Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 10/26/1981 AGENDA - ATASCADERO WY COUNCIL Regular Meeting October 26, 1981 7: 30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Invocation Roll Call Public Comment A. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are con- sidered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion in . the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered separately. Vote may be by roll call. 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of October 12, 1981 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2. Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701:1, 9040 San Diego Road, David Dunham (Twin Cities Engineering) to allow subdivision of approximately 9 . 7 acres into three parcels (RECOMMEND APPRO- VAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 3. Appeal of Departmental Review R810602: 1, 5265 El Camino Real, Glen Lewis, to convert existing butcher shop into profession- al offices (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOM- MENDATION) 4. Lot Line Adjustment LA 810817: 1, 5300 Traffic Way, Ernest Simon (Hilliard) to adjust exiting lot line to resolve a building encroachment (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMIS- SION RECOMMENDATION) 5. Award Bid No. 81-17, Balboa Road reconstruction, to Ventures West in the amount of $84,754 (RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE OF LOW BID) B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. Public hearing on appeal of Departmental Review R810811: 1, 7315 El Camino Real, Bob Lawrence, to allow establishment of a game arcade 2. Appearance of Chamber of Commerce representatives regarding funding • 3. Report on General Plan Amendments/Cycled (1982) AGENDA - ATASCADERAITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 26,*98`1 C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Ordinance No. 44 relating to buildings and construction and establishing a Board of Appeals (first reading) 2. Set date to consider location of Police Department facilities 3. Resolution No. 34-81 recommending certain parking restric- tions on State Route 41, specifically on El Camino Real and West Mall D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution No. 32-81 authorizing the filing of a claim for local transportation funds in compliance with the Transporta- tion Development Act 2. Resolution No. 33-81 authorizing purchases of certain items for the City by the Purchasing Agent of the County of San Luis Obispo 3. Consideration of election date legislation 4. Review of San Luis Obispo County Area Council of Governments agenda items E. INDIVIDUALDETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Manager MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL • Regular Meeting October 12 , 1981 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. Roth Huth of the Community Church gave the invocation . ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmen Highland , Mackey, Nelson , and Mayor Wilkins ABSENT: Councilman Stover PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment . A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 . Minutes of the regular meeting of September 28 , 1981 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2 . Treasurer ' s Report , 9-1-81 to 9-30-81 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 3. Departmental Review R810806 : 1 , 7313 Santa Ysabel , Steven Garman (Gaylen Little) , to allow construction of one-bedroom unit (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA- TION) 4 . Tentative Tract Map AT 810806 : 1 , 7320 Sombrilla and 7313 Santa Ysabel , Steven Garman (Gaylen Little), , to allow subdivision of an existing two-lot , ten unit apartment com- plex and one proposed unit into a one lot tract with eleven air space condominiums (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COM- MISSION RECOMMENDATION) 5 . Tentative Tract Map AT 810811 : 1 , Northwest Corner of Morro Road and Santa Ynez, Paul Washburn (Twin Cities Engineering) to allow subdivision to create 15 air space office condomin- iums (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA- TION) 6 . Tentative Parcel Map AT 810722 : 1 , 4605 Carrizo Road , Ralph Brink (Hilliard) , to subdivide 5 .28 acres into two parcels of 2.5 and 2 . 68 acres each (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COM- MISSION RECOMMENDATION) 7 . Lot Line Adjustment LA 810807 : 1 , 7580 Valle Avenue , Antonio • Arellano/Gene Stanley (Stewart) , to adjust existing lot line to resolve a building encroachment problem (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) MINUTES - ATASCADEOCITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 12.19$ 1 8. Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 800829 : 1 , 10325 Atascadero Avenue , Fred Hartman (Morgan) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 9 . Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 801210 :1 , 2200 San Fernando Road, Allen Grimes (Fargan) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COM- MISSION RECOMMENDATION) 10 . Acceptance of Lot Line Adjustment LA 810227 : 1 , 10055 E1 Camino Real , Rex Hendrix (Associated Professions) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSIONRECOMMENDATION) 11 . Award of Bid No. 81-14 , storm drain improvements, to Conco Engineering , Inc. , in the amount of $6 , 417 .00 (RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE OF BID) 12. Award of Bid No. 81 -15 , street overlay project , to Madonna Construction in the amount of $86 ,238 . 20 (RECOMMEND - ACCEPT- ANCE OF BID) 13 . Award of Bid No. 81 -16 , utility vehicle , to Cushman Motor Sales , Inc . , in the amount of $7 ,732 . 36 (RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE OF LOW BID) Mayor Wilkins reviewed all items on the Consent Calendar . Councilman Highland asked that Item A-6 be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar and considered separately. Mr . Warden advised Council that Item A-12 , the street overlay bid , involved approximately 2 . 8 miles of asphalt paving; he also reviewed , by name , the streets included in the project . With regard to Item A-12, the utility vehicle bid , the City will not purchase the mounted sprayer initially, so the total bid on that project will be $7 ,732 . 36; less than indicated on the memorandum to the City Council. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item A-6. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried by roll call vote. A-6 Tentative Parcel Map AT 810722: 1 , 4605 Carrizo Road , Ralph Brink (Hilliard) , to subdivide 5 . 28 acres into two parcels of 2.5 and 2 .68 acres each Councilman Highland noted that 2. 5 and 2. 68 acres do not add up to a total of 5 .28 acres. The total was changed to 5 . 18 . Councilman Highland stated that he has noticed a recurring statement in Planning memos to the effect that "a number of lots in the vicinity are under '2 1 /2 acres . " He wondered if this condition was being used as justifi- cation to approve less than 2 1/2 acre lots . Mr. Stevens replied that the statement was an observation due to the General Plan provi- sion that consideration be givento the type of lots in an area when considering lot size and requests for splits or subdivisions . i 2 MINUTES - ATASCADERPITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 12 ,0981', MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council accept the recommen- dations of the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried. B. HEARINGS , APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1 . Report by City Manager on commission selection procedures Mr. Warden reviewed his memo to Council outlining several proce- dures Council could consider for use in selecting commission members . He noted that the City Attorney felt that the Council has acted appro- priately in their past selection process . COUNCILMAN STOVER WAS PRESENT AT 7 :50 p .m. Mayor Wilkins felt that the Council was satisfied with the re- cruiting and interview process currently in effect. He was in favor of selecting commissioners one position at a time. Councilman Mackey disagreed; she felt that the selection process should be the same as when citizens go to the polls, with all candidates being voted for at one time. Councilman Nelson suggested that Council put their names on a piece of paper and write their selections , not necessarily in order of priority, and the City Clerk could then read the Council member ' s name and the candidates each had voted for . Comments were heard from Ted Munson and Dorothy McNeil . SCouncil decided to proceed with the same recruiting and interview process , but that the voting procedure would require that each Council person to put their name on a ballot which would also identify, by name, the candidates for whom they were voting. If more than one po- sition was open , they would list their choices for whatever number of vacancies existed. MOTION : Councilman Highland moved that Staff be directed to prepare a resolution incorporating the guidelines discussed. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried . Councilman Nelson thought that perhaps Council could discuss the candidates generally after the interview before voting. There was discussion about this proposal ; Councilman Highland thought that the discussion should occur before the interview process when Council could discuss candidates ' planning philosophy. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1 . Resolution No. 29-81 adopting Memorandum of Understanding with the Atascadero Fire Captains Bargaining Unit Mr . Warden stated that this resolution and the next one incor- porated those items previously approved by Council. 3 MINUTES - ATASCADEOCITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 121*1981 MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Resolution No. 29-81 be read by title only. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried . Mayor Wilkins read Resolution No. 29=81 by title only. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 29-81 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried by roll call vote. 2 . Resolution No. 30-81 adopting Memorandum of Understanding with the Atascadero Firefighters ' Bargaining Unit MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Resolution No. 30-81 be read by title only. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried . Mayor Wilkins read Resolution No. 30-81 by title only. MOTION : Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 30-81 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried by roll call vote. 3. Ordinance No. 43 , real property transfer tax - second reading MOTION : Councilman Highland moved that ' Ordinance No. 43 be read by title only. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried. Mayor Wilkins read Ordinance No. 43 by title only. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that this constitute the second reading of Ordinance No. 43 and that it be adopted . The mo- tion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried by roll call vote. D. NEW BUSINESS 1 . Resolution No. 31-81 amending Resolution No. 12-80 regarding Personnel Rules and Regulations to include impasse procedures Mr . Warden reviewed this resolution for Council . He stated that both employee associations have been given an opportunity to comment on the contents and since no comments have been forthcoming, he has assumed they are in agreement with it. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Resolution No. 31 -81 be read by title only. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried . Mayor Wilkins read Resolution No. 31 -81 by title only. 4 MINUTES - ATASCADEROITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 12 ,0981 MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 31 -81 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and unanimously carried by roll call vote. 2. Reclassifying Assistant Civil Engineer position Mr. Warden stated that the Public Works Director was requesting that the Assistant Civil Engineer position recently vacated by John Kennaly be reclassified as an Associate Civil Engineer . This change will require three years experience instead of one and will emphasize on municipal experience. He is requesting that the salary range be changed from Range 30 ($1,712 . 10 monthly) to Range 34 ($1 , 883 . 31 monthly) . MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for Council approval of reclassi- fying the Assistant Civil Engineer position to that of an Associate Civil Engineer , from Range 30 to Range 34 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and unanimously carried . E . INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1 . City Council (a) Councilman Nelson suggested that Department Heads give monthly verbal reports to Council at Council meetings about activities their departments have been involved in . There was considerable discussion with Councilman Highland stating that once a month was too often . Mr . Warden stated that the Council will be re- ceiving copies of Departments ' monthly reports which may answer some of Councilman Nelson ' s questions . Councilman Nelson stated that he would prefer to have verbal re- ports from the Department Heads. MOTION : Councilman Nelson moved that Department Heads make an oral presentation once every two months on what is happening in their department. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and carried with Councilman Highland voting no. Councilman Highland thought that every two months was too often; he felt that quarterly would be more appropriate. Council noted that the reports could be spread over several Council meetings; not all reports would have to be given in one night. (b) Councilman Nelson asked about the status of the zoning ordinance , the moratorium, and the General Plan update. ance , the moratorium, and the General Plan update . Mr . Warden stated that the zoning ordinance is in the process of being typed and should be to the Planning Commission by the first meeting in November . With regard to the moratorium, Mr. Warden stated that a rough draft of rec- ommendations is being prepared . Larry Stevens stated that the City is 5 MINUTES - ATASCADEPCITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 1291981 in the process of accepting General Plan amendment applications and should begin hearings at the Planning Commission level at the next meeting and at the Council meetings in November . (c) Councilman Nelson felt that the Council should begin studying the matter of where the Police facilities will be located . He suggested that a committee of interested people be formed to look at the matter before Staff comes to Council with recom- mendations. There was considerable discussion regarding this matter with Mayor Wilkins suggesting that a special study session be held so that Council can discuss the matter with suggestions being taken from the public. Council decided to hold a special meeting regarding this matter , but would set the date at the next Council meeting. Counclman Nelson thought that perhaps a committee could be formed after the special meeting. (d) Councilman Mackey asked about the arcade-type machines that have recently been installed in Safeway and asked if they had a permit to operate them. Mr . Stevens stated that since the game machines were not the main business , a permit for an arcade is not required . (e) Councilman Mackey complimented the fire , police and am- bulance services for responding so quickly when she had occasion to call them during the last month. 2. City Attorney Mr. Grimes was absent because of illness . 3. City Manager (a) Mr . Warden discussed a recent editorial in the Atasca- dero News which seemed to indicate that the Staff was dragging its feet in complying with the traffic controls ordered by Council because Staff did not agree with Council ' s decision. He noted that several things had to be done before the contract could be imple- mented. Among these was that permission must come from Caltrans and that supplies must be purchased. He noted that Staff has an obliga- tion to give Council their considered opinions and all information regarding any particular problem involving the City in order for Coun- cil to have the best possible information available in order to arrive at a decision. Then , once Council makes that decision , it is the Staff's obligation to carry it out as professionally and completely as possible . (b) Mr . Warden stated that he will be meeting with Bond Counsel and County Engineering personnel while he is in San Francisco next week to discuss some problems connected with the transfer of bond obligations for the Sanitary District from the County to. the City. Farmers Home Administration, who is issuing the bonds , 6 MINUTES - ATASCADEROITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 12 *981 states that they will not transfer the bonds without re-issuing them . which will mean that the interest rates will increase considerably. He will keep Council advised of this matter . (c) Mr . Warden advised Council that the agreement for the proposed demonstration transportation project between Atascadero and San Luis Obispo will be coming to them for approval . (d) Mr . Warden advised that the League of California Cities is holding a briefing on legislative implementation on November 13 and 20 , 1981 . He has particulars if any Council members are interested in attending. (e) Mr . Warden stated that the screening of the Fire Chief applicants has been completed and requested a date from Council for interview of finalists . Council set Saturday, November 7 , 1981 , beginning at 9 : 00 a.m. (f) Mr . Warden requested a closed session to discuss per- sonnel matters. He stated that he did not anticipate that there would be an announcement at the conclusion of the meeting. The meeting adjourned to closed session at 9 : 05 p.m. and returned to regular session at 11 : 15 p.m. at which time they adjourned . Recorded by: MURRAY L . WARDEN , City Clerk By: Ardith Davis Deputy City Clerk 7 f M `E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER October 20 , 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701: 1 LOCATION: 9040 San Diego Road (Lot 21, Block 66)' APPLICANT: David Dunham (Twin Cities Engineering) REQUEST: To allow subdivision of 9 . 7± acres into three parcels of 3. 7+, 3 .0+, and 3.0+ acres each On October 5th and October 19th, the Planning Commission conducted public hearings on the subject matter and unanimously approved the three-lot parcel map adopting Findings 1-2 (deleting #3) , approving a Conditional Negative Declaration, and setting conditions per the attached Staff Report and Memorandum. The conditions include 1-19 from the Staff Report as modified by the Memorandum dated October 19th with the following additional revision: 113. All other available utilities not .already in place shall be . extended underground to each parcel frontage prior to issu- ance of a building permit for each parcel." There was considerable discussion among the Commission on this application including such issues as the slope and adequacy of the driveway access to Parcel 2 , the appropriate lot size for this area based on the General Plan and zoning, the need for underground ing of utilities and timing of their construction, the location of building sites (including the on-site sewage disposal system) , and the possibility of developing an interior circulation pattern. The matter was initially continued to allow the applicant to prepare a plan and profile of the access for Parcel 2 . A consensus was reached on these issues as reflected by the decision, although it should be noted that the three-lot map is dependent upon demonstra- tion that Parcel 2 has sufficient area for both a house and sewage disposal system, Allen Campbell, applicant' s engineer, appeared in support of the request for a three way parcel map discussing the driveway access to Parcel 2 , surrounding lot sizes, and other General Plan and zoning criteria. David Dunham, applicant, and Richard Shannon, realtor, also appeared in support of the request. No one else appeared on the matter. LAWRENCE STEVENS MURRAY L;. WARDEN Planning Director City Manager M E M O R A N D U M: TO: PLANNING COMMISSION October 19 , 1981 FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map AT810701: 1 LOCATION: 9040 San Diego Road (Lot 21 , Block 66) APPLICANT: DavidDunham (Twin Cities Engineering) BACKGROUND At their regular meeting, on October 5, 1981, the Atascadero Planning Commission moved to continue the above referenced subject matter to this date in order to allow time to prepare plan and profile of driveway access as a response to concerns raised in the Staff Report regarding the requested 3 way division of the subject property. A plan and profile for the proposed access drive to Parcel 2 was prepared by the engineer. An on-site review of the plan and profile was made by Staff with the engineer. After making the review it was determined that an acceptable driveway access could be provided to Parcel 2. However some doubt still remains as to the appropriateness of creating 3 parcels vs. 2 parcels with regard to adequate area for a homesite and private sewage disposal area. Depending on the results of percolation tests performed in the building site area of Parcel 2 there may not be sufficient area to install the disposal system and a house. A percolation test could be performed prior to the recording of the Final Map so that a determination could be made to assure that there is adequate area on the site for home construction and an acceptable sewage disposal system. FINDINGS Staff makes Findings 1 and 2 as contained in the attached Staff Report, deleting Finding 3. RECOMMENDATION Based on Findings 1 and 2, the Planning Department recommends approval of AT810701: 1, subject to conditions 1-4 for the Conditional Negative Declaration and conditions of approval 1-19 as contained in the attached Staff Report (October 5, 1981) with the following modifications and/or additions to the conditions of approval: Memo to Planning C&ission . October 19 , 1981 Page Two - "l.a With regard to Parcel 2 , a percolation test performed in the area of the designated building site and log of soil boring for review by the Planning Department prior to the recordation of the Final Map. Prior to recordation of the Final Map the Planning Department shall make a determination as to the accept- ability of the test and the capability of the site to accommodate private disposal system and a residence. If in the judgement of the Planning Department conditions resulting from the percolation test are not acceptable the Final Map shall be recorded as a two-way division, with no parcel being less than 3 acres. If the conditions are acceptable, the following note shall be shown on the Final Map: "A percolation test and log of soil boring has been submitted for Parcel 2 and found adequate. The results of this test will be acceptable only in the event the private disposal system is installed in the area where the test was performed. In the event a private disposal system is not installed in the area where the tests were performed, additional tests may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit for Parcel 2 . " Condition 4 shall be deleted and the following condition shall be inserted in its place: "4 . The 25 foot wide private access easement to Parcel 2 shall be shown on the Final Map and shall conform with the plan and profile submitted to the Planning Department. A note shall be placed on the Final Map designating the easement as the only acceptable access to Parcel 2. a. The access easement shall be designated for use as a public utility easement but need not be used for that purpose if utilities can be brought to Parcel 2 in a more economical manner. LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director s Ai CITY OF ATASCADERO X979 r iAia n7a r' �' rn�c l Planning Department October 5 , 1981 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701 :1 LOCATION: 9040 San Diego Road (Lot 21, Block 66) APPLICANT David Dunham (Twin Cities Engineering) REQUEST: To allow subdivision of 9 .7± acres into three parcels of 3 . 7+, 3 . 0+, and 3. 0+ acres each BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: A-1-3 2 . General Plan: Suburban Single Family Residential 3 . Environmental Determination: An initial study environmental description form has been completed. The Planning Director has prepared a Conditional Negative Declaration indicating that the project will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment if certain mitigating measures are in- corporated into the project. 4 . Site Conditions : The site topography varies with two knolls on either end of the site and the north fork of the Paloma Creek bisecting the property. The site fronts San Diego Road on the northwest and LaPaz Lane on the southeast. Property adjoining the site to the west and south are presently devel- oped as residential with similar lot sizes; the property to the north and east is presently vacant. A mobile home and shed exist on the site in the proposed Parcel 1. The site also has a 15 foot wide utility easement which runs along the entire length of the northern property line. The site vege- tation consists of a number of oak and pine trees and natural grasses. 5 . Project Description: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the subject 9 . 7+ acres into three parcels of 3 . 7 , 3 . 0 and 3 . 0 acres each. Proposed Parcell will have frontage along San Diego Road; Parcel 2 will have access via a private access easement across Parcel 3 to LaPaz Lane; and Parcel 3 will have direct access to LaPaz Lane. Page Two Re: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701 :1 , (Dunham) October 5 , 1981 STAFF COMMENTS On Thursday, September 10 , 1981 the Subdivision Review Board met with the applicant, David Dunham, Richard Shannon, and Allen Campbell (Twin Cities Engineering) , to discuss the application. Also attending the meeting were : Larry Stevens , Planning Director; Mary Beatie, Associate Planner; Joel Moses, Associate Planner; and Wayne LaPrade, Planning Commissioner. The following items were discussed: 1) Access to proposed parcel 2 from LaPaz Lane appears difficult and would probably require extensive grading and drainage con- trol - also does not seem to terminate at logical building site. Planning Director indicated a strong inclination to recommend approval for two lots only, unless he can be shown sufficient evidence that three are appropriate. Engineer agreed to set stakes to show alignment of proposed access easement and prop- erty line common to Parcels 2 and 3 in order for a determina- tion to be made on the appropriate number of lots. This shall be completed prior to scheduling application before the Planning Commisssion. 2) Building sites on parcel 2 appear limited by topographic condi- tions and expected sizeable innundation .from the north. branch of the north fork of Paloma Creek. 3) Need to clarify easement and offer-of-dedication situation along LaPaz Lane extension. 4) Require City standard road improvements be extended along property frontage on LaPaz . Concern expressed over future lot split potential in the area and whether or not to require a cul-de-sac. It was determined no cul-de-sac would be neces- sary. It will be the applicant's responsibility to acquire necessary street dedications. 5) Existing mobile home on proposed parcel 1 will be subject to the new mobile home ordinance (#41) . Submit certification from manufacturer of year of mobile home and compliance with Nation- al Mobile Home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 . 6) Fire hydrant will be necessary on LaPaz Lane near driveway,. 7) Observed well on adjacent property. Is this under same owner- ship as subject property? Are there potential lot division . plans on this property? Page Three Re: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701 :1 (Dunham) October 5, 1981 8) Driveway access of LaPaz may require plan and profile (showing topo and extent of cut and fill slopes) . It is suggested the driveway alignment follow more closely the topography. 9) Drainage conveyance (existing CMP) on parcel l shall be repaired including necessary grading and erosion control and slope pro- tection of driveway. It was determined that the CMP is on adjacent property. 10) Recommendation for Conditional Negative Declaration. 11) Was a permit obtained to locate mobile home on the property? It was verified that a permit had been obtained. 12) What is the minimum lot size of parcels in the vicinity? Generally they are three acres or larger. The recommendation to reduce the number of lots from three to two is predicated on criteria established in the General Plan. Careful review of the site topography indicates that there is, at best, one building site and its access is highly questionable. Paloma Creek i and site topography preclude reasonable access from San Diego and i the need for extensive grading and some tree removal to achieve acceptable driveway access from LaPaz limits the desirability of the proposed easement access . Even if the easement was realigned to follow the topography more closely and avoid the trees , its slope is still questionable with considerable fill needed due to a major swale. While redesign to accommodate two lots with frontage on LaPaz is possible, the lot design is not particularly desirable since the lots would be long and narrow (i .e. 120 ' X 10881 ) . It would, therefore, appear that the only acceptable way to create lots at the three acre minimum allowed by the zoning is to work with adjacent owners of other similarly situated lots to develop an interior street circulation system to accommodate such divisions . Difficult road design and economics may make this alternative infeasible. FINDINGS 1. The application as submitted together with recommendations which follow complies to the applicable zoning and subdivision regulations and conforms to the 1980 Atascadero General Plan. i Page Four Re: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701: 1 (Dunham) October 5, 1981 2. The application as submitted together with conditions of ap- proval, will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment and therefore the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not necessary. 3. Redesign of the land division reducing the number of parcels to two is necessary to conform with lot size criteria established in the General Plan especially as it relates to the slope and design of the easement access . RECOMMENDATION Based on the above findings, the Planning Department recommends : A. Issuance of a Conditional Negative Declaration as follows: 1. Adequate provision shall be made to ensure proper septic suitability on all parcels created. 2. Adequate provision shall be made to minimize grading and tree removal on the site. 3. Adequate provision shall be made to reduce and minimize drainage and erosion in conjunction with site development. 4. Adequate provision shall be made to minimize fire hazards in conjunction with site developments and B. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701: 1 subject to the following: 1. Private sewage disposal systems will be an acceptable method of sewage disposal, if reports and design are acceptable. All tests, reports , and designs shall conform to methods and guidelines prescribed by the Manual of Sep- tic Tank Practice and other applicable City ordinances. The following shall appear as a Note on the Final Map: "Appropriate soils reports including a percolation test, a test to determine the presence of ground water, and a log of a soil boring to a minimum depth of (10) feet shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issu- ance of a building permit. Where soils reports indicate that conventional soil absorption systems are not acceptable, City approval of plans for an alternative private sewage disposal system, designed by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be required. Depending upon the system, more re- strictive requirements may be imposed. " Page Five Re: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701: 1 (Dunham) October 5, 1981 2. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and water operable facilities shall exist at each parcel frontage prior to filing of the Final Map. A' letter from the water company indicating they are willing and able to serve the property shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to recordation of the Final Map. 3. All other available utilities not already in place shall be extended underground to each parcel frontage prior to filing of the Final Map. 4. A revised map reducing the number of lots to two shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Department. No lot shall be less than three acres in size . 5. One fire hydrant of a type and size specified by the City Fire Department shall be installed by the applicant near the southerly property line along the LaPaz Lane frontage. Exact location and manner of placement shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Department. A letter from the Fire Department certifying the installation of the hydrant shall be received by the Planning Department prior to the recordation of the Final Map. 6 . The existing mobilehome located on proposed Parcel 1 shall be removed prior to recordation of the Final Map unless determined to be in compliance with standards for mobile- homes on individual lots as it now exists or as it can be modified (See Ordinance No. 41) 7. The driveway access shall be improved to at least the following minimum standards: - an improved width of 12 feet - unobstructed vertical clearance of fourteen (14) feet These standards shall appear as notes on the Final Map. 8. Effort shall be made to minimize grading that would be disruptive to the natural topography and removal of exist- ing mature trees . The following shall appear as a note on the Final Map: "No trees shall be removed without compliance with appli- cable City ordinances. No grading shall commence without an appropriate permit and compliance with applicable City ordinances. " Page Six Re: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810701: 1 (Dunham) • October 5, 1981 9. Individual driveways providing access to building sites may be subject to Planning Department review and approval at the time of building permit application for each parcel. If average slope exceeds 12% , paved improvement would be required, otherwise, an all-weather surface would be re- quired similarly. In no event will driveways be allowed which exceed 20% in slope. In the event any portion of a driveway is shared, improvement of the shared portion shall be a requirement made in conjunction with the first building permit. Notes to these effects shall appear on the Final Map. 10 . An offer for dedication to the public for road purposes for twenty five (25) feet along LaPaz Lane for the 240 foot of frontage thereon shall be made by the actual ease- ment owner. Said offer to be shown on the Final Map and be made by certificate on the Final Map. 11. The applicant shall construct LaPaz Lane along the frontage of the property to a minimum paved width of twenty (20) feet with three (3) feet of graded shoulder on each side of the paving prior to recordation of the Final Map. a. The applicant should attempt to coordinate required road improvements on LaPaz Lane with existing improve- ments in order to avoid a change in alignment. 12. Improvements to be constructed under an inspection agreement and encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Depart- ment. a. Improvement drawings, including improvements to control grading and erosion with the road right-of-way, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to recordation of the Final Map. 13. Improvements required by Conditions 2 , 3,5, and 11 may be deferred for a period not to exceed three years by entering into an agreement. Any such agreement shall include a bond, certificate of deposit or similar improvement guarantee acceptable to the Public Works Director. 14 . Roof materials for all structures shall be Class C rating or better and a Note to that effect shall appear on the Final Map. Page Seven Re: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810707:1 (Dunham) October 5, 1981 15. Drainage swales shall be indicated on the Final Map and a Note shall appear on the Final Map which states : "Any modification of the ground during site development within fifty (50) feet of the drainage swales shall be subject to approval by the Planning and Public Works Departments 16. Final grading and drainage plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for development on each parcel may be re- quired to be submitted for review and approval by the Planning and Public Works Departments prior to issuance of building permits . A note to this effect shall appear on the Final Map. 17. All easements of record shall be shown on the Final Map. 18. A Final Map in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a Registered Civil Engineer or licensed land surveyor shall submit a letter certifying that the monuments have been set prior to recordation of the Final Map. b. A final title policy (CLTA or ALTA) shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the provessing of the Final Parcel Map. 19 . Approval of this Tentative Parcel Map shall expire one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. Page Eight • Re: Tentative Parcel Map AT 810707: 1 (Dunham) October 5, 1981 ACTION The Planning Commission should by motion direct Staff as deemed appropriate. TO APPROVE: Motion to adopt findings and set conditions . TO DENY: Motion setting findings for denial. REPORT PREPARED BY: O L MOSES Associate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: 6r{OtfVtt 'L Aml� aLA RENCE STEVENS Planning Director /Ps i J �j-' Q _57f � s.itYX.. # `v" }} /�:• ?+^R � f� .. > ' h�4��1a11f11r al�/e'�llit♦M�1.ffi�rlU r•snm J tt 1 ��i �2�-Yu.l �• 1 � s• .� f ei � ;V^t\11 A +i 4 4�'i 1.. +q '��f} 'Yr'•+1• 1� 5 +F" t � } b { r ._� t.�#±-RK -� �l Y,-a._r °� -" yr i •� _ �,{i> ,2 3, 1 �e'�4.y h. .°i �. J + � a�— �: - r�..-.�''t�� t c t * � r� �-� s ;� � r. 1 t:. , i .�t •• �` - .� ter. •a .. 1 w �.. .l te.. � t s ) `f-�� � s y �t a !. -.. on ODD t• ..` ��� \t,;. -a...- -tr z-e4'� r �'s s - �. s �"'��• -EF .f', u y - N��. N �N . 7 J. •r�'�NRN� N ear.: � ,�s %�.' _ _ �/ Lbr Z5 7DE�ZxU N N A cm N m N is to f Lt ro TV co ^ f. I � Y L L , { r 1 r Y q v r l • e: (� Z ONE MAP AT810701 : 1 (DUNHA14) r i t r t 9040 SAN DIEGO RD. LOT 21 BLOCK 66 PM. CITY OF ATASCARO ,v 9i'sz Y✓ py PTN.44 M 43 PO .. sass , �o S�Go i-ioS� M PTN.43 Q\ O CD 19 431 R.M.4 C3-97 PTN. 66 Rs.3o-1 .V �a O HAki Y Lt Zt $t b6 zo s 7046 sAm Ve 4r610701r! a \�` q l p R.N 4C3-98 97'S.Zia' a 3S � Y- Ste. ,Uk evr PM 27-21 33o P.M.27-20 399 aio y A 22 3.0 AQ 093' II PM P6 73 szo R.S.25-9 Zit n 4.52 AC, 3.0 AC. —� - h h O h 399 - 23 - 30-100 >3r r PTN. 66 M to M .3PTN.30 N H h PTN. - rh 24 O "( 27 �i 07 ct: >0a t •roo 12 I a 4.25 AC. � v me 9 h O PTN 25 q PTN.26 0 3.74 AG U N /JJ� Z2o� ATASCA DfRO ROAD >s�o •ro. Soy 30 58 LOCATION MAP AT810701 : 1 (DUNHAP/i) 9040 SAN DIEGO RD. LOT 21 BLOCK66 �i et Ni Nel i wol S5 n# ' I SITE MAP AT810701 : 1 (DUNHAM) 9040 SAN DIEGO RD. LOT 21 BLOCK 66 ZA .s i�sz I � f +1' ' , ,L�L4'i i own .I,a� III * 1 i l l II I— f IIII sen ...d iy 0. li� II III I�i� I� IIII IN ry �. .,„,,.,�,..,,,.,,�•,,.,,,„� c9 oz 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t ij � 1 j! . I I E i I - .. I�I It - told ! r 3 r.*�y eyN. 1111111 111 IIII ii 1 ��II III! III fit IIII illi �I 011ilil _ ( -+ W 161 iI11 IIII I) i��l.l IIII ub ��.�'f WIN 'III ISI j I I a !I 1 I. 11� 'il f�� +� NANO IIII I Komi I, � 1/ I I II 0 I'E 3 I III I,IIiI I II:III /71.;1 ^ -I. \N_ l III � I illl IIII l .'�II 'I �` - •� ! /OS 3J Ii 1i: I 'A sm IIII I! - r f It 1111 W, '� I— '� III III III I II III 99>PI i1 Its .^Rr.,x�` .aC;7i• '_'ct�"y-:r...^' /n- -'-- f- ,� ,11.,.r - r I�� IIII III I I ; • II I - Cl II I .i I ,VIII I �.� 6Y_7 T^r^-a��t'it•n F�- 1.^' Arc i air T� "�i I��I'I i,'�I I� �I I�� I'� I 1 I 'I. � I � � ��' ISI, �^'•+ 1'Lti+1C 'a'l M spf/ KTF.A."''t:.`n .,aa, y / a..._ . -.S._• .. ..... __ zt - j uN,S ;: M`E M 0 R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER October 20 , 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Appeal of Departmental Review R810602 :1 LOCATION: 5265 E1 Camino Real (Ptn. Lot 10 , Block RA) APPLICANT: Glen Lewis REQUEST: To convert existing butcher shop into professional offices . On October 19, 1981 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the subject matter unanimously approving the appeal adopting Findings 1-5 and setting Conditions 1-12 per the attached Draft Notice of Approval with the following revisions: - Added Finding #6: "6. Existing easements and site development preclude a two-way driveway of adequate width. A reduced width driveway is • acceptable due to its limited length provided appropriate warnings are made. " Modified Conditions 7a and 7b: "7a. A 12. 5 foot wide driveway is approved as the only access to the rear parking area as shown on plans submitted. 7b. Painted directional markings or signs subject to the approval of the Planning Department shall be provided to warn of the restricted width and possible uncoming vehicles . This re- quirement may be deleted or modified if, at some future date, acceptable easement access becomes available to the rear parking area. There was some discussion among the Commission concerning alter- natives available to the applicant, but it was their consensus that approval of the reduced width was the only feasible option available since the owners were apparently unable to work out an easement. Glen Lewis, applicant, appeared noting unsuccessful efforts to obtain an easement and requesting approval of the appeal. He pointed out that the restricted width was only fora short dis- tance and could be signed or otherwise worked to maximize safety. • Page Two Re: Appeal of Departmental Review R810602 :1 (Lewis) October 20, 1981 Stan Sherwin, owner of the adjacent property, noted his discussion with the applicant concerning the easement indicating he thought they were close to working something out when the appeal was filed. No one else appeared on the matter. IQ� LAWRENCE STEVENS RRAY L. WARDEN Planning Director City Mnager /ps M E M O R A N D U M : TO: PLANNING COMMISSION October 19, 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Appeal of Departmental Review 8810602 :1 LOCATION: 5265 El Camino Real (Ptn. Lot 10 , Block RA) APPLICANT: Glen Lewis REQUEST: To convert existing butcher shop into professional offices. BACKGROUND Attached is a copy of the Draft Notice of Approval of Application Requiring Departmental Review within which certain conditions were established concerning driveway width and parking access (see Con- dition #7) . Essentially the conditions required the applicant to obtain an easement across the adjacent property (site of K-Dons • Jewelers and Home T.V. owned by Mr. Sherwin) . It was determined that the 122 foot wide driveway (8 ' on the Lewis parcel and 4 .5 ' on the Sherwin parcel with an existing easement) between the build- ings is not adequate in width for two-way travel so the easement was necessary to facilitate a one-way circulation pattern through both sites. This appears to be the only acceptable form of ingress and egress to the parking area. There has been considerable discussion between the owners concerning the easement and apparent verbal assurances given which would have been consistent with the approval. The applicant is requesting an appeal of the easement condition as he has been unsuccessful in negotiating an easement across Mr. Sherwin 's property. STAFF COMMENTS Given the existing easements, the location of existing buildings, and the apparent inability to obtain another easement (or modify existing easements) , Ivery few options remain. They appear to be limited to the following: - allow a substandard width driveway to the rear parking area (this would require minor changes to Condition #7) - require adequate two-way access to the rear parking area • (this may result in no project if the owners cannot work out an agreement) Page Two Re: Departmental Review R810602 :1 (Lewis) October 19 , 1981 It should be noted that the rear parking area is necessary to com- ply with parking requirements for the office use and the extent of the proposed remodeling necessitates such compliance. The parking area in front of K-Jon ' s, even though on the Lewis property, is not large enough to provide parking for both uses. As written, Condition #7 is flexible enough to allow for considerable revision to the existing easements to accommodate adequate access. FINDING 1. The proposed 12 . 5 foot wide driveway is inadequate to provide two-way access to the parking required for the project. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above finding, the Planning Department recommends denial of the appeal and approval of Departmental Review R810602 :1 subject to Conditions 1-13 listed in the attached Draft Notice of Approval. ACTION Direct Staff by motion as deemed appropriate. �PXX444'(4 LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director i /Ps �LF.YL � �EGCTC.� A Professional Law_Corporation P.O. Box 1166 ATASCADERO, CA 93423 (805)466-6644 � 1 ©CT 2 1`61 October 2, 1981 A Ci4V *^` P►anning � �artment �1�% Mr. Larry Stevens 6 S� City of Atascadero e 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93423 Re: Departmental Review R-810602: 1 5265 El Camino Real Dear Mr. Stevens: I hereby request an appeal of the above entitled Departmental Review in order to obtain a variance to permit ingress and egress on Parcel 2 through the twelve and one-half (12-1/2) foot driveway between the building commonly known as Gilbert' s Meats and the building next door which houses K-Jons Jewelers. • I am making this request because I have no ingress and egress access for the parking behind my building unless I obtain such a variance, as no easement rights are accessible. Very truly yours, GLEN R. LEWIS GRL:am f • s ' ;. .• N _ v _i.-. •TJ 7V .71 AL :N v� vie >s �r o v } O O 18 17 16 15 J4. 13 12 1l IO t it t2 �/ 32 2'4'I 15 _ f6 AVE. J N,1y'sd s✓ 9P b"9 �9 aD i SP GS '33 33 1 (oS 9P . ("i-iLMH i 33 3.`� l 35 33 �I 21 -�1 t -- 6'q �K 47 co r37 3,8 I 39 40 4r 42 �3 D t9 40 se (� I. RA 70.1 22 151 83 98 - FR. ca 1 64.42 3 0 196 48 !2 6 5 14 13 AMENDMENT RM 4 82 :• ;. _ : 6'99`3'-��- qy . EL CAMINO RrEAL - ,r toL:c VICNITY MAP REPT. LEW/S �- 52G5�L C�MINO / � .1 is � '�: • '��! ' .,,�`� ,�� _ � 'R ` •� - �� Ir � '`ice_�. • ►7iI+L � EN J � �. • �� Ly+�,C� ��h!�-. _..fit �", � °±\ J � _ ��.♦. ltd r • - EI Camino Real o - 19 jI O Am a� 8 � r o - /I I -If' S3'oo`!a/ 39 Io' N V 5 �4 w ab A COI) oMOT �• e . tw ` o a s mot 53.00"4/ .53.GO'W LOT RbV, R?/06 82= Lim GAJI -- 521,5 EG CAM/N 0 CITY OF ATASCADERO / rnrr77, r:�, 1918 G r -� 1979 Planning Department - DRAFT September 16 , 1981 NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION REQUIRING DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW SUBJECT: Departmental Review R810602: 1 LOCATION: 5265 El Camino Real (Portion Lot 10 Block RA) APPLICANT: Glen Lewis (Bob Sonne) REQUEST: To convert an existing butcher shop into a professional office building BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: C-1-D (511) , General Shopping District with the "D'(511) " to mean as follows: Design development review is required to ensure the establish- ment of uses compatible with the remaining residential uses and to ensure attractive appearance from the highway by: A) Limiting signing to 20 sq. ft. unless approved by a con- ditional use permit, and B) Requiring landscaping covering not less than 10% of lot area, including screen planting along lot lines abutting residential uses. 2 . General Plan: Retail Commercial 3. Environmental Determination: The Planning Director has determined the project to be a Class 1 (a) Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15101 of the California Environmental Quality Act. 4 . Site Conditions: The site is currently developed with a 1500 sq. ft. , single- story structure previously used as a butcher shop and with a small metal shed located at the rear of the parcel. The lot slopes gently downward towards El Camino Real. There are several trees located against the E1 Camino Real side of the shed. The site is bounded by single-family structure to the north and commercially designated property to the east and west. The site fronts El Camino Real on the south. Access to the property is via a driveway off El Camino Real. • Page Two Departmental Review R810602: 1 Lewis 5. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing meat market/ butcher shop into a professional office. Interior modifications include removal of existing restrooms and locker and storage area and removal of certain interior partition walls and doors, with construction of new partition walls and doors to create 2 reception areas, four small office spaces, a conference room, and 2 restrooms. The two existing entrances are proposed to remain exterior modifications include painting; removal of a metal shed at rear of property; removal of an existing tree; designation of 5 standard (9' x 20' ) parking spaces and one handicapped space (12 ' x 20' ) ; screen landscaping along the rear (northeast) property line, and low landscaping in front of the parking along the southeast property line and around the proposed trash enclosure at the rear of the building. Ease- ments are proposed across the adjacent lot to the north (Parcel l of CO 70-47) to provide adequate turning radius from proposed parking spaces and to provide circular (one-way) access to the site and parking area. No significant changes to the exterior elevations are proposed, except for removal of existing signing, painting, and removal of rear roll-up door. FINDINGS 1. The site of the proposed office use can be adequate in size and • shape toaccommodatesaid offices and all yards, fencing, parking, landscaping and other features required by the Atascadero Municipal Code. 2. Streets in the vicinity of the proposed use are adequate to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated. 3. The proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting pro- perty of the permitted use thereof. 4. Establishment and conduct of the professional offices for which the Departmental Review is sought will not be detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or improvements in said neighborhood. 5. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above findings, the Planning Department recommends approval of Departmental Review R810602 : 1 subject to the following conditions: Page Three Departmental Review R810602:1 Lewis 1. Site development including buildings, aisles, parking, landscaping, fencing and other features shall be consistent with site plans submitted and with modifications as required by other conditions herein. 2. Building architecture shall be consistent with elevations submitted. a. Any existing or proposed roof-mounted mechanical equip- ment shall be screened from view from adjacent streets and properties in a manner approved by the Planning Department. 3. Approval is granted to remove the tree so designated on plans submitted. Site plans for building permit shall indicate the location of other existing trees on the site and effort shall be made to retain any mature trees. No other trees shall be removed without prior Planning Depart- mental approval. 4 . Submit two copies of detailed landscaping and irrigation plans indicating size, type, spacing of plant materials proposed for review and approval by the Planning Department • prior to issuance of building permits. a. Raised concrete curbs or similar shall border each planter area. b. Plant materials shall be sized to achieve a mature appearance within three years. C. The type of irrigation system shall depend upon the plant materials used and the watering needs. d. The planter area around the trash enclosure shall be expanded five feet to the rear of the building. e. Landscaping along El Camino Real shall be upgraded as necessary to provide healthy plants and an attractive visual effect for the building frontage. f. A minimum four-foot wide planter shall be provided be- tween the two driveways on El Camino Real. 5. On-site signing shall be limited to an aggregate area of twenty (20) square feet for the entire project site, not to exceed the height of the building unless a Conditional Use Permit is secured. • Page Four Departmental Review R810602: 1 Lewis 6. Lighting fixtures shall not project above the roof of the building and shall be designed to minimize on-site and off-site glare. 7. Parking and access areas shall be provided as shown on site plans. Parking and access areas shall be paved with a mini- mum of 2-inch AC on adequate base, and spaces shall be paint striped. Wheel stops or approved functional equivalent shall be provided. a. Submit evidence of recordation of access easements across Parcels 1 and 2 of PM 4-27 (CO 70-47) prior to issuance of building permits. b. One-way circulation pattern shall be clearly indicated on the site by painted arrows in the driveway and/or other approved functional equivalent. Circulation pattern to be approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits. , C. Provide a minimum of six parking spaces. The proposed handicapped space may be converted to a regular space. a ' d. Existing concrete slabs in the parking area are to be • removed or otherwise modified to provide a smooth and even surface in parking and driveway areas. 8. All new utilities and utility connections shall be placed underground. 9. The project shall be connected to the community water and sewer systems. Submit evidence from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and the Atascadero County Sanitation District indicating the agencies are willing and able to, or already do, provide service prior to issuance of permits. 10. Provide a paved (or concrete) enclosed trash storage area as shown on the approved site plan. 11. This Departmental Review approval is granted for a maximum period of one year from the date of final approval unless an extension is granted by the Planning Director pursuant to a written request filed a minimum of ten (10) days prior to expiration date. 12. All conditions of approval established herein shall be com- plied with prior to occupancy of proposed use. • Page Five Departmental Review R810602: 1 Lewis 13. This Departmental Review approval shall become final at 5 p.m. on September 25, 1981 unless an appeal has been filed prior to that date. REPORT PREPARED BY: � RY E.L 13EATIE ssociate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: lal�o� /&ew LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director /ms M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER October20 , 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Lot Line Adjustment LA 810817: 1 LOCATION: 5300 Traffic Way (Lots 30 and 31, Block DA) APPLICANT: Ernest Simon (Hilliard) REQUEST: To adjust existing lot line to resolve a building encroachment On October 5, 1981 and October 19, 1981, the Planning Commission con- sidered the subject matter approving the proposed lot line adjustment on a 3-2 vote (Commissioner Summers and Chairman Moore dissenting Commissioners Wentzel and Carroll absent) subject to Conditions 1-8 as listed in the attached Staff Report. There was considerable discussion among the Commission concerning the size of proposed Parcel B and its compliance with zoning standards. The matter was continued to allow review of prior lot line adjustments pertinent to this issue. The dissenting Commissioners felt that a lot less than the 10,000 square feet minimum for the B-2 combining dis- trict should not be allowed even for a lot line adustment. Robert Hilliard, applicant's surveyor , appeared and noted any effort to comply with the 10, 000 square foot minimum would result in un- usually shaped lots. No one else appeared on the matter . 4e4 -- LAWRENCE STEVENSM �'tAY L. WARDEN Planning Director City 'Man�ager /ps M E- M G R A N D- U- M ; TO: PLANNING COMMISSION October 19 , 1981 FROM PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Lot Line Adjustment LA 810817 :1 LOCATION: 5300 Traffic Way (Lots 30 & 31, Block DA) APPLICANT: Ernest Simon (Hilliard) REQUEST: To adjust existing lot line to resolve a building encroachment BACKGROUND On October 5, 1981 the Planning Commission considered this matter continuing it to allow further review of the size of Parcel B relative to consistency with the General Plan and compliance with zoning standards. A review has been made of all lot line adjustments approved over the last two years and only five were found to have problems with0 either the zoning or the general plan standards. A summary of each of those follows. To date, no lot line adjustments have been denied. L WRENCE STEVENS Planning Director /PS , 1. 5100 Alamo - AL 79-46 (Garza) Lots 13 & 58 , Block Q Zoning: R-1-B-3-D (508) , 20 ,000 sq. ft. minimum parcel size Existing Lot Size: Lot 58 - 17 ,093 sq. ft. Lot 13 - 25,088 sq. ft. Proposed_ Lot Size: Lot 58 - 22 ,142 sq. ft.. (Parcel B) Lot 13 - 20 ,040 sq. ft. (Parcel A) Reason for Request 'rouse encroachment -Decision: approved 2/11/80 by Council per Planning Commission recommendation. 2 . 8808 Arcade - AL 81-119 (Williams) Lots 22 & 23 , Block 4 , Eaglet No. 1 Zoning: R-1-B-2-D - 10 , 000 sq. ft. minimum parcel size Existing-Lot-Size: Lot 22 - 8170 sq. ft. Lot 23 - 8170 sq. ft. Proposed Lot Size: Parcel A - 8624 sq, ft. Parcel B - 6879 sq. ft. Reason for Request: Carport encroachment . Decision: Approved 6/8/81 by Council per Planning Commiss recommendation. 3. 4550 San Ardo - AT 80-104 (Silva) Ptn. Lots 9 & 10 , Block CA Zoning: R-1-B-3-D - 20 ,000 sq. ft. minimum General-Plan: Moderate Density Single Family, no sewer, 12 acre minimum (65 ,340 sq. ft. ) Existing-Lot Size: Ptn. Lot 10 - 20, 023 .2 sq. ft. Ptn. Lot 9 - 33 ,594 . 8 sq. ft. Proposed Lot size: Ptn Lot 10 - 22, 984 sq. ft. Ptn. Lot 9 - 30,634 sq. ft. Reason: Driveway Encroachment Decision: Approved 4/13/81 by Council per Planning Commission Recommendation 4 . 5260 Maleza AT 81-38 (Craig) Lots 16 & 17 , Block C Zoning: R-A - 20, 000 sq. ft. minimum General Plan Moderate Density Single Family, no sewer, 12 acre minimum (65 , 340 sq. ft. ) Existing Lot Size: Lot 16 - 42 , 000 sq. ft. Lot 17 - 45 ,696 sq. ft. Proposed Lot Size: Parcel A - 38 , 986 . 2 sq. ft. Parcel B 44 , 518 .32 sq. ft.. Reason: House encroachment Decision: Approved 4/27/81 by Council per Planning Commission recommendation. 5. 7720 Cristobal - LA 810414 :1 (Texeira) Lots 4,34 , 34A, Block OB Zoning R-1-B-2-D, 10, 000 sq. ft. minimum General Plan: Moderate Density Single Family, sewer, 1 acre minimum (43 , 560 sq. ft. ) Existing Lot Size: Lot 4 43 , 511 sq. ft. Lot 34 - 22, 600 sq. ft. Lot 34A 20, 855 sq. Proposed Lot Size: Lot 4 — 56 ,806 sq. ft. Lot 34 13 , 100 sq. ft. Lot 34A - 12 , 500 sq. ft. Reason: House encroachment Decision: Approved with merger of 34 and 34A on 6/8/81 by Council per Planning Commission recommendation, IF,r� -v Fla1 r. CITY OF ATASCADERO • C r I ,ti 1979 IKOM19 Planning Department October 5, 1981 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Lot Line Adjustment LA 810817 : 1 LOCATION: 5300 Traffic Way (Lots 30 & 31 , Block DA) APPLICANT: Ernest Simon (Hilliard) REQUEST: To adjust existing lot line to resolve a building encroachment BACKGROUND 1 . Existing Zoning: R-3-B-2-D 2. General Plan: High Density Multiple Family Residential 3. Environmental Determination: The Planning Director has deter- mined the application as presented to be a Class 5 (a) Categorical Exemption according to the provisions of the California Environ- mental Quality Act. 4 . Site Conditions: The site is bounded on the north by Honda Avenue (a 40 foot, two lane paved right-of-way) , on the east by Traffic way (a 60 foot, two lane paved right-of-way) , on the south and west by residential neighborhood. Parcel A is already developed with a single family residence. Parcel B is presently vacant. Both parcels have walls that encroach into the Honda Avenue right-of-way. 5. Project Description: The applicant proposes to adjust the common property line between Lots 30 and 31 . The proposed lot line adjustment would resolve building encroachments where the existing residence on Lot 30 encroaches onto Lot 31 . The applicant proposes to move the existing property line west approximately 15 feet. The result of the adjustment will pro- vide the necessary side yard setback of five feet and increase Parcel A to be 19 , 727 square feet in size, while reducing Par- cel B to 8 ,277 square feet. STAFF COMMENTS On Thursday, September 10 , 1981 the Subdivision Review Board met with Rick Barber of Hilliard Surveys to discuss this application_ Page Two Re: Lot Line Adjustment LA 810817 : 1 (Simon) October 5, 1981 Also attending the meeting were: Larry Stevens, Planning Director; Mary Beatie, Associate Planner; Joel Moses, Associate Planner; and Wayne LaPrad'e, Planning Commissioner. The following items were discussed: 1) Adjusted property line should provide for a five foot setback from all structures or else structures should be removed (i.e. block wall and overhang) . 2) The notation on the map of the existence of unacceptable slope condition and nonconforming grading, to be corrected at the time of site development. 3) Requirement of an easement, removal or relocation to street right-of-way of an existing overhead utility line crossing the lot. Subsequent to the S.R.B. meeting, the encroachment of the block walls was noted. FINDINGS 0 1. The application as submitted has been determined to be Cate- gorically Exempt from the requirements of C.E.Q.A. as defined by Class 5 (a) . 2 . The application as presented conforms with the applicable zon- ing and subdivision regulations. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings, the Planning Department recommends approval of Lot Line Adjustment LA 810817: 1 subject to the follow- ing conditions- 1 . The lot line adjustment as shown on the map attachment provided herein shall be submitted in a Final Map format to be approved by the Planning Department prior to recordation by the County Recorder' s Office. a. Adjusted property line shall provide for a five foot setback from all structures, or structures shall be altered or removed to provide said setback. Page Three • Re: Lot Line Adjustment LA 810817 : 1 (Simon) October 5, 1981 2. Any tree removal or site grading necessary for the development of the lots shall be subject to Planning Department approval prior to issuance of building permits . This requirement shall appear as a Note on the Final Map. 3. An informational note shall be placed on the Final Map as follows: "Unacceptable slope condition and nonconforming grading shall be corrected on the site with the development of Parcel B. " 4. The portions of the decorative and structural retaining walls encroaching into the Honda Avenue right-of-way shall be removed prior to recordation of the Map. 5. Electrical line crossing Parcel B shall be removed or relocated or have an easement provided for it prior to recordation of the Final Map. 6 . The proposed adjusted lot lines shall be surveyed and monuments set at new property corners prior to recordation of the Final lei Map. 7. The location of all easements of record shall be delineated on the Final Map. 8 . Approval of this Lot Line Adjustment shall expire one year from the date of final approval unless a time extension has been' granted pursuant to a written request prior to the ex- piration date. ACTION The Planning Commission should by motion direct Staff as deemed appropriate. TO APPROVE: Motion to adopt findings and set conditions. TO DENY: Motion setting findings for denial . REPORT PREPARED BY: JO L OS S, Asso ' to Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: IZA66�� /J&/144 LAWRENCE STEVENS, Planning Director _ I2 µ.I7920. O V-1 (4), 4 V SO VO z y SO y m V / �� S� O :83250 10417 311 O ZE .p S° d 771 41.6 A DD O H � i0 SS O - 15�• ` �'N S � vJ 3b rZ-p0 4g 8Z 66 sdw �Oh4y ao ;t mCA 0 o �o ro S50° O 0Q. O.E . N 241SE - m t0 O ti 1 2 4 S4?°35W m.\_ k`,r��l. N286.2.5 N 219 00,E m v S,38. ly 45' O b W O uO V m z A 2. Ab N32°30'E a N V 310.29 N29°05E h ti a O m 23 1 ` ' w144.43 NS33°1154'4°'h O t, (3) V7 O O T l 159 SV30 04O N29°05'E 15-3.05 159:05.. gi 16,48 h IO4 _ 297.11 212.0 pQ > U p 129 S 1 °05'W 233.42 288.23 F 258.17 V O 210 215. 0 24A4.6-- 27L_A3 _ 185.75 90 149.25 g O 2°9.n PM 2052 �(Jff o m NAoc / 2,:: a a ! V F l�s � tri - ----199.36 ---/n m. O rn 210.10 �'' O 17962 C b n N " OD g h h V ~ S IE .rte 14. 'D .N29 / _ - P+�nn.n9 3 +`66 62.b0 62.50 89.71 I 5 �� - .^s 200 _ m 140 60 • c w 1 _O (m A -m (A ro fJ u p N E 152.82 1 ) ,)1 ____ N 1.30 U A u �, O1 V m b. _ �i ✓�.'L O� K m a _ 71 N •40 I ® tta O I 40 a 110 90 90 62.50 62.50 85 104.71 75 75 171.69 m m TRAFFIC S29 05 W WAY 0 X Q /Es b GOD / A � bm /cn 0 0 m Z SITE L.CC,4770,k) z 5300 72C4rrI6 &�.aq � ----- --- - -- --- --- - -_ - .Co1� 3031 BZLY-k ,::1,4 - --- h C7 Y-2779 /E 07 �Q�' (wow/Sc') �. igol8�7 o "I-Z I,99.09 iY 91 1h .4 ig ZL i o ti u T, aro D pi �\—� 6, Q °oi11 O`o (7 ry r co I° ir O / 0 yaD WAV ; Z o l \ TRAFFjC • nr=A aH an->oi six >n h A � • Vmn a ^'1 Oa A p O ND�iZ as3A ^ o °���� � i a o mLAoa . 10 11 02 � (r©wis) 1 L�goig7 �►N �(v�Ncrz - ap nro b 410 4�3 7i N VN ` 'ry 43 lb N ryti a _ j O O V b 0 / fir \N. N fn \ ry M (O r a pb a �'/ �..J (•\ r t�\( t J £b M C%' I '.Co .<bb P ^ ry � P � sl �y M p ,p0 ry e 0 ^)� 6�Bo N {y ` O 10 N b y (O. M N N d' � ry\ b 00a O Q N a N M� CD _ N N r e Alb v _ _ N N 'ITCV ` y U Or � ��1♦ y p'r� i Q In P a o L -CD h N O N N _ 1 tF tp H N n (O /� O _ CO N N `Q a • Q 1 ,,, N d _ �a E In le N v, \eR nJ ti h M QM, M1 M to N Rf M O }G r P I i \01 `0 Oj to yV O Bd Q `• � ,tom\ . � O �N�. O, / \� d6 d ..,\/:' \ �'�.. r ! �51 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Murray FROM: Larry McPherson SUBJECT: Balboa Road Reconstruction - Bid No. 81-17 Recommendation It is recommended that City Council accept the low bid for the subject project submitted by Ventures West, 1048 Barstow Ave, Clovis, CA in the amount of $84 ,754. 00. Background This project calls for the reconstruction of Balboa Road from San Fernando to Graves Creek, a total of approximately 1. 2 miles. Existing paving will be broken up and mixed with the subbase and a 2 asphalt surface laid on the ;compacted I processed base. The planned paving width is 18 ' . The funds for this project are available in account #02-41- 4317 - Reconstruction of Balboa Road. The attached bid spread sheet shows the results of the bids received. r�RNCE McPHERSON LM:vh 10-22-81 att. Cl) WI'd. W - O N n o ((DD c a a O En O Om 00 C c) Cf) G o�o :j CD 0 G w " w w r. w � � : �j En w rt CD Z O' H. O O OCn Fj• O AF • Q L N - C 9C �' Fl In -S n H ::$ n (n (D n to 0000 (0n O- 0 Olo0 CI F - N > rr � t�r CD ft �3' t3' F- : > o O (D F'• to �' rn (D -Fj• O En �j R'> "o E N F, cn (D Oo N to rr W rt, CD N to n C) ho w C7 to m > \ i O (n O h O N C N F✓ M . �j N N CD —I W UI 00 F-' U1 (a to (cn in ('D CD d N (� cn Cn (D (D (D (D (D :Z O Fi f i Fi Fj En rr p ro ro ro ro ro F- h rt, Q cn m ul U) w 0 En En U) En 0) to D 1-0 ( (D(D 10 (D(D (D x to m cn En to P) (0-4,C �71;zC/) OL CD ;'lo ; rirtM 3 J Fes- rt `. F-' ID OD Co Oo p x1 110 r O � rn rn v O ` to . OD OD N cn Ui �J CD Ln N W OD A -p (A C7 -S rt r-t- DD N O N Fl -- O O- `P O O C) (D (� rr o o !d H, r rp w CDCr3 -�, -1o < a i i M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER October 20 , 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Appeal of Departmental Review R810811: 1 LOCATION: 7315 El Camino Real APPLICANT: Bob Lawrence REQUEST: To allow establishment of a game arcade On October 8, 1981 the attached letter of appeal requesting a formal public hearing concerning the above--referenced project was filed by Ronald J. von Felden, attorney representing the Sugarless Shack. On September 28, 1981 the City Council concurred with the Staff Report and Planning Commission' s recommendation to conditionally approve the game arcade, as a non-hearing item. The attached minutes summarize the comments both in support of and opposition to the project. On September 8, 1981 the Planning Commission approved the request subject to the eleven (11) conditions in the attached Staff Report with the two added conditions in the attached Memorandum. The following alternatives are available to City Council in consid- ering this appeal: 1) Approve the Departmental Review subject to the Findings and Conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. 2) Approve the Departmental Review subject to additional or re- vised Findings and Conditions deemed necessary to make the use compatible with the surrounding uses. 3) Deny the Departmental Review on the basis that the game arcade is not a permitted use even though so determined by the Planning Commission and Planning Department. Appropriate findings to support this determination must be made. (Note: It has been determined that a game arcade, although not specifically listed in the C-1 Zone, is permitted subject to Departmental Review since it is similar to other uses so listed, such as bowling alley and skating rink. ) 0 Memorandum: Appeal of Departmental Review R810811: 1_ (Lawrence) Page Two October 20, 1981 4) Deny the Departmental Review on the basis that the game arcade use would, if established, constitute a public nuisance. Sub- stantial findings of fact in support of this action would be essential. 5) Adopt an urgency ordinance establishing a moratorium on game arcades to allow time to study possible zoning techniques and standards for the use. This application could be held in abey- ance pending that study but would obviously be delayed for some , time. The possible consequences to Alternatives 4 and 5 should be care- fully considered especially since it may be difficult to develop adequate findings for these possible actions. LAWRENCE STEVENS *C ' y WARDEN Planning Director nager /Ps • • MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting September 28 , 1981 7: 30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building m. by Hayer W�44f�nq t4619 th Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Wilkins � also• gave the invocation. ROLL LL PRESENT : ouncilmen Highland , Mackey, Nelson , Stover and Mayor W kins ABSENT: None PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment . A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 . Minutes of the regular eeting of September 14 , 1981 (RECOM- MEND APPROVAL) 2. Lot Line Adjustment LA 8107 : 1 , 2100 Traffic Way, Levi Barrett (Stewart) , to adjust existing lot line between Parcel A of AT 80-72 and parcel of AL 77-183 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION R OMMENDATION) 3 . Resolution No. 27-81 authorizing ente ' ng into a deferred compensation plan -i-ssued by Hartford Va ' able Annuity Life Insurance Company (RECOMMEND ADOPTION) Mayor Wilkins reviewed all items on the Consent Ca endar . He noted that the meeting of September 14 , 1981 , adjourned t 8 : 45 p.m. MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved for the acceptance of the nsent Calendar . The motion was seconded by Councilman Nel n and unanimously carried . B. ti , 1 . Report on Departmental Review R810811 : 1 , 7315 El Camino Real , Bob Lawrence, to establish game arcade Mr . Warden stated that this item would normally have appeared on the Consent Calendar , however , because Staff expected public comment on this item, it was scheduled as an agenda item. Mayor Wilkins asked for any comments regarding the proposed arcade AOL in the Adobe Plaza. Those speaking in opposition to the arcade ' s lo- cation were Ron Von Felden , Attorney for the tenant at the Sugarless Shack; Don Chapman , Sugarless Shack; Earl Murie , Venus de Milo ; David MINUTES - ATASCADE* CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER* , 1981 Graham, resident behind the proposed arcade ; Anna Fleming and Karen Belcher , Mary Anne 's Hallmark; Melanie Karp, Calico Kids; and Norleen Ginther , Ginther ' s Menswear . The tenants in the Adobe Plaza were _ba- sically concerned with the possibility of loitering by teenagers around the businesses in the area and disturbing their patrons . They cited disturbances when the last arcade was located in the Plaza. Those speaking in favor of the Arcade 's operation were Bob Lawrence , applicant; David von Ter Stegge , attorney for Ed Worthan , lessor of the Adobe Plaza; and Mr . Robert , attorney for Bob Lawrence . The proponents cited clauses in the applicant ' s lease which estab- lishes control of the business and required adult supervision of the patrons . Council members discussed this matter with Councilmen Mackey and Nelson opposing the arcade at this location and Councilmen Highland , Stover and Mayor Wilkins of the opinion that the applicant should be given an opportunity to establish his business in the Adobe Plaza and show his ability to run an acceptable operation . Mr . Warden advised that if the Council was to alter any of the conditions of the Planning Commission ' s recommendations , it would be necessary to schedule the matter for a full public hearing. MOTION: Councilman Stover moved for acceptance of the Planning Commission ' s recommendations regarding the arcade at the Adobe Plaza. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and carried on the following roll call vote : w,,> AYES: Councilmen Highland , Stover and Mayor Wilkins NOES: Councilmen Mackey and Nelson RECESS 8 ; 17 p.m. RECONVENZO 8:22 P.M. 2. Report from Citizen ' s Parking Committee regarding parking 1 tations Erwin Mannin , representing the Citizen ' s Parking Committee , re- viewed the Committee recommendations regarding parking in the down- town Atascadero area. e basic difference between the Traffic Com- mittee ' s recommendation an he Citizens ' Committee recommendation was in areas where the Traffic Com ' ttee was recommending "no parking" the Citizens ' Committee was recommends 112-hour parking" . The Citizens ' Committee felt that there is a need on-street parking and that there has not been a demonstrated safety azard under present condi- tions . The Traffic Committee based its reco endation on the high traffic volumes , adequate off-street parking , a demonstrated sight distance problems . Councilman Highland expressed his desire to have one ace on the traffic side of each curb cut kept clear . He felt that the ty should start with the least restrictive measure and only work to mo re p a s-i tion if it pc mss—,re e e s mar-. r 2 • 0 M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Departmental Review R810811:1 LOCATION: 7315 El Camino Real APPLICANT: Bob Lawrence REQUEST: To establish game arcade On Tuesday, September 8, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the game arcade unanimously adopting Findings 1-5 and approving the request subject to Conditions 1-11 as listed in the attached Staff Report with the following added conditions: 12. This Departmental Review is not transferrable to another business owner. 13. This Departmental Review shall be subject to review one year from the date of final approval by the Planning Commission at a public hearing and may be subject to further annual re- views as determined at that hearing. There was discussion among the Commission expressing concern for the feelings of the shop owners in the Adobe Plaza. It was the Commission' s general consensus that the arcade should be allowed the opportunity to prove itself. It was generally agreed that the conditions, including the added ones above, were sufficient to protect existing tenants while making clear the limits under which the applicant could operate. Norleen Ginther (Ginther' s Menswear) , Betty Hale (Santa Lucia Prop. , Shoe Tree) , Earl Murie (Venus de Milo) , and Melanie Karp (Calico Kids) all spoke in opposition to the proposed arcade citing several reasons why they did not want the arcade. These included lack of adequate parking, numerous requests for change, loitering and littering by teenagers, lack of adequate super- vision (as was noted with the previous arcade) , etc. Concern was expressed because of problems with the previous arcade. Bob Lawrence, applicant, concurred with the Staff' s recommendation and expressed his concern over condemnation of the arcade prior to establishment of the use. He stated the business would be family run and he would exercise sound management control over the busi- ness and the surrounding area. No one else appeared on the matter. This matter would normally be on the Consent Calendar, but since 41 there is a strong likelihood that discussion will occur, it has i i Departmental Review R810811:1 .Lawrence Page 2 been scheduled to allow such discussion. The Council cannot, however, change the conditions recommended by the Commission or deny the Departmental Review without setting the matter for a formal public hearing. LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director LS:ms TO: City Council If Council feels this approval should be denied, then it must be scheduled for a full public hearing. A finding would have to be made that, in fact, the arcade was not permitted use as determined during Departmental Review and as endorsed by the Planning Com- mission. F`���� CITY OF ATASCADERO 1 979 Planning Department September. 8 , 1981 -STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Departmental Review R810811 :1 LOCATION: 7315 El Camino Real (Adobe Plaza) APPLICANT: Bob Lawrence dba: "Star Station 101" REQUEST: To allow establishment of a game arcade ' BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: C-1-D 2. General Plan: Retail Commercial 3 . Environmental Determination: This application is exempt from the requirements of C.E.Q.A. 4 . Site Conditions : The site is the present location of the Adobe Plaza Shopping Center. A parking lot exists across the entire frontage of the Center along El Camino Real and provides parking shared by all tenants. 5. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to rent an 18 ' -6" X 60 ' 6" (1120 sq. ft. ) store in which to operate "Star Station 101" - an arcade with electronic games. A pool table is also proposed. The floor plan indicates the placement of approximately 20 game machines, a change booth and a restroom. The game machines would be located against the two walls running the length of the store.. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation of the family arcade to be 10 : 00 a.m. to 11: 00 p.m. seven days a week. STAFF C014MENTS One problem inherent in zoning ordinances is the coming into vogue of new uses not previously provided for in the ordinance text. Though it may be generally similar in nature to bowling alleys or pool halls, there may be some unique aspects to the use; such as adverse public reaction for certain locations , potential noise problems, public nuisance perceptions , etc. At the present time game arcades are not listed specifically as a permitted use in any commercial zones. However, Staff has determined that an ar- cade is similar to certain uses as described above. Page Two Res Departmental Review R810811:1 (Lawrence) September 8 , 1981 The Planning Commission previously approved an arcade as a proposed use in a recreational facility in an "L" or Recreational zone.. The determination at that time rendered a game arcade as a "commercial recreational" use under Section-22:62 ,015 Bepartmental Review Uses . Game arcades have more recently been viewed as undesirable uses because of their tendency to be a "hang-out" for kids. Gatherings occur in and around the business possibly creating an adverse effect on adjacent businesses by blocking walkways, causing noise to the detriment of nearby commercial and residential uses , and even causing police problems. Many of these can be adequately controlled by proper management along with other limitations attached to zoning or license approvals . -FINDINGS 1. The site of the proposed game arcade can be adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use and all parking and other features required by the Atascadero Municipal Code. 2 . Streets in the vicinity .of the proposed use are adequate to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated provided access to residential areas is prohibited. 3. The proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof if recommended conditions are imposed and if the use is properly managed. 4 . The establishment and conduct of the game arcade for which the Departmental Review is sought will not be detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or improvements in said neighborhood. 5. The project will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above findings, the Planning Department recommends approval of Departmental Review R810811 :1 subject to the follow- ing conditions : Page Three Re: Departmental Review R810811 :1 (Lawrence) September 8 , 1981 1. Site development including interior floor plan and signing and other features shall be consistent with site plans sub- mitted and with modifications as required by other conditions herein. 2 . Permits shall be obtained from the Planning Department for all interior modifications, including the proposed change booth, and for upgrading of electrical service to accommodate increased loads 3. Business sign shall conform to approved sign plans for the Adobe Plaza shopping center. 4 . Hours of operation shall be limited to the following: - Sunday through Thursday 10 :00 a.m. - 9 :00 p.m. - Friday and Saturday 10: 00 a.m. -11:00 p.m.. 5. Provision shall be made for responsible adult (over age 21) management of the business during all hours of operation. 61 To minimize possible congregating and related noise behind the premises, the rear door shall be used as an emergency exit only and shall be so posted and equipped with any necessary signs and panic hardware as required by the Planning Department. 7. An occupant load sign with the occupant load to be determined by the Planning Department shall be posted inside the building. 8. Effort shall be made to minimize unnecessary noise and congre- gating at or near the business premises by customers to avoid disturbance to adjacent businesses and residences . If such a public nuisance develops in conjunction with the operation of the business, the Planning Director may set the matter for public hearing by the Planning Commission to consider the revocation of the Departmental Review and/or additional con- ditions deemed necessary to minimize such nuisance. 9. A business license shall be secured and it shall be subject to successful completion of a background investigation as re- quired by the Licensing ordinance. 10 . This Departmental Review approval is granted for a maximum period of one year from the date of final approval unless an extension is granted by the Planning Director pursuant to a .written request filed a minimum of ten days prior to the expiration date. Page Four Re: Departmental Review R810811 :1 (Lawrence) September 8 , 1981 11. All conditions of approval established herein shall be complied with prior to occupancy of proposed use. ACTION The Planning Commission should by motion direct Staff as deemed appropriate. TO APPROVE: Adopt findings and set conditions TO DENY: Set findings for denial REPORT PREPARED BY: MARY E, BEATIE Associate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: Awme /16 LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director /Ps f cli ._' N /a ® M N N N Q lYl Ln CL CD / r NrN �, \ 7 � `� G �/ M � 8 �'}f� fid• / / J � � �•`� Ila • � e_``�-� '•� c" � •\�\ _\� LTJ �/�� /N � d I� ��m .., 01� _J/ \ \ �• Cb mei; v\ � \�V ��` \\ \\`. "lug jam\ /♦S' �X� o ✓ `gip `� IV / . 1 dr 61 10*4 cb- 10 19 ZOY-FINN-4- MAP e j LAwr,6NC a v • �s:'" �t `OTS 5-- 29 r PROJECT DATE SHEET — -- JOB NO -- ® McCarthy & Brady Architects,AIA DRAWN { 615 Creston Road, P.O.Box 305 Paso Robles,California 93446 (805)238-7447 CHECKED 738 Higuera Street, Suite A. San Luis Obispo, California 93401 (805)543.0729. OF q — _-- 1351_:.-x. -- - - - - - i -- '7341 - - - -- - --- - -- --- } -7Z- - - Rt�� f5us1r � �`T"s 6 z9 X� 'I t3 i WR Fc- 71R)II-I)/NCT -PKAN FrN LOT5 5-2� --- - - -- ------- LL O4 4 L c CSf 0 O CD J�. • \ N b tbb.A N ci N 5q (n �O a t� 130 Q O Q c� N �C \ 00 h1 _ X O cm v N 0 O V� O 5�54 b c\ NO - y 5 I00. .58 CIJ �. N �a ,[(� .Al \C ci Hca O� Oa (p Q LO 'FLA 7-461v �+� U 0' `Q crM w� 0 v ^� co 2� a G saw • -FAP—CC-Z- MA Relo8ro `V 3 dal V1ai de ';Milo, September 11, 1981 The Honorable Robert J. Wilkins, Jr . Mayor of Atascadero P. O. Box 1064 Atascadero, CA 93446 RE: Game Arcade, 7315 El Camino Real , Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mayor Wilkins : I am Corporate Counsel for Venus de Milo, the franchisor of the Venus de Milo salon in the Adobe Plaza. It is in this capacity I am contacting you regarding the above-referenced business which is to be established in the Adobe Plaza Shopping Center . The City Planning Commission approved this business for opening at its September 8, 1981 meeting when application was made by the owners of the proposed facility under the heading Public Hearing #2. Venus de Milo is a national franchise chain of locally-owned • ladies ' figure and reducing salons. Because our salons are located from coast-to-coast we have had the opportunity to evaluate the importance of tight quality control on the types of uses which will enhance or destroy a particular commercial district. The Adobe Plaza is a beautiful addition to the commercial environment in Atascadero and the uses permitted in it should be carefully controlled in order to maintain a truly superior commercial environment there . Currently, the plaza is primarily a mixture of small specialty retail stores and a few food and service establishments . The types of businesses in the center would seem to be slightly more attractive to the women of Atascadero than to the men. This is not surprising because the owners and developers of the center knew that women generally control family spending and consequently, they want to attract women. The Game Arcade is without question the type of business which attracts primarily males who are in the adolescent and teens age groups . Although most young men and boys are law-abiding, this particular demo- graphic group has the highest rate of lawless acts including crimes against both persons and property; many of such crimes are committed during use of alcohol . It is inevitable that in this age group liquor will be present at the Game Arcade if not available at that facility. The presence of alcohol in any location naturally greatly increases the possibility of criminal acts . Ladies Reducing and Figure Salons Corporate Offices: 1600 Dove Street, Suite 215, Newport Beach, California 92660-2458 (714) 955-1491 Each Salon is independently owned and operated The Honorable Ro rt J. Wilkins, Jr . Page 2 9/11/81 You have already had the advantage of determining what effect a penny arcade would have in the Adobe Plaza. Last summer a simi- lar facility was opened there temporarily and it was reported by several of the merchants that the incidents of shoplifting increased substantially. In addition to the already proven problem of shoplifting, the new facility will be located very close to the Venus de Milo figure salon, where many women from the community come to exercise. It is inevitable these women will be subjected to verbal harassment and possibly physical abuse by the ever-present, rowdy element which frequents facil- ities similar to the Game Arcade One Venus de Milo figure salon was ruined by the opening of a facility such as the Game Arcade. The fate of the business was the direct result of the verbal and physical abuse, in the presence of the use of alcohol , experienced by the women patrons of the salon. In other words, these patrons did not feel safe . As the representative of the citizens of Atascadero your concern is for the safety of the citizenry and for the general improvement of your town. The opening of the Game Arcade in the. Adobe Plaza would be a grave disservice both to the safety of the citizens of the city, particularly women, and to the improvement of the business environment in Atascadero. Currently, the Venus de Milo salon draws a substantial number of its patrons from surrounding cities who come to Atascadero and spend money which helps support Atascadero merchants who, in turn, pay the city taxes. A use such as the Game Arcade would be more appropriate in a free-standing location where other businesses and persons would be unaffected by the troubles and conflicts which are the inevi- table results of the opening of such an establishment. Because it would be in the best interest of the safety of the citizens of Atascadero and the business establishments in the Adobe Plaza it is respectfully requested that you vote against the issuance of permits for the opening of the Game Arcade in the Adobe Plaza . Sincerely yours, Venus e Milo a By: o LL)-~ C Kev' C. F_ . - , _ Vic President and Co orate ns- 1 KCF/lw cc: Edward E Worthan Earl and nary Murie, c/o Venus de Milo of Atascadero William H. Stover George P . Highland Marjorie R. Mackey Rolfe D . Nelson i SepzembeA 21, 1981 City Counci.t Membmsh.ip City o6 Axaz cadvLo Adracn,,Esttation Bu °ding P.O. Box 747 Alas c.adeAo, Ca. 93423 To the Membeu o6 the City Councit, Reeentty I tece.ived appnovat bAom .the Atascadem Ptann%ng Commission i.on to estabZP ,sh a game atceade at the Adobe Ptaza. HoweveA, it was not untiZ that meeting that I was awatce o6 any dissension .to my ptan. At that meeting sevehat o6 �he�o trete bustness owneu .in .the ptaza zpoke o� theiA beau of an aAcade iso c tole to the.itr. estab.eishments. ASteA that meeting my w,i6e and 1 to ked with many o6 these peop.-e and they we&e Fund enough to allow us .to join them at a meeting o6 the meAchants in the p.ea.za. A.Ythough at 6.c nt not eoAdiae, by the .time the di6cos.6 i.on ukv- oveA, we sound .that on.2y one meAchant was s.titt. unhappy with the puzpeets o6 out atceade opening. AppaAentty the owner. o6 .the Venin" de Mito SaQ.on has wtit-ten you a ZetteA containing many negative thoughts. He head his copy aeoud at the meeting. I wish only to Aebu66 a bew ztatementa that U6 attouey .inceuded, ,ie; that theAe would be tiqu.oA on the ptemisez and that we might even sett t quoA ittega ty to young teenagetus. As you can imagine, thin would not ont y be eau e 5oA atvice st by the pozi.ce, but wowed endanger outs .kens i.ng o6 the a Cade, which wife be .the ma-i.n zoutcee ob ouk income, We have not in the past oA present evex -thought o6 setting Uqum to minou. FutctheA in outs tease, we have ,inceuded that we weAe not going to allow any beve,taga oA 4mok i.ng on the pAemise, IS Just one coke goes .into a machine, you can ,thtcow away } machine �h innet ci A a 0 0 0 m c e e ne o Fungus o They w.c,�e {�a-c.e and Aendetr. $3,0 0, -i.n.opeAabZe. We have also been toZd that the debAis outside out bus.ine-s,s would be u.nmanageable. In our Zease, aethough there .us a cho ge bon communal ce.eani.ng o6 the pnopentie�s, we have -i.nctuded a maintenance ctause, that we wilt be nespon,s ib& bon a. 100 boot tadita, to inceu.de clean-up and any b.icycZe bQo ckag e o6 the ,s idewa&s, Zo.i teAing o6 teenageras and paticoZi.ng the area to prevent any pubtem. F.inaUy the Saton owner suggests that we would hindeA his buzine66 because the boyd might congregate and make kude nemankz to his cUents. We again, wish to a5duAe everyone that we w.i U not allow thus to occuA. We 6untheA wish to state that both o6 the ahcada in Pismo Beach and San Luis Obispo have no such probZems with Zittee on no ,supenvi.sion. Thene6one with aduts at our opeAation, we be?-leve thht there shouZd be no reason to assume we wi Z be anything but an a,s.6et to the P&za and .the community. Y We hope that you wiU view our buz i.n.ezz with 6avon, as the Pta.nn.i.ng Commizzion did unan.imoustyo Yothus t tt y, - L' Bob Lawrence • LAW OFFICES MICHAEL T. LESAGE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 620 131-- STREET MICHAEL T.LeSAGE P" 0. BOX 306 PASO ROBLES, CALIFORNIA 93446 TELEPHONE 238-3484 September 17, 1981 Honorable Robert J. Wilkins, Jr. Mayor of Atascadero P.O. Box 1054 Atascadero, CA 93423 RE: Game Arcade, 7315 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA Dear Mayor Dar t_.�vor Wilkins: 1 Please be advised that the proposed use is for a family arcade. That use is very carefully- defined in' the lease with a long series of operating restrictions relating to hours , professional management practices, management by an adult and not a minor, cleanliness within and outside the store, etc. • Under the terms of the lease the lessee must close by no later than ten o'clock. Sound control is a condition of the lease. The attorney for Venus de Milo incorrectly assumes that the arcade will be of the worst type. To the contrary, the lessee is a mature adult with a background in law enforcement, previously operated a chain of family arcades in Hawaii. His wife is an artist who draws for snoopy and intends to hand paint the walls within the building. The proposed family arcade is separated by approximately three stores f rom Venus de Milo and will be subject to very tight and all-inclusive lease restrictions. Ed Worthan is very sensitive about tenant mix and appropriate control and I believe his past management and the Adobe Plaza itself demonstrates that. In the final analysis he stands to lose considerably more if the family arcade is not operated to the highest standards. Both the prospective lessee and the lease terms assure that the highest standards will be maintained. It should further be noted that when the franchisee executed the lease and when Venus de Milo approved the site there was a family arcade in operation at Adobe Plaza. It is my understanding that a hearing on this matter is scheduled for September 28, .1981 and at that time I would repsectfully request that the Council consider these factors and the community's need for wholesome family entertainment and uphold the unanimous decision of the Planning Commission. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, MICHAEL T. Le SAGE b MTL:rg cc: Edward Worthan Kevin C. Findley, Corporate Counsel, Venus de Milo Venus de Milo of Atascadero William H. Stover George P. Highland Marjorie R. Mackey Role D. Nelson • • LAW OFFICES RONALD J. VON FELDEN VON FELDEN & IVERSEN CHRISTIAN E. IVERSEN 1421 PARK STREET P. O. BOX 2308 PASO ROSLES, CALIFORNIA 93446 PHONE: (805)238-0730 October 8 , 1981 RF C"!V -'r� M ICA, HAND DELIVERED City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, Ca. , 93422 Attention: Planning Director Re: Use Permit for Proposed Arcade in Adobe Plaza Gentlemen: Our firm represents the Sugarless Shack, a tenant in the Adobe Plaza Shopping Center. This letter . is to perfect an appeal from the City Council 's decision on Monday, September 2f%, 1981, concerning a use permit for an arcade to he located within the Adobe Plaza in Atascadero. Enclosed is the required fee of $60.00 in the form of a check from us. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, onald J. mon Felden RJvF/pd Enclosure M E M O R A N D U M � cd �I • TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Chamber of Commerce funding At the beginning of this Fiscal Year , the Chamber of Commerce re- quested funding from the City to support their activities. Initially the Council ' s reaction was to deny any funds at the present time. After dicussion, however , the Council agreed to refer the matter back to the Chamber for them to provide a proposed contract for performance of community promotion services and to provide information as to plans and programs which the Chamber would initiate and would continue with the support of the City funds . At the same time, the Chamber reduced its initial request to a figure of $16, 500 reflecting a one dollar per capita formula. Since that time, the Chamber has prepared the attached documents, one of which is a general explanation of Chamber activities, accom- plishments and programs entitled "Proposal for City ;Funding. " The second document is an agreement which provides for performance of cer- tain duties by the Chamber in return for which the City shall budget an unspecified future amount, but at the present time proposed for $16,500 as a budgeted item. iThe Agreement appears be a proper one and to follow the general practices of other cities in these matters. The Agreement requires the Chamber to furnish semi-annual reports as to its performance and to submit its annual budget request and programs at the time of pre- paration of the City' s budget for consideration by the Council in pre- paring the next Fiscal Year budget. The Agreement has an automatic renewal provision with the proviso, however , that automatic renewal is dependent upon the Council' s budgeting funds in the succeeding fiscal years . As far as I can determine, the Chamber ' s submission meets the cri- teria which you established for reconsidering their request. Whether you agree to this program or as to the desirability or need to grant their request is still open. If you agree that support is justified, then you should determine the amount and if that amount is to be applied to the current fiscal year starting July 1, 1981. If funds are approved, then it will be necessary for that amount to be trans- ferred from reserve and the budget adjusted to accommodate the Chamber expenditure. We can bring those adjustments back at a subsequent Council meeting. AUR L. WARDEN MLW:ad 10/22/81 AGREEMENT FOR COMMUNITY PROMOTION SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, effective ` -{ z:> , 1981, is entered into by and between the City of Atascadero, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City") , and the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce, a non-profit corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Chamber" ) . WITNESSETH: WHEREAS , City desires to promote its advantages as a business, retail, commercial, recreational, and residential center, dissemi- nating information relative thereto, and properly follow up and give consideration to inquiries made from time to time relative to the various activities of City and its possibilities; and WHEREAS, City desires Chamber to perform certain promotional and other services for City, which City believes will be of great advantage and benefit to City, and to the citizens, residents, property owners, and taxpayers thereof, and will promote the general welfare; and WHEREAS, Chamber is organized for such promotional activities on behalf of City, and is in a position to accomplish such aims and purposes of City in an efficient and economical manner; and WHEREAS , Section 37110 of the Government Code of the State of California authorizes the expenditure of public funds by a municipal corporation for advertising or publicity as therein and herein pro- vided; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and covenants and promises hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto hem agree as follows: 1. That the foregoing recitals are true and correct and con- stitute accurate statements of fact herein. 2 . Chamber shall carry on promotional activities as follows: a. Maintain a public office to be identified by a suitable sign that will be readily identifiable by members of the public, and provide information to visitors, tourists, businesses, commer- cial interests, professional people, and residents. A staff member or members of Chamber will be available daily during regular office hours, Monday through Friday. b. Employ competent personnel to carry on promotional activities herein enumerated. . _l_ r 0 C. Answer promptly all correspondence relative to the business, industrial, residential, educational , cultural, and recreational advantages and opportunities in City, and disseminate information by correspondence, newspaper publicity, and personal contacts, favorably advertising such advantages and opportunities. d. Prepare articles and news stories , compile data, gather and assemble news items, photographs, literature, and scientific and historical articles descriptive of City' s resources, and develop proper surveys whereby outside interests and individuals may be in- duced to locate in City. e. Supply maps and promotional literature about City and maintain files on economic conditions, commercial and industrial sites, tourist information, and general business information about the community. Chamber will be responsible for updating published information included in Chamber literature. These materials will be available to visitors, tourists , and potential commercial inter- ests who are seeking information. f. Aid in promoting home building programs and the develop- ment and use of unoccupied and vacant properties. g. Interview business and industrial executives with the view of urging the establishment of their business activities in City. • h. Promote and invite trade and business meetings , cele- brations, and conventions whereby outside interests and individuals may become acquainted with the advantages and opportunities in City. i. Study the needs of the community for public improvements of every character, and prepare data, attend conferences, and by every proper method, aid in securing such improvements. j . Carry on such other duties as may be requested by City to promote the business, industrial, and residential development of City. 3 . Chamber shall furnish semi-annual reports of its promotional activities to City, which shall consist of the activities scheduled for the next six succeeding months and a review of the activities accomplished during the preceding six months. Said reports shall include a detailed breakdown of all amounts expended and expected to be expended by Chamber for said activities. `-blv e 4. Chamber will submit to City a budget request and program for each Chamber fiscal year to June 30) in the manner, at the time, and in the form requested by the City Manager. Said budget request shall be submitted in the same form as budget requests submitted by City departments. The amount of the budget • request, to the extent approved by the City Council , shall be -2- • • allocated, for the purposes herein mentioned, by City to Chamber in four quarterly installments, payable in arrears on July 10 , October 10 , January 10 , and April 10 of each year. 5. This Agreement shall become effective on the date of exe- cutio hereof by both parties , and shall continue in effect until 199-Z ; provided, however, that this Agreement shal e automatically renewed each year hereafter, for periods of one year, commencing July 1 through June 30 of the succeeding year, by action of the City Council budgeting funds as provided in Para- graph 4 hereof, and Chamber' s acceptance thereof of said budget allocation. 6. City reserves the right to award separate bids for more specific advertising and promotional projects approved by the City �ouncii` during the term"o'f this Agreement: 7 . In the event, in the opinion of the majority of the City Council, Chamber is not functioning effectively, then City may give Chamber notice of this fact, specifying in detail the alleged de- fault or defaults, and Chamber must forthwith correct said default or defaults, or the provisions in this Agreement for financial sponsorship of Chamber, which may be terminated by action of the majority of the City Council. 8. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by written agreement signed by both parties, and failure on the part of either party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of the right to compel enforcement of such provision or provisions. 9. It is understood that the contractual relationship of Chamber to City is that of independent contractor. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agree- ment to be executed in duplicate on the date indicated below. Dated: 1981 CITY OF ATASCADERO Mayor Attest: Dated: , 1981 City Clerk -3- PROPOSAL FOR CITY FUNDING • OF THE ATASCADERO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SECTION I . WHAT IS THE ATASCADERO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE? The Atascadero Chamber of Commerce is a voluntary, non-profit organization uniting the energizing and vitalizing forces of the Atascadero community, bringing together the commercial , industrial , professional, and civic interests for the purpose of promoting and improving life in Atascadero. The overall objective of the Chamber of Commerce is to ensure progressive and orderly economic development so as to make Atascadero a better place in which to work and live. The Chamber ' s strength lies in its membership, enabling it to accomplish collectively what no one could do individually. We, the Chamber, are an organization of people investing our time and money under effective leadership to advance the economic, recreational, cultural, educational, and civic welfare of Atascadero. SECTION II. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ATASCADERO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. • Beginning as the Atascadero Businessmen ' s Club over 50 years ago, the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce, as it is now known, is a self-supporting, non-profit California public benefit corporation. +`� inanciasupport for the Chamber has come from membership dues and fund-raising activities, which, up to two years ago, was sufficient to maintain an office with a part-time staff person and to provide the Atascadero community with limited Chamber functions. Two years ago, the Chamber' s Board of Directors , in keeping with the new spirit of incorporation of the City of Atascadero and with the desire to help Atascadero grow properly, hired a full-time manager and secretary, developed a realistic budget with proper goals to achieve the new expanded budget, rewrote the bylaws to bring them in line with the new non-profit legislation, expanded the number of directorships, commenced a membership drive, and set out on a course to assist the citizenry, business community, and the new city government. The Chamber of Commerce has sought to be the unifying force in the Atascadero business community. During the past 20 years, the Chamber has built and maintained its own office; we are the only Chamber in the County of San Luis Obispo that owns its own office building. Over the years, the Chamber of Commerce has provided a weekly luncheon meeting for its members and visitors, providing speakers with topics on all facets of our economic, political , and -1- • civic life. In addition, the Chamber has been the focal organiza- tion for the promotion of and assistance to many of Atascadero 's civic events. Indeed, the Chamber was the catalyst that established the Incorporation Committee that was responsible for the referendum and cityhood of Atascadero. SECTION III. WHAT THE CHAMBER IS PRESENTLY ACCOMPLISHING. 1. Increasing Membership. During the past two years, we have conducted a campaign to increase our membership from an average of 200 paid members annually to over 600 paid members. Our membership runs the gamut from individual memberships to community organization and club memberships, from professional businesses to retail estab- lishments, stablishments, and from small, one-person shops to large businesses with over 40 employees. All facets of the Atascadero community are represented in our membership. Our membership presently stands at 600, with a dues structure ranging from $20. 00 for an individual membership to $100. 00 for a business with over 10 employees. 2 . Promotional Material. We produce and distribute a city brochure and city and county map for the benefit of our citizens , tourists, and visitors. A business directory is published annually, outlining essential services provided by businesses in our city. A newsletter, published quarterly, informs our membership of current happenings within the Chamber. An economic profile is published annually, outlining the geographic and economic infrastructure of • Atascadero, and is provided to all business inquirants desiring information as to the suitability of establishing a business in our city. 3 . Inquiries. We provide information about our city and county to approximately 2 , 000 travelers annually, and respond to well over 2 , 000 mail and telephone inquiries, and this number is growing. 4 . Maintaining an Active Office. For the past year, the Chamber has had a paid, full-time manager and secretary, who have provided eight hours a day of service, five days a week. They have coordinated the Chamber ' s various activities, and have been respon- sible for preparing news releases, answering correspondence and inquiries, and providing information on businesses, housing, schools, cultural events, and local history to visitors, tourists, and resi- dents. 5. Weekly Membership Meetings. A weekly luncheon meeting, with a program of speakers on the vital and interesting topics of the day, is provided to our membership and guests. This also func- tions as a forum for the discussion of concerns and problems in the community and on the state and national scene, by allowing our mem- bers a chance to see their neighbors, business associates, and com- peti.tors in a convivial atmosphere. Our weekly luncheons are quite • popular, and we are the only Chamber of Commerce in the County pro- viding them. -2- 6 . Retail Merchants Committee. We have an active Retail Mer- chants Committee that plans and coordinates six major sales activi- ties ctivi ties during the year. The campaign to have residents shop Atascadero first is their byword, and the goal of the committee is to ensure successful retail sales activities in Atascadero. The result is increased revenue for our city and a more viable economic climate with greater inventory and selection for shoppers. 7 . Economic Development Committee. The Economic Development Committee seeks to provide proper controlled growth in Atascadero. By providing input on zoning and industrial and commercial problems and needs to the Planning Department and City Council, the committee seeks to preserve the beauty of the community, while encouraging proper economic development._ In addition, the committee updates annually the economic profile for Atascadero, and answers business inquiries concerning Atascadero. 8. Health Insurance Plan. The Chamber sponsors and endorses a group health insurance plan for business people and small busi- nesses that provides insurance at a reasonable cost. 9 . Float Committee. This committee is responsible for the construction of an annual float that is exhibited in several local parades representing the City of Atascadero. 10. Halloween Window Painting. The traditional Halloween win- dow painting is a contest for elementary school children that is a • tradition in Atascadero at Halloween. Developed to recognize the artistic abilities of our youngsters, it also protects merchants ' windows during Halloween. This highly successful program provides awards to deserving young people and encourages their artistic development. 11. Display of American Flags. The Chamber maintains and dis- plays over 40 American flags in the downtown area on appropriate holidays. Both civic and national pride are enhanced by this color- ful and patriotic display. 12. Citizenship Awards. Yearly, at the Chamber Auction and again at the annual Chamber Dinner, those outstanding citizens of Atascadero are recognized for their many contributions to the com- munity. Recognition of citizens ' efforts to assist the growth and development of their city and of their unselfish devotion to their clubs and organizations is a function that the Chamber feels is of greatest importance. 13. Beautification Awards. Quarterly and annual awards are presented in various categories to Atascadero residents and busi- nesses that have improved existing or developed new properties that beautify our city. The presentation of these awards encourages the continual beautification of Atascadero. -3- • 14 . Maid of Atascadero Pageant. The "Chamber organizes and sponsors an annual Maid of Atascadero Pageant that selects a beau- tiful and gracious young lady to represent the City of Atascadero. The pageant develops young ladies in poise, public speaking, and personal development. The winner of the Maid of Atascadero Pageant represents the City at various events during the year throughout the County. 15. Political Candidates ' Forum. During election time for all public offices that affect the citizenry and voters of Atascadero, the Chamber provides a structured forum whereby the political views of all candidates may be presented to the public and the .various media who are always present. The opportunity for political debate to inform the voting public of differing political opinions is thereby provided by the Chamber. 16. Membership Mixers. The Chamber sponsors several member- ship mixers throughout the year that are open to members and their guests. The purpose is to encourage individuals to get to know their customers, their city officials, their neighbors , and their business associates. The holiday membership mixer in December is held in conjunction with the Sunken Gardens tree lighting ceremony and marks the start of the local merchants ' annual holiday sales. 17. Sister City Programs. We presently are a sister city with the City of Puli in Taiwan, and the Chamber hosts foreign visitors • and guests to our city. 18. Colony Days. We helped to found and continue to assist the Colony Days Committee in the annual Colony Days Week, including parade and musical performances, honoring of the Colony Days Royalty, and committee and distribution of fund-raising material. SECTION IV. OTHER ACTIVITIES THE CHAMBER IS PLANNING. As well as continuing the above specific programs and providing and coordinating the dissemination of information to inquiries, the Chamber is planning to increase its services to its members and the community of Atascadero. The following areas we feel are of greatest concern and need: 1. Promotion. a. Motel and convention facilities are a form of industry that benefits all residents by attracting tourist dollars to support local businesses. Since Atascadero is blessed with mild weather, is conveniently situated halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco, and is so close to recreational attractions, we feel that efforts should be spent to attract this type of business. Every town needs good lodging and restaurant facilities, and Atascadero is no excep- tion. The bed tax and sales tax from meals would expand the City' s • revenues. -4- b. Promotional brochures that beautifully display the attractions of Atascadero and its environs are a requisite to good • promotions. Colorful and informative brochures are expensive, yet are badly needed, since we recognize that to attract visitors re- quires displaying our attractiveness through this form of adver- tisement. C. Industrial and commercial development that fit within the controlled growth philosophy of Atascadero are needed in order to provide for a more stable and well balanced community. We seek to attract clean industry to Atascadero by actively soliciting and choosing those that will best provide local jobs and bring in out- side dollars. d. Promotion of our beautiful local golf course and future golf tournaments should be a priority item since it benefits our local businesses. e. A Hospitality Committee should be developed that will assist businesses with grand opening and ribbon cutting ceremonies. Also, this committee would provide keys to the City to visiting dignitaries. 2 . Civic Development. a. We seek to establish branch offices of important and vital services in Atascadero such as Social Security offices Department of Motor Vehicles, Pacific Telephone, P.G.&E. , Southern California Gas, and United Parcel Service. b. A Highway and Transportation Committee should be de- veloped to lobby for and coordinate freeway landscaping in Atasca- dero, and assist in the planning of a cross-town artery, and future bridge and major street developments in Atascadero. C. Parking is becoming a major problem as Atascadero down- town develops. We encourage a major study committee be appointed by the City, with recommendations for long-term developments and solutions to the Planning Department. d. We badly need statistical information in order for proper growth to take place in Atascadero. Facts and figures on the local business economy, housing availability, and development of educational facilities and needs, employment types, and oppor- tunities are prerequisites to proper zoning and the implementation of the General Plan. We seek to develop a professional study to gather this data. 3 . Miscellaneous. a. The Chamber is presently establishing a chapter of the Service Corps of Retired Executives, or S.C.O.R.E. , to assist local • businesses with their financial, accounting, and production problems. -5- ! • b. The Chamber is seeking to have Cal Poly and Cuesta extension courses utilize Atascadero facilities. C. The Chamber would like to establish its office as a central ticket sales point for all of the activities taking place in the city and county. SECTION V. PROGRAM OF WORK. The many activities and projects that the Chamber has supported over the years are only partly shown in the above listings. The projects listed in Section III are the ones to which we commit our- selves annually. The projects noted in Section IV only begin to list the types of projects we would like to be doing for the com- munity. But all of these items take people, time, organization, work, and money. The Chamber can coordinate our volunteers , working with a small paid staff, to get full use from the resources available. But our funding is limited. We need additional money to help us do our promotions successfully. Our budget does not use specific reve- nues to be spent on specific projects. We plan various sources of income and many programs where these funds will be used. We can account for all funding granted by the City and use it to pay for a portion of the following projects: Approximates • Printing of a city brochure and map $ 5, 000 . 00 Printing of a business directory 3 ,000 . 00 Building and maintaining afloat to be entered 500. 00 ' in various local parades Producing a Maid of Atascadero Pageant 500. 00 Actively seeking motel and convention facilities 1 , 000. 00 Maintaining an active office which will be open 1 ,000. 00 , .2 5 days a week promoting community activities , producing news releases, answering inquiries , and giving out information Gathering statistical information and producing 500 . 00 = = = an economic profile Promoting a "Shop in Atascadero Campaign" 5 , 000 . 00 Total $16 , 500 . 00 SECTION VI. REQUEST FOR FUNDS . The Chamber of Commerce cannot be measured by the above activi- ties alone. We are responsible for helping the City of Atascadero to have a sense of community. The economic and social interaction between the business community, the civic community, and the govern- mental community are of prime concern to the Chamber. The Board of Directors, which is elected by the general member- ship, is responsible for hiring a manager. The directors, manager, • and his staff are the motivating and coordinating force for all the Chamber' s activities. The Atascadero Chamber of Commerce has the -6- organization, the desire, and the capability to accomplish and/or - assist in the above programs and plans. With our present sources • of income (membership dues and fund-raising activities), we are able to afford a manager' s and secretary' s salary, overhead opera- tions of our office, and the projects listed in Section III, but we would like to be able to accomplish more. We can, with City help. We are asking to be partners with the City in helping to provide programs, promotions, services, and assistance that we feel are vital to our community. We are asking for $16 , 500. 00 to cover some of the costs associated with these projects. We will provide the City with an accounting to show how each dollar is spent on which program and/or promotion. We will use these funds judiciously for the betterment of the City of Atascadero, and do whatever is necessary to keep our economic condition strong. The question we ask is, "Who would concern themselves with and pro- mote the economic health of our community if the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce does not?" We respectfully ask for this funding to allow us the opportunity to show the City how successfully we can help the community of Atascadero. • • -7- • F11 M E M O R A N D U M — — — — — — — — — — — TO: CITY MANAGER October 20 , 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: General Plan Amendments/Cycle l (1982) On October 19, 1981 the Planning Commission considered the attached Staff Report and concurred with the recommendation to conduct hear- ings on general plan amendments as follows: - Items la (Salmeron) , lb, (LaLande) , lc (Hohenstein) , le (Lindsey) , if (Rauch/Little) , and 3a (Walley) to be grouped as one amendment covering the area delineated as Study Area on the attached map. In conjunction with this, some text.modifications may be appro- priate to better evaluate transitional areas. - Item ld (Garman) including expansion covering the area between San Anselmo, E1 Camino Real, Del Rio and Highway 101. In conjunc- tion with this, some text modifications, especially as they per- tain to Commercial Park, may also be appropriate. - Item 3b on multiple family density. - Item 2a on the Special Commercial and Professional Office land use designations including both text and land use changes. In addition, the Commission added the following issue for consid- eration in this review cycle: - review of general plan criteria pertaining to mini- mum lot sizes for single family residential designations especially pertaining to clarification of the "distance from the center of the community" and "decreasing density/increasing lot size when moving away from the core" policies. Marion Young, representing George Salmeron, and Jack McCown, repre- senting Aime LaLande, spoke in support of those requests . Jack Stinchfield spoke concerning the appropriateness of higher densities on Santa Ysabel if it developed as a collector parallel to El Camino Real. Doug Lewis spoke concerning the need to review the Circulation Element. Hank Hohenstein spoke in support of the comprehensive approach recommended by Staff. Page Two Re: General Plan Amendments/Cycle 1 (1982) October 20, 1981 No one else appeared on the matter. The City Council is given this opportunity to review applications submitted to determine if those areas of consideration should be expanded and to initiate other general plan issues which may need to be addressed. LAWRENCE STEVENS AY RDEN Planning Director Ci y M nager /ps a IRFFilr., CITY OF ATASCADERO 1979 Planning Department October 19 , 1981 GC .'- ; r' STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: General Plan Amendments/Cycle 1 (1982) BACKGROUND The City is initiating its second round of general plan amendments. The deadline for Cycle 1 was October 1, 1981 at 5: 00 p.m. Generally, general plan amendments should be considered in the same manner as a zone change with amendments being initiated by the City Council, the Planning Commission, or the property owner. This report will allow the Commission the opportunity to initiate any amendments or to consider expansion of any property owner amendments. STAFF COMMENTS 1. Application Submitted: a. George W. Salmeron has submitted an application requesting a change in land use designation for Lot 21 in Block HA at 7710 Sinaloa from Low Density Multiple Family Residential to High Density Multiple Family Residential in order to allow three two bedroom units. The site is currently vacant and is zoned R-3-B-2-D. Surrounding uses include a mixture of single and multiple family residences along Sinaloa and commercial behind the subject property fronting on El Camino Real. The applicant contends there is an incongruity in the transition of land uses from commercial, along E1 Camino Real frontage, to Low Density Multiple Family, along the northeasterly frontage of Sinaloa. The High Density extends to the northeasterly frontage of Santa Ysabel with moderate density single family beyond fronting on Sombrilla. There would appear to be a need to expand the area consideration beyond that requested by the applicant. b. Aime LaLande has submitted an application requesting a change in land use designation for Portions of Lots 2 & 3 of A.D.S. Addition No. 1 at 9110 and 9160 Pino Solo from Moderate Density Single Family to High Density Multiple Family in order to allow 25 units of one and two bedroom Page Two 0 Staff Report: General Plan Amendments/Cycle 1 (1982) October 19, 1981 apartments. The site is currently vacant and is zoned 1 R-A. Surrounding uses include single family along both sides of Pino Solo, service commercial along the north- west side of Gusta Avenue to El Camino Real, and vacant retail commercial property along the southeast side of Gusta Avenue. The applicant contends the requested land use would provide a more logical transition between the commercial uses along El Camino Real and Gusta, and the single family along Pino Solo Avenue. There may be a need to expand the area of consideration beyond that requested by the applicant. C. Henry H©henstein has submitted an application requesting a change in land use designation for the westerly half of Lot 87 in Block MC at 8760 Curbaril Avenue from Moderate Density Single Family to Professional Office. The current zoning is R-1-B-2-D. The site is developed with a single family residence. Surrounding uses include single family along both sides of Curbaril with exception of the corner lots facing El Camino Real which are retail commercial (C-1 zoning) north of Curbaril and heavy commercial (C-2 zoning) south of Curbaril. The applicant contends the requested land use would provide a better buffer and transition from the Heavy Commercial to the single family residential. The applicant has provided a list of reasons and several study maps covering a large area around the subject lot in support of his request. There would appear to be a need to expand the area of consideration beyond that requested by the applicant. d. Steven Garman has submitted a request to change the land use designation on Portions of Lots 5 & 6 in Block 18 near 3650 El Camino Real from High Density Multiple Family Residential in order to allow a commercial center consisting of a bowling alley, motel , restaurant, offices and retail commercial. The site is presently undeveloped and zoned R-4-B-2-D. Surrounding uses include Chapel of the Roses to the north on El Camino, Retail Commercial south on El Camino Real and single family residential east of the El Camino Real. West of the property is U.S. Highway 101. It maybe necessary to expand the area of consideration beyond that requested by the applicant. e. Joe Lindsey has submitted a request to change the land use designation on Lot 24 in Block 4 of the Eaglet Tract No . 1 at 8500 El Dorado and 8725 El Centro from Moderate Density Single Family Residential to High Density Multiple Family. The property is currently vacant and is zoned R-1-B-2-D. Page. Three • Staff Report: General Plan Amendments/Cycle 1 (1982) October 19, 1981 Surrounding uses are largely single family, with some commercial beyond Cascada Road fronting on E1 Camino, and the Lucky' s Market site bounded by Cascada, Solano and E1 Camino Real. There may be a need to expand the area of consideration beyond that requested by the applicant. f. Gaylen Little and Don Rauch have submitted an application to request a change in land use on Lot 17 in Block JA at 7326 Santa Ysabel from Low Density Multiple Family Residential to High Density Multiple Family Residential. The property is currently vacant and is zoned R-2-B-2-D. Surrounding uses include a mixture of single family and multi-family residential along both sides of Santa Ysabel. The applicant contends the requested land use would provide a better buffer adjoining the property to the rear and fronting E1 Camino Real. There appears to be an incongruity in the transition of land uses, from E1 Camino Real back to Sombrilla Ave. There may be a need to expand the area of consideration beyond that requested by the applicant. 2. Amendments Initiated by Planning Commission: No amendments have been initiated to date but Staff points out the following issues for consideration: a Special Commercialys. Professional O.f.fice Designations The General Plan provides for two separate land -uses which. have overlapping definitions and some possible basic conflicts within the definitions. These raise the question what is achieved by having two distinct land uses for each side of Morro Road between San Andres and Portola. Morro Road is designated a divided arterial, a road designed for high traffic volume, however "specialty commercial" uses are allowed in the Special Commercial designation only if they are "low traffic generators. Professional offices., personal services and public utility offices are recommended as permitted uses in both designations. Consideration should be given to reviewing the General Plan text in this ,regard and, depending on the text changes , the land use designations along Morro Rd. should also be evaluated. 3. Amendments initiated by City Council; At the conclusion of the last cycle the Council .requested two items be reconsidered at this cycle of general plan amendments , they are summarized below: Page Four . Staff Report: General Plan Amendments/Cycle l (1982) October 19 , 1981 a. 7565 Sombrilla (Helen Walley) This was an application to request a change in land use designation from Moderate Density Single Family Residential to High Density Single Family Residential. The request was denied by both the Planning Commission and the City Council generally on the basis that it was premature to begin piecemeal changes to lot size standards . The item was referred to this cycle for reconsideration. It should be pointed out that this particular item could be included in the overview of land use transitions in the area as may be prompted by the five or so applications summarized above in Section 1. b. Densities Allowed in Multi-Family Residential Land Use Designations There was considerable discussion prior to the previous cycle of general plan amendments that density limits speci- fied in the General Plan are inadequate to allow economically feasible developments . The request initiated by Planning Commission to consider amending the General Plan concerning increased multiple family densities was denied by both the Commission and the Council . There was considerable discussion from the public that the current densities permitted seemed economically restrictive but that more time as needed to review the matter in detail. The matter was directed for reconsideration during the next cycle pending the availability of more data to support the contentions. STAFF COMMENTS It should be noted that five out of the six requests received for this round of general plan amendments are for residential land use changes east and one block behind El Camino Real (beyond the commer- cial designations) from Gusta Avenue north to the terminus of Sombrilla Avenue. At the heart of these five requests is the question of appropriate and logical land use transitions from commercial to single family. A widely accepted planning technique for land use transitions employs the concept of using where possible natural or physical barriers (i .e. , streets, creeks, topography) as logical boundaries rather than property lines. Zoning traditionally handles the transitions at the "property line" level of detail. Staff suggests that perhaps a more comprehensive view of this potential problem should be taken. One option avail- able to the Planning Commission is to expand the areas of considera- tion of each of the applications to an area which encompasses all of the applications (except for Garman) . Additionally the Walley request could be included within the expanded area of consideration. i Page Five • Staff Report. General Plan, Amendments/Cycle 1 (1982) October 19 ,1981 The Garman application raises the issue of El Camino Real commercial development in the northwesterly section of the City. The present land use plan proposed a transition from Retail Commercial to High Density Multiple Family Residential to Commercial Park to Retail Commercial. The proposal would, if approved, eliminate a portion of the High Density Residential creating an illogical pattern. Furthermore, the Commercial Park designation has presented some problems. As a result, it seems appropriate to review this entire strip - both for the land use designations and the related text. There is also concern for the land use designations along Morro Rd. (Highway 41) . It seems unnecessary to have two different land use designations in essentially similar circumstances. In addition there are marked similarities between the uses allowed in the two designations . Review of this situation both in terms of the land use designations and the text seems worthwhile. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends that public hearings be conducted to consider general plan amendments as follows: - Items la (Salmeron) , lb (LaLande) , lc (Hohenstein) , le (Lindsey) , if (Rauch/Little) and 3a (Walley) to be grouped as one amendment covering the area delineated as Study Area on the attached 'map. In conjunction with this some text modifica- tions may be appropriate to better evaluate transitional areas. - Item lb (Garman) including expansion covering the area between San Anselmo, E1 Camino Real , Del Rio and Highway 101. In conjunction with this some text modifications especially as they pertain to Commercial Park may also be appropriate. - Item 3b on multiple family density. - Item 2a on the Special Commercial and Professional Office land use designations including both text and land use changes . ACTION Direct Staff as deemed appropriate REPORT PREPARED BY: MARY E. UEATIE AsFpciate Plan r REPORT APPROVED BY: G �✓�U�YJ'lik /*",W- LAWRENCE STEVENS • Planning Director • -`� � �: �� ►Sri== >��`�. Nll dimSlIrl � ,Cv ' .�--.',;,�•�e ,'� ��y '' lor, 4V ..x ;. ISM NOW vim` - ��" 1,:..►�,,, ,.� ,,,;� `'rte k pt Ov, =����'Lid��� � _ . �►,� ��ry - '► " INN", F s®WE ■ �.. r K � • i-�loam Y 2 INtI NMI. ry AM WO; • mss, • � ms's � ��Ja •��./ilJs� �S. j��'-y I a !�I � � 1 . ��•Yw7u6f�111JL '� �� �y l'�f�l ' � � ' �� J r L � � ♦ I � ♦ � i � • ® �. •moi� • � � � � • G I� _ WIN !tl V � ti•/ '� f � '��f7 r s ?iC � •:rc � •' ads 1. J }'sem I STU Dy AREA �• � ;�j• � :;:��, r 'tet � ti � , I�. ou `1 i�h. ••�•:':•:{tiff'.:':::: •9 :F •f .. . - .. 00 GENERA-L PLAN 1V.I.A.P LAND USE AND CIRCULATION HIGH DENS.MULT FAM HEAVY COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE LOW DENS. MULT FAM _ RE-AIL COMMERCIAL RECREATION ` HIGH DENS, SNGL.FAM COMMERCIAL PARK SPECIAL RECREATION ` ? MOD.DENS.SNGL FAM SPECIAL COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL UVIDED ���� LDV/ DENS.SNGL.FAM PROFESSIGNAL OFFICE ARTERIAL UND DED DDUECTOS SUBURBAN SNGL FAM � � INOJSTRIAL PARK —•———• URBAN—VICES LINE PUBLIC INDJSTRIAL URBAN Rrse vE L c _ cln Rouuon��r _ G EA16eAC PL,4W M,' G yc4E-/ GGT /945/ A,"4U6H - GvA L[ F fJo�iV UNDSEI I - LA L 4A) STU D y /i-R-EA - r ,sem � .�� �- � , • � - � �t� .;yam -- . � `�►i � - , a � � sir, � •,�� . _ -�, fes _ Y fir' INNER ♦ F ,•� , RM FA ®r oil ��� o .. , �� : � '� �i� ��� •err o-- � 0 .E r •� � , � tire �:-, I 1 will E , s • A 2�2 3-fl ,3 A-I A-I 3D 10 3' G-1-N - C_1_N =Dy C .1-q vs AREA 4' �0►t G/•E C-I D N 2-0 411 A-i A-i � 1 o o P C.N A-t-2'/z. A-t-2�I2 R-A-B-D-tso g a 04 4111 f2-A Z A- -2''2 ry P v 3-D q -157 ZON l SVG HIAA GyGL� ! OGT. /98/ A-t-a-v-s GAeJ"A-iJ ..._._... .._ F' ........ I• ... •,� ••: ........::E:'" .... .... :y ...... : .:: dRDY : ...i •••.:.:.:.' ; .. .... ' ....... ......... : .. *^ ' : . j ......... ................ ...... G �... .......... ... . :. . .. ^. :::::::::. :. r :.........::::...: ................ ..... ., 4" �:•' :::::::.:: .::... :::' '..::::::::::::::::::'::::::::. �...:....-� •, fit.Q nC ':::::':: �. o AT-.SCADER0 GENERAL PLAN NEAP LAND USE AND CIRCULATION HIGH DENS,MULT FAM HEAVY COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE _l LOW DENS.MULL FAM _ RETAIL COMMERCIAL RECREATION HIGH DENS. SNGL.FAM COMMERCIAL PARK SPECIAL RECREATION MOD.DENS.SNGL,FAM SPECIAL COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL DrvIDEo ARTERIAL UNDIVIDED LOW DENS,SNGL FAM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. .. .0......�.r COLLECTORS SUBURBAN SNGL.FAM INDJSTRIAL PARK -------•—-- URBAN SERVICES LINE PUBLIC INDUSTRIAL Err R111v°E LINE &EA1EJ4A•L LAA) MAP GyGLE / ©GT /9&/ STuPy M-2t=�-A r > � 1 � ,fr V Vii- ta♦�_f �y , V �♦ r l r� A .... � 1q1 dw WARN ♦ �j � 1 rl1► • h �1 1 t�� �} .� iii� ♦� 1 • / � � •.+f.• �I ,•{;•;;•9c •i I t t � 7;�t t t_71 ! tt-'. :.. I :4C y� {,f t .... ..... : .. .. '�-- ' 1 ' : ::..... STUDY AREA :' :: . .. :::... :: : . : .:.: ::::..::::: : ::::: :::::: :::: . ... : ATASCADEA RO GENERAL PLATT MAP LAND USE AND CIRCULATION HIGH DENS.MULT FAM i�—�`j HEAVY COMMERCIAL . AGRICULTURE t LOW DENS. MULL FAM RE-AIL COMMERCIAL RECREATION .: HIGH DENS. SNGL.FAM CCHMERCIAL PARK SPECIAL RECREATION NOD DENS.SNGL FAM I SPECIAL C01-0MERCIAL ARTERIAL DIV;ED ARIEHIAL UNDIVIDED LO! DENS.SNGL.FAM. •••'J PROFESSIONAL OFFICE........................... MLLECTDRs SUBURBAN SNGL.FAM. INDJSTRIAL PARK —.—.—.———- Je Al 1ERICES LINE _.I PU IC 7� ,� INDJSTRIAL _ 4 Y i.,:?.rAlye LINE - ,_—_ _ Pl,-•y MAP �S�CiCII Com/Ylercia.l' �, P�essioraczJl G•�c� l% ORDINANCE NO. 44 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTIONS 8. 04. 230 AND 8.04.130 OF TITLE 8 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION AND ESTABLISHING A BOARD OF APPEALS The Council of the City of Atascadero ordains as follows: Section 1. Section 8.04. 120 and 8.04.130 of Title 8 of the Atascadero Municipal Code are amended to read as follows: Section 8.04 .120. Board of appeals established. In order to conduct hearings to determine the suitability of al- ternate materials and methods of installation, and to provide for rea- sonable interpretations of the provisions of this Code, there is here- by established a Board of Appeals. The Board shall consist of five (5) members, two (2) of whom shall be general contractors, one (1) one whom shall be an architect or structural engineer , one (1) of whom shall be a specialty contractor, all of whom shall be qualified by experience and training, and one (1) of whom shall be a member of the public who is not one of the foregoing. Members of the Board of Appeals shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City Council. The Building Official of the City shall serve as secretary ex-officio to the Board. In order to be eligible for appointment to the Boad, the person shall live within the City. Terms of initial appointment shall be for a term of two (2) years for two (2) members , for a term of four (4) years for three (3) members with four (4) year terms for subsequent appointments. Each member of the Board shall be required to comply with the applicable provisions of the Political Reform Act of 1974, California Government Code Section 81000 , et seq. The Board shall adopt reasonable rules and regulations, subject to approval and adoption by the City Council, for conducting its business which shall conform to the requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Government .Code Section 54950 , et. seq. , and shall render all decisions and findings in writing with a copy to the appellant. Section 8. 04.130 . Appeal procedure. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Planning Department re- lated to any manner within the purview of this title, shall have the right to appeal the decision. The appeal shall be filed with the Building official within fifteen (15) business days after the render- ing of the decision affecting the aggrieved person. Grounds for the appeal shall be set forth in writing. Ordinance No. 44 - tard of A • Appeals The secretary of the Board shall set the time and place for a hearing on the appeal, and notice of the hearing shall be published in a newspaper of general ciculation and shall be given to the appellant by mailing it to him, postage prepaid, at his last known address, at least ten (10) calendar days prior to the date set for hearing. Any written reports to be made to the Board shall be filed with the Secretary of the Board and shall be made available to the Board and to the public no less than three (3) working days prior to the date set for the hearing. Any Department Head shall have the right to be heard on any matter coming before the Board. The decision of the Board on the appeal shall not become final until ten (10) working days after the Board has made its determination in order to allow time for an appeal to be made to the Council from the Board' s decision. Any party aggrieved by the determination of the Board shall have the right to appeal its determination to the Council. Such appeals must be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) working days after the Board has made its determination. The Council shall set appeal fees to the Appeals Board and to the City Council by resolution. There shall be no charge for city- initiated appeals. Section 2. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be pub- lished once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atas- cadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in this City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adoption and posting of this ordin- ance; and shall cause this ordinance and its certification to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 3. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12: 01 a.m. on the thirty-first (31st) day after passage and shall termiantion three (3) years from its effective date on , 1981. The foregoing ordinance was 'introduced on , 1981, and adopted and ordered published on , 1981, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: } ROBERT J. WILKINS, JR. , Mayor 2 Ordinance No. 44 - Ard of Appeals • ATTEST: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: /s/ Allen Grimes ALLEN GRIMES , City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Manager 3 RESOLUTION NO. 34-81 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO RECOMMMENDING CERTAIN PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON STATE ROUTE 41, SPECIFICALLY ON EL CAMINO REAL AND WEST MALL WHEREAS, the City Council on July 13, 1981, and September 28, 1981, conducted public meetings to discuss parking problems within the City of Atascadero; and WHEREAS , City staff, business and property owners made various recommendations to mitigate certain parking and sight distance pro- blems; and WHEREAS, after receiving public comments and staff reports, Council found that certain revisions should be made to parking retric- tions on El Camino Real from Morro Road to West Mall and on West Mall from E1 Camino Real to Lewis Street, also known as State Route 41. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero re- quests that the California Department of Transportation accept and install the parking controls on portions of Highway 41 as shown on Exhibits A, B, and C. The 2-hour parking limitation shall be effec- tive from 9:00 a.m. to 5: 00 p.m. , excepting Sundays and holidays. • On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES; NOES: ABSENT: ROBERT J. WILKINS, JR. , Mayor ATTEST: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: /s/ Allen Grimes ALLEN, GRIMES, City Attorney PTY OF ATASCA ER0 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS o.• uA 1918 1979 q 4'Y (r�.Rr PKG. { SAMBOS I a � i j� STOPPING I MORRO ROAD 10 m 2HR.PKG. Z BR 1 DG-C N ° (p STvPPIIRG o 4 f L � I NO STC�pP►NG '� 70 M N 2H17 . PKG- > O Z HfZ F No Pi,, 0 CUl,�5 pp(IFN TAS: 'INo1 MALL m STOPf IWG i 2 HR. PKG. EXHIS IT REVISIONS Date WEST ;Vi mo crossWALK PRr {<1 ZONE:: DRAWN CHECKED: APPROVED: DATE: Y OF ATASCAIERO I F 'AT IEOF PUBLIC WORKS No STOPPIo", 1 m LJ m n YSASEZ, MORn ROAD ! r � © NQ STOPPING t ; 1 • O HR, Na PGG Ew", r STOP PIN, ! NQ--I'-- 5�'0'�PING � E 73 21VLIM f r f-r G ! rl 70 Phi > m 2 HP, � PKG, 5;0�Pf;sGl�.' STQP�1f�1G—�„ � REVISIONS Data DRAWN: CHECKED: APPROVED: DATE: � 3 tITY OF A7, ASCA*DERO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS g43i8 �INttt��' ,��e: �97g 7 CAD EL CAMINO REAL E� f pp i i1S-- a 4 1 - PA Ll\AA AVE " 01, c0 y w � 9 1 I 1 " REVISION Dade t ' DRAWN. CHECKED: APPROVED DATE M E M O R A N D U M • TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Claim for SB325 funds The attached resolution is an annual requirement for the City to receive transportation funds supporting the Dial-ARide system and Regional Handicapped Transportation system as well as other transportation programs. The money is disbursed through the San Luis Obispo County Area Council of Governments as a part of their function under the State Transportation Act. Recommend your approval. RAY WARDEN LW:ad 0/23/81 RESOLUTION NO. 32-81 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A CLAIM FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT WHEREAS, Articles 4 and 8 of Chapter 4 of the Public Utilities Code, require claims for .operating funds to be filed with the trans- portation planning agency by local transportation operators; and WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero is eligible for transportation funds as provided in Chapter 4 of the Public Utilities Code; and WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo County Area Council of Governments designated transportation planning agency for San Luis Obispo County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of Atascadero -does hereby authorize the filing of a claim for Transportation Devel- opment Act funds in the amount of $253 ,736 for fiscal year 1981-82. The claim form is attached hereto marked Exhibit A and by reference thereof made a part hereof. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ROBERT J. WILKINS, JR. , Mayor ATTEST: MURRAY L. WARDEN City Clerk APPROVED AS TO F RM: ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney a ANNUAL CLAIM FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS (Claim Number) TO: San Luis Obispo County Area Council of Governments 2156 Sierra ti'day_ San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 FROM: Claimant: City of Atascadero Address: 6500 Palma Avenue, P.O. Box 747 City: Atascadero Zip Code: 93422 Contact Person: Larry McPherson Telephone No: 466-8000 This claimant, qualified pursuant to Section 99203 of the Public Utilities Code, hereby requests, in accordance with Chapter 1400, Statutes of 1971, as Samended and applicable rules and regulations, that an allocation be made in the amount of $253 .736 for the fiscal year 1981 1982 to be drawn from the Local Transportation Fund of the County of San Luis Obispo for the following purposes and in the following respective amounts as described in the Annual Project and Financial Plan. City of Atascadero laimant) By Title: City Manager Date: Oet. 14 , 1981 Approved by San Luis Obispo County Area Council of Governrients : By: Title: Date: SLOCOG-TDA-4/80 :ayN.,U PROJECT ND FI`;a:`;CIAL PL.-,,N Briefly describe all proposed projects and indicate proposed expen- ditures for the ensuing fiscal year. Project Title and Brief Description Purpose* mount 1 Regional Handicapped Payment of City' s share of 20 ,360 Transportation System regional handicapped trans- portation system (Article 8 , Section 99400c) s 2 Atascadero Dial-A-Ride Includes all direct costs 152 ,510 Transportation System related to operation of the City' s Dial-A-Ride transit system (Article 4 , Section 99260) 1 3 Dial-A-Ride Equipment City' s 20% share of grant 4 , 946 Grant Matching Funds matching funds to purchase 2 new handicapped equipped vans (Article 4 , Section 99260) 4 Bus Parking Lot and For development of property 15 ,000 Turnaround Development adjacent to the bus dispatch Fund location to be used for bus parking and turnaround. (Article 4 , Section 99260) * Identify apprcnriate .article and Section of the .act. , (attached checklist may be used as a guide) *jf�Desc- device. Title an-intien s Yirpo e�5 Ferrocarril Railroad City' s 10% share for the 10 ,000 Crossing Protection construction of a railroad grade crossing protection (Article 8, Section 99400a) 6 Street Maintenance Asphalt overlays for roads 50 , 920 and streets within the City street system.. (Article 8 , Section 99400a) a. Total claim for Pedestrian $ Bicycle Funds (Section 99234) . $ -0 b. Total claim for Article 4 Funds (Section 99`260). $ 172F456 C. Total claim for Article 8(c) Funds (Section 99400c) . $ 20 , 360 d. Total claim for Article 8(a) Funds (Section 99400a) . $ 60 , 920 (1) Total agency budgeted expenditures for streets and roads (copy must be attached to claim) . $ 550 ,074 (2) Percentage of claim (d) of total (d-1) . 11 e. Total claim designated for $ —0-- (Other) 0_.(Other) *Identify appropriate Article and Section ofh t e Act. (use attached checklist as a guide) S T A T E M ENT OF CONFORb9ANCE The City of Ataseadero hereby certifies that the Annual (claimant) Claim for Local Transportation Funds for Fiscal Year 1981 - 1982 in the amount of $-253 , 736 conforms with: I. Provisions of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 1090 of Division 4, Title I) of the Government Code and the requirements of the Transportation Development Act and its applicable rules and regulations. 2. The rules and regulations adopted by the San Luis Obispo County Area Council of Governments. 3. The Regional Transportation Plan, Transit Development Program, and the Transportation Improvement Program. Further, the claimant certifies that the audit findings pursuant to Section 99245 of the Transportation Development Act have been complied with: /X/ Yes / / No / / Not Applicable CERTIFI - By: Title: ity anager Date: Oct. 14 , 1981 Allocation instructions and payment by the County Auditor to this claimant are subject to such monies being on hand and available for distribution, and to the provision that such monies will be used only in accordance with the terms of the approved Annual Project and Financial Plan. J O U 00000000 0000 = O (N U-) (D mOOLnOO I (DOOO d~ O Ol rI 00 a) r-I rI ) OOOOOlOUI Q m } C` M lfl [� rl r I M M M 1-1 0 d o z � N F- cn Z OOOOOOOONO00 (D Q N UlC) 1001.f) OOmO o00 u ri -iM OOr-IOOl0ul O ► ► ► NkD r-I r I M 1 M M r-i w rr Ol M N N w ca cr Z w N N w d w co N to O 0 0 0 0 O O O O N O 0 0 0 a a F P I N 00 r ) U) LnOLr) OoLr) 0000oOOo X C O H to t\ t` r-1 r-1 H M O O r-1 O O l0 m \Q W w rs L(1 N lfl r i r-i H M rl M 1 r I 7 p N 44W a w viol,got `o N O O r-I c D j .pW F O m t Ln 0000000000000 _ 001114 Olf) Otf) 00000 g i co yi f J E O r I Ol 0 r-1 r--q O M 11) T O Ln O <N O Q w Cr) M W M (N a n u x r -1 m r- N 111 r1 U ,wQw w W wLL z G r w tL j vlE< � E-+ W € v W u w 1x a Ei X U) W 4-9. w ca � 0 dt O �a4.H u "� m F-: 10 rz a) a <L m Cl- Q (/ � '�r"{ .fin ,2 -A N F.. J U) U) > •� U) U) �)4 v q W Q W �A M N \ $:. Q4 a) r-I Ul w O p -� z H N )-d �4 N O 04 U N U r•i v z G'S Q Q a A H Ga U •H ri r, �:l U) O Pa 2 \\ ul a-) �5 (0 G-, U M O t� U- L:J t . 1— t— W N N N N rd t5 !~ )~ O E-1 cr- D � is � � U (d W N rl •r1 � O C0.7 rti M O (1) •r1 -r1 \4-) N r-I 0 r-I 0 o ,``' a o U) m 4-) LH LHr-I U Or� U O \r-q — c a D U) 0 r-I U) •ri s~ N -I-) -H Q) m r-4 (d cm W •ri O � O Cao �5 (d -r-1 rd •r1 E~ H a J U) H Q :E� WDUWU) f: ( 0 0 W a X t w R N M �' u) l0 m O u) t— 0001 O r-I W OOOOOOr-Ir-Ir-♦ r-ir-4NN u U) NN NN NN NN NNNCNN a w 2 J F- >- U N Ln r-1 m O cr r- M Ln 00 IZT m j O N CU r--1 O N Ln tet' Ln l0 r- O r- l0 M 01 U) N O N N O m w U M r I r- r- ri cr 110 M N r- ~ >- N MN O a p � U N 00I Ln r- l0 m O 'I r I O N' O H lqv d M m O N r- O N WP OJ -i N N O cT l0 I O I l0 0 LU w D O U I a. O H m Ln r- r-I N LO M Ln p Dj r-1I F N N N w Ol m � a 0- P Z ~ 0` w w _ Z M d+ N 00 O c1' O r-1 2 0 I Ln Ln l0 `- O N M c1 ® O 00 m r-4 01 Ln 'll Ln I 1 I r- O F Yd P N N N a) - w E- sd. .6J W CN - F- = W 00 � w FE-1 I . o ' � LUd= O _ U) 00O ♦v d U m U Z ri N N U) Ln, Ln Ln I J H Cl) -' = z M Vol CL w a cl� v Z O Q O 0 3 w w w F- W H Q rO CL Hl U O rl r-1 N N Ln d' U) Ln Ln �N I U Gq �n J O �:D U- a. C.0 P4 E a w J Q r--I N N Ln d+ Ln M I �J 1- U 4J Q N H W s~ HH z W W rl U w U) r♦ Z �x O H % O a w :� 2 U �D U. E1 LU U) O O W H U) y+ z -J Z H 3 U) z m H F- W U U N HW H Q H r z T U U m % a x W z H J_ a O O a a O x 3 a J uH] Hvi a. •,q 4.4-JI I I I I O 1 r-1 r' s~ ° ri Q -i • i M 1-1r Ln to r- 00 0) O �j ro ro O O O O O O o r"1 a r--) r-- r•i H H 0 N N N N N Cl) 1 W Lo N) NN trJ C A N J p W co m {; try • x o 0 0 0 QI-3 C7 C7 H G C) C) 0 00 N• trJ G) z i 0 . w N F_ �j K U) M o In CIO 1-3D C I F d sr rt rt n Ali n C1 b D m I 'zs F n n fD F'- � t FOr rtrA t7i t--h 0 tiI ! N (D (D rt F-h Uj I D i. 0 o rt rt cn (D H_ t� U) F3 cn M n P) fD O o mn �• 0 � c n P � � nZ� � (D -Fl (n N• F - Ai (D '3 cL o It � �j ::; F� In z ! Q LQ II 3 z Si t� tl H m -> z o �. mr ; n m C O 1 � m > m 1� n xnC)Ln ;. D y N rr. C C r- co co co z r- � A4 ( I O �_ r D�� � gas F F-' O 01 I -i m l0 C) o O 00 C O'i C o C o'A t�7• O O 1 0 I o N m I FJ M ol• N n As F� m 00 `P N J F-' N F "O z1-0 ®` 00 m v m I t-I J t- Ln CSI O J Ul O o F-' D x 00 0 00 O CSIO O OI m� m � Cn O00 OwoO O 00 Cn , z I! N 1Z o C m I m . F� m m cn l0 W H n =+ ! n A N J F_ N N 00 Os N D I o N Nl1iCJI OJU10 O Z W OOO OUtOO O 00 Ul O O o O w o O o N p o O n N J w 1 A �7 I Lo A NJF� N F- C 1 n {O N F-' Ln Ul o J Ul CD o 0 .� u O o 0 O O CSI o 0 O C = " I m LO o0o z C) woC> o 0 r H w w Li LI) LA) LI) ww w Li LA) n ro N N N N N F� F� H H N F' b C A W N N O 01 Ul A W N F ro td y ' H com r �' X I • :U (71n ' My � '.z7CTJwF3 > 10 1,5 H � o m In rtn O W 0 m O (D 0 P __; n r c L I n rZ Cr C) Sl Fl- :� ::$ Fj (D ro 0 K K �l �u (D n N• �3P- 0 rt In C F- 0 F- 0 "0 0 O (D 7V F- Al 0 (D P) rt Fes• F• In 0 ;3' rt C� -+ ft (D n F� Fl 0 In � 0 � H0 F-3 A i x LQ : ro >; (D rt rt �l m Fl ri r 2 m I Cn 'O (D O P) 0 O `O (D G \ > D F'• Fl rl LQ rt In n d n 0 r F,< rn �Q CL (D F'• :3Al F•'• (D (D C< n F rt Fi O O QQ In In \ sv — (n In O N• �5 'U (D O (n r In U) v, t:$ 0 (D (D tt t.Q v trJ ro sr Fh K w En 1-10 I; 1( F-3 Ol td '"d O� E O G Fl- rt rt 0 4 { �31 Z II ` ho rt rt rt (D d .' O II M, I! H x I. M. >;I LTJ z n i LTJ o -JI: y c;; co n i; n m c o ? +1 I m n m n N N F- a -4 --a I W 00 Ln 00 Z D C) I I I I I cor- mb z �' NI I I I N I I I I I O CO :0 o C) ~ m II ~ m N { o • =As DX G) :�• 'I t� z N W N N F� dl N F- Ul O N O N 4�:. 0 x� F- m n m r J O N N 0'% O O Ul O O N 1 0 73 x O O lII O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O N m K m —i Z O mi J w w w N F' F- m � It. C) N F-' A. O O H O 0 a�. Q0 n -� y v 00 O_ K i x`00 O N N Ol O C) C) In O O N N - D o OCIt OO U-1 00 0000 O O I O OO O O 00 OObO O O 0 N p m I o Cn Cf) In co W In P 0 n N J W W W N N {CD AP M N F- l? O O F-' O 00 4A ..<O .* I I I I I I . n O 100 ON N 0l0 OOUnO O N C) Ln 00 Ui 00 0000 O O C = I Z ,m 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O n O U] Cn In Un m U] In oo Z D c t o o " n o. n n 0) w a > > x x x x c CD N N c N ❑ oo LtTJ 000 d rn LiJ JJ6l 'Z �-3 cn cn tTi O v �E: C) o rt w O f✓ ¢� LTJ N LQ rtrt N. . . cD n m N 3 Q cD .:a D m Q < c m z n -n Z p Ul o I w ;. m C p :v m ; �. D r. n CD .c LC D n � i-3 x Ul Ul J W Cl) J ooCT) rn orn �10 o QO .P:- o11OJ - w 0 00 m 00 J 0 Ul 1,. 00 N O J lh O Ol OOUl ? 61 O l0 J N - w m m N wANJ � N on, < - CO N W O 1-' N 3 N Z N O N O O J OJO co _ D_ a W W () h7 . N F- > l0 J. H > x > m H O rt h CO �� 17 z �5 Ft () O rt N O D < ri O G7 '0 U: c � rt tin HrTl m O zl rt N D rt W G f-< D D r S Z fJ O D r rt r to m a H rl v O n O frI -n -i rt (D W o I z (n sz m z x LTJ � A LTJ m v 5�3 c D m N 61 H 4A + y 1 � - Cn w N xnvyi p Ll -0 -1 -•I 9 c I Ln W m 7 r 1 00 O O r c © ` m fo I % 10 c o , a o O C) FJ m N m N c P F- F- o \fie @A w w o w w �-, m y �\ w w o w m-o > m� m w w o w w I I N o x i N N ON N c-I -V jJ O v vCIOm r m i0m Z IA m F-' N F- z7 m W W O W W n ---1 a W W O W W I I co O s' F- v o W w Co W W I 'c --i [V O N N I I m n J -11 O m z m o O p O � j UO 0 n �O O �� C: -� Z mm r ~ Z 0 0 o c� W N N N Ln un y a w Fd Ui < txj to p m n w H 0 m N O w xl . ri- rt tri o r� � z t�y m N --t n CD n D m O C < C �1 n m Z c Z ► rn a m r�= W r - n co m C Co =` r K, O m `a > � . o -F <u tr3 -� D n fd c O n � H F-j H W W Q I-' N m z 0 0 L N N 3 Q cn n co Ln Ul - o r w co N N In Cl O F- F J J In U-1 N W N TI C) In N w co °' t'D o a. �] J o N Z W W p n O Ol 01 p 0 CL D 1� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A (n < 0000000 •P LTJ m �161Ut .I� WNI-' o x rn xnHrorrodN 0 ?i :0o � • �uo � � ms✓ � N r� o b < _ rn uS O Ai N W S m 0 -D CO � Nn � mHi c\n i -� (n i m ora te cl o x �v (Dc�i �'• b z o cn 'b (D K F . C D r m R �3' ((DD (D trJ -rG r C cn In in W n -u Fri T (Do (— Z- f7 n rn -rlrl -+ � H (t W (D rt 0 rt Z d c Iv (D 2! f Ul (t F i Z c 4► eif is b► Cn m H x m ;>E zC y C: cv� Z m \ Ci m v (A H LTJ G �l M bf 61 !A ^ t1J mnV, y n x cn� }, co N co ol mc -�a r- 1 Cn O Ul Ul z r > o -M Ln C0 5 0 1-' N 0I C 0_ c 0 0 Ln o M C m olu-I e p Ln �, m � m (n n L �V ti " �3 �(11 � m N F-' 1-' N O 00p Z In prnrn JcnO co rn N mn m ~ O;3 x W 001 Ln CTt 0 0 Id al 61 O 0o m m O dl 41000000 N N Cnm z ,ZJ O OO OOOOO 0 W Ul -1z 0 H C: y x m H to �n an 6v M i F-' m 0 F-' .-{ F ' N 00 J m O co O a I N O Ol a) -j Ln m Ui m c F- n . o a -I c co W O M (n Ln 0 l0! 61 01 I'D MIO N P -_I 4100000 H O �t W N 0 A = O 0000000 co W (n m p o 0 n O I- N N N �l N 1-1 h-' N 00 l0 61 W I m 0 N 001 61 �l In 0101 m O Cl O O�-u co wO m Cn Ln C) lO �1 C1 i ' Zmm �1 01 O0oO0E- CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O W �l W W ,A n "1> N 4L6 �d n F-' N IP > N H A C; kD 00 0 ori o tai N H N p m I t+ {+ i x � ons ' a rn ; n o rt (D r oo � � L �:l n n w �j F'• rs rt (D F1 O rt -! O 0) rt H rt W (D A c x x rt � K ((D rt W r' A� Fi FC (D (D �l N F rt cli 0 n F- (D - rt (D n rt (D y `w� u �3 110r. ((DD o n O F'• () n +I rt (D F rt �J (D N• o !> { Fl 4 � � Ij H z m li y x m D�i z n'i �-3 o - c 1; -� D I. Z m U) ( y td z -n al m A m 11 n FJ 0 � �11 M v ►� A I 00 Z D is co C C v C R � O _q o� C) ,a� Oi Ol Ul f W N m _m O dl J 00 lD �> dl m O O N 00 F O a x v v O Ol ,A F-' I C -4 m W W O Vt J 00 00 N Z N -i Z C j II �-3 j y m i H M I 0 N cn Ol Cn F-' W N lU m y dl m O v 00 00 O m 0) O O N 00 J J O al +A N 00 m M O y W W O Ul __1 00 N o I { + U C II p o O. N n al Ul F- Un Ul Ol m O J O r,{o I Ol m O N N O O I J _1 O `P A O C W W O �l O Z O r OOO O In 00o Ln trJ LI) N H I F . .P W N �7 47 W t7 O Cn LTJ FS G N. o w cn w 1 LTJ �J H r z `t n xVC P. H. n ((D �4 R y O ca \ C rt �� �-3 t l n s; ro ro FJ- � H- O �-3 ro SL 1 'U .d H ;d !-� �11 �l H H O 1 Fl (D > N ro O tH t�1 xJ �:; (t H 1 Cn H 7d t:� O Fl- S)j 7d z �-3 �l (D H (D ho O H N w O CD O (n -3 n F3 0\0 (D 'J H O �l �-3 ct (n . (D t-' FC N Pii rl nn O 1 O t-I rn y F�-3 rn Iy1 �0 1 co m Z n � orn o rn 00 C C) co 00 In > O y H O z cnw � w cnw !� LO co o w I f oo rnocoo coN i i a • M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Purchasing through County Purchasing Agent The attached Resolution No. 33-81 is an enabling resolution which will allow the City to purchase a variety of items from the County thereby capitalizing on the mass buying power of the larger entity. Adoption of this resolution does not require us to buy all our items through the County, but rather gives us an additional source at a considerably less cost than we might be able to enjoy through our own independent purchasing. We have similar arrangements through the State of California. I have previously worked with the County pur- chasing on a cooperative basis and have found, that there have been appreciable savings. The question always arises in a situation such as this as to - whether a City should buy exclusively in the local area or whether it should shop for the best available price. As a general rule, we have • been following a policy which gives priority to local purchases pro- vided that, after consideration of shipping times and costs , support service, service facilities and similar factors that there is no sig- nificant difference in price. We have used, as a rule of thumb, a 10% differential depending upon the size of the purchae. An argument is always made by local business interests that local businesses should be supported by the city' s purchase of locally sold items. Balancing that argument, of course, is the need to get the best buy for the least expenditure of money. In consideration of the foregoing, it is my recommendation that you adopt Resolution No. 33-81, understanding what our purchasing pro- cedures have been and understanding that they will continue along the same lines. In the past, a difficulty with the County cooperative purchasing arrangement was in having sufficient warehousing space. The current proposal, however , is somewhat different than what I have previously experienced and allows us selective purchasing through the County. Both the City and the County will benefit by having mutually increased their buying power and thereby having the advantage of eco- nomies of scale. Recommend your approval. • MURRAY WARDEN MLW:ad 10-22-81 RESOLUTION NO. 33-81 RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING PURCHASES OF CERTAIN ITEMS FOR THE CITY BY THE PURCHASING AGENT OF THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO WHEREAS, it is permissible under Sections 51301, et seq. , of the Government Code of the State of California to contract with the County to perform certain functions for the City; and WHEREAS, it appears that it is possible to acquire certain items consistent with the City' s purchasing system at a substantially lower- cost by having them purchased by the County; and WHEREAS, it is, therefore, the desire of the City Council to con- tract with the County for the County Purchasing Agent to purchase cer- tain items for the City under the conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Atascadero City Council that the City of Atascadero hereby agrees with the County of San Luis Obispo that the Purchasing Agent for the County shall purchase for the City items required by the City of Atascadero regularly purchased by the County as may be designated from time to time. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said agreement shall commence on the lst day of November , 1981, and shall continue until 30 days after either party gives written notice of termination to the other party, • on which date the contract shall come to an 'end not to exceed five years. On motion by Councilman , and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ROBERT J. WILKINS, JR. , Mayor ATTEST MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk APPROVED JASTO FORM • ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Consideration of new legislation regarding election dates Last Council meeting, I noted that recently enacted legislation becoming effective January 1, 1981, will allow municipalities to hold their general municipal elections on the same day as the Statewide direct primary in June, during the State-wide general election or dur- ing school district elections. The purpose of the bill is to allow cities, through consolidation, to save costs of independently holding- their April elections which may or may not be able to be consolidated with the County election depending upon the County having an election issue. The costs of running an independent election are unknown since we have not done so. The City of Morro Bay ran its own election this year and so did the City of Paso Robles, both for special measures. The costs to Morro Bay was in the $10,000 area with a similar cost for • Paso Robles. Assuming some increase for differences in size, we can anticipate an increased cost for the City of Atascadero for an inde- pendently run election. Opposed to this is the cost of last year' s election consolidated with the County of $1,990.71. On this basis, then, it appears advantageous to take advantage of the new legislation and to hold the next municipal election in June at the same time that the State-wide direct primary is held. There are some questions which do arise which may be considered advantages or disadvantages depending on your perspective. By consolidating, one would expect a larger voter turn-out. There are cost savings which have been demonstrated and there is less direct work for the City staff to accomplish since the County Clerk's office takes care of our printing, publication and mailing of election matters as well as handling all election proceedings. Although not fully known at this time because the procedures have not been worked out, the County Clerk' s office would handle almost all, if not all, of the election process . From another viewpoint, an objection which has been advanced is the possibility that local issues could be submerged in the larger State-wide issues. This is argued to be offset, however , by the larger voter turn-out in State-wide elections, therefore having local issues decided by more citizens participating in the process. There may be other technical differences, but overall there do not appear to be significant difficulties in implementing this legislation • sh act you decide to do so. It will be necessary for the City to en - 1 an ordinance specifying our intention to hold the general munici- pal election the same day as the State-wide direct primary. In order for the ordinance to become operative, however , it must meet with the Memorandum - Elect dates approval of the Board of Supervisors since consolidation affects the County Clerk's operation. This latter provision has been in exis- tence for any County-City consolidated election. If you wish to proceed with implementation of the consolidated election law, you should indicate your desire to do so and I shall return an implementing ordinance for your consideration in the near future. RRA L. WARDEN MLW: ad 10/22/81 • 2