Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 07/11/1995
" PUBLIC REVIEW COPY • Please do not remove from cgun AGENDA ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL ' REGULAR MEETING CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 6500 PALMA AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM Tuesday, July 11, 1995 7:00 P.M. This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the requirements of Go lernment 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 inclu : A referral to staff with specific requests for information, continuance, sPecific direction to staff concerning the policy ormission of the item,discontinuance of consideratio ;authorization to enter into negotiations and execute agreements pertaining; to the,its ; adoption or approval,• and, disapproval. Copies of the staff reports or other_documentation relating to each it m 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 CitK Ha# business hours. The City Clerk will answer any questions regarding the agenda. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need spec' I assistance to participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City,,please ontact the City Manager's Office ((805)461-5010)or the City Clerk's Office ((805J 461- 074). Notifica- tion at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needs Y will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provr le accessibility to the meeting or service. RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: PLEASE SEE BACK PAGE CLOSED SESSION: The City Council will meet in Closed Session at 6:30 pan., 4th Floor Club Room, for purposes of discussion pertaining to: Conference with labor negotiator--Agency Negotiator: Andrew Takata; Emp! yee Organization: Management REGULAR SESSION: CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS: o Special recognition to Donna Marshall, Volunteer, C arles Paddock Zoo Gift Shop Manager COMMUNITY FORUM: Please see "Rules of Public Participation" (Back Page) 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. RESOLUTION NO. 67-95 - Approving an Interim Budget for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year Staff recommendation: Adopt 2. RESOLUTION NO. 75-95 Supporting request that CalTrans retain the temporary Curbaril Bridge structure following the completion of the Highway 41 Realignment Project Staff recommendation: Adopt B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. AUTHORIZING THE FORMATION OF SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 9 (Sart Gabriel Road) ` Staff recommendation: Approve "- 2. AUTHORIZING THE FORMATION OF SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 10 (West Santa Rosa Road) Staff recommendation: Approve 3. RESOLUTION NO. 70-95 - Placing delinquent solid waste charges on the 1995- 96 property tax rolls Staff Recommendation: Adopt 4. APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR'S DETERMINATION THAT AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 'REPORT IS REQUIRED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATIONFOR RAMONA RD. FREEWAY FRONTAGE.(GPA 95003 Beck) Staff Recommendation. Deny Appeal 5. RESOLUTION NO. 74-95 - Authorizing the execution of a Reimbursement Agreement for those properties on Traffic Way and San Anselmo adjacent to the Sanitation District #4 sewer lines (but not within the boundaries of the district) Staff Recommendation:` Adopt 2 C. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1 CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT PROPOSAL BY THE ATAISCADERO ROTARY CLUB TO INSTALL PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING AROUND AT SCADERO LAKE Parks & Recreation Commission recommendation: Approve with conditions 2. REPORT ON RECOGNITION OF ORANGE COUNTY"INVESTMENT POOL LOSS Staff recommendation: Review and file 3. LAS ENCINAS/3-F MEADOWS AND EL CAMINO REAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS: A. Resolution No. 71-95 - Authorizing staff to call bonds and issue refunds utilizing remaining construction proceeds and SLTP Grant monies (Las Encinas/3-F Meadows A.D.) Staff recommendation: Adopt B. Resolution No. 72-95 -Authorizing staff to call bond utilizing,remaining construction proceeds and SLTPP Grant monies (El amino Real A.D.) Staff recommendation Adopt 4. CITIZEN REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION RELATIVE TO U111 SOLICITED HOME' PAPER DELIVERY Staff recommendation: Provide staff direction 5. SALINAS DAM OWNERSHIP TRANSFER AGREEMENT (Mayor Highland) Staff recommendation: Provide staff direction 6. SET DATE FOR 1995-96 'BUDGET HEARING Staff recommendation: Select date D. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as tq1t necessary.): 1 S.L.O., Council of Governments/S.L.O. Regional Traiisit Authority 2. City/School Committee 3. County Water Advisory Board/Nacimiento Water Pu veyors Advisory Group 4. Economic Round Table 5. Finance Committee 6. Air Pollution Control District 7. Upper Salinas Riv. Coordinated Resource Mgmt. and Planning Committee 8. North County Council 9. Integrated Waste Management Authority 3 E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council - Confirmation of CommitteeAssignments (Mayor Highland) 1 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager 4 RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:' The City Council welcomes and 'encourages your ideas and comments as a citizen. ` To increase the effectivenes of your participation, please familiarize yourself with the followiny rules of decorum: © Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda, in the order the item(s) are addressed by the Council, as directed by the Mayor. Items not on the agenda should be submitted during the Community Forum period (see below).' o Persons wishing to speak should step to the podium and stale their name and address, for the official record. O All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and nol to any individual member thereof. O - No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any elected official, commissions and staff. O A person may speak for five (5) minutes. o' No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so, and no one may speak more than twice on any item. o Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may respond but, after the_allotted time has expired, may not initiate further d scussion. o The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. COMMUNITY FORUM: o The Community Forum period is provided to receive commen s from the public on matters other than scheduled agenda items. O A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Communi y Forum, unless Council authorizes an extension: o State law does not allow the Council to take action on issues not on the agenda staff may be asked to follow up on such items. REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: A-1 CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Andy Takata, City Mgr. Meeting Date: 7/11/95 ' From: Brad Whitty, Finance Director SUBJECT: Adopting an interim budget for FY 95-96. RECOMMENDATION: _ Adoption of Resolution 67-95, establishing interim appropriations for the upcoming fiscal year. BACKGROUND: The City's annual budget has been delayed due to the challenges of balancing the City's General Fund. As a result, an interim budget is necessary, and adoption of Resolution 67-95 will establish that interim budget. The recommended budget is expected in July. Two Public Hearings will be scheduled, prior to formal adoption, to 'address funding requests and to discuss the budget in general. res67-95 #45 RESOLUTION 67-95 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING AN INTERIM BUDGET FOR THE 1995-96 FISCAL YEAR AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREOF BE IT RESOLVED by the Atascadero City Council as follows: Section 1. Pursuant to the provisions of Section '37208 of the Government Code, an Interim Budget isherebyapproved for the City of Atascadero for Fiscal Year 1995-96 to the extent that certain annual totals contained in the Fiscal Year 1994-95 Budget are extended into the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Interim Budget for the purpose of continuing Salaries and Benefits, expenditures for Services and Supplies and certain limited Capital expenditures for each function in the General Fund, Special RevenueFunds,, Enterprise Funds, Capital Improvement Funds, Reserves and totals set forth for each capital project with the following stipulations: A. Salaries and benefits will continue asappropriatedwithin each Department of the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Budget. - Salary and benefit adjustments for Fiscal Year 1995-96 will be in accordance with approved Memorandum of Understanding upon adoption of a final Fiscal Year 1994-95 Budget; B. Expenditures for Services and Supplies, as currently appropriated within each Department of the Fiscal Year 1994- 95 budget, will be commensurate with maintaining basic City services; C. Expenditures for Capital Outlays will be restricted to those lease-purchase payments which were obligated prior to June 30, 1995. D. All references made within this section to the Fiscal Year 1994-95 budget, as a -basis for expenditures and limitations, will be replaced by the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 1995-96, once such budget is distributed and placed on file of record,' Section 2. The Council, from time to time, by motion, may approve and authorize the payment of non-budgeted demands and may appropriate funds for budgeted or non-budgeted demands and any such appropriation for a non-budgeted item shall constitute an approval to issue a warrant in payment of a proper demand or demands therefor. 000002 Resolution 67-95 Page 2 Section 3. This resolution shall become effective and be in full force immediately upon its passage. On motion by Councilperson and seconded by Councilperson , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call votes: AYES: Councilmembers NOES: None ABSENT: None ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor ATTEST: T LEE PRICE, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney 000003 MEETING AGENDA DAT 7/11 95 ITEM# A_.? RESOLUTION NO. 75-95 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO SUPPORTING REQUEST THAT CALTRANS RETAIN THE TEMPORARY'CURBARIL BRIDGE STRUCTURE FOLLOWING THE COMPLETION.OF THE HIGHWAY 41 REALIGNMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, Extraordinary rainfall in early 1995 rendered th a permanent bridge crossing on Curbaril Ave. over the Salinas River inoperable; and WHEREAS, Due to the health and safety hazards pos d by the lack of emergency access in the absence of said bridge, a temporary bridge was put in place by`CalTrans; and WHEREAS, The City of Atascadero is desirous of maintaining the best possible emergency, bicycle, pedestrian and equestrian access across the Salinas River at the Curbaril Bridge location; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by -the City Cou cil of the City of Atascadero to request that CalTrans retain the temporary Curb ril Bridge structure following the completion of the Highway 41 realignment project. ON MOTION BY Counciimember , seconded by Councilmember the foregoing resolution is hereby,adopted on the followi g roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO: ATTEST: GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor LEE PRICE, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney 000004 REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting ate: 7-11-95 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda tem: B-1 THROUGH: Andy Takata, City Manager VIA: Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services FROM: Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations SUBJECT: Public Hearing regarding the formation of Sewer Assessment District No. 9 San Gabriel (west RECOMMENDATION• Approve the formation of Sewer Assessment District No 9, BACKGROUND: The City is operating under a Cease and DeEiSt Order issued by the Regional Water Quality control Board which requires that we provide sanitary sewer service to specific areas of the city. The deadline for the complete sewering of this area (Area G) is August 31, 1995 On July 6, 1995 bids were received for the construction of a sewer line to serve thirty properties located on San Gabriel Road between Highway 41 and Monita Road. Council will be asked to award a contract for the construction of this sewer line later during this council meeting. Upon completion of construction, because these properties are covered under the State Cease and Desist Order, connection is mandatory within 24 months. Letters were sent via certified mail adv'sing all affected property owners of this 'hearing and explaining the procedures to be followed by the City. In addition, since April 30, 1993, the property owners in this area have been familiarized with this project via two neighborhood meetings, two citizen/city sub committee meetings and six letters of information. DISCUSSION• The purpose of this hearing is to receive protests regarding any aspect of the formation of the District. Residents can protest their inclusion into the district, the estimated cost of the improvements, the proposed interest rate '-to be charged, or the time given for connection. 000005 It must be noted that for properties covered under the State Cease and Desist Order the requirement for connection is dictated by the State. Council can choose to waive the City's requirement for connection by waiving the pertinent sections of the City Ordinance. However, if lots located in the Cease and Desist Area are not connected to the City sewer, it is likely that the, State will initiate enforcement action against the City. It is proposed that each of these thirty-three lots be assessed for their proportionate share of this project. The Contractor will be paid from Wastewater funds and reimbursement will be accomplished through a lien against each benefitting property collected on the property taxes over 15 years at 10% interest. Property owners can elect to pay the entire cost at any time. Upon ,completion :of the project, when all actual costs are known, owners are entitled/ to an equalization hearing. The estimated cost is as follows: Engineering. . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 63 , 357 .45 Construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336,993 .07 Total $ 400, 350.52 FISCAL IMPACT: Cease and Desist Property Owners: Assessment Fee (est. ) ., . . $ 12, 131.83 Annexation Fee. . . .$ 850. 00 Connection Fee. • $ 000.00 Total , $ 12,981.83 All affected property owners will be responsible for any on-site construction required for connection to the sewer lateral provided by this project. In addition, a Septic Tank Abandonment Inspection fee of $37.11 will also be required. Attachments: A) Excerpt from State Cease and Desist Order No. 81-60 B) Excerpt from State Cease and Desist Order No. 92-68 C) Letter from S.L.O. County Health Department D) Map of Cease and Desist Area G 00000tZ ATTACHAMNT "A„ • C D ordor xn. ft flo ' -to mataiiY Omm" T"Ito pursumst to•8eotf m 3U41 Of the Cauis Water Code, the Ataocadtro Cauaty &ml,•tatL= D1atrUto md th® City +off w .Atomcaaevo ski cmov xith "a eolls+r3aga 1. Ceans and Dotde 'i Arm daet" amtravy to m8gWx4mAt6 "ted An heat$ 9. aped 14.10 above# 1W oorastruatSug �dd3tioual . %zmmtmut capacity aaamdtn,S to tU foUmlft Uva sahadias s bask �+ Date* Begat c'oi�stvUqUOU add Naatan► tsar dattOW 255 3.001 '�iae�at�neiafi Merit . a8reseepox�fi •' eeptei�ber yi fE, 19 ! Cal" tete Q=Wt3eat3ao of 1lautOl 3.985' 'i�atteetit �►.� . A zKw4rt of Compliance able be OWW tied within 10 days aite* the •' • 2. XXbftate water 9WIty a14 #WMq li aft probleM SBSoClat 4 W1011 hilUxis vewe X04 ift emriae i9a►tr�mass abom antttac i sA �B aQaa>vd�np� to the toll ow3ax t1in aahedul e t Date* submit WOrl ,an (3n%ftft aag bane Saudi" 198X to PNOWLde Sower 8MV16e fav mmonv d Araas 0 4od 8. sdi T it a Warlq?)= 0natadlU4 the adtwda 4 1982 to >e3xi3IAt s radang Ob-Sita 8err+�e 9""m; 30 red Aveas ps as x, ata[ 1L. PROSPOIS Report Oax'obep h 1905 Fx�ossP Oatob" 1, 1803 ' Subodt a Wvl plan '(txttale IM tsme *dwdWs) OctabOV 1+ 19814 to Prav3.de Semm SerA06 For vasewe"d $vans IF* 0s 1s emd 3:. 1 Begin dealp of ft"" fb* A 4 Asad s. FAvQlh 1985 ftmpl4te desidct of seve" yax ft*w C quad B. valmewher IV 1985 fe$in ametruCtli n of severe fQ* Arm C 1988 and So • 00000'7 a C & D Order No. 81- 60 -4- Task Compliance Date* Complete construction of sewers November 1, 1986 for Areas C and E. *The discharger shall advise the Regional Board of compliance by at least one copy of the appropriate documents no later than the date specified. Where tasks do not include completed documents U. e. , tasks f, h, and i), written reports are due within ten (10) working days of the compliance date. All reports shall include sufficient detail to allow determination of whether satisfactory progress is being made to comply with all terms of this Order. 3. If, in the opinion of the Executive Officer, .the District or - City fails to comply with the provisions of this Order, the Executive Officer is directed to request the Attorney General to take the appropriate enforcement action against the discharger, including injunction and civil monetary remedies, if appropriate. I, KENNETH R. JONES, Executive Officer of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of an Order adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board on June 12, 1981. Executive cer 1 000005 ATTACHMENT "B" • • r 0 m D OrdeV oto. 92--60 ..•6 J*1yr lot 1992 h. lete servering •paquang AUG OU? 31,► 1994 ent�. :t bxx*1p8%} of Cease and Desist axes Atieobaeut S). �.. late sersexlb9 (IAcIv ing AUOUST 311 1995 res en .�t7E b=kupaCease and Dist axes a (age 14L 1-0 1-Ob b). 3. The City of Atasoad"o, shall aulsait VwLttXOPOxte wj.twLn fifteen (15 ire aitex each due date expl the eu •t Statue of 3e0t XGUtive to �schedule LU scffioleat detail t4 OftblsBoaxd av�aplia4ce status and the � of SLOW 4. Xrr is the Opinion of the antive 0refterr the City of Ata aadexo Xullx to amp. 3y vXth, i*e picavisions of the A:cd+aac0 itOind = nplianceill the above schedal a, t2t0 lmeaatt ve officer ie authaxi-1-13 to t the A.ttty Geseval to take a cut4 Onforam mt a ion sgolhat thhe� b iaoh incl= rededles aPpaca�r a e1 M51FOO an hftf,&tsILuft "'C ,vii, lity ox Imfer tha City back to the Boamd Vw 1*axthea- �ct oa eaossat Action, , Xjr VIYZXM R* XROBUD, 8,vacutil. O .cera of the Callf0 u RogjAma.1 Water Quality Coatxol. Bpavd, Ceni::aZ Coast Regia►n, do �► z csea�t3. that tihe foxegt U- s a a faiX� �ie0 and cvrreotcroy►yai Crdex adopted by the Regi©��, utter Quality COnt3c01 UOZ a�n ftly lot 1.992• 1bwcat " Officer am3���►ta�.�&�E 000009 ATTACHNMNT "C" SAN LUIS OSISPO WUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 2156 Sierra way • P.O. B= 1489 • San Luis Obispo, California ;_;40 TF;LEPHONE (805) 781485" * FAX (803) 781-4211 AUQUST 31., 1994 CITY OF ATASCADER4 + dl tlNt�Y t7 �T 6500 DALMA AV AM ATASCADERo, CA. 93422 ATMS Henry Engen, Dir;*Qtor of Communitx Development During the months of January, •February and Ranh of 1991, staff from the Division of Environmental Health conducted an ars'^Glte+ sewage disposal system survey in eleven selected areas throughout the City of Atascadero. The Survey was requested by the County Engineering Department repr6denting the Atascadero Sanitary District. The areas to be surveyed were selected on the basis of historical sewage disposal. problems. The survey was accomplished by door to door interviews with residents. The ed in other surveys questionnaire by the Division of My ron ntal HeaVas similar to those lth- Past surveys in the communities of •Cambria and Nipomo in the 70's significantly influenced the Board Of Supervisors and water Quality Control Boards in their decision to impose 6 and 3.o year building moratoriums respectively due to septic tank system problems similar to those in the city of Atascadero. In addition to the survey results, a review of Soil . Conservation Service radagorllpt permeability and a high shrink-swell severs imltionsfo absorption fields. Those factors on the survey form indicating failures and potential failures of septic tank sewage disposal systems in Area a correspond to the other 10 areas surveyed which have been severed over the past years. Due to the signif scant constructionesct end challengeso residents we to the surV'ey expect a significant amount of pro findings. The survey findings were obviously acceptable (12 years ago) to the Board of Supervisors and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Xo date time to challenge the accuracy of this survey would The app p Brit gg development m have been during the morat8riwn consideration and stages. Any current attempt to discredit the study appears to be 9 A DEPAATMEW OF THE SAN LUIS OMPO COUNTY HEALTH AgeNCY 0(� Q� economically motivated rather than out of a legitimate concern for proper long term sewage disposal considerations. We remain open to and available for further discussion on this issue. Should you feel it necessary to convene 'a joint meeting with City Staff, RWQCB Staff and Environmental Health Staff please advise me. MICHAEL J. DOHERTY, R.E.H.S supervising Environmental ealth Specialist h8/94 000(-)'1 1 ATTACHMENT "D" f .-- )M3 Co - 0 N A 0000,12 REVISED W$ DATE: July 10, 1995 TO: Atascadero City Council FROM: Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations Via: Andy Takata, City Manager SUBJECT: Reconciliation of Staff Report cost estimates to actual construction bids received for: 1) Santa Rosa Sewer Extension (Proposed Assessment District #9) 2) San Gabriel Road Sewer Extension (Proposed Assessment District #10) Scheduled for Public Hearings on July 11, 1995 Santa Rosa Sewer Extension Engineers construction cost estimate. . . . . . . . . . . . . .;,$ 28 , 750. 00 • Low bid received. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 43 , 916. 00 Difference. . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 15, 166. 00 Original estimate of property assessment (Total) . .I,,$ 6, 335. 88 New estimate of property assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .';'$ 8, 231. 63 Difference. . . . . . . . . . . . $', +1, 895.75 San Gabriel Road Sewer Extension Engineers construction cost estimate. . . . . . . . . . . . . .$336, 933 . 07 Low bid received. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$284 , 408 . 00 Difference. . . . . . . . . . . .1. $52,525.07 Original estimate of property assessment (Total) . . $ 12 , 981.83 New estimate of property assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 11, 388 . 35 Difference. . . . . . . . . . . . $',' -1, 593 . 48 SAN GABRIEL SEWER EXTENSION (PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT #9) HOME-OWNER COST SCENARIOS Estimated Construction. Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241. 689 . 00 Engineering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 , 357 . 45 Storm Drain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 , 719 . 00 Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . 347 , 765 . 45 1) Home-Owner Expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347, 765.45 / 33 = 10, 538 . 35 Annexation Fee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (+) 850 . 00 11, 388 . 35 @ 15 yrs. 5% 7 . 5% 10% $90. 16/mo $105 . 57/mo $122 . 38/mo $11, 388 . 35 $1, 081.92/yr $1, 266 .84/yr $1, 468 . 56/yr $4 , 822 . 15/Intr $7, 614 . 50/Inst $10, 640.01/Ins $16, 210 . 50/T $19 , 002 . 85/T 1 $22 , 028 . 36/T 2) Estimated Construction Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 , 765 . 45 Minus Estimated Storm Drain Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (-) 42 , 719 . 00 305, 046. 45 Home-Owner Expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 046.45 P / 33 = 9, 243 . 83 Annexation Fee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 . 00 10 , 093 . 83 @ 15 yrs. 5% 7 . 5% 10% $79 .82/mo $93 . 57/mo $108 . 47/mo $10 , 093 .83 $957 . 84/yr $1, 122 .84/yr $1, 301. 64/yr $4 , 274 . 02/Intr $6, 748 . 96/Intr $9, 430. 56/Intr $14, 367 .85/T $16, 842 . 79/T $19 , 524 . 39/T 1 Ab. 3) Estimated Construction Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 , 765. 45 Minus Estimated Engineering Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (-) 63 , 357 . 45 284 , 408 . 00 Home-Owner Expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .284,408. 00 / "33 = 8 , 618.42 AnnexationFee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850. 00 9 , 468.42 @ 15 yrs. 5% 7.5% 10% $74. 88/mo $87.77/mo $101.75/mo $9, 468 .43 $898 .56/yr $1, 053 .24/yr $1, 221. 00/yr $4, 009. 20/Intr $6, 330.80/Intr $8, 846. 24/Intr $13 , 477 . 62/T $15,799. 22/T $18, 314 . 66/T 4) Estimated Construction Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347, 765. 45 Minus Estimated Engineering Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (-) 63 , 357 .45 284 , 408 . 00 Home-Owner Expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284, 408 . 00 '/ 33 = 8, 618 . 42 Wave Annexation Fee. . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (+) 000. 00 8 , 618 . 42 7 @ 15 yrs. 5% 7 . 5% 10% $68 . 15/mo $79 .89/mo $92 . 61/mo $8, 618 .42 $817.80/yr $958 . 68/yr $1, 111. 32/yr $3, 649.28/Intr $5,762 .47/Intr $8, 052 .10/Intr $12, 267 . 70/T $14, 380.89/T „ $16, 670. 52/T 2 SANTA ROSA ROAD SEWER EXTENSION (PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT #10) HOME-OWNER COST SCENARIOS Estimated Construction Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 , 916. 00 Engineering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 , 633 . 00 Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 549 . 00 1) Home-Owner Expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 549. 00 / 8 = 6,443 . 63 Annexation Fee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (+) 1,210. 00 Connection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (+) 578.00 8,231. 63 @ 15 yrs. 5% 7 .50 10% Project Total $65. 10/mo $76. 31/mo $88.46/mo $8 , 231. 63 $781. 20/yr $915.72/yr $1, 061. 52/yr $3 , 485. 51/Inst $5, 503 .85/Inst $7 , 690.72/Inst $11,717 . 14 $13 , 735.48 $15, 922 . 35 II REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting ate: 7-11-95 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda tem: B-2 THROUGH: Andy Takata, City Manager VIA: Brady Cherry, Director of Community Servi es FROM: Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operat•ons SUBJECT: Public Hearing regarding re ardin the formation of Sewer Assessment District, No. 10 Santa Rosa (west RECOMMENDATION• Approve the formation of Sewer Assessment District No. 10. BACKGROUND: The City is operating under a Cease and Desist Order- issued by the Regional Water Quality control Board which requires that we provide sanitary sewer service to specific areas of the city. The deadline for the complete sewering of this area (Area F) was August 31 1994. On July 6, 1995 bids were received for the const uction of a sewer line to serve three properties locatel on Santa Rosa Road near Avenal Avenue. Five additional oroperties located in the City's Urban Service Area but which are not located in the State Cease and Desist Area will acquire access to the municipal sewer system e to this project. Council will be asked to award a contract for the construction of this sewer line later during this council meeting. Upon completion of construction, for properties covered under the State Cease and Desist Order, connection is mandatory within 24 months. Properties not cov red by the Cease and Desist Order but which gain access to the municipal sewer system will be required to co nect when their septic system fails or when the propert is sold. Letters were sent to all affected property owners via certified mail advising them of this hearing and explaining the procedures to be followed by the City. In addition, since May 1994 two additional letters have been sent and one neighborhood meeting was held to keep property owners apprised of this project. 000013 DISCUSSION- The purpose of this hearing is to receive protests regarding any aspect of the formation of the District. Residents ;can protest their inclusion into the district, the estimated cost of the improvements, the proposed interest rate to be charged, or the time given for connection It must, be noted that for the three properties covered under the State Cease and Desist Order the requirement for connection is dictated by the State. The five additional properties which are not in the Cease and Desist Area will berequiredto connect by City Ordinance only. Council can: choose to waive the City's requirement for connection by waiving the pertinent sections of the City Ordinance. However, if lots located in the Cease and Desist Area are not connected to the City sewer, it is likely that the State will initiate enforcement action against the City. The three lots located in the Cease and Desist Areaare currently being assessed for a sewer line located in Marchant Way, which they have been unable to ,gain access to. Since these owners are already assessed for a collection line, "it is proposed that these lots not be assessed for this project and that the City pay three eights (3/8) of the cost of this project and that the five non Cease and Desist lots pay only their proportionate share The Contractor will be paid from Wastewater funds and reimbursement will be accomplished through a lien against each benefitting property collected on the property taxes over 15 years at 10% interest Property owners can elect to pay the entire cost at any time. Upon completion of the project, when all actual costs are known, ownersare entitled to an equalization hearing. The estimated cost is as follows: Engineering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,633 . 00 Construction. . . . . . . . . . . . $ 28 .750. 00 Total. $ 36, 383 .00 000()-14 FISCAL IMPACT• City $ 13 , 643 . 63 Non C&D Property Owners: Assessment Fee. . . . . . . . . . . $ 4 , 547 .88 Annexation Fee. . . . . . . . . . . $ 1, 210.00 Connection Fee. . . . . . . . . . . $ 578.00 Total 6, 335.88 Cease and Desist Property Owners: Annexation Fee. . . . . . . . . . . $ 850. 00 All affected property owners will be responsible for any on-site construction required for connection to the sewer lateral provided by this project. In addition!,, a Septic Tank Abandonment Inspection fee of $37 . 50 will also be required. Attachments: A) Excerpt from State Cease and Desist Order No. 81-60 B) Excerpt from State Cease and Desist Order No. 92-68 D) Map of properties affected 00001 kTTACEMENT "A" . -i — f ' . >< a djN � 0 C 6 D Order Nn. 81-60 1T IS HMWiY ORUHRFd1 THAT, pursuant to-Section 19241 Of the Califv=lu Water Code, the Atascadevo County Satnitetion Districts and the City Of A'tasoadero shall comply with the tal,],adM5: w .. Cease and Duals% fret Aaahatrgfng wastes CAUtravy to requirements 11ted JA Ztems S. and 4-s abaveO by eonet"Oting add3tiaua7. treatment capacity awavding to the foLlowing time sahadutle: azA CLx a Defies Bealm Qwstvuct:ion of wastewater Oetobear 28s 1981 lteatment Plant Progress Repou+t geptepbev Is, 1982 M COVAte constvUetion of Hsstexatt ar duly 1, 1983 Treatstettt Plant: A report of a mplianeq shall be submitted within 10 days ai-te* the ca*21ance date. 2. nix"ate water+ quality and pvblia health problems assoalat ed witts fail.ing iva Lvidual. on-site wastewater aySten &srhargas by providing sewage col leatian Sevvios to I?robXem eras_wham an AttaChtnent A a4cor4l" to the fonawlug time schedule: Task C t21.iance Date* Submit j% Workplan (IncXvding time 6eheduJ4 November 1s 1981 to provide Sewer Semvlae fop Vaeewered Areas C•and 8. Submit a Workplan Unclvding time 8&sduW ' scab 11, 1982 to m3Aimise FaiLinng On-Site BOW890 Systems in Dauaewered Areas Fs qs is and K. Fragx'ess Report OaJobav 10 3.962 Pxwgress Report ' . October is 1883 Subaait a Workplan 'Unalv4ing tlma sahedule) Oatobev It 1884 to pravlde Sewer Servlve for Unsevered Areas F, 0, 2s akd K. Begin design of Savors fame Av"s 0 grad D. March l:; 1985 Complete design of aeuMa fvr Areas C and X. December 1, 1988 Begin lxmstructl n of sewers €oft Areas C Namb is 1,986 and B. s 0000,g •r a 44 C i D Orden No. 81- 68 _4_ " T--ask Q5km-p a�iCe yAatE: Complete construction of sewers November 10 1986 for Areas C and E. *The diecharger shall, advise the Regional Board of compliance by at least one copy of the, Appropriate docnmenta no later thian the date specified. Where tasks do not include completed doeumeKits (i. e., tasks £, b, and i), written repoz+ta are dues within ten (10) working days of the compliance date. All reports s3hal..3. inaiude sufficient detail to a.Uow determination of whether eatisfs ctory parogress is being made to comply with all terms of this Order* g- If* In the opinion of the F,xeecutiva Offieer,.the District or •- City fafxs to *QWIY with the provisions of this Order, the Wxeeutiwe Officer is directed to request the AttomOy General to take the appropriate enforcement action against the discharger, Including in3unction and civil monetary remedies, if appropriate. Y, KENNE'i'fi R., JONES, Executive Officer of the Regional. Nater Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region, do hereby Certify that the:: foregoing is a full, true, and correct Copy of an Order adopted by the Regional. Water Quit ity Control Board on Jtme 12, 1981, • Decut ve aer 0000,111 ATTACHMENT "B" AN C & D OrdeV No. 92-89 .,g« July 'Or 1992 h. Complete sewering ,(including ADs3'UST 31, 1994 resideatlax hookups Cease and a Desist ve8 V (8.00 lttacbamt s). t• Mete seewering (inalud3,ng 1MGUS`�' 310 x.995 ren dentia l hookups of Cease and moist areas a (see �ttach b S). 5. ztte City of A,tasscadero. shalt submit kitten reports within 'if teen. (15) days after each duo date explaining the cu=mat staltue of the pro feat reltive to the- time schedule Ln eufficlent detail to enabla Regioaa]. Boaxd staff to deter�in® aomvlunce status and the ts -Mumteunaes of any nonLance. 4. xfr in the opinion of the oxamtive officer, the City of Atasecadero fails to ,complyR with the provisions of the Oaodear* itoluding comliance wfth the above umtioned schedule, the Uxecuttve Officer Is authorized to regaes3t the Attomey aeneval to take approptlAte enforcement action agalfiet the Diaahargrexr Including injunction and civil remedies If appropr ate; issue an Administrative Civil. Ligflity Complaint) or refer the City back to the Board four fuacthW= enforcement action. , Xs, VXXL R, INOMMf Executiie Officery of the California RegiMal Water Quality Control Hqa. d, Cent-ral Coast Region, do hereby certify that the foxego#g Le a f all r ,tue, and correct copy of an Order adapted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board on July 2U, 1992. Muffmill Executive Officer am33;A,fias�s.c&d 0000,19 s t t t 001, goo 0 000 *%loaf Otto do;i KIM • ►�� .y ►� DI 1 r REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: B-3 CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Andy Takata,City Manager Meeting bate: 7/11/95 From: Brad Whitty, Finance Director VAF- SUBJECT: Placing Delinquent Solid Waste Charges on the Prop( rty Tax Roll for FY 1995-96. RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of Resolution No. 70-95 as may b9 amended, placing delinquent solid waste charges on the FY 1995-96 Property Tax Roll. BACKGROUND_ Council adopted Ordinance No. 269 on May 11 , 1993, which allows the City to place delinquent solid waste bills on the property tax roll, provided: 1 .) That the accounts were over 60 days delinquent 2.) That the charges could be assessed only after a Public Protest Hearing, and 3.) That each effected property owner would receive wri tten notice ten days prior to the hearings. Notices will be mailed to 83 property owners notifying them of the hearing scheduled July 11 . ANALYSIS The total amount of outstanding bills to be placed cn the tax rolls is $10,447.97 with individual bills ranging from $39.00 to $390.55. Most bills are under $100.00. Council has the discretion to remove individual accounts from the listing in Resolution 70-95, based on the circumstances presented at the hearing. However, Council's decision to remove an individual account would not necessarily preclude Wil Mar from pursuing other means of collection. In addition, Wil-Mar representatives will be present to respond to individual questions. 000020 It should be noted that some accounts may have been paid in full or resolved in some other manner prior to the hearing. Wil-Mar is tracking these accounts and will be able to report any accounts that should be removed from the listing for that reason. FISCAL IMPACT If the total $10,447.97 is recovered,the City will receive $522.40 in additional franchise fee revenues. a taxroll #42 000021 RESOLUTION NO. 70-95 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATA►SCADERO PLACING DELINQUENT SOLID WASTE CHARGES ON THE 1995-96 PROPERTY TAX BILL WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 38790.1 and 25831 allows cities to place delinquent solid waste bills onto the annual property tax roll, under certain conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance 269 on Mayl11, 1993, applying the provisions of said Government Code to the City of Atascadero; and WHEREAS, all property owners with solid waste fees delinquent for at least sixty (60) days were duly notified in writing that their delinquent fees would be placed on the FY 1995-96 property tax rolls, after a public hearing scheduled for July 11 , 1995; and WHEREAS, Council had duly held a public hearing concerning the placement of delinquent solid waste fees on the FY 1995-96 property tax rolls; and WHEREAS, at said hearing the attached report marked "Exhibit A" containing the delinquent fees by Assessor's Parcel Number was duly received by said Council; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing opportunity was given for filing objections and protests and for presentation of testimony or other evidence concerning same; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest that this body ',confirm the report presented at the hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the, City of Atascadero as follows: Section 1 . That the recitals set forth hereinabove are true, correct and valid. Section 2. That Council hereby determines and confirms the report containing delinquent fees as set forth in "Exhibit A", which is hereby expressly incorporated herein by reference as though here fully set forth, and hereby further determines and confirms that each delinquent fee set forth in said report is true '',and accurate and is in fact owed. 000022 Resolution No. 70-95 Page 2 Section 3. That the fees as so confirmed and determined and adopted shall appear as separate items on the tax bill of each parcel listed in said report, and such fees shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary County ad valorem taxes are collected, and are subject to the same penalties in the same procedure and sale in case the delinquency is provided for such taxes. Section 4. The City Clerk shall file a certified copy of this resolution and said "Exhibit A" with the County Auditor upon its adoption. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption by a majority vote of Council. On motion by Councilman , seconded by Councilman , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: . ADOPTED: ATTEST: LEE PRICE, City Clerk By: GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney �ID4�O2� i RESOLUTION 70-95 EXHIBIT A. 1 SUPERCEDES "EXHIBIT AIS" Property Liens for Solid Wast Submitted by Wil-Mar Disposal Fund Assessment Lienable No . Number Bal Due 1879 056 . 291 .007 81 . 55 030;. 141 .016 277 . 50 029 .082.029 144 . 67 0301134. 005 34 . 12 910 .002 . 328 248 . 50 030. 111 . 014 169 . 52 910 . 002 . 271 58 . 50 030 ; 091 . 038 97, 50 056 . 384.032 58 . 50 030, 071 .017 62 . 25 056 . 261 .088 149 . 10 030 ';071 . 001 97 . 50 056 . 051 . 033 96 . 37 030 .051 . 004 85 . 31 055 . 311 . 018 39 . 00 029a: 391 .014 98 . 65 055 .071 .018 87 . 75 029 . 391 .011 39 . 00 054. 212 .013 78 . 00 029 . 382 . 021 92 . 62 054 .061 .032 29 . 25 029 :. 341 . 016 48 . 75 054 .051.045 97 . 50 029 ; 302 . 060 50 . 26 054 .041 .008 68 . 25 029 302 . 028 39 .00 054 . 032 . 022 97 . 50 029 ; 241 .033 99 . 40 054 .013 .016 78. 45 029 ; 201 .031 66 . 18 050 . 212 .021 97 . 50 029 ; 191 . 029 123 . 65 050 . 092 . 009 91 . 80 029 : 171 . 008 97 . 50 050 .071 . 026 246 . 95 029 :061 . 015 53 . 62 . 049 . 301 .014 193 . 80 029 .041 . 023 80 . 65 049 . 301 .014 58 . 43, 029 .021 . 004 112 . 12 049 . 211 .018 48 . 76 029 .011 . 044 87 . 75 049 . 201 .037 31 . 06 028 . 371 . 021 109 . 27 049 . 191 . 027 97 . 50 028 :371 . 021 202 . 55 049 . 191 . 026 98 . 50 028 . 321 .020 47 . 50 049 . 191 .002 97 . 50 028 -'271 . 032 29 . 25 049 : 151 .033 97 . 50 028 .``251 . 025 97 . 50 049 . 102 . 008 87 . 75 028 :161 .029 97 . 50 049 .071 .017 92 . 62 028 . 101 . 002 97 . 50 049 .051 .022 248 . 50 028 .061 .017 97 . 50 045 .431 .004 118 . 00 028 ..:061 . 009 100. 35 045 .032 . 003 97 . 50 028 .,051 . 018 137 . 50 031 . 371 .028 34 . 55 028 . 042 .046 26 . 14 031 . 231 .036 108 . 80 028 . 021 . 031 51 . 30 031 . 183 .018 63 . 50 --- 031 . 082.025 33 . 75 82 8 , 129 . 80 031 .071 . 030 202 . 15 031 .062 .002 88 . 00 031 .042 .017 81 . 30 031 . 042.005 49 . 70 031 . 023 . 017 58 . 50 031 . 012. 004 29 . 25 030 . 522 .005 107 . 25 030 . 412.001 148 . 80 030 . 373 .008 390 . 55 030 . 351 .031 177 . 40 030 . 281 .032 117 . 31 030 . 281 .025 87 . 75 030 . 281 .006 99 . 85 030 . 281 .006 28 . 12 RESOLUTION NO. 70-95 EXHIBIT: "A" 031 . 061 . 022 34 . 75 028 . 061 . 017 97 . 50 031 . 043 . 029 28 . 50 028 . 061 . 009 100 . 35 031 . 043 . 028 47 . 50 028 . 051 . 018 137 . 50 031 . 043 . 019 39 . 00 028 . 042 . 046 26 . 14 Fund Assessment 028 . 032 . 019 97 . 50 No . Number Bal Due 031 . 042 . 017 81 . 30 028 . 021 . 031 51 . 30 031 . 042 . 005 49 . 70 031 . 041 . 016 22 . 80 ° 028 . 021 . 031_- 69 . 05 1879 056 . 291 . 007 131 . 55 029 . 082 . 029 169 . 67 031 .023 . 017 58 . 50 910 . 002 . 410 148 . 20 031 . 012 .004 29 . 25 10 , 447 . 97 910 . 002 . 328 248 . 50 030 . 522 . 005 107 . 25 910 . 002 . 271 58 . 50 030 . 473 . 014 29 . 25 056 . 384 . 032 58 . 50 030 . 412 .001 148 . 80 056 . 261 . 088 149 . 10 030 . 373 . 008 390 . 55 056 . 051 . 033 96 . 37 030 . 351 . 031 177 . 40 055 . 311 . 018 39 . 00 030 . 281 . 032 117 . 31 055 . 071 . 018 87 . 75 030 . 281 . 025 87 . 75 054 . 212 . 013 78 . 00 030 . 281 . 006 99 . 85 054 . 061 . 032 29 . 25 030 . 281 . 006 28 . 12030 . 141 . 016 277 . 50 054 . 051 . 045 97 . 50 054 . 041 . 008 68 . 25 030 . 134 . 005 34 . 12030 . 111 . 014 169 . 52 054 . 032 . 022 97 . 50 054 . 013 . 016 78 . 45 030 . 091 . 038 97 . 50030 . 071 . 017 62 . 25 050 . 212 . 021 97 . 50 0 050 . 092 . 009 91 . 80 30 . 071 . 001 97 . 50 050 . 071 . 026 246 . 95 030 . 051 . 004 85 . 31 049 . 301 . 014 193 . 80 029 . 391 . 014 98 . 65 049 . 301 . 014 58 . 43 029 . 391 . 011 39 . 00 049 . 211 . 018 48 . 76 029 . 382 . 021 92 . 62 049 . 201 . 037 31 . 06 029 .341 . 016 4x3 . 75 049 . 191 . 027 97 . 50 029 . 322 . 006 49 . 70 049 . 191 . 026 98 . 50 029 . 311 . 038 156 . 49 049 . 191 . 016 98 . 80 029 . 302 . 060 50 . 26 049 .191 . 002 97 . 50 029 . 302 . 028 39 . 00 049 . 163 . 017 58 . 59 029 . 281 . 005 110 . 15 029 . 241 . 033 99 . 40 049 . 151 ..033 97 . 50 .... 029 . 222 . 012 29 . 82 049 . 131 . 048 97 . 50 049 . 112 . 022 24 . 55 029 . 201 . 031 66 . 18 049 . 102 . 008 87 . 75 029 . 191 . 029 123 .'65 029 . 171 . 008 97 . 50 049 . 071 . 017 92 . 62 ' 049 . 051 . 022 248 . 50 029 . 142 . 004 24 . 85 045 . 451 . 044 48 . 35 029 . 141 . 015 119 . 10 ' 045 . 431 . 004 118 . 00 029 . 071 . 005 172 . 05 045 . 381 . 006 174 . 75 029 . 061 . 015 045 . 353 . 004 78 . 00 029 . 041 . 023, 80 . 65 045 . 032 . 003 97 . 50 029 . 024 . 019 49 . 70 ± 031 . 371 . 028 34 . 55 029 .024 . 007 31 . 55 ', 031 . 311 . 021 48 . 40 029 . 022 . 018 59 . 40 ' 031 . 311 . 007 108 . 50 029 . 021 . 004 112 . 12 ': 031 . 231 . 036 108 . 80 029 . 011 . 044 87 . 75 031 . 183 . 018 63 . 50 028 . 371 . 021 109 . 27 ' 031 . 152 . 003 136 . 67 028 . 371 . 021 202 . 55 031 . 082 . 025 33 . 75 028 . 321 . 020 47 . 50 ' 031 . 081 . 007 49 . 70 028 . 271 . 032 29 . 25 031 . 071 . 030 202 . 15 028 . 251 . 025 97 . 50 031 . 062 . 002 88 . 00 028 . 161 . 029 97 . 50 '' 028 . 101 . 002 97 . 50 000024 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda, Item: B-4 Via: Andy Takata, Meeting Date Jntre-23;-}95 City Manager July 11, 1995 Through: Steve Decamp, City Planner p From: Doug Davidson, Senior Planner File: GPA 95004 ZC 95004 SUBJECT: Consideration of an appeal by Richard Beck of the Environmental Coordinator' s determination that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required for the _Ramona Road General Plan Amendment. The proposed amendment and corresponding Zone Chane would change the land use designation of the Ramona Road freewa frontage from Suburban Residential to Service Commercial. RECOMMENDATION• Staff `recommends denial of the appeal. BACKGROUND: On November 25, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended initiation to the City Council of General Plan Ame dment 94002, a request to change the land use designation of the Pamona,'Road freeway frontage from Suburban Residential to Tourist Commercial. On December 13, 1994, the City Council decided not to initiate the proposal. On March 18, 1995, General Plan Amendment 95001 was received for inclusion into the April,p , 19 95 cycle. This is basically Y y a resubmittal of the earlier request with the exception of proposing a Service Commercial designation, as opposed to Tourist Commercial. As specified in the recently modified rocedures for initiating General Plan Amendments (Resolution 26-95) , the Planning Commission and 'City Council were notified of this application on May 2, 1995 and May 23, 1995, respectively. Upon the submittal of additional information, the a3plication was considered complete on May 4, 1995. The applicant as notified in writing on May 25, 1995 that the Initial Study c ncluded in the requirement for an EIR. The applicant appealed this determination on June 7, 1995. 00002 ANALYSIS• The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) demands that environmental review take place at the earliest possible stage in the planning process. The Initial Study is the method by which this is accomplished. It identifies the significant effects of a project and focuses the review on these impacts while eliminating insignificant issues from further consideration. After completion of the Initial Study, the environmental determination is based on the "fair argument" test. An EIR is required if a "fair argument" can be made that "substantial evidence" exists that the project could have a significant effect on the environment. A general plan land use change is a "project" under CEQA. As the attached Initial Study shows, the proposed General Plan Amendment raises more questions than answers. No plans for commercial development were submitted with the application. Absent any development plans, the review must encompass the environmental consequences, cumulative or singular in nature, that could result from changing the land use of the area from low density residential to commercial service. . The potential impacts of commercial development in this area are many - wastewater disposal, traffic generation, archeological resources, light, noise, and land use compatibility, among others. Planning staff believes that the "fair argument" test is clearly made in this case. CONCLUSIONS• By its decision to require an EIR, the Environmental Coordinator is not 'stating that the proposed land use change will have a significant effect upon the environment. As the Initial Study concludes, "the project ,may have a significant effect. This is particularly true in the subject case where no site specific or project specific information was provided. ` Many impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment were checked "maybe" they are unknown at this time. Indeed, this is the primary purpose of an EIR to provide information to the public and their decision makers. ATTACHMENTS: Letter to Richard Beck dated May 25th w/attachments 0000?.ti May 25, 1995 Richard Beck 2300 Ramona Road Atascadero, Ca. 93422 RE: General Plan Amendment 95001/Zone Change 95001; Dear Mr. Beck: The Planning Division has concluded its initial review of the above-referenced application. The Planning Commission and City Council have also been notified that the application is being processed. As we have stated from the outset - either with this proposal or the previous request for a Commercial Tourist designation - it seemed likely that a land use change of this nature would require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) . The attached Initial Study confirms this thinking. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that environmental assessment occur at the earliest possible stage of a proposed project. In the case of a General Plan Amendment without an corresponding development project, such as the subjiect application, the analysis must look at the impacts 'which could result from changing the land use from Residential ''Suburban to Commercial Service. Without any site specific reports analyzing the traits of commercial development, many items on the attached checklist have to be checked as potential impacts. ' The next step is to issue a Request for Proposals ('',RFP) in order to contract with a consultant to prepare the EIR. We would also begin obtaining comments from all concerned partied by issuing a Notice of Preparation. If you intend to appeal our determination that an EIR is required, you must file an appeal within 10 days of receiving this letter. An appeal must be filed '',in writing listing the reasons for the appeal and be accompanied by a processing fee of $200.00. 0000`2', Please feel free to contact me at (805) 461-5035 if you have any questions about this process or your application. Sincerely, Doug Davidson Senior Planner Attachment: Project Description Study Area Map Initial Study w/explanations 000028 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Ramona Road General Plan .Amendment (GPA 95001) 1is a request to change the land use designation (General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps) on the Ramona Road freeway frontage from Suburban Residential (RS zone) to Service Commercial (CS zone. ) The analysis will also include the implications of extending the Urban Services Line (USL) to the subject properties,. The proposed change from suburban residential to the City's most all- encompassing commercial district dictates that thelimpacts of sewer service be evaluated. There are ten ( 10) parcels, comprising approximately 11.50 acres, proposed for commercial service land uses that are '',presently zoned for single family residential uses. The existing land use pattern of these parcels is a mixture: of churches (2) , single family homes (6 ) , and vacant parcels (2) . In addition, the three parcels presently zoned Commercial Tourist (CT) onhe west side of U.S. 101 at Del Rio Road are included in the study area to evaluate the impacts of including these commercial properties within the USL. The CT designation of these parcels is not proposed to change. These parcels total a little over four (4) acres, making the total study about 15.65 acres in ''size (see attachments) . The RS zone is intended for single family residences on large parcels. The minimum lot size for new parcels is two and one- half acres - none of the vacant lots or parcels with existing homes would be eligible for a parcel map. The change to commercial service land use would promote light manufacturing and large lot service commercial businesses. The CS zone is the broadest land use category allowing for all uses allowed in the Commercial Retail zone, as well as those more service oriented. A similar General Plan Amendment was denied by the City Council in 1985 (Resolution 74-85. ) This request, from RS °'to CR (Commercial Retail) was deemed premature and inconsistent with the goals of the General Plan. In 1992, General Plan Amendment 92003 was also denied by the City Council. This was an application to extend the USL west of Highway 101 to the CT sites at Del Rio Road. The study area was expanded to include an additional 17 acres of land under common ownership,", in addition to the CT parcels. The environmental and growth inducing impacts of such an extensive enlargement of urban services 'resulted in an EIR being required. The applicant chose not to undertake an EIR and thus the project was denied. The existing environmental setting is formed by the development pattern as outlined above. The terrain is uniformly level throughout the study area with scattered oaks and other native • vegetation. The following Initial Study checklist 'looks at the environmental effects of changing the area to Service Commercial, including sewer and other urban services. 000029 CITY OF ATASCADERO r ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR INITIAL STUDY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 6500 PALMA AVE. ATASCADERO,CA 93422 (805)461-5035 L BACKGROUND: L Proposal Title: RAMONA ROAD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2. ReNumber(s): GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95001/ZONE CHANGE 95001 3. Brief Description of Proposal: A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION (GENERAL PLAN & ZONING MAPS) FROM SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL TO SERVICE COMMERCIAL. THE ANALYSIS WILL INCLUDE THE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH EXTENDING THE URBAN SERVICES LINE. II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe"answers are provided on attached sheets.) YES MAYBE NO 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? ❑ ❑ X❑ b. Disruptions,displacements,compaction or overcovering of the soil? ® ❑ ❑ C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? ❑ ® ❑ d. Theetruction,covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical ❑ ❑ ❑ e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils,either on or off the site? ❑ ❑ a f. Changes in siltation,deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of any lake? ❑ ❑ ❑X g. Exposure of people or property to geological hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,mudslides,ground failure,or similar hazards? ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ b. The creation of objectionable odors? ❑ ❑ ❑X c. Alteration of air movement,moisture,temperature,or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? ❑ ❑ 0000'In YES MAYBE NO 3. Wates. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents,or the course or direction of water movements? ❑ F-1 ❑ b. Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of F] El runoff? X c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood water? ❑ ❑ FLI d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? ❑ ❑ FLI e. Discharge into surface waters or in any alteration of surface water quality., a ❑ a including but not limited to,temperature,dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? ❑ ❑ g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,either through direct additions ❑ ❑ ❑ or withdrawals,or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? IL Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public ❑ ❑ ❑ water supplies? I. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ❑ ❑ ❑ 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species,or number of any species of plants(in- cluding trees,shrubs,grass,crops,aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, ❑ a a rare,or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area,or in a barrier to the normal El F-1replenishment of existing species? El d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ❑ ❑ FX I 5. Animal Life, Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species,or numbers of any species of animals(birds, land animals including reptiles,fish and shellfish,benthic organisms,ori- El © ❑ sects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,rare,or endangered species of ❑ ❑ �--� animals? ED c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area,or result in a barrier to the ❑ ❑ migration or movement of animals? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Fx-� ❑ ❑ b. Exposure of people to severe noise? ❑ ❑ ❑ 7. Light and Glare, Will the proposal produce new light or glare? ® ❑ ❑ 00001-1. S MAYBE 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or a El ❑ planned land use of an area? 9. Natur�ll Resources. Will the proposal result in a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ❑ ❑ IZI b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? ❑ ❑ 10. Risk of U12sef, Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances(including,but not limited to,oil,pesticides,chemicals or radiation)in the event of an accident ❑ ❑ ❑ or upset conditions? b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency ❑ Elevacuation plan? 12 U. Population. Will the proposal alter the location,distribution,density,or growth ❑ ® ❑ rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing,or create a demand for ❑ FX-]additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation, Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movements? � ❑ ❑ b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? ❑ ❑ ❑ c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ❑ X❑ ❑ d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or a ❑ ❑ goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? ❑ ❑ ❑ f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? ❑ ❑ ❑ 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon,or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? ❑ a ❑ b. Police protection? ❑ 0 ❑ c. Schools? ❑ ❑ X❑ d. Parks or other recreational facilities? ❑ ❑ a e. Maintenance of public facilities,including roads? ❑ ❑ ❑ f. Other governmental services? ❑ ❑ 0 0000-12 Y MAYBE NO 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? ❑ ❑ 12 b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy,or require the ❑ ❑ a development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities Will the proposal result in a need for new systems,or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? ❑ ❑ ❑ b. Communications systems? ❑ ❑ a c. Water? ❑ ❑ ❑ d. Sewer ortic tanks? � ❑ ❑ �P e. Storm water drainage? ❑ a ❑ f. Solid waste and disposal? ❑ a ❑ 17. Human Health, Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard(excluding mental ❑ a a health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health ❑ ❑ Q hazards? 18. Aesthetics, Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public,or will the proposal result in the creation of an ❑ Q ❑ aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of ❑ ❑ ❑ existing recreational opportunities? 20. C'ulturai_Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric ❑ x Elarchaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric ❑ ❑ ❑ or historic building,structure,or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would ❑ ❑ ❑ affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential ❑ © ❑ impact area? 000033 S MAYBE NO 21. *mandato yFindings Sipificance an a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, . substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or . wildlife populatilon to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a _ plant or animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of.a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major ❑ © ❑ periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term,environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief,definitive period of time while long- ❑ ❑ term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small,but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) a ❑ F-1 d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? IIL DEIF12MMTION On the basis of this initial study: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the ❑ environment,and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project,and a ❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: 5 =j Henry Engen Community Devel ment Director Environmental Coordinator N ATTACI-RYMNTS: Explanations Location Map Project Map Environmental Information Form mo N" 000034 Explanations to "Yes" and "Maybe" Answers Earth #1 b,c,f. Commercial development usually entails substantial earthwork, including changes in surface elevation and ultimately in large areas of impervious surface. Extensive grading also exposes large amounts of surface area to erosion without adequate safeguards. No development plan is proposed at this time - any commercial project'' will require grading/drainage plans. Air #2 a. Commercial development could generate a substantial number of new vehicle trips. Commercial service land uses would create higher trip generations than low density residential. This increase would potentially create both short range and cumulative air quality impacts by exceeding the Air Pollution Control District standards. Furthermore, air quality was one of two significant unavoidable impacts of implementation of the 1992 General Plan. Water #3b. Commercial site development will increase surface runoff by the construction of buildings and parking lots'!. A grading and drainage plan will be required upon submittal of development plans. Plant Life #4 a. Oaks and other native vegetation could be affeicted by commercial development. Animal Life #5 a. Development under the General Plan will continU: e to convert undeveloped land and reduce natural habitats. New commercial development will accelerate this trend. Noise #6 a. The Noise and Circulation Elements of the General Plan indicate that although a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips will occur in the City by the' year 2010, the increase in noise levels is not significant. The increase in traffic from commercial land uses would not result in new significant noise sources from traffic. Noise from the operation of commercial enterprises could impact the surrounding area. 3 OOOO'IS Light and Glare #7 Commercial development will result in increased light and • glare with security and parking lot lighting and illuminated signs. The ambient lighting in Atascadero is quite low - commercial sites must take adjacent land uses, and in this case freeway traffic, into account. Land Use #8 The proposal would change the planned land use of the area from suburban residential to commercial service. Commercial uses create more traffic, noise, and light than residential uses and also result in greater site disturbance with larger buildings and paved areas. Population #11 The change to commercial service would eliminate approximately 11.5 acres of RS zoned land from the City. Due to the minimum lot size criteria in the RS zone and the existing development pattern of the area, however, only two new single family residences could be built. This represents a negligible amount of housing units. On the other hand, the extension of urban services may be a growth inducer as the sewer district expands into outlying areas. Housing #12 Although commercial development would replace potential housing units and produce the need for new housing by job creation, this is an insignificant impact. Transportation/Circulation #13 a,b,c,d,f Commercial development generates more vehicle trips than low density residential land uses ( 13a) . This could change the pattern of circulation by increasing commercial traffic in the northwest part of the City ( 13d) . This could have a substantial impact upon the existing transportation systems because the freeway overpass at Del Rio was improved to accommodate the Fashion Outlet project only - traffic generation was predicted with the existing zoning in place. No projections were made with commercial designations replacing residential ones in this area ( 13c) . This could increase the potential for traffic hazards if adequate transportation networks are not provided ( 13f) . A change to commercial land uses would demand that additional parking be provided per the Zoning Ordinance ( 13b) . 0000"g Public Services #14 a,b,e The study area falls within the five (5) minute Fire Department response time. Furthermore, emergency calls are not significantly greater in number for commercial projects than for residential sites ( 14a) . Commercial '' projects tend to increase the number of calls to the Police! Department which could cause an impact on law enforcement in the City ( 14b) . Public improvements, such as sewer facilities and roads, are typically constructed by the developer and maintained by the City. Due to budget constraints, increased City maintenance responsibilities are worthy of careful consideration ( 14f) . Utilities #16 d,e,f The extension of the Urban Services Line, especially the expansion of the sewer district, has potential significant impacts. Urban services, such as sewer and drainage facilities, are essential for commercial service uses, both from a marketing and site development perspective. The City' s 1992 General Plan Update did not foresee such an expansion of commercial uses. Furthermore, the City' s sewer treatment plant is near capacity ( 16d. ) The large amounts of impervious surface and solid waste associated with commercial development dictate careful consideration of these utilities as well ( 16eyf. ) Aesthetics #18 The Ramona road freeway frontage is highly vioible along the U.S. 101 corridor. This visibility is important for potential commercial enterprises. The site' s ',. visibility also makes the visual quality of future commercial development an important issue in light of its current low density residential, quasi-public, and open space nature. Cultural Resources #20 a,b,c,d The site is level and in proximity to Graves Creek. The site has potential as an important archeological site and assessment of cultural resources will be required in the environmental review. Mandatory Findings of Significance #21. a,c. The project does have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, particularly its potential to affect important examples of California history (21a. ) 0000"t-I The change to commercial land uses has the potential to • create significant impacts in the areas of drainage, noise, light, sewer service, traffic, land use compatibility, and cultural resources. These impacts may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable (21c. ) 000011)R REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 7-11-95 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-5 Through: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager Via: Brady Cherry, Director of Community services From: Valerie Humphrey, Engineering Division SUBJECT:' Reimbursement to the City of Wastewater funds expended during the construction of Assessment District No. 4 (Sep rado-Cayucos),. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends_that Council adopt Resolution No. 74-95 which provides for the reimbursement of construction expenses related to the San Anselmo and Traffic Way main lines and the Iraffic Way lift station. BACKGROUND• In an attempt to reduce the individual assessment to this District, Council agreed to finance portions of the main line extensions that were necessary to provide sewer service to the Cease and Desist` Areas but which were not within the actual boundaries of the District. It was the intention at that time to seek reimbursement from properties adjacent to these lines pursuant to Section 7-5.003 of the Municipal Code which states "No service shall be provided to any lot by lateral sewer connection to a sewer extension until the owner of said lot has paid a proportional share of the cost of sand sewer extension, or has entered into an agreement uith the City to pay said share of the costs" . At this time staff is attempting to formalize this requirement. To further complicate the situation, it was recently determined that a number of properties had been allowed to connect to these Lines without reimbursement to the City. At a future' meeting, staff will be making a recommendation to C uncil regarding recovery of these fees. These properties are not listed on Exhibit A as their reimbursementwillbe handled separately, although all parcels are included on Exhibits B and C. FISCAL IMPACT: The total reimbursement amount due the City is approximately 40 $.110, 000. 00. 000019 RESOLUTION NO. 74-95 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO SETTING THE RATE OF REIMBURSEMENT FOR PROPERTIES SERVED BY THE CITY FINANCED PORTION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 4 WHEREAS, in an attempt to reduce costs to residents in Assessment District No. 4 (Seperado-Cayucos) , portions of the San Anselmo and Traffic Way main lines and the Traffic Way pump station were paid for out of the Sewer Facilities Fund; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City to obtain reimbursement from benefitting property owners upon connection to these lines; and WHEREAS, the benefitting properties and their reimbursement costs have been detailed on Exhibit A, attached; and WHEREAS, the properties affected are delineated on the attached maps marked Exhibit B (San Anselmo) and Exhibit C (Traffic Way; and WHEREAS, Section 7-5. 003 of the Municipal Code states "No sewer service shall be provided to any lot by lateral sewer connection to a sewer extension until the owner of said lot has paid a proportional share of the cost of said sewer extension, or has entered into an agreement with the City to pay said share of the costs" ; and WHEREAS, all affected property owners have been notified of the Public Hearing and allowed to offer comments regarding this issue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero properties listed in Exhibit A be required to pay the indicated reimbursement to the Sewer Facilities Fund upon connection to the public sewer system. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: 000040 Resolution No. 74-95 Page Two ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADHRO BY LEE PRICE, City Clerk GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON City Attorney • 000031 I RESOLUTION NO. 74-95 EXHIBIT A ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER REIMBURSEMENT AMOUNT TRAFFIC WAY REIMBURSEMENT AREA 028-082-002 6701.70 028-082-007 4485. 25 028-082-013 4485. 25 028-082-012 4814.83 028-084-002 12795. 09 028-071-006 2236.98 028-071-027 4250.92 028-071-033 3195. 68 028-071-001 7047 . 55 In addition to the amounts listed above, the Traffic Way parcels shall pay a portion of the cost of the lift station based upon a cost of $184 . 10 per acre. This cost will be calculated at the time of connection. SAN ANSELMO PARCELS 049-163-050 $ 4650. 94 049-163-054 4650. 94 049-163-055 4650.94 049-163-014 4650. 94 000011? N oe 4 69 v d ti all o TC 76 75 $ 74 73 72 ;t pl3 12 Q 70 2 q 0 10 Q9 .95AC ` 9 . b.ez /� i 49AC t o / lo.rc »�J d ^ ' 1.40AC IS RESOLUTION NO. 74-95 n 14 EXHIBIT B SAN ANSELMO SEWER Zap 3 '1027-50 ,.�JOAC Q 3T P 7-,2 5.24 AC 1.31 AC ' s N 4 41 0 43 5555AC A 3.61 AC M 61 (n + v 3 p AC 101 3 36 40 C 1.01 `1 1.09AC 1.14AC 105 52 1 29' p _i /7G•Of h ioS 4G ,I i ? � 21 � 42 a 44 45 i 2 35 39 a ' , IAC { 1.16AC 1.13AC l ^ 106 I AW 0 M h w A i a ! J� _ 1 34 k 38 vM Q 47 48 1.24AC 1 Q IAC ti 49 /as.ze • 07 108 109 t4 Y (/0/) roi rr a a h /13•�S /et /e ifc.is i�c if B! IS icz.d� ,se. EL CAMI NO REAL 22 CITY OF ATASCADERO Assessors Map 8k. 49— Pg.16 County of San Luis Obispo, Calif. 000OA-4 3 RESOLUTION NO. 74-95 EXHIDIT C y ' 'TRAFFIC WAY SEWER JAe�Hro 4 � O _ ti �j r J )yd a a� 'INV = o t x ti � 2 Q • � St y.' Y 1A _ M /Fri Y • �/� aa7 Y r• 4 r O R • v P y Y 1 :�•� i v,LENT1Np a 6 0000A4 MEMORANDUM TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDAITEM: c-1 DATE: 07-11-95 THROUGH: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager FROM: Brady Cherry, Director Department of Community Services SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSAL FROM ROTARY- CLUB OF- ATASCADERO TO INSTALL PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING AROUND ATASCADERO LAKE. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission and Staff o approve the Rotary Club's offer to install pedestrian lighting around Atascadero Lake, with th provisions stipulated in this report: DISCUSSION• The Rotary Club of Atascadero has made a generous offer to the City o Atascadero to "Light up the Lake" as a community project for the City of Atascadero. (Please see attached correspondence.) The Rotary envisions approximately 50 lights to encircle the circumference of the Lake. This proposed project appears to be of great benefit to the community. There is a need for lighting around the Lake to increase visibility and security, at d extend the hours of when the Lake can be used by pedestrians. Many people feel that the lig is will be an attractive amenity to the Lake area. The Rotary Club also intends to make some rilinor improvements to the path itself. There are a number of issues which have been addressed concerning the fighting project. Such issues considered by the Parks and Recreation Commission and Staff in Jude the following: • The Parks and Recreation Commission and Staff suggests turning the lights off at 10:00 P.M. to correspond with Lake Park hours. • The exact placement of light locations should be sensitive to re idents' concerns; for example, placing standards near lot lines when possible. • The City's ability to afford ongoing energy and maintenance.costs. This is a significant; problem. Staff recommends that Rotary establish a fund to pay for the energy cost for the first two years. The Rotary Club has agreed to this request. 0 Fee waivers: The City may wish to consider waivers, if appropriate. • There is no conflict with the lighting project's conformity with the park master plan for the Lake Park. • The Staff and Rotary Club President, John Vial, have contacted Mr. Charles Marshall of the Department of Fish and Game.' He indicated that the agency has no problems with the project as proposed. • The scope of path improvements needed around the Lake are more substantial than what the Rotary Club is able to offer. However, the Rotary Club is willing to make improvements as may be necessary to accommodate the lighting and create an adequate path in specific areas.' Many of these issues and others can be addressed by the Staff working in cooperation with the Rotary Club and the public. At a public hearing on the project at the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting on June 15, 1995, the response from the public was mixed. There was public testimony both for and against the project. A majority spoke in opposition to the project. There is correspondence attached to this report which was received by the Commission expressing concerns about the project. Several speakers questioned the real need for such a project, and suggested that the Rotary and community resources would be better spent elsewhere. The Parks and Recreation Commission ultimately acted to recommend their support for the project because they felt the lighting would indeed enhance a very popular recreational amenity and improve public safety around the Lake for those who would like to use it after dark. One commissioner commented that, "The priority should be placed on safety rather than the aesthetics of the Lake with or without lights." 0 The Parks and Recreation Commissioners indicated that there was a pressing need to light the footpath between the Zoo parking lot and the Pavilion.` They suggested to the Rotary that lighting the path through the park be included in their project. Also, based upon public input, the Commission suggested that greater emphasis be given to improving and maintaining the path itself. The Commission recognized that Rotary and City resources were limited in this regard. Ultimately, the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Rotary Lighting Project around the Lake, providing that the Club install lighting on the path through the Park as the first phase. Also the Commission suggested that the path improvements be given greater consideration if possible. In a separate but related matter, the Commission recommended that the idea for a one-way street around'the Lake be dropped due to Tack of public support. The Commission also made some suggestions for the Traffic Committee to study related parking issues. Staff will prepare a list of the related parking issues and forward them to the Traffic Committee for review. s 0000 FINANCIAL IMPACT Annual energy costs are estimated to be approximately $2,190.00. Maintenance costs should be minimal due to the type of lighting and fixtures that are proposed. The fixtures are strong and considered "Vandal resistant". (Nothing is really "vandal proof".) The Rotary Club has agreed to fund the energy costs for two years upon installation of the lights. JULY7-7.mem • 0000,11", 1 n1�n� Board of Directors 1994-95 Vial,President ROTARY CLUB OF ATASCADERO Rob rtLilley,President Elect DISTRICT 52410 OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL Pete Reed.Past President Mike Mamot,Secretary Mike Lucas.Treasurer \1 l/ Bob Johansen.Club Service Director Don Idler.Community Service Director Dutch Nichols,Vocational Service Director Jackie Lerno,International Service Director Allen Litten. Membership Director Russ Silva.Fellowship Director Don Price.Director at Large RECEtl/C APR April 17J995- 1ATASCADERO CITY [iMI AGIER, Atascadero Citv Council 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero , CA 93422 Dear Mr . Mayor , and Members of the Cz .`:.y Coucil ; Each year the Rotary Club of Atascadero takes on the responsibility for a project that: will benefit the people in our community. This year we have chosen to 'Light the Lake" , escribed t-riefly -1 the attached folded page . We are requesting a place on yo,...--f- May 9 , L995 ineeting agenda whe- we will be able to describe our pr.-uposal in more d`tail . your support and cooperation are essentiaL to !- !-;e -;ucces. of our project . Thank you . Sincerelyr,, John Imo'. Vial , E'resLdenL JOHN VIAL • 6.000 LLANO ROAD • ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422 • (805) 466-3153 MIKE MAMOT • POST OFFICE BOX 100 • ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93423 • (805) 466-2988 0000,11 ROTARY CLUB OF ATASCADERO PROJECT PIAN LIGHT THE LAKE 9994-1995 Goals: 1. Provide and install approximately 50 decorative lamp posts along the walking path ground Atascadero Lake. 2. Upgrade the walking path. Purpose: 1. Provide added safety for the many people who use the path in the evening or early morning. 2. Extend the use time of the area for those who would use the path if light were provided. 3. Add to the aesthetics of the area without offending nearby residents. Organization, The Rotary Club of Atascadero will organize the project by: 1. Obtaining necessary permits, approvals, and community support. 2. Choosing the lamp post. 3. Determining the costs for maintenance, installation, path upgrade, power and lamp posts. 4. Offering to the public(individuals, groups, and businesses)the opportunity to make'a donation toward the purchase of the lamp posts. 5. Overseeing the installation process. 6. Providing permanent plaques on each lamp post recognizing the sponsor. Lamo Post Cost Estimate: 1. Lamp post including tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 1600.00 2. Installation per post with path upgrade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2000.00 Total estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3600.00 Lamo Post Description: 1. Lamp Post: Domus Series Model DMS 10,teal color, manufactured by Tumec Inc-land sold through Gold Coast Sales in Arroyo Grande. 2. Light output pattern: soft light(.2-.4 footcandles) output in a ground pattern 20'wide and 125' long with a "luminous ring"on top. 3. Lamp height 15 feet. Club's Financial Commitment Estimate: 1. Purchase 1lamp post. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . $ 3600.00 2. Pavilion display expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1000.00 3. Ad flyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 500.00 4. City permit fees . . . . S 500.00 5. Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 500.00 6. Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1000.00 7. 50 permanent plaques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 2500.00 Total Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S9,600.00 0000,,.4 O o Q� 0 m s 0 0 � m S Z O O_> Cam m :Em T Ze A O K vn rl i' = .,..._.._.. LIGHT THE LAKE OWNTS"aAa I ......... AT aXTASCADOW I ATASCADERO LAKE 00005", . 7 aFFr -a :.. .,...,.fir CITY OF ATAS CAD E R O 1918 a 19:9 SPECIAL NOTICE Zoe J. Duty "2 Shnft Awa Ad Maaeadem CA 931X.24941 i You are invited to attend a public hearing to consider a proposal by the Rotary Club of Atascadero to install pedestrian lighting around Atascadero Lake. The public hearing will be held at the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting on Thursday, June 15, 1995 at 7.•00 p.m. in the 4th floor Rotunda Room of the City Administration Building, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero. Also, the suggestion to convert Lakeview Drive to a one-way street will be explored. Please attend, your ideas, questions and comments are welcome! For more information please contact the Department of Community Services at 461-5001 o00WZ1 9275 Mountain View Dr. Atascadero, Ca 93422 • May 26, 1995 Unfortunately, we will not be able to attend the public hearing scheduled for June 15 on the proposed changes at Atascadero Lake. This letter will, however, help the City Administration know how at least some of the residents who stand to be affected do feel. As long-time residents of the lake neighborhood, we have always enjoyed walking around the lake and have always appreciated the undeveloped atmosphere. We see no need for pedestrian lighting or changing Lakeview Drive into a one-way street, and would view these changes as unnecessary development that would subtract from the character of the city. Pedestrian lighting will encourage increased after-dark . activity, not a particularly advantageous situation for those permanent residents entitled to a measure of peace and quiet. Changing Lakeview Drive into a one-way street will adversely impact traffic on adjacent streets. Of particular concern is Mountain View Drive, a narrow winding road which cannot absorb additional traffic. We would like to be counted among those who vigorously object to the proposed changes. Sincerely, John and Olive Dorman WOW;? A i _ �Lvilyl_d _ -- ----=-- Douglas W. Young - ---- -- - ---Joyce L.L. Young 9425 Lakr Vww Dr. - Atascadew, Cil 93422 -- - - ----- --- -- - OOOn1--.3 moms*ROAD M O O V) O) m m 0 0 z z m o O • • O0 M _ �• 0 { O • �n n m n c v v • O® o v O > m... X a. o X > > > a co -{ .a Chi a > v a o Y m { • n� w • • a P � O GA v/z!G l^4 At Al -r-r> c _i Cx HT WA 1--K-.t v A`r • • «�_�«« PROPOSED PARK PATHWAY o�c oor•tm wr ` -- «•- ROTARY CLUB OF ATASCADERO I REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 7/11/95 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-2 Through: Andy Takata, City Manager �. "�► ` From Bradford Whitty, Finance Director SUBJECT: Recognition of OCIP loss against City of Atasc deco funds. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council review the range County Investment Pool worksheet. BACKGROUND The City had funds invested with the Orange County Investment Pool (OCIP) when they declared bankruptcy on December 6, 1994. After several months of legal work reviewing which distribution plan to pursue, on April 18th, Co ncil selected to pursue Plan B which allows the City to receive 77 cents on the dollar for our investments held by OCIP. The city received our final distribution a month later Dn May 19th. DISCUSSION: The loss to be distributed to the funds is shown on the attached Exhibit A. This amount will be recognized in the 1994-95 fiscal year. The audited financial statements will < reflect the loss as an individual line item rather than combined with total expenditures. Exhibit A illustrates how the loss will be di tributed over the funds. Basically, the city takes the i terest earned since the inception of the city's accounts ith OCIP, and ,distributes the doss against the interest a rnings. The principal portion of the funds is not eff. cted by this calculation. This report of fund losses is an unaudited report. The independent auditors of Moss Levy & Hartzheim, will need to review this during their audit of the 1994-95 financial statements. However, several discussions were held with them over the course of the .00IP bankruptcy, and they agree with the methodology of this loss calculation. 000O,�-; W V? tl M M•-�M P.v C•O O C M r G P.G C M N t�.-+M P.t6--.N to M h d OC.M P.N.M h:N N O M N M.-�•-•In 1 M - U W 11 d to to to d M Q C O G.to^-+.G�•O.G M M to G••-�M tt N M r-t tG.O:M t7•.tt•-+-�M to W to M tG C.•^.. . 1 M - .. v,Z Ci It , P. -C 114 it MOftn to oC�OOOOP.CC•tnOOto OC.-•+O•-+P.-••�v1�th.ti P•d'Nh�d'+O Of NMP.eY r-.'S.rM.i OG P.nNWtoO t P. h .•+tG.-+NOd'M MO Myr•-•+O•-•d•L00•-.MOGto N.-•kov.-3 to , �• . F MfYaN 11 "OMf -+M et.7 v, MNOC-P.M--.NMP.tnMNr to to tL.'+NMM•-+M v+.-O�:M�Gr 1 M .. i I>•'1 \ 11 fV O vto M.-•. h d' M O•.` M tt.-+v.r -}N f 3 7 .••v SF'-+--�to h Vi•-+tt3 G ?to 7 M 1 00 0c, -•+ N d' M d M t•-r d tt ON M•1.M -•.M dt a• C d ¢ 11 i P: it I F ti: It N(14 f- t- K.--.C•O O C••-••r.O.f O O tG•3 P:N N�O'.OC•�C•O v,:t:vS d C•N d'Q M O'.•r M M.-+.N V',.G•••. 1. -+ V•C• tl '! hd NMM.00CO-tMO M GC to.�C•r Md C•-kc.-*O••+O d^+Qh OC•O w. r t- Ir,NP.d Q I .-. W H 11 , atY Ii M.rMNC•GG0, C• d d Qf GGO d d Mt44d e}GMO7 GQMd %0, tr; l et 'r-W.Z it o-t h w O K. d M h. ..-t to M to.-.O•.to.-..-� N to.-.M .-+O N.tO O tr,.Q•.N.-.NOP.tt i h It to to O --•O 7�^. N •-+N d M ••••tl O--• M r.. *t- N to m oo to N.M M t-Q.tn i to o z¢ it « _ _ , , F•..W a -,tt-. -, r .a M NNoh r~ r tGt-M..rO Coco i c 11 C M' .-. M h M M--! > I 1-0 H --•P.ot-tow 000oottooGGhM.- mNP.o-- wo"%rc>ooworhookc•oMONwo-+ I c- a..w a..w 7 11 rtc•ONtbd OOOOOP.CGL�O-••+.tn G.P.+}et tnMP.O.•. . . . ..O .. . . .rC . .ct . NOON ONQGOOO.toO C•OO.-.r'>P.et MP..N'; 6Mw OOO NG tG M N.-•NtGC rtn,*%r, 1 P. - MW Z II 0 q c* 1- d tC P. OC +P. d P. NtL P. V MMOMN NCP.4t , tG P.F 04 11 'n-t0 tF O. h. M rCtoti � 00 N P.tt to tt�M hCvl 1 7 •-t.+-.tc1.H N P. N P.O C 0!•O i r• M.-. f- It .i it F'to H O N O o `tb-0 G oo"M a.m Ott C tr to O o o 00 of-Ott w tt to W o o 0000 i P. m in II d o O(-1. O 0 M C)O O G a.tc t•-M C,"P.-+to.O O O O O O h O O N to M P.0 0 0 0 0 0 1 N P.W.z 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 tYi t-. 11 viO toO C•QMG OoO Gh G M00M Q-Q 0 OOO G O O W G O t+ '4tC Q O O G G' 1>N NW Z N N C P.M-4 %0O'.tL P.N %0 MNM,N-t 1 M i O•.F tY. ti M to .��.to N t+M d 7 N 0.'•tom to to 1 01 v.z¢ H - .-. 11 GN N M M 1 1 N N N•-+0�N to 1 tC ; 11 f O d H C•G 0 PPx OC• -.C• C N h C tC•G G r'M C C N d tr GCC• +C• o O M f r 7 -+O C C G C•G V, 1 P. tiff N44z if o'. . . G OP.P.G MC•C•C••?C•C•COC•OtoOGtoNGOt" .--•N'Z•�^.N .CCC•C•C 1.•-+ 17..f H Of w. •- C, O^-t C3ot•-C G N C.M C.C.M to tC N-OG-•••O:O o r O to t-+L P..to OG C.C.O G 1 O c -•t W Z It N 00.- %C• -•t M t- P.M O o t-O t0 P.N N -"O- 1- 1 h P•£-.:C4...H M-tt. G to f N O P. M-•.. to%0 N ttr,G.-•M h i N 1^t. ^.•-t W N C M M v5 •?N .-t t0 +L M.M r M P. f <G• F V_• it P.r P. C•O OP. - C 000 to G M O C•0>r P:P.000 eF et0-+ +NON P.C-- -000 1 tC. t--t • ^'�=L Ii d :-.et CO Gd v,O0 C•O It C•P.O G O O tG P.0 Q ON.+O M M M Nb•.M oNrl000QO 1 t- ¢ P.Wz it . 1 C4 t-. II NO-t 'GG GNNC•OOCIr,O•-•c•GONm--t O Q C•v'.G CNet kr ,r,f CC•C•cc,C•C•C•C. 1 -•+ C•W z 11 to-M.. M>r %C• P. G t-M M w M O--•OC N P.. •-• I O P•F 04 it M P.d -OC•P. --P 0 M th t- d t0 m OCP P M 1 P. if i 11beb` bevv,beb`'ebeWbebegle.9ev9eeK9beeKevV's'be i V wa if P.P.N%C•t-NOOOCw a,o- V.C•OtoMr dP.t-...•-td Ot0O.7 M O'-•^•C.to in%r.f tt-G d C•M I C C•¢ ii N d f G G to C O O O P.r C .•-+O O--•-•-t h N G et M M OC•O to N C•to C c-;d P.r M to�'.••-•C•..P.«•C•O 1 C it F Ii G M C C•Q f COO 0 Q P.O 6 C G tF C to C•G-•- z 7.0 0-+to C.O to C-1-In to t-M C.•1 to•3 G 1 C. i C)F 1, MNQCC•QocaoG +c•oaQOGooCOGOc•O0OOGONctnNu ord c•V t� -G i G °� n .-• d 1 0 H r ... n � H vi f «�.�'i tt:OC+o G O C•M v7 Q.O•.O O M d to tG M tt P.C m 0 m M O It ko t`w w tL MM%C•to i d II to P.to tfi(NI P.0O'OOh w NOOv,yrtc•MtoMP.triMOInt-hMOP..•-thP.oC•NM 3to�'^..d P.-•. 1 O H Mtn h d'P.OGOOOO d/'-OMC C•Ovi to MO NMh MOONetNOiv'i--•• I a tli. If N M N�•r OC r•,P� .-•. 00.-•to r..-.d P.h M K 1 M O O tL h-+N to>D M to 00 N-•t M h io tt 06 d tG.f•-• yr h M t M. t-+ to Ii vy.-t.00 to Cr.. 'N 00 N to N t- M to to M m to N tf a•.r to 00 r to 3 00«+ 1 N Oa 11 o r M. .:.d� tt lC• -.N.t�•vs ..tr, P. P:P.to o0 tt.to M P•ttl i to if to N 00 N vs N%C• M tr, to N•-! 1 v, �. a if. .-. _ C. if W W W W W F E+W M z v. z G it >> z u0Q0.mU F E- W 11 W 04 `G z A t-,�•,z ++ U Ci <C�FF F^ z >>>Ww>toD «- uE+tr,tnF H x w a twi+twil zF zv. aWP4a0IxF.04 E. w04E-• Qzzto N it >+W WwWWWWWt.(- UAWFt-•>--"oGZQ to GW H Fw inZa404 t- x ;E¢(A Zu)vltnaxcoWtoE+ ¢. C•Uav+FaL•U0 • G x> to HG W wo z Iaw w ow tizu FaxGt zt F u ¢ Wzz to H Z IL,I- e>~t•a • Cw vow Wt U + 04 ZFFF.-1 •FOO<CFc) c'+' Ga an auk t 0 1: :ZD ¢z E-<Q9nWWc• zaWFxewwww¢Aarauav¢ ,ua at•- Z.< <M¢ �+ W 11 w vz W to 1 ¢W •C••-•WU 0.404 w. •FW Www •wa ,c ¢P4 Wo4 •FUo WZ3C^ M U>•.F x If zz aa¢ a(-ZZW - a4F AWCna6a0Aw•C0 z-axwF F• I ¢C;•at•••.GG +oF¢ to ¢ tI .4x00.0t4W 0 1 ¢C•OUFW a m aG X-0 1 &Zzk, QQW 3 ¢Za Z l) ¢ ¢t- C - 49:04 . •IYI * S C • ar¢aW¢ W¢Met%r o ¢ - W.t ¢¢ o -,OZ¢ to F.:r.^• n rpf,-4F• GZF•A t W aFW. > �C'rC:• �t:ac�+tZHP,FaU tozov>.¢Zt43uZWW.¢ a U ¢C•Ci Cttl W wwd .r-.tn wF{-. ¢ G U� F z If zEn <> z00x ¢tno4>:•CiwFGlwaW-AAgZ Cw>axx¢¢ d ¢3fi U• Z, a H W¢nsWG C•¢NN. ¢¢ ¢aww¢t+�Gw •¢N ¢ ¢C ¢tx C•FG7W d ¢w ¢ G a C•WU W It G'•C•FAA¢NUP.v.AB tl O. �u FZtn W n $ ¢ ¢¢UP.L•Uo.awo G¢cLv.Fu ZUaMto F ¢ C. ,i E >•z V• V? Q ti --.NMr O rli to to hC C-•.NM d tn..-.Mkof G.•-tM tt v>kr,h NC CvsGC.-h•-.N.C.Vi tot- CC'P.. z F¢v, w z 11C•OC•6-- ;.t'� NNO0 o 0 OO O OO OO--+-+C�O O O O to O O w.r G G OC. M a,(_,O C O G t t- rWC• o :D H C•CC•0 OGOO•-t NNN N NNMMMM.M M-t tT'd'd'-tdtot vi in t0r r f r hr w w 0••X+0:• M 5 U C a a w n P. 00001 5 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: C-3 CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Andy Takata, City Manager 01 Meeting Date: 7/11/95 From: Brad Whitty, Finance Director- Art Montandon, City Attorney SUBJECT: Las Encinas/3-F Meadows and El Camino R al Assessment Districts. Determination ofdistributionof excess funds. RECOMONDATION: Review this staff report and consider Resolutions No. 71-95 and 72-95 for adoption. Both Resolutions recommend calling bonds and making pro-rata refunds to prepaid Farcels. BACKGROUND: A. MONEY AVAILABLE The City has issued bonds to finance public i provements for the Las Encinas/3F Meadows area and the E1 Camino Real area adjacent to the Factory Outlet. The benefitted property' owners are now obligated to repay, through assessments, the bond costs Construction is complete and there is excess bond proceeds for each district in the followingamounts: 1. Fund 807:Las Encinas $30,0(6. 11 2. Fund 808:3-F Meadows 53, 1 8.71 3. Fund 806:E1 Camino Real 50,7! 1.08 The City has also received State Local Transportation Partnership Program (SLTPP) grant money for these two projects. The amount of SLTPP money for each district is as follows: , 1. Las Encinas $ 8 ,347 2. 3-F Meadows 43 ,453 2. El Camino Real $10S ,202 As the preceding Agenda Item C-2 reported, the losses for the Orange County Investments due to accounting requirements have been posted. These losses may be temporary but have been realized for this fiscal year. As such the a ove referenced funds reflect the posted losses. When and if the City receives additional monies, it could be subje t to the same distribution. B. PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The Las Encinas/3-F Meadows excess money was discussed, by the City Council, on March 14, 1995. The City Council directed that a questionnaire be sent to the property owners who are,being assessed as to their preference in the distribution of these funds. The results of this questionnaire are discussed below. The E1 Camino Real excess money was discussed, by the City Council, on March 28,, 1995. The agenda item was initiated by a request by Golden West Development that the bond assessment due be paid with excess bond proceeds. (Letter of March 8, 1995 attached) The City Council directed staff to: 1) Defer payment to the county from its ,due date of April 10, 1995, to a date close to when this assessment payment is required to pay the bond payment and work with the developer and County staff to have any late payment penalty waived or delayed until payment is required. 2) Bring this item back to the City Council for further ' consideration when the City had received more sales tax information regarding the Factory Outlet. C. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR REIMBURSEMENT The administration of surplus assessment bond proceeds are governed by Sections 10427 and 10427. 1 of the Streets and Highway Code. Briefly stated, the City Council must determine the amount of the surplus and apply the surplus towards one or more of the purposes (a) For transfer to the general fund of the City, provided that the amount transferred shall not exceed the lesser of one thousand dollars ($1,000) or 5 percent of the total amount, expended from the improvement fund. (b) As a ,credit upon property owner assessment payments in , accordance , with Section 10427.1 of the Streets and Highway Code. (c) For the maintenance of the improvements. (d) To call bonds for redemption, thereby reducing outstanding assessmentsand subsequent assessment installments. , A few additional points regarding the administration of the surplus proceeds are inorder: First, staff does not anticipate meeting the requirement in (a) above. Second, if the proceeds are used to credit the property owner assessments (b) , no credit may be paid or credited !,until after a period of two years from the date of receipt of proceeds of the sale of bonds by the City. The City took receipt of the proceeds for Las Encinas/3-F Meadows on September 13, 1993. The City took receipt of the proceeds for El Camino Real on July 8, 1993. Therefore, the credit cannot occur until after September 13, 1995 and July 8, 1995 respectively. Additionally, the credit would be a one time reduction of the owner' s assessment over one or more installments, and the original installment amountswould return once the credit was exhausted. Third, Council has the option to set aside amounts to maintain the public improvements. The maintenance fund would be solely for the purpose of maintenance in the project area. The interest earnings on the principal may be used to maintain public improvements on a continuous basis over a long period of time. Thus, the maintenance would be self-funded. Fourth, if Council chooses to call bonds, the next call date would be September 2, 1995. The City would have to notify the fiscal agent of its intentions no less than thirty days in advance. A redemption premium would be charged, calculated by multiplying the amount of unmatured principal by three percent. This amount would be exclusive of principal due during the fiscal year of prepayment. A bond call would reduce everyone' s annual assessment over the remaining life of the bond. The property owners who', prepaid would receive a cash refund against their original payment'. The Special Reserve Fund would have to be reduced as necessary pursuant to Section 8887 to assure that the bonds will not become subject to federal income taxation. The SLTPP money is not subject to the samedistribution requirements as the excess bond proceeds. We do not believe the City can give this money to the property owners. If the City Council wishes to distribute this grant money the funds should be credited to pay for costs of these public improvements. This would leave only excess bond proceeds to distribute pursuant to the restrictions of the streets and highway code. D. LAS ENCINAS/3-F MEADOWS The questionnaire (attached) was sent to 172 property owners, 83 were returned. The results of the responses are as follows: 1. Partially reduce annual levy 35 2. Maintenance Fund 5 3. Bond Call 29 4. Paid in Full (Refund due) 11 5. No option picked TOTAL 83 Y The credit to property owner payments or refunds due to fully paid parcels will vary upon the SLTPP monies being included in the calculation. These amounts were unavailable at the time of this report, but will be available by the July 11th Council meeting. E. EL CAMINO REAL (FACTORY OUTLET) Since the first City Council consideration of the developer' s request, staff has accomplished and discovered the following: 1. Brad Whitty, Finance Director, spoke with the County Assessor's staff about deferring the late penalty for the April assessment. Since under the "Teeter Plan" penalties are now the county's revenue, the City could not unilaterally defer the penalty. The only way to accomplish the City Council' s direction was to send a letter to the County requesting the developer be rebilled. This was done and the assessment is now due in July, 1995. 2. The City has received $30,327 in sales tax revenue from the Factory Outlet up to December 1994. As stated in the March 28, 1995 staff report, there is no legal requirement set forth in the sales tax sharing agreement, to use sales tax proceeds or other funds to pay a portion of the current assessment. The City' s obligation under this agreement begins the . in 1996 Fiscal Year. Also, land credit must be based upon the legal requirements for this distribution of excess bond proceeds as set forth above. a:3-fine adows #42 a CITY OF ATASCADERO 1918 1979 \ ►SCADE�p� FINANCE DEPARTMENT Re: Surplus Funds - Street Improvement Project 1992 Las Encinas/3-F Meadows Assessment District Dear Property Owner- P Y Construction fund dollars and a State Grant in the Las Encinas/3-F Meadows assessment district have been identified as surplus money. Per the City Council' s March 14th meeting, I have been directed to poll owners as to g how to apply the surplus money. Other than those parcel owners who have paid off in cash, there is no provision for the cash return of surplus construction fund dollars. Those who have paid off in cash have already paid their ('' full share of the construction money and as a result are due a refund. The California Streets and Highways Section 10427 'provides that these funds may be used in accordance with the options shown below. Please circle the option of your choice, sign, and return in the enclosed envelope by June 5, 1995. i ( 1) Allows a partial reduction in the annual levy of approximately 75% for three years beginning with the 1995-96 tax year. The remaining 9 years will be fully levied. The reserve fund requirements will remain the same, the pay-off schedule will not be modified and no reduction from the County ad valorem tax will be available. (2) Allows a general benefit to all district parcel owners. The maintenance fund would be solely for the purpose of maintenance of the Las Encinas/3-F Meadows roads. (3) Allows a bond call of approximately 30% of the outstanding bonds which would provide a reduction in approximately the: same proportion for all future annual levies ( 12 years) . This option involves an approximately $13,500 reduction in the reserve fund requirement which will be used in the bond call and a small reduction in the ad valorem taxes to reflect the reduced construction costs. ' Pay-off schedules would also reflect this reduction in outstanding principal. I may be reached at 461-5014 if you have general 'I,questions regarding this procedure. Specific questions regarding the effect on your property should be directed to Muni Financial Services at 1-800-755-MUNI. Please have your assessor' s parcel number available when you call. Sincerely, Printed Name BRADFORD WHITTY Signature Finance Director 6500 PALMA AVENUE ATASCADERO,CA 93422 Risk Management:(805)461-5014 Finance(805)461-5016 Business License:(805)461-5017 City Pax:(805)461-0606 RESOLUTION NO. 71-95 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING DECLARATION REGARDING SURPLUS IN THE LAS ENCINAS/3-F MEADOWS CONSTRUCTION FUNDS WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California, has conducted proceedings and completed construction for certain works of improvement in a special assessment district known and designated as Las Encinas/3-F Meadows Assessment Districts (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment Districts" ) ; and WHEREAS, after completion of the improvements and payment of all the claims from the Construction Fund for said Assessment Districts, there remains a surplus in the Construction Fund, and this Council is desirous at this time to make the disposition of said surplus with the proceeds available at June 30, 1995 as so governed by Sections 10427 and 10427. 1 of the California Streets and Highways Code, and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That the work of improvements have been completed to the satisfaction of the legislative body, and all payments have either been made or set aside for all existing or potential claims, costs, and expenses. SECTION 3. That the surplus monies, remaining in the Construction Funds as of June 30, 1995, shall be used to call bonds and make payment to property owners within the boundaries of the Assessment Districts on a pro-rata basis. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held on the of , 199x. ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: LEE PRICE, City Clerk GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 72-95 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING DECLARATION REGARDING SURPLUS _ IN THE EL CAMINO REAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California, has conducted proceedings and completed construction for certain works of improvement in a special assessment district known and designated as El Camino Real Assessment District', (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District" ) ; and WHEREAS, after completion of the improvements and payment of all the claims from the Construction Fund for said Assessment Districts, there remains a surplus in the Construction Fund, and this Council is desirous at this time to make the disposition of said surplus as so governed by Sections 10427 and 10427. 1 of the California Streets and Highways Code, and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That the work of improvements have been completed to the satisfaction of the legislative body, and all ,'payments have either been made or set aside for all existing or potential claims, costs, and expenses. SECTION 3. That the surplus monies, remaining in the Construction Funds as of June 30, 1995, shall be used to call bonds. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held on the of j 199x. ATTEST: CITY OF ATA$CADERO By: LEE PRICE, City Clerk GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Items C_4 Through: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager Meeting Date: 7/11195 From: Arther R. MontandonAttorney SUBJECT: City Council request for opinion (July 27, 1995, letter from Leon Korba) RECOMMENDATION: That the'City Council not attempt to regulate the delivery of unsoli ited and unwanted newspapers. BACKGROUND: On July 27, 1995, Mr. Leon Korba delivered the attached letter to the City Council during the public comment portion of the City Council meeting. H requested that the City exercise its authority to stop the delivery of newspapers which are not requested by City residents. The City Council requested that a report be brought back at this meeting. 9• DISCUSSION: The legal issue presented by Mr. Korba is whether a City may prohibit the unauthorized delivery of newspapers to residences. This issue involves two competing rights: Freedom of speech vs. the privacy/property rights of residents. In Van Nuys Publishing Co. v. City of Thousand Oaks (1971) 5 C I. _3d 817, 97 Cal. Rptr. 777, the court struck a city ordinance as unconstitutionally overbroad. The court held that a city cannot preserve the privacy rights of its residents by prohibiting all distribution of literature without prior consent. The court stated a precisely-worded ordinance could withstand constitutional scrutiny. Such a precise ordinance was enacted by the City of Fresno. his ordinance was invalidated in City of Fresno v. Press Communications. Inc. (1994.) 36 Cal. Rptr. 2nd 456. This court held that a-city could not prohibit certain categories of written publications. If the City prohibited all publications, it ma have been held constitutional Unfortunately, the court did not offer instruction a to how to prohibit political flyers, religious publications or other forms of constitutionally protected speech and activity. The court also awarded attorney fees to the newspaper . company. These cases demonstrate that the courts have protected the rights of newspaper companies to deliver unwanted paper against cities' attempts tregulate. It is my recommendation that the City not attempt to regulate this condL Ct. . 000065 I The court in the City of Fresno case did suggest an avenue of redress for disgruntled ' residents. It stated that there is a: ...distinction between the private individual's right to decline delivery and the government's power to restrict delivery. The individual's right arguably may be absolute, but the government's power is constrained by the First Amendment." As such, a private cause of action may exist against the newspaper company for the unsolicited and unwanted delivery of newspapers. ARM:cw 2 OOOOG G Mayor, Members of the Council,and City Manag r A recffM; iey,which I conducted.showed newspaper iiitermg lots in Long Valley and )F Meadorays. his was conducted at the behest of some neTghboTs who are tired of hg paper=de'K erect to which tbe,,r b-Tven't s-ubscr. d. aside from the unseemly sight generated,;n particular by the Country News which is the Aolator.theire are other reasons t.;ris iTlude ;fdl l+Ut 0i1 shouid be m -,Io4ved a51oll0:h?S. o pfit ential fr_a hz.:rd It Shou'd-zot iJe"bhQ r {Un ti?e flan, i r?Tl n'.',Ana< s;ne v_to Tnt Jr!n the LSI ti'rJL-`tl%Y?'o cea-e 47'.x',t 1 e aicrr_ e e 0 Abc .and 3TI I,,, ?tht, '-";l7jA p or get rri lu;<�l',. ;` r"_r]-. .,ev—j al;ti iuluan, F-bijn2 --urnnlj1. I,hereby,reques"that the Cly tdr-:e;^ ve.:er,-eys are nese. ,='y to-issue a cease arid de:�sfwider to Ire y;b Sher:1f the Col3ntry News,such that rave can h.we a safer and clearer en,,4onment- r e51)0Ct,Fy s�bn:it =d on?"r jly Leon &orba 305 Santa Ana Road oOOOP7 1 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-5 From: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager 04C Meeting Date: 7/11/95 SUBJECT: Salinas Dam Ownership Agreement RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council provide direction to staff: BACKGROUND; Mayor George Highland has requested that this item be placed on the agenda for discussion and that the Council formally oppose the transfer agr ement. AJT:cw O( OOC*Q ��IIIII{iillll811111111111���;� �1111111111111� � ��� _ � city- of sAn luiS OBI �I 955 Morro Street • San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 June 23, 1995 RECD"t' Andrew J. TakataJUN .. 6500 Palma Avenue I _ Atascadero, CA 93422 ATASCADERO CITY MANAGER Dear Andy: This letter is sent to inform you and your Board of an upcoming Council meeting on July 5' (Wednesday) which includes several items relative to Salinas Reservoir. As I have stated in the past, the City wants to keep you informed on issues which may be of interest to your agency. The first issue involves the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the City of San Luis Obispo's water rights permits. The City and the Corps staff have agreed to "stipulated language" that would be added to the City's permit which would make the Corps a co-permittee under the City's permit. The inclusion of the Corps on the City's permit would allow the State Water Resources Control Board to revoke the Corps original permit. This issue is more fully explained in the staff report which is currently being prepared for our council meeting. The second issue involves the draft ownership transfer agreements between the City of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The Council's approval of the agreement language will begin the process towards transfer of ownership, but the actual transfer will require numerous studies and several years to accomplish. City and County staff believe that even if the expansion project does not proceed, the transfer of ownership to the County provides benefits for the County and the City,as well as the County at large. Again, this issue is explained in more detail in the staff report. Both staff reports will be sent to you as soon as they are available to our City Council. I expect the reports to be available on Tuesday June 27 , therefore you should receive the reports by late next week. If you have any questions, please giveme or Gary Henderson a call at 781-7215. Si `ce ly, John Moss Utilities Director i i OThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805) 781-7410. o00n W q i RECEIVED QII�I���lll'tl�llll�lll II`IIIII►i I MEETING GAT1995 E:ciJf san Lues OBIspO 8 Ju5 COUNCIL AGEN ITEM NUMQER: FROM: John Moss Prepared By: Gary W Henderson Utilities Director Water Division,'Manager SUBJECT: Modification of the City of San Luis Obispo's Water Rights Permit for Salinas Reservoir (Permit 5882). CAO RECOMMENDATION: By Motion, approve the Stipulated Agreement for Permit 5881 of the L .S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and Permit 5882 of the City of San Luis Obispo (Citi) and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. DISCUSSION: The Salinas Dam was constructed by the federal government in 1941, principally as an emergency measure to assure an adequate supply of water for Camp San Luis Obispo. It was also intended to supply water to the City of San Luis Obispo. The United States government filed an application with the.State Water Resources Control Board to appropriate water from the Salinas River on May 27, 1941. The state granted Permit 5881 to the United States of America (now the Corps) which allows for up to 45,000 acre-feet of storage and a maximum direct diversion of 12.4 cubic feet per second. The area identified in the permit':for beneficial use of the water is Camp San Luis Obispo. The City of San Luis Obispo filed a identical application on June 4, 1941 with the exception of the area for beneficial water use being the City. The state granted Permit 5882 to the City with the same storage and diversion rights identified in Permit 5881. Since 1941, the City has been using water from Salinas Reservoir to meet the City's water needs under they terms of our permit and the license (agreement) between the City and the Corps. The two permits are separate and are not additive (ie. the maximum allowable storage is 45,000 a.f.). The priority under state law is to the first permit in time, thereforO the City's permit is junior to the Corps. This is an unusual situation, to have dual permits,;and the State Water Resources Control Board staff has been interested in "cleaning up" this''situation for several years. Since the Corps has not utilized water under their permit, the State Board staff had preliminarily recommended revocation of Permit 5881. The Corps then requested a change in area of beneficial use in their permit to include the City of San Luis Obispo. This request was protested by the City of Paso Robles as well as the City of San Luis Obispo. The City of San Luis Obispo staff protested the request due to a number of technical and legal concerns. The resolution of the protests would require a hearing before the State Boajrd and would require significant staff time for the Corps and the City, in addition to that of the State Board staff. Therefore, State Board staff recommended a meeting between the Corps of Engineers and the City of San Luis Obispo to determine whether there could be a mutually acceptable alternative 0000'"f, My Of SAn LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Salinas Reservoir Water Permit Page 2 to the Corps' request for the change to their permit. Attachment A is the stipulated agreement language that was agreed to between the Corps and City staff at the meeting. The Corps has formally approved the language and the original signed form has been sent to the City for execution. The agreement would allow State Board staff to add a condition to the City's permit and would not require a Board hearing. Since the protests were filed against the Corps' requested change, and the agreement would result in revocation of the Corps' permit, there would be no need for a hearing before the State Board. The agreement would allow the Board to revoke the Corps' permit and add the Corps as co-permittee under the City's permit(5882). The area of beneficial use under the City's permit would remain the same (ie. for use within the City of San Luis Obispo). The changes will not impact the City's water rights and will leave the City/Corp permit as the "senior" permit at the Salinas Reservoir with the City's use of the water "senior" to the Corps. This agreement language provides benefits for the City and the Corps. Staff supports the proposed language and believes that it strengthens the City's water rights at Salinas Reservoir. CONCURRENCE The City Attorney and the City's water rights attorney have reviewed the language and concur with the recommendation. FISCAL EVIPACT The approval of the agreement will have no negative fiscal impacts and may reduce'potential costs if a State Board hearing was required to resolve the protests. Attachment: A. Stipulated Agreement for Permit 5881 of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and Permit 5882 of the City of San Luis Obispo (City) , i 0000'"^! i Attachment A STIPULATED AGREEMENT • FOR PERMIT 5881 OF THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (CORPS) AND PERMIT 5882 OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO(,(CITY) The Corps and the City stipulate to revocation of Permit 5881 of the Corps, provided the following conditions are included in Permit 5882 of the City: "The Salinas Reservoir is a Federal facility over which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has sole discretionary authority to grant access to the Federally owned project works and to require maintenance thereof as required by the terms and conditions of license agreements that. may be executed by the Corps and the City of San Luis Obispo (City) from time to time. The City has historically and continuously applied water to beneficial use within the boundaries of the areas designated for use udder both Permits 588". and 5882. In retlecclon of this historical practice, Permit 5881 held by the Corps and Permit 5882 held by the City shall be combined under revised terms for Permit 5882. The combined permit shall authorize the continued use of water within the designated place of use, manner and method of diversion. Upon completion of the appropriation and beneficial use of water under this Permit 5882, any license or licenses which may be issued pursuant to Chapter 9 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the California Water Code shall be issued to the City and to the Corps for water which should have been found by inspection by the State Water Resources Control Board, to have been applied to beneficial use. Under the terms of any license and licenses so issued, as between the City and the Corps, the City shall be given primary authorization to continue appropriation, diversion and use of water under the terms and conditions of Permit 5882, provided that in the event the City shall fail to divert water to beneficial use under Permit 5882 for a period of five consecutive years, the City's rights title and privileges accruing under Permit 58$2 shall cease upon determination by the State Water Resource Control Board that such action''is appropriate. The Corps shall retain any residual rights not exercised by the City. Upon determination that the City has ceased use of part or all of Permit 5882, the Corps shall then have the sole right to divert the remaining quantity of water under Permit 5882. The City shall maintain all necessary agreements with the Corps for the purposes of storing directly diverting water under Permit 5882. Nothing in Permit 5882 shah be construed as granting access to project works not under ownership of the City". Signed: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of Date: _Z Signed: City of San Luis Obispo Date: 'i MEETINGDATE: ��llbIIIAU�I 1 city of san Luis oBIspo Jul 5, 1995 ITEM COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NUMBER: FROM: John Moss�M Prepares By: Gary W. Henderson 4 Utilities Snwtor Water Division Manager SUBJECT: Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project Ownership Transfer Agreements. CAO RECOMMENDATION: By Motion, approve the language for the ownership transfer agreements and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreements. R2 DISCUSSION: Background , The Salinas Dam,facilities and surrounding property are owned by the federal government. The dam was originally constructed to serve water for Camp San Luis Obispo as well as the City of San Luis Obispo. The water from the reservoir has been used almost exclusively by the City. of San Luis Obispo. Since the Salinas Reservoir no longer serves a federal purpose, the U S Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has been interested in transferring the facilities to agency for many years: :Both the City and the County of San Luis Obispo have expressed interest in acquiring ownership of the facilities but in the past have not agreed on which agency , should gain control. During discussions with the Corps of Engineers concerning the expansion project, the Corps indicated that the expansion project could not proceed until the ownership of � ; the facilities were transferred to a local agency. This was done to motivate;the City and the ks County to resolve the issue of.which agency should gain control. TiJ '`[KS d In November 1992, the San Luis Obispo City Council endorsed.the concept of transfemng the ownership of the Salinas Dam, related facilities, and surrounding property to the CountyThis � decision was based on the City's desire to proceed with the reservoir expansion projectµand the understanding that north,countyagencies would be opposed to,the City,controlliiig the operation „_ of the valves which regulate water releases required.under,the live steam agreement r ,. x 5f Y Agreements The City and Countystaff have negotiated thedraftagreements untendedto protect each ag ,nencys , N. interests at the lake -:.These draft agreements_have been presented to north county agencies dor y 5.: their information.. The draft agreements are included as attachments to this report rx There are' three separate agreements:' the ownership transfer agreement, the operation and :maintenance' }� agreement and the recreation agreement. Following transfer of ownership,;the facilittes would continue to be operated as they have iri the past. The. property transfers-is <operauonally k . "transparent" and the only change will be who owns the.facilities ;} K4� r . r 0000"`t CI-W of San Luis OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REFP014T Salinas Reservoir Ownership Transfer 3 Page 2 Although the approval of these a greements by the City and County do not formally transfer the x: property, the opponents to the expansion + k, Pan. Project are opposed to the property.transfer because ' it may facilitate future approval of the e -.So M„ t PP xpansion project. . me of the key areasof w ownership transfer agreement are summarized below: _* 4 YF •.r fi- :;. ... .. `•, tea'����U����V�Yv� Fi � . The agreement is between the City of San Luis Obispo, th 'County of San LuisIr a" Obispo, and Zone. 17 of the San `Luis. Obispo Flood i Control` and Watei Conservation District (Zone 17): b ■ The ownership of the Salinas Dam, related facilities and surnroundmg 4,400 acres Of property would transfer to Zone 17. x * 45 ■ The County and Zone 17 would agree to endorse and cooNrate with the Ci . ' the furtherance of the City's Salinas Reservoir Expansion ProjectrL ty ' - , ■ The Countyhas the option to receive up to 100 acre-feet pier year from Salinas Reservoir for Waterworks District A, which serves the to of Santa Margarita, if the expansion project is accomplished. ■ If the County does not exercise the above option within 10 years ors the Coun4 (through Waterworks District#6)decides to participate in the Nacimiento Project the option is lost. <4n"- • If the County exercises the above option, the agreement wires that .. their prorata share of the costs associated v�nth the 71y x` ` ^ ongoing reservoir dxpansion protect and s w g g operation and maintenance expenses z ■ The Ci and County t4 `t h' agree to share the costs (50-50)associa iivith the p { transfer ( . additional studies ie u K � etc up to a maximum Coun share of ,fid ,.st'.r��E ' .:. 3 North'county agencies and individuals are,opposed to the ownership:transf because this zs:one of the"avenues available for haltingex the pansion project In particular a n mberof�uididuats r z � and1 agencies are opposed to the language in the`owners lup'agreenentw ch states t " e t 'County.will agree to endorse and cooperate-in the furttierance*of thecpanslnnz k �> Project The intent of the language is to insure that if the ro �s ",i th k p perry trsferredthe Coun -would not obstruct the reservoir expansion 'project Ttus is an essential component of e 3 ,x F { , }r agreement and is necessary to insure that the expansion project will not be blocked b the Board Y` of Su Y pervisors following property transfer.' The expansion project will stall have to saps ally "'Ys -;related • .r , n. OF requirements (ie. certification of the-TER and resolution of pro to the Cit}iq's wa t rights permit) prior'to beginning construction. v �; � � c i 57T, , ai4). 000Ot"A , �� ►� �aINIIIII�h ��Illl city of San LUIS OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Salinas Reservoir Ownership Transfer 'F Page 3 Additional Studies The approval of the ownership transfer agreements by the City and County does;'not formally k transfer the Property-- Additional studies and processes must be completed prior to the property transfer, these include NEPA :compliance, cultural resource studand hazardous material '� J' Y evaluation. If the County approves the draft agreements, the costs associated with these studies T 3�F` 1 "1 xr t and other related ownership transfer expenses would be shared between the�two agencies.' Meeting with Corpsu-, ,+e v On May 16, 1995, a meeting was held in Los Angeles with the Army Corps of Engineers°staff. " The meeting was attended by City and County staff, as well as representatives from the City's consultant for the project p j (Woodward-Clyde). The meeting was held to discuss the ownership ' transfer and to identify the work necessary to proceed with the transfer. The Corps are anxious i. a y to accomplish the property transfer and strongly encouraged the City and the County to move forward with the approval of the agreements between the two agencies. The Corps has agreed that the ownership transfer and the expansion project are separate issues and an environmental assessment (EA) for the transfer of ownership will not require detailed analysis of the impacts `~ z t associated with the expansion project. The impacts of the expansion project will be addressed in the environmental impact report that is currently being prepared. City and County staff} �4 ` indicated that the property transfer was beneficial for all P PertY parties involved;even'if the expansion - project does not happen. Benefits 1 " �> The transfer of ownership to the.County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distract'under r the terms of the draft agreements has benefits for both the County and.the CityThe trans will insure that the lake and surrounding property will be available for�recreational`-o,0os R`k n the future and will remain under;.County control. The agreements alsoprovide written, contractual language between the City and the County Flood Control and Water Conservation . District concerning the`operations at the lake. • Currently, the City and the District ha,e, o binding agreements concernin the o �tions and maintenance. The Ci and:Coon staff lXiave g P .cit � K-county �.� worked very positively for the past several years on issues concerning the budget and operational_ issues. The operations and maintenance agreement will provide the mechanism to insure Mat =� the cooperative relationship will continue in the future. AY2111, Follow-Up Action 4. 4 4 K Following Council approval, the agreements will be presented to the County Board of �.< Supervisors as the board of the Flood Control and Water Conservation'District'for approval _`, , Y A i) 00(1nw� j��,h city of San Luis OBIspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ` Salinas Reservoir Own erstup Transfer Page 4 .. . .. 1.•� �f.itl�'J.,yL��M•',�71YJQ�.^ a_ hKS•V '4 � 1 �4 ' Once the agreements have been executed by.both the City and County; staff will` began ork .s ..-. u �.ikiRwc. •t+,st..AL�I}'�fc ,j with the Corps, our consultant and other mvolved agencies to complete the ownership transfer Ka, ,sy,�, .ic}'� s. 1 -r'' ! ttMKd sj# �'.-sa� � r4 a kit-�yaa°'$,ty1' 'b.`n .. �"`•"'-. ". FISCAL IlVIPACT f: < `� '�� ! yy... f . l.l!p .; ,x :rY f �" •. ?'^" •rt�..'Ts!'Y`is.� '�'' M 3`:e..f.�}' r3�- . 1111,1,1,111pp Ill FINE!— The additional studies necessary to allow for the property transfer to pec Have been estunated ` to cost between$100000 and $400,000' Y �^ , At taus point, it is anttgpated at`the costs will.be"', :N� xaA x the`mid to low end of the`pace range `Y The additional studies and co is ar ;cu�r�rent1y 6ifi£ ` refined through consultations with involved regulatory agencies and will be presented to Council , r 111 the near future. . k , •3' of �� ,�` i� .L �' Attachments: A. Salinas Reservoir Ownershnp Transfer Agreement Ai -r B. Salinas Reservoir Operation and Maintenance Agreement *� h 10 C. Joint Powers Agreement between Zone 17 of the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distnct a d AM Cotinty�of San Luis Obispo for Operation of the Santa Marganta Lake ltegnonal Park and Natural Area 4 "r 4, fg � d -.c �f`{`+'ti ti�^! � i..� sad t�;: ,a r�y��r -. �s -• ^��.ii ry 6 '''.: ak a' , mks + r Jo n i `ii (.�b 4 - »•;; J} y, +M1; �h 4 #y Sa}�' �# syf.Aft{'k�,TF . , .yt�,`YA'.}.1•�+_jy ',t��'y<,(b„(.t., f-:. � - .y .1'y !� H ��FIlr'� • �# -SS�V`�+:•.�, w44j� F'�k1�j � 4'3`.jy`� 1' i 00001"C SALINAS RESERVOIR OWNERSHIP TRANSFER AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made this day of , 1995, by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ("City") , a Charter municipal corporation of the State of California, the COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ("County") , a subdivision and one of the counties of the State of California, and Zone 17 of the SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD -CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT ("Zone 1711) , a local governmental entity of the State of California. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Salinas Dam and Reservoir were built in 1941 by the United States War Department to supply water to Camp San Luis Obispo and the City of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, the Salinas Dam and Reservoir, related facilities, and certain of the surrounding real property ("Project") , are currently owned by the Army Corps of Engineers ("ALOE") , and are leased to the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ("District") and to the County ofISan Luis Obispo ("County") , who are responsible for the -Project's operation and maintenance; and WHEREAS, In 1941 the City applied for and received Permit No. 5882, dated October 91, 19411 from the State Division of Water Resources, said permit granting to the *City the right to store and appropriate 45,000 acre-feet of water per year from the Salinas River at the Salinas Reservoir, and to divert directly 12.4 cubic SLO 1-93 0nnn►-" feet per second (cfs) ; subordinate only to an identical senior • permit, No. 5881, issued to the War Department (as predecessor in interest to ACOE) , and subject to State Water Resources Control Board Order 78-3 (otherwise known as the "Live Stream Agreement") , and WHEREAS, as currently constructed, the storage capacity of the Project is 23,842.9 acre-feet; and . WHEREAS, .City now desires to increase the storage capacity of the Project up to the previously permitted 45,000 acre-feet by the installation of spillway gates on the Salinas Dam in'' order to meet current and projected future water supply demands in the City; and WHEREAS, ALOE has been interested in transferring ownership of the Project to a local agency for many years, and ACOE had indicated that any increase in the storage capacity mf the Salinas • Reservoir must first be. preceded by transfer of ownership to a local agency; and' WHEREAS, the Salinas Reservoir is one of the major sources of water for the City; and the City has, since .1944, been using this water beneficially, prudently and with due diligence , in increasing amounts to serve municipal purposes; and WHEREAS, the Zone 17 has the authority, pursuant to the provisions of the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and `Water Conservation District Act, Act 7205 of the California Water' Code- Uncodified Acts of California, to do all things requijred of Zone 17 by this Agreement; and SLO 2-93 _ 0nnnryQ WHEREAS, the City has been paying all costs for the operation and maintenance of the Salinas Dam and water delivery facilities; • WHEREAS, the Project includes a major recreational facility which benefits all County residents; and WHEREAS, the County currently operates the recreational facilities, and the San Luis Obispo Flood . Control and Water Conservation District currently operates the Salinas Dam, the Salinas Reservoir and water delivery facilities at the Project; and WHEREAS, San Luis Obispo County Waterworks District No. 6 ("Waterworks No. 611) has been granted a Permit No. 7253 (Application No. _ 11745) , from the State Division of Water Resources, said water permit granting to Waterworks No. 6 the right to store and appropriate 200 acre-feet of water per year from the Salinas River at the Salinas Reservoir, and to divert directly 1.5 cubic-feet per second; and WHEREAS, the City and Zone 17 desire, under certain conditions provided for herein, to provide water from Salinas Reservoir to Waterworks No. 6 by means of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, in order to facilitate the transfer of _ownership of the _Project and thereby obtain expansion of the Salinas Reservoir by the installation of spillway gates on the Salinas Dam, the City Council of _the City of San Luis Obispo, on November 16, 1992, approved in concept the..-transfer of ownership _of the Project to the - San Luis... Obispo County Flood . Control and Water Conservation District, provided the City's interest in the Salinas Reservoir as the primary .water supply for the City is adequately protected; SLO 3-93 0000""4 sr NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their, mutual covenants, and in furtherance of the above recitals, the Parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Effect of Agreement Except for those provisions relating to cooperation between City and Zone 17 to effect a transfer of the Project, this Agreement and all rights and duties of the Parties hereunder are subject to the express condition precedent that the Project is conveyed to Zone 17. 2. Proiect Description The Project consists of the 'Salinas Dam in the northwest quarter of Section 8, T 30 S, R 14 E; M.D.B. & M. , Salinas Reservoir, certain lands adjacent thereto, recreational facilities, and the pipelines, tunnel, pumping plants and other facilities appurtenant thereto, as more fully set forth in the certain lease (Lease No. DACW09-73-56) between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the San Luis Obispo County Flaod Control -and Water Conservation District, which is incorporated herein by reference. 3. Transfer of Ownership A. The City and Zone 17 shall' fully`cooperate!,and assist in the transfer of ownership of the Project from ACOE to Zone 17, -and shall take such steps and attend any : necessary, meetings to facilitate an expeditious and cost effective transfer. -- The -City shall be °the lead agency on the ownership transfer. The City, Zone 17 and County each agree to provide their respective personnel and ' direct administrative support, at no charge or expense to any other party, to facilitate the transfer of ownership. A tepresentative" • SLO 4-93 from each Party shall be designated to meet with ALOE on the transfer of ownership. B. The parties agree that all costs associated with the transfer of ownership '(other than each entity's own staff and direct administrative support) , including but not limited to all required studies, surveys,- legislation, interagency costs, shall be shared between the City and the San Luis Obispo Flood Control and Water Conservation District ("District") in the following percentages: The City agrees to pay 500 of all applicable costs, and the District agrees. to pay 50% of all applicable costs up to a maximum cost to the District of $100, 000. 4 Salinas Reservoir Expansion Pro-iect. A. Zone 17 and County agree to endorse and cooperate with the City' in the furtherance of the City's Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project, as that expansion project is more fully described in the "Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project", which is incorporated herein by reference. Zone 17 and County agree to cooperate with the City as City accomplishes any necessary mitigation measures identified in -the City's Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project environmental review or other documentation, and shall provide assistance in obtaining any required County permits, and in complying with County conditions. B. The City shall' do or cause to be done all work necessary to accomplish construction of the spillway gates on the Salinas Dam, and other related work for the expansion of the Salinas Reservoir storage capacity, at its sole cost and expense. Before SLO 5-93 000()Q1 9 S- the City shall undertake the aforesaid constructionand works, the • City shall submit the plans and specifications for said aid construction and works to the County Engineer of the County and shall consult with the County Engineer regarding said plans and specifications. If the County. Engineer objects to any part of the plans or specifications, the County Engineer shall notify, in writing, the City within. 30 days of receipt. -If .the City agrees with any of the County Engineer's objections, the said .,plans and specifications shall be changed . to eliminate or correct said objections. If the City disagrees with any of the said objections of the County Engineer, the City shall so notify, in writing, the County Engineer. As owner of the Salinas Dam, Zone 17 will be responsible for the safety of the structure and is accountable to the State Department of Water Resources Division. ivision of Safety of Dams (DSOD) . By this Agreement, the City agrees to assume all responsibility for gaining the approval of DSOD for the Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project. The City also agrees to assume all liability for any damage, cost or injury to any entity, agency_ - or .individual _that may be caused in anyway by the Salinas Dam modificationsConstructed by the City. This liability includes, but ..,. is not, limited to, structural failure of„ facilities constructed by the City, inundation by increased storage, inundation by increased discharge in the event of Salinas Dam failure, and claims of interruption of flow. in- the Salinas River. C. The City agrees that existing County recreation facilities SLO 6-93 000()Cd'p S lD inundated as a result of the expansion of the Salinas Reservoir • storage capacity shall be replaced and/or relocated at City's sole cost and expense as shown on the conceptual -Recreation Facilities Relocation Plan (Exhibit C) . Included in the City's replacement obligations under this part shall be the one-for-one replacement of the well and potable water system and the sewage collection and treatment system which now serve the said existing County recreation' facilities, with facilities equivalent to those in existence on the date -of execution of this -Agreement. S. Water Rights. A. Zone 17 and the County acknowledge the City's rights as set forth in said Permit No. 5882 (as modified by the "Live Stream" Agreement) and agree that the County or Zone 17 shall not seek to modify the area' of beneficial use for water under appropriation issued pursuant to Application No. 10211 without first obtaining the City's agreement to such modification; except that Zone 17 and the City agree that they will cooperate' in 'providing water from Salinas Reservoir to Waterworks No. 6 as provided for by Paragraph 8 of this Agreement, including obtaining a modification to said area of beneficial use if necessary to provide water to Waterworks No... 6.-- - B. ...B. Upon transfer of ownership of the Project to Zone 17, ' Zone - 17 will continuously operate and maintain the Salinas Dam and the Salinas Reservoir in a manner that will achieve the purpose of appropriating water under Permit No. 5882 for the benefit of the City. All matters related to the diversion,- storage and use -of water appropriated from the Salinas River shall be 'carried out by - SLO 7-93 OOnnQIA S/ / Zone 17 pursuant to Permit No. 5882 including but ''not limited .to the quantity. of water to be diverted to and from ''storage in the Salinas Reservoir. Zone 17 shall exercise good faith in carrying out the provisions of Permit No. 5882. Neither Zone 17 nor County . shall: do any _ act which will reduce or impair the: City's rights under Permit No. 5882. County and Zone 17 agree that, as among the parties- to this Agreement, the .water rights and privileges of the City existing prior to the execution of this agreement, including ; but not limited to Permit 5882, License No. DA-04-353-eng-1943, and . the area for beneficial use for water under appropriation issued pursuant to application number 10211, shall not be changed or impaired by this Agreement except as otherwise expressly provided herein. C. No provision of this Agreement shall be considered to be • in derogation of any existing water ri ht(s ) or clam(s) .to water right(s) by or any agreements concerning water rights of any party hereto, including but not limited to overlying, prescriptive, appropriative, riparian, or pueblo rights, nor shall it . be construed to .result .in any relinquishment or adjustment of any-such water rights.or claims thereto; and, in -particular, no provision of this Agreement shall be considered to diminish, reduce or affect,in any ,way, any, party's -rights pursuant to California , water Code Section 1005.1 and/or Section -1005.2 6. Water Transmission Facilities. A. Zone 17 shall be responsible for operation and maintenance of the water transmission facilities which supply water to the City from the Salinas Reservoir -and shall deliver Salinas Reservoir SLO 8-93 000(JO t water, insofar as such is available, to the City at such times and at such rates of flow within the capacity of the delivery P Y facilities as 'the City shall from time to time specify. Zone 17 shall continue to be responsible for meeting the requirements of the Live Stream Agreement (as required by amendments to Permit ,,`5881 and 5882) and the physical operation of the valves on the Salinas Dam which control downstream releases. Zone 11 shall also be responsible for- monitoring the establishment of the live stream at the appropriate observation points prior to adding water to storage at the Salinas Reservoir. B. The specific terms and conditions concerning operation and maintenance of the Salinas Dam, the Salinas Reservoir and the water transmission facilities will be addressed in a separate agreement between the City and Zone 17 substantially similar in form and . effect as the attached Exhibit A and as said Exhibit A may from time to time be amended by mutual agreement of the parties thereto. 7. Recreation Facilities. A. The City, Zone 17, and County acknowledge that the County of San Luis Obispo currently maintains and operates` recreational facilities, open to the public, at the Project which are compatible with the rights of the City under said Permit No. 5882. The City, Zone 17 And County intend . that the County shall continue to maintain and operate the 'said recreational facilities and, from time to time, modify and/or expand said facilities, provided, that the said recreational facilities and operations shall continue to be only those which are compatible with the rights of the City under said Permit No. 5882 and said Permit No. 7253 and with SLO 9-93 00(1naC,- S-/3 - a applicable state and federal health and safety laws and regulations in the use of the reservoir as a domestic water supply for the residents of the City and Waterworks No.6 .(as Waterworks No. 6 rights are provided for by Paragraph 8 of this Agreement) . It is . anticipated that Zone 17 will enter into an agreement with the County for the said operation and maintenance of recreational facilities by the County with the terms and conditions of such. agreement ' to be in substantially, the form and effect as the attached Exhibit B. B. The City shall have no responsibility for any costs associated with the operation, maintenance, or capital costs of any recreational facilities at the Project, except as provided in Paragraph 4C of this Agreement. C. The City, Zone 17 and County shall work together during the design and construction phase of the Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project to minimize the impacts to the public's recreational opportunities at the Project. Construction and relocation of recreation facilities will likely require restricted access to areas around the Salinas .Reservoir during certain periods. .The development_ of the, plans and specifications will attempt to minimize the length .of restricted access by phasing construction activities in order to maintain access, even though, , at times access will, of necessity, be, restricted. . 8. Waterworks No. 6. A. City, Zone 17 and County agree that following the construction of .the Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project, Waterworks iNo. 6 shall have the right to receive, every year, 100 acre-feet of_ SLO 10-93 UO0nas/� water from the said Salinas Reservoir; provided that, the said right of Waterworks No. 6 is conditioned upon Waterworks No. 6 giving written notice to City, within ten years from completion of the said Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project, that Waterworks No. 6 elects to exercise its right .to thereafter receive 100 acre-feet per year from the Salinas Reservoir; and, further provided that, in the event that (i) the San Luis Obispo County -Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) or other agency constructs the "Nacimiento Project" (a project to - deliver Lake Nacimiento water, to which the District has certain rights, to public agencies within the County, and (ii) Waterworks No. 6 takes delivery of water from the said Nacimiento Project as a substantial and continuous source of water to-Waterworks No. 6, then, at such time, the provisions of this Paragraph No.8 shall be of no further force or effect and Waterworks No. 6 shall be entitled to no rights by reason of this Agreement or under any other provisions of this Agreement. B. In the event that Waterworks No. 6 shall exercise the option granted by the parties in this part, Waterworks No. 6 shall _ Pay (i) to the"City and the District, a portion of: the costs and -expenses incurred by the City and -the District in accomplishing the transfer of ownership of. the Project from the ACOE to Zone 17,1 the said Waterworks No 6 portion being the result of dividing 100 by 5450; . and (ii) . to the City, a portion of the -costs and expenses incurred by the City for the-construction of the Salinas Reservoir • SLo 11-93 000OQ" Expansion Project including but not limited to: installation of spillway gates, relocation of recreation facilities and environmental mitigation measures, the said Waterworks No. 6 portion being the result of dividing 100 by 1650; and (iii) to Zone 17, the actual annual , operation and maintenance costs and expenses of making Salinas reservoir water available to Waterworks No. 6, the said Waterworks No. 6 , costs being 100/5450ths of the actual annual operation -and maintenance costs and expenses of making Salinas Reservoir water available to the City after first subtracting from said actual annual costs and expenses those costs and expenses attributable to supplying water to the City downstream from the Waterworks No. _ 6 Turnout. . C. Waterworks No. 6 is a third-party beneficiary of this Agreement. D. The said 100 acre-feet of water from the Salinas Reservoir shall be delivered by Zone 17 to Waterworks No. -6 from the Waterworks No. 6 Turnout which shall be located, as follows: (i) At the existing blow-off valveinthe vicinity of the town of Santa 'Margarita (the saidvalve being : located , at dor near pipeline station 424+36) ; or At . a turnout paid tor .:by__rWaterworks ..No. 6 and constructed 'by ".Zone 17 `in =the vicinity 'ofi:;the town of Santa Margarita. E. The parties further agree, concerning this paragraph -No.,' . 8, that the provisions of this paragraph and the obligations of City and Zone 17 described herein and- the rights of Waterworks No. 6 described in this paragraph shall not accrue not be effective SLO 12-93 0000Q44 unless and until the City installs spillway gates on the Salinas Dam such that the storage capacity of the Salinas Reservoir is increased to an amount greater than 23 ,900 acre-feet and that, by including this paragraph in this Agreement, the City has not, and does not, become obligated to Waterworks No. 6 to install the said spillway gates or in any other way increase .the-storage capacity of the Salinas Reservoir. 9. 'Water Ouality. The City, Zone 17 and County acknowledge and agree that the City is ultimately responsible for the quality, quantity and cost of water delivered by City to its residents, and therefore: A. The City shall have full authority to require Zone 17 to restrict or prohibit any activity at the Salinas Reservoir which is determined by the County Health Officer, the State Department of 0 Health Services, the State Water Quality Control Board, Regional Water Quality Control Board or other appropriate state or federal regulatory agencies to adversely impact the City's ability to adequately treat or deliver water or increases the City's cost to do so, as =required by municipal, state -or federal laws or regulations. B. Prior-to any change by the County or Zone 17 of their respective operations of facilities at the Project, ' which change could forseeably have an adverse effect on the quality or quantity of the water that the City delivers to its residents or increases the City's cost to treat or deliver said water, the party desiring to make said change shall first notify the City of .the party's intent to make 'the change at least 60 days in advance of the date . SLO 13-93 000iju4 sir s that the change is intended to be accomplished. • 10. Notices. Any notice to be given or other document to be delivered by any party to -the other hereunder shall be in writing and delivered to the party by personal delivery or by depositing the same in the United States Mail with first , class postage thereon, fully prepaid, and addressed to the party for whom intended, as follows: City: Zone 17: City Administrative Officer County Engineer City of San Luis Obispo County Government Center 990 Palm Street; P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 County: General Services Director County Government Center San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 • Any party hereto may from time to time by written notice to the other parties designate a different address which shall be substituted for the one above specified. Notices shall be effective when received. Any notice or other document sent by certified mail, as .required herein, .:,shall _be deemed received seventy-two (72) hours after the mailing thereof. 11. 'Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be Construed in accordance with the. laws .ofthe State of California. . 12. Time of the Essence. Time is- of the .dessence in the performance of the respective obligations of the Patties under this Agreement. 13. Indemnification. A. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to SLO 14-93 000()On ��U create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this contract (other than Waterworks No. 6) or affect the legal liability of any party to this contract by imposing any standard of care different from the standard of care imposed by law: B. It is understood and agreed that neither City, -nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any damage -or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the County or Zone 17 under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the County or Zone 17 under this Agreement. It is also understood and agreed that pursuant to Government Code 895.4, County and Zone 17 shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the City, all officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from anything done or omitted to be done .by.the County or Zone 17 under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the County or Zone 17 under this Agreement except as otherwise provided by Statute. C. It is understood and agreed that neither County, Zone 17, nor any off icer or employee thereof is responsible for any damage or `liabilityoccurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the City under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the City under this Agreement. It is also understood and agreed that pursuant to Government Code 895.4, City shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the County and Zone 17, all officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of SLO 15-93 every name, kind and description brought for or on account of iinjuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from anything done or omitted to be done by. the City under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the City under this Agreement except as otherwise provided by Statute. 14. Dispute Resolution.- The parties will attempt in good faith to " resolve any controversy or claim arisitg out of or relating to this Agreement promptly by negotiations between the appropriate project managers of the parties. If a controversy or claim should arise, .the appropriate project managers will meet at least- once and will attempt to resolve the matter. dither project manager may request the other to meet within fourteen days at a mutually agreed time and place. If the matter has not been resolved within twenty days of their first meeting, the project managers shall refer the matter to their respective chief administrative officers. Thereupon, the project managers shall Promptly -prepare and exchange_ memoranda stating the issues in dispute and their positions, summarizing the negotiations which have taken place and attaching relevant .documents. The chief, administrative ..Of ficers will meet for negotiations within fourteen days of the end of the twenty-day period referred^to above, at a mutually agreed time and place. Provisionsof this paragraph shall l not deprive any party of any otherremedy provided by law. 15. Waiver. No waiver or any breach of any of the terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this Agreement shall be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach of the SLO 16-93 0000"7 Seo same or other terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions, and conditions hereof. 16. Modification of Agreement. No change in or modification, termination or discharge of this Agreement in any form whatsoever shall be valid or enforceable unless it is in writing and signed by the party " to ' be ' charged therewith or its duly authorized representative; - provided, however, that any change in or modification, termination, or discharge of this Agreement expressly- provided in this Agreement shall be effective as so provided. 17. Assignment or Transfer. Neither party shall assign or transfer this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party first had and received. City reserves the right to refuse any proposed transfer or assignment if, in City's sole discretion, such transfer or assignment could adversely impact the • City's water supply. Zone 17 reserves the right to refuse any proposed transferor 'assignment if in Zone 17's sole discretion, such. transfer or assignment could adversely impact Zone 17's operations at the Project. 18. Good Faith. City, Zone 17 and County shall each- act in good faith"in performing their respective obligations as setforth in this Agreement. 19. Remedies not Exclusive. The use by any party of any remedy specified herein for the enforcement of this Agreement is not exclusive and shall not deprive the party using such remedy of, or limit the application of, any other remedy provided by law. SLO 17-93 - OOnn"z �,� I 20. Headinvs The titles to the sections of this Agreement • and the Table of Contents are not a part of this Agreement and shall have no effect upon the construction or interpretation of any part of this Agreement. The headings used herein are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference, and in no way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of any section hereto. 21._ Review by Counsel Each party . is represented by legal counsel. Each party and its legal counsel have reviewed this Agreement. Any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any ,amendments or attachments hereto. 22. Entire Agreement This Agreement, together with its exhibits incorporated herein by reference, constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and there are no negotiations, g ations, conditions, representations or agreements regarding the matters covered .by this Agreement which are not expressed herein. 23. Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. IN .WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed. this agreement as of the day and year first above written. .CITY OF SAN OBISPO By: Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: . SLO 18-93 City Clerk Diane R. Gladwell 0000QA APPROVED AS TO FORM: SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT By: Chairman Board of Supervisors of District ATTEST: County Clerk and ex-officio Clerk 'of said Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: County Counsel i SLO 19-93 D0nnClr- EXHIBIT A SALINAS RESERVOIR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT ' THIS AGREEMENT is made this day of 1995, by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ('City") , a Charter municipal corporation of the State of California, - and Zone 17 of the SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION-DISTRICT (I'Zone 17°) , a local governmental entity of the State of California. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Salinas Dam and Reservoir were built in 1941 by the War Department to supply water to Camp San Luis Obispo and the City of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo applied for and received permit No. 5882, dated October 9, 1941 from the State Division . of Water Resources for the diversion and storage of water from the Salinas River; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has appropriated water from the Salinas River and dedicated this water to a public use for the benefit of its inhabitants; and WHEREAS, the Salinas Reservoir is one of the major sources of water for the City of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, the Zone 17 currently provides the operation and maintenance of the Salinas Dani and the Salinas Reservoir and related facilities for water delivery to the City; and WHEREAS, the City currently pays all expenses related to Zone 17's operation and maintenance of the water delivery'' system; OOOntAg Salinas Operations Agreement Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants, and in furtherance of the above recitals, the Parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Effect of Agreement. This agreement and all rights and duties of , the Parties hereunder are subject to the express condition precedent that the Salinas ' Dam, the Salinas Reservoir, certain surrounding real property and Related Facilities ("Project") is conveyed to Zone 17 by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. This Agreement shall automatically terminate in the event the transfer of ownership of the project fails for any reason whatsoever, unless this Agreement is amended by mutual agreement of the Parties. 2. Operations. Zone 17, as owner of the Project, now, and during the term of this Agreement, shall continue to operate, maintain, and repair the following Project facilities which serve 'the City's water delivery system: A. Salinas Dam ` 'B. Salinas Reservoir (Lake Santa Margarita) C. Water Transmission Facilities which supply water to the City (including the booster station and tunnel) . Zone 17 shall also be responsible for the original "Army" pipeline on the westerly side of the mountains. D. Pumping Plant at Dam E. Cuesta Tunnel OOOf►"Pl A� Salinas Operations Agreement . Page 3 , F. 57, 190 lineal feet (more or less) of 18-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe from Salinas Dam to Cuesta Tunnel. G. 5,800 lineal feet (more or less) of 18-inch diameter steel pipeline .from Cuesta Tunnel to .City turnout. H. 3, 120 lineal feet (more or less) of 12-inch diameter steel pipeline from Citi turnout to terminal structure near Chorro Reservoir I. Easements and right-of-ways for pipelines Zone 17 shall not be responsible for City .facilities,',' including but not limited to: A. City facilities starting at, and including, the valve at the City turnout on the pipeline between the turnout and the City's. hydroelectric facility (pipeline station . 751+48) and City facilities downstream from said valve. B. . .City equipment . at the South portal of the tunnel . .that is used in monitoring the operation of their hydroelectric facility. 3. Live Stream Releases. Zone 17 shall continue to be responsible for meeting the requirements of the "live stream concept" (as required by amendments to' Permit #5881 and 5882) and all other established water rights and rulings of the State Water Resources Control Board. Zone 17 will be e responsible for the h 000O"I a Salinas Operations Agreement Page 4 physical operation of the valves which control downstream releases and for the monitoring the establishment of the live stream at the appropriate observation points prior to adding water to storage at the reservoir. 4. Water Delivery. . Zone 17 shall deliver , Salinas Reservoir water at the time and rate specified by the .City, subject to the storage limitations imposed by the Salinas Reservoir. At all times, Zone 17 shall operate and maintain the Salinas Reservoir in a manner which does not interfere with the enjoyment of the City's appropriative rights to water from the Salinas River and the City's dedication of this water supply to a public use. Zone 17 shall give the City 30 days written notice for planned maintenance work which will limit or prevent water deliveries. In the event of an emergency which prevents water deliveries, Zone 17 shall immediately notify.the City of the nature and extent of the problem and Zone 17 shall take such action as may .be necessary to reestablish transmission capability as quickly as possible.. ' Zone 17 shall regulate- the flow of Salinas Reservoir water :to the City - as . requested ity -as . requested by City within the operational limits of Salinas Reservoir '.delivery. system. The line of communication for' requesting flow changes will be directly . between . City Water_. Treatment Plant staff and Zone 17 Salinas Reservoir staff. The City shall give 24-hour advance notice 'of flow change requests. 5. Water Quality. The . City and Zone 17 acknowledge and agree that the .City is ultimately responsible for the quality, 00(1 " �� Salinas Operations Agreement Page 5 quantity and cost of water delivered by City to its residents, and therefore: A. The City shall have full authority to .require Zone 17 to restrict or prohibit any activity at the Salinas Reservoir which is, determined by the County Health Officer, the State 'Department of Health Services, the State Water Quality Control' Board, Regional Water Quality Control Board or other appropriate state or federal regulatory agencies to adversely impact the City*'s ability to adequately treat or deliver water or increases the Oity's cost to do so, as required by municipal, state or federal laws or regulations. B. Zone 17 shall not change its manner of operation g peration of the Salinas Dam or the Salinas Reservoir in a manner that will adversely affect the quality or quantity of the water that Zone 17 delivers to City or increase the City's cost to treat or deliver said water without the consent of the City; .provided that, Zone 17 shall have the authority.and obligation to make such changes to its operation of the' Salinas -'Dam and/or . Salinas Reservoir as are required by law or .regulation�or for safety :of the operation -of the Salinas Dam or Salinas -Reservoir. ` Zone -17 shall notify the City at least 60 days in advance of the date that the change is intended to be accomplished. 6. Costs of Operation The City will pay all costs associated with Zone 17's operation of the Salinas Dam and Salinas Reservoir and, also of the transmission nsmission of water from the Salinas Reservoir 0001 nn Salinas operations Agreement Page 6 to the City. These costs may include an agreed-upon .reserve. The City will not be responsible for any costs of any recreation operations of the County of San Luis Obispo at the Project or for any other Zone 17 or County of San Luis Obispo operations at the Project site that are not directly related to the City water supply. A payment schedule will be established by Zone 17 whereby the City will make quarterly .payments of the said costs of operation based upon an annual Zone 17 budget. At the end of the fiscal year, the City shall receive from Zone 17 a refund or a bill, depending on how actual costs of operation compare to the year's Zone 17 budget. Zone 17 shall provide a statement for any i significant variance from budget. 7. Zone 17 Budgets. Zone 17 shall meet with the City on or before January 311 of each year to discuss Zone 17's budget for the coming fiscal year for the Salinas Dam/Reservoir. Either the City or Zone 17 may propose capital improvements or changes in operations for the coming year(s) The City and Zone 17 must reach mutual consensus on capital improvements or changes in operations that will result in an increase in costs that will ultimately be paid by the `City, except that the City and Zone 17 shall approve any capital improvement or change in operation mandated by law or regulation. Zone 17 shall also provide five year budget projections for both capital and operating programs to allow for long range planning for the City. 000-1 tAl Salinas Operations Agreement Page 7 8. Statements/Audits. Zone 17 shall ' provide,.', an unaudited year-end financial statement prepared in accordance with generally .accepted accounting principles and/or in accordance with promulgations of the Government Accounting Standards Board, whichever may apply, except that notes to the financial statements shall not be required unless an audit is performed. Audits of the statements may be required by the City at any time with the City to pay for the audit. City shall have the right to reasonably inspect the books .and records of Zone 17 for Zone 17's operations at the Salinas Dam/Reservoir.. 9. Data. Zone 17 shall continue to supply to the City, monthly reservoir data which includes, but is not limited to, rainfall, evaporation; storage, downstream releases, etc. lo. Limnology. - Zone 17 shall continue limnology sampling of the Salinas Reservoir. The sampling schedule shall be established by the City. 11. Water Treatment. The City shall approve all treatment of water at the Salinas Reservoir required to maintain water quality- . Zone uality.. Zone 17 shall do all of the required water treatment at the Salinas Reservoir. The manner and extent of water treatment shall be that specified by the City unless Zone 17 determines that the specified water treatment is in violation of health and safety/fish and game/CEQA or other legal requirements. . 12. Consultation. Zone 17 will consult with the City on any and all substantial matters concerning the operation and 0000 n� Salinas Operations Agreement • Page 8 maintenance of the Salinas Reservoir and Salinas Dam and attempt to reach agreement with the City on any issue raised. In matters where Zone 17 concludes that a request from the City is contrary to the *law or water rights, Zone 17 would have the right to refuse the City's .request on this basis. 13 . Notices. Any notice to be given or other document to be delivered by any -party to the other hereunder shall be in writing and delivered to the party by personal delivery or by depositing the same in the United States Mail with first class postage thereon, fully prepaid, and addressed to the party for whom intended, as follows: City: Zone 17: City Administrative Officer County Engineer City of San Luis Obispo County Government Center 990 Palm Street, P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 Any party hereto may from time to time by written notice to the other parties designate a different address which shall be substituted for * the one - above specified. ' .- Notices shall be effective when 'received. Any notice ` or'.other document -sent by certified mail, * as - required herein, shall be deemed -received seventy-two (72) hours after the mailing thereof. 14 . Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 0001 n- i Salinas Operations Agreement . Page 9 15. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence in . the performance of the respective obligations of the Parties under this Agreement. - 16. Indemnification. A. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement'', is intended to create duties, or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this contract or affect the legal liability of any party to. this contract by imposing any standard of care different from the standard of care imposed by law. B. It is understood and agreed that neither : City, nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for ;any damage or • liability occurring by reason of anything done or :, omitted to be done by the County or Zone 17 under or in connectionl'with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the County or Zone 17 under this Agreement. It is also understood and agreed that pursuant to Government Code 895.4, County and Zone 17 shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the City, all- officers - and employees from all claims, .suits or actions -of every name, kind and description brought ,for or on account .of injuries to or .death of any person or damage to property resulting from anything, done• or;' omitted to be done by the County or Zone 17 under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction -delegated to the County or -Zone 17 under this Agreement except as otherwise provided by Statute. C. It is understood and agreed that neither County, Zone 17, • nor any officer or employee mployee thereof is responsible dor any damage 0001 (14 Salinas operations Agreement Page 10 or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be . done by the City under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the City under this Agreement. It is also understood and agreed that pursuant to Government Code 895.4, City shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the County and Zone 17, all officers and employees .from all claims, suits or actions of every name,. kind and description brought for or on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from anything done or omitted to be done by the City under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the City under this Agreement except as otherwise provided by Statute. 17 . Dispute Resolution. The parties will attempt in good faith to resolve any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this :Agreement promptly by negotiations between the appropriate project managers of the parties. If a controversy or claim should arise, the appropriate project managers will meet at least once and -will •attempt to resolve the matter. �Either,project manager may request the other to meet within fourteen '-days at a mutually agreed _time and place. If the matter- has -not - been resolved within twenty days of their first meeting, the project managers shall refer the matter to their respective chief administrative officers. - Thereupon, the project managers shall promptly prepare and exchange memoranda stating the issues in dispute and their positions, summarizing the negotiations which 00(>1 ckc� 533 Salinas operations Agreement Page 11 have taken place and attaching relevant documents. The chief administrative officers will meet -for negotiations Within fourteen days. of the end of the twenty-day period referred to above, at a mutually agreed time and place. Provisions of this paragraph shall not deprive any partyof any other remedy., provided ',by law. 18• Waiver. No waiver or-any -breach of any of: the terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of :this Agreement shall be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding: breach of the same or other terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions, and conditions hereof. 19. Modification of Agreement No change in or modification, • termination or discharge of this Agreement in any y fprm whatsoever shall be valid or enforceable unless it is in writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith or its duly authorized representative; provided, however, that any change in or modification, termination, or discharge of this Agreement expressly provided . in this Agreement shall be effective as so!, provided. - 20• Ass'gnment or Transfer. Neither party shall assign or transfer .this-,Agreement without the prior written Oonsent .of the other party... first had and received... City reserves; the right-to refuse any proposed transfer or assignment if, in City's sole discretion, such transfer or assignment could adversely impact the City's water supply. Zone 17 reserves the right to refuse . any proposed transfer or assignment if in Zone 17!s sole discretion, such transfer or assignment could adversely impact Zone 17's 0001 (19 Salinas Operations Agreement Page 12 operations at the Project. 21. Good Faith. City, Zone 17 and County shall each act in good faith in performing their respective obligations as set forth in this Agreement. 22. Remedies not Exclusive. The use by any party of any remedy specified herein for the enforcement of this Agreement is not exclusive and shall not deprive the party using such remedy of, or * limit the application of, any other remedy provided by law. 23. Headings. The titles to the sections of this Agreement and the Table of Contents are not a part of this Agreement and shall have no effect upon the construction or interpretation of any • part of this Agreement. The headings used herein are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference, and in no way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of any section hereto. 24. Review by Counsel Each party is represented by legal counsel. Each party and its legal counsel have reviewed this Agreement. Any rule of construction to the effect that -ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or--- attachments r-attachments hereto. 25. Entire Agreement. This Agreement,' together with its exhibits incorporated herein by reference, constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and there are no negotiations, conditions, representations or agreements regarding the matters covered by this Agreement which are not expressed herein. 0001"'-7 9 Salinas Operations Agreement Page 13 26. Counterparts This Agreement' may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have execute& this agreement as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By: Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: City Clerk AP OVEDAS FORM: IAt or SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT By: Chairman Board of Supervisors :of District ATTEST: - County Clerk and ex-officio Clerk .of said Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: County Counsel 0001 "k EXHIBIT B DRAFT JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN ZONE 17 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FOR OPERATION.OF THE SANTA MARGARITA LAKE REGIONAL PARKAND'NATURAL AREA THIS JOINT 'POWERS AGREEMENT entered into this day of 199_1 by and between Zone 17 of the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, hereinafter referred to as Zone 17, and the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, hereinafter referred to as County: WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Zone 17 will acquire from the Federal Government certain lands which include various facilities, including the Salinas Dam and Reservoir,which entire project has been named the Salinas River Water Supply Project, hereinafter referred to as Project; and WHEREAS, a portion of this Project is being operated as a park known as the Santa Margarita Lake Regional Park and Natural Area, hereinafter referred to as Park; and WHEREAS, County has operated and maintained Park for many years under lease from the Federal Government and wishes to continue to operate and maintain Park under Zone 17 ownership; and WHEREAS, Zone 17 within its powers may operate such a recreational facility, but District does not presently have the trained personnel, administrative know-how, or administrative facilitiesto operate such a Park; and WHEREAS, County, within its Department of General Services, has the trained personnel, or the means to secure same, the- administrative know-how, and the administrative'facilities to operate such`a Park; and WHEREAS, Zone 17 and County desire that County should operate the`Park; and WHEREAS, the most feasible method of providing for such operation by the County is by means of a joint powers agreement entered into pursuant to Government Code Sections 6500, et seq. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions, promises, and agreements herein set forth, Zone 17 and County, the parties hereto, hereby mutually covenant and agree, as follows: 1. County shall operate and administer the Park, and in connection with such operation and administration shall furnish all personnel necessary therefor. 00011,14 • 2. Funds used by County for operation and maintenance purposes shall be from a County budget. All fees collected by County for use of the Park shall be credited to such budget. Any deficit in such budget shall be met by the County. Any surplus in such budget shall remain the assets of County. 3. The parties recognize that the fee title to all real property within the Park shall remain in the-name of Zone 17. The parties also recognize that .ownership of all facilities within the-Park, and of certain equipment used in the maintenance and operation thereof, is, and shall remain, in the County. 4. The parties recognize that the highest degree of cooperation must be achieved between staffs of both parties so that the Project and the Park, as a part of the Project, may be operated in'a manner Moth efficient and beneficial to the public who will use the Park, to the agencies who will receive the water from the Project, and to the taxpayers of Zone 17. Both parties pledge their best efforts to accomplish this end. They also recognize that many details must be worked out in the course of operation of the Project and the Park under this agreement which cannot be spelled out herein. Both parties pledge themselves that their respective staffs will cooperate fully in doing this. . 5. Both parties recognize that this agreement is subject to all agreements entered into by.Zone 17 with the City of San Luis Obispo, the State of California and the United States and agree that nothing in this agreement shall be construed to permit County to in any way hinder Zone 17 in its performance of such agreements. 6. In order that rules and regulation, laws and ordinances may be properly enforced by personnel of the Department of General Services within the Park, the parties do hereby declare that the Santa Margarita Lake Regional Park and.Natural Area is, and shall be, a county park for all purposes of Section 5380 of Public Resources Code of the State of California. 7. : This agreement shall continue in effect until thirty.(30) days after a notice of termination has been delivered by either party to the other.', This agreement may be,amended from time to time by mutual action taken in the same manner,and subject to the same statutory provisions, as the agreement was adopted. 8. The County shall. defend, indemnify and save harmless the District, its officers, agents and employees from any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses, or liability occasioned by the performance or attempted performance of the provisions hereof, or in any way arising out of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, inverse condemnation, equitable relief, or any wrongful act or any negligent act or omission to act on the part 0001 - n of the County, or of agents, employees or independent contractors directly responsible to the County; providing further that the foregoing shall apply to all wrongful acts, including any passively negligent acts or omissions to act, committed jointly or- concurrently by the County, the County's agents, employees,' or independent contractors and the District, its agents, employees, or independent contractors, excepting nothing contained in the foregoing indemnity provisions shall be construed to require the County to indemnify the District against any responsibility or liability in contravention of Section 2782 of the Civil Code. 000111 s-�g i IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Joint Powers Agreement on the day and year first above stated. SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT By: Chairperson of the Board of Sulpervisors, San Luis Obispo County Flood'Control and Water Conservation District ATTEST: County Clerk and ex-officio clerk-of the Board of Supervisors of the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By: Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California ATTEST: County Clerk and ex-officio clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California Approved as to Form: District Attorney By: m\catdna\glp\jpa.agr 000-1 -19 /i�Y��/r '//r T rip 05 Me lt`C v � www "°�:t. •� l�1'1,�`\���i, ; of� �/•Q�-F� 1; i��� �•\ \,ts�,,._•�\�i��I/�Ali��15����—J��. i 1K/, C`Z����.q� •��1:v�� ���v � �`�� .` ' t:\:' V�r"'`�l�t��ll�%����C� )rem {�f, �(����� �,. �„�►z.- �,���� ,�� 1`�Y�( �������(«t<<,�, • ��L ��it w w r- cn c7 O :3 ? co Q D Lu D. W to N Q n `v O a. O _t r..y ` CV R a a -cC cam'`, U)i ul CC cn 11 = a u, o '' CrO ,u Q z cr. Xa Xa 3 (nz zcr moa X. ,! •. {+,; t •• l \ �,��,/r•�,1��'�. �l Cid r .. y4� s.�1��?(r fir► ��►� •! •id� � !"'�' y Vii '�. �jt•�.r•�� L� y. t. CL uj ;d Is 1>0 Wfet ;c!^"`'`•'r+� 't7` 1 C,r ; �~'1. O / f% e ••:•'' iii."47 '•. �1�;• �...i d .� \\.� LU ��I�� ^deGCQ �'`` •.,. Ir�i—� S"� •�. � '`vt;-ter •T% :;+rte•d .• •'•. rl i/ " ; �i� .�•v` Yli �-_ x .X 'Il it i�/Jj !'�i. •t';•� [[Z t ¢Q CL a,``' ~a -SO ,i =Z'�t�• s i i s Qi m 1. MIR -f ✓/ •. .^• •; \\`` ``���\'♦�..ti{.•«w1.�*�': � i��\/ j;' r -y�% Tom•• � NV .7F Z5 m Q \ :\t yi . Vis,• 11 /^ >. ... /Atli 0:0 ,; ''•` jam.,;:�` \ ., ►� f<' m C .r 4 I' • t V. s a 1:1a`' ,, t at l f fSS Q� CL cis x 01 o� co c i `��•`�,_. t�• ��/. .�v •�•• •' '• is \ '\ ` ��+�'r j�Ri.\� �`� ? •— � cY) rn c� 1 T_ Q t Q r r Q o > > r Z U H j O w s j ! U ¢z 3 Z c, ! ul < N ¢O r ul Z P 'a Y Q LLI a 'Luy us tu CM ! LL. y �•! I 93 O O �.1 ••%sCL1 ) a cr-0 c a . c CIS C LL. a c7 (CO xW �► tu LU i N Z rs et N1 :,• r ,:�tti 1 � - ♦.fi_ OY CZ •t.-.1 � W � C_3 00(1 r +Water - Exis' His �— t 220'Inundation line- I t 4ELO TED ROAD \y • v: U ) ' / / v~ r-`� �/ FLAT- . ITE OA/K�Aff TING ITt1AF —� EXIS RESTROOM BLDr 1 ry»•' �cc�_ ON EON T����� % ,}�4 ��� ��'.; J , tl xk \• 1`\�\ \\ �,1.--� j�%� ' !~may �� =�•��'a ) ~i��:'�';i l� �� VI A 16 RE R6AO9 White Oak Flat I " - 200' 0" " Project No. Salinas Reservoir 916813181 Expansion Pro'ect Figure 2-11. WHITE OAK CONCEPT PLAN 1993 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Saud:ca"e"'one i A"o St—. taxa +...+ 7 �1. _ _ C-4 00(1-1' 6z MEETING AGENDA DATE.,Z/_llJ_9_�, fTEM O .F,i.—.,140 MEMORANDUM To: City Council Members Date: 7/11/95 From: George Highland, Mayor Subject: Committee Assignments Following is a list of committee assignments following reorganization of the Council. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Committee/Agency Meets Appointee Alternate City-School Committee 3rd Thurs., 1:30 Ray Johnson George Luna Atascadero Traffic Committee 3rd Wed., 3:30 George Luna Ray Johnson City Hall SLO Council of Govts. 1st Wed., All day Hal Carden George Highland (SLOCOG) SLO SLO Regional Transit 11 nGeorge Highland Hal Carden Authority (SLORTA) Liability Claims Review As called George Luna Hal Carden and Finance Committee City Hall Economic Round Table 3rd Wed., 7:30 am Ray Johnson Dave Bewley City Hall County Water Advisory 1 st Wed. George Highland George Luna Board SLO Nacimiento Water Purveyors' 3rd Thurs., 10 am George Highland George Luna Contract Technical Advisory Group SLO Integrated Waste Management Authy. 2nd Wed., 1:30 pm George Luna Dave Bewley SCO (every other month) 000-1-1'�