HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 09/13/1988 *DY W I LK I NS
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
NOTE: THERE WILL BE A COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION AT 6 :30 P.M.
FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING LITIGATION MATTERS
AGENDA
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA .ROOM
SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
7:30 PAM
RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
* Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda.
* A person may speak for five ( 5) minutes .
* No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to
. speak has had an opportunity to do so.
* No one may speak more than twice on any item.
* Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may
respond, but, after the allotted time has expired, may not
initiate further discussion.
* The floor will then be closed to public participation and
open for Council discussion.
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
City Council Comment
* PROCLAMATION ACKNOWLEDGING SEPTEMBER 16 , 1988 AS
NATIONAL POW/MIA RECOGNITION DAY
* PROCLAMATION ACKNOWLEDGING SEPTEMBER 22 AS
AMERICAN BUSINESS WOMEN' S DAY
* PROCLAMATION ACKNOWLEDGING SEPTEMBER 15 - OCTOBER 15, 1988
AS EROSION CONTROL MONTH
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
• (Approximate Time - 7 :40 P.M. )
(The following represents Ad Hoc or Standing Committees .
Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary. )
1 . City/School Committee
2 . North Coastal Transit
3 . San Luis Obispo Area 7 . Police Facility Committee
Coordinating Council 8 . Atascadero Lake Acquisition
4 . Traffic Committee Committee
5 . Solid/Hazardous Waste 9 . Business Improvement Assoc .
Management Committee 10 . Tree Committee
6 . Economic Opportunity 11 . Pavilion Committee
Commission
COMMUNITY FORUM:
(Approximate Time - 7 :45 P.M. )
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 may do
so by forwarding to Council, prior to the Council Meeting,
nine ( 9 ) copies to the City Clerk by 5 : 00 p.m. on the
Wednesday preceding the Council Meeting.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
(Approximate Time - 8 : 00 P.M. )
All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are considered
to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form
listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these
items . A member of the Council or public may, by request, have
any item removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then be
reviewed and acted upon separately after the adoption of the
Consent Calendar.
1 . AUGUST 23, 1988 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
2 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10-88 - 8100 COROMAR
(Subdivision of 1 .5 Acres into Two Parcels of 20, 000 &
44 , 500 Square Feet - Bishop/Volbrecht Surveys)
(RECOMMEND DENIAL)
3 . CLAIM BY SHANE W. SMITH (Recommend Denial)
2
a
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES/REPORTS:
(Approximate Time - 8 : 10 P .M. )
1 . TREE REMOVAL REQUEST - 7675 DEL RIO ROAD
A. Public Hearing
B. Council Action
(Approximate Time - 8: 20 P .M. )
2 . PALOMA CREEK PARK EQUESTRIAN ARENA
(Policy Status on Usage)
(Approximate Time - 8 : 30 P .M. )
3 . GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS REPORT
A. Progress Report/Update
B. Set Meeting Date
(Approximate Time - 8 :40 P.M. )
4 . ATASCADERO LAKE PARK PAVILION BUILDING
(Demolition Alternative Report)
BREAK: 8 :55 P.M.
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(Approximate Time - 9 : 10 P .M. )
1 . CHANDLER RANCH ROAD MAINTENANCE DISTRICT #5
Resolution 93-88 — Amending Boundary Map (Resolution 91-88)
Resolution 94-88 -
Approval of Engineers Report on Road Improvements
Approval of Time & Place for Hearing Protests
Approval to Solicit Bids for Road Improvements
(Approximate Time - 9 : 55 P.M. )
2 . DIAL-A-RIDS CONTRACT EXTENSION
(Contract with Community Transit Services)
(Approximate Time - 10 : 00 P.M. )
3 . DISSOLUTION OF ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT:
REPEAL OF ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT ORDINANCE
& ADOPTION OF WASTEWATER DIVISION ORDINANCE - ORDINANCE 181
(second & final reading) (Cont' d from 8/23/88)
ADOPTION OF WASTEWATER DIVISION SERVICE CHARGES -
RESOLUTION 90-88 (Cont' d from 8/23/88)
3
i •
•
(Approximate Time - 10: 10 P.M. )
4 . WEST MALL/EL CAMINO REAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL
(Resolution 95-88 - Authorizing Agreement with Caltrans)
(Approximate Time - 10: 20 P.M. )
5 . ATASCADERO LAKE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CONTRACT
(With Associated Pacific Constructors)
(Conceptually Approved on 8/23/88)
D. NEW BUSINESS:
(Approximate Time - 10 : 25 P.M. )
1 . POLICE DEPARTMENT VEHICLE
(Authorization to Purchase)
E. SANITATION DISTRICT:
(Approximate Time - 10 : 30 )
1 . ATASCADERO SANITATION DISTRICT QUIT CLAIM DEED TO THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION:
(Approximate Time —10 : 40 P .M. )
1 . City Council
A. DISCUSSION REGARDING TREE PROTECTION ORDINANCE ##168
* Tree Replacement Fund
* Revisions to the List of Arborists
2 . City Attorney
3 . City Clerk
4 . City Treasurer
5 . City Manager
�lOr��o�i
NOTE : THIS COUNCIL MEETING WILL E JOURNED TO A SPECIAL
OPEN COUNCIL SESSION ON . SEPTEMBER 19,
S 4 :30 P.M. IN THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, FOURTH
FLOOR CLUB ROOM FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERVIEWING
CANDIDATES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS
4
eafn�n;- 11 FA
...,�. _
1913 " 11 r: C 19 9
i `ATASCADF�iOii
, . s
P R O C L A M A T I O N
POW/MIA RECOGNITION DAY ;, t. °
SEPTEMBER 16, 1988r
WHEREAS, America' s men and women have heroically served a f°
their country in time of conflict ever since the Revolutionary "
War,, and in each of America' s wars, - our prisoners of ,war have
been required to make special sacrifices, serving their country t4;
under conditions of hardship; and
WHEREAS, because our POW' s and MIA' s have earned a special
place in the hearts of all Americans due to their selfless
devotion to duty and u r
nflinching courage, we must not forget .,
fail to
honor those who have served their country so faithfully;
and
WHEREAS, our Nation deeply appreciates the acute suffering r
and pain experienced by the families of our servicemen held k '-
captive or missing in action. The loss of a loved one is a
tragic situation under any circumstance, but that burden is
magnified when the fate of the loved one is unknown; and
WHEREAS, we must accept- and remember our obligation to these t
missing servicemen and be determined that until the issue
is resolved, it will remain a matter of the highest national
priority; and
Y
WHEREAS, National POW/MIA Recognition Day is the day we
should recognize the special debt all Americans owe to our fellow _
citizens who gave up their freedom in the service of our country
and to the families who have undergone a great travail.
THEREFORE, the Atascadero City Council proclaims Friday,
September 16, 1988 as ;
POW/MIA RECOGNITION_ DAY
and call on the residents of the City of Atascadero to join in
honoring all former American prisoners of -,war, those still
missing, and their families who endured the uncommon sacrifices
on behalf of this country.
BONITA BORGESON s
Mayor
September
,
r 0Fn-,v .f f 57,;.rl
n
1918 C (r 1979
P R O C L A M A T I O N
"EROSION CONTROL MONTH"
SEPTEMBER '15 - OCTOBER 15, 1988 � tv
r x
WHEREAS, the well-beingour of people depends. upon the
production of ample supplies of food, fiber, and other products
of the soil; and
WHEREAS, the
. .quality and quantity of these products depend �#
upon the conservation, wise and proper management of the soil and
water resources; and .` h
. WHEREAS, the upper Salinas-Las Tablas and Coastal San Luis
Resource Conservation Districts provide a practical and
democratic organization through which -landowners are taking the '
initiative to conserve and make proper use of these resources; ;
and
WHEREAS, the Soil Conservation movement is dedicated to
keeping quality food on the table by carrying forward -a strong
conservation program; and
WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo County Erosion Control
Ordinance recognizes the necessity of preventative measures and ,
establishes October 15 as the date by which all erosion control
measures must be installed.
THEREFORE, the City of Atascadero City Council hereby
proclaims September 15 October 15, 1988 as
"EROSION CONTROL MONTH"
• BONITA BORGESON
Mayor
September 13, 1988w �
0AEETi ;AGENDA
tDATE ITEM#
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 1988
The regular meeting of the Atascadero City .Council was called to
order at 7: 30 p .m. , followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
All Present Councilmembers Dexter , Lilley, Shiers, Mackey and
Mayor Horgeson
Staff Present : Paul Sensibauqh , Int . City Mqr . /Public Works Dir . ;
Henry Engen, Commun. Devel . Dir . ; Jeff Jorgensen,
City Atty. ; Hud McHale, Police Chief ; Cindy
Wilkins , Dep . City Clerk
COUNCIL COMMENT
Councilman Shiers commented on a newspaper article which indi-
cated that the City is in the process of drafting a skateboard
ordinance; f,1r . Jorgensen, City Atty . , clarified there was no such
ordinance being prepared .
Councilwoman Mackey noted having received a small oak tree from
Tree Committee Member Ursula Luna and asked for suggestions on a
planting 'location; Councilman Dexter suggested the new APD.
Mrs . Mac!-e%,/ also suggested that each Councilmember hold office
hours on a certain day of_ the week for availability to the pub-
lic .
Councilman Lilley announced that he has installed a new phone
line to his office to receive Council-related calls from the
public .
COMMITTEE REPORTS
North Coastal Transit - Councilman Dexter reported on -a meeting-
of this committee last week , noting that a possible express bus
between Atas. -SLO fjill be discussed at a future date.
Traffic Committee - Councilwoman Nac'.-ey noted the T.C. will meet
tomorrow r_o take action on last week ' s "drive-around
Police Facility Committee - Chief McHale reported that the Beno.' s
• sign is now down, and lyre offered gratitude & appreciation to
'young Bros . Const . for removing it at no cost to the City_ He
indicated that a color- rendering of the renovated facility is in
1
•
offs!:e � Dr.-anyone interested to "1Pw. The ctrchltect is ex-
-�ected a presentation to Coun= ll at the last, cneetinq
Tree Committee - !vommittee Ne,,,ber- `tubbv Pa=_iq addressed the
problem o replacement trees . Toting objection by some praoE� rr ,
owner; to do sa. The T . C . ;Members are of the opinion that if
feasit. le , a fund should be established solely for use in planting
native t ees within City parks and right-of-ways ; this cuuld caive
private prooerty owners the option of placing money in the fund
instead of `I13ntinq repiac ?ment trees they don ' t want .
Bicentennial Committee Councilman Lilley reported that Atass-
cadern is n.:),-J a member of a growing legion of Bicentennial
Cities -- hies which have joined ,in the official effort to
celebrate the bicentennial' of the U. S . Constitution.
I
Pavilion Committee - Councilman Shiers reported the P.C. ,net and
discussed 41-he state of the Pavilion Bldq . , agreeing that it
should be riernolished . He suggested that Council direct staff to
take aoprepriate steps to aut the project out to bid . Mayor
Borgeson directed Mr . sensibaugh to prepare a staff ,-eport for
Counc i l ' s next regular- meeting .
PUBLIC COMMENT
Tom Bench , ,505 Carmelite , relayed the concerns of the local
eaue=_trian grout, regirdinq being locked out of the Paloma Creek
Park facility . Mr . Jorgensen, City Atty. , commented that the
issue involves insurance' requirements . - Mayor Borgeson directed
that staff prepare a full background report for Council as soon
as possible.
Maggie Rice, -epresentinq the Colony Days - Committee, invited
Council and all present to particioate in,` the 75th Annual Colony
Days Celebration, jhich is Sat . , Oct . 15, 1988.
Terril rraham, resident , er.pressedoricern regarding a proposal
by Williams Bros . several months ago . He feels that GP reviews
haven ' t been thorough and haven ' t allowed the individuals
affected proper noti Fication ,nor review. He asked for appro-
priate time and location for public review of changes about to
occur in the GP. Mr . L ngen Nlas directed to submit a progress
report nn the rewrite of the GP.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Approval of the August 9, 1988 Regular Council Minutes
2. Approval of July 29, 1988 Special Council Minutes
3. Approval of Treasurer' s Report — July 1988
2
• •
4. Approval of Finance Dept. Report - July 1988
5. Approval of TPM 8-88 - 9180 Santa Lucia - Proposed subdivn.
of 7.54 ac. into four parcels of 1 .5, 1 .5. , 2.0 & 2.5 ac.
(Key-Morris/Cuesta Eng. )
b. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 22-87 - 8635 Coromar
(Stoner/Cuesta Eng. )
7. Approval of annual Cooperative Personnel Svcs. Agmt.
Councilman Dexter pulled Item #5 for discussion.
Motion: By Councilman Lilley to approve the Consent Cal-
endar , minus #5, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey;
passed unanimously by roll-call .
re: Item 45: Councilman Demter noted his observation of flag lots
created (by this proposal and other_ ) , expressing traffic circu-
lation concerns and noting the need for better- roads connecting
such properties . Mayor Borgeson requested better maps for Loth
Council and Planning Commission review.
Pub 1 i c Comment
John Falkenstien, Cuesta Enq . , representing the applicant , com-
mented CQ Cond . #7, saying he feels the 20 ' driveway width
standard is ounitive, due to added expense, and doesn ' t mitigate
the formation of flag lots. He proposed amending line one to
read , ' . . . . L0 ' -0" wide paved access drive, or to the standards in
effect at the time of development " .
Council discussion ensued .
Motion: By Councilman Dexter to approve TPM 0-99 , seconded
by Councilman Lilley; passed by 3 :2 roil-call ,
with Councilman Shiers and Mayor Borgeson opposed .
Motion: By Councilwoman Mackey to amend the previous mot-
ion by adding the ianguage to Condition 47 , as
suggested by the applicant ' s representative fsee
J. Falkenstien ' s comment , above ) , seconded by
Councilman Lilley; passed by 3:2 roll-call , with
Councilman Shiers and Mayor Borgeson opposed .
B. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES/REFGRTS
1 . Res. 89-88 - Vacating a portion of San Benito Rd. , between
ECR and Hwy. 101 - Frederick/Shea (Public hearing date set
at meeting of 8/9/88)
3
A. Public Hearing
B. Council Action
' Engen , Commun . Dev. Dir . . r1ave staff report . Following r-e-
eacci-r )t pr in I n ar V +title eour-ts , the qu05tion was raised
that it ; he esolution is passed , would it itfect the apprai-ed
value of the property to the rear , which is thought to be City-
ovined . Staff suggested that Council either ccn,tinue this item
for further research & that staff pursue appraisals, or direct
that the :jraisa1 be based on -`u11 access rights to ECR
( t h t--?r eb,.,, . unaffected by the closing of San Benito Rd . ) . Staff
and Council discussion followed .
Mr . Joraensen, City Atty. , summarized the tasks that need to be
accomplished should Council continue this matter : ( 1 ) Obtain
marketable ti ` le in the City in order to be able to deed the
propert ' . and (2) Conduct an appraisal at the Citly ' s expense to
determine 'he value For the purposes of negotiatino L•jith the
applicants on a fixed price as part of the abandonment .
Publ :c Comment
Tom Rench , resident , suggested the property be considered for the
development of a skateboard facility.
Greg r7avatt , of the Waring GrOup , representing the owners . spoke
irn support of this proposal and in opposition to a continuance .
Sarah Gronstrand , resident , suggested that Council consider the
City Attorney ' s direction on the best approach to this proposal .
John HcNeil , resident , urged continuance of this item for rurther
review.
Motion: By Councilwoman 111ackey to continue this item for a
more complete staff report of the options , dir-
ecting that staff obtain a title search to
determine ownershio of the property, and , if 3o ,
obtain an aopraisal . Motion seconded by Coun-
cilman Dexter ; passed unanimously by roll-call .
2. Tree Removal Request - 5220 Aguilla Rd. - Hicks (Cont ' d from
8/9/88)
A. Public Hearing
B. Council Action
Mr . Engen, Commun. Devei . Dir . , gave staff report .
Put)1 i c Cor-Ti men t
4
'
Betty Sanders , attorney for the applicants . spoke in support of
this request , noting the Hicks ' s efforts to comp .Jcth the
ordinance. She yrged Council ' s support based on c7taff ' �_ recom-
�endation . as yell as the certified arborist ' s recort '
Jack ze=l , certi -Fied a/burist for the Hicks , reiterated his
opinion, following thorough examination, that subject trees are
^diseaseo beyond reclamation" and are currentl / zn a hazardous
condition' He spoke in support of their removal as requested ,
Ste.e Le,'D-alle, Tree Committee Member , relayed the committee ' s
recommendation th-;at this reouest either be continued or denied .
He expressed their concern that the design of the house .should be
submitted addressing tree removal , replacement and protection, so
that all asoects of the development can be taken into consi�era-
ticn,
Eric Michielssen, 53OO Aguilla, spoke in suoport of this reouesc
based un the condition of the trees and their potentially hazar-
dous state.
Li " ia kellerman, resident ~ spuke in support of the plot plan
re�uirement as stated in the Tree Ordinance'
�erril Braham, resident , spoke in support of the Hicks ' s reque5t .
r/oting that he supports the basic chilosophy of the Tree Commit-
'-I e
ommit-
he asked Council to consider an amendment to the Trce Or�J ,
ni-) ich *ould allow for more lenient restrictions on the demoli -
tion of diseased and/or dead trees.
E3etty Sanders pointed out that a major ambiguity of the Tree Ord -
is that it appears that , in the public ' s mind , permit
for tree removal is only necessary if a property owner intends to
construct a home o � structure. Mrs . Sanders is of the opinion
tha� it appears the language applies to anyone who pr000ses to
remove any tree which fits within the criteria of the oroinance;
if it ' s in fact only intended for construction purposes , perhaps
the Hick�_- do not need a permit at all .
John McNeil spoke again, saying he doesn ' t understand the appli-
cants ' concern for possible denial '
Picnard Shannon, resident , spoke in support of the applicants '
� request , asking who will be held liable if removal is not
�
granted and a tree does fall and cause some type of damage .
�
� Mildred Cooelan, an insurance agent , noted that claims related to
falIinci trees as the result of an act of God are normally covered
a homeowner ' s insurance. However , in this case, a certified
arborist has stated the trees are diseased and considered hazar-
dous . She urged Council ' s approval of this request .
5
'
:aurlCll i �t s s i o n ensuPd . Mr ii�l-QPnscP Ci Att` . , 3s%:ed that
the minutes :reflect the I Councilwoman h'!: c++:e'y_ ( absent a= the last
iad opportunity ?;c review the minutes , the matr--r- i_� l
coneem! f -:I this matter and is F3mi l i3r !lith the items discussed
cit the n!-E-vict_ s m'eetinc) .
Motion: By Councilwoman P11ackey to approve the tree !-emoval
requ��. t at 52120 qui11a , seconded by Co_in:_ ilman
Lilley ; passed by 3:2 -o11-call , :vith Councilman
Shiers and layor Borgeson, opposed .
3. Tree Removal Request - 7800/7880 Santa Cruz Rd. - Davis
A. Public Hearing
B. Council Action
Mr- . Sensibaugh , Acting amity 11gr . , noted receipt of a letter
withdrawing this application, indicating the applicant wishes to
attempt to save subject trees.
Motion: By Councilman Lilley , seconded by Councilman Dex-
ter , to accept the : ithdrawal of this application;
passed unanimously .
4. Tree Removal Request - Extension of Vista Rd. - Ibsen
A. Public Hearing
(Recommend continuance to receive additional data)
Motion: By Councilman Dexter to continue this item per
=tafi recommendation, seconded by Councilman
Lilley; oassec unani!rrously .
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1 . Ord. 180 —Amending the existing RSF-Y and RSF-Z zoning to
provide a Planned Development Overlay, to permit reorgan-
izing the existing six (6) lots, totaling 6.32 ac. , into six
(6) lots from 7,260 to 9, 132 sq. ft . , creating a new open
space of 5. 18 ac. and abandon a portion of Vista Bonita Rd .
—SECOND & FINAL READING (Cont ` d from 7/12, 7/26 & 8/9/88)
(_ZC 15-.917 - 9240 Vista_ _Bonita Rd. Yeomans/Frederick)___�, _
Nr . Engen, Commun. Devel . Dir , . gave staff report . There vja,s no
public. c�.-mment .
Motion: By Councilman Li119y to approve I-C 15-87 on second
rQading of Ord . 180 by title only, seconded by
Councilwoman [lac key. !Mayor Borgeson read Ord . 190
ty title ; motion passed by 3: 2 roll-call , with
Councilman Shie;-s and !Mayor Borqeson opposed .
6
• !
CDUNC I L RECESSED FOR A BREAK; FROM 9: 50 - 10:("14 P .M .
2. Award of bid for Atas. Lake Improvement Proj . to Associated
Pacific Constructors _($117"1 )___
Mr . SensiLaugh , Pub . Works Dir . , gave staff report .
Pub 1 i C Comment
One gr?ntle,r:an ( didn ' t give name) noted that the lake is actually
a pond , :,jith its own ecology ; he expressed doubt that a filtra-
tion process is feasible. He urged that Council look further
into this matter to confirm the level of sediment before spending
excessive monies on the proposed improvements. He suggested al-
ternati ,.e ways to improve lake conditions ( replace current fish
population, add sand , raise water level : .
Motion: By Councilman Shiers to approve staff recommen-
dation , directing that staff bring back an
agreement for Council approval , seconded by
Councilman Dexter ; passed unanimously by roil
r_all .
3. Chandler Ranch Road Maintenance Assessment District #5
A. Res. 91-88 - Approving map of proposed boundaries1/ '
B. Res. 92-88 - Declaring intention to undertake prose 1
-ings for a,road_ maintenance district
Mr . Sensibaugh , Pub . Works Lir . , gave staff port . He pointed ►//
cut , on Res . 92-88, two blanPs sta�ru""Tc -' illed in as follows :
Page 3, Res . filo . 91-58 ; Page b1e noted this is staff ' s
recommendation and is not a r nal ure; all costs will be
itemized at a later date. This figure is purposely high and has
nothing to do with the actual assessment on the land . ) John
Falkenstien. Engineer of Mork on the project , briefly reviewed
the proposed boundary map and improvements . There was no public
comment .
Motion: By Councilwoman Mackey to approve Res. 91-58,
seconded by Councilman Dexter ; passed unanimously
by roll-call .
Motion: By Councilman, Lilley to approve Res. 92-S9 , sec-
onded by Councilman Dexter ; passed unanimously by
roll-Cali .
4. Award of Dial-A-Ride bid to Santa Barbara Transportation-
(Cont ' d from 6/14/88) __
Mr . Sens ibaugh ,. -Pub . !forks Dir . , aave staff r-eoort .
Public Comment
f-.en Stokes . Presiuei f S . B. T. Co . , reviewed transportation
services ,urovided by said company in both Santa Rarbara and San
Luis ObIGc County , sxpr �,sinq he feels they ` re ?auipped to
handle the r;-A-R' service in Atas . He noted the fi -m ' s- desire to
keep all avai ?able current EI-A-R employees and ti? continue the
service exactly the :jay Dave Systems has set it up . flod i f i ca-
tions would be made as recommended by drivers and staff. He
indicated that cur--rent employees would have first right to the
jobs and r-jill probably receive a higher- rate of pay.
Mark Wells , Regional Mqr- . for C. T .S. , spoke in opposition to
staff ' s report . He made sever-al points regarding the selection
process and revier-jed the C . T. S. proposal . Noting the firm ' s ( 9+ )
gears of see-vice in Ata - . , he asked that this and 311 other
factors -- not only cost -- be considered . He disputed the fi .-Ial
statement in staff ' s report ( which speaks to the difficuIt , �-
acceptinq the loo: bid ) , refer encing Page 5 of the bid proposal
nd higfrlighting the criteria listed upon which the City would
tease its award . He urged the Council not to award ±;his bid to
S. B. T . Mr . Jorgensen, City Atty. , clarified that law requires
the City to award the bid to the lowest responsible bidder ; he
r-;oted that staff has analyzed the bids and found all of them to
be responsible .
Council and staff discussion ensued .
Betsy Blank , current Mgr . for C . T.S. , stated she won ' t be stayinq
on if this_ bid is awarded to S. B. . , as she feels unccmfortable
with her knowledge c-F their past performances . She read a letter
from teachers at the Head Start Program in Atas. supporting
C .T .S. continuing the D-A-R service.
Leonard Sherhorn, representing ! 49) citizens at California Manor
whom he contacted just this evening , er.pressed pleasure with the
current Services teinq provided in Atas . , saying they ' re absol-
utely against cutting any services . He urged the Council to
award this bid to C. T.S .
Motion: By Councilwoman Mack'ev to continue the meeting
Past ll : '-)O p .m. , seconded by Councilman Shier=, ;
passed unanimously.
Linda Lounder , Controller- with C .T. S . , expressed she feeis there
will be �:er-vice cuts should the bid be awarded to S. B.T.
Janet Speaks , Driver with C . T .S . , reviewed the current D-A-R
staffing . She feels there will be an inevitable decline in the
8
high quality of personal customer service Atas. D-A-R has con-
sistently provided .
Donna Rancour , resident , expressed support for the current D-A-R
system.
Sherry Fontan, Director at Escuela del Rio , expressed support for
current D-A-R services , noting their above-and-beyond efforts,
and is concerned about whether- this same level of service can
continue.
Joanne Portune, resident , indicated she relies on D-A-R for all
transportation, and she urged that the current system continue.
Carol Harrison, Divn. Mgr . for S.B. T. , attempted to clear up
misconceptions that Atascadero is losing D-A-R. She spoke in
support of S. B. T . ' s qualifications .
Catherine Roberts, resident , indicated that she relies on D-A-R
and spoke in support of the current staff , saying she feels they
are underpaid for their services.
Doug Lewis , resident , requested clarification on staff ' s use of
the terms "responsive" and "responsible" ; Mr . Jorgensen, City
Atty . , indicated Council should be concerned with whether the
bidders are responsible , since all bidders were responsive to the
bid proposals .
Paula Salvadon, V. P. of S.B. T. , as well as a State-licensed
instructor , commented on the comprehensive training programs
provided by the firm to its drivers.
Mr . Stokes noted that the City reimburses the cost for the liabi-
lity insurance on the vehicles , thus the difference in cost . He
responded to comments relative to wages.
A current D-A-R driver (didn ' t give name) , spoke in support of
the current services.
Mr . :Jells =_peke again, expressing he feels the RFP has misled
bidders or , perhaps , potential bidders .
Irene Garcia , 8-yr . D-A-R user , spoke in support of the current
services .
Additional lengthy discussion between staff and Council followed .
Motion: By Councilman Dexter to reject all bids and re-
quest resubmittals, directing staff to wort; with
Council to develop new criteria, including ex-
tension of the present contract, seconded by
9
Councilwoman Mackey; passed unanimously by roll-
call .
Mr . Sensibaugh requested that a Council representative work with
staff ; Ma,/or Borgeson appointed Councilman Dexter and The volun-
teered to be involved in the process . it was clarified that the
current service with C .T .S. would be extended on a month-by-month
basis.
D. NEW BUSINESS
1 . Caltrans request for right-of-way - Barranco Rd. extension
Mr . Sensibaugh , Pub . Works Dir . , gave staff report , recommending
that Council direct staff to route the r-o-w request to the
Planning Commission prior to considering the proposed agreement .
Motion: By Councilwoman Mackey to approve staff recommen-
dation, seconded by Councilman Lilley; passed
unanimously by roll-call .
2. Formulation of WW Divn. of the Dept. of Pub. Works
A. Ord. 181_ - Repeal of ACSD Ordinance and adoption of WW
Divn. Ordinance (FIRST READING)
B. Res. 90-88 - Ado.Dttion of WW Divn. service charoes
Mr . Sensibaugh , Pub . Works Dir . , gave staff report , noting that
no action is necessary on the proposed resolution at this time.
Mr . Jorgensen, City Atty. , commented that the need for this
ordinance. at this meeting , is that staff has been negotiating
with the County for the dissolution of the ACSD. Once it is
dissolved , there will , technically, be no such thing as the
sanitation district nor an ordinance to impose fees, etc . The
County has completed its dissolution paper work , short of filing
it with the Secy. of State; staff requested them to hold off on
that to allow the City to get an ordinance adopted which would
allow for operation as the City of Atascadero .
Motion: By Councilwoman Mackey to adopt Ord . 181 on first
reading by title only , seconded by Councilman
Dexter. Mayor Borgeson read Ord . 181 by title;
motion passed unanimously by roll-call .
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION - No comments.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:05 A.M. 1�
MINUTES RECORDED/PREPARED BY: � `
CINDY WILKINS, Dep. City Clerk
10
AE'TET1N 3 �GENQA _
TEMO
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council September 13 , 1988
VIA: Paul Sensibaugh, Acting City Manager`
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director -Vv;
SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map 10-88 —8100 Coromar Road
(Judi & David Bishop/Volbrecht surveys)
BACKGROUND:
At their regular meeting of , August 2 , 1988, the Planning
Commission recommended denial of the above-referenced map. The
Commission directed staff to prepare Findings for Denial to bring
back for their meeting of August 16, 1988 .
• RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the Planning Commissions' recommendation of denial .
HE :ph
Encl : Planning Commission Staff Report August 2, 1988
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpts - August 2, 1988
Findings for Denial - August 16, 1988
•
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B-4
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission M eting Date: August 2, 1988
BY: Joel Moses, Associate Planner File No: TPM 10-88
SUBJECT:
Subdivision; of an existing parcel of 1. 5 acres into two (2)
parcels containing 20, 000 and 44, 500 square feet.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .Judi & David Bishop
2. Representative. . . . . . . . Volbrecht Surveys
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8100 Coromar Road
4. Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Ptn. Lot 15A, Blk. 7
(Atas. Col. )
5'. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 5 acres
6. Zoning. . . RSF-X (Residential Single •
Family; 1/2 acre without
sewer, 20, 000 sq. ft. with
sewer) .
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Single Family
8. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Single Family Residence
9 Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted
July 19, 1988
B. ANALYSIS:
The applicant proposes to subdivide an existing developed parcel
containing 1.5 acres into two (2) parcels containing 20, 000, and
44,500 square feet. The subdivision is a flaglot development.
Parcel 1 will have direct access to Coromar Road. Parcel 2 will
have access to Coromar Road by way of an easement across Parcel
1. The Subdivision Ordinancerequires that the access way be
owned in fee title by the near lot (Parcel 2) . The access strip
is over one hundred and fifty feet (150 '-0") in length so the
access will be required to be twenty four (24) feet in width and
_1 •
developed with a twenty (20) foot paved driveway. These items
can be required as a part of the map approval.
The subject property is located in the RSF-X (Residential Single
Family) zone. Minimum lot size in this zone is based on sewer
avalibility. If sewer is available, the minimum lot size is
20, 000 square feet. Without sewer, the minimum lot size is set
at 1/2 acre. The site is within the sewer service area and sewer
service is being provided. With the addition of the easement
area to the lot, the lot size will be increased above the 20, 000
square foot minimum.
Comments were received from several outside agencies. Our Fire
Department 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 2 inch main in Coromar
Road. If additional gas mains are installed, they will need to
be within the Public Right-of-Way or within approved easements.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Parcel Map 10-
88 based on the Findings in Exhibit C and Conditions of Approval
in Exhibit D.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Tentative Map
Exhibit C - Findings for Approval
Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval
JM/jm
2
• ♦ ♦ ♦ . •
���� `� I Vii► �� � �
FA
s
�i -� Vit► ► ♦ �/
/ .� PIP
�N. .. POP a ,,
hadi ♦ r
iso� ♦ s
A ��
XHIBIT B TENTATIVE MAP
;• .•• • y�a CITY OF ATAS CADERO
r,eo. i,! == 8100 Coromar Road
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tentative Parcel Map 10-88
DEPARTMENT Bishop/Volbrecht
t n. b
ra yf `f �.= �� �� _. .. coley(✓ <�<..�r.<,r.5-a�sv an•+✓✓/rm.isi.'
::\ :*. .. ���� ci s•/�q�s.�-s�<.�>,'Lirl�✓odd-a
a
b f U�CFS CC.CT,f•.CATd:
. q ':\. te,✓�eca✓,,aarat��iyc>oi/•�..�'pr�Jr,.%.�r-.vi j
,.Ac uT< <�erN«f�N-Ym vtar«-N�.✓o
E %• - U TF.<6cs7.N O✓t'.yu0.•.ILbC�/. I,
� '�`' rf�F<a✓y7:+>Z r�s,r �l i'<L:esu-+Y
��� +=`__` � �f f�m rc rysrv�r�.:s.•�asc..:o�:"-^cj;�
1.OIL
J✓ev.✓.s.ay,✓.•+�ircrTa,..o:iy!o—t
i�'` tet. �\ • `sL""'ra.�.. `o• ,y. .J .J36
r \- __� \`GC \FO�\Q��M(arF✓!u�\ f•]f1 f \�. �\\
N.
.�
\ � •f \liL, Y 4!
�y/•oc,<o,cam.aye rs
� .fYrrsCO t•%)-M •
• •
EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 10-88 (AT 86-240)
8100 Coromar Road
Bishop/Volbrecht
August 2, 1988
FINDINGS
1. The creation of the proposed parcels conform to the Zoning
Ordinance and the General Plan land use designation, densities
and other policies.
2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the
recommended Conditions of Approval, will not have a significant
adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, and the proposed improvements,
will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially
and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the
public at large for access through or the use of property within
the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternate
easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision complies with Section 66474. 6 of the
State Subdivision Map Act as to the methods of handling and
discharge of waste.
8. The required findings per Section 11-8. 209 of the
Subdivision Ordinance for Flag Lots (deep lot subdivisions)
an be made. The subdivision is consistant with the
character of the immediate neighborhood, the installation of
a standard street is not feasable, and the flag lots are
justified by the topography.
JM/jm
a •
EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 10-88 (AT 86-240)
8100 Coromar Road
Bishop/Volbrecht Surveys
August 2, 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. The map shall be revised to show the access way owned in fee
by Parcel 2. The access way on Parcel 2 shall be developed
with a twenty (20) foot paved driveway. Driveway shall be
installed 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 at his expense.
5. The newly formed lots shall be separately connected to the
Public Sewer. All annexation and permit fees shall be paid
for the newly formed lot prior to the recording of the
final map. Any sewer extensions shall be completed within
one year after annexation.
6. Grading and Drainage plans, prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer shall be submitted 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.
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. Offer for dedication to the Public, for Public Utility
Easements, the access way.
9. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior
to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map.
� s
10. A final map in substantial_ conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth herein shall be submitted. for review and approval in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s
Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final
map.
a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners
created and a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed
Land Surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the
final map, that the corners have been set or will be
set by a specific date and that they will be sufficient
to enable the survey to be retraced.
b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be
submitted for review in conjunction with the processing
of the final map.
C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted
for review in conjunction with the processing of the
final map.
11. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from
the date of final approval unless an extension of time is
granted pursuant to a written request prior to the
.expiration date.
JM/jm
MINUTES EXCERPTS
PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 2, 1988
4 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10-88 :
Request submitted by Judi and David Bishop (Volbrecht
Surveys) to subdivide 1 .5 acres into two (2) parcels of
20,000 and 44 ,500 square feet each. Subject site is
located at 8100 Coromar Road.
Mr. Moses presented the staff report on this request. Staff
recommendation is for approval subject to it conditions .
Mr. Moses referred to a letter received this afternoon from
Volbrecht Surveys requesting modification to Condition #2 to
develop driveway standards in effect at the particular time
of development. He then responded to questions from the
Commission.
Judi Bishop, applicant, spoke in support of the request.
She noted the driveway is fairly steep and expressed concern
with the 20 foot wide driveway standard being proposed as
there are several large trees that may have to be removed.
She would like to keep the driveway width as it now exists .
Mrs . Bishop then responded to various questions from the
Commission.
There was no public testimony given.
Commissioner Tobey stated that the 20 foot wide driveway is
creating a problem with the trees in the driveway, and would
be in favor of reducing the driveway standard in this case.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Brasher to continue the
hearing on Tentative Parcel Map 10-88 to the meet-
ing of August 16, 1988 due to changes in the
tentative map. Upon further discussion, she with-
drew her motion.
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Luna to deny Tentative Parcel
Map 10-88. The motion died for lack of a second.
There was continued discussion among the Commission concern-
ing the proposed driveway standards versus preservation of
the trees in the driveway. Commissioner Luna referenced the
General Plan with regard to division of property and urged
that consideration be given to this particular lot split as
it pertains to removal of trees in the driveway, flag lots,
etc .
MOTION: Made by Commissioner Luna and seconded by Chair-
person Lochridge to deny Tentative Parcel Map 10-
88 . . The motion carried 4 : 2 with the following
roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Luna, Chairperson Lochridge,
Waage, and Brasher
NOES: Commissioners Highland and Tobey
ABSENT: Commissioner Lopez-Balbontin
Mr. Engen clarified that findings for denial will be
necessary for Commission consideration, and that they will
be on the next Planning Commission Agenda reflecting the
points raised by Commissioner Luna (under Consent) .
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7-88 :
Request submitted by Donald K. Vaughn (Safe igns) to
allow for the installation of signs totalin more than
00 square feet on a commercial site. Sub 'ect site is
1 cated at 7635 E1 Camino Real.
Mr. Moses presented the staff report on this signage request
noting sta ' s recommendation for approval.
There was no ublic testimony given.
MOTION: Made b Commissioner Highlan , seconded by Commis-
sioner bey and carried 6 : to approve Condition-
al Use ermit 7-88 sub ect to the findings and
conditions ontained in a staff report.
6 . CONDITIONAL USE PE T 8-8
Request submitted b Vineyard Christian Fellowship
(Chris Zillig) to a w for the establishment of a
church as an interim within a commercial complex.
Subject site is locat d a 3250 E1 Camino Real .
Mr. Moses presented the taff rep rt with the recommendation
to approve the use per t. He th responded to questions
from the Commission.
Chris Zillig, repre enting the Vineyar Christian Fellow-
ship, spoke in sq port of the request a d noted his concur-
rence with the r ommendation.
No public testimony was given.
MOTION: Mede by Commissioner Brasher, seconde by Commis-
�Zioner Luna and carried 6 :0 to approve onditional
se Permit 8-88 subject to the findings d condi-
tions contained in the staff report.
C. PUBLC COMMENT
Jo Elkins welcomed the new Planning Commission and note
s appreciation for the hard work and interest of this
ody.
• 0
EXHIBIT C - Findings for Denial
Tentative Parcel Map 10-88 (AT 86-240)
8100 Coromar Road
Bishop/Volbrecht
August 16, 1988: (Planning Commission revision)
FINDINGS
1. The creation of the proposed parcels conforms to the Zoning
Ordinance and the General Plan land use map designation, but
does not conform to the following General Plan policies:
A. The proposed 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 principles" .
B. The proposed 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."
2. The findings required by Section 11-8. 209 of the
Subdivision Ordinance for Flag Lots (deep lot subdivisions)
can not be made. The subdivision is not consistent with the
character of the immediate neighborhood and the flag lot
is not justified by the topographical conditions.
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.
JM/SD/jm
TIENDA
DATE .. 3 �EMJ _ .?L$
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council Members September 13, 1988
FROM: Karen Vaughan
City Manager' s Office
SUBJECT: CLAIM BY SHANE J.W. SMITH
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council deny the above mentioned claim for an unknown amount
of money, which was submitted July 22, 1988 .
BACKGROUND
A claim was filed against the City of Atascadero for personal
damages caused from an occurrence on January 31, 1988 .
It is noted that this claim has been reviewed by the City' s
Insurance Adjustors, who recommend denial .
•
EC4 ���,,,, AGENDA 8_
i7A7C/ - ITEM �....,�.�.-
M E M O R A N D U
TO: City Council September 13, 1988
VIA: Paul Sensib'augh, Acting City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Tree Removal Request: 7675 Del Rio (Plot Plan 44-88)
BACKGROUND:
The Tree Ordinance requires that heritage trees not be removed
unless approved by the City Council, following public hearing.
PLOT PLAN APPLICATION:
Murray Warden is requesting the removal of a 28 inch live oak at
a residence .owned by him at 7675 Del Rio. The house and deck
• were built around this oak tree (refer to attached plot_plan) ,
and is being requested to be removed in that it "may cause heavy
damage to roof or house" if allowed to remain.
Given the healthy nature of the tree, off-set by the liability
question that it poses, a _second-opinion was sought from Arborist
Art Tonneson (see attached) , who concluded that there was "no way
to modify the tree to compensate the impending threat to this
home" .
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the removal of the heritage tree as requested, with
two 15 gallon live oaks as replacement trees .
HE :ph
Encls : Location Map
August 11 , 1988 Letter from Jon Ecklund
Tree Removal Permit Application
Plot Plan
Second Arborist' s opinion - August 30, 1988
• cc: Murray Warden
Art Tonneson
Chuck Scovel
Tree Committee
.M F-,i 6
,
/ r
LOCA M .0
..IL
I ° �
40,0
POW
111 MON r... r`
II
aQ
11
If
W
W
IT (<
s 1
RS
00 1
Leo
X4 sa
R S
t
a
PC
1, Oq Q
/ll ,
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
POST OFFICE BOX 747
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93423 POLICE DEPARTMENT
PHONE: (805) 466-8000
POST OFFICE BOX 747
�aseade�® ATASCADER O, CALIFORNIA 93423
CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (805) 466-8600
CITY CLERK
CITY TREASURER �•
CITY MANAGER INCORPORATED JULY 2, 1979
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 6005 LEWIS AVENUE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
PHONE: (805) 466-2141
August 11, 1988
Murray Warden
% Ayers Construction
Attn: Richard Ayers
Post Office Box 1437
Atascadero, California 93423
Subject: Tree Removal 7675 Del Rio - Plot Plan #44-88
Dear Mr. Warden,
We have reviewed your request to remove the 28" Live Oak tree as
indicated on the plot plan submitted. The letter submitted by the
arborist states that the tree "may cause heavy damage to roof or
house" if allowed to remain.
Due to the size and species of the tree it is classified as a +
"Heritage Tree". The removal of all healthy Heritage Trees must
be approved by the City Council. Only dead native trees of this
size or trees which are immediate hazards are allowed to be
removed without City Council approval.
The removal of the tree (Plot Plan #44-88) will be scheduled
for City Council consideration on September 13,1988. The
item will be a Public Hearing and you or your representative
will be allowed to present information for the Council's
consideration.
Mr. Warden, if you have any questions regarding this matter
please call me at 466-8000 Ext. 145.
Sincerely,
Henry Engen, Dir or 'f Community Development
by,!
Jpn ;Ecklund, Assi ant Planner
Tree Removal Permit Application
�.'jo r,� ,��i��iJ Supplemental Information
r µ=
191y;'.1 0 19791CAAD
7 f `M1 r e
(Please type or print in ink)
.i. 1 b e {'itrl'a lil1r�. * _ 1F' s° � �. a r is •r J f ,r t Th,I.
-f53iTfF.
•:dx''*1 4 w ri d t '•�- 5 i .., - � r r r �i � r � f r 4 , :�, 5 -�' tiy
bX� Reason for Removal : tMn
rs chbo+ or
i`
4l
!! y�1 f.toff.• _. - .. 'P Ts"Jtj.h�.'"'�'-
l�lJ`� 1 li_ �} :! _ ,P. .t Y:• � •i� l'� 4i�LI4:a1.U' %f���.- an• �-
:t. _ r f•:. p {J11ai ��rrYJ
Number of Trees to be Removed k r ;'
Specify the size (measured 4 ' above ground level ) , 'species
common and botanical name) and condition of each tree to be r� we
removed:
�� e ,
IQ
z.
3.
K, rr
.4.
y a
Spgc ify the size and species of the. trees proposed to replace
those intended for removal : fiI,
a
3.
8,
4. ax ,
5.
;. Please prepare a "Plot Plan" showing all improvements on your
property, trees to be removed , trees to remain, and the proposed '? .tt •:
location of replacement trees as per the attached example.
Owner
Arborist
Certificate Number >> "
tzO kt
f - .•,- �.. v l�- �5
.!4 v tn„>• ,reR r.R tif1''ti
t o
1� t �
Da Dat r r ?t�+^`} Sar�ti lit � � �J{V
'eS t t t.r'.h i •+--;;. sa�th�l S�T..��! 4t�S� `�.x,.'fv=
r
�,
��
i � �\
-,
f � � ��
.:
� �
- _ -- __ �
�---r�,�
___
I � i Y i
,�\ � _
� i__
I�=r�_.'�`---"lam ��,
`� � --- t
,�� � _ _
. � -r.-- �--•,�� ,� ..�
r � -�
Y ` `��,
'' i
fj � .�i
� � �,r
ill '
7,�S Pel._ ;z..!O
ATG.�.�.D ��-...�'_�
��������� 8U� � 1 ��
^~^~��~`x �-� ".. � . —_
'
City of Atascadero
P. O. Box 747
Atascadero, Ca. 93423 August 30, 1988
Dear Mr. Decamp;
As per your request I have reviewed the tree located at 7675
Del Rio Road. This reporter found the twenty eight inch
heritage oak tree to be in good health. The tree is located
in some decking along side of the house. The roof was cut at
construction to accommodate the growth of the tree. At this
time the trunk of the tree is hitting the e;isting facia
board on the roof . The tree is also leaning in the direction
of the house. The eves could be cut back another 4 inches,
but this would only prolong the problem. With the growth of
the tree and substantial wind, the tree will again rub
against the house. There exist no way to modify the tree to
compensate the impending threat to this home.
Sincerely,
Art Tonneson
' Certified Arborist #199
International Society of Arborculture
'
s
- �EETtN ,
�'. AGENDA ??
DATE_ ITEM IY
•
August 31
g , 1988
To: City Council
Via : Paul Sensibau h� ActingCityManager
From: Bob Best, Parks and Recreation Directors--
Subject :
irectorSubject : Equestrian Arena Status Report
BACKGROUND
At the direction of the Council , this report is being
submitted to provide City Council with the status of the
Equestrian Arena at Paloma Creek Park, particularly as it
relates to liability insurance and the requirement for
keeping the arena locked. This was an item which appeared
before Council in June of 1986, with an outcome which had a
clearly defined set of policies regarding arena construction,
scheduling, fees, and locking of arena when not in use by a
• scheduled group/individual .
I have attached a copy of the Staff report presented to
Council in 1986 for your review. It was at this time that the
Equestrian group received approval from the Council to
construct the arena under an Agreement of Performance The
Council approved the Staffreportand authorized the
construction of the arena under the terms set forth in the
Staff report . Of specific interest are the items listed in
the Findings section relating to requirements from the City' s
Liability carrier. They included: 1) The arena is to be kept
locked at all times; 2) A 'control system is developed for
reserving the arena; 3) Group insurance is required when an
organization uses the arena.
ISSUE STATEMENT
The key concerns expressed by equestrians in the
community center around the arena being locked, thus
Preventing them from drop—in use of the arena. Staff has been
working individuals to .assist them in their i ease of
usage of the arena under the established guidelines. However,
the central question remains is the City willing to change
the current policy to allow an open arena, realizing no
• insurance coverage will be provided in the event of an
accident? Staff has been meeting with interested equestrians
during the past several months, and the policy of the locked
arena remains the major problem area
i
GENERAL INFORMATION
Current procedure requires any individual or group
wanting usage of the arena to make application at the
department office for usage of the arena. This is the same
Process which is required for anyone who wants to reserve a
picnic facility at the park or a softball field. Payment is
made in advance, a deposit is paid for the key, and a key is
issued to the applicant . Upon return of the key the deposit
is returned to the applicant . This creates the need to plan
ahead for when usage of the arena is desired, but it is also
the only way that proper control and scheduling may be
accomplished.
As part of my research into possible solutions for the
arena, I contacted Mr. Ralph Goeken at Atascadero State
Hospital regarding the portion of the park where the arena is
located. I explained our dilemma in writing, along with a
statement that this was not a request for the state to take
back this portion of the park, and that my inquiry did not
come from the Council or the Commission. It was simply an
inquiry as to possible solutions . The response from the State
was negative, as they were not interested in taking back this
Portion of the park, even if offered. ( It was not, as my
letter clearly indicated) .
ALTERNATIVES
Consider the question of the open arena concept, and
issue a revised (if deemed appropriate by the Council ) policy
statement regarding the arena, particularly as it relates to
the locked gates . It is important to realize that an open
arena would make it virtually impossible to properly manage
the arena, especially relating to scheduling.
Retain existing policy of a locked arena and reservation
requirements . Staff has discussed this concept with local
equestrians . It is agreed upon by all concerned that the
current policy may not be optimal , but it is understood as to
why it is needed. A conversation with Mr. Jim Comes, the
Atascadero Horse Advisory Committee President , indicated that
they now have a better understanding and acceptance of the
current policy, and in absence of the viability of the open
arena concept, no better alternative exists at the present
time.
i
M E M O R A N D U M
June 13 , 1986
To: City Council
Via: Mike Shelton , City Manager
From: Bob Best , Parks and Recreation Director
Subject : Equestrian Agreement
RECOMMENDATION
Approve an Agreement of Performance with the Paloma Creek Park Equestrian
Committee for the development of the equestrian facility at Paloma Creek
Park providing recommendations from the City ' s insurance carrier are met ,
and Council is willing to risk the liability exposure created by this
facility.
BACKGROUND
In October, 1984 , the City Council approved an agreement , in concept , with
the Atascadero Horse Advisory Committee for the development of an eques-
trian arena at Paloma Creek park. Initial interest was positive , but this
group eventually lost interest in the project due to lack of funds and
commitment from volunteers . As a result , this project has been placed on
hold since that time .
Recently, another group, Paloma Creek Park Equestrian Committee , headed by
Mr. Jim Comes , approached the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding
developing the arena. At it ' s April meeting , the Commission recommended
approving an agreement with this organization.
ISSUE STATEMENT
At this time the Parks and Recreation Commissioners still desire to have
an equestrian facility at the park. Despite the problems with the previous
group , the new committee believes this facility can still be constructed
at no cost to the City.
However, the Commission and staff are concerned about the continued long
term committment toward this facility without it actually becoming a real
ity. As a result , the proposed agreement has a time frame for completing
the Phase I development . It is our opinion the facility should either
be developed as proposed under specific time guidelines , or the area plan-
ned for another use . There are already inquiries concerning this area
from other groups in the community , mainly as a location for youth base-
ball fields .
-2- • •
The question of insurance should also be a factor in the decision by
Council to approve/disapprove the development of an equestrian facility
With the City being self-insured, we have a $100 ,000 deductible in the
event of a claim against the City. The issue here is whether or not
Council believes this facility will warrant the liability exposure it
will create.
The Recreation Division currently sponsors many programs which has a
certain amount of liability exposure . Does Council believe the develop-
ment and use of an arena will create a liability exposure which is greater
than current programs currently being offered to residents of Atascadero?
Another important question is whether or not the development of the eques-
trian arena would provide for the best use of this area. Is there a higher
priority for Council?
FINDINGS
t
Research has been completed concerning the insurance question. According
to Mike Simmons of Crump/Kindler and Laucci Insurance Brokers , they would
not exclude the arena from our policy providing : 1) The arena is kept locked
at all times , 2 ) A control system is developed for reserving the arena,
getting liability releases , and getting the key to the arena, 3) When a
group uses the arena they must provide the City with a copy of their
Certificate of Insurance . He indicated it would not be necessary to have
the City added as an additional insured, 4) If an individual uses the
arena, they must sign a release . If it is a minor , they will require a
parent to sign the release of liability , 5) If any type of jumping equi -
ment is provided, a second key should be used for access to this equipm .
The City should require use only by experienced jumpers , and should con-
sider a testing program to determine skill level .
Mr. Simmons also recommended the City attempting to locate a separate
policy for the initial $100 ,000 of exposure , believing it would at least
address initial expenses. He added, however , that it might not be avail-
able .
Further research indicated that "standard" policies are probably not avail '
able - London American Insurance Company provides policies for private arenas.
They informed me they would not write a policy for the City on the arena.
Discussions were also held with Marin Insurance Agency and Atascadero In-
surance . Marin also indicated that no one will currently handle a munici-
pality due to the "deep pockets" problem. Mr. Stan Gobbin , their agent ,
indicated this could change and recommended the City put this on hold for
several months and perhaps the situation would change .
ALTERNATIVES
If the project is approved by Council , it should be stressed that this
facility should be completed uring the time frame proposed on the agree-
ment . At the March 1987 meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission ,
the equestrian project should be reviewed for completeness and quality .
At that meeting the Commission should either 1 ) allow the equestrian co
mittee to proceed to Phase II , or 2 ) Recommend to Council the equestrian"
project be eliminated as part of the development of Paloma Creek Park.
In addition , if the arena is eliminated, publicize that recommendations
will be taken at the Commissioner ' s April 1987 meeting for development
Proposal consideration and submittal to Council for action in May.
-3- , 0
A second alternative is to eliminate the equestrian facilty from the park
and provide this area for other recreation uses . Specific recommendations
could be determined as above .
A third alternative is to put this project on hold until early 1987 and
then evaluate if insurance for a reasonable amount would be available.
This , however, is a total unknown and the City cannot be certain the situ-
ation will change in the near future .
FISCAL IMPACT
The development of the equestrian facility would be at the expense of the
Equestrian Committee . All labor and materials costs would be the res-
ponsibility of the Committee . The facility would be revenue generating,
as groups would be charged for using the arena. Specific fees have not
yet been determined, but these will be used to offset operating expenses.
Fees charged will cover the cost of arena preparation, cleanup after the
event , inspection of the facility by Parks employees , and any utility costs
associated with the arena. In addition , a deposit will be required from
each group using the arena in the event of damage to the facility. With a
control system, it will even be possible to determine if an individual
using the arena was responsible for damage .
Any improvements made to the facility would be the responsibility of the
Equestrian Committee . With a proper fee structure in place , this facility
could be self-supporting. Daily maintenance of the facility would be
minimal , and would not affect the Parks Division budget adversely.
0 •
AGREEMENT OF PERFORMANCE
This Agreement of Performance is entered into by and between the City of
Atascadero , herein designated as "City" and the Paloma Creek Park Equestrian
Committee , herein designate as "Equestrian Committee" and pertains to the
development and use of four ( 4 ) acre park site , to be used for equestrian
purposes , located at the corner of Halcon and Viejo Camino Roads .
WITNESSETH
Whereas , the "Equestrian Committee" is organized to raise support , materials ,
and funds toward the development of the equestrian facility.
Whereas , the "City" desires assistance in developing, :promoting , fund raising
and supporting the equestrian facility.
Whereas , the agreement with the Atascadero Horse Advisory Committee , the
original group entering into an agreement with the "City" , is no longer effec-
tive due to this group no longer being active .
Now, therefore , in consideration of the premises and covenants and promises
hereinafter set forth, the "City" and "Equestrain Committee" agree as follows :
1. That the "City" shall provide :
a. Four acres of land for the development of the equestrian facili
b. Site engineering , when available , will be provided by "City" sta .
c . The "City" shall not be responsible for the development of the
arena park plans .
2 . That the "Equestrian Committee" shall provide :
a. Construction and development of the equestrian facility to in-
clude labor, materials , and design of the site .
3. All funds collected, including donations , shall be handled through
the South Atascadero Park Committee , a sub-committee of the Atascadero
Improvement Corporation. Funds raised shall be placed in this
account and designated only for the use of the "Equestrian Committee"
for the Equestrian facility .
4 . All work projects including construction , design , and types of materials
will be reviewed and approved by the Director , Parks and Recreation ,
before any work commences .
5. Phase I development of the equestrian facility includes construction
of the main arena , main arena sprinkler system, grading , fencing and
parking lot . Time frame for completing Phase I is as follows .
-2-
1 . Submitting c•letedlans
July 1 , 1986 , p to Park and Recreation Director -
2 . Grading completed - August 31 , 1986
3. Construction of arena sprinkler system - October 1 , 1986.
4 . Construction of main arena - December 15 , 1986
5. Parking Lot - March 1 , 1987
6. Fencing - March 1 , 1987 .
Upon completion of Phase I the Parks and Recreation Commission shall
review the progress of the Equestrian Committee for completeness and
quality.
6. If Phase I is properly completed, the "Equestrian Committee" may be
authorized to complete Phase II (to include , but not limited to , an
announcing stand, meeting room, drinking fountains , rest rooms , and
additional site amenities as developed by the "Equestrian Committee" ) .
This shall be completed by November 30 , 1987 ,
7. Any time during the project , the "City" may issue a stop work order
to the "Equestrian Committee" for lack of progress or any other reason
affecting the quality of the project , subject to appeal by the
"Equestrian Committee
8. Scheduling the facility will be the responsibility of the "City" .
9. Upon completion of the project , the "Equestrian Committee" may act as
an advisory group to the Parks and Recreation Commission.
Any remaining funds will be utilized for improvement projects at the eques-
trian facility.
In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be
executed on the date indicated below.
DATED: 1986
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO:
BOYD SHARITZ , CITY CLERK MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM: EQUESTRIAN COMMITTEE
ROBERT M. JONES , CITY ATTORNEY JIM COMES
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MICHAEL SHELTON , CITY MANAGER
OMEETiNAGENDA _
DAT c"TE.,
..,,,�_
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council September 13 , 1988.
VIA: Paul Sensibaugh, Acting City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director .-
SUBJECT: General Plan Update Status Report/Request for Joint
Meeting with Planning Commission
BACKGROUND:
At the City Council ' s meeting of August 23 1988, Terril Graham
inquired of means of public input into the General Plan Update
process, and staff was directed to report on the status of the
General Plan at your meeting of September 13 , 1988 .
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE STATUS REPORT:
The Planning Commission held a special meeting on August 30, 1988
to review and discuss background materials provided them on the
General Plan Update. The attached draft minutes; from that
meeting outline the information covered, which may be further
summarized as follows:
1 . Inventory - Land uses have been mapped, measured and tab-
ulated, as has existing zoning. A series of base data maps
including existing land use, development constraints,
topography, existing lot sizes', existing circulation, sewer
service area, etc. have been completed.
2 . Community Forums Four quadrant Community Forums and one
City-wide forum were held to solicit citizen comments, on the
General Plan Update. Concurrently, the Parks and Recreation
Commission also held five such meetings to obtain input into
a draft Parks and Recreation Element.
3 . Parks and Recreation Element The draft was transmitted to
the Planning Commission and the Community Development
Department for incorporation into the updated General Plan
in May 1988 .
• 4 . Economic Base Analysis Economic Research Associates
presented their recommendations relative to General Plan,
zoning ordinance, and Downtown Revitalization in the latter
part of May 1988
* i
5 . Circulation Element - Draft recommendations are being
reviewed by the City Engineer.
6 . Suburban Residential Analysis - Alternate scenarios have
developed to evaluate the impact of establishing a given
minimum lot size in the suburban residential areas, as
opposed to use of the current formula.
7 . Sewer Master Plan - One of the key products in the proposed
sewer master plan will be recommendations relative to the
Urban ServiceLine, which is a key determinate in single
family densities. We are awaiting consultant' s work in this
area,
WHAT'S NEXT:
A Joint Study Session of the Planning Commission and City Council
has been requested to review progress to date, and to give staff
direction on the approach and schedule desired for developing and
bringing to public hearing, a hearing draft of an updated General
Plan covering the land use, circulation, conservation, and open
space elements of the plan. This direction-setting meeting
should focus on specific General Plan policy directions, together
with the approach desired for public participation and
involvement early on in the process . The Planning Commission
indicated that they , generally would prefer a Thursday night
meeting. Staff would request that consideration be given to
setting the meeting for such a joint study session on either
September 22nd or September 29th at 7 :00 p.m. in ,the Rotunda
Room.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Following discussion, establish a - joint meeting date with the
Planning Commission.
HE :ph
cc: Planning Commission
Encl : August 30, 1988 - Planning Commission Minutes
MINUTES - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION
Special Meeting
Tuesday, August 30, 1988 7 : 30 p.m.
Club Room, City Administration Building
The meeting was called to order at 7 :30 p.m. by Chairperson
Dennis Lochridge .
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Tobey, Luna, Highland, Brasher, Lopez-
Balbontin, Waage and Chairperson Lochridge
Absent: None
Staff Present: Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Steve
Decamp, Senior Planner.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
None
1 . Planning Commission Orientation - Henry Engen referenced the
Commissioners ' Workbook that had been reviewed on July 27 ,
1988 and asked if there were any questions on the materials
therein.
George Luna inquired of "Planning Commission Interpreta-
tion" , Page 18 , and was advised that periodically there are
cases, for example, where the Zoning Ordinance is unclear as
to a permitted use, or definition, and the matter can be
scheduled for Planning Commission determination. For
private individuals, a $150 fee has been established for
such agenda items .
2 . General Plan Update - Chairperson Lochridge suggested that
the Community Development Director summarize the contents of
the General Plan Update binder prior to Commission
discussion of the subject in detail . Henry Engen noted that
the binder contained approximately 2 1/2 years of work in
pursuing and updating of the City' s 1980 General Plan which
had been prepared in the mid 19701s . Referencing wall maps
reflecting data gathered to date, he noted that the General
Plan had gone .through base mapping, inventory, goals review,
and a community forum process and includes special studies
prepared relative to the economic base by Economic Research
Associates , together with a draft Parks and Recreation
Element submitted by the Parks and Recreation Commission.
Currently there is no Parks and Recreation Element in the
General Plan. It was noted that the City currently has a
population of 22 , 185 people, and following the reduction in
density allowances and for multi-family dwellings, there' s a
current population holding capacity of 32 , 800 .
Recommendations in the Parks and Recreation element were
highlighted and those made by ERA for consideration in the
General Plan Update were also noted.
Staff is working with the City Engineer to update the
circulation element of the plan, and we are awaiting the
recommendations of the consultant' s report on the Sewer
Master Plan which will make recommendations with respect to
the location of the Urban Service Line, which is a very
important growth management tool .
Following the arrival of Ray Windsor, the new City Manager,
on September 12th, there will be a joint meeting of the
Council and the Planning Commission to give direction to the
General Plan Update. Among the issues that will have to be
addressed in the General Plan, are the following:
Single Family - Urban Service Line Location; Flag Lot
Standards; 10,000 square foot lots ( ? ) ; Suburban
Residential density formula simplification; and "net"
vs . "gross" basis for minimum lot size determination.
Multi-Family - Consideration of alternate land uses for
multi-family areas; consideration of 10,000 square foot
lots as an alternative; evaluation of the means to
encourage mobile homes vs . multi-family; and policy
direction on whether to pursue a condo conversion
ordinance .
Downtown - Definition of its "niche" , boundaries and
standards .
Commercial - Encouragement of "nodes" over strip
development; amounts and types of zones by area; and
evaluation of the number of zoning districts provided,
and their purpose.
Industrial Amounts and location; re-evaluation of
South El Camino industrial zoning; consideration of
possible North E1 Camino for a light industrial park;
access problems to Traffic Way and Sycamore industrial
park areas .
Parks and Recreation - Review and refinement of
proposed -draft.
Civic Center - Incorporation of means to reinforce and
protect the Civic Center area.
Circulation Element - Standards; provision for trails;
route-to-school plans; etc .
In addition, the County Land Use Element for the Salinas
River planning area is being updated and there will have . to
be coordination between the City and County with respect to
the Urban Reserve Line and the planning area of the City.
A key concern is that any proposed land use changes that
would affect the community be referred to the City for
comment.
Mr. Tobey questioned whether any provisions had been made in
County plans for a North County motorcycle park to direct
off-road abusers to a single site.
Discussion continued on difficulties, but necessity, for
establishing minimum lot sizes, notwithstanding the mixed
pattern of existing residential lots . Limited locations for
expanding incubator businesses was noted, and there was
sentiment to consider converting existing RMF zoning to
10, 000 square foot lots for single family homes .
Commissioner Highland said that a neighborhood should be
encouraged in efforts to establish greater lot sizes to
protect them, as was done on Carmelita. Commissioner Luna
questioned what was intended by the General Plan language of
lots less than 1/2 acre "except for unusual and compelling
reasons" (Page 49 ) . There was discussion of the best means
for gaining community input into any density revisions,
including smaller area meetings vs . quadrant meetings . In
response to an earlier suggestion by Sarah Grontstrand that
a new citizens ' survey be commissioned, there was discussion
of a recent survey in Paso Robles and staff will obtain
information on their methodology and results , together with
forwarding the Commission an earlier questionnaire done by
Cal Poly at the beginning of the General Plan Update
Program.
Commissioner Luna expressed concern that single family
residences are not subject to appearance review as directed
in the General Plan design review guidelines .
Chairperson Lochridge called a recess at 9 : 10 p.m.
Commissioner Brasher expressed a concern that the "old town"
area be reinvigorated so as to be inviting to tourists and
encourage pedestrian traffic . Steve Decamp indicated that
we are working with the BIA for distinctive downtown zoning
and can report on this subject in the future to the Planning
Commission.
Discussion of Junior High and Lewis Avenue schools being
replaced for commercial development ensued. Engen noted
that the ERA analysis had indicated that there was not a
market for the scale of commercial needed to supplant and
relocate the schools . School master planning was
discussed and the need for close coordination with the
district.
Commissioner Tobey expressed the desire to have the sign
standards re-evaluated to allow for greater signage.
Commissioner Waage spoke to the need for better appearance
standards on signs . Staff pointed out that sign ordinance
enforcement is handled on a complaint basis, as are all
zoning enforcement matters . There was considerable
discussion on enforcement activities . It was noted that the
City Council had authorized the establishement of a
permanent position for enforcement, with time currently
being split between citizen complaints on enforcement and
the Tree Ordinance. Council also authorized $10,000, in the
current budget for an abatement process which could lead to
the City Council directing, after hearing, clean-up of
properties . The owner would be charged the cost or their
property be liened. The Planning Commission has the
discretion to revoke Use Permits that are not in compliance
with the conditions of approval, and Commissioner Lopez-
Balbontin expressed concern that before such action was
taken that there be adequate warnings and time allowances to
bring property into compliance.
Chairperson Lochridge questioned whether any changes were
anticipated in animal regulations, and there was discussion
of the current rules and the fact that there are complaints
on people who do not maintain sanitary conditions on their
properties, in the summer especially. It was noted that
when the Zoning Ordinance was adopted, that there was more
concern expressed over standards for animals than over lot
size standards .
The meeting adjourned at 10 : 15 p.m.
MINUTES RECORDED BY:
HENRY ENGEN
Community Development Director
�. OMEETt,� AGENDA'TEM M
•
September 7, 1988
To: City Council
Via : Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director
Acting City Manager
From: Bob Best , Parks and Recreation Director---
Subject : Lake Pavilion Demolition Options
The Lake Pavilion Committee has discussed the future of
this structure and has been considering possible options
relating to the potential demolition of the building. Staff
has received two written estimates to assist the Council in
determining the future of the Pavilion. A copy of the two
estimates is attached to this reportfor consideration by the
Council .
ALTERNATIVES
•
1 . Total demolition of Pavilion. An estimate from two local
contractors is attached. With this method, the City would
contract to have the structure demolished and all debris
hauled to the dump.
2. Total demolition, but save the floor. The current floor
could be saved if possible to be used at a later date for
another project . The two contractors who provided the
estimates were not interested in saving the floor, and
additional costs would result if Council made the decision to
save the floor.
3. An approved State Fire Marshall ' s certified training
exercise could be conducted to burn the Pavilion, and then ~
have the debris hauled from the site by a contractor. This
was the preferred way by one contractor, as it would save the
City money.
4. Save the floor, burn the building, and have debris
disposed of by a contractor.
5 . Do not have Pavilion demolished.
RECOMMENDATION
• 1 . Alternative No. 3 would be the most
efficient method of
demolishing the Pavilion. It would save the City money, as
contractor costs would be reduced by having the Fire
Department burn the structure.
2 . Alternative No. 4, as Staff recognizes an interest to
•
preserve the floor in the Pavilion for future use . The
condition of the floor is poor, however, and this option may,
be more for sentimental purposes than a sound recommendation
based on fiscal responsibility and professional judgment .
FISCAL IMPACT
No funds are currently budgeted to fund the estimated
$10, 000 cost of demolition.
•
•
R-- A . _N
STEV SCHMIDT No.274007
TOP SOILS • GRADING • CUSTOM SOIL MIXES • SHREDDING & SCREENING_
ROUTE 1, BOX 11, • PASO ROBLES, CA.93446 • 805/238-2892
Ramada Drive & Highway 46 West
Sold to: City of Atascadero Job Pavilion Building next to Paddock Zoo
Address: Recreation Dept. Address
CIN: Atascadero CIN Atascadero
Phone: Bill White/Gill Terms: Payment upon completion
PAVING - EXCAVATING - GRADING - DEMOLITION
We hereby propose to.
1 . Demolish and remove pavilion building
2. All permits by others
3. All salvage to become property of contractor.
4. Payment in full upon completion.
TOTAL BID PRICE: $7600.
Loan Co.
By Check:
By Voucher
NOTICE—Unless otherwise stated, this proposal when for pavinq, includes only specified above.
the finish grodinq. There will be an extra charge for any dirt hauled on or off
this iob. We accept no responsibility for devil qrass, plants, etc., growing All dirt excavated not shown on plans will be an extra charge, we will assume
through paving, poisoning of ground not being a quarantee when used. When no responsibility for caved in dirt or shoring of banks, we accept no respon-
tractors and trucks are involved, we assume no responsibility for broken sibility for inside of curb line.
pipes, power lines, telephone cables, etc. All contracts subject to final accept- If suit be commenced to collect the amounts herein, the buyer agrees to pay
once at Main Office. Payment to be in full upon completion of our work as reasonable attorney fees and costs in such suit.
8r
STEVEN D. SCHMIDT
Date_ August 17
You are hereby authorized to proceed with the work as per above.
B
YBC YOUNG BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO.
Buildin- Contractors
P. O. BOX 1176 - 5530'/2 TRAFFIC WAY
ATASCADERO, CALIF. 93423
Telephone: (805) 466-0353
August 8 , 1988
Mr.Bob Best
City of Atascadero
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, Ca. 93422
Parks and Recreations Dept.
Reference: Atascadero Lake Pavilion
Dear Bob:
As you requested we meet at the Pavilion today to determine
the cost to demolish the structure.
As we discussed,the most economical way for the city,would
be to have the Atascadero Fire Department perform a control
burn, then have a contractor demolish and haul the remaining
debris to the Atascadero Disposal Site. The concrete rubble
could be desposed along the river, next to the Water Deptartment
shop
To make access for the removal of debris , you would have to
move the mobile home on the west, out of harms way. Remove
2 @ 4" pine treesq and one 8"decidioves tree.
The gas company would have to remove the two gas miters and
abondon the line to the building.P.G. &E. would have to remove
the two electric meters and abandon the underground service
at the pole. The water can remain until the debris has been
removed.
To contain the debris from floating all over the Lake, a float
guard must be installed approx 30 ' -o" away from the building.
The debris should be removed from the water daily to elemanate
any excaped debris from getting water logged and settling
to the lake bottom.
The small sewer pump building can remain, but the pumps can
be removed later. The building can possiably be used for another
function.
Our estimated costs are as follows:
1. After the building has been 80% burned the cost for the
demolition is $10 ,000 . . ,
2. The cost to demolish the building as it is would be $20,000 .
The above cost would be a complete abatement by legally despesing
the debris and all concrete footings. Coordenating the removal
and or capping off all utilities.
Thanks Bob, and if you have any questions or need any further
information please cantact me.
Sincerely yours ,
YOUNG BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO.
Marion W, oun
MWY/lp
• MEETING/ AGENDA
Q� ITEM r Com'
• MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
le 006 Acting City Manager
Subject Engineer' s Report, Setting of Public Hearing,
Authorization to Bid, Ammended Boundary Map
Date : September 6, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolution approving
the Engineer' s report , appointing the time and place for hearing
protests, and the calling for construction bids . Coq- �
Staff does not recommend the adption of the resolution
approving the revised boundary map .
Background:
The Engineer' s Report, submitted under separate cover, shows
the estimated project costs and the spread of assessments based upon
an equal benefit to all parcels within the adopted boundary. The
receipt of said report allows for -the-setting of the time and place
to hear protests, such time and place being 7:3Qpm, Tuesday, October
25, 1988 at the City Hall Council Chambers and for the advertising
of bids, which are to be received on October 14, 1988 . Please refer
to the attached revised summary of dates for these and future
actions leading up to the sale of bonds for this district : discard
Previous copies of the dates summary.
Since the last regular meeting at which time the boundary map
was adopted for Assessment- District No . 5, staff has received the
attached petition from the residents of San Diego Rd. asking to be
excluded from the district boundaries . Since the reason for the
request was that the signers were on a City—maintained street it
seems reasonable to hear any group protests to the proposed
boundary. At the last meeting, however, no one from the audience
spoke against the proposed boundary and no written objections were
received.
Discussion: •
The petition is acceptable and the boundary question can be
answered prior the the receipt of the Engineer ' s Report . If the
boundary is changed at the protest hearing on October 25, or if a
zero benefit is determined at that time, the other parcels can not
be assessed the difference to complete the project; the City would
have to front those costs ordefeatthe district . A resolution to
ammend the boundary is, therefore, presented at this time to
hopefully resolve the question prior to the protest hearing.
Although the signers argue that their road is improved and that
they do not need to worry about maintenance or liability, those
issues are still secondary to the question of benefit . The Engineer
must determine the benefit to each parcel within a boundary. In the
case of this district, which was formed due to a petition initiated
by a 61% majority of the lots by land area, including several
parcels on San Diego Rd. , it has always been presented that all
parcels benefit equally.
The Engineer has determined that neither land area nor length
of frontage is a fair or reasonable method for the distribution of
the costs . It is difficult to argue that those lots at the most
remote portion of the district do not benefit from the work being
done since the residents must travel a considerable amount of the
roads being improved in order to get to San Diego Rd. Indeed, it
can./ be more easily argued that the parcels that least benefit are
those at the bottom or start of the district off the main highway;
and that the parcels that benefit the most arethoseat the most
remote end of the district, i .e . , San Diego Rd parcels .
Any magic formula that pretends to distribute the cost
differently would cause a nightmare of calculations and arguments
from parcels halfway within the district or on cul-de-sacs , etc.
The Engineer is recommending that all parcels included within the
adopted boundary should be included and that all such parcels
receive an equal benefit . Council has the right, after hearing
comments from those within the boundary. to change that boundary or
allow it to remain unchanged. Any such changes may cause
corrections to be made in the Engineer ' s Report, which may call for
an ajournment or suspension of actions on said report until such
changes are made.
Fiscal Impact :
Adopted as recommended there will be no cost to the City for
the above actions . Any subsequent changes at the protest hearing
stage may or may not result in some costs to the City.
'
_
August 26, 1988 `
-
'
Mr. �a:l 5e:si�a:gh
Public Wurks
��ty of Atascadero
Dear �r . Sensibaug�:
We, the un�ersigned resi�ents of San Diego Rcad, do not wi7h
to be included : the Improvement District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch
Area AssesI'D ent District) . Since San Diego Road already meets !--:r
exceeds city standards and does not need to be improved, we feel
t�at we should not be resposible for improvi:g roads in front of
other property owners. Please remove our lots (San Diego Road)
fro� the assesment district. Thank you.
Name Address Lot #
^/ i-S�T�
`^
vj�\\`^�--`P^/��*"���- '
Fr^"K Y,r�rA
LZ
Lx
'
1 '
'
'
I
• • R-3a
CITY OF ATASCADERO
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
RESOLUTION NO. 93-88
RESOLUTION APPROVING REVISED BOUNDARY MAP
WHEREAS, in accordance with prior proceedings duly
had and taken, the City Council of the City of Atascadero (the
"City Council" ) has declared its intention to and has
determined to undertake proceedings pursuant to the Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913 and to issue bonds in said proceedings
under the provisions of the Improvement Bonds Act of 1915 for
the acquisition and construction in and for the City of
Atascadero of certain public improvements in and for an
assessment district in the City designated "City of Atascadero
Improvement District No. 5 (Chandler Rauch Area Assessment
District) " ; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 91-88, adopted
on August 23 , 1988, the City Council approved a map of the
proposed boundaries of said assessment district; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to revise said boundary map;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the
City of Atascadero, as follows:
1 . The foregoing recitals are true and correct and
this City Council so finds and determines.
2 . The revised map submitted to this City Council,
entitled "Proposed Boundaries, City of Atascadero Improvement
District No. 5 (Chandler Rauch Area Assessment District) ,
7824d
County of San Luis Obispo, State of California" a copy of
which is attached hereto and labeled Exhibit A is hereby
approved as the map of the proposed boundaries of said
assessment, which map shall govern for the assessment
proceedings.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September, 1988,
by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES:
ABSENT:
Bonita Borgeson,
Mayor of the City of Atascadero,
San Luis Obispo County,
• ATTEST: State of California
Boyd C. Sharitz
City Clerk of the City of
Atascadero, San Luis Obisbo
County, State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN
City Attorney
2
7824d-041003-000001-198 08/31/88
R-5
CITY OF ATASCADERO
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
RESOLUTION NO. 94-88
RESOLUTION APPROVING ENGINEER' S REPORT ON
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, APPOINTING TIME AND
PLACE FOR HEARING PROTESTS TO SAID IMPROVE-
MENTS AND CALLING FOR CONSTRUCTION BIDS
WHEREAS, in accordance with prior proceedings duly
had and taken, the City Council of the City of Atascadero (the
"City Council" ) has declared its intention to and has 40
determined to undertake proceedings pursuant to the Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913 and issue bonds in said proceedings
under the provisions of the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 for
the acquisition and construction in and for the City of
Atascadero (the "City" ) of the public improvements more
particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and
incorporated herein and made a part hereof, in and for an
assessment district in the City designated "City of Atascadero
Improvement District No. 5 (Chandler Ranch Area Assessment
District) " ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution duly
adopted, appointed the firm of Cuesta Engineering as Engineer
of Work in and for' said proceedings and authorized and 0
7700d
directed said firm to do and perform or cause to be done and
performed all engineering work necessary in and for said
proceedings, including the preparation of plans and
specifications for said improvements and the descriptions of
the acquisitions, together with estimates of costs thereof,
and the preparation of a map of the assessment district, an
assessment diagram, and an assessment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, by Resolution of
Intention No. 92-88 duly adopted on August 23, 1988 declared
its intention to order said improvements to be made in and for
said assessment district; and
WHEREAS, the City Council in and by said Resolution
of Intention referred said proposed improvements to the
Engineer of Work in and nd for said assessment district and
directed said Engineer of Work to make and file a report in
writing containing the matters specified in Section 10204 of
the Streets and Highways Code; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with said Resolution of
Intention, said Engineer of Work has filed with the City Clerk
of the City a report in writing containing the matters
specified in said Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways
Code; and
WHEREAS, Said report has been duly presented by the
City Clerk of the City to the City Council for consideration
and has been fully considered by the City Council;
2
7700d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Atascadero, as follows:
1 . The foregoing recitals are true and correct and
the City Council so finds and determines.
2 . Said report is hereby preliminarily approved by
the City Council, and 7 : 30 P.M. on Tuesday, October 25, 1988,
at the Chambers of the City Council, City Hall, 6500 Palma
Avenue, Atascadero, California 93423, is hereby fixed by the
City Council as the time and place for hearing protests to
said proposed improvements. Any interested person may object
to said proposed improvements, the extent of the assessment
district or to the proposed assessment by filing a written
protest with the City Clerk of the City at or before the time
set for said hearing. Each protest must contain a description
of the property in which the signer thereof is interested
sufficient to identify the same and, if the signers are not
shown on the last equalized assessment roll as the owners of
such property, must contain or be accompanied by written
evidence that such signers are the owners of such property.
The City Clerk of the City shall endorse on each protest the
date of its receipt and at said time appointed for said
hearing shall present to the City Council all protests filed
with her.
3 . The City Clerk of the City is hereby directed
(a) to cause notices of said hearing to be posted in the time,
form and manner provided by law, and (b) to cause a notice of
3
7700d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
said hearing to be published in The Atascadero News in the
time, form and manner provided by law, and (c) to give notice
by mail of the adoption of said Resolution of Intention for
said proposed improvements and of the filing of said report to
all persons owning real property proposed to be assessed in
the time, form and manner provided by law. Upon the
completion of the mailing of said notices, the City Clerk of
the City is hereby directed to file with the City Council an
affidavit setting forth the time and manner of the compliance
with the requirements of law for publishing, posting and
mailing said notices.
4. Mr. Sensibaugh, City Engineer, City of
Atascadero, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California 93423 ,
• telephone (805) 466-8000, is hereby designated to answer
inquiries regarding the protest proceedings.
S. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause
notices to bidders inviting sealed proposals or bids for the
making of said improvements, in substantially the form
attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A" and made a part hereof, to
be posted in three (3 ) public places in the City for two (2 )
succeeding weeks and to be published once a week for two (2 )
succeeding weeks in The Atascadero News.
6. Sealed bids for making said improvements shall
be received at the times and places and in the manner
specified in the notice.
4
7700d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
7. The City Council hereby declares that it intends
to collect liquidated damages in the amount of $300 per day
for failure to complete the work as scheduled, as will be
provided in the contract specifications.
5
7700d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
• •
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September, 1988,
by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers
Noes:
Absent:
Bonita Borgeson,
Mayor of the City of Atascadero,
San Luis Obispo County,
State of California
[ Seal ]
ATTEST:
Boyd C. Sharitz
City Clerk of the City of
Atascadero, San Luis Obispo
County, State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN
City Attorney
6
7700d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
EXHIBIT A
Resurfacing of streets, including the removal and
replacement of the existing base and surface course prior to
resurfacing.
Partial grading of shoulders and minor drainage
improvements; minor widening of streets and surveying.
Construction inspection wil be performed throughout.
The work will also include necessary appurtenances,
including, but not limited to, mobilization, clearing and
grubbing, excavation, importation of graded material,
compaction, testing, acquisition of necessary easements and
tapering at driveways.
A-1
7700d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
CLERK' S CERTIFICATE
I , BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk of the City of
Atascadero, do hereby certify as follows:
The foregoing resolution is a full, true and correct
copy of a resolution duly adopted at a regular meeting of the
City Council of said City, duly and regularly held at the
regular meeting place thereof on the 13th day of September,
1988, of which meeting all of the members of said City Council
had due notice and at which a majority thereof were present;
and that at said meeting said resolution was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
An agenda of said meeting was posted at least 72
hours before said meeting at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero,
California 93423, a location freely accessible to members of
the public, and a brief description of said resolution
appeared on said agenda.
I have carefully compared the foregoing with the
original minutes of said meeting on file and of record in my
office, and the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of
the original resolution adopted at said meeting and entered
in said minutes.
Said resolution has not been amended, modified or
rescinded since the date of its adoption and the same is now
in full force and effect.
Dated: September , 1988.
City Clerk of the City of Atascadero
[SEAL]
2
7700d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
CITY OF ATASCADERO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 5
(CHANDLER RANCH AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT)
SUMMARY OF DEADLINES FOR
NOTICES AND FILINGS
Dates
1. City Council of Atascadero Meeting
Resolutions 1+2 adopted July 26, 1988
2. City Council of Atascadero Meeting August 23, 1988
Resolutions 3 and 4 adopted
3. City Council of Atascadero Meeting September 13, 1988
Resolution 5 adopted
4. File copy of Boundary Map of *September 28, 1988
Assessment District with the
San Luis Obispo County
Recorder [per S&H § 3111]
(within 15 days after
Resolution [R-5] is adopted)
5. City Clerk executes Affidavit of *September 29, 1988 •
Filing Boundary Map [A-2]
6. Notices of Invitation to Bidders *September 14, 1988
published [per P.C. § 20482] September 21, 1988
(twice in successive weeks per
Gov't § 6066; the bids may not
be opened before 14 days after
the first publication)
7. Request newspaper to mail tear September 14, 1988
sheets for each publication of September 21, 1988
(A) Notice of Invitation to Bid
and (B) Notice of Improvement &
Hearing to Bond Counsel
8. Publishing Notice of Improvement September 14, 1988
& Hearing [N-1,2] [per S&H § 103041 September 21, 1988
(twice in successive weeks per
Gov' t § 6066)
9. Request newspaper to mail Proof September 21, 1988
of Publication of (A) Notice of
Invitation to Bidders and
(B) Notice of Improvement &
Hearing (3 certified copies,
2 for City Clerk, 1 for Bond
Counsel)
*These represent the latest possible date for completion, not the earliest.
Dates
10. Contract Bids Opened October 14, 1988
11. Mailing Notice to Property *October 5, 1988
Owners of Adoption of Resolution
of Intention [N-2] [per S&H
§ 10306] (20 days before the
hearing, 10/25/88)
12. Posting Notices of Improvement *October 5, 1988
& Hearing [N-1] [per S&H § 10304]
(at least 20 days before the date
of the hearing, 10/25/88)
13. Engineer executes 2 copies of *October 6, 1988
Affidavit of Posting [A-5]
(1 to City Clerk, 1 to Bond Counsel)
14. City Clerk executes Affidavit of *October 6 1988
Compliance with Requirements for
Publishing, Posting & Mailing
Notice of Hearing and Affidavit of -
Posting Notices Inviting Sealed
Proposals [A-3, 4] [per S&H § 10308] ;
15. City Council of Atascadero Holds October 25, 1988
Public Hearing, 7 :30 p.m. and
adopts resolution levying assessment
[R-6] [per S&H §§ 10301, 10312, 10600,
10603] and adopts resolution awarding
construction contract [R-7] ;
16. City Clerk Records Assessment *October 26, 1988
and Diagram with the Superintendent
of Streets [per S&H § 10401]
17. Copy of Assessment Diagram *October 26, 1988
filed with San Luis Obispo
County Recorder [per S&H
§§ 3114(a) , (c)] , City Clerk
executes Affidavit of Filing and
Recording Assessment Diagram [A-6]
18. Notice of Assessment [N-4] *October 26, 1988
recorded with San Luis Obispo
County Recorder [per S&H
§10402.5]
*These represent the latest possible date for completion, not the earliest.
2
7608d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
Dates
19. Mailing Notice to Property October 26-28, 1988
Owners of Recording of
Assessment [N-5]
[per S&H §§ 10404, 5070]
20. Request newspaper to send October 28, 1988
tear sheet for each November 4, 1988
publication of Notice of
Recording of Assessment
to Property owners to Bond
Counsel
21. Publication of Notice of October 28, 1988
Recording of Assessment to November 4, 1988
Property Owners [N-5]
(published twice, in
successive weeks) [per S&H
§ 10404]
22. Request Newspaper to mail October 28, 1988
tear sheets of publication
of Notice of Award of
Contract to Bond Counsel
23. Publication of Notice Award *October 28, 1988
of Contracts once [N-6]
[per Pub. Cont. Code § 20484]
24. Request Newspaper to mail *October 28, 1988
Proof of Publication of
Notice of Award of Contract
(2 certified copies, 1 to
City Clerk, 1 to Bond Counsel)
25. City Clerk to execute *October 28, 1988
Affidavit of Mailing
Notice to Property Owners of
Recording Assessment [A-6]
26. Request newspaper to mail Proof *November 4, 1988
of Publication of the Notice of
Recording of Assessment to
Property Owners (3 certified
copies, 2 for Clerk, 1 for Bond
Counsel)
*These represent the latest possible date for completion, not the earliest.
3
SIF
7608d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
! i
Dates
27. Underwriter distributes draft October 26 - November 11, 1988
Private Placement Memo and Bond
Purchase Contract to City
and Bond Counsel
28. Comments on draft Private November 11-18, 1988
Placement Memo and Bond Purchase
Contract telephoned to
Underwriter
29. Statutory Period for paying November 28, 1988
or attacking assessment ends
[per S&H §§ 10400, 10402.5,
10403] (30 days after Assessment,
Diagram and Notice of Assessment
filed and recorded)
30. List of Paid and Unpaid November 28 - December 2, 1988
Assessments compiled [per
S&H § 8620] & information
telephoned to Underwriter
31. Resolution Approving December 13, 1988
Amount of Bonds to be issued
adopted; Approving Bond Purchase
Contract and Authorizing
Private Placement Memo [R-8]
32. Underwriter delivers December 13, 1988
Private Placement Memo
33. Bond Closing December 21, 1988
34. Construction Begins January, 1989
35. Construction Completed May, 1989
4
7608d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
Resolutions
R-1 = Resolution Determining to Undertake Proceedings and
Accepting Petition
R-2 = Resolution Appointing Engineer of Work, Underwriter
and Bond Counsel
R-3 = Resolution Approving Boundary Map
R-4 = Resolution of Intention
R-5 = Resolution Preliminarily Approving Engineer' s
Report, Appointing Time and Place for Hearing
Protests and Calling for Construction Bids
R-6 = Resolution Confirming Assessment and Ordering
Proposed Improvements to be Made, Providing For
Notice of Recording Assessment, Designating City
Treasurer to Collect and Receive Money
R-7 = Resolution Awarding Construction Contract
R-8 = Resolution Approving Unpaid Assessment List,
Authorizing Issuance of Bonds, Approving Official
Statement and Approving Bond Purchase Contract
Notices
N-1 = Notice of Improvement ( same form for posting &
publishing
N-2 = Notice to Property Owners of Adoption of Resolution
of Intention, Filing Engineer' s Report and Notice of
Time and Place of Hearing Protests (form to be
mailed)
N-3 = Notice of Assessment ( form to be recorded)
N-4 = Notice to Property Owners of Recording of Assessment
(form to be mailed to property owners)
N-5 = Notice of Assessment (form to be published)
N-6 = Notice of Award of Contract
7608d
Affidavits
A-1 = Affidavit Re: Petition (Engineer)
A-2 = Affidavit of Filing Boundary Map (City Clerk)
A-3 = Affidavit of Compliance with the Requirements of Law
for Publishing, Posting & Mailing Notices of Hearing
Protests (City Clerk)
A-4 = Affidavit of Posting Notices Inviting Sealed
Proposals (City Clerk)
A-5 = Affidavit of Posting Notice of Improvement (Engineer)
A-6 = Affidavit of Filing & Recording Assessment Diagram
(City Clerk)
A-7 = Affidavit of Mailing Notice of Recording Assessment
(City Clerk)
2
7608d-041003-000002-198 08/31/88
SAGENDA
DATMA/aITEM# .�..._.._
• MEMORANDUM
To : Honorable-Mayor and City Council
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
`fAs Acting City Manager
Subject : Dial-A-Ride Contract Extension-120 Days
Date: September 7, 1988
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 bids for the
above service . Staff was directed to extend the agreement after
negotiations with the current contractor.
• Discussion:
Stuff has negotiated a 120 day extension to December 31 , 1988
for the following fees : Weekly fixed-$2058 . 25, and Hourly- variable-
$6 .410 . This compares to the current rates of $2209.02 and $6 . 945,
respectively.
Fiscal Impact :
The savings over the life of the contractextension is
estimated at just over $4, 000.
•
CIT CHUIL AGENDA - 9/13/88 '
AGA I TEM:
C - 2
(PLEASE ADD INTO AGENDA PACKET)
• 1 AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
2 Amendment No. 5
3 This Amendment No. 5 to the previous agreement is made and entered into
4 the 6th day of July, 1988, by and between the CITY OF ATASCADERO, hereinafter
5 called "City" and COMMUNITY TRANSIT SERVICES, INC. , hereinafter called "M&0."
6
7 W I T N E S S E T H:
8 WHEREAS, City and M&0 entered into a prior agreement on the 24thdayof
9 June 1984, for the management and operations of City's Dial-A-Ride System; and '
10 WHEREAS, City and M&0 modified certain elements of this Agreement
11 through Amendment No. 1, dated August 12, 1985, Amendment No. 2, dated June
12 23, 1986, amendment No. 3, dated July 28, 1987, and Amendment No. 4, dated
13 July 6, 1988; and
t14 WHEREAS, City and M&O desire to modify said agreement as previously
15 amended;
16 NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed that the Agreement dated June 24,
17 1984, between the parties, as subsequently amended is further amended in the
18 following particulars only:
19 1. ARTICLE 3, Contract Term, amended to read: The term of this
20 Agreement shall be from September 1, 1988 through December 31, 1988, and may
21 be extended beyond that term on a month-to-month basis by mutual agreement.
22 2. ARTICLE 4, Maximum Obligation, amended to read: City agrees to pay
23 M&O in consideration for its services as described herein. The maximum price
24 to be paid by City to M&O for Budget Period September 1, 1988 to December 31,
25 1988, shall not exceed Fifty-Two Thousand, Three Hundred Thirty-Five Dollars
• 26 ($52,335.00) .
27
-1-
1 3. ARTICLE 5, Price Formula, amended in part to read:
2 (a) Payment of a rate of $6.41 per vehicle service hour.
3 (b) Payment of a fixed weekly rate of $2,058.25 per service week.
4 4. ARTICLE 20, Termination, subparagraph (a) , amended to read:
5 (a) City may terminate the Agreement upon thirty (30) days' written
6 notice to M&O and shall be liable for costs and a prorate of the fee as spe-
7 cified under the heading "Price Formula" accrued to date of termination and
8 for all other termination costs. In the event the Agreement is terminated,
9 all pertinent data prepared for the project shall be made available to City
10 without additional cost.
11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to
12 Agreement to be executed by and through their respective officers thereunto
13 duly authorized on the date first written above.
14
15 CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY TRANSIT SERVICES INC.
16
17 By: By
18 Date:
19
20 Witnessed by: And
21 f� _
22 Date: Date:
23
24
25
26
27
-2-
MEET i AGENDA _
l3AtE c ITEM --�
• MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
leoz� Acting City Manager
Subject : 2nd Reading Wastewater Ordinance-Rate Resolution
Date : September 6, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council adopt Ordinance 181 and
Resolution 90-88.
Background:
Please refer to the attached staff report for the August 23
regular meeting.
• Discussion:
The attached ordinance is a combination of the present ACRD
ordinance and thevarious ammendments thereof. Although there are
no major or material changes in the "new" ordinance, there are
several minor changes or clarifications of existing policy that are
Pointed out below. There are no changes in any fees or charges
although some are included that were left to calculations
Previously. Page references refer to the small hand written number
in the lower right corner of each sheet .
Pg. 4&5, 7-2 .032 : Definition expanded to cover terms used
throughout the ordinance .
Pg. 8, 7-4. 010 (b) , 4th line The phrase "for one lot only was
changed to "for all but one lot" . The intention of this section was
to allow credit for the annexation fee for an existing vacant Tot in
Improvement District No . 1 that has paid assessments for about 15
years, but to assess that fee to any new lots due to lot splits
The existing language which was an ammendment in 1986 makes sense
for a two-lot subdivision, but does not capture fees for any
additional lots as was intended. Therefore, the new language will ,
for example, provide 7 fees for an 8 lot subdivision of a parcel
that was a single lot during Improvement District No. 1 . This will
not change the present collection procedure since the staff report
• at the time of the ammendment adoption made this point clear even
though the text language was confusing.
Pg. 8, 7-4. 010 (c) , last line : The $850 was added to clarify •
the fee in effect at the time of the last ammendment .
Pg. 8, 7-4. 012, first line : After discussions with the old and
new auditors, several inconsistancies were apparent with respect to
the disposition of the various accounts in the Sanitation Fund.
Only a portion of the rates paid for service are slated to go to
operations and maintenance and debt service . Capital improvements
are supported by connection charges (connection fees and annexation
fees) as well as a portion of the sewer rates . There are several
minor changes throughout the ordinance that reflect proper
accounting of funds which considers the old ordinance, the EPA grant
procedures and 'the staff report regarding the new fees adopted in
1986 .
Pg. 12, 7-7.005, 2nd line: Since it is not very practical in
many cases to place a cleanout five feet from the sewer main, the
right-of-way language was incerted. This language is consistant
with the Uniform Plumbing Code .
Pg. 12, 7-7. 007, last line TV-monitoring has become an
acceptable method of testinglfor some aspects of construction.
Pg. 12, 7-7.010 : This section replaces a section that spelled
out the different materials ',that tends to grow with time . Standards
such as this should not be adopted by ordinance since they may •
change as the City Standards change . •
Pg . 16, 7-10 . 002, last line : The capital outlay portion of the
sewer rates were supposed to go into this account which also
includes connection charges deposits . This also decreases the
number of accounts necessary.
Pg. 16, 7-11 .001 : This section previously contained the sewer
rates as is customary for political districts . Under the City
policy rates are contained in the form of resolutions since they are
subject to more frequent change .
Pg. 17, 7-11 . 009 (c&d) , first lines : The word "remaining" has
been inserted prior to "revenues" and "after (a) is subtracted"
inserted after "rates" to show the true percentages that were
orginally distributed for the EPA grant estimates of
revenue/expenditures . As presently shown the sum of
(a) +(b) + (c)=>100%.
Pg. 18, 7-12 . 008, last 4 lines : This language was added to
clarify the intend of the last ordinance ammendment . The intent was
to discourage the "gobbling up" of available space within the system
or to "buying a spot" at current fees without the intention of
building. However, the present language on one hand encourages
building to escape the repeat fee and discourages building on the
other hand due to the risk of personal budget overruns . This added •
language, which has been applied consistantly, allows important
exceptions to the above rule without either incouraging or
discouraging building.
• Pg. 18, 7-12 . 013, last line : Added since a master plan is
being developed that was not previously available .
Pg. 19, 7-12 . 013, last 4 lines : Added to clarify the fees that
are being charged.
There are no changes in the rates shown in attached Resolution
90-88.
Fiscal Impact :
There is no anticipated fiscal impact due to the adoption of
the new ordinance or fee resolution.
ORDINANCE NO. 181
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO REPEALING THE ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION
DISTRICT ORDINANCE CODE; ESTABLISHING THE
WASTEWATER DIVISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
AND SETTING RULES AND REGULATIONS THERETO
The City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain
as follows :
SECTION 1 . The Atascadero County Sanitation District
Ordinance Code , Section 1 , Articles 1 through 13, is hereby
repealed in its entirety .
SECTION 2 . Title 7 is hereby added to the Atascadero
Municipal Code, relating to the establishment of the
Wastewater Division of the Public Works Department , to read
as follows :
CHAPTER 1 . GENERAL PROVISIONS
7-1 . 001 Establishment : There is hereby established a
Wastewater Division of the Public Works Department , and
rules and regulations concerning the Atascadero Wastewater
disposal facilities . These regulations are established and
adopted to protect and promote the public health , safety
and welfare , pursuant to authority of California Health and
Safety Code Section 5470 through 5474 . 10.
7-1 .002 Application: The provisions of this Ordinance
shall apply to any person , or persons , including
corporations , and others connected to the Atascadero
Wastewater disposal facilities .
7-1 .003 Liability for Violations : Any person violating
any provision of this Ordinance shall be liable to the City
for all damages to City property resulting therefrom. A
violation of any provision of this Ordinance is a
misdemeanor . Penalties for violation of this ordinance
shall be as set forth in Chapter 3 of Title 1 of this Code .
CHAPTER 2 . DEFINITIONS
7-2 .001 Apartment : A residence , as herein defined, which
is part of or located in a multiple family dwelling as
herein defined.
7-2 .002 Bath : A room containing one or more water
closets , bathtubs , shower stalls , and wash basins which are
intended and suitable for human use and are connected to
the sewer system.
7-2 .003 Building: Any structure used for human habitation
or a place of business , recreation , or other activity and
containing sanitary facilities .
7-2 .004 Building Sewer : That portion of any sewer
beginning two (2) feet from any building and extending to
and including its connection to a public sewer .
7-2 .005 Cleanout : A branch fitting installed in a sewer
or other pipe for the purpose of providing access for
cleaning.
7-2 .006 Commercial Establishment : A building or portion
thereof used for , or intended for use for , commerical ,
business or governmental purposes , including but not
limited to stores , markets , theatres , business offices ,
government offices and other places of business , but not
including eating establishments , laundromats , or other
business establishments previously defined herein.
7-2 .007 Condominium Unit : A residence occupied or
suitable for occupancy in whole or in part as a home or
living quarters either permanently or temporarily by a
single-family, their guests and servants , but not including
an apartment or other unit of multiple-family dwelling as •
defined herein .
7-2 .008 _Eating Establishment : A building or portion
thereof, upon the premises of which are provided facilities
for dining, eating and/or beverage consumption by the
public , and which is held out by the owner or operator
thereof as a place where food and/or beverages may be
purchased for consumption upon the premises , including
establishments designated as restaurants , cafes , drive-ins ,
coffee shops , ice cream parlors , bars , and bowling alleys ,
and other such establishments where food or drink are
served.
7-2 .009 Fixture: Any sink, tub, shower, toilet , or other
facility connected by drain to the sewer .
7-2 . 010 Garbage: Solid wastes from the preparation,
cooking, and dispensing of food and from the handling,
storage, and sale of agricultural products .
7-2 .011 Garbage Grinder: A unit designed and used to
grind or otherwise treat garbage so that it can be disposed
of through the sewer system.
7-2 .012 Hotel : A building or group of buildings containing
• six or more sleeping rooms or suites of rooms designed as ,
and occupied or suitable for occupation as , a temporary
abiding or sleeping place for persons who, for
0 0
compensation , are lodged with or without meals , including
buildings designed as hotels and boarding, lodging or
rooming houses , but not including those defined herein a
multiple family dwellings , motels , trailer courts , or
dormitories , sanitariums , hospitals , asylums , orphanages ,
or buildings where persons are housed under restraint .
7-2 .013 Hotel Room: A room or suite of rooms in a hotel as
herein defined, designed as , and occupied or suitable for
occupation as , one sleeping or living unit .
7-2 .014 House Trailer or Mobile Home: A transportable
structure designed, built and equipped as , and occupied or
suitable for occupation as , a home or living quarters ,
either permanently or temporarily, by a single family and
their guests and servants .
7-2 .015 Kitchen : A room, all or any part of which is
designed, built or equipped as , and is used or is intended
to be used for the cooking and/or other preparation of food
for human consumption .
7-2 . 016 Lateral Sewer: That portion of a sewer lying
within a public right of way or easement , which connects ,
or is intended to connect , a building sewer to a main
sewer .
7-2 .017 Laundromat : A building or portion thereof
designed, equipped, and used or intended for use as a self-
service laundry , where there is no pickup or delivery
service and no steam or hand laundry of any type.
7-2 .018 Lot : Any piece or parcel of land, bounded,
defined, or shown upon a plot or deed recorded in the
office of the County Recorder of San Luis Obispo County;
provided, however , that in the event any structure is
located upon more than one parcel of land all under one
ownership and as herein defined; the term "lot" shall
include all such parcels of land.
7-2 .019 Main Sewer : Those sewers , excluding lateral
sewers , whose main purpose is to accept waste water from
laterals and convey it to the waste water treatment plant .
7-2 .020 Manager : Manager of the Wastewater Division of
the Public Works Department .
7-2 . 021 Manholet A structure for the purpose of providing
access of a man to a buried sewer .
7-2 .022 Motel : . A building or group of buildings
containing two or more rooms or suites of rooms , and
designed, intended, or used primarily for the accommodatin
of transient automobile travelers ; including establishments
3
• •
designated as motels , auto courts , tourist cabins , motor
lodges , motor courts , and by similar designations .
7-2 .023 Motel Unit : A room or suite of rooms in a motel as
herein defined, designed as , and occupied or suitable for
occupation as , one sleeping or living unit .
7-2 . .024 Multiple Family Dwelling: A building or group_ of
buildings designed as , and occupied or suitable for
occupation as , a home or living quarters , either
permanently or temporarily, by more than a single family,
including buildings designated as apartment houses ,
apartment buildings , duplexes , triplexes and condominiums ,
but not including motels , hotels , dormitories , or trailer
courts as herein defined.
7-2 .025 " : The logarithm of the reciprocal of the
weight of hydrogen ions in grams per liter of solution.
7-2 .026 Permit : Any written authorization required
pursuant to this Ordinance Code .
7-2 .027 Person : Any human being, individual , firm,
company partnership association, corporation, government or
agency .
7-2 .028 Public Sewer: That portion of a sewer lying
within a public right of way or easement , and maintained
by, and subject to the jurisdiction of, the Wastewater
Division of the Public Works Department .
7-2 .029 Residence: A building or portion thereof, or a
group of buildings , designed as and occupied or suitable
for occupation in whole or in part as a home or living
quarters , either permanently or temporarily, by a single
family and their guests and servants , including a house and
an apartment or other unit of multiple family dwelling as
herein defined.
7-2 .030 School : An institution of learning which offers
instruction in the several branches of learning and study
required to be taught in the public schools by the
Education Code of the State of California , including pre-
school or nursery, elementary, Junior and Senior High and
parochial and private schools and junior colleges ,
colleges , and universities .
7-2 .031 Sewer: A pipe or conduit for carrying waste
water .
7-2 .032 Sewer Connection Charge: The charge levied by the
City of Atascadero for connection to the main-line sewer.
(a) Sewer Connection Fee: Fee assessed to assure
upgrade of sewer system.
• •
(b) Sewer Annexation or Extension Fee : Fee assessed to •
assure expansion of sewer system and wastewater treatment
plant .
7-2 .033 Sewer Tap Charge: A charge by the City of
Atascadero for the actual physical connection from a
building sewer to the main-line sewer .
7-2 .034 "Shall" and "May" : Shall is mandatory; may is
permissive .
7-2 .035 Trailer Court : An area containing two or more
trailer spaces as herein defined, including areas designed
as trailer courts , trailer camps , and by similar
designations .
7-2 .036 Trailer Space: An area which is laid out and
provided with facilities including a sewer connection for ,
and is occupied or is suitable for occupation by, a house
trailer as herein defined.
7-2 .037 Waste Water: Any water-carried wastes from
residences , business buildings , public buildings ,
institutions , and industrial facilities .
7-2 .038 Waste Water Treatment Plant : The arrangement of •
devices and structures used for treating waste water
generated within the City .
CHAPTER 3. SEWER CONNECTION REQUIRED:
SEPTIC TANK ABANDONMENT
7-3.001 For the purposes of this Chapter a public sewer
shall be deemed to be available to a building if said sewer
is installed in a public right-of-way or easement adjacent
to the lot upon which said building is located.
7-3.002 The City Council hereby finds and declares the
maintenance or use of cesspools and other local means of
sewage disposal within the City to constitute a public
nuisance , and finds it to be in the public interest that
property to which a public sewer is available be required
to connect thereto .
7-3.003 When a public sewer becomes available to a
building served by a private sewage disposal system, said
building shall be connected to the public sewer within
twenty-four (24) months after said public sewer is
available and said private disposal system shall be
abandoned in the manner prescribed by the City Building
Department in accordance with the currently adopted edition
of the Uniform Plumbing Code unless a variance is granted
by the City of Atascadero.
S
• •
7-3.004 Any newly-constructed building to which a public
sewer is available shall be connected to said public sewer
prior to its use for human occupancy , unless a variance is
granted by the City Council .
7-3.005 Variances referred to in Sections 7-3. 003 and 7-
3 . 004 may be granted upon written application to the City
Council by the applicant setting forth the basis for such
request . Variances may be granted only upon affirmative
showing that no health hazard, public nuisance , or inequity
to other property owners will result therefrom.
CHAPTER 4 . PERMITS AND CONNECTION FEES
7-4 .001 It shall be unlawful for any person other than the
City to make any connection with any public or building
sewer, or to construct or alter any public or building
sewer, within the City without first obtaining a permit
from the City for such work.
7-4 .002 Any person desiring a permit for work involving
sewers shall make application in writing to the City giving
such information as it may require, on blanks to be
furnished for that purpose . If it appears therefrom that
the work to be performed thereunder is to be done according
0 to the regulations contained in this Ordinance and
otherwise provided by law governing the construction of
such work, a permit shall be issued upon payment of the
required fees .
7-4 .003 Nothing contained in this Chapter shall be deemed
to require the application for, or the issuance of , a
permit for the purpose of removing stoppages or repairing
leaks in a building sewer , except when it is necessary to
replace any part of such sewer .
7-4 .004 The following fees shall be charged for sewer
permits ;
(a) When the work to be performed involves the
connection of a building sewer to the public
sewer, the permit processing charge shall be
five dollars .
(b) When any portion of the work to be performed is
within the public right-of-way or public sewer
easement , an encroachment permit shall be
obtained from the Public Works Department of the
City of Atascadero. The applicant shall pay such
fees as shall be set by the Council of the City
of Atascadero.
(c) The applicant shall pay the following sewer
• •
connection fees according to the category of
building sewer : is
(1) Five hundred seventy-three (573) dollars
per unit for single-family residences ;
(2) Five hundred thirty-three (533) dollars per
unit for multifamily residences ;
(3) For hundred fifty-one (451) dollars per
unit for mobilehomes ;
(4) Twenty dollars and fifty cents ($20 .50) per
fixture unit for commercial , industrial and
other nonresidential units .
7-4 .005 Permit fees shall be credited to the general
operating account for the Wastewater Division of the Public
Works Department .
7-4 .006 For each connection of a building sewer to a public
sewer a "sewer tap charge" shall be collected by the City
before the permit for the construction is issued.
7-4 .007 A "sewer tap charge" in the amount of two hundred
and fifty (250) dollars shall be charged and deposited to
the general operating account for each physical connection
to the public sewer except that :
(a) No charge shall be made when the owner of the
lot has already paid for lateral sewer
installation by assessment or otherwise :
(b) No charge shall be made when a wye or tee fitting
has already been installed at the public sewer
at the property owner' s expense, and the lateral
sewer is to be installed from said fitting.
7-4 .008 Any parcel which was assessed during an
Improvement District Assessment proceeding for a collection
system, but on which the assessment was not paid because
the parcel was deeded to the State for nonpayment of taxes ,
shall incur an additional sewer connection fee equal to the
particular assessment involved for that parcel , at the rate
established pursuant to this ordinance .
7-4 . 009 In addition to such fees as shall be assessed for
sewer connection and sewer taps , applications for sewer
service shall be assessed a sewer annexation fee, subject
to the exceptions and applictions of Section 7-4 . 010, as
follows :
(a) One thousand two hundred ten (1 ,210) dollars for
a single family lot
(b) One thousand one hundred twenty-three (1 , 123)
dollars per living unit for a multifamily lot ;
• 7
(c) Nine hundred fifty (950) dollars per mobilehome
unit for a mobilehome park;
(d) Forty-three dollars and twenty cents ($43.20)
per plumbing fixture as defined in the currently
adopted edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, for
commercial , industrial , nonresidential lots .
7-4 .010 Exception to and application of annexation fees
will be as follows :
(a) A vacant lot presently inside Maintenance
District Number 1 where sewer is available
will be exempt from payment of an annexation
fee .
(b) Where a lot inside Maintenance District Number
1 is subject to a lot-split , and the annexation
fee has not been previously paid, the applicant
shall pay an annexation fee for all but one lot
in addition to such other fees as shall be
required according to the City of Atascadero.
(c) Area designated Cease and Desist and adjacent
areas covered by a Health Officer' s Letter will
be exempt from new charges and increase in
annexation fees , but will pay the fees in effect
prior to passage of this ordinance-eight hundred
fifty (850) dollars
7-4 ,011 It is the intent of the City to equalize the cost
of sewer service throughout the area of the City by the
application of these regulations , and, notwithstanding any
provisions of the foregoing sections , the City may in any
instance increase or decrease the connection fee to be
charged for any extraordinary service to achieve such
objective.
7-4 .012 Connection fees and Annexation fees shall be
deposited in the City' s Sewer Facilities Fund (Chapter 10) ,
and shall be used to pay the cost of system upgrade and
expansion .
7-4 ,013 Intent of Chapter : It is the intent of the
foregoing sections that in each instance in which
connection to a public sewer is desired the property owner
makes his own arrangements with an approved private
contractor to perform the work, and shall submit
satisfactory evidence to the City that this has been done
prior to issuance. of a permit pursuant to Section 7-4 . 001
of this Code.
B '
• •
7-4 .014 Fees assessed pursuant to this Chapter IV for
annexations and permits shall be payable at the time of the
application for annexation and permit, and fees for the
sewer connection and tap charge shall be payable upon
actual connection of the building sewer to the public sewer
system.
7-4 .015 In the event of a re-zone of a lot or change of
use, applicant for a building sewer shall pay such fees as
shall be required pursuant to this Chapter IV , including
sewer connection , annexation , tap charge, and permit fee,
except that such annexation fee may be waived if previously
paid and the applicant has connected to the sewer within a
timely manner pursuant to this Ordinance .
CHAPTER 5 . PUBLIC SEWER EXTENSIONS
7-5 .001 Extensions of the public sewer system of the
Wastewater Collection Facilities shall be made as follows :
(a) Any person desiring an extension of the public
sewer system shall make a request in writing to
the City for a preliminary investigation
of the feasibility of said extension . If said
sewer extension is feasible, the City shall
prepare a preliminary estimate of the cost of •
said extension , including any repair to a roadway
necessitated by said sewer extension .
(b) Requestor shall submit improvement plans of the
proposed extension, prepared by a Registered
Civil Engineer in the State of California, for
approval by the City Engineer .
(c) The person requesting said extension shall
execute and file a written Sewer Extension
Performance Agreement , the terms of which shall
be subject to approval by the City Council ,
whereby said person agrees to complete all
required improvements at his expense and to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, within the
time period specified within the agreement . Said
person further agrees to provide the City
Engineer with a detailed cost break-down of his
actual expenditures for any improvements
authorized in the agreement . The agreement
shall also provide for inspection by the City
Engineer , or his designated representative, of
all improvements , and reimbursement of the City
by the requestor, for the costs of the
inspection. The City will invoice the requestor
for such inspection costs and any amount unpaid
thirty (30) days from the date of the City' s
invoice shall bear interest at ten (10%) percent
9 :
0 •
per annum beginning within thirty (30) days
after the date of the invoice. The Sewer
Extension Performance Agreement may also
provide (1) for the construction of the
improvements and units ; and (2) for an extension
of the time under conditions that are
unspecified. No extension of time shall be
granted except upon certification by the City
Engineer that such extension is justified, and
upon approval of the Board of Directors . In
addition to the requirements of this Section
7-5 . 001 (c) said person shall provide the City
with a bond or other suitable security as
deemed appropriate by the City Attorney not to
exceed fifty (50%) percent of the cost of
improvements . The City Council may waive such
requirements for a bond at its option .
(d) No hookup to the public sewer will be permitted
until all improvement work has been completed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and all
charges have been paid by the requestor in
accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance .
7-5 .002 The City may approve a refund agreement with
persons who have paid for public sewer extensions . Said
• agreements shall provide for reimbursement of the excess
cost borne by said persons , at such time within fifteen
(15) _years as money is paid to the City for service from
said sewer extension . The City shall require the applicant
to file and have approved by the City Engineer a
reimbursement map showing the method and amount of cost
spread to each future connection to the sewer extension .
7-5 .003 No sewer service shall be provided to any lot by
lateral sewer connection to a sewer extension until the
owner of said lot has paid a proportional share of the cost
of said sewer extension , or has entered into an agreement
with the city to pay said share of the costs .
CHAPTER 6. INSPECTION
7-6.001 Inspection of Work: All work done under the
provisions of this Ordinance shall be subject to inspection
by the City . Notice must be given in writing to the City
by the person, firm or corporation doing said work, or
causing same to be done, immediately after said work is
ready for inspection . Up to the time of the inspection all
work shall remain uncovered and convenient for the
inspector' s examination . If any pipes are enclosed or
covered in any way whatsoever , so as to tend to obstruct a
• thorough inspection of the drainage system, said
obstruction must be removed upon notice to do so from the
City, before an inspector shall be required to inspect the
/O
work. When , upon examination by the inspector , it appears
that any such work is defective, either in its construction
or material , the same shall be made to conform to the
requirements set forth in this Ordinance , in default
whereof the permit therefor shall be revoked by the City
and subject work shall be discontinued immediately.
7-6.002 Certificate of Inspection : When it appears to the
satisfaction of the City that any work authorized by these
regulations has been constructed according to , and meets
the requirements of, all provisions of this Ordinance and
other applicable laws , and that all the fees for the doing
and inspection thereof have been paid, the City shall cause
to be issued to the person , firm or corporation
constructing such work a certificate of final inspection,
which certificate shall recite that such work as has been
done pursuant to the permit hs been constructed according
to the Ordinance provisions of said City, that said work is
in sanitary condition . The City shall not issue such
certificate of inspection unless the requirements of this
Ordinance have been met .
CHAPTER 7 . BUILDING SEWERS
7-7.001 Every building in which plumbing fixtures are
installed or located shall be separately and independently
connected with public sewer , except that , on a case by case
basis the City Engineer may approve the connection of more
than one building to the public sewer by a common building
sewer, if City Engineer determines that requiring a
separate and independent connection would cause or
aggravate a hardship, and that such approval is consistent
with good engineering practice and will impose no burden or
hardship on the City .
7-7.002 The requirements for building sewers as set forth
in the latest adopted versions of the Uniform Plumbing Code
shall apply in the City and are incorporated herein by
reference. However , where the regulations of this
Ordinance are more restrictive than said Plumbing Code,
this Code shall apply .
7-7.003 No building sewer shall be constructed with pipe
of internal diameter less than four (4) inches .
7-7.004 Building sewers shall be placed on a uniform slope
of not less than one-fourth (1/4) of an inch per foot ,
except that when it is not practical to obtain this slope,
then a slope of not less than one-eighth (1/8) of an inch
per foot may be used when approved by the City .
7-7.005 A clean-out shall be placed in every building
sewer within five (5) feet of each building, at all changes
in alignment or grade in excess of twenty-two and one-half
0 •
(22-1/2) degrees , within five (5) feet of the junction with
the public sewer or at the right-of-way line, as directed
by the City Engineer, and at intervals not to exceed one
hundred (100) feet in straight runs . The clean-out shall
be made by inserting a "Y" fitting in the line and fitting
the clean-out in the "Y" branch in an approved manner .
However in the case of the clean-out near the junction of
the public sewer , the "Y" branch shall be extended to a
depth of not more than two (2) feet , nor less than one (1)
foot below the surface of the ground before the clean-out
is installed.
7-7.006 No portion of a building sewer , or its connection
to the public sewer, shall be covered or concealed in any
manner until it has been inspected and approved by the
City .
7-7.007 All piping and all joints in each building sewer
are to be watertight and shall be tested by filling the
building sewer with water, in its entirety or in sections ,
in such a manner that no part is tested with less than a
three (3) foot head of water . TV-monitoring may also be
required, as directed, if the alignment is questionable .
7-7.008 Drainage piping serving fixtures located at an
elevation of less than one foot above the nearest upstream
manhole cover in the main sewer serving said fixtures shall
drain by gravity into the main sewer, and shall be
protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved
type back water valve, and each such back water valve shall
be installed only in that branch or section of the
drainage system which receives the discharge from fixtures
located less than one foot above the nearest upstream
manhole cover .
7-7.009 Installation , maintenance, and replacement of the
building sewer shall be the responsibility of the
connecting property owner .
7-7.010 Materials shall be as per the current edition of
the Uniform Plubing Code on private lots , and as per
current City Standards within the public right-of-way .
CHAPTER 8. MAINLINE EXTENSIONS
7-8.001 Service to Areas Outside Existing System:
(a) When a mainline extension outside of the
established public sewer system is requested,
the applicant shall have an estimate
of the cost of extending sewer lines and
providing sewer services to the lots included
in the request prepared by a civil engineer
registered in the State of California . These
' /2
• 0
estimates shall not include the cost of
building sewers . This estimate and the pro-
portional share to be borne by each lot shall be
furnished to the owners of the property affected
by this request .
(b) Applicant shall submit improvement plans of the
proposed extension , prepared by a civil enigneer
registered in the State of California , for
approval by the City Engineer
(c) The applicants of the sewer extension shall
execute and file an agreement with the City as
provided in Section 7-5 . 001 (c) of this
Ordinance.
(d) No hookup to the public sewer shall be permitted
until all improvement work has been completed to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer and all
charges have been paid by the applicant in
accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance .
Inspection costs shall be paid by applicant as
set forth in Section 7-5 . 001 of this Ordinance .
(e) The City may approve a refund agreement with
persons who have paid more than their pro- •
portional cost of the sewer service extension .
The agreement shall provide for reimbursement
of the excess cost borne by said persons at such
time within fifteen (15) years as money is paid
to the City for service from said sewer
extension . The City shall require the applicant
to file and have approved by the City Engineer
a reimbursement map showing the method and amount
of cost spread to each future connector to the
sewer extension .
(f) No sewer service shall be provided to any lot by
lateral connection to said sewer servic
extension until the owner of said lot has
paid a proportional share of the cost of the
service extension as well as the appropriate
sewer connection fees as outlined in Section
7-8 . 002 of this Ordinance.
7-8.002 Sewer Extension Fees : For sewer service to any
lot where sewer service has been extended beyond the
boundaries of the existing maintenance districts , or within
the same, the fees shown in Section 7-4 . 004 and 704 . 009
shall be charged.
• 0
Where a Wye or Tee fitting has not been installed in
said sewer extension , applicant shall pay a sewer tap
charge of two hundred and fifty (250 . 00) dollars in
addition to other fees that apply .
It is the intent of this Chapter that the referenced
fees of this section approximate the cost of expanding the
present sewer system and wastewater treatment plant to
accommodate those additional connections brought into the
sewer system by the extension of the service area .
7-8 . 003 The annexation fees shall be paid before a permit
is issued for a sewer connection pursuant to this Chapter
in that amount as set forth in Chapter IV . For the
purposes of this chapter , lot splits or changes in use of
lots shall be considered an annexation for the payment of
the annexation fee.
CHAPTER 9. PROHIBITED DISCHARGES
7-9.001 No person shall discharge or cause to be
discharged any stormwater , surface water , groundwater , roof
runoff , swimming pool , sub-surface drainage , uncontaminated
cooling water , or unpolluted industrial process waters to
any sanitary sewers .
7-9.002 No person shall discharge or cause to be
discharged any of the following_ described waters or wastes
to any public sewers :
(a) Any gasoline, benzene, naphtha, fuel oil , or
other flammable or explosive liquid, solid, or
gas .
(b) Any waters or wastes containing toxic or
poisonous solids , liquids , or gases in
sufficient quantity , either singularly or by
interaction with other wastes , to injure or
interfere with any waste water treatment
process or constitute a hazard to humans or
animals , or create any hazard in the receiving_
waters of the wastewater treatment plant .
(c) Any waters or wastes having a pH lower than 5 .5 ,
or having any other corrosive property capable
of causing damage or hazard to structures , equip-
ment , and personnel of the wastewater treatment
and collection system.
(d) Solid or viscious substances in quantities or of
such size capable of causing obstruction to the
flow in sewers , or other interference with the
proper operation of the wastewater treatment-
collection works such as , but not limited to,
0 w
ashes , cinders , sand, mud, straw, shavings ,
metal , glass , rags , feathers , tar, plastics ,
wood, underground garbage, paper materials such as
newspapers , dishes , cups , milk containers , and
meat processing plant wastes such as animal
skins , intestines , fleshings , and paunch
materials retained on a screen having_ eight (8)
meshes per inch each way .
(e) Any liquid or vapor having a temperature higher
than one hundred fifty (150) degrees Fahrenheit .
(f) Any water or wastes which may contain more than
one hundred (100) parts per million , by weight ,
of fat , oil , grease , or wax .
(g) Any waters or wastes containing suspended solids
of such character and quantity that unusual
attention or expense is required to handle such
materials at the waste water treatment plant .
(h) Any noxious or malodorous gas or substance
capable of creating a public nuisance.
7-9.003 Grease, Oil and Sand Interceptors : Grease, oil and
sand interceptors shall be provided when , in the opinion of
the City , they are necessary for the proper handling of
liquid wastes containing grease in excessive amounts or any
flammable wastes , sand, or other harmful ingredients ;
except that such interceptors shall not be required for the
private living quarters of dwelling units . All
interceptors shall be of a type and capacity approved by
the City and shall be located so as to be readily and
easily accessible for cleaning and inspection .
7-9.004 Construction : Grease and oil interceptors shall be
constructed of impervious materials capable of withstanding
abrupt and extreme changes in temperature . They shall be
of substantial construction, watertight , and equipped with
easily removable covers which, when bolted in place, shall
be gas-tight and water-tight .
7-9.005 Maintenance: Where installed, all grease, oil and
said interceptors shall be maintained by the owner, at his
expense, in continuously efficient operation at all times .
CAHPTER 10. SEWER FACILITIES ACCOUNT
7-10.001 A Sewer Facilities Account is established to
consist of revenue obtained from connection fees , sewer
extension fees , and designated revenues from the monthly
sewer charges .
7-10.002 The Sewer Facilities Account shall be primarily
to finance expansion and replacement of the wastewater
treatment facilities, and the replacement or enlargement of
trunk sewer lines or other sewer lines or capital
improvement items , including equipment .
7-10.003 When moneys are available from the Account , the
City Council may utilize these monies to construct public
sewers in streest or easements to extend service to
previously unsewered areas when the cost of such sewer
construction are to be reimbursed by the owners of the
properties requesting such extensions . Before monies from
said account are so used, the City Council shall enter into
an agreement with the owner or owners of the properties to
be served.
CHAPTER 11 . SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
7-11 .001 There is hereby levied and imposed upon any
occupied premises within the City, having any sewer
connection with the sewerage system of the City, or
otherwise discharging wastewater which ultimately passes
through the City' s sewerage system or to which a public
sewer is available according to article 7-3 . 001 of this
Ordinance, and upon the owner or occupant thereof , a
monthly service or standby charge as provided by Resolution
• of the City .
7-11 .002 Unclassified Uses : For premises having a sewer
connection but for which a specific classification for
sewer service has not been set forth in the Resolution
referenced in Section 7-11 . 001 , the City shall charge such
a rate as in its sole discretion it deems most applicable
for the type of use being made of the premises in relation
to the uses made of classified premises and the rate fixed
for said classified premises .
7-11 .003 Whenever required, sewer service charge rate
computation information shall be furnished to the City, on
forms furnished by the City, upon written request therefor .
7-11 .004 In the event of failure to furnish rate
computation information when requested and within the time
allowed, the City may compute the rate based on such
information as it finds reasonably available and such
computation shall be conclusive and final .
7-11 .005 Truck disposal of sanitary wastes may be accepted
by the City at the treatment plant during normal daytime
working hours , or at such other times as the City may elect
for a service charge to be specified in the rate
. Resolution .
9 w
7-11 .006 The City may elect to have such sewer service
charges collected by any manner authorized in the
applicable sections of the Health and Safety Code of the
State of California, in which event such charges shall be
delinquent on the date indicated in the bills rendered
therefor, after which date a delinquent penalty of ten (10)
percent per annum of the amount of unpaid charges shall be
due and payable with the delinquent charges upon which they
are imposed.
7-11 .007 The City elects to have current and delinquent
sewer service charges collected on the County tax roll in
the same manner as its general taxes , as an alternative to
other methods of collection prescribed herein , pursuant to
Health and Safety Code Sections 5473 through 5473a .
7-11 .008 Collection by Suit As an alternative to any
other procedures provided for herein, the City may collect
any delinquent sewer service charges and penalties thereon
by suit , in which event judgment therefor shall include
the cost of suit and reasonable attorney' s fees arising
from such action .
7-11 .009 The revenues derived from the rate set forth in
Chapter 11 of this Ordinance shall be allocated to specific
categories in such amounts and percentages as follows :
(a) The annual sum of seventy-six thousand (76, 000)
dollars shall be allocated to debt service on
existing bonded indebtedness of the City .
(b) Seventy-three (73%) percent of the remaining
revenues derived from sewer service rates after
(a) is subtracted shall be allocated to operation
and the maintenance fund of the Wastewater
Division .
(c) Twenty-seven (27%) percent of the remaining
revenues derived from the sewer service rates
after (a) is subtracted shall be allocated to the
Sewer Facilities Account .
CHAPTER 12 . POLICY STATEMENTS
The following Policy Statements are hereby adopted by
the City of Atascadero to be a part of this Ordinance.
7-12 .001 All sewer main extensions are to be funded by
those requesting annexation . •
0 •
7-12 .002 Annexations must be contiguous to the existing
Maintenance Districts , however, for a problem sewer area,
the City Council may annex public areas to provide
continuity .
9-12 ,003 In consideration of the annexation requests , the
City Engineer may be required to furnish an engineer' s
evaluation of adequacy of existing sewer mains affected by
the service extension . This would include an evaluation of
the down-stream line capacities as well as any possible
upgrading of existing lift stations .
7-12 .004 On-going service to the annexed areas shall not
require substantially higher costs than other areas
presently served. Typical of this consideration would be a
need for an additional sewer lift station .
7-12 .005 Annexations will be processed as outlined in
Chapter 8 of this Ordinance.
7-12 .006 Annexation fees , based on use , will be due and
payable upon application for annexation or lot splits or
use change or rezoning.
7-12 .007 Should the proponent of the annexation wish to
receive reimbursement for any sewer main extension by those
connecting within the annexed area , then the proponent
shall file a reimbursement map with the City upon
completion of the extension .
7-12 . 008 Annexations become void if connection is not made
within 12 months after the application , and fees will be
deemed forfeited after that time . Re-application shall
require such new fees as are set forth in this Ordinance .
This section shall not apply to vacant lots that are merged
within one year, or vacant lots to which the sewer main has
been extended within one year or vacant lots which abut
upon an existing sewer main .
7-12 .009 Within the Maintenance Districts , if sewer is
available on the boundary, it shall be deemed available to
lots outside of the actual Maintenance District as well as
those inside.
7-12 .010 Sewer connection fees and tap charges shall be
paid upon connection to the sewer system.
7-12 .011 Sewer line extensions shall be brought to the far
property line unless otherwise approved by the Director of
Public Works for cases where future extensions are not
practical due to perimeter or problem lots or lots that are
shown in the sewer master plan to be served from another
direction .
7-12 .012 For the purposes of this Ordinance, condominium
units shall be treated in the same manner as single-family
residences .
7-12 .013 Where there is a change of use from apartments to
comdominiums , the applicant shall pay the difference in
current fees and rates as established by this Ordinance
prior to the approval of such change. Specifically, an
apartment complex which is converted to condominiums shall
be assessed a connection charge of forty (40) dollars per
unit and an annexation fee of eighty (80) dollars per unit .
7-12 .014 Where there is a change of use from one
commercial use to another, the applicant shall pay the
difference in fees per fixture unit in addition to the
applicable rate for the new use.
7-12 .015 User rates shall be designated in the proportion
outlined in the revenue program for the EPA-RWQCB Grant and
allocated to appropriate accounting funds respective of
their intended use.
CHAPTER 13. ENFORCEMENT
7-13.001 Investigative Powers : City representatives shall
carry evidence establishing their position as authorized
representatives of the City , and, upon presentation and
exhibiting these proper credentials and identification, be
permitted to enter in and upon all buildings and premises
within the Maintenance District for the purpose of
inspection, observation, measurement, sampling, testing, or
otherwise performing such duties as may be necessary in
carrying out this Ordinance .
7-13.002 Termination : As an alternative measure for
enforcing the provisions of this Ordinance, the City may
terminate service to the building, structure or property in
question . Upon termination , the City Engineer or his
reprentative shall estimate the cost of termination and
reconnection to the system and the user shall deposit this
amount with the City before being reconnected. The City
shall refund any part of the deposit remaining after
payment of all costs or termination and reconnection .
7-13.003 Relief : Any person , who by reason of special
circumstances believes that the application of any of the
provisions of this Ordinance to him is unjust or
inequitable, may make written application to the City
Council for relief therefrom. Said application shall set
forth all of the special facts and circumstances and shall
request the specific relief or modification desired. The
City Council upon receipt of such application and after
such investigation as deemed necessary may take action to
grant such relief or modification as it finds necessary .
• •
The City Council , on - its own motion and without
application, may, when special circumstances make the
application of any of the provisions of this Ordinance
unjust or inequitable, modify or suspend the rules and
regulations for the period during which the special
circumstances exist .
SECTION 2 : If any portion of this Ordinance or the
application thereof is held to be invalid for any reason,
the validity of all remaining portions and applications
shall be unaffected and shall remain in full force and
effect .
SECTION 3: 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 in the Book of
Ordinances of this City .
SECTION 4 : Effective Date
This Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force
and effect of 12 : 01 a.m, on the 31st day after its passage.
On motion by Councilmember and seconded by
Councilmember ,the motion was approved by the
following roll call vote:
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT :
ADOPTED:
ATTEST :
BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN
Director of Public Works City Attorney
City Engineer
> EET� AGENDA,,_,_
AA7E Ii Z~
TEMI c••
MEMORANDUM
To : Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Acting City Manager
Subject : Wastewater Division Ordinance/Repeal of ACSD Ordinance
Date : August 16, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommend that Council adopt the attached ordinance .
Background:
Due to the necessity of the dissolution of the Atascadero
County Sanitation District (a political boundary) it is necessary to
conduct business under the auspicies of the City in the same manner
as other departments . This requires the restructuring of the
sanitation ordinance .
Discussion:
There are no major changes included in the new ordinance . The
fees will be adopted by resolution instead of by ordinance and the
department will continue to operate as an enterprise fund in the
budget process . Since the ordinance is not effective for 30 days
after adoption, the dissolution negotiation time period will lapse
and the County will have to begin that process again. It is
expected that the effective date of the ordinance and the
recordation of the dissolution will coincide . The dissolution
resolution will be placed before Council approximately 30 days after
the second reading of the above ordinance—October 11 .
Fiscal Impact :
There will be no fiscal impact due to the restructuring of the
ordinance .
MEETINICJ AGENDA. 7
DAT ITEM N .., �
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Paul M. Sensibauah, Acting City Manager
Director of Public Works
City Engineer
SUBJECT : Resolution Setting Sewer Charges
DATE: August 16, 1988
Recommendation :
Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached
resolution setting the monthly sewer charges .
Background:
Upon dissolution of the Atascadero County Sanitation
District a new Ordinance was prepared putting the
Department of Public Works in charge of the Wastewater
Division .
Previously , the monthly rates were addressed in the
ACSD Ordinance . This was due to regulations that require
charges levied by a District to be enacted by Ordinance.
Setting the rates separately from the Ordinance and
in Resolution form will simplify rate adjustments in the
future.
Fiscal Impact :
There will be no fiscal imv_ act at this time as we are
not proposing rate adjustments .
RESOLUTION NO. 90_88
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO SETTING SERVICE CHARGES FOR THE
WASTEWATER DIVISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS , Section 7-11.001 of the Wastewater Division
Ordinance imposes a monthly sewer service charge for all
premises connected to the public sewer system, or to which
connection is available; and
WHEREAS , The Public Works Department has analyzed the
cost of treatment of effluent from each category and has
set the service rate as appropriate.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero
does resolve to establish the following service charge
schedule :
a) Single Family Residential Unit $10 .54
b) Apartment Buildings
(per dwelling unit) 9. 86
c) Mobile Home Spaces (per square) 8 .24
d) Hotel/Motel (per dwelling unit) 2 . 62 •
e) Rest Homes/Hospitals (per bed) 3.50
f) Commercial Unit 3.23
g) Office Buildings (per office unit) 3.21
h) Restaurants
40 seats or less 74 .58
41 - 60 seats 109. 35
61 - 100 seats 144 . 12
More than 100 seats 178 . 89
i) Churches/Meeting Halls
Less than 150 seats 15 . 00
150 - 250 seats 25 . 00
Over 250 seats 35 . 00
j) Schools (per student average
daily attendance as of March 31
preceeding each fiscal year) 0. 085
k) Service Stations 23 .28
1) Laundry/Laundromat 145 . 85
m) Dry-Cleaners :basic commercial rate 3 .23
plus per washing machine 4 . 88
n) Car Wash 78 . 18
o) Fire Station 99.26
P) Warehouses/Storage Facilities 17 . 09
q) Theater 44 .42
r) Any Occupied Premises not Connected
to an Available Sewer 7. 00
s) Truck Disposal of Sanitary Waste
Per Standard Residential size truck 20. 00
NOW, THERFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero
does further resolve that this Resolution shall take effect
immediately .
On motion of Councilman and seconded by
Councilman , the foregoing resolution is
hereby adopted in its entirety by the following role call
vote:
AYES:
NOES :
ABSENT :
ADOPTED
ATTEST :
BOYD C . SHARITZ, City Clerk BONITA BORGESON, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT :
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH
City Attorney Dir , of Public Works
City Engineer
AGENDA
ITEM
• MEMORANDUM
To Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
<:�W' Acting City Manager
Subject : West Mall Signal Agreement-Caltrans
Date : September 6, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the attached agreement through the
adoption of Resolution 95-88
Background:
There is a long history behind the attached agreement which'
culminates over two years of difficulties with right-of-way, fuel
tank removal and design changes . Please refer to the Public Works
files for additional information on this topic .
Discussion:
The agreement is essentially the same as the one presented over
one year ago when we were informed of the problems with the Hoff
right-of-way. Subsequently, the Council has adopted an agreement
with the Hoffs and Caltrans is awaiting the results of the hazardous
materials report to be done in the fuel tank excavations .
The Caltrans agreement refers to a 51-49 split which is
correct once all of the costs are figured, including those which are
100% City. Since the attached exhibit reflects the actual 33-67%
breakdown for most items, including the traffic signal itself, ,staff
has agreed to disagree with the new approach. It is expected that,
if anything, the City stands to benefit from the new distribution
if change orders are needed for roadway items which were figured at
100% City. Once the bids are received, which is now anticipated in
the Spring of ' 89, the City will have to deposit our share of the
costs with Caltrans .
Fiscal Impact : •
The costs shown do not reflect the $16 ,500 maximum contribution
to the City from the Hoffs which is a part of our right—of—way
agreement with them. Also not included, except by reference, ,is
Caltrans ' share of the design costs which equal $24, 883. Included
in the City cost, not-to-exceed, is $25, 287 for engineering.
Therefore , the total cost for Caltrans ' engineering is $50, 170 or
29% of the construction costs .
The maximum cost to the City, without additional approvals, is
$95, 987, and includes $8, 000 for a modulated light signal detection
system (fire truck preempt) . This share will come out of
development fees already accumulated for signalization and roadway
work, Staff suggested the use of FAU funds but Caltrans indicated
that such use of the new funds would del"ay the project another year.
•
•
i
•
RESOLUTION NO, 95-88
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
APPROVING THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE INSTALLATION
OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE ROADWAY AT
EL CAMINO REAL AND WEST MALL
WHEREAS , the California Department of Transportation
has determined the need for a signal installation at E1
Camino Real and West Mall , and
WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation
has prepared plans and specifications for this project , and
WHEREAS , the City recognizes the importance of the
upgrade and modification of the intersection , and
WHEREAS , the City of Atascadero is a 33 percent owner
of this intersection,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the
City of Atascadero hereby;
1 . Approves that the certain agreement attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference between the
City of Atascadero and the State of California, Department
of Transportation , and that the Mayor is authorized to
execute the same ,
2 . Authorize the City Clerk to transmit the original
and two copies , attaching to each a copy of the authorizing
resolution to :
Vaughn Newlander
Local Assistance Engineer
Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 8114
San Luis Obispo , CA 93403-8114
for execution by the State .
•
• 3 . Directs the Citv Finance Director to deposit with
the state within 25 days of receipt of billing from the
state . $112 ,487 for construction and engineering costs .
On motion of Councilman , seconded by
Councilman and on the followincr roll call
vote :
AYES :
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 13th
day of September, 1988.
ATTEST:
BOYD C . SHARITZ BONITA BORGESON
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT :
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH
City Attorney Dir , of Public Works
City Engineer
0 r
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 8114
&AN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403-8114
elephone: (805) 549-3111
TDD (805) 549-3259
August 18 , 1988
5-SLO-41-16 . 22
State Highway Route 41 (E1 Camino
Real ) at West Mall
Dist. Agreement No. 05A695
5-202-254101
Mr. Paul Sensibaugh
Public Works Director
City of Atascadero
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
Dear Mr. Sensibaugh:
Attached for execution are the original and four copies of
the Cooperative Agreement between the State and the City of
Atascadero for the installation of traffic signals and safety
lighting (and performing roadwork) at the intersection of El
Camino Real and West Mall with State Highway Route 41 .
After execution by authorized City officials , please return
the original and three copies with a copy of the authorizing
resolution attached to each copy for execution by the State .
A fully executed copy will be returned for your files .
Sincerely,
Dar leen J. Osborne
Special Studies/Review
Attachment 59-3/20
5-SLO-41-16 . 22
5-202-254701
State Highway Route 41 (El Camino
Real ) at West Mall
District Agreement ; 05A695
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, ENTERED INTO ON
is between the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its
Department of Transportation, referred to herein as "STATE" , and
CITY OF ATASCADERO,
a body politic and a municipal
corporation of the State of
California, referred to
herein as "CITY"
RECITALS
( 1 ) STATE and CITY contemplate installing traffic
control signals and safety lighting (and performing roadwork) at
the intersections of El Camino Real and West Mall with State
Highway Route 41 , referred to herein as "PROJECT" , and desire to
specify the terms and conditions under which PROJECT is to be
engineered, constructed, financed, and maintained.
SECTION I
STATE AGREES :
( 1 ) To provide all necessary preliminary engineering ,
including plans and specifications , and all necessary
construction engineering services for the PROJECT and to bear
STATE' S share of the expense thereof, as shown on Exhibit A
attached and made a part of this Agreement .
( 2 ) To construct the PROJECT by contract in accordance
with the plans and specifications of STATE .
( 3 ) To pay an amount equal to 49% of the PROJECT
construction costs , as shown on Exhibit A but in no event shall
STATE' s total obligation for PROJECT construction costs , under
this Agreement , excluding costs referred to in Section III ,
Article (9 ) , exceed the amount of $85 , 800 ; provided that STATE
may, at its sole discretion, in writing , authorize a greater
amount.
( 4 ) Upon completion of PROJECT and all work incidental
thereto, to furnish CITY with a detailed statement of the portion
1
of the engineering and construction costs to be borne by CITY,
including resolution of any claims which may be filed by STATE ' S
contractor, and to refund to CITY promptly after completion of
STATE' S audit any amount of CITY' S deposit required in Section
II , Article ( 1 ) remaining after actual costs to be borne by CITY
have been deducted, or to bill CITY for any additional amount
required to complete CITY"' S financial obligations pursuant to
this Agreement.
( 5 ) To maintain the entire traffic control signal ( s )
and safety lighting as installed and pay an amount equal to 67%
of the total maintenance costs , including electrical energy
costs .
( 6 ) To operate the traffic control signal ( s ) as
installed and pay 67% of the operation cost .
SECTION II
CITY AGREES :
( 1 ) To deposit with STATE within 25 days of receipt of
billing therefor (which billing will be forwarded immediately
following STATE'S bid advertising date of a construction contract
for PROJECT) , the amount of $112 , 487 , which figure represents
CITY' S estimated share of the expense of preliminary engineering ,
construction engineering , and construction costs required to
complete the PROJECT, as shown on Exhibit A. CITY' S total
obligation for said anticipated project costs , exclusive of
claims and excluding costs referred to in Section III , Article
( 9 ) , under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of
$115 , 000 ; provided that CITY may, at its sole discretion, in
writing , authorize a greater amount .
( 2 ) CITY' S share of the construction cost (estimated
to be $87 , 200 ) , shall be an amount equal to 51% of the total
actual construction cost, including the cost of claims , the cost
of STATE defense of any claims and the cost of STATE-furnished
material , if any, as determined after completion of work and upon
final accounting of costs .
( 3 ) CITY' S share of the expense of preliminary
engineering shall be an amount equal to 51% of the STATE ' S costs
for preliminary engineering for the entire PROJECT.
( 4) CITY' S share of the expense of construction
engineering shall be an amount equal to 51% of the actual costs
of construction engineering for the entire PROJECT.
( 5 ) To pay STATE upon completion of all work and
within 20 days of receipt of a detailed statement made upon final
• accounting of costs therefor, any amount over and above the
2
i
aforesaid advance deposit required to complete CITY' S financial
obligation pursuant to this agreement.
( 6 ) To reimburse STATE for CITY' S proportionate share
of the cost of maintenance of said traffic control signal ( s ) and
safety lighting, such share to be an amount equal to 33% of the
total maintenance costs , including electrical energy costs .
( 7 ) To furnish the necessary right-of-way unless
otherwise provided for.
( 8 ) To certify to STATE that the right-of-way is owned
by CITY or that CITY had Right of Entry to do work prior to
advertisement of PROJECT by STATE.
SECTION III
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS :
( 1 ) All obligations of STATE under the terms of the
Agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the
Legislature and the allocation of resources by the California
Transportation Commission.
( 2 ) STATE shall not award a contract for the work
until after receipt of CITY'S deposit required in Section II , �.
Article ( 1 ) .
( 3 ) Should any portion of the PROJECT be financed with
Federal funds or State gas tax funds all applicable procedures
and policies relating to the use of such funds shall apply
notwithstanding other provisions of this Agreement .
( 4 ) After opening of bids CITY' s estimate of cost will
be revised based on actual bid prices . CITY' s required deposit
under Section II , Article ( 1 ) above will be increased or
decreased to match said revised estimate. If deposit increase or
decrease is less than 81 , 000 no refund or demand for additional
deposit will be made until final accounting .
( 5 ) After opening bids for the PROJECT and if bids
indicate a cost overrun of no more than 10% of the estimate will
occur, STATE may award the contract .
( 6 ) If, upon opening of bids , it is found that a cost
overrun exceeding 10% of the estimate will occur, STATE and CITY
shall endeavor to agree upon an alternative course of action.
If, after 60 days, an alternative course of action is not agreed
upon, this Agreement shall be deemed to be terminated by mutual
consent pursuant to Article ( 8 ) of this Section III .
( 7 ) Prior to advertising for bids for the PROJECT, .
3
CITY may terminate this Agreement by written notice , provided
that CITY pays STATE for all costs incurred by STATE .
( 8 ) If termination of this Agreement is by mutual
consent , STATE will bear 49% and CITY will bear 51% of all costs
incurred prior to termination, except that any utility relocation
costs shall be prorated in accordance with STATE' S/CITY' S
responsibility for utility relocation costs .
( 9 ) If existing public and/or private utilities
conflict with the construction of the PROJECT, STATE will make
all necessary arrangements with the owners of such utilities for
their protection, relocation or removal . STATE will inspect the
protection, relocation or removal , which if there are costs of
such protection, relocation or removal which the STATE and CITY
must legally pay, STATE and CITY will share in the cost of said
protection, relocation or removal , plus cost of engineering
overhead and inspection, in the amount of 49% STATE and 51% CITY.
Required protection, relocation or removal of utilities shall be
performed in accordance with STATE policy and procedure.
( 10 ) Upon completion of all work under this Agreement,
ownership and title to all signal ( s ) , materials , equipment and
appurtenances installed will be jointly shared in the ratio of
67% STATE and 33% CITY.
( 11 ) The cost of any engineering or maintenance
referred to herein shall include all direct and indirect costs
( functional and administrative overhead assessment) attributable
to such work, applied in accordance with STATE ' s standard
accounting procedures .
( 12 ) Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof
shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by
reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CITY under or in
connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to
CITY under this Agreement . It is also agreed that , pursuant to
Government Code Section 895 . 4 CITY shall fully indemnify and hold
STATE harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined
by Government Code Section 810 . 8 ) occurring by reason of anything
done or omitted to be done by CITY under or in connection with
any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this
Agreement.
( 13 ) Neither CITY nor any officer or employee thereof
shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by
reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or
in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction not
delegated to CITY under this Agreement . It is also agreed that ,
pursuant to Government Code Section 895 . 4 STATE shall fully
indemnify and hold CITY harmless from any liability imposed for
injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810 . 8 ) occurring by
4
reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or
in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction not
delegated to CITY under this Agreement .
( 14 ) That , in the construction of said work, STATE
will furnish a representative to perform the functions of a
Resident Engineer, and CITY may, at no cost to STATE , furnish a
representative , if it so desires , and that said representative
and Resident Engineer will cooperate and consult with each other ,
but the decisions of STATE' s engineer shall prevail .
( 15 ) That execution of this Agreement by CITY grants
to STATE the right to enter upon CITY owned lands to construct
the PROJECT referred to herein.
( 16 ) That this Agreement shall terminate upon
completion and acceptance of the PROJECT construction contract by
STATE or on June 30 , 1990 , whichever is earlier in time ; however,
the ownership and maintenance clauses shall remain in effect
until terminated, in writing , by mutual agreement . Should any
claim arising out of this project be asserted against STATE, CITY
agrees to extend the termination date of this Agreement and
provide additional funding as required to cover CITY' s
proportionate share of costs or execute a subsequent agreement to
cover those eventualities .
STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF ATASCADERO
Department of Transportation
ROBERT K. BEST
Director of Transportation
By
Mayor
By
District Director
Attest :
City Clerk
Approved as to form and procedure
Approved as to Content
Attorney, Department of Transportation
Public Works Director
Certified as to funds and procedure
Approved as to Form
District Accounting Officer
By
City Attorney
5
5-SLO-41-16 . 22
5-202-254701
District Agreement 405A695
EXHIBIT A
ESTIMATE OF COST
Total Est . City' s State ' s
Description Cost Share Share
Construction Cost 51% 49%
Signals $ 84 , 000 $ 42 , 336 $ 41 , 664
Roadwork $_ 89 , 000 $ 44 , 864 $ 44 , 136
Subtotal $173 , 000 $ 87 , 200 $85 , 800
Engineering Cost - Signals
Prelim. Engr . (Non-labor) $ 1 , 512 $ 762 $ 150
1 . 8% of Const. Cost
Prelim. Engr . (Labor only) $ 6 , 300 $ 3 , 175 $ 3 , 125
7 . 5% of Constr. Cost
Prelim. Engr . (Overhead) $ 3 , 108 $ 1 , 566 $ 1 , 542
49% of 7 . 5% = 3 . 7% of
Constr. Cost
Const . Engr. (Non-labor) $ 3 , 024 $ 1 , 524 $ 1 , 500
3 . 6% of Const . Cost
Const. Engr . (Labor only) $ 6 , 972 $ 3 , 514 $ 3 , 458
8 . 3% of Constr. Cost
Const . Engr . (Overhead) $ 3 , 444 $ 1 , 736 $ 1 , 708
49% of 8 . 3% = 4 .1% of
Const . Cost
Subtotal $ 24 , 360 $ 12 , 277 $ 12 , 083
Engineering Cost - Roadwork
Prelim. Engr . @ 13% $ 11 , 570 $ 5 , 832 $ 5 , 738
Overhead included
Const. Engr. @ 16% $ 14 , 240 $ 7 , 178 $ 7 , 062
Overhead included
Subtotal $_ 25 , 810 $ 13 , 010 $ 12 , 800
Total (Excl . Engr . Cost for $197 , 360 $ 99 , 477 $ 97 , 883
• Roadwork)
Total ( Incl . Engr . Cost for $223 , 170 $112 , 487 $110 , 683
Roadwork)
6
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
C> O O o u! O o 0 0 00 0 0 0
aaaLLL111������ o a a a I; o 0 0 0 ,; o a 0 0
O O O d M 14 O co O Ln O O O O
N N W
E' d h co M d ••1
r•1 •••1 M r•l
VY
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
L O N N N U1 O h O O to O O O 1
Oi h h d kD O d b N co h N U7 O O
�D �p O M .4 In 1•i '•1 It
-d N O W 1
.••� N ri N N rl .-1
O
H
N"4 O
N O 2
.h O O O O O O O O O O Co. O O O
'D d • O O0 O M O O O O O O O O O
1-1 to ; O O O O O O
I N 6 1
-1 O W N W N O M O
O� •Ii M N u•1 h M h M N W W N O O
'V' i Q U M 1f1 r•1 1A M M N W
v
1 N VI lD N N r•1
O N •+
a O u
VI N N N
I 1
Ln vi O
O O O O O O O O ma
O O O O
O O O O N O O O O O O O O O
O O M O O O N
•.1 O O O N O N d M %D ••1 O d
G O 1D L 1-I 1-1 C%
O
rl rl M
N
h 1
E,1 O N V1 Imo• N co %O .-1 N M to a N O
00 yt�y�ll h r- d N O N d h M O 1
NI- �D O M - N
W •-1 N �
0
eo I 1 1 1 N 1 I N h M d ^i N O
CDC) O O O .••1 O O f'1 N co 1-1
Od
• 1 I 1 1 •-1 1 1 11 PI
1-4
N
M I
O W 'n M rl d M .i 1••1 h D\ d 1-1 O
aV M N - r•1 O .••1 N M 1••1 L" I
M• M N r-1 r•i O
M
•••1
N U] In O N N •4 -f O Ul O O N O
a a a d r+ d O M d h 'r
ro d, r•1 N
1
i
E E
Q
co Q 4 >+ a. Q Q N C.
ul ca W V V E a U a
O� U C ro
C ..� tr Q!
4
Y ro N in (2) o a/ Q ^
ro a, m ro rn v , co 4
o i1 u u (aci d v
V) ¢ o v v b•.. a•. v N ro m
4 al W a!x 0-'A •.� v 41 > y u U O
C C u 4J•.1 a.+ u E w N 11 w ro .
. O . IYx+ O, — U 4 O W
V 4J +1 V (1W rd .a O N W Q m C+J 4+ -
c� U U M 0.ai E+J M O al N v O N C 01
a O U U C C W L C >. N (v Q U •H N
D 4 w •.1 6 >•H a N > a7 a! ro O ro a 4 a) W
to 11 N w" >w > (D > E >10 U 1 3 N >. u 4 O W�.
N Ul G W i� O W O N O a1 O O O G 10 N E V- O G U
G G Mro N E co F_ > 8 > 6 0 .•^I tT ro ro 10 C•.+ a G
O O•.r .. >, ar .. ar ro a, ro a 3 ar—4 o .•1 v .-1 •.1£ co O
u UU) Ell C4 as as x - aV) a U
O O O OO O O O O O O O O O
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CD o m 0 Ln o 0 0 0 0 0 o b o
0 o r b r co N o O O o o M O
N 1D 1 01 M 1
4 14 O O O O r M O
m 01 .i rl V) m N N b v M
.i ri b b n
N N N
O O O O O O O O O O o O q O
G1f O O O O O O O O I O O O O O
(JyfJpi1�Nj
0 o n o o 0 0 0 0 0 co n o
Vl O of -17T r-1 N m Vl I •p d n�O
M O T b Q1 ri 1l M M v 1 c
b m M ri 1-4 r •-1 V1
� m CD
N N
N
O O O o O O O o o O O O O O
O O Vl O O O O O O O O O O O
O (3 r-1 0 0 o O O O O O N 0\ o
V1 O M N VJ b V Vl o to b .-I V) O
m m N M V Q O ID
b N r N
r/ H .i r•i m N N n
N m m
N N
N
O O O O O O O o O O O O
41 W O O V1 O O O O O O O o O .a m 0•.1 O O r/ 7 Vl N O O O O O o 11 O
C Vl o r1 O o O O o O Vl 0
U
O N O O O O r 41
C:
V1 m N N b 7 tW 0
b„, N N••+
..1aj
N U U
C 7
Nf.
r O m O M O m O 1 O O 01 t3,41
CO N ? 04 b m b Vl Q m C N
r .I N 1
.i r1 u 1 M M V' •.1 C
b 4• O
M r-1 •-1 T C U
ro
u
M O M I I 1 1 1 O 1 1 1 0
>{ r v n o 0 0 0 'b 0 0 0 o H
o ul 1 D 1 1 I 1 1 o t I I
o m
1 O O •-1
CP b N '.T m 01 M to o to b rl
M•.-� H aT 1 b b
M N
OI
.i N
N
V 01 01 O toO N N W to t/] to
b 0,. .-I v tr. 0% ••4 a a a a a
ro M .•I N N
CC, m to to y
a u a a a a w a a a a a
to
e
uJ
d N
•°. v •w rn m e a
41 d U OI AJ CC U •.1 e
U 4.1 .. C U1 L. �••� 41 O •.i 41 0
b N 7 t/1 41 Cl •.1 N L .0•.. W N rl N
N d IJ N N C1 U Y U Y .0 a,41 W •.. ro UJ
U Q, v L b ro•.. •.1 w •.+ M tT •ti U cc % C 4
N ./ �. N .--1 N 41 �Q W (a d •.1 a Q V w tT
O W U C C: CL 41 0 S W E > a u F •+ �+
w C O O O ul 0 ro '.1 'O N
N C 0 O U N E —4.1 W 4./L b 0 A
•.+4) U 1•+ 1. U O.C N 41 C U u •a o iJ U 0
N tll Cl_14 O d 0 E d .•1 4.'o ro 1 w •. O
a u 0 to ,c W e E 4+ o e.1 ro =1 a +� c al w �.
U O N U F W a. > C I >W C 7 C C ro > W J.1
• C c:-A N ro O > •.1 I > 111 OI 'O CT ••/ W N ro C
N v O .�Se. •+ • 4 •C ro ro N ro a .� O En ro N 7 , O
N U E`•� E V H F A. W P.�• N N >~ U V F U
AGENDA nn
• MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable 'Mayor and City Council
From: Paul M. Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject : Award for Atascadero Lake Improvement Project
Date : September 7, 1988
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council approve the attached agreement
for the Ozonation, Water Supply Extension and Siltation Basin.
Background:
Please refer to the attached staff report from the last regular
meeting.
Discussion:
• The standard agreement attached is recommended based upon the
receipt of the required performance bond and payment bond. _There is
not any apparent problem with this requirement but the documents
were not available for the agenda at this writing.
Fiscal Impact :
The cost to the Cityis $117, 118 and will be paid through ,a
grant from the State
•
AC EE, __INT, mi.,de this 6th day of September 1.q8 '
by'
and between —City ofAtascadero hirci^after C4i1
(VdTa Ot Owner)•(an i n jivtdua:) ;- ed OW,R
and Associated Pacific Constructors doing business as (an individual,) or a
partnership,) or (a corporation) hereinafter called "CONTRACTOR".
WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the payments and agreements
herein-
after
erein-ofter mentioned:
— 1. The CONTRACTOR will commence and complete the construction of
Atascadero Lake•Improvement Project
2. The CONTRACTOR will furnish all of the material, supplies, tools, e ui men
q P t,
labor and other services necessary for the construction and cora-�pletion of the PROJECT
described herein.
3. The CONTRACTOR %viIl commence the 1%-ork required by the CONTRACT
UMENTS within 15 working =bmifm days after the date of the NOTICE 'I'O PRO-
CELD and will complete the same within 110 working
:a M days unless the period
for completion is extended otherwise by the CONTRACT L�OCUl�Ei`�TS.
4. The CONTRACTOR Agrees to perform, all c f the t"t'01"' descriU-ed in the COSI_
TRACT DOCUMENTS and comply L;i!ii ti:e te.rns t e- � for ^e r ^ 11 7,118.00
:( in t�, �a�� c�
or as sho,,vn in the BID schedule.
5. The term "C O.-TRACT DOCUME\,TS" mea
i :� anacluu2 S t,�I er „
(A) Advertisement For BIDS
(B) Information For BIDDERS '
(C) BID
(D) BID BOi\'D
(E) !Agreement
•
CONT((gCT D:)CJ:ENTS FOR CONSUILICTION OF
FEDER.',LLY ASSISTED WATER AND Wil': R PRDJ%CTS _Dxurcrer.(P:o.S
• A;,'cert�r.::Fage 1 of�;
(F) G 1i: PZJ, C IT LG: S •
,E:. L :� �':'� , C`: 1:i'Ai. i�i'�' O
(I) Perfo.m£lllce EDIND `r
(J)
NOTICE OF AVdARD
(K) NOTICE TO PROCEED
(L) CHANGE 0,11DE,1:
(M) DIZAWINGS prepared by Alderman Engineering
numbared 1 .1 through 7•12• , and dated ,
19
(N) SPECIFICATIONS prepared or issued by Alderman Engineering
items 1 , 4s and' S only ( 2 & 3 omitted by the City Council of Atascadero)
dated September 1 ;x,88
(0) ADDD"
1J:�.
T.
19—
No. d t Ci
No. _, ("ated l�
N,0. , (1atCC1
No. dated a�J
1VTo. ? ^�
✓i.i I)i_::y' J t.(1C i t:1 i u;IL:::r c:;.�. al Suct-' ilI'i�CJ aj
C.-L forth in t e CC i1 r(a C�)nLalt:Cli s ".. ai:l( .: :1 S i 1 CONT
l:J 11 i,U:. ll Li`i �1.Ci 1 ACTT
DO'CU::iE:NT S.
I. This A-reement Shall CE', bindin o- up0n all P:.—LI--s heloto aP.CI their resoecti'.,e
heirs, executors, adrni li;Lrato: successor;, and assic::s.
IN %ViYNESS �ti�"' ,
:�EP.L:G��, t:�e parties her(:�o I:�l�, e�.(,cute(�, or caz:s;:d to b(: e;;>ciltec?
by OiilCiill' , tili:� Cacti of
(hum„=r of Cc,,,;:-!i)
xvhich shall be, dceine(l an orll-iCla I oil tl:C: Clate first �i)JC1ve wriLLCIL
A.rru.".:,c,' P.�o 2 of 3
Y Gi`V, E ,,:
f
l BY
Name
(?tease Type)
Tile
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
Name —
~
ro
Title
CONTRACTOR:
Associate Pacifi Constructors :^
BY
Name
. Edward Strasser
(?lease Tyra)
AddCOSS 495 unbarcadero
"Morro .Bay, ca. 93442
(SEAT))
ATTEST:
Name
picaw Type).
Document No.
MEE�1 AGENDA
MEMORANDUM • JAT & ITEMS
• TO: Acting City Manager Paul Sensibaugh and City Council Members
FROM: Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Police Car Purchase
DATE: August 24, 1988
RECOMMENDATION/COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
By motion, authorize the purchase of one mid-sized vehicle from Atascadero Ford
for a total amount not to exceed $15,500.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The purchase of this vehicle will be in keeping with the previously authorized
fiscal year 1988-89 budget which calls for the acquisition of two police cars.
A specific amount isnot listed inasmuch as this car will be purchased through
a wholesale auction process in cooperation with our local Ford dealer ,who will
actually negotiate the sale below the amount authorized.
The listed ceiling amount of $15,500 was obtained from both National Auto
Leasing/Sales and Hertz Auto Leasing/Sales, and the estimated costs are for
comparable, intermediate sized cars.
• The clear advantage of purchasing our cars in this manner is that we can
purchase comparable vehicles in our City to those offered in the metropolitan
areas, thus, we return sales tax money to City revenues, and additionally, the
vehicle warranty and servicing is more easily accommodated.
The second vehicle, which is a special heavy-duty patrol car will likely be
purchased later through the CHP, cooperative allied,agency purchasing plan as
has been past practice.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As indicated, the amount reflected is a maximum amount which was previously
authorized by Council in its adoption of our current budget.
For your consideration.. .
RICHARD H. MCHALE
RHM:sb
N
MEETIN AGENDA
DAT �' ITEM M
MEMORANDUM
•
City of Atascadero
September 8, 1988
TO: Board ,of Directors
Atascadero County sanitation District
FROM: Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
Sanitation District/City Attorney
SUBJECT: Sale of Traffic Way Surplus Lot, Atascadero
City of Atascadero/Carroll, Escrow No. 164474RZ
The preliminary title report issued by Ticor Title Insurance
shows title to the Traffic Way surplus lot vested in the
Atascadero County Sanitation District and the City of
Atascadero. In order to clear title to this property so that
it may be conveyed by the City of Atascadero to Mr. and Mrs.
Carroll, it is my recommendation that the Board of Directors
of the Atascadero County Sanitation District authorize the
president to execute the attached quitclaim deed quitclaiming
the District's interest in the property to the City of
Atascadero. Further, it is recommended that the Board of
• Directors authorize staff to take all steps necessary for the
recordation of the quitclaim deed, including the execution of
a preliminary change of ownership and a certificate of
acceptance on behalf of the City of Atascadero.
Respectfully submitted,
J FREY G ORGENSEN
Sanitation District/City Attorney
JGJ• fr
A:MMATA338
Attachment
, cc: City Manager
Mr. and Mrs. William H. Carroll
Recording requested by:
When recorded mail to:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Attn: City Manager
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
QUITCLAIM "DEED
The undersigned Grantor declares:
Documentary transfer tax is $-0
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, the ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT, a
county sanitation district organized pursuant to Health and
Safety Code Section 4700, et seq. , hereby remises, releases,
and forever quitclaims to the CITY OF ATASCADERO, a municipal
corporation- of the State of California, the following
described real property in the City of Atascadero, County of
San Luis Obispo, State of California
Parcel 1 as shown on Parcel Map ATAL 87-290 in the •
City of Atascadero, County of San Luis Obispo, State
of California, as per map filed for record June 20,
1988 in Book 43, Page 56 of Parcel Maps in the
office of the county recorder of said county, being
more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Lot 12 ;
being a point on the centerline of Traffic Way;
thence along the Northerly line of said Lot 12 South
61007102" East 30. 00 feet to the true point of
beginning; thence continuing along said line South
61 07102" East 227.36 feet; thence leaving said line
South 28055137" West 43 . 63 feet; thence North
82055146" West 105. 00 feet; thence South 84017115"
West 110. 14 feet; thence North 57034118" West 37 .42
feet to a point on the Easterly right-of-way of
Traffic Way; said point being a point on a 543 . 10
foot radius curve concave Easterly; a radial line to
said curve bears North 66003120" West; thence along
the arc of said curve 47 .85 feet through a central
angle of 5002154" ; thence continuing along said
right-of-way North_ 28059135" East 95. 96 feet to the
true point of beginning.
! i
• EXECUTED on , 1988 at Atascadero,
California.
ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION
DISTRICT
By
BONITA BORGESON, President
ATTEST:
PAUL SENSIBAUGH
Acting Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN
Sanitation District Attorney
JGJ: fr/9/8/88
C:AGATA665
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ) ss.
On this day of 1988, before me,
, a Notary Public, State of California,
duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared BONITA
BORGESON, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis
of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this
instrument as President of the ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION
DISTRICT, a county sanitation district organized pursuant to
Health and Safety Code Section 4700, et seq. , and acknowledged
to me that said county sanitation district executed it.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name
and affixed my official seal of the day and year in this
certificate first above written.
Notary Public for the
State of California
My commission expires:
[Notary Seal] , 19
` •
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real property
conveyed by the quitclaim deed dated , 1988,
from the ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT to the CITY OF
ATASCADERO, a municipal corporation, is hereby accepted by the
undersigned officer or agent on behalf of the CITY OF
ATASCADERO pursuant to authority conferred by resolution of
the City Council of the City of Atascadero adopted on April
28, 1987, and the grantee consents to recordation thereof by
its duly authorized officer or agent.
Executed on 1988, at Atascadero,
California.
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By
PAUL SENSIBAUGH, Acting City
Manager/Public Works Director
II
s
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF
On this day of 1988, before me,
a Notary Public State of Cali-
fornia, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared PAUL
SENSIBAUGH, known to me to be the Acting City Manager/Public
Works Director of the CITY OF ATASCADERO, a municipal
corporation of the State of California, that executed this
instrument, and known to me to be the person who executed this
instrument on behalf of said municipal corporation therein
named, and acknowledged to me that such municipal corporation
executed it.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name
and affixed my official seal of the day and year in this
certificate first above written.
Notary Public for the
State of California
My commission expires:
[Notary Seal] , 19
i
►*
AGENDA
ITIEMM �L
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council September 13, 1988
VIA: Paul Sensibaugh, Acting City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director V%
SUBJECT: Tree Replacement Fund
BACKGROUND•
The Tree Committee has requested that the City give consideration
to establishment of a Tree Replacement Fund that would enable
donations to a City account, which could be used for purchase of
trees to be planted in the public rights-of-way, downtown, park
areas, etc .
Part of the '' motivation for the Tree Committee' s suggestion is
• found in the following Sub-section 9-4 .155 (c) ,(5) Replacement
Trees which reads as follows :
"Except where, - upon recommendation of the arborist, the
remaining tree cover is so extensive that tree replacement
would serve no useful _ purpose, removed tree(s) shall be
replaced with a similar native tree or a number of trees
which provide equal aesthetic quality. The minimum size of
a replacement tree shall be in a fifteen (15) gallon
container.
The 'foregoing language provides an exception to the General Plan
language which states as follows on Page 158 :
"Permits for 'both residential and commercial development
shall take into consideration the trees existing' on the
property. Building shall be designed to utilize existing
trees in the landscaping pattern. Any trees removed shall
be replaced. "
At the present time, there does not exist authority to mandate
that individuals having heavily wooded properties be required to
contribute towards a general City-wide tree replacement fund in
lieu of providing replacement trees. This matter could be
considered as part -of the October 25th evaluation of potential
• amendments to the Tree Ordinance, recognizing that there are
pros and cons to establishing such a mandate. There' s nothing,
however, to preclude the City establishing a revenue account for
voluntary donation from individuals in general, and for those
with construction projects who would be interested in such a
donation in lieu of a strict replacement tree requirement.
• •
•
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
1 . Direct the Finance Department to establish a Tree
Replacement Fund account
2. Refer the issue of whether to amend the Tree Ordinance to
provide for ordinance directed donations to such an account
to the City Council ' s meeting of October 25th for review.
HE:ph
cc: Tree Committee
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council September 13 , 1988
VIA: Paul Sensibaugh, Acting City Manager
FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director \AE
SUBJECT: Request of Richard Alvarez to be designated as a
City-certified arborist
BACKGROUND:
The City has received the attached letters from Richard Alvarez
relative to his qualifications to serve as a City-designated
arborist under the Tree Ordinance.
ANALYSIS:
The Zoning ordinance contains the following language with respect
to certified arborists :
(b) TREE PROTECTION PLAN: In order to protect trees during
construction of a project and to maximize chances for
their subsequent survival , a tree protection plan shall
be required as part of applications subject to this
section. Said plan shall be approved by an Interna-
tional Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified
arborist chosen from a list recommended by the Tree
Committee and designated by resolution of the City
Council as acceptable to the City of Atascadero.
Hence, Mr. Alvarez , notwithstanding his considerable credentials,
does not qualify under the present language in the ordinance.
However, in creating the Tree Committee, the Council called for a
report in 6 months (October 25 , 1988) to consider amendments to
the ordinance .
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Refer the issue to the October 25 , 1988 City Council meeting to
be considered as part of recommended amendments to the Tree
Ordinance.
HE :ps
cc: Richard Alvarez
Tree Committee
Enclosures : Communication from Arbor Tree Surgery
RICHARD ALVAREZ, OWNER 802 PASO ROBLES STREET
TELEPHONE: (805) 239-1239 j PASO ROBLES, CALIFORNIA 93446
July 15, 1988 RECE(VEDJJL 22 1988
City of Atascadero
Tree Committee
P.O. Box 737
Atascadero, CA 93423
Attn: Marge Macky
I would like to voice my opinion in regards to'-,the City of Atascadero's
selection of Certified Arborists.
It is wrong to only recognize the Western
� Chapters rs Certified
Arborists.
This certification can be obtained b an horticulture
Y Y student with little
or no real experience. This eliminates your more qualifiedP rofessions in
the tree industry. For example: there is the N.A.A. , National Arborist
Association and the A.S.C.A, American Society of Consulting Arborist. I
would like to suggest that your wording encompass these other capable
professionals.
D. 0. Denney and -I, Richard G. Alvarez, are members of the American Society
of Consulting Arborist. - To be a member of A.S.C.A. , you need to have at
least 20 years of experience. These people are called on by the American
Bar Association frequently to service as expert witnesses. It is much harder
to get into this group of professionals then the Western Chapter I.S.A. Certi-
fication. Approximately 95/0 of the I.S.A. Certified Arborist would not qualify.
Very truly yours,
2
Richard G. Alvarez
President
- ... ,.�.y.,..-�xh,..., z .. _..�,..<,.� .e.+.. ,r..: s - ���' i eyn y �.Mwfi`'`+�}F''--t air�.i`Sy.'n,.} '�"°•�-"'�'rfa.`�ii+,J`y.
RICHARD ALVAREZ, OWNER 802 PASO ROBLES STREET
TELEPHONE: (805) 239-1239 s PASO ROBLES, CALIFORNIA 93446
qECEIVED AUG 3 i iS`;s8 Z Eree �$Urnerg
August 30, 1988
City of Atascadero
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
Dear Sirs:
. We are requesting that the following names be added to your current
list of qualified Arborist Consultants:
Richard G. Alvarez
Steven G. Alvarez
Donald 0. Denney
Very truly yours,
C�
Richard G. Ak1r z
Consulting Arborist #164
t!�T.IL1IDIdI➢�f®IDIID� i' �� ' i
cn
d
z -
_ O
`-�
LLJ
x :F: d _
® d
d •�
o ff w � bb 00
E•-+ ® o
o W ¢ w o
v c-,j
p � d 't3 J
vFi Ei PLq ~ W d d
5 w •� -
� U •N � O �
ZC2
1-4
Q .�
� c-
c.�
�1LI�IUid[II11111. i ( i p�(iffiflifliflili�ilif!liflilil�f�(�1j�I�jjj it I-
A
L
YN
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF
CONSULTING ARBORISTS
APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP IN THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CONSULTING ARBORISTS
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Give name- of College , University, Vocational Insti-
tution, Adult Education courses, etc. , and dates attended. Give degree or
certification received.
ARBORICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL EXPERIENCES : Give brief •history of your
experiences in the arboricultural and horticultural fields. List employers ,
the positions you held, and dates of each position.
ARBORICULTURAL, HORTICULTURAL AND CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS : List those organi-
zations in which. you have had or now have membership and the dates when
first becoming a member . List the committees served or offices held in each
,organization.
CONSULTATION EXPERIENCES : Give a brief account of your activities in arbor-
icultural and horticultural consultation . Attach copies of three consulta-
tion reports you have made in recent years . If you appeared in or aided in
preparation of court testimonies in these fields , or in IRS claims or insur-
ance cases , give details .
/)/ SPONSORS: Give names and addresses of four persons you have asked to submit
references on your behalf, including two active RSCA members , in your area
or persons associated with your work and activities in arboricultural and
horticultural fields . Ask, to have these letters addressed to the ASCA office .
ACTION ON YOUR APPLICATION: When action has been taken on your application
by the Membership Committee and the Board of Directors you will be notified.
It usually takes at least two months for final action. Whatever action is
taken will be reported to you. If your application is approved you will be
so notified and billed. The initial Membership Fee is $200 and the Annual
Dues are $125 , for a total of $325 for the first year of membership.
INFORMATION TO BE SENT TO:
5/��s�'�� • ASCA MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE
i,�,Ls s�.�•.v�firm`. 700 Canterbury Road
Clearwater, FL 33546
(813) 446-3356
Lie
�,.,.. Tr+-r^I onr_c fila l W* .
/ X44 \rr 4�� \��r J/i, _ �\�+(�i1 - _ _\/ =li _ \�, �'�. �•r � ._/ t .1rri��.
L.+ CTS z
sy cfs
+� cfs0 C11
04
CA>>
w C13
• k i
' •:�, �`► � .,, ��3i `?�� � .,, � '► . tip..•. ,r fL ,
i
a•
� 1
V O O `
Ei H
Hk,
i
U2 Z
S H H w `"
LLA p
m
�i
N C4 o
N Ea. o .�
�1 a
LuW O= h N S y W h U�
co V v Q THP P4 r, CX.
H !'
r Z O ~ m W W N I.-
ca U
`d
W O J �..�.. W N
V \j a�
- Q to d yOj Q �. LI W LL CL"o '• y v z H c � f-
ti ` Q� c A U a � I CO
\ c
y H C4 .J
_ _ Q -�—+ F•-{ Z co w to
Cn a LU m
H _ H = w c
W cc u+ 3 ~ \ o
Y 2: y V CY W a H c
r z s 3 �,—
_ F-+ 3
Q a
4r LM
® � H
� � H
m
3
e�
ARBOR TREE SURGERY
RICHARD ALVAREZ
A
MEMBERNATION l PASO ROBLES, CA
ARBORIST
ASSOCIATION / )
1987 /{ "
Membership year Executive Vice President
7ate¢.catio.utl Saudcy 0� iGn2cau[f'u:e =''• � h1s-Ce
y
303 W. University Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
MEMBERSHIP NO. 83-2442
erica odiUlHrlg Arbor(sts�
RICHARD G. ALVAREZ �s RU R,FIc�,�3s�a
' l {.
1988 p �U 4j'••t � ,tet
9�8 � "3� IC CI 0
Executive Director r
THIS IS YOUR POCKET IDENTIFICATION CARD — KEEP IT WITH YOU
DETACH AT PERFORATION
AND FOLD
67
.► � ,. Audit No. 6 6 5 6
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS ,a
CONTRACTORS STATE LICENSE BOARD
EXPIRES ON ANY ` CHANGE OF BUSINESS
r+o. oav va ADDRESS MUST BE REPORTED TO .�
THE REGISTRAR WITHIN 90 DAYS.
04; 30" 901
CLASSIFICATIONS 1
343996 ARBOR TREE' SURGERY_ �.- C69 e
P 0 BOX 965
3
ATASCADERO., ',CA-.93423.1 -f-
RECEIPT NO.
i 13L-22(REV.8-85) SIGNATURE FOLD-4 1 1-FOLD 04081 10 +1
RICHARD ALVAREZ, OWNER 802 PASO ROBLES STREET
TELEPHONE: (805) 239-1239 j PASO ROBLES, CALIFORNIA 93446
Z)
September 1 , 1988
City of Atascadero
City Manager
P.O. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
Dear Sir:
Richard Alvarez has requested that this information be sent on to
you to qualify hims as an consulting arborist.
Very truly yours,
��Gj e� G�GUIZ L
Piikea Alvarez
Secretary