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 10/10/1989
• BOY D C. SHARITZ CITY CLERK * NOTE : THE COUNCIL WILL MEET IN CLOSED SESSION AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE 4TH FLOOR CLUBROOMFOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION REGARDING PERSONNEL AND WORKERS COMPENSATION MATTERS. A G E N D A ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATIONBUILDING 6500 PALMA FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM OCTOBER 10, 1989 7 :00 P.M. RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: * Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. . * A person may speak for five ( 5 ) minutes * No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to • speak, has had an opportunity to "do so No one may speak more than twice on any item. Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may respond but, after the allotted time has, expired, may not initiate further discussion. The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. Call to order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call 7 City Council Comment: - PROCLAMATION: "FIRE PREVENTION WEEK" , October 8-14 , 1989 4` 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 . SEPTEMBER 26, '1989:CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 2. REQUEST FOR A ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 26-87 , 11300 VIEJO CAMINO (Yamabe & Horn Eng. /Vanden �C? Berghe Development) J 3. TENTATIVEPARCEL MAP 16-89, 9350 SANTA CRUZ - 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. ea. , and one parcel of 3 .64 ac . (Lindsey/Eng- ineering Development Associates) 5 . APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN, DAVID BRAGG : 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 y- 2 B. HERRINGS/APPEARANCES 1. APPEAL BY TURKO SEMMES OF INVESTIGATION - FEE CHARGED FOR GRADING WITHOUT A PERMIT AT 12070 SAN MARCOS ROAD C. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1 . SALARY ADJUSTMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE FY88-89 WAGE AND> CLASSIFICATION STUDY: A. RESOLUTION NO. 73-89 ADDING & DELETING VARIOUS JOB CLASSIFICATIONSAND ADOPTING A SALARY/CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE ' FOR VARIOUS MANAGEMENT, MIL?-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 CLERK AND CITY TREASURER STP � 2 . HAZARDOUS WASTE PILOT PROGRAM FUNDING k1 3 SELECT DATE FOR CITY ATTORNEY INTERVIEWS (Verbal) 4 . RESCHEDULE 2ND MEETING IN OCTOBER DUE TO LEAGUE CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE (Verbal) -r6 Egc�f hn e � 0 D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1 . City Councils A. Committee Reports (The following represents ad hoc or standing .commitees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary. ) : 1 . City/School Committee (Nothing to report) 2 . North Coastal Transit (Nothing to report) 3 . S .L.O. Area Coordinating Council (Nothing to re- port) 4`. Traffic Committee (See Items A-8 & 9 (A/B) ) 5 . Solid/Hazardous waste Mgmt . Committee ( See Item C-2 ) 6. Recycling Committee (Nothing to report) 7 . Economic opportunity Commission (Nothing - to re- port) 8 . Finance Committee (Nothing to report) 9 . B. I .A. ('Nothing to report) 3 10 . Downtown Steering Committee (Nothing to report) 11 . Interim Growth Management Committee (Nothing to report) 12 . General Plan Subcommittee (Nothing to report) 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4 . City Treasurer 5. City Manager 4 . • PROCLAMATION FIRE PREVENTION WEEK WHEREAS , the week of October 8-14 , 1989 , has been designated as Fire Prevention Week nationwide ; and WHEREAS , Fire Prevention Week is held in commemoration of the anniversary of the "Great Chicago Fire" ; and WHEREAS , the Atascadero City Fire Department and firefighters nationwide symbolize Fire Prevention Week as a time to stress the importance of fire prevention and education to the public . NOW, THEREFORE , 1 , Rollin De :t.er , Mayor of the City ,of. Atascadero , do hereby proclaim the week of October 8-14 , 1989 , as • Fire Prevention Week and urge all citizens to make a commitment: to fire prevention and home fire safety and to visit the fire station and become familiar with the many aspects of the fire service . IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 10th day of October , 1989 . ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor City of Atascadero , California • MEETING A5ENDADATE_�� ITEM ,. • ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 26, 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 Councilwoman Borgeson. ROLL CALL: All Present : Councilmembers Lilley, Shiers, Mackey, Borgeson and Mayor Dexter Staff: Ray Windsor , City Manager ; Henry Engen, Community Development Director ; Chief Bud McHale, Police Department ; Jeff Jorgensen, City Attorney; Andy Takata, Director of Parks, Recreation and Zoo ; Mark Joseph, Director of Administrative Services; and Boyd Sharitz , City Clerk . • Rudy Hernandez the new Assistant Finance Director was introduced . Councilwoman Borgeson announced that the month of October is "Adopt-A-Dog" Month and is being sponsored by AFAR. Mayor Dexter proclaimed October 1-7, 1989 as "Mental Illness Awareness Week" and presented the proclamation to Barbara Barnard . COMMUNITY FORUM: Gail Mudgett , 3125 Ardilla Rd. read the attached prepared statement regarding drainage, erosion and seismic hazards in Atascadero. Mayor Dexter told Ms. Mudgett that she had raised some very important questions and Council is in the process of looking into this situation. Lee Perkins thanked the City for the generous support of the DARE Program so that children at Lewis Avenue School could learn about the dangers of drugs. Also as a member of the Lewis Avenue PTA she expressed concern of the safety issue of the crossing at Olmeda and Traffic Way. They would like a crossing guard at that intersection due to the heavy traffic. She presented the City Clerk with a petition requesting a crossing guard at this intersection. Mayor Dexter advised that this would be an • appropriate subject for the City-School Committee. 0 ! Terry Graham stated he agreed with Mrs. Mudgett ' s statements. He also expressed his concerns regarding exclusion of the public from occurrences which are occurring all around us. There have been several issues on the consent calendar that he feels were of great significance to the general public of Atascadero, but to which the Chairpersons of those meetings felt were inconsequential for public input , including the establishment of a hazardous waste and/or other toxic waste dump in the North County and the changing of the zoning requirements for the Amapoa Tecorida District . Glenda Silva urged Council action on having a crossing guard at the Intersection of Olmeda and Traffic Way. She stated her granddaughter had been struck this summer crossing the street from the Junior High School as she left Summer School . She said trees are important but our children are our most natural heritage. Dolores Berry, 6955 Balboa Rd. spoke in support of Mrs. Mudgett ' s statement . Alan Volbrecht spoke on behalf of the Atascadero Highlands Project . Drainage and erosion control in the immediate vicinity of Mrs. Mudgett ' s property and the people down stream can be • mitigated . He feels that through the improvements proposed on Ardilla Rd. that with the erosion control plan that has been submitted to the City that they can help to contain the water and run off from the large bowl that is immediately above their property. The intent of the developers is to put the road in the original road right of way as was originally laid out by the original colony subdividers 60 or 70 years ago. 1 . PRESENTATION OF WARNER BROS. RE: FILMING SCHEDULE City Manager Ray Windsor introduced Andy Stone, Executive Producer , Charlie Harrington, Location Manager , and Barbara Friedman, Production Assistant . Mr . Stone stated that the name of the movie will be called "My Blue Heaven" and will be released around the end of July. The Production Office is at 3100 E1 Camino Real , telephone number 461-7000. Atascadero will be the main location of this film. Photography will start on November 6th. About 110-125 technicians, scenic people, cast , etc. will be used to make this movie. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. SEPTEMBER 12* 1989 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 2. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT —JULY 1989 • 3. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT — AUGUST 1989 4. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT — JULY 1989 5. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - AUGUST 1989 6. REQUEST BY THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FOR SUPPORT IN ASKING LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES TO SPONSOR LEGISLATION ENABLING CITY-SPONSORED BUSINESS SIGN PROGRAMS ALONG STATE HIGHWAYS. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 17-89 - PROCLAIMING THE MONTHS OF SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER AS "GOOD NEIGHBOR- MONTHS (United Way/Neighbors Helping Neighbors) S. FIRE, EMERGENCY MEDICAL AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL MASTER PLAN REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS 9. AWARDS OF BIDS - RESURFACING PROJECT 10. ELIMINATION OF CROSSWALK AT ARCADE AND EL CAMINO REAL 11 . AUTHORIZE AMENDMENT TO AUDITOR'S CONTRACT TO REFLECT INCREASED COMPENSATION ($2,000) FOR SANITATION DISTRICT AUDIT. 12. RESOLUTION NO. 72-89 - APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS UNDER THE ROBERTI-Z'BERG-HARRIS URBAN OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PROGRAM FOR THE ATASCADERO LAKE PAVILION. Councilman Shiers stated he would like item A-6 pulled from the Consent Calendar. Councilwoman Borgeson said she would like item A-12 pulled from the Consent Calendar . MOTIONS By Councilwoman Mackey, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to approved the Consent Calendar except for items A-6 and A-12. Passed unanimously by roll call vote. Councilman Shiers said he pulled Item A-6 because of the issue that was raised in that item. He has no problem with what is being proposed here, but this proposed resolution as written would not apply to the City of Atascadero and that seems to be what is implied in the issue. He would like it applicable to the City of Atascadero and would like us to pass on to the City of San Luis Obispo a request that it would be reworded so that the City of Atascadero , as well as other cities, could take advantage of such a program. 3 MOTION: By Councilman Shiers, seconded by Councilman Lilley, to approve Item A-6 noting that the City of Atascadero requests that the language be modified so it includes sign abatement programs as well as amortization programs. Passed unanimously. Councilwoman Borgeson asked that Andy Takata give a staff report on Item A-12. Mr . Takata gave the report and answered questions from the Council . Terry Graham spoke against this grant . Sarah Gronstrand spoke in favor of securing this grant . MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey to approve Item A-12, Resolution No . 72-89. Passed unanimously by roll call vote. B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES: 1 . APPEAL BY TOM VAUGHAN OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 23-88 - PROPOSED DIVISION OF TWO LOTS OF 18.78 ACRES INTO 4 PARCELS OF 4.5 ACRES EACH ( 10750 SANTA ANA RD. ) Henry Engen, Community Development Director , gave staff report with the recommendation to deny the appeal based on the Findings for Denial adopted by the Planning Commission. Council discussion and questions followed. Tom Vaughan, the applicant , thanked the Council for meeting with him at the site and allowing him to explain what he personally feels has been a confusing issue. He has letters from various engineers who have addressed the buildability of these sites. He asked that condition #7 that says "cul-de-sac" be replaced with the word "Private road" and condition #10 the word "three" changed to "four" . He feels that this is a unique site and a lot of time and effort has been spent in trying to preserve this setting. Dave Main from Engineering Development Associates stated that the sites are septic sites. He stressed that all septic systems are engineered and he would venture to say that every septic system in this area has been engineered and that the City is equipped with everything it needs to review and approve this type of system. The Building Department already has in place the mechanism that it needs to assure that a proper and effective system is going to be installed on any one of these sites. Mr . Main responded to questions from the Council . 4 • William Dohan, 8035 Santa Rosa Rd. , stated that four different engineers have visited the site and have indicated that not only are there adequate room for building sites but also for the private disposal systems and the 100% recharge area. Since they have agreed to utilize the existing fire road alignment , not only can they do the subdivision without removing a single tree, by so doing the concurrent adjustment of the lot lines will add additional disposal area to parcels 1 and 2. Mr . Dohan answered questions from the Council . Council discussion followed. Henry Engen indicated that mound, evapotranspiration and infiltration, and evapotranspiration systems are unconventional , last resort systems on existing lots of record but not advisable if they can be avoided . MOTIONS By Councilman Shiers, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to deny the appeal based on the findings for denial adopted by the Planning Commission in Exhibit A. Passed unanimously by Roll Call Vote. • Mayor Lilley asked for a 10 minute recess at 8:55 p .m. Meeting reconvened at 9:09 p .m. C. REGULAR BUSINESS: SS: 1 . DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT AGREEMENTS (3) (City of Atascadero with B. I .A. /J. Stinchfield/D. Smith) (Continued from 8/22/89 and 9/12/89) Councilman Lilley stated this item will be continued until the next Council meeting. 2. CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION FINANCING: A. RESOLUTION NO. 68-89 — AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 IN CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director , gave the staff report and then introduced Jerry Laster who answered Council questions. Doug Lewis asked questions regarding the bids for the Police Facility. Terry Graham said he felt that the building of the Police Facility should be placed on the ballot and let the people decide about the building of the Police Facility. Sarah Gronstrand said Council should "stop talking , and do" . 5 • MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Mayor Dexter to approve Resolution No . 68-89. Passed unanimously by roll call vote. B. RESOLUTION NO. 70-89 — AMENDING THE BUDGET TO RECEIVE THE PROCEEDS FROM THE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director , stated that no action will be taken on this resolution at this time. 3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Ray Windsor , City Manager , gave the staff report . Council discussion followed. It was the consensus of the Council to approve having an Economic Development Committee. D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1 . City Council Councilman Lilley asked that the City Manager contact Dr . • Avina from the Atascadero Unified School District in writing requesting a meeting of the City-School Committee as soon as possible. Mayor Dexter asked the City Attorney to work with the City Manager and the Mayor regarding the selection of a new City Attorney. 2. City Attorney None 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer Gere Sibbach said he would like to meet with Council in closed session to review the salary of the City Treasurer . 6 5. City Manager Ray Windsor stated that he had given a copy of a proposed Resolution from the Home Owners Assoc . regarding creekway set backs. He recommended that this be referred to the General Plan Sub-Committee and to then come back to Council with a recommendation on the matter . Whitey Thorpe inquired as to the nature of this proposal . MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey to forward the Study and Resolution adopted by the Home Owners Association be referred to the General Plan Sub Committee for further study and actions they deem appropriate. Passed unanimously. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:55 P.M. TO A CLOSED SESSION IN THE 4TH FLOOR CLUB ROOM FOR DISCUSSION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(b) , SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION; SAID MEETING WILL ADJOURN TO A CLOSED SESSION ON WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1989 AT 3:00 P.M. , ROOM 207, FOR DISCUSSION CONCERNING EMPLOYEE SALARIES AND BENEFITS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6. MINUTES RECORDED BY: BOYD SHARITZ, CITY CLERK PREPARED BYt GEORGIA RAMIREZ, ACTING DEPUTY CITY CLERK 7 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCAERO Agenda Item: A-2 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 File No: TPM 26-87 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director { , SUBJECT: Request by Yamabe & Horn Engineering, Inc . (VandenBerghe Develop- ment) of a one year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 26-87 (11300 Viejo Camino) . RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a one year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map • 26-87 , extending the approval date to September 8, 1990. BACKGROUND : The above-referenced map was approved by the City Council on September 8, 1987 based on the attached Conditions of Approval. The applicant has requested a continuance in order to complete the required conditions of approval . Continual effort has been made toward completion of the project to a point where the map is near completion. Under the City' s Subdivision Ordinance, this is the only time extension allowed. HE :ph Attachments : Memorandum to Planning Commission - Sept. 19 , 1989 Request for Extension - August 15 , 1989 Planning Commission Staff Report - Aug. 18, 1989 cc : Yamabe & Horn Engineering, Inc. VandenBerghe Development • ITEM : A-2 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: V ` Doug Davidson, Associate Planner RE: Tentative Parcel Map 26-87 - 11300 Viejo Camino DATE: September 19, 1989 The above referenced map was approved by the Planning Commission on August 18, 1987 and subsequently approved by the City Council on September 8, 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. Throughout the last year, the applicant' s representative (Yamabe & Horn Engineering) has been addressing the requirememts in the final map check process to a point where the map is near completion. 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 26-87, extending the approval date to September 8, 1990. DD/dd Attachments : 1 . Request for Extension 2 . Staff Report YAMABE & HORN ENGINEERING, INC. Consulting Civil Engineers 3097 Willow Avenue,Suite 8,Clovis,California 93612 (209)292-5703 August 15, 1989 Mr. Henry Engen Community Development Director Citta of Atascadero �J P.O. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 RE: Tentative Parcel Map 26-87 Dear Mr. Engen, On behalf of the owner we request an extension of one year for the above referenced map. Additional Time is needed to complete some of the conditions of the tentative map. Please contact our office if you need any additional information. Very truly yours, Gary Horn GDH:cay cc: VandenBerghe Development 0602 pCi.�ei :u r+ti,v 2 8 089 Cit of Atascadero Item: BA Y STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: August 18, 1987 BY: Doug Davidson'9Associate Planner File No: TPM 26-87 Project Address: 11300 Viejo Camino SUBJECT: Division of one parcel containing 27.01 acres into four lots con- taining 8.52, 4.23, 6. 59, and 7. 67 acres each. BACKGROUND: The Bordeaux House 400 unit apartment project is currently under con- struction. Project review included certification of an EIR, Precise Plan approval, and issuance of building permits. The reason for this request is to obtain permanent financing of the project. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bordeaux House 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Yamabe & Horn Engineering 3. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27.01 acres 4. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF/16 5. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .400 apartment units (under construction) 6. Adjacent Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . .North: RMF/16, Villa Margarita Mobile Home Park South: RS, Residential East: State Hospital, vacant West: RS, Residential 7. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Multiple Family 8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted B. ANALYSIS• The minimum lot size in the RMF/16 zone is one-half acre. Thus, lot size is not an issue here, with these proposed lots being well in excess of one-half acre. Staff review will concentrate on the effect of this proposal on site maintenance and function. Reason for Request The applicant is stating that this request is to obtain perman- ent financing and not to sell off individual parcels. However, the creation of four separate parcels allows the potential for individual ownership and management, even though the entire apart- ment project is interrelated. Staff' s main objective is to insure that the project will function efficiently. Shared Access/Facilities The Bordeaux House apartments are now under construction and will share the following amenities and improvements upon completion: A. Roadways (3 private roads) B. Parking (800 required spaces) C. Drainage D. Sewer E. Other Utilities (gas, electric, water , cable) F. Open Space (4. 5 acres) G. Recreational Facilities (4 pools) The Precise Plan approval of this project did not envision sep- arate ownership of individual parcels. The project was approved and is being constructed as one project with common access and shared facilities. Common access easements and maintenance agree- ments are necessary to ensure reciprocal access over all four parcels for the items listed above. Staff feels that CC&R' s are a more all-inclusive method to obtain reciprocal agreements, as opposed to one road maintenance agreement, one drainage mainten- ance agreement, etc. We are also recommending that the CC&R's in- clude a provision to assure common management regardless of the individual parcel ownership. Density/Parcel Design The proposed parcel map would result in the following densities: Par celArea Plan B Plan C Total Dens;ty 1 8. 52AC. 72 52 124 14. 55 2 4. 23AC. 38 44 82 19.39 3 6. 59AC. 62 36 98 14. 87 4 7.67AC. 28 68 96 12. 51 None of the proposed parcels are eligible for additional units because the density approved (400 units) exceeds that allowed under the new Multiple Family Density Standards. The proposed parcel design does consider the topography and site layout. Each parcel contains its required number of parking spaces. Each parcel also contains a pool and associated recrea- tional facilities. 0 C. SUMMARY: Recorded access easements and maintenance agreements (embodied in CC&R' s) can insure that this project will function adequately and be maintained appropriately in the event of a sale of any parcels. The project is currently being developed to the maximum allowable density and the proposed parcels are a logical division of the site improvements and terrain. The 4. 5 acre open space area will remain for the benefit and use of the entire project. On-site and off-site improvements have been conditioned as part of the Precise Plan (see Exhibit D) . The recommended conditions of this parcel map strive to make sure those improvements function as a whole. D. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map 26-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit E and the Conditions of Approval in < Exhibit F. DD:ph Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Parcel Map Exhibit C - Street Names Exhibit D - Precise Plan 9-85 - Findings and Conditions Exhibit E - Findings for Approval Exhibit F - Conditions of Approval CITY OF ATAS E X A I Q 1 T A �. :,..-7.. . .� CADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOCA T ID ki DEPARTMENT TF/VI Z� —87 I I , , I � , I I ' I I � a / I SITE R F� ' a CR 3 / r •16 1 0� Q,44E -R-S RS lo � r a y r a u fl RS(FH) CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT S SC-LD 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TFM 2 (o- 07 t i /t r � r �. v� , •„c a +i E , _ .)it �-A Q 50 "tt � � � Ittl�► C AR g y i` tt � s � n�..� a j ;� n 111th e� # � � •��,' },��i � o v • •' ,,., ,... . CITY OF ATASCADERO E A H i E r T r - T Inter .J.-, ST'R EST NA M C S� �0- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT T PM 26 - 57 �fHllr DWI u; i? 1 !! 5 3 nn Atm:r�• z rj oc . `\`��?^` ,�� � ,Y'l�✓��y°fit - � ti N g: NOTfCE ,.... .........n. _.__ .] _. EXHIBIT - Precise Plan 9-85 Findings/Conditions of Approval December 16 , 1985 (REVISED 12/16/85 and 12/30/85) FINDINGS: 1. The proposed project with the recommended conditions of approval is consistent with City zoning regulations. 2. The proposed project, with the recommended conditions of approval, will not be inconsistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development. 3. That the proposed project, with the recommended conditions of ap- proval, will not generate a volume of traffic beyond the safe cap- acity of all roads providing access to the project, either exist- ing or improved in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic volume of the surrounding neighborhood that would result from full development in accordance with the Land Use Element. 4. Based on a parking survey of the adjacent 64 unit apartment pro- ject, the on-street parking problems occurring in this area, and the recommendation of the City' s Traffic Committee based on evalu- ation of recent multi-family development, two parking spaces per unit (800 total) are necessary to ensure adequate on-site parking for residents and visitors alike. 5. Development of this proposed project will result in a substantial impact on City services and utilities, thus making the imposition of additional mitigation measures a necessary requirement. 6. The Environmental Impact Report is hereby certified as a complete and accurate document consistent with the provisions of the Calif- ornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Proposed construction shall comply with the submitted development plans (Exhibit B, site plan) , (Exhibit D, elevations) , conditions of approval, and all other applicable codes and ordinances of the City of Atascadero. Site plan shall be redesigned to reflect the conditions of approval. Any subsequent modification shall require approval by the Community Development Department prior to imple- menting any change. Re: Precise Plan 9-80(VandenBerghe/Forsher & Guu,irie) 2. Complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to, and require approval by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of buiding permits (See Zoning Ordinance Section 9-4. 124) . The following items shall be noted or detailed on these plans: a. All areas including setbacks, parking lots, and unused areas shall be landscaped appropriately per Zoning Ordinance Sec- tion 9-4.125 (a) . b. Concrete curbing, or a functional equivalent, shall be pro- vided to enclose all required landscaping. C. All existing trees with a diameter of eight inches or more shall be shown. Trees which are to be removed shall be noted as such. d. Proposed landscaping shall be accompanied with a planting schedule which includes species, container sizes, number of plants or flats, and the space distribution of ground cover . e. Trash enclosures shall be provided with appropriate details per Zoning Ordinance Section 9-4.129 . Construction standards require the bottom of the trash enclosure area to be concrete or an equivalent impervious material and that trash collec- tion facilities shall be provided within 100 feet of said units. f. Parking areas which abut an adjacent residential area shall be screened with solid fencing six feet in height and a landscaping strip five feet in width. This shall be in- creased to ten feet on the rear property line, adjacent to the mobile home park , to provide an adequate buffer zone. g. Perimeter fencing shall be compatible with the rural charac- ter of the area and attempt to preserve views as much as possible: solid wood fencing along Viejo Camino and an open wood fence (50% or more open around the perimeter of the site should accomplish these goals) . h. Ten percent (10%) of all parking areas shall be landscaped with shade trees approximately 30 feet on center . i. A tree protection plan shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of permits, including the temporary fencing of oak trees, to insure their safety during construction. 3. 800 parking stalls are required: a. 400 carport spaces with one reserved for each unit; 200 un- covered, unreserved spaces; and 200 uncovered spaces designa- ted for visitor parking. 2 • Re: Precise Plan 9-85 (VandenBerghe/Forsher & Guthrie) b. Nine handicapped stalls shall be appropriately designated in conformance with Zoning Ordinance Section 9-4.115 (c) . C. Parking shall be prohibited along Viejo Camino and on El Cam- ino Real along the Mira Vista Apartments frontage as required by the Public Works Department. d. The storage of recreational vehicles and boats shall be prohibited. 4. On-site circulation improvements shown in Figure 11 (page 50 of the Draft E. I.R. ) shall be implemented (Exhibit F) . 5. Drainage and erosion control plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to and approved by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of building permits. This shall include the submittal of a preliminary soils report to determine the structural design of footings for the proposed structures. The proposed drainage plan shall be redesigned to eliminate the proposed detention basin, resiting of structures proposed in swales, and additions to the drainage system to protect project buildings. 6. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered civil engineer , shall be submitted to and approved by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of building permits. Construction of these im- provements shall be completed prior to final building inspection for the initial apartment building. Road improvement plans shall include the following: a. Install curb, gutter and five foot sidewalk and paveout along property frontage along Viejo Camino, to include a bus stop for Dial-A-Ride and school buses, with a shelter (passenger) with a ten foot, or wider , sidewalk in the vicinity of the bus stop. b. Reconstruct the intersection of Santa Barbara Road with Viejo Camino and with E1 Camino Real, and Santa Barbara Road within those limits. Rework the profile and cross-section of Santa Barbara to a minimum width of 20 feet and appropriate thick- ness based on R-value as directed by Public Works Department. C. Improve the intersection of E1 Camino Real and Viejo Camino and provide left turn lane on El Camino Real into Viejo Cam- ino with 200 feet of storage and provide appropriate widening to accommodate tapers, including curb and gutter . d. The applicant shall be required to pay a fair share (or post securities) for future traffic signal improvement at Santa Rosa and E1 Camino, and Santa Rosa and West Front, in the amount of 14% of the total cost prior to the issuance of any building permits. 3 l e. Construct a left turn lane and right turn lane in Viejo Cam- ino from El Camino Real to 100 feet south of the north fork of Palomar Creek, widen bridge at north fork of Paloma Creek to allow for widening to be provided to accommodate tapers, including curb and gutter . f. Applicant shall grant an easement for public improvements and maintenance of improvements on private property, particularly at bus stop shelter and sidewalk. 7. Sanitary sewer facility plans, prepared by a registered civil en- gineer , shall be submitted to and approved by, the Public Works Department prior to issuance of building permits. Construction of these improvements shall be completed prior to final building in- spection for the initial apartment building. Sanitary plans shall include the following: a. Pay an in-lieu sewer connection fee of $795 per dwelling unit prior to issuance of building permits for Phase I (total = $318 ,000: $159 ,000 per phase) . b. Sanitary sewer facilities shall be designed to accommodate Paloma Creek Park facilities in addition to the project. A lift station shall be provided for gravity flow from park facilities and shall have adequate capacity as determined by the Public Works Department. Plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase I , and the park lateral shall be run from the lift station to the Park restrooms prior to final build- ing inspection for Phase I. C. Do other work as recommended by the Sanitary Sewer Study (prepared by Wallace and Associates) and required by the Pub- lic Works Department to accommodate this project or work in- cluding, but not limited to: increasing existing line sizes and expansion of wastewater treatment plant and lift sta- tions, not to exceed $350, 000, prior to final building in- spection of Phase I. 8. The following additional fees for public improvement purposes shall be paid prior to final building inspection for Phase I. a. Pay $27 ,850. 00 , which is approximately the equivalent to the proposed Drainage Development Fee. b. Pay $7,900 .00 , which is approximately the equivalent to the proposed Parks Development Fee. C. Pay $101, 750. 00 ; which is approximately the equivalent to the proposed Bridge Development fee. 4 9. The following additional fees shall be paid, or improvements made, prior to any final building inspection for Phase I: l a. Construct to City plans and specifications the Paloma Creek Park restroom as soon as practicable in 1986 (goal: April) . (Not to exceed $65 ,000) . b. Design and construct to City standards and specifications a satellite fire station and/or its associated equipment, as soon as practicable in 1986 (goal: prior to combustible construction) (not to exceed $270, 000) . C. Pay $235 ,000.00 toward improvement/construction of a police station facility and its associated equipment. 10. The project applicant shall provide security guards or security measures on the site during construction, including enclosure of the site by a cyclone or chain link fence , until final inspection of the last building. 11. Carports and areas around buildings shall be well lit; however , lighting shall be directed away from Viejo Camino and surrounding residences (Zoning Ordinance Section 9-4.137) . 12. An eight inch water main shall be installed as a loop throughout the site as directed by the Fire Marshall. 0 13. The project shall comply with the City' s fire code provisions and Zoning Regulations. These shall include the following : a. Driveway access width shall be a minimum of 20 feet with a maximum slope of 20%. b. Turning radii shall be a minimum of 28 feet inside and 48 feet outside. C. Fire hydrant spacing shall be a maximum of 300 feet; location and type to be determined by the Fire Department, prior to the issuance of any building permits. d. Hydrants and water lines shall be installed prior to com- mencement of combustible construction. 14. A determination by a qualified biologist shall be made as to whether the pond area in the western portion of the site is a true vernal pool. This shall be completed prior to issuance of permits for Phase II , with no disturbance of the "vernal pool" area to occur during Phase I construction. If it is determined that any rare plants are present on the site, adequate protection measures shall be taken. 15 . All new utilities required for this site shall be installed underground. 5 16. All applicable development standards shall be complied with as a part of Phase I to ensure that the initial phase can function in- dependently. This shall include the provision of 2. 0 parking spaces per unit and adequate circulation in conformance with the zoning ordinance and this precise plan approval. 17. Internal signage and directories, including addresses, shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of any permits. 18. The design of the three proposed recreational centers shall be re- viewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of any permits and shall include outdoor use areas for younger children. 19 . This phased project precise plan is approved for a period of three years from the date of final approval, provided that substantial site work commences within the first year of approval. Further extensions may be granted pursuant to Section 9-2. 118 of the Zoning Ordinance. 20. In addition to the developer fee currently in place, pay an addi- tional $150, 000 .00 to the Atascadero Unified School District to mitigate the impact of the Bordeaux project on the school of the District. Said additional fee is to be paid prior to final build- ing inspection. 6 EXHIBIT E - Findings for Approval Tentative Parcel Map 26-87 August 18, 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 pro- posed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed. 5. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife of their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvement will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or that substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474.6 of the State Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge of waste. EXHIBIT F —Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 26-87 August 18 , 1987 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions, and Restric- tions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances and architectural control of all buildings. a. These CC&Rs shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and Community Development Department prior to approval of the final map. b. These CC&Rs shall be administered by the property owners. C. These CC&Rs shall include common access easements, utility easements, and shared parking agreements. d. These CC&Rs shall include maintenance agreements for streets, parking areas, drainage, sewer lines, utilities, and any other shared facilities. e. These CC&Rs shall assure common management of the entire . 400-unit project. 2. A final map, in compliance with all conditions set forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit- ted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 3. All conditions imposed on the project by Precise Plan 9-85 and building permits shall be satisfied prior to recording the final map. 4. Final map shall show street names and location of all utilities. 5. Approval of this tentative parcel map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. • 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 Directory 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 Commission 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 • • 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. r f • • 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 4ystems, 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. 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 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. RECOrMENDAT I ON: 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 (19.5%) 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 • T requiring that the street The Public Works Department is requ g 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 A 7— NJ -it GENERAL PLAN MAP AXCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TPM 16-89 + r 1� I,/.,1 if I,/., 1! 1 ' \11 4 l +' 1 \ ir AN SIN FAMI , —J S.L.O. ii'_• County ! sb SITE / 1 S.L.O. County a - 1� N 1 of 2000' \ 0 .y CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT B �'""'■�� -R■ "'■ LOCATION AND ZONING MAP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TPM 16-89 RS f rl � 1� r` r 1,, D 1 S.L.O. p o County '' .. - R S 0 00 site -. \` �LAG \\\ o cc0 Count N o \` O� . 2000 \. CITYtF ATA.SCADERO F]XHIBIT C 7-loin —scat — r TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . DEPARTMENT TPM 16-89 f y SITE • VIGINSLAI NOT TO fLAL[ / -r• . d•''i i31'r � •!?/. _�� ..�-�Y.-\\,\rOt,Rt l\i�.\^ � f/)i'S.// iflif// - �E..B,•6r��PY�y .. ;.; / .JUN 2 7 1989 I, IV OWNERS CERTIRCATL /\ t. \\ '`I�1" 'I+,' fmrRf#VAmrm&AI ,Pr rwL LD O � " \\ \I+�F t ofvn/av arRu�nso+rfrrAfswww �' rIf�IUNO OEVEL;:i'I�lc � t�t �"; f ` r[ b !.O -- "�'� 1 1 \,`tl\t`\\\it It\N lit• nr,rrRiin rRr ovw•MAPA A wA✓.ae.r o+ . 1?]s At + Orf AFG � / 1` \1\\ H\ *\\ \\,. R(ATrsrwrAsfwsrs,weFNRRA.. '\\\\khl\\ r rr, rfr wresnrnsr.ww/ws.e„ r ' \ \`j , " •,•'\ ArAYr Awr rMARrAMAr,r 1R V, ��� r *r s .. : \ikk \��\� '�-nw(srelv(� •1 nr cwew. + p LARRY ft"'.p any. •Ti,._._I �� \jot zr TffNTAT/V£PARCEL HAP R� 1 11'. ♦ (. .! + .La,fn ��� r�.i�' u.u'n ' i �,.r i AT 89-/73 ` { .� 1` �•' } w' J "'�" i Ar!w AP'40 CO&DW.er Larl 1MON TI:f f t r f t , y . :'•\ ArA(<AafRO Ce,ONr•lY/Nf A. A TRI 19% ',}ry Mr.MwrTLw rAACfI D,►f(.l<rp(fq/,/ATiaa,' ' - j ! � i, � � aA�Y uusraRrTr or S.(w Lqf f�ftse, . Ysanes.,rf: . oe.frA.ec q.v. oz - ....�._�OfoTc M•rlAeNy L�}A?sar e� .. , � •at�w ri.r.«• a n • Rxm arrv.R/eC(W �� t .. i � , 1• `1L'TrrRA/vLC,Y/er•n/�^•. •iTt MR<:`/K .. t LL.sro N w/>i<O Ma'.cr Loeo l/Wl,Srm=%Er9,kw. PR(rArrr RY: wERwA/.^!P MI/M••rte, w/ L!N(LerrALr,f EAs(.fvr fiR 3PA[[,KP £LHT SURVEYS -•;,Z,��t ty./� .:t F � J9J P__3, M7S0I1!MOMORRD AtoAO '. Ofr C Ww rr,/Runxw.. �.1• �.i�l( •1 1 ` - A4%AiR MAN.•,1✓LMrwR� JM tap.a-.4 f1Or( AlASCAA(-ft qA Crt I'IRY RAWWJ*" M •I�e �, Z:: �} i'kF.:f .'.'f t . 1 t Jir .• rwRc/sAn'n..aq faa�rn L fAw f f fr—R w N/ It .� _ - (/ARAM Pm A.rnrir�• doer t AK p s'wxw,wRe.as. -i 0 • 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. i 0 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. 0 0 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. JOINUTES EXCERPT - 9/16/89 i 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 evisedplans were just recei d this aft- noon, therefore, it is requested that the hear 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 tin is now present . ) Commissioner Waage tated this is the s and time this matter has come b- ore the Commission. H would like to see the matter Lesol ed one way or the other at the October 17th meeting. MOTION: Mi e by Commissioner Highland, seconde by Commis- ioner Luna and carried 7 :0 to continue he hearing on Conditional Use Permit 20-88 t 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 Luna also expressed concerns with attempting 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 0 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 Findinas 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. Decamp 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 has been informed that it is the intent of the developers to finish pave-out by the middle of October. Mr. Baldner discussed concerns and ob"iections he had with revised conditions =5 , =7 . #81. #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 Hall 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 to 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 13-15r 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 Load 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. McNeil 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. Commissioner Highland explained that the City Council did authorize the Public Works Director to sign the road avreement 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 SIR 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. OeCamp explained that conditions cannot be imposed upon an applicant which cannot be met. If the applicant is unable 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 IversoI] (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 ►ent of two new Ci v standard roads to serve the su ivision - Via Tortuga id 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 ess of redesigning the map. No public testimony was 'rec ed. MOTION: By Commissio r Highlat seconded by Commissioner Lopez-Balb tin and carr i d 7 :0 to continue the hearing Tentative Tract p 14-89 to a future date. 4. COND IONAL USE PERMIT 7-89 : Ap kation filed by Folkins and Folkins, 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. • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-4 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 File No: TPM 43-87 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director INC, SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 43-87 at 8500 E1 Dorado (Joseph and Mary Lindsey/Engineering Development Associates) to subdivide 5 .02 acres into four (4) parcels, three (3 ) containing 20,000 square feet each, and one parcel of 3 .64 acres. RECOMMENDATION: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 43-87 as all conditions of • approval have been met by the applicant. BACKGROUND : On February 23, 1988, the City Council concurred with the Plan- ning Commission' s recommendation to approve Tentative Parcel Map 43-87 based on the Findings and Conditions of Approval. HE :ph CC: Joseph & Mary Lindsey Engineering Development Associates • EXHIBIT A - LOCATION MAP -zoTentative Parcel Map 43-87 CITY OF ATASCADERO 8500 El Dorado +pix". IF �,»�n Lindsey/Eng. Devel. c+n COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • x .�- �aN SITE 8500 .El Dorado TPM: 43-87 • LindseY/ gEn •Dev. JE .. LL IM = ' EL.. MF-4 6) Ce , �L� NT L AA �>� r o / o- °0,9 CT -- C R N a$ / t \ Eno F AVE \ o a �� • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO AGENDA ITEM: A-5 Through: Ray Windsor , City Manager Meeting Date : 10/10/89 From: Department of Public Works Subject - Consideration ubject :Consideration of Employment Agreement with David Bragg. Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council approve the attached Employment Agreement with David Bragg for Engineering Technician services . Background: David has been working for the Department of Public Works as an Engineering Technician since February 14 , 1989 through a program • with the State Department of Rehabilitation . During this program the State has paid 90% of David' s salary with the city contributing the remaining 10%. Discussion: David has become a valuable part of the Engineering Department . His background in construction has proven extremely beneficial to the department . David' s current contract will expire on November 10th and it is requested that he be retained as a contract employee through the end of this fiscal year . Options : 1) Approved Employment Agreement 2) Deny Employment Agreement Fiscal Impact : The cost of this contract will be approximately $15 ,500 . Funds sufficient to cover this expenditure were appropriated in the 1989-90 budget under the heading of temporary/part time personnel . • • E!"IP-L.OYMENT AGREEMENT DAVID L . BRAGG THIS CONTRACT t e City of A-Lascadero . an —U41- 'City!' David L .Bragg . e- ''Contractor , WITNESSETH: WHEREAS , City 7_ I Engineering Technician -; ,--a WHEREAS . Contractor 2*. qualified l NOW . THEREFORE- -h - partie follows . • loyment . EmP -.r. e n 4--f Z r! ac7 - 4- YI E- Fj rt l.",e in nt ScoiDe of Service . a 0-1: z rv? ET� i i L r t i r m OZI D 'ter1 - n i E7 a2 a ie n Contractor Status . -,2- j n,- n- a r t-2 S _t he 2; n t7� L f 01, =-,ny �L V ID a 1-i -�,-er -.a rr-!e cij i c u r Vu_`2?. C,2T-1(":n . C! r • + T:no,,., -Pay , h e n f i L-s or a, - ac C r ua. an n i.e s*e e e e i C'-I Wlill he e.-l.J'L,--;aJ--)-Le zor R e,-- 2-e n!e n a,n 6, -.0.1 C)- e r s C omrr e n s a -D n Cr-n--races-r unae2 c--t-2--cas, and acrres-c, t.'_a h E. J -2 e r C t.-nure :E; r i'�, -n -emenir I nt--rel)'1,1 , a. 1, 0 aei'la— c r e a rd n e 0 e- C-'- h c,I d a P h s� C e v t Aq-�E-rll,lel-ll is. 7oin all -pE-I-- *.: ". I tL-rn;::� I n i- AcTreo�-ment . 4 . Warranty of Contractor. Contractor warrants that ne qualified to provide the services herein agreed to . 5 . Compensation. City shall pay to Contractor as compensation in full for all services performed by Contractor Pursuant to this Agreement , the sum of $11 .45 per hour . Payments by the City shall be made in accordance with established City procedures on a biweekly basis to coincide with the City ' s normal pay day. 6 . Term of Agreement . This Agreement shall commence on November 10th, 1989 (which shall be the date on which Contractor commences work under this Agreement) , and shall be terminated on June 30, 1990 unless extended by mutual written agreement of the parties . a) All work shall be performed for the Public Works Department under the direct supervision of the Director of Public Works or designee . 7 . Termination of Agreement for Convenience . Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time by giving to the other party fourteen ( 14) calendar days ' written notice of such termination, specifying the effective date of such termination . Termination shall have no effect upon the rights and obligations of the Parties arising out of any termination occurring prior to the effective date of such termination. Contractor shall be paid for all work satisfactorily completed Prior to the effective date of such termination. 8 . Termination of Contract for Cause . If Contractor fails to fulfill in a timely and professional manner his obligations under this Agreement, or if Contractor shall violate any of the terms or provisions of Agreement , City shall have the right to termin— ate this Agreement effective immediately upon the City ' s giving ten (10) calendar days ' written notice thereof to Contractor. Termination shall have no effect upon the rights and obligations of the parties arising out of any transaction occurring prior to the effective date of such termination. Contractor shall be paid for all work satisfactorily completed, as determined by City, prior to the effective date of such termination . 9 . Modification. This Agreementconstitutes the entire under— standing of the parties hereto and no changes, amendments, or alterations shall be effective unless in writing and signed by both parties . Non-Assignment Ln t: 0 Contract . r em-, a S n . rans,f er ael ecrat,... r U C-11 r r J n 17 _yr andin-, f:,u+ h e CL C via caus7e f i i_s In'_lr em en t T.C' + rl u a n nt . s,,o er�a :1,v n n t ez, -z:, S. -a u e of a_ 4' da . anc unet—orceal + y o: 1.,17 Enforceabiliti. he i Le2MIS 01 n er e of -,-:a n r1c,- wa-, e i-L 4 ect ll : i a n y u, h e r e Jr p- I n -n Actions a., a 1 1:11. en. :han e, a Ah,I e a 7, h __,1S 4- r ney I e e s a g, e e-d _a L e n T e C, 7 -L n _T I n-i T Nondiscrimination . h,E: sl Scl h 7: r s u,a n't iv M-:e i a ny lu Conflicts of interest . N 0 C,1- C er . e , c:_._ j_. a cr e n a I in 't n 4 1 + r f t ny r r a i C,n Y"E n a -127 C- %j 7 L�'RT a 1 17 2 1 CONTRACTOR CITY OF ATS SCADERO S • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-6 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Award of bid for Planning Division utility vehicle. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council award the bid to the lowest bidder, Pete Johnson Chevrolet. BACKGROUND: • The 1989/90 fiscal year budget authorized expenditures for a new vehicle for the Planning Division. Bids were requested from twelve ( 12) different dealers and four (4) dealers responded with six (6) different proposals ranging from $11 ,356 . 84 (Pete John- soli) to $15,526 . 29 (Jerry Reneau) , as indicated in the attached Bid Summary. FISCAL IMPACT: The budget provides for up to $15, 000 for the vehicle and the Chevrolet 5-10 vehicle bid by Pete Johnson would meet the City' s request for a proposal . HE :ph Attachment: Bid Summary • • BID SUMMARY: PLANNING DIVISION UTILITY VEHICLE Agency Vehicle Total Cost Pete Johnson 190 Chevrolet 5-10 $ 11 ,356 .84 San Luis Nissan 189 Hardbody SE .V6 $ 11 ,894 . 00 Palla Equipment, Inc. 190 GMC S-15 $ 11 , 944 . 50 Jerry Reneau 189 Dodge Caravan $ 15, 526 . 29 Jerry Reneau 190 Dakota 2WD $ 12, 130. 53 (Regular Cab) Jerry Reneau 190 Dodge Dakota 2WD $ 12, 808 . 29 • (Club Cab) • • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO AGENDA ITEM: A-7 (A & B) Through : Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 From: Department of Public Works SUBJECT: Acceptance of recently constructed roads into the city- maintained road system. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolutions accepting Alegre Avenue and Rayar Avenue into the city road system. BACKGROUND: • Both Alegre and Rayar Avenues were constructed by private developers in accordance with plans approved by the City Engineer. All required inspections have been completed and the roads have been determined to have been constructed as to the plans . OPTIONS: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 64-89 and Resolution 81-89 accepting both roads . 2) Adopt only Resolution No. 64-89 (Alegre Avenue) 3) Adopt only Resolution No. 81-89 (Rayar Avenue) 4) Deny both requests FISCAL IMPACT : By accepting these roads into the city-maintained system the city will become responsible for the repair, however, no significant work is expected for several years . • RESOLUTION NO. 64-89 • RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ACCEPTING ALEGRE AVENUE INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED ROAD SYSTEM The Council of the City of Atascadero resolves as follows : 1 . Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1806 of the California Streets and Highways Code, the following street is hereby accepted into the city street system: Street Name Length in Feet Miles Alegre Avenue 400' .08 2 . A copy of this resolution shall be furnished to: Cuesta Engineering On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member the Atascadero City Council hereby adopts the foregoing resolution in its entirety on the following roll call vote: • AYES; NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN RAY WINDSOR City Attorney City Manager i PTN.. CITY OF ATASCADERO 56-2 J ROAD .ADERO ATASCADCD^ '� 1 � !76.05 -90 . N v"ol,1./ I 77.62 Q ` 7R 1489 /s�.sa isa a /.._/S.D W �4 �. .503 ec P 17 OA k /Yo.Ib J 193.41 nr.e .C•tGfQ ©j 2 O N <i1G O .4L AC l79.GJ ,p .w /EH.9 2or Ys .I. '_J $ �' 3 .✓3.'•39'i �2N WLLI o 0 -jnes. tN Q u Q Ns © Q o 2. ! 70. /63.05 /6212 ` -.i Je s° 6 ,7m 4c f'► . PM, 17-141 1. PM 43-4 y. TR,HB^ P M.29-42 a� S 34' 43' 4C E �f FEC:. -RACT 1489, R.M. BK, 14, PG. 16 �, �3 AMENDED MAP OF - THIS MAP IS FOR ASSESSMENT NOTE—ASSESSOR'S BLOCK B ATASCADERO COLONY PURPOSES ONLY. LOT NUMBERS SHOWN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY IN CIRCLES CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NO. 81-89 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ACCEPTING RAYAR ROAD INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED ROAD SYSTEM The Council of the City of Atascadero resolves as follows : 1 . Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1806 of the California Streets and Highways Code, the following street is hereby accepted into the city street system: Street Name Length in Feet Miles Rayar Avenue 885, . 17 ` 2 . A copy of this resolution shall be furnished to: Glen Milholland On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member the . Atascadero City Council hereby adopts the foregoing resolution in its entirety on the following roll call vote : AYES; NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST : BOYD C. SHARITZ ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN RAY WINDSOR City Attorney City Manager It CIA, �tO►D � � A i I { v�1 � i_ LL. t ` ' —�� X33,0100 ` \ CL /,t h' O rl c J a Il �t zol, OPP \ 0 ,jib /QP 11 11 Ott �0vp low v 100 1 cr It • r 1 I t� O I 9 . REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A_8 Through : Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 From: Department of Public Works SUBJECT: Citizen request for a stop sign on Sierra Vista Avenue at Monita Avenue. RECOMENDATION, The Traffic Committee recommends that Council adopt Resolution No . 77-89 establishing a stop intersection on Sierra Vista at Monita Avenue. BACKGROUND, Residents in this area requested a stop intersection at this • location . The Traffic Committee reviewed the situation in the field and concur with the citizen request . DISCUSSION: The intersection of Sierra Vista Avenue and Monita Avenue is currently an uncontrolled "T" intersection . Residents are concerned about vehicle conflict at this intersection and have noticed many "near misses" . OPTIONS: 1) Adopt Resolution 77-89 and establish a stop intersection . 2) Return item to Traffic Committee for further review. 3) Deny request . FISCAL IMPACT The cost of this improvement would be approximately $150. 00 to be paid out of budgeted funds . • Attachments : Resolution No . 77-89 Diagram of Location VJH/vjh 10/3/89 0 • RESOLUTION NO. 77-89 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON SIERRA VISTA AT MONITA AVENUE WHEREAS, Section 4-2 . 801 et seq, of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of STOP intersections , and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee has recommended that establishing a STOP intersection on Sierra Vista at its intersection with Monita Avenue will improve a potentially hazardous traffic situation . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating a STOP intersection at the location listed above. • On motion by ; , and seconded by ,the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT ADOPTED: ATTEST : BOYD C. SHARTIZ, City Clerk ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN RAY WINDSOR City Attorney City Manager PTN Cl TY OF S 47°17'14"E _ 1 Oi 5 �! `-� w ; p 97 31 99 a o 1.72 C. 2.8 7AG o. v ' 0 �A 80 R 0.81AC. G)�e FR. 2 � 31 0.8'AC. OO " STOP ,.zac. 104 f.5b AC. a ,.60AC. O294j� `_f 78 4° J' 0 tia BK.53 F NOTE—ASSESSBCKa TBERS SHOWN _ IN CIRCLES. i • • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-9 (A & B) Through : Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 From: Department of Public Works SUB ECT: Recommendation for stop intersections on Laurel Avenue at Santa Lucia and Cenegal Avenue at Laurel Avenue . RECOMENDATION: The Traffic Committee recommends that Council adopt Resolution No. 78-89 establishing a stop intersection on Laurel Avenue at Santa Lucia Avenue and Resolution No. 79-89 establishing a stop intersection on Cenegal Avenue at Laurel Avenue. • BACKGROUND: Initially the residents in this area requested a stop intersection on Cenegal Avenue at Laurel Avenue . During field review the Traffic Committee became aware of the need for a stop intersection on Laurel Avenue at Santa Lucia Avenue . I have provided separate resolutions to give Council the flexability to approve only the options they feel warranted. DISCUSSION: The intersection of Laurel Avenue and Santa Lucia Avenue is currently an uncontrolled "T" intersection . Santa Lucia is the main access road for this area and as such is heavily traveled. Stopping vehicles entering from this side street will improve safety for the traveling public . The intersection of Cenegal Avenue at Laurel Avenue is also an uncontrolled "T" intersection with sight distance considerations . By stopping traffic on Cenegal Avenue at this intersection safety will be improved. • OPTIONSt 1) Adopt Resolutions 78-89 and 79-89 establishing both stop intersections . 2) Adopt only Resolution 78-89 or 79-89 2) Return item to Traffic Committee for further review. 3) Deny both requests . FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of this improvement would be between $150.00 and $300 . 00 depending upon Council recommendation . These funds would be paid out of currently budgeted funds . Attachments : Resolution No. 78-89 79-89 Diagram of Location VJH/vj h 10/3/89 • • RESOLUTION NO. 78-89 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON LAUREL AVENUE AT SANTA LUCIA AVENUE WHEREAS. Section 4-2 .801 et seq. of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of STOP intersections , and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee has recommended that establishing a STOP intersection on Laurel Avenue at the intersection with Santa Lucia Avenue improve a hazardous traffic situation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating a STOP intersection at the location listed above. On motion by , and seconded by ,the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARTIZ, City Clerk ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY JORGENSEN RAY WINDSOR City Attorney City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 79-89 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON CENEGAL AVENUE AT LAUREL AVENUE WHEREAS, Section 4-2 .801 et seg, of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of STOP intersections , and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee has recommended that establishing a STOP intersection on Cenegal Avenue at the intersection with Laurel Avenue will improve a hazardous traffic situation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating a STOP intersection at the location listed above. On motion by , and seconded by ,the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES : ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: BOYD C . SHARTIZ, City Clerk ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT JEFFREY JORGENSEN RAY WINDSOR City Attorney City Manager Owl J 4 Cz kc)^ o sTo a Q o; wt vQ� Or co SAN QJ 0 • • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director Wz- SUBJECT: Appeal by Turko Semmes of investigation fee for construction without a permit at 12070 San Marcos Road. RECOMMENDATION: Denial of the appeal . BACKGROUND: As indicated in the attached communications, grading and instal- lation of a gas line was done on this property without a building permit. The Uniform Administrative Code provides for a "double fee" for work begun without a permit. Mr. Semmes is appealing said fee as indicated in his attached letter of appeal . ANALYSIS : An investigation fee (not a fine) was assessed in accordance with the Uniform Administrative Code which states as follows : "An investigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued. The investigation fee shall be equal to the amount of the permit fee required by this code. " The $1,590 that was levied was to equal the cost of the building permit which was subsequently granted. As indicated in our September 5, 1989 letter and September 1 , 1989 Memorandum, work was commenced on the site involving grading and installation of a 800 foot long gas line prior to the issuance of the building permit. With respect to the grading, Section 8-1 . 107 of the City' s adopted Building Regulations states: "Grading and/or waste disposal permits for residential sites • shall not be issued separately from the residence permit without the specific approval of the Building Official . " Mr. Semmes had applied for a building permit which included grad- ing, and had paid a plan check fee for review and processing of the permit application. This in no way constitutes de facto approval for construction. At any given time, there are numerous projects either approved or nearly approved for permit issuance which may or may not ever be issued. Until permits are issued, construction should not begin. It is contended that previous staffs have allowed certain phases of construction to start prior to issuance of a permit. Grubbing - or brush clearance - is not subject to a permit requirement. However, over the past four years, concrete formwork-steel placement has never been approved prior to permit issuance. Utility trenches have been allowed when installed in conjunction with road permits as a result of map conditions . Investigation fees have been charged against both commercial and residential projects that commenced construction without benefit of permit. In summary, the investigation fee was for commencing construction without a permit. ALTERNATIVE: The City Council could uphold the appeal and direct a refund of • the $1 ,590 investigation fee. HE:ph Enclosure: September 26, 1989 - Letter of Appeal September 5, 1989 - communication from the Community Development Director cc: Turko Semmes i SEMMESnE C`IN`L s`P 2 7 1989 73"EL CAMINO REAL—SUITE D �_U` _ ATASCADERO,CALIFORNIA 93422 TELEPHONE. (805)466-6737 ee LICENSE NUMBER 392939 0 Design and Constructlon SEPTEMBER 26 , 1989 CITY COUNCIL OF ATASCADERO 6500 PALMA AVENUE ATASCADERO, CA 93422 RE: FINE ON PERMIT FOR 12070 SAN MARCOS ROAD DEAR COUNCILMEMBERS, I AM WRITING CONCERNING A SITUATION AT 12070 SAN MARCOS ROAD OWNED BY BURDETTE AND CECILIA BURTSFIELD. A FINE OF $1 , 590 . 00 WAS LEVIED AGAINST THE BURTSFIELD'S PERMIT IN PROGRESS FOR GRADING DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT. I DO NOT FEEL THIS FINE IS APPROPRIATE. THERE ARE TWO REASONS THIS FINE IS NOT APPROPARIATE. I WILL TOUCH ON THEM HERE AND COVER THEM IN MORE DETAIL IN PERSON. THE FIRST IS PRE-PERMIT CONSTRUCTION. THE STAFFS OF PERVIOUS DEPARTMENTS OF ATASCDERO HAVE ALLOWED CERTAIN PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION TO START IF A BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE WAS EMINENT. THESE WERE CONCRETE FORMWORK AND STEEL PLACEMENT, UTILITY PIPE PLACEMENT, OR MINOR GRADING THAT WAS EXCEPTED UNDER SECTION 7003 ITEMS 1-9 OF THE UBC. WITH THE CURRENT STAFF THIS HAS CHANGED WITHOUT WARNING. THE FACT IS ON THIS PROJECT THE MINOR GRADING WORK DESCRIBED BY BILL WITTMEYER IN HIS MEMORANDUM DATED 9-1-89 DOES NOT REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT. THIS SITE INCLUDING THE DRIVEWAY HAD BEEN GRADED LONG IN THE PAST. THE 1 : 1 SLOPE BILL DESCRIBES WAS IN EXISTENCE ALSO. WE DID NO GRADING THAT IS NOT EXCEPTED UNDER UBC 7007 ITEM 8 AND 9. I LOOK FORWARD TO DISCUSSING THESE ITEMS IN MORE DETAIL AT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE THEN PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CALL. SINCERELY, tt{ TURKO SEMME 0 geal14 /03 to 3 9/tel r9 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AAL_seade�®6500 PALMA AVENUE SCADERO,CALIFORNIA 93422PHONE: (805) 466-8000 POLICE DEPARTMENT PORATED JULY 2. 197EBS00 PALMA AVENUE CITY COUNCILATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 93422 CITY CLERK PHONE: (805) 486-8600 CITY TREASURER CITY MANAGER •�-. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 93422 PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT PHONE: (805) 466-2141 September 5, 1989 Mr. Turko Semmes Semmes and Company 7360 El Camino Real - Suite D Atascadero, CA 93422 SUBJECT: 12070 SAN MARCOS ROAD - Investigation Fee Dear Mr. Semmes: In response to your recent letter, we reviewed our files as evidenced by the attached memorandum from Bill wittmeyer, Senior Building Inspector and I have to conclude that the investigation fee was appropriate pursuant to both the U.B.C. and City Council policy. Title 8 , the City' s Building Regulations, was adopted with the following refinement to Section 8-1 . 207 "Permits are Required" to include: "Grading and/or waste disposal permits for residential sites shall not be issued separately from the residence permit without the specific approval of the Building Official . ,, The City has been concerned with past projects where grading was done without permits to create pads or to clear property to facilitate future development, and Council has approved the levying of an investigation fee equal to the cost of a building Permit fee (refer to attached code sections) . in the past, we have historically accepted grubbing to clear brush, etc. , provided trees subjected to the tree ordinance are not being affected, but not grading in conflict with the attached Section 7003, Chapter 70 of the U.B.C. It is regrettable that you have run afoul of this policy, but I do not see where the facts in the case lead to waiving ihe fee. However, you are entitled to filing a letter of appeal and a Si00 appeal fee to the City Council for consideration provided that it is received within 14 days of your receipt of this letter. Please call if you would like further clarification. Sincerely, i Henry En n, Dire r Community Development Department HE:ps Enclosures: September 1, 1989 Building Division Memorandun 1985 U.B.C. excerpts , Chapter 70 and Investigation Fees M E M O R A N 0 U M 1 of 2 DATE: September 1 , 1989 TO: Henry Engen, Director, Community Development Department a FROM: Bill Wittmeyer, Senior Building Inspector SUBJECT 12070 San Marcos Road -- Turko Semmes letter HISTORY The application for a building permit for the referenced address was received by the Building Division on June 20, 1989 . On June 21 , 1989 I d i d a site check. In the course of the site check I observed that the building site had been grubbed, there were piles of tree limbs recently cut and stacked. There was no indication of any grading, trenching, etc. It appeared that there was not enough room to accommodate the leach field expansion area as shown on the plan; additionally, it appeared that the proposed primary location was in a low spot ( drainage) . These observations were noted and passed on to the plan checker. In the plan check the following comment was made on the correction list: 2 . Please stake out location of septic system ( including expansion trenches ) prior to submitting plans for recheck . Also, locate property line adjacent to trenches. This was accomplished and on August 18, 1989 , prior to the permit being issued, I re-visited the site to verify the previous concerns. It was apparent that the leach field design would fit; however, at that time I also noted that a gas line had been installed from the road to the building site (approximately 800 '+) ; and the building site, atop a knoll , had been leveled, a large quantity of sand had been placed on the leveled area, and, the side of the knoll (where the garage was proposed) had been cut back to almost a 1 : 1 slope. It was my observation that this constituted commencement of construction of the house without benefit of permits and approved plans . SPECIFIC RESPONSE ( letter and Your conversation) Past practice has been consistently to discourage and dis-allow any pre-permit construction (see Warwick/Devanie, Carl High and Ken Highfill ) . Intent isnot the real question. With or without intent, the work was done. The Uniform Administrative Code reauires the "double fee" : "An investigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected , whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued. The investigation fee shall be equal to the amount of the permit fee required. .'. . " The absence of a "red tag" does not automatically imply approval or acceptance. The red .tag is a communication method, used when it is deemed to be the most effective means of advising those responsible of a problem. It was not necessary since Mr. Semmes office was readily accessible and immediately notified. (There did not appear to be any further "preparation work" to be done and so no need to post the job at that point. ) The 50 cubic yards myth is an unfortunate mi s-understanding of the provisions of the building code. Less than 50 cubic yards is one part of one of the exceptions* to permit requirement determination. This situation does not qualify under the conditions set forth therein. * "A fill less than 1 foot in depth and placed on natural terrain with a slope flatter than five horizontal to one vertical , or less than 3 feet in depth, not intended to support structures, which does not exceed 50 cubic yards on any one lot and does not obstruct a drainage course. " [ITALICS ADDED Essentially this provision is to ` facilitate ' "heavy landscaping" , not an early start on construction. It is not the city 's place to determine whether an act is malicious or not; in the three examples cited earlier (see Warwick/Devanie, Carl High and Ken Highfill ) neither maliciousness, intent nor repetition were considered as factors in the department' s action. s a#A BUILDING CODE 1985 EDITION APPENDIX Chapter 70 and oil shall not be EXCAVATION AND GRADING zontrol such lines by Purpose Sec.7001.The purpose of this chapter is to safeguard life,limb.property and ad exits from a fallout the public welfare by regulating grading on private property. _ utdoors.Exits from the Scope for every 200 shelter Sec.7002.This chapter sets forth rules and regulations to control excavation. -es wide, grading and earthwork construction, including fills and embankments. estab= lishes the administrative procedure for issuance of permits: and provides for shelters shall have a approval of plans and inspection of grading construction. Permits Required Sec. 7003. No person shall do any grading without first having obtained a 4 f dual-use fallout grading permt from the building official except for the following: ovem,except that 1. Grading in an isolated,self-contained area if there is no danger apparent to private or public property. loads for floor design in 2. An excavation below finished grade for basements and footings of a build- foot except that ing,retaining wall or other structure authorized by a valid building permit.This shall not exempt any fill made with the material from such excavation nor exempt any excavation having an unsupported height greater than 5 feet after the comple- tion of such structure. normal water supply 3. Cemetery graves. aasis of one toilet per 4. Refuse disposal sites controlled by other regulations. _y be provided outside 5. Excavations for wells or tunnels or utilities. .onsidered as fulfilling 6. Mining, quarrying, excavating, processing, stockpiling of rock, sand, gravel,aggregate or clay where established and provided for by law,provided such operations do not affect the lateral support or increase the stresses in or pressure upon any adjacent or contiguous property. 7. Exploratory excavations under the direction of soil engineers or engineering geologists. '! 8. An excavation which(a)is less than 2 feet in depth,or(b)which does not create a cut slope greater than 5 feet in height and steeper than one and one-half horizontal to one vertical. 9. A fill less than I foot in depth and placed on natural terrain with a slope flatter than five horizontal to one vertical,or less than 3 feet in depth,not intended to support structures,which does not exceed 50 cubic yards on any one lot and does not obstruct a drainage course. µ Hazards r Sec. 7004. Whenever the building official determines that any existing exca- vation or embankment or fill on private property has become a hazard to life and limb,or endangers property,or adversely affects the safety,use or stability of a public way or drainage channel, the owner of the property upon which the excavation or fill is located,or other person or agent in control of said property, 763 �i .DMMgSTRATM CODE 1985 EDrMH 304-305 en made or will be made applicant or destroyed by the building official.The building official may extend and provided further that the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days upon year. In order to renew request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the ay a new full permit fee. applicant have prevented action from being taken. No application shall be ry for an extension of the extended more than once. In order to renew action on an application after mit when he is unable to expiration,the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee. i for good and satisfactory (e)Investigation Fees:Work Without a Permit. 1.Investigation.whenever :ion by the permittee for a any work for which a permit is required by this code has been commenced without e permittee showing that first obtaining said permit.a special investigation shall be made before a permit e prevented action from ' may be issued for such work. - 2. Fee. An investigation fee,in addition to the permit fee,shall be collected may,in writing,suspend whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued.The investigation fee shall and die technical codes be equal to the amount of the permit fee required by this code.The minimum 3f incorrect information investigation fee shall be the same as the minimum fee set forth in Tables Nos.3- any of the provisions of A through 3-H. The payment of such investigation fee shall not exempt any person from compliance with all other provisions of either this code or the technical codes nor from any penalty prescribed by law. .ance with the provisions (f)Fee Refunds. 1.The building official may authorize the refunding of any nedule adopted by this fee paid hereunder which was erroneously paid or collected. 2. The building official may authorize the refunding of not more than 80 I forth in Tables Nos.3-A percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued d by the jurisdiction for in accordance with this code. ee required shall be in 3. The building official may authorize the refunding of not more than 80 ve body. percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a `the provisions of these plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing to be used in computing is done. be the total value of all i The building official shall not authorize the refunding of any fee paid except well as all finish work. upon written application filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days iitioning,elevators.fire- after the date of fee payment. _,nt. Inspections -equired to be submitted See,305,(a)General.All constriction or work for which a permit is required Al be paid at the time of shall be subject to inspection by the building official. and certain types of review fee for buildings I construction shall have continuous inspection by special inspectors as specified in .e as shown in Table No Section 306. plumbing work shall be A survey of the lot may be required by the building official to verify that the rabies Nos.3-B,3-C and ! stricture is located in accordance with approved plans.It shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to be accessible and exposed for inspection ,rth in Table No.3-G. purposes. Neither the building official nor this-jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow additional plan review. ; inspection. gown in Tables Nos.3-A (b) Inspection Requests. it shall be the duty of the person doing the work .rich no tis issued authorized by a permit to notify the building official that such work is ready for pew inspection.The building official may require that every request for inspection be ..pile by!imitation,acid tiled at ieast one working day beioresura inspection is aesireu.�ucn reyuebt may after be returned to the be in writing or by telephone at the option of the building official. 23 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C- 1 (A/B/C) Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/10/89 From: Mark A. Joseph, Director of Admin. Services - SUBJECT: Salary Adjustments as a result of the FY88-89 Wage and Classification Study. RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of the attached 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. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Council appropriated funds for a compre- hensive wage and classification study in its FY88-89 budget . An outside consultant , Comp Pius, was contracted to perform the • study in October , 1988. The company submitted its recommen- dations in May, 1989. Due to a variety of issues and concerns , a committee consisting of all Department Heads , met to review the study , conduct additional fact findina and make recommendations, as appropriate. The results of this effort were combined with the original Comp Plus study, and with assistance from our labor relations consultant , Becker and Fell , Inc . , a proposal was submitted to Council for consideration. The proposal recommended at this time reflects further refinements. Generally, an increase of seven percent is recommended for the City Manager , Management , Mid-Management/Professional and Confidential Employees. Management ' s salary adjustment is effective July 1 , 1989, Car allowances for Department Heads receiving a stipend have been eliminated with the result that their base salaries have been adjusted accordingly, thus making them more competitive throughout the County . Increases are retroactive to January 1 , 1989 for Mid-Management/Professional and one Confidential employee. Equity adjustments have been given to two Mid-Management/Professional classifications . effective January 1 , 1990. Finally , a four percent raise due January 1 , 1990 for Support Services Assistants has been moved Up to July 1 , 1989. • Although not included in the Wage and Classification Study, salaries for City Clerk and City Treasurer are proposed to be increased $50 and $25 per month , respectively. • Additional adjustments are expected in the General Services and Clerical Units based upon the various survey data; however , in light of the fact that this group ' s current MOU does not expire until June 1990, specific changes and effective dates are subject to meet and confer sessions, which are being scheduled. No adjustments are proposed for the various Police and Fire Bargaining Units, based on the salary data collected . The objective behind these adjustments was to both improve the competitiveness of City salaries relative to other cities in our market area as well as acknowledge cost of living factors. By and large, the proposed adjustments bring the various classifications closer to the County wide median. OPTIONS 1 . Council can adopt the attached resolution implementing salary adjustments as proposed . 2. Council can modify any or all of the proposed salaries. 3. Council can direct staff to continue review of the data and report back at a later date. • FISCAL IMPACT The proposed adjustments are projected to cost approximately $90,000 during the current fiscal year . Funding consists of approximately $60,000 already budgeted and the balance is available from an increase in projected tax revenues. No use of the General Contingency is required. The actual budget adjustments will be included at the Midyear Budget Review. MAJ: al ref: Resolution 73-89 9 Resolution 74-99 Resolution 75-89 m\sa 1 mem89.90 • . EXHIBIT I MONTHLY SALARY SCHEDULE FOR VARIOUS MANAGEMENT, MID-MANAGEMENT- PROFESSIONAL, CONFIDENTIAL AND ATASCADERO PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNICIAN ORGANIZATION EMPLOYEES (APSTO), EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1989 MANAGEMENT POSITIONS ------------------------------ Police Chief* 4482 Fire Chief* 4482 Public Works Director* 4488 Community Development Dir. * 4347 Admin. Services Director* 3832 Parks Rec and Zoo Director* 3477 JOB TITLE A B C D E ----------------------------------------------------------------- Police Lieutenant 2916 3062 3215 3376 3545 Support Services Supervisor 2028 2129 2236 2348 2465 Fire Battalion Chief 2916 3062 3215 3376 3545 Assistant Finance Director 2740 2677 3020 3171 3330 Senior Civil Engineer 2791 2931 3078 3231 3393 Superintendent of Public Works 2728 2864 3008 3158 3316 City Planner 2791 2931 3078 3231 3393 Associate Planner 2364 2483 2607 2737 2874 Assistant Planner 1922 2018 2119 2225 2336 Building Official 2948 3095 3250 3412 3583 Senior Building Inspector 2629 2761 2899 3044 3196 Plan Check Engineer 2728 2864 3008 3158 3316 Ass't Parks, Rec and Zoo Dir. 2448 2570 2698 2833 2975 Personnel Coordinator 1760 1846 1940 2037 2139 Secretary to the City Manager* 1685 1769 1858 1950 2048 Support Services Assistant II* 1449 1521 1597 1677 1761 * No change from existing schedules; included for purposes of continuity only. 03-Oct-89 EXHIBIT II MONTHLY SALARY SCHEDULE FOR VARIOUS MANAGEMENT, MID-MANAGEMENT- PROFESSIONAL, CONFIDENTIAL AND ATASCADERO PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNICIAN ORGANIZATION EMPLOYEES (APSTO), EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1989 MANAGEMENT POSITIONS ------------------------------ Police Chief 4796 Fire Chief 4796 Public Works Director 5016 Community Development Dir. 4839 Admin. Services Director 4287 Parks Rec and Zoo Director 3908 JOB TITLE A B C D E ----------------------------------------------------------------- Police Lieutenant* 2916 3062 3215 3376 3545 Support Services Supervisor* 2028 2129 2236 2348 2465 Fire Battalion Chief* 2916 3062 3215 3376 3545 Assistant Finance Director* 2609 2739 2876 3020 3171 Senior Civil Engineer* 2791 2931 3078 3231 3393 Superintendent of Pub. Works* 2728 2864 3008 3158 3316 City Planner* 2791 2931 3078 3231 3393 Associate Planner* 2364 2483 2607 2737 2874 Assistant Planner 2018 2119 2225 2336 2453 Building Official* 2948 3095 3250 3412 3583 Senior Building Inspector* 2629 2761 2899 3044 3196 Plan Check Engineer* 2728 2864 3008 3158 3316 Ase't Parks, Rec and Zoo Dir. * 2448 2570 2698 2833 2975 Personnel Coordinator* 1760 1848 1940 2037 2139 Secretary to the City Manager 1803 1893 1987 2087 2191 Support Services Assistant II 1552 1630 1712 1797 1887 * No change from existing schedules; included for purposes of continuity only. 03-Oct-89 EXHIBIT III MONTHLY SALARY SCHEDULE FOR VARIOUS MID-MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1990 JOB TITLE A B C D E ----------------------------------------------------------------- City Planner 2987 3137 3293 3458 3631 Plan Check Engineer 2919 3065 3218 3379 3548 03-Oct-89 • RESOLUTION NO. 74-89 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 76-88 MAKING CHANGES TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND RAY WINDSOR, CITY MANAGER Section 1 . That section 4 of the agreement is amended to establish an annual salary of $68, 160 for the City Manager , effective July 1 , 1989. Section 2. That section 10 of the agreement regarding vehicle allowance, is deleted . PASSED AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held October 10, 1989, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA By ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 75-89 RESOLUTION APPROVING NEW SALARIES FOR CITY CLERK AND CITY TREASURER Section 1 . That the compensation for City Clerk and City Treasurer shall be as follows: City Clerk - $100 monthly City Treasurer - $50 monthly. Section 2. That the effective date of this resolution shall be October 1 , 1989. PASSED AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held October 10, 1989, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA By ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY JORGENSEN, City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 73—B9 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ADDING AND DELETING VARIOUS JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND ADOPTING A SALARY/CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE FOR VARIOUS MANAGEMENT, MID—MANAGEMENT/PROFESSIONAL, CONFIDENTIAL AND ATASCADERO PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNICIANS ORGANIZATION (APSTO` EMPLOYEES Section 1 . The following classifications are deleted : Support Services Coordinator Support Services Aide Secretary/Personnel Technician Zoo Curator Chief Building Inspector Section 2. The following classifications are added : Support Services Supervisor Support Services Assistant I Support Services Assistant lI Personnel Coordinator Assistant Parks, Recreation and Zoo Directcr Assistant rinance Director City Planner Building Official Section 3. Base salaries shall be increased pursuant to Exhibits 1 , II and _ II , which are made a part of this resolution, for the classifications listed in said Exhibits , effective on the dates noted therein,. Section 4. Vehicle Allowances for the Public Works Director , Community Development Director , Parks, Recreation and Zoo Director and Administrative Services Director are eliminated , effective July 1 , 1989 and said allowances shall be added to the appropriate Director ' s base salary. • Resolution No . -89 ( continuet ) Page Two On motion by Councilperson and seconded by Councilperson — , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA By: _ ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor ATTEST : APPROVED AS TO CONTENT : BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk RAY WINDSOR, City Manager PREPARED BY : APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARK A. JOSEPH, Director of JEFFREY G. uORGENSEN. Administrative Services City Attorney IIAFET'lG DRTc _ TFM • NOTE: A REPORT REGARDING HAZARDOUS WASTE PILOT PROGRAM FUNDING WILL BE PROVIDED AT A LATER TIME. •