittee and staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings:
1. Title 4, Chapter 6 of the California Administrative Code restricts outdoor
advertising signs along highways to official, public utility, service club, public
directional and private directional signs; and
2. Section 101.7. of the California Streets and Highways Code allows the placement of
business logo information signs in advance of state highway exits along a section of
Interstate Route 5 to identify roadside businesses available to serve highway users;
and
3. The City of San Luis Obispo is actively pursuing a sign amortization program to
remove signs that clutter highways, distract the travelling public and block or
disrupt vistas and scenic resources along highways; and •
4. Many businesses, such as gas stations, motels and,restaurants along highways are
economically dependent on business from highway users attracted to and directed by
freeway-oriented signs.
SECTION 2. Reauest. That the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo requests
that the League of California Cities, assembled in Annual Conference in San Fransisco,
October 22 - 24, 1989, sponsor enabling legislation to allow cities to develop business
logo sign programs, similar to that used along Interstate Route 5, to allow for a uniform
method of business identification at convenient locations within the state highway
right-of-way in lieu of larger advertising signs and devices along the highway provided
that:
1. The city or county is actively pursuing a sign amortization program and has
satisfactorily demonstrated, to the California Department of Transportation, the
removal of larger freeway-oriented signs including, but not limited to business
identification and directional signs and billboards.
2. The city or county is responsible for the cost, design, installation and
maintenance of the sign program.
3. The design of the signage is consistent with standards adopted by the California
Department of Transportation.
4. The California Department of Transportation is responsible for the review and
approval of the sign program.
Freeway signing resolution
Page 2
On motion of , seconded by ,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1989
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
City Administrative Officer
City Attorney
Community Development Director
�ul�llllllullll�hl������� �►1111111111
o sa�n lugs ocityBis
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
5 September 1989
TO: League of California Cities
FROM: Ron Dunin, Mayor
SUBJECT: Freeway signing legislation request
The City of San Luis Obispo is asking for your help in developing legislation that would
allow cities to develop and install a business logo sign program for the state highways.
We have found that our sign regulations, which we feel in part makes San Luis Obispo an
attractive place to visit, do not provide the visibility needed by freeway-oriented
businesses, such as service stations or motels. Since 1977, when the city adopted a new
set of sign regulations, we have been working to eliminate the large pole signs that
existed before the regulations. But business owners tell us that the travelling public
search for specific logos ("Motel 6"). They are concerned that without the large signs
the public will not find them easily and their businesses will be significantly affected.
Getting these highway-oriented businesses to remove their large nonconforming signs or to
install smaller signs that conform with our current regulations has been a long,
difficult process involving countless applications for exceptions to the regulations. We
have spoken to representatives of cities throughout the state and found that similar
conflicts between esthetics and economics exist elsewhere as well.
The city's Architectural Review Commission appointed a subcommittee to explore ways to
address businesses' concerns without allowing the sign blight to continue. The option
that looks most promising to the subcommittee and the City Council is uniform signing
including logos within the highway rights-of-way. The California Department of
Transportation (Cal Trans) initiated such a program several years ago. A pilot program
on Interstate Route 5 is in place. After analysis of this program, Cal Trans determined
that this type signing would only be appropriate in rural areas, where distances between
exits are great and existing signing visible from the freeway is limited. Cal Trans
finds that a logo signing program would not be appropiate anywhere on Highway 101.
Our subcommittee has looked at Cal Trans' objections to the logo signing program and
developed conditions to respond to them. The attached resolution outlines the program we
think would work.
We are now asking that you sponsor legislation allowing cities to develop logo signing
programs at their own cost, with Cal Trans' review and approval. We feel that many
cities would benefit from this legislation, that freeway clutter would be reduced and
highway signing standardized, a boon to the travellers. Please refer the attached
resolution to your Transportation and Public Works Policy Committee for review. If you
have questions about the proposal, please call Gary Price, Associate Planner, at (805)
549-7169, or write to the above address.
•
RESOLUTION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES TO SPONSOR LEGISLATION
ALLOWING CITIES AND COUNTIES TO DEVELOP BUSINESS LOGO
SIGNING PROGRAMS FOR STATE HIGHWAYS
WHEREAS, Title 4, Chapter 6 of the California Administrative Code restricts
outdoor advertising signs along highways to official, public utility, service club,
public directional and private directional signs; and
WHEREAS, Section 101.7. of the California Streets and Highways Code allows the
placement of business logo information signs in advance of state highway exits along a
section of Interstate Route 5 to identify roadside businesses available to serve highway
users; and
WHEREAS, many cities and counties have removed larger business identification and
directional signs and billboards or are pursuing sign amortization programs to remove
signs that clutter highways, distract the travelling public and block or disrupt vistas
and scenic resources along highways; and
WHEREAS, many businesses, such as gas stations, motels and restaurants along
highways are economically dependent on business from highway users attracted to and
directed by freeway-oriented signs; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of ther League of California Cities, assembled
in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October 22 - 24, 1989, that the League sponsor
enabling legislation to allow cities to develop business, logo sign programs, similar to
that used along Interstate Route 5, to allow for a uniform method of business
identification at convenient locations within the state highway right-of-way in lieu of
larger advertising signs and devices along the highway provided that:
1. The city or county is actively pursuing a sign amortization program and has
satisfactorily demonstrated, to the California Department of Transportation, the
removal of larger freeway-oriented signs including, but not limited to business
identification and directional signs and billboards.
2. The city or county is responsible for the cost, design, installation and
maintenance of the sign.program.
3. The design of the signage is consistent with standards adopted by the California
Department of Transportation.
4. The California Department of Transportation is responsible for the review and
approval of the sign program.
O y U O i 'y O a) U y O .i >-- o y C y N O C G 'p
LZC �:: 3L Lao .3nwy a � c - o � o�-ro � �nL.a t° o d
`° M o r o.c a3i ay o o .� y� bu o 3 E c " .- O o av a,
3a)� bo•�' U� dua n iL tJ , 5y. Ecdw U � � U• :d
Q �+ ELuL*L
ayoc� o � v c E ccd 3 0a) cn
-tj M: 96"0-d �,hr. C y-0 bci� p` ..L un a) ^ -O c.. OS V U 0 0.0
3 p u p 'a:. U U .Ui•. "C O_0 ►..... cS p U >. •> C""
O ca-O-� �'C fl.� ^= L G p ^ i y U c 3 U ay. L cN p C-C y O C N
G y d cd _.0 n.U p o 3
o id
.O-C >� -C U C Cd n"a) Y L'} '� = 0 L y bO O 3 .'3-C 0 y•_ jy> "C d G Y G-b cn Y .c Z
G -0 yK .C.. O y O y y U w 3 O V
Yacd bo a) 'Y�. yU.- i O .n >.- UU bO '� bOU- .O.�Zy � a C 4. OO U
.1 in O U1� � S - u UUN'in >�" cdG.c•c COObOV
N a) y O L a) y y y a) L 1"•. U�' 3 y+' _. O ,� L p 0 Co C U Y 3 Y vi y 'at'cn C a) �^.: c C
C ��. 0-0 Cd Cd � O "- aa)i td0.`- C-G� > a �y CU3,, .:: C�' pvi;; EviZyn. B: bO0 W '
d Za) C.:c`� C0 y-8O >•rn > C)� cobo�' >= _In-3 ^31:i3y � UyyC cd3 >�
-u-0 y G L A Z 4..0 Y L rte,•.c 0 C 01 ::cd y.n y �..0. h C N y Z C 3 w Y d 0
U L. U 0�+- cyn cd C. cS-(7 L .�. Z aU.�'- H y OL.L'. y a) b0 O y of.c yid-C'-' b0 O c'"
�. 3 '~.c °' Ea.o"'-•�' a�F- �� c vEy � oo�-- a�c_. L °�'yuC-o b_o co.cc =0
0 Y E C•�V cn C v) r � a) O L 3�Z y aL.. U Cd cd O O cd � a) i 0 U�0 a) cd O.
Lu L m �., La, c.� G r. o E � .
3 cyuyocd3 � E u3n) oy ��, L y-c E S ozyayLy
cdZ L a� O E 3 cn-cu.2 cd y U o0�. a) C `"Z � cs Y.E u C�Y cd L ed:: a) a) N- d cd O C
_ C O a)�0 E U ►Y. y a) &- a) C L cd C vUi 'in a O 0-0 a) c~d U"O ��w•E r CL cd>•L cd E a w cd '
.rte wNGcd -cLUycd (D U a_Oa) n .� yLGCaa) cyEOLU ha)y'" C
>•fl ap 3-o E p 'B ca L. Cc .Z yd N L cd wc' u bo C-fl
Oc-Oma) a) OGa) 0 >.E � _ ^ CyanC -3o0--cZ=p S. pCCy bO r- 0U A
i O �" v� a)C..G.y pZ�' ed O C b0U U E t:• u y a)w O ; . C L•F a) - c y c
. �. N G bo--. a C G OJ O „ =•i••-' C U'ti._•--• G�, w in O l„..•_ c
b L V w vi U cd p E U d o U '^ .n 0 O u 0 s G U U aE U cd c 3 >+_3 a)''n
O O O >��E aU..L. �•y C-C C .U. -p a>. U 0. aw ca O.0 3�. -U u -G 4: i 2
` >� E CGLcc >.a•. Oc cL-- - ^_ � a) yGa) OyycL-owU �-oLC a) U
cisE y' Cc.� c p en_ 3 E Y v U `? C > O ar y cd-0 y C a)C Y•� 0 i ed C 3 a) U ai 3 u
Eby-O._ 0 a) .UnuL >w �, s :dLj L L.. cy >�C._.--. 3o0L U � ....E•CdN Y•--. cn +.
C a..: U ca L-- O b0 b0 C t Ld" L.,
p C cd p a) O C U i S a y t.U .�. v _ 'L.].L h0 ->.u E•y�y E.0 y G y C U a C U y C O F
Uy U'.O". UOO `�' = Oy LOSO30 C - > >•.Ny CCc cd b0 C-e08> y -0.r O..r
b Ea) aS _ � uc.0 L� a� E ^. Oa i] O � CmCY e! Cq2 y � �C Zgi
CA-
.8)
V .8) ++ U i a y Q.C L U L a)•�. a.'. U Q) a y- a) �^ bO 'N G cd C d�...7 N C'. y O r y cd
LO
O ed c+'�C C'- of L L ea u L �+-b p T e3--0 L Z M pO in..0 3 U y C a) G ►,-O G-0 c U E
O L 3 -- a vi d 3 .e bO n E C cow L cd C O cd ►.^p W
o d 3 �'� E`er °' boyL c= u >. c a E u a u y e c.-- E cd •moo acd 0 3= o c ``..,,
Z O U _C C T (u " � M U u c cd C L C a,O-C Z L .n a) E T N N cid O w Cc Co E ed lW UJ
a U () E U 4i C C E`.� O C Z _ >• ,���• 'Z bOE ed L.
0.CMZ`'-0� � Z N� 3 O E - l">
y-�''' c y �'YO j�`Z -r Z �.Lhfi U C C....-'a C) H y cd L C (U.- C w c G b U U O b .-. y O amp v
= E- y > >-a3000h-a c-• °'� ; = =� `n _-•� � ^ uy e - GuEo.�?-BG � o �dp ocL�cn.,ao� C p, �d,�
b ao CZ V ss ` N 00-L= v 1, „ N U .�`�. v^ C`"o.c COC c cd O aci O C �U..: C
Ou� E O-•L - C - - _ _ •� _ O - O c- 4i O �� -U U-►. Ol Z yL p �O
- •- y, J. - E a) 3 •y E O O ..,.� C y U a) M - a) ci
_I I"b- -_ __ a d U GL M L-Y. u J;L. a O't a)
- - - - be�` o - u E-
`� - - - ' .0 - •� -y14 a- Cam .L 7 C
wpm
a) UO c� E U.C-O C %-h V-0!r. a) O 0 c a) a) 0 a) a) L06.
ued W y cd C E 3- y O-- z cz G � i S y�.0 Jo bO-'y bO 0 CIS O C as >
a) C a) a! c -c U 0. O ;C Z O U
a E E w E C CO-a O n, u` -'.y. a) w C i ►: •� 4.p..0 r.
� , ►• C w
'. y.V.LU. C O U'.- " ,d y = 0 O'^ O y.=L.. "^.�'C -0.0•^'� L V u C _ Y - -fl O
L bO cd -0 U a) .... - O .- 3 '^3 S•� 0.2 E E U •E
08 , Z C a > cd E O 4 .^ _ , �•d c C'� d C cn U p s a) 0 > 'C3
-Y U "•- N cs C vs �.;,• ^ CL).- L "'O .^ L._ ... u cd a) 3 3 �„ •y. a)
L y L U ^' vs -.�i_. Q! O -,., L O'•G L L C U vl
�S U C EZ r N = C `� ^) C v C0 O ci- 0 M >'ZWL C aZL p, V 0 O.
E.0.0 bO n c :.'".c be z�' Q Q cn-0 t1 lCd.0 0 0 t° a� ,,
C ► cc
U. O y Y � dF cs C.) C u ^p . 7 U O L =.y' 0 0 0- Ca- _010 cCa 3 C
y.U. 0 cd C y =Z_ (u > i ~cE '� U �' u O Z U a
U E cd 4) .n cS'y N y U .•�. t i -- G 0 �' ;� E u C) cdY >t= C.co • y O O .L.. :-
0) bO c -c YvUi'E vi C C) C Cr --C =0-C J ` J Y L: C C C T O 0�
C ` u oCUJt-- u °� aa, a a c >, y
.. w� oo.uva) �_-_ �_ ? ^�_' �'� c c•u > -C
0C-naCi o•bao u
cd cd a)y cD i a)• C x u_ -.. O~ v C 2 v y 0 0 0 C m 4U,, y - 6) a) c •.
•3 L' to L •')• - 5 =.- .� > :+C•_ O - ,. �. -0 bO L C cdl"..._ c L U.
LEO OZCa>.cd �ua) - - �z � •� G Cv ^ E ccis 0_-OyU3C3o U y
•ai:: y C O.c L 0: cu n ;;, ,Lis br J,� _. i y i. C.s C. = :d.0 CO cd C 0 U O r U
y ed L al
cd u Z O U _ ' L .n ea L O ed c `
L-O �'. 3 U w L C-•_ L bU'� U C-75 ) y C L L y '--• y i-:d •:J
c2 bo c0o .., E 0--L � y ^ a "_ N _ � -L_ E o-C_ 0-0-tea a�Y 3 yam. u
y L Q) coJ a. v .�..L G._ 0,0_0_ cd a) c
a U > L"L3.10'U W e' .c'rs m u -. U._ .U. U `.-- _ L U -. a)Z.ed H cd^ 30 3.5 :d
U 3 ; y Cl'> s 'U-= C - L U C .-c.. cd a+ b0 0 cd a•y
C O �.D .n E=ULA ^ ' O Y^L-��. '� .. O O O y•E W V)._+. .yin cU••� E ..
-•. O w _ Uo cd Z y O E j 0- L U '-.0
• MEETING AGENDA
DATE_9/� ITEM# A 7
•
RESOLUTION NO. 71-89
A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
PROCLAIMING THE MONTHS OF
SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, NOVEMBER & DECEMBER 1989 AS
"GOOD NEIGHBOR MONTHS"
WHEREAS, United Way of San Luis Obispo County/Neighbors
Helping Neighbors is a voluntary grouping together of donors to
provide financial support to local and national charitable
health, welfare, research and youth organizations; and
WHEREAS, this organization was formed by the efforts of rep-
resentatives of labor, management and the general public and
WHEREAS, these representatives, acting as a volunteer Board
of Directors, are responsible for directing United Way of San
Luis Obispo County/Neighbors Helping Neighbors and are to insure
that the wishes of the givers will receive first priority in fund
distributions; and
. WHEREAS, United Way of San Luis Obispo County/Neighbors
Helping Neighbors with its low operating cost provides everyone
with an orderly system of contributing to charitable causes of
one' s own selection through a single contribution; and
WHEREAS, United Way of San Luis Obispo County/Neighbors
Helping Neighbors provides the donor with the knowledge that his
or her gift is collected, processed and distributed in the most
efficient way possible.
NOW, THEREFORE, this City Council hereby resolves to pro-
claim the months of September, October, November and December
1989 as "Good Neighbor" months in the City of Atascadero, County
of San Luis Obispo, and encourages all citizens who so desire and
who find it within their means to contribute to the charities of
their choice through United Way/Neighbors Helping Neighbors .
On motion by Councilmember , seconded by Coun-
cilmember I the foregoing resolution is hereby
adopted on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
• ADOPTED:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
I
t F-
Sy 141989 United Way •
of San Luis Obispo
County/
C1Ty MGR. Neighbors Helping Neighbors
September 13, 1989
Post Office Box 523
Georgia Ramirez, City Clerk San Luis Obispo,California 93406
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma
Atascadero, Ca. 93422
Dear Ms. Ramirez:
The enclosed sample resolution is from the United Way of San Luis Obispo
County/Neighbors Helping Neighbors. We are asking for your help in
forwarding this resolution to the City Council for consideration at their
earliest convenience.
This resolution proclaims the months of September, October, November and
December as "Good Neighbor°months, to coincide with the conduct of the
annual United Way/Neighbors Helping Neighbors campaign on behalf of human
services. Your Council has passed similar resolutions in the past on
behalf of the Neighbors Helping Neighbors program, which merged with
United Way locally as of January 1989.
If you have any questions about the resolution or the United Way/Neighb
Helping Neighbors program, please give Dixie Budke a call at 541-1234. She
is the Executive Director of United Way/Neighbors Helping Neighbors and
will be happy to tell you all about it.
Thank you in advance for your interest and assistance. Could you please
let Dixie know if there is any further action we need to take (i.e. , be
present at the meeting, send for an approved copy of the resolution,
etc. )?
Best wishes,
Bill Coy, General Campaign Chairperson
County Board of Supervisors, District 2
•
• 0
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-8
Through : Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting date: 9/26/89
From: Michael Hicks, Fire Chief W- d
SUBJECT: Fire, Emergency Medical and Hazardous Material Master
Plan
RECOMMENDATION: That Council authorize the Fire Chief to seek
requests for proposals (RFP) for a Fire, Emergency Medical
Service and Hazardous Material Master Plan. Also, the Fire Chief
would request that the Council appoint one or two members of the
Council to work with the review committee that will be making a
recommendation back to Council . I strongly urge your continued
support for this important item.
BACKGROUND: For the past several years the City of Atascadero
has been experiencing a fairly rapid rate of growth. That growth
has put a major strain on emergency services provided by the City
Fire Department. It is becoming more and more common that
development is moving rapidly into areas that are difficult for
• us to provide adequate services to., sending our present resources
on long response times of 10, 15 , and 20 minutes, thereby
removing those resources from the centralized populated areas
where the greatest demand for services are, without adequate
resources in reserve.
It is my desire as Fire Chief to provide as equal a level of
service to all citizens as is reasonable . It is also my belief
that our present delivery system is in jeopardy of being spread
too thin, therefore actually providing a lesser level of service
than we are providing at the present time .
In addition, cities that experience large areas of urban wildland
fire interface in California are well known for their fire
disasters . I want us to continue to prevent this from happening
by having a master plan developed and implemented when
reasonable. This proposed plan should take us into the year
2000, and perhaps beyond.
FISCAL IMPACT: This item was approved by Council and is in the
present fiscal budget. The approved amount is $20, 000 . It would
be my estimate that this item would cost between $15 , 000 and
$20,000 . It would take Council action before a contract could be
awarded.
• Attachments : draft RFP
MH:pg
DRAFT •
(date)
( firm address)
Subject: Request for Proposal - Fire Department Master Plan-
City of Atascadero
Dear
Youareinvited to submit a proposal to the City of Atascadero to
prepare a Fire Department Master Plan.
The City of Atascadero is a "bedroom community of 23 , 000
residents situated on the Central Coast of California and is
characterized by large areas of wildland/urban interface and
intermix. The City was incorporated in 1979 and the existing
fire district became a City department at that time.
The City is experiencing rapid growth in the large outlying areas
and the fire department is striving to provide services to •
residents of those areas without depleting resources that must be
available to the rest of the City. The fire department' s goal,
therefore, is to provide quality fire suppression, fire
prevention, hazardous materials , emergency medical and other
services to all residents within the 24 . 3 square miles of the
city. A well-designed fire master plan is essential if this goal
is to be accomplished.
It is envisioned that the master plan would be used as a guide
for decision making by fire department and other city
administrators. Consequently the master plan must look far into
the future, at least through expected build-out (estimated 2000 ) ,
and provide a clear view of what needs to be done now and years
from now to keep delivery of services even with the demand for
those services .
Scope of work
The master plan should address the areas of fire suppression,
fire prevention, emergency medical services , hazardous materials ,
disaster control , fire department management and operation and
the peculiar problems posed by the dominating factor of the
wildland/urban interface and intermix. Programs should be
proposed to meet objectives in each area, including costs and
time frames . The current capabilities of the fire department •
should be analyzed as well as current statistical data on fire ,
emergency medical , hazardous materials , and other incidents .
0 •
• A proposed minimum level of service should be established for the
future based on growth rate , current capabilities, current
incident data and minimum response times .
Recommendations on fire station locations, apparatus and manning,
organization expansion, ordinances , fire prevention and training
programs , fuel management, revenue enhancement and information
management/data processing should be included.
An area of particular concern that should be explored thoroughly
is that of the wildland/urban intermix and interface areas of the
city. Long response times , volatile fuels., steep terrain, and
elements of building construction that are conducive to fire
spread are the factors which are present. The master plan must
address the water delivery system and suggest how to mitigate the
above factors now and in the future.
Please refer to the attached study outline which lists the
specific areas that should be addressed. A thorough study of
these areas should lead to a finished product which will give the
fire department the following:
1 ) A snapshot of the emergency incident history and
future trends .
• 2 ) The emergency demand faced now and in the future
( the fire, EMS, hazmat problem) .
3 ) The current system' s capabilities contrasted
against the emergency demands placed upon it .now
and in the future .
4 ) Identification of goals , objectives and programs
for the future.
5 ) Identification of the "levels of service" needed
to implement the goals and objectives .
6 ) A general list . of recommended improvements for the
fire department, water system, road patterns ,
ordinances , fuel management , mutual aid, etc .
Available information
Annual reports containing statistical data on alarm activity are
available for the past eight years . Apparatus , fire prevention,
and fire training records are contained in the same documents as
are charts and maps illustrating response times to demand zones
within the city. Fire department files contain additional
-2-
information essential for preparation of the master plan and
designated staff members will be available for consultation. The
Community Development Department has existing land use
topography, flood hazard and similar mapped information. The
City' s existing General Plan is also available for reference
purposes .
Approach
Please describe your firm' s philosophy and your understanding of
the project and the services you will provide, including cost, a
work plan, anticipated schedule with completion date, and any
exclusions .
Qualifications
Please include in your proposal a summary of the background of
your firm, a description of personnel who will be actively
involved in the project, and a list of client references and
similar projects . Indicate the team members responsibilities and
any experiences they have that will contribute to the project.
This description should include any sub-consultants and their
qualifications .
Public involvement .
The fire department staff will coordinate appropriate meetings
with any committees , commissions, or the City Council .. It is
expected that there would be meetings with the City
Council to present the final report. copies of the
report will be required.
Submittal
Your proposal should be submitted to the Atascadero City Fire
Department no later than 5 : 00 p.m. on ,
1989 . If you have any questions , please call myself or Fire
Marshal Vern Elliott at ( 805 ) 461-5070 .
Sincerely,
Michael Hicks
Fire Chief
City of Atascadero
VE:pg ._
attachment
• •
• STUDY OUTLINE
1 ) Analyze the existing and future structural and wildland fire
threat=, to the community.
2 ) Provide wildland fire spread modeling and predictions . (May
be included as an option. )
3) Review and document historical alarm data ( fire/EMS/hazmat) .
4 ) Provide predictions of future trends in growth and fire loss
over ten years, and to full build-out ( 2000-2004 ) .
5 ) Review the manning, configuration , response levels, and
incident mitigation capabilities ( fire/EMS/hazmat) of the
current city forces and the mutual/automatic aid forces .
6 ) Review water system, road patterns , fire station locations .
7 ) Review station, apparatus and equipment adequacy.
8) Identify the protected, unprotected and acceptable levels of
risk in the community.
9 ) Review the fire prevention, operation, administration and
training programs of the department. This should include
review of the Incident Command system utilized on
emergencies .
10 ) Review current fire codes , ordinances and new development
requirements within the city relative to fire protection.
11 ) Identify goals and objectives for the emergency service
delivery system.
12 ) Identify programs and implementation dates for the emergency
service delivery system, for the next 10 years .
13 ) Identify recommended "levels of service" ; provide map of
current response times .
14 ) Provide recommendations for fire station locations ,
apparatus and staffing.
15 ) Recommend necessary modifications , improvements , and
expansion of the organization and its programs .
16 ) Identify revenue enhancement programs .
17 ) Identify possible improvements in mutual aid, automatic aid,
• etc. --
• •
Study outline - continued .
18) Provide suggested ordinances , general plan language, service
levels., and alternatives for the protection of new
development relative to the geographical area, response
times, etc. This should be accomplished without allowing
growth/no growth advocates to use the master plan as an
issue.
0 •
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A - 9
Through: Ray Windsor; City Manager Meeting Date : 9/26/89
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
Resurfacing Bid Award for 1989-90
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Council award the lowest responsible bid
to Union Asphalt (Hermreck) of Santa Maria .
BACKGROUND: -
Council authorized staff to receive bids on September 18 for
the annual resurfacing program. Included in the work are the paving
of the parking lots at Paloma Creek Park and Atascadero Lake Park.
DISCUSSION:
• Union Asphalt received the contract last year and performed
very well . Additionally, they did the work for the Chandler Ranch
assessment district and previously had constructed Halcon Road near
Paloma Creek Park.
OPTIONS:
(a) Approve staff ' s recommendation.
(b) Reject all bids .
FISCAL IMPACT:
The low bid is $485, 987 as compared to the Engineer' s Estimate
of $561 , 250 . The main difference between the two is the cost of
asphalt; the staff estimate was based upon last year' s average,
including shoulder work. The budget for 1989-90 is $588,465 . The
work could be, and may be, increased by about three miles of paving
to bring the total program to approximately 15 miles plus two
Parking lots . Alternatively, 2 additional miles plus the downtown
Parking lot could be accomplished.
Attachments : Bid Summary
• PMS/pms
9/20/89
DEPARTMENT DF PuBLiC aORKS
DID SUMMARY
PR= EvT: 1959-90 Res rfat;nq
# BiDDER 3L=nion A5phaIt,5anta Maria35.P..1111ng Co.,0xnard 1M3onna Const.
1 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT o_ANT"Y Y UNIT PRICE = TOTAL x UNIT PRICE = TOTAL x UNIT PRICE = TQIAL #
1 1 As;,halt 'B' T 1:f-10 x $23,00 =$446,200,0+0 x $22,30 =$432,620.00 x $24.33 4471062.00 1
1 2 Emulsion T 12 x $90.00= $6,480.00 x $200.00 = $14,400.00 x $1.00 = $72.00 1
1 3 Adj.-Manhole Eta 42 x $150.00 = $6,300.00 x $?50.00 = $10,5010.00 x $150,00 = $6,300,00 1
1 4 Adj.Monurent Ea 24 x $150.00 = $3,600.00 x $160.00 = $3,840.00 x $150.00 = $3,600.00 1
1 5 New Mon.Neil Ea 57 x $150.00 = $8,5:0.00 x $195.00 = $11,115.00 x $125.00 = $7,125.010 1
# 6 Pavt. Mkg. SF 1320 x $2.05 = $2,706.00 z $1.35 = $1,182.00 x $1.65 = $2,178.00 #
1 7 C.L. 114. LF 333100 x $0.22 = $7,232.:10 x $0.18 = $5,958.00 x' V).o = $9,937.01 1
1 8 Pavt. Refl. Ea 162 z $5.00 = $810.00 x $6.00 = $972.00 x $5.00 = $810.00 1
1 9 Shoulders C'i 40nJ x $10.00 = $4,1+}0.00 x $12.00 = $4,310.-11 x $12.10 = $4,800.00 1
1 10 x = x = z = #
1 TOTAL BID # $485,928.00 1 $485,987.00 1 $506,811,00 1
111112###1111#####1#######3###1t##11113####13###11111##11########1#####1111#1#1#111#11#1####1#11#11#111#11#33####
LOW BID •
1 BiD E? 3R. _urke Corp., SJ .0. !Michael Frederick, Atas. I ENEiNEER'S ESTIMATE #
1######1##113#1###133#1111111111133#11111111111313313#;11111#31##33#####1####11###1#33#111#3131###1###311331133##
1 ITEM DESCRIPTION_ iIUJI U."IL ;_ :' . = LN_ •.,= = 111'AL uR:i, PRICE = TO!A� x ?'M�1T FRi?.: = TOTAL x
750. K5.95
1 1 TG+�hEl 11 i _ c ;i �� 7 -$4 ! 750 V 5 95 c7 $7t! C L 00 -11527
i" $i_aiJ Z .. �, 1 .. $L .. �$ 3, .J_.�1 x $ 7.JV -ivL
1 2 EulSioa T 12 .2:5.+10 = $19,131.00 x $215.00 = $19,80+0.00 z $125,00 = $9,5070,{}0 x
1 3 A^' M3:^:':oie $157.50 = $6,615.00 x $150!.010 = £6,300.00
1 4 Ad ,"anument t x $1'_.03 = s3,i2'?, 0 $18.75 = $1,890. x. 5 " CI x
1 5 New Mon.Wel c1 _e _. . $111.00 $2-,551.00 x! �x+ 1
1 6 Pavt. 1?4. S- ---. x 2.::' _ #7 Q. _ , 7 7 r = i !
$ .?,016.:_;} x $x.10 $1, 7".On $0.f.0 $1 i,0010.00 x
1 1 , ern LF w = 7 r:;� _ ,"2 ;� _
�. '1 .. $:P.2 $ ,6i.._, x $7.22 $7,218 .60 x $C.l11 x
1 8 Pavt, R' fl, ra 16� x $6.0:1 = $, .y,1%:! x $5.20 = $950.51 x $0.110 =
1 "y c(.'ou'der5 Cl; VCl y $1c 0 = h t`00.00 x 22 '' = i =
.�.� $_,�: $L ..;0 $9,0 X0.00 z $0.00 z
# 10 = x = x = x
##########111##3#323#####3111331##3#31#33#######1###333#3###3#31##1###11#1#######1##############1###########$####
1 C1TAL BID # $517,1.31.500 1 $5571909.50 1 $561,250.00 1
####3#331#3####333####3133113#13###31###31####11#3#3##33#3#33#3E#1######11################################1######
•
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A — 10
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date : 9/26/89
From: - Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
Pedestrian Crosswalk at Arcade across E1 Camino Real .
RECOMMENDATION:
The Traffic Committee recommends that Council pass a motion to
direct the City Traffic Engineer to eliminate the crosswalk at the
above location.
BACKGROUND:
The new traffic signal at Palomar and E1 Camino Real has
Pedestrian signal heads and marked crosswalks across Palomar and El
Camino Real . The City Traffic Engineer noticed that the proximity
of the existing crosswalk at Arcade, which is a short block away, is
• no longer needed except for the convenience of a small number of
people . The existing crosswalk is not protected by a pedestrian
signal and was initially installed by the County, apparently without
a resolution authorizing it ' s location.
DISCUSSION:
The Traffic Committee observed the situation for two sessions
and unanimously agreed that its use should be superceded by the
crossing at Palomar. Since there is no resolution to repeal , a
motion by Council is the only direction staff needs to obliterate
the markings .
OPTIONS:
(a) Approve staff 's recommendation.
(b) No change .
(c) Hold a public hearing.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be no significant fiscal impact associated with the
above recommendation.
• PMS/pms --
9/19/89
g
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-11
Through : Ray Windsor , City Manager Meeting Date: 9-26-89
From: Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Authorize Additional Compensation for FY 88-89 Audit
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Council authorize the City Manager to pay an
additional $2,000 to prepare the audit for the Atascadero
Sanitation District for the period ending October 31 , 1988.
BACKGROUND-
• The Auditor ' s costs were based on the Sanitation District being
closed out by June 30, 1988. In fact , the District was closed
out by October 31 , 1988. As a result , it is necessary to perform
a short audit for the period July 1 through October 31 , 1988.
The Auditors have estimated the cost at $2,000 (see the attached
letter ) . The original cost of the FY 88-89 audit is $11 ,670, so
the total bill will be $13,670.
FISCAL IMPACT•
Although the cost is higher than estimated , sufficient funds
exist in the Finance Department ' s budget to cover the additional
cost .
Members of the Firm: Principal of the Firm:
Fred L.Glenn,CPA Robert A.Silva
GB Stephen A.Burdette,CPA Manogers:
David W.Phillips,CPA
A.
David A.Bryson,CPA •
GLENN,BURDETTE,PHILLIPS, BRYSON Carlos J.Reynoso,CPA
Gary A.Wintermeyer,CPA Jeanne A.Potter,CPA
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Bradford M.Hair,CPA Retired:
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION James W.Lord,CPA David R.Booker,CPA
July 27, 1989
Mark Joseph
Administrative Services Director
City of Atascadero
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
Dear Mark:
In response to your letter dated July 20, 1989, we estimate an additional $2,000. in
fees in excess of our original agreement for audit services in order to prepare the
additional audit report for the sanitation district. These fees would be for the
extra report required that would cover the period of July 1, 1988 through October 31
1988. •
If you would like to discuss these fees or if you have any questions, please call me.
Sincerely,
Bradford M. Hair, C.P.A.
for
Glenn, Burdette, Phillips & Bryson
Certified Public Accountants
A Professional Corporation
BMH:smd
cc: Ray Windsor
Alden Shiers
Bob Lilley
RECEIVE [9
JUL 31 'W9
PERSONNEL
1150 Palm Street-San Luis Obispo, California 93401-(805) 544-1441-FAX (805) 544-4351
•
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: A-12
CITY OF ATASCADERO
-----------=------------------------------------------------
Through : Ray Windsor Meeting Date: 9/26/89
From: Andrew J. Takata, Director
Parks, Recreation and Zoo Depart nt
------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT:
Roberti-Z 'berg-Harris Urban Open Space and Recreation Grant
Program
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution Number 72-89, authorizing application for
funding under the Roberti-Z' berg-Harris Urban Open Space and
Recreation Grant Program to be utilized towards the Atascadero
Lake Pavilion Project .
BACKGROUND:
• The 1988 Park Land Bond Act has a total of $4, 164,790 funds
available to be dedicated towards non-urban jurisdictions
throughout the State of California. Eligible projects include
acquisition and development of special renovation in innovative
recreation programs.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
After discussions with State representatives, the approximate
amount that could be received would be between $10.0,000 _to
$150,000, which would help offset costs related to the
construction of the Atascadero Lake Pavilion or for the purchase
of adjacent land.
In order to receive funding , the City is required to provide a
total of 30% matching funds. Of the 30% matching funds, the City
is required to provide 2/3rds and 1/3 (or 1/7th of the total
grant ) is required to be provided by private donations or non-
State sources.
OPTIONS:
1 . City Council can authorize filing an application for funds
from the Roberti-Z' berg-Harris Urban Open Space and Recreation
Grant Program.
• 2. City Council can determine not to apply for grand funding
from the Roberti-Z' berg-Harris Urban Open Space and Recreation
Grant Program.
RESOLUTION NUMBER 72-89
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
AUTHORIZING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS UNDER THE
ROBERTI-Z'BERG-HARRIS URBAN OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PROGRAM
FOR ATASCADERO LAKE PARK PAVILION
OR ADJACENT LAND ACQUISITION
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has
enacted the Roberti-Z'berg-Harris Urban Open Space and Recreation
Program, which provides funds to certain political subdivisions
of the State of California for acquiring lands and for developing
facilities to meet urban recreation needs; and
WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation has
been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the
program, setting up necessary procedures governing application by
local agencies under the program; and
WHEREAS, said procedures established by the State Department
of Parks and Recreation require the applicant to certify, by
resolution, the approval of applications prior to submission of •
said applications to the State; and
WHEREAS, said applications contain a certification that the
applicant will comply with all Federal State, and local
environmental , public health, relocation, affirmative action, and
clearinghouse requirements, and all other appropriate codes,
laws, and regulations prior to the expenditure of the grant
funds; and
WHEREAS, the project (s) applied for under this program must
be of a high priority and satisfy the most urgent park and
recreation needs, with emphasis on unmet needs in the most
heavily populated areas;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Atascadero City
Council hereby resolve:
1 . Approve the filing of an application for funding under the
Roberti-z' berg-Harris Urban Open Space and Recreation Program;
2. Certifies that said agency understands the general
provisions of the agreement .
3. Certifies that said agency has or will have sufficient funds
to operate and maintain the project (s) funded under this program.
4. Certifies that said agency has or will have available, prior •
to commencement of any work on the project (s) included in this
application, the required match funds.
5. Certifies that the project (s) included in this application
conform to the Recreation Element of the City of Atascadero ' s
General Plan.
6. Appoints the City Manager as agent of the City of Atascadero
to conduct all negotiations and execute and submit all documents
including, but not limited to, applications, agreements,
amendments, payment results, and so on that may be necessary for
the completion of the aforementioned project (s) .
7. Appoints the City Attorney as legal counsel for said agency
with authorization to sign the certification on Page 1 of the
application.
On motion by -----------------------------
and seconded by
----------------------
----------------------------, the foregoing resolution is hereby
adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
-------------------------- -------
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
ATTEST:
- ----------------------------
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
------------------------------
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
------------------------------
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item. B-1
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 9/26/89
File No: TPM 23-88
From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:
Appeal by Tom Vaughan of Planning Commission' s denial of Tenta-
tive Parcel Map 23-88 (10750 Santa Ana Road) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Deny the appeal based on the Findings for Denial adopted by the
Planning Commission in the attached Exhibit A.
•
BACKGROUND :
At their August 1 , 1989 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed
this proposed lot division from two lots to four lots, and re-
quested the applicants to redesign the project to a three-lot
configuration and continued the matter to the meeting of Septem-
ber 51 1989 . At that meeting, the applicants indicated that they
wished to have the four-lot proposal judged. The Commission, on
a 5 : 1 vote with one abstention, denied the project based on the
Findings for Denial included herewith.
ANALYSIS :
The applicants are requesting to subdivide two existing lots
totaling 18 .78 acres into four parcels containing approximately
4 .50 acres each to be served by a proposed cul-de-sac City
street. As indicated in the attached staff reports and Planning
Commission minutes excerpts, the key issue was the availability
of four adequate building sites given the steepness of slopes
and poor septic suitability of the site. Moreover, the existing
terrain and vegetation is not conducive to the construction of a
City-standard road. The three-lot proposal served by a private
• drive would result in less grading in that it would follow the
existing access path and would not involve the removal of one
heritage tree and other smaller , healthy oaks .
•
Included with the letter of appeal are letters submitted at the
Planning Commission' s September 5,1989 meeting contending that
there are four adequate building sites . Neither Commission nor
staff concurred with that conclusion.
ALTERNATIVE
1 . The City Council could uphold the appeal and direct staff to
bring back conditions of approval for the four-way division.
2 . If the applicants have a change of heart, Council could
refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for a
redesign for a three-way division.
HE :ph
Enclosures: Letter of Appeal, received September 6, 1989
Sierra Pacific Engineering letter - Aug. 30, 1989
EDA Engineering Letter - August 24, 1989
Staff Report - August 1 , 1989
Staff Report - September 5, 1989 •
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpts - Aug. 1, 1989
Planning commission Minutes Excerpts- Sept. 5, 1989
6 r
VAUGHAN SURVEYS
630;14 fli STREET p6" Roblgs, CA 93446
(805) 238-5700 • FAX(805)239-7878
City of Atascadero
Planning Department
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Attn: Mr. Steve DeCamp
Re: PM AT 88-242
Dear Steve,
As you know, the above referenced Parcel Map was denied
last night at Planning Commission. We hereby appeal that
desicsion to City Council. Enclosed is a check for $100. 00
to cover the cost of the appeal.
Sincerely,
• VAUGHAN SURVEYS
-
Tom Vaughan
TV/bc ;
v ,
SEP 61999
SIERRA PACIFIC ENGINEERING
CML ENGINEERING TIMOTHY P. ROBE
SUBDIVISION DESIGN
LAND USE PLANNING PRINCIPAL ENGIN
August 30, 1989
PUBLIC WORKS DESIGN
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN
City of Atascadero ` n
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Post Office Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
Attn: Mr. Steve DeCamp
Re: Parcel Map 23-88 - 10750 Santa Ana Road
Subject: Suitability of Proposed Parcels
Dear Steve,
I have reviewed the issues concerning the above
referenced application and revisited the site personally on
Friday 25 August 1989. In walking the existing access road
I would tend to support staff's recommendation that a
private access road, requiring less site disturbance and no
tree removal would be preferable over a city standard
street. .
With minor realignment of a switch back curve in Parcel
1 the existing access road would nicely serve the proposed 4
parcels. This proposed realignment would traverse an area
void of tree ., cover while still maintaining an acceptable
grade of less than 20%. The road could be constructed
essentially at "Natural Grade" with very little earthwork
required. Minor trimming and removal of downed branches
would be the only work required around the existing tree
cover.
The second major issue concerning this proposed
development is that of parcel size and compatibility. I am
forced to disagree with your staff's findings where in it
was stated that: "Lots which are impractical for intended
uses due to terrain, location of natural features,
inadequate access, frontage, or buildable area, or other
physical limitations will not be approved. "
During my site inspection I personally identified
several additional building sites which were not shown on
your attached exhibit. The preferred sites have been
carefully identified and analized for their esthetic appeal,
630 14TH STREET PASO ROBLES,CALIFORNIA 93446 • (805)238-5700 • FAX: (805)239-7878
i
septic suitability, and minimal site disturance. I strongly
concurr with the applicants contention 'that a minimum of
four appropriate building sites have been determined. These
sites clearly conform to your Residential Suburban Parcel
Size Test Criteria and provide a minimum of 150 feet between
future homes.
With the existing oak tree canopy left intact as
proposed; these sites will be afforded privacy and
seclusion while being virtually hidden from view from the
surrounding area.
In summary, I would submit the following
1) Utilization of the existing access road would
effectively and safely provide access to building sites on
all four of the proposed parcels with no required tree
removal and only minor grading.
• 2) The site has the capability to accomodate the
proposed four home sites without compromise of any
environmental concern. A reduction to three lots would
serve only to underutilize the potential of this property.
3) All engineering design concerns can be accomplished
without utilizing "Extreme Building Techniques Roadway
access, Home Design, Foundation Design, Septic Installation,
Etc. will all incorporate Standard Hillside Construction
Techniques.
In closing, I would welcome the opportunity to meet
with you or a designated staff member to walk the site to
further clarify our design and address any possible concern
which you may still have.
I am confident that your further investigation and
consideration of the special concern and effort which has
gone into this application will result in a position of
support for the project as presented.
Sincerely,
SIERRA PACFIC ENGINEERING
Timothy P. Roberts, P.E.
-�C �-XP. 9-30-91
TPR/bc s�\\ r. t�•,�
i
EDA
LNGINLLHING
;;"4VELOPMENT
-SSOCIATES
August 24, 1989
Mr. William Dohan
8035 Santa Rosa Rd.
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: Building sites - 10750 Santa Anna Road, Atascadero, CA
Dear Mr. Dohan,
On August 23, 1989 two representatives for EDA walked the subject
parcels in order to determine the availability and suitability of
potential building and waste disposal sites. The sites accessed
are delineated on Tentative Parcel Map AT-88-242 and a detailed
Topographic Survey map provided by Mr. Tom Vaughan. The detailed
locations were considered.
The Tentative Parcel Map AT-88-242 proposes a 600 ' long access road
into the site terminating at a cul-de-sac. The proposed building
sites are set back from the proposed road at distances from 25 to
40 feet.
Parcel 1•
The building site on Parcel 1 is located approximately 160 feet
north of Santa Anna; Road, and 25 feet west of the proposed access
road, on a north facing slope with an average grade of
approximately 17 percent. This location provides an unobstructed
area nearly 90 by 60 feet in which to site a residence and waste
disposal field. Additional area that appears suitable (slope less
than 30%) for the waste disposal field is located west of the
building site and the required 100 percent expansion area is
located further north and down-slope of the building site.
Parcel 2 •
The building site on Parcel 2 is located approximately 400 feet
north of Santa Anna Road, and 30 feet northwest of the proposed
cul-de-sac, on a north facing slope with an average grade of
approximately 15 percent. This location provides an open area
nearly 100 by 90 feet in which to site a residence and waste
disposal field. An area that appears suitable for the 100 percent
expansion area is located approximately 60 feet further north and
down-slope of the building site. This site will be the most
difficult to develop but it is our opinion that with careful design
the indicated building site is adequate.
ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING • PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
1320 NIPOMO STREET • SAN LUIS OBISPO , CA 93401 • 805 - 549 - 8658
August 24, 1989
10750 Santa Anna Rd. Atascadero, CA
Page 2
Parcel 3 •
The building site on Parcel 3 is located approximately 600 feet
north of Santa Anna Road, and 200 east of the proposed cul-de-sac,
on a north facing slope with an average grade of approximately 14
percent. This location provides an unobstructed area nearly 100
by 200 feet in which to site a residence and waste disposal field.
Additional area that appears suitable for building development is
located down-slope toward northeast approximately 100 feet. Space
for the required 100 percent waste expansion field is located west
of the building site.
Parcel 4:
The building site on Parcel 4 is located approximately 350 feet
north of Santa Anna Road, and approximately 150 feet east of the
proposed access road, on a north facing slope with an average grade
of approximately 10 percent. This location provides an area nearly
120 by 50 feet in which to site a residence. A location th-t
appears suitable for the waste disposal field is located east of
the building site and the required 100 percent expansion site is0
located further north and down-slope of the building site. An
alternate building site is located about 70 feet south and up hill
from the identified location.
Comments•
The location of the cul-de-sac "bulb, " and therefore the paving,
is situated where two large oak trees exist. It appears prudent
to relocate the bulb, perhaps up-slope to the south 50 feet, in an
effort to avoid destruction of these trees and enlarge the proposed
building site on Parcel 2. A "hammerhead" turnaround, in place of
the cul-de-sac would further minimize tree removal and increase the
area available on Parcel 2 while still providing an adequate
turnaround.
Conclusions•
The exact building site locations that will be chosen will
necessarily vary in the eye of the ultimate owner, building
designer and engineer at the time actual building design
development begins. Each site demands, and deserves, a well sited,
designed and engineered building and septic disposal field. The
building plan review and permit process in place in Atascadero
August 24 , 1989
10750 Santa Anna Rd. Atascadero, CA
Page 3
provides the mechanism for the Planning and Building Department to
assure that all applicable building and health codes as well as
engineering standards are adhered to in the design of all proposed
residences.
Should you have questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely, Reviewed and Approved,
ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES
<�)-C kk-q V/,
David C. Main eith V. Crowe
I? OFESS/p,.,a
G 3i;�c1` /Erp. 12192 h
DCM\89-861\DOHANI.LTR
Co
e
e
,L
S ; ' m
_--- � -
�!tn�� -,,� �' \: ��,•��a .nom-� R_
s
n7 li
f '•9
/ n
= n � o
3 z < Q
n
m
m is
m �
z
R z D r t!
e n
orl
< cn
� s rn
a
'sN _
1 � S
� Y m
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B. 1
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: August 1, 1989
BY: Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No: TPM 23-88
SUBJECT:
To consider a request to subdivide two existing lots of 18 .78
acres total into four parcels containing approximately 4 .50
acres each. The request also includes the construction of a City
standard cul-de-sac named Arbol Linda Lane.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of a three-way subdivision based on the
Findings for Approval in Exhibit G and the Conditions of Approval
in Exhibit H.
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1 . Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bill Dohan/Tom Vaughan •
2 . Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Twin Cities Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10750 Santa Ana Rd.
4 . Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Lots 30 and 31, Blk. 26
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 . 78 acres
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (Residential Suburban)
7 . General Plan Designation. . . . . Suburban Single Family
8 . Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant
9. Environmental Status . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
July 18, 1989.
B. ANALYSIS:
The applicant proposes to subdivide two existing lots containing
a total of 18 .78 acres into four parcels of approximately 4 .50
acres each. Both existing lots have frontage on Santa Ana Rd.
1
P !
• Under this proposal, the four lots will all be served by a new
public road named Arbol Linda Lane. This road will be offered
for dedication to the City for acceptance into the maintained
street system.
The subject property is located in the RS (Residential Suburban)
zone. Minimum lot size in this zone ranges between 2 .5 and 10
acres depending on the "score" of the various performance
standards. For this site, the minimum lot size criteria are:
Distance from Center (10, 000 12, 000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 30
Septic Suitability (40 - 59 min/inch) . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .50
Average Slope (21% - 25%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .00
Access Condition (City accepted road) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.40
General Neighborhood Character (5.40 acres) . . . . . . . . . . 1.08
Minimum Lot Size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 .28 acres
The proposed lot sizes of 4 .50 acres are larger than the minimum
lot size required for this site. Although, the minimum lot size
criteria is met, the development of the proposed lots poses
special concerns, most notably the placement of adequate septic
systems on these sites .
Septic System Design
Although, the percolation results indicate a moderate rate of
percolation (septic suitability) , staff has given a severe rating
to this project (see above table of performance standards) . The
reason for this is that the perc tests submitted (deep pit)
indicate bedrock at only five and six feet. The minimum distance
between the bottom of any absorption trench and bedrock must not
be less than ten feet. This means that conventional septic
designs will not function properly on these sites. Thus, it
seems appropriate to define these lots as "severe" for septic
suitability, regardless of the percolation rates in min/inch.
In situations such as this, extensive engineering for septic
system design is required. One alternative is an above-ground,
or mound system, for obtaining the required depth to an
impervious surface. As Exhibit F states, sufficient natural
slope for mound systems does not exist on these sites; grading is
necessary to accomodate them. Other alternatives are E.T. I . or
E.T. systems which involve evaporation, transpiration, and
infiltration for sewage disposal. The City has processed few
systems of this type, however, they are becoming more common.
These systems require considerable space (6, 000 square feet in
one instance) and cannot be located on steep slopes.
Furthermore, the systems tend to emit odors and should not be
placed in proximity to neighboring dwellings. These systems are
typically proposed only as a last ditch alternative to failed
conventional systems.
2
As the Exhibits show, the proposed building sites are
characterized by 20-30% slopes and are placed close to one
another, particulary the lower sites where the natural slope is
steeper. -- The City is frequently dealing now with the development
of difficult lots that were created under County jurisdiction or
as part of the Atascadero Colony. Staff believes that new lots
should not be created unless it is certain that they are
developable as single family parcels using proven waste disposal
systems.
Based upon the above analysis, staff cannot make the required
findings for approval, particulary those dealing with the
physical suitability and proper density of the site for
development. As the City' s Subdivision Ordinance states on page
37, "Lots which are impractical for intended uses due to terrain,
location of natural features, inadequate access, frontage, or
buildable area, or other physical limitations will not be
approved. "
Options
While staff cannot support a four-way split, the site does appear
suitable as a division of two lots into three. In this case, the
three lots would be approximately six acres in size and provide
buildable sites with more open space between them. This
satisfies the land use goals of "elbow room" and scattered house
sites so important to the General Plan. Larger lots will allow
adequate area for the space consuming septic systems, as well as
keeping these potentially odorous systems farther apart.
A further justification for three-way split is the topography of
existing Colony Lot 30 . As the attachments show, this lot does
not contain a suitable building site. All four of the proposed
building sites are located on Colony Lot 31 (with building area
for Parcel 2 crossing the line) . However, Lot 30 is an existing
legal lot and the City is bound to process a building permit
application with the extensive grading and tree removal
associated with it. Also, if only one of these lots was
considered for a two-way split, it would be a parcel in excess of
the 3: 1 ratio or a flag lot . Thus, the staff recommendation
incorporates the site' s buildable areas by utilizing the entire
18 acre site. Most importantly, it eliminates dealing with the
site development problems inherent in Lot 30 .
Access
The project proposes to construct a public street named Arbol
Linda Lane for acceptance into the City maintained street system.
This proposed street does not follow the existing access path and
would involve the removal of one heritage tree and several other
3
0
healthy oaks during construction. Also, to constuct the City
• standard cul-de-sac as proposed would require extensive grading
on the site. The grading of the existing driveway, on the other
hand, did not result in excessive grading or tree removal. As
Exhibit D shows however, the existing dirt road is characterized
by sharp angles which would require substantial rounding to meet
the City' s turning radii requirement. Additionally, the maximum
slope allowed on a City street is 15%, which in this case would
require additional grading. Thus, to construct a City standard
road in the location proposed, or along the existing alignment,
will involve substantial site disturbance. For these reasons,
staff is suggesting that the access road be constucted to
private road standards to minimize grading and tree removal.
The creation of flag lots was also reviewed as an alternative.
A typical flag lot subdivision, however, is not consistent with
the neighborhood (see Exhibit A) . Furthermore, the creation of a
flag lot, with the "flag" access off to one side serving a lot in
the rear, is not suitable to serve the proposed building sites.
The existing road can be developed to meet the private road
standards of the City and provide adequate fire access, while not
creating a long "dead-end" cul-de-sac. The road should be owned
to centerline by each of the fronting parcels, not by the lot
furthest from the street. A private road agreement among the
property owners will ensure maintenance. Lastly, a road serving
three parcels is private in nature and does not warrant City
• status.
The proposed street name of Arbol Linda Lane poses no problems of
identification to the public safety agencies. Translated from
Spanish, arbol linda means "pretty tree", an appropriate name in
this case.
CONCLUSIONS :
Staff' s recommendation attempts to minimize the site disturbance
necessary to develop these lots by utilizing the buildable sites
of the 18 acre property. Due to steep slopes slopes and poor
septic suitablity of the site, a four-way subdivision is not
appropriate. Likewise, the existing terrain is not conducive for
the construction of a City standard road. A private street
using the existing fire road alignment results in less necessary
site work, while still providing adequate private and emergency
access. Since this subdivision is not a typical flag lot, the
road should be owned and maintained equally. The other road
standards for flag lots, such as width of pavement, road
maintenance agreement, and address identification signs have been
included.
4
ATTACHMENT - •
ATTACHMENTS : Exhibit A Location Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Map
Exhibit C - Map Detail
Exhibit D - Existing Dirt Road
Exhibit E - Development Statement
Exhibit F — Letter on Septic System Design
Exhibit G - Findings for Approval
Exhibit H - Conditions of Approval
5
mow. Exhibit A
,I :" .,",y CITY OF ATASCADERO Location Map
COMMUNITY DEVELOPNIENT TPM 23-88
DEPART.NfENT
RSi: <
'9
�L
S ( F H )
Ng \
4N r,
O
O D �
'sem i L(FH)
i
S ITE 7
0
�ROADzo
LL,NO \ /;
Exhibit B
CITY OF'ATASCADERO Parcel Map
CO,,VI UNITY DEVELOP.vfENT TPM 23-88
�Cuc�nF_R��1
`'Cam•.. T'/ DEPARTiti1ENT
i
OWNBRr3 CERTIFICATE
X NcauT nRuur urRe,lAl.of rllw
OM/ION OF REAL/f0►ERTr SHDw on
THIS TENTATNa MAR ANO CSRTVr TWT
Z AM THE AYTHORtssO REMIEETMTArM
K O
THE MNERS AND THAT TIM NAI
N TROE AND CORRECT TO THE GEST or
W RMDN'LEOOE.
^LLgR��
a I t8.
i
.... � r PA � / ♦ °j l
0
♦� �. "7 y'
4 •A.
VICINITY MAP
• �.s
r��-`s T 1•^�I �
DFosa
LOO•
\ SrTE S
AU"AOLW
t
------------
i
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP ATOS-242
RENO A OV ON OF LOTS 10 AHD IN. N.00R 2s
N ATAS MOO COLONY COUNTY Or SAH LW ON M,
STATE v CALMORNIA,AS RECoMp N VVL1/41• TWIN CITIES EN6NJEE8ING INC
ROO MAN frREaT/►O.Eox aYN777'Y
_-- rsFm4 CALIOONIA sa4s IN!) I11•Rs4
s/NaT 1
Exhibit C
'
CITY OF ATASCADERO Map Detail
TPM 23-88
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
,�. DEPARTMENT
-LOT 30
E { N C� IDT
♦/ 1. +
(r1
_ p5id '
( S
O J z
1125
TOM VAUGHAN, L.S. 57510
1940 Spring Street
Paso Robles, California 931,46
(805) 238-5700
March 7, 1989 Exhibit E
City of Atascadero Development Statement
Planning Department
6500 Palma Avenue TPM 23-88
Atascadero, CA 93422
RE: Parcel Map AT88-242 (Dohan/Vaughan)
Dear Doug:
I would like to thank you and Steve for allowing me the
opportunity to join you on your recent field review of the
subject project. As per your request, I am addressing
several concerns that we discussed at that meeting.
First, is septic suitability. ;As indicated by the
percolation tests submitted, engineered septic systems should
be designed once a specific residence is chosen. This is
primarily because of the depth to bedrock encountered on the
site, however, this would still be a requirement because the
percolation rates exceed 30 minutes/inch.
Secondly, the proposed building sites indicated on the
Tentative Map should not be misconstrued as being the only
sites available. These sites are merely a representation of
what I feel would be the easiest areas on which to build. As
we saw in the field there are several alternatives.
Thirdly, I am in the process of flagging the proposed
centerline of the road as well as the propoced building sites
shown on the Map. I hope this helps those viewing the site.
Finally, the reason I have decided to 'provide access with a
city standard road versus a private road is because of the
flag lot requirement of the zoning ordinance. I would
however, be susceptible to reverting back to the private road
aspect. This could allow steeper slopes, less site
disturbance if tha existing fire .--.ad were used, and less
tree removal. I have been under the irp ession that the City
preferred standard- roads over private, but either way would
be acceptable. The change would not be major.
At any rate, I hope this helps, and if I can answer any
additional questions, please do not hesitate to give me a
call.
Very truly ours,
v
TOM VAUGHAN, L.S. 5751 -
TV:ds
EXHIBIT F
VAUGHAN SURVEYS
1940 Spring Street • Paso Robles, CA 93446
(805) 238-5700 • FAX (805) 239-7878 .
JUr-4 31) 1989
CVM MzMTY DCVLL'f J
..=ascaderc , Cm. 934-
11 6
_,!r. ,==vim- ' _' „une 27 1989
Re . Private Sewage Disp-Sa_ -ea.S' bi -ity Study fCr Tentative
M_� A-_ 33-242 , 10753 -3anta Aa, Atascadero .
Dear `:r . DeCamp :
to your _e=er ^4--;ed Jule 6, TAe have performed a
7'orog� -r�chicai suer` ey on o Sub i ect site , We have ide:-_-` _e:
S'_4-es ��_= Lade -cr '_e g. .^_eery: 7riva-e- sewage disposal Systems
W=i-= na:':ra_ grou n: slopes ra n_' ng from 11-1710.
is t:.is C_-C on }hat :Hound or
��TapC:r3nSTJlr?t'_O^.%-ni l r3r:4^ type systems will function
adequate' y. The areas identi=led are srowr. on the
accommpanying map as shaded areas 45 'x 60 ' . These areas Will
accommodate a system for a 3- bedroom house with space for
100expansion. The 3nt�cl�ated design infiltration rate will
be . 50 Ga: per sq. ft. per 3�1r.
There are adequate building sites above cr adjacent the
pro-oosed di:-osal Sites which will facilitate gravity flow
systems . Individual system=s will be designed and constructed
in 3�Cor^.3::Se
with the State Water Resources Control Board
"Guide l-nes for i1cun d Systems" and "Guid1 ines for
�vapotra spiratior. System_ . "
The prim---y constrain= regarding the installation of
mound systems _s the na-ura_ ground slope . The .natural ground
slope fcr mound systems is not to exceed 12%. We propose to
Yer:orT minor site grading
ing (cuts and fills less that: 2 ' ) to
�i
bring the areas into con=ormance for installation of mound
systems . In no case will the existl ing soil mantel be
disturbed in the area where the system is to be installed .
Should this ^T '"-e unacceptable , the alternative
would be to Inst-c+ -S'--,spiration/Infiltratior. systems .
�U, Sincerely,
V Z,�4 1JGHAN SURVE S r
No. 44086
UP. 6/30/93 � � frey B. Mills
`p;" CIVIL j' Ci it Engineer
RTV/and F OF CAU'
_l
0
EXHIBIT G - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 23-88
10750 Santa Ana Rd.
Dohan /Vaughan/Twin Cities Engineering
August 1, 1989
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:
r
1. The creation of three parcels conforms to the applicable
General or Specific Plan.
2. The design and/or improvements associated with a three-way
subdivision is consistent with the applicable General or
Specific Plan.
3. The site as three parcels is physically suitable for the
type of development proposed.
4. The site as three parcels is physically suitable for the
density of the 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 proposed subdivision, as conditioned, will not cause
serious health problems.
8. A three-way subdivision is consistent with the character of
the neighborhood.
9. The installation of a standard street, while feasible, is
not desirable, due to extensive site disturbance necessary
for construction.
10 . A three-way subdivision is justified by topographical
conditions .
0 •
EXHIBIT H - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 23-88
10750 Santa Ana Rd.
Dohan/Vaughan/Twin Cities Engineering
August 1, 1989
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The parcel map shall be redesigned as a three-way
subdivision, with the three lots being approximately equal
in size. The existing fire road alignment shall be
developed to private road standards to serve the three
parcels.
2. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Co. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of each
parcel or its public utility easement prior to the recording
of the final map.
3. 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.
4 . Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans, prepared by a •
registered civil engineer, shall be submitted for review and
approval by the Community Development and Public Works
Departments prior to recordation of the map. Drainage
facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero
standards and completed prior to recording of the final map.
5. Road improvement plans for the private road, prepared by a
registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to and
approved by the Community Development and Public Works
Departments prior to recordation of the final map. Plans
shall include, but not be limited to the following:
a. The private road shall follow the alignment of the
existing fire road and include measures to preserve and
protect trees.
b. Plan and profile for the private road.
c. The private road shall be twenty-four feet wide with
twenty feet of pavement.
d. A reflectorized house number master sign shall be
located at the intersection of the street and accessway
and individual reflectorized address signs shall be
placed on the right hand side of the driveway to each
individual lot.
0 0
6. Construction of the private road shall be completed prior to
recordation of the final map.
7. The improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Fire- Department prior to recording the final map. Plans
shall include the provision of one City standard fire
hydrant at the end of the cul-de-sac.
8 . The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic
delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs,
guardrails, barricades, and other similar devices where
required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in
conformance with the Public Works Department sign standards
and the current State of California uniform sign chart.
Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review
and modifications after construction.
9. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Public
Works Department for all work to be done within the public
right-of-way prior to recording of the final map. Applicant
shall sign an inspection agreement, guaranteeing that the
work shall be done and inspections paid for prior to the
start of public works construction. The construction of
these improvements, as directed by the encroachment permit,
shall be completed prior to recording the final map. The
location of the new private road shall be checked for
adequate sight distance along Santa Ana Rd. prior to
approval of road improvement plans.
10 . All three parcels shall have no direct access to Santa Ana
Rd. Access to all lots of the subdivision shall be from the
new private road. Relinquishment of access rights shall be
shown on the final map.
11 . A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the
City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each
parcel at the time it is first conveyed. A note to this
affect shall appear on the final map.
12 . 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 and a registered civil engineer or licensed
land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the
final map, that corners have been set or shall be by
a date specific and that they will be sufficient to
enable the survey to be retraced.
0 0 ,
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
c. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
13. 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.
ITEMP B-1
iMEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM:D•D Doug Davidson, Associate Planner
RE: Tentative Parcel Map 23-88 - 10750 Santa Ana Rd.
DATE: September 5, 1989
On August 1, 1989, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the above-referenced parcel map. After taking public
testimony, the Commission decided to send the item back to staff
to prepare Findings for Denial of a four-way lot division. As an
alternative, the applicant could submit a revised three-way map
for consideration at the September 5th meeting.
After submitting two options for a three-way split on an informal
basis, the applicant has decided not to revise the map.
Consequently, the staff has prepared the appropriate findings per
the Commission' s direction. As stated in the staff report,
Findings #3 and # 4 were the most difficult to make in the
affirmative. Due to the steep slopes and severe septic
suitability, this site is not suitable for the development of
four residences. Likewise, the construction of the proposed City
standard cul-de-sac would result in substantial grading and tree
removal. Thus, Findings #1 and #2 are also written in the
negative for the General Plan does not invite this type of
subdivision based on the following language (Pg. 57) :
"Attention shall be paid to the aesthetic result of land
division. Building sites shall be encouraged on natural
slopes, with minimal disruption of native vegetation and
watersheds, and efficient layout of access and utilities. "
Perhaps the City' s Subdivision Ordinance provides the best
summary of the staff' s position (Pg. 37) :
"Lots which are impractical for intended uses due to
terrain, location of natural features, inadequate access,
frontage, or buildable area, or other physical limitations
will not be approved. "
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of Parcel Map 23-88 based on the attached
Findings for Denial.
DD/dd
Attachments: Findings for Denial
Staff Report dated August 1, 1989
EXHIBIT A - Findings for Denial
Tentative Parcel Map 23-88
10750 Santa Ana Rd. (Vaughan/Dohan)
September 5, 1989
MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed map is not consistent with the General Plan.
2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
not consistent with the General Plan.
3. The site is not physically suitable for the proposed type of
development.
4. The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density
of development.
5. The proposed map is not consistent with the general
requirements of the City' s Subdivision Ordinance, as
contained in Section 11-8. 201.
PLANNING COMMISSION
• • MINUTES EXCERPTS - 8/1/81
•
MOTION: Ma e _ ommissioner Luna, seconded b s-
sioner Waage carried approve Item A-1
with the amen ted above.
B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 23-88 :
Application filed by Bill Dohan and Tom Vaughan to sub-
divide two existing lots of 18 .78 acres into four lots
of approximately 4 . 50 acres each. Subject site is
located at 10750 Santa Ana Road.
Mr. Davidson presented the staff report summarizing reasons
(septic system design, slopes, topography, access) for staff
recommending approval of a three-way lot division as opposed
to a four-way split. He responded to questions from the
Commission relative to the appropriateness of reviewing the
recommendation in light of the applicant' s desire for four
lots, the flexibility of condition ##1 for provision of a
three lot redesign, suitable areas for septic systems, etc.
• Tom Vaughan, representing the applicant, presented the Com-
mission with information Concerning permit time limitations
( from the Government Code) and asked for approval of a four
way split. A lot of time and effort has been spent in
designing the site; various experts have dealt with septic
suitability on the site with four engineers making their
recommendations . Mr. Vaughan stated his belief that Lot 30
has two buildable sites and that efforts have been taken to
minimize site disturbance on that lot; extensive design has
been done to preserve the trees on the site.
In response to question from Commissioner Brasher, Mr.
Vaughan replied that either a mound or evaporative type
septic system could be designed for the site. He expressed
concern that some material pertaining to the engineers' '
recommendations, as well as copies of percolation tests,
were not included in the agenda packet.
In response to question from Commissioner Luna, Mr. Vaughan
spoke on the number of trees proposed for removal . Discus-
sion followed.
Bill Dohan, applicant, presented a letter to the Commission
that he read which summarizes their position on this
application. The letter questioned, among other issues,
timely processing With regard to time limits allowed by the
Government Code, why the proposed sites are not Suitable
after four engineers ' statements attested to the suitability
of the sites, percolation rate calculations ; etc. Mr. nohan
contended that the average building site slopes are 11-17
and not 20-30 as determined by staff and noted that the
(•
proposed average lot size of 4 . 5 net acres is . 72 acres per
lot above the minimum. He further stated his belief that
the recommendation has been based on misrepresentations,
deletions and erroneous information.
Chairperson Lochridge referenced a letter from John Falken-
stien with Cuesta Engineering and stated he felt Mr.
Falkenstien' s recommendation differed from that of another
engineer with regard to adequate percolation, septic
suitability, etc. He expressed concern on 'whether there is
enough room to accommodate a building site, driveway, and
septic system without extensive site disturbance.
Discussion followed.
In response to question from Commissioner Waage, Mr. Dohan
stated it was his understanding that Mr. Vaughan, on a
number of occasions, informed staff that they should watch
their time limits concerning applications, and explained
time lines involved.
In addressing Mr. Dohan' s and Mr. Vaughan' s testimony, Mr.
DeCamp stated that part of his working relationship with Mr.
Vaughan for the past 3+ years has been based largely on
telephone conversations and spoke to the time limitations
involved with CEQA and the Government Code. Mr. DeCamp
summarized the application' s timeline from date of submittal
until the application was determined to be complete on June
30, 1989 . Mr. DeCamp further stated that, based on informa-
tion the applicant submitted which indicated the average
cross slopes ranging from 20; to 35 , staff began to have
serious concerns about the suitability of the sites for
septic systems . He explained methods by which staff deter-
mined the minimum allowed lot size.
Discussion continued concerning the difference between
conventional septic systems and extraordinary systems (e.g
mound system, E.T.I . or E.T. ) ; average cross slope as
determined by the Subdivision and Zoning ordinances, road
improvement plans as they relate to tree removal, etc .
Chairperson Lochridge expressed his feeling that both staff
and the applicant were working toward a common goal with
this application and based on information he has reviewed,
he would be reluctant to create a home site where there may
not be one where all issues in the Subdivision ordinance and
General Plan aren' t met.
Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin inquired whether staff had re-
viewed the applicant' s contention that there are two
buildable sites on Lot 30 to which Mr. DeCamp responded.
Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin stated the proper spelling for
the proposed street name "Arbo Linda" should read "Arbo
Linda" .
i
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Brasher, seconded by Commis-
sioner Luna to send Tentative Parcel Map 23-88 to
staff for development of Findings for Denial of a
four-way lot division. If, during that process,
the applicant wishes to consider a three-way
split, staff is to report back for the meeting of
September 5, 1989 . The motion carried 4 : 2 with
the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Brasher, Luna, Waage, and
Chairperson Lochridge
NOES: Commissioners Highland and Lopez-Balbontin
Commissioner Highland stated he could not support the motion
because his personal observation of the property would lead
him to believe there are at least five buildable sites on
the two lots . He also felt that based on the information
presented tonight, engineered septic systems could be
installed.
Commissioner Waage noted he has walked the site extensively
and did not feel there was room for four building sites
along with the septic systems .
Chairperson Lochridge declared a recess at 8: 53 p.m. ;
meeting reconvened at 9 :03 p.m.
2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 12-89 :
ApDlication filed by Genevieve Colombo for divisioi of
one parcel containing 10 . 0 acres into two lots
stain-(J 2 . 0 acres, one lot containing 1 . 0 acres, d one
lot ontaining 5 .0 acres . Subject site is orated at
10785 Camino Real.
Mr. DeCamp presei ed the staff report t ing a recent Gen-
eral Plan Amendment hick extended t Urban Services Line
to the subject parcel id one to a south. Staff is
recommending approval su ect 21 conditions which are
based on the site' s zoning r high density multi-family
use.
Commissioner Lopez- dlbontin express -d concern of what
impacts might oc r if one of the pare s is sold and then
developed as ► ti-family in a possible p ' - cemeai manner.
Discussion ollowed as to the potential of e property
develop ' g multi-family; discussion also took ace on the
propo d 20 foot private access road.
len Lewis, representing the applicant, summarized the
history concerning the lot configuration for the property.
• • PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES EXCERPTS -9/5/8
Nomin tions for Vice-Chairperson -
MOTION: ommi ssi over• Brasher moved to nominate Comrni :si or .r
L na for Vice-Chairperson . Chairperson Lochri e
sec nded the motion .
MOTION: Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin moved to not nate Commis-
sioner
ommis-
sioner• Hi hland for vice chairperson .
Commissioner High nd stated he would n _ serve in this
office .
Commissioner Lope -Bal bona i n w' hdr•ew the motion .
Steve stater.! Commissioner Luna as t e new Vice-Chair•per•son by
acclamation .
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public, comment was r•p ..e i ved .
A. CONSENT CALE AR
1 . Appr• .oval of minutes of the regular P1 anni n Commission
m- :ting of August 15 , 1989
MO ON: Made by Commissioner Luna , seconded by Commi
s i oner• Brasher and carried 7 : 0 to approve the
consent calendar as presented .
S . HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
1 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 23-88 :
Application filed by Bi 1 1 Dohan and Torn Vaughan to
subdivide two lots of 18 . 78 acres into four parcels
containing approximately 4 . 50 acres each . The request
also includes construction of a City standard cul -de-
sac named Ar•bol Li ndo Lane . Subject site is located at
10750 Santa Aria Road . (CONTINUED FROM 8/ 1/89 MEETING)
Chairperson son Lachr•i cage announced that he will entertain only
new information associated with this item.
Doug Davidson presented the staff report summarizing the
background from the previous meeting . It: was noted the
applicant has decided not to revise the map ; staff
recommendation is for denial of the four-way lot: split .
Chairperson Lochr• i dge stated two letters were subm i f Led to
the Commission just prior to this meeting and allowed Lhe
Commission the opportunity to review them .
Commissioner, Hanauer- stated he Would abStairl fr,orri any
par-ticipat ion in this matter- As he was not -in --n-O-Aendance at
the August 1st 11,F-al"ing .
Tom Vaughan , Applicant , apologized for, the lateness in
submitting the 1 e t t e r-s and S U mitia r-i z e d i---h e s t a f e m E...n ky
contained in the cor-r-espondence Fr•om -two engineer_�.; ( EDA and
Sier-r-a Pacific. Enc3ineer-ing) who concluded that four, parcel
were possible . He Asked that the -Findings for- denial be
adjusted to r-eflect findings for- approval of a four—way
split . He then responded to quest-ions from the Commission
pertaining to the potential for- tree removal with putting in
the proposed street rather- than utilizing- the existing fir-e
lane ; other, alter-native building sites for, the Dar-cels And
Sep-tic systems for- the sites .
--ommissioner, Luna referenced a section of the General Plan
pertaining to dead end streets and cul -de-sacs being
limiting factors as it relates to fire district operations.
Discussion followed .
There was also discussion relative to what effect a three
waySpl it Vel"SUS a four--Way Split WC.)Uld have on the. Fir-e
Department ' s r-equir-ements .
MOTION: Made by Commissioner- Luna and seconded by Commis-
sioner- Brasher to deny Teti fat i ve Par-cel Map 23-88
based on the findings For, denial contained in the
staff r-epor-t . The motion car-r- ied 5 ., 1 : 1 with
Commissioner- Highland dissenting and Commissioner,
Hanauer- Abstaining .
2. V RJANCE 2-89 :
Apple altion filed by David Singer- and Susan Har-kn
for- a VFKIanc:e from the Zoning Or,dinance r-ear, e t b.4.-1 c_k
standards . Subject site is located at 540 a j a dia
Avenue .
Mr- . Davidson presented e staff r-ep sumuiHr-i z i fig the
Plannina COMIllission ' s or,ev " us (A-- i -al of .4 var,iance for• a 01
f- coati. to the
setback with the COUn i �t Fer-r,i ng h mH :er,
--ommission For, consider-at - n of 5 rear- setback .
gaff ' s r•ecornrn�ndation sror• Beni;..
OfTifflission ques ..Ions and di scussi oil Fol wed c(:)I I c e r,li i n f:l
possilble a! locations .
1!.-iv ' S i nger- , ;:tpol icant. , spoke 1n stipoor, I .)F 111 -'euut
Lina the effo;_fs which h.-,v.= [)eell i r1 1 r,v i nu I ec i-
location Fol- the gar-,la- which would Nave I-A)�
her-itage (:).=ik tr-ee in the r-ear- . Mr- . � .I
- I I":j e I Spoke the
I i S t of n e i g I-l'o o r- i n ag p r-op i;-r, 1:i e.s CI 0 11 1a i i I e d i f'1 1-he s I:a F F
r-e P 0 r-f fT)a n v of therm r-n e-r- i o w f I I c n do:) n o t meet -F h e
MEETIV6/89 AGENDA c-1
DATA_____._._
•
# NOTE: DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT AGREEMENTS:
AS OF TIME OF DISTRIBUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA, THE STATUS OF
THIS SUBJECT HAS NOT CHANGED; HOWEVER, STAFF IS CONTINUING TO KEEP THIS
ITEM ON THE AGENDA. ANY FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS WILL BE REPORTED AT THE
COUNCIL MEETING.
•
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item C-2
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 9-26-89
From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:
Adoption of Resolution authorizing the sale of Certificates of r
Participation, f
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Council adopt the attached resolution ;
authorizing the City Manager and the Mayor to sign a purchase
contract and associated legal documents to provide funding for
the Police Headquarters, Park Pavilion and Parkland Acquisition
Projects. The resolution does not include a specific sale price,
but sets an upper limit to how high the bonds can be sold without
further Council action.
• BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
The documents are undergoing final revisions and are expected to
be in their "final form by Tuesday. The latest version is
available in my office. They are substantively in the same form
as those included in the September 12 agenda packet . The
adjustments relate to filling in the blanks, reconciling the
various documents to each other , and clarifying collateral issues
(see below) . The agreements will undoubtedly continue to have
minor changes made even after Council adoption. In fact, the
resolution authorizes the City Manager to make such changes.
The major change of events since Council ' s meeting of September
12, 1989 is that the interest rates for municipal bonds have
climbed sharply. Based on the Underwriter 's latest review, our
net annual premiums (after deducting interest earnings from the
reserve fund and adding administrative charges) ,will be
approximately $185,000. This is $15,000 more than reported to
Council on September 12. (The amount noted in the draft
resolution does not include interest earnings) .
•
•
Frankly, the City can afford this additional cost . The concern
centers around the volatility of the market . If interest rates
continue to climb , the sooner we enter the market the better . If
the market is only experiencing a temporary upswing (due, for
example, to a sudden influx of borrowers entering the market--
such as ourselves) then we might reduce our expense by waiting .
It is very important to stress that no one can predict what the
market will do -- the Underwriter ' s best guess is that the market
is temporarily flooded with similar issues, thereby driving rates
up for a limited period of time.
The second issue regards the Police Headquarters as collateral .
In order to assure the bondholders have $2 million worth of
value, and , since part of the collateral is the remodeled Police
Headquarters , the City needs to be prepared to commit itself to
completing the project , and to commit enough resources to assure
that the combined value of both facilities ( the Fire Station and
the Police Station) equal or exceed $2 million. Based on the
latest architect ' s estimates, even the scaled down version would
meet the requirement . In fact , if bids come in lower than
expected , we could still apply the value of the architect ' s time
(and other incidental costs) to meet the collateral obligation.
The third issue involves annual administrative charges. The two •
primary costs are trustee fees and rental interruption insurance.
The trustee fees are estimated at approximately $2,500 annually
and interruption insurance at somewhat less than $2,000. The
insurance estimate is probably on the high side and might also
come down some. Administrative costs represent roughly two
percent of the total debt payment , which does not appear
excessive.
OPTIONS•
1 . Adopt a "Parameters" Resolution on September 26.
The resolution would constitute formal approval to undertake
the _ transaction yet allow the City Manager limited
discretion on when to sell the bonds. By taking action on
September 26, the City will be able to take advantage of any
trends in the market . For example, if the market continues
to escalate, we can take action immediately, to avoid
further costs.
2. Adopt a "Parameters" Resolution at a later date.
This option maintains the same advantage as number 1 , except
that it necessarily precludes our ability to take immediate
action (until at least the next Council session, on October •
10) .
FISCAL IMPACT:
The exact cost is not known at this time which explains why there
is no budget resolution. The actual sale may occur prior to
Council ' s October 10 session. If that is the case, an update
with a budget resolution will be submitted .
Attachments
1 ) Draft Resolution
r
RAFT
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $$2, 000, 000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION IN LEASE PAYMENTS TO BE MADE
BY THE CITY PURSUANT TO A LEASE WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
AGENCY LEASING CORPORATION, AUTHORIZING THEIR SALE AND A
PURCHASE CONTRACT, AUTHORIZING A REAL PROPERTY LEASE, A LEASE
AGREEMENT AND A TRUST AGREEMENT AND APPOINTING A TRUSTEE AND
APPROVING A TRUSTEE'S AGENT THEREUNDER, AUTHORIZING AN
AGENCY AGREEMENT, APPROVING AN ASSIGNMENT AND AUTHORIZING
APPROVAL OF A FORM OF OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS
POLICE HEADQUARTERS, PARK PAVILION
AND PARK ACQUISITION PROJECTS
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero, San Luis Obispo County,
California. (the "City") , is owner of certain real property for fire
station purposes (the "Fire Station Property") and has recently
acquired certain real property for police headquarters purposes (the
"Police Headquarters Property") ;
WHEREAS, the Fire Station Property is fully-improved with a
fire station and the Police Headquarters Property is improved with a
building with respect to which the City desires to reconstruct,
rehabilitate, improve and install a police headquarters (the "Police
Headcraarters Project") ;
WHEREAS, the City desires also to demolish, construct,
reconstruct, improve, adapt and install with respect to certain
other real property which it owns, a public park pavilion, to
acquire additional land for park purposes, and to relatedly improve
park land (the !°Park Pavilion, Park Acquisition and Improvement
Project") ;
WHEREAS, the City proposes to finance the Police Headquarters
Project and the Park Pavilion, Park Acquisition and Improvement
Project by the lease by means of a real property lease (the "Real
Property Lease") between the City, as lessor, and the California
Public Agency Leasing Corporation (the "Corporation") , as lessee, of
the Fire Station Property and the Police Headquarters Property, by
the lease by means of a lease agreement (the "Lease") between the
Corporation, as lessor, and the City, as lessee, of the properties
leased pursuant to the Real Property Lease, and by a trust agreement
(the "Trust Agreement") among the City, the Corporation and The Bank
of New York Trust Company of California, as trustee (the "Trustee") , _
an assignment agreement (the "Assignment") between the corporation
and the Trustee, and an agency agreement (the "Agency Agreement")
between the Corporation and the City, each of which instruments are
for the purposes of identification, dated as of October 1,1989
ATAs(5)/Cop208
i,1_1 J.Li:,ll'i
RESOLUTION NO.
Page (2)
WHEREAS, moneys to pay for the Police Headquarters Project
and the Park Pavilion, Park Acquisition and Improvement Project are
proposed to be obtained by the Corporation by the issuance by the
Trustee of certificates of participation evidencing the undivided
fractional interest of the owners thereof in lease payments to be
made by the City as the rental for the Fire Station Property and the
Police Headquarters Property pursuant to the Lease (the
"Certificates of Participation") , and by the sale of the
Certificates of Participation to First California Capital Markets
Group (the "Purchaser") pursuant to a purchase contract (the
".Purchase Contract") ; and
WHEREAS, the Purchaser has caused a preliminary official
statement (the "Preliminary Official Statement") to be prepared
relating to the Certificates of Participation;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero
hereby resolves, as follows:
1. The forms of Real Property Lease, Lease, Trust
Agreement, Assignment, Agency Agreement, Preliminary Official
Statement and Purchase Contract are approved.
2. The City Manager is authorized to approve insertions,
omissions and other changes in the Preliminary Official Statement,
including in the schedule of principal maturities, and to release
the same for distribution by the Purchaser to brokers, dealers,
banking institutions and other persons who may be interested in
purchasing the Certificates of Participation from or through the
Purchaser substantially in the form hereby approved.
3 . The City Manager is authorized to approve insertions,
omissions and other changes in the Purchase Contract and to execute
and deliver the Purchase Contract to the Purchaser, substantially in
the form hereby approved, upon the following conditions:
(a) The Certificates of Participation shall aggregate
$2 , 000, 000 in principal amount and the final maturity date
shall be July 1, 2009 ;
(b) The aggregate amount of each of the annual Lease
Payments shall not exceed $�3 OOo ; and
(c) The underwriting discount of the Purchaser shall
not exceed1,
SATA5(5)/COP208
RESOLUTION NO. _ - --
Page (3)
4. The Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore is authorized to approve
insertions, omissions and other changes in each of the Real Property
Lease, Lease, Trust Agreement, Assignment and Agency Agreement, to
execute the Real Property Lease, Lease, Trust Agreement and Agency
Agreement, substantially in the forms hereby approved, with such
additional changes therein as shall be necessary in order to conform
the sauce to the Purchase Contract, and to acknowledge execution of
the Real Property Lease and the Lease.
5. The appointment by the Trust Agreement of The Bank of
New York Trust Company of California as Trustee is confirmed and the
appointment by the Trustee of The Bank of New York as Trustee's
Agent is approved.
6. The issuance by the Trustee of $2, 000,000 principal
amount of Certificates of Participation is authorized pursuant to
the Trust Agreement and the sale of the Certificates of
Participation to the Purchaser is authorized pursuant to the
Purchase Contract.
7. The City Manager is directed to review and is authorized
to approve and execute a final Official Statement (the "Official
Statement") , setting forth such amendments, supplements and other
changes to the Preliminary Official Statement as shall be necessary
or appropriate so that the Official Statement does not make any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the
circumstances under which made, not misleading, and to deliver for
and on behalf of the City the official Statement to the Purchaser
for distribution by the Purchaser to the purchasers from or through
the Purchaser of -the Certificates of Participation.
a . The City Clerk is authorized to authenticate execution
of said instruments to be executed by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore
and affix the official seal of the City.
9 . The City Manager is authorized to deliver for and on
behalf of the City each of said instruments to be executed by the
Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore and to receive for and on behalf of the
City delivery of such instruments executed by the other parties
thereto.
10. The City Manager at the time of delivery is authorized
to approve insertions, omissions and other charges in any of said
instruments authorized hereby and in the Assignment, and delivery by
the City Manager of each of said instruments executed by the City
shall be deemed to be approval by the City of any changes in the
ATAS(5)/C0P208
RESOLUTION NO.
Page
(4)
forms of said instruments authorized hereby, even if substantial,
and any insertions, omissions and other changes, so that said
instruments fully executed by each of the parties to the respective
instruments and delivered shall be conclusive evidence of their
authorization pursuant hereto.
11. Upon execution of the Purchase Contract, the Mayor,
Mayor Pro Tempore, City Treasurer, City Clerk, City Manager and
other City officers and employees are hereby authorized, for and on
behalf of the City, to do any and all things and take any and all
actions which they, or any of them, may deem necessary or advisable
in order to consummate the transactions as hereby authorized
including, without limitation, the recordation of said instruments
and the Assignment to be recorded and the execution of any and all
. certificates, requisitions, notices, consents, other documents and
agreements (which agreements may include escrow instructions and
agreements with the Trustee and with any title or other insurers)
and the approval of any and all of same executed by others.
12 . The provisions of this resolution and of the Real
Propertyy Lease, the Lease, the Trust Agreement and the Certificates
of Participation shall, unless otherwise provided therein,
constitute a contract with the owners from time to time of the
Certificates of Participation which shall continue in effect until
the Trust Agreement shall be discharged by its terms or the terms of
the Lease and the Real Property Lease shall end, and the duties and
obligations of the City and its officers, employees and agents under
each of said instruments shall be enforceable as provided therein.
13 . For the purpose of qualifying the Certificates of
Participation under Section 265 (b) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended, describing an exception for certain obligations
from the disallowance, in the case of certain financial
Institutions, of a deduction for interest expense which is otherwise
allocable to such obligations, in order that interest expense
allocable to they Certificates of Participation not be disallowed as
a deduction by such financial institutions under Section 265 (b) (1)
of said Code, the City hereby designates and confirms the
delignation by Section '7 . 06 (f) of the Trust Agreement of the
Certificates of Participation for purposes of Section 265 (b) (3) of
said Code and further confirms the representations and covenant
stated in said section 7. 06 (f) of the Trust Agreement.
14 . All resolutions and other official actions of the City
in conflict with this resolution are hereby repealed, rescinded and
set aside to the extent of such conflict.
ATAS(5)/COP208
RESOLUTION NO.
Page (5)
15. This resolution shall be immediately effective.
- PASSED AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Atascadero held September 26, 1989 by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATED ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By _
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARrTZ, C ty Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY U. JORGENSEN, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
�rr►scs�icoazoa ---
NG
• �
DATE-2a6T'� 89 AGENOI�-2
_(_ tTM
•
# NOTE: THE STAFF REPORT AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING CERTIFICATES OF PARTI-
CIPATION FINANCING WILL BE PROVIDED AT A LATER TIME.
•
•
•
M E M O R A N D U M
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item C-3
Fro Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 9/ 26/89
SUBJECT:
Economic Development Committee
RECOMMENDATION:
It is requested that Council review this matter further and
• indicate whether you wish to move forward as indicated.
BACKGROUND :
In the recent past, there has been informal discussion about
the creation of an economic development arm of the City similar
to but more comprehensive than the Chamber of Commerce committee.
DISCUSSION:
In light of the fact that the Downtown Steering Committee is
winding up its work with the proposed Master Plan, a suggestion
has been made that it not be disbanded but asked to continue
functioning as the Economic Development Committee. As you know,
this committee reflects a cross-section of interests and groups
within the community and would function, essentially, to provide
both overview of proposed projects prior to or during the ap-
plication development process, as well as attempting to secure
potential economic development consistent with policies and goals
of the General Plan.
This matter was briefly touched on at a recent Steering
Committee meeting, and the members present seemed to feel that
such a transfer of authority from Downtown Steering Committee to
Economic Development Committee would be appropriate.
•
RW:cw
r,
t
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF $2, 000, 000 PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT OF CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION IN LEASE PAYMENTS TO BE MADE
- BY THE CITY PURSUANT TO A LEASE WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
AGENCY LEASING CORPORATION, AUTHORIZING THEIR SALE AND A
PURCHASE CONTRACT, AUTHORIZING A REAL PROPERTY LEASE, A LEASE
AGREEMENT AND A TRUST AGREEMENT AND APPOINTING A TRUSTEE AND
APPROVING A TRUSTEE'S AGENT THEREUNDER, AUTHORIZING AN
AGENCY AGREEMENT, APPROVING AN ASSIGNMENT AND AUTHORIZING
APPROVAL OF A FORM OF OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS
POLICE HEADQUARTERS, PARK PAVILION
AND PARK ACQUISITION PROJECTS
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero, San Luis Obispo County,
California (the "City") , is owner of certain real property for fire
station purposes (the "Fire Station Property") and has recently
acquired certain real property for police headquarters purposes (the
"Police Headquarters Property") ;
WHEREAS, the Fire Station Property is fully-improved with a
fire station and the Police Headquarters Property is improved with a
building with respect to which the City desires to reconstruct,
rehabilitate, improve and install a police headquarters (the "Police
Headquarters Project") ;
WHEREAS, the City desires also to demolish, construct,
reconstruct, improve, adapt and install with respect to certain
other real property which it owns, a public park pavilion, to
acquire additional land for park purposes, and to relatedly improve
park land (the "Park Pavilion, Park Acquisition and Improvement
Project") ;
WHEREAS, the City proposes to finance the Police Headquarters
Project and the Park Pavilion, Park Acquisition and Improvement
Project by means of a real property lease (the "Real Property
Lease") between the City, as lessor, and the California Public
Agency Leasing Corporation (the "Corporation") , as lessee, of the
Fire Station Property and the Police Headquarters Property, a lease
agreement (the "Lease") between the Corporation, as lessor, and the
City, as lessee, of the properties leased pursuant to the Real
Property Lease, and a trust agreement (the "Trust Agreement") among
the City, the Corporation and The Bank of New York Trust Company of
California, as trustee (the "Trustee") , an assignment agreement (the
"Assignment") between the Corporation and the Trustee, and an agency
agreement (the "Agency Agreement") between the Corporation and the
City, each of which instruments are for the purposes of
identification, dated as of October 1, 1989;
ATAS(5)/COP208
. S • •
t
RESOLUTION NO.
Page (2)
WHEREAS, moneys to pay for the Police Headquarters Project
and the Park Pavilion, Park Acquisition and Improvement Project are
proposed to be obtained by the Corporation by the execution and
delivery by the Trustee of certificates of participation evidencing
the undivided fractional interest of the owners thereof in lease
payments to be made.by the City as the rental for the Fire Station
Property and the Police Headquarters Property pursuant to the Lease
(the "Certificates of Participation") , and by the sale of the
Certificates of Participation to First California Capital Markets
Group, Inc. (the "Purchaser") pursuant to a purchase contract (the
"Purchase Contract") ; and
WHEREAS, the Purchaser has caused a preliminary official
statement (the "Preliminary Official Statement") to be prepared
relating to the Certificates of Participation;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero
hereby resolves, as follows:•
1. The forms of Real Property Lease, Lease, Trust
Agreement, Assignment, Agency Agre-ement, 'Preliminary Official
Statement and Purchase Contract are approved.
2. The City Manager is authorized to approve insertions,
omissions and other changes in the Preliminary Official Statement,
including in the schedule of principal maturities, and to release
the same for distribution by the Purchaser to brokers, dealers,
banking institutions and other persons who may be interested in
purchasing the Certificates of Participation from or through the
Purchaser substantially in the form hereby approved.
3 . The City Manager is authorized to approve insertions,
omissions and other changes in the Purchase Contract and to execute
and deliver the Purchase. Contract to the Purchaser, substantially in
the form hereby approved, upon the following conditions:
(a) The Certificates of Participation shall aggregate
$2 , 000, 000 in principal amount and the final maturity date
shall be July 1, 2009 ;
(b) The aggregate amount of each of the annual Lease
Payments shall not exceed $203 , 000; and
(c) The underwriting discount of the Purchaser shall
not exceed 3 percent of the principal amount of the
Certificates of Participation.
ATAS(5)/COP208
RESOLUTION NO.
Page (3)
4. The Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore is authorized to approve
insertions, omissions and other changes in each of the Real Property
Lease, Lease, Trust Agreement, Assignment and Agency Agreement, to
execute the Real Property Lease, Lease, Trust Agreement and Agency
Agreement, substantially in the forms hereby approved, with such
additional changes therein as shall be necessary. in order to conform
the same to the Purchase Contract, and to acknowledge execution of
the Real Property Lease and the Lease.
5. The appointment by the Trust Agreement of The Bank of
New York Trust Company of California as Trustee is confirmed and the
appointment by the Trustee of The Bank of New York as Trustee's
Agent is approved.
6. The execution and delivery by the Trustee of $2 , 000, 000
principal amount of Certificates of Participation is authorized
pursuant to the Trust Agreement and the sale of the Certificates of
- Participation to the Purchaser is authorized pursuant to the
Purchase Contract.
. 7. The City Manager is directed to review and is authorized
to approve and execute a final Official Statement (the "Official
Statement") ,setting forth such amendments, supplements and other
changes to the Preliminary Official Statement as shall be necessary
or appropriate, and to deliver for and on behalf of the City the
Official Statement to the Purchaser for distribution by the
Purchaser to the purchasers from or through the Purchaser of the
Certificates of Participation.
8. The City Clerk is authorized to authenticate execution
of said instruments to be executed by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore
and affix the official seal of the City.
9. The City Manager is authorized to deliver for and on
behalf of the City each of said instruments to be executed by the
Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore and to receive for and on behalf of the
City delivery of such instruments executed by the other parties
thereto.
10. The City Manager at the time of delivery is authorized
to approve insertions, omissions and other changes in any of said
instruments authorized hereby and in the Assignment,- and delivery by
the City Manager of each of said instruments executed by the City
shall be deemed to be approval by the City of any changes in the
forms of said instruments authorized hereby, even if substantial,
ATAS(5)/COP208
RESOLUTION NO.
Page (4)
shall be deemed to be approval by the City of any changes in the
forms of said instruments authorized hereby, even if substantial,
and any insertions, omissions and other changes, so that said
instruments fully executed by each of the parties to the respective
instruments and delivered shall be conclusive evidence of their
authorization pursuant hereto.
11. Upon execution of the Purchase Contract, the Mayor, ~
Mayor Pro Tempore, City Treasurer, City Clerk, City Manager and
other City officers and employees are hereby authorized, for and on
behalf of the City, to do any and all things and take any and all
actions which they, or any of them, may deem necessary or advisable
in order to consummate the transactions as hereby authorized
including, without limitation, the recordation of said instruments
and the Assignment to be recorded and the execution of any and all
certificates, - requisitions, notices, consents, other documents and
agreements (which agreements may include escrow instructions and
agreements with the Trustee and with any title or other insurers)
and the approval of any and all of same executed by others.
12. The provisions of this resolution and of the Real
Property Lease, the Lease, the Trust Agreement and the Certificates
of Participation shall, unless otherwise provided therein,
constitute a contract with the owners from time to time o the
Certificates of Participation which shall continue in effect until
the Trust Agreement shall be discharged by its terms or the terms of
the Lease and the Real Property Lease shall end, and the duties and
obligations of the City and its officers, employees and agents under
each of said instruments shall be enforceable as provided therein.
13 . For the purpose of qualifying the Certificates of
Participation under Section 265 (b) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended, describing an exception for certain obligations
from the disallowance, in the case of certain financial
institutions, of a deduction for interest expense which is otherwise
allocable to such obligations, in order that interest expense
allocable to the Certificates of Participation not be disallowed as
a deduction by such financial institutions under Section 265 (b) (1)
of said Code, the City hereby designates and confirms the
designation by Section 7 . 06 (f) of the Trust Agreement of the
Certificates of Participation for purposes of Section 265 (b) (3) of
said Code, further confirms the representations and covenant stated
in said Section 7 . 06 (f) of the Trust Agreement, and authorizes the
printing of an appropriate legend on the Certificates of
Participation.
ATAS(5)/COP208
RESOLUTION NO.
Page (5)
14. All resolutions and other official actions of the City
in conflict with this resolution are hereby repealed, rescinded and
set aside to the extent of such conflict.
15. This resolution shall be immediately effective.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Atascadero held September 26, 1989 by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATED ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
ATAS(5)/COP208
P
$2,000,000
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION
(POLICE HEADQUARTERS, PARR PAVILION
AND PARK ACQUISITIONPROJBCTS)
CITY OF ATASCADERO
AND
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC AGENCY LEASING CORPORATION
AND
FIRST CALIFORNIA CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP, INC.
PURCHASE CONTRACT
Dated September 26, 1989
The Honorable City Council
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA. 93422
Honorable Councilmembers:
The undersigned, First California Capital Markets Group,
(the "Purchaser") , offers to enter into the following agreement
with the City of Atascadero (the "Issuer") and the California
Public Agency Leasing Corporation (the "Corporation") , which,
upon the acceptance by the Issuer of this offer, will be binding
upon the Issuer and the Corporation and, subject to the terms and
conditions set forth herein, upon the Purchaser.
This offer is made subject to the Issuer's and the
Corporation's acceptance on or before 10:00 p.m. , California
time, on September 26, 1989, or at such other time as shall be
agreed to in writing by the Purchaser.
1. Purchase and Sale of the Certificates.
(a) Upon the terms and conditions and upon the basis of the
respective representations, warranties and covenants herein and
as set forth in the Official Statement, the Purchaser hereby
agrees to purchase from the Issuer and the Corporation, and the
Issuer and the Corporation hereby agree to sell to the Purchaser,
$2,000,000 aggregate principal amount of the City of Atascadero,
Certificates of Participation, Police Headquarters, Park Pavilion
and Park Acquisition Projects (the "Certificates") at the
purchase price equal to percent (_%) of the
aggregate principal amount of Certificates, plus accrued
interest, if any. The maturity schedule and interest rates will
be those attached herewith and made Exhibit B. The obligations
of the Issuer and the Corporation to sell and of the Purchaser to
purchase hereunder are with respect to all (but not less than
all) of the Certificates.
(b) The Certificates shall be substantially as described in
the Preliminary Official Statement dated as of September 26, 1989
(including the cover page and all summary statements, appendices,
and other materials included with or attached to it, as it may be
amended or supplemented from time to time, the "Preliminary
Official Statement") . The City shall deliver to the Purchaser
promptly after the City's acceptance hereof, two executed copies
of the Official Statement dated as of the date of delivery in
October, 1989 (the "Official Statement") . The proceeds of sale
of the Certificates will be used for acquisitions and
construction of the improvements described- in the Preliminary
Official Statement, to create a Reserve Fund equal to $194,000,
and to pay expenses incurred in connection with the issuance of
the Certificates, including underwriter discount and reasonable
expenses normally associated with the costs of issuance.
2. Public Offering of the Certificates. The Purchaser
intends to make an initial bona fide public offering of the
Certificates at a price not in excess of the offering price set
forth herein.
3 . Representations, Warranties and Covenants of the Issuer.
The Issuer represents and warrants to and covenants with the
Purchaser that:
(a) The Issuer is a municipal corporation duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of California and has
all necessary power and authority to enter into and perform
its duties under the Legal Documents.
(b) The information contained in the Preliminary Official
Statement as of its date does not, and the information
contained in the Official Statement as of its date does not,
and as of the date of the Closing will not, contain an
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact required to be stated therein, or necessary to
make the statements made therein, in light of the
circumstances under which they were made, not misleading.
(c) This Purchase Contract, the Trust Agreement, the Real
Property Lease, the Lease Agreement, and the Agency
Agreement (as said terms are defined in the Official
Statement) (collectively, the "Legal Documents") have been
authorized and, when executed and delivered by the Issuer
will be legal, valid and binding agreements of the Issuer
enforceable against . the Issuer in accordance with their
terms (subject to any applicable bankruptcy, reorganization,
insolvency, moratorium or other law or laws affecting the
enforcement of creditors' rights generally or relating to
municipal corporations such as the Issuer as may be in
effect from time to time, and further subject to the
availability of equitable remedies) , except as rights to
indemnity hereunder may be limited by applicable law,
including federal and state securities laws.
(d) The Certificates will be duly and validly authorized,
and when duly and validly executed, authenticated, issued,
delivered and paid for, will be validly issued and
outstanding.
(e) There is no action, suit, proceeding, inquiry or
investigation at law or in equity or before or by any court,
public board or body pending or, to the knowledge of the
Issuer, threatened against or affecting the Issuer; and, to
the knowledge of the Issuer, there is no meritorious basis
to enjoin the execution and delivery of the Certificates, or
the payment of lease payments by, the Issuer, or in any way
contesting or affecting the validity of the Legal Documents
or affecting the Projects or involving the business or
property of the Issuer or in which an unfavorable decision,
ruling or finding would materially adversely affect the
transactions contemplated herein.
(f) By official action of the Issuer concurrently with the
acceptance hereof, the Issuer has duly approved and
authorized the distribution of the Preliminary Official
Statement and the distribution of the Official Statement and
has duly authorized and approved the execution and delivery
of, and the performance by the Issuer of the obligations on
its part contained in, the Legal Documents and the
consummation by it of all other transactions contemplated by
the Official Statement and herein (collectively, the "City
Actions") .
(g) Except as may be required under Blue Sky or other
securities laws of any state, there is no consent, approval,
authorization or other order of, or filing with, or
certification by, any regulatory authority having
jurisdiction over the Issuer required for the issuance and
sale of the Certificates or the consummation by the Issuer
of other transactions contemplated by the Official Statement
and herein.
(h) The Issuer is not in breach of or default under any
applicable law or administrative regulation of the State of
California or the United States or any applicable judgement
or decree or any loan agreement, indenture, bond, note,
resolution, agreement or other instrument to which the
Issuer is a party or is otherwise subject, and no event has
occurred and is continuing which, with the passage of time
or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a default
or an event of default under such instrument.
(i) The Issuer covenants that it will take no action and
will cause no action to be taken that would cause the
interest evidenced by the Certificates to be included in
gross income for federal income tax purposes.
( j) As of the date of Closing there shall not have been any
material adverse occurrence in the results of operations or
financial condition or general affairs of the Issuer since
June 30, 1988.
(k) As of the date of Closing, there shall have been no
increases in the long term debt of the Issuer since June 30,
1988, or in any debt of the Issuer secured by a pledge of or
payable from the General Fund of the Issuer or Net Revenues
other than as disclosed in the Official _ Statement.
(1) Between the date hereof and the Closing, the Issuer will
not have issued any bonds, notes or other obligations for
borrowed money on behalf of the Issuer, except for such
borrowing as may be described in or contemplated by the
Official Statement.
(m) The Issuer has not been notified of any listing or
proposed listing by the Internal Revenue Service to the
effect that the Issuer is a bond issuer whose no-arbitrage
certificates may not be relied upon.
(n) The adoption of City Actions and the execution and
delivery of the Legal Documents, and compliance with the
provisions of the City's part contained herein and therein,
do not and will not conflict with, or constitute a breach of
or default under any law, administrative regulation,
judgment, decree, loan agreement, indenture, bond, note,
resolution, charter, by-laws, agreement or other instrument
to which the City is a party or is otherwise subject or by
which it is otherwise bound, nor will any such execution,
delivery, adoption or compliance result in the creation or
imposition of any lien, charge or other security interest or
encumbrance of any nature whatsoever upon any of the
properties or assets of the City under the terms of any such
law, administrative regulation, judgment, decree, loan
agreement, indenture, bond, note, resolution, charter, by-
laws, agreement or other instrument, except as provided in
the City Actions or in the Legal Documents.
4. Representations, Warranties and Covenants of the
Corporation. The Corporation represents and warrants to and
covenants with the Purchasers that:
(a) The Corporation is a non-profit, public benefit
corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of
the State of California and has all necessary power and
authority to enter into and perform its duties under this
Purchase Contract, the Trust Agreement, the Real Property
Lease, the Lease Agreement, the Assignment Agreement (as
defined in the Official Statement) , and the Agency Agreement
(the "Corporation Legal Documents") .
s
(b) The information contained in the Preliminary Official
Statement as of its date does not, and the information
contained in the Official Statement as of its date does not
and as of the date of the Closing will not, contain an
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact required to be stated therein, or necessary to
make the statements made therein, in light of the
circumstances under which they were made, not misleading.
(c) The Corporation Legal Documents have been authorized
and, when executed and delivered by the Corporation will be
valid and binding agreements of the Corporation enforceable
against the Corporation in accordance with their terms
(subject to any applicable bankruptcy, reorganization,
insolvency, moratorium or other law or laws affecting the
enforcement of creditors' rights generally or relating to
corporations such as the Corporation as may be in effect
from time to time, and further subject to the availability
of equitable remedies) , except as rights to indemnity
hereunder may be limited by applicable law, including
federal and state securities laws.
(d) There is no action, suit, proceeding, inquiry or
investigation at law or in equity or before or by any court,
public board or body pending or, to the knowledge of the
Corporation , threatened against or affecting the
Corporation; and, to the knowledge of the Corporation, there
is no meritorious basis to enjoin the execution and delivery
of the Certificates, or in any way contesting or affecting
the validity of the legal documents or affecting the Project
or involving the business or property of the Corporation
wherein an unfavorable decision, ruling or finding would
materially adversely affect the transactions contemplated
herein.
(e) Except as may be required under Blue Sky or other
securities laws of any state, there is no consent, approval,
authorization or other order of, or filing with, or
certification by, any regulatory authority having
jurisdiction over the Corporation required for the issuance
and sale of the Certificates or the consummation by the
Corporation of other transactions contemplated by the
Official Statement and herein.
(f) The Corporation is not in breach of or default under any
applicable law or administrative regulation oftheState of
California or the United States or any applicable judgement
or decree or any loan agreement, indenture, bond, note,
resolution, agreement or other instrument to which the
Corporation is a party or is otherwise subject, and no event
has occurred and is continuing which, with the passage of
time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a
default or an event of default under such instrument.
(g) The Corporation covenants that it will take no action
and will cause no action to be taken that would cause the
interest evidenced by the Certificates to be included in
gross income for purposes of federal income taxation.
5. Closing. At 10:00 a.m. , local time, on October ,
1989 or at such other time or such other date as shall have been
mutually agreed upon by the Issuer, the Corporation and the
Purchaser, the Issuer and the Corporation will deliver, or cause
to be delivered at a location designated by the Purchaser, to the
Purchaser, the Certificates in definitive form, together with the
legal opinion of Special Counsel and the Purchaser will accept
such delivery and pay the Purchase Price of the Certificates.
The above described payment and delivery is herein called the
"Closing" .
The Certificates will be delivered as fully registered
Certificates in such authorized denominations and registered in
such names and in such amounts as the Purchaser may have
requested not less than one business day prior to the Closing.
The Certificates will be made available for checking and
packaging by the Purchaser not less than one business day prior
to the Closing, at such place. as the Issuer, the Purchaser and
the Trustee and the Trustee's Agent shall agree.
It is anticipated that CUSIP identification numbers will be
printed on the Certificates, but neither the failure to print
such numbers on any Certificate nor any error in the printing of
such numbers shall constitute cause for a failure or refusal by
the Purchaser to accept delivery of and pay for any Certificates.
The Purchaser and the Issuer will cooperate to obtain the CUSIP
numbers.
The Certificates will be made available for checking and
packaging not later than 12:00 noon on the business day prior to
the Closing. In the event that, with the agreement of the
Underwriter, temporary Certificates are delivered, the Issuer and
the Corporation will deliver or cause to be delivered definitive
Certificates to the Underwriter as soon after the Closing as is
reasonably possible, but in no event more than 15 days
thereafter. The temporary Certificates, if any, will be made
available for checking and packaging at the above mentioned
office not later than 12:00 noon on the business day prior to the
Closing.
6. Termination of Purchase Contract. The Purchaser shall
have the right to cancel its obligation to purchase the
Certificates if, on or after the date hereof and on or before the
date of Closing: (i) the marketability of the Certificates or
the market price thereof, in the opinion of the Purchaser, has
been materially adversely affected by an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States or by any legislation in or by
the Congress of the United States or by the State of California,
•
or the amendment of legislation pending as of the date of this
Purchase Contract in the Congress of the United States, or the
recommendation to Congress or endorsement for passage (by press
release, other form of notice or otherwise) of legislation by the
President of the United States, the Treasury Department of the
United States, the Internal Revenue Service or the Chairman or
ranking minority member of the Committee on Finance of the United
States Senate or the Committee on Ways and Means of the United
States House of Representatives , or the proposal for
consideration of legislation by either such Committee or by any
member thereof, or the presentment of legislation for the staff
of either such Committee, or by the staff of the Joint Committee
on taxation of the Congress of the United States, or the
favorable reporting for passage of legislation to either House of
the Congress of the United States by a Committee of such House to
which such legislation has been referred for consideration, or
any decision of any federal or state court or any ruling or
regulation (final, temporary or proposed) or official statement
on behalf of the United States Treasury Department, Internal
Revenue Service or other federal or state authority affecting the
federal or state tax status of the Issuer, or the interest on the
Certificates or any bonds or notes; (ii) a stop order, ruling or
regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission shall be
issued or made, the effect of which is that the issuance,
offering or sale of the Certificates, as contemplated herein or
in the Preliminary Official Statement, is or would be in
violation of any provision of the Securities Act, or other
federal law; (iii) there shall occur any event which in the
reasonable judgment of the Purchaser either (A) makes untrue or
incorrect in any material respect any statement or information
contained in the Official Statement or (B) is not reflected in
the Official Statement, but should be reflected therein in
therein to make the statements and information contained therein
not misleading in any material respect and, in either case, the
Issuer refuses to permit the Official Statement to be
supplemented to correct or supply such statement or information,
or the effect of the Official Statement as so corrected or
supplemented is, in the reasonable judgment of the Purchaser, to
materially adversely affect the market for the Certificates or
the sale of the Certificates by the Purchaser at the contemplated
offering price; (iv) there shall have been an outbreak of
hostilities or any other insurrection or armed conflict or any
calamity or crisis which, in the reasonable judgment of the
Purchaser makes it impracticable or inadvisable to offer or sell
the Certificates; (v) there shall have been a general suspension
of trading in securities on the New York Stock Exchange, the
American Stock Exchange, the Pacific Stock Exchange, the Chicago ,
Board of Trade or other major U.S. financial or securities
exchange, maximum or minimum prices not previously in effect
shall have been established on any such exchange, or the daily
volume or average prices on any such exchange shall have
significantly changed from the current average daily volume or
level of prices, the effect of any of which on the financial
markets of the United States is, in the reasonable judgment of
the Purchaser, to materially adversely impact the market for the
Certificates or the sale of the Certificates by the Purchasers at
the contemplated offering price; (vi) a banking moratorium 'shall
have been declared by federal, California, or New York
authorities; (vii) there occurs any material adverse change in
the affairs of the Issuer; (viii) if there shall be any
litigation, pending or threatened, which, in the reasonable
judgment of the Purchaser, makes it impracticable or inadvisable
i to offer or deliver the Certificates on the terms contemplated by
the Official Statement; or (ix) the Certificates are not
executed, approved and delivered; (x) there shall be established
any new restrictions on transactions in securities materially
affecting the free market for securities (including the
imposition of any limitations upon interest rates) or the
extension of credit by, or the charge to the net capital
requirements of, underwriters established by the New York Stock
Exchange, the Securities and Exchange Commission, any other
Federal or state agency or the Congress of the United States, or
by Executive Order; or (xi) the Controller of the Currency
renders an opinion or issues a regulation which has the effect of
prohibiting the Underwriter from underwriting the Certificates.
In the event of any termination of this Purchase Contract
permitted under Section 6 hereof, there shall be no liability by
any party to this Purchase Contract to any other party.
7. Conditions to the Purchaser's Obligations. The
obligations of the Purchaser hereunder shall be subject to the
performance by the Issuer and the Corporation of their respective
obligations to be performed hereunder at and prior to the
Closing, to the accuracy in all material respects of the
representations and warranties of the Issuer and the Corporation
herein as of the date hereof and as of the time of the Closing,
and to the following conditions, including the delivery by the
Issuer of such documents as are enumerated herein in form and
substance reasonably satisfactory to the Purchaser:
(a) At the time of the Closing, (i) the Legal Documents and
the Corporation Legal Documents are in full force and effect
in the form heretofore approved by the Issuer, the
Corporation and the Purchaser, and none of the foregoing -
documents shall have been amended, modified or supplemented
from the forms thereof as of the date hereof, except as
contemplated by the Preliminary Official Statement or as may
have been approved in writing by the Purchaser, the Closing
in all events, however, to be deemed such approval, (ii) the
net proceeds of the sale of the Certificates shall be
deposited and applied as described in the Official
Statement.
(b) At the Closing the Issuer will deliver the Certificates.
(c) At or prior to the Closing, the Underwriter shall
receive the documents described in Exhibit A hereto, in each
case satisfactory in form and substance to it and its
Counsel.
8. Nonsatisfaction of Conditions. If any of the conditions
to the obligations of the Purchaser contained herein shall not
been satisfied when and as required herein, all obligations of
the Purchaser hereunder may be terminated by the Purchaser at, or
at any time prior to, the Closing by written notice to the
Issuer.
9. Expenses. If the Certificates are sold to the Purchaser
by the Issuer, the Issuer shall pay, but only out of the proceeds
of such Certificates, any expenses incident to the performance of
its obligations hereunder, including, but not limited to: (i)
the cost of the preparation of the Legal Documents and the
preparation and printing of the Preliminary and Final Official
Statements, together with a reasonable number of copies thereof;
( ii) the cost of the preparation and printing of the
Certificates, including the cost of CUSIP numbers; (iii) the fees
and disbursements of Special Counsel and the Purchaser and of any
other experts or consultants retained by the Issuer; (iv) and all
registration or filing fees and related costs and expenses.
The Purchaser shall pay: all advertising expenses incurred
by it in connection with the offering of the Certificates.
10. After the Closing (a) the Issuer will not adopt any
amendment of or supplement to the Official Statement to which the
Underwriter shall object in writing or which shall be disapproved
by Counsel for the Underwriter and (b) if any event relating to
or affecting the Issuer or the Corporation shall occur as a
result of which it is necessary, in the opinion of Counsel for
the Underwriter, to amend or supplement the Official Statement in
order to make the Official Statement not misleading in the light
of the circumstances existing at the time it is delivered to an
initial purchaser of the Certificates, the Issuer and the
Corporation will forthwith prepare and furnish to the Underwriter
a reasonable number of copies of an amendment of or supplement to
the Official Statement (in form and substance satisfactory to the
Counsel for the Underwriter) which will amend or supplement the
Official Statement so that it will not contain an untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary in order to make the statements therein, in the light
of the circumstances existing at the time the Official Statement
is delivered to an initial purchaser of the Certificates, not
misleading. For purposes of this section the Issuer and the
Corporation will each furnish such information with respect to
itself as the Underwriter may from time to time request.
11. Miscellaneous.
(a) Any notice or other communication to be given to
the Issuer under this Purchase Contract shall be deemed given
when delivered in person to its address set forth on the first
page hereof, or when mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid,
and addressed to such address, or when confirmation is received
by the sender that any telex, telegram or telecopy to the Issuer
i at such address has been received. Any notice or other
communication to be given to the Purchaser or the Corporation
under this Purchase Contract shall be deemed given when delivered
in person to the addresses set forth below, or when mailed by
first class mail, postage prepaid and addressed separately to
such addresses, or when confirmations are received by the sender
. that any telex, telegram or telecopy to the Purchaser or
Corporation at such addresses have been received by each of them,
as follows:
California Public Agency Leasing Corporation
c/o 50 California Street - Suite 3200
San Francisco, CA. 94111
ATTENTION: K.R. Martin, President
Telephone: (415) 284-3800
First California Capital Markets Group, Inc.
50 California Street —Suite 3200
San Francisco, Cala 94111
ATTENTION: Richard B. Kerwin -
Telephone: (415) 982-2444
Telecopy: (415) 982-1855
(b) This Purchase Contract is made solely for the
benefit of the Issuer, the Corporation and the Purchaser and no
other person, including any purchaser of the Certificates, shall
acquire or have any right hereunder or by virtue hereof. All the
representations, warranties, covenants and agreements contained
herein shall remain operative and in full force and effect and
shall survive delivery of and payment for the Certificates
hereunder, regardless of any investigation made by the Purchaser
or on their behalf.
(c) This Purchase Contract shall be governed and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California
as such laws apply to contracts made and performed in the State
of California.
•
(d) This Purchase Contract shall become effective upon
the execution of the acceptance hereof by the Issuer and the
Corporation.
Very truly yours,
FIRST CALIFORNIA CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP, INC.
Purchaser
By:
Title:
Accepted and agreed to as of
the date first above written:
CITY OF ATASCADERO CALIFORNIA PUBLIC AGENCY
Issuer LEASING CORPORATION
Corporation
By: BY:
Title: Title:
Acknowledged:
THE BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA
Trustee
By:
Title:
r
EXHIBIT A
1. the unqualified approving opinion of Special Counsel, dated
the date of Closing, addressed to the Issuer and the
Underwriter, substantially in the form previously submitted
to the Underwriter;
2. the supplementary opinion of Special Counsel in form and
substance satisfactory to the Underwriter, dated the date of
Closing and addressed to the Issuer and the Underwriter;
3. an opinion of the Attorney for the Issuer, dated the date of
Closing in form and substance satisfactory to the
Underwriter and addressed to the Issuer and the Underwriter;
4. an opinion of Counsel to the Corporation, dated the date of
Closing, in form and substance satisfactory to the
Underwriter and addressed to the Corporation and the
Underwriter;
5. the opinion of Counsel to the Trustee, dated the date of
Closing and addressed to -the Issuer and the Underwriter in
form and substance satisfactory to the Underwriter;
6. the opinion of Brown & Wood, Los Angeles, California,
Counsel to the Underwriter, dated the date of Closing and
addressed to the Underwriter to the effect that (a) the
Certificates are exempt from registration pursuant to the
Securities Act of 1933 , as amended, and the Trust Agreement
is exempt from qualification as an indenture pursuant to the
Trust Indenture Act of 1939, as amended; and (b) based upon
examinations which they have made, which may be specified,
and without having undertaken to determine independently the
accuracy or completeness of the statements contained in the
Official Statement, nothing has come to their attention
which would lead them to believe that the Official Statement
(other than financial statement therein or incorporated
therein by reference as to which no opinion need be
expressed) contains an untrue statement of a material fact
or omits to state a material fact required to be stated
therein or necessary to make the statements therein, in the
light of the circumstances under which they were made, not
misleading;
7. a certificate, dated the date of Closing, signed by a duly
authorized official of the Issuer satisfactory in form and
substance to the Underwriter, to the effect that the
representations and warranties made by the Issuer in this
Purchase Contract are true and correct as of the .date of
Closing and that no litigation or proceeding is pending or
threatened against the Issuer (a) to restrain or enjoin the
delivery of any of the Certificates or the payment of Lease
s • •
Payments under the Lease Agreement, (b) in any way
contesting the validity of the Certificates, the Legal
Documents or the authority of the Issuer to enter into the
Legal Documents, (c) in any way contesting the powers of the
Issuer in connection with any action contemplated by this
Purchase Contract or the Legal Documents, or (d) in which a
final adverse decision could materially adversely affect the
operation of the Issuer or the ability of the Issuer to
j perform its obligations under the Legal Documents;
8. a certificate, dated the date of Closing, signed by a duly
authorized official of the Corporation satisfactory to the
Underwriter, to the effect that the representations and
warranties made by the Corporation in this ,Purchase Contract
are true and correct as of the date of Closing and that no
litigation or proceeding is pending or threatened against
the Corporation (a) to restrain or enjoin the delivery of
any of the Certificates, (b) in any way contesting the
validity of the Certificates, the Corporation Legal
Documents, or the authority of the Corporation to enter into
the Corporation Legal Documents, (c) in any way contesting
the powers of the Corporation in connection with any action
contemplated by this Purchase Contract or the Corporation
Legal Documents;
9. a certificate, dated the date of Closing, signed by a duly
authorized official of the Trustee satisfactory in form and
substance to the Underwriter and counsel to the Underwriter;
10. two executed or certified copies of each of the Corporation
Legal Documents;
11. two copies of the Official Statement, with the approval
thereof executed on behalf of the Issuer by an authorized
representative of the Issuer;
12. two certified copies of the general resolution of the
Trustee authorizing the execution and delivery of certain
documents by certain officers of the Trustee, which
resolution authorizes the execution and delivery of the
Certificates and the Trust Agreement;
13. copies of resolutions adopted by the Issuer and certified by
the Clerk authorizing or ratifying the execution and
delivery of the Legal Documents and the approval of the
Official Statement;
14. copies of resolutions adopted by the Corporation and
certified by the Secretary or Assistant Secretary of the
Corporation, authorizing or ratifying the execution _ and
delivery of the Corporation Legal Documents;
15. arbitrage certification by the Issuer in form an substance
acceptable to Special Counsel and the Underwriter;
16. a letter from Glenn, Burdette, Phillips & Booker, Certified
Public Accountants, consenting to the reference to such firm
and to the use of the financial statements of the Issuer and
the report relating to such financial statements prepared by
such firm as Appendix A to the Official Statement.
17. a certificate, dated the date of Closing that the Issuer has
complied with all insurance requirements set forth in the
Lease Agreement;
18. a policy of title insurance; and
19. such additional legal opinions, certificates, proceedings,
instruments and other documents as Special Counsel and
counsel for the Underwriter may reasonably request to
evidence compliance by the Issuer and the Corporation with
legal requirements, the truth and accuracy, as of the time
of Closing, of the representations contained herein and in
the Official Statement and the due performance or prior to
such time of all agreements then to be performed and all
conditions then to be satisfied.
i
September 26, 1989
CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT
The Council will now hold a closed session concerning:
* Litigation
With respect to litigation, the closed session is being
held pursuant to the following subsection(s) of Government
Code Section 54956.9.
Section (b) . Significant Exposure to Litigation.
* * * * * * * * * * *
r
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM
September 26, 1989
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Specific Reasons and Legal Authority for Closed
Session, September 26, 1989, Pursuant to Section
54956.9, Government Code - Litigation
Existing Litigation
1. The referenced closed session is pursuant to Section (a) ,
to wit:
"An adjudicatory proceeding before a
court, administrative body exercising its
adjudicatory authority, hearing officer, or
arbitrator, to which the local agency is a
party, has been initiated formally. "
The title(s) of the adjudicatory proceeding(s)
(litigation) is(are) :
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Significant Exposure to Litigation
-� 2 . The referenced closed session is pursuant to Section (b) ,
to wit:
11 (1) A point has been reached where, in
the opinion of the legislative body of the
local agency on the advice of its legal
counsel, based on existing facts and
circumstances, there is a significant exposure
to litigation against the local agency; or
11 (2) Based on existing facts and circum-
stances, the legislative body of the local
agency is meeting only to decide whether a
closed session is authorized pursuant to
paragraph (1) of this subdivision. "
e'
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM: Members of the City Council Page 2
SUBJECT: Specific Reasons and Legal Authority
for Closed Session, September 26, 1989
The existing facts and circumstances are as set forth
below.
Initiation of Litigation
3 . The referenced closed session is pursuant to Section (c) ,
to wit:
"Based on existing facts and circum-
stances, the legislative body of the local
agency has decided to initiate or is deciding
whether to initiate litigation. "
The existing facts and circumstances are as set forth
below.
Existing Facts and Circumstances
Please see the attached letter dated September 15, 1989 from
Attorney Roger Picquet concerning Tentative Parcel Map No.
7-89 (7000 San Palo Road: McNamara) .
NOTE: THIS MEMORANDUM WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL PRIOR
TO OR AT THE CLOSED SESSION IF FEASIBLE, OR AT LEAST ONE WEEK
AFTER THE CLOSED SESSION. A COPY WILL BE RETAINED BY THE CITY
MANAGER. THIS MEMORANDUM IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE AND IS
PROTECTED BY THE ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGE UNTIL THE
PENDING LITIGATION HAS BEEN FINALLY ADJUDICATED OR OTHERWISE
SETTLED.
J REY G JORGENSEN
City Attorney
JGJ: fr
A:MMATA343
LAW OFFICES
LYON & PICQUET
ROGER LYON* 1104 PALM STREET TELEPHONE
ROGER PICOUET POST OFFICE BOX 922 (805) 541-2560
TELECOPIER
TIMOTHY J.CARMEL .SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA 93406 (805) 543-3857
•A LAW CORPORATION
September 15 , 1989
Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
City Attorney
City of Atascadero
1135 Osos Street, Suite A
P.O. Box 910
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
Re: Tentative Parcel Map No. 7-89 (7000 San Palo Road, McNamara)
Dear Mr. Jorgensen:
I represent Mr. Thomas McNamara in the above matter. As you
recall, his application for a subdivision of seven (7) acres into
four (4) parcels was denied by the Planning Commission. He amended
his proposed subdivision and appealed to the City Council which was
unable to make a decision on either July 11 or 25, 1989. Mr.
McNamara received a letter that said, in effect, that the inability
of the Council to resolve their differences on this item resulted
in the original Planning Commission decision to deny being upheld.
Such a position by the City is without legal support or authority.
Under the State Subdivision Map Act and the Atascadero Municipal
Code, the City Council is the decision-making body on tentative map
applications . The decision is quasi-judicial, and not legislative,
Iii Tiature' Arne! v Costa Mesa (1980) 28 Cal. 3d 511) As such, the
due process rights of an applicant are an important element in the
decision-making process. By not making a decision on his applica-
tion, the Council has deprived the property owner of his right to
a determination on the merits.
The general rule, of course, is that an appeal of an administrative
decision is a hearing "de novo" entitling the appellant to a new
decision. Additional testimony and evidence is allowed and the
decision of the Council must be supported by findings adopted by
that body. A review of the Atascadero Municipal Code reveals no
alternate process which would alter the above rule. Also, there
are no Council By-Laws or adopted procedures which would convert
the failure of a motion to a confirmation of the advisory body' s
action. (By way of contrast, please note that the Atascadero
Planning Commission By-Laws provide that matters resulting in a tie
vote are continued to the next regular meeting. ) As a result,
s f
Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
City Attorney
City of Atascadero
September 15 , 1989
Page 2
under Government Code § 66452. 5 , the failure of the Council to
decide this matter is deemed an automatic approval of the map.
Aside from the procedural issue discussed above, the appeal should
have been granted on the merits. The findings adopted by the
Council are without any support in the record. The alleged
inconsistency with the General Plan is not specified or articulated
in any manner (Woodland Hills Residents Assn. . Inc. v City Council
(1975) 44 Cal.App. 3d 825) . The staff report clearly states that
the amended tentative map before the Council met all relevant City
standards "with respect to density, setbacks, access, fire hydrant
improvements and other City requirements. " A review of the record
shows no contrary evidence or testimony was presented to the
Council; therefore the record cannot support the decision (sic) to
deny.
Mr. McNamara does not desire to engage in expensive and controver-
sial litigation. However, he is under the obligation to initiate
such action ,in a timely manner if he desires to protect his rights.
The circumstances of this situation are certainly unique.
Pursuant to our prior telephone discussion on this matter, please
review these issues and advise. the Council of the various options
available. I am willing to meet with you and Mr. Engen to discuss
this further. Without prejudice to his rights under Government
Code § 66452. 5, Mr. McNamara would accept a resubmittal of his
application amended to address some of the concerns individual
Council members may have; however, it would not be possible to
eliminate a lot (to three (3) ) for economic reasons .
Sincerely,
LYON & PI
RogerI icquet
RP: ar
t
cc : Thomas McNamara