Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 10/30/1989
BOYD C. SHARITZ CITY CLERK A G E N D A ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 6500 PALMA FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM OCTOBER 30, 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 RollCall City Council Comment - PROCLAMATION "NATIONAL HOSPICE MONTH" , November 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, unless Council authorizes an extension. All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and not to any individual member thereof. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous , profane or personal remarks against any Council Member, commissions & staff . A. CONSENT CALENDAR; All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are 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 OCTOBER 10, 1989 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 2. CITY TREASURER' S REPORT SEPTEMBER 1989 3. - FINANCE D'IRECTOR'S REPORT SEPTEMBER 1989 4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 17-89, 7550 CORTEZ - Subdivision of one parcel containing 6 . 25 ac into four lots of 1 .5 ac . , 1 .5 ac .', 1 . 58 ac . and 1 . 66 ac . ` (Barrett/Twin Cities Engineering) 5 . REQUEST FOR ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP` 23-87, 13900 LOS ALTOS ROAD (Vaughan) 6. AUTHORIZATION TSO;PURCHASE VEHICLES (Public Works Dept. ) 7 . AWARD CONTRACT FOR BACKHOE ATTACHMENT-AND HYDRAULIC SCRAPER ( Parks Divn. ) 8. RESOLUTION NO. 76-89 - ESTABLISHING ANNUAL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES (DBE) POLICY AND LIAISON OFFICER j14j 9`N NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE ATASCADERO' ADMINISTRATION BLDG RENOVATION, PHASE IIC 10. AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT REQUEST TO THE STATE FOR REDUCED CENTREX SERVICE CHARGES B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES: 1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 7-89, 7000 SAN PALO ROAD - Reconsidera- tion of proposed subdivision of one 7 . 0 ac. parcel into four lots of 1 . 55 , 1 .60, 1 .65 and 22 acres (McNamara/CuestaEng- ineering) (Reference July 11 , 1989 City Council Meeting) (Applicant requests continuance) \N2. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO REMOVE A HERITAGE TREE, 12550 SANTA ANA ( Sandel ) 3. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO REMOVE A HERITAGE TREE, 3550 TRAFFIC WAY ("The Oaks`" ) 2 P R O C L A M A T I O N "NATIONAL HOSPICE MONTH" November, 1989 WHEREAS , Hospice is a unique humani-arian organization dedicated to quality care for the terminally ill and the dignity of the human experience; and WHEREAS , in 1988 Hospice provided home care and counseling services to over 961. clients in our communities; and WHEREAS ; there are currently 75 volunteers , including visiting in-home volunteers , bereavement, administrative a d office volunteers , medical and social consultants; and WHEREAS, compassionate professionals and volunteers provide appropriate competent care in an environment sui title to one ' s • persona, individualit_✓; and WHEREAS , tree lighting ceremonies will occur in our city and county during the ?rd weer in December with the lighting of holi- day trees with brilliant whit_ bulbs , each in honer of a loved one : and WHEREAS , Ncvember is National Hospice Month. NOW, THEREFORE, the Atascadero City Council hereby proclaims the mor.-h of Ncvember as Hospice Month. RSL- _-NDEXTER, Mayor Cit' of Atascade.o, CA October 30 , 1989 yq MEETING�,. ; AGENDA 'DASTT.-- �11TEk4 ft' • ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 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 Sarah Gronstrand. ROLL CALL: All Present : Councilmembers Lilley, Shiers, Mackey, Borgeson and Mayor Dexter . Staff: Ray Windsor , City Manager ; Henry Engen, Community Director ; Chief Bud McHale, Police Department ; Jeff Jorgensen, City Attorney; Andy Takata, Director of Parks, Recreation and Zoo; Mark Joseph , Director of Administrative Services; Fire Chief, Mike Hicks and • Boyd Sharitz , City Clerk . Mayor Dexter proclaimed the week of October 8-14 as "Fire Prevention Week" and presented the proclamation to Fire Chief, Mike Hicks. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS: None. COMMUNITY FORUM: Steve LaSalle read the attached prepared statement regarding the selection process in choosing the most recent appointee to the Planning Commission. He stated he will return to the next Council meeting and read the answers from Council to the public . John McNeil stated that 6 months ago he spoke regarding a Board of Supervisor ' s meeting at which time they considered the frequent and flagrant violations of the grading permit process. He said the stated at that time Atascadero is having the same problems with many violations of our grading permit process and he thought it would be appropriate that our Planning Department would take a look at what was being done at the County. The Mayor instructed staff to do so at that time. Six months have • gone by and the Board of Supervisors have voted to make the first infraction of the grading permit process a misdemeanor . It is about time that Atascadero do the same. It is about time something is done about the previous speaker ' s comments and Mr . McNeil ' s also . 0 i City Attorney, Jeff Jorgensen, indicated that the County revised their code to make all violations of land use entitlement an infraction as a way of streamlining the enforcement process because they had so many enforcement actions and they found that wasn ' t enough to deter people because the penalty for an infraction was less than the cost of a permit . So they did in fact make recent changes which would allow them to prosecute under a misdemeanor violation. Under the Atascadero Municipal Code we have the authority to prosecute any land use or building code violation as a misdemeanor and that is the way it has been since incorporation. There is the ability to charge certain offenses as infractions if that is considered proper and more efficient . Councilwoman Borgeson said that what the public is saying to Council is that when the public speaks and asks to look into an item, what they are asking for is an answer and when directed to have staff bring that information back , it should be forth coming . A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. SEPTEMBER 26, 1989 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES • 2. REQUEST FOR A ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 26-87, 11300 VIEJO CAMINO (Yamabe 6 Horn Eng./Venden Berghe Development) 3. TENTATIVE PARCELMAP 16-89, 9350 SANTA CURZ - Subdivision of one parcel containing approx. 9.63 ac. into two lots of 4.0 ac. and 5.63 ac. (Lobo Investments/Pace) 4. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PARCEL MAP 43-87, 8500 EL DORADO - Sub- division of 5.02 ac. into four parcels, three containing 20,000 sq. ft. each, and one parcel of 3.64 ac. (Lindsey/ Engineering Development Associates) 5. APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN, DAVID BRAGS 6. AWARD OF BID FOR PLANNING DIVISION UTILITY VEHICLE TO PETE JOHNSON CHEVROLET 7. ACCEPTANCE OF RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED ROADS INTO THE CITY- MAINTAINED ROAD SYSTEM: A. RESOLUTION NO. 64-89 - ACCEPTING ALEGRE AVENUE B. RESOLUTION NO. 81-89 - ACCEPTING RAYAR ROAD 8. RESOLUTION NO. 77-89 - DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON • SIERRA VISTA AT MONITA AVENUE 9. RECOMMENDATION FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF STOP INTERSECTIONS: A. RESOLUTION NO. 78-89 - DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON LAUREL AVENUE AT SANTA LUCIA AVENUE B. RESOLUTION NO. 79-89 - DESIGNATING STOP INTERSECTION ON CENEGAL AVENUE AT LAUREL AVENUE Cbuncilwoman Borgeson asked that item #3 Tentative Parcel Map 16- 89 be pulled from the consent calendar and continued until the next council meeting . Philip Baldner of Volbrecht Surveys responded to Council questions. It was the consensus of the Council to have this item continued until the October 30th meeting for staff input and to have it scheduled as a public hearing. Councilwoman Borgeson asked that item #7 Acceptance of Recently Constructed Roads into the City-Maintained Road System: A. Resolution No. 64-89 - Accepting Alegre Avenue B. Resolution No. 81-89 — Accepting Rayar Road be pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. Council discussion followed . MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey, seconded by Councilman Lilley to approve all Consent Calendar Items except Item A-3. Passed unanimously by roll call vote. B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES: 1 . APPEAL BY TURKO SEMMES OF INVESTIGATION FEE CHARGED FOR GRADING WITHOUT A PERMIT AT 12070 SAN MARCOS ROAD Henry Engen, Community Development Director , gave the staff report with the recommendation for denial of the appeal . Council discussion followed . Turko Semmes said he does not feel the investigation fee is justified . There was no work done on the site that requires a permit . The grading that was done is exempt (UBC Section 7003, line items 8 and 9) . The site is on a major old farm road that attached Paradise Valley and the top of San Marcos Rd . That road has been there over 20 years. The grading was already there and the house has been designed around that grading by putting it in two levels. The sand that was piled up was brought in for future use. Only very minor grading was done. He put in a pipe for the gas line but this does not require a permit. There are a lot of reasons you can dig a trench that does not require a permit . It was his intent not to use the pipe for gas unless he 3 0 had a permit . Mr . Semmes answered questions from Council . Henry Engen responded that the $1590 fee has been established as a precedent to discourage violations as noted by earlier community forum comments. Our Senior Building Inspector visited the site twice before the permit was issued and verified site activity clearly showing work was begun without a permit . Council discussion followed . MOTION: By Councilman Shiers, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to deny the appeal . Motion failed by 3:2 vote with Councilmembers Lilley, Mackey and Dexter voting no . MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Mayor Dexter to accept the appeal . Motion was amended to read : to deny the appeal but reduce the fine to the sum of $100. Also that there be a communication with the Contractor ' s Assoc. to clarify the City 's regulations not allowing commencement of work without a permit . Passed by 3:2 vote by roll call vote with Councilmembers Shiers and Borgeson voting no . MAYOR DEXTER ASKED FOR A RECESS AT 8: 15 P.M. MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:30 P.M. C. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1 . SALARY ADJUSTMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE FY 88-89 WAGE AND CLASSIFICATION STUDY: A. RESOLUTION NO. 73-89 - ADDING 7 DELETING VARIOUS JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND ADOPTING A SALARY/CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE FOR VARIOUS MANAGEMENTy MID-MANAGEMENT/PRO- FESSIONAL, CONFIDENTIAL AND ATASCADERO PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNICIANS ORGANIZATION (APSTO) EMPLOYEES B. RESOLUTION NO. 74-89 - AMENDING THE EMPLOYMENT AGREE- MENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND RAY WINDSOR, CITY MANAGER. C. RESOLUTION NO. 75-89 - APPROVING NEW SALARIES FOR CITY CITY AND CITY TREASURER. Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director gave the staff report with the recommendation for adoption of resolutions, adjusting salaries for the City Manager , City Clerk , City Treasurer and various Management , Mid-Management/Professional , Confidential and Atascadero Public Safety Technicians Organization (APSTO) employees. 4 MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to approve Resolution No . 73-89. Passed unanimously by roll call vote. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Shiers to approve Resolution No . 74-89. Passed unanimously by roll call vote. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey, seconded by Mayor Dexter to approve Resolution No. 75-89. Passed unanimously by roll call vote. 2. HAZARDOUS WASTE PILOT PROGRAM FUNDING Councilwoman Mackey gave the report. Council discussion followed . It was the consensus of the Council to refer to the City Manager that the Council is in agreement and willing to cooperate and a statement or resolution be drafted to indicate this. 3. SELECT DATE FOR CITY ATTORNEY INTERVIEWS. Mayor Dexter gave the staff report based on the memo Council received from the City Manager . Lengthy Council discussion followed . Council directed staff to place display advertisements with City Logo contained in them in the following newspapers: Santa Maria Times, Atascadero News, Telegram Tribune and the News Press. Deadline for applications will be November 1 and the interviews will be held all day on November 8. It will be decided at the next Council meeting whether it will be an open or closed session. Councilmembers Borgeson and Lilley, City Manager and City Attorney will serve on the Committee to develop this recruitment . 4. RESCHEDULE 2ND MEETING IN OCTOBER DUE TO LEAGUE CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE. Mayor Dexter said that due to the League Conference it will be necessary to change the next Council meeting . It was the consensus of the Council that the next Council meeting will be Monday, October 30, 7 p .m. in the Rotunda. 5 0 D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/fit ACTION: 1 . City Council : Mayor Dexter read a proclamation for Red Ribbon Week during the week of October 22-29. The proclamation was given to Police Chief, Bud McHale. Red ribbons were handed out the Council and staff present . Councilwoman Borgeson asked that staff re-evaluate the developer fees in relationship to other cities in the county. City Manager Ray Windsor said his office will be doing this, going one step further doing all fee structures for the City. Councilman Shiers said he would like staff to look into how you define the cumulative impact of development and how does that tie in with the City 's zoning ordinance and sub-division ordinance and whether 10% slopes required a CEQA determination. Councilman Lilley asked to have a Growth Management Committee Meeting as soon as possible to review anything that might impact this city in light of the current debate. City Manager Ray Windsor said one will be held the first week of November . Councilwoman Mackey discussed the Colony Days Parade. Councilman Lilley said he is working on cars for the Council to ride in. 2. City Attorney: None 3. City Clerk: None 4. City Treasurer: None 5. City Manager: None MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10: 15 P.M. UNTIL THE OCTOBER 309 1989 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. 6 MINUTES RECORDED BY: HOYD C. SHARITZ, CITY CLERK PREPARED HYi GEORGIA RAMIREZ, ACTING DEPUTY CITY CLERK 7 October 10 , 1989 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council , As you know, several people from the public , including myself , questioned the selection process in choosing the most recent app•aintee to the Planning Commission. The meeting was chaired by Mayor Dexter. I refer to my letter published in the Atascadero News, dated August 16 , 1989 " . . .From the standpoint of fairness, the voting pattern is even harder to justify. After the first round the two candidates that received the least votes were eliminated. After the second round the candidate that received the least votes was not eliminated. When questioned, Mayor Dexter decided without obtaining a consensus from the Council that this was acceptable . This candidate went on to become the eventual winner. . . " . I call your attention to Resolution No. 35-81 , titled "Resolution Adopting Procedures for the Selection of Committee , Commission and Board Members" . See section 4 . pharagraph c . "The candidate or candidates receiving a majority of the votes of the Council members present shall be appointed. In the event that no candidate or candidates receive a majority vote or in the event of a tie vote, -+hen a run-off ballot or ballots will be cast, following the procedure of sub-paragraph a. above, until a majority is reached. The run-off candidates will consist of all andidates receiving at least two ( 2) votes and if no candidates have received at least two ( 2 ) votes, then those receiving at least one ( 1 ) vote will participate in the run- off balloting. This procedure shall be continued until a majority vote is cast" . I am submitting this in writing an4I wish a written response to the following questions : 1 . Was and is the Council obligated to follow Resolution 35-81 in the selection process of a Planning Commissioner? Did the Council follow Resolution 35-81? 3 . If Resolution 35-81 was not followed, what rules , regulations , procedures or resolutions did Mayor Dexter follow? 1 I£ \&e 2� �.cil was obligate§ t ±c±l/w EeEc±et±oB 25-£I tbf= . �L ��� gate& to �= csect the £lave= o ba11ot12g 2= =eEs . . AtIL:e\ tEl Secon-d rou=t &t Sad been narrowed down to K±I315& 2 § =rL an& U § z ,- - tkeB12to2 5-/I oeiee — I i5e of those two =andi6ates 360516 be selected 1o= the COmmisIi0ln I will be back In twc weeks to read your answers ±_ p lic . ser? t==±7 73333 , Z I �' S epfen zz . ca Salie . See enciOBQ=es : I . Resolution No . 35-e1 2 , tette= t0 toe Editor. Altas adelc News , k=g. QQestlo23 Proce622e 3 . gort5 -aunty Tr"tune, Aug. I7 . Ira§ . Eesident ` ap-a±leJ` Et city` s Selection process, ty Ryan xc2artt7 4 . 20=zc±1 ` 3 votig7 §elle== £02 east ==cent a22ciGteG . 21a22£2= zomrizz±oner | £££Et kn=ee 0± £ive ballots } . . � � . . t RESOLUTION NO. 35-81 RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROCEDURES FOR THE SELECTION OF COMMITTEE, COMMISSION AND BOARD MEMBERS The Council of the City of Atascadero hereby resolves as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this resolution is to establish procedures for the City Council to follow in recruiting, selecting and appointing members to the standing committees, commissions or boards created pursuant to statute or by action of the City Council. Section 2. Recruitment and Eligibility. Announcements of openings for any committees, commissions or boards to which members are appointed by the City Council will be through the local news media. All electors of the City of Atascadero, over the age of 18, and meeting any announced additional criteria as established by the City Council shall be eligible to apply. Section 3. Interviews. All candidates meeting the criteria established in Section 2 will be interviewed by the City Council during a properly noticed meeting. Section 4. Selection. a. Council members will vote for the candidate (s) of their choice by placing their name and circling the name of their selection (s) on a ballot form provided by the City Clerk. Candidates' names will be placed in alphabetical order on the ballot form. b. After the City Council has had an opportunity to make its individual determination, the City Clerk will col- lect the ballots and will announce first the Council member ' s name and second the name (s) of the candidate (s) of that Council member ' s choice (s) . C. The candidate or candidates receiving a majority of the votes of the Council members present shall be appointed. In the event that no candidate or candidates receive a majority vote or in the event of a tie vote, then a run- off ballot or ballots will be cast, following the proce- dure of sub-paragraph a. above, until a majority is reached. The run-off candidates will consist of all candidates receiving at least two (2) votes and if no candidates have received at least two (2) votes, then those receiving at least one (1) vote will participate in the run-off balloting. This procedure shall be con- tinued until a majority vote is cast. Resolution No. , Commission Selection Procedures On motion by Councilman Mackey , and seconded by Councilman Nelson , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Highland, Makey, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Wilkins NOES: None ABSENT: None ADOPTED: November 9, 1981 ROBERT J. WIL 'INS, JR. , 04ayor ATTEST: RAY . WARDEN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney 2 0 LETTER TO THE EDITOR ATASCADERO NEWS, AUGUST 16, 1989 Quel' sdons.prcedur Dear Editor: I attended the recent Atascadero City Council inter- views to fill the Planning Com- mission vacancy. It seems to me that the rules of fair play in_the selection process were violated. I realize that the position of Plann- ing Commissioner is not a paid position and therefore many rules and regulations that apply to employment interviews do not necessarily come into effect. However, equitable treatment and fairness should still apply. Councilman Lilley was not pre- sent for the first two interviews, but he still voted on all can- didates. Even when this pro- cedure was questioned, Mayor Dexter decided without obtaining a consensus from .the entire Council that this would be accep- table. ''.-,From. the ; standpoint...of j even harder to justify. After the first round the two candidates that received the fewest votes were eliminated.After the second round the candidate that received - the fewest votes was not eliminated. When questioned, Mayor-Dexter decided without obtaining the consensus from the . Council thatthis was acceptable. This candidate went on to become the eventual winner.` Is this a example of the make- it-up-as-you-go-along procedure. now used to conduct City" business? Stephen La Salle I esi ent 'appallePat city's selection oces' s vn McCrthyy as commissioner. arrived late for the meeting and elegram-Tribune He replaces Michael Tobey, who mused their interviews. resigned in May for health reasons. Additionally,Hanauer was not elim- ATASCADER0 — An Atascadero The vote for a new commissioner inated as a candidate despite receiv_; ident who,.was a consultant to split the council along slow-growthing only a single vote in the early ties on personnel matters said he is and pro-development lines,with Han- rounds,LaSalle said y :appalled" at how the City Council suer winning votes from &ormcil-. Finally, he questioned a statement- elected a new planning commission- members Robert Lilley,Rollin Dexter by Mayor Dexter that a candidate and Marge Mackey. "There was no sense of fairness," James H y could receive council votes even if he aid Steve LaSalle. elan, who ran for City did not show up for the interview. City Steve S defended the process, Council last year on a slow-growth "That is totally out of the realm of owever. A P platform, won votes from Council any interview situation I've ever been Personnel department members Bonita Borgeson and Alden in," LaSalle said of Dexter's com- pokgswoman said planning commis- Shiers.Herman,a county government ment. =sioners are not, city employees, so employee, formerly worked as a LaSalle, who also worked for the' ";formal rules'for hiring personnel do builder contractor in Southern Cali- State personnel Board, asked "what of apply to the commission. forma. After kinds of rules and procedures are. taking five votes, the council LaSalle, who has been active in they following?" He said children majority Friday finally selected J. slow-growth efforts, wanted Lilley to picking teams for schoolyard games Donald Hanauer;a former Los Ange- abstain from.voting'on Herman or . es Chamber of Commerce executive, Hanauer, because the councilman "have pa better sense of honor and fair "That's Mr.LaSalle's point of view," Dexter responded, "and I'm going to stick by my guns.,, Dexter called the council proce- dures fair and Lilley's voting proper. NORTH COUNTY TRIBUNE 'Tin the mayor," Dexter said. "I had to make,a decision and I did it." August 17, 1989 I `Lilley,an attorney,was late getting to Friday's meeting because of a court hearing. . He said Friday that he knew Herman from the city council cam paign.and knew Hanauer from a local service club. Candidates for the planning com- mission submitted written state- ments, Lilley noted "An interview is part of an overall impression," he added.. Herman said that he would like to see Lilley's vote stricken and for the councilto to.vote again on a planning commissioner. ! Hanauer said this week that it -would have been"disastrous"for his try to win a commission post if Lilley had not voted, but that the council- man's participation was proper be- cause he knew the contenders. As -the council vote for a new commissioner developed Friday,Mar- gey Mackey became the swing vote in the selection of Hanauer. Herman had two votes, Hanauer ihad two-Votes,and Mackey supported former planning commissioner Mildred Copelan.. j After the cotmcil twicedeadlocked iwith two votes apiece for Hanauer and Herman,with Copelan getting the fifth vote, Mackey announced she would support Hanauer. I She said after the meeting that she supported Hanauer because he had a business background,as did Michael Tobey. City Clerk Boyd Sharitz said this .veek that only three of the five council members turned in evaluation heets used to help rate candidates. COUNCIL S VOTING PATTL'L+t,T rr%F }-i`ryT RECENT T 1T)7 /" T P T T C O FIVE BT T OTS 7 �'..,ruvr.?��v� �,uMM�..• T'1N:,r' � FiF:aT THREE v£ � ;.LE H1,L:,-� "5- =liot Dexter Hanauer Lilley Cope Ian Mackey Johnson Borgeson Herman. achers Keefe Note : The following people received no votes and were eliminated: McNek, Sharp Second Nallot Dexter Hanauer Lilley Copelan Mackey ''ope1an Borgeson Herman Schiers Herman '"!tird zealot: ��r.�. -- Hanauer Lilley Hanauer Ma cke-y C:pelan Borgeson Herman SciierS Herman MEETII�C�,, . ,, -,AGENDA DATE�.�. ITEM 1 =: CITY OF ATASCADERO • SCHEDULE OF CASH RECEIPTS AND TRANSFERS IN TREASURER' S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1989 CASH RECEIPTS: Taxes: Property Taxes 66 ,215. 00 State Trailer In-Lieu 5,642.27 Sales Tax 169,155. 97 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 67,152.16 Cigarette Tax 3 ,555. 42 Miscellaneous Taxes 173. 88 Sanitation Fees 8,003. 00 Licenses/Permits/Fees 59 ,667. 00 Franchise Fees 4,516. 11 Fines/Penalties/Overages 1,092. 04 Investment Earnings 22, 496. 74 P.O.S.T. Reimbursement 636. 64 Sales-Maps/Publications/Reports 327.20 Rents/Concessions 260.50 Police Services 176. 00 • Parks and Recreation Fees 11, 794. 62 Traffic Safety 5 , 805.24 Dial-A-Ride 2 , 756. 65 Development Fees 42 ,207. 00 Lake/Park Concessions 3 , 849. 33 Zoo Receipts 5 ,120. 08 Amapoa-Tecorida 51. 76 Miscellaneous 3, 439. 04 TOTAL CASH RECEIPTS 484 ,093. 65 OTHER CASH RECEIPTS: Refunds 5 ,654.38 Bail/Refundable Bonds 19 ,458. 79 Reimbursement to Expense 11,242. 12 TOTAL OTHER CASH RECEIPTS 36 ,355. 29 • CITY OF ATASCADERO CASH ACTIVITY SUMMARY • TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1989 BEGINNING CASH RESOURCES 6 ,993 ,314. 20 ADD: RECEIPTS 520,448. 94 FUND TRANSFERS 602 ,263. 89 LESS: DISBURSEMENTS 910,845. 00 FUND TRANSFERS 602,263. 89 ENDING CASH RESOURCES 6,602,918. 14 SCHEDULE OF CASH RESOURCES Int. Due AS OF SEPTEMBER 30 , 1989 Rate Date Checking Account: Mid-State Bank 62, 893. 42 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 4,915,000.00 8. 80 N/A Fed Home Loan Bank Discount Note-City 488,947.22 8. 97 10/02/89 Fed Home Loan Bank Discount Note-Sanit 937,537.50 9. 12 10/24/89 Other Cash Resources: Petty Cash 540. 00 TOTAL CASH RESOURCES 6,602,918. 14 n 1 i G � SIBBACH • City Treasurer • CITY OF ATASCADERO SCHEDULE OF DISBURSEMENTS FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1989 DISBURSEMENTS Hand Warrant Register for September, 1989 103 ,610. 87 09/01/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 167,204.59 09/15/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 240 , 831.53 09/19/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 48 ,181.29 09/29/89 Accounts Payable Warrants 124 ,551. 83 Service Charge-Mastercard/Visa 5. 00 Wires for September 200, 000. 00 09/13/89 Payroll Checks #47356-47508 112,681.32 09/27/89 Payroll Checks #47509-47662 114,161. 75 Total 1,111,228. 18 LESS: Voided Check #47607 24. 00 Voided Check #47575 201. 40 Voided Check #47884 19. 95 Voided Check #47892 105. 33 • Voided Check #47608 32. 50 Total Disbursements 1,110, 845. 00 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 H • AdministratiVee Services Director REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-4 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/30/89 File Number: TPM 17-89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director lwil. SUBJECT: Subdivision of one parcel containing 6 . 25 acres into four (4 ) lots . Two lots will contain 1 . 5 acres , one lot will contain 1 . 58 acres and one lot will contain 1 . 66 acres at 7550 Cortez Road (Nathan Barrett/Twin Cities Engineering) . RECOMMENDATION: • Approval in accordance with Planning Commission recommendation based on the Findings contained in the staff report dated October 3, 1989 , and the attached revised Conditions of Approval . BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the above- referenced map on October 3, 1989 and - on a 5 : 2 vote - recom- mended approval of Tentative Parcel Map i7-89 subiect to the Findings and Conditions of Approval with the addition of Condition #19 to read: 1119 . A one hundred ( 100) foot Boli-buildable easement parallel to Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way shall be shown on the final map. " HE :ph Attachment: Planning Commission - Revised Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Staff Report - Oct . 3, 1989 Planning Commission Minutes Excerpts - Oct. 3 , 1989 CC : Nathan Barrett • Twin Cities Engineering PLANNING COMMISSION - REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Kap 17-89 7550 Cortez Ave. (Barrett) October 3, 1989 CONDITIONS OF .APPROVAL: 1 . Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water service shall be stubbed to a meter vault at the right of way line of each lot. , 2 . Electric power, gas, telephone and cable television services shall be stubbed to the right-of-way line of each lot and all facilities to distribute such services shall be provided according to the requirements of the responsible utility companies. 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. 4 . All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer. 5a. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for the entire subdivision, including driveways, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recordation of the final map. b. A drainage plan shall be prepared, and an easement shall be offered to the City to handle runoff from Curbaril from current and future development. c. Drainage facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero standards . All work shall be completed or bonded prior to the recording of the final map. d. The grading and drainage plan shall include the elevation of proposed structures and pads. If the site is to be filled above the base flood, the final pad elevation shall be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor and submitted to the City Engineer prior to transmittal to the Floodplain Administrator. Final pad elevations shall appear as a note on the final map. 6. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community 0 i Development and Public Works Departments, prior to the construction of improvements. Said plans shall include, but not be limited to: Cortez Avenue: a. Design shall conform to design of Cortez Avenue being prepared in connection with proposed development at 7445 Cortez as per AT89-013 being prepared by Cuesta Engineering. Plans shall include a minimum paved section of 20 feet with 4 foot based shoulders, berms and drainage facilities as required by the City Engineer. The intersection at Curbaril shall be reconstructed to include a 30 foot radius curve return at the edge of pavement on each side. A temporary turn-around constructed to fire department standards, may be required at the end of the Cortez Avenue extension. Design shall include measures to save and preserve trees within the right-of-way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Curbaril Avenue: b. Pavement shall be widened to 20 feet from centerline with a taper installed to match the railroad crossing. A four foot based shoulder shall be installed along the edge of roadway along with any berms or drainage facilities required by the City Engineer. Design shall include measures to preserve trees within the right-of- way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments . 7 . Construction of the public road improvements shall be completed prior to the recording of the final map. 8 . Subdivider shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department prior to the installation of improvements, including drainage facilities and all road construction. Subdivider shall also sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done in conformance with approved plans and inspection fees paid. All work required by the encroachment permit shall be completed prior to the recordation of the final map. 9. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs, barricades, and other similar devices where required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in conformance with the Department of Public Works standards and the current State of California uniform sign chart . Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review and modifications after construction. 0 0 10 . All public improvements shall be covered with a 100% Performance Bond until construction is accepted and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until one year after construction approval. 11 . Offers of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following street rights-of-way are required: Street Name: Curbaril Avenue Limits: 25 feet from centerline to right of way limits and corner radius . Street Name: Cortez Avenue Limits: 20 foot (min. ) from centerline to right of way. Additional right-of-way shall be required to provide a minimum of 10 feet of right-of-way adjacent to the edge of the pavement. 20 foot radius at the north corner of Curbaril and Cortez Avenues . 12 . An offer of dedication to the Public for a Public Utilities Easement at the following location: a. A 6 foot public utilities easement along all street frontages. 13. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously with the recordation of the final map. 14 . Parcel 1 shall have no direct access to Curbaril Avenue. Access shall be by way of Cortez Avenue only. Relinquishment of access rights shall be delineated on the final map. 15 . The fire hydrants located at the intersection of Cortez Avenue and Curbaril Avenue and Cortez and Maleza Avenue shall be upgraded to City standards . All fire hydrant installation and upgrade shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 16. A landscaping plan for noise attenuation, including number, location and species of trees and other plants, and irrigation plans, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the recordation of the final map. Installation of the required landscaping and irrigation system may be bonded for a period not to exceed one (1) year form the date of final approval of the map. 17 . A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s Subdivision Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be 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. 18 . 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. 19. A one hundred (100) foot non-buildable easement parallel to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way shall be shown on the final map. CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B- 1 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 3, 1989 BY: Karl Schoettler, Assistant Planner File No: TPM 17-89 v`4, SUBJECT: Subdivision of one (1) parcel containing approximately 6.25 acres into four (4) lots. Two lots will contain 1 .5 acres. One lot will contain 1 .58 acres and one lot will contain 1 . 66 acres. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of TPM 17-89 based on the Findings for Approval in Exhibit E and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit F. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1 . Applicant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nathan Barrett 2 . Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Twin Cities Engineering 3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . .7550 Cortez Ave. 4 . General Plan Designation. . . . .Moderate Density Single Family 5. Zoning District . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-Y (1. 0 ac w/sewer; 1 .5 ac. w/o sewer min. lot size) 6. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.25 acres 7 . Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant 8 . Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted September 19, 1989 ANALYSIS: The application before the Commission proposes to subdivide one (1) existing parcel which contains approximately 6.25 acres into four (4) lots . Two of the new lots will contain 1 .5 acres each. One lot will contain 1 .58 acres and one lot will contain 1 . 66 acres. The General Plan designates this property for Moderate Density Single Family development . The property is located within the Urban Services Line and is within the RSF-Y zone • ! district. The minimum lot sizes in this zone are one (1 . 0) acre where sanitary sewer service is available and 1 .5 acres where there is no sewer service. There is no sewer service to this site; therefore, the minimum allowable lot size is 1 .5 acres. A part of this proposal involves the extension of Cortez Avenue north to a subdivision previously approved by the Commission (TPM 04-89) . At present, the paved section of Cortez terminates at the intersection with Maleza Avenue. The applicant for the subdivision to the north is being required to extend and pave Cortez from Maleza north to its proposed terminus. This will include construction of a city-standard cul-de-sac. However, this subdivision has not been submitted for final approval. In the event that that map is not approved, or tentative approval expires, the required street improvements would not be constructed. Therefore, the subdivision presently being considered has been conditioned to construct a temporary turn- around, built to fire department standards, at the end of the existing Cortez Avenue right-of-way. There are two important concerns relative to this site being developed for residential use. The Southern Pacific Railroad runs along the east side of the site, producing significantly increased noise levels when trains are passing by. The City' s General Plan Noise Element indicates that a passing train generates 70 dB (A) when measured at 50 feet. This level is above the 45 dB (A) considered maximum for rural single family areas during the day. This maximum drops to 35 dB (A) during the night. The subdivision approved to the north of this site has been required to establish a 100 foot setback with the installation of screening plantings along the railroad to help reduce noise problems. These steps, along with soundproofing construction incorporated into future buildings, should work to reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels . The second area of concern involves the inclusion of this area within the 500 year flood hazard boundary of the Salinas River as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) . The FEMA map is attached to this report as Exhibit D. The FIRM (Flood Insurance Rate Map) includes this area in Zone B. Zone B is defined as : "Areas between limits of the 100-year flood and 500-year flood; or certain areas subject to 100-year flooding with average depths less than one (1) foot or where the contributing drainage area is less than one square mile; or areas protected by levees from the base flood. " This site is generally lower than surrounding ground (the railroad, Curbaril Avenue, Cortez Avenue, and Pine Mountain to the north) and can be expected to experience some minor flooding problems as a result. However, the property could be developed for residential use by incorporating flood control measures, and if necessary, elevating building pads above flood levels . The • 0 subdivision should be conditioned to insure conformance with the City' s Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance (Ordinance 193) . Conditioned as such, the subdivision should not contribute to downstream flooding problems or expose future residents to unreasonable flood related damage or hazards. This project has been reviewed by the City' s Fire Department and the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department . Both Departments have provided recommended conditions of approval which are included in Exhibit F. With these conditions, neither Department has any objection to the approval of the proposed subdivision. CONCLUSIONS: The design of the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the City' s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed home sites can be developed without adverse impacts on surrounding areas. The recommended Conditions of Approval will insure that the potential effects of noise and flooding on future residents are mitigated to acceptable levels. The proposed use, and the size of the proposed lots is consistent with existing development in the vicinity of the subdivision. Staff believes that each of the Findings required by the Subdivision Map Act can be made relative to this proposal. KCS/kcs ATTACHMENTS : Exhibit A - Location and Zoning Map Exhibit B - General Plan Map Exhibit C — Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit D - FEMA Map Exhibit E - Findings for Approval Exhibit F - Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT A �r LOCATION & ZONING A ACITY OF ATASCADERO N, - , TPM 17-89COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Ls I / tHl � o i gyp. r i , ; SITE •~'+� �``�o•9�+�� I �-- 7550 Cortez Ave. ,�` `� �.�r �r P Zone: RSF-Y ►� i !/: •� `�,� 11 1 L ,r •� vALLE \SET/�\ '� N♦y \ �'_' 1 \ �— " { i �-C! i I l� - R F•Z E( N ` ;_ C i'°;�4o T L r.. . EXHIBIT B �. � ., CITY OF ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN MAP !RIP C^�su -�" COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TPM 17-89 DEPARTMENT INDUSTRIA r - NOR j �\e�9 �tNDUSTRIA --__ - • .P U RLI-O-- l • 0 I I pI se • • RECREATIR/ • - SITE ., • \ EC 7550 Cortez Ave. • — , Mod. Density Single !t, � ! Family \may ✓ ° • fj Y_ • ,j �h DEN. . RECREATIO 3/ � � �z_ -,-�' `" `� •° I TY ! `a LLE IGH ►E i t N►� IGH I -;-- ,:_ •��. �.� i E N S, MFLia w w • • • RE OENSI`fV. MULTI-,fjA4t r- LOW •• •0 4t !BETA. DENSITY OM'M R!CIALI �- ULTI•FAWLY 4 FL DW. Stirl(1 At 1 -VENst \ '� �` ±` FA ILY o MOOVIRAT�E , • RE .SIC R`fd +ITLIN� -�a .M F._�.-1-i L;�, �, Du E,N S1 TY \ _ COMMER:jAL, RE T. ti_ EXHIBIT C CITY OF ATAS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CADERO TPM 17-89 - scan. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT �t' .ti • - s a�V�r 11Xti22 771 aAT ILA w1 Z EXHIBIT D FEMA Map � CITY OF ATASCADERO TPM I7-89 CAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RM2 - o �T r y 1 Y `riblY rift- TE if.r II4P 1i 11 � 0 EXHIBIT E - Findings for Approval Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 7550 Cortez Ave. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment . The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. MAP FINDINGS: 1 . The proposed map is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 2 The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 3 . The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development . 4 . The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed improvements, will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat . 6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7 . The design of the subdivision and/or the type of proposed improvements will not cause serious public health problems. EXHIBIT F - Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 7550 Cortez Ave. (Barrett) October 3, 1989 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water service shall be stubbed to a meter vault at the right of way line of each lot. 2 . Electric power, gas, telephone and cable television services shall be stubbed to the right-of-way line of each lot and all facilities to distribute such services shall be provided according to the requirements of the responsible utility companies. 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. 4 . All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer. 5a. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for the entire subdivision, including driveways, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recordation of the final map. b. A drainage plan shall be prepared, and an easement shall be offered to the City to handle runoff from Curbaril from current and future development. c. Drainage facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero standards . All work shall be completed or bonded prior to the recording of the final map. d. The grading and drainage plan shall include the elevation of proposed structures and pads . If the site is to be filled above the base flood, the final pad elevation shall be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor and submitted to the City Engineer prior to transmittal to the Floodplain Administrator. Final pad elevations shall appear as a note on the final map. 6. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, prior to the construction of improvements. Said plans shall include, but not be limited to: Cortez Avenue: a. Design shall conform to design of Cortez Avenue being prepared in connection with proposed development at 7445 Cortez as per AT89-013 being prepared by Cuesta Engineering. Plans shall include a minimum paved section of 20 feet with 4 foot based shoulders, berms and drainage facilities as required by the City Engineer. The intersection at Curbaril shall be reconstructed to include a 30 foot radius curve return at the edge of pavement on each side. A temporary turn-around constructed to fire department standards, may be required at the end of the Cortez Avenue extension. Design shall include measures to save and preserve trees within the right-of-way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments . Curbaril Avenue: b. Pavement shall be widened to 20 feet from centerline with a taper installed to match the railroad crossing. A four foot based shoulder shall be installed along the edge of roadway along with any berms or drainage facilities required by the City Engineer. Design shall include measures to preserve trees within the right-of- way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments . 7 . Construction of the public road improvements shall be completed prior to the recording of the final map. 8 . Subdivider shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department prior to the installation of improvements, including drainage facilities and all road construction. Subdivider shall also sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done in conformance with approved plans and inspection fees paid. All work required by the encroachment permit shall be completed prior to the recordation of the final map. 9. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs, barricades, and other similar devices where required by the Director of Public Works . Signs shall be in conformance with the Department of Public Works standards and the current State of California uniform sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review and modifications after construction. 10 . All public improvements shall be covered with a 100% Performance Bond until construction is accepted and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until one year after construction approval . 11 . Offers of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following street rights-of-way are required: Street Name: Curbaril Avenue Limits : 25 feet from centerline to right of way limits and corner radius. Street Name: Cortez Avenue Limits : 20 foot (min. ) from centerline to right of way. Additional right-of-way shall be_ required to provide a minimum of 10 feet of right-of-way adjacent to the edge of the pavement. 20 foot radius at the north corner of Curbaril and Cortez Avenues . 12 . An offer of dedication to the Public for a Public Utilities Easement at the following location: a. A 6 foot public utilities easement along all street frontages. 13 . Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously with the recordation of the final map. 14 . Parcel 1 shall have no direct access to Curbaril Avenue. Access shall be by way of Cortez Avenue only. Relinquishment of access rights shall be delineated on the final map. 15 . The fire hydrants located at the intersection of Cortez Avenue and Curbaril Avenue and Cortez and Maleza Avenue shall be upgraded to City standards. All fire hydrant installation and upgrade shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 16. A landscaping plan for noise attenuation, including number, location and species of trees and other plants, and irrigation plans, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the recordation of the final map. Installation of the required landscaping and irrigation system may be bonded for a period not to exceed one (1) year form the date of final approval of the map. 17 . A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s Subdivision Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be 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. 18 . 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. . . PLANNING COMMISSIO MINUTES EXCERPTS MI S - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION Regul Meeting Tuesda_ October 3, 1989 7 :30 p.m. Atascade o Administration Building The regular n -eting of the Atascadero Planning Comn scion was called to orde - at 7 :30 p.m. by Chairperson Loehr — ge, followed by the Pledge o Allegiance . ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Waage, Brasher, Lo ez-Balbontin, Luna, Hanauer, Highl 'nd, and Chairpe on Lochridge Absent: None Staff Present: Steven DeCamp, Seni r Planner; Doug Davidson, Associate Plann r; Karl Schoettler, Assistant Planner; Pat She hard, Administrative Secretary PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 . Approval o minutes of the regular tinning Commission meeting o September 19, 1989 2 . Consid -ation of staff report for approv 1 of time extei ion for Tentative Parce Map 23-87 a 13900 Los it Road - Tom Vaughan Commis ioner Luna requested that item A-2 be pulle for disc sion. M ION: By Commissioner Luna, seconded by Commissioner Waage and carried 7 :0 to approve Item A-1 of t e Consent Calendar. B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS 1 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 17-89 : Application filed by Nathan Barrett (Twin Cities Engin- eering, agent) to subdivide 6 . 25 acres into four 'lots of 1 . 51 1 . 5 , 1 . 58 , and 1 . 66 acres each. Subject site is located at 7550 Cortez Avenue. Doug Davidson presented the staff report which focused on issues involved with the subdivision including road improvements, proximity to the railroad right-of-way, and the site' s location in the 500 year flood zone. Staff is recommending approval subject to 18 conditions . Commission questions and discussion followed relative to drainage and flooding concerns, proper channeling of run- off, effects of possible flooding in this area, etc. Allen Campbell, representing the applicant, stated the property slopes to the northeast and explained that the water would channel toward a bridge opening under the railroad. He explained that percolation rates for this site are good. Since the lots will all be at least 1 1/2 acres, the percentage of coverage on the lots are relatively small compared to the area of the lots, so most of the water will Percolate into the ground. Mr. Campbell expressed concern with condition #k6-b as he felt a safety hazard could result by only widening the road in front of one property as the road would narrow past this point. He asked that this condition be eliminated. He then responded to questions from the commission. Iii response to question from Commissioner Luna, Mr. Campbell explained that the road improvements for this subdivision would coordinated with the adjacent Larson property which recently received Council approval for a 4 lot subdivision. Mary McTaggart, 5200 Maieza, stated she is not opposed to the proposed development and spoke on concerns she had. Neither she nor 2 neighbors received notification of this hearing. She expressed concern with the road construction standards as there is a large tree right by the proposed extension. Mrs. McTaggart also spoke on concerns she had that any construction would not add additional water run-off onto her property. Discussion followed concerning road and drainage improvement standards, suitable location for conveyance of the water, adequate tree protection, public notification procedures , etc. Wayne Kasper, 7480 Cortez, asked if development would be limited to one building site and whether "granny housing" would be allowed, and expressed Concern that septic systems would percolate into the lower area adding to the drainage problem. Discussion ensued relative to the differences between granny housing versus guest housing. In response to questions from Commissioner Highland, Mr. Davidson explained the intent of condition 6-a and b was to provide better access to the ultimate development of eight lots along Cortez. Mr. Decamp pointed out that an additional condition needs to be added reflecting the restriction of building within a 100 foot easement adjacent to the railroad tracks . Mr. Campbell noted he had no problem with this addition. MOTION: By Commissioner Highland and seconded by Commis- sioner Waage to approve Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 subject to the Findings and Conditions contained in the staff report with addition of condition #19 to read: 1119 . A one hundred (100) foot non-buildable easement parallel to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way shall be shown on the final map. " Commissioner Luna stated he could not support the motion as he had concerns about drainage; flooding, pipelines, and noise. Commissioner Brasher expressed concern with the possible impacts drainage may have on this subdivision as well as the Larson subdivision. The motion passed 5 : 2 with the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Highland, Waage, Hanauer, Lopez-Balbontin and Chairperson Lochridge NOES: Commissioners Luna and Brasher Chairperson Lochridge declared a recess at 8 : 27 p.m. ; meeting reconvened at 8 :40 p.m. 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 13-89 : Application filed by Sanders Construction (CN Ss and hics, agent) to request a change in th- eviously appy d sign criteria for the individ tenants of the Food Less and Longs Drugs s _ ing center. Subject site ' located at 83 310 E1 Camino Real . Mr. Davidson presented th- aff report in which approval for a change in sign teria recommended subject to four conditions . . Commiss ' questions and discussion follow Andy Ballard with CN Signs and Graphics , represen a the • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-5 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/30/89 File No: TPM 23-87 From: Henry Engen, Community Development DirectorAr<: SUBJECT: Request by Tom Vaughan of a one year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 23-87 ( 13900 Los Altos Road) . RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a one year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 23-87 , extending the approval date to September 22 , 1990 . • BACKGROUND : The above-referenced map was approved by the City Council on September 22 , 1987 based on the attached Conditions of Approval . The applicant has requested a continuance in order to complete the required conditions of approval . Since a continual effort has been made toward completion of the project, the Planning Com- mission recommended approval . Under the City' s Subdivision Ordinance, this is the only time extension allowed. HE:ph Attachments : Memorandum to Planning Commission - Oct. 3 , 1989 Request for Extension - August 17 , 1989 Planning Commission Staff Report - Sept. 1 , 1989 CC : Tom Vaughan • MEMORANDUM • TO: Planning Commission FR0M:9 9 Doug Davidson, Associate Planner RE: Tentative Parcel Map 23-87 - 13900 Los Altos Rd. (formerly 11605 San Marcos Rd. DATE: October 3, 1989 The above referenced map was approved by the Planning Commission on September 1, 1987 and subsequently approved by the City Council on September 22, 1987 based on the Findings and Conditions of Approval in the staff report (see attachments) . The applicant has requested a continuance in order to complete the required conditions of approval. Since a continual effort has been made toward completion of the project, the map should be extended for one year. Under the City' s Subdivision Ordinance, • this is the only time extension allowed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a one year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 23-87, extending the approval date to September 22, 1990 . DD/dd Attachments: 1 . Request for Extension 2 . Staff Report • VAUGHAN SURVEYS 630141h STREET Paso Robles, CA 93446 (805) 238-5700 • FAX(805) 239-7878 August 17, 1989 City of Atascadero Planning Department 6500 Palma Street Atascadero, CA 93446 Attn: Mr. Steve De Camp Re: Time Extension of Parcel Map AT 87-134 Dear Steve, I hereby request an extension of time for the above referenced Parcel Map in order to complete the conditions required for approval. As you know, we have been attempting to meet Condition Number 5 for quite some time now and feel optimistic about acquiring the necessary grading permit shortly. Enclosed please find the required check for $220. 00. Sincerely, VAUGHAN SURVEYS Tom Vaughan • 0 CITY OF ATASCADERO Item:—B-3 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: 9/1/87 BY: 010steven L. DeCamp, Senior Planner File No: TPM 23-87 SUBJECT: Request to subdivide one (1) parcel containing 10.55 acres into two (2) lots containing approximately 5.2 acres each. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tom and Karen Vaughn 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Same 3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11605 San Marcos Road 4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Lot 2, Block 80, Atas Col. 5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 10. 55 acres 6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (2. 5 - 10.0 ac. min. lot size) 7. General Plan Designation. . . . .Suburban Single Family 8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant , 9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted August 5, 1987 B. ANALYSIS: The property proposed for subdivision is located in the RS (Residential Suburban) zone. Minimum lot size in this zone ranges between 2. 5 and 10. 0 acres depending upon the "score" of various performance standards. For this site, the minimum lot size criteria are: Distance from center (16, 000 - 18, 000) 0. 60 Septic Suitability (severe) 1. 50 Average Slope (31% - 35%) 1. 75 Access Condition (paved) 0. 40 Neighborhood Character (4. 75 ac. ) 0. 95 Minimum Lot Size 5. 20 ac. i • Tentative Parcel Map 23-87 September 1, 1987 Page 2 The lot size proposed (5. 2 acres) is equal to the minimum lot size that would be allowed. The property proposed for subdivision is very steep with slopes of between 25% and 48%. These slopes limit residential development opportunities on the proposed lots. Each lot does have, however, a site that appears suitable for the construction of a single family dwelling and septic system. Because of these steep slopes, the grading required for construction on the new lots will require Precise Plan review and approval. Precise Plan review is done at staff level and is dictated by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and this City's guidelines for its implementation. The slopes on this property appear to be relatively unstable. For this reason, the applicant was required to submit a Preliminary Geologic Investigation. This report, which was prepared June 27, 1987 by Dr. David Chipping, indicates that considerable care needs to be exercised in the development of the proposed new lots. The existence of this report will be noted on the final map to insure future purchasers of the findings of the report. In addition, it will be recommended that the applicant be required to construct the access road to the property to insure conformance with the recommendations of the geologic report. Development of this site in conformance with the recommendations of the geologic report and proper engineering standards will result in appropriate densities for the site and the surrounding area. Under no circumstances, however, can staff recommend that this site ever be further subdivided given the knowledge we now have of the site's geology and septic suitability. C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval of TPM 23-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit C and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit D. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location and Zoning Exhibit B - Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit C - Findings for Approval Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval • t=XulF317 Q ., CITY OF ATASCADERO Loc-a4-ion wnd z�,n - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT IPM 7-3- 87 �A �O S 4040 S44' P� AD OS OL Oa S I Tc I y� D OR O SA tO �p G • Exp-���-r 6 pool ..., . CITY OF A . TASCADERO Ta•p% 4�a-�#va, pirc-c-1too M a p ` ►scnn>�1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IPM Z3 -8-7 DEPARTMENT J -Zvf� I lift —107 2 mac p :1 pp • ; i '7 ! Iii` \` '.\ � ,. : i I I ♦ .\ t\�. \ • i EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval Tentative Parcel Map 23-87 September 1, 1987 FINDINGS: 1. The creation of these parcels conforms to the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. 2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the recommended Conditions of Approval, will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed. 5. The design of the subdivision, and the proposed improvements, will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474.6 of the State Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge of waste. r • EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 23-87 September 1, 1987 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel or its public utilities easement prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for private driveways and access easements, 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 final map. 4. Improvement plans for the proposed private access, 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. 5. Construction of the private access and driveways shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 6. An encroachment permit shall be obtained for all work to be undertaken within the public right-of-way. 7. 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. 8. A note shall appear on the final map indicating the existence of the Preliminary Geologic Investigation, the author, the date of preparation, and the fact that the report is on file in the Community Development Department. 9. The fire hydrant located at the intersection of the proposed access easement and Los Altos Road shall be upgraded to City standards prior to recordation of the final map. 10. 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. ! 0 Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 23-87 September 1, 1987 Page 2 a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be 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. 11. 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 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting_ Date : 10/30/89 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-6 Through : Ray Windsor . City Manager From: Department of Public Works Subject : Authorization to purchase vehicles . Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council approve the purchase of the following vehicles : 2 ea 20-22 Passanger Dial-A-Ride buses with wheelchair lifts and radios 1 ea 1/2 ton pick-up - Street Division • 1 ea 1 ton pick-up - Street Division 1 ea 1/2 ton pick-up - Engineering Division 1 ea Sewer Jetter Truck — Sanitation Background: Each of these vehicles were proposed and approved during the 1989-90 budget process . Discussion: The buses are being purchased with an 80% UMTA Section 18 grant . Both buses are replacements for existing high mileage vehicles . The two trucks for the street department are expansion vehicles to relieve aging vehicles . The 1/2 ton pick-up for engineering is a replacement vehicle for the 1980 LUV 4 X 4 . The sewer fetter truck is a replacement for the existing jet truck which was inherited from the County . • Options : • 1) Approve all purchases 2) Approve only select items 3) Deny all purchases Fiscal Impact : As stated above , all vehicles are funded in the 1989-90 budget . The cost breakdown is as follows : 2 ea Dial-A-Ride Buses $16,400 (City Share) 1 ea 1/2 ton Truck $32 ,000 1 ea 1 ton Truck (Streets) (Both) 1 ea 4 X 4 Truck (Engr) $13,500 1 ea Jetter Truck (Sanit) $70,000 VJH/vjh • • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-7 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10-30-89 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director "I"ID SUBJECT: Award Contract for Backhoe Attachment and Hydraulic Scraper RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council award a contract to Berchtold Equipment Co . for $7,335.20 to purchase a backhoe attachment and hydraulic scraper . BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Funds in the amount of $8, 300 were appropriated in the FY • 89-90 Budget to purchase a backhoe attachment and hydraulic scraper for a Parks Division tractor ($6,500 and $1 ,800, respectively) . Because the items are commonly stocked by the same type of vendors, both items were combined into one formal bid. A Notice Inviting Bids (Bid No. 89-7) was issued on September 18, 1969, with sealed bids due no later than October 5, 1989 at 2 p .m. A total of three bids were received. Exhibit I breaks out the results of those bids. The bid file is available for review in the Finance Office (Room 210 B) . Based on Exhibit I , and after consultation with the appropriate Department Head , the lowest responsive bidder was Berchtold Equipment Co. (Santa Maria) for a total cost ( including shipping and taxes) of $7,335.20. FISCAL IMPACT: A total of $8,300 was budgeted in accounts 900-86-10 and 900-86-11 , both in Fund 740. Since the lowest bid is under budget , there is no negative fiscal impact . The remaining funds are available for future use. • EXHIBIT I : BID RESPONSE ANALYSIS FOR BACKHOE ATTACHMENT AND HYDRAULIC SCRAPER (Bid No . 89-7) VENDOR TOTAL AMOUNT Berchtold Equipment Co . (Santa Maria) $7,335.20 E1 Camino Farm Supply (Paso Robles) 8,341 . 14 C & N Tractors (Watsonville) 9,251 .68 Budgeted Estimate 8,300.00 • 0 0 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 10/30/89 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-8 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Department of Public Works Subject : Annual Resolution establishing a Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) Policy and Liaison Officer . Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Resolution and Policies . Background: The "Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1987" requires that an annual goal of not less that 10% be established for the participation of small business concerns owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals . Additionally women shall be included into this category and a • separate goal for Women Business Enterprises (WBE) is no longer acceptable . Discussion: The City must (1) establish a Policy Statement by council action, (2) designate a DBE Liaison Officer , (3) establish an annual goal , (4) Establish individual project goals , (S) give public notification of annual goal on an annual basis and (6) administer the DBE policy . The annual goal is the aggregate of the individual contract project goals that are expected during the federal fiscal year . By establishing the annual goal now the project goals can be set individually with a single goal less than or greater than the annual goal . A project goal is based on the size (cost) and type of work, availability of DBE participation , and past achievement . Title 49CFR requires that a waiver must be requested and approved for an annual goal of less than 10% . Options : (1) Approve attached Resolution and Policy (2) Reject Resolution and Policy which would create • ineligibility for City to participation in Federally funded programs . Fiscal Impact • The fiscal impact of the required policy is unknown at this time. The factors such as availability of DBE' s , inefficiencies due to subletting just to meet the requirements , and unforseen actual administrative time could be costly. On the other hand the value of the grant itself will outweigh the negatives . Attachments : Resolution No. 76-89 Exhibit A - Policy Statement VJH/vjh • • by hex AYf RESOLUTION NO. 76-89 NOF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ESTABLISHING ABF A POLICY STATEMENT FOR DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRIS] (DBE) AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A DBE LIAISON OFFICER IN DAI ACCORDANCE WITH THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS 49 , PART SECTION 23 .45 AND OTHER RELATED SECTIONS ATI WHEREAS , CFR 49 23 requires the establishment of a Po Statement and a Liaison Officer with respect to Disadvani Business Enterprises ; and B0) Cit WHEREAS, certain City projects receive Federa: funds ; and App WHEREAS , the City recognizes the hardships of : business concerns owned and controlled by socially economically disadvantaged individuals ; and JE] WHEREAS, the minimum acceptable goal for contract 1: C i i DBE. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of City of Atascadero does hereby establish the policy to ut'. Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) in all aspeci contracting to the maximum extend feasible. This polic fully described herein on Exhibit A which constitutes pi and commitment to substantially increase Disadvantaged Busi Utilization. This policy includes any program activity ft wholly or in part by any U.S. Department of Trnasporta model element . This City, its contractors and subcontractors , which the reciepients of Federal—Aid funds , agree to ensure that firms have the maximum opportunity to participate in performance of contracts and subcontracts . In this regard, city and all of its contractors and subcontractors will all reasonable steps in accordance with 49 CFR 23 to er that DBE firms have the maximum opportunity to compete fox perform contracts . I , Adopt Policy Statement II . Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Liaison Officer Gary Sims , Senior Civil Engineer, is the DBE Liaison Officer for this agency and shall report to the City Manager . He/She will be assigned such staff as is necessary to fully implement the provisions of 49CFR Part 23 and such other DBE programs as may be required. The reporting structure and duties of support staff are shown on Attachment III . Duties of DBE Liaison Officer The DBE Liaison Officer shall develop, manage and implement the DBE Program on a day-to-day basis. The Liaison Officer shall : - Develop and carry out technical assistance programs for DBE' s . - Arrange solicitations , time for the presentation of bids , quantities , specifications , and delivery schedules so as to facilitate the participation of DBE' s . Where such chancres are found necessary to increase DBE utilization , they will be made in con- sultation and cooperation with the functional unit involved. - Provide guidance to DBE' s in overcoming barriers , such as inability to obtain bonding or financing. - Carry out information and communication programs on contracting opportunities in a timely manner . Programs shall be bilingual where appropriate . - Investigate the services offered by banks owned and controlled by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises . - Unless noted elsewhere herein the listing of DBE' s certified by Caltrans will be utilized. Said listing is to be made available to all project bidders . Such listing will include the following information : Name, address , phone number , ethnic and/or sexual ownership, type of work performed by firm. - Prior to approval of the substitution of any DBE sub- contractor , the prime contractor will be required to prove performance of crood faith efforts to replace the DBE with another elicrible DBE. - Establish overall croals for disadvantaged business enterprises . Goals shall be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary. - Establish appropriate individual project goals for disadvantaged business enterprises . All projects will be evaluated for the appropriatness of goals . - Perform good faith analysis when project goals are not achieved. - Maintain such documentation as is necessary to verify performance of all activities included in this program. IV . Public Notification 1 . At the time of the submittal of this program to the State Deaprtment of Transportation , a notice in both minority and majority local media will be published. Said publication shall include : - The annual overall DBE goals . - Inform the public that the goals and a description of how they are set are available for public inspection for a period of 30 days . - Inform the public that both U.S. DOT and this agency will accept comments on the goals for 45 days from the date of the notice . - The notice shall advise interested parties that comments are for information purposes only . 2 . This program will be reaffirmed by public notice annually at the time of publication of overall goals . If substantial changes are made to this document , the entire document shall be subject to notification noted in (1) above. 3. In addition to the foregoing, interested disadvantaged and majority contractor organizations will receive direct mailings of this complete program. V. Establishment of Goals 1 . DBE goals will be established both annually (overall) and on a per contract basis . The overall goal will be based on planned contract activity for the coming year . The overall goal established will be subject to methodology and procedures established in 49CFR 23. Subparts (C) and (D) and take effect on October 1st of each year . 2 . The overall goals established with this initial program is 10% DBE; and covers the period of October 1 , 1987 to September 30, 1988 . 3 . Individual project goals will be established for DBE activity based on the following criteria : - Attainment of established overall goals . - Size of project . • 0 - Opportunities for DBE' s as subcontractors , vendors , and suppliers . Minority population of geographic area in which work is to be performed. DBE goals being utilized in the geographic area by other State, Federal or local jurisdictions . Availability of DBE' s . Past experience on projects similar to the project being evaluated. Such other factors as may effect the utilization of DBE. Complete evluation documentation will be retained for each project . 4 . Projects which do not contain specific goals will contain the following provisions ; A. "Policy . It is the policy of the City of Atascadero that disadvantaged business enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 23 shall have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds under this agreement . Consequently, the DBE requirements of 49 CFR Part 23 apply to this agreement . " B. "DBE Obligation . (i) The recipient or its contractor agrees to ensure that disadvantaged business enterprises as defined in 49 CFR 23 have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts and subcontracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds provided under this agreement . In this regard, all recipients or contractors shall take all necessary and reasonable steps in accordance with 49 CFR Part 23 to ensure that disadvantaged business enterprises have the maximum opportunity to compete for and perform contracts . Recipients and their contractors shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color , national origin, or sex in the award and performance of DOT-assisted contracts ." VI . Contract Procedure This program shall be implemented through the utilization of a contract special provision which will be provided/updated as necessary by Caltrans' Division of Local Streets and Roads . These procedures require bidders to submit the names of DBE subcontractors and suppliers , a description of the work each is to perform or material to be furnished, and the dollar value of each DBE subactivity . 0 0 VII . DBE Notification Projects will be advertised in local newspapers and minority focus newspapers when possible. These ads will include reference to DBE requirements and will indicate DBE project goals . DBE assistance centers will receive notification of projects scheduled to be advertised. Assistance Centers , Minority Business Development Centers and Program Management Centers will be afforded the opportunity to receive complimentary plans and specifications for projects within their geographical area of responsibility . VIII . Selection Criteria for Projects with DBE Goals Every project containing DBE goals shall be evaluated by the DBE Liaison Officer or his/her designee to ascertain bidding contractors' efforts to attain the DBE goals . The award of any project with DBE goals must be concurred with by the DBE Liaison Officer or his/her designee before said contract may be awarded. Should there be disagreement between functional units concerning contractors' efforts to attain contract goals for DBE participation , the matter shall be referred to City Council or his/her designee for final determination . Competitors that fail to meet the DBE goals and fail to demonstrate sufficient reasonable good faith efforts shall not be eligible to be awarded the contract . Any contracts that contain DBE goals , pursuant to this Policy, will be monitored on an ongoing basis by project personnel during the course of construction . The DBE Liaison Officer is to be immediately advised of any circumstances wherein contractor compliance with thee DBE provision is questionable. The contractor shall submit a final report for each project with DBE goals which includes total payments to the prime contractor as well as payments the prime contractor has made to DBE subcontractors , vendors and suppliers . If the report indicates the prime contractor has not achieved the project goals , project personnel shall attach an evaluation, in narrative form, of the reasons for failure to attain the goals and any corrective action that was taken . Prime contractors will be required to notify the Agency of any situation in which regularly scheduled progress payments are not made to DBE subcontractors , vendors or suppliers . IX . Set-Asides If determined necessary by the DBE Liaison Officer , DBE Set-Asides will be considered a tool to achieve annual overall goals . 0 • X . Counting DBE Participants This Agency, its contractors , and subcontractors shall count DBE participation in accordance with the provisions of Section 23 .47 , Title 49 , of the Code of Federal Regulations . XI . Records and Reports 1 . The DBE Liaison Officer shall maintain such records , and provide such reports , as are necessary to ensure full compliance with this policy . Such records and reports shall include, as a minimum, the following information : - Awards to DBE' s - Awards to majority contractors . - Final project reports concerning DBE utilization - Such other data as is needed to fully evaluate compliance with this program. 2 . The DBE Liaison Officer shall submit reports to Caltrans and/or to the appropriate U.S . DOT element as required. These reports will include : - Number and dollar value of contracts awarded. - Number and dollar value of contracts and sub- contracts awarded to DBE' s . - Description of general categories of contracts awarded to DBE' s . - The percentage of the dollar value of all contracts awarded during the year which were awarded to DBE' s . - Indication as to the extent of which the percentage met or exceeded the overall goals . - Reports shall be broken down separately by ethnic grouping and sex . • i XII . Complaints Any complaints received by the Agency concerning this program will be investigated by the City Manager. He/She will endeavor to resolve said complaints within 90 days of receipt by the DBE Liaison Officer . The appropriate DOT element and Caltrans will be furnished a copy of the complaint and may be invited to participate in the investigation/resolution . The DOT element and Caltrans will receive a complete investigative report on the complaint and may be requested to concur in the proposed disposition of said complaint . Contractor will be directed to notify the Agency of any complaints they may receive concerning this program. • „Ti c�C.'tiMEV DnI ANNJ�L PL�+N � . TO : CALTR;UIS DISTRICT 05 Local Streets and Roads Civil Rights Coordinator The CITY Of ATASCADER0 requests approval of annual overall goal of DBE for Fiscal Year 19_0 beginning on July 1 1989 and ending on June 30, 1990 - the following Federal-Aid gighaay proj It is anticipated that e cts l Year with preliminary DB will be advertised during this Fiscal ( Include consultant participation levels established as shown. contracts anticipaX.._03 for preliminary engineering and construction award. ) ESTIMATED PROJECT CONTRAC'.6 DHE DESCRIPTION ITMiS COST PARTICIPATION TYPE OF WORM . Monterey Rririoa ('gnat^ �r'^n - (1) Road Bridge $ 280.000 $ 28,000�_ Sycamore ( 2} Road Bridge $ 400,000 $ 40.000 Bridoe Construction_ _ San Andres $ Bridge Const-uc:ion ( 3) Road Bride Garcia Road $ Bridge Construction ( 4) Bridcre $ n- i S nM West Mall $ 1 ( 5 ) Sinal $ 60 Oen 6,000 GRANO TOTAL $ 1,270,000 $ 127,000 DHE 10 $ _ 10/30/89 Gary Sims OAT E - C 3c L::AISaN 0F?IC ZR ATTACHMENT "C" l THIS CITY OF ATASCADERO FOR FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROJECTS HAS SET -AN ANNUAL -GOAL FOR THE 1989-1990 FISCAL YEAR OF 10 FOR DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES (DBE) . THE GOAL ESTABLISHMENT PROCEDURE WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION FOR A PERIOD OF 30 DAYS AT CITY HALL 6500 PALMA AVENUE IN THE PUBLIC WORKS OFFICE. COMMENTS ON THESE GOALS WILL BE RECEIVED IN THE ABOVE- MENTIONED OFFICE AND BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, WASHINGTON, D. C. , FOR A PERIOD OF 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE. • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 10/30/89 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-9 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Department of Public Works Subject : Notice of Completion for the Atascadero City Administration Building Renovation - Phase IIC . Background: Bids were received for this phase of the project on November 10, 1988 and awarded on February 14 , 1989. The successful bidder was • R.P. Richards Construction Co. from Goleta . The work under this contract includes removal and sealing of asbestos insulation within vertical pipe chases and piping in basement (originally $54 ,000 - Change Order No . 1 increased this line item to approximately $95 ,000) . Construction of mechanical pad and brick masonry unit enclosure at parking lot ($58,000) Mechanical Renovation (HVAC System) including soffit work ($345 ,000) , and Architectural Renovation including the 3rd Floor restrooms and painting and carpeting in some offices ($101 ,476) . Discussion: A walk-thru was held on October 24th with the contractor , architect , and city staff and the project has been determined to be substantially complete . It is customary to allow the Notice of Completion to be recorded upon substantial completion and permit the contractor to complete any minor or touch-up work during the 30 day period. The filing of the Notice of Completion allows the sub- contractors 30 days in which to file a Mechanic' s Lein against the prime contractor to recover any past-due payments . • Options : • 1) Approve the Notice of Completion 2) Reject the Notice of Completion and direct staff to resubmit at a future meeting. Fiscal Impact : The City has held in retention 10% of all progress payments paid to R.P. Richards . Upon completion this will amount to approximately $61 ,000. Attachments : Notice of Completion VJH/vjh • • NR LS RECORDING REODESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAZE TO r Name City of Atascadero street 6500 Palma Avenue Ad:ress Atascadero, CA 93422 City A State Department of Public Works L J SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECO DER'S USE NOTICE OF COMPLETION Notice pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093,must be filed within 10 days atter completion. (See reverse side for Complete requirements.) Notice is hereby given that: 1. The undersigned is owner or corporate officer of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described: 2. The full name of the owner is City of Atascadero 3. The full address of the owner is 6500 Palma Avenue _ Atascadero CA 93422 4. The nature of the interest or estate of the owner is; In fee. Municipal Government Building (If other than fee,strike"in fee'and insert,for example.'purchaser under contract of purchase."or"lessee") 5. The full names and full addresses of all persons,if any,who hold title with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common are: NAMES ADDRESSES 6. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on _ The work done was: 7. The name of the contractor,if any,for such work of improvement was ._R.P_Richards—Con struction—Company— (It no contractor for wort.of�mpRwement as a whole,insert"none-1 (Date of Contract) 8, The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the city of Atascadero_ —_ County of __San Luis Obispo___.State of California.and is described as follows. _Atascadero City_Hall__- 9. The street address of said property is 6500 Palma Avenue_____ — (II no street address has been officially assigned.insert"none".) Dated: Verification for Individual Owner Signature of owner or corporate officer of owner named in paragraph 2 or his agent VERIFICATION I,the undersigned.say:I am the City Manager the declarant of the foregoing ("President of","Manager of"."A partner of-,"Owner of".etc.) notice of completion; I have read said notice of completion and know the contents thereof:the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on . ,19 .at California. (Date of signalure.) (City where signed.) (Personal signature of the individual who is swearing that the contents of the notice of completion are true.) RAY WINDSOR City Manager NOTICE OF COMPLETION WOLCCTTS FORM Ills--RE, 6 74 (ynceda„a) 8 pt.type or larger • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-10 Through: Ray Windsor , City Manager Meeting Date: From: Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director"1 ` SUBJECT: Pacific Bell Centrex Service at State Bid Rates RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council authorize the City Manager , or his designee, to submit a request to the State for reduced Centrex service charges. BACKGROUND: The City switched to Pacific Bell Centrex in June 1989 in order to enhance our phone services, particularly as it relates to direct dial access by the Public . At the time, we were not • eligible to take advantage of the State ' s lower rates. Since that time, Pacific Bell ' s position has changed to allow us to request the lower rates. Brad Schram ' s letter of September 28, 1989 outlines the enhanced services and reduced cost , and staff has prepared the necessary paperwork (attached ) . The break-even point of 22 months is expected to drop to 15- 18 months. This is primarily due to savings resulting from the installation of phone service at the new Police Facility. Based on a break-even point within 18 months starting January 1 , 1990, guaranteed rates until September 1993, and the same number of lines, total savings over the life of the contract is approximately $4,500. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Council can decline the State rates. Although the monthly savings are significant , the one- time conversion cost is unbudgeted . Department ' s would have to absorb the extra cost . • • FISCAL IMPACTS The negative impact is based upon absorbing the one-time installation cost of $3,792 (79 lines) . This cost would be distributed based on the number of lines by Department . The largest bill would be to the Police Department or $960. This represents less than one-half of one percent of the Department 's total non-employee services budget . • • "FA PACIFIC"FA BELL=. A Pacific Telesis Company September 28 , 1989 Mr. Mark Joseph Director of Administrative Services City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, California 93422 Dear Mark: A new pricing opportunity has become available for the City of Atascadero' s Centrex system. Official confirmation has been sent me that the City of Atascadero may choose to join the State of California' s contract with Pacific Bell for Centrex service. The contract ' s outline and benefits follow: -The contract expires the first day of September 1993 -The price per station remains fixed during that period at the rate of $15 . 75 per month per line, including the following features and charges: -Call forwarding busy -Call forwarding don' t answer -Call forwarding variable/variable unlimited -Call hold -Call pickup, station -Call pickup, group -Touch tone -Trunking charges -Primary line charges -Flexible Route Selection -FCC Access charges -There would be a one-time charge of $48 per line for the City of Atascadero to adopt the State Contract -Future line installations would be made at the cost of $48 per line, instead of the present $70-$90 per line, for the life of the contract (the only possible exception being a large number of lines farther than three cable miles from the Central Office) Presently, the City is paying $1362 per month for its Centrex, the provisions of the State Contract would change the monthly charge for the existing seventy-six line Centrex to $1197 per month, for a monthly savings of $165 . This would amortize the $3684 cost of joining the contract in twenty-two months. The City could also make use of the features included in the State Contract on an unlimited basis, with no added cost . In order to acquire the provisions of the Contract, the City will need to complete a State of California Telecommunications Service Request (Form 20, attached) and mail it to the State Department of Telecommunications for approval . Following approval , the State of California will send notification to Pacific Bell , which will construct an addendum adding City of Atascadero to the existing contract . Please call me with any questions you may have concerning this contract opportunity. Sincerely, Brad Schram Account Executive 541-2150 Attachment REQUEST IS FOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA ❑ INFORMATION TESOMMUNI CATIONS SERVICE RE40ST AGENCY-REQUEST NO. ❑ SERVICE ❑ EXCEEDS SAM— SEE SAM 4SOO SUBMIT ALL COPIES. INTACT, TO ❑ DOES NOT EXCEED SAM— SECTIONS. DATE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DIVISION ARTMENT DIVISION. BUREAU. ETC. TY OF ATASCADERO Public Offices A DRESS OF PRESENT SERVICE (INCLUDE CITY AND ZIP) ADDRESS OF REQUESTED SERVICE (INCLUDE CITY AND ZIP) 6500 Palma Avenue ROOM NO. 6500 Palma Avenue ROOM NO. Atascadero, CA 93422 ALL Atascadero, CA 93422 ALL PERSON TO CONTACT FOR ACCESS TELEPHONE NO. LOCATION ROOM NO. Cathy Sargent 1(805 ) 461-501 Same as above 210B BILLING ADDRESS (INCLUDE CITY AND ZIP) VENDOR ACCT. NO. UTILITY PRIMARY BILL NO. 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422 18054615000 8054615000 TELEPHONE NUMBER(S) INVOLVED I REQUESTED DATE OF SERVICE GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY CODE 461-5000 through 461-5096 CHECK TYPE OF REQUEST: (ATTACH COMPLETED BS 141 FORMS FOR ALL LINE REQUESTS) El SERVICE ❑ ATSS (ANONYM.TOLL STATEMENT E ❑ ATSS/DS ❑ SINGLE UNE ❑ KEYSYSTEM ❑ PBX ❑ STATE AGENCY ❑ TAX SUPPORTED (ATTACH COPY OF CHARTER OR OTHER DOCUMENTS ElCENTREX SERVICE SHOWING TAX SUPPORTED FUNDING ❑ SINGLE UNE ❑ KEYSYSTEM ® OTHER S t A fi P o f ('a l i f n rn i g_('gn t r_gx ❑ WATS Contract pricing. ❑ FEX ❑ MOBILE TELEPHONE ❑ DEDICATED CIRCUITS ❑ OTHER BRIEFLY DESCRIBE PRESENT SERVICE Presently 79 lines of Centrex serving the City of Atascadero (805)461-5000 PRESENT EQUIPMENT VENDOR SERVING UTILITY Adhalk Shop FLY DESCRIBE SERVICE REQUESTED (ATTACH JUSTIFICATION) Adoption of the State of California Centrex conract with Pacific Bell. A one-time charge of $48 per line. Future line installations would be made at the cost of $48 per line. Station rate to be $15.75 per month per line, including: Call forwarding, Call hold, Call pickup, touchtone , Trunking charges, Primary line charges , Flexible route selection, FCC Access chares. . . . There would be a one-time charge of $48 per line for the City to adopt the State Contract. Future line installations would be made at the cost of $48 per line, instead of the present $70-90 per line. TOTAL COST OF REQUESTED SERVICE—SEE STD 20V&20U FOR ITEMIZED PRICING METHOD OF ACQUISITION RECURRING NON-RECURRING ❑ PURCHASE ❑ INSTALLMENT PURCHASE 1,245 3 ,792 ❑ RENT ® OTHER MOnthl Y APPROVAL BY AGENCY TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS REPRESENTATIVE PRINTED OR TYPED NAME TELEPHONE NO. ATSS: SIGNATURE DATE PUBLIC: 1 ) ADDRESS: CITY ZIP —� TELECOMMUNICATIONS DIVISION ❑ APPROVED ❑ DISAPPROVED (SEE COMMENTS BELOW) ❑ INFORMATION ONLY PRINTED OR TYPED NAME TELEPHONE NO. ATSS: ATURE DATE PUBLIC: 1 ) COMMENTS: DATE ORDER SENT TO VENDOR UTILITY L 85 94792 STD.20(REV. 1 1-84) TSL P-1 ID5 =717 F . il.� 4AW OFF-{CES ROr,EA LYON' LYON O & P-,cQun:y ROCtC,a"ICOUET 1104 PALM �(lJ STREET TIMQTI.17 J.CAAMCL ad3T Qi FiCE 60X Q22 'ELEPi-LONE •a,..sw Gc �sAN 1..1115 O5ilgP (A3'Sj A41.26E+o nPaw.t,�ry O, CAUPORNIA 934C16 TEL Eefl PIER DATE: a {sos� s43 �as� OCT 0198 ,1 ------__ ROGER LYON ., RGGER PIC r ET TIMCA PAGESiPJC' Ul: TNG THIS SHEET:Vt- AN CARMEL ALLER_ROYA.T„ FX 9,0 . :[F YOU ..r.I__ (eO5) 54?�-256U ASK FOR HAVE -a-NY QUESTIONS, PL8ASE Al'VD COMMENTS : ANNETTE i { 3 1 LAW OFFICES LY0 7q & PICQ_U.ET 1104 PALM STREET TELEPHONE POST OFFICE SOX 5122 (805) 541-2S4SQ :$A N '"IS OBISP",, CALIFORNIA 034jL)e TELEr-OPI&P (805) 543-.'4a3-? October 30, 1989 eCT City Council C.LtY Of AIL-Idscadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atdscadero, CA 93422 Reconsf ,- detaL, on of Tentdive Map Applicata On (McNamara) Doan "z--'Qn0rabla Mayor and Council: 3 4 m at -urrent;'Y scheduled for today' s meeting (October -989 ' - MCIT'lamara and I have gis been linable tO fully Prepare Ued �I- ""rPr ein q0n and respec,,"fully reuitem be contin- untithe l INOveDlber 28, 1989Counceil meetin . are Pleased tha,-, the COUncil has decided to hold further iberat-.4.Cris or, this application orl and are confident that the ,.fO.:'ruatio that will be '�; )ncernz J presented will satisfy the Council ' s ' PreVOU81Y expressed and permit a favorable decision. You -very much for matter. Your cooperation and courtesies in this Sincerely, LYON pICQU c e RP; ar Roger�jllcque 7 CC Tom McNEimara MEETINGS : ,.AGENDA ,5 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 7/25/89 File Number: TPM 7-89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director ;}, SUBJECT: Appeal by Thomas McNamara of Planning Commission denial of Tenta- tive Parcel 7-89 (7000 San Palo) (continued from 7/11/89 meeting) . BACKGROUND: At the Council ' s July 11, 1989 meeting, there was a 2 : 2 tie vote on this appeal resulting in no action. At the request of the City Attorney, this matter was continued to meeting of July 25 , 1989 to permit time for legal evaluation. HE :ph Enclosure: July 11 , 1989 - Staff Report to City Council CC : Thomas McNamara John Falkenstein • i MEer AGENDA DATE ' 2, rMM# REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date : 7/11/89 File No: TPM 7-89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 4Ar� SUBJECT : Appeal by Thomas McNamara of Planning Commission denial of Tenta- tive Parcel Map 7-89 (7000 San Palo) . RECOMMENDATION: Uphold the appeal and approve TPM 7-89 based on the Findings for Approval in the attached Exhibit "D" and subject to the Condi- tions of Approval in Exhibit "E" . BF. KGROUND: On June 6 , 1989 , the Planning Commission on a 4 : 2 vote denied this proposed lot division based on the attached Findings for Denial (Exhibit F) . The attached staff report and minutes excerpts provides a record of the material and comments considered in making these findings . ANALYSIS: The parcel in question contains seven (7 ) acres and the minimum required lot size under RSF-Z residential zoning is 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 acre minimum depending on site characteristics . The ordi- nance ' s formula requires a minimum of 1 . 54 acres per site and all of the four (4) lots proposed meet this minimum. The primary issue at the Planning Commission was whether this should be a four (4 ) lot versus a three (3 ) lot subdivision, with Commission concern focusing on whether the building sites on lots 3 and 4 at the top of the hill would bring the homes too close together, and conflict with the "elbow room" intent of the City' s General Plan. Following the Commission' s action the applicants , in filing their accompanying appeal , have modified the tentative map to designate a minimum thirty foot ( 301 ) yard on each side of the property line separating lots 3 and 4 thereby assuring a minimum of 60 feet ( 601 ) between adjoining residences at this location. By contrast, the conventional minimum side yard setback in the Zon- ing Ordinance is 5 feet for side yards, 10 feet for rear yards and 25 feet for front yards . This seven acre hilltop lot is occupied by one existing dwelling. The three proposed dwellings all meet the City' s standards with respect to density, setbacks , access, fire hydrant improvements, and other City requirements. Very little grading would be required in that the existing driveway would provide for access to all four parcels and no tree removal is required. Hence, staff continues to support findings for approval subject to the proposed eleven ( 11 ) Conditions of Approval . ALTERNATIVE : Should the Council desire to reject the proposed four-way divi- sion, the Findings for Denial made by the Planning Commission are enclosed herewith. HE :ph Attachments : . .June 12 , 1989 - Letter of Appeal and Revised Tentative Parcel Map . . June 6 , 1989 - Staff Report . . June 6 , 1989 - Planning Commission Minutes Excerpts . . June 6 , 1989 - Planning Commission Findings for Denial (Exhibit "F" ) cc : Thomas McNamara John Falkenstien CUESTA ENGINEERING* 7401-B EI Camino Real/ P.O. Box 2066 Atascadero, California 93423 (805)466-6827 June 12, 1989 RE CEIVEU -Xii 3 1989 Henry Engen City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Atascadero, CA 93422 Subject: Tentative Parcel Map 07-89/McNamara Dear Henry: As representative of Mr. Tom McNamara, I hereby request to appeal the Planning Commission decision of June 6, 1989 of denial of this appli- cation to the City Council . Attached is the application form and $100.00 fee. We have slightly revised the Tentative Parcel Map to indicate a 30 foot building setback along both sides of the lot line between lots 3 and 4. If you have any questions, please call me. Respectfully Sumitted, hn Falkenstien Y R.C.E. 33760 Exp. 6/30/90 JF:pd 87-245 21 rP'M 7- 8� V F � EV/ 5/0N 7C �'Si5N VII zs j y ` s 44 is a '�: 11 •1 / // / i� o\ \ \�� �,\ `. 1\\\`� . ,,,', ,',,,,� 1 !' �. 111' 1'!1 1 11j � I;1Il� ' i 1 I l , lIli� Jill Nq IL� - t 1 +-r�` •� ,�// lir / i / � L VI�5�// yr lu VZ 7 ' ki1 CITY OF ATASCAI=R1 Item: - STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: June 6, 1989 BY: PSP Steven L. DeCamp, Senior Planner File No: TPM 07-89 SUBJECT: Subdivision of one parcel containing approximately 7. 00 acres into four (4) lots of 1. 55, 1. 60, 1. 65, and 2. 20 acres. RECOIDUMATION: Staff recommends approval of TPM 07-89 based on the Findings for Approval in Exhibit D and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit E. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Thomas McNamara 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cuesta Engineering 3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7000 San Palo Road 4. General Plan Designation. . . . .Low Density Single Family 5. Zoning District. . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-Z (1. 5 - 2. 5 ac. min. ) 6. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. 00 acres 7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Single Family Residence 8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted May 23, 1989 ANALYSIS: The application before the Commission proposes the subdivision of one (1) parcel containing approximately 7. 00 acres into four (4) lots containing 1. 55, 1 . 60, 1. 65, and 2. 20 acres. The General Plan designates this property for "Low Density Single Family" development. Consistent with this designation, the property is located within the RSF-Z zoning district. This district has a minimum lot size that ranges between 1. 5 and 2. 5 acres depending on the "score" of the performance factors specified in the Zoning Ordinance. • • For the area in which this proposal is located, the lot size performance factors and the related scores are: FACTOR SCORE Distance from Center of Town 0. 10 Septic Suitability 0. 30 Average Slope 0. 70 Access Condition 0. 15 Neighborhood Character 0. 29 Minimum Lot Size 1. 54 acres The smallest lot proposed by this application is, therefore, larger than the minimum lot size allowed by the Zoning Ordinance for this neighborhood. Existing development on the property consists of a single family dwelling on what is proposed to become Lot 1 . This dwelling is served by a dirt driveway that is located where the private road access for the new lots is proposed. The proposed house sites on Lots 2 - 4 appear to have been graded at some time in the past. There are no trees or other visible physical features which would restrict development of single family homes, or their related septic systems, in the locations shown on the tentative map. Two of the proposed lots are clearly "flag lots" (Lots 1 & 2) . Although the other two lots (Lots 3 & 4) have frontage on San Palo Road, their access will be from the private road. Because of this, the Subdivision Ordinance' s flag lot standards should be applied to each of the proposed lots. The subdivision' s major point of divergence from the Ordinance' s standards is that the lot furthest from the street does not own the accessway as required by Sec. 11-8. 209 C. The Developer' s Statement (see Exhibit C) provides a reasonable argument for an exemption to that requirement in this case, however. Staff concurs with the applicant that the topography of the site, and the configuration of the proposed lots is adequate justification for modification of the access ownership standard. Staff believes that granting the requested exemption will not be detrimental to the orderly development of the site nor will it adversely affect surrounding properties. The accessway for this subdivision is proposed to be thirty (30) feet wide with 16 feet of paving. Because the accessway is in excess of 150 feet in length, the paved portion of the access will be required to be 20 feet in width. This width can easily be accommodated within the 30 foot easement provided and will not require extensive additional grading. The applicant has proposed the name "Legado Avenue" for the new, private road serving the subdivision. Translated from Spanish, legado means "legacy" or "bequest. " This name does not conflict with other existing street names because of its spelling or pronunciation. Neither the Fire Department nor the Police Department expressed any objection to the establishment of Legado Avenue as a street name. CONCLUSIONS: The design of the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the City' s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Although the average slope of the property is relatively steep (30%+) , previous grading has created reasonable sites for the construction of three new homes. These home sites can be developed without significant additional grading or tree removal. Finally, the size of the proposed lots appears to be consistent with the character of the other residential lots in the vicinity. Staff believes that each of the Findings required by the Subdivision Map Act, as well as the "Flag Lot" Findings required by local ordinance can be made relative to this proposal. SLD/ ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location and Zoning Nap Exhibit B Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit C - Developer' s Statement Exhibit D - Findings for Approval Exhibit E Conditions of Approval • r N � ` um van owl •��aw W, r IL •�r . 1 ,, EXHIBIT B CITY OF ATASCADERO TPM 0'-89 � CAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT� Tentative Parcel Map DEPARTMENT £yIy> I 41! +II+ 11"11 II fill jjh 1 �,11 1i11 ,.11.111 prw 11 11 �1 1 11 , 1 a`L 1 1 �1111/1�l1 1111I„i r11��I�'Il �� �• � ,CI� f^� 41 It 04) a as a a• �� ! �� ^� f •,, �(.�4�� ,`/7 � RH Ii •' Ilii/ /��+/� £ �ql•� i i/- i \l� 'r l Ill r, ��� f .11/�' 'r.7'','% , L\\L,• 1,��11i1�1"1'I/j/L t5 �'� ' '��I � ' 1 1 +'r �IIU ' �1�II 1 '111 ',� 3 1• I.I.; ♦, Z 1I 1 'I�',i11�,: t .11/11'. 11 I I „ II 1 II /, P �� � N Z� aV� `• ,,1; i1 ;;'�;I 1,11 111+I`'ll \ ;�r l l„ ,'I'„�'/, C/� � w!`` [a�•� iN�' - 1 11 1 1 1 i'l 111•1 1 ;111.1 1,11;' ����II OOOJJJ� ,'I�,� f',I�'I//r 'y n ,� 111111111`11 �II�I !1.I'I'•1�}I1 1\ I�I�II • �•1 �I+,ri+�d�j,�,�/pltii,,'I t i �� `\ `'\\1 11111''1 � h� `�!•�`.:'��"'�� i.f��, ,4, �% ����l�rr� 3jp p 1 ', 1\ 1\\ \\ ° � � 1. "1�•� :n0.«,/�'��n�i�i/ � � ,��� �� .�\ �S � :•�� %/'p�/�;�� ”'SII �. 111 i 1': �4 1 t�1 _ '7� 1 .w:'� _ _ "_ �_ l •'n,. :.,� :t 11 k EXHIBIT C CITY OF ATASCADERO TPM o'-s 9 y�,. •If1 ;r.f • ��9/ YYYY 1�- Illi�x'11 � f IB7B-'+ - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Developer' s Stateme� DEPARTMENT CUESTA ENGINEERING 7401-B El Camino Real/P.O.Box 2066 Atascadero,California 93423 (805)466-6827 September 27, 1988 MAR- 9 X049 City of Atascadero COr,MIJ�''T'l Planning Department i 6500 Palma Atascadero, CA 93422 Subject: Supplemental Development Statement Tentative Parcel Map AT 88-225 McNamara Gentlemen: This is an application to subdivide an existing 7.0 acre parcel into four parcels containing 1.60 acres, 2.20 acres, 1.55 acres, and 1.65 acres respectively. The property is zoned RSF-Z. The minimum lot size for this property is calculated to be 1.54 acres by use of the formula established in the Zoning Ordinance. Each lot has a comfortable area available for establishing a single family residence as indicated on the tentative map. There is one existing residence on the property. The existing driveway to the residence will be used to serve all four proposed parcels and will be paved to conform to the standards established in the flag lot section of the Subdivision Ordinance. Very little grading will be needed to accomplish this. The Subdivision Ordinance states that the lot most distant from the street shall own the main access. Lot 1 is the most distant lot from San Palo Road, however, its access splits Lot 2. There- fore we have shown the accessway under ownership of Lot 2 with an ease- ment overlay for use by the owners of Lots 1, 3 and 4. A maintenance agreement among the lot owners will control maintenance and ensure per- petual access rights. Sincerely, John Falkenstien R.C.E. 33760 Exp. 6/30/90 JF:pd • EXHIBIT D — Findings for Approval Tentative Parcel Map 07-89 7000 San Palo Road (McNamara) June 6, 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: 1. The proposed map is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed improvements, will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The design of the subdivision and/or the type of proposed improvements will not cause serious public health problems. 8. The subdivision is consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood. 9. The installation of a standard street, either alone or in conjunction with a neighboring property is not feasible. 10. The flag lots are justified by topographical conditions. • • EXHIBIT E - Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 07-89 7000 San Palo Road (McNamara) June 6, 1989 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water lines shall exist at the Legado Avenue frontage of each parcel prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the subdivider. 4. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for all accessways, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recordation of the final map. i 5. Plans and profiles for the private accessway (Legado Avenue) ! shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The accessway shall be paved to a minimum width of twenty (20) feet with two foot graded shoulders within a minimum a twenty four (24) foot right- of-way (or to the standard in force at the time of construction) . 6. Permits shall be obtained and the construction of Legado Avenue shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 7. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to the construction of improvements. Plans shall include, but not be limited to, the following: San Palo Road: a. Drainage improvement design shall meet all City development standards, including measures to protect and preserve existing trees on the site and in the public right-of-way. r 0 b. Construction shall include an eighteen (18) inch asphalt dike to convey water along the edge of the road and a City standard approach to serve Legado Avenue. 7. Subdivider shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department for improvements in the public right-of-way for the private road encroachment and drainage facilities. Subdivider shall also sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done in conformance with City standards and inspection fees paid. All work required by the encroachment permit shall be completed prior to the recordation of the final map. 8. A registered civil engineer shall provide written certification that all grading and drainage improvements have been completed in full compliance with the approved plans prior to final inspection. 9. 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. 10. Parcels 3 and 4 shall have no direct access to San Palo Road. Relinquishment of access rights shall be delineated on the final map. 11 . An offer of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following right-of-way is required: Street Name: San Palo Road Limit: twenty-five (25) feet from centerline 12. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously with the recordation of the final map. 13. A fire hydrant shall be installed at the point where the driveway for Lot 1 leaves Legado Avenue prior to recordation of the final map. The exact location and specifications of the fire hydrant shall be as determined by the Fire Dept. 10. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth. herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Subdivision Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. 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. 11. 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. Ms . Hollowell noted that they will do whatever is neces .Ly to mitigate Mrs . McTaggart ' s concerns . Discussion flowed. Commi loner Luna stated he could not suppor} everal of the findings t the site is physically su a le for the proposed densi of development) as t re are problems with flooding, one .or tw ipelines on , rcel 1 , and the noise factor (railroad) . MOTION: Made by Comm ' Toner H- and, seconded by Commissio r Waage and carr ' 5 : 1 with Commi oner Luna dissenting to rove Tentative P el Map 4-39 subject to the finds and conditions contained in the staff report �' th modification to Condition3a to delete ths : . . . "including driveways" . . . . 2 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 7-89 ; application filed by Thomas McNamara ( Cuesta Engineering) to allow subdivision of one lot containing approxiamtely 7 . 00 acres into four lots containing 1 . 55 , 1 . 60, 1 . 65 and 2 . 20 acres each. Subject site is located at 7000 San Palo Road. Mr. Decamp presented the staff report noting staff' s recommendation for approval subject to 11 conditions . There was discussion concerning the proximity of the proposed building sites on Parcels 3 and 4 with regard to minimum setbacks . John Falkenstien with Cuesta Engineering, representing the applicant, stated they have no problems with the staff report. He clarified that the applicant has no intention of reducing the distance between the two homes to the minimum side setback and is proposing the home sites as shown on the tentative map. The tree on parcel 2 will not be affected by development . Thomas McNamara, applicant, explained that the grading on the property took place in 1956 and the tree has been there since that time and has never suffered any adverse effects . In response to question Commissioner Lopez-Balbotnin, Mr. Decamp responded that the Fire Marshall has determined that one fire hydrant is adequate to serve the four lots . Commissioner Brasher asked that provision be incorporated into the conditions that the two house sites on Parcels 3 and 4 have a certain amount of distance between them as she felt that it was not in keeping with the rural character of the neighborhood to have the homes that close . ?AGE =OUR Commissioner Luna concurred adding that the two homes on one half acre in a one and one-half acre subdivision are not consistent with the General Plan' s comments on "elbow room" . He could support a three-way subdivision but not what is being considered this evening. Chairperson Lochridge remarked he, too, has reservations whether there is adequate room for the two home sites . He referenced the "elbow room" concept of the General Plan, the open space concept in the Zoning Ordinance, and the five foot side setback in the Zoning Ordinance adding there is opportunity to allow for more setbacks; he would support a three-way lot split. Commissioner Waage felt he could not make the findings supporting this lot split, but could support a three-way subdivision. MOTION: Commissioner Brasher moved to deny Tentative Parcel Map 7-89 . It was pointed out that findings for denial need to be made . Mr. Falkenstien stated the applicant would be willing to accept incorporating a fifty foot setback between the two home sites . Mr. DeCamp commented that if the Commission is more comfortable with establishing a wider setback, there is adequate room to do so which could be incorporated in the final map. Discussion continued. At this point, Commissioner Brasher restated her motion: MOTION: Made by Commissioner Brasher to deny Tentative Parcel Map 7-89 by amending the Findings for Approval to reflect Findings for Denial (modification of #1-4 and deletion of #5-10) . Commissioner Waage seconded the motion with the motion carrying 4 : 2 with Commissioners Highland and Lopez-Balbontin dissenting. Commissioner Highland stated his belief that the Commission is moving into the area of dictating where on a piece of property an individual shall build even though the Zoning Ordinance has minimum standards which are met. Philosophically, he feels this is not x:ight. Chairperson Lochridge declared a break at 8 : 55 p.m. ; meeting reconvened at 9 : 10 p.m. EXHIBIT "F" - FINDINGS FOR DENIAL TPM 07-89 - 7000 San Palo Rd. (McNamara) June 6 , 1989 - Planning Commission Action MAP FINDINGS: 1 . The proposed map is inconsistent with the applicable general or specific plan. 2 . The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the applicable general or specific plan. 3 . The site is physically unsuitable for the proposed type of development. 4 . The site is physically unsuitable for the proposed density of development. REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL • • CITY OF ATASCADERO Agendaly= B-2 Ray Vftdwr,City Manager Meeft DawI W240 men,Commurdty Development Direm W-File No: From: Lisa Scbicker,City Arborist ffUBJECT; Consideration of a request tD remove three berimge trees b enable construction of a home acrd garage, a 24" and 26" Qu ww egrifok,coot live oak and a 26"Qaous bbaaa, valley oak by Andrev Sandel, Box 2486, Akwedem on his property at 12550 Seams Ana,Lot 6,Block 45. RECOMMENDATION: Affrovad of the tree zemovals and the tree protection plans as recommended by the arborist, D.O. Denney, vim a two-four-one rep]acenm mt Please see Demaey's report and additiaml cormmew and m%geadonis in the analysis miction of this report. BACKGROUND: The tree oultu ce specifies that native trees 20"or greater in diameter an deemed herhage tree's and cannot be removed unless approved by the City Council follovnag public bearing. Ow 4m6b, or coast tine oak is a native Califonnda evergreen tree species gmvmg m Cabform&coastal ranges and kyr bots and valleys in oak voodland and oak grassland plant communities and in semi-wilt canyons usually belov 3000 feet On asks typically have a broad cnovn and a short ttmnk vh9ch divides into umnerous massive branches. It is a relatively fast groving oak, adding 2-4 feet per yemr under good conditloms. It is a sUM foliage and form tree which bei to achieve good chancier between 20-25 yew. It can reach heights of 39 feet(vhth a spread of 42 feet and a dbh of 16" in tvemy years (Lem and Domley,CAMornia Native Mnts and Trees3. The coast live oak is resistant b beat acrd cold, drought and heavy rain seasons,gravelly or head-pecked softs and repeb marry insect pest drat datoy other trees; therefore ti is one of the most valuable of trees from a natural landscape vievp= The live oak is quare imporoeuat to vild>ife as veil, providing food and shelbr for may species of birds and mammals. (hww17tW4 or ve Dey oak is a California native and deciduous tree species usually growing !n rich loamy valley soils as a member of the foots voodhund and oak voodkmd pant commardties. It is usu a ly found belov 2000 feet in elevation and is reporbd b be the largest of all American Oaks. jz.wA?Ar&favors hot valleys ava4y from ocean influences in deep rich soi]s vim the voter table 10-40 feet below the smface. it exhibits four steges of grow& the pole stege, the ehn stage, the veepmg stege and 'second youth". Vasey oaks can grow rapidly under good conditions,and have been knov to grov 36 feet UA(vim a 36 foot spread)in tventy five years. Becwze the Sanders homesite is on a hilltop, it is interesting 1D find a valley oak graving there;perhaps they have a high vater table andlor deep soils. Qr&&jrmrA?M&ere also the most sensitive of the oaks to impmper conswiction practices end disturbance. Um van inspecled with Randy Rossi and discussions vere held vith In arborist, D.0. Denney regarding the condition► f these trees. A sire plan and photographs of these trees are provided vim this report. ANALYSIS: • The IM trees selacted far removal are the hast beep-trees an I*site. From the she plan and ph tgM&, one can see 69 ore of ttn trees is completely burred out on ft Wide and ft outer two are in etas of decbft bmdL there is evidence of insect irfestadbn and a great deal of rot and branch leas in aR ttm tim. As Use is euroemky m bvMkigs on ft she, JO decline can be azibut d to n aaral factors. There an,bovever,several he&V trees on We site(mostly Quercus agMW earl plemty of opportanides for nplembg on the pascal after to commuft of the rev bome takes place. The Saffiels are ag=bla to a two to one rept for the removers,and I think this is a good xftt on. It should aka be rrembred timet several heap- oaks (at least 6 tees-please see she plead} are very close to the proposed coaostmetioin of the borne end game (between 3-15 faatt from the fooftp). I would like to ask the epphnm to attempt all MUM to use sound canslrWtion practices around ft3a trees (b ad)vst the footings ID poaotect these urea) if at all p030le. D.O.Dewey las also prepared a plan b prevent the oaks from betag damaged ditg commotion,and it vm be imporunt for the tbnorL'tora to falbw bb namnmandeniors ceaaefuU,q. It vM make a differ m m the survival of ttaso old trees, and provide the Saudels vr&a very atocacuive hmmmite "nestled in the tress Beceap of the bedtage stagy of utas Trees and ttre ;mtk*n descrW above, I vrouR ask for The coopendion of the apglicamo ad recommend to folbving: a. Upon D.O. Demaey's racommeni l4m n,request anal a two to one replacem m for ttse tees be made. The property b lege and dare is ample space for the replacemem trees. A fev pkmft guidelines an listed hen to aid the applies vii replacamams to vin hon a good chance of svacvhmL • 1. Choose 6, 15 gel=site rn 4rAK*aW(%mm. . &. 2. Inspect ttte on for ewkckirg mus(roans that veep around the pot hove a poorer chance of ot*htentt out and pyvkg right in the gumd). 3. When per,make sun that Om roots have been untangled,st*htenm and loommed es much as possible. 4. PLnt in a hole at best twice as big as the pot,and use ft=*a sods in the hole. 5. PmvAe the taee with a deep vateift-meauft a sbv,gradual and long vmeft (which encovaaages root grovih to anchor the tree). Provide one deep vwft in late spring and two in the um mer. If drip irriga*m is used, do k mg, abv walefts applying 10-20 genera over a dmee-foliar bony period. 6. Pum m the young trees from graft -especlally deer(vith velded vire fercit-I can provide some specs)mrd they an at least fear feet in height. b. If the applicxa►ts are willing,ask if they allav the city m receive a slice of the trm 0 record the age of 19tis tn. (Those skies ton be W mn to the zoo or the corporadoa yard for MMW Mg =I the irrformatbn can be recorded.) They can San be discarded or vsed for"stepping stores"elorg pathvays in public areae. c. Request that to appli=provide evidence of the psmirg (through receipts or phatagrephs) and a ore-year's follov-up (through photogrephs or on-site inspection)on the heap and mus of these plantings. Attachments: Location Map Site Plan Permit applicaton Arboxist's rept(iwbAUg photographs of the urns) Tyre pmtec*m plan(included in arborist's reporo • % Y� /�� I � /, ;/ Imo• CL pr R S I 'mss, i •1 ``�',� f � '../�� � � '• / R Jr I/j 46�1 A- 40 40 a0AD l _ /i• 60-0, i ? eo 04 , ti� ` `' / 11 \` �1 .y0 00 a L:. -- 4.0 404 1 �w � • D `\ ^`_IZ ' •+ �QV 1 N WRAt • N -Y'. 1 Z } MEW AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CONSULTING ARBORISTS A FIELD REPORT CASE L0CA11ON Block #45 Lot #8 Santa Aria Road CITY Atascadero, CA OWNEn NAME A. L. Sandel ADDRESS ( 1 ) P.O. Box 2486 CITY Atascadero, CA 93423 _(2��2$(:eda-r free —Tacc i i c Grove, RES. PHONE ( ) BUS. PHONE ( 408 ) 372-6332 AGENT NAME ADDnESS CITY RES. PHONE ( ) BUS. PHONE ( ) DAMAGE or ACCIDENT DATE TYPE OF DAMAGE INSPECTION DATE 8/9/89 WEATHER TEMP. D. 0. Denney Certified Arborist #391 P.O. Box 3090 0 Paso Robles, CA 93447 C) •��-�^"�� The purpose of this report is to make application to cut down three (3) structurally weak and declining oak trees and to remove some overhanging limbs on tree # for structure clearance. 140. SIZE NAME CONDITION RECOMMENDATION 1 . 24" Live oak leaning cleaning out (Quercus agrifolia) 2. 24" Live oak structurally weak remove (Quercus agrifolia) burned out 3. 30" Live oak major deadwood side trim (Quercus agrifolia) 4. 26" Live oak good clean out (Quercus agrifolia) 5. 26" Live oak poor remove (Quercus agrifolia) 6. 26" White oak poor remove (Quercus 1 b ta) Consultation Report cont'd. Page 2 NO. SIZE NAME CONDITION RECOMMENDATION 7. 2111 White oak fair (Quercus lobata 8. 32" Live oak good (Quercus agrifolia) 9. 34" Live oak off balance, leaning (Quercus agrifolia) 10. 26" Live oak good (Quercus agrifolia) 11 . 32" Live oak fair (Quercus agrifolia) 12. 26" Live oak good (Quercus agrifolia) 13. 26" Live oak good (Quercus agrifolia) 14. 26" Live oak good (Quercus agrifolia) ..fes, .. �' • 416 A • • • I Ir. ♦I f V • of 4 • • i i • / f wr w_ �*' i TREE PROTECTION PLAN In most cases when building, we change the complete environment around a tree. It survived very well in it's natural state. We sever its roots which are needed for anchorage and absorption of water and nutrients. We pave and compact the soil around them, hindering the oxygen and water supply to the roots. Yes, you purchase the property because of the beautiful tree scape only to witness many of your trees declining soon after or even some years after you have built your home. Who is to blame? Did the Architect, City Planner, the Arborist, Contractor add to the demise of the tree? Was your building plan condusive to the impact on the trees on your property? Your City or County Planner have codes and regulations to follow and public pressure to preserve and protect your trees. Even trees that are in excellent health sometimes cannot tolerate the transition from natural (growing in a desirable natural condition) to semi-natural (sever the roots, compact the soil and build within the dripline) to the unnatural (paved all the way around the trees causing disturbances in air and water exchanges in soil and many other changes). Many changes can take place in the soil during construction. Physical changes may have effects on aeration and moisture. Changes in grade, new paving, trenching, soil compaction, can all affect the soils ability to support life. Almost all building and landscape development will involve some grading and exca- vation. The consequences of these changes can sometimes be detrimental to trees. Soil aeration is a critical factor. Roots must receive adequate oxygen. Trees can also suffer from moisture related problems, either not enough or too much. Now that you are aware that trees are sensitive living things, and we all must put measures into effect that will protect them. Protective measure needs to be applied: Yes No During construction, trees on the property outside the immediate construction zone will be barricaded off with bright color flagging. No parking, storage of materials and dumping of excavated or building material will be permitted. Trees within -,20 feet of the construction zone will be protected by installing a light colored protective fence (temporary) around the drip line area of the trees. yam_ frees within t© feet of construction zone will have their trunks barricaded to minimize damage caused by construction equipment. No parking of equipment, storage of equipment, disposing of gasoline, Faint, thinner or anyother foreign material will be permitted in an around this property unless so noted in report. Tree Protection Plan cont'd. Page 2 Yes No >C Trenching for utilities is required. Line will run feet from base of tree. Hand dig and tunnel under or above major anchorage roots. If a major root is encountered in direct line of utility, a Certified Arborist will be consulted before severing it. No grade changes will be made around the tree unless (1 ) a protec- tive measure is applies, (2) and it is so noted in the Certified Arborist report. Factors have been used to determine the tree condition before con- struction begins. This report has been reviewed by all people involved in this pro- ject. Diligent care will be applied to protect the trees. ' EC ! -,&. . . . .� S E P 81989 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT y9 a •- PLANN I N6 DIVISION 1 !s s COMMUNITY DE*,V'L.Urhi"N1l 6500 Palma Ave. P.D. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 (805) 466-8000 APPLICATION FORM Please type or print in ink Owner: Qi„c�r�,.� cS��.e�e� Agent : O , ��nne•^ Address: W X 24 (o Address: p - O • BOVE n _ rAsc19,9Z,;r-, CA 9342 3 CZElcs Ca c13447 Phone #: 40& - 372 - 6 :53Z Phone #: R_ ns- 23q- a 3 6-4303 V(47 ' Applicant : C � ' Address: Phone #: r` �V1YFcFIIfiP¢ E-1Cb . .k t'�syT Project Description: Existing Use: Project Address: Legal Description: Lot(s) 43 ; Block 4 S ; Tract Assessors Parcel No(s) : I/We consent to the filing of this application and declare that this application and related documents are true and correct. (NOTE: The signature of the property owner is required on the application before it will be accepted for processing. ) acd4Q.)IL Owner Agent Is -Z1 -Scl Date Date For Staff Use Only Fee: Receipt #: Tree Removal Permit Application o,aSupplemental Information 1913 -- � (Please type or print in ink) Reason for Removal : Trees Ae-cX,^, 'nq 2n.e1 L, z',+-�-- Brae. Number of Trees to be Removed: Specify the size (measured 4 ' above ground level ) , species (both common and botanical name) and condition of each tree to be removed: E-+-,, 3. ohc Z�`� /c ,�� 0.-��1�' ,� Poor— c�tCli�ninG 4. 5. Specify the size and species of the trees proposed to replace those intended for removal : . i . !��ah`E- S►� CL 1 rl a�,v� �D�c.i�.s— ��-�c�- -I-�, ���' n � �'�'�.5 c�e�p 3. 4. 5. Please prepare a "Plot Plan" showing all improvements on your property, trees to be removed , trees to remain, and the proposed location of replacement trees as per the attached example. Owner Arborist Certificate Number �- 21 f 4 °I— C6 Date Date REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY'OF ATASCADERO • Agenda Items B� Thonk Ray Windsor,City Manager Meeting Dow 10124189 u:: Engen,Co mA urditg DevelopmentDinecbr W File No:K. Schicker,City Arborist Comaidendon of a regvm to remove one heritage tree,20" ()wAw 4uA* or Chat Live Oak, by Homeran Homeowner's Association,(mammged by bulla Associaft)"The Oaks"5550 Traffic Way. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the tree removal as recommemded by tae arborist, Chuck Scovell, vhh a tyre to one replacement. Please me addition al commmemu in the amelysis section of report BACKGROUND: The tree ordinance specifies that ne&e trees 20"or greaser In diemeter an deemed heritage trass aaad covet be removed Ulm approved by the City Cowacil fob public hearing. <)wjwognX?&, or aaat We oak is a native CeMornia evergreen tree species grovimg in California coastal mages arid kav and valleys in Oak voodlamd end Oak gressland plant commurdties and m semi-moist canyons usvnity bekty 3000 feet oaks typically have a broad cmvn and a short frank vhich divides ratio numerous masatre bnaaches. It is a relatively fast groving oak, adding 2-4 feet per yeer wader good tendinous. It is a strong forge and form tree vbieh begins to whim good cbuwter between 20-25 yew. It can rich heights of 39 feet(vim a spread of 42 feet and a dbh of 18"in tvreaty years (Lenz and Downy,Califon Native Shrift and Tis?. The cast Uve oak is resisant m heat and cold, drou&and hwry rein seasons,gravelly or hard-packed sots and repels may insect pest ft deMy other trees; therefore it is one of the most vahaable of trees from a nenaral gape vkvpomt. The tree hes high vildlife value, providirig food and shelter to many buds and mamme3s. As vith most oaks,it provides shade and relief from hot stammer temperatures and clew end filters our air trough photosynthesis. Tbia We Is located enroximwely five feet away from the edge of one of the condominium buildings and is bested on a vegetated sbprag back portion of the lot There an other mks gmving on this slope aril the area does not appear to be used by The residents. The tree vas photographed and discussions van held vim Randy Rossi,the arborist Chuck Scovell and the property manager,Richead WMhott regarding the coffin of tats tree. ANALYSIS: This ves a difficult tree m make a recomm eredation for removal, because at first glawe, the tree did wt look in danger of ,dying or preseubg a hazard to the public,as the arborist had stated. The canopy is alive and velL,and the cambium is fmxtomng. Hovever, this oak v quite kearge and does have tvo longe limbs vhich hang over one of the residential condominiums on the site. There has been major branch breakage vitro the year, and there is eviderce of insect mfeit wn and some heart rot(most old trees villtmoy get this). A14rough MMM nor rot Onecessam make a tree tall, fty are suns that the tree is render some stress. My main contenn would be for to safely of die children Vho be in the complex who vera pkyft on the edge of to asphalt pe4ft area ad*M to vbm the leacga limb felt lest year. I ftk that is the c ON IM of the hameavnera as veII,aid their pacime vim an for aWft for to removal of the tree. They are also c o nceimed about ;*ea falling on aid daamaging the moi. Itis difficult for arrvone b REW when,if and hay an oak limb is ggbg to faL Chu*condhiom can influx the "when" - oftentimes hat, humid and vindless unnimer days as well as the obvious heavy vet snowfall days are times b watch for breakage. There are also physical suns to look for which might help ID predict,(such as deed branches or straws irdctonas In the b&M,but ftse are not evident is ibis tree. (The only vay b possibly see a stress frectme vouM be to get up in ffie uee (eiter by bvdclaet our by climbing up to examnine closely and even then they may not be evident}. Although I do not pemiially see wry►irmaAnenI danger from Us tree, the manager of This property, Richeatd wiilooit and the coonsu tnig aabozist we coir earned about the potential damage and danger to the residents and #at property; therefore I feel compelled to defer to them request Hecam of The berfage emus of No tree and the;rlip mi'm described above,I vould ask for the c oopereotion of the apphna and recommend the following: e- Upon Chuck Sc oveirs rein,request that a three to one replacement for This twee be made. Tire propeM slopes behind the condominium and Then are some (}nor iW2M&yvhich are doing well back Then; this would be an ideal site for the replecei arft. A fev plaft guidebes an listed hen to aid the applicaio vilb replacementa That vM have a good erne of aun<vival: • 1. Choose tone l oft i5 gallon size fir•.Mr4,W 2. Inspect the trees for encircling roots(roots that vrap around the pot hen►e a poorer chance of str*hte:abag out and gmving right in the ground). 3. When ple ndng,mob sun amt the roots lrave been untangled,straightened and loosened as mush as possible. 4. Plant in a hole at least twice as big as the pot,aid use the native sob in the hole. S. Provide ft tree with a deep vater>ng-meaning a slow,gradual and lorg vatering (which en=ngw root gnovlh to anchor the toe). Provide one deep vba late spring and two in the summer. If drip irrigation is vied, do kn, slov vaterings applying 10-20 gallons over a Thee-four have'period. 6. Protect the young trees from gn=g animals-especially deer(v:bh welded wire fencing-I cen provide some specs)anal%ey an at]east four feet in height. b. If The applicants an wing,ask if they allov the city to receive a slice of the t m*to record the age of this tree. (These slices be taken tQ The zoo or the corgorecion yard for wry starea'e until the infonanation con be recorded.) They can then be discarded or used for"stepping stones"along pathways in public areas. c. Request That the applicant evidence of the 1 no h receipts ar and a one- 's follov- �i aPP Proms Pte► ( '� Ph�mP�} 3� up (through phottraphs or on-site man)on the health and states of these platings. • Attachmerm P applicatin Location Map Site Pian q' .�y, � `�, ice): ■ �r analog ���� 1111■ tittlll"fin �l�:� IN WA Now— NOW— Row CL rkAoar -U-J I 11 i t w00 .•.•r/ ti 6 I ', \ \ X3',1•' r � �� p �/ r •1 �• - � �� • � t s ; ,� 11 ` � �'•`,•\ \ " tsof : `awl � p t .\� �\ I Q_ to �-• ' F•t � � ra TL rf! I 9 . • j OL ' : '•',.j, � I h J ': •'•'"lam �t .�+s _'- „/J�"'. •�. I'` i D _ C us it a 5 it US ILI .eoec>t>t y.. �� • I �i 11 F 1 M i a�soolata• ~-- ��'"" .Or • ,►•rru• .•. ..... •i.ddel M JC_arf&%L VMS r rr wwt._w•.wr-ww.•a s�rr ••.rr J-J• PM!J,a 641..,.1 9 MW G1 •. -,am K. v WI Land--.,. ..M/ .�j �I •'uO D�?�_.. �cP f,19�9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT a �^�f ..t�f�i4 � PLANNING. DIVISION A r'r:�f/� v� (�l �l.;t 6500 Palma Ave. rl n g P.D. Box 747 CARE Atascadero , CA 93423 (805) 466-8000 APPLICATION FORM Please type or print in ink Owner: f e2 t.,4 Agent: Cjitce K. lj Address: a44Address: CW1c !si Phone #: 3 r -/,0 Phone #: MrA-UZ2Z Applicant: so-,n - Address: Phone #: _5�•+• c Pro ject Description: Existing Use: .� Project Address: .5rTa Legal Description: Lot(s) ; B ock ; Tract / &V-T— Assessors Parcel No (s) :O 2g206 - n'.n Yr i3 on I/We consent to the filing of this application and declare that this application and related documents are true and correct. (NOTE: The signature of the property owner is required on the application before it will be accepted for processing . ) Owner Agent Date Dahe For Staff - Use Only Fee: Receipt #: Tree Removal Permit Application 0I11 r41. Supplemental Information 191 ! q�g 1 (Please type or print in ink) Reason for Removal : ` Arrlf4l AOkA 14 J, , al O of- rb �- 17 Number of Trees to be Removed: Specify the size (measured 4 ' above ground level ) , species (both common and botanical name) and condition of each tree to be removed: 1 . 0 2. 3. 4. 5. Specify the size and species of the trees proposed to replace those intended for removal : 1 . l ,.rqc / 2. 3. 4. 5. Please prepare a "Plot Plan" showing all improvements on your property, trees to be removed, trees to remain, and the proposed locati of replacement trees as per the attached example. wner Ar rist � �*7 - 0 Certificate Number Date Date • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-4 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/30/89 File No: TPM 16-89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director TI'- SUBJECT: Proposed subdivision of one parcel containing approximately 9 . 63 acres into two ( 2) lots, one of 4 . 00 acres and one of 5 . 63 acres at 9350 Santa Cruz Road (Lobo Investments, Inc. /Larry Pace) . RECOMMENDATION: Approval in accordance with Planning Commission recommendation • based on the Findings contained in the staff report, dated Sep- tember 19 , 1989, and the attached Revised Conditions of Approval . BACKGROUND: This matter was on the Council' s consent agenda for the meeting of October 10, 1989 , and was pulled and scheduled as a public hearing on October 30, 1989 . Staff was directed to check on response time for emergency services and the cumulative affect of subdivision activity in the western portion of the City. ANALYSIS: The Planning Commission minutes reflect their discussion and the concerns expressed relative to emergency response to this loca- tion. The Fire Marshall indicated that it could be 13 to 15 minutes before a fire truck could reach the site. This issue was identified early on in the staff-review process ( including legal review) and as a result Condition #14 calling for a resi- dential sprinkler system for future construction was added. importantly for long-range planning, Council has authorized preparation of a Fire Services Master Plan, which will address needs City-wide. The present General Plan calls for a third fire station. The Master Plan work program will also get into issues • of type of construction appropriate in areas where wildland fire hazards exist and response time analysis and standards . i The attached staff memorandum provides a 1989 update on subdivi- sion applications within the City. A total of 22 applications, including one condo conversion, have been submitted. Although several were withdrawn and resubmitted as new applications, the net result was that a total of 25 existing lots are being pro- posed to be converted to 145 lots for a net increase of 120 building sites. As indicated on the map, these sites occur throughout the City, with most lots being created within the Urban Services Line. The parcel map in question is identified as Item 16 on the City-wide map. This increase in parcels has been anticipated in calculating the City' s population holding capacity of approximately 33,000 people. With respect to parcels located beyond desirable response times, it should be recollected that the City' s General Plan states that: "It is not in accordance with Atascadero' s development policies to fill up the core before the lands to the west and south are built upon. " (Page 56) . As a final note, Santa Cruz Road was completed during the week of October 16, so that issue discussed before the Planning Commis- sion has been resolved. Enclosures : October 10, 1989 - Staff Report and Attachments i 1989 Update - Subdivisions Staff Memorandum HE :ph cc: Lobo Investments, Inc . Larry Pace Volbrecht Surveys • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-3 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 File No: TPM 16-89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director }, SUBJECT: Subdivision of one parcel containing approximately 9 .63 acres into two (2) lots, one of 4 . 00 acres and one of 5 . 63 acres at 9350 Santa Cruz Road (Lobo Investments, Inc . /Larry Pace) . RECOMMENDATION: Approval in accordance with Planning CommissioIi recommendation based on the Findings Contained in the staff report dated Sep- tember 19 , 1989, and the attached revised Conditions of Approval . BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the above- referenced map on September 19 , 1989 and recommended approval of Tentative Parcel Map 16-89 on a 4 : 3 vote subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval with modification to Condition #5 as follows: "Construction of Santa Cruz Road to City standards along the entire frontage prior to recording the final map shall be required. " HE :ph Attachment: Planning Commission - Revised Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Staff Report — Sept. 19 , 1989 Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - Sept. 19 , 1989 CC : 'Lobo Investments, Inc . Larry Pace Volbrecht Surveys 0 EXHIBIT E - Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 16-89 9350 Santa Cruz Rd. Lobo Investments, Inc. September 19, 1989 (Revised 9/19/89 by Planning Commission) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, access, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer 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 issuance of building permits. 5. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City . of Atascadero Public Works Department, and shall sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done and the inspections paid for, prior to the issuance of a building permit or start of public works construction. Construction of Santa Cruz Road to City standards along the entire frontage prior to recording the final map shall be required. 6. 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 Department of Public Works standards and the current State of California uniform sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review and modifications after construction. 7. Construction of the public road improvements shall be completed or bonded for prior to the recording of the final map. 8 . All public improvements shall be covered with a 100% Performance Bond until construction is approved, and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until one year after construction approval. Exhibit E - Conditions of Approval (continued) TPM 16-89 September 19, 1989 (Revised 9/19/89 by Planning Commission) _ 9. Applicant shall offer to dedicate to the City of Atascadero for right-of-way and/or easement purposes, the following: Street name: Santa Cruz Road Limits: 20 feet from centerline to edge of right-of-way along entire frontage of lots. 10 . Applicant shall offer to dedicate to the public for public utility easements the private access easement on Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. 11 . Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map. 12. Vehicular access to Parcels 1 and 2 shall only be from one common driveway originating from Santa Cruz Road. 13. Residential sprinkler systems, approved by the city Fire Department, are required in future residences built on these parcels. 14 . A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herin shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the California Subdivision Map Act and the City of Atascadero Subdivision Ordinance prior to recording of the final map. A. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. B. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be 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. 15. 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. i • CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B-2 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: September 19, 1989 BY: Michael Sullivan, Assistant Planner File No: TPM 16-89 iAGL� SUBJECT: Consideration of a request to subdivide one existing lot of 9. 63 acres into two lots, one of 4 . 00 acres and one of 5. 63 acres. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map 16-89 based on the Findings for Approval in Exhibit D and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit E. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1 . Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Larry Pace for Lobo Investments, Inc. 2 . Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Volbrecht Surveys 3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9350 Santa Cruz Road 4 . General Plan Designation. . . . .Suburban Single Family 5. Zoning District. . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (Residential Suburban) 6. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. 63 acres 7 . Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant 8. Environmental Status . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted September 7, 1989 ANALYSIS: The applicant proposes to subdivide an existing lot of approx- imately 9. 63 acres into two lots, one containing 4 . 0 acres (Lot 1) and one containing 5.63 acres (Lot 2) . Access to the lots would be from a common driveway originating on Santa Cruz Road near the northeast corner of Lot 1 . A 30-foot wide easement would provide for access to Lot 2 . 1 This property and surrounding properties to the north, south and east are in the RS (Residential Suburban) zone. Property to the west is in San Luis Obispo County jurisdiction. Land use in the local vicinity is currently vacant land at the site and at the surrounding properties. Using the performance standards for minimum lot size in the RS zone (Zoning Ordinance 9-3. 144) , staff determined that the minimum lot size for this site is 3. 87 acres. Lot size factor Distance from Center (>20, 000 ft) 0 . 90 Septic suitability (52 . 6 min/inch) 1 . 00 Average slope (19.55) 0.75 Access condition (Paved road, <15% slope) 0.40 General neighborhood character (4 . 12 acres) 0 . 82 Minimum lot size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 87 acres The proposed parcels 1 and 2, of 4 . 00 and 5. 63 acres, meet the minimum lot size standards for the Residential Suburban zone. The two proposed parcels would each be similar in size to the the average lot size of 4. 12 acres existing in the neighborhood. The percolation rate for Lot 1 was 52. 6 min/inch and is classified as "slow"; an engineered septic system would be required since the rate is over 30 min/inch. For Lot 2 the rate is 12 . 8 min/inch. "Los Padres Engineers" performed the perco- lation tests and recommended conventional leach-line systems for both proposed lots. Lot 1 has a proposed building site in the northeast corner of the lot. Lot 2 has a proposed building site near the southern lot boundary. Each of these sites would require grading on slopes of about 19% (or less) for the building sites and for the driveways. Construction of houses, driveways and septic systems on either of the lots would not require any tree removal. The driveway leading to Lot 2 would require a fill area crossing a swale. Proposed culvert pipes under this fill area would allow proper drainage down the swale. The city Fire Department has expressed concern about slow response times for this general neighborhood. As a mitigation measure, residential sprinklers are recommended by the Fire Department . 2 0 • The Public Works Department is requiring that the street improvements for Santa Cruz Road along the property frontage shall be constructed to city standards prior to recording the final map. Santa Cruz Road has a right-of-way width of 40 feet and would be paved to a width of 20 feet. At this site the utilities which presently are in place along Santa Cruz Road include water, power, and natural gas . Telephone and cable TV lines will also be installed. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed subdivision meets applicable standards of the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and the General Plan. The subdivision would be suitable for the intended residential use, would be compatible with the neighboring properties, and would not produce any significant environmental problems. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - General Plan Map Exhibit B - Zoning Map Exhibit C - Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit D - Findings for Approval Exhibit E - Conditions of Approval 3 CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT '7A CAD� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GENERAL PLAN MAP DEPARTMENT TPM 16-89 r, r 1 r, Ir 1 ' U - 1 t' o � \I rj` 1 SAN SIN FAMI 1 �i S.L.0. 1�i Po= `gyp• County _F / 11 �� o e SITE , Po• �� r, M2 /top O \� S.L.O. r.� County __ 0• "2000 \ r-� i'� -t CITY OF ATA.SCADER4 EXHIBIT B LOCATION AND .ZONING MAP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TPM 16-89 amIf1 RS 0► i 1� \1 /' f �I c r�► 1� S.L.O. if;. • County If o site t►'� ao�► �/ ►1 cc a �~ County .. M \, "2000 Kz� � CITY A ATASCADERO EXHIBIT C r�* �,n i� �r�• T TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP �� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TPM 16-89 Sii[�s � f VI roU scL HAP Moi AEE l'� //+ : /' .1'i. �_� \--yi \\ Peav^l I`�•\ ;/ '( !1'•..E-.CEIVI EP61 „ills I ' �: �. ..JUN 271999INT WNER'SCERTIt/CAT£ `) J /N(.Q(lYAMEYIRR RMR[VAa T—c � Q � , Lb I^ \ \`` 1,IIS 1 �P�I�I,Y�,./,"• ' �! ( rIVIfRRV e<Rd1 PRQI(RYl Rr fRe..N ��IfYtJ1'iiTY,DEVE�;i'hliitl 1 - ON MK rewx IV(MAIRNO sn r \\+lie, Atlr/AM 1#6~-A aA Ar -e. \\0�•\ ,0 —res s REMrrwranru.r sLr.RwwrREw .^I t 4 ;i ��.O S\� [Acy�s•a /'. 1 \\\\ N\ 1,\\\\�� - •�t preAMrrwr fbrN riser Y r P t` q 1RIr WP LMARr A N KP 1I a �\\� \ \ y: ` }fir i 41f 2 \ ( \..� i 9`�♦ \ .'["r \ f .... '7� t '.::, r{ F' �t �S I` \\ ��_ ' icei% %�:+ 1I j 1 TENTAT/yE PARCEL HAP n '..1 f�A,1 i^� , r:f ww '"o fa.rrn •N,' -P� AT_89'%73 _ a .� . E..y .,i .r^,J V� .•*.•• iNa ASWOIVIfMNQrE0Y10!eEOCR l/O! II Y� } V a• , ATAf A COIeNY,EYING 4w 9 Ar LIIr N AYIf.rMRO,COIlN1Y OP sRN IIr MIf10. ' ',Iry Mt r/irwu+fSiKrc ibr[CkrunnvLrrou: PSRAre•E.oi Y.WMR O derWl qeo' • ('•. . ':10e1os•I•n� �. i 'a wYwe.cnrnr• - '. , •. , - TR'TAHlwMt rM ;•... EKE EYI,l:`4M i r a+.[ sw w ruo s..ncv LOAD hvvrsrMGNIS,MK. "EPArrE IY: ICRIOC^.en wP n r I' LNR�ARRrPA[[,KP VOLBRELHT Sl_/RVEY9 ki'li r„i 'I.-4 - WPEOTTA•al EwffnrNr 313 P_'.or 7f0•MORRO+•ORO Oo—L.W-1,/A'N rls, fAr LYN O•a».4 L1er A(RSCR Of**,CIE~-- a•+1 1 is \- �t t _ Na(iMR N wN lE1MLOrrAP• (bIJ p.•'rrb Mir a r M t::xl;,+ tv a f i . ' 6 iRffJAEM mr.mtowns t.r_raw PrP.aP«1 A1fNAr.P w0,KLaIAV r 1�.. ,( _ sawc b,Arran►dmEgr. ' I i j i EXHIBIT D - Findings for Approval Tentative Parcel Map 16-89 9350 Santa Cruz Road Lobo Investments, Inc. / Volbrecht Surveys (September 19, 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: 1. The proposed map is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed improvements, will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The design of the subdivision and/or the type of proposed improvements will not cause serious public health problems. EXHIBIT E - Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 16-89 9350 Santa Cruz Rd. Lobo Investments, Inc. / Volbrecht Surveys (September 19, 1989) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 . Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel prior to recordation of the final map. 2 . All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, access, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer 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 issuance of building permits. 5. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Atascadero Public Works Department, and shall sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done and the inspections paid for, prior to the issuance of a building permit, or start of public works construction, and shall construct improvements as directed by the encroachment permit prior to the recording of the final map. 6. 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 Department of Public Works standards and the current State of California uniform sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review and modifications after construction. 7 . Road improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to recording of the final map. Plans shall include, but shall not be limited to: A. Santa Cruz Road: Design shall meet all City development standards, including measures to preserve and protect existing trees on the site and in the public right-of-way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Exhibit E - Conditions of Approval (continued) TPM 16-89 (September 19, 1989) 8. Construction of the public road improvements shall be completed or bonded for prior to the recording of the final map. 9. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100% Performance Bond until construction is approved, and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until one year after construction approval. 10 . Applicant shall offer to dedicate to the City of Atascadero for right-of-way and/or easement purposes, the following: Street name: Santa Cruz Road Limits: 20 feet from centerline to edge of right-of-way along entire frontage of lots . 11 . Applicant shall offer to dedicate to the public for public utility easements the private access easement on Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. 12 . Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map. 13. Vehicular access to Parcels 1 and 2 shall only be from one common driveway originating from Santa Cruz Road. 14 . Residential sprinkler systems, approved by the city Fire Department, are required in future residences built on these parcels. 15. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herin shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the California Subdivision Map Act and the City of Atascadero Subdivision Ordinance prior to recording of the final map. A. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. Exhibit E - Conditions of Approval (continued) TPM 16-89 (September 19, 1989) 15 . 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. 16. 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. �4INUTES EXCERPT - 9/16/89 B. ARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS 1 . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 20-88 : pplication filed by SLO Moving and Storage Gary -court, agent) for consideration of a re est to all w a "Vehicle and Freight Terminal" to ovate in the CS ( mmercial Service) zone. Subject to is located at 836 El Camino Real. (CONTINUED FRO 7/18/89 MEETING - CONTI NCE REQUESTED TO 10/3/89 M TING) Doug Davidson re rted that the applic- t has requested a continuance in ord - to allow additio al time to address the Commission' s concern on this matte. However, revised plans were just recei d this aft- noon, therefore, it is requested that the hears g be cot inued to the meeting of October 17 , 1989 . In response to question from ommissioner Brasher, Mr. Decamp stated it appears n of rt has been made to clean up the site. ( 8 : 05 p.m. - Commissio er Lopez-Bal b itin is now present. ) Commissioner Waage toted this is the s and time this matter has come b- ore the Commission. H would 'Like to see the matter resol ed one way or the other at the October 17th meeting. MOTION: M e by Commissioner Highland, seconde by Commis- ioner Luna and carried 7 : 0 to continue he hearing on Conditional Use Permit 20-88 to the meeting of October 17 , 1989 . 2 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16-89 : Application filed by Larry Pace for Lobo investments, Inc . (Volbrecht Surveys, agent) to subdivide one existing lot of 9 .63 acres into two lots of 4 . 00 acres and 5 . 63 acres each. Subject site is located at 9350 Santa Cruz Road. Chairperson Lochridge spoke about the difficulties he encountered in gaining access through locked gates of the subject property. He stated he would feel more comfortable in continuing the matter until such time as anyone who wanted to view the site would have the opportunity to do so . Commissioner Brasher commented she was disturbed that the applicants had not made arrangements so that the Commission or the public could have access prior to the public hearing. Commssioner Luisa also expressed concerns with attemUtina to view the site and did not feel he should use his power is as a Commissioner to take the place of the public ' s right to visit these sites . He referenced a section of the Government Code relative to the public ' s right to comment on environmental effects of a project prior to a hearing. Commissioner Waage stated it was his understanding that the Planning Commission is here to consider the public' s best interests when voting on an item and noted he felt comfortable with conducting the hearing at this time. Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin commented that if any member of the public is uncomfortable' with hearing the matter, then he could support a postponement. Commissioner Highland stated he had no problem with conducting the hearing. There are times when we have to reach a balance between full access and protection of property ( i.e. , possibility of vandalism concerning the present work being done on utility lines on the site) . Commissioner Hanauer said he walked to the site and could understand why the owner would not want to keep the gate open with all the utility material on the site. At this time, Mr. Davidson presented the staff report. The Findings have been revised to include Subdivision Ordinance Findings for a lot in excess of the 3 : 1 depth ratio. The Conditions of Approval have been revised to delete #7 (regarding road improvements) and the addition of a sentence to #5 . In response to question from Commissioner Luna, Mr. DeCaiitp explained staff is not aware of the full extent of the subdivisions that will be proposed in this area. As a result, applications will be responded to on a case by case basis. Engineering is reviewing drainage concerns which have been expressed in the past. Discussion followed relative to the need for a fire station on the west side of the City and funding measures by which this need can be fulfilled. There was also discussion concerning ultimate lot build-out and what impacts will result, and the funds necessary to take care of the various list of projects such as drainage, roads, bridge replacement, etc . Philip Baldner with Volbrecht Surveys, agent for the applicant, complimented engineering and planning staff on their efforts in preparing the staff report and clarified that the reason the gates are locked is that there are rather extensive utilities presently being installed along with open trenches ( safety hazard) . He iias been informed that it is the intent of the devei.opers to finish pave-out by the middle of October. Mr. Baidner discussed concerns and obl ections lie had with revised conditions i5 , -T71- #9, T7 .#9, (pertaining to road improvements ) and =13 ( residential sprinklers) , and offered suggestions for modification. He noted the City already has a road agreement signed by the City Engineer and developer (Gordon T. Davis) which covers road construction, an inspection agreement and reimbursement of inspection fees, installation of underground public utilities, installation of erosion and drainage control facilities, remonumentation of centerlines , provision for accurate as-builts, and maintenance of the roads for one year after construction. After the one year period, the City would then have the responsibility for maintaining the roads . Mr. Baldner asked that #13 (requiring fire sprinklers) be deleted and instead be made a part of the building conditions as he understood fire sprinklers have not been required for this area in the past. He added that it took him seven minutes to drive from City Hail to the property. In response to question from the Commission, Mr. Baldner stated the conditions pertaining to the road improvements are inappropriate for this project and need revision. Chairperson Lochridge referenced the road construction agreement with respect to the phasing portion and asked Mr. Baldner for clarification on his intent concerning the road conditions . Commissioner Highland stated that this road agreement is essentially one of the few in the City where any one has signed an agreement to develop streets to full City standards in a large area with subsequent dedication to the city. This is a different situation. Steve LaSalle noted he was previously a member of the Tree Committee and related his experience wherein the Committee received criticism for tresspassing onto private property in order t0 monitor the tree ordinance. Vern Elliott, City Fire Marshall, stated he did a time test from Fire Station #1 to the property in his vehicle. It took him Over 10 minutes to reach the site. It Could be at least 13-15t minutes for. a heavy fire vehicle. He explained the sprinklers are a mitigation measure and spoke to a proposed master plan which the Fire Department is presently developing. Commission questions and discussion followed. John McNeil expressed concern with the road agreement. He asked if the applicant was relying upon the road agreement as the basis for his road grading within the subject parcel . He asked under what possible "cloak" can the applicant come in and claim any rights under this agreement. What authority did the City Engineer have to enter into the agreement? was it approved by the Planning Commission or City Council? Was it delegated to the City Engineer by the City Council, in which case, Mr. Mc,Neii felt that this delegation is completely illegal and cannot be authorized in any sense. Mr. McNeil further questioned the validity of the agreement itself and asked that an investigation take place. Mr. Baldner stated he was at a disadvantage to address Mr. McNeil ' s questions in that the agreement predates his involvement with this area. He stated that Santa Cruz Road will be built under that agreement and pointed out his client does not own any portion of the Santa Cruz Road right-of-way and has no ability to offer Santa Cruz for any form of dedication. Discussion continued relative to timing problems with respect to the road agreement and the conditions of approval . Mr. DeCamp explained that with regard to #5, the anticipation is that the road will be constructed under the terms of the existing agreement and #5, #7, and #8 may be moot by the time the applicant is prepared to file the final map. However, the agreement may not be legally binding and the City has no assurance that the road will be completed. Barring completion of the road, the standards used in determining the minimum lot size will change. Discussion continued. 0 Commissioner Highland explained that the City Council did authorize the Public Works Director to sign the road agreement with Gordon Davis . MOTION: By Commissioner Luna to continue the hearing on Tentative Parcel Map 16-89 to give the public the opportunity to view the site and give their input. Commissioner Brasher seconded the motion. Commissioner Waage stated it would be a waste of time to continue this matter. There were no speakers from the general public who said they had tried unsuccessfully to view the site. Commissioner Hanauer concurred. Chairperson Lochridge indicated that he would like to see the matter continued until such time as the validity of the road agreement has been researched. An EIR may be necessary because of the possible cumulative impacts that may result with future projects in the neighborhood. Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin stated he had not heard from any citizen who was unable to visit the site and felt that the matter should not be continued. Commissioner Highland commented that the condition requiring residential sprinklers is going to become a standard condition for future land divisions on the west side . Discussion followed relative to the enforceability of the condition. The motion was defeated 4 :3 with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Luna, Brasher and Chairperson Lochridge NOES: Commissioners Lopez-Balbontin, Waage, Hanauer and Highland MOTION: By Commissioner Highland to approve Tentative Parcel Map 16-89 subject to the revised Findings and Conditions of Approval with modification to condition ##5 to read: 115 . Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Atascadero Public works Department, and shall sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done and the inspections paid for, prior to the issuance of a building permit, or start of public works construction, and shall construct improvements as directed by the encroachment permit prior to the recording of the final map. Construction of Santa Cruz Road to City standards along the entire frontage prior to recording the final map shall be required. " Commissioner Waage seconded the motion. comissioner Waage stated he understands the Commission members ' concerns relative to the roads and drainage, but he believed this will be resolved. This parcel map should be voted upon on its own merit. Commissioner Luna expressed concern that there is not enough information on which to base a vote. All the possible subdivisions which exist in the west (Las Encinas II and III) should trigger an EIR because of the cumulative effects, impacts on tree removal, drainage, air pollution, fire hazards, etc. commissioner Brasher added there are unanswered questions which relate either directly or indirectly to this project. In clarifying condition ##9 , Mr. Decamp explained that conditions cannot be imposed upon an applicant which cannot be met. If the applicant is linable to acquire ownership of the road, then that condition would be moot. Commissioners Highland and Waage agreed with this clarification. Chairperson Lochridge expressed concern that the Commission may be facing a similar situation such as Mrs . Mudgett' s . There are going to be cumulative effects which must be addressed before going further and he would support a continuance. The motion carried 4 :3 with the following roil call vote: AYES: Commissioners Highland, Waage, Hanauer, and Lopez-Balbontin NOES: Commissioners Luna, Brasher and Chairperson Lochridge Chairperson Lochridge declared a break at 9 :45 p.m. ; meeting reconvened at 9 : 57 p.m. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-89 : Application filed by Clark Iverson (Central Coa ngineering, agent) to subdivide a portion of wo e ' sting lots ( 13 . 9 acres) into 23 parcels one-half acre each. Request includes the establis gent of two new Ci v standard roads to serve the su ivision - Via Tortuga zd Calle Refugio. subject s ' a is located at 8625 Atasc ero Avenue. Mr. Davidson report the applicant as asked for a continuance as they ai - in the pr ass of redesigning the map. No public testimony was rec ed. MOTION: By Com mi- io r Highlal seconded by commissioner Lopez-Balb tin and carri d 7 :0 to continue the hearing Tentative Tract p 14-89 to a future date. 4 . COND IONAL USE PERMIT 7-89 : Ap ication filed by Folkins and Foikins, c . (R.P . eim, agent) to establish a service station asoline cardlock) including a 1 ,350 square foot retail ore in the CN (Commercial Neighborhood) zone. Subject s ' e is located at 2025 E1 Camino Real . Mr. Davidson presented the staff report noting staff' s concern with the nature and magnitude of the proposed use in the Commercial Neighborhood zone . MEMORANDUM TO: Henry Engen, Community Development Director Oct. 30, 1989 FROM: Doug Davidson, Associate Planner RE: 1989 Update - Subdivisions The following subdivision applications have been reviewed in 1989 as of this date: 1 . Tentative Tract Map 01-89 - 8625 Atascadero Ave. (Iverson) Withdrawn - Resubmitted as Tentative Tract Map 14-89. 2 . Tentative Parcel Map 02-89 - 7503 Carmelita Ave. (Bench) One lot of 3 .44 acres into three lots of approximately one acre each. Pending resolution of land purchase options . 3 . Tentative Parcel Map 03-89 - 4200 Obispo Rd. (Von Dollen) One lot of 6.2 acres into two lots of 3. 1 acres each. Tentative Map approved on August 22, 1989. 4 . Tentative Parcel Map 04-89 - 7445 Cortez Ave. (Larson) One lot of 8 .26 acres into four lots, with three lots of 1 .5 acres each and one lot of 3 .76 acres. Tentative Map approved July 11, 1989. 5. Tentative Parcel Map 05-89 - 7255 Pinal (Whelpley) One lot of 3.21 acres into two lots of 1 .50 and 1 .71 acres each. Incomplete - awaiting Water Quality Control Board review. 6. Tentative Parcel Map 06-89 - 9451 Cortez Ave. (Barrett) Withdrawn - Resubmitted as Tentative Parcel Map 17-89. 7 . Tentative Parcel Map 07-89 - 7000 San Palo Rd. (McNamara) One lot of 7 . 00 acres into four lots of 1 .55, 1 . 60, 1 . 65, and 2 .20 acres each. Denied by City Council on July 25, 1989. Reconsideration set for 10/30/89. 8 . Tentative Parcel Map 08-89 - 5455 Bolsa Rd. (DeKocker) Withdrawn - Did not meet minimum lot size. 9. Tentative Parcel Map 09-89 - 905 El Camino Real (Rochelle) Withdrawn - Resubmitted as Tentative Parcel 11-89. 10 . Tentative Parcel Map 10-89 - 12500 Santa Ana (Master Mort. ) One lot of 10 .51 acres into two lots of 5.26 acres each. Tentative Map approved on September 12, 1989. 11 . Tentative Parcel Map 11-89 - 905 El Camino Real (Rochelle) One lot of 100 acres into one 90+ acre lot and one 10 acre lot. Tentative Map approved on September 12, 1989. 12 . Tentative Parcel Map 12-89 - 10785 El Camino Real (Colombo) One lot of 10 acres into four lots of 1. 0,2 . 0, 2 . 0, and 5.0 acres each. Tentative Map approved on August 22, 1989. 13. Tentative Parcel Map 13-89 - 10955 San Marcos Rd. (Highfill) One 20+ acre parcel into one 16 acre lot and one 4 .52 acre lot. Map is tentatively scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of 11/07/89. 14 . Tentative Tract Map 14-89 - 8625 Atascadero Ave. (Iverson) Two lots of 14 acres into 23 lots of one-half acre each. Tentatively scheduled for Planning Commission meeting of 11/21/89. 15. Tentative Tract Map 15-89 - 5900 Bajada Ave (Low) 4-unit condominium ;,canversion. Tentative Map approved on September 12, 1989. 16. Tentative Parcel Map 16-89 - 9350 Santa Cruz Rd. (Pace) One lot of 9. 63 acres into two lots of 4 . 0 and 5. 63 acres each. Continued to City Council meeting of 10/30/89. 17 . Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 - 9451 Cortez Ave. (Barrett) One lot into four lots of approximately 1 .50 acres each. Scheduled for City Council meeting of 10/30/89. 18 . Tentative Parcel Map 18-89 - 8555 E1 Centro Rd. (Lindsey) One lot of 3. 64 acres into six one-half acre lots. Application is currently incomplete. 19. Tentative Parcel Map 19-89 - 7675 Bella Vista Rd. (Gearhart) One lot into two lots of 2 . 83 and 3.72 acres each. Project is currently being reviewed. 20 . Tentative Parcel Map 20-89 - 14205 Santa Ana Rd. (Atas. Highlands) Two lots of 17 acres into three lots of 5.7 acres each. Project is currently being reviewed. 21 . Tentative Tract Map 21-89 - 8555 E1 Corte Ave. (Bunnell) Six lots of 21 acres into a residential subdivision of 77 lots ranging from 3, 283 to 9792 square feet . Application is currently incomplete. 22 . Tentative Parcel Map 22-89 - 8000 Santa Cruz Rd. (Long) Two lots of 10 acres into three lots of 3 . 42 acres each. Application is currently incomplete. 2\ I ? i 1 f�•. W /�`\ �� �;�-- pph • , '� j'',�g� ~I , i '"tel/ �y` -'.,� ;;- / � � ,. ".. // ' \ \ '\;Y Ute, I'�—___/1--•-• i ' -�� 7/�`i .O/ IV •''� '�, � i `�; -�� � 7:r.��i� "Ian C:'7 - � �_ t =: ,�_re � / /41 :;� r \—� - ��I .�T.T'�F Ni I i H " �` "'/ I'u'J i, 7�` 1�' r s..•y., r y� - k � � �jw y •�7 if Tw { z�r -�l�si �i "�\ f/ - '�1?'` .-� - j/Y - •,3 /� m a� y1 7-1 1\ � S 7 .>�1r�F��'�.�• �«Jil!! Il/o J c*` 9ry I��i I ! .� \ R - >\ :�� i Q' ♦�\ �• ,r �F i'��.7.'rr Y' r = 1 it„'i7 /-r 410 d, / •J //.__'� .`J �J� . � „yy�'^y �h/�Y_ 7 s t:r _Tr � _ a i �I '.� � ••� � �' a,� ; ��. 0 •fir\�•` Y..--��a� �) f, ;:'t� ��i = ��', � . )• \ � ...d.. �'” ,zs a /"`=:�E �+ F� ��". ,� •+a.�v " y}/, —�/`��"�. ry. :ten, '\ ^i/ - Yt.poP'*"° x < �. .^*i•9 �"-""` •.''f �r W; Ll 1. i.'1 \ R II �'.`^! r..' �•f� � rh'Y� �;� ( �l \ lI _ �� i��� / \fir i� �t / / rn y 74 =� '•".v�s '1•!(pl {�� a 7�,ef - 7`.• yam. J �� I .�.< -1 . 3:t$sr `� �7d 3�2 4..a�,..'l Ly $.�� \�,n, m•e=� ��. i n•, _F{ ,, \ F � +,j.t�=+yie:ydf;;��.Y' i�� "h'�S' I. a•T. r� �..� ._• �,( �G i :Zc ':— a x - _ i-- :t Y a A'f� `?:-=.�. ``s lt. �J• y U41, 7sp �� o � �•-2.. - "_ ci� U' 111 ��+ -C7`� ` .'/ 1 — i`t � ?%( _ '�l✓ -����, a/ � �� � - y:lv ne kv pt MEETING AGENDA DAT 10 30 89 tTEM i 7 A • M E M O R A N D U M To: City Council Members From: Rollin Dexter, Mayor Subject: Planning Commissioner Selection Date: October 19 , 1989 Ever since the Council meeting at which we selected a Planning Commissioner to fill the vacancy of Mike Tobey, I feel I have been unnecessarily maligned over the process used. By innuendo, if not direct accusation, it has been alleged that I personally subverted/manipulated the selection process to assure the selec- tion of one particular candidate. I vigorously and categorically deny this . Other charges have also been leveled at me directly, and the Council indirectly, over the question of the propriety of Coun- cilman Lilley' s involvement, as well as our failure to follow Resolution 35-81 . Even though I believe the City Manager is • responding to this whole issue as requested by Mr. LaSalle, I feel an obligation to my colleagues , as well as the public, to make some comments on this issue, particularly in light of Mr. LaSalle ' s latest letter to me, dated October 16 , 1989 ( see copy attached) . First and foremost, I make no apology to anyone over the sel- ection procedure, but, in the absence of a majority of my colleagues protesting the method, what transpired was neither illegal nor improper. I confirmed this with Jeff Jorgensen. As much as I resent having to go through the process used again, let me state for the record how this whole thing was conducted: My underlying premise for selection was that, regardless of how many ballots it might take, unless a candidate received no votes at all, he or she could remain in the running. And in the absence of my stating any rule to the contrary or having the majority of my colleagues indicate a desire to use a different approach, this was the process used and which went as follows : 1st Ballot: Herman 1 vote Hanauer 1 vote Johnson 1 vote McNew 0 vote • Copelan 1 vote O' Keefe 1 vote Sharp 0 vote • Using my method, MCNew and Sharp were eliminated. 2nd Ballot: Herman 2 votes Hanauer 1 vote Johnson 0 vote Copelan 2 votes O' Keefe 0 votes Using my method, Johnson and O' Keefe were eliminated. 3rd Ballot: Herman 2 votes Hanauer 2 votes Copelan 1 vote Using my method, all remaining candidates received at least one vote and would remain in the balloting. Ap- parently, this is what Mr. LaSalle takes exception to, and while I respect his opinion to differ with mine, a change in the voting procedure at this juncture was the prerogative of the Council only--which didn' t occur by majority vote. 4th Ballot: Herman 2 votes • Hanauer 2 votes Copelan 1 vote 5th Ballot: Herman 2 votes Hanauer 3 votes Copelan 0 vote At this point, Councilperson Borgeson made a motion to make the selection unanimous , and it passed. In his letter to me, Mr. LaSalle reiterates his having raised a point of order regarding the interview procedure; and again, all I can say is , unless a majority of the Council saw fit at that time to question and change the procedure, it would proceed accordingly. I have discussed this with Jeff, and he has stated emphatically that appointments of this nature are made at the sole discretion of a majority of the Council, even where a resolution such as No. 35-81 existed because, as clearly enunciated in the Manager' s report, there was ignorance on everyone' s part as to its exis- tence. However, as pointed out by Jeff , our failure to adhere to the letter of Res . 35-81 would, in and of itself, not invalidate our selection because, unlike the statutory requirements of Coun- cil when it is functioning in a judicial or quasi-judicial role, • our action was legislative and discretionary, as has been point- ed out . 2 • 0 Incidentally, the City Attorney points- out that were we to treat the language of Res . 35-81 as absolute and totally binding, then there is good reason to consider all Planning Commission ap- pointments after 1981 invalid. Obviously, from a practical standpoint, this would be infeasible and only underscores the point that the method of selection is secondary to the issue of whether three or more votes were cast for any particular appli- cant. Finally, with respect to Councilman Lilley' s participation, one must again distinguish between the roles we play as elected of- ficials . Had we been sitting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity where testimony must be weighed by all five Council members prior to a decision, Bob' s tardiness may well have re- quired his abstaining from a particular vote or requesting a continuance in order to have the opportunity to listen to the tape of the meeting. But, since we were making a legislative decision based on wide discretion, Bob' s absence for part of the interviews was not cause for invalidating his vote. I hope I have clarified my position in this matter, and apart from my intention, as recommended by the Attorney and Manager, to ask Council on October 30, 1989 , if anyone desires to reopen this issue and go through the interview process again, I consider the matter closed and will have nothing further to say one way or the other. RD: cw ( f :pc/appt) Attachment: Letter from S . Lasalle, dated 10/15/89 c : Planning Commission Henry Engen Jeffrey Jorgensen 3 October 16, 1989 Stephen P. La Salle OCT 17 i' P.Q. Box 962 Atascadem, CA 93423 Rollin Dexter Mayor Atascadero, CA Honorable Mayor Dexter; I request that the matter concerning the flawed balloting process to select the most recent appointment to the Planning Commission and its consequences be placed on the next City Council agenda. You have identified yourself as the councilperson making the crucial decision (Telegram Tribune, August 17, 1989), therefore I am asking you to bring it before the public and other council members. During the interviews I raised a point of order, raising questions regarding your - interview procedures. There was no need for a "Rush to Judgement'. You could have listened and heeded the public, or consulted your fellow councilpersons and polled their opinion, or you could have requested expert staff advice, since the Community Development Director was present. If the above resources were not sufficient to resolve a question which some would consider involving nothing but fairness and common sense, you could have called a recess and gone downstairs to research it in the files. Since all the interviews were completed, you could have adjourned and continue to a later date, thereby giving yourself time to research the procedures in order to avoid a hasty decision. But now, however, time is of the essence. Mistakes were made; they continue to be compounded. Take this opportunity to correct them properly and openly. Very truly yours, Stephen P. La Salle cc: Members of the Council Planning Commission Chairman City Manager r _J M E M Q R A N D U M To: City Council From: Ray Windsor, City Manager Subject: Planning Commissioner Selection Date: October 17 , 1989 At the request of the Mayor, I am placing this matter on the agenda for Monday, October 30th, in order to respond at the ear- liest possible time to the questions raised by Steve LaSalle in his letter to the Council , dated October 10, 1989 . In answering the questions raised, I have consulted with the City Attorney and also had Cindy Wilkins research the Clerk' s files on the subject (see attached) . Questions raised by Mr. Lasalle are: 1. Q: Was and is the City Council obligated to follow Res. 35-81 in the selection process of a Planning commissioner? A: As with any procedure adopted by the Council, whether by motion, resolution or ordinance, the Council should make every effort to follow its terms and conditions unless and until they are modified or rescinded. In this case, however, the record clearly reflects that Res . 35-81 has not been used in the intervening years due to the fact that its existence after 1981 was either not known or not referenced at the appropriate time . I will address this issue in more depth at the end of the memo. 2 . Q: Did the Council follow Res. 35-81? A: While the answer is obviously no, the City Y important question to Attor- ney ne and I believe the more p ask is, in light of Council ' s ignorance of the -81 was the selection of Mr. existence of Res . 35 , Hanauer invalid? The answer is no, both legally and otherwise, because the Council, as a legisla- tive body, has broad discretionary powers in the selection of its lay bodies . This fact is evi- dent in the previous research I did on the methods used by other communities to select their boards and commissions ( see my memo dated 10/4/89 ) . i • Inasmuch as the appointment of boards and commis- sions are made at the sole discretion of the Council , operating within the guidelines of the Brown Act, using methods which are reasonable and acceptable to the majority of its members , ulti- mate selection is strictly a matter of three votes . 3. Q: If Res. 35-81 was not followed, what rules, regu- lations, procedures or resolutions did Mayor Dexter follow? A: In order to respond to this , I questioned Mayor Dexter, who reiterated a statement made following the selection process, which was that he had indi- cated at the beginning of the meeting, where any candidate received no votes, they would be auto- matically eliminated from consideration. Thus, on the first two ballots four candidates were dropped from further consideration. For the final ballots leading up to ultimate selection, the Mayor be- lieved that as long as any candidate continued to receive at least one vote, they would be able to remain in the balloting until three votes were ob- tained. When questioned about this procedure, in light of the existence of Res . 35-81 , the Mayor responded that he was unaware of this policy and, because of such, suggested a procedure that he felt was both fair and equitable. In light of the existence of Res . 35-81 and the fact that it has not been followed since its inception, the City Attorney and I feel that the matter at hand (Mr. LaSalle' s question of the legi- timacy of the selection process used) can be laid to rest most easily by having the Mayor publicly ask his colleagues if they feel that, under the circumstances, they would desire to change their vote in this matter. If so, the selection process can begin again, either under the adopted guidelines of Res . 35-81 or other guidelines acceptable to the Council, which would super- cede Res . 35-81 . With respect to the issue of Mr. Lilley' s vote in the selection process and its validity, in light of his having missed a portion of the interviews leading up to selection, the City Attorney and I concur that such an irregularity would not nullify his vote. Which brings me to my last point and a follow up to the answer given to Mr. LaSalle' s first question: As was indicated earlier, the selection of boards and com- missions is made pursuant to the legislative powers of the Council , which, by their nature, give broad discretionary 2 overview in such matters . Notwithstanding the existence of Res . 35-81 and any other formal procedure or procedures al- ready agreed to by this or any other Council , the ultimate charge of a legislative body in selecting someone to fill a vacancy on a board or commission is to assure itself and the public that it is done by majority vote. As long as this is accomplished, the procedure itself is essentially a secon- dary matter. Having said this , we want to make it clear that a logical process for filling vacancies is to be de- sired; however, it is also important to make the distinction when addressing appointments of this nature to separate the difference between the statutory requirements of civil ser- vice or quasi-civil service procedures and procedures which rest solely upon the discretionary legislative power of the Council . RW: cw ( f:bdsappt) 3 October 16 , 1989 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council , As you know, several people from the public, including myself, questioned the selection process in choosing the most recent appointee to the Planning Commission. The meeting was chaired by Mayor Dexter. I refer to my letter published in the Atascadero News, dated August 16 , 1989 " . . .From the standpoint of fairness, the voting pattern is even harder to justify. After the first round the two candidates that received the least votes were eliminated. After the second round the candidate that received the least votes was not eliminated. When questioned, Mayor Dexter decided without obtaining a consensus from the Council that this was acceptable . This candidate went on to become the eventual winner. . . " . I call ° your attention to Resolution No. 35-81 , titled "Resolution Adopting Procedures for the Selection of Committee, Commission and Board Members" . See section 4 . pharagraph c . "The candidate or candidates receiving a majority of the votes of the Council members present shall be appointed. In the event that no candidate or candidates receive a majority vote or in the event of a tie vote, then a run-off ballot or ballots will be cast, following the procedure of sub-paragraph a. above, until a majority is reached. The run-off candidates will consist of all candidates receiving at least two ( 2 ) votes and if no candidates have received at least two ( 2 ) votes, then those receiving at least one ( 1 ) vote will participate in the run- off balloting. This procedure shall be continued until a majority vote is cast" . I am submitting this in writing anAI wish a written response to the following questions : 1 . Was and is the Council obligated to follow Resolution 35-81 in the selection process of a Planning Commissioner? 2 . Did the Council follow Resolution 35-81? 3 . If Resolution 35-81 was not followed, what rules, regulations , procedures or resolutions did Mayor Dexter follow? 1 If the Council was obligated to follow Resolution 35-$i than it iS obligated to correct the flawed balloting process . After the second round it had been narrowed down to Mildred Cope LQr, ant' u'_L n__ Ift ".L 41 rC.C*o L f-ivn one vi those two candidates should be selected for the C-ommiission. I will be back in two weeks to read your answers in public . Very truly yours .. ...tephen P . Laalle See enclosures : � . Resolution No . 35-81 3 . Netter to the Editor, Atascadero News. , Aug . 15 , 198= Queti ti::ns Procedure � '" T — rs. ::.rt17 County Tribune , r�Ug. 1 . 1�b9 , Resident appaiic- 'moi at Cit";'' s selection process , by Ryan McCarthy 4 . CC�UiiCl ' s Voting pattern 'Lor :".ost recent appointee Plcnning Commi-ssioner ( first three of five ballots ) • COUNCIL ' S VOTING PATTERN FOR MOST RECENT APPOINTED PLANNING COMMISSIONER ( FIRST THREE OF FIVE BALLOTS ) First ballot : Dexter Hanauer Lilley Copelan Mackey Johnson Boraeson Herman Schiers O' Keefe Note : The following people received no votes and were eliminated: McNew, Sharp Second ballot : Dexter Hanauer Lilley Copelan Mackey Copelan Borgeson Herman SchierlHerman Third ballot: Dexter Hanauer Lilley Hanauer Mackey Copelan Borgeson Herman Schiers Herman October 16, 1989 Stephen P. La Salle OCT 16 i983 P.O. Box 962 1 Atascadero, CA 93423 Ray Windsor City Manager Atascadero, CA Dear Ray; I have been advised that some statement may be necessary on my part to officially protest the selection process for the recent Planning Commissioner. If this is so, 1 formally protest from the time I raised a point of order from the floor during the interview process for Planning Commissioner. Very truly yours, Stephen P. La Salle cc: Planning Commission Chairman E:IV ED OCT 1 "L..); '1989 October 11 , 1989 v tN4G R Ray Windsor City Manager Atascadero, CA Dear Ray: As we discussed on the telephone today, it has occurred to me that if my concerns expressed last night have merit, and if indeed, the latest Planning Commissioner has assumed his Position under an irregular selection process contrary to established City procedures , then any vote he may have or will cast could be held in question . If the above is true, it might be assumed that this exposes the City of Atascadero to potential litigation, especially any close votes , where his vote was the deciding vote . I offer this as a suggestion, that until the public's concerns are clearly resolved, that Mr. Hanyver abstain from voting on any issue which has large financial consequences . Very Truly Yours , Stephen P. LaSalle cc : Dennis Lochridge LETTER TO THE EDITOR ATASCADERO NEWS, AUGUST 16 , 1989 Questions proMed u re Dear Editor: I attended the recent Atascadero City Council inter- views to fill the Planning Com- mission vacancy. It seems to me that the rules of fair play in the selection process were violated. I realize that the position of Plann- ing Commissioner is not a paid jposition and therefore many rules and regulations that apply to employment interviews do not necessarily come into effect. However, equitable treatment land fairness should still apply. - Councilman Lilley was not pre- y sent for the first two interviews, but hestill voted on all can- didates. Even when this pro- cedure was questioned, Mayor Dexter decided without obtaining a consensus from the .entire Council that this would be accep- table. From;..the, standpoint-..of even harder to justify. After the 1 first round the two candidates 1 that received the fewest votes were eliminated.After the second round the candidate that received the fewest votes was not eliminated. When questioned, Mayor..Dexter decided without obtaining the consensus from the . Council that'this was acceptable. This candidate,,went on to become the eventual winner.- Is this a example of the make- it-up-as-you-go-along procedure j now used to conduct City business? Stephen La Salle i 2 es i.O.ent "aalf a at ci 's s.eIectionP_ocess p� ty . v Ryan McCarthy as commissioner. arrived late for the meeting and `kelegrani-Tribune He replaces Michael Tobey, who missed their interviews. resigned in May for health reasons. Additionally,Hanauer was not elim- - ATASCADERO — An Atascadero The vote for a new commissioner inated as a candidate despite receiv- tiident,.who..was a consultant to split the council along slow-growth :ing only a single vote in the early es on personnel matters said he is and pro-development lines,with Hate ° rounds,LaSalle said . `appalled" at how the City Council auer winning votes from botmdl Finally, he questioned a statement elected a new planning commission- members Robert Lilley,Rollin Dexter by Mayor Deader that a candidate r. -.,, ' and Marge Mackey. could receive council votes even if he 4' "There was no sense of fairness," James Herman, who ran for City did not show up for the interview. aid Steve LaSalle, , Council last year on a slow-growth "That is totally out of the realm of At City officials.defended the process, platform, won votes from Council any interview situation I've ever been _ owever. A personnel department members Bonita Borgeson and Alden ' in," LaSalle said of Dexter's com- ` ` okeswoman said planning commis- Shiers.Herman,a county government ment. '!loners are not, city employees, so employee, formerly worked as a LaSalle, who also worked for the "formal rules'for'hiring personnel do builder contractor in Southern Cali- State personnel Board, asked "what of apply to the commission. fornix. kinds of rules and procedures are -i After taking five votes, the council LaSalle, who has been active in they following?" He said children majority Friday finally selected J. slow-growth efforts, wanted Lilley to picking teams for schoolyard games fRonald Hanauer;:a former Los Ange- abstain from.voting on Herman or •"have a better sense of honor and fair es Chamber,of Commerce executive, Hanauer, because the councilman ply" "That's Mr.LaSalle's point of view," Dexter responded, "and I'm going to stick by my guns.,, . Dexter called the council proce- dures fair and Lille s voting `Tm the mayor," Dextrsapic`,I NORTH COUNTY TRIBUNE �`` had to make a decision and I did it." August 17, 1989 I `fey,an attorney,was late getting to Friday's meeting because of a court hearing He said Friday that he knew. Herman from the city council cam-, Paign and knew Hanauer from a local service club. Candidates for the planning com- mission submitted written state- ments, Lilley noted "An interview is Part of an overall impression," he added.. Herman said that he would like to see Lilley's vote stricken and for the council to-vote again on a planning commissioner. Hanauer -said this week that it would have been"disastrous"for his try to win a commission post if Lilley had not voted, but that the council- man's participation was proper be- cause he knew the contenders. As -the council vote for a new - - commissioner developed Friday,Mar- ___ ._ gey Mackey became the swing vote in the selection of Hanauer. - Herman`had two votes, Hanauer Ihad twovotes,and Mackey supported former planning commissioner Mildred Copelam. After the cotmcil twice deadlocked with two votes apiece for Hanauer and Herman,with CoPelan getting the fifth vote, Mackey announced she would support Hanauer. I She said after the meeting that she supported Hanauer because he had a business background, as did Michael Tobey. City Clerk Boyd Sharitz said this .veek that only three of the five ouncil members turned in evaluation heets used to help,rate candidates. M E M O R A N D U M To: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Cindy Wilkins , Secy. to City Manager(-,,. Subject: Planning Commission Appointment Procedure Date: October 16 , 1989 Following research of the records in the City Clerk' s Office for reference to Resolution No. 35-81 , attached are copies of several items which pertain to past Planning Commission appointment pro- cedures . Some explanation of how the actions of Council are indexed ( as a reference source) might be helpful in an attempt to determine how the implementation of Res . 35-81 was overlooked. The current Clerk' s index is a 3x5 card system, which ( 1 ) re- flects various subject matter referenced and, where applicable, is cross-referenced by title and/or some other indexing factor. While the system is manual , it is relatively dependable, depend- ing on the experience and knowledge of the person doing the entry. ( 2 ) However, as with any human input system without cross-check, relevant information can be and, unfortunately, is from time to time omitted. This appears to be the case with regard to Res . 35-81, due to the fact that it was only indexed under the title of "Committees" (logically, it should also have appeared under the title of "Boards" and "Commissions" , or at least those boards and commissions currently functioning within the City' s structure) . It seems only fair to note that, in 1981 , the City was two years old and the records management was in its developing stages . Also, there have been numerous personnel changes in the Clerk' s Office, each charged with the responsibi- lity of maintaining the index, each applying his or her own system of cross-indexing, and apparently without a formalized procedure as a guide. A second important factor regarding the exclusion of Res . 35-81 from resolutions authorizing appointments is noted in the absence of its reference from the text of Res . 37-85 , which authorized appointment of six new Planning Commissioners in 1985 , following resignations . Resolution 37-85 references Urgency Ordinance No. 101 , which speaks to appointment of commissioners and the terms of said appointments, but does not reference Res . 35-81 as a basis for the selection procedure. The 1985 recruitment and appointments would have been the initial implementation of the specified voting procedure as it applies to Planning Commission appointments (* ) . It appears that then City Attorney, Allen Grimes, never had the opportunity to review the text of Res . 37- 85 , as he passed away during the period when it was adopted; the resolution does not bear his signature. Given Mr. Grimes ' s rep- utation for detailed text review of official city documents, it is unfortunate that this resolution missed his examination. ( * Note: Previous to the 185 appointments, three commissioners with expiring terms due were reappointed to four-year terms in July, 1983, by Council motion on a 3 : 2 passing vote; there was no recruitment for new commissioners or a procedure necessary for selection as specified in Res . 35-81 . ) In 1985 , when drafting Res . 37-85 , which undoubtedly involved some research of the Clerk' s index for appointing authority, it is obvious that Res . 35-81 was missed. The City Clerk (and, sub- sequently, Interim City Attorney) Robert Jones, was apparently unaware of its existence, and it' s understandable that one would not necessarily think to look under "Committees" for the appro- priate reference to Res . 35-81 . From 1985 to the present, Res . 37-85 has served as the "model" resolution for appointments to City boards and commissions , and as I 've noted, no reference to Res . 35-81 appears . Therefore, in its absence, Councils have made selections based on criteria established at the time. This issue makes a strong case in support of considering the pur- chase of a computer index system for input of City records, which would provide for a standard cross-indexing system and could be accessible to the various City departments and public . : cw ( f : apptproc) 2 PLANNING COMMISSION (3) Req. for waiver of curb & gutter requirements; approved PC recommendations . � 9-22-80 ; p.l Resignation of Norm Norton from above effective 1-1-81; Council to advertise for position until 11-28-80 10-27-80; p:3 Special meeting to interview applicants; 7/13/81. Commissioners Moore, Sherer, Carroll and LaPrade appoint- ed to four-year terms; 7/27/81, P. 4-5. Special meeting to interview applicants; 7/27/81. Request for ordinance to set method for commission self tion by Leslie Cannon; 9/14/81, p 2. . , ounci�l adjourned to 4/21/83 for joint Planning Commis- sion & Council mtg; tentative agenda discussed;4/11/83, p 9. Consideration for reappointment of Commissioners to be considered 6/27/83; 6/13/83, p. 6 . Commissioners Lilley, Summers & Wentzel reappointed for .4 yrs. ; 6/27/83, p. 4._ MINUTES - ATASCADEROITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 1 , 1981 Mayor Wilkins reviewed all items on the Consent Calendar . MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved for acceptance of the Consent Calen- dar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unani- mously carried by roll call vote. B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1 . Appearance of Leslie Cannon to request an ordinance be adopted to set a method for commission selections Leslie Cannon read parts of her letter to the Council which charged that the Council had abused the intent of *the Brown Act in their recent selection of Planning Commissioners and confused the pub- lic in the process. She proposed that an ordinance be adopted setting out a method for commission selections. Most other cities make their selection by roll call vote one at a time. She suggested that Council declare the most recent Commission appointments invalid and vote again. Mayor Wilkins reminded Mrs . Cannon that she was selected as a Com- mission member under the same probess. Mrs . Cannon stated that when she was selected she was not aware there were other procedures and there did not seem to be the confusion then as there was this time. Mayor Wilkins stated that he did not feel that the Council had made a mistake and that they had acted within the scope of the Brown Act. Councilman Mackey stated that she wanted to vote on the whole list of candidates at one time; she could not tell how other Councilmen were voting in the most recent procedure and , if she had voted for Elaine Oglesby at the time when two other Councilmen did, Mrs. Oglesby would have been reappointed . Councilman Highland was not in favor of the roll call procedure because it could end up a follow-the-leader process. He stated that only one member of the Council was confused; the Council has followed the same process three times before without complaint. He suggested that some were upset with the outcome rather than with the process . He also did not feel that Council needed another ordinance; however , a procedure could be devised for voting that will satisfy everyone. Councilman Nelson stated that he would like to see a list of al- ternatives for discussion . There was considerable discussion regarding the matter with the decision that Staff would come back with alternatives for Council con- sideration. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1 . Designation of voting delegate for League Annual Convention MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the Mayor be designated as the voting delegate and the Mayor Pro Tem as the alternate. 2 COMMITTEES j RES. NO. ADOPTED Adopting procedures for selection of committee, commission & board 35-81 11/9/81 members. 6ek: c�.a 1974 CC /��X) PLANNING COMMISSION RES. NO. ADOPTED Submittal of resignations of above 2-85 3-11-85,4 Ord. 101 activated, establishing 35.85 5/13/85 commission. Commission members appointed & terms of 37-85 5/13/85 office established. Marjorie Kidwell appointed to fill unex- 36-86 4/14/86 pired term of Carla Sanders. Appoints T. Hatchell, J. Lopez-Balbontin & 87-86 7/28/86 M. Copelan to 4-yr. terms. Appoints D. Lochridge, G. Luna, G. Highland, 64-88 7/26/88 K. Waage to 4-yr...;terms, G. Brasher to un- expired term(vacated by T. Hatchell) . = tt 0 /e g0�v7�ol1s O/' �D 85 c.>L r c1 MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL - June 27, 1983 2 . Planning Commission selection procedures Norman Ted Monson felt that the Commissioners should be elected. MOTION: Councilman Wilkins moved to reappoint Commissioners Lilley, Summers, and Wentzel for four year terms. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and carried on the following roll call vote: AYES : Councilmen Mackey, Stover and Wilkins NOES: Councilman Molina and Mayor Nelson ABSENT: None Councilman Wilkins suggested that each Council member draft clarifying language for Resolution No. 35-81 which could be considered at a later date. 3. Petition for Street Maintenance District - Sonora, Lower Pinal Larry McPherson stated that Staff recommends acceptance of the petition for formation of a Street Maintenance District. MOTION: Councilman Molina moved to approve the petition and directed Staff to proceed with the necessary steps. The motion was seconded by Councilman Wilkins and unanimously carried. Dal Caudil thanked Larry McPherson and Michele Reynolds for their assistance. 4 . Resolution No. 27-83 approving an Interim Budget for the 1983-84 Fiscal Year and appropriating funds therefor MOTION: Councilman Wilkins moved to adopt Resolution No. 27-83. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried by roll call vote. 5. Regulation of certain adult and related businesses A resident asked why an x-rated adult book store would not be permitted. Mr. Warden stated that anyone can apply for a business license but if the City Council had made a finding through an ordinance. as to certain types of businesses that they felt needed special controls, that some businesses could be denied after the proper process. -4- COM L MEETING 5/13/85 AGS"OA I TEM NO. : C - 1 - B RESOLUTION NO. 37-85 A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE CITY PLANNING p� l COMMISSION /J1 I WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Ordinance No. 101 relating to the establishment of a city planning commission; and WHEREAS, public advertisements soliciting interest in appointment to the planning commission have been published; and WHEREAS, the City Council did receive 33 applications for consid- eration; and WHEREAS, the City Council aid, on April 29, 1985, consider 26 candidates for appointment to the planning commission; and WHEREAS, on May 6 , 1985, City Council did vote for specific nomin- ations to the planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to make the following appointments to the planning commission: 1. Oneex ear terms which will ire August 1, 1986: Y P a. Thomas Hatchell b. Nellie Kennedy C. Wayne LaPrade 3. Three year terms which will expire August 1, 1988 : a. Jerry Bond b. Eric Michielssen C. Ed Nolan d. Carla Sanders NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does further resolve that this resolution shall take effect immediately. On motion by Councilman Molina and seconded by Council- woman Mackey , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following vote: AYES: Councilwomen Mackey & Norris, Councilmen Molina & Handshy and Mayor Nelson NOES: None ABSENT: None u1 A qr Resolution No. 37-85 ADOPTED: May 13 , 1985 n By ROLFE E S N, M yor )' City of Atascadero, California ATTEST. ROBERT M. JONES, ' ty Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney APPRO D AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager PREPARED BY: HENRY EN EN, P an ing Director 2 U� MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting July 23, 1979 Page Two Councilman Mackey was not in favor of hiring' a Finance Director at this time; she felt the City could wait a couple of months. Councilman Nelson also felt that the timing was wrong and was in favor of waiting until the City had a better idea of the volume of work required of a finance officer. Councilman Highland was in favor of getting a Finance Director on board as soon as possible. MOTION: Councilman Stover moved that Ralph H. Dowell, Jr. be hired as Finance Director for the City of Atascadero within the next thirty days. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland. There was considerable discussion with comments from the public. Several people felt that Council should advertise more widely for this position; perhaps someone could be hired on an interim basis. There was also a review of Mr. Dowell ' s qualifications. Council advised that they had interviewed him and were satisfied that he was well qualified for the position. The motion carried on the following roll call vote : AYES : Councilmen Highland, Stover and Mayor Wilkins NOES : Councilmen Mackey and Nelson C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Consideration of Ordinance No. 9 creating a Planning Commission Mayor Wilkins read Ordinance No. 9 in its entirety. Councilman Nelson asked why the 120-day requirement inserted in Ordinance No. 8 did not have to be included in this ordinance. There was some dis- cussion regarding Ordinance No. 8 with City Attorney Allen Grimes requesting that Ordinance No. 8 be tabled until he reviewed the require- ments of the 120-period. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 9 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried. D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Selection of Planning Commissioners Mayor Wilkins stated that the Council had interviewed applicants for Planning Commissioner on July 17th and were now prepared to make their selections. He called a recess while the votes were tallyed. RECESS 8 : 03 p.m. RECONVENED 8 :20 p.m. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting July 23 , 1979 Page Three Mayor Wilkins announced that the following people were the Planning Commissioners selected by the Council : Leslie Cannon, Robert Lilley, Shirley Moore, Norman Norton, Elaine Oglesby, Shirley Summers, and James Wentzel. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the named persons be appointed Planning Commissioners for the City of Atascadero. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. B-1 Finance Director Mr. Warden requested that Council set the salary of the new Finance Director by motion. MOTION: Councilman Stover moved that the salary of the Finance Director be set at $20'; 000 per year. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and carried with Council- men Mackey and Nelson voting no. D-1 Planning Commission selection Mayor Wilkins introduced the selected Planning Commissioners " who were present and advised that they would be sworn in on August 6, 1979 at 7 : 30 p.m. 2. Consideration of Ordinance No. 8 amending Ordinance No. 1 relating to the time and place of regular meetings of the City Council Mr. Grimes requested that this matter be tabled until the next meeting of the Council. Council decided they would consider this ordinance at their meeting on July 30, 1979 . 3. Consideration of Resolution No. 3-79 establishing a special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund Mayor Wilkins read Resolution No. 3-79 in its entirety. Mr. Warden advised that Council was required by State law to establish this fund in order to receive Gas Tax monies which must be spent for specific purposes. MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 3-79. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. i M u iia 0 R A N D TT M To: City Council From: Ray Windsor, City Manager Subject: Method of Selection of Board and Commission Members Date: October 4 , 1989 Following your recent appointment of a Planning Commissioner, I was asked to look into methods by which other communities select members or fill vacancies of boards and commissions . In this endeavor, I contacted each jurisdiction in S.L.O. County as well as the League of California Cities Library. Having received all of the data, I have come to the following conclusions : ( 1) There is no standard method for such appointments . It ranges from a situation where council members provide names to the mayor and allow him or her to make the final selection; designating a subcommittee of the Council to review applications and to recommend names for action by the whole Council; to a situation simi- lar to the one used by you for the last appointment . There are variations on these themes, too. For exam- ple, one community allows the board or commission chairman to sit in as a selector or application screen- or. ( 2 ) Your method used for the last Commission appointment, with the exception of not eliminating in sequence, was, in my opinion, as good as any being used. My point here is that it probably would be best to have a rule that says : Anyone receiving zero votes on the first ballot is automatically eliminated; and, anyone receiv- ing less than two votes is automatically eliminated on the second ballot. Perhaps , at this point, the matter is mute. I say this only because, as part of our research, we discovered a City resolution on the books "Adopting Procedures for the Selection of Committee, Commission and Board Members" (Res . No . 35-81 , copy attached) . Since this has never been amended, the question at this point is whether it meets your collective satisfaction as a selection pol- icy. If yes , we should just follow this method in the future. If no, I need further direction as to handling. RW: cw RESOLUTION NO. 35-81 RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROCEDURES FOR THE SELECTION OF COMMITTEE, COMMISSION AND BOARD MEMBERS The Council of the City of Atascadero hereby resolves as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this resolution is to establish procedures for the City Council to follow in recruiting, selecting and appointing members to the standing committees, commissions or boards created pursuant to statute or by action of the City Council. Section 2. Recruitment and Eligibility. Announcements of openings for any committees, commissions or boards to which members are appointed by the City Council will be through the local news media. All electors of the City of Atascadero, over the age of 18, and meeting any announced additional criteria as established by the City Council shall be eligible to apply. Section 3. Interviews. All candidates meeting the criteria established in Section 2 will be interviewed by the City Council during a properly noticed meeting. Section 4. Selection. a. Council members will vote for the candidate (s) of their choice by placing their name and circling the name of their selection (s) on a ballot form provided by the City Clerk. Candidates' names will be placed in alphabetical order on the ballot form. b. After the City Council has had an opportunity to make its individual determination, the City Clerk will col- lect the ballots and will announce first the Council member ' s name and second the name (s) of the candidate (s) of that Council member ' s choice (s) . C. The candidate or candidates receiving a majority of the votes of the Council members present shall be appointed. In the event that no candidate or candidates receive a majority vote or in the event of a tie vote, then a run- off ballot or ballots will be cast, following the proce- dure of sub-paragraph a. above, until a majority is reached. The run-off candidates will consist of all candidates receiving at least two (2) votes and if no candidates have received at least two (2) votes, then those receiving at least one (1) vote will participate in the run-off balloting. This procedure shall be con- tinued until a majority vote is cast. Resolution No. , Cott' sign Selection Procedu On motion by Councilman Mackey , and seconded by Councilman Nelson , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Highland, Makey, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Wilkins NOES: None ABSENT: None ADOPTED: November 9 , 1981 , tv ROBERT J. WILDS, JR. , Mayor 4 ATTEST: BRAY .. WARDEN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ALLEN GRIMES , City Attorney 2 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10!30!89 File No: TPM 7-89 From: Henry Engels, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Reconsideration of Council denial of Tentative Parcel Map 7-89 , 7000 San Palo (McNamara/Cuesta Engineering) . RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 7-89 based on Findings for Approval contained in the attached Exhibit "D" , and subject to • modified Conditions of Approval its Exhibit "F" . BACKGROUND: On July 25 , 1989 , the City Council on a 2j2 vote did not over- rule the recommended denial of this map by the Planning Commission. This vote was handled as a denial of the map. Subsequently, legal counsel for the applicant has met with staff and the City Attorney to review the intricacies of this particu- lar case and to re-evaluate the conditions with the hope of obtaining approval . PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS: The attached map and modified Conditions of Approval include the incorporation of an open-space easement across most of the prop- erty to assure that home sites on lots 3 , & 4 will avoid grading; construction, and tree removal on the highly visible slopes on the property. Placement of the open-space easement line on approximately the 1 , 045 foot contour would serve to preclude tree removal for home construction, including septic fields . In addition . the applicants are agreeable to respond to the Citv' s esthetic concerns by addition of the following Condition. #12 : • "12 . A dote shall be placed on the final !slap indicating that: 'New residences constructed on lots 2 ,. 3 , and 4 shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director pursuant to the criteria and • I procedures for precise plan applications contained in the City' s Appearance Review Manual , dated May 15, 1987 . ' " With the foregoing added conditions, this lot would be subject to more careful scrutiny than any single family lot in the City, in that the City' s Appearance Review Guidelines presently exempt single family homes from appearance review criteria. HE:ph Enclosures: Modified Tentative Map - October 18,1989 Exhibit "F" - Conditions of Approval (modified 10/30/89 ) City Council Staff Report - July 25, 1989 CC : Thomas McNamara Cuesta Engineering • I a W 2 I< ki W - _- - Z r lit ~ 0O �, - - �� PNIol:ps = WV W —_ LL m 'o, / /, ,'/�/ i�(�� 1-�\��`�`.y \ i O CI 'Yg V Ot 2yd\�L 1Ai// %,." vp 1 1 1\ 11 11, 1 i\ 1 l\11111111 r 1 i \ _ \ l 1 1 i VI 1 r 1 1( !1 % 1 , 111 11111111111\ C / 1 I ll , II7/, II`rl lltl f ILII `1i� 11If) O 1 CC � I1I �l1 11, I1 1111 1 a w�h l I l I I If 11 Itt /h , - r1111I1r I I // li/r 11 t fl liIN I fll / / I I�.idt � it if I 1111 i f1 / 1 ' ' �Illill 1 1 {LI (111 I III I j / / I l I Y 1 u U�I1 ft I IAIitf 1 I ��I IIII , y4 111111111 11(l I 1 11'1 t'I1 i I { \ I 1 I 1f 1 1 1 I ( I 1 1 1 1 1 II .® �1II III 1 I I I1/ 1 11 1 �N 11 I I \ 11 1\ ; 1 f III 111 1 1111 Ilr 1111 I I! 1 A .L. —JIlit IIII/ Ilrl Illi Ill .� a L , Illj/1", III/I, I � � t• < / 11N'111� / — or, 1 �` f• fV � ll>, V � 2 •� t � 2 i �a V l \ 8 < I 1� I - u yA Vi > a l 1,I✓S7� EXHIBIT F - CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (MODIFIED 10/30/89) Tentative Parcel Map 07-89 7000 San Palo Road (McNamara) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water lines shall exist at the Legado Avenue frontage of each parcel prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the subdivider. 4. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for all accessways, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recordation of the final map. 5. Plans andP rofiles for the private accessway (Legado Avenue) shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The accessway shall be paved to a minimum width of twenty (20) feet with two foot graded shoulders within a minimum a twenty four (24) foot right- of-way (or to the standard in force at the time of construction) . 6. Permits shall be obtained and the construction of Legado, Avenue shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 7. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to the construction of improvements. Plans shall include, but not be limited to, the following: San Palo Road: a. Drainage improvement design shall meet all City development standards, including measures to protect and preserve existing trees on the site and in the public right-of-way. • • b. Construction shall include an eighteen (18) inch asphalt dike to convey water along the edge of the road and a City standard approach to serve Legado Avenue. 7. Subdivider shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department for improvements in the public right-of-way for the private road encroachment and drainage facilities. Subdivider shall also sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done in conformance with City standards and inspection fees paid. All work required by the encroachment permit shall be completed prior to the recordation of the final map. 8. A registered civil engineer shall provide written certification that all grading and drainage improvements have been completed in full compliance with the approved plans prior to final inspection. 9. 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. 10. Parcels 3 and 4 shall have no direct access to San Palo Road. Relinquishment of access rights shall be delineated on the final map. 11. An offer of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following right-of-way is required: Street Name: San Palo Road Limit: twenty-five (25) feet from centerline 12. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously with the recordation of the final map. 13. A fire hydrant shall be installed at the point where the driveway for Lot 1 leaves Legado Avenue prior to recordation of the final map. The exact location and specifications of the fire hydrant shall be as determined by the Fire Dept. 10. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Subdivision Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. • i - 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. 11 . 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. 12 . A note shall be placed on the final map indicating that : '"New residences constructed on lots 2 , 3, and 4 shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director pursuant to the criteria and procedures for precise plan applications con- tained in the City' s Appearance Review Manual , dated May 15 , 1987 . " M E M O R A N D U M Date: October 10, 1989 To : Council From: City Manager Subject: City Attorney Recruitment Although tonight ' s agenda indicates a request to select a date for interviews, perhaps it would be well to reaffirm Council ' s position with respect to the hiring . 1 . To this point all indicaf`ions are that Council feels the City ' s best interests, at least financially, are served by continuing to seek a qualified attorney with at least some municipal experience on a contractual part-time basis. If this isn ' t the case there will be a delay of some three months for full recruitment. 2. Recognizing built-in limitations in retaining someone part- time whose office would be away from City Hall , logic and reality dictates that recruitment should take place -within a reasonable distance from us. This we are attempting to do by ads in local newspapers (Atascadero News, Telegram Tribune and the Daily Press) , together with personal contacts where names have been mentioned . To date three letters of interest have been received . The final filing date is October 18th . 3. In order not to delay the selection process needlessly yet attempting to schedule a date and time convenient for the full Council , it is suggested that Thursday, October 26th be set aside for such purpose. If delayed beyond this date, Council will have to wait an additional week due to Councilman Lilley being out of the Country. 4. In light of Jeff ' s memo on open versus closed interviews, Council .needs ,to specify its preference for this part of the selection. 5. As a means to assist Council in focusing on this issue, I offer the following concerns related to selection: a. Availability: What other legal obligations do they have and what time constraints does this cause? What is their ability to respond during non-scheduled hours or hours beyond the amount established by contract? What evening or daytime limitations do they have for various in-person meetings? b . Expertise: What are their strengths and weaknesses in legal matters, municipal and otherwise? Are they adept at complaint enforcement ( litigation of code violations, etc ) as well as other types of litigation? C . Flexibility: What are their minimum/maximum hours of availability? Remuneration: Hourly rate? Monthly lump sum? Incidental charges? If a base monthly fee is agreed to , what is the hourly rate over this, if required? How many hours (minimum) can we be guaranteed on a weekly and/or monthly basis? d . Back-up : When unavailable who provides coverage and under what circumstances? e. Internal Relations: Are they (and can they) willing to participate in various staff related funct-ions, i .e. staff meetings, agenda preparation and other consultation. One final comment : As with the City Manager , the City Attorney is appointed by the Council outside of the formal procedures established for regular , full-time classified employees. This leaves a great deal of discretion on the part of council in terms of its method of recruitment and selection. That you decide on one method over another is strictly a .matter of preference and not law, since the City Rules and Regulations on hiring do not apply. This statement is intended purely for purposes of clarification. • • a ' DIEHL 8 RODEWALD A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION JOSEPH W. DIEHL,JR. ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE: RODERICK A.RODEWALD (80S) 541-1000 FREDERICK J.WOOD 1011 PACIFIC STREET TELECOPIER: OF COUNSEL P.O.Box 1207 (805) 541-6870 ANNE M. RUSSELL SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA 93406 September 20, 1989 Mayor Rollin Dexter City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 RE: City Attorney Position Dear Mayor Dexter: We are pleased to take this opportunity to tell you about ourselves and our firm. Diehl & Rodewald was formed in 1985. The principals of the firm have practiced together in San Luis Obispo County since 1980. Ms. Russell has served in an "of counsel" position to the firm informally since 1985, and on an exclusive basis since January, 1988. We feel that the educational background and work experience of each of us compliments that of the other, and enables us to offer a wide range of legal service to our clients. Mr. Diehl obtained his B.S. , M.S. , and J.D. degrees from the University of California at Davis in 1974, 1975, and 1978, respectively. He received his M.S. degree in human anatomy, specializing in neuro anatomy. After graduate school, he attended law school at the University of California at Davis, and was admitted to the California State Bar in 1978 . He is currently admitted to practice before all State and Federal courts i.. the state olf California. Mr. Diehl began his practice in 1978 as an attorney in the department litigation de g p nt of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company in San Francisco, representing the railroad's interests in various litigation matters throughout Northern California. He was an associate with a major San Luis Obispo firm from 1980 - 1982. He opened his own office in October of 1982 , and developed a successful and diverse practice, emphasizing insurance defense, business and real property litigation. He currently belongs to several professional associations, including the American Bar Association, State Bar of California, the San Luis Obispo County Bar Association, and the National Association of Railroad Trial Counsel. Additionally, he is an appointed member of the Governing Committee for California Continuing Education of the Mayor Rollin Dexter Page Two September 20, 1989 Bar (1986 - present) . He has served as a past member of the Business Law section of the California State Bar Committee on Continuing Education in the years 1982-85, and as a trustee of the San Luis Obispo County Law Library in 1986. He is a designated arbitrator by the American Arbitration Association. Mr. Rodewald obtained his B.A. degree, Magna Cum Laude, from the University of California at San Diego in 1976. He then attended Boalt Hall, the law school at University of California at Berkeley, where he received his J.D. degree in 1979. While in law school, he was employed at a respected labor law firia and held responsibilities on the general staff of the Boalt Hall Industrial Relations Law Journal. Mr. Rodewald was admitted to the California State Bar in 1979, and joined a major San Luis Obispo law firm shortly thereafter. In 1982, he left-that firm to become in-house regulatory counsel for a consortium of telecommunications firms. In that capacity, he represented those clients before the Federal Communications Commission and other regulatory agencies. He returned to private practice in 1984, and both he and Mr. Diehl have worked in concert on the majority of matters involved in their respective practices. Anne Russell is of counsel to the firm. Ms. Russell received her B.A. degree in Political Science from the University of California at Santa Barbara in 1974 with high honors. She received her law degree from University of California at Davis in 1978. She was admitted to the California State Bar in 1978. She is the past Assistant City Attorney for San Luis Obispo in 1981 through January of 1988, and was the Acting City Attorney of Morro Bay in August through October, 1988. Prior to that she was in private practice in San Francisco, emphasizing business litigation. She is a n_ember of the California State Bar, the California Women Lawyers, and a member of the San Luis Obispo County Women Lawyers having been its past president in 1986. She is admitted to practice in all courts in the state of California as well as in northern and central districts of the United States District Courts. Her practice emphasizes municipal law and real estate, including land use and development. The firm. employs Frederick J. Wood .as an associate attorney. Mr. Wood graduated from Arizona State University in August 1982, with a B.A. in Business Administration. Thereafter, he attended Brigham Young University Law School in Provo, Utah, and he received his J.D. degree in April, 1985. Prior to joining Diehl & Rodewald, Mr. Wood served as Law Clerk for the Honorable Walter E. Craig, United States District Court, District of Arizona. Mayor Rollin Dexter Page Three September 20, 1989 We currently have a 3,000 square foot office space located approximately two blocks from the San Luis Obispo County Court- house. Our office is equipped with up-to-date stand-alone data and word processing equipment, as well as a facsimile telecopier. We have a complete California law library, and have access through ABANET to national data bases including Lexis, Nexis, News Net and others. We are quite proud of our competent and professional support staff, who make up an integral part of the firm of Diehl & Rodewald. The firm's practice emphasizes insurance defense, business and real property litigation, municipal law and transactions.- We are firm believers in "preventative law, " but also stand ready to aggressively pursue or defend our clients' interests in negotiations or litigation. It is our goal to maintain a practice that is both professional and personal, and we hope you will feel free to drop by our offices and meet with us if you have not previously had the opportunity to do so. Very truly yours, DIEHL . RODE W LD J e W. D e - J f oderick A. Rodewald nne M. Russell kj s DIEHL 8 RODEWALD A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION JOSEPH W. OIEHL,JRA. ROD WA ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE: FREDERODERRICK A..WOOD LD (805) 541-1000 FREDERICK J.WOOD 1011 PACIFIC STREET TELECOPIER: OF COUNSEL P.O.Box 1207 (805) 541-6870 ANNE M. RUSSELL SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93406 September 20, 1989 Mayor Rollin Dexter City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 RE: City Attorney Position Dear Mayor Dexter: I understand that Jeff Jorgensen, your City Attorney, will soon be leaving private practice and assuming the position of City Attorney for the City of San Luis Obispo. I have spoken with Mr. Jorgensen, as well as with Mr. Windsor, the City Manager, concerning the City of Atascadero Is search for a new City Attorney. Both advised me to convey my interest, as well as the interest of my firm, in the position of City Attorney for the City of Atascadero. I have taken the liberty of including a personal resume, as well as a firm resume for consideration by you and other members of the City Council. I have extensive experience in municipal law, having been the Assistant City Attorney for the City of San Luis Obispo from 1981 to 1988, and the acting City Attorney for the City of Morro Bay in December, 1985, as well as in August through October, 1988. I have had back-up contracts with the City of Morro Bay, as well as the "'}Y f "" c_dcr^ �� ""O:lg.'1 Mr. JoZgc7'isen) for many years.�..l 1. vL AI.t.LJ vl4�.t�.:L vJ �.l�i y regret that I have never been called upon to perform any back-up legal services for the City of Atascadero. I have been a member of the California State Bar since 1978. I was in private practice in San Francisco prior to assuming the position of Assistant City Attorney for the City of San Luis Obispo, and have been in private practice in San Luis Obispo since leaving that position in January, 1988. My practice emphasizes municipal law and real estate, including land use and development. I am currently representing the City of San Luis Obispo in the negotiations and drafting of a lease and other agreements for the Court Street Center project, which is a major public/private development. I also have extensive litigation experience, primarily in municipal law. Mayor Rollin Dexter Page Two September 20, 1989 I would appreciate an opportunity to meet with you and other members of the City Council to discuss my qualifications. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, DIEHL & RODEWALD Anne M. Russell AMR:kjs ANNE M. RUSSELL 1011 Pacific Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 (805) 541-1000 ADMISSIONS TO PRACTICE LAW State Bar of California, November, 1978 United States District Court: (N.D. Cal. ) , November 1978, and (C.D. Cal. ) , September, 1984 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS State Bar of California, Real Propertv Section; California Women Lawyers; San Luis Obispo County Bar Association; Women Lawyers Association of San Luis Obispo County (President 1986) - LEGAL EXPERIENCE 1988 - Present Of Counsel, Diehl & Rodewald San Luis Obispo, California Provide contract legal services in areas of municipal law, land use, real estate and civil litigation for both private and public clients. Public entity clients include: City of San Luis Obispo; City of Pismo Beach; City of Morro Bay; Cambria Community Services District. 1981 - 1988 Assistant City Attorney (70% time) City of San Luis Obispo, California Primarily involved in litigation and real property matters. Litigation responsibilities included tort defense, mandamus and injunctive actions, code enforcement, Pitchess motions, personnel disciplinary actions. Real property . responsibilities included acquisition and sale of City property (including negotiations) , land use, and public works construction dispute resolution. Served as legal advisor to Planning Commission. Provided legal advice to City Council in absence of City Attorney, and to department heads and other City officials under general direction of City Attorney. Drafted and/or reviewed contracts, ordinances, resolutions and other legal documents (including financing of hydroelectric plant) . Anne M. Russell 1985 - Present City of Morro Bay (Concurrent with other employment) Provided back-up legal services under two separate City Attorneys. Interim City Attorney, December, 1985. Acting City Attorney, August - October, 1988, during maternity leave of incumbent. 1980 - 1981 Associate - Ogle, Gallo & Merzon Morro Bay, California 1979 - 1980 Associate - Elkus, Giles & Forster San Francisco, California Business litigation, State and Federal Courts EDUCATION University of California, Davis: J.D. , May, 1978 Electives included water law, land use & planning law, moot court and trial practice; Director, Student Lawyers for the Arts. Internship - Sacramento Legal Aid Society. Law Clerk - Hardy, Erich & Brown, Sacramento, California (insurance defense) . Law Clerk - Michael P. Lehtonen, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands (general civil practice) . Hastings College of the Law: Entered Class of 1978 (transferred after first year) University of California, Santa Barbara: B.A. Political Science, with High Honors, June, 1974 Dean's List, Honors at Entrance, Chi Omega Sorority. Appointed Student Representative, University Center Governing Board. RECENT COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES Bishop's Peak Elementary P.T.A. , First Vice-President, 1988-90 Boy Scouts of America - Camp French Cub Scout Camp, Volunteer Staff, 1988 Nativity of Our Lady Church - Teacher, Elementary Religious Education, 1988-90 References available upon request RECEIVE ® CARROLL A. MONTGOMERY SEP 2 71989 Attorney at Law CITY MGR. 2190 DeMille Road Paradise CA 95969-6607 (916 538-7411 26 September 1989 Chief Administrative Officer City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA Re: Position(s) in Office of City Attorney Dear Administrative Officer: I understand that the City of Atascadero is, or may be, looking to fill the positions of City Attorney or Assistant/Deputy City Attorney. In that regard, I enclose my resume for your review and consideration. I would be pleased to speak with you at your convenience. Very truly yours, CARROLL A. MONTGOMERY CAM:moh Enclosure CARROLL A. MONTGOMERY 2190 DeMille Road Paradise , CA 95969 (916) 538-7411 (w) (916) 877-1402 (h) SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS Over nine years of experience in the general practice of law. My present assignments include family support and representation of minors in dependency proceedings . I also prosecute crimes against children. General areas of experience relating to public entities include: land use, labor, conservatorships, probate, public contracts, mental health, public health, public works and protective services. I trained/supervised support staff, developed and implemented law office procedures . PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Deputy District Attorney, 4-E, County of Butte 11 /87 to present Primary responsibilities include family support enforcement, representation of minors in WIC 300 proceedings, child stealing, child abandonment and child molest; code enforcement; welfare and consumer fraud and "paper" case prosecution; advise District Attorneyconcerning "civil" matters . Chief Deputy County Counsel, County of Butte 7/86 to 11/87 Primary responsibilities included advising and representing all County departments and preparation of County Counsel opinions, review/draft contracts, ordinances, resolutions and ballot measures. Assist with litigation as necessary and assigned. Superior Court Custody Mediator, County of Sonoma 9/85 to 7/86 Appointed as a mediator to the Sonoma County Superior Court' s Family Mediation Services. In addition to mediating child custody disputes, I prepared reports and recommendations regarding same for the Court. I also testified at temporary custody hearings and assisted judges with ex parte orders regarding custody, visitation, domestic violence and other "child" related restraining orders . Private Practice, Santa Rosa, California 12/80 to 7/86 Interview clients; perform legal research; court appearances; supervise work of support staff; prepare for and conduct trial work; responsible for office administration, library ordering and tax compliance; perform all work incidental to the operation of a general practice law office. • 0 SIGNIFICANT AREAS OF PRIVATE SECTOR EXPERIENCE 1 . Family Law: a. Representation of both petitioners and respondents in dissolution of marriage, legal separation, nulity, support and custody proceedings . This also incorporates experience in application of accounting principles, tax law, pension law and analysis of financial records . b. Representation of conservators and conservatees in conservatorship proceedings including private and LPS matters. 2. Tort Law a. Physical Injury: Representation of both plaintiffs and defendants in litigation arising from negligent and intentional torts. In addition to knowledge and use of applicable tort law and civil procedure, this representation incorporates knowledge of, as pertinent, medicine, insurance law, and economics relating to wage loss . b. Other Injury: Representation in personal and property tort litigation including professional negligence and fraud. 3 . Probate a. Advising clients regarding applicable tax and property law relating to estate planning; drafting of wills and other appropriate documents . b. Representation of beneficiaries, executors and administrators in both contested and uncontested proceedings . Lam. Business Law: Advising clients regarding formation, operation and dissolution of business entities. This includes experience in "corporate housekeeping" , analyzing and drafting contracts of various kinds, and assuring compliance with federal, state and local law and regulation. 5 . Contract Law• a. Representation of parties in negotiation and drafting of contracts including residential and commercial leases and lease options , employment agreements agreements, agreements for purchase and sale of businesses and real property. b. Representation of parties in breach of contract and rescission. 6. Trial/Arbitration: Representation of both plaintiffs and defendants in litigation which has proceeded to trial and also American Arbitration Association proceedings . 7. Appellate Practice: Representation of clients on appeal requiring research and writing, of briefs and memoranda in support of petitions for extraordinary relief. 8. Judicial Experience: Experience as Judge Pro Tempore on numerous occasions hearing small claims matters in Butte County Municipal Court. Chair of and service on Sonoma County Fee Arbitration Panel. Continuing Education Attendance at numerous continuing education courses and seminars presented by CEB, CTLA and County Counsels' Association. The areas addressed have included: family law, personal injury, real estate, civil procedure, consumer law, settlement negotiation, land use, mental health and welfare. CDAA and NDAA continuing education courses in the areas of code enforcement and trial practice. Speaking/Teaching a. Associate Dean of Faculty and professor of law at CalNorthern School of Law in fields of Criminal Procedure, Trial Advocacy/Moot ° Court, Family Law and Community Property. The school is . provisionally accredited by the State Bar. b. Guest instructor at UC Davis, teaching custody mediation in the prelaw and psychology programs. C. Guest speaker and panel member at meetings of various organizations concerning family law. Law Office Organization/Supervision a. Developed and implementated alpha/numeric case file indices, calendaring procedures and conflict detection system. b. Developed litigation master documents for use with word processing equipment. c. Authored office procedures manual. Organizations and Memberships - State Bar of California — Butte County Bar Association California District Attorneys Association. - Lawyers in Mensa Publications County- of Butte v. Superior Court of Butte County (3d Dist. 1989 210 Cal-App-3d 555 Education/Certificates San Francisco Law School, Juris Doctor, 1980 Admitted to practice law in: - State of California United States District Court (Northern and Eastern Districts) Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals d October 10, 1989 # Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council, As you know, several people from the public, including myself, questioned the selection process in choosing the most recent appointee to the Planning Commission. The meeting was chaired by Mayor Dexter. I refer to my letter published in the Atascadero News, dated August 16 , 1989 " . . .From the standpoint of fairness, the voting pattern is even harder to justify. After the first round the two candidates that received the least votes were eliminated. After the second round the candidate that received the least votes was not eliminated. When questioned, Mayor Dexter decided without obtaining a consensus from the Council that this was acceptable. This candidate went on to become the eventual winner. . . " . I call your attention to Resolution No. 35-81 , titled "Resolution Adopting Procedures for the Selection of Committee, Commission and Board Members" . See section 4 . pharagraph c. "The candidate or candidates receiving a majority of the votes of the Council members present shall be appointed. In the event that no candidate or candidates receive a majority vote or in the event of a tie vote, then a run-off ballot or ballots will be cast, following the procedure of sub-paragraph a. above, until a majority is reached. The run-off candidates will consist of all candidates receiving at least two ( 2) votes and if no candidates have received at least two (2 ) votes, then those receiving at least one ( 1 ) vote will participate in the run- off balloting. This procedure shall be continued until a majority vote is cast" . I am submitting this in writing anzI wish a written response to the following questions : 1 . Was and is the Council obligated to follow Resolution 35-81 in the selection process of a Planning Commissioner? 2 . Did the Council follow Resolution 35-81? 3 . If Resolution 35-81 was not followed, what rules, regulations, procedures or resolutions did Mayor Dexter follow? 1 I If the Council was obligated to follow Resolution 35-81 then it is obligated to correct the flawed balloting process . After the second round it had been narrowed down to Mildred Copelan and Jim Herman. According to Resolution 35-81 one of those two candidates should be selected for the Commission. I will be back in two weeks to read your answers in public. Very truly yours, A d� Stephen P. La Salle See enclosures : 1 . Resolution No. 35-81 2 . Letter to the Editor, Atascadero News, Aug. 16 , 1989 , Questions Procedure 3 . North County Tribune, Aug. 17 , 1989 , Resident ' appalled' at city' s selection process, by Ryan McCarthy 4 . Council ' s voting pattern for most recent appointed Planning Commissioner ( first three of five ballots ) 2 K RESOLUTION NO. 35-81 RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROCEDURES FOR THE SELECTION OF ', COMMITTEE, COMMISSION AND BOARD MEMBERS The Council of the City of Atascadero hereby resolves as follows: '. Section 1. Purpose. ThePur purpose of this resolution is to .. establish procedures for the City Council to follow in recruiting, selecting and appointing members to the standing committees,_ commissions or boards created pursuant to statute or by action of the City Council. Section 2. Recruitment and Eligibility. Announcements of openings for any committees, commissions or boards to which members are appointed by the City Council will be ' through the local news media. All electors of the City of' Atascadero, over the age of 18, and meeting any announced additional criteria as established by the City Council 'shall be eligible to apply. Section 3. Interviews. All candidates meeting the criteria established in Section 2 will be interviewed by the City Council during a properly noticed meeting.. Section 4. Selection. a. Council members will vote for the candidate (s) of their choice by placing their name and circling the name of their selection (s) on a ballot form provided by the City Clerk. Candidates' names will be placed in alphabetical order on the ballot form. b. After the City Council has had an opportunity to make its individual determination, the City Clerk will col- lect the ballots and will announce first the Council member ' s name. and second the name (s) of the candidate (s) of that Council member 's choice (s) . C. The candidate or candidates receiving a majority of the votes of the Council members present shall be appointed. In the event that no candidate or candidates receive a majority vote or in the event of a tie vote, then a run- off ballot or ballots will be cast, following the proce- dure of sub-paragraph a. above, until a majority is reached. The run-off candidates will consist Qf ,all candidates receiving at least two (2) votes and if no candidates have received at least two (2) votes, then those receiving at least one (1) vote will participate in the run-off balloting. This procedure shall be con- tinued until a majority vote is cast.. Resolution No. , Am ssion Selection Procedu*s�e On motion by Councilman Mackey , and seconded by Councilman Nelson , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its . entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Highland, Makey, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Wilkins NOES: None ABSENT: None ADOPTED: November 9, 1981 L ROBERT J. WIL INS, JR. , Mayor ATTEST: MY�RATX. WARDEN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: h ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney 2 _,.: LETTER TO THE EDITOR ATASCADERO NEWS, AUGUST 16, 1989 Questions procedure Dear Editor: I attended the recent Atascadero City Council inter views to fill the Planning Com- _ mission vacancy. It seems to me that the rules of fair play in the selection process'were violated. I realize that the position of Plann- ing Commissioner is not a paid position and therefore many rules and regulations that apply to employment interviews do not necessarily come into 'effect. However, equitable treatment _.. and fairness should still apply. - Councilman Lilley was not pre- - -- sent for the first two interviews, but he. still voted on all can- didates. *Even when this pro- cedure was questioned, Mayor - Dexter decided without obtaining a consensus from .the entire .Council that this would be accep- table. From the�- standpoint...of even harder to justify. After the first round the two candidates that received the fewest votes were eliminated.After the second round the candidate that received the fewest votes - was not eliminated. When questioned, - '-- Mayor, uestioned, - '--Mayor:Dexter decided without obtaining the consensus from the . .Council that this was acceptable. This candidate,;went on to become the eventual winner.'- ' -Is this a example of the make- it-up-as-you-go-along procedure now used• .to : conduct City business i Stephen La Salle Res�ident 'a allecOat cit ' �. pp y s selection � ocess Ryan McCarthy Telegram-Tribune as commissioner. arrived late for the meeting and. fieHe replaces Michael Tobey, who missed their interviews. resigned in May for health reasons. Additionally,Hanauer was not elim ATASCADER0 — An Atascadero The vote for a new commissioner inated as a candidate despite receiv resident ,who,.was a consultant to . split the council along slow-growth =ing only a single vote in the early, cities on personnel matters said he is and pro-development lines,with Han rounds,LaSalle said "appalled" at.how the City Council auer winning votes from: bound•_ . -Finally, he questioned a statement- -----— — -- selected a new planning commission- members Robert Lilley,Rollin Dexter by Mayor Dexter that a candidate .r.There vr�s and Marge Mackey. could receive council votes even if he paid Steve LaSalle sense of fairness," James Herman, who ran for City did not show up for the interview. Council last year on a slow-growth "That is totally out of the realm of City officials-defended the process, platform, won votes from Council any interview situation I've ever been iowever. A' personnel department members Bonita Borgeson and Alden in," LaSalle said of Dexter's com :pokeswomah said planning commis- Shiers.Herman,a county government ment. :ioners are not_.city employees, so employee, formerly worked as a LaSalle, who also worked for the brmal rules for hiring personnel do builder contractor in Southern Cali- State Personnel Board, asked "what iot apply to the commission. . forma. kinds of rules and procedures are. After taking five votes, the council LaSalle, who has been active in they following?"-He said children aajority Friday finally selected J. slow-growth efforts, wanted Lilley to picking teams for schoolyard games )onald Hanauer;a former Los Ange- abstain from.voting'on Herman or <<, �s Chamber,of Commerce executive, Hanauer, because the councilman p Y e a better sense of honor and fair "That's Mr.LaSalle's point of view," Dexter responded, "and I'm going to stick by my guns." Dexter called the council proce- dures fair and Lilley's voting proper. NORTH COUNTY TRIBUNE ."I'm the mayor," Dexter said "I Md to make a decision and I did it." August 17, 1989 ``fey,an attorney,was late getting to Friday's meeting because of a court. hearing He said Friday that he knew Herman from the city ,council cam-,- paign and knew Hanauer from a local - service club. Candidates for the planning com ' _ mission submitted written state- ments, Lilley noted "An interview is'. part of an overall impression," he added.. < Herman said that he would like to see Ulley's vote stricken and for the council to.vote again on a planning - =- commissioner. Hanauer -said this week that it I would have been"disastrous"for his -- try to win a commission post if Lilley had not voted, but that the council-, i man's participation was proper be- cause he knew the contenders. i As -the council vote for a new commissioner developed Friday,Maz - gey Mackey became the swing vote in--- the selection of Hanauer. Herman'had two votes, Hanauer had two-votes,and Mackey supported _ former planning commissioner Mildred Copelan... After the covackl twice deadlocked with two votes apiece for Hanauer and Herman,with Copelan getting the fifth vote, Mackey announced she would support Hanauer. She said after the meeting that she supported Hanauer because he had a business background, as did Michael Tobey. City Clerk Boyd Shantz said this meek that only three of the five council members turned in evaluation •heets used to helpXate candidates. COUNCIL' S VOTING PATTERN FOR MOST RECENT APPOINTED PLANNING COMMISSIONER (FIRST THREE OF FIVE BALLOTS) First ballot : Dexter Hanauer Lilley Copelan Mackey Johnson Borgeson Herman Schiers O' Keefe Note: The following peoplereceived no votes and were eliminated: McNees, Sharp Second ballot : Dexter Hanauer Lilley Copelan Mackey Copelan Borgeson Herman Schiers Herman Third ballot: Dexter Hanauer Lilley Hanauer Mackey Copelan Borgeson Herman Schiers Herman