HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 12/13/1988 BOYD C. SHARITZ
CITY CLERK
A G E N D A
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6500 PALMA
FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM
DECEMBER 13, 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
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 vzi ✓ 7 . Police Facility
2 . North Coastal Transit /%Of,% Committee
3 . S.L.O. Area Coordinating 0"" 8 . Atas . Lake Acquisition
Council Committee
4 . Traffic Committee ✓ 9 . Business Improvement
5 . Solid/Hazardous waste Mgmt9 Assoc .
Committee 10 . Pavilion Committee
6 . Economic Opportunity Commission"P-11 . Tree Committee ftAy'
• 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 staff .
Any person desiring to submit written statements to the
Council may do so by forwarding nine (9) copies to the City
Clerk by 5 : 00 p.m. on the Wednesday preceding the Council
Meeting.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are considered
to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form
listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these
items . A member of the Council or public may, by request, have
any item removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then•be
reviewed and acteduponseparately after the adoption of the
Consent Calendar.
1 . NOVEMBER 22, 1988 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
� J2. NOVEMBER 29, 1988 JOINT COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
3, APPROVAL OF FINAL PARCEL MAP 19-87 , 2800 ARDILLA (Norman
Ruskovich/Central Coast Engineering)
4 . APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 24-86, 7425 EL CAMINO REAL (Don Messer/Cuesta Engineer-
ing)
5 . APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 26-86, 7408-7478 SANTA YSABEL (Richard Montanaro)
6. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR DESIGN OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT INTER-
SECTION OF SANTA ROSA ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL
7 . RESOLUTION NO. 112-88 - APPROVING THE SALE OF BONDS FOR
STREET ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area)
8. SENATE RESOLUTION 46 - LIST OF MAINTENANCE &CONSTRUCTION
NEEDS FOR 1990-2000
9 . RESOLUTION 114-88 - AUTHORIZATION TO PARTICIPATE IN CAREER
OPPORTUNITIES DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
10. CLAIM OF BRETT MORRIS - RECOMMEND DENIAL
2
11. RESOLUTION NO. 115-88 - AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER AND AD-
MINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR TO OPEN CITY SAFE DEPOSIT
BOX
12. RESOLUTION NO. 113-88 - AUTHORIZING PERMANENT BUILDING IN-
SPECTOR POSITION
13 . AUTHORITY FOR LEASE/PURCHASE OF COPY MACHINE
14 . DIAL-A-RIDE RE-BID AUTHORIZATION
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES:
1 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16-88 APPEAL, 12405 SANTA ANA ROAD
(First Nationwide Bank/Volbrecht Surveys)
2. RESOLUTION NO. 110-88 - APPROVING PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO
FARMERS MARKET LAYOUT
3. ORDINANCE NO. 184 - ZONE CHANGE 14-88 CLARIFYING THE 1/2
ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE STANDARD FOR LSF-X AND RSF-X SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS (First reading, by title only)
4 . ORDINANCE NO. 183 - AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 119 RELATING TO
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES (First reading, by title only)
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. ORDINANCE NO. 185 - ACCEPTING THE STATE PENAL CODE REQUIRE-
MENTS RELATING TO THE SELECTION AND TRAINING STANDARDS OF
PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS ( Second & final reading, by title
only) (Cont' d from 11/8/88 & 11/22/88)
2. RESOLUTION NO. 111-88 - MODIFYING EFFECTIVE DATE TO CHARGE
VARIOUS FEES ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 100-88
3. AMENDMENT TO SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CONTRACT EXTENDING TERM-
FOR AN ADDITIONAL TWO-YEAR PERIOD - WIL MAR DISPOSAL (Cont' d
from 11/22/88)
4. ORDINANCE NO. 186 - CHANGING TIME OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
FROM 7 :30 P.M. TO 7 :00 P.M. ( Second & final reading, by
title only)
3
D. NEW BUSINESS:
1. CONSIDERATION TO INITIATE ZONING AMENDMENT REGULATING OFF-
SITE SALES OF ALCOHOL (Cont'd from 10/25 & 11/22/88)
2. RESOLUTION NO. 109-88 APPROVING APPLICATION FOR GRANT
FUNDS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA WILDLIFE COASTAL AND PARKLAND
CONSERVATION BOND ACT OF 1988
3. DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN AND TASK FORCE
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION/AND OR ACTION:
1 . City Council
2 . City Attorney
3 . City Clerk -
4 City Treasurer
5 . City Manager - A. Downtown lot acquisition
COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION AT 7 :00 P.M. , WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 14 ,
1988, IN THE NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY ON OLMEDA AT TRAFFIC WAY
IN ATASCADERO, TO CONSIDER TESTIMONY REGARDING HIGHWAY 41 .
4
MEETIN AGENDA�_ �
DAT Z 13 � ITEM N -G-..�..._
•
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 22, 1988
The regular meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to
order at 7 : 30 p.m. by Mayor Borgeson, followed by the Pledge of
Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
All Present: Councilmembers Dexter, Lilley, Mackey, Shiers and
Mayor Borgeson
Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Henry Engen, Commun.
Devel . Dir. ; Paul Sensibaugh, Pub . Works Dir. ;
Chief Bud McHale, Police Dept. ; Mark Joseph,
Admin. Svcs . Dir. ; Jeff Jorgensen, City Atty. ;
Boyd Sharitz, City Clerk; Cindy Wilkins , Acting
• Deputy City Clerk
COUNCIL COMMENT
Mr. Windsor introduced the City' s new Administrative Services
Director, Mark Joseph, who is to begin employment on Monday,
November 28th.
Chief McHale introduced Bodo, of the City' s K-9 unit, who began
employment in mid-August.
COMMUNITY FORUM
Steve Terry, 9080 San Rafael, voiced opposition to the site on
San Rafael Rd. under current study as a school site by the AUSD,
and he asked for the City' s support by requesting that the AUSD
abandon their plans due to serious traffic problems which would
be generated. He noted that 74 signatures have been gathered on
a petition which will be submitted at the next School Board
meeting.
Sue Terry, resident, elaborated on points stated in the petition
referenced by the previous speaker.
Nancy Hyman, 10760 Colorado, reiterated comments of the previous
two speakers and expressed opposition to the location of an addi
• tional school in the City' s southwest quadrant.
1
•
Kathleen Daly, resident, read a letter to Council expressing the
consensus of the residents in subject neighborhood to oppose the
location of a school at the prospective San Rafael site .
Councilman Lilley noted that this topic was discussed at the last
City/School Committee meeting, where concerns were expressed
regarding the need to attempt to develop a master plan and that
the City and schools coordinate on school site acquisition.
COMMITTEE REPORTS - Nothing to report
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. November 8, 1988 City Council Minutes
2. City Finance Department Report - October, 1988
3 . City Treasurer' s Report - October, 1988
4. Approval of TPM 17-88, 11200 Santa Ana Rd. (Kamm & Dohan
Partnership/Twin Cities Eng. )
5. Approval of request for time extension for TPM 30-85, 905 •
ECR (Donald Rochelle, et al)
6. Res. No. 108-88 - Establishment of stop intersection on
Cabrillo Ave. at its intersection with Ensenada Ave.
Ernest Dillon pulled Item A-6 , Councilman Shiers pulled Item A-5
and Mayor Borgeson pulled Item A-4 for separate discussion.
Motion: By Councilwoman Mackey to approve Items A1-3 ,
seconded by Councilman Dexter; passed unanimously
by roll-call .
Re: Item A-4 : Mr. Engen gave staff report and explained why the
Planning Commission asked for deletion of #11 on the Conditions
of Approval . There was no public comment.
Motion: By Councilwoman Mackey to approve TPM 17-88 ( Item
A-4 ) , seconded by Councilman Lilley; passed by
3 : 2 roll-call , with Councilman Shiers and Mayor
Borgeson dissenting.
Re: Item A-5: Councilman Shiers noted discrepancies in the total
acreage; Mr. Engen responded that there may be a typographical
error, but the final map will require exact acreage figures .
There was no public comment.
Motion: By Councilman Dexter to approve Item A-5 , seconded
by Councilman Shiers; passed unanimously by roll-
call .
2
Re: Item A-6 : Ernest Dillon, 5330 Ensenada, indicated he
brought this issue before the Traffic Committee for considera-
tion, and he urged that stop signs be placed on Ensenada in the
locations where they would be most helpful, instead of the
location proposed. Mr. Sensibaugh emphasized that stop signs
aren't utilized for speed control as a matter of policy; Chief
McHale noted that there are increased patrols in subject area to
curtail speeders .
Motion: By Councilman Shiers to approve Res . 108-88 (Item
A-6) , 'seconded by Councilman Lilley; passed unan-
imously by roll-call.
It was suggested that Mr. Dillon contact the Public Works Depart-
ment in a few months relative to the effectiveness of this
action.
* DUE TO TECHNICAL PROBLEMS WITH THE RECORDING EQUIPMENT,
MAYOR BORGESON CALLED A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS AT 8 : 25 P.M.
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES:
1. Request for extension of Solid Waste Collection Contract-
Wil-Mar Disposal
Mr. Windsor gave staff report. He suggested he and Mr. Sensi-
augh be directed to meet with representatives from the Chamber of
Commerce to discuss development of an annual City-wide clean-up
program with Wil-Mara
Public Comment
An attorney from the Law Office of Betty Sanders was present to
request extension of subject contract on behalf of Wil-Mar Dis-
posal.
Tom Bench, resident, noted that San Luis Obispo has implemented a
recycling program in conjunction with its disposal service.
Motion: By Councilwoman Mackey that Council authorize a
two-year extension of the contract with Wil-Mar
for solid waste collection and authorize the City
Attorney to draw up the necessary resolution,
seconded by Councilman Dexter; passed unanimously.
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. Ord. No. 185 - Accepting the State Penal Code requirements
relating to the selection and training standards of public
safety dispatchers (First reading, by title only) (cont' d
from 11/8/88)
3
Chief McHale gave staff report, noting that, upon adoption of the
proposed ordinance, the City will receive a reimbursement of all
training Costs . There was no public comment.
Motion: By Councilman Dexter to adopt Ord. 185 on first
reading, by title only, seconded by Councilman
Shiers; passed unanimously by roll-call .
2. Proposed ordinance prohibiting abandonment of waterfowl at
Atas. Lake (cont'd from 11/8/88)
A. Ord. No. 182 - Amending Title 4 of the Atas. Muni.
Code, entitled Animals, relating to the abandonment of
waterfowl at Atas. Lake (Second & final reading, by
title only)
There was no public comment.
Motion: By Councilman Shiers to adopt Ord. 182 on second
reading, by title only, seconded by Councilwoman
Mackey; passed unanimously by roll-call .
3. Proposed ordinance changing time of City Council meetings
from 7 :30 to 7 :00 p.m. (cont' d from 11/8/88)
A. Ord. No. 186 - Amending Title 2 of the Atas. Muni.
Code, entitled "Administration" (First reading, by
title only)
Public Comment
Maggie Rice, Chamber of Commerce, encouraged the proposed 7 : 00
p.m. starting time and that meetings continue to be held on
Tuesdays , noting that local organizations have tailored their
meetings around those of the City Council.
Lon Allan, Atascadero News Editor, responded to comments made by
Mayor Borgeson regarding publication of agenda items .
Motion: By Councilman Shiers to adopt Ord. 186 on first
reading, by title only, seconded by Councilwoman
Mackey; passed unanimously by roll-call .
4 . Regulations relating to sale of alcoholic beverages-
Request continuance until meeting of December 13 , 1988
(Verbal)
This item continued to 12/13/88, as requested by City Manager.
Mr. Windsor noted both Items 4 and 5 on the agenda are listed as
4
a courtesy so Council and the public are aware that staff is
working on them.
5. Regulations relating to anti-loitering - Request continuance
of this item to .near future agenda (Verbal)
This item continued, as requested by City Manager.
D. NEW BUSINESS: w
1. Award of contract for traffic signal at intersection of ECR
& Santa Rosa Road 0z4'
�x
Mr. Windsor noted the title of this item should be amended to
reflect award of contract for design of subject traffic signal .
Mr. Sensibaugh gave staff report.
Motion: By Councilman Dexter to approve the selection of
Keith B. Higgins & Assoc. , Inc. , of Gilroy to
perform the design for the Santa Rosa/ECR Traffic
Signal, and that Council direct staff to bring
back a contract in the amount of $10, 600 plus
allowance for FAU mandatory plan checks not in-
cluded in the RFP. Motion seconded by Councilman
Shiers; passed unanimously by roll-call .
2. Request for Lewis Ave. Bridge fee refunds
Mr. Engen gave staff report. There was no public comment.
Motion: By Councilman Dexter to approve the requested fee
refunds and authorize staff to refund $2 ,518 . 54 to
Dr. John Anderson and $2,601 .00 to Steven Yung,
seconded by Councilwoman Mackey; passed unani-
mously by roll-call .
3 . Request by Friends of the Library regarding hours of
operation of the Atas. Branch Library (Verbal)
Public Comment
Sarah Gronstrand spoke on behalf of Friends of the Library in
support of this request, feeling this is a matter for discussion
• between the City and the County who are responsible for the
library. Mrs . Gronstrand noted a great increase in library
patronage and that many would like the library to be open on
Mondays.
5
Council consensus was for support of this request and Mr. Windsor
was requested to review this with appropriate County personnel .
4 . Status of No. Co. Govt. Center site selection (Verbal)
Mr. Windsor gave staff report, referencing the Atas . Mutual Water
Board' s position as outlined in its letter dated 11/10/88, in
agenda packet. Council expressed concern about the mixed mes-
sages the City is getting from the Water Co. regarding who they
will serve, Councilman Lilley referencing a 10/16/81 letter from
the Water Board' s then Supt. , Elwood Peterson, to the City re-
laying its decision to grant water service to the Rochelle
property.
Mr. Engen noted that the County' s Site Selection Committee ex-
pects to make its final report to the Co. Board of Supvrs . at
its December 6th regular meeting.
Motion: By Mayor Borgeson to direct Mr. Windsor to draft a
letter to the Water Co. Board encompassing Coun-
cil ' s concerns , referencing the 1981 letter, and
asking the Board how it plans to address other
such problems ( i.e. , the question of water service
to properties within the City limits but outside
the Water Co. ' s service boundaries) , seconded by
Councilman Lilley; passed unanimously.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION/AND OR ACTION:
City Council - Mayor Borgeson explained her earlier comments in
suggesting a change in the regular meeting day for Council .
City Manager - Mr. Windsor noted receipt of proposal (after
posting of this meeting' s agenda) from a Daniel Derschon for use
of the APD parking lot ( 5505 ECR) , at the lease price of $1, 000,
from 11/26/88 through 1/1/89, for the sale of Christmas trees .
Provision of necessary insurance, including fire, and a $500
cleanup deposit would be required.
Motion: By Mayor Borgeson to consider this as an emergency
item which occurred after the 72-hour agenda
posting period, seconded by Councilman Lilley;
passed unanimously.
Chief McHale requested that any funds received from the
above lot lease be directed to the
police facility account.
Motion: By Mayor Borgeson to direct the City Manager to
enter into agreement for lease of the APD parking
. lot for the sale of Christmas Trees, as per the
6 :
terms discussed, and that the $1,000 for the use
of the lot be directed into the police facility
account. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Mackey;
passed unanimously by roll-call .
Mr. Windsor, regarding downtown revitalization, noted the need
for a comprehensive master plan for the downtown. He requested
Council consensus to direct staff to seek proposals from pros-
pective master planners and that Council begin considering the
make-up of a task force that would be working with the consult- .,
ing firm on the various elements of the master plan. Council
d
consensus was to bring this item back as a noticed agenda item
for the 12/13/88 agenda.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:40 P.M. TO A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION AT 7 :00 P.M. , TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1988, IN r
THE FOURTH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM FOR DISCUSSION REGARDING GENERAL
PLAN POLICY SETTING AND REGARDING HIGHWAY 41 .
MINUTES RECORDED BY:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
PREPARED BY:
CINDY WILKINS, Acting Dep. City Clerk
7
D TETM3 AGENDA
ITEM
•
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES - SPECIAL MEETING
NOVEMBER 29, 1988
The joint meeting of the City Council/Planning Commission was
called to order at 7:00 p .m. by Mayor Borgeson, followed by the
Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present : Council members Dexter , Shiers, Lilley,-.and Mayor
Borgeson
Commissioners Luna, Highland , Lopez Balbontin, Waage,
Brasher , Tobey and Chairperson Lochridge
Absent : Councilwoman Mackey
Staff Present : Henry Engen, Community Development Director ;
• Paul Sensibaugh , Public Works Director ; Mike
Hicks, Fire Chief; Bud McHale, Police Chief; and
Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director .
Mayor Borgeson stated that in view of the large turnout of
people for the subject of Highway 41 and upon consultation with
the City Attorney and City Manager she announced that it was
appropriate to have a public hearing on this matter and that this
meeting had not been noticed for that purpose. Moreover , such
hearing should have all the members of the City Council in
attendance. Since the purpose of this meeting was to continue
discussion by the Council and Planning Commission to give staff
direction for updating the General Plan it would be appropriate
to not hear testimony on Highway 41 but to set a special public
hearing for that purpose. Mr . Austin Carlton, CalTrans
representative, noted that individuals can still submit written
comments to Cal Trans on the matter of Highway 41 and this should
be done by December 1st . In response to questions he offered
that he thought it would be possible to extend the public comment
time period. The Mayor then declared a 15 minute recess. The
meeting was reconvened at 7:34 p .m. Public Hearing was set for
Wednesday, December 14th at 7:00 p .m. at a location to be
deterrni ned .
•
-1-
•
1 . Policy direction discussion
a. Industrial land use
acreage extent and location, north vs south E1
Camino Real . Access to Traffic Way and Sycamore
industrial park areas.
Craftsman Park idea (ERA)
Henry Engen reviewed the existing General Plan policies in
regard to industrial land use policies and he noted that
currently there are 56 acres of land in industrial use and
the plan provides for 162 acres ultimately. Existing
locations for, industry were discussed and it was noted that
in addition to industrial and industrial park designations
that commercial park and service commercial zoning
catagories allow for industrial land uses. The purposes for
districts were reviewed and was noted that site development
standards called for in zoning are substandard in comparison
to goals identified in the General Plan. Recommendations
of the Economic Research Associates analysis relative to
industrial land were summarized and recommended no increase
in industrial land use unless a unique opportunity was •
presented. Engen noted that there had been
pressures on the industrial land use on south E1 Camino
between Curbaril and Santa Rosa from industrial to
service commercial . This should be evaluated in the General
Plan update. Under discussion it should be noted that the
Traffic Way/Ferro Caril industrial area has major access
problems and that the craftsman park idea might be
implemented on the north El Camino Real . It was
acknowledged and recognized that the problem with the
with the current incubator industries is that they out grow
the land areas that are designated for them. The consensus
was that the present criteria for industrial areas is
confusing and needs to be simplified and clarified .
The feasibility of modern technology parks was discussed
and the observation was made there is a need to encourage
and nurture those activities which have proven successful
here.
The idea of a craftsman park was supported but there is a
need to define exactly the character of that concept . One
suggested candidate location was the Santa Barbara/E1 Camino
Real area. The City ' s lack of accessible flat land for
industry was acknowledged as being a deterrent to providing
more land for local job creating manufacturing activities.
Paso Robles and San Luis Obispo are more suite for job
centers notwithstanding the push for creating jobs where
people live.
-2-
It was acknowledged that there is intense competition for
quality development by communities across the state and
there is a need in Atascadero to focus on desired
pragmatic way. An economic round table or economic
development committee could assist in targeting appropriate
firms. Development of a downtown master plan could
provide direction for proper uses in that area. Candidates
for appropriate craftsman park activities included hand made
furniture, iron works, etc . There was a consesnus that
Idler ' s providied a good case study of a successful
iron works, etc . There was consensus that Idler ' s service
commercial type business that should be encouraged . It was
also the consensus that in order to have adequate
industrial land the zoning ordinance needs to be
strengthened .
At this time Mayor Borgeson asked for public comment .
Jerry Bond , 4840 E1 Verano , complimented George Highland ,
Bob Lilley, Mike Tobey and Ken Waage for good points that
they had made in prior discussion. Maggie Rice of the
Chamber of Commerce has worked very hard to secure light
industrial groups for this area. She is trying to do a very
good job and it is very hard . The major tax base comes from
retail sales to support the city other than property taxes.
We cannot attract people like May Co . , Penneys, Sears for
large clothing stores in this area. We do have some very
good stores that bring in taxes such as DeCou ' s, Grisanti ' s,
Pacific Home, Improvement , Rileys, etc . People that are
looking to come in for industries or stores look at what the
population base is to buy merchandise from their stores and
if it will pay them to put a store in for the amount of
sales that they will have. If there isn ' t enough of retail
sales for them, they won ' t come to Atascadero .
James Herman, 4545 Sycamore, commented on the per capita
tax . All of the towns that have better per capita tax than
Atascadero , their major thing is tourism. The only one that
doesn ' t is Grover City, they don ' t have a big tourist base.
Atascadero is missing the ball here, this is San Luis Obispo
County and that is what we are famous for and these are the
type of industries and businesses we need to attract to our
city. As far as the Arts and Crafts Park we need it in a
downtown location so that everybody can benefit from it .
This will bring in the tourists and hopefully they will use
some of our other retail stores in the area. We can make it
attractive and use some the commercial land we have off of
Traffic Way and put in some green belts in, trees and low
visibility industrial parks behind it where the people can
actually manufacture the merchandise they will be selling .
What we also need in this town is stricter zoning in the
-3-
r
landscaping that is being put in or lack thereof. Driving
down E1 Camino Peal doesn ' t exactly make you feel like you
are in a real nice rural area.
Pete Boonesar , 5212 Magdelana, said he agreed with
Councilman Lilley that if we are starting incubator
industries here in Atascadero and they grow and they are
forced to leave the area because the City isn' t cooperating
or allowing them to grow here, when a perspective business
looks to locate here, they probably talk to businesses in
this area and found out that the cooperation isn ' t here,
why should they make an investment here and not be able to
grow and prosper here, so then they look somewhere else.
This should be addressed .
Jerry Frederick , who lives on Santa Barbara Rd . , commented
that approximately two years ago the City paid for a survey.
This survey was sent out to the public for public input .
Many of those were returned and showed exactly what the
public wanted . It showed where they shopped and that the
only thing they bought in Atascadero was their groceries and
their gasoline. The rest of it was spent in San Luis
Obispo , Santa Maria, etc . The survey showed they needed a
shopping center , recreation trailer park , all of which are
excellent tax base type of businesses. We need high
paying tax base businesses. Up and down our highway we have
plenty of property available, we have lots of people who
want to do a lot of things, but we do not have the open arms
of the Council or the Planning Commission in order to get
it . There is always somebody who doesn ' t like the fence,
the parking , etc . He feels that the people making the
decisions for the city are either retired or they are a
government employee being subsidized by the public , so
consequently any decision that they make to turn down
anything that would be good for the tax base, doesn ' t affect
them in the least . Let ' s get some cooperation.
Eric Michielssen, 5300 Agila, complimented Councilman Shiers
on good comments he had made. His association with Cal Poly
could be fruitful for the city. His observation that we
have a lot of highly trained technical people at Cal Poly
that are going to school and would like to stay in the area
is a good observation. Our areas offer affordable housing
compared to other areas in the state that they could re-
locate to . What we don ' t have is an industrial park area
which would attract this type of industries. We need to be
more attractive to these businesses . The number one thing
they are looking for is location. The areas we have zoned
industrial right now arelightindustrial are just not good
locations. They do not have the intra structure that will
allow them to be developed . To put in the type of park that
Councilman Shiers talked about that would attract these Cal
Poly trained technocrats is right along the highway. We
-4-
have land at the south end of town that is fairly level ,
that has sewers and utilities near by that could be
developed nicely.
Barbara Rieter presented council and commission with copies
of a suggestion she has for a craftsman village and a Colony
Sports Village. She stated that $25-$30,000 money has been
given to the Tourist Bureau and Chamber of Commerce
this past year and asked what do we get in return for that
investment . We do not have a contract with them stating
what we will ;receive for this money. The ERA
report indicates that tourists do not come to Atascadero ,
they stop in San Luis Obispo or in Paso Robles. Where does
our money go as far as the Tourist Bureau is concerned? She
stopped in at the San Luis Obispo Tourist Bureau one day
and asked about Atascadero . She was told they didn ' t
have any information, it was "up stairs" . We need to
investigate how our money is spent , are we getting our
moneys worth .
Buz Hinkley who lives on San Gregorio Rd . spoke representing
the property that is to be developed at Santa Rosa on the
west side of the freeway on Portola. The developers of that ,
property have requested that he approach not only the City
Council but the Planning Commission and the staff of the
City of Atascadero to inquire as to their input as to the
design, the kinds of uses that the City would like to see.
They would like all of the input that can be given, or that
the City can give to him, or to them, or to the design
people in that center in order to make something that the
city and the staff would be proud of and would be
comfortable with . This project is in the . very beginning
stages of development and he asked that any of the members
of the Planning Commission or City Council , or staff would
give to him any input they may have.
Robert McNeal, 4830 El Verano , stated that we have an
infra structure problem. When you get on the roads and pull
off to the industrial areas , what do you drive on? You have
to get there via Curbaril , Traffic Way, Capistrano , or El
Camino Real . You examine those roads in regards to how you
can take a truck on them. You have to consider the problems
of getting in., the problems getting out . If we want to
attract business we need to do something to provide access
to the facilities that are available including zoning them
so they can be used and they can develop and grow. If not ,
we need to make a decision right now whether we really do
want to remain a rural community or do we want to draw in
those industries and maybe compromise a little bit .
At this time, Mayor Borgeson closed to public comment .
-5
! i
b . Circulation Element
- road classification system, trails, bikeways,
routes to school .
- implementation. . .paper roads, assessment district
- Highway 41 extension impacts
- 101 corridor deficiencies
Commission/Council comments followed .
Mayor Boregson asked for public comment at this point .
Barbara Reiter stated in regard to circulation and school
site that we have a designated industrial area along Traffic
Way where there is a proposed school site and believes those
two are incompatible.
Jerry Bond spoke regarding the circulation element . One of
the problems that he has with the circulation element is
Traffic Way. People ask how can we help the downtown
Atascadero . He would like to see the consideration of the
possibility of taking Traffic Way from about where
Atascadero Door Company is where it makes the turn to go
south , to take it behind PCA across the back of the auto
salvage yard area and tap it into Capistrano in the vicinity
of the railroad undercrossing . The truck traffic going up
Traffic Way through the downtown does not help the downtown
area. He would like to see a study made on something like
that to see if it is feasible.
Mayor Borgeson closed for public comment and returned to the
Planning Commission and City Council . She noted that this
subject would be continued to a future study meeting .
The Mayor requested a S minute recess at this time.
d . Request to direct staff to solicit proposals to prepare a
plan for downtown.
Staff report was given by Henry Engen, Community Development
Director .
Council and commission comments followed .
Consensus of the council and commission was to direct the
staff to develop an RFP for council review.
There was no public comment .
Meeting adjourned to next regular Council Meeting on December 13
at 7.00 p .m.
MINUTES RECORDED BY:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, CITY CLERK
PREPARED BY :
GEORGIA RAMIREZ, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
MEETI AGENDA
DATE 81TEM N -�:_.:..
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13 , 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PARCEL MAP 19-87
LOCATION: 2800 Ardilla
APPLICANT: Norman Ruskovich (Central Coast Engineering)
On July 28, 1987 , the City Council approved Tentative Parcel Map
19-87 subject to certain findings and conditions and in concur-
rence with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. The
findings and conditions required for Phase One of the map are
• complied with and the map is recommended for approval .
This is the lot line adjustment portion of this parcel map which
conforms to the approved road alingment. After the property
transfers have been recorded, Tract 1057 (Dovica Tract Map) can
be processed for final approval .
HE :DD:ps
cc : Norman Ruskovich
Central Coast Engineering
dxW18►T A
CITY OF ATASCADERO ZoN,µ
•
rts�:'I�p " t 11071D-7- ` COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 P/W1 X9-87 •
DEPARTMENT
J
1
i
•
i
H)
I
�f AOAD 1
Q
�q 1
4�
..L7 % l i"L
f
R S � �►-d►I �. � s�i I,o� rias.
AT 8Zo 3z,S: l
R RS
• MEETI AGENDA�_
DAT ITEM i ._..,... .,
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13 , 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director Nk�j
SUBJECT: Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map 24-86
LOCATION: 7425 E1 Camino Real
APPLICANT: Don Messer (Cuesta Engineering)
BACKGROUND:
On November 15, 1988, the Atascadero Planning Commission reviewed
the above-referenced subject on its consent calendar. On a 7 : 0
vote, the Commission approved a one year time extension as
reflected in the attached staff report. There was no public tes
• timony given.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of a one year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 24-
86, per the Planning Commission' s recommendation.
HE :ps
cc : Don Messer
Cuesta Engineering
•
ITEM: A-3
M E M O R A N D U M
•
DATE : November 15, 1988
TO : Planning Commission
FROM : Joel Moses, Associate Planner
SUBJECT : Time Extension - Tentati Tr ct Map 24-86
7425 El Camino Real - esser)
The applicant is requesting a one year time extension for the
tentative map. On October 20, 1986, the Planning Commission
approved Tentative Tract Map 24-86. The map proposed the
creation of fifteen commercial condominium units. The project
(Plaza de Pueblo) is now built and occupied. The applicant is
working to complete the map, but the work will take longer than
the allotted time. The one year time extension will be the only
one allowed.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of a one year time extension for
Tentative Tract Map 24-88.
•
JM/jm
Attachments - Exhibit A - Developer' s letter
- Exhibit B - Staff Report (October 20, 1986)
•
XI?IFIT A — DEV. LETTER
*EN. TRACT MAP 2,.-86
CUES?A ENGINEERING 7425 EL CAIIINO REAL
MESSER/CUES TA
7401-B'El Camino Real/ P.O. Box 2066
Atascadero, California 93423
(805)466-6827
October 21 , 1988
MFIE IP
City of Atascadero OCT 24 1988
Henry Engen
Community Development Director COMMUNITY DEME;
6500 Palma ."'NE;VT
Atascadero, CA 93422
Subject: Tentative Tract Map 24-86
Tract 1400
Dear Mr. Engen:
This is to request a time extension on behalf of Don Messer for
Tentative Condominium Tract 1400. The applicant is currently
working to complete the final map requirements, but will not be
ready to record the final map prior to the November 10 expiration
date.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this request.
Sincerely,
Deborah Hollowell
DH:pd
EXHIBIT B - STAFF REPORT
• TENT. TRACT MAP 24-86
7425 EL CAMINO REAL
MESSER/CUESTA
I
City of Atascadero Item:—B-2
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: 10/20/86
BY: Steven L. DeCamp, Senior Planner File No: TTM 24-86
Project Address: 7425 El Camino Real
SUBJECT:
Creation of fifteen (15) commercial air-space condominium units on a
1.4 acre site.
BACKGROUND:
Notice of public hearing was published in the Atascadero News on Fri-
day, October 10, 1986 . All property owners of record located within
300 feet of the subject property were also notified on that date.
A. LOCATION: 7425 E1 Camino Real (Lot 2, Block JA)
B. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Creation of fifteen (15) commer-
cial air-space condominiums.
2. Applicants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Don Messer/Camino Real Prop.
3. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cuesta Engineering
4. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. 4 acres
5. Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .El Camino Real is a City-main-
tained street.
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CR (Commercial Retail)
7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Commercial (shopping center
under construction)
8. Adjacent Zoning and Use. . . . . .North: CR (commercial)
South: CR (commercial)
East: RMF-16 (residential)
West: CS (commercial)
9. General Plan Designation. . . . .Retail Commercial
10. Terrain. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Flat
11. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Categorically Exempt (Class 1)
TO
I 0
Tentative Tract Map 24-86 (Messer/Camino Real Prop./Cuesta)
C. ANALYSIS:
This application proposes the creation of fifteen (15) a commer-
cial air-space condominiums. The project consists of the conver-
sion of an existing fifteen unit commercial structure to individ-
ual ownership. Thus, each commercial unit will be individually
owned with parking and other open areas owned in common.
This project was previously reviewed and approved under the pre-
cise plan and building permit processes. All public improvements
that would normally be required at the time of tract map approval
have been secured or conditioned as part of these prior approvals.
Tentative tract map approval will not effect the imposition of
those requirements:
The conversion of the project to a condominium does not present
any substantial planning issues of concern to staff.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Tract Map 24-86
based on the Findings in Exhibit C and the Conditions of Approval
in Exhibit D.
iSLD:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location and Zoning Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit C - Findings for Approval
Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval
2
ti
PROlww-
♦
vim
In
on
In
•ice -F-
PIP
MIKE
°�i���. �����♦ �� : �� � .�
• �� �♦ �r
•♦ W
VA
Ilk la
� � t►� iii �. ♦s
>C[••�I B r T �
A/1� �-✓!��Y ru� L r A.�-4' Zino
TM 7-4 -84
J Z �x •�} • ,3 Y 3�? �ALLI.Y.,t> I a' i k :% � 1`w. tr
E Q a `aj -'
f j. ,,' ^ v
n 1' 1 f• .. lei,; t•`, � J. t, t j I k - IW 2
,n
4 4� ,y
8 } � l Vit•b �� t 1
1 ,1
� s - f >. •
I N F
j C V
� � I
I .
I
W BZ u
``
I ca
AS
2
� ��j97/ I V 1•�C,Yti �4'
Tentative Tract Map 24-86 (Messer/Camino Real Prop./Cuesta)
EXHIBIT C - Tentative Tract Map 24-86
Findings for Approval
October 20, 1986
FINDINGS:
1. The creation of these parcels conforms to the Zoning Ordinance and
the General Plan.
2. The creation of these parcels is categorically exempt from the
provisions of CEQA (Section 15301. (0) ) .
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development that
is proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development
that is 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 improvement will not
conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access
through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or
that substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474. 6 of the
State Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge
of waste.
3
10 0
Tentative Tract Map 24-86 (Messer/Camino Real Prop./Cuesta)
EXHIBIT D - Tentative Tract Map 24-86
Conditions of Approval
October 20, 1986
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions, and Restric-
tions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances
and architectural control of all buildings.
a. These CC&Rs shall be submitted for review and approval by the
City Attorney and Community Development Department prior to
approval of the final map.
b. These CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium Homeowners
Association.
2. The open space (Lot 1) shall be designated as a Public Utilties
Easement.
3. Submit a soils report or engineer ' s certification that existing
soils on the site are adequate to support proposed structures per
Chapter 70 , subsection (e) of the Uniform Building Code.
4. A final map, in compliance with all conditions set forth herein,
shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to
recordation.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created
and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor
shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners
have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that
they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit-
ted for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
5. All conditions imposed on the project by Precise Plan 47-85 and
building permits shall be satisfied prior to recording the final
map.
6. Approval of this tentative tract 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.
4
A
f
MEETI�! GENDA _
DA
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13 , 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director �fc,
SUBJECT: Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map 26-86
LOCATION: 7408-7478 Santa Ysabel
APPLICANT: Richard Montanaro
BACKGROUND:
On November 15, 1988, the Atascadero Planning Commission reviewed
the above-referenced subject on its consent calendar. On a 7 : 0
vote, the Commission approved a one year time extension as re-
flected in the attached staff report. There was no public testi-
mony given.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of a one year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 26-
86, per the Planning Commission' s recommendation.
HE :ps
cc: Richard Montanaro
ITEM : A-4
M E M O R A N D U M •
DATE : November 15, 1988
TO : Planning Commission
FROM : Joel Moses, Associate Planner
SUBJECT : Time Extension - Tentative r ct Map 26-86
7408-7478 Santa Ysabel - Montanaro)
The applicant is requesting a one year time extension for the
previously approved map. The twenty eight (28) unit residential
condominium tract map was approved in 1986. This will be the
first and only time extension for the map. The existing
residential apartment complex was approved by Precise Plan 14-86
and has been constructed and occupied.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the approval of a one year time extension of
Tentative Tract Map 26-86.
•
Attachments Exhibit A - Developers Letter
Exhibit B - Staff Report (October 20, 1986)
JM/jm
• HIBIT A - DEVELOPER"S LET
Tentative Tract 26-86
Time Extension
7403-7478 Santa Ysabel
October 30 , 19d(N '
CITY OF ATASCADERO '999
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISIOPJ ;(AA"',
51....
6500 Palm Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93423
RE: TENATIVE TFACT MAP EXTENSION
I am requesting a one-year time extension for the
Tentative Tract Map for converting the 28-unit
Vista Del Monte Apartments (APN 30-121-47 ) to
condominiums . I have no immediate plans to sell Vista
Del Monte as condominiums . However, I want to keep
the Tract Map viable in case I decide to sell them
in the future.
Sincerely,
419/ar Montanaro
7460 Encinal Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
&XEIBIT B - PRIOR REPORT
entative Tract 26-86
Time Extension
7408-7478 Santa Ysabel
City of Atascadero Item:—B-4
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: 10/20/86
BY: Meg Morris, Assistant Planner File No: TTM 26-86
Project Address: 7408-7478 Santa Ysabel
SUBJECT:
Request to create 28 residential air-space condominiums with common
area.
BACKGROUND:
Notice of public hearing was published in the Atascadero News on Fri-
day, October 10, 1986. All property owners of record located within
300 feet of the subject site were also notified on that date.
A. LOCATION: 7408-7478 Santa Ysabel (One legal lot as merged by
Lot Merger 4-86 in Block JA)
B. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .To create 28 residential condo-
minium units with common area.
2. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Richard Montanaro
3. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .North Coast Engineering
4. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Approximately 1.75 acres
5. Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .Santa Ysabel is a City-main-
tained street with a 40 foot
right-of-way.
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF/16 (Residential Multiple
Family - 16 units per acre)
7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 unit apartment complex under
construction
8. Adjacent Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . .North: RMF/16
South: CR
East: RMF/16
West: CR
9. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Multiple Family
10. Terrain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Flat
0 0
Tentative Tract Map 26-86 (Montanaro/North Coast Engineering)
11. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Categorically Exempt (Class 1 (k)
C. ANALYSIS:
A precise plan (PP 14-86) review was applied for in March of 1986
to construct a 28 unit apartment complex at this site. Develop-
ment design was addressed as a part of this administrative review.
The precise plan was subsequently approved and building permits
issued for the project.
This application now proposes the creation of 28 residential air-
space condominium units. The 28 apartment units under construc-
tion will be converted to individual ownership. This will allow
individual ownership of the dwelling units and common ownership of
the parking and open space areas.
The residential units are still under construction and are not
presently occupied or rented. However, it is estimated that con-
struction could be completed as early as within 60 days. If these
units were then to be occupied by renters (prior to recording the
final tract map) , there would be several procedural steps' to be
followed as required by State law. These include notification of
tenants of the conversion and offers to sell the units to existing
tenants.
The proposed conversion from apartments to condominiums will mod-
ify the sewer connection fee requirements. Any fees charged
previously will have to be amended.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Tract Map 26-86
based on the Findings contained in Exhibit C and the Conditions
contained in Exhibit D.
MM:ps
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location and Zoning Map
Exhibit B - Proposed Tract Map
Exhibit C - Findings for Approval
Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval
2
��.,i �� ��,�•���.. . ' 1111! � � !�� : .,.�
�. �NVIR
�� ��� i� 1 r' •' �:ice -
♦ i
WE 12W
MMO
NOWN
UP
FEE
so
wi
Fes'
!�-�,�t� _uu pair►te � "� ■
QL
? I:V v► _'M' is '�: — .p.-..,`1' —
1 � stu
o
CC ,k
--Z-4
tzNJ
C\jfit o<
$ �
�,�. O '!•3 ��� � �� � �a�� �� , ; - •tea Q
:FA Vo 739 d5'A 6'1 iV 6/S
_� .s •cam �. zs i;d s . . . —._
04
le
/ 1
1
--
CIA
I` t ;
a_--- -�_— ,— -•662nd_' - -
---------------
Tentative Tract Map 26-86 (Montanaro/North Coast Engineering)
EXHIBIT C - Tentative Tract Map 26-86
Findings for Approval 0
October 20, 1986
FINDINGS:
1. The creation of these parcels conforms to the Zoning Ordinance and
the General Plan.
2. The creation of these parcels is categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Section
15301 (k) ) .
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development that
is proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development
that is 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 improvement will not
conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access
through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or
that substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474.6 of the
State Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge
of waste.
3 [
1 0
Tentative Tract Map 26-86 (Montanaro/North Coast Engineering)
EXHIBIT D - Tentative Tract Map 26-86
Conditions of Approval
October 20, 1986
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions, and Restric-
tions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances
and architectural control of all buildings.
a. These CC&Rs shall be submitted for review and approval by the
City Attorney and Community Development Department prior to
approval of the final map.
b. These CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium Homeowners
Association.
2. The open space (Lot 29) shall be designated as a Public Utilities
Easement.
3. Submit a soils report or engineer ' s certification that existing
soils on the site are adequate to support proposed structures per
Chapter 70, subsection (e) of the Uniform Building Code. 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.
4. All conditions imposed on the project by Precise Plan 14-86 and
building permts shall be satisfied prior to recording the final
map. This shall include grading, drainage and road improvements
to be completed or bonded for to the satisfaction of the Director
of Public Works.
5. All requirements of state law (Subdivision Map Act) concerning the
conversion of occupied residential units to air-space condominiums
shall be complied with.
6. Wastewater disposal shall be connected to the public sewer, and
the applicant shall pay all appropriate fees in force at the time
of recordation of the final map, to include sewer connection fee
per single family dwelling unit as established by City Ordinance.
7. A drainage maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the City
Attorney, shall be recorded at the time it is first conveyed and a
note to this effect shall be placed on the final map.
8. A drainage mitigation fee, as determined by the Public Works De-
partment, shall be paid to provide downstream drainage
improvements.
4 n
Tentative Tract Map 26-86 (Montanaro/North Coast Engineering)
9. A final map, in compliance with all conditions set forth herein,
shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to
recordation.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created
and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor
shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners
have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that
they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit-
ted for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
10. Approval of this tentative tract 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.
5
to U
Minutes - Planning Commission - October 20, 1986
n presenting the staff report, Mr. Engen pointed out tha condi- Y
t' n #1-b should also reflect "Owners" associatio instead of
"Ho owners" association, and noted staff's recom ndation for
appro 1.
Commissio r Nolan asked if there had been co ern expressed by
the homeow rs on Navajoa, to which Mr Engen responded that
during the pr ise plan process for this ' te, concern had been
expressed, esp ially concerning the rking situation, but that
no appeal ever as result of project hanges made during the pre-
cise plan process.
Commissioner Kidwell noted her concern that there be adequate
parking for the complex there will not be spill-over traffic
such as exists at the El M Plaza. Commissioner Nolan com-
mented on guaranteeing at t parking lot exiting on Navajoa be
limited to employees.
Patsy West with N th Coast Engineer g, representing the appli-
cant, stated th all of the condition were acceptable.
MOTION: M e by Commissioner Hatchell, se ded by Commissioner
opez-Balbontin and carried unanimou y to approve Tenta-
tive Tract Map 27-86 subject to the fi Ings and condi-
tions contained in the staff report, wit modification to
condition #1-b to reflect "Condominium O ers Associa-
tion" instead of "Condominium Homeowners ssociation"
with CC&Rs to limit the Navajoa parking lot employee
parking.
4. Tentative Tract Map 26-86 :
Request submitted by Richard Montanaro (North Coast Engineer-
ing) to allow creation of 28 residential condominium units
with common area. Subject property is located at 7408-7478
Santa Ysabel.
Mr. Engen presented the staff report noting the units are current-
ly under construction, and stated staff' s recommendation for
approval of the request. He pointed out the difference with this
conversion request as opposed to the previous requests on the
agenda. Mr. Engen stated that the grading plans have been revised
since the precise plan process.
Chairman Bond expressed his concern with apartment houses being
converted into condominiums and asked what this is doing to the
City' s rental structure. He asked why this is occurring to which
Mr. Engen noted that usually the applicants obtain a precise plan
and building permit approval first and then apply for a tract map
for conversion, and pointed out that one advantage to proceeding
in this manner is the applicants know at that point where the
walls of the building will be, where the improvements will be,
and exactly what the details of the project will be in relation to
the site plan.
4
[ .
Minutes - Planning Commission - October 20 , 1986
Commissioner Kidwell concurred with Chairman Bond' s concerns and
noted that since she has been on the Planning Commission (since
April, 1986) , over 220 condominium units have been approved for
conversion.
Commissioner Michielssen talked about the advantages of condomin-
iums stating that he felt the market place will take of itself
in relation to apartments and condominiums. He commented on Atas
cadero's lack of housing opportunities to purchase homes.
Commissioner Kidwell stated she would like to see the building of
condominiums designed more specifically for first-time buyers.
Chairman Bond stated he would like to see more mobilehome park
condominium projects.
Richard Montanaro, applicant, explained his intent in requesting
the condominium conversion was to keep them for rentals, but with
the future option of selling the units if market conditions so
dictate.
Patsy West with North Coast Engineering, expressed concern with
Condition #8 concerning the drainage mitigation fee and stated the
wording of the condition is vague and open-ended. Mr . Engen
stated what the fee would be if charged from the fee schedule. He
further stated he had spoken with Engineering and they had indica-
ted they would not know what the exact fee would be until drainage
plans have been evaluated.
Discussion ensued. Ms. West stated that if this condition could
be resolved before the map is scheduled for City Council consider-
ation, it would be acceptable to them.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Hatchell, seconded by Commissioner
Copelan to approve Tentative Tract Map 26-86 subject to
the findings and conditions contained in the staff report
with modification to Condition #8 to direct staff to
come back with some type of upper or lower end cost for
the mitigation fee prior to City Council' s approval.
Commissioner Nolan asked for clarification contained in Exhibit B
wherein it states there are 29 lots. Mr . Engen responded that
actually there are 28 units with the 29th lot being open space.
He stated this should be cleared up before the final map is
recorded.
The motion carried with Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin
dissenting.
C. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was noubli ment
P at time.
5
. AdEEn AG�Nnp
aA7E /3 ITEMS ..,
• MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject : Contract for the Design of Santa Rosa/ECR Traffic Signal
Date : December 7, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council approve the attached agreement
between the City and Keith B. Higgins & Assoc . , Inc . of Gilroy to
Perform the above design for the amount of $10 , 600, plus allowance
for FAU mandatory plan checks not included in the RFP on a cost—plus
basis .
Background:
• Please refer to the attached staff memos from November 16 and
October 11 .
Discussion:
This is a follow up to the at from the last regular meeting.
Fiscal Impact :
The revenue resource will be the Traffic Development Impact Fee
account, including contributions .
•
• OA7•� r t`�C�C����/
MEMORANDUM •
To : Honorable Mayor and City Council
Through : Ray Windsor , City Manaqer
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh , Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject : Award of the Design for the Santa Rosa/ECR Traffic Siqnal
Date : November 16 . 1988
Recommendation :
Staff recommends the selection of Keith B. Hic_rgins &
Assoc . , Inc , of Gilroy to perform the above design , and that Council
direct staff to bring back an contract in the amount of $10. 600 plus
allowance for FAU mandatory plan checks not included in the RFP.
Background:
Please refer to the attached staff memo from October 11 . •
Discussion :
Only two proposals were returned out of the six invited.
Higgins and North Coast Encrineerinq, Inc . (John McCarthy , Traffic
Engineer) both indicated that they met the scope of services and
both have been involved in comparable projects in the past and both
are well qualified to perform the work. Higgins will do the work
within 11 weeks from the notice to proceed, and North Coast 12 weeks
after start which will be within two weeks of the notice to
proceed.
North Coast' s proposal is for $11 , 167 . Higgins is for $10, 100
after taking out the $500 for the timing which is not included in
North Coast' s design phase figure , but in their construction
estimate . The contract will include the attached Scope of Services
and will include language to comply with FAU regulations . Addition
money for FAU plan reviews outside the scope of the RFP, which did
not include FAU financing, will be on a time and material basis .
Fiscal Impact :
The revenue resource will be the Traffic Development Impact Fee
account .
0
` JNEETT�/,, AGENDA �
DATITEM# ..,,;.,.,,.L
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject : Request for Proposals for a Traffic Signal at the Santa
Rosa/E1 Camino Real Intersection
Date: October 4, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to request
Proposals for the design of the above project .
Background:
The above intersection has been recently impacted by the new
Post Office facility and southside multiple family residences . It'
is- assumed that this intersection will now meet the necessary signal
warrants that could not be met prior to the opening of the Post
Office . The Planning Commission, City Council and City Staff have
all suggested that this project be moved up in the priority ranking
once the Post Office opened.
Discussion:
The design for the above signal will cover any geometric
changes or recommendations for median deviders along the E1 Camino
Real frontage . The Scope of Services is attached for Council ' s
review. This work is not on the Caltrans system but is on the
Federal Aid Urban system. Therefore, since we are suggesting FAU
funds below, the City will have to use the consultant selection
guidelines presented by Caltrans, including encouragement of DBE
firms .
Fiscal Impact :
Contributions from the Bordeaux House project and the Post
Office facility amount to $50, 000 or approximately 50% of the cost
of a new traffic signal . Another $23, 000 is expected from the
Proposed bowling alley project nearby and $2, 000 has been committed
by two smaller projects within the area . The remaining funds ,
aproximately $25, 000, not including median islands if necessary,
will come from future Traffic Development Impact Fees .
MEETtk At3E�
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Paul Sensibaugh , Director of Public Works
Valerie Humphrey , Clerical Technician
SUBJECT : Chandler Ranch - Street Assessment District #5
DATE: December 7, 1988
Recommendation :
Staff recommends that Council approve Resolution No.
attached which provides for the issuance of $166,515 of
Limited Obligation Improvement Bonds for the construction of
Improvement District No . 5 .
• Background:
This is the 8th and final resolution required for the
formation of this assessment district . As rea_uired, a cash
payment period was established during which time
approximately 30% of the assessments were paid. The
remaining assessment balance will be marketed by Security
Pacific Merchant Banking.
Also available in the Public Works Office are the
Preliminary Private Placement Memorandum and Bond Placement
Offer prepared by Security Pacific Merchant Bank. These
documents give a condensed overview of the marketing process
and may prove to be interesting reading.
Fiscal Impact :
Assessment Districts are self-financina and as such
require no expenditures of City funds .
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO I
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
RESOLUTION NO. 112 -88
RESOLUTION AND ORDER PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE
OF $166, 515 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF LIMITED
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, CITY OF
ATASCADERO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
PRESCRIBING THE DENOMINATIONS, DATE, FORM,
AND MAXIMUM RATE OF INTEREST THEREOF; AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTION OF SAID BONDS; APPOINTING A PAYING
AGENT FOR SAID BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION
OF ASSESSMENTS TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST
ON SAID BONDS; PROVIDING FOR A RESERVE FUND FOR SAID
BONDS; APPROVING THE PRIVATE PLACEMENT MEMORANDUM
FOR SAID BONDS; APPROVING BOND PLACEMENT OFFER;
AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 94-88 TO PROVIDE
THAT THE CITY WILL NOT ADVANCE AVAILABLE FUNDS TO
CURE ANY DEFICIENCY IN THE BOND REDEMPTION FUND.
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "City Council") of
the City of Atascadero (the "City") , on August 23, 1988, •
adopted its Resolution of Intention No. 92-88 (the "Resolution
of Intention") relating to the acquisition and construction of
certain proposed public improvements in an assessment district
in and for the City of Atascadero (the "City") designated City
of Atascadero Improvement District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area
Assessment District) , as described therein (herein, the
"Assessment District") , pursuant to the provisions of
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913, which Resolution of Intention
provided that serial bonds to represent unpaid assessments and
to bear interest at a maximum rate of not to exceed the
maximum rate permitted by law would be issued in the manner
•
: provided by the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (the "Act") ,
being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California, and that said bonds would extend over a
minimum of three (3) years and a maximum of five (5) years
from the second day of September next succeeding twelve (12)
i
months from their date reference bein hereby made to the
9 Y
Resolution of Intention for further particulars; and
WHEREAS, : an assessment and diagram were thereafter
duly made and filed with this City Council, and after a
hearing duly noticed and held said assessment was confirmed,
levied and approved by Resolution No. 103-88 adopted by this
City Council on October 25, 1988; and
WHEREAS, said assessment and diagram were duly
recorded on October 26, 1988, in the office of the
Superintendent of Streets of the City of Atascadero, and said
diagram was recorded in the office of the San Luis Obispo
County Recorder, all in the time, form and manner required by
law; and
WHEREAS, said assessment was in the total amount of
$235, 080 and was apportioned upon the several subdivisions of
land in the Assessment District in proportion to the estimated
benefits to be received by such subdivisions, respectively,
from said work, acquisitions and improvements as shown in said
assessment; and a notice of assessment was duly recorded in
the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Luis
Obispo, all in time, form and manner required by law; and
2
0950b5
WHEREAS, notice of the levy of said assessment and
notice otherwise as required by law has been duly given by
mailing and by publication in the time, form and manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, all sums assessed by said assessment and
said corrected assessment were due and payable to the
Treasurer of the City of Atascadero (the "Treasurer") on or
before the close of business on November 25,1988; and
WHEREAS, the Treasurer has determined that the total
unpaid assessment is $166, 515 and this City Council now finds
and determines that the aggregate amount of unpaid assessments
is $166, 515; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined not to
obligate itself to advance available funds from the City
Treasury to cure any deficiency Y which may occur in the bond
redemption fund, and to amend Resolution No. 94-88, adopted by
the City Council on August 23, 1988 (the "Resolution of
Intention") to so provide;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Atascadero, as follows:
Section 1. The foregoing recitals, and each of
them, are true and correct and the City Council hereby so
finds and determines.
Section 2. The City Council has reviewed all
proceedings heretofore taken relative to the foregoing and has
found, as a result of such review, and does hereby find and
determine that all acts, conditions and things required by law
3
0950b5
! !
to exist, happen and be performed precedent to and in the
issuance of improvement bonds as hereinafter provided do
exist, have happened, and have been performed in due time,
form and manner as required by law and the City is now
authorized pursuant to each and every requirement of law to
authorize the issuance of bonds in the manner and form as in
this resolution provided.
Section 3 . Bonds in the principal amount of
$166,515 shall be issued upon the security of the aggregate
amount of unpaid assessments (together with the interest
thereon) in accordance with the provisions of the Act and
pursuant to the provisions of the Resolution of Intention and
proceedings taken thereunder. Said bonds shall be designated
"City of Atascadero, Improvement District No. 5 Limited
Obligation Improvement Bonds (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment
District) " (the "Bonds") , shall be issued as fully registered
bonds, shall (except for one Bond maturing September 2, 1990
in the denomination of $515) be in the denomination of $1, 000
or any integral multiple of $1, 000 (not exceeding the
principal amount of Bonds maturing at any one time) , shall be
dated December 2, 1988 (which is hereby fixed and determined
to be the date of issue of the Bonds) and shall mature and
bear interest as set forth in the following schedule:
Principal Maturity Date Interest
Amount (September 2) Rate
$ 27, 515 1990 8.40%
31, 000 1991 8.40
33, 000 1992 8.40
36, 000 1993 8 .40
39, 000 1994 8.40
4
0950b5
The Bonds shall bear interest from the interest
payment date next preceding the date of authentication and
registration thereof, unless such date of authentication and
registration is on a day during the period from the
sixteenth (16th) day of the month next preceding an interest
payment date, to such interest payment date, both inclusive,
in which event they shall bear interest from such interest
payment date, or unless such date of authentication and
registration is on a day on or before the fifteenth (15th) day
of the month next preceding the first interest payment date,
in which event they shall bear interest from December 2,
1988. Such interest shall be payable semiannually on March -2
and September 2 of each year, commencing September 2, 1989 .
lection 4 . Both the interest on and principal of
and redemption premiums, if any, on the Bonds shall be payable
in lawful money of the United States of America at the
corporate trust office of the Paying Agent hereinafter
appointed in Los Angeles, California. Payment of the interest
on the Bonds due on or before the maturity or prior redemption
thereof shall be made by check or draft mailed to the
registered owners of the Bonds at their addresses as they
appear at the close of business on the fifteenth (15th) day of
the month prior to each such interest payment date on the
registration books maintained by the Paying Agent as
hereinafter set forth. Payment of the principal of and
redemption premiums, if any, on the Bonds shall be made only
5
0950b5
upon surrender thereof on their maturity dates or on
redemption prior to maturity at the corporate trust office of
the Paying Agent in Los Angeles, California.
Any Bond may be redeemed in whole or in part in
integral multiples of the minimum authorized denomination of
the Bonds on the second day of March or September in any year,
at the option of the Treasurer, upon payment of the principal
amount thereof and interest accrued thereon to the date of
redemption, together with a premium equal to three per cent
(3%) of such principal amount; Provided, that the Treasurer
shall proceed pursuant to Part 11.1 of the Improvement Bond
Act of 1915 in determining those Bonds to be redeemed and the
manner of the redemption thereof. Notice of redemption of any
Bond shall be given by the Treasurer as provided in the
Improvement Bond Act of 1915.
Section 5. The Bonds shall be substantially in the
following form, the blanks to be filled in with appropriate
words and figures, namely:
6
0950b5
i
• [FORM OF BOND]
[FORM OF FACE OF BOND]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
REGISTERED REGISTERED
NUMBER $
CITY OF ATASCADERO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
LIMITED OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BOND
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
INTEREST MATURITY BOND CUSIP
RATE DATE DATE NUMBER
8 .40% September 2, December 2, 1988
REGISTERED OWNER:
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: DOLLARS
Under and by virtue of the Improvement Bond Act of
1915, Division 10 (commencing with Section 8500) of the
Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") , the City of Atascadero
(the "City") , County of San Luis Obispo, State of California
will, out of the redemption fund for the payment of the bonds
issued upon the unpaid portion of assessments made for the
acquisitions, work and improvements more fully described in
proceedings taken pursuant to Resolution of Intention
No. 92-88, adopted by the City Council of the City on
August 23, 1988, pay to the registered owner set forth above
on the maturity date stated above, the principal sum set forth
above in lawful money of the United States of America, and in
like manner will pay interest from the interest payment date
next preceding the date on which this bond is authenticated
and registered, unless this bond is authenticated and
registered on a day during the period from the
sixteenth (16th) day of the month next preceding an interest
payment date to such interest payment date, both inclusive, in
which event it shall bear interest from such interest payment
date, or unless this bond is authenticated and registered on a
day on or before the fifteenth (15th) day of the month next
7
0950b5
preceding the first interest payment date, in which event it
shall bear interest from December 2, 1988, until payment of
such principal sum shall have been discharged, at the rate per
annum stated above, payable semiannually on March 2 and
September 2 in each year, commencing on September 2, 1989 .
Both the principal hereof and redemption premium hereon are
payable at the corporate trust office of Security Pacific
Merchant Bank, as Paying Agent (the "Paying Agent") in Los
Angeles, California, and the interest hereon is payable by
check or draft mailed to the owner hereof at the owner's
address as it appears on the records of the Paying Agent or at
such address as may have been filed with the Paying Agent for
that purpose, as of the fifteenth (15th) day immediately
preceding each interest payment date.
This bond will continue to bear interest after
maturity at the rate above stated; provided, it is presented
at maturity and payment hereof is refused upon the sole ground
that there are not sufficient moneys in said redemption fund
with which to pay the same. If it is not presented at.
maturity, interest hereon will run until maturity.
This bond shall not be entitled to any benefit under
the Act or under Resolution No. _-88, duly adopted by the
City Council of the City on December 13, 1988, pursuant to
which this bond has been issued (the "Resolution of
Issuance") , or become valid or obligatory for any purpose,
until the certificate of authentication and registration
hereon endorsed shall have been signed by the Paying Agent.
The City has determined in the Resolution of Issuance that the
bonds are qualified tax-exempt obligations pursuant to
Section 265(b) (3) (B) (ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended.
REFERENCE IS HEREBY MADE TO THE FURTHER PROVISIONS
OF THIS BOND SET FORTH ON THE REVERSE HEREOF, WHICH FURTHER
PROVISIONS SHALL FOR ALL PURPOSES HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS IF
FULLY SET FORTH AT THIS PLACE.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said City of Atascadero has
caused this bond to be signed in facsimile by the Treasurer of
said City and by its City Clerk and has caused its corporate
seal to be reproduced in facsimile hereon, all as of
December 2, 1988 .
CITY OF ATASCADERO
City Clerk City Treasurer
[SEAL]
8
0950b5
[Certificate of Authentication and Registration]
This is one of the bonds described in the within
mentioned Resolution of Issuance, which has been authenticated
and registered on the day of 1988.
SECURITY PACIFIC MERCHANT BANK,
as Paying Agent
By:
Authorized Officer
[FORM OF BACK OF BOND]
This bond is one of several annual series of bonds
of like date, tenor and effect, but differing in amounts,
maturities and interest rates, issued by the City under the
Act and the Resolution of Issuance for the purpose of
providing means for paying for the work, acquisitions and
improvements described in the proceedings, and is secured by
the moneys in said redemption fund and by the unpaid portion
of said assessments made for the payment of said improvements,
and, including principal and interest, is payable exclusively
out of said fund.
This bond or any portion of it in the amount of one
thousand dollars ($1,000) , or any integral multiple thereof,
may be redeemed and paid in advance of maturity upon the
second day of March or September in any year by giving at
least 30 days ' notice by registered or certified mail or by
personal service to the registered owner hereof at the owner ' s
address as it appears on the registration books of the Paying
Agent by paying principal and accrued interest together with a
premium equal to three percent (3%) of the principal.
This bond is transferable by the registered owner
hereof, in person or by the owner 's attorney duly authorized
in writing, at the office of the Paying Agent, subject to the
terms and conditions provided in the Resolution of Issuance
including the payment of certain charges, if any, upon
surrender and cancellation of this bond. Upon such transfer a
new registered bond or bonds of any authorized denomination or
denominations, of the same maturity, for the same aggregate
principal amount, will be issued to the transferee in exchange
herefor..
9
0950b5
t
Bonds shall be registered only in the name of an
individual (including joint owners) , a corporation, a
partnership, or a trust.
Neither the City nor the Paying Agent shall be
required to make such exchange or registration of transfer of
bonds during the fifteen (15) days immediately preceding any
interest payment date.
The City and the Paying Agent may treat the owner
hereof as the absolute owner for all purposes, and the City
and the Paying Agent shall not be affected by any notice to
the contrary.
[Form of Assignment]
For value received the undersigned do(es) hereby
sell, assign and transfer unto
the within bond and do(es) hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint
attorney to transfer the same on the register of the Paying.
Agent of the City of Atascadero with full power of
substitution in the premises.
Date:
SIGNATURE GUARANTEED:
NOTE: The signature(s) to this Assignment must correspond
with the name(s) as written on the face of the
within bond in every particular, without alteration
or enlargement or any change whatsoever and the
signature(s) must be guaranteed by a member firm of
the New York Stock Exchange or a commercial bank or
trust company.
10
0950b5
t
As to the outstanding principal balance of this Bond
at any time, the payment record of the Paying Agent shall be
conclusive.
PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF PRINCIPAL
Principal Balance of
Amount Principal
Payment Date Redeemed Amount Unpaid Signature
Section 6. The City Treasurer and the City Clerk
are hereby authorized and directed, respectively, to execute
each of the Bonds on behalf of the City by use of their
engraved, printed or lithographed facsimile signatures, and
the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to affix the
seal of the City thereto, which seal may be engraved, printed,
lithographed or otherwise placed by facsimile thereon. Such
signing and sealing as herein provided shall be a sufficient
and binding execution of the Bonds by the City. In case any
of the officers whose signatures appears on the Bonds shall
cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Bonds to
the purchaser, such signature shall nevertheless be valid and
sufficient for all purposes the same as though such officer
11
0950b5
had remained in office until the delivery of the Bonds . Only
such of the Bonds as shall bear thereon a certificate of
authentication and registration, executed and dated by the
Paying Agent, shall be entitled to any benefits hereunder or
be valid or obligatory for any purpose, and such certificate
shall be conclusive evidence that the Bonds so authenticated
have been duly authorized, executed, issued and delivered
hereunder and are 'entitled to the benefits hereof.
Section 7. Security Pacific Merchant Bank, at its
corporate trust office in Los Angeles, California, is hereby
appointed Transfer Agent, Registrar and Paying Agent (the
"Paying Agent") of the City for the purpose of paying the
interest on and principal of and redemption premiums, if any,
on the Bonds and for the purpose of performing the other
obligations imposed on it in this resolution. The Paying
Agent may at any time resign, which resignation shall become
effective upon the appointment of a successor Paying Agent.
Upon receiving notice of such resignation the City shall
promptly appoint a successor Paying Agent, except that if no
successor Paying Agent shall have been appointed by the City
within thirty (30) days of receiving such notice, the
resigning Paying Agent may petition any court of competent
jurisdiction for the appointment of a successor Paying Agent.
The City may at any time in its sole discretion remove the
Paying Agent initially appointed and any successor thereto and
may appoint a successor or successors thereto by an instrument
12
0950b5
• 0
in writing; provided that the City agrees that it will at all
times maintain a Paying Agent with a corporate trust office in
Los Angeles, California. The Paying Agent is hereby
authorized to pay interest on the Bonds due on or before the
maturity or prior redemption thereof to the registered owners
thereof as their names appear at the close of business on the
fifteenth (15th) day of the month preceding each interest
payment date on the registration books required to be kept by
it pursuant to this section as the registered owners thereof,
such interest to be paid by check or draft mailed to such
registered owners at their addresses appearing on such books
or at such other addresses as they may have filed with it for
that purpose, and to pay to such registered owners the
principal of and redemption premiums, :if any, on the Bonds
upon presentation and surrender of the Bonds to it at maturity
or on redemption prior to maturity.
Upon surrender of Bonds for redemption in part only,
the City shall execute and the Paying Agent shall authenticate
and deliver to the owner thereof, at the expense of the City,
a new Bond or Bonds of authorized denominations equal in
aggregate principal amount to the unredeemed portion of the
Bonds surrendered. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the owner
of any Bond to be redeemed in part may, in lieu of
surrendering the same for a new Bond, endorse on such Bond a
notice of such partial redemption to be made on the form set
forth below which shall be typed or printed on the reverse
13
0950b5
side of such Bond, in which case the following legend shall be
typed on such Bond:
As to the outstanding principal balance of this Bond
at any time, the payment record of the Paying Agent
shall be conclusive.
PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF PRINCIPAL
Principal Balance of
Amount Principal
Payment Date Redeemed Amount Unpaid Signature
The Paying Agent shall maintain a record of each such partial
redemption made in accordance with the preceding sentence and
such record shall be conclusive. Such partial redemption
shall be valid upon payment of the amount thereof to the owner
of such Bond and the City and the Paying Agent shall be fully
released and discharged from all liability to the extent of
such payment irrespective of whether such endorsement shall or
shall not have been made upon the reverse of such Bond by the
owner thereof and irrespective of any error or omission in
such endorsement.
14
0950b5
The Paying Agent will keep at its corporate trust
office in Los Angeles, California sufficient books for the
registration, transfer and exchange of the Bonds, which books
shall at all time be open to inspection by the City. Upon
presentation for such purpose, the Paying Agent shall, under
such reasonable regulations as it may prescribe, register or
transfer or exchange the Bonds on such books as hereinafter
provided.
Any Bond may be transferred or exchanged on such
books by the registered owner thereof, in person or by his
duly authorized attorney, upon payment by the person
requesting such transfer or exchange of any tax or other
governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such
transfer or exchange and upon surrender of such Bond for
cancellation accompanied by delivery of a duly executed
written instrument of transferor exchange in a form approved
by the Paying Agent. Whenever any Bond or Bonds shall be
surrendered for transfer or exchange, the City shall execute
and the Paying Agent shall authenticate and deliver a new Bond
or Bonds of authorized denominations of the same maturity date
aggregating the same principal amount of the Bond or Bonds so
surrendered. The City and the Paying Agent may deem and treat
the registered owner of any Bond as the absolute owner of such
Bond for the purpose of receiving payment thereof and for all
other purposes, whether such Bond shall be overdue or not, and
neither the City nor the Paying Agent shall be affected by any
15
0950b5
s 0
notice or knowledge to the contrary; and payment of the
interest on and principal of and redemption premium, if any,
on such Bond shall be made only to such registered owner,
which payment shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and
discharge the liability on such Bond to the extent of the sum
or sums so paid.
The City shall from time to time, upon request of
the Paying Agent and subject to any agreement between the City
and the Paying Agent then in force, pay the Paying Agent
compensation for its services, reimburse the Paying Agent for
all its advances and expenditures, including, but not limited
to, advances to and fees and expenses of independent
accountants, counsel and engineers or other experts employed
by it in the exercise and performance of its rights and
obligations hereunder, and indemnify and save the Paying Agent
harmless against liabilities not arising from its own
negligence or willful misconduct which it may incur in the
exercise and performance of its rights and obligations
hereunder; provided that the Paying Agent shall not have any
lien for such compensation or reimbursement against any moneys
held by it in any of the funds established hereunder, although
it may take whatever legal actions are lawfully available to
it directly against the City.
The statements, agreements, conditions, covenants
and terms contained herein and in the Bonds shall be taken as
statements, agreements, conditions, covenants and terms of the
16
0950b5
City, and the Paying Agent does not assume any responsibility
for the correctness of the same or for the observance or
performance by the City of the same and does not make any
representation as to the sufficiency or validity hereof or of
the Bonds . The Paying Agent shall not incur any
responsibility in respect hereof other than in connection with
the rights and obligations assigned to or imposed upon it
herein or in the Bonds, and the Paying Agent may conclusively
rely on the written instructions, representations and
calculations received by it from the City Council of the City
or from any officer of the City or from any officer of San
Luis Obispo County hereunder.
Section 8 . The unpaid assessments in the aggregate
amount of $166,515, as hereinabove referred to and as
determined by the Treasurer and the City Council, together
with interest thereon computed at the rate specified in the
Bonds (which interest shall begin to run from the date of the
Bonds), shall in accordance with and consistent with the
Improvement Bond Act of 1915, remain and constitute a trust
fund for the redemption and payment of the principal of the
Bonds and for the interest due thereon, and said assessments
and each installment thereof and the interest and penalties
thereon shall constitute a lien against the lots and parcels
of land on which they are made, until the same be paid. The
Treasurer shall annually make a record in his office showing
the several installments of principal and interest on said
17
0950b5
assessments which are to be collected for the forthcoming year
during the term of the Bonds. An annual installment of said
unpaid assessments shall be payable and shall be collected in
each year corresponding in amount to the amount of Bonds
unpaid and to accrue that year, which amount shall be
sufficient to pay the Bonds as the same become due, and an
annual installment of interest on said unpaid assessments
shall be payable and shall be collected in each year
corresponding in amount to the amount of interest which will
accrue on the Bonds outstanding for such year, which amount
shall be sufficient to pay the interest thereon that shall
become due on the next succeeding March 2 and September 2.
The annual proportion of each assessment coming due in any
year, together with the annual interest on such assessment,
shall be payable in the same manner and at the same time and
in the same installments as the general taxes of the County of
San Luis Obispo on real property are payable, and said
assessment installments and said annual interest on said
unpaid assessments shall be payable and become delinquent on
the same dates and in the same proportionate amounts and bear
the same proportionate penalties and interest after
delinquency as do general taxes on real property in the County
of San Luis Obispo.
The City Council hereby covenants with the holders
of the Bonds that in the event any assessment, or installment
thereof, including any interest thereon, is not paid when due,
18
0950b5
• i
it will order and cause to be commenced within one hundred and
fifty (150) days following the date of delinquency, and
thereafter diligently prosecute, judicial foreclosure
proceedings upon such delinquent assessment or installment
thereof and interest thereon, which foreclosure proceedings
shall be commenced and prosecuted without regard to available
surplus funds of the City, including money available in the
Reserve Fund provided in Paragraph 11 of this resolution. The
City Council hereby further covenants with the holders of the
Bonds that it will monitor the records of the Treasurer and,
not later than one hundred and fifty (150) days following the
date when each assessment, or any installment thereof,
including any interest thereon, is due, it will advise the
Paying Agent either that there are no such delinquencies, or
that there are such delinquencies, and (in the latter case)
whether or not it has caused to be commenced the aforesaid
judicial foreclosure proceedings. If the City has advised
that such judicial foreclosure proceedings have not been
commenced, then the Paying Agent agrees that it will use its
best efforts to institute a suit at law or in equity to compel
the City to commence such foreclosure proceedings (the
expenses of which suit shall be paid by the City in accordance
with Section 7 hereof) ; provided, that the Paying Agent shall
not be responsible for monitoring the records of the Tax
Collector of San Luis Obispo or for taking any action other
than as specified herein, it will cause to be commenced the
aforesaid judicial foreclosure proceedings.
19
0950b5
Section 9 . There is hereby created and established
a fund to be known as the "City of Atascadero Improvement
District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment District)
Redemption Fund, " which fund shall be kept by the Treasurer
and shall constitute a trust fund for the benefit of the
holders of the Bonds. At the time of the issuance of the
Bonds, the City shall deposit in said fund from the proceeds
of the sale of the Bonds the sum of $9,752.23, representing
capitalized interest, plus the accrued interest received from
the sale of the Bonds from December 2, 1988, which shall be
applied to the interest payment on the Bonds on September 2,
1989 . All sums received by the Treasurer which are received
from the collection of unpaid assessments, and of the interest
and penalties thereon, shall upon receipt be deposited in said
fund. All sums to become due for the principal of and the
interest on the Bonds shall be withdrawn from said fund and
transferred to the Paying Agent so as to be received by the
Paying Agent for use for the payment of the principal of and
the interest on the Bonds at least two (2) business days
before each such principal or interest due date, and the Bonds
and the interest thereon shall not be paid out of any other
funds . The City Council hereby agrees and covenants that it
will timely make or cause to be made such withdrawals and
transfers in compliance with the requirements of this
sentence. The Paying Agent shall not be required to invest
any funds held by it under this section, nor shall it
20
0950b5
be liable to the City for payment of interest on any funds so
held. Any surplus remaining in said fund after payment of all
Bonds and the interest thereon shall be applied as directed by
the City.
There is hereby created and established within the
Redemption Fund a Prepayment Account. Upon receiving any
prepayment of an assessment, the Treasurer shall deposit such
prepayment as received in the Prepayment Account. At least
three (3) business days before each principal or interest due
date, the Treasurer shall withdraw from the Prepayment Account
and transfer to the Redemption Fund the installment of
principal due in the fiscal year of prepayment and interest-
accrued to the next redemption payment date. Any surplus
remaining in said account shall be used to advance the
maturity of bonds to the next redemption date as provided in
Part 11 of the Act.
All moneys in said fund shall be invested in any
lawful investments of City funds maturing not later than the
date on which such moneys are required for disbursement as
herein provided. All interest earned on such investments
shall be credited to said fund, except as otherwise required
by Section 12 of this resolution.
Section 10. There is hereby created and established
a fund to be known as the "City of Atascadero Improvement
District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment District)
Improvement Fund" (herein, the "Improvement Fund") , which
21
0950b5
shall be kept by the Treasurer. After making the deposit in
the Reserve Fund as required by Section 11 and after making
the deposit in the Redemption Fund required by Section 9, all
remaining proceeds of the sale of the Bonds (together with the
paid assessments) shall be placed by the Treasurer to the
credit of the Improvement Fund and shall be kept separate and
distinct from all other City funds. All moneys in the
Improvement Fund shall be invested in any lawful investments
of City funds maturing not later than the date on which such
moneys are required for disbursement as herein provided. All
interest earned on such investments shall be credited to the
Improvement Fund, except as otherwise required by Section 12
of this resolution. The moneys in the Improvement Fund shall
be applied exclusively for the purpose of paying the cost of
the improvements for which the Assessment District has been
formed, including payment of the incidental expenses in
connection with such improvements; provided, that after
completion of said improvements and the payment of all claims
from the Improvement Fund, any surplus moneys remaining in the
Improvement Fund (as determined by the City Council) , or such
portion thereof as is allowed by law, shall be used as a
credit on the assessment in accordance with the provisions of
Section 10427. 1 of. the Streets and Highways Code.
Section 11. There is hereby created and established
a separate fund to be known as the "City of Atascadero
Improvement District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment
22
0950b5
District) Reserve Fund" (herein, the "Reserve Fund") , which
Fund shall be kept by the Treasurer and which shall constitute
a trust fund for the benefit of the holders of the Bonds. At
the time of the issuance of the Bonds, the City shall deposit
in the Reserve Fund from the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds
the sum of $11, 656, and all money in the Reserve Fund shall be
paid and transferred in the following amounts and at the
following times and under the following circumstances :
(a) Whenever there are insufficient funds in the
Redemption Fund to meet the next maturing installment of
principal of or interest on the Bonds, the City shall
transfer an amount necessary to satisfy such deficiency
to the Paying Agent, for use for the payment of the
principal of and the interest on the Bonds, at least two
(2) business days before each such principal or interest
due date which amount shall be calculated by the
Treasurer and which calculation shall be set forth in
writing. The City agrees that if such insufficiency was
caused by delinquent payment of installments of
assessments, then an amount equal to the amount so
transferred shall be reimbursed and deposited by the City
in the Reserve Fund from the proceeds of redemption or
sale of the parcel in respect of which payment of
installments of assessments was delinquent.
23
0950b5
" (b) In the event unpaid assessments are prepaid in
cash prior to their final due date, the City shall
transfer from the Reserve Fund for deposit in the
Redemption Fund an amount equal to the ratio of the total
amount initially provided for in the Reserve Fund to the
total amount originally assessed in the proceedings for
the Bonds multiplied by the reduction in said assessments
(as a result of any such prepayment) , which shall be
calculated by the Treasurer.
(c) If at any time the amount of interest earned by
the investment of any portion of the Reserve Fund,
together with the principal amount in the Reserve Fund;
shall exceed $11, 656, as such amount may have been
reduced pursuant to subparagraph (b) above, such excess
shall be transferred to the Redemption Fund and credited
by the City upon the unpaid assessments in the manner set
forth in the Act.
(d) Whenever the balance in the Reserve Fund is
sufficient to retire all the remaining outstanding Bonds,
the City shall transfer the balance in the Reserve Fund
for deposit in the Redemption Fund and the City shall
cease the collection of the principal and interest on the
unpaid assessments . In such case, the City shall credit
such balance against the assessments remaining unpaid in
the manner set forth in the Act, with the amount
apportioned to each unpaid assessment credited against
24
0950b5
1 • •
the last unpaid assessment installment; and if the amount
apportioned to each parcel exceeds the amount of said
last installment, then such excess shall be credited
against the next preceding unpaid assessment installment
or installments until exhausted. In the event that the
balance in the Reserve Fund at the time of such transfer
exceeds the amount required to retire all outstanding
Bonds, then such excess shall be apportioned by the City
to each parcel upon which an individual assessment
remained unpaid at the time the balance in the Reserve
Fund was sufficient to retire all outstanding Bonds, and
such payments shall be made by the City in cash to the
respective owners of the parcels, except that if such
excess is not greater than One Thousand Dollars
($1, 000) , such excess may be transferred to the general
fund of the City.
Section 12. (a) The City will not make any use of
the proceeds of the Bonds or any other funds of the City or of
the improvements acquired and constructed with the proceeds of
the Bonds or any part thereof which would cause the Bonds to
be "arbitrage bonds" subject to federal income taxation by
reason of Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the "Code") , "private activity bonds" subject to
federal income taxation by reason of Section 141(a) of the
Code, or obligations subject to federal income taxation
because they are "federally guaranteed" as provided in Section
25
0950b5
149(b) of the Code; and to that end the City, with respect to
the proceeds of the Bonds and such other funds, will comply
with all requirements of such sections of the Code and all
regulations of the United States Department of the Treasury
issued thereunder to the extent that such requirements are, at
the time, applicable and in effect, and will comply with the
provisions of the Rebate Certificate delivered by the City,
dated the date of issuance of the Bonds, as originally
executed and as it may be amended from time to time (the
"Rebate Certificate") .
(b) In furtherance of the covenants of the City set
forth above, the City will cause the Paying Agent to comply
with the Rebate Certificate, and the City hereby agrees and
covenants to establish and maintain with the Paying Agent the
"City of Atascadero Improvement District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch
Area Assessment District) Rebate Fund" and to use such fund to
segregate the Rebate Requirement (as that term is defined in
the Rebate Certificate) and Rebate Earnings (as that term is
defined in the Rebate Certificate) from all other moneys of
the City and the Paying Agent in accordance with the Rebate
Certificate.
(c) The City hereby represents that the reasonably
anticipated amount of "qualified tax-exempt obligations" which
has been and will be issued by the City in 1988 does not
exceed $10, 000, 000, and hereby designates the Bonds to be
"qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section
265(b) (3) (B) (ii) of the Code.
26
0950b5
: Section 13 . The City Clerk is directed to cause the
Bonds to be typed, lithographed, printed or engraved, and to
cause the blank spaces thereof to be filled in to comply with
the provisions hereof, and to procure their execution by the
proper officers, and to deliver them when so executed, to the
Paying Agent, who shall authenticate them, and thereafter
deliver them or cause them to be delivered to the purchaser
thereof, on receipt by the Treasurer of the purchase price
thereof. The Treasurer and the City Clerk are further
authorized to execute and deliver to the purchaser of the
Bonds a signature and no-litigation certificate in the form
customarily required by purchasers of municipal bonds,
certifying to the genuineness and due execution of the Bonds
and to all facts within their knowledge relative to any
litigation which may or might affect the Assessment District
or the City, said officers or the Bonds, and the Treasurer is
further authorized to execute and deliver to the purchaser of
the Bonds a Treasurer's receipt in the form customarily
required by purchasers of municipal bonds, evidencing the
payment of the purchase price of the Bonds, which receipt
shall be conclusive evidence that said purchase price has been
paid and has been received by the City. Any purchaser or
subsequent taker or holder of the Bonds is hereby authorized
to rely upon and shall be justified in relying upon any such
signature and no-litigation certificate and any such
Treasurer' s receipt with respect to the Bonds executed, sold
and delivered pursuant to the authority of this resolution.
27
0950b5
S
Section 14 . The officers of the City and the Public
• Works Director are hereby authorized and directed, jointly and
severally, to do any and all things and to execute and deliver
any and all documents, or to make any necessary modifications
thereto, which are acceptable to the City Attorney and Bond
Counsel and which they deem necessary or advisable in order to
consummate the issuance, sale and delivery of the Bonds.
Section 15. The Private Placement Memorandum
relating to the Bonds on file with the City Clerk is hereby
approved, and the Bonds are hereby authorized to be sold
pursuant to the terms of the Bond Placement Offer on file with
the City Clerk at a price not less than one hundred per cent-
(100%) of the principal amount thereof, together with accrued
• interest thereon to the date of delivery. The officers of the
City are hereby authorized for and in the name of the City to
execute a Private Placement Memorandum and a Bond Placement
Offer, respectively, in substantially the forms presented to
the City Council, with such changes as such officers may
require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced
by the execution thereof, Security Pacific Merchant Bank, as
Placement Agent, is hereby authorized and directed to cause to
be printed and mailed to prospective purchasers of the Bonds
copies of such Private Placement Memorandum in substantially
such form as was presented to this City Council.
Section 16. The Resolution of Intention is amended
by adding a new Section 8 which reads as follows: The Council
. hereby determines and notice is given that the City will not
28
0950b5
r" obligate itself to advance available funds from the City
Treasury to cure any deficiency which may occur in the bond •
redemption fund.
Section 17. This resolution shall take effect
immediately.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December, 1988,
by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES:
ABSENT:
[SEAL]
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSON, RAY WINDSOR,
City Attorney City Manager
29
0950b5
• tutEEft 1�f AE3ENDR -�
• MEMORANDUM
To : Honorable Mayor and City Council
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject : Senate Resolution 46-List of Maintenance and Construction
Needs for 1990 to 2000
Date : December 7, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council adopt by motion the estimated
list of maintenance and construction needs for the above years and
request submittal to the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council
by December 14, 1988 for their inclusion in the area needs list .
• Background:
Please refer to the attached letter from Ron Dicarli , SLOACC
Program Manager.
Discussion:
Staff was not able to get the material corrections to the area
council by December 5, but the SLOACC meeting was postponed to
December 14. We would ask our representative, Mayor Borgeson, to
hand carry our changes to the County Staff ' s estimates as shown on
the attached summary sheet .
The corrections show $6, 900, 000 needed for maintenance with
revenues of $4, 750, 000 mainly from gas tax and TDA funds; $6, 625 , 000
needed for new construction (assuming improvement of such roads as
listed in the SLOACC report that are for the most part unfunded)
with revenues of about $1 , 100, 000 mainly from FAU funds and
development fees; $700 , 000 needed in engineering fees with only
$50 , 000 in revenues from a percentage of the funds available;
$500 , 000 needed for roadway construction equipment with only
$100, 000 available from development fees.
The total estimate is $14, 725_. 000 needed and only $6, 000, 000
anticipated. These needs do not include the State Highway needs in
our city outlined in the SLOACC report .
• Fiscal Impact :
The basis of this action is to acknowledge the need for
additional funding through the State programs .
San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council ArroyoGrande
Grover*
and Regional Transportation Planning Agency Paso Robles
Pismo Beach
San Luis Obispo
San Luis Obispo County
November 1, 1988
Mr. Ray Windsor, City Manager
City of Atascadero
P. 0. Bog 747
Atascadero, CA. 93422
Dear Mr. Windsor:
SUBJECT: SENATE RESOLUTION 46
Senate Resolution 46 (September 1988) directs the the Senate Transpor-
tation Committee to prepare a transportation facilities and financing
plan. The plan intends to assess state-wide transportation needs verses
available resources. The results of this assessment will provide techni-
cal and political justification for the state legislature to enact appro-
priate revenue measures. The committee intends to use the plan for this
purpose in the upcoming 1989/90 legislative session.
While focusing upon state highway deficiencies, the committee realizes
the critical needs of local jurisdictions Toward meeting that end, the
committee has requested that the Regional Transportation Planning Agen-
cies (RTPA) provide information on local needs verses resources. Specif-
ically, the committee requests a "summary of annual local road mainte-
nance and rehabilitation needs between 1990 and 2000. . ." and a "summary
of capital and operating expenditures needed for implementing necessary
TSM measures between 1990 and 2000, if any."
In August of this year, we gathered information from members of our
Technical Transportation Advisory Committee (TTAC) concerning local main-
tenance and rehabilitation needs to include in the 1988 update of the
Regional Transportation Plan. Attached, please find the information that
was submitted for your jurisdiction. (Note: We did not receive informa-
tion for all jurisdictions.) We discovered a wide variance in the esti-
mated costs of improvements; hence we ask that you review the attached
information to verify that it reflects your jurisdiction's needs verses
available revenues for the ten year period including 1990 - 2000. If
not, please modify the plan to reflect this information.
The Senate Transportation Committee requests that this information be
"formally adopted by your policy board." Please have your plan approved
by resolution or minute order before your council and return it to us by
County Government Center, San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 (805) 549-5710
SENATE RESOLUTION 46
November 1, 1988
Page 2
December 5, 1988. We will present this aggregated regional request to
our Council for adoption on December 7, 1988. The accompanying state
highway improvement plan is being developed and reviewed independently
with TTAC and will be considered by our Council at their December 7, 1988
meeting.
Should you have questions or require further clarification, please call
me at 549-5714.
Sincerely,
Paul C. Crawford, AICP
Executive Director
RONALD L. DE CARLI
Program Manager
RLD/cl/8892-1
11-01-88
r
SAN LUIS OBISPO AREA COORDINATING COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE
DEC MBM 14, 1988
SUBJECT:
IMIONAL 1990-2000 TRM4SPCP=CN F'AcnXTTIES PLAN (PER
SENATE RESOLUTION NO. 46, 1988)
Senate Resolution 46 (1988) direct-.ed the Senate Transportation Committee
to prepare a Transportation Facilities and Financing Plan. Each region in
the state has been requested to submit a formally adapted plan by Deoember
1, 1988 s mmtar;zing local road maintenance and rehabilitation, and new
Construction needs: as well as all planned or necessary improvements to
the state highway system.
REO7Il4EN=0N
STAFF: Approve resolution adopting the attached facilities plan and
authorize its transmittal to the State Senate Ccm=ttee on
Transportation.
TIM General Concurrence (see discussion below)
CTAC: General Concurrence, with a recce mendation to expand scope of
Route 46 widening project to include Almond Drive to the east
junction of Routes 46/41 (See discussion below)
BACKGROUND
During the 1988 legislative session there was a spurt of activity
resulting in 10 bills or related constitutional wwxA rents designed to
increase transportation funding. Most of these proposed to increase
transportation taxes and all were tied in same manner to voter approval.
Progress on all bills broke down in the last days of the legislative
session reportedly because of both partisan and philosophical differences.
A major stmbling block was the Proposition 4 issue and the opposition of
certain factions toward an override or any "tampering" with the Prop. 4
limit that might benefit transportation at the expense of other interests
in the state. A secondary noted concern was the inability of individual
legislators and commnities to know what projects would be funded if
revenues were increased.
Bel-1
In response to the concerns expressed, Senator Quentin Kopp
San
Francisco) , Chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee (SIC )
sponsored and secured Passage of Senate Resolution 46. This resolution
directs the Senate Transportation Committee (SIC) to prepare a
Transportation Facilities and Financing plan. Zhe objective of the
resolution is to collect and assemble information from each RTPA in the
state on transportation needs. The apparent intent is for members of the
Legislature to be able to identify for their constituents improvements to
I provided if additional funding was developed. The STC intends to
Produce a plan in early 1989 to be used as a basis for a new revenue
P1 in the 89/90 Legislative Session.
theS l tResolution requests all RTPA's to develop a Regional plan and
adoptedforwarrecommendations to the STC by December 1st, but
acknowledged they could accept it no later than December 31, 1988. The
1990 to 2000 Plan should includes
I.
Summary of local road maintenance and rehabilitation needs, current
expenditure levels and deficiencies, if any.
2. Summary of new local construction projects (new facilities, extensions
and increa-sed capacity improvements) .
3• Summary of anticipated street-related
Management (TSM) measures. Transportation Systems
4. List of all planned or necessary major state hiccwaY Projects (in
excess of $5 million) and, optionally, minor state highway projects
(defined by staff $.5 to 5 million) .
In addition, the projects must be reasonable and cost-effective; needed to
correct existing or projected deficiencies; have local or
onal
support; be able to secure environment clearance before January 1,12000
and not be included in the 1988 STIP.
Much of .this information was previously gathered for integration into the
1988 Regional Transportation Plan. It is being reviewed and modified with
affected jurisdictions to meet the conditions of SR 46. Each adopted local
jurisdictions SR 46 plan will be attached with the resolution at the time
it is submitted to the state
ADVISORY OONIIwrgrrPE REVIEW.
Major comments and recommendations from MC included: Concern over the
limited available state funds and how the local share of project costs is
determined; a question of whether increasing Route 101 to six lanes will
Preclude adding lanes to Route 227; and a recommendation to include an
additional project on the SR46 list for a new/improved interchange to
serve southern Arroyo Grande with improved east-west access.
B-1-2
Major C anments and reconmendations from CTAC included: Concern over the
scope of the necessary Cuesta Grade inprovements and expression of a
desire for ccmu zuty review in the early planning stages; A
whether the list should include a larger range of Possible
question a
recommendation to e Projects; and a
to include all of teencope Of
the Route 46 East widening project
of Routes 46 and 41.of Road and the east junction
STAFF RESPONSE To TTAC AND CTAC C XMnS
4Staff concurs and the recommendations have been included, except for Route
funding constraints, four laning of Route 46 is being
reamanended in the RTP as a long range project. The
existing STIP ieles
$9 million for passing lanes east of Airport Road. SR 46 guidelines
Preclude listing of STIP projects. Additional funding on Route 46 counts
against county minimms and must be weighed against
Route 101, et al. meting needs on
DATA � ONS AND OLTAT IFTCATIONS
s
local street and road maintenance and capital needs were developed in
consultation with the local jurisdictions. Data for the County, San Luis
Obispo City and Monro gay (to be distributed at hearing) was developed in
specific
response to SR46 and was adopted by their governing boards. There
the either no response or a response to an earlier RTP needs survey from
remaining jurisdictions.
ATTA�S:
I. Resolution of
Approval for the San Luis Obispo Regional
Transportation Facilities Plan, required by SR 46.
2. Regionwide State and
Local
Financial plan Data. Transportation Facilities and
3• Regionwide major and minor State Highway Improvement Projects
with a
Ying exhibits.
4• Local Public Street and Road Information by Jurisdiction.
B-1-3
w w
SAN LUIS OBISPO AREA COORDINATING COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 88-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SAN LUIS OBISPO
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
PLAN REQUIRED BY SR 46
The following Resolution is now offered and reads:
WHEREAS, the California Senate has recognized the need for a
comprehensive long-range transportation facilities and financing plan to
accommodate current and future transportation demands; and
WHEREAS, . the Senate has also recognized the State has insufficient
revenues to meet the current and future transportation facilities needs;
and has had difficulty in developing a transportation revenue package as
individual legislators and communities did not know what projects would
be funded; and
WHEREAS, in recognition of these concerns the Senate approved
Senate Resolution 46 directing the State Transportation Commission to
prepare a transportation Facilities and Financing Plan; and
WHEREAS, Quentin L. Kopp, the Chairman of the Senate Transportation
Committee has requested all Regional Planning Agencies to coordinate with
member jurisdictions, to develop, adopt and submit a Regional
Transportation Facilities Plan by December, 1988 which:
Summarizes local road maintenance and rehabilitation needs
between 1990-2000, current expenditure levels and any
deficiencies.
° Summarizes all local street and road capital facilities needs.
° Lists all planned, or necessary, major state highway improvement
projects; '
and
WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Regional Facilities Plan, attached
hereto, as Exhibit A, was developed to meet these requirements in
coordination with the California Department of Transportation, the county
and each of the seven cities in the region.
1�
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Luis Obispo Area
Coordinating Council hereby adopts the San Luis Obispo Regional
Transportation Facilities Plan, included herein as Exhibit A.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that said Plan be transmitted by
certified mail to Senator Quentin L. Kopp, Chairman, Senate Committee on
Transportation.
On motion by Delegate , seconded by Delegate
and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted on this day
of 1988.
Evelyn Delaney, Vice President
San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL EFFECT:
By•
Deputy County Counsel
w
Date:
ATTEST:
Paul C. Crawford, Executive Director
San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council
RD/cl/sb/8888-1
11-02-88
-2-
0
EXHIBIT A
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES PLAN
SENATE RESOLUTION 46(1)
1990 to 2000
MAJOR STATE HIGHWAY PROJECTS (OVER STATE $(2)
° Rt. 46 - East of Paso Robles - Convert two-lane
to four-lane divided highway from
Airport Road to .5 miles east of Almond
Drive. (P.M. 32.1 - 41.1) ........ . .... $11.0 M
°
Rt. 101 - Cuesta Grade - provide northbound and south-
bound truck climbing lanes (P.M. 30.0 - 36.5) $21.5 M (4)
° Rt. 101/1 - In San Luis Obispo - revise and consoli-
date Santa Rosa interchange and adjacent
ramps to meet current standards
(P.M. 29: Total $10 M est.)............... $ 8.0 M (4)
° Rt. 101 - In San Luis Obispo - Widen from four to
six lanes from Madonna Road to Monterey
Street (P.M. 27.5 - 30.0).... ..............
$15.0 M (4)
° Route 101 - In Arroyo Grande and Pismo Beach - widen
from four to six lanes from Grand Avenue
to Hinds Avenue overcrossing ......... . .... $9.0 M
° Route 101 - From Avila to San Luis Obispo, widen from
4 to 6 lanes (P.M. 21.1): $17. M ......... $17.0 M
TOTAL MAJOR PROJECTS (over $5 M; in State funding) 81.5 M
MINOR STATE HIGHWAY PROJECTS ($.5 TO $5 M) STATE $ (2)
° Rt. 1 -
In Morro Bay - Revise interchange at Morro
Bay Blvd. overcrossing
(P.M. 28.6 - 29.0: Total $1.7 M).. ... . . ... $.4 M (4)
° Rt. 101/41 - In Atascadero, revise interchange and
on/off ramps (P.M. 45.6: Total $ 5M) $ 4.0 M (4)
Rt. 41 - Widen from two to four lanes from San
Gabriel Road to Route 101
(P.M. 14.2 to 15.9: Total $3.1 M. ....... .. $3.1 M
° Rt. 41 - Construct passing lanes from junction Rt. 1
in Morro Bay to 1.0 M n/o Los Altos Rd. at
various locations (P.M. .5-12.6: $3.2 M)... $3.2 M
° Rt. 101 San Luis Obispo at Prado Road - Construct 4-lane
overpass; southbound on/off ramps;
reconfigure northbound on/off ramps ($5 M est.) $1.0 M (4)
° Rt. 101San San Luis Obispo at Los Osos Valley Road
revise southbound on/off ramps and improve
drainage (P.M. 25.9: Total $4 M est.).. ... .. . . $ .8 M (4)
° Rt. 101/227 - Marsh Street (Rt. 227) - revise interchange to
meet current standards and provide West Marsh
St. extension (P.M. 28.09: total $5 M est.). . $4.0 M (4)
° Rt. 101 - Atascadero - revise interchange at Traffic
Way for improved east-west traffic flow and
access, including relocation of northbound
on ramp (P.M. 45.9: Total $4.0M est).. .....
Rt. 101/58 - Widen northbound bridge structure and extend
northbound on ramp (P.M. 37.9: $.95 14)... .. $ .9 M
°
Rt. 227 - South of San Luis Obispo - widen from two
four lanes from Tank Farm Road to Crestmont
Drive (P.M. 9.37 - 11.06: $2 M est.).. . . . $ 2,0.,4
° Rt. 101 - Arroyo Grande at Brisco Road - provide
supplementary underpass. I'
. Revise on/off
ramps; add southbound auxiliary !j
(P.M. 13.7: total $5 M est.). . . . ... .. . . $ 1.0 M
i
° Rt. 1 - Curve correction at Willow Road
(P.M. 2.3 - 2.6 $11-i est).. .. . .. . . . . $ 1.0 M
° Rt. 101 - Improve/construct interchange south of
.Grand Avenue and construct a two-lane
highway on a new alignment of Rt. 227 east
to P.M. 1.3; Total $11 M.... .. . . . .. ...... $ 4.0 M (4)
° Rt. 1 & 101 TSM: Construct five park-and-ride lots
at various locations: Total $ .5 M ext.. $ .5 i4
° Rt. 227 -
At intersection of Corbett Canyon and I
Printz Roads, improve alignment and
replace bridge. (P.M. 1.42 to 1.49)
Total $1.5 M est. .. . .. .. . . .. . . . . .. .. . . $ 1.5 M
TOTAL MINOR PROJECTS
$28.2 M �(
TOTAL STATE HIGHWAY PROJECTS � '
109.7 M
NOTES:
1. Includes all capacity - increasing state highway improvement
projects exclusive of those programmed in the State Transportation
Improvement Plan.
2. State share of "jointly funded" projects assumes 20% unless State
to State route which assumes 80% state share. Costs derived from
Caltrans 1988 Candidate List unless noted by "est." in which
estimate was developed by SLOACC staff.
3. Minor project includes all state highway projects that have a state
share between $.5 to $5 million.
4. Significant design, environmental and/or engineering needs to be
addressed.
RLD/cl/sb/8889-1/82
11-29-88
-3-
n
I •
J
1 F}- r� _
I z
1 m (D (n
Z 1 �- Q
V LU 0 M .O.I^
O
oYa.amepV s�N.0NCV0
o.
QQ
?-
JZW
V2
Vc«1 0 A n
m CCa yon
py VppQ ZN I OMM
C3 a
ILVe^ 0Q"
O O w V�7 ..d p 7 W f�
�� O OLO
c0 �,>� w o
n u I.
I m
1 u a d.-1 1,
E
o a /L, .cr-
UJ
C L V v ` w +•
V D O Q {„jam
v
1 o c a $ a Q, WO
v m o Z co LU W
U N (7 p p z (D z
1 N Q N rd cx i P .
F-
�- W
N LL w
ca CL
1 aO q m J) Q
I N s cr Q C
CL _ I
U)
Z
I i e c =
W
U 1 y 7 F-
b O'u .•. V � "� "v
14
r 8 L (
W O V 01 1_
/V ..1 7 w " f
W v v O V O 7w
W 1 -�i z V/
p V '7 0 d N .. '/.Y•
� � p N y0 � a V O ll I .
M
O O N V y .r° p
o
O ro N b 11 p a O Q
A >p
y w w.r °'F O O O
.3 u m o o« w� >= Q.
~ Ngo 0 -C U)
p0 9 bO• -_ b y CO O
cn
0 1 v V y N H 10 Cl) O �'
v 0 H v u Z i C N I V I
'Jm
.d V CIV O
Z
O u A u 0 0 u u u 0 u Q
V/ T
..~ .r c Y . • o M
C y
4 3
o m a
.y i • m VS _ O c C
>, M m m Q m 0 7
y�
m
z u v^ mai
y O mj Yea` rom
� mT'C ,gym O o-Cl
oj
.� " s ..
,y C
.O N m y+l
Q y N
f• 7 7 .2 mj f W
/��• = 1 by m .•1 7 ° >N � +i V N
Z YIu > Y':1 y LL 1 x •• m a x'y ° y Y v y
mI J O m 2 Q
O y q� pmp0 m yr m aaOM y B.r q ,Y J
C.v)�O n aC L 0 �P, � m � U•� u Cwe i J
L L4
C C6
.°I m~ mGo .00 eea �i yam41 L, Iva > m cu
W
0 I mm
tj
Z m > q a u S O my Q aoZ I ua 8� m i LQ
i m Q V J y Y Y Is .0N y 8 V v N p W m LL y
"� y Q Q o O y v ° Q b
I u u.mi > ° mnm Y •+c aai.-� u m u
y0
w y N .. O W O O'd.u m m b :3w 4 m u as m y M G'. O O F
m e " wd yv92 6ao
9 m7o 7a Z
m w
co :r '
•�'. e O O M N ^ H ti W 1—
ti w w o m cd W U
//''�'•� m y n N \\ .y F ~ u P1 V/ y/
`1 w °a m
7 i L OI�
• y
V4i Qc a m Y m
LO
QCOEf3
J
w
0
N a
V N O i �..'• W
1 N Q N_ _ J Z
U�/
V)J
iIa LL C)
cw_ / Q o• p = 4wi aJ� Z W
\ •O IOO \CD Q LL
cn
cz
cc Q
O
CL 0-
00
Z c�
Q
O I y Ww
B o u 1 4 0 E m C i 1 Q W O y > .. O m
"'I m y b 7 0 m 7 0
1 ^mlC woo
. °1-^ m eId
W B
I-- f
QS 7
CLL
m 7 y i > 0 = CO
L Q O ro Y LL C N Y ° y y V y Y
1� �� p0Y V wv S u m JN a C a a 0.,44i 7 ° O cr
z0 0 60
p v Om ° i1 0 m 4• m
o
L O O m O u i• y Vi m o m d g l..• 7•r°i 1.1 /�\
N u y y a V L V N .y L 7 O y V Y co V Ll L
V) m •� d 'O U Q '�\
O 7 I > qy u t m O O w u ,m.+ Q toIm VL) O
_ w a y C u A O �. S u m O O y 1Q'W
O B m W i tyi O
O m
q p�w N
m! SO B i"i S •�.s m \N Q.o Fr d p /Q'
u N Q y y m 'd O Z~ ' `v
S^ m �/'�
m
7: p ti Y p N �!.-1 N O m m S Q'C O•-� V) O
Y 1 'K q N S T N m x m W d Z 1 904 v CO N m ^•W
1 c= o ' u A,n I a u v
.-1 :J V•-..y � I W F C .a y .• ,.y j i'N O O m a m Q V J
O
o" Y
SO • Y O •I C\ 8 •..1 7 •'i m Q
ICJ Y a w co Y O Q m Y m O y u oa IZ M Y
O y
O N
a s m•°y K Uya
T fns
........�.................�-- it
u i
m a m � N n Niim C
Z mO
ii O O
N N
W N
LL u v O �� .�
II Cp 11p
In O
IIII N M II N
v
I I v v
II ...................._......_. II co
co II
m Q�Q��
11 A N II Q9
z 11 A o O f TryV I I V)
O: II m C O O N m m N it It C
LU w 11 IT N N a 0) �D II G
M-p II
II N N M N N
.J N N
�� ............................ II N �A
1.- 11 O0 N In N
II D
Z IISp IT O A OIIN
ll!!1� UU77 O ¢ 't, mit v
V 11 oh m Z O i in
�i� a N ov iii o
11 .............. N II M dT
11 Q ¢ ¢ OC - p••0 II O l OLi
n z z Z z N ri g q a
o ii L
�-O ii 0 o p u c
wu o 0 uO oq, u
of
If ii N
2 O II
U.1 w I I
:a R f- n A
08off11
II ypI
ms' mi1m c
o woii °
In o � Iln qy
Qp{� W 11 a c E
'D .+ N m 0
W II
W Z 11
r� I
O p Y li IS 2 �Vpf G S S pO ii A q
U~ mw ItII n =x m
J ii j N O 10 it Ln
Ty g
O II y 'A
W60 29 liu4, o u lf� M'O IA
. 01 i1N
al
It
Ln
=3o S 8 " 8 crc C
Zw 'I .0 V1 �p y t
$ wuo m I!
In a of� q L 0 8 n w N r;ii
it N. V) 11 O N M J .0 I.I.w H 11 11 q d q
Ln 11 ¢ N ¢..V. m U
.'
n 11 A
8 o niiA y
W �� g f�f 11 R11 11
LD U9) coo c L pp d
I I `
M it
M 76Li
I 0 01 L •9
II
n po a pop z z g yo
�QpD1
W I I ppO QpOw RI �p it SyCC 6 GGA 1 '
W 11 O O i
w II m yCC11
U 2 iD 7 �p O C L v
T 11 N N N M N O S
tl N N ii M A C N 0(
Z 11
z Z �g L
=W II °
w II 8
CJ 11 �
9 li
mll 4it �
11 -N N 11 iI N � L��
11 II
................... ......
O II ^
It ci
G 11 v It .�•� i•...
II
U, 11
w..
O II >. it J O
O G it n L) II H Z
U ii O
F- II 1-
11 m of 5S u
V) u
� II i
11 & w Y J
IIII
II U v,1 U m 8 m 14
II O 5>r -Is
II 2 ¢ a Z 11 1
to J
SENATE RESOLUTION 46 NEW PROJECT LIST
SUMMARY OF TEN YEAR NEEDS ( 1990 - 2000)
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COST
-------------------------------------------
NEW CONSTRUCTION
Oak Park Interchange $550,000
Camino Mercado Overcrossing $4,000, 000
Brisco Rd. I/C - Grand Ave. Modification $7, 000, 000
BRIDGE PROJECTS
Traffic Way Br. over Arroyo Grande Creek $500,000
Coach Road over Arroyo Grande Creek $900,000
James Way over Tally Ho Creek $2, 000,000
Le Point Street over Tally Ho Creek $1 ,000,000
Route 227 over Tally Ho Creek $1 ,500,000
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Various Improvements to Traffic Way $ 1 ,600,000
MAINTENANCE NEEDS
General ' Overlays ($100, 000 per year) $ 1 , 000,000
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE TOTAL ROAD NEEDS $20, 050,000
SENATE RESOLUTION 46 NEW PROJECT LIST
SUMMARY OF TEN YEAR NEEDS ( 1990 - 2000)
i
GROVER CITY 10 YEAR PROJECT LIST
COST
--------------
-----------------------------------------------
NEW CONSTRUCTION
Widen 4th Street $350, 000
Widen N. Oak Park Blvd $700, 000
Traffic Signal Projects $875,000
Grand Ave./ 16th St. i
Grand Ave. /8th St. -
So. 13th/Farrol .l. St.
No. 4th St./Atlantic City Ave.
So. 13th Street pavement widening $700,000
So. 4th St. (Operational Improvements) $1 , 000, 000
Oak-Park-Road/101 Interchange $250, 000
GROVER CITY -NEW CONSTRUCTION NEEDED $3 ,875,000 ! '
MAINTENANCE
Reconstruct EI Camino Real $500,000
Reconstruct Farroll St. $1 ,500, 000
Local street overlays ($ 200K/year) $2, 000, 000
GROVER CITY MAINTENANCE NEEDED $4, 000,000
GROVER CITY TOTAL ROAD NEEDS $7,875,000
i.
i
SENATE RESOLUTION 46 NEW PROJECT LIST
SUMMARY OF TEN YEAR NEEDS ( 1990 - 2000)
1
CITY OF ATASCADERO - 5 YEAR PROJECT LIST
COST
Santa Ysabel $300, 000
Cascada $ 100, 000
Baranco Extension $250, 000
West Front Street Widening $25, 000
Lewis Avenue Bridge Project $650,000 -
S YEAR PROJECT TOTAL $1 ,325, 000
CITY OF ATASCADERO - 10 YEAR PROJECT LIST COST
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Gabriel -Bridge $400, 000
Santa Cruz Bridge $400, 000
Non City Maintained Streets $4,000, 000
Traffic Signals (3) $300, 000
C�ution ights (4) $200, 000
-tY��utS`fi=----------------- ______
--------------------------
10 YEAIR PROJECTTOTAL $5,300, 000
ATASCADERO - 2
,�X YEAR PROJECT LIST $6,625, 000
SENATE RESOLUTION 46 NEW PROJECT LIST
SUMMARY OF TEN YEAR NEEDS ( 1990 - 2000)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
COST
-------------------
STREET IMPROVEMENTS - WIDENINGS
Widen Orcutt Road, Broad to Laurel $ 1 ,500,000
Widen Prado Road, Higuera to 101 $260, 000
Widen South Street, Higuera to Beebee $500, 000
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECTS
Traffic signal controller interconnect $200, 000
Traffic signals @ various locations $ 1 ,080, 000 -
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECTS
Toro St. over San Luis Creek $450,000
Nipomo St. over San Luis Creek $500, 000
Prado Rd. over San Luis Creek $800,000
Elks Ln. over San Luis Creek $800,000
STATE .HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS
Signal @ Los Osos Valley Road and 101 $90, 000
5 YEAR PROJECT SUBTOTAL
$6, 180,000
I
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO - 10 YEAR PROJECT LIST
PROJECT COST r
-------------------------------------------------------------
STREET IMPROVEMENTS - WIDENINGS -;
Higuera St. , Madonna Road to S. city limits $ 1 ,900,000
California Blvd. , San Luis Drive to Foothill $2,500, 000
Tank Farm Road, Higuera to city limits $500,000
Madonna Rd. , Zozobra to Oceanaire $300, 000
Higuera St. , Marsh to High $600,000
Johnson Ave. , Marsh to San Luis ( low priority) $ 1 , 100, 000
Osos St. , Monterey to Higuera $70, 000
Orcutt Road, Laurel to Johnson ( low priority) $240,000
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECTS
Traffic signals @ various locations $800,000
-----------------------------====
10 YEAR PROJECT TOTAL $8, 010, 000
SLO CITY NEW CONSTRUC'rION NEEDED $ 14, 190, 000
i
• SENATE RESOLUTION OLU IQN 46 NEW PROJECT LIST
SUMMARY OF TEN YEAR NEEDS ( 1990 - 2000)
SAN LOIS OBISPO COUNTY - 5 YEAR PROJECT LIST
COST
----------------------------
Avila Road, Hwy. 101 to San Luis St. $595,000
Burton Drive, Main St. to Ardath $1, 037,000
Foothill Drive, SLO CO LN to LOVR $1 ,211 ,000
LOVR, Hwy. 101 to Rodman $9, 171 ,000
Main St. , Cambria Dr. to Santa Rosa Ck. $622, 000
Nacimiento Dr. , Paso CL to Nac. resort $8,835,000
Price Canyon Rd. ,: Hwy. 227 to Ormonde $846,000
San
Luis Ba
Drive,, Hwy 101 to Avila1 03
$ 1 ,000
South Bay Blvd. , Hwy 1 to Bay Oaks $6,623, 000
Tank Farm Rd. , Hwy 227 to Higuera $1 , 190,000
Tefft St. , Las Flores to Thompson $4,055,000
Valley Rd. , Hwy 1 to Arroyo Grande CL $309,000
--------------------------------------------
5 YEAR PROJECT TOTAL $35,525,000
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY - 10 YEAR PROJECT LIST
PROJECT COST
Ardath Drive, Hwy 1 to_ Marlborough $944,000
El Camino Real , Atascadero CL to Hwy 58 $3,298,000
El Morro Ave. , South Bay to 7th $305,000
Halcyon Rd. , El Campo to Arroyo Grande CL $896,000
Las Tablas Ave. , Hwy 101 to Old County $388, 000
Las Tablas Road, Hwy 101 to Bethel $3, 708,000
Main Street, Vineyard to Ramada $1 , 152,000
Noyes Road, Hwy 227 to Arroyo CL $1 ,249,000
Old County Road, Vineyard to Main $622,000
O'Connor Road, Foothill to Cuesta $1 , 761 ,000
Santa Ysabel Ave. , South Bay Blvd. to 2nd $494,000
7th St. , Santa Ysabel to Nipomo $363,000
Willow Rd. , Pomeroy to Thompson $7,222,000
10 YEAR PROJECT TOTAL $22,402, 000
SLO COUNTY NEW CONSTRUCTION NEEDED $57,927, 000
•
MEET� - EaDA
DAT ��13
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Ray Windsor , City Manager
FROM: Paul Sensibaugh , Director of Public Works
Valerie; Humphrey , Clerical Technician
SUBJECT: Career Opportunities Development Program
DATE: December 8, 1988
Recommendation :
Staff recommends that Council approve the attached
resolution authorizing the City of Atascadero to enter
into a contract with the State Personnel Board to
participate in the Career Opportunities Development (COD)
Program. (Resolution No. 114-88)
• Background:
The COD Program is designed to provide employment
opportunities to disadvantaged persons on a financially
cooperative basis with the employer .
The employee will be working as an Engineering Aide
Trainee for a period of 9 months .
Financial Impact :
The State will pay 90% of the wages and benefit for
this employee, the Citv' s contribution will be $1 , 855 . 00
and funds are available in the 1988-89 Public Works budget .
• i
RESOLUTION NO. 114-88
•
WHEREAS, the CITY OF ATASCADERO
Contractor
a public agency, is qualified to do business in California under the Federal
Employer's Idenfitication Number 95-3389063 ; and
BE IT RESOLVED, that by the City Council Meeting of December 13, 1988,
Date
the City Council approved and authorized the above named
Contractor to enter into an Agreement with the State Personnel Board for the
Career Opportunities Development Program from November 16, 1988 through
November 15, 1989 ; and -
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that at the above mentioned Counciheeting, the
Director of Public Works, Paul M. Sensibau h has been authorized
Title and Department
and directed to execute Agreements for and on behalf of the CITY OF •
Contractor
ATASCADERO
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December , 19 88 by
the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
NOT VOTING:
Signature
Printed Name:
Title:
ATTEST:
MEETJN AGDit
DATE ITEMENi �D
i
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council
FROM: Ray Windsor, City Manager
SUBJECT: Claim of Brett Morris
DATE: December 13 , 1988
BACKGROUND
Claimant, a City police officer, is seeking compensation for
glasses damaged while in the course of police business .
iRECOMMENDATION
The City' s insurance adjustor recommends denial of this claim.
Claimant has been advised to utilize departmental procedures
regarding damage to his property in the course of police busi-
ness .
•
MEE
DATT, EMI A „
•
RESOLUTION NO. 115-88
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCESS TO
CITY SAFE DEPOSIT BOX
The Council of the City of Atascadero does hereby resolve as
follows :
THAT the City Manager and the Director of Administrative
Services are hereby authorized to access the City' s safe deposit
box located at Mid-State Bank in Atascadero.
ON MOTION BY Councilmember seconded by Coun-
cilmember the foregoing resolution is adopted on
the following vote:
• AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney
•
QAET1 G�3 ,:-AGENDA �� _/'
I
MM
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13, 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: REQUEST' TO CONVERT EXISTING CONTRACT BUILDING
INSPECTOR POSITION TO A PERMANENT POSITION
BACKGROUND:
The City of Atascadero has been functioning with one permanent
full-time building inspector position together with a second (and
sometimes a third and fourth) contract position since May, 1986 .
As part of the fiscal year 1988/89 budget request, the depart-
ment sought to make the contract position of Jon LeSage into a
permanent position which would cost approximately $3600 a year.
• The volume of work has continued to require two full-time build-'
ing inspectors per day, and in order to lend stability to this
function and to continue a high level of service, it is requested
that Mr. LeSage be made permanent for the following reason:
Jon has proven to be a valuable employee who is not only
knowledgable of the various codes but more important,
familiar with the community and our basic inspection needs .
Jon indicated some time ago that it was his intention to
seek a permanent, full-time position_ 'as a building
inspector, preferably with us . However, because of the
uncertainty in timing associated with our creating a
permanent full-time position, Jon has been competing for
similar positions elsewhere. As a result of this, he has
competed for and is considering a position in a neighboring
community.
As I indicated to you earlier, I would be seeking to gain
Council authorization at the time of budget review in
January to make Mr. LeSage full-time, in order to avoid
losing his services . I realize this is a little premature
but in light of present circumstances, together with the
fact that the increase in cost will be less than $2000 for
the remainder of the fiscal year and the fact that Jon would
like to remain with us , I respectfully request that we seek
Council approval at this time.
•
•
BUDGET IMPACT:
Approximately $1800 for six months remaining in the fiscal year.
No appropriation is requested at this time, but may be sought as
a budget adjustment should the need necessitate before the end of
the fiscal year.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorization of a second permanent building inspector position
through approval of Resolution No. 113-88 .
HE :ps
Enclosure: Resolution No. 113-88
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 113-88
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AUTHORIZING A PERMANENT BUILDING
INSPECTOR POSITION
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommends the con-
version of a full-time contract building inspector to a perma-
nent position under Personnel Rules and Regulations, Section 3 . 2
and 3 .3; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has analyzed the request and finds that
the position has been a de facto full-time position since 1986;
and
WHEREAS, the creation of a full-time position would lend
stability to this important City function consistent with the
demands of a growing community and is recommended for approval
by the City Manager.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Atascadero City Council
approve the addition of one building inspector to the 1988/89
authorized personnel of the Community Development Department .
On motion by , and seconded by
, the foregoing resolution is adopted in its
entirety by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney
PR ARED BY:
HENR ENG Commurtity Development Director
ETINMEAGENDA
SAT ITEM 1 w J�
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council
THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Mark Joseph, Administrative Svcs . Directo
SUBJECT: Lease/Purchase of Photocopier
DATE : December 13 , 1988
BACKGROUND
The City' s existing IBM photocopier is over three years old and
is beginning to experience a high level of down time. Copy
quality is an additional concern. As a result, bids have been
• solicited from a number of vendors . The top two bids are for a
Mita copier - (Model DC-5585) and a Konica copier (Model 5503 ) .
Although the Konica is slightly lower in overall lease/purchase
cost, the projected service agreement is higher.. Copier speed is
the same, but other features, particularly copy quality, led
staff to recommend the Mita Model DC-5585 .
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The adjusted lease/purchase price, including tax, ( after trade-
in) is $12 , 110 . 20 . The 36-month lease/purchase agreement will
result in monthly payments of $392 . 37. The maintenance agreement
is projected to cost approximately $454 . 00 per month (The actual
cost consists of a flat minimum of $335 .00, plus a per copy
charge over 40 , 000 copies) . Thus, the annualized cost is esti-
mated at $10, 156 . The City currently has budgeted $28 , 626 for
photocopying purposes .
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Council authorize the City Manager to
enter into both a lease/purchase agreement and a maintenance
service agreement with Coastal Xerographic Service, the
authorized Mita dealer.
•
MJ:cw
MEET AdENDA _
DATE 8 iTEM� �"
• MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject : Re—bid�for Dial—A—Ride Service Contract Proposals
Date : December 8, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council approve the revised
specifications and authorize staff to re—bid the contract proposals .
Background:
At the last regular meeting in August, the Council rejected all
bids for the above service . Since that time a committee made up of
• Mayor Borgesson, Councilman Dexter, Public Works Director Sensibaugh
and Public Works Superintendent Leib have reworked the
specifications and h1ve made a recommendation to re—bid.
Discussion:
The major changes are that the bid proposal bids will be
evaluated by the committee on a point system basis which is shown in
the specifications and the requirement of five (5) years experience
in the demand—response area. Several minor changes have been made
to the specifications which will be briefly outlined at the council
meeting.
The proposed point system is as follows :
15 . . . . . . . .Completeness of proposal submitted and compliance
with terms of the request, and Proposer ' s interview.
40 . . . . . . . . Cost of providing the required service .
15 . . . . . . . .Management approach, employment and training
Practices, response of references, and operations plans and schedule
for the implementing the proposed services .
30 . . . . . . . .Experience and capabilities of general contractor;
The number of years of responsible service .
100 . . . . . . .Total points available .
Fiscal Impact :
It is presumed that the specification changes will yield the
lowest responsible bid that reduces service cost but maintains
service quality.
MEMORANDUM
'Y o:; i-ionorable Mayor and City Council
From; Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Acting City Manager
Subject; Dial-A-Ride Contract Extension-120 Days
Date: Saptamb2r 7, ASS
Recommendation-,
Staff recommends approval of the attached contract extension
for the present Dial-A-Ride service.
Background:-:
At the last regular Meeting Council rejected all bits for the
above S2rViCe, Staff was directed to extend the agreement after
negotiations with the current contractor.
Discussion-
Staff has negotiated a 120 day extension to December 31 , 1983,
for the following fees: Weekly fixed-$2058. 25, and Hourly variable-
$6. 410. This compares to the current rates oi $2209. 02 and $6. 945�,
respect i vel y.
Fiscal impactg
The savings over the life of the contract extension is
estimated at just over $4, 000.
` • MEETl* AGENDA
Da?E_ 'TEM,
-�
• MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh. Director of Public Works/City Engineer
,40� Acting City Manager
Subject : Dial-A-Ride Bid Award
Date : August 16, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council award the Dial-A-Ride service
contract to Santa Barbara Transportation, Inc . of Santa Barbara, Ca.
in the amount of $124, 004 for the 1st year, $128,894 the 2nd year
and $134, 031, maximum and direct staff to bring back an agreement at
the next regular meeting.
Background:
Bids for the above service were received on July 15 . The bid '
summary below is based on 7800 hours and broken down between fixed
costs such as insurance and variable costs such as labor in order to
fluxuate the demand hours . (That breakdown is not shown below. ) The
current contract for Community Contract Services assuming the same
maximum number of hours is $169, 037 . The apparent low bidder is
Santa Barbara Transportation, Inc . at $124, 004, the next low bidder
is Laidlaw Transit, Inc . at $139, 357, and the high bid was from CTS
in the amount of $143,495 (which alone represents a savings of
$25, 542 over the present contract) .
Item S.B.T. Laidlow CTS
Labor:
Management Labor $13,520 $16,328 $20, 100
Management Bene . 2,563 4, 088 5, 025
Office/Cler.Lab. 11 , 440 17,563
Off . /Cl .Benefits 1 , 870 3, 864
Operator Labor 38, 654 46, 800 45, 178
Operator Benefits 13, 000 12, 131 6,777
Admin. Labor 19, 558 11 ,480
Admin. Benefits 5, 664 2, 870
Subtotal : $81 , 047 $104,569 112, 857
Expenses :
Non—Vehicle Ins . $ 26 , 300 $ $11 , 914
Telephones 1 , 200 1 , 200 750
Office Supplies 1 , 200 360 900
Train. /Recruit. 1 , 000 2, 000 250
Uniforms 500 600 175
Physicals 250 300 300
Other
Corp .Overhead 30,328 14, 349
Travel/p . cash 2, 000
Contract Fee 12,757 30, 328
Subtotal : $ 43, 207 34, 788 30, 638
Total : $124, 254 139, 357 143,495
Discussion:
Attached is a letter from SBT stating their insurance costs
which were not entered into their bid initially. These costs are in
line with the other bids for that item and did not remove SBT from
the apparent low bid position. The discrepency in the numbers from
the letter to this report is due to an addition error in the SBT
bid. Staff recommends that these irregularities be waived and that
the corrected bid be accepted.
SBT does not have any experience in demand response (dial—a—
ride) transit operations . All of their systems are either fixed
route or subscription service such as our contract with Escuela De
Rio . They recently acquired the Run—a—Bout system for the County,
but it is too early to judge their performance . It is true,
however, that they have not been able to hire d dispatcher and are
not operating that system as it was bid.
Additionally, SBT has indicated that they will be using the
same manager that operates the South County Area Transit (SCAT)
system and the Run-a—Bout (handicap) system. SLOACC has judged this
position to be stretched very thin and since SBT has bid only one
dispatcher for our D—A—R system staff is concerned that a smooth
transition may not take place . SCAT has experience frequent late
runs on that fixed system of 1/2 hr. and problems are not being
taken to the County due to the lack of staff support ( in Grover
City) .
Staff is concerned about the lack of dial—a—ride experience for _
the low bidder and is used to working with a company that has a very
good reputation throughout California in this type of a system.
However, SBT is the lowest responsible bidder and enjoys the legal
right to prove that they can provide the service for which they bid.
The contract is a three year contract but the City has the
right to terminate the contract upon notice at any time throughout
the contract . Each of the bidders increased their bids
approximately 5% per year to arrive at the 2nd and 3rd year bids .
SBT bid $128, 894 and $134, 031 , respectively for the 2nd and 3rd
Years (after error adjustments) .
Fiscal Impact :
The savings over the current contract will be $44,833 for the
first year and similar savings for subsequent years . Despite the
concern regarding the service we are buying it is difficult, if not
impossible, to not accept the low bid.
i
i
MEETI a4kN
t3AT ITEM�-�
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13, 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director ;
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16-88 APPEAL
LOCATION: 12405 Santa Ana Road
APPELLANT: First Nationwide Bank (Volbrecht Surveys)
BACKGROUND:
On October 18, 1988 and November 15, 1988, the Planning Commis-
sion conducted hearings on a request to subdivide two existing
parcels totaling 16 .36 acres into four parcels of 4 . 09 acres
each. On a 4 :3 vote, the Commission adopted the findings for
denial contained in the attached staff report and denied the
parcel map request. There was considerable discussion on this
• matter as reflected in the attached minutes excerpts .
ISSUES:
A majority of the Commission opposed the proposed division based
upon the configuration of the lots - which exceed a 3 : 1 depth to
width ratio - and concern that the houses could be too close
together. In response, the applicant submitted "Site Development
- Exhibit All showing that the homes could be sited 145 ' to 150 '
apart. The scenic easement would preclude building to the rear
of the Santa Ana frontage and prevent potential deep lot subdivi-
sions . The applicant has also submitted an exhibit limiting the
building sites to the area designated.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
To approve Tentative Parcel a - a -w
PP 1 M 16 88 for four-way lot split
P Y P
subject to 18 conditions (Exhibits E and F - Conditions of
Approval - October 18 1988) Staff would further recommend that
an additional condition #19 be added to the conditions of
approval :
1119 . Issuance of building permits shall be. limited to the
building envelopes designated on the Designated Building
Sites Map dated December 7 , 1988 . "
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
•
The Planning Commission recommended denial of Tentative Parcel
Map 16-88 as presented (Attachment C Findings for Denial
November 15, 1988) .
HE:ps
Attachments : Appeal Letter dated November 18, 1988
Designated Building Sites Map
Staff Report dated November 15, 1988
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - 10/18/88
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt - 11/15/88_
cc: First Nationwide Bank
Volbrecht Surveys
•
•
ibrecht
SURVEYS 7508 Morro Rd. • Atascadero, CA 93422 • 805/466-9296
!I
November 18, 1988
1
City of Atascadero
Community Development Department
6500 Palma
Atascadero, California 93422
RE: Tentative Parcel Map AT87-315 (TM 16-88)
At the Planning Commission meeting of November 15, 1988, the
Commission voted to deny our application for four parcels.
Some of their concerns were as follows:
1. The parcel sizes are too small.
We met with staff prior to submitting the lot line adjustment
that created these parcels to make sure the parcel sizes would
meet City zoning requirements. No concern for the parcel sizes
was addressed at that time.
2. The building sites are too close together.
We have demonstrated that houses could be built on all four
parcels without being closer than 145' from each other. Existing
zoning, however, would allow houses within twenty feet of each
other no matter what size the parcels are.
3. The lot lines ,should be perpendicular or radial to the street.
This is not feasable for this project due to terraine and the shape
of the existing parcels themselves as well as the irregular alignment
of Santa Ana Road.
In answer to the findings for denial :
I. This tentative parcel map was thoroughly evaluated prior to
submittal . The City's staff stated in the original staff report
that they were "impressed with the character and visual aspects
of the site."
2. We have attempted to arrange these parcels to fit the existing
topography of the site. The parcels will utilize two points of
access from Santa Ana Road which already exist (rather than adding
two more points of access for the two additional parcels), along
with the existing graded house site on parcel 4, thereby not adding
to the disruption of native vegetation or watershed. The remaining
building sites would require little or no grading or tree removal.
Surveying - Land Planning
page 1RECEIVED A9�s1 � : 1988
The lot configuration is unusual due to the existing building site
on parcel 4. The other two parcel lines were created utilizing
the existing topography to create the most useable areas around
the building sites. We also felt that this configuration would
encourage prospective builders to place the houses as far from
each other as is physically possible. If necessary the lines
between parcels 1, 2, and 3 can be straightened somewhat.
3. We find the site to be physically suitable for the type of
development proposed as we believe we have demonstrated.
4. We find the site to be physically suitable for the density of
development proposed as other developed parcels along Santa Ana
Road have been developed in a similar manner.
At this time we wish to appeal the action taken by the Planning
Commission.
Sincerely,
M" Vik
.
Alan L. Volbrecht
L.S.5201 (exp. 6-30-88)
cc: Abdul Kahn - First Nationwide Mortgage
o �}
c
� V
�1
� w
a
s J �
Q U
o
Q
K Isi
v
. ti
Q
o �
m
ITEM : B-1
MEMORANDUM
DATE : November 15,, 1988
TO : Planning Commission
FROM : Joel Moses, Associate Pla7Tletative
SUBJECT : Continued Public Hearing Parcel Map 16-88
12405 Santa Ana Road - (First Nationwide Bank)
At it's October 18, 1988 meeting, the Planning Commission
continued the public hearing on the above referanced parcel map
to its November 15, 1988 meeting. The continuance was to allow
time for the applicant to prepare a revised map reducing the
number of proposed lots from 4 to 3. To date, the applicant has
not submitted a revised parcel map. Attached is the previous
staff report and revised conditions for a three lot parcel map.
Staff has also prepared findings for denial of the four lot
parcel map if the Commission wishes to procede in that direction.
Attachments Attachment A - Staff Report (October 18, 1988)
. Attachment B - Revised Conditions of Approval
Attachment C - Findings for Denial
JM/jm
•
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF ATASCADERO STAFF REPORT - 10/18/88
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 18, 1988
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: TPM 16-88
SUBJECT:
Subdivision of two (2) existing parcels totaling 16. 36 acres into
four (4) parcels containing 4.09 acres each.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .First Nationwide Bank
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Volbrecht Surveys
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12405 Santa Ana Road
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . .Ptn. Lots 2, 3, 11 & 12
B1k. 44 (Atas Col. )
5. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16. 36 acres
6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS (Residential Suburban)
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .Suburban Single Family
8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant
9. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
Oct. 7, 1988
B. ANALYSIS:
The applicant proposes to subdivide two (2) existing undeveloped
parcels containing 16. 36 acres into four (4) parcels containing
4. 09 acres each. All parcels will have direct access to Santa
Ana Road, a fully developed and accepted City maintained road.
Parcel 2 will also have access to Sausilito Road, an undeveloped
road.
The subject property is located in the RS (Residential Suburban)
zone. Minimum lot size in this zone ranges between 2. 5 and 10
acres depending on the "score" of the various performance
standards. For this site, the minimum lot size criteria are:
1
i i
Distance from Center (14, 000-16, 000) . . . . . . . . . . . .0.50
Septic Suitability (40-59 min. /inch) . . . . . . . . . . 1. 00
Average Slope (26-30%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.25
Access Condition (City accepted) . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 40
General Neighborhood Character (Ave. 4.7) . . . . . . . 0. 94
Minimum Lot Size. . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 09 acres
The proposed lot sizes of 4. 09 acres is equal to the minimum lot
size required for the site.
The site has previously been reconfigured to allow for the
proposed subdivision. Lot Line Adjustment 19-87 was approved
enlarging the lots by adding enough property to provide for a
four way lot division. The lot line adjustment has been finialed
and this map proposed.
In examining the site, staff is impressed with the character
and visual aspects of the site. The site is located along a
ridge line and continues down the west side of the ridge. It is
highly visible to both , the east and west. The developer has
located the potential building sites back from Santa Ana Road.
In doing so, the potential impact is significantly reduced. The
building sites do meet the minimum internal setback requirements
from the proposed lot lines, but are relatively close to one
another. Parcels 1 & 4 have building sites a distance of 100'-0"
from the adjoining sites. Building sites on parcels 2 & 3 site
are within 50 '-0" of each other.
Access is provided by Santa Ana Road The right-of-way is
currently fully developed and accepted by the City. The site
also has frontage on Sausilito Road, an undeveloped road. In
reviewing the potential development of Sausilito, the City feels
that due to the slopes and existing alternative access to the
area, Sausilito Road is not needed for the development of the
area. In the future, the City will examine the potential for
abandonment of the road.
Internally, the site currently has a dirt road connecting all of
the proposed building sites and the property to the north. The
applicant has not proposed any specific information on potential
access, but it would appear that each parcel could have
individual driveways connecting to Santa Ana Road. The
development of these additional driveways will increase the
number of access points to Santa Ana and would require additional
site grading and potential tree removal. The development of
access points would have some significant visual impact as well.
Limiting access to the site would improve public safety and
reduce visual impacts of the development.
If individual accesses are developed they would have to meet the
• driveway standards of 12 '-0" width and paving when exceeding 12%
2
6 0
in slope. If the access is required to be joint, then two lots
still can be served by a private drive. In this case the access is
could be required to serve all four lots with two access points
and still be considered as a private driveway.
The proposed lot configuration is unusual. The proposed lots not
only exceed the maximum lot depth to width ratio of three to one
but create some odd lot forms. The configuration is dictated by
the location of the four potential building sites. The
Subdivision Ordinance allows for the approval of lots exceeding
the 3 to 1 lot depth to width ratio if specific findings can be
made (see Exhibit D) . These finding require that deep lot
subdivisions will not occur as a result of the subdivision, or
that a deep lot subdivision will not be detrimental to adjacent
properties. The Subdivision Map Act also requires that specific
findings be made as to the acceptability of the site for
development.
The site' s developable areas are limited to the upper area of the
site that is relatively level and which has access. Perk tests
show that the area is suitable for the installation of septic
systems. Individual systems will have to be designed to building
code standards. The sites are ample for single family
residences with slopes of approximately 10%. Little grading will
be needed for development. The sites have ample area for single
family residences ranging in size from 7, 500 to 15, 000 square •
feet.
The applicant has proposed the establishment of scenic easements
covering the western half of the proposed parcels. The easements
will cover a majority of the site and a goodly number of the
trees. The establishment of these easements will preclude
future splitting the new parcels. The existing zoning and
general plan designations require minimums of 2 1/2 acres. This
will make future splitting difficult requiring the modification
of lots to acquire additional land to meet the minimum lot sizes.
Additionally, the staff can see no future buildable sites that
can be used on the parcels.
Comments were received from several outside agencies. Our Fire
Department requested that no driveway exceed the allowed 20%
slope. Building Division noted no problem with the proposal as
long as the existing codes and standards are followed in the
development of the parcels. The Southern California Gas Company
has noted that the site can be served by an existing 3 inch main
in Corriente and Cebada Roads.
3
0
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Parcel Map 16-
88 based on the Findings in Exhibit E and Conditions of Approval
in Exhibit F.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Map
Exhibit C - Developer' s Statement
Exhibit D - Map Detail
Exhibit E - Findings for Approval
Exhibit F - Conditions of Approval
JM/jm
4
112405
HIBIT A - LOCATION MAP
CITY
OF ATASCADEROntative Parcel Map 16-88
Mi'l Santa Ana Road
X12COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENt Nationwide/volbrecht
`�s DEPARTMENT _ •
s A
W
SITE: 12405 Santa Ana Road
TPM 16-88 °a
Cq�i
► P
v�
J
a R S
i�� • fP
RS
0
R S
s•Nt► �/
RS (
°PON► I/ I' 't'
1; 11 �� � 1�♦
� �� 1 D o-- \\ •MT
AO
.o
R 10
.1\ \\�
J_fto.,
It Ao
90
,,.
R S No
EXHIIBIT B - TENTATIVE MAP
CITY OF ATASCADERO Tentative Parcel Map 16-8£
• LAM = ,»:. 12405 Santa Ana Road
sCAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1st Nationwide/Volbrecht
��� DEPARTMENT
.;� � TENTAT/lfE PrORCE!�LIAPATBL9/S �'i
. ... _ wNLCAY.M,LMN SM'LIRf LVT�{ M
k
/9 /j" /J:9
-�1ff: �`�1.� f,`•_��• , /K/tlf bC4'Y InY M'MV✓/t d/nfOnNW M�••K ,<Y
. .. �� a.ar r •�� Com_• - .an^rnrwsrmswa✓nry r�w•r�wi flrrsr. �. f
• _ _•'L Spalrw'.9/A✓aJrl AYiaM%LfOnI f.W O!//�l'(1Y%fI f
. ✓ .a 7•'\ � N.WO NRYNr✓ww rpllrnr L{✓pIM.1MNJAgMf
it \ mwrer a aLse/m(w/!lr ornlsuru w
J/'/. 1J% "�.e ' �ealvn.E•j � _�._'_ �/�i-4����y� .�j�
•j �����• •!6�\ $,.Qi.=. � ! :j��•�1• ••ij NX .V 9•Z9iYB
aa`s`y. �++ / ,iw.c✓uuLc+r(r s:w
fC/.d ,2 I /�.(.•j �s� / (IJrNe�%�,�,.^!M_dw�'l�utfl.
rn• Lei
i '! (ql A,W(alJ,f/lfV.'vu AtXS
Fu.Kro,rox rxu.+f»'/' 40CB.PECHT SURIfEYS
m ulasd
ssw.ia.w w.+
i a/(l 4+phll r+LSH✓A!l O.f//!!.0 .P fnV.'.Rl l�AsaW fXJr
SANTA AN9 RDAL7 i (!°s('cc'L'�
' .krrn r•!r' 'i wv!•Ata[cf dJrtlH
j
EXHIBIT C DEVELOPER'S STAT
I
C TY OF ATASCADERO Tentative Parcel Map 16-88
c 'B'B-7 12405 Santa Ana Road
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1st Nationwide/Volbre
DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPER'S STATEMENT
PARCEL MAP AT87-315
There are four beautiful building sites on these two lots. They are along
a ridge with many trees providing a buffer between the potential building sites.
Two of the sites are partially graded and no tree removal should be necessary.
A Lot Line Adjustment (ATAL 87-314) has been recorded to ensure that the
parcel size will meet the City's lot size criteria for this site.
Santa Ana Road will provide access to these four parcels. It is a paved
20' wide road, with a fire hydrant fronting Parcel 4. The driveways to Parcels 2
and 3 will be built when a building permit is issued.
It is not feasable to build to the end of Saulsilito Road and it will
probably be abandoned at a future date since it is not needed to provide
access to these parcels.
The lot configuration is unusual, however, every attempt has been made to
have the parcel lines take into account the homesites, septic system locations
and access requirements. More than 50% of the total acreage will be reserved for
the'openspace through a scenic easement on the Parcel Map. This should exempt
these lots from any problem due to the width-depth ratio since there could be
no improvements within the scenic easement.
�. oA
lan L. Volbrecht L. exp. -30-88)
EXHIBIT D - IMP DETAIL
'{
CIT
Y OF ATASCADERO Tentative Parcel Map 16-88
'B'•� 12405 Santa Ana Road
' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1st nationwide/Volbrecht
DEPARTMENT
\ A - ...................
0 .��b�ia' 895�,�^•?a.z�. —�- � ?l`n'"�• - .. �, �. Eby -
104 19'
r��J. �✓� -T �FELD �BU/LD/Ni �� 1�� '` - -i y�/�.So-��.e�o'- �. ,�` �_r I� ` +` .
-Ns3's9'Se'ry 233 23' -- �_ j i y� � i ��.' t- � `-� ' rd'•,+�3 �/ ,. ��' , , �
AmCEL 3
• j – - N �� � '. �o9acTEsj/11 �9.�c�fs I o cs b
..........
\� �,.- � ,�., .. .- �-� Fi4.^ AND \ � � '• �
•J ill '� �� .�j,' ! _ �c ,�, ,�
� � 1 r. '� � � "/•� SCJ \ \�" _ , /- `�� t `� �
29734
• \ �?moo»• ___- ��- �] (" _ _
.t C iiGiNG � i
411( W
EXHIBIT E - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 16-88 (AT 87-315)
12405 Santa Ana Road
First Nationwide Bank/Volbrecht
October 18, 1988
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
1. Creation of the proposed parcels conforms to the Zoning
Ordinance and the General Plan land use designation,
densities and other policies.
2. 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 lot configuration proposes a lot depth-width
ratio greater than three to one. The proposed deep lots
can not be resubdivided further due to proposed openspace
easements. The proposed subdivision meets the
qualifications for a lot depth-width ratio in excess of
three to one as stated in Section 11-8. 206 of the
Subdivision Ordinance.
JM/jm
• EXHIBIT F - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 16-88 (AT 87-315) O
2405 Santa Ana Road D
First Nationwide Bank / Volbrecht
October' 18, 1988
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the property
line 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.
4. Grading, and Drainage plans, prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted to The Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments prior to the
issuance of any building permits or the recording of the
final map.
5. Parcels 2 & 3 shall have no direct access to Santa Ana
Road. Access shall be by way of paved driveways and
easements across Parcels 1 & 4. Relinquishment of access
rights shall be shown on the final map.
6. The access way to Parcels 2 & 3 shall be developed to a
paved width of 12 '-0" (or to the standard in force at the
time of development) . Plans and profiles shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department for review
prior to the recording of the final map. The access
improvements shall be installed prior to the recording of
the final map.
7. 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.
8. The proposed scenic easement on the west side of the sites
shall be extended 50'-0" to the east. An additional scenic i
easement shall be provided along Santa Ana Road extending
west from Santa Ana Road; 50 '-0" on Parcel 1, 75 '-0" on
Parcels 2 & 3, and 200 '-0" on Parcel 4, these easements
shall not preclude the development of access driveways or
septic systems.
9. Offer for dedication to the Public for Public Utility
Easements the following:
a. A 6'-0" PUE along all street frontages.
b. All private access easements proposed.
10. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map.
11. 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 by a
Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor •
as required by the Land Surveyors and Subdivision Map
Acts.
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.
12. 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
0
ATTACHMENT B - Conditions of Approval
• Tentative Parcel Map 16-88 (AT 87-315)
12405 Santa Ana Road
First Nationwide Bank/Volbrecht
November 15, 1988 (Revised)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The parcel map shall be redesigned to provide for three lots
parallel to Santa Ana Road. The specific design shall be
reviewed and approved by the Community Development
Department staff prior to the maps action by the City
Council.
2. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water
Company. Water lines shall be extended to the property
line frontage of each parcel or its public utilities
easement prior to the recording of the final map.
3. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or
other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there
are building or other restrictions related to the easements,
they shall be noted on the final map.
4. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
5. Grading, and Drainage plans, prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted to The Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments prior to the
recording of the final map.
6. The center Parcel shall have no direct access to Santa Ana
Road. Access shall be by way of paved driveways and
easements across the northern or southern Parcels.
Relinquishment of access rights shall be shown on the final
map.
7. The access way to the center Parcel shall be developed to a
paved width of 12 '-0" (or to the standard in force at the
time of development) . Plans and profiles shall be submitted
to the Community Development Department for review prior to
the recording of the final map. The access improvements
shall be installed prior to the recording of the final map.
8. 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.
W of
9. The proposed scenic easement on the west side of the sites
shall be extended 50' -0" to the east. An additional scenic
easement shall be provided along Santa Ana Road extending
west from Santa Ana Road; 50'-0" on the northern Parcel,
75'-0" on the center Parcel, and 200 '-0" on the southern
Parcel, these easements shall not preclude the development
of access driveways or septic systems.
10. Offer for dedication to the Public for Public Utility
Easements all private access easements proposed.
11. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map.
12. Developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City
of Atascadero Public Works Department prior to the issuance
of a building permit for improvements in the public right-
of-way. All work required by the encroachment permits
shall be completed prior to the recording of the final map,
or bonded for, but in no case shall the site be occupied
prior to the completion of the improvements.
13. Road improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments, prior to the
construction of the improvements, prior to the recording of
the final map. Plans shall include, but not limited to
Sausilito Road: Design shall meet all City development
standards,including measures to preserve and protect
existing trees on the site and in the Public right-of-way,
as approved by the Community Development and Public Works
Departments. -
14. Offers of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the
following rights-of-way and/or easements are required:
Street Name: Sausilito Road
Limits: All right-of-way that falls within the
subdivision
15. Conditions 13 & 14 shall not apply if Sausilito Road is
abandoned as a public access.
16. 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.
0 0
17. 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 by a
Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor
as required by the Land Surveyors and Subdivision Map
Acts.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
c. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
18. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from
the date of final , approval unless an extension of time is
granted pursuant to a written request prior to the
expiration date.
JM/jm
3
•
6 6
ATTACHMENT C - Findings for Denial
Tentative Parcel Map 16-88 (AT 87-315)
12405 Santa Ana Road
First Nationwide Bank/Volbrecht
November 15, 1988
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL
1. The proposed parcel map does not conform to General Plan
Land Use Element Policy Number 10 requiring that "Lot splits
shall be thoroughly evaluated and be in accordance with
community plans and principals.
2. The proposed parcel map does not conform to General Plan
Land Use Element Policy Number 11 requiring that "Attention
shall be paid to the aesthetic result of land divisions.
Building sites shall be encouraged on natural slopes, with
minimum disruption of native vegetation and watersheds, and
efficient layout of access and utilities.
3. The site is not physically suitable for the type of
development proposed.
4. The site is not physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
i
JM/jm
h4EETiN AGI
i
MINUTES - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION _
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, October 18 , 1988 7 :30 p.m.
Atascadero Administration Building
The regular eting of the Atascadero Planning Commission was
called to order t 7 :30 p.m. by Chairperson L hridge followed by
the Pledge of All giance.
J ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioner TobeY, Highland Lopez-
Balbontin, Waage,
Brasher, Luna, and Chairpers n Lochridge
Absent: None
Staff Present: Steven Decamp Se for Planner; Joel Moses, Asso-
ciate Planner; P t Shepphard, Administrative
Secretary I
PUBLIC
COMMENT:
There was no public comm nt.
A. CONSENT CALENDA
1 . Approva of minutes of the regula Planning Commission
meetin of October 4, 1988
Commissio er Luna requested that the minute be pulled from
the Con nt Calendar for discussion. It was oted this will
be dis ussed after the "New Business" section the agenda.
B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16-88:
Request initiated by First Nationwide Bank (Volbrecht
Surveys) to allow subdivision of two parcels of 16 .36
acres into four parcels containing 4 . 09 acres each.
Subject site is located at 12405 Santa Ana Road.
Joel Moses presented the staff report on this request. He
referenced a final set of conditions (staff report contained
a set of draft conditions) which the Planning Commission
received prior to the meeting. He then responsed to various
questions from the Commission.
. -1-
or -2- 4t
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - 10/ 18/88
- i
There was discussion among the Commission pertaining to the
proposed establishment of scenic easements for the parcels .
Commissioner Luna referenced the General Plan regarding lot
splits with double frontages and asked what effect this
could have on future lot splits .
There was discussion among the Commission pertaining to the
proposed establishment of scenic easements, what effect
these proposed lots having double frontage could have on
future lot line adjustments, criteria used in determining
staff' s recommendation for four lots as opposed to three,
and larger setbacks than is required in the Zoning
Ordinance.
r.
Chairperson Lochridge expressed concern that the proposed
four lot subdivision does not meet the General Plan' s goals
pertaining to larger lots, "elbow room" between the lots,
and felt these particular lots are long and narrow, non-con-
forming to neighborhood standards and have a lot of
undevelopable land.
Alan Volbrecht, agent for the applicant, objected to condi-
tion #4 (grading and drainage plan requirement) noting
there are no specific house designs completed at this time
and that this condition is premature in nature. With regard
to #8, Mr. Volbrecht asked that the scenic easements, if
granted, would allow both driveway and septic tank/leach
field construction within those scenic easements . Concern-
ing condition #12, it was pointed out that Sausilito is un-
useable, and asked for modification to allow this condition
to be met by putting a lien on the property.
In response to question from Chairperson Lochridge, Mr. Vol-
brecht stated that he would have no problem with modifica-
tion to #12 to reflect simply abandonment of Sausilito Road.
In response to question from Commissioner Waage, Mr. Vol-
brecht explained the reasons the applicant is offering the
scenic easements.
No public testimony was given.
Commissioner Waage felt that the building sites are too
close together to allow four lots but felt a three lot sub-
division would be adequate. Commissioner Luna concurred and
suggested that this map be directed back to staff to explore
explore the possibility of a three lot subdivision, and to
abandon Sausilito Road. Chairperson Lochridge also felt
that three lots as opposed to four would better serve this
site.
In response to question from Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin,
staff addressed Mr. Volbrect' s concerns with the conditions
0 -3- fo
MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION 10/ 18/88
expressed earlier.
Upon conclusion of discussion, Chairperson Lochridge, by
order of the Chair, continued the hearing on Tentative
Parcel Map '16-88 to the meeting of November 15, 1988 to
allow the applicant to revise the subdivision map to propose
a three-way lot design.
2. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 18-88:
Request initiated by Golden West Community artnership
Ltd. (Volbrecht Surveys) to allow subdivis n of an ex-
{ istin commercial
g parcel of 2 .79 acres in ten parcels
varying in size from 1 ,600 to 28,000 squ a feet with a
ommon lot for parking, landscaping and utilities.
S ject site is located at 3100 and 3150 E1 Camino
Rea .
Mr. Moses esented the staff report and referenced a master
plan for de lopment which was previous y approved. He then
responded to questions from the Co ission concerning the
timing of land cape installation, th difference between air
space condomini s and this "footpr' t" subdivision, etc.
Richard Shannon, p rtner with Gol en West Community Partner-
ship, spoke in supp t of the equest. He apologized for
the delays in putti in the andscaping and explained the
time constraints invol ed with the delay. He noted that be-
tween 20-40 trees have een a ded over what had been origin-
ally approved for the si a d explained that many of these
are screening trees (for hway 101 and the storage yards) .
He spoke on the desig explaining the reason for the
"footprint" design.
In response to questio from Co missioner Brasher, Mr. Shan-
non explained the typ of fencin which will be utilized for
the project.
Barbara Shoenike, rea resident, spo a on the poor condition
of the trees in f ont of the site a d asked what is being
done to address this problem. Staff sponded that as part
of the master p an approval, a tree rotection plan was
required. M Shannon added comments regarding measures
which have b n incorporated to revitalize these trees, in-
cluding ins ction and recommendations by a arborist.
Mr. Shan n further elaborated on the pr osed fencing
around t e site.
Mr. De amp indicated that at this point, since a m ster plan
for d velopment was previously approved, action onis item
was ore of an administrative nature. . There was c tinued
dis ussion relative to concerns raised by the Comm ssion
pe taining to the type of fencing not being compatible with
MINUTES EXCERPT - FJONNING COMMISSION - 11/15/
-2-
spoke on general plan consistency with a par cular school ' s
location but add d that the school district i not required to
follow the City' s vice in site selection. D ' cussion followed.
Chairperson Lochridg stated the neighb rs have legitimate
concerns and should to their protest to t e school board adding
that "a little clout go e a long way. "
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
1 . Approval' of minutes th regular Planning Commission
meeting of November 1, 88
2 . Approval of minutes o t e City Council/Planning Com-
mission meeting (spe ial eting) of October 27 , 1988
3 . Approval of time tension f Tentative Tract Map
24-86 at 7425 E1 Camino Real Don Messer (Cuesta"
Engineering)
4 . Approval of 'me extension for Te ative Tract Map
26-88 at 74 8-7478 Santa Ysabel - R' chard Montanaro
MOTION: Mad by Commissioner Highland, s onded by Commis-
si ner Tobey and carried 7 : 0 o approve the
nsent Calendar as presented.
B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS
1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16-88 :
Request initiated by First Nationwide Bank (Volbrecht
Surveys) to allow subdivision of two existing parcels
totaling 16 .36 acres into four parcels containing 4 . 09
acres each. Subject site is located at 12405 Santa Ana
Road. (CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
OCTOBER 18, 1988)
Doug Davidson presented the staff report summarizing the
background from the previous hearing. To date, the appli-
cant has not submitted a revised map reducing the number of
proposed lots from four to three, as requested by the
Planning Commission, but submitted a map showing a four lot
subdivision proposal with dimensioned distances between
building sites ( from 145 to 150 feet) .
Commissioner Highland inquired if it was procedure for staff
to bring back revised conditions reflecting approval of a
three-way lot split when the applicant failed to revise the
map by the Commission's direction. Mr. Engen stated staff' s
intent was to give the maximum number of choices to the
Planning Commission.
a
MINUTES EXCERPT — OANNING COMMISSION — 11/150
-3-
•
Alan Volbrecht, agent for the applicant, stated that the
applicant felt strongly in pursuing a four lot subdivision
which they felt is a viable split, and that it does conform
to the applicable land division regulations. He pointed out
that a great deal of time and effort was spent on the lot
development and lot configuration along with spending a lot
of time working with staff. Mr. Volbrecht emphasized
staff' s concurrence with the four-way lot split adding that
the staff are paid professionals which the public relies
upon. He then responded to questions from the Commission
pertaining to, splitting to the very minimum lot size allow-
able and explained how a previous lot line adjustment
affected this property enabling submittal for the proposed
four-way lot split.
Commissioner Luna noted the possibility exists for future
subdivisions and lot line adjustments as in this situation,
with new parcels being created and he asked if the build-out
population figures take this into account. Mr. . Engen
explained that the calculations are keyed to the existing
lot size being split. Discussion continued.
Chairperson Lochridge stated that the General Plan super-
cedes all other documents and expressed disappointment that
the applicant failed to follow the Commission' s direction in
revising the map.
Commissioner Waage stated that just because the minimum lot
size is 4 .09 does not mean that a lot can necessarily be
split to that size. He added that his opinion had not
changed since the last hearing in that this is not a good
subdivision.
Commissioner Brasher voiced her disappointment that a
revised map for a three-way split was not submitted as she
did not think a four-way division for this map is feasible .
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Brasher and seconded by Com-
issioner Luna to deny Tentative Parcel Map 16-88
based on the findings for denial contained in the
staff report. The motion carried 4 : 3 with the
following roll call vote :
AYES: Commissioners Brasher, Luna, Waage, and
Chairperson Lochridge
NOES: Commissioners Lopez-Balbontin, Highland,
and Tobey
. Henry Engen advised that the applicant could appeal the
denial to the City Council.
MEE�'1 SNDA
OAT
j � EM# y
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13 , 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Proposed Modification to Farmers Market Layout
BACKGROUND:
The City has received the attached request from North County
Farmers Market to relocate their Wednesday afternoon market to
the east side of Entrada (referenced as south side in their
request) .
ANALYSIS :
• The arrangement of stalls for the Farmers Market and authoriza-
tion to close Entrada was a result of Council action on Resolu-
tion No. 9-88 . A proposed winter modification to the stall
arrangement is being requested to: 1 ) avoid the problem with the
low-setting sun getting in the eyes of customers, and 2) open up
an area for the Santa Claus but on the west side of Entrada.
This arrangement (Exhibit B) has been approved by the Police,
Fire and Public Works Departments . There has, however, been some
concerns expressed by Mary Walsh of the Shoe Corral who would
prefer a staggered layout.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of Resolution No. 110-88 providing for greater flexibil-
ity in stall layout.
HE :ps
Enclosure: Letter dated November 18, 1988 from North County
Farmers Market
Proposed Resolution No. 110-88
cc : Kirk Pearson, Business Improvement Association
James Harer, Secretary, NCFM
•
1
00 ROBLES • ATASCADERO • TEMPLIPON
3 'Ds. R �
a.
Post Office Box 1783, Paso Robles, Calif. 93447
(805) 238-3734 or (805) 238-6916
November 18, 1988
Ray Windsor, City Manager
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Dear Mr. Windsor: •
The North County Farmers Market would like approval to relocate the
Market from the North side of Entrada to the South side of Entrada.
All other conditions of Resolution No. 9-88 are to remain the same.
Your kind attenti n to this request will be greatly appreciated.
Sinc ely,
James . arer
Secretary, NCFMA
JVH:sll
Enclosure: Resolution No. 9-88
✓ecc: Henry Engen
•
RESOLUTION NO. 110-88
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ATASCADERO AUTHORIZING CLOSURE OF ENTRADA AVENUE
BETWEEN EL CAMINO REAL AND PALMA AVENUE ON
WEDNESDAYS BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 2 :30 P.M. AND 7 :30 P.M.
WHEREAS, the North County Farmers Association Inc. has, pursuant
to Resolution No. 9-88, been operating a Farmers Market in down-
town Atascadero; and
WHEREAS, the North County Farmers Association is desirous of
being able to locate stalls on the east side of Entrada in the
wintertime; and
WHEREAS, the proposed layout (Exhibit B) has been reviewed by the
Community Development Department, Public Works Department, Fire
Department, and Police Department; and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Code Article 15, Section 4-2 . 21501 gives
authority for temporarily closing streets for local special
events; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on December
13 , 1988 to consider said proposal and 'public comments; and
WHEREAS, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection
of persons who are to use that portion of the street.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Atascadero as follows :
SECTION 1 . Resolution No. 9-88 is hereby rescinded in favor
of this resolution.
SECTION 2 . The City Manager or designee thereof is authorized
to close Entrada from E1 Camino Real to Palma Avenue to through
vehicle traffic between 2:30 p.m. and 7 :30 p.m. every Wednesday.
Said closure shall be affected in a manner agreeable to the
Public Works Director, Police Chief and Fire Chief.
SECTION 3. The North County Farmers Market Inc. is authorized
to conduct operation of a farmers market subject to the following
conditions :
1 . Provide the City with a copy of the Farmers Market certifi-
cate issued by the County Agricultural Commission.
2 . All sellers shall have Producer Certificates from the County
Agricultural Commissioner and/or be selling farm products
pursuant to other State regulations authorized by rules of
the Association ( i . e. , the seller must be the producer,
member of the producer' s family, or employee of the producer
member of the producer' s family, or employee of the producer
with no reselling allowed) .
3 . Sale of handicrafts is not permitted.
4 . Barbeques in compliance with all Health Department rules are
permitted.
5 . Appropriate barriers, to the approval of the Public Works
Department, shall be provided and positioned.
6 . The site shall be cleared of all rubbish and debri after
each sale.
7 . Hours of operation shall be limited to 2 :30 p.m. to 7 :30
p.m.
8. Temporary signage for the Farmers Market shall be limited to
32 square feet.
9 . The proposed Farmers Market shall take up no more than 40
stalls depending on the layout alternative selected which
are indicated in the attached Exhibits A (proposed stall
#15 is eliminated in order to provide alley access) and B.
10 . A certificate of insurance shall be provided, naming the
City of Atascadero as additional insured, with a minimum
liability coverage of $500 , 000 .
11 . The City Council may, on ten ( 10) days written notice
rescind this authorization.
On motion by and seconded by
this resolution was approved by the following roll
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
by:
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY JORGENSEN, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
- X H II3 A
JEJr
O ti
'1,=��1 �_� • � ,a - - . �: .. _ ,___s•a..:..sr-- 'STREET
✓sem
tit
f'r siJ-•
4� -tt-.ri -.{ - I - - Ya►OG14�S
R r
fo
x 2 4!+.> 7 is*9 I..l i4
s f Z '7.G. w---1 /jL• 7c
t s�•uu�.. _x 'LZ' i'7.. AGcib�r $ {-J tiw_s
G
4` 6-ti-.P4
� K
u
a
r
r
-` 1 thru 5-88
__ _ _
•r•_
,_i •r
�•t�, .•37fj�E� r�,•.T. .
El
x
G L I T Z f- 2 A
r -f o•�.��- 1 � Lliv 76 9fit i1s1 , s) I.-I
, •T f. :.,•,. > .,t' RHO.
x
I.- .- zc c; u ss s+cs sr.
H., c�7 r
i.
J.
^ I
I
F-L
1
u
El iL
a
r:;, 1 thru 3-88
MEETING 1 .:AGENDAA..2
DAT / ITEM iY
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13 , 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director AVu
SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE 14-88 clarifying the 1/2 acre minimum
lot size standard for LSF-X and RSF-X single family
residential districts.
BACKGROUND:
On November 15 , 1988, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing concerning a City-initiated request to amend the Zoning
Ordinance text relative to minimum lot sizes allowed in the RSF-X
(Residential Single Family) and LSF-X (Limited Single Family)
residential zones . On a 7 :0 vote, the Commission recommended
approval of attached Ordinance No. 184 which would make permanent
the minimum net lot size of 0 . 5 acre with sewer and 0 . 5 acre
• without sewer in these districts .
No public testimony was given on the matter.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of Ordinance No. 184 by:
1) Reading by title only.
2 ) Adoption of Ordinance No. 184 on first reading.
HE :ps
Attachments : Staff Report dated November 15 , 1988
Minutes Excerpt dated November 15 , 1988
Ordinance No. 184
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B-3 •
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: November 15, 1988
BY.-,,g Steven L. DeCamp, Senior Planner File No: ZC 14-88
SUBJECT:
Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance text relative to the minimum
lot sizes allowed in the RSF-X (Residential Single Family) and
LSF-X (Limited Single Family) residential zones.
BACKGROUND:
On May 26, 1987, the City Council adopted an "urgency ordinance"
(Ordinance #152) establishing minimum net lot sizes in the RSF-X
and LSF-X zones. Additional urgency ordinances (# ' s 154 and 175,)
on this topic have been subsequently adopted to extend the life
of the lot size provisions. It now appears appropriate to adopt
a permanent Ordinance relative to the establishment of minimum
lot sizes in the RSF-X and LSF-X zones.
•
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .City of Atascadero
2. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Citywide
3. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-X and LSF-X
4. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Single Family
5. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration
previously certified
B. ANALYSIS:
On February 23, 1987, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 145
which established revised minimum lot sizes in the RSF-X and LSF-
X single family residential zones. The Ordinance amended Zoning
Ordinance Sections 9-3. 154 and 9-3. 164 to allow for minimum lot
sizes of 20, 000 square feet where sewers are available and 0. 5
acres where sewers are not yet available. The prior minimum lot
size in the affected zones had been 0. 5 acres regardless of the
availability of sewer service. This change in the Zoning •
Ordinance was implemented to allow for the subdivision of certain
0 0
lots in the affected zones that could not be subdivided under a
0. 5 acre minimum lot size.
On May 26, 1987, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 152 (an
"urgency ordinance") which clarified the Council' s intent to
require that lots in the RSF-X and LSF-X zones meet a net minimum
lot size of 20, 000 sq. ft. or 0. 5 acres depending upon the
availability of sewer service. This was done because a number of
parcel map applications were submitted that would have resulted
in parcels of less than 20, 000 sq. ft. after areas required for
roads were deducted. An urgency ordinance was adopted because of
the immediacy of the problem and to allow staff time to analyze a
General Plan amendment that would have required that all minimum
lot sizes be based on net (exclusive of roads) rather than gross
(including road right-of-way) parcel sizes.
The Council has twice extended the life of the urgency ordinance
(Ordinance Nos. 154 and 175) . In the interim, the Planning
Commission and Council determined that the question of net versus
gross lot sizes Citywide should be considered as part of the
General Plan Revision Program, and not as a separate General Plan
amendment. Because of this delay, and the desirability of
maintaining the minimum lot size requirements established by the
Council, adoption of a permanent Zoning Ordinance amendment
appears to be appropriate at this time.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 14-88 making permanent
the minimum net lot sizes of 20, 000 square feet (with sewers) and
0. 5 acres (without sewers) in the RSF-X and LSF-X zones. The
Commission should recommend that the City Council adopt the
attached draft Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Maps
Exhibit B - May 12, 1987 Staff Report
Exhibit C - Ordinance 175
Exhibit D - Draft Ordinance
i
P .
ammu
� ,.
jq
I
NOP
ILI
Millm
"NXITAll � Baa •`• __ 1
... \ U�..11�h1►�
Milli
9 EXHIBIT A-2
CITY Location Map
,k 4� OF ATASCADERO
RSF-X & LSF-X Zones
' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ZC 14-88
DEPARTMENT
Y ( W
\ � J
I
r r RMF
VSAW
,y
AV I(PD
4 `�
{_ .o �d
N,.�PNap`GSA �/ /�/ .� _ / \\\ / \ ♦\.
dl ,RC \
OA/ST tR- �
/ 0944 a -W
CT
Cr
44
d PO
EXHIBIT A-3
Location MAP
A, jI CITY OF ATASCADERO RSF-X & LSF-X Zones
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ZC 14-88
DEPARTMENT
/p Q coq
Or
CT
PIITOSAL�
T-AVIECL
417
---PRO /
i
2 a
7=/� __ /
1 ,
/C? bow �o
y W
s s0^7M y!�
Sol1
b ��a / •Sa �I(- ( E N
(?
v V4
>'
SF•Xt��l•�
R I i
\
ri
t i �
IN �.F
AOq � g /
1
i
EXHIBIT B
May 12 , 1987 Staff Report
zC 14-88
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council May 12, 1987
VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen,. Community Development Director HE
SUBJECT: A Report to City Council Relative to Clarifying 20,000
Square Foot Minimum Lot Size Requirement
BACKGROUND:
At the City Council' s meeting of April 26, 1987, Council requested
that staff report back on the matter of minimum lot sizes required in
the LSF-X and RSF-X Single Family Residential Districts. In amending
the minimum lot size in such zones from one-half acre with sewer to
20,000 square feet, the Council had intended to establish a net. ac-
reage standard, i.e. , 20 ,000 square feet minimum exclud ni g street
rights-of-way whether owned or not owned by the abutting owner. Sub-
sequently, lot splits have been received which "net" to less than
20,000 square feet when roads are excluded. The Planning Commission
is recommending to the Council that the General Plan and related zon-
ing language be amended to establish a net density standard as part of
the next cycle of amendments.
ANALYSIS:
The General Plan of the City currently states as follows with respect
to minimum lot area (page 58) :
"8. In the calculation of lot area for the purposes of con-
sidering land divisions and in determining permitted numbers
and types of animals allowed, gross acreage shall be used.
However in determining permitted densities for multiple fam-
ily residential developments, net acreage (excluding land
area needed for streets rights-of-way) shall be used. "
In reviewing this language with the City Attorney, the opinion was
given that the Council could consider a zoning text amendment to
tighten up the language with respect to minimum lot size on 20 ,000
square foot lots. The normal process for a zoning text amendment
would be to refer the matter to the Planning Commission for study and
public hearing and then forward a recommendation to the City Council
for first and second reading with an effective date thirty-one days
thereafter.
0 0
The Council also has the option of adopting clarifying language as an
urgency ordinance which is permitted pursuant to Section 65858 of the
Government Code (see attached) . This language allows for adopting on
a four-fifth vote an urgency ordinance which is effective for forty-
five (45) days, and which permits subsequent extension for ten months
and fifteen days pending conclusions of ongoing studies pertinent to
the issue at hand. As noted, the Planning_ Commission will be recom-
mending to the City Council on the matter of establishing a tighter
definition of net minimum lot size in residential districts. A draft
urgency ordinance reciting requisite findings changing the zoning text
is enclosed for Council' s consideration.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are available to implement a net acreage
lot size standard:
1. No action - in anticipation of receipt of a recommendation from
the Planning Commission to initiate this change in both the gen-
eral plan and zoning as part of the current General Plan cycle.
2. Initiate a conventional zoning text amendment to be referred to
the Planning Commission, or
3. Adopt the attached ordinance No. 152, which would go into immed-
iate effect and preclude approving any future parcel maps or tract
maps in LSF-X or RSF-X zones which contain lots proposed to be
less than 20,000 square feet after streets have been deducted from
the acreage.
HE:ph -
Enclosures: Draft Ordinance No. 152
Government Code Excerpt Section 65858
EXHIBIT C
Urgency Ordinance
Ordinance # 175
• ZC 14-88
ORDINANCE NO. 175
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 9 ZONING REGULATIONS
BY CLARIFYING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED LOT SIZE IN THE LSF-X
AND RSF-X DISTRICT AS REQUIRING A NET MINIMUM LAND AREA OF
20,000 SQUARE FEET WITH SEWER (EXCLUDING LAND AREA NEEDED FOR
STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY WHETHER PUBLICLY OR PRIVATELY OWNED)
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 154
WHEREAS, Section 65858 of the Government Code authorizes the
adoption by local legislative bodies of interim ordinances as
urgency measures to protect the public safety, health and
welfare; and _ l
WHEREAS, said ordinances may be adopted as urgency measures
prohibiting actions which may be in conflict with a contemplated
zoning proposal which the legislative body, Planning Commission
or Community Develoment Department is considering, or studying, ,
or intends to study within a reasonable time; and
WHEREAS, the City is presently studying amendments to the
City' s General Plan and zoning regulations to clarify definitions
of minimum lot areas required; and
WHEREAS, the City Zoning Ordinance Sections 9-3 . 154 and 9-
3 . 164 were amended (Ordinance 145) to reduce minimum lot size in
the RSF-X and LSF-X 'districts to 20, 000 square feet with sewers;
and
WHEREAS, said revision was a reduction from one-half acre
minimum lot size to eliminate disputes as to credit for fee
ownership of roads with the objective of setting a minimum net
lot area of 20, 000 square feet in these districts where sewer is
available regardless of ownership of said fee title to the roads;
and
WHEREAS, applications for the subdivisions of land with lot
sizes of less than 20, 000 square feet net have been submitted
contrary to the City Council ' s intent; and
WHEREAS, the proposed extension of interim Ordinance No. 154
has been noticed for public hearing held on ,Tune 14 , 1988
pursuant to Section 65090 of the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, such urgency measures shall require a four-fifths
vote of the legislative body for adoption.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero
does ordain as follows :
Section 1 . Council Findings .
1 . The proposed code amendment is in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations.
2 . The proposed zoning text amendment will not have a
significant adverse effect on the environment.
Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not
necessary.
3 . That further study is necessary to determine what
legislation, if any, is proper for the protection of
the public health, safety and welfare.
4 . That there is a current and immediate threat to the
public health, safety, or welfare, and that the
approval of additional subdivisions inconsistent with
the zoning text changes provided for herein, would
result in a threat to public health, safety, or
welfare.
Section 2. Zoning Text Change.
That the chart in Section 9-3 . 154 Minimum Lot Size in the
Residential Single Family zone and 9-3 . 164 Minimum Lot Size in
the Limited Residential Single Family zone shall be changed to
read as follows in relation to the Symbol X:
SYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE
X 20,000 square foot net area (excluding land area
needed for street rights-of-way whether publicly
or privately owned) with sewer; half acre net
area (excluding land area needed for street
rights-of-way whether publicly or privately
owned) where sewer is not available.
Section 3 .
All applications for a permit for a subdivision of land
which had been pending before the City of May 12 , 1987 , shall not
be affected by or subject to the restraints herein enacted.
Section 4 .
This ordinance is adopted under Government Code Section
65858 and is in full force and effect for one ( 1) year.
Section 5 .
The City Council hereby declares that this is an urgency
ordinance necessary to preserve the public peace, health and
safety due to the facts set forth above.
Section 6 .
This ordinance being an urgency ordinance for the immediate
protection of the public safety, health and general welfare,
containing a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency
and passed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council shall take
effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 7 . 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.
On motion by COUNCILWOTNIAN MACKEY and seconded by
COUNCILWWLAN BORGESOy1 the foregoing ordinance is hereby adopted in
its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIUMEMBERS BORGESON, BOURBEAU, HANDSITY, MACKEY AND MAYOR NORRIS
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
DATE ADOPTED: 6/14/88
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
BARBARA NORRIS, MAYOR -
ATTEST: .
A0Y S�RITZ, City Cler
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
OLLANLEY Interim City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PY 1G. IR -NSEN, City Attorney
REPARED :
HENRY ENGEN
Community De elopment Director
EXHIBIT D
Draft Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO.
ZC 14-88
. AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE
TEXT RELATIVE TO MINIMUM LOT SIZES IN THE RSF-X AND LSF-X
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES BY REQUIRING A NET MINIMUM
LOT SIZE OF 20, 000 SQUARE FEET (WITH SEWERS) AND
0.5 ACRES (WITHOUT SEWERS) EXCLUSIVE OF ROADS
(CITY OF ATASCADERO: ZC 14-88)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning text amendment proposes
standards that are consistent with the General Plan as required
by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on November lei, 1988, and has recommended approval of the
Zoning Ordinance text amendment; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal. is consistent with the General Plan
land use element and other elements contained in the
General Plan.
2. The proposal. will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
Section 2. Zoning Text Change.
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 14-88 is approved to change
the text of the Zoning Ordinance as shown in the attached Exhibit
A, which is made a part of this Ordinance by reference.
Section 3. Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (1.5) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
Ordinance No.
circulated u ted in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and
effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
On motion by and seconded by
the motion as approved by the following role
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
ATTEST: City of Atascadero, California
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY JORGENSEN Cit Attorney
Y
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Communit" Development Director
EXHIBIT A
The charts contained in Zoning Ordinance Section 9-3. 154 and
Section 9-3. 164 are amended to read as follows:
SYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE
X 20,000 square foot net area (excluding land
area needed for street rights-of-way whether
publicly or privately owned ) with sewer ; half
acre net area (excluding land area needed for
street rights-of-way whether publicly or
privately owned ) where sewer is not available.
Y One ( 1 ) acre, when sewers are available
One and one-half ( 1 1/2) acres, when sewers
are not available.
Z One and one-half ( 1 1/2) to two and one-half
(2 1/2) acres based on performance standards
set forth in this Section.
•
MINUTES EXCERPT *LANNING COMMISSION - 11/188
-8-
In resp o se to comment by the Commission, Ms . ollowell
clarified heir desire to have this hearing ntinued in
order to ork out the design problems earli addressed.
She emphasiz that the primary issue is w ther the use
(drive-thru) i compatible with the site.
Chairperson Loch idge explained that he ould like to see
the areas that re addressed throu the staff report
worked on by the a licant.
Ms . Hollowell asked for the Com ssion' s consensus as to
whether this site is c patible fo a drive-thru restaurant.
Commissioners in favor: High and, Lopez-Balbontin, Waage,
an Tobey �
Commissioners against: L idge, Brasher, and Luna
At this point, Commissio er Tob y restated his motion. .
MOTION: Made by Co missioner T ey to approve Conditional
Use Permi 12-88 with a signage modifications
(to rem ve logo from t e entrance )
sig n . The
motion ied for lack of a s cond. '
MOTION: Mad by Commissioner Tobey, econded by Commis-
si her Highland and carried : 0 to continue the
aring on Conditional Use ermit 12-88 to
ecember 6, 1988.
Chairp son Lochridge requested that a repre entative from
Publ ' Works be in attendance at the December 6 h meeting. -
Ch irperson Lochridge called a recess at 10: 23 p. meeting
convened at 10:30 p.m.
3. ZONE CHANGE 14-88 :
Request initiated by City of Atascadero to amend the
Zoning Ordinance text relative to the minimum lot sizes
allowed in the RSF-X (Residential single Family) and
LSF-X (Limited Single Family) residential zones.
Subject zone change is City-wide.
Mr. Engen presented the staff report summarizing the
background involved with this matter.
There was discussion relative to gross vs . net density which
has been referred to the Commission to be addressed as part
of the General Plan update.
There was no public comment.
WINUTES EXCERPT - OKNNING COMMISSION - 111154k
-9-
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Highland, seconded by Commis-
sioner Tobey and carried 7 :0 to recommend approval
of Zone Change 14-88 and recommend that the City
Council adopt the draft ordinance with the
following modification:
To make permanent the minimum net lot size of 0. 5
acre with sewer and 0. 5 acre without sewer in the
RSF-X and LSF-X zones .
Proposed Resolution No. 3-88 adopting "Dista ce Factor"
Map for determining minimum lot size.
Mr. gen explained the background concerni this resolu-
tion n ting that all affected persons ( rchitects, land
surveyo engineers) will receive a py of the larger
distance actor map for determining minim lot sizes .
Commissione Brasher noted she liked t new map and found
I� it much easie to work with than the der one.
There was disc ssion concerning a more definitive way of
determining minim lot size when particular parcel lands
between two distanc ratings for a lot size factor.
MOTION: Made by Co missio r Waage, seconded by Commis-
sioner Highl d and carried 7 :0 to adopt
Resolution No. - 8 .
MOTION: Made by Comm ' ssi ner Highland and seconded by
Chairperson chrid e to continue the meeting past
11 :00 P.M.
There was further discussion conc ning initiation change in
the Zoning Ordin ce pertaining t modification concerning
lot size fact s (where the 1 s restrictive factor
prevails when a parcel falls between t o distance ratings ) .
There was also discussion concerning th theory behind the 2
1/2 to 10 ac a lot size ranges . Commissi n consensus was to
initiate a ange to Section 9 .3144 (b) ( of the Zoning
Ordinance o require the more restrictive f tors .
C. INDIVI UAL COMMENT
1. Planning Commission
mmissioner Brasher asked for an update concerning de elop-
ent of a downtown plan by Cal Poly students.
In response to question from Commissioner Luna, Mr. Eng
reported that proposed tree ordinance revisions will be
heard by the Commission on December 20th. It was noted that
ORDINANCE NO. 184
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE
TEXT RELATIVE TO MINIMUM LOT SIZES IN THE RSF-X AND LSF-X
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES BY REQUIRING A NET MINIMUM
LOT SIZE OF 0.5 ACRES EXCLUSIVE OF ROADS
(CITY OF ATASCADERO: ZC 14-88)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning text amendment proposes
standards that are consistent with the General Plan as required
by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on November 15, 1988, and has recommended approval of the
Zoning Ordinance text amendment; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does •
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element and other elements contained in the
General Plan.
2. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
Section 2. Zoning Text Change.
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 14-88 is approved to change
the text of the Zoning Ordinance as shown in the attached Exhibit
A, which is made a part of this Ordinance by reference.
Section 3. Applicability.
All applications for subdivisions of land within the City
accepted as complete for processing prior to December 13, 1988
shall not be affected by or subject to the restraints herein
enacted.
0 •
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 the 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
call vote: the motion as approved by the following role
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
ATTEST: City of Atascadero, California
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY JORGENSEN, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGE Commun' y Development Director
ITEM B-4
t , (Please insert in Agenda)
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Paul Ms Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject : Orddiinance 183 Ammending Sections of Chapter 12
(Ordinance 119, Development Fees)
Date : December 12, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council adopt Ordinance 183.
Background:
Resolution 100-88 recently established new development fees on
the basis of Ordinance 119 . Ordinance 119 refers to sections of the
50c Tax ordinance that must be added to Ordinance 119 prior to the
repeal of the 50c Tax ordinance .
Discussion:
Ordinance 183 adds the definitions and exemptions contained in
Ordinance 111 , the 50c Tax ordinance, to the Development Fee
Ordinance 119 (Chapter 12, Article 3 of the City Code) .
Additionally, the new ordinance allows the use of non—residential
fees, as well as residential fees, for parks and recreation
facilities . The only other change is the deletion of the reference
to the school development fee .
After the second reading, staff will be submitting the repeal
for several ordinances and resolutions associated with the old
development fees .
Fiscal Impact :
This is a procedural step that must be taked to maintain the
development fee revenue collections .
ORDINANCE NO. 183
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 , ARTICLE 3 OF THE CITY
OF ATASCADERO CODE RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES .
The Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain that Article
3 of Chapter 12 of the Atascadero Municipal Code is hereby amended as
follows :
SECTION 1 .
Section 3-12 . 03 DEFINITIONS :
The following terms shall have the following meanings when used in
this Chapter .
The following definitions to be added to Section 3-12 . 03
(h) "Building" : means any structure having a roof supported
by columns and/or walls and intended for shalter , housing, and/or
enclosure of any person , animal or chattel , but not including tents
or mobile homes .
(i) "Building Permit" : means a buiilding permit for
residential , non-residential , or mobile home site development applied
for to the Community Development Department of Atascadero on or after
the effective date of this Ordinance .
(j) "Construct" "Construction" as used in this Chapter means
the putting together, assembling, erection or altering of
construction materials components , or modules into a structure , or
portion of a structure, and includes restructuring, enlarging or
altering any structure . "Construct" also includes the moving from
outside the City and locating of a building, or portion thereof, onto
a lot or parcel of land, and also includes the improvement of land as
a mobile home lot .
(k) "Dwelling Unit means an independent , attached or
detached residential building designed
ned to house and provide living
space including kitchen and bathroom facilities , for an individual
(.1) "Gross Building Area" means the total floor area of each
floor of all buildings subject to this ordinance , including internal
circulation , storage and equipment ment s ace as
4 P p measured from the
outside faces of the exterior walls , including halls , lobbies ,
stairways , elevator shafts , enclosed porches and balconies .
(m) "Mobile Home" means a vehicle without ut self-propulsion
designed and equipped as a dwelling unit to be used with a
foundation .
(n) "Mobile Home Lot" , as used in this Chapter , means any
area or portion of a lot designated, designed, or used for the
occupancy of one(1) mobile home on a permanent basis.
(o) "Non-Residential" includes all uses of land other than
residentialincluding agricultural , communication, cultural ,
educational , recreation, manufacturing, processing, resource
extraction , retail trade, services , transient lodging, transportation
and wholesale trade uses .
(p) "Person" includes any individual , firm, co-partnership,
corporation,_ ` company, association , joint stock association , city,
county , state or district : and includes any trustee , receiver,
assignee , or other similar representatives thereof .
(q) "Structure" as used in this Chapter means any artifact
constructed or erected, the use of which requires attachment to the
ground, including any building, but not including fences or walls six
feet or less in height .
(r) As used in this Chapter , the terms "residential , "
"commercial , " "office , " "industrial , " "hotel , " "motel , " and "quasi-
public" have the same meanings as are defined in the General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance of this City , as well as administrative
interpretations thereof .
Section 3-112_07 (c) LIMITATIONS ON USE
The words "except parks and recreations facilities" shall be
deleted and a new section 12 . 07 (c) shall read as follows :
(c) Fees from residential and nonresidential development may be
used for all types of capital improvements .
Section 3_1210 - EXCEPTIONS
Section 3-12 . 10 is deleted in its entirety and a new section 3-
12 . 10 shall be added to read as follows :
(a) The construction of a building or structure or mobile
home which is a replacement for a building or mobile home being
demolished or moved to outside the City from the same lot or parcel
of land. The exception shall equal but not exceed the fee which
would be payable hereunder if the building or mobile home being
replaced were being newly constructed. If the fee imposed on the new
building exceeds the amount of this exception, such excess shall be
. paid;
(b) Accessory buildings or structures in planned
developments , multi-family or mobile home parks , such as a clubhouse,
swimming pool , or laundry facility ;
• •
(c) Buildincs or structures which are "
_ clearly accessory to
a principal use'' such as fences , pools , patios , parking spaces
garages , residential accessory buildings . ;
(d) Any person when imposition of such tax upon that person
would be in violation of the Constitution and the laws of the State
of California , County of San Luis Obispo, or City of Atascadero;
(e) A condominium project converting an existing multi-
family building into condominiums where no new dwellincrs are added or
created;
(f) Any rebuilding of a structure destroyed or damaged by
fire ; explosion, act of God or other accident or catastrophe, which
rebuilding does not increase the original cross building area. If
such increase does occur , the increase shall be subject to the fee as
imposed by this chapter .
(g) Any restoration/reconstruction of a historical
building recognized, acknowledged, and designated as such by the City
Planning Commission or City Council ;
(h) The construction of any building by the City of
Atascadero , or the United States or anv Department or Agency thereof,
or by the State of California or any Department , Agency or Political
Subdivision thereof , or any residential development where the City
Council finds there are specific over-riding fiscal , economic , social
or environmental factors benefitting the City which , in the sole
judgement of the City Council , would justify the approval of such
development without the payment of said tax .
SECTION 2 . PUBLICATION
The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published in the
Atascadero News , a newspaper of general circulation, printed,
published and circulated in this City, once within fifteen (15) days
after its passage, in accordance with government code Section 36933;
and shall certify the adoption of this Ordinance; and shall cause
this Ordinance and certification to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of this City.
SECTION 3__EFFECTIVE_DATE
This ordinance shall ao into effect band be in full force and
effect at 12 . 01 a .m. on the 31st day after its passage .
On motion by Counci
lmember and seconded by
Councilmember the foregoing ordinance is herebv adopted
in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT :
ATTEST :
BOYD C . SHARITZ BONITA BORGESON
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN
Director of Public Works City Attorney
City Engineer
MEET
OA E�N �DA
,
NOTE: STAFF REPORT RELATING TO ORDINANCE NO. 183 WILL BE PROVIDED
AT A LATER TIME BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
ORDINANCE NO. 183
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 119 OF THE CITY
OF ATASCADERO CODE RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
PART 1 .
Section 3-8. 03 : DEFINITIONS :
The following_ terms shall have the following meaninQ_s when used in
this Chapter .
(h) "Building" : means anv structure having a roof supported
by columns and/or walls and intended for shalter , housing, and/or
enclosure of any person , animal or chattel , but not including tents
or mobile homes .
(i) "Building Permit" : means a buiilding permit for
residential , non-residential , or mobile home site development applied
for to the Community Development Department of Atascadero on or after
the effective date of this Ordinance: 0
(J) "Construct" "Construction" as used in this Chapter means
the putting together , assembling, erection or altering of
construction materials components , or modules into a structure, or
portion of a structure , and includes restructuring, enlarging or
altering any structure . "Construct" also includes the moving from
outside the City and locating of a building, or portion thereof , onto
a lot or parcel of land, and also includes the improvement of land as
a mobile home lot .
(k) "Dwelling Unit" means an independent , attached or -
detached residential building designed to house and provide living
space including kitchen and bathroom facilities , for an individual
family .
(1) "Gross Building Area" means the total floor area of each
floor of all buildings subject to this ordinance , including internal
circulation , storage and equipment space, as measured from the
outside faces of the exterior walls , including halls , lobbies ,
stairways , elevator shafts , enclosed porches and balconies .
(m) "Mobile Home" means a vehicle without self-propulsion
designed and equipped as a dwelling_ unit to be used with a
foundation .
(n) "Mobile Home Lot" , as used in this Chapter, means
area or portion of a lot designated, designed, or used for
occupancy of one (1) mobile home on a permanent basis .
• (o) "Non-Residential" includes all uses of land other than
residential including agricultural , communication , cultural ,
educational , recreation , manufacturing, processing, resource
extraction , retail trade, services , transient lodging, transportation
and wholesale trade uses .
(p) "Person" includes anv individual , firm, co-partnership,
corporation, company , association , joint stock association , city,
county , state or , district ; and includes any trustee, receiver,
assignee, or other similar representatives thereof .
(q) "Structure" as used in this Chapter means any artifact
constructed or erected, the use of which requires attachment to the
ground, including any building, but not including fences or walls six
feet or less in height .
(r) As used in this Chapter, the ,terms "residential ,"
"commercial , " "office , " "industrial , " "hotel , " "motel , " and "quasi
public" have the same meanings as are defined in the General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance of this City, as well as administrative
interpretations thereof .
Section 3-8 , 07 : LIMITATIONS ON USE
(c) Fees from residential and nonresidential development
may be used for all types of capital improvements .
Section 3-8_10_ EXCEPTIONS_:
There is excepted from the fee imposed by this Ordinance the
following:
(a) The construction of a buildincr or structure or mobile
home which is a replacement for a building or mobile home being
demolished or moved to outside the City from the same lot or parcel
of land. The exception shall equal but not exceed the fee which
would be payable hereunder if the buildinc_r or mobile home beincr
replaced were being newly constructed. If the fee imposed on the new
building exceeds the amount of this exception , such excess shall be
paid;
(b) Accessory buildings or structures in planned
developments , multi-family or mobile home parks , such as a clubhouse,
swimming pool , or laundry facility ;
(c) Buildings or structures which are "clearly accessory to
a principal use" such as fences , pools , patios , parking spaces
garages , residential accessory buildings . ;
(d) Any person when imposition of such tax upon that
• person would be in violation of the Constitution and the laws of the
State of California , County of San Luis Obispo, or City of
Atascadero ;
(e) A condominium project converting an existing multo
family building into condominiums where no new dwellings are added or
created;
(f) Any rebuilding of a structure destroyed or damaged by
fire; explosion , act of God or other accident or catastrophe, which
rebuilding does not increase the original gross building area . If
such increase does occur , the increase shall be subject to the fee as
imposed by this resolution .
(g) Any restoration/reconstruction of a historical
building recognized, acknowledged, and designated as such by the City
Planning Commission or City Council;
(h) The construction of any building by the City of
Atascadero, or the United States or any Department or Agency thereof,
or by the State of California or any Department , Agency or Political
Subdivision thereof , or any residential development where the City
Council finds there are specific over-riding fiscal , economic , social
or environmental factors benefitting the City which , in the sole
judgement of the City Council , would justifv the approval of such
development without the payment of said tax .
PART 2 .
The Citv Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published in to
Atascadero News , a newspaper of general circulation , printed,
published and circulated in this City, once within fifteen (15) days
after its passage, in accordance with government code Section 36933;
and shall certify the adoption of this Ordinance; and shall cause
this Ordinance and certification to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of this City .
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
ATTEST :
BOYD C . SHARITZ BONITA BORGESON
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT : APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PAUL M. SENSIB
HUGH JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN
Director of Public Works City Attorney
City Engineer
0 *MEETING AGENDA
DAt / 3 ITEM#
•
ORDINANCE NO. 185
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY of
ATASCADERO ACCEPTING THE PENAL CODE REQUIRE-
MENTS RELATING TO THE SELECTION AND TRAINING
STANDARDS OF PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS
The Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as
follows:
Section 1. Atascadero Municipal Code Section 2-11.04 is
hereby amended by adding subsection 2-11. 04 (c) to read as
follows:
(c) Pursuant to the provisions of Section
13510 (c) of the State Penal Code, the City of
Atascadero will adhere to standards for recruitment
and training of public safety dispatchers estab-
lished by the California Commission on Peace Officer
Standards and Training (POST) . Further, pursuant to
the provisions of Section 13512 of the State Penal
Code, the Commission and its representatives may
• make such inquiries as deemed appropriate by the
Commission to ascertain that the City of Atas-
cadero's public safety dispatcher personnel adhere
to standards for selection and training established
by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and
Training.
Section 2. 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 this City in
accordance with Government Code Section 36933 ; shall certify
the adoption of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance
and certification to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of
this City.
Section 3 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into
effect and be in full force and effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the
thirty-first (31st) day after its passage.
On motion by Council member and
seconded by Council member the foregoing
ordinance is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following
roll call vote:
•
0 •
ORDINANCE NO. 185 •
Page 2
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
•
E EY/,-'-.rGrSEN, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RICHARD H. McHALE, Police Chief
JGJ: fr
C:ORATA676
•
MEET! �l �1GENDA
DA7 � RTEM N
CSN GV/l (it,> %7f S J7NC�/J
TO: Chief of Police ea=cor+ML.1-,oA-,7QrJ ANt;0 I_AE7" 43"
FROM: Support Services Coordinator Tzar waT r •rXr}T 1��s / Tom"' II c
46LH G O,� FYI E GtY+N ei L RGL?iJ1f!
SUBJ: Public Safety Dispatcher Program r.c cv.vri.ocn.•TioN
DATE: Nov. 3, 1988
113-BS
BACKGROUND:
Penal Code Section 13510 has been amended to require the Commission on Peace
Officer Standards and Training to establish minimum selection and training
standards for local public safety dispatchers. The Commission adopted the
below described standards for agencies which participate in the program which
will become effective 1-1-89:
-a thorough background investigation;
-a medical examination;
-an evaluation of oral communication skills;
satisfactory completion of a POST-certified, 80-hour Basic
Complaint/Dispatcher course within 12 months of the date of hire;
and
-a minimum of 12 months probation.
Only participating agencies will be eligible for reimbursement of certain
dispatcher training costs. To participate in the Public Safety Dispatcher
Program, an agency must submit a letter to the Commission requesting participation,
accompanied by a copy of an ordinance pledging adherence to the standards adopted
by the Commission. (As you will note, we currently adhere to the program
requirements, however, without the ordinance and request to POST, effective
1-1-89, we will no longer be reimbursed for the POST training.)
Attached is a proposed ordinance for City Council review and adoption. Once
approved, I will forward a copy with a letter to POST.
RECOMMENDATION:
I request that the attached proposed ordinance, in whatever format is appropriate,
be approved by City Council ,so that our City may continue to participate in
POST-funded training programs for our dispatchers.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no cost to the City for participation in this program.
SANDI BARTELT
Sb
ME ETt LEND
DAT / TEM —,Z
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13 , 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director A
SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESOLUTION MODIFYING EFFECTIVE DATE TO CHARGE
VARIOUS FEES ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 100-88
BACKGROUND:
On November 8, 1988, the City Council approved Resolution No.
100-88 which modified various development fees . This resolution
provided that it would apply upon"the issuance of any building
permits" which is a departure from past practices. It creates
administrative problems with regard to having to retype and re-
calculate fees on permits that have been submitted and approved
prior to the effective date but simply haven' t been picked up.
Historically, such fees have been determined on the basis of
there having been a completed set of plans submitted and accepted
• for processing. The fees in existence at the time of plan
submittal were the fees charged when the plans are finally ready
to be picked up.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of attached Resolution No. 111-88 to provide that the
fees charged will be those in place at the time of complete
building plan submittal .
HE :ps
Enclosure: Resolution No. 111-88
cc : Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director
Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 111-82
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUI+ TX W. T33E
CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING RESOIM= - 100-88
TO CLARIFY VARYING EFFECTIVE DATES CYID :FEES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of At�a>s : av bas adopted
Ordinance No. 119 'creating and establishin) apt rtt7 for impos-
ing and charging development fees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City ofAftasmaderro -an November
8, 1988 adopted Resolution No. 100-88 mod?a,fjg l'd feces and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Ata-az_adWyw Is desirous of
clarifying the status of building plans jwvv- . ;lye a@plied for.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the : +.ty, Cowacil of the
City of Atascadero as follows :
1 . The following Section it of Resoluti,3 ,A Nm.. -0G-88 is hereby •
repealed in its entirety:
"11 . This Resolution shall become of vat'itww imue lately upon
passage and shall apply to the ii is + of any building
permit or certificate of occu ac,y� tau- amy residential
development issued on or after J�jnwa . �),; 198.9 follow-
ing passage of this resolution indi ± ; all raomi-residen-
tial developments immediately Wpz � sage."
2 . The following language is hereby adiagA.af. to) smpercede the
prior Section 11 :
118. This resolution shall become el' ez.q'sv in ately upon
passage with fees to be assessv t as fimUavwz:
a. All building permit applixad-taniw, accepted by the
Building Division as complka--t*� 2�a':Lorr November 9 ,
1988, shall be charged jvsezAstimg fees except
that Lewis Avenue Brig; few shall be as
specified in Section 7 , afros);
b. Non-residential buildinVz=.it applications
accepted by the Building MItwisiom as complete
between November 9th but : oz- to January 9th,
1989 shall be charged fee4 7Lxamtamt to t. his sched-
ule; for residential build!. g pemm-it, .applications •
accepted as complete, pre--ecistt`1mg fees shall be
charged (except Lewis Aver Mrkd.ge fees shall be
as specified in Section 7,f77e)
C . All building permits for construction activities
applied for on and after January 9, 1989 shall be
charged fees pursuant to this resolution. "
Passed and adopted this of 1988 .
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
By:
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
1 � •
MEETI G AGENDAO_3
SAT �3 ITEM#
• MEMORANDUM
� � CEle/ � I3
NOV 2 g 19bb City of Atascadero
CITY MGR. November 28, 1988
TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Solid Waste Collection Contract
Pursuant to the Council's direction at the November 22 , 1988
City Council meeting, attached please find a proposed First
Amendment of Solid Waste Collection Contract, extending the
term of the contract for an additional two-year period to
expire on December 31, 1992 .
I do not believe a resolution of approval is really necessary
in this instance. Therefore, I would recommend placing this
item on the City Council agenda for approval by a roll call
vote. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions or
comments concerning this matter.
• Sincerely,
OJRJORGENSEN
Cityt
rney
JGJ: fr
A:MMATA465
Attachment
•
FIRST AMENDMENT OF •
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CONTRACT
Re: Solid Waste Collection Contract, dated May 13 , 1985,
between CITY OF ATASCADERO, a political subdivision of
the State of California, and WIL-MAR DISPOSAL COMPANY,
INC. , a California corporation, covering solid waste
collection within the City of Atascadero for a term
expiring December 31, 1990.
The undersigned, CITY OF ATASCADERO and WIL-MAR DISPOSAL
COMPANY, INC. , do hereby agree to amend the above-referenced
Solid Waste Collection Contract, effective January 1, 1989, as
follows:
Extension of Term. The term of the Solid Waste
Collection Contract is extended for a period of two
(2) years so that the expiration date of said Solid
Waste Collection Contract shall be changed from
December 31, 1990 to December 31, 1992.
Notices. Notice to the City of Atascadero
shall be changed to City Manager, City of Atascadero,
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422 . •
All of the other terms, covenants, conditions, provisions,
and agreements of said Solid Waste Collection Contract, dated
May 13, 1985, as amended herein, shall remain in full force
and effect.
Dated: December 13, 1988
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
*EYIG. 0 ENSEN, City Attorney
1
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
WIL-MAR DISPOSAL COMPANY, INC.
By
President
By
Secretary-Treasurer
JGJ: fr
C:AGATA677
2
EETI
DAT T - 3
• DAT AGENDA
MEMORANDUM DAT ITEM 11 -�
City of Atascadero
November 10, 1988
TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Ordinance Changing Time of City Council Meetings
Attached please find an ordinance which would amend Section 2-
1.01 of the Atascadero Municipal Code to change the time of
City Council meetings from 7: 30 to 7: 00 p.m. Please submit to
the Council as you feel appropriate.
Sincerely,
hREY GREY G. OR ENSEN
City Att rney
JGJ: fr
A:MMATA442
Attachment
•
ORDINANCE NO. 186
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 2 OF THE ATASCADERO
MUNICIPAL CODE, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION"
The Council of the City of Atascadero ordains as follows:
Section 1. Section 2-1. 01 of the Atascadero Municipal
Code is amended to change the time of regular meetings of the
Atascadero City Council from 7: 30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and shall
read as follows:
Section 2-1.01. Meetings. The Council shall
hold regular meetings in the Rotunda Room, fourth
floor, Administration Building, 6500 Palma Avenue,
Atascadero, every second and fourth Tuesday evening
at 7: 00 p.m. and on such other days, at such other
times, as may be designated in an order for a
special meeting. A special meeting may be ordered
in accordance with the provisions of Sections 54956
and 54956.5 of the Government Code of the State.
When the day for any regular meeting of the Council •
falls on a legal holiday, the meeting shall not be
held on such holiday, but shall be held at the same
hour on the next succeeding day thereafter which is
not a holiday, or at such other time as shall be
determined and noticed by the Council.
Section 2 . 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 this City in
accordance with Government Code Section 36933 ; shall certify
the adoption of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance
and certification to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of
this City.
Section 3 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into
effect and be in full force and effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the
thirty-first (31st) day after its passage.
On motion by Council member and -
seconded by Council member the foregoing
ordinance is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following
roll call vote:
•
ORDINANCE NO. 186
Page 2
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
E G. O ENSEN, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
JGJ: fr
C:ORATA675
MEETIN ENDA
DAT OREM#
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council December 13, 1988
VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director jNf',
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO INITIATE ZONING AMENDMENT REGULATING
OFF-SITE' SALES OF ALCOHOL
BACKGROUND:
At the City Council ' s October 25th meeting, there was discussion
regarding the number of liquor sales outlets in the City. Action
of the Council was to refer this matter to staff for a report
back on potential zoning regulation control.
The City Attorney responded with the enclosed memorandum
outlining law on the matter and concluding that a use permit ,
• requirement could be considered.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council initiate a proposed change to the City' s
Zoning Ordinance requiring that a conditional use permit be
required for off-site sales of alcoholic beverages . Staff would
bring proposed language and analysis to the Planning Commission
for public hearing and a recommendation back to the Council .
HE :ps
Enclosure: November 7 , 1988 memorandum from City Attorney
t
t
ro � •
MEMORANDUM •
City of Atascadero
November 7, 1988
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Licensing and Regulation of the
Purchase and Sale of Alcoholic Beverages
At the October 25, 1988 City Council meeting, additional
information was requested concerning the extent to which the
City has control over the licensing and regulation of the
purchase and sale of alcoholic beverages. The purpose of this
memorandum is to set forth the basis on which said regulations
exist and the extent to which the City may exercise control.
1. Regulation of Alcoholic Beverage Sales.
The state, acting through its Department of Alcoholic Beverage
Control, has exclusive authority to license and regulate the
purchase and sale of alcoholic beverages within the state. •
(California Constitution, Article XX, Section 22. ) Since the
alcoholic beverage licensing and regulatory power vested in
the state is exclusive, local government control is generally
precluded, including direct regulation of the number or manner
in which licenses are issued. However, the Alcoholic Beverage
Control Act itself provides for certain zoning controls by
cities and counties. No retail license may be issued for any
premises located in territory where the exercise of the rights
and privileges conferred by the license is contrary to a valid
zoning ordinance of any county or city unless the premises
have been used in the exercise of such rights and privileges
at a time prior to the effective date of the zoning ordinance.
(Business and Professions Code Section 23790. )
Further, it is specifically provided that the powers contained
in the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act shall not interfere with
the zoning power of cities conferred upon them by Government
Code Sections 65850-65851. (Business and Professions Code
Section 23791. ) Therefore, the City has broad authority to
regulate alcoholic beverage sales under its zoning power. One
exception to this broad authority is in the area of the
concurrent retailing of motor vehicle fuel and beer and wine.
In response to ordinances adopted in several cities
prohibiting the sale of beer and wine at automobile service
stations, the legislature adopted Business and Professions
MEMO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJ: Licensing and Regulation of Alcoholic Beverages
November 7, 1988 - Page 2
Code Section 23790.5 in 1987, eliminating the authority of
cities to prohibit concurrent sales, and restricting their
ability to regulate such sales by conditional use permit. A
copy of Business and Professions Code Section 23790.5 is
attached for your information.
The primary issues that arise in local zoning control of
alcoholic beverage sales are state preemption and equal
protection. Both of these issues have been raised in
appellate cases, and all have been decided in favor of the
city. Town of Los Gatos v. State Board of Equalization (1956)
141 C.A.2d 344; Jon-Mar Co. v. City of Anaheim (1962) 201
C.A.2d 832.
In one case, a city ordinance requiring a conditional use
permit for a cocktail lounge if the lounge was located within
200 feet of a residential zone was challenged. In upholding
the city's regulation, the court rejected the owner's argument
that the ordinance was preempted by the Alcoholic Beverage
Control Act, and the argument that the isolation and
identification of the cocktail lounge as opposed to other
businesses allowed as a matter of right, became an invalid
special regulation of the sale of liquor. The court found
that the city could validly single out sales of liquor
pursuant to a zoning ordinance since the legislature had
conferred upon counties and cities the right to control
various types of liquor businesses by enactment of valid
zoning ordinances. Floresta. Inc. v. City Council (1961) 190
Cal.2d 599 . -
RECOMMENDATION•
From the above, it appears clear that the City may adopt broad
zoning regulations to control uses involving the sale of
alcoholic beverages. If the City Council wishes to proceed
further in regulating such sales, it is recommended that the
matter be referred to the Planning Department to develop an
amendment to the zoning ordinance to require conditional use
permits for alcoholic beverage sales. Such a procedure should
include specific performance standards concerning issuance of
a CUP. Both the City and County of Los Angeles have taken an _
aggressive posture in regulating alcoholic beverage sales
through the conditional use permit procedure. A copy of the
City of Los Angeles regulations is attached for your
information.
J
MEMO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJ: Licensing and Regulation of Alcoholic Beverages
November 7, 1988 - Page 3
Finally, issues which need to be addressed by the City Council
include whether the Council wishes to regulate both on-site
and off-site sales, and beer and wine or hard liquor
establishments.
2. Regulation of Alcohol on City Property.
It seems clear that the City has sufficient authority,
inherently and through its police power, to regulate the
possession and/or consumption of alcohol on city-owned
property. Therefore, the Council may, if it so desires,
establish policies or ordinances prohibiting the possession
and/or consumption of alcohol in city parks, City Hall, and on
other city-owned land.
RECOMMENDATION:
If the City Council wishes to proceed further in restricting
the possession and/or consumption of alcohol on city-owned
property, it is recommended that the Council refer this matter
to staff to develop appropriate policies and ordinances.
Issues which need to be addressed by the Council include
whether the Council wishes to totally prohibit alcohol on all
city property, or only on certain specified properties, and
whether alcohol will be allowed in specified areas subject to
conditions or permit approval. A review of existing permits
and concessions will also need to be made to determine under
what conditions any rights to sell alcoholic beverages
previously granted by the City can be terminated.
3 . Regulation of Alcohol in Public Places.
The authority of the City of regulate the possession and/or
consumption of alcohol in public places, other than city-owned
land, is far less clear. In this regard, I have attached a
previous City Attorney Opinion, dated September 18, 1981, on
this subject which may be of interest.
RECOMMENDATION•
I would recommend that the City not attempt to regulate the
consumption of alcoholic beverages in public places not owned
by the City, unless the City Council determines that a
specific problem exists which is not adequately addressed by
r
MEMO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJ: Licensing and Regulation of Alcoholic Beverages
November 7, 1988 — Page 4
state regulation under Penal Code Section 647 (f) , or which
cannot be resolved through stepped up law enforcement. If the
Council determines that additional regulation is needed in
this area, it is recommended that this matter be referred to
staff to prepare an ordinance which can sustain a challenge on
the basis of state preemption.
Respectfully ubmitted,
RE JORGENSEN
y Att ney
JGJ: fr
A:MMATA421
Attachments
cc: City Manager
Community Development Director
i
-BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
23790.b. Concurrent retailing of motor vehicle fuel and beer and wine; local regulation;
conditional use permits; conditions on retailers; sale to'minors
(a) It is the intent of the legislature in enacting this section to ensure that local government shall
not be preempted in the valid exercise of its land use authority pursuant to Section 23790, including.
but not limited to,enacting an ordinance requiring a conditional use permit. It is also the intent of
the Legislature to prevent the legislated prohibition of the concurrent retailing of beer and wine for
off-premises consumption and motor vehicle fuel where the retailing of each is otherwise allowable.
(b) (1) No city, county, or city and county shall, by ordinance or resolution adopted on or after
January 1, 1988, legislatively prohibit the concurrent retailing of motor vehicle fuel and beer and
wine for off-sale consumption in zoning districts where the zoning ordinance allows motor vehicle
fuel and off-sale beer and wine to he retailed on separate sites.
(2) On and after January 1, 1989, no city, county, or city and county ordinance or resolution
adopted prior to May 5, 1987, shall have legal effect if it legislatively prohibits the concurrent
retailing of motor vehicle;fuel with beer and wine for off-sale consumption in zoning districts where
the zoning ordinance allows beer and wine and motor vehicle fuel to be retailed on separate sites.
(3) On and after July 1, 1988,no city,county,or city and county ordinance or resolution adopted on
or after May 5, 1987, shall have legal effect if it legislatively prohibits the concurrent retailing of
motor vehicle fuel with beer and wine for off-sale consumption in zoning districts where the zoning
ordinance allows beer and wine and motor vehicle fuel to be retailed on separate sites.
(4) This section shall not apply to a prohibition by a city,county, or city and county of the sale of
beer and wine in conjunction with the sale of motor vehicle fuel if that prohibition occurs as a result
of the prohibition of the combining of the sale of motor vehicle fuel with a broader class of products
or uses which includes alcoholic beverages or beer and wine as a named or unnamed part of that
larger class, if that prohibition was enacted before August 1, 1985.
(c) Subject to the restrictions and limitations of subdivision(b),this section shall not prevent a city,
county, or city and county from denying permission, or granting conditional permission, to an
individual applicant to engage in the concurrent retailing of motor vehicle fuel with beer and wine for
off-premises consumption pursuant to a valid conditional use permit ordinance based on appropriate
health,safety,or general welfare standards contained in the ordinance if that conditional use permit
ordinance contains all of the following:
(1) A requirement for written findings.
(2) A provision for an administrative appeal if the governing body has delegated its power to issue
or deny a conditional use permit.
(3) Procedures for notice of a hearing, conduct of a hearing, and an opportunity for all parties to
present testimony.
(4) A requirement that the findings be based on substantial evidence in view of the whole record to
justify the ultimate decision.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, establishments engaged in the concurrent sale of
motor vehicle fuel with beer and wine for off-premises consumption shall, until January 1, 1990,
abide by the following conditions:
(1) No beer or wine shall be displayed within five feet of the cash register or the front door unless
it is in a permanently affixed cooler as of January 1, 198R.
(2) No advertisement of alcoholic beverages shall be displayed at motor fuel islands.
13) No sale of alcoholic beverages shall be made from a drive-in window.
(4) No display or sale of beer or wine shall be made from an ice tub.
(5) No beer or wine advertising shall be located on motor fuel islands and no self-illuminated
advertising for beer or wine shall be located on buildings or windows. .
(6) Employees on duty between the hours of 10 p.m and 2 a.m. shall be at least 21 years of age to
sell beer and wine.
The standards contained in this subdivision are minimum state standards which do not limit local
regulation otherwise permitted under this section.
(e) Until January 1, 1990, if there is a finding that a licensee or his or her employee has sold any
alcoholic beverages to a minor at an establishment engaged in the concurrent sale of motor vehicle
fuel with beer and wine for off-premises consumption, the alcoholic beverage license at the
establishment shall be suspended for a minimum period of 72 hours. For purposes of Section 23790,
the effect of such a license suspension shall not constitute a break in the continuous operation of the
establishment nor a subsuintial change in the mode or character of oln-ration.
(f) The provisions of this section apply to charter cities.
(Added by Stats.1987, c. 176, 4 1.)
Ch.I,Ait.2 ZONING §12.24
2. The equine enclosure shall not be expanded, extended, or
relocated in such a manner as to reduce the nonconforming distance
between the enclosure and the habitable rooms of the residential
building on an adjacent lot.
3. The nonconforming equine use shall be discontinued if, during
a successive 3-year period, no equine is licensed by the Department
of Animal Regulation to be stabled on the subject lot.
Nothing in this Subdivision relieves any person from the obligation
to comply with the requirements of any County or State law.
SEC. 12.24.CONDITIONAL USE:
A. PURPOSE—The principal objective of the "Comprehensive Zon-
ing Plan"is to provide for the proper location of all types of land use.To
accomplish this objective,each type of land use is classified by this plan
as being permitted in one or more of the various zones established by
this plan. However, it is often necessary to permit certain uses in zones
other than those in which they are classified, because of their unusual
characteristics or the large area required for their operation.These uses
require special consideration as to their proper location in relation to ad-
jacent uses or to the development of the community, and to the various
elements of the General Plan. Because of the various types of uses and
locations requiring this special consideration, the special conditions
C under which each use may be permitted also must be considered. Such
uses, together with the conditions controlling their operation, are
designated as "Conditional Uses" and shall be regulated by the follow-
ing provisions of this section. (Amended by Ord. No. 138,800, Eff.
6/23/69.)
B.DETERMINATION BY COMMISSION
1. -Authority of Commission. (Amended by Ord. No. 143,109, Eff.
3/20/72.) The Commission shall have authority to approve the use of a
lot in any zone, for any of the following conditional uses, if it finds that
the proposed location will be desirable to the public convenience or
welfare and will be in harmony with the various elements and objectives
of the General Plan. In approving a proposal to acquire land for a
governmental enterprise, as provided by Sec. 15.00 of this Code of by
State Law, the Commission may simultaneously approve a conditional
CI-122C (Bev. No. 34-19871 i
Ch.I,Art.2 ZONING §12.24
use.The conditional uses under the jurisdiction of the Commission are:
(a)Airports or aircraft landing fields.
(b) Auditoriums, stadiums, arenas and the like. (Amended by Ord.
No.146,030,Eff.7/11/74.)
(c)Cemeteries. I
(d)Correctional institutions.
(e)Educational institutions.
(f)Golf courses and facilities properly incidental thereto.
(g)Land reclamation projects through the disposal of rubbish,as the
term rubbish is defined in Section 66.00 of this code, and operated or
caused to be operated by the city, county, district, or public or
municipal corporation.
(h) Libraries, museums, fire or police stations, or governmental
enterprises which are controlled by this Article.
(i) Natural resources development(except the drilling or production
of oil, gas or other hydrocarbon substances,or the production of rock
and gravel), together with the necessary buildings, apparatus or ap-
purtenances incident thereto.
(1) Piers,jetties, Man-made islands, floating installations,or the like
in connection with the uses listed in Section 12.20.1-B,2(a) in the SL
Ocean-Submerged Land Zone.
(k)Public utilities and public service uses or structures.
(1) Research and development centers for experimental or scientific
investigation of materials, methods or products except in the RA and
R Zones.
(m) Schools, elementary and high,controlled by the Los Angeles Ci-
ty Board of Education, and all other elementary and high schools
located on a site of ten acres or more.
(n) Mobilehome parks where any trailer or mobilehome is permit-
ted to remain longer than one day, and which were lawfully in ex-
istence on the effective date of this ordinance.(Amended by Ord.No.
161,716, Eff. 1216186.)
(o)The sale or dispensing for consideration of alcoholic beverages,
including beer and wine unless otherwise permitted by the provisions
of Section 12.22 C 23 of this Code, for consumption on the premises
as an incidental business in or accessory to a conditional use approved
pursuant to the provisions of this Subsection.(Amended by Ord.No.
161,716, Eff. 1216/86.)
(p) Buildings over six stories or 75 feet in height within the Wilshire-
Westwood Scenic Corridor Specific Plan Area. (Added by Ord. No.
155,045,Eff.5/10/81.)
(q) Hotels and motels in the M1 and M2 Zones when expressly per.
mitted by the applicable Community or District Plan.(Added by Ord.
No.159,228,Eff. 9/ 6/84.)
(r)Restaurant(including cafe)for the use of the general public in the MR
or MR2 Aones. (Added by Ord. No. 159,916, Eff.7/ 7/85.)
(s) Recreational vehicle parks and mobilehome parks in the A, R
( or C Zones where any trailer, mobilehome or recreational vehicle is
\ permitted to remain longer than one day and which were lawfully
created after the effective date of this ordinance.(Added by Ord.No.
161,716, Eff. 12/6/86.) L1-123 (Rev. No. 33-1987)
I
§12.24 MUNICIPAL Cane Ch.I.Art.2
2.Conditions of Approval. (Amended by Ord. No. 138,800, Operative
6/23/69.) In approving the location of any of the above uses, the Commis-
sion may,impose such conditions as it deems necessary to protect the
best interests of the surrounding property or neighborhood, or to secure an
appropriate development in harmony with the objectives of the General
Plan. The height and area regulations required by other provisions of this
Chapter shall not apply to the conditional uses under the original jurisdic-
tion of the Commission. In order to secure an appropriate development,
the Commission shall determine the height and area regulations for these
conditional uses including the conditional uses lawfully existing on the
date these regulations became effective. i
The ordinance and the procedure provided therein is neither unconstitutional nor void.
and the power vested in the Planning Commission is not an unlawful delegation of
legislative power,but is an exercise of quasi judicial or administrative power,and a deci-
sion to grant a conditional use permit does not create a new zone.
Wheeler v.Gregg,90 Cal.App.2d 348.
Granting of a conditional use does not constitute"changing.amenomg or altering of
a zone within the meaning of the charter provision prescribing the procedure to be
followed in connection therewith but authorized a change within a zone,and the Council
in granting such permit after an adverse recommendation by the Planning Commission
need not follow the Charter provisions,such use may be accomplished by resolution.
Essick v.City of Los Angeles,34 Cal.2d 614.
A conditional use is distinct from a variance and is granted for a
public or quasi public purpose within the terms of the ordinance.
whereas a variance is granted to prohibit unnecessary hardship.
Essick v. City of Los Angeles. 34 Cal. 2d 614.
3. Procedure.
(a)Application—Form and Contents—An application to permit any
"Conditional use" referred to in this subsection, shall be filed with the
Commission upon a form and accompanied by such data and informa-
tion as may be prescribed for that purpose by the Commission.
(b)Hearing Date-Notice.(Amended by Ord.No. 144,193,Eff. 2l 3173.)
Upon filing of such application the Commission shall set the matter
for public hearing and an examiner may be designated to conduct the
hearing. Notice of the time, place, and purpose of such hearing shall
be given to the applicant by mailing of a written notice not less than
25 days prior to the day of such hearing. No further notice need be given
in connection with applications for public utilities and public service
uses or structures, or governmental enterprises, including elementary
and high schools,libraries,museums,fire or police stations. In connec-
tion with all other applications,notice of such hearing also shall be given
as follows:
(1) By at least one publication in a newspaper of general circula-
tion in the City, designated for that purpose by the City council,not
less than 24 days' prior to the date of hearing; and
(2) By mailing a written notice not less than 24 days prior to the
date of hearing to the owner or owners of the property involved,and
to the owners of all property within and outside of the City that is
within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property involved,
using for the purpose of notification the last known name and ad-
dress of such owners as shown upon the records of the City Clerk
(Rev. No. 33-1987) C1-121
ChA.Art.2 ZONING §12.24
or in the case of property outside the City, the records of the County
Assessor.Where all property within the 300-foot radius is under the
same ownership as the property involved in the application, the
owners of all property which adjoins said ownership,or is separated
only by a street,alley, public right of way or other easement, shall
also be notified as provided herein. In the event this notice provi-
sion will not result in notice being given to at least 20 different owners
of at least 20 different parcels of property other than the subject pro-
perty, the 300 foot radius for notification shall be increased in in-
crements of fifty feet until said required number of owners and parcels
of property are encompassed within the expanded area,and notifica-
tion shall then be given to all property owners within such area.
(c)Time Limit.(Amended by Ord.No.144,193,Eff. 213173.)The Com-
mission shall make its determination within 75 days from the date of
the filing of an application and shall forthwith transmit a copy of said
determination to the applicant. This time limit may be extended by
mutual consent of the applicant and the Commission for an additional
period of not more than 21 days.
(d) Determination Effective—Appeal. (Amended by Ord. No. 143,802,
Eff. 10/19/72.) The determination of the Commission shall become fins'
after an elapsed period of 15 days from the date of mailing of the Commis-
sian's determination to the applicant, unless an appeal therefrom is filed
with the City Council within such period. Any appeal not filed within
the 15-day period shall not be considered by the City Council.
The filing of an appeal stays proceedings in the matter until deter-
mination by the City Council.
(e) Appeal- Contents (Amended by Ord. No. 152,080, Eff.4/22/79.) —
An applicant or any other person aggrieved by a determination of the
Commission may appeal to the City Council. Such an appeal may also
be filed by the Mayor, members of the Council, the City Attorney or the
Controller. The appeal shall set forth specifically wherein the deter-
mination of the Commission fails to conform to the requirements of this
section, or wherein the conditions imposed are improper. Such appeal
shall be filed in duplicate in the public office of the Department of City
Planning. Thereupon, the appeal and the Planning Commission file
shall be transmitted to the City Council, together with a report thereon,
disclosing in what respect the Commission found that the application
and facts offered in support thereof, met or failed to meet requirements
of this section. I
The City Council, by resolution,may reverse or modify,in whole or in -
part,any determination of the Commission, but such resolution_shall be
adopted by at least a two-thirds vote of the whole Council. The resolu-
tion must contain a finding of fact showing wherein the proposed Condi-
tional Use meets or fails to meet the requirements of this section. The
failure of the Council to adopt such a resolution within 90 days after the
expiration of the appeal period or within such additional period as may
C be agreed upon by the applicant and the Council shall be deemed a
denial of the appeal. If an appeal be denied, the action of the Commis-
sion shall thereupon become final and conclusive, except as provided in
Subsection H hereof.
CI-124A (Rev. No. 33-1987)
§12.24 MUYICIPAI.CODE _ Ch.I.Art.2
(f) Failure to Act—Transfer of Jurisdiction. (Amended by Ord. No.
116,066,Eff.7/2/60.) If the Commission fails to act on a conditional use
application within the time limit specified in this subsection, the appli-
cant may file a request for a transfer of jurisdiction to the City Council
for a determination of the original application, in which case the Com-
mission shall lose jurisdiction. Such request shall be filed in the public
office of the Department of Planning. Thereupon, the request and the
Planning Commission file shall be transmitted to the Council.
The Council may approve the conditional use application subject to
the qualifications contained in Subdivision 1 of Subdivision B of this sec-
tion, and may impose upon such approval such conditions as it deems
necessary in accordance with the provisions of Subdivision 2 of Subdivi-
sion B of this section. Such action of the Council shall be by resolution
adopted by a majority vote of the whole Council.
(Rev.No.31-1985) C1-124B
C1,1,Art.2 ZONING: §12 24
(g)Hearing by Council.—Before acting on any appeal,or on any mat-
ter transferred to it because of the failure of the Commission to act,
the',City Council or its Planning Committee shall set the matter for
hearing, giving the same notice as provided in this Section for hear-
ings before the Commission.
(h) Limitation upon Approval of Planned Residential Developments.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the approval
hereafter of any planned residential development as a conditional use
shall not be complete or effective until such approval and the conditions
thereto have been approved by ordinance. (Added by Ord. No. 139,305,
Eff. 11/10/69.)
C.DETERMINATION BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
1. Authority of Zoning Administrator—A Zoning Administrator shall
have authority to approve the use of a lot in the zones hereafter indicated
for any of the following conditional uses, if he finds that the location is
proper in relation to adjacent uses or the development of the community
and to the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and that
the use will not be materially detrimental to the character of the develop-
ment in the immediate neighborhood. (First sentence Amended by Ord.
No. 138,800, Operative 6/23/69.) These conditional uses (which are ap-
pealable to the Board) are:
/ (a) Animal kennels in the M Zones, where any portion of the parcel
upon which such a kennel is located is within 500 feet of any residential
zone. (Added by Ord. No. 150,138, Eff. 10/31/77.)
(a) Kennels or facilities for breeding and boarding of animals (no
outside keeping of animals - no open runs) in the M Zones where any
portion of the parcel is located within 500 feet of any residential zone.
(Amended by Ord.No. 158,939,Eff. 6/21/84.)
(b) CM uses lnthe Cl, C1.5, C2, C4 and*C5 Zones where located
within the boundaries of a•community redevelopment project area and
when such uses conform to the provisions of the applicable redevelop-
ment vl.arl..(Added by Ord.No: 154.899,Eff,3/22/81.)
(c)(Repealed by Ord.No. 158,208, Eff.9/12/83.)
(d) Cattle or goat dairies in the Al or A2 Zones. (Amended by Ord.
No. 122.543. Eff. 9/2/62.)
(e) Circus quarters or menageries in the A zones and MR2 zone.
(Amended by Ord. No. 148,969, Eff. 12/17/76.)
(f) Columbariums, crematories or mausoleums, other than in
cemeteries in the A,R,C, (except CR) M1 and M2 zone. (Amended by
Ord. No. 148,969, Eff. 12/17/76.)
(g)Child care facilities or nursery schools in the A.RE,RS,RI, RU,
RZ, RW,R2,R3 or RD Zones, and in the CM and M Zones when pro-
viding care primarily for children of employees of industries in the
vicinity. (Amended by Ord. No. 161,716, Eff. 1216/86.)
(h) Drive-in theaters in the A,R.or C1 Zones.
(i) Foundries in the MR1 zone. (Added by Ord. No. 148,969, Eff.
12/17/76.)
C1-125 (Rev. No. 34-19871
i
I
612.24 MUNICIPAL Coue Ch_l.Art.2
(j) Miniature or pitch and putt golf courses, golf driving tees or
ranges, and similar commercial golf uses, in the A. R,or Cl Zones.
(k) Mortuaries or funeral parlors in the C2, C4, C5, CM or M1 Zones.
(Amended by Ord. No. 138,095, Eff. 4/19/69.)
(1) Nurseries, including accessory buildings, necessary only for the
growing of flowers, shrubs and trees, but not including any store or of-
fice building nor any retail sales on the premises, in the R, Cl and C1.5
Zones. (Amended by Ord. No. 144,365, Eff. 4/5/73, Operative 9/1/73.)
(m) Parks, playgrounds, of recreational or community centers in the
A,R,or Cl Zones. (Amended by Ord. No. 145.250, Eff. 12/24/73.)
(n) (Added by Ord. No. 149,517, Eff. 5/26/77.1 Counseling and reter-
ral facilities in �.ne R3, R4 and R5 zones; provided that, in addition to
the findings tar approval required pursuant to this subdivision, the Zon-
ing Administrator shall also specifically find that:
(1)The facility will serve the immediate neighborhood in which it is
to be located; and
(2) No commercial zoned property equally accessible to that
neiguborhoo? is reasonably available for the Location.of the facility
(o) Private clues m the A, R1, KU, RZ, RW1, Ku, RD, RW2, R3 or
R4 Zones. (Amended by Ord. No. 1fi1.716. Eff. 1216/86.)
(p) Private schools(other than elementary or high or nursery schools)
in the A, R, CR, Cl or C1.5 zones. (Amended by Ord. No. 145,474, Eff.
3/2/74.)
(q) Professional uses in the R4 or R&Zones, provided the property
fronts a major or secondary highway as such highways are shown on the
Highways and Freeways Element of the General Plan, and provided fur-
ther that such uses shall be conducted within a one or two-family
dwelling, the residential character of which shall not be changed, and
that no signs shall be permitted other than those specifically allowed in
the zone or by a zoning administrator. (Amended by Ord. No. 141,821,
Eff. 5/24/71.)
(r)(None►
(s) Radio or television transmitters in the A, R or C Zones.
(t) Hotels(including motels)or apartment hotels in the CR,Cl,C1.5,
C2, C4 and C5 zones when any portion of a structure proposed to
be used as a hotel (including a motel) or apartment hotel is located
within 500 feet of any A or R Zone. (Added by Ord. No. 162,394, Eff.
6/22/87.)
(u) Swine keeping, more than five, in the "Al" Zone, and swine
keeping in the"A2" and"RA" Zones.(Amended by Ord.No. 159,341,
Eff. 10/11/84.)
(v) Garbage, fat, offal, or dead animal reduction, or rendering in the
M3 zone, provided the site is located at least 500 feet from a more restric-
tive zone. (Added by Ord.No. 146,789, Eff. 1/12/75.)
(w) Temporary storage of abandoned, partially dismantled, ob-
solete or wrecked automobiles (not including the dismanteling or
(Rev. No. 34-19871 C1-126 -
I 58,820 APPDX 561 •
INTERIM SPECIFIC PLAN FOR CONDITIONAL
USE APPROVAL FOR ESTABLISHMENTS FOR
THE SALE OF ALCOHOL WHICH ARE
GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL
AREA OF THE CITY
Ordinance No. 158,820 (Effective 4/30/84)
An Ordinance establishing an interim specific plan for the temporary
regulation of establishments dispensing, for sale or other consideration,
alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption, and generally located in the
South Central Area of the City of Los Angeles.
WHEREAS, there is an unusually large number of establishments
dispensing,for sale or other consideration,alcoholic beverages, including
beer and wine, for off-site consumption, generally located in the South
Central Area of the City of Los Angeles, including portions of the South
Central Los Angeles, Southeast Los Angeles and West Adams District
Plan Areas (hereinafter Area'); and
WHEREAS, the existence of this inordinate number of establishments
appears to directly contribute to numerous peace, health, safety and
general welfare problems in the Area including loitering, littering, drug
trafficking, prostitution, public drunkenness, defacement and damaging
of structures, pedestrian obstructions, as well as, traffic circulation,
parking, and noise problems on public streets and neighborhood lots;
and
WHEREAS, the existence of such problems create serious impacts on
1 the health, safety and welfare of residents of nearby single- and
multiple-family areas; including fear for the safety of their children and
of visitors to the Area, as well as contributing to the deterioration of C7
their neighborhoods, and concomitant devaluation of their property and H
destruction of their community values and quality of life; and b H
WHEREAS, the District Plans for this Area provide for a commitment I r n
by "the City to the redirection of its energies toward the improvement O
and upgrading of declining areas of Los Angeles in general and the
xr
South Central Los Angeles District in particular and an intent to" . O >
encourage and contribute to the economic, social and physical health, z
safety, welfare and convenience of the people who live in the District ... •I ��
contribute to a healthful and pleasant environment; balance growth with r•,
stability ... and promote a socio-economic climate which will result in
stable and desirable neighborhoods for the residents ... "; and
WHEREAS, on May 28, 1983, the City Council adopted a motion O
which requested the Police,Fire and Public Safety Committee to investi-
gate the problems associated with liquor store outlets in the Area and,
pursuant to such request, the Working Group on Liquor Store Outlets
has held regular meetings and has focused attention on ways to elimi-
nate these problems on and about the premises of liquor outlets in the
f
582 APPENOI!a 158,820
Area and has prepared a draft report of recommendations for the review
of the Police,Fire and Public Safety Committee of,the City Council;and
WHEREAS, the Working Group on Liquor Outlets has compiled
information which indicates serious problems in this Area and provides
the substantive information for the immediate imposition of a temporary
control measure to prohibit the introduction of any additional establish-
ments or any expansion or changes in the mode or character of operation
of existing such establishments within the Area unless new or expanded
establishments have first been thoroughly reviewed by the City through a
conditional use process; and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 1983, the City Council, being aware of
the serious concerns raised by such establishments in the Area and
desiring to prevent any worsening of such situation and any further such
intrusions into such neighborhoods, requested the City Attorney, with the
assistance of the Department of City Planning, "to prepare and present
an appropriate ordinance establishing a conditional use process gov-
erning off-site liquor outlets, with the goal of inhibiting or reversing the
proliferation of such outlets in heavily impacted areas of the City"; and
WHEREAS, land use problems related to establishments dispensing
for sale or other consideration alcoholic beverages for off-site consump-
tion may also occur elsewhere in the City and should be studied on a -
Citywide basis; however,pending City Council consideration of the Task
Force Report and information derived from public hearings on the
necessity of the adoption of permanent Citywide regulations, the immedi-
ate imposition of a temporary control in the Area is not only appropriate,
but necessary, NOW THEREFORE
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES
DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Establishment of an Interim Specific Plan for Condi-
tional Use Approval for Sale of Alcoholic Beverages.
The City Council hereby establishes an interim Specific Plan for condi-
'` tional use approval for establishments dispensing for sale or other consider-
is ation,alcoholic beverages,including beer and wine,for off-site consumption,
�which are located in the area of the City shown upon the map below within
otted black lines (hereinafter the "Area"):
Section 2. Conditional Use Approval Regulation `
t. Beginning on the effective date of this Ordinance, and for the following )
teven hundred and thirty (730) days, no person shall establish in the Area /
n establishment dispensing, for sale or other consideration, alcoholic
everages, including beer and wine, for off-site consumption, without first
- )taining conditional use approval from the City of Los Angeles as set forth
�. Grein.
Section 3. Procedures.
A. The City Planning Commission,and the City Council on appeal,shall
have authority to approve the use of a lot in the Area for an establishment
dispensing, for sale or other consideration, alcoholic beverages, including
beer and wine, for off-site consumption. In granting a conditional use
approval, the City Planning Commission, and the City Council on appeal,
shall follow the procedures set forth in Section 12.24 of the Los Angeles
158,820 APPENDIX 563
Municipal Code.
B. In making the findings required pursuant to Section 12.24B of the
Los Angeles Municipal Code, the City Planning Commission, or the City
Council on appeal, shall consider whether the proposed use will adversely
j affect the welfare of Area residents or will result in an undue concentration
\\ in the Area of establishments dispensing, for sale or other consideration,
alcoholic beverages, including beer and wine. The City Planning Commis-
sion,or City Council on appeal,shall also consider whether the proposed use
will detrimentally affect nearby residentially zoned communities in the
Area,after giving consideration to the distance of the proposed use from the
following:
C 1. residential buildings;
2. churches, schools, hospitals, public playgrounds and other similar
uses; and
3. other establishments dispensing, for sale or other consideration,
alcoholic beverages, including beer and wine.
C. Whenever an application for a conditional use has been filed pursu-
ant to this Ordinance, the City Planning Commission shall give notice of
this fact forthwith to the City Council members whose Districts include
portions of the Area for their information.
D. Each application or appeal filed in connection with a conditional use
pursuant to this Ordinance shall be accompanied by payment of the same
Cfee as that set forth in Section 19.01C of the Los Angeles Municipal Code.Section 4. Existing Uses.
The use of a lot for an establishment dispensing, for sale or other
consideration, alcoholic beverages, including beer and wine, for off-site
consumption may not be continued or re-established without conditional use
approval granted in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance,if any
of the following occur after the effective date of this Ordinance:
A. The establishment changes its type of retail liquor license within a
license classification; or
B. The operation of the establishment is abandoned or discontinued,
including the case where the license for such operation is suspended; or
C. There is a substantial change in the mode or character of operation of
the_establishment.
Section 5. Extension.
The City Council may, by resolution,extend the conditional use approval
regulation set forth in this Ordinance for one additional period not to exceed
three hundred and sixty-five (365) days, if the City Council makes the
following findings:
A. It is resonably foreseeable that the termination of the regulations
established by this Ordinance could result in development in the Area
inconsistent with the continuing study and possible permanent regulation of
such establishments; and
564 APPENDIX 158,820
B. Any burden on affected property owners caused by the extension of
this Ordinance for an additional period of three hundred and sixty-five(365)
days is necessary to avoid further deterioration of the Area; and
C. Appropriate City agencies are continuing to study the problems
addressed by this Ordinance and are developing appropriate permanent j
regulations. \\
Section 6. Applicability of the Zoning Code.
The regulations of this Ordinance are in addition to those set forth in the
Planning and Zoning provisions of Chapter I of the Los Angeles Municipal
Code and do not contain any rights not otherwise granted under the
provisions and procedures contained in said Chapter—
Section 7. Severability
If any provision of this Ordinance is found to be unconstitutional or l
otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity
shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Ordinance which can be
implemented without the invalid provision, and, to this end, the provisions
of this Ordinance are declared to be severable.
yMf� rMT1
....... %`-. VERNON .
3
� t NUNTINGTON PARK �
INGLEWOOD
i
1 i -
GARDENA
i
COMPTON
7
AAT{ A Rv
564a
SOUTH CENTRAL LOS ANGELES-365-DAY EXTENSION
OF INTERIM SPECIFIC PLAN APPLICABLE TO ALCOHOLIC :
BEVERAGE SALES i
Resolution adopted by City Council 4-30-86 ,
/ WHEREAS, the City Council, with the assistance of concerned citizens,
(\ community organizations, state legislators, city took necessary steps to
prevent further proliferation of liquor outlets in South Central Los Angeles
because of the large number of establishments dispensing alcoholic beverages
for of-site consumption in that area;and
WHEREAS, the City Council, with the assistance of the abovementioned
parties, took necessary steps to eliminate the crime problems, nuisance
C problems and other land use problems associated with the operation of many
establishments dispensing alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption in
South Central Los Angeles;and
WHEREAS, the City Council, being aware of the serious concerns raised
by the number of such establishments in the area and desiring to prevent any
worsening of neighborhood conditions, adopted a two-year interim Specific
C Plan Ordinance(No. 1588.10)on March 27,1984,which established a process
for conditional use approval for establishments seeking licensing for the sale
of alcoholic beverages for off-site consuntptiou in the South Cental Area;and
WHEREAS, the Ordinance if-ill expire. on April 30, 1986, unless it is ex-
tended,by resolution,foran additional.165 days,and the City Council makes
the following findings:
1. It is reasonably foreseeable that the termination of the regulatio>ts
established by this ordinance could result in development in the area incon-
sistent with the continuing study and possible pernanent regulation of such
establishments;and
2. Any burden on affected property owners caused by the extension of
/ this ordinance for an additional period of J65 days is necessary to avoid -
(\ further deterioration of the area;and
J. Appropriate city agencies are continuing to study the problems
addressed by this ordinance and are developing appropriate permanent
regulations.
WHEREAS, the extension of the ordinance is necessary to prevent further
proliferation of such liquor outlets in this area,protect the health,welfare and
safely of residents of nearby single and multiple family dwellings;and, to
Callow the city attorney to complete.pending litigation as a result of vigorous
enforcement of the interim ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council extend
Ordinance No. 158820 for J65 days, beginning April 30, 1986.
JUNE 1908
.
RON[RT J.WILKING.JR.
•{ CITY ATTORNEY
wwroR - — - - -- — -
" P. O. BOX 740
WILLIAM H.STOV[R ATASCADERO,CA ti�422
MAYOR Polo-t[MPOR[ 16031 466.5676
G[OR �,G[ P. HIGHLAND � sca ct®
MARJORI[ B. MACK[r iNCORPORATEO JULY 2. 1876
ROL/[N[L40N POLICE DEPARTMENT
16031 466.6600
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
MuAnAr L.WARD[N POST OFFICE BOX 747
CITY MANAG[R/CL[RK
ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 63422 FIRE DEPARTMENT
PHONE (603) 466.6000 6003 LEWIS AVENUE
ATASCADERO. CA 07422
16031 466.2141
CITY ATTORNEY'S OPINION
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Opinion No. 81-16
September 18, 1981
REQUESTED BY: Murray Warden, City Manager
FROM: Office of the City Attorney
SUBJECT: Regulation of Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages
BACKGROUND: You have asked me to render an opinion as to whether the sub-
ject of regulation of alcoholic beverages by the City has been
preempted by state law and is, therefore, invalid. It proposes:
"g 4-4. 101. Unlawful Act.
No person shall drink or have in his Possession un open
container of any alcoholic beverage:
(a) On any public street, sidewalk, or other public way ;
(b) While on private property open for public use without
the express permission of the owner, his agent, or any person
in lawful possession thereof;
(c) Upon the grounds of any public park unless a special
(written) use permit has been obtained from the City of Atas-
cadero."
QUESTION: Is the ordinance proposed by the Police Chief valid?
RULING: An ordinance which prohibits the following activities has been
held valid by the appellate courts of this state:
"No person shall drink any beer, wine, or other intoxicating
beverage on any street, sidewalk, alley, highway, or playgound
(in the City) . This section shall not be deemed to make punish-
able any act or acts which are prohibited by any law of the
State of California."
Opinion No. 81-16
September 18, 1981
Page 2
DISCUSSION: By the end of 1964, it was the opinion of legal scholars in
California that the regulation of alcoholic beverages by cities
was preempted and clearly invalid.
The case of In re Koehne (1963) 59 C.2d 646, held that a city ordinance pro-
hibiting intoxication was invalid. Then in In re Zorn (1963) 59 C.2d 650,
the court held that a municipal ordinance prohibiting intoxication in a public
place or in a place open to public view or in any governmental building or
premises was not invalid as being in conflict with Penal Code section 647 (f) .
The Zorn case was followed by People v. Lopez (1963) 59 C.2d 653, which upheld
the city ordinance of Pomona making it a penal offense for a person to be
intoxicated in a place open to public view, etc.
Therefore, it was somewhat surprising that in 1964, the court, in People v.
DeYoung (1964) 228 C.A.2d 331, held that the field of intoxication is com-
pletely occupied by Penal Code section 647 (f) and that cities are prohibited
from legislating on the subject.
At this point in time, all good city attorneys were aware of the fact that
cities could not regulate intoxication in a public place or a place open to
public view.
Notwithstanding the DeYoung case and the Koehne case, in which the Californiu
Supreme Court held that the state had adopted a general scheme for the rc,gul.J-
tion of criminal aspects of being intoxicated in a public place and that I it.i,
had no such power, the court, in People v. Butler (1967) 57 C.R. 924, uphcic;
a Fresno ordinance prohibiting consumption of intoxicating beverages un sir ,.:t :, ,
sidewalks, and playgrounds.
While the cases appear indistinguishable, the Butler case may- be explained
on the basis that the decision rests very strongly on the argument of Fresno
that because of its smallness, it had a unique local problem that had not
been considered or did not exist on a statewide level, and that the impact
of transients and lack of knowledge did not outweigh the preservation of the
social benefits of society locally. The provisions of the ordinance cited
in the ruling above are precisely those of the Fresno ordinance involved in
the Butler case .
Since the Butler decision was rendered, it has been cited favorably in Gluck
v. County of Los Angeles, 155 C.R. 435; People v. Robinson (1976) 58 C.A. 3d
363, 129 C.R. 915 (upheld a local ordinance prohibiting consumption of alco-
holic beverages on a public highway) ; and Christmat, Inc. v. County of Los
Angeles (1971) 15 C.A. 3d 590, 93 C.R. 325 (upheld the county ordinance pro-
hibiting intoxicated non-abstaining persons from attending model studios
while permitting sober and abstaining ones to do so) .
f d
Opinion No. 81-16
September 18, 1981
Page 3
Assurance of validity of an ordinance involving the field of intoxication
which goes farther than that approved in the Butler case cannot be had.
Respectfully submitted,
GVH,,,J ,
ALLEN GRIMES
City Attorney
AG: fr
cc: Bud McHale, Police Chief
bcc: Subject File
-,JCA Opinion File
Santa Maria
s
i 0EET
IN DATE/ IAGEND
EM#
• M E M O R A N D U M
To : City Council
Via : Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Gil Dovalina, Recreation Supervise
Subject : California Wildlife Coastal and Park Land Conservation
Bond Act .of 1988
INTRODUCTION
With the passage of Proposition 70, the City of Atascadero
is eligible to receive funding for improvement of recreational
facilities . Under the California Wildlife , Coastal and Park Land
Conservation Bond Act of 1988, the City is eligible for
$67, 000 . 00 .
BACKGROUND
• Grant funds may be expended only for land acquisition.
development or rehabilitation of parks, recreation or historical
facilities . Operation and maintenance expenditures are not
authorized.
With the passage of Proposition 70, I have presented the
options for these grant funds to the Parks and Recreation
Commission . The Commission has determined that the number one
concern at this time is the continued rehabilitation of Traffic
Way Park and the construction of the two (2) youth fields .
At this time, the California State Department of Parks and
Recreation is requesting from Council an authorizing resolution.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No . 109-88 approving the application for
grant funds for Atascadero Youth Sports Complex at Traffic Way
Park under the California Wildlife , Coastal and Park Land
Conservation Bond Act of 1988 .
At a later date a recommendation will be made to Council
concerning specific details for the project . What is needed at
this time, is for the City to notify the State of our intent to
• utilize these grant funds for FY/1989-90 . The State will ask for
project specifics which have already be outlined in the Community
Park Land Act of 1986 grant request .
0
The application deadline is January 13 . 1989 to receive funds in •
FY/1989-90 . Late applications will be considered in late 1989 .
FISCAL IMPACT
The passage of Proposition 70 guarantees the City of
Atascadero $67, 000 .00 with no matching requirements . Costs can
be controlled by dividing the project into phases according to
development steps . This enables the City to develop the
facilities in relation to available funding. Youth organizations
have volunteered to assist the Parks and Recreation Department in
developing this project , this alone will dramatically increase
the value of the grant for the Traffic Way Youth Sports Complex.
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 109-88
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS
ATASCADERO YOUTH SPORTS COMPLEX, TRAFFIC WAY PARK
WHEREAS, the people of the State of California have enacted
the PER CAPITA GRANT PROGRAM under the California Wildlife,
Coastal and Park Land Conservation Bond Act of 1988, which
Provides funds to the State of California ant its political
subdivisions for acquiring and developing facilities for public
recreational and historical purposes; and
WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation has
been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the
Program within the state, establishing procedures governing
applications by local agencies under the program; and
WHEREAS, said procedures established by the State Department
of Parks and Recreation require the applicant to certify by
resolution the approval of application before submission of said
application to the State; and
WHEREAS, said application contains assurances that the
applicant must comply; and
WHEREAS, the applicant agency will enter into an agreement
with the State of California for acquisition, development,
rehabilitation or restoration of the project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Atascadero hereby:
1 . Approves the filing of an application for Per Capita Grant
Program funding under the California Wildlife , Coastal and
Park Land Conservation Bond Act of 1988 .
2 . Certifies that said agency understands the assurances and
certification in the application form; and
3. Certifies that said agency has or will have sufficient funds
to operate and maintain the project ; and
4 . Certifies that said agency will complete the project within
three years from date of approval by the State; and
5 . Appoints the Director of Parks and Recreation as Agent of
the City of Atascadero to conduct all negotiations, execute
and submitt all documents including but not limited to
applications, agreements , amendments, payment requests, and
so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the
aforementioned project .
ON MOTION BY Councilmember and
seconded by Councilmember the City Council
of the City of Atascadero hereby adopts the foregoing resolution
in its entirety by the following roll call vote :
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
BONITA BORGESON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY G . JORGENSEN, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
GIL DOVALINA
Acting Parks and Recreation Director
MEETI AGENDA
DAT �-3 ITEM! �,_,3
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Ray Windsor, City Manager
SUBJECT: Downtown MasterPlan and Task Force
DATE : December 13 , 1988
In accordance with your action at the 11/29/88 joint Council/
Planning Commission meeting, staff is in the process of sub-
mitting a request for proposal (RFP) for a downtown master plan
which will be brought back to you for your evaluation and
selection early in 1989 .
As a concurrent action, I would like to ask you to appoint a
task force reflecting the interests of a cross-section of the
• community to work with the consultant on the downtown project.
Council may choose to add or delete representatives from the
following list of groups and organizations :
- Council
- Planning Commission
- Chamber of Commerce
- Business Improvement Assoc .
- Atascadero Homeowners Assoc.
- Atascadero Board of Realtors
- Atascadero Unified School District
- Two members at large
- City staff
I would like to request that this selection take place no later
than your second meeting in January, 1989 .
RW:cw
•
ITEM A-7 (Resolution Only)
!Please replace existing
resolution
a
CITY OF ATASCADERO
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
RESOLUTION NO. 112 -88
RESOLUTION AND ORDER PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE
OF $166, 515 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF LIMITED
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, CITY OF
ATASCADERO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
PRESCRIBING THE DENOMINATIONS, DATE, FORM,
AND MAXIMUM RATE OF INTEREST THEREOF; AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTION OF SAID BONDS; APPOINTING A PAYING
AGENT FOR SAID BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION
OF ASSESSMENTS TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST
ON SAID BONDS; PROVIDING FOR A RESERVE FUND FOR SAID
BONDS; APPROVING THE PRIVATE PLACEMENT MEMORANDUM
FOR SAID BONDS; APPROVING BOND PLACEMENT OFFER;
AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 94-88 TO PROVIDE
THAT THE CITY WILL NOT ADVANCE AVAILABLE FUNDS TO
CURE ANY DEFICIENCY IN THE BOND REDEMPTION FUND.
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "City Council") of
the City of Atascadero (the "City") , on August 23, 1988,
adopted its Resolution of Intention No. 92-88 (the "Resolution
of Intention") relating to the acquisition and construction of
certain proposed public improvements in an assessment district
in and for the City of Atascadero (the "City") designated City
of Atascadero Improvement District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area
Assessment District) , as described therein (herein, the
"Assessment District") , pursuant to the provisions of
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913, which Resolution of Intention
provided that serial bonds to represent unpaid assessments and
to bear interest at a maximum rate of not to exceed the
maximum rate permitted by law would be issued in the manner
provided by the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (the "Act") ,
being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California, and that said bonds would extend over a
minimum of three (3) years and a maximum of five (5) years
from the second day of September next succeeding twelve (12)
months from their date, reference being hereby made to the
Resolution of Intention for further particulars; and
WHEREAS, an assessment and diagram were thereafter
duly made and filed with this City Council, and after a
hearing duly noticed and held said assessment was confirmed,
levied and approved by Resolution No. 103-88 adopted by this
City Council on October 25, 1988; and
WHEREAS, said assessment and diagram were duly
recorded on October 26, 1988, in the office of the
Superintendent of Streets of the City of Atascadero, and said
diagram was recorded in the office of the San Luis Obispo
County Recorder, all in the time, form and manner required by
law; and
WHEREAS, said assessment was in the total amount of
$235, 080 and was apportioned upon the several subdivisions of
land in the Assessment District in proportion to the estimated
benefits to be received by such subdivisions, respectively,
from said work, acquisitions and improvements as shown in said
assessment; and a notice of assessment was duly recorded in
the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Luis
Obispo, all in time, form and manner required by law; and
•
2
0950b5
y • •
WHEREAS, notice of the levy --of said assessment and
notice otherwise as required by law has been duly given by
mailing and by publication in the time, form and manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, ail sums assessed by said assessment and
said corrected assessment were due and payable to the
Treasurer of the City of Atascadero (the "Treasurer") on or
before the close of business on November 25, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the Treasurer has determined that the total
unpaid assessment is $166, 515 and this City Council now finds
and determines that the aggregate amount of unpaid assessments
is $166, 515; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined not to
obligate itself to advance available funds from the City
Treasury to cure any deficiency which may occur in the bond
redemption fund, and to amend Resolution No. 94-88, adopted by
the City Council on August 23, 1988 (the "Resolution of
Intention") to so provide;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Atascadero, as follows:
Section 1. The foregoing recitals, and each of
them, are true and correct and the City Council hereby so
finds and determines .
Section 2 . The City Council has reviewed all
proceedings heretofore taken relative to the foregoing and has
found, as a result of such review, and does hereby find and
. determine that all acts, conditions and things required by law
3
0950b5
to exist, happen and be performed precedent to and in the
issuance of improvement bonds as hereinafter provided do
exist, have happened, and have been performed in due time,
form and manner as required by law and the City is now
authorized pursuant to each and every requirement of law to
authorize the issuance of bonds in the manner and form as in
this resolution provided.
Section 3 . Bonds in the principal amount of
$166,515 shall be issued upon the security of the aggregate
amount of unpaid assessments (together with the interest
thereon) in accordance with the provisions of the Act and
pursuant to the provisions of the Resolution of Intention and
proceedings taken thereunder. Said bonds shall be designated
. "City of Atascadero, Improvement District No. 5 Limited
Obligation Improvement Bonds (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment
District) " (the "Bonds") , shall be issued as fully registered
bonds, shall (except for one Bond maturing September 2, 1990
in the denomination of $515) be in the denomination of $1, 000
or any integral multiple of $1,000 (not exceeding the
principal amount of Bonds maturing at any one time) , shall be
dated December 2, 1988 (which is hereby fixed and determined
to be the date of issue of the Bonds) and shall mature and
bear interest as set forth in the following schedule:
Principal Maturity Date Interest
Amount (September 2) Rate
$ 27, 515 1990 8 .40%
31, 000 1991 8.40
• 33,000 1992 8 .40
36, 000 1993 8 .40
39, 000 1994 8 .40
4
0950b5
The Bonds shall bear interest from the interest
payment date next preceding the date of authentication and
registration thereof, unless such date of authentication and
registration-.is on a day during the period from the
sixteenth (16th) day of the month next preceding an interest
payment date, to such interest payment date, both inclusive,
in which event they shall bear interest from such interest
payment date, or unless such date of authentication and
registration is on a day on or before the fifteenth (15th) day
of the month next preceding the first interest payment date,
in which event they shall bear interest from December 2,
1988. Such interest shall be payable semiannually on March 2
and September 2 of each year, commencing September 2, 1989 .
Section 4 . Both the interest on and principal of
and redemption premiums, if any, on the Bonds shall be payable
in lawful money of the United States of America at the
corporate trust office of the Paying Agent hereinafter
appointed in Los Angeles, California. Payment of the interest
on the Bonds due on or before the maturity or prior redemption
thereof shall be made by check or draft mailed to the
registered owners of the Bonds at their addresses as they
appear at the close of business on the fifteenth (15th) day of
the month prior to each such interest payment date on the
registration books maintained by the Paying Agent as
hereinafter set forth. Payment of the principal of and
redemption premiums, if any, on the Bonds shall be made only
5
0950b5
Y; •
upon surrender thereof on their maturity dates or on
redemption prior to maturity at the corporate trust office of
the Paying Agent in Los Angeles, California.
Any Bond may be redeemed in whole or in part in
integral multiples of the minimum authorized denomination of
the Bonds on the second day of March or September in any year,
at the option of the Treasurer, upon payment of the principal
amount thereof and interest accrued thereon to the date of
redemption, together with a premium equal to three per cent
(3%) of such principal amount; Provided, that the Treasurer
shall proceed pursuant to Part 11. 1 of the Improvement Bond
Act of 1915 in determining those Bonds to be redeemed and the
manner of the redemption thereof. Notice of redemption of any
Bond shall be given by the Treasurer as provided in the
Improvement Bond Act of 1915.
Section 5. The Bonds shall be substantially in the
following form, the blanks to be filled in with appropriate
words and figures, namely:
6
0950b5
[FORM OF- BOND] ,
[FORM OF FACE OF BOND]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
- COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
REGISTERED REGISTERED
NUMBER $
CITY OF ATASCADERO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
LIMITED OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BOND
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
INTEREST MATURITY BOND CUSIP
RATE DATE DATE NUMBER
8 .40% September 2, December 2, 1988
REGISTERED OWNER:
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: DOLLARS
Under and by virtue of the Improvement Bond Act of
1915, Division 10 (commencing with Section 8500) of the
Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") , the City of Atascadero
(the "City") , County of San Luis Obispo, State of California
will, out of the redemption fund for the payment of the bonds
issued upon the unpaid portion of assessments made for the
acquisitions, work and improvements more fully described in
proceedings taken pursuant to Resolution of Intention
No. 92-88, adopted by the City Council of the City on
August 23, 1988, pay to the registered owner set forth above
on the maturity date stated above, the principal sum set forth
above in lawful money of the United States of America, and in
like manner will pay interest from the interest payment date
next preceding the date on which this bond is authenticated
and registered, unless this bond is authenticated and
registered on a day during the period from the
sixteenth (16th) day of the month next preceding an interest
payment date to such interest payment date, both inclusive, in
which event it shall bear interest from such interest payment
date, or unless this bond is authenticated and registered on a
day on or before the fifteenth (15th) day of the month next
7
0950b5
preceding the first interest payment date, in which event it
shall bear interest from December 2, 1988, until payment of
such principal sum shall have been discharged, at the rate per
annum stated above, payable semiannually on March 2 and
September 2 in each year, commencing on September 2, 1989 .
Both the principal hereof and redemption premium hereon are
payable at the corporate trust office of Security Pacific
Merchant Bank, as Paying Agent (the "Paying Agent") in Los
Angeles, California, and the interest hereon is payable by
check or draft mailed to the owner hereof at the owner ' s
address as it appears on the records of the Paying Agent or at
such address as may have been filed with the Paying Agent for
that purpose, as of the fifteenth (15th) day immediately
preceding each interest payment date.
This bond will continue to bear interest after
maturity at the rate above stated; provided, it is presented
at maturity and payment hereof is refused upon the sole ground
that there are not sufficient moneys in said redemption fund
with which to pay the same. If it is not presented at
maturity, interest hereon will run until maturity.
This bond shall not be entitled to any benefit under
the Act or under Resolution No. _-88, duly adopted by the
City Council of the City on December 13, 1988, pursuant to
which this bond has been issued (the "Resolution of
• Issuance") , or become valid or obligatory for any purpose,
until the certificate of authentication and registration
hereon endorsed shall have been signed by the Paying Agent.
The City has determined in the Resolution of Issuance that the
bonds are qualified tax-exempt obligations pursuant to
Section 265(b) (3) (B) (ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended.
REFERENCE IS HEREBY MADE TO THE FURTHER PROVISIONS
OF THIS BOND SET FORTH ON THE REVERSE HEREOF, WHICH FURTHER
PROVISIONS SHALL FOR ALL PURPOSES HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS IF
FULLY SET FORTH AT THIS PLACE.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said City of Atascadero has
caused this bond to be signed in facsimile by the Treasurer of
said City and by its City Clerk and has caused its corporate
seal to be reproduced in facsimile hereon, all as of
December 2, 1988.
CITY OF ATASCADERO
City Clerk City Treasurer
[SEAL]
8
0950b5
•
[Certificate of Authentication and Registration]
This is one of the bonds described in the within
mentioned Resolution of :Issuance, which has been authenticated
and registered on the day of. : 1988 .
SECURITY PACIFIC MERCHANT BANK,
as Paying Agent
By:
Authorized Officer
[FORM OF BACK OF BOND]
This bond is one of several annual series of bonds
of like date, tenor and effect, but differing in amounts,
maturities and interest rates, issued by the City under the
Act and the Resolution of Issuance for the purpose of
providing means for paying for the work, acquisitions and
improvements described in the proceedings, and is secured by
the moneys in said redemption fund and by the unpaid portion
of said assessments made for the payment of said improvements,
and, including principal and interest, is payable exclusively
out of said fund.
This bond or any portion of it in the amount of one
thousand dollars ($1, 000) , or any integral multiple thereof,
may be redeemed and paid in advance of maturity upon the
second day of March or September in any year by giving at
least 30 days ' notice by registered or certified mail or by
personal service to the registered owner hereof at the owner ' s
address as it appears on the registration books of the Paying
Agent by paying principal and accrued interest together with a
premium equal to three percent (3%) of the principal.
This bond is transferable by the registered owner
hereof, in person or by the owner 's attorney duly authorized
in writing, at the office of the Paying Agent, subject to the
terms and conditions provided in the Resolution of Issuance
including the payment of certain charges, if any, upon
surrender and cancellation of this bond. Upon such transfer a
new registered bond or bonds of any authorized denomination or
denominations, of the same maturity, for the same aggregate
principal amount, will be issued to the transferee in exchange
herefor.
9
0950b5
Bonds shall be registered only in the name of an
individual (including joint owners) , a corporation, a
partnership, or a trust.
Neither the City nor the Paying Agent shall be
required to make such exchange or registration of transfer of
bonds during the fifteen (15) days immediately preceding any
interest payment date.
The City and the Paying Agent may treat the owner
hereof as the absolute owner for all purposes, and the City
and the Paying Agent shall not be affected by any notice to
the contrary.
[Form of Assignment]
For value received the undersigned do(es) hereby
sell, assign and transfer unto
the within bond and do(es) hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint
attorney to transfer the same on the register of the Paying
Agent of the City of Atascadero with full power of
substitution in the premises.
Date:
SIGNATURE GUARANTEED:
NOTE: The signature(s) to this Assignment must correspond
with the name(s) as written on the face of the
within bond in every particular, without alteration
or enlargement or any change whatsoever and the
signature(s) must be guaranteed by a member firm of
the New York Stock Exchange or a commercial bank or
trust company.
10
0950b5
As to the outstanding principal balance of this Bond
at any time, the payment record of the Paying Agent shall be
conclusive.
PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF PRINCIPAL
Principal Balance of
Amount Principal
Payment Date Redeemed Amount Unpaid Signature
•
Section 6. The City Treasurer and the City Clerk
are hereby authorized and directed, respectively, to execute
each of the Bonds on behalf of the City by use of their
engraved, printed or lithographed facsimile signatures, and
the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to affix the
seal of the City thereto, which seal may be engraved, printed,
lithographed or otherwise placed by facsimile thereon. Such
signing and sealing as herein provided shall be a sufficient
and binding execution of the Bonds by the City. In case any
of the officers whose signatures appears on the Bonds shall
cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Bonds to
the purchaser, such signature shall nevertheless be valid and
sufficient for all purposes the same as though such officer
11
0950b5
G
had remained in office until the delivery of the Bonds. Only
such of the Bonds as shall bear thereon a certificate of
authentication and registration, executed and dated by the
Paying Agent, shall be entitled to any benefits hereunder or
be valid or obligatory for any purpose, and such certificate
shall be conclusive evidence that the Bonds so authenticated
have been duly authorized, executed, issued and delivered
hereunder and are entitled to the benefits hereof.
Section 7. Security Pacific Merchant Bank, at its
corporate trust office in Los Angeles, California, is hereby
appointed Transfer Agent, Registrar and Paying Agent (the
"Paying Agent") of the City for the purpose of paying the
interest on and principal of and redemption premiums, if any,
on the Bonds and for the purpose of performing the other
obligations imposed on it in this resolution. The Paying
Agent may at any time resign, which resignation shall become
effective upon the appointment of a successor Paying Agent.
Upon receiving notice of such resignation the City shall
promptly appoint a successor Paying Agent, except that if no
successor Paying Agent shall have been appointed by the City
within thirty (30) days of receiving such notice, the
resigning Paying Agent may petition any court of competent
jurisdiction for the appointment of a successor Paying Agent.
The City may at any time in its sole discretion remove the
Paying Agent initially appointed and any successor thereto and
may appoint a successor or successors thereto by an instrument
12
0950b5
in writing; provided that the City agrees that it will at all
times maintain a Paying Agent with a corporate trust office in
Los Angeles, California. The Paying Agent is hereby
authorized to pay interest on the Bonds due on or before the
maturity or prior redemption thereof to the registered owners
thereof as their names appear at the close of business on the
fifteenth (15th) . day of the month preceding each interest
payment date on the registration books required to be kept by
it pursuant to this section as the registered owners thereof,
such interest to be paid by check or draft mailed to such
registered owners at their addresses appearing on such books
or at such other addresses as they may have filed with it for
that purpose, and to pay to such registered owners the
principal of and redemption premiums, if any, on the Bonds
upon presentation and surrender of the Bonds to it at maturity
or on redemption prior to maturity.
Upon surrender of Bonds for redemption in part only,
the City shall execute and the Paying Agent shall authenticate
and deliver to the owner thereof, at the expense of the City,
a new Bond or Bonds of authorized denominations equal in
aggregate principal amount to the unredeemed portion of the
Bonds surrendered. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the owner
of any Bond to be redeemed in part may, in lieu of
surrendering the same for a new Bond, endorse on such Bond a
notice of such partial redemption to be made on the form set
forth below which shall be typed or printed on the reverse
13
0950b5
• 0
side of such Bond, in which case the following legend shall be
typed on such Bond:
As to the outstanding principal balance of this Bond
at any time, the payment record of the Paying Agent
shall be conclusive.
PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF PRINCIPAL
Principal Balance of
Amount Principal
Payment Date Redeemed amount Unpaid Signature
The Paying Agent shall maintain a record of each such partial
redemption made in accordance with the preceding sentence and
such record shall be conclusive. Such partial redemption
shall be valid upon payment of the amount thereof to the owner
of such Bond and the City and the Paying Agent shall be fully
released and discharged from all liability to the extent of
such payment irrespective of whether such endorsement shall or
shall not have been made upon the reverse of such Bond by the
owner thereof and irrespective of any error or omission in
such endorsement.
•
14
0950b5
The Paying Agent will keep at its corporate trust
office in Los Angeles, California sufficient books for the
registration, transfer and exchange of the Bonds, which books
shall at all time be open to inspection by the City. Upon
presentation for such purpose, the Paying Agent shall, under
such reasonable regulations as it may prescribe, register or
transfer or exchange the Bonds on such books as hereinafter
provided.
Any Bond may be transferred or exchanged on such
books by the registered owner thereof, in person or by his
duly authorized attorney, upon payment by the person
requesting such transfer or exchange of any tax or other
governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such
transfer or exchange and upon surrender of such Bond for
cancellation accompanied by delivery of a duly executed
written instrument of transfer or exchange in a form approved
by the Paying Agent. Whenever any Bond or Bonds shall be
surrendered for transfer or exchange, the City shall execute
and the Paying Agent shall authenticate and deliver a new Bond
or Bonds of authorized denominations of the same maturity date
aggregating the same principal amount of the Bond or Bonds so
surrendered. The City and the Paying Agent may deem and treat
the registered owner of any Bond as the absolute owner of such
Bond for the purpose of receiving payment thereof and for all
other purposes, whether such Bond shall be overdue or not, and
neither the City nor the Paying Agent shall be affected by any
15
0950b5
notice or knowledge to the contrary; and payment of the
interest on and principal of and redemption premium, if any,
on such Bond shall be made only to such registered owner,
which payment shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and
discharge the liability on such Bond to the extent of the sum
or sums so paid.
The City shall from time to time, upon request of
the Paying Agent and subject to any agreement between the City
and the Paying Agent then in force, pay the Paying Agent
compensation for its services, reimburse the Paying Agent for
all its advances and expenditures, including, but not limited
to, advances to and fees and expenses of independent
accountants, counsel and engineers or other experts employed
by it in the exercise and performance of its rights and
obligations hereunder, and indemnify and save the Paying Agent
harmless against liabilities not arising from its own
negligence or willful misconduct which it may incur in the
exercise and performance of its rights and obligations
hereunder; provided that the Paying Agent shall not have any
lien for such compensation or reimbursement against any moneys
held by it in any of the funds established hereunder, although
it may take whatever legal actions are lawfully available to
it directly against the City.
The statements, agreements, conditions, covenants
and terms contained herein and in the Bonds shall be taken as
statements, agreements, conditions, covenants and terms of the
16
0950b5
City, and the Paying Agent does not assume any responsibility
for the correctness of the same or for the observance or
performance by the City of the same and does not make any
representation as to the sufficiency or validity hereof or of
the Bonds. The Paying Agent shall not incur any
responsibility in respect hereof other than in connection with
the rights and obligations assigned to or imposed upon it
herein or in the Bonds, and the Paying Agent may conclusively
rely on the written instructions, representations and
calculations received by it from the City Council of the City
or from any officer of the City or from any officer of San
Luis Obispo County hereunder.
Section 8. The unpaid assessments in the aggregate
amount of $166,515, as hereinabove referred to and as
determined by the Treasurer and the City Council, together
with interest thereon computed at the rate specified in the
Bonds (which interest shall begin to run from the date of the
Bonds) , shall in accordance with and consistent with the
Improvement Bond Act of 1915, remain and constitute a trust
fund for the redemption and payment of the principal of the
Bonds and for the interest due thereon, and said assessments
and each installment thereof and the interest and penalties
thereon shall constitute a lien against the lots and parcels
of land on which they are made, until the same be paid. The
Treasurer shall annually make a record in his office showing
the several installments of principal and interest on said
17
0950b5
0
assessments which are to be collected for the forthcoming year
during the term of the Bonds. An annual installment of said
unpaid assessments shall be payable and shall be collected in
each year corresponding in amount to the amount of Bonds
unpaid and to accrue that year, which amount shall be
sufficient to pay the Bonds as the same become due, and an
annual installment of interest on said unpaid assessments
shall be payable and shall be collected in each year
corresponding in amount to the amount of interest which will
accrue on the Bonds outstanding for such year, which amount
shall be sufficient to pay the interest thereon that shall
become due on the next succeeding March 2 and September 2 .
The annual proportion of each assessment coming due in any
year, together with the annual interest on such assessment,
shall be payable in the same manner and at the same time and
in the same installments as the general taxes of the County of
San Luis Obispo on real property are payable, and said
assessment installments and said annual interest on said
unpaid assessments shall be payable and become delinquent on
the same dates and in the same proportionate amounts and bear
the same proportionate penalties and interest after
delinquency as do general taxes on real property in the County
of San Luis Obispo.
The City Council hereby covenants with the holders
of the Bonds that in the event any assessment, or installment
thereof, including any interest thereon, is not paid when due,
18
0950b5
it will order and cause to be commenced within one hundred and
fifty (150) days following the date of delinquency, and
thereafter diligently prosecute, judicial foreclosure
proceedings upon such delinquent assessment or installment
thereof and interest thereon, which foreclosure proceedings
shall be commenced and prosecuted without regard to available
surplus funds of the City, including money available in the
Reserve Fund provided in Paragraph 11 of this resolution. The
City Council hereby further covenants with the holders of the
Bonds that it will monitor the records of the Treasurer and,
not later than one hundred and fifty (150) days following the
date when each assessment, or any installment thereof,
including any interest thereon, is due, it will advise the
iPaying Agent either that there are no such delinquencies, or
that there are such delinquencies, and (in the latter case)
whether or not it has caused to be commenced the aforesaid
judicial foreclosure proceedings . If the City has advised
that such judicial foreclosure proceedings have not been
commenced, then the Paying Agent agrees that it will use its
best efforts to institute a suit at law or in equity to compel
the City to commence such foreclosure proceedings (the
expenses of which suit shall be paid by the City in accordance
with Section 7 hereof) ; provided, that the Paying Agent shall
not be responsible for monitoring the records of the Tax
Collector of San Luis Obispo or for taking any action other
than as specified herein, it will cause to be commenced the
. aforesaid judicial foreclosure proceedings .
19
0950b5
Section 9 . There is hereby created and established
a fund to be known as the "City of Atascadero Improvement
District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment District)
Redemption Fund, " which fund shall be kept by the Treasurer
and shall constitute a trust fund for the benefit of the
holders of the Bonds . At the time of the issuance of the
Bonds, the City shall deposit in said fund from the proceeds
of the sale of the Bonds the sum of $9, 752.23, representing
capitalized interest, plus the accrued interest received from
the sale of the Bonds from December 2, 1988, which shall be
applied to the interest payment on the Bonds on September 2,
1989 . All sums received by the Treasurer which are received
from the collection of unpaid assessments, and of the interest
and penalties thereon, shall upon receipt be deposited in said
fund. All sums to become due for the principal of and the
interest on the Bonds shall be withdrawn from said fund and
transferred to the Paying Agent so as to be received by the
Paying Agent for use for the payment of the principal of and
the interest on the Bonds at least two (2) business days
before each such principal or interest due date, and the Bonds
and the interest thereon shall not be paid out of any other
funds . The City Council hereby agrees and covenants that it
will timely make or cause to be made such withdrawals and
transfers in compliance with the requirements of this
sentence. The Paying Agent shall not be required to invest
any funds held by it under this section, nor shall it
20
0950b5
i r
be liable to the City for payment of interest on any funds so
held. Any surplus remaining in said fund after payment of all
Bonds and the interest thereon shall be applied as directed by
the City.
There is hereby created and established within the
Redemption Fund a Prepayment Account. Upon receiving any
prepayment of an assessment, the Treasurer shall deposit such
prepayment as received in the Prepayment Account. At least
three (3) business days before each principal or interest due
date, the Treasurer shall withdraw from the Prepayment Account
and transfer to the Redemption Fund the installment of
principal due in the fiscal year of prepayment and interest
accrued to the next redemption payment date. Any surplus
remaining in said account shall be used to advance the
maturity of bonds to the next redemption date as provided in
Part 11 of the Act.
All moneys in said fund shall be invested in any
lawful investments of City funds maturing not later than the
date on which such moneys are required for disbursement as
herein provided. All interest earned on such investments
shall be credited to said fund, except as otherwise required
by Section 12 of this resolution.
Section 10 . There is hereby created and established
a fund to be known as the "City of Atascadero Improvement
District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment District)
Improvement Fund" (herein, the "Improvement Fund") , which
•
21
0950b5
shall be kept by the Treasurer. After making the deposit in
the Reserve Fund as required by Section 11 and after making
the deposit in the Redemption Fund required by Section 9, all
remaining proceeds of the sale of the Bonds (together with the
paid assessments) shall be placed by the Treasurer to the
credit of the Improvement Fund and shall be kept separate and
distinct from all other City funds. All moneys in the
Improvement Fund shall be invested in any lawful investments
of City funds maturing not later than the date on which such
moneys are required for disbursement as herein provided. All
interest earned on such investments shall be credited to the
Improvement Fund, except as otherwise required by Section 12
of this resolution. The moneys in the Improvement Fund shall
be applied exclusively for the purpose of paying the cost of
the improvements for which the Assessment District has been
formed, including payment of the incidental expenses in
connection with such improvements; provided, that after
completion of said improvements and the payment of all claims
from the Improvement Fund, any surplus moneys remaining in the
Improvement Fund (as determined by the City Council) , or such
portion thereof as is allowed by law, shall be used as a
credit on the assessment in accordance with the provisions of
Section 10427. 1 of the Streets and Highways Code.
Section 11. There is hereby created and established
a separate fund to be known as the "City of Atascadero
10 Improvement District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment
22
0950b5
District) Reserve Fund" (herein, the "Reserve Fund") , which
Fund shall be kept by the Treasurer and which shall constitute
a trust fund for the benefit of the holders of the Bonds . At
the time of the issuance of the Bonds, the City shall deposit_
in the Reserve Fund from the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds
the sum of $11, 656, and all money in the Reserve Fund shall be
paid and transferred in the following amounts and at the
following times and under the following circumstances:
(a) Whenever there are insufficient funds in the
Redemption Fund to meet the next maturing installment of
principal of or interest on the Bonds, the City shall
transfer an amount necessary to satisfy such deficiency
to the Paying Agent, for use for the payment of the
principal of and the interest on the Bonds, at least two
(2) business days before each such principal or interest
due date which amount shall be calculated by the
Treasurer and which calculation shall be set forth in
writing. The City agrees that if such insufficiency was
caused by delinquent payment of installments of
assessments, then an amount equal to the amount so
transferred shall be reimbursed and deposited by the City
in the Reserve Fund from the proceeds of redemption or
sale of the parcel in respect of which payment of
installments of assessments was delinquent .
23
0950b5
(b) In the event unpaid assessments are prepaid in
cashrior to their final due date the Cit shall
P Y
transfer from the Reserve Fund for deposit in the
Redemption Fund an amount equal to the ratio of the total
amount initially provided for in the Reserve Fund to the
total amount originally assessed in the proceedings for
the Bonds multiplied by the reduction in said assessments
(as a result of any such prepayment) , which shall be
calculated by the Treasurer.
(c) If at any time the amount of interest earned by
the investment of any portion of the Reserve Fund,
together with the principal amount in the Reserve Fund,
shall exceed $11, 656, as such amount may have been
reduced pursuant to subparagraph (b) above, such excess
shall be transferred to the Redemption Fund and credited
by the City upon the unpaid assessments in the manner set
forth in the Act.
(d) Whenever the balance in the Reserve Fund is
sufficient to retire all the remaining outstanding Bonds,
the City shall transfer the balance in the Reserve Fund
for depositosit in the Redemption Fund and the City shall
cease the collection of the principal and interest on the
unpaid assessments . In such case, the City shall credit
such balance against the assessments remaining unpaid in
the manner set forth in the Act, with the amount
apportioned to each unpaid assessment credited against
24
0950b5
the last unpaid assessment installment; and if the amount
• apportioned to eachP arcel exceeds the amount of said
last installment, then such excess shall be credited
against the next preceding unpaid assessment installment
or installments until exhausted. In the event that the,
balance in the Reserve Fund. at: the time of such transfer
exceeds the amount required to- retire all outstanding
Bonds, then such excess shall be apportioned by the City
to each parcel upon which an individual assessment
remained unpaid at the time the balance in the Reserve
Fund was sufficient to retire all outstanding Bonds, and
such payments shall be made by the City in cash to the
respective owners of the parcels, except that if such
excess is not greater than One Thousand Dollars
($1, 000) , such excess may be transferred to the general
fund of the City.
Section 12. (a) The City will not make any use of
the proceeds of the Bonds or any other funds of the City or of
the improvements acquired and constructed with the proceeds of
the Bonds or any part thereof which would cause the Bonds to
be "arbitrage bonds" subject to federal income taxation by
reason of Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the "Code") , "private activity bonds" subject to
federal income taxation by reason of Section 141(a) of the
Code, or obligations subject to federal income taxation
because they are "federally guaranteed" as provided in Section
25
0950b5
• a
149(b) of the Code; and to that end the City, with respect to
the proceeds of the Bonds and such other funds, will comply
with all requirements of such sections of the Code and all
regulations of the United States Department of the Treasury
issued thereunder to the extent that such requirements are, at
the time, applicable and in effect.
(b) The City hereby represents that the reasonably
anticipated amount of "qualified tax-exempt obligations" which
has been and will be issued by Y
the Cit in 1988 does not
exceed $10,000,000, and hereby designates the Bonds to be
"qualified tax-exempt obligations"
Pursuant to Section
265(b) (3) (B) (ii) of the Code.
Section 13 . The City Clerk is directed to cause the
Bonds to be typed, lithographed, printed or engraved, and to
cause the blank spaces thereof to be filled in to comply with
the provisions hereof, and to procure their execution by the
proper officers, and to deliver them when so executed, to the
Paying Agent, who shall authenticate them, and thereafter
deliver them or cause them to be delivered to the purchaser
thereof, on receipt by the Treasurer of the purchase price
thereof. The Treasurer and the City Clerk are further
authorized to execute and deliver to the purchaser of the
Bonds a signature and no-litigation certificate in the form
customarily required by purchasers of municipal bonds,
certifying to the genuineness and due execution of the Bonds
and to all facts within their knowledge relative to any
is
26
0950b5
• 0
litigation which may or might affect the Assessment District
or the City, said officers or the Bonds, and the Treasurer ,is
further authorized to execute and deliver to the purchaser of
the Bonds a Treasurer' s receipt in the form customarily
required by purchasers of municipal bonds, evidencing the
payment of the purchase price of the Bonds, which receipt
shall be conclusive evidence that said _purchase :price _has been
paid and has been received by the City. Any purchaser or
subsequent taker or holder of the Bonds is hereby authorized
to rely upon and shall be justified in relying upon any such
signature and no-litigation certificate and any such
Treasurer's receipt with respect to the Bonds executed, sold
and delivered pursuant to the authority of this resolution.
Section 14 . The officers of the City and the Public
Works Director are hereby authorized and directed, jointly and
severally, to do any and all things and to execute and deliver
any and all documents, or to make any necessary modifications
thereto, which are acceptable to the City Attorney and Bond
Counsel and which they deem necessary or advisable in order to
consummate the issuance, sale and delivery of the Bonds.
Section 15. The Private Placement Memorandum
relating to the Bonds on file with the City Clerk is hereby
approved, and the Bonds are hereby authorized to be sold
pursuant to the terms of the Bond Placement Offer on file with
the City Clerk at a price not less than one hundred per cent
(100%) of the principal amount thereof, together with accrued
27
0950b5
t
interest thereon to the date of delivery. The officers of the
City are hereby authorized for and in the name of the City to
execute a Private Placement Memorandum and a Bond Placement
Offer, respectively, in substantially the forms presented to
the City Council, with such changes as such officers may
require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced
by the execution thereof. Security Pacific Merchant Bank, as
Placement Agent, is hereby authorized and directed to cause to
be printed and mailed to prospective purchasers of the Bonds
copies of such Private Placement Memorandum in substantially
such form as was presented to this City Council.
Section 16. The Resolution of Intention is amended
by adding a new Section 8 which reads as follows: The Council
hereby determines and notice is given that the City will not
obligate itself to advance available funds from the City
Treasury to cure any deficiency which may occur in the bond
redemption fund.
Section 17. This resolution shall take effect
immediately.
28
0950b5
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December, 1988,
by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES:
ABSENT:
[SEAL]
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSON, RAY WINDSOR,
City Attorney City Manager
29
0950b5
REVISED
A9
AGENDA ITEM B-3
CITY COUNCIL 12/13/88
ORDINANCE NO. 184
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE
TEXT RELATIVE TO MINIMUM LOT SIZES IN THE RSF-X AND LSF-X
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES BY REQUIRING A NET MINIMUM
LOT SIZE OF 0.5 ACRES EXCLUSIVE OF ROADS
(CITY OF ATASCADERO: ZC 14-88)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning text amendment proposes
standards that are consistent with the General Plan as required
by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on November 15, 1988, and has recommended approval of the
Zoning Ordinance text amendment; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Council Findings.
1. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element and other elements contained in the
General Plan.
2. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse
environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
Section 2. Zoning Text Change.
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 14-88 is approved to change
the text of the Zoning Ordinance as shown in the attached Exhibit
A, which is made a part of this Ordinance by reference.
Section 3. Applicability.
All applications for subdivisions of land within the City
accepted as complete for processing prior to December 13, 1988
shall not be affected by or subject to the restraints herein
enacted.
Section 4. Publication.
Ordinance No. 184
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News,, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 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 approved by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
By:
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i
Z,JT .—FREYXhJ--1'
EEN, City Attorney
,PREPARE
HENRY ENGEN Communit? Development Director
EXHIBIT A
The charts contained in Zoning Ordinance Section 9-3. 154 and
Section 9-3. 164 are amended to read as follows:
SYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE
X One-half ( 1/2) acre net area (excluding land
needed for street rights-of-way whether
publicly of privately owned )
Y One ( 1 ) acre, when sewers are available
One and one-half ( 1 1/2) acres, when sewers
are not available.
Z One and one-half ( 1 1/2) to two and one-half
(2 1/2) acres based on performance standards
set forth in this Section.
Revised
Agenda Item C-2
City Council 12/13/88
RESOLUTION NO. 111-88
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 100-88
TO CLARIFY VARYING EFFECTIVE DATES OF DIFFERENT FEES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero has adopted
Ordinance No. 119 creating and establishing authority for impos-
ing and charging development fees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero on November
8, 1988 adopted Resolution No. 100-88 modifying said fees; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero is desirous of
clarifying the status of building plans previously applied for.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the
City of Atascadero as follows :
1 . Section 11 of Resolution 100-88 is hereby amended to read as
follows :
118 . This resolution shall become effective immediately upon
passage with fees to be assessed as follows:
a. All building permit applications accepted by the
Building Division as complete prior to November 9 ,
1988, shall be charged pre-existing fees except
that Lewis Avenue Bridge fees shall be as
specified in section 7 , above) .
b. Non-residential building permit applications
accepted. by the Building Division as complete
between November 9th but prior to January 9th,
1989 shall be charged fees pursuant to this sched-
ule; for residential building permit applications
accepted as complete, pre-existing fees shall be
charged (except Lewis Avenue Bridge fees shall be
as specified in Section 7 , above) .
C . All building permits for construction activities
applied for on and after January 9 , 1989 shall be
charged fees pursuant to this resolution. "
Passed and adopted this of 1988 .
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
By:
BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk
,AkPROVED A TO FORM:
E� YBBY:
JO NSEN, City Attorney
2EPARED
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
REVISED 11/23/88
A G E N D A
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday - November 29, 1988 7 :00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
Rotunda Room (Fourth Floor) Administration Building
Atascadero, California
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE:
1 . Policy direction discussion
a. Industrial land use
acreage extent and location, north vs . south E1
Camino Real . Access to Traffic Way and Sycamore .
industrial park areas .
Craftsman Park idea (ERA)
b. Circulation Element
- road classification system, trails, bikeways,
routes-to-school
- implementation. . .paper roads, assessment districts
- Highway 41 extension impacts
- 101 corridor deficiencies -
C . Resolution 105-88 . Authorization for City to enter
into Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) relative to measures
to mitigate the impact of Highway 41 extension on
historic resources (continued from City Council ' s
November 8, 1988 meeting)
d. Request to direct staff to solicit proposals to prepare
a plan for downtown (Ray Windsor)
PUBLIC COMMENT
NEXT JOINT MEETING
ADJOURNMENT
(11/23/88)
- 1 II