HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 05/22/1990 # PUBLIC REVIEW COPY #
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
FROM COUNTER
A G E N D A
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6540 PALMA
FOURTH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM
MAY 22, 1990
7 .00 P.M.
This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the require-
ments of Government Code Section 54954 .2 . By listing a topic on
this agenda, the City Council has expressed its intent to discuss
and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in
the brief general description of each item, the action that may
be taken shall include: A referral to staff with specific re-
quests for information; continuance; specific direction to staff
concerning the policy or mission of the item; discontinuance of
consideration; authorization to enter into negotiations and exe-
cute agreements pertaining to the item; adoption or approval;
and, disapproval .
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating
to each item of business referred to on the agenda are on file in
the office of the City Clerk, available for public inspection
during City Hall business hours. The City Clerk will answer any
questions regarding the agenda.
RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda.
* A person may speak for five (5) minutes .
* No one may speak for a- 'second time until everyone wishing to
speak has; had an opportunity to do so.
No one may speak more than twice on any item.
* Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may
respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not
initiate further discussion.
* The floor will then be closed to public participation and
open for Council discussion.
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
City Council Comment:
• Plaques of Recognition to Kevin Rock and Carrie Ketzen
banger for performance of life-saving emergency medical
procedures
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. Where ordinance adoption is involved, action by
Council on the Consent Calendar will presuppose waiving of the
reading in full of the ordinance in question.
1. MAY 8, 1990 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
2. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - APRIL 1990
3 FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT - APRIL 1990
4 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 03-90, 7715/7745 SINALOA - Creation of
six parcels ranging in size from 3, 206 sq. ft. to 4 ,775 sq.
ft. , in conformance with Ordinance No. 198 (Zone Change 08-
89 -
889' - PD7 ) (Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
5. AWARD OF BID # 90-6 - 1990 WEED ABATEMENT CONTRACT
6. ORDINANCE NO. 206 - AMENDING MAP 17 OF 'THE' OFFICIAL 'ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 7955 SINALOA FROM
RMF/16 TO RMF/16 (PD7) (ZONE CHANGE 08-89) (Voorhis/Mitsu-
oka) ,(Second reading & adoption)
7 . ORDINANCE NO. 207 AMENDING MAP 23 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 11455 VIEJO CAMINO
FROM RMF/10 (FH) TO RMF/10 (PH) (PD7) (ZONE CHANGE 13-89)
(VanGundy/Baud) (Second reading & adoption)
2
S. CONTRACT WITH SUSAN BEATIE FOR CREATION OF BRONZE SCULPTURE
- CHARLES PADDOCK ZOO
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES :
1. HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL REQUEST FOR THE PURPOSES OF DRIVEWAY
CONSTRUCTION AT 14260 MORRO ROAD (Rockstad)
2. WEED ABATEMENT APPEALS
C. REGULAR BUSINESS :
1. RESOLUTION NO. 59-90 - EXPRESSING SUPPORT OF "PUBLIC SCRU-
TINY OF UNSAFE CONDITIONS AT ATASCADERO STATE HOSPITAL"
2. TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FOR THE HOMELESS - ADDRESS
3. RESOLUTION NO. 61-90 - ESTABLISHING AN UNDERSTANDING OF
CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE OF ROADS COMPLETED UNDER, AN AGREE-
MENT DATED AUGUST 22, 1986 BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS AND THE GORDON T. DAVIS CATTLE COMPANY
• 4 . RESOLUTION NO. 62-90 - AGREEING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE` PRE-
LIMINARY COSTS OF ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FORMATION FOR
THE 3-F MEADOWS AREA AND A PORTION OF TECORIDA
5 . ATASCADERO CREEK PEDESTRIAN FOOTBRIDGE
6. PARKS AND RECREATION ISSUES:
A. SYCAMORE ROAD PROPERTY DISPOSITION
B. LAKE PAVILION - DISMANTLING
C. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION - PROPOSED REDUCTION OF
COMMISSIONERS
7. RESOLUTION NO. 60-90 - AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ENTER INTO
DISCUSSIONS WITH WELLS FARGO BANK, TRUSTEE, REGARDING ACCEP-
TANCE OF ROADS
S. PROPOSED STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW MULTI-FAMILY ZONING/SMALL
LOT ALTERNATIVES (Councilwoman Borgeson)
9 . ADOPTING RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND FIRST READING OF , THE ORDI-
NANCE IMPLEMENTING THE ENHANCED PUBLIC SAFETY RETIREMENT
10. ESTABLISH DATES FOR COUNCIL BUDGET HEARINGS - LAST WEEK IN
JUNE (Verbal)
3
s
D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
A. Committee Reports (The following represents ad hoc or
stan ing committees . Informative status reports will
be given, as felt necessary. ) :
1 . City/School Committee
2 . North Coastal Transit
3. S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council
4 Traffic Committee
5 . Solid/Hazardous Waste Mgmt. Committee
6 Recycling Committee
7 Economic Opportunity Commission
8. -B.I .A.
9 . Downtown Steering Committee
10. General Plan Subcommittee
2 City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
5 City Manager
4
MEETING AGENDA
DATE 5E -2/9n ITEM# Q-1
# NOTE: THE MINUTES FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY STH WILL BE
DISTRIBUTED AT A LATER TIME.
� a
MEETING AGENDA
*DATE V_?� UEM# A-2
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE OF CASH RECEIPTS AND TRANSFERS
TREASURER ' S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 1990
CASH RECEIPTS:
Property Taxes $577,352.21
Sales Tax 100, 100.00
Bed Tax 15,453.21
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 71 ,510.91
Cioarette Tax 2,647.72
Sanitation Fees 205,059. 16
License/Permit/Fees 43,414 .50
Franchise Fees 179,659.93
Fines/Penalties/Overages 362.50
Investment Earnings 133,441 .99
Rents/Concessions 4,781 .72
Sales-Maps/Publications/Reports 171 .05
Police Services 517.74
• Weed Abatement 24 ,785.85
Parks and Recreation Fees 17,818.20
F'.O.S.T. Reimbursement 3,651 . 96
Miscellaneous 331 .00
Developer Fees 49,913. 13
Zoo Receipts 7,560.78
Dial-A-Ride 2,889.98
B. I .A. Dues 200.00
A.D. #4 - Separado/Cayucos 16,091 . 34
A.D. #5 - Chandler Ranch 11 ,634.38
Street Maintenance Districts 52.50
Gas Tax Receipts 27,845.01
Sub-Total 1 ,497,246.77
Other Cash Receipts
Reimbursement to Expense 25,696.59
Total Cash Receipts $1 ,522,943. 36
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CASH ACTIVITY SUMMARY
TREASURER ' S REPORT
FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL, 1990
BEGINNING CASH RESOURCES $7,920,782.74
ADD:
RECEIPTS 1 ,522,943.36
FUND TRANSFERS 382,416.09
LESS:
DISBURSEMENTS 428,741 .28
FUND TRANSFERS 700,000.00
ENDING CASH RESOURCES 68,697.400.91
SCHEDULE OF CASH RESOURCES
As of April 30, 1990
Checking Account : Int . Due
Mid-State Bank $153,415. 91 Rate Date
Other Investments:
Local Agency Inv. Fund 6,716,000.00 8.538%. N/A
Fed Home Loan Bank-FICO 1 ,827,445.00 8. 35 •l. 12/6/90
Other Cash Resources:
Petty Cash 540.00
TOTAL CASH RESOURCES $8,697,400.91
DERE SIBBACH
City Treasurer
i
MEETING AGENDA
DATES/22/90 ffEMJ A-3
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE OF DISBURSEMENTS
FINANCE DIRECTOR ' S REPORT
FOR, THE MONTH OF April , 1990
DISBURSEMENTS
Hand Warrant Register for April , 1990 $12,451 .05
4/6/90 Accounts Payable Warrants 101 ,673.33
4/13/90 Accounts Payable Warrants 61 ,660.87
4/20/90 Accounts Payable Warrants 36,727.03
4/27/90 Accounts Payable Warrants 94 ,803.04
Service Charge - Mastercard/VISA 5.00
Wires for April , 1990 700,000.00
4/11/90 Payroll Checks 49756-49928 123,950.71
4/25/90 Payroll Checks 100001-100150 125,093.51
Total $1 ,256,364 . 54
LESS:
Voided Check # 50441 630.00
• Voided Check # 50846 661 . 36
Voided Check # 50858 39.00
Voided Check # 50868 55. 40
Voided Check # 50886 2, 185.00
Voided Check # 50934 39.00
Voided Check # 50994-51200 123, 878.20
Voided Check # (PR) 49929-50000 -O-
Voided Check # 100002 135.30
Sub-Total Voided Checks $127, 623.26
Total Disbursements $1 , 128,'741 .28
I , MARK A. JOSEPH, do hereby certify and declare that
demands enumerated and referred to in the foregoing register
are accurate and just claims against the City and that there
are funds available for payment thereof in the City Treasury.
The breakdown detail on all accounts is available for your
viewing in the Finance Office.
MARK A. J S PH
Administra ive Services Director
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT ITEM: A-4
FOR: City Council Meeting Date: 5/22/90
File No: TTM 3-90
BY: Henry Engen, Community Development Director y
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a request to create six (6) parcels, ranging in
size from 3 , 206 square feet to 4 ,775 square feet, in conformance
with Ordinance 198 (Zone Change 8-89 - Planned Development Overlay
No. 7 ) at 7715/7745 Sinaloa Road (Bruce Jones/Cuesta Engineering) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Per the Planning Commission' s recommendation, approve Tentative
Tract Map 30-90 based on the Findings and Revised Conditions of
Approval contained in the staff report.
BACKGROUND:
On May 1 , 1990, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
concerning the above-referenced subject. On a 6 : 0 vote, the
Commission recommended approval of the map subject to the Findings
and Revised Conditions of Approval contained in the attached staff
report. There was discussion and public testimony as referenced
in the attached minutes excerpt.
HE :ps
Attachments : Staff Report dated May 1, 1990
Minutes Excerpt dated May 1 , 1990
Revised Conditions of Approval - May 1 , 1990
cc : Bruce Jones
Cuesta Engineering
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B. 1 •
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: May 1, 1990
BY:J).P. Doug Davidson, Senior Planner File No: TTM 03-90
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a request to create six (6) parcels, ranging in
size from 3,206 square feet to 4, 775 square feet, in conformance
with Ordinance 198 (Zone Change 08-89 - Planned Development
Overlay No 7) .
RECON ENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map 03-90 based on
the Findings for Approval contained in Exhibit C and the
Conditions of Approval in Exhibit D.
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Owner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bruce Jones
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cuesta Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7715/7745 Sinaloa Rd.
4. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Multiple Family
5. Zoning District. . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF/16
6. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 51 acre
7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Single family residences (2)
8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
on February 8, 1990.
BACKGROUND:
On October 17, 1989, the Planning Commission recommended approval
of Zone Change 08-89, allowing the creation of a small lot
subdivision through a Planned Development Overlay Zone (PD7) . On
November 19, 1989, however, the City Council referred the matter
back to the Planning Commission to review a revised site plan
with additional outdoor space. On January 2, 1990, a revised
plan was approved by the Planning Commission. This plan proposed •
the demolition of both existing homes, thus allowing more freedom
in site design and larger yard areas. The City Council approved •
the revised plan and Ordinance 198 on January 23, 1990.
In an effort to obtain construction permits while the Tract Map
was being processed, the applicant submitted a Precise Plan
application. Precise Plan 87-89 allowed the construction of six
single family residences, without the creation of individual
lots. The Precise Plan was approved on February 8, 1990 and
became effective on March 1, 1990. Building permits are
currently being reviewed.
ANALYSIS:
The proposed Tract Map conforms to the approved Planned
Development Overlay Zone, in fact, it is the necessary conclusion
to the Zone Change (PD) process. For this reason staff is now
reviewing the PD and the resultant subdivision simultaneously in
these types of projects. The Voorhis project at 7955 Sinaloa
Ave. showed that this comprehensive approach is a better method
to review and condition small lot subdivisions.
The proposed lots range in size from 3,206 square feet to 4,775
square feet. This Tract Map carries out the master site plan
adopted as part of Ordinance 198. The project has been
thoroughly reviewed, with environmental review for the
subdivision conducted as part of the PD, and a Negative
Declaration adopted for the development plan during the Precise
Plan. Drainage control is the major development concern that was
not specifically resolved at the previous hearings. As the staff
stated at the hearing on January 2nd, a grading/drainage plan is
necessary component of the Tract Map application.
Precise Plan Condition of Approval #3 required adequate methods
to control off-site drainage impacts, either through off-site
improvements or an on-site detention basin. As Exhibit B shows,
the applicant' s engineer has proposed the detention basin method
to retain the additional runoff on the site while not increasing
the flow onto adjacent streets or properties. The Engineering
Division has reviewed the drainage plan and determined that a
detention basin will function as a drainage control device.
Private agreements will cover detention basin maintenance.
CONCLUSIONS:
The proposed Tract Map fulfills the PD7 Overlay as adopted in
Ordinance 198. The Zone Change has been reviewed, revised, and
approved through the public hearing process. Drainage control
has been incorporated within the environmental review and
subsequent conditioning of this project.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit B — Grading/Drainage Plan
Exhibit C - Findings for Approval
Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval
Exhibit E - Staff Report Zone Change 08-89
Exhibit F - Staff Report Precise Plan 87-89
EXHIBIT A
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
t.119 - ., . �t�
CITY OF ATA.SCADERO.i
TTM 03-90
• 00SCAD�n. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
\
\
s \
ti
\ \y 1AC9/TY 1MP
\ \.• a.rawrc
ams�: /•' \ \ •�\ \\� i
P T M.
stt
/-y Owaww� s r,.• :0 T 39
\ \ ♦ is wi ..sws�r.+st
LOT-42
�_``�,Ps •'� �'' 0 'r 7DITAlNE TRACT 1941
Jam'-�--�. vd a L r / ►_�ira.��•.i�a:..�i�
N
5 1 /-
\ / r
¢JBTA OiGNft.RNG
OalIOC 7C�Ii aw.��
ry ar.s /+
EXHIBIT B
' GRADING/DRAINAGE PLAN
CITY OF RTASCADERO TTM 03-90
-J »�' • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .
DEPARTMENT
YVI�Y4 c
,�• 5.-
`
9►OiStANIIC SURVEY w•j'
•
QTS 40 41 Rttx KALOT!z
J..
L
wrre�:�a:w a� � � •.;ice .�.a. �.-� .
f'
1 •\\\ _ /�` /• M. LOT 39
i 4-24
LOT 41
lool
` �\'"'� ♦� a `• wf / \ \♦ / /
CRIOICC lGdl' a u ,••_ Y+�«•.. /�� '•♦J y� \\` / _r+.r.. r
C UTA L\�S\EEPi`C
i' �r
EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval
Tentative Tract Map 03-90
7715/7745 Sinaloa Ave. (Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
May 1 , 1990
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant impact upon the
environment. The Negative Declaration previously 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 the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by
the public at large for access through or the use of
property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially
equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The design of the subdivision and/or the type of proposed
improvements will not cause serious public health problems.
EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 03-90 0
7715/7745 Sinaloa Ave. (Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
May 1, 1990
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Co. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of each
parcel prior to the recording of the final map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the
easements, they shall be noted on the final map. All
relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be
the responsibility of the developer at his sole expense.
3. 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 recording of the final map. These
shall include, but not be limited, to the following:
a. The proposed detention basin is an acceptable method,
however, if it is not utilized, plans shall include
calculations and an evaluation of the impact of
projected runoff onto adjacent streets and properties.
In this case, off-site drainage improvements may be
required to convey increased runoff to E1 Camino Real.
b. A temporary drainage facility shall be constructed to
contain mud and debris on the site during construction.
If construction occurs during the rainy season (October
15 through April 15) , a sedimentation and erosion
control plan is required.
C. A drainage maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable
to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed
to each parcel at the time it is first conveyed. A
note to this affect shall appear on the final map.
d. Drainage facilities shall be constructed to City of
Atascadero standards and completed prior to occupancy
of any building.
4. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Engineering
Division prior to recordation of the final map. Plans shall
include, but not be limited the following:
. Design for Sinaloa Ave. shall include a minimum street
section of 20 feet from centerline of the right-of-way to
face of curb with City standard curb, gutter, and five (5)
foot sidewalk.
5. Construction of the public improvements may be deferred to
allow recording of the final map. Deferral of the public
improvements shall require the recording of a Deferred
Improvement Agreement and the posting of appropriate
securities guaranteeing that the work will be completed
prior to occupancy of any unit on the lot.
6. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100 percent
Performance Bond and a 100 percent Labor and Material Bond
until construction is accepted and by a 10 percent
Maintenance Bond, or other suitable guarantees approved by
the Director of Public Works, until one year after
construction approval.
7. Public improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Fire Department to verify compliance with Condition #6
of the Precise Plan prior to recording the final map.
8. Sewer improvement plans shall require approval from the
Public Works Department prior to recording of the final map.
All newly created lots shall be connected to public sewer.
. All annexation fees in effect at the time of recordation
shall be paid for the newly formed lots prior to recording
the map.
9. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Public
Works Department for all work to be done within the public
right-of-way prior to the start of construction. Applicant
shall sign an inspection agreement, guaranteeing that the
work shall be done and inspections paid for, prior to the
start of public works construction. The construction of
these improvements, as directed by the encroachment permit,
may be deferred per condition #5 above.
10. Parcels 3 and 4 shall have no direct access to Sinaloa Ave.
Access to the lots shall be from the common access road.
Relinquishment of access rights shall be shown on the final
map.
11. A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the
City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each
parcel at the time it is first conveyed. A note to this
affect shall appear on the final map.
12. Prior to the recording of the final map, a soils
investigation as required by the Subdivision Map Act shall
be submitted, recommending corrective actions to prevent
structural damage. The date of such reports, the name of
the engineer, and the location where the reports are on file
shall be noted on the final map.
13. The applicant shall make the following offers of dedication
to the City:
a. 25 feet from centerline of right-of-way to property
line along Sinaloa Ave.
b. The offers of dedication shall also include public
utility easements.
C. All offers of dedication shall be recorded prior to or
simultaneous to the recordation of the final map.
14. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the
approved tentative map and compliance with all conditions
set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval
in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot
Division Ordinance prior to recordation.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
created by a registered civil engineer or licensed
land surveyor as required by the Land Surveyor' s Act and
the Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within any road
right-of-way shall conform to City standard M-1.
b. Pursuant to Section 66497 of the Subdivision Map Act the
engineer or surveyor shall notify the City Engineer in
writing that the monuments have been set.
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
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.
EXHIBIT E
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-4
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 1!23/90
File No: ZC 08-89
From: Henry Engen, Community Development Directori{�,
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a revised request to establish a Planned
Development Overlay Zone (PD7 ) to allow for the creation of a
small lot residential subdivision.
BACKGROUND:
This matter was considered by the City Council on November 14 ,
1989 and referred back to the Planning Commission for
consideration of redesign. On January 2 , 1990, the Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on this subsequently
revised application, and on a 7 : 0 vote, recommended approval of
staff' s recommendation to approve the zone change as reflected in
Ordinance No. 198 . There was discussion and public testimony as
reflected in the attached minutes excerpt.
RECOMMENDATION:
1 ) Waive reading of Ordinance No. 198 in full and approve by
title only; and
2) Approve Ordinance No. 198 on first reading
HE :Ds
Attachments : Staff Report dated January 2 , 1990
Minutes Excerpt - January 2, 1990
Ordinance No. 198
CC: Bruce Jones
Cuesta Engineering
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B. 2
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: January 2, 1990
BY: Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No: ZC 08-89
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a revised request to establish a Planned
Development Overlay zone (PD7 ) to allow for the creation of a
small lot residential subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 08-89 based on the
Findings for Approval contained in the attached Ordinance No.
198 (Exhibit C) .
BACKGROUND:
On October 17, 1989, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing on Zone Change 08-89 and voted unanimously to approve
the proposal. On November 14, 1989 , the City Council directed
the item back to the Planning Commission to evaluate a revised
plan with larger lot sizes and more recreational open space. The
applicant has submitted a revised site plan which incorporates
these concerns of the City Council (see attached letter and site
plan) .
ANALYSIS:
The major change in this revised master plan is the demolition of
the existing residence on proposed Parcel 3. While the existing
residence on proposed Parcel 6 was originally planned for
removal, the previous plan attempted to save the home on Parcel
3. With no existing structures to accomodate, the site has more
freedom to provide open space and larger lot sizes. The
smallest lot size under the revised master plan is 3, 200 square
feet, as opposed to 2, 775 square feet under the original plan.
The proposed lots are also more equal in size, ranging from 3, 200
to 4, 697 square feet, as opposed to 2 , 775 to 5, 070 square feet.
Likewise, the open space provided is well in excess of the
minimum standards required by the Zoning Ordinance. Staff agrees
with the applicant that common open space is not appropriate in
this type of development. One of the fundamental aspects of
single family home ownership is private yard space. Common open
space areas are intended for apartment, condominium, and mobile
home developments. Finally, as stated in the previous report,
the proposed modifications to the setback standards pose no
P P
problems to the staff. It is the PD Overlay and building
orientation toward the private road, which triggers the setback
modification. Otherwise, the building locations as proposed,
maintain the required setbacks and conform to the make-up of the
neighborhood.
CONCLUSIONS:
Staff supported this project in its original form. The
elimination of the existing residence has allowed the site to
provide larger, more uniform lots, with more open space. The
small lot subdivision provides an opportunity for more affordable
home ownership, while not exceeding the density standards of the
General Plan.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Development Statement
Exhibit B - Revised Master Plan
Exhibit C - Ordinance 198 (Revised)
Exhibit D - Staff Report to City Council - 11/14/89
(includes Prior Staff Report to
Planning Commission)
i
EXHIBIT A
DEVELOPMENT STATT ,MMT
CUESTA ENGINEERING ZONE CHANGE 08-89
6717 Morro Road
Atasmdero,CA 93422
(905)466-6827
November 29, 1989
City of Atascadero
Planning Commission
6500 Palma
Atascadero, CA 93422
Subject: PD Masterplan Revision
Zone Change ZC 08-89 / Jones
Dear Planning Commissioners:
On October 17, 1989 the above zone change was heard by the Planning Commission
and was recommended for approval by a 7-0 concensus. On November 14, 1989 the
same application was reviewed by the City Council and referred back to Planning
Commission for your further review. Two of the Council Members were primarily
concerned with adequate recreation area for the units. Suggestions were made
for designation of a common play area and for elimination of one or two units
toward that end. The basic intent of this PD proposal is to create a type of
property division that will allow not only air space ownership, but for individ-
ual ownership of structures and land as well . A major benefit of the PD subdivi-
sion is the elimination of the "common" ownership and entanglements normally as-
sociated with Condominiums. Therefore, a "common" play area is not appropriate
for this PD proposal .
The revised plan proposed the removal of both existing buildings and construction
of 6 new units. Removal of the existing house provides better spacing between
Units 1 , 2 & 3; and we have moved the access road, and Units 4, 5 & 6 for more
equal spacing of buildings. The net results are seen in lot size and yard size.
The minimum lot size was formerly 2775 S.F. and is now 3200 S.F. The smallest
yard area was formerly 420 S.F. and is now 650 S.F. The useable yard areas are
all more than twice the required 300 S.F.
The balance of the Site Development Standards are outlined on the Revised PD Master-
plan drawing. We continue to meet or exceed the RMF standards for this property,
with minor changes requested for rear yard setbacks. We believe that the quality
proposed for this project will meet with the approval of single and retired buyers
as well as first-time buyers with young families. We respectfully request that
you review this revised Masterplan and recommend, once again, that the City Council
approve this project as a much-needed housing alternative for Atascadero.
Sincerely,
Deborah Hollowell ►'' ' :_
Agent for Applicant ;
DH:pd
89-070
EXHIBIT J
r REVISED BLASTER PLAN
ZONE CHANGE 08-8
r / .+•
i '• o tom.
y
Ub
tp
17
YA
• t!Y ��/ •t r- �'rte t-�- _.o \� '�
C \ \ �- - •fit M
As? �
a1 of\ \�.. "r \� •� sS
• M
ot
,s
a o I c
4
: XHIBIT C (revised)
ORDI!gAIJCE "30. 198
ZONE CHANGE 08-89
ORDINANCE NO. 198
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 7715/7745 SINALOA
FROM RMF/16 TO RMF/16 (PD7)
(ZC 08-89: Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on January 2, 1990 and has recommended approval of Zone
Change 08-89.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows :
Section 1 . Council Findings.
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonius development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be
reasonably achieved through existing development
standards or processing requirements.
•
Ordinance No. 198
7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for requested modifications.
Section 2. Zoning Map.
Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as
shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Ptn. of Lot 39 and Lots 40 and 41; Block HA; Atascadero
Colony
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and
effect at 12: 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
On motion by and seconded by
' the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
•
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ , City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
EXHIBIT A
f �
ORDINANCE 198
� a
CP
s * ••`- ` C
r
s
Y. r• ' 't.
y� 1
It
ell
10
cz
47 'q6
CA
i i +
.421 �.• , vtop
•C w i- �.
a '
v �s
.s
—19
to u
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 2, 1990
De rah Hollowell with Cuesta Engineering, rep r senting the
appl ant, stated her concurrence with the st f report.
William iter Jr. asked for clarificatio on the proposed
project.
Willy Vetter II stated his family ns property adjacent to
the proposed aban nment and aske what the applicant' s
intent is . Mr. DeCa exnlaine that the Vetters own a
portion of the road in ee b are unable to use the land
because of the existing -of-way. If the abandonment is
approved, they would the able to utilize the 20 feet,
minus anv easement that s re uired by the City.
Mrs . Vetter Jr. in .red whether sere would be anv disad-
vantages to her p operty as a resul of the abandonment.
MOTION: Mad by Commissioner Highland, seconded by Commis-
S ,Oner Brasher and carried 7 :0 recommend
avoroval of Road Abandonment 3-89 -sed on the
draft ordinance contained in the , t- report.
Com ssioner Lopez-Balbontin expressed concern over the
p ential of the rear of the property being used as a
I1loading ramp as he did not think there would be enoug
room.
2. ZONE CHANGE 8-89 :
Application filed by Bruce Jones (Cuesta Engineering)
to establish a Planned Development Overlay Zone (PD7 )
to allow for the creation of a small lot residential
subdivision. Subject site is located at 7715/7745
Sinaloa Avenue.
Mr. Davidson presented the staff report providing a back-
ground on previous Commission and Council actions for the
project. A revised site plan has been submitted which
allows for larger lot sizes . Staff is recommending approval
of the request.
Commission Questions and discussion followed.
Commissioner Luna commented on the Commission' s previous
unanimous vote on this zone Change and subsequent Council
action to refer th:, matter back to the Commission for a
revised site plan to reflect larger lot sizes and more
recreational open space.
Commissioner Brasher questioned the proposed lot sizes ,
stating it was her understanding from the recent joint
Council/Commission meeting that there was discussion
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 2, 1990
concerning the setting of a minimum lot size for planned
unit developments .
Commissioner Hanauer commented that the purpose of the
Planning Commission is to come to some kind of conclusions
on those kinds of problems to help direct and lead the
Council. He added that the applicant has come back with a
superb solution to the problem.
Commissioner Highland stated the basic problem is a contra-
diction in what the Commission looks at and the opinions and
viewpoints that have been voiced by the Council on minimum
lot sizes for single family residential . At the same time,
too many apartments are being built. A decision needs to be
made in this regrard. He added he would rather see single
familv dwellings in a planned development than see six
apartments go in. Discussion followed.
Deborah Hollowell with Cuesta Engineering, agent for the
applicant, referenced the Young PD ion Santa Ysabel) in
that there are differences between that project and the one
proposed. she presented an overhead of ;thti� site plan and
explained how the lot sizes were determined. Ms . Hollowell
added that the revised plan is better than the original one
and hoped the Council ' s concerns have beeIl addressed. She
then responded to questions from the Commission.
Bruce Jones, applicant, spoke in support of the project
stating he has never attempted this type of project before .
He was surprised at the Council ' s recommendation after the
Commission had recommended approval. He spoke about the
deteriorating character of the neighborhood and felt this
project would benefit the neighborhood. Mr. Jones added the
purpose of the project is to make it affordable. He then
responded to questions from the Commission.
In response to question from Commissioner Brasher, Mr. Jones
explained that he intends to see the project through to com-
pletion of the development.
in response to question from Commissioner Luna, Mr. Jones
explained why he chose 1700 square feet for the units and
described the proposed amenities . The project is designed
to be a piece of property that could reflect pride of owner-
ship and be easily maintained.
In response to further question, Mr. Jones stated he felt he
may encounter difficulties with receiving approval from the
Council, and added that he believes in the project. As a
result of the project being referred back to the Commission,
it gave him all opportunity to fine tune the site plan and
felt this new plan was better. It is a question of econom-
ics when it comes down to the number of lots which is
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 2, 1990
feasible or desireable.
Commissioner Hanauer expressed concern with the lengthy
Processing of this application and felt the applicau'_- was
going more than the extra mile on this project.
Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin expressed concern with the
density regarding the size of the units . Ms . Hollowell
clarified that the residence is 1439 s . f. and the garage is
327 s . f.
Commissioner Waage felt the project is basically a good one.
This is a good trade-off between apartments and single
family dwellings .
Chairperson Lochridge echoed commissioner Waage' s comments
adding he was glad the Commission was able to take a close
look at the project. He stated he understands some of the
Council ' s concerns and felt the applicant has made an
attempt to address those concerns . He hoped the Commission
will pass the project on a unanimous voter and that the
Council will support this project as well . -
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Highland and seconded by
Collmissioner Brasher to strongly recommend that
the City Council accept Zone Change 8-89r and
strongly recommend that the Council adopt
Ordinance No. 198 .
There was further discussion concerning guarantees of allow-
able densities . Mr. Decamp explained there are guarantees
to restrict the densities through the commission' s approval
and the Zoning ordinance.
The motion carried 7 : 0 .
C. INDIVIDUAL COMMENT
1. Planning Commission
Commissioner Luna remarked that f Mr. Jones ' project is
referred back to the Commiss ' 1 in a negative form, he hoped
it will return with clear icy direction on minimum lot
sizes for planned develo gents .
Commissioner Waage - quested clarification on what proced-
ures there are to hange a vote made at the last commission
meeting. Disc cion followed.
Commi- ioner Lopez-Balbontin reported that there are some
par ed cars on E1 Camino Real between San Anselmo and Del
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY Or ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-4
Through: Ray Windsor; City Manager Meeting Date : 11!14!89
File No: ZC 08-89
From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director JW.
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a request to establish a Planned Development
Overlay zone (PD7 ) to allow for the creation of a small lot
residential subdivision at 7715/7745 Sinaloa Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
1 . Motion to waive reading of ordinance in full and approve
reading by title only.
2 . Motion to+approve Ordinance No. 198 on first reading. !
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the above-
referenced zone change on October 17 , 1989 and recommended
approval of Zone Change 08-89 subject to the Findings and Condi-
tions of Approval contained in the attached staff report.
HE :nh
Attachments : Ordinance No. 198
Planning Commission Staff Report - Oct. 17 , 1989
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - Oct. 17 , 1989
CC : Bruce & Sandra Jones
Cuesta Engineering
ORDINANCE NO. 198
• AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 7715/7745 SINALOA
FROM RMF/16 TO RMF/16 (PD7)
(ZC 08-89: Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on October 17, 1989 and has recommended approval of Zone
Change 08-89.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows:
Section 1 . Council Findings.
1 . The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2 . The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4 . Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonius development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be
reasonably achieved through existing development
standards or processing requirements .
Ordinance No. 198
7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for requested modifications .
Section 2 . Zoning Map.
Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as
shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Ptn. of Lot 39 and Lots 40 and 41; Block HA; Atascadero
Colony
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4 . Effective Date.
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and
effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B-2
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 17,1989
BY: Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No: ZC 08-89
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a request to establish a Planned Development
Overlay zone (PD7) to allow for the creation of a small lot
residential subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 08-89 based on the
Findings for Approval contained in the Draft Ordinance (Exhibit
E) .
SITUATION AND FACTS:
1 . Owner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bruce Jones
2 . Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cuesta Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . .7715/7745 Sinaloa Rd.
4 . General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Multiple Family
5. Zoning District. . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF/16
6. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .51 acre
7 . Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Single family residences (2)
8 . Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
on October 3, 1989.
ANALYSIS:
The proposed project is six single family dwellings on a site
currently comprised of two separate legal lots. The site
contains two existing single family residences, one of which is
to remain (lot 41) . With a site area of just over one acre
(0 .513 acres) , a maximum of six two-bedroom units could be
constructed under the Multiple Family Density standards of the'
Zoning Ordinance. A project of this size would normally be
processed as a Precise Plan application, however, this project
i
proposes the creation of individual small lots . With a minimum
lot size of one-half acre in the RMF zones, small lot
subdivisions require the establishment of a Planned Development
Overlay Zone (PD) . The City has created an generic overlay zone
of PD7 for small lot residential subdivisions . In addition to
minimum lot size, the master plan of development (Exhibit C)
proposes a modification to the required setbacks.
Minimum Lot Size Standards
The Zoning Ordinance and General Plan set a minimum lot size of
one-half acre in multiple family zones. Residential Policy #6 of
the General Plan (Page 57) allows smaller lot sizes "in
conjunction with planned residential developments, provided that
the overall density within the project is consistent with other
density standards contained herein. " As stated above, the
proposed density conforms to the density standards of the Zoning
Ordinance and General Plan. Twelve (12) two-bedroom units are
the maximum allowed per acre on a level to gently sloping lot in
the RMF/16 zone. Thus, the creation of the PD Overlay to allow a
small lot subdivision is the key issue of the analysis .
Planned Development Overlay Zone
To implement the General Plan policy cited above, the Zoning
Ordinance contains the purpose and required findings for PD
zones . The purpose statement (Section 9-3. 641) reads as follows :
"The Planned Development Overlay Zone identifies areas where
development standards or processing requirements different
from those established by the underlying zoning district are
deemed necessary to promote orderly and harmonius
development and to enhance the opportunity to best utilize
special characteristics of an area. "
To fulfill the purpose statement, the following four findings
(Section 9-3. 644) must be made:
1 . Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and harmonius
development .
2 . Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best utilize
special characteristics of an area and will have a
beneficial effect on the area.
3 . Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably
achieved through existing development standards or
processing requirements .
4 . The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for the requested modifications.
r
The applicant' s development statement (Exhibit D) presents a
valid argument for allowing smaller lot sizes. Although the
lots are quite small (2, 775 to 5, 040 square feet) , the identical
project could be approved under a Precise Plan, without the small
lot subdivision. Staff agrees with the applicant that the
ability to provide small lots for single family home ownership is
a worthy benefit, particulary in the current climate of rising
real estate values. A quick survey of local realtors indicates
that the selling price of a typical single family home increased
by an average of 30 percent within the last nine months ! One of
the fundamental goals of the General Plan (Page 130) is "a desire
to encourage residential projects to provide housing units
affordable to persons with low and moderate incomes by offering
developers either a density bonus or other bonus incentives. "
In this case, the goal of providing more affordable housing
cannot be achieved with a minimum lot size of one-half acre.
Development Standards
The applicant is also requesting a modification to the rear
setback requirements . Again, it is the request for a PD Overlay
that triggers the setback modification. If this were a typical
multiple family project, the required rear setback (10 feet) ,
side setback (5 feet) , and setback between buildings (10 feet)
are satisfied. The creation of individual lots, however, changes
the building and parking orientation, and thus the required
setbacks. The plot plan shows a five feet rear setback for Lots
1 and 2 of Block 41 and a nine feet and six feet rear setback for
Lots 2 and 3 of block 40, respectively. The existing residence
is nonconforming as to the required front setback along Sinaloa
Ave and the 10 feet rear setback. Lastly, the proposed
residence on Lot 3 of Block 40 does not meet the rear setback,
but this can easily be modified.
In general, the proposed modifications present no problems to the
staff. The proposed setbacks maintain the character of the
neighborhood, with the exception of parking in the front setback
on Sinaloa Ave. Staff will condition the development plan to
provide both required parking spaces outside the front 25 feet
setback for the existing residence. The four smaller lots to the
rear have met the required parking by providing one parking space
for each lot less than 4, 000 square feet (Zoning Ordinance
Section 9-4 .118 c 5) . Additional parking is provided to the
front of these residences. The other development standards
required by the Zoning Ordinance, including outdoor recreation,
enclosed storage, and maximum percent coverage have been
satisfied.
CONCLUSIONS:
Staff is confident that this site is suitable for the proposed
development. The density of the project is consistent with the
General Plan, while the creation of a small lot subdivision
provides more opportunities for single family home ownership.
Staff is recommending that the conceptual site plan (Exhibit C)
be approved as part of the Ordinance (see draft in Exhibit E) .
Minor modifications to the site plan will be necessary, such as
the elimination of parking in the front- setback on Sinaloa Ave.
The next step in the review process is the submittal of a tract
map application in conformance with the PD to create the six
lots. Drainage plans will be required as part of the map
application with the necessary public improvements and access
easements being conditions of the map.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Zoning Map
Exhibit B - General Plan Land Use Map
Exhibit C - Conceptual Site Plan
Exhibit D - Developer' s Statement
Exhibit E - Draft Ordinance
EXHIBIT A
'',�✓., � � CITY C - ATASCADERO NING IAP
zo
COMMUNITY DE'v rLOPMENT ZONE CHANGE 08-89
DEPARTMENT
fll •Its- ,-. --t 'r ti
� � �\ �` �• yet _ /`. �q •,
(71.16 6 j L C �; `•' `' ��`�O ��i~ `/
P�j _ -� QRS F •
R M Ft
ri 4i + ��� I O� 1Vcd •(• j� r-
S _ r• _ �-�..
IT
;J •O ` / ,
i IST+�♦O/ j ��� w�i t l . �•a,4�
P
t [li
LoQE
a
�'
f I EXHIBIT B
I
CITYC _ ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN r4AP
oil ZONE v '"' ZONE CHANGE 08-89
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
"moo+ ���`•
��• �"� RECREATION • � r y � '` �• �
� I • •"
LI• �.� I � 1000A♦ •
�J 'o
• RECREATION • •
� 1
• •y • � � moo,, � •
PL
.vf I � � r � I; . •
MOO. SON({ ♦ / �_ ^" '` •
(L.+ N. RECREATIO((��,, �
:NSITY tt �\,jT
r
i
L
IGH
ENS / f I ` \ \ • "
M. E 51. V` ,� • •••••
e ' irAIILT LO
ETAll
r� l DENSITY
r , I � I
OM RI IA r—� J 1 o i 3 \ MULTI-FAM
� ---" i i mss♦( i ' r- 'ca
ISI ad
J �
S I�T E _ FA L ��00 � Z
11 �
f
M RET.
arm
__,✓� C
3LIC P "
// (i
DE
a SINGLE M
,`
EXHIBIT C
CITY C- ATASCADERO
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
I Ell
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE CHANGE 08-89
�•,;?;, DEPARTMENT
t i
po
- f�t,�Via^�=�:+i i.° s � �r�. i t•` �� _ ..
..I .n `
44 ON
``
�+' � �s•}tjltEE � � ' � w � o
EXHIBIT D
DEVELOPER'S STATEMEN-
ZONE CHANGE 08-89
• June 29 1929
Community Development Department
City of Atascadero " ii
4e%Sr'
6500 Palma Ave
Atascadero . CA 9Z42-
Th,a attached is an appli--ation to rez-one two parcels on Sinaloa
Avenue from RMF-16 to RM-7-16 with a PD overlay designation. The
PD overlay is being, requested so that we wi-1 -1 have the f leJ_bility
t C offer in d 1-.7 4.dual units wir-h small-acr=_aga lots to f:.rst-time
buyers in the zommunit-7. The -eventual devel,cpment we propose wi-1 -1
create s-4 :: units on si:�. separate parcels in a neighbcrhood c1der
homes and apartments .
Each property curr-antly has one r-asidenc-e = it . We zrcpcse to
keep the house on Lot 41 and to demolish the building or, Lot 40 as
the structure is in a state of serious disrepair. We propose five
-wo-
new single-family detached residences. The units will be t
story, approximately I445 square-feet each, and will be served with
individual utilities and a common driveway off of Sinaloa Avenue .
Cu-- preliminary design meets all of t-he current site design
standards for the RMF zone and been reviewed with favorable
response by the Fire Department, Public Works Department ,
Atascadero Mutual Water Co. , and Wil-Mar Disposal . The preliminary
plan has also been reviewed by Jack Brazeal , certified arborist ,
who has determined the design to be in, conformance with the Tree
Ordinance. The units described in this plan could be built- as
apartment units under the current RMF-16 zoning. Under the PD-7
type zone we are requesting, we could build the identical project
with the added benefit of creating an individual lot for each unit .
With housing prices continuing to increase faster than inflation,
it is becoming more difficult for the entry level or lower income
buyer to purchase a home. The only affordable housing options for
these buyers are to rent, to purchase an older home , to purchase
a condo, or to purchase a new home on a smaller lot.
Apartment living offers no chance to build equity, and mortgage
financing for condominiums is not always readily available. Condo
ownership also comes with Homeowner Association fees that are tied
to inflation and unpredictable insurance rates . The purchase of an
older home is often complicated with hidden repair costs and
inflated by the value of a large lot . A new unit on the small lots.
propose could be more readily financed, would have only the
. EXHIBIT o (cont. )
( .
June 29 , 1535
.ice 2
shared maintana==e of _\} =es3 dr47eW\7 . and w=eld @=07/32 1 62me
and 'sre than .c=13 se g=£7a:a17 aw=ed.
9e propose than the PD ove£137 sesS7nat£o= i2clQ2a 3 meg=£mime=t
than the prspeI=7 22 developed a==o.6I=9 =2 an a=mrcva6 mast.-a-1--p.1a= .
£=3±1�= - tae ==5 S=b=1t=a£ . &s=21£35 the s__, 3eslg=
standards `£or =±5 @e=ject . This ensu-. a the c=3e=17 and
5a=mcnious develcpment o! the 2_=pe_t7 95±32 c . c . & &. ' 3 mill
ensure the ===ti=ed main=ananca =3 the 2==per;7.
Tha=2 7c= £.r your review and cons ide-ration of this g =2osal .
Bruce Jones
1200 Calle 2ordcni=
Los Csos , CA. 93402
�
. �
EXHIBIT E
i
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 7715/7745 SINALOA
FROM RMF/16 TO RMF/16 (PD7)
(ZC 08-89: Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment . The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on October 17, 1989 and has recommended approval of Zone
Change 08-89.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows :
Section 1 . Council Findings .
1 . The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2 . The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts . The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4 . Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonius development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be
reasonably achieved through existing development
standards or processing requirements .
Ordinance No.
7 . The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for requested modifications .
Section 2 . Zoning Map.
Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as
shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Ptn. of Lot 39 and Lots 40 and 41; Block HA; Atascadero
Colony
Section 3 . Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4 . Effective Date.
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and
effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
{
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY JORGENSEN, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
•
MINUTES EXCERPTS
E FOUR
of Atascadero. Any modific on to this
pproval shall be approve y the Community
D elopment Department for to implementing
any ranges. "
"3 . No outdoo stora of semi-trailers, trucks,
vans, or an. o ler storage equipment is
allowed on a -ite. Moving vehicles are
permitted n the -ite for loading and
unloadi only for eriod not to exceed 24
hour
115. 1 conditions herein shal a implemented
within 30 days of this approv This Condi-
tional Use Permit shall be :rev ie d by the
Planning Commission in three Monti for
compliance with these conditions .
The motion carried 06: 1 with Commissioner Brasher
dissenting.
2. ZONE CHANGE 8-89 :
Application i ed by Bruce Jones (Cuesta Engineering,
agent) to request establishment of a Planned Develop-
ment Overlay Zone (PD7) to allow for the creation of a
small lot residential subdivision. Subject site is
located at 7715/7745 Sinaloa Road.
Mr. Davidson presented the staff report which focused on
issues of minimum lot size standards, the Planned
Development Overlay Zone and general development standards.
Staff is recommending approval of the zone change request as
outlined in the draft ordinance.
Commission questions and discussion followed.
Commissioner Hanauer commented that because of the various
costs involved with developing this project, the homes would
not fall under the low and moderate income level .
Discussion ensued relative to the merits of developing a
planned development rather than apartments or condominiums
with the planned development overlay being the controlling
factor in assuring uniformity in development of the
individual lots.
Deborah Hollowell, representing the applicant, spoke in
support of the project stating that it is the applicant's
intent to see the project through to completion, and
explained that the site plan at this point is conceptual .
It is hoped that this small lot subdivision will provide an
alternative for ownership other than condominiums.
PAGE FIVE
Charles Harrington, Sinaloa resident, expressed concerns
regarding on-street parking, reduced setbacks with regard-to
adequate emergency vehicle access, and drainage.
Bruce .;ones, applicant, spoke in support of the request and
described the various project amenities . He addressed the
criteria involved with the four findings necessary to
fulfill the purpose statement and explained his intent to
provide an alternate form of occupancy other than apartment
rentals, condominiums, etc.
In response to question from Commissioner Brasher, Mr. Jones
stated there will be an additional parking space provided
so there will be space for two vehicles on each lot at all
times that are not on the street. He added that there will
be no need for a dumpster or any onstreet trash pickup as
the disposal company will go to each individual residence.
In response to question from Commissioner Waage, Mr. Jones
responded that he will be able to meet any appearance review
guidelines imposed.
Discussion continued relative to incorporating minimum lot
sizes within the zoning ordinance.
Commissioner Highland stated he prefers single family
residences to apartments and would like to see more projects
like this one developed.
Commissioner Brasher concurred adding that this plan is
well thought out. A single family mix in this area would
enhance the neighborhood.
There was continued discussion relative to assurances being
made that this project is reviewed under the appearance
review guidelines .
MOTION: By Commissioner Highland, seconded by Commissioner
Brasher to recommend approval of Zone Change 8- 89
subject to the Findings and draft ordinance
contained in the staff report. The motion carried
7 . 0 .
Chairperson Lochridge declared a break at 9:08 p.m. ; meeting
reconvened at 9 : 17 p.m.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 4-89 :
ation filed by House of Glory Fel p (Fred
Watkins) uest the use of fisting single
family residence ai yle garage as a church in
the RS/FH (R i lal Subu Flood Hazard) zoite.
S11b41 a is located at 11700 Vied 'no.
EXHIBIT F
r
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ta,scader�.�
8500 PALMA AVENUE POLICE DEPARTMENT
ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93422
PHONE: 16051 466.8000 INCORPORATED JULY 2. 1979 6500 PALMA AVENUE
ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93422
CITY COUNCIL PHONE: 16051 468-8600
CITY CLERK .•-�-
CITY TREASURER
CITY MANAGER
FIRE DEPARTMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 93422
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PHONE: (805) 466-2141
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
r
February 8 , 1990
Bruce Jones
1200 Calle Cordoniz
Los Osos, CA 93402
RE: PRECISE PLAN 87-89
7715/7745 Sinaloa Ave.
Dear Mr. Jones :
The City of Atascadero has received and reviewed your application
. for a Precise Plan and Environmental Determination for the
construction of six (6) single family residences , each contai
ining
two-bedrooms.
The proposed site is zoned RMF/16 (Residential Multiple Family
High Density) and the proposed use is allowed as defined as a
single family dwellings (Section 9-3 . 172 (a) . The surrounding
properties are zoned the same as the subject site and are
currently developed with residential uses.
A review by the Community Development Director of the
environmental description form and application, along with other
background information, shows that the project will have no
detrimental effect upon the environment; therefore, a .legative
Declaration has been prepared. The Director has also found the
project, as conditioned, to be in compliance with the provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance.
The proposed Precise Plan is approved as shown on attached
Exhibit C (site plan) , Exhibit D (grading plan) and subject to
the conditions of approval in Exhibit H. Final approval becomes
effective on March 1, 1990 , unless appealed. (NOTE: THIS DOES
NOT CONSTITUTE A GRADING OR BUILDING PERMIT. )
u intend to appeal any of the conditions , your
In the event you
appeal should be in writing and should state the reasons for the
appeal. Any appeal would be scheduled for Planning Commission
consideration as a public hearing. You should, however, discuss
any objections to the conditions with planning staff as it may be
possible to alter conditions after such discussion.
Ir� you should have any questions concerning this project, you are
welcome to contact the Community Development Department for
assistance.
Sincerely,A'—f IP2 ,
"'/"s'
Doug Davidson
Senior Planner
DD/dd
cc: Cuesta Engineering
Attachments: Exhibit A - Zoning Map
Exhibit B - General Plan Map
Exhibit C - Site Plan
Exhibit D - Grading Plan
Exhibit E - Elevations
Exhibit F - Tree Removal/Protection Plans
Exhibit G - Findings for Approval
Exhibit H - Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ATASCADERO GONTNG MAP
-
PRECISE PLAN 87-
89
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
_CAD
DEPARTMENT
I
sowoa� � !
' i �-'of�4�s•., a �
QO l ` � v►��E�_ �IvE
1 � �� �_ ,�— � ��4. � �- • './/j Imo(
S.
�41L,c•r.
—i L ; r
p` ,� �+` R M F
Rs
SITE
.%\ LSF•Y
,arc
Py. P \f
Q/S row 1
CT
C R
, u
/ ,K•ojib~ o M
Q
EXHIBIT B
ATA.SCADERO uENERAL PLAN MAP
_ �.✓.,., :.. . �r.:� CITY OF
_ PRECISE PLAN 87-89
" "c w ` ~7a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC
11" SOMODA7
)NZ
W / I �� ♦ L ,I s" �I
Q'. �,' \' �J►mob ��� � � ��• �`�
;-- -' - - s i T E : R E C'
t.Ow '1.' sse
0 E N S I Y
- - MULTI-FAMILY
I A L - S'AI
° �4�� _ OPSIT
FA
4 IT
CDMM` El- ,l R=Txe-77"
�j�
A* SIN
P�xRK t
.T � �, any •, .. \� •.._ �__� �:,,, LN O �p A.R
. �'' C 0 M.
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF ATA.SCADERO SITE PLAN
l•.H
�. . , PRECISE PLAN 87-89
1171 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
s
0.1
cz
w \ 1 t
�r \
'�� \'� rte( \ _Sj��r��•\. . J a` , '/ /. , `• \�_ ���r
. / a
'A_ r
Tow t
E i �C �• ,� •r. iii t !•t .
J
EXHIBIT D
CITY OF AIASCADERO GRADING/DRAINAGE PLAN
PRECISE PLAN 87-89
�'r ,.�. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CAD
DEPARTMENT
61
' �t� w � is#� �v:•� 3i e �
�' j t � c S )� � R '• n`t
. ib,>
!•fes I�M� � tT.'\�: � y, .\� �.i�N V l'
*t
to
r iI'Me
. t
EXHIBIT E
CITY OF AT—ASCADERQ ELEVATIONS
at` �� PRECISE.: PLAN 87-89
—� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
is i IHI
l
Zz
k Li
<
Z
i.� ::.«owe:• i � 'I «••w..«":'� � j
1
nTu
D
'
0
"XHIBIT E (cont. )
CITY OF ATA.SCADERO ELEVATIONS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PRECISE PLAN 87-89
DEPARTMENT
1 -- ---- -- 0
,
- " ,'
IL h
► T E!E',/ATI0N
i 1
--------------------
It
-#er**
r
r----�
,
ML
L'=FT ELEVATION
( F/� EXHIBIT F v v
,
JACK BRAZEAL
TREE CONSULTANT
Vo �. .' 4531 SKIPJACK LANE
TERN .; CHAPTER PASO ROBLES, CA 93446
YN..t
WCISA #163
' •�1' (805) 227-6140
-9R8� R�S
October 7, 1989
Bear Valley Building Co. Inc.
1200 Calle Cordoniz
Los Osos, California 93402
Tree Protection Plan for:
(PD) Six, two bedroom units
Lot 41 , 40 & portion of Lot 39
Sinaloa Street
Atascadero, California
Existing trees on this site are as follows:
1 . Fruitless Mulberry - To be removed.
2 . Siberian Elm - To be removed.
3 . Siberian Elm - To be removed.
4 . Siberian Elm - To be trimmed.
5 . Valley Oak (off site) - Not impacted.
6 . Siberian Elm - To be removed.
7 . Siberian Elm - To be removed.
Five trees are to be removed as indicted and compensatory
planting of ten ( 2 for 1 ) , fifteen gallon size trees are to
be planted as shown on these plans .
Recommended tree types are:
1 . Quercus Lobata (Valley Oak ) for street tree planting (4 ) .
2 . Maytenus boaria (Mayten Tree) , Liquid Amber, Palo Alto
( Sweet gum) Hymenosporum flavum (Sweetshade) , Lager-
stroemia indica (Crape Myrtle) , Prunus blireiana (Purple
Leaf Plum, and Crataegus phaenopyrum (Washington hawthorn) .
These six trees are good lawn or patio trees that can be
incorporated into the landscape in small or confined areas.
Sizes are from small to medium.
( continued)
EXHIBIT F (cont. )
r
Bear Valley Building Co. - 2 - October 7, 1989
Sinaloa Street
Atascadero
COMMENTS'
The three trees, (one Mulberry and two Elm trees ) , #1,2,&3
are to be removed to accomodate street improvements. The two
small Elm trees #6 & 7, are to be removed to accomodate the
building site #2 on Lot #40. The one large Siberian Elm #4 ,
is to be trimmed to accomodate the building site #2 on lot #41 .
The large Valley oak, #5, is off the site and will not be im-
pacted by this development. All pruning and planting is to
be performed using good arboricultural practices and in com-
pliance with the City of Atascadero' s Tree Protection Ordinance
and Guidelines.
SUMMARY•
With the conditions of this report, I recommend that this
Tree Protection Plan be approved.
Alt, e
a k Brazeal Arborist Date
EXHIBIT F (cont. )
i
LAI
x
\ �W ' 4160 A
�=
Vol
• !t.I'�� I - - I ..�.J' _ fit.
AAMNO
I
l . 1
i .car
.:�G? .t..' t♦
_ .w-, sem. \ '. `♦ r _ t i
- -----
A'%Y-s N v '
1 ,t t
r
6 % .
Exhibit G - Findings for Approval 0
Precise Plan 87-89
7715/7745 Sinaloa Ave.
(Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
1 . The proposed project or use is consistent with the General
Plan.
2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the
use will not, because of the circumstances and conditions
applied in the particular case, be detrimental to the health,
safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing
or working in the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental
or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of
the use.
4. The proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the
character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its
orderly development.
5. The proposed use or project will not generate a volume of
traffic beyond the safe capacity of all roads providing
access to the project, either existing or to be improved
in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic
volume of the surrounding neighborhood that would result from
full development in accordance with the Land Use Element.
6 . The proposed project is in compliance with the City ' s
Appearance Review Guidelines.
EXHIBIT H - Conditions of Approval
. Precise Plan 87-89
7715/7745 Sinaloa Ave.
(Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. All construction shall be in conformance with Exhibit C
(Site Plan) , Exhibit D (Grading Plan) , Exhibit H (Conditions
of Approval) , and shall comply with all City Codes and
Ordinances. Any modification to this approval requires
approval by the Community Development Department prior to
implementing any changes.
2. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
3. Grading and drainage plans , prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer, shall be resubmitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Community
Development and Public works Departments prior to the
issuance of any building permits. Drainage plans shall
include calculations and an evaluation of the effects of
projected runoff on adjacent properties and streets . Off-
site drainage improvements may be required to convey
increased runoff to E1 Camino Real. An on-site detention
basin may be an alternative, if approved by the Engineering
Division.
All required drainage work shall be constructed to City
standards and completed prior to final building inspection.
4. Road improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Community
Development and Public works Departments, prior to issuance
of any building permit. Plans shall include, but not be
limited to:
Curb, gutter, five (5) foot sidewalk and paveout on Sinaloa
Ave. along entire property frontage.
Construction of the public road improvements shall be
completed prior to the final inspection.
5. All mechanical equipment (roof or ground mounted) shall be
screened from public view.
1
6. Plans shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to .
issuance of building permits, particulary for the adequacy
of the existing off-site fire hydrant three feet north of
the property line or the need for a new City standard
hydrant. Three alternatives are possible, subject to
approval by the Fire Department:
a. Extend the sidewalk fifteen (15) feet north of the
hydrant with the permission of the property owner of
Lot 42 and the approval of the Public Works Department.
b. Relocate the hydrant to the south side of the existing
driveway.
C. Install a new fire hydrant within the boundaries of the
proposed project.
7 . A trash enclosure is required to serve the six dwelling
units. The facility must be screened on all sides and
cannot be located in the front 25 foot setback.
8. Landscape plans shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.
These plans shall incorporate the recommendations of the
certified arborist (Exhibit F) .
9. This Precise Plan shall expire one year from the date of
final approval (March 1, 1990) . A one year time extension
may be granted pursuant to a written request filed prior to
the expiration date as per Section (9-2. 118) of the Zoning
Ordinance. Any further one year time extensions may be
approved by the Planning Commission.
2
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - 5/1/90
MINUTES - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 1, 1990 7 :30 p.m.
Atascadero Administration Building
The regular meeting of the Atascadero Planning CoFission was
called to order at 7 :30 p.m. by Chairperson Lochri a followed by
the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Waage, Lopez-B ontin, Luna, Hanauer,
Highland and Chairperson L hridge
Absent: Commissioner Brasher xcused)
Staff Present: Steven DeCa _ , City Planner; Doug Davidson,
Senior P1 finer; Gary Sims, Senior Civil Engineer;
Pat She hard, Administrative Secretary
PUBLIC COMMENT:
• There was no ublic comment.
A. CO ENT CALENDAR
1 . Approval of minutes of the regular Planning Commission
meeting of April 17, 1990
MOTION: By Commissioner Luna, seconded by Commissioner High-
land and carried 6 :0 to approve the consent calendar
as presented.
B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
1 . TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 3-90 :
Application filed by Bruce Jones (Cuesta Engineering) to
create six parcels, ranging in size from 3,206 square
feet to 4,775 square feet, in conformance with Ordinance
No. 198 (Zone Change 8-89 - Planned Development overlay
No. 7 ) at 7715/7745 Sinaloa Road.
Doug Davidson presented the staff report and summarized a
recent zone change approval in which a planned development
overlay zone was established. Staff is recommending approval
• subject to certain conditions .
Commission questions and discussion followed.
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - 5/1/90
Commissioner Waage expressed concern with the detention basin
next to the sidewalk and asked who will be responsible for its
maintenance.
Gary Sims provided a description of a detention basin and its
function and noted the applicant was given the option to
either address the offsite drainage impacts or detain the
water onsite. He added that detention basins are not the best
solution but they are a viable option. Discussion followed.
Deborah Hollowell with Cuesta Engineering, representing the
applicant, explained why an on-site detention basin was chosen
to mitigate the drainage. She suggested that the Commission
pursue the idea of evaluating the construction cost of the
basin and taking that amount and applying it towards the
City' s development fee fund so that drainage work can be done
on Pueblo. Ms. Hollowell requested amendments to conditions
##1 (water lines) and ##5 (public improvements) .
In response to inquiry, Ms. Hollowell presented a drawing
which showed proposed improvements relative to landscaping
around the detention basin.
Discussion continued pertaining to drainage problems in the •
area and whether an immediate solution to the problem heeds
to be sought and development fees which go towards mitigating
overall City drainage problems which are separate from any
fees imposed for this particular project.
Commissioner Waage stated his concern for possible hazards
related to the detention basin.
Bruce Jones, applicant, stated he appreciates the
Commissioners' comments with respect to the drainage basin as
he felt it to be a poor solution to an ongoing problem in the
City, and noted he feels his project is being penalized
because this problem has not been addressed. He summarized
the background since he first initiated the project 11 months
ago and felt this is a late date for the drainage basin to be
an issue as the drainage problem has been on Sinaloa for
years . He requested that the basin requirement be deleted.
Mr. Jones stated he did not feel it fair for him to solve the
incremental problem of his drainage run-off as no one else has
been asked to do that.
Mr. Jones noted that during the project' s process, it has been
his intent to pass on the land savings to the buyers of the
homes . With regard to the affordability aspect, the drainage
contributes to the cost, but he added he would be happy to
contribute his fair share to the drainage problems on Sinaloa.
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSIG
MINU'
Comm] MINUTES - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION
nextl Regular Meeting
maint
f Tuesday, May 1, 1990 7 :30 P.M.
Gary
Atascadero Administration Building
func-
eith4 The regular meeting of the Atascadero Planning Co issi-
Ovate called to order at 7 :30 p.m. by Chairperson Lochri _e foliow
solut the Pledge of Allegiance.
DeboY ROLL CALL:
appli
to mi present: Commissioners Waage, Lopez-B ontin, Luna, Hana..
pursu Highland and Chairperson L hridge
basir.
City'
on Pu Absent: Commissioner Brasher xcused}
#1 (W Staff Present: Steven DeCa , City Planner; Doug Davidson,
Senior Pl 1ner; Gary Sims, Senior Civil Enna
In r
which Pat She hard, Administrative Secretary
arouiJ
I PUBLIC COMMENT:
Disco
area There was no ublic comment.
to b
over
fees , A. CO ENT CALENDAR
Commi 1 . Approval of minutes of the regular Planning Comr
relat meeting of April 17, 1990
Bruce MOTION: By Commissioner Luna, seconded by Commissioner
Commi land and carried 6 : 0 to approve the consent ca
he fe as presented.
City,
becau
the b B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
ago a
an is 1 . TENTATIVE. TRACT MAP 3-90 :
years Application filed by Bruce Jones (Cuesta Enginee
Mr. J'
create six parcels, ranging in size from 3 ,20E
incr feet to 4,775 square feet, in conformance with 01
been No. 198 (Zone Change 8-89 - Planned Development
Mr. I No. 7 ) at 7715/7745 Sinaloa Road.
his Doug Davidson presented the staff report and summa
homes recent zone change approval in which a planned devel
conte overlay zone was established. Staff is recommending al
cont2 subject to certain conditions.
1
Commission questions and discussion followed.
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - 5/1/90
Lon Allan, 5625 Capistrano, indicated that he has observed,
through his attendance at many hearings of various bodies, the
issue of detention basins . He spoke about two locations where
these basins exist noting that aesthetically, they are not as
bad as they may seem.
Whitey Thorpe, 8025 Santa Ynez, stated that affordable housing
will be achieved by allowing people to build houses in a
decent fashion, and added that something is wrong if an
individual cannot obtain a permit within 11 months .
Commissioner Waage commented that he would like to see an
alternative for the retention basin and a possible solution
for the drainage along Sinaloa.
Commissioner Luna stated he would be open to another option
with regard to the drainage but believed that this project
needs to mitigate its own impacts .
In response to question, Mr. Sims explained the problems
associated with doing piecemeal drainage mitigation along the
street. He added that with all the current projects which
have been reviewed along Sinaloa, methods are being addressed
as to how to get the water onto E1 Camino Real .
Commissioner Highland expressed his frustration with regard
to the difficulty in making a decision on this project when
information is vague as to what other types of off-site
mitigation improvements which could be made. Discussion
followed.
Commissioner Waage stated that he would rather see off-site
improvements than the retention basin.
Chairperson Lochridge stated he would like to see the project
move forward in a timely manner with regard to resolving the
drainage issues.
Deborah Hollowell expressed frustrations with the Engineering
Department' s vagueness in helping to address what needed to
be done to resolve the drainage for this project. She
indicated that the applicant would be willing to address
protecting properties immediately across the street and would
like the project approved with the alternative of either off-
site mitigation or the detention basin.
Mr. DeCamp suggested the drainage plans should be redesigned
to prevent a precipitous drop from the back of the sidewalk
but felt in this case, an on-site detention basin would serve
the project well. Mr. Sims stated that the plans presented
this evening are conceptual in nature and final improvement
plans will be reviewed in order to prevent the creation of any
liability situations .
MINUTES EXCERPT -PLANNING COMMISSION - 5/1/90
chairperson Lochridge conveyed commissioner Brasher' s concern
that there be adequate landscaping around the detention basin.
Mr. Decamp responded that the way the basin is constructed and
landscaped will have a bearing on how it functions; he
suggested a condition that would require staff to review the
landscaping plans for the basin to assure that it is
aesthetically pleasing but does not impede the function of the
basin.
Discussion continued concerning amendments to the conditions .
MOTION: By Commissioner Highland, seconded by Commissioner
Luna and carried 6 : 0 to approve Tentative Tract Map
3-90 subject to the Findings and Conditions of
Approval as amended:
##1 - delete " . . .prior to the recording of the final
map. "
##5 . Construction of the public improvements,
including the installation of utilities, may
be deferred to allow recording of the final
map. Deferral of the public improvements shall
require the recording of a Deferred Improvement
Agreement and the posting of appropriate
securities guaranteeing that the work will be
completed prior to occupancy of any unit on the
lot.
##16 . Landscape plans shall require approval by the
Community Development Department prior to
recording of the map.
r
EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 03-90
7715/7745 Sinaloa Ave. (Jones/Cuesta Engineering)
May 1, 1990
Revised by the Planning Commission May 1, 1990
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Co. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of each
parcel.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the
easements, they shall be noted on the final map. All
relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be
the responsibility of the developer at his sole expense.
3. 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 recording of the final map. These
shall include, but not be limited, to the following:
a. The proposed detention basin is an acceptable method, •
however, if it is not utilized, plans shall include
calculations and an evaluation of the impact of
projected runoff onto adjacent streets and properties .
In this case, off-site drainage improvements may be
required to convey increased runoff to El Camino Real.
b. A temporary drainage facility shall be constructed to
contain mud and debris on the site during construction.
If construction occurs during the rainy season (October
15 through April 15) , a sedimentation and erosion
control plan is required.
C. A drainage maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable
to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed
to each parcel at the time it is first conveyed. A
note to this affect shall appear on the final map.
d. Drainage facilities shall be constructed to City of
Atascadero standards and completed prior to occupancy
of any building.
4. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Engineering
Division prior to recordation of the final map. Plans shall
include, but not be limited the following:
Design for Sinaloa Ave. shall include a minimum street
section of 20 feet from centerline of the right-of-way to
face of curb with City standard curb, gutter, and five (5)
foot sidewalk.
5. Construction of the public improvements, including the
installation of utilities, may be deferred to allow
recording of the final map. Deferral of the public
improvements shall require the recording of a Deferred
Improvement Agreement and the posting of appropriate
securities guaranteeing that the work will be completed
prior to occupancy of any unit on the lot.
6. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100 percent
Performance Bond and a 100 percent Labor and Material Bond
until construction is accepted and by a 10 percent
Maintenance Bond, or other suitable guarantees approved by
the Director of Public Works until one year after
construction approval.
7. Public improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Fire Department to verify compliance with Condition #6
of the Precise Plan prior to recording the final map.
8. Sewer improvement plans shall require approval from the
Public Works Department prior to recording of the final map.
All newly created lots shall be connected to public sewer.
All annexation fees in effect at the time of recordation
shall be paid for the newly formed lots prior to recording
the map.
9. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Public
Works Department for all work to be done within the public
right-of-way prior to the start of construction. Applicant
shall sign an inspection agreement, guaranteeing that the
work shall be done and inspections paid for, prior to the
start of public works construction. The construction of
these improvements, as directed by the encroachment permit,
may be deferred per condition #5 above.
10. Parcels 3 and 4 shall have no direct access to Sinaloa Ave.
Access to the lots shall be from the common access road.
Relinquishment of access rights shall be shown on the final
map.
11. A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the
City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each
parcel at the time it is first conveyed. A note to this
affect shall appear on the final map.
12. Prior to the recording of the final map, a soils
investigation as required by the Subdivision Map Act shall
be submitted, recommending corrective actions to prevent
structural damage. The date of such reports, the name of
the engineer, and the location where the reports are on file
shall be noted on the final map.
13. The applicant shall make the following offers of dedication
to the City:
a. 25 feet from centerline of right-of-way to property
line along Sinaloa Ave.
b. The offers of dedication shall also include public
utility easements.
C. All offers of dedication shall be recorded prior to or
simultaneous to the recordation of the final map.
14. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the
approved tentative map and compliance with all conditions
set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval
in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot
Division Ordinance prior to recordation.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
created by a registered civil engineer or licensed
land surveyor as required by the Land Surveyor' s Act and
the Subdivision Map Act. Monuments set within any road
right-of-way shall conform to City standard M-1.
b. Pursuant to Section 66497 of the Subdivision Map Act the
engineer or surveyor shall notify the City Engineer in
writing that the monuments have been set.
C. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
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.
16. Landscape plans shall require approval by the Community
Development Department prior to recording of the map.
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-5
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting date: 5/22/90
From: Michael Hicks, Fire Chief�J/�
SUBJECT:
Weed abatement contract - Bid #90-6
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend awarding of contract for hand work and tractor work to
the low bidder, Jack R. Bridwell .
BACKGROUND:
Bids for the weed abatement contract were opened 4/30/90, by
Cindy Wilkins , Secretary to the City Manager. As indicated on
the attached bid summary sheet, four bids were submitted.
The low bidder for tractor work was Jack R. Bridwell , bidding
$28 . 50 per hour/$15 . 00 per half hour.
Low bid for hand work was from Jack R. Bridwell , bidding $16 .00
per hour/$8. 50 per half hour.
Mr. Bridwell has previous experience as the weed abatement
contractor for Morro Bay and is highly recommended by their
Public Works Department. His equipment is more than adequate for
the job and appears to be kept in good condition.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are budgeted annually to cover costs of the weed abatement
program and fees are recovered through assessments on property
tax bills .
•
BID SUMMARY
TO: Mile dicks
Fire Chief
FROM: Lee Dayka
City Clerk.
BID NO. 90-6
OPENED 4/30/90 10:00 A.M.
PROJECT: 1990 Weed Abatement Program
The following bids were received and opened as follows:
Bidder 's Name Part I Part II Special
and Address (Large Parcel ) (Hand Work) Terms
Curley ' s Light Tractor 35. 00/hr- . No Bid *hourly
Service 25.00/ 1/2 hr . rate is PSR
P. O. Box 316 TRACTOR
Templeton, Chi 93465
Jack R. Bridwell 28.50/hr . 16.00/hr . none 0
11600 Viego Camino 15.00/ 1 /2 hr . 8.50/ 1 /2 hr .
Atascadero , CA 93422
Young Bros . Construction 32.00/hr . 17.50/hr- . none
P.D. Boy, 1176 18.00/ 1 /2 hr . 10. 00/ 1 /2 hr .
Atascadero , CA 93423
B&H Communications, Inc . 40.00/hr . 75. 00/hr . none
P.O. Box 92 30. 00/ 1 /2 hr . 55. 00/ 1 /2 hr .
Santa Margarita, CA
93453
00
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A_6
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 5/22/90
File No: ZC 8-90
From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director Af--)
SUBJECT:
Proposed adoption of ordinance No. 206 to approve a Planned
Development Overlay Zone (PD7 ) . (7955 Sinaloa Avenue - Charles
Voorhis II/Richard Mitsuoka)
BACKGROUND:
On May 8, 1990, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the
above-referenced subject. upon review, Ordinance No. 206 was
approved on first reading.
RECOMMENDATION:
• 1 ) Adoption of Ordinance No. 206 on second reading to reflect the
same vote as occurred at the May 8th City Council meeting.
HE :ps
Attachment: Ordinance No. 206
•
ORDINANCE NO. 206
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 7955 SINALOA
FROM RMF/16 TO RMF/16 (PD7)
(ZC 14-89: Voorhis/Volbrecht Surveys)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
—WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have- a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on April 3, 1990 and has recommended approval of Zone
Change 14-89.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows: •
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonius development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be
reasonably achieved through existing development
standards or processing requirements. e
Ordinance No. 206
7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for requested modifications.
Section 2. Zoning Map.
Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as
shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Lot 32 of Block HA; Atascadero Colony
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and
effect at 12: 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ORDINANCE NO. 206
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, Acting City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
t
EXHIBIT A
-� CITY OF ATS r-CADE;��
1\
O ORDINANCE NO 206
n uc COLtif.vfUNITY DEVELOPM NT
�..� DEPAR7XfENT
PHI SOMOR
dK
1
RIM RSF•Z
6)
oa3
4
CA
F-0 EL •g4pQ I�• ,
//1 tom✓/ /
K '
co
ass r
'R
,CR
a
N 4S"DF
1
f
4
� � Z
t
O �
1) �
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-7
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 5/22/90
File No: ZC 8-90
From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT :
Proposed adoption of Ordinance No. 207 to approve a Planned
Development overlay Zone (PD7 ) in the Residential Multiple Family
10/Flood Hazard Overlay (RMF-10) (FH) zone. (11455 Viejo Camino -
Larry Van Gundy (Joseph Boud and Associates)
BACKGROUND :
On May 8, 1990, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the
above-referenced subject. Upon review, Ordinance No. 207 was
approved on first reading.
• RECOMMENDATION:
1 ) Adoption of Ordinance No. 207 on second reading.
HE:ps
Attachment: Ordinance No. 207
•
ORDINANCE NO. 207
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 23 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 11455 VIEJO
CAMINO FROM RMF/10 (FH) TO RMF/10 (FH) (PD7)
(ZC 13-89: Van Gundy/Boud)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent
with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the
California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and -
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on April 17, 1990 and has recommended approval of Zone
Change 13-89.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows: is
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element.
3. The .iproposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
4. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements is warranted to promote orderly and
harmonius development.
5. Modification of development standards or processing
requirements will enhance the opportunity to best
utilize special characteristics of an area and will
have a beneficial effect on the area.
6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be
reasonably achieved through existing development
standards or processing requirements.
Ordinance No.
7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to
compensate for requested modifications.
Section 2. Zoning Map.
Map number 23 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of
Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department
is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as
shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of
this ordinance by reference.
Lot 12 and 13, Block 67; Atascadero Colony
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and
effect at 12: 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, Acting City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: A-8
CITY OF ATASCADERO
THROUGH: Ray Windsor , City "tanager MEETING DATE:
FROM: Andrew Takata, Director
Department of Parks . Recreation and Coo
SUBJECT:
CONTRACT - SUSAN BEATIE - CREATION OF BRONZE SCULPTURE -- CHARLES
PADDOCK ZOO
RECOMMENDATION:
• =nter into the attached acreement for the creation of a life-
sized bronze tiger sculpture with Susan Head e.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
The City Council , at it ' s previous meting , approved the concept
of the creation of a tiger sculpture to ne placed at the entrance
of Charles Paddock Coo with no cost to the City.
Mrs . Beane is presently activeiy raising funds to deft-ay -osis
for the sculpture.
The at'..ached is an aoreement between Susan Beate and t'-'e City of
Atascadero for theJ creation of the life-sized b�-cnze ti =er
sculpture.
A.Ti I . K v
tigerl
•
AGREEMENT FOR CREATION OF SCULPTURE
FOR CHARLES PADDOCK ZOO
AGREEMENT dated as of this day of ,
19901 between SUSAN J. BEATIE and the CITY OF ATASCADERO.
WHEREAS SUSAN J. BEATIE is a recognized professional artist
(hereinafter referred to as "Artist") ; and M
WHEREAS the Artist shall create a work of art, namely, a
life-sized bronze tiger sculpture for the entrance to the Charles
Paddock Zoo (hereinafter referred to as the "Sculpture") , in the
Artist's own unique style, and compensation shall be made to the
Artist for said Sculpture as set forth below; and
WHEREAS the parties wish to have the creation of this work
of art governed by the mutual obligations, covenants, and
conditions herein,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals
and the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth and other valuable
considerations, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION;. COMPENSATION TO ARTIST
The schedule for completion of the Sculpture is as
follows:
March, 1990: Sculpture armature made by Cyberware.,
Monterey, California; Artist to begin
work on Sculpture
November, 1990: Artist to finish master model and
begin molds for casting Sculpture
December, 1990: Artist to begin casting Sculpture
June, 1991: Estimated completion and dedication •
of Sculpture
1
The Artist shall use her best efforts to adhere to the above
schedule, but the Artist shall incur no liability under this
Agreement for delays which may occur. The estimated completion
date shall be extended in the event of delays caused by events
beyond the control of the Artist, . including but not limited to
fire, theft, strikes, shortages of materials and Acts of God.
Time shall not be considered of the essence with respect to the
completion of the Sculpture.
The parties are aware that Artist is, in addition to the
creation of the Sculpture, coordinating the fund-raising efforts
to finance the Sculpture. The parties also understand that the
Artist has created custom-framed, hand-cast paper sculptures,
embodying the design of the Sculpture, in a limited edition of
1, 000, to be used in these fund-raising efforts. In addition, up
to one hundred (100) additional prints may be sold as "artist's
proofs, " and a portion of the profits from such prints will be
allocated by the Artist to defray the costs of the Sculpture.
Funds raised by Artist shall be received and administered
according to the Trust Account Administration Agreement executed
on January 20, 1990, by the Artist and Trustees Richard J.
Chafin, Stan Cherry, and Bonnie Wilkins, attached hereto as
Exhibit A and hereby incorporated by reference. Artist's
compensation for the creation, installation, and promotion of the
Sculpture shall be as set forth in that Agreement.
2 . INSURANCE, SHIPPING, AND INSTALLATION.
The Artist agrees to maintain liability, fire, and
2
theft insurance for the Sculpture and bear any other risk of loss
until the Sculpture's delivery to the Charles Paddock Zoo. The
cost of said coverage shall be paid from the Trust Account
described at Paragraph 1. In the event of loss caused by fire or
theft, the insurance proceeds shall be placed in the Trust
Account described at Paragraph .1 for use by the Artist to
recommence the making of the Sculpture. Upon completion of the
Sculpture, it shall be shipped to the Charles Paddock Zoo, the
expenses for which shall be paid from the Trust Account.
The City shall assume all responsibility for insurance
coverage on the Sculpture from the time of installation forward.
3. TERMINATION.
This Agreement shall automatically terminate on the
death of the Artist, provided, however, that the Artist's estate
shall retain all compensation paid to Artist pursuant to
Paragraph 1.
4. OWNERSHIP.
The Artist shall retain all rights of ownership and
have returned to the Artist the preliminary designs, all
incidental works made in the creation of the Sculpture, including
the bronze molds, and all copies and reproductions thereof and of
the Sculpture itself, provided, however, that in the event of
termination pursuant to Paragraph 3, the City shall have a right
to keep copies of the preliminary design for the sole purpose of
completing the Sculpture, at which time said copies shall be
returned to the Artist's estate.
The Artist shall also retain all rights of ownership in the
3
original artwork used for the paper sculptures described in
Paragraph 1.
5. COPYRIGHTS.
The Artist reserves all rights of reproduction and all
copyrights in the Sculpture, the preliminary design and any
incidental works made in the creation of the Sculpture. The
Artist shall be listed as the sole author and owner of said
copyrights on any Copyright Registrations obtained on the
Sculpture, preliminary design, and incidental works. Copyright
notice in the name of the Artist shall appear on the Sculpture,
and the Artist shall receive authorship credit in connection with
the Sculpture or any reproductions thereof.
All rights set forth above shall apply with equal force and
. effect to the original paper sculptures created by the Artist for
fund-raising purposes as described at Paragraph 1.
It is the understanding of the parties that neither the
bronze sculpture nor the paper sculptures are works for hire, nor
are they commissioned works as defined by Section 101 (2) of the
Copyright Act of 1976. Artist is an independent contractor, and
shall not be considered an employee of the City for any purpose.
6. PERMISSIONS.
The City gives to the Artist permission to use the
City's name, along with likenesses of the Charles Paddock zoo, in
all forms and media and in all manners, including but not limited
to exhibition, display, advertising, trade and editorial uses.
7. LICENSED RIGHTS.
a. The Artist hereby grants to City non-exclusive
4
right to manufacture, sell, distribute, and display derivative
works based upon the Sculpture, with the exception of bronze
sculptures of any size.
b. Artist hereby reserves all rights not specifically
granted by this licensing provision.
C. City agrees to credit Artist as the author and
owner of the Sculpture copyright on all product labels and
promotional materials.
d. City shall print, stamp, or affix such notices of
copyright and/or trademark which Artist may from time to time
designate on each of the licensed products, each package or
container used in connection therewith and all advertisements
pertaining thereto.
e. Artist hereby represents to City that the Sculpture •
design is original with Artist; that Artist is the sole and
exclusive owner thereof; that it is free, clear, and
unencumbered; that to Artist's knowledge, City's use of said
Sculpture for derivative works in accordance with the provisions
and conditions of this agreement will not infringe the copyright
or any other right of any person whatsoever; and that Artist has
the full power to enter into this license agreement with the
City.
f. The non-exclusive license granted under this
paragraph shall commence upon installation of the Sculpture, and
shall continue for a period of one year, unless renewed by the
parties pursuant to the Option to Renew License set forth in
Exhibit B to this agreement. Upon termination of this license
5
agreement for any reason all rights granted herein shall
immediately revert to Artist.
g. All proceeds from Sales by City of derivative works
pursuant to this license agreement shall go to the San Luis
Obispo County Zoological Society for the benefit of improvements
of the Charles Paddock Zoo.
8. NON-DESTRUCTION, ALTERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
The City agrees that the City will not intentionally
destroy, damage, alter, modify or change the Sculpture in any way
whatsoever. If any alteration of any kind occurs after receipt
by the City, whether intentional or accidental and whether done
by the City or others, the Sculpture shall no longer be
represented to be the Sculpture of the Artist without the
Artist's written consent. The City agrees to see that the
Sculpture is properly maintained.
9. REPAIRS.
All repairs and restorations which are made during the
lifetime of the Artist shall have the Artist's approval. To the
extent practical, the Artist shall be given the opportunity to
accomplish said repairs and restorations at a reasonable fee.
10. NON-ASSIGNABILITY.
Neither party hereto shall have the right to assign
this Agreement without the prior written consent 'of the other
party. The Artist shall, however, retain the right to assign
monies due to the Artist under the terms of this Agreement.
11. HEIRS AND ASSIGNS.
This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties
6
hereto, their heirs, successors, assigns and personal .
representatives, and references to the Artist and the City shall
include their heirs, successors, assigns and personal
representatives.
12 . INTEGRATION.
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding
between the parties. Its terms can be modified only by an
instrument in writing signed by both parties.
13 . WAIVERS.
A waiver of any breach of any of the provisions of this
Agreement shall not be construed as a continuing waiver of other
breaches of the same or other provisions hereof.
14. NOTICES AND CHANGES OF ADDRESS.
All notices shall be sent to the Artist at the
following address: 10025 E1 Camino Real #8, Atascadero, CA 93422.
and to the City at the following address:
Each party shall give written notification of any change of
address prior to the date of said change.
15. GOVERNING LAW.
This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the
State of California.
Artist:
City of Atascadero
By:
7
EXHIBIT B
OPTION TO RENEW LICENSE
SUSAN J. BEATIE, Artist, hereby grants to City the option to
extend the term of the non-exclusive license granted in the
agreement dated , 1990 for an additional
period of year(s) from the expiration of the initial term
hereof, upon the same terms and conditions as therein contained.
Said option shall be exercisable not later than thirty (30) days
prior to the expiration of the then current period. Said option
shall not be exercisable unless the City has theretofore duly
performed its obligations hereunder. The exercise of any option
by the City shall not be deemed to be a waiver by it of any prior
breach or default on the part of Artist hereunder.
SUSAN J. BEATIE
Artist
8
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-1
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 5/22/90
Via: Henry Engen, Community Development Director A4.
From: Lisa Schicker, City Arborist
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a request to remove thirteen native heritage trees
( ranging in size from 20"- 54" dbh) and eighteen others (ranging in
size from 4" - 19" dbh) for the purposes of driveway construction at
14260 Morro Road by Jim Rockstad. The oaks are located in the path of
a driveway to access four buildable lots .
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the arborist' s report, the condition of the trees and the
• existing Tree Ordinance, recommend approval of some of the removals
with two to one replacements on site. Please see additional comments
and details in analysis section of this report.
BACKGROUND:
The Tree Ordinance specifies that live native trees 20" or greater dbh
(measured four foot above grade) are deemed heritage trees and cannot
be removed unless approved by the City Council following a public
hearing.
This site was subject to wildfire three or four years ago which
damaged many of the mature oak trees and shrubs located here.
Evidence of the fire remains in the charred and blackened branches of
tree remaining vegetation.
The site has been posted and the center line of the proposed driveway
has recently been staked. Trees have been marked with flagging tape
and numbered with white-faced tags . The trees were inspected by ISA
certified arborist D .O. Denney and the City Arborist on several
occasions .
STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
This project has been reviewed for environmental compliance by the
• Planning Department and California Fish and Game. This project has also
been reviewed for overall compliance by the Planning Division, the
Engineering Division, Fire Department and Cal Trans .
•
ANALYSIS:
Because this lot has been subdivided into four buildable lots , they
must be accessed in some way. One driveway to access all four lots is
certainly more site sensitive than four individual driveways, but
because of the sensitive topography of this site in combination with
additional City requirements, namely Fire and Engineering access
standards , trees will need to come out.
I visited the site with Mr. Rockstad to discuss possible alternatives
to the proposed alignment. we explored several options , all of which
appear to be infeasible. Each alternative is briefly discussed below.
1 . Change alignment. (This site is quite steep, has gas and oil
pipelines with easements and blue line drainageways to avoid if
possible; to change the alignment would not result in the ability to
avoid many of these factors or stay under the 15% slope requirement for
gravel roads . )
2 . Narrow the driveway. (The Engineering and Fire Departments have
already placed their constraints on this road which define minimum
curve radii (381 ) and minimum width (20 ' pavement with 4 ' shoulders-
Henry Engen, as Environmental Coordinator;has already granted design
relief on shoulder width from 4 ' to 2 ' width) . The driveway has
already been redesigned several times to comply with these
requirements . Unless Council is willing to override these established
standards , this is not an option.
3 . Use the property to the east (for some of the driveway) to avoid
some of the trees . (An easement exists to allow a small portion of the
road on the neighboring property to avoid trees - the property has been
sold and an additional easement is not an option. This option may have
avoided endangering 4 trees that are not going to be removed anyway. )
4 . Use an existing road to the west of the property to construct
access to the current building site. (That side of the property is very
steep and the driveway would also be too steep. )
5 . Reroute the road around the back ( instead of the front) of the
proposed building sites . (This option would remove far more trees that
are much healthier than the ones that are proposed for removal . )
6 . Locate the building sites and access drive farther down the hill .
(This option would be a more visually obtrusive view for travelers on
Highway 41 and noisier for the residents-to-be. The current proposed
building sites are only slightly visible from the road.
Most of the trees that are proposed for removal are severely damaged by
fire - but they are not dead. Evidence of life appears in the form of
epicormic growth; a leafing out along the branches ( instead of the eno
of branches ) , which usually signifies that a tree is on its "last leg"
Again, evidence of the fire is apparent on the blackened trunks and
end branches of most of these trees .
After walking the alignment several times and inspecting the condition
of these trees, I am inclined to say that the City would benefit long
term by allowing most of the removals and requesting replacements . It
was also apparent to me that some of the trees proposed for removal on
the original application may not need to come out and that additional
trees may be endangered by cut and fill; I would like to request that
these be included in calculating the replacement requirements .
Mr. Rockstad has also proposed to construct retaining walls to save
four trees along the edges of the proposed drive - they are healthier
specimens that were not as damaged by the fire.
D.O. Denney' s original report is slightly confusing when coming up with
a final of trees to be removed. We both visited the site several times
and agreed that initial field work had been flawed because the center
line of the road had not been staked. I have marked the copy of
Denney' s report for my differences with his recommendations . The final
tally of trees recommended for removal is different than his original
report:
Heritage Tree Removal : 5 trees to be removed ( 13 on first
application)
Other Tree Removal : 10 1, 18 on first application)
Endangered Trees : 10 (None on the original application. Instead
of removing these trees initially, I recommend that they remain
for now to see if they might survive. These trees are not
directly in the path of the drive but may be affected by
construction and/or declining health caused by the fire . If these
trees die within the next three years, they could be removed and
replacements would be required to replace them) .
Recommended Replacements : All trees to be removed and all trees
that are listed as endangered that do not survive for three years
shall be replaced at a same species 2 : 1 ratio.
Please refer to the report for specifics on each tree. If the Council
approves my report and recommendations, I shall provide the applicant
with a revised map designating trees to be removed, trees that are
considered endangered and trees to be protected.
It would be appropriate to plant the new trees in areas where culverts
are installed or on the new cut and fill areas to help protect the
newly formed banks from eroding. Hydroseeding these sloped banks with
native grasses and/or shrub species would also help stabilize these
areas .
The applicant shall provide the City with a signed statement that
attests to the planting of these trees which should be planted within
the first year, for the trees to be initially removed, or first three
years , for the trees that are endangered and do not survive. Records
will be kept in the office of the City Arborist.
Attachments : Vicinity Map
Location Map (showing all four buildable lots)
Site Plan of Proposed Driveway and One Residence
Arborist (Denney' s) Report with City Arborist
Comments on Specific Trees
Replanting Guidelines
Comments Regarding Plans and Tree Protection
Fencing
cc Sim Rockstad
i
FC y �c
SA '
D RD
D
Its
0 0 ► wk
J
ITS
' Z
Rpq
p
41
VICINITY M NO 5GALE
�-er►d�Ti� '�e�mov�,(,S
Jim
o h0
Z�
h �
T
i
1 / /Q ,.6 3►j Se9N
06.
Uj
0411
a .
cp eW 1Jll `��JJ Qoo
• ��� �„�_ � icy• « g 3
117; 21. 1
1A 4
44
P,F{ Ell
cs
�#7=;ii ffis
Fi
:.fi•:a£ ,t+.i r!7 ` �iiSits,S.t
/� .-/ a •. _ F� ° --�_ � t: :¢:f:i.c:ti#.;a;;::�:=u�sdt@ int.
0/f\ � � � £til i,;il, `,_: r•#! .� r
/ u Sa3; �et:•- 2.
1 ,L. �!_g��a�._�\ :+ s x }Ii,�I7%£;,�F:;,.-i:,�Fi F•;2£lyF
N'
}�-- •�'�:� ::t:£:Fi #jai:e,l!%•£F!€Fii`�F�
T5 6
za-
kiffl
I ` a
++ I
• 1� u�a
Itt� F
` I
In
M1. it
1i77�i�
m �.II!-t•�j F!
.__ M�OG1p�NM
1 "S
fit, eQ tal.• 3� ee
",�=
Jaz= i
o / / fit ►"- :i 3 ii
� � r
i sr � •/i ¢ � R
E
a
111M s3
LS
\ }_" 0
y.�
101 Y •
06
rill
Vt fit lo
\lam• 't� `\` �\� ss s
C� if
-is rill
_ _
jj
� � • �� '� �� .l�li a� 11 ;\\•. \ i � ' � «eE) is = j s'i tic= j e�
;
t; . } i i sai
} `ll t
t +t
iN£il-[i
sF! aafl irf is} +i'eii
r i .t ii i!lti !
WIN t {
i;� s
°i ii i+f f i s lc:}ii M HIP j is Fl
t 1 -
• it
O
4C
spa^
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF .CONSULTING ARSORISTSt
^N FIELD REPORT
CASE LOCATION Fraction of Lot 32A "Portion of Block 80 CITY Atascadero
OWNER NAME Jim Rockstead
ADDRESS CITY
RES. PHONE ( ) BUS. PHONE ( 805 ) 434-367
AGENT NAME
ADDRESS CITY
RES. PHONE ( ) BUS. PHONE ( )
DAMAGE or ACCIDENT DATE TYPE OF DAMAGE
INSPECTION DATE WEATHER TEMP.
D. 0. Denney Certified Arborist #391
P.O. Box 3090
Paso Robles, CA 93447 C) .
The purpose of this report is to determine what impact development will have on
the oak trees along the road and in the area of the building site.
Contents : 1 . Special arborist notes on fire damage to many of the trees on
this project.
2. Vital statistics of trees affected by this project and recommen-
dations.
3. Photos of the trees to be removed.
4. Tree protection plan.
Special Notes:
This parcel of land has had several fires in the last five (5) years. Many of
the trees have been damaged beyond restoration. I am recommending the removal
of all the trees that create a liability. The tremendous heat from the fire
not only destroyed some of the inner tissue (cambium and phlom) but some of the
hollow trees acted as natural flumes. For the damaged trees that will be removed,
I am recommending replacement of these trees with five (5) gallon sizes of the
native species of oak trees. The instructions are as follows:
1 . The trees shall be planted according to modern arboriculture or landscape
practices.
2. A protective wire barrier will be put around the trees to protect them from .,
animals such as deer, cattle and etc.
3. They should be multched with a suitable watering table.
Consultation Report cont'd. Page 2
I am recommending the removal of twenty-nine (29) oak trees with a replacement
ratio of two (2) to one (1 ) for a total of 58 trees of five (5) gallon size
native species.
To simplify this report, I will abbreviate tree species. For proper identification,
refer to the key below:
Abbreviation Name: Common & Botanical
L.O. Live oak (Quercus agrifolia)
W.O. White oak (Quercus lobata)
B.O. Blue oak (Quercus douglasii )
S.O. Scrub oak (Quercus dumosa)
C.B. Calif. Bay (Umbellularia Californica)
All trees included in this inspection, are numbered with a white tag attached
to the tree, for location refer to tree satistics section. Refer to this section
also for size, identification and recommendations.
This inspection covers approximately forty (40) trees alon the road and in the
building site of this project. .
To allow space for building site and to remove the liability along the road, it
will require the removal of twenty-nine (29) trees.
Remember, this area was razed by fire and over 70% of these trees were damaged
beyond repair. Refer to Atascadero Fire Department for statistics.
The following trees listed, are to be removed :
1/5/6/10/14/16/17/18/19/21/24/25/28/29/30/31/33/34/35/36/37/38/39/40/41/42/43/44./45
(A+tl Fmboas} Re___
NO. SIZE SPECIESCONDITION _ RECOMMENDATION
enda fk w of
1 . 45" W.O. burnt bafi�dfh�'canopy mau �n poor (oa> removal ( nm�",' _) 'J I
2- 23" W.O. endana-M,4 good -�►� �
3. 4011 L.O. Fn,kI5f_ fair
CndanA=d-Wat(}ypraect poor remove lower 1m s
-5. 4b L.U. poor remove
L.O. # poor no) remove w�tn wall)
7. 18" L.O. poor remove lower limbs
8. 28" L.O. poor remove lower limbs
32L.U. poor
10. 24" , t poor no remove can pwkel vAt h re. .wa
. &,da, ri-ym4 -h fia lett fair
— -1Z. 4811L.O. Enclar e _ poor no no eeammenc�tfwn-G+uo►cl�h�M�,
__13 �18°71-2"M.�L 0:__. 1��,�., air
-- 14. 32" L.O. 1'�mo F? f (act.,, poor s� remove re da
15. 3 L-0. ---
f?r�rrore 1 poor ! �5, remove ire darner
_ e�.. � Jes�
,' U�ALCQtCS Cr�`"�^S 'MAdt.-�1/ � �T�D'1S� 111 Or�gq'1� i`CC0YY1rMA1GW��V►5
Consultation Report cont'd. Page 3
G+y Artmst . C rasm
NO. SIZE SPECIES CONDITION kQ0 RECOMMENDATION ----5'
19. 26" L.O. *cl poor (yip) remove +nE*in drtt, oY
fair
21 . 611 L.B. Poor C �� remove ma;HwAbf*wcwA4
22. 11 L.u. Tair '
23. 1811 B.D. fair
f poor remove
2 poor remove dnre
Woill
air
L.O.2211 A*.e�27. air
poor remove
snag) bad remove AamjjV
u _ hu remove
poor , to artrrrw
c
32. 17" B:U- "L.O. Fndaedl a i r
ji. FZ"-- � �g f'' esrefiluveto road
34. 12 A 406cv Por qrkK MUM in I-OaAW
35. 16" L.O. Qor►,Qdr Poor I,,fs �„ roady►'
36. 24" L.O. poor Iremove No+ p,.
b
,4poor remove
TJ�I. 48 L.U. poor remove
air remove
poor remove
42. _ 12" _ _L.O. poor remove
43. 1511 L.O. poor remove
�c Ida poor remove p&vjyj(jtj4Ajjc
poor remove rdWe!
1
(U1
I-McSh I,- Emo�j - 15 (5 heriiTAIC)
need +n 12,,
re dkd or`f ice-)
(5 hcxt )
TREE PROTECTION PLAN
In mnsl. rasps when building, we change the complete environment around a tree.
It: survived very well in it's natural state. Vie sever its roots which are
needed for anchorage and absorption of water arid nutrients. Vie pave and compact
the soil around them, hindering the oxygen arid water supply to the roots. Yes, you
purchase the property because of the beautiful tree scape only to witness many
of your trees declining soon after or even some years after you have built your
h(wne. Who is to blame? Did the Architect, City Planner, the Arborist, Contractor
add to the demise of the tree?
Was your building plan condusive to the impact on the trees on your property? Your
City or- Cnrrrrty f fanner have codes arid regulations to follow and public pressure
to preserve and protect your trees.
Even trees that are in excellent health sometimes cannot tolerate the transition
from natural (growing in a desirable natural condition) to semi-natural (sever
the rents, compact the soil and build within the dripline ) to the unnatural (paved
all the xray around the trees causing disturbances in air arid water exchanges in
soil and many other changes).
l•13ny changes can take place in the soil during construction. Physical changes may
have effects on aeration and moisture. Changes in grade, new paving, trenching,
soil compaction, can all affect the soils ability to support life.
Almosl, all building arid landscape development will involve some grading arid exca-
vation. The consequences of these changes can sometimes be detrimental to trees.
Soil aeration is a critical factor. Roots must receive adequate oxygen. Trees
can also suffer from moisture related problems, either not enough or too much.
flow that you are aware that trees are sensitive living things, and we all must put
measrrr•es into effect that will protect them.
Protective measure needs to be applied :
Yes lfo
_ During construction, trees on the property outside the immediate
corrstr•uction zone will be barricaded off with bright color flagging.
No parking, storage of materials arid dumping of excavated or
building material will be permitted.
_ frees within 2-10l feet of the construction zone will be protected
by installing a H—glrt colored protective fence (temporary) around
the drip line area of the trees.
►
frees within r� feet of construction zone will have their trunks
barricaded to minimize damage caused by construction equipment.
No parking of equipment, storage of equipment, disposing of gasoline,
l:aint, thinner or anyother foreign material will be permitted in and .
ar•ourrd this property unless so noted in report.
free i'r•otection Plan cont'd. `page 2
YOB No
1r•enching for utilities is required. Line will run feet
-- from base of tree. Hand dig and tunnel under or abov je amam or
anchorage roots. if a major root is encountered in direct line
of utility, a Certified Arborist will be consulted before severing
it.
ho grade changes will be made around the tree unless (1 ) a protec-
tive measure is applies, (2) and it is so noted in the Certified
Arborist report.
Factors have been used to determine the tree condition before con-
structiorr begins.
This report has been reviewed by all people involved in this pro-
ject. Diligent care will be applied to protect the trees.
w f,,, � " r *� q2}��Q"�I�y� rs;r�-•-M tiff 1s,r � ;�;���?!rf � ,�j i�.:
1 •.1 � i.{a• � i.• � y� {c�a.. .� �'_„� .+� !t�`�.+a n.M. ',.y4w,r�r 1j 1�`y`;
tc _� v• - �,. r.+ .��F�,A;'?� r ,. .� ,, Cott.. �j", ra .,��,
'•i. '�,� '�! a-1 f Y..���� 011.. a-sb"�..w a^ r�. .�r•A r' ry'1► � '����.i '.a
�'%. `. �,.•.a . tea. f s Y�y-s... �-'.
,t. � a s.,�k.7 � {.j' f •.��'r-�-�'' t R ,,t ass
IL
3 �. r . � 'r•s�i:, �"�f+$�i moi,. ,, , rte- '4 ' -,
e. t t• 1 o-
�Jy��d.
Jr
14
1.
r �
�`,� � f�'"' k' M Jr, f",z, '*{a,`y}J� •r �.r rC � 'Y Tom,a a� t'2' .'.
r �- a'�►! i� �'�'�.�„«�•t•..��; ''"'L�T„i A"�;.t�,•��r;� `.si � d ;r ,],r�!".Ik!Js,
�) ;(,� 1 ✓_ , P �!!j -f+;. t '3 kv �, '.f .s►r'� 7�t-'�•- � ��'� � � /�n,t, r� 1 t' :i...
�,-� -f! ) it . �• t5 ��Y �
1 ter` :
r.l., •. 1 ♦, (Jrl � •fir ,\.` ��1
•ekl JA
VSA, `
ds a l `1 ,
. G` ; �'� :, 5.'14y1•�u��a, ,�r�' S �`t .,; ` •� •'�:i�c _i ty � �i
h' s •,ti{ '. a,' r f
f
t a �ti., ill.. _1.� i+ � .� � rl�+ , �l '^e� •� 'i
' ♦. •�yice ft �' u{ k ,i
• e• b iii t�y}� �e'!- ,_ nr �j' j\
KA
tet. �i >*: ? 3 r �S 'Sti ' ;�' J. {, •�` t � �_S
r
1 ,
It_,
VL
21
ri
AL
Sj
1 ��•� alp.�`*�-;-t �`�i�T� ,.�f3J�' Vii,...'- +��.-�'" �.'
•' '+ _}Y '( 'iJj, ",�it
71 \• s > '
w • _�y) s 1
y � +
�s'' ` �� +•�,. � � �t`'- R• ' !� -1 rite
•f i !r \ - V w-� y - orf'y� �1} .• , �-.
,
k
e �
C
41
;let f .
�i
•. �� � _.. tea`°. �: �
- '.7"���� f� ;C' F'li lj• �6 �wcri�G�r�!".4� '3
�"4�L' � �iw►,��•- r s'Tom.'L `+,h; g ���
vin
ti-� ♦ .rqN i �, 1� •',� 'i IYjr
-�`{�'-.:�`'; ♦�„a �. ♦'Syr- ,.,, ;' S
C _ ` iiiii% .S Ti. .`+i�♦orb{. i { � �
ii-�j. � �F.(n1,�j♦f,
x.
WIG
Y oil
wi I
1_f
AN
Zv
lot
VA
,� � til f Y i yN{ .' •� �'•� r
y t ,
•, ., �• t�+ .� �� E (, fY�CRt.,a ;t .� ��,,i. ( ,fit R� �`r
,` f Y .Y w.. ► .�t r ;( ) t>• fes'' 't. , .4➢ � 4: ♦ h" }i�.
yl I
FE
,`}�'.. ".`7Y"ti �1 ,,�/' i 211 � _•,1 , i 'y � 4� *�'�,,� �p}�{
< j1Jxt-'
IYJ
fill
�., _ �`"?e W,a.• � ,/{;,�.��.'�j..�t Ss r. -�f�,��, ;j�-�'�-«�;ii�t�S�sss�"'rrr„+++, a
.A � ��,-. 1-r r � \� �P � t •"`d.it'f1a r.c
. li� ��) 7 r �A. •� - qqq
Jr
�'• t� i+FI?' 777
TZ,� , 1� 6 'i' t •Y "7}•fit kL �At�.^!Fly.'.
fer
tor-
d .rr
p Ipr
�/ lrf' 1�ti��� i' 4 ► 4 ,
yo
IL
16
s �
r eK lF�.i-..- �. °�i-*���� �i jet- � , tA. t.""►
r' ` iJ/ tS ylisi•'i ,k'(��.`" ����`,°T�!1Y,.re;
r -
,
t tf 1� .iTp n f
��iy1�'a ,'s � i y7� }\'1 1�,� �{ 1 *„•y t Z+11 Y i' ��7/(,1►
�.:`�:_�,��`'�r�,�- F:,��" .���;'qF/ice � x ,:r� f r' _ + ;•� ,2;:�:� �r
ti d
0,
��,Ao.
Ow- ri ,•^ jj i` of
' '+s �- •o :�•'1' ytA• •'a+;.• ,,`4 �{ �-- f���.`i:14 �� �i �J r;' ,.' •'^3. �} 71
•`c 1/����'�t:� �n♦a71� �3r:f'� 1 s°,r'�d _ � k _ i": � +���' � ��y"S, .s, 'y 7 y, _,k�, �, 1 r� 1-
�< • i �4r 1 �1M tr t , �( Rlc s �<,� t` jco � l 7� }
ll .n
`'fit ^ a,t � •L
r •
��{ud�►Mona
REPLANTING GUIDELINES
I . Choose 15 gallon - sized native trees (either Q. douglasii, Q.
agrifolia or Umbellularia californica) for the trees to be
removed.
3 . Inspect the trees for encircling roots (roots that wrap
around the pot have a poorer chance of straightening out and
growing right in the ground.
4 . When planting, make sure that the roots have been untangled,
straightened and loosened as much as possible.
5 . Plant in a hole at least twice as big as the pot, and use native
soils in the hole.
6 . Provide the tree with deep watering - meaning a slow, gradual and
long watering (which encourages downward root growth to anchor
the tree) . Provide one deep watering in late spring and two in
the summer. If drip irrigation is used, do long, slow watering,
applying 10-20 gallons over a three-four hour period.
7 . Protect the young trees from wildlife or vandalism with some kind
of fencing - both above and below ground if possible; welded
wire fencing of at least 4 feet in height above ground and one-
two feet below ground (I can provide some specs if needed) .
It would be appropriate to plant these new trees in areas wher
culverts are installed to help protect the newly formed banks fro
je
eroding. Hydroseeding these sloped banks with native grasses would
also help stabilize these areas.
The applicant shall provide the City with a signed statement that
attests to the planting of these trees which should be planted within
the first year (for trees removed now) and first three years (for
replacing the endangered trees that do not survive) . Records will be
kept in the office of the City Arborist.
Roc� I
Comments on Plans and Tree Protection Notes
On the plans and notes that I reviewed, there were a couple of
comments I would like to make . The tree protection notes and specs
mentioned on this plan also do not adequately protect the trees or
comply with the standards set forth in the Tree ordinance. The
ordinance states that tree protection fencing should extend and
encircle the dripline of the trees, not just the base or trunk of the
tree. I did notice, however, that most of the trees to be protected
fall within the cut and fill lines on the banks of the road; it is not
known for sure if these trees will even survive; it has been known that
a grade change of no more than 2" can sometimes kill trees . If at all
possible, the soil within the dripline of the trees should not be
disturbed, even in these cut and fill areas . Therefore, all of these
trees that appear endangered by grading shall require a written
agreement to provide replacement trees that guarantees that if the
endangered trees don' t make it, they will be compensated for. According
to the ordinance, if these trees die within the next three years , the
builders are to be held responsible and be required to replace any
trees that did not make it. In regards to tree protection, then, three
recommendations :
1 . Identify and label all trees to be protected (within 20 ' of
construction, including areas to be graded) and delineate the areas to
be fenced on the plan (most of this has been done)
2 . Change Plan Note 16 (page 1) specifying tree protection to
comply with the ordinance requirements (should be a 5 ' high fence at
I.-he dripline of the trees (or at the line of encroachment with the
road) - fence types suggested include welded wire, snow fence, chain
link or safety fence - all staked so as not to fall in on themselves or
the tree) .
3 . Require a written agreement between City and Applicant to have
Applicant replace the trees to be removed and the endangered trees ( if
they die during a three year period) in the cut and fill areas of the
proposed road.
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-2
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting date: 5/22/90
From: Michael Hicks, Fire Chiefo/w-
SUBJECT:
Weed abatement public hearing
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend action by motion, i .e. , I move that the Fire Chief or
his authorized representatives are ordered to abate the nuisance
of noxious or dangerous weeds on the lots identified in
Resolution No. 35-90 . "
• BACKGROUND:
As part of the weed abatement process, the City Council is
required to hear objections to the proposed removal of weeds,
rubbish, and other combustible material . This hearing allows any
affected property owner to protest the proposed abatement of
hazards on his property.
After hearing the objections, Council overrules or allows any
objections . This can be done by resolution or motion. I
recommend action by motion, i .e. , "I move we (allow -- overrule)
the objection to the proposed removal of noxious or dangerous
weeds on the lots identified. "
After disposing of the objections , or if no objections are made ,
the Council orders the abatement of the nuisance. This also can
be done by motion or resolution.
As of this date we have received no written protests.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Costs involved in administering this program are recovered
• through the administrative fee charged to parcels abated by the
City contractor.
MEETING AGENDA
DATES�O ITEM I .-.
•
RESOLUTION NO. 59-90
A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
EXPRESSING SUPPORT OF "PUBLIC SCRUTINY OF
UNSAFE CONDITIONS AT ATASCADERO STATE HOSPITAL"
WHEREAS, The Associated Unions of Atascadero (AUA) have
declared the months of May and June, 1990, to be "A Time for
Public Scrutiny of Unsafe Conditions at Atascadero State
Hospital" ; and
WHEREAS, the recent murder of a hospital employee, who was
also an Atascadero citizen, underscores the need for increased
public scrutiny of safety conditions at Atascadero State Hospi-
tal; and
WHEREAS, a large segment of Atascadero State Hospital em-
ployees are also Atascadero residents; and
WHEREAS, the citizens of Atascadero recognize that the State
Hospital payroll is a major factor in the City' s economic pic-
ture; and
• WHEREAS, State Assemblyman Eric Seastrand has called for
Legislative investigations into safety conditions inside the
hospital;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of Atascadero, State of
California, is pleased to join the Associated Unions of Atasca-
dero in supporting Assemblyman Seastrand' s call for Legislative
investigations into safety conditions at Atascadero State Hospi-
tal; and
FURTHERMORE, the City Council joins the Associated Unions of
Atascadero in proclaiming the months of May and June, 1990 , "A
Time for Public Scrutiny of Unsafe Conditions at Atascadero State
Hospital" .
On motion by Councilmember seconded by Coun-
cilmember the foregoing resolution is hereby
adopted on the following vote:
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
•
RESOLUTION NO. 59-90 ( cont' d)
ATTEST:
LEE DAYF.A, City Clerk ROLLIN W. DEXTER, Mayor
City of Atascadero, CA
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney
•
2
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-2
From: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 5/22/90
SUBJECT:
Transitional Housing for the Homeless
DISCUSSION:
Following your last meeting and conceptual approval of the
above project, a number of residents have expressed concern
about the impact this will have on the neighborhood. On Wednes-
day, May 16th, Mayor Dexter, Councilwoman Mackey, Henry Engen and
• myself met with about 25 concerned individuals and 8-9 represen-
tatives of the various social agencies who would be involved in
the project. As a result of the meeting and the obvious degree
of negative emotion generated by the project and its location, it
was indicated that the matter would be placed on your next agenda
for possible reconsideration through means of a noticed public
hearing.
I might just point out that the project itself is subject to
a grant application by the County Housing Authority in conjunc-
tion with the Department of Social Services . The deadline for
submittal of the application is the day before your next meet-
ing. An integral part of the support data was to have been a
letter of conceptual approval by the City. However, in light of
the meeting on Wednesday and the conclusion reached, I have taken
the liberty of holding back that submittal pending Council deter-
mination of reconsideration at your meeting of May 22nd. This
action was explained to the people in attendance and the County
agencies responsible for the grant .
RW: cw
Attachment : 5/16/90 neighborhood meeting attendance list
RW: cw
•
Neighborhood Meeting
Wednesday, May 16, 1990
Subject: Transitional Housing - Empire Inn
Attendance List
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
1 . Housand Rassmusson 6705 Santa Lucia 466-2321
2 . Howard Rassmussen it " it " to
3 . Steve Hendrickson 2017 Chorro, S .L.O. 544-8040
4 . Dale E. Ziegler P .Q. Box 1529, Atas. 466-4910
5 . Philip & Virginia Carpenter 5130 Ardilla 466-4526
6 . Robert & Janet Minich 5764 Venado Rd. 461-1427
7 . James W. & Joan N. Walkling 5425 Pescado Ct. 466-3682
S . Sandy & Chuck Edmunson 5705 Venado Rd.
9 . Sharon Beaudette (EIA Bd. ) 7800 San Gabriel 466-5114
10 . Bonnie Barton 5900 Venado 466-8156
11 . Lois Coalwell 5825 Venado 466-4147 •
12 . DyAnne Neileigh 5885 Venado 461-1323
13 . Mrs . R. Kerney P .O. Box 332 , Atas . 466-2085
14 . Jayne Sacks 5170 Ardilla 466-9384
15 . Ann Travers (Social Svcs . ) P .O. Box 8119, S .L.O. 549-4214
93403-8119
16 . Biz Steinberg, c/o EOC 880 Industrial Way, S.L.O. 466-3444
93401
17 . George Moylan (Hsg. Authy. ) P .O. Box 638, S.L.Q. 543-4478
18 . Barbara MacGregor (NCWS) P .O. Box 2155, Atas . 461-1338
19 . Gwen Guyre 880 Industrial Way, S.L.O. 544-4353
20 . St. Williams Parish P .O. Box 2230, Atas . 466-0849
Ruth Cowne, Asst. Pastral Assoc .
21 . St. Williams Parish 6410 Santa Lucia 466-0849
Mary E . Souza, Office Mgr.
22 . Nancy N. Enright 6830 Santa Lucia 466-9674
23 . Dwight W. MacCurdy 5655 Venado 466-0522
'24 . Dennis & Janemarie Clifford 5670 Venado 466-6118
. REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date : 5/22/90
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-3
Through : Ray Windsor , City Manager
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT :
August 22 , 1986 Road Construction Agreement Between Paul M.
Sensibaugh and the Gordon T . Davis Cattle Company
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No . 61 -90 establishing an understanding of
conditional acceptance of roads completed under an agreement dated
August 22 , 1986 between the Department of Public Works and the
Gordon T . Davis Cattle Company .
BACKGROUND:
Since Atascadero incorporated as a City some of the existing
Colony roads have been constructed according to written agreements
between road construction contractors and developers and the
Department of Public Works . These agreements delineated
construction standards to be adhered to in the design and
construction of the roads .
The City has discontinued this practice of allowing road
construction by negotiated agreement . The current department
procedure is to require roads to be constructed according to
published road standards including plans and specifications to be
approved prior to the commencement of work. Proper licenses ,
security agreements , environmental documentation and an array
of
other provisions are also required prior to construction .
DISCUSSION:
The resolution presented here deals with roads constructed by
the Gordon T . Davis Cattle Company . Regardless of present
department policy, a number of roads have been constructed under
the old system of a development agreement . It is in the best
interest of the City to bring the roads into the city maintained
road system.
•
Under the agreement portions of San Gregorio, Santa Cruz,
Santa Ana , Balboa, Llano and Corriente have been constructed and
all of Garcero, Corona , Jaquima, Sausalito, Enchanto, and Tecolote
roads have been constructed. Chorro , Serrijon and Ardilla roads
have only been partially graded and remain substantially
unconstructed. A section of Corriente Road remains unconstructed
due to steep slopes and only a fire access road remains along the
unconstructed portion . It is not being proposed that this steep
section of Corriente Road be upgraded from a fire access road.
Staff recognizes that the roads already constructed will not
meet strict "minimum road standards" recently passed by the
Council . It simply is impractical to require the developer to make
major road modifications to meet every requirement of the new
standards .
However, the developer does have an obligation to meet the
construction criteria of the original written agreement . Therefore,
we are proposing that the Public Works staff inspect the existing
roads and identify all conditions which are unsafe, poorly
constructed, difficult to maintain, or otherwise do not meet the
requirements of the original agreement .
The Gordon T. Davis Cattle Company is requesting that the
roads that have been constructed be reviewed by the Engineering
Staff to determine compliance with the previous agreement in order
to have the roads accepted into the City maintained system. The
Engineering staff has periodically reviewed these roads during the
construction process and is prepared to compile a list of necessary
drainage and erosion control improvements . There remain a
significant number of minor alterations that will be required but
the basic road configuration is complete.
Resolution xx-90 states that once the deficiencies identified
by the Public Works Director are corrected, a final resolution will
be broughht before the Council recommending the City accept the
roads into the City maintained road system.
OPTIONS:
1 . Approve the Resolution as presented.
2 . Approve an amended resolution .
3. Deny the resolution and request that an alternative
review procedure be proposed.
RESOLUTION 61 -90
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO ESTABLISHING AN UNDERSTANDING OF CONDITIONAL
ACCEPTANCE OF ROADS COMPLETED UNDER AN AGREEMENT
DATED AUGUST 22 , 1986 BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS AND THE GORDON T. DAVIS CATTLE COMPANY
WHEREAS, the past Director of Public Works entered
into a written agreement with the Gordon T . Davis Cattle
Company concerning the construction of certain Colony roads ;
and
WHEREAS, this agreement specifically outlined the
construction standards to be utilized in the construction of
specific Colony roads ; and
WHEREAS, except for Ardilla Road, Serrijon Road and
Chorro Road, these certain Colony roads have been
constructed; and
WHEREAS , the City Engineering Staff has been requested
by the Gordon T. Davis Cattle Company to review these roads
for technical compliance with the terms of the Agreement .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT ;
The Public Works Staff is hereby directed to review the
previously constructed roads for technical compliance in
accordance with the terms of the agreement between Paul M.
Sensibaugh and the Gordon T . Davis Cattle Company , dated
August 22 , 1986 . When the Gordon T . Davis Cattle Company
meets all of the requirements of the agreement , as
determined by the Public Works Director, it is the intent of
the Council to accept these roads into the city maintained
road system.
The roads addressed by this resolution shall include
those sections of roads shown in attached Figure 1 .
Specifically excluded from this resolution are Ardilla Road,
Serrijon Road and Chorro Road which remain unconstructed.
(RESOLUTION NO. 61-90, cont'd)
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 ,
' LEE DAYKA, City Clerk ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
ARTHER MONTANDON GREGORY LUKE
City Attorney Director of Public Works
City Engineer
.s z
�� ��►�
�,� ,fir►! � � �' �; �r , .
hl
• � . -
805/434 .1834
TWIN CI TIES
ENGINEERING Ilk
INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERING A SURVEYING
ALLEN W. CAMPBELL RGE 20244
June 13, 1986
Mr. Paul Sensibaugh
Public Works Director
City of Atascadero
PO Boc 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
RE: Road Construction Agreement Portions of Atascadero Colony
(See attached map)
Dear Mr. Sensibaugh:
In accordance with discussions between Gordon T. Davis Cattle
Company and the City, the following is a summary of our under-
standing of the procedures to be followed for the improvement
of the roads shown on the attached plot plan.
1. Developer to enter into an inspection agreement
with the City to reimburse City for actual
inspection costs .
2. Every attempt will be made to maintain the
constructed road at its mapped location.
Centerline monuments will be referenced
prior to rough grading.
3. Developer will rough grade the roadway using
information supplied by developer's engineer and
a qualified soils lab , approved by City , will take
representative compaction tests at developer' s
cost and furnish the results to the City.
4. City Engineer' s office will make an on-site inspection
of the completeed rough grading with developer' s
engineer. Adjustments will be made on recommendation
concerning roadway grades and site distances . Cut and
fill slopes will be examined at the time along with
proposed location and size of drainage structures .
Judgements will be based on well-recognized standards and
practices . Drainage calculations are to be submitted
to City prior to the field inspection.
P.O. BOX 777 • 200 MAIN STREET • TEMPLETON, CALIFORNIA 93465
Page 2
Road Consturction Agreement
Davis 6-13-86
S. All underground utilities shall be placed prior
to paving. Trenches are to be adequately com-
pacted with appropriate backfill material .
6. Developer shall place aggregate base . This
work will be inspected by the City and will require
compaction tests to be furnished by developer
verifying the satisfactory placement of these
materials.
7. After basing, City will review erosion control
work and roadside drainage facilities . The
City and developer's engineer will determine the
location of any roadside ditches or downdrains .
8 . Developer shall re-establish and monument centerline
controls for the roadway as approved by City.
County standard monument well at road intersections
and on long tangents , 5/8" rebar with metal caps at
all other locations . The monument wells are also to
serve as bench marks with elevations shown on the
As-Built Plans .
9 . Developer shall provide accurate As-Built plans -for •
the roadway including plan and profile , culvert
locations and invert elevations , berm locations ,
utility locations , and any other improvement
features .
10. Drive approach cuts and fills will be accomplished
along with the subgrade preparation in order to
eliminate the necessity of disturbing the completed
roadway section when the balance of the driveways
are constructed to serve individual lots . A no
charge grading permit will be obtained and plans
showing the location of the access points will be
presented to the Planning Department and a field
review of the driveway location made prior to
approval to proceed with this work . The driveway
grading should be kept to no more that 50 c.y.
11. Final improved section shall be a minimum of 2 inches
A. C. over at least 4" of Class 3 aggregate base.
The structural section is to be based on a traffic
index of 4 and the R-value of the sub-base soils .
12 . The upper 18" of subgrade shall be compacted to
95% relative density as measured by California
Test Method No. 216 or by calibrated nuclear
density instrument.
' %M.,
Page 3
Road Construction Agreement
Davis 6-13-86
13. Final pavement width is to be 20 feet with an
additional two foot required where A.C. berms
are placed for drainage control . Aggregate
base width would then be a minimum one foot
outside the edge of pavement. Also an additional
two foot of A. C. widening with adequate tapers
will be required where sharp horizontal curves
are encountered.
14. Cut ditches shall be paved with 2 inches of A. C.
where the road grade exceeds 10% .
15. It is understood that Gordon T. Davis Cattle Co .
also agrees to pay actual costs for City inspec-
tion and engineering performed on this project .
16. Developer will maintain roads for one year after date
of acceptance.
17. The roads in question will be accepted for City
maintenance when all steps have been completed.
18. Generally the roads are to be developed in
accordance with the attached phasing plan. The
stages of the work is to take place , such as tree
removal , grubbing , rough grading, etc. prior to start
of construction.
Sincerely,
Allen W. Campb 11
R.C.E. 20244
AWC/pas
enclosure
cc : Henry Engen
I agree with all conditions outlined in this agreement from
Mr. Campbell .
Signed , c5 Signed
Coe
Paul Sensibaugh Gordon T. Davis Cattle Co.
Dated 8/x '86 Dated �� - 2 "��
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda I tems C-4
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date : 5/22/90
From: Gregory L. Luke, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Assessment District Engineer for 3-F Meadows roads and
a portion of Tecorida Road
RECOMMENDATION:
I . Adopt resolution 62 -90 directing the Director of Public
Works to contract with Tartaglia-Hughes Consulting
Engineers to complete preliminary assessment district
work for 3-F Meadows roads and a portion of Tecorida
Road.
2. The City Council may wish to pass this cost information
to the residents with direction that they hire the
engineer, and that the City will determine its level of
participation at a later date .
BACKGROUND:
The 3-F meadows area roads that are not currently maintained
include potions of Sierra Vista, Cassanova, Carmelita, Barranco,
Barranco Heights, Casitas and Lucinda Lane . These roads have
been paved but do not meet the City ' s current minimum road
standards . All of these roads can be classified as rural
residential roads . The standards delineated in the City' s minimum
road standards A-1 and A-2 would apply to these roads .
A portion of Tecorida Road extends south from San Andres and
currently terminates before crossing a small tributary of
Atascadero Creek. New residences are currently being constructed
along this portion of the road and three building permit
applications are under review. The road is unpaved and will
require extension to reach the lots with pending building
permits . Mike Messer, one of the applicants, has been trying to
organize the neighborhood to make a combined effort to construct
the road to minimum City standards .
DISCUSSION:
The process of determining interest in upgrading existing roads
to a standard acceptable for City maintenance generally includes
the following steps .
1 . A community group or an individual expresses an
interest in having the road upgraded in order to
transfer maintenance responsibility to the City.
2. A de •
tailed cost estimate must be completed along with
an estimate of the allocation of assessment costs
before the group or individual can enlist a commitment
from involved property owners . It is this step that
the private citizen has difficulty in completing.
Because few residents have the knowledge of road
construction necessary to complete the cost estimate
and assessment spread a consultant must be retained.
The problem is that the individual or group must bear
the cost of retaining the consultant because it is very
difficult to enlist the financial support from affected
residents in the feasibility stage of a project.
3. Once the estimate of allocation of cost is completed
the neighborhood group can poll the effected residents
to determine if sufficient interest exists to continue
the project . If there is sufficient favorable
response then the project continues through the
assessment district formation process . If there is
insufficient support, the detailed estimates can be
filed for future reference .
A similar situation exists for a building permit applicant along
a very substandard road such as Tecorida. Each building permit
applicant is required to construct a the full road width along
the project frontage according to the City' s minimum road
standards in addition to an all weather fire access road to the
frontage . This of course leads to patchwork construction with
disconnected sections of pavement . An example of this is Amapoa
or Separado Avenue . The advantages of comprehensive road
construction are clear but, once again, it is very difficult for
a building permit applicant to organize a large scale project and
to enlist the preliminary financial support of the adjoining
Property owners.
Residents in the 3—F Meadows area have formed a project committee
and are requesting the City to participate in the preliminary
phase of forming an assessment district . Mike Messer, a permit
applicant on Tecorida, has also been trying to organize his
neighbors to construct that portion of Tecorida to City standards
but, without a detailed cost estimate, he has also been unable to
organize a neighborhood project . On this short section of road
there are currently four single family residence projects in
different stages of review. The difficulties experienced by the
residents promoting these two projects highlights the reason that
road management has traditionally been transferred to "public"
agencies.
The question before the City Council is, "Does the City have a
sufficient interest in improving the City' s privately owned
streets to financially participate in the preliminary phase of is
assessment district formation?"
FINAL IMPACT:
The City staff has contacted two local engineering firms that
have the capability to manage an assessment district project .
One of the firms has withdrawn from Participation because of
potential conflicts of interest and project scheduling. The
remaining firm, Tartaglia-Hughes Consulting Engineers, has
provided the following cost fee estimate to complete the
preliminary phases of the two projects.
1 . 3-F Meadows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4, 355
2 . A Portion of Tecordia . . . . . . . . $ 910
Enclosures: 1 . 3-F Meadows Map
2. Tecordda Map
3. Tartaglia-Hughes Proposal
RESOLUTION NO. 62 —90
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
AGREEING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PRELIMINARY COSTS
OF ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FORMATION FOR THE
3—F MEADOWS AREA AND A PORTION OF TECORIDA
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has an interest in
improving privately maintained streets to provide a safe
environment for the traveling public; and
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has an interest in
acquiring maintenance responsibility for privately maintained
roads in order to provide a uniform system of maintenance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has an interest in
assisting City residents to promote the construction of road
improvements where that activity may be difficult or impossible
for individual residents to complete because of the "public"
nature of the activity;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
The City Council hereby directs the Director of Public Works to
enter into an agreement with Tartaglia—Hughes Consulting
Engineers to complete the preliminary assessment district tasks
associated with the two proposed road improvement projects.
On motion by Councilperson , seconded by
Councilperson , the foregoing resolution is passed on
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON GREGORY L. LUKE
City Attorney Director of Public Works
K a.P-TME.M.00 I
N
AFM
law
one Sul
40
idow
i!+ : ��O-P 0,
IIS,�
T TARTAGLIA-HUGHES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
7360 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE E - P. O. BOX 1930
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93423
PHONE (805) 466.5660
City of Atascadero May 15 , 1990
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422 File: 04
Attention: Mr. Gary Sims
Subject: Preliminary Engineering for the Formation
of Proposed Assessment Districts -
3-F Meadows and Tecorida Road
Dear Mr. Sims:
Thank you for the opportunity to submit our proposal to provide
preliminary engineering services for the formation of the "3-F
Meadows" and "Tecorida" assessment districts.
Our services for each of the districts will consist of the
following tasks:
1 . Prepare district area base maps for presentation purposes
at a scale of 1 inch = 100 feet, or as needed for clarity.
2 . Field review of project areas to determine required im-
provements to be constructed as part of the final project.
3. Prepare preliminary construction quantity estimate and pre-
liminary construction cost estimate.
4. Prepare preliminary assessment spread which will include
construction costs and incidental costs.
5. Coordinate all preliminary assessment work with the City
of Atascadero.
Our proposed cost for preliminary engineering services for the
"3-F Meadows" assessment district is $4 ,855 . It is estimated
that the total number of parcels affected is approximately 120 .
The cost per parcel is $40. 45±.
Our proposed cost for preliminary engineering services for the
Tecorida assessment district is $910 . It is estimated that the
total number of parcels affected is approximately 12. The cost
per parcel is $75. 80±.
Improvements that will be considered to be included in the pro-
posed construction for the two districts are :
City of Atascadero May 15 , 1990
Att. : Mr. Gary Sims Page 2
1 . Aspahlt concrete overlay.
2. Repair of failed areas in existing paving.
3. Construct and reconstruct roadway shoulders.
4 . Road grade corrections to eliminate safety problems.
5. Install storm drainage improvements where needed.
6. Grading, excavation and embankment construction as required.
7. Any additional items as determined by the City and our firm
which should be included.
All work will be performed in accordance with City Standards and
any other standards recognized by the City.
If you have any questions regarding this proposal, we will be
happy to discuss tem at your convenience.
Thank you for considering our firm for this work.
Sincerely yours,
Tartaglia-Hughes
Consulting Engineers
Robert C. Tartaglia
Civil Engineer
RCT:jf
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date : 5/22/90
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-5
Through : Ray Wind3,__-
From:
I City Manager
Gre Luke, rector of Public Works
Greg ,
SUBJECT:
Atascadero Creek Pedestrian Footbridge
RECOMMENDATION:
In light of the budget impact and need for further policy
direction on this and other capital projects , it is recommended
that this item be referred to the forthcoming budget discussions in
June.
BACKGROUND:
The concept of a pedestrian bridge crossing Atascadero Creek
apparently originated in 1975 with the original Atascadero Creekway
• Schematic Plan . More recently , the need for a creek crossing has
been discussed during the hearing process for the new bowling alley
and during the development of the Atascadero Downtown Master Plan .
As you may recall , the Council budgeted $60, 000 in the current
years budget for the construction of a pedestrian bridge.
DISCUSSION:
The term "Pedestrian Bridge" can be defined in many different
ways . During discussions with members of the staff, Council and
various citizen' s committees several concepts have been suggested
for the bridge .
One concept has been studied in an engineering report prepared
by John Wallace and Associates . This plan calls for a bridge
approximately 190' long, 10' wide running from the top of bank on
both sides of the creek. It would consist of three spans with two
mid-span supporting columns . The bridge would be located at
elevation 855 , approximately 3' above the 100 year flood level and
16' above the existing creekway . The engineers estimated
construction cost is $210, 000. If landscaping, lighting, permit
fees , processing and contingencies are included, the "in place"
cost for this type of bridge would be about $250 ,000 . (Note : More
recent conversations with local engineers and contractors have
indicated a 5' wide bridge could be constructed for about
$150,000.) This plan is supported by the School Committee because
it affords maximum protection for students traveling to the nearby
schools .
The Atascadero Creek Plan and the Downtown Redevelopment Plan •
have suggested a more modest bridge, commonly referred to as a dry
weather crossing. While no formal design studies have been
prepared, this concept generally calls for an improved walkway down
to the creek and a short bridge or a series of man-made stepping
stones to allow creek passage during normal flows .
The cost of constructing a dry weather crossing would vary
according to the level of improvement desired. For example, the
$60, 000 budgeted by Council would allow construction of an
attractive 4' wide concrete or brick walkway down to the creek,
with some stairs , hand rails, landscaping and modest shoreline
erosion protection. An attractive prefabricated wood or steel
bridge approximately 30' long would span the creek.
By way of comparison, a gravel path with railroad tie steps,
minor landscaping and man-made stepping stones would cost
approximately $30, 000.
It is important to realize that any dry weather crossing would
be constructed below the 10 year flood level . During a year of
heavy rainfall most of the improvements would be destroyed. Every
effort would be made to make the improvements as durable as
possible and the bridge could conceivably be removed prior to a
flood, however, in reality, the powerful floodwaters of a narrowly
confined creek would destroy most dry weather creek crossing
improvements .
ISSUES:
Several issues must be considered when considering the scope
of the pedestrian bridge project .
1 . What is the status of the Lewis Avenue Bridge?
Constructing this new bridge would satisfy some of the
requirements the pedestrian bridge is now being asked to
provide, namely, passage to school and an all-weather
crossing.
2 . Is the purpose of the pedestrian bridge to easily and
conveniently carry people across the creek; or is the
intent of the bridge more to allow people to walk
within the lush vegetation and scenic environment of
the creekway?
3. What is the relative value of constructing a pedestrian
bridge? In judging the issue from a cost vs , benefit
perspective, how valuable is a link from the existing
shopping center with the Downtown area?
C®NCLUBI®Ni
In my opinion the Council is faced with two alternatives : (1)
An all-weather , durable, bridge which spans from bank-to-bank
costing between $150,000 - $250,000, or (2) a dry weather path and
small bridge subject to periodic innundation costing $30,000 -
$50, 000 .
The question before the Council is to decide the scope,
purpose and cost of the pedestrian bridge. If an all-weather
crossing is desired, I suggest the existing budget be augmented by
$150,000 and a bridge spanning from bank-to-bank can be
constructed. Conversely , the Council may wish to retain the
existing funding level and support a modest , low-water bridge.
E1 Camino Associates
dba Century Plaza
6905 E1 Camino Real #5
Atascadero, CA 33422
466-7712
R E C E I V E 0
City of Atascadero AOR 171990 April 16, 1990
Henry Engen
6500 Palma Avenue CITY MGR.
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: Pedestrian Footbridge
Dear Mr . Engen:
This letter is written on behalf of El Camino Associates and
Creekside Lanes, a California Limited Partnership to reconfirm our
support for the construction and placement of a footbridge across
Atascadero Creek .
Creekside Lanes has been under construction since March 23, 1990.
During this period we have experienced excessive foot traffic every
weekday morning from 7 : 30am to 6: 30am, primarily made up of Junior High
students walking to school and again in the afternoon when school is
dismissed . We have also observed the public traversing the creek at
all times of the day . The pedestrians are using a pathway and creek
crossing at the same location of the proposed footbridge as diagramed
in the Atascadero Creekway Plan .
We believe the installation of the bridge would provide safety for
those crossing the creek . Currently , one must negotiate the creek by
way of precariously placed boards, dodge limbs and then climb a steep
dirt incline . The presence of the bridge, would allow the children to
cross the creek in a safer, more timely manner and reduce the damage to
the vegetation . In addition, we would like to see the bridge link the
BIA district with Century Plaza to increase access to shopping and
provide shared parking .
The design of Creekside Lanes includes a plaza to greet
pedestrians as they walk to and from the bridge, as shown in the
enclosed site plan . This area could include park benches and a
directional sign describing the vegetation and wildlife habitat in the
immediate area .
We would like to coordinate the construction of the bridge with
Creekside Lanes so the design and exact location could be established .
Please give this your immediate attention as Creekside Lanes should be
completed by August , 1990 .
Sincerely _
Gaylen Little
General Partner
CC: Ray Windsor
Anthony Avina
Marge Mackey
Enclosure: Bowling Center Site Plan
G
' GTO`'•� �, r G 1
r+w0 M C Y•.. 4 ��[ 1 1
mom Z c l _
M f m � /f
o
O • p •
25
in
t �
5
z C
f
y O
V
m • ,,
' A s
e
Q
o,;o �,� o��`oo �'• � f�� '� •�ani _��
M�
• � 1 1
1 1
c
r
vS' �
� r!
' J
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: C-6(A)
CITY OF ATASCADERO
THROUGH: Ray Windsor , City Manager MEETING DATE: 5/22/90
FROM: Andrew Takata, Director
Department of Parkas, Recreation and Zoo
SUBJECT:
SYCAMORE ROAD PROPERTY - DISPOSITION
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council authorize the surplus the City-owned Sycamore Road
property, APN RB-092-091 retain a 15-foot easement for Salinas
River access, and have funds from the sale to be specifically
dedicated towards the purchase of other more suitable property
for recreational purposes.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSTS:
•
The City Council previously requested that the Parks and
Recreation Commission to review future use alternatives for the
aforementioned City-owned property to be developed as a mini-
park , remain in open space, or be declared surplus property.
The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed all the above
proposals. Staff did an informal survey of area residents, of
which 61'% were against the development of a mini park , 6?% were
in favor of retaining the site as open space. 10% were not in
favor the property being surpl.ussed , and BSS. were not interested
in subsidizing a mini park development .
The Parrs and Recreation Commission had two public hearings on
this subject . The public comments are documented in the attached
minutes. After the two public hearings, the Parks and Recreation
Commission agreed with staff ' s above listed recommendation on a
5-0 vote
AJT: kv
;Syc
Attachments
•
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES
JANUARY 4, 1990
ITEM 4-A _-DISCUSSION ON USE OF CITY-OWNED SYCAMORE ROAD
PROPERTY APN#28-092-09:
Commissioner Mc Krell arrives to the meeting.
The City Council has requested direction from the Parks and
Recreation Commission regarding future use of the Sycamore Road
property. The Planning Commission previously recommended the
surplus of the property. The property has been appraised at
approximately $72,000.
Staff' s recommendation is to surplus the property and dedicate
funds from the sale to purchase recreational use properties
adjacent to Atascadero Lake Park.
An informal survey was sent to residents in the vicinity of the
Sycamore Road property as to the future use of the subject
property. The survey indicated disinterest in developing the
lot into a mini-park, with many interested in leaving the
property in open space.
Commission consensus is that a mini park and related upkeep would
be inappropriate with the density of the area. It was felt that
it would be too small for an equestrian staging area to the
Salinas River . Commissioners agreed that if surplussed, an
access easement should be considered across the property.
Local residents concluded the lot has been previously used as
access to the Salinas River during floods and access is needed .
The development of a mini park was not desirable and could
attract vagrants. There is a desire to retain the property in
open space, and allow pedestrian/equestrian access to the river . .
A local resident states that the City has not been maintaining
the property by mowing, etc . in the past , and maintenance should
be addressed if the City continues to keep the property.
MOTION: Commissioner Harris moves to continue this
item to the January 18, 1990 Parks and
Recreation Commission Meeting; Commissioner
Mc Krell seconds; Motion carries 5-0
(Commissioner Cooper absent)
•
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 15, 1990
ITEM 4-B - DISCUSSION ON FUTURE USE OF CITY-OWNED SYCAMORE ROAD
PROPERTY, APN#28-092-09:
Parks, Recreation and -7oo Director Andrew Takata states that this
• item was continued from January 4, 1990 to allow additional
staff/public input .
Mr . Takata feels that if the property is to be surplussed , it is
recommended to retain a 15-foot easement for Salinas River
3
access. Community Development Director Henry Engen confirms that
the site would still qualify as a buildable lot with a 15-foot
easement . If an easement was established, it could be gated to
allow only emergency use.
It is noted that the lot was previously been used as an access to
the river during prior floods.
Commissioner Smart questions utilizing Atascadero Mutual Water
Company easement as an alternate access.
The Atascadero Mutual Water Company submitted a letter requesting
an easement be retained at this location.
Commissioner Meyer is in favor of surplussing the property if it
is not determined to be usable.
Commissioner Mc Krell states that the residential survey recently
completed showed that the residents were not in favor of a mini
park development of the site.
Commissioner Mc Krell feels if the property is surplussed , funds
should be dedicated towards recreational uses.
Chairman Bench feels that funds from property surplus could be
utilized towards other recreational projects now in the formal
planning stage.
Commissioner Harris feels that mai'ntenance and liability
preclude the need to continue ownina the subject property, and
agrees with surplussing it .
No public comment was given on this item.
Motion: Commissioner Meyer recommends the City Council
surplus the Sycamore Road Property; Seconded by
Commissioner Smart; Commissioner Smart seconds;
Motion withdrawn by Commissioner Meyer
Motion: Commissioner Meyer recommends the City Council
surplus the Sycamore Road Property, APN# 28-092-
09, maintaining a 15 foot easement, and funds
from the sale be specifically dedicated towards
the purchase of land for recreational purposes;
Motion carries 5-0
4
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: C-6(B)
CITY OF ATASCADERO
THROUGH: Ray �Windsor, City Manager MEETING DATE: 5/22/90
FROM: Andrew0 Takata, Director
Department of Parks Recreation and Zoo
SUBJECT:
ATASCADERO LAKE PAVILION - DISMANTLING
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the removal of the Pavilion floor by California
Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo, Construction Department ;
and direct staff to seek contractor for the dismantling of the
Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Staff is requesting permission for the dismantling of the
Pavilion at Atascadero Lake Park , to make way for the
construction of the new faciiity.
As you are aware, the existing wood sub-floor is from the
historic "Stadium Park" . Staff has contacted California
Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo , Construction Department ,
and they are willing to remove the flooring .
AJT . kv
;pav3
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO AGENDA ITEM: C-6(C)
THROUGH: Ray Windsor , City Manager MEETING DATE:
5f22/90
FROM: Andrew Takata, Director C11,
Department of Parks Recreation and moo
SUB— JECT:
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION - PROPOSED REDUCTION
COMMISSIONERS OF
RECOMMENDATION:
Direct staff to place on the next agenda an ordinance reducing
the number of Parks and Recreation Commissioners from seven (7)
to five (5) .
sBACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
The present Commission has been operating with six ( 6)
Commissioners since January, 1489, due to the resignation of
Commissioner Michael Lara.
Staff has reviewed with the proposed Parks and Recreation
Commission member reduction from seven (7) to five (5) , with the
Commission is in concurrence with staff in that it could be more
cohesive with five members.
The reasons for the recommendation are as follow:
1 . The ability of a smaller group being more productive in a
shorter period of time
2. Cohesiveness of five members.
3. Communication and receiving a consensus
more efficient, from five members is
4. A five member Commission
by all members. psychologically demands attendance
There has only been an average of 4.5
Commissioners in attendance since January, 1929,
elte
to the Commissioners knowing other Commissionerschwill may rbeain
•attendance, providing a quorum.
The only disadvantage could be from additional citizen input .
Staff will be advertising the meeting agenda in the newspaper in
order to compensate for this possible disadvantage.
AJT: kv r
:PRC 3
ORDINANCE NO. •
Page 3
CHAPTER 13. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION (Reorganized)
Sec. 2-13 Ot . Established.
There it ' created a Parks and Recreation Commission com-
posed of seven (7) members.
Sec. 2_ 02. Qua i ica+;ons.
The regular members of the Commission shall be qualified
electors of the City.
-Sec. 2-13 , 01. Members: Appointment Terms of office,
The City Council shall appoint the members of the 'Parks
and Recreation Commission. Regular members of the Commission
shall serve for a period of four (4) years beginning July l of
the year of appointment. The terms of three (3) of the regular
members shall expire on June 30, 1986, and every four (4) years
thereafter; and the terms of four (4) regular members shall
expire on June 30, 1988, and every four (4) years thereafter.
Vacancies on the Commission occurring other than by expiration
of term shall be filled in the manner established for appoint- �.
ments. All members shall serve at the pleasure of the City
Council.
Sec. -2-13 04 . Ex officio member.
A member representing the school district shall be ap-
pointed by the Mayor as an ex officio member of the Commis-
sion. The appointee shall serve at the pleasure of the Mayor
and without compensation.
Sec . 2-13 , 05 . Absence f* p**1 meA
tics• Runnino for Offic
on C� t�� ouncii , e
Absence of a member of the Commission from three
con—
secutive meetings, or from four (4) meetings durin (3)year, without formal consent of the Commission notedcinenits
Official minutes, shall be r-lorted by the Recreation Director
to the City Council for consideration of removal from office.
If a member of the Commission files for election as a member
of any elective City office, his term as a commissioner shall
terminate as of the date of filing.
Sec. 2-13 . 06 . orcanization.
As of August 1 annually, or as soon thereafter as is fea-
sible, the members of the Commission shall elect a chairman
ORDINANCE NO.
Page 4
and a vice chairman, who shall hold office, for one1
The chairman shall preside over meetings, a ( ) Year.
ate
committees, sign resolutions, and direct pthenaffaiirsooflthe
Commission. In the absence of the chairman, the duties of
this office shall be performed by the vice chairman.
Sec. 2-13_07. Procedure.
The Commission shall adopt rules and regulations to gov-
ern its procedures and shall set a time and place for regular
meetings which will be held at least once a month. _
_Sec. 2-13 08. O Drum.
A majority of the members shall constitute a quorum.
Sec. 2-13 ,09. Secretary--_ Appointment Minutes.
The pity Manager shall designate a secretary who shall
maintain accurate fin- Utes of the activities and official - ac-
tions of the Commission. If this person is a city employee,
said person shall be compensated accordingly.
S ec. 2-13 10. D t • d esoon ib ' itie .
The. duties and responsibilities of the Parks and Recrea-
tion Commission shall be to:
(a) Act in an advisory capacity to the City Council in
all matters pertaining to parks and public recreation and to
cooperate with other governmental agencies and civic groups in
the advancement of sound park and recreation planning and pro-
gramming;
(b) Formulate policies and parks and recreation services
for consideration by the City Council;
(c) Meet with the City Council at least once each year to
discuss policies, programs, future needs, or other matters
requiring joint deliberations. More frequent meetings may be
held if deemed necessary by a determination . of a majority of
members of the City Council and Parks and Recreation Commis-
sion. All such meetings shall be held in accordance with
statutory requirements governing public meetings;
e
(d) Recommend to the City Council the development and
improvement of parks, recreational areas, facilities, pro-
grams, and recreation services;
•- i
ORDINANCE NO.
Page 5
(e) Make periodic surveys of parks and recreation ser-
vices that exist or may be needed and ascertain the needs of
the public for such services;
(f) Assist in coordinating parks and recreation services
with the programs -of governmental agencies and voluntary or-
ganizations;
(g) Disseminate to the public information concerning the
policies and functions of the Parks and Recreation Department;
(h) Advise the Recreation Director in the development and
operation of the parks and recreation programs and 'facilities;
(i) Suggest rules and regulations governing. the use of
parks and recreation areas and facilities.
Sec. 2-13 .11. Recreation Director and Public �7orks
Director: Meeting attendance Renorta.
The Recreation Director and 'fublic works Director shall
attend the meetings of the Parks ana ecreation 0=3-ssion and
shall make such reports to the Commission, the City Manager,
or to the City Council as may be required.
Sec, 2-13 ,06. Expenses.
Commission members shall' be entitled to remuneration for
expenses in accordance with the procedure approved by resolu-
tion of the Council.
Section 5 . This ordinance is- hereby declared to be urcently re-
quired for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and
safety, and shall take effect immediately upon its adoption, but shall
be operative as ' specified herein. The facts constituting the urgency
are as follows: Six (6) of seven (7) members of the Planning Commis-
sion of the City of Atascadero have resigned and the Council has
declared itself as an urgency measure to act as the Planning Agency
for the City. It is essential that a reorganized Planning Commission
and a reorganized Parks and Recreation Commission be established and
members be appointed to such commissions.
Section 6 .
be The City Clerk shall cause this urgency ordinance to
published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the
Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, pub-
lished and circulated in this City in accordance with Government Code ,
Section 36933 ; shall certify the adoption of this ordinance; and Code
cause this ordinance and its _certif'cation to be
of Ordinances of this City. ,entered in the Boo
.
ORDINANCE NO.
Page 6
Section 7. This urgency ordinance shall go into effect immediat '-t•
upon adoption, but shall not become operative until the Council adop4;" •
a resolution or resolutions declaring all or part of this ordinancE-
operative and fixing the operative date.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced on
adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on an,.
AYES:
NOES: _
ABSENT:
r - -
ROLFE D. NELSON, Mayor
ATTEST:
ROBERT M. JONES, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/77 'A'
MZK'E HICK'S, Acting er
City Manag
APPROVED AS TO OPI.1:
ALLEN GRT ------
' ES, City Attorney
MEETING AGENDA
DgTF_5f22/90 ITEM#
RESOLUTION NO. 60-90
A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ENTER
INTO DISCUSSIONS WITH WELLS FARGO BANK, TRUSTEE,
REGARDING ACCEPTANCE OF ROADS
WHEREAS, Wells Fargo Bank is the successor trustee
( "Trustee" ) of a trust created in 1931 to hold title to certain
real property in the Atascadero area;
WHEREAS, for several decades the only remaining asset of
such trust has been the technical legal title to roadways in the
Atascadero area;
WHEREAS, the Trustee desires to divest itself of such title
and has set forth various proposals for doing so;
WHEREAS, the City Council has previously created a committee
(the "Roads Committee" ) comprised of Councilpersons Bonita
Borgeson and Robert Lilley, City Attorney Art Montandon, and City
• Manager Ray Windsor, to study and make recommendations to the
City Council concerning various issues relating to streets and
roads.;
WHEREAS, the Roads Committee has met with representatives of
the Trustee for the purpose of initiating discussions and
exploring options with respect to the acceptance by the City of
the roads held by the Trustee;
WHEREAS, the Roads Committee has determined that it would be
appropriate for the City to conduct surveys of the roadways
within City limits for the purpose of determining which roads are
currently acceptable for inclusion in the City-maintained system,
and which roads may be the subject of an acceptance but do not
currently meet standards for inclusion in the system of roads
maintained by the City;
WHEREAS, subject to making such determination, the City
Council considers it to be in the best interests of the citizens
of the City of Atascadero that a comprehensive solution to issues
of title, liability and maintenance of roadways be achieved;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Atascadero that the members of the Roads Committee are
hereby authorized to initiate such studies and surveys of the
roads within City limits as may be necessary or desirable to
make a determination with respect to acceptance of such roads
into the City-maintained system;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the members of the Roads
Committee are authorized and directed to coordinate with the
Trustee for the purpose of achieving a comprehensive solution to
all relevant issues relating to roads within a reasonable period
of time from the date hereof, and in furtherance of that goal , to
enter into such agreements with the Trustee, on behalf of the
City, as they deem necessary or advisable.
b
On motion by Councilmember seconded Y Con-
u
cilmember , the foregoing resolution is hereby
approved on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk ROLLIN W. DEXTER, Mayor •
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON RAY WINDSOR
City Attorney City Manager
•
2
� U
MEMORANDUM
To: City Council
From: Ray Windsor, City Manager
Subject: Colony Roads - Wells Fargo Meeting
Date: April 26 , 1990
Earlier today, Bonita, Bob, Art, Henry, Greg and myself met with
Michael Harrington, General Counsel for Wells Fargo, Margaret
Devine, Project Manager with Wells Fargo for the Colony roads
issue, and Jalynne Giles of Sinsheimer, Schiebelhut & Baggett. I
am pleased to report that the tenor of the meeting was upbeat and
conciliatory, and as a result of approximately 112 hours of deli-
beration, there was conceptual agreement at our level to work
toward a mutual resolution of the existing Colony roads issue.
It was agreed by both parties that we should work jointly to
fully resolve the outstanding issue of Colony roads title trans-
fer from Wells Fargo to the City without the necessity of either
party having to seek adversarial litigation. It was further
agreed that we would work to ultimately resolve the matter in as
comprehensive a way as possible. Essentially, this would neces-
sitate our agreeing, at some point, to accept from Wells Fargo
title to all of the various portions of real estate within the
City' s incorporated limits through an agreed upon vehicle, re-
sulting in a vested transfer of ownership.
In recognition of the City' s major concerns involving transfer
of ownership, Wells Fargo has agreed to a minimum of one year (or
more, if the circumstances warrant) as a goal for accomplishing
this transaction, a period of time in which wells Fargo will turn
over data from their files and participate with the City in un-
dertaking the necessary definitive survey of street and roadway
conditions and their ultimate costs to the City.
This memo is intended to provide an overview of the general un-.
derstanding which was reached by the Council sub-committee and
will be followed up as quickly as possible with a draft resolu-
tion memorializing the substance of such agreement. Both parties
fully appreciate and acknowledge that a vote of the full Council
is necessary before any formal agreements are structured and
executed.
RW: cw
c : All Departments
MEETING AGENDAC
DATE I
• M E M O R A N D U M
To: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Bonita Borgeson
Subject: Multi-family zoning/Small lot alternatives
Date: April 27, 1990
I would like to follow-up on the discussion related to agenda
Item B-3 of April 24th. Given the concerns expressed by Alden
and myself, as well as questions raised by other members of the
Council , I believe it is time to update our existing inventory
of the multiple-family zoning. To that extent, I would like to
know how much acreage we have, how much is developed, how many
units are currently built and, of that number, what percentage
are currently occupied?
Inasmuch as the hearing to establish a planned development over-
lay zone and the corresponding creation of a four-lot residential
subdivision on Sinaloa raised the issue of how lofts are to be
treated, in terms of their potential impact on sleeping quarters,
it would seem timely for Council to provide some direction to
staff on this subject. In fact, I intend to request that Council
consider holding a study session to address this issue further,
as well as my concerns about whether or not small lot develop-
ments are providing adequate trade-offs, from which I am hopeful
that firmer guidelines and standards can be established.
Please agenda this for the meeting of May 8th, so we may consider
suitable dates for a study session.
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
Greg Luke, Public Works Director
RE: Proposed Study Session Agenda Items
DATE: May 22, 1990
BACKGROUND:
Councilmember Borgeson, in her memorandum of April 27 , 1990,
requested a study session for consideration of multi-family zoning
inventory and small lot alternatives in planned development
projects. We are quite well along in gathering data on multi-
family housing at the request of the Planning Commission, and this .
would appear to lend itself well to a joint study session. In
addition, there are other matters where policy direction would be
appropriate from the City Council and/or as a result of a joint
session with the Plannina Commission.
PROPOSED AGENDA TOPICS:
1 . Multi-family zoning inventory - acreage, number of units,
holding capacity, extent of condominium conversion activity,
etc . However, we don' t have a means for determining the per-
centage of occupancy (the 1990 Census will provide that data) .
2 . Planned development overlay zone criteria - including small
lot minimum lot size, adequate trade-offs, etc .
3 . Housing Element update - "affordable" housing, granny units,
timing of adequate census data, etc .
4 . General Plan Update - review of the draft Land Use, Conserva-
tion & Open space Elements that were recently transmitted to
the Council, Planning Commission and the General Plan mailing
list
5 . Road standards - Engineering staff is preparing draft policy
for imposition of road standards through road improvement plan
project stages . Discussion should include when to require
what types of improvements for development projects together
with how to encourage assessment districts for a more
comprehensive solution to area road needs .
•
6 . Drainage Improvements - Review drainage problems throughout
the City and discuss both short-term (such as detention ponds)
and long-term solutions (such as storm drains) .
7 . Capital Improvement Needs and Priorities - The City' s capital
improvement needs for the decade should be discussed. Also
their respective priority for construction needs to be
examined. Council ' s input will be helpful for the Public
Works Department to work with the consultant developing the
Fiscal Management Model.
HE:ph
s
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-9
Through: Ray Windsor , City Manager Meeting Date: 5/22/9
From: Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Directo�
SUBJECT: Adopting Resolution of Intent and First Reading of the
Ordinance implementing the enhanced Public Safety Retirement .
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council adopt the attached
Resolution and approve the first reading of the Ordinance
implementing the Section 21251 .01 (2% at 50 full formula)
Retirement benefit .
BACKGROUND: Early retirement for Public Safety employees is
fairly common place in local governments. After extensive
negotiations in the Spring of 1988, the enhanced retirement
package was included in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the City and the four Public Safety bargaining units
(Firefighters, Fire Captains, Police Officers and Police
• Sergeants).. Under the terms of the contract , the new benefit
would be implemented in July, 1990.
There are a number of procedural steps required by the
Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) . These include Council
adoption of a Resolution of Intent and enabling Ordinance, and an
election by the affected members. The attached time schedule
explains these steps in greater detail .
FISCAL IMPACT: The increased costs will not be effective until
at least after the current fiscal year . The City ' s costs will be
included in the annual budget process as appropriate.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
Public Agency Contract Services
Contract Services Division - Section 220
Post Office Box 942709 C:(apr
Sacramento, CA 94229-2709
Telephone (916) 326-3420
326-3000 (Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf.) /
ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE OF AGENCY ACTIONS
The City of Atascadero, ER 1248 hereby. requests the-
documents necessary to amend its contract to include the benefit(s) as shown
below. Check the appropriate benefit.
•1. Section 21251.01 - 2% @ 50 full formula (from 2% @ 55 full formula) for
local safety members.
1. nS/jA ion DEADLINE DATE THE RESOLUTION OF INTENTION IS NEEDED TO
INCLUDE IN AGENDA FOR GOVERNING BODY. This date must- be at
least three weeks from the date this form is received in the
Public Agency Contract Services Office.
2. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. The first reading of
the Ordinance may be held on the same day the Resolution of
Intention is adopted. •
3. 4 EMPLOYEE ELECTION. (Necessary for options which affect the
employees' rate of contribution).
4• n6 ADOPTION OF FINAL ORDINANCE. This date cannot be earlier
than 20 days after adoption of the Resolution of Intention
(date #2).
5. EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE. Usually 30 days following
the date of the adoption of the final Ordinance (date #4) .
If an Urgency Ordinance is adopted waiving this 30 day
period, please specify this on the Ordinance.
6• n7114190 EFFECTIVE DATE OF PERS AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT. If. the
employees' rate of contribution will not be affected, the
effective date can be. the day following the effective
date of the final Ordinance (date #5). If the employees'
rate of contribution is affected, the effective date cannot
be earlier than the first day of a payroll period following
the effective date of the Ordinance (date #5).
BY
MARK JS H
Date 05/01/90
TITLE DIRE R OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERV I Cj
PERS-CON-8 (ORDINANCE)
C0708A (Rev. 2/90)
# NOTE: THE RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING THE ENHANCED
PUBLIC SAFETY RETIREMENT WERE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF AGENDA
PREPARATION AND WILL BOTH BE DISTRIBUTED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE UPON
RECEIPT.