HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 11/28/1995 PUBLIC REVIEW COPY
fcarantssr
AGENDA
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6500 PALMA AVENUE, 4T" FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM
NOVEMBER 28, 1995
7:00 P.M.
This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the requirements of G vemment 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 additfon to any action ides fied in the brief
general description of each item, the action that may be taken shall in e: A referral to
staff with specific requests for information;. continuance; specific diection to staff
concerning the policy ormission of the item;discontinuance of consideratit n;authorization
to enter into negotiations and execute agreements pertaining to the it m; adoption or
approval; and, disapproval.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each hem of business
referred to on the agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk fRoo 208)and in the
Information Office (Room 103), available for public inspection during City Hall business
hours. The City Clerk will answer any questions regarding the agenda.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,if you need sp al assistance to
participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City,please contact the City
Manager's Office, (805) 461-5010, or the City Clerk's Office, ( 5) 461-5074.
Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or dme when services are needed will
assist the City staff in assuhng that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide
accessibility to the meeting or service.
6:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION:'
CONFERENCE WITH LEGALCOUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation: One (1) potential case
7:00 P.M. REGULAR SESSION:
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
COMMUNITY FORUM
Deputy City Attorney: Status report on the adult book store (verbal)
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar,
are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion in the form
listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these items. A member
of the Council or public may, by request, have any item removed from the
Consent Calendar, which shall then be reviewed and acted upon separately
after the adoption of the Consent Calendar.
1. NOTIFICATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE
CYCLE DEADLINE OF OCTOBER 1, 1995
(Staff recommendation: Receive and file)
2. TENTATIVE PARCEL.MAP 95005, 8775 COROMAR RD. Consider request to
divide a 1 .14 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 0.50 and 0.53 net acres for
single-family residential use. (Shores/Sholders Surveys)
(Planning Commission recommendation: Approve)
3. AWARD OF BID FOR PURCHASE OF ALARM DIALERS
(Staff recommendation: Approve)
B PUBLIC HEARINGS: None scheduled.
C. REGULAR BUSINESS:
1. STATUS REPORT ON THE AMAPOA/TECORIDA INTERIM DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS
(Staff recommendation: Accept staff report)
2. REQUEST TO REMOVE WEED ABATEMENT CHARGES FOR APN 050,051,005
(Mortorff)
(Staff recommendation: Deny request)
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing
committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary.):
1. S.L.O. Council of Governments/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority
2. ` City/School Committee
3.. County Water Advisory Board/Nacimiento Water Purveyors Advisory Group
4. Economic Round Table
5. Finance Committee
6. Air Pollution Control District
7. North County Council
8. Integrated Waste Management Authority
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1 . City Council
2. City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
5. City Manager
2
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-1
Through: Andrew J. Takata MeetingDate: 11/28/95
City Manager
From: Doug Davidson
D,D Senior Planner
SUBJECT:
Notification of General Plan# Amendments received prior to the
cycle deadline of October 1, 1995.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file (see attached Planning Commission staff report) .
BACKGROUND:
• At their November 7, 1995 meeting, the Planning Commission con-
sidered the above-referenced subject on their Consent Agenda. The
Planning Commission recommended that the General Plan Amendment -
applications be accepted for consideration.
These applications will be brought forward for public hearings by
the Planning Commission and City Council when the environmental
review, consultation with other agencies, and staff -reports are
prepared.
/ph
Attachment: Planning Commission Staff Report - 11/7/95
000001
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Planning Commission
FROM:'D.b • Doug Davidson, Senior Planner
RE: General Plan Amendments —October 1, 1995 Cycle
DATE: November 7, 1995
SUBJECT:
Notification of General Plan Amendments received prior to the
cycle deadline of October 1, 1995.
RECOMMENDATION•
Receive and file.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS:
The Planning Division has received the following General Plan
Amendments for consideration during the October 1, 1995 cycle:
1. General Plan Amendment 95003 —7470 El Camino Real
(Winnaman/Palmer/LaPrade)
A request to change the existing Office designation to
Service Commercial. A corresponding Zone Change
application from CP to CS will be also be reviewed.
2. General Plan Amendment 95004 - 8805 Old Santa Rosa Road
(Lanini/Messer)
A request to change the existing Moderate Density Single
Family Residential to High Density Single Family
Residential., A corresponding Zone Change from RSF-Y to RSF-
X will also be reviewed.
3. General Plan Amendment 95005 - 8555 E1 Centro Road
(Lindsey/Watson)
A request to change the existing designation of High Density
Single Family Residential ,to High Density Multiple Family
Residential. - A corresponding Zone Change from RSF-X to RMF-
16 (,PD) will also be reviewed. A Conditional Use Permit and
Tentative Tract Map will be processed concurrently to
consider the number of proposed units, including a density
bonus request, and the subdivision of the property,
respectively. A focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) .
will be prepared to analyze the impacts of the project.
000002 � :
4 . General Plan Amendment 95006 - 3425/3505 E1 Camino Real
(Verheyen/Peters)
A request to change the existing designation of Suburban
Residential to Moderate Density Single Family Residential,
including an extension of the Urban Services Line. A
corresponding Zone Change from RS to RSF-Y will also be
reviewed.
5. General Plan Amendment 95007 - 6675 Navajoa Ave.
(Gearhart)
A request to change the existing Office designation to Low
Density Multiple Family Residential. A corresponding Zone
Change from CP to RMF-10 will also be reviewed'.
6. General Plan Amendment 95008
5505 Del Rio Rd./2055,2115,2205,2325, and 2375E1 Camino
(Investec/Cannon Associates)
A request to change the existing designations of
Neighborhood Commercial and Suburban Residential to
Commercial Park and Low Density Multiple Family Residential,
including an expansion of the Urban Services Line. A
corresponding Zone Change from CN and RS to CPK and RMF-10
(PD) will also be reviewed. A Conditional Use'; Permit and
Tentative Tract Map will also be reviewed to evaluate the
scope of the proposed commercial project and the
residential subdivision, respectively. A Supplemental EIR
will be prepared to analyze the environmental impacts of the
project; Phase II Factory Outlets (85,000 sq. ft. ) and and a
32 lot residential subdivision.
7 . General Plan Amendment 95009 - 1740 El Camino Real
(Christ Chapel/Levitz)
A request to include the subject property within the Urban
Services Line. A corresponding Zone Text Change will be
processed to review proposed changes to the tent of the
Public (P) zone. A Conditional Use Permit to allow a self-
storage facility is included in the application.
These applications will be brought forward for public hearings at
the Planning Commission and City Council when the environmental
review, consultation with other agencies, and staff', reports are
prepared.
I
000003
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-2
Through: Andrew J. Takata Meeting ate: 11/28/95
City Manager
File Num er: TPM 95005
From: j� Doug Davidson ,
•Y ' Senior Planner
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a Tentative Parcel Map -application to divide a
1. 14 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 0.50 and 0.531 net acre for
single family residential use. Subject site is loc ted at 8775
Coromar. (Jim Shores) (Sholders Surveys) .
RECOMMENDATION•
Per the Planning Commission's recommendation, approve Tentative
Parcel Map 95005 based on the Findings and Conditio s of Approval
contained in the attached staff, report.
t
BACKGROUND:
On November 7, 1995, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the above-referenced map. After discussion (see
attached minutes excerpts) , the Planning Commission recommended
approval of Tentative Parcel Map 95005 in accordance with staff' s
recommendations .
/ph
Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report —1 /7/95
Planning Commission Minutes Excerpts - 11/7/95 ;
000004
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: g , l
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: November 7, 1995
BY:_tDoug Davidson, Senior Planner File No: TPM #95005
SUBJECT•
Consideration of a tentative parcel map application to divide a
1. 14 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 0.50 and 0.53 net acre for
single family residential use.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the following actions:
1. That the Negative Declaration prepared for the project be
found adequate under the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ; and
2. That Tentative Parcel Map #95005 be approved based on the
Findings for Approval contained in Attachment E and the
Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment F.
A. SITUATION AND FACTS:
1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jim Shores
2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Shoulders Surveys
3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8775 Coromar Road
4. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 14 acres
6. ' Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-X (Res. Single Family,
1/2 acre minimum lot size)
7. General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Single Family
8. Existing Use.. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .Single Family Residence
9 . Environmental Status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration
posted October 17, 1995
1
000005 ,
B. ANALYSIS:
The subject request is to subdivide a 1. 14 acre panc�el into one
lot of 0.50 acre and one lot of 0.535 acre net (0.6',17 acre
gross) . The proposed project, located at 8775 Coroumar Road, will
be examined in light of the site' s land use designation and the
City' s Flag Lot (Deep Lot) Standards found in the Subdivision
Ordinance.
The high density ( 1/2 acre) single family residential area,
centered around Atascadero and Portola Roads has grown in area
over the last 10 years. The 1992 Land Use Element Update
resulted in additional parcels in this zone. Prior to this
action, in 1985, Coromar Road was changed from Modeirate Density
(one acre minimum ) to High Density. With its prox*mity to the
center of town, good access, gentle slopes, and urban services,
this area has continually been seen as suitable for, higher
density single family development. Furthermore, encouraging
higher density on Coromar Road with the approval of! the General
Plan Amendment, in turn, portended the creation of additional
flag lots. These relatively long and narrow one acre lots,
particularly the parcels located between Highway 10:1 and Coromar,
such as the subject site, are especially appropriate for flag lot
subdivision.
In order to approve the creation of flag lots, the proposed
parcel map must meet the flag lot criteria of the Subdivision
Ordinance contained in Section 11-8.209 (or be granted an
exception) and the Findings for Approval shown in Attachment F
must be affirmed. First, the project complies with' all the
Subdivision Ordinance flag lot standards. In addition to the
Finding of consistency with the Subdivision Ordinance and General
Plan, staff believes that the other necessary Findijngs can be
made. The subdivision is consistent with the character of the
neighborhood and the site is physically suitable for one
additional residence. The proposed building site its relatively
level and no grading or tree removal is necessary. : Tree
protection will be required for driveway access through the two
oak trees.
If this were a vacant piece of property, staff would be
recommending a relinquishment of access rights across the
frontage of this property, except for the area of the 24 foot
flag lot accessway. This action would create one driveway to be
shared by two single family residences. In the subject case,
however, the front parcel is fully developed with a' loop
driveway. This type of driveway is a good approach', to reduce the
impact to the two oaks in the front of the property'.. Due to the
existing driveway improvements, the low volume of traffic on
Coromar Road, and the nature of the uses (single family
residential) , staff is comfortable with the closeness of the two
driveways as proposed.
2
000006
E T
s
E
Noise
Noise contour maps contained in the General Plan' s Noise Element
show existing and future levels of noise exposure from stationary
sources throughout the City. According to the future noise
contour maps, proposed Parcel 2 will fall within the 65 Ldn
(Day/Night Average Sound Level) associated with Highway 101.
Pursuant to the Noise Element, new residential developments
occurring in areas potentially exposed to noise levels between 60
Lan and 70 Ldn are acceptable, but require mitigation; new
residential developments in areas exposed to noise levels of 60
Ldn or less require no mitigation. Therefore, protective
measures must be incorporated into this project to reduce the
potential noise exposure for the dwelling on proposed Parcel 2.
According to the Acoustical Design Manual (Technical Appendix to
Noise Element) , an acoustical analysis performed by an expert is
not required nor necessary to mitigate noise impacts for this
particular project. Rather, protective measures described as
"standard noise mitigation packages may be imposed to reduce
noise exposure to an acceptable level. Because no portion of the
site will experience noise levels exceeding 65 Ldn, and because
new residential development not exceeding 60 Ldn are considered
acceptable, a Noise Level Reduction (referred to as NLR in the
Acoustical Design Manual) of at least 5 decibels must be
achieved.
Such a NLR value has already been incorporated into the project
as proposed. In fact, the Acoustical Design Manual states that
normal construction practices per the latest edition of the
Uniform Building Code are sufficient to provide a NLR value of 15
decibels. During plan check review, Planning staff will offer
the homeowner/builder suggestions to further reduce noise
exposure, such as window and wall treatment, floor plan and
building orientation alternatives, and other sound attenuation
methods.
CONCLUSIONS•
The project is consistent with the City' s General Plan and, with
conditions of approval recommended herein, satisfies applicable
Zoning/Subdivision requirements. Upon review of the site and its
surroundings, staff has found no indication that potentially
significant environmental effects could result from project
approval and has found the project consistent with the character
of the neighborhood in which it is located.
3
000007
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A -- Location Map (General Plan)
Attachment B -- Location Map (Zoning)
Attachment C -- Tentative Parcel Map
Attachment D -- Negative Declaration
Attachment E -- Findings for Approval
Attachment F -- Conditions of Approval
4
000008
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF ATASCADERO ZONING MAP
of A TPM 95005
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
oC R F.Z '
1 ! AVCL
IA
of-
tt Q Q
044
--t
Q0
v
(��) L 1 \ Cyt
' / ! C• � 'ti0 C�a i O
y
J
-i--- o-0. l • � . �-\,l /.
V C04
jp
L ,
5 / 1-E
` \Sc 4p Eq
Jam--- ,_� �� ✓ �' .� �/',_ �,,
000009 ,���
oca�t�
151t irk
f�►, rte„! ���� �� m ��;� �- __
Va i -A MA
�lg,, �A�1t • •e��•� �ILLI
A-4
'pp�,,.���''�B gyp-� �..a ( •• •,
RR
lam
VA09-MA ON
�r
WMA
gIm
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF ATASCADERO PARCEL MAP
. an TPM 95005
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
------
HWY 101 e 4_
�iC�. •a�F3 ^ A r �'�.
• i I ij,� "t seAcer /-•fo._. .. _ Af fl��'Ato n� .
I ~ A e m io m a no TF
•r�M.r J.�I rd
1. M moi.
V/6/N/_ TY izg
tf•paruCls ru)
.O.Lrr ACRS Af A<
�, I ' l6EGEN0:
-RtmRRfAn/rR.AC1?W4f AS�lErl90R oARC�G MAP '
_AC :
\ m � "•fON a 1 /} R-)Ruafau/ei rrtffO on•a/•aaf
'\ 3 • i�r j + V ` //•/ RLfTLO.PO MrA K{rAtJfyK R/R/f!O•RM,MII.•
fm R•/
M IwASrA[r IATA W/UER
RwvrrR rus `; r`•r ^ f }}} • nuw fgff MEW - SZOO SALEr.°lEf�//TO IQO.
Rry•fii.J0 \ t / / O ArpLR/Y CORUCR A7 eC SET
minus WW an«rrow AtAfCADERO)CA 93¢t ti
t Rff.fY(n) tVA[nM IDHVMRY tA`MRCCL ryM fUQVEYDR
mffAwrnNfAAreuAw eturAuei
La� 2 1 tl +- �•— 49~are SAIYCMLU/ MgMM A,eYOlefRf.(f sfT00
Offf ACRCS/� ¢ �\ ��••�—. .Lr mw MANAse emw%r 680f LIOf/Arpf JOAOAvew
(' / 1
�iJrut0."fit
�,•R� �� O" /� 1
tic.[fr/RAriM/eATr•f/i//ff
L 2
t.
'- AMDRYo tI'o4N "
KtlJ1�NR/Ir ArIA p •�
fry l ro[s n
CDROM ,e ?OAO r,5VTAT/V9 -
+: - RrT•ro'f/ ,.;.7— FARCSL MAP AT 95-091
-nva.-1 r"(Or orvn/ow.VAroCMarjor•ff,
)Or ji r OT J�� f��3�V eloe/t A $AC.No RO tOteNY,As RrCOAOlp oer r,
-_'/f/f'rT eiOR iA6 Mr.0 M Of MAH,/U MC/[r OF M[
_Cd/wtY RiCORffA f STAT!Of CAt/fORUm/A
� d� rncn./f e'JC.raf nru
/N1/f RJ_e[by,
000011 ��
Al I ACHMENI I U
CITY OF ATASCADERO
ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR
00 NEGATIVE DECLARATION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 6500 PALMA AVE. ATASCADERO. CA 93422 (805) 461-5035
APPLICANT: JIM SHORES DOUG SHOULDERS
5200 SAN BENITO ROAD 6805 LOS GATOS ROAD
ATASCADERO, CA 93422 ATASCADERO, CA 93422
PROJECT TITLE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 95005
PROJECT LOCATION: 8775 COROMAR ROAD
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A REQUEST TO DIVIDE A 1. 14 ACRE PAR C E L
INTO 2 LOTS OF 0 . 50 AND 0 . 53 ACRE NET.
FINDINGS:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment.
2. The project will not achieve short-terns to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
0 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 ether directly or indirectly.
DETERNUNATION:
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
- A
STEVE DE CAMP
CITY PLANNER
Date Posted: OCTOBER 17, 1995
Date Adopted: NOVEMBER 7, 1995
CDD 11-89
000012
ATTACHMENT E - Findings for Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 95005
8775 Coromar Road (Shores/Shoulders) 0
November 7, 1995
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING:
The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project
is adequate.
MAP FINDINGS•
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable
General and Specific Plans.
2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the
development proposed.
5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed
improvements, will not cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and
wildlife or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the
improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by
the public at large for access through or the use of
property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially
equivalent alternate easements are provided.
7. The proposed subdivision design, and/or the type of
improvements proposed, will not cause serious public health
problems.
FLAG LOT FINDINGS:
1. The subdivision is consistent with the character of the
immediate neighborhood.
2. The installation of a standard street, either alone or in
conjunction with neighboring properties is not feasible.
3. The creation of flag lots is justified by topographical
conditions. 0
000013 ��
a
ATTACHMENT F -- Conditions of Approval
Tentative Parcel Map 95005
8775 Coromar Road (Shores/Shoulders)
November 7, 1995
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Fire Department Conditions
1. Prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map, the improvement
plans and Final Map shall be reviewed and accdpted by the
City Fire Marshall for compliance with the Fire Code. A
fire hydrant shall be located within 250 feet ',of the
property frontage.
Engineering Division Conditions
2, -_ All =tihl i c i m=ro ement s _
aha 1 l_he constructed in
conformance with the City of Atascadero Engineering
Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as
directed by the City Engineer.
3. The applicant shall enter into an Plan Check/Inspection
agreement with the City. Prior to recordation of the map,
all outstanding1
check/inspection
pan fees shall be paid.
4. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City
Engineering Department prior to the start o construction.
5. A Preliminary Soils Report shall be prepared for the
property to determine the presence of expansive soil or
other soil problems and shall make recommendations
regarding grading of the proposed site. A final soils
report shall be submitted by the soils engineer prior to
the final inspection and shall certify that ,all grading
was inspected and approved and that all work done is in
accordance with the plans and the preliminary report.
A separate document shall be recorded in con=junction with
the parcel map stating that a soils report has been
prepared. The document shall state the date; of the report
along with the name and address of the soils'' engineer or
geologist who prepared the report. The document shall
indicate any soils problems which may exist 'ion the newly
created lots.
6. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline open space,
scenic or other easements are to be shown on'' the parcel
map. If there are building or other restrictions related
to the easements, they shall be noted on th6 parcel map.
1
000014 ,�
7 . The relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities
shall be the responsibility of the developer.
8. The applicant shall install all new utilities (water, gas,
electric, cable TV and telephone) underground.
9 . Any utility trenching in existing streets shall be
overlayed to restore a smooth riding surface as required
by the City Engineer.
10. A grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered
civil engineer, shall be submitted for review and approval
by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of building
permits. A registered civil engineer shall provide a
written statement that all work has been completed and is
in full compliance with the approved pians and the Uniform
Building Code (UBC) .
11. A black line clear Mylar (0.4 mil) copy and a blue line
print of the parcel map shall be provided to the City upon
recordation.
12. A parcel map in substantial conformance with the approved
tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set
forth in the City of Atascadero Subdivision Ordinance and
the Subdivision Map Act shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval. The parcel map shall be signed by
the City Engineer prior to it being placed on the agenda
for City Council approval.
13. Sewer connection fees shall be paid prior to the issuance
of building permits.
14. The applicant shall enter into a Drainage Acceptance
Agreement with the City for the storm water run-off
discharging from Coromar Avenue onto Parcel 1 and Parcel 2
prior to recordation of the map.
15. The applicant shall construct a 4 ' wide aggregate base
shoulder along the property frontage in conformance with
City Standard 401, Type A prior to issuance of building
permits.
Planning Division Conditions
16. A reflectorized house number master sign shall be
installed at the intersection of the street and accessway
and an individual reflectorized address sign shall be
placed on the right hand side of the driveway to the rear
lot. This shall be done prior to recording of the final
map.
2
000015
17. Improvement plans for the private accessway 'shall be be
reviewed and approved prior to beginning any', work on the
driveway. The private accessway shall consilst of 20 feet
of paving and shall extend the entire length': of Parcel I.
The accessway shall be completed prior to recording the
final map.
18. Construction of the new single family residence on Parcel
2 shall comply with the noise mitigation mea sures of the
Noise Element as contained in Volume III Acoustical Design
Manual. (Note: Normal construction practices under
current Building Codes should accomplish this without
further mitigation. )
19. This tentative map approval shall expire two' (2) years
from the date of final approval unless an extension of
time is granted pursuant to a written request received
prior to the expiration date.
'
3
00001#1
MINUTES EXCERPTS - 11/7/95
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION
11/7/95
ACTION MINUTES
SUBJECT: B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #95005:
Consideration of a request to divide a 1 . 14 acre parcel
into two (2) lots of 0 . 50 and 0 . 53 net acre for single
family residential use. Subject site is located at
8775 Coromar Road. (Jim Shores) (Sholders Surveys)
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION: (Davidson)
1 . That the Negative Declaration prepared for the project
be found adequate under the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ; and
2 . That Tentative Parcel Map #95005 be approved based on
the Findings for Approval contained in Attachment E and
the Conditions of Approval in Attachment F.
TESTIMONY;
Jim Shores, 5200 San Benito Road, applicant was available to answer
questions; however, there were none.
Commissioner Zimmerman expressed that, although he was very
uncomfortable with building right next to a freeway, he found no legal
reason to deny the request .
ACTION:
The Planning Commission finds that the Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate under the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) .
Motion: Edwards
Second: Wallace
AYES : Edwards, Wallace, Bowen, Zimmerman, Hageman, Sauter,
Johnson
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
(Page 3 of 6)
00001'7
Planning Commission Meeting, November 7, 1995
ACTION:
The Planning Commission approves of Tentative Parcel Map
#95005 based on the Findings contained in Attachment E and
the Conditions of Approval in Attachment F
Motion: Edwards
Second: Wallace
AYES : Edwards, Wallace, Bowen, Zimmerman, Hageman, Sauter,
Johnson
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
SUBJECT: B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS
2 . APPEAL OF PRECISE PLAN #93019 :
Appeal filed by John Haggerty of a approved P cise
Plan application which would allow for the cons uction
of three (3) single family residences on ree (3)
separate lots to be served by a single Comm driveway.
Subject site is located at 620 Garcia ' R d.
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION: (Kaiser)
The Planning Commissi should deny the appea based ', on the Findings
contained in Attachment
TESTIMONY:
Don Vaughn, the applicant, aske for access to the easement from lot
#2 .
John Haggerty, 695 Via Yerba, S to Ba ara, California. Mr. Haggerty
complained of the lack of no ice and ex ained the damage he foresees
to his property from flo ing. He as for just a little help
(possibly an engineerin report) in panni g for the runoff . He
indicated that he wasn' trying to stop this oject, ',, but just to get
a little assistance.
Hugh McCaffrey, 82 Niderer Road, Paso Robles, su orted his step-
father' s (Mr. H ggerty) position on the anticipated mage .
(Page of 6)
000018
i
REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting ate: 11/28/95
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda tem: A-3
THROUGH: Andy Takata, City Manager
VIA: Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services
FROM: Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operat'ons
SUBJECT•
Award of Bid for Purchase of Alarm Dialers.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends that five Raco VSS-4C Verbatim telephone
dialers with asychronus communication cards, be purchased from
and programmed by D.A. Matthews/Associates.
BACKGROUND•
In 1992 an alarm system developed by Raco Remote Alarms and
Controls and distributed by D.A. Matthews and Associates was
• selected, by Council Award, as the alarm systept which the City
would use to warn on-duty or standby wastewatex operators when
a problem occurs at the City's treatment facility or at any of
it's remote wastewater pumping stations. A that time, a
central computer, software and one alarm dialer was installed
at the Wastewater Treatment Facility. Since that time, as
existing pump stations have been refurbished and as new pump
stations have been added, this alarm system has grown to
include seven alarm dialers. Five additional dialers are
needed to connect the remaining unarmed wastewater pumping
stations to this system.
DISCUSSION•
As only one supplier is authorized to distribute Raco Alarm
Dialers in this region staff is requesting that Council waive
formal bidding procedures and accept the price quote submitted
by D.A. Matthews/Associates to supply and program five Raco,
Verbatim Alarm Dialers.
FISCAL IMPACT•
$ 15, 142 . 44
To be deducted from funds approved in Wastewater Division's FY
95/96 budget, Account No. 201-50300-0430
000019
REQUEST FOR
r
A TAT
ION
e 7t1� F.R Mtn' /1PP�i ON Q{JQFtAt�3N
'mm is T AN t�l#t��
To �.
D.A. Matthews/Associates city of Aumad+ero
P.O. Box 3997 SSW pgdma
Anaheim CA 92803-3997 AWqtadefoa CA SOMM
UMUEW
Oiti'iflUBBY R
10/18/95 11/15/95
LW
0= cow Iva
42 x ISO oil
1 5 Raco VSS-4C Verbatim Telephone Dialers w/
Asychronus Communication Cards 13jQ•d
2 5 Programming and Start--up service
(including incideiztals, travel, lodging, etc.)
11 .'
V'Pr6a7 vn price 3 ��ja
a !/�ed to
fre
f�06l �l�sf.nafj'�.
�rYQ� • -¢r 6 wee k%r ARO
+/
FF
By jes-7, 74tx 14m
TdtAL COSTS:
TOTAL AUT Pk�%�
7-A
nMsW GWM WAGiWA8 Wt';L U"iftH T1il8 VR'NDSiE�
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 11/28
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-1
Through: Andrew J Takata, City Manager
Via: Steve Sylvester, City Engineer
From: John Neil, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT:
Status of the Amspoa/Tecodda interim drainage improvements
RECOMMENDATION:
Accept staff report.
DISCUSSION:
At the June 27, 1895 City Council meeting, Council directed staff to implement interim
measures to.help reduced flooding potential In the Amapoa/Tecorida drainage basin
prior to the onset of the 85M winter rains. The IbIlo ging interim measures, as
. authorized by Council, have been completed:
1. The undersized culverts beneath Atascadero Avenue Nkve been
upgraded.
2. The existing undersized culvert beneath the driveway a Morro Road
immediately below the existing diversion structure has I een upgraded.
3. Obstructions have been removed from the existing con4 mte drainage
channel which parallels Amapoa Avenue.
4. A one-time cleaning of the drainage channel between Morro Road and
Marchant Avenue at Highway 101 has been completed .
The attached exhibit shows the channels which were cleaned and the location of the
culverts which were upgraded.
It is anticipated that the above interim measures coupled with otherdrainage
Improvements being constructed as a result of the development of T ct 2103 will help
reduce the potential for flooding in the lower portions of the Amapoafrecorlda drainage
basin.
• Staff is currently pursuing the funds necessary to construct the imp ements idengied
in the AmapoarFecorida Master Drainage Study. A Cooperative Ag meet has been
000021
r � •
rir
> >i
1
Page 2
AmapoalTecorida status
Meeting pate= 11/28/95
entered into with CalTrans to secure $300,000 in funds for construction of the first
phase of a storm drain paralleling Highway 41. An additional $427,040 of City funds
has been budgeted in FY 95/96 for construction of the storm drain. The source of these
funds are Amapoa/Tecorlda Drainage Impact Fees and Developer Drainage Impact
Fees. Council set the construction of the storm drain as the first priority in reducing the
flooding potential in the lower portions of the Amapoa/Tecodda drainage basin.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A- Exhibit showing the location of the AmapoalTeconda interim
drainage improvements
N.%JBNX$3104.RPT
000023
f
kid
4
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-2
Through: Andy Takata, City Manager MEETIN DATE: 11/28/95
From: Michael P. McCain, Fire Chief , m
SUBJECT:
a) Request for removal of fees for weed abatement on Parcel #050-051-005
in the amount of$452.00.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Deny request for reimbursement
Discussion / History:
When the current property owner, Denise K. Mortorff, received her County
Tax Bill for Parcel #050-051-005, she found an assessmentof $452.00 for the
removal of hazardous weeds (weed abatement charges). Mrs. Mortorff made
contact with the Fire Department, Captain Fred Motlo, and advised that she
should not be required to pay the abatement because of the following
reasons:
1 The abatement had taken place before she purchased her property.
2) She was not informed before the purchase that there was an assessment
against the property.
3) That notification to property owners using tax roll information was not
satisfactory.
4) The city should use the direct lien process instead of the assessment
process.
Captain Motlo referred her to me and we spoke at len h regarding this
issue. Mrs. Mortorff and her husband purchased the pr perty which had
been repossessed from a bank in mid-August. The abatement work was
completed and filed with the county before the purchase date. Because of
this information, staff felt that the real estate broker, bank or escrow
company should have advised her of all debts owed against 1he property. She
was advised to seek reimbursement from that avenue. Mrs. Mortorff was
also informed that staff would not recommend reimbursement because the
work was performed and that proper property owner notiflaition practices at
the time of abatement was done. Mrs. Mortorff was informed that if no
satisfaction from her bank'or escrow company was received, she could appeal
to the city council, through the city manager.
i
000024
On November 7th, I. called Mrs. Mortorff for routine follow up to inquire if her
situation had been resolved. She advised it had not because disclosure laws
do not apply to foreclosures, therefore she could not seek reimbursement
from the escrow company or bank. Mrs. Mortorff advised that she would
pursue reimbursement from council and recommend changes in the weed
abatement ordinance that night at the city council meeting. We continued to
discuss at length her four concerns, as outlined in her letter. The staff
position on those four concerns are as follows:
1) Not owning the property at the time of abatement:
At the time of abatement every effort was made to contact the current
property owner. The property needed and was abated and billed
against that property..
2) Not being informed of an assessment against the property:
Every effort was made to notify property owners using the most current
information available. When buying property, especially a foreclosure,
it is the buyers responsibility to research debts against that property.
3) Tax roll information not being current:
Again the most current tax records were used, as well as daily trips to
our local county tax office where information is received before it is
put on the tax rolls.
4) Direct lien being used:
The city uses an assessment process in that charges against the
property which will become a lien if not paid. This practice has not been
challenged in the past and has been proven to be effective. Mrs.
Mortorff was informed that staff was sympathetic to her problem and was
open to suggestions for improvement in our weed abatement program. I
assured Mrs. Mortorff that I would research her recommended
improvements.
Because this was a unique situation and the research would require
many staff hours, an offer was made to only charge Mrs. Mortorff the
city's abatement cost and wave the administrative fee. This would
reduce the properties abatement bill in half. Mrs. Mortorff rejected
this offer and advised that she would appeal to council and further if
needed.
CONCLUSION:
Since 1983 the weed abatement program has grown to be an effective tool,in
assisting our city to be safe and beautiful. There are between 5 and 7
thousand parcels that are inspected annually with fewer parcels each year
having to be abated. This tells us that the program works. Additionally, each
year there are relatively very few complaints, with the majority of those
complaints being that the requirements of the ordinance are not strict '
000025
enough. Because of this program, Atascadero has become a fire safety
conscious community.
After a complete review by legal counsel in regards to assessments on liens
and notifications, it was determined that our present abatement practices
meet Government Code requirements.
OPTIONS:
1) Refund full amount of$452.00.
Pro:
Could end this dispute immediately.
Con:
Would not be beneficial to overall program by impactf future
requests for reimbursement as well as weaken the city's compliance
message.
Impact of$452.00 from the city budget
2) Wave administrative fee, which reduces the property owners assessment
by one half.
Pro:
Would be a workable agreement that would allow both parties
to not realize a significant loss.
Con:
The city would be compromising unnecessarily to an agreement
for no wrong doing on our part.
3) Deny request for reimbursement:
Pro:
Supports program, shows consistency, enforces a fire',safe
community.
Con:
Applicant will most likely take legal action.
Attachments: Mortorff letter to Mayor Highland
Ordinance No.# 61
000026
7910 Balboa Rd.
Atascadero CA 9342271
November X14, 1995 MV
i
LCJTTyY CLERKS OFFIi
Honorable Mayor George Highland
& Councilmembers
City of Atascadero
Atascadero, CA 93422
Dear Mayor& Councilmembers:
My husband and I, recently received a tax bill for property we purchased and owned. as of
August 18, 1995. Parcel#050,051,005. This tax bill included a charge for"Atas
Weed Abatmnt" in the amount of$452.00.
I would like your assistance in reviewing this tax bill charge, the policy and procedures
involved in billing for these charges and respectfully request your directing staff to have
this charge removed from my bill.
Based on my experience as a former Director elected to the Rodeo-Hercules Fire
Protection District Board, I would like to share its policy as it relates to fiscal costs
and weed abatement charges in a case like my own. It is my understanding that
the District relies on billing for weed abatement charges by initially relying on the
most recent tax roll to get address information, when noticing property owners
when they are not in compliance in maintaining their properties to abate weeds.
Notices are posted on most properties, as is customary, with the exception of
those properties for which mailed notices are returned. .The District then checks
with the appropriate County agencies to get information for changes of ownership
and mails notices to the appropriate owners of properties for which initial notices
were returned. For those properties still not abated, the on-site notices are posted
and the property cleaned up under the direction of the District. The District then
files a lien through the Recorder's Office and bills the owner for weed abatement
charges on the next tax bill.
In my case, the City of Atascadero followed a somewhat similar approach with the
exception of two significant steps. The notices to property owners went out utilizing the
tax roll information. However, no check for changes in ownerships were made for
returned letters to ensure the proper parties were being held accountable. The City then
followed the appropriate steps by posting notices and seeing the property was abated.
The City did not file a lien however, and the abatement was placed as a billing charge
utilizing the Tax Assessors Office as a means for billing.
00002'7
By the City not checking for changes in property ownership and resending out notices to
new property owners it resulted in not holding the existing owner accountable for
something for which they were responsible at the time and should bear the burden of the
cost. In addition, since there was no lien recorded, the title search on my property did
not discern any charge like the one in question. Therefore, I had no opportunity to deal
with the problem when acquiring the property.
Since I am not negligent for improper maintenance of this property at the time natio was
given on this property, and since the process didn't enable me to resolve tbii2 ploblem
when acquiring the property I would appreciate your having this charge reproved from bill.
I would also like to see the current policy for recovering weed abatement Costs examined
with consideration for the steps we found effective in the former District fpr which I
served. It is my understanding from discussions with City staff they are a anumng this
carefully in an attempt to resolve this issue. I have found the staff extremely courteous
and interested in the isssues I have presented to them.
I realize there are many other serious matters you have to consider in the next few weeks,
and any time you can give to resolving this measure would be most appreciated. It would
be most helpful if my request for removal of this charge could be considerepd at the next
Council meeting as a discusssion item.
Respectfully,
Denise K. Mortorff
000028
ORDINANCE NO . 61
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ADDING
CHAPTER 13 TO TITLE 6 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO THE REMOVAL OF WEEDS, RUBBISH,
AND SIMILAR MATERIALS
The Council of the City of Atascadero ordains as follows:
Section 1. Chapter 13 of Title 6 is added to the Atascadero Munici-
pal Code to read as follows:
6-13 .01 . Chapter 13. Removal of Weeds , Rubbish and Similar Materials.
Whenever the Fire Chief or his authorized representatives shall
find weeds , rubbish, or similar material upon any property, lands , or
lots in the City, which in his opinion is or may become a fire hazard,
he shall cause to be given to the owner of said property a notice to
remove such weeds, rubbish, or other material which may constitute a
fire hazard in the manner hereinafter provided in this part.
6-13 .02 . Definitions
The following words and phrases, when used in this part, shall be
defined -as follows unless otherwise indicated:
(a) "Council" shall mean the City Council of the City.
(b) "Debris" shall mean waste matter, litter, trash, refuse , rub- 0
bish, dirt, dry grass, dead trees , tin cans, paper, waste
material of every kind, or other unsanitary substance, object,
or condition which is, or when dry may become a fire hazard,
or which is or may become a menace to health, safety, or wel-
fare, or which is offensive to the senses.
(c) "City" shall mean the City of Atascadero.
(d) "Fire Chief" shall mean the Fire Chief of the City or his
authorized representative.
(e) "Property" shall mean and include lands and/or lots.
(f) "Street" includes public streets, alleys, parkways, sidewalks,
and areas between sidewalks and curbs.
(g) "Weeds" shall mean any of the following:
(1) Weeds which, when mature , bear seeds of a downy or
wingy nature;
(2) Sagebrush, chaparral , and any other brush or weeds which
attain such large growth as to become, when dry, a fire
menace to adjacent improved property;
" 000029
Ordinance No . 61
Page Two
(3) Weeds which are otherwise noxious or -dangerous ;
(4) Poison oak and poison ivy which the conditions are such
as to constitute a menace to public health; and
(5) Dry grass , stubble , brush, litter, or, other flammable
material which endangers the public safety by creating
a fire hazard.
6-13 .03 . Weeds and Debris a Public Nuisance
The City Council may declare, by resolution in !accordance with
Sections 39561-39565 of the Government Code, that all weeds that are,
or may become a fire hazard upon or in front of privSte property to
the center line of adjoining streets in the City are public nuisances .
Also , it shall be unlawful for any property owner in', the City to cause
or permit any combustible debris or similar material! to be or remain
on any real property in the City or on portions of streets adjoining
such real property to the center line of such streets. It shall be
the duty of every such person to remove and destroy Such weeds and/or
debris. Destruction by burning within the City shall. be unlawful un-
less the written permission of the Fire Chief is first obtained.
6-13 .04 . Notice to Destrov or Remove Weeds and Debris
In the event the person or persons owning, occupying, renting,
managing , or controlling any real property in the City shall fail to
remove therefrom and from the portions of streets adjoining such
property all weeds and debris in accordance with theprovisions of
this part, it shall be the duty of the Fire Chief or ''; his authorized
representatives to notify such person or persons to remove the same .
Such notice to be conspicuously posted on or in front of the property
on or in front of which the nuisance exists .
As an alternative to posting notice of the resolution and notice
of the meeting when objections will be heard, the City Council may di-
rect the Citv Clerk, in accordance with Section 39567 . 1 of the Govern-
ment Code , to mail written notice of the proposed abatement to all
persons owning property described in the resolution. '. The City Clerk
shall cause such written notice to be mailed to each ',person to whom
such described property is assessed in the last equalized assessment
roll available on- the date the resolution was adopted by the City Coun-
cil . The address of the owners shown on the assessment roll shall be
conclusively deemed to be the proper address for the 'purpose of mail-
ing such notice . Such notice shall be mailed at least fourteen (14)
days prior to the time fixed for hearing objections by the City Council .
-2-
--- - --- ---- - 000030
Ordinance No . 61
Page Three
6-13 . 05 . Form of Notice
The notice shall be substantially in the following form:
NOTICE TO DESTROY WEEDS AND REMOVE
RUBBISH, REFUSE, AND DIRT
Notice is hereby given that on the day of , 19
the City Council passed a resolution declaring that noxious or dan-
gerous weeds were growing upon or in front of the property on this
street, and that rubbish, refuse , and dirt were upon or in front of
property on this street, in the City of Atascadero, and more par-
ticularly described in the resolution, and that they constitute
a public nuisance which must be abated by the removal of the weeds ,
rubbish, refuse, and dirt. Otherwise they will be removed and the
nuisance abated by the City and the cost of removal assessed upon
the land from or in front of which the weeds, rubbish , refuse , and
dirt are removed and will constitute a lien upon such land until
paid. Reference is hereby made to the resolution for further par-
ticulars . A copy of said resolution is on file in the office of
the City Clerk.
All property owners having any objections to the proposed removal
of the weeds , rubbish, refuse , and dirt are hereby notified to
attend a meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero to
be held , when their objections will be heard
and given due consideration.
Dated this day of 19
Fire Chief
City of Atascadero
6-13 . 06 . Hearing of Objections
At the time stated in the notices , the Council shall hear and
consider all objections to the proposed removal of weeds , rubbish,
debris , and similar material.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the Council shall allow or
overrule any objections. At that time , the City acquires jurisdic-
tion to proceed and perform the work of _abatement. The decision of
the Council is final
6-13 . 07 . Order to Abate Nuisance
If objections have not been made or after the Council has dis-
oosed of those made , it shall order the Fire Chief to abate the
nuisance .
-3-
0000;31
Ordinance No. 61
Page Four
6-13 . 08 . Destruction and Removal of Weeds and Debris by City
In the event the person or persons owning, occupying, renting
managing, or controlling real property in the City shall fail to re-
move or destroy weeds and debris in accordance with ',provisions of
this ordinance within ten (10) calendar days after the hearing of
objections and order to abate nuisance, it shall be the duty of the
Fire Chief and his deputies, assistants, employees, ''contracting agent,
or other representatives to destroy or remove such weeds and debris,
and they, and each of them, are hereby expressly authorized to enter
upon private property for such purpose, and it sha1L be unlawful for
any person to interfer, hinder, or refuse to allow them to enter upon
private property for such purpose and to destroy or remove weeds and
debris in accordance with the provisions of this part. Any person
owning, occupying, renting, managing, leasing, or controlling real
property in the City shall have the right to destroy' or remove weeds
and debris, or have the same destroyed or removed at:: his own expense,
at any time prior to the arrival of the Fire Chief or his authorized
representatives for such purpose.
6-13 . 09 . Account and Report of Cost of Abatement
The Fire Chief shall keep an account of the cost', of abatement on
or in front of each separate lot or parcel of land. i, He shall submit
such itemized written report, showing such cost, to the Council for
confirmation. Such report shall refer to each separate lot or parcel
of land by description sufficiently reasonable to idientify the same,
together with the expense proposed to be assessed against it, which
shall include charges sufficient to meet the administrative costs of
the program.
6-13 . 10 Notice of Report and Hearing
The City Clerk shall post a copy of such report and assessment
list on or near the door of the Council meeting room, together with
the notice of the filing thereof and of the time and'; place when and
where it will be submitted to the Council for hearing and confirma-
tion. The posting shall be for at least five (5) calendar days prior
to the submission to the Council.
6-13 . 11. Hearing of Report; Modification; Confirmation of Report
At the time and place fixed for receiving and considering the
report, the Council shall hear the same, together with any protests
or objections of the property owners liable to be assessed for the
abatement. Upon the conclusion of such hearing, the ' Council shall
then confirm the report by motion and the amount theteof shall consti-
tute a lein on the property assessed until paid. The confirmation of
the assessment by the Council shall be final and conclusive.
6-13 . 12. Report to Assessor and Tax Collector; Filinq Copy of
Report with County Auditor
A certified copy of the report shall be filed with the County Au-
- - -- - - -- - --- -- OOOU32
Ordinance No. 61
Page Five
ditor on or before August 10th of each year for entry of such asses-
ments on the County Tax roll. In the event that the report cannot be
prepared in time for the County Auditor to enter the assessment on the
next immediate tax roll, the certified copy may be filed with the
County Auditor before August 10th of the succeeding year.
6-13. 13 . Collection of Assessment; Penalties and Procedures for
Foreclosure
The amount of the assessment shall be collected at the time and in
the manner of ordinary, municipal taxes. If delinquent, the amount is
subject to the same penalties and procedure of foreclosure and sale
provided for ordinary municipal taxes.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be pub-
lished once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in- the Atasca-
dero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, _ published and
circulated in this City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Gov-
ernment Code; shall certify the adoption of this ordinance; and shall
cause this ordinance and certification to be entered in the Book of
Ordinances of this City.
Section 3. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full
force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the thirty-first (31st) day after
passage.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced on April 11 . 1983
and adopted on April 25 , 1983 by the following vote
AYES: Councilmen Mackey, Stover, Wilkins and Mayor Nelson
NOES : None
ABSENT: Councilman Molina
ROLFE NEL ON, Mayor
ATTEST:
PATSY/A. ._ T,� , Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
ALLEN GRILSES , City Attorney 4URY4L7,.�_Kk]DEN, City Manager