Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 09/25/2001
C; Oil ■ ■ AGENDA fo-ii 1-9 M9 i ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2001 7:00 P.M. City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue, 4t" Floor Atascadero, California REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENT - CLOSED SESSION • CLOSED SESSION: 1) Conference with labor negotiator(Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6) Agency Negotiator: Mayor Mike Arrambide Position: City Manager CLOSED SESSION REPORT REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Luna ROLL CALL: Mayor Arrambide Mayor Pro Tem Scalise Council Member Clay Council Member Johnson Council Member Luna APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call PRESENTATIONS: 1. Proclamation declaring October 7-13, 2001, "Fire Prevention Week." COMMUNITY FORUM: (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the Council on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to five minutes. Please state your name and address for the record before making your presentation. The Council may take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.) COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: _ (On their own initiative, Council Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities. Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to staff or take action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Council may take action on items listed on the Agenda.) A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call • (All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non-controversial by City staff and will be approved by one motion if no member of the Council or public wishes to comment or ask questions. If comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered in the listed sequence with an opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council concerning the item before action is taken.) 1. City Council Minutes— September 11, 2001 ■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of September 11, 2001. [City Clerk] 2. City Treasurer's Agenda Report- July 2001 ■ City Treasurer recommendation: Council review and accept the July 2001 Treasurer's Report. [City Treasurer] 3. August 2001 - Accounts Payable and Payroll ■ Fiscal Impact: $1,835,846.77 ■ Staff recommendation: Council approve certified City accounts payable, payroll and payroll vendor checks for August 2001. [Administrative Services] 2 4. Purchasing Policy- Adoption of Ordinance ■ Fiscal Impact: None. The proposed policy is expected to generate a savings of staff time. ■ Staff recommendation: Council: 1. Introduce for second reading by title only, and adopt Ordinance No. 386, amending sections 2-3.01, 2-3.04, and 2-3.05 of the Atascadero Municipal Code and deleting Sections 2-3.08 and 2-3.09, and Section 2-3A.01 through 2-3A.09, inclusive of the Atascadero Municipal Code [Administrative Services] 5. Public Safety_Communication Center- Dispatch Console ■ Fiscal Impact: $159,002.97 (in FY 2001-02 Budget) ■ Staff recommendations: Council: 1. Designate 2001 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) monies for use in Public Safety Technology improvements; and 2. Authorize purchase of the Orbacom Radio system and workstations from Durham Communications. [Police] 6. City Manager Employment Agreement _ ■ Fiscal Impact: Contract enhancements provide an additional cost of $1,200.00 annually, the elimination of the incentive program provides a potential savings of $5,000.00 resulting in an overall savings of$3,800.00. ■ Staff recommendation: Council approve Employment Agreement with the City Manager and authorize the Mayor to sign. [City Manager] 7. Authorization to Execute Master Agreement, Administering Agency - State Agreement for Funded Projects Program Supplements -Agreement No. 000421 Fiscal Impact: None ■ Staff recommendation: Council adopt the draft Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute Administering Agency - State Agreement No. 000421 Program Supplements. [Public Works] B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Appeal - Planning Commission Resolutions PC 2001-040, PC 2001-035, and Tentative Tract ME 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road - Yellow Rose Ranch (David Graves) 2. Appeal - Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019 (Condition #4) - Sprint PCS Telecommunication Facility- Chalk Mountain - (Sprint PCS / 9230 Vista Bonita) • 3 C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. Atascadero Road Program III ■ Fiscal Impact: Trench Repair Program - There will be some administration costs in setting up the program. Once the program is set up the parties requesting the Trench Cut would pay for all costs. Assessment Districts - There would be costs to the City. This would depend on how many Assessment Districts were requested and how many were approved. Staff recommendations: Council: 1) Receive the update on the Atascadero Public Works Department Actions; and 2) Introduce for first reading by title only, the draft Ordinance amending Chapter 15, of the Atascadero Municipal Code, relating to trench cuts; and 3) Approve the Assessment District Program. 2. 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program(STIP)Project Funding ■ Fiscal Impact: $270,000.00 ■ Staff recommendation: Council accept the projects nominated for 2002 STIP funding, and authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate funds for the nominated 2002 STIP projects if they are approved by San Luis Obispo Council of Governments for funding. [Public Works] D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: (The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary.): Mayor Arrambide 1. S.L.O. Council of Governments(SLOCOG)/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority(SLORTA) 2. Water Committees 3. County Mayor's Round Table Mayor Pro Tem Scalise 1. Finance Committee 2. City/ Schools Committee 3. Economic Opportunity Commission(EOC) 4. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Board Council Member Luna 1. Finance Committee 2. Integrated Waste Management Authority(IWMA) 3. North County Homeless Coalition Council Member Johnson 1. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC) 2. Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO) Council Member Clay 1. Air Pollution Control District(APCD) 2. City./ Schools Committee 4 E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer F. ADJOURNMENT: Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this Agenda in court, that person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to this public hearing. I, Marcia McClure Torgerson, the City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda for the September 25, 2001 Regular Session of the Atascadero City Council was posted on September 18, 2001 at Atascadero City Hall, 6500 Palma Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 and was available for public review in the City Clerk's office at that location. • Signed this 18th day of September, 2001 at Atascadero, California. 6� Mq'g-T-W, arcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk City of Atascadero 5 City of Atascadero WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber of City Hall. Matters are considered by the Council in the order of the printed Agenda. Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk(Room 311) available for public inspection during City Hall business hours. An agenda packet is also available for public review at the Atascadero Library, 6850 Morro Road. Contracts, Resolutions and Ordinances will be allocated a number once they are approved by the City Council. The minutes of this meeting will reflect these numbers. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in . a City meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager's Office, (805) 461-5010, or the City Clerk's Office, (805)461-5074. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting Viu or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service. TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject, staff will give their report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is open and will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding the matter being considered to step up to the podium. If you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way: • You must approach the podium and be recognized by the Mayor • Give your name and address(not required) • • Make your statement • All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council • All comments limited to 5 minutes(unless changed by the Council) • No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so,and no one may speak more than twice on any item. The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public comments will be heard by the Council. TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Under Agenda item, "COMMUNITY FORUM", the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience having business with the Council to: • Please approach the podium and be recognized • Give your name and address • State the nature of your business This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Council's attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum(unless changed by the Council). TO HAVE ITEMS PLACED ON AGENDA All business matters to appear on the Agenda must be in the Office of the City Manager ten days preceding the Council meeting. Should you have a matter you wish to bring before the Council, please mail or bring a written communication to the City Manager's office in City Hall prior to the deadline. • "FIRE PREVENTION WEEK" October 7-1,3, 2001 WHEREAS, The week of October 7-13, 2001, has been designated as Fire Prevention Week nationwide; and WHEREAS, Fire Prevention Week is held in commemoration of the anniversary of the "Great Chicago Fire"; and - WHEREAS, The 2001 Fire Prevention Week theme nationwide is "Cover the Bases & Strike Out Fire" and • WHEREAS, The City of Atascadero Fire Department and firefighters nationwide symbolize . Fire Prevention Week as a time to stress the importance of fire prevention and education to the public; NOW THEREFORE, I, Mayor of the City of Atascadero, do hereby proclaim the week of October 7-13, 2001, as "Fire Prevention Week. ". J P. Michael Arrambide, Mayor City of Atascadero September 25, 2001 • 001 ITEM NUMBER: A- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 K 1911 1979 DRAFT MINUTES ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 7:00 P.M. City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue, 4th Floor Atascadero, California REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENT- CLOSED SESSION CLOSED SESSION: 1) Conference with labor negotiator(Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6) Agency Negotiator: Mayor Mike Arrambide Position: City Manager REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.: Mayor Arrambide called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. and Council Member Johnson led the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Arrambide announced that he had asked Pastor Tom Farrell to speak at this meeting. Pastor Tom Farrell addressed those gathered with words of encouragement regarding the terrorist attack in New York City then led an invocation of prayer. CLOSED SESSION REPORT • Mayor Arrambide announced that there was no reportable action from the Closed Session. CC 09/11/01 ' Page 1 002 ROLL CALL: Present: Council Members Clay, Johnson, Scalise and Mayor Arrambide • Absent: Council Member Luna Others Present: City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson and City Treasurer David Graham Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Assistant City Manager Brady Cherry, Community Development Director Lori Parcells, Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard, Public Works Director Steve Kahn, Waste Water Operations Chief Mark Markcort, Police Chief Dennis Hegwood, Fire Chief Kurt Stone and City Attorney Roy Hanley. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay to approve the Agenda. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. PRESENTATIONS: 1. Employee Service Awards • City Manager Wade McKinney recognized employees who had served the City of Atascadero for 5, 10, 15 and 20 years. Mr. McKinney and the City Council gave each employee a service award and thanked them for their service. Included in the presentations were: Five Years Fire Engineer Scott Hallett, Police Officer Robert Molle, Police Officer Franco Bechara. Ten Years Police Officer Paul Bebeau, Support Services Technician Dawn Klenen, Fire Captain Keith Aggson, Community Services Maintenance Worker Lisa Conklin, Public Works Maintenance Worker John Blair, Senior Police Officer John Cole, Chief of Wastewater Operations Mark Markwort. Fifteen Years Public Works Maintenance Worker Cory Meyer, Police Officer Brian Berry, Police Sergeant Jeff Fredricks, Police Officer Jay Von Bafgen. Twenty Years Fire Captain/Paramedic Peter Gaw, Fire Engineer Ken Dahlen, Police Sergeant Bill Swift, Community Development Building Tech. Debbie Cini, and Maintenance Worker Roy Strong. • CC 09/11/01 003 Page 2 COMMUNITY FORUM: Daphne Fashing, requested, in a prepared statement, the Council amend the Municipal Code to • prohibit bow and arrow hunting. She asked the Council to place this issue on a future Council agenda. (Attachment A) Martha Hyatt, 8840 El Centro, expressed her concern with the dangerous intersection of El Camino Real and Santa Barbara Road where her niece was killed in August. She made suggestions to the Council of potential improvements to make this intersection safer. Ms. Hyatt asked the Council to place this issue on a future Council agenda. Council Member Clay stated he would like to see the El Camino Real and Santa Barbara Road intersection placed on a future Council agenda. City Manager.Wade McKinney explained the City improvements made to the intersection since the fatal accident. Mayor Arrambide felt any response to this issue must be carefully planned. Council Member Johnson stated he would like to see staff prepare a report on this issue, but would like them to wait until all the information is available, such as the CHP report on the fatal accident. Mayor Pro Tem Scalise indicated her agreement with Council Member Johnson and asked if it would be appropriate to bring this issue before SLOCOG. • Mayor Arrambide stated that Ms. Hyatt raised several good points such as improving signage and installation of warning strips. Council Member Clay reported that he had sent a letter to all of the County Supervisors and he is hopeful that between SLOCOG, the County and the City of Atascadero, there will be a permanent fix for the intersection. Until that time, he feels a temporary fix such as flashing lights, etc. would be appropriate. Mayor Arrambide closed the Community Forum period. Council Member Clay asked that the bow hunting issue be placed on the Council's agenda within the next six months. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: Mayor Pro Tem Scalise referred to the Rancho de Parisio project from the June 26, 2001 meeting approving Tentative Tract Map 2000-001, and requested that Resolution No. 2001-025 be placed on a future agenda to clarify the language regarding whether this project ensures a private open space easement or a private drainage easement. Council Member Clay spoke regarding the events of the day and shared his feelings as well as his conviction that America will overcome this. CC 09/11/01 ,q Page 00`f Council Member Johnson shared his mixed emotions regarding attending tonight's Council meeting, but stated that at times like this it is important to come together and tightly stand shoulder to shoulder. Mayor Arrambide stated that on days such as this it is possible to find great common ground • despite individual differences. He felt it was important to be at the heart of the City at this time and involved in the process that makes America the great country that it is. Mayor Arrambide thanked those in attendance at tonight's meeting. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. City Council Minutes—August 28, 2001 ■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of August 28, 2001. [City Clerk] 2. Zone Change 2001-0011 - 9351-9353 Musselman Drive (Shannon/Roberts Engineering) ■ Fiscal Impact: Negligible ■ Planning Commission recommendations: Council introduce for second reading by title only, and adopt the draft Ordinance approving Zone Change 2001-0011 [Community Development] 3. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 2000-0013 / AT 00-225 - 4580 Potrero (Beckwith / Cannon) ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ Staff recommendations: Council: 1. Accept the Final Parcel Map 2000-0013 (AT 00-225); and • 2. Reject without prejudice, the public utility easement (P.U.E.) shown on Final Parcel Map 2000-0013. [Community Development] 4. Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement - Home Depot ■ Fiscal Impact: $257,400 (in FY 2002-03 Budget) ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute a Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement with Home Depot U.S.A., Atascadero 101 Associates and the City of Atascadero [Public Works] 5. Award Wastewater Pump Project ■ Fiscal Impact: S40,763.85 (in FY 2001-02 budget) ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize a Public Works Project for the purchase of one Fairbanks Morse 10" VTSH, 50 Horsepower Pump for Wastewater Pumping Station No. 5,from Flo Systems Inc. and installation of the same. [Public Works] 6. Azucena Avenue Drainage Improvements - Bid No. 2001-003 ■ Fiscal Impact: $155,040.10 (in FY 2001-02 Budget) ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Arthurs Contracting, Inc. in the amount of S124,032.10 for construction of the Azucena Avenue Drainage Improvements Project. [Public Works] • cc 09/11/01 005 Page 4 7. Traffic Way Storm Drain Project ■ Fiscal Impact: $85,000.00 (in FY 2001-02 Budget) ■ Staff recommendation: Council: • 1. Approve the Change Order for $91,289.22 with Souza Construction, Inc. for the Traffic Way Storm Drain Project; and 2. Authorize the Director of Administrative Services to allocate S85,000.00 from the Drainage Impact Fee Fund for this project. [Public Works[ MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Scalise to approve the Consent Calendar Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. (Item #A-2 Ordinance No. 385, Item #A-4 Contract No. 2001-029,Item #A-6 Contract No. 2001-030) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Purchasing Policy ■ Fiscal Impact: None. The proposed policy is expected to generate a savings of staff time. ■ Staff recommendation: Council: 1. Introduce for first reading by title only, Ordinance No. 386, amending sections 2- 3.01, 2-3.04, and 2-3.05 of the Atascadero Municipal Code and deleting Sections 2-3.08 and 2-3.09, and Section 2-3A.01 through 2-3A.09, inclusive of the Atascadero Municipal Code; and 2. Approve the draft Resolution adopting a Citywide Purchasing Policy. • [Administrative Services] Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. PUBLIC COMMENT: None MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Scalise to introduce for first reading by title only, Ordinance No. 386, amending sections 2-3.01, 2-3.04, and 2-3.05 of the Atascadero Municipal Code and deleting Sections 2-3.08 and 2-3.09, and Section 2-3A.01 through 2-3A.09, inclusive of the Atascadero Municipal Code; and approve the draft Resolution adopting a Citywide Purchasing Policy. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution No. 2001-035) C. COMMITTEE REPORTS: Mayor Arrambide 1. S.L.O. Council of Governments (SLOCOG)/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA): The major issue being addressed is the potential expansion of Highway 101 • to six lanes. CC 09/11/01 Page 006 2. County Mayor's Round Table: There will be a joint meeting next month of all City Councils in the County. The main focus of this meeting will be affecting the legislature through a grassroots movement. Council Member Johnson • 1. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC): They are still gathering information to determine how they will be organized in the future. Council Member Clay 1. Air Pollution Control District (APCD): The State is concerned with the build up of fuel and a ruling is pending for counties to encourage burning that will reduce the danger where this fuel is building up. D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: City Council Council Member Johnson recognized Fire Chief Kurt Stone and some of his staff who had gone north to help fight the fires there. City Clerk The City Clerk reported that only one application had been received to date for the opening on the Planning Commission, and as the recruitment period closes tomorrow, she requested the approval to do additional advertising for the position. There was Council consensus to approve additional advertising for the Planning Commission vacancy. • City Treasurer The City Treasurer stated that due to the events of the day, all security markets are shut down. There are several investment purchases in the pipeline at the present time and it will be important to reconfirm these before funds are forwarded. Public Works Director The Public Works Director announced that the contractor on Traffic Way encountered a problem today with his trenching operation, and Mr. Kahn authorized the closure of Traffic Way from Chico Road to San Jacinto for approximately seven days. E. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Arrambide adjourned the meeting at 7:51 p.m. to the special meeting of the City Council on September 17, 2001. MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY: Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk • Attachment A—Daphne Fahsing CC 09/11/01 Page 6 00171 ITEM NUMBER: A-2 DATE: 09/25/2001 ■ Foa ■ • tats o to a Atascadero City Council David G. Graham, EA City Treasurers Agenda Report RECOMMENDATION: City Council approve the City Treasurers reports for the following periods: July 2001 DISCUSSION: Starting with the July Treasurer's report we have added the "Weighted Average Yield" of the • City investment portfolio. The weighted average yield is calculated by multiplying the yield of each investment by the amount of the investment, summing the products and dividing by the total investment. For July the City "weighted average yield" was 4.83%. The City benchmark yield (2 year Treasuries) is currently 3.51%and trending downward. Market conditions: I think everyone will understand that, at the present time, all economic bets are off. As I prepare this report in the aftermath of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, we have no assurance of when markets may open again or what the economic consequences of this horrible act may be. Comments by most economists indicate a slide into recession for the U. S. economy. There is now a heightened possibility of somewhere between a 25 and 50 basis point cut in the Federal Funds Rate by the FOMC either immediately or at their next regularly scheduled meeting on October 2, 2001. Some economists are predicting a future Federal Funds Rate as low as 2.5%. Investment Strategy: Uncertainty in the present market (or lack there of) calls for caution! The short-term inverted. yield curve makes it impractical to consider individual investments with maturities of under I year. LAIFs mix of long and short-term maturities will continue to be the preferred investment for short and medium term funds. For long-term funds it will be important to restrain maturities • to coincide with any anticipated tightening by the Federal Reserve, which could occur in from 24 to 3 6 months. 008 City Treasurer's Report July 2001 David Graham • REPORT IN_BRIEF: Cash and Investments Checking $ 578,016 Money Market Accounts 7,800 Certificates of Deposit 1,732,149 Government Securities 993,030 Corporate Paper - LAIF 14,749,789 Cash with Fiscal Agents 143,367 Cash in Banks at July 31,2001 $ 18,204,151 Deposits in Transit - Outstanding Checks (248,382) Cash and Investments at July 31, 2001 $ 17,955,769 Investment Activity Securities Purchased: . Purchase Date Description Type Cost Maturity Date 7/25/2001 Republic Bank CD $ 97,000.00 7/25/2003 7/26/2001 Federal Home Loan Bank Gov't Security 250,000.00 7/26/2005 7/26/2001 Federal Home Loan Mtge Corp Gov't Security 250,000.00 7/26/2006 7/27/2001 Liberty Bank CD 97,000.00 7/28/2003 7/30/2001 Federal Farm Credit Gov't Security 250,000.00 1/30/2004 7/31/2001 Old National Bank CD 95,000.00 1/30/2004 Securities Matured: - Maturity Date Description Type Original Cost Amount Matured 7/9/2001 San Jose National Bank CD $ 99,000.00 $ 99,000.00 7/23/2001 Greenwood Trust CD 95,000.00 95,000.00 7/31/2001 Advanta Bank CD 95,000.00 95,000.00 Securities Sold/Called Prior to Maturity: Transaction/ Original Cost/ Gain/(Loss) Transaction Date Description/Type Maturity Call Price on Call Called Federal Home Loan Bank $ 250,000.00 $ 250,000.00 $ - 7/6/2001 Government Security 7/6/2004 Called M&I Bank of Southern Wisconsin $ 95,000.00 $ 95,000.00 $ - 7/7/2001 Certificate of Deposit 7/7/2004 Page 1 of 9 009 City Treasurer's Report July 2001 avid Graham Securities Sold/Called Prior to Maturity(continued): Transaction/ Original Cost/ Gain/(Loss) Transaction Date Description/Type Maturity Call Price on Call Called IBJ Whitehall Bank&Trust $ 95,000.00 $ 95,000.00 $ - 7/8/2001 Certificate of Deposit 7/8/2002 Called Charter One Bank $ 95,000.00 $ 95,000.00 $ - 7/21/2001 Certificate of Deposit 7/21/2004 Other Reportable Activities: None - • • Page 2 of 9 010 CITY OF ATASCADERO TREASURER'S REPORT CASH&INVESTMENTS ACTIVITY SUMMARY • FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 2001 CHECKING FISCAL ACCOUNT INVESTMENTS AGENT TOTALS Balance per Banks at July 1, 2001 $ 795,204 $ 17,545,342 $ 142,928 $ 18,483,474 Receipts 1,098,842 193,963 439 1,293,244 Disbursements (1,572,567) - (1,572,567) Transfers In 1,825,537 1,569,000 - 3,394,537 Transfers Out (1,569,000) (1,825,537) - (3,394,537) Balance per Banks at July 31, 2001 $ 578,016 $ 17,482,768 $ 143,367 18,204,151 Deposits in Transit - , Outstanding Checks (248,382) Adjusted Treasurer's Balance $ 17,955,769 • Page 3 of 9 O 1 l • (. oao o e 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C, r h 00 M 7 v'1 V1 M M G� 1� H v'1 v1 a a a Cl c oz 0 C 4 A c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 �0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v o a v v v o a a a c a N c a c c a J T o e oA o e o o e o e e a e e O m b V b 7 COQ b O b O T Q o e o e o o e e e o o e e O O O O O O W 4 � V ol 10 10 10 10 Cl) 10 ol ol 0 r ti eun P0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ly N > CS. eC A e7 N ttl O h r r r > U U U L U Cj U U U U U a O a 0 Q B1 o a o o a o 0 0 0 c o 0 N 4 a u O Y C Y R ►� d tLC O �y l' C R U� ai eCi C R O vi G^n n.I p Y h ` Cd p ao o y W y N y X y u o c L O Y Pte.. _ > t OD O O i U (n o Y U h 't7 •� h .1 V V 7 O 0 L10, •o .a q �n ¢ z U F � ..a a w m = U U rs. U .S m ¢ U m 3 G F U rn t v 10 • � Q O o O O O O O O O O 012 o o O o O o o. O oo h h V • �. _ h o C C 0 C 0 C 0 o O g e e 10 0 � 0 0? o LL (Zv N 7 h h G, O O O N M M 10 O Q• (71 Q\ C., C, N h N N Q- c h O Z vi U 4 O sn S o 0 C C 0 C o O o O o v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o V jvivi h h C, O vi O O O �n M M 00 O\ T C\ C, C, N C, O N N h V tm q 0 w 0 w 0 0 0 w w 0 w v J o o o o00 0 o 00 00 h rl� v N e �, .d � v v .� c v oo �•; h d � `� Q w w e w e w o e e w QO O O O N V V n o0 h V O h h vl vi Z � v7 N V7 1L' 1L' lG Q ¢ Q Ir Q D\ O U \ W D Q D JQ. u W J N CJ o `o E EE u.. � @ R R R R G R •c! E T E w E E X r > r > > U U U U U C7 U U V V F e W a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Er N N N N N N N N N N M M N N h r n 4 a w M 2 e R •L R R b0 A O O F L V C M O u j a1 c c o ' o 0 `u Ao R F c z E M z R E E a d E F - o O Q n"oo ca Y Ci O c W o ai .Q x u x e u c -R `o L a' i A; h 3 c b Z E 00 V •G 7 9 h Gn C 7 V7 'O VJ R 7 u o o '- a > 3 z � a m a w � � m u o w d w u w u a oa x T CO 1>1 M M M M M K V h V1 10 C A � cy o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � � •d CO Q O O O O O O O O O > •v • Q> 3 013 � � ( § § � v \ ± � § ) § dCL ( r / / ƒ � ol ) \ ( [ > \ \ � \ � \�\ t � ) / \ � \ ( / \ k § ` 72 cls - \ § j4 014 City of Atascadero Investments by Type July 2001 • Cash Gov't with Certificates of Deposit Securities Fiscal 0 �� 6% Agent 1 Other % 0% • LAIF 83% Investment July 2001 LAIF $ 14,749,789 Certificates of Deposit 1,732,149 Government Securities 993,030 Corporate Paper - Cash with Fiscal Agent 143,367 Other 7,800 $ 17,626,135 • Page 7of9 0115 City of Atascadero Investments by Maturity • July 2001 Within One One Month Month to One Year 0% 6% One to Five Years 9% • On Demand 85% Investment July 2001 On Demand $ 14,757,589 Within One Month 45,560 One Month to One Year 1,093,328 One to Five Years 1,586,291 $ 17,482,768 • 016 Page 8 of 9 City of Atascadero Investments by Custodial Agent July 2001 • Penson Gibraltor River Financial Corp. Securities 1% Trust 1/o 6% 8% Bank of New York 1% City of Atascadero 1% State of California • 83% Custodial Agent July 2001 State of California $ 14,749,789 Penson Financial Corp. 1,147,524 Gibraltor Securities 1,352,515 Riverway Trust 187,380 Bank of New York 143,367 City of Atascadero 188,927 $ 17,769,502 • Page 9 of 9 017 ITEM NUMBER: A-3 s ® s DATE: 09/25/2001 Atascadero City Council Staff Report-Administrative Services Department AUGUST 2001 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE & PAYROLL RECOMMENDATION Approve certified City accounts payable, payroll and payroll vendor checks for August 2001. DISCUSSION Attached for City Council review and approval are the following: Payroll Dated 8/02/01 Checks # 10744 - 10912 $ 162,107.17 • Dated 8/16/01 Checks# 10913 - 11066 154,998.92 Dated 8/30/01 Checks# 11067 - 11230 169,040.19 Accounts Payable Dated August 1-31, 2001 Checks # 80254 -80772 & EFTs 1,349,700.49 TOTAL AMOUNT $ 1,835,846.77 FISCAL IMPACT Total expenditures for all funds is $ 1,835,846.77 CERTIFICATION The undersigned certifies that the attached demands have been released for payment and that funds are available for these demands. (" ) I nk�' LL (721-0 Rachelle Rickard,Administra ive Services Director Approved by the City Council at a meeting held September 25, 2001. • Marcia M.Torgerson, City Clerk ATTACHMENT: August 2001 Eden Warrant Register in the amount of $ 1,349,700.49 018 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Number Date Vendor Description AmmintAllk 80254 8/1/2001 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COMMISSIO Accounts Payable Check 4,161.78 80255 8/1/2001 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC Accounts Payable Check 313.59 80256 8/1/2001 PAM PALADINI Accounts Payable Check 250.00 80257 8/2/2001 A-JAY EXCAVATING,INC. Accounts Payable Check 1,475.00 80258 8/2/2001 ACTION FAX&PRINTER Accounts Payable Check 99.80 80259 8/2/2001 AIR-LEFT REFRIGERATION&HTG Accounts Payable Check 100.66 80260 8/2/2001 ALBERTSONS Accounts Payable Check 78.82 80261 8/2/2001 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 278.20 80262 8/2/2001 ANDERSON'S AUTO SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 993.14 80263 8/2/2001 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 487.69 80264 8/2/2001 ATASCADERO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Accounts Payable Check 20,420.00 80265 8/2/2001 ATASCADERO FORD Accounts Payable Check 1,114.83 80266 8/2/2001 ATASCADERO GLASS,INC. Accounts Payable Check 144.22 80267 8/2/2001 ATASCADERO MUTUAL WATER CO. Accounts Payable Check 4.00 80268 8/2/2001 ATASCADERO RADIATOR Accounts Payable Check 150.72 80269 8/2/2001 B&B TECHNICAL SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 39.00 80270 8/2/2001 BICKMORE RISK SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 1,59• 80271 8/2/2001 CAL-COAST REFRIGERATION,INC Accounts Payable Check 160.75 80272 8/2/2001 CALIFORNIA INTERNET CONNECTION Accounts Payable Check 5,218.90 80273 8/2/2001 CENTRAL COAST PLUMBING SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 266.43 80274 8/2/2001 CHANNEL COUNTIES DIVISION Accounts Payable Check 100.00 80275 8/2/2001 CHEM CLEAN Accounts Payable Check 318.48 80276 8/2/2001 CHEVRON Accounts Payable Check 70.00 80277 8/2/2001 CJP PRODUCTIONS Accounts Payable Check 6,900.00 80278 8/2/2001 CMI,INC. Accounts Payable Check 111.53 80279 8/2/2001 CONWAY DISTRIBUTORS Accounts Payable Check 118.64 80280 8/2/2001 CIMON CORMIER Accounts Payable Check 119.00 80281 8/2/2001 COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER Accounts Payable Check 11,061.00 80282 8/2/2001 CPOA Accounts Payable Check 450.00 80283 8/2/2001 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER Accounts Payable Check 77.00 80284 8/2/2001 DARRYL'S LOCK AND SAFE Accounts Payable Check 323.46 80285 8/2/2001 DAVID M FLEISHMAN Accounts Payable Check 800.00 80286 8/2/2001 DECOU LUMBER COMPANY Accounts Payable Check 604.48 80287 8/2/2001 DIGITAL WEST VIDEO Accounts Payable Check 3 80288 8/2/2001 EL CAMINO BUILDING SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 019 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check umber Date Vendor Description Amount 80289 8/2/2001 EL CAMINO VETERINARY HOSP Accounts Payable Check 120.00 80290 8/2/2001 FARM SUPPLY COMPANY Accounts Payable Check 32.05 80291 8/2/2001 FERRELL'S AUTO REPAIR Accounts Payable Check 186.00 80292 8/2/2001 FGL ENVIRONMENTAL Accounts Payable Check 97.20 80293 8/2/2001 FOOD FOR LESS Accounts Payable Check 208.94 80294 8/2/2001 GEM AUTO PARTS Accounts Payable Check 335.14 80295 8/2/2001 GIBSON'S ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSUL Accounts Payable Check 1,500.00 80296 8/2/2001 GRISANTI HARDWARE Accounts Payable Check 95.80 80297 8/2/2001 H.D.PETERSON Accounts Payable Check 506.29 80298 8/2/2001 HOBBY SHOP Accounts Payable Check 138.50 80299 8/2/2001 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE INSTI Accounts Payable Check 215.00 80300 8/2/2001 TOM JAMASON Accounts Payable Check 146.00 80301 8/2/2001 JESPERSEN'S TIRE SERVICE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 23.75 80302 8/2/2001 JIFFY LUBE#1932 PCJL,INC. Accounts Payable Check 28.18 80303 8/2/2001 JIM'S CAMPUS CAMERA Accounts Payable Check 74.90 80304 8/2/2001 JOBS AVAILABLE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 64.40 80305 8/2/2001 K-MART Accounts Payable Check 237.41 • 80306 8/2/2001 STEVEN KAHN Accounts Payable Check 47.44 80307 8/2/2001 CHUCK KENDRICK Accounts Payable Check 153.00 80308 8/2/2001 KENT H. LANDSBERG CO. Accounts Payable Check 486.85 80309 8/2/2001 DON LAVALLELE Accounts Payable Check 29.50 80310 8/2/2001 LOCAL FAVORITES Accounts Payable Check 375.00 80311 8/2/2001 LONGS DRUG STORES Accounts Payable Check 8.52 80312 8/2/2001 RUDY LORTON Accounts Payable Check 136.00 80313 8/2/2001 MAINTENANCE SERVICE&SUPPLY C Accounts Payable Check 102.16 80314 8/2/2001 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK,INC. Accounts Payable Check 158.62 80315 8/2/2001 BECKY MAXWELL Accounts Payable Check 13.71 80316 8/2/2001 ROBERT MAXWELL Accounts Payable Check 240.00 80317 8/2/2001 MIKE HOWE'S AUTOMOTIVE Accounts Payable Check 43.40 80318 8/2/2001 PAUL MILLER Accounts Payable Check 136.00 80319 8/2/2001 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 40.68 80320 8/2/2001 MUNIFINANCIAL Accounts Payable Check 1,701.93 80321 8/2/2001 MUSIC FACTORY Accounts Payable Check 367.03 80322 8/2/2001 NORTH COUNTY GLASS Accounts Payable Check 420.87 • 80323 8/2/2001 O.C.TANNER Accounts Payable Check 2,932.49 020 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Number Date Vendor Description Amo 80324 8/2/2001 OUTLET TOOL SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 2 80325 8/2/2001 PACIFIC HOME DO IT CENTER Accounts Payable Check 160.96 80326 8/2/2001 PANASONIC COMMUNICATIONS Accounts Payable Check 1,889.10 80327 8/2/2001 PAPER WORKS Accounts Payable Check 184.49 80328 8/2/2001 PASO ROBLES SUPERIOR COURT Accounts Payable Check 75.00 80329 8/2/2001 FINANCE DEPARTMENT PETTY CASH Accounts Payable Check 137.40 80330 8/2/2001 PITNEY BOWES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 238.02 80331 8/2/2001 POWER CONVERSION PRODUCTS,LLC Accounts Payable Check 1,659.57 80332 8/2/2001 PRO MOTION Accounts Payable Check 1,135.66 80333 8/2/2001 QUILL CORPORATION Accounts Payable Check 584.18 80334 8/2/2001 RADIO SHACK Accounts Payable Check 60.43 80335 8/2/2001 RAINBOW MEALWORMS,INC. Accounts Payable Check 29.98 80336 8/2/2001 RECOGNITION WORKS Accounts Payable Check 304.95 80337 8/2/2001 REPUBLIC ELEVATOR CO.,INC. Accounts Payable Check 26,215.00 80338 8/2/2001 RACHELLE RICKARD Accounts Payable Check 300.00 80339 8/2/2001 ROBERT F.DRIVER COMPANY,INC. Accounts Payable Check 12,039.90 80340 8/2/2001 ROTARY CLUB OF ATASCADERO Accounts Payable Check 40.00 80341 8/2/2001 SAN JOAQUIN SUPPLY COMPANY Accounts Payable Check I� 80342 8/2/2001 SAN LUIS PERSONNEL INC. Accounts Payable Check 1,633.50 80343 8/2/2001 SEARS Accounts Payable Check 123.02 80344 8/2/2001 GRACE PUCCI,SECRETARIAL SERVICES BY GRACE Accounts Payable Check 180.00 80345 8/2/2001 TOM SILVA Accounts Payable Check 238.00 80346 8/2/2001 SMITH&WESSON Accounts Payable Check 436.56 80347 8/2/2001 SOUTHWEST ELECTRIC Accounts Payable Check 450.19 80348 8/2/2001 SUNSET Accounts Payable Check 16.00 80349 8/2/2001 SUPERIOR QUALITY COPIERS,INC. Accounts Payable Check 675.00 80350 8/2/2001 TAYLOR RENTAL CENTER Accounts Payable Check 145.04 80351 8/2/2001 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS Accounts Payable Check 35.30 80352 8/2/2001 TESSCO TECHNOLOGIES Accounts Payable Check 385.16 80353 8/2/2001 THE TREE MAN Accounts Payable Check 74.90 80354 8/2/2001 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR Accounts Payable Check 210.06 80355 8/2/2001 TODD PIPE&SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 49.08 80356 8/2/2001 TOMARK SPORTS,INC. Accounts Payable Check 230.84 80357 8/2/2001 TRIBUNE Accounts Payable Check 79.50 80358 8/2/2001 UNITED GREEN MARK,INC. Accounts Payable Check 80359 8/2/2001 UNIVERSAL SPECIALTIES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 280 021 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Aftaumb Date Vendor Description Amount 80360 8/2/2001 TOM VELASQUEZ Accounts Payable Check 68.00 80361 8/2/2001 TINA VILLALON Accounts Payable Check 170.00 80362 8/2/2001 VONS Accounts Payable Check 24.00 80363 8/2/2001 DAN WEBSTER Accounts Payable Check 80.00 80364 8/2/2001 WESTERN JANITOR SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 977.70 80365 8/2/2001 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 62.06 46911302 8/2/2001 MID-STATE BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 26 335.84 80366 8/3/2001 ATASCADERO FED.CREDIT UNION Payroll Vendor Payment 5,760.00 80367 8/3/2001 ATASCADERO FIRE DEPT EMP.ASSN Payroll Vendor Payment 210.00 80368 8/3/2001 ATASCADERO MID MGRS ORG UNION Payroll Vendor Payment 40.00 80369 8/3/2001 ATASCADERO POLICE OFFICERS ASN Payroll Vendor Payment 333.25 80370 8/3/2001 COUNTY-CITY EMPLOYEES CU Payroll Vendor Payment - 895.00 80371 8/3/2001 EMPLOYMENT DEV DEPARTMENT Payroll Vendor Payment 6,998.72 80372 8/3/2001 EMPLOYMENT DEV.DEPARTMENT Payroll Vendor Payment 603.62 80373 8/3/2001 FAMILY SUPPORT DIVISION Payroll Vendor Payment 261.69 80374 8/3/2001 HARTFORD LIFE INSURANCE Payroll Vendor Payment 6,408.31 • 80375 8/3/2001 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Payroll Vendor Payment 500.00 80376 8/3/2001 KENNEDY CLUB FITNESS Payroll Vendor Payment 47.00 80377 8/3/2001 VOID Payroll Vendor Payment 0.00 80378 8/3/2001 PUBLIC EMPL RETIREMENT SYSTEM Payroll Vendor Payment 17 300.80 80379 8/3/2001 SEIU LOCAL 620 AFL-CIO Payroll Vendor Payment 381.60 80380 8/3/2001 FAMILY SUPPORT DIVISION Payroll Vendor Payment 444.00 80381 8/3/2001 UNITED WAY OF SLO COUNTY Payroll Vendor Payment 38.00 80382 8/3/2001 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 1,278.96 80383 8/3/2001 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 432.00 80384 8/3/2001 PERS LONG TERM CARE PROGRAM Payroll Vendor Payment 59.07 47163737 8/7/2001 MID-STATE BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 32,708.54 80385 8/9/2001 ALLAN HANCOCK COLLEGE Accounts Payable Check 180.00 80386 8/9/2001 JOE ALLEN Accounts Payable Check 269.95 80387 8/9/2001 AMERICAN WEST TIRE&AUTO INC Accounts Payable Check 297.45 80388 8/9/2001 ANDERSON'S AUTO SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 174.82 80389 8/9/2001 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 107.09 80390 8/9/2001 ARCH Accounts Payable Check 161.72 • 80391 8/9/2001 ATASCADERO FORD Accounts Payable Check 692.66 022 City of Ataseadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Number Date Vendor Description Amo 80392 8/9/2001 ATASCADERO MUTUAL WATER CO. Accounts Payable Check Mw 80393 8/9/2001 ATASCADERO SAW SHOP Accounts Payable Check 56.00 80394 8/9/2001 BELL'S PLUMBING REPAIR Accounts Payable Check 127.50 80395 8/9/2001 BOTACH TACTICAL.COM Accounts Payable Check 447.68 80396 8/9/2001 JOSH BOWLING Accounts Payable Check 105.00 80397 8/9/2001 JACK BRIDWELL Accounts Payable Check 236.00 80398 8/9/2001 DENNIS CAGLE Accounts Payable Check 250.00 80399 8/9/2001 CALIF DEPT OF FORESTRY&FIRE Accounts Payable Check 30.00 80400 8/9/2001 CALIF REDEVELOPMENT ASSC Accounts Payable Check 1,040.00 80401 8/9/2001 CALPERS CONFERENCE 2001 Accounts Payable Check 500.00 80402 8/9/2001 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL CED Accounts Payable Check 186.27 80403 8/9/2001 CENTRAL COAST LOCK&KEY Accounts Payable Check 127.63 80404 8/9/2001 CHARLES SCOTT CHAPMAN Accounts Payable Check 108.50 80405 8/9/2001 CHEM CLEAN Accounts Payable Check 450.42 80406 8/9/2001 CHEVRON Accounts Payable Check 70.00 80407 8/9/2001 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Accounts Payable Check 254,990.00 80408 8/9/2001 KAREN CLANIN Accounts Payable Check 294.00 80409 8/9/2001 CLEAN WATER OUTLET Accounts Payable Check 3• 80410 8/9/2001 COAST ELECTRONICS Accounts Payable Check 283.51 80411 8/9/2001 COASTAL IMAGING SUPPLIES Accounts Payable Check 182.97 80412 8/9/2001 CRIME PREVENTION RESOURCES Accounts Payable Check 194.00 80413 8/9/2001 DARRYL'S LOCK AND SAFE Accounts Payable Check 24.08 80414 8/9/2001 DECOU LUMBER COMPANY Accounts Payable Check 38.70 80415 8/9/2001 DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 100.00 80416 8/9/2001 DIGITAL WEST VIDEO Accounts Payable Check 51.00 80417 8/9/2001 DISPLAY SALES Accounts Payable Check 77.04 80418 8/9/2001 EXXON MOBIL Accounts Payable Check 558.48 80419 8/9/2001 FARM SUPPLY COMPANY Accounts Payable Check 65.31 80420 8/9/2001 FARWEST LINE SPECIALTIES Accounts Payable Check 490.06 80421 8/9/2001 FERRELL'S AUTO REPAIR Accounts Payable Check 222.00 80422 8/9/2001 FIRSTLINE,LLC Accounts Payable Check 166.92 80423 8/9/2001 FIVE STAR CARTRIDGES Accounts Payable Check 34.13 80424 8/9/2001 FOOD FOR LESS Accounts Payable Check 279.10 80425 8/9/2001 TAMARA GEARHART Accounts Payable Check 250.00 80426 8/9/2001 GEM AUTO PARTS Accounts Payable Check 15 80427 8/9/2001 DONNA GIBSON Accounts Payable Check 5 023 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Oumber Date Vendor Description Amount 80428 8/9/2001 KENNETH GLYNN Accounts Payable Check 189.00 80429 8/9/2001 H.D.PETERSON Accounts Payable Check 29.22 80430 8/9/2001 DAVID HAGGMARK Accounts Payable Check 250.00 80431 8/9/2001 HART IMPRESSIONS PRINT© Accounts Payable Check 344.92 80432 8/9/2001 HAWTHORNE SUITES HOTEL Accounts Payable Check 297.00 80433 8/9/2001 EVELYN INGRAM Accounts Payable Check 576.89 80434 8/9/2001 JIFFY LUBE#1932 PCJL,INC. Accounts Payable Check 28.04 80435 8/9/2001 LESLYN KEITH Accounts Payable Check 35.00 80436 8/9/2001 LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 19,827.60 80437 8/9/2001 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES Accounts Payable Check 1,294.00 80438 8/9/2001 LIFE ASSIST,INC. Accounts Payable Check 408.83 80439 8/9/2001 TERI LIPPER Accounts Payable Check 2,162.00 80440 8/9/2001 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION Accounts Payable Check 600.00 80441 8/9/2001 RUDY LORTON Accounts Payable Check 51.00 80442 8/9/2001 KAYDA MAGRUDER Accounts Payable Check 250.00 80443 8/9/2001 JOHN MARTINO Accounts Payable Check 362.00 80444 8/9/2001 WADE MCKINNEY Accounts Payable Check 277.35 80445 8/9/2001 MID-COAST MOWER&SAW Accounts Payable Check 8.60 80446 8/9/2001 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 150.62 80447 8/9/2001 YOLANDA NEAL Accounts Payable Check 47.50 80448 8/9/2001 NORTH COUNTY GLASS Accounts Payable Check 74.95 80449 8/9/2001 OUTLET TOOL SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 26.08 80450 8/9/2001 PACIFIC HOME DO IT CENTER Accounts Payable Check 286.05 80451 8/9/2001 PC CONNECTION,INC. Accounts Payable Check 346.00 80452 8/9/2001 POLICE DEPARTMENT PETTY CASH Accounts Payable Check 131.26 80453 8/9/2001 FRED PFLUM Accounts Payable Check 350.00 80454 8/9/2001 PFLUM'S ATASCADERO MUFFLER Accounts Payable Check 65.00 80455 8/9/2001 PITNEY BOWES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 97.12 80456 8/9/2001 PORAC LAW ENFORCEMENT NEWS Accounts Payable Check 126.00 80457 8/9/2001 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION,INC. Accounts Payable Check 587.37 80458 8/9/2001 PRO MOTION Accounts Payable Check 216.65 80459 8/9/2001 PRO POWER PRODUCTS Accounts Payable Check 238.00 80460 8/9/2001 QUILL CORPORATION Accounts Payable Check 432.26 80461 8/9/2001 REPUBLIC ELEVATOR CO.,INC. Accounts Payable Check 18,990.00 • 80462 8/9/2001 SUZY REYNOLDS Accounts Payable Check 250.00 024 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Number Date Vendor Description Amnwiift 80463 8/9/2001 JOHN RODGERS Accounts Payable Check 1wr 80464 8/9/2001 SAFETY-KLEEN INC. Accounts Payable Check 100.00 80465 8/9/2001 SANTA MARIA TIRE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 38.44 80466 8/9/2001 LISETTE SCHOLL Accounts Payable Check 80.50 80467 8/9/2001 JOHN SIEMENS Accounts Payable Check 321.00 80468 8/9/2001 CHARLES L. SMITH Accounts Payable Check 34.00 80469 8/9/2001 SAFETY EQUIPMENT SOLON FIRE CONTROL FIRE& Accounts Payable Check 498.06 80470 8/9/2001 DAWN STARR,PH.D. Accounts Payable Check 558.00 80471 8/9/2001 SUNLIGHT JANITORIAL Accounts Payable Check 1,360.00 80472 8/9/2001 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS Accounts Payable Check 409.74 80473 8/9/2001 TESSCO TECHNOLOGIES Accounts Payable Check 2,425.56 80474 8/9/2001 TODD PIPE&SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 230.40 80475 8/9/2001 UNISOURCE MAINT SUPPLY SYSTEMS Accounts Payable Check 271.52 80476 8/9/2001 UNITED GREEN MARK,INC. Accounts Payable Check 65.17 80477 8/9/2001 TINA VILLALON Accounts Payable Check 34.00- 80478 8/9/2001 VISION QUEST CO. Accounts Payable Check 166.20 80479 8/9/2001 WESTERN JANITOR SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 146.91 80480 8/9/2001 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE CO Payroll Vendor Payment 71* 80481 8/9/2001 COLONIAL LIFE&ACCIDENT INS. Payroll Vendor Payment 2,084.20 80482 8/9/2001 CPIC LIFE Payroll Vendor Payment 1,405.25 80483 8/9/2001 DELTA DENTAL,ATTN:ACCOUNTING Payroll Vendor Payment 5,840.89 80484 8/9/2001 EQUITABLE LIFE Payroll Vendor Payment 348.88 80485 8/9/2001 LIFEGUARD INC. Payroll Vendor Payment 28,904.65 80503 8/16/2001 ACCENTS Accounts Payable Check 150.46 80504 8/16/2001 ACTION TOWING Accounts Payable Check 54.15 80505 8/16/2001 ZACKARY ADAMS Accounts Payable Check 15.00 80506 8/16/2001 AMERICAN WEST TIRE&AUTO INC Accounts Payable Check 211.00 80507 8/16/2001 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 17.60 80508 8/16/2001 MARGARET ARCHULETA Accounts Payable Check 248.50 80509 8/16/2001 ATASCADERO NEWS Accounts Payable Check 1,249.98 80510 8/16/2001 PAUL BEBEAU Accounts Payable Check 9.50 80511 8/16/2001 DEBRA BILEK Accounts Payable Check 15.00 80512 8/16/2001 JACK BRIDWELL Accounts Payable Check 2,791.00 80513 8/16/2001 CAROL BRUNS Accounts Payable Check 150.00 80514 8/16/2001 CELLULARONE Accounts Payable Check 3� 025 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Allftiimh Date Vendor Description Amount 80515 8/16/2001 CENTRAL COAST STRIPING Accounts Payable Check 775.00 80516 8/16/2001 CHEVRON Accounts Payable Check 1,650.60 80517 8/16/2001 CHEVRON Accounts Payable Check 334.65 80518 8/16/2001 CHICAGO GRADE LANDFILL,INC. Accounts Payable Check 680.50 80519 8/16/2001 COASTLINE EQUIPMENT Accounts Payable Check 6,372.58 80520 8/16/2001 MARCIA COHEN-KERSCHEN Accounts Payable Check 105.00 80521 8/16/2001 COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Accounts Payable Check 45.00 80522 8/16/2001 CRAWFORD MULTARI CLARK&MOHR Accounts Payable Check 14,235.50 80523 8/16/2001 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER Accounts Payable Check 86.00 80524 8/16/2001 CUESTA COLLEGE Accounts Payable Check 108.66 80525 8/16/2001 DEANNA CURTIS Accounts Payable Check 44.00 80526 8/16/2001 KELLY DAKIN Accounts Payable Check 33.00 80527 8/16/2001 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Accounts Payable Check 1,834.47 80528 8/16/2001 DGM ARCHITECT Accounts Payable Check 4,429.97 80529 8/16/2001 CHELSEA DOWNS Accounts Payable Check 50.00 80530 8/16/2001 ECONOMIC VITALITY CORP OF SLO Accounts Payable Check 549.00 80531 8/16/2001 EL CAMINO BUILDING SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 483.59 . 80532 8/16/2001 SHEILA ERB Accounts Payable Check 60.00 80533 8/16/2001 FGL ENVIRONMENTAL Accounts Payable Check 97.20 80534 8/16/2001 FRAZEE PAINTS Accounts Payable Check 502.19 80535 8/16/2001 GAS COMPANY Accounts Payable Check 34.21 80536 8/16/2001 GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTATION Accounts Payable Check 1,096.40 80537 8/16/2001 WENDY GIBSON Accounts Payable Check 25.00 80538 8/16/2001 DAVID GRAHAM Accounts Payable Check 144.53 80539 8/16/2001 HEISER&ASSOCIATES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 11,804.00 80540 8/16/2001 HIS&HERS UPHOLSTERY Accounts Payable Check 499.48 80541 8/16/2001 INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION Accounts Payable Check 73.75 80542 8/16/2001 EDWARD P.JARDINI Accounts Payable Check 114.00 80543 8/16/2001 JAMIE KIRK Accounts Payable Check 59.52 80544 8/16/2001 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC CO.INC Accounts Payable Check 1,083.50 80545 8/16/2001 LONGS DRUG STORES Accounts Payable Check 42.75 80546 8/16/2001 MAHONING VALLEY MFG.,INC. Accounts Payable Check 1,333.22 80547 8/16/2001 MAINTENANCE SERVICE&SUPPLY C Accounts Payable Check 102.16 80548 8/16/2001 ANNETTE MANIER Accounts Payable Check 15.00 • 80549 8/16/2001 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 18.31 80550 8/16/2001 MITCH FREDERICK SEALCOATING Accounts Payable Check 595.00 026 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Number Date Vendor Description po 80551 8/16/2001 MITY LITE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 4 470. 5 80552 8/16/2001 MOSS,LEVY,&HARTZHEIM Accounts Payable Check 2,000.00 80553 8/16/2001 DOROTHY NELSON Accounts Payable Check 200.00 80554 8/16/2001 NORTH COAST ENGINEERING INC. Accounts Payable Check 9,281.18 80555 8/16/2001 PACIFIC BELL Accounts Payable Check 455.20 80556 8/16/2001 PACIFIC HOME DO IT CENTER Accounts Payable Check 24.73 80557 8/16/2001 FINANCE DEPARTMENT PETTY CASH Accounts Payable Check 117.63 80558 8/16/2001 PRODUCERS DAIRY FOODS,INC. Accounts Payable Check 18.00 80559 8/16/2001 RICHARD PROKOP Accounts Payable Check 60.00 80560 8/16/2001 QUICK CRETE PRODUCTS CORP. Accounts Payable Check 1,557.92 80561 8/16/2001 QUILL CORPORATION Accounts Payable Check 450.46 80562 8/16/2001 REVENUE&COST SPECIALISTS LLC Accounts Payable Check 5,200.00 80563 8/16/2001 RRM DESIGN GROUP Accounts Payable Check 3,750.10 80564 8/16/2001 SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY SHERIFF Accounts Payable Check 8,047.50 80565 8/16/2001 SANTA MARIA TIRE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 13.00 80566 8/16/2001 STEVE SCHNARS Accounts Payable Check 564.75 80567 8/16/2001 JONI SONEK Accounts Payable Check 5 80568 8/16/2001 STAPLES INC. Accounts Payable Check 3,24 80569 8/16/2001 MICHAEL STORNETTA Accounts Payable Check 120.93 80570 8/16/2001 TURF STAR,INC. Accounts Payable Check 1,349.70 80571 8/16/2001 U.S.BANK TRUST NATL ASSOC Accounts Payable Check 862.50 80572 8/16/2001 UNOCAL Accounts Payable Check 4,003.02 80573 8/16/2001 VERIZON WIRELESS Accounts Payable Check 264.56 80574 8/16/2001 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS Accounts Payable Check 500.66 80575 8/16/2001 WESTERN FARM SERVICE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 48.85 80486 8/17/2001 ATASCADERO FED.CREDIT UNION Payroll Vendor Payment 5,360.00 80487 8/17/2001 ATASCADERO FIRE DEPT EMP.ASSN Payroll Vendor Payment 210.00 80488 8/17/2001 ATASCADERO MID MGRS ORG UNION Payroll Vendor Payment 40.00 80489 8/17/2001 ATASCADERO POLICE OFFICERS ASN Payroll Vendor Payment 333.25 80490 8/17/2001 COUNTY-CITY EMPLOYEES CU Payroll Vendor Payment 895.00 80491 8/17/2001 EMPLOYMENT DEV DEPARTMENT Payroll Vendor Payment 6,176.39 80492 8/17/2001 EMPLOYMENT DEV.DEPARTMENT Payroll Vendor Payment 608.75 80493 8/17/2001 FAMILY SUPPORT DIVISION Payroll Vendor Payment 261.69 80494 8/17/2001 HARTFORD LIFE INSURANCE Payroll Vendor Payment 5,10 80495 8/17/2001 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Payroll Vendor Payment 5 027 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check AdWurnh Date Vendor Description Amount 80496 8/17/2001 KENNEDY CLUB FITNESS Payroll Vendor Payment 47.00 80497 8/17/2001 PERS LONG TERM CARE PROGRAM Payroll Vendor Payment 59.07 80498 8/17/2001 SEIU LOCAL 620 AFL-CIO Payroll Vendor Payment 399.85 80499 8/17/2001 FAMILY SUPPORT DIVISION Payroll Vendor Payment 444.00 80500 8/17/2001 UNITED WAY OF SLO COUNTY Payroll Vendor Payment 38.00 80501 8/17/2001 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 1,199.15 80502 8/17/2001 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 432.00 80576 8/17/2001 PUBLIC EMPL RETIREMENT SYSTEM Payroll Vendor Payment 16 784.53 103 8/20/2001 BANK OF NEW YORK Accounts Payable Check 129 655.84 101 8/21/2001 MID-STATE BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 29,719.60 104 8/23/2001 BANK OF NEW YORK Accounts Payable Check _ 58,224.33 80577 8/23/2001 ACCURATE MAILING SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 388.75 80578 8/23/2001 JOSH BOWLING Accounts Payable Check 267.36 80579 8/23/2001 COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Accounts Payable Check 73 158.63 80580 8/23/2001 CUSTOM SEWING&ALTERATIONS Accounts Payable Check 6.00 80581 8/23/2001 EMERGENCY MEDICAL SVCS AGENCY Accounts Payable Check 2,816.00 80582 8/23/2001 GATEWAY COMPANIES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 4,321.73 80583 8/23/2001 ROBERTA HART Accounts Payable Check 16.65 80584 8/23/2001 HOME DEPOT Accounts Payable Check 680.05 80585 8/23/2001 JESPERSEN'S TIRE SERVICE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 12.50 80586 8/23/2001 L.N.CURTIS&SONS Accounts Payable Check 719.04 80587 8/23/2001 LEISURE TIME POOL SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 19.80 80588 8/23/2001 LOOKOUT SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 485.73 80589 8/23/2001 MID-COAST GEOTECHNICAL,INC. Accounts Payable Check 1,782.00 80590 8/23/2001 PASO ROBLES TRUCK CENTER Accounts Payable Check 512.59 80591 8/27/2001 AGT BATTERY SUPPLY,LLC Accounts Payable Check 107.30 80592 8/27/2001 ALLAN HANCOCK COLLEGE Accounts Payable Check 85.00 80593 8/27/2001 AMERICAN WEST TIRE&AUTO INC Accounts Payable Check 198.91 80594 8/27/2001 AMERISUITES Accounts Payable Check 1,236.04 80595 8/27/2001 ANDERSON'S AUTO SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 78.00 80596 8/27/2001 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 269.39 80597 8/27/2001 ATASCADERO MUTUAL WATER CO. Accounts Payable Check 12,465.30 • 80598 8/27/2001 PAUL CARTER Accounts Payable Check 7.50 80599 8/27/2001 CERRO ALTO 4H Accounts Payable Check 250.00 1028 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Number Date Vendor Description Amo 2e 80600 8/27/2001 KELLY DAKIN Accounts Payable Check 30. 80601 8/27/2001 SIGOURNEY HARRINGTON Accounts Payable Check 15.00 80602 8/27/2001 HENRY HUBBARD Accounts Payable Check 280.00 80603 8/27/2001 VALERIE HUMPHREY Accounts Payable Check 66.22 80604 8/27/2001 CHUCK KENDRICK Accounts Payable Check 102.00 80605 8/27/2001 BETH LAWHEAD Accounts Payable Check 15.00 80606 8/27/2001 RUDY LORTON Accounts Payable Check 118.00 80607 8/27/2001 JOHN MARTINO Accounts Payable Check 51.00 80608 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 1850 Accounts Payable Check 822.47 80609 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 4093 Accounts Payable Check 43.27 80610 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 4101 Accounts Payable Check 111.85 80611 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 4119 Accounts Payable Check 654.18 80612 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 4135 Accounts Payable Check 1,590.13 80613 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 4150 Accounts Payable Check 322.66 80614 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 4168 Accounts Payable Check 176.58 80615 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 6090 Accounts Payable Check 142.35 80616 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 6108 Accounts Payable Check 124 80617 8/27/2001 MASTERCARD DEPARTMENT 9902 Accounts Payable Check 64 80618 8/27/2001 PAUL MILLER Accounts Payable Check 204.00 80619 8/27/2001 TIM O'MEARA Accounts Payable Check 34.00 80621 8/27/2001 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC Accounts Payable Check 34,303.32 80622 8/27/2001 DONNA PICK Accounts Payable Check 250.00 80623 8/27/2001 MARY RUSH Accounts Payable Check 60.00 80624 8/27/2001 ANGELA SCHMIDT Accounts Payable Check 200.00 80625 8/27/2001 TOM SILVA Accounts Payable Check 289.00 80626 8/27/2001 CHARLES L. SMITH Accounts Payable Check 68.00 80627 8/27/2001 DELIA TURNER Accounts Payable Check 60.00 80628 8/27/2001 TOM VELASQUEZ Accounts Payable Check 170.00 80629 8/27/2001 TINA VILLALON Accounts Payable Check 187.00 105 8/30/2001 U.S.BANK Accounts Payable Check '78,840.00 80630 8/30/2001 AT&T Accounts Payable Check 26.46 80631 8/30/2001 ATASCADERO BATTERY EXCHANGE Accounts Payable Check 278.20 80632 8/30/2001 ATASCADERO COMMUNITY Accounts Payable Check 114.00 80633 8/30/2001 ATASCADERO FORD Accounts Payable Cheek 1,089 4 80634 8/30/2001 ATASCADERO MUTUAL WATER CO. Accounts Payable Check 029 City of Ataseadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Aftumb Date Vendor Description Amount 80635 8/30/2001 ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST Accounts Payable Check 75.00 80636 8/30/2001 AVAYA INC. Accounts Payable Check 22.36 80637 8/30/2001 TIFFANY AYLES Accounts Payable Check 420.00 80638 8/30/2001 BAY LAUREL GARDEN CENTER Accounts Payable Check 9.98 80639 8/30/2001 BEE INTERNATIONAL Accounts Payable Check 143.34 80640 8/30/2001 CINDY K.BENSON Accounts Payable Check 610.40 80641 8/30/2001 BEST WESTERN BIG AMERICA HOTEL Accounts Payable Check 885.00 80642 8/30/2001 JOHN BLAIR Accounts Payable Check 10.00 80643 8/30/2001 BOB KEULEN CONSTRUCTION Accounts Payable Check 4,082.50 80644 8/30/2001 BRENDLER JANITORIAL SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 1,000.00 80645 8/30/2001 JACK BRIDWELL Accounts Payable Check 8,018.00 80646 8/30/2001 CAL-COAST REFRIGERATION,INC Accounts Payable Check 92.00 80647 8/30/2001 CALIFORNIA INTERNET CONNECTION Accounts Payable Check 39.90 80648 8/30/2001 CALIFORNIA PARKS&RECREATION Accounts Payable Check 260.00 80649 8/30/2001 CDW GOVERNMENT,INC. Accounts Payable Check 240.04 80650 8/30/2001 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL CED Accounts Payable Check 254.95 80651 8/30/2001 CENTRAL COAST STRIPING Accounts Payable Check 2255.00 . 80652 8/30/2001 CHEM CLEAN Accounts.Payable Check 70.51 80653 8/30/2001 BRADY CHERRY Accounts Payable Check 300.00 80654 8/30/2001 CHEVRON Accounts Payable Check 2,923.68 80655 8/30/2001 JOSEPH CHOUINARD P.E. Accounts Payable Check 1,737.70 80656 8/30/2001 COAST ELECTRONICS Accounts Payable Check 936.25 80657 8/30/2001 COASTAL IMAGING SUPPLIES Accounts Payable Check 167.99 80658 8/30/2001 COMPUTER NERDS Accounts Payable Check 5,338.40 80659 8/30/2001 COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT Accounts Payable Check 337.23 80660 8/30/2001 CREDIT BUREAU Accounts Payable Check 48.00 80661 8/30/2001 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER Accounts Payable Check 127.00 80662 8/30/2001 CUESTA EQUIPMENT Accounts Payable Check 120.29 80663 8/30/2001 CUSTOM SEWING&ALTERATIONS Accounts Payable Check 9.00 80664 8/30/2001 DARRYL'S LOCK AND SAFE Accounts Payable Check 152.36 80665 8/30/2001 DECOU LUMBER COMPANY Accounts Payable Check 309.95 80666 8/30/2001 DIAMOND MANUFACTURING,INC. Accounts Payable Check 945.50 80667 8/30/2001 ROBERT ECKROTE Accounts Payable Check 51.50 80668 8/30/2001 PEGGY EDWARDS Accounts Payable Check 8.38 • 80669 8/30/2001 EL CAMINO CAR WASH LLC Accounts Payable Check 61.00 80670 8/30/2001 ESCUELA DEL RIO Accounts Payable Check 67.60 030 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Number Date Vendor Description AmounAft 80671 8/30/2001 FARM SUPPLY COMPANY Accounts Payable Check 195. 80672 8/30/2001 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 340.32 80673 8/30/2001 FERRELL'S AUTO REPAIR Accounts Payable Check 295.07 80674 8/30/2001 FGL ENVIRONMENTAL Accounts Payable Check 260.10 80675 8/30/2001 FIRE OUT UNIFORM COMPANY Accounts Payable Check 604.03 80676 8/30/2001 FOOD FOR LESS Accounts Payable Check 91.33 80677 8/30/2001 FOX&SOHAGI,LLP Accounts Payable Check 738.59 80678 8/30/2001 FRAZEE PAINTS Accounts Payable Check 17.07 80679 8/30/2001 GALL'S INC. Accounts Payable Check 78.02 80680 8/30/2001 KAREN GARMAN Accounts Payable Check 399.00 80681 8/30/2001 PETER GAW Accounts Payable Check 35.00 80682 8/30/2001 GEM AUTO PARTS Accounts Payable Check 605.08 80683 8/30/2001 H.D.PETERSON Accounts Payable Check 12.84 80684 8/30/2001 ROY HANLEY Accounts Payable Check 19.00 80685 8/30/2001 HART IMPRESSIONS PRINT© Accounts Payable Check 11.13 80686 8/30/2001 HAWTHORNE SUITES HOTEL Accounts Payable Check 297.00 80687 8/30/2001 HOBSON'S POLYGRAPH SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 300 80688 8/30/2001 HOME DEPOT Accounts Payable Check 62 80689 8/30/2001 INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION Accounts Payable Check 308.00 80690 8/30/2001 INGLIS PET HOTEL Accounts Payable Check 188.21 80691 8/30/2001 INSTALLATIONS BY JIM Accounts Payable Check 285.09 80692 8/30/2001 J.CHRISTOPHER TOEWS Accounts Payable Check 45.00 80693 8/30/2001 JESPERSEN'S TIRE SERVICE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 269.24 80694 8/30/2001 JIFFY LUBE#1932 PCJL,INC. Accounts Payable Check 28.01 80695 8/30/2001 JOBS AVAILABLE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 119.60 80696 8/30/2001 STEVEN KAHN Accounts Payable Check 300.00 80697 8/30/2001 KEN'S MOBIL SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 1,355.70 80698 8/30/2001 KENT H.LANDSBERG CO. Accounts Payable Check 132.15 80699 8/30/2001 L.N.CURTIS&SONS Accounts Payable Check 3,013.12 80700 8/30/2001 LIFE ASSIST,INC. Accounts Payable Check 280.98 80701 8/30/2001 TERI LIPPER Accounts Payable Check 2,209.90 80702 8/30/2001 LOOKOUT SERVICES Accounts Payable Check 498.57 80703 8/30/2001 LYNDON'S AUTOMOTIVE Accounts Payable Check 486.65 80704 8/30/2001 MAINLINE Accounts Payable Check 300.00 80705 8/30/2001 MARIN CONSULTING ASSC Accounts Payable Check 241D 031 City of Atascadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check umber Date Vendor Description Amount 80706 8/30/2001 JIM MARTIN Accounts Payable Check 120.00 80707 8/30/2001 WADE MCKINNEY Accounts Payable Check 559.03 80708 8/30/2001 TAMARA MILLER Accounts Payable Check 1,000.00 80709 8/30/2001 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 87.05 80710 8/30/2001 MONROE CLASSIC,INC. Accounts Payable Check 494.62 80711 8/30/2001 MUSIC FACTORY Accounts Payable Check 824.06 80712 8/30/2001 YOLANDA NEAL Accounts Payable Check 477.50 80713 8/30/2001 NORTH COAST ENGINEERING INC. Accounts Payable Check 6,776.50 80714 8/30/2001 TERRY OTARRELL Accounts Payable Check 168.00 80715 8/30/2001 OUTLET TOOL SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 210.09 80716 8/30/2001 PACIFIC BELL Accounts Payable Check 474.12 80717 8/30/2001 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC Accounts Payable Check 829.22 80718 8/30/2001 PACIFIC HOME DO IT CENTER Accounts Payable Check 132.41 80719 8/30/2001 LORI PARCELLS Accounts Payable Check 300.00 80720 8/30/2001 PASO ROBLES SUPERIOR COURT Accounts Payable Check 225.00 80721 8/30/2001 PAST Accounts Payable Check 3,971.10 80722 8/30/2001 PERRY'S PARCEL SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 56.50 • 80723 8/30/2001 PLF,INC. Accounts Payable Check 288,86 80724 8/30/2001 PRIMEDIA WORKPLACE LEARNING Accounts Payable Check 567.07 80725 8/30/2001 PRO MOTION Accounts Payable Check 1,374.04 80726 8/30/2001 PROCARE JANITORIAL SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 95.02 80727 8/30/2001 PROMO EXPRESS Accounts Payable Check 499.81 80728 8/30/2001 RADIO SHACK Accounts Payable Check 534.96 80729 8/30/2001 RAINBOW MEALWORMS,INC. Accounts Payable Check 34.47 80730 8/30/2001 RECALL SECURE DESTRUCTION SERV Accounts Payable Check 48.30 80731 8/30/2001 RICK BUTLER BUSINESS MACHINES Accounts Payable Check 96.00 80732 8/30/2001 RACHELLE RICKARD Accounts Payable Check 300.00 80733 8/30/2001 JOHN RODGERS Accounts Payable Check 105.00 80734 8/30/2001 RRM DESIGN GROUP Accounts Payable Check 442.60 80735 8/30/2001 RXLASER Accounts Payable Check 333.90 80736 8/30/2001 SAFETY-KLEEN INC. Accounts Payable Check 178.70 80737 8/30/2001 SAN LUIS PERSONNEL INC. Accounts Payable Check 594.00 80738 8/30/2001 SANTA MARIA TIRE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 836.31 80739 8/30/2001 GRACE PUCCI,SECRETARIAL SERVICES BY GRACE Accounts Payable Check 120.00 80740 8/30/2001 JOHN SIEMENS Accounts Payable Check 253.30 80741 8/30/2001 SAFETY EQUIPMENT SOLON FIRE CONTROL FIRE& Accounts Payable Check 389.06 032 City of Ataseadero Disbursement Listing For the Month of August 2001 Check Check Number Date Vendor Description Amo 80742 8/30/2001 SOUZA CONSTRUCTION INC. Accounts Payable Check 73 385. 1 80743 8/30/2001 STEWART'S WHEEL SHOP Accounts Payable Check 305.00 80744 8/30/2001 SUPERIOR QUALITY COPIERS,INC. Accounts Payable Check 752.11 80745 8/30/2001 SYLVESTER'S SECURITY ALARMS Accounts Payable Check 537.50 80746 8/30/2001 TEMPLETON FEED&GRAIN Accounts Payable Check 254.92 80747 8/30/2001 TOM FLYNN&SONS Accounts Payable Check 900.00 80748 8/30/2001 TOMARK SPORTS,INC. Accounts Payable Check 330.55 80749 8/30/2001 TWIN CITIES COMMUNITY HOSPITAL Accounts Payable Check 16.65 80750 8/30/2001 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT Accounts Payable Check 313.08 80751 8/30/2001 UNISOURCE MAINT SUPPLY SYSTEMS Accounts Payable Check 174.61 80752 8/30/2001 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Accounts Payable Check 500.00 80753 8/30/2001 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS Accounts Payable Check 780.05 80754 8/30/2001 TODD WALKER Accounts Payable Check 24.50 80755 8/30/2001 WAYCO-NORTH COUNTY FIRE PROT Accounts Payable Check 51.27 80756 8/30/2001 WESTERN FARM SERVICE,INC. Accounts Payable Check 99.44 80757 8/30/2001 WESTERN JANITOR SUPPLY Accounts Payable Check 502.73 80758 8/30/2001 WINE COUNTRY BALANCE Accounts Payable Check 9 80759 8/30/2001 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES,INC. Accounts Payable Check 80760 8/31/2001 ATASCADERO FED.CREDIT UNION Payroll Vendor Payment 3,880.00 80761 8/31/2001 COUNTY-CITY EMPLOYEES CU Payroll Vendor Payment 715.00 80762 8/31/2001 EMPLOYMENT DEV DEPARTMENT Payroll Vendor Payment 6,996.04 80763 8/31/2001 EMPLOYMENT DEV.DEPARTMENT Payroll Vendor Payment 591.11 80764 8/31/2001 FAMILY SUPPORT DIVISION Payroll Vendor Payment 261.69 80765 8/31/2001 HARTFORD LIFE INSURANCE Payroll Vendor Payment 5,100.62 80766 8/31/2001 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Payroll Vendor Payment 500.00 80767 8/31/2001 PERS LONG TERM CARE PROGRAM Payroll Vendor Payment 59.07 80768 8/31/2001 PUBLIC EMPL RETIREMENT SYSTEM Payroll Vendor Payment 16,621.22 80769 8/31/2001 SEIU LOCAL 620 AFL-CIO Payroll Vendor Payment 407.13 80770 8/31/2001 FAMILY SUPPORT DIVISION Payroll Vendor Payment 444.00 80771 8/31/2001 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 1,584.68 80772 8/31/2001 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK Payroll Vendor Payment 432.00 $ 1,349,700.49 0 033 ITEM NUMBER: A-4 DATE: 09/25/2001 T as @101 iaia � 197e Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Administrative Services Purchasing Policy Adoption of Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: City Council: 1. Introduce for second reading by title only, and adopt Ordinance No. 386, amending section 2-3.01 of the Atascadero Municipal Code and deleting Sections 2-3.02 through 2- 3.11, and Section 2-3A.01 through 2-3A.09, inclusive of the Atascadero Municipal Code. • DISCUSSION: On September 11, 2001, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider amending the purchasing ordinance. The proposed changes to the ordinance will allow the Council to adopt the purchasing policy by resolution. There were no changes made by the City Council to the Ordinance during its first reading and it is ready for final adoption as attached. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed policy has no direct fiscal impact, however it is expected to generate a savings of staff time. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance#386 034 ORDINANCE NO. 386 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION 2-3.01 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE AND DELETING SECTIONS 2-3.02 THROUGH 2-3.11, AND SECTION 2-3A.01 THROUGH 2-3A.09, INCLUSIVE OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 AMENDMENT TO ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE Section 2-3.01 of the Atascadero Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2-3.01 Purchasing system adopted. A purchasing system is adopted and ordered to establish efficient procedures for the purchase of supplies and equipment, to secure supplies and equipment at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality needed, to exercise positive financial control over purchases and to define authority for the purchasing function. The purchasing system shall be adopted by • resolution of the City Council. SECTION 2 DELETIONS Section 2A. The following sections of the Atascadero Municipal Code are hereby repealed and deleted in their entirety effective upon the adoption of a purchasing resolution: Section 2-3.02 through Section 2-3.11, and Section 2-3A.01 through 2-3A.09, inclusive. SECTION 3 SEVERABILITY The City Council of the City of Atascadero hereby declares that should any section, paragraph, sentence or work of this ordinance or the Code, hereby adopted, be declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of the Council that it would have passed all other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination of any such portion as may be declared. THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE is approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Atascadero this 25th day of September, 2001. 035 ITEM NUMBER: A-5. DATE: 09/25/2001 • �e.a m ie a Atascadero City Council Staff Report — Police Department Public Safety Communication Center Dispatch Console RECOMMENDATIONS: Council: 1. Designate 2001 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) monies for use in Public Safety Technology improvements; and 2. Authorize purchase of the Orbacom Radio system and work stations from Durham Communications. DISCUSSION: Background: Staff has identified the need for replacement of the dispatch console and related radio equipment in the Public Safety Communications Center. The current dispatch console and radio controls were used equipment when purchased over 20 years ago. The mechanical console controls are based on obsolete technology, require considerable maintenance to keep in service and are no longer supported by the manufacturer. The equipment must be replaced to insure reliability of public safety dispatch operations. Support Services Technicians who dispatch Police, Fire, and Public Works calls for service use the dispatch console 24 hours per day each day of the year. The console houses the radio controls, phones, paging equipment, door and intercom controls, as well as computer monitors and controls for E911, computer aided dispatching and the local area network. The console constitutes a critical link in communication with local and outside public safety departments. Police Department representatives conducted research into two leading providers of dispatch equipment. Current and future communications needs, price, reliability and recommendations by other communications centers were considered when selecting the vendor. A technology committee reviewed the proposals and selected the Orbacom brand console system offered by Durham Communications. Orbacom is a state of the art fully modular dispatch center designed • with no single point of failure. The workstations meet ergonomic design requirements of extended use by dispatch personnel. One of the factors influencing the selection was the provision for on-going maintenance. The County of San Luis Obispo recently installed the Orbacom system in their communications center and trained their technicians to maintain it. The 037 ITEM NUMBER: A-5 DATE: 09/25/2001 same technicians service the current dispatch console and related radios under a service level • agreement. They will continue to service the Orbacom system, which will eliminate costly annual maintenance agreements. The Orbacom radio system and related workstations are available through California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) purchasing. In accordance with established the City purchasing policy, purchase of equipment through CMAS pricing does not require competitive bidding. The attached Durham Communications Statement of Work includes integration and installation of all electronic components and workstations. The City of Atascadero has accumulated Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) grant monies since 1998. These funds have been used to fund public safety technology improvement projects. The City was awarded $100,000 in SLESF monies for 2001. The Government Code requires cities to appropriate use of the funds by public hearing in the month of September. The 2001 SLESF funds will be used partially for the console replacement. Analysis: The City of Atascadero will benefit from the purchase of Orbacom equipment through CMAS pricing and installation of equipment that will continue to be maintained by local technicians. The Orbacom equipment is $40,000 less expensive than the equipment offered,by the other vendor. Parts from the old dispatch console will be removed and used for non-safety dispatching by Dial-a-Ride. Conclusion: Replacement of the dispatch console represents an important component of an established comprehensive technology plan. The plan focuses on improving the reliability and function of the entire Public Safety Communications system including using an electronic medium to streamline the process by which field reports are generated and transmitted to the District Attorney. Projects already in process include expansion of the radio repeater system, dispatch voice logging and implementation of a Computer Aided Dispatch and Records Management System. FISCAL IMPACT: $159,002.97 from grant monies accumulated in the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund designated for Public Safety Technology improvements. ALTERNATIVE: Defer replacement at this time, which is not recommended due to the age and reliability of the equipment. ATTACHMENTS: • Durham Communications Statement of Work 038 09/10/01 MON 20:21 FAX 4809817146 DCI 121002 . ... DURHAM COMMUNICATIONS INC. "Over 50 Years of Quality Service" September 10, 2001 John G. Couch Police Lieutenant Atascadero Police Department 5505 EI Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93423 Dear Lt. Couch: DISPATCH CENTER UPGRADE Thank you for the opportunity to propose new equipment to upgrade the Atascadero Police Department's Dispatch Center. My company, Durham Communications Inc. has been providing PSAP communications for over 55 years. We have built a strong customer base by providing the highest in quality products with excellent engineering design and superior customer service. I am proposing the Orbacom TDM-150 dispatch console and Orbacom System 9 Dispatch Furniture. The console is engineered with no single point of failure and found • in over 800 dispatch centers across the United States. Orbacom is still supporting its original console made back in 1975. The Police Department can expect many years of trouble free service. The Police Department will receive delivery approximately 90 days from receipt of order. The removal of the old console and installation of the new console with take approximately 5 to 7 working days. The actual span of time from start to finish may vary depending on other Vendors and any refurbishing the Police Department may want to do. Our terms for payment are 70% upon delivery, 20% upon completion of install and 10% after test period and customer acceptance. I look forward to working with you to provide the Atascadero Police Department the best possible Dispatch Center available. Since ly, er umpin Major Account Manager • PHONE (480) 981-8875/FAX (460) 981-7146 www.dcicomm.com 4611 East Virginia Street• Mesa, Arizona U.S.A. 65215 039 • Atascadero Police Department Implementation Plan Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................ 2 2.0 Objective........:.............................................................2 3.0 Scope ......................................................................... 2 4.0 Equipment Installation descriptions.......................................3 5.0 Central Processor Package Installation ............................ 4 • 6.0 Spectracom Netclock Installation ..... . 4 7.0 Installation of Logging Recorder.... ...............................4 8.0 Temporary Dispatch Position Installation ......... 4 9.0 Remodel of Existing Dispatch Center.................................... 5 10.0 Installation of Dispatch Furniture ..................................... 5 11.0 Permanent Dispatch Center Installation ........................... 5 12.0 Transition to Permanent Dispatch Center ............................ 5 13.0 Acceptance Testing......................................................... 6 14.0 Acceptance Period............................................................ 6 15.0 Final Acceptance and Warranty Period ............................ 6 • Created by: Dave Collett Field Engineer, Durham Communications Inc. 10 September, 2001 Q� � • 1.0 Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide a written plan for implementation of the Orbacom TDM-150 console at Atascadero Police Department. 2.0 Objective The objective of this document is to provide Atascadero Police Department personnel with information required for a smooth transition to a state of the art Dispatch Center. 2.1 Many different vendors as well as city personnel will be required to coordinate efforts to complete the transition.Portions of this document that require - personnel other than DCI to be completed will be in Italics and underlined. 2.2 These should be considered to be general guidelines rather than hard and fast rules. Changes in delivery schedules and other external factors could cause some items to be completed out of order. 2.3 Durham Communications Inc. specializes in Public Safety communications and is aware of the needs of a 24-7 dispatch operation. All efforts will be made to • eliminate disruption of service and minimize dispatcher discomfort during this transition. 3.0 Scope This document will cover the following system areas: • Orbacom TDM-150 console • Orbacom Dispatch Furniture • Spectracom Netclock • Ups Power Supplies • Integration of Radios • Integration of Intercoms • Integration of Electric Door Switches • Logging Recorder Installation • Radio Installation Major milestones include: • Contract negotiations and signing • Order equipment • 2 04 • • Delivery Schedule • Installation of Orbacom TDM-150 console Central Processor Package (CPP) • Installation of temporary Dispatch Center • Installation of Spectracom Netclock • Installation of logging recorder • Remodel ofpermanent Dispatch Center • Installation of Dispatch Furniture • Installation of permanent Dispatch Center • Acceptance testing • Thirty day acceptance period • Final acceptance 4.0 Equipment Description 4.1 The Orbacom TDM-150 console is a state of the artfully modular Dispatch Center with built in integration for two-way radio control, telephone headset interface, alarm control, door control, voter control and intercom control. Dispatcher interface is through a touchscreen with all controls and radio channels available on the screen. Transmit audio is automatically routed from the headset to the radio, telephone or intercom depending on which is active. Receive audio is routed to selected or unselected speakers. When a headset is used selected audio is routed to the earpiece. Transmit; selected and unselected audio as well as RS-485 • data is connected to a Position Interface Card (PIC) in the CPP through a 6 pair phone style cable for each position. A star grounding system is used with all grounds terminating near the CPP. 4.2 Orbacom Systems 9 Dispatch Furniture is top quality office furniture with powered lift countertops, ergonomic design and advanced cable management. Modular components are combined to form aesthetically pleasing and space saving workspaces. Data, audio and power cables are routed through the interior of the furniture easily accessed through snap-on panels. 4.3 Spectracom's Netclock will be installed in the radio room with the Orbacom TDM-150 console and will be interfaced to the console, 911 phones, logging recorder and CAD systems (this will require participation from the CAD system and 911 switch vendor). 4.4 Integration of Radios will be through remote control in the radio room of the police department. Each control station will be connected to a separate Line Interface Card (LIC) inside the CPP 4.6 Integration of alarms is through an AUX-A card with software for alarms. Normal interface is through a line terminator on the CPP to a phone style 25 pair 66- block. Alarms are controlled through popup modules on the screen. 3 042 4.7 Integration of intercoms requires two cards in the CPP. A Multiple Station Intercom (MSI) for handling audio and an AUX card for steering the audio to the • proper location. Interface will be in the radio room on a 66-block. 4.8 The integration of the door switches uses an AUX card with 16 four-pole double- throw relays for connection to switch contacts. Two 8-button modules on the screen control door switches. 4.9 A Dynamic Instruments DI936Pro2 logging recorder will be installed in the dispatch center near the place where the existing logging recorder stands or near the CPP for logging radio and telephone audio. 5.0 Central Processor Package Installation 5.1 Installation of the CPP will be in the radio equipment room. 5.2 The CPP is the central nervous system for the console package. 5.3 Connections to existing equipment will be through punch blocks in the equipment room. 5.4 Cables will be routed from the radio room to the temporary Dispatch Center for use during remodeling and installation of the new equipment. • 5.5 A ground bar will be installed and all equipment grounds terminated at that point. 5.6 Existing equipment will be connected in parallel where possible. • Radio channels will be fully operational during all phases of installation. • Temporary disconnection of intercoms, alarms and door switches may be necessary. • Any possible disruption of service will be preceded by communications with PD personnel to minimize problems. • 4 043 • 6.0 Spectracom Netclock Installation • The Spectracom Netclock receives Global Positioning Satellite time signals through an antenna mounted on the roof of the PD. • The Spectracom Netclock will interface to the Orbacom TDM-150 console through RS-232 data. • Other equipment will be interfaced to the Netclock through RS-232 or Irig-B signaling as required. • A clock will be mounted on the wall of the Dispatch Center synchronized with the Netclock. 7.0 Logging Recorder Installation • Installation will be completed several weeks before the dispatch furniture and electronics. • Installation will be in parallel with existing recorder to ensure continuity of recording. • The Logging recorder will be connected to the Police Departments LAN to be accessible from remote PC's. • The Logging recorder will be connected to the Orbacom Console • 8.0 Temporary Dispatch Center Installation 8.1 Consists of installing one Orbacom TDM-150 console positions in a location to be designated by PD personnel. 8.2 This position will be fully functional with all connections to existing equipment completed. 8.3 UPS power supplies will be located at each position with all critical equipment connected for emergency power. 8.4 Coordination with CAD, 911 switch and the City's computer personnel will be required for installation of telephone and CAD computers at the temporary dispatch location. • Training dispatchers to use the new equipment will be done after the completed installation of the temporary Dispatch Center. • Training can be scheduled to coincide with shift changes to minimize disruption to dispatcher routines. • After training, dispatch operations will commence on the temporary Dispatch Position. • 5 044 9.0 If the Police Department chooses any Remodeling to the existing Dispatch Center it • will need to take place at this time, such as carpeting or painting. This may increase the time schedule of the install and therefore may increase the cost of the installation. 9_1 The first of the old dispatch consoles will be taken down. This will involve DCI personnel and possible SLO County personnel. 9_2 The second position will be taken down once it is determined that the first new position is working properly. 10.0 Installation of the dispatch furniture will be completed after Dispatch Center remodeling has been completed. Installation to be performed by DCI personnel. 11.0 Installation of the permanent Dispatch Center 11.1 Phase I • Install one dispatch position _ 11.2 Phase II will be to move one position at a time from the temporary location to the permanent location. • By installing the position in the permanent center first then moving the second dispatch console functions no loss in service should occur. • 11.3Coordination with C.A.D., 911 phone switch and the Ca 's computer personnel will be required for a smooth transition to the new center. 12.0 The transition to the permanent Dispatch Center will be the most difficult part. The transition will be performed in the following order: 12.1 Dispatchers will be using one Orbacom TDM-150 console position in the temporary dispatch center. 12.2 One Orbacom TDM-150 console position will be installed in the permanent Dispatch Center. 12.3 Telephone and CAD will be installed in the permanent Dispatch Center. 12.4 The Temporary Dispatch will now be moved into the permanent position. 12.5 DCI, PD vendors and city personnel will combine efforts to move the free position from the temporary Dispatch Center to the permanent Dispatch Center. 12.6 The second dispatcher will be moved into the permanent Dispatch Center. • 6 045 • 13.OAcceptance testing will commence after the completion of the move to the new center. • Durham Communications Inc. and designated city personnel will complete testing jointly. • Procedures to be followed are outlined in a separate document. 14.OFollowing completion of acceptance testing a 30-day acceptance period will start. • Emergency call-out numbers will be given to designated city personnel. • During this period city personnel will note all problems in a log. • Durham Communications Inc. will repair any problems resulting in an outage (loss of Orbacom CPP) and a new 30-day period will start. - • Since each Dispatch Center has unique configuration and audio level preferences, efforts will be made to accommodate them during this time period. • Minor problems requiring configuration changes or level settings will not be cause to restart the 30-day period. • 15.0 Final acceptance will be granted by the city and the warranty period will commence at the end of the 30-day period. During this the 30 day period, Durham Communications Inc. is responsible for the cost and completion of repairs to the equipment. Warranties are varied for different products and copies of each Manufacture's Warranty Statement will be included under separate cover. • 7 046 • et 0 0 et v co 0 0 o a) 0 0 a) 0 0 0o cc D0 v o 0 0 't o o 't T- 00 O O r N ti O ti M O O O O N r Itt M 1- O O O N O O M Z I (0 f` ti ti It Z 'fit "1 a) 10 Ln W) LO LO � N N 00 M o P- r co t7 N 2 U) T- to Z Z W w O r r 000_ 0 000 0 0 0 0 T- 00 O O ti O O 1 ti q L M LO Ln f� r w Ln Ict N w - U U CL a 0 0 rn F= w w • � U F- Q O CL w LL � U J w w J U J J w F d z LLI a Y D Q Z o IL LLI J a o a U) 9 to to z Z U J U O O U QN ULL 0 0z F- O Z zOQ w a � a F- O w w x a O O H wa p a IL v v Z w O Q a rn m w W w F- O O O O CO N (L) J Z O Ue o 0 U LL z Z Q LL_ Z Ln LO T- F- y U F a 0 W Q O V T- r to Ln U Q J a Z W LLI C7 J N M Z O j a v tai v z tan c=n tan ? M z U =20 aN • ofoma =) Dr2 000 0V ITEM NUMBER: A-6 DATE: 09/25/2001 MIN MIN, 1-97. A rv°�,oi Atascadero City Council Staff Report — City Manager's Office City Manager Employment Agreement RECOMMENDATION: City Council approve Employment Agreement with the City Manager and authorize the Mayor,to sign. DISCUSSION: • The City Council initially approved an Employment Agreement in 1997 with the City Manager. The agreement has been unchanged since that time. The attached Agreement modifies the provisions of the initial document. Many of the changes are cleanup language recognizing that it is no longer an initial contract and clarifying other provisions. The performance incentive or bonus provided in the original agreement has been eliminated. The severance provision has been increased to twelve months. This provision is only engaged where there is a termination without cause. If the City Manager is terminated for cause there is no severance. The vehicle allowance is increased and the annual physical has been replaced with a fitness program. The City Manager salary is part of the Management Resolution adopted at the last City Council meeting. This agreement will have no impact on salary. FISCAL IMPACT: Contract enhancements provide an additional cost of $1,200.00 annually, the elimination of the incentive program provides a potential savings of $5,000.00 resulting in an overall savings of $3,800.00. • ATTACHMENT: Employment Agreement 048 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT • THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into September 25, 2001, by and between the City of Atascadero (hereinafter called "City") and Wade G. McKinney (hereinafter called "Employee") amending the employment agreement dated July 16, 1997. RECITALS WHEREAS, the City desires to employ the services of Wade G. McKinney, as City Manager of the City of Atascadero, (hereinafter referred to as "City Manager"); and WHEREAS, the City desires to provide certain benefits, establish certain conditions of employment, and to set working conditions of said Employee; and WHEREAS, the City desires to (1) retain the services of Employee and to provide inducement for him to remain in such employment, and (2) to make possible full work productivity by assuring Employee's morale and peace of mind with respect to future security; and provide an equitable means of terminating his services; and WHEREAS,Employee desires to be employed as City Manager. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: SECTION 1. DUTIES The City hereby agrees to employ Wade G. McKinney as Ciy Manager to perform the functions and duties as currently in effect or as hereafter may be established by ordinance, resolution or action of the City Council. The City Manager's schedule of work each day and week shall vary in accordance with the work required to be performed. It is recognized that the City Manager must devote a great deal of his time outside normal office hours to the business of the City and to that • 049 end, will be allowed to take time off during normal office hours. The City Manager is a full-time • employee. He shall not spend m p ore than ten (10) hours per month in non-City connected business for which compensation is paid without the express prior consent of the City Council. SECTION 2. COMPENSATION 1. The City agrees to compensate Employee for his services as City Manager by payment of salary in a manner consistent with other City employees. The City Council may, from time-to-time, by resolution, adjust Employee's salary. SECTION 3. TERMINATION 1. This Agreement is made for an indefinite term, and may be terminated by a majority vote of the City Council at any time, for any reason whatsoever, or for no reason at all. City Manager may also terminate this Agreement at any time with ninety (90) days written • notice. In the event that City Council terminates this Agreement without the consent of City Manager, City Manager shall be given severance pay in an amount equal to twelve (12) months salary at the then current rate from the effective date of termination. City shall also pay for a continuation of City Manager's health insurance plan and life insurance policy for twelve months from the effective date of termination. In the event the City Manager is terminated because of misconduct materially related to his performance of official duties, as described in Atascadero Municipal Code sections 2- 4.20 through 2-4.25, inclusive, the City shall have no obligation under this Agreement to provide any severance payment. During a period of ninety (90) days immediately following the date of installation of any person elected to the Council at a regular or special City Election, or of any person newly appointed to the Council, the Council shall • take no action, whether immediate or prospective, to remove, suspend, request the 050 resignation of, or to reduce the salary or benefits of the City Manager. • SECTION 4. COUNCIL COMMITMENTS 1. City Council commits to participate in a duly noticed team building /strategic planning workshop annually based upon the City's ability to fund. 2. City Council agrees, in concept, to an annual department head strategic planning workshop. The details and costs of such a workshop will be handled in each annual budget. 3. City Council commits to an appropriate employee incentive program to be administered by City Manager. Annually funds shall be included in the budget to be used as employee incentives at the direction of the City Manager. SECTION 5. BENEFITS 1. In addition to the compensation set forth in Section 2 of this Agreement, Employee shall • be entitled to receive the same benefits as are accorded all other City management employees except as herein provided. Employee shall be entitled to the following benefits: a. Any across the board salary increases extended to City employees are automatically provided to the City Manager. b. City Council shall engage in a review of the City Manager's performance annually. City Council and Employee shall define such goals and performance objectives which they determine necessary for the proper operation of the City in the attainment of the City Council's policy objectives, and the City Council and Employee shall further establish a relative priority among those various goals and objectives reduced to writing. These goals and objectives shall be obtainable . 051 • generally within the time limits as specified in the operating and capital budgets and appropriations provided. C. City will pay for the annual cost of membership in a local physical training facility. d. In addition to benefits described herein, Employee shall be entitled to the same benefits granted to management employees. As used herein, benefits include, but are not limited to, vacation, sick leave, administrative leave [administrative leave to be taken at employee's sole discretion], holiday pay, retirement (PERS) benefits and payments, health insurance, dental insurance, vision insurance, and life insurance. Accrual shall be at rates afforded other employees. The death benefit of term life insurance provided shall be $189,000. Employee's medical payback • is frozen consistent with the City's management group. f. City agrees to provide long term disability insurance comparable to employee's present policy. g. City will budget for and pay the travel and subsistence expenses of the Employee for official travel, meetings, professional development of the Employee and necessary official and other functions for the City, including, but not limited to, national, regional, state, and local conferences, governmental groups, and committees. City will budget and pay for necessary professional dues and subscriptions to organizations. h. Employee shall receive five hundred dollars ($500.00) each month as an automobile allowance. The allowance is in exchange for (1) Employee making available for his own use a personal automobile, and (2) for his use of his personal 052 automobile for City related business and/or functions during, before and after • normal work hours. Employee is not precluded from using City vehicles for City business during before, and after the normal work day. A City vehicle will not be provided to Employee for his exclusive use and no City vehicle shall be utilized by Employee for commuting purposes. Employee will be entitled to mileage reimbursement at standard rates for trips over Two Hundred (200) miles. i. City understands that Employee is moving from an area with much lower comparable housing costs than those in Atascadero. City also understands that Employee is taking a reduction in salary to come to Atascadero. In recognition of these facts, City will provide a loan secured by a first trust deed against employee's new home to be acquired in Atascadero in a principal amount not to exceed $200,000. The loan will be payable amortized over a thirty year period, • but be due and payable upon the sale of his new home, or within one year of his effective date of termination of employment, whichever first occurs. Interest on the loan will be 5.6% (maximum interest rate will be 6.6% and minimum interest rate will be 4.6%) which is the current yield from the Local Agency Investment Fund rate for the twelve month period immediately preceding the date of the loan. The interest rate will be adjusted annually, on the anniversary date of the loan, to reflect the average monthly Local Agency Investment Fund rate for the previous twelve months. SECTION 6. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. This Agreement shall constitute the entire Agreement between the parties. 2. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and • 053 executors of Employee. 3. This Agreement shall become effective upon approval by the City Council. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. CITY OF ATASCADERO BY: J. Michael Arrambide, Mayor Wade G. McKinney ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk • • 054 ITEM NUMBER: A-7 DATE: 09/25/2001 • iaia ® is9 \ y CAD��� Atascadero City Council Staff Report — Public Works Department Authorization to Execute Master Agreement Administering Agency - State Agreement For Funded Projects Program Supplements (Agreement No. 000421) RECOMMENDATION: - Council adopt the draft Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute Administering Agency— State Agreement No. 000421 Program Supplements. • DISCUSSION: At their August 10, 1999 meeting the City Council authorized, by Minute Order, the Mayor to execute Administering Agency-State Agreement for State Funded Projects No. 000421 and Program Supplements thereto. State regulations require that any Local Agency (such as the City of Atascadero) that accepts STIP funding for projects must administer the projects under a Master Agreement between the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the local agency. The Master Agreement sets down the requirements and conditions to be met before funds can be authorized and distributed. Each individual project is then authorized by a Program Supplement to the Master Agreement. In an effort to streamline the processing time of the Program Supplements, it is recommended that the City Manager be authorized to execute these documents. As a matter of efficiency, many other local agencies have already adopted this procedure. FISCAL IMPACT: The City relies upon both State and Federal sources for a substantial portion of the funding for • the construction and rehabilitation of City infrastructure. The current Master Agreement covers both the 1998 STIP Amendment projects and the 2000 STIP projects. There are still active projects in both funding cycles. 055 ITEM NUMBER: A-7 DATE: 09/25/2001 Invoicing for the reimbursement of these funds is not allowed until a signed Program Supplement • is in place. The benefit to the City of expediting these documents is that progress invoices may be submitted immediately — and reimbursement can be obtained early and continually as the project progresses. ALTERNATIVES: Continue having the Mayor sign Program Supplements for Master Agreement No. 000421. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Resolution Authorizing the Public Works Director to execute Master Agreement No. 000421 Program Supplements Attachment B: Copy of Administering Agency- State Master Agreement No. 000421 Attachment C: Copy of Minute Order, dated September 17, 1999, authorizing the Mayor to sign Administering Agency-State Master Agreement No. 000421 056 • DRAFT RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENDORSE THE MASTER AGREEMENT ENTITLED, "ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT FOR STATE FUNDED PROJECTS." WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has enacted legislation by which certain State funds are made available for use on lbcal transportation facility projects; and, WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has applied to the California Transportation Commission for State funding from the State Transportation Improvement Program for the local administration of certain transportation facility projects; and WHEREAS, as provided by State policy, said local transportation facility projects will not receive any federal funds; and, WHEREAS, before State funding will be made available for specific local transportation facility projects, the City of Atascadero and the State of California are required to enter into an agreement relative to prosecution of specific project and maintenance of the completed facility; and, WHEREAS, Caltrans has prepared a Master Agreement entitled, "Administering Agency — State Agreement for State Funded Projects" for execution by Caltrans and the City of Atascadero pursuant to State requirements; and WHEREAS, a Program Supplement to the Master Agreement is required to be approved for every specific project that is to receive State funds; and WHEREAS, Paragraph 4 of Article 1, "Project Administration," of the Master Agreement allows a local agency governing body to delegate the authority to manage the Program Supplements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City Manager of the City of Atascadero be, and hereby is, authorized to endorse the Master Agreement entitled, "Administering Agency — State Agreement for State Funded Projects"; and, 2. The City Manager of the City of Atascadero be, and hereby is, authorized to endorse Program Supplements to the "Administering Agency — State Agreement for State Funded Projects." 057 • On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: \ ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk J. Michael Arrambide, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: • Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 058 MASTER AGREEMENT ADMINISTERING AGENCY - STATE AGREEMENT • FOR STATE FUNDED PROJECTS District 05 Agreement No. 000421 City of Atascadero Adminstering Agency THIS AGREEMENT, made effective this C1 `"day of ��n� , 1999 is by and between the City of Atascadero, a city, county, or other public entity, hereinafter referred to-as 'ADMINISTERING AGENCY,' the State of California, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, herinafter referred to as 'STATE.' VIITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has enacted legislation by which certain State funds are mad_ e available for use on local transportation facilities and ADMINISTERING AGENCY has applied to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) and/or STATE for funding from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or other programs as defined in the Local Assistance Program Guidelines for-use on those local transportation facilities as local administered PROJECT(s), hereinafter referred to as • "PROJECT"; and WHEREAS, as provided by STATE policy, said PROJECT will not receive any federal funds; and WHEREAS, STATE is required to enter into an AGREEMENT with ADMINISTERING AGENCY to delineate those certain obligations placed upon ADMINISTERING AGENCY relative to said State funding and the prosecution of said PROJECT by ADMINISTERING AGENCY. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE I -PROJECT ADMINISTRATION 1. This AGREEMENT shall have no force or effect with respect to any programmed PROJECT unless and until a PROJECT-specific program supplement, adopting the terms of this AGREEMENT, hereinafter referred to as "PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTT," has been fully executed by the parties. 2. The Financial commitment of STATE funds will occur only following the execution of this AGREEMENT and the subsequest execution of each applicable PROJECT-specific PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT. • 3. ADMINISTERING AGENCY further agrees, as a condition to the release and payment of State funds encumbered to the PROJECT described in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, to comply with the terms of this AGREEMENT and all of the agreed-upon Special Co-veaants and Conditions attached to or made a part of the PROGRAMz7SUPPLEMENT, identifying and defining the nature of that specific PROJECT. 05.9 Page 1 of 8 4/21/99 4. The PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT shall designate the ADMINISTERING AGENCY • responsible for implementing the various phases of the PROJECT, the State funding program, and the matching funds to�be provided by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and/or STATE. Adoption and execution of the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and STATE, incorporating the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT into the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT as though fully set forth therein, shall be sufficient to bind the ADMINISTERING AGENCY to these terms and conditions w henerf ormin p the PROJECT. - A Unless otherwise expressly delegated in a resolution by the ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S governing body and concurred in by STATE. the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT shall be managed by the ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S governing body. y 5. PROJECT shall be acquired, designed, and constructed as required in the Local Assistance Program Guidelines, such other STATE procedures as are identified in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, and as is specified in this AGREEMENT. 6. Unless otherwise provided in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, the ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall advertise, award, and administer the PROJECT construction contract or contracts. 7. The estimated cost and scope of PROJECT will be as described in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT and State funding participation is limited to the amounts established by STATE. A contract for an amount in excess of said approved estimate may be awarded and expenditures may exceed said estimate provided ADMINISTERING AGENCY provides the necessary additional funding or a PROJECT cost increase in State funding is first requested by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and is approved by STATE in the form of an amended PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or a STATE approved encumbrance document adding or deleting PROJECT funds. v 8. Subsequent to the inclusion of the PROJECT in a plan or program approved by STATE and the ADMINISTERING AGENCY entering into this AGREEMENT and the PROJECT specific PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, the ADMINISTERING AGENCY may request and receive payment for eligible work as follows: (a) STATE will reimburse the STATE's share of eligible participating PROJECT costs monthly in arrears upon ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S submittal of signed acceptable monthly progress pay invoices (in duplicate) for expenditures actually made by ADMINISTERING AGENCY. (b) If PROJECT involves work on the STATE highway system, that PROJECT shall also be the subject of separate standard forms of STATE issued encroachment permits issued to ADMINISTERING AGENCY and any contractors and, where appropriate, an executed cooperative agreement between STATE and ADMINISTERING AGENCY to determine how PROJECT is to be acquired, designed, or constructed and to establish ownership and future maintenance obligations. (c) State funds will not participate in any portion of PROJECT work performed in . advance of either the effective date of the executed PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT for said PROJECT or the effective date of this AGREEMENT. ' OQO Page 2 of 8 4/21/99 9. The total of all ADMINISTERING AGENCY invoices (submitted monthly or quarterly • in arrears) for reimbursement of participating PROJECT costs, including all required ADMINISTERING AGENCY matching funds, must not exceed the actual total allowable PROJECT costs, including, but not limited to, ali completed preliminary engineering work; right of way acquisition, design acid construction included within the PROJECT description contained in the PROGRAM SUPPL-:vIENT. 10. Invoices shall be submitted on ADMINISTERING AGENCY letterhead and shall reference this AGREEMENT number, PROJECT number, and progress billing number for the PROJECT, and shall be f)--matted and costs reported in accordance with the current version of Chapter 5, "Accounting/-r.voices," of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual published by STATE. 11. STATE programr i�!d amounts may be increased to cover PROJECT cost increases only if such funds are available. !,.TATE concurs with that proposed increase, and STATE executes an amending PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or a STATE approved encumbrance document encumbering those funds. 12. 'When additional State funds are not available, the ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees that the payment of State funds will be limited to the amounts approved in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, and ag-ees that any increases in PROJECT costs must be defrayed with ADMINISTERING AGENCY funds. • 13. The legislature of the State of California and the Governor of the State of California. each within their respective jurisdictions, have prescribed certain employment practices with respect to contract and other work financed with State funds. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall ensure that work perfo:med under this AGREEMENT is done in conformance with the rules and regulations embodving such requirements where they are applicable. 14. ADMINISTER T,1G AGENCY and its subcontractors shall establish and maintain an accounting system coi if arming to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (G AAP) to support reimbursement payrr e:zt vouchers or invoices which segregate and accumulate costs of PROJECT work elera(:nts and produce monthly reports which clearly identify reimbursable costs, matching costs. znd other expenditures by ADMINISTERING AGENCY. _ 15. After complet:c,n of all work under this AGREEMENT, and after all PROJECT costs are known, ADMINTISTEi;ING AGENCY shall contract for a financial audit of PROJECT costs if those costs are in excess of$300,000. This Audit, to be accomplished at the ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S expense, may be done on an individual PROJECT basis, or PROJECT may be included in the ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S annual Single Audit. If an individual audit of PROJECT is done, the auditor must prepare a Final Audit Report. If ADMINISTERING AGENCY chooses the Single Audit option, an audit report is required for the State funding share. This report should be prepared in accordance with the guidelines set forth in OMB Circular A-133. Co--rnpliance testing performed for this audit should determine whether the • ADMINISTERING AGENCY has a system that is adequate to accumulate and segregate reasonable, allowable and allocable costs to assure that: 061 Page 3 of 8 4/21/99 (a) Reimbursement claims submitted to STATE for the PROJECT are supported by payment vouchers and canceled checks. • (b) Charges for the various categories of eligible PROJECT costs incurred by the ADMINISTERING AGENCY are fully supported and recorded in the ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S accounting records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. (c) The ADMINISTERING AGENCY complied with CFR 49 Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for State and Local Governments and OMB A-87, Cost Principles for State and Local Governments. Any instances of noncompliance or costs determined ineligible in accordance with these regulations but claimed for reimbursement should be identified and set forth in-the auditor's report. 16. ADMINISTERING AGENCY and'all subcontractors shall comply with the Uniform Administrative Requirements for State and Local Governments set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Part 18. In addition, the ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to comply with the cost principles and procedures set forth in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87. The ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees that a reference to either Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87 or the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Chapter 1, Part 31, whichever is applicable and the code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Part 18, will be included in any subcontracts entered into as a result of this AGREEMENT. 17. The "State Report of Expenditures" must be completed by ADMINISTERING AGENCY within one hundred eighty (180) days of PROJECT completion in the format • described for State funded projectsin Chapter 17, "Project Completion" of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual. The Final Invoice must be submitted with the "State Report of Expenditures". The Audit must be completed by the December 30th following the fiscal vear of PROJECT completion. Project completion is defined as when all workidentifiedin the approved PROJECT Application and PORGRAM SUPPLEMENT has been completed and final costs are known. The report documents (State Report of Expenditures and Final Audit Report) will be sent to the appropriate STATE office. Failure to comply with these reporting requirements may result in the withholding of future allocations for other projects. 18. STATE reserves the right to conduct technical and financial audits if it is determined to be necessary. After any financial audit, ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall promptly refund any excess State funds erroneously reimbursed to ADMINISTERING AGENCY. 19. Should ADMINISTERING AGENCY fail to refund all moneys due STATE as provided hereunder or should ADMINISTERING AGENCY breach this AGREEMENT by failing to complete PROJECT, then, within thirty (30) days of demand, or within such other period as may be agreed to in writing between the parties hereto, STATE, acting through the State Controller, the State Treasurer, the California Transportation Commission (CTC), or any other public agency, may withhold or demand a transfer of an amount equal to the PROJECT amount paid by STATE from future apportionments or any other funds due ADMINISTERING AGENCY from the Highway Users Tax Fund or any other funds and/or may withhold approval of future • ADMINISTERING AGENCY projects. , 062 Page 4 of 8 4/21/99 20. When PROJECT is not on the STATE highway system but includes work to be • performed by a railroad, the contract for such work shall be prepared and administered by ADMINISTERING AGENCY or by STATE, as the parties may hereafter agree. In either event, ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall enter into an AGREEMENT with the railroad providing for future maintenance of protective devices or other facilities installed or constructed under that contract. ARTICLE II - ENGINEERING 1. "Project Development Costs" includes all preliminary work up to contract award for construction and directly related to the PROJECT, including, but not limited to, environmental studies, preliminary surveys and reports, laboratory work, soil investigation, preparation of plans, specifications and estimates, advertising for bids, awarding contract, as well as Project Development Contract Administration. 2. "Construction Engineerina" eligible costs include actual inspection and supervision of construction work, construction staking, laboratory and field testing, preparation and processing of field reports, and records, estimates, final reports, and allowable expenses of employees/consultants engaged in such activities. I Unless the parties shall otherwise agree in writing, ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S • employees or its subcontractor engineering consultant shall be responsible for all PROJECT engineering work. When construction engineering is performed by STATE, charges by STATE invoiced to ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall include an assessment on direct labor costs in accordance with Section 8755.1 of the State Administrative Manual. The portion of such STATE charges not contractually absorbed by STATE shall be paid from PROJECT or other funds of ADMINISTERING AGENCY. 4. No reimbursable or matching costs incurred by ADMINISTERING AGENCY in the period prior to the effective date of this AGREEMENT or a later date specified in a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT are allowable by STATE. ARTICLE III -RIGHT-OF-WAY 1. All related rights-of-way as are necessary for the construction of PROJECT shall be acquired by ADMINISTERING AGENCY, and no contract for construction of PROJECT or any portion thereof shall be advertised until those necessary rights-of-way have been secured. 2. The furnishing of rights-of-way as provided for herein includes, and is limited to, the following, unless the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT provides otherwise: (a) expenditures to purchase all real property required for PROJECT free and clear of • liens, conflicting easements, obstructions and encumbrances, after crediting PROJECT with the fair market value of any excess property retained and not disposed of by ADM W- STERING AGENCY. A63 Page 5 of 8 4/21/99 (b) the payment of damages to real property not actually taken but injuriously affected by the proposed improvement • (c) the cost of relocating owners and occupants pursuant to Government Code Sections 7260-7277 (d) the cost of demolition and sales of all improvements on the right of way (e) the cost of all unavoidable utility relocation,protection or removal (f) the cost of all necessary hazardous material and hazardous waste clean up for which ADMINISTERING AGENCY is not responsible and the actual generator cannot be identified or recovery made. 3. Should ADMINISTERING AGENCY, in acquiring right-of-way for PROJECT, displace an individual, family, business, farm operation or nonprofit organization, the ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall provide relocation payments and services as required by California Government Code, Sections 7260-7277. 4. State funds will not participate in any PROJECT costs arising out of delays to construction or demolition contractor's orderly prosecution of the work because utilities have not been timely removed or relocated or due to the unavailabiiit}- of rights-of-way. • 5. If any protection, relocation or removal of utilities is required within STATE'S right-of-way, such work shall be performed in accordance with STATE policy and procedure. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall require any utility company performing relocation work in the STATE'S richt-of-way to obtain a STATE Encroachment Permit prior to the performance of said relocation work. Any relocated utilities shall be correctly located and identified on the PROJECT as-built plans. ARTICLE IV - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 1. The cost of security, protection, or maintenance performed by ADMINISTERING AGENCY or contractor forces during any temporary suspension of the work or at any other time may not be charged to the PROJECT. 2. Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this AGREEMENT. It is also understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify and hold STATE, its officers and employees harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined be Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, i authority, or jurisdiction delegated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this AGREEMENT. 064 Paae 6 of 8 4/21/99 I Neither ADMINISTERING AGENCY nor any officer or employee thereof, shall be • responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reasons of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this AGREEMENT. It is also understood and agreed that pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, STATE shall fully defend, indemnify and hold ADMINISTERING AGENCY harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined be Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this AGREEMENT. 4. Auditors of STATE shall be given access to books and records of ADMINISTERING AGENCY and its contractors and subcontractors for the purpose of verifying PROJECT costs and share to be paid. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall include clauses in its contracts for PROJECT obligating contractors and subcontractors to conform and cooperate in any audit of their PROJECT costs. 5. ADMINISTERING AGENCY will maintain and operate the PROJECT property acquired, developed, rehabilitated, or restored for its intended public use until such time as the parties might amend this AGREEMENT to otherwise provide. With the approval of STATE, ADMINISTERING AGENCY or its successors in interest in the property may transfer this obligation and responsibility to maintain and operate the property to another public entity. • 6. upon ADMINISTERING AGENCY acceptance of the completed p ed PROJECT construction contract or upon contractor being relieved of the responsibility for maintaining and protecting a portion of the work. the ADMINISTERING AGENCY having jurisdiction over the PROJECT shall maintain, repair and restore any damaged portions of the completed work in a manner satisfactory to the authorized representatives of STATE. If; within ninety (90) days after receipt of notice from STATE that a PROJECT, or an er ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S jurisdiction is not being properly moaintained, repairedrtion thereof, orrestored and ADMINISTERING AGENCY has not satisfactorily remedied the conditions complained of, the approval of future projects of ADMINISTERING AGENCY will be withheld until the PROJECT shall have been put in a condition satisfactory to STATE. The provisions of this section shall not apply to a PROJECT which has been vacated, as preapproved by STATE, through due process of law. 7. The ADMINISTERING AGENCY obligation to maintain, referred to in paragraph 6 above, includes not only the physical condition of the PROJECT but its continued operation as well. PROJECT shall be maintained by an adequate and well-trained staff of engineers and/or such other professionals and technicians as the PROJECT requires. Said maintenance staff may be employees of ADMINISTERING AGENCY, another unit of government, or a contractor under an agreement with ADMINISTERING AGENCY. All maintenance will be performed at regular intervals or as required for efficient operation of the complete PROJECT improvements. 065 Page 7 of 8 4/21/99 8. Without the written consent of STATE, this AGREEMENT is not assignable by ADMINISTERING AGENCY, either in whole or in part. • 9. No alteration or variation of the terms of this AGREEMENT or the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT shall be valid unless made in writina and signed by the parties hereto, and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein shall be binding on any of the parties hereto. - 10. This Agreement is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, conditions, or any statute enacted by the State Leaislature or adopted by the CTC that may affect the provisions, terms, or funding of this AGREEMENT in any manner. 11. ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to use all PROJECT funds reimbursed hereunder only for transportation purposes that are in conformance with Article XIX of the California State Constitution. ARTICLE V - CONDITION OF ACCEPTANCE ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall conform to all State statutes, regulations,and the Local Assistance Program Guidelines and Local Assistance Procedures Manual including all subsequent approved revisions thereto. hereafter collectively referred to as PROCEDURES, applicable to PROJECT unless otherwise designated in the approved PROGRAM • SUPPLEMENT. This AGREEMENT and any PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT(s) executed under this AGREEMENT shall terminate upon sixty (60) days' prior written notice by STATE. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this AGREEMENT by their duly authorized officers. STATE OF CALIFORNIA City of Atascadero Department of Transportation By By Chief, Office of Local Programs (Authorized Representative) Project Implementation Date Date • 066, Page 8 of 8 4/21/99 CITY OF ATASCADERO 1 8 �■ � 1978 \ CA►t>` / OFFICE of the CITY CLERK MINUTE ORDER TO: Hugh G. Brady, Chief Office of Local Programs Department of Transportation Design and Local Programs P.O. Box 942874, MS-"I Sacramento, CA 94274-0001 DATE OF MEETING: August 10, 1999 . COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Council Members Arrambide, Clay. Lerno. Luna. and Mayor Johnson COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT : None • SUBJECT: Item 1-A-10: Master Agreement - Administering Agencv-State Agreement- for State Funded Projects No. 000-421 - Fiscal Impact: -: one, STIP funded STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council authorize the Mayor to execute a Masrer Agreement for administering State funded projects (Master Agreement.V o. 000421) MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay, to approve Item#A-10; motion passed 5:0 by roll call vote. CERTIFICATION I, Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is the true and exact motion made and passed by the Atascadero City Council at their regular meeting of August 10, 1999. Dated: September 17, 1999 � f • Marcia McClure Torgerson, Ci Clerk City of Atascadero 067 6500 PALMA AVENUE ATASCADERO, CA 93427 • (805) 461-5074 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 miss o s. �I 9 City Council Staff Report Community Development Department Appeal of Resolutions PC# 2001-040 & PC 2001-035 Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road Yellow Rose Ranch (David Graves) REPORT IN BRIEF: The six lot tract map known as the "Yellow Rose Ranch" was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission at the August 7, 2001, Planning Commission hearing. The project approval included the adoption of two separate resolutions. PC Resolution 2001-040 . certified the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and PC Resolution 2001-035 approved the six-lot tract map with attached conditions and exhibits. The Planning Commission considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicants and the public before voting to approve the project and the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. On August 21, 2001 staff received a letter appealing the decisions made by the Planning Commission regarding Resolution PC 2001-040 and PC Resolution 2001-035 (attached). The appellants are requesting that an Environmental Impact Report be prepared for the project. Staffs responses to the issues raised in the appeal are included in Attachment 2. The Planning Commission staff report and Planning Commission meeting minutes have been attached for background information. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 -- Letter of Appeal Attachment 2-- Staff response to Appeal letter Attachment 3 -- Planning Commission Staff Report Attachment 4-- Planning Commission Minutes (8/7/01) • 068 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Attachment 1: Letter of Appeal TTM 2000-0002 Jugust 21, 2001 DECEIVED AUG 212001 Marcia McClure-Torgerson Atascadero City Clerk CITY OFATASCADERO 6500 Palma Avenue Cl?Y CLER"^':'ICE Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Ms. McClure-Torgerson, According to the terms of the Atascadero Municipal Code section 9-1.111, the Atascadero residents listed herein (signatures on file)hereby appeal the decisions made by the Atascadero Planning Commission on August 7, 2001 regarding resolution#PC2001-040(proposed mitigated negative declaration 2001-023)and resolution#PC 2001-035(tentative tract map 2002-0002)for 8300 Santa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. - For the following reasons,we hereby request that the Atascadero City Council ask for a full Environmental Impact Report(EIR)to be completed by an impartial source prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision: 1. There are numerous potentially significant adverse effects on the environment by the,proposed development. 2. The Atascadero General Plan calls for the preparation of an EIR when a project has potentially significant adverse effects on the environment. 3. The California Environmental Quality Act calls for preparation of an EIR when there is a potentially significant effect on the environment. 4. The initial study and mitigated negative declaration prepared by the Atascadero Community Development Department do not adequately address and/or mitigate all potentially adverse environmental impacts. 1. Potential Adverse Effects on the Environment There are many potentially significant adverse effects on the environment from this project that are reasonably foreseeable and not in dispute: (a) The unique location of the property just south of Atascadero Lake Park makes it the primary watershed for Atascadero Lake. Millions of gallons of water flow into the lake each year through a wide, seasonal creek a p and flood lain that covers about two-thirds of the property,creating the clear potential for adverse effects on the lake's water quality,wildlife and fish population due to sedimentation and runoff from new residential development in this location. (b) The development approach under consideration will require 6,800 cubic yards of imported fill to create raised home sites and a new road directly in the path of the registered blue line creek and flood plain that currently flow across the property, introducing new sources of sedimentation. (c) The dense vegetation and grasses that cover about 90%of the creek bed will be completely removed, seriously jeopardizing the filtration effect and resistance to sedimentation that currently exist and have been in place for over 50 years. (d) Replacing the wide, natural creekway with drainage swales and a subdivision of 6 lots(4 of which will be artificially raised pads 2 to 3 feet high), and bisecting the property with a new street and cul de sac,will clearly degrade the visual character and rural aesthetics of this historic area. 069 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • (e) Other potential impacts from this development include: • loss of riparian habitat • the loss of watershed • loss of agricultural resources • damage to existing wetlands • creation of flooding and back-up problems • potential safety problems due to the proposed drainage channels adjacent to homesites that will hold standing water up to 3 feet deep • loss of biological resources (f) The City of Atascadero has already cited the adverse effects on Atascadero Lake by development in this area in August,2000,when in"News From City Hall",the city manager pointed out: "As development has encircled the lake in recent decades,the water purity has degraded." 2. Atascadero General Plan Section 5. Environmental Review in the Implementation Section of the Land Use Element of the - Atascadero General Plan states: "The long-term protection of the environment has been incorporated as a central goal in the Atascadero General Plan and is not thought to be in conflict with the objective of allowing reasonable use of land. Towards this end, major projects or general plan amendment proposals which are identified as having the potential for significant adverse effects on the environment shall be required to have environmental impact reports prepared prior to their consideration. Further, the policies of the conservation and open space elements in particular shall be adhered to in reviewing both public and private development proposals." (underlining added) Other sections of the Land Use Element of the General.Plan which impact the approval of the proposed subdivision include the following: A. Basic Community Goals. Atascadero should retain its overall character and rural atmosphere with long-term protection of the environment as a primary guiding criteria for public policy decisions. a. Single Family Residential. (3) Determination of appropriate lot sizes shall be based upon evaluation of such factors as slope, existence of a natural building site... 1 a. Scenic and sensitive lands including creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands and areas of significant habitat shall be protected... 1b. Public and private development in close proximity to or over such lands shall be carefully evaluated to protect scenic and sensitive lands, including creek reservations, wooded areas, flood plains,prominent view sheds and historic sites. le. Lot splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and be in accordance with community plans and principles in order to retain the desired natural character of the community. In addition to requiring an Environmental Impact Report,the Atascadero General Plan makes it clear that alternative approaches to developing this property should be considered that would not involve the creation of artificial home sites in a natural creek and flood plain. Appeal of 8/7/01 Atascadero Planning Commission decisions re: 8300 Santa Rosa Road Page 2 of 4 • Oaf ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 09/25/2001 `� •3. The California Environmental Quality Act a) Section 8.0 Environmental Impact Reports in the CEQA guidelines adopted by the City of Atascadero states: °'Whenever the Environmental Coordinator determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of a project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the Environmental Coordinator shall notify the project applicant and request that the applicant agree to an EIR pursuant to these guidelines. If the applicant does not agree to process an EIR for the project, the Environmental Coordinator shall recommend to the Planning Commission and/or City Council that the project be disapproved." (underlining added) b) Section 15064.1(a)of the CEQA statute states: "if there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before a lead agency, that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, the agency shall prepare a draft EIR. c) A petition signed by 300 people(attached)asks that a full EIR be completed to deal with the many potentially adverse impacts of this project. Section 15064.4 of the CEQA states: `The existence of public controversy over the environmental effects of a project will not require preparation of an EIR if there is no substantial evidence that a Proiect may have a sign cant effect on the environment." (underlining added) In this case,there is no dispute that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 3. The Mitigated Negative Declaration The initial study conducted for the proposed project and the conditions and mitigation measures in the Mitigated Negative Declaration(2001-023)do not adequately address many of the potentially negative effects of this project,for example: a) No scientific study has been completed or is requested to analyze the contents of the creek water that currently moves across the property into Atascadero Lake. Without any baseline • measurements, no objective evaluation about the future impacts of the project can be made, either positive or negative. An EIR would provide this analysis. b) No scientific study has been made of the potential impacts created by totally removing the dense grasses that currently line the creekway and have provided water filtration and sedimentation control for decades. An EIR would provide this analysis. The initial study states"no discernable creekway of significant vegetation exists"which is clearly incorrect. c) No scientific study of the wildlife, habitat,or plant life that currently exists in the creekway has been completed or is requested. An EIR would provide this analysis. d) No alternatives to the proposed development have been suggested or reviewed. AN EIR would present a number of alternative approaches to the project that would reduce environmental impacts. e) Numerous plans are requested to mitigate key potential negative impacts, including: • A comprehensive landscape plan • An erosion and sedimentation control plan • A drainage swale enhancement plan • A creek restoration and enhancement plan • A storm water pollution prevention plan These requests, however, are not mitigation. They are only requests for mitigation which are open to interpretation and not yet developed in detail. For example,the discussion of erosion control mentions an initial planting of native trees and shrubs that will"ultimately naturalize into a creek habitat". The number, size and location of these plants is not specified. So how long will it take Appeal of 817/01 Atascadero Planning Commission decisions re: 8300 Santa Rosa Road Page 3 of 4 071 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 before erosion control in the proposed drainage swales is actually in place? And who will be responsible in the future to ensure this"naturalization" process actually occurs and protects the lake? Is it realistic to ask future residents of the proposed development to take responsibility for the negative impacts on Atascadero Lake? An EIR would provide alternatives and detailed specifications as to what must be included in the plans to mitigate the adverse effects of removing a natural, blue line creek and replacing it with drainage swales. (f) To maintain the proposed drainage swales and keep them clear of debris that could cause flooding and sedimentation problems, a"maintenance agreement"with future homeowners is mentioned in the negative declaration. This is not adequate mitigation since it would be extremely difficult to enforce such an agreement. An EIR would provide alternatives for effectively monitoring and maintaining new drainage swales in a way that would protect the lake and surrounding properties. (g) No sequence is specified for conducting various construction activities, i.e.,when the new water channel would be built,when the creek landscaping and erosion control measures must be in place,when the dirt fill would be imported, when construction would begin on the street and houses, etc. This key information would be delineated in an EIR. Summary - Atascadero Lake is a valuable community resource for everyone. We have recently seen many problems created by the degrading water quality, including avian botulism found in two swans that died at the lake last summer,the large fish kill that occurred recently due to lack of oxygen in the water,the build up of mud and sediment that is making the lake too shallow, the growing size and duration of algae blooms, etc. The potential for further degradation of Atascadero Lake by the proposed subdivision on the Yellow Rose Ranch is absolutely clear. • One of the primary duties of the Atascadero City Council is to act as the public's guardian of our city's precious public resources, such as Atascadero Lake. The City Council is also sworn to uphold the city's General Plan. We therefore respectfully request that an EIR be ordered for this project so that all potential negative impacts are properly identified, alternatives are proposed, and mitigation measures are specified in detail. This approach will help the developer,the public at large, and the city of Atascadero make the best possible decisions about the proposed development of the Yellow Rose Ranch property. Sincerely, Ronald Bell Jean Trumbull Jeannie Rokos John Nowak Alan Thomas Bruce Stamp Henry Engen Gerry Mulder Doug Young Sandy Engen Joyce Young Kathy Kock Frank Kock Kathy Thomas Jonathon Trumbull Steeve Goode Mary Anna Goode Arlys Little Christine Bell Tex Little cc: Lori Parcells, Director, Community Development Department Philip Dunsmore,Assistant Planner Attached: Address list for appellants Appeal of 8!7/01 Atascadero Planning Commission decisions re: 8300 Santa Rosa Road Page 4 of 4 • 0'/ 2 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Attachment 2 Staff Response to Appeal Letter TTM 2000-0002 Comments Staff Responses Comment# Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 1. Potential Adverse Effects on the Environment a)The unique location of the property just south This property is an important watershed for of Atascadero Lake Park makes it the primary Atascadero Lake. Restoration and enhancement of watershed for Atascadero Lake.Millions of the watershed and the removal of grazing animals gallons of water flow into the lake each year will contribute to the enhancement of the water through a wide,seasonal creek and flood plain quality of Atascadero Lake. The property does not that covers about two-thirds of the property, contain any dense vegetation or significant native creating the clear potential for adverse effects on trees. At this time the pasture has loose surface the lake's water quality,wildlife and fish soils and sparse non-native grasses-a combination population due to sedimentation and runoff from that likely creates significant erosion and new residential development in this location. sedimentation during storm events. As supported by written comments from the Regional Water Quality Control Board,the existing cattle grazing use negatively impacts water • quality of Atascadero Lake and damages wetlands. The cattle have eliminated any existing native vegetation and frequently graze within the area identified as a wetland. Removal of the cattle and restoration of an enhanced wetland and creek habitat area will likely increase the natural aesthetics of the vicinity and result in enhanced water quality. 2 (b)The development approach under The proposed future drainage area is consistent consideration will require 6,800 cubic yards of with the present drainage and mapped blueline imported fill to create raised home sites and a new creek on the property. The imported fill placed on road directly In the path of the registered blue line this site is designed to create level building pads creek and flood plain that currently flow across and an acceptable roadwayand bridge above the the property, introducing new sources of 100-year flood elevation.The fill will be placed sedimentation. only on a portion of the property reserving an average 100 foot wide drainage swale. The proposed building pads and road are engineered to not impede the water flow nor create additional impacts to the flood plain. The approximately 100-foot wide swale along the east and north side of the property would remain in permanent open space within the proposed project. The project conditions will also require an additional 25-foot building setback from the edge of the drainage easement for residential development on each of the parcels.This will 073 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • Comment# Comments Staff Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 result in an open area of approximately 125 feet or more at the north and east portions of the property. Approximately 25%of the property or nearly 2 '/z acres of land will be preserved outside of the construction areas. To avoid additional sedimentation,the project is conditioned to include a comprehensive landscape plan and sediment preventative devices constructed within the waterway. The landscape plan is being designed by a professional landscape architect under consultation with the project biologist. The sediment control devices will be installed with the landscape and grading plan for the project. These features will consist of: rock barriers,temporary sediment fencing and other methods designed to slow water flow and prevent sediment from entering the lake. When landscape materials become established within the drainage areas,the landscape itself will act as a sediment prevention device and a water purifier. (also refer to B3) . 3 (c)The dense vegetation and grasses that cover According to the biological study,this property about 90%of the creek bed will be completely does not contain any dense vegetation or grasses. removed, seriously jeopardizing the filtration All remaining vegetation consists of sparse grasses effect and resistance to sedimentation that and several small willow trees that have been currently exist and have been in place for over 50 impacted due to cattle grazing. Cattle grazing and years. agricultural uses have been in place at this property for over 50 years virtually clearing the native vegetation and adding to sedimentation and potential water contamination of Atascadero Lake. The introduction of an enhanced wetland and creek habitat along the drainage Swale with native trees, shrubs and riparian vegetation will increase the richness of the site as a wildlife habitat. The addition of native vegetation and wetland habitat plants within the drainage swale will enhance the filtering effect of the site drainage. 4 (d)Replacing the wide,natural creekway with The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration did drainage swales and a subdivision of 6 lots(4 of analyze the potential changes to the existing which will be artificially raised pads 2 to 3 feet viewshed. The project as designed includes a 100- high),and bisecting the property with a new street foot wide landscaped drainage swale along all and cul de sac,will clearly degrade the visual visible frontages. The swale will be vegetated with character and rural aesthetics of this historic area. native riparian species of trees,shrubs and plants. The design of the landscape will be required as • part of the subdivision improvement plans and is to be designed by a landscape architect.The Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that the 074 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Comments Staff Responses Comment# Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 project would have a less than significant aesthetic impact. 5 (e)Other potential impacts from this development The project conditions are designed to create a include: habitat in a location that does not currently contain a viable habitat. The project will contain an • loss of riparian habitat approximately 100-foot wide drainage area along the north and east sides of the property. The • the loss of watershed drainage area will be within an open space easement and will encompass approximately 25% • loss of agricultural resources of the property.The landscaped swale is likely to attract bird varieties due to increased surface water • damage to existing wetlands and enhanced vegetation cover. • creation of flooding and back-up problems The existing agricultural use is too small to be considered significant agricultural use. The site is • potential safety problems due to the proposed designated within the General Plan and Zoning drainage channels adjacent to homesites that Map for a Residential Single Family land use. All will hold standing water up to 3 feet deep adjacent surrounding properties are currently developed as single family residential uses. • loss of biological resources The existing wetlands at the property has been identified as being 0.04 acres in size adjacent to the existing culvert that runs beneath Santa Rosa Road. This location, including a buffer around it, will be preserved and enhanced with the proposed project. The extension of the drainage area is anticipated to result in an expansion of the wetland area. The drainage analysis prepared for the property demonstrates that the proposed drainage will not create flooding or back up problems. (RTC consulting,January 200 1)A copy of the report is a part of the Planning Commission Staff Report. The complete report is available for review within the project file. The proposed drainage area may contain water for short periods of time following a major storm event. According to the proposed elevation of the drainage Swale the swale should not contain more than six-inches to two feet of water depth during a storm event. The water volume should be no different than an average native creek in Atascadero. Each of the pro osed 0'7 5 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • Comments Staff Responses Comment# Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 residential lots will be fenced,not allowing immediate access to the drainage area. Approval of the proposed Tentative Tract Map is based on specific project conditions that are designed to enhance the natural environment. A complete detailed landscape plan prepared by a landscape architect is a condition of approval for the subdivision improvement plans. The drainage and erosion control plan has been designed by a civil engineer. The drainage enhancement plan will be designed as required by the biological consultant for the project. The enhancement plan will include erosion control and sedimentation mitigation for the proposed drainage swale.The project conditions require the creek restoration plan to be designed and monitored by a qualified biological consultant to ensure adequate restoration of the drainage area. 6 (f)The City of Atascadero has already cited the It should be noted that the average developed lot adverse effects on Atascadero Lake by size surrounding Atascadero Lake is less than '/2 development in this area in• August,2000,when in acre in size. The proposed new lots would be a"News From City Hall",the city manager minimum of 1.5 acres each. The project design is pointed out: "As development has encircled the intended to enhance the water quality of lake in recent decades,the water purity has Atascadero Lake by eliminating the cattle grazing degraded." use. 2. Atascadero General Plan 7 Section 5. Environmental Review in the Implementation Section of the Land Use Element The existing property is designated for residential of the Atascadero General Plan states: development as indicated within the Atascadero General Plan Land Use Element. The subject "The long-term protection of the environment has parcel is also surrounded by existing residential been incorporated as a central goal in the development on three sides. The project will Atascadero General Plan and is not thought to be maintain a minimum lot size of 1.5 acres consistent in conflict with the objective of allowing with the General Plan's rural character goal. reasonable use of land. Towards this end, major projects or general plan amendment The property is zoned RSF-Z which allows lot consideration. Further, the policies of the sizes that range between 1.5 acres and 2.5 acres conservation and open space elements in based on performance standards. Since the particular shall be adhered to in reviewing both property has an average slope less than 10%, is public and private development proposals." served by City sewer and is fronting an existing roadway the minimum lot size has been calculated Other sections of the Land Use Element of the to be 1.5 acres for this vicinity.The lots are • General Plan which impact the approval of the designed as a continuation of the rural character of proposed subdivision include the following: the Atascadero Lake neighborhood.The average parcel size fronting Atascadero Lake is less than n 0706 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Comments Staff Responses Comment# Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 A. Basic Community Goals.Atascadero should 0.5 acre. The new parcels will be three times the retain its overall character and rural average size of existing lots fronting Atascadero atmosphere with long-term protection of the Lake. environment as a primary guiding criteria for public policy decisions. The site is not designated as open space, recreation,or agriculture. The site was subject to a a. Single Family Residential. (3) temporary"open-space"agreement that expired Determination of appropriate lot sues shall upon change of ownership of the property and be based upon evaluation of such factors as payment of sewer fees to the City. At this time the slope, existence of a natural building site... fees have been paid and the temporary"open space"agreement has expired. An open space I a. Scenic and sensitive lands including creeks, "easement"was never recorded for the property. riparian corridors, wetlands and areas of significant habitat shall be protected... The initial site assessment included three criteria: I b. Public and private development in close 1. Consistency with basic General Plan standards proximity to or over such lands shall be and specifically the Land Use Element carefully evaluated to protect scenic and sensitive designation. The site is relatively flat,served lands, including creek reservations, wooded by sewer and meets standards to allow 1.5 acre areas,flood plains,prominent view sheds and residential lots within the designated RSF-Z historic sites. district. 2. The biological issues were a primary concern. I e. Lot splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and A Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters report be in accordance with community plans was prepared by Sierra Delta Corporation for and principles in order to retain the desired the site. The report concluded that 0.04 acres natural character of the community. of the site is a wetland. This portion of the property will not be disturbed with the In addition to requiring an Environmental Impact proposed project and additional wetlands Report,the Atascadero General Plan makes it would be created. The report concluded that clear that alternative approaches to developing little to no native vegetation exists on the site. this property should be considered that would not The existing grass cattle pasture provides little involve the creation of artificial home sites in a habitat value,although it may be considered a natural creek and flood plain. scenic viewshed. 3. The site has been known for its flooding even though it is not shown as a flood plain on FEMA maps. Staff asked for a flood plain analysis and drainage calculations for the proposed grading plan.RThompson Consulting prepared a Preliminary Drainage Calculations report in January 2001. The report and proposed grading and drainage plan were prepared by a professional civil engineer. The proposed plan creates building sites above the 100-year flood plain without compromising adjacent properties. The proposed site design is consistent with General Plan goals and preserves 25%of the site in open space in order to enhance the riparian corridor, retain the rural character,and become compatible with adjacent uses. 077 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • Comment# Comments Staff Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 3. The California Environmental Quality Act 8 a)Section 8.0 Environmental Impact Reports in The City of Atascadero CEQA Guidelines are the CEQA guidelines adopted by the City of intended to guide staff through the State CEQA Atascadero states: guidelines. The proposed project followed all required provisions of CEQA and the Atascadero "Whenever the Environmental Coordinator CEQA guidelines. The project has been properly determines that there is substantial evidence that mitigated in order to qualify for the Mitigated any aspect of a project, either individually or Negative Declaration that has been prepared for cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the project. It is staff's opinion that if the project the environment, regardless of whether the is developed according to recommended mitigation overall effect of the project is adverse or measures and project conditions,the project will • beneficial, the Environmental Coordinator shall not result in significant environmental impacts. note the project applicant and request that the applicant agree to an EIR pursuant to these Chapter 1, Section 1.4 states: `The state CEQA guidelines. If the applicant does not agree to guidelines encourage local governmental agencies process an EIR for the project, the Environmental to reduce delay and paperwork by, among other Coordinator shall recommend to the Planning things: Commission and/or City Council that the project J)Allowing applicants to revise projects to be disapproved." eliminate possible significant effects on the environment, thereby enabling the project to qualms for a Negative Declaration rather than an EIR." The project qualified for a Mitigated Negative Declaration since the project contained mitigation measures to reduce all potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures are included as project conditions in the project that has been approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant has agreed to include all recommended conditions in the final project submittal to the City of Atascadero Community Development Department. • 17 I, ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Comments Staff Responses Comment# Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 9 b)Section 15064.1 (a)of the CEQA statute states: Chapter 2 of the Atascadero CEQA guidelines contains the following definition that describes a "If there is substantial evidence, in light of the Mitigated Negative Declaration: whole record before a lead agency, that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, "Mitigated Negative Declaration"means a the agency shall prepare a draft EIR." Negative Declaration prepared for a project when the Initial Study has identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but(1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and(2)there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment." The original project application was modified,as recommended by staff,to avoid wetland and drainage impacts. The wetland study,and hydrology studies for the property indicate that the project could be developed to enhance the existing drainage and preserve the wetlands,thus eliminating significant impacts. Staff finds no substantial evidence that the project,when developed according to mitigation measures,will have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore the Mitigated Negative Declaration is sufficient for the scale of the project. 10 c)A petition signed by 300 people asks that a full The petition and public testimony were a part of EIR be completed to deal with the many the Planning Commission public hearing on potentially adverse impacts of this project. August 7,2001. The studies that were required for Section 15064.4 of the CEQA states: the project(wetlands study,drainage analysis,site distance analysis,field inspections)did not reveal "The existence of public controversy over the evidence of a significant effect on the environment environmental effects of a project will not require with development of the proposed project.At this preparation of an EIR if there is no substantial time staff does not have substantial evidence,other evidence that a project may have a significant than public controversy,that the project would effect on the environment. " result in a significant effect on the environment. In this case,there is no dispute that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 4. The Mitigated Negative Declaration 079 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • Comment# Comments Staff Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 11 The initial study conducted for the proposed As evidenced by site visits during storm events in project and the conditions and mitigation January of 2001,staff has noted a significant measures in the Mitigated Negative Declaration amount of sedimentation(mud)within the water (2001-023)do not adequately address many of flowing from the subject property. At this point the potentially negative effects of this project,for the water quality leaving the site has not been example: tested to measure bacteria levels or sediment levels. A recent site visit has revealed significant a)No scientific study has been completed or is quantities of cattle waste combined with loose requested to analyze the contents of the creek surface soils and a lack of significant vegetation water that currently moves across the property cover throughout the entire drainage area. Non- into Atascadero Lake. Without any baseline scientific theory would suggest that significant measurements,no objective evaluation about the drainage passing over surface soils of this nature future impacts of the project can be made,either would result in bacteria,nitrogen and sediment positive or negative.An EIR would provide this contamination. analysis. 12 b)No scientific study has been made of the The grasses currently covering the site consist of potential impacts created by totally removing the non-native European grasses. A close visual dense grasses that currently line the creekway and inspection of the property reveals that the grass on have provided water filtration and sedimentation the site is not a dense ground cover. Cattle grazing control for decades.An EIR would provide this has loosened the surface and created large voids analysis. The initial study states "no discernable that contain no vegetation. Remaining grass areas creekway or significant vegetation exists"which are sparse with very little support for surface soils. is is clearly incorrect. No significant vegetation exists within this property. There is no evident creekway on the property. Drainage concentrates near the north and east property lines and spans out across the property during significant storm events. Due to a lack of a drainage swale,no riparian vegetation, and consistent grazing,the water filtration that would naturally be present at this site is non- existent. Restoration of a riparian habitat with vegetation that will assist with water filtration is a ri rity of this ro'ect. 13 c)No scientific study of the wildlife,habitat,or Regional Water Quality Control Board has plant life that currently exists in the creekway has determined that no creekway exists across the site. been completed or is requested.An EIR would The property was initially investigated by Sierra provide this analysis. Delta Corporation for all biological resources. A complete bio study was not required due to the lack of native habitat found within the vicinity. The wetlands study contained an evaluation of the existing flora and fauna at the site. Due to a lack of trees and shrubs on the property very little native fauna habitat exists. Egrets and Herons do utilize the grass pasture likely feeding on field mice,moles, and pocket gophers in the pasture. These migratory birds do not utilize this pasture as a rookery,shelter or extensive feeding area due to the lack of native cover. • 080 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Comments Staff Responses • Comment# Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 14 d)No alternatives to the proposed development The project that has been approved by the Planning have been suggested or reviewed.AN EIR would Commission is an alternative to the originally present a number of alternative approaches to the submitted project. Staff asked the project project that would reduce environmental impacts. applicant to submit an alternative project in order to mitigate potential significant environmental impacts. Several alternatives were reviewed prior to finding the application complete and proceeding to Planning Commission with a superior alternative. 15 e)Numerous plans are requested to mitigate key A complete detailed landscape plan prepared by a potential negative impacts, including: landscape architect is a condition of approval for the subdivision improvement plans. The drainage • A comprehensive landscape plan and erosion control plan has been designed by a civil engineer. The drainage enhancement plan • An erosion and sedimentation control plan will be designed as required by the biological consultant for the project. The enhancement plan • A drainage swale enhancement plan will include erosion control and sedimentation mitigation for the proposed drainage swale.The • A creek restoration and enhancement plan project conditions require the creek restoration plan to be designed and monitored by a qualified • A storm water pollution prevention plan biological consultant to ensure adequate restoration of the drainage area. These requests,however,are not mitigation.They • are only requests for mitigation,which are open The project plans will incorporate a drainage swale to interpretation and not yet developed in detail. enhancement plan which will include riparian For example,the discussion of erosion control landscape,erosion control,and construction mentions an initial planting of native trees and methods designed to enhance and naturalize the shrubs that will"ultimately naturalize into a creek drainage into Atascadero Lake. A drainage swale habitat". The number,size and location of these will be created on the site with approximately 70 to plants is not specified. So how long will it take 100 feet in width with a fall of approximately 1- before erosion control in the proposed drainage foot per 200 feet of length. Under these swale is actually in place?And who will be specifications the drainage area is not likely to responsible in the future to ensure this become a fast moving creekway,especially since "naturalization"process actually occurs and the majority of the drainage area will be at or protects the lake?Is it realistic to ask future below the height of the dam at the south end of residents of the proposed development to take Atascadero Lake. During storm events water may responsibility for the negative impacts on remain within the drainage areas enhancing the Atascadero Lake? size of the existing wetlands. An EIR would provide alternatives and detailed A field inspection at this site reveals that no natural specifications as to what must be included in the creek habitat presently exists-only a pasture void plans to mitigate the adverse effects of removing of significant vegetation. The addition of a a natural,blue line creek and replacing it with restored drainage and introduced creek habitat is drainage swales. likely to enhance the natural and aesthetic value of the site. 16 (f)To maintain the proposed drainage swales and The project mitigation measures and approved keep them clear of debris that could cause project conditions currently contain a requirement flooding and sedimentation problems, a for a maintenance agreement to be submitted to the "maintenance agreement"with future Community Development Department for review • homeowners is mentioned in the negative and approval. The Maintenance agreement would declaration.This is not adequate mitigation since become part of the homeowners association 031 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Comments Staff Responses Comment# Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Appeal Letter, August 21, 2001 it would be extremely difficult to enforce such an proposed for the project. Ownership of property at agreement.An EIR would provide alternatives for this location will require participation in the effectively monitoring and maintaining new homeowners association. It will be in the best drainage swales in away that would protect the interest of the association to maintain the drainage lake and surrounding properties. course. At this time the agreement is a requirement,however it has not been reviewed or approved by the Community Development Department. If the drainage is not maintained in the future the City would have the option of enforcing this condition, as with any condition of the approval for this project. 17 The sequence and timing of construction at the site g)No sequence is specified for conducting will be regulated as directed by required permits various construction activities, i.e.,when the new from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, water channel would be built,when the creek Department of Fish&Game,and the City of landscaping and erosion control measures must be Atascadero. Permits from all of these agencies will in place,when the dirt fill would be imported, coordinate best project timelines and sequencing when construction would begin on the street and based on the project specifications and each houses,etc.This key information would be agency's best interest. Project sequencing can be delineated in an EIR. added to project conditions as a condition of approval and does not need to be mandated through an EIR. It is not likely that the Mitigation Measures proposed for the project would change significantly following the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. The Mitigated Negative Declaration included a wetlands study, a drainage analysis,a traffic study,and extensive site review. The mitigation measures were created to reduce any site impacts to less than significant levels. • 032 FILECOPY ITEM NUMBER: Z— DATE: 7-17-01 n Isis iii Planning Commission Staff Report Ptiblic Hearing Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002 (Tract 2410) 8300 Santa Rosa Road (David Graves) SUBJECT: An application to allow a six lot tract map at 8300 Santa Rosa Road at the location of two existing parcels with a total area of 9.56 acres. One of the proposed parcels will contain an existing residence and five parcels with building sites will be created, allowing for single family residential development. RECOMMENDATION: • Staff Recommends: 1. The Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-040, certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-02 and adopting a mitigation monitoring program. 2. The Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-035, approving Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002, based on findings and subject to conditions. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant: David Graves 2. Representative: R Thompson Consulting, 7400 Morro Road, Atascadero, CA 93422 3. Project Address: 8300 Santa Rosa Road,Atascadero, CA 93422 APN 056-351-004 4. General Plan Designation: Low Density Single Family • 5. Zoning District: RSF-Z (Residential Single Family, with a minimum lot size of 1.50 acres based on performance standards). 000008 084 ITEM NUMBER: Z DATE: 7-17-01 6. Site Area: 9.56 acres 7. Existing Use: One single family residence, cattle grazing pasture 8. Environmental Status: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration posted June 28,2001. Site description: The ,� _� i� Ir property is located at the south end of � Atascadero Lake. The consists of an property open, grassy pasture ' that has historically W`V-�a RSF-Y Atascadero Lake been used for cattle ,. grazing. The property , \\ is known as the "Yellow Rose Ranch" and is still used for cattle grazing today. _Z The site consists of 8300 Santa Rosa Road two legal parcels with a total area of 9.56 RSF- acres. The southerly portion of the property currently contains a single residence and is accessed from a driveway intersecting with Santa Rosa Road. The new tract will include the construction of a new cul-de-sac road intersecting with Santa Rosa Road near Lake View Drive. DISCUSSION: The tract is consistent with the General Plan and zoning regulations. The general plan and zoning maps designate the property for "Single Family Residential" uses. The General Plan designation for this property is Low Density Single Family. The property is zoned Residential Single Family with a"Z" suffix. The Z district has a minimum lot size that ranges from 1.5 acres to 2.5 acres based on performance standards. The minimum lot size for this property has been calculated to be 1.50 acres. The performance standards for this property resulted in the smallest lot size possible for this zoning district since the property is fairly flat, served by sewer and is surrounded by smaller lots averaging 1.5 acres. All six of the proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum lot size standard and will be used for single family residential purposes. The lot and building sites are compatible with the General Plan for this zoning district in relation to slope and • proposed subdivision design. 00©0(tq 085 ITEM NUMBER: Z DATE: 7-17-01 • Tract Design: The tract will allow the creation of six parcels from two existing parcels with a maximum development capacity of six single-family residences. Parcel 1 will be 2.06 acres, containing an existing residence; Parcels 2 through 6 will be 1.5 acres each, with each parcel containing the entitlement for one new residence. The existing residence on proposed Parcel 1 is currently accessed from Santa Rosa Road utilizing a driveway. The residence and driveway will remain unchanged with the proposed tract. The proposed new lots will utilize a separate roadway, Rio Blanco Court, constructed to City standards, that will intersect with Santa Rosa Road west of Lake View Drive. The five new homesites will be accessed from individual driveways attaching to the new road. The project engineer has designed a road plan that will be constructed with a bridge crossing, accommodating the drainage swale. _ A unique feature of the project is the drainage swale shown on the map on the following page. It is a proposed drainage area that will be constructed and landscaped as part of the on-site improvements for the tract. The project will include features intended to resemble a natural watercourse, accommodate seasonal storm water and ultimately improve Atascadero Lake water • quality. The house sites will be located on elevated pads approximately 2 to 3 feet above the 100-year flood plain. Street Design The street design will consist of a cul-de-sac street approximately 280-feet in length. The street design will meet City standards as a rural local street with a pavement width of 20-feet. The 20- foot width will limit the ability to park vehicles on the road. Staff recommends the construction of a five-foot wide shoulder overlain with compacted decomposed granite at both sides of the roadway to act as a walking path and road shoulder. The applicant has chosen the name "Rio Blanco Court" as the name for the new street. This is consistent with the requirement for street names to be of Spanish origin. The applicant has proposed to plant Coast Live Oaks as street trees at the edge of the new street. Staff.recommends the use of London Plane Sycamore trees as street trees since they are faster growing, produce a better shade canopy and are more tolerant of the lakeside environment. Staff has added a condition of approval requiring London Plane Sycamore trees to be planted 35-feet on center on both sides of the new street. House Plans The applicant intends to construct custom homes on each of the lots. The homes are expected to range in size from approximately 2,800 +/- square feet to 3,700 +/- square feet and may be a combination of single story and two level homes. • 000010 086 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 7-17-01 Yellow Rose Ranch Tract Map Concept PIan Atascadero Lake rY � ~/' �e ` �� i f I i einta-Rosa -Road _ ad and bridge ti. TYP{'_.i ctvsrr erCTXN r Existing y= Driveway 1 k 1 `. '� , PARCEL 3 A \ "'RCEL' ° Proposed drainage area �� • � t \` ':with landscaped swale :varies between 75 and i r 0,0 feet in width. w) ,.. d Home site (lo Existing residence --' F ` \` PIWCEL e , \\ Project statistics: Existing lots: lots 9 and 10 encompass 9.56 acres. Proposed Lots: ^WaSHO K-PAD Lot 1: 2.06 Acres OW VA"' Lot 2: 1.50 Acres SAM_ Lot 3: 1.50 Acres / '°°'" Lot 4: 1.50 Acres Lot 5: 1.50 Acres Lot 6: 1.50 Acres Preliminary grading plan showing drainage swale. Base of drainage swale will be landscaped and treated with Street erosion control measures that are not shown in this Rural collector with 280 foot length. drawing. Open Space . Approximately 25% of the project area will be contained within drainage /open space easement. 00001 . 087 ITEM NUMBER: Z DATE: 7-17-01 Drainage Swale As part of the on-site improvements for the tract the applicant will construct a drainage area that will serve as a creekway or swale through the site. It is intended that the creekway will ultimately naturalize into a creek habitat. To initiate the naturalization of the swale the applicant will landscape the drainage area with native trees and shrubs. The drainage area itself will be designed with amenities to prevent soil erosion and silting before the native landscape is able to become established. During storm events, Atascadero Lake will back up into the Swale. In order to develop a defined drainage at the property and locate houses outside of the flood plain, a significant amount of imported fill will be needed at the site. Approximately 6,800 cubic yards of imported fill material will be required in order to complete the project as proposed. The total amount of grading at the site will be 11,075 cubic yards which will include 4,240 cubic yards of onsite cut slope within the location of proposed Parcel 2. Currently the project area contains no native tree species and no significant native plant species. Planning Issues: Temporary Open Space Agreement In August of 1994; the property owners and the City adopted an agreement to temporarily maintain the property as open space. The agreement allowed the property owners to avoid payment of sewer assessment fees as long as the property remained as open space. A permanent open space easement was not recorded for the property. The agreement was specifically written to allow development of the property as long as all sewer assessment fees were repaid to the City. As the agreement states, the requirement to maintain the property as open space can be terminated at any time after fees have been paid to the City, therefore, allowing the property to be developed with the proposed tract map. A copy of the agreement is attached to the staff report as Attachment 3. Site Drainage The property is known to be subject to seasonal flooding during significant storm events. The site flood elevations are influenced by several factors unique to this site such as the spillway elevation of Atascadero Lake, the existing culvert beneath Santa Rosa Road and the relatively flat sloping ground on the site. The site does serve as a watershed to Atascadero Lake. The property has been used for cattle grazing for many years and any defined watercourse on the property is not apparent. During heavy storm events, such as occurred in January of this year, storm water collects on the east and north portions of the property and then drains into Atascadero Lake. Throughout the majority of the property, water "sheet flows" across the property and then drains into Atascadero Lake. • Oi30012 088 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 7-17-01 • Subject property during a significant storm event January 2001 looking west. Note how water drains across a wide area of the property through the cattle pasture. • The FEMA flood plain maps for Atascadero do not map the site as a flood plain. To determine accurate flood elevation data for the property, the project engineer (RThompson Consulting) prepared a specific flood analysis and drainage calculation report for the property in January 2001. The analysis was prepared using the Atascadero Lake spillway as the basis for the 100- year flood elevation for the property. The spillway elevation at the south end of Atascadero Lake is at elevation 913 feet. During significant storm events, the spillway may have a flow that is between 1 and to 2 feet deep. This creates a backwater effect that will allow water to back into the subject property up to approximately the 915-elevation mark. All of the proposed building pads are designed to be at least 1-foot above the 100-year flood elevation mark. The lowest building pad will be at 916.6 while the highest will be at 920.0 base elevation. The site will be designed to handle a significant amount of backup water from Atascadero Lake utilizing a drainage area that will be incorporated into each of the lots as a private easement. The drainage swale will have a width that varies between 75 and 100 feet that will accommodate 100-year flood events. In summary, the project engineer has concluded that the proposed project does not adversely affect upstream property owners, and maintains the historic 100-year water surface elevation on their properties. According to engineering studies, the proposed drainage plan will work to improve existing drainage across the site by defining a drainage swale and reducing water contamination associated with cattle grazing and "sheet drainage" across the field. A copy of the • summary of the engineering report is provided as attachment 4 to the staff report. 0000-13 089 ITEM NUMBER: Z . DATE: 7-17-01 • A maintenance agreement will be required to be established for the maintenance of the drainage area to ensure adequate water flow and cleanup. The drainage area will be within an easement that will cross the proposed parcels at this property. Staff has added a condition of approval to require the drainage areas and easements to be permanently fenced between the drainage swales and the private yards. Staff is recommending consistent, split rail fencing throughout the tract to match the rural characteristics of this Lake neighborhood. The project conditions require the drainage easement itself to be protected from grading, cross fencing, accessory structures and grazing. As part of the project, the applicant has offered to dedicate to the City an existing well at the property to assist in the recharge of fresh water into Atascadero Lake. The well could be used to feed the lake when necessary by releasing water into south end of the lake near Santa Rosa Road. The flow amounts and details of the well are unknown at this time; however, test runs of the well have produced significant water flow into the lake. Staff has added a condition of approval that will require a biological consultant to recommend specific design solutions for the drainage swale to avoid sedimentation and erosion following construction. The project applicant is proposing a landscape plan that will include native tree, • shrub and groundcover species to assist with the naturalization of the drainage swale. The swale area is intended to become a naturalized creekbed channel that will ultimately assist in the filtration of water flowing into Atascadero Lake. All drainage swale improvements, erosion control and landscaping will be provided as part of the subdivision improvement plans. Blueline Creek and Wetlands The USGS maps for this site identify a blueline creek within this property. The project applicant hired a Sierra Delta Corporation to analyze the creek and wetland issues. The consultant prepared a Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters L \ report addressing all of the wetland hydrology and wildlife species potential at the property. As evidenced by aerial - photos which date back to the 1950's, the property has been Mappe creeks used as a grazing pasture and no discernable creekway or 1«ad`de. significant vegetation has existed on the property in recent history. At this time, the property contains only non-native grasses, several small willow trees, and a couple of oak trees near the west property boundary. The site does not a - -..- specifically drain as a creek as the maps suggest, but instead water spreads across the pasture and eventually drains into Atascadero Lake underneath Santa Rosa Road through the existing culvert. The consultant concluded that approximately 0.04 acres of the site qualifies as a wetland area. This determination was confirmed using soil tests and examining plant species as wetland • indicators. These wetland indicators exist at the property regardless of the time of year and weather conditions. The wetland area is located at the lowest portion of the property close to the - 000�9l0 ITEM NUMBER: Z, DATE: 7-17-01 • culvert at Santa Rosa Road. This portion of the property is characterized by a few small willow trees and is subject to inundation as water backs up out of Atascadero Lake. The project applicant proposes to preserve the wetland area which is currently degraded by the grazing cattle. Staff has added a mitigation measure and a project condition of approval that will require an open space easement for this portion of the property. No grading or construction will be allowed within 25 feet of this location. The proposed drainage Swale to be constructed with the subdivision improvements closely matches the location of the blueline creek shown on USGS maps. A defined creek does not currently exist within this location. -T- Drainage r- Draina a"creek" area to e. I�ir✓ .I.+� ..2`�.... Y ..-------'-- .. _ be constructed on the property. Approximate location of wetland area to be left undisturbed. \ ` PAR=3 f' Location of raised pad areas to accommodate fill material and future house sites. Site Access The project will involve the construction of a new road, "Rio Blanco Court", that will intersect with Santa Rosa Road just east of the intersection of Lake View Drive. The road will become a private road allowing public access. Five of the six proposed parcels at this property will utilize this road to access the future residences. The existing residence on the parcel (proposed Parcel 1) will continue to use the existing driveway with a separate connection to Santa Rosa Road. Near the intersection of Santa Rosa Road the new road will span the drainage swale. The bridge feature will be constructed utilizing concrete culverts. The purpose of the bridge feature will be to eliminate fill material and sedimentation within the drainage swale and to add an enhanced • design feature at the entry of the tract. 000015 091 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 7-17-01 • OZXT#4 mom Wm?4= Sao oa►+cwm aims MEICAL BRIQZ SECTPM NOT m SCA" Conceptual bridge design for new road A sight distance analysis was performed by the project engineer for the new roadway intersection with Santa Rosa Road. It was found that the proposed road intersection has 1010 feet of sight distance to the east side and 345 feet to the west side. The sight distance does appear to be adequate for the new intersection considering the speed of the traffic and the number of vehicle trips that will be produced by five new residences within this tract. House Sites The house sites will be designed on elevated pads built above the 100-year flood elevation • points. Staff has added a condition of approval requiring consistent fencing between the house sites and the drainage easements on the property. Staff recommends the fencing consist of a low fence (3 to 4 feet in height) with split rail construction to match the rural character of the site. The neighborhood expressed concerns regarding the locations of the new home sites and potential flooding. In order to satisfy these concerns staff has added a condition of approval requiring 25-foot setbacks between the homesites and the edge of the drainage easement on the north and east sides of the property. The additional setback will also increase the width of the viewshed through the property. Fire Safety The proposed private road serving the new parcels will be developed according to City standards with a cul-de-sac that will allow adequate turn around space. The project includes a new fire hydrant to be located within the cul-de-sac. Wastewater The project will be required to utilize City Sewer. Each of the new homesites will have an individual sewer hookup linking with a new sewer extension to be installed within the new private road. Public Improvements The proposed tract will have frontage along Santa Rosa Road, a paved City road. The City • Engineer is requiring the following off site improvements at Santa Rosa Road as a condition of approval for the map: 0000: 6 092 ITEM NUMBER: zu DATE: 7-17-01 • 1. Santa Rosa Road shall receive a 2-inch asphalt overlay along the tract frontage or as directed by the City Engineer. 2. The north side of Santa Rosa Road shall be improved with a 5-foot wide decomposed granite walkway from the intersection of Lakeview Road to a point where the existing path ties into the Atascadero Lake path. Any existing signs and or rocks encroaching into the proposed pathway shall be relocated to a location approved by the City Engineer. Site Improvements The proposed tract will include several on-site improvements to be completed prior to completion of the final map. This will include, at a minimum, construction of the private roadway, construction of the building sites, drainage areas and landscape. The roadway will not be accepted as a public road; however, it will remain open to public access. The Public Works Department has added a condition of approval requiring provisions for* the repair and maintenance of the road, sewer lines, and the drainage swale to be incorporated into CC& R's handled by a homeowners association for this tract. Environmental Review: The Initial Study concluded that there would be no significant harm to the environment as a • result of this subdivision if proposed project mitigation measures are incorporated into the project's conditions of approval. A proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project and certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is included in the draft resolution of approval. Staff has received two letters responding to the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. Formal responses to the letters are included as exhibit B of attachment 5. In addition to the two letters, a neighborhood petition challenging the Negative Declaration has been received claiming that a full EIR should be prepared for the project. The petition quotes a section of the California Environmental Quality Act that has since been modified. The section formerly read: "If there is serious public controversy over the environmental effects of a project, the lead agency shall consider the effect or effects subject to controversy to be significant and shall prepare an EIR. " This same section in the current CEQA guidelines now reads: "The existence of public controversy over the environmental effects of a project will not require the preparation of an EIR if there is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. " Based on substantial site review, a flood analysis and a wetlands analysis it is staff's opinion that development of the property consistent with project mitigation measures will not have a significant adverse environmental impact. • CONCLUSIONS: O0001r� 093 ITEM NUMBER: 2- DATE: 7-17-01 The tract is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance when project conditions are incorporated into the project. The parcel configurations are consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance requirements and the sizes of the proposed lots are consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood. The newly created parcels will be among the largest parcels around the perimeter of Atascadero Lake. Existing parcels surrounding the lake area average 1/4 to %z acre in size. The proposed building sites and road construction will not create significant environmental impacts when constructed in accordance with project conditions and mitigation measures. If approved, the project would allow for the creation of four additional lots, creating a total of six lots within the project area. The drainage plan for the property, including the addition of a new lake water source could contribute to the improvement of long-term water quality for Atascadero Lake. Staff is basing a recommendation of approval on consistency with current property zoning and consistency with adjacent developed residential property. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The Commission may approve the subdivision subject to additional or revised project conditions. The Commission's motion to approve needs to include any new or revised project conditions. • 2. The Planning Commission may decide not to certify the proposed Y fy p p Mitigated Negative Declaration and send the project back for additional environmental review. The Planning Commission should specify the environmental issues that require additional analysis. 3. The Commission may deny the subdivision if it is found to be inconsistent with the General Plan or any of the other required findings. The Commission's motion to deny must include a finding basis for denial. 4. The Commission may continue the hearing and refer the item back to staff for additional information or analysis. Direction should be given to staff and the applicant on required information. PREPARED BY: Philip Dunsmore, Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 -- Location Map (General Plan&Zoning) Attachment 2 -- Site Aerial photo Attachment 3-- Temporary Open Space Agreement Attachment 4-- Preliminary Drainage Calculations (RThompson Consulting) Attachment 5-- Draft Resolution PC 2001-040 Certifying Mitigated Negative • Declaration 2001-023 Exhibit A- Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-023 00066 i ITEM NUMBER: ' DATE: 7-17-01 • Exhibit B- Response to Mitigated Negative Declaration Comments Exhibit C- Neighborhood petition opposing Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-023 Exhibit D- Letter from Lake neighborhood Exhibit E- Letter from Regional Water Quality Control Board. Attachment 6-- Draft Resolution PC 2001-035 approving TTM 2000 -0002 Exhibit A- Project conditions Exhibit B- Tentative Tract Map - Exhibit C- Proposed Concept Plan Exhibit D- Road and bridge concept Exhibit E- Wetland and drainage area locations • 08g(� ITEM NUMBER: 2 • DATE: 7-17-01 ATTACHMENT 1: Location Map(General Plan/Zoning) TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road ' IY i Atascadero Lake RS F-Y S F-Z • RS Proiect Site 8300 Santa Rosa Road, 9.56 acre lot APN 056-351-004 Zoning: RSF-Z General Plan: Low Density Single Family ITEM NUMBER: Z. DATE: 7-17-01 • ATTACHMENT 2: Site Aerial Photo TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road 's r. 17 41 AA- Iq i k �k r ` r- �b � 1999 Aerial photo shows the irrigated pasture (subject tract property) adjacent to Santa Rosa Road. The photo is evidence of no significant native flora and no evident creekway at the property. 00CG IL 097 ITEM NUMBER: 2— DATE: DATE: 7-17-01 I ATTACHMENT 3: Open Space Agreement TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road F Contract No. 94020 AGREEMENT TO MAINTAIN OPEN SPACE USE This agreement is entered into this LAay of Jkty, 1994 by and between Arthur and Betty Blankenship. (hereinafter, "Owners"), owners of real property located at 8300 Santa Rosa Road, San Luis Obispo County, Atascadero,California(hereinafter, property")and the City of Atascadero,a Municipal Corporation,organized under and existing by virtue of the general laws of the State of California (hereinafter, "City"). WHEREAS,the City has installed public sewer facilities within Santa Rosa Road in front of the property; and WHEREAS, the property has been legally assessed for the installation of these sewer facilities; and • WHEREAS,the property has been and is currently used as open space pasture- land by the Owners; and WHEREAS,the Owners do not currently intend to use the property for purposes other than its' current use in the future; and WHEREAS, the property is subject to flooding and as such is unlikely to, due to costs, develop in the near future; and WHEREAS,the City desires that the property be maintained in its' current open space use in the near future. The Owners and City hereby agree to the following terms and conditions: 1. The recitals above are true and correct. 2. The City agrees to pay the assessments due on the property for Sewer Assessment District No. 7, subject to the terms of this agreement. 3. The owners agree to maintain and use the property in its' current state and use, which is open space pasture-land and drainage. 4. Owners may develop this property at any time but must first repay the City for the assessments paid by the City pursuant to this agreement. When such repayments are received by the City, the agreement so far as it requires City payment or maintenance by Owners of open space is terminated. • 1 000022 098 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 7-17-01 • 'I 5. Owners must immediately repay the City upon the occurrence of any of the following events: A. The passage of fifteen (15)years from the date of this agreement. B. The sale of this property, prior to the recordation of the deed. C. The development of the property prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of a new dwelling, or other permitted new structure not necessary to a use existing on the date of this agreement. 6. Repayment to the City shall be the amount paid by the City plus five percent (5%) simple interest from the date of each payment. Owners may repay the City at any time, without penalty. Said repayment shall be the total assessment plus any accured interest. 7. This agreement, and covenants contained herein, shall burden the property and the land; and.shall run with the land and be binding upon; and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, • successors, and assigns of the Owners, and any future owners of, or any portion of, the property. 8. This agreement may only be modified by the mutual written consent of both parties or the respective successors in interest. 9. Time is of the essence in this agreement. CITY OF ATASCADERO ATTESTS BY y 4*AlEWLEY, Ma r l{� o PROPERTY OWNERS LEE PRICE, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: BY: ' 1 RTHUR BLANKENSHIP y: f ARTHER R. M_. TA ON, BETTPLANKENSHIP City Attorney 2 • 00002 09 ITEM NUMBER: -- • ( DATE: 7-17-01 ATTACHMENT4: Preliminary Drainage Calculations report summary RThompson Consulting January 23,2001 TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road TTM 20001*0002 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS _ SANTA ROSA ROAD; ATASCADERO (BETWEEN MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE AND MARCHANT AVENUE) JANUARY 23, 2001 By. RUSSELL S.THOMPSON, PE C43,069 EXP.3-31-04 R THOMPSON CONSULTIN 7400 MORRO ROAD ATASCADERO, CA 93422 (805) 462-1375 �\� s LFticti� FOR: r . i L1C.NO.C43 JAN 2 3 2001 MR. DAVID GRAVES PICOFCAlY i 0000 10 V i INTRODUCTION • The following report is a preliminary drainage evaluation for Mr. David Graves proposed subdivision of Lots 9 and 10 of Block 13 (TTM 2000-0002). The project is a 6-lot subdivision of 9.5-acres on Santa Rosa Road. The project site is immediately upstream of the south end of Atascadero Lake. The report will define the proposed drainage improvements required to create building sites above the 100-year flood elevation of the un-named drainage swale flowing through the site, and the general scope of drainage improvements required in accordance with the City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standards. The site flood elevations are influenced by several factors unique to this site, namely the spillway elevation of Atascadero Lake, the existing double 6' x 8' concrete box culvert under Santa Rosa Road, and the relatively flat sloping ground onsite and immediately upstream of the site. Also pertinent to this project are the results of a Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters Report prepared by Sierra Delta Corporation dated November 17, 2000 which identified a minor wetland area near the upstream side of the Santa Rosa Road box culvert. SITE DESCRIPTION • The 9.5-acre site is located immediately upstream of the Atascadero Lake on the south side of Santa Rosa Road. An existing residence exists onsite near the southerly property line in the southwest corner of the site. The balance of the site is being used as grazing/ pasture land. A drainage area of 386-acres drains through the project site, as shown on Exhibit A,_Area 1. The drainage basin is made up of perennial grass and woodland grass areas as defined by the Soil Conservation Service(SCS)maps for the area, as shown on Exhibit B. The proximity to Atascadero Lake also requires the analysis to address what if any affect the spillway elevation has on potentially backing water up through the Santa Rosa Road box culvert. To facilitate that analysis the additional drainage area surrounding the lake was determined. The additional area shown as Area 2 on Exhibit A, is 139-acres. The average slope of the watershed was determined to be 17%using the summation of contour lengths method. The project site has two main points of flow onto the site, one along the easterly property line where culverts drain under an existing driveway, and the main channel at the southeast corner of the site. 000025 101 Graves/Santa Rosa Road TTM 2000-0002 • Floodplain/Drainage Analysis January 23,2001 Page 2 1 HYDROLOGY The peak drainage flows were determined using the SCS Method due to the size of the drainage basins involved. The SCS Method is widely accepted for studies of this magnitude. The attached drainage calculations summarize the analysis, including the design rainfall estimates based on NOAA Atlas charts for 6-hour and 24-hour rainfall. PEAK RUNOFF The peak runoff flow rates were determined for the 25-year and 100-year storms. The 25-year and 100-year peak flows through the project site were determined to be 229=cfs and 326-cfs respectively. The 100-year peak flow rate at the lake spillway was determined to be an additional 117-cfs, bringing t he total flow at the spillway to 443-cfs. 100-YEAR ANALYSIS The determination of the 100-year flood limits begins with the determination of the required elevation of water flowing over the lake spillway. In this analysis we have made the assumption to neglect any effect of the beginning elevation of the lake and storage of water in the lake on the flow rate over the spillway, in other words, the lake is full when the 100-year peak flow arrives at the spillway(spillway elev. = 913.0). The attached calculations show that when the 100-year flow is passing over the lake spillway the depth is 1.9-feet or Elevation 914.9. This elevation is approximately 4.4-feet above the invert elevation of the box culverts under Santa Rosa Road. Therefore using the assumptions state above the spillway creates a backwater effect onto the project site. Pre-development Analis The pre-development 100-year flood condition was determined using Manning's Equation to calculate the water surface elevations across the project site. Cross-sections were strategically selected at key points across the site. A Manning's coefficient of 0.040 was utilized for analysis. The design of the proposed improvements must ensure that adjacent properties do not experience flooding in excess of pre-development levels due to the project. The calculations are attached, as well as a map of the pre-development flood elevations • and limits(see Drawing labeled"Existing Condition' Graves/Santa Rosa Road TIM 2000-0002 000M Graves/Santa Rosa Road TTM 2000-0002 • Floodplain/Drage Analysis January 23,2001 Page 3 4 Post-development Analysis The post-development 100-year flood condition is influenced by the proposed grading_for building pads and driveways and culverts across the channel. The proposed design creates broad shallow channels to channelize the runoff and direct the flow to the proposed culvert crossings as well as directing the flow away form the proposed building pads. The proposed channels also provide a defined route from the two main points of flow onto the project site to a point above the area designated as a potential wetland. The proposed site grading does not include that area designated as a potential wetland. The post-development analysis also uses Manning's Equation to evaluate the water surface in the proposed cross-sections (after site grading). A Manning's coefficient of 0.040 was utilized for analysis. The-first driveway culvert crossing upstream of the Santa Rosa Road culvert (see calculations for"Driveway Culvert No. 1), near the end of the proposed cul-de-sac,was analyzed for both the 25-year and 100-year storm events. Due to the proximity of the crossing to the properties to the east there is minimal elevation difference in this location and the properties to the east as well as the elevation of the low point in Santa Rosa Road. Therefore the culvert was sized to pass the 100-year storm (330 cfs) with minimal headwater depth so as to not create backwater across the easterly property line or the low point in Santa Rosa Road. We are recommending a triple 4' x 10'box culvert or equivalent at this location. The second driveway culvert is a smaller culvert for the driveway serving the proposed Parcel 5 (see calculations for"Driveway Culvert No. 2). Similar to Culvert No. 1, due to the proximity of the crossing to the properties to the east there is minimal elevation difference in this location and the properties to the east as well as the elevation of the low point in Santa Rosa Road. Therefore the culvert was sized to pass the 100-year storm (50 cfs)with minimal headwater depth so as to not create backwater across the easterly property line or the low point in Santa Rosa Road. We are recommending a single 42- inch HDPE smooth wall culvert or equivalent at this location. Attached to this report is a"Proposed Condition" drawing which depicts the anticipated 100-year, post-development water surface. This drawing shows, as we have determined that, that the proposed project does not adversely effect upstream property owners, and maintains the historic 100-year water surface elevation on their property. 000027 103 Graves/Santa Rosa Road TTM 2000-0002 • Floodplain/Drainage Analysis January 23,2001 Page 4 CONCLUSION , The proposed project can be developed in a manner that meets or exceeds the current City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standards and will not cause detrimental storm water/flooding effects on adjacent properties. Furthermore the proposed grading and drainage improvements required for the proposed project can be constructed outside of that area designated as potential wetlands. • • 0000`'8 104 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 7-17-01 • ATTACHMENT 5: Draft Resolution PC 2001-0040 Certifying Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-0023 TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. PC 2001-035 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO CERTIFYING THE PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO DIVIDE AND DEVELOP PROPERTY AT 8300 SANTA ROSA ROAD INTO SIX RESIDENTIAL LOTS (TTM 2000-0002/TRACT 2410 /David Graves) WHEREAS, David Graves, 7475 Cortez Avenue, Atascadero (Owner/Applicant), applied for a Tentative Tract Map to divide two residential lots, totaling 9.56 acres, into six parcels; and, WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-023 were prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the • requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing following the close of the public review period for the Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration to consider the proposed environmental determination; and, NOW, THEREFORE,the Atascadero Planning Commission, at a public hearing held on Tuesday, August 7, 2001, hereby resolves to certify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-023 based on the following Findings and shown on Exhibit A: 1. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and, 2. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the Planning Commission, and the information contained therein was considered, prior to action on the project for which it was prepared; and, 3. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project's mitigation monitoring program as conditions of approval; and, 4. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals; • and, 0000`' l � ITEM NUMBER: 2, . DATE: 7-17-01 5. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable; and, 6. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. On motion by Commissioner and seconded by Commissioner the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Royce Eddings, Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Lori Parcells, Director Community Development Department 0000, 0 106 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 7-17-01 • Exhibit A: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-0023 TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road SCIN Ilia f 191a! _ 1979 A�SCAD 9, CITY OF ATASCADERO ' PROPOSED MITIGATED 1 NEGATIVE DECLARATION #2001-023 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero,CA 93422 805/461-5035 APPLICANT: David Graves PROJECT TITLE: _ Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002 PROJECT LOCATION: 8300 Santa Rosa,Atascadero, CA,San L:us Obispo County, APN 056- 351-004 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Tract map subdividing two existing lots into six parcels. One lot currently contains a single-family residence. Five vacant parcels would be created, allowing the development offive additional individual residences. The project site is at the south end of Atascadero Lake within a location currently zrtilized for cattle grazing. The site is part of a watershed for Atascadero Lake and contains sectional drainage. A new road would serve the parcels, intersecting tivith Santa Rosa Road near the intersection of Lakeview Drive. General Plan Designation:Low Density Single Family; Zoning District:RSF-Z,minimum lot size 1.5 to 2.5 acres (calculated to be 1.50 acres using performance standards). FINDINGS: 1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project. 2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of longi term environmental goals, when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project. 3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable, when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project. 4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly, when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project. DETERIYIINATION: Based on the above findings,and the information contained in the initial study 2001-023 made a part hereof by reference and on file in the Community Development Department), it has been determined that the above project 8i@ �0 not have an adverse impact on the environment when the following proposed mitigation measures are incorporated • into the project. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM: Please note: Mitigation measures shown underlined have been revised in response to comments recieved. Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road FM:Final Map GP Grading Permit PS Planning services TTM 2000-0002 BP.Building Pertrit BS Budding serwin TO,Temporary occupancy FD:Fire Departrnent Fo:Final Occupancy DFG:Departnentof PI:Public improvements Fish and Game CE City Engineer RWOC8:Regional Water Duality control Board CA,CayABorney AMWC:Atascadero MuWal Water Company 1. The project shall utilize a comprehensive landscape plan FM BP PS 1.a. that will list tree, shrub and groundcover species for the project. Landscape plan shall include street trees,.and native type landscape species for all drainage areas within the 100-year flood elevation. • 2. Graded slopes on proposed parcel 2 shall be landscaped FM BP PS 1.b. utilizing native tree and shrub species. 3. Landscape plan should list size,quantity and species of all FM BP PS I.C. plant species to be utilized at the property. Landscape plan shall be prepared and installed by a qualified landscape professional to be approved by the Community Development Department. 4. Any lighting within public areas(i.e.street lighting)shall be BP PS 1.d. low intensity lighting,to be approved by the Community Development Department. 5. The project shall be conditioned to comply with all Ongoing PS/CE 3.a-I applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust(PM-10)as contained in section 6.4 of the Air Quality Handbook. All site grading and demolition plans notes shall list the following regulations: All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least twice daily with complete coverage, preferably in the late morning and after work is finished for the day. All clearing,grading,earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease during periods of high winds(i.e. greater than 20 mph averaged over one hour)so as to • prevent excessive amounts of dust. City of Atascadero Page 2 of 14 Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure • 8300 Santa Rosa Road FM:FwW Map C.P.Grading Pertrit PS:Planning Services TTM 2000-0002 BP.Building Peruft BS:Bing Senka TQTengaaryOxupancy FD:FreI)Watrnent FO:Final Occupancy DFG:Depatnentof PL•Punic Improvements Fish and Gane CE Gly Engineer RWOCB:Regional Water QualityControl Board CA City Attorney AMWC:Atascadero Mutual Water Company All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations shall be minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Permanent dust control measured identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with fast-germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation becomes established. All disturbed areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,jute • netting, or other methods in advance by the APCD. All roadways,driveways, sidewalks, etc.to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, structural foundations shall be completed as soon as possible following building pad construction. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph for any unpaved surface. All unpaved areas with vehicle traffic shall be watered at least twice per day, using non-potable water. Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept daily to remove silt which may have accumulated from construction activities so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust from leaving the site. Wheel washers may be required when significant offsite import or export of fill is involved. 6. All new construction on the proposed parcels shall be BP PS 4.a. consistent with the City of Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. 7. Drainage area near east and north boundaries of property FM BP 4.b. shall be restored as a native creek area utilizing a native landscape plan incorporating trees and shrubs. 8. Location delineated as a wetland by Sierra Delta Corp. FM BP PS 4.c. • report, November 2000 shall be preserved and fenced City of Atascadero Page 3 of 14 Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road Fit RW Map Smim TTM 2000-0002 �s ding P� B:B�n9SwAm Ta.TwPo ary ocapancy FD:Fre Depatrnent FQ:FinalOocupancy DFG:Depaventot Pt Public Improvemerds FM and Game CE City Engineer RWQCB:Regional Water Quality Contrd Board CA City AWmy AMWC:At=adero Mutual Watar Company during all phases of construction of the project. The fencing shall be placed a minimum of 25 feet from edge of defined wetland. No grading,trenching or filling of soil material shall occur within 25 feet of designated wetland. 9. The final parcel map shall identify a permanent open space FM BP PS 4.d. easement that shall prohibit grading,trenching,construction or native tree removals following completion of on-site improvements. Open space easement shall be recorded _ for all locations to remain within 100 year flood plain in areas which are to be restored as a creekway. 10. Proposed building sites will be delineated on the parcel FM PS 4.e. map. Proposed new construction will be limited to a • specific radius as provided on the parcel map and approved by the Community Development Department. A 25-foot setback for homes adiacent to the drainage areas on the east and north sides of the property shall be required.The setback shall be measured from the rear of the homes to the edge of the drainage easement. 11. The applicant shall notify the Department of Fish and Game BP PS/DFG/RW 4.f. and the Regional Water Quality Control Board to obtain the QCB necessary permits prior to site construction. 12. The applicant shall notify the Regional Water Quality BP PS/CE 4.g. Control Board(RWQCB)prior to any site construction in order to obtain any necessary permits for alteration of drainage area.A National Pollutant Discharqe Elimination System General Construction Permit (General Permit)will be required.This may be accomplished by submitting a General Permit. Notice of Intent,through the RWQCB.The General Permit requires adopting and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for construction and post- construction phases. 13. All areas within drainage swale shall be designed to FM BP PS 4.h • eliminate erosion and sedimentation. A qualified biological consultant shall prepare drainage swale design recommendations including plant materials City of Atascadero Page 4 of 14 Initial Study 00Of�� i Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure • 8300 Santa Rosa Road Fret FwW Map Ps:Planning smicu GP.Grading Pemit Big Sery ces TTM 2000-0002 ac wogh PenFD:Fre Department To:TwPorary occupancy FO,Finaloccupancy DFG.DepaVvrdof Pt Punic Inprovem rft Fish and Game CE City Engineer RWQCB.Regional Water Quardy Control Board CA,City AM-y AMWC.At madero Mutual Waxer Cortgany swale lining,silt protection,and methods to naturalize the new drainage course. 14. A biological consultant shall be retained by the project FM BP PS 4.1 applicant to assist with the construction techniques within the drainage areas. The biological consultant shall monitor the construction methods and certify the completion of the drainage swale restoration proiect (creek enhancement). 15. All grading and excavation within the proposed drainage BP PS 8.b. locations of the property shall be performed during dry season months as recommended by the Department of Fish&Game and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 16. All future residential development shall be required to hook BP CE 8.c. up to city sewer to serve all wastewater needs 17. Site drainage shall be provided through the proposed lots FM CE/PS 8.d. as shown on the exhibit B Tentative Parcel Map. Drainage channels shall be designed consistent with map exhibits and as required to handle drainage as shown within the Prelminary Drainage Calculations prepared by RTC, January 2001 18. No structures,fences, earthwork or other activities which Ongoing 8.e. may impede flow are to be placed within drainage locations 19. A maintenance agreement shall be required for the FM CE 8.f. drainage areas that cross individual private lots to ensure maintained drainage,weed and refuse abatement. 20. A preliminary site distance analysis shall be prepared for FM CE 15.a. the new intersection of Santa Rosa Road and the new road serving the subject property. PREPARED BY: Philip Dunsmore,Assistant Planner DATE POSTED: 6/28/01 PUBLIC REVIEW ENDS: 7/17/01 • City of Atascadero Page 5 of 14 Initial Study Figure 1 • Vicinity Map �k tea. Atascadera Lake RS F-Y S F-Z RS lv 8300 Santa Rosa Road General Plan: Low Density Single Family APN 056-351-004 Zoning District: RSF-Z Two existing lots: 9.56 acres total • City of Atascadero Page 6 of 14 Initial Study 112 12 00003t; Figure 2 Tentative Parcel Map • f 1� t ►� 1 _ I r \�� %!I It NV Op (14 9 1 _ • � yti' /' �. Ili(( i''q'�'/i.�/ /r��`" � / I n • rN/ l // J ����7 �t � -. ��� r i-'fg]gn�'� iJ/�' 1 r�•il1/'r`,��1� // 11� ,� y! -/ •rte*��i�i- � ��''/ ��, i6"/11//�,7�##j` City of Atascadero Page 7 of 14 Initial Study 0000313 stag: lir. f CITY OF ATAS CADER O INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002 Residential Subdivision Environmental Review 2001-023 1. Proiect Title: TTM 2000-0002: 6-lot subdivision (David Graves) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: - Philip Dunsmore, Assistant Planner City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 4. Proiect Location: • 8300 Santa Rosa Road Atascadero, CA 93422 San Luis Obispo County APN 056-351-004 5. Proiect Sponsor's Name and Address: David Graves 7475 Cortez Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Single Family 7. Zoning: RSF-X 8. Description of Project: Tract map subdividing two existing lots into six parcels. One lot currently contains a single-family residence. Five vacant parcels would be created, allowing the development of five additional individual residences. The project site is at the south end of Atascadero Lake within a location currently utilized for cattle grazing. The site is part of a watershed for Atascadero Lake and contains a seasonal creekway. A new road would serve the parcels, intersecting with Santa Rosa Road near the intersection of Lakeview Drive. General Plan Designation: Low Density Single Family; Zoning District: RSF-Z, minimum lot size 1.5 to 2.5 acres (calculated to be 1.50 acres using performance standards). • 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is surrounded by developed residential lots and is separated from Atascadero Lake by a developed collector roadway. City of Atascadero Page 9 of 14 Initial Study 114 0000--1v 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or • participation agreement): Dept. of Fish & Game, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Army Corp of Engineers. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards&Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning Materials ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance On the basis of this initial evaluation: • ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant effect"or"potentially significant unless mitigated"impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects(a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. • City of Atascadero Page 10 of 14 Initial Study 115 0000=f0 Phil Dunsmore,Assistant Planner Date • EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS• 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a Lead Agency cites following each question. A"No Impact"answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved(e.g.the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A"No Impact"answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards(e.g.the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct,and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more"Potentially Significant Impact"entries when the determination is made,an EIR is required. - 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated"applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"to a"Less than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures,and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level(mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses,"may be cross-referenced). • 5) Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA process,an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references information sources for potential impacts(e.g.general plans,zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached. Other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. • City of Atascadero Page 11 of 14 Initial Study rr 0000.,; Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation I.AESTHETICS-Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b)Substantially damage scenic resources, including,but not limited to, trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c)Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d)Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? SOURCES: Project description,Proposed Tentative Parcel Map, DISCUSSION:The subject property is at the south end of Atascadero lake and is currently open cattle grazing field with low grasses. Development of the property will modify the existing viewshed,placing homes and landscape in a location that is currently an open field,as viewed from Santa Rosa Road and adjacent properties. The project is intended to restore the drainage at the property and utilize extensive native landscape in an effort to reduce visual impacts of the site construction to a less than significant level. MITIGATION MEASURES:Aesthetics a. The project shall utilize a comprehensive landscape plan that will list tree,shrub and groundcover species for the project. Landscape plan shall include street trees,and native type landscape species for all drainage areas within the 100-year flood elevation. b. Graded slopes on proposed parcel 2 shall be landscaped utilizing native tree and shrub species. c. Landscape plan should list size,quantity and species of all plant species to be utilized at the property. Landscape plan shall be prepared and installed by a qualified landscape professional to be approved by the Community Development Department. d. Any lighting within public areas(i.e. street lighting)shall be low intensity lighting,to be approved by the Community T1PvPInnm,-nt n,-nnrhnant 2.AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model(1997)prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.Would the project: a)Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared El El pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use? b)Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a Williamson Act contract? El El City of Atascadero Page 12 of 31 Initial Study 00 JJ,7. a.., • Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation c)Involve other changes in the existing environment which,due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use? SOURCES: Land Use Element EIR DISCUSSION: The site is not suitable for significant agriculture use and is currently used for residential purposes. The property is used for seasonal cattle grazing,however due to the limited size of the property and the surrounding developed residential lots,the property is not considered prime grazing land. The property is identified for residential development on the city's General Plan and Zoning maps. 3. AIR QUALITY-- The significance criteria established by the Air Quality Control District in its CEQA Guidelines may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air rg quality plan? b)Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an ® El ❑ existing or projected air quality violation? c)Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria ® El pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard(including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? El e)Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? El SOURCES: Air Pollution Control District(APCD)CEQA Air Quality Handbook,project description DISCUSSION: The Air Quality Handbook finds that a project that produces 10 pounds a day of emissions will have a significant effect on air quality.The construction of 35 homes would result in the production of 10 pounds of emissions per day.The proposed project will allow the construction of five additional homesites. It is anticipated that minor air quality impacts may result from construction of the five new residences and access road,however following construction air quality impacts will be less than significant. The project should incorporate dust and soil erosion control measures during site grading and construction. • City of Atascadero Page 13 of 31 Initial Study 00004, 118 Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impac 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation MITIGATION MEASURES: Air Oualitv 1.The project shall be conditioned to comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM-10)as contained in section 6.4 of the Air Quality Handbook. All site grading and demolition plans notes shall list the following regulations: a. All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust..Watering shall occur at least twice daily with complete coverage,preferably in the late morning and after work is finished for the day. b. All clearing,grading,earth moving,or excavation activities shall cease during periods of high winds(i.e.greater than 20 mph averaged over one hour)so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust. _ c. All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. d. The area disturbed by clearing,grading,earth moving,or excavation operations shall be minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust. e. Permanent dust control measured identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. f. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with fast- germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation becomes established. g. All disturbed areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,jute netting,or other methods in advance by the APCD. h. All roadways,driveways,sidewalks,etc.to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition,structural foundations shall be completed as soon as possible following building pad construction. i. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph for any unpaved surface. j. All unpaved areas with vehicle traffic shall be watered at least twice per day,using non-potable water. k. Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept daily to remove silt which may have accumulated from construction activities so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust from leaving the site. 1. Wheel washers may be required when significant offsite import or export of fill is involved. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES --Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications,on any species identified as a candidate,sensitive,or EJ El El City of Atascadero Page 14 of 31 Initial Stud '009 • Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation special status species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, El El El policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c)Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(including,but not limited to,marsh,vernal pool, coastal, etc.)through direct removal, filling,hydrological interruption,or other means? d)Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or El migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? • f)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation El Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other approved local, regional,or state habitat conservation plan? SOURCES: Project description,Land Use Element EIR,Atascadero Tree Ordinance,Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters Report-Sierra Delta Coroporation November 17,2000. ISCUSSION: The subject property is in a residential area of Atasacadero on the southern end of Atascadero Lake. Historical aerial photographs as far back as 1956 and as recent as 2000 show the property being used for primarily for cattle grazing. The vegetation is non-native grasses with a few native trees located at the northwest corner near the culvert under Santa Rosa Road. The elevation of the property ranges from 910 feet above mean sea level at the northwest corner and 954 feet above mean sea level at the southwest corner. Atascadero Lake currently has a surface level of 907 feet above mean sea level. The level of the lake is controlled by the level of the spillway at the north end of the lake. The property has a historical stream course which runs in a southeast/northwest direction through the property. However the stream course is not visible on the property today nor in aerial photos dating back to 1956. The stream channel is mapped on current U.S.G.S.maps as a blueline creek. Any stream channel was likely obliterated due to historical agricultural and cattle grazing uses on the property. As confirmed in the report prepared by Sierra Delta Corporation for the subject property, a small portion of the property has been identified as a wetlands.Approximately.04 acres of the property has been delineated as wetland as approximately shown in figure 3. The wetland boundary was established where the hydric soils and wetland hydrology gave way to non-hydric soils and hydrophitic vegetation.This portion of the property is the lowest lying area of the property,approximately 3 feet above the surface level of Atascadero lake. The location is identified by a small cluster of willow trees located near the culvert that crosses beneath Santa Rosa Road.The proposed project is designed to preserve the existing wetland area during and following construction of the project. No grading or construction is proposed for this vicinity and the proposed tract map will identify this location as permanent open space. • City of Atascadero Page 15 of 31 Initial Study go 0U0 45 Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impac 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation ' ;\'pig; • � This aerial photo of the property from bt: "� , : 2000 shows the evidence of irrigated grassland with no discernable watercourse. Atascadero Lake is at the z` <' top of the photo separated from the t property by Santa Rosa Road. t ° A large portion of the property is not identified as a wetland,however it is considered to be an inundation area subject to seasonal flooding. Some portions of the inundation area are within the 100-year flood zone. The proposed project has been designed to accommodate the existing drainage on the site with the intention of improving the existing water quality. Current and historic grazing on the property has contributed to a deterioration of water quality feeding Atascadero Lake. The proposed project would eliminate grazing at the property and restore a creekway at the property allowing a natural water course to cross the property.As mentioned there is no defined watercourse on the property and the site"sheet drains"into Atascadero Lake. Development of the property will require site grading and filling of soil on the property in order to create acceptable building • pads. The site grading will create a defined"creekway" in order to accommodate site drainage e and restore a natural drainage course. The project will include a significant native type landscape plan in order to naturalize the new drainage course and re- establish a habitat area that is not presently on the property. lit- Project site during a significant storm event,January 2001 City of Atascadero Page 16 of 31 Initial Stud 000 • Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation The site is currently irrigated with sprinklers that utilize a spring on the property as a water source. The irrigation is used to keep vegetation growing on the property in order to feed grazing cattle. Development of the property will eliminate the site irrigation and utilize the existing spring in order to contribute a water source to Atascadero Lake. The additional water source, combined with the elimination of the cattle are likely to enhance the water quality of Atascadero Lake. MITIGATION MEASURES: 4: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a. All new construction on the proposed parcels shall be consistent with the City of Atascadero Native Tree Ordinance. b. Drainage area near east and north boundaries of property shall be restored as a native creek area utilizing a native landscape plan incorporating trees and shrubs. C. Location delineated as a wetland by Sierra Delta Corp.report,November 2000 shall be preserved and fenced during all phases of construction of the project. The fencing shall be placed a minimum of 25 feet from edge of defined wetland. No grading,trenching or filling of soil material shall occur within 25 feet of designated wetland. — d. The final parcel map shall identify a permanent open space easement that shall prohibit grading,trenching,construction or native tree removals following completion of on-site improvements. Open space easement shall be recorded for all locations to remain within 100 year flood plain in areas which are to be restored as a creekway. e. Proposed building sites will be delineated on the parcel map. Proposed new construction will be limited to a specific radius as provided on the parcel map and approved by the Community Development Departrnent.A 25-foot setback for homes adjacent to the drainage areas on the east and north sides of the property shall be required.The setback shall be measured from the rear of the homes to the edge of the drainage • easement. f. The applicant shall notify the Department of Fish and Game and provide the City of Atascadero with one of the following prior to any activity occurring on the site: 1. A Streambed Alteration Agreement;or 2.Written verification from the Department of Fish and Game that the project will not adversely affect existing fish or wildlife resources and a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not required. g. The applicant shall notify the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to any site construction in order to obtain any necessary permits for alteration of drainage area.A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Construction Permit(General Permit)will be required.This may be accomplished by submitting a General Permit,Notice of Intent,through the.RWQCB.The General Pertuit requires adopting and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for construction and post-construction phases. h. All areas within drainage Swale shall be designed to eliminate erosion and sedimentation. A qualified biological consultant shall prepare drainage swale design recommendations including plant materials,Swale lining,silt protection,and methods to naturalize the new drainage course. i. A biological consultant shall be retained by the project applicant to assist with the construction techniques within the drainage areas. The biological consultant shall monitor the construction methods and certify the completion of the drainage swale restoration project(creek enhancement). Is. CULTURAL RESOURCES --Would the project: a)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? El b)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an El archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? c)Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or ❑ is City of Atascadero Page 17 of 31 Initial Study 0 OQ Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impac 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation site or unique geologic feature? d)Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? SOURCES: Project description,site visit,Land Use Element EIR,confidential map of known archaeological sites(not available for public review) DISCUSSION:There are no known cultural resources on the property. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS --Would the project: a)Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, ❑ ❑ including the risk of loss,injury,or death involving: i)Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on the most El El recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii)Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? F ❑ R ® • iv)Landslides? 1:1 ❑ ❑ b)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? F1 ® El c)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,subsidence,liquefaction or collapse? d)Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life or property? e)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic El tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? SOURCES: Project description,site visit,Land Use Element EIR. DISCUSSION: The proposed project will allow the construction of five new residences on a level parcel,currently served by city sewer services. The proposed parcels will contain building envelopes that have slopes less than 10%. Any new construction will be required to be built to current building codes and designed to handle seismic events. Separate review and City of Atascadero Page 18 of 31 Initial Stud 000048 123 • Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation building permits will be required for the construction on the individual parcels. Proposed parcel 2 will require some slope grading in order to create a level building pad. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would the proj ect: a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through D El the routine transport,use,or disposal of hazardous materials? b)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c)Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? • d)Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e)For a project located within an airport land use plan area or,where El such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? f)For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the E El project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? g)Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury or ❑ E E (27,11 death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? SOURCES:Project description DISCUSSION: Residential uses do not generate or involve use of significant amounts of hazardous materials. The property is not near an airport. The site is within the Fire Department's 6-7 minute response area(not considered a high fire severity zone). Any new access driveways or new construction shall require approval from the building department,which will include review of fire department access. A new roadway developed to city standards will serve the proposed project. • City of Atascadero Page 19 of 31 Initial Study 0 0Y Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation There are no known hazardous materials on the site or nearby. F8, HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY--Would the project: a)Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b)Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially ® E with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level(e.g., the production rate of previously-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, 0 El including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, El including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner • that would result in flooding on-or off-site? e)Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide El substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f)Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g)Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a LLN federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h)Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? i)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding,including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j)Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? E] El SOURCES: Project description,Flood Insurance Rate Map,USGS Map(Atascadero Quadrangle)Preliminary Drainage Calculations:R Thompson Consulting January 23,2001. DISCUSSION: A portion of the project will be developed within a known 100-year flood hazard area. The elevation of the City of Atascadero Page 20 of 31 Initial Stud • Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation property ranges from 910 feet above mean sea level at the northwest corner and 954 feet above mean sea level at the southwest comer. Atascadero Lake currently has a surface level of 907 feet above mean sea level. The level of the lake is controlled by the level of the spillway at the north end of the lake. The property has a historical stream course which runs in a southeast/northwest direction through the property. However the stream course is not visible on the property today nor in aerial photos dating back to 1956. The stream channel is mapped on current U.S.G.S.maps as a blueline creek. Any stream channel was likely obliterated due to historical agricultural and cattle grazing uses on the property. A large portion of the property is considered to be an inundation area subject to seasonal flooding. Some portions of the inundation area are within the 100-year flood zone. The proposed project has been designed to accommodate the existing drainage on the site with the intention of improving the existing water quality. Current and historic grazing on the property has contributed to a deterioration of water quality feeding Atascadero Lake. The proposed project would eliminate grazing at the property and restore a creekway at the property allowing a natural water course to cross the property.As mentioned there is no defined watercourse on the property and the site"sheet drains"into Atascadero Lake. Development of the property will require site grading and filling of soil on the property in order to create acceptable building pads. The site grading will create a defined"creek-way"in order to accommodate site drainage and restore a natural drainage course. The project will include a significant native type landscape plan in order to naturalize the new drainage course and re-establish a habitat area that is not presently on the property. The locations designated for single family residential development will be located above the estimated 100-year flood elevation. The house sites will consist of raised pad areas several feet above the flood plain.The preliminary drainage calculations prepared for the property indicate that the raised pad areas will not adversely affect upstream property owners. • The proposed grading plan will maintain the historic 100-year water surface elevation on adjacent properties. On-site the project will accommodate necessary drainage patterns while allowing additional areas for inundation during extreme storm events. MITIGATION MEASURES: 8: Hydrology and Water Quality a. All grading and excavation within the proposed drainage locations of the property shall be performed during dry season months as recommended by the Department of Fish&Game and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. b. All future residential development shall be required to hook up to city sewer to serve all wastewater needs. c. Site drainage shall be provided through the proposed lots as shown on the exhibit B Tentative Parcel Map. Drainage channels shall be designed consistent with map exhibits and as required to handle drainage as shown within the Prelminary Drainage Calculations prepared by RTC,January 2001. d. No structures,earthwork or other activities which may impede flow are to be placed within drainage locations. e. A maintenance agreement shall be required for the drainage areas that cross individual private lots to ensure maintained drainage, weed and refuse abatement. • City of Atascadero Page 21 of 31 Initial Study 00005, Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant impale 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING-Would the project: a)Physically divide an established community? ❑ E R b)Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or regulation of E E an agency with jurisdiction over the project(including,but not limited to the general plan,specific plan,local coastal program,or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c)Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural El community conservation plan? SOURCES: Land Use Element,Zoning Ordinance,project description,Land Use Element EIR _ DISCUSSION: The new lots are consistent with the Zoning Ordinance in that they meet the minimum lot size requirements and the land use element states that single family dwellings are to be the primary principal use in this General Plan designation. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES --Would the project: a)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that ®. would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b)Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral 0 0 resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,specific plan or other land use plan? SOURCES: Project description DISCUSSION:No mining is proposed as a part of this project. No known mineral resources have been identified in the area. 11. NOISE--Would the project result in: a)Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of other agencies? b)Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borneEl El El N vibration or ground-borne noise levels? c)A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the 0 ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d)A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e)For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such E] ❑ M a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or City of Atascadero Page 22 of 31 Initial Stud 000052 127 • Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f)For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the D project expose people living or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? SOURCES: Project description,Noise Element,Noise Ordinance,Acoustical Design Manual DISCUSSION:The proposed new building entitlement will be for a single family residence per lot in a location that conforms with the noise ordinance and Noise Element of the City of Atascadero. With the construction of five additional residences as allowed by the proposed subdivision minor increases in noise as a result of the construction will during construction period. 112. POPULATION AND HOUSING --Would the project: a)Induce substantial population growth in an area,either directly(for El ❑ ® El example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b)Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c)Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the 0 ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? SOURCES: Project description DISCUSSION: .No housing or persons will be displaced.Five new residential properties will be created by the proposed project in a location not presently developed with housing. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES a)Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? • City of Atascadero Page 23 of 31 Initial Study 0000511- 128 Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impar• 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation Other public facilities? E ❑ ® El SOURCES:Project description,Land Use Element EIR,Parks and Recreation Element DISCUSSION: The project will allow for five new entitlements,therefore allowing five additional residences at the property. Five new residences will create minor impacts to all Public Services within the City at a less than significant level. 14. RECREATION -- a)Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and ® El regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b)Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? SOURCES: Project description,Parks and Recreation Element DISCUSSION: The project will allow for five new residential entitlements,therefore allowing five additional residences at the property. No significant impacts to recreation services are anticipated. 15.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC --Would the project: a)Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to theEl 0 El existing traffic load and capacity of the street system(i.e.,result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips,the volume to capacity ratio on roads,or congestion at intersections)? . b)Exceed,either individually or cumulatively,a level of service 1:1 ❑ ❑ standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c)Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including either an increase EJ El in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d)Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e.g.,sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? e)Result in inadequate emergency access? El E f)Result in inadequate parking capacity? EJ 1:1 El (1ZIN City of Atascadero Page 24 of 31 Initial Stud 0000% 129 • Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impact 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation g)Conflict with adopted policies,plans,or programs supporting alternative transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)?. SOURCES: Land Use Element,Circulation Element,project description DISCUSSION: The project would require the construction of a new roadway serving five single-family residences. The new roadway would intersect with Santa Rosa Road west of the intersection of Lake View Drive. The new road will be constructed to City standards for a residential rural local roadway with a 20-foot width. Santa Rosa Road is currently utilized as a collector roadway with varying established widths. The project will include minor improvements to Santa Rosa Road which include a pedestrian pathway,new road surfacing and necessary road striping. Traffic speed and site distance at the new intersection of the proposed road serving five lots is not anticipated to create significant traffic impacts.The proposed project will not significantly impact circulation with the addition of five single-family residences at this location. MITIGATION MEASURES: • 15: TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC a. A preliminary site distance analysis shall be prepared for the new intersection of Santa Rosa Road and the new road serving the subject property. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS --Would the project: a)Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable El Regional Water Quality Control Board? b)Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater El ® ❑ treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c)Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainageEl El V\J El facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from E] El E existing entitlements and resources,or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e)Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that El 11 serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve • City of Atascadero Page 25 of 31 Initial Study 000055 130 Initial Study 2001-023 Potentially Less Than Less Than No TTM 2000-0002 Significant Significant Significant Impale 8300 Santa Rosa Road Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f)Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? ILN g)Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations related El to solid waste? SOURCES: Project description,Land Use Element(LUE)EIR,Long-Tenn Viability of Water,letter from Atascadero Mutual Water Company DISCUSSION: The.project currently has water service and contains one residence. The new parcels and entitlements proposed at the property will be served by City sewer. The land use element anticipates construction of new residences at this density.Five new homes are not anticipated to create significant impacts to existing water and wastewater services. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE-- a)Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or • animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b)Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable?("Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future projects)? c)Does the project have environmental effects that will cause El El substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES City of Atascadero Page 26 of 31 Initial Stud* 000056 131 ITEM NUMBER: Z DATE: 7-17-01 Exhibit B: Comments and Staff responses on Draft Neighborhood petition for Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-0023 TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road Comment Staff Response Regional Water Quality Control Board July 19, 2001 Al. 1. The Environmental Checklist Form, under The site does accommodate seasonal item 8-Description of Project, states that the drainage that appears to sheet flow across the site"...contains a seasonal creekway." property. A blueline creek is indicated on However, under the initial study's Evaluation U.S.G.S maps for the property, however a site of Biological Resources, the initial study analysis does not identify any discernable states that"Any stream channel was likely drainage Swale through the property. The obliterated due to historical,agricultural and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration cattle grazing uses on the property."The does not contradict itself but instead initial study seems to contradict itself. compares the.U.S.G.S map and actual Based on observations, we believe the site condition of the property. The project does not have a defined creek channel. The description will be clarified to reflect that a project description should reflect the actual defined creek channel does not exist on site. situation to ensure proper environmental The proposed drainage swale will follow the • assessment and mitigation. approximate creek alignment indicated on 7 '/2 min. USGS maps. A2. 2. Earthen filling for pad construction, as well The property currently contains approximately as channelization to create a creek, will 0.04 acres of wetlands that meet the three key alter hydrology that may support the criteria of the CE/EPA definition of a wetland wetlands. The proposed hydromodifications (Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters Report, will likely lessen flow attenuation and cause Sierra Delta Corporation November 17, 2000). more intense but shorter duration flow This wetland is created from waters that back characteristics. The proposed projects up from Atascadero Lake inundating a portion hydromodifications must be designed such of the property. This portion of the property is that the wetlands area and lake water at or below the level of the dam that created quality are not significantly impacted. Atascadero Lake. This portion of the property will not be disturbed with the proposed development and will remain within an open space easement. The channelization of the drainage on the site will be contained within a drainage swale that averages 70 to 100 feet in width with a fall of approximately 1-foot per 200 feet of length. Under these specifications the drainage area is not likely to become a fast moving creekway, especially since the majority of the drainage area will be at or below the height of the dam at the south end of Atascadero Lake. During storm events water will back up into • the drainage areas. The project plans will incorporate a drainage swale stabilization Ian which will include 0000517 Print Date:08101/01 5:33 PM File:TTM 2000-OW2.response to comments RWQCB.pjd.doc n'� \..Zr ®per CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • TTM 2000-0002 August 1,2001 Page 3 of 4 riparian landscape, erosion control, and construction methods designed to enhance and naturalize the drainage flow into Atascadero Lake. Additional project conditions have been added to the project to ensure preservation and enhancement of draina a and water ql fality. A3. 3. The initial study cites a report by Sierra The Sierra Delta Corporation used criteria Delta Corporation regarding a wetlands established by the US Army Corps of delineation. There exist different criteria for Engineers and the EPA. The definition used delineating wetlands. Some are more is as follows: rigorous than others. For purposes of "Those areas that are inundated or saturated applying Clean Water Act Sections 404/401, by surface or groundwater at a frequency and we prefer the U.S. Army Corps of duration sufficient to support, and that under Engineers'wetlands delineation criteria. We normal circumstances do support, a recommend the City ensure that U.S. Army prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for Corps of Engineers'wetlands delineation life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands criteria was used. generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas." The Sierra Delta Corporation used three criteria adopted by the Army Corp of • Engineers in order to determine the area of wetlands: 1. inundated or saturated soil conditions resulting from permanent or periodic inundation by ground water or surface water. 2. A prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. 3. The presence of"normal circumstances". (The presence of normal circumstances refers to the presence of normal environmental conditions at the subject site) • Print Date:08101/015:33 PM Fite:TTM 2000-0002.response to comments RWQCB.*.doc 000055 133 t �. CITY OF ATASCADERO • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TTM 2000-0002 August 1,2001 Page 4 of 4 A4. 4. The General plan designates the site as Under the proposed project the grazing Low Density Single Family and the site is practices will be eliminated. Animal grazing is currently in the RSF-Z zoning district. For not part of the project description. Staff has that zoning, the City allows two animal units added a condition of approval for the project to graze for every acre. There are grazing that will require the creation of CC&R's for the management practices that lessen the tract. The project conditions will require a environmental burden on the land and could CC&R that prohibits the keeping of large farm lead to improved water quality and habitat. animals on these lots consist with the Our agency knows of many studies, and RWQCB recommendation to exclude cattle& has undertaken our own, that show horses from wetlands &drainages. Large improvement to a watershed once modem farm animals include all ovines, bovines and grazing management practices are equine(horses, cows, goats, pigs sheep etc.) implemented. For example, excluding cattle The proposed project also requires fencing and horses from wetlands areas would that will delineate and protect all of the enhance the wetlands. Regional Board staff drainage areas from normal household recommends that the wetlands and activities and urban landscapes. drainage areas be protected from large animals and less destructive methods of grazing be investigated. A5. 5. As you are aware, construction sites over The project contains conditions of approval • fives acres require a National Pollutant that will require the applicant to secure Discharge Elimination System General permits from the RWQCB, Dept. of Fish & Construction Permit(General Permit). This Game and Army Corp of Engineers prior to may be accomplished by submitting a issuance of any construction permits from the General Permit, Notice of Intent, through City of Atascadero. The conditions will be our office. The General Permit requires specifically modified to satisfy the National adopting and implementing a Storm Water Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Pollution Prevention Plan for construction General Construction Permit requirement. and post-construction phases. The Storm Water Plan includes Best Management Practices for erosion and sediment control, and monitoring. The erosion and sedimentation controls listed in the Initial Study, along with any others recommended by the City or the environmental consultant, and should be included in the Storm Water Plan. Print Date:081011015:13 PM File:TTM 2000.0002.response to comments RWQCB.p�` 0jd}}.doc1 nn3 4 0VSQ v C CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 2 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 B1 A. Aesthetics 1. There will clearly be a significant adverse The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration effect on the scenic vista currently did analyze the potential changes to the provided by this property, which has existing viewshed. The project as designed historically been an open pasture and includes a 100-foot wide landscaped drainage cattle grazing area adjacent to swale along all visible frontages. The swale Atascadero Lake Park. will be vegetated with native riparian species of trees, shrubs and plants. The design of the landscape will be required as part of the subdivision improvement plans and is to be designed by a landscape architect. The draft Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that the project would have a less than significant aesthetic impact. B2 2. Replacing this unique, open area with a An approximately 100-foot wide area along subdivision of 6 homes, 4 of which will the east and north side of the property would be on raised pads 2 to 3 feet high, and remain in permanent open space within the bisecting the property with a new street proposed project. The project conditions will and cul de sac, will clearly degrade the also require an additional 25-foot building • visual character of this site. The setback from the edge of the drainage property's unique proximity to easement for residential development on each Atascadero Lake Park will also impact of the parcels. This will result in an open area hundreds of people who walk or drive of approximately 125 feet or more at the north around Atascadero Lake and enjoy this and east portions of the property. All yard pastoral scene every day. fencing along the drainage swale will be a consistent rail fence design. A decorative entry feature & bridge will be installed along Santa Rosa Road. The draft Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that the project would have a less than significant aesthetic impact. B3 Regarding proposed mitigation for this item: The design of the landscape will be required a) For example, the request to develop "a as part of the subdivision improvement plans comprehensive landscape plan with and installed prior to final. Also see response trees, shrubs and groundcover"does not to B2. specify the size or number of plants required or when they must be planted. These plantings would also do very little to counteract the dramatic change that would occur in the character and use of this open property if approved. Print Date:08/01/015:26 PM File:TTM 2000-0002.response to comments NBHood#2.pjd.doc13 5 000060 CITY OF ATASCADERO • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 3 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 B4 b) The mitigated negative declaration The existing property is designated for makes no mention of Atascadero's residential development as indicated within General Plan, the basic goal of which the Atascadero General Plan Land Use states "Atascadero should retain its Element. The subject parcel is also overall character and rural atmosphere surrounded by existing residential with long-term protection of the development on three sides. The project will environment as a primary guiding criteria maintain a minimum lot size of 1.5 acres for public policy decisions."The Yellow consistent with the General Plan's rural Rose Ranch property is one of the few character goal. remaining in-town parcels which exemplifies our rural character, and as such, should be preserved to the extent possible. B5 B. Agricultural Resources The property is not considered prime 1. The property has been used as a grazing agricultural land and is only suitable for year area for cattle for at least 50 years and is round grazing since it is irrigated. The supported by an extensive watering system property is too small to be considered prime and rotating pasture management plan. agricultural land and furthermore is Changing this to a residential subdivision surrounded by existing residential essentially constitutes a conversion of the development. As supported by written property from agricultural to non-agricultural comments from the Regional Water Quality use. Control Board, the existing cattle grazing use Regarding proposed mitigation for this item: negatively impacts water quality of The proposed mitigated negative declaration Atascadero Lake and damages wetlands. incorrectly states that this property has been The cattle have eliminated any existing native used primarily for residential purposes. vegetation and frequently graze within the area identified as a wetland. Removal of the cattle and restoration of an enhanced wetland and creek habitat area will likely increase the natural aesthetics of the vicinity and result in enhanced water quality. B6 C. Hazards No significant information has been collected 1. Potential health hazards exist in the regarding this potential hazard. The majority development of this area, such as the of Atascadero residential neighborhoods were possible presence of formaldehyde gas- former cattle ranches and grazing lands. No a potentially toxic substance. Cases evidence exists to support a potential hazard have been documented in which the within existing neighborhoods. Robert presence of this gas was detected in Hopkins from the San Luis Obispo County residential homes built over ranch lands. Agricultural Commissioners office was consulted regarding these potential hazards. • Regarding proposed mitigation for this item: The Agricultural Commissioners office has no No mention is made of any potential negative knowledge or reports of such issues within Print Date:08/01/015,.-26 PM File:TTM 2000.0002.response to comments N8Hood#2.gdlx/_'103 6 ( lrll DC7 1 F T' CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 4 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 impacts on the health of future residents who San Luis Obispo County. Formaldehyde gas might live in this subdivision. is generally not associated with any cattle grazing activities. Since the site is a seasonal tributary to the lake high levels of animal waste are drained from the property into Atascadero Lake, This situation contributes to the current lake water quality problems. B7 D. Biological Resources The property was initially investigated by 1. The proposed subdivision may have a Sierra Delta Corporation for all biological significant adverse impact on the riparian resources. A complete bio study was not habitat, watershed, and wetlands, which required due to the lack of native habitat and take up a significant portion of the wetlands found within the vicinity. The property. Egrets, herons, and many other wetlands study contained an evaluation of the migratory bird species have been existing flora and fauna at the site. Due to a observed feeding in the large natural lack of trees and shrubs on the property very creek way that crosses the grass- little native fauna habitat exists. Egrets and covered property. Herons do utilize the grass pasture likely feeding on field mice, moles, and pocket Regarding proposed mitigation for this item: gophers in the pasture. These migratory birds • No study of the wildlife, habitat, or plant life do not utilize this pasture as a rookery, shelter has been completed or is requested. or extensive feeding area due to the lack of native cover. The introduction of an enhanced wetland and creek habitat along the drainage swale with native trees, shrubs and riparian vegetation will increase the richness of the site as a wildlife habitat. The project conditions are designed to create a habitat in a location that does not currently contain a viable habitat. The project will contain an approximately 100- foot wide drainage area along the north and east sides of the property. The drainage area will be within an open space easement and will encompass approximately 25% of the property. The landscaped swale is likely to attract bird varieties due to increased surface water and enhanced vegetation cover. The Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded a less than significant impact. B8 Water Quality The site does accommodate seasonal 1. The unique location of the property drainage that flows across the property in a makes it the primary watershed for sheet pattern during storm events.A blueline Atascadero Lake, creating a potentially creek is indicated on U.S.G.S maps for the significant adverse effect on the lake's property, however a site analysis does not Print Date:08/01/015:26 PM File:TTM 2000-=2.response to comments NBHood#2.pjd 137 0000 ::; CITY OF ATASCADERO • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 5 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 water quality due to sedimentation and identify any discernable drainage swale runoff from new residential development through the property. A natural creek does and the establishment of a new dirt water not exist on the property according to channel to replace the natural creek. Regional Water Quality Control Board. NOTE: The City of Atascadero previously A drainage Swale will be created on the site cited the potential damage to Atascadero will approximately 70 to 100 feet in width with Lake by additional development in the a fall of approximately 1-foot per 200 feet of surrounding area. For example, in August of length. Under these specifications the 2000 in "News From City Hall", City Manager drainage area is not likely to become a fast Wade McKinney pointed out:"As moving creekway, especially since the development has encircled the lake in recent majority of the drainage area will be at or decades, the water purity has degraded." below the height of the dam at the south end Since the proposed development is of Atascadero Lake. During storm events positioned directly in the lake's primary water will back up into the drainage areas. watershed, the potential for causing further degradation of Atascadero Lake is self- The drainage area will not be a "dirt-lined evident and not in dispute. channel". The project plans will incorporate a drainage swale enhancement plan which will include riparian landscape, erosion control, and construction methods designed to enhance and naturalize the drainage into Atascadero Lake. Additional project conditions have been added to the project to ensure preservation and enhancement of drainage and water quality. This property is an.important watershed for Atascadero Lake. Restoration and enhancement of the watershed and the removal of grazing animals will contribute to the enhancement of the water quality of Atascadero Lake. B9 2. The subdivision of the property and A flooding and drainage report was prepared creation of raised pads and a public by RThomspon Consulting, Civil Engineers street directly in the center of the blue and was incorporated into the Mitigated line creek currently on the property will Negative Declaration. The report concluded significantly alter the drainage patterns that: on the site, causing potential flooding in "...the proposed project does not adversely upstream or adjacent properties. effect upstream property owners, and maintains the historic 100-year water surfaces on their property." • The reports conclusion is summarized as follows: Print Date:0801/01 5:26 PM File:TTM 2000-0002.response to comments NBHoodQ.W.doc 138 00,11 e40 M1 CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT . TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 6 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 " The proposed project can be developed in a manner that meets or exceeds the current City of Atascadero Engineering Department standardsand will not cause detrimental storm water/flooding effects on adjacent properties. Furthermore the proposed grading and drainage improvements required for the proposed project can be constructed outside of that area designated as potential wetlands." Based on these findings the Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded a less than significant impact would result with mitigation measures incorporated into the project. (TTM 2000-0002 Preliminary Drainage Calculations _prepared b RThom son Consulting January 23,2001 B10 3. Hundreds of tons of new soil would need 3. See Response to B8.An erosion control • to be brought onto the property to create and sedimentation plan is required for the the pads for the new homes and project. roadway, adding new sediment and potential contamination of the watershed leading into Atascadero Lake. B11 4. The engineered, dirt-lined water channel The channelization of the drainage on the site proposed will carry a concentrated will be contained within a drainage swale that volume of water at a higher force than is approximately 70 to 100 feet in width with a the wide grass-covered creekway. This fall of an average of 1-foot per 200 feet of will substantially increase the likelihood length. Under these specifications the of sedimentation and erosion that would drainage area is not likely to become a fast further compromise Atascadero Lake. moving creekway, especially since the Regarding proposed mitigation for this majority of the drainage area will be at or item: Mitigation measures proposed below the height of the dam at the south end regarding water quality and/or flooding of Atascadero Lake. During storm events impacts are incomplete, theoretical or water will back up into the drainage areas. non-existent: Refer to response B8 612 a) No study has been completed or is A drainage report has been prepared by a civil requested to analyze the creek water engineer see.response B9. that currently moves across the property into Atascadero Lake. Without any baseline measurements, no conclusions about the future impacts of the subdivision can be made or evaluated. • Print Date:08101101 5:26 PM File:TTM 2000.0002.response to comments NBHood#2.pjd.doc1_ 3 V 000064 CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 7 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 B13 b) The amount of wetlands determined by The Sierra Delta Corporation used criteria the Sierra Delta Corporation is established by the US Army Corps of questionable since their analysis was Engineers and the EPA. The definition used completed at the driest point in the is as follows: season, November 13/14, 2000, after 7 "Those areas that are inundated or saturated months of having no rainfall in the area. by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes,flogs, and similar areas." The Sierra Delta Corporation used three criteria adopted by the Army Corp of Engineers in order to determine the area of wetlands: 1. Inundated or saturated soil conditions resulting from permanent or periodic inundation by ground water or surface water. 2. A prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. 3. The presence of"normal circumstances. The property currently contains approximately 0.04 acres of wetlands that meet the three key criteria of the CE/EPA definition of a wetland. This wetland is created from waters that back up from Atascadero Lake inundating a portion of the property. This portion of the property is at or below the level of the dam that created Atascadero Lake, and because of that is inundated with lake water during storm events. This portion of the property will not be disturbed with the proposed development and will remain within an open space easement. A copy of the report by Sierra Delta can be made available upon request. • Print Date:08/01/01 5:26 PM File:TTM 2000-0002.response to comments NBHood#2.'d d 00G." � G,. CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 8 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 B14 c) Undocumented assertions are made that See response B9 the proposed building pads and road will not affect flooding conditions upstream or on adjacent properties or roads. B15 d) Claims that removing the cattle will help The Regional Water Quality Control Board, in improve water quality in Atascadero a recent letter to the City of Atascadero, Lake are not based on any scientific expressed concerns regarding cattle that are measurements or data. The well water to currently allowed to graze the property and be made available for the lake from an the wetland area. Extensive cattle grazing existing well on the property can also be within the vicinity does impact lake water obtained from an adjacent property quality. The cattle loosen the topsoil creating (negotiations are currently underway for erosion. The cattle consume all surface a water easement on 8350 Santa Rosa vegetation not allowing native flora to become Road). established. The animal waste drains into the NOTE. If there are potential negative impacts lake during significant storm events. The from cattle grazing, these could also be project is intended to improve the water mitigated by other means, such as simply quality of Atascadero Lake by decreasing the . reducing the number of cattle, or using BEST amount of water contamination that is management described by the Regional occurring currently. The City does not have Water Quality Control Board. Also, the the ability to manage the current grazing proposed zoning for the subdivided lots, Low practices occurring on the property. A Density Single Family of 1.5 to 2.5 acres, condition of approval on the proposed would not necessarily eliminate the potential subdivision will not allow farm animals on the damage to the lake from fecal runoff, since future homesites. future residents would be allowed to keep horses and/or other livestock under this zoning designation. B16 e) The engineered "water channel"to be See responses B8 through B11 created along the east and north sides of the property was designed with no measurement of the volume of water it will need to handle. In addition, no plans are specified or requested on how to address the potential for creating major erosion and sedimentation problems by re-routing and channeling a large volume of water through an exposed dirt channel. • Print Date:08/01/01 5:26 PM File:TTM 2000-0002.response to comments NBHood#2.pjdlI"do`[c,�1 ` 1 00000, �a CITY OF ATASCAIDERO • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 9 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 B17 J The proposed tract map shows large See response B9 "inundation areas"will remain around or near Drainage areas built into the proposed project five (5) of the proposed home sites, a tacit will likely become inundated during storm admission that the new water channel will not events, however the house sites are designed eliminate annual flooding on portions of the to be built above the 100 year flood plain. new home sites and could indeed create new The existing property is not shown as a flood flooding hazards. plain on FEMA maps and is a flood plain as a result of a man made dam at the south end of Atascadero Lake. B18 g) The proposed mitigation requires only A complete detailed landscape plan prepared "landscape plans"be developed to handle by a landscape architect is a condition of new drainage areas and runoff. It does not approval for the subdivision improvement specify the actual drainage components or plans. The drainage and erosion control plan the size and number of many trees, bushes has been designed by a civil engineer. The and shrubs that will be needed to drainage enhancement plan will be designed successfully manage the problems created as required by the biological consultant for the by adding several large building pads in the project. The enhancement plan will include middle of this large flood plain. erosion control and sedimentation mitigation • for the proposed drainage swale. The project conditions require the creek restoration plan to be designed and monitored by a qualified biological consultant to ensure adequate restoration of the drainage area. B19 F. Atascadero General Plan The property is under private ownership and In order to approve a subdivision, the project is designated under the General Plan for must be found consistent with the single family residential development with lot Atascadero General Plan, which clearly size minimums to be 1.5 acres. The site has states in Section Il, Land Use Element.* not been designated for open space, (underlining added) recreation, or agriculture. The site is served A. Basic Community Goals. Atascadero by City sewer and meets lot size criteria for should retain its overall character and rural the existing zoning district. The site was atmosphere with long-term protection of the subject to a temporary open-space agreement environment as a primary guiding criteria for which expired upon change of ownership of public policy decisions. the property. An open space easement was a. Single Family Residential. (3) never recorded for the property. Determination of appropriate lot sizes shall be based upon evaluation of such factors as The initial site assessment included 3 major slope, existence of a natural building site. criteria: 1 a. Scenic and sensitive lands including creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands and 1. Consistency with basic general plan areas of significant habitat shall be protected. standards. The site is relatively flat, 1 b. Public and private development in close served by sewer and meets standards to proximity to or over such lands shall be It allow 1.5 acre residential lots within the • carefully evaluated to protect scenic and designated RSF-Z district. sensitive lands including creek reservations, 2. The biological concerns were a primary Print Date:08101101 526 PM File:TTM 2000-0002.response to comments NBHoodx2.pjd.doc1 4 2 0000617 0 CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • TTM 2000-0002 MND 2001-023 August 1,2001 Page 10 of 10 Comment# Comments Responses Atascadero Lake Neighborhood Letter, July 11, 2001 wooded areas, flood plains, prominent view concern. Staff requested additional sheds and historic sites. information. A Jurisdictional Wetlands 1 e. Lot splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and Waters report was prepared by Sierra and be in accordance with community plans Delta Corporation for the site. The report and principles in order to retain the desired concluded that 0.04 acres of the site is a natural character of the community. In the wetland. This portion of the property will case of the proposed subdivision of the not be disturbed with the proposed Yellow Rose Ranch, at least 4 of the project. Additional wetlands would be proposed building sites fail to meet the created by the proposed project. The fundamental principles and guidelines of the report concluded that little to no native Atascadero General Plan. vegetation exists on the site. The existing We believe the lot-split application should be grass cattle pasture provides little habitat denied on this basis alone. value, although it may be considered a scenic viewshed. 3. The site has been known for its flooding even though it is not shown as a flood plain on FEMA maps. Staff asked for a flood plain analysis and drainage calculations for the proposed grading • plan. RThompson Consulting prepared a Preliminary Drainage Calculations report in January 2001. The report and proposed grading and drainage plan was prepared by a professional civil engineer. The proposed plan creates building sites above the 100-year flood plain without compromising adjacent properties. The proposed site design is consistent with General Plan goals and preserves 25% of the site in open space in order to enhance the riparian corridor, retain the rural character, and become compatible with adjacent uses. • 143 Print Date:08/01/01 5:26 PM File:TTM 2000-0002.response to comments NBHood#2.pjd.dd ITEM NUMBER: Z- • IbATE: 7-17-01 Exhibit C: Neighborhood petition for Proposed Mitigated Negative DeI61aration 2001-0023 TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road July 30, 2001 i ! JUL 3 1 X001 Henry Engen I 9575 Lake View Drive =! =W.E►lT Atascadero, CA 93422 Members of the Atascadero Planning Commission: Enclosed find copies of our petition opposing the Mitigated Negative Declaration proposed by staff for Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002. The Yellow R9se Ranch encompasses the primary watershed for Atascadero Lake. The prior owners, Art • & Betty Blankenship, told me when I was Community Development Director that this property was floodplain and shouldn't be subdivided. The City Council agreed and an open space easement was recorded. Unfortunately, the current owner found a loophole in that agreement and has applied to increase the number of lots from the present 2 to 6. The subdivision as proposed is in serious conflict with a number of General Plan policies and we are petitioning for a full Environmental Impact Report, done by an impartial environmental consulting firm. Please be advised that section 15064 (h)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act states that , "If there is serious public controversy over the environmental effects of a project, the Lead Agency shall consider the effect or effects subject to the controversy to be significant and shall prepare an EIR." temphasis added). Sincerely, c� f Henry Engen • Enclosures: Petition to Complete a full EIR (Over 225 signatures) 144 'cc: City Council 000069 Petition for completing a full Environmental Impact r<eport (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the • undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS/ PHONE # 1 H��2: ��C,•�i.s - 951 iAl� �(�tiw Com: �.� ��¢��47 2 pp _ _ 'L / 7 P, s 5 6 C C \ G l�NJ uc2 77) Ar 8 _ _ AL Z-c! 10 12 ; Ccvnvvi ��s I t 7;�S C uiz; 2A. ,4-FT,,9 2 i cl 13 I�.i �Ci ir15� (( (?,n iS S 1� 7-04- ' 69"/�7�}S: f 14 i ^Vt r^tt 7 �-t/ , 6/ c�`���, �l Ccul Z AI 115 16 �� c I c �' , 1 17 /. . Z' . 18 /-7g � c a � / 19 � cl�C— 20 le7c- 21 /?A_j - - rsj 22 11- G rrc 23 `)' `<01. /y ��(• /0.7 _�Gt ti /G Y!�)/�o ,/. �/ •5'CG — 24 !J 25 i / i ZZ �. PAGE r OF JC. • 145 0000'70 Petition for completing a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). • According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. <PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS/ PHONE# qL�Z Pit 1�C 3 f a ` !7 I! p �U �• 4 _ Wrn 6 10 �. 13 14 15 1 <. 7/6 �. �/ G 7/6 16 1?014A, Zc'VK1 Gv ��� Serif .Yris/d G 17 4yr 18 19 a S �� ir?�� ��� •���' 21 ' 22 l �,1L� l��G= ._cL tett Sly/` �t�1d HA2" o7D9 23 .�3 24 J I 25 rrr- `'U� - V Fno PAGE ? OF IC. 146 000071 Petition for completing a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the • undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS/ PHONE # 3 1 �Sur� 4A I LS Q L 7 ik 5 s e. gra- 435r4 7--L 7 s "'G, SSG rZC� +ZZ 1 _ 12 13 i "� FO C� 9 �� 14 1 23 /r r1 t�?Z.1 Ci,- i Cryo 15 ! 3 �a� C'f jAa Aa 16 ,-- 17 6// 18 19 2014,4j r,, y�s s 21 i 22 23 ✓ 1 J c 24 /(YLav �.v 25 lj�.ntt So 01 Loll) PAGE 3 OF IO. 147 0000'72 Petition for completing a full Environmental Impact rceport (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SI RE ADDRESS/ PHONE# 44 4-7 4 C _ Lk 4 _ 5 ?i` ,v\ f ( X5„1,, j U LL ., 7 r f ' 9 A� ViN i �ti.F c - 2/A' 0--Va L-A G 1 tic, -1y1&,,t,-/J'/,// ,A',4 La 12 — 13 KCS 14f eq-,A J1 n �� � ; Coo 14 15 Tc� ) w - ' r�7 CL 1� C 1819 20 21LA 26 r _ ,O / 'G `/6/—/N 24 25 Aa ( /z� ' i 4wo � c gas !600 PAGE+OF iQ. 4900'73 Petition for completii._ a full Environmental Impac.i . eport (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report(EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS/PHONE# 34 oz •�,IG = may. . 5 S ✓� WV 7 ^b 8 ` 10 - �1/y I�1•`'1'�� ��� d�•��. 113 n���l� n /' � 1,: r Vii/ '-��7 1 14 1 A Zre 17 �h s 10 w I'i�`c y?1 Sf. A °o 18 - 20 LL 1 " 21 i Y V( -7 L1 L/l/�1 22 ' , l JlJyzi 23 sC 24 �0.vi 25 I C PAGE OF 10. • 0 0009 4 Petition for completh a full Environmental Impac. _leport (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road,-0Atascadero, California 93422). According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS/ PHONE# (1% - '.'/�a-[4/lJS ' .�— v� cJ =mid i�l9L:a+hl i5►-v-e 21 5 5 1 VA 'j #M c'm c rl t -�70 7 _ Ln CA-S Y7t Fla 1342 IL L �- 10 11 -SSGRel We Sa,+ 12 > /3 9 Y 7u�vcrr�-•- % Ctoa �t r "3 774 13 s o � �F 93f.=Z 14 15 16 17 18r—\AI E19 S 20 j AY c/ Y 21 v SO� W1 �'Of^ 22 daAa- 23 V �C 24 ✓�' W�YCI'( �� ' o r�tvt+2Ct '1Icaci 25 �' n c e- S 4-b Cr' • PAGE_LOF IC. 00t 75 Petition for completing a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SIGN TURE ADDRESS / PHONE# 2 c r U / 3 �� 55�� lJ S 57 C/ 4 5 6 .�0 AF)c_ tz I 132 ao 61 �65 7U 1104. 11 I � 53 Z z (,' � viT-t \4/ 12 14 ) 15 -79,25 F16 -7cl 17 �,� �� j c mac✓!fa l�rc� !�rl� {�,�7r 18 l L- 19 �l ��c c ar a /1 S /`?a /c z.� fI. /� a 20 14L- 21 cam21 u61-'t;;/>7' 22 sx� 23 24 fto 'U 25 PAGE Z OF E O. • 0000'76 151 Petition for completh a full Environmental Impac, report (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). • According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS/ PHONE# Rouse 2 3 '- �a-�'h c r ` • r _ 5 / d y io�g 5 tsdv e- 7c_CC c:c V, j 9 7105 Arlqs- yGZ-��EC 10 11 0A Y1 L. f^+ed e ` 7 12 13 i7oh h r r t k 0 4�cSa l f a1 . 4CG (-�c�71/ tYL 14 ra!v1" 1 is VA11'- AC-11 15 16 17 i _ 18 19 / A 71 20 Andl 1M 1`^ NCL C 21 I <' 044 (,t w/f C �S3'/ -•��- �i{%/G� j2�( A¢Gr� yG(� z 22 ' P Le ►,,i K3Y -4n Sabtry y 7 A �, /�i, - s 23 24 1 c�iyi: ;rn�t�z i 25 • PAGE$OF lf�. 0000'7"1 152 Petition for completh - a full Environmental Impac, ,-Zeport (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the • undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS/ PHONE# 1 Lam►- i/Coole az l"y.�L gra is����� 3z L 2 j x11 `a 5`-I Ilk 4-533 C9 - ��7 ' r a 10 "�ar� 'JGQ- J a /�a ? 1214 Ind 13 �. 16 L3 -56- 17 ' PAC-4 ..0 , 18 19 20 o j c OFA r c4 vv ' 21 I t tMIA— k v a,_0- 1 La 5���i f-0 22 23 25 I 44 .61 -' PAGE OF i0. • 0000'78 153 Petition for completing a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prior to considering the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch (8300 . Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero, California 93422). • According to the terms and conditions of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) the undersigned hereby request that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe the proposed subdivision may create significant adverse effects on the environment, including but not limited to: the loss of an historic scenic vista, potential human health hazards related to the conversion of the property from agricultural to residential use, negative impacts on the riparian habitat, watershed and wetlands, and potential degradation of the water quality, wildlife and riparian habitat of Atascadero Lake. PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS / PHONE # 1 _ <-i' GrGt _ I 4 t <}C,�� 7zv 1o9x5 .,.,,i6 LAsoR6 5 /C -%c- 6 %s 6 _ "- �:n 'JM � l� �J CCii �-�' JJZ.J 7 elctrl lr,21nbull S4,-1 fr;- la 8 : � Z cOCL 10 11 I 12 13 14 15 i 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 • PAGE/00F JO. 00100'79 154 ITEM NUMBER: 2. DATE: 7-17-01 • Exhibit D: Letter From Lake Neighborhood TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road. July 11,2001 FILE COPY I . - 0(�h/-Sj��4/� It Lori Parcells, Director ` " Atascadero Community and Economic Development Dept. 6500 Palma Avenue JUL 1 1 2001 Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Ms. Parcells, L f'tU'`ll;^� The Atascadero residents listed herein object to the proposed mitigated negative declaration issued by your office on June 28,2001 regarding the proposed subdivision of 8300 Santa Rosa Road, also known as the Yellow Rose Ranch. We believe a full Environmental Impact Report(EIR)must be completed prior to consideration of the proposed subdivision due to many potentially significant adverse effects on the environment, including (but not limited to)the following: A. Aesthetics 1. There will clearly be a significant adverse effect on the scenic vista currently provided by this property,which has historically been an open pasture and cattle grazing area adjacent to Atascadero Lake Park. 2. Replacing this unique, open area with a subdivision of 6 homes,4 of which will be on raised pads 2 to 3 feet high, and bisecting the property with a new street and cul de sac,will clearly degrade the visual character of this site. The property's unique proximity to Atascadero Lake Park will also impact hundreds of people who walk or drive around Atascadero Lake and enjoy this pastoral scene every day. Regarding pr000sed mitigation for this item: a) The mitigation measures outlined by the City of Atascadero are incomplete and non-specific. For example,the request to develop"a comprehensive landscape plan with trees, shrubs and groundcover"does not specify the size or number of plants required or when they must be planted. These plantings would also do very little to counteract the dramatic change that would occur in the character and use of this open property if approved. b) The mitigated negative declaration makes no mention of Atascadero's General Plan, the basic goal of which states"Atascadero should retain its overall character and rural atmosphere with long-term protection of the environment as a primary guiding criteria for public policy decisions." The Yellow Rose Ranch property is one of the few remaining in-town parcels which exemplifies our rural character, and as such, should be preserved to the extent possible. B. Agricultural Resources 1. The property has been used as a grazing area for cattle for at least 50 years and is supported by an extensive watering system and rotating pasture management plan. Changing this to a residential subdivision essentially constitutes a conversion of the property from agricultural to non-agricultural use. Regarding pfopOsed mitigation for this item: The proposed mitigated negative declaration incorrectly states that thiS_property has been used primarily for residential purposes. C. Hazards 1. Potential health hazards exist in the development of this area,such as the possible presence of formaldehyde gas-a potentially toxic substance. Cases have been documented in which the presence of this gas was detected in residential homes built over ranch lands. • Regarding proposed mitigation for this item: No mention is made of any potential negative impacts on the health of future residents who might live in this subdivision. 0000Sb D. Biological Resources 1. The proposed subdivision may have a significant adverse impact on the riparian habitat, watershed, and wetlands, which take up a significant portion of the property. 2. Egrets, herons, and many other migratory bird species have been observed feeding in the large natural creek way which crosses the grass-covered property. Regarding proposed mitigation for this item: No study of the wildlife, habitat, or plant life has beep completed or is requested. E. Water Quality 1. The unique location of the property makes it the primary watershed for Atascadero Lake, creating a potentially significant adverse effect on the lake's water quality due to sedimentation and runoff from new residential development and the establishment of a new dirt water channel to replace the natural creek. NOTE: The City of Atascadero previously cited the potential damage to Atascadero Lake by additional development in the surrounding area. For example, in August of 2000 in "News From City Hall", City Manager Wade McKinney pointed out: "As development has encircled the lake in recent decades, the water purity has degraded." Since the proposed development is positioned directly in the lake's primary watershed, the potential for causing further degradation of Atascadero Lake is self-evident and not in dispute. - 2. The subdivision of the property and creation of raised pads and a public street directly in the center of the blue line creek currently on the property will significantly alter the drainage patterns on the site, causing potential flooding in upstream or adjacent properties. 3. Hundreds of tons of new soil would need to be brought onto the property to create the pads for the new:homes and roadway, adding new sediment and potential contamination of the . watershed leading into Atascadero Lake. 4. The engineered, dirt-lined water channel proposed will carry a concentrated volume of water at a higher force than the wide grass-covered creekway. This will substantially increase the likelihood of sedimentation and erosion that would further compromise Atascadero Lake. Regarding proposed mitigation for this item: Mitigation measures proposed regarding water quality and/or flooding impacts are incomplete, theoretical or non-existent: a) No study has been completed or is requested to analyze the creek water that currently moves across the property into Atascadero Lake. Without any baseline measurements, no conclusions about the future impacts of the subdivision cavi be made or evaluated. b) The amount of wetlands determined by the Sierra Delta Corporation is questionable since their analysis was completed at the driest point in the season, November 13/14, 2000, after 7 months of having no rainfall in the area. c) Undocumented assertions are made that the proposed building pads and road will not affect flooding conditions upstream or on adjacent properties or roads. d) Claims that removing the cattle will help improve water quality in Atascadero Lake are not based on any scientific measurements or data. The well water to be made available for the lake from an existing well on the property can also be obtained from an adjacent property (negotiations are currently-underway for a water easement on 8350 Santa Rosa Road) NOTE: If there are potential negative impacts from cattle grazing, these could also be mitigated by other means, such as simply reducing the number of cattle, or using BEST management . described by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Also, the proposed zoning for the subdivided lots, Low Density Single Family of 1.5 to 2.5 acres, would not necessarily eliminate the potential damage to the lake from fecal runoff, since future residents would be allowed to keep horses and/or other livestock under this zoning designation. - UUUa�� I56 e) The engineered "water channel" to be created along the east and north sides of the property was designed with no measurement of the volume of water it will need to handle. In addition, no plans are specified or requested on how to address the �otential for creating mgjor erosion and • sedimentation problems by re-routing and channeling a arge volume of water t rough an exposed dirt channel. f) The proposed tract map shows large "inundation areas"pill remain around or near five (5) of the proposed home cites, a tacit admission that the new water channel will not elirrfinate annual flooding on portions of the new home sites and could indeed create new.flooding hazards. g) The proposed mitigation requires only "landscape plans" be developed to handle new drainage areas and runoff. It does not specify the actual drainage components or the size and number of any trees, bushes and shrubs that will be needed to successfully manage the problems created by adding several large building pads in the middle of this large flood plain. F. Atascadero General Plan In order to approve a subdivision, the project must be found consistent with the Atascadero General Plan, which clearly states in Section II, Land Use Element: (underlining added) A. Basic Community Goals. Atascadero should retain its overall character and rural atmosphere with long-term protection of the environment as a primary guiding criteria for public policy decisions. _ a. Single Family Residential. (3) Determination of appropriate lot sizes shall be based upon evaluation of such factors as slope, existence of a natural building site... 1a. Scenic and sensitive lands including creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands and areas of significant habitat shall be protected... 1b. Public and private development in close proximity to or over such lands shall be carefully evaluated to protect scenic and sensitive lands, including creek reservations, • wooded areas, flood plains, prominent view sheds and historic sites. le. Lot splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and be in accordance with community plans and principles in order to retain the desired natural character of the community. In the case of the proposed subdivision of the Yellow Rose Ranch, at least 4 of the proposed building sites fail to meet the fundamental principles and guidelines of the Atascadero General Plan. We believe the lot split application should be denied on this basis alone. Sincerely, Barbara Combs Tex Little Jean Trumbull Roger Combs Arlys Little Alan Thomas Henry Engen Gerry Mulder Doug Young Sandy Engen Lee Swam Joyce Young Frank Kock Kathy Thomas Jeannie Rokos Kathy Kock Jonathon Trumbull Bruce Stamp cc: Philip Dunsmore, Assistant Planner Wade McKinney, City Manager Members of the Atascadero Planning Commission Members of the Atascadero City Council Member's of the Atascadero Parks and Recreation Commission Mike Hill, California Department of Fish and Game Representative, Regional Water Quality Control Board Representative, US Army Corps of Engineers 0000512 3157 ITEM NUMBER: Z • DATE: 7-17-01 Exhibit E: Letter from Regional Water Quality Control Board TTM 2000-0002 t 8300 Santa Rosa Road California Regional Water � = Quality Control Board Winston H.Hickox Central Coast Region Secretaryfor Internet Address:http:/hvww.swrcb.ca. v/rwgcb3 goGray Davis Environmental Protection 81 Higuera Street,S'ite 200,San Luis Obispo,California 93401-5427 Governor Phone X0,c 549-3147 FAX(805)543-0397 July 19,2001S 's 31 E I L E COPY P.C. rC . a � ��D, Philip Dunsmore 3 2001 Assistant Planner Community Development Department 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 (805)461-5035 • Dear Mr.Dunsmore: COi i NTS ON PROPOSED NUTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NIA.P 2000-0002 (ATASCADERO,SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY) Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject document and project. We understand the project consists of a tract map subdividing two existing lots into six parcels, allowing the development of five additional individual residences. A new road would be built on earthen fill to serve the parcels. The fill will raise the homes and a road out of the 100-year flood plain and the site would be drained by construction of an earthen drainage channel. Please accept the following comments on the proposed mitigated negative declaration and project: 1. The Environmental Checklist Form, under item 8 - Description of Project, states that the site "...contains a seasonal creekway." However, under the initial study's Evaluation of Biological Resources, the initial study states that "Any stream channel was likely obliterated due to historical agricultural and cattle grazing uses on the property." The initial study seems to contradict itself. Based on observations, we believe the site does not have a defined creek channel. The project description should reflect the actual situation to ensure proper environmental assessment and mitigation. 2. Earthen filling for pad construction, as well as chpnnelization to create a creek, will alter hydrology that may support the wetlands. The proposed hydromodifications will likely lessen flow attenuation and cause more intense but shorter duration flow characteristics. The proposed projects • hydromodifications must be designed such that the wetlands area and lake water quality are not significantly impacted. 3. The initial study cites a report by Sierra Delta Corporation regarding a wetlands delineation. There exist different criteria for delineating wetlands. Some are more rigorous than others. For purposes of 00008', applying Clean Water Act Sections 404/401, we prefer the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' wetlands J delineation criteria. We recommend the City ensure that U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' wetlands delineation criteria was`used. Mr.Dunsmore 2 July 19, 2001 4. The General plan designates the site:as Low Density Single Family and the site is currently in the RSF-Z zoning district.For that zoning,the City allows two animal units to graze for every acre.There • are grazing management practices that lessen the environmental burden on the land and could lead to improved water quality and habitat. Our"agency knows of many studies, and has undertaken our own, that show improvement to a watershed once modern grazing management practices are implemented. For example, excluding cattle and horses from wetlands areas would enhance the wetlands. Regional Board staff recommends that the wetlands and drainage areas be protected from large animals and less destructive methods of grazing be investigated. 5. As you are aware, construction sites over fives acres require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Construction Permit (General Permit). This may be accomplished by submitting a General Permit, Notice of Intent, through our office. The General Permit requires adopting and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for construction and post- construction phases. The Storm Water Plan includes Best Management Practices for erosion and sediment control, and monitoring. The erosion and sedimentation controls listed in the Initial Study, along with any others recommended by the City or the environmental consultant, should be included in the Storm Water Plan. If you have any questions,please call Tom Kukol (805) 549-3689. - Sincerely, 4-Roger Briggs • Executive Officer TJK S:\WB\Central Watershed\CEQA Docs\SLO County\Lot Division above Atascadero Lake.doc Agency File:City of Atascadero Task: 121-01 • California Environmental Protection Agency 000084 Recycled Paper 159 ITEM NUMBER: 2 • DATE: 7-17-01 ATTACHMENT 7: Draft Resolution PC 2001-035 TTM 2000-0002 8300 Santa Rosa Road DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. PC 2001-035 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE PROPERTY AT 8300 SANTA ROSA ROAD INTO SIX RESIDENTIAL LOTS (TTM 2000-0002 /TRACT 2410/David Graves) WHEREAS, David Graves, 7475 Cortez Avenue, Atascadero (Owner/Applicant), applied for a Tentative Tract Map to divide two residential lots, totaling 9.56 acres, into six parcels; and, WHEREAS,the proposed project has a General Plan Designation of Low Density Single Family (LDSF) and is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and all other applicable General Plan policies; and, WHEREAS the site is located in the Residential _ t al Single Family zoning distract (RSF Z), with a minimum lot size of 1.50 acres as calculated using performance standards for the RSF-Z zoning district, which allow for the proposed use and density when certain findings are made; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Tract Map application on July 17, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicants, and the public; NOW,THEREFORE,the Planning Commission takes the following actions: Section 1: Findings for approval of subdivision. The Planning Commission finds as follows: 1. The proposed subdivision, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan and applicable zoning requirements. 2. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and applicable zoning requirements. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed. • 5. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat when project mitigation measures are incorporated. OOOOSS 160 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 7-17-01 • 6. The subdivision is consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood. 7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or the use of property within, the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternative easements are provided. 8. The proposed subdivision design and type of improvements proposed will not cause serious public health problems. 9. The proposed subdivision will be accomplished without detriment to the adjacent properties. SECTION 2. Approval. The Planning Commission does hereby approve Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002 for the division of two residential lots, totaling 9.56-acres, into six parcels, subject to the following Conditions and Exhibits: EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT B: Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002 EXHIBIT C: Conceptual Tract Development and Landscape Plan EXHIBIT D: Conceptual Drainage Plan EXHIBIT E: Road and bridge concept • 000086 161 ITEM NUMBER: '2- DATE: DATE: 7-17-01 On motion by Commissioner and seconded by Commissioner the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA • Royce Eddings, Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Lori Parcells, Director Community Development Department Oyez ITEM NUMBER: 'Z, DATE: 7-17-01 EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval Draft Resolution PC 2001-035 TTM 2000-0002(8300 Santa Rosa Road) Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road PM:Paw Map GP:Gracing Permit PS:Planning Smices TTM 2000-0002 BP:Buddng Pemrt BS:Buldng Services TO,T-Wary Occupancy FD:Fine Depatment FO:Final Occupancy PD:Police Department PI:Pubk hpovements CE City Eng rear IP:Improvement Plans WW:Wastwater Ck City Alfaney AMWC:Atascadero Mutual Warr Company Planning Services 1. The approval of this application shall become final,subject PM PS to the completion of the conditions of approval,fourteen (14)days following the Planning Commission approval unless prior to the time,an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in Section 9-1.111(b)of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Approval of this Tentative Tract Map shall be valid for two PM PS years after its effective date. At the end of the period,the approval shall expire and become null and void unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to the expiration date. 3. The Community Development Department shall have the PM PS authority to approve minor changes to the project that(1) result in a superior site design or appearance,and/or(2) address a construction design issue that is not substantive to the Tentative Tract Map. 4. The Tract map shall be subject to additional fees for park or PM PS recreation purposes(QUIMBY Act)as required by City Ordinance. 5. The granting of this entitlement shall apply to the property PM PS located at 8300 Santa Rosa Road(APN 056-351-004) regardless of owner. 6. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the Ongoing PS approved tentative map,and 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's Subdivision Ordinance. 7. New residential construction on parcels 2-5,shall be in PM PS substantial conformance with the proposed building envelopes submitted with the Tentative Tract Map application and as provided in Exhibit B. The building sites shall be delineated by a survey point and radius on the final map. 163 000088 ITEM NUMBER: 2 • DATE: 7-17-01 Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road P6t Parcel Map GP Grating Pemrt PS:Planning Services TTM 2000-0002 BP.Bubrig Penrit BS:Building Services To:Temporary Occupancy FD:Fire Departner t FO:Final occupancy PD:Police Deparbnent Pt Public hvmvernents CE:Gh Engineer IP.Urymvement Plans WW:Wastewater Ck OtyAM-ey AMC:Atascadero Mutual Water Company 8. Each of the residential lots shall be identified with individual BP GP PI PS address identification signs located at the intersection of each driveway and Rio Blanco Court. The design of the address signs shall be approved by the Community Development Department. 9. A drainage easement,in substantial conformance with PM PS Exhibit D, shall be recorded in conjunction with the final map. The easement area shall not allow any site development,structures,fences,or private landscaping to occur within the easement area. 10. A permanent open space easement shall be recorded for IP PS the area identified as wetlands by Sierra Delta Corp.on exhibit D. The wetland area shall not be graded,filled,or disturbed in any fashion. All site grading and construction • activities shall remain a minimum of 25 feet from the wetland location. 11. All tract improvements as shown in project concept and IP PS expressed within project conditions shall be completed prior to the recordation of the final map, unless a bond in an amount sufficient to ensure improvements has been posted for the project. 12. A project landscape plan shall be prepared by a landscape IP PS architect as part of the subdivision improvement plans. Landscape tree varieties shall be a minimum size of 15 gallon nursery stock. An adequate quantity of trees shall be planted at both sides of the drainage course at the eastern and northern boundaries of the property. Additional trees and shrubs may be necessary as required by Community Development Department. Shrub and groundcover species shall be designed to control soil erosion and sedimentation of drainage course. 13. The improvement plans shall include a plan for stabilization IP PS of the drainage course to enhance drainage and water quality. The plan should consist of design features that will eliminate sedimentation and erosion of the drainage course while enhancing the natural appearance and utilizing native landscape. The plan shall be prepared by a professional biological consultant in conjunction with a landscape architect(Sierra Delta or comparable). • 14. The street improvements shall include street trees with IP PS irrigation to consist of 24-inch box size nursery stock London Plan Sycamore trees planted 35 feet on center, 164 000089 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 7-17-01 • Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road At Parcel Map GP Grating Penrit PS:Planning Services TTM 2000-0002 BP Buidng Pemit Bs:Building Services TO:Tengaary Ota panty FD:Fire Deparbnent FO:Final Occupancy PD:Pollee Departrnent PL Public l"mvements CE City Engineer IP.brpmvernerd Plans WW:Wastewater CA.CityAtfnmey AMWC:Atascadero MuW Water Camany where possible,at the edge of the roadway. 15. The existing well on the property shall be contained within BP GP PI PS an easement that is dedicated to the City. The easement shall allow for maintenance,operation and access to the well. 16. As part of the subdivision improvements all side property IP lines and drainage easement areas between private lots shall be fenced with low(max.4'height)consistent fencing such as rail type fencing or comparable. 17. The private road serving the five new building sites will be developed with a bridge feature consistent or superior to bridge shown exhibit E. An earth covered culvert shall not be acceptable. MITIGATION MEASURES 18. The project shall utilize a comprehensive landscape plan FM BP PS 1.a. that will list tree,shrub and groundcover species for the project. Landscape plan shall include street trees,and native type landscape species for all drainage areas within the 100-year flood elevation. 19. Graded slopes on proposed parcel 2 shall be landscaped FM BP PS 1.a. utilizing native-tree and shrub species. 20. Landscape plan should list size,quantity and species of all FM BP PS 1.b. plant species to be utilized at the property. Landscape plan shall be prepared and installed by a qualified landscape professional to be approved by the Community Development Department. 21. Any lighting within public areas(i.e.street lighting)shall be FM BP PS 1.6. low intensity lighting,to be approved by the Community Development Department. 22. The project shall be conditioned to comply with all BP PS 1.d. applicable District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust(PM-10)as contained in section 6.4 of the Air Quality Handbook. All site grading and demolition plans notes shall list the following regulations: All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently • watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least twice daily with complete coverage, preferably in the late morning and after work is finished 000050 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 7-17-01 • Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road PIvt Parcel Map GP:Gradng perrrft PS,Planning Services TTM 2000-0002 BP.Buildng Permit BS:BWdng sere es TO,.Tertporary Occupancy PD:Fire Department FO:Feral Occupancy PD:Police Department PI:Public Improvements CE Cay Engineer IP:Improvement Plans WW:Wastewater CA Cay Atbr-y AMWC:AMwadero Mutual Water Company for the day. All clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease during periods of high winds(i.e. greater than 20 mph averaged over one hour)so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust. All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. - The area disturbed by clearing,grading,earth moving, or excavation operations shall be minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Permanent dust control measured identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall . be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with fast-germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation becomes established. All disturbed areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,jute netting,or other methods in advance by the APCD. All roadways, driveways,sidewalks, etc.to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, structural foundations shall be completed as soon as possible following building pad construction. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph for any unpaved surface. All unpaved areas with vehicle traffic shall be watered at least twice per day, using non-potable water. Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept daily to remove silt which may have accumulated from construction activities so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust from leaving the site. Wheel washers may be required when significant • offsite import or export of III is involved. 23. All new construction on the proposed parcels shall be Ongoing PS/CE 3.a-I consistent with the City of Atascadero Native Tree 166 000091 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 7-17-01 • Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road Pu Patel map GP:Graddng Peart PS.Planning Services TTM 2000-0002 BP:guiding Pent BS BuNng Services TO,Temporary Occupancy F.Fre Depabnent FO:Final Occupy q PD:Police Department PI:Public Improvements CE Ciy Er4neer IP:Improvement Plans W.WasewaWr CA.,City ntWmy AMWC:Alascadero MuWal Water Company Ordinance. 24. Drainage area near east and north boundaries of property BP PS 4.a. shall be restored as a native creek area utilizing a native landscape plan incorporating trees and shrubs 25. Location delineated as a wetland by Sierra Delta Corp. FM BP 4.b. report, November 2000 shall be preserved and fenced during all phases of construction of the project. The fencing - shall be placed a minimum of 25 feet from edge of defined wetland. No grading,trenching or filling of soil material shall occur within 25 feet of designated wetland. 26. The final parcel map shall identify a permanent open space FM BP PS 4.c. easement that shall prohibit grading,trenching,construction or native tree removals following completion of on-site improvements. Open space easement shall be recorded . for all locations to remain within 100 year flood plain in areas which are to be restored as a creekway. 27. Proposed building sites will be delineated on the parcel FM BP PS 4.d. map. Proposed new construction will be limited to a specific radius as provided on the parcel map and approved by the Community Development Department. A 25-foot setback for homes adjacent to the drainage areas on the east and north sides of the property shall be required.The setback shall be measured from the rear of the homes to the edge of the drainage easement. 28. The applicant shall notify the Department of Fish and Game FM PS 4.e. and the Regional Water Quality Control Board to obtain the necessary permits prior to site construction. 29. The applicant shall notify the Regional Water Quality BP PS/DFG/RW 4.f. Control Board(RWQCB)prior to any site construction in QCB order to obtain any necessary permits for alteration of drainage area.A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Construction Permit(General Permit)will be required.This may be accomplished by submitting a General Permit, Notice of Intent,through the RWQCB.The General Permit requires adopting and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for construction and post-construction phases. 30. All areas within drainage swale shall be designed to SP PS 4.e . eliminate erosion and sedimentation. A qualified biological consultant shall prepare drainage swale design recommendations including plant materials,swale lining,silt 167 000092 ITEM NUMBER: Z DATE: 7-17-01 • Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road P%t Parcel Map GF,.Gracing Pwrit PS:Planning Services TTM 2000-0002 BP:Bumng Penrit BS:BuBdng Services TO:Tengaary Occupancy FO:Fire Departrnent FO:Final Occupancy PO:Parise Departrnent Pt:Pubic hVmvements CE Olt'Engineer P.hpmvernent Plans WW:Wastewater CA City Attrxney MAWC:Atascadero Mutual Water Company protection,and methods to naturalize the new drainage course. 31. A biological consultant shall be retained by the project BP PS applicant to assist with the construction techniques within the drainage areas. The biological consultant shall monitor the construction methods and certify the completion of the drainage swale restoration project(creek enhancement). 32. All grading and excavation within the proposed drainage BP PS/CE 4.g. locations of the property shall be performed during dry season months as recommended by the Department of Fish&Game and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 33. All future residential development shall be required to hook BP PS 8.b. • up to city sewer to serve all wastewater needs 34. Site drainage shall be provided through the proposed lots BP CE 8.c. as shown on the exhibit B Tentative Tract Map. Drainage channels shall be designed consistent with map exhibits and as required to handle drainage as shown within the Prelminary Drainage Calculations prepared by RTC, January 2001 35. No structures,fences,earthwork or other activities which FM CE/PS 8.d. may impede flow are to be placed within drainage locations 36. A maintenance agreement shall be required for the Ongoing PS CE CA 8.e. drainage areas that cross individual private lots to ensure maintained drainage,weed and refuse abatement. The form of the agreement is to be approved by the City Engineer and the City Attorney. 37. A preliminary site distance analysis shall be prepared for FM CE 8.f. the new intersection of Santa Rosa Road and the new road serving the subject property. Engineering Conditions: • 168 000093 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 7-17-01 • Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road Pk PaMap GP:Grating Pernik PS:Planning Services TTM 2000-0002 BP.Budding Pemit BS Buddng Services TO:Temporary Occupancy F0:Fre Department FO:Final Occupancy PO:Police Department PI:Public Improvements CE Cky IP:ImpmvementPlans WW:Was*mater CA City Albrney AMC.,Atascadero Mutual Water Company 38. Prior to recording the final map,provisions for the repair BP/PM CE and maintenance of the paving of the private road shall be included in the CC&R's for this Tract.Provide a mechanism to maintain the private street, private sewer,and drainage swale and structures,such as a homeowners association. Submit copies of the same for review by the City Engineer and approval by the City Attorney. 39. Applicant shall construct,to the approval of the City BP/PM CE - Engineer,the following street improvements: a. Santa Rosa Road shall receive a 2"asphalt overlay along the tract frontage or as directed by the City Engineer. b. The north side of Santa Rosa Road shall be improved with a 5'wide decomposed granite walkway from the • intersection of Lakeview Road to a point where the existing path ties into the Atascadero Lake path.Any existing signs and or rocks encroaching into the proposed pathway shall be relocated to a location approved by the City Engineer. c. A 6'wide public utility easement along the Santa Rosa frontage shall be delineated on the final map. 40. Prior to recording the final map,the applicant shall BP/PM CE construct or bond for all public improvements required by these conditions of approval.All improvements shall be constructed within one year of the recordation of the final map. 41. Provisions for the repair and maintenance of any on-site BP/PM CE drainage structures and/or swales shall be included in the CC&R's for this Tract.Submit copies of the same for review by the City Engineer and approval by the City Attorney. 42. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted for BP/PM CE review and approval by the City Engineer in conjunction with the checking of the final map. 43. Prior to recordation of the final map a grading and drainage BP/PM CE plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by the City Engineer. • 169 000094 ITEM NUMBER: 2 • DATE: 7-17-01 Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road PM:Para�Map _ Perawt PS, TTM 2000-0002 BP:BSWAM GR ng9Pemrt BS uadng services To,Tenpaary Occupancy FD:Fre DepW"A FO:Rd Occupancy PD:Poice Departrnent PL Public Inpmements CE:Gty Engireer P.Improvement Plans WW:Wastewater CA Gly Attrxney AMWC:AWcadero MuWal Water Corpany 44. Improvement plans for the drainage system shall be BP/PM CE submitted with calculations justifying the design. Calculations and plans shall be wet stamped by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 45. Sewer connection and sewer extension fees shall be paid BP/PM CE to the City of Atascadero prior to recordation of the final map. _ 46. Prior to final map applicant shall submit plans and profiles BP/PM CE for review and approval by the City Engineer,designed by a registered civil engineer,for the extension of the sewer main from the terminus at Lakeview Drive to the western most property line. . 47. In the event that the applicant chooses to bond for the BP/PM CE public improvements required as a condition of this map, the applicant shall enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with the City Council. 48. An engineers estimate of probable cost shall be submitted BP IPM CE for review and approval by the City Engineer to determine the amount of the bond. 49. The Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall be accepted BP/PM CE by City Council on the consent agenda with the map and record concurrently with the Final Map. 50. All public improvements shall be constructed in BP I PM CE conformance with the City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as directed by the City Engineer. 51. The applicant shall enter into an Plan Check/inspection BP/PM CE agreement with the City. 52. A six(6)foot Public Utility Easement(PUE)contiguous to BP/PM CE Santa Rosa Road shall be offered for dedication on the Tract Map. 53. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or BP/PM CE • alteration of existing utilities. 170 0000.95 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 7-17-01 • Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road PM:Parte Map PS:Planning Services GP:Grading Penrit 9 7TM 2000-0002 BP.Bua6ng PemK BS:Building Services TO:Temporary Occupancy FD:Fire Depanrnent FO:Final Occupancy PD:Police Department Pt Public Improvements CE City Engineer IP.Improvernerd Plans W`N:Wastewater CA Ciy Attorney AMWC:Atascadero Mutual WaterCampany 54. The applicant shall install all new utilities(water,gas, BP/PM CE electric,cable TV and telephone)underground. Utilities shall be extended to the property line frontage of each lot or its public utility easement. 55. The applicant shall monument all property corners for BP/PM CE construction control and shall promptly replace them if disturbed. 56. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for BP/PM CE review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 57. All existing and proposed utility,pipeline,open space,or BP/PM CE other easements are to be shown on the tract map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the parcel map.The applicant shall show all access restrictions on the tract map. . 58. Prior to recording the parcel map,demonstrate that all BP/PM CE easements required to provide utilities to the new parcels have been acquired and are shown on the map. 59. Prior to recording the tract map,the applicant shall submit a BP I PM CE map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein.Said map shall be submitted for review and approval by the City in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 60. Prior to recording the final map,the applicant's surveyor BP/PM CE shall set monuments at all new property corners or shall indicate,by certificate on the final map,that comers have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. 61. Prior to recording the parcel map,the applicant shall pay all BP/PM CE outstanding plan checkrinspection fees. 1710 000096 ITEM NUMBER: Z • DATE: 7-17-01 Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road Pu Parcel Map PS PlannngSenices TTM 2000-0002 BPa�PWrn BS.&A&gsw;es TO,T-paary Occupancy FD:Fre OWar"rt F0:Final Occupancy P0:Police Deparrnent Pl:Pubk Improvements CE City EV— IP'.Improvement Plans WW:Wastewaw CA Cdy Aflorney AMWC:Atascadem Mutual Warr CaMany 62. Prior to placing the final map on the agenda for Council BP/PM CE approval,the applicant shall have the map reviewed by all applicable public and private utility companies(cable, telephone,gas,electric,Atascadero Mutual Water Company). The applicant shall obtain a letter from each utility company that indicates their review of the map. The letter shall identify any new easements that may be required by the utility company. A copy of the letter shall be submitted to the City. New easements shall be shown on _ the final map. 63. Upon recording the final map,the applicant shall provide BP/PM CE the City with a black line clear Mylar(0.4 mil)copy and a blue line print of the recorded map. 64. Prior to the final inspection of any public improvements,the BP/PM CE • applicant shall submit a written statement from a registered civil engineer that all work has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans. Atascadero Mutual Water Company: 65. Prior to recordation of the parcel map,the applicant shall PM AMWC submit plans that show all existing and proposed water distribution facilities required to provide water service to the subdivision. The plans shall be submitted to the Atascadero Mutual Water Company for review and approval. All water distribution facilities shall be constructed in conformance with Atascadero Mutual Water Company standards, policies and approved procedures and Title 22 of the California Administrative Code. 66. The applicant shall design and construct a water main PM AMWC extension from the existing main in Santa Rosa Avenue to the Southerly terminus of Rio Blanco Court,or as directed by the AMWC. A fire hydrant shall be constructed at the southerly terminus of the water main extension. Water service extensions shall be located as near as practical to the end of the water main extension. Ten feet of horizontal clearance shall be maintained between the proposed sewer main and the proposed water main extension. 67. Prior to the final inspection,the applicant shall pay all PM AMWC installation and connection fees required by the Atascadero • Mutual Water Company. 00009'7 112 ITEM NUMBER: '2— DATE: DATE: 7-17-01 • Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation /Monitoring Measure 8300 Santa Rosa Road PNL Parcel map PS Planningswkes GP:GraQng Pemrt TTM 2000-0002 eP:euddng PemB es:Bw 9 Services TO:Temporary Occupancy FD:Fre Department F0:Final Occupancy PD:Poke Depa tmA PL Pubic Improvements CE City Engineer IP.4mvement Plans WW:Wastewaler CA.Cdy Altaney AMC:Alascadero Mutual WaWCanpany 68. Prior to the issuance of building permits,the applicant shall BP AMWC obtain a will serve letter from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company for the newly created lots. • 00Q G 8 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 7-17-01 • EXHIBIT B: Tentative Tract Map Draft Resolution PC 2001-035 TTM 2001-0002 t 'iY ■� 3� � � i i� � et •, �, it ( ` / / ,fit�`;/(7` .% �}}/ ! a �' ■ � /o+ —' / i it �• r R /r' - �li t i 1 1 f �r Ll I 4-1 090099 i:/` 174 ITEM NUMBER: 'Z DATE: 7-17-01 • EXHIBIT C: Proposed Tract Development and Landscape Plan Resolution PC 2001-035 TTM 2000-0002 a It Rail Fence at t j III II edge of: 8 = [t t eatemetit. wt Drawage Swale jigrr �� t4_ r 4" 1 i[ry �,fi/g ®i 000310 175 U ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 7-17-01 • EXHIBIT D: Drainage and wetland Pian Draft Resolution PC 2001-035 TTM 2000-0002 g I Limits of \ drainage • easement T, I 1 1/ �' t ' Area to rem i / 1 1 1 1 / ' {{ I'll ' f in 100 year r /�/�/ ;e''� a 1 + q /.• 1 � r ► 1 }\ 1 1 i/ //// J/ J � •1 1 / / / �� 11 sf th Wetland area — � JJ 1W r u11 / /l r i 11 r r411 lrrIyri J 000101 f , 176 ITEM NUMBER: Z DATE: 7-17-01 • EXHIBIT E: Road and bridge design Draft Resolution PC 2001-035 TTM 2000-0002 30' T- 4' 10' 10' 4' 2' 2" MIN. TYPE "B" A.C. (TYP.) '4 5% 2R Sx * R.� _. 6" MIN. CLASS II Road standard for typical Rural Local Street design Rail f ncing 1 ;�. oasiva nafa SA�(TA RCSA R'8AD fin:OJl L < . P SAL ENDGI_ 599ON Concrete headwall with architectural treatment MOT in Sr" Conceptual bridge design for new road 00010; 177 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 9/11101 • Attachment 4: Planning Commission Minutes TTM 2000-0002 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2000-0002: The proposed project is a Tentative Tract map subdividing two existing lots into six parcels. One lot currently contains a single-family residence. Five vacant parcels would be created, allowing the development of five additional residences. The project site is at the south end of Atascadero Lake within a location currently utilized for cattle grazing and contains a seasonal drainage flow at the edge of the property. A new road would serve the parcels, intersecting with Santa Rosa Road near the intersection of Lakeview Drive. General Plan Designation: LDSF (Low Density Single Family); Zoning District: RSF-Z, minimum lot size 1.5 to 2.5 acres (calculated to be 1.50 acres using performance standards); APN 056-351-004; Address: 8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero; Owner and Applicant: David Graves. PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2001-023: The Initial Study prepared for the project has found that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, when mitigation measures are implemented. A proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact has therefore been prepared for the project in conformance with the • California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public review through August 7, 2001, at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, Room 104, from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Staff Recommends: 1. The Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-040, certifying proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-023 with findings and the adoption of a mitigation monitoring program. 2. The Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-035, approving Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002, based on findings and subject to the conditions and exhibits as attached. Assistant Planner, Phil Dunsmore provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Russ Thompson, Russ Thompson Consulting, 7400 Morro Road, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He stated that the applicant supports the staff report and thanked • staff for their work on this project. Mr. Thompson addressed the issues of drainage, the well on the property, water quality, and the positive impacts of this project for the lake area. 178 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 9111/01 • Steve Goode, 8830 San Gabriel Road, felt that there should be a written agreement regarding maintenance of the drainage ditch. He expressed concern regarding length of time of construction and the effect on the roads. Mr. Goode spoke in support of reopening the old Colony road to allow a walking path on the east border of the property. Alan Thomas, 9520 Marchant Way, stated that in his opinion the project would create significant impacts on the lake and is concerned with the amount of water draining into the lake from the project. Mr. Thomas encouraged the Commission to request an Environmental Impact Report on this project. Henry Engen, 9579 Lake View Drive, read from a prepared statement addressing his concerns regarding the subdivision of this property. (Attachment 1) John Novak, 8605 San Gabriel Road, stated his concerns regarding water backup from the property draining into the lake, as well as the maintenance of the drainage ditch. He would like to see a portion of this property dedicated to the Lake Park to provide access to the lake, and felt strongly that the project needs an Environmental Impact Report. Ron Bell, 8800 San Gabriel Road, shared his concern regarding water coming off Eagle Ranch and would like to see an Environmental Impact Report on this project. . Zoe Dudy, 8092 Santa Rosa Road, inquired why animals would be excluded from this property and expressed her concern regarding flooding issues. She also questioned whether another house could be built on the site. Janice Silva, 8865 San Gabriel Road, lives behind the property and feels the top priority for this or any project should be the health of the lake. She would also like to see a walking path through the property to the lake. Ernie Porter, Atascadero Lake resident, stated that he has lived around the lake for 82 years and that this property was originally a flat, dry plain at most times of the year where barley and wheat were harvested. He does not feel that flooding is the most significant issue for this property, but he does support an EIR. Frank Kock, 9545 Lake View Drive, presented additional petitions supporting a full Environmental Impact Report for this project. Additionally, he handed out a package of material for the Commission containing a staff report for an adjacent property as well as a site map of adjoining properties. (Attachment 2) Lee Swan, 9065 Lake View Drive stated that he is concerned about drainage on the property and supports an Environmental Impact Report for this project. Mr. Swan encouraged the City to consider the option of a land trade to expand the Lake Park. • 179 ITEM NUMBER: • DATE: 9/11/01 Ann Ketcherside indicated her concerns regarding public notification of the location of this meeting, the school going in across from the State Hospital and the lack of power to the property belonging to the Vetters. Russ Thompson, applicant's representative, answered questions raised during Public Comment, and those of the Commission. 1. Maintenance of the drainage channel and area subject to flooding: The area is conditioned to be preserved as an open space and drainage easement that will be privately maintained by the homeowners. 2. Walking path from San Gabriel to the lake: The owner is concerned about liability and security issues if he were to dedicate a right of way for a walking path. 3. Mud and water drainage into the lake: There will be erosion and sedimentation plans as well as an NPDS permit from the State. There should be no significant increase of water into the lake from the drainage swale. 4. Water runoff from Eagle Ranch: While there may be a trickle of water for several weeks after a major storm event, it will not affect the home pads, road or utilities. 5. Size.of homes proposed for the property: 2,800 to 3,500 square feet. . 6. Protection of riparian habitat during construction: Area will be fenced off during construction. 7. Amount of water to be stored in drainage swale during a flood event: The swale is not designed to store water, but rather to maintain a constant flow. Chairman Eddings closed Public Comment. Vice-Chairman Jeanes asked if there were any risks, hazards or impacts not addressed in the absence of a full EIR. Mr. Dunsmore indicated that there were not. Commissioner Blaser inquired what would be gained by doing a full Environmental Impact Report on the project. Mr. Dunsmore stated that it would necessitate additional time, money and public comment. Director Parcells reported that the studies an EIR would be based upon have already been done and the mitigation measures that those studies proposed have been presented as conditions of approval for the project. Vice-Chairman Jeanes raised the issues of exclusion of animals and the number of homes permitted for this site. Mr. Dunsmore responded that in the project conditions, hoofed and grazing animals would not be allowed on this property due to concerns regarding water contamination and erosion due to vegetation loss. Regarding the number of homes allowed on this property, there is one existing home and a maximum of five additional homes could be built. • Chairman Eddings indicated that the rights of thero ert owner are at issue here. P P Y He feels that this property is entitled to create 1Y2-acre parcels, which are three to 180 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 9/11101 • six times as large as anything currently around the lake, and the visual impact would be minimal. Chairman Eddings felt that all environmental issues have been addressed and he fully supports the project. Commissioner Kelley also felt that all environmental issues have been looked at and he supports the project. He feels these homes will add to property values around the lake. Commissioner Bentz stated his support for the project and indicated that he felt it was not within the Commission's right to do other than what was in the staff report. MOTION: By Commissioner Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Bentz to adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-040, certifying proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-023 with findings and the adoption of a mitigation-monitoring program. - AYES: Commissioner Kelley, Bentz, Norton, Blaser, Fonzi, Jeanes and Chairman Eddings NOES: None ABSTAIN: None • Motion passed 7:0 by a roll-call vote. Commissioner Fonzi stated that she is concerned that there are no natural building sites near the front of the property were the three front lots are proposed and she is concerned with flooding issues. She could approve additional sites toward the back of the property making a total of three building sites rather than six. Commissioner Bentz felt that the property could be properly engineered to eliminate the flooding issue. MOTION: By Commissioner Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Bentz to adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-035, approving Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002, based on findings and subject to the conditions and exhibits as attached. AYES: Commissioners Kelley, Bentz, Norton, Blaser, Jeanes and Chairman Eddings NOES: Commissioner Fonzi ABSTAIN: None • Motion passed 6:1 by a roll-call vote. ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Attachment 4: Planning Commission Minutes TTM 2000-0002 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2000-0002: The proposed project is a Tentative Tract map subdividing two existing lots into six parcels. One lot currently contains a single-family residence. Five vacant parcels would be created, allowing the development of five additional residences. The project site is at the south end of Atascadero Lake within a location currently utilized for cattle grazing and contains a seasonal drainage flow at the edge of the property. A new road would serve the parcels, intersecting with Santa Rosa Road near the intersection of Lakeview Drive. General Plan Designation: LDSF (Low Density Single Family); Zoning District: RSF-Z, minimum lot size 1.5 to 2.5 acres (calculated to be 1.50 acres using performance standards); APN 056-351-004; Address: 8300 Santa Rosa Road, Atascadero; Owner and Applicant: David Graves. PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2001-023: The Initial Study prepared for the project has found that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, when mitigation measures are implemented. A proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact has therefore been prepared for the project in conformance with the California, Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The . Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public review through August 7, 2001 , at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, Room 104, from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Staff Recommends: 1. The Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-040, certifying proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-023 with findings and the adoption of a mitigation monitoring program. 2. The Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-035, approving Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002, based on findings and subject to the conditions and exhibits as attached. Assistant Planner, Phil Dunsmore provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Russ Thompson, Russ Thompson Consulting, 7400 Morro Road, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He stated that the applicant supports the staff report • and thanked staff for their work on this project. Mr. Thompson addressed the 182 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 issues of drainage, the well on the property, water quality, and the positive impacts of this project for the lake area. Steve Goode, 8830 San Gabriel Road, felt that there should be a written agreement regarding maintenance of the drainage ditch. He expressed concern regarding length of time of construction and the effect on the roads. Mr. Goode spoke in support of reopening the old Colony road to allow a walking path on the east border of the property. Alan Thomas, 9520 Marchant Way, stated that in his opinion the project would create significant impacts on the lake and is concerned with the amount of water draining into the lake from the project. Mr. Thomas encouraged the Commission to request an Environmental Impact Report on this project. Henry Engen, 9579 Lake View Drive, read from a prepared statement addressing his concerns regarding the subdivision of this property. (Attachment 1) - John Novak, 8605 San Gabriel Road, stated his concerns regarding water backup from the property draining into the lake, as well as the maintenance of the drainage ditch. He would like to see a portion of this property dedicated to the Lake Park to provide access to the lake, and felt strongly that the project needs an Environmental Impact Report. Ron Bell, 8800 San Gabriel Road, shared his concern regarding water coming off . Eagle Ranch and would like to see an Environmental Impact Report on this project. Zoe Dudy, 8092 Santa Rosa Road, inquired why animals would be excluded from this property and expressed her concern regarding flooding issues. She also questioned whether another house could be built on the site. Janice Silva, 8865 San Gabriel Road, lives behind the property and feels the top priority for this or any project should be the health of the lake. She would also like to see a walking path through the property to the lake. Ernie Porter, Atascadero Lake resident, stated that he has lived around the lake for 82 years and that this property was originally a flat, dry plain at most times of the year where barley and wheat were harvested. He does not feel that flooding is the most significant issue for this property, but he does support an EIR. Frank Kock, 9545 Lake View Drive, presented additional petitions supporting a full Environmental Impact Report for this project. Additionally, he handed out a package of material for the Commission containing a staff report for an adjacent property as well as a site map of adjoining properties. (Attachment 2) • 183 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Lee Swan, 9065 Lake View Drive stated that he is concerned about drainage on the property and supports an Environmental Impact Report for this project. Mr. Swan encouraged the City to consider the option of a land trade to expand the Lake Park. Ann Ketcherside indicated her concerns regarding public notification of the location of this meeting, the school going in across from the State Hospital and the lack of power to the property belonging to the Vetters. Russ Thompson, applicant's representative, answered questions raised during Public Comment, and those of the Commission. 1 . Maintenance of the drainage channel and area subject to flooding: The area is conditioned to be preserved as an open space and drainage easement that will be privately maintained by the homeowners. 2. Walking path from San Gabriel to the lake: The owner is concerned about liability and security issues if he were to dedicate a right of way for a walking path. 3. Mud and water drainage into the lake: There will be erosion and sedimentation plans as well as an NPDS permit from the State. There should be no significant increase of water into the lake from the drainage swale. 4. Water runoff from Eagle Ranch: While there may be a trickle of water for several weeks after a major storm event, it will not affect the home pads, • road or utilities. 5. Size of homes proposed for the property: 2,800 to 3,500 square feet. 6. Protection of riparian habitat during construction: Area will be fenced off during construction. 7. Amount of water to be stored in drainage swale during a flood event: The swale is not designed to store water, but rather to maintain a constant flow. Chairman Eddings closed Public Comment. Vice-Chairman Jeanes asked if there were any risks, hazards or impacts not addressed in the absence of a full EIR. Mr. Dunsmore indicated that there were not. Commissioner Blaser inquired what would be gained by doing a full Environmental Impact Report on the project. Mr. Dunsmore stated that it would necessitate additional time, money and public comment. Director Parcells reported that the studies an EIR would be based upon have already been done and the mitigation measures that those studies proposed have been presented as conditions of approval for the project. Vice-Chairman Jeanes raised the issues of exclusion of animals and the number • of homes permitted for this site. Mr. Dunsmore responded that in the project conditions, hoofed and grazing animals would not be allowed on this property due to concerns regarding water contamination and erosion due to vegetation 134 ITEM NUMBER: B- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 loss. Regarding the number of homes allowed on this property, there is one . existing home and a maximum of five additional homes could be built. Chairman Eddings indicated that the rights of the property owner are at issue here. He feels that this property is entitled to create 1 'h-acre parcels, which are three to six times as large as anything currently around the lake, and the visual impact would be minimal. Chairman Eddings felt that all environmental issues have been addressed and he fully supports the project. Commissioner Kelley also felt that all environmental issues have been looked at and he supports the project. He feels these homes will add to property values around the lake. Commissioner Bentz stated his support for the project and indicated that he felt it was not within the Commission's right to do other than what was in the staff report. _ MOTION: By Commissioner Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Bentz to adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-040, certifying proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-023 with findings and the adoption of a mitigation-monitoring program. AYES: Commissioner Kelley, Bentz, Norton, Blaser, Fonzi, Jeanes and • Chairman Eddings NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 7:0 by a roll-call vote. Commissioner Fonzi stated that she is concerned that there are no natural building sites near the front of the property were the three front lots are proposed and she is concerned with flooding issues. She could approve additional sites toward the back of the property making a total of three building sites rather than six. Commissioner Bentz felt that the property could be properly engineered to eliminate the flooding issue. MOTION: By Commissioner Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Bentz to adopt Resolution No. PC 2001-035, approving Tentative Tract Map 2000-0002, based on findings and subject to the conditions and exhibits as attached. AYES: Commissioners Kelley, Bentz, Norton, Blaser, Jeanes and Chairman • Eddings 185 ITEM NUMBER: B-2 -= DATE: 09/25/2001 .5 Rim r ■ V� 1918 ,. 1878 City Council Staff Report Community Development Department—Public Hearing Appeal of Condition #4 Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019 Sprint PCS Telecommunication Facility Chalk Mountian (Sprint PCS / 9230 Vista Bonita) REPORT IN BRIEF: The subject project was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission at the August 7, 2001, Planning Commission meeting. At the meeting the representative of Sprint PCS requested a modification to project condition # 4. Project condition #4 required that the above ground • cabinets /shelters for all three wireless carriers be treated with a camouflage colored pattern consistent with the color board submitted by the applicants for the project. The camouflage treatment was chosen as an appropriate treatment for the cabinets in order to minimize the visual impacts associated with the above ground cabinets / shelters on the site. At the Planning Commission meeting, Sprint PCS expressed difficulty with meeting this requirement since the cabinets for the site had already been purchased and painting the cabinets could cause the equipment within to function improperly and could void the manufacturers warranty. The Planning Commission deliberated the request and did not grant an exception to the condition. On August 24, 2001 the City received a letter of appeal from Sprint PCS, appealing the Planning Commission condition regarding the color treatment of the cabinets. The letter states that the cabinets cannot be painted without jeopardizing the manufacturer's warranty, which insures the proper operation of the units and that based on the nature of the site design it is doubtful that the equipment cabinets will be visible. Staff agrees that the nature of the site design will reduce the visual impacts of the site, however the combination of the site design, landscaping, and color treatment is recommended to reduce the visual impacts of the cabinets to a less than significant level. The Planning Commission staff report, Planning Commission meeting minutes and the appellant's letter of appeal have been attached for background information. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment - 1 Planning Commission Staff Report Attachment 2 -- Planning Commission Minutes (8/7/01) - Attachment 3 -- Letter of Appeal 187 ITEM NUMBER: B-2 DATE: 09/25/2001 Attachment 1: Planning Commission Staff Report • CUP 2000-0019 SEE NEXT PAGE • 188 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • 1 197-9 191 � 1979 Planning Commission Staff Report Conditional Use Permit #2000-0019 — Sprint PCS Conditional Use Permit # 2001-0028—AT&T Wireless Conditional Use Permit #2001-0035 — Edge Wireless Chalk Mountain Telecommunications Site 9230 Vista Bonita (JM Consulting / Michael Fredricks) SUBJECT: Request to allow the establishment of three additional wireless telecommunication facilities on a property that has been approved as a co-location site for cellular facilities RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-037 certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019, Conditional Use Permit 2001-0028 and Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-038 approving Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019 (Sprint PCS), Conditional Use Permit 2001-0028 (AT&T Wireless), and Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035 (Edge Wireless), a request to establish three telecommunication facilities at 9230 Vista Bonita. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant CUP 2000-0019: Sprint PCS 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100 Pleasanton, CA 94588 925-468-7800 • 189 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 Applicant CUP 2001-0028: AT&T Wireless C/o Tacit Communications 510 Castillo Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 805-481-2290 Applicant CUP 2001-0035: Edge Wireless C/o The Consulting Group 118500 Von Karman, Suite 870 Irvine, CA 92612 714-906-6273 2. Property Owner: Michael Frederick PO Box 573 Atascadero, CA 93423 _ 3. Project Address: 9230 Vista Bonita 4. General Plan Designation: Moderate Density Single Family 5. Zoning District: RSF-Y 6. Site Area: 1.84 acres • 7. Existing Use: Approved as a co-location site for cellular facilities 8. Environmental Status: Proposed Negative Declaration posted July 19, 2001 DISCUSSION: Background: On March 17, 1998 the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1998-005 thereby approving the co-location of cellular facilities on the southwesterly face of Chalk Mountain (9230 Vista Bonita). The approval of this Resolution allows an undetermined number of cellular carries to locate their facilities on the site "provided such additional facilities are also designed in such a manner that avoids excessive visibility. " Anal Project Site: The site is on the east side of the Highway 101 corridor, located on the hillside above the intersection of Santa Rosa Road and El Camino Real. There are currently four cellular providers with active leases on the site. The site is developed with eight monopoles located on 190 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8107/01 • the hillside and four equipment shelters on thep raded equipment ad. Manzanita trees have been g planted on the perimeter of the pad for screening purposes and additional native trees and shrubs have recently been installed above and below the equipment pad that will further screen the existing facilities. The site is surrounded by single family residential uses. Sprint PCS Project Summary: Sprint PCS proposes to install one 17-foot tall monopole and one 11-foot tall monopole both equipped with three PCS antennas, and a 15-foot tall steel pole equipped with a 2-foot microwave dish. The Sprint above ground facilities will consist of two equipment cabinets; 4%-feet (W) by 3-feet (D) by 5 '/2-feet(H) (dimensions are approximate). AT&T Wireless Project Summary: AT&T Wireless proposes to install one 12-foot tall monopole mounted with four panel antennas and one 15-foot tall monopole equipped with two antennas. The above ground facilities for the project consist of an equipment shelter 10-feet (W) by 12-feet (D) by 10-feet (H) above ground equipment shelter. Edge Wireless Project Summary: Edge Wireless proposes to install two 15-foot tall monopoles equipped with three panel antennas each. The above ground facilities for the project include a 4- foot (W) by 11-foot(D) by 7-foot (H) equipment shelter (dimensions are approximate). ABOVE GROUND FACILITY LOCATIONS AT&T EDGE W U ttZyy a�'"�0 a �O <Si s es. o ^ s w � m SPRINT PCS Q � / 'n Existing Alpine Facilities • 191 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 Visual Impacts: The antennas and the monopoles will be painted with the same earthtone • P P treatment as the existing antennas and poles on the site. The equipment cabinets will be painted with a camouflage pattern to try to minimize the visibility of the cabinets. The topographical elevations at the top of the poles will not exceed the elevation of the existing poles on the site (1223 feet). The equipment shelters have been "pit-set" into the ground to minimize the visual impacts of the facilities. It is staff's observation that the existing visual impacts of the site are related to the equipment shelters, therefore special consideration was taken when reviewing the placement of the proposed shelters. Additionally, the project has been conditioned that the existing Verizon equipment shelter be painted with a similar camouflage treatment to minimize the existing visual impacts of the facility. EXISTING ALPINE - LINE OF HILL BEHIND North Elevation ANTENNAS SECTION CUT - EXISTING CELLULAR SPRINT STUB MOUNTED ONE ANTENNAS ANTENNAS MAXIMUM HEIGHT ———————_ITAJ�,(Ildj)ly1 AL�Q.WPBLE F1 1�('.FTT BIZ ADSL___— t68-0 .. - ------�_ EXISTING CINGULAR WIRELESS ANTENNAS RF EXISTING CHAPARRAL (TYPICAL) EXISTING VERIZON SPRINT STUB ;^ - W RELESS ANTENNAS PROPOSED 0' EDGE STUB MOUNT - MOUNTED ANTENNA ANTENNA PROPOSED EDGE WIRELESS EQUIPMENT, (BEYOND CHAIN LINK FENCE) • SPRINT EQUIPMENT i0P OF RAD - E LEV. (*1155 - Pit-Set method for equipment shelters .EXISTING WATER TANK EXISTING CHAPARRAL(TYPICAL) SPRINT STUB MOUNTED EXISTING ALPINE ANTENNAS ANTENNA - EXISTING VER120N ---- ---WIRELESS GANCTEELNLNUAL NTENNAS MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT 1,223' AL -MAXIMUM.HEIGHT ECCE__ _CELL___- w - z ONE ANTENNAS EXISTING CINGULAR SPRINT STUB MOUNTED WIRELESS ANTENNAS ANTE- S OPOSED IT EDGE WIRELESS --------- `� STUB MOUNT ANTENNA ---_-- ) AT&T FIXED.WIRELESS ANTENNAS _ EXISTING VERIZON _ _ EOUIPMENT SHELTER _ EXISTING CELLULAR - _ ONE EQUIPMENT SPRINT PCS NIE`ROWAVF___ ANTENNA _ TOP OF GRADE REI ELEV. PROPOSED IW&28O' S (t 1155 AMSL) EDGE WIRELESS STUB PROPOSED EDGE WIRELESS MOUNT ANTENNAS ECUIPMENT,(BEYOND CWMN LRRL FENCE) ;RURE AT&T FIXED WIRELESS AMEN.(BELOW GRACE LINE BEHIND V--MN CUT) O e South Elevation • 192 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • Site Landscaping: The applicants have been working extensively to provide a site design that g minimizes visual impacts of the proposed facilities. A comprehensive landscape plan has been prepared for the site. The addition of the plant materials shown on the landscape plan will minimize the visual impacts of the proposed facilities as well as contribute to the aesthetics of the overall project. A 3-foot tall landscape berm has been incorporated into the site design along the edge of the equipment pad. The landscape berm is shown as terminating at the edge of the AT&T Wireless Cabinet. Staff has added a condition that the landscape berm be continued along the entire perimeter of the equipment pad. EQUIPMENT LAYOUT PLAN SCALE-1/4--1'-0- 22 n A_6 PROPOSED STUB A 5 MOUNTED ANTENNA AT&T FIXED WIRELESS EXISTING CINGULAR ANTENNAS WIRELESS EQUIPMENT AREA AT&T EQUIPMENT EXISTING VERIZON SHELTER EQUIPMENT SHELTER SPRINT PCS EQUIPMENT EXISTING WATER PROPOSED EDGE WIRELESS --,TANK EQUIPMENT, SEE A-7 EXIST!NG PG&E EXISTING CELLULAR EXI G ALPINE PROPOSED TRANSFORMER ENT AREA E IPMENT ARE AND EDGE WIRELESS ROPOSED EDGE EQUIPMENT AREA • WIRELESS EQUIPMENT PROPOSED STUB ELEVATION MOUNT ANTENNAS �n "-1 SCALE 1/8•=1'-0• Extend Landscape Berm along Perimeter of Equipment Pad Access Issues: A significant portion of the access road that serves the telecommunication site suffered severe erosion during the heavy rains of last winter. The project has been conditioned that the access road will be required to be reconstructed to city standards prior to the issuance of a building permit for the cellular facilities. Site Build Out Issues: The addition of three additional carriers at this site will use up the existing area designated on the equipment pad for equipment shelters. The addition of future carriers on the site could require additional grading that will receive further evaluation with respect to future compliance with Planning Commission Resolution 1998-005, the resolution that approved the site as a co-location facility for an undetermined number of cellular facilities "provided such additional facilities are also designed in such a manner that avoids excessive visibility. " Conditional Use Permit Findings: The site is in the RSF-Y zoning district (Residential Single Family, minimum lot size 1 acre with sewer and 1% without sewer) where the use is a conditionally allowed use. Under Section 9-2.109 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, conditional uses require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. In order to approve the Conditional Use • Permit the Planning Commission is required to make the following findings: . i93 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, & 6 DATE: 8/07/01 1. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. • 2 The proposed use satisfies all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the use will not, because of the circumstances and conditions applied in this particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the general public or persons residing or .working in the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and the use. 4. The proposed use will not be inconsistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development. 5. The proposed use will not generate a volume of traffic beyond the safe capacity of all roads providing access to the project, either existing or to be improved in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic volume of the surrounding neighborhood that would result from full development in accordance with the Land Use Element. Environmental Review: The Initial Study concluded that there would be no significant hann to the environment as a result of this Conditional Use Permit, when mitigation measures are implemented. A proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project and certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is included in draft Planning Commission Resolution 2001-0037 CONCLUSION: The projects will not be detrimental t the hal w • p � o e e th, safety or welfare of the general public, nor will the project generate additional traffic in the surrounding neighborhood. Additionally, the projects have been designed to be consistent with Planning Commission Resolution 1998-005, which approved the site as an appropriate location for the co-location of cellular facilities. In staffs opinion, it appears that the projects are consistent with the findings required for Conditional Use Permits. ALTERNATIVES: Since each project is a separate application, the Planning Commission may act independently on the merits of each project. The Commission could take one or more of the following actions: 1. The Planning Commission may approve Conditional Use Permit #2000-0019 (Sprint) with modified conditions of approval. 2. The Planning Commission may approve Conditional Use Permit #2001-0028 (AT&T Wireless) with modified conditions of approval. 3. The Planning Commission may approve Conditional Use Permit #2001-0035 (Edge Wireless) with modified conditions of approval. • i9 � ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, 8.6 DATE: 8/07/01 • 4. The Planning Commission may deny Conditional Use Permit #2000-0019 ( rint Sp ), based on appropriate findings. To deny the application, the Commission must find that it is inconsistent with one of the required findings. The motion to deny must include a finding for denial. 5. The Planning Commission may deny Conditional Use Permit #2001-0028 (AT&T Wireless), based on appropriate findings. To deny the application, the Commission must find that it is inconsistent with one of the required findings. The motion to deny must include a finding for denial. 6. The Planning Commission may deny Conditional Use Permit #2001-0035 (Edge Wireless), based on appropriate findings. To deny the application, the Commission must find that it is inconsistent with one of the required findings. The motion to deny must include a finding for denial. 7. The Planning Commission may continue one or all applications and refer the project(s) back to staff for additional information or analysis. Direction should be given to staff and the applicant. ATTACHMENTS: • Attachment 1: Zoningand General Plan Designation g Attachment 2: Photo Simulations Attachment 3: Draft Resolution PC 2001-037 Attachment 4: Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 • I 195 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • ATTACHMENT 1: Zoning and General Plan Designation CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 Zoning District: RSF-Y General Plan Designation: Moderate Density Single Family 9230 Vista Bonita APN 030-441-014 , 1 i, �ftn i I i96 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • ATTACHMENT 2: Photo Simulations CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 <v s • 197 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8107101 • ATTACHMENT 2: Photo Simulations CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 r; • 198 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, & 6 DATE: 8/07/01 • ATTACHMENT 3: Draft Resolution PC 2001-037 Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. PC 2001-037 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO CERTIFYING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2001-0026 PREPARED FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2000-0019, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-0028 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-0035 (9230 VISTA BONITA/CHALK MOUNTIAN/MIKE FREDERICK) WHEREAS, an application has been received from Michael Frederick, PO Box 573, Atascadero, CA 93423 (Property Owner), and Sprint PCS, 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100, Pleasanton, CA 94588 (Applicant) to consider Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019, allowing the installation of cellular facilities on APN 030-441-014; and, • WHEREAS, an application has been received from Michael Frederick, PO Box 573, Atascadero, CA 93423 (Property Owner), and AT&T Wireless, c/o Tacit Communications, 510 Castillo Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 (Applicant) to consider Conditional Use Permit 2001- 0028, allowing the installation of cellular facilities on APN 030-441-014; and, WHEREAS, an application has been received from Michael Frederick, PO Box 573, Atascadero, CA 93423 (Property Owner), and Edge Wireless, c/o The Consulting Group, 18500 Von Karman, Suite 870, Irvine, CA 92612, (Applicant), to consider Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035 allowing the installation of cellular facilities on APN 030-441-014; and, WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001-0026 were prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero held a public hearing following the close of the review period for the Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration to consider its adequacy; and, NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a public hearing held on Tuesday, August 7, 2001, hereby certifies Mitigated Negative Declaration 2001- 0026 based on the following Findings and as shown on Exhibit A: 199 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, & 6_ DATE: 8107101 1. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with • requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act; and, 2. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment, when mitigation measures are implemented; and, 3. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, when mitigation measures are implemented; and, 4. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, when mitigation measures are implemented; and, 5. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly, when mitigation measures are implemented. On motion by Commissioner ' and seconded by Commissioner the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: • ABSTAIN: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Royce Eddings, Planning Commission Chairperson Attest: Lori Parcells Community Development Director • 200 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, & 6 DATE: 8/07/01 EXHIBIT A: Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Resolution PC 2001-0037 i 4Fe-,G` n n, W 9CITY OF ATASCADERO PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION #2001-026 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 805/461-5035 APPLICANT: Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019 Sprint PCS Wireless 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100 Pleasanton, CA 94588 Conditional Use Permit 2001-0028 AT&T Wireless c/oTacit Communications 510 Castillo Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035 Edge Wireless C/o The Consulting Group 18500 Von Karman, Suite 870 Irvine, CA 92612 PROJECT TITLE: Chalk Mountain Co-Location Telecommunication Site PROPERTY OWNER: Michael Frederick, PO Box 573,Atascadero, CA 93422 PROJECT LOCATION: 9230 Vista Bonita/Chalk Mountain PROJECT DESCRIPTION: • Consideration of three applications to install cellular receiving facilities on a site previously approved as a co-location site for wireless communication facilities 201 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8107101 The Sprint PCS application includes the addition of a wireless communication facility consisting of a 10- foot by 20 foot above ground equipment area, one 17 foot tall monopole, one 11 foot tall monopole, both equipped with three PCS antennas, and a 15 foot tall steel pole equipped with a 2-foot microwave dish. The facility will be situated on the south side of similar facilities leased by Alpine PCS. The AT&T application includes the establishment of a broadband wireless communication facility consisting of a 10 foot by 12 foot above ground equipment shelter, one 12 foot tall monopole mounted with 4 panel antennas and one 15-foot pole mounted with two antennas. The facility will be located adjacent to the Sprint PCS facilities. The Edge Wireless application includes a 14 foot by 7%s foot above ground equipment cabinets, two 15- foot tall antennas, each equipped with three panel antennas. The site has been designed to minimize the visibility of the improvements on the site. The equipment shelters have been slightly recessed to minimize the visual impacts and an extensive landscape plan has been submitted with the application that will assist in screening the facilities. The poles have been dispersed on the site and the height of the poles has been kept below 20 feet to minimize their visibility and the top of the poles will be kept below the topographical elevation of the top of the hill. FINDINGS: 1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project. 2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. 3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. 4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. DETERMINATION: Based on the above findings, and the information contained in the initial study 2001-026 (made a part hereof by reference and on file in the Community Development Department), it has been determined that the above project will not have an adverse impact on the environment when the following proposed mitigation measures are incorporated into the project. PREPARED BY: Jamie L. Kirk,Associate Planner DATE POSTED: July 19, 2001 PUBLIC REVIEW ENDS: August 7, 2001 • 202 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation CUP 2001-0035/CUP 2001-0027!CUP2001-0028 /Monitoring Measure PS:Planning Services 9230 Vista Bonita BL:Business License BS:Building Services GP:Grading Permit FD:Fire Department BP:Budding Permit PD:Police Department FI:Final Inspection CE:City Engineer Chalk Mountain TO:Temporary Occupancy ww:Wastewater FO:Final Occupancy CA City Attorney PLANNING SERVICES Mitigation Measures 1. The 2-3 foot tall landscape berm shall be continued BP/ PS 1.C. along the perimeter of the equipment pad. Landscape Plan 2. The existing Verizon cabinet shall be painted with a FO PS 1.C. camouflage pattern to minimize the existing impacts of the structure and to maintain consistency with the new applications. 3. The above ground shelters shall be inset two feet into BP Ps I.C. the hill and pit set 2-3 feet to minimize the visual impacts of the cabinets. • 4. The access drive shall be gated at the top of the hill FO PS 7.C. and RF Radiation Warning sign shall be posted on the gate and in a visible location near the equipment area. • 203 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, & 6 DATE: 8/07/01 • ATTACHMENT 4: Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. PC 2001-038 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92000- 0019—SPRINT PCS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2001-0028—AT&T WIRELESS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92001-0035—EDGE WIRELESS; APPLICATIONS TO ALLOW THE INSTALLATION OF THREE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES AT THE CHALK MOUNTAIN TELECOMMUNICATION CO_- LOCATION SITE. (9230 VISTA BONITA/CHALK MOUNTIAN/MIKE FREDERICK) WHEREAS, an application has been received from Micheal Frederick, PO Box 573, Atascadero, CA 93423 (Property Owner), and Sprint PCS, 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100, Pleasanton, CA 94588 (Applicant) to consider Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019, allowing the • installation of cellular facilities on APN 030-441-014; and, WHEREAS, an application has been received from Micheal Frederick, PO Box 573, Atascadero, CA 93423 (Property Owner), and AT&T Wireless, c/o Tacit Communications, 510 Castillo Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 (Applicant) to consider Conditional Use Permit 2001- 0028, allowing the installation of cellular facilities on APN 030-441-014; and, WHEREAS, an application has been received from Micheal Frederick, PO Box 573, Atascadero, CA 93423 (Property Owner), and Edge Wireless, c/o The Consulting Group, 18500 Von Karman, Suite 870, Irvine, CA 92612, (Applicant), to consider Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035 allowing the installation of cellular facilities on APN 030-441-014; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project is in conformance with the Moderate Density Single Family Land Use Designation of the General Plan; and, WHEREAS, the site is located in the Residential Single Family — Y zoning district wherein the proposed use is allowable by Conditional Use Permit; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Conditional Use Permit on August 7, 2001, and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicants, and the public; and, . 204 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • WHEREAS, Zoning Ordinance Section 9-2.109.(c)(4) requires the Planning Commission make certain "Findings"prior to approving a Conditional Use Permit; and, NOW,THEREFORE, the Planning Commission finds as follows: 1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan; and, 2. The proposed project satisfies all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance; and, 3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the use will not, because of the circumstances and conditions applied in this particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of the use; and, 4. The proposed project will not be inconsistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development; and, 5. The proposed project will not generate a volume of traffic beyond the safe capacity of all roads providing access to the project, either existing or to be improved in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic volume of the surrounding • neighborhood that would result from the full development in accordance with the Land Use Element. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019, Conditional Use Permit 2001-0028, and Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035 allowing the installation of cellular facilities at 9230 Vista Bonita (APN 030- 441-014) consistent with the following Exhibits: 1. EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval 2. EXHIBIT B: Site Plan 3. EXHIBIT C: South Elevation 4. EXHIBIT D: North Elevation 5. EXHIBIT E: East Elevation 6. EXHIBIT F: Landscape Plan 7. EXHIBIT G: Color Board On motion by Commissioner and seconded by Commissioner , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES NOES: 205 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 ABSTAINED: • ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Royce Eddings, Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Lori Parcells, Director Community Development Department • 206 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, & 6 DATE: 8/07/01 • EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 /Monitoring Measure PS:Planning Services 9230 Vista Bonita BL:Business License BS:Building Services GP:Grading Pemrit FD:Fre Depa trent BP:Building Pemd PD:Police Departnent FI:Final Inspection CE:City Engineer Chalk Mountain Telecommunication Site TO:Temporary Occupancy WW:Wastewater F0:Final Occupancy CA City Attorney Standard Conditions 1. The approval of this use permit shall become final and BP PS effective for the purposes of issuing building permits, provided the required conditions of approval have been satisfied, fourteen (14) days following the Planning - Commission approval unless prior to the time, an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in Section 9-1.111(b) of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall be valid for BP PS twelve(12) months after its effective date. At the end of the period, the approval shall expire and become null and void . unless the applicant has received a building permit or applied for an extension of entitlement. 3. The Community Development Department shall have the BP PS authority to approve minor changes to the project that (1) increase the square footage of the project by less than 10%, (2) result in a superior site design or appearance, and/or(3) address a construction design issue that is not substantive to the Conditional Use Permit. Project Conditions 4. All site design, landscaping, antenna / shelter placement, BP/FO PS site fencing, exterior elevations, finish materials and colors shall be consistent with Exhibit B through Exhibit F. 5. The 3-foot tall landscape berm shall be continued along the BP/ PS 1.C. perimeter of the equipment pad as shown on Exhibit E. Landscape Plan 6. The existing Verizon cabinet shall be painted with a FO PS 1.C. camouflage pattern to minimize the existing impacts of the structure and to maintain consistency with the new applications 7. The above ground shelters shall be inset two feet into the hill BP PS 1.C. and pit set 2-3 feet to minimize the visual impacts of the cabinets as shown on Exhibit D. • 207 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 /Monitoring Measure PS:Planning Services 9230 Vista Bonita BL Business License BS:Building Ser es GP:Grading PwM FD:Fire Depaftent BP.Balding Peri PD:Police Depat rent FI:Final Inspection CE:City Engineer Chalk Mountain Telecommunication Site TO:TenporaryOccuparny ww:wastewaler F0:Final Occupancy CA City Attomey 8. The access drive shall be gated at the top of the hill and RF FO PS 7.C. Radiation Warning sign shall be posted on the gate and in a visible location near the equipment area. 9. The City of Atascadero shall be allowed reasonable access Ongoing to the site and shall be allowed use of the site for the purposes of installing, operating and maintaining telecommunications equipment. 10. No exterior lighting shall be installed on any structures BP PS 11. Air conditioning units and controls shall be maintained to BP PS insure proper operation and prevent excessive high speed operation and the air conditioning units shall be equipped with the Bard Compressor Sound Cover 8002-0005 described on the noise analysis information provided for the project. 12. All chain link fencing on the site shall be treated with an FO PS earth tone coating without slats. 13. Any perimeter fencing required by the RF study shall be an BP/FO PS agricultural style t-bar fence with metal barbed wire. 14. Prior to the final inspection the applicant shall submit written FO PS verification from a licensed land surveyor or a registered civil engineer that the elevation of the top of the monopoles is at or below the 1223-foot topographical elevation. City Engineer Conditions 15. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check/Inspection BP CE agreement with the City of Atascadero. 16. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or BP CE alteration of existing utilities. 17. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall BP CE submit a grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer for review and approval by the City Engineer. 18. Prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall submit a FO CE written statement from a registered civil engineer that all work has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans and the uniform Building Code (UBC) prior to the final inspection. • 208 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring Program Timing Responsibility Mitigation CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 /Monitoring Measure PS:Planning Services 9230 Vista Bonita BL Business License BS:Building Services GP:Grading Pemdt FD:Fire Deparrnent BP:Building Pemffi PD:Police Departnent FI:Final Inspection CE City Engineer Chalk Mountain Telecommunication Site TO:TemponvyOccupancy WW:wastewater F0:Final Occupancy CA City AWmey 19. The existing driveway shall be reconstructed to meet City BP CE Standards prior to the issuance of a building permit for the cellular facilities. An engineered grading and drainage plan will be required to be approved for the reconstruction of the driveway. • 209 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 EXHIBIT B- Site Plan Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 CUP 2000-00`19/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 11 � e — ac , K S F . 9 M _ • / / zzzz IV `X 9 Detail y G G4 �a Edge Wireless i N o Sprint 210 ITEM NUMBER: 4, DATE: 8/07/01 • EXHIBIT C: South Elevation Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 EXISTING WATER TANK EXISTING CHAPARRAL(TYPICAL) SPRINT STUB MOUNTED EXISTING ALPINE ANTENNAS ANTENNA EXISTING VERIZON --_WIRELESS ANTENNAS MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT 1,223 AMSL MAXIMUM HEIGHT ISTING CELLULAR . 369-6- ONE ANTENNAS ( XISTING CINGULAR SPRINT STUB MOUNTED _. WIRELESS ANTENNAS ANTENNA --------- ROPOSED 0' EDGE WIRELESS _------------ ) STUB MOUNT ANTENNA --__ AT&T FIXED.WIRELESS ANTENNAS EXISTING VERIZON EOUtPMENT SHELTER EXISTING CELLULAR ONE EQUIPMENT SPRINT PCS MIeROWAVG ANTENNA - _ TOP OF GRADE - 3 REF ELEV. PROPOSED 160' & 280' ( t (31155 AMSL)EDGE WIRELESS STUB PROPOSED EDGE WIRELESS MOUNT ANTENNAS EQUIPMENT, (BEYOND CHAIN LINK FENCE) FUTURE AT&T FIXED WIRELESS ANTENNA(BELOW GRADE LINE BEHIND SECTION CUT) SOUTH SECTION .G SCALE.1/16-1-0 • 211 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • EXHIBIT D: North Elevation Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 EXISTING ALPINE LINE OF HILL BEHIND - - - - ANTENNAS SECTION CUT EXISTING CELLULAR SPRINT STUB MOUNTED ONE ANTENNAS ANTENNAS - MAXIMUM HEIGHTLLEV...±68-0 -------�MIMgV A614WVU MEIL�IT� .SSL-._ - - EXISTING CINGULAR _ WIRELESS ANTENNAS I EXISTING CHAPARRAL (TYPICAL) - EXISTING VERIZON SPRINT STUB WIRELESS ANTENNAS - PROPOSED Cr EDGE STUB MOUNT MOUNTED ANTENNA ANTENNA - F PROPOSED EDGE WIRELESS - EOUIPMENT• (BEYOND CHAIN LINK FENCE) g SPRINT EOUIPMENT 8 - TOP OF GRADE A"- REF EL ±1155 g 3 4 ,Nn ORTH SECTIONG SC 3/32'=1'-0' • 212 ITEM NUMBER: 4,5, &6 DATE: 8/07/01 • EXHIBIT E: East Elevation Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 22 22 A-6 PROPOSED STUB A-5 MOUNTED ANTENNA F-AT&T FIXED WIRELES EXISTING CINGULAR ANTENNAS WIRELESS EQUIPMENT AREA AT&T EQUIPMENT EXISTING VERIZON SHELTER EOUIPMENT SHELTER SPRINT PCS EQUIPMENT EXISTING WATER"STANK PROPOSED EDGE WIRELESS EQUIPMENT, SEE A-7 EXISTING PG&E EXISTING CELLUL EXISTING ALPINE LPROPOSED AT&T, TRANSFORMER ONE EQUIPMENT AREA EQUIPMENT ARE SPRINT PCS. AND EDGE WIRELESS PROPOSED EDGE EQUIPMENT AREA WIRELESS EQUIPMENT PROPOSED STUB 2ELEVATION MOUNT ANTENNAS � SCALE:1/8"=P-0" Continue Landscape Berm along Perimeter of the Equipment Pad 0 213 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, &6 DATE: 8107/01 • EXHIBIT F: Landscape Plan Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 CUP 2000-0019/CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-00P35 /' as-oa..w re.terr)r.�)lr.ror o-rrL IM-Ibtr�Y.wtiNkY/tea_ M-e OC•s..l..brl.rblyw.�.rr/D.OA�pb Ar4 p_1µ OC-MrwYaNwels\'rtl�-eM T+•Y�•�M 70-tai /� '' 6C-NYeww heelne.swTr l4✓JCOD-rbwern0-tµ --_ lan U T`ff '� .,rt�a� • \`� � :'{tali zm .J ♦ �`''QAwMwrtaie L..I—eNets a w.r_-rr-r.r.Mr�w� �.f •w-`ruwr»Rrr.r.�rr�w'rr wrr ...r._�+.�r..�."..ti.errr �L O ��rr.�r��rw.rri.�rr�r_rtw - • i • ra hwr • w.w ...�-�.�_ � tl ww1.r�w..r-.rrrrrrrrrwoe�rrwr '. r"•��.� rw�w.e rwa �. .r..nrr • •O �����rWw -� - ar �r.rrw.�r►r r� .� `y\� y r_r+++.r.r.y:�w�wr-eMw_..--� ��N— -- •-__� __ ^W;r.wr•�ra ��� i�rr.l�i...fy.rrtrreeYw.r.rr.r. Quo MareuNe Irtyetioe Notm VIMa .."-�'..s��.�w.w��-oma =_ n.•r w'._..w.«..�`..'+n.r�r pww`..r� .aty Q-Tu� ' \ wa• �4f _iJYt • I _ 3.• 4. mss• � aye •r. __"�_- _-� • i 214 ITEM NUMBER: 4, 5, & 6 DATE: 8/07/01 • EXHIBIT G: Equipment Shelter Colors Draft Resolution PC 2001-038 CUP 2000-00191 CUP 2001-0028/CUP 2001-0035 � h Wi / J, ,r S. ��. 6� �rh•,i:I q. •\ n i � I oa SHERWIN WILLIAMS '� a. OLIVE GROVE — # 2369 YEW HEDGE — # 2371 x y r , ,.. v y &A b r 4 / r a A CAMOFLAGE PATTERN "y IK �'3� CAN BE A COMBINATION OF THE SELECTED COLORS. �ti f f VERANDA — # 2057 FALCON BROWN — # 2065 SITE ID#: CA-513-A SITE NAME: CHALK MOUNTAIN ,d. geW I R E L ESS SM ' SITE ADDRESS: BONITA VISTA ATASCADERO, CA 93423 • 215 ITEM NUMBER: B-2 DATE: 09/25/2001 Attachment 2 Planning Commission 8/7/01 Meeting Minutes • CUP 2000-0019 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #2000-0019 - SPRINT PCs: The proposed project is a request to allow the establishment of a wireless communication facility consisting of a 10- foot by 20-foot above ground equipment area, one 17-foot tall monopole, one 11-foot tall monopole, both equipped with three PCS antennas, and a 15-foot tall steel pole equipped with a 2-foot microwave dish. The site has been previously approved as a co-location site for cellular facilities. The project site is a 1.84 acre parcel commonly known as Chalk Mountain. The project parcel has a General Plan Designation of MDSF (Moderate Density Single Family) and a Zoning District of RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, minimum lot size 1 acre with sewer and 1% acres without sewer). The proposed use is a conditionally allowed use in the RSF-Y Zone. (APN 030-441-014), Address: 9230 Vista Bonita, Owner: Michael Frederick. PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2001-026: The Initial Study has determined that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, when mitigation measures are implemented. A proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact has therefore been prepared for the project in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public review through August 7, 2001 at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, Room 104, from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Staff Recommends: • 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-037 certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-038 approving Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019 (Sprint PCS) a request to establish three telecommunication facilities at 9230 Vista Bonita. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #2001-0028 - AT&T WIRELESS: The proposed project is a request to allow the establishment of a broadband wireless communication facility consisting of a 10-foot by 12-foot above ground equipment shelter, one 12-foot tall monopole mounted with 4 panel antennas and one 15-foot pole mounted with two antennas. The site has been previously approved as a co-location site for cellular facilities. The project site is a 1.84 acre parcel commonly known as Chalk Mountain. The project parcel has a General Plan Designation of MDSF (Moderate Density Single Family) and a Zoning District of RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, minimum lot size I acre with sewer and 1 '/i acres without sewer). The proposed use is a conditionally allowed use in the RSF-Y Zone. (APN 030-441- 014), Address: 9230 Vista Bonita, Owner: Michael Frederick. PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2001-026: The Initial Study has determined that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, when mitigation measures are implemented. A proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact has therefore been prepared for the project in conformance with the California Environmental 216 ITEM NUMBER: B-2 DATE: 09/25/2001 • Quality Act (CEQA). The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public review through August 7, 2001 at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, Room 104, from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Staff Recommends: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-037 certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for Conditional Use Permit 2001-0028. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-038 approving Conditional Use Permit 2001-0028 (AT&T Wireless), a request to establish three telecommunication facilities at 9230 Vista Bonita. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #2001-0027 - EDGE WIRELESS: The proposed project is a request to allow the establishment of a wireless communication facility consisting of a 14-foot by 7 1/2 -foot above ground equipment shelter and two 15-foot tall monopoles, each equipped with three panel antennas. The site has been previously approved as a co-location site for cellular facilities. The project site is a 1.84- acre parcel commonly known as Chalk Mountain. The project parcel has a General Plan Designation of MDSF (Moderate Density Single Family) and a Zoning District of RSF-Y (Residential Single Family, minimum lot size 1 acre with sewer and 1 1/2 acres without sewer). The proposed use is a conditionally allowed use in the RSF-Y Zone. (APN 030-441-014), Address: 9230 Vista Bonita, Owner: Michael Frederick. PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2001-026: The Initial Study has determined that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse,impact on the environment, when mitigation measures are implemented. A proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact has therefore been prepared for the project in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public review through August 7, 2001 at 6500 Palma Avenue, Community Development Department, Room 104, from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Staff Recommends: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-037 certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-038 approving Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035 (Edge Wireless), a request to establish three telecommunication facilities at 9230 Vista Bonita. Chairman Eddings announced that presentation of Public Hearing Items No. 4., 5., and 6., would be combined. • Associate Planner Jamie Kirk provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. 217 ITEM NUMBER: B-2 DATE: 09/25/2001 PUBLIC COMMENT • Leah Emerson, 234 Reef Court, Santa Barbara, representing Sprint PCS and AT&T Wireless, addressed the issue of radio frequency emissions at the site. Their study has shown that the proposed sites will be well under the FCC guidelines for telecommunication facilities. She expressed concern regarding the space on the graded area afforded to creating a turnaround as well as the extension of the landscape berm. Additionally, she asked that the condition requiring Sprint to paint their equipment be dropped. It is felt that painting the cabinets will create additional heat within the unit. Debra Robinson, engineer for Sprint PCS, stated that the R. F. radiation on the site is non- ionizing and does not heat the body. The FCC guidelines were set so conservatively that the actual exposure limits are far below any possibility of human impact. Samantha Kim, 18500 Von Carmen Avenue, Irvine, representative of Edge Wireless, discussed her concerns with two of the conditions for approval. Regarding the condition requiring the existing Verizon cabinet to be painted, she recommended that language be added to state"upon authorization from Verizon." Additionally, regarding extending the landscape berm, she suggested that taller vegetation be planted along that end of the equipment pad area rather than extending the berm. Rick Ford, Orcutt, Sprint Construction Manager, spoke to the issue of painting the Sprint cabinet. Mr. Ford stated that the cabinet would be dropped three feet into the ground leaving only three feet six inches exposed. He felt with the landscaped berm these cabinets will not be exposed to sight. Chairman Eddings closed Public Comment. Chairman Eddings inquired about the turnaround on the site, and extension of the landscape berm. Associate Planner Kirk stated that the site currently does not have an adequate fire truck turnaround, however, the Fire Department did not require one. Regarding the landscape berm, staff felt that extending the landscaping along the berm would help to further mitigate the visual impact of the site. Commissioner Fonzi asked if the applicants would be required to replace any plant material used for landscaping that might die. Ms. Kirk stated that they are required to irrigate the landscaping to be planted on the site, and it could be required that the landscape architect do a yearly inventory to determine the status of the plants. MOTION: By Vice-Chairman Jeanes and seconded by Commissioner Fonzi to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-037 certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019, Conditional Use Permit 2001-0028 and Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035 with the statement "upon authorization from Verizon" added to Project Condition No. 6. AYES: Commissioners Jeanes Fonzi Bentz Kelley,lle Norton Blaser and Chairman Eddings. 218 ITEM NUMBER: B-2 DATE: 09/25/2001 • NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 7.0 by a roll-call vote. MOTION: By Vice-Chairman Jeanes and seconded by Commissioner Fonzi to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-038 approving Conditional Use Permit 2000-0019, Conditional Use Permit 2001-0028, and Conditional Use Permit 2001-0035 (Edge Wireless), a request to establish three telecommunication facilities at 9230 Vista Bonita. AYES: Commissioners Jeanes, Fonzi, Kelley, Norton, Blaser, Bentz and Chairman Eddings NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 7.0 by a roll-call vote. • 219 RECEIVED AUG 2 12001 • i"60p%/ CITY OFATASCADE COMMUNICATIONS RO CITY CLER!��0"`!CE City of Atascadero August 20,2001 City Clerk's Office-Room 311 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero,Ca.93422 Attn:Marsha Torgerson RE: Appeal for Sprint PCS-CUP #2000-0019 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is hereby submitted on behalf of Sprint PCS in reference to their recently approved project on Chalk Mountain. The purpose of this letter is to provide the specific reasons for the requested appeal by the applicant,Sprint PCS. - The applicant is objecting to painting their equipment cabinets as required in project condition #4. Sprint PCS utilizes Motorola, Inc.equipment cabinets,also referred to as BTS units,on all of their wireless communications facilities. The equipment cabinets to be utilized on the Sprint PCS Chalk Mountain project were previously ordered and have since been received by the applicant. The problem is that these cabinets cannot be painted without jeopardizing the manufacturer's warranty,which insures the proper operation of the units. The letter from the equipment manufacturer,Motorola, Inc.,which details these • issues,has been provided for further clarification. The Sprint PCS facility,once it has been constructed,is unmanned and is operational 24/7. In order for the facility to function properly,the equipment cabinets (i.e. BTS units) must be operational at all times. Given the extreme heat over the summer months in the North County area,the location of the facility on the western slope of the property,commonly referred to as Chalk Mountain,it is very likely that painting the cabinets a darker color could cause the units to operate at a higher temperature than the manufacturer's specified maximum operating temperature of 1200,rendering the warranty null and void. Therefore,Sprint PCS,by painting the cabinets,will significantly increase the likelihood of the equipment to malfunction and will not be afforded warranty coverage should the units fail to function properly. The equipment cabinets are very expensive and it would be cost prohibitive for the applicant to replace the cabinets should the initial installation fail to operate as needed. The intent behind project condition#4 is to mitigate the visual impacts associated with the new installations. However,given the additional mitigation contained within the condtions of approval, including the comprehensive landscape plan (condition #7) and extended berming around the entire perimeter of the equipment area (condition #5),the need for painting the Sprint PCS equipment is unnecessary and excessive. It should be noted that the Sprint PCS equipment is significantly smaller than the approved AT&T equipment shelter,which the planning commission was attempting to mitigate through condition #4. However,we feel that it unfairly burdens Sprint PCS should it cause their facility to malfunction after the initial installation of the equipment on what is known to be a hot,arid and exposed hillside. To further illustrate the extraneous nature of project condition#4 in reference to the Sprint PCS project,it should be pointed out that the cabinets are 56"in height,which will be pit-set 2-3'below grade,leaving 3.5' above grade at most,with a 3'landscaped berm obscuring the top-half from public view.It is doubtful that the equipment cabinets will be visible,which is why the applicant is objecting to painting the cabinets • if not absolutely necessary. 221 Page 2 City of Atascadero 8/20/01 In conclusion,I would like to thank you for your time and consideration of the points contained herein. We are confident that project conditions#5 and #7 will effectively screen the Sprint PCS equipment from public view,which is why we respectfully submit our request for an appeal of project condition #4 in reference to CUP #2000-0019. Should you have any additional questions please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, y' Leah Emerson,Planner Tacit Communication for Sprint PCS Enc.: Letter from manufacturer,Motorola,Inc. Photosims-West and Southwest elevations(as taken from EI Camino Real) Cc: Eric Rheinsch:k-i, Project Manager Tacit Communications for Sprint PCS Alba Hernandez,Senior Property Specialist Sprint PCS • • li 222 02/05/1995 02:56 8054615036 COM DEV PAGE 01 yr ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICAA fION REQUIREiMENTS • t4tte C11Al1Gs Aria Pxs-:ansr _ Appltcat on Lots Aptlttsrion lona Appltc+cion leve Applioation fee $475.00 Kip +5 8 2 P . 0 0 Four Plot plan drawings - Planned der. Oce • l/1- 2 li• teduetloh of plat plan - Text 1c 3'tellulmary title report. currant within Fra-co" $1, 6 5 0. 0 0 six Pentre Crapnic lilvstraslon of request (map) s+lplbe Cal develop"ae.statement Supplemental development statement !iwlrenmental descrtpttan lotm Lnvtronmentai deseription taco - OC+e asaeseot's parcel 0op shoring all Ptellmlaagy title report, current propettiee within 300 foot or wic2llA six Menthe subject property One +s0e90009 parcel map showtnq one sat of stick-on address labels for 411 properties within 100 test Of all pfo5+arty orners within 30C fast the subject property Ono Morax aapy of the address labels One set of stick-on 364rsss labels far all'pro"ety owners vtthin 300 rete One xerer ceoy of the address labels Aadtltl9tMI Application form Applieaeion ter $50. 00 O1t1B1tAt sLA1r_AMtttct)MAacr (yeti ase !u01: aa* S i/3• X 11' r*dvetton of ?lot plan Vase Mesa cequ%caa car none ahan,re dtawinq Application rr* 5 8 5 0. 0 0 14"1e4rntal inf0cmat ton �aAL RUMV tText)• AppTlution ora Applicatton fee $850. 00 Text of proposed tavision tavtronmentai deatclotion tact _ SVppl/mental development Statement Tim ca» c3F `Up1 Pv ¢stlom tons APgilaattoa Sea Pplieatton ;arm steals* planj5 . 00 Appllcetton rev $j 0 7 5 . 0 0 Conditional use permit b 0 00 All its** listed undwIc tentative care*% - iateel asps/subdivisions 3 3 0.0 0 map Letter stotihq reasons far extension M R O)1 P- p teat on ova �- APplicaclo,t tae $1 ,075 . 00 TZ lima d : Copy of notttieation letter to existing ctor requesting tingono* • tenants Application ;at 5b . 0(i !roof of delivery of letter to all ton- ants 60 days prior to submittal of +vplieatlon l P#j &am r xza�o T: COPY Of 7COTwed CCiR•s and Mamea.gtrs• tit P 6n Farm Assoaistion Byte.* ApplIcatiam to* $2 2 5 n 0 All items listed under tsntetivs parcel Getter Stating reasons of reconsideietlon map slot plan (a 1/2• x ll-) LCf :i7+t ADauSTM><iI �—�PlIcAttM1 corm Application form Application :e• (5725.00) A90"Catiat tee $200.00 e copies of ton eative amp sap Letter stating reasons rue appeal Oma i 1/2- x 11' reduction of tentative lupplWoonral development statement TreliminarY title report curraAt Mithln six pontes FINAL MAP FOR LLA - $285 . 00 + DC ENC,. FES Ms , Pplication form Appllctton tte$285. 00 + $200.00 •i• DC cation cot* 3 copies of final map Application too $550. 00 one s 1/2• n 11- reduction Of final .ap ENG. FEE Graphic lllustcstcon at request updacsd title report inviconmental description form Preliminary subdivision quaranta* BevVL*mental development stat*aent Proliminscy title report, current within �. six AaRthn pP11e*tlon tars Applleation tea $5 5. 0 0c 1 T1t1e "Part Currant vlthtn xtx months A +i ean good abandonst Oraphlc npreseneaclon es'proposal -�-- APPllOation'fee $475 Q0 Metas and Boun+ia desctiptaon at to- List of three proposed stress names sultans lot i¢pplemrnc+l deval0P01ent stetewent / �• 31C�t L� S Anes C1tANCL: __,.�5� tattoo torK ' _ Application fora A"Lieaetsn teapp AppliaatIon rev $2 5 5 0 0 Yttle reposo current-Ai stat aoncys Craphic illustration of cequ*st _..� Grapnie representattOn of lot tequesci" SupPiewantal dsvet':'"rrs atxsssnt Gcaatelot title an4 deeds COnCtcniny • C�PorcY 223 02/05/1995 02:56 8054615036 COM DEV PAGE 02 CM OF ATASCADERO PLANNING DIVISION AP'PLIC•ATIGN FORM COMAUUNI Y DEVELOPMENT DEPT; 6500 PA'Mk AYE. ATASCADERO,CA 93422 (SQrya 461-5035 Pease type or pNttt dealt fit a'tk htootr Gets WVbMtbrw UM be netti p'tterl. Owner. ' � vii t PC _ Address �c� ��;n 1?�.�n;t� —„ e8s: '�_ Phone Owner. Agent: zc; �crv�n�vn Address: ess: Phone #•, phone #: s c) - 6 C-0 Project Address: 1113C-) e Legal Description: C `< ATc-1,S --T-t2 Assessors Parcel Number(s): -c 3c - L44 1 U 1 q E�dsttng Use: Project lWe (Parcel Map. Precise pbM etc.): C.�E T 'Zcc-,o - cctr,)f �A 4 �u►�u�t���'1 t Project,Description: ? o, f { s 2 ,� 2t �,��tticf v1 I/We consent to the filing of this application,and declare that this Application and related documents are true and correct. Mote:: The slemtwe of the pmPesty ow=two)is ftqWxid oe this+PFReation before It vM be soaepteM Owner / Date A - F,,r ?u C -CNwv4t�rt•Cao ar�S/s 1.LL 1��� Date FOR STAFF USE ONLY Yrs \iieOtpt#: am Was 224 02/05/1995 02:56 8054615036 COM DEV PAGE 03 CI'T'Y' OF ATASCADER4 • ENM- O AL COORDINATOR . EwMONAENTAL nvFORmATIDN FQRx COMMUNriy DEVMDPXDrr DEPT. 6600 PALMA AVE. A'TA.SC',ADERO,CA ON22 (8051481-3033 Please We Or PTU ceUriy iR&IX &=MPARwJ =uga be mend Applicant• -�S2 ri YV t hC5 Addru : r o t (0D Phone t: 6- S Project Address: cfZ?�C) Awmaces Parcel - �-t y G legalPttaa: _S ����o N 2T List and describe any at permits or public any Federal,State ar local)approvals ngwYed far Project: c Proposed Use of Site: r zs i s ci • 1. Site ansa(in ache): 2. Square footage ofbuildtngs: z n ?,rru . 100 3. Square footage of parking areas: N,,6 4. Number of on-site parking spaces: S. Describe Proposed scheduilng ;z c � S. Describe associated projects.. Tp DAA. ;>ry �.c C ' re /LL2 �j < 7. If resictenttal.Include the number at units,aeduIe of ugtt sizes.anticipated sak prfca or C`� 4cec z.r`�a and antietpated houachold aize. 4,A lents, 8. 1f commerc w,iadtcate tht hype(Uelg a bond.regiorW.eta.),and square footage�saIes areas. N��� 9. If industrial.indicate type.estimated employ=mt per ahilL and products/byproducts produced. N 10. If tnstitertioaaL indicate major functions, d-11-PI*Ym6At Y=shift.esttmated Occupancy.and community benefits to be derived from the prIML p is • 225 02/05/1995 02:56 8054615036 COM DEV PAGE 04 1. Deaerihe the project atte as ft heists bdar+e ibwe pee, QL uK ha&W h2fb matron an tovagmptW,sc4 SUMN►•planta mid aaimale.avaddiftry d ages► air eultival.Mata*='or agenic aspects. Describe MY e3d1=9 sftatR =as the aster tad tbs=0 offt strtxebaea. 2. Deaezibe the aurroundiag pmpaftm toc>ssd. h6cmumM PkIft and animalsand any cum historical,or scenic aspects. Indicate the*W a(land use fresideatlalcommetusal.etc.).tUeasity of davelopaaeat,and scale of dcvdqpnumt Ougdwg hogK s tbwk,eta.). EFFECTS Are the following ZnW=effects of your ymjeeo ptbvi&a wrii =response to each tient checked IfW. YES 1. Change to eziStt4g features of any aftm sw"dmftp pat==. or substiLnual altenuoa to Cidsttag Copo~ ❑_ 2. Cbange!a scenic views ar TWA$from �� � tv .rec��;rc�c1 �C sz cti r�� pubbe lands,or reads? ' ® a�ihiti L 1 �cr,vti 3. Ch=ge in pattr=scale.or character of the Arai area of the 1 11,19- h��uv zc v i eW-5 -Cb:i cjc A project? ❑ ? c'�'S;c� b'(- / (?"'dSC< ~" 4. SlgniBcant amounts of solid waste or litter? ❑ S. Change is dust.ash.=ake,filmes,or odes to vietaitr? ❑ � • S. Cbangc is stream or ground water quality or qusatlty? ❑ 7. Substantial change ire cdattng anise or keels? [� 8. Is the site on filled land or on slopes of 10%or maie? � ❑ 9. Use of disposal of hazardous materials? ❑ 10. Substantial change to demand for manicw see iiees? ❑ 11. Substantial increase in fossil fuel eon$L=pd=? ❑ 12. Is the project related to a larger project or sere of pleats? ❑ 13. Removal at or grading wnhta the dripltue otmatu>ta trees? ❑ `�\ 226 02/05/1995 02:56 8054615036 COM DEV PAGE 05 • DLscuss in detail the other devel"wo't a trines that I"=Coasideted for this Otte or project. Exp why each of the alternatives wag refectej. ntal affects Wadditional Information that you belim be beise&W art the analysis of the Potential eavtran- 3*aQ'PrMec'L Such additional suPMtWg data may taclucle; Maps charts Drainage studies Soils Reports Geologic Reports _ Archaeological Reports Traffic Studies • I hereby certify that the statements ftunlsbtd about,acid in the attached exhibits. t th tnf=mation required for this initial evaluation.to the best of my Ability ct a date and inforrnauon and that the facts.statttaerrts,and prevented am true and correct to the best of my kuCwledge and belief. Date cmuar • 227 �i "psi � 1 _� - K \. M�.♦' ".! '_ � � • °� yqa..� tit♦ '. P0 � •� ; �., �yis SY I .. -:C 1....� y�g -t' Ari,_ � "''• �tfJ V• ' l'�1..-. ... -. Chalk Mountain Proposed Facilities Existing proposed AT&T Proposed Edge artenna [ • � - it �_._ iy •. _ . ;R - - ,.. - „:prctuosed equ:pment'� • - r Proposed West • • T. ALA proposed Edge antenna proposed AT&T anterr,a proposed Sprint a�lenma proposed Sport micr-�ave d;sh proposed Edge arterna dL t ! ,~ v ,« .rr proposed equ�m�n� +: ' :.ter ; •.��. .J v 'r�,�,�` ,f�� ••• -• Wi • o �Q� OLA Steven Cramer Sr.Director,Business Operations 9401 Indian Creek Pkwy Overland Park,KS 66210 July 26,2001 SRC-023-01 Mike Hennigan Vice President Site Development and Project Management Sprint PCS - 15500 W. 113"'St. Lenexa,KS 66219 Dear Mike, Another request has come to my attention that has been made of Motorola by Sprint PCS relative to the California Coastal market. The request is for Motorola base stations to be repainted to meet landlord and/or zoning requirements. As you know,normally any modifications to the BTS cabinet would void the warranty on those cabinets. However,in consideration of the unique circumstances in the California Coastal market and in a gesture of good faith,Motorola is willing to make an exception for Sprint PCS only for the BTSs that are part of the California Coastal project. Motorola will allow Sprint PCS to repaint the BTSs to satisfy the landlord or zoning requirements, maintaining full warranty coverage per Section 17 of the Second Amended and Restated PCS CDMA Product Supply Contract between Sprintcom,Inc.and Motorola,Inc dated as of March 1,2001 ("the Contract")on the following conditions: • Sprint PCS,at its sole cost,will follow the procedure outlined in the"SC4812ET Color Modification Procedure(v_1.0)"attached to this letter. This procedure outlines how to properly mask/protect the weatherproofing and ventilation points of the BTS. • Sprint PCS acknowledges that if the repainting of the cabinet causes the BTS to operate at a higher temperature than the maximum operating temperature specified in Exhibit D of the Contract,the warranty on that BTS will be null and void. • Sprint PCS acknowledges that if the repainting of the cabinet negatively impacts the weatherproofing of the BTS,the warranty on that BTS will be null and void. • Sprint PCS will identify to Motorola,by cascade number and serial number,the date when the subject BTS(s)are to be painted prior to any action being taken. Should the notification of the cascade number and serial number not be made prior to the painting of the BTS,the warranty on that BTS will be null and void. Motorola reserves the right to inspect any base station,upon prior notification to Sprint PCS,that has been deployed in this manner to assure that this procedure is being followed. If at any point,Motorola finds that Sprint PCS has deployed the base stations without following the attached procedure,the warranty provided in accordance with Section 17 will be voided per subsection 17.7(a). • Although outside the scope of what is required by the Contract,Motorola has taken the initiative to create this procedure in the spirit of cooperation and trust that embodies our business relationship. We are more 231 Page 2 of 2 SRC-023-01 July 20,2001 than happy to assist in satisfying Sprint PCS'goals of on-time deployment and allow Motorola to provide warranty service on these base stations. Please sign the attached page and return this letter by August 3,2001 as an indication of Sprint PCS's acknowledgement of these requirements. Should we not receive acceptance by this date,Motorola will presume Sprint PCS's acceptance of this procedure and will consider this issue to be resolved in a positive manner. Should you have any further questions or concerns please contact the at 913-317-3053. Regards, Steven Cramer Sr.Director Business Operations North America Telecom Carrier Solutions Group Motorola—Global Telecom Solution Sector Agreed and accepted: Mike Hennigan,Vice President Date Site Development&Project Management Sprint PCS cc: Kathryn Hanson-SPCS Jeremy Johnson Ken Kawano Dave Koch Jenice Lewis-SPCS Dennis Michuda Kevin Neuer—SPCS Lyle Neffler—SPCS File Attachment: SC4812EI'Color Modification Procedure v. 1.0 • 232 ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 iy 1918 Atascadero City Council Staff Report — Public Works Department ATASCADERO ROAD PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS: City Council: 1) Receive the update on the Atascadero Public Works Department Actions;and 2) Introduce for first reading by title only, the draft Ordinance amending Chapter 15, of the Atascadero Municipal Code,relating to trench cuts; and 3) Approve the Assessment District Program. REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Atascadero has 141 miles of City Maintained Roads and 29 miles of Non-City Maintained Roads. Our last report estimated the total backlogged maintenance to be more than $25,500,000.00. Road Type Miles of Road Cost Circulation Plan Road 65 $8,789,621 City Maintained Local Roads 76 $9,500,000 Non-City Maintained Local Roads 29 $7,250,000 The Atascadero Road Program is a program to maintain and protect the roads of Atascadero in an organized, efficient and cost-effective manner. This is the fourth City Council meeting on the Atascadero Road Program. The first meeting was a workshop on road maintenance and potential strategies for road repair. The second provided a detailed background on the roads of Atascadero, a breakdown of the road maintenance backlog and alternatives for the repair, maintenance and rehabilitation. The third meeting the Council accepted for maintenance roads that the County had accepted and portions of San Gabriel Road • and San Marcos Road. The Council also gave staff direction on trench cuts, development standards and assessment districts. 233 ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 p Tonight staff will update Council on Public Works Department actions, present for approval g programs on trench cuts and assessment districts and present for approval an Ordinance on road improvement requirements for new development. DISCUSSION: I. Atascadero Public Works Department Actions • Hiring new maintenance workers; The Public Works Maintenance Division is in the process of recruting two new Maintenance Workers I's. One is a new position funded by Council and the other is to replace a retiring Maintenance Worker. These position will be assigned to the Street Division and help with road maintenance and repair. • Crack Sealing The Public Works Maintenance Division is testing different crack seal machines on Atascadero Streets. The Council funded the purchase of a crack sealing machine in the last budget. Crack Sealing is an important part of a road program. Sealing the cracks will reduce water infiltration under the road surface and increase the life of the road. • • Additional Funding Staff is preparing applications for the 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). One application is for $394,000.00 for road maintenance. These funds will be used to improve roads on the Atascadero Road Program Maintenance List. • Updated Atascadero Road Program Map and Maintenance List(See Attachment A & B) Several road maintenance projects have been completed, many projects are in design and will be constructed this spring. The Atascadero Road Program Map and Maintenance List have been revised to reflect these changes. Projects completed: El Camino Real Rehabilitation, Santa Rosa to Morro Road ➢ Santa Barbara Road Reconstruction and Overlay, US 101 to El Camino Real ➢ Reconstruction of the intersection of San Gabriel Road and San Marcos Road. Project scheduled for this spring: ➢ Curbaril Overlay, El Camino Real to Atascadero Ave • ➢ San Fernando Overlay, Graves Creek Road to Balboa Road ➢ Santa Ysabel reconstruction and widening, Curbaril to State Route 41 234 ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • ➢ El Camino Real Overlay, Morro Road to Rosario ➢ West Mall Reconstruction and Overlay, El Camino real to Capistrano ➢ Capistrano Overlay, West Mall to Sycamore ➢ Sycamore Overlay, Capistrano to Curbaril Road ➢ Santa Cruz Road Construction ➢ Maintenance District Projects, in maintenance districts II. Trench Repair Program A paved road is constructed by placing an asphalt layer and a base layer over compact native soil. A trench cut occurs when a utility (water, gas, electric, telephone, cable TV, sewer, storm drain or other) is placed in the road after it is paved. The asphalt is cut and removed, a trench is dug, the utility is placed and the trench is back filled and paved over. Poor construction, settling backfill, poor paving and lack of maintenance have all lead to failure of trench repairs. When the trench repair fails and settles it produces a dip in the road and cracks around the edges of the repair. The dip is uncomfortable to drive over and the cracks allow water to get under the surface of the road. Poor trench repair can lead to a bumpy and uncomfortable ride. Staff proposes the following new Trench Repair Program to insure proper construction and inspection of trenches. The basic requirements of the Ordinance are: • Encroachment Permits. The Engineering Division of the Public Works Department will now issue encroachment permits. In the past the Community Development Department issued encroachment permits. Any persons working in the right-of-way without an encroachment permit will be stopped and required to obtain an encroachment permit. The fee for the encroachment permit will be the actual cost to administer and inspect the trench repair, including a 1-year bond release inspection. • Inspection. A City inspector will inspect the trench cut. This will include asphalt removal, digging of the trench, bedding of utility, backfill and compaction of trench, placement of base material, saw cut for"T" section and paving. (See Attachment C) • Trench Specifications. Care in removal of existing asphalt and top trench material. Mitigate ground water in the trench. Backfill shall be select material approved by the City Engineer, sand, base or slurry. Native soil will not be allowed in the trench. Proof of compaction of trench backfill. Saw cut and remove asphalt 18 inches from the edges of the trench after the trench is backfilled. Pave to City Standard. • Cash bond and one year inspection. A cash bond will be taken when the encroachment permit is issued. The City will inspect the trench 1-year after the trench is completed. The party that • requested the encroachment permit and put up the bond will repair all trench deficiencies discovered at the inspection. This could include crack seal, skin patch, remove and replace trench paving and in extreme cases where the backfill has failed, remove all backfill, replace and repave. 235 ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • Trench Cut Moratorium. There will be a moratorium on trench cuts in a road for 2 years after • it has been paved. The City will publish a two-year paving schedule every year to keep the community and utility companies posted on the planned projects. If a utility needs an emergency repair or new development occurs and the recently paved road needs to be cut the road shall be repaired to the condition prior to the cut, including overlaying the entire road. If these provisions are approved the Public Works Department will meet with local developers, contractors and engineers to explain the new requirements. III. Assessment Districts The funding for road maintenance has increased dramatically over the last four years. The City Council made road maintenance their top priority and allocated State and Local funds to repair the roads. The majority of the funds are targeted at Circulation Plan Roads, arterials and collectors. These are roads the general community use every day, Santa Lucia, Curbaril, West Mall, El Camino Real, San Gabriel, Atascadero Ave. " Local City Maintained Roads are maintained by the Public Works Maintenance Division. These are neighborhood roads, Junipero Ave, Llano Road and Arena Road. The Public Works Crew is placing skin patches, crack sealing, fixing potholes and other minor repairs on these roads. The City has 76 miles of City maintained local roads and the Public Works Maintenance Division can not keep up with the volume of work. • Assessment Districts are a tool that can be used to fund improvements for the roads through an assessment on the property tax bill. This assessment is approved by a vote of the parties effected. This tool could be used by neighborhoods to fund paving dirt roads, reconstruction of old roads, the building drainage systems to keep storm water off roads and to provide preventive maintenance on roads as they age. This tool could be used on non-City maintained roads or City maintained roads. A City wide assessment district could be used to repair and maintain the roads of the entire City. This would require an election with 51 percent of the community favoring the assessment district. This would be a significant undertaking. The community survey completed in 1999 indicated that the residents would not support an assessment at a level sufficient to improve the streets. It is possible to gain approval of an assessment and would take community leaders to build consensus and gain community support. Several cities in California have successfully completed City wide assessment districts. In Atascadero some neighborhoods have roads in poor condition and are motivated to fund improvement and maintenance for their roads. The best method to improve and maintain the roads is to approve two assessment districts. One district to improve the road, which would sunset after the costs are paid and one district to maintain the road as needed, this cost would be ongoing. There are several major policy issues that face the City should the assessment district option be • implemented. 236 ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • ❑ Will the City accept the roads following improvement to City standard through the assessment district process. ❑ Who will pay for the up front costs of developing an assessment district? In the past, the City has accepted roads that were improved to City standards. However, in the last several years since the Council has targeted roads and initiated the Atascadero Roads Program, the City has maintained a policy of only accepting roads designated in the General Plan Circulation Element or arterials/collectors. Because the City's current road responsibility is so vast and resources limited no additional local or neighborhood roads have been accepted. Staff would recommend that this policy be continued. It does increase the inventory of non City maintained roads. The costs of developing an assessment district include both out of pocket expenses and labor. This has been one of the major impediments to the creation of assessment districts. Contract engineer services are expensive and the assessment district process requires a great deal of time and product. The City's Public Works Department does not have adequate staff to provide engineering assistance to prospective neighborhoods. Recognizing the Council's direction and desire to develop a standardized approach to assessment districts reducing the financial exposure to neighborhoods staff has developed the following approach. Public Works will assume the lead on assisting localized assessment districts. Staff would • prepare press releases about assessment districts inviting assessment district petitions once annually. Coordination of all assessment districts at one time will help reduce cost and staff time. Because of the costs of issuance associated with bond financing a minimum borrowing of $1,000,000 is recommended. Based upon this threshold, staff would only begin an assessment district process if the assessment district or combination of districts exceeds an estimated improvement cost of$1,000,000.00 Prior to the approval for the assessment district there is significant staff time and costs. Staff time would be spent on meetings, preliminary construction estimates, district boundaries, administration with assessment district engineer, staff reports, administration and other tasks. Funds would need to be spent on an assessment district engineer, plans and specifications for the improvments and an engineer's report. The estimated time and expense that would go into a typical assessment district prior to approval are estimated as: • Staff Time 80 hours • Assessment District Engineer Support $3,000.00 • Plans and Specifications $4,000.00 to $10,000.00 • Engineers Report $5,000.00 to $10,000.00 If the assessment district is eventually approved these cost can be rolled into the assessment. If the assessment district is not approved there is no mechanism for reimbursement to the City. The following process is recommended to insure that if an assessment district is requested the • chances of approval are high before the cost and time to the City are too great. This process is detailed in Attachment D. 237 ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 Assessment District Program • • An interested property owner meets with the Public Works Department to discuss the program and the requirements. • A package is given to the property owners and a petition circulated to be signed by 60% or more of the affected property owners and presents it to the City Engineer. • If petitions are received for districts representing $1 million or more in improvement costs, the City Engineer will present the informal petition(s) to the City Council. Staff will request direction to: ➢ Draw up the tentative boundaries of an Assessment District ➢ Assess the condition of the existing street ➢ Prepare a preliminary cost estimate for construction of the improvements necessary to repair existing deficiencies and bring the street into substantial conformance with City standards. ➢ Prepare a preliminary cost estimate for continued maintenance of the road. ➢ Estimate the costs of establishing the assessment districts (hiring an Assessment Engineer, hiring Bond Counsel, bond issuance costs, etc.) above and beyond the actual construction costs. ➢ Estimate the yearly cost to each property owner based on an assumed interest rate . and amortization period. ➢ Schedule a community meeting with the property owners and present the information and approximate costs. The approximate City costs to this point are estimated to be $3,000.00 and 30 hours of staff time on a one street Assessment District with few issues or protests. The following steps would occur if, after the community meeting with the property owners, the City Engineer determines there is sufficient commitment from the property owners to continue: • A formal petition in conformance with the Municipal Bond Act is circulated. The petition is signed by the requisite number of landowners and filed with the City Clerk. An engineer then certifies that the petition meets legal requirements and files a certificate with the City Clerk. • Civil engineer is hired or staff is directed to design the plans and specifications for the project and the project is sent out to bid. • City Council adopts a Resolution determining to proceed, appointing a engineer and bond counsel to handle the proceedings and a Resolution of Intention to Acquire and Construct Improvements. • Engineer's Report is prepared. • 23s ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 • • The Engineer's Report is then filed with the City Clerk and presented to the City Council for approval. City Council adopts a Resolution of Preliminary Approval of the Engineer's Report and appointing a time and place of two public hearings on Engineer's Report. • The first public hearing is conducted for information purposes only. • Ballots are sent to all parties effected by the Assessment District. • The second public hearing is held. The mayor opens the hearing for oral protests or endorsements, and after everyone is heard the public hearing is closed and the matter is subject to City Council deliberation. After deliberation, the following actions are considered: a. If majority protest is filed: 1. The Assessment District fails and this agenda item is closed. 2. Resolution Overruling Protests is adopted. Resolution Approving the Engineer's Report, Ordering the Acquisitions, and Confirming the Assessment is adopted. Resolution Awarding Construction Contract for the improvements is adopted b. If a majority protest is not filed: 1. Resolution approving the Engineer's Report, ordering the acquisitions, and confirming the assessment is adopted. Resolution awarding construction contract for the improvements is adopted • The improvements are completed. Currently the City Capital Projects Budget has $50,000.00 allocated for Engineer Assessment District Report. These funds could be used for the initial costs discussed in this section of the staff report. Staff is requesting direction on this program. FISCAL IMPACT: Trench Repair Program, There will be some administration costs in setting up the program. Once the program is set up the parties requesting the Trench Cut would pay for all costs. Assessment Districts, There would be costs to the City. This would depend on how many Assessment Districts were requested and how many were approved. • 239 ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 09/25/2001 ALTERNATIVES: Trench Repair Program, Most of the requirements recommended in the Ordinance are already required in the Atascadero Municipal Code but have not been enforced. The new requirement is the 1-year inspection and bond. An alternative would be not to require the 1-year inspection and bond. Assessment Districts, Require the neighborhood to fund the staff time and costs of creating the Assessment District prior to the approval of the District. This would eliminate the financial risk to the City and probably limit the number of Assessment Districts. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment"A"—Atascadero Road Program Map Attachment`B"—Atascadero Road Program Priority List Attachment"C"—Trench Repair Requirements Attachment"D"—Assessment District Initial Letter- Petition I 240 +l � v a .--�+ 'l `S f� a W n � �✓� �I j � r. J P avl If l 1 < f� I O O CL C/) En r r r 0 CD 0U- 04 N N N O a s m M a M M N N M 00 O. O O W W O O W O O O Of O O y 0 0 O O O 0 0 O O O U O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N Ham a a a > > aa � d' a cz a a O W W W W LU u) W W ch W W W N 2 W W Z22L rL 2 2 22 2 rL 2 aU 2 2 V V V 2 Luo > > > > (n 7 > > > > 7 2f- > > U) U) to N � � U) U) y :3 a. N JJ ~ J J JZZ J � Z �? J m aaU' a a a00 aa0 =' 0: a � ¢ > > 0 > > > W W > > W o > > > w w W W O O N O O O a a O O a U 0 O O 80 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 f-- Q M = O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t 0 0 V•O N n O M G O O N 0 0 0 v O O O c O O O O O O O O O O MMO 0OWQO O 00 O o 0 0 00 p00000p Op On QO(sist(OMM OOOQO p ON 0000000000 pM0 O O O O 00(000 O O1n OM N t00 M O v O.-O 00000 0'V.O 000 00 r 11Y O t0 M O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O O N V a7 M(ri (n IN(0 O—W MN000O(D Va70 M M'rO Vn(nN WCD m y lA r a'- a7 O O O40n CO O 0> O v N .-NON COO V NM v� v v�LO UO fAM v 00 v M(n W NN N2 fig N(n ��M EO N t` v e►M N O (t9 N N � n �N is.-U9.est v M(n N(a tq e�(a(n "1 tri O M(a en vs M ess (a M of v U M Cl)(�M M N M M M r M e- r Vi to M 64-k fin.is W� to 40 r 19 H)fA fA (A f9 64 N M M M M M M M M W O O TT T JQ mm y Vm' 3 L�C- L►O- Fc L�OC-. Fc LY�>-`iCV iCvO TC �TiC- Yf>�-`�O- Y Fc Y mFm-_�F(Ta cOO ' T . A V " , N N0 ► N > c > d i m fT- .Ic-►TO- -rTzT�'rc- fO0=Fzr�FTN F-m'zNz@ h-- >.F-F-HF-F-F-LN(mnL�Ff9c cFfcT9�fTca- _d mN (a (O NfNNO'cMNNNNN@N=v ic cLt=ttt C) > > m > > > > > U >� >2 > > > > >t > > > > > > > > > n > > > yO tL> 00000000000002OOy000000000000Z000000000 �0Na � cV V000ZO S c r Is 2.G VUc CcccV c LLLL� LL LJ �� 30 a a LL to LL LL LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p O O O O O O O O O O O O p 0 0 O O O O Q O Q O O O Q O O O O O O p O O O O O 0 O p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O p O O O O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 V X 41 O N Q ONv r• O m V7OtivN �� �0(A NOOO M00000a7O0u•1 In(n NO y y 0 CO O M , ,0 0 OD t0 O CO N (O - 01 O) M v co), C:' N W vMN�o o� rn 00 CD WWWW W W n n o WW WWW(o(Dai nuiV V V v V v O v � IOMO � M (O (n NNS � 00IZr- N����.- Of OI t0 e1' L S N N t0 W M N N N N N N r r r U) X J U y CM M M M M V Ln Ln N M M -q (M v Cl V N M N M Vn M M CM M V M v.-M M Cl)V M N v 7 M M M M M M M M v N v Cl)Cl)Cl) N C14 v IL c 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C� OOOOQOQ000Qo000o00000oo000000o0000000000p000000000000poo [~� O CO O t0 O O N N O f0 M Ul 01 O V N ." O M M M N N O.-N n n n O 4q cD t-t"N O O O O O a LQ N IA In In N O (� Q 1- (O e` 0 M O Q (O (f! (A ti tr N W 4 (n M 1�-v OMN v M v MNN N CO N N N NN Cl) N N CNA NN N N N—N—— —— NN c N N N C%4 L y 0 CO M t0 vN O Ln CD OO n 00 0 0) N 0 t 0 Cl)Cl)LQ CO M1- n O O N M O N O N N n 00 In (n O CO M M N N n n to N M In co m N 00 n O 0 M v O — (A p M N N (O — CO v h (0 -MCO eO M 0) V NO V MN v IT -v(n IT -n OO M(n O N N 04 Ln In(n<f CV 10 Cl O— •(C� 0 O O O ' Q O Q O O O Q O O O O O O p O r•O O p O p O(V O G O O O O O O O - M O O D O O O p O N G E car 24) � O 3 C (0 T a R a N O O O � ` mDoCai d O •O3 1"owo¢(�o7° 'QO CD 0C id a c (a w 2 O c m 0 r.o-o O a - c O 0 Q ) Oo O O wErO p m o 0 N2 R (6 v O Vo o � y oNy oO U mEo O to 0 O U O 0 @ `O.o0c a) O¢ 'n r-a- Oh H 3OoOE oyE o00 O � �m000 — O « ua a Q E o _ £ m 0uWoopE- 0 . omyQy O O Oc > ° > ia)ixy0o c « 3o ) O � m Oromm� 0� 0 ogUO oUa u) o�ro� Odpv` 0m 'c cUO a> oVw- imar cc mc ca 02 mm0m U NeIX amOo° d ° W � ma � ° 0Womc Toov ( E �� d �� ° 00 ca c owH fo � oomomo0£ "5.c00 ovo aaSm O E c o o m c Tc $ o a) (moC m yco E m Oy 20Z .o m JmEmE _ m ca op o .ovm o O (p O y m m¢ rm m cU0 U� m (>u. m oo ` BEmOr- 0m 5 c: Om O R E 0 O O (0mm (odVm � mUN3 R O wo H (LwQNaaaotAnn(noaW2c ¢ nWwn7nw2Uc7vm> naU7WOnanwnmmwxpnzoc(v7ca is to to to O O c c c c m m m m aaaa 'a dd d m co f� y LL E C O a> dm _ .O O L° 0. Qo¢'Q o Qr� o G> dCCC _Ca >._ NyTO W ._ 7Taamaay mCT9 y$ Em0 OOi � Ey Oca cyiON N m O"U O o 0 R O (O m y o y« (a O'- O L« N c C C > >- c } J �o c O c c E a .�, ?i (°a�- `d H O 0 a`0 a E 2 N� o � E Y'c m (o O P V E E E E E (a � (o :° ea � Q Rw (° ;a � 0 'E-(.EEfO m (n mmm'c cam mm cc Omm a)C) U' m m (o (o R Q U O O (� �a 0 mC7-� m m m a;¢ ro oC7 0 o R ¢¢a._ �ti tom f° m UUUU �j tC i C C E r- p C L CE � tjcUUc Nr a ccc�ccccc � cyy V cccN� � ccc�cE Oc O W (` (4 i (0 3 (9 (` O _ m-- m o m m m m 0 0 0 o m m:.° m:��° T m m m m a� m mmm m m N m W.WWWWC�I- UfAtnr- tAQtAU0 MOJ(nww(n � CL U)(n(nU���(n(n¢(n¢¢ tA (n(n(nwo¢(n(n(n>(nC7fA(n 242 O O O O O O O O O O O V O O O O O O O O O O O O O N a0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 n V O O O O N O N N N O O Q)O N N O O n o 0 0 0 0 0 010 10 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 M(O(O 00000 O Nc0 M N �cO a(000(0000(DN O a0 V Ct O10 O co C6 n vi wi 4(n (o Mrnr"t oivNM 0; (6 )r V M O O M M N 0 N(H N N(O ION (i! N N N V O c0 N N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C � 64 m m f0 f0 <4 f0 m T J ca 11 ca 11000 pOOOo > cmU=TcTcTm nm fm m n m o o p 0 000 U UOU � cm pO O OU (n(3U2) t0 !AF NN'09_ 7 N Cn NNN LL(nA7Fnnn( n FF- 0 _. F F F LL LL LL w LL LL LL V 0000000000000000888888800000000000 0800800000000000 O O O O O 10 O o 0 10 0 OOOq(31CR P%P'!(q V V N" LO In N O O O n1010 V)V N } ��V V('�MMMMMMniMNNNNNN NN N—— ——" U Z m QQ}o E V N V C",C, N N N N M M N M MMN NC,C'.NNM 7 J N K 5 w 0 0000000000000000000000000000000o O }j> m ogoo000000000000000000000000l4N04 IJ n F U) z UZ) 0 O OOO�Nn��101O olnn rf�7NNr-rn o(o 10 vIn l00NNNN'- Q yK YZ N N—M r MMM—— —"NNr--—— r r F w j�UO r J j(nF=W P'- 04 CD Q F FK d (0 O(0 = LL Inv(OrnvrrnaornmwvmrnnMrnraovraoMrnvMmaornronrnM 6 6 w to TO 0)�-�LL7 OMo(0 N(0r V M�V M(010 cl Oma.-(0� �MIn '-N(p yo ar LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C m Q F z m O W F U— 0 F o w J m CL com UQ �� m LU 3 E LU E Of E V, . O 0 W 0000 O N o � > �) 0 ami 5 a �w (7 °p°W°vw.0 cK (° Y Ua o o E N m m Oc n KKK n F'° G tl1 LL O N O p ami :9 m m � E . � U c a c ow LU a. 11 U U U V S � T E y0 U� mK U E m m -� mp n00 am_ �mU) ap K UaaVU ayic m m m O O N m J LL T� m.> U U m O N N d m j m va a a (' E m oc�Qo�� > o�� c (smOV wm>ic> �'dEo 0o eovw E 0 C ` tll T O -r m(mnm ���a)Q�2(D(L00o QLL cov° mmm00matcc FTmto v ? >w 00¢UcoQo o000 �° 0o `m 30@Qc0mO?O oEE io°im Nf40om O'OOmm r QF >,d USKaom0fnm oUc°? a? (^ 2 j m m N V d 0 C) 0 7�` E T 4' O m a co O O >,m m(n C O c U O O O T T m m m UJ'o-D '0W�KJmcOm ohm oo �m@oEmQ (° cmma=id pap ° cmicmi� 3cmiocmim _o C7ad $� OUmd�o�aUomo�� moo£o CCNN-t0 0CCc CE—' CU...— CCymUtCC C 77 my m m m (D rn t� .m-• m m m d O m m m— O m O m — o m m m O m 0 0 > O 0 (n(n¢Q�'2¢ ¢(n(n(n>�UOF_CDWao20(n9OWatn(nmamNN QUm m m > m Y Z ma 00 N —N M V In yF N M m 0 O O p 00 m No mm Q c E m Q a U w•c C (Qm . � A C N Cc c c �C 'e 0 tcm m > 7 m m.0•2 m 0 7 md O na00aJ00�mnm(m) 20 0 UmFn0> nmn(cmouooQQU z - 243 REVISIONS APPROVALS DESCRIPTIONS BY I DATE APPROVED COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 26-92 3/10/92 BACKFILL AND DETAILS SBK 9 01 i CUT EXISTING ROADWAY TO PROVIDE VERTICAL SURFACES AND SQUARE CORNERS, AFTER TRENCH HAS BEEN BACKFILLED. CUT EDGE WILL BE STRAIGHT AND NEAT IN APPEARANCE. PROVIDE MIN 12" BENCH FINAL INTO UNDISTURBED GRADE MINIMUM 2 po►\p / o► p ' p ► p INCHES o O / ROAD B ED (BOTH SIDES) 2 ASPHALT OTHERWIS o— p o— p o— p o— o �\ o— p O ►\ o- o ►\ o o oo o- 4 o, o: /4o p o O / G O ° o /Do0/�o , oo ` o40 o4 4 o` 0 1. 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION MIN. 6" CLASS 2 24" AGGREGATE BASE SEE NOTE BELOW -- COMPACTED SAND, APPROVED CONCERNING TRENCH INSTALL--' GRANULAR MATERIAL OR IN EASEMENTS. MAGNETIC SAND SLURRY TRACER TAPE • 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION COMPACTED SAND OR APPROVED GRANULAR MATERIAL. 1 6. 6" MIN - 6" MIN 8" MAX 8 MAX .��. 6" BELOW FL A CITY ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND INSPECTION ARE REQUIRED FOR GREATEST O.D. DIMENSION TRENCHING IN PUBLIC OR COLONY RIGHT—OF—WAYS. AT PIPE JOINTS NOTE: A MINIMUM OF 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION IS PERMITTED IN A NON—ROADWAY TRENCH WHEN NO STRUCTURES ARE TO BE BUILT OVER THE TRENCH. IF STRUCTURES ARE TO BE BUILT OVER THE TRENCH, USE RELATIVE COMPACTIONS SHOWN ON THE TRENCH SECTION ABOVE. • DRAWN BY: CITY OF ATASCADERO JAV ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAWING NO. DESIGNED BY: 244 I9 25 01 TRENCH REPAIR REQUIREMENTS 702 FILE NAME: AT702a.DWG • Subject: Assessment District— Dear, Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding the maintenance of . What follows is the basic concept, that Public Works is considering, to help the citizens of Atascadero maintain their roads. The impacts of this proposal would be: • Considerable staff time if the City Council directs the City Engineer to begin informal assessment district formation proceedings. • Substantial cost to the City, or the property owners, to produce Engineers Report and provide Assessment District professional support. If the District is approved,-these costs could be rolled into the District. • • It is recommended that, if this program is approved, these requests be processed in groups once a year. The larger the assessment district is, the lower the percentage of costs is administrative, and staff time could be made more efficient. The cost of this requires the property owners to seek financing to fund the necessary improvements and long term maintenance. Formation of assessment districts is one way of obtaining the necessary financing. By forming assessment districts, the cost of the improvements can be amortized over a 15 to 20 year period and the cost of road maintenance would be spread out as long as the district continued. Due to the long-term, cost and commitment the property owners must make the City seeks the assurance that 60% or more of the property owners,who will benefit from the improvements, are willing to participate before formal assessment district proceedings are begun. The informal process is as follows: 1. An interested property owner meets with the Public Works Department to discuss the program and the requirements. 2. A package is given to the property owners and a petition circulated to be signed by 60% or more of the affected property owners and presents it to the City Engineer. 3. The City Engineer presents the informal petition to the City Council, and asks that • he be directed to: a. draw up the tentative boundaries of an Assessment District 245 b. assess the condition of the existing street c. prepare a preliminary cost estimate for construction of the improvements necessary to repair existing deficiencies and bring the street into substantial conformance with City standards. d. prepare a preliminary cost estimate for continued maintenance of the road. e., estimate the costs of establishing the assessment districts(hiring an Assessment Engineer,hiring Bond Counsel,bond issuance costs, etc.) above and beyond the actual construction costs. f estimate the yearly cost to each property owner based on an assumed interest rate and amortization period. g. schedule a community meeting with the property owners and present the information and approximate costs. The above steps would occur if the City Council directs the City Engineer to begin informal assessment district formation proceedings. These proceedings are to assure the City that adequate interest still exists in district formation once the approximate cost to the property owners are known. This assurance is necessary since significant City staff • time and City costs will be involved. The following steps would occur if, after the community meeting with the property owners, the City Engineer feels sufficient substantial and serious commitment from the property owners to continue: 1. A formal petition in conformance with the Municipal Bond Act is circulated. The petition is signed by the requisite number of landowners and filed with the City Clerk. An engineer then certifies that the petition meets legal requirements and files a certificate with the City Clerk. 2. City Council adopts a Resolution Determining to Proceed. 3. City Council adopts a Resolution Appointing Engineer and Bond Counsel to handle the proceedings. 4. City Council adopts a Resolution of Intention to Acquire and Construct Improvements. Note at this point the proceedings usually stop for a period of a few weeks to several months while the Engineer prepares the Engineer's Report as directed • in the Resolution of Intention. The Engineer's Report can be submitted based 246 • on either schematic or detailed plans and specifications, depending on the desires of the City. 5. Civil engineer is hired or staff is directed to design the plans and specifications for the project and the project is sent out to bid. 6. Engineer's Report is prepared and consists of. a. detailed or schematic plans and specifications of the improvements to be constructed. b. maps and descriptions of lands, easements, and property necessary to be acquired. c. an itemized Engineer's estimate of the cost of acquisitions and improvements. d. a diagram of the assessment district showing each lot or parcel of land within the assessment district. e. an assessment roll showing the actual assessments against the properties benefited. • f, a proposed maximum annual assessment to reimburse the City for registration and administration of expenses. 7. The Engineer's Report is then filed with the City Clerk and presented to the City Council for approval. 8. City Council adopts a Resolution of Preliminary Approval of the Engineer's Report. 9. City Council adopts a Resolution Appointing Time and Place of two public hearings on Engineer's Report. 10. City Council adopts Resolution Describing Boundaries of Assessment District. 11. City Council adopts Resolution Establishing Prevailing Wage Rates. Note at this point the proceedings stop for at least 45 days (typically 60 to 75 days)for various notices to be given advising property owners of the two public hearings and their associated rights. 12. The first public hearing is conducted for information purposes only. • 2r 7 13. In compliance is Proposition 218,the second public hearing is noticed in writing • 45 days in advance of the hearing. The official notice includes: a. total assessment for entire assessment district; b. assessment chargeable on owner's parcel; C. duration of proposed assessment; d. reason for assessment e. basis on which amount of proposed assessment was calculated; f. date,time and place of public hearing; g. summary of voting procedures and effect of majority protest. - 14. The second public hearing is opened and a staff report is made which consists of: a. an explanation by Bond Counsel of the purpose of the hearing. b. a report by the City Clerk that the necessary affidavits of notice are on file an that said notices were given within the statutory time limits provided. . C. a report by the City Clerk on the written protests filed by property owners prior to the second public hearing and the percentage of protest. 15. The mayor opens the hearing for oral protests or endorsements, and after everyone is heard the public hearing is closed and the matter is subject to City Council deliberation. 16. After deliberation,the following actions are considered: a. If majority protest is filed: 1. The Assessment District fails and this agenda item is closed. 2. Resolution Overruling Protests is adopted. Resolution Approving the Engineer's Report, Ordering the Acquisitions, and Confirming the Assessment is adopted. Resolution Awarding Construction Contract for the improvements is adopted b. If a majority protest is not filed: • 248 • Resolution approving the Engineer's Report, ordering the acquisitions, and confirming the assessment is adopted. Resolution awarding construction contract for the improvements is adopted 17. The improvements are completed. In addition to the above,there are numerous steps related to issuance of bonds,payment of bond proceeds, disposition of surplus bond proceeds, etc.which also occur concurrent with or soon after construction of the improvements. As can be seen,the assessment district process is lengthy and potentially costly to the City. Therefore the City has instituted the informal petition process to "test the waters" before formal assessment district proceedings are undertaken. If you wish to initiate the assessment district process,please begin with the informal petition and present it to the City Engineer. To assist you with this process,we are _ enclosing a copy of an informal petition for your street. If you have any questions regarding the above,please do not hesitate to contact us. Steven B.Kahn Public Works Director • 249 • August 14,2001 Mr. Steven Kahn Director of Public Works 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mr. Kahn, We,the undersigned residents of , hereby petition the City of Atascadero to begin the necessary proceedings to create assessment districts for the repair and continued maintenance of Please accept this petition as the necessary first step in initiating the process to: draw up • the tentative boundaries of an assessment district; assess the condition of the existing street; prepare a preliminary cost estimate for construction of the improvements necessary to repair existing deficiencies and bring the street into substantial conformance with City standards; estimate the costs of establishing an assessment district (hiring a Assessment Engineer, hiring Bond Counsel, bond issuance costs, etc.) above and beyond the actual construction costs; estimate the amortized monthly cost to each property owner based on an assumed interest rate and amortization period; schedule a community meeting with the property owners and present the information and approximate costs. We understand that this petition is not binding in any way. We further understand that a formal petition conforming to the requirements of the Municipal Bond Act is required to begin assessment district formation proceedings. By signing this petition, we do not waive our right under the Municipal Bond Act to protest the formation of an assessment district. • 2-50 • Name, address,phone number Signature leaseprint) • 251 DRAFT ORDINANCE • AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING CHAPTER 15, ENCROACHMENT ON PUBLIC PROPERTY OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO TRENCH CUTS The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows: WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero spends millions of dollars annually to improve and maintain public streets and alleys (hereinafter streets); WHEREAS, studies undertaken for the cities of Austin, Kansas City, Burlington, Cincinnati, Phoenix, San Francisco, Sacramento and Los Angeles have concluded that excavations in paved streets degrade and shorten the life of the surface of the streets, and this degradation increases the frequency and cost to the public of necessary resurfacing,maintenance and repair. The studies performed on streets in the cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco have concluded that pavement degradation occurs no matter how well the excavation is restored; WHEREAS, the cutting of the pavement and trenching in the streets permits water seepage into the street as well as weakening pavement support around the patch, thereby allowing deterioration at an accelerated rate; . WHEREAS, millions of dollars in public funds have been invested to build, maintain, and repair the streets within the City's geographical boundaries, and the City holds these streets as an asset for its citizens. It is desirable to adopt regulations that will help protect the structural integrity of City streets and thereby safeguard the value of the public investments in City streets for the benefit of all City residents, by requiring proper repair with quality materials, inspection, and follow up inspection and further repair if the trench repair fails, to help offset the shortened life of the streets that are cut. WHEREAS, entities making and benefiting from an excavation in a City street also will comply with standards and requirements for compaction, backfill and pavement restoration and resurfacing that ensure the best possible restoration of the paved surface over and adjacent to the trench or cut; WHEREAS, regulation of excavation in City streets to help reduce disruption of and interference with public use of the streets, and to help prevent damage and maintain the safe condition of the streets protects the public health, safety and welfare, is a valid and appropriate exercise of the City's police power, and is a municipal affair; WHEREAS, with respect to the installation of telecommunications facilities, Section 253(c) of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 expressly recognizes the authority of local governments to impose reasonable nondiscriminatory requirements upon • 252 telecommunications providers using the public right-of-way, and California Government Code • 50030 specifically authorizes the imposition of permit fees that do not exceed the reasonable costs of providing the service for which the fee is charged. A Encroachment Permit Fee imposed by this ordinance and any associated Resolution is such a reasonable fee. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 ORDINANCE Article 4 of Title 7, Public Works, Chapter 15, Encroachments on Public Property, of the Atascadero Municipal Code is hereby amended, to add the following sections as follows: 7-15.419. Trench Cut. "Trench Cut" means the cutting of an existing asphalt road for the installation, repair, location of utilities, conduit, storm drain, or any other underground facility. 7-15.420. Encroachment Permits. The Engineering Division of the Public Works Department will now issue encroachment permits. In the past the Community Development Department issued encroachment permits. Any persons working in the right-of-way with out an encroachment permit will be stopped and required to obtain an encroachment permit. The fee for the encroachment permit will be the actual cost to administer, inspect and 1 year inspect the trench repair. • 7-15.421. Inspection. A City inspector will inspect the trench cut. This will include asphalt removal, digging of the trench, bedding of utility, backfill and compaction of trench, placement of base material, saw cut for"T" section and paving. 7-15.422. Trench Specifications. Care in removal of existing asphalt and top trench material. Mitigate ground water in the trench. Backfill shall be select material approved by the City Engineer, sand, base or slurry. Native soil will not be allowed in the trench. Proof of compaction of trench backfill. Saw cut and remove asphalt 18 inches from the edges of the trench after the trench is backfilled. Pave to City Standard. 7-15.423. Cash bond and one year inspection. A cash bond will be taken when the encroachment permit is issued. The City will inspect the trench 1-year after the trench is completed. The party that requested the encroachment permit and put up the bond will repair all trench deficiencies discovered at the inspection. This could includes crack seals, skin patch, remove and replace trench paving and in extreme cases where the backfill has failed, remove all backfill, replace and repave. 7-15.424. Trench Cut Moratorium. There will be a moratorium on trench cuts in a road for 2 years after it has been paved. The City will publish a two-year paving schedule every year to keep the community and utility companies posted on the planned projects. If a utility needs an emergency repair or new development occurs and the recently paved road needs to be cut the road shall be repaired to the condition prior to the cut, including overlaying the entire road. 253 7-15.425. Provisions of Chapter 15.This Article does not change or alleviate anyone from • following the provisions of the entire Chapter 15 Encroachments On Public Property. SECTION 2 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Atascadero hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective f the fact any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or other portions might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ADOPTED • ATTEST: Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk J. Michael Arrambide, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney • 254 ITEM NUMBER: C-2 DATE: 09/25/2001 M • i9ia e C i/ Atascadero City Council Staff Report — Public Works Department 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Project Funding RECOMMENDATION: Council accept the projects nominated for 2002 STIP funding, and authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate funds for the nominated 2002 STIP projects if they are approved by the San Luis Obispo Council Of Governments for funding. DISCUSSION: • On 6/26/01, Council reviewed a list of public works projects for which applications for 2002 STIP funding could be submitted. Applications were submitted to SLOCOG on September 5, 2001 for these projects. The project name, amount of requested STIP funds, and the amount and source of local matching funds are listed below. Project Requested STIP/Category Match/Source Street Overlay Projects at Various $394,000.00 Local Choice $40,000 LTF Locations Downtown Circulation, Pedestrian $400,000.00 Regional $80,000 Redev and Landscaping Improvement Significance Funds Lewis Avenue Bridge $1,000,000.00 Regional $440,000 TEA21 Significance $482,000.00 Enhancement $150,000 St& Bridge Fund SR41 /US Highway 101 $6,000,000.00 State Highway $0 N/A Interchange Improvements TOTAL: $8,276,000.00 = STIP $710,000.00 = MATCH 255 ITEM NUMBER: C-2 DATE: 09/25/2001 FISCAL IMPACT: • There is a local match of$710,000.00, $440,000.00 of which is a Federal grant, so the fiscal impact to the City is $270,000.00. ATTACHMENTS: None • 256