Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 06/08/1993 RHAC REVIEW OWY ELEA,SE QQ NOT„MWE FRGM tXJNTER AGENDA 4 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 6500'PALMA"AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM JUNE 8, 1993 7:00 P.M. This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the requirements of Gov mment Code Section 54954.2. By listing a topic on this agenda, the City Council has expressed its intent to discuss and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in the brief general description of each item, the action that may be taken shall include: A referral to staff with specific requests for information; continuance; specific dire tion to staff concerning the policy ormission of the item;discontinuance of consideration authorization to enter into negotiations and execute agreements pertaining to the item, adoption or approval,• and, disapproval. Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to eachto of business referred to on the agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk (Room' 08)and in the Information Office (Room 103), available for public'inspection during Cit Hall business hours. The City Clerk will answer any questions regarding the agenda. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need specia assistance to participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City,:please contact the City Managers Office ((805) 461-5010) or the City Clerk's Office ((805) 461-5074). Notifica- tion at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are neede will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to prov+ accessibility to the meeting or service.' p E RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: * Members of the audience may speak on any item on the a enda. * A person may speak for five (5) minutes.' * No-one may speak for a second time until everyone wishin 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 ay respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not initiate further V iscussion. * The floor will then be closed to, public participation and open for Council discussion. g Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Calf City Council Comments: Appreciation Plaque - Dave Vega, Economic Round Table Proclamations: "Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run Day", June 20, 1993 COMMUNITY FORUM: The City Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and comments from you, the citizen. The Community forum period is provided to receive comments from the public on matters other than scheduled agenda items. To increase the effective- ness 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 elected official, commissions and staff. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing commit- tees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary.): 1 S.L.O. Council of Governments 2. S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority 3. Solid/Hazardous Waste Task Force 4. City/School Committee 5. Traffic Committee 6. County Water Advisory Board , 7. Economic Round Table 8. Colony Roads Committee 9. Liability Claims Review & Finance Committee B. CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under Item B, 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 . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 11, 1993 2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 25, 1993 3. RESOLUTION NO. 45-93 - Providing for the issuance of 1993-94 Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes 2 4. RESOLUTION NO. 43-93 - Designation of no-parking zone ok San Luis Avenue 5. RESOLUTION NO. 44-93 - Designation of loading zones at the Lake Pavilion 6 6. RESOLUTION NO. 42-93 - Accepting the transfer of applicant status for two non-urban county Proposition 116 projects 7. RESOLUTION NO. 46-93 - Authorizing the execution of, n agreement with John Madonna Construction Co., Inc. for construction of the EI Bordo Road/Chalk Mountain Golf Course wastewater collection lie (Bid #93-05)' 8. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23-89, 11455 VIEJO CAMINO t Request for time extension (Van Gundy/Bond & Associates) s C. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. SMARA HEARING Consideration of Surface Mining and Reclamation Act- mandated "Report of Results: Mined Land Reclamation and compliance -- City of Atascadero,, t i D. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. CIRCULATION ELEMENT & FINAL EIR (Cont'd from 5/111/9i3,) A. Resolution No. 23-93 - Approving the adoption of an Lpdated Circulation Element of the Atascadero General Plan P E INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1 . City Council 2. City Attorney . 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager i * NOTICE: COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO A CLOSED SESSION FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSION< REGARDING POTENTIAL LITIGATION, PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (a). s 3 I "Special Olympics/Law Enforcement Torch Run Day" June 20, 1993 WHEREAS, Law enforcement agencies contribute to the well-being of our community and our residents; and WHEREAS, Partic�ation in special Olympics contributes to the physical, social and psychological well-being of the developmentally disabled participants; and WHEREAS, special olympics provides developmentally disabled participants with the opportunity for successful experiences in sports which develops confidence and builds a positive se(- image; and WHEREAS, Representatives from various law enforcement agencies in the county will be participating in the torch run through S.L.O. county; and THEREFORE, The council of the city of Atascadero does hereby proclaim June 20, 1993 to be '•Special oly'npics/Law Enforcement Torch Run Day" in the city of Atascadero and urges all citizens to give their support to this unique and highly beneficial program which gives the developmentally disabled their best opportunity to experience athletic competition and share in a mainstream community event. ROBERT P. NIMMO, Mayor city of Atascadero, calf fornia June S, 1993 0 to, • Special Olympics of 8anEuis Obispo County F � POST OFFICE BOX 1164 • SAN LUIS OBISPO • CALIFORNIA 93406 (805) 544-6444 May 19 , 1993 OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS Mayor MAY 2 PRESIDENT GUYPAULHACKMAN 6500cPalma Ave . y Counci, ��.Y ��R. Atascadero , CA 93422 VICE PRESIDENT JIM GARDINER Dear Mayor : SECRETARY On Sunday June 20 Law Enforcement Officers from your city LINDA SHEPHERD will be running the Special Olympics ' torch through Atascadero on its way to UCLA to light the cauldron and start the California Special Olympics Summer Games. TREASURER FRED RUSSELL We are hoping that you can proclaim June 20 as Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run Day K.ATCHOACHADJIAN Enclosed is a sample proclamation for your convenience . JAN BECK DICK BLANKENBURG Sincerely , GREG COATES �r/',!/✓ c/U� DOUG FILIPPONI JIM FREDENBERG PHIL GAMMONS Mary Ellen Gibson MIKE HESSER Area Director LARRY NEWMAN. M.D. ROB ROSSI DIRECTOR EMERITUS VICTORIA L. SACKSTFDER AREA DIRECTOR MARY ELLEN GIBSON Created by The Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. Foundation Authorized and Accredited by Special Olympics. Inc. • Agenda Item: B-1 Meeting Date: 6/8/93 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MAY 11, 1993 MINUTES The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Bewley, Borgeson, Kudlac, Luna and Mayor Nimmo Absent: None Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Raboin, City Clerk Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Andy Takata, Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Services; Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Art Montandon, City Attorney; Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director; Lt. Bill Watton, Police Department; Steve Sylvester, City Engineer and Kelly Heffernon, Administrative Analyst PROCLAMATIONS: Mayor Nimmo read the proclamation for "Perinatal Substance Abuse Prevention Awareness Week" and presented it to Katrina Rosa representing County Drug and Alcohol Services. In addition, he proclaimed May 16-22, 1993 as "World Trade Week". COUNCIL COMMENTS: Councilwoman Borgeson reported that she had taken several calls from residents complaining that they had received weed abatement notices after already cutting down their weeds. Staff clarified that notices were sent to all property owners • CC 05/11/93 Page 1 identified on Exhibit A of Resolution No. 21-93 and confirmed that only lots that still had weeds upon them would be abated. Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, urged staff to seek out Transportation Enhancement Act (TEA) funding available for transportation related projects. (See Item A-1 , below). Daphne Fahsing, 5105 Llano Road, read a prepared statement asking the City Council to close the Millhollin Mine until a full Environmental Impact Review (EIR) can be conducted (see Exhibit A). The City Manager mentioned that an EIR has been done on the mine and announced that this matter was scheduled for a public hearing the first meeting in June. Ms. Fahsing urged the Council to obtain a restraining order in the meantime. Councilman Kudlac inquired about the amount of truck traffic generated from the mine. Councilman Luna remarked that this information was included in the EIR. Staff was directed to ensure that this data be made a part of the staff report when the matter comes before the Council. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing commit- tees. Informative status reports were given, as follows.): 1. S.L.O. Council of Governments (COG) - Mayor Nimmo reported that COG had met Wednesday, May 5 and commented that the City would have further opportunities to apply for Transportation Enhancement Act project funding. He suggested that freeway frontage landscaping would be a worthy project. 2. County Water Advisory Board - Councilwoman Borgeson reported that the May meeting had been canceled and the next meeting would be in early June. She noted that the Board of Supervisors had invited the; City to appoint a representative to the Purveyor's Technical Advisory Group to study the Nacimiento Reservation Agreement. 3. Economic Round Table - Mayor Nimmo announced that the next meeting would be May 19, 1993 at 7:30 a.m. in Room 102 of City Hall. B. CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Nimmo read the Consent Calendar, as follows: 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1993 • CC 05/11/93 Page 2 2. RESOLUTION NO. 35-93 - Designation of no-parking zones on EI Camino Real at u-turn locations at the raised median 3. APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATES OF ACCEPTANCE A. San Andres Avenue Bridge (R. Burke Corporation) B. Graves Creek Bridge (Whitaker Contractors, Inc.) C. S. EI Camino Real Street Improvements (Whitaker Contractors, Inc.) 4. RESOLUTION NO. 24-93 - Approving City/CalTrans Traffic Signal Operational Cost-Sharing Agreement 5. RESOLUTION NO. 34-93 - Intent to enter into a cooperative agreement with S.L.O. County to establish joint participation in a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program Councilman Bewley pulled Item #B-2. MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman Kudlac to approve Consent Calendar Items #B-1 , 3, 4, & 5; motion carried unanimously by roll call vote. Re: Item #13-2. RESOLUTION NO. 35-93 - Designation of no-parking zones on EI Camino Real at u-turn locations at the raised median Councilman Bewley questioned the projected costs for signs and red-curbing and asked for a detailed report. Councilman Luna requested that staff also prepare a random sample of the general costs related to this type of project. By consensus, the matter was continued until May 25, 1993 and staff directed to prepare a cost breakdown for the specific project and a randomsample of similar projects. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None D. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. CIRCULATION ELEMENT & FINAL EIR A. Resolution No. 23-93 - Approving the adoption of an updated Circulation Element of the Atascadero General Plan (Cont'd from 4/27/93 meeting CC 05/11/93 • Page 3 with public hearing closed) Mayor Nimmo announced that the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) had advised him that they were not likely to have a formal response to the question of whether or not he has a potential conflict of interest relating to this matter until the first week in June. He stepped down from the dias and turned the gavel over to Mayor Protem Kudlac. The City Manager reported that all relevant materials had been submitted to the FPPC for their review and noted that an opinion might be rendered before the Council meeting of May 25, 1993. He pointed out, however, that two members of the Council would be absent that evening and suggested that a full Council deliberate on this important issue. In addition, he advised that should the Council move forward at this time without the mayor, the decision might result in a 2:2 vote (result = no action) and proposed that the item be put over until June 8, 1993. Brief discussion ensued. Responding to inquiry from Councilwoman Borgeson, the City Attorney explained that the question before the FPPC was as follows: May the mayor participate in decisions regarding: 1) a proposed road extension adjacent to property owned by Mayor Nimmo 2) proposed deletion of language which previously recommended the construction of a median on a road which is within 300 feet of Mayor Nimmo's undeveloped commercial property and 3) components of the general plan amendment in which he has no financial interests if those portions of the plan are segregated from the first two items. CML indicated that he did not have a problem with continuing the matter. MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman Bewley to continue the matter until June 8, 1993; motion carried 3:1 with Councilwoman Borgeson voting in opposition. 2. 3-F MEADOWS, TECORIDA AND LAS ENCINAS ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS - Informational meeting (Atascadero Street Improvement Project No. 1992) Steve Sylvester clarified that this was an opportunity for the Council and public to ask questions and noted that the protest hearing was set for June ,22, 1993. Bond Counsel, Cameron Weist, from Haight & Haight Attorneys-at-Law provided an overview of the assessment district process and responded to brief questions from Council. Public Comments: Ron Alanis, 8525 Casanova, asked when he could see some specific plans and on what was the estimate based. Steve Sylvester responded that the projected costs • were based on the engineer's preliminary overview of all the roads in the district and CC 05/11/93 Page 4 pointed out that working drawings had not yet been prepared. Cameron Weist advised that legally the assessments could not be more than what has been presented. Mike Arrambide, 7243 Del Rio Road, inquired about the City's intention to accept the roads once the improvements have been made. Steve Sylvester indicated that the City would then be obligated to accept the roads. George Knecht, 7755 Del Rio Road, referred to a letter signed by former Public Works Director, Paul Sensibaugh, in 1987 estimating improvement costs to be approximately $2,700 per lot. He asked for an explanation of the increased costs and why it has taken six years to get to this matter. Councilman Luna indicated that the former quote did not reflect City minimum road standards adopted in 1992. Henry Engen mentioned that citizens had not followed through with initiating the assessment district process and reported that the City CO had agreed to initiate it in an effort to get the needed improvements constructed. Laura Simpson, 7675 Del Rio Road, asked how the district was determined. Henry Engen explained that there had been a series of meeting with interested property owners and highlighted some of the complex legal issues surrounding many of the roads. Ed Riffel, 7500 San Gregorio Road, inquired about the status of Ropo Court and asked if it would be paved. Steve Sylvester asked for a few moments to study the map. Becky Cyester, 8450 Del Rio Road, wondered if the assessment included a cost for purchasing portions of the road. Mr. Engen indicated that there would be no need for purchase because the construction would occur within the right-of-way. He also explained that the City would accept the streets as community roads. The City Attorney added that many of the rights-of-way were held in trust by Wells Fargo Bank. He explained that by accepting the roads, the City was not acquiring ownership, but was assuming the liability. Tom Neilson, 7455 EI Rio Road, asked how bonds affect payments on the tax bill and wanted to know if the assessment would be considered an un-paid lien and if property owners would be subject to future assessments. Cameron Weist provided an explanation of the bonding and amortization processes. He assured the residents that they would not be subject to further assessments for road improvements because the City would become responsible for maintenance. Steve Sylvester, addressing Dr. Riffel's question regarding Ropo Court, reported that the street was not part of the proposed assessment district. Dr. Riffel asked who owned that section of the road and who was responsible for it. The City Engineer stated that the matter would have to be further researched. Staff was directed to determine if Ropo Court is City-maintained and to get back to Dr. Riffel. CC 05111/93 Page 5 Dean Benedix, Tecorida Avenue property owner, asked a number of questions including why the assessment district was instigated and how the costs were determined. He also asked if an EIR had been completed. Henry Engen, replied that there were no construction plans as yet and an EIR would be done when the design project goes out to bid. ---End of Public Testimony---Informational Meeting closed. The Mayor announced that the Protest Hearing would be on June 22, 1993. 3. CAMINO REAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - Informational meeting (Camino Real Improvement Project) Steve Sylvester provided a brief overview and noted that the proponents were the property owners. Cameron Weist reported that financing for this assessment district differed from that of the Street Improvement Project because the public improvements would be secured by an acquisition agreement held in trust by a major bank. There were no questions or comments from the public. 4. WIL-MAR RECYCLING CREDIT PROGRAM - Consideration of replacing the recycling coupon program Kelly Heffernon provided the staff report and presented alternatives for the current coupon program. Responding to the mayor's inquiry, Ms. Heffernnon indicated that she preferred Alternative C, replacing the coupons with periodic, special recycling events. She stated that this option would benefit the community as a whole. Council discussion followed. Public Comments: Betty Sanders, representing Wil-Mar Disposal, reminded the Council that recycling is not a revenue source for the garbage company. She noted that recycling materials pick-up and processing costs are not figured in to the collection rate. She added that the coupon served it's original purpose but reported that it was expensive to administer. In addition, Ms. Sanders asserted that Wil-Mar was overdo to have a rate review. Michelle Velasco, also of Wil-Mar, reported on a recent recycling event which she described as successful. She stated that Wil-Mar was hoping to be able to offer more specialized recycling events on the future. ---End of Public Testimony--- MOTION: By Councilman Kudlac, seconded by Councilman Luna to direct staff to CC 05/11/93 Page 6 bring back an amendment, reflecting Alternative C, to Resolution No. 96- 91 changing the recycling rebate program; motion approved unanimously. 5. LETTER FROM PASTOR TREY LITTLEJOHNS RE: CITY FACILITY POLICY Pastor Trey Littlejohns questioned the legality of the City's rental policy and asserted that there was discriminatory language relative to the use of facilities by churches. He asked that the City Council instruct the City Attorney to research case law, appoint a committee to look into the matter of "separation of church and state" and to re-write the City's policy. In addition, Pastor Littlejohns asked how it was the School District will rent to churches and the City will not. Mayor Nimmo indicated that he supported the City's policy to rent facilities to any group, including churches, for social functions; but declared that they should not be leased out to any group for religious teachings. He added that the City must avoid being asked to make decisions about who is a legitimate church and who is not. Councilman Kudlac agreed. Councilman Luna displayed an overhead of Section 5 of the State Constitution. Paraphrasing, he read the language, as follows: "Neither the legislature, or any county...city...shall ever grant anything to, or in aid, of any religious sect, church...." He stated that he had no problem renting a church on an occasional basis, but did find it difficult to believe that a long-term lease to a church would not be aiding the church. Pastor Littlejohns asserted that other cities rent to churches and do not take the position the City of Atascadero does. He argued that he wanted to use the Pavilion only when no one else was and had not demanded a long-term lease. Councilman Kudlac asked the pastor what the current status was of his church, the Christ Chapel. Pastor Littlejohns reported that his need was now irrelevant but stressed that this did not change the situation. He stated that he was still opposed to the language in the policy and emphasized that it was a matter of principle. Public Comments: Mike Arrambide proclaimed that any church has the right to rent any facility. Woody Shoemaker, 7130 Sycamore, commented that there had been a decision made regarding equal access of public buildings and cautioned that no separate policy may be made for different groups. He then asked when and how the City's policy was made. Andy Takata responded and provided an explanation of how the policy was drafted and adopted by the City Council. Mr. Shoemaker criticized the City Attorney's interpretation of the Constitution and spoke in support of allowing churches to rent CC 05/11/93 Page 7 from the City. He urged the Council to change its' policy. Councilman Luna asked the City Attorney for his legal opinion. Art Montandon clarified that the issue had become one of long-term rentals and indicated that this was the question originally asked of him when he reaffirmed the City's policy. He stated that he had advised staff against renting City facilities to churches on a long- term basis. He added that he had re-examined the matter and spoken with other city attorneys who agreed with him and had, therefore, not changed his opinion. He reiterated that granting a long-term request would subject the City to legal problems because it would appear as if the City was helping to establish a church. Additionally, he noted that the Equal Access Act referred to by the previous speaker applies to schools and not to cities. Andy Takata, at the request of Councilman Kudlac, provided background relating to the arrangements made by Pastor Littlejohns for use of the Pavilion. He emphasized that the staff told the pastor that a long-term reservation was not allowed by the rental policy and that the church was able to use it as available on a week-by-week basis most Sundays for approximately one year. Mr. Takata pointed out that staff denied, based on advise from the City Attorney, a request by Pastor Littlejohns to approve a long-term extension. Councilman Bewley asked the City Attorney if it would be a violation of the policy to . rent to a church for one day. Art Montandon indicated that he believed it would. He emphasized that the policy was drafted and adopted based on the State and Federal Constitutions. John Cole, 8710 Sierra Vista Road, implored the Council to be more flexible and allow churches to rent City buildings. Councilman Luna stated that flexibility in this situation may not be appropriate in light of the fact that each councilmembers took an oath to uphold the Constitutions of the United States and the State of California. Al Sherman, resident, agreed with Mr. Cole. ---End of Public Testimony--- Councilwoman Borgeson asked the City Attorney if the City's present policy was in conformance with the State Constitution. Mr. Montandon indicated it was. Councilwoman Borgeson stated that she would accept the advice of the attorney and made the following motion: MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson to make no change to the present policy; motion died for lack of second. MOTION: By Councilman Kudlac, seconded by Councilman Bewley to amend policy CC 05/11/93 Page 8 language by striking all references to religious sects, churches, etc., making no policy with regard to churches and allowing unlimited rental to any organization; motion failed 2:3 (Luna, Borgeson, Nimmo). MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman Kudlac'to send the matter back to staff with direction that the policy be made constitutional; and further that if staff determines that it is unconstitutional to rent to churches on a long-term basis that staff address the possibilities of renting to church groups for ceremonial occassions; motion carried 5:0. 6. ORDINANCE NO. 269 (2nd reading) - Amending Title 6 of the City's Municipal Sanitation Code relevant to placing delinquent refuse collection charges on the property tax rolls (Recommend motion to adopt on second reading by title only) MOTION: By Councilman Kudlac, seconded by Councilman Bewley to adopt Ordinance No. 269 on second reading; motion carried 4:1 (Borgeson). E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council Mayor Nimmo and Councilwoman Borgeson both announced that they would be absent for the meeting of May 25, 1993. 2. City Attorney Art Montandon revealed that he had served on the editorial board for the League of California Cities California Municipal Law Handbook and indicated that he had received a complimentary copy. 3. City Treasurer Micki Korba reported that interest rates on Orange County funds were at 8.1 %. 4. City Manager Ray Windsor asked the Council if it would stili agree to meet on May 25, 1993 despite the absence of Mayor Nimmo and Councilwoman Borgeson. He reported that there were a number of routine items staff would like to bring forward. By consensus, the Council agreed to hold the May 25th meeting. Public Comment: Resident, George Zidbeck, stated that he would have liked to speak to Item #D-6. The mayor apologized for having overlooked him. CC 05/11/93 Page 9 THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:30 P.M. THE NEXT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE TUESDAY, MAY 25, 1993 AT 7:00 P.M. MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY: LSENXBOIN, Ci Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A (Fahsing) • CC 05/11/93 Page 10 Atascadero City Council , Tuesday, May 11 , 1993 Public Comment Period My name is Daphne Fahsing. I live at 5105 Llano, not far from the Milhollen Mine, or quarry; on Santa Lucia . I 'm requesting this mine immediately be declared a Public Nuisance and a restraining order imposed, pending' a full Environmental Impact Report . An EIR should be required to determine the environmental effects of the 1980 decision to allow the contractor (the County) to level the property . Apart from traffic hazards, and annoyance from tractor operations, huge, double trailer trucks cause dust , noise and gas emissions . Every time a truck goes by our property, the exhaust drifts over, and is quite sickening. People living within sight and sound of this mine find their property devaluating more every day, as the formerly beautiful hillsides are levelled, leaving ugly, raw scars . I understand this mine is authorized to operate under a 1980 permit by the County. But times have changed since 1980. Because effects on the environment were not addressed, or were overlooked in 1980, is no reason to allow environmental destruction now that we know better. Such an operation is totally inappropriate in a residential area . I ask that the City take this initiative with an immediate restraining order on the Milhollen Mine because of an existing Public Nuisance; and that a full Environmental Impact Report be required before any more dirt can be removed . Thank you. Agenda Item: B-2 Meeting Date: 6/8/93 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MAY 25, 1993 MINUTES The Mayor ,called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilperson Luna led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Bewley, Luna and Mayor Protem Kudlac Absent: Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Nimmo (vacation) Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Raboin, City Clerk Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Andy Takata, Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Services; Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Art Montandon, City Attorney; Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director; Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief and Bud McHale, Police Chief PROCLAMATION: Mayor Protem Kudlac read the proclamation for "Zoo & AquariumMonth 1993" and presented it to Lindsey Hampton on behalf of the San Luis Obispo'County Zoological Society. Ms. Hampton invited all to Conservation Day at the Zoo on Saturday, June 5, 1993. COMMUNITY FORUM: Pastor Trey Littlejohns, Christ Chapel, continued dialogue regarding church use of City facilities and reiterated that, in his opinion, current City policy is discriminating. He asked for clarification of what Council direction was given to the City Attorney at the CC 05/11/93 • Page 1 meeting of May 11 , 1993. Art Montandon explained that he had been ordered to re- draft the City's policy to allow building usage within constitutional limits. Pastor Littlejohns argued that the California Constitution provides for free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing committees. Informative status reports were given, as follows.): 1. Traffic Committee - Councilman Bewley reported that the committee had met Wednesday, May 19 and heard public complaints regarding speeding on Carmelita Avenue. In addition, he indicated that the committee had approved recommendations regarding a loading zone at the Lake Park Pavilion and red curbing on San Luis Avenue. These items, he added, would be before the Council at the next meeting. B. CONSENT CALENDAR: The Mayor read the Consent Calendar, as follows: 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - April 27, 1993 2. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - April 1993 • 3. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT - April 1993 4. TPM 18-90 - TIME EXTENSION REQUEST 7970 SINALOA (Best/Cuesta Engineering 5. RESOLUTION NO. 38-93 - REPLACING WIL-MAR RECYCLING COUPON WITH COMMUNITY WIDE RECYCLING EVENTS 6. AWARD OF BID NO. 93-3 FOR WEED ABATEMENT 7. AWARD OF PROPOSAL FOR DIAL-A-RIDE PHONE SYSTEM 8. AWARD OF PROPOSAL FOR AUDITING SERVICES 9. RESOLUTION NO. 39-93 - APPROVING YEAR-END BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS Councilman Luna pulled Item #13-2. Resident, Eric Greening, pulled Item #B-1 MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman Bewley to approve • CC 05/11/93 Page 2 Consent Calendar Items #13-3 through B-9; motion carried 3:0 by roll call vote. Re: Item #B-1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - April 27, 1993 Mr. Greening asked that the Minutes be amended by adding the word, "intermittent" to "Class II Bike Lanes" under his comments regarding the Circulation Element on page 4 of the Minutes. MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman Bewley to approve the Minutes as amended; motion carried unanimously. Re: Item #13-2. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - April 1993 Councilman Luna noted that two copies of an amended report had been received and asked for clarification. The City Treasurer explained that the report had been amended after the agenda had been run. It was determined that the Council had been given the amended report twice. MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman Bewley to approve the City Treasurer's Report for April 1993; motion carried unanimously. C. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES: 1. WEED ABATEMENT 1993 PROTEST HEARING Chief McCain provided the introduction. Public Comments: Jeff Hendrix, property owner, noted he had sixty-four acres of hay planted on Santa Barbara Road and wondered if the weed abatement order applied to him. Chief McCain explained that the notice did not apply to land planted in crops. ---End of Public Testimony--- MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman Bewley to direct the Fire Chief or his authorized representatives to abate the nuisance of noxious or dangerous weeds on the lots identified in Resolution No. 21-93; motion carried 3:0 by roll call vote. CC 05/11/93 Page 3 D. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CYCLE 93-1 - CONSIDERATION OF INITIATION OF THREE (3) PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'SGENERAL PLAN Henry Engen provided the staff report and recommendation to initiate three General Plan amendments for analysis and action in the first cycle of 1993,. He noted that the number of lots identified in GPA 93-3 had been revised from five to six. Public Comments: Rush Kolemaine, Box 1990 Atascadero, suggested that commercial development might be encouraged if the Urban Services Line (USL) south east of the Fashion Outlet project on Del Rio was extended. Henry Engen explained that this matter had already been addressed in 1991 when the General Plan was updated. He stated that the sentiment at that time did not favor opening up any major proposed changes to the USL. He pointed out that GPA 93-3 is an adjustment to pick up land already commercially zone and would not invite new commercial land expansion. Councilman Bewley asked what it would take for others to hook up. Mr. Engen reported that property owners are capable of requesting a general plan amendment; but cautioned that a conflict in policy would arise if the USL is moved and sewer service is provided to residential suburban zoning without changing the Land Use Map of the General Plan. Councilman Bewley stated that he thought it would be worthwhile to look at what it would take to sewer the other side' of the street. MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman Bewley to approve the initiation of GPA 31-2, 93-2 and 93-3 for analysis and action in the first cycle of 1993; motion carried unanimously. 2. APPROVAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES GRANT APPLICATION Henry Engen presented the staff report and recommendation to approve retaining David Morrow, Environmental Consultant,to prepare and submit grant applications for Transportation Enhancement Act (TEA) funding. He reported that there were two specific projects being proposed: a phased program for landscaping Highway 101 and assistance in the acquisition of Stadium Park. Mr. Engen suggested that the Council may want to study, perhaps at Budget Review, the Capital Improvement Plan and look at a strategy for approaching competitive grant applications. CC 05/11/93 Page 4 • Councilman Bewley remarked it was frustrating to have to hire consultants and asserted that someone on staff should be capable of preparing the grant applications. Mr. Engen noted that Kelly Heffernon would be participatingin, and therefore receiving in-house training on, the grant-writing process. Councilman Luna expressed concern that Atascadero is not getting its' fair share of funding through the Council of Governments (COG). Public Comments: Eric Greening spoke in support of the staff recommendation claim;,.ing it to be a "win- win" situation. He asked the Community Development Director when and to whom letters in support of the acquisition of Stadium Park could be addressed. Mr. Engen remarked that letters should be delivered to him and that they will become part of the grant application documentation. Rush Kolemaine asked if the proposed action would preclude any other groups or organizations outside of City government from making application and from whom should they get information regarding grants. Mr. Engen indicated that the recommendation would not preclude others from pursuing grant funding and reported that relevant information could be obtained from COG. ---End of Public Testimony--- The City Clerk noted for the record that Councilwoman Borgeson had prepared a memo to the Council in support of the staff recommendation (see Exhibit A). MOTION: By Councilman Bewley, seconded by Councilman' Luna to approve retaining David Morrow, Environmental Consultant, on a contingency basis to submit applications on behalf of the City for a phased program for landscaping Highway 101 and to assist with the acquisition of Stadium Park; motion carried 3:0. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 35-93 - DESIGNATING NO PARKING ZONES ON SOUTH EL CAMINO REAL (Continued from 5/11/93 for cost analysis), Henry Engen presented the staff report and explained that the previous cost analysis had been significantly reduced. MOTION: By Councilman Bewley, seconded by Councilman Luna to approve Resolution No. 35-93; motion carried 3:0 by roll call vote. CC 05/11/93 • Page 5 4. NACIMIENTO RESERVATION AGREEMENT PURVEYOR'S TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP APPOINTMENT The City Manager reported that although Atascadero Mutual Water Company is the water purveyor, the County Engineer had extended the courtesy of offering City representation on the technical advisory group. Councilman Luna volunteered to serve. Mayor Protem Kudlac indicated that Councilwoman Borgeson had expressed an interest in participating. MOTION: By Councilman Bewley, seconded by Mayor Protem Kudlac to appoint Councilman Luna as the technical advisory group representative and, further, appointing Councilwoman Borgeson as the alternate; motion carried 3:0 by voice vote. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Treasurer Micki Korba reported that she would be attending a State budget seminar in Sacramento later in the week. In addition, she announced that she would be bringing a resolution of authorization for obtaining Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes for the fiscal year 1993-94 at the next Council meeting. CLOSED SESSION: At 7:53 p.m., the City Council adjourned to a Closed Session for purposes of discussions relating to: 1 . Potential Litigation - Said session held pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a). and 2. Pending Litigation entitled, Lee v. City of Atascadero - Said session held pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9. THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL WILL BE TUESDAY JUNE 6, 1993 AT 7:00 P.M. MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A (Borgeson) CC 05/11/93 • Page 6 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: B-3 CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Andy Takata, Asst. City Manager Meeting Date: 6/8/93 From: Micki Korba, City Treasurer_/;V� SUBJECT: Approving FY 93-94 Tax and Revenue Anticipation (TRANS) Notes. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No. 45-93, authorizing the issuance of the FY 93-94 TRANS, in an amount not to exceed $3, 500, 000 . BACKGROUND: Last November, 1992, the City issued its first TRANS, in the amount of $2, 000,000. At that time, Council recommended staff pursue pooled efforts for FY 93-94. At the same time, the League of California Cities offered a statewide TRANS pool for FY 93-94, which Atascadero considered participating in. However, due to a deadline we were unaware of and a relatively small sizing (approximately $1.2 million) , we have no choice but to proceed with the Bank of America TRANS. In addition to the resolution, the time schedule and draft contract of purchase agreements are attached, for Council review. They are virtually identical to the materials submitted last year. The material has been reviewed by the City Attorney. OPTION: 1. ) Council could decline to pursue the TRANS': This would result in the City' s General Fund operating in a cash deficit condition for the first five months of the upcoming fiscal year. Other funds would then be required to subsidize the General Fund' s short-term cash position. This would have the effect of reducing interest earnings for those funds. FISCAL IMPACT• If a $2, 000, 000 (or hopefully $2,500,000) TRANS is issued at 3 .25 percent interest (or less depending on Moody Rating) , and assuming a spread of 4 percentage points (the difference between the TRANS interest rate and our own investment earnings rate) , the City' s General Fund should net more than $20, 000 in revenues, after the cost of issuance. In addition, the TRANS will facilitate higher interest earnings for the City's'; other funds. � r RESOLUTION NO. 45_93 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF 1993-94 TAX AND REVENUE ANTICIPATION NOTES WHEREAS, in accordance with Article 7 .6 of Chapter 4, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Code") , entitled "Temporary Borrowing, " the City Council of the City of Atascadero California (the "City Council") , intends to issue 1993-94 Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes (the "Notes") of the City of Atascadero, California (the "City") , in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed -" $3,500,000; and - WHEREAS, the City .Council hereby finds and determines that the City needs to borrow funds in an amount not to exceed A $3,500,000 in fiscal year 1993-94 for authorized purposes of the City and the City Council intends to authorize for that purpose the issuance of, and offer for sale, tax and revenue anticipation notes of the City in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed "' $3,500,000 (the "Notes") pursuant to the cited provisions of the Code, to be applied for any purposes for which the City, is authorized to expend moneys; and WHEREAS, the Notes may bear interest not exceeding twelve percent (12%) per annum, as permitted by Section 53531 of the Code, notwithstanding Section 53584 of the Code; and WHEREAS, the Notes will not be outstanding after the period ending 13 months from the date on which the Notes are issued and will not be issued in an amount greater than the maximum anticipated cumulative cash flow deficit of the City to be financed by the anticipated tax or other revenue sources for which such taxes or other revenues are anticipated and during which such Notes are outstanding, all as provided in Treasury Regulation 1.103-14 (c) under the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended (together with the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, the "Tax Code") ; and WHEREAS, the City hereby designates its City Treasurer (the "Treasurer") to serve as fiscal agent, paying agent and as agent for the City in matters relating to the Pledged Revenues (defined below) ; and WHEREAS, Bank of America, NT&SA (the "Underwriter")-, has submitted to the City an offer to purchase all of said Notes at a discount to be established prior to execution of a R0932LAW 1 1531535 B 3- )-- Contract of Purchase (the "Contract of Purchase") , and the City Council desires to have the Underwriter purchase the Notes on the terms to be stated therein; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero hereby resolves as follows: Section 1. Authorization of Issuance of Notes; Terms Thereof. Subject to the conditions set forth in Section 6 below, the City Council hereby determines to, and shall, issue an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $3,500,000 of its 1993-94 Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes (the "Notes") ; to be numbered from 1 consecutively upwards in order of issuance; to be in the denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, as directed by the Underwriter; to be dated the date of delivery thereof; to mature (without option of prior redemption) on the date and in the amounts stated in the Notes, such maturity date to be no more than 364 days from the date of delivery thereof nor more ,than 13 months after the date on which the Notes are issued; and to bear interest, payable at maturity and computed on a 30-day month/360-day year basis, at the rate determined at the time of sale thereof to the Underwriter, but not in excess of twelve percent (12%) per annum. Both the principal of and the interest on the Notes shall be payable, but only upon surrender thereof, in lawful money of the United States of America in accordance with the provisions of Section 2 hereof. Section 2 . Form of Notes. The Notes will be delivered in book-entry-only form by appointing the Depository Trust Company ("DTC") , 55 Water Street, 19th Floor, New York, New York 10041, to act as securities depository for the Notes. A single Note, substantially in the form of Exhibit A hereto, representing all of the outstanding '•Notes, will be executed and, on the day prior to closing, delivered to DTC. There shall be printed on the reverse of, or attached to, each Note the legal opinion of Buchalter, Nemer, Field & Younger respecting the validity of the Notes and exclusion of the interest thereon from gross income for federal income tax purposes and the exemption of such interest from State of California personal income taxes. Upon closing, the City shall notify DTC at which time DTC (in accordance with the Letter of Representations defined below) will credit the account of the Underwriter, and process the book-entry deliveries to the accounts of the subsequent purchasers of interests in the Notes. The single Note will be lodged with DTC until maturity of the Notes. On the date of maturity of the Notes, the Treasurer shall remit to DTC sufficient funds to pay all outstanding principal and interest due with respect to the Notes. R0932LAW 2 1531535 .9-3. 3 The City Manager and the Treasurer are hereby instructed to take all action necessary in order to qualify the Notes with DTC for book-entry-only issuance, including entering into a Letter of Representations with DTC (the "Letter of Representations") setting forth the terms and conditions of, and procedures for the book-entry-only form of issuance and, with the assistance of the Underwriter, the completion of and delivery to DTC's Underwriting Department of the requisite Eligibility Questionnaire in the form required by DTC not later than ten (10) business days prior to closing. DTC shall act as clearing agent with respect to the payment of principal and interest on the Notes to the subsequent purchasers thereof. Section 3 . Deposit of Note Proceeds. The moneys representing the proceeds of sale of the Notes shall be deposited into the City's general fund. Following such deposit, said proceeds shall be withdrawn and expended by the City for any lawful purpose for which the City is authorized to expend moneys, including, but not limited to, current expenses, capital expenditures and the discharge of any obligation of indebtedness of the City. Section 4. Payment of Notes. (A) Source of Payment. The principal amount of the Notes, together with the interest thereon, shall be payable from taxes, income, revenue, cash receipts and other moneys which are received by the City during fiscal year 1993-94 and which are available therefor. Pursuant to Section 53857 of the Code, the Notes shall be the general obligations of the City, and to the extent the Notes are not paid from the Pledged Revenues identified below, the Notes shall be paid with interest thereon from any other moneys of the City lawfully available therefor, as provided in this Resolution of the City Council and otherwise by law. (B) Pledged Revenues. As security for the payment of principal of and interest on the Notes, by this Resolution, the City hereby pledges an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the principal amount of the Notes from the first unrestricted revenues received by the City during the month ending April 30, 1994; an amount equal to thirty percent (30%) of the principal amount of the Notes from the first unrestricted revenues received by the City during the month ending May 31, 1994; and an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the principal amount of the Notes, plus an amount sufficient to pay interest on the Notes, from the first unrestricted revenues received by the City in the month ending June 30, 1994 (such pledged amounts being hereinafter called R0932LAW 3 1531535 • the "Pledged Revenues") . The term "unrestricted revenues" shall mean taxes, income, revenue, cash receipts and other moneys of the City, as provided in Section 53856 of the Code, which are intended as receipts for the general fund of the City and which are generally available for the payment of current expenses and other obligations of the City. There is hereby established and created the special fund designated in paragraph (C) below, to be maintained by the Treasurer in the name and on behalf of the City, into which the Treasurer shall promptly deposit all Pledged Revenues of the City when and as received, without further permission of or instruction by the City Council. From the dates of receipt by the 'Treasurer of any Pledged Revenues, the City shall have no right, title or interest therein, and the Treasurer shall have the sole right of withdrawal from the Repayment Fund hereinafter established for the purposes described in this Resolution. The principal of the Notes and the interest thereon shall be a first lien and charge against and shall be payable from the first moneys received by the City constituting such Pledged Revenues, as provided by law. In the event there are insufficient unrestricted revenues received by the City to permit the deposit into the Repayment Fund (as hereinafter defined) of the City of the full amount of Pledged Revenues required hereunder to be ideposited from unrestricted revenues in a given month, then S the amount of any deficiency shall be satisfied and made up from the first additional moneys of the City received and lawfully available for the repayment of the Notes and the interest thereon. (C) Deposit of Pledged Revenues in Repayment Fund. The Pledged Revenues for the City shall be held by the Treasurer in a special fund designated as the "City of Atascadero, California, 1993-94 Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes Repayment Fund" (herein called the "Repayment Fund") , and applied as directed in this Resolution-. Moneys placed in the Repayment Fund shall be for the sole benefit of the holders of the Notes, and until the Notes and all interest thereon are paid in full or until provision has been made for the payment of the Notes at maturity with interest to such date, the moneys in the Repayment Fund shall be applied only for the purposes for which the Repayment Fund was created. (D) Disbursement and Investment of Moneys in Repayment Fund. From the date this Resolution takes effect, all Pledged Revenues shall, when received, be deposited into the Repayment Fund. After such date as the amount of the Pledged Revenues deposited in the Repayment Fund shall be sufficient to pay in full the principal of and interest on the R0932LAW 4 1531535 a Notes, when due, any moneys in excess of such amount remaining in or accruing to the Repayment Fund shall be transferred to the general fund of the City. On the maturity date of the Notes, moneys on deposit in the Repayment Fund shall be used, to the extent necessary, to pay the principal of and interest on the Notes. Moneys in the Repayment Fund, to the greatest extent possible, shall be invested in investment securities by the Treasurer, as permitted by applicable California law, as now in effect and as it may be amended, modified or supplemented from time to time. Section 5. Execution of Notes. The Treasurer is directed to cause to be lithographed, printed or engraved a sufficient number of blank Notes of suitable quality, showing on their face the interest rate(s) applicable thereto. The Treasurer, or any designated deputy thereof, is hereby authorized to sign the Notes manually, and the City Manager is hereby authorized to sign the Notes manually or by facsimile signature and the City Clerk is hereby authorized to countersign the Note manually or by use of his or her facsimile signature and said City Clerk is hereby authorized to affix the seal of the City thereto by facsimile impression thereof, and said officers are hereby authorized to cause the blank spaces on the form of Notes to be filled in prior to initial delivery as may be appropriate. Section 6 . Approval of Contract of Purchase. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute and deliver a Contract of Purchase, in the form to be delivered by the Underwriter, on such 'terms as the City Manager may approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by his execution and delivery thereof; provided, however, that the maximum effective interest rate on the Notes shall not exceed A four percent 4.0$ per annum and the discount which the City Manager may approve shall not exceed "' one percent 1.0% of the par amount of the Notes. The City Manager is further authorized to determine the maximum principal amount of Notes to be specified in the Contract of Purchase for sale by the City, not to exceed � $3,500,000, and to enter into and execute the Contract of Purchase with the Underwriter, if the conditions set forth in this Resolution are satisfied. Section 7 . Delivery of Notes. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to deliver the Notes to Underwriter upon payment therefor in accordance with the Contract of Purchase. All actions heretofore taken with respect to the sale and issuance of the Notes are hereby approved, confirmed and ratified, and the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed, for and in the name and on R0932LAW 5 1531535 behalf of the City, to do any and all things and take any and all actions and execute and deliver any and all certificates, agreements and other documents, including but not limited to those described in the Contract of Purchase, which may be deemed necessary or advisable in order to consummate the lawful issuance and delivery of the Notes in accordance with this Resolution. Section 8. Bond Counsel. The law firm of Buchalter, Nemer, Fields & Younger, a Professional Corporation, Los Angeles, California, is hereby appointed as Bond Counsel for the issuance of the Notes. Section 9. Approval of Preliminary Official Statement and Official Statement. The Underwriter is hereby authorized to prepare a Preliminary and a Final official Statement to be used in connection with the offering and sale of the Notes and the City Manager is hereby authorized to approve the Official Statement, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by his execution thereof for and on behalf of the City. Section 10. Rebate Exception. The City intends to qualify under the "small governmental unit" exception of Section 148 (f) (4) (C) of the Tax Code to be exempt from the rebate requirements of Section 148 (f) (2) of the Tax Code, and, therefore, the aggregate face amount of all tax;-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds) issued by the City (and all subordinate entities thereof) during the 1993 calendar year, which is the calendar year in which the- Notes are issued, is not reasonably expected to exceed $5, 000,000. Section 11. Bank Qualification. The City Council specifically finds, determines and declares that the Notes are designated to be "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 165 (b) (3) of the Tax Code. In connection with this designation, the City Council hereby represents that it intends to issue less than $10,000,000 .in tax-exempt obligations for calendar year 1993, including the Notes. R0932LAW 6 1531535 Section 12 . This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting this resolution. On motion by Councilperson and seconded by Councilperson the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney City= Clerk R0932LAW 7 1531535 d F 3 d EXHIBIT A CITY OF ATASCADERO COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO STATE OF CALIFORNIA 1993-94 TAX AND REVENUE ANTICIPATION NOTE Dated Date: Maturity Date: July _, 1993 July _, 1994 Principal Amount: CUSIP: FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the City of Atasca►dero, San Luis Obispo County, California ("City") , acknowledges itself indebted to and promises to pay to CEDE & CO. , or registered assigns, at the office of the Treasurer of the City the principal sum of DOLLARS ($ ) , in lawful money of the United States of America, on July _, 1994, together with interest thereon at the rate of percent (_%) per annum computed on a ', 30-day month/360-day year basis, in lawful money of the United States of America from the date hereof until payment in full of said principal sum. Both the principal of and interest on this note shall be payable only upon surrender of this note -at the office of the Treasurer of the City as the note shall fall due; provided, however, that no interest shall be payable for any period after maturity during which the holder hereof fails properly to present this note for payment. It is hereby certified, recited and declared that this is one of an authorized issue of notes in the aggregate principal amount of dollars ($ ) , all of like date, tenor and effect, made, executed and given pursuant to and by authority of a resolution duly passed and adopted on , 1993, by the City Council of the City of Atascadero, under and by authority of Article 7.6 (commencing with Section 53850) of Chapter 4, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5, California Government Code, and that all acts, conditions and things required to exist, happen and be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this note have existed, happened and been performed in regular and due time, form and manner as required by law, and that this note, together with all other indebtedness and obligations of the City, does not exceed any limit prescribed by the Constitution or laws of the State of California. R0932LAW 8 1531535 5 5 The principal amount of the notes, together with the interest thereon, shall be payable from taxes, income, revenue, cash receipts and other moneys which are received by the City during fiscal year 1993-94 . As security for the payment of the principal of and interest on the notes, the City has pledged an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the principal amount of the Notes from the first unrestricted revenues received by the City in the month ending April 30, 1994; an amount equal to thirty percent (30%) of the principal amount of the notes from the first unrestricted revenues received by the City in the month ending May 31, 1994; and an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the principal amount of the notes plus an amount sufficient to pay interest on the notes, from the first unrestricted revenues of the City to be received in the month ending June 30, 1994 (such pledged amounts being hereinafter called the "Pledged Revenuesn) , and the principal of the notes and the interest thereon shall be payable from the Pledged Revenues, and to the extent not so paid shall be paid from any other moneys of the City lawfully available therefor. Unless this note is presented by an authorized representative of DTC to the City or its agent for registration of transfer, exchange or payment, any Note issued will be registered in the name of Cede & Co. or such other name as requested by an authorized representative of DTC and any payment is made to Cede & Co. , ANY TRANSFER, PLEDGE OR R0932LAW 9 1531535 )6-316 OTHER USE HEREOF FOR VALUE OR OTHERWISE BY OR TO ANY PERSON IS WRONGFUL SINCE THE REGISTERED OWNER HEREOF, CEDE & CO., HAS AN INTEREST HEREIN. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City Manager and the City Treasurer of the City of Atascadero, California, have executed this note and have caused it to be countersigned by the City Clerk, which signatures may be facsimile signatures, except that one of such signatures shall be manual, and have caused a facsimile of its official seal to be printed hereon as of this day of July, 1993 . By City Manager By City Treasurer [SEAL] Countersigned: By City Clerk R0932LAW 10 1531535 Z- --;, // r r $ CITY OF ATASCADERO 1993-1994 TAX AND REVENUE ANTICIPATION NOTES CONTRACT OF PURCHASE July , 1992 City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, California 93422 ATTENTION CITY TREASURER: The undersigned, Bank of America NT&SA (the "Underwriter"), offers to enter into this Contract of Purchase (the "Contract of Purchase") with the City of Atascadero (the "City"). This offer is made subject to written acceptance by the City prior to 11:59 p.m. California Time on the date hereof, and, upon such acceptance, this Contract of Purchase will be binding upon the City and the Underwriter. 1. Purchase and Sale of the Notes Upon the terms and conditions and in reliance upon the representations, warranties and agreements herein set forth, the Underwriter hereby agrees to purchase from the City for reoffering to the public, and the City hereby agrees to sell to the Underwriter for such purpose, all (but not less than all) of the City's 1993-1994 Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes, (the "Notes") issued on the Issue Date, as defined below, in the aggregate principal amount of$ The aggregate purchase price to be paid by the Underwriter for the Notes shall be the principal amount thereof plus a premium of$ and less a discount of$ for a total of$ plus accrued interest, if any. 2. The Notes. The Notes shall be dated July_, 1992 (the "Issue Date"), shall mature July 1993, and shall otherwise be as described in and shall be issued and secured pursuant to the provisions of Resolution number of the Atascadero City Council adopted on June_, 1993 (the "Resolution"), and Article 7.6, Chapter 4, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 (commencing with Section 53850)of the California Government Code (the "Act"), as amended and supplemented. The Notes will bear interest at the rate of_% per annum. The aggregate principal amount of the Notes shall be $ . The Notes will 1 be initially issued as a single note registered initially in the name of "Cede & Co." as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC") in New York, N.Y., the securities depository for the Notes. 3. Use of Documents. The City has delivered to the Underwriter copies of the Preliminary Official Statement dated . 1993 (the "Preliminary Official Statement"). As of its date, such Preliminary Official Statement has been "deemed final" by the City for purposes of Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 (b) (1). The City agrees to deliver to the Underwriter a final Official Statement, dated the date hereof(the "Official Statement")within 7 days of the date hereof. The number of Official Statements so delivered will be sufficient to comply with Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12(b)(4)and the Rules of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City has approved the distribution by the Underwriter of the Official Statement and hereby authorizes the Underwriter to use, in connection with the offer.and sale of the Notes, the Official Statement and the Resolution and all information contained herein and therein and all other documents, agreements, certificates or statements furnished by the City to the Underwriter or entered into in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Contract of Purchase. 4. Public Offering of the Notes. The Underwriter agrees to make a bona fide public offering of the Notes at the price or yield set forth on the cover of the Official Statement; provided that in connection with this initial offering, the Underwriter may overallot or effect transactions which stabilize or maintain the market price of the Notes at a level above that which might otherwise prevail in the open market. Such stabilizing, if commenced, may be discontinued at any time. The Underwriter may offer and sell the Notes to certain dealers and banks at prices lower than the public offering price stated on the cover of the Official Statement and said public offering price may be changed from time to time by the Underwriter. 5. Closing. At 9:00 a.m., California Time, on July_, 1993, or at such other time and on such other date as shall have been mutually agreed upon by the City and the Underwriter(the "Closing"), the City will deliver to the Underwriter through DTC the Notes in definitive form duly executed and other documents hereinafter mentioned, and the Underwriter will accept such delivery and pay the purchase price thereof in immediately available funds to the order of the City. 6. &presentations. Warranties nd Agreements of the City. The City hereby represents, warrants and agrees with the Underwriter that: 2 13 e (A) The City is a political subdivision of the State of California (the "State") duly organized and operating pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the State, and has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business, to adopt the Resolution, to execute and deliver this Contract of Purchase, and to perform all of its obligations under this Contract of Purchase and the Resolution. (B) (i) At or prior to the Closing, the City will have taken all action required to be taken by it to authorize the issuance and delivery of the Notes; (ii) the City has full legal right, power and authority to enter into this Contract of Purchase and to adopt the Resolution and to perform its obligations under each such document or instrument, and to carry out and effectuate the transactions contemplated by this Contract of Purchase and the Resolution;(iii)the execution and delivery of the Notes e Ci of the Resolution and the performance by the City and this Contract of Purchase, the adoption by the City of the obligations contained herein and therein have been duly authorized and such authorization will be in full force and effect at the time of the Closing; (iv) this Contract of Purchase has been duly executed and delivered and constitutes the valid and legally binding obligation of the City enforceable against the City in accordance with its terms except as limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium and other similar laws in effect for the protection of debtors and by application of general principles of equity; (v) the City has duly authorized the consummation by it of all transactions contemplated by this Contract of Purchase;and(vi)the City has authorized and approved the Preliminary Official Statement and the Official Statement and the distribution thereof by the Underwriter. (C) No consent, approval, authorization, license, order, filing, registration, qualification, election or referendum, of or by any person, organization, court or governmental agency or public body whatsoever, is required for the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, except for such actions as have been taken or as may be necessary to qualify the Notes for offer and sale under the Blue Sky or other securities laws and regulations of such states and jurisdictions of the United States as the Underwriter may designate. (D) All Notes will be issued only under and within the limits of the Act, and, as such, are general obligations of the City, but payable only out of certain taxes, income, revenue, cash receipts and other moneys to be received by the City attributable to fiscal year 1993-1994 and lawfully available for the payment thereof (the "1993-1994 Revenues"). 3 r (E) The City has complied in all respects with the Act and, in so far as it relates to the Notes, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the "Code"). (F)- The issuance of the Notes, the execution, delivery and performance of this Contract of Purchase and the Notes,the adoption and performance of the Resolution, and compliance with the provisions hereof and thereof do not conflict with or constitute on the part of the City a violation of the Constitution and laws of the State and do not conflict with or result in a violation or breach of, or constitute a default, under any agreement, indenture, mortgage, lease or other instrument to which the City is a party or by which it is bound or to which it is subject. (G) To the best knowledge of the City, as of the time of acceptance hereof, there is no action, suit, proceeding, inquiry or investigation, at law or in equity, before any court or public body, pending or threatened against the City: (i) in any way affecting the existence of the City or in any way challenging the respective powers of the City or the entitlement of the officials of the City to their respective offices; or (ii) seeking to restrain or enjoin the sale, issuance or delivery of any of the Notes; the application of the proceeds of the sale of the Notes, or the collection of revenues or taxes of the City pledged or to be pledged or available to pay the principal of and interest on the Notes, or the pledge thereof, or in any way contesting the validity of the Notes, this Contract of Purchase or the Resolution, or contesting the powers or authority of the City with respect to the Notes, the Resolution or this Contract of Purchase; or (iii) in which a final adverse decision could (a) materially adversely affect the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Contract of Purchase, (b)declare this Contract of Purchase to be invalid or unenforceable in whole or in material part, or(c) adversely affect the exclusion from gross income of the interest paid on the Notes for purposes of federal income taxation and the exemption of such interest from State income taxation. (I) The audited balance sheet of the City as of June 30 1992, and the related statements of revenues, expenditures and changes in financial position for the fiscal year ended on such date, as set forth in the Official Statement, are true and-correct and fairly present the financial condition of the City as of such date and the results of its operations for such fiscal year. There has been no material adverse change in the financial condition of the City since June 30, 1992, except as described in the Official Statement. 4 ,8- , i.-5 f (I) To the best knowledge of the City, as of the date thereof, the Preliminary Official Statement did not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, except for information permitted to be omitted therefrom by Rule 15c2-12(b)(1) of the Securities and Exchange Commission. (J) To the best knowledge of the City, as of the date thereof, the Official Statement does not and will not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. If between the date of the Official Statement and the Closing (i) any event shall occur or any pre-existing fact or condition shall become known which might or would cause the Official Statement, as then supplemented or amended, to contain any untrue statement df a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, the City shall promptly notify the Underwriter thereof, and (ii) if in the reasonable opinion of the Underwriter, such event, fact or condition requires the preparation and publication of a supplement or amendment to the Official Statement, the City will at its expense supplement or amend the Official Statement in a form and in a manner approved by the Underwriter, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. (K) The City undertakes that, for a period beginning with the day on which the Notes are delivered to the Underwriter and ending on the earlier of(i) the 25th day following the end of the underwriting period, as defined in Rule 15c2-12(e)(2)under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or (ii) 90 days following Closing, it will (i) apprise the Underwriter of all material developments, if any, occurring with respect to the City and (ii) if requested by the Underwriter, prepare a supplement to the Official Statement in respect of any such material event; provided, however, that the out-of-pocket costs and expenses, including legal fees and expenses, associated with providing any such supplement, will be borne by the Underwriter. Unless otherwise notified in writing by the Underwriter, the City may assume that the end of this underwriting period occurs on the date the City delivers the Notes to the Underwriter. (L) Between the date hereof and the Closing, without the prior written consent of the Underwriter, the City will not have issued any bonds, notes or other obligations for borrowed money except for such borrowing as may be described in or contemplated by the Official Statement. 5 (M) The City has not been notified of any listing or proposed listing by the Internal Revenue Service to the effect that the City is a bond issuer whose arbitrage certificates may not be relied upon. (N) Any certificates signed by any official of the City and delivered to the Underwriter shall be deemed a representation and warranty by the City to the Underwriter as to the statements made therein but not of the person signing the same. 7. Covenants of the City. The City covenants and agrees with the Underwriter that: (A) The City will punctually pay or cause to be paid the principal of and interest on the Notes in strict conformity with the terms of the Resolution and the Notes and it will faithfully observe and perform all of the conditions, covenants and.requirements of the Notes and the Resolution. (B) The City will not incur any indebtedness, other than the Notes as provided for in the Resolution, for money borrowed which may or must be repaid from the 1993-1994 Revenues except to the extent that such other indebtedness will not be secured by a pledge of the 1993-1994 Revenues that ranks prior to or on a parity with the pledge thereof created by Section of the Resolution. (C) The City will furnish such information, execute such instruments and take such other action in cooperation with the Underwriter if and as the Underwriter may reasonably request in order(i)to qualify the Notes for offer and sale under the Blue Sky or other securities laws and regulations of such states and jurisdictions of the United States as the Underwriter may designate and(ii)to determine the eligibility of the Notes for investment under the laws of such states and other jurisdictions and will, if requested by the Underwriter, use its best efforts to continue such qualifications in effect so long as required for distribution of the Notes; provided that the City shall not be required to subject itself to service of process in any jurisdiction in which it is not presently so subject. (D) Between the date hereof and the Closing, the City will not modify or amend the Resolution without the prior written consent of the Underwriter. 8. Conditions to Obligations of Underwriter at Closing. The Underwriter has entered into this Contract of Purchase in reliance upon the representations and warranties of the City contained herein 6 and the performance by the City of its obligations hereunder, as of the date hereof and as of the Closing. The obligation of the Underwriter to purchase the Notes at the Closing is subject to the following further conditions, any or all of which can be waived by the Underwriter in writing: (A) The representations and warranties of the City contained herein shall be true and correct in all material respects at the date hereof and at and as of the Closing, as if made at and as of the Closing, and the statements made in all certificates and other documents delivered to the Underwriter at the Closing and otherwise pursuant hereto shall be true and correct in all material respects at and as of the Closing; (B) At and as of the Closing (i)the Official Statement, this Contract of Purchase and the Resolution shall be in full force and effect and shall not have been amended, modified or supplemented except as may have been agreed to in writing by the Underwriter; (ii) all actions under the Act which, in the opinion of Buchalter, Nemer, Fields & Younger and the Underwriter, shall be necessary in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby, shall have been duly taken and shall be in full force and effect; and (iii) the City shall perform or have performed all of its obligations required under or specified in the Resolution or this Contract of Purchase to be performed at or prior to the Closing; (C) To the best knowledge of the City after reasonable inquiry, no action, suit, proceeding, inquiry or investigation, at law or in equity,before or by any court or public body, is pending or threatened against the City which has any of the effects described in Section 6(G)hereof or contesting in any way the completeness or accuracy of the Official Statement; (D) No order, decree or injunction of any court of competent jurisdiction, nor any order, ruling or regulation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, has been issued or made with the purpose or effect of prohibiting the issuance, offering or sale of the Notes as contemplated hereby and no legislation has been enacted, or a bill favorably reported for adoption, or a decision by any court rendered, or a ruling, regulation, proposed regulation or official statement by or on behalf of the Securities and Exchange Commission or other governmental agency having jurisdiction of the subject matter has been made or issued, to the effect that the Notes or any other securities of the City or of any similar body of the type contemplated herein are not exempt from the registration, qualification or other requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and as then in effect, or of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, as amended and as then in effect; and 7 J3-3. /e (E) At or prior to the Closing, the Underwriter shall have received three copies of the following documents in each case dated at and as of the Closing and satisfactory in form and substance to the Underwriter: (1) An approving opinion of Bond Counsel as to the Notes and in the form attached to the Official Statement as Appendix A, addressed to the City and upon which the Underwriter may rely; (2) A supplemental opinion of Bond Counsel, addressed to the Underwriter, to the effect that: (i) This Contract of Purchase has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by the City and, assuming due authorization,execution and delivery by the Underwriter, is valid and binding agreement of the City, provided that no opinion is expressed as to the validity or enforceability of any indemnification provision as a matter of federal or state law; and (ii) The statements of law and legal conclusions contained in the Official Statement under the captions "THE NOTES" (excluding information under the subheading "Book-Entry- Only System") and "TAX EXEMPTION", insofar as such statements summarize certain provisions of the Notes, the Resolution and the opinion of such counsel concerning certain federal tax matters relating to the Notes, included as Appendix A of the Official Statement are accurate in all material respects; (3) The opinion of City Attorney, dated the Closing Date and addressed to the Underwriter, to the effect that: (i) the City is a political subdivision of the State duly organized and validly existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State; (ii) the Resolution which was duly adopted',at a meeting of the City Council which was called and held pursuant to law with all public notice required by law and at which a quorum was present and acting throughout, and the Resolution is in full force and effect and has not been amended, modified or rescinded; (iii) the adoption of the Resolution and the execution and delivery of the Notes and this Contract of Purchase and compliance with the provisions hereof and thereof, under the circumstances contemplated thereby and hereby, do not and will not conflict with or constitute on the pan of the City a breach of or default under any agreement or other instrument applicable or binding upon the 8 City or any of its properties or any existing law, regulation, court order or consent decree to which the City or any of its properties is subject; and (iv) there is no action, suit or proceeding, inquiry or investigation before or by any court, public board or body, other than as disclosed in the Official Statement pending or, to the knowledge of the City Attorney, threatened against or affecting the City, (a) contesting in any way the completeness or accuracy of the Official Statement, or wherein an unfavorable decision, ruling or finding is likely to have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of the City, the transactions contemplated by the Contract of Purchase or by the Official Statement, or(b)which is likely to adversely affect the validity or enforceability of, or the authority or ability of the City to perform its obligations under the Notes, the Contract of Purchase, the Resolution or any other agreement or instrument to which the City is a party and which is used or contemplated for use in consummation of the transactions contemplated by the Contract of Purchase or the.Official Statement; (4) A certificate signed by an appropriate official of the City to the effect that (i) the representations and warranties of the City herein are true and correct in all material respects as of the date made and as of the date of the Closing, provided however that the representation and warranty contained in paragraph 6(I) hereof shall not apply to any changes to the Preliminary Official Statement made after the date thereof; (ii) the City has performed all its obligations required under or specified in the Resolution and this Contract of Purchase to be performed at or prior to the Closing; and (iii) such official has reviewed the Official Statement and on such basis certifies that, to the best of his knowledge after due investigation, the Official Statement does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact and does not omit to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; (5) A certificate, together with a fully executed copy of the Resolution, to the Clerk of the City that the City complied to the effect that: (i) such copy is a true and correct copy of the Resolution; and (ii)the Resolution was duly adopted and has not been modified,amended, rescinded or revoked and is in full force and effect at and as of the Closing, except for amendments, if any, adopted with the consent of the Underwriter; (6) An arbitrage certification from the City in form and substance satisfactory to Bond Counsel signed by an official of the City; . 9 (7) Evidence satisfactory to the Underwriter that at and as of the Closing the Notes have the same rating, if any, from Moody's Investors Service as was used on the date of pricing to determine the interest rate for the Notes; (8) Accountants' verbal consent to use of financial statements in the Preliminary Official Statement and Official Statement; and (9) Such additional legal opinions, certificates, proceedings, instruments and other documents as the Underwriter or Bond Counsel may reasonably request to evidence compliance by the City with legal requirements, the truth and accuracy, at and as of the Closing, of the representations, warranties and agreements of the City herein contained and the statements contained in the Official Statement, and thedue performance and satisfaction by the City at or prior to such time of all agreements then to be performed and all conditions then to be satisfied by the City, provided that Bond Counsel shall not be required to render an opinion as to the truth and accuracy of the representations, warranties and agreements of the City contained herein or of the statements contained in the Official Statement except as set forth in subparagraph (E)(2) of this Section. 9. Termination of Obligations of Underwriter. If the Cityshall be unable to satisfy the conditions set forth in Section 8 to the obligations of the Underwriter contained in this Contract of Purchase, the obligations of the Underwriter under this Contract of Purchase may be terminated by the Underwriter by notice to the City at, or at any time prior to, the Closing. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the performance of any and all conditions contained herein for the benefit of the Underwriter may be waived by the Underwriter in writing in its sole discretion. The Underwriter shall also have the right to terminate, in its sole discretion, its obligations under this Contract of Purchase, by notice to the City at, or at any time prior to the Closing, if between the date hereof and the Closing: (i) any event occurs or information becomes known, which, in the reasonable professional judgment of the Underwriter, makes untrue any statement of a material fact set forth in the Official Statement or results in an omission to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made therein, in light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading; (ii) the market for the Notes or the market price for the Notes shall have been materially and adversely affected, in the reasonable professional judgment of the Underwriter, by (a) legislation enacted by the Congress of the United States, or passed by either House of Congress or favorably reported for passage to either House 10 of Congress by any Committee of such House to which such legislation has been referred for consideration, or formally proposed, or introduced on the floor of either House of Congress, or by the legislature of the State of California or by the United States Tax Court, or a ruling, order, or regulation (final, temporary cir proposed) made by the Treasury Department of the United States or the Internal Revenue Service or other federal or State Court or other authority, which would have the effect of changing, directly or indirectly, the federal income tax consequences or State income tax consequences of interest on obligations of the general character of the Notes in the hands of the holders thereof, or(b) any new outbreak or escalation of hostilities or other national calamity or crisis on the financial markets of the United States, or (c) a general suspension of trading on the New York Stock Exchange, or fixing of minimum or maximum prices for trading or maximum ranges for prices for securities on the New York Stock Exchange, whether by virtue of a determination by that Exchange or by order of the Securities and Exchange Commission or any other governmental authority having jurisdiction, or(d)a general banking moratorium declared by either federal or State or New York authorities having jurisdiction; or (iii) additional material restrictions not in force or being enforced as of the date hereof shall have been imposed upon trading in securities generally by any governmental authority or by any national securities exchange which, in the reasonable professional judgment of the Underwriter, materially and adversely affect the market price for the Notes. 10. Conditions to Obligations of the City. The performance by the City of its obligations under this Contract of Purchase with respect to issuance, sale and delivery of the Notes to the Underwriter is conditioned upon(i) the performance by the Underwriter of its obligations hereunder; and (ii) receipt by the City and the Underwriter of opinions and certificates being delivered at or prior to the Closing by persons and entities other than the City. 11. Expgnses. (A) The City shall pay all expenses incident to the performance of its obligations hereunder, including but not limited to the following: (i) the cost of the preparation and reproduction of the Resolution; (ii) the fees and disbursements of Bond Counsel; (iii) the fees for Note rating; (iv) the cost of printing and distribution of the Preliminary Official Statement and the Official Statement; (v)DTC costs and fees; and(vi)the fees payable to the California Debt Advisory Commission, Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and California Municipal Statistics, Inc. To the extent the Underwriter pays any of the foregoing expenses and fees on behalf of the City, the City shall reimburse the Underwriter at the closing. s 11 (B) The Underwriter shall bear all of its own expenses incident to the purchase and resale of the Notes. (C) The City shall pay all legal expenses of the Underwriter incurred by reason of any litigation between the Underwriter and the City regarding this Contract of Purchase in which there is an adverse legal determination against the City. 12. Indemnification. To the extent permitted by law, the City agrees to indemnify the Underwriter and to hold the Underwriter harmless against any loss, damage, claim, liability or expense (including reasonable cost of defense) to which the Underwriter may become subject arising out of or based upon any allegation that, in connection with the sale of the Notes, the Preliminary Official Statement and the Official Statement included any untrue statement of a material',fact or omitted to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, except for statements concerning the Underwriter based upon information furnished in writing by the Underwriter for inclusion therein. The City makes no representation as to the validity or enforceability of these provisions as a matterof federal or state law. 13. Notices. Any notice or other communication to be given under this Contract of Purchase (other than the acceptance hereof as specified in the first paragraph hereof) shall be given by telephone or telex, confirmed in writing, or by delivering the same in writing, if to the City, to: Finance Director, City of Atascadero,6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero,California 93422, or if to the Underwriter, to: Bank of America Dept. #3295, 555 California Street, San Francisco, 94104, Attn: Managing Director. 14. Parties in Interest:Survival of Representations and Warranties. This Contract of Purchase when accepted by the City in writing as heretofore specified shall constitute the entire agreement between the City and the Underwriter and is made solely for the benefit of the City and the Underwriter(including their respective successors and assigns). No other person shall acquire or have any right hereunder or by virtue hereof. The obligations of the City arising out of its representations and warranties in this Contract of Purchase shall not be affected by any investigation made by or on behalf of the Underwriter. The agreements of the City to indemnify the Underwriter, to pay expenses and to return the Good-Faith Deposit as provided elsewhere in this Contract of Purchase shall survive termination of this Contract of Purchase. is 12 15. Execution in Counterparts. This Contract of Purchase may be executed in counterparts each of which shall be regarded as an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same document. 16. Atsblicable Law. This Contract of Purchase shall be interpreted under, governed by and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 13 l Very truly yours, BANK OF AMERICA NT&SA By Vice President The foregoing is hereby agreed to and accepted as of the date first above written: City of Atascadero By Treasurer • 14 THE CITY OF ATASCADERO 1993-94 Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes TIME AND RESPONSIBILITY SCHEDULE City: The City of Atascadero BofA: Bank of America NT & SA BC: Bond Counsel (Buchalter, Nemer, Fields & Younger) DATE EVENT RESPONSIBILITY May 19 Distribute resolutions and supporting BofA, BC documents for approval May 21 Distribute draft of Preliminary Official BofA Statement and Purchase Contract June 3 Distribute cash flows City June 8 City Council adopts Resolution City June 15 Mail package:to Moody's Investors Service BofA June 21 Rating Agency Conference Call City June 25 Distribute Final Preliminary Official Statement City, BofA June 28 Receive rating City, BofA June 29 Price notes and sign purchase agreement City, BofA June 30 Finalize documentation BC, BofA July 7 Pre-closing All July 8 Closing and delivery of funds All Bank of America 3. -_2_/, REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 6-8-93 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-4 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager via: Henry Engen, Director of Community Development From: Valerie Humphrey, Engineering Division SUBJECT• Establishment of No Parking zone on San Luis Avenue. RECOMMENDATION• It is the recommendation of the Traffic Committee that Council adopt Resolution No. 43-93 authorizing the modifications as described on the attached resolution. DISCUSSION• San Luis Avenue is a narrow street which runs between Curbaril Avenue and Pueblo Avenue. The east side of San Luis Avenue is developed with commercial businesses which include Wil-Mar Disposal, Arp's Auto and Fender's Auto. The west side, adjacent to 101, is developed as a Caltrans Park and Ride. The roadway is not wide enough in this area to allow for on- street parking and a two .lane road. In addition, large trucks have difficulty getting to the businesses. The owners of these businesses have voiced their desire to, have the curb in front of their businesses designated as No Parking. OPTIONS• 1) Adopt Resolution No. 43-93 2) Deny Resolution No. 43-93 3) Return item to Traffic Committee for further review FISCAL IMPACT• The cost of these modifications will be approximately $500 for painting and signs to be paid out of currently budgeted funds. Attachments: Resolution No. 43-93 000001 RESOLUTION NO. 43-93 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING NO PARKING ZONES ON SAN LUIS AVENUE WHEREAS, Section 4-2.1101, et. seq. , of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to designate "No Parking" areas, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Committee has determined that establishing No Parking on the East side of San Luis Avenue would alleviate a congested traffic situation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings as indicated above. On motion by ,and seconded by the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: - ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO By LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ROBERT P. NIMMO, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: HENRY ENGEN Director of Community Development 000002 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 6-8-93 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-5 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager it via: Henry Engen, Director of Community Development i From: Valerie Humphrey, Engineering Division ' SUBJECT: Establishment of Loading Zones at Atascadero Lake Pavilion. RECOMMENDATION: The Traffic Committee recommends that Council approve Resolution No. 44-93 authorizing the installation of two freight loading zones at the Atascadero Lake Pavilion. DISCUSSION• The original request for parking modifications at the Pavilion was received from the Parks and Recreation Commission who requested four 30 minute parking spaces in front of the Pavilion. Their request stated that the spaces were needed for the "loading and unloading of item in relation to the Pavilion usage. Short term parking also provides parking to the public for use of the park, Ranger House, and the Pavilion food concession . " A number of members of the Rotary club attended the Traffic Committee meeting to voice their opposition to the 30 minute restriction. They stated that there 'was an area provided for loading and unloading at the pavilion and that their were very few activities available at the lake which could be accomplished in a 30 minute time frame. Lt. Watton, APD representative to the Traffic Committee, also noted that enforcing the 30 minute parking restriction would be difficult. It was the consensus of the Committee to deny the request for the 30 minute parking stalls and return the item to the Parks and Recreation Commission for recommendations on additional parking at the Lake Park and the suggestion of placing a loading zone in the chained area next to the Pavilion. In a May 13th memorandum to the Traffic Committee, the Parks and Recreation Commission requested the establishment of two loading zones. The locations proposed are one stall located on the east side of the Pavilion, next to the existing handicap stall, and the other adjacent to the Ranger House on the eastern side of the parking lot. This request was approved by the Traffic Committee at the meeting of May 19th. 000003 OPTIONS: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 44-93 2) Deny Resolution No. 44-93 3) Return item to Traffic Committee and/or Parks and Recreation Commission for further review FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of these modifications will be approximately $150.00 for painting and signs to be paid out of currently budgeted funds. 000004 RESOLUTION NO. 44-93 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING LOADING ZONES AT THE ATASCADERO LAKE PAVILION WHEREAS, Section 4-2.1201, et. seq. , of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to designate "Loading Zones" areas, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Committee has determined that establishing two Loading Zones at the Atascadero Lake Pavilion will provide a needed facility for citizens utilizing the facilities. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings to provide for loading zones located on the east side of the Pavilion, adjacent to the existing handicap stall, and adjacent to the Ranger House on the eastern side of the parking lot. On motion by and seconded by , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ROBERT P. sNIMMO, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: HENRY ENGEN Director of Community Development 000005 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 6<8M CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-6 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Via: Henry Engen, Community Development Director From: Kelly Heffernon, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Proposition 116 Grant Application for EI Camino Real and Traffic Way bikelane projects RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve Resolution No. 42-93 transferring applicant status for two Proposition 116 bikelane projects from the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) to the City of Atascadero. BACKGROUND: In 1990, California voters approved Proposition 116, or the Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act. This action allocated in excess of 510,000,000 for public transit capital and bicycle improvement projects within San Luis Obispo County. In total, 27 project applications were submitted to SLOCOG to compete locally for the funding. On 9/22/92 Council approved Resolution No. 92-92 endorsing two Proposition 116 applications for bikeways along EI Camino Real and Traffic Way. Both of those applications have been received and conceptually approved by SLOCOG for local 116 funding. EI Camino Real was approved for 100% of what the City City requested, or $375,000, and Traffic Way for 73%, or 5100,000. The City has until the year 2000 to complete both projects. DISCUSSION: The state has addi io al funds available through its discretionary grant Bicycle Program in which EI Camino Real has been competing for. A recent letter from Caltrans indicates that EI Camino Real was not successful in the ranking process. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) is scheduled to adopt'a resolution to fund the ranked projects on July 8 and 9 (see Attachment A). 000006 It was hoped that EI Camino Real would receive financial support through the local and state discretionary Proposition 116 funds, thereby freeing up additional monies for local projects (including the Traffic Way project). North Coast Engineering is currently reevaluating the dollar figures needed to complete both EI Camino Real and Traffic Way. All final applications are due to the state by June 30th and SLOCOG staff has indicated that any changes must be submitted to SLOCOG by June 18th. Enclosures: Resolution No. 42-93 A.Caltrans letter dated 5/20/93 00000'7 RESOLUTION NO. 42-93 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ACCEPTING THE TRANSFER OF APPLICANT STATUS FOR TWO NON-URBAN COUNTY PROPOSITION 116 PROJECTS WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) approved the City of Atascadero's request for Class II bikelanes along El Camino Real and Traffic Way, and WHEREAS, the SLOCOG is the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA)_and eligible applicant identified in Proposition 116, and WHEREAS,the SLOCOG desires to transfer their eligible applicant status for the purposes of these projects to the City of Atascadero. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1 . That the City of Atascadero accepts the transfer of status and all management and responsibilities of the projects. - 2. That the City of Atascadero as the applicant, certifies it has the financial and institutional ability to accept the legal liabilities and obligations associated with the project. 3. The project is a part of an approved transportation plan and is consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan. 4. The City of Atascadero can encumber the funds within twenty four(24) months following funding allocation. 5. The City of Atascadero will use other funding sources (federal, local, private) to complete this project if the project costs exceed those in this ';application. 000008 Resolution No. 42-93 Page 2 On motion by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember the following resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA By: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ROBERT P. NIMMO, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney 000009 ATTACHMENT A STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS 1120 N STREET a CCRAMENTO,CA 95814 (916) 654-6228 TDO(916)6544014 May 20, 1993 Mr. Greg Luke Public Works Director City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mr. Luke : The Proposition 116 Bicycle Program Public Hearing is scheduled for 9:00 a.m. to noon on June 2 in Senate Hearing Room 2040 of the State Capitol in Sacramento. The Hearing has two purposes. The first is for Caltrans to present the Ranked List of Projects to the Commission, and the second is to allow applicants/counties/regional agencies/public an opportunity to comment to the Commission on the , list . The Commission is scheduled to adopt a resolution to fund projects at its meeting on July 8 and 9 in Los Angeles . Enclosed is a copy of the Ranked List of Projects that Caltrans will present to the Commission. Projects are listed in order of their scores as scored by the Caltrans Office of Bicycle Facilities (OBF) . The OBF selected the applications to be scored according to the Ranking Method developed by the Proposition 116 Bicycle Program Technical Advisory Committee. Enclosed is a copy of the Ranking Method. The OBF scored and ranked 98 applications . $10. 8 million is available to fund the projects selected by the Commission. If your project is not on the list, it was not ranked high by the county or regional agency in your area and was not considered for scoring by the OBF. Please contact your county or regional agency if you have questions about their ranking of your project . If your project is on the list, and you have concerns about the placement of your project, please contact your county or regional agency to discuss your concerns and how to best address them. They may wish to coordinate your comments and the comments of other applicants in your area prior to the Hearing. Because of the limited funds and the enormous interest in this . program, any change by the Commission in the selection of a project will impact another. Therefore, the counties and regional agencies are a critical part of the selection process . 000010 °May 20, 1993 Page 2 If you have additional questions after talking with your county or regional agency, please contact Rick Blunden, Chief of the Office of Bicycle Facilities, at (916) 653-0036. Sincerely, �Jjj VAS MARTHA J. TATE GLASS, Chief Division of Highways Enclosure 000011 1992/93 PROPOSITION 116 BICYCLE PROGRAM RANKED LIST OF PROJECTS FY 92/93 Cum. 92/93 IN o Oct OBF' Prop. 116 Pro 116 mber Applicant/Project Name SCORE Request Requests 1 Sacramento County-Sunrise Corridor Commuter Bikeway CL 1 90 $420,000 $420,000 2 San Francisco-Commute Bicycle Route Signage 90 $85,000 $505,000 3 Ca itola -41st AveJClares SURis in Site Bikeway Cl. 1 & 11 87 ' $175,000 $680,000 4 Palo Alto -Alma Street Bike Bride Cl. 1 85 $196,650 $876,650 5 Davis-Putah Creek Overcrossing Cl.1 82 $750,000 $1,626,650 6 Santa Barbara- City Wide Commuter Bikeway_Safety Enhancements 82 $320,000 $1,946,650 7 Huntington Beach-Pacific Coast Highway Bike Lanes Cl. 11 80 $750,000 $2,696,650 8 Contra Costa County-Iron Horse Trail Cl.1 79 $600,000 $3,296,650 9 Folsom-Rainbow Bride Bicycle Lanes 79 $750,000 $4,046,650 10 San Jose-Route.237 Bikeway Corridor Extension Cl. I & 11 79 $218,500 $4,265,150 11 Chico-Class I:Bridge and Bikeways 78 $728,500 $4,993,650 12 Monterey Count -Pine Canyon-Kigg City Bike Path and Bridge-CL 1 78 $365,000 $5,358,650 13 Sacramento Count - Hazel/Folsom Bikeway and Overcrossing Cl. 1 78 $750,000 $6,108,650 14 Ca 'tola-McGregor Drive Bike Lanes Cl.II 77 $150,000 $6,258,650 is San Diego-Grand Avenue/Mission Bay Drive Bikeway Cl. VII 77 $137,000 $6,395,650 16 San Francisco-Valencia Street Commute Bikeway Cl. III 77 $285;000 $6,680,650 17 Mammoth Lakes - Mammoth Lakes Trail System Segment 3 Cl. 1 76 $309,573 $6,990,223 18 Santa Cruz Count - Porter Street Improvement Project Cl. 11 76 $267,046 $7,257,269 19 Santa Monica-Broadway Class 11 Addition 76 $75,585 $7,332,854 20 Los Angeles Count -San Gabriel River Bike Trail Undercrossin s Cl. 1 75 $200,000 $7.532,854- 21 San Diego-Ocean Beach Bicycle Path Extension CI.1 75 $350,000 $7,882,854 22 Santa Cruz - Broadway Corridor Lanes/Loop Detection 75 $228,000 $8,110,854 23 Santa Maria-Battles Road Bikeway Cl.1 75 $388,000 $8,498,854 C54 Chino-Chino Cit -wide Bic cle Plan CI.I and II 73 $364,147 $8,863,001 Lake County-Lake Street BikewayCI. 11 72 $208,242 $9,071,243 Los Angeles-Sepulveda Blvd Bike Lanes 74th to Manchester Cl. 11 72 $50,000 $9,121,243 27 Riverside County Public Works-Token Operated Bike Locker Network 72 $155,000 $9,276,243 28 San Jose-Bicycle Transportation Corridor I Cl. 11 & 111 72 $180,500 $9,456,743 29 Del Norte LTC-Washington Blvd.Class It Bikeway Cl. II 71 $156,600 $9,613,343 30 Humboldt Coun - Central Ave.Shoulder Widenin Cl. III 71 $142,200 $9,755,543 31 Manhattan Beach-Manhattan Beach Segment Bay Cities Regional Bikeway Cl.Il 71 $266,224 $10.021,767 32 San Buenaventura-Ventura Commuter Bicycle Trail Cl. 1 71 $750,000 33 BART-BART Bicycle Lockers 70 $417,615 S 1 1,189,382 34 Santa Cruz-Plaza Lane Bicycle Parkin 70 $32,000 $11,221,382 35 Santa Cruz-Commerce Lane Bicycle Parkin 69 $18,000 $11,239,382 36 San Diego-Perez Cove Way Bicycle Path Cl. 1 68 $166,650 $11,406,032 37 Stockton -Calaveras River Bikeway Cl.1 68 $624,000 $12,030,032 38 San Bernardino Associated Governments - Commuter Rail Station Bicycle Storage 67 $21,000 $12,051,032 39 Santa Clarita- Santa Clara River Commuter Bikeway 67 $750,000 $12,801,032 40 Mariposa County-Bus and Bus Stop Bike Racks 66 $6,000 $12,807,032 41 Los Angeles-Watts Bikeways CI. I,11, & III 65 $65,000 $12,872,032 42 Sacramento -City CollS,9eJFreeport Blvd. Bikeway Cl. 11 & 111 65 $58,105 $12,930,137 43 Santa Cruz County- Broadwa -Brommer Bike Path Cl. 11 65 $15,000 $12,945,137 44 Hercules- San Pablo Avenue Improvement Project Cl. 11 64 $75,000 $13,020,137 4S Palmdale-Sierra Highway Regional BikewaCI.II 64 $431,500 $13,451,637 46 So ate Rec./Park Dist_ - Tillotson Bikeway Undercrussing 64 $300,000 $13,751,637 47 Atascadero-EI Camino Real Bike Lanes Cl.11 &111 63 $375,000 $14,126,6370 48 Brentwood- Brentwood Bikeway Project CI. 1, 11, 111 62 $157,995 $14,284.632 49 Fullerton-Bastanchury Bypass Bikeway Cl. 1 62 $365,000 $14,649,632 50 Los Angeles County-San Jose Creek Bike Trail Cl.1 62 $750,000 $15.399,632 51 Los Angeles-Plummer Street Bike Lanes Cl.II & III 61 $60,000 $15,4 59,632 AdML2 Martinez -AlhambraJBerrellessa Bike Lane Project 61 $43,310 $15,502.942 Mendocino Transit Authority- Bike Racks on Buses/Bicycle Parkin 61 $10,670 $15,513,612 1-54 .Orinda-StStephen's Bicycle Trail-Class 1 61 5200,000 $15,713,612 5 5 Roseville-Class II Bikeways 60 $213,526 S1 5,927,138 Page 1 000012 1992/93 PROPOSITION 116 BICYCLE PROGRAM RANKED LIST OF PROJECTS . FY 92/93 Cum. 92/93 Project 013F Prop. 116 Prop 116 Number ApplicanUProject Name SCORE Request Requests 56 San Diego Association of Governments - Bay Route Bikeway-Sweetwater Crossing 60 $750,000 $16,677,138 57 Costa Mesa-Class 11 Bikeways Cl.11 59 $20,070 $16,697,208 58 Oakland - Park Blvd, Bicycle Lanes Project 59 $365,000 $17,062,208 59 Santa Cruz - Downtown Bicycle Loop Dectection 59 $296,000 $17,358,208 60 Berkeley- Bike Route Sign Program 58 $50,000 $17,408,208 61 Anaheim- Mira Loma/Sunkist Class 11 Bike Trail Cl.11 57 $101,410 $17,509,618 62 EI Paso De Robles-Niblick Bride Bikeway Cl.1 56 $750,000 $18,259,618 63 Salinas-Bicycle Route Signage Cl.111 56 $184,800 $18,444,418 64 San Joaquin-San Joaquin Bike P ram Cl.1 56 $21,600 $18,466,018 65 Modesto- Dry Creek Bike Path 55 $326,700 $18,792,718 66 Novato- Commuter Bike Connection Cl. I & 111 55 $456,910 $19,249,628 67 Westminster- Ward Street Bikeway Cl. 11 55 $18,000 $19,267,628 68 Santa Cruz Count -41st Avenue Cl. 11 & 111 54 $30,000 $19.297,628 69 Mountain View- Stevens Creek Trail CL. 1 52 $750,000 $20,047,628 70 Anaheim-Santa Ana Caoyon Class Il Bike Trail Cl.II 51 $30,200 1 $20,077,828 71 EI Dorado Co.Transportation Commission- El Dorado Trail Highway Ove ass Cl. 1 51 $395,000 $20,472,828 72 Los Angeles -Tu un a Wash/L.A. River Bike Path Phase 1 Cl.1&111 51 $750,000 $21,222,828 73 San Benito-Rehab. Prospect Ave. Bike Path Cl. 1 51 $24,000 $21,246,828 74 Alameda Count -Redwood Road Class II Bike Lane Project CI.11 49 $650,000 $21,896,828 75 Laguna Niguel - Citywide Bike Lane Project Cl. 11 49 $35,500 $21,932,328 76 Merced -Northeast Merced Bicycle Path Project Cl. 1 49 $85,000 $22,017,328 77 Riverside-U.C. Riverside Bikeway Project Cl.II 49 $235,000 $22,252,328 78 San Marcos- SR 78 Rail/Trail Bicycle Path 49 S750,000 $23,002,328 79 Walnut Creek- Iron Horse Trail-Y nacio Valley Road Overcrossing 49 S750,000 $23,752,328 80 Martinez-Reliez Valley Road Bike Trail CI.1 48 $31,000 $23,783,328 81 Visalia-Visalia Bikeway Plan Projects Cl.If&111 48 $254,400 $24,037,728 82 Woodland-City of Woodland Bikeway Project C1.11 & III 48 $422,195 $24,459,923 83 jAnaheim-Imperial Highway Class 11 Bike Trail Cl. II 47 $1,100 $24,461,023 84 Placer Count -Douglas Boulevard Class 11 Facility Cl.11 46 $26,000 $24,487,023 85 Santa Rosa-Santa Rosa Creek Bike Path 45 $180,000 $24,667,023 86 Eureka -Fairway DrJF St. Bike Lane lm rvmts. Cl. II & 111 42 S144,000 $24,811,023 87 Vacaville - Southside Bikeway 41 $750,000 $25,561,023 88 El Segundo- EI Segundo Segment/Bay Segment/BayCities Regional Bikeway-Segment 1 CI. 1 & II 40 $39,900 $25,600,923 89 Santa Barbara Count -Refugio Road Class 11 Bikeway Cl.II 39 $206,184 $25,807,107 90 San Benito- Cl. 11 & III Signing & Striping: Hollister/San Juan Bautista Cl.11 & 111 38 $35,000 $25,842,107 91 Manteca - Tidewater Bikeway Cl. 1 37 $750,000 $26,592,107 92 Lancaster- Sierra Highway R iona) Bikeway Cl. 1 36 $750,000 $27,342,107 93 Windsor- Hembree Lane Billington to Old Redwood Highway Cl. II 36 545,333 $27,387,440 94 Windsor-Old Redwood Highway Lakewood to Bilfin ton Cl. 11 34 $17,325 $27,404,765 95 Riverside County Parks-Santa Ana River Bikeway LandscapiL19 Draina a 33 $165,000 $27,569,765 96 Windsor- Old Redwood H hway Windsor to Star Cl. 11 29 $50,925 $27,620,690 97 Alturas - City of Alturas Bike Lane Project Cl 1, II 14 S570,515 $26,191,205 98 1 Biggs - 2nd Street Bikeway- Class 11 1 14 $56,400 $28,247,605 000013 Page 2 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 6-8-93 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B_7 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager via: Henry Engen, Community DevelopmentDirectorHC From: Steve Sylvester, City Engineer SUBJECT- Bid Award - E1 Bordo Road/Chalk Mountain Wastewater Collection Line RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 46-93 authorizing the execution ofla contract with John Madonna Construction Company, Inc. to construct the EI Bordo/Chalk Mountain Wastewater Collection Line for $218,328.00. DISCUSSION• Bids were solicited in order to provide a replacement for an undersized wastewater collection line identified in the City's 1990 Sewer Master Plan. Bids for the project were opened on May 27, 1993 . The work involves'the abandonment of a section of a force main in El Camino Real, construction of a 6" force main in E1 Bordo Avenue, construction lo" gravity sewer main: in E1 Bordo Avenue, construction of a 10" gravity sewer main across the Chalk Mountain Golf and other appurtenant items. The new wasterwater collection line will discharge into an existing 15" sewer main at the northerly end of the Chalk Mountain Golf Course near the 13th green. The Bid Summary prepared by the City and the itemized bid summary are included for reference as Attachments' A and B. The low bid was submitted by John Madonna Construction Co. , in the amount of $218, 328.00. The Engineers Cost Estimate for the project was $251,387 .70. The bids have been checked for completeness and accuracy. Staff finds John Madonna Construction Co. to be the lowest responsible bidder. FISCAL IMPACT: The final project estimate is as follows: Construction Bid $218,328.00 Contingencies @ 10% $ 21,832.80 SUBTOTAL $240, 160.80 000014 Engineering, inspection, contract administration, survey, soils testing @ 15% $ 36, 024. 12 TOTAL ESTIMATE $276, 184.92 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Project Bid Summary Attachment B - Itemized Bid Summary 9113001.ATA 000015 RESOLUTION NO. 46-93 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN MADONNA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE EL BORDO/CHALK MOUNTAIN WASTEWATER COLLECTION LINE The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California hereby resolves as follows: 1 . The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an agreement with John Madonna Construction Company, Inc. for construction of the EI Bordo/Chalk Mountain Wastewater Collection Line. 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to make minor corrections or modifications of a-mathematical or clerical nature. 3. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to appropriate funds, if necessary; release and expend funds; and issue warrants to comply with the terms of this agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held on the 8th of June, 1993. ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ROBERT P. NIMMO Mayor s 000016 BID SUMMARY TO: Henry Engen, Community Development Director FROM: Lee Raboin 1 City Clerk BID NO.: 93-05 OPENED : 05/27/93 2:00 p.m. PROJECT: WASTE WATER COLLECTION LINE- EI Bordo Road/Chalk Mountain Golf Course Six bids were received and opened today, as follows: Contractor Base Bid Sum John Madonna Construction Company $218,328.00 P.O. Box 5310 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 543-7751 Dechance Construction Co., Inc. 222,696.00 P.O. Box 275 Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 489-7310 , Whitaker Contractors, Inc. 233,678.50 22985 El Camino Real Santa Margarita, CA 93453 438-5751 Dennis O'Brien 239,673.00 7210 Sycamore Atascadero, CA 93422 - 466-9281 R.P. Richards, Inc. 243,875.00 5949 Hollister Avenue Goleta, CA 93117 683-1511 R. Baker, Inc. 248,632.00 P.O. Box 419 Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 489-8711 c: Mark Markwort, Chief Waste Water Operations John Neil, North Coast Engineering Valerie Humphrey, Engineering 000017 N 2 19 Orn $ n $ $ 8 8 8 $ $ $ $ $ 8 N » N glicoig 299 ca o ca « rn O °C $ 8 g 8 0 8 n 8 g 8 g 8 tO m lO n ♦O O N W N O � n: cn N c g 8 g 8 y 8 8 8 a 8 88 R x w w a » N w w N O 0) C y N 04) LO x (!) ¢ 8 8 8 0 8 8 8 8 8 O Z m a g S ygy § �v § , g 8 8 g g g Q m U t » N N » N » N N N N N O2 O § m o a ¢` O Wg 8 8 8 8 8 R U $ 8 g n g a o 8 g $ g ♦g 8 8 8 8 8 88 b 46 0 GS a CO 11 Z C 2 Q U8 o Z >. ca 5 a 8 g 8 p 8 a n g„ 8 g p 8 p 8 p 8 g FE Ixm b N /0 $O N O r N Y O O O N Lu O O' 2 N N p N N NN N N V( N N N NN zg 0a: u) 7 z LU W ¢ N 0J S8O♦ .00 gWpa O»$ ^N a ?Wnpn 0 �immNyD AN8 ptl »8 pN N OM NSp ON p 8 (A NNO ^M - W U In N 1=- W Lu N W cc Z N ¢ $ o $ g ^ " $ o n n n g Z '_j C � Wo ri a r, "! z 8) W N QM y Q a Q Q QQ N J J W W J W W N J W W W W J N O m M > J eoi a o N a H Q U o Q 0 E o Lu ¢_ � -0, w to O U Z Q C'd J a z 0 1-- Oui a IW,. O U W o 0 M W M 6 N W 000038 N cli 2 a a # # # m 8 § # # m # m § § m # # @ LLJ } S 2 a s ■ a s a _ s a S a a . . s a s a a 2 � a CL CL E / 0 § 0 2 j \ § j \ a j § 8 i \ b ) k \ § § 2 § 2 & § ] a a . , a a . C GG gym / ¢ a 0 ) 7 ■ § 7 # § # q_ 2 k 2 ■ - Co \ / mk ceak § m # e 8 § 8 a a@ 8 a m m ) A A # § ■ k ■ § § © § § t . § § § § 2 § V § w o 2 # © a § 2 © k a d Cl) z 220 G 2 \ () 2 . m $ $ # m a a 8 a m m a §� 40g & § § § \ 2 � � U) . ■ L« o (L g° 8 8 9(. 9� e ma # a # a § § § S§§ 6k ® - 6 cc / § § k Sm e2 < = 2 q § a Ck °\ k 8 00 azk - . cu , a @3 #\ i# C4 0z 2z . 0 3p / � a § ! a K a a a a a k @ C= m0 § . . eeo CC 2 k 3 0 ` " 2 / kk ui 2 a- 8 z 7 �2k z g / 0 LU z \ § d I a a { J ! K ■ 2 . } ■ 2 ! 2 f I ! ! 2 k » w w § / d In i 000019 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B_8 Through: Andy Takata, Assistant Meeting date: 06/08/93 City Manager File Number: TTM 23-89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 441q, SUBJECT: Consideration of time extension request for Tentative Tract Map 23- 89 at 11455 Viejo Camino (Van Gundy/Boud & Associates) . RECOMMENDATION• Per the Planning Commission' s recommendation, approval of a time extension to May 8, 1994. BACKGROUND: . On May 18, 1993 Planning Commission reviewed the above-referenced subject on its Consent Calendar. On a 6:0 vote (one Commissioner was absent) , the Commission recommended approval of a time exten- sion for Tentative Tract Map 23-89 to May 8, 1994 . ' HE:ph Attachment: Staff Report - May 18, 1993 cc: Richard J. Komorowski 000020 ITEM : A. 2 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning Commission FROM: Doug Davidson, Senior Planner RE: Tentative Tract Map 23-89 - Time Extension 11455 Viejo Camino DATE: May 18, 1993 The above referenced map was originally approved by the Planning Commission on April 17, 1990 and subsequently approved by the City Council- on May 8, 1990. This map approved the subdivision of the 5.69 acre property into 19 lots for residential use and 4 lots devoted to common areas. In 1992 a one year time extension was granted, including a determination that a minor lot line adjustment was in conformance with the approved map. � The applicant is exploring the possibility of revising the approved tentative PP i e map, but wishes to keep the current approval active. The Map is eligible for this extension, and one additional extension. For these reasons, the Tract Map should be extended for one year. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends approval' of a one year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 23-89 (Tract 1864) , extending the approval date to May 8, 1994. Attachments: 1. Request for Extension 2. Prior Staff Report 000021 KOMOROWSla DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL April 27, 1993 COMMERCIAL Steven L. De Camp Community Development Department INDUSTRIAL 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, California 93422 RE: 11455 Viejo Camino Dear Steve: First of all, I want to thank you for the information you gave me regarding the subject site. I hope to submit alternate development concepts to you within 2-3 weeks as the basis for processing a new Planned Development Permit. As you know,Tentative Tract Map 23-89 expires 5/8/93. 1'believe it is in our best interest to protect the existing 19 lots. Accordingly, I request you approve a one year time extension for that map. Our check for$330 is attached. Yours truly, Komo/Komorowski opment Richa RJK/jm cc: Donald F. Lopez, Mid-State Bank FIREHOUSE PLAZA 4227 E. MAIN ST. • SUITE 216 VENTURA, CA 93003 (805)654-8220 RECEIVED FAX (805) 650-9969 APR 3 01993 M �� CO MU TY DEVELOPMENT 000022 'r ti CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: April 17,1990 BY: Michael Sullivan, Assist.Planner File No: TTM 23-89/ZC 13-89 SUBJECT: Consideration of a request for a zone change to establish a Planned Development Overlay Zone (PD-7) in the Residential Multiple Family 10/Flood Hazard Overlay (RMF-10) (FH) zone; and for a Tentative Tract Map to create 19 lots for single family residences and 4 lots for common areas on the 5. 69 acre property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval of Zone Change 13-89 based on the Findings for Approval contained in the Draft Ordinance (Exhibit J) . Likewise, staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map 23-89 based on the Findings for Approval in Exhibit K and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit L. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Larry Van Gundy 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Joseph Boud and Associates 3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11455 Viejo Camino 4. General Plan Designation. . . . .Low Density Multi-Family 5. Zoning District. . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF/10 (FH) 6. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5. 69 acres 7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .one single family residence (to be removed) 8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted March 27, 1990 -fir 000023 �l ,1 ANALYSIS: The proposed zone change and subdivision are linked together for this report because the tentative tract map approval is dependent on the zone change approval. The applicant proposes to establish a Planned Development Overlay Zone Number 7 to the existing Residential Multiple Family 10 (Flood Hazard overlay) zoning and to create a subdivision for 19 single family homes and four lots for common open areas. The residences would consist of ten 3-bedroom units and nine 4-bedroom units designed with several different elevation treatments using a Spanish style architectural theme. ' An existing single family residence within the project area is to be moved. Private Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions are proposed. Connection to the gravity portion of the City sewer system line on El Camino Real would be achieved by a pressurized sewer line along Viejo Camino using an on-site pumping station maintained privately. Proposed road improvements include curb, gutter, sidewalk, and drainage improvements. The creek channel would be realigned slightly and regraded in some portions, but would otherwise remain natural with no concrete channelization. The Grading and Drainage plan assures protection from'' a 100-year flood. The zoning and General Plan designations in the vicinity of the project site are as shown in Exhibit A. The property to 'the north and west in the RMF-16 zone is the Bordeaux House apartments. The property to the south in the RS (FH) zone is single-family residential use. The property to the east is outside city limits and is owned in common with the State Hospital and is developed as Paloma Creek Park. The north fork of Paloma Creek, shown as "blue line" on the USGS map, runs near the southeast edge of the project site and traverses the south corner of the site. Purpose for Zone Change to PD-7 Overlay The primary reason for the requested zone change to PD-7 overlay is to permit development on lots smaller than the minimum lot size of one-half acre as required in multiple family zones (General Plan, page 57, Residential Policy # 6; and Zoning Ordinance Section 9-3. 174) . The General Plan Residential Policy # 6 states that in multi-family use areas, "smaller lots may be allowed in conjunction with planned residential developments provided that the overall density within the project is consistent with other density standards contained herein. " The proposed density conforms to the density standards (RMF-10) of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan, as the RMF/10 zone allows 5 three-bedroom units per acre and 3. 8 four bedroom units per acre. Secondary purposes of the zone change to PD-1 are to allow modification of front setbacks from 25 feet to 20 feet and to' allow minor modifications to parking requirements. 000OZ4 The applicant' s project description states, "The Planned Development concept would be employed, enabling the units to be located outside of the seasonal creek (north fork, Paloma Creek) which crosses the property at the southern tip. This also permits the units to be clustered on areas of more gentle slopes. The development will include such amenities as interior pedestrian pathways and passive recreational areas, uniform landscaping and buffer vegetation, compatible architecture, uniform fencing, signage and lighting. " Consistency with Zoning Ordinance and General Plan Requirements for Planned Developments Staff believes the proposed development is consistent with the requirements and intent of the Planned Development (PD) Overlay Zone. The Zoning Ordinance contains the purpose and required findings for PD zones. The purpose statement (Section 9-3. 641) reads, "The Planned Development Overlay Zone identifies areas where development standards or processing requirements different from those established by the underlying zoning district are deemed necessary to promote orderly and harmonious development and to enhance the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area. " To implement the purpose statement, the following four findings (Section 9-3. 644) must be made: 1. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted to promote orderly and harmonious development. 2. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a beneficial effect on the area. 3. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably achieved through existing development standards or processing requirements. 4. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to compensate for the requested modifications. The applicant' s development statement summary (Exhibit B) and other information contained in the project brochure present a valid argument for allowing the planned development. Although the lots are smaller then one half acre (ranging in size from 6000 to 17,270 sq. ft. ) , the proposed residential plan presents another option to townhouse apartments or large-lot single family homes. 040025 Property Development Standards The proposed density of residences is lower than what would be permitted in the RMF-10 zone. With 0-10% slope, the allowed maximum number of units would be 28. 45 3-bedroom units or 21. 62 4-bedroom units. Using the contour measurement method, the applicant computed that the average slope for the project is 10%. For RMF-10 standards on 0-10% slope the required lot area per unit would be 8712 sq. ft. for a 3-bedroom unit and 11,463 sq. ft. for a 4-bedroom unit. Therefore the proposal for ten 3- br. units and nine 4-br. units would require a total space of 190,287 sq. ft. while the total site area contains 247, 856 sq. ft. (5. 69 acres) . The proposed residential lot sizes range from 6000 to 17,270 sq. ft. with an average size of 7700 sq. ft. A modification of the front setback is proposed to permit a 20 ft. setback rather than 25 ft. Staff believes that this should be granted because many of the lots are shallow enough to warrant a reduced setback and the site disturbance is minimized. The minimum side and rear setbacks of 5 and 10 ft. are to be maintained. The Zoning Ordinance requires a total of 56 parking spaces, as follows: per 3-BR unit: 2.5/unit x 10 = 25 spaces per 4-BR unit: 3. 0/unit x 9 = 27 spaces guest 1. 0/5units = 4 spaces 56 total The parking plan of the project would require the following modifications: (1) 55 total spaces instead of the required 56 spaces (2) no handicap spaces instead of the required 2 spaces (3) guest spaces on street to be 8x22 instead of 9x22 ft. This request should be granted, for each single family residence contains the required two spaces and more than adequate guest parking is provided. It is the number of bedrooms that increases the required parking. A general landscaping plan is as shown in the Site Plan. The proposal also includes specifications for on-site signage, lighting, fencing, and street furniture. An archaeology report was prepared and concluded that no known resources are located at the site. The Zoning Ordinance requires immediate notification to the City if any artifacts are found. NJ NJ vv (100,029 '0' The property is within the City of Atascadero Sewer District and sewage treatment will be provided by that facility. A sewer lift station will be built on the project site and an offsite 4" pressure discharge line approximately 1200 ft. in total length will be extended to serve the development and connect with the nearest city main sewer line (the gravity system on E1 Camino Real) . All of the residences within the project will have lateral connections into the project's gravity sewer main line that then connects to the lift station. The Conditions of Approval of Public Works Dept. specify conditions related to the sewer system including the on-site pumping station. Atascadero Mutual Water Company will supply water. The water main will be extended on the site along La Paloma Court and individual hookups will be provided for each residence. All of the other utilities (P.G. and E. , gas, telephone, cable TV) will be extended to all of the residences in the project through standard construction agreements with the suppliers of those specific utilities. The Public Works Dept. has a Condition of Approval that states that these utilities shall be installed underground and service lines shall be brought to the property line frontage of each lot during construction of La Paloma Court. Standards of the Residential Muli le Family Percent coverage: 40% maximum coverage of lot by' structures permitted. Project meets this standard. Enclosed storage: 100 sq. ft. per dwelling required. _ This is provided within the garage space. Outdoor recreation areas: j00 sq. ft. per unit required. Suffient space in provided by the individual yards. Additional space is provided in the 4 common open space lots. Screening wall: Not required because no single family uses abut the property. Fences already exist around Bordeaux House apartments. Covered parking: One covered space per dwelling unit required. This is provided by the 2-car garage for each unit. Environmental Concerns and Mitigation Measures Staff determined that although the proposed project could have some significant effects on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures have been added to the project. Revegetation graded areas in the creekway and rock rip-rap at drainage outlets entering the creekway is required. The previously proposed 2-ft. wide concrete channel for the creekway 0000 centerline will not be recommended. It is anticipated that natural plant succession will eventually re-establish native vegetation along the realigned creekway area. Drainage from the site to the north fork of Paloma Creek is to be controlled by the drainage measures shown on the Grading and Drainage Plan. In addition, the Conditions of Approval call for the addition of rock rip-rap at drainage outlets and revegetation of graded creekway areas to prevent erosion. Drainage from off the site is to be addressed by Conditions of Approval of Public Works Dept. which include improvement of the box culvert under Viejo Camino. The engineering design of the project for flood control is discussed in Exhibit H. The project shall meet the construction standards and other standards for the Flood Hazard Overlay Zone. The proposed 2- ft. wide concrete channel in the centerline of north fork of Paloma Creek shall not be installed; and that the creekway flow shall be maintained by appropriate regrading of the channel and the installation of rock rip-rap. Staff believes the elimination of the proposed concrete channel is more in keeping with the General Plan (ResidentialPolicy Proposal # 11, page 57) which recommends minimum disruption of native vegetation and watersheds. Because the creek has a relatively minor flow volume and is intermittent, it is probably not necessary to include the proposed 2-ft. wide concrete channel as a means of enhancing creek flow. The applicant submitted information on traffic analysis (contained in Exhibit G) . No adverse impact to the City's traffic system is anticipated. The Conditions of Approval call for a left-turn pocket to provide better pafety and to prevent backup of traffic on Viejo Camino behind vehicles turning left into the tract. Impacts on fire, police, schools, and parks are part of the cumulative effects generated by the addition of 19 single family homes. Impacts on these services are expected to be absorbed adequately within existing capacities of those services. For fire protection the site will have three on-site fire hydrants. La Paloma Court is to be a private street and will be maintained according to a private maintenance' agreement. The Viejo Camino road frontage improvements and widening will help mitigate traffic impacts. The sewer engineering design has been reviewed by the City Engineering Division and additional Conditions of Approval have been imposed by the Public Works Deptartment to ensure proper functioning of the system. The police department has requested that La Paloma Court should be a public street, however, under this Planned Development plan the street is intended to remain a private one because it serves only the residents of the project. The developer has stated that the guest parking spaces on La Paloma 00 (3 � Court (17 spaces) would give more than sufficient parking room for police vehicles. The Police Department has also expressed concern about the need for a repeater station in this area due to the poor radio reception. Development fees will be collected, a portion of which are directed toward public safety. An Archaeology Report of Dec. 19, 1989 by Charles Dills states that the site has no known significant archaeological resources. The recommendation of the report is that the project should be allowed to continue with no further archaeological impediment. CONCLUSIONS: Staff believes that the proposed project justifies the granting of the zone change establishing the Planned Development Number 7 Overlay, and that the proposed tentative tract map for single family housing presents a development which is consistent with the City' s General Plan and goals and policies. Staff believes that the areas of environmental concern will have been satisfactorily mitigated by the design of the project and by the Conditions of Approval for the tentative tract map. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A .- Zoning and General Plan 'Map Exhibit B - Development Summary Exhibit C - Tentative Tract Map 23-89 Exhibit D —Site Plan _ Exhibit E - Grading and Drainage Plan Exhibit F - Floor Plans/Elevations Exhibit G - Development Statement Exhibit H - Letter from Engineer Exhibit I - Negative Declaration Exhibit J - Draft Ordinance for Zone Change 13-89 with Findings for Approval Exhibit K - Findings for Approval for TTM 23-89 Exhibit L - Conditions of Approval for TTM 23-89 0OOQ ., ,,r. ��!!.•• : • • CITY C)F ATASCADERO EXHIBIT A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DEPARTMENT ZC 13-89 / TTM 23-89 I 1 PU 'I ArASCR•40 $rArr I� SITEalo��Irw� 11455r'..Viejo Cart' o = `. • LOW pyla � _ J oERSIn �� MULTI t � � � ••• • � • CREATION � `' t z, UTI• AMILT , �p ,T i .�/. f 4- 7. 7. /c so }` 4. _ 1 1` —' Zoning General Plan Van Gundy �ntn-Company La Paloma Estates 7s HOma Street Atascadero, Caft mia San Luis_nusm CA 93401 OQQ3� A- �1 \y- CITY F ATASCADERO PROJECT SUMMARY s T` COXIMUNITY DEVELOPMENT zC 13-89/TTM 23-89 DEPARTMENT La Paloma Estates A Planned Residential Development in Atascadero,Cal ifornia Project Description The property owners desire to develop their 5.69 acre property with 19 single family detached homes. The residences would consist of a mix of 3 and 4 bedrooms <�, designed with several different elevation treatments using a Spanish style architectural theme. The Planned Development concept would be employed', enabling the units to be located outside of the seasonal creek which crosses the property at the southern tip. 'This also permits the units to be clustered on areas of more gentle slopes. The development will include such amenities as interior pedestrian pathways and passive - recreational areas, uniform landscaping and buffer vegetation,, compatible architecture, uniform fencing, signage and lighting. Protect Options Other development options were considered, such as townhouse apartments and a large lot subdivision of the property for custom build-out after lot sales. Because of the large inventory of apartment properties presently available in the city of Atascadero and the large amount of grading activity that a mass of apartments or common-wall buildings would require, the apartment option was dismissed. Likewise dismissed was the option of developing a large lot subdivision (20,000 sq ft or larger lots), since the City contains a large inventory of attractive suburban residential properties that aren't located adjacent to a high density apartment project and a busy city park. It was decided then, that the most realistic and appropriate design solution for this site would be a low density development of single family detached residences clustered through the gentle sloping areas of the property. EXHIBIT D SITE PLAN .,.. CITY OF ATASCADERO zc 13-$9/TTM 23-$9 �—t«r,. D L '_05CAo. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Site Plan Conceptual Landscaping : -- -- kt 1 M La Paloma Estates J05"h Bftd t M.oaetes Sam t w CbW0.CA n Ataseadero, CalMornia Smit teW 000032 - ffl`, EXHIBIT E CITY OF 1�1C�SCADERO GRADING/DRAINAGE PLAN CI ZC 13-89/TTM 23-89 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Grading/Drainage/Utility Plan 00 J i • "' �•+ TLe Paloma Estates s.�wr oe4pe.CA ua� Atasmdefo, dikomia ----- —�� Wit:Baa son Luis ObiPo.CA SWI 00033 EXHIBIT F ELEVATIONS/FLOOR PLAN ' CITY OF :�•• , ... ATASCADERO ZC 13-89/TTM 23-89 �— ', sc��►oe�»� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT nay pn net w r w b'•l hM1. dl bC PLAN 'B' First Floor Second Floor 1891 Sq'Ft tt n Elevation 1 Elevation 2 awnwaumu Van our*ogweluarrom cono«* La Paloms Estates S-u�,,, Atascadero,California low�mhos,a"206 tea.CA ss•o+ son t,r om•va CA sHm i von' .. EXHIBIT G a JOSEPH BOUD ' i ASSOCIATES December 18, 198 , Michael Sullivan City of Atascadero' D E C 19 1999 Community Development Department 6500 Palma Avenue CQMMuNt i Y utvtL&MENT Atascadero, CA 93422 Re: La Paloma Estates Tract 18NPlanned Development Rezone 11455 Viejo Camino Dear Mr. Sullivan, ' As you requested in in your November 7, 1989 letter and clarified in our November 30 meeting,the following supplemental information is provided for your review and consideration. Project Design StandardslAdjustrnents lot Sizes. The Planned Development concept allows smaller lotsizes than specified in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. On this project; using smaller lot sizes and providing large, accessible and useable common areas presents an interesting design solution and provides obvious benefits to the future occupants of the property. The La Paloma Estates project has residential lot sizes that range from 6000 square feet to 17,270 square feet with an average size of 7,700 square feet The common area totals 66,500 square feet. Since each lot also has unrestricted access to and shares a fee We interest in the common lots,the average lotsize is actually 11,200 square feet. Rc�adwaylCirculation. Planned Developments allow for different roadway designs than ordinance standards. The roadway ghat loops through the property is proposed as a private street with two 12 foot wide travel lanes and guest parking spaces located conveniently throughout the loop. Parking spaces are proposed as 8 feet wide by 22 feet long,whic4 is the standard that is recommended in the Cal Trans Traffic Design Manual. Handicapped spaces are not proposed,since they are not a requirement for single family residences. Each,residence does contain a t io car garage and driveway area,which provides adequate area for this type of user. Building Settacks. Building setbacks have been reduced to Zia feet on some of the lots,which enables a driver to back out of the garage or driveway and still see both directions for oncoming traffic befcare actually entering the traveled roadway. Traffic Traffic generated from the 19 residential units swill number approximately 116 Trips Per Day*(TPD). As shown on the tractmap,a 12'over of dedication will be made along the Viejo Camino frontage and thatfrontage improved with curbs,gutters and sidewalks. The intersection of Viejo Camino and El Camino Real has recently been widened and resurfaced and contains a northbound acceleration lane and a continuous left turn lane for approximately 800 feet of southbound traffic. Both of these streets in this area continuously operate at Level of Serrice Wand no adverse impact to that system is anticipated. * tion Manual- 1982 edition. TPD standards from ITE Trip Genera 1009 Morro Street.Suite 206 � � 000035E� 1 Sm Luis 93401 80S/S4334S65 Road Improvement Plans & Sewer Improvement Plans These plans are included with the revised subdivision plans(attached)and also described in the original submittal package. Archaeological Study An archaeological surface search was conducted by Charles Dill,registered archaeologist,who concluded that the site is clear of any archaeological material. The preliminary finding letter is attached and the complete report will be fornyarded when received. Conditions, Covenants & Restrictions A craft set of CC&A's are attached. These covenants address such items as the operation and maintenance of all common walkway and landscape areas,project drainage system,sanitary sewer system,roadway and circculabon system,architecture and design compatibility, nuisances, and the management of same. Geology & Soils Evaluation A soils report was conducted and submitted with the initial application. The reportconcluded that the site was suitable and appropriate for resid6ntial developmentand contained standards and recommendadons for construction. Further,a geologic evaluation has been made,which also concluded that the site is an appropriate one for residential development This letterlevaluation is attached. Miscellaneous 'Check-IisC Items Other minor and miscellaneous items noted in your letterand check-list such as landowner consent form,signatures on the maps, locations and sizes of utilities,etc, have either been incorporated with the map revisions or ached to this transmittal. Please don't hesitate to contact my office should you have any questions on any of this material or require any addition information to help with yourreview of the project Sincerely, r Joe Loud Joseph Bo - t.ani�;.�,��ot;i,�FYI cc: Steve deCamp Henry Engen Attachments , 000036 Yv 1�' EXHIBIT H CUES?A ENGINEERING 7401-B EI Camino Real/P.O. Box 2066 Atascadero, California 93423 (805)466-6827 October 23, 1989 Planning Division City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Subject: Tentative Tract 1864 - Van Gundy La Paloma Estates , Viejo Camino Avenue Gentlemen: The attached tentative map application includes proposals for off- site sewer improvements and both on and off-site drainage channel' improvements along the North Fork of Paloma Creek. Sheets 2 and 3 of the tract map submittal describe the preliminary designs for these improvements. The sewer design for the project has been reviewed with the Engineering Division. We propose to serve the' individual lots with gravity service to a gravity main within the project site. A private lift station will pump to the public sewer in E1 Camino Real , near San Diego Road. According to Gary Sims , _there is adequate capacity in the existing main in E1 Camino Real. Pumping from the lift station will have to be in accordance with the current pumping schedule in effect for- this section of the sewer system. This pumping schedule currently regulates discharge from the Bordeaux House apartments , Casa Camino apartments , Lost Oak Mobile Home Park and other projects in the area, and was designed to accomodate future projects . The proposed lift station and holding tank will be designed to work within the constraints of the Pumping schedule. The project site is adjacent to the North Fork of Paloma Creek. This intermittant creek enters the property through existing box culverts under Viejo Camino and flows northeasterly between the site and Paloma Creek Park. The creek was included in the 1982 FEMA Flood Insurance Study for Atascadero. Portions of the site are located within the 100-year flood plain. The existing creek will be cleaned of debris and will be graded to carry a 100-year storm flow within the channel designed for the project. The improvement of this channel will relieve upstream property of standing water held back by debris and siltation. RECEIVED OCT 24 1989 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 00003'7 �5 The existing creek crosses the southerly corner of the project site and flows northeast along Paloma Creek Park property. The Park improvements have been designed to leave a wide strip of land available for this drainage course. Drainage improvements will include extension of the box culvert at Viejo Camino in conjunction with street widening, a concrete flowline gutter to relieve nuisance water on the site, and excavation of the channel on Park property to ensure positive flows through the Park. The channelization of the creek will accomodate 100-year storm flows . All future homes will be well above the flood plain levels designated- by the FEMA Study. , All work will be done in accordance with Ordinance 193 of the Municipal Code relating to Flood Damage Prevention. Drainage calculations based on the storm flows given in the FEMA Study are attached, along with preliminary- cross- sections of the proposed creek channel improvements . We would be pleased to meet with you to review this application and answer any questions regarding these proposed improvements . Sincerely, John Falkenstien R.C.E. 33760 89-038 . app r 0000.38 , EXHIBIT I �� .. ` CITY L" ATASCADERO NEGATIVE DECLARATION ZC 13-89/TTM 23-89 COMA�fUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF ATASCADERO � fir u• son 7 ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION COMMUN=DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 6500 PALMA AVE. ATASCADERO.CA 93422 (805)461-5035 APPLICANT: V,t i2 n�(' �/n� G✓►�,o'Y 'fig 9' ri�!rvEr•-.� sem' crr i. 5^VJ L._ 4a tL4 o�iS1'd, �oN� GHi1 nXfE tai= P�a� WLIVI F— �O�HTa Gov T`C N T PROJECT TITLE: i, ro 4�- n-n tei�G io 2"3 8 L PROJECT LOCATION: 1 1 A-,;5, v t>i:5a C,-,r-1 i N0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ?otJ G GN^,vG-E lefcvnn ,,i�E S i��*�"(�t� n� t,-c i- Finn►t.Y % 4e -Cy "Y't",torjew D6\,rf- M 6. ,- o.iGn-i-n'C Nco�nnv36'W'- 0 I:c 'W'-oI:c -(wa E;Kk�*-(%N(�- -CS aF -ro--c^tom AY?_C'A _� G�'/ /�G✓Ltioi l N-CO��VcTC S Icp'�i°`C�rnOa.��rZ.�h� 1:/t�A i c,�(' t2.0 el 110 GN FINDINGS: 1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment. 2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. 3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited.but comulatively considerable. 4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. DETERMINATION: Based on the above findings.and the information contained in the initial study(made a part hereof by refer- ence and on file in the Community Development Department).it has been determined that the above project will not have an adverse impact on the environment. Henry Engen Community Development Director Date Posted: A4A"N Z?, 199a Date Adopted: cm„-6v 000039 t EXHIBIT J ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 23 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 11455 VIEJO CAMINO FROM RMF/10 (FH) TO RMF/10 (FH) (PD7) (ZC 13-89: Van Gundy/Boud) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 17, 1990 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 13-89. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Council Findings. 1. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use and zoning. 2. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan land use element. 1. 3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. 4. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted to promote orderly and harmonius development. 5. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a beneficial effect on the area. 6. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably achieved through existing development standards or processing requirements. 000040 Ordinance No. ' 7. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to compensate for requested modifications. Section 2. Zoning Map.' Map number 23 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Lot 12 and 13, Block 67; Atascadero Colony Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12: 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by , the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: ROLLIN DEXTER, Mayor City of Atascadero, California 000042 -%J j ATTEST: LEE DAYKA, Acting City Clerk .APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: RAY WINDSOR, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director 000042 �` EXHIBIT A CITY OF ATASCADERO ZONING MAP �, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 207 DEPARTMENT I b y S ITE N/4- I ;f , i yQ R ` � 3 t EL 6N ( FHS R rha QE,L R;S r m a Z 4 aTASC.1pI% � w a 000043 �• CITY OF ATASCADERO EXHIBIT Al. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TRACT MAP DEPARTMENT ORDINANCE 207 aAa.itYo AR.�n Subdivision Plan -Tract 1864 rOfOOtHtc ARMY .� •' - _� '� r r. ' Tw .,� \ .-w \_ wn'1:a u woa a . -��1..11�� a+ •� aresG�y uira�rvr c.mn evv�=� '..�— VM°�:owwompam La Paloma Estates . a.Ge e...M.ea... Atascadem.California 1000 a""SWOK 3 tos 3�LUG t]ssa G tt3�01 SM tft fb IM G=401 000044 'Ob605 '- $0, EXHIBIT R - Findings for Approval Tentative Tract Map 23-89 11455 Viejo Camino (Van Gundy/Boud) April 17, 1990 ENVIRONNENTAL FINDING: The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. NAP FINDINGS: 1. The proposed map is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 2. The design and/or improvements of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. The design of the subdivision, as conditioned 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 design of the subdivision and/or the type of proposed improvements will not cause serious health problems. 000045 Exhibit J - Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 23-89 11455 Viejo Camino (Van Gundy/Boud) April 17, 1990 (as revised by the Planning Commission) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water services shall be extended to the property line frontage of each parcel prior to the recording of the final map. 2 . All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3 . All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer. 4 . The newly formed lots shall be connected to the Public Sewer. All annexation permit fees in effect at the time of recordation shall be paid for the newly created lots prior to the recording of the final map. Any sewer extensions for annexation must be completed within one .year after annexation. 5 . Sewer main extension plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to the recording of the final map. 6. Provide a sewer pump station design with flow limited to 150 gallons per minute. Demonstrate that the pump time for this project can be coordinated with the other pump stations along E1 Camino Real. 7 . Grading, and Drainage plans , prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to The Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to the issuance of any building permits or the recording of the final map. 8 . Obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Atascadero Public Works Department. Sign an Inspection Agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done and the inspections paid for prior to the start _of public works construction. Construct improvements as directed by the encroachment permit prior to final building inspection for the first structure or the expiration of one year, whichever comes first. 000046 a� AS �� 9. A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be included in the C.C.& R. ' s for this tract. 10 . Road improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Public Works Department. Plans shall include, but not limited to the following. Viejo Camino: Design shall include City standard curb, gutter and, 5 foot sidewalk. Pavement shall be widened to a 32 foot wide travel surface from centerline to face of curb. Include a left turn lane on Viejo Camino to serve La Paloma Court. La Paloma Court: Design shall include 20 feet of pavement as shown on the Grading/Drainage plan. No on-street parking is allowed other than in designated locations . 11 . Provide a landscaping plan for review and approval by the Director of Community Development. Landscaping shall include placement of trees and appurtenant irrigation system along the Viejo Camino right of way. A maintenance easement shall be provided to the City across proposed lots 22 and 23 for future tree trimming. A landscape maintenance agreement shall be included in the C.C.& R' s . An agreement and security for the maintenance or replacement of landscape plants and trees for a period of one year after recording the tract map shall be posted with the Department of Public Works . The form of the agreement and security shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Public Works . 12 . Construction of the public road improvements shall be completed or suitable guarantees shall have been provided prior to recording the final map. 13 . All public improvements shall be covered with a 100% Performance Bond and a 100% Labor and Material Bond until construction is accepted and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until 1 year after construction approval. 14 . All utilities shall be installed underground and service lines shall be brought to the property line frontage of each lot during the construction of La Paloma Court. 15 . Parcels 22 & 23 shall have no direct access to Viejo Camino . Access shall be by way of the La Paloma Court. Relinquishment of access rights shall be delineated on the final map. 16. Drainage Facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero Standards . All work shall be suitably guaranteed 00004'7 14( prior to recording the final map, and completed prior to the final building inspection for the first structure. 17. All grading and erosion control measures shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and constructed in accordance with the City of Atascadero grading codes and standards. Prior to recording the final map the engineer shall submit to the City written certification that grading is in conformance with said codes and standards. 18 . The City shall be provided with an easement to access and maintain the north fork of Paloma Creek channel. Mowing, weed control, erosion control, removal oflitter, and other routine maintenance activities shall be the responsibility of the development. These activities shall be addressed in the C.C.& R' s . 19. The developer shall grade and. lower the creek channel below the box culvert invert. The channel shall be lowered the full length of the Paloma Park property. The creek shall remain in its natural state with rock rip-rap at drainage outlets, but no concrete channelization. 20 . The developer shall relocate the Paloma Park fence, to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks and ;Recreation, as necessary to accommodate the redirected creek channel. 21 . Provide a site drainage plan demonstrating that the drainage facilities proposed will accommodate the 10 year runoff event and that the 100 year runoff event will be contained within roadways or other drainage swales. 22 . Extend the box culvert located beneath Viejo Camino as necessary to support the road widening and sidewalk. Extend metal beam guard rails and bridge railing at back of sidewalk as directed by the Director of Public Works . 23 . Of-ers of dedication to the City of Atascadero the following right-of-way. Street Name: Viejo Camino Limits : 42 feet from centerline of right of way along entire project frontage. 24 . Of'-O'er for dedication to the Public for Public Utility Easements the following: a. A 6' -0" PUE along La Paloma Court frontage. b. La Paloma Court right of way 25 . Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneous with the recordation of the final map. 000048 fNrir 26. Prior to the recording of the final map, a soils investigation as required by the Subdivision Map Act shall be submitted, recommending corrective actions which will prevent structural damage to each structure proposed to be constructed in the area where soil problems exist, as indicated in the Preliminary Soils Report. The date of such reports, the name of the Engineer making the report, and the location where the reports are on file shall be noted on the final map. 27 . The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances, architectural control of all buildings, driveway and landscape maintenance. These C.C.& R. ' s shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and the Community Development Department prior to the recording of the final map. 28 . Three (3) City standard fire hydrants are required as approved by the Fire Department. 29. A final map in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s Subdivision Ordinance prior to the recording of the final map. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor as required by the Land Surveyors Act and Subdivision Map Act . Monuments set within any road right of way shall conform to city standard drawing M-1. b. Pursuant to section 66497, of the Subdivision Map Act the engineer or surveyor shall notice the City Engineer in writing that the monuments have been set. c. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. d. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 30 . 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. 31 . Subject to the approval of the State of California, the creek walk shall be extended along the entire length of the North Fork Paloma Creek to the existing pathway within 0 0 0049 Paloma Creek Park. 32 . Plans for interior fences along the common; open space areas shall be reviewed and approved by staff to ensure conformance with the Design Review Guidelines and to preserve the sense of open space intended by the common areas . 000050 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 6/8/93 Via: Henry Engen, Community Development Director A, From: Gary Kaiser, Associate Planner'��-'R`j File No. : SMARA SUBJECT: Public hearing to consider the results of recent surface mine inspections and provide direction to staff with respect to reporting inspection results to mine operators and the State. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REQUIRED INSPECTIONS: Based on information contained. in Report of Results: Mined Land Reclamation and Compliance, the Council should authorize staff to finalize this year' s surface mine inspections and thereby: 1. Order the termination of mining activities on Atascadero Mutual Water Company property (Salinas River Sand Pit) until such time as a new surface mining permit (CUP) and Reclamation Plan are approved per current requirements; 2. Allow continued exclusive use of the Santa Lucia Road mine (Millhollin Pit) by the County of San Luis ' Obispo on the condition that good faith efforts be made to have financial assurances for site reclamation, and a revised Reclamation Plan, approved in a timely manner. If financial assurances are not approved within six (6) weeks of this bearing, and/or if a revised Reclamation Plan is not submitted for approval within three (3) months of this hearing, an order to cease mining activities shall be issued. Both financial assurances and the revised Reclamation Plan shall be reviewed under current CEQA and SMARA requirements -- including an assessment of truck traffic and related impacts on circulation. 3. Admonish the County of San Luis Obispo as to the seriousness of unsafe vehicle operations associated with their use of the Santa Lucia Road mine (Millhollin Pit) . PROLOGUE: The purpose of this hearing is to: ( 1) gather general information regarding mining activities and (2) authorize staff to finalize required mine inspections. This item has not been noticed as a nuisance abatement hearing nor does it involve the approval or re- approval of existing entitlements to conduct surface mining activities. 000051 BACKGROUND: The staff report prepared for the Council' s April 14, 1992 meeting (assuming lead agencies responsibilities and regulatory control over surface mining operations) and memorandum to Council dated August 7, 1992 (progress report on mine regulation) are attached hereto and provide the background necessary for consideration of this matter (Attachments A & B) . Since distribution of the August 7, 1992 memorandum to Council, the consulting firm of Sierra-Pacific Groundwater Consultants, Inc. was selected to perform inspections of the two (2) mining operations within the City and present inspection results in the form of a draft report containing the following: * Adequacy of existing Reclamation Plans; * The degree to which the mining operations are in conformance with existing Reclamation Plans and applicable State and local requirements; * The degree to which the existing Reclamation Plans and mining operations conform to current mining and reclamation standards; * The estimated cost of site reclamation and the adequacy of existing financial assurances for reclamation, if any; * Recommendations for improving mining operations, Reclamation Plans and/or streamlining future inspections. On January 4, 1993, the draft report was made available for public review and comment. After considering comments received, a final report was prepared, entitled Report of Results: Mined Land Reclamation and Compliance (transmitted to Council under separate cover) . The final report provides the City with technical information regarding mining activities in the City and facilitates completion of the City' s first series of mine inspections (required annually) . ANALYSIS: The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) requires lead agencies to conduct annual inspections of surface mining operations within their jurisdiction to ensure that mining activities are in conformance with approved Reclamation Plans. The required inspections and review of financial assurances for reclamation of mined land are exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements and do not require public hearings. Although a public hearing is not required for the current task (completing inspections) , it is felt that public input is necessary for the Council to be made fully aware of mining issues. This is the rationale for staff' s decision to present the Report of Results to the Council at a noticed public hearing. 000052 Summary of Findinus The consultant has found that both of the existing Reclamation Plans for the two mines in Atascadero were approved by the County in error -- neither was subject to environmental review, State review nor public hearings, yet all of these things were required at that time of original approval ( 1980) . In addition to these procedural flaws, both of the approved Reclamation Plans are fraught with technical oversights. With respect to the required inspections, the consultant has found the Salinas River (Mutual Water Company) mine to not be in conformance with the approved Reclamation Plan. Generally, the Salinas River Reclamation Plan relies on seasonal rains to reclaim the site (fill the hole) naturally, yet on the date of inspection a large depression was observed in the river channel indicating not only that planned Reclamation was not working but that adverse effects on stream flows and associated lateral erosion could result from continued mining. The Santa Lucia Road mine (Millhollin Pit) , however, was found to be in substantial conformance with the approved Reclamation Plan (however inadequate). While in substantial conformance with approved plans, the mine lacks adequate financial assurances for reclamation. Public Comment on Draft Report/Neighborhood Concerns Although the final report responds to many of the comments received, copies of actual written comments are not included in the report. Therefore, copies of three (3) letters received from the public in regards to the Santa Lucia Road mine have been attached hereto (Attachment C) . In addition to these letters, a form letter regarding this mine was circulated among neighborhood residents. Thirty-three (33) people' signed and submitted this form letter, with several people adding comments of their own. A copy of the form letter is contained in Attachment 'D. These comments indicate a general discontent with the existence of the Santa Lucia Road mine and that testimony to this effect will likely be received at the hearing. Generally; these comments are an expression of the public' s understandable frustration towards the County and the fact that Reclamation Plan approval was granted without due process (public hearings, environmental ,review, etc. ) . SMARA Section 2774. 1 (d) states: "If the lead agency or the State Geologist determines that the surface mine is not in compliance with this chapter, so that the surface mine presents an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or the environment, the lead agency or the Attorney general, on behalfof the State geologist, may seek an order from a court of competent jurisdiction enjoining that operation. " 000053 SMARA Section 2715 includes the following language: "No provision of this chapter or any ruling, requirement, or policy of the Board is a limitation on any of the following; (a) On the police power of any city or county or on the power of any city or county to declare, prohibit and abate nuisances. " In response to public concerns, therefore, and realizing that the Santa Lucia Road mine is a vested operation which is not up for re- approval by virtue of the required inspections, the Council may want to advise the public of the City' s nuisance abatement process. At a noticed public hearing, the Council, with City Attorney present, could consider the legal ramifications of mine closure based on public nuisance Findings. CONCLUSIONS: Upon filing inspection results with the State, the City would have satisfied its first lead agency responsibility under SMARA. With the availability of the Report of Results, the City can continue efforts towards resolving mining-related problems which exist as a result of poor planning practices of the past. Likewise, the City is prepared to act on new mining/reclamation proposals, if and when received, with knowledge of State requirements and in a manner that ensures due process for its citizenry. Again, the inspections are not to confirm that existing Reclamation Plans are adequate nor are they to reassess the appropriateness of surface mining from a land use perspective. The inspections are solely to ascertain whether mining activities are being conducted in accordance with existing, approved Reclamation Plans. Notwithstanding the fact that Reclamation Plans for both of the City' s mining operations are inadequate; it has been found that one mining operation (Millhollin Pit) is in substantial conformance with its Reclamation Plan and one (Salinas River Sand Pit) is not. Further, it has been found that continued use of the mine found not to be in conformance (Salinas River Sand Pit) could have detrimental effects to other properties and should therefore be prohibited. As far as long-term resolution of noted problems at the Santa Lucia Road site, staff feels the City should seek cooperation from the County (mine operator) and Mr. Millhollin (property owner) in establishing a workable timeframe for having a new/revised Reclamation Plan approved that meets current SMARA, CEQA and procedural requirements. In reviewing such a new/revised Reclamation Plan for this mine, a "sunset date" should be established for the eventual cessation of mining activities as ( 1) eternal mining is fundamentally unrealistic and (2) mining will continue to be an increasingly incompatible land use amid suburban residential buildout of the surrounding area. 000054 Whereas immediate mine closure would solve problems associated with traffic, noise and dust, and would protect the site from further disturbance, it does not appear to be the best long-term solution for site reclamation. The existing scar in the hillside could remain an eyesore with potential health and (safety hazard unsuitable for practically any reuse whatsoever. In staff ' s opinion, the preferred approach would be to have a 'well-conceived new/revised Reclamation Plan developed that allows interim use of the mine while working towards an acceptable end product for the site and surrounding area. Attachments: Attachment A - Staff Report dated April 14, 1992 Attachment B - Memorandum dated August 7, 1992 Attachment C - Public Comments Received Attachment D - Form Letter Received Separate Cover: Report of Results: Mined Land Reclamation and Compliance, Sierra-Pacific Groundwater Consultants, Inc. , May, 12 1993. CC:RW/HE-gvk.smara2 000055 ATTACHMENT A Staff Report of 4/14/ SMARA Hearing/Inspect REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-3 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 4/14/92 Via: Henry Engen, Community Development Director}e From: Gary Raiser, Associate Planner64- File No. : SMARA SUBJECT: Assuming lead agency responsibilities and associated regulatory control over surface mining operations RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends that the City of Atascadero assume lead agency responsibilities for surface mining operations within its jurisdiction through certification by the State Mining and Geology Board (Board) . In order to accomplish this, Council must: (1) adopt a new ordinance relative to surface mining and reclamation activities; and (2) direct staff to develop a work schedule, which may involve obtaining the services of a consultant, for performing annual inspections of existing mining operations and ensuring that adequate financial assurances exist for the reclamation of all mined lands. BACKGROUND: Recent amendments to the State Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (CA PRC Section 2710 et seq. -- SMARA) require local lead agencies to (1) conduct annual inspections of all surface mining operations within their jurisdiction for conformance with applicable state and local requirements, and (2) ensure that adequate financial assurances exist to guarantee reclamation of mined lands. The inspections, which are required this year and every year hereafter, are to be prepared on a state-issued form._ When staff sought to obtain the necessary forms, we were informed by the Board that Atascadero was not a "certified" lead agency authorized to perform the newly required inspections. In fact, we were told that the City of Atascadero has no authority whatsoever to implement the provisions of SMARA, regardless of existing Zoning Ordinance language addressing surface mining and reclamation activities, until such time as we become certified. The Board went on to state that, although there are two mines now located within our incorporated jurisdiction, lead agency status remained with the County. The County has made it clear that they would rather not regulate mines within our City Limits, even though they were the agency that had approved the original entitlements for these two operations prior to incorporation. 00005G The two (2) surface mining operations within the City of Atascadero are: the Salinas Sand Company operation on Atascadero Mutual Water Company property within and adjacent to the Salinas 'River channel; and the so-called Millhollin Pit located in the 11500 block of Santa Lucia Road. Due to the provisions of SMARA, and the current vesting of responsibility with the County, the City's regulatory powers are extremely limited with respect to ; these mining operations. There have been several citizen complaints relative to both mining sites and, in order to effectively respond, the City would have to be designated lead agency under SMARA through certification by the Board. Assuming Lead Agency Status Board certification is granted by our transmitting an adopted local. ordinance (regulating surface mining and reclamation activities in accordance with SMARA) to the Board for review and 'approval. On January 30, 1992, relevant pages of the Zoning Ordinance were forwarded to the Board for preliminary review. Six (6) weeks later, after receiving no response from the Board, staff inquired as to the status of that review. Apparently our existing Zoning Ordinance language confused Board staff with respect to the modifications/amendments necessary for "approvability. " Alternatively, the Board suggested we consider adopting a model ordinance on the subject, which is fully up-to-date with SMARA regulations. Such an ordinance has been attached hereto for review and introduction. SMARA Implementation --Consultant Needed Once certified by the Board, the City' s ,immediate responsibilities under SMARA would be two-fold. The City would be obligated to: ( 1) inspect each of the surface mining operations within its jurisdiction for SMARA compliance and conformance to all applicable local requirements and approvals, and (2) ensure that adequate financial assurances exist, in a form payable to and approved by both the City and State Geologist, to guarantee site reclamation. Both of these duties will require time and expertise beyond that currently available in house. It is anticipated, therefore, that a consultant would have to be retained by the City to perform required inspections, recognizing that SMARA regulations permit the costs associated with such outside expertise to be charged to the respective mine owners. ooh# �. Fiscal Impact: According to an October 3, 1990 letter from James A. Anderson, Chairman of the State Mining and Geology Board, lead agencies are authorized to charge mining operations for their costs of administering SMARA. In fact, SMARA Section 2774(b) states that "the operator shall be solely responsible for the reasonable cost of the inspection (emphasis added) . " Thus, the direct cost of the required inspections, plus a reasonable administrative fee, is the responsibility of the "applicants. " It is anticipated that inspections will be conducted and reports generated following a process similar to that currently used for Environmental Impact Report (EIR) preparation. CONCLUSIONS: The City presently has very little control over existing surface mining activities within its jurisdiction, and has. no authority to act on new applications or amendments to existing entitlements. Moreover, without obtaining lead agency status, the City is impotent to respond to citizen complaints and/or other legitimate concerns about a specific mine operation. Once in control, new regulatory responsibilities should have no substantive fiscal impacts. Staff feels that Atascadero residents (and the natural environment) would be best served, and best represented, by the City assuming , lead agency responsibilities under SMARA. Attachment -- Draft Ordinance 242 CC:RW/HE-gvk.smara 000058 alkl .. ATTACHMENT B Memo dated 8/7/92 SMARA Hearing/Inspecti MEMORANDUM TO: City Council Members THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manage VIA: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 44 FROM: Gary Kaiser, Associate PlannerC� SUBJECT: SMARA Update -- City's Progress in Regulating Mines DATE: August 7, 1992 This is intended to provide the Council with a brief progress report on our regulation of surface mining operations. So far. . . Following the Council's adoption of Ordinance 242 came the June 15, 1992 adoption of Resolution #92-10 by the State Mining and Geology Board (copy enclosed) . This action finalized our efforts to become a certified lead agency under California's Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) . Now that lead agency status has been secured, staff has been working to carry out State-mandates to conduct inspections of mining operations and ensure that adequate financial assurances exist for the reclamation of mined lands. It should be noted that the "Millhollin Pit" was ordered to stop work in a letter dated April 24, 1992. The reason for the stop work order was twofold: first, an abandoned vehicle on the site constituted a nuisance and health and safety hazard; second, an approved business license was lacking for the use. The stop work order has recently been lifted, however, as the abandoned vehicle was removed and the County has entered into a lease agreement with Mr. Millhollin to assume all responsibility for the mining operation. Mr. Millhollin has been issued a business license for the commercial leasing of his property, and the County's use of the pit is believed to be exempt from business license requirements (no re-sale or profit is involved and the use is therefore not a business) . We believe the stop work order sent a clear message to Mr. Millhollin and the County that, with the City of Atascadero as lead agency, mining activities will not go unregulated. Upon realizing that this would now be the case, and despite the County's adamant refusal to perform lead agency functions within Atascadero while they were the State-recognized lead agency, the County attempted to file their own inspection. City staff refused to accept this inspection, and it is now understood that a consultant selected by the City will conduct this year' s inspections, including the review of financial assurances, at the expense of mine operators. 000059 On July 7, 1992, RFPs were sent to qualified consultants believed to be interested in performing these tasks (copy enclosed) . The proposals are due today, but will be accepted if postmarked no later than today. Upon receiving proposals, staff will continue to work with mine operators/land owners to refine a work scope and select a consultant. Coming soon. . . Although mine inspections and the review of financial assurances is exempt from the requirements of CEQA, public participation at some stage in this process is desirable. This is especially true insomuch as there was no public involvement or environmental review associated with past approvals granted by the County (1980 Reclamation Plans) . In any case, we plan' to develop a process similar to that used for EIRs for said inspections -- preparation of a draft report, presentation at a public hearing, preparation of a final report to include responses to public comment, and acceptance by the City Council prior to submitting findings to the State. For more information on this subject, or for clarification of any of the above, please feel free to contact me at (805) 461-5035. cc: Art Montandon, City Attorney Enclosures (2) 000060 STATE OF CALIFORNIA - THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION 09-05ASS TE MINING AND GEOLOGY BOARD .CE�� D ,jU 2 fit` K Street .r Sacramento, CA 95814-3500 James A.Anderson,Chairman DeWayne Uolmdahl t Telephone:(9161322-1082 Bob Grunwald T00 lane: (9161324-2555 R.Gary Mer June 18, 1992 Julie Mann Raymond Krauss Lee 7hibadeau Henry Engen, Director _ City of Atascadero Planning Department 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mr. Engen: State Certification of the City of Atascadero's Surface Mining and Reclamation Ordinance 1242 Adopted June 15, 1992 s i On June 15, 1992 the State Mining and Geology Board certified the City of Atascadero's surface mining and reclamation ordinance as being in conformance with State policy governing the regulation ' of surface mining and reclamation activities in California (Resolution # 92-10 enclosed) . - This action completed the certification procedure for the subject ordinance as required by .� Section 2774.3 of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 f, (SMARA) , also enclosed. i Certification assures that each ordinance contains a basic core of procedural requirements, and is consistent with State policy, for the review and approval of reclamation plans and the issuance of permits to conduct surface mining operations. After certification of a local -ordinance, it is the continuing responsibility of the local agency, as lead agency for SMARA purposes, to implement and enforce its ordinance in accordance with the provisions and requirements of the Act. In particular, it is important to realize the intent of the reclamation portion of the Act is that reclamation plans are prepared and approved for all lands disturbed by surface mining operations after January 1, 1976. f S t 000061 PETE WILSON, Govrrmor /AENT F CALIFORNIA - THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CONSERVATION -05 �� STATE MINING AND GEOLOGY BOARD RESOLUTION #92-10 ' 4; 801 K Street Sacramento, CA 95814-3500 Certification of SMARA ordinance James A.Anderson,Chairman Telepbona 49161 322-1062 pewayae uolmdabl City„ of Atascadero T00 line 19163 324-2555 Bob Grunwald R.Gary&Eller Julie&iron Raymond Krauss Lead agencies with active surface mining operations in their Lee7hibadcau jurisdictions are required to adopt ordinances, in accordance with specific criteria, which establish procedures for review and approval of reclamation plans and the issuance of permits to conduct surface mining operations. This action is pursuant to Section 2774 (a) of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) . Section 2774.3 of the Act :also requires that the State Mining and Geology Board review these local SMARA ordinances to determine whether each such ordinance is in accordance with State policy and. to certify them if they. are in accordance. On May 2, 1981, the Board, by Resolution ,J81-6, adopted the.. following criteria as constituting the minimum requirements for certification of ordinances: (1) The ordinance shall establish procedures for the review and approval of reclamation plans, financial assurances, and the issuance of permits to conduct surface mining operations. (2) The ordinance shall establish procedures requiring at least one public hearing and annual inspections. (3) The ordinance shall neither "contradict the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975, nor the State policy for surface mining and reclamation as adopted by the Board. The City of Atascadero submitted Ordinance No. 242, adding Chapter 9 to Title 5 of the Atascadero. Municipal Code relating to surface mining and reclamtion regulations, for certification. The Board, having reviewed this ordinance, finds that it meets the certification criteria. Therefore, the State Mining and Geology Board resolves to certify Chapter 9 of Title 5 of the Atascadero Municipal Code, as amended by Ordinance No. 242 (adopted April 28, 1992) , as it adds Chapter 9 to Title 5 of the Atascadero Municipal Code, as being in compliance with State policy governing the regulation of surface mining and reclamation in California. An"lrso 64A Chairman ADOPTED: June 15, 1992 -000062 Henry Engen June 18, 1992 Page 2 Section 2774.3 (b) of the Act also requires that future adopted amendments to the ordinance must similarly be certified by the State Board before the ordinance in its revised form can take effect. You should also be aware that should there be future changes in the State policy for surface mining and reclamation, then there may be a need for corresponding changes in the ordinance pursuant to Section 2774.4 (a) . Thank you for your cooperation in the certification process. If the Board can be of any further assistance to you, please contact Deborah Herrmann, Executive Officer, at (916) 322-1082. -�incerely, ".►�w'� A James A. Anderson Chairman Enclosures cc: --Gary--Kaiser, Associate Planner, City of Atascadero i t -000063 �.� •• • • CITY OF ATASCADERO ia>Is e >ta e7e7 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT July 7, 1992 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS -- SURFACE MINING INSPECTION Dear Consultant: The City of Atascadero has recently been certified by the State Mining and Geology Board to perform lead agency functions pursuant to the State Surface Mining and ReclamationAct of 1975 (PRC Sec. 2710 et seq. ) and City Ordinance No. 242. Having secured this jurisdictional authority, the City is now seeking a qualified consultant to assist the City in bringing the two (2) surface mining operations within its jurisdiction into compliance with applicable State and local requirements. Specifically, a consultant is sought to perform inspections of these two existing surface mining operations and present inspection results to the City in the form of a draft report containing the following: - * The adequacy. of the existing Reclamation Plans; * The degree to which the mining operations are in conformance with existing Reclamation Plans and applicable State and local requirements; * The degree to which the existing reclamation plans and mining operations conform to current mining and reclamation standards; * The estimated cost of site reclamation and the adequacy of existing financial assurances for reclamation, if any; * Recommendations for improving mining operations, reclamation plans and/or streamlining future inspections. it is anticipated that a final report will also be prepared containing the consultant' s responses to comments and/or questions regarding the draft report. Both the draft report and final report may be items considered by the City Council at a public hearing. 6500 PALMA AVENUE • ATASCADERO, CA 93422 Building Pefnuts:18051461-5060 Planning:(805)461-5035 Enforcement:(805)461-5034 Director:4805)461-5097 City Fax:(805)461-0606 000064 Proposals are to include the following: * Estimated total cost, as well as a cost breakdown, for completion of work (including attendance at public meetings, delivery of five (5) preliminary drafts of the report(s) , ten (10) draft reports, and ten (10) final reports) ; * Indication of any sub-contractors) to be used, and the study area of each sub-contractor(s) ; * Estimated time required to complete work; * Qualifications of the consultant to perform work, and examples of similar work/references. The City' s selection of a consultant will be based on qualifications, cost, and ability to complete desired work in a timely manner. It is unlikely,. but possible, that the selection process will also include interviewing of preferred candidates following an initial screening of proposals. The successful consultant will perform under contract with the City; the contract, among other things, will contain provisions for insurance coverage and prevailing wages. Please mail or deliver proposals to: Community Development Department Attention: Gary Raiser City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue, Room 311 Atascadero, California 93422 All proposals must be received by 5:00 pm on Friday, August 7, 1992. If you have any questions regarding this RFP, or need additional information or background materials, please contact Gary Raiser in the Community Development Department at (805) 461-5035. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Henry Eng n Community Development Director Enclosures: Location Map(s) City Ordinance No. 242 Copy of Reclamation Plans/Operator's Report (one mine only) 000065 ATTACHMENT C Public Comments ReceivE 12100 Cenegal Road SMARA Hearing/Inspectic Atascadero, CA 93422 February 12 , 1993 CITY OF ATASCADERO Community Development Department 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 "WE FACE URGENT ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES THAT DEMAND A NEW WAY OF THINKING. . . " . . . Presiden`_ Bill Clin`_On February 8 , 1993 In this year of 1993 it is truly time to face up to the responsibility we have to our environment. Throughout the entire "Report of Results, Mined Land Reclamation and Compliance, " there are no mentioned alternatives to the destruction of the eastern hillside of the Paradise Valley. This is the essential bottom line of the issue - a hill is being irrevocably destroyed in favor of maintaining a contract between the land owner and the County of San Luis Obispo. Contracts can be broken and it is time that this be discussed. The City of Atascadero gains no benefit by destroying its greatest asset: its beautiful hills ! 0 There are approximately 150 homes directly affected by this quarry (notto mention the homes along the trucking route) , yet-these people are not being protected by their city. What are the real reasons for this collusion between city, county, and land owner? Whv has there never been open, competitive bidding for the purchase of these road materials? It is common knowledge that there are other locations that would be more suitable for providing these road base materials which are not smack in the middle of a residential neighborhood! The hazards that have been created will only grow larger, the longer the quarry is allowed to continue operation. The environmental scar is only going to get bigger. The chances of an accident caused by the semi trucks travelling on narrow, winding city roads which our children use daily (with no sidewalks) only increase. Will it take the death of an innocent child walking home from school for the city to recognize its responsibility to its citizens? Article 1 , Section 2715 of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 clearly states : No provision of�his chapter or any ruling, requirement, or policv of the board is a limitation on any of the following : (a) On the police power of any city or county or on the power of any city or county to declare, prohibit, and abate nuisances. z 000066 City of Atascadero -2- February 12, 1993 (b) On the power of the Attorney General, at the request of the board, or upon his own motion, to bring an action in the name of the people of the State of California to enjoin any pollution or nuisance. (d) On the right of any person to maintain at any time any appropriate action for relief against any private nuisance as defined in Part 3 (commencing with Section 3479) of Division 4 of the Civil Code or for any other private relief . THE CITY HAS FULL POWER TO END THIS DESTRUCTION CLEARLY STATED IN THE ABOVE PROVISIONS; IT IS TIME IT USES THAT POWER! The logic of the Recommendation for Reclamation and Compliance, Page 24 , Section 4 . 1 , No. l, is faulty -and-makes no sense. It does not follow that because "Road maintenance is an essential government responsibility, and local roads are used by virtually every San Luis Obispo County resident. " : "That the Milhollin (Santa Lucia) quarry remain open and continue providing aggregate base materials for local road construction and maintenance. " It appears that the justification for this recommendation is the low cost of purchasing this material. I submit to you that. the TRUE cost of acquiring this material is far greater than is stated. The total true cost of materials should include: - (1) Purchase price of material . (2) Mining operation costs, i .e. , labor , equipment rental (3 ) Hauling costs from mine to construction sites or storage areas , i .e . , fuel, insurance, depreciation (mauling costs are greater than need be because there are sources of material closer to construction sites . ) (4 ) Stockpiling (causes double handling which equals double costs) (5) Liability costs (6) Reclamation costs All of these costs are subject to inflation and should be estimated in terms of future values . This issue brings much questioning regarding the efficiency of our Countv Roads Department. Why is the huge budget of County Roads in the hands of unchecked persons (i .e. , Dan Beck?) who oversees these decisions? It is a proven fact that much of the materials acquired from the quarry are used in "make work" situations . Semi trucks have been followed from the quarry to destinations 45 minutes away from the site to fill road shoulders on remote county roads that did not require such work. Whv are the citizens paying for road crews leaning on shovels in remote area waiting for trucks to arrive? What is the 000067. City of Atascadero -3- ebr_lar_y 12 , 1993 basis for work priorities of the Roads Department? Where are the roads specifications? This $9 . 7 million annual budget for roads cannot give up 10% for bike lanes without compromising basic road maintenance? The "basic road maintenance should not include make-work situations on roads which are not in need of repair ! Back to the "Reclamation Plan" : Because the present slopes are so steep, the only way to achieve reclamation is by disturbing considerably more mountainside . If t-he quarry remains open, the size_ of this Scar increases phenomenally , mu redt e`" t:"a'= wheat nas been _ :di cared in owner su. itta' s . The plan to reclaim the land for housing development has a large flaw: the red rock material is not suitable for -septic tank percolation. Unless these home owners are willing to use composting toilets , the only alternative is to bring in vast amounts of fill soil . It is also very questionable that because of the slopes involved, any housing or public use is suitable for this area without greatly reducing said hillsides . A valley is no longer a valley without its hillsides . Dan Beck flatly stated to my father in a meeting with Supervisor David Blakely on September 21 , 1992 , that he favored taking the whole area down to level ground. Why is this man allowed to make decisions of this nature? It does not seem that he has the appropriate attitude for a 1993 county employee with so much power. Much of hisattitude seemed based on a vindictive power trip which also involves (seemingly) collus with the land owner . His department definitely seems a good candidate for Grand Jury_ investigation (which seems to be where this issue is leading) . And, of course , the greatest issues again are environmental - extreme aest'-etic and noise , water andair pollution. The pollution not on1v affects local families , but also, wildlife. Constant, i::sidicus n---se has b.--en proven time and again to be disturbing to humans ' Teaof mind, but also, affects wildlife habitat. The wildlife area contains a very diverse group (reptiles , birds , cats , deer , etc . ) ic > has not been clearly studied (or included in the Also , in tae Reclamation Plan and Draft Report, Graves Creek is called irate--:-.ittant, but even in the depth of our recent drought, wa st-__ _'o,•,ed in that creek. The pi-nn that no waste materials reach the Creek because of lower 1`�,y1 of t -:e ry base . This is not true. A visit to the site clearly 4t e drift of rock dust across the road into the Creek. Also , the i s' e of toxicity of this dust needs to be addressed. ti1a�a people -.-. the neighborhood are experiencing health problems wait_- igins . The neighbors have already submitted their ,des_ '"-25 :' t: C-01, -v Health Department i n�,eSri �to this issue . 000068 City of Atascadero -4- February 12 , 1993 The problems with this quarry far outweigh the benefits of a supposedly "cheap" source of road materials . The neighbors in this area are becoming involved. People are ready to lay down in front of the tractors in order to get some notice. A Grand Jury investigation will be pursued if no decent solution is arrived at. The media will be informed and this issue is not going to subside ! As you may know,John Flaherty passed away from brain' cancer.on February3 , 1993 , a disease became down with in mid-November, 1992 . There have been proven studies that show the effects of frustration h.el i.essness n tine onset of cancers . This i s how MI fa _. felt in his ongoing struggle to close this quarry. His efforts will not be lost as his family and neighbors arepicking up the slack in pursuing this issue. It is my recommendation that restoration of this site (to its natural , vegetative state) begin immediately. Rose Flaherty, Landscape Architect Feb. 12 , 1993 000069 P.O. Box 849 Atascadero, CA 93423 is Tel : 466-9299 February 4, 1993 Gary Kaiser Planning Dept . City of Atascadero 5600 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Gary: Re: Surface Mining Impact Report - Milhollen Mine I am very concerned about the "leave open" recommendation in the above report on the Milhollen Mine on Santa Lucia Rd. This mine has been a scar on the environment for many years, recently becoming a disgrace both to the City (for condoning it) and the County (for its over-zealous work to take as much as it can get before any controls may go into effect . ) Such an operation is totally unacceptable within a rural residential area, and I would question the motives of the consultant in making the recommendation. With the taking of so much material , viable reclamation is impossible - making a flat land out of a mountain is not reclamation. A county official is noted as saying that he will not stop until the mountain is flat to the ground. If this is allowed to happen, it will completely change the climate on this side of the hill and in this small valley. If an individual developer were to propose something of this magnitude, an EIR would be called for . I submit that the City should close this mine as well as the river mine , and stop all work immediately. If this cannot be done, there is ne :' for a survey to shoe; the actual maximum acreage slated for mining; stakes should be set out to make this limit clear , and that the area used for mining may not be expanded beyond its original limit . Thank you for entering my comments in the in the public records . Sincerely, �'" Daphne W. Fahsi g- 0000'70 February 3, 1992 Mr. Gary Kaiser Community Development Department 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, Ca 93422 Dear Mr. Kaiser, I would like to give you my own comments on this issue in addition to the letter that is being sent by some of the concerned residents near this quarry. Besides the quarry being an eyesore and a use that is quite incompatible for the area that it is located, the heavy vehicle traffic on Santa Lucia has been markedly increased. The operators of these heavy construction vehicles seem to be very unconcerned about the speed limits on Santa Lucia and it will only be a matter of time before there will be a serious accident. Most of these vehicles are large double semis that are hauling rock at high speeds. There are blind corners and a lot of small children in this area. I 'm sure that you understand my concern. As a six year resident of Atascadero I can also tell you that this traffic has increased considerably and that this operation was not as active or as dangerous to the community in the past as it is presently. Please let me know the feelings of the city in this matter. Regard , I Chuck Greenbera 11655 Cenegal Rd. Atascadero Ca 93422 461-9434 0000,71 ATTACHMENT D Form Letter Received SMARA Hearing/Inspect February 2 , 1993 TO THE CITY OF ATASCADERO: I am a local resident in the neighborhood of the Millhollin Quarry. I am very concerned about the outcome of the report which recommends this quarry remain open for seven years . This quarry is no longer a compatible land use within our community. This is because of many factors including: constant, disturbing noise pollution of tractors all day and all week long; heavy equipment traffic on our roads from Paradise Valley to Rt. 101 all day long which creates hazardous conditions for our children who use the same streets; air and water pollution from the rock dust which has yet to be studied for its toxicity and effects on our health; the destruction of the hills which create Paradise Valley and the visible scars left behind. We do not want this quarry to remain open for seven more years . We would like to see a much more timely solution to this issue which is affecting us , our health, and our environment. We would like to see the Health Department conduct a study of the dust particles . We would like to have the city/county move rock operations to another more appropriate site (there are many! ) . Surely, the Planning Department can come up with a solution that benefits more people than the out-of-town owner and operator of this quarry. Sincere-,y P. S. E.G. Lewis planned a residential community in Paradise Valley, but he sure didn' t include with it industrial operations which deface and pollute. 000072 RESOLUTION NO. 23-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF AN UPDATED CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE CITY' S GENERAL PLAN (CITY OF ATASCADERO) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has grown considerably since incorporation; and WHEREAS, the City' s General Plan, which was prepared in the- 1970 ' s and adopted in 1980 to guide the City' s general growth is in need of updating; and WHEREAS, the City has undertaken a comprehensive program of study and public participation to update the General Plan beginning in 1986; and- WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero conducted public hearings on the subject amendment on December 15, 1992 , March 2 , 1993, March 16, 1993 and April 6, 1993; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65356 provides that a General Plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows : 11 The proposed General Plan amendment recommended -by the Planning Commission reflects policies and standards appro- priate for the City of Atascadero. 2 . The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project is hereby certified as a complete and accurate document consis- tent with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to approve the General Plan Update as follows : 1 . Amendment to the General Plan text by adoption of the Circu- lation Element, dated April 9, 1993 (Attachment A) . 2 . Rescinds the following chapter of the 1980 General Plan: VIII Circulation Element (Chapter III of Updated General Plan) . 3 . Incorporates the following additional material by reference into the Technical Appendix: Circulation Element Technical Report, DKS, October 1992 . 0000'75 _004W49__ Resolution No. 23-93 Page 2 On motion by Council , and seconded by Council the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA by: ROBERT P. NIMMO, Mayor ATTEST: LEE DAYKA, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN Community Development Director 0000'76* 4tft