HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 02/23/1988 CINDY WILKINS
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
A G E N n A
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA .ROOM
FEBRUARY- 23, 1988
7:30 P. M.'
RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda.
* A person may speak for five ( 5) minutes
No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to
speak has had an opportunity to -do so.
No one may speak more than twice on any item.
Council Members may question any speaker; the ,speaker may
respond; but after the allotted time has expired, may not
initiate further discussion.
* The floor will then be closed to public participation and
open for Council discussion.
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
City Council Comment
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
(The following represents Ad Hoc- or Standing Committees .
Informative` status reports will be, given, as felt necessary. )
1 City/School Committee 6 . Equal Opportunity Commission
Co . North Coastal Transit 7 . Police Facility Committee
3 . San Luis Obispo Area 8. Atascadero Zake Acquisition
Coordinating Council Committee
4 . Traffic Committee 9 Tree Committee
5 . Solid/Hazardous Waste 10 . Bicentennial Committee
Management Committee
11 . Pavilion Committee
i
,k _ 1
P
I
I
f
Approximate Time - 30 Minutes)
COMMUNITY FORUM:
The City Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and
comments from you the citizen. The Public Comment 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-or City
staff. ;
Any person desiring to submit written statements may do
so by forwarding to 'Council, prior to the Council Meeting.,
nine (9) copies to the City Clerk by 5 :.00 p.m. on: the
Wednesday preceding the Council Meeting.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR't
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
Consent Calendar'.
-1 . Approval of February 4 , 1988 Special Council Minutes
2 . Approval of February 9 , 1988 Council Minutes
3 . Approval of Treasurer' s Report January, 1988
4 . Approval of Finance Department Report - January, 1988
5 . Approval of Tentative Lot Line Adjustment 19-87 - 2405
Santa Ana 'Road Davis/Volbrecht Surveys
6 . Approval of Tentative Tract Map 42-87/Precise Plan 49-87 -
6875 Tecorida - (Woodglen Development Ltd)
T. Approval of Tentative Tract Map 45-87 - 8300 E1 Camino-
Real ('Sanders Construction/Cuesta Engineering)
8 Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 31-87 - 7800 Santa Cruz
Road - Davis/Cuesta Engineering
2
i
`�
,�
i
i
;'I
i
i
r
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 3/$$
(REVISED )
U TEM A-16 ADDED )
9 . Approval' of Tentative Parcel Map 43-87 - 8500 E1 Dorado
Road - Lindsey/Engineering Development Assoc . )
-10 Approval of Road Name 01 --88 (Gal l i na Court) 5200 Llano
Road - Drake'/Cuesta Engineering
11 . Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 14-85 9850 Las Lomas Ave -
Bebeau/Janolis/Cuesta Engineering'
12. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 5-87 8925 Atascadero Ave -
Fisher
y .
13 . Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 24-87 - 9122 Atascadero- AVe-
d'Bannon/Cuesta Engineering
14. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 22-85 6905 El Camino Real -
El Camino Associates/Cuesta Engineering
15. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 7-87 - 5020 Palma - Ebhardt/
Vol breeht Survey's
1.6. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 29-87 ' - 10655 Real i to Ave
Kinz/Twin Cities Engineering
B . HEARINGS/APPEARANCES/REPQ'RTS:
(Approximate Time - 10 Minutes)
1 . Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use
Permit 1 -88 - Establishment of a Mobile Home Dealership for,
One Year on the Corner of San An:selmo and the West Side of
U.S . Highway 101 (Beehive" Mobile Homes) - Goff,
(APPEAL WITHDRAWN)
C . ATASCADERD COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT;
(Council will recess and 'convene as the Atascadero County
Sanitation District Board of Directors)
(Approximate Time - 30 Minutes)
1 . Proposed Sewer Annexation into Improvement District # 1
Mac Corkle (Cont ' d from 2/9/_88)
A. Resolution 21 -58 - Extension of Public Sewer Service
to Lot 25 , Block YB ( Larga Avenue) and Incorporation
of the Location into the Boundaries of Improvement
District # 1
• B . Relief Request by Adjacent Property Owners
3
-
(Approximate Time - 15 Minutes)
2 . Proposed Sewer Annexation into Improvement District #1 -
Dewing;
A. Public Hearing
B. Resolution 24-88 - Extension of Public Sewer Service to
Lot 30, Block IB (Violetta Ave. ) and Incorporation of
the Lot into the Boundaries of Improvement District #1
C. Consideration of Relief Request by Adjacent Property
Owners, if any)
(Approximate Time 10 Minutes)
3 ._ Award of Proposal for Sewer Master Plan to CH2M Hill. for
$24 ,900
(Board to recess and reconvene as Atascadero City Council)
D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
(Approximate Time - 10 Minutes )
1 Comprehensive Rewrite of City Building Codes :
A. Ordinance 166 - `Amendment of Building Regulations
to the Atascadero Municipal Code, and Adoption, by
Reference, the Uniform Administrative Code, 1985
Edition ( SECOND AND FINAL READING) (Cont'd from
2/9/88)
(Approximate Time - 10 Minutes)
2 . Proposed City/School District Joint Use of Facilities Joint'
Powers Agreement (Cont'd from 1/26/88 Council Agenda)
(Approximate Time - 10 ,Minutes)
3 . Authorization to Begin Recruitment Process for an `
Administrative Services Director Position (Cont'd from
2/9/88)
E. NEW BUSINESS:
(Approximate Time - 20 Minutes)
1 . Resolution 16-88 - Increasing Speed Limit on El Camino- Real
in the Southbound Lanes, Between San Jacinto and Rosario
Avenues (Cont' d from 2/9/88)
-4
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 2 /$$ ( REVISED )
( ITEM E-6 ADDED )
•
(Approximate Time _ 0 riit rateaz---)
2 . Resolution 22-88 Proposed Acceptance of Corriente Road
into the City of Atascadero' s Maintained Street System
Davis (Cont'd from 2/9/88)
(Approximate Time - 15 Minutes)
3 . Resolution 19-88 Designation of a Stop Intersection on
Atascadero •Avenue at Santa Ynez Avenue (Cont' d from 2/9/88) `
(Approximate Time - 15 Minutes)
4 . Proposed Zoning Text Amendment to Require Conditional Use
Permit Hearings for certain Large Scale Projects
(Approximate Time - 15 Minutes)
5. Request by Vineyard Christian Fellowship for City Council to
Initiate a Zoning Text Amendment to Permit Churches in the
Commercial Park Zone
(Approximate Time - 30 Minutes)
6 . Council Consideration regarding Location of Regional
Government Center
F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION:
1 . City Council
2 . City Attorney
3 . City Clerk
4 . City Treasurer
5 . City Manager
5
r * •. i.- A
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES - 'SPECLAL MEETING
FEBRUARY 4, 1988
The Special Joint Meeting with the 'AUSD Board (held in the
IMC Building of Atas. High School ) was called to order at 6:35
p•m•
ROLL CALL
Present : Councilmembers Borgeson, Bourbeau, Mackey and ,Mayor
. Norris
Absent: Councilman Handshy
Staff Present: Mike Shelton, City Mgr . ; Paul Sensibaugh, Pub .
Wks. Dir . ; Henry Engen, Commun. Devel . Dir. ; Bob
Best , Parks & Rec . Dir . ; Gil Dovalina, Rec . Supvr
Cindy Wilkins, Dep.; City Clerk
AUSD Representatives Present : Dr . Anthony Avina, Supt. ; Board-
members Emile LaSalle, Sue Molle,
Roy King, Leslie Haynes, Orville
Horst, Theon Burt and Kenneth Beck
Dr . Avina made opening comments, noting that this is the firs
joint meeting between the two bodies of Council and School Board.
Mayor Norris introduced Council and staff, followed by opening
comments ;by Mr . Shelton, C. Mgr .
1 . Atascadero Creek Bridge Consensus of Bridge Location and
Traffic Flow/Configuration
Mr. Sensibaugh, Pub. Wks. Dir . , reviewed a brief history of the
bridge issue and presented current alternatives for bridge
location. After reviewing staff report, Mr . Sensibaugh
recommended that the Council and Board agree to the; proposed
alignment or make -a joint recommendation to the committee.
Lengthy discussion ensued regarding alternatives. The Board
expressed its main concern is that some of the proposed alignment
areaarea involvesthe only available property the school has for
future expansion needs as student population increases.
• Dr . Avina acknowledged the district ' s concerns relating to growth
and _` future space needs (particularly at the Junior High ) ,
however , he noted support of Mr . Sensibaugh ' s comments regarding
the issue. Dr . Avina indicated that the Board will meet with
City staff to insure that the proposed land lease "swap" will be
City staff to insure that the proposed land lease "swap" will be
as equal as possible to preserve the interests of both parties.
Public Comment
Gaylen Little, a co-owner of Century Plaza, requested some
direction as to what to expect in the near future, noting that
many decisions were made with the bridge_. in- mind . He urged the
Council and Board to reach a decision this year on the project .
The consensus of --the Board and Council was to study this issue
further and meet again in joint session to reach an agreement .
Said meeting was scheduled for Monday, Feb. 22nd, at 7:00 p.m. in
the IMC Building of Atas. High School .
2. City of 'Atascadero/Atascadero Unified School District -
Conceptual Approval of the Proposed Joint Use of Facilities
Agreement
Mr. Best, Parks & Rec. Dir. , gave staff report followed by
additional comments by Mr . Dovalina, Rec . Supvr.
Boardmember Molle expressed the Board ' s concern that youth sports -
groups might be alienated from using facilities. Mr. Dovalina
responded that it is not the Recreation Dept. ' s (nor the Board ' s)
intent to dominate recreation facilities, and this concern was
eliminated .
The Board expressed concern that, due to the fact that the School
District encompasses areas outide the City limits, children
enrolled in the AUSD not residing within the City limits might
be restricted from participating in activities at school sites.
Related discussion ensued ; an Addendum was included in the text
of the proposed agreement to address this concern.
The Board unanimously approved the JPA, including the Addendum.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:00 P.M.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
CINDY WILKINS, Deputy City Clerk
*MEE�"AGEND�PLEASE ���INCLUDE^ RTO: YOIIR"2723 8 DATN n
COUNCIL PACKET
•
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
'I
FEBRUARY 9, 1988
The regular meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to
order at 7 :30 p.m. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present Councilmembers Borgeson, ;Bourbeau, Mackey, Handshy, and
Mayor Norris
COUNCILCOMMENT:
Mayor Norris announced that the Council had held a closed session
regarding personnel matters, which began at 6 :30 p.m.
Councilmember Borgeson' requests scheduling for the next Council
Meeting regarding review procedures for conditional use permits
related to large 'scale projects .
Mayor Norris requests Item F-1 , Request for Special General Plan
Amendment Hearing for Oak Tree Plaza (San Anselmo and Highway
101) , be reviewed by Council at this time rather than at the end
of the agenda.
REQUEST FOR SPECIAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT HEARING FOR OAR TREE
PLAZA (SAN ANSELMO AND HIGHWAY 101) :
Community Development Director Henry Engen states that the
project, by ' Crossroads Development Company, is proposing to
develop an 18 acre site as a shopping center. They are
requesting a sPecial General Plan Amendment Review cycle to
change the land use designation from SuburbanSingleFamily
Residential to Retail -Commercial with an urban
service line extension to provide sewer to the site.
Mr. Engen clarifies that the City presently has two General Plan
Amendment cycles, but legally could have more . The next cycle
application deadline is April 1, 1988
iAs a side issue, it is noted that Beehive Mobile Homes have been
granted a one year temporary use permit to place mobile homes on
a portion of the above site, which is presently privately owned.'
1
Councilmember Bourbeau clarifies to the audience that Council is
not reviewing the merits of this project at this time, but
addressing the request for a special General Plan Amendment
cycle.
Dan Lloyd, Engineering Development Associates, representing the
applicant, summarizes the types of retail shops proposed. He
states that this will be the largest retail project in
Atascadero. Mr. Lloyd further clarifies the need for a special
General Plan Amendment cycle because if this proposal is placed
with the other General Plan Amendment requests received by the
City, it would be subject to time delays encountered , by
processing the other requests, as they do not advance through the
process individually, but as a group.
Mr. Williams, applicant, states his willingness to work with
staff to do everything needed to make the proposed store an asset
to the area. He clarifies that he does not intend to close his
downtown location once the new site is developed.
Mr. Richard Kirkpatrick, Monterey Court resident, voices his
concerns regarding additional traffic impacts on surface roads
to the San Anselmo offramp, and to existing school traffic. He
objects to changing the present land use from minor development
into the largest commercial site in Atascadero. He also
disagrees with granting a special General Plan Amendment cycle
and bypassing the normal process.
Joey Mann, Crossroads Development, representing the applicant,
reviews public concerns regarding landscape screening, and 36
inch box tree planting proposed. He clarifies that the applicant
wants to provide a retail environment to serve the north end of
town that will not affect the downtown businesses and benefit the
City of Atascadero.
Henry Engen clarifies to John Mc Neil, resident, the process
related to environmental review and project reporting. Mr. Mc
Neil urges no special review, cycles .
Mary Kirkpatrick, resident, feels this project will require
maximum study and review due to it' s size and should not be
hurried along.
Celia Moss, resident, requests delaying decisions on this project
till after the E.R.A. development study is completed for the
City.
George Highland, resident, states that the regular April General
Plan Amendment cycle should not be impacted by reviewing this
project beforehand.
Kathy Williams, applicant, states that this proposed development
2_
will highly consider adjacent residents and will try to meet all
City requirements .
Betsi Outland, adjacent property owner, requests Council not to
grant a special review cycle for this proposal .
Francis Grimes , adjacent resident, feels this proposal will
remove the possibility for "piece meal development" on the site .
Louis Borjes , Monterey Road resident, feels this proposal is
better than previous projects proposed for this area.
Councilmember Handshy feels this type of proposal is good for the
area, but has concerns regarding deviating from the normal review
process . He further expresses his concerns regarding Beehive
Mobile Homes ' temporary relocation to the site.
Councilmember Bourbeau feels that granting a special review
process would be a precedenting action to accomodate large
development for future proposals . He also feels that the
applicant waiting for the normal cycle, beginning in April ,
should not be a great impact. Councilmember Bourbeau encourages
staff to work with the applicants in the time prior to April 1 in
preparing their application, etc .
Councilmember Mackey feels that an extra cycle would allow
additional time to review this project specifically.
Mayor Norris feels that a third additional cycle would allow
review of the project sooner.
MOTION: Councilmember Borgeson requests staff to process
this application as part of the April 1 General
Plan Amendment Cycle; Councilmember Bourbeau
seconds; Motion carries 4-1
(Mayor Norris opposed)
A 1-8 CONSENT CALENDAR:
The following are items listed on the Consent Calendar:
1 . Approval of January 26 , 1988 Council Minutes
2 . Approval of Time -Extension for Tentative Parcel Map 11-85 -
7150 Serena - Kennedy/Stewart
3 . Approval of Surplus Miscellaneous City Vehicles :
3
A. Resolution 23-88 - Declaring the following vehicles
as Surplus :
1961 Van Pelt Fire Truck
1979 Dodge 16 Passenger Van
1981 Chevrolet 16 Passenger Van
1980 Ford LTD (blue)
1980 ford LTD (blue/white)
1985 Ford LTD (blue/white) (wrecked)
1981 Chevy Impala Station Wagon
B. Authorize Sealed Bid procedures for Disposal of
Above Referenced Vehicles
4 . Approval of Resolution 17-88 - Designation of a Stop
Sign at Intersection on Los Gatos Avenue at the Westbound
Intersection with Flores Avenue
5 . Approval of Resolution 18-88 - Designation of a Stop
Intersection on La Paz Lane at Atascadero Avenue
6 . Approval of Resolution 20-88 - Designatin of a No Parking
Zone on the Southerly Side of Santa Lucia road, Directly
Across from the Catholic Church, the Entire Length of
Lot 24 , Block HB
7 . Approval of Resolution 14-88 - Calling and Giving Notice of
Holding the June 7 , 1988 General Municipal Election
8 . Approval of Resolution 15-88 - Requesting the County Board
of Supervisors to Consolidate the June 7 , 1988 General
Municipal Election with the Statewide Primary
Item A-4 , Resolution 17-88 - Designation of a Stop Sign
Intersection on Los Gatos Avenue at the Westbound Intersection
with Flores Avenue is removed from the Consent Calendar by
Councilmember Borgeson for further review.
After discussion and clarification between Council and Public
Works Director Paul Sensibaugh regarding logic for the sign
location at the intersectio,.-i; the item is placed back on the
Consent Calendar.
MOTION: Councilmember Bourbeau moves approval of the
Consent Calendar, as presented; Councilmember
Mackey seconds; Motion carries 5-0
4
B-1 COMPREHENSIVE REWRITE OF THE CITY BUILDING CODES:
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE 166 - AMENDMENT OF BUILDING REGULATIONS TO
THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE, AND ADOPTING, BY
REFERENCE, THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, 1985
EDITION (FIRST READING)
Community Development Director Henry Engen states that this
ordinance revision will be updating the existing ordinance with
the latest legislation on codes .
No public comment is given on this item.
Staff and Council review various changes proposed without further
changes requested.
Chief Building Inspecor Bob Fielding notes that the code changes
will not be retroactive.
MOTION: Councilmember Bourbeau moves to read Ordinance
166 by title only; Councilmember Borgeson seconds;
Motion carries 5-0
MOTION: Councilmember Borgeson moves this action to
constitute the first reading of ordinance 166;
Councilmember Mackey seconds; Motion carries 5-0
MOTION: Councilmember Bourbeau moves adoption of Ordinance
166; Councilmember Mackey seconds; Motion carries
5-0
B-2 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE - STATUS REPORT ON POSTAL SERVICE
COMPLIANCE WITH CITY DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
Community Development Director Henry Engen reviews prior
communications with the Postal Service representatives , and their
reluctance to meet with staff regarding development conditions
requested by the City, as they claim no additional funds
available.
The Post Office has a tentative completion date of Jure/July,
1988 .
Mr. Engen reviews possible actions the City could pursue if the
Postal Service continues to ignore development conditions the
City is requesting.
5
Mr. Engen states that today he received a telephone call from the
Postal Service Area Development Contracting Officer for this
area, who has requested to meet with staff to further discuss
this project.
City Attorney Jeffrey Jorgensen clarifies that the Postal
Service, falling under the jurisdiction of the Federal
Government, is exempt from local laws , but must meet Federal
Building Standards and their own review process . Any additional
funding given by the Postal Authorities would be strictly
voluntary to meet development conditions requested by the City.
Fire Chief Hicks encourages staff and Council to continue
pursuing negotiations with the Postal Service for additional
safety development condition requests, as our obligation is to
the people of Atascadero.
Council encourages staff to meet and negotiate with Postal
Service representatives and report back to Council .
C-1 ORDINANCE 163 - REVISED SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
(SECOND AND FINAL READING (CONT-D FROM 1/2 & 1/26/88) :
Community Development Director Henry Engen states that the
ordinance is being presented with changes made that were
requested at the January 26 , 1988 Council Meeting.
City Attorney Jeffrey Jorgensen clarifies that the Subdivision
Regulations are largely dictated by the Subdivision Map Act, of
which the City has no discretion over. The two areas the City
does have discretion over would be flag lots and lot line
adjustments .
Staff clarifies that the appeal fee of $100 is not refundable to
the applicant if his appeal is approved. The $100 fee relates
more so to staff time/materials involved in preparing for an
appeal .
Regarding cable service, the ordinance gives the City
discretionary ability to require cable where necessary, as cable
does not service all of Atascadero due to topography, etc .
No public comment is given on this item.
MOTION: Councilmember Bourbeau moves to read Ordinance
163 by title only; Councilmember Borgeson seconds;
Motion carries 5-0
6
E-1 PROPOSED SEWER ANNEXATION TO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT #1 -
MAC CORKLE:
A. PUBLIC HEARING
B. RESOLUTION 21-88 - EXTENSION OF PUBLIC SEWER SERVICE TO
LOT 25 , BLOCK YB (LARGA AVENUE) AND INCORPORATION OF
THE AREA INTO THE BOUNDARIES OF IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
NUMBER 1
Public Works Director Paul Sensibaugh feels that the proposed
annexation is acceptable as it is located in an already defined
"septic problem area" . He clarifies that this area has not yet
been defined as a "Cease and Desist Area" .
Mr. Sensibaugh submits a protest letter to Council by Patrick
and Suzette Snyder, requesting a waiver of hookup till their
septic system fails, as it is only 18 months old.
Mr. Sensibaugh clarifies that Mr. Mc Corkle will be requesting a
Reimbursement Agreement be set up (which has a life of 15 years )
to help defray his initial extension costs .
Mr. Sensibaugh states that when more people who hook up to sewer
in a problem area, it reduces a possible future cease and desist
area.
It is noted that the applicant is not present, as it was expected
that this would be a routine item.
It is clarified that if a request for waiver is not granted, the
extension costs would be divided equally by the number of lots
affected. Costs are approximated from $4 , 000 to $6 , 000 .
Council continues this item to the February 23 , 1988 Council
Meeting to allow staff to meet with the applicant regarding his
desire to pursue his request in light of a Request for Waiver
option to adjacent property owners .
D-4 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR RECRUITMENT:
A. AUTHORIZATION TO UTILIZE THE SERVICES OF PUBLIC
SKILLS (LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES) FOR AN INTERIM
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR
B. AUTHORIZATION TO BEGIN RECRUITMENT PROCESS FOR AN
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR
Due to the lateness of the hour, Council agrees to act on Park
"A" only at this time and continue Part "B" to the February 23 ,
1988 Council Meeting.
10
MOTION: Councilmember Borgeson moves to direct staff to
allow Mental Health Associates to remain in the
Ranger House location, with an increased rent,
which will be negotiated with staff , and directs
staff to re-present to Council viable alternatives
for recreational facilities; Councilmember
Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries 5-0
C-4 AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT A PROPOSAL BY BECKER AND BELL
CONSULTANTS TO CONDUCT A CITY MANAGER RECRUITMENT:
City Manager Shelton states that seven Executive Search Firms
were contacted, and the City received four proposals ranging from
$6 , 100 to $12 , 500 plus expenses .
Staff recommends Council accept the proposal by Becker and Bell
Consultants at $6 , 100, as they fulfill the basic scope of
services requested and were the low bid. They have an extensive
background in personnel and are familiar with the City, as they
do the City' s employee relation negotiations .
Councilmember Borgeson reviews the second lowest bid by Ralph
Anderson and Associates for $9 , 000 . In her opinion this firm is
much more qualified to provide the services requested, and that
the Becker and Bell firm' s specialty is employee relations and
not as an executive search firm.
City Manager Shelton agrees with Councilmember Borgeson' s
comments regarding the professionalism of Ralph Anderson and
Associates and supports this choice also.
George Highland, resident supports not accepting the Becker and
Bell proposal , as executive searching is not their forte .
Council further discusses the need to negotiate reasonable
expenses that can be incurred by the consultants .
cIt is noted that Councilmember Handshy departs the Council
Meeting at this time .
MOTION: Councilmember Borgeson moves to accept the
proposal by Ralph Anderson and Associates in
the amount of S9 , 000 plus reasonable expenses;
Councilmember Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries 4-1,) W 2AI
( -H-dTrd: ih7 _abs-en_t}
C
9
0 i
MOTION: Councilmember Borgeson moves to approve the second
reading of Ordinance 163 and adopt the ordinance;
Councilmember Bourbeau seconds; Motion carries
4-1 (Mayor Norris objects )
MOTION: Councilmember Mackey moves to publish Ordinance
163 with a synopsis display advertisement rather
than a whole ordinance printing; Councilmember
Handshy seconds; Motion carries 5-0
C-2 ZONE CHANGE 14-87 - 11250/11350 EL CAMINO REAL - FREDERICK
ORDINANCE 164 - AMENDMENT TO THE CITY ZONING MAPS FROM
RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN) (FH)
(SECOND AND FINAL READING) (CONT-D FROM 1/26/88) :
Community Development Director Henry Engen gives a brief review
of this item, and that it is now presented for final adoption.
No public comment is given on this item.
MOTION: Councilmember Bourbeau moves to read Ordinance 164
by title only; Councilmember Borgeson seconds;
Motion carries 5-0
MOTION: Councilmember Borgeson moves to adopt Ordinance
164 , by title only; Councilmember Handshy
seconds; Motion carries 5-0
C-3 ZONE CHANGE 16-87 - EAST OF SOMBRILLA AND WEST OF VALLE AVE
CITY OF ATASCADERO INITIATED:
ORDINANCE 165 - AMENDMENT TO THE CITY ZONING MAPS FROM RSF-X
(HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY ( 20 , 000 SQUARE FEET WITH SEWER)
TO RSF-Y (MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY) ( 1 .0 ACRE WITH
SEWER (SECOND AND FINAL READING) (CONT' D FROM 1/26/88) :
Community Development Director Henry Engen gives a brief review
of past events on this proposal .
No public comment is given.
MOTION: Councilmember Borgeson moves to read Ordinance 165
by title only; Councilmember Bourbeau seconds;
Motion carries 5-0
MOTION: Councilmember Bourbeau moves to Adopt Ordinance
165; Councilmember Borgeson seconds; Motion
carries 5-0
7
. 0 *91sy
C-5 AT C
AS ADERO LAKE PARK RANGER HOUSE NEEDS FEASIBILITY STUDY
(CONT'D FROM 11/24/87 AND 1/26/88) :
Park and Recreation Director Robert Best states that he has met
with Mental Health representatives regarding a possible shared
use of the Ranger House, with a mutual agreement that this would
only be feasible in a very limited use and that it is not a good
idea.
An alternative discussed related to demolition of an old
structure at the park and construct a facility to accomodate an
activity building that would be larger than the Ranger House .
Barbara Fisher, Mental Health Associates Director, reviews her
concerns regarding a shared use of the Ranger House. She
describes the service that is provided by her program to certain
residents of Atascadero, and that it is a needed service . She
also clarifies that she is mandated by State Law to offer her
services in a home-like setting, and her concerns on relocating
to a residential area.
George Brudney, Mental Health Associates volunteer, states that
Mental Health Associates have been operating out of the Ranger
House for 10 years and feels the service is an asset to the
community.
Dug Chisolm, Phycologist, states that the service is a
socialization program and opposes a move.
John Harris , Parks and Recreation Commissioner, clarifies the
issues related to this item in that the Mental Health Associates
are on a short-term rental agreement for use of the Ranger House .
With the demise of the Pavilion Building and shortage of other
City facilities , the Park and Recreation Department is in need
of additional space for classes . The Ranger House is a
recreational facility in a recreational area. If the City has
need of a City-owned facility, it should be the priority use of
the facility. Mr. Harris supports staff recommendation of
terminating the present rental agreement and utilization of the
building for City recreational functions .
Councilmember Bourbeau discusses a need to renegotiate the
present rental agreement to represent fair market value of the
facility and to relocate recreational activities to other areas
within Atascadero.
Councilmember Borgeson supports Councilmember Bourbeau' s opinion
and adds that the funds received from the rent should be utilized
for purchase of a portable building located at the lake .
Mayor Norris agrees that Mental Health Associates should remain
at their present location.
8
MOTION: Councilmember Bourbeau moves to authorize
utilization of the services of Public Skills
for an Interim Administrative Services
Director; Councilmember Mackey seconds;
Motion carries 4-0
D-1 RESOLUTION 16-88 - INCREASING THE SPEED LIMIT ON EL CAMINO
REAL IN THE SOUTHBOUND LANES, BETWEEN SAN JACINTO AND
ROSARIO AVENUES:
Due to the lateness of the hour, this item is continued to the
February 23, 1988 Council Meeting without review.
D-2 RESOLUTION 22-88 - PROPOSED ACCEPTANCE OF CORRIENTE ROAD
INTO THE CITY OF ATASCADERO' S MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM:
Due to the lateness of the hour, this item is continued to the
February 23 , 1988 Council Meeting without review.
D-3 RESOLUTION 19-88 - DESIGNATION OF A STOP INTERSECTION ON
ATASCADERO AVENUE AT SANTA YNEZ AVENUE:
Due to the lateness of the hour, this item is continued to the
February 23 , 1988 Council Meeting without review.
City Attorney Jeffrey Jorgensen reviews the draft Beno' s purchase
agreement with Council, which represents negotiations made thus
far. He requests Council to revieview this agreement in detail,
with special interest towards Beno' s special demands .
The Atascadero City Council Meeting is adjourned at 11 : 50 p.m. to
a Closed Session on February 14 , 1988 and a February 18, 1988
Joint City/School District Meeting.
Prepay d by:
K en Vaughan
Deputy City Clerk
11
h1F•Ei*-N3 AG:JDA
lam# ka
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE .OF CASH RECEIPTS AND TRANSFERS IN
FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY, 1988
CASH RECEIPTS:-
Taxes:
Property Tax 82,040.13
Sales Tax 76,300.00
Franchise Tax 3.883.85
Livestock-Head Day Tax " 88.62
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 53,258.34
Cigarette Tax 4,183.30
Development Impact Tax 6,238.50
Occupancy Tax 10,,502.51
Other Receipts:
Licenses/Permits/Fees 43,351.09
Contribution to Fire Dept. 2.00
Pines/Penalties/Overages 943.84
Police Reimbursements 16,040.81
Zoo Reserve Fund 505.00
Parks and Recreation Fees " 12,925.75
Investment Earnings 49,730.03
Traffic Safety 5,577.58
Local Transportation 97,322.64
Development Fees 3,790.23
Zoo Receipts 2,467.67
Rents/Concessions 263.83
Sales-Maps/Publications/Reports 307.20
Special Police Services 159.00
Weed Abatement 1,539.47
Street Assessments 11,424.50
Miscellaneous 7,295.18
TOTAL CASH RECEIPTS° 490,141.07
FUND TRANSFERS IN:
Sanitation Fund Reimbursement 79,386.35
TOTAL FUND TRANSFERS IN 79,386.35
OTHER CASH RECEIPTS:
Performance Bonds 5,448.10
Bail/Bonds 650.00
Reimbursement to Expense 1,967.99
Refunds 4,021.49
TOTAL OTHER CASH RECEIPTS 12,087.58
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CASH ACTIVITY SUMMARY
FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY, 1988
BEGINNING CASH RESOURCES 3,372,539.86
ADD:
RECEIPTS 502,228.65
-FUND TRANSFERS 791386.35
INVESTMENTS REDEEMED 245,000.00
LESS:
DISBURSEMENTS 601,978.27
FUND TRANSFERS 47,000.00
INVESTMENTS MADE 204,000.00
ENDING CASH RESOURCES 3,346,176.59
SCHEDULE OF CASH RESOURCES _Int. Due
AS OF JANUARY 31, 1988 Rate Date
Checking Account:
Mid-State Bank 46,213.67
Certificates of Deposit:
Cal America Savings 99,000.00 8.50 03/09/88
Beverly Hills Savings 99,000.00 8.60 03/28/88
Pacific Savings Bank 99,000.00 8.65 03/28/88
Butterfield Savings 99,000.00 8.60 05/17/88
First Cal Savings 99,000.00 8.75 06/21/88
Gateway Savings 99,000.00 8.75 08/16/88
Farmers Savings 99,000.00 9.15 07/07/88
Other Investments
Bankers Accept Wells Fargo 486,422.92 7.35 04/18/88
Local Agency Inv. Fund 2,120,000.00 8.07 N/A
Other Cash Resources:
Petty Cash 540.04
TOTAL CASH RESOURCES 3,346,176.59
Gere Sibbach
City Treasurer
i
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SCHEDULE OF DISBURSEMENTS
FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY, 1988
DISBURSEMENTS:
Hand Warrant Register for January, 1988 3,056.28
01/08/88 Accounts Payable Warrants 68,727.36
01/15/88 Accounts Payable Warrants 209,109.-93
01/22/88 Accounts Payable Warrants 71,638.90
01/29/88 Accounts Payable Warrants 63,957.02
Service- Charge-Mastercard/Visa 2.50
12/31/87 Wire Transfers 204,000.00
01/06/88 Payroll Checks #41443-41557 89,520.65
01/20/88 Payroll Checks #41558-41697 96,241.`01
TOTAL 806,253.65
LESS:
Voided Check #37226 275.38
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS 805,978.27
I, DAVID JORGENSEN, 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.
DAVID (101WENSEN
Admin. Services Director
•
Mme' �? L A^v';3A
DA;
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council February 23, 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen,; Community Development Director
RE Lot Line Adjustment 19-87
2405 Santa Ana Road (Gordon T. Davis) (Volbrecht Surveys)
-BACKGROUND
At their regular meeting of February 2, 1988, the Planning ;Commission
considered the above-referenced lot line adjustment on their Consent
Calendar and recommended approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Lot Line Adjustment 19-87 aser Planning Commission recom-
P 9
- mendation.
HE:ph
Attachments: Staff Report - February 2, 1988
i
City of Atascadero item A,.2
STAFF REPORT •
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: February 2, 1988
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: LLA 19-87
SUBJECT:
Lot Line Adjustment 19-87 to adjust the property line between
four existing lots of record.
I,
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . .Gordon T. Davis
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . .Volbrecht Surveys
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . .2405 Santa Ana Road
4 Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .29.7 acres
5 Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .RS (Residential Suburban)
6. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant
7. General Plan Designation—Suburban Bingle Family
8. Environmental Status. . . . . .Categorically Exempt (Class 5)
B. ANALYSIS:
The subject property is located in the RS (Residential
- Suburban) zone. Minimum lot size in this zone ranges between 2.5
and 10.0 acres depending. upon the score of various performance
standards. The minimum lot size has been determined to be 4.04
acres on the front two parcels and 5.04 acres on the rear
parcels. The four resulting parcels with 8. 2, 7.9, 8.5, and 5.1
acres all conform to the minimum lot size standards set by the
zoning ordinance.
Parcels 3 & 2 1 & 4
Distance from Center (14,000 16, 000) 0.50 0.50
Septic Suitability (40 min. /inch) 1: 00 1. 00
Average Slope (26%-30%_, front) 1. 25
(40 and up, rear) 2. 25
Access Conditions (Road 'under construction) 0.40 0.40
Neighborhood Characteristics (4.72) 0.94 0.94•
minimum lot size 4.04 5.04 •
The applicant' s proposed lot line adjustment is based on
plans to subdivide the parcels further at a later date. Parcels
1 & 4 will be reduced in size while Lots 2 & 3 will be made
larger. With a minimum lot size of 4. 04 acres one additional
lot may be created from Parcel 3. Parcel 2 might be able to be
enlarged to allow for a split at a latter date.
Two building permits have been applied for to build homes on
Parcels 2 & 3. The placement of the homes and utilities do not
conflict with the proposed lot lines.
The proposed map, as presented, complies with City policies
and standards. It is staff' s determination that the proposed lot
line adjustment does not present any significant planning issues.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends conditional approval of Lot Line Adjustment
19-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit C and the Conditions of
Approval in Exhibit D.
JM/jm
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Lot Line Adjustment Map
Exhibit C - Findings for Approval
Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT A - LOCATION MAP
CITY OF L
KaSCADERO LA 19-87
2405 Santa Ana
CAB COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Davis/Volbrecht
DEPARTMENT
s •
RS
P
'p'p
O 0p�
s si
a q.
o a
7
R S
SITE 2405 Santa Ana
LLA 19-87
2405 Santa Ana
S
e� Davis?Volbrecht
.7 0�
Qo
�4N
OapN' 11 1 F
/L
� \\` 1 I •y I;\
C C "Rp4 \ /
Co OI OQ I�
•Q
1\
1
11
ROAp \
m
\ Lc H) R S
Roy ��. �` ---r--r-�_�oM'T�s�1 •. `"
EXHIBIT B - TENTATIVE MAP
CITY OF LLA 19-87
y!1 :�•� :•.. . �'�i ATASCADERO 2405 Santa Ana
'B9's� Davi s/Volbrecht
CAM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
�P,ml,'L MAP NO.AT/9187-;W)
TENTAT/l�E LOT L/NE ADJUST/NENT _
BE/H6 AN AD✓OST.Y/ENL OF IOTS 2,//,/2,ANO A POAT/ON Of
` !Old,BCOCK 60,ATASlA0EA0 CO[02'Y/N JHE f//Y Of
A/ASCAOEQO, fOIJNTY Of SAY[GYS OB/SPO, STALE Of
CAUFOCti/9
N>q I pip ROAD �
f
OWNERS CE<YT/F/C_ATE
J
� � / @� /HEREBY REQUEST THE AfPROLAL Of THE.'l.'l'/.fiO.V Of
HPOPERTV AS SHOiY.V.ONT,:/S rEL7;l/LE'iL1AV.
r
AyTj i1 zj
i Q /NfRf9Y Sl9lE THAT/AAf THE.9Gr/y"9rffO.f!'i'Ev1 p�
PARCEL 3 eA) 2 THE 0,4SR Of SAiO HPOAEAIY ANO'.f 1h"27Wt19aRY
„s �,. * ,Sf/OlYN HEREON/S 7RGE ANO fOR4f">!D THE?ESr pf
Z ! SAG NET f7.9 AC NE7
ROAD E '
k effect 4 PA/PCEL/
SAOS !S./ACAE°T .BZ ACNEr
/J
/ WIAl rY MAP
RECEIVED
JAN 121999
9CA /'•t?o• COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
- _ PfEF9PE0 FOR
F/,PSI tiAnatirsr�E_�lEn�nrr.'.�r����E
!JS AAGECES. C9uF�R4i9 9.^..^SB
,/GKV Gc'EGlESV, SC 0:'Cf fPES.:EI"
� /ff49fED d»
{/OLBRECHT SURVEYS
7JAS MJG 0 ROAD
• A' [! C4.:OCi:N 1311.
/SPS)4Gd-9:9G
EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval
Lot Line Adjustment LLA 19-87
2405 Santa Ana Road .
Davis/Volbrecht
February 2, 1988
FINDINGS:
1. The application as submitted has been determined to be
categorically exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
2. The application as submitted conforms with all applicable
zoning, general plan and subdivision regulations of the City
of Atascadero.
JM/jm
i •
EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval
Lot Line Adjustment LA 19-87
2405 Santa Ana Road
Davis/Volbrecht
February 2, 1988
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The lot line adjustment as generally shown on the map
attachment provided herein shall be submitted in final map
format or reflected in a record of survey to be approved by
the Community Development Department prior to recordation.
2. The proposed adjusted lot lines shall be surveyed and
monuments set at the new property corners prior to
recordation of the final map or record of survey.
3. If a final map is to be recorded, all existing easements
shall be delineated thereon.
4. Approval of this lot line adjustment shall expire two years
from the date of approval unless a time extension has been
granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration
date.
JM/jm
Mr�'r�1G � ItGEt`tOA
D tir`J1 -
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council- February 23, 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
RE Tentative Tract Map 42-87/Precise Plan 49-87
6875 Tecorida (Woodglen Development Ltd. )
BACKGROUNDS
At their regular meeting of February 2, 1988, the Planning Commission
held a public hearing on the above-referenced tract map and precise
plan. This project had formally been submitted as a subdivision with
a ' planned development overlay zoning change to .allow for a small lot
subdivision. This was denied ,by the City Council in October 1987.
The application, as submitted, is for a combination precise plan and
condominium tract map, with the project having been . modified to re-
flect multi-family standards for storage, parking and recreation
space. Following discussion, Commission voted 5:0 to approve the pro-
ject (Commissioner Mchielssen stepped down clue to conflict of inter-
-est) .
nter-
.est) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Tentative Tract _ Map 42-87/Precise Plan - 49-87 per Commis-
sion recommendation.
HE:ph
Attachments: Staff Report - February 2, 1988
Minutes Excerpt
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B.1
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: February 2, 1988
BY: Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No: TTM 42-87
PP 49-87
SUBJECT:
A- Precise Plan and Environmental Determination ` for the
construction of nine (9) single family dwellings in the
RMF/16 (FH) zone. The application includes a request for the
creation of nine (9) air-space condominium units with a common
area. The analysis also reviews the establishment of Los Arboles
as a private road name.
BACKGROUND: '
On October 27, 1987 the City Council denied Zone Change 9-87 and
Tentative Tract Map 10-87. These applications sought to create a
nine lot subdivision through a planned development overlay. This
•current request is also for nine (9) units, however, it proposes
air-space condominiums, as opposed to nine separate lots. Thus,
a rezoning and PD overlay are not necessary and the project can
• be processed as a Precise Plan and condominium Tract Map.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . ..Woodglen Development, Ltd.
2. Representative. . . . . .Cuesta Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . 6875 Tecorida
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Lots 30,31,32 of Block UA
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2 acres
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF/16 (FH)
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Multiple Family
8. Existing Use. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .Vacant
9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
.January 19, 1988
B. ANALYSIS:
The proposed number of units and their site placement is
essentially the same as previously reviewed. The major
difference is that this project proposes air-space condominiums,
while the previous project proposed the creation of separate lots
via a planned development and zone change procedure. Thus, the
current project is reviewed under the Multiple Family Density
Standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff has combined the
precise plan and tract map into one report and environmental
determination to avoid duplication and to consolidate processing. .
Nine (9) three-bedroom residential units are the maximum allowed
under the hillside density standards of the Zoning Ordinance.
The property development standards, however, may affect this
maximum number when parking, recreation, coverage, and storage
requirements are included. Staff received a revised site. plan on
Monday, January 25, 1988, which attempted to meet these
standards. In a quick review, staff has determined that the
parking and coverage requirements are met. The site plan appears
to meet the outdoor recreation provision, but a. more thorough
review will occur in the building permit process. The
requirement that each dwelling unit be provided with a minimum of
100 square feet of enclosed storage space, exclusive of closets,
is not met in the submitted floor plan and site plan. The
project is being specifically conditioned to meet these standards
to ensure that they are met prior to issuance of permits or
filing the map.
The project was previously reviewed and accepted by Caltrans,
Fish and Game, and an archeologist. The utility companies have
been notified and responded with requests for easements. The
road name Los Arboles poses no problems to public safety agencies
and is consistent with road name policies. Drainage and soils
reports were also previously submitted and found to be adequate.
These reports need to be resubmitted and reviewed during the
building permit process, particulary because the site is located
in the Amapoa/Tecorida Drainage Impact Fee area. The site is
presently quite marshy with two streams traversing it, making
drainage the most critical development issue.
Once the conditions of approval have been secured in the Precise
Plan, the creation of condominiums does not present any special
planning issues. Each unit will be individually owned and the
parking and open space areas will be owned in common. To achieve
proper and timely project development, all conditions of the
Precise Plan must be completed before the tract map is recorded.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Precise Plan 49-87 and Tentative
Tract Map 42-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit E and the
Conditions of Approval in Exhibit F, including the establishment
of Los Arboles as a private road name.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Location Map
Exhibit B - Site Plan
Exhibit C - Tract Map
Exhibit D - Developer Statement
Exhibit E - Findings for Approval
Exhibit F - Conditions of Approval
,r �. ♦ 111 (� �
/ I
yet .. ,
EX 1419 1T 13
�•
-Sl -FE }SLA N
CITY F PREC. 15 E PLAN 91-S'
O ATASCADERO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT �S-75 TEGOR IUI*
W0017GLEIll
i
�yl
Al� Lo
A b
^`• f � w
`; iPiC7 TrP
•r
�' •' 4g'vi I
• • � s � � I � �acr..,c,ti Y
` ion •• _ -- � _ "\ ..
I- X �4 1Z 1T L�
gyp. TTM y Z-87
CITY OF AT - _- _- _
�. ASCADERO
,1179-,, 104375 T GOR I D14
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WOOD GL E7 1J
J DEPARTMENT
remwlVG rtAcr/573
011N A SNCO/V/S.NN—L.`HLJ•••.:•'
I,:1115 00/>/D.1rJrG:i Gc:•:«',J
I `\\�.,�:..
I
\\\\ —_ I Ijl �OWNECS CERT/f/GiTC
A/KY/CR JMROrfL O/rhG
:�„\\;:•.�\\ - O/V/$CN N,l<JL rF:rLVY�h.WN>V
/ /5 r<vnrrvG nwr ANo,`.uH,H+r[
\\�\ \- - �ij li /� /r/ rN<c/✓nc:r\ I i.r rNe rN CA oN 3N ✓GC=w
"10WroIt(LC• rNa
'T7 rNG OEir.Y
-/v cvoNKeA3<
/ � � . � �II �//�/r ii: r/���� W �'.ww•/::.e=vsncei<cE. »i..o ::ri
l / l `,ll/Illi llz 1 1 N/T 7 w
UN/T I
_ \ � �� - /./ /li /ill/ �� , � o I I \ ✓A''I•'�
C � � � \\\ll�j�ll�j�ll�ll"lll,�l�/i, ;/�� /,.�.,• L\\`\ \
- a v/clN/ry ri-i,�
BLDG i=.1 xi Le•r.re• W65rA fA&NEBC/NG
C[vJNar6 (rCL NS/rG NSG AGGI' J4C/GL UM/NO". L S'/rL0
.1Y.:W.'rvVltV/L A.SO LG/—t A/15LAOG(0,l.�U/.+µ%A i!!!L
* ExHiEIT D,
DFVELOPER'S STATEMENT ,STA i 1 AA F_ AJ -7-
Recreational
Recreational Space Provided On Site
The WOODGLEN project provides a minimum of over 1000 square feet per unit
of fenced recreational area for each unit located in the fenced backyard
areas of each unit. Please note the attached site plan with designated
fenced recreational areas for each unit.
The recreational space so provided still enable all occupants to enjoy
secure, fenced yard space. Please note that the targeted market for
these homes are typically retired couples, "empty" nesters whose
children have left home, and young couples buying their first home.
Purchasers will typically not have large families or numerous
children. Children will probably be infants, toddlers, etc. The
yard areas are very secure and spacious. There would be very
little use for a common recreational area. Mothers of young
children normally do not permit unsupervised play in common
park area these days. Fenced and secure backyards are the
definite preference. _
Storage Space per Unit
The newly enacted apartment development standards effects the project
, in another way--storage. Each unit must have 100sq.ft. of storage space.
Within the double garage all area outside an 18ft.xl8ft. footprint for
auto parking in storage--as in a typical single family home. The one-
level units have overhead storage in garage open rafters. The two-story
model has storage-under the stairwells. All units have at least one
oversized closet for additional storage, plus attic areas. Since all
these units are being constructed to single family home standards,
it would be discriminatory to demand more than what a standard home
provides--although these units do indeed meet the ordinance anyway.
Parking
According to newly enacted increased parking standards, these units will
require 23 gQAcE-o TOTAL .
A. 2 GAiZ bAZAZvf. ,ATrA4tdP, 1C0 rAZ0YI17aS:::1 AIV SHOWK OR A-LR-1
for each unit, two tandem spaces in each separate driveway, plus 5
random parking spaces including one handicapped. See site plan.
Solid Waste Disposal
The CC&R's (Conditions,Covenants and Restrictions) to be developed for
Woodglen will require that each unit have a minimum of two garbage cans
to be kept in fenced yard area with placement for curb pick-up on
designated days. Collection service will be mandatory in the CC&R's.
It is not appropriate to site a garbage bin with inherent problems
when collection can be handled as in other single-family type
neighborhoods.
Thank you.
WOODGLEN, LTD.
EXHIBIT E - Findings for Approval
Precise Plan 49-87
Tentative Tract Map 42-87
6875 Tecorida
(Woodglen/Cuesta)
February 2, 1988
FINDINGS
1. The creation of the proposed parcels conform to the Zoning
Ordinance and the General Plan land use designation,
densities, and other policies.
2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the
recommended Conditions of Approval, will not have a
significant adverse effect upon the environment. The
Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
.5. The design of the subdivision, and the proposed
improvements, will not cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and
wildlife or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by
the public at large for access through or the use of
property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially
equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474. 6 of
the State Subdivision Map Act as to the methods of handling
and discharge of waste.
8. The proposed project. or use is consistent with the General
Plan.
9. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
10. 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
i •
vicinity of the use.
11. The proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with
the character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to
its orderly development.
12. 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.
13. The appearance of the proposed project is in compliance with
the City' s Appearance Review Guidelines.
EXHIBIT F - Conditions of Approval
Precise Plan 49-87
Tentative Tract Map 42-87
(Woodglen/Cuesta)
February 2, 1988
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PRECISE PLAN
1. All construction shall be in conformance with Exhibit B
(site plan) , Exhibit F (Conditions of Approval) , and shall
comply to all City codes and ordinances. Any modification
to this approval requires approval by the Community
Development Department prior to implementing any changes.
2. Complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted
to, and subsequently approved by, the Community Development
Department prior to issuance of building permits (Section 9-
4. 124) . The following items shall be noted or detailed on
these plans:
a. All areas including setbacks, parking lots, and unused
areas shall be landscaped appropriately (Section 9-
4. 125 (a) .
-
4. 125 (a) .
b. Concrete curbing, or a functional equivalent, shall be
provided to enclose all required landscaping.
C. All existing trees with a diameter of eight (8) inches
or more shall be shown. Trees which are to be removed
shall be noted as such. A tree protection plan,
including fencing and other necessary measures to
protect existing trees, shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department for approval prior to
issuance of permits.
d. Proposed landscaping shall be accompanied with a
planting schedule which includes species, container
sizes, number of plants or flats, and the space
distribution of ground cover.
e. Five (5) foot of landscaped area with six (6) foot
fencing is required where parking areas abut adjacent
property.
3. Two (2) fire hydrants are required; to be located
approximately at each private road entrance with Tecorida.
Exact location shall be determined by the Fire Department
prior to issuance of permits. -
4. Grading and drainage plans, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, shall be submitted for review and approval to the
Community Development and Public Works Department prior to
the issuance of any permits or the recording of the final
map. The design of drainage facilities shall be based upon
the 100 year storm and construction of facilities shall be
certified by the design engineer. All work shall be
completed prior to final building inspection or recording of
the final map. Prior to final building inspection, the -
engineer shall submit to the City written certification that
grading is in conformance with approved plans and City
codes, including all Flood Hazard Overlay requirements.
5. A Drainage Maintenance Agreement, in a form acceptable to
the City Attorney, shall be included ih the CC&Rs to be the
responsibility of the Homeowners Association, unless the
storm drain system is constructed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer to become accepted into the City' s storm drain
system.
6. Sewer main extension plans shall be submitted for review and
approval by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of
permits or recording of the map. Construction of facilities
shall be completed and all applicable sewer fees paid prior
to final building inspection. An "as-built" original plan
shall be provided by the design engineer to- be kept on file
in the Department of Public Works. A minimum separation of
ten (10) feet horizontally shall be maintained at all times
between the sewer main and water main.
7. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the
Public works Department. This includes signing an
Inspection Agreement and a Curb and Gutter Agreement,
guaranteeing that the work will be done and inspections paid
for, prior to issuance of permits or the start of public
works construction. The construction of these improvements
shall be completed prior to final building inspection or
recording of the final map.
8. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered engineer,
shall be submitted to the Community Development Department
and Public Works Department for review and approval, prior
to issuance of permits. These shall include, but not be
limited to:
a. TECORIDA RD.- Design shall conform to the design of
Tecorida Rd. being prepared in connection with proposed
development at 6715 Morro Rd. as per Precise Plan 03-
87. Plans shall include a minimum paved section of 20
feet, plus a City standard curb, gutter, and 5 foot
sidewalk. Design shall include measures to protect
trees within the right-of-way, as determined by the
Community Development and Public Works Department.
b. SAN ANDRES - Design shall include City standard curb,
gutter, five (5) foot sidewalk, and paveout. Width
•
shall be determined by the City Engineer, not to exceed
20 feet from the centerline to curb face. This design
shall also include tree protection measures.
Construction of these public improvements shall be completed
prior to final building inspection or recording the final
map.
9. A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the
City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each unit
at the time it is first conveyed. A note to this effect
shall be placed on the final map.
10. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic
delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs,
guardrails, and barricades, and other similar devices where
required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in
conformance with the Department of Public Works standards
and the current State of California uniform sign chart.
Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review
and modification after construction.
11. Prior to the approval of the improvement plans by the
Director of Public Works, either the subdivider shall
acquire sufficient interest or title in the off-site land to
allow the improvements to be made as required by these
conditions; or the City Council, upon request by and at the
expense of the subdivider, shall have made all appropriate
findings and adopted a Resolution of Necessity as required
by law so that the City may exercise its power of Eminent
Domain.
12. The applicant shall deposit with the City a dollar amount to
be determined by the Director of Public Works to be used
for the future development of a Routes to School Plan for
Santa Rosa Elementary School.
13. The applicant shall make to the City of Atascadero the
following offers of dedication:
a. Public right-of-way purposes along San Andres and
Tecorida, 25 feet from centerline.
b. A 15 foot sewer easement over onsite facilities - to
be centered upon the sewer main.
C. A 15 foot drainage easement - to be centered upon the
onsite storm drain facilities.
d. A right-of-way offer for corner rounding (minimum 30
foot radius) at the intersection of Tecorida and San.
Andres.
e. Offers of dedication to the public for Public Utility
Easements. ,
Offers of dedication shall be recordedP rior to or
simultaneous to recording the final map.
14. A soils report shall be submitted, recommending corrective
measures to prevent structural damage or erosion.
15. A lot merger or the tract map shall be recorded prior to the
issuance of building permits.
16. All roof-mounted or ground-mounted mechanical equipment
shall be screened from public view.
17. The project shall comply with all standards of Zoning
Ordinance Section 9-3. 176, specifically the provision of
outdoor recreation area and enclosed storage area.
18. Each unit shall be required to have individual trash
collection.
19. This precise plan is approved for a period of one year from
the date of final approval (February 2, 1988) .
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each unit or its public utility easement prior to recording
the final map.
2. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements shall be shown on the final map. All
relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities or their
easements shall be the responsibility of the developer at
his sole expense. Any building or other restrictions shall
be noted on the final map.
3. Each condominium unit shall have a separate connection to
the public sewer. All annexation fees shall be paid for
each unit prior to recording the final map.
4. Access rights shall be relinquished along entire subdivision
boundary adjacent to San Andres and Tecorida, except where
private road connects to Tecorida as shown on tentative
tract map. Relinquishment of access rights shall be
certified on the final map.
5. Address identification signs shall be approved during the
building permit review. The signs shall contain four (4) -
inch reflective address numbers for each residential unit
served by a driveway or private road. The signs shall be
located on the right side of the driveway or road and shall
be placed so as to not affect the visibility of the
intersection.
6. Prior to recording the final map, a soils investigation (as
required by the Subdivision Map Act) shall be submitted,
recommending corrective actions to pre-vent structural damage
or erosion. The date of the report, name of the engineer,
and the location where the reports are on file shall be
noted on the final map.
7. Offers of dedication shall be recorded prior to or
simultaneous to recording the final map.
8. The common open space shall be designated as a Public
Utilities Easement.
9. All conditions imposed on the project by Precise Plan 49-87
shall be satisfied prior to recording the final map. This
includes completion of grading, drainage, and road
improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
10. All requirements of the Subdivision Map Act concerning the
conversion of occupied residential units to air-space
condominiums shall be complied with.
11. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions, and
Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control
of nuisances, individual trash collection, and architectural
control of all buildings. These CC&Rs shall be submitted
for review and approval by the City Attorney and the
Community Development Department prior to approval of the
final map. The CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium
Homeowners Association.
12. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance prior to recording the final map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
created and a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed
Land Surveyor shall indicate, by certificate, on the
final map, that the corners have been set or will be
set by a specific date and that they will be sufficient
to enable the survey to be retraced.
b. A recently updated title report shall be submitted in
conjunction with the processing of the final map.
13. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from
the date of final approval unless a time extension is
granted pursuant to a written request prior to the
expiration date.
Minutes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988
I em: A.2
MINUTES - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular eting
Tuesday, F ruary 2, 1988 7:30 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Atascadero P nning Commission was
called to orde at 7 :30 p.m. by Chairpers n Nolan, followed by the
Pledge of Allegian
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissione s Kidwell, M' hielssen, Hatchell, Copelan,
Lopez-Balbon 'n, Bond, nd Chairperson Nolan
Absent: None
Staff Present: Henry Engen, munity Development Director; Joel
Moses, Ass iate Planner ; and Doug Davidson,
Associate lanner
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approval of inutes of the regular anning Commission meet-
ing of Ja ary 19, 1988.
2. Consid ration of Lot Line Adjustment 19- 7 at 2405 Santa Ana
Road o adjust the property line between our (4) existing
to of record - Gordon T. Davis (Volbrecht urbveys) .
Commissi er Bond noted there should be a correction on age 4 of the
minute , indicating that Cottonwoods, not Sycamores, not a character-
ized s a native species tree. Henry Engen noted that a minutes
sho d also reflect the fact that Steve DeCamp arrived at 8 : 0 p.m.
OTION: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissioner
Hatchell and carried 7 :0 to approve the Consent Cal ndar
to include the minutes as corrected.
B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
1. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 42-87/PRECISE PLAN 49-87 :
Request initiated by Woodglen Development Ltd. proposing the con-
struction of nine (9) single family air-space condominiums in the
RMF/16 (FH) (Residential Multiple Family - 16 dwelling units per
acre maximum - Flood Hazard) zone. Subject site is located at
6875 Tecorida; legal description being Lots 30 , 31, 32 of Block
UA.
1
Minutes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988
Commissioner Michielssen announced that he was stepping down due to
conflict of interest. Doug Davidson presented the staff report cite-
Ing the history of this project, which had formally been submitted as
a subdivision with a planned development overlay zoning change to al-
low for a small lot subdivision. This was denied by the City Council
in October 1987. The application, as submitted, is for a combination
precise plan and condominium tract map, with the project having been
modified to reflect multi-family standards for storage, parking and
recreation space. Staff recommendation is for approval subject to
thirteen (13) findings, and thirty-two (32) conditions of approval for
both the precise plan and subdivision.
There being no questions from the Commission, meeting was opened to
the public. Joe Elkins, architect, stated that this was a low impact
project which would fit into the neighborhood and provides for fewer
units than could be allowed under multi-family zoning. He stated that
it met every requirement to date, including drainage, vegetation,
flora, fauna, and saving of many trees. In response to question, he
stated the conditions of approval were acceptable or can be worked
out.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, seconded by
Commissioner Kidwell and carried on 6 :0 vote, with Com-
missioner Michielssen absent, to approve the project
subject to staff .findings and conditions.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 45-87 :
equest in by Sanders Construction to subdivide portion
o two (2) lots containing 8. 61 acres into five (5 ots of .46,
51, 21, 2.33, and 3 . 09 acres each. Subject sit is located at
8300 E1 ino Real; legal description being Pt . of Lots 6 and 7,
Block 7.
Doug Davidson present the staff report, in cating that this was a
subdivision to divide th ownerships of t various buildings proposed
as part of a shopping cente recise pl which had been approved on
December 10, 1987. The requir ents the precise plan are incorpor-
ated into the proposed subdivisio ' requirements, which also include
reciprocal agreements on parking n ccess. He concluded that there
was agreement, at the request f the 'applicant, to amend Condition
No. 10 ' s first sentence to ange the recjuirement for a six foot pub-
lic utility easement from tating "and the�arameter of each lot" to
as required by u%li company" . Mr . Davison then clarified ques-
tions from the Commis on relative to buildin usage, circulation,
adequacy of parki g, and clarifying that the so therly driveway will
be redeXReal.
ysically not permit exiting tra fic to go left onto
El Camiis will bring such traffic out a�' a new traffic
signal which will be required prior to the opening of the
shoppinThemeen opened to the public with Dan Lloyd, Engineer
repre nting the applicant, commending the staff report and qu tion-
ing Nether Condition No. 12 could be modified to require the improve-
m is prior to occupancy. Henry Engen responded that staff would work
ith the applicant to defer any nonpublic safety items, and felt that
2
? rcTWG AGENDA
ITEM# 4- 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council February 23 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 4
RE: Tentative Tract Map 45787
8300 El Camino Real (Sanders Construction) (Cuesta Engineer-
ing)
-BACKGROUND;
At their regular meeting of February 2, 1988, the Planning Commis-
sion held a public hearing on the above-referenced tract map. After
discussion, the Planning Commission voted unanimouslyto recommend
_approval subject to staff findings and conditions, with modification
proposed to amend the first sentence in Condition No. 10 to change
the requirement for a six foot public utility easement from stating:
"and the parameter of each lot" to "as required by utility company".
RECOMMENDATION;
Approve Tentative Tract Map 45-87 per Planning Commission recommen-
dation.
HE:ph
Attachments: Staff Report - February 2, 1988
Minutes Excerpt
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B.2
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: February 2, 1988
BY: Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No: TTM 45-87
SUBJECT:
Subdivision of a portion of twolots containing 8.61 acres into
five lots of 46, .5-1, 2.21, 2. 33, and 3.09 acres each.
BACKGROUND:
Precise Plan 42-87 became effective on December 10, -1987. As
part of this Environmental Determination, conditions were set
forth for the construction of a 95,042 square foot shopping
center, composed of a drug store, market, two restaurants, and
retail shops. This subdivision- proposes that each of these five
components of the shopping center be situated on. a separate
parcel.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .Sanders Construction
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Engineering Development
Associates
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . 8300 E1 Camino
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Ptn. of Lots 6 and 7, Blk.7
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 61 acres
6. Zoning. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CS (Commercial Service)
7. General Plan Designation. . .. .Service;,Commercial
8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Commercial/Light Industial
9. Environmental Status . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
January 18, 1988
B. ANALYSIS:
This application proposes the subdivision of a portion of two
lots containing 8.61 acres into .46, 51, 2.21, 2.33, and 3.09
acres each. The property is located •in the CS (Commercial
Service) zoning distict. _` There is no minimum lot size in the CS
zone under the Zoning- Ordinance. Minimum lot sizes in commercial
zones are determined by market conditions and development
constraints (e.g. parking requirements, site configuration, etc. )
Development of the subject property was approved under Precise
Plan 42-87 (see Exhibit D for precise plan conditions of
approval) . The proposed subdivision of the property generally
conforms with the physical development of the precise plan. The
tract map, however, does show tree removal that was not approved
as a part of the development plan. This needs to be revised to
reflect the tree removal approval of the Precise Plan.
A new issue raised by the proposed subdivision is the provision
of access, parking, and utilities for each of the resultant
parcels. Approval of the tentative map will be conditioned upon
recordation of such reciprocal agreements to ensure that each of
the parcels can function as a separate entity. Furthermore, each
of the newly created lots is required to have its own separate
sewer line.
Subdivisions of more than four parcels are deemed a tract map
under the Subdivision Map Act, which require notification of all
utility companies. The subject site is within the service area
of all the necessary utility companies. Pacific Bell and
Southern California Gas Co. have requested abandonment of their
existing easements and provision of new .easements in accordance
with the development plan.
It should be noted, in conclusion, that all conditions of Precise
Plan 42-87 will be incorporated into approval of the subject
tentative tract map.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map 45-87 based on
the Findings in Exhibit E and the Conditions of Approval in
Exhibit F.
DD:dd
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location and Zoning Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit C - Site Plan (PP 42-87) .
Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval (PP 42-87)
Exhibit E - Findings for Approval
Exhibit F - Conditions of Approval
i
FAHIBIT A
LOLAT lDN1ZDlNING
Al .. . CITY OF ATASCADER
O
�=��s.��i'w ,�� TTM I*S -S 7
— ` COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT S300 EL LAM IN
DEPARTMENT
SAN DE )ZS /EDIP
,o �l
�+ ..ue�<� '�� mow` --y �• ��
R -1'6 `R,Sgy�F1
• 4'
RIF Z
MF 4 Q6)
/
am �
_ IeQ\d\� Of
•+ j�� /gam \ f � r � � i
�M SITE
d -F_•Y
J }�N L( '
/,RSF.X
( � y F
N
EX IS IT A
R S. LOCAT 10 N
ZONING—
XH C9 [T E
TRALT MA ?
CITY OF ATASCADERO
9300 E L C-A M l N 0
E IZ �F
' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTS A N D S'
• DEPARTMENT
--
I I I!
` Q ores
�- l W --
�( -- ---- I-- -- --
-- —
r•I: °°z... �'�I;1 •, I � 1'I�'� I ; ..K..,a..,
L
XCU
S
-- „I _
Il
t I 9 II .........
VIA
'k�9 � �• It, �1 ��<� is .I � � v l
a '•,� �,a.t", � k... LLLL33T J7..P.1�cec r/ �,, i11
M�. <�.<,q x v: /l TENTATIVE TRACT 1583
l T F PLA N
CITY OF ATASCADERO (SER FREC,s E NLA 4V
1979-
`scam COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ES00 FL CA-MIND
IND
DEPARTMENT SAN D EZ-5, /E DA
- • •r_ � i - sss.y Ger �� _ _
rK `� t f•. •• -. -rte~ �L.% li..r. �. �� �. �
rl
o,
I
r rl ..• � I.f � � r I I� 1 1
_�ff .kms
•1 ` -- • _ f'I•. it• C i.T �; '- �''
12
r././ !./. /... ..._ /... ../.., .na/ , t••/ 'la'e c_�-71
lY rl• ,. ' 4i
/./.l I_.lr._r.r .• M.it .r r/ ` C+ I ��' I � _.{Y
RECEIVED
� OCT is lvr
di
d.flpn unllm N.O I !•
J
EXHIBIT D - CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Precise Plan 42-87 (Barbeau/Sanders Construction)
8300 E1 Camino Real
(Revised December 10, 1987)
1. All construction shall be in conformance with Exhibit B (site
plan) , Exhibit C (fire hydrants) , Exhibit F (conditions of approv-
al) , and shall comply to all applicable City codes and ordinances.
Any modification to this approval shall be approved by the Commu-
nity Development Department prior to implementing any changes.
2. Complete landscape and irrigation plans in substantial conformance
with submitted plans, shall be submitted to, and subsequently ap-
proved by, the Community Development Department (Section 9-4.124) .
The following items shall be noted or detailed on these plans:
a. All areas including setbacks, parking lots, and unused areas
shall be landscaped appropriately (Section 9-4.125 (a) ) .
. b. Concrete curbing, or a functional equivalent, shall be pro-
vided to enclose all required landscaping.
C. All existing trees with a diameter of eight inches or more
shall be shown. Trees which are to be removed shall be noted
as such. Tree protection measures shall be required during
construction, including fencing or other necessary measures
to protect oaks, as determined by the Community Development
Department. Such measures shall be approved as part of a
tree protection plan prior to issuance of building permits.
d. Particular emphasis shall be given to freeway landscaping to
ensure an attractive appe,�rance and adequate screening from
the freeway. An encroachment permit from Caltrans is re-
quired for planting within their right-of-way.
e. Proposed landscaping shall be accompanied with a planting
schedule which includes species, container sizes, number of
plants or flats, and the space distribution of ground covers.
f. Ten percent (10%) of the parking area shall be landscaped
with shade trees approximately 30 feet on center.
g. Five (5) foot of landscaped area with six (6) foot fencing
is required along the easterly property line.
h. Where parking spaces are arranged to. head toward a street, a
three (3) foot high fence or landscaped berm is required.
3. Trash enclosures for each building shall be provided with appro-
priate details (Section 9-4. 129) . Please note that the construc-
tion standards require the bottom of the trash enclosure area to
be concrete or an equivalent impervious material. Trash facili-
ties shall be integrated within- the design of each building that
EXHIBIT D
S E X H I S I T 1:� ((,mr)
they serve.
4. Three (3) fire hydrants shall be installed at the locations desig-
nated in Exhibit Cl' prior to combustible construction occurring
on-site.
5. The architect must identify type of construction, area separation
walls, sprinklered occupancy, etc. , as part of the building permit
submittal.
6. The applicant shall verify that all underground gas tanks have
been removed.
7. A lot merger or tract map shall be recorded prior to issuance of
building permits.
8. The project shall comply with the City' s Appearance Review Guide-
lines, including the following:
a. Mechanical equipment is to be screened - including roof
mounted facilities, PG&E transformers, service areas, trash
enclosures, etc.
b. A master signage plan requires approval prior to issuance of
sign permits. Projects with over 100 square feet of signage
require a conditional use permit.
c. Provision of outdoor public seating areas.
d. Elevation or cross-section showing landscaping in relation to l
buildings at the rear of the site.
e. Exterior lighting shall be designed and shielded to direct
light away from adjacent street's and property.
f. Rear building faces require architectural treatment, as shown
on submitted plans.
t '
g. Front of building (drug store, market, retail) shall be off-
set to break up building face, in substantial compliance with
submitted plans. "
9. A soils report is required to be reviewed prior to issuance of
building permits. Report shall address the suitability of soils
for the proposed development and include recommended mitigation
measures.
10. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City prior
to issuance of a building permit, and construct improvements as
directed by the encroachment permit prior to final building
inspection.
�" • E X H ) 13 1 T D (ccwr)
11. Applicant shall obtain a sewer connection permit prior to hooking
Up to the public sewer.
. 12. Grading and drainage plans, prepared by a registered civil engin-
eer, must be submitted to and approved by the Departments of Pub-
lic
Works and Community Development prior to issuance of building
permits. These shall include:
a. Receiving comments from Cal Trans and coordinate their con-
cerns with city staff.
b. A pro rata share not to exceed $2, 500 toward drainage improve-
ments, including plans and specifications for west side of E1
Camino Real to Cascada.
C. All grading/drainage work shall be completed (or bonded for)
prior to final building inspections.
13. Road improvement plans, prepared by a registered civil engineer,
shall be submitted to and approved by the Public Works Department
prior to -issuance of building permits. These shall include:
a. The reconstruction of existing curb, gutter, sidewalk, as
determined by the City Engineer . This shall also include
removal of curb cuts and upgrading of off-site drainage
facilities, prior to final building inspection.
b. Plans, specifications, and installation of a traffic signal
at the Palomar - main project driveway - with El Camino Real.
• This signal shall have separate left turn phasing on E1 Cam-
ino Real (25% of the cost may a conditioned on future com-
mercial projects in the area and reimbursed to the applicant
within the next five (5) years) .
C. Applicant shall contribute a 14% share of the future traffic
signal at Santa Rosa and El Camino Real. This 14% may be
credited to the Palomar signal for a total contribution of
89%. The remaining 11% may optionally be credited against
road and drainage development fees.
d. The redesign of the southerly project drive intersection with
El Camino Real to provide for one right turn only, physically
separated lane and two ingress lanes. This will eliminate
left-turn morvement out of the southerly driveway onto E1
Camino Real.
e. Provision of two (2) inch conduit along the project frontage
for a future interconnect with traffic signals at Curbaril
and Cascada or Solano.
f. On-street parking shall be prohibited between the project
driveways due to sight distance problems.
i -Ex H IS ► r 1) (comm.)
g. The construction of new returns and appropriate widening of
the existing approach of Palomar to back of left turn storage
lane.
h. Applicant shall Install all street signs, traffic devices,
warning signs, guardrails, barricades, and other similar_
devices where required by the Public Works Director.
14. All utilities on the site shall be underground. When an under
grounding district is formed in the area, all utility connections
shall be placed underground.
15. A minimum of 438 parking stalls are required, seven (7) of which
must be designated for the handicapped. Three (3) loading bays
are required. Additionally, parking along front of buildings
requires pedestrian access openings to storefronts. No access
connection shall be allowed with Via Obra.
16. Storage of shopping carts shall not be allowed in front of any
building. All shopping carts shall be stored within the buildings
or in the -designated areas in the parking lots.
17. Adequate truck turning radii shall be provided at the rear of the
building. No parking of semi-trailers is allowed to the rear of
the building.
18. This precise plan is approved for a period of 'one year from the
date of final approval (December 8, 1987) .
I
. EXHIBIT E - Findings for Approval
Tentative Tract Map 45-87
8300 EI Camino Real
(Sanders Construction/EDA)
February 2, 1988
FINDINGS
1 . The creation of the proposed parcels conform to the Zoning
Ordinance and the General Plan land use designation,
densities, and other policies.
2 . The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the
recommended Conditions of Approval , will not have a
significant adverse effect upon the environment . The
Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5 . The design of the subdivision, and the proposed
improvements, will not cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and
wildlife or their habitat .
6 . The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by
the public at large for access through or the use of
property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially
equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7 . The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474 . 6 of
the State Subdivision Map Act as to the methods of handling
and discharge of waste.
8 . The proposed project is in compliance with the City of
Atascadero ' s Appearance Review Manual Guidelines .
EXHIBIT F - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 45-87
8300 E1 Camino
(Sanders Construction)
February 2, 1988
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel or its public utilities easement 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.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities and/or
their corresponding easements shall be responsibility of the
developer at his sole expense. The applicant shall provide
proof that the conflicting utility easements have been
abandoned prior to filing of the final map.
4. The newly formed lots shall be connected to the Public
Sewer. All annexation permit fees shall be paid for the
newly formed lots prior to the recording of the final map.
Any sewer extentions for annexation must be completed within
one year after annexation.
5. Obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Atascadero
Public Works Department. Sign an Inspection Agreement and a
Curb & Gutter Agreement, guaranteeing that the work will be
done and the inspections paid for, prior to -the issuance of a
building permit, or start of public works construction, and
construct improvements as directed by the encroachment permit
prior to the final building inspection or the recording of
the final map, whichever comes first.
6. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic
delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs,
guardrails, barricades, and other similar devices where
required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in
conformance with the Department of Public works standards and
the current State of California uniform sign chart.
Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review
and modifications after construction.
7. Parcels 3, 4, and 5 shall have no direct access to E1 Camino
Real. Access shall be by way of the two (2) driveways
approved under Precise Plan 42-87 and as shown on the
tentative map. Relinquishment of additional access rights
shall be certified on the final map.
• 8. The Subdivider shall provide drainage easements and/or
drainage releases from the points of concentration of
stormwater leaving the project boundary through adjoining
properties to the nearest natural watercourses as approved by
the Public Works Department, if applicable.
9. 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 and a note to this
effect shall be placed on the final map, if applicable.
10. Applicant shall make an offer of dedication to the public
for a six (6) foot Public Utility Easement along entire
property frontage and the parameters of each lot. Offer of
dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or
simultaneous to the recordation of the final map.
11. A soils investigation (as required by the Subdivision Map
Act) shall be submitted, recommending corrective actions
which will prevent structural damage to each structure
proposed to be constructed in the area where soil problems
exist, as indicated in the preliminary soils report. The
date of such reports, the name of the engineer making the
report, and the location where the reports are on file shall
be noted on the final map.
• 12. All conditions of approval required by Precise Plan 42-87
shall be completed prior to recording the final map or as
directed by the Director of Public Works for road
improvements.
13. Tract map shall be redesigned to reflect the Precise Plan
approval, specifically regarding tree removal.
14. A reciprocal 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, and a note to this effect
shall be placed on the final map, covering:
a. ingress and egress
b. parking
C. utilities and drainage facilities
15. The property line wall between Parcels 1 and 2 and between
Parcels 2 and 3 shall be designed in accordance with the fire
rating requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
16. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in ,
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final
map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners i
created and a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed
Land Surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the
final map, that the corners have been set or will be
set by a specific date and that they will be sufficient
to enable the survey to be retraced.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
17. 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.
0 •
Minutes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988
Comm sinner Michielssen announced that he was stepping dow due to
conflic of interest. Doug Davidson presented the staff eport cite-
ing the h tory of this project, which had formally bee submitted as
a subdivisi with a planned development overlay zon ' g change to al
low for a smal lot subdivision. This was denied the City Council
in October 1987. The application, as._ submitted is for a combination
precise plan and co ominium tract map, with a project having been
modified to reflect multi-family standar for storage, parking and
recreation space. Staf recommendation i for approval subject to
thirteen (13) findings, an thirty-two 2) conditions of approval for
both the precise plan and su ivisio .
There being no questions from t Commission, meeting was opened to
the public. Joe Elkins, ar itect, stated that this was a low impact
project which would fit in the neig orhood and provides for fewer
units than could be all ed under multi- mily zoning. He stated that
it met every requirem t to date, inclu 'ng drainage, vegetation,
flora, fauna, an saving of many trees. In esponse to question, he
stated the condi ons of approval were acceptab or can be worked
out.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, s conded by
Commissioner Kidwell and carried on 6:0 v e, with Com-
missioner Michielssen absent, to approve a project
subject to staff findings and conditions.
2. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 45-87:
Request initiated by Sanders Construction to subdivide aP ortion
of two (2) lots containing 8. 61 acres into five (5) lots of .46,
51, 2. 21, 2.33, and 3.09 acres each. Subject site is located at
8300 E1 Camino Real; legal description being Ptn. of Lots 6 and 7,
Block 7.
Doug Davidson presented the staff report, indicating that this was a
subdivision to divide the ownerships of the various buildings proposed
as part of a shopping center precise plan, which had been approved on
December 10, 1987 . The requirements of the precise plan are incorpor-
ated into the proposed subdivision' s requirements, which also include
reciprocal agreements on parking and access. He concluded that there
was agreement, at the request of the applicant, to amend Condition
No. 10 ' s first sentence to change the requirement for a six foot pub-
lic utility easement from . stating "and the parameter of each lot" to
"as required by utility company" . Mr . Davidson then clarified ques-
tions from the Commission relative to . building usage, circulation,
adequacy of parking, and clarifying that the southerly driveway will
be redesigned to physically not permit exiting traffic to go left onto
E1 Camino Real. This will bring such traffic out at the new traffic
signal at Palomar, which will be required prior to the opening of the
shopping center.
The meeting was then opened to the public with Dan Lloyd, Engineer
representing the applicant, commending the staff report and question-
ing whether Condition No. 12 could be: modified to require the improve-
ments prior to occupancy. Henry Engen responded that staff would work
with the applicant to defer any nonpublic safety items, and felt that
2
Minutes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988
the language as proposed permitted the Public Works Director 'to guar=
antee certain improvements until after the recording of the final map
Commissioner Hatchell commended the excellence of the project and Com-
missioner Bond inquired of the tree protection plan intentions. Dan
Lloyd responded that they fully intended to take care of the trees,
and that they would be hiring a registered landscape architect.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, seconded by Commis-
sioner Copelan and carried unanimously to approve TTM
45-87 subject to findings and conditions of the staff
report, including the modification proposed to Condition
No. 10
3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 31-87:
Request initiated by Gordon T. Davis Cattle Company (Cuesta Engi-
.neering) to subdivide 10.26 acres of vacant property i -o three
(3) parcels containing 3.40, 3.40 and 3.46 acres. Subj t site is
cated at 7800 Santa Cruz Road; legal description bei g Lot 37,
B1 k 50 of Atascadero Colony.
Joel Moses resented the staff report, noting that a archaeological
survey had een required and special mitigation me ures incorporated
into the prop o ed conditions of approval to monito grading. The Pub-
lic Works Depart ent has re-evaluated proposed C' dition No. 7, rela-
tive to the Gar 'a Road bridge, and is recomm nding it be deleted in
that development fee on building constructio will provide adequate
funding towards this urpose. Upon reques of Commissioner Michiel-i
Isen, the archaeological urvey was circul ed to the Commissioners.
John Falkenstein, Cuesta Engineering, i icated concurrence with pro-
posed conditions of approval.
MOTION: Made by Commissione ond, seconded by Commissioner
Hatchell and carr ' unanimously to approve TPM 31-87
subject to the st f commended findings and condi-
tions of appro al wit the elimination of Condition
No. 7.
4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAPA -87 :
Request initiated by oseph and Mary Li dsey (Engineering Develop-
ment Assoc. ) to sub ivide 5. 02 acres of acant property into four
(4) parcels; thre containing 20 , 000 squa a feet, and one contain-
ing 3. 64 acres. Subject site is located a 8500 E1 Dorado Road;
legal description being Lot 24 , Block 4, Ea et Tract No. 1.
Joel Moses pres nted the staff report, indicating hat the three (3)
20,000 squar foot lots proposed on E1 Dorado hav been appropiately
conditioned ith the 3.64 acre lot being designated "remainder lot" ,
which unde recent Subdivision Map Act language - pre udes condition-
ing unti future development. He noted that the app 'cant had ex-
presse concerns over Condition No. 10 , requiring offsi a improvement
deposits, and has been advised by that department that the maximum
amo t of money involved is some $24725. He clarified hat the ac-
c s easement serving parcels No. 2 and 3 provides for sing culvert
or a driveway to serve two lots over the drainage swale.
3
EXHIBIT F - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 45-87
8300 E1 Camino
(Sanders Construction)
February 2, 1988
(Revised by the Planning Commission)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Water shall be obtained from .the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of
each parcel or its public utilities easement 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.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities and/or
their corresponding easements shall be responsibility of the
developer at his sole expense. The applicant shall provide
proof that the conflicting utility easements have been
abandoned prior to filing of the final map.
• 4. The newly formed lots shall be connected to the Public
Sewer. All annexation permit fees shall be paid for the
newly formed lots prior to the recording of the final map.
Any sewer extentions for annexation must be completed within
one year after annexation.
5. Obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Atascadero
Public Works Department. Sign an Inspection Agreement and a
Curb & Gutter Agreement, guaranteeing that the work will be
done and the inspections paid for, prior to the issuance of a
building permit, or start of public works construction, and
construct improvements as directed by the encroachment permit
prior to the final building inspection or the recording of
the final map, whichever comes first.
6. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic
delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs,
guardrails, barricades, and other similar devices where
required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in
conformance with the Department of Public works standards and
the current State of California uniform sign chart.
Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review
and modifications after construction.
7. Parcels 3, 4, and 5 shall have no direct access to El Camino
Real. Access shall be by way of the two (2) driveways
approved under Precise Plan 42-87 and as shown on the
tentative map. Relinquishment of additional access rights
s •
shall be certified on the final map.
8. The Subdivider shall provide drainage easements and/or
drainage releases from the points of concentration of
stormwater leaving the project boundary through adjoining
properties to the nearest natural watercourses as approved by
the Public Works Department, if applicable.
9. 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 and a note to this
effect shall be placed on the final map, if applicable.
10. Applicant shall make an offer of dedication to the public
for a six (6) foot Public Utility Easement along entire
property frontage and as required by the utility companies.
Offer of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to
or simultaneous to the recordation of the final map.
11. A soils investigation (as required by the Subdivision Map
Act) shall be submitted, recommending corrective actions
which will prevent structural damage to each structure
proposed to be constructed in the area where soil problems
exist, as indicated in the preliminary soils report. The
date of such reports, the name of the engineer making the
report, and the location where the reports are on file shall
be noted on the final map.
12. All conditions of approval required by Precise Plan 42-87
shall be completed prior to recording the final map or as
directed by the Director of Public Works for road
improvements.
13. Tract map shall be redesigned to reflect the Precise Plan
approval, specifically regarding tree removal.
14. A reciprocal 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, and a note to this effect
shall be placed on the final map, covering:
a. ingress and egress
b. parking
C. utilities and drainage facilities
15. The property line wall between Parcels 1 and 2 and between
Parcels 2 and 3 shall be designed in accordance with the fire
rating requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
16. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in .
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final
• map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
created and a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed
Land Surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the
final map, that the corners have been set or will be
set by a specific date and that they will be sufficient
to enable the survey to be retraced.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
17. 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.
AG7?-1DA
M E M O R A D U
TO: City CouncilFebruary 23, 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
RE: Tentative Parcel Map 31-87
7800 Santa Cruz Road (Gordon T. Davis Cattle Company) (Cuesta
Engineering]
BACKGROUND:
At theirregular meeting of February 2, 1988, the Planning Commission
held a public hearing on the 'above-referenced `parcel map. _ After dis-
cussion, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of
the project subject to special mitigation measures incorporated into
the proposed conditions of approval to monitor grading, and elimina-
tion of Condition No. 7 per Public Works' recommendation (see attached
minutes excerpt) .
.RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Tentative Parcel Map -31-87, with deletion of Condition No. 7
as per Planning Commission recommendation.'
HE:ph
Attachments: Staff Report - February 2, 1988
Minutes Excerpt
CITY OF'ATASCADERO Item:- B.3
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: February 2, 1988
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: TPM 31-87
SUBJECT:
Tentative Parcel Map 31-87 to ,subdivide an exi1.sting 10.26
acre vacant lot into- three parcels containing 3.40, 3.40 & 3.46
acres.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .Las Encinas (Gordon Davis)
2 Representative. . . . . .. . . Cuesta Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . 7800 Santa Cruz Road
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Lot 37, B1k.50• (Atas. Col. )
5. Site Area.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.26 acres
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (Residential Suburban)
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .Suburban Single Family
8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . .Vacant
9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
January 17, 1988
B. ANALYSIS:
The applicant proposes to subdivide a single undeveloped
parcel containing 10. 26 acres into three parcels containing 3. 40,
3. 40 and 3.46 acres. Parcels 1 & 2 will have direct access to
Santa Cruz. Parcel 3 will have access by way of an easement
along the joint property line between Parcels 1 & 2.
The subject property is located in the RS (Residential
Suburban) zone. Minimum lot size in this zone ranges between 2.5
and 10 acres depending upon the "score" of the various
performance standards. For this site, the minimum lot size .
criteria are:
Distance from Center (16,000-18,000) . . . . . . . . .0. 60
Septic suitability (20-39min/inch) . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 75
Average slope (11-20%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 75
Access condition (Paved less than 15%) . . . . . . . 0. 40
General Neighborhood character (3. 84) . . . . . . . . 0. 77
Minimum lot size 3. 27 acres
The proposed lot sizes of 3. 40, 3. 40 and 3. 46 acres are
larger than the minimum lot size required for the site.
Comments were received from several outside agencies. The
Fire Department and the Building Division noted no problems with
the proposed map. It should be noted that the access drive will
have to meet the minimum Fire Code Standards where more than two
parcels are accessed from one driveway. The Souther California
Gas Company indicates that the site may be served from a 3" gas
main in Santa Cruz Road. If gas mains are installed they will
need to be within the public right of way or within approved
easements. The State of California Regional Office of
Archaeological Surveys responded by requesting that an
archeological survey be done. A survey was done, and an
archeological site was discovered to cover portions of Parcels 1
& 2. A full report has been prepared, and will be submitted to
the State Clearing House covering the site. The report notes the
need to make proper monitoring procedures a part of any grading
permits issued for the development of the property.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Parcel
Map 31-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit C and Conditions of
Approval in Exhibit D.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Map
Exhibit C - Findings for Approval
Exhibit D - Conditions
JM/jm
EXHIBIT A
LOCATION MAP
CITY OF
ATASCADERO TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 31-87
'.c — , ' � 7800 SANTA CRUZ ROAD
` COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DAVIS / CUESTA
DEPARTMENT
a
�444I,y
11 gfAL
S
i � S4ti
11
L )
G
R 4p
11
11
N
r /
V
f
I
11
/
0
j/ SITE : 7800 SANTA CRUZ RD. .
TPM : 31-87
DAVIS / CUESTA
� f
I
1
"1 R S ss
,
l\
EXHIBIT B TENT MAP
CITY OF
ATASCADERO TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 31-87
/97j7 7800 SANTA CRUZ ROAD
oto` COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DAVIS / CUESTA
DEPARTMENT
0 ti
45
1
N
Lfz
_ rFNr4T/VE PARCEG MAP AT B7 2/f
- \tuu/•.oe• Or/Ay..svearr7.Jx <ar Jr•e/au In
f�' //AS(wOfre(OLONI G!r>AfilGOfNe,
.. Y`7� - • rdUN/7 0/11x Lxii OorJ/o,9rA/Y GY '
- GufeN,ylw I!lNoww/oV!'I tf 9I.
ter S TO 6r XNWAr,,V
moxa'/-c++rrvrE� � - d�✓NFRS CE/�T/F/GATE
r,x(RfeI N/LV%MIeCY.IL 0I%f Lfi'/44.V.Y.ffAL MOKt>•/
A='o 01r/ev r 10 fy/CHM m)Ni!7<N/A/Af.y//ANo((Rr//Y Ix<(f AH!F'p NfR
Na6Nearxew(/(�(,SpM �•p _ ,ht AUJM'4f/l o fC% txi.v A fi—J<:•//•V/.(
1 ayVMN,WZF J CNN N(ALpV 3 r.(Vr Lve rJrrF'!/I/Nf eyl M
.'wwwenters/u '-.3II/ rly rx�LflGf�/...f tUeirA fN6/NfE,Vp6
I < fClvSddifztr3J7ia— a r3—'1' 7411 rL uY.xe cuL.xrte
afAs40(w0,4U/pyV41�/Ir
. /enJ Ici-Leff '.•
OCT 191987
' I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
r .
i
EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval
• Tentative Parcel Map 31 ,1- 87
7800 Santa Cruz
Davis/Cuesta
February 2, 1988
FINDINGS
1. The creation of the proposed parcels conforms to the Zoning
Ordinance and the General Plan land use designation, densities
and other policies.
2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the
recommended Conditions of Approval, will not have a significant
adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, and the proposed improvements,
will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially
• and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of 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.
7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474. 6 of the
State Subdivision Map Act as to the methods of handling and
discharge of waste.
8. The proposed project is in compliance with the City of
Atascadero' s Appearance Review Manual Guidelines.
JM/jm
EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 31-87 .
7800 Santa Cruz Road
Davis/Cuesta Eng.
February 2, 1988
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of each
parcel or its public utilities easement 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.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer at his sole expense.
4. Grading, and Drainage plans , prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted to, and for review and approval by,
the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to
the issuance of any building permits or the recording of the
•final map.
5. An onsite 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 effect
shall appear on the Final Map.
6. Address identification signs shall be approved as a part of
the issuance of building permits. The signs shall contain
4" (inch) reflective address numbers for each residential unit
served by a driveway. The signs shall be located on the right
hand side of the driveway and shall be placed so as not to
affect the visibility of the intersection.
7. A fair share contribution for the road approaches to the new
Garcia Road Bridge shall be paid at the time of recordation of
the final map. The amount to be determined by the Director of
Public Works.
8. A note shall appear on the final map stating that during any
grading work requiring a permit done on Parcels 1 & 2 shall be
accompanied by proper Archeological Monitoring.
9. All lot grading and drainage improvements shall require
written certification by a registered Civil Engineer that all
work has been completed and is in full compliance with the
approved plans.
10. All grading and erosion control measures shall be designed
by a registered Civil Engineer and constructed in accordance with
the City of Atascadero grading codes and standards. Prior to any
final building inspection, said engineer shall submit to the City
written certification that grading is in conformance with said
codes and standards.
11. Offer of dedication to the City of Atascadero the following
right-of-way:
20 '-0" from Centerline of Santa Cruz Road along entire
frontage.
12. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map.
13. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth
herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance
with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s Subdivision Ordinance
prior to the recording of the final map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
created and a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land
Surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map,
that the corners have been set or will be set by a specific
date and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey
to be retraced.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of
the final map.
c. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the final
map.
14. 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.
JM/jm
EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 31-87
7800 Santa Cruz Road
Davis/Cuesta Eng.
February 2, 1988
(Planning Commission revised)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of each
parcel or its public utilities easement 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.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer at his sole expense.
4. Grading, and Drainage plans , prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted to, and for review and approval by,
the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to
the issuance of any building permits or the recording of the
final map.
5. An onsite 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 effect
shall appear on the Final Map.
6. Address identification signs shall be approved as a part of
the issuance of building permits. The signs shall contain
4" (inch) reflective address numbers for each residential unit
served by a driveway. The signs shall be located on the right
hand side of the driveway and shall be placed so as not to
affect the visibility of the intersection.
9. A note shall appear on the final map stating that during any
grading work requiring a permit done on Parcels 1 & 2 shall be
accompanied by proper Archeological Monitoring.
10. All lot grading and drainage improvements shall require
written certification by a registered Civil Engineer that all
work has been completed and is in full compliance with the
approved plans.
11. All grading and erosion control measures shall be designed
by a registered Civil Engineer and constructed in accordance with
the City -of Atascadero grading codes and standards. Prior to any
final building inspection, said engineer shall submit to the City
written certification that grading is in conformance with said
codes and standards.
12. Offer of dedication to the City of Atascadero the following
right-of-way:
20 '-0" from Centerline of Santa Cruz Road along entire
frontage.
13. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map.
14. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all . conditions set forth
herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance
with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance
prior to the recording of the final-<map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
created and a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land
Surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map,
that the corners have been set or will be set by a specific
date and that they will be_ sufficient to enable the survey
to be retraced.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of
the final map.
c. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the final
map.
15. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from
the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted
pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date.
JM/jm
tes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988
the language roposed permitted the Public Work erector to guar
antee certain impro ents until after the rec ing of the final map*
Commissioner Hatchell c ended the excel ce of the project and Com--
missioner Bond inquired of a tree ection plan intentions. Dan
Lloyd responded that they f intended to take care of the trees,
and that they would be hirin re ' tered landscape architect.
MOTION: Made b ommissioner Hatche seconded by Commis
s ' er Copelan and carried un 'mously to approve TTM
45-87 subject to findings and condi t s of the staff
report, including the modification propos to Condition
No. 10
3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 31-87
Request initiated by Gordon T. Davis Cattle Company (Cuesta Engi-
neering) to subdivide 10.26 acres of vacant property into three
(3) parcels containing 3.40, 3.40 and 3.46 acres. Subject site is
located at 7800 Santa Cruz Road; legal description being Lot 37,
Block 50 of Atascadero Colony.
Joel Moses presented the staff report, noting that an archaeological
survey had been required and special mitigation measures incorporated
into the proposed conditions of approval to monitor grading. The Pub-
lic Works Department has re-evaluated proposed Condition No. 7, rela-
tive to the Garcia Road bridge, and is recommending it be deleted in
that development fees on building construction will provide adequate
funding towards this purpose. Upon request of Commissioner Michiel-0
lsen, the archaeological survey was circulated to the Commissioners.
John Falkenstein, Cuesta Engineering, indicated concurrence with pro-
posed conditions of approval.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commissioner
Hatchell and carried unanimously to approve TPM 31-87
subject to the staff recommended findings and condi-
tions of approval with the elimination of Condition
No. 7.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 43-87 :
est initiated by Joseph and Mary Lends (Engineering Develop-
ment c. ) to subdivide 5. 02 acres o acant property into four
(4) parcels, three containing 20 , 000 quare feet, and one contain-
ing 3. 64 acres. ubject site is ocated at 8500 E1 Dorado Road;
legal description b Lot 2 , Block 4, Eaglet Tract No. 1.
Joel Moses presented the st f r rt, indicating that the three (3)
20,000 square foot lot proposed o 1 Dorado have been appropiately
conditioned with the . 4 acre lot being signated a "remainder lot" ,
which under recent ubdivision Map Act langua - precludes condition-
ing until futur development. He noted that the pplicant had ex-
pressed con rns over Condition No. 10, requiring o ite improvement
deposits, nd has been advised by that department that he maximum
amount of money involved is some $2,725. He clarified th the ac- 0
cess asement serving parcels No. 2 and 3 provides for single lvert
fo a driveway to serve two lots over the drainage swale.
3
M 7 E:i N 5 AG NDA
ak
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council February' 23, '1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager •
FROM: ; Henry Engen, Community Development Director M
RE: Tentative Parcel Map 43-87
8500 El Dorado Road .(Joseph and Mary Lindsey (Engineer;ing
Development Associates)
BACKGROUND:
At their regular meeting of February 2, 1988, the Planning Commission
held a public hearing on the above-referenced project. After discus-
sion, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the
parcel map subject to the findings and conditions of the attached
staff report.
RECOMMENDATION:
ApproveTentative Parcel Map 43-87 as per Planning Commission recom-
mendation.
HE:ph
Attachments: Staff Report - February 2, 1988
Minutes Excerpt
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B.4
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: Feb. 2, 1988
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: TPM 43-87
SUBJECT:
Tentative Parcel Map 43-87 to subdivide 5.02 acres of vacant
property into four parcels, three containing 20,000 square feet,
and a remainder parcel of 3.64 acres:
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .Joseph & Marg Lindsey
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Engineering Development
Associates
3. Project Address. . . . .. . : . . . . . . 8500" El- Dorado Road
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Lot 24, Blk. _-4, (Eaglet Tract
No. 1)'
5. Site Area.. . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5.02 acres
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-X (Residential Single
Family "(20, 000 sq.ft.
minimum lot size with sewer)
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Single Family
8. Existing Use. . . . . .. . . . .Vacant
9. Environmental Status. . . . .< Negative Declaration posted
January 18,1988
B. ANALYSIS:
The applicant proposes the subdivision of an existing lot
containing 5.02 acres into three parcels containing. 20,000 sq.
_ft. and a remainder lot of 3. 64 acres. The property is located
within the RSF-X (Residential Single Family) Zoning District.
The site is served by sewer and thus the minimum lot size is
20, 000 sq. ft. (without sewer it would be 1/2 acre) . Under the
current zoning, the site could be divided into 10 parcels. The
remainder lot could in the future- be divided into as many as 7
additional lots.
The proposed subdivision takes advantage of the properties
double frontage (E1 Dorado & El Centro) . The subdivision
proposes the development of three 20,000 sq. ft. lots along the
E1 Dorado frontage. The remainder lot covers the remaining
property fronting on E1 Centro. The lots along El Dorado will be
developed in the near future with single family residences, while
the remainder lot will be reserved for future development.
The applicant proposes to create a remainder lot containing
3. 64 acres. The Subdivision Map Act notes that a subdivider may
designate a "remainder" which is not divided for the purpose of
sale, lease or financing (Sec. 66424. 6) . This designation
brings into play other sections of State law restricting the
ability of the City to require improvements on the lots road
frontage. Improvements shall not be required until a permit or
other grant of approval is given for a development of the
remainder parcel, or where provided by local ordinance, an
agreement may be entered into setting the date the improvements
are to be installed. In the absence of an agreement, the City
may require the improvements to be installed within a reasonable
length of time following the recording of the final map and prior
to the issuance of permits to develop the property. In
requiring the improvements the City, must make findings that the
improvements are necessary for the public' s health and safety; or
are necessary prerequisites to the orderly development of the
surrounding area.
Comments were received from several outside agencies. Our
Building Division noted the need for City sewer service to the
site. The Police Department found no problem with the proposed
subdivision design. The Fire Department indicated a need to have
appropriate fire hydrants in the area. Souther California Gas
has found that the site can be served from existing lines in E1
Dorado and El Centro. The Public Works Departments concerned
with the development of adequate street improvements on both El
Dorado and E1 Centro.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Parcel
Map 43-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit D and Conditions of
Approval in Exhibit E.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Map
Exhibit C - Developer' s Statement
Exhibit D - Findings for Approval
Exhibit E - Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT A - LOCATION MFF
CITY OF ATASCADERO Tentative Parcel Map 43-8
8500 El Dorado
` — COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Lindsey/Eng. Devel.
Ro
DEPARTMENT
SITE 8500 El Dorado
- TPM: 43-87 '
Lindsey/Eng.Dev.
' M
RM� � _ {
Y R FZ •
AV MF-4 6)
E �
\DO \
1
CaMr a o ,c
L
q V P�,o \ a
rP a
H d
v4 l Pte. '
�R,=roa R a
wf / r / 4�E CT G T
CR
AS q fR0 i ¢
PD3 � P� E� �
CE
\� EXHIBIT B - TENT. MAP
, . - CITY OF ATASCADERO Tentative Parcel Map 43-87
8500 El
.
,,, ��:A Dorado
-stn _ _.,
Lindse
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT y/Eng, bevel.
- DEPARTMENT
L_3L/:. 4
V \ \ tf• W(y'
\ P/ • I 1 \\\ `\ \\ `hr. PA�PCEL\\( \I 1\ y
`, 1 cqc�n•r ` 1�
01
0
le-
x Q
4N,JV0 u F3
IsS IP4w
mQ
pp I 6tw,r
R� -- r a �\ i�✓ � 1 n•q f_9L/..4
['•' RCMA/NOLR- , I OF/vc
3,141A, CLL✓eat 71
1` \I I �`a.l�✓\ \ � I � 1 I � __ 0 Cos,.e..Ove:..ce
W \I 1 6y \\ \ ---------- ' / l 1 i � I ,1[zoa[rns. � •�j
U \\ 1 1 \\ \ -``•'''')��
fl) W ^\\ 111 1 \ 1� \\ �� ✓/ /��i %/ /1 0 e;r3 i; SAW rnF_E_
y m• �.°• \\ 1 1 1 \\ /��� i , IocAc) // 1 ROAD
.._li ;� � 1__---r—•- '°-"/ — c7�I'�—:%'t���/--/r/—ra.l i
ofr'% Jl'
Lor 2.5 ' ( e�
4 TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP '
r WN L 7-m., R/.�Ld r9e No. AT-87-321
A•.�.cr .R/n Lula ODiy10(b 9lIO/
e.,,y.s1.e./•.•.,1Dn or Lo/ ed r/h.
• .P.AI rz! _ ..., Co9p.r No./.y,bd��u.on n rn.Ci/yL
or
"t-coora Pone./Ne. Aloamdo.ro,in/h.Cou' u•a/yy or 3,r, OD•ape,
PM.b)/ Aiwa UobYp 30' J'/n/e rCo/lror ' R cony rY„bn/O•/9,9
d_o.or a �� Book Ir o/A•ye tS or Map..
dM1.,rt✓.ro,u/uo/HDl r Co. �.i•*w —
o+G•n,dN d/lkn/�N,v/C•p/G / _.LAPPS[CrIHf
„•/,L.1/3.Py.J:
_VICINITY MAP ✓oe.,nE[- /e.yi
1.P.N,L Mws.//.L•nde.y.
u.hifj./Gy Urd.4.r./t,Il70 T.Z.-
d
IO hit
lJS,,y/!/.
ENmnccawc Oc vc[ov.vcNr Aaaocl6 n.
.9Gwl•11'•40' /3C0 N,--o S,.,.r
/��y Gam• 3—L.I.Odeeo Co!3401
!w Cw.-, I,fief/-%�� ''Y„ •l-05/349'069a
-60,11506
EXHIBIT C - Development St
Tentative Parcel Map 43-87
CITY OF ATASCADERO
8500 E1 Dorado
Lindsey/Devel.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
c c _
EDA
ENGINEERING
DEVELOPMENT
ASSOCIATES
SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STATEMENT:
FOR
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP: AT-87-321
14 December 1987
APPLICANT•
Joseph E. and Mary H. Lindsey
P.O. Box 4337
San Luis Obispo, Calif.
93403
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT 24, BLK 4 OF EAGLET NO. 1, SUBDIVISION
EXISTING ZONING:
RSF-X: RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY; 20,000 SQ. FT. MIN.
WITH SEWER.
EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION:
MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:
The proposed development consists of division of the 5.02+ Ac.
tract into three 20,000 sq. ft. lots and one 3.64+ ac. remainder
parcel. This is wholly consistent with the existing zoning and
land use designations. As such it represents a less intensive
land use than the existing + 7,500 sq. ft. lots abutting the
property to the North and the Commercial Retail zone to the West.
The three smaller parcels front on El Dorado Rd. Two of the
parcels (Lots 2 and 3) will share a common access easement, thus,
minimizing the traffic impacts.
No significant or unusual impediments to development exist on
this site. No variances or exemptions are requested.
ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
1320 NIPOMO STREET • SAN LUIS OBISPO , CA 93401 805-549-8658
EXHIBIT D - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 43-87
8500 E1 Dorando Road
Lindsey/Eng. Devel. Assoc. -
February 2, 1988
FINDINGS
1. The creation of the proposed parcels conform to the Zoning
Ordinance and the General Plan land use designation , densities
and other policies.
2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the
recommended Conditions of Approval, will not have a significant
adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, and the proposed
improvements,will not cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their
,habitat
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the
public at large for access through or the use of property within
the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternate
easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474. 6 of the
State Subdivision Map Act as to the methods of handling and
discharge of waste.
8. The proposed project is in compliance with the City of
Atascadero' s Appearance Review Manual Guidelines.
EXHIBIT E - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 43-87
8500 E1 Dorado Road
Lindsey/Eng. Devel. Assoc.
February 2, 1988
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the frontage of each
parcel or its public utilities easement 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.
3. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be responsibility of the developer at his sole expense.
4. The newly formed lots shall be connected to the Public
Sewer. All annexation permit fees shall be paid for the newly
formed lots prior to the recording of the final map. Any sewer
extensions for annexation must be completed within one year after
annexation.
5. Grading and Drainage plans , prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted to and for review and approval by,
the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to
the issuance of any building permits or the recording of the
final map.
6. Obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Atascadero
Public Works Department. An agreement for public improvements,
guaranteeing that the work will be done and the inspections paid
for, shall be required prior to the issuance of a building
permit, or start of public works construction, and construct
improvements as directed by the encroachment permit prior to the
final building inspection or the recording of the final map,
whichever comes first.
7. Road improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development and
Public Works Departments for review and approval, prior to the
construction of the improvements, or prior to recording of the
final map, or prior to the issuance of any building permit,
which ever comes first. Plans shall include, but not limited to :
a. El Dorado Road: Plans shall include a minimum paved
section of 15 ' -0" from centerline plus. Design shall
include measures to save and preserve trees
within the right-of-way, as approved by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments.
8. Construction of the public road improvements shall be
completed or bonded for prior to the recording of the final map,
or completed prior to the final inspection of a building, if
approved by the Community Development and Public Works
Departments.
9. Prior to the approval of the improvement plans by the
Director of Public Works, either the Subdivider shall acquire
sufficient title or interest in the off-site land to allow the
improvements to be made as required by these conditions: or the
City Council, upon request by and at the expense of the
subdivider, shall have made all appropriate findings and adopted
Resolution of Necessity as required by law so that the City may
exercise its power of Emminent Domain.
10. The applicant shall deposit with the Director of Public-
Works a dollar amount determined by the Director of Public Work,
which shall be utilized for:
1. 1% of the total cost of a traffic signal at the
intersection of Palomar and El Camino Real.
2. 3% of the cost of drainage improvements from the site
to the golf course including improvements to La Linia.
3. 1% of the cost of road way extension of Cascada Road
from Arcade to Palomar.
4. 1% of the cost of the extension of E1 Centro Road south
from the site to La Linia at E1 Dorado.
5. 1% of the cost of the improvements of the intersection
of Palomar Road and E1 Camino Real.
6. 3% of cost of left turn lane elimination from Arcade ,
onto El Camino Real.
11. Drainage Facilities shall be constructed to City Qf
Atascadero Standards. All work shall be completed or bonded for
prior the final building, inspection or completed or bonded for
prior to the recording of the final map.
12. The Subdivider shall obtain drainage easements and/or
drainage releases from the points of concentration of stormwater
leaving the project boundary through adjoining properties to the
nearest natural watercourses as approved by the Public Works
Department if applicable, if an historical flow pattern is not
preexisting.
13. All lot grading and drainage and Public improvements shall
require written certification by a registered Civil Engineer that
all work has been completed and is in full compliance with the
approved plans. As-builts shall be provided to the City prior
to the recording of the map, whichever comes first.
14. All grading and erosion control measures shall be designed
by a registered Civil Engineer and constructed in accordance with
the City of Atascadero grading codes and standards. Prior to the
final building inspection, said engineer shall submit to the City
written certification that grading is in conformance with said
codes and standards.
15. Offer of dedication to the City of Atascadero the following
rights-of-way and / or easements:
Street Name: E1 Dorado
Limits: 20 '-0" from Centerline to edge of Right of Way
Minimum R/W Width: 40 ' - 0" Right of Way
Minimum Paved Width of 15 '-0" Pavement
16. Offer for dedication to the Public for Public Utility
Easements 6'-0" Public Utility Easement along all street
frontages.
17. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map.
18. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth
herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance
with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s Subdivision Ordinance
prior to the recording of the final map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners and a
Registered or Licensed Land Surveyor shall indicate, by
statement on the final map, that the corners have been set
or will be set by a specific date and that they will be
sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of
the final map.
c. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the final
map.
19. 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.
JM/jm
Minutes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988
t language as proposed permitted the Public Works Director 'to uar-je
ante certain improvements until after the recording of the fi 1 map.
Commiss ner Hatchell commended the excellence of the proje and Com
missioner nd inquired of the tree protection plan inte ions. Dan
Lloyd respo ed that they fully intended to take car of the trees,
and that they uld be hiring a registered landscape rchitect.
MOTION: Made Commissioner Hatchell, se nded by Commis-
sioner opelan and carried una mously to approve TTM
45-87 sub ' ct to findings and c ditions of the staff
report, inc ding the modific ion proposed to Condition
No. 10
3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 31-87 :
Request initiated by Gordon T. D is Cattle Company (Cuesta Engi-
neering) to subdivide 10.26 res of vacant property into three
(3) parcels containing 3.40, .40 nd 3.46 acres. Subject site is
located at 7800 Santa Cruz oad; le al description being Lot 37,
Block 50 of Atascadero Co ony.
Joel Moses presented the aff report, noti that an archaeological
survey had been requ . and special mitigation measures incorporated
into the proposed conditions of approval to mo ' tor grading. The Pub-
lic Works Department as re-evaluated proposed ' ndition No. 7, rela-
tive to the Garc ' Road bridge, and is recommen ' ng it be deleted in
that development ees on building construction will provide adequate
funding toward this purpose. Upon request of Com ' ssioner Michiel-•
Isen, the arc aeological survey was circulated to the mmissioners.
John Falk stein, Cuesta Engineering, indicated concurren a with pro-
posed citions of approval.
MOTI Made by Commissioner Bond, seconded by Commi Toner
Hatchell and carried unanimously to approve TP 31-87
subject to the staff recommended findings and condi-
tions of approval with the elimination of Condiion
No. 7.
4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 43-87 :
Request initiated by Joseph and Mary Lindsey (Engineering Develop-
ment Assoc. ) to subdivide 5. 02 acres of vacant property into four
(4) parcels; three containing 20 ,000 square feet, and one contain-
ing 3. 64 acres. Subject site is located at 8500 E1 Dorado Road;
legal description being Lot 24 , Block 4, Eaglet Tract No. 1.
Joel Moses presented the staff report, indicating that the three (3)
20 ,000 square foot lots proposed on E1 Dorado have been appropiately
conditioned with the 3. 64 acre lot being designated a "remainder lot" ,
which under recent Subdivision Map Act language - precludes condition-
ing until future development. He noted that the applicant had ex-
pressed concerns over Condition No. 10, requiring offsite improvement
deposits, and has been advised by that department that the maximum
amount of money involved is some $2.,725. He clarified that the ac-
cess easement serving parcels No. 2 and 3 provides for single culvert
for a driveway to serve two lots over the drainage swale.
3
Minutes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988
Dan Lloyd, EDA, indicated that the client had no concerns with the
conditions as proposed. Commissioner Copelan expressed approval of
the fact that no flag lots were being proposed.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Copelan, seconded by Commissioner
Bond to recommend approval of TPM 43-87 subject to the
findings and conditions of staff report.
5. ROAD NAME 01-88 :
Request initiated by John & Alberta Drake (Cuesta Engineering) to
establish Gallina Court as the name for a new priva road. Sub-
'ect site is located at 5200 Llano Road; legal des ription being
Lo 1-4, Block 43 of Atascadero Colony.
Joel Mose presented the staff report, indicating hat this name had
been appro ed by various emergency agencies and is translated as
"chicken" in nglish. Commissioner Michielssen reminded the Commis-
sion that th ' s was the subdivision that le to cooperation between
neighbors and d elopers to improve the road erving that area.
MOTION: Made y Commissioner Copelan seconded by Commissioner
Bond a d carried unanimousl to recommend approval of
the pro osed road name.
6. CONDITIONAL USE PE T 1-88 :
Request initiated by hive Mobi a Home Sales Inc. to establish a
Mobile Home Sales Deale ship a allow for the modification of the
Zoning Ordinance' s scree ing equirements and to allow for the
establishment of a sig o a frontage without a public entrance
(freeway frontage) . Subje site is located at 6000 San Anselmo
Road; legal description b ing Parcel A of PM 9-21, Ptn. Lots 27
and 28 of Block 18 of At scadero Colony.
Joel Moses presented the taff repor noting that this is a Tourist
Commercial zone wherein use permit uld allow sale of mobile homes.
Staff 'recommendation, sed on the purp�se of the zoning to serve the
traveling public, is or denial. The aP%Sscant has indicated his wil-
lingness to establis the use as an interim use without permanent im-
provements and w is to eliminate the fen ing and screening require-
ments of the ordi ance. Chairperson Nolan oted the letter having
been received a d distributed to the Plannin Commission from Francis
Grimes and two eighbors. He clarified that a car lot had been ap-
proved at D Rio and E1 Camino Real, as a CUP\ in the CT zone. Com-
missioner Mi hielssen noted the previously menti6ged letter referenced
the fact t t there had been a rezoning on El Camino Real on the
Brazzi prpperty where Beehive Mobile Homes was suppnsed to locate, and
staff no ed that this was CR zoning. Commissioner \"dwell questioned
the r nest to eliminate fencing, and Mr. Moses explained with the
rollirrg hill character of the area, landscaping would ` a more attrac-
/and .he
and efficient.
ouff, owner of Beehive Mobile Homes, indicated that e did want
hange the application to a conditional use permit f one year,
has talked to both the proposed shopping center dev loper af-
fecting this property and Dr. Yocum, its ' owner. If the c nter does
4
AGENDA`
4-16
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council February 23, 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
r
FROM: Henry Engem, Community Development Director
RE: Road Name 01-88 5200 Llano Road
(John & Alberta Drake) (Cuesta Engineering)
BACKGROUND:
At their regular meeting of February 2, 1988, the Planning Commis-
sion held a public hearing on the above subject. The name (Galling
Court) is translated as "chicken" and has been approved by various
emergency agencies. The Commission voted unanimously to recommend
approval of the proposed road name.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Approve Road Name 01-88 (Galling Court) per Planning Commission rec
-ommendation.
HE:ph
Attachments: Staff Report -- February 2, - 1988
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B.5
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Dater February 2 1988
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: SN 01-88
SUBJECT:
The applicant t is requesting ting the establishment of Gallina Court as
the name for a new private road established as a part of
Tentative Tract Map 36-86.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John & Alberta Drake
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cuesta Engineering
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . .5200 Llano Road
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Lots 1-4, B1k.43,
(Atas. Col. )
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.4 acres
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (Residential Suburban) ;
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .Suburban Single Family
8. Existing Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant
9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Catigorically Exempt
(Class 1)
B. ANALYSIS:
The proposed road name, Gallina Court, has been reviewed by
staff with the emergency services agencies (Police & Fire) No
problem was found with the use of the proposed road name. A
check of street names within the county and other cities in the
county has found no conflicting names.. The proposed road will be
a Private Road and is will be maintained by the property owners.
Gallina Court meets `the`City' s policy of requiring that
street names be of spanish origin or the name of a deceased
person of historical note. Gallina is translated from spanish to
mean "chicken" .
The applicants have note •
pp d this would be somewhat of a historical
name due to the site' s prior use as a poultry farm.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the establishment of Gallina
Court as an official private road name as shown on Exhibit A.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Developers Statement
EXHIBIT B — DEVELOPMENT Sr
CITY OF AT Road Name Establishment
ASCADERO
"Gallina Court„
Drake/Cue sta
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT .
r CUESTA ENGINEERING C
7401-B EI Camino Real/P.O.Box 2066
Atascadero,California 93423
(805)466-6827
January 11, 1988
Joel Moses
Atascadero City Planning Department
P. 0. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
SUBJECT: Tract 1477 - Drake
Dear Joel:
This is to request approval of "Gallina” as the official street name
for the cul-de-sac in Mr. Drake's tract. Thank you for scheduling
this item to Planning Commission as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Deborah Hollowell
DH:cb
RECEIVED
,JAN 111983
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
EXHIBIT A LOCATION MAP
`
CITY F
.4, .,.. . . , O ATASCADERO
n Road Name Establishment
iwi
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Gallina Court
• Drake/Cuesta
DEPARTMENT
4H'
i
i
01.0 ---,S4N
L(FH)
I
R S R046
A oP1
W Q
Y
O
J
�R04p
r\
lL4Np �\
0
_o
o
z
0
N
J W
RS
SITE: Gallina Court
\9� Drake Cuesta
Yy.
RS
<ti
RS
i0'r TANO'�
ZZ
'90,0�PUENTO
/ RO4p
I I 4 p0
/• I - /'O� SII,
INC; AGENDA
M .E M O' R A N D U M
TO: City Council February 23 , 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton , City Manager
FROM : Henry En9en , Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 14-85
LOCATION : _ 9850 Las Lomas Avenue
APPLICANT: Lynn Bebeau & Christine Janolis (Cuesta Engineering)
eOn June 10 , 1985 the City Council approvedParcelMap 14-85, .
subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the
recommendation of the Planning Commission . The required
conditions have been complied with and the final map is
recommended for approval :
j
HE:pe
cc : Lynn Bebeau
Christine Janolis
Cuesta Engineering
g o g
o F>
w
1 is
N
Ll
y
' •v 3t'w';x�"W � 113 Oh
Q
L46 LOd-1[4`S 'AVENUE
L
"5r, AM4
yy 1
O h
�
Ing *[.
M
P 'NG AGENDA
T IEM J172..
M E M 0 R A N U U M
TO: City Council
February 23 , 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM : Henry Engen , Community. Development "Director
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 5--87
LOCATION : 8925 Atascadero Avenue
APPLICANT: Robert S . Fisher
On August 25 , 1987 the City Council approved Parcel Map 5-87 ,
subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the
recommendation of the Planning Commission . The required
conditions have been complied with and the final map is
recommended for approval
I
HE :pe
cc : Robert S . Fisher,
OF
AVENUE a:I
ATASGAOERO vi
•
a
t
• v Z'''a g m
o
tm.. 6
I
v O
w
C a '
r
e y p
w
on 0 v
Y � J
C M
1 c
o.
m = �e
J > /•
" vn
I „r
m
r
C
m
o
g
h �
r� 'f:'•):. a.�a:N) ot:••'Y 914 f. •Wants
At
GO �r
co
it _
v3) e
6 • ; Ate,�.J - _ A .�m It. 7 ai'x R
v r•; e%` ..iii �
o
r'!r'1a'w)ss':r) r7r 1-Sx 9a/ry5. ri�4c7�1 Ri.u)
A+SET? AGN- DA
ITEM
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council February Z3 , 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton , City Manager
FROM : Henry Engen, CommunityDevelopment Director
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map '24-87
LOCATION : 9122 Atascadero Avenue
APPLICANT: Richard & Ther°esa O'Bannon {Cuesta Engineering}
On September, 8 , 1987 the City Council approved Parcel Map .24-87 ,
subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the
recommendation of the Planning Commission . The r•equi red
conditions have been complied with and the final map is
recommended for, approval
HE pe
cc: Ri char,d & Thwr•esa O ' Bannon
Cuesta Engineering
•
.EXhibit "B"
Tentative Parcel Map
;... ... . . � CITY OF ATASCADERO
r•�eu!I�� - »� Tentative Parcel Map 24-87
` ►sc�w> COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
QIdNfN'S tERT/flCATE
. I Na"AptY/At Affx^u M Im O/Y/lSMr ff X" /dom"y
.. >�lYM AY7JVNTlNTAT/Yi NAt AMO f6fl/v'Y TAtU'.:T AN THEAr✓r1E
K AU!Nat/ZfF!F/+ri:1ENlAT/Mi M'�t�B QA'.tt6�IH077W1!NE
NIP /wo~/6W.MON#s".W a Ti --No fabWr TO ra Mo.,A"
,p nr
oJm wj '
� o
vr�
0
.c
,10 I
dub. (
A,!!ft I I ".IAPGI 1 r01 IAR[ft X r V' NSS'OL'OD'L�,7:•.J7'
-!{a S z4uaosr j'ra 4f /q � 7ENTAT/VE PARLEL MAP AT el-109
I �' =r ".t /� -N:f_"��-.71,x,„Sf SJ'-•�. V ?GA110-A IO/Y/4/OK tY O.tYIE L L DI` G07Y•3tll,C:fY�Y
wfiwSuoLIO.Gawr'Y GE uv 44/r0 4ets9012.9ftra Af uciloxW/
/ zt _ �6 1-
:
�_.� IN�� - �� l` 45 G i0'(J` 1!fS• __ q 1 1
✓.� J I 4U£5T4 ENG/N££kflNd
1101 Lr.CA-N..VO"At B'
� ' Id ,.� � A1A2sA✓L'J,IACd.XN/A 131t1
I
.29.4E/'.30• _
IDA
M E M O R , A N D U P1
TO: City Council February 23 , 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM : Henry Engen , Community -Development Director
it
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 22-85
LOCATION : 6905 E1 Camino Real
APPLICANT: El Camino Associates (Cuesta Engineering)
on October, 14 , 1985 the City Counci 1 approved Parcel Map 22-85,
subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the
recommendation of the Planning Commission . The required
conditions have been complied with and the final map is
recommended for approval .
HE :pe
cc : E1 Camino ,Associates
Gaylen Littler
Cueste Engineer>in
•
��f - � . _
_ . � � .
_.__
\ .
.,
T rr , �� �
1 �'` �I��
1 6
1 1
�£ � r
1/` �% � 1
1
s � �M1 £� � 1
!// r � � 1
\ ` i #�
1 1 i 1 � 1 ��
�� ` wy
r..
'.
^e ��..- t
N\�•°• ' /
t .r
..�
� m '` � N r' �, �' '�
vor.` 1• . � ; �
a �r,
^ .— �, 1 y�
1` , /'
.. �, F w t
\ l
1 \
f _ s�. ,,, ,r \ �
• � ;:+
� \
'. l 1
,��+b �
a° � 'R\a 1
��� � �� i
_�a A �
�� ����
ME :a 437 `-.V-c`1DA
M E M O R A N D U h1-
TO: City Council February 23 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton , City Manager
FROM : Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: - Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 7-87
LOCATION: 5020 Palma
APPLICANT: Fernando Ebhar•dt (Volbrecht Surveys)
On July 14 , 1987 th.. City Council approved Parcel Map 7-87 ,
subject to certain conditions and in concur•r,ence with the -
r,ecommendati on of the Planning Commission . The r•equi rod
conditions have been complied _ with and the final map is
recommended for appr'ov'al
I A E :p e
cc : Fernando Ebhar•dt
Val br•echt Surveys
•
goes :... A CITY OF ATASCADERO197
291 Poke"
tt
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT M ��►
DEPARTMENT
f
OT1 ;,.
� N
• Error
� � BtOG. 's•rar...»irr F
Erirrrwar Bca�
F.A'Ea2.naem'
w
a a � veEwti.y,•
• /7I.T/" • JerP+..^se+rrCnrck
TENTA7'7NE T,pAC7- IX07 CF?r/F/rArw ,
8 w+y d Ce+adm ne� /Irrisby r/P'/Y s�or lYi�!PP I/
d /pnm! ltoA tJ'8ieci.ry eI�C d ni n.d.d/maxwf
wXoii/biro r/On Or fOf if Swat FA,1J 1�ONn ewe '�.��'
//i C/y orA�fir sero �/y.e/ �"A Ten/f sp wed tr/Iy
ssn[w,r oe�,s«✓l.�f/ogre /�lh o�,.r e.�/.toggles ��B.fEC//r.S�u�PY6Y,f'
rtp.vr /1rr.Is.se.••wei sno.s.+vs ra
led/.fw/flle in/arm/fia>r.6�rn �'OO
Ari•M f .vdc•X</fie lle .IrwttwsrAm
NX
!<K
/ Aewrr lBeS//K
iEG , AGENDA
� f ITEM
M E M ' 0 R A D U ht
TO: City Council February 23 , 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton , City Manager•
FROM : Henry Engen , Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 29-87
LOCATION; 10655 Realito Ave
APPLICANT: Richard Kinz (Twin Cities Engineering)
On November, 24 , 1987 the City Council approved Parcel Map 29-87 ,
subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the .
recommendation of the Planning Commission. The required .
conditions have been complied with and the final map i_:
recommended for approval .
HE :per
cc : Richard 'Kinn
Twin Cities Engineering
EXHIBIT B TENT. MAP
y!, 'get• :e a CITY OF ATASCADERO
Tentative Map 29-87
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10655 Reality Road
DEPARTMENT ,
Kinz/Twin Cities
Ms'aa' uveas' ao: „+osww•�nve.'w'wnwrmaow,«
4 W Lar2S nv,as mrsr erAr"m ne My vs u
Raraaaewaa t a•aMrawAK.U.wn nap•
• f.
7w MW.ar syrwS'arns aer
vin rww�ers.
M
gL nAt _1�
p4,aOiM
ti
Ab
A%
Nata+
:<
`�, �«.e�%:„ ! •'. g�( � V�mwTFxnrmrlr_Mv,AT'E7-tRL
La IG r 1lYe.��Le• .YJ'pyid��ear D ,eNnror.rwao,..uc.ea.
rnumsr. �msa• wv w..i,awaru a�aur mwq,
OCT 11991
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
d, Tw/# Cmen Fwa—Ap nym
s'arrs«.•cav toe nwH anarzr,s.nsa ro aimrtn 1 i
m se ir•swla./e,s 7wssc>w,u.+rnw,w�ssssr<mr)wr .!
TO: City Council
VIA: Mike Shelton , City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen , Community Development Director w
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission ' s approval of Conditional
Use Permit 1 .88- to permit establishment of a mobile home
dealership for one year, on the corner of San Ansel mo and the: west
side of US Hwy 101 . (CUP 1 -88 : Beehive Mobile Hames)
UPDATE : Neighbors who originally appealed this Planning
Commission action have subsequently withdrawn their appeal'.
(See attached. ) For Councils information the Planning Commission
record of action is included herewith.
ACTION REQUIRED : None ; appeal has been withdrawn
Enclosure : February 16 , 1988 Letter- Withdrawing' Appeal
February 10 , 1988 Letter, of ,Appeal
Exhibit I , Conditions of Approval ( Planning
Commission revised)
February 2 , 1988 Staff Report
February 2 , 1988 Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt
SANTA MARIA SAN LUIS OBiSPO
MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE
1969.1974 1974.1982
RICHARD C KIRKPATRICK
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
1045 MILL STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO. CALIFORNIA 93401 0
TELEPHONE (805) 541.1183
February 16, 1988
RECEIVE
FEB 17 1989
The Honorable City Council COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma
Atascadero, CA. 93422
Re Beehive Mobile Home Sales
Conditional Use Permit
Dear Councilmembers:
We, the undersigned,_ wish to withdraw our appeal of the Planning Commission decison
to grant a conditional use permit to Beehive Mobile Homes Sales for a temporary re-
location to San Anselmo Road and Highway 101.
We have been assured that this use of the property out of its classification is
temporary and that no significant grading or asphalt work wil'T be done.
We also wish to reaffirm our opposition to the proposed' Williams Bros. - Oak Tree
Plaza development and to make clear` that`the lifting of this appeal in no way
should be construed to be a lack of interest in the type of development and use
permitted at this location.
c i J
t
RICHARD C. KIRK?ATRICr ANNE MARIE KIRKP ICK
CC: Beehive Mobile Homes Sales -' Thomas H. Gouff
SANTA MARIA O SAN LUIS OBISPO
MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE
1969.1974 RICHARD C. KIRKPATRICK 1974.1982
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
1045 MILL STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93401
TELEPHONE (805) 541-1183 HOME ADDRESS :
FEBRUARY 10, 1988 6291 MONTEREY COURT
ATASCADERO, CA. 93422
466-4638
THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO
6500 PALMA
ATASCADERO, CA. 93422
RE : BEEHIVE MOBILE HOME SALES
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
DEAR COUNCILMEMBERS :
'WE WISH TO APPEAL THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO GRANT A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO BEEHIVE MOBILE HOME SALES FOR RELOCATION
TO SAN ANSELMO ROAD AND HIGHWAY 101 .
THE BASIS FOR OUR APPEAL IS THAT THE GENERAL PLAN PROVIDES FOR
COMMERCIAL-TOURIST ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AT THAT LOCATION AND THE
MOBILE HOME SALES USE WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE .
. THE REASONING GIVEN IN GRANTING THE PERMIT APPEARS THAT A SHOPPING
CENTER DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE IS IMMENENT.
AS PROPERTY OWNERS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, WE FEEL THAT THE GENERAL
PLAN SHOULD NOT BE CIRCUMVENTED OR ALTERED . ITS PURPOSE IS TO
PREVENT IMPROPER LAND USE AND TO PROVIDE FOR GROWTH THAT IS
HARMONIOUS TO ITS SURROUNDINGS . THE RESIDENTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD
HAVE A RIGHT TO EXPECT THAT THE GENERAL PLAN WILL PROTECT US FROM
HAVING. DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS THE PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER THRUST IN
OUR MIDST.
THE TRAFFIC GENERATED BY MONTEREY ROAD SCHOOL AND THE K-MART
SHOPPING CENTER IS ALREADY SUBSTANTIAL . ADDING TO THIS WOULD CAUSE
IMPOSSIBLE CONGESTION AS WELL POSING A REAL THREAT TO THE SAFETY OF
THE CHILDREN, OTHER PEDESTRIANS AND MOTORISTS WHO WOULD BE FORCED
TO DEAL WITH IT.
WE FEEL THAT IN GRANTING THIS PERMIT. THE COMMISSION OVER-RODE THE
OBJECTIONS OF ITS OWN PLANNING STAFF, AS WELL AS THE INTENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN AND THE FEELINGS OF NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS .
SINCERELY,
E IV
• RICHARD C . KIRKPATRI
CK ANNE MARIE KIRKAR,Vf,RICK �g8g
(SEE PAGE TWO FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNERS) FEB 9
COMMUNITY DDELOPMENT
-1-
b
O
FEBRUARY 10, 1988
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL /� ` ✓ C ,JZ�
PAGE TWO
i
ENCL . CHECK NO . 2446 - $100
EXHIBIT I - CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditional Use Permit 1-88
6000 San Anselmo Road
Beehive Mobile Home
February 2, 1988
(Planning Commission Revised)
CONDITIONS
1. All construction shall be in conformance with Exhibit B
(Site Plan) and Exhibit I (Conditions of Approval) , except as
revised as follows:
A. No sign shall be allowed on the east face of the
building. A wall mounted building sign in conformance
with the Zoning Ordinance maybe placed on the south
elevation.
B. A 10 '-0" landscaped area shall be established along the
San Anselmo Road frontage.
C. Interior property line screen shall be eliminated.
2. Fire suppression facilities in conformance with Fire Code
Standards shall be provided. Design and installation shall
be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department.
3. Drainage fees in an amount determined by the Director of
Public Works shall be paid prior to the issuance of a
business license.
4. This Conditional Use Permit shall expire one year from the
date of final approval, unless a time extension has been
granted pursuant to a written request received prior to the
expiration date. The Planning Commission shall review the
time extention through a Public Hearing process. A review
shall be held by the Planning Commission six months after the
opening of the business in a Public Hearing process. After
the Public Hearing the Planning Commission may impose new
conditions or cancel the use permit.
5. All site improvements. shall be installed prior to the
issuance of a business license for the operation of the
use.
6. The landscaping required along the freeway property line may
be bonded for a maximum of 60 days.
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B.6
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: February 2,1988
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: CUP 1-88
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Permit 1-88, rtoestablish� a Mobile Home
Dealershi on the northeast corner ofU.S.
P San Anselmo and �wv!
. ,�
Highway 101. 4 x OF - ,aAi.Al
1 t i
a ria
't
d . ,ni .,,
BACKGROUND , r � , e a � t;4A �
0,;
The applicant wishes to establish a Mobile Home Sales Dealership V�CY44
within the CT (Commercial Tourist) Zone. The use is defined as zx w s
"Auto,, Mobilehome and Vehicle dealers and supplies","and requires
the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (Section 9-3. 243 (a) ) .
:The use is required to meet specific development standards
contained in the Zoning Ordinance (Section 9-6. 163) .
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Beehive Mobile Home Sales
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rocky Russell/Jeff Philips
3. Project Address. . .. . . . . . . . . . . 6000 San Anselmo Road
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Par.A of PM 9-21 (Ptn. Lts.
27 & 28 Blk. 18 Atas. Col. )
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 0 acres
6: Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CT (Commercial Tourist)
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .Retail Commercial
8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Veterinary Office
9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
January 18, 1988
B. ANALYSIS:
Two basic questions need to be answered as a part of the review
of the proposed CUP. First, is the use appropriate for the site
and zoning. Secondly, are the, requested modifications of
specific development standards acceptable.
• In determining the appropriateness of the use for the site, C
_several items need to be considered. Items like zoning
compatibility, site compatibility and general plan consistency
should be examined. The proposed use (Auto, Mobilehome & Vehicle
Dealers) is allowed in the CR, CS, and the CPK zones and is a
Conditional Use within the CT zone. The use could be established
within the CR, CS & CPK zones and meet the zone purposes stated
for those districts. It is difficult to try to fit the use into
the purpose of the CT zone. The CT zone is suppose to provide
commercial uses to the traveling public on Highway 101. The site
is located next to the freeway,' and is ideal for a use oriented
to the traveling public. But is a Mobile Home Dealership a
Commercial use oriented to the traveling public?
The use proposed is what could be considered an interim use. The
use will require no new structures and few permanent
improvements. -The current site on E1 Camino Real is being' ; t Q= ..
developed with a new shopping center, and the use has acted as an >.
interim use on the site for the past several years. The E1
Camino Real property, due to the lack of improvements required is
. now available for a more intense development. 'It is envisioned
that the proposed site would fall into the same category.
The proposed four acre site currently contains a building and
parking area. The site has been used as a Veterinary Clinic
which is now in the process of relocating to a new site on E1
Camino real. The applicant' s proposal will take advantage of and
use the existing building and parking area. Two based areas will
be added and used for the storage of units for sale. -An area
covering approximately 1/3 of the site is proposed to be left in
a natural state and will not be used.
The current zoning allows for the establishment of the proposed
use with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The
ordinance also requires the use to meet specific development
standards as to the development and operation of a "Dealership" .
The proposal meets the requirements of having access from a
collector, limiting the use to sales of vehicles from the site,
and only the vehicles will be displayed on the site. The
required 10 ' -0" landscaped setback is not provide as a part of
the proposal. The use will also have to meet the requirements
set for the development of "Sales Lots" (Section 9-6. 139) .
These sections require:
1. The interior property lines are to be screened with
a 6 ' -0" solid wall or fence;
2. Parking shall be provided at a rate of 1 space per
3, 000 sq. ft. of offices;
3. A 5 ' -0" landscaping area along street frontage is
required;
4. Screening of the property;
5. Offices may be allowed in a Temporary Trailer
if the unit meets specific installation
- requirements; and
6. The site' s sales area is required to be surfaced in
a dust free manner.
The proposed plan meets these requirements with the exception of
the 6' -0" screen fence on the interior property line and the
landscape area along street property lines.
The proposed project is requesting the modification of the
required development standards. These modifications cover the
modification of screening standards, and landscaping standards.
The proposal shows no landscaping along the San Anselmo street
frontage. A 10 '-0" landscaped area would normally be required.
The area is controlled b CalTran
s as an on ram he
T freeway
Y P• Y
frontage would not be defined as a street frontage and thus would
not be required to be screened per the ordinance. As a storage
yard the area would be required to be screened. The Design
Review Manual would also require some type of screening. The
applicant is providing a 5'-0" landscaped area instead of the
required 6'-0" screen fencing along both the freeway and interior
property lines. The applicant proposes the use of a conifer
plant (evergreen) screen, replacing the required 6 '-0" screen
fence. The zoning ordinance allows the Planning Commission to
modify the screening requirement as part of a Conditional Use
Permit (Section 9-4. 128) . In allowing the modification the
Commission must make a finding that the characteristics of the
site and the vicinity would make the required fencing and
screening unnecessary or ineffective. The property ' s location
adjoining the freeway and surrounding slopes would make the sites
characteristics different than other sites of similar zoning.
The intent of the ordinance and the General Plan would be better
served with a landscape screen rather than a solid wall.
The applicant has also requested the use of a sign on a building
frontage without a public entrance. The sign would be a freeway
oriented sign' on the east side of the building. The proposal
would not meet the standards previously reviewed and recommended
for adoption by the City. The use is not a multiple tenant site
or a use directly catering to the traveling public.
In summary the staff feels that the use is not appropriate as a
permanent use in the CT zone, but as an interim use, could be
made compatible with the zoning ordinance and general plan. The
modifications of the type of screening would be acceptable. The
establishment of signing in confomance with the existing
ordinance is appropriate and no freeway identification is
required.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of Conditional Use Permit 1-88 based
on the Findings in Exhibit H.
CITY EXHIBIT A LOCATION MAP
OF ATASCADERO
CUP 1-88
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6000 San Anselmo
DEPARTMENT Beehive Mobile Homes
SITE: 6000 San Anselmo
CUP 1-88 A
Beehive, Mobile Homes
Tq N UI A
IV ��
RSQ
ZILLA p, r
1� L N
2A y OZ �
/+
CA MI NO EAL C N � EDA
44
CI PALLIA
�S P fwy IO
I,MO
M• ' 1
i ' ROAD
'1� I ROAD
yy n
u
p; s
at� y`, F
vENAp
AOIX
J
O J
I ARICOP ' o
/� � \
�. ` I u
p/n
/ 1
)ILL>-
RS /� s
CITY EXHIBIT C DEVEL.STAT
,M; ,.. :.. . �. OF ATASCADERO
4�
j-1914;11 Alin --; NT
, � IU 7•� ..
�' --' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEcuP 1-88
6000 San Anselmo
DEPARTMENT Beehive Mobile Homes*
MOBILE HOME SALES INC.
8380 EL CAMINO REAL • ATASCADERO, CA 93422 • (805)466-6525
2375 VENTURA BOULEVARD • OXNARD,CA 93030 • (805)983-1355
January 8, 1988
City of Atascadero
P.O. Box 474
Atascadero, Ca. 93423
Subject: Supplemental Development Statement
Dear Joel,
With the approval of the new Longs' Shopping Center we have been given an
eviction notice of our present address, 8380 E1 Camino Real, Atascadero;
we have been given until February 15th to vacate the premises.
We have searched all available property in Atascadero and have found one
suitable for our needs in terms.of size, freeway access, visibility,
existing office and parking spaces. For this reason we hereby submit an
application with the City of Atascadero to relocate our business to 6000
San Anselmo Rd., Atascadero, California.
We only have six :seeks before .ve have to be off the premises, please
expedite this as fast as possible; ::e would really appreciate your help.
Thank You,
T cmas H. Gouff
Beehive t^obile Home Sales, Inc. RECLII,T�!�
JA(4II �98�
COMMUNITY DEVELOPh!j,yT
THG/gab
'Business is buzzin'¢t Beehive"
0 EXHIBIT E SITE ELEVATIONS
CITY CUP 1-88
OF ATASCADERO 6000 San Anselmo
4,
Beehive Mobile Homes
'DCADF� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
PROPOSED RELOCATION
BEEHIVE MOBILE HOME SALES, INC.
6000 San Anselmo Road, Atascadero, CA.
. 1
EXISTING OFFICE - SUBJECT PROP. EXISTING OFFICE - SUBJECT FRCP.
Front and Side View Rear View
EXISTING CFFICE - SUBJECT PROPERTY
Taken frcm driveway -
1 -_ = -
JAN 11 19°9
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
{ CI EXHIBIT G CALTRANS LETTE
,�,-���.� TY OF ATASCADERO
CUP 1-88
> COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6000 San Anselmo
.;� DEPARTMENT Beehive Mobile Homes*
STATE OF CALIFORNIA--BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
GEORGE DEUKNEJIAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. 0. BOI 8114, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93483-8111
TELEPI NE, (815) 549-3111
January 5, 1988
5-SLO-101-46.87
Beehive Mobile Home Sales BEEHIVE
8380 El Camino
Atascadero, CA 93422
Attn. Tom Gouff
Dear Tom:
1 have reviewed your proposed relocation to San Anselmo Road with our
drainage section. Your plan to install base material on the portion
of the lot adjacent to the Highway right of way would have no •
appreciable effect on the Highway.
As the proposal does not require any work in our right of way an
encroachment permit will not be required from us. If you were to
revise your plan and need to work in our right of way a permit would
be required, at that time we would need a detailed plan to review.
Sincerely,
L"/
Orville Morgan C/
District Permit Engineer
i
i
RECEIVED
JAN 11 1998
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Minutes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988_
n L oy , EDA, in icate t at the client had no concerns with
con tions as proposed. Commissioner Copelan expressed appro o
the fa that no flag lots were being proposed.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Copelan, seconded by ommissioner `
d to recommend approval of TPM 43-8 subject. to th
fin s and conditions of staff re rt.
5. ROAD NAME 01-88 :
Request initiated by Jo & Alberta make (Cuesta Engineering) to
establish Gallina Court as'`-the nam6 for a new private road. Sub-
ject site is located at 5200 no Road; legal description being
Lots 1-4 , Block 43 of Atasc ero %in
.
Joel Moses presented the aff report, atingthat this name ha
been approved by va 'ous emergency agenc s and is translated a
"chicken" in Englis . Commissioner Michielssen inded the Commis
sion that this was the subdivision that led to peration betwee
neighbors an evelopers to improve the road serving t area.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Copelan, seconded by Comm i ioner
Bond and carried unanimously to recommend appro 0
the proposed road name.
6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1-88 :
Request initiated by Behive Mobile Home Sales Inc. to establish a
Mobile Home Sales Dealership and allow for the modification of the
Zoning Ordinance ' s screening requirements and to allow for the
establishment of a sign on a frontage without a public entrance
(freeway frontage) . Subject site is located at 6000 San Anselmo
Road; legal description being Parcel A of PM 9-21, Ptn. Lots 27
and 28 of Block 18 of Atascadero Colony.
Joel Moses presented the staff report, noting that this is a Tourist
Commercial zone wherein a use permit would allow sale of mobile homes.
Staff recommendation, based on the purpose of the zoning to serve the
traveling public, is for denial. The applicant has indicated his wil-
lingness to establish the use as an interim use without permanent im-
provements and wants to eliminate the fencing and screening require-
ments of the ordinance. Chairperson Nolan noted the letter having
been received and distributed to the Planning Commission from Francis
Grimes and two neighbors. . He clarified that a car lot had been ap-
proved at Del Rio and El Camino Real, as a CUP in the CT zone. Com-
missioner Michielssen noted the previously mentioned letter referenced
the fact that there had been a rezoning on El Camino Real on the
Brazzi property where Beehive Mobile Homes was supposed to locate, and
staff noted that this was CR zoning. Commissioner Kidwell questioned
the request to eliminate fencing, and Mr . Moses explained with the
rolling hill character of the area, landscaping would be more attrac-
tive and efficient.
Tom Gouff, owner of Beehive Mobile Homes, indicated that he did want
to change the application to a conditional use permit for one year ,
and he has talked to both the proposed shopping center developer af-
fecting this property and Dr . Yocum, its ' owner . If the center does
4
Minutes - Planning Commission - February 2, 1988
not develop, they would expect to come in for time extensions. Last.
year , they sold approximately fifty mobile homes and only three to
Atascadero residents, including people building in the Naciamento Lake
area. All the sales tax is recouped here in Atascadero. In response
to questions from Commissioner Michielssen, . he indicated that it was` a
twelve month lease. They are now under a thirty day eviction notice
at their present location. Mr. Gouff also indicated that they would
have permanent open space for the unused area on the site plan, and
felt that this would shield the property in the area to the south.
Caltrans has approved drainage, etc. Chairperson Nolan indicated
staff had prepared draft conditions of approval for an interim use,
should the Commission so recommend. Mr. Gouff indicated that they
would like to bond for the improvements and waive the trees on the
interior, which would be removed should the area be developed as a
shopping center. He clarified- that there had been no written agree-
ment with Brazzi, and that land is unavailable -
and the cost is prohib-
itive P
r hib
itive for them to move there. In response to question, he noted that
the would
y normally be closed on Sunday and close at 5:00 p.m. most of
the year, and perhaps 7: 00 .m. in the Summer. -
P r. They do not have elec-
tricity to the units and
Y so they are not lit after dark. Normally,
they generate only three to four customers per day and average two
sales per week. Caltrans' trees will impact about half of the view of
the site and he felt that most businesses of this nature are located
on freeways. Sales tax is off of approximately four to five million
dollars in sales (this also includes their Oxnard properties) . Six
percent sales tax is collected, with each city getting 1%.
In response to Chairperson Nolan, Engen advised that if approved for a
one year permit, it would be null and void at the end of twelve months
..unless an extension was granted. Commissioner Kidwell noted that the
draft conditions of approval call for examination of the operation in
six months, and Joel Moses advised that this same condition also ap-
plied to the "teenage club" and allowed for examination of the use.
In response to question, Mr. Gouff indicated he had thirty days to
move in, but two weeks to allow for an appeal should the Planning Com-
mission approve the use permit, so he 'd actually have only two weeks
to move. He thought they would have to bond for landscaping, but in-
dicated he could guarantee installation within sixty days if the
trees on the inside property were waived. Discussion followed and
Commissioner Kidwell noted that additional landscaping could be re-
quired if the use were someday to become permanent.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Copelan, seconded by Commissioner
Bond and carried unanimously to approve CUP 1-88 subject
to findings in Exhibit H and modified conditions of ap-
proval to Exhibit I, which limits the use to one year
and eliminates interior fencing and landscaping require-
ments, with an allowance to bond for remaining landscap-
ing up to a sixty day period.
Commissioner Michielssen noted, that in response to the neighbor ' s
letter, he looked upon this as a temporary use ; were this a permanent
use, it could lead to piecemeal development.
Commission recessed at 9 : 23 p.m. .
5
MEMORANDUM
To: Board of Directors/Atascadero County Sanitation District
Through: Michael Shelton City ManagerKA
.
From: Paul-M Sensibaugh, Director of Public ;Works/City Engineer
Subject: Requests for Relief from Mandatory Connection to Sewer
Date: February 16, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Boardgrant the requested waivers until
such time as the on-site systems fail , but that the Properties be
required at the end of mandatory two years to show proof to the City
that . their septicsystems have not failed by using o al test 'ng
• procedures which routinely' accompany the sale of a home.
Background:
At the last regular meeting the Board addressed the Mac Corkle
annexation which was carried over to the present agenda. All of the
owners of property adjacent to the proposed annexation requested a
waiver from the 2 year mandatory connection to the new sewer by
Petitioning the Board in 'writing under the relief clause provided in
the ACSD code Knowing that the concensus of the Board was to grant
the requests Mr. Mac Corkle was approached as to his intention to
extend the mainline even though a future reimbursement agreement may
Provide a waiver for adjacent properties until such time as their
septic systems fail . Mac Corkle does, however, wish to proceed with
his project since an on-site septic system would be either too
expensive or impossible.
Discussion:
Staff recognizes that this sudden extension may provide a
hardship for certain owners, but also recognizes the action as
Precedent setting and a threat to any septic problem area. Previous
requests for waivers have been denied by the Board, such as relief
from the Le Jeal extension and those on standby that have been given
one year to connect.
It has been discussed thatwhen the ACSD line and the USL are
enjoined that any permit to build within the new boundary must show a
public sewer or be rejected. Other considerations were to place a
time restraint on the waiver to say 5. or 10 years, but the thought of
this occuring city=wide reeked of an administrative nightmare.
I;t is common when ' selling a home to be required to do aseptic
tank evaluation which costs about $200 . Due to the fact that
testimony was given that some of the septic tanks abutting the
proposed sewer are about 20 years old, it is not unreasonable to
require such a test at the end of the mandatory time period to prove
that the system is still adequate
Fiscal' Impact :
The impact of this decision is not directly meaningful to the
City but is very important to the homebuilder that may have to provide
for the entire cost of the sewer extension.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Directors
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: . Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT : Sewer A/-jnWnexation - Larga Avenue - Mac Corkle
DATE: February 2 , 1988
Recommendation :
Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached
Resolution. annexing Lot 25 Block YB into Improvement
District #1 .
Background:
Staff has received a request from the owner of the
subject parcel to annex into Improvement District #1 due to
site conditions which preclude standard septic systems .
Mandatory Connection :
District Ordinance makes it mandatory for parcels to
connect to a sanitary sewer within two (2) years of the time
that the sewer becomes available . The sewer is considered
"available" if it is constructed along the frontage with a
dedicated right of way or easement .
The owners of such an affected parcel have the right
to request a variance in writing to the Board. This
variance may, for example, be granted until such time as the
septic system for the parcel fails . Upon connection to the
sewer system the parcel will have to pay the annexation fee
and run the service line at private expense.
The developer may •,file for reimbursement from any
future connections into the line for which they fronted the
costs .
Because District Ordinance makes connection mandatory
we have, by regulation, set a Public Hearing for this item.
Fiscal Impact :
There is no cost to the District related to this
annexation . All costs incurred in the line extension are to
be paid by the developer . In -addition the Developer is
required to pay all annexation and connection fees in
effect at the time of connection .
RESOLUTION NO. 21-88
A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION
DISTRICT APPROVING EXTENDING PUBLIC SEWER SERVICE TO
LOT 25 BLOCK YB AND INCORPORATING THE AREA
CONCERNED INTO THE BOUNDARIES OF IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT NO. 1
WHEREAS, the Atascadero County Sanitation District is '
empowered by Section 4834 of the Health and Safety Code to
annex territory already a part of the County Sanitation
District to the Improvement District of that County Sanitation
District ; and
WHEREAS, Mr , Ron MacCorkle owns the property described in
Exhibit A attached to this resolution; and
WHEREAS, said, property, located on Larga Avenue, is
contiguous with Improvement District #1; and
WHEREAS, the proposed annexation has received a Negative
Declaration pursuant to the provisions of the' Environmental .
Quality Act ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Directors of the
Atascadero County Sanitation District as follows ;
Section 1 . The Board finds that the territory described
in this resolution will be benefitted by such sewer service
(Health and Safety Code Section 4830)
Section 2 . The Board approves the connection of public
sewer service to the following parcel , subject to the payment
of appropriate fees as listed in the Atascadero County
Sanitation District Code:
Lot 25 Block YB APN 31-133-05
Section 3. The area included in APN 31-133-05 , Lot 25 ,
Block YB is hereby incorporated into the boundaries of
Improvement District NO. 1 .
. On motion by Board Member and_, sec,onded by a
Board Member ,the foregoing resolution is adopted
in its entirety by the following roll call vote.
AYES:
NOES
ABSENT :
DATE:
ATTEST: ATASCADERO COUNTY
SANITATION DISTRICT
MICHAEL B. SHELTON BARBARA NORRIS
Secretary President
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO CONTENT
EY R NSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH
#i �
Ator y� Dir , of Public Works
•
e, N
w/ p
0 �
III Z
_� �• tea,
� Y "
a
r
h b` N 30054.01 .r
7 W O• t_ O 011 M i4 � ..
q / 3
i
40
nsr' y q
N26 ow ie
.- J. �±• �^ gci H 't to
03
•F. s• �M.N
W O O y Zoom M
m a w Y N 0
O o
3.3 O 4D
M N33 �..W ; p 98.82to
O. -
4f
/71t 2
A
_ /a91
N 2 N33 00 W u
H250 0 /ss•
ai W •y.. V py '. N •a N 8-,/Of p 3 YI a, 2 3 30 w
► N
bCD
IA
e
O
rl ' N •� y C lD ti
O OI CbywO ,�.
Zo9yN s M$�i b Z _ H' 28 38 W
(D Fl-N• M oto�/ O ♦ _ > `
A to £
rr aos m n
x � N 37 W e a 1-
rtLtf
oo z O ye \
m A7 cs \
ON � H
,L
>a
M,
7
j
( PLEASE INCLUDE INTO YOU /9/88 COUNCIL PACKET ) ITEM — E =-1—
Ed Allred
P.O. Box 1334
Atascadero, Ca 93423
February 4, 1988
Atascadero County Sanitation District Board of Directors
City Administration Building
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, Ca 93422
This letter is to inform you that I protest the extension of the sewer main
on Larga Avenue as referenced in the copy of the attached notice.
I am the property owner of APN 31-133-06, 8185 Larga Avenue, Atascadero,
which would be directly affected by any such extension. I am in the process
of completing a new residence on my property and under District Ordinance if
the sewer extension were ccnnpleted, I would have to abandon the new septic
system I recently installed. Before the City would approve my building
plans and issue a building permit, they required that I submit plans for an
engineered septic system which I did and subsequently received my building
permit and installed the engineered septic system pursuant to said plans at
. a cost of over $4,500.00. To abandon my new septic system and pay for the
extension of the new sewer main would create quite a needless financial
hardship for me since my new system will last me many years.
In the event I would choose. to hook up to a sewer line, I would choose to
hook up on E1 Descanso and not Larga. This would alleviate the need for a
sewage lift station as my property is well below the proposed sewer line
on Larga and a gravity flow sewer line to E1 Descanso would be more logical
and cost efficient.
Because of my situation as explained herein I am asking for a variance.
In the future if my existing new septic system fails, I would agree to
bring the sewer line in from E1 Descanso and hook up with a gravity flow
sewer line mentioned above.
Sincerely,
Ed Allred
8185 Larga
Atascadero
0
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING CITY ATTORNEY
POST OFFICE BOX 747
ATASCADERO. POST OFFICE BOX 749
PHONE: CALIFORNIA 93!23 ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93423
PHONE: (BOS) 466-8000 PHONE: (805) 466.5678
CITY COUNCIL ascadeiC®CITY CLERK
Atljjvww���
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CITY TREASURER POST OFFICE BOX747
CITY MANAGER CORPORAATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 9
FINANCE DEPARTMENT PHONE: (805) 466.8600
PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT �-
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT
RECREATION DEPARTMENT
6005 LEWIS AVENUE
ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 93422
PHONE: (805) 466.2141
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given_fi at a Public Hearing will be
held on February 9, 1988 before the Atascadero County
Sanitation District Board of Directors (City Council)
at 7:30 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 4th Floor Rotunda, -
City Administration Building, 6500 Palma Avenue, ATascadero,
CA. This Public Hearing shall be on the proposed annexation
of Lot 25 Block YB (APN 31-133-05)
Any interested party desiring to make written protest
against such annexation shall do so by written communication
containing the signature and street address of the protestant,
and shall be filed with the Clerk of the Atascadero County
Sanitation District, P.O. Box 747, Atascadero, CA 93423, not
I
later than 7:30 P.M. on February 9, 1988.
NOTICE: The proposed sewer annexation will require a ewer
main extension, the construction of which mayMpact
your property. District Ordinance requires all
property to which sewer service is available to be
connected to the sewer and abandon on-site disposal
systems. Additionally, the cost of const--uction of
the sewer main extension can be recoverab e from
. those required to connect.
1
February 5, 1988
To: Clerk
Atascadero County Sanitation District
P. 0. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
From: C. J. and M. E. Scri vner
Owners, Lot 39, Block YB
8150 Larga
Atascadero, CA
We, as joint owners of Lot 39, Block YB, City of Atascadero, wish to
protest the proposed annexation of Lot 25, Block YB (APN 31-133-05).
We request that a variance be granted to allow us to continue to use our
present on-site disposal system. We request that this variance be in
effect until our present septic system fails.
If the variance is not approved, we strongly protest the annexation. We
also will attend the public hearing on February 9.
Thank you for sending the notice.
u,v44t, d J z:%1
CyrJl J. qcrivner Mary E. Sc vner
PLEASE INCLUDE INTO YOUR 2/9/88 AGENDA PACKETS ITEM : E - 1
------------
February 8, 1988
Clerk
Atascadero County Sanitation District
P. 0. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423 _
Dear Clerk:
Thank you for sending the notice regarding the public hearing on the
proposed sewer annexation of Lot 25, Block YB, City of Atascadero
As the owner of Lot 40, Block YB, City of Atascadero, I wish to go on
record as opposed to the annexation unless a variance is granted to allow
me to continue to use my present on-site disposal system. I request that
this variance be in effect until my present septic system fails. This
system has always functioned satisfactorily with no problems whatsoever.
If the variance is not approved, strongly P proposed
I strop 1 protest the ro osed
annexation.
Sincerely,
Guido Lombardi
Owner, Lot 40, Block YB
8160 Larga
P. 0. Box 162
Atascadero, CA 93422
8 February 1988
•
Clerk of Atascadero County Sanitation District
P. O. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
RE. Proposed Annexation of Lot 25 Block YB (APN 31-133-05)
The undersigned wish to go on record as being opposed to the
annexation of the above into the Sanitation District. While we
believe that- expansion of the sewer system is important to the
continued development of the City of Atascadero, we feel that
this expansion must be systematic and predictable. Although we,
personally, would welcome this expansion as valuable to our
property, we understand the opposition of neighbors who have
recently spent a good deal of money building carefully engineered
septic systems. Furthermore, we do not want to defray, a larger
share of the costs should these homeowners seek, and be granted,
a variance to hooking up their household wastes to the sewage
main extension.
• Donald G. Wheeler Anne M. Wheeler
8200 Larga Ave.
Atascadero CA. 93422
February 9, 1988
Atascadero County Sanitation District
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, California 93423
Re: Proposed annexation of Lot 25 Block YB (APN 31-133-05)
We, the owners of Lot 41 Block YB (APN 31-132-06) , wish to
request a variance in hooking up to the above annexation until
such time that, our existing septic system fails . As our septic
system is under 18 months old we would find it a financial burden
to abandon it and be required to hook up to the proposed sewer
line .
We are not opposed to sewer lines being established in our area,
and we would support the idea of a sewer annexation district
being formed to help keep the intial costs to existing homeowners
in this area from being unreasonable . We would also be willing to
look at any other options available to this neighborhood in
installing and financing a sewer system.
Patrick W. Scrivner Suzette L. Scrivner
8180 Larga Ave . 8180 Larga Ave .
Atascadero, CA 93422 Atascadero, CA 93422
I Ate,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Directors
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager - 3 .
FROM: Paull M Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT Sewer Annexation - Violetta Avenue - Dewing
DATE: February 12 , 19`88
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached
Resolution. annexing Lot 30 Block IB into Improvement
District #1 .
Background;
Staff has received a request from the owner of the
subject parcel to annex into Improvement District #1 due to
site conditions which preclude standard septic systems
Mandatory Connection;
District Ordinance makes it mandatory ,for parcels to
connect to a sanitary sewer within two (2) years of the time
that
the sewer becomes available'. The sewer is considered
"available" if it is constructed along the frontage with a
dedicated right of way or easement .
The owners of such an affected parcel have the right.
to request a variance in writing to the Board. This
variance may, for example, be granted until such time as the
septic system for the parcel fails . Upon connection to the
sewer system the parcel will have to pay the annexation fee
and run the service lime at; private expense.
The developer may file for reimbursement from any
future connections into the line for which they fronted the
costs .
Because District Ordinance makes connection mandatory
we have, by regulation, set a Public Hearing for this item.
Fiscal Impact ; '
There is no cost to the District related to this
annexation. All costs incurred inthe :line extension are to
be paid by the developer . In -addition the Developer is
required to pay all annexation and connection fees in
effect_at the time of connection .
s �►
RESOLUTION NO. 24-88
A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION
DISTRICT APPROVING EXTENDING PUBLIC SEWER SERVICE TO
LOT 30 BLOCK IB AND INCORPORATING THE AREA
CONCERNED INTO THE BOUNDARIES, OF IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT NO. T
WHEREAS,` the Atascadero County Sanitation District is
empowered by Section 4834 - of the Health and Safety Code to
annex territory already a part of the County Sanitation
District to the Improvement District of that County Sanitation
District ; and
WHEREAS, Mr . James E. Dewing owns the property described
in Exhibit A attached to this resolution and
WHEREAS, said, property, located on Violetta Avenue, is
contiguous with Improvement District #1; and
WHEREAS, the proposed annexation has received a Negative
Declaration pursuant to the provisions of the- Environmental
Quality Act ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Directors of the
Atascadero County Sanitation District as follows ;
Section 1 . The Board finds that the territory described
in this resolution ' will be benefitted by such sewer service
(Health and Safety Code Section 4830)
Section 2 . The -Board approves the connection of public
sewer service to the following parcel , subject to the payment
of appropriate fees as listed in the Atascadero County
Sanitation District Code:
Lot 30 Block IB APN 31-022-12
Section 3. The area included in APN 31-012-12 , Lot 30
Block IB is hereby incorporated into the boundaries of
Improvement District NO. 1 .
On motion by Board Member and seconded by
Board Member ,the foregoing resolution is adopted
in its entirety by the following roll call vote ,
AYES :
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE:
ATTEST : ATASCADERO COUNTY
SANITATION DISTRICT
14
MICHAEL B. SHELTON BARBARA NORRIS
Secretary President
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO CONTENT
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH
City Attorney Dir , of Public Works
•
.P
O
„s
O
a f
R.M.4-35A
N
CA
6 V l,q
O
4Q O
\
OI a4
N
tot
.. 2.r N Biu ,e O O s r
A -
r *fA
r ' a
V�0L
02 04
» o fM-4 Frri
" Z m 144 r u
� v
•e t � O
•° CORTA `o AVE. s'
y Z 2 W
r \of
m % _
J
-24
(VCD
W n
NVS_- _ Tn �a
15 020 /1 C)
F
Q 5 9 10 m a
�_t .x
y l t, G W m O N•
r
w
m
(A
O Y
N .1
FI-
MD
s 21 w f
-�
m
S O N � O 111 1 I
toot 1,: u
9�0 to
N O T I C E O F P U B L I C H E A R I N G
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be
held on February 23, 1988 before the Atascadero County
Sanitation District Board of Directors (City Council) at
7 :30 P.M. in the City Council Chambers , 4th Floor Rotunda,
City Administration Building, 6500 Palma Avenue,
Atascadero,CA. This Public Hearing shall be on the proposed
annexation of Lot 30 Block IB (31-012-12)
Any interested party desiring to make written protest
against such annexation shall do so by written
communication containing the signature and street address
of the protestant , and shall be filed with the Clerk of the
Atascadero County Sanitation District , P.O. Box 747,
Atascadero, CA 93423, not later than 7 :30 P.M. on February
23, 1988.
NOTE: The proposed sewer annexation will require a
. sewer main extension , the construction of which may impact
your property . District Ordinance requires all property to
which sewer service is available to be connected to the
sewer and abandon on-site disposal systems . Additionally,
the cost of construction of the sewer main extension can be
recoverable from those required to connect .
•
j to �J
MEMORANDUM
To: Board of Directors/Atascadero County Sanitation District
Through: Michael Shelton, City Manager
From: Paul )[. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject: Award Proposal for Sewer Master Plan
Date: February 16, -1988
e
Recommendation:' �(
Staff recommends - that the Board award the Sewer Master Plan to
CH2M Hili inov^ e amount $24,900 and direct staff to bring back az-
contract at the next regular meeting.
Background:
Proposals were received for the Sewer Master Plan; on February 2.
Due to the differences in the consultants size and backgrounds and the
difference in costs, staff decided :to interview the firms that entered
the two lowest cost proposals. Interviews were held on Thursday,
February 11 . The Scope of Services is attached for your review
although it has been presented previously.
Proposals were sent to Cuesta Engineering, Tartaglia '& Hughes,
North Coast Engineering, Contract Survey & Design (CSD) , Engineering
Development Assoc. (EDA) Wallace & Assoc . , CH2M Hill , Terry N.
Maughmer, and Creegan + D"Angelo (C+D) . The following is a 'summation
of the proposals received. Note that Wallace was in conjunction with
Cuesta.
FIRM QUALIFICATIONS COST` COMPLETION
EDA Good $18,250 4 mos
CH2M Hill Excellent $24,900 6 mos.
Maughmer Adequate $26, 120 6-1/2 mo
Wallace-Cuesta Very Good $27,400 7-1/2 mo
C + D Good $51 ,200 4 mos.
Since the proposals are voluminous a copy of the two lowest cost
Proposals will be placed on ,the council podium for scanning. Copies
for review are available in the office of the DPW.
Discussion:
The interview presentations were very helpful in determining
which firm would be considered for the above work. Both companies
were professional in their approach and were open to any questions of
the staff . EDA did not have the resources which CH2M Hillis able to
provide- and although the team contained competent individuals the
company did not have the background in the particular scope of work
desired (2) as compared to CH2M Hill (20+) The main advantage of EDA
is its proximity to the project which is worthwhile in construction
but not essential in design.
EDA lowered their Price after figuring �a- cost in the range of
CH2M Hill , Maughmer, and Wallace--Cuesta. If they were successful the
Atascadero job would be a good example for future clients and thus
they are willing to sacrifice profit -in the short term. However,. this
is not a competitive bidding. procedure and an engineers product is
related to a '. variety of factors. Staff was somewhat' leary of a firm
going into a project under these circumstances. EDA does work for
local developers such as Long' s-Lucky`s, McNamara—Long, and Williams
Bros. and is respected for their good work in these areas .
CH2M Hill is a nationally known and wide spread firm and has
almost every resource available to engineers and scientists. However,
the Bay area design office _ assigned to this project specializes in
projects in the $25,000 to $50, 000 range and has developed specific
computer models for this type of work. The computer demonstration of
the program that the City Will receive is impressive and includes -
graphic illustrations of the sewer network ' system as well as a
printout.
The mapping capabilities are equally impressive and the examples
shown will be ideal for this project . It is noted here that they were
impressed with the City's scope of .services, not only the detail upon
which they could arrive at a. reasonable fee but because of the fact
that we are one of the very few that require the work to be placed
onto base maps instead of a report . The only drawback noted was that
nearly all of their team were graduates of the same university. This
is not normally considered a drawback but sometimes diversity in
background is healthy in design, although should not matter for this
work.
Fiscal Impact :
The recommended firm did not present the lowest quote for their
sevices and will cost about $6,750 more than the lowest proposal .
This amount is still about $4,700 lower than the average of all the
proposals and lowest of the cluster remaining after discarding the
high and low. The appropiation budget for this project is $50, 000.
" ADMINISTRATION BUILDING • "'•'�
POST OFFICE BOX 747
ATASCAOERO. CALIFORNIA 93423 - POLICE DEPARTMENT
PHONE: (805) 466-8000
POST OFFICE BOX 747
ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93423
CITU COUNCILascade�® PHONE: 1905) 466.8600
CITU CLERK
CITY TREASURER
INCORPORATED JULY 2. 1979 ,
CITY MANAGER
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 93422
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT - - PHONE: (805) 466.2141
January 15, 1988
Dear Consultant:
You are invited to submit a proposal to the City of
Atascadero to provide a design for the..Sewer Main Master Plan for
the Atascadero County Sanitation District . Your proposal should
be based upon the following Scope of Services:
_Scope of Services
1) Analysize the existing system with respect to known
deficiencies, pumping problems and downstream problems for
upstream extensions . Reference is made to the sewer study
entitled "City of Atascadero—Capacity Analysis and Evaluation of
the ACSD Wastewater Treatment and Collection System" prepared by
John L. Wallace & Associates .
2) Provide 100 scale plan view of the existing sewer system,
including lift stations, manholes and sewer wyes . Reference is
made to the several as—built plans available in the City
Engineering Office Work shall be done on the aerials to be
supplied by the City. Line sizes and manhole numbers shall be
shown as well as lift station data.
3) Show the different assessment district boundaries and the
/ Urban Services Line and the ACSD boundary on lou scale and 1000
scale provided by the City.
4) Outline all Cease and Desist and Septic Problem Areas defined
by the County in *1981 , specific to individual property lines :
5) Pin Point and provide data for all on—site Private
stations . Such pumps shall be taken into cons to lift•
extension of lines and suggested timing shall lberProvided rwhen
coordination is necessary between more than one Pumping site .
5) Divide the ACSD into watersheds and determine the reach and
size of long range sewer extensions based on existing zoning.
Consideration will be given to combining seperate watersheds by
the use of lift stations or to eliminating lift stations
of new sewer mains. Particular attention shall be by use
most remote lots to be served by a given to the
Particular
ain
showing the feasibility options for either lserving thee
remaining
and
lots with a new lift station or with a new system in the adjacent
watershed. The ACSD versus the Urban Se �acebe
analysed to Services Line ine
determine which is the appropriat aboundary.
shall be
The Direct future
Director of uture b
Public ounda -
ic Works shall make the determination based
upon the information provided
by the
progresses.
g sses,. consultant as the
Project
7
In
general pipe sizes will be determined for buildout
capacity of the ACSD/Urban Services Line and with respect to
Slopes taken from the contour mapping provided by the City.
Lines may be shown to buck grades if the results
more economically feasible. obtained are
8) - 'Provide 100 scale drawings as above for the suggested
line extensions using a seperate designation. Recommended -
Parallel sewer
replacement or parallel lines shall be treat rnmended
Alternative concepts and sketches shall be shown dfor lspecial
situations such as crossing Highway 101 or Atascadero Creek.
9) All calculations for
edetermination
computerized using an IBMorIBMcompatible systemland Shall be
l be
set up to allow changes in slope. capacity, etc. forhalactual
future data . This program shall also be set up to utilize
changes in zoning or land use at a future date . for
available floppies showing the existing system The City
senarios of Iand use changes future
developed) which are written on (sLotusof123hich have already
desirable for the above work. A similar set is
10) Gather existing plans, ma
rds or ps and other data . The City will
Provide any maps, recot . other data that it has readily
available , upon reques
himprior to self/herself The consultant should satisfy
available . sub �i �tal as to what information is
11)
Review the results with the Director of
consultant will Public Works . . The
be expected to meet with staff at least on a
weekly basis at the discretion of the Director and at least one
before the Board of Directors of- the Atascadero County Sanitation
District . At least one major review will be provided to the City
Prior to submitting the final drawings . Two weeks shall be given
for such review and five (5) draft copies shall be provided.
12) The consultant shall present the City with background '
information on his/her firm and the key'-individual (s) that will
work on this project . A contact person will be named -if the
Proposal is accepted. Personnel and available resources will be
a determining factor for award.
13) The consultant shall' give a fee based on a lump
exceed figure and shall include all incidental costs such as
printing, travel , etc. Additional compensation shall not be
awarded. Progress payments are permissible with a 10% retention.
14) The consultant shall estimate a time of completion for the
work. Time of completion may be a consideration for award. The
consultant shall provide twenty five (25) copies and one original
of the completed work.
15) The consultant shall be expected t
er into
With the City for the above work and istexpectedatogreement Provide
limited liability insurance.
This is a Master Plan and is not intended to be detailed
construction drawings. No cost analyses are necessary except to
study different alternatives in determining economic feasibility.
We look forward to your submittal and are ready to answer
any questions that you may have . Proposals are due on or before
-2 : OOpm. February 2, 1987 at the office of the Director
Works/City Engineer. of Public
Very Truly Yours.
14
Paul M. Sensibaugh,
Director of Public Works/
City Engineer
I 0
•
Engineering Services Proposal
to provide a
SEWER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN DESIGN
I for
Atascadero County Sanitation District
�Ce
3 INCORPORATED JULY 2. 1979
f
li
I
CWHILL February 1988
Engineers
Planners
Economists
® Scientists
February 1 , 1988
An F272. 72
City of Atascadero -
Public Works Department
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, California 93423
Attention: Mr. Paul M. Sensibaugh
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject: Sewer System Master Plan Design
We are pleased to have the opportunity to propose our ser-
vices to the City of Atascadero for a Sewer System Master
Plan Design of your wastewater collection system. This pro-
posal contains a detailed description of our proposed work
plan for your project, presents our project team, provides
an estimate of our technical service fees, and tabulates a
realistic schedule to complete the Master Plan within a
6-month period from notice to proceed.
We believe our approach, as described in this proposal , will
provide the City of Atascadero with a Sewer System Master
Plan Design that is very realistic and will become an excel-
lent roadmap for your collection system improvements.
CH2M HILL will provide excellent professional services and
would like the opportunity to demonstrate this to you. The
highlights of our proposal for your project are:
o We offer you an exceptionally experienced team
that has worked on similar projects as described
in Section 2, Related Experience. We invite you
to call the designated official for references on
our work.
o CH2M HILL is a leader in the field of sewer system
data management. Since our computer programs are
fully developed, we can gather, organize, and ana-
lyze the vast amounts of information involved in a,
collection system master plan at minimum cost.
CH2M HILL San Francisco Office 6425 Christie Avenue,Suite 500 415.652.2426
Emeryville,CA 94608
Mr. Paul M. Sensibaugh
Page 2
February 1 , 1988
F272 .72
o We have hands-on experience and will perform all
of the work with CH2M HILL personnel including
mapping, land use planning, pipeline design, and
flow monitoring if necessary. This results in
quality assurance .and cost savings to the City of
Atascadero.
o Our recommended approach to your project is devel-
oped to suit your needs. CH2M HILL has a history
of providing clients with useful, practical engi-
neering services. Our goal is to provide you with
a Sewer System Master Plan Design that will easily
interface with the City's future development.
In summary, CH2M HILL offers the City sewer evaluation tech-
nology that has been fully developed through our experience
with over 50 similar projects in California. Since our
E technology is proven and the project team is *exceptionally
experienced, we can complete the master plan design for
sewer service within the ACSD/Urban Services Line at a cost
of $24, 900 .
Once again, thank you for this opportunity. We will, if
At selected, successfully complete your project in a timely and
cost-effective manner. We are eager to prove this to your
satisfaction and to justify the confidence you indicated in
CH2M HILL by requesting the attached proposal.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert Parent
Project- Manager
SFP29/041
Attachments
•
CONTENTS
Section
Page
1 Introduction
IN 1-1
2 Related Experience
' 2-1
3 Project Approach
3-1
4 Project Team
4-1
5 Project Schedule
- 5-1
6 Estimate of Fees
6-1
APPENDICES
Appendix A Resumes
. es
Appendix B Project Schedule
Appendix C Work Product Example
- STATIC User's Manual
- Mapping Examples
SFP29/042
Section 3
PROJECT APPROACH
This section presents a work plan to provide the City of
Atascadero with a city-wide sewer system master plan design.
The master plan design must provide maps of the existing
collection system as well as develop an area-wide develop-
ment plan for any unserviced areas within the Atascadero
County Sanitation District (ACSD) and Urban Services Line.
CH2M HILL proposed to complete your project in 7 tasks:
1 . Identify Existing Conditions
2. Review Wastewater Flow Data
3. Project Future Land Use
4. Develop Design Flows
5. Determine System Capacity
6. Develop Recommended Plan
7. Prepare Plan Maps
8 . Provide Computer Hydraulic Model
TASK 1 - IDENTIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS
The first task in your project is to gather and review all
existing information regarding the City' s sanitary sewer
system and land use plan. We will work closely with City
staff to collect information in one common format using ex-
isting plans, reports, records, and discussions with opera-
tion and maintenance personnel.
1 . 1 - PREPARE PROJECT METHODOLOGY
Establishing the project methodology
will b _
ority of the project. The first stepwillbetto meethe twith
key City individuals in a workshop environment and discuss
in detail the project objectives, determine the existing and
future service area such as the ACSD or Urban Services Line
and to what degree the City staff and others will be
involved.
During preparation of this proposal, we believe we understand
what the City desires from the master plan design. During
this workshop, CH2M HILL will work with the staff to develop
an expansive decision tree. This decision tree will include
the methodology of the master plan and will direct all future
system evaluations . At the completion of the report, the
City should then have the experience and capability to con-
tinue.
3-1
1 .2 - REVIEW EXISTING INFORMATION
^ In this subtask, we will collect and review available infor-
mation regarding the Atascadero sanitary collection system
including, but not limited to, maps, records , surveys,
, plans, construction drawings, topographic information, rain-
fall records, groundwater data; maintenance records, and
water consumption data. Specifically, the following shall
be collected and carefully reviewed:
o City of Atascadero - CapacityAnalysis Y and Eval-
uation of the ACSD Wastewater Treatment and Col-
lection System prepared by John L. Wallace and
Associates.
o . City and County General Plan documents.
o As-builtP lan.
0 1" = 100 ' scale aerial mylars of the study area.
o Assessment district boundary information.
o Properties with septic tank problems defined by
San Luis Obispo County for Cease and Desist.
o Locations and drawing for the 9 public lift sta-
tions and each on-site private lift station.
TASK 2 - REVIEW WASTEWATER FLOW DATA
The most difficult task in evaluating an existing sanitary
sewer system is development of realistic wastewater flows
during dry and peak wet weather conditions. We will collect
and review the historical monthly flow charts from the
treatment plant. The treatment plant historical charts
should also include flow data during several rain events .
This data will be used to assess historical infiltration/
inflow (I/I) levels within the City and to compare water
consumption with wastewater flows. Rainfall records that
correspond chronologically to the historical flow records
will also be collected.
This flow information will be used for calibration of the
computer model, to quantify I/I components , verification of
land use flow rates, and to develop peaking factor curves.
Our extensive experience in flow monitoring work has given
us many practical techniques to reduce the flow and rainfall
data. We have a complete computer library to reduce the
data into a manageable form in a cost-effective and timely
• manner. Since development of our software is complete, Atas-
cadero can benefit from our extensive experience at minimum
cost.
3-2
2 . 1 - DEVELOP RAINFALL-DEPENDENT INFILTRATION/INFLOW (P.DI/I)
HYDROGRAPH .
The first step in the analysis is to discern dry and wet
weather flow conditions. The rainfall data collected during
the monitoring period is used to accomplish this task. The
next step in the analysis is to separate rainfall-dependent
infiltration/inflow (RDI/I) from wet weather flow. RDI/I is
the component of infiltration/inflow which enters the sani-
tary collection system during and shortly after a rain event.
The RDI/I component is the extra flow that causes the
Atascadero flow to jump from '1 . 0 mgd to 3. 6 mgd during peri-
ods of rainfall.
CH2M HILL has found that theuantit of
4 y RDI/I is highly
dependent on antecedent soil conditions. As the soil be-
comes saturated, more RDI/I can be expected. Although the
presence of I/I is not considered to be substantial, the
actual relative peak flow from each basin such as the older
downtown areas may be significant. The capacity analysis of
the trunk sewer system must be conducted during saturated
soil conditions when RDI/I is at ..a maximum.
In addition_ to soil conditions, the amount of. RDI/I is also
dependent on the intensity and duration of each rainfall
event. CH2M HILL has developed custom software which is
capable of synthetically simulating the amount of RDI/I for
any given design event.
The final product of this analysis will be the design storm
RDI/I hydrographs for the system. Depending on the magni-
tude of this flow, the City may wish to conduct further flow
monitoring of key locations in the collection system. CH2M
HILL has conducted many flow monitoring studies specifically
with the objective of isolating areas within a collection
system contributing significant I/I . A flow monitoring pro-
gram of this type would supplement your ongoing internal
closed-circuit television inspection program to identify
actual sources of I/I such as broken pipe, open or broken
joints, roots, laterals, direct connections , etc.
2 . 2 - DEVELOP SANITARY FLOW ALLOCATION FACTORS
Development has been categorized into three major land uses :
o Residential
o Commercial
o Industrial
CH2M HILL will review the sanitary flow allocation factors
for each of these land uses specific to Atascadero. Res-
idential and commercial categories will be further subdi-
vided as detailed information is available. The industrial
3-3
category is very minor within Atascadero. These unit flow
values are not only .category specific, but also season
specific.
2. 3 - CALCULATE GROUNDWATER INFILTRATION
The treatment plant flow recorded.'during the rainy season
when GWI is present will be reviewed. Groundwater infiltra-
tion rates will be calculated by subtracting calculated
sanitary flow from non rainfall flow recorded during the
winter season.
GWI = DWF - SF
Where:
GWI = groundwater infiltration,, mgd
DWF = monitored dry weather (winter) flow, mgd
SF = sanitary flow, mgd
Sanitary flow will be calculated from tabulated land use
data and developed unit flow allocation factors. Groundwater
table elevations will be taken into consideration as well as
minimum morning flows at each monitor site. During the early
morning flows (12 :00 MN to 6 :00 AM) , . sanitary flow is mini-
mal. It is suspected that GWI will be greatest -in those
basins to the east where the groundwater table is closest to
the surface.
2 .4 - CALCULATE SANITARY FLOW PEAKING FACTORS
Sanitary flow normally flows in a diurnal pattern with mini-
mum flow occurring in the early morning hours (3 to 5 a.m. )
and the maximum flow occurring in mid-morning (8 to 9 a.m. ) .
The relationship between average daily flow and the peak
hour flow is called the sanitary flow peaking factor. This
factor depends on the size and composition of the upstream
wastewater generators and varies from community to community.
CH2M HILL has found that realistic, accurate peaking factors
are best determined from community-specific flow monitoring
data and not from textbooks.
An example peaking factor curve is shown on Figure 1 at the
end of this section. This curve will be used to develop
sanitary peaks for each basin during present and future de-
sign flow conditions.
TASK 3 - PROJECT FUTURE LAND USE
The objective of this task, is to develop land use data which
3-4
can be used to evaluate and plan the City' s wastewater col-
lection system, thus resulting in a master plan which is
consistent with the City' s General Plan, zoning, and possi-
ble extensions of service area. It is our understanding
from your Request for Proposals and from discussions with
the City staff that existing land use data have been iden-
tified and allocated to specific areas of the collection :
system. Within this task , we will concentrate on evaluation
sof General Plan documents and discussions with City and
County planning to understand future growth projections and
w identify the locations and timing of each development.
3 . 1 IDENTIFY PROJECTED GROWTH
During preparation of this proposal , we have talked with the
City and County Planning Departments and understand that the
following will have an effect on further growth in
Atascadero.
o City of San Luis Obispo has historically desired a
policy for slow and controlled growth. Growth
within San Luis Obispo County has, therefore, gone
to other communities within the county such as
Atascadero.
o Scarcity of water throughout the county has con-
strained growth. The communities of Sar. Simeon,
Cambria, and Templeton have "water moratoria" in
place, effectively stopping growth in the near
term. The community of Los Osos has a moratorium
in place due to sewer insufficiency. The community
of Oceana has decided not to increase existing
land use densities .
0
One
.solution to the county' s water problems is the
ro osed Coastal P P Bra
nch of the State t to Wat
er Project.
An EIR is currently being prepared, with completion
estimated b October,y o er, 1989 . The Coastal Branch,
if approved, would take from 5 to 10 years to com-
plete.
o The City o
� f Atascadero population projections are
as follows : ..
1987 estimate - 20 , 000
1995 estimate - 27, 000
2000 estimate (estimated build-out)
32 , 000 to 33, 000
o By the year 2000, approximately half the city' s
projected population will be residing outside the
city ' s existing Urban Services Line and will still
3-5
be depending upon septic sewage
P P g disposal. Typi-
cally, the failure rate of septic systems in-
creases as they age. As failures occur, local
residents often look to the nearest municipal ser-
vice provider for wastewater collection and treat-
ment services.
o Unlike other cities within San Luis Obispo p County,
the City of Atascadero appears to have no physical
constraints to growth.
(a) The Atascadero Mutual Water Company assures
the city that it has sufficient water to meet
the city' s build-out projections .
(b) The current system of user fees should enable
the city to expand the wastewater facilities
in order to accommodate future growth.
3 .2 - DELINEATE BASINS
The City' s service area shall be delineated into individual
basins as defined by the collection system configuration and
location of proposed development. Each basin shall represent
a specific and separate portion of the collection system.
3 . 3 - PROJECT LAND USE
Based on the updated general plan document, future land use
will be identified. The identification of future conditions
can only be an estimate because of the political nature of
the general plan document. We will work closely with your
planning staff as well as with San Luis Obispo County to
identify the projected development. Development projections
beyond even 2 years can only be determined within a range.
These projections shall be summarized in a Technical Memoran-
dum and reviewed with the City.
3.4 - CALCULATE SANITARY FLOWS
The existing and future sanitary flows will be calculated
based on existing and future land use data multiplied by the
unit flow values from Subtask 2 . 2 , Develop Sanitary Flow
Allocation Factors. The future flows will be calculated
based on projected land use for each development within the
ACSD/Urban Services Line. The City' s current software and
database (Lotus 123) will be utilized and expanded to include
the future growth areas .
3-6
TASK 4 - DEVELOP DESIGN FLOWS
In this task, present and future design flows are developed
for each predefined basin of the collection system. Design
flows are the peak wastewater flow rates that are expected
to be carried by system facilities after future development.
These peak wastewater flows occur during wet weather peri-
ods . During this master plan, design criteria shall be de-
veloped to identify the following three components for peak
wastewater flow:
o Peak Groundwater Infiltration - The peak ground-
water infiltration (GWI) rate for each basin will
be derived in Task 2 , Review Wastewater Flow Data.
A GWI allowance will be applied to currently un-
serviced areas and major extensions of the City's
sewer system.
o Peak Sanitary Flow - Sanitary flows generally fol-
low regular diurnal patterns, with peak flows oc-
curring in the morning and early evening hours of
the day. Peak hour sanitary flows will be esti-
mated by applying a multiplier, called a peaking
factor, to the ultimate development average sani-
tary flow rates. . The ultimate development average
sanitary flow for each basin will be developed in
Task 3 , Project Future Land Use. The peak hour.
sanitary flow will be calculated using the sani-
tary flow peaking curve such as that presented in
Figure 1 .
o RDI/I Hydrograph - RDI/I hydrographs for each basin
will be developed for a design rainfall event in
Task 2 , Review Wastewater Flow Data. An RDI/I
allowance will be applied to currently unserviced
areas and major extensions of the City' s collection
system.
Groundwater infiltration, peak sanitary flow, and rainfall-
dependent infiltration/inflow will be combined to develop a
design flow composite hydrograph for each sanitary basin and
the future growth areas . An example design flow composite
hydrograph is shown on Fiaure 2 at the end of this section.
The design flow hydrograph data for each basin will be used
to analvze the existing collection system, as described in
Task 5 , Determine System Capacity.
TASK 5 - DETERD,IINE SYSTEM CAPACITY
The sewer capacity analysis will be performed with the use
of computer modeling techniques . The hydraulic model STATIC,
3-7
developed by CH2M HILL, will be used to predict and simulate
flow in the wastewater collection system under various load-
ing rates.
5 . 1 - INVENTORY MAJOR TRUNK SEWER SYSTEM
An inventory of the sewer lines and lift stations to be mod-
eled will be collected from previous reports and the City' s
maps . The inventory information will consist of the manhole
rim and invert elevations and the pipeline length, size,
material, and street location. Drawings and related pump
data for the 9 public lift stations will be reviewed to as-
sess the available capacity.
5 .2 - CONDUCT HYDRAULIC U IC MODELING
After the flow data and inventory data have been gathered,
we will assess the available capacities in the sewer lines
with the use of STATIC.
Actual flow quantities, pipe capacity, and sizing calculations
are based on Manning' s equation for uniform flow applied on
a pipe-by-pipe basis. STATIC also calculates hydraulic
grade lines and distributes headloss back into the collection
system. Thus, surcharging is identified both by capacity
limitations and backflow conditions . We will determine the
present and available hydraulic capacity of the "existing
Atascadero sewer system.
Once the sewer lines are identified and the model has been
verified and calibrated during present flow conditions , the
future design flow hydrographs developed in Task 4, Develop
Design Flows , will be routed through the collection system.
Input sanitary and I/I flows will be allocated to each flow
point load location on the basis of tributary area and land
use.
Wet weather flow will be evaluated for the design rainfall
event. Various flow scenarios will be evaluated such as
present dry weather, present wet weather, future dry weather,
and future wet weather. Available capacity and the defi-
ciencies will be noted for each scenario within the trunk
sewer system and at the lift stations.
STATIC will also be used to size new collector and trunk
mains in the currently unserviced areas of Atascadero. The
approximate line sizes and locations will be developed from
design flows and available topographic data . New line ex-
tensions to the remote lots will be compared with the option
of providing a new lift station or line extensions in an
adjacent basin.
3-8
The hydraulic model (STATIC) .will berovided
p to the City.
This hydraulic model operates on IBM and IBM-compatible mi-
crocomputers, is user friendly, and facilitates modification
of data by City staff to determine impacts of future land
use changes and development which may occur within a basin.
Detailed information describing STATIC -is provided in Task 8 ,
Provide Computer Hydraulic Model . '
TASK 6 - DEVELOP RECOMMENDED PLAN
The preceding tasks are necessary to develop background data
and design criteria for sewer system improvements in a master
plan. The existing system deficiencies, under present and
future scenarios during both dry and wet weather conditions,
were identified in Task 5, Determine System Capacity.
For each. sanitary drainage basin and future service area
alternative solutions to eliminate deficiencies and provide
capacity needs under the future growth scenario will be iden-
tified and developed. A cost estimate for each alternative
plan will be prepared. The best apparent alternative will
be selected based on this cost-effectiveness analysis.
Once the best apparent alternative is selected, a staged
construction program will be developed. The projects will
be prioritized and staged according to projected development,
complexity of the projects , and available funds .
A Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for each basin will be
developed for staged construction. The CIP will include
preliminary cost estimates for the recommended improvements .
The CIP will be staged from the final prioritization scheme
selected by the City of Atascadero and CH2M HILL. The
schedule for construction will list immediate projects nec-
essary to correct possible existing deficiencies and those
for the next 5 years and include stated expansion of the
collection system beyond the existing configuration.
TASK 7 - PREPARE PLAN MAPS
The results of the master
planning analysis will be presented
to the City in a map format. These maps will be the basis
for planning and scheduling the required existing capacity
correction_ projects , future collection system extensions ,
and for future evaluations of the system capacity as devel-
opment conditions change. The City has approximately 50 ae-
rial maps available with contour information at 100 scale.
These aerials cover the 3 , 600 acre ACSD/Urban Services Line
service area.
An overlay system has been used successfully on man proj-
ects by CH2M HILL for these types. of maps to indicatethe
3-9
system and associated information. Examples of our mapping
abilities are provided in Appendix C.
7 . 1 PLOT EXISTING SEWER FACILITIES
Using the City' s available as-built plans and the input data
from the computer model, the existing collection system will
be plotted onto an overlay to the aerial base maps. The
overlay for the existing collection system will include the
following information:
o Street names
o Assessment district boundaries
o Properties with Cease and Desist for septic tank
problems identified by the County
o Manhole/cleanout location and number
o Invert and rim elevations
o Pipeline length, diameter, and material (if avail-
able)
o Public lift stations
o Onsite private lift stations
7 .2 PLOT CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS
Based on the results of Task 5, Determine System Capacity,
and Task 6, Develop Recommended Plan, the capacity cor-
rection improvements will be plotted onto an overlay to the
base map. These improvements will consist of a parallel or
replacement pipeline to convey the peak flows to the treat-
ment plant without surcharge or overflow. Alternative align-
ments to avoid construction within developed areas will be
presented when shown to be cost effective. Special con-
struction considerations such as the Highway 101 and
Atascadero Creek crossings will be shown.
The information plotted on the map overlay will include up-
stream and downstream manholes which designate the start and
finish of construction, new pipeline diameters , lengths , and
the indication of whether the improvement is to be a replace-
ment or parallel pipeline.
7 . 3 - PLOT FUTURE COLLECTION SYSTEM EXTENSION'S
During the future land use evaluation in Task 3, new devel-
opments will have been located. Using the results of Task 5,
Determine System Capacity, and Task 6 , Develop Recommended
3-10
z _
O L-
N p
� a
w
p w
F-
Uw
O W W Q
cr- Q
M ~ ul
(7 Q w
O LL LL H
p cn
~ CC
lD U W
W
W
M
p
C7
t
- N O
LL
W
2
H
Q
w
}
p
}
J
co Q
G p
n
O w
• C7
tD Q
O
Er
W
to >
O Q
• W
O
M
C5 [L
O
0
U
Q
N LL
O
• z
Y
Q
W
J
o Q
o m co n to Lo v fn N (�
aol3v:J orviNv3cl >-
F-
0
r
NOW oe
Q =
Oa
LL LU
W
C4
N Qcn
WL U Q
O ¢ Q �
W (9 Q w
LliLL.-J 0 }
C4
H cc
V W
W
N
N
N
r
N
r �
W
a
cr-
0 0o co
0 0 0 0
O
J
(Pbw)MOIL LL
(n
W ry
Q n
O
Table 3
City of Atascedero
Sewer System Master Plan i
ESTIMATE OF FEE
Total
Task Fee
1 .0 Identify Existing Conditions
1 . 1 Prepare Project Methodology 1 ,300
1 .2 Review Existing Information X600
Task 1 .0 Subtotal 1 ,900
2.0 Review Wastewater Flow Data
2. 1 Develop RDI/I Hydrograph 1,000
2.2 Develop Flow Allocation Factors 400
2 . 3 Calculate Groundwater Infiltration 700
2 . 4 Calculate Sanitary Flow Peaking Factors 500
Task 2 .0 Subtotal 2 ,600
3 .0 Project Future Land Use
3 . 1 Identify Project Growth 700
3 . 2 Delineate Basins 600
3 .3 Project Land Use 2 ,000
3 . 4 Calculate Sanitary Flows 1 ,300
Task .3 .0 Subtotal
4 ,600
4 .0 Develop Design Flows 1 ,200
5 .0 Determine System Capacity
5 . 1 Inventory Major Trunk Sewer System 1 , 600
5 .2 Conduct Hydraulic Modeling 2 ,000
Task 5 . 0 Subtotal 3 , 600
6 . 0 Develop Recommended Plan 2 , 500
7. 0 Prepare Plan Maps
7 . 1 Plot Existing Sewer Facilites 1 , 600
7 . 2 Plot Capacity Improvements 2 , 300
7 . 3 Plot Future Collection System Extensions 2 , 500
Task 7 . 0 Subtotal 6, 400'
8 .0 Provide Computer Hydraulic Model 2 , 100
TOTAL PROJECT 24 , 900
SFP73/054
AENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES
1320 NIPOMO STREET•SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 •805 549-8658
y
DESIGN PROPOSAL FOR:
SEWER MAIN MASTER PLAN rry
CITY OF ATASCADERO
1 `.t 7�tih�2�•y"µp..
,
Submitted in response to RFP dated January -19, 1988
Submitted to: Mr. Paul Sensibaugh
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Date: 2 February, 1.988
Prepared by: Keith V. Crowe, Principal Engineer
W. Noel Higa, Project Engineer
�1JTRODDGTT0�1:
This Proposal addresses the preparation of a Sewer Main
Master Plan for the Atascadero County Sanitation District as
described in the Request for _Proposal from the City of
Atascadero Department of Public Works dated January 15, 1988.
Engineering Development Associates, a San Luis Obispo
Civil Engineering consulting company, believes that it is
well qualified and staffed to be able to provide the services
required for this project. The company resume which
accompanies this submittal details the types of work which
EDA has handled in the past and the listing of past projects
and clients therein speaks to the ability of this firm to
undertake and successfully complete a
project of this scope.
Our' highly experienced and qualified staff has - worked +
extensively in the evaluation and design of sanitary sewer I�
systems and is anxious to have the opportunity to assist you
on this project.
This Proposal is organized in three sections:
1 . Scope of Services
t 2. Background / Qualifications
3. Conditions / Fee
Please contact Keith V. Crowe, Principal Engineer or
Noel Higa, Project Engineer, if you have any questions
regarding this proposal.
i
I
1
i
SCOPE OF-SERVICES:
Based on the RFP and discussions with Mr. Paul
Sensibaugh, the following services are understood to be
required to meet the objectives of this proposal:
1. MAPPING OF EXISTING SEWER SYSTEM•
r
The entire existing sanitary sewer system will be
mapped and drawn using permanent black ink on 100 scale mylar
aerial photographs which will be provided by the City. The
mapping will be based on the existing documentation available
from the City including as-builts, previous studies and City
staff notes as will be gathered by our staff from the various
city sources (RFP item #10)`.
The following items will be included on the drawings:
A. All existing public lift stations, manholes and
sewer wyes with line sizes, manhole numbers and
lift station data shown (RFP item #2) ;
B. Sewer Assessment District Boundaries, Urban
Services Line and Atascadero County Sanitation
District boundary. These will also be shown on a
1000 scale drawing, assumed to be similar to the
existing Generalized City Zoning Map (RFP item 3) ;
C. Cease and Desist and Septic Tank Problem Areas (RFP
item #4) ;
D. Location and pump/storage characteristics for all
major commercial/private lift stations (RFP item
#5) ;
City of Atascadero, Sewer Master Plan Proposal--
-- 1 --
2 . EXISTING SYSTEM -- ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS•
A complete analysis of the existing sanitary sewer •
system with respect to improvements required to accomodate
complete future buildout to the ACSD boundary shall be
undertaken. In particular, emphasis shall be placed on those
items identified by the 1985 Wallace Report (RFP item #1) .
Pumping stations, public and private, will be analyzed and
recommendations made regarding pump timing and storage
capacity, where appropriate.
The analysis shall be closely coordinated with the
Director of Public Works and the findings reported in a
written report similar to the ' 85 Wallace study.
-- City of Atascadero, Sewer Master Plan Proposal--
-- 2 --
3. SYSTEM EXPANSION -- ANALYSTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS'
Those portions of the ACSD and Urban Services District
which are as yet unsewered shall be analyzed to determine
system requirements to extend services. This portion of the
project will include:
A. Division of the ACSD into watersheds to determine
reach and size required for extensions, and/or
pumping or other means to combine watersheds to
accomodate future buildout to the most remote lots,
- based on existing zoning (RFP item #6) . This
analysis shall be based on contour maps provided by
the City.
B. Consultation with the Director of Public Works to
assist in determination of whether the ACSD or
Urban Services Line is the most appropriate
boundary for future buildout (RFP item #6) .
C. Preparation of Conceptual Drawings and sketches for
special cases (RFP item #8) .
D. All proposed extensions will be shown on 100 scale
drawings similar to those prepared for the the
existing system, with distinctive line type and
labled as "proposed" (RFP item #8) .
-- City of Atascadero, Sewer Master Plan Proposal--
-- 3 --
4. COMPUTER ANALYSIS:
All pipe calculations will be computerized utilizing a
LOTUS Spreadsheet/Database format similar to that currently
in use. The analysis will be set up to allow for examination
of user defined "WHAT IF" scenarios for various land use
changes or options. One set�of all necessary data disks and
operations documentation will be provided.
} 5 MEETINGS/CONSULTATION:
EDA representatives will meet weekly at a minimum with
the Director of Public Works and/or staff to discuss the
progress of the project. Engineers will attend more frequent
meetings as are required during the evaluation and analysis
phases.
t
6. SUBMITTALS:
Submittals shall include, at a minimum, the following:
A. Single copies of completed 100 scale drawings as
work progresses;
B. Five draft copies of all final drawings prior to
review by the Board of Directors of the ACSD;
C. Twenty five copies of the final approved drawings
and the set of originals;
While not included in this proposal, it is our
recommendation that the City consider reduction of the
original 100 scale drawings to approximately half size and to
having some of the reproduction sets made at the reduced
scale. The smaller sets would be easier for field and counter
personnel to handle and such reduction would not
significantly reduce legibility. If it is anticipated that
reductions are to be made, the original lettering can be made
slightly oversized to. enhance readability on the copies.
-- City of Atascadero, Sewer Master Plan Proposal--
-- 4 --
BACKMOUND / QUALIFICATIONS:
Engineering Development Associates is well qualified to
perform the tasks required in this project. EDA is involved
in a wide variety of land development projects which have
required the evaluation, and analysis of existing sewage
systems designs for improvements and proposed new sewerage
' systems. EDA recently completed an evlauation of a large
portion of the Vandenberg Air Force Base housing sanitary
sewer system, recommended solutions to problems in the system
and prepared plans and specifications to rectify the
problems.
Individually, EDA personnel have had extensive in
similar projects. Of its 15 member full time staff, the
following individuals appear to be the best suited to
assignment to this project:
Mr. Keith V. Crowe, Principal Engineer, is a Licensed
Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor, will be responsible for
overseeing this project and will be actively involved in all
analysis and evaluation. During his tenure as Assistant
Engineer with the City of San Luis Obispo, Keith implemented
the Flood Control and Drainage Master Plan for the San Luis
' Obispo Creek Watershed.
Mr. Philip Baldner, also a Licensed Civil Engineer and
Land Surveyor is an Atascadero resident and will be Project
Engineer for this project. Mr. Baldner will coordinate
production, conduct the necessary research and field
verifications and meet regularly with the Director of Public
Works and City staff. Phil served in a similar capacity in
the previously cited Vandenberg project.
Mr. Melvin Forbes, also an Atascadero resident, will be
responsible for the production of the maps and drawings.
Mr. Forbes brings thirty years of drafting experience to EDA
and has been in charge of drafting for similar projects in
the cities of Fresno and Bass Lake while in the employ of
Boyle Engineering and CalTrans.
More detailed information is included in the Company
Resume, enclosed.
-- City of Atascadero, Sewer Master Plan Proposal--
-- 5 --
CONDITIONS / FEE: •
1 . TIME OF COMPLETION:
4 •It is anticipated that the entire project can be
completed within a period of four months from date of the
contract award. This timing assumes that regular meetings
with the Director of Public Works and other appropriate City
personnel can be scheduled and that review by the City will
be accomplished in a timely manner.
2 CONTRACT AND INSURANCE
In submitting this proposal, EDA agrees to be bound by
the terms and conditions of the City of Atascadero Request
_ for Proposal dated January 15, 1988. Should this proposal be
accepted, EDA agrees to enter into an agreement with the City
of Atascadero to provide the detailed services and agrees to t �
`- ` provide limited liability insurance coverage to the
_ satisfaction of the City.
2. FEE:
The estimated fee for each category of work defined
under the "SCOPE OF SERVICES" is noted below. This breakdown
is for guidance only. The total sum of the estimated cost
represents our "lump sum, not to exceed figure" (RFP item
#13) . Billings for progress payments against the contract .
total will be submitted monthly based on the standard hourly
billing rates in force at the time. Only those hours
actually spent on the project will be billed.
SCOPE OF SERVICES:
F
1 . MAPPING OF EXISTING SEWER SYSTEM: $ 8, 720
3
2. EXISTING SYSTEM
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 3, 000
3 . SYSTEM EXPANSION
-- ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 3, 000
4. COMPUTER ANALYSIS.: 1, 430
5. MEETINGS: 1 , 200
6. SUBMITTALS: 900
CONTRACT TOTAL -- NOT TO EXCEED $ 18, 250
-- City of Atascadero, Sewer Master Plan Proposal--
-- 6 --
V►-'*Q AG_�Ir?A
M E M O R A N DU M
TO: City CQuncil February 23 , 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton , City Manager
FRdM: 'Henry Engen, Community Development Director
RE: Proposed Comprehensive Amendment of Title 8 ,
Building Regulations
OACKCROUND
On February 9, 1988 , the 'City Council considered on first reading
the proposed new Title 8 . Following hearing , Council passed
proposed Ordinance No. 166 on first reading .
RECOMMENDATION : i
1 . Read by title only.
2. Approval of attached Ordinance No. 166 on second reeding .
3 . Direct the Community Development Director to publish a
summary of the amendment pursuant to Government Code
Section 36933 .
HE :pe
Attachments : Staff Report - February 9 , 1988
Draft Or'di'nance No. 166
cc : Dave Baker , North County Contractor. ' s Association
M E M 0 R A N D U M
TO: City Council February 2, 1988
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Directorr.
Bob Fielding , Chief Building Inspector
SUBJECT: Proposed Adoption of Model Codes Comprehensive
Amendment of Title 8, Building Regulations
BACKGROUND-
_The State Building, Standards Law, Health and Safety Code Section
18942, requires the State Building Standards Commission to adopt
and publish editions of the State's technical building codes in
their entirety once in - every three years.: The State Building
Code (Title 24) has now incorporated the following model codes:
1985 Uniform Housing Code
1985 Uniform Plumbing Code
1985 Uniform Building Code
1985 Uniform Mechanical Code
1987 National Electrical Code
In accordance- with State Law,_ the authority having jurisdiction
must 'adopt the Published. Model Codes within six (b) months of
adoption by the State.
This draft ordinance has been prepared with the cooperation of
the Fire Department and has been discussed with ,the North County
Contractor ' s Association. We have also included, based on
special local circumstances, proposals to amend the Model 'Codes
and/or previous additions of Title 8. Included in the Fire Code
is an amendment requiring automatic fire extinguishing systems in
buildings over 10,000 square feet .
Page 1 of 3
I�
Other important amendments include:'
1 . Deleting references to the Planning Department and inserting
Building Division.
2. Deleting references in the Uniform Building Code to Appendix
Chapter 1 (Life Safety Requirements for Existing Buildings ) .
3. Adopting Appendix Chapter 35 (Sound Transmission Control ) .
4. Adding requirements for cargo containers, cabooses, railroad
cars, and similar assemblies.
5. Clarifying that grading and/or waste disposal system permits
shall not be issued separately from residential permits
without specific approval of the Building Official .
6. Clarifying conditions of suspension or abandonment in regards
to permits.
. 7. Transferring the requirement of treated shakes to Chapter 8
Uniform Fire Code (Fire Department to interpret when
required ) .
8. Permitting use of area separation walls in lieu of parapets .
4. Retaining Article 310 of the 1981 National electric Code
10. Allowing use of 3" pipe for building sewers with specific
approval of the Building Official .
11 . Adding a provision allowing waste disposal systems on slopes
of 30% or more when approved by both the Administrative
Authority and the Regional Water Quality Control Board .
12. Deleting the requirement for a covenant when percolation rate
exceeds 60 minutes -per inch .
13. Deleting requirement for 120 volt receptacle within 25 feet
of equipment for maintenance purposes .
14. Prohibition of liquefied Petroleum Gas lines under slabs.
15 . Clarifies an alternative, when expediency warrants action
involving dangerous buildings.
Page 2 of 3
•
ACTION REQUESTED:
Following public hearing , ( 1 ) read by title only and (2) adopt ,
on first reading , Ordinance No . 166.
HE:dc
Enclosures : Title 8 as Revised
Draft Ordinance No . 166.
cc : Mr . Dave Baker
North County Contractor ' s Association
Page 3 of 3
C�ITALS = NEW LANGUAGE
�--- = deleted text
ORDINANCE NO. `�0-166
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 8
(BUILDING REGULATIONS) TO THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE
AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE,
-19&2 1985 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
OF BUILDING OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, INCLUDING
APPENDIX CHAPTERS-1, 7, 32, 35, 38, 57 AND 70, -19rS2- 1985 EDI-
TION, AND THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARDS, ALL PUBLISHED
BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS; THE
NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, -19&1 1987 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE
NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION; THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE,
INCLUDING ALL APPENDICES,-19•8-a 1985 EDITION, AND THE IAPMO IN-
STALLATION STANDARDS, -19.8-2- 1985 EDITION, ALL PUBLISHED BY .THE
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS
AND THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BUILDING OFFICIALS;
THE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, INCLUDING ALL APPENDICES, -1-9-&2-
1985 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS AND THE INTERNATIONAL CONFER-
ENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND
HOT TUB CODE, -19$-2- 1985 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM
SIGN CODE, 1-9$2- 1985 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL
CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, INCLUD-
ING APPENDIX CHAPTERS I-A, I-B, II-A, II-B, II-D, III-A, III-C,
IV-A, V-A AND VI-A, 1982 1985 EDITION, AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE
STANDARDS, 1-92- 1985 EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE WESTERN FIRE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION AND THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING
OFFICIALS; THE UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, 14&-2- 1985 EDITION, PUB-
LISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS;
THE UNIFORM CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, -14&2- 1985
EDITION, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING
OFFICIALS, ALL AS AMENDED.
Section 1. This amendment has been evaluated in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and this City' s environmental
impact procedures guidelines and a negative declaration has been
granted by the City.
Section 2. Title 8 (Building Regulations) of the Atascadero
Municipal Code is amended to read as contained in the attached Exhibit
A, which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference.
Section 3. Penalty Provisions.
It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect,
construct, enlarge, alter , repair , move, improve, remove, convert or
demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building, structure or
building service equipment or cause or permit the same to be done in
violation of this Title and the technical codes.
Ordinance No. 166 • •
Penalties for violation of this Title shall be as set forth in
Chapter 3 of Title 1 of this code.
Section 4. 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 this City.
Section 5. 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 hereby .adopted in its
entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELT N, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
L2 /j,
J FF EY J RG SEN, City Attorney
Ordinance No. 166
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN
Community Development Director
• EXHIBIT "A"
TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 1. Administrative Code
8-1.101. Adoption of Uniform Administrative Code. Certain docu-
ments marked and designated as the "Uniform Administrative Code" , -1982
1985 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building
Officials, are hereby adopted for establishing administrative, organi-
zational and enforcement rulesand regulations for technical codes
which regulate site preparation and construction, alteration, moving,
demolition, repair, use and occupancy of buildings, structures and
building service equipment. Each and all of the regulations, provi-
sions, conditions and terms of such "Uniform Administrative Code" ,
-1982- 1985 Edition, published by the International Conference of Build-
ing Officials, on file in the-111annipig-BegarrtmeRt BUILDING DIVISION,
are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in
this Chapter, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter .
8-1.102. Modification of Certain Parts of the Uniform Adminis-
trative Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Administrative
Code" , -1-9.8.2- 1985 Edition, are hereby deleted:
(a) Section 204 (Board of Appeals) i
(b) Section 304W-(B) (Permit Fees) !'
(c) Section 304 (-b�)-(C) (Plan Review Fees)
(d) Section 304 (d) (2) (Fee) Change reference to " . . . .Tables Nos.
3-A through 3--F"- 3-H" to read " . . .the resolution of the City
Council establishing fees. "
(e) Section 305 (h) (Reinspections) Change reference to " . . . .
Tables Nos. 3-A through -3--H11-- 3-H1' to read" . . . the resolution
of the City Council establishing fees. "
(f) Table No. 3-A (Building Permit Fees)
(g) Table No. 3-B (Electrical Permit Fees)
(h) Table No. 3-C (Mechanical Permit Fees)
(i) Table No. 3-D (Plumbing Permit Fees)
(j) Table No. 3-E (Grading Permit Fees)
(k) Table No. 3-F (Grading Plan Review Fees)
8-1.103. THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE ADDED TO SECTION 104 (f) UNIFORM
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE:
• 1. WHEN PROPOSED USE IS OTHER THAN ORIGINALLY DESIGNED AND/OR INTEN-
DED AS DETERMINED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, RAILROAD CARS, CA-
BOSES, SHIPPING CONTAINERS AND SIMILAR ASSEMBLIES, ETC. , MAY NOT;
BE MOVED INTO OR RELOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS WITHOUT HIS
PRIOR APPROVAL.
2. RAILROAD CARS, CABOOSES, SHIPPING CONTAINERS AND SIMILAR ASSEM-
BLIES, ETC. , DO NOT QUALIFY AS CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION; THERE-
FORE, ALL DESIGN/ENGINEERING WORK, PLANS, CALCULATIONS, ETC. , MUST
BE ACCOMPLISHED BY A CALIFORNIA LICENSED ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER.
8-1.193-104. Establishment of Board of Appeals. In order to con-
duct hearings to determine the suitability of alternate materials and
methods of installation and to provide for reasonable interpretations
of the provisions of this Title, a Board of Appeals is hereby estab-
lished. The Board of Appeals shall also make interpretations of and
hear appeals pursuant to the Housing and Dangerous Building Codes.
(a) Membership. The Board of Appeals shall consist of five
(5) members, two (2) of whom shall be general contractors,
one (1) of whom shall be a structural engineer or architect,
one (1) of whom shall be a specialty contractor , all of whom
shall be qualified by experience and training, and one (1) of
whom shall be a member of the public who is not one of the
foregoing. Members of the Board of Appeals shall be ap-
pointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City Council.
Each member shall comply with applicable provisions of the
Political Reform Act of 1974 ,California Government Section
81000, et seq. The Building Official shall serve as Secre-
tary to the Board of Appeals.
(b) Eligibility. A person shall live within the City to be
eligible for appointment to the Board of Appeals.
(c) Term. Terms of initial appointment shall be a term of two
(2) years for two (2) members and four (4) years for three
(3) members. Subsequent appointments shall be for a term of
four (4) years.
(d) Rules and Regulations. The Board of Appeals shall adopt
reasonable rules and regulations, subject to approval by the
City Council, for conducting its business. The Board shall
render all decisions and findings in writing with a copy to
the appellant.
(e) Appeal Procedure. Any person aggrieved by a decision of
the Plasa4ng-DepaFtmeet BUILDING DIVISION related to any man-
ner within the purview of this Title shall have the right to
appeal the decision. The appeal shall be filed with the
Building Official within fourteen (14) days after the render-
ing of the decision affecting the aggrieved person. Grounds
• for the appeal shall be set forth in writing.
-2-
The Secretary of the Board shall set the time and place for a
hearing on the appeal, and notice of the hearing shall be
published in a newspaper of general circulation and shall be
given to the appellant by mailing it to him, postage prepaid,
at his last known address, at least ten (10) calendar days
prior to the date set for hearing. '
Any written reports to be made to the Board shall be filed
with the Secretary of the Board and shall be made available
to the Board and to the public no less than three (3) working
days prior to the date set for the hearing. Any Department
Head shall have the right to be heard on any matter coming
before the Board.
The decision of the Board on the appeal shall not become fi-
nal until fourteen (14) days after the Board has made its de-
termination in order to allow time for an appeal to be made
to the Council from the Board' s decision.
Any party aggrieved by the determination of the Board shall
have the right to appeal its determination to the Council.
Such appeals must be filed with the Cit Clerk within four-
PP Y
teen (14) days after the Board has made its determination.
The Council shall set appeal fees by resolution. There
shall be no charge for city-initiated appeals.
8-1.184=105. Fees. Fees for permits, plan review, reinspections,
special inspections, appeals and other activities of this Title shall
be established by resolution of the City Council. The determination
of value or valuation under any of the provisions of this Title shall
be made by the Building Official. The value to be used in computing
the building permit and building permit plan review fees shall be the
total value of all construction work for which the permit is issued as
well as all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing,
heating, air-conditioning, elevators, fire-extinguishing systems and
any other permanent equipment.
8-1.189-106. Exempted Work. The following shall be added to Sec
301 (b) :
115. Sign Permits. The following .signs shall not require a sign
permit. These exemptions shall not be construed as relieving
the owner of the sign from the responsibility of its erection
and maintenance, and its compliance with the provisions of
this code or any other law or ordinance regulating the same.
A. The changing of the advertising copy or message on a
painted or printed sign only. Except for theater mar-
quees and similar signs specifically designed for the
use of replaceable copy, electric signs shall not be •
included in this exception.
-3-
B. Painting, repainting or cleaning of an advertising
structure or the changing of the advertising copy or
message thereon shall not be considered an erection or
alteration which requires a sign permit unless a struc-
tural change is made.
C. Signs less than six (6) feet above grade.
6. Swimming Pool, Spa, and Hot Tub Permits. No permit shall
be required in the case of any repair work including: The
stopping of leaks in drains, soil, waste or vent pipe, pro-
vided, however, that should any trap; drainpipe; or soil,
waste or vent pipe be or become defective and it becomes nec-
essary to remove and replace the same with new material in
any part or parts, the same shall be considered as such new
work and a permit shall be procured and inspection made as
hereinbefore provided. No permit shall be required for the
clearing of stoppages or the repairing of leaks in pipes,
valves or fixtures, when such repairs do not involve or re-
quire the replacement 'or rearrangement of valves, pipes or
fixtures. "
8-1.418-6--107 . Permits Required. Section 301 (a) shall be revised
to read as follows:
"Permits Required. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or
corporation to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move,
improve, remove, convert or demolish any building or structure,
including a swimming pool, spa or hot tub, or make any installa-
tion, alteration, repair , replacement, or remodel any building,
service equipment, including swimming pool, spa and hot tub equip-
ment, regulated by this Title, except as specified in Subsection
(b) of this Section, or cause the same to be done without first
obtaining a separate, appropriate permit for each building, struc-
ture or service equipment from the Building Official. " GRADING
AND/OR WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMITS FOR RESIDENTIAL SITES SHALL
NOT BE ISSUED SEPARATELY FROM THE RESIDENCE PERMIT WITHOUT THE
SPECIFIC APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
8-1. 108. (EXPIRATION. Section 302 (d) shall be revised to read as
follows:
302 (d) : EVERY PERMIT ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY UNDER
THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE SHALL EXPIRE BY LIMITATION AND BECOME
NULL AND VOID, IF THE BUILDING OR WORK AUTHORIZED BY SUCH PERMIT
IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS FROM THE DATE 'OF SUCH PERMIT, OR
IF THE WORK AUTHORIZED BY SUCH PERMIT IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED AT
ANY TIME AFTER THE WORK IS COMMENCED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS.
*FAILURE TO REQUEST AND RECEIVE A RECORDED INSPECTION BY THE AD-
MINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY WITHIN THE 180 DAY PERIOD CONSTITUTES A
CONDITION OF SUSPENSION OR ABANDONMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
*underlined is new language
-4-
! !
TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 2. Building Code
8-2.101. Adoption of Uniform Building Code. Certain documents
marked and designated as the "Uniform Building Code" , including Ap-
pend ix-Ghapter--l-fb}€e-Sa€e€y-Regslrrements--€ar---Existing--Build ings)-,
Chapter 7 - Part 1 (Covered Mall Buildings) , Chapter 32 (Re-roofing) ,
CHAPTER 35 (SOUND TRANSMISSION) , Chapter 38 (Basement Pipe Inlets) ,
CHAPTER 49 (PATIO COVERS) , CHAPTER 55 (MEMBRANE STRUCTURES) , Chapter
57 (Regulations Governing Fallout Shelters) and Chapter 70 (Excavation
and Grading) , -1993-1985 Edition, and as the "Uniform Building Code
Standards" ; -1983-1985 Edition, published by the International Confer-
ence of Building Officials, are hereby adopted for regulating the
erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair , moving, re-
moval, demolition, conversion, occupancy, equipment, use, height, area
and maintenance of all buildings or structures. Each and all of the
regulations, provisions, conditions, and terms of such "Uniform Build-
ing Code" , -1983-1985 Edition, and the "Uniform Building Code Stan-
dards" , -1982- 1985 Edition, published by the International Conference
of Building Officials, on file in the Plasxlxig--Bepartmeet, BUILDING
DIVISION, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully
set out in this Chapter, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter.
i
8-2.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Building Code.
The following portions of the "Uniform Building Code, "-1983-1985 Edi-
tion are hereby deleted:
(a) Chapter 1 (Title, Scope and General) , including Sections
101-107
(b) Chapter 2 (Organization and Enforcement) , including Sections
201-205
(c) Chapter 3 (Permits and Inspections) , including Sections 301-
307 and Table No. 3-A
-8-2�183T--F€�e-Re�a�dax€- tee€€sg-P4a�e�lals-Re6lt�i�edT--Ree€--ee�e�----
-�sQs--€e�--all-xew-btu}ldlxgs-asd-€e€-asy-�e-gee€iag-a€-exls�4eg-�au4l�l-
-�t�gs-sha��-be-�►e-fess-Chas-Elass-E�-�ega�dless--a€--be}ldlsg--hype--o�-
-eeesgasey:--Asy-�e€e�esee-�e-€�ie-app�e�ved--ese--e€--�ee€4ag--ma�e�}als-
-w��h-less-€has-a-E4.ass-E-�a�4.sg-4s-�ie�eby-Bele€e�l�- '
(transferred to Chapter 8 - Fire Code)
8-2.104 103. Grading. FILLS. Section 7010 (a) is hereby
amended to read as follows:
-5-
"General. Unless otherwise recommended in an approved soils
engineering report,°; fills shall conform to the provisions of this
Section, except that lots located outside the Urban Services Line
may exceed the 50 cubic yard limitation for a fill when approved
by the Building Official and when in compliance with the following
(1) All other limitations established by Subsection 9 of
Section 7003; and
(2) The lot is a minimum of 2 1/2 acres; and
(3) The location and extent of the fill is clearly delin-
eated on grading plans. "
8-2.104. PARAPETS. SECTION 1709 (A) OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
IS HEREBY AMENDED BY ADDING A NEW EXCEPTION 5 TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
"5. EXTERIOR WALLS WHICH, DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY, ARE REQUIRED TO
BE OF ONE- OR TWO-HOUR FIRE-RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION, MAY TERMINATE
AT THE ROOF SHEATHING, DECK OR SLAB, PROVIDED:
A. WHERE THE ROOF-CEILING FRAMING ELEMENTS ARE PARALLEL TO SUCH
WALLS, SUCH FRAMING AND ELEMENTS SUPPORTING SUCH FRAMING
SHALL BE OF NOT LESS THAN ONE-HOUR FIRE-RESISTIVE CONSTRUC-
TION FOR A WIDTH OF FIVE FEET FROM THE WALL.
B. WHEN ROOF-CEILING FRAMING ELEMENTS ARE PERPENDICULAR TO THE
WALL, THE ENTIRE SPAN OF SUCH FRAMING AND ELEMENTS SUPPORTING
SUCH FRAMING SHALL BE OF NOT LESS THAN ONEHOUR FIRE-RESISTIVE
CONSTRUCTION.
C. OPENINGS IN THE ROOF SHALL NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN FIVE FEET OF
THE EXTERIOR WALL.
D. THE ENTIRE ROOF SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A FIRE-RETARDANT ROOF
COVERING. "
-6-
TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS •
Chapter 3. Electrical Code
8-3.101. Adoption of National Electrical Code. Certain documents
marked and designated as the "National Electrical Code" , -1-991- 1987
Edition, published by the National Fire Protection Association, are
hereby adopted for safeguarding persons and property from hazards
arising from the use of electricity. Each and all of the regulations,
provisions, conditions, and terms of such "National Electrical Code" ,
-13&1 1987 Edition, . published by the National Fire Protection Associa-
tion, on file in the -P1arrnrng-Beparrtnrent, BUILDING DIVISION, are here-
by referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this
Chapter.
8-3.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the National Electrical
Code. The following portions of the "National Electrical Code" , 1987
Edition are hereby deleted:
(a) Article 310 , and all related references.-
8 .3.103. Adoption of Certain Parts of the National 'Electrical
Code. The following portions of the "National Electrical Code" ,
1981 Edition are hereby adopted:
(a) ARTICLE 310, AND ALL RELATED REFERENCES.
-7-
• TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 4. Plumbing Code
8-4.101. Adoption of Uniform Plumbing Code. Certain documents
marked and designated as the "Uniform Plumbing Code" , including all
appendices, 1992 1985 Edition, published by the International Associa-
tion of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, and as "IAPMO Installation
Standards" , 1992 1985 Edition, published by the International Associa-
tion of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, are hereby adopted for reg-
ulating the erection, installation, alteration, addition, repair, re-
location, replacement, maintenance or use of any plumbing system.
Each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions, and terms of
such "Uniform Plumbing Code" , -1992-1985 Edition, and "IAPMO Installa-
tion Standards" ,-1982-1985 Edition, published by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, AND THE INTERNA-
TIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BUILDING OFFICIALS, on file in the-P1anntng--He-
partment, BUILDING DIVISION, are hereby referred to and made a part
hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter , except as otherwise pro-
vided in this Chapter .
8-4. 102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Plumbing Code.
The following portions of the "Uniform Plumbing 'Code, " -1988 1985
Edition, are hereby deleted:
(a) Part 1 (Administration) , including Sections 10.1-10 . 5 and
20 .1-20 .14
(b) Table I-1, entitled "Location of Sewage Disposal System"
(c) Section I-4 (Percolation Tests)
(d) Section I-8 (Cesspools)
(e) Table I-4, entitled "Design Criteria of 5 Typical Soils"
(f) Table I-5
8-4. 103. Use of Plastic Pipe in Water. Systems. PB, PVC and CPVC,
as well as any other plastic pipe, shall not be used for hot and cold
water distribution systems. Any reference to the approved use of such
materials is hereby deleted.
8-4.104. Building Sewers. The following requirements shall apply
to building sewers and related drainage piping. Any reference to
different standards in Table 4-3 or Chapter 11 of the Uniform Plumbing
Code is hereby deleted.
-8-
(a) All building sewers shall be constructed with pipe of inter-
nal diameter not less than four (4) inches, UNLESS A PIPE OF
INTERNAL DIAMETER NOT LESS THAN THREE (3) INCHES IS DEEMED
SUITABLE BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
(b) A clean-out shall be placed in every building sewer within
five (5) feet of each building, at all changes in alignment
or grade in excess of twenty-two and one-half (22 1/2) de-
grees, within five (5) feet of the junction with the public
sewer , and at intervals not to exceed one hundred (100) feet
in straight runs. The clean-out shall be made by inserting
a "Y" fitting in the line and fitting the clean-out in the
"Y" branch in an approved manner. In the case of a clean-out
near the junction of the public sewer , the "Y" branch shall
be extended to a depth of not more than two (2) feet, nor
less than one foot below the surface of the ground before the
clean-out is installed.
(c) Drainage piping serving fixtures located at an elevation of
less than one foot above the nearest upstream manhole cover
in the main sewer serving said fixtures shall drain by grav-
ity into the main sewer, and shall be protected from backflow
of sewage by installing an approved type backwater valve, and
each such backwater valve shall be installed only in that
branch or section of the drainage system which receives the
discharge from fixtures located less than one foot above the
nearest upstream manhole cover .
8-4.105. Private Sewage Disposal Systems. The design, installa-
tion, operation and maintenance of private sewage disposal systems
shall be in conformance with Appendix I of the Uniform Plumbing Code
and with standards specified in this Section. Where specific stand-
ards are not provided within this Title or where the Administrative
Authority determines that higherrequirementsare necessary to main-
tain a safe and sanitary condition, the "Manual of Septic Tank Prac-
tice" (published by the United States Department of Health, Education
and Welfare) , the "Design Manual - Onsite Wastewater Treatment and
Disposal Systems" (published by the United States Environmental Pro-
tection Agency) , "Guidelines for Mound Systems" (State Water Resources
Control Board) , "Guidelines for Evapotranspiration Systems (State
Water Resources Control Board) , and the "Water Quality Control Plan,
Central Coast Basin" (adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control
Board of the Central Coast Region) shall be used as guidelines by the
Administrative Authority.
(a) Percolation Test. An on-site investigation shall be made
in order to determine the suitability of a particular site
for a private sewage disposal system and to provide the data
necessary to design a private sewage disposal system. A
percolation test shall be required prior to issuance of a
permit for all new or enlarged private sewage disposal sys-
tems. The following percolation test procedure shall be used 0
in performing percolation tests, except that other accepted
test procedures may be used when approved by the Administra-
-9-
0
• tive Authority.
(1) Number and Location of Test Holes: A minimum of three
separate test holes spaced uniformly through and located
in the immediate vicinity of the proposed leach field
site shall be made.
(2) Type of Test Holes: The test hole shall have horizon-
tal dimensions between 4 and 12 inches and vertical
sides to the depth of the absorption trench.
(3) Preparation of Test Hole: Smeared soil surfaces shall
be removed from the sides and bottom of the test hole
to provide a natural soil interface. All loose material
shall be removed from the test hole. Two inches of
coarse sand or fine gravel shall be added to the test
hole to protect the bottom from scouring and sediment.
(4) Soil Saturation and Swelling: The test hole is to be
carefully filled to a depth .of one foot above the gravel
or sand with clear water which is to be kept in the hole
for at least four hours but preferably overnight. This
step may be omitted in sandy soils containing little or
no clay.
(5) Measurement of Percolation Rate: The percolation rate
shall be determined twenty-four hours after water is
first added to the test holes; except, in sandy soils
containing little or no clay, the percolation rate shall
be determined after the water from one filling of the
test hole has completely seeped away.
(i) If water remains in the test hole after the over-
night swelling period, adjust the depth to approxi-
mately six inches over the gravel or sand and, from
a fixed reference point, measure the drop in water
level over a thirty minute period to calculate the
percolation rate.
(ii) If no water remains in the test hole after the
overnight swelling period, add clear water to bring
the depth of water in the test hole to approximate-
ly six inches over the gravel or sand. From a
fixed reference point, measure the drop in water
level at approximately thirty minute intervals over
four hours refilling six inches over the gravel or
sand as necessary. The drop that occurs during the
final thirty minute period is used to calculate the
percolation rate. The drops during prior periods
.provide information for possible modification of
the test procedure to suit local conditions.'
-10-
(iii) In sandy soils (or in other soils in which the
,*first six inches of water seeps away in less than
thirty minutes after the overnight swelling peri-
od) , the time interval between measurements shall
be taken as ten minutes and the test shall run for
one hour with the drop during the final ten minutes
being used to calculate the percolation rate.
(6) Deep Boring: A soil boring, to a minimum depth of ten
(10) feet below the bottom of the absorption trench,
shall be made in order to determine the presence of
bedrock and/or ground water.
(b) General Design Standards: The following standards shall be
used in the design of new or enlarged private sewage disposal
systems where the percolation rate does not exceed 60 min-
utes per inch.
(1) Determination of Size of Absorption Area: The 'absorp-
tion area, measured in lineal feet of absorption trench,
shall be calculated as set forth in this Section.
Tables 4-1 (Absorption Area Requirements) and 4-2
(Standard Trench Adjustment Factors) , included in this
Subsection, shall be referred to as necessary.
area
(absorption per bedroom)X no. of bedrooms) X (standard
P
(width of trench, in feet) trench adjust-
ment factor)
factor)
TABLE 4-1. Absorption Area Requirements.
Percolation Rate Absorption Area Per Bedroom
(Minutes/Inch) (Square Feet)
0- 9 150
10 165
11-15 190
16-20 215
21-25 230
26-30 250
31-35 270
36-40 285
41-45 300
46-50 315
51-60 330 °
-11-
• �l)
TABLE 4-2. Standard Trench Adjustment Factor
Depth of Gravel Below Pipe Trench Width (in inches)
(in Inches)
12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
12 .75 . 78 . 80 .82 .83 . 85 . 86 . 87 . 87
18 .60 . 64 .66 .69 .71 .73 .75 .77 .78
24 . 50 . 54 . 57 . 60 . 62 .64 . 66 . 68 . 70
30 .43 .47 .50 .53 .55 .58 .60 .62 .64
36 .37 .41 .44 .47 . 50 . 52 . 54 . 56 . 58
42 .33 .37 .40 .43 .45 .48 .50 .52 .54
48 .30 .33 .36 .39 .42 .44 .46 .48 . 50
1. For trenches not shown in Table 4-2, the standard trench adjust-
ment factor may be computed as follows:
W + 2
W + 1 + 2D
Where W = width of trench (in feet)
D = depth of gravel below pipe (in feet)
(2) Location of Private Sewage Disposal Systems: The min-
imum distance between components of a private sewage
disposal system and other site features shall be as set
forth in Table 4-3 (Horizontal Distance Separation) and
and Table 4-4 (Vertical Distance Separation) . Where
physical limitations on a site preclude conformance with
distance separation requirements, the Administrative
Authority may approve a lesser separation when the de-
sign is prepared by a registered engineer competent in
sanitary engineering and when adequate substantiating
data is submitted with the design. The Administrative
Authority shall not approve a separation less than that
set forth in the "Water Quality Control Plan - Central
Coast Region" unless the Regional Water Quality Control
Board or its designated representatives have previously
approved the design.
-12-
TABLE 4-3. Horizontal Distance Separation (in feet)
Building Septic Leach Field Seepage
Sewer Tank or Seepage Pit
Bed
(1) (1)
Buildings or structures, in- 2 5 8 8
cluding porches, steps, breeze-
ways, patios, and carports
whether covered or not
(2)
Property Line Clear 5 5 10
(3)
Water Supply Well 50 50 100 150
Streams, when shown on 7 1/2 50 50 100 100
minute USGS Map and when a
defined channel with definite
bed and banks exists
Swales, ephemeral draws, or 50 50 50 50
other natural watercourses
with drainage areas larger
than 10 acres
Trees -- 10 -- 10
Seepage Pits -- 5 5 12
Leach Field or Seepage Bed -- 5 6 5
(4)
"On-site domestic water service 1 5 5 5
line
Distribution Box -- -- 5 5
5
Pressure Public Water Main 10 10 10 10
(6) (6)
Sloping ground, cuts, or other -- -- 15 15
embankments
(7) (7)
Reservoirs, including ponds, 200 200 200 200
lakes, tanks, basins, etc. for
storage, regulation and con-
trol of water , recreation,
power , flood control or
drinking
Springs 100 100 100 100
(1) Distance separation shall be increased to twenty (20) feet when
building or structure is located on a downward slope below a
leach field, see pagebed or seepage pit.
(2) See Section 315 (c) of Uniform Plumbing Code.
(3) Distance separation may be reduced to twenty-five (25) feet
when the drainage piping is constructed of materials approved for
use within a building.
-13-
0 •
• (4) See Section 1108 'of Uniform Plumbing Code.
(5) For parallel construction or crossings, approval by the Health
Department shall be required.
(6) Distance is measured as horizontal distance to daylight. This
distance may be reduced where it is demonstrated that favorable
geologic conditions and soil permeability exist based on a
report and analysis prepared by a licensed geologist or soils
engineer.
(7) Distance is measured at spillway elevation.
(1)
TABLE 4-41. Vertical Distance Separation (in feet)
.Leach Field or Seepage
Seepage bed Pit
Ground water 5 10
Bedrock 10 4
1. Distance is measured from bottom of trench or pit.
(3) Additional Standards:
(i) Existing legal building sites which are served by
an individual on-site well may be approved for a
• private sewage disposal system only if the site is
one acre or larger in size.
(ii) Private sewage disposal systems proposed to be in-
stalled on slopes of 20% or more shall be designed
by and have their installation inspected and certi-
fied by a registered civil engineer. The design
shall minimize grading disruption associated with
access for installation and maintenance. Such
systems shall be prohibited on slopes of 30% or
more, UNLESS APPROVED BY BOTH THE ADMINISTRATIVE
AUTHORITY AND THE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL
BOARD.
(iii) When the percolation rate exceeds 30 minutes/inch,
a private sewage disposal system shall be designed,
inspected, and certified to work by a registered
civil engineer.
(iv) When the percolation rate exceeds 60 minutes/inch,
a private sewage disposal system using soil absorp-
tion shall not be allowed.
(v) When the percolation rate exceeds 30 minutes/inch,
a private sewage disposal system using a 'seepage
pit.-.shall not be allowed.
(vi) Expansion area shall be provided on all building
sites, shall be identified on all plans submitted
-14-
for private sewage disposal systems, and shall re-
main available for system expansion. If areas re- •
served for system expansion are not accessible for
future installation, then the expansion area shall
be installed with the original system.
(c) Special Design Standards. The following standards shall be
used in the design of new or enlarged private sewage disposal
systems where the percolation rate exceeds 60 minutes per
inch. Designs for alternate types of private sewage disposal
systems shall be by registered engineers competent in sani-
tary engineering and may be approved by the Administrative
Authority when the design engineer submits adequate substan-
tiation data with the design.
(1) Determination of Size of Disposal Field: The size of
the disposal field shall be determined by the design
engineer using methods of accepted engineering practice
including manuals and documents specified in this
Chapter.
(2) Location of Private Sewage Disposal Systems: The min-
imum distance between components of a private sewage
disposal system and other site features shall be as set
forth in Table 4-3 (Horizontal Distance Separation) and
Table 4-4 (Vertical Distance Separation) using the col-
umn entitled "Leach Field or Seepage Bed. " •
(3) Additional Standards:
(i) When private sewage disposal systems are designed
pursuant to Subsection (c) of the Section, the de-
sign engineer shall provide the owner with infor-
mation on the location, design, operation and
maintenance of the private sewage disposal system.
A--covenant--shall--a4.-so-be-�reeo-rded-p 3o -to--fi+1a3-
app-renal-of-the--sysbem--indicating--the--name--and-
location-_of_-the--design--engineer-_ and_
indiEating-
wher e-the-above-_inf®-r matien-can-be-seen-red..-
(ii) Existing legal building sites which are served by
an individual on-site well may be approved for a
private sewage disposal system only if the site is
one acre or larger in size.
(iii) Expansion area shall be provided on all building
sites, shall be identified on all plans submitted
for private sewage disposal systems, and shall re-
main available for system expansion. If areas
.reserved for system expansion are not accessible
for future installation, then the expansion area
shall be installed with the original system.
-15-
(d) Replacement of Existing Private Sewage Disposal Systems.
Where an existing private sewage disposal system has failed,
the replacement system shall be designed in conformance with,
this Chapter and shall be designed, INSPECTED AND CERTIFIED
TO WORK by a registered engineer competent in sanitary engi-
neering. In the event that the replacement system cannot be
designed to conform with this Chapter , the Administrative
Authority may approve a system designed to lesser standards
when it is designed, inspected, and certified to work by a
registered engineer competent in sanitary engineering.
(1) A private sewage disposal system shall not be replaced
by another system if sewers are available.
(2) The Administrative Authority shall not approve a re-
placement system which does not conform with prohibi-
tions set forth in the "Water Quality Control Plan -
Central Coast Basin" unless the Regional Water Quality
Control Board or its designated representatives has
previously approved the design. The Administrative
Authority may authorize a temporary means of sewage
disposal pending such approval.
i
-16-
TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS •
Chapter 5. Mechanical Code
8-5.101. Adoption of Uniform Mechanical Code. Certain documents
marked and designated as the "Uniform Mechanical Code" , including all
appendices, 1982-1985 Edition, published by the International Associa-
tion of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, are hereby adopted for reg-
ulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, qual-
ity of materials, location, operation and maintenance or use of heat-
ing, ventilating, cooling, refrigeration systems, incinerators and
other miscellaneous heat-producing appliances. Each and all of the
regulations, provisions, conditions ,and terms of such "Uniform Mechan-
ical Code" , 1982 1985 Edition, published by the International Associa-
tion of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials AND THE INTERNATIONAL CON-
FERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS, on file in the Planning-Department;
BUILDING DIVISION, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof, as
if fully set out in this Chapter, except as otherwise provided in this
Chapter.
8-5.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Mechanical Code
The following portions of the "Uniform Mechanical Code, " 1-982 1985
Edition, are hereby deleted:
(a) Chapter 1 (Title, Scope and General) , including Sections
101-107
(b) Chapter 2 (Organization and Enforcement) , including Sections
201-204
(c) Chapter 3 (Permits and Inspections) , including Sections 301-
306 and Table No. 3-A
(D) CHAPTER 5 (HEATING, VENTILATING AND COOLING) SECTION 509 . A
120 VOLT RECEPTACLE SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN 25 FEET OF THE
EQUIPMENT FOR SERVICE AND MAINTENANCE PURPOSES.
8-5 .103. Installation of Liquefied Petroleum Gas-burning Appli-
ances. The following shall be added to the last paragraph of Sec-
tion 504 (Installation) :
. . . . "When appliances so fueled are located in underfloor or attic
areas, provision shall be made to drain the appliance to the out-
side of the building. " LPG LINES ARE PROHIBITED UNDER CONCRETE
SLABS.
-17-
0
TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 6. Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code
8-6.101. Adoption of Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code
Certain documents marked and designated as the "Uniform Swimming Pool,
Spa and Hot Tub Code" , -1982-1985 Edition, published by the Interna-
tional Association of Plumbing. and Mechanical Officials, are hereby
adopted for regulating the erection, installation, alteration, addi-
tion, repair, relocation, replacement, maintenance or use of any swim-
ming pool, spa or hot tub plumbing system. Each and all of the regu-
lations, provisions, conditions, and terms of such "Uniform Swimming
Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code" ,-+-982-1985 Edition, published by the In-
ternational Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, on file
in the Punning-Hepartment; BUILDING DIVISION, are hereby referred to
and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter.
8-6 .102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Swimming Pool,
Spa and Hot Tub Code. The following portions of the "Uniform Swim-
ming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code. " 1982-1985 Edition, are hereby de-
leted:
(a) Part 1 (Administration) including Section 1.0-1.9 and
1.11-1.18
8-6.103. Swimming Pool Defined. The definition of a swimming
pool in Section 102 of the "Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub
Code, " 39$-2-1985 Edition, shall be revised to read as follows:
"Swimming Pool - Any constructed or prefabricated pool used for
swimming or bathing. "
•
-18-
TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 7. Sign Code
8-7.101. Adoption of Uniform Sign Code. Certain documents marked
and designated as the "Uniform Sign Code, " -3.85-2- 1985 Edition, pub-
lished by the International Conference of Buildng Officials, are here-
by adopted for regulating the design, quality of materials, construc-
tion, location, electrification, and maintenance of all signs and sign
structures. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions
and terms of such "Uniform Sign .Code" , .19-8.2-1985 Edition, published by
the International Conference of Building Officials, on file in the
�i$r� �r�g--flepartment; BUILDING DIVISION, are hereby referred to and
made a part hereof as if fully set out in this Chapter, except as
otherwise provided in this Chapter.
8-7.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Sign Code. The
following portions of the "Uniform Sign Code" , -.952 1985 Edition, are
hereby deleted:
(a) Chapter 1 (Title, Scope and Enforcement) , including Sections
101-103
(b) Chapter 3 (Permits, Fees and Inspections) , including Sections
301-306
(c) Section 1401 (Temporary Signs - General)
•
-19-
TWE 8 - BUILDING REGULATOS
Chapter 8. Fire Code
i
8-8.101. Adoption of Uniform Fire Code. Certain documents marked
and designated as the "Uniform Fire Code" , including Appendix Chapter
I-A (Life Safety Requirements for Existing Buildings) , Chapter I-B
(Stairway Identification) , Chapter II-A' (Suppression and control of
Hazardous Fire Areas) , Chapter II-B (Protection of Flammable or Com-
bustible Liquids in Tanks in Locations That May Be Flooded) , Chapter
II-D (Rifle Ranges) , Chapter III-A (Test Procedures for Fire Extin-
guishing Systems) , Chapter III-B (Basement Pipe Inlets) , Chapter III-C
(Fire Alarm Systems) , Chapter IV-A (Interior Floor Finish) , Chapter
V-A (Nationally Recognized Standards of Good Practice) , and Chapter
VI-A (Emergency Relief Venting for Fire Exposure for Aboveground
Tanks) , 1982 Edition,_ and the "Uniform Fire Code Standards" , 39,8-2-1985
Edition, are hereby adopted for the purpose of prescribing regulations
governing conditions hazardous to life and property from fire or ex-
plosion. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions, and
terms of such "Uniform Fire Code" , 39$-2- 1985 Edition, and the "Uniform
Fire Code Standards", -1982-1985 Edition, published by the Western Fire
Chiefs Association and the International Conference of Building Of-
ficials, on file in the -P3aaR4.nq-E)epaT+_mea+_ BUILDING DIVISION are
hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this
Chapter, except as otherwise provided - in this Chapter.
8-8.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Fire Code. The
following portions of the "Uniform Fire Code" , i98-2- 1985 Edition,are
hereby deleted:
(a) Section 2. 302 (Board of Appeals)
8-8 .103. Board of Appeals. In order to provide for interpreta-
tion of the provisions of the Chapter and to hear approvals provided
for hereunder , the Board of Appeals established pursuant to Section
8-1. 103 shall govern. Procedures specified by Section 8-1.103 (c)
shall be followed. I
G
8-8. 104. Alarm Signal Defined. The definition of an alarm signal
in Section 4 of Appendix III-C, shall be revised as follows:
" (c) Alarm Signal IS AN AUDIBLE OR VISUAL SIGNAL, OR BOTH, IN-
DICATING THE EXISTING OF AN EMERGENCY FIRE CONDITION. Aud-
ible devices may be bells, horns, chimes, speakers or simi-
lar devices but no audible alarm shall conflict with the
response of emergency vehicles or civil defense systems. j
Under no circumstances shall sirens of wail, yelp or hi-10
soundings be used. All devices shall be approved by the
Police and Fire Chiefs. "
• -20-_
8-8. 105. ESTABLISHMENT OF LIMITS OF DISTRICTS IN WHICH STORAGE OF
FLAMMABLE OR COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS IN OUTSIDE ABOVEGROUND TANKS IS
PROHIBITED. THE LIMITS REFERRED TO IN SECTION 79.501 OF THE UNIFORM
FIRE CODE IN WHICH THE STORAGE OF FLAMMABLE OR COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS IS
PROHIBITED ARE HEREBY ESTABLISHED AS THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO. THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO STORAGE OF FLAMMABLE OR
COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS IN ABOVEGROUND VAULTS AS APPROVED BY THE FIRE DE-
PARTMENT.
8-8.106. ESTABLISHMENT OF LIMITS OF DISTRICTS IN WHICH STORAGE OF
EXPLOSIVES AND BLASTING AGENS IS PROHIBITED. THE LIMITS REFERRED TO
IN SECTION 77.106 (B) OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, IN WHICH STORAGE OF
EXPLOSIVES AND BLASTING AGENTS IS PROHIBITED, ARE HEREBY ESTABLISHED
AS THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO.
8-8.107. ESTABLISHMENT OF LIMITS IN WHICH STORAGE OF LIQUIFIED
PETROLEUM GASES IS RESTRICTED. THE LIMITS REFERRED TO IN SECTION
82.105 (A) OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, IN WHICH STORAGE OF LIQUIFIED PE-
TROLEUM GAS IS RESTRICTED, ARE HEREBY ESTABLISHED AS THE CITY LIMITS
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO.
8-8.108. AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS. SECTION 10.308 (A)
SHALL BE REVISED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 10.308 (A) WHERE REQUIRED. AN AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING
SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED:
1. IN ALL NEW BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES HAVING A TOTAL FLOOR
AREA OF 10, 000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS AREA OR MORE.
2. IN ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES WITH A TOTAL FLOOR
AREA EXCEEDING 10, 000 SQUARE FEET WHICH UNDERGO ADDITION IN
EXCESS OF 25% OF THE ORIGINAL FLOOR AREA.
3. IN THE OCCUPANCIES AND LOCATIONS AS SET FORTH IN THIS SEC-
TION.
FOR PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION, THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA SHALL BE COMPUTED
WITHOUT REGARD TO AREA SEPARATION WALLS AND FLOORS OF LESS THAN 4-HOUR
FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION AS DEFINED IN THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE.
FOR SPECIAL PROVISIONS ON HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS AND MAGNESIUM, AND CAL-
CIUM CARBIDE, SECTIONS 10. 301 AND 45 .209 AND ARTICLES 48 , 49 , AND 80.
8-8 .109. FIRE RETARDANT ROOFING MATERIALS REQUIRED. ROOF COVER-
INGS FOR ALL NEW BUILDINGS AND FOR ANY RE-ROOFING OF EXISTING BUILD-
INGS SHALL BE NO LESS THAN CLASS C, REGARDLESS OF -BUILDING TYPE OR
OCCUPANCY. ANY REFERENCE TO THE APPROVED USE OF ROOFING MATERIALS
WITH LESS THAN A CLASS C RATING IS HEREBY DELETED.
-21-
TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 9. Housing Code
8-9 .101. Adoption of Uniform Housing ` Code. Certain documents
marked and designated as the "Uniform Housing Code" , 19-9.2 1985 Edi-
tion, published by the International Conference of Building Officials,
are hereby adopted for regulating the use and occupancy, location and
maintenance of residential buildings and structures. Each and all of
the regulations, provisions, conditions and terms of such "Uniform
Housing Code" , 1982 1985 Edition, published by the International Con-
ference of Building- officials, on file in the -P1a4g--�e�a �nee �
BUILDING DIVISION, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if
fully set out in this Chapter, except as otherwise provided in this
Chapter.
8-9.102. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Housing Code.
The following portions of the "Uniform Housing Code" , -195-2- 1985
Edition, are hereby deleted:
(a) Section 203 (Housing Advisory and Appeals Board)
8-9 .103. References to Building Code. References made in Chap-
ters 1, 2 and 3 of the "Uniform Housing Code" , 1982=1985 Edition, to
various administrative sections and chapters of the Building Code
shall mean the corresponding sections and chapters of Chapter 1 of
this Title.
8-9.104. Appeals Board. In order to provide for interpretation
of the provisions of this Chapter and to hear appeals provided for
hereunder , the Board of Appeals established pursuant to Section
8-1.103 shall govern. References to the Housing Advisory and Appeals
Board in the Uniform Housing Code shall mean the Board of Appeals es-
tablished pursuant to Section 8-1.103. Procedures specified by Sec-
tion 8-1.103 (c) shall be followed except where additional procedures
are required by this Chapter .
8-9 .105. Time Limits for Appeals. The following portions of the
"Uniform Housing Code" , 1982 1985 Edition, are modified as specified:
(a) Section 1101 (b) (5) is amended to change the appeal time from
"30 days" to 1114 days. "
(b) The last paragraph of Section 1201 (a) is amended to read as
follows:
"The appeal shall be filed within 14 days from the date of
service of such notice or action of the Building Official. "
-22-
TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 10 . Dangerous Buildings Code
8-10. 101. Adoption of Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous
Buildings. Certain documents marked and designated as the "Uniform
Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings" , -lg$Q- 1985 Edition,
published by the International Conference of Building Officials, are
hereby adopted for regulating the repair, vacation or demolition of
buildings or structures which may endanger the life, limb, health,
morals, property, safety or welfare of the general public or their
occupants. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions
and terms of such "Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Build-
ings" , 1982-1985 Edition, published `by the International Conference of
Building Officials, on file in the Pi-anning-flepaTtment; BUILDING DIVI-
SION, are hereby referred to and made a part hereof as if fully set
out in this Chapter .
8-10 .102. The following is added to Section 202. AS AN ALTERNA-
TIVE, IF IN THE JUDGEMENT OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR OTHER EMPLOYEE "
OR OFFICIAL OF THIS JURISDICTION AS DESIGNATED BY THE GOVERNING BODY,
MAY INSTITUTE ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE ACTION TO PREVENT, RESTRAIN,
CORRECT OR ABATE THE VIOLATION.
8-10.102- 3. Deletion of Certain Parts of the Uniform Code for the
Abatement of Dangerous Buildings. The following portions of the
"Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings" , 1985
Edition, are hereby deleted:
(a) Section 205 (Appeals Board)
8-10.103- 4. References to Building Code. References made in Chap-
ters 1 and 2 of the "Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous
Buildings" , 398-2- 1985 Edition, to various administrative sections and
chapters of the Building Code shall mean the corresponding sections
and chapters of Chapter 1 of this Title.
8-10.104- 5. Appeals Board. In order to provide for interpretation
of the provisions of this Chapter and to hear appeals provided for
hereunder , the Board of Appeals established pursuant to Section 8-1.
103 shall govern. Procedures specified by Section 8-1.103 (c) shall be
followed except where additional procedures are required by this
Chapter .
8-10.105-6. Time Limit for Appeals. The following portions of the
"Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings" , -1982- 1985
Edition, are modified as specified:
-23-
(a) Section 401 (b) (5) is amended to change the appeal time from
"30 days" to "14 days. "
(b) The last paragraph of Section 501 (a) is amended to read as
follows:
"The appeal shall be filed within 14 days from the date of
service of such notice or action of the Building Official. "
-24-
AG !IDA �IJ
February 23. 1988
To: City Council
Via: Mike Shelton, City Manager ` s
From: Bob Best, Parks and Recreation Director-6—
Subject:
irectorSubject: Joint .Powers Agreement 4
Background
For the past year the City and Atascadero Unified School
District has been working to develop a Joint Powers Agreement for
joint use of facilities . The development of a JPA will establish
a basis for the cooperative use of respective recreational and
educationalfacilities.
On January 26 a rough draft agreement was presented to
Council as an informational item only. On February 4, 1988 the
Joint Powers Agreement received conceptual approval..from both the
Council and the Board of Education of Atascadero Unified School
District.
The development of this document represents the culmination
of many months of work on the part of the committee, and
demonstrates the desire on the Part of both agencies to maximize
their resources to. the greatest extent possible .
Recommendation
Approve the Joint Powers Agreement with Atascadero' Unified
School District as presented.
Fiscal Impact
Unknown at this time, but should result in cost savings to
the City in the future
A G R E E M E N T
FOR JOINT USE OF FACILITIES
AGREEMENT entered into this day of by
and between Atascadero Unified School District and City of
Atascadero, hereinafter referred to as "School District" and
"City"
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, Chapter 6 of Division 12 of the EducationCodeof
the State of California authorizes and empowers public school
districts and municipalities to cooperate with each other and to
that end enter into agreements with each other for the purpose of
organizing,- promoting and conducting such programs for community
recreation and education objectives for children and adults of
the state; and
WHEREAS, the "School District" and "City" desire to
establish a basis for the cooperative use of their respective
recreational and educational facilities located in the community;
NOW, THEREFORE "School District" and "City" hereby mutually
covenant and agree with each other as follows:
A. Principles
1 . The "School District and "City" shall cooperatively
plan in the acquisition, development and maintenance of
certain school and recreational areas, facilities and
buildings to insure their maximum joint use for the benefits
__1
of the residents of the City of Atascadero.
2 . This agreement covers general requirements needed to
effectively implement the overall cooperative program for
the "School District and "City" . Agreements affecting the
joint acquisition, development, use and maintenance of
specific "School District" and "City" facilities may be
accomplished by an agreement executed for each such facility
and attached to this document as addenda. Each addendum
becomes a part of this agreement and is subject to the
general requirements specified here.
3. The administrators and delegated representatives of
. both the "School District" and "City" shall confer
regularly in regard to the acquisition, development, use of
maintenance of joint—use facilities to insure maximum
community use and to avoid duplication.
4. A joint meeting of the "School District" and the
"City" representatives shall be held as necessary during the
term of this agreement to consider matters of mutual
concern.
5 . Details regarding usage of specific facilities shall
be outlined in a Letter of Understanding.
Utilizing guidelines established by this agreement, the
appropriate School District Administrator and the Parks and
Recreation Department Staff shall be responsible for
outlining specific responsibilities
for the recreation staff
and. what is expected from the school district , and may
2
i
include any financial commitments for either agency.
B. Joint Planning
1 . .-The School District and the City shall advise the
other regarding its land acquisitions and major development
plans : '. ::The preliminary plans for all new recreational
facilities shall be presented to each staff for review
and suggestions. It is the policy of the cooperating
Jurisdictions to acquire adjacent sites wherever
appropriate and possible .
2. Each jurisdiction' s planning staff may perform minor
and *short—term Planning and design work for the other on an
actual cost basis when time permits.
3. Public buildings and facilities for each
jurisdiction shall be designed to effectively serve the
specific purpose for which constructed. Where practical ,
they shall also be designed to meet community needs for both
leisure—time activities and school programs . Buildings and
grounds shall be designed to be compatible with the
surrounding environment and with a strong awareness for
efficiency of operation, maintenance and aesthetics .
4. The "City" and "School District" staff or architect
may consult on the initial site plan for areas that will be
included as addenda to this agreement in order to create an
efficient, integrated master site plan. •
. 5 . The "City" shall work cooperatively with the
3
"School District" to acquire grants for development of
recreational facilities on or adjacent to district
property.
C. Joint .Development
1 . Both the "School District" and the "City may
agree to jointly develop facilities they deem beneficial to
both agencies. Projects recommended for joint development
during the next fiscal year should be presented to the
School Board and City Council for approval before
March 1st of the current fiscal year.
• 2. The cost of developing such facilities jointly
approved by the agencies may be shared, as deemed
appropriate and fair to the agencies .
3 . Responsibility for preparing design, specifications,
and bid forms, for supervision of work, and for maintaining
the facility to be jointly developed shall be defined and
approved by the agencies .before starting the development .
If the facility is built on school property, it has to
meet the State specifications established for school
districts .
4. Availability of new jointly developed facilities for
use shall be determined by the owner agency.
5 . Each, with the consent of the other agency, may make
such improvements as may be deemed necessary Y b them for
their program.
4
•
D. Joint Use
1. The "School District" agrees to grant to the "City"
on application, the use of any facility or equipment owned
by the School District, which the "City" may require in
connection with its community learning and leisure program,
provided that the use of such facility or equipment for
community recreation purposes shall not interfere with its
use by the "School District" for that agency ' s stated
Purposes, or--constitute a violation of provisions of the
California Education Code or Government. Code Sections .
2 . The "City" agrees to grant to the "School District"
on application, the use of any facility or equipment owned " •
by the "City" which the "School District" may require in
connection with its program, providing such use of the
facility or equipment will not interfere with its use by the
"City" in connection with its stated purpose.
3. The use of facilities and equipment pursuant to this
agreement shall be granted subject to existing rules and
regulations of the perspective owners pertaining to their
use .
All efforts shall be made to insure reasonable
conformity in such rules and regulations between respective
owners .
4. The Superintendent of Schools and the Parks and
Recreation Director shall delegate the responsibility for
establishing schedules for facility use to the Recreation
5
•
Division Staff the Principals/Vice Principals of each
school , and the school district ' s Director of Maintenance &
Operations .
5 . The agency using facilities or equipment owned by
the other pursuant to this agreement shall furnish qualified
Personnel deemed necessary by the respective owners for the
Proper conduct and supervision of the activity.
6. The party using facilities or equipment of the other
Pursuant to this agreement will repair, or cause to be
repaired, or will reimburse the owner for the cost of
repairing damage done to said facilities or equipment
during the period of such use , other than that attributed to
ordinary and reasonable use . The Letters of Understanding
at each school site shall identify responsibilities for
replacement of items due to wear and tear on equipment and
facilities .
7 . The "City" will indemnify and hold harmless the
"School District" , and its officers, agents, servants, and
employees . from any and all claims, demands, actions , causes
of action, damages or liability for injury to or death of
Persons . or for damage to property, resulting from or
arising out of any act or omission of the ''City" or its
officers, agents , servants or employees of the use of
"School District" property or in the exercise of any other
• right or privilege granted to the "Ci the
"City" by "School
District" pursuant to this agreement . The "School
6
District" will indemnify and hold harmless the "City" and
its officers. agents, servants, and employees . from any and
all claims, demands , actions, causes of actions, damages or
liability for injury to' or death of persons, or for damage
to property, resulting from or arising out of any act or
omission of the "School District" or its employees, agents,
servants, - or employees in the use of "City" property or in
the exercise of any other right or privilege granted to the
"School District" by the "City" under or pursuant to this
agreement.
8. Insurance shall be purchased and maintained by the
City of Atascadero and Atascadero Unified School District
for the term of this contract as follows :
TYPE AMOUNT
A. Workers Compensation Statutory Amount
B. Automobile liability 1 Mil . C. S.L.
including owned. hired,
borrowed, and non-owned
autos .
C . Comprehensive General 1 Mil . C . S .L.
Liability including contractual
liability and Personal injury
A Certificate of insurance evidencing the required coverage with
a 30 day written cancellation notice to the other entity shall be .
provided. Each entity shall name the other entity as additional
insured..
7
•
E. Cooperative Delivery of Programs
1 . When possible, the "School District" and "City"
shall work toward co-promotion of adult education programs
and City recreational activities . Responsible parties shall
be the Recreation Supervisor and the Adult School Principal .
2. The "School District" shall endeavor to provide
space at each elementary school in Atascadero for the "City
to conduct its After School Program.
3. The "City" will make available to the "School
District" zoo education programs . This could include a
teaching packet for district instructors, an in-school
• program to be given by the Zoo Curator or designated
representative , and a slide presentation on zoo education .
4 . The "City" may provide staff for "noon-time"
recreational activities at each elementary school and the
junior high school . Frequency and type of program shall be
determined by recreation staff and the appropriate school
principal .
5 . The "City" shall grant continued usage of Alvord
Field to Atascadero High School for its baseball programs .
Improvements needed specifically for the program shall be
the responsibility of the "School District" .
6 . An Atascadero High School student, to be designated
by the "School District" , shall be an ex-officio member of
• the Parks and Recreation Commission. lrovid
This will Provide the
opportunity for direct communication with high school age
8
students concerning their needs for recreational activities
in the community.
7. The "School District" and "City" shall cooperatively
work to maximize the usage potential of school district
outdoor recreational facilities . Under guidelines
established by the "School District" the "City" will be
responsible for coordinating outdoor facility usage during
non-school hours at the elementary and junior high schools
in Atascadero.
F.) A
11_ children in the Atascadero Unified School
District are eligible to participate in recreation
activities sponsored by the "City" .
F. Costs and Re-Imbursements
1 . The "City" and "School District" shall , when
Possible, cooperatively purchase equipment for use by the
intramural programs of the district and City sponsored
activities .
2 . Specific details regarding costs for facility usage
shall be outlined in the Letter of Understanding for each
site, with the specific goal to reduce program delivery
costs for the "School District" and the "City" .
3 . If either entity initiates action to terminate this
agreement , the improvements on said sites shall become the
Property of the entity and title thereto shall vest in the
entity without the necessity of a formal documentation of •
transfer effective on said date . For projects involving
9
State or Federal parks and recreation funds , the above
action may not be completed until State or Federal
representatives have determined that the benefits received
were commensurate with the type and duration of interest in
the land held by the project applicant .
H Terms of Agreement .
r
' } 1 . This agreement shall become operative on date set
ti
1;
forth above, and shall continue in effect for a period of
five (5) years unless previously terminated by either party
on ninety (90) days written notice to the other party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto executed this
agreement as of the date set forth above .
ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Ken Beck
Chairman, Board of Education
Attest :
Dr. Anthony Avina, Superintendent of Schools
Secretary, Board of Education
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Barbara Norris. Mayor
Attest :
Boyd Sharitz, City Clerk
10
Pel h7�.:e jN
MEMORANDUM
r' TO: City Council Members February 23 , 1988
FROM: Michael Shelton
City Manager
SUBJECT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR RECRUITMENT
BACKGROUND:
This item was on the February 9, 1988 Council Agenda. Due
to the lateness of the hour, Council approved the hiring of
an Interim Administrative Services Director, but continued
Part "B" , requesting authorization to recruit for an
Administrative Services Director, for further Council con-
sideration at the February 23rd meeting.
i
MS:kv
PLEASE INCLUDE INTO Y* AGENDA PACKET
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council Members January 9 , 1988
FROM : _ MichaelShelton
City Manager
SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR VACANCY
RECOMMENDATION :
1 . Council authorize staff to solicit applications and
interview applicants to appoint an Interim Finance Director .
2 . Council ,authorize recruitment of an Administrative Services
Director department head position .
BACKGROUND
The effective date of the Administrative Services Director
resignation is February 29 , 1988 . Due to conversion of the
computer- , budget preparation responsibilities , .and upcoming labor
negotiations , workload oad demands for, this position will be heavy .
Accordingly , staff requests authorization to recruit , through the
League of California Cities Public Service Skills, to fill the
position on .an interim basis pending recruitment ,and sale-ction
of a neva Administrative Services Director .
DISCUSSION :
Staff has discussed , at length , the need's of the City as they
relate to the duties of the Administrative =ervic>-, Director
position .'
It is the feeling of the Administrative Services Director and
Finance staff that :str'onger finance expertise .and ,a stronger
finance focus is needed . Accordingly , the merit of rr�crui ti ng
for a Finance Director has also been discussed at 1 .•n9th . The
hiring� of a Finance Director position would require the
responsibilities of personnel and risk management to fall under,
the City Manager ' s Office .
Staff feels the stronger, financial focus can still be
accomplished ' in recruiting for, a replacement Administrative
Cervices Director , by emphasizing ,and selecting the new candidate
on the basis- of a strong- financial orientation.
By this action , greater personnel responsibility would be
shifted to the Personnel Secretary Technician . Recognizing
current duties and responsibilities. performed by the Personnel
Secretary Technician , it is the intent of the current
Administrative Services Director ( David Jorgensen) to recommend ,
in next year ' s budget process , the upgrade of the Personnel
Technician position to that of a Personnel Analyst .
In recruiting for an Administrative Services Director , it is the
staff ' s intent to advertise the salary as "open" , along with
showing the current salary , to enable a market survey to ensure a
competitive compensation range to hire the new department head
level position . Any salary rang, adjustment that may be needed
will be presented for Council approval .
FINANCIAL IMPACT :
There is basically no financial impact in hiring an Interim
Administrative Services Director , as the vacant salary will be .
utilized for the interim position . However , a slight cost
increase for the Interim Administrative Services Director may be
required over current compensation .
ALTERNATIVES :
1 . Do not obtain an interim position , . placing the
responsibility of the Administrative Services Director duties on
current Finance and Personnel employees , under the direction of
the City Manager/Acting City Manager .
2 . Recruitment of the Administrative Services Director position
could be delayed until after a new City Manager is chosen ,
providing enhanced flexibility for the new Manager to analyze and
recommend the replacement of the Administrative Services Director,
position . This option would result in an Administrative Services
Director interim or vacancy for 9- 12 months .
3 . The City may revert back to a Finance Director department
head and upgrade the current Personnel Technician position to
Personnel Analyst or Assistant to the City Manager , responsible
for personnel and risk management in the City Manager ' s Office .
MS : kv
DHT ^Vd� HEM
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Paulsibaugh, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT Resolution to Increase Speed Limit on
a Portion of El Camino Real
DATE, February 2, 1988
Recommendation.:
The Traffic ' Committee recommends that Council adopt
the attached resolution.
Background:
round.
This speed adjustment will correct inconsistant speed
zoning on El. Camino Real from SanJacinto to Rosario.
Currently the northbound lane is posted 35 MPH while the
southbound lane is posted 25 MPH.
Fiscal Impact
The cost; of this adjustment will be ,approximately
$75 .00 to be paid out of budgeted funds .
•
RESOLUTION NO 16-88
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE _
CITY OF ATASCADERO INCREASING THE SPEED LIMIT
ON EL CAMINO REAL IN THE SOUTHBOUND LANES BETWEEN
SAN JACINTO AND ROSARIO AVENUES
WHEREAS, Section 4.2 .502 (a) of the Atascadero
Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to
determine the appropriate speed limit for streets within
the City of Atascadero; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that to establish
consistant speed zoning the speed limit in this section of
El Camino Realshould be 35 MPH.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of
Atascadero directs theTrafficEngineer to cause the speed
limit on, the above section of El Camino' Real to be
increased to 35 MPH.
On Motion by Councilman and seconded
by Councilman ,the foregoing Resolution is
hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call
vote;
AYES
NOES;
ABSENT
DATE
ATTEST
BOYD C SHARITZ BARBARA NORRIS
City Clerk Mayor
jy
OVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
JS? GENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH
t rn Dir. of Public Works/
City Engineer
MEETING AGENDA
DATE ITEM
MEMORANDUM
TO City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, .Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Road Acceptance Resolution
DATE: . February 2, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council approve the attached
Resolution accepting Corriente Road into the city
maintained road system,
Background:
The road referred to here was constructed in 1986 by
the Gordon T. Davis Cattle Co. , in accordance with plans
i approved by the City Engineer . All required inspections
have been completed and the road has been determined to have
been constructed as to the plans .
Fiscal Impact;
By accepting this road into the city-maintained system
the city will become responsible for the repair, however,
no significant work is expected for several
years .
RESOLUTION NO 22-88
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO ACCEPTING CORRIENTE ROAD INTQ
THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM
The Council of the City of Atascadero -resolves as
follows :
1 . Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1806 of the
California Streets and Highways Code, the following street
is hereby accepted into the city street system
Street Name Length in Feet Miles
Corriente Road 2640 .S
2 . A copy furnished of this resolution shall be fur shed to
Gordon T. Davis Cattle Co.
On motion by Council Member and
seconded by Council Member the
Atascadero City Council hereby 'adopts the foregoing
resolution in its entirety on the following roll call vote:'
AYES;
NOES:
ABSENT;
ADOPTED
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
r
RSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUG
��ijAtt r y Director of Public Works
DOC.NO. 88890
yo.
OFFICIAL RECORDS
RECORI3ING REQUESTED BY SAN LUIS OBISP'O,CAL
and when recorded, j
please return to: DEC 291987
Twin Cities Engineering Inc.
P. 0. Box 777 FRANCIS M.COONEY
Templeton, CA 93465 County Clerk Recorder
TIME 8;05 AM
IRREVOCABLE F, PERPETUAL
OFFER TO DEDICATE
APN# 50-221-16
0 0 0 - - -
THIS OFFER TO DEDICATE, made the day of 19
by Gary S. Dishen & Sandra Northrop, Disenof the ounty o an Luis
Obispo, btate of Cali ornia, ereina ter termed Offeror:
WHEREAS, .said Offeror desires to make an offer to dedicate,
irrevocably, to the public an easement, for public road purposes,
which offer may be accepted at any time by any governmental entity
which -has the power to establish, construct and maintain roads.
NOW, THEREFORE, said Offeror covenants and promises as follows:
1. That said Offeror is the owner of the following interest
described below:
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map AT86-015•, as per map recorded
in Book 41 of Parcel Maps; page 43, Records of said
County.
2. That said Offeror does nereby irrevocably and in per-
petuity offer to such governmental entity a dedication of a public
right-of-way for road purposes and incidental uses upon the
following described property:
(Description)
See Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part thereof.
t
3. That until such time as the above offer of dedication is
accepted by such a government entity, all owners of property
contiguous to the above described road parcel shall have the right
to the use of said road parcel as a private road.
4. That said Offeror agrees that said offer of dedication
shall be irrevocable and that such a government entity may, at
any time in the future, accept the offer of dedication of the
public right-of-way.
S. That said Offeror agrees that this irrevocable and per-
petual Offer to Dedicate is and shall be binding on his heirs,
legatees and assignees.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, this Offer to Dedicate is hereby
executed by the said Offeror on the day and year first above
written.
OfferoyGary S. Dishen eror
Sandra Nort rop Dishen
utteror urrerOr
•
utteror
eror
vOL M OO PAGE OOO
EXHIBIT "A"
All that portion of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map AT86-015, as
} recorded in Book 41 of Parcel Maps, per Mao
Obispo Count � page 43, Records of San Luis
County, California, lying Westerly of the following
described line:
Beginning at a point in the centerline of
feet wide, Corriente Road, 40. 00
(formerly San Pedro Road) said
Pnt Lots 10A and 13 of Block 45 of Atascadero1Colony,,g asmmon per map
recorded in Book 3AC of Maps, page 61 , Records of said County',
and also common to Lot 18 of Block 26 of Atascadero Colony as per
map recorded in Book 3AC of Maps, page 32, Records of said
County;
Thence S 22� 38' 29" E. a distance of 219. 19 feet to the POINT OF
TERMINUS in the centerline of said Corriente Road, said
being common to Lot 11 of said Block 45 and common point
to said Lot
18, as shown on said Maps.
r
- 1
1
END OF DOCUMENT VOL 3090PAGE 305
PLEASE INCLUDE INTO YOJ) COUNCIL PZVT . 2'/9/88
v IT117" _ D-2
o
.00", t 0
All
10
O a N
O�
O �
� n�
N
er
M
O g.
eo vd a H^
N /
O Q r f
9 F O
� l 9
Q
O 3
I? 6
'E
r" NLZ'SL
a� dqs \\
� < } r a O G ^FW ,� k-59•° � Ott � (III
�o� 3002' �_e e '•
6 4 ♦ tl
v
9 OE
Sr
LL.
N rci.seN ? "r
N °66js 3b
r
o- Q i °of
zstz 0
r
.L a Oqq
;\ 3
o
O � ~
N e
v
h ;obi r d N
V
N \ bysr I
�n to
'•�/� 0Lf /' SII
e
N n
N O \ 5
0 Q` 00,,V
Z �[o YlNV
0
3
ts
40
Q A oa n
Z
N
Gr p�i
JA7c -STEM� ---l
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager '
FROM: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Stop 19ign - Atascadero Avenue
DATE February 2, 1988'
Recommendation :
The Traffic Committee recommends that Council adopt
the attached resolution establishing a' Stop intersection
for northbound traffic on Atascadero Avenue at the
intersection with Santa . Ynez Avenue.
Background:
The Traffic Committee, in response to a -citizen
request , visited the site and observed the hazardous
condition of this intersection. At this loction
Atascadero Avenue is lined with mature trees which
obstruct the view of oncoming traffic from motorists
stopped on Santa Ynez. The installation of a 'Stop sign on
Atascadero Ave northbound at this intersection will
improve the safety at this intersection .
Fiscal Impact ;
The cost to the City is approximately $100 to be
paid out of the 1987/88 budget.
RESOLUTION NO 19-88
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A STOP
INTERSECTION ON ATASCADERO AVENUE
AT SANTA YNEZ AVENUE
WHEREAS, Section 4-2 .501 et seq. of the Atascadero
Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to
determine the location of STOP intersections , and to place
and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the
same; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee * has
recommended that establishing a STOP intersection on
Atascadero Avenue at Santa Ynez will alleviate a
hazardous traffic situation;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of
Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and
maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating a STOP
intersection at the .location listed above.
On motion by , and seconded by
,the, foregoing Resolution is hereby
adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote :
AYES;
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED;
ATTEST;
BOYD C. SHARTIZ, City Clerk BARBARA NORRIS, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM; APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
F ty RG SEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH
-11
Ci ' Attor y Director of Public Works
City Engineer
EXHIBIT A
HIGH SCHOOL
_i
cc
w
Q
a
0
W
O
U N
Q x
F� W
Q
•3Ad
Z3NA blNbS
posed Stop Sign
x
F
rr
q
rt
�°0 n • d°C
0
�n rn
GQ
e
-a ti
o -
D .
m
i
!G�
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council
VIA: Michael Shelton , City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen , Community Development Director I1G
SUBJECT: Proposed Zoning Text Amendment to Require
Conditional Use Permit Hearings, for ' Certain• Scale
Projects
BACKGRGUND
At the Louncil ' s February 9th meeting Councilperson Borgeson
spoke to the matter of the attached Staff Memorandum, which -
evaluated a number of large scale projects within the City which
had generally been approved at staff level ( .e. as Precise
Plans) . It was requested that this matter be placed ' on the
Council 's agenda for discussion . As indicated on page 3 it was
proposed that Council initiate a zoning ' text amendment t('>-
require
orequire that multi -family projects of 25 units or more be
subject to a Conditional Use Permit -.approval with commercial or
industrial projects of 15 , 000 _square footof gross floor area or
outdoor, storage area also being subject to CUP`s .
RECOMMENDATION :
Following Council review :and discussion direct'` staff to initiate
zoning amendments to require +CUFs at a selected threshold level
of scale .
Enclosure : November 24 , 1987 Staff Memorandum
cc : Planning Commission
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council November 24, 1987'
VIA: Michael Shelton, ,City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director *C
RE: Staff/Planning Commission/City Council Development Approval
Authority
BACKGROUND:
At the September 24, 1987 joint City Council/Planning Commission meet-
ing, there was discussion of the delegation of responsibilities for
various planning entitlements. Concern has been expressed by some
Council members as to which types .of projects should be required to '
have public hearings and before whom (Planning Commission or City
Council) . As a result, staff was requested to report back to the City
Council on two areas: (1') precise plans/conditional use permits and
(2) subdivision maps. This memorandum responds to the former and a
comprehensive re-write of the Subdivision Ordinance will be before the
Council in the near future dealing with the latter.
..ANALYSIS:
PreciseP1 -
an'
s
At
present, precise plans area.. approved by ,City staff
.following interdepartmental routing for appropriate conditions of ap-
proval. In last year's budget, some 70 precise plans were expected to
be processed. Notices of project approvals are published in the Atas
cadero News and abutting property owners are notified by mail. Indi-
viduals (including Planning Commissioners and City Council members)
may appeal any project within 14 days of staff approval. Absent an
appeal, "a project may proceed to the building permit stage.
Conditional Use Permits are a delegated responsibility to the
Planning Commission and require a 10 day advertised notice in the
newspaper together with notification of 'property owners within a 300 <
foot radius of the project site. Conditional use 'permits are final
after a Planning Commission determination unless there is an appeal by
an aggrieved applicant or other ,party (including Planning Commission
and City Council members) who have 14 days to appeal for a hearing
before the City Council.
The attached memorandum has been prepared to indicate the scale and
characteristics of some of the major precise plans and use permits
processed or in process. The following table summarizes the tYPes of
precise plans processed over the last 3 years.
Precise Plans: 1985 - 1987 '
Type of Project 1985 1986 _ 1987 (3/4)
Single Family/20% slope 26 32 31
Multi-family 23 23 5
Commercial/Industrial 15 9 5
Total No.
With respect to conditional use permits in 1986, 5 were for freeway
signs, 6 were for .-other types of signage approval and 11 were for uses
requiring CUP approval by the Planning Commission, for a total of 22
conditional use permits in the last year.
POLICY QUESTION:
The question at hand is whether the level of review for all the pro-
jects being processed by the City is sufficient to ensure both effi-
cient processing and carefully conceived project approvals. Related
to this is whether community notification is sufficient or has been
working, or whether a higher level of review would be appropriate in
certain instances. Staff supports the concept of precise plan ap-
provals being delegated to staff for routine approvals, e.g. , single
family residences on slopes over 20%. However , there are large scale
projects which should receive greater public scrutiny in the form of
M full public hearings before the Planning Commission. The 400 unit
VandenBerghe project, for example, could have theoretically have been
processed strictly as a staff review project. A determination was
made to require an Environmental Impact Report and one public informa-
tional hearing plus a full public hearing before the project was
approved.
Given the complexities and impacts that can occur with a larger scale
multi-family project, staff would recommend that certain scale multi-
family projects be the subject of conditional use permit hearings be-
fore the Planning Commission. In addition, in looking at commercial
Projects, it should be noted that most commercial centers come to the
Planning Commission for review solely on the basis of signage requests
that exceed ordinance provisions. Here again, it would appear in the
public interest to have larger scale commercial centers subject to use
permit hearings before the Planning Commission prior to approvals.
This would add relatively little time to the Department' s turn-around
standards adopted as part of the budget process. Precise plans are
normally completed within four weeks; conditional use permits can take
up to eight weeks. So there would be additional titre required in such
approvals, with the trade-off being a higher :Level of scrutiny and
more public.
A related question -is whether use permits (precise plans and -. condi-
tional use permits) should be subject to City Council public hearings.
Given the expectation of conceivably 70 precise plans and 20 use per-
mits annually, or 90 agenda items, staff recornmends basically retain-
2
ing the present system delegating minor use permits (precise plans) to "
administrative handling with appeals invited, but with CUPs being re-
quired for larger scale multifamily and commercial/industrial projects, .
in the future. A controversial project approval (or denial) by the
Planning Commission may still be brought before the City Council
through appeal.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Following discussion, as a scheduled item during a future Council
meeting, initiate zoning amendments which would serve to modify the
Zoning Ordinance' s provisions for precise plan and conditional use
permit approval to require CUPs for the following scale projects:
1. Multi-family residential projects: plus 25 units
2. Commercial/Industrial 15,000 square foot gross floor area
or outdoor storage area
HE:ps
Enclosure: Project Scale Comparisons Memorandum - November 17, 1987
(filer htrn1117)
3
' s
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
FROM: Doug Davidson, Associate Planner
RE: Project Scale Comparisons
DATE: November 17, 1987
A. EXISTING COMMERCIAL PROJECTS
Parking
Square Feet Spaces Req. Acres
1. Precise plan 2-86 (RMART) 86,000 285 8.3
3980 E1 Camino Real
2. C.U.P. 26-84 (Century 104 ,000 433 8.0
Plaza) 6905 E1 Camino
Real
3. R810106 :1 (Lucky' s) 70 ,000 322 6.75
8605 El Camino Real (adj . granted
for 300)
-4. Precise Plan 30-87 (Hotel 69, 696 322 6. 7
Park) 5805 Capistrano (adj . requested)
5. C.U.P. 2-83 (Colony Park/ 44 , 000 132 2. 43
Little) 3500 E1 Camino
Real
6. C.U.P. 10-84 (Comm. Park/ 40 ,000 83 3. 2
Filipponi) 3250 E1 Camino
Real
7. C.U.P. 21-84 (Colony Inn 26 , 400 183 5
Hotel/Restaurant) 3600
E1 Camino Real
, 8. Precise Plan 47-84 18, 000 84 1. 5
(Messer) 7425 E1 Camino (max. 20% adj .
Real granted for 67)
9. Precise Plan 43-86 13 , 000 33 . 40
(Golden West) 7500
Morro Road
• 10. Precise Plan 2-85 (Atas- 9, 000 14 2. 56
cadero Ford) 3850 El
Camino Real
*PROPOSED
s
11. Precise Plan 25-85 6,000 20 .40
("Red/Blue Barn") 8865
Morro Road
OTHER PROJECTS
C.U.P. 17-85 (Madrid 88 , 000 438 6.2
Plaza) (Previous Pro-
ject Approval) 8890
West Front
PROPOSED PROJECTS
(PRELIMINARY STAGE)
1. (Messer) 9255 El 82,200 274 6.4
Camino Real
2. (McNamara) 8260 E1 94,900 316 8.6
Camino Real
B. MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS
Existing/Approved
Parking
No. Units Spaces Req. Acres
1. Precise Plan 9-85 400 800 . 27
(VandenBerghe) 11300
Viejo Camino
2. Precise Plan 11-84 140 246 10
(Casa Camino) 10705
E1 Camino-Jornada
3. Precise Plan 9-84 64 112 4
(Montanaro) Viejo Camino
11145 E1 Camino Real
4. Precise Plan 36-85 36 64 2.2
5760 Ardilla (expired)
5. C.U.P. 7-86 (Shahan) 36 64 2
9333 Musselman (w/density bonus)
6. C.U.P. 25-84 (Heim) 32 57 2
5550/5560 Traffic Way
7. Precise Plan 14-86 28 50 1. 75
(Montanaro) 7450
Santa Ysabel
8. Precise Plan 41-84 11 20 .70 •
(Shadowbrook)
8435 San Andres
STAFF REPORT'
TO: City Council
VIA: Michael .Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry 'Engen, Community Development Director 4yo
SUBJECT: Request by Vineyard Christian Fellowship for City
Council to initiate Zoning Text Amendment to permit churches in
the CPK (Commercial Park Zone) .
BACKGROUND: Staff has been meeting with Mr. Chris Zellig of the
I
Vineyard Christian Fellowship in an attempt to find them an
appropriate location for their church. Their fellowship has, in
the past, been denied zoning change to establish their use in a
CS (Commercial Service) Zone owing to conflicts with community
objectives with regard to economic base development'.
ANALYSIS: The City Zoning Ordinance allows individuals to
request either the Planning commission or City Council to
initiate zoning _text `amendments. As indicated in the attached
letter, the Vineyard Christian Fellowship is requesting that
churches be"allowed to be made a permanent use in the CPK zone.
They have made tentative arrangements with an existing commercial
park development owner to utilize a presently vacant building for
Sunday services only with the use limited to office use during
the week.
As indicated in the request a numberof communities have
liberalized certain commercial zone: provisions to allow for
churches . Staff has a problem in light of Atascadero' s need for
prudent land use management practices with respect to its
existing and future economic base to allow uses such as churches
within such zones and with the compatibility of churches in that
type of setting on a permanent basis. However, we would concur
with Mr. Zellig' s` observation that in the short run the Economics
_Research Associates analysis has indicated an overbuilding in the
commercial market and that adaptive use of surplus space would
be beneficial in the short term to both the busyness sector and
uses such as Mr._ Zellig'' s for interim uses . Should the Council
concur it could initiate consideration for a` zoning text
amendment to .allow either permanent or interim use of CPK
facilities for churches. The fee for a zoning text amendment is
$550.00 and the Fellowship may be requesting a waiver of the fee.
Staff Report
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION: Initiate a Zoning Text Amendment to enable
establishment of churches as an interim use in CS and CPK zoning
districts. (Staff would prepare a report for public hearing
before the Planning Commissionand bring their recommendation
back to the City Council
ENCLOSURE: February 16, 1988 Letter from Vineyard Christian
Fellowship
Zoning Matrix Excerpt
RECEIVED 117cr-
76 1988
CHRISTIAN
FELLOWSHIP
February 16, 1988;
Department of Community Development
6500 Palma Ave.
Atascadero, Ca. 93422
Attn: Henry Engen
Dear Mr. Engen,
We, Vineyard Christian Fellowship, are requesting the City
Council to initiate a text amendment to allow churches, temples
and synagogues in Commerical Park zones.
As a six year old congregation of 150+ people, we have
rented a facility on a once a week basis from the Atascadero
School District. With our present facility available on a temporary
basis and with the obvious limitations of having to set up and
take down chairs, sound equipment , furnishings, - ect. , it has
caused us to look continually for a more suitable facility. Because
of the tremendours lack of existing assembly type buildings, we
have explored purchasing land and constructing as well as renting
and remodeling a building in an allowable zone. Constructing a
building to accomodate a congregation of our current size is cost
prohibitive and suitable facilities in present zoning usage is
also prohibitive. We have located suitable facilities in Commerical
Park zoning. We believe reasons for a text amendment in Commerical
Park zones are numerous as well as logical and hopefully favorable.
1 ) The first consideration is use compatibility. Presently
Commerical Park is an allowable use for Public Assembly
facilities. Public Assembly uses have many parallels to
church usage. Church usage takes place primarily on Sunday
and off-business hours, therefore there is little or no
conflict with existing businesses . In Commerical Park
zones parking standards accommodates church parking
requirements.
2 ) The second consideration is. use of existing commerical
building space. According to an independent study by
Economics Research Associates (E.R.A. ) , the city of
Atascadero is at a near term over-built commerical market .
E.R.A. ' s recommendation for adaptive use of existing
commerical structures supports our consideration of a
text amendment . Most Commerical Park zoning is presently
outside the 21 mile (San Anselmo to Santa Rosa) redevelop-
ment strategy by the E.R.A. , thus location of churches
in Commerical Park would be outside of the city' s
development strategy.
P.O. Box 2356 . Atascadero, CA 93423 . (805) 466.7389
3) The third consideration is the precedent of other local
cities that presently allow church use in equivalent _
Commerical Park zoning: Paso Robles , Grover City, San
Luis Obispo as well as Santa Barbara, Santa Paula,
Thousand Oaks , Ventura, Camarillo, Newberry Park,
Moorpark, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Tustin and Irvine.
4) The fourth consideration is one that may not be so
obvious. Due to the recent increase of theft and burglary
in Commerical Park businesses, off-business hour use
may help in crime prevention for these areas .
We would like to thank you for your consideration of this
request .
Sincerely, -
Chris Zillig
Representative/Vineyard Christian Fellowship
CZ/g1
0 - 0
_ CITY OF ATASCADERO A-ALLOWABLE C-CONDITIONAL
ZONING MATRIXI JUNE 27, 1983 -S-SUBORDINATE H-HISTORICAL
*SPECIAL CONDITION
LAND USE A RS RSF LSF RMF CN CP CR CS CT CPK IP I L LS P '
Accessory, Storage AIA A A JA A A A A A A 11A A A A
Agricultural, A A A A
Accessory
Agricultural A C C A
Processing
Amusement C C C A A C
Services
Animal Hospitals A C C A
Apparel and A A A
Finished Products C*
e is a Dea ers A A C A
and Supplies
Auto Repair C A S JA A A
and Services j
Bed and Breakfast ; C C C C A A A A S C A A
Broadcasting H H H 11 H I A JA A A A A I A .
Studios
Building Materials A* A A' A A A
and Hardware C*
Business Support H H H H JA* A A A A A C
Services
'Caretaker C'; C C C C C C C C C IC G C A
Residence 11 I
Cemetaries C C A
Chemical Products C 11C C
[ urc es an C
Related Activities
Collection AiJ A A JA A A A A A A A A
• Stations
'Concrete, Gypsum, & C C A
Plaster Products
Contract Constr- A A A A
tion services
Crop Production A C A
and Grazing _
Eating andA* A A A A S C C
Drinking Places I C*
Electronic and Scien A* 1 A A A
tific Instruments C*I
Farm Animal A �A A C A
Raising II I
Farm Equipment A A i A A A
and Supplies
Farm Labor Quarters A
Financial A A A S
_ Services
Fisheries and C i A C
~ Game Preserves
EETING AGENDA
T TEM N �- .
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council Members February 23 , 1988
FROM: Michael Shelton
City Manager
SUBJECT: SITE SELECTION NORTH COUNTY GOVERNMENT
CENTER
BACKGROUND:
At the February 16, 1988 County Board of Supervisors Meeting, the
Board directed County staff to research financing for the
acquisition and construction of a 'North County Government Center,
estimated to cost $3.15 million dollars. Staffwas also directed
to proceed with identifying an appropriate site.
The action of the Board stems from a long-range facility study.,
which ultimately proposes to provide full County services to the
north and south county areas through regional satellite
facilities . The action of the Board directed a phased approach
in the provision of satellite services-.
The first phase would require the acquisition of five acres, to
accomodate ultimate build-out, and build an initial first phase
facility to -house a Municipal Court, Sheriff Substation and
holding cells, and a 1,`900 square foot community room with
offices. Additional phased services would provide full services
including Social ' Services, Health,` Planning, Engineering,
Assessor and Clerk-Recorder services .
The action of the Board to identify a large enough site for full
consolidation suggests current health and municipal court
facilities, as well as additional full County services; will
eVentially be located at one regional north county facility.
CURRENT COUNTY NORTH COUNTY SERVICES :
North county Regional Health facilities are located in Atascadero
at the old hospital site. Municipal Court services are provided
in Paso Robles at the Paso Robles Municipal Court. All other
services are provided at the County Government Center in San Luis
Obispo.
SITE CONSIDERATIONS.
The location of _a County - Government Center provides many
advantages to the community in which the center is located. In
addition to the considerable convenience to the surrounding
public, the Center would provide local jobs, provide a
significant enhancement to the Local economy, and depending on
the location, may serve as a catalyst to arrest declining
economic conditions.
Staff feels strongly that the location of a government center in
Atascadero should be carefully considered for the following
reasons:
* Paso Robles already benefits and has benefited for many
years, being the site of major County, private, and State
services, including the Department of Motor Vehicles, E.D.D. ,
County fair grounds, airport, PG&E, and Pacific Bell.
* Atascadero-and surrounding communities, comprising the major
north county population base (providing the greater tax base)
should be the beneficiary of a local government center.
As a post Proposition 13 community, the need for a major
employment industry is important to the economic viability of the
community,
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council direct a letter be written in behalf of the Council
to the County Board of Supervisors requesting strong
consideration be given to locating the County Government Center
in Atascadero, The letter should request City representation
regarding the site selection process, and that public hearings be
held prior to formulating recommendations. It is further
recommended that Council consider the appointment of a Council/
staff/and business community committee to meet with District
Board representatives .
ATTACHMENTS:
Attached is the County staff report, dated February 16 1988,
and the Telegram Tribune North County Edition newspaper article,
dated February 18, 1988
•
Regarding the staff report, the Board went with Option 2 in the
south county and Option 2 in the north county.
In discussing the article with County staff, contrary to the
article, they state that there are no preconceived location
plans at present.
MS:kv
Attachments : County Staff Report
Telegram Tribune Article
i
w t � •
a
TO: BOARD OF SJPERVISJRS
4ILLIM L. 3 Ia1", .IJITY MII IISTRATOR
)ti T I=-
3R'JAIY 1
SJRJc ,T: JPJATE OF TAE LJ6 RA741-7G FACIL ITY PLAN
Suiiirnary
Several issues were your 3oard during consideration of the Longs
1ange Facility Pian ?i to resa,�ct to recommendations for north and sout'i
county. The issues primarily focused upon adequate planning for. long range
facility needs of these areas and the exploration of potential cost sharing
wit't cities in wIric,� facilities are constructed. In addition, staff vaas
directed to farther evall',3te the potential for �rrovi-Iing holding cells in the
Sheriff's Su'�station proposals. Staff has had an opportunity to examine these i
issues and is returni rrq to your 3oard with Ind ited recoi-r-r,anciati ons for
f,3ci l i ty devel oo„Ient ill the norVi and so.atrr county.
teco:ii-;Iendati on
That your Board approve, drase I of the Long Range Facility Plan, as modified
in this report, and direct staff to 7ursue financi �; of Phase I through r;Va i.
'-punt,' Sunarvisors' nssociati.an of ralifornia
(C'Ar) i'o.1i Loan Program.
Jiscussion
Your Board considered toe Long Range Facility y Plan last December, and
requested that additional information be arovided. Staff has had an
opportunity to re-exatni ne toe recor.rnendati ons for facility development it) the
north and south County areas. 'siren the recom-in-ndati ons for the Facility Plan
were originally developed, the long term objective was to eventually
consolidate all count .government services on regional sites in the north and
south county. The advantages to the general
public as well as the internal
efficiencies gained oy locating all services on a regional site are obvious.
No,vever, because of the substantial costs associated witi new construction and {
the reasonable_ condition of many of tie existing faci l i ties located in these
areas of tine county, tine recorriended plan phases tris process in both t,ie
10. tZ and south county.
With res ect to
P your 5oar�' s interest in sharing construction costs with the
cities which will benefit from the development of facilities, such as the
Sheriff's Substation holding cells, it is staff' s intention to pursue tris
Proposal further. Staff is hopeful that a cost sharing arrangement can be
reached with the cities regarding this issue.
1
i
0 0
I I
Fin-ally, staff has worked with tile Sheriff to deterni ne Vie need for nol di ng
cells in outlying areas of the county. The Sheriff ;las determined that two
detoxification cells and .WO holding cells at ear=l location will he
necessary. As a result, the constructiO" costs of tyle additional cells have
been incor?orated into til cost estirjates contained in tris report. It should
be noted that while the inclusion of the boldin, cells in the north and South
county substation proposals represents prurient planning, and is recommended
agreement has yet to be reached regarding their staffing and operation. It
could require as riany as ton additional officers to staff each 24-flour
substation operation l;';-,h holding cells.
Soutia County
The Long Range Facility Plan evaluated three options to address facility needs
of t:ie south county. °=ach option )rovile,d for varying degrees of
consolidation at tile Soutn County Regional CenL+ter site. The recommended
alternative contained in file faci 1 i t.y plan, :)pti nn 1 , oroposed to address t'l@
south county's space proble;>>s in two sta=les. Tfle first stage called for
constructing a new Sheriff' s Substation and Aunicil)al Court facility at tae
SOut'l County Regional ,enter. This favi l itv k•;oul,j address the space needs of
these two departments tier<a!_rrltr 1995-95, at an estimated cyst of $1 .94 Million.
The second stage of t;)is proposal orovidod for tl°e roe:;odelii.q of t,,tie vacated
`Junicipal Court buildirlla at t7e Grov^r Sit.y )ro�)erty. Tiis would acco.,a irate
oro.jected groi�rth for tiie 'Jealtil Dapart:,lent -irld Social Services and WOjl d not
. )P necessary until the ^arl y 19901S. T;le `^r.iai nd,r of t'le oro;ra:ns, such ��
;-1`ntal }ieaith and alco'iol Services, :vould cont, I- to '1t11ize rental space as
a ;majority of their yenta} exocns,'s are rii`t)urs?1 ),• ".fin stat. Tae cost of
the second stage is $13fi3Ojj, brirginn ,le total cost of Dation 1 to $2.125
ail l ion.
.1s a result of input
fro:-:,I your 3oard, staff ,las :aodifieti ear=l option contained
in tae racility Plan to include holdiig cells ;o>� Sheriff' s substations.
3110w is a saa,�,lary of t;i1 nodi fied options:
Option 1 - iodified/$2.37 1illion/13,240 .Square Feet
Tni s 0941-i3n basically :)rovi des for the ;c-roe of 114orle described as Option
1 in uie original Facility Plan. riowever, inclusion of holding cells in
tine construction esti--fate has increased the cost of this option by
$245,000, bringing tie total cost of Ootioil 1 to $2.37 ±;lillion.
Option 2 - iodi f i ed/t4. 1 -li l l i on/31 , 140 Square ;eet
TMs a,)tiorl proposes to inraVe all i?xisting so;it.l county operations at
the Regional Center. Again, tais option basically }provides for the sari-2
scope of work as Option 2 in tie orijinal Facility Plan. However, the
construction costs have been increased to reflect inclusion of holding
cells for the Sheriff' s Substation. This proposal is estimated to cost
approximately $1.1 illioi. 3ecause talis proposal includes the sale of
the rover City oronnrty, valued at $&00,000, the total
cost of tie option would ,t)J r-,duced to $,x.} ;
:ii t } ion.
C1ation 3 - Aodified/54.7 5 'Ii llion/35,740 Square Feet
T!ii s ')')ti on proposes to 1 aCat,' all ';.'xis ting soiit.'i county Servi Ct's a4 1;",1e
egi.n!1a1 0-!lter •_!Id -'Sta61ish full-service 1)r i,i'--n offices for -iie
Assessor, Ll er'K-:Z�COrd''r', �l�nni!in ail,! Enginecrinq leoarty;lents. As wi til
0-)tions l and ', t'te constr�.iction costs :)f t'lis option have been
increased to reflect ti? inclusion of loldinn cells, bringinq tie total
sost to LS.34!. -ni i 1 i ori. Alain, tli s i�loul d y.)e )f fset oy 3pproxi!1latel y
$iijO,GiJ frol tie s,il,, of tie ";rover City proper't'✓, roduciwll t e cost )-
tlis OptJoli to $4.74S' ..iillion.
S-)d '-,o+inty Recdmilx-ndati ori
,rks your Board is a.+ar�, tele process of donsoliIating services began in t'ie
south county wi tri tl7_' our base of the Zegi oval Conter site in tie ,aid-1 J7J' ;.
As oirt of the initial d;2vel n)vaent of this property, a Board arpproved -Master
,)]an •.gas arepared o;it a anased auoroacn to consolidating allso!�rl
county services ou tae site. Currently, a l i arary, cogriuni t`,•' bui 1 d i n an,,]
road yard are located at tie �Iegional Center. Tic reca°xnendations contain-id
in tie original Long Range Facility Plan proposal were devei opAd :1i ti t1 i s
gradual consolidation concent in Mind. Aft�2r re-tixaminirig the options
nrese:ntnd in tie Lon; Rangy Facility Plan, it was concluded trial; phasing, t+i;-
co:'isol i datio-.1 ot ser'v i cas at Vie �„"ii ona i Cantr stili r^DreSr'rlt5 t'1e -1031
oruIcnt ,wjr-oac7 t] 3' iressi n; S,)!at'.'l coilni_-"/ space
T i? `Jrad„a i CorlsoI l't-,tZiaii a o)r oa- �1 11a t-.-Io -13I jor 3 1-v..i taIes: it re,-Jucos n-2
i"•1^a3!li 3t=' financial b'1t";jn•1 of tit? pro j�c t and it 3l l oOls 1-le county to Conti rig!"
to use i;i'? :rover tit )roperty '.d:lich aflequltoly ':lents -C;1,210`7.1 ter"1 1 i” � 1f
SoCidl S'rvic?s aid t'io Tal tl Denartient. It •do:ll+i �)'' staff's intl?ntion t•
►"�'l ocate t'i"Se Ser+1i ?s t0 t 1e Ze'1 i 0'1?l ^'lt?i' l`] n f;`l' ar,ad�'r it t'✓ 7roJ;?y•a.y'
i s no 1 ons^r 3,)]-,2 t7 ac(.o!:I:i-jda t}a Mel r Sna e rn!'1')1 rr"lents or 1 S ol:'lerwi se
fina-ici.aliv
.di t i respect t:) est l 1 sni n11-serviea arai7C l )f ices f--)r R1 anni
�.n;i neeri nq, Assossor and tae J1 erg- ecorder, it is r2cofn,`1<2nried tl-iat tni s
addressed on a Case- y-case basis. Staff nas esti ,sated t-rat regional
faci 1 i ties for lese d-D.art-tants would cost aaoroximateI y $r)5,J00 to
construct. Annual staffing costs have been esti.,iated to be ap.aroximlatoly
$545'0'JO. It is recognized that irloroved pudic service and operational
effirieicies can 1e gainers tirougn regionalizing. 4o-viever, the expense
associated witli orovidin_1 facilities and stiff, cau;)led with tie difficulty of
s�iporvising satellite offices, make Bill-service regional offices less
advantageous at this tine.
in src;rlary, staff is recon-n=on:lifig that your 3)arl direct staff to move forward
A th Jati on 1 as mods l i 2d i n 't_1i s rouort at a c?si o $;'.37 ,ii l l i ori. Should
your !ioaro concur is i ti t:l i 5 aparoaC!i, staff !Mould ).jrsue fi nanci nq for t!IL
project through lie CS.yt: Pool Loan progra-R.
''forth County
The Lo:ij Range Facility �l an ex3mined fo..ir options t-) jddress spac^ needs i}f
_ the nort'rl county. Kaci o;atin-1 provided for var:i,,ig es of consolidation
o. services at an undeterr.;incd regional site. The original proposal
recom'.1eided in tyle Plan, gptil)n 1 , called for constructing a
'1:anici la1 Girt and Sheriff's Sl)statio�l on a 2 1/2' acr- parcel of ;property in
talc north : JuntI Ll addition, q;l tion i )roDosed a second ?hase to take place
in the early 1990s. Tnis ,would involve the re�iorelinq of tile vacated
i•lunicipal Court facility ijl naso ?opies to accon^ro fate the needs of the Health
Depart,ient. The 0e;partment of General Services estimates that it would cost
t2.4 million to acco:tipl i sh Option 1 . iecause t;ri s aroposal called for the
purc0ase of a 2 1/,? acre parcel, it was staff's intention to gradually
consolidate all of tale services in the north cpunty at a regional site as
roilies becafne availaolc.
As a result of input from your Board during discussion of north county
options, staff }`ias made several modifications to each notion. I=irstly,
holding cells for the Sheriff's Substation have been added to each option. In
addition, each option reflects the purchase of up to a 5 acre parcel as
:);)posed to a 2 Ile acre parcel . The additional acreaq•-2 give the county
greater flexibility in %iakinj long tern decisions for facility development ijl
north county. Finally, an additional option, L� 1ic;i has not previously been
discussed, ;las been created. Tnis option oroposes to construct a Municipal
Cj�
Court, Sheriff's SuSstation and a coiunit.v roo:a. 3e10w is a surmilary of the
Modified options:
�ltirpn 1 - i`9.a•i7 lei/bZ. �, Aillio;l/12,3:;-J sglj3re Feet
"lis 0 )+-ian Jasically ;Jrovides for trie scor)i: of wor: described as option
l in -the original 'acility plan. However, "Lol� inclusion of the holding
• cells aAd tale purohasn of a larder parcel of )ro.Derty in tale construction
esti:iate has i lcrease i tae cost of this -0- tion ,y $495,000, bringing t,`le
total cast of :)Dtioo i to $,x'.33 nil Iion.
Jnion 2 - 'nodiFled/$3.1 ii11ion/l ,r ;0 ' 4;aar .-3: t
Tnis a:?tion is similar to Option 1 ill t'lht it ;hr:oposes to purchase
approxi-;ratel y 5 acres to acco,.ihlodat,, t;lr. 10,1:, tart i facility needs in the
north county. do•.aever, in addition to tale construction of the :Municipal
Court and Sheriff's Substation, a 1 ,9-Yj s_laare foot co!rrhunity room with
offices would also he included. Tlerefor,, L.
cost estimate was
increased to reflect a co!"uni ty roo-i, holding cQ11 s for tiie substation,
and he purc;lase of a larger aarcel of oroonrty. I t is esti::rated that a t
building of this size trill cost $3..15 ;aillion.
Or-)tion 3 - .iodi fi 4 a/$1.,�5 :li l l i on/21 ,30a Square =yet
This option to cons tr'1ct a muni ci Dal .curt, )iln-ri ff' S 3_IbS tIti or, r
an:i a r 1i,^ai pea i t;r fact I i ty on a 5 acre ;pari:-1 1 ocat-ed in t7e iort-il
,
courlty. The total cost of constructinq a Juilding of talis size is t1.40'
mi 11 1 on. FW' cost of tills option wouldo0 o�f fset by tile_ sale of t:l^
vacated Paso .1obles ;-lu-hicipal Court sit>>, r2+i.-ing the total cost ;o
approximately $4.25 jaillion.
:)ration 4 - _1odified/$4. 1 `Zillion/3?,000 3.3uare r=n.3t
Tnis option calls or - x to
f ?ar,na,ing 3aJr0.,l�rak.cly ) 3�ros and relocatinu all
existiila nort-1 county s•3rvic,3s to tris site. T'r? cost of this option has
been updated to reflect the inclusion of holding cells, a larger parcel
of oronerty and a regional health facility. It is estimated that a
b:li1ding of this size �ai11 cost $5.4 !r�iIlion, including land
acquisition. The cost of this option would be offset by the sale of the
old Atascadero Hospital and naso Robles �Unici pal Court sites and lease
payaent savings, reducing the total cost to $4.7 million.
Option 5 - `4odifiedM.4 Billion/36,600 Square Feet
This option calls for relocating all existing services to a single site
and establishing regional full-service offices for Planning, Assessor,
Clerk-Recorder and Engineering Departments on that same site. As with
options 3 and 4, the construction costs have been increased to reflect
the inclusion of holding cells, a larger parcel of property and a
regional health facility. It is estimated that a facility of this size
would cost approxi-l►atel v $6.1. million, including land acquisition. The
cost of tlis )roposal would be offset by the sale of the Paso Robles
Aunicipal Court and tle old Atascadero hospital properties and
termination of lease payments, reducing the total cost of this option to
approximately $5.4- million.
Aorth County teco:,xnendation
-after re-examining the options presented in the Long Range Facility Plan, it
4as concluded that oiiasinq the consolidation of services at a regional site
reoresents t'te -most prudent approacil to addressing north county's spare needs.
The gradual consolidation approach i`7as two ina jor advantages: it reduces the
H.nedia-'Cp financial ' urden of the project and allows t`ie county to continue to
use the old Atascadero Hospital site ,Oich adequately meets the long tern
needs of tie 0ep3rt-!eit of S_-)cial Services. It would be staff's intention to
rolocate Social Services to a reiional center site when t;ie Atascadero
lospital site is na longer sufficient to accom?.iodate Ie depart=tent's needs.
1-lith respect to establishing full-service branch offices for P 1 ann11I,
Engineering, Assessor and the Clerk-Recorder, it is recommended tnat this be
addressed on a case-)y-case basis. Staff has estimated that regional
facilities for these departments world cost approximately $865,000 to
construct. Annual staffing costs have been estimated to be approximately
$560,000. It is recognized that improved public service and operational
officiencies can he gained through ' regionalizing. However, the expense
associated Epitl providing facilities and staff, coupled with tine difficulty
of -supervising satellite offices, make full-service regional offices less
idvantageous at this ti�ae.
In su-rr:nar_y, it i s reco-r-vended t:iat your Uoard direct staff to stove forwardwith Option 1 as ;irodified in this report at a cost U?.38 million. Should ,your
3oard conc!jr with Viis approach, staff would pursue financing of this project
_througn the CSAC Pool Loan orogram and move forward with the site selection
orocess.
-:inancinq
It is reco;nmend2d twat; . ,'rre county participate in the California Supervisors'
Association of California (CSAC) Pool Loan program to finance the recon?nded
construction projects identified in trais report for the north and south
county. This would necessitate borrowing a little over bS Million and result
. in annual estimated deaf service pay;cents of approximately 440,0f)Q over a
tW."ItY year period. tev�n.a�� generated from the Criminal Justice Temporary
Construction and Courthouse Co=nstruction Funds are expected to offset this
annual dent service payment for t}le court and substation facilities. Should
Your Board concur with this reco-nendation. staff will return at your next
meeting with a com'.)rehensive report on the CSAC Pool Loan program.
J906U
i
l
6'A, ` ' �.'> a+.� , : f, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1988
o � ya- 5
n pn. myope oR
�p o .moo b
to
ti obV :0
c �A �' m oo o y coos
Board
�+,t ,..,•w ae y .-. 5• y C y p p�p "�o ❑ '"'.C
.+.C,•(tip ,y.,, C' rte„fD .r, y,w p O �p ..
ry ; � o b •� �e to�yn��c�. lra
y i d cv ,p p o b c w co 9 Q
Er.
En
g •f
O �"f ►��-m 0 b w O p.fnp
O
North offices
o 5 c �r5 0 oc a `9 `°T Er° Err ' "Although it looks expensive and
By Patrick O'Sullivan - g P
.c Q o movingtoo fast ...it's never going
' " m it , p !..kok-v Telegram-Tribune to be lss expensive," he said. "We
� bo
b�.5 w o o o 5. 4.• .�..�� I SAN LUIS OBISPO — County spent a lot of money hopping one
ov E°° w w o E ., ., o S o a �' 0 government offices are coming to barrier at a time.":; 1.r
w
DIV g z 0 (3 l M•! the North County. He pointed out how the ,Caunty
9 CD b o ��'� w a Plans to build a county govern- sheriff's substation had to move
0 0 o 8 'C/> ment center north of Cuesta Grade from the Templeton office it shared
R Q o y �• �: ~" o won unanimous a royal Tuesda with the California Highway Patrol
fp o f as o m C" g 5'o o' u C3� PP y q
o o;; g ,F 00 `� w 5 o M^ from the county Board of Supervi-, when the CHP said it needed the
y m a sors. room.
r"5S w 5 c o � gip. 1 Included will be a new sheriff's "Too soon thaf facility;was to(
cQ G 5'n z; n'a y M p W. ...�.
5•;9, E=: p t;-y a+ g. ,.. tl �.�.p ... ,� , substation with holding cells, a Mu- small,"he said' The substation is It
L' �' �' t:o- i nicipal Court and a 1,900-square-foot the process of being movedtg at
" a H community meeting room. office in Paso Robles.
=± o ,p ;Y�• •ti p E; a °� County Analyst Debbie Hossli said The need for afull-se4'trlCe oral
=3 the project is the first step In County.facility will cokle Aoonei
establishing a full-service county than anyone probably'dikdts, hi
�c 8. •v �,
A y !✓o x o �,�,,y � services center in the North County. said.
• uicklthose needs wi
o G ° 0'T b m approved Tut sdayi for similar
the South mature iroect "Hows anyone's guess,"hes dl
`p rA o F: y o "t County Regional Center, the Supervisor Carl Hysen, whose dis
G o projects will be the first major tract includes part of thisLortl
reach of county offices Into the County, supported Dtefe r'.
Eoutlying areas. proposal for more offices ao
H o y; E Estimated cost for the North "It's false economy to be tot
5 5 Cr y County project is $3.15 million, said short-sighted,"he said.
°a c°: o' o o�► 0 Hossli. Target date for completion Hossli said the county's goal re
cams � -*aN y
� is about 2S'i years,she said. mains to build the full-service-cen
d° A search will now begin for a 5-
were
Previous plans to buy a 2%-acr
�� acre site.said County Administrator site were chanced to 5 acres so i
ti tv ti ti to p William Briam. Hossli said she will could accommodate full-service op
be talking to officials with the Paso erations in the future.
S o �,g oa c –• 0 Robles redevelopment project about upervtsor i Coy said he wa
'Coo S d m w ' a possible site. worried that building more office
�.�o q r.A. a '�" too soon would encourage hiring c
�^ y as a w Supervisor Jerry Diefenderfer,
o c R y ;, o w,y r, � P ymore employees.
y •, , E;r.A, o�e M ; who represents much of the region, "I have an inherent fear when yo
13 M g � 5,y urged the board to build a$5 million build a large facility you tend to fE
5 a y 0 , full-service coLmty office complex in it up with new people,"he said.
M o 0 5 s o. o Q the North County now. It would Briam said the county does nc
g 6- S g�a a include satellite offices for planning, have the money to hire more en.
v~ y o c o engineering, assessor, county clerk ployees.It's too soon establish sate
c and a regional health facility. lite offices in the outlying areas;h
y g m " Gr `p E a CD
C-) He said the area's population will said.
o,� a `° y o" continue to grow, as will frustra- Diefenderfer and Hysen agreed t
M a y o a '"5' Cn tions with trying to get to county the smaller project with the ide
o°+' c offices in downtown San Luis Obis- that the goal will remain a ful
po. service facility at the new site.
Exhibit B
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
The project has been divided into 8 tasks as detailed in
Exhibit A, Responsibilities of Consultant. The lump sum
fee by task to complete each task of the scope of work is
provided in Table B-1 . These estimates include all labor
and direct expenses to complete the work. CH2M HILL's total
lump sum fee to complete the master plan and prepare maps
for your wastewater collection system is $24 ,900 .
Specific items included within this estimate are noted below
for reference:
o Flow Data Analysis--Sufficient flow data must be
collected from the wastewater treatment plant.
The resulting flows will be critical for evalua-
tion of the sewer system.
o Future Land Use--CH2M HILL has a planner experi-
enced with future growth projections.
o Computer Modeling--Review of the City' s collection
system maps will provide the basis of hydraulic
analysis of the trunk sewer system.
o Citv Involvement--We have developed our approach
to your project to. include your staff.
This estimate is representative of a flexible program. As
the program progresses , the approach can be adapted to meet
the critical needs as they are identified by your staff or
the CH2M HILL team.
SFP73/053
L_
Table B-1
City of Atascedero
1 Sewer System Master Plan
C PAYMENT SCHEDULE '
Total
Fee
Task
1 .0 Identify Existing Conditions
1.1 Prepare Project Methodology 1,300
1 .2 Review Existing 'Information 600
Task 1 .0 Subtotal 1,900
2.0 Review Wastewater Flow Data
2.1 Develop RDI/I Hydrograph 1,000-
2 .2 Develop Flow Allocation Factors 400
2.3 Calculate Groundwater Infiltration 700
2 .4 Calculate Sanitary Flow Peaking Factors 500
Task 2 .0 Subtotal 2,600
3 .0 Project Future Land Use
3 .1 Identify Project Growth 700
3 .2 Delineate Basins 600
3 .3 Project Land Use 2 ,000
3.4 Calculate Sanitary Flows 1,300
Task 3 .0 Subtotal 4 ,600
4 .0 Develop Design Flows 1,200
5 .0 Determine System Capacity
5 .1 Inventory Major Trunk Sewer System 1 ,600
5 .2 Conduct Hydraulic Modeling 2 ,000
Task 5 .0 Subtotal 3,600
6 .0 Develop Recommended Plan 2 ,500
7. 0 Prepare Plan Maps
7 .1 Plot Existing Sewer Facilites 1 ,600
7 .2 Plot Capacity Improvements 2, 300
7 .3 Plot Future Collection System Extensions 2 ,500
Task 7. 0 Subtotal 6,400
8 .0 Provide Computer Hydraulic Model 2 ,100
TOTAL PROJECT 24 , 900
SFP73/054