Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 03/10/1980 AGENDA ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 10, 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 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 February 25, 1980 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. Public hearing on Atascadero General Plan (continued) 2. ' Public hearing on request of Atascadero Door Company and Colony Associates for rezoning a 13 . 6 acre site on the west side of Frontage Road, between Santa Rosa Road and Portola Road from C-H and R-A to C-1 3. Public hearing on the request for Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing single-family residence to a pre- school in an R-A zone, located at 8660 Portola Road 4. Public hearing' on the request for Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a 6-unit apartment project in an R-2-B-2-D zone, located on the east side of Tunitas 5. Public hearing and consideration of Ordinance No. 17 extending the moratorium on the approval of permits for condominium uses , condominium subdivision, and condominium conversions within the City for an eight month period - emergency ordinance C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1 . Ordinance No . 16 authorizing a contract between the City and Public Employees ' Retirement System - second reading 2. Resolution No. 3-80 with the County of San Luis Obispo concerning non-agreement of exchange tax base - Atascadero County Sanitation District 3. Recommendations from the Automobile Club of Southern California regarding study on E1 Camino Real 4. Architect ' s Administration Building alternative floor plans AGENDA - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 10, 1980 Page Two D NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of acceptance of Parcel Map AT 78-041 - Heinemann 2 . Consideration of Ordinance No. 18 accepting the require- ments of Section 13522 of the State Penal Code relating to the training of law enforcement officers - first reading 3 . Salary survey and consideration of adoption of a salary plan E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Manager f • 01 MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 25, 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. Reverend E. B. Claud of the Atascadero Bible Church gave the invocation. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Wilkins ABSENT: None PUBLIC COMMENT 1. Carol Athey pointed out a drainage problem on Portola between the Morman Church and the Chtristian Pre-School. Staff was directed to investigate the matter. 2 . Mayor Wilkins introducted Larry McPherson, Director of ` Public Works/City Engineer and Richard "Bud" McHale, Chief of Police. 3 . Michael Lane advised the public that KIQO would air a pro- gram about nuclear plant operations and possible accidents . Mr. Lane noted the inadequacy of insurance coverage for such acci- dents . A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of February 11 , 1980 (RECOD,21END APPROVAL) 2 . Minutes of the special meeting of February 14, 1980 (RECOr,24END APPROVAL) 3 . Treasurer' s Report, 1-23-80 to 2-20-80 (REC%!MEND APPROVAL) 4. Correspondence (RECOMMEND ITEM BE RECEIVED AND FILED) MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. B. HEARINGS , APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1 . Appearance of representative from the Economic Opportunity Commission requesting Council representation on EOC Board Mr. Steven E. Otto, Executive Director of the EOC outlined EOC activities and programs and requested that Council appoint one of T • • MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 25 , 1980 Page Two their members to serve on the Board of Directors . Mayor Wilkins ` asked Councilman Mackey to represent the City and she agreed. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that Councilman Mackey be appointed as the City' s representative on the EOC Board. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and unanimously carried. 3 . Public hearing on Atascadero General Plan - .continued Mayor Wilkins stated that this matter. would be heard before item. B-2 because there were a large number of people waiting to be heard on this issue. Councilman Highland reviewed his proposals . He explained that his amendment applied only to the orange-colored area on the General Plan Map outside the Urban Services Line. He proposed allowing 1 1/2 acre parcels in the orange area outside the Urban Services Line which would only affect 41 lots and would not make that much differ- ence in the population of Atascadero. The difference in site require- ments between the orange and yellow areas outside the Urban Services Line is the 1 1/2 vs . 2 1/2 acre minimums . If the Council decided to establish a 2 1/2 acre minimum in the orange area, he suggested that they also amend the General Plan Map to reflect the 2 1/2 acre minimum in the orange area. This would permit the public immediately knowing, by looking at the map , the lot minimums without having to read the text. Larry Stevens, Planning Director, reviewed the Planning Commis- sion' s recommendation that the proposal for the 1 1/2 acre minimum parcel size not be favorably considered. Comments were heard from many members of the audience both favoring and opposing the amendment. Ron Nelson stated that the proposed General Plan downgraded his property and requested that it be left as it now exists . MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that this request be referred to the Planning Commission for their recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried There was considerable discussion on the 1 1/2 acre minimum proposal by Council members. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that Council adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation of a 2 1/2 acre minimum. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 25 , 1980 Page Three The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried by roll call vote. Councilman Highland suggested that the map be changed to reflect this action. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the General Plan Map be changed to reflect that area outside the Urban Services Line currently shown as low density, single family residential;ryt a ,,, &.o - - surburban. The motion was seconded by Mayor Wilkins . Councilman Nelson suggested that Staff review the recommenda- tion and report on it before Council acts ; Councilman Stover felt that it should be sent back to the Planning Commission for recommenda- tion. The motion carried with Councilmen Nelson and Stover voting no. Mr. Grimes , City Attorney, noted that the Council ' s action only indicates their intention as far as the General Plan is concerned; the whole plan must be adopted later by resolution. RECESS 9 : 05 p.m. RECONVENED 9 : 15 p.m. Larry Stevens proceeded to review the Planning Commission recom- mendations on items referred to them by Council at their last meeting. The following items were considered and acted upon by Council : a. Request by Roy Luebbers for Low Density Single Family Residential or similar land use designation for property located along the northerly side of Ferro-Carril Road. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request . MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council adopt the Planning Commission' s recommendations . The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried. b. Request by various property owners along Sombrilla between Pueblo and the old golf course for a Multiple Family Residential designation (either low or high density) . The Planning Commission recommended that the westerly side of Sombrilla be changed from Moderate Density Single Family Residential to Low Density Multiple Family Residential. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 25 , 1980 Page Four MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council adopt the recommendations of the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried. C. Request by Jack McCown for High Density Single Family Residential or similar for his property located on the westerly , side of Pino Solo. The Planning Commission recommended that the request be favorably considered. . MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that Council adopt the Planning Commission' s recommendation. The motion was seconded ° by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. d. Councilman Nelson' s previous request that the General Plan include a provision for acquiring or utilizing County owned lots on Lakeview by Atascadero Lake. The Planning Commission recom- mended that the request be favorably considered and that page 64 of the General Plan, third paragraph of the section entitled, "Areas of Open Space. . ." , include the wording, "County-owned lots fronting on Lakeview adjacent to Atascadero Lake." MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the Council adopt the recommendation of the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried. Council decided to continue the General Plan hearing beginning with page 69 to the next meeting. 2. Presentation by A. H, Stephenson of proposed Administra- tion Building remodeling plans Mr. Stephenson reviewed the proposed remodeling plans for the Administration Building. Councilman Mackey was concerned about the proposal to combine the Children' s Library with the Adult Library. She stated that space would be reduced and that traffic in the libraries was such that it would not be able to accommodate the reduc- tion in space. There were some comments from the audience in oppo- sition to the relocation of the Children's Library. Council dis- cussed the matter and suggested that the architect look at using the museum space for combined libraries, or changing the City Offices ' business center to the front of the building using the vestibule as well as adjacent office space. Council approved the concept of the police department in the basement and the police dispatcher' s center in Room 106. It was pointed out that these were high priority items . Mr. Stephenson said that he would come back with detailed drawings of the police MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 25, 1980 Page Five department and dispatcher office along with cost estimates . Also, alternatives would be considered for the library proposal, 4. Public hearing on condominium conversion matter- continued Larry Stevens stated that a draft ordinance had not yet been completed by Staff on the condominium conversion matter. The Planning Commission had suggested several alternatives, however, it was recommended that Council set a public hearing date and consi- der the alternatives at that time. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that a hearing date of March 10, 1980, be set for consideration of extending the condominium conversion moratorium. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried. C. UNFINISHED. BUSINESS 1 . Ordinance No. 16 authorizing a contract with Public Employees ' Retirement System first reading MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that full reading of the ordinance be waived. The motion was seconded by Council- man Nelson and unanimously carried. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that this constitute the introduction of Ordinance No. 16 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried by roll call vote. D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Application for Conditional Use Permit to amend previous Use Permit to allow continued use of the Church School at 8205 Curbaril Avenue - Atascadero Gospel Chapel Mr. Stevens reviewed the history of this matter which included a previous Conditional Use Permit to allow the Christian School to occupy the premises for a two year period ending November 14, 1979. This was to allow them time to find an alternate site. They have had difficulty obtaining an alternate site and are asking for another two year extension to the Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission had recommended approval subject to the conditions that they would vacate the premises no later than August 31, 1981 with no further time extension to be granted; all conditions for the first Conditional Use Permit except No. l remain in effect; and the applicants meet with the City staff to consider alternatives to relieve traffic problems along Curbaril. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 25, 1980 Page Six MOTION: Councilman Stover moved for approval of the Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the Planning Commission's recommendations. The motion was seconded by Council- man Nelson and unanimously carried. 2 . Award bid for communications equipment Mr. Warden reviewed the bid process and the bids received. It was recommended that the bid for the communications console be awarded to Comm Center Corporation in the amount of $21,277.00 and the bid for base station hardware, mobile radios and portable, hand- held radios be awarded to General Electric Company in the amount of $35 , 591.00. Other equipment (CLETS machine, antenna equipment installation charges, and a battery charger) amounts to $17, 625.00 and will be purchased separately either from the County or other vendors. Comments were heard from Bob Meyers of Motorola as to why the Council should award the bid to his company. The total communications package is $74,493.00, It was noted that Council might wish to use a lease/purchase program for obtaining this equipment. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council approve the bids as recommended by Staff and authorize negotiation for the lease/purchase of the equipment . The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried by roll call vote. 3 . Consideration of amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement with the San Luis Obispo Cities and County Area Planning Coordinating Council Mr. Warden reviewed his memo to Council. It was recommended that Atascadero join with some of the other cities in the County in retaining the name of the agency as the San Luis Obispo County and Cities Area Planning Coordinating Council. It was felt that this designation more nearly reflected the activities and purpose of the agency. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 2-80. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. .MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 25, 1980 Page Seven E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council Council members had nothing. 2. City Attorney (a) 14r. Grimes advised that the Court had ruled in the City' s favor in the matter of the City of Atascadero vs,. Daly; the proposedordinance being circulated by the Daly' s has been judged invalid. 3. City Manager (a) Mr. Warden stated that he had been advised by the County that the street striping lines on Atascadero Avenue would be painted by the County. (b) Mr. Warden reviewed the "friendly disagreement" between the City and the County with regard to the transfer fo the Santiation District so that the bonds could be sold without jeopardizing the funding of the new sewer plant. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the Council authorize the action described by Mr. Warden. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried. (c) Mr. Warden stated that legislation will be introduced to permit newly incorporated cities to use their first full year of operation as their base year for Proposition 4 purposes.. (d) Mr. Warden advised that the City will shortly seek proposals for copy equipment. The meeting adjourned at 11 . 25 p.m. Recorded by: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk By: Ardith Davis Deputy City Clerk • 0 bi M E M O R A N D U M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: March 10, 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN - Continued public hearing and referral of reports and recommendations by the Planning Commission on item referred for their review by the City Council on February 25, 1980 After several months of work, the Planning Commission has concluded its review of the General Plan and adopted Resolution 1-80 recom- mending adoption. The Planning Commission recommendation consists of the following: a. The text marked "Exhibit A" which includes: 1`) Amendments and corrections approved by the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors specified in Resolution No. 78-674, adopted December 18 , 1978; 2) Mitigation measures as a supplement to Environmental Impact Report as recommended by the Environmental Coordinator in a letter dated September 14, 1978; and 3) Amendments approved by the Atascadero Planning Commission as recorded in November and December, 1979 minutes and as delineated in the attached supplement. b. The General Plan of Land Use marked "Exhibit B" .including the supplement approved with amendments to the map It should be pointed out that Government Code Section 65356 provides . that " . . .any modification of the proposed plan by the legislative body (City Council) not previously considered by the Planning Commis- sion during its hearing, shall first be referred tothe Planning Commission for report and recommendation, but the Planning Commission shall not be required to hold a public hearing thereon. " . Included as part of this material are reports and recommendations from the Planning Commission on items referred back for their review. The City Council has completed a page-by-page review through Page 68. In the event that this review process is completed, it is appropriate to close the public hearing and direct Staff to prepare a Resolution for consideration on March 24 to adopt the Atascadero General Plan. LAWRENCEEVENS Planning onsultant/Director LS:kp RESOLUTION 1-80 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA JANUARY 7, 1980 PRESENT: Commissioners Cannon, Lilley, Moore, Oglesby, Summers, Wentzel and Chairman Norton ABSENT: Commissioner IN THE .MATTER OF ADOPTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY GENERAL PLAN BEING A COMPREHENSIVE LONG TERM GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO The following resolution is now offered and read: WHEREAS, Section 65300 through Section 65307 of the California Government Code provides for the authority and scope of General Plans consisting of a statement of development policies and diagrams and text setting forth objective principles and standards and plan proposals among others; and WHEREAS, Section 65302 of the California Government Code requires a Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, An integrated Environmental Impact Report and . supplemental letter to the County Planning Commission of September 14, 1978, with suggested mitigation measures to certain portions of the plan have been prepared and reviewed by the County Environmental Coordinator; and WHEREAS, Several public hearings have been conducted by the Atascadero City Planning Commission, including the con- sideration of the Atascadero City General Plan adopted by the County of San Luis <).bispo in December, 1978, as amended; and WHEREAS, Additional a,nendments to the Draft Plan have been proposed and incorporated herein as if made part of the draft copy of the Atascadero City General Plan; and WHEREAS, Adequate notice has been given of the Planning Commission' s consideration of this General Plan including notice as required by Section 65351 of the Government Code; and WHEREAS, The staff of the Commission has reviewed and made recommendations regarding the Draft General Plan prepared as amended by the Commission herein and made part of this draft copy; and WHEREAS, This Commission has carefully considered the proposed Atascadero City General Plan and finds that said Plan constitutes a suitable, logical and timely Plan for the City of Atascadero; • NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Atascadero City Planning Commission: 1. That the Planning Commission after review and consideration of the Environmental Impact Report and supplemental letter of September 14 , 1978, with suggested mitigation measures to certain portions of the Plan find said Environmental Impact Report is adequate 2. Resolve further that the Atascadero City General Plan, including the Environmental Impact Report, be recommended to the Atascadero City Council and replaces the Atascadero General Plan adopted by the County of San Luis Obispo and consisting of: A. The attached text marked Exhibit "A" ,. which includes: (1) Amendments and corrections approved by the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors specified in Resolution No. 78-674 adopted December 18, 1978; (2) Mitigation measures as a supplement to the Environ- mental Impact Report as recommended by the Environ- mental Coordinator in a letter dated September 14, 1978; .and, (3) Amendments approved by the Atascadero City Planning Commission as reflected in the minutes of their meetings in November and December, 1979 and as delineated in the attached supplement. B. The General Plan of Land Use Map marked Exhibit "B" including supplement approved as amendments to the map. On motion by Commissioner Oglesby , seconded by Commissioner Summers and upon the following roll call vote, to wit AYES: Commissioners Cannon, Lilley, Moore, Oglesby, Summers, Wentzel and Chairman Norton NOES: None ABSENT: None 0 • I hereby certify the foregoing as a full, true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the City Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, State of California, at a meeting thereof held on 7th day of January, 1980. w S cretary, Planning Commission City of Atascadero State of California 0 0 S U .P P L E M E N T TEXT CHANGES APPROVED BY THE ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION' Pg Col. Par. Line 1 L 2 3 delete "amends the County Land Use Element and" 1 L 2 4-7 delete 3rd sentence referring to County General Plan 1 L 2 8 delete "County and replace with City, 1 L 4 delete second sentence 43 L delete entire left column 43 R 4-6 delete "The rate of residential construction—problems are dis- cussed in Chapter IX, HOUSING. " 44 L 4 3 amend to read " . . . schools, libraries and board and care facilities. " 44 L 7 amend first sentence to read "Minimum lot sizes within the Urban Services Area shall range from ' A to two' and one-half acres while the minimum lot size outside the Urban Services Area shall be two and one-half acres." 44 R 2 11-13 delete last sentence "Because this plan. formerly designated Rural are increased. " 44 R 4 3 delete first point "The use density . . .does not exceed 36 individual residents per acre. " 45 L 1 add under High Density "The use density. . .does not exceed 36 indivi- dual residents 'per acre. " 45 L 1 amend second sentence under Low Density to read " . . .and fourplexes, but generally no more than 5 dwelling units per building. -2- Pg. Col. Par. Line 45 L 1 add third sentence under Low Density "New projects with more than four units per structure shall require specific design approval. " 45 R #6 delete " . . .with the number. . . the following table: including the table 46 L #15 renumber "15" to "16" and amend to read "Newcondominium projects, planned mobile home developments and stock cooperatives shall be reviewed on an individual basis as community housing needs, neighborhood character, and site improvements will dictate. " 46 L #15 add "15. Where all factors are favorable, board and care facilities . could satisfactorily be developed in designated neighborhood areas. The use density shall not be permitted to exceed that of High Density Multiple Family use. " 46 L #17 add "17. To alleviate the problems arising from the conversion of existing rental units, the City may regulate condor«inium conversions. The City shall revise its zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance regarding condominium conversions in order to: (a) Establish criteria for the con- version of existing multiple rental housing to condominiums, community apartments, stock cooperatives, and new or limited equity stock cooperatives. (b) Reduce the impact of such con- versions on residents in rental housing who may be required to relocate due to conversion of apartments to condominiums, community apartments,- stock cooperatives, and new or limited equity stock cooperatives by providing procedures for notifi- cation and adequate time and assistance for such relocation. (c) Insure that the purchasers of converted housing have been properly informed as to the physi- cal condition of the structure whichi -3- Pg. Col. Par. Line is offered for purchase. (d) Insure that converted housing achieves high quality appearance and safety and is consistent with the goals of the City' s General Plan. (e) Encourage opportunities for hous- ing ownership of all types, for all levels of income and in a variety of locations. (f) Encourage a continuing supply of rental housing for low and moderate income persons and families. 47 L 2 10-12 delete last sentence referring to Countywide Land Use Element 47 L 3 5-8 amend to read " . . .Santa Rosa Road. There are many. . . for the immediate future. " deleting " . . .it is recommended . . . 4 .4 acres in this category. " 47 R #1 delete "completely" 47 R #4 delete "and dangerous 52 L #2 amend #2 to read "2. The area along the west side of El Camino Real from Curbaril Avenue south to the Commer- cial use at the Santa Rosa overpass shall also be upgraded to the status of Industrial Park." 66 L 3 8 change "County to "City" 68 L 3 4 change "County" to "City" 77 L 2 d. change "County-granted" to "City- granted" 88 R 1 delete paragraph "To relieve con- gestion. . .back to El Camino Real. 134 L 9 3 change "County" to "City" -4- Pg. Col. Par. Line 45 L l add the following under "Low Density" : "The use density shall be based upon the criterion of approximately 22 individual residents per acre. The following maxima shall apply: 11 one bedroom apartments per acre 7 two bedroom apartments per acre 5 three bedroom apartments per acre 4 four bedroom apartments per acre or, any combination of the above which, multiplied by standard occu- pancy factors, does not exceed 22 residents per acre. 45 L 4 add paragraph to read "Mobile home parks may be permitted in Single , Family Residential areas at the same densities as if they were stick-built structures and may be permitted in Multiple Family Residential areas at a maximum of 11 dwellings per acre. " 97 R 5 delete references to County in sen- tence: "Although a local Housing Authority. . .under the current County Administration. " 87 R 4 add sentence tc read "Proposed plans to realign and improve Highway 41 from Freeway 101 shall be dropped in order to prevent further bisecting of the community. " 87 R 5 1 delete "temporary:" 88 L C. delete "until the eastern portion of Highway 41 is rerouted. 92 R #3 delete "temporary" and change "a to "an" 9.2 R #3 add a new #3 and renumber 3-18 to 4-19 with the new wording "3. Highway 41 shall not be realigned and improved eastward of Freeway 101." -5- • Pg. Col. Par. Line 1 L 1 2 change "more than a half century" to "nearly three-quarters of a century" 1 R 1 4 change "still stand" to "stood until recently" 2 L 2 2 delete " ,now a County landmark, " 9 L 1 5 change "2311" to "1711 41 R 1 8+ change third sentence to read "In this Plan the Urban Reserve Line generally coincides with the Atas- cadero Colony boundary, except for two Agricultural Preserves and a portion of a third (The Eagle Ranch Agriculture Preserve has a total of 5 , 978 acres of which 2 , 786 acres are within the Colony boundaries) that are located on the periphery of the Colony and except for areas south of Santa Barbara Road and west of the summit' of_ Frog Pond Mountain. " 42 L 1 2, 3 change first sentence to read, "The Suburban Services Area consists of the remainder of the City and the portion of the Eaglet Tract within the City boundaries. " 42 R 1-3 delete the three paragraphs explaining a method of calculation 44 L 7 the wording of the section under "Low Density shall read "Minimum lot sizes within the Urban Services Area shall range from 111 to 2� acres while the minimum lot sizes outside the Urban Services Area shall be 2-� acres. Determination of approp- riate lot sizes shall be based upon such factors as slope of access road to the building site; availability of services, especially sewers; distance from center of the community; general character of neighboring lands; percolation and the area needed for access roads to the building site,. The keeping of poultry. . .," 46 R 1 delete the first paragraph including the table Pg. Col. Par. Line 48 R 3 under Neighborhood Commercial #2 reading, "On the two northern corners of Morro Road and Curbaril .Avenue. " shall be deleted 66 R 1 1, 2 the words "now in the .initial stages of development" should be changed to "which is nearly completed" 77 L 1 2 , 3 should be changed to read " . . .Fire Department has made several recom- mendations to the Fire Board. Among the. . . " 80 R #10 delete reference to Sheriff ' s Substation and renumber 90 R 1 b. delete "b. Designation of another. . . is of high priority.'' 97 R .4 delete last sentence "A proposal. . . has been presented. " 43 R #8 the following wording is suggested "' 8 . In the calculation of lot area for the purposes of considering land divisions and in determining per- mitted numbers and types of animals allowed, gross acreage shall be used. However, in determining permitted densities for multiple family resi- dential developments, net acreage (excluding land area needed for street rights-of-way) shall be used. various placesain text Use the word "shall" in place of "should" and "will" in those instances where binding standards are intended (i. e. , regulations , principles) and retain the word "should" in those instances where flexibility is desired ' (i .e. , policy proposals, property acquisitions, capital improvements) 77 R 2 4 add the following sentence, "The French medical Clinic, located on the south end of El Camino Real, also provides medical services to the community. " 77 R 3 6 delete sentence beginning, "It may be possible. .. " and insert the following, "A Dial-a-Ride program e - service o ' i"° ( Citi e�-►stU ted. " -7- Pg. Col. Par. Line 76 R 2 delete the last two sentences and insert the following: "The City of Atascadero is in the process of establishing its own loolice s ' e establis ment of those serr - vicibs, consideration is being given to a public safety function combin- ing some police and fire services. " 76 R 3 delete the entire paragraph 91 L c rewrite this sentence to read, "The lot on Entrada Avenue between 5975 Entrada Avenue and the Post Office building. " SUPPLEMENT MAP CHANGES APPROVED BY THE ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION 1. The CEMETERY shall be shown as a public facility on Map VII-3. 2. Lots fronting on the southerly side of Palomar Avenue, adjacent to the Atascadero Regional Park, shall be shown as Moderate Density Single Family Residential. 3.. Santa Ysabel Extension .to the County Clinic property. (see attached sketch) .4. Lots on the westerly side of Santa Ysabel from the Thrifty complex to Pueblo and on the westerly side of Sinaloa between Pueblo and Curbaril shall be shown as Low Density Multiple Family Residential. 5. The west side of E1 Camino Real from Curbaril Avenue south to the commercial use at the Santa Rosa overpass shall be shown as Industrial Park. J1lV f� \ ` �4 J ti ! N �J r 1 � U(NTOL- - �,. Q C S! �� \QQ'r�� u4 ��� 'lam �� /•f 1 "YS4� �6,17A G S ►� � T C �-� - /"USI C N N'co. 3 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED REVISIONS: 1. A map change from Low Density Multiple Family Residential to High Density Multiple Family Residential for the northerly side of Capistrano extending to Country Club Drive. 2. A map change from Moderate Density Single Family Residential to Retail Commercial for the northwesterly corner of Coromar and Portola. 3. A map change for all land outside the Urban Services Line now designated Low Density Single Family Residential from that designation to Suburban Single Family Residential. 4. A map change from Industrial to Low Density Single Family Residential for property located on Ferro-Carril as shown on the attached sketch. 5. A map change from Moderate Density Single Family Residential to .; Low Density Multiple Family Residential for the westerly side of Sombrilla between Pueblo and the Quail Ridge development. 6. A text change on Page 64, Paragraph 3, inserting the following wording under the section entitled, "Areas of Open Space that should be considered for acquisition by a public agency and/or preserved for recreation" : "County-owned lots fronting on Lakeview adjacent to Atascadero Lake" REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON REVISIONS TO ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN 1) Request by Ron Nelson for a Multiple Family Residential land use designation (High or Low Density) for property located along the south side of Hermosilla near San Jacinto The present zoning is R-2-B-2 and the recommended General Plan designation is High Density Single Family Residential (h acre minimum lot size) . The proponent feels that the General Plan map change would be appropriate because of his desire to construct a duplex in addi- tion to the existing residence on his . 41 acre lot. To support that desire the proponent points to the existing R-2 zoning and at least one existing duplex (or triplex) located on San Jacinto. In reviewing the subject area, it would appear that single family uses are the dominant uses and in no way could the area be represented as an apartment area. The Commission should also consider the size of the proponent' s lot in relationship to the minimum h acre lot size. Circulation to the subject site and area is limited to narrow and winding streets which are designed for compatibility with slopes and contours in the area. There is no doubt that a change in land use designation for the pro- ponent' s property only is inappropriate. If consideration is given to a change, it should include the area south of Hermosilla and west of San Jacinto now designated High Density Single Family Residential. It would also appear that if a multiple designation is deemed accept- able, that lot density is most appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the proponent' s request not be favorably considered. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that multiple development would be inconsistent with the neighborhood and that changing the Gneral Plan designation for the entire block was not appropriate. ,q Qcp5 APS C- I 183- 13--Z 'B-2 - NEL 5nti1 R�QUC- S T CRy� /H 0 Sr f T• Q s �o a ,9 <ow F /All 4L S� 5 AgOSED GENERat. PuUJ h VO �o � M E M O R A N D U M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: March 10, 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: 2790604 : 1 - REZONING FROM C-H and R-A to C-1 - ATASCADERO DOOR COMPANY, INC. AND COLONY ASSOCIATES The Planning Commission recommends approval of the change of zoning from C-H. and R-A to C-1-D with the` "D" to mean "Departmental Review, with particular attention to insuring attractive appearance from public roads by means of appropriate landscaping and screening with a Planned Development allowing discretionary approval of the proposed uses to be submitted prior to commencement of development activities. The Planning Commission concurs with the findings recommended in the Staff Report prepared by the County Planning Department. It should be pointed out that there was considerable discussion con- cerning which zoning qualifications might be considered to be con- sistent with the Retail Commercial designation .recommended in the General Plan. There was some support because of the location and nature of the site to rezone to C-H. In lieu thereof, after consider- able discussion, the Commission decided to use the "D" designation as specified above. It is their desire to at least encourage overall site plan prior to development of the site with careful review of proposed uses. In the event that City Council concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation, it would be appropriate to direct Staff to prepare an ordinance and ordinance map for first reading to be considered on March 24. LA4VRENC STEVENS PlanninV Consultant/Director LS:kp PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: February 19, 1980 FROM: Development Review Section SUBJECT: Z790604: 1 - ATASCADERO DOOR COMPANY, INC. AND COLONY ASSOCIATES - REZONING FROM C-H AND R-A TO C-1, ATASCADERO (Accepted June 4, 1979) SPECIFIC REQUEST the applicant is requesting a rezoning from R-A (Suburban Residential) and C-.H (Highway Commercial) to C-1 (General Shopping) .for a 13. 6 acre site on the west side of Frontage Road, between Santa Rosa Road and Portola Road, Atascadero. Approval of the rezoning would bring the zoning of the site into conformity with the adopted 1978 Atascadero General Plan. No immediate plans for development have been proposed. A Negative Declaration for this request' s Environmental Determination was issued by the Environmental Coordinator on October 26, 1979 , with the following conditions: 1. The adoption of a D designation on the C-1 zone request to insure Planning Department input for the maintenance of the visual quality of potential developments. 2 . Comprehensive drainage and erosion control plans to be reviewed and approved by the County Engineering Department as per standard County procedures. ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN INFORMATION EXISTING ZONING: 8. 0 acres of R-A and 5. 6 acres of C-H SURROUNDING ZONING: North C-H South - P-A East - M-1-D (518) and C-H West - R-A GENERAL PLAN: Retail Commercial . (1978 Atascadero General Plan) SITE CONDITIONS SIZE: Approximately 13. 6 acres TOPOGRAPHY: Fairly level with two natural drainage swales running southwesterly from Frontage Road SOILS: High erosion potential; moderately high land- slide risk indicated by Seismic Safety Element Z790604 : 1 Atascfero poor Company, Inc./ • Colony Associates Page Two IMPROVEMENTS: Abandoned gas station on the north corner, otherwise vacant VEGETATION: Vacant except for some clusters of oak trees on the north end; native grasses throughout SERVICE CONSIDER- Within Atascadero County Sanitation District ATIONS: and Atascadero Mutual. Water District AREA CONSIDERATIONS SURROUNDING LAND USES: North - Single family residences South - Single family residences East Highway 101 with miscellaneous com- mercial uses beyond West - Single family residences with a school beyond STAFF COMMENTS This rezoning request is intended to bring the zoning for the site into conformity with the adopted 1978 Atascadero General Plan, which designates the site as suitable for retail commercial uses. Such uses are not permitted under the present R-A zoning and are subject to Departmental Review in the C-H zone. Erosion is an important consideration for the site, as indicated by the "moderately high landslide risk" designation in the Seismic Safety Element. Yet the essentially level terrain indicates that the risk of landslide can be mitigated. Comprehensive drainage and erosion control plans should be approved by the County Engineering . . Department prior to the issuance of any construction permits for site development. The final consideration is the high visibility of the site from Highway 101. The requested C-1 zoning would permit a number of retail commercial uses that would not be subject to any discretionary approvals. Conceivably, the development of the potential permitted uses could erode the quality of views from the freeway if attractive siting, screening and architectural methods are not used. This con- cern could be addressed by adding a "D" to the requested C-1 zoning which would require Departmental Review approval for all uses. This approach would provide an opportunity for requiring appropriate controls on subsequent development proposals. RECOMMENDATION It is the Staff recommendation that this rezoning be approved as follows: Z790604 :1 Atasc0ro Door Company, Inc./ Colony Associates Page Three 1. Rezone the site from R-A and C-H to C-1-D with the "D" to mean: "Departmental Review, with particular attention to insuring attractive appearance from public roads by means of appropriate landscaping and screening. " It is further recommended that this action be based on the following: Findings: A. The recommended rezoning would be consistent with the Retail Commercial designation of the adopted Atascadero General Plan. B. Adoption of the recommended "D language will reduce the visual impact of future commercial- development Report prepared by Barbara J. Heinrich and approved by Warren Hoag, Supervisor Development Review Section • Al 1 g � ;����� ,c`�'�'• •�`'fit O `,,;j!/0 - J' '.�r\ : ,.`/ . -O .•. • ((- rye/`. . ' \ ` O — tb • • • �3Y C NZ A IETN Pte~ �S I T E °�-'- \\ o , - --- 2 G / cps 3 • _ 4� �• Z02 • • a �y N ',\� •" G _. ° `�• � ,,; _gam - f` S� / an Fa \Rp /008 �.• `� J w • pk �� , •� --� ' _ . C �-�, ��� � 965 f — X34 101 ., v �y ? ^ _ Al- 1130 l130 ( — � a:. • , " • �� j ;:, Ro �,© •" VICINITY MAP 1 " 3y p� L PA I lc All LC,--74r-14-9 1r .: —e 13 pi 38 �o J��°.• : �L,c•,` \ 6 \\P (^.ioi� Pru3 I -_A I B Go^37 GO 36 3 3 s/a)I ,} 34 C-4Q �,�F.. L�,'',I/'1 •°+- � P-43• PtloAQ I� 0tie1 neo P-34 G34 0 / .2 r O ,ShTE 18 3AVE ING►pp• 2 � r 3 Peµ r \P-34 i - P' ;.. CO � Nat- RG\\\\�� �s1�i d �/ �� f "�--� ... ` , -.R� C�i/n •uullel+.i. c077-22 \\\ \\ P-178 a _ - 46�CJ 74 3`'lb t� ,\ m 10'-. S U61l to 13 v 14 Y c� ��qq '` , co% \/ PAfC.2' lk. `S._ _ �' P-385 - z LO-75-29 u�su ,v l �n '7 _ - ort � r` Z i 5if441 P48 : ol:i\�`��-a \4 ' ` 90 \ 3 ` ,- _ i�` ILO-7J-124 —323 �G�-'l0 .� I j "�• . � Qa4 P: 1 -A 3-A 3-A }8. . pp R 2 +h PNC1 \ R — IF -A '9 10-A 38 / 6 A+eA 1 lgao P C-JI74-52 9 Z O N I N G r �"�, .r:- t ':� J..l;•�1/` „.Lia r'a ` L �+ w; J-`•' •` ,:1 %�� '�' �✓ .IKI x'1!4 L✓� � *%/ ; �.•,/.. � � "I��� C• y !t/ .I�`l�, k U. �w �'. f W� � v •�s. ly ,� 1- �t tea♦ �[[,`d �• _y �•_ •-. y ,, ♦ / Y .J.✓Y�i l J� � Sl / •�••:�•:�• • !moi/// •`, i�/Y� •' y. � ^ � ' !`i V t�� ,���.• t' •:••:•• � ' } Ad, / IrNOLIS±RIA:: �. • J y1 .'} y .^r. ri4 + r r ��'E r • r; SIT RETAIL COMMERCIAL_.&A. •Y' fi l~ •� PUBLIC # s MOO OENSITY SINGLE FAMILY 44 P qo �• '. .: ; . : .. • .1. GENERAL PIAN • • M E M O R A N D U M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: March 10, 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: U800122: 1 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TO A PRESCHOOL IN AN R-A ZONE - JOHN SYKES The Planning Commission, with two dissenting votes, recommends approval of U800122: 1 subject to Conditions 1-10 as recommended in the attached report prepared by the County Planning Department with the addition of Condition No. 11 which ..states "The play area in the rear yard shall be totally enclosed within a solid six-foot fence of masonry or wood construction prior to issuance of a business license. " The consensus of the Planning Commission is to support the findings outlined in the Staff Report. Several residents in the immediate vicinity appeared at the public hearing and objected to the establishment of a preschool in this area stating that it would be a commercial use, traffic would be excessive, noise would be excessive and that a more suitable loca- tion should be found. LAWRENCEAnsultant/Director EVENS Planning LS:kp • PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Atascadero Planning Commission DATE: March 3, 1980 FROM: Development Review Section SUBJECT: U800122 :1 - JOHN SYKES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TO A PRESCHOOL IN AN R-A ZONE, ATASCADERO. (Accepted January 22, 1980) SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicants have requested a Conditional Use Permit to allow the conversion of an existing single-family residence at 8660 Portola Road, Atascadero, into a preschool. The applicants intend to live in a portion of the house, also. The existing house is a single story structure approximately 2, 688 square feet in area. The preschool addition will be 1, 100 square feet added on the back portion of the existing structure producing a total of 3, 788 square feet for the proposed preschool and residence. A looped driveway and three . parking spaces are proposed by the applicant in the front of .the site with direct access to Portola Road. A large play area would be provided in the backyard of the residence. ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN INFORMATION Existing Zoning: R-A (Suburban Residential) - Existing General Entire site is within the Urban Services Line Plan: of the 1978 Atascadero General Plan and desig- nated Moderate Density Single Family Residential. SITE CONDITIONS Topography: Approximately one acre of level terrain. Existing Uses and One single-family residence; two small storage Improvements: sheds; extensive landscaping including nine oak trees; a circular driveway; a 6 ' redwood fence on the south, west, and one-half of the east side. Access: Portola Road, paved two-lane travelway with no curb, gutter or sidewalk. Services: Water provided by Atascadero Mutual Water Company and sewer by the Atascadero County Sanitation District. AREA CONSIDERATIONS Character: Located in the southern portion of the City of Atascadero in an area of single-family residences on suburban-sized parcels. U800122. 1 - John SWS • Page Two Surrounding Land North, West - single-family residences Uses: East - 40 ft. wide dirt access road to residences located to the south with a single-family residence beyond South - single-family residences with Santa Rosa Elementary School beyond STAFF COMMENTS Staff is supportive of this proposal for a preschool because it would be compatible with the existing residential area and the nearby Santa Rosa School. Parking and circulation does need to be addressed, however. The existing. 40 foot easement along the eastern boundary of the site provides access to the residences south of this project. The existing residence on the site has informally used this easement as a secondary access to Portola Road to provide a circular driveway for the residence. The continued use of this driveway would be very useful for the school in terms of drop-off and pick-up of children. The Staff supports this idea, but feels permission to use the easement should be obtained from the property owners as a condition of approval before the school opens and produces more traffic on it. If the permission is not granted, some sort of circular drive should be provided on-site by the applicant for adequate internal circulation with access to the easement fenced off. RECOMMENDATION It is the Staff recommendation that this application be approved subject to the following: Findings: A. The proposed project would not be incompatible with the existing neighborhood. B. The proposed project is consistent with the mandatory findings set forth in Section 22 .92 . 080 of the County Zoning Ordinance. C. The proposed project is consistent with the Moderate Density Single Family Residential designation of the 1978 Atascadero General Plan. Conditions: 1. If permission is obtained to use the easement along the eastern boundary, site development is to be consistent with the approved site plan. 2. If permission is not obtained to use the easement along the eastern boundary, submit a revised site plan for Planning Department review and approval prior to application for a building permit, said plan to indicate the following: a. The location of a second circular driveway along the eastern property line totally on the project site. U800122: 1 - John Spes • Page Three 3. Provide a minimum of three (3) off-street, parking spaces with a temporary parking area for two cars in the circular driveway; said spaces and driveways shall be provided and permanently maintained with gravel or red rock. 4 . Removal of the oak trees is not approved at this time; future removal of said trees shall be subject to first obtaining a tree removal permit per procedures specified in Title 19 of the County Code. 5. Submit for Planning Department review and approval a letter stating that permission has been given to use the easements to Assessor' s parcels 56-191-34 and 56-191-35 for access to the project site prior to issuance of a business license; if no permission is granted, extend the circular driveway to Portola Road totally on the project site and fence off the access to the easement. 6. The proposed use of the structure for a preschool shall be subject to review and approval of the change in building occupancy by the Building Inspection Section of the Planning Department prior to issuance of a business license. 7. Site and building plans shall be reviewed by the following agencies. Provide the Planning Department with letters or other documentation verifying review and any requirements from these agencies prior to issuance of a building permit or establishment of the use: a. Atascadero Fire Department b. County Health Department 8. On-site signing shall be limited to an aggregate area of three (3) square feet for the entire project, not to exceed the height of the building. All signing to be reviewed and approved by the Development Review Section of the Planning Department prior to issuance of a building permit or sign permit. Flashing or rotating signs and wind-activitated devices are prohibited. Signs on buildings shall be mounted flush with the building face. 9 . This approval is granted for a preschool with a maximum of 25 students and operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6 : 00 p.m. 10. Site development shall be limited to the additions as proposed on the approved site plan unless an additional Departmental Review approval is secured. Report prepared by Rory Anne Walsh and reviewed by Warren Hoag, Supervisor Development Review Section Commissioners , In order to help clarify any questions you may have in regard to the project for which this use permit application is submitted I am also including this description of our plans . We wish to develop a preschool at the residence in pending , which will serve from twenty to twenty—five children . The style of teaching will be mainly from the Montessori school of teaching , but will also include other teaching styles as well . Because of the monetary backing which we have we intend to create a quality preschool environment for the students . Furthermore , because of our records of hard work and dedication to our responsibilities , we know that our plans will succeed . The school will be attached to the existing home . The new addition will more than meet the state requirements for space . All fixtures will also meet all standards . The school will be situated on almost one acre of land , .most of which will be access- able to the children ;for play . We will develop the yard area into three play areas , one for water play , one forbicycleand wagon play , and one for grass and associated play. We intend to make good asthetic use of the large oak and other trees of the property , and develop other areas in the yard with other planting . At no time will any of the trees or landscaping be removed , only improved ._ In regard to accessability to the property, there are three entrance ways from two circle driveways off Portola Ave . Parking is sufficient , and the asthetics of the drives are tremendous . One other significant feature of this setting , is that it is almost next door to Santa Rosa Elementary School , which would mean convenience for parents with elementary and preschool children in school . The noise level would be minimal , and even in harmony with that from the elementary school . We have given consideration to all requirements of both state and county , and are trying to fulfill these requirements accordingly. Our ambitions and dedication are sincere , because in all our search ings and investigations we have not found a location that seemed more suited for our plans and future. We appreciate your kind conciderat'ions on our application . Sincerely , John W. Sykes \\ / , 13_E ` PARI .�^s` 6 15-8 9 �2 15 34 4. 25 t�� � - - 5-C�3a6 - - "I \ paw L. At F //\EQ sT Cr +mss•:. 2 O 39 J,, 38 100, RA D Poon �'�"� �. 36 A3 ` sr &)i 09 v P-257 34 s 3 _ 2 8-1..- 2 2 PAR A` .. 'b G34 0 Q -75 co 76-260 v OAK. 30 12 ITE rt 1 \ \ - /z �° -34 8 4 p 78 5 ��'� Y P- co74�." u- \ 10ft - ° C - i frf"• � 2 14 16'- 10 11 I-A 0. P44T, 748 / 17 \ 3° J� A, v \/\j too i s10 3-A PAR ZONING 24 \\FAR.1 \�PAR.Z \PAR.1 PM \ ADVO 25 PAR.3 \ ��\ ,��,-' Co ,r-rZ7 VICINITY MAP � �•�. � .hJ•"„YJJ 1a�t1J•'.,J �Lr" �•�lit.: iy,.VV,.,•.✓ •'�-.� •� ;.�, .•> a �_r> � 'J""L,Jn"'j7-.ft J ,•'>� ,�„:i�t�'J`t>... JQY A. 1 r,: •n; � •T 11 t�!• s � `"�: .i ,t.I .v ham.yV� �„/. l••J iI. 1 F �+ " `�� r' fI 'n ✓`'J�i�JJ�r :l .+'' �/ .T y rte' Q✓�. r J):. - •♦ a w��j , �' �` vJ 'J, ..�� f,. ••t�. J} Y� `i • •11. 1 -. •J �� y t ;•�,.,,;.'.� ��+�/ ♦ 1•• •♦• e♦•♦ ! v1e1 ems• • ♦ k ► •` e1• •• 1♦•04 a ,,r��� '�- �. ..1,•,... w •• ee oo ow- OW 41 40 00 F e ♦• h SITE, COMME CIAL ,MOO. DENSING SITY J *- LE .- FAMILY w • `� T - PUBLIC e t ase :k .'r •:L �i �•' ::.:::::::::.:::::;:': GENERAL PLAN (1:) R�IGENC.B =P ZL fSCS-Igl-?yj' *NOr 03 ill CE P1�Y e=iFMENT CN)fD�REGWDOD mIma LINK FEMA INC �3, `i i - �\ � GGNCt:ci2 ��D�'• AND C,W'h'v�I� MNIe4N(2P FOUNTk]N 1 3E ( SPOl12 PLAY PREP. 41 -"'XD-191-3 v LANK 0.1kI,E o m".M � \. CN) Pte.�-N,�• �o� .. �?W0. " T iA NITON I IZ 3 c sN RX ) vF-L t�NE To � � i ) i � Cc)I�L•IQt. LITE f= A,X\ I SSI '' ' ACDITION •t•ND B � I • , --PlM-"=HC OL ALOITION M�• arRlr�s• JGt-iN ��� � �1y:111=3G'-C RiTZrG�J� �D � \ p�C/ s • C�)UTILIY P_�.c p.TA�CP.C:�i201 CAtt 1=0IeN I P �_ `"� i2p� SITE PLAN M E M O R A N D U .M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: March 10, 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: U790622 : 2 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUC- TION OF A 6-UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT IN A R-2-B-2-D ZONE - DAN DAY/RALPH NEIDIGH The Planning Commission recommends denial of U790622:2 based upon the findings presented in the Staff Report prepared by the County Planning Department with the addition of the following finding that, the intensity of the proposed development would create traffic and circulation problems in the neighborhood. Several residents in the neighborhood expressed opposition to the project because they felt it was not suitable for the area based upon drainage considerations and the density of the proposed development. LAWRENCE ST ENS Planning Co . sultant/Director LS:kp PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Atascadero Planning Commission DATE: March 3, 1980 FROM: Development Review Section SUBJECT: U790622: 2 DAN DAY AND RALPH NEIDIGH - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 6-UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT IN A R-2-B-2-D ZONE, ATASCADERO (Accepted June 22, 1979) SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a 6-unit apartment project in a R-2-B-2-D zone located on. the east side of Tunitas Avenue in Atascadero. The project would consist of two one-story buildings linked by a covered carport. The structures would have mostly stucco exteriors with some wood siding. Each individual unit would have two bedrooms and two baths. The applicants are also proposing seven parking spaces: two in enclosed garages, four in carports and one open space. Landscaping has also been proposed. A Conditional Negative Declaration for this request's Environmental Impact Determination was issued by the County Environmental Coordinator on October 26,1979, with the following conditions: 1. Design of the property to maintain the usual character of the surrounding neighborhood and to supply adequate parking as reviewed and approved by the County Planning Department. 2 . The oaks that presently exist on the site should be retained. 3. Comprehensive drainage and erosion control plans to be sub- mitted and approved by the County Engineering Department as per standard County procedures. ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN INFORMATION The site is zoned R-2-B-2-D, the Low Density Multiple Family Resi- dential District with a minimum building site area of 10, 000 square feet, which allows multiple family residential uses of more than 3 units in any structure subject to first obtaining a Conditional Use Permit. The "D" requirement stipulates that setbacks are to be equivalent to those required by the underlying "R" zone. The County-adopted 1978 Atascadero General .Plan shows the site as Low Density Multiple Family Residential. The version of that plan being considered for adoption by the City proposes certain refinements to the language in the text on page 45 regarding the Low Density. Multiple Family Residential category. Projects would generally be limited to no more than 5 units per building with specific design approval required for structures with more than 4 units. Overall project density would be limited to approximately 22 residents per acre and the maximum number of two-bedroom units allowed would be U790622 : 2 - Dan D*and Ralph Neidigh Page Two seven per acre. These changes have been approved by the City Plan- ning Commission and are presently being considered for adoption by the City Council. SITE CONDITIONS The site is a triangular 26, 720 square foot parcel which is presently vacant. Extensive vegetation covers the site, including several oak, eucalyptus, and willow trees. The site fronts on Tunitas Avenue, which is a paved two-lane travelway without curb, gutter or sidewalk. Water and sewage disposal at the site will be provided by the Atasca dero Mutual Water Company and the community sewer system. AREA CONSIDERATIONS The site is situated in an area characterized predominately by single family residential development although the zoning provides for multiple family uses. Land uses adjacent to the site include single family residences to the west, triplexes to the south and north, and vacant land to the east with two single family residences beyond. STAFF COMMENTS The primary concerns with this project are its compatibility with surrounding uses in the area, site design and parking considerations, and the question of consistency with the General Plan. Although the surrounding uses to the north and south of the proposed project are duplexes, the neighborhood gives the appearance of a . large-lot, low-density residential neighborhood. The narrow street and rolling terrain of the site neighborhood emphasizes this appear- ance. The addition of a six-unit apartment complex with carports and two separate buildings would not be compatible with the existing visual character of the area. The large swale that extends along the entire west and south boundaries inhibits the development of this site by requiring buildings to be placed along the northern boundary. This swale also provides the majority of the drainage for this parcel, and it does not appear from the site plan submitted that adequate drainage and erosion control measures have been taken. It would also appear that the proposed plan would require removeal or substantial disturbance of most, if . not all, trees on the site. Additionally, the proposed site plan does not provide a sufficient number of parking spaces or a workable on-site circulation pattern. The County Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of 7 spaces for the project at a ratio of 1-1/6 spaces per unit. However, it should be noted that it has been long-standing County practice to require 1� spaces per unit for projects subject to a discretionary approval such as a Conditional Use Permit. In keeping with that practice, a total of 9 spaces should be required for the project. Providing additonal parking is particularly important because two bedroom units are proposed. However, the proposed maneuvering area for the spaces U790622: 2 - Dan D10and Ralph Neidigh Page Three is ineffeciently designed and some backing out directly into the street would be required. Because of the limited size and narrow configuration of the site, it appears unlikely that the project could be successfully redesigned to provide both two more spaces and a satisfactory circulation pattern. A final concern is the project' s inconsistency with the pending amendments to the General Plan pertaining to the Low Density Multiple Family Residential category. When adopted, the new standards would limit the number of two-bedroom units on the site to four as the maximum number of such units allowed would be 7 per acre. The project, as presently proposed, represents a density of over 9 units per acre. Approximately 10, 600 square feet of additional lot area would be needed to accommodate a total of 6 two-bedroom units in compliance with the new standards. Given the site'.s various constraints, 4 units would be a more realistic total for achieving an efficient and attractive redesign of the project. The goals of such a redesign should include retaining the drainage swale, minimizing tree disturbance, and providing sufficientparking with a satisfactory circulation pattern. RECOMMENDATION It is the Staff recommendation that this application be denied based on the following: Findings: A. The proposed project is incompatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. B. The proposed project is inconsistent with the mandatory findings set forth in Section 22 . 92 .080 of the County Zoning Ordinance. C. The proposed project is inefficiently designed and would produce negative drainage, vegetation, and parking impacts. D. The density of the proposed project is inconsistent with the pending standards for the Low Density Multiple Family Resi- dential designation of the Atascadero General Plan. Report prepared by Rory Anne Walsh and approved by Warren Hoag, Supervisor Development Review Section or- '' _q=�4,0 H ` L\' A S U N C I O N q,� c, ,P •e�01 v qo.D \ •,r r.Js O f 1� MgiS/ yqJ. J, Oqe L 9 L 1 p0.0 4 •fM1Y L 9 qy 0 •f: rJ( F SOLFDC cvCAyDq�p...q . y♦ e•q0 q h f Y U `q 1 l Mv'JgpD♦O FPU + 40 yv:J, Mv.S, r°v J �� J .• �,� C ♦O O,�( O F H C q \ v,1Q e0 •fH t_.�Osy o F4U F e J aL on .vF YOST L° J� f H s.a v`�L ji4P 4. u 5 6M i,y9 i p. rn O W p p0 �q p OLOq ] +SC e'L\ • �+ Cos • �^ J'In � pJ�N• �\a � O 2 ( y G 90 <� , ( MY. p0 • T'L\9 /J J C A°•° - .BaorD \Y R A N C NOITT A� 4 p Fyi.� fL O q IT •J F pry v t pOH+06 CI])\ .'// P L y vpyvl2 f \ // - 82 1 TFM1f/F F _ gOgO O f LES M1D\ .aFi• p y0 q0 'M1 F L f;Y t b♦ S H C, v,7i : YF 4 vCp d O y• 101 V qh OL y M1O a y foe M VFNUF d w\Op LO •r7p � M°� q LI P G qy v Qf L y ey( 1, - ♦L Gsi ♦q�D uir. ;•f COYgCp YI i,4Q D.0 P G `0JJ i(` ♦LFM1YF >OLwFO• 3 ;' y�99 M�9• S. /pQ ♦ �y >• J �f _9 s. II 1:f y^pp0`�\.Yp 91 \v O, pDSp0.`O 4 66b Cvi,v LO � •' II 3,4 3r\! F' v v(4L. pp eq 4 "11 .NDIl' ; My q,Oar♦ Bsr� °„b ±yam�4 �!Cq (fN II A1QsCQderO °°y066 vaP by�4YF`r o NpJ + •pF ?/• L`\�'���Ir II 8. ___ fPJ vEN.DO Iv ♦F ? Ov' v'Y 1� FM1�, M1L f ?' O•° Y ♦fq N♦Id7 �F \� `���o9 Jii ' pp .B •q Nt d % �s Bq Bq 5 po 41 yvos7 fOyeq qYF"Yt VIOL FCq •Y N.Crw I[Nf0 E• Oy • L1 C My 9 P w♦IBT Nj /ti 0. q J \Mdc •H °p•i JC 1 LVC'A ,0 h T. 40 Fpu \o q • 'IJ 'Q pizoo yq s.q Q i p° .LOO 37 •Lr\ •r5(. • CJ dy I � •.JLY 9 JE p° •M1O i • I. M4,BB L -V 41 7` •VC BN.\ W •f O� L (�pv >glNu! 92 ^ s.N •NDB(S \vF y' ,F , - 4• M°' G315J 101 p• R Lel y4 Ai FI r[ v,B9 rp, f 'f n •�',� q�~00 � y� k\L �OF G` SpN CL(w[M i! J' • O q 4 It X w4,95 p+v M°O ay~ W / 41 VICINITY MAP � D • FAU V06 ar f.0 Y Loge o 06Jf„ (506) 4 5 - 22 2J / P-431 20 J 6 a.t 13 ^i. A, 8 10-q 221 21 4 S •-•• 16: IS _I4 g lar 3 17 /q //q 12 i 9. s la L e3 ZS /3 4 13 8 9 v24 15� L �/ 'Qo e• 92 �2 12 se 26 /� a 6 �1,. _. 13 %� Pe>;•61 66 � �, *°►7 ter / r59 68 4 67 16 eek 2e O IT 16 I 59 69 s $ /g �,_ � 70 tel: 116 ZK 1 I9 19 ag 50 51 52 sss �� 30 M �s -,81 20 s4 ►�/1 J'I I s � 21 s3 31 S 22. 48 T) .78 6 16 23 oP 30 a a P a 79 7B 32 P. l 5 4 24 a k 80 34 � PAR.B 3 061 25 2e A 30-C m a2 36 37 a3 04 � 3 1a 4.u��o571,•3_ 85 85. /,• ..,/,'- 35 yl, 'r�:i 26 34 6 2. j P4R.q 28 / 35 74 3 19 ;20�s ,y v.39 -6e 3s ap a 15 / • / / �` 1 PAI;.C 2T C3 17 /9 /O 27•A e° � G 2 �30 6 0 / 42 � • ' - 40 41 39 13 8 5,14 /i' oa\ P-3D2 6 / ,A / 15 J$ s ` 2 6 416: 6 7 O 30 a ?/ A 1-741 2 4 ® 4?,3 e 10 18 3 9 Y q r i ?Y RL A 43 3/ Z 19 N. 2 •::}•y 3 S ITE. TE9 s• o S 20 I ® 11 12 r45 P9 ' F 2 ♦ \ VS4 �- rr 7 L 21 22 23 24 . ZZ / Rbitto. 1_ t-1 ►-i P 53g 15 4 3 p 1 11 so / 12 8 1 I _—� S/I � � �P-226 • _ j7\ 7 Q? 7A T Is�q �>sri - 0 --r� �• L r0 12 1 h� a � 5 q ► Pil'�7 1 P `''�/ �:�°gra 8 a iso 0 �o r 6 6 . 0 61 61LA �1�R.76 b a� •'Si P-159 �0, z ZONING '` as e o. .3 �1 ah 4 ►L INAS RIVER y —ns we .•;.;.'::::}y.��',.►. ::•;•::::�; ::'.".•,..� �I� .1 f,•�� �' � moi.: i`�' . i � ry•.y r. " lam, !•�,�( j t,1 ' �` � � rte < �+1's.j ,�/Y.�- {F '�.�` !• L, •t:. .� MOO DENSITY SINGLE FA Ly • L ' '�".a•. < .t:. 1•° ••e;...:;;: ` s art.• "Ci;a;;?:::it:`�:•:•:::i::}:}il:;%4"' :`.i'r�'�•,�` �fi::z: •s;.t5:•s •:i :1W r r. .::ic:•• .:. : . r - LOW OE N I Y MULTIPLE -Ly- 14 •'I�', :� J %:, .+ ,4•,:i x } �rF' HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY•• p �:.'�• :• fir _ '••�'�. ,• ..,.1.- r GENERAL o o ti V � V 0 1,, J. low .10 rtp ? Wi fn r ul / o- I ' ,1r73 T 11�Nlir UL 611. �� VCOD i I 11 4 !j h � v i SITE PLAN I I, I � FT o 0 II. iJ F Ii zi z� 4 III I ELEVATIONS M E M O R A N D U M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: March 10, 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: EXTENSION OF MORATORIUM ON CONDOMINIUMS AND CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS At the meeting of February 25, 1980, the City Council directed Staff to schedule a public hearing to consider extending the current moratorium. The moratorium was initially established by the City Council on November 1.4, 1979 , by the adoption of Ordinance No. 12 (which is attached) . That urgency ordinance was valid for four months and . will expire on March 14. Government Code Section 65858 provides that an urgency ordinance may be extended for an additional eight months subject to conducting a properly noticed public hearing and subject to a four-fifths vote of the City Council. It should be pointed out that, despite my efforts to develop a draft ordinance for consideration by the Commission and Council, time expended on the General Plan, in response to public inquiries, and in setting up the Planning Department has prevented completion of the condominium/condominium conversion studies. In considering the moratorium several alternatives are available to the Council, including: A. Allow the moratorium to lapse on March 14 . This could be coupled with a directive to Staff to complete a draft ordinance within a specified time. This would allow current projects to proceed subject to complying with current zoning and general plan provisions. B. Adopt attached Ordinance No. 17 extending the moratorium. This would continue the current "freeze' until a draft ordinance is adopted and could be coupled with a directive to Staff (as noted in Item A) . C. Direct Staff to modify attached Ordinance No. 17 extending the moratorium but revising the standards set forth in Ordinance No. 12. Standards currently include new condom- iniums within the moratorium and at least some discussion indicates that this may not have been intended. In addition, the variance procedure allowed for by Section 6 may not be particularly desirable. In any event, any revisions con- templated must be specific. Memorandum to Cityoouncil • March 10, 1980 Page Two PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Planning Commission to: 1. Extend the moratorium for eight months with the intent of terminating sooner when an ordinance is adopted and con- sider setting forth standards or other provisions that would allow some processing during the moratorium (i.e. , time extension requests, final maps, etc. ) . As part of this, it is desirable to include new construction projects in the moratorium. 2. Table the current public hearing on the draft ordinance directing Staff to publish for new hearings when the draft ordinance is complete. 3. Direct Staff to bring a draft ordinance back within 60 days, but sooner if possible. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance No. 17 (as outlined in Item B above) and direct Staff to bring back draft ordinance within 60 days. LAWRENCE VEVENS Planning Consultant/Director LS:kp 0 • ORDINANCE NO. 17 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ON THE APPROVAL OF PERMITS FOR CONDOMINIUM USES, CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISIONS , AND CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS WITHIN THE CITY FOR A PERIOD OF EIGHT MONTHS AND DECLARING SAID ORDINANCE TO BE AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the Council made certain findings in Ordinance No. 12 adopted November 14, 1979 entitled, "An Ordinance Making Findings and Creating a Moratorium on the Approval of Permits for Condominium Uses , Condominium Subdivisions , and Condominium Conversions within the City of Atascadero and Declaring Said Ordinance to be an Emer- gency Measure" ; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that said findings remain valid in that additional time is required to complete the ongoing studies and to prepare procedures and regulations governing condominiums and condominum conversions ; and WHEREAS , the appropriate public hearings have been conducted by the Planning Commission and the Council pursuant to Section 65858 of the State Government Code. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows : Section 1 . The existing moratorium on the issuance or approval of any permits for condominium uses , condominium subdivisions, and condominium conversions within the City as imposed by the provisions of Ordinance No. 12, is hereby extended for a period of eight (8) months . Section 2 . Urgency Measure. This ordinance is an urgency ordinance necessary to preserve the public peace, health and safety 0 Ordinance No. 17 Page Two due to the facts as set forth in Ordinance No. 12, and is adopted pursuant to Goverment Code Section 65858. Section 3 . Effective Date. This ordinance, being an urgency ordinance for the immediate protection of the public health, safety and general welfare, containing a declaration of the facts con- stituting the urgency, and passed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Section 4. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in this City; shall certify to the adoption and publication of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance and its certification, together with proof of publica- tion, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of this City. The foregoing ordinance was introduced, adopted, and ordered published at a meeting of the City Council held on March 10, 1980, by the ,f, ,o, lllowing vote AYES : NOES : ABSENT: ROBERT J. WTLKINS , JR. , Mayor ATTEST: 14URRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk Ordinance No. 17 Page Three APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Manager LARRY STEVENS, Planning Director APPROVED AS TO OMI: A T GRIMES , City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. 12 h AN ORDINANCE MAKING FINDINGS AND CREATING A MORATORIUM ON THE APPROVAL OF PERMITS FOR CONDOMINIUM USES, CONDO- MINIUM SUBDIVISIONS, AND CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND DECLARING SAID ORDINANCE TO BE AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. ------------------- WHEREAS, the Atascadero General Plan has not yet been adopted; and WHEREAS, adequate procedures and regulations regarding con- dominiums, condominium subdivisions and subdivisions have not been provided for in the Atascadero Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the significance of condominiums , condominium conversions and condominium subdivisions with regard to the long- range planning and maintenance of cities is often superficially discounted in favor of short-term economic and Financial consider- ations , it is incumbent upon the City of Atascadero to develop adequate performance standards by ordinance designed to minimize any deleterious effects of condominium ownership upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS• SECTION 1 . The City Council finds and determines as follows : 1. That there are pending many requests for the conversion of apartments to condominiums , and for approval of condominium subdivisions ; and that the statutory time limit for approval or disapproval of some of these requests is about to expire, unless the time is extended. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 12 2 . That a large proportion of the apartments sought to be converted to condominiums do not meet present building, zoning, and land use requirements and that condominium use requires that condominium projects be treated differently from apartment projects due to the different demands the two types of projects place upon the City; 3 . That the Atascadero General Plan and Municipal Code does not presently provide adequate standards, procedures or regulations to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; 4 . That a study is necessary to determine what legislation is required for the protection of the public; 5 . That an interim ordinance is necessary to allow the preparation of procedures and regulations to properly establish and administer condominium standards, condominium subdivisions , and condominium conversions within the City of Atascadero. SECTION 2 . All permits for condominium uses , condominium subdivisions , and condominium conversions , within the City of Atascadero are hereby prohibited fora period of four (4) months from the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 3 . The processing of all development projects, sub- divisions and parcel maps relating to condominiums or condominium conversions within or by the City of Atascadero is hereby suspended for a period of four (4) months from the effective date of this ordinance. All applications for development projects , subdivisions and parcel maps relating to condominiums or condominium conversions now pending, the time for the approval or disapproval of which will occur during the period of this moratorium, shall be deemed -2- ORDINANCE NO. 12 disapproved or denied but any applicant affected thereby may revive his application by letter agreeing to extend his ,app- lication to a date not less than 120 days after the expiration of this moratorium. SECTION 4 . Any provision of the Atascadero Municipal Code inconsistent herewith to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby suspended for the type of construction described herein during the moratorium period. SECTION 5 . If any provision of this Ordinance is held to be unconstitutional, it the intent of the City Council that such portion of such ordinance be severable from the remainder and that the remainder be given full force and effect. SECTION 6 . The City Council may grant a variance from the provisions of this moratorium ordinance upon recommendation of the Planning Commission, subject to a finding of the following: 1 . That strict application of the provisions of the mora- torium to a particular condominium project would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of the moratorium; 2 . That there are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the condominium project that do not apply generally to the other projects covered by this moratorium; and 3 . That the granting of a variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare as defined above. SECTION 7 . Authority for Enactment. This ordinance is adopted under Government Code Section 65858. -3- 0 • ORDINANCE NO. 12 SECTION 8 . Urgency. ' The City Council does hereby declare that this is an urgency ordinance necessary to preserve the public peace, health, and safety due to the facts set forth above. SECTION 9 . Taking Effect. This ordinance, being an emergency ordinance for the immediate protection of the public safety , health, and general welfare, containing a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency, and passed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. SECTION 10 . Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in this City; shall certify to the adoption and publication of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance and its certification, together with proof of publication, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of this City. The foregoing ordinance was introduced, adopted, and ordered published at a meeting of the Council held on November 14 , 1979 , by the following vote: Ayes : Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Nelson and Mayor Wilkins Noes: None Absent: Councilman Stover MAYOR ROBERT J. WILKINS, R. jATrTES TY ERK MURRAY L. N. RDEN -4- ORDINANCE NO. 16 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL of the Name of Governing Body authorizing a Name of Public Agency CONTRACT BETWEEN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO Governing Body AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM. The COUNCIL of the CITY OF ATASCADERO Name of Governing Body Name of Public Agency does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That a Contract between the COUNCIL Name of Governing Body of the CITY OF ATASCADERO and the Board of Administration, Name of Public Agency California Public Employees' Retirement System is hereby authorized, a copy of said Contract being attached hereto, marked "Exhibit All, and by such reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full. SECTION 2. The MAYOR of the (Title of Presiding Officer OUNCIL is hereby authorized, empowered, and Name of Governing Body directed to execute said Contract for and on behalf of said Agency. SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its adoption, and prior to the expiration of 15 days from the passage thereof . shall be published at least once in the ATASCADERO NEWS , Name of Newspaper a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the CITY of Name of ATASCADERO and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall Public Agency be in full force and effect. Adopted and approved this day of Attests Presiding Officer Approved as t form: Clerk t ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney PERS-CON-11 .(Contract). (3/78) 0 • C(tit`! RCT Rt-7 ,10EN TFF B ."-.RD OF ^.Di"I?3ISTRTION PUBLIC FMPLOv;-*FS ' RETIRMENT SYSTEMi►NJ T14E CITY COUNCIL' O;; THE CITY OF ATASCADERO In consideration of the covenants and agreement hereafter, contained and ark' the part. of bothparties to be kept and performed, the governing body of above public agency, hereafter referred to as "Public Agency" , and the Board of Administration, Public Employees' Retirement System, hereafter referred to as "Board" , hereby agree as follows: 1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall. mean age 60 for local miscellaneous and age 55 for local safety members. 2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after L making its employees as hereinafter provided , m#nbers of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except such as by express provisions thereof apply only on the election of contracting agencies. 3. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: a. Local Policemen (herein referred to as looal safety members); b. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as ' local miscellaneous members) . In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the fallowing classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: NO ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS 4. The fraction of final ecmpensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21251 .13 of said Retirement Law (2;6 at Get :0) . 5. The frac`. on of final tv •bc provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local safety member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21252.6 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 55) . 6. The following additional prdvisions of the Public Employees' Retire- ment Law which apply only upon election of a contracting agency shall apply to the Public Agency and its employees: a. Section 20952.5 (Age 50 voluntary retirement) for local safety members only. b. Section 20983.6 (Waiver of age 70 retirement) for local miscel— laneous members only. 7. Public Agency, in accordance with Section 20759. 1 Government Code, shall not be considered an "employer" for purposes of Chapter 6 of the Public Employees' Retirement Law. Contributions of the Public Agency ' shall be fixed and determined as provided in Section 20759, Government Code, and such contributions hereafter made shall be held by the Board as provided in Section 20759, Government Code. 8. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System as follows: a. With respect to miscellaneous members, the agency shall con— tribute the following percentages of monthly salaries earned as miscellaneous members of said Retirement System: (1 ) 0.364 percent until June 30, 1999 on account of the liability for prior service benefits. (2) 12.405 percent on account of the liability for current service benefits. b. With respect to local safety members, the agency shall contribute the following percentages of monthly salaries earned as local safety members of said Retirement System: (1 ) 14.575 percent on account of the liability for current service benefits. C. A reasonable amount per annum, as fixed by the Board to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. d. A reasonable amount as fixed by the Board, payable 'in one install— ment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valua— tions on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. 9. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined ,by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 10. Contributions recuired of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public A.-ancy t,:� tha Retirement Syste;ri within thirty days after the_ end of t'r.= period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Soard rQ?tal3tiott. If more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment ship ill b ti;=:de in r_nnection with subsequentremittances, or adjustments on 2ccount of errors in cantrib}ations required of any employee may be rie;de by direct cash payments between the employee and the Foard . Payments by Public Agency to Hoard may be made in the form of warrants, bank check-s, bank drafts, certified checks, money orders or cash. Witness our hands the day of 19^ BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC E!4PLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY BY Carl J. Blechinger, Executive Officer Presiding Officer Approved as to form: Attest: ^ thia G. Yesem6r, Legal Office, Date Clerk PERS CON-702 APPROVED AS TO FOR4j f CITY ATTORNEY—'' M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Resolution concerning non-agreement of exchange tax base The attached resolution formalizes your approval of our entering into an agreement to disagree with the County concerning exchange of tax base for the Sanitation District. Purpose, of course, is to assure that we do not jeopardize the sewer plant expansion project. - R ommend your adoption. N Y L ARDETJ MLW:ad 3-6-80 RESOLUTION NO. 3-80 JOINT RESOLUTION OF CITY OF ATASCADERO AND COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CONCERNING NON-AGREEMENT OF EXCHANGE TAX BASE The following resolution is hereby offered and read: WHEREAS, in June 1978 the voters of the State of California duly approved Proposition 13, the Jarvis-Gann Tax Limitation Initiative; and WHEREAS, Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99(b) [added by A.B. 8 (Chapter 282) of the 1979 legislative session effective July 24, 1979 as follow-up legislation implementing Proposition 13, the Jarvis-Gann Tax Limitation Initiative] states in part as follows: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no such jurisdictional change shall become y effective until each county and city included in such negotiation agrees , by resolution, to accept" the negotiated exchange of pro- perty tax revenues."; and WHEREAS, in the Atascadero reorganization, the dissolution of the Atascadero County Sanitation District was set to become effective June 30, 1980; however, the Atascadero reorganization was adopted and approved by the voters before the adoption of said Proposition 13 and before the enactment of said A.B. 8; and WHEREAS, in the Atascadero County Sanitation District a revenue bond measure was duly approved by the voters of the District in November 1978; and WHEREAS, because of delays in approval by the State of California of the plans for the proposed sanitation facilities to be constructed by use of said bonds , it does not appear to be possible to issue and sell said bonds before June 30, 1980; and WHEREAS, the bond counsel retained by the District to give legal advice concerning said bonds has ruled that if the Atascadero County Sanitation District dissolves before said bonds are issued and sold, then such bonds can no longer be issued and sold because that right to issue and sell bonds is not a legal property right which would pass to the successor entity of said District; and WHEREAS, therefore, it is required that the Atascadero County Sanitation District continue in existence until after said bonds are issued and sold. NOW, THEREFORE, be it jointly resolved by the City Council of the City of Atascadero and by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo as follows: 1 . That the recitals set forth hereinabove are true, correct and valid. 2. That in view of the recitals set forth hereinabove the City of Atascadero and the County of San Luis Obispo are not able to agree upon the negotiated exchange of property tax revenues pursuant to said Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99. 3. That since the City and County have not been able to agree on such negotiated exchange of property tax revenues, then pursuant to said Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99(b) the Atascadero County Sanitation District will not dissolve effective June 30, 1980, but rather will continue in existence until the City and County have agreed upon a negotiated exchange of pro- perty tax revenues pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99. 4. That copies of this resolution shall be sent to the following: Partin Roehrke (State Board of Equalization) , Lorraine Luoma, Ampy Haber, Kent Taylor," Jac Crawford, Carlo Fowler (bond , counsel for said bonds) , Allen Grimes (Atascadero City Attorney), Murray Warden (Atascadero City Manager). -2- 5. That the State Board of Equalization be and hereby is requested to retain the 1980-81 County Sanitation District on the blue line for the next fiscal year, - Upon the motion of City Council member seconded by City Council member and on. the following roll call vote, to-wit: AYES: s NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINING: t:.5. The foregoing resolution is duly adopted by the City of Atascadero. Upon motion of Supervisor seconded by Supervisor and on the following roll call vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: 1 ABSENT: r, ABSTAINING: the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted. d � Chairman of the Board of Supervisors ATTEST: ROBERT J. WILY.IT?S, Mayor Clerk of the Board of Supervisors City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: [SEAL] APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL EFFECT: 1,qJRRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk y. JAMES B. LINDHOLM, JR. City of Atascadero, California County Counsel j By: �� 5 APPROVED AS TO FORM hep—uty County Counsel Dated:_ February 13, 1980 5•i' Q7Y ATTORNEY - -3- M E M O R A N D U M TO: Atascadero City Council DATE: March 10, 1980 FROM: Planning Consultant/Director SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF PARCEL MAP AT 78-041 The Planning Commission recommends acceptance of the final map. LAWRENCE gTEVENS Planning onsultant/Director r • LU COUNTY SRO IS OBISPO COU HTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ROOM A101 + COURTHOUSE ANNEX + SAN LUIS OBISPO + CALIFORNIA 93408 + (805) 549-5252 GEORGE C. PROTOPAPAS ROADS County Engineer TRANSPORTATION FLOOD CONTROL CLINTON MILNE WATER CONSERVATION DEPUTY COUNTY ENGINEER SURVEYOR GUY PREWITT SPECIAL DISTRICTS SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATOR RECEIVED L 0 L u 19CO February 25, 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 78-041 Gentlemen: Your consideration of the approval of Parcel Map AT 78-041, a proposed subdivision by D. J. and J. L. Heinemann and H. C. and V. M. Heinemann, is requested. It is our RECOMMENDATION that your Honorable Council act upon the attached resolu- tion, 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 City Council of the City of Atascadero on August 13, 1979. Attached is a vicinity map and layout of Parcel Map AT 78-041 . The total area of this development is '13 .18 acres with minimum lot areas of 4 acres. The area is zoned A-1-B- V-3-D508. The road will be maintained by City of Atascadero; water service will be from Atascadero Mutual Water Company; sewage facilities will be maintained by property owners. es p ctful C. GEORGE C. RA-& TOPAP S County Engineer GCP/JRE/nt RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A 5 FOOT WIDENING OF A CERTAIN ROAD INTO THE CITY ROAD SYSTEM CITY ROAD NO. 4176 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 additional widening of a road presently in the maintained system in said City; and WHEREAS, the County Engineer by letter .dated February 25, 1980, has duly recommended that the City Council: . Accept the offer of dedication for public use of a 5' strip along Balboa Road as shown on Parcel Map AT 78-041. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero: . 1. That the offer to dedicate for the 5 foot widening of City Road No. 41.76 as shown on Parcel Map AT 78=041 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 Ci:Ey of AtascadeFo- Clerk of the City of Atascadero Co. Eng./JRE/nt Pianninq (1) ♦ W C � Z� I 11.1'l i�J � _ ,J �� �.LJf � .$ � t u� t '/ G N r lJ -oY w ec �• 11 � 'r' ►,_- F5g _'., jr}�-..r tI/A_ .� � ,"J 'y"t,��t' '�aS v'� Fa './ ♦♦.♦ •" F`, Z z 'Fd' r.4 � I>r•���f�F _ Z. � n � r i.9vty ptiR � C�C X�`b o\ ? Wig SFr �+ � ��I�ca�� ` � `I ,��`fit, }� � J Ov�♦n c� cc l C.f c v$ { p a� n / r err ,. I r1j (�� W m (' Ie LL a m< n r I .., i¢�4 � Q O Qi �,Eq $ski $i� , fat 171), li+ co cn - O I pj Q - - �� 'J .• \ .J, l :t J �ry�}Y'�h!a , i. � `{J �f`� '��•'.'� r'�.Q.: u�; I + S J•. I , 6 ql IN.OB'9P9 309.515 �', I W.09 a" not, nJ1 '.a W A S I(�1 L' ' 51 i •® ec sill _ tli f }. '1 '' '. i♦ IJ oil Sky N a, ti r 1 ' ��'' � */.• )� .9 F ..' : '�I ` ( aa � Iy �.tV Y1{ilk{ � ♦i _, . -- 1 V 111.E � �✓ (••�^ � Ii n1f_a�°°rte `� �I'/f.i .'�? � } + �' •„, ,,, 4 �,'��I�,♦ 1� i� I/,� ter'` rl yz� 1 3l� �• �` +� , J. �r �f vOoo �o° ' i ��. IIJttt1r� aY JA 'rn, }�a1�� y li•} yV1t :' a'�$"8:$FiR$ 4 i� •6�, ajl6�Zs1,'"'ue �j'1 �y( �` ��%rnm nnml',kiP I cj: , Y+7,• Cl lig, w fi ♦ , IZ =jt .� .yl�liqy .1 PJA„ '} w��a�aaa a '4I;Z �Ali]% �F.�+1$ ♦fit r. 7 \ If /�Tp��c.0 nn � C� 111 1♦ r �•�t r •�_ �' 'i '' - i`��'- '. .1 NjI KI Imo.[.r�IM� ♦ (j(IA�i �'. f if i '• '� I,J �,- y:f I � 4� ��Y f 1 11 t '1 � ••� I 1 I .i'I 'f I: ' 1;• to,'�I, r�al'�S 'rd-- f ! ill, t U:. f��f f” ✓ �1. 1 i.• ' e � '' 1 � �,� �ter�:�,l'$y,� 1 fr tS 14 }1 f ,i;' r` � �'•'�' ':�t �;.�! fit lIr t�^ ',I �♦' S.� ,lv}';S{� + ii.+ I t'�Ir��(k `.:, t r,,�,](/� 1 ��I• ') c V. IvY''it� ♦ R rSrL:::1 L�1 -1; ..vr �♦-. .., Ip ^l ,.'�9 , &W .1,. MEM 0 R A N D U M TO: City Manager FROM: Police Consultant SUBJECT: Proposed City Ordinance - POST Training & Standards The attached draft ordinance is proposed for adoption at the March 10th Council meeting. Passage of this ordinance will allow our City police employees to participate in required training authorized by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, examples of which will include: 1.. Basic Police Academy 2. Dispatcher training 3 . Special investigations training 4. Supervisory training 5 Management training 6. Executive training 7 . Records training 8. Other technical and advanced officer training Reimbursement for most courses includes all ?xpenses incurred at the course site and some training will include 50% salary reim- bursement to the City of Atascadero. I am planning to send the dispatcher supervisor to some courses relating to dispatching and records functions during the next two months and we will need this ordinance to authorize payment for these and future courses . �Wm ICA R. H. McHALE RHM:ad 3-5-80 ORDINANCE NO. 18 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ACCEPTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 13522 OF THE STATE PENAL CODE RELATING TO TRAINING OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS Section 1. The City of Atascadero declares that it desires to qualify to receive aid from the State of California under the provisions of Chapter 1 of Title 4, of Part 4 of the State Penal Code. Section 2 . The City of Atascadero will adhere to the standards for recruitment and training established by the Cali- fornia Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training pur- suant to the provisions of Section 13522 of the State Penal Code. Section 3. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in this City; shall certify to the` adop- tion and publication of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance and its certification, together with proof of publica- tion, to be entered in the Book of Ordinance of this City. Section 4. Effective date. This ordinance shall go into effect and shall be in full force and effect at 12 :01 a.m. on the thirty-first day after its passage. The foregoing ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the Council held on March ko 1980. r • r Ordinance No. 18 Page Two AYES : NOES : ABSENT: ROBERT J. WILKINS, JR. , Mayor ATTEST: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO C014TENT: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Manager RICHARD M. McHALE, Chief of Police APPROVED AS TO F l ALN GRIMES, City Attorney