Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 01/28/1980 AGEN6A - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 28 , 1980 7: 30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Invocation Roll Call Public Comment NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Iteia A, Consent Calendar, are con- sidered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered separately. Vote may be by roll call. A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of January 14 , 1980 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2 . Treasurer' s Report, 12-18-79 through 1-22-80 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. Public hearing on Public Safety Committee report 2. Public hearing on condominium conversion ordinance - recommend item be continued to 2-11-80 3. Public hearing on Atascadero General Plan 4. Report by City Manager on El Camino Real traffic accidents C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1 1. Second reading of Ordinance No. 14 to grant a franchise to Southern California Gas Company 2. Second reading of Ordinance No. 15 to grant a franchise to Pacific Gas and Electric Company 3. Consideration of appraisals on parking lot property and acquisition of same D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of bids on City office furniture 2. Consideration of supporting legislation to mitigate Propo- sition 13 impacts on involuntary relocatil�_ E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Manager MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 14 , 1980 7 : 30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building The meeting was called to order at 7 : 35 p.m. by Mayor Wilkins. The Pledge of Allegiance was given by Mayor Wilkins and the Invo- cation was given by Don Bollard of the Foursquare Gospel Church. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Wilkins ABSENT: None PUBLIC COMMENT (1) Mr. Cecil Barrett had a question regarding the amount allocated by the City for remodeling the Administration Building. He was also concerned about the executive session procedure. (2) Mr. Bob Sparling, U. S. Department of Agriculture, spoke with reference to the possible consolidation of the fire and police departments. He felt that the integrity of both departments would be lost under such a plan and that it should remain two distinct departments. A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of December 26 , 1979 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved for the approval of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. Consideration of proposed street name change - Castenada Lane Larry Red stated that the name change was recommended for approval by the County Planning Department and the City Planning Commission. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of this street name request. Councilman Nelson seconded the motion and it was unanimously carried. Mr. Warden pointed out that the Planning Commission has adopted a street naming policy which will utilize Spanish names or names of non-living persons having historical significance. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Reqular Meeting January 14, 1980 Page Two 2. Consideration of AL 79-77, proposed lot line adjustment on San Gregorio Road - Vaden/Rancour (Hilliard) Larry Red explained that the purpose of this lot line adjust- ment is to equalize the acreage between the two lots. It was recommended for approval by the County Planning Department and the City Planning Commission. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved for approval of this lot line adjustment subject to Conditions 1-5 as set forth by the County Subdivision Review Board. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and was unanimously carried. 3 . Consideration of AL 79-79, proposed lot line adjustment on Lucinda Road - Stevenson (Stewart) Larry Red noted that both the Subdivision Review Board and the City Planning Commission recommended approval. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of this lot line adjustment subject to Conditions 1-4 as set forth by the Subdivision Review Board. Councilman Nelson seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. 4 . Request for Certificates of Compliance for parcels on Coromar Road near Portola Road (CC56-111-26) Seitz/Farmer Larry Red noted that the County Planning Department and the City Planning Commission recommended approval. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved for approval of this request and Councilman Highland seconded the motion. It was unanimously carried. 5. Public hearing on proposed lot division (CO 79-116) , Portola Road near Mountain View - Gosselin/Hilliard Larry Red stated that the County Subdivision Review Board had recommended conditional approval relating to dedication and improvement of a road easement to Mountain View. The City Planning Commission also recommended approval. subject to the same conditions with the exception that Conditions 3 and 5 of the Subdivision Review Board memorandum be modified to allow the Planning Department to waive these conditions if the applicant could provide evidence that the owners along the now-private "access" known as Pine Dorado objected to dedication and improvement of that area as an access to Mountain View. Mr. Hilliard, representing the applicant, stated that he had been able to contact only one property owner, who was not in favor of the lot split but would be in favor of the road. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 14 , 1980 Page Three Mr. Crimes, the City Attorney, stated that legally a person cannot be required to dedicate or improve land that belongs to someone else. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the proposed lot division be approved subject to the conditions set forth by the Planning Commission and that Conditions 3 and 5 be waived and adding a condition requiring access to Parcel 1 via an easement from Portola along the "flag" and across Parcel 2. Councilman Nelson seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. 6. Public hearing on proposed lot division (AT 79-077) , Santa Cruz Road - Hurdle/Hilliard MOTION: Councilman Highland moved to continue this item to the February 11, 1980 City Council meeting. It was seconded r' by Councilman Stover and was unanimously carried. 7 . Public hearing on proposed lot division (AT 79-139) , Atascadero Avenue - Hartman/Bray Larry Red stated that the Subdivision Review Board had recom- mended approval. The City Planning Commission recommended approval with an added condition that the lot sizes be modified so that each parcel. will be one acre net (excluding the right-of-way for Atasca- dero Avenue) . Councilman Highland stated that he was concerned with double- stacking lots without any interior access. He felt that this was a problem that should be seriously considered. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of this lot division with Conditions 1-13 as set forth by the Sub- division Review Board and with the additional condition as set forth by the Planning Commission regarding the placing of the lot line. Councilman Mackey seconded the motion and it was unanimously carried. Councilman Mackey stated that she would like to see a system where the sites under consideration could by physically marked so as to permit easy Council identification. 8 . Public hearing on proposed lot division (AT 79-106) , Santa Rosa Road - Baldwin/San Luis Engineering Larry Red related that the County had recommended conditional approval. The Planning Commission also recommended approval with the added condition that the property be brought into compliance with zoning prior to recording the final map. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 14 , 1980 Page Four MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of this lot division with the stated conditions . Councilman Nelson seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. 9. Public hearing on proposed lot division (AT 79-46) , San Dimas and San Diego Roads - Bewsey/Orton Larry Red stated that the Subdivision Review Board had recom- mended approval with an added condition that the applicant improve the road frontage to County paving standards. The Planning Com- mission also recommended approval with the added condition that the applicant follow the road exception procedure which would allow the applicant to more precisely determine the improvements necessary to comply with the road improvement conditions set forth by the County. There was considerable discussion by persons in the audience concerning this requirement and whether the applicant should be required to improve a road not fronting his property. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that this item be approved subject to Conditions 1-20 set forth by the County with the added recommendation from the Planning Com- mission that the applicant follow the County road exception procedure. Councilman Mackey seconded the motion. It carried with Councilman Nelson voting no. 10. Public hearing on proposed lot division (CO 79-40) , San Gabriel Road near Atascadero Avenue - Fairbanks/Hilliard This item was recommended for approval by the County Sub- division Review Board and by the City Planning Commission. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of the lot division with the conditions as set forth by the County Subdivision Review Board. Councilman Nelson seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. 11. Report by the Public Safety Committee Chairman The report was read by Mayor Wilkins. John Cole, a member of the Fire Board, spoke giving his opinion that he felt that the report was totally inadequate and that there were many things omitted. Russell Wright also spoke stating that he felt that many portions of the report were vague. He also said that the Fire Board, at their last meeting, passed a resolution stating that they would continue to oppose the full integration of fire and police services. Clarence George then read his personal report and noted that the committee report does not clearly indi- cate any dissenting opinions. Leslie Cannon spoke stating that she felt that the report did not apprise the public as to the information used in preparing the report. Councilman Highland MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 14 , 1980 Page Five said that all members of the committee felt that there were areas where there could be consolidation and integration of certain functions of both .departments. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that this report be referred. to the Council for study and that a hearing be scheduled for January 28, 1980, to further consider the matter. Councilman Mackey seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Mayor Wilkins called a recess from 9: 50 - 9: 55 p.m. 12. Public hearing and first reading on Ordinance No. 14 to grant a franchise to Southern California Gas Company MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Ordinance No. 14 be read by title only. Councilman Mackey seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Mayor Wilkins then read Ordinance No. 14 by title only. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved to accept the first reading of Ordinance No. 14 . Councilman Mackey seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. 13. Public hearing and first reading on Ordinance No. 15 to grant a franchise to Pacific Gas and Electric Company MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Ordinance No. 15 be read by title only. Councilman Mackey seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Mayor Wilkins then read Ordinance No. 15 by title only. MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved to accept the first reading of Ordinance No. 15 and it was seconded by Councilman Highland. The motion carried unanimously. Councilman Nelson raised a question as to responsibility for street lighting. Mr. Warden stated that it was the city ' s responsi- bility to decide what standard of lighting it wished to maintain and then to contract for this service. He pointed out that PG&E provided lighting according to PUC regulations. 14 . Report by City Manager on status of Proposition 4 • clean-up legislation Mr. Warden reported that he had been in a discussion with several city managers, the League of California Cities staff as well as State legislative personnel regarding our lack of status under Proposition 4 . These persons had arrived at some legis- lative proposals which would give newly incorporated cities a MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 14 , 1980 Page Six basis for determining the base year required by Proposition 4 by using the third full year of incorporation. Several legislators representing the affected cities will co-sponsor this new legis- lation which will probably be introduced during the first part of February. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Consideration of Resolution No. 1-80, resolution of intention to approve contract with Public Employees ' Retirement System The following facts were made public by Mayor Wilkins : Assuming April 1, 1980 to be the start of participation, the next calendar year costs, ending April, 1981, for miscel- laneous employees will be $61, 292. The rate for computation of that cost to the City is 12. 7690 of the gross pay paid by the City. This rate will continue until the year 2000 unless there is a change in future actuarial data. As to the local safety employees, police and fire, the estimated cost for the twelve month period starting April, 1980 and ending April, 1981 is $57, 650. This amount is based upon a cost rate to the City of 14. 5750 of gross pay. The rate will continue for all safety members through the year 2000, except when the City absorbs the Fire District on July 1, 1980. The entire safety category will then be reevaluated along with the new police department personnel. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved to adopt Resolution 1-80 as presented. Councilman Nelson seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously with a roll call vote. D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Cable TV Franchise This request to increase the area of franchise was discussed briefly. An area of concern was whether subscribers should be required to pay higher installation fees if they lived in an area designated as remote, where the cost of extending the line would be more than the norm. It was the consensus of the Council that the Staff should be directed to work with the cable company to work out this type of problem and report back to the Council. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council (a) Councilman Nelson had a question concerning the 13 lots owned by the County near the lake, and whether there was any policy in the General Plan concerning this property. Mr. Warden noted that the County staff had been asked as to the MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 14 , 1980 Page Seven County' s disposition of these properties . There was no present intention to dispose of them. 7 (b) Councilman Mackey reported that the Zoo Committee was working and that another committee was working _ unofficially concerning the Historical (c) Councilman Highland reported that he had been approached by KPRL Radio to speak on the "Sound Off" program on the fire/police consolidation topic. He suggested that Councilman Nelson also be on the program since he was also on the Public. Safety Committee. (d) Mayor Wilkins proclaimed the week of January 20-26 as Jaycee Week. He also announced that Lawrence McPherson has been selected as the Public Works Director/City Engineer and will be starting approximately March 1. He reported that Richard McHale will be on staff as of January 15. 2. City Attorney The City Attorney had no comments at this time. 3. City Manager The City Manager reported that: (a) A Symposium on Historical Preservation, sponsored by the City of San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly will be held on Saturday, January 26, and invited interested Council members to attend if they so desired. Councilmen Mackey and Nelson indicated they would like to attend. (b) Orville Smith, Chief Building Inspector, will be coming on board this week and will be handling plan checks and building inspections commencing March 1. (c) The annual LOCC Planning Commission Institute will be held February 27-29. Planning Commissioners who wish to attend are invited to do so. (d) , The LOCC New Mayors and Council Members Institute will be held May 8-10 at the Santa Clara Marriott Hotel. (e) Channel Cities Division of LOCC will be held in Ventura on January 21. Mayor Wilkins plans to attend. Russell Wright invited the Council members and staff to attend the Fire District Association Conference. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL . Regular Meeting January 14 , 1980 Page Eight The meeting adjourned at 10: 45 p.m. Recorded by: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk FTTZ BY: )athleen Peterson Planning Commission Secretary • TREASURER'S REPORT December 18, 1979 through January 22, 1980 BALANCE as of 12/17/79 $ 4 , 451. 49 RECEIVABLES: Per attached deposit listing 156, 137. 99 PAYROLL: 12/19 $2, 508 . 95 1/2 $2 , 768 . 78 1/16 $2, 746. 80 ( 8 , 024 . 53) PAYABLES: Per attached Expenditure List (141, 172. 95) BALANCE as of 1/22/80 $ 11, 392. 00 OTHER FUNDS : Petty Cash 17 . 25 Local Agency Investment Fund State of California 260, 000. 00 Time Deposit, Mid-State Bank 13. 90 int. , mature 4/25/80 10.0, 000 . 00 TOTAL: $371, 409 . 25 DEPOSIT LISTING December 18, 1979 through January 22 , 1980 Date Source Amount 12/20 State - Cigarette Tax (11/79) $ 2,163 . 35 State - Gas Tax (11/79) 12, 870.03 State - Sales Tax (11/79) 28 , 750. 00 1/4 Collections/Publications sales 51. 69 1/8 County Revenues (12/79) 37, 292.60 1/16 State - LAIF Interest 2nd quarter 2, 663 .47 State - Motor Vehicle "in lieu" (12/79) 26, 250. 15 State - Off Highway (7/1 - 12/31/79) 136 . 80 1/18 State - Sales Tax (12/79) 28, 750. 00 State - Gas Tax (12/79) 13, 986. 43 State - Cigarette Tax (12/79) 3, 223. 47 TOTAL,: $156,137. 99 EXPENDITURE LIST December 18 , 1979 through January 22 , 1980 PAYROLL: 12/19 Checks 1167, 1168, 1169, 1170, 1171 $ 2 , 508. 95 1/2 Checks 1184, 1185, 1186, 1187, 1188 2,768. 78 1/16 Checks 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221 2, 746. 80 $ 8, 024. 53 PAYABLES: Dated Check No. Vendor Amount 12/19 1172 IRS - FWH 12/1-12/14 $ 625. 00 12/19 1173 U. S . Post Office - Box rental 22. 00 12/19 1174 U. S. Post Office - Postage 49. 60 12/19 1175 Reg. LOCC Prop. 4 Seminar 40. 00 12/19 1176 SLO County- Maps 117 . 58 12/19 1177 Jobs Available - Ads 46. 10 12/19 1178 Atascadero News - Ad 7 . 56 12/19 1179 Western Office Prod. - supplies 121. 44 12/20 1180 Local Agency Investment Fund 10, 000. 00 12/20 1181 Local Agency Investment Fund 25, 000. 00 12/21 1182 Fred Metzger - legal services 526 . 81 12/26 1183 Blue Cross of Southern California 48 . 41 1/2 1189 IRS - FWH 12/15-12/28 649. 60 1/2 1190 Void ---- 1/2 1191 M. Warden - Car Allow. 12/79 150. 00 1/2 1192 Arrowhead - water 12/79 18. 50 1/2 1193 Atascadero News Ads 181. 02 1/2 1194 Void ---- 1/2 1195 Dataramics JPA Medical 1, 750. 00 1/2 1196 M. Warden Travel Prop. 4 167. 78 1/2 1197 M. Warden - Travel SUI , Prop. 4 239. 00 1/2 1198 A. Grimes - legal svc. 12/13-12/31 918 . 27 1/2 1199 Western Office Products - supplies 49. 25 1/2 1200 M. Warden = office supplies 16. 99 1/2 1201 R. Dowell - mileage 74 . 12 1/2 1202 EDD-SIT 10/20-11/2, 12/1-12/28 344 . 80 1/8 1203 Local Agency Investment Fund 30, 000. 00 1/9 1204 SLO City - Medical 1/80 269. 99 1/9 1205 Atascadero News - Ads 37 . 17 1/9 1206 IBM-Typewriter lease 114. 48 1/9 1207 IBM-Typewriter rental 61. 42 1/9 1208 Western Office Products - supplies 60. 00 1/9 1209 Fred Metzger - legal services 275. 50 1/9 1210 PG&E, Street lights to 12/31 1,645. 13 1/9 1211 K&L Leasing, dictaphone 105. 80 1/9 1212 Paper Works - copy to 12/31 271. 58 1/9 1213 Pacific Telephone - Install/Svc to 12/20 851. 56 1/9 1214 Reg. LOCC Managers Meeting 57 . 00 1/9 1215 Physical - Lab for McHale 87. 00 1/10 1216 U. S. Post Office Postage 30. 00 1/16 1222 IRS - FWH 12/29 - 1/11 649. 60 v Expenditure List 12/18/79 to 1/22/80 Page Two PAYABLES: (Cont. ) Dated Check No. Vendor Amount 1/16 1223 City SLO - Seminar 1/26 $ 60. 00 1/17 1224 Local Agency Investment Fund 25, 000. 00 1/18 1225 Local Agency Investment Fund 40, 000. 00 1/21 1226 City Santa Paula LOCC 22. 00 1/21 1227 Cooperative Personnel Service 111. 75 1/21 1228 IBM-Typewriter lease 87 . 06 1/21 1229 Municipal Finance Assn. - books 75. 00 1/21 1230 Atascadero News - Ads 19. 32 1/21 1231 ICBO - Codes, dues 117 . 76 $141,172 . 95 TOTAL: $149, 197. 48 ORDINANCE NO. 14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO GRANTING TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY, A CORPORATION, THE RIGHT, PRIVILEGE AND FRANCHISE TO LAY AND USE PIPES AND APPURTENANCES FOR TRANSMITTING AND DISTRIBUTING GAS FOR ANY AND ALI, PURPOSES UNDER, ALONG, ACROSS OR UPON THE PUBLIC STREETS, WAYS, ALLEYS AND PLACES, AS THE SAME NOW OR MAY HEREAFTER EXIST, WITHIN SAID MUNICIPALITY. The City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: SECTION ONE Whenever in this ordinance the words or phrases hereinafter in this section defined are used, they shall have the respective meanings assigned to them in the following definitions (unless, .in the given instance, the context wherein they are used shall clearly import a different meaning) : (a) The word "Grantee" shall mean the corporation to which the franchise contemplated in this ordinance is granted and its lawful successors or assigns; (b) The word "City" shall mean the City of Atascadero, a municipal corporation of the State of California, in its present incorporated form or in any later reorganized, consolidated or reincorporated form; (c) The word "Streets" shall mean the puhlic. streets, ways, alleys and places as the same now or may hereafter exist within said City; _ (d) The word "Engineer" shall mean the of the City; (e) The word "Gas" shall mean natural or manufactured gas, or a mixture of natural and manufactured gas; ( f) The Phrase "Pipes and Appurtenances" shall mean pipe, pipeline, main, service, trap, vent, vault, manhole, meter, gauge, regulator, valve, conduit, appliance, attachment, appurtenance and any other property located or to be located in, upon, along, across, under or over the streets of the City, and used or useful in transmitting and distributing gas. (g) The phrase "lay and use" shall mean to lay, construct, erect, install, operate, maintain, use, repair, replace, or remove. SECTION TWO That the right, privilege and franchise, subject to each and all of the terms and conditions contained in this ordinance, and pursuant to the provisions of Division 3, Chapter 2 of the Public Utilities Code ol` Lhe State of California, known as the franchise Act of: 1937, be and the same is hereby granted to Southern California Gas Company, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, herein referred to as the "Grantee", to lay and use pipes and appurtenances for transmitting and distributi.nq gas for any and all purposes, under, along, across or upon the streets, of the City, for an indeterminate term or period from and after the effective date hereof, that is to say, this franchise shall endure in full force and effect until the same shall, with the consent of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, be voluntarily surrendered or abandoned by its possessor, or until the State of California or some municipal or public corporation thereunto duly authorized by law shall purchase by voluntary agreement or shall condemn and take under the power of eminent domain, all property actually used and useful in the exercise of this franchise, and situate within the territorial limits of the State, municipal or public corporation purchasing or condemning such property, or until this franchise shall be forfeited for non-compliance with its terms by the possessor thereof. SECTION THREE The Grantee shall pay to the City at the times hereinafter specified, in lawful money of tire United States, a sum annually which shall be equivalent to two per cent (2%) of the gross annual receipts of Grantee arising from the use, operation or possession of said franchise; provided, however, that such payment shall in no event be less than one per cent (1%) of the gross annual receipts of the Grantee derived from the sale of: gas within the limits of the City under this franchise. The Grantee of this franchise shalL file with the Clerk of the City within three (3) months after the expiration of the calendar year, or fractional calendar year, following the date of the grant of this franchise, and within three (3) months after the expiration of each and every calendar year thereafter, a duly verified statement showing in detail the total gross receipts of the Grantee, its successors or assigns, during the preceding calendar year, or such fractional calendar year, from the sale of the utility service within the City for which this franchise is granted. It shall be the duty of. the Grantee to pay to the City within fifteen (15) days after the time for filing such statement in lawful money of the United Mates, the specified percentage of its gross receipts for the calendar year, or such fractional calendar year, covered by such statement. Any neglect, omi:.sion or refus,r1 by said Grantee to fi.Le such verified statement, or to pay said percentage, at the times or in the manner hetcinh-,I oro provided, shall be grounds for the declaration of a forfeiture of this franch.ise and of all rights thereunder. SECTION FOUR This grant is made in lieu of all other franchises owned by the Grantee, or by any successor of the Grantee to any rights under this franchise, for transmitting and distributing gas within the limits of the City, as said limits now or may hereafter exist, and the acceptance of the franchise hereby granted shall operate as an abandonment of all such franchises within the limits of: this City, as such limits now or may hereafter exist, in lieu of which this franchise is granted. 2 - SECTION FIVE The franchise chanted hereunder shaaL riot become effective unt=il written acceptance thereof shall have been filed by the Grantee thereof with the Clerk of the City. When so filed, such acceptance shall constitute a continuing agreement of the Grantee that if and when the City shall thereafter annex or consolidate with, additional territory, any and all franchise rights and privileges owned by the Grantee therein shall likewise be deemed to be abandoned within the limits of such territory. SECTION SIX 'I'he franchise granted hereunder shall not in any way or to any extent. impair or al`fect the right of the City to acquire the property of the Grantee hereol ci.ther: by purchase or through the exercise of the r.i.c3ht of eminent domain, and nothing herein contained shall be construed to contract away or to modify or to abridge, either for a term or in perpetuity, the City's right of eminent domain in respect to the Grantee or any public utility. Nor shall this franchise ever be given any value before any court or other public authority in any proceeding of any character in excess of the cost to the Grantee of the necessary publication and any other sum paid by it to the City therefor at the time of the acquisition thereof. SECTION SEVEN The Grantee of this franchise shall ('a) construct, install and maintain all pipes and appurtenances in accordance with and in conformity with all of the ordinances, rules and regulations heretofore, or hereafter adopted by the legislative body of this City in the exercise of its police powers and not in conflict with the paramount authority of the State of California, and, as to State highways, subject to the provisions of general laws relating to the location and maintenance of such facilities; (b) pay to the City, on demand, the cost of all repairs to public property made necessary by any operations of the Grantee under this franchise; (c), indemnify and hold harmless the City and its o ficers from any and all liability for damages proximately resulting from any operations under this franchise; and be liable to the City for all damages proximately resulting from the failure of said Grantee well and faithfully to observe and perform each and every provision of this franchise and each and every provision of Division 3, Chapter 2 of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California; (d) remove or relocate, without expense to the City, any facilities installed, used and maintained under this franchise if and when made necessary by any lawful change of grade, alignment or width Of any public street, way, alley or place, including Chc c0nstruCtJ0r1 of any subway or viaduct by the City; and 3 - • • (e) file with the legislative body of the City within thirty (30) days after any sale, transfer, assignment or lease of this franchise, or any part thereof, or of any of the rights or privileges granted . thereby, written evidence of the same, certified thereto by the Grantee or its duly authorized officers. SECTION EIGHT The Engineer shall have power to give the Grantee such directions for the location of any pipes and appurtenances as may be reasonably necessary to avoid sewers, water pipes, conduits or other structures lawfully in or under the streets; and before the work of constructing any pipes and appurtenances is commenced, the Grantee shall file with said Engineer plans showing the location thereof, which shall be subject to the approval of said Engineer (such approval not to be unreasonably withheld) ; and all such construction shall be subject to the inspection of said Engineer and done to his reasonable satisfaction. All street coverings or openings of traps, vaults, and manholes shall at all times be ':ept flush with the surface of the streets; provided, however, that vents for underground traps, vaults and manholes may extend above the surface of the streets when said vents are located in parkways, between the curb and the property line. Where it is necessary to lay any underground pipes through, under or ,across any portion of a paved or macadamized street, the same, where practicable and economically reasonable shall be done by a tunnel or bone, so as not to disturb the foundation of such paved or macadamized street; and in the event that the same cannot be so done, such work shall be done under a permit to be granted by the Engineer upon application therefor. SECTION NINE If any portion of any street shall be damaged by reason of defects in any of the pipes and appurtenances maintained or- constructed under this grant, or by reason of any other cause arising from the, operation or existence of any pipes and appurtenances constructed or maintained under this grant, said Grantee shall, at its own cost and expanse, immediately repair any such damage and restore such street, or portion of street, to as good a condition as existed before such defect or other cause of damage occurred, such work to be done under the direction of the Engineer, and to his reasonable satisfaction. SECTION TEN (a) If the Grantee of this franchise shall fail, neglect or refuse to comply with any of the provisions or conditions hereof, and shall not, within ten (10) days after written demand .for compliance, begin the work of compliance, or after such beginning shall not prosecute the same with due diligence to completion, then the City, by its legislative body, may declare this franchise forfeited. (b) The City may sue in its own name for the forfeiture of this franchise, in the event of non-compliance by the Grantee, its successors or assigns, with any of the conditions thereof. 4 - SP:C'C1ON 1'LEVErI The Grantee of this franchise .shall pay to the City a sum of money sufficient to reimburse it for all publication expenses incurred by it in connection with the granting of this franchise; such payment to he made within thirty (30). clays after the City shill furnish such Grantee with a written statement of such expenses. SECTION TWELVE Not later than thirty (30) days after the publication of this ordinance, the Grantee shall file with the City Clerk a written acceptance of the franchise hereby granted, and an agreement to comply with the terms and conditions hereof. SECTION THIRTEEN The City Clerkshall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be published once in the Attest City- Clerk -- -- ---- —Mayor --------- I hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was adopted by the of the City of on the day of , 19 by the following Votes: — - -- - - ----- Ayes: Noes: City Clerk Approved as to form: Approved as to content: City Attorney City Manager 5 - ` � S Applicant accepts the franchise granted by this ordinance, subject to the terms and conditions thereof, this day of 1979. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY By _ 6 _ • Elec. Indet. A:F. ORDINANCE NO. 15 ORDINANCE GRANTING TO PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, THE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN AND USE POLES, WIRES, CONDUITS AND APPURTENANCES, INCLUDING COMMUNICATION CIRCUITS, NECESSARY OR PROPER FOR TRANSMITTING AND DISTRIBUTING ELECTRICITY TO THE PUBLIC FOR ANY AND ALL PURPOSES IN, ALONG, ACROSS, UPON, UNDER AND OVER THE PUBLIC STREETS AND PLACES WITHIN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO The City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Whenever in this ordinance the words or phrases hereinafter in this section defined are used, they shall have the respective meanings assigned to them in the following definitions: (a) The word "Grantee" shall mean Pacific Gas and Electric Company, and its lawful successors or assigns. (b) The word "City" shall mean the City of Atascadero a municipal corporation of the State of California, in its present incorporated form or in any later reorganized, consolidated, enlarged or reincorporated form. (c) The word "streets" shall mean the public streets, ways, alleys and places as the same now or may hereafter be established within City, and freeways hereafter established within City. (d) The phrase "poles, wires, conduits and appurtenances" shall mean poles, towers, supports, wires, conductors, cables, guys, stubs, platforms, crossarms, braces, transformers, insulators, conduits, ducts, vaults, manholes, meters, cut-outs, switches, communication circuits, appliances, attachments, appurtenances, and, without limitation to the foregoing, any other property located or to be located in, upon, along, across, under or over the streets of City, and useful in transmitting and/or distributing electricity. -1- 0 Elec. Indet. A.P. (e) The phrase "construct, maintain and use" shall mean to construct, erect, install, lay, operate, maintain, use, repair or replace. Section 2. The franchise to construct, maintain and use poles, wires, conduits and appurtenances necessary or proper for transmitting and distributing electricity to the public for any and all purposes, in, along, across, upon, under and over the streets within City is hereby granted to Grantee. Section 3. Grantee shall relocate, without expense to City, any poles, wires, conduits and appurtenances constructed, maintained or used under this franchise, if and when made necessary by any lawful change of grade, alignment or width of any streets by City, including the construction of any subway or viaduct, provided, however, that the cost of any such relocation made necessary by the construction or any lawful change of grade, alignment or width of any freeway constructed by the State of California shall be divided equally between Grantee and the State of California Section 4. Said franchise shall be indeterminate, that is to say, said franchise shall endure in full force and effect until the same shall, with the consent of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, be voluntarily surrendered or abandoned by Grantee, or until the State or some municipal or public corporation thereunto duly authorized by law shall purchase by voluntary agreement or shall condemn and take under the power of eminent domain, all property actually used and useful in the exercise of said franchise and situate in the territorial limits of the State, municipal or public corporation purchasing or condemning such property, or until said franchise shall be forfeited for noncompliance with its terms by Grantee. -2- s Elec. Indet. A.P. Section 5. Grantee shall during the term of said franchise pay to City two per cent (2%) of the gross annual receipts of Grantee arising from the use, operation or possession of said franchise; provided, however, that such payment shall in no event be less than one per cent (1%) of the gross annual receipts of Grantee derived from the sale of electricity within the limits of City. Section 6. Grantee shall file with the City Clerk of City, within three (3) months after the expiration of the calendar year, or fractional calendar year, following the date of the granting hereof, and within three (3) months after the expiration of each and every calendar year thereafter, a duly verified statement showing in detail the total gross receipts of Grantee during the preceding calendar year, or such fractional calendar year, from the sale of electricity within City. Grantee shall pay to City within fifteen (15) days after the time for filing such statement, in lawful money of the United States, the aforesaid percentage of its gross receipts for such calendar year, or such fractional calendar year, covered by such statement. Any neglect, omission or refusal by Grantee to file such verified statement, or to pay said percentage at the time and in the manner specified, shall be grounds for the declaration of a forfeiture of this. franchise and of all rights of Grantee hereunder. Section 7. Said franchise is granted under the Franchise Act of 1937. Section B. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its final passage unless suspended by a referendum petition filed as provided by law. -3- Eloc. Indct. A.P. Section 9. Grantee shall pay to City a sum of money sufficient .to reimburse it for all publication expenses incurred by it in connection with the granting of said franchise. Such payment shall be made within thirty (30) days after City shall have furnished Grantee with a written statement of such expenses. Section 10. The franchise granted hereby shall not become effective until written acceptance thereof shall have been filed by Grantee with the City Clerk of City. Section 11. The City Clerk of City shall cause this ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of l the State of California. First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of City held on the day of , 19 , and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said Council held on the day of 19 , by the following vote: AYES: Councilmen NAYS: Councilmen ABSENT: Councilmen Mayor of the City of Atascadero ATTEST: Clerk of the City of Atascadero -4- • • c3 M E M O R A N D U N! TO City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Parking lot property acquisition As you will recall, the City was asked if it would be interested in acquiring properties located to the east of the Administration Building consisting of approximately 1/2 acre. The asking price was $210, 000 with terms of $20,000 down and interest only for the first two years at 10% with payments to begin January 2, 1982. The City Council directed securing two appraisals for the property. One appraisal came in at a value of $232, 500 and the other at a value of $250, 000; both higher than the asking price of $210,000. Cities have certain limitations concerning the assump- tion of indebtedness. 2 have presented this problem to the City Attorney who is exploring our options for acquisi- tion should the Council wish to proceed. I have been asked by the owners of this property to determine your wishes at this meeting, if at all possible, since he asserts that he has a buyer who is interested in the property. - The General Plan has certain recommendations with respect to the Creekway Plan which would involve these properties. The Sch000l may have some future concerns, but I have been unable to contact Dr. Avina on the matter. He indicated ,in past discussions a possible interest depending upon price. We do have a grant application pending which would provide approximately $70, 000 to be used for Dial-A-Ride parking space as well as for public and perhaps police parking. The question, then, is does the Council wish to pursue acquisi- tion of this property further? If so, then the City Attorney and I will have to reach an agreement with the property owners and find a method for the property acquisition. URRA L. WARDEN MLW•ad 1-24-80 alien grimes attorney at law 7360 EL CAMINO REAL. SUITE B • P.O.BOX 749 • ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 93422 PHONES (603) 466.8678 OR 466.1408 MEMORANDUM January 25, 1980 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council From: : Allen Grimes, City Attorney Subject: Parking Lot Property Acquisition: Debt-Limitation The legal issue has arisen as to whether the City has the legal authority to purchase real property on an installment or credit basis when the pur- chase price would and could not be fully paid from the current annual rev- enues of the City? Would the answer be any different if there were sufficient revenues in the City Treasury at all times during the life of the purchase contract to cover the purchase (though not used) and the City had a contract right to pay off the indebtedness for the property at any time it saw fit? The answer is that cities are precluded from doing so by the State Consti- tutional Debt Limit, Article XI, Section 18 of the California Constitution which reads: ".. .No county, city, town, township, board of education, or school district, shall incur any indebtedness or liability in any manner or for any purpose exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided for such year, without the assent of two-thirds of the qualified electors thereof, voting at ant election to be held for that purpose. . ." The purpose of the section was to prevent runaway spending by local agencies. The intent was to prohibit accumulated indebtedness by requiring that each year's revenues should pay fully for everything received that year. If the revenues were not sufficent therefor, the creditor would be out of luck, having only himself to blame for not having made a more careful investiga- tion. The key to the application of the debt limit is the incurring of any indebtedness or liability which exceeds the City's income for the year. That is why the answer to the second question is in the negative. The indebtedness is incurred when obligation to purchase is assumed. The pay ing off the amount at a later time does not have any bearing on incurring • ' ��,+ew �tr.� �/.!a- � c;� � �'�f lit-. ., 0 MEMORANDUM: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Counci n January 25, 1980 Page 2 ' the debt. The onus of violation may be less i violation is the same. Certain exceptions to the debt limi (1) General obligation bond: tcr� f (2) Revenue bonds. (3) Special fund theory. Thi r secured by revenues from a re such as water plant revenues, etc. `~ If parking revenues from the use of the property would be sufficient to amortize its cost and legally pledged Leto that purpose, the debt limit would not apply. (4) Lease - option - purchase arrangement. This is used basically to acquire personal property such as equip- ment as a fire truck, etc. The lease must be drawn in such a manner as to commit the agency for only one year with the right to terminate each year and monies must be used each year from revenues to pay annual rental. The option to purchase is usually provided to the City and may be exercised for cash at any time during lease or at its termination for its reasonably depreciated value. Under the authority of an appellate court decision, the lease-purchase method also may be used as follows: Divide the land to be acquired into a number of parcels for acquisition purposes. Provide in the purchase agreement an option to buy one or more parcels each year, having the cash each year to do so. City to rent all of the parcels so that it has unified possession and use of them. MEMORANDUM: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council January 25, 1980 Page 3 The agreement must give the City the right to buy only one or more parcels and stop any time it desires. This question provides an opportunity to inform the Council of the application of the doctrine of ultra vires to municipal affairs. If an action by the City Council involving funds is challenged in Court and found to be beyond the power of the Council (ultra vires) there \ is an ever present risk that the individual members of the Council may be ordered to reimburse the City for the money that has been un- � lawfully paid out. Iflf one cannot repay, the balance will have the 1 obligation. Other than discussed, I know of no other exceptions to the debt limit provision. I have discussed the contents of this opinion with the legal staff of the League of California Cities; Arthur Shaw, City Attorney of Pismo Beach and former City Attorney of San Luis Obispo; Michael T. LeSage, City Attorney of Morro Bay and Paso Robles; and James Lindholm, County Counsel, and they each agree with the basic conclusions stated herein. AG:f M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Bid No. 1-80, furniture Attached is the Finance Director' s discussion of our furniture bid process. I concur in his recommendations for acceptance of Western Office Products' bid. Since these are budgeted items, your bid acceptance would allow purchasing our furniture on an "as needed" basis within the budgetary limits. Please note that the dis- count is vali from the period 1-1-80 to 1-1-81. 4MRRA�Y . WARDEN MLW:ad 1-24-80 ti � • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director SUBJECT: Bid No. 80-1, office furniture On January 14,1980, the City opened bids for office furniture which had been addressed to three outlets within the City. The lowest acceptable bid was Westerr Office Products, Inc. , Atascadero, California, which was 31% discount off manufacturer' s printed list price for Anderson Office Furniture, or their equal. Second lowest bid was Atascadero Stationers, Atascadero, California, which was 20% discount. The third addressee ' s request for bid was returned as "not deliverable" . During the timing of the bid process, I explored the used fur- niture market. On January 10th, I visited the Nearly New Furniture Store in San Luis Obispo which is considered a large outlet in the used furniture business. They have a limited amount of surplus government desks for $80. 00. These desks were stored outside and definitely require refinishing. New metal desks, not too sturdy, ranged from $190 to $210. Used executive desks ranged from $225 to $300. Filing cabinets, full suspension new were $180. Reconditioned government surplus executive chairs were $49. 95 which appeared acceptable if a low backed chair is desired. I discussed local availability of used furniture with Mr. Loren Hielman on January 10th. He obtains these type items by attending auctions throughout the State, which we could do ourselves. We would require "cash in hand" plus a transportation and handling capability. Mr. Hielman could accomplish this for us through an "open purchase order" as a business arrangement. I contacted Van- denberg Air Force Base in relation to surplus sales and was advised we had no priority as a City and were certainly welcome to compete in scheduled auction sales. I discussed the situation with the County Purchasing Department and found their past experience in analyzing the market similar to ours. In addition, they found the requirement or desire to match used furniture, if it could be located, an impossibility for all practical purposes. They requested bids for similar new furniture from all outlets within the County and accepted as low bid the same outlet that responded to our bid request, Western Office Products. The Fiscal Year 1979-80 budget contains $15,654 for the purchase of furniture for all departments. As new departments are organized, the need for furniture becomes more critical; establishment of the Building Inspection and Public Works departments are examples. Our • Memorandum Bid No. 80-1, office furniture Page Two present furniture is on loan from the County Social Services Department and could be withdrawn with limited notice. Based on the .above, it is recommended that the bid submitted by Western Office Products for 31% discount off manufacturer' s printed list for the period January 1, 1980 through January 1, 1981, 'be submitted to the City Council with a recommendation for acceptance. RALPH H. DOWELL, JR. RHDsad 1-23-80 -M-E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Legislation Attached is a resolution forwarded by City Councilman John McWherter of Ventura requesting Council support and approval for the Channel Counties Division of the League of California Cities to adopt this resolution. As I understand the resolution, it addresses a request for legislation to assist property owners who are involuntarily moved as a result of governmental action. It would exempt these owners from falling into a new and higher assessed valuation bracket as required by Proposition 13 upon the sale of property. The resolution does not provide the legislative language, leaving that to the legislative process. If .you approve the resolution, a motion so indicating would be appropriate. The Mayor could then convey to the Channel Counties Division approval at the meeting on February lst in Ventura. RRA L, WARDEN MLW:ad 1-24-80 clay of an )BucnAvcntuQN mission san suenaventuiza- f ounaea 1782 January 22 , 1980 I RECEIVED JAN 2 3 1980 TO : Mayors - Channel Counties Division League of California Cities FROM : Councilman John A. McWherter Since time is of the essence , I am using this from as a means of communicating to you City Council Resolution No. 80- 11 urging legislation to mitigate Proposition 13 impacts on involuntary relocation. This matter will be the subject of discussion and action at the next meeting of the Channel Counties Division of the League on Friday , February 1 , 1980. �1 "V post office Box 99 . ventu>iza, call f orznia • 93001 [8051648-7881 4 RESOLUTION NO. 80-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BUENAVENTURA URGING LEGISLATION ACTION TO MITIGATE PROPOSITION 13 IMPACTS ON INVOLUIITARY RELOCATION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Buenaventura as follows: SECTION 1 : Under the provisions of Proposition 13, property which is sold is re-assessed at the current valuation and it is recognized that this is particularly burdensome to property o-Nners who are forced to sell and re- locate as a result of actions such as local redevelopment. SECTION 2: Involuntary displacement of property owners resulting from government acquisition causes a permanent property tax increase at a new to cation that is not covered or compensated for under exis'.ing relocation pro - cation Even though 'a particular jurisdiction may supplement the basic pay- ments to help offset taxes, this is only a short term solution. SECTION 3: The City Council of the City of San B;aenaventura hereby urges the League of California to pursue legislative action to solve this State-wide problem Passed and adopted this 21st day of January, 1980. r, Ci Clerk — 80-11/66 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF VENTURA ) SS CITY OF SAN BUENAVENTURA ) I, BARBARA J. Kam, City Clerk of the City of San Buenaventura, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting held on the 21st day of January 1980, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Harrington, Orrock, McWherter, Chaudier, Ellison, Monahan and Henson. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the offi- cial seal of said City this 22nd day of January 1. 1980. d 7 rp o c d x C00 C,_- n N G CL % s O ca �o 3 N �g azzo z3 - nz m_ ? O y 3 a 2 o x [a r IZ � mm Kv ~ ©� -n - O PO m O W a� e� � • r C Q v 25 22 0 O D n $ t O z rm >m N Z p - a c pox 3 � n 'n io d am > 3 z 2 r �y n < ,,, -ir1l a N Z (7 rD (n A Z O0 CD rj 3 l7 D M co n (/) � 5� `i lam- •.. < 25 n G U1 N N ' r���j l/I�O I 11 \•• 'il'a� _� F 0 D n u a r D A I mD 0 w m 0 N m ♦ _ n, 0 A N -LLF2.- ' "'a AbA - L��� A _ 902 y� — , 5h 14 Aki 145& e W- 1 h YOVA ir JL 7 pc 62— a4 �X11`�- �' SNA' ~f '• � /� \/ - - limrTFD r` Z R �' / SEPr1C rArvK /1a0�aRbrioN MELD ED =-LL flu AGENDA - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting April 14 , 1980 7 : 30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Invocation Roll Call Public Comment - NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are con- sidered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no" separate discussion of these items. If discussion is required, that item will be removed from the Con- sent Calendar and will be considered separately. Vote may be by roll call. to "k s , �. A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of March 24 , 1980 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2 . Claim of Dorothy Robinson for injuries and damages (RECOMMEND DENIAL) 3. Library/museum joint usage (RECOMMEND COUNTY LIBRARY LETTER w BE REFERRED TO HISTORICAL SOCIETY FOR COORDINATION) 4 . Request by Historical Society for custodianship of light fixtures , Administration Building (RECOMMEND REQUEST BE ' GRANTED) 5 . Request of San Luis Obispo County Symphony Association for funds (RECOMMEND LETTER BE DEFERRED FOR CONSIDERATION DURING BUDGET HEARINGS) -- 6 . Request for Conditional Use Permit to allow excess signing for a proposed 122-unit motel (Motel 6) in a CH zone - Young Electric Sign Company (RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 7 . Lot Division (AT 79-239) of Parcel A of CO 77-32 , West Atascadero, Northeast side of Los Osos Road - Marrow (Stewart) (RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOM- MENDATION FOR DENIAL) 8. Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 77-241 - Finch (Stewart) (RECOM- MEND ACCEPTANCE) B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS None C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Ordinance No. 19 regarding Council procedures - second reading 2 . Ordinance No. 20 amending the zoning map - second reading 3. Amending salary classification plan 4 . Consideration of revisions to City Manager' s employment agreement regarding salary AGENDA - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting April 14 , 1980 Page Two D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of revisions to City Attorney' s contract 2 . Consideration of adding funds to the reward offered by the High School for information regarding the vandalism at the High School - Councilman Highland 3. Consideration of grant request for Dial-A-Ride 4. Consideration of Ordinance No. 21 amending the business license ordinance - first reading E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2 . City Attorney 3. City Manager 1 MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 24 , 1980 7 : 30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building The meeting was called to order at 7 : 30 p.m. by Mayor Wilkins with the Pledge of Allegiance. Councilman Mackey gave the invoca- tion. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Wilkins ABSENT: None PUBLIC COMMENT None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of March 10 , 1980 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2 . Treasurer' s Report, 2-21-80 to 3-19-80 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 3. Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 79-33 - Molina/Rudd (RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE) 4. Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 78-065 - Meeks/Gouff (RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE) 5. Application for Certificate of Compliance on a portion of Lot 42 , Block 20 , Atascadero Colony, near the intersection of Traffic Way and San Benito - Roselip (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 6. Lot line adjustment of Lots 1-6 , Block 43, Llano Road, AL 79-84 - Drake/Wilmore (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 7. Environmental determination - Wakefield (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the approval of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried by roll call vote. B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. Public hearing on Tract No. 866 , proposed condominium sub- division on Lot 4 , Block 18 , Atascadero Colony, located on the west side of EI Camino Real, just north of San Anselmo - Lenzi (Maddalena) Larry Stevens , Planning Director, reviewed the project. The Planning Commission had recommended a finding of consistency with the General Plan and approved the project subject to conditions, 1- 26, as recommended by the County Subdivision Review Board with two revisions. • s MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 24, 1980 Page Two Councilman Mackey stated that since the moratorium on condomin- iums had been extended, she did not feel it was appropriate to approve this application. Robert Gannage , representing the applicant, urged approval of the project. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council approve the Planning Commission' s recommendation with the conditions and their revisions to these conditions. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover. Allen Grimes , City Attorney, asked that the Council place one additional condition on the project; that the City Attorney review and approve the CC&R' s before the map can be recorded. Councilman Highland amended his motion to include that the City Attorney approve the CC&R' s before recordation of the map. The amendment was accepted by Councilman Stover and the motion carried with Councilman Mackey voting no. 2 . Public hearing on CO 79-81, proposed lot division of Lots 12 and 13 , Block 33 , Atascadero Colony, San Gabriel Road, west of Atascadero Avenue - Slote (Hilliard) Mr. Stevens reviewed the lot division and stated that the Planning Commission had recommended a finding of consistency with the General Plan and approval subject to the conditions recommended by the County Subdivision Review Board with an additional condition concerning driveways. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of the Planning Commission' s recommendations including the additional condition. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. 3. Consideration of AT 79-077 , proposed lot division of Lot 13, Block 49 , Atascadero Colony, Santa Cruz Road - Hurdle (Hilliard) Mr. Stevens reviewed the proposed lot division which had pre- viously been before the Council. At that time, the Council had de- cided that the Planning Commission should reconsider the matter after the recommendation to allow llz acre lots with engineered septic systems had been decided. The Planning Commission was now recommending approval subject to the conditions recommended by the Subdivision Review Board with additional conditions pertaining to private drive- way construction and modifying Condition 7 to require road improve- ments along the property frontage. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 24 , 1980 Page Three Councilman Highland did not feel that this project was consistent with the General Plan since the Plan requires larger lot sizes on the perimeter of the community. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved for approval of the Planning Commission' s recommendations and modifications to the conditions . The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and carried with Councilman Highland and Mayor Wilkins voting no. 4 . Report No. 3 from the City Attorney Mr. Grimes reviewed his report. He requested Council approval to join in an amicus brief with other cities for several cases now pending in federal and state courts , He also reported on litigation involving IBM vs. the County and the cities within the County. The complaint had been forwarded to the County since they administer property taxes; the County Counsel has filed an answer to the complaint denying its allegations. MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved for approval of amicus partici- pation by the City of Atascadero in the four cases out- lined by the City Attorney in his Report No. 3, dated March 24 , 1980 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Consideration of Resolution No. 6-80 adopting the Atascadero General Plan MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for adoption of Resolution No. 6-80 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey. Mayor Wilkins read Resolution No. 6-80 by title only. The motion was unanimously carried by roll 'call vote. 2 . Ordinance No. 20 amending the zoning map - first reading Mr. Warden noted that this ordinance was prepared at the direc- tion of Council at a previous meeting. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Ordinance No. 20 be read by title only. The motion was seconded by Council- man Stover and unanimously carried. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 24 , 1980 Page Four Mayor Wilkins read Ordinance No. 20 by title only. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that this constitute the intro- duction and first reading of Ordinance No. 20 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and unani- mously carried. 3 . Ordinance No. 18 accepting the requirements of Section 13522 of the State Penal Code relating to the training of law enforcement officers - second reading and adoption MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 18 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried by roll call vote. Mayor Wilkins read Ordinance No. 18 by title only. 4 . Resolution No. 5-80 approving the lease-purchase agree- ment for parking lot property MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 5-80 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and carried on the following roll call vote: AYES : Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Stover and Mayor Wilkins NOES: Councilman Nelson 5. Consideration of department head salary classification plan Mr. Warden summarized his memo to Council which explained the salaries recommended for department heads. Howard Marohn read a statement in opposition to the proposed salaries . There was considerable discussion among Council members with Councilmen Mackey and Nelson stating that they were unable to approve increases as large as proposed. Mr. Warden pointed out that as of July 1, new increases from 6% to loo will be in effect in the other cities in the County and Atascadero will be behind several cities . He also stated that the salary plan was not intended to be a raise but is intended to establish a salary level and system for the new city. He recommended that Council review salaries again in December to determine the relationship between other salaries prevailing within other cities in the County. MOTION: Councilman Stover moved for adoption of the proposed salaries recommended for the Finance Director, Planning Director, Fire Chief, Police Chief and Public Works MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 24 , 1980 Page Five Director. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and carried on the following roll call vote. AYES: Councilmen Highland, Stover and Mayor Wilkins NOES: Councilmen Mackey and Nelson Mr. Warden noted that these salaries would not go into effect until July 1, 1980 . D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Ordinance No. 19 relating to Council procedures - first reading Allen Grimes reviewed this ordinance for Council members . MOTION: Councilman Stover moved that Council waive full reading of the ordinance and that this constitute introduction and first reading of Ordinance No. 19 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and unanimously carried by roll call vote. Mayor Wilkins read Ordinance No. 19 by title only. 2 . Award of bid for police department vehicles Mr. Warden reviewed the bids received from Jerry Reneau Ford, Gayle Sharp Ford and Roger Algee. Mr. Warden stated that he had hoped to get more innovative bids than had been received. Bids had gone out to a large number of potential bidders , but only three had responded. Because of the time element involved in getting the Police Department operational, it was necessary to chose from those submitted. The low bidder was Gayle Sharp Ford at $494 . 17 per month per unit for Ford LTD' s. MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved that Council accept the proposal submitted by Gayle Sharp Ford. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried by roll call vote. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council approve a color scheme which would consist of all white vehicles with blue stripes . The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried. 3. Consideration of lease-purchase of copy machine MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY_ COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 24 , 1980 Page Six Mr. Warden reviewed the memo recommending lease purchase of an IBM Series III copier, Model 20 , to include a 20 bin collator module and meter control for a total monthly lease-purchase cost, including service contract at 25, 000 copies per month; of $964. 72 . MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council authorize lease purchase of the equipment as listed in the memo. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried by roll call vote. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council (a) Councilman Nelson asked. about the recommendations from the Zoo Committee for various needs at the Zoo. Mr. Warden noted that the request will go through the normal budgetary preparation process and be considered by the Council during its bud- get deliberations . (b) Councilman Mackey asked that a letter be directed to Caltrans regarding the elimination of the Highway 41 extension, She would like the route to be along Curbaril to the Salinas bridge. She also would like the letter to request that any monies secured from the sale of property along the abandoned right-of-way be used for improvements along Curbaril. Councilman Highland felt that the proposed route should be along Highway 101 rather than El Camino. Mr. Warden stated that the process would be to request the Area Council to amend the Regional Transportation Plan and then petition Caltrans to drop the matter from their funding list. MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved that the City' s representative make a presentation to the Area Council to amend the Regional Transportation Plan. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and unanimously carried. 2 . City Attorney Mr, Grimes advised the Council that he would be attending the League of California Cities seminar for City Attorneys ' on April 50 through May 2 , 3. City Manager (a) Mr. Warden advised that he and the Mayor had attended the meeting of the Senate Sub-Committee on Local MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 24 , 1980 Page Seven Government at which legislation amending Proposition 4 as developed and suggested by the City of Atascadero was considered. The com- mittee enacted a "do pass" recommendation and the bill will now pro- ceed through the legislative process, (b) Mr. Warden requested an executive session to discuss possible litigation and personnel matters. He stated that no action was anticipated after the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 9115 p.m. Recorded by: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk By: Ardith Davis Deputy City Clerk _M_E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Claim of Dorothy Robinson Attached is a copy of a claim submitted for an accident occurring on a Dial-A-Ride vehicle. The claimant has filed with both the City and the County. We have forwarded the matter. to our joint powers authority claims manager. Because Dial-A-Ride was and still is a part of the County operation, I forwarded the claim to the County Engineer' s office. For your information, any claimant wishing to file a personal injury claim with the City must do so within a statutory period of 100 days from the date of accident. The City has the option of settling the claim, contesting it, or referring it to the insurance carrier through the JPA process. Under our JPA arrangement, we will be establishing a minimum dollar amount which will authorize immediate settle- ment of claims as determined by the JPA claims manager. An additional higher amount will be established authorizing some settlements on authorization of the City Manager. Amounts in excess of these two exceptions will require specific indi- vidual action by referral to the JPA claims manager and City Council. In all cases , every accident will be processed by the JPA claims manager before any settlements are made. The present claim, while apparently under the jurisdiction of the County, must nevertheless be acted upon by the City Council. The matter is on the consent calendar with a recom- mendation for denial and referral to our excess coverage carrier. UP YU Y WARDEN MLW:ad 4-10-80 r TELEPHONE (6053) 4669026 � 1 WRIGHT, REAM & PETERSON A LAW CORPORATION $9550 ENTRADA AVENUE POST OFFICE Box 10.000 ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 94322 WILLIAM D. WRIGHT JAMID D. REAM DAVID February 1980 AVIb C. PETERSON Bob Wilkins , Mayor City of Atascadero 6500 Lewis Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 RE: Claim of Dorothy Robinson Date of Accident: 11/29/79 Gentlemen: Please be advised that this office has been retained by Mrs . Dorothy Robinson with respect to the injuries and damages suffered by her and her husband, Howard Robinson, as the result of Mrs . Robinson' s being thrown off of her seat while riding in a Dial-A-Ride bus being driven by Hilda Stocker along Amapoa Avenue in Atascadero, California . The exact amount of the damages claimed by Mrs . Robinson is unknown as of this date because she is still under the care of her physician and the length of her disability as well as the medical costs are impossible to determine at this time . Please direct all communications regarding this matter to the undersigned. Please consider this letter the claim of Mrs . Robinson and advise at your earliest convenienc s to how you intend to handle this matter on behalf of ty of Atascadero. 3 rY� yours, DAVID C. PETERSON DCP/dt cc : Dorothy Robinson y • A NON-PROFIT CORPORATION • POST OFFICE BOX 1047 A ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422 April 6, 1980 City Council Atascadero, Calif. 93422 Gentlemen: RE: LIGHT FIXTURES We have been reminded recently that the city has, right under its nose, some historical artifacts which, through vandalism and neglect, are all but ruined. We refer to the light fixtures, (wall sconces) , on the north and south outside walls of the Administration Bldg. The fixtures on the north wall have no globes nor bulbs, and are all but falling apart, and the two on the south wall are in imminent danger of receiving a similar fate . These fixtures were in the City Hall in University City, and thus of great historical value to Atascadero. The Board of the Atascadero Historical Society asks that you grant the Society custodianship of these fixtures . We have located the crystal globe covers belonging to them, but unless we are in official possession of the fixtures themselves, we are of the opinion that the owners of the globes won' t sell them. It is the hope of the Board that the Historical Society be allowed to restore and preserve these fixtures . bspectfully, ;' h ��e, Imo/` ,_../� c �Zark Herman, President CH:bc cc, Kent Kenney 1 �1 San Luis Obispo County Symphony Association RECEIVE APR 9 1980 April 1, 1980 Mr. Murray Warden, City Administrator 6501 Lewis Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mr. Warden: The purpose of this letter is to request, through you, a grant of $500 from the City of Atascadero as part of the financial support of the Symphony Orchestra of San Luis Obispo County. The Symphony Association, which is the business arm of the Symphony Orchestra, must rely heavily on the contributions received from City and County governments and from individuals in order to provide the necessary support for our excellent County Symphony Orchestra. Such contributions , plus the proceeds from ticket sales and from various fund raising events , are our sole means of support for the annual Concert Season. We will very much appreciate the City Council ' s consideration of this request. The Symphony Orchestra and the Association are truly county-wide in nature . Several of the musicians live in Atascadero and other North County areas as do several members of the Board of Directors of the Association . If you will let me know when the above request is to appear on the Council' s agenda, I will plan to attend the meeting and provide any information or explanations required. Enclosed is a copy of the 1980-81 Concert Season brochure. Sincerely, Hazel J. ,tone's, President Symphony Association Telephones : Home: 489-2555 Business: 546-2.1.86 Symphony Office: 543-3533 cc: George Highland Post Office Box 658 San Luis Obispo,California 93406 (805)543-3533 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: April 7, 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT ON REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (U791108: 2) TO ALLOW EXCESS SIGNING FOR A PROPOSED 122-UNIT MOTEL (MOTEL 6) IN A CH ZONE - YOUNG ELECTRIC SIGN COMPANY The Planning Commission recommends adoption of Findings A through D and approval of the Use Permit subject to Conditions 1-2 as recommended in the Staff Report. The Planning Commission recommenda- tion is based upon a County signing policy established in 1971 which allows an aggregate on-site sign area of 200 sq. ft. while .limiting freeway signs to a height of 50 feet and an area of 125 sq. ft. At the hearing the applicants proposed an alternate which would comply with the 200 sq. ft. limitation and the 50 foot height but which would allow the freeway sign to be 180 sq. ft. This matter is referred to the Council as required by Section 22. 92. 050. In the event that the City Council desires to modify the Planning Commission recommendation, the matter should be set for public hearing. If not, the ten-day appeal period will begin. lavvcq/ 0;44ozo7/ 6141�� LAWRENCE EVENS MUR Y L WARDEN Planning nsultant/Director Ci Ma ager kp Attach. PLANNING-. DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Atascadero Planning Commission DATE: April 7, 1980 FROM: Development Review Section SUBJECT: U791108: 2 - YOUNG ELECTRIC SIGN COMPANY - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW EXCESS SIGNING FOR A PROPOSED 122- UNIT MOTEL IN A CH ZONE, ATASCADERO. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicants have requested a Conditional Use Permit to allow signing exceeding 20 square feet in area for a proposed 122-unit motel in a CH zone on the northwest corner of Santa Rosa Road and E1 Camino Real, Atascadero. This request is for two separate signs: 1. A double-faced freeway sign on a single pole 320 square feet in area (on one face) and 80 feet in height, to be located in the northwest corner of the site. 2. A double-faced entrance sign on a single pole 44 . 5 square feet in area (on one face) and 18 feet in height, to be located on the north side of the proposed driveway entrance along El Camino Real. The requested signing represents a total area of 364 . 5 square feet on one face. The signs would be plexiglas in aluminum frames and would display the Motel 6 corporate logo. A 4. 9 square foot, building-mounted office/vacancy sign is also proposed but it is not subject to the Conditional Use Permit process as the message is directional and not advertising. A separate Departmental Review application for the proposed motel (R790719 : 4) is being considered concurrently. ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN INFORMATION Existing Zoning: CH (Highway Commercial) ; signing in excess of 20 square feet allowed subject to Condi- tional Use Permit approval. County Planning Individual signs shall not exceed 125 square Commission Policy feet in area or a height of 50 feet above for Freeway Sign- grade. Total on-site signing shall not ing: (Adopted exceed 200 square feet. July 14, 1971) : General Plan: County-adopted 1978 Atascadero General Plan: Retail Commercial CUP - Young Electric Sign Company April 7, 1980 Page Two SITE CONDITIONS Area and Shape: 2 . 46 acres and nearly rectangular Topography: Gradual upward slope to the west (rear) Existing Vege- Five significant Live Oak trees tation: Existing Improve None, except a large billboard on the southeast ments and Uses: corner Access: A single driveway proposed off El Camino Real, a paved four-lane arterial with curb, gutter and sidewalk on surrounding developed parcels in the site vicinity; no street frontage improvements along the subject site. Site is readily accessible by on- and off-ramps from Highway 101. Services: Community water to be provided by Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Sewer service to be provided by the Atascadero County Sanitation District. AREA CONSIDERATIONS Surrounding Land Northwest: Nursery and Lumber Yard Uses: North: Vacant East: Small shopping center with a medical office and residential uses beyond South: Freeway overpass with vacant property beyond West: Highway 101 with residential uses beyond STAFF COMMENTS In considering this request, an evaluation must be made of the relative importance of two conflicting factors: the compatibility of the proposed signing in terms of design and scale with the sur- rounding character of the area; and the need to attract motorists and enable a safe exit from the freeway. Signing is specifically addressed in the adopted 1978 Atascadero General Plan. Applicable guidelines for signing in the general plan (on page 118) are as follows: 1. Signing should be in harmony with community standards, as applied to each development. CUP Young Electric Sign Company April 7 , 1980 Page Three 2. Signing should not project into the street or sidewalk nor above the building. 3. Lighting of signing should be constant, and be directed or shielded so as not to interfere with pedestrian or vehicular movement. The intent of the CH zone is to encourage development attractive to the traveling public and compatible with adjacent land uses. The Staff agrees that signing in excess of the 20 square feet allowed as a permitted use in the CH zone is an appropriate request due to the nature of the proposed project and its dependence upon effectively attracting motorists to the site. However, the County Planning Commission has adopted specific standards for freeway signing which have been consistently enforced both in Atascadero and elsewhere throughout the County. The current request for excess signing exceeds those standards in all three of the areas addressed, as indicated below: ADOPTED PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY REQUESTED SIGNING Area of Individual Freeway Sign: 125 sq. ft. (maximum) 320 sq. ft. Height of Freeway 50 ft. above grade 80 ft. Sign: (maximum) Total Area of On- Site Signing: 200 sq. ft. (maximum) 369 .4 sq. ft. The proposed freeway sign is of a height and scale which may diminish the attractive character of the site vicinity. The visual quality from the highway has been marred by an existing 71-foot-high service station sign just south of the subject site. That sign was installed prior to the adoption of the current signing requirements of the County Zoning Ordinance and the Planning Commission' s freeway signing policy, however. Thus, this exception does not justify additional signing of a similar scale in this vicinity. Southbound freeway traffic has good visibility of the subject site. Locating the freeway sign in the northwest corner of the site would allow motorists ample time to safely exit without need of the addi- tional distraction provided by an extremely large or high sign. Site visibility is impaired for northbound traffic due to the site eleva- tion below the Santa Rosa Road overpass, and extensive screening vegetation. In addition, the northbound off-ramp exits onto Old Santa Rosa Road, approximately one block south of the subject site, requiring more advance notice of the need to exit from that direction. Freeway • CUP - Young Electric Sign Company April 7, 1980 Page Four signing for northbound traffic that would enable safe exit from the highway would not be feasible due to site elevation, screening vegetation, and the existing ramp and overpass alignments . ].Instead, the purpose of signing on this particular site should be limited to attractive identification along the freeway with particular attention to southbound traffic, and should be scaled appropriately. This request for excess signing also includes a proposed 18 foot high identification and entrance sign, which would be below the height of the proposed motel. However, the height and scale of this sign as proposed is unnecessary due to the good visibility of the site from both directions on E1 Camino Real. Other freestanding signs in the site vicinity are lower and of a much smaller scale. The Staff concludes that redesigning the proposed sign to reduce the total area and height would result in signing that is both effective and visually compatible with the surrounding uses. Due to the potential for development on surrounding vacant parcels, appropriate and attractive signing at this site is important to prevent a precedent for a visually cluttered appearance along El Camino Real in this area. RECO14MENDAT ION It is the Staff recommendation that the requested signing be denied and that reduced and revised signing be approved instead, subject to the following: Findings: A. As modified by the recommended conditions of approval, the size of proposed signing will be of a scale compatible with the emerging commercial development along El Camino Real. B. The approved signing will be adequately visible to travelers along El Camino Real and Highway 101. C. The proposed project is consistent with the mandatory findings set forth in Section 22. 92. 080 (1) of the County Zoning Ordinance. D. The recommended conditions will result in compliance with the Planning Commission policy. Conditions: 1. On-site signing shall be limited to an aggregate area of 200 square feet for the entire project site. The freeway sign shall be limited to a maximum area of 125 square feet, with a maximum height of 50 feet. Other freestanding signs shall be limited to a maximum height of six feet and a maximum individual area of 20 square feet. All signing to be reviewed and approved by the Development Review Section of the Planning Department prior i • CUP - Young Electric Sign Company April 7, 1980 Page Five to issuance of a building permit or sign permit. Flashing or rotating signs and wind-activated devices are prohibited. Signs on buildings shall be mounted flush with the building face. 2. No signing shall be constructed on the site until a building permit has been issued for the 122-unit motel approved by Departmental Review R790719 : 4 . Report prepared by Barbara J. Heinrich and approved by Warren Hoag, Supervisor Development Review Section 0-PINE M T N s �I[y1 L • O OI Yr O. y 4 N i� W6Y 2 9 fr C 9 J D °yfyp .r9 L Jq if POs.p. 4 Cq v f �� i 11 qnr as or �4 y �11 G Atascadero 4fh 1 � �• \ �9 Henry • q• °�' MALELA AVE •ifypf M0,92 vi Li / 1 L \�06Jirr � S a hq.Ba 1rf v ••\\\\ 09 vm i^ of 41 ° Y90nz J�q4 °1'fyuf n 4 ° o° .Y l qL N•OIM,[N r0 ygEe � •i: Cg• L.. S ♦y O M9iBr � pOeE +�E sy ts a Hp�M`rNe� /�L AgIPJ P Mo q° � c r $• •vt SAy \ g^a i 33 sP� y J M4OB° • CJ' ,9E •ypyf N - wA166 t � N �v SO °9 J l C Sy i / 4; ~gUBs •v[ BP.1 N F S O/ .O 0� A9 wA,92I cA,,, 5•v AV DPES AVE •� qJ� J. 0 1,1 q 101 O fip o i •'iC J, ( S• 9 r r E `• n' / o / 1'' u rn - °� 1195 '¢\` 41 °o L 9 J y n y° qA rJCUglvgil qs h oa EPJ � y°y 'oa {•' F i IOiA vq i IAVE p•0`� P>� j� .s. JY06S vF�' •a°�v C Ae•NIL L^pO O t •Pf°\ ° FAU Y065 ow 101 Prw•O E 6 s yb'4.�/po' rs ° � PPCA° M•os� yy. a C J° s \ Atascadero eouBo R a Aoq r .\ Orq yO 6•� s R4( C: � d o ] o C N ¢ W b�` _2v] e ♦ q + EL 50•DO AY[ 1 Cv0 MPpi SS I T C4 wA0.2 so .� G w 10• Av �{, V/ r 0 C° N P4`M w•0° 406' `°Orp I RANCHM ,, .r' [° �• �4Q V` .[, ° •>< O O SANTA NOS• F •rAt C ^�\ M s0 C � L•0 C9013 C 9 ; cera o A J°eo T � 0 P�� M4026 OLD SANTA 8054 RD , G AY o C4017 MAACNAMT N HAOAA JJ l 4\ pOSP P f S OA9 pa. \\ \ 7 N,A - y 4\ VG SP4 Sa 0Y1 }0 C161o`�1yy>Cpo nW E �• "°lVICINITY MAP R R _ SAh DABR,EL r¢ ¢I R N ¢r 5V P-401 P-96 II ; _� 4 A- l -24 • p41 Cl 3 P-114 - \ I r 23 .<✓� Z�` nP'� `y-1 i� \�\ LD''k1�149 I '1'111 uic ^ \ x `" •� �.. - --- •13 . 2 r I 22 a� PIs.1 0 PAFb BILL _ O G D 21 9 \3 ` 29 16 19 3 - s;,.�z INC0 . P-47 FbCAQ(� het I 2. 3 C 2 = P v 34 \ cJ�o /^C 0/ \\ 25 10-A DG 26 PA 14 AVE \ 15 28 S 16 3 / \ \ x-34 O - Y F��S.v co-73-o9 17 - I P, 2 r 30 \ ao \ -qB sys - � r I-� (4) . -• i� M 31 'm 10 *4N\ "ice \ 32' \l .X41,1,0 R.•� - -- - - 06 �- CP PAK.I Co L' GAFC.Z - \ _ \\ lf� P-3834 / C 38 �601C], A'. P, / �x 35 . f i z 1 �,. ` ' .f 1 -i :',�� \ c+a>. s 1 r,•I> I \`\ .1 > 2 S - *\ �\\; `♦ .� 171 t,{ P-130s50 G Cj.- 1cc-7-�-1z-t ' --- 13�r. 2 3# 8 _ II-A 6 10 -A\ e Vr 10 °\ \ 10-B 10 A - 74 f .8 ZONING 6 ,` 1 mxo P 1 y l a:Yoe� R2 A �I-L'4 52 9 Y. � -.� s,! �1 w,�,LTJ � � ✓_ ,r•^:�_ti �•i'�� - � ��'k/' v�• ,, u ;,,�. ��i .Jz . �,,,y:' �✓� -. rtir7t'� }'ti"-vsiti - a._ ^3'Y'" }' Z fT I'•] �^ ~'V ✓�y l C' y Viy�'•' t Jx V l :t ��I'. •�, J:'- ,J v r1; s W y .JFJJ ��✓�iv ,��.4�.✓ice > �� J ��y s J �fu � rti'�` �1%?"��,tir ti{ �,� 1 � J - rll'�W�1d ytJj J�>D.�� •`s. r S`{•� J V J LY J`JZ 1.J I� V J>i J-1 J`_�i✓v J } ✓ C C4 J•y„J x � "- " J" � v t � .✓.,> J y v. ::' � s.1. r v' tJ .. iy ✓sem{� � t�` �� �Imo.. �^s�C.IdJ\S �a t a s J ,�4.• �'tl<,: _w yY.r' _ I < ::I f .! �y � \J � 1y} 'Jf W��w /V ��✓Y�WI Jv y�V 1'l. {J. i C .C. `. / ���✓��� aJtli '� J<t v. L`W� � -1 J iW4L•sj �•� ._.,. , �,,; _: ��1«s✓..W t){ i+:s„at,� 1. / '., rff j- ys'J•.ui;,;, . • � � ti � lf .1. J� VV Art. f•X1•:1• • t:: 1 7`•y� a�J��,ry 04 ow j� � .' . ••'a-4, j zhr INCUSTRIAL • vj ET IL COMMERCIAL 4V I �Y Y f qk ,� V�.'?,..-;;yam`---,roF -•�...... �!. -:.'� _ . GENERAL . ,;�:::::::: ::: :::::::': ;:� ,:::�.;:':::'::::':::::��:::: ;:::::.::.; ':::�'::•... PLAN �� yl a ��� Irl e ���� •.mi _ '.�} — _]OAl1A� _�' y➢�- 1����-" p aT�' 11 � -�l=1 �F�. u I Ilt P � ` •ti eri, � si a !IZ 4 71 s •� 0 ( �` z 1 C R'�Ct\ mn JnYb'NO ONNO6N1tlON SITE PLAN r V 0 {{ 1 ` ., � Wim.• � � ' U C J = Pis. "�• .4 �� ��� � --_ _ :z .��.,`fix.•,`ter n .rola^' � ,,. \P •'� - ,.. IIIb- i . " a Q' o ,j:`> - � Llj a N_ Ej lb UA r 0 a 1 i �41L. LL ELEVATIONS t M E M O R A N D U M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: April 9 , 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT ON PROPOSED LOT DIVISION (AT 79-239) OF PARCEL A OF CO 77-328, WEST ATASCADERO, NORTHEAST SIDE OF LOS OSOS ROAD - MARROW (STEWART) The Planning Commission recommends that the lot division be found not consistent with the General Plan and be denied. The primary reason is that the proposed lot sizes of 12 acres are less than the 22 acre minimum standard contained in the 1980 Atascadero General Plan. The applicant' s representative contends that many parcels in the area are similar to the size being requested. A resident of the area submitted a letter signed by other residents in the area opposing the proposed lot division. This matter is referred to Council as required by Section 21. 48 . 105. In the event that Council desires to modify the Planning Commission recommendation, the proposed lot division should be for public hearing. If not, the 15-day appeal period begins . LAWRENCE EVENS MURY L. RDEN Planning nsultant/Director CitrManatjer kp Attach. Telephone(805)549.5600 as PLANNING DEPARTMENT Courthouse Annex SAN LUIS 0BIspo, CALIFORNIA - 93408 March 10, 1980 Honorable Atascadero Planning Commission and City Council City of Atascadero, California Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: SUBJECT: AT 79-239, PROPOSED LOT DIVISION OF PARCEL "A" OF CO 77-328, WEST ATASCADERO, NORTHEAST SIDE OF LOS OSOS ROAD, ATASCADERO. (A-1-12: LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY) (MARROW - STEWART) SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT #5 (884: _ 10/26/79) RECOMMENDATION AGAINST CONSISTENCY AND FOR DENIAL RECOMMENDATION ON ROAD IMPROVEMENT'S At a regular meeting of the County Subdivision Review Board, the attached subdivision was considered and is being referred to you for required action and findings regarding consistency with applicable general plans. Respectfully submitted, LARRY' J. RED, upervisor Subdivision Review Section ca Attachment cc: County Engineer County Health Department REPORT OF THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD MEETING MARCH 5, 1980 RE: AT 79-239, PROPOSED LOT DIVISION OF PARCEL "A" OF CO 77-328, WEST ATASCADERO, NORTHEAST SIDE OF LOS OSOS ROAD, ATASCADERO. (A-1-12: LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY) (MARROW - STEWART) SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT #5 (884: 10/26/79) RECOMMENDATION AGAINST CONSISTENCY AND FOR DENIAL CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION SRB Members in Attendance: Acting Chairman, Larry Red, John Hofschroer, John Wallace, Jerry Erickson Planning Commissioner in Attendance: None Legal Counsel Present: None PROJECT DESCRIPTION This application proposes a subdivision of a 3 acre parcel into two parcels of approximately 1.5 acres each. The site is located on the northeast side of Los Osos Road, approximately 2 mile southeast of Highway 41 in Atascadero City. Zoning: A-1-12: "Light Agriculture" (12 acre minimum parcel size) General Plan: 1978 Atascadero General Plan: "Low Density Single .Family" (22 - 10 acre range until sewers are available) COMMENTS Environmental Determination A Conditional Negative Declaration was issued by the Environmental Coordinator on January 15, 1980, stating that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report, subject to the following conditions: 1. That water be obtained for the parcels prior to the filing of the final map. 2. That a note be placed on the map that development of the parcels occur in such a manner as to insure design and landscape considerations for the preservation of the scenic character of the area. Site and Area Considerations The terrain of the project site is level to gently rolling. Vegetation on the site is dominated by annual grasses and scattered oak trees. Water is to be provided by the Atascadero Mutual Water Company upon receipt of payment for a recovery agreement payable to the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Sewage disposal is proposed to be through the use of individual i AT 79-239 Page 2 • septic systems. The Soil Conservation Service indicates that the soils on the site may have severe limitations for the percolation of sewage effluent. It is recommended that the applicant submit the results of a soil percolation test accomplished in accordance with standard County procedures, prior to the filing of the final map. The County Seismic Safety Element identifies the project area as having a high potential for landslide. The slopes of the project site are gentle and the actual risk from landslide would appear to be minimal. The area is designated as a high fire hazard area by the County Fire Hazard Map. The Atascadero Fire Department can serve the parcels to be created with an expected response time of five to ten minutes. The Area of Critical Concerns Map designates the project area as being of a high value for scenic backdrop. Properly designed development and landscaping can reduce the visual impact of residential development in this area. The initial study together with direct observation of the project area indicates that with proper design and engineering practices the project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. Zoning and General Plan Considerations The property is presently zoned A-1-12 and the minimum parcel size in this zone is 12 acres. The 1978 Atascadero General Plan designates the property as Low Density Single Family with a parcel size range of 12 to 22 acres. Pertinent language in the Atascadero General Plan is as follows (p. 44) : • "LOW DENSITY Minimum lot sizes within the Urban Services Area should range from 12 to 22 acres. Determination of appropriate lot sizes should be based upon such factors as the availability of services, especially sewers; slope of access road to building site; distance from the center of the community; general character of neighboring lands; soil percolation; and the area needed for access roads to the building sites." This property, however, is located outside the Urban Services Area (see Atascadero General Plan Map) and Land Use Policy Proposal #2 has been amended to include the following sentence: "Properties outside the Urban Services Line should be evaluated for lot sizes based on the Suburban Residential range (22 to 10 acres) until sewers are available." AT 79-239 • • Page 3 RECOMMENDATION Although the City Planning Commission and the City Council will take final action on this project, the Subdivision Review Board may still take action on this matter. Any action taken will likely constitute an informal recommendation to the City Council . It should be noted this staff report. and the recommendations are based on County policy, procedure and ordinances. After review of applicable General Plans and other available information, the Subdivision Review Board recommends denial to the City Council and that the proposed subdivision be found not consistent with the General Plan in accordance with Section 65302.5(a) (4) of the Government Code. Provided that a finding of consistency is made and the application ultimately approved, the following conditions are hereby established regarding the design and improvements of the proposed subdivision; which conditions when satisfied will mitigate the environmental concerns expressed by the Environmental Coordinator in the Environmental Determination of January 15, 1980. 1. That the following "NOTES ' shall be placed on the final map: A. No sewage disposal system installations are to be placed closer than 100 feet from the top of the existing creek bank, drainage swales or areas subject to inundation. B. Septic tanks will be an acceptable method of sewage disposal, if soil tests and plans are acceptable, until public sewers may become available. C. Water is to be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Compapy. D. That when a potentially operational or operational existing well(s) is located on the parcels created and approved community water is proposed to serve the parcels, the community water supply shall be protected from real or potential cross-contamination by means of an approved cross-connection control device installed at the meter or property line service connectionrp for to occupancy. (Chapter 8.30, San Luis Obispo County Ordinance) 2. Prior to the filing of theap rcel map, the applicant shall submit to and be jointly approved by the Planning Department and Health Department, results of percolation tests and the log or logs of soil borings performed by a registered civil engineer. For this purpose, the applicant shall perform one or more soil borings to be a minimum depth of ten (10) feet in the area of the proposed sewage disposal system to determine the: (a) subsurface soil conditions, (example: impermeable stratas which act as barriers to at 79-239 • • Page 4 the effective percolation of sewage) ; (b) and the presence of groundwater. And the applicant must perform a minimum of three (3) percolation test holes per lot, to be spaced uniformly in the area of the proposed sewage disposal system. Percolation tests shall conform to the methods and guidelines prescribed by the Manual of Septic Tank Practice as adopted by the County Building and Construction Ordinance Title 19, Chapter 10.24. 3. That operable facilities exist prior to the filing of the Final Map. A letter shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and submitted to the Health and Planning Departments for review and approval stating there are operable facilities immediately available and ready for connection to the parcels created. 4. That in order to protect the public safety and prevent possible ground water pollution, any abandoned wells on the property shall be destroyed in accordance with the San Luis Obispo County Well Ordinance Chapter 8.40, and Health Division destruction standards . (permit required) (Parcel l) S. That Los Osos Road fronting said property be improved in the following manner: 2/3 an A-5 suburban section fronting the property and continuing to Morro Road. 6. That any private easement as shown on the Title Report be shown on the Parcel Map with recording data. 7. All conditions of approval herein specified are to be complied with prior to the submittal of the Parcel Map Original to the County Engineer for approval. 8. That a Final Parcel Map shall be filed in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, prior to sale, lease or financing of the subject property within a period of one year from approval date of the Tentative Map. 9. FIRE PROTECTION STANDARDS The applicant must comply with state and county laws/ordinances applicable to fire protection and consider increased fire risk to area by the land proposed, 10. After approval by the Board of Supervisors, compliance with the preceeding conditions will bring the proposed subdivision in conformance with the Subdivision Map Act and local ordinances. AT 79-239 • Page 4 11. The Tentative Parcel clap will expire one year (12 months) from the date of Board of Supervisors approval . The Tentative Parcel Map may be extended one year by the Subdivision Review Board. Written requests with appropriate fees must be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the expiration date. DISCUSSION Applicant's engineer attended the meeting. The Subdivision Review Board unanimously adopted the preliminary report as written. � yr-" • " - � --- �- .i \ Mfr __ • .. r.,•, y _ R • ^ 14 • ri •/, � .r "F `� � �;. .lam � � r � �. uke, r _ + 13 I + 1 R� o \ - 000 F E •' O0 JA �. 37 N .S 1200 _ 64 i Y 0- 97 1sa opo P. 1 E/ Ppb 18A 18 F �o� / Go-74-� \ PnR A �3 27 G 4 J, 7 \ PAF\ A PAR.2 B \ 28 �� �'h� i •• \ Qp�3 �,4�j \�C - \ 0 , CO PaR.l21 Go _ 2 \ nA�.3 � �142.� J.150� J7.388 21 Ppb Pay 13 32 22 a 1 31 23 i 30 i PAR.0 �\\ PAR. 6 $111Z 24 13 God 20 PaR. A A- PAR.6 28 14 18 co 768 _ 17 PARA . 21 _ 27 15 I 1 26 26A �� � MAh �-T- 74o,239 Com. �a� •`�/] � ° / O V otvCLLa m Zo�WS3 � s °per 4 ggo O•Qp Nco < aOf L-Ute` VIO= i= t- �o 0( J u LlUl m� F CL Cf.< LL LL o"r o o LJ C,2. I-- �► °_ U imZ hqd us NQO�yw w / n� J �1 = m s< o 1�- 20) m0C4 ��.", g�3 t z uou w N >tj Lu F= 01 Q ` rW� W°u v w omiu` Z BCD Z; O E. 04 a uj 1455 l 16 .I sit r . fr ZLI � 1 �d e �i 1 I ~•! ,/t lcf 9_9E•.99.ACS r r r 015 -. _.. .. �� � �� '•�ire\\ .�,\ _ /// 'JJ � - I •t.. ` 1 — r.l' 11. �_• f - ...� ' /• /y ../' /- //r � N T.K: CY;. Iv✓ '� *t ! -. - ..-h � .'�•' r ¢Z�• v I �1 I.t !� Yt r �;,r 1 .. ✓ 4Cy •f,R-0•/�:,. Ov3°5 �- t'A) .>'. 1 a.•6F1 }.J.r-� til0 .{.it I :r 11.y.� /'P y.I'• i ti ' 9 1 t <. 1 r t � � f � �f SFr•• - .j `� 0505 F '1 - '1 4� Y: •=I J• �I 'r -C r. l F�' ;J. .c 1• _ t' cC - c` .f :l ` J •C �. '•ice •��.'t. :tom .. •'1 v :f 1 1 i 9 78 ATA s. Pt A'r • U J t t ct_y ..,� l � LZ1' OZC_x_ �4-v✓L�Lti.��J L' Z•C_ LC.-s 2L 71 ,z_C �U-Z�-c�Y.�`��✓ CJ�- ����Ct LJ � � C�L_C `L� �� Z c--''L�� Lt c'r'Z �L�� C��;_ --�Q Jam-L- G_-� `�'`�L{,) .�1'�--"7 y�L-�d./�t,.✓ �C1�1,'�.-E'_�_� - �� G=�z`-_ �•L�,c,�,-fit,, � �-'�-Ci.,��s��(' � �`Z�-,-�.,� ���-��•��4�-�E�" Lam.-��c.��_�s'L—�- �C.�'1•L-�� �:�� .Cd.��,��v i���1Pe� L el (_.i C.'�. it: w � 1 ell \ J \\ c�. �__ �, l�-C ` �����•�� ��C,C SC cq-5 C-c L � � 4-1 el r M E M O R A N D U M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: April 9 , 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF PARCEL MAP AT 77-241 - Finch (Stewart) The Planning Commission recommends that the attached Parcel Map be accepted. LAWRENCE SREVENS MTJRYAY L AARDEN Planning nsultant/Director Cit Man ger kp Attach. COUNTY S fl H LUIS 0BISPO CO U HTY f ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ROOM A101 + COURTHOUSE ANNEX + SAN LUIS OBISPO + CALIFORNIA 93408 + (805) 549-5252 GEORGEC. PROTOPAPAS ROAD$ County Engineer TRANSPORTATION FLOOD CONTROL CLINTON MILNE WATER CONSERVATION DEPUTY COUNTY ENGINEER .SURVEYOR GUYPR£WITT SPECIAL DISTRICTS SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATOR March 17 , 1980 City of Atascadero Veterans Memorial Building, Room 106 P. O. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93422 Attention Mr. Murray Warden, City Administrator Subject: Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 77-241 Gentlemen: Your consideration of the approval of Parcel Map AT 77-241, a proposed subdivision by Wilma M. Finch, is requested. It is our RECOMMENDATION that your Honorable Council act upon the attached resolution, and authorize the Clerk to sign the map. Discussion: A finding of consistency with the General Plan in accordance with Section 66473. 5 of the Subdivision Map Act was made by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo on September 19 , 1977 . Attached is a vicinity map and layout of Parcel Map AT 77- 241 . The total area of this development is 2. 049 acres with minimum lot areas of 1. 02 acres. The area is zoned A-1-1 1/2 . The road will be maintained by the City of Atascadero; water service will be from Atascadero Mutual Water Company; sewage facilities will be maintained by property owners . Respectfully, GEORGE C. PROTOPAPAS County Engineer GCP/JRE RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A CERTAIN ROAD INTO THE CITY ROAD SYSTEM CITY ROAD NO. 4328 The following resolution is hereby offered and read: WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, has been duly requested to accept a certain offer to dedicate for Chauplin Avenue in said City; and WHEREAS, the County Engineer by letter dated March 17, 1980, has duly recommended that the City Council: Accept the offer of dedication for public use of a 5-foot strip along Chauplin Avenue as shown on Parcel Map AT 77-241. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero: 1. That the offer to dedicate as shown in 2216 OR 878 for Chauplin Avenue and the 5-foot widening of City Road No. 4328 as shown on Parcel Map AT 77-241 is hereby accepted into and made a part of the City Road System, to be maintained in kind, and shall and does constitute a public highway in the City of Atascadero. 2. That the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized and directed to record a copy of the resolution in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo. Upon motion of Councilman seconded by Councilman and on the following roll call vote to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINING: the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted. ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Atascadero Clerk of the City of Atascadero Co. Eng./ (TN/S CURVE CRL0. TO PASS /NROUON TNREE FOUND POINTS/ s 1 / Rq p/4 1' sr d s.?B spm• e � y -.. W" ?9F3�� j68 Di f, LOT 20 LOT 2/ A_ LOT 22 M � 70 N J V /S33. 2I•E 244.13'R./ S53•p5' 'E 243.95',!. Q /09./4 Al aT�r o 134.8/' M, e _ � h V OT /O LOT ti e PARCEL / a PARCEL ' 2 N m /.029 ACRE rh /.020 ACRE pi (1 V N r U7 W h `.. M g i hi w s. N OFF A R R 'so. 50 all 1 6 gg X?. Noy.? M PD.2•'X4"WO R£C./ /:^ NOT USED /�/CI V/, ,C �•w Io X09 day Um. `^_ SUP[/IV 9'-B•R'B M O � a ' 4v (MELD R[CORO RAD�USI m m •�\ . • 03 • M_E_M_O_R A_N_D_U_M_ TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director SUBJECT: Section 18 formal fund request - Dial-A-Ride Attached are two formal fund requests for Section 18 transit funding. The first request is for capital assistance in obtaining two handicapped lift equipped buses , mobile radios , fareboxes and additional base communications equipment totaling $73, 528. 00 . Cities 20% share would be $14 , 705. 60 which can be supported by SB 325 funds. The second request is for 28. 81% share of purchase price, $210, 000 . 00, of land acquisition for City parking. This equates to 7500 square feet of 26 ,037 square feet for Dial-A-Ride turn-around, passenger loading and parking. This request is for $66 ,050. 10 with cities 20% share being $13, 310. 22 which can also be supported by SB 325 funds. These applications require approval from Council by motion to include authorization for the City Manager to sign the Fund Request Assurances. Upon approval, the package will be forwarded to the Area Planning Council for their action. The final step will be the preparation of a final application required by the State. RALPH H. DOWELL, JR. Concur with recommendation RHD:ad 4-10-80 MUR Y L WARDEN, City Manager ' Y 1 SECTION 18 - PROGRAM OF PROJECTS Fund Request (Mark appropriate box. A fund request must be submitted for each grant application) . Completed by TPA Completed y Applicant ❑ County Apportionment ❑ Operating Assistance ❑ State Discretionary ® Capital Assistance Reserve GENERAL INFORMATION Name of Applicant t City of Atascadero Address P. 0. Box 747 City Zip Code Phone Atascadero, Ca. , 93422 (805) 466-8000 Contact Person Ralph Dowell, Finance Director Name and address of Operator if different than applicant County of San Luis Obispo Department of Engineering Room 101, Courthouse Annex San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93408 * If project is programmed for funding from State Discretionary Reserve, the additional information and justifications contained in Categories and Criteria for State Discretionary Reserve Funding must be supplied. EXHIBIT A TRANSIT SYSTEM OVERVIEW The existing Atascadero Demand Response System (Dial-A-Ride) is operated by the County of San Luis Obispo within the service area indicated on the attached map. This system will be assumed by the newly incorporated (July 2 , 1979) City of Atascadero on July 1 , 1980 . Therefore, this grant request is prepared and for- warded by the City. The system presently has two (2) Dodge 79 B300 Maxivan 16 passenger buses and operates the DAR Control Center in the Atascadero Senior Citizens Center. Present hours of opera- tion are Monday through Friday from 9 : 00 a.m, to 6 : 00 p.m. with an average daily patronage of 195 passengers . The fare for each trip is $ . 50 with handicapped and senior at half fare. The system is operated by a private contractor, Community Transit Services , Anaheim, California, which presently operates 18 separate transit systems within the State of California. PtE7b1� / ' HgSPITAL J r 4SCADERO, ICU LI x. �-- Y - TRASIT 'SERVICE .�� _ � ��. ' •''I�1 ~_�?'^,. � � �� ;r � a` YIDI" r 1, xy 9 r 7 t r F � ` ATASCA®ERO t TATE HOSPITA�, , 41 Ex d" IT 'A I N • I H EXHIBIT B PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Atascadero, located in the County of San Luis Obispo, was newly incorporated on July 2 , 1979. There is operating within the City a Dial-A-Ride transportation system which has recently inaugurated service. The system has two sixteen passenger ' buses with the control center located in spaces leased from the Atascadero Senior Citizen facility. The Dial-A-Ride system is operated by the County of San Luis Obispo on a contract basis with the Community Transit Services, Anaheim, California. Maintenance is accomplished locally on a cost plus contract. Both buses are leased by the County from the Bank of America. The estimated annual budget for total operating costs is $130 , 000. 00 utilizing the County' s share of SB 325 funds. This transportation system is in conformance with the; Regional Transportation Plan. The City of Atascadero will assume total responsibility for this operation on July 1, 1980 . Funding will be from the City' s allocation of SB 325 monies. The City is requesting grant funding for two (2) additional buses , both handicapped lift equipped, plus radios and fareboxes , in order to meet the following criteria: 1. An expansion of the service area to provide services to most areas within the City boundaries. 2 . Provide a handicapped capability which does not exist within the present system. 3. Provide a backup capability when a normal schedule would require a three-bus service with one bus in a spare status. Exhibit B - Project Description Page Two The Atascadero Dial-A-Ride system is presently operating on the County public service frequency. This frequency must be vacated by Dial-A-Ride on July 1, 1980, and equipment will be changed to the City of Atascadero public service frequency. Either one of these methods provides interference between the priorities of Dial- A-Ride and the public service facility. The City has requested the County to prepare an application for a discrete mass transpor- tation frequency which is available for systems such as Dial-A-Ride. The County will change the mobile communications equipment in the existing buses prior to turn-over to the City which will allow operation on either the City of Atascadero public service frequency or a new mass transportation frequency. A need exists for new base communications equipment and related antenna structure to allow the use of a discrete mass transportation frequency. The description of the equipment to be purchased is as follows : Two buses; 16 passenger handicapped lift equipped; gaso- line engine powered; and wheelchair tie-downs Two mobile radios to equip each bus Two fareboxes -- New base"communication equipment and. related antenna structure rage nz Section 18 - Program of Projects CAPITAL GRANT REQUEST Aoplicant City of Atascadero ITEAd DESCMPTION COST Two (2) buses , handicapped lift equipped, gasoline powered, wheel- chair tie-downs $ 57 ,240. 00 Two (2) mobile radios 2968 . 00 Two (2) fareboxes 636 . 00 New base communication equipment and related antenna structure _ 69000 . 00 Subtotal $ 66 , 844 . 00 (1) Contingency (10016) 6, 684 . 00 (2) Less proceeds from sale of equipment, facilities and land Project Total $ 731528 , 00 (3) Federal Share (80%) $ 58 , 822 . 40 (d) L-_c' Share 120c.c) Itemize by Source nt Amount (SB 325 funds) Total Local Share $ 14 ,705. 60 (5) iL`:D REQUEST .43SURANCL:S Upcn approval of this preliminar; fund request by the Jnited States Deportment of Transportation, I htrreby gi,.e assurance that a grant application ,viil be submitted ,vhich describes the actions .hen to achieve, as a minimum, pursuant to T We 21, Chapter 2. Subchapter 15, Section 1680 of the California Administrative Code, thz fcilc.vinu: (a) Project coordination. (b) Public participation and receive public input to the application. (c) Private sector involvement in the project to the maximum extent feasible. (d) A-95 clearance of the final application. (e) Compliance with labor protection provisions of UMTA Section 13(c). (f) Compliance with Title Vl, Civii Rights Act of 1964 and Mincrity Business Enterprise activities. (g) Environmental assessment documentation. (h) Meeting the needs of elderly, handicapped, and other transit dependent people. (1) Compliance with applicable Federal charter and school bus provisions. (j) Assurance that any capital equipment to be purchased meets the requirements of California Government Code 4500 and United States Department of Transportation regulations for the implementation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Signed Title Date Attach governing body's authorization for official representative to submit this request. r l SECTION 18 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS Fund Request (Mark appropriate box. A fund request must be submitted for each grant application) . Completed by TPA Completed Ai: scant ❑ County Apportionment ❑ Operating Assistance ❑ State Discretionary ® Capital Assistance Reserve * GENERAL INFORMATION Name of Applicant City of Atascadero Address P. O. Box 747 City Zip Code Phone Atascadero, Ca. 93422 (8Q5) 466-800 Contact Person Ralph Dowell , Finance Director Name and address of Operator if different than applicant County of San Luis Obispo, Dept. of Engineering Rm. 101, Courthouse Annex San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93408 If project is programmed for funding from State Discretionary Reserve, the additional information and justifications contained in Categories and Criteria for State Discretionary Reserve Funding must be supplied. EXHIBIT A TRANSIT SYSTEM OVERVIEW The existing Atascadero Demand Response System (Dial-A-Ride) is operated by the County of San Luis Obispo within the service area indicated on the attached map. This system will be assumed by the newly incorporated (July 2 , 1979) City of Atascadero on July 1, 1980 . Therefore, this grant request is prepared and for- warded by the City. The system presently has two (2) Dodge 79 B300 Maxivan 16 passenger buses and operates the DAR Control Center in the Atascadero Senior Citizens Center. Present hours of opera- tion are Monday through Friday from 9 : 00 a.m. to 6 : 00 p.m. with an average daily patronage of 195 passengers. The fare for each trip is $ . 50 with handicapped and senior at half fare. The system is operated by a private contractor, Community Transit Services, Anaheim, California, which presently operates 18 separate transit systems within the State of California. PL ASADER ' PUl BUC,DIA A--AID A�N lI 'SERVICE ! 1 • + IL mi ^f�TASCA®EROti :TATE HOSPITA� t r A` IT � 4 J ` _ • a3h t sir y � • EXHIBIT B PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City is requesting grant funding for land acquisition for which a portion will provide support to the existing Dial- A-Ride system. The City has approved a Lease-Purchase program for the purchase of a parcel of land located within excellent proximity of the City Administration Building, Junior High School, Unified School Offices , and Senior Citizen Center. This land measures 26 , 037 square feet of which approximately 7,500 square feet would be used for Dial-A-Ride turn-around, passenger loading, and off-street parking. Based on this utilization, a grant appli- cation is submitted for 28 . 810 of the purchase price. Purchase price of this property is $210,000. 00 which is somewhat below that established by two appraisals. Based on the agreed purchase price of $210 , 000. 00, the grant request (28. 810) would total $60 , 501. 00. The legal description of the properties is as follows : Lot A: The northerly 50 feet of Lot 21, in Block OL, of Atascadero, according to Amendment N to the Map of Atascadero recorded September 3 , 1925 in Book 4 at Page 670 of Maps. Lot B: The southerly 50 feet of the northerly 100 feet of Lot 21, in Block OL, of Atascadero, according to Amendment N to the Map of Atascadero recorded September 3 , 1925 in Book 4 at Page 670 of Maps. Lot C: The southerly 50 feet of the northerly 150 feet of Lot 21, in Block OL, of Atascadero, according to Amendment N to the Map of Atascadero recorded September 3 , 1925 in Book 4 at Page 670 of Maps . Lot D: Lot 18 , Lot 19 , Lot 20 , in Block OL, of Atascadero, according to Amendment N to the Map of Atascadero recorded September 3 , 1927 in Book 4 at Page 67-C of Maps and the southerly 6 . 23' of Lot 21, in Block OL, of Atascadero, according to Amendment N to the Map of Atascadero recorded September 3 , 1925 in Book 4 at Page 670 of .Maps. A � � Page i32 Section 18 - Program of Projects CAPITAL GRAIN REQUEST Applicait city of A asnadprn ITENI DESCRIPTION COST Purchase 26 , 037 square feet of property utilized for parking of which 7,500 _ sguare feet (28 , 81%) would be utiliz_erl for Dial-A-Ride turn-around, passenger 1 nAdi nq , and off-atrPPt jaarki nc3 Grant funding requested for 28 . 81% of purchase price $210,000. 00 $ 60 , 501. 00 Subtotal $ 60,501. 00 (1) Contingency (1010) 6 , 050. 10 (2) Less proceeds from sale of equipment, facilities and 0 land Project Total $ 66 ,551. 10 (3) Federal Share (80%) $ 53 , 240. 88 (d) -_3' Share 120�c) Itemize by Source and Amount (SB 325 Funds) Total Local Share $13, 310. 22 (5) L,11111U11.. D • � Page B3 .� PROJECT DESCRIPTION OPERATING ASSISTANCE GRANT Operating assistance projects are described by a budget which details the expenses and revenues accrued (or reasonably expected on the basis of projections) during one local fiscal year (i.e. , the Project Year) . Project approval constitutes a recognition of eligible transit operating expenses, the revenues applied to such expenses, and the maximum amount of funds which can therefore be granted. The required documents to be submitted to document the operating assistance grant are as follows : 1. Project budget 2. Statement of revenue and expense for the project year and two preceding years 3. Statement of' Change in Financial Position and Balance Sheets for preceding two years 4. Items 2 and 3 above should be provided in a format consistent with the State Controller' s Uniform System of Accounts and Reports for Public Transit Operators . See enclosed State Controller Report Forms. i=U` ',D IREOUEST . SSURANCES Upcn approval of this preliminary fund request by 'he United States Department of Transportation, 1 hereby gine assurance that a grant application will be submitted which describes the actions ':.nen to achieve, as a minimum, pursuant to T We 21, Chapter 2. Subchapter 15, Section 1680 of the California Administrative Code, the fcllowina: (a) Project coordination. (b) Public participation and receive public input to the application. (c) Private sector involvement in the project to the maximum extent feasible. (d) A-95 clearance of the final application. (e) Compliance with labor protection provisions of Uh1TA Section 13(c). (f) Compliance with Title Vl, Civii Rights Act of 1.964 and �A nority Business Enterprise activities. (g) Environmental assessment documentation. (h) Meeting the needs of elderly, handicapped, and other transit dependent people. (1) Compliance with applicable Federal charter and school bus provisions. (j) Assurance that any capital equipment to be purchased meets the requirements of California Government Code 4500 and United States Department of Transportation regulations for the implementation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Signed Title Date Attach governing body's authorization for official representative to submit this request. • ��- 04 M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Business license ordinance amendment Attached is an ordinance amending our presently adopted County business license ordinance. The amendments _ are designed to establish grounds for denial of a business license and to give full consideration to certain business operations. The overall County business license ordinance will probably need major revisions sometime in the future; but, in the interim, the proposed amendment addresses the problem of establishing a basis for denial which is presently lacking. I would recommend your acceptance of this ordinance as a first reading with the second reading to be at the next Council meeting. *RRAY WARDEN MLW:ad 4-10-80 alien grimes attorney at law 7360 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE B • P. O.BOX 749 • ATASCADERO.CALIFORNIA 93422 PHONES (505) 466.5678 OR 466.1408 MEMORANDUM April 7, 1980 To: Murray Warden, City Manager From: Allen Grimes, City Attorney Subject: Proposed Ordinance Relating to Business Licenses Attached is the revised proposed ordinance taking into considera- tion the matters set forth in your memo, which incorporated the comments of the department heads . I agreed and incorporated all of the suggestions you made, except the elimination of the disqualification for a misdemeanor. You will note that proposed Section 6 .08 .080 goes into some detail about the procedure to be followed if the applicant has been con- victed of a felony or misdemeanor. Importantly, it provides that the existence of such a conviction shall be only prima facie dis- qualification of an applicant. Upon such an event occurring, the ordinance provides that the City licensing authority then is to take into consideration the various possible mitigating circum- stances and see if the conviction should be overlooked. Both Chief McHale and I believe that there are a number of high misdemeanors which should have a bearing on granting a license. I 'd rather not comb through the thick Penal Code in an attempt to find them, but merely recognize them when they come about in the licensing process and treat them in accordance with their just merit. I believe the proposed ordinance will greatly improve our licensing process and protect the City against uses which would be contrary to the public interest should the facts require this result. If the ordinance is satisfactory, please place it on the next Council agenda for the Council 's consideration. If you ask me to write an explanatory memo to the Council about the ordinance, I will do so. Otherwise, I will assume that you will do so. AG:fr Attachment ORDINANCE NO. 21 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 6 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUSINESS LICENSES AND REGULATIONS . THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ORDAINS as follows : Section 1 . Section 6 .08 .080 of the Atascadero Municipal Code is amended to read as follows : Section 6 . 08 .080. Grounds for denial of license: Ineligibility for city licenses and permits . A license may be denied if the applicant has knowingly made a false statement in a material matter either in his application or in his testimony before the Council or other body hearing such testimony, or before a referee appointed by the Council . A license shall be denied unless the premises of the proposed business and the operation thereof comply with current building, fire, and health code requirements of the City. In addition, except as otherwise provided herein, conviction (including pleas of guilty and nolo contendere) of a felony or misdemeanor shall be prima facie disqualification of an applicant for the following city licenses or permits : (a) Adult book stores (b) Adult movie theaters (c) Arcade operations (d) Billiard rooms (e) Bingo operations (f) Card rooms (g) Fortune telling (h) Head shops (i) Massage parlors (j) Mechanical amusement devices (k) Pawn shops (1) Taxi cabs The City licensing authority, however, may disregard such con- viction if itis found and determined by such licensing authority that mitigating circumstances exist. In making such determination, the City licensing authority shall consider the following factors : (a) The type of business license or permit for which the person is applying; (b) The nature and seriousness of the offense; (c) The circumstances surrounding the conviction; AG:fr -1- 2/16/80 4/5/80 ORDINANCE NO. (d) The length of time elapsed since the conviction; (e) The age of the person at the time of the conviction; (f) The presence or absence of rehabilitation or efforts at rehabilitation; (g) Contributing social or environmental conditions . The City licensing authority shall give notice of disquali- fication to an applicant disqualified under this provision. Such notice shall be in writing and delivered personally or mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application. An applicant who is disqualified for a city business license or permit under this provision may appeal such determination of disqualification. Such appeal shall be in writing and filed with the Finance Director within ten (10) days of the date of the notice of disqualification. The appeal shall be referred to the City Manager who shall hear and determine the appeal within ninety (90) days after it is filed. The determination of the City Manager on the appeal shall be final . Section 2 . Section 6 .08 .161 is added to the Atascadero Municipal Code to read as follows : Section 6 .08 .161 . Access to information for licensing or permit purposes . Pursuant to Section 11105 of the Penal Code of the State of California, the following officers of the City are hereby author- ized to have access to and to utilize State Summary Criminal His- tory Information when it is needed to assist them in fulfilling licensing duties as set forth in this chapter: (a) City Councilmembers (b) City Manager (c) City Attorney (d) Finance Director (e) Chief of Police Section 3. The provisions of this ordinance are intended to supersede any provision of Ordinance No. 2 which is in conflict therewith. Section 4 . The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, -2- . • w ORDINANCE NO. published and circulated in this City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adoption and post- ing of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance and its certification, together with proof of posting, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 5. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the thirty-first (31st) day after passage . The foregoing ordinance was introduced, adopted, and ordered published at a meeting of the Council held on 1980 , by the following vote : Ayes : Noes : Absent: Robert J. Wilkins, Jr. , Mayor ATTEST: Murray L. Warden, City Clerk Approved as to orm: Approved as to content: %_ 04WI'L't'� Allen Grimes , City Attorney Mur r y L. arden, City Manager -3- ORDINANCE NO. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and cor- rect copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of Atascadero at its regular Council meeting held on 1980 . Murray L. Warden, City Clerk -4-