City Council - Regular Meeting

Newsome. Please join me for the pledge. Stand if you're able.

All right. Thank you. We will proceed to roll call, please. Mayor Borbo here. Mayor Permirez here. Council member Funk here. Council member Nuome here. Council member Peak here. All present. All right. Thank you. Well, if you're attending here in person and we have people in the audience or if you're listening on one of our many uh options at home, we welcome you to our to tonight's meeting. Thank you for participating. We will begin this evening with the presentations from the police department recognition awards. Chief Subtles,

Mr. Mayor, City Council, thank you guys very much. I know that uh we have a limited amount of time in our meeting. So, I really think it's uh important to thank you for allowing uh the staff to come and recognize some of the good work that's done. Uh so, tonight I have two different uh citations to read. Uh one is a group uh award and one is one uh for one singular person. So, I'll get started if I could. Uh I have code enforcement officer Come on up. Huh? Oh, no. No. You have to stand all the way. So tonight is my honor to recognize the outstanding dedication and professionalism of code enforcement officer Tomasac and to present her with the meritorious service award for her exceptional work in resolving a longstanding and complex code enforcement case that had impacted our community for more than 20 years. For over two decades, this property had been the subject of repeated violations, community complaints, and public health concerns, legal challenges, environmental issues, and a resistant property owner created significant obstacles. Despite these difficulties, Officer Tom remained steadfast in her commitment to achieving a lasting and lawful solution. Throughout the case, she demonstrated perseverance, integrity, and a strong sense of public service. She skillfully navigated legal and procedural requirements while maintaining professional and respectful communication with all involved parties, including residents, city staff, and propert and the property owner. Most importantly, Officer Tomas consistently advocated for the health, safety, and quality of life of the surrounding neighborhood. Through her leadership and determination, the property was ultimately brought into full compliance, resulting in a meaningful improvement for the community. What further distinguished officer Tomas is her compassionate and collaborative approach. Even after years of

non-compliance, she worked respectfully with the property owner to reach a positive outcome, one that was ultimately met with gratitude and appreciation. For her exemplary service, professionalism, and lasting impact on our community, I'm proud to present code enforcement officer Tomac with the meritorious service award. So, please join me in recognizing her for her outstanding contributions to the public safety and community's well-being. Volunteer with a with a camera to come up here real quick. Thank you.

I want to ask a to stay put because uh I have one more citation to read and coincidentally she happens to be part of the group that's going to be recognized again. Can I have the rest of my uh individuals be recognized? Overer, Sergeant Hall, Pettinger, and Hughes. All the way up, guys. All the way up. All the way up. Come on up. It's my honor to recognize the outstanding investigative work for uh of Sergeant Hall, Detective Overacher, Detective Hughes, Detective Pittinger, uh together with code enforcer enforcement officer Tomac and community service officer Purify, who is not here tonight, uh for their collective efforts in the investigation into the tragic murder of Todd Pinion. Their teamwork, professionalism, and dedication exemplify the very best of a Tescadero Police Department. On October 30th, 2024, the Tescadero Police Department received a report of a missing person. Over the following two days, information developed that to that elevated circumstances of the disappearance to a suspicious case, and detectives were formally assigned to lead a focused and coordinated investigation. The investigative team led by Detective Hall moved swift swiftly. Within a short period of time, detectives identified critical surveillance footage, developed leads regarding the vehicle involved, and located and intervened a key sus interviewed, I'm sorry, and interviewed a key suspect in Southern California. Through skilled investigative work and effective interviewing techniques, detectives obtained information that led to the recovery of the victim and critical evidence related to the crime. Detectives Overacher, Hughes, and

Pittinger worked diligently to follow up on emerging leads, recover evidence, and ensure all investigative steps were completed thoroughly and professionally. Code enforcement officer Tomas and community service officer Purify played a vital role in canvasing the area and locating supplemental video evidence, which led to the identification of the primary crime scene and helped corab corroborate witness statements. Through teamwork, urgency, and precision, this investigation was resolved in a remarkably short period of time. For their outstanding service, I am proud to present Sergeant Hall, Detective Overacker, Detective Hughes, Detective Pettinger, Code Enforcement Officer Tom, and Community Service Officer Purify with the Chief Certificate of Commodation. Please join me in recognizing these professionals for their dedicated dedication to justice and public safety.

So, thank you all very much uh for coming out. Uh and and thank you again, mayor, for giving us the time. Council would like to come down and take a picture with everybody to invite you. So, thank you very much. So, let's go ahead and get you guys more into the middle here. If I can get you everybody here to scoot over in front of where the mayor's seat is. This time I'll be in

All right. Thank you again to the police department. Great work, especially on the pinion murder case. That was outstanding. Um and uh we always appreciate the opportunity to honor our outstanding employees. We're going to move on to our consent calendar. And the consent calendar are consists of items that are considered routine and non-controversial by city staff and will be acted upon by a single motion by the city council unless otherwise requested by a council member. Uh and we will allow public comment. I will first see there are only two items on tonight's consent calendar. So I'll first see if any member of the council has a question or would like to pull an item. All right, let's see if we have any public comment on the consent calendar. Okay, seeing none, we'll bring it back to council for a motion. Move approval of the consent calendar.

I'll second. Okay. We have a motion by council member Funk and a second second by Council Member Nuome. Roll call, please. Council member Funk, yes. Council member Nuome, yes. And council member Peak, yes. Mayor Promarez, yes. Mayor Borbo, yes. Motion passes unanimously. All right. Okay. Thank you. Our next item is updates from the city manager. Uh city manager Lewis is actually attending a League of Cities or Cal Cities conference. He is on the board of directors and a member of the city city manager division as well. So he is out of town this evening and he will be substituted by our assistant city manager and city clerk Laura Christensen.

Thank you mayor and councel. Um today I'd like to provide um some updates. Uh upcoming events this weekend will be the sweetheart stroll the sip and shop. That'll be this Friday from 5:30 to 8:00. Um, come down, get tickets through um the Tascadero Chamber. You can enjoy phenomenal wine, beer, coffee, and other treats while you visit uh 15 plus businesses in downtown Atascadero. Have a little pre Valentine's Day celebration. Um, online tickets, like I said, they're available until noon on Friday through the Chambers's website. They are $35. Um, just a reminder, there's a limited number of tickets uh that'll be available for purchase in-person day of event. So, if you do plan to attend, get those tickets in advance. And they will also be offering tours of City Hall, and those will be available from 5:30 to 7:30. This weekend is also Woo at the Zoo. This is a new and wildly fun Valentine's Day celebration. Uh it'll kick off Valentine's Day um from 10:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. 10:00 a.m. will also be the unveiling of the um refurb refurbished Lion Water Fountain. So that will be right at 10:00 a.m. So for everyone who remembers that or would like to see what it looks like now, please come out. The event will include keepers talks and that will focus on how animals choose their mates. There will be Valentine's themed activities including enrichment for the animals. This is all part of uh general admission or if you are a zoo member then it's free. Also on Valentine's Day, so on Saturday, Earth Shine will be here in Atascadero doing some creek cleanup. Uh it will be the 9th annual Earth Shine in Atascadero. So, you can spend

Valentine's morning um helping to clean up along Atascadero Creek and throughout the community from 10:00 a.m. to noon. Ershine will be serving free pizza and refreshments to all of the wonderful volunteers and that's thanks to donation from Mayor Borau. Um Ershine will supply everything that you'll need to help clean up. So, in that will include grabbers, bags, safety vest, and gloves. and uh the city of Atascaderoa will have um trash cans and disposal to um collect all that litter. Um as a reminder, state of the city, the 2026 update will be on February 18th from 7:30 to 9:30 a.m. at Colony Cinemas. Tickets are available online through uh the chamber's website, business.atascaderochamber.org. um find out what's upcoming for 2026. We'd love for you to stay informed and find out what's in store with the city. You can also hear from the president of the Chamber of Commerce. Uh coffee with a cop is upcoming. That'll be Thursday, February 19th from 8 to 10:00 a.m. That'll be held at Malibu Brew. It'll be a nice relaxing environment to come and connect with our uh police department. come on down, share a hot cup of coffee and conversation and learn all about what's happening with our police department. Again, that's February 19th. That's Thursday, from 8 to 10 a.m. As a reminder, there's current on there's ongoing uh wreck registrations for youth t-ball. That registration's open from for boys and girls ages 4 and a half to six. That registration does end February 27th. Volunteer coaches and sponsors are needed for the league. If you're interested, please uh contact the rec

division. A if you do plan to coach or are interested in coaching, a coaches meeting will be held on Thursday, March 19th at Paloma Creek Park. Adult basketball spring season, that registration's open ending March 2nd. And adult social kickball spring season, that that registration's open and registration deadlines March 23rd. Again, registration can be done online or by visiting uh Colony Park Community Center. The Los Altos covert repair is completed. It's now safe for passage. And the improvements that were done after a covert failure include the replacement of the covert, stabilization of the covert's entrance and exit, and new pavement over the trench line. And uh our 2020 the well not ours but the 2026 chipping program is open for registration. Uh the St. Louis Abyispo County Fire Safe Council is offering free chipping services to help a Tascadora residents create and maintain that 100 foot defensible space that's required by California law. Please visit www.chipperday.coms chipperday.comsfsc to register for the chipping. The shipping will actually begin end of March, but it's important to get registered now. And um always, as a reminder, information regard regarding storm preparation is on the city's website. Please be prepared for the storms that will continue through this weekend and then pick back up next week. If there's if you see flooding or down limbs or trees in the street, those can be reported to the city's public works department. During regular business hours at 805-4703148 and after regular business hours, please

call our non-emergency police dispatch line at 8054615051. And sandbags are sand is available free of charge at in front of the uh city yard at the very end of Garbata. Please bring your own sandbags and sandbags are available for purchase at both Home Depot and Miners. Again, for information on storm preparedness, visit the city's website atasascadero.org/emergencyparedness and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Um, question for fire chief. Is sand no or or the public works director. Sand no longer available at the fire station. We do have a little bit of sand left, but I think this will probably be the last time we have sand there. It'll all be over at the at the city yard on Gabarda. Got it. Because once it's gone, we need to start Exactly. clearing out because as a reminder to the public, we will be tearing down fire station one to build a brand new station. Okay. Any other questions from council members? Council member Newsome, your mic is on. Did you have a question? No.

Okay. All right. Seeing none, thank you very much uh for the update. Uh we will move on to our next item which is community forum and community forum is reserved for persons wishing to address the city council on any matter that is not on the agenda but over which the council has jurisdiction. The Brown Act prohibits the council from discussing matters not on the agenda, but we may at our discretion ask staff to contact us. speaker regarding an issue raised in community forum or answer a very quick question. All right, we will begin. You speakers are limited to three minutes and we ask that you state your name for the record. First speaker, please, Jeff Hosel, resident of Tascadero. Uh good evening, council and staff. Um it was brought to my attention from a couple residents in a certain area that we have a little problem going on. uh they don't feel inclined to uh notify the city. So, they've notified me because I'm the boisterous one that likes to keep everybody honest. So, I've sat through some very long meetings and discussions of uh construction of the north area of town, whether it's Barrel Creek or the area where the market is or where the glamping is going to be. and we've talked about how we're going to enforce certain things, regulations, whether it's lighting or anything else. In the next council meeting, you're going to be discussing whether you're going to add other ordinances or not to Airbnbs and short-term rental. And I think this is where this comes into play. We have a lot of ordinances on the books right now and we really don't have the staff to enforce them. So my opinion is why are we adding more? And I get to use my time tonight and in two weeks to discuss this. So we have a new market in town, a supermarket in town. We had lengthy discussion with all

council members here present. Um maybe not Mr. Peak, but everybody else about what time and how they get to offload their trucks in the morning and what goes on. So, based on the calls I've had, I have gone by six days in a row, and trucks are being offloaded at 555, 5:45 in the morning before 7 a.m. is the point. The residents over there are not very happy about that. The garbage truck also goes at 6:10 in the morning to get the dumpsters from our new market. Uh, it was agreed upon when they were here in the audience that it would be a 7 a.m. start. I've been told it's very difficult to enforce. Well, time for the city to say you guys can't take your trucks till 7 a.m. and they shouldn't be idling either from 5 in the morning or 6:00 in the morning behind there. It's the only supermarket in town that has residents behind it where a truck or trucks uh are very noisy. And I do have video of the forklift with the beep beep on the back. So, it is a little bit of an issue and I think our council and our staff need to work it out between maybe planning and code enforcement or whatever uh to fix this problem and make sure going forward our other projects have the same and we shouldn't be having to pay for more staff to do this and everybody's very busy, but we don't have code enforcement on at 6:00 a.m. and our police officers are pretty busy and it's petty for them to be dealing with it. So, I hope there'll be some direction. Thank you. And yes, three minutes.

Excellent timing. 256. Anybody else wishing to speak at community forum?

Hello. Hello. Uh my name is Chris Towers and I'm hoping I can address the planning department. I'm not sure what other forum to use, so I'm hoping this is appropriate. uh 3 years agoish, we bought a house or a piece of property here in town with the intent of building a house on it. And we began the uh fun journey of fighting with the city to get a permit to build that house on. And uh after months and months of going back and forth, we initially got denied because building a 2,000 ft house on a 3acre piece of property qualified as dense residential according to your rules. even though that would occupy less than 0.8% of the total land. So after months and months of fighting that we got a letter from the city granting us permission to build the house. We then hired an architect and got the process rolling. So 6 months after that we went to file for the uh permit to build the house and were again denied because the lady that wrote us the letter from the city of Atascadero no longer worked there. So they were not going to honor that. So we have been fighting with the city for the last several years to get permission to build said house. And we were kept quoting that we were being denied because the laws have changed. Every time we asked the city uh planning people what the law was that changed, they dodged our question despite numerous emails. And about three months ago, we finally got them pinned down and they said that the laws had not changed, but their interpretation of the laws is what has changed. So we are constantly being told things that are not true. So we then got a hold of the appropriate people at the state of California who launched an investigation on our behalf. And it turns out that by law from the state of

California, we were allowed to build a house. So, miraculously, after they came and did an investigation on our behalf, the next day we got a letter from the city again stating we would be allowed to move forward because they reinterpreted a map that had been issued a year and a half ago. So, my question on that is the letter that we got, is that going to be honored? because according to the city, they also would not honor the first letter because there was no expiration date on it. This new letter we received also has no expiration date on it. So, as we've now spent tens of thousands of dollars developing this property, and I'm sitting here wondering how much more do we have to keep enduring, are we actually going to get to build this? So, I'm not sure if this is the right forum, but we're at the end of our wits and I'm just asking for you guys understanding and this is happening to more and more people. So, I'm just bringing it to your attention. Thank you.

Thank you. 255 beat Mr. Osland by one second. Anybody else wishing to speak uh community forum? Okay, seeing no one else approach uh try to address this real quickly. Um, uh, Mr. Oen, thank you for bringing that to our attention. I wish folks would just if they have a complaint to make like that, they should just make it because I doubt that anybody in the city is particularly aware of that issue. So, thank you for bringing that to our attention and I'm sure that community development will take a look at that back at the conditions of approval for that uh, project and we'll see go from there. And Mr. Tower, I'm sorry to hear about your frustrations, but I'm sure Mr. Dunore in community development has made note of your comments and will uh I'm sure advise us what the what the status is. So as I noted we cannot discuss anything brought up here in detail. So um since it's not on the agenda. So okay with that we will move on from community forum and we will move on to our first public hearing item H1 which is regarding the 2026 community development bro block block grant funding recommendations and I believe public works analyst Ryan Betts is going to present this item to us.

Thank you mayor city council Ryan Betts public works analyst with uh public works. Uh I am pleased to present tonight the 2026 community development block grant final funding recommendations. And just a little uh background regarding this item. Um the community de uh development block grant um is a federally uh very stricted funding source that cities and ultimately the county can take advantage of um with the goal of helping um lowincome improvements and benefits to individual cities. Uh the city participates along with other agencies in what's called the urban county program. Uh again, it's funded by the the federal housing uh and urban development uh uh department and administered locally by the county of St. Louis Pisville. And that comes into play later on when I show you that the county uh takes an administrative fee right off the top. Uh the community development block grant is an annual grant. Again, it provides activities um that meet um one of the three following criteria, and these are important. It has to benefit uh low and moderate income persons or aid in the prevention or elimination of blight or address urgent needs that pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. This item should look fairly familiar to council because we presented the draft recommendations at the November 12th, 2025 city council meeting uh upon which the council gave direction on what the final recommendations could look like. And that is the purpose of tonight's meeting. Just a quick breakdown of the funding um requests, if you will, or at least the final recommendations from council based upon the November 12th meeting. Uh city

staff expects approximately $176,000 to be allocated for the city of Atescadero to be used in a variety of ways for low-income families. in support of um there are certain restricted categories within the CDBG program. Those are public facilities and housing projects. They have a 65% minimum. Then there's our public services. They have a 15% max. And then finally, administration is a 20% max and as I mentioned earlier, the county takes right off the top the 13% share which leaves the city of Atescar with 7%. Uh it's important to note that the final final final numbers have not been released by HUD yet. So you'll see in the recommendation that um for council's consideration that if the amounts slightly change um staff has the ability to adjust those proportionally to the items that you provide a final recommendation too. staff has put together the following table that lists the requests by the different um requestes for the funding separated by categories. The application amount is that first column and then the council draft recommendations from uh from earlier or later in 2025 are on the right as you can see. Uh, and this is typical requestees ask for um more funding than actually available and then council has the uh privilege of figuring out where those limited resources go towards. Um, just a couple of notes um of what this funding uh is proposed to be used for. The first one under public facilities is the VJO Commamino sidewalk and ADA improvements um for an out for a request of $114,000. Uh that project will provide 450 linear feet of new ADA compliant sidewalk curb ramps at two locations on Vio Camino

between El Camino and Halcon Road. Connection to a regional bus stop with a new bench and a new shelter. Um, and I will make note uh because I know council will ask me, we are going to design uh or create the the the bid for the construction and add some bid alternatives for the enhanced crosswalk. The cost of those crosswalks we believe will be higher than what's budgeted. We're we're fingers crossed and and hoping for a better result. So, we will establish a bid alternative for that enhanced crosswalk to ensure that the project moves forward regardless of the the funding amount. Um, that estimated cost overall is between 400 and $650,000. And why there's a huge variance is primarily that midblock cross, that enhanced crosswalk, which includes electrification and all those kind of things that go into enhanced crosswalk. and that enhanced crosswalk. If we do a crosswalk, we we really really highly highly recommend doing an enhanced crosswalk, which is signalized, if you will, for pedestrian safety. Uh the second one item under the public facilities and housing was from CAPSLow, Community Action Partnership of St. Bispo. They requested uh funding for minor home repair and accessibility improvements of homes occupied by low and very low income within the city. Moving quickly onto public services category, the city of Atascadero has a um a robust strong history of utilizing these funds for youth activity scholarships. This allows children of low-income families to participate in organized recreation, social, and cultural activities to keep children active and engaged. And more importantly, this population served would be otherwise unable to afford the activity fees to participate in the activities of choice without these important scholarships. The second item under public services is um supporting ECHKO. Uh Echko operates

two navigation centers, one here in Atascadero, another one in the city of Pasar Robels. Echo works to meet the needs of unsheltered residents who have not yet sought emergency shelter through street outreach services and the needs of residents who are housed but in danger of losing their housing through homeless prevention services. This funding would greatly go toward um their limited budget for operations. They also note that with the support of this funding, approximately 1,300 people per year are expected to access the services within Echko. Um, and ECHKO continues to leverage volunteers, partners, and community support to serve and house a large number of people with a very small operating budget. Um, and then the rest of the items are for administration. So, the recommendation before you tonight, council, is to review and approve the funding recommendations for the 2026 community development block grant as shown below. We want to make sure it's crystal clear about the funding requests and authorize staff to adjust the award amounts proportionally upon receipt once we receive that final funding amount and staff is available for any questions. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Betts. Any member of the council have any questions? Mayor Pro Timuras, not a question, just a comment because you answered it right at the end there. I was going to ask if the if the allocation amount was significantly different up or down, would it come back to us or would it be uh proportionally distributed? And you answered that question. So, thank you. And just curiosity along those lines, how often does it come back different? You know, over time it's come back a little bit different, a little high, a little low, but I would say within the margins enough that we can adjust it proportionally. Um, staff just kind of does that and make sure everything is kosher.

Got it. Okay. Thank you. Any questions? All right. Thank you. With that, we'll proceed out to see if there's any public comment on this item.

Good evening, Council Jeff Hoslin. Um it's really sad that this uh dollar amount continues to get lower and lower every year. Um and uh it affects ECHKO which does a great job in our community obviously. Um, I do like the fact that we are putting a little bit more money into our youth uh scholarship program, but I will also make the comment that that does also help folks at ECHKO because the children there now can get that grant money as well. So, I think it's a great partnership and I would recommend that uh you approve it um as it is, but if the dollar amounts really do go up, which they normally don't, that the additional money does go to Echo. Thank you. Okay. Thank you for your comments. Anybody else wishing to comment on this item? Okay. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to council for consideration. Does any member of the council want to make a comment or just make a motion to approve um or re reaffirm our previous recommendations?

Yeah, I do want to b make a brief comment as since these uh grants uh funnel through the homeless services oversight council on which I represent the city. I just want to note that we are the only city that uh chooses to dedicate some of these funds to youth activity uh scholarships in this county. that is u and it almost always comes up as a question and we almost always have to remind folks that a that the homeless services oversight council has no jurisdiction over what this council chooses to do with this money. So there sort of a mind your own business. Um and but the other point that that I always make sure is made is something that Mr. Oslin just mentioned that is echo supports are giving money to youth activity scholarships because many times it is their residents who desperately need these opportunities uh that are funded um you know through this money. So it is you know at the levels we're talking about um is really valuable um work and it's a great tradition in this community to support our youth. Uh so with unless any somebody else has a comment, I'll offer them a motion that um we approve the funding recommendations for the 2026 uh community development block grant program um as shown by staff and that we authorize staff to adjust final award amounts proportionately upon receipt of the final funding amount. um unless the uh change is so large that um it renders you know downward that it renders something um unworkable as a uh as a as a grant. Um and I would incorporate the suggestion from Mr. Rossland that we that um if there's a a a change of significance upward that in the public

services category that we'd uh put that rem additional money to echo since we put the if we wanted to do that though I think we'd have to specify what's significant to staff otherwise they're going to you know um in other words if if the category changes by $1,000 I don't expect them to do that but um do you want to attach a number to that in terms of a significant if the if there happens to be a significant increase in if the uh if the change in the thing results in a grant of less than $8,000 which would make it um if the organization doesn't get money from other sources on CDBG it becomes difficult for them um then it should come back to council

understand that but I mean in terms of an increase are you just suggesting that any increase in the public services category should go to Echo okay can that's clear enough for staff since we we did the youth activity scholarships earlier. We can you know small change we do that that and everything else is proportional. Okay. So here let's try let me try this. What I'm hearing from council is if we get more than the proposed $176,000

no just specifically in the public services category. Well, if it would get more than than the uh $176,000, then the proportion of that uh which is dedicated the 15% maximum that's dedicated to the public services category uh should that all categories should be proportionately adjusted and that the public services category within that cavity that additional minor amounts go to echo. I see. Thank you. That's clear. Okay. Is that clear enough for a second? Yeah, I'll second. Thanks. Okay, we have a motion by Council Member Funk, second by Mayor Promdderez. Roll call, please. Council member Funk, yes. Council member Nuome, yes.

Council member Peak, yes. Mayor Promarez, yes. Uh, Mayor Borbo, yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. We will move on to our next item, which is an U 2025 or or is it 2026 building and fire code updates. Um, I guess it's actually 25, but we're dealing with it in 26. We're going to turn this over to our community development director, Mr. Phil Dunmore.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. It's that time again. Every 3 years, we're here with the required building code updates, fire code updates. Um, they are basically called the 2025 code. They are effective January 1 of this year and a lot of it's incorporated into city code by reference. We also are going to be introducing you to you tonight some local amendments. A lot of those local amendments we already have, but we have to carry those over each cycle. But there's also some new ones to really clean up the process a bit. This all results in amendments to our municipal code. Two titles, title four, which is the fire code adoption and local amendments, and those items you see there on the screen. And then there's title eight, which is a building code adoption and its local amendments. and all the components that go with it. Now, we're very fortunate tonight because we have the individuals here that actually work with these codes on a daily basis and they actually implement these codes out in the field. So, I thought those are the best folks to tell you about the details and lead you through all the stuff. So, first up, Dave Vansson, our fire marshal, is going to give you some details on the fire code portion. then we'll go to some questions and then we'll branch off to our building official who's here tonight as well, Bruce St. John, and we'll talk about the building side of things. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dunmore, and u Mr. Mayor, Council, I'm just here to talk about the fire code adoption and also the new 2025 cow wildland interface code adoption as well. So, we're going to start off with the fire code adoption. So, um the fire code sets strong safety standards, but they don't always address local standards. And like Mr. Dunort said we've had multiple um code amendments in the past in the fire code um that we use uh we use to add better safety or more more um let me start over for this code cycle. Our proposal of local amendments mirror all previous code updates with some minor clarifications. we had some some some issues in the codes that were confusing. So, we just made some minor clarifications to make those updates more or those amendments more easily understandable. Um, so these amendments assure uh practical effective fire protection tailored to our community specifically, but we don't have any new amendments to the fire code this year, which is something something um different than in the past. So everything is going to be a carryover from last year. Um the another thing is is the fire code does not have any significant changes this year that affects um the city property owners, business or developers at all. I went through a code um code significant changes code class that they they talked through every specific code change in the fire code. and none of those code changes had a direct impact into um to the city of Atascadero. And

then finally, um this fire code adoption is going to replace the 2021 wildland urban interface map with the 2025 local responsibility area fire hazard severity zone map that we adopted in in back in Maine. So, I'm going to go ahead and talk about this this specific section right here because this is the one that has um had the most concern with council and the community. So, the 2025 local responsible area has three different zones. The very high, which you see up there in red, and currently it's um with this new map adoption that affects 1,600 parcels. Then we have the high v high fire severity zone which is in the orange and that affects 1,285 parcels. And then everything else in the yellow is the moderate fire hazard severity zone with 6,292 parcel and everything in the in the gray is unclassified. So the significance of of those areas is that's where the WOOI code uh wildland urban interface code is going to take effect um specifically in the high fire severity zone and the very high severity zone. And we do have a few local amendments that's going to address the moderate fire um severity zone. So again, like I said, this map, the map on the on the top was the one that was adapt adopted in May of 2025 and we'll be replacing um the map on the bottom that is in the green se the green section of the map that'll be going away. So the recent change parcel um the recent changes of our maps add um changes to actual parcel classifications.

So um so this map determines which parcels are subject to the 2025 WOI code which I talked about previously. So 875 parcels that were considered urban um which didn't have any classification at all that didn't have to to meet any of the wildland urban interface code are now designated as high fires severity zones. So those 875 parcels will now have to um follow the the wildland urban interface code section. Additionally, we had 3,095 parcels that were in our WOWI, which was in that green section of the map, that now have been reclassified to the moderate. So, they're they're not going to have to do the full code um for wildland urban interface. Um, and if the council chooses to adopt the amendments, they'll only have to to um the ones in the moderate only have to do those that are uh amended to the moderate fire hazard severity zone. So now I'll get into the um WOI code adoption. So this WOOI code was historically found in chapter 7A of the building code or chapter um R 337 of the residential code. Um so there was also sub se several other places there was an international wildland urban interface code that we had adopted previously. So this this code section on building standards were in several different locations. Um so in 2025 um the state decided to create their own California Louis code and they combined the California residential code, the building code, the fire code all into one comprehensive code in this book. Um so this is what we're proposing to adopt tonight with some local amendments.

Um so this is uh so the major um sections um construction areas that are going to be affected um in the high and very high and some of the moderate um are these ignition resistant um materials that need to be done. So it would be roof assemblies. Um class A roofs meaning um the roofs have to have a two twohour fire rating rather than a 1 hour fire rating. Um exterior walls and protection have to be fire resistance. Uh decks and accessory structures are subject to special ignition resistant requirements. Um the vents, exterior doors, uh glazing on windows and enclosures have to be limited um ember entry and limited fire spread. Uh the windows and glazings u must use a multipi multi-pane window with one of those windows one of those panes being a tempered glass. um underf flooror and e protection is going to be required as well as perimeter gaps in the exterior doors to prevent ember intrusion. So we have um we have uh four significant changes or amendments that we're we're requesting with this wooi code adoption. So currently a task municipal code requires full compliance of two specific things. An addition and increase of the building size by 50% or more or the work of that remodel or uh rehabilitation of a structure or more the building's replacement value. So if the replacement value is 75% more, the remodel is 75% more the building's replacement uh value or the addition is

going to be 50% or greater than the original size of the structure, then we're requesting that the full um WOOI code be implemented. So that structure is in full compliance of the WOOI code. And that that change is there in the red of of the code. And we have three other uh separate amendments that address the moderate um moderate fires severity zone. And so um that's the yellow area in the maps. And so current um let me get to that page. So these proposed local amendments will apply to the yellow moderate and that's to reduce amber casts and wildfire exposure based on the findings of the recent palisades and eaten fires that caused major structure loss. So after after seeing those two significant fires and the potential of a significant wildfire event and a tascadero sending those embers into the moderate area, we we are proposing to make some changes to protect um specifically ember intrusion into these these structures. And the first one would be the roof assembly. So everything in the moderate um fire severity zone would have have the roof assembly class A roof that's established by the code. The second would be garage door perimeter gaps. Um so we would it would eliminate the entrance of embers into garages. Um it's it's the gap can't be more than 1/8 inch thick. And the third one that we're um we're looking into is the um vents. Ventilation openings must comply to prevent embers and flame intrusion um to reduce that ignition ignition res uh risk. And that's significant because

most of those those three things will prevent the embers um with the roofs. It it allows those embers two hours is a long time. Um it gives the the ability to to for patrol crews to patrol the area if they're seeing embers on roof um to get those while the rest of the um fire apparatus or personnel are actually fire fighting the fire. So they could prevent the spread of the fire by embers um with these these specific things to uh reduce the intrusion of the embers into the home um and to ignite them. And so we do also have a few minor changes um to the WOI code to improve clarity um ensuring consistency with our current municipal code and our engineering standards that we have um already in place and to main safe maintain safe building and property conditions. And these are specifically for our driveway standards um fire department turnaround standards and our addressing standards. the the the code has different standards than what we currently have in our municipal code. So, those are just minor amendments that we're proposing to um the Louis code. And that's what I have if you have any questions for me.

Okay. Uh as a second part of this, we're going to hear from somebody in community development. Okay. But since we have the questions slide up, I think we'll go to council questions for this portion. Uh I'll start on my left. Council member Peak.

Yeah. Two questions. Um, could you clarify on the garage door uh header and casing says metal flashing? Normally you have like a vinyl strip around for weatherproofing the garage door metal flashing. What is that exactly? What do you mean by So the code says perimeter gapping. So, it's um it would be a non-combustible sat type of weatherproofing material that reduces the gap along the garage door to 1/8 inch or or less. So, normally that's like a vinyl gasket that's like um like a poly vinyl gasket.

Correct. But this is has to be of a non-combustible type of material. Is that going to be something that's readily going to be sold by garage door companies or is this going to be a separate thing we have to as homeowners deal with? Um, just for the record, Bruce St. John, chief building official here with the city of Atascadero. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, council members. Um, so typically speaking with the flashing, as Dave Anson, a fire marshal, mentioned, um, it'd be readily accessible from any uh, sheet metal manufacturer, most likely garage door uh, marketers and u installers. Yes, that's correct. I've never seen a metal flashing on a garage door, so I'm just kind of curious if that's something that's coming like

noisy. I'm just I've never seen it. So, I'm wondering what that is going to be look like and where it's going to be coming from. The the flashing would be from the front fascia when the garage door makes its approach to the house. Usually, you have an angle on a garage door. I'm not specifically sure what that angle is, but the flashing be attached so that as a garage door closes, there'd be less of a gap between the actual front face of the door and the structure itself, which would eliminate or provide a smaller air gap. So, it wouldn't be moving. it wouldn't be part of that portion of the garage door. Okay. It just seems like a new building material. Maybe I just haven't seen it before, but usually it's it's vinyl. Yeah.

Um and then in terms of the 50% um on the addition or alterations to a house, a lot of our houses are like a colony house is relatively small. My my old house in Dolores was a thousand square feet. So, if I added a larger living room and a bigger and expanded the kitchen, that would be 50%. Um, you know, on suite bedroom, typical new remodel right now is like 20 x 15 is going be 300. So, if you had another bathroom and a little bit um I'm just kind of curious if that number was just because of any specific like u u data as to like permits that we've pulled, how what our average addition is in town um in terms of where that number came from, the 50%. Um

yeah so so that number came from that's what we currently require in residential structures when they do um additions for fire sprinklers. So anything currently for an R3 a residential that has a um an addition over 50% we require the whole building to be sprinkled. Um so we're trying to be consistent with that and to to reduce you know fire spread structure structure spread too. um because that that 50% of the house already has to be built to the WOOI standards. So half the house would be to the Wland urban interface standards and the other half would not be to the WLAN interface standards. So if you remodel and you add more than 50% you don't have to the entire house doesn't have to be retrofitted with everything in the fire code

wi with this amendment if you're doing 50% or more the entire house would have to without the amendment it would not so half the house would be would be compliant and the other half other half of the house would not be compliant. No more questions. Mayor Portas,

actually I had two questions and that was kind of one of them right there. So just for clarification, so if somebody was to do an addition that was more than 50% and it is a colony house that has woodlap sighting, then the entire house would have to that that sighting would have to come off and put say Hardy or Stuckco or something that because the wood the wood sighting would be considered a combustible material. That that is correct.

The entire house. Wow. Okay. Well, it's makes it safer, I guess. Your neighbor's house isn't going to burn down. Um uh the next question is and this this is just for discussion you can answer it how you can the multi-pane windows. So obviously we were required to put mult uh dual pane windows in at a minimum anyway but I found it interesting that said at least one of the panes or not at least one of the panes needs to be tempered and I'm curious as to I'm sure the window manufacturer will take care of it but which which wind which pane is going to be tempered? It seems like it make it more sense that they'd both be tempered, which I imagine they probably are, but is that is that so there's something significant to that because I can't imagine you having

dual pain and one being tempered and the other one not because the non-tempered one should be on the outside because that's the one that's going to be the most dangerous of the brakes. Yeah, the code the code specifically says that one is tempered and um Bruce could correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's the exterior window that has to be the tempered glass um which reduces the the impact of the heat on that window.

So, I'm sure the homeowners or the contractors don't have to worry too much about that because the window manufacturers will take care of that. I mean, unless you seriously customize have a custom window. Actually, I did have that where somebody had a stained glass window that they wanted to put, so they had to add it. That's right. So, that stained glass would have to be tempered. So, I did I did come across that with a house that I did in Santa Cruz. So, anyhow, that one was was just an interesting one. I just thought you're going to buy a window with tempered glass. Are both going to be tempered? I would assume, but maybe not. Anyway, that's all I got. Thank you.

I'll defer my questions until after my rights. So, we'll go to Council Member Funk. this thing to There we go. Okay. No. Yes. Okay. Uh thank you. Um a couple of things. First, uh going back to uh how much value the project adds to the property. Um, I want to clarify that. Um, my understanding that it doesn't if you have a detached structure like a a really you've got a older house and you put a fancy new big accessory dwelling unit there that could add more than 75% of the value of the current structures on the property, but it's a detached structure. Is there any circumstance in which that would trigger having to make add sprinklers or do a new roof on the main house?

So, detached structures according to the code already require that anything over 120 square ft is required to be compliant with the woolly code detached structure. That 75% is for remodels of existing structures. So, does that answer your question? So, so the so the answer you're confirming is um essentially no. That there's that no matter how fancy the ADU is, you don't have to do anything to to upgrade the main house. Uh but the ADU has to be compliant with the standards. That's correct.

Okay, great. Thank you. Well, just wanted to be clear for for everybody on that. Um then then coming back to the list uh could you put up the list um that you showed us um of the Yeah, there we go. So, one because part of the discussion we had earlier at council was um what's you know the do we really have to require every thing uh homes that are being built or major re majorly renovated in the moderate fire risks area um to meet every single one of these new requirements. And I appreciate staff coming back with a judicious list that includes only three of these. Um, and two of them I, you know, the exterior garage doors and the vents are probably not all that costly relative to some of the other ones. Um, the class A roof would be the, you know, exception to that potentially. So just can you elaborate a little bit more on how it is that um having a class A roof on a structure helps the fire fire department fight the fire in the community?

So the difference between a class A and a class B roof is the fire um the hours of fire resistance. Um, so a class A roof have has a two-hour fire resistant and the material underneath underneath the shingles or the the tile or whatever also has a fireresistant barrier. Um, a class B roof only has a 1-hour fire resistance and they're not required to have that uh underneath layer of of fire resistant material. So, it it gives it it gives the fire department more time um to get ahead of that ember casting, to do patrols in that area, in those areas that these these embers are casting um to see if there are embers on the roof, um you know, to knock those down or to get rid of little small spot fires. So, it gives them a little bit more time um rather than one hour of that ember sitting on that roof, igniting through the the material and then starting the attic and fire. And once the attic's on fire, that that structure is a total loss. So, giving them an actual extra hour um in in a significant event um with with significant amber casting is the reason for the recommendation.

Okay. So basically, it gives you a much better chance of catching um an ember and dowsing an ember that that gets onto onto that roof before it catches that structure on for fire, burns it down, and turns it into a torch that casts embers all over the rest of the community.

Yeah, that's correct. And that has to be consistent with the venting as well. um if you had a class A class A roof but you didn't have the proper venting, those embers are going to get in that attic anyway. So that's why we kind of combine the two together to have the venting to prevent the embers entering into the attic and the class A roof um to prevent the embers catching that roof on fire and getting into the attic.

Okay, thank you for clarifying that. And then one more thing um we have there's language that we find on pages 68 and 69 in there about mulch And um I want to thank the fire marshall for coming out and doing uh a fire inspection on on the property that my husband and I own and live in. Um and want to remind the community that anybody can request that, right? You know, any anywhere in the community. Um and and it was really valuable. And one of the things I learned is like the single cheapest thing I can do to reduce fire risk on my at my own house is to rake back the mulch that is um that we put on to improve the drought tolerance. So rake it back five feet from the house so we don't have mulch next to the house that can light other things on fire. And I just wanted to make sure that um there's some language there that mulching for new landscaping that mulching is required. Um but that there's an exception for it and want to confirm that there is an exception. So you don't you're not caught in this thing where you have to put mulch next to the house that really is not a good idea for fire reasons. Can we Does this meet that exception?

Yeah. So I believe you're referring to a section of the building code that talks about landscaping that um Bruce is going to address. Ah but um they it does so um this this code here did adopt the the zero zone the 0 to 5 foot zone. So any new structures being built are going to be required to have that zero zone of hardscaping or nonflammable material from from the edge of any part portion of that structure to 5t out. So even if the building code says you have to do some sort of landscaping or some sort of mulch activity, they still have to abide by the WOOI code saying that they cannot do that in that 0 to 5 foot zone.

Perfect. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Nome.

Thank you. Um originally when we discussed the WOOI um we were told it was statemandated that we had to adopt the WOOI. But here on page 24 it says our current section 101 allows any additions or alterations to be made without the existing building in complying with the special building construction regulations. Are we required to add the WOOI into all existing So from my understanding this this code was adopted by the state back in 2025 and if we adopt it or not um the city is still required to follow um the requirements within the code. Um by adopting it we are able to make our own local amendments to that code. So the local amendments that we're making in here would then place a little bit more financial burden on those property changes that currently are exempt from that. Correct.

Yes. It would be for um the additions and modifications and then to those three sections we pointed out for the moderate fire severity zone. So, as a city, we don't have to make this local amendment for those existing. That's correct. They're proposed amendments that um it's up to the council if they would like to adopt them or or not.

Okay. And then do we currently have any permits in on file that are going to be affected by any of the changes that are made tonight? I I believe all the permits that have been issued um since 2026 already follow the current um WOOI code that was adopted by the state. Uh it would not affect the local amendments if I'm correct with that. So right now there's no one that's undergoing existing building or structures that are more 50% or 75% or value. I I'll let uh Bruce answer that question. Sorry, I'd like to ask the technical ones.

Thank you for your question, council member. So, currently right now, these provisions, as Mr. Van had mentioned earlier, would apply to anybody that applied for any um alterations, modifications or additions after January 1st of this year. Currently right now under the 50% or the 75% rule for the particular structure we would typically meet with them to discuss to get provide the valuation information or to receive the information to overlook it. And as of right now neither of those two situations have existed after the first of the year. Okay. So if we don't make these changes or if we make these changes it's not affecting anybody that's currently sitting in with permits.

Thank you. Oh, go ahead. Thank you, mayor. Just for clarification for anybody that might be listening, doesn't I started to understand your question a little bit different. Council member Nome's question a little bit different. If somebody has a house in a high severity, high fire severity zone that is wood sighting, class B roof, I mean, basically a rating to catch on fire at any moment with this with what was it? Never mind. um these new amendments, they're not these people are not required to now bring their house up to code just because only if they pull a permit. Is that correct? That's correct. Only for additions or modifications or new construction.

Okay. I just want to make that clear that people aren't sitting at home thinking, "Oh my god, I know my house is doesn't comply with any of that stuff." And now with this thing that we're about to adopt, they're going to have to spend thousands of dollars to bring their their house up to code. And I know that's not true, but I just want wanted to hear them have them hear from you. Appreciate that. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. And so I'm concerned though about the con the question and answers earlier regarding using the example of a colony home. So you know somebody's got a 1500 foot older home. You know they want to add a fair amount um or let's say a home burns down and obviously now the replacement work is going to be more than 75% of the replacement value. And with these requirements, it'll be well over a 100% of the replacement value. Um, we're going to make somebody, you know, potentially tear up the sighting on their ex existing house because they want to do an addition and and that's part of the state requirement, though. That's not that's not under under our discretionary modifications. Correct.

No, that that is a local uh local amendment that we're uh we're requesting to adopt.

Okay. because I mean that does cause me some concern and we're going to tell somebody with an older home that essentially well scrap your scrap your remodel plans because you just triggered this and and we're going to make you you know retrofit the entire house. Um and I understand that maybe from a fire perspective half a house isn't much better than no house. Is that what you're kind of indicating that, you know, if one side of my house is up, you know, 2026 standards, but the other side of my house is, you know, 1968 standards, that it's really not much much protection. Is that your perspective? Yeah. Unfortunately, if the half that's not up to standards catches on fire, the whole house will end up burning down,

right? Well, and and if the half that's not protected is the one that's exposed to the, you know, neighborhood fire, I guess the same, you know, logic would apply. Okay. I guess, you know, if we, if we're going to require it, I guess we have to do that. But it certainly would is going to affect I mean some people's plans are just going to be out the window because this requirement would render their desire to expand is essentially unaffordable or they'll have to shrink their their expansion to below 50%. You had a follow on?

Yeah, I wanted to comment on that. Um what what what's being proposed as it was already stated is kind of been in effect for years anyway. um if somebody wanted to do an addition to their house uh and it was a certain size and I don't remember all the numbers and everything but you know you'd have to based on the size you might have to add fire sprinklers to just the addition but if it goes over a certain size and you have to do the entire house and these are the kind of things that just homeowners have to look into and it becomes part of the the construction cost as far as I'm concerned. Um so so then you can you can base your size of your addition on that. Uh, and if you know it ahead of time, then it's, you know, I mean, I wouldn't want to blind signs somebody with it. But I'm, my feeling is I'm okay with all these changes because I think it makes it safer and it's sort of something that we've already been doing anyway. So, okay. Thank you for that. Um, follow on to Council Member Funk's questions regarding the roof uh, the roofing requirements that we're looking to impose on the yellow areas of the map. And like her, I'm glad we didn't impose all of these because I know from personal experience that some of these things um you know, under floor and eve protection, all this kind of stuff. I mean, my thousand square foot ADU cost more to build than our 2,300 foot house because mostly because of, you know, WOOI fire code requirements. So, I'm glad that we aren't requiring all of this in the yellow zone. But in terms of the roof, you you said something that I perhaps didn't realize. Well, a couple things. One is I picture an ash, you know, or an ember landing on my tile roof. How is that going to catch my tile roof on fire? What am I What am I How am I feeling unrealistically secure with my tile roof?

No. No. Your tile your tile roof actually meets the current code standards. We'll understand. It's classic, but I mean it's uh Okay. And you list these different materials here. Um and it made me wonder the question for um for Bruce is that I assume that in this day and age, even in our yellow and even the white zone, you know, on our map here, most people are putting a class A material roof on anyway, right?

Thank you for the uh question, mayor. Um yes, that'd be correct. to to give you an example to go along with what you're asking. Uh photovoltaic, which we'll talk about here soon, or solar systems on houses, right? They require a certain level of protection or fire protection. So, if you have a class B roof and you add a class A photo voltage system on the roof, that would work. You're co-compliant. But if you had a class A roof and you went to add a class B rated photoic system on, that would not work. So typically speaking, as you could say right now to go along with what you're asking, most of the foldable take systems, there's certain UL listings that have already class A rating. The structure of the PV system is class A. So most likely for all new structures, the roofing to support the energy code and the requirements for photovoltaic, they're getting class A roofs installed already for new structures.

What is a a non-class A roofing material? Well, like Mr. Van Sun mentioned earlier. So you have A, B, and C, and it's just a less of a rating. So wood shake would be considered a non-class A. Well, yeah. I mean, that's wood shake is just call it kindling. I mean, yeah. Yes, I agree 100%.

Okay. Which is funny because I mean where I grew up in Modesto, everybody had a, you know, a woodshake roof. Now, um, okay. But the reason I'm asking that is I don't see in this case that we're really imposing an additional expense. Although Chief Ensan, I was surprised to hear about the underllayment having needing to be fireproof. But if you have the class A material in the terms of the roof like a tile roof, concrete tile, whatever it that's not going to burn in and of itself, do you so do you need that fireproof underllayment or fire rated underllayment?

I I believe I believe and uh Mr. St. Sean could correct me, but I believe I that material is included in the whole class A portion of a of a roof construction would be that underllayment. Okay? Because I mean, like I said, I'm not picturing the necessity of the underllayment if it if you got a tile or nonflammable roofing material. And I'm only looking out for the people in this yellow zone because we're making a discretionary, you know, we're talking about taking a discretionary action here that's going to impose costs on people. So I want to you know I don't want to get super technical but I want to ensure that we are you know cognizant of that additional cost if there is one. So I'm going to let him answer.

Go ahead answer. Yeah. So for a good example uh mayor um a class A tile roof for example you would have the tile roof then you had wooden slats that create the pitch right but below that you would have the underllayment which would be part of the listing of the class A which would be typically two layers of a certain type of building paper. Now you would have combustible materials between the two. But because of the overllayment of the tile and the paper below, it would create the listing for a class A where asphalt shingles for example would sit right on top of the underllayment paper. So the asphalt shingle becomes the majority of the listing of for the class A roof and it doesn't take really into consideration the paper. Okay. All right. Thank you. You had a follow- on question. Yes. Sorry.

Yeah. I want to follow on that. So, what I'm trying to get clear is if you already have a roof that's made out of of um tile or asphalt or something that's not combustible, uh and you're in uh the yellow areas of moderate fire risk. Um, or would we be requiring you if that if a new addition is of a certain value to rip off that roof and put something underneath it and then put it back? Or or would it would something that's made with tile or um asphalt shingles or other com non-combustible materials already be made with the underlays that make it a class A roof? Thank you for the question, council member. Um, I would love to speak on the behalf of most manufacturers and uh, roof roofing contractors, but the majority of the roofs that we do see here within the city limits are typically already class A. So there would be if you had a structure that was doing a re-roof on a partial or doing an addition, they usually would match the same materials for the addition with the same materials that were on the structure or they would just re-roof the whole structure because you wouldn't typically have somebody that had a 30-year-old roof on one portion and they do an addition with a brand new roof. They would remove which we see a lot and they would install an all new roof for the whole structure.

Okay, go ahead. We're gonna have followup after followup. So, again, I'm just trying to I want to make this feel easy for the people listening. Um, good question on the on the roofing thing. Um, but if somebody's going to re-roof their house, you know, they got 30-y old roof, uh, asphalt shingles, it's ready to go. Put something new on it. This isn't this isn't a a more of a burden for them because what they're going to put on is already compliant with what we're what we're doing. So, we're not asking them to do anything more than what's already would have been required anyway. Is that correct? Thank you, council member. Yes, that'd be correct. I would say it'd be industry standard. Industry standard. That's good. Okay. Thank you.

Okay, back to my Oh, you have another you have a followup now. Yeah. That's what everybody's doing. So, figured go for it. Uh, so 75% of replacement costs. Two questions. Who determines that? Do you contact our insurance company? Do you have an appraiser go out there and or a general contractor? And and it says or so do we get to decide which of those either 75% replacement cost or 50% or more on the size of the addition because I can remodel less more than 50% of my house for for less than 75% of the replacement value. So if I go by the second and

I I believe the 50% is with additions and the 75% is for uh alterations. So that means not adding an addition to the house. So if you're if you take a an existing structure and strip it down to the studs um and that and the value of that remodel is more than 75% of the replacement value of the home, then that will trigger it. Or if you're doing an addition, it's not and or it's they're two separate things. One's for the addition, one's for the alteration. So the 50% is for the addition, the 75% is for the alteration.

Okay, I would make that more clear. Um it I don't know if I'm the only one that thought it was it was or in the same uh I could be just, you know, I'm just not I'm not also just not 100% um I get fire safety, but the cost of building now and the cost of remodeling your house now is is crazy. I mean, you can a kitchen is like $60,000 um for a full remodel with, you know, top of the line everything, maybe even more. I could see, you know, a small house if someone's buying a fixer upper that's a smaller house, like 1500 feet or less, a good a good a good remodel could easily be um 75% of the replacement value if the house is a is a piece of crap when you buy it. I'm just kind of concerned with uh adding so much more cost. Um if you're doubling the size of your home, I don't know. I I'm just kind of I see the fire safety aspect of it, but it's so expensive to do any construction in California as it is, and this is just going to make people either not buy a house and increase the property tax by increasing the value of the property.

I think we're getting into commentary, so let's save that those thoughts for after public comment. and we finish questions. So, good good thoughts, but we'll save that. Um, I had a question regarding um driveway turnarounds and turnouts. I read this says that driveways exceeding 150 ft in length but less than 800 shall have a turnout near the midpoint. And if you and if the driveway exceeds 800 feet, turnout shall be provided not more than 400 feet, which seems a little like a higher standard than the first part of the sentence. But my question is this. On a flag lot, like I have a flag lot and said it's 512 feet officially from the roadway to, you know, to where my property opens up and it's 25 ft wide. It it, you know, it doesn't seem like there's room for a turnout on a lot of flag lots. And I think of some people who maybe have a curvy driveway that's hugging, you know, hugging a hillside. How the heck are, you know, how wide does it turn out have to be? and how I imagine there's got to be some circumstances where they just really can't have one.

Correct. There are we do have specific standards for the size of our our turnouts. I don't have those in front of me, but the code does say if your drive aisle or your driveway is um 20 ft wide or more, then the turnouts could be exempt. Um because that's the that's a fire access road width requirement is 20t wide. So, if your if your driveway is 20 feet wide or more, then those turnouts um are not required.

But, I mean, some people have I mean, ours is 25 ft with like a 12 foot, you know, driveway, and there's and because it's kind of centered in a thing, there's really not room on one side or the other for a, you know, for a turnout. And I think some people have even more tighter space situations than than we do. Um, and I just know how they would how they would physically accommodate a turnaround in the middle of a long flag, you know, the pole part of a flag lot.

Yeah. There's also sections in the code that allow um code modification so that if it's physically impossible to do the um to do those turnouts, they could actually submit a code modification and it's up to the code official to either allow the normal driveway without turnouts.

So, we we rec we recognize physical impossibility. That's a That's a good good thing. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Um and then here's a here's a very quick question that you'll either know the answer or not. In in the thing regarding the um draft ordinance B um and it talks about, you know, our fire hazards and whatever. And it says that with the potential for collapsing freeway overpasses or a slide on both Qua and Ontario grades. Where in the hell is Ontario grade? I'm looking at fire or community development.

Yeah. Or ordinance B is building code. So I'm gonna I'm gonna pass that one over to to Bruce. I've never heard of that. And if you mayor, if you could reference

on page 47 in in par about the middle of paragraph two on page 47. So it's just a curiosity. it doesn't really affect our deliberation. So that's your homework for if we take a break or at the end of the meeting you can answer that question. Okay, I think that um takes up my questions. Let's go see if we have public comment and then we'll come back. Okay. Yeah, the the question regarding where the 75% comes from, I think in terms of who determines that, that's probably community development. But um how do you determine that especially given that you know by adding these requirements the I mean a replacement cost is going to go up partly because of these requirements and replacement cost is obviously going to be a lot more than somebody originally paid for the house. Can you address how the 75% is actually calculated?

Typically speaking, uh, mayor, uh, thank you for your question. The 75% would be calculated from the licensed design professional. Um, and the 75%, just so council and mayor, you're aware um that is currently in our Tascadero Municipal Code. Um, it's currently is a provision that was established for when the value of proposed remodel, renovation, repair work to an existing building exceeds 75% of the current valuation for a new building. That's when it'd be applicable. And um the valuation with the conversation with the licensed design professional would only be applicable to things that would require a permit. So, if you're doing addition and you're putting in new carpet and you're doing new flooring and new cabinets, well, those three items don't require a permit. So, those would not be included in the evaluation. that. Okay. And and I assume this applies if your entire house burns down, you know, unrelated to a communitywide wildfire. Your house burns down and you have to rebuild the whole thing, that's automatically going to be greater than 75%.

Yes. That would be considered a new house. And so this would, you know, Yeah. And which is interesting though because I mean even if you had like what you call replacement cost coverage with your insurance, you know, they're going to go, "Well, yeah, but now you're adding all these new features like sprinklers and this and that and the other." And so that would put some people in a bind from uh, you know, adding replacement costs that wasn't part of their coverage. I imagine

it's very common when you get home insurance that it comes along with a provision that uh calls for building code and fire code upgrades. I know I when I got insurance for my home, it includes those provisions. Now, you do have to pay for that. Sure. Upgrade provision, but cost coverage would would acknowledge that there's been changes in Yes, most policies include that. Got it. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and go out to community forum. See if any members of the public would like to comment on this item. Good evening, Council Jeff Osland. Um, Mr. St. James, I have a class A roof on my new buildings question.

Let's let's say that he'll answer that.

Well, it makes a big difference here because if I don't have a class A, that just adds more cost. If it's a class A at this point on the on my project, then it does make sense. I don't believe it is a class A. Secondly, um going forward on this, if I tore my roof off my house and wanted to put a new roof on, would I have to go to a class A in this new regulation? That makes a big difference. U in the other zone, I understand the red zone now would probably in building code require that. Um so I throw that out there. I'm going to give you uh because both of uh these gentlemen have been out to inspect my project. If I wanted to build my project today, it would be $241,000 approximately more than it was three years ago to do this project. We adopted the WOOI in May because the state mandated it. Before that, I think our building codes and our fire codes were pretty up to snuff and we had the flexibility to do what we wanted to do in this city um with our fire code and alterations in our building code to make things make sense. The problem I have with if we adopt this is the state's already come in and said screw you city of Atascadero and every other city in the state. This is what you're going to do. Now, we're adding other costs to other people outside of it. And I have a big problem with that. Our council does speak about trying to keep things less expensive so people can actually live here, work here, maybe remodel their house, maybe build a new ADU. We already have stringent requirements and the state could care less of what we do. So, why are we going to make it any tougher? I have I have issue with that. Um, no different than the roofs. I can tell you right now that if your roof is in

crappy shape, your insurance company requires you to either coat it or pull it off and redo it. This goes on all the time, just like trimming trees and everything else. I have a 12 foot apron that I have to maintain between my trees and my house. If I violate that, my insurance is going to be cancelled. I'm well aware of what the insurance companies do as well. They require a lot and now we're asking for more stuff. I'm concerned about these new adoptions. Um I think they're good, but I also don't want the added increase on it. Um I believe on this it's just going to add more more dollars to people um all the way through um living in a Tascadero. And lastly on the garage door, um I have the rubber things on my doors to uh prevent that uh you know, wind or whatever coming in. I don't believe ambers in a garage door being built today to code would make a difference. Most houses burn down from the vents, from the roof, and other areas. And your garage is going to melt from a fire, not an amber. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Anybody member, any other member of the public wishing to speak on this item,

Chris Towers, again, I just wanted to follow up on his comment about the vinyl stripping. I know for us, we put it on there just for temperature control. It's for part of the title 24, right? to keep the thermal energy down. And I'm just sitting here thinking about an eighth of an inch metal gap. And we're talking because they don't come garage doors don't come with that metal trim on the top. You're going to have to add that unless there's a special Atascadero edition or something from the garage door manufacturer. But, you know, the engineer in me goes, I've got a 20 or standard two-car garage is about 16 feet wide made out of 24 26 gauge sheet metal. I, you know, between 30 degrees at night and 110 during the day, thermal expansion on a piece of metal like that is an eighth of an inch. So, I could almost make the argument that's going to cause more of a safety hazard cuz if that metal expands, now your garage door is stuck and then you can't get out of your house. Which is why, if you remember, we had to put all those battery backups in the garage doors so that during the event of a loss of power, you could still get out of your garage. So, I would make the case you're actually inducing more of a hazard requiring an eighth of an inch metal gap at the top of it.

Okay. Thank you for your comments. Um, okay. Seeing no one else approach, uh, I will bring it back to council and I would comment, uh, that you see from the council questioning that the council does have very much have concern about adding costs to folks. There is a I think something we you know we've learned through seeing some of these large scale fires is um you know requiring greater fire safety also though is is for the entire neighborhood. So that you know your home is not a essentially a source of fuel for spreading the fire in the neighborhood because I think fire folks would would say that in some of these large fires the homes become the fuel for spreading the fire because you're you're in a neighborhood and things are going from house to house. It's the houses that are the fuel, not, you know, not the trees, you know, not the bushes. You maybe for an ignition initial source, but when you're going house to house to house, it's the houses that become the fuel source. And having, you know, better protected homes is partly, you know, a responsibility we're putting on people, I suppose, to say, you know, don't let your home be the source of the, you know, the whole neighborhood burning down. I think, you know, we've expressed a great deal of concern that because I think the question is realistically can we um are there any of these requirements that we could realist realistically uh lighten up on any of these local requirements because obviously we're stuck with what the state requires. It's not within our prerogative to do that. And the state um you know says they're concerned about affordability of housing, but everything the state does makes housing more expensive. So whether it's, you know, fire or energy requirements or this that. So I wouldn't pay attention to what they say on that because they have demonstrated over and over again they don't really care about

the price of housing. Um but locally we do. And so the question is are these local requirements are you know are we comfortable with the additional costs the trade-off between the additional costs they might impose but the but the safety they provide for the you know for individual residents and for neighborhoods as a whole. So that's kind of like to lead off the discussion uh with with council on I see you have mic. So we'll start on my right.

Thank you. I have a couple more questions. Um, I know we're all concerned about fire dangers, but some of the things that I worry about is is having earthquakes and a lot of us don't have earthquake coverage because it's unaffordable, unattainable. So, if we were to sustain in some of these older homes that are unraised, foundations a little bit of damage that ends up causing them to rebuild as well as pay out of pocket to do these additions they've always dreamed of, but then there's no insurance coverage. So now the cost to fix their home and live in that home is three to four times as much. Um, one of the things I also concerned about is is if we're requiring sprinklers um in these remodels over 50%. Because I believe once we modify that we do also require fire sprinklers. Is that correct? the modification for fire sprinklers already exist in our municipal code for additions over 50%.

Okay. So, we already have that requirement. Um, thank you.

I was going to add though also that one of the other things that makes me a little more accepting of some of this is insurance companies are more and more driving some of these requirements anyway. I mean, you want fire insurance, they're going going to want to insure you if you have a class B roof, you know, that sort of thing. It's gone from not just, you know, having discounts, if you will, for enhanced features like sprinklers, uh, to now it's like, you know, they won't cover you if you have some of these conditions. So, in that sense, I feel like we're um you know, we're imposing things that if we don't impose it, your insurance company's going to impose it in some circumstances. So, okay, I'll go council member since

I have one more thing to add. Go ahead.

Our insurance is not a given. The state does not or locally it's very very challenging to get homeowners insurance. You can't even make a change to reduce your premiums without losing your policies. So, a lot of people are foregoing insurance because they can't get it. A lot of people are not doing changes to their policies because they lose that coverage. So, insurance own companies can impose this, but some people are going without insurance. So having that replacement cost is out of pocket which could bankrupt someone if we're adding these additional local amendments that we have flexibility to kind of not make as um unaffordable for anybody that's doing a a small addition on a home that's already a really small square footage.

Council member Funk. Yeah. The uh concern that the mayor and others have expressed is exactly why I pushed back against the request initially that um all seven of the seven or eight or whatever of those new requirements be placed voluntarily by this council on everybody building a new uh property or substantial addition in the moderate fire zone areas. I'm if I'm am I correct in understanding that we do not have the discretion about whether or not those apply in the fire high and and very high fire zone risks, right? Yes, that's correct. We don't have the discretion.

Okay. So the discretion is about the yellow thing which is um a substantial portion of the parcels of the community um of the build of the built the at least the built parcels um that that's where we have discretion and so um I know I continue to be concerned that we if we're going to add additional requirements they've got to have an important community benefit as well as as just you something that we think it would be really smart for you to do this. Um, we can we can educate homers, staff can educate homeowners on on the value of doing all seven of those things, right?

Absolutely. And I might add too, the long-term goal for our community is to become a fires safe community. And all of those things, these provisions that um we have worked on and tried to suggest are getting us closer to being that fire safe community. And that's extremely important to us because that would be a substantial uh reduction in insurance costs long term for the community. I should also point out the other factor here and I I should have um our fire marshall correct me if I'm wrong but it's important to look at the current wild and urban interface too which already has these requirements

and the difference between that map and that yellow zone area. It's not adding the 6,292. It's a different number. So a big portion of the city already has the requirements. Um just the map is changing the states change the maps. um and we're responding to that. So, the reality is the area that's going to require the new improvements is less than what you might see. And the long-term goal and purpose of doing it is really to help us get to a a lower insurance cost and help us get closer in line with what the state's going to require anyway and to help us be fires safe in this new era. So, these are just things to consider. We have taken extreme caution in bringing these forward to you knowing that there are increases to construction in cost.

Yeah. Okay. So I with with those things in mind um I'm fairly comfortable that the much more limited list that came back this time of of what you're asking the council to apply voluntarily um are predominantly things that are either really small investments um or are um w with huge payoffs or uh they are um like the the class A roof something that is pretty universally happening. Anyway, so that I would be, you know, cautiously willing to to go with that this time. Um, and that's that, you know, withdrawing the objection that I raised earlier to applying any of this voluntarily because, you know, we need to be cautious of the cost that that it adds to housing and give people as much choice as possible in what they take on on their properties. Okay, thank you. And before we proceed though, I want to make sure we're on track of where we were. We had fire marshall go through his thing and we had questions.

We're we still have to go through the other section. We still have a building code section to go through. Bruce is anxiously awaiting telling you about that. Back at council on this. We're not in motion mode or anything that. So, go ahead. Uh,

just a couple comments. Thank you, Mr. Dunmore for for clarifying the potential increases in cost, which I don't believe that what anything we're doing is going to make a significant change in the cost of of construction. It's the California building code that's pretty much doing that and most of it's already industry standard anyway. Um, with respect to earthquake insurance, um, I agree with what council member Nuome said, although I would add that the best insurance policy at this point. If you have a an older house that is not, um, seismically seismically stable is to fix that. Go in there and do the seismic upgrades that are necessary. Um I I lived through the Loma Pria quake in up in the Bay Area probably 30 miles from the epicenter in a house that was built in the probably the 70s maybe the 60s and not even a window broke. Okay. So houses that failed buildings that failed would failed because they were on unstable ground um and that caused to sink and crack and break open all that kind of stuff. Um, so houses that were seismically uh attached to the foundation generally didn't didn't have much damage to them at all from what I what I understand. So that's my recommendation on that. But anyway, so far I think I'm good with everything that we've had so far. Thank any further com. Okay, then let's go ahead and Oh, I did have a question though. Mr. Dunmore, you referred to fires safe community. Did we not have a particular neighborhood in our city that became rated as a fires safe community? Because fires safe community doesn't necessarily apply to the entire city at large. Correct. Or can it?

We do. We did have a specific community, Oakidge Estates, that became a firewise recognized community through uh National Fire Protection Association. We have two more communities applying for that right now. But the state also recognizes a fire safe community which is the whole entire uh city that an application has to be made. Um we're waiting for our general plan update to make that application um to become a fires safe community. Okay. They're two two separate things. Got it. Thank you for the clarification. Appreciate it. Okay. Let's move on to the the second aspect of this. Uh believe either Mr. Dunore or Mr. St. John will present this.

All right. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, council members. And then we're going to jump into ordinance B, title 8. I'm going to grab that real fast. So, what is title 24? Just to clarify with everybody real fast for this evening. Title 24 is all of what you see there. And uh Mr. Dunore is gladly showing all those books that I brought that I read right before this meeting this evening. So, I appreciate your patience. Um but Title 24 does include everything. This is what we're considering right now. It also includes, as Mr. Van Sundance spoke, the fire code and the California WOOI code is in there as well. Um, some quick summaries uh or some short key changes overall. Um, we're really excited about the building with the first ever califan the California WOOI um because it did it it is going to make it easier as the reference instead of going to multiple different books to kind of come to conclusions on structures. um they're incorporated to one which is great. But just to cover a couple more key changes, uh one of the other benefits, the California Building Code adopted consistent language with the California Health and Safety Code as it relates to swimming pools, spas, and hot tubs. That would be for both residential and commercial. Uh, another good opportunity for the California Residential Code was the addition of a completely new section for sleeping lofts, which is going to allow for a little bit of flexibility for people that are looking to uh build smaller size structures and having some abilities to um find flexibility in the code to create uh opportunities for additional sleeping areas. Um some of the other more significant changes now the California residential code requires that all utility connections go through the building department. Currently right now with the city of Atascadero they have to get approval for the gas meter release and the electrical meter release. Now u the state is requiring

that they also do uh the water connection. Um some smaller stuff electrical code changes to some similar small things. arc fault breakers, new uh restrictions for energy storage systems, not necessarily restrictions on the systems themselves, but more protections to prevent accidents. Um really minor stuff in the plumbing code and the mechanical code. Um but local amendments that are carrying over uh we made some improvements uh with our off-grid for single family residences which would allow the not having the connection to the utility provider. That circumstance uh when applicable would be actually having the raceway or the conduit that would allow a future property owner to be able to connect to the utility company, but the current one could opt to not have the conductors installed so they can be off-grid. Um tiny homes is something that's kind of advanced a little bit and efficiency dwelling units some more flexibility in the code as it applies to the homes or single family residences under 400 ft. Um, one of the things I would like to clarify that we kind of touched on again is one of the carryovers we we talked about is the applicability for remodel, renovation, and repair to existing buildings. That is where that 75% cost evaluation comes into play. There are some provisions um coming up in the there would be the um existing building code in a in an appendicy in the California residential code for um existing residential units that might allow for some flexibility under certain circumstances or historical homes in nature. Uh we can dive into that later if needed. Um some new local uh amendments. Um, there's a lot more appendices in the new provisions of the California Building Standard Commissions, uh, mostly pertaining to the California Building and the California Residential Code. I listed this year, we listed all of them in specifics with their topics, so it kind

of gives you a better understanding that what we're going to do with them. Um, some more local amendments to the Task Municipal Code. We provided a lot of clarification this year. We we get a lot of questions in the building department like well hey how come this applied to this property but not to this property or why are you enforcing this this way. So we thought it was best to be consistent with most jurisdiction as they update their municipal codes during this time to provide a lot of the provisions of the code that people don't have necessarily access to even though they are available online but there's so many things that are online that might not be an accurate representation of the California building code or California residential code. So, we took those the opportunity to add those specifically so you guys all could take a peek at it or members of the community can as well. Um, but to jump in just to kind of give you a little bit more of example, really excited about this. Um, so what we did is this is appendix P uh in the California building code which references sleeping lofts. There's also an appendicy in the California Residential Code that kind of adopts the same language, but it does provide allowance for and limitations on spaces intended to be used for sleeping lofts. Um the use of ship ship ladders uh for the means of egress and then reduced guard height when the ceiling height is reduced. So that's one of the benefits right now of um not necessarily reducing the provisions of the code but providing flexibility for certain types of structures and certain um sizes of structures. Um we are also going through the residential code there's an appendicy that was not previously adopted. It's BO it's existing buildings and structures. This is in encouraging the continued use or reuse of legally existing buildings and structures. uh it while the new work would have to comply with the new code, the existing conditions can remain under the right circumstances or the right provisions of the code. We kind of touched on that a little bit earlier with a lot of the questions, but uh there are provisions

for that currently with the California residential code. Uh off-grid is another big topic right now. Uh we previously had provisions, but we're including them and kind of elaborating a little further. Um so single family residences without that electrical utility connection are required to have or should have the photovoltaic energy storage systems and backup generators. Um amended sections of the international property maintenance code. Here's a few uh amended sections talk about unlawful acts. A list of what actually declares something to be unlawful or a public nuisance and violations of these codes or ordinances. Unsafe conditions. This helps provide clarity for myself and other staff members in the building department to make determinations when we consider a condition or a circumstance unsafe. Uh and there's some additional information about sidewalks and driveways for property owners and the responsibility remove hazardous conditions. Some of the benefits of some of what is mentioned up on the screen is the opportunity to provide again clarity for members of our community when we do have code enforcement opportunities or uh building inspections. We're trying to enforce provisions of the code. Um, this will make it a little bit easier. It'll be a little readily accessible uh, informationally. Um, post- disaster regulations. I know this topic was brought up a little bit earlier regarding um, earthquakes and our fires. Um, there are certain repair, excuse me. Um, I added there was a section that was added to our municipal code for repair criteria. Uh this section will establish the criteria required to help support and any rebuild efforts due to damage that occurred during a locally declared disaster. We also included information on there as it relates to definitions to help provide support and clarity uh for some of the terms referenced in that uh provision of

the municipal code. Um some additional sections that were added that we're looking forward to get approval on. Um we took some of these provisions here. You'll see these are actually in all the books back there on that beautiful cart, but they were not in our municipal code. So, if somebody had a question regarding scope and intent of the building code, but they were having trouble finding it, or they looked online and they found it, but they didn't realize they were looking at the state of Nevada, we've added these sections, conflicts between requirements, applications, and permits, notices, and orders. My favorite is inspections and inspection requests because it's very difficult to get consistent information out to requesties for inspections. So we have that provision now uh that's been added to the municipal code uh permit expiration limitations and reactivating an expired permit. We provided additional clarity on that which will make it more consistent for when people call the front counter any department for that matter or if you folks are asked a question you can see in the municipal code what is the actual provisions that talk about uh permit expirations and reactivating expired permits. Um, also location of permits and plans on job sites. I know we have this recommendation slide here, but really what's supposed to be here is a question slide. So, we're open now for your questions. That concludes our presentation from both building and fire. And um but our final recommendation will be to introduce both the draft ordinance A to approve amendments title 4 and introducing draft ordinance B which uh improve the amendments to title 8 building code and 2025 California building codes. Thank you.

Yeah, I feel like we'll have less questions on this part, but we'll see. Um, I have a very quick question for you on page 60 and and you mentioned this in the slides, but on page 60 it says the minimum size for a tiny house is not to be less than 300 square feet. And and this stuff is applicable to things that are 400 less than 400. So, it's only applicable between three and 400. But it says it shall be noted that a tiny house is not an efficiency dwelling unit as defined in the building code. And you mentioned efficiency dwelling unit on the slides. What is an efficiency dwelling unit and how does it differ from either a tiny house or a regular house?

Thank you, mayor, for that question. Um, I'm going to pull out a provision of the code real fast to read it for you. But in short, um, in the California, uh, building standard commissions, what they allow is an efficiency dwelling unit is there's a restriction on what is the minimum required area or square feet for particular residents or occupants based on what is required for one person, two, three or four people. So efficiency dwelling unit would be a residence that would be constructed when allowed that would not have more than two occupants. So it would start with a 120 ft minimum size for like a the sleeping room with an additional 70 ft for the inclusion of uh storage uh bathroom and kitchen facilities based on the architectural layout or design. So the difference between that is a tiny house um with the requirements cannot be less than a efficiently dwelling unit but doesn't have the actual occupant number that's restricted and

it sounds like a tiny home can be between three and 400 square feet. So an efficiency dwelling unit can be even smaller um based on what you described. So go I didn't know what they were. Okay, thank you. I'll start on my left. Any questions? Yeah, quick one. Uh thank you Bruce. the maintenance. When talking about maintenance and the discretion on safety or maintenance meaning just out and about town seeing something that's unsafe on someone's property or is it um can you clarify what you what it what it means by maintenance as it pertains to your department?

Thank you, council member, for that question. Um I'm trying to go back right now when uh maintenance was referenced and there are some provisions about sidewalks uh in the international property code um as it relates to maintenance. So that's just the reference of the standard. So the international maintenance or property maintenance code is the California health and safeties code's way of enforcing substandard living conditions. So maintenance would be like if somebody failed to maintain a structure so it became the structural components came became dilapidated or the structure was at a circumstance where it could fail uh during a seismic event or if there they didn't accurately maintain a water distribution system so there wasn't adequate water to faucets or water closets or showers. So that's where the the maintenance reference would come from. I think when when we were going over that slide, there was a comment on uh giving us a little bit more leniency to be more use our own judgment when it comes to those items moving forward. That's why I was kind of wondering how would we know unless we're inspecting someone's property because they're doing some other work or it's a code enforcement thing or um if just observable from the street like what are we what are we being more lenient on judgment wise when it comes to this this stuff

or I assume tenant complaints would drive drive some of that. Yeah. So typically our access to property is going to be related to two functions. that's going to be permit building permit related or code enforcement related.

But in terms of council member Pig's base question of how would we know, I'm picturing that tenant complaints would drive that sometimes where in other words, hey, my I've told my landlord there's mold everywhere or you know the beams holding up the back patio are broken or something. that is would that be something that would come into play here that then we're saying okay Mr. property owner you are not maintaining this property in a safe manner? Yeah, that could be from a tenant. It could be from an actual property owner themselves. It could be from adjacent property. Um any concern that is submitted to the city uh would be looked into.

Okay. Some of you could look over your back fence and say, "Hey, my neighbor's porch is about to collapse and their kids are playing under it all every day." Something like that. That's a really good question, mayor. So from our perspective, we would investigate uh a complaint like that from the property at which uh the complaintant um requested us to, but we would not be able to pursue it too much without actually being able to see the issue from the public right away unless we went and approached that property owner and asked permission to enter into their property.

Thank you. Any other question? So then the discretion would be, you know, if you're going somewhere to investigate a complaint or you can see it, there would be the possibility to go, we're not going to worry about this and walk away. Are we going to be we see something, we do it. So where does the judgment come into I mean, am I the only one that heard that when we were explaining it where there's a little bit more judgment? We're able to exercise a little bit more judgment. I know judgment was the right word but discretion maybe was the was the word. I'm not recalling that at this time. Do you remember the slide at which was referenced? Yeah, it was the slide that the word maintenance was on the top of it.

Oh, there you go. Go back the other direction. Back up one there. Yeah. Property maintenance code unsafe conditions provides clarity for the building official to determine unsafe conditions. Does that mean we're going to be more by the book or was that more of a a a general judgment call? Grace like giving a little bit more grace to the building official.

That was just a short synopsis of what the California Health and Safety Code considers as unsafe conditions. So without instead of just providing the whole list of them, I just use that as a quick reference. So it' be consistent with the California Health and Safety Code, which would be consistent with generally speaking things that are fire life safety related. Yeah. Yes. But I would still have a discretion. That's correct.

Okay. Any other questions from council? Yeah, just to comment on the previous not the previous well the one you had up there the municipal code. I wanted to thank you um Mr. St. John for recommending that uh to be in the municipal code even though it might be redundant locations but this is going to be really helpful for a lot of people looking stuff up including myself when I have to go look for something. This will be great. So thank I think it's going to be a great addition um for a reference. Thank you.

Okay with that. Oh, do you have another question? U couple things. One, I want to uh second council member Daryus's note that that uh to the extent to which this was discretionary of staff to do all this work to bring it in together. Yes. Thank you. Uh anything we can do to make it easier for people to get it right the first time and know what's expected of them. We just heard from a property owner tonight how frustrating it is when the rules seem to be changing and they don't know why and they don't know what's expected and and those frustrations mount really quickly. So hopefully this will be that good and reflect um things that that staff has noticed. Uh along those lines, uh could you just mention briefly what are the most common things that people think and don't I just want to do this and they don't think it requires them a permit, but it actually does.

Absolutely. Um detach accessory structures to a limit unlimited size or additions to their single family residence to house water heater closets, exterior laundry rooms. Those are probably some of the most common.

Okay. Thank you. Just good to educate folks. And then last, in the the items that you've presented, differentiating between what you presented and and the discretionary items that Mr. Vansone presented, um, is any of this discretionary for the council? I mean, we basically th the the when the state adopts new building codes, they go into effect and we either put them into our code and make it easier for people or we're bound by them anyway, right? Is there any discretion here? A lot of the items that were added or introduced to be approved for the task municipal code would be at your discretion for approval. So they are additions to they're not applying provisions of the code to certain areas but just more or less um providing additional clarity. There is one provision that was um introduced in the municipal code that actually allows the um foundation sizes for structures previously adopted. that it was any structure under 1,000 square feet or less could um provide a letter of sight suitability in lie of a soils report. And so what we did is we took that and actually applied it to three different sizes of structure. So somebody trying to build a 250 square foot detach accessory storage shed doesn't have the same requirement that somebody is trying to build a thousand square foot uh massive metal steel structure. Yeah. So there would be money that can be saved on the construction cost and for uh the licensed design professional or engineering or soils reports.

Okay. So the things in in here that make things more efficient that help people save money and that co pull in stuff that's already in these state and international codes that people are you are bound by anyway to get them all in one place so that people can comply better. That's essentially the summary of what we're doing here. Yes, that's correct. Okay. Thank you. Okay, Council Ben, have any questions?

Um, since we're making it clarifying this for the public, um, if you look at the list of ignition resistance and it talks about the materials, where do they get that information that says under floor and eve protection must use the enclosed materials? Do we have a list here at the city that we can provide of what all of that is if they want to? Council member, do you mind providing the page number? What's your page 24? A major focus of the ignition resistance. You know, it's back in part A, part B. It's I think we've all blended it together, right? Yeah, that's ordinance A, but

especially because we're incorporating these changes into the building code. Um, so it talks about underfloor and eve protection. ignition resistant materials. Where do we get those lists? I'm gonna start with the response and then I'll allow uh Dave Anson to take it over. But those are the different code sections that are listed primarily in the California building code, California residential code, but now combined in the California wildland urban interface.

Okay. So, if we're trying to be a little bit more proactive as homeowners and we want to implement these without making changes, but we also want to reference as we go to make changes, what's an easy instead of all of these books over here, what's an easy material that we can provide? Do we have this on our site website? So actually in the code in the code it specifically sets what what I presented tonight is just a synopsis of what it is but in in the code under underside projections it lists one through eight different types of of materials that can be used but we can do we can we are putting together a um a handout for WOOI compliance that will be available for contractors and homeowners um to tell them what type of material or what needs to be done um under those recommendations.

Perfect. And then it makes it a little bit easier. We don't have to figure out what page and what part we're looking at. And then um Mr. Bo uh Orbo spoke about turnarounds. Sorry, things gets really loud. Um turnarounds. That's for new builds. That isn't something that has to be done for existing flag lots that he was speaking about. Correct. That's correct. And and we take it on a case-byase basis with auxiliary dwelling units as well. Um depending on the square footage and and um how far the actual flag lot is um if we would require them to to uh modify or adjust their driveway. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. With that we will go out to to your quick followup. Okay. on this list of things that was mentioned about permits and what what people are what you need a permit for. There's a lot of things that people do that they don't realize. Now, if you're adding an addition to your house, you should know that. Okay? But but right, people will do. It's just a bedroom, so I'm just going to add only a couple hundred square feet. They should know better than that. But there are some things that people, you know, if they're replacing their windows, I got single pane windows and I want to put dual pane in there. I'll just take them out, put new ones in there. I'm doing a good thing, but they don't realize they need a permit. um a re- roof. You mentioned the water uh water heater. Um a lot of I know I've heard a lot of stories people putting up perglas over their patio. It's just a pergola. It doesn't have, you know, I'm still going to get wet in the rain, so it doesn't have an actual roof on it, so I shouldn't need a permit, but that's not true. If something like that was in here, I don't know if it is. I It's probably under frequently asked questions. I don't know if it is, but I think if that's not in here, you know, a list of a lot of the basic things that people do without a permit, it would be good to have that list to say, yes, you need a permit for for these items that if it's not in there,

I think there's no more under how you structure. Is that something that's in there now or is that So with uh with the amendments made to the municipal code, there is a portion of it that talks about work exempt for the permit. And then I did list all 13 provisions in the code that specify what specifically does not require a permit.

And then on in regards to roofs, there is a provision that was added to clarify at what point a re-roof permit would be required based on the amount of square foot in terms of a repair or replace was also included just for clarity. Okay. If if I'm sorry if I didn't if I missed it in here, but is if somebody was to, you know, replace windows, they need a permit. Is there someplace in there that where there's a that they would be able to find that or does, you know, if they're going to say, "Do I need a permit for to replace my windows?" Would they look in here and find something that say, "Yes, you do." Or no, it's the it's the other way around, council member. It says everything that does not require permit. That's what I thought.

Yeah. Okay. Okay, now we're going to go out to see if we have any public comment on this item. Both pieces of this item, I'd say. Good presentation. I have a couple uh couple questions and comments. Um my understanding the state of California does allow a tiny home to be up to 500 square feet. And I also understand that a lot of the 400 square feet are towed in on wheels and that's why they're 400 square feet and after the fact now they're doing 100 square ft expansion pop out on them. Uh I actually have seen them built that way now. So I just want to make sure that we're not downragging our regulation to 400 square feet if it is possible for 500 square feet. The other comment that I have in the general um process here is the gentleman over here has been trying to get his permit for three years and we're adding more fees and more regulations on that. So going back to January 1st, retro doesn't make sense to me. It should be uh a time frame that's reasonable for anybody else applying for new permits or whatever would have to meet all the new codes that are um by our city, not by state. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Any other public comment on this item? Okay, we'll bring it back to council. I do want to ask that question though. Um the tiny house is different than I mean we have ADUs. The state has rules like under 750 you don't charge fees etc. We're we're talking about a minimum well we're talking about the minimum size of a tiny house is 300 but we say this particular appendix is applicable to SFRs that are

less than 400. Is there a tiny home definition minimum somewhere or are we are we saying it's 400 and above that's not tiny. I can provide that for you here momentarily. But the reference typically speaking to a tiny home, a home is a home. Tiny home is just applying certain provisions of the code to minimize how much square footage is required per occupant. So you could build a 600 foot tiny home technically speaking, but would be but it's also a 600 foot could also be a home. But I'll provide the definition here.

Okay. Yeah. because I mean it says this particular appendix applies to single family residences that are less than 400. Um but then says a minimum is 300. So okay, we'll let you pull out the big binder. I want to bring it back to council then and see if we have uh discussion on where we want to go here. We you know the going back to the staff recommendation is that we adopt both draft ordinance A and draft ordinance B. Now, both of these repeal and replace in their entirety in the one case, title four and the other case, title eight, which did make it a little hard to read because we couldn't just read changes, you know, like red marked up changes like we do sometimes. Um, but I'll open it for discussion andor motion from council. Any

I'll make a motion that we uh approve the recommendations um as stated one and two. Okay. Got it. To adopt, you mean to adopt draft A ordinance A and B as correct. Got it. Okay. Do we have a second of that motion and we'll discuss?

Okay. So, we have a motion by council me or mayor promander, a second by council member Funk. Before we vote, I want to open it up to discussion. Any discussion? I think that the the 50% I'm still going back and forth with like the the determination there. I think the smaller the house, the more that's going to be a burden on the homeowner that's remodeling. You know, I don't know if there's a way to, you know, the larger the footprint of the house, the less likely you're going to be doing 50% or more addition or remodel to the home. But I just I liken it back to, you know, my first two houses were thousand square feet and 500 square feet is not that big of an addition in the grand scheme of things. And so I just think that there's there's got to be some sort of break or um so I'm just kind of wanted to see if that anybody wants to discuss something like that if there's any sort of uh leniency on the council for making that less

well less strict.

I understand where you're going. I would like to ask staff then as to in terms of how would you either word or frame that in the sense would you say that you know below a certain size you know, you can have a sliding scale or whatever because it's it's kind of I understand conceptually where you're going with that, but how do you do that? And the other thing would be, you know, do we are there different categories as we go these square footage levels in terms of the way this is written at 300 or 400 or 750 or whatever where um they enter into a different category in terms of what's applicable. Anyway, that's a really good question. It would be probably project specific. For example, somebody can do addition but not modify a lot of the stuff on the interior of the structure or they can do an addition that would be considered a garage. There's just a wide variety of applicability in how we would apply the codes. So the 50% was to kind of go off of that 75% cost evaluations, what we'd consider a new home, but it would be very specific to each particular project. Dave, I don't know if Mr. Vansson, if you'd like to add on to that.

Yeah, we were just looking at um similarities within the municipal code on our sprinkler ordinance. That's where uh the 50% um came with that. And I don't know um like mayor stated, I don't know how we would do that on a rolling scale based on different square footage um of the home. So it was it was clear and and easy to understand um and easy to u enforce the code at the 50% um rather than a a a rolling scale. Understand? Thank you, council member.

Yeah. Couldn't Couldn't you just do something that it's you know the requirement is the greater of 800 square feet or 50% of the uh addition of the home if it exceeds that amount instead of the current one is just 50% if it exceeds 50%. And all you have to do is say if it exceeds uh the greater of 800 square feet and throwing that out there is

but I think that you're also only looking at an addition right because there's two parts there's an addition and the valuation for someone who's so we're not just talking an addition I mean we're there's two parts to the code so the 50% is for an addition but there's also if someone's doing um rehab to the Right. Because then that's where the 75% trigger comes in. So then it's only talking about So we only care about the addition. Yeah. That we're okay with 75%

addition and trying to make that for starting with square feet that are small. Um may just have a a hurdle to to apply that. Um and it's clear in the language that was shown on the screen. um that the 50% criteria is specific to additions and the valuation criteria is specific to um to updates and other renovations alterations. Yeah. I just want I had heard council member Peak mention earlier that he was concerned about both. So I wanted to make sure

I was concerned about both. But the more I think about it, it's going to be more tough to meet 75%. If you're just altering like like consider my last the house I'm in now, I just did the whole inside remodel. I didn't expand the footprint. I just completely did everything inside. It was nowhere near 75% of the replacement value of the house. Um, but then if you do a remodel or an addition on the home, not a remodel, if you do an addition on a home and you're like me and I could live in a box and have a fivecar garage, um, would that be would that be included? That's more than 50%. Um, you know, just there's certain it just see it just seems like I'm having the roof like the the gradea roof is is fine, you know, like there's certain things that I'm like totally on board with, but replacing a roof on a 1500 foot house is like 15 to $20,000, but then you trigger, okay, now I got to do all the siding on my house to Hardy board or stucco. If it's stucco, L and plaster, you're in the 30 to $35,000 range. Then maybe you got to paint. If you do Hardy board, it's 20,000. and then you got to paint it for 10 and just you you just become like this like monster of making the whole outside of your house fireproof and it could easily be a $50 to $70,000 addition to your master on suite add-on that's already $200,000, right? So, it just makes me very nervous to just add all these extra costs. Um, and I understand the fire safety. I'm not I just it's just a matter of um it's just going to encourage people not to improve their properties which doesn't improve the assessment value of their property which just I don't know I think there's a point at which though you know you got to draw a line somewhere and and the only potential modification I would see would be something along the lines of what

council member Funk suggested but that' be on a smaller home you apply a minimum minimum square footage or maximum square footage. In other words, if if you're doing over 50% or um more than 500 square feet or whatever, whichever is greater um you know, so that if you have a 800 foot home, you know, we allow you to do more than 50%, let's say, uh slightly more, but but a fairly small number because I don't I mean, you know, modifying a thousand square foot home or, you know, 800 square home by another 500 ft is a pretty significant change in the structure. So in that sense I I feel okay with a percentage because while granted it's only might be one room or something it's a pretty significant change because I mean I our first house in town was 900 square feet um you know wood siding built in 1930 probably a fire trap you know but um you know adding 500 feet would have changed the entire um you know sense of that of that home. So I mean I'm comfortable with with with 50% but if you are insistent I would suggest something along the lines of of you allow them to do a certain square footage or 50% which you know whichever is greater would be the trickery triggering point for the new requirements. I you know I'd be willing to amend that if as a seconder to that effect and and we can revisit this after we've had this code for a bit um and have staff can come back and let us know hey as we work with this you know you've got

this kind of thing that gets you know what falls into this little trap that doesn't make sense to you to require this but actually technically does. Um if we find that that projects um that are you know falling into that then um we then it should come back to council so that we can all move down the learning curve with how to do this you know as we're trying to balance how do we keep our communities safe and how do we make it affordable for people to live here. I think I would just point out that a a big reason why I think this discussion was brought up between fire and building was one to make it a consistent application across the board for these types of builds and then two from what they have seen and learned from the most recent fires that occurred in LA and where those fires were occurring those homes were not in the high and very high right so the embercast and those homes that were burning were in moderate or regular build and so those were the homes that were then burning to the ground. So I think what fire was looking at was we're already applying this in our codes for other areas. Why not look at applying it in these moderate areas as well when we're talking about largecale additions or renovations to homes that then harden the home that then protect the community at large in the neighborhoods where then an ember cast. So if you have a thousand foot house and you've now added a 500 foot addition, then the entire home now has that protection which then doesn't allow ember casting to the next. Because if like um fire marshall Van mentioned, if that non if that ember cast comes, it doesn't matter that your 500 square foot

house has that that section has been hardened, your entire house is going to burn. So that's what they were trying to just sort of put something in that's consistent and that shows learning from other fires. So if if we'd like to kind of wait on that and see how many applications we're getting in over the next couple of years in homes within those moderate and then readress it at that point. That's what we can do. But I think I just wanted to sort of point out what the logic behind was that. It wasn't to increase cost. It was to protect the community at large. Mayor, can I add one more? Oh, yeah. Go ahead.

That um my department and my building official also tells me that in almost all cases of someone doing a massive addition to their house, more than 50% of the floor area, they all almost always replace their entire exterior siding, trim, and roof at the same time to match what they're doing. So, it's just something to keep in mind. It's very rare that someone do an addition with that percentage and and keep an old portion. It could happen, but it's very rare.

Understand? I mean, I'm hesitant to to to, you know, pause on this and say, you know, bring it back. I on the other hand, you know, whatever we impose, that is the requirement on applicants until we do otherwise. But I'd like to we have a motion in a second and um I know you were willing to modify but you know I'd like to call the question and have us vote on the thing as is and our concerns are noted and like you staff to um keep that in mind as you see the process going forward. So

yes, I just like to say thank you, Miss Christristen, for the the clarification on that and I would rather not amend my motion. Okay. So with that, I'd like to go ahead and call the question and ask for a roll call on the motion as is. Council member Funk, yes. Council member Nuome, yes. Council member Peak, yes. Uh, Mayor Promarez, yes. Mayor Borbo, yes. Motion passes unanimously.

Okay, thank you. That was a long item H2. Our next item is item I1, but I think we need to take a very short break since we've gone on longer than I thought. So, let's make it uh 8 minutes. We'll be back at 8:35.

He said 8:35. I believe it is now 8:36. Oh yes, we're a minute late. Returning from break here. And we are going to proceed to item I1. And this is a zoning code update. Permits and process policy discussion led by Mr. Phil Dunmore, I believe. or Kelly. He can delegate.

Thank you, mayor. Thank you, council. All right. Well, I'm going to basically start tonight off by saying this is kind of the beginning of a a little bit of a marathon run. You've heard a little bit about the general plan over the last few months. You're going to hear a lot more about the zoning and the general plan over the coming months as we get into the home stretch of adopting both of these very substantial documents. Tonight, we're going to kind of introduce the first of several sections of the zoning. The zoning has so much to it, we want to break it up in individual pieces. We're not going to be asking you for an action tonight, but we do want to introduce um some basic things and kind of outline what's to come in the future. but we're also kind of going to get through some descriptions of some components of sort of the basic outline of how the the new zoning code format is going to go and um some of the things that we're going to be doing in terms of process and entitlement improvements. Now, we're very fortunate tonight we have our consultant uh with MIG Genevieve who's going to be online kind of giving you some of the details. We'll get to that in a little bit, but uh let's take a look um kind of where we are right now. It's February 10th and we're really what we're in study session one of the zoning. We're going to come back to you on March 10th with another study session on zoning. We'll talk about um another module such as mixed use and then again March 24th, then again on April 14th. Now, sprinkled in throughout this time is also going to be some discussion on the general plan. Basically, it gets us to final adoption um and certification of the EIR by June. So, it's a fairly aggressive schedule. We're finally in that home stretch. As you know, over the last year, we've been working on in the background on the environmental impact report, on the final sections of the

general plan, and on this draft zoning, uh, to get us to the point where we're at today. So, I think at this point, we're going to turn it over to Genevie, our consultant, and I think if we do a little technology, we can get her online. Here she is. She's been waiting hours to to speak with us. Thank you, Genevie. Great. Thank you so much. Um, and I'm excited to be here tonight. I actually cannot see the slide that we are on in the view that I have. Um, so I might need a little bit of of assistance in that, but I assume you're on the slide that says objectives and outcomes. Um, and we can go to the next slide, which should have three numbers on it. Oh, yes, now I can see it. That's better. Thank you. Um, so we've identified and good evening mayor, council, and staff. Thanks for having me tonight. We've identified three kind of main pro uh objectives for the zoning code part of the project. Um, and the first is really linked to the general plan. Um, as we're doing the general plan, the general plan has these new, as you know, um, place types and new policies. The zoning code is a direct implementation measure of the general plan. Um, so we want to achieve consistency with all the new policies and place types that you're developing. Second, we really want to make the code easier to use. Um, that key to that is reformatting it and using really clear language. Um, everyday language that anyone can understand. And third, we want to build on the work that has been done over the last few years to really try and streamline the entitlement process. Next slide. So the zoning code, as I said, is a really it's it's directly implemented um and directly linked to the general plan and it's a direct implementation action of that new general plan. The zoning

code goes into a lot more detail. The general plan, you know, is inherently more general. The zoning code sets up the structure though for how projects can get built both from listing the development standards and the process that goes into when an applicant comes in and um is seeking an an entitlement. Um so if the discretionary permit is not required, the zoning code also lists those development standards that have to be followed in order to get that ministerial building permit approval. Next slide. So, as you're all aware, the general plan has these new land use place types, and the the zoning code takes those place types and translates those into zoning districts. Multiple zoning districts might exist within a single general plan place type as as you see here in the rural residential and single family residential place types. Uh the new general plan will also include two separate mixeduse place types which then translate into six different mixeduse zoning districts. And we'll discuss that as Phil mentioned in more detail in the next um study session we see in March. The new commercial and industrial place types will also correlate with unique zoning districts um as will the agriculture, public and conservation place types. So the result of this is a zoning map that directly implements the general plan types. The second objective is really to increase transparency and predictability for anyone who uses the zoning code. The most probably visible aspect of this effort will be a complete reorganization of the code to make it more intuitive so we can find things more easily in the code. Um but alo also with a focus on on brevity and and ease and understanding. And then our third objective is really building on that good streamlining work the city has already started um with

projects that were adopted in 2024 for objective design standards and SQA thresholds for certain environmental conditions. Um this project is really trying to build on those successes um and incorporate consistent timelines and align processes uh for various entitlements. So, one of the most important parts of zoning code update, even if it's really boring, is reorganizing the code into a structure that makes sense. So, the existing code has not been comprehensively updated since it was adopted back in 1983. And as time went on, new chapters had to be added um as state laws changed and circumstance changed and they didn't always have a logical place to go. There just wasn't space left in uh the existing code. So, new chapters were added kind of at the end um to respond to changes over time. This project will reorganize chapters to allow for more logical placement now. So, we're going to put those in the right place, but also allow for amendments over time to kind of slot into the right locations. So, the proposed zoning format is in these kind of eight chapters, and as amendments come, they can slide in to these placements. One of the key aspects of that will be adding kind of an additional level in the organizational structure um called the article level. So there's there's eight chapters proposed in the zoning code. Um and then there's this article level that some chapters in the m municipal code use really well and some of them don't. And we're going to embrace the article um because it having that extra layer of um of kind of hierarchy really helps with organization. Um, a lot of the times in the code right now that article might be used, but we don't have a separate number that then you can put everything under that number so that you're not

running out of numbers moving forward. So, this is going to allow for amendments to be located in the right place from a numbering perspective. So, it'll be a great improvement. So, chapters six and seven in the new zoning code are going to cover processes and entitlement procedures. So, we want to go over these um couple of chapters with you tonight. There are pretty minor changes that are proposed in these chapters. In general, um administrative procedures can be kind of vague or confusing and and really just kind of affect development. They're frustrating for users. They're frustrating for staff. Um so, the new zoning code is really being written with a goal of implementing really clear and predictable procedures that avoid confusion for both applicants and staff. and then result in predictable outcomes. So, in recent years, the city's adopted a variety of changes to procedures, some to implement new state law requirements like SB9 and density bonus and ADU law. Um, as well as the housing accountability act. Um, and then the city's also proactively updated procedures like the SQA thresholds for hillsides, historical areas near creeks um to have a really clear process for development for those projects. So the new chapter 6 builds on that good existing work and ex- it organizes all of the entitlements and processing procedures into one place. So we're also leaving space in our new numbering system for amendments to integrate within the existing structure rather than leaving everything to tack on at the end. So we use an an odd an even numbering system so you can slot things in over time. the proposed changes to processes and procedures chapter. They're really fairly minor even though there's a lot of words on this slide. Um but they generally formalize existing processes that are already kind of um department

policies. Um and um we just really want to clearly outline them in the zoning code to make it um clear what's expected of applicants. So for instance, the current fee schedule has a number of items that aren't mentioned in the zoning code. So, this draft proposes to better align the fee schedule with sections in the zoning code so that people know what they're what they're being charged for and what the what the requirements are for those particular things. So, for instance, we've got two new sections uh for one is for ministerial review of business licenses, which will be called a zoning clearance um and the other is for review of building permits to ensure compliance with zoning regulations. The current code also doesn't list the process that an applicant has to go through for certain um certain entitlements and certain permits. So alcohol licenses are not referenced. While we have standards for plan developments and specific plans and general plan amendments and development agreements, we don't actually list the process right now in the code. So we want to be clear like what is the process that someone has to go through to go to make that application happen. So, the new code will articulate what that process is. Um, and that's consistent with what the city's already been doing. Uh, it's just making it really clear for everyone. Um, similarly with temporary use permits, currently temporary events are covered by largely by department policies. So, adding this into the entitlements and process section of the zoning code really just helps provide clear direction for applicants on the required process and any required performance standards. One other change to note, currently uh a native tree permit for a heritage tree goes directly to city council because the planning commission is a recommending body for city council and we've kind of listed that really clearly in the zoning code. Uh we want to be

consistent with all of the permits that do that same process. So, we would recommend that uh the native tree permit for a heritage tree instead of skipping straight to city council makes a stop at planning commission for their recommendation before getting to city council. So, the new entitlement processes chapter is going to include tables to really clearly articulate who is the responsible review authority for these various actions. Um, with regard to legislative actions, the process is going to be outlined to show that the community development director is responsible for review of of these pieces with the exception of development agreements um, which are reviewed by the city manager's office and then the planning commission recommends and the city council will act to approve or deny the action. So, these are all processes that are currently undertaken. We're just consolidating them in one place, making them really clear and um but no change to to review authority or process or proposed for other entitlements that don't require city council approval. The new tables will clearly outline who is the review authority um with the the community development director responsible for acting on precise plans, administrative use permits, and temporary use permits and the planning commission acting on variances, conditional use permits. This is the same as current process today. No changes are proposed. The table continues with other various entitlements that are acted on largely by the community development director. Generally, ministerial actions uh with the exception of native tree permit reviews. Uh and there's no change proposed to the non-heritage tree permits. Um just that one that I mentioned um with regard to the the heritage trees making a stop at at planning commission before council with regard to design review. We'd like to be more clear about what the process

is at various levels and again align directly with the fee schedule for the different types of review. So we want to use the same ter terminology in the code and in the fee schedule. So, and kind of how people generally refer to these entitlements to eliminate confusion for applicants. There's no real changes to the overarching process that are proposed. The same projects that go to DRC today would go to DRC in the future. Um, but for instance, the master plan of development uh isn't really talked about in the zoning code, but we've got it in the fee structure. Um, so we want to codify that existing practice. One minor change would be to make the the process for for what we've termed the design review modifications. So these are um kind of a deviation from the general code standards. And today we have a lot of these scattered throughout the code. Um and they're largely approved with an administrative use permit process. But it's not really a use related approval. It's about allowing a slightly different development standard. For example, one uh example in the code now is that um in single family dwellings, you can uh ask for an additional five feet in height um with approval of an administrative use permit. But the findings for an administrative use permit don't really make sense for that kind of an approval. So, we'd like to create this process that links deviations from development standards with the appropriate findings through this other process. So, we're it's really kind of a parallel approval process doing the same kind of thing just with the right findings associated with them. This also allows for an avenue for design review modifications to deviate from objective design standards that were adopted in 2024. Uh with regard to chapter 7, this one

covers the administrative procedures that apply across the board. This is appeals, noticing, hearings, um, and entitlement procedures after they've been approved. In general, the processes and procedures remain the same as existing code describes. Key changes are really identified to be more efficient and to formalize some existing policies. Specifically, from an efficiency standpoint, we propose to make a minor change to hearings that the community development director oversees. So this is currently um AOPS and precise plans and it would include that design review modifications that would go to the the director as well. So currently the director if if a project comes for one of these the director would notice the project and the notice includes a hearing date and time um and then the director holds that hearing and makes the action. But often no one shows up for that hearing um as you know they can um either they they support the project or they can call staff ahead of time get their questions answered and feel no need to come to the hearing. So um because they're not hugely attended um and to be more efficient we propose to notice the project and um in that notice say you can request a hearing and if you would request the hearing we'll hold the hearing otherwise we won't hold the hearing. So just to save time, money, not hold um unnecessary hearings, that's the the proposal that we recommend there. There's also some larger projects where staff has found that um kind of a larger than standard 300 foot radius is um important and warranted. So particularly for for general plan amendments, zone zoning map amendments where the kind the use of the property is really potentially going to change. Um so the new code proposes to codify that larger radius for for mailing notices when this type of project is proposed. Um really looking to make

greater transparency for the surrounding neighborhood. And also we just want to note in the new code that the director could make a larger than standard um noticing radius at any time to you know if it's a if it's a important issue um we just want to codify that the director could do that in the interest in the community. A few final changes to note. Um, the current code has an existing entitlement expiration for DRC approvals that's only one year, but everything else is 2 years. We want to make sure everything's consistent. All entitlements should expire after two years so that nothing is confusing. It's much easier to enforce and um and to uh less confusing for applicants. And then finally, if an applicant wants to amend an existing entitlement, currently if it's really minor, it's done at the director level as a finding of consistency, we want to codify that practice. um which is currently a department policy. Um and then major amendments certainly go back to the original entitlement application procedure going back to the review authority um to review anything major. So tonight we don't really have any specific options for you to consider because these changes are pretty minor with the really big item being the total kind of reorganization of the code. Um largely the effort associated with these chapters is about formalizing existing processes and ways we can try and make it a little easier to apply and process entitlements in a task. So I'm here for any questions you might have.

Okay. Thank you. I'm going to start on my left. Council member Peak. Any questions? What's a heritage tree? Excellent question. And how old does it have to be? And who determines that?

I can answer that, Genevie. We actually have an established list of heritage trees. And for example, they include the Dod Cedars and Sunken Gardens Park, the large uh Coast Live Oaks that line East Mall and West Mall, the sycamores along Atascader Avenue, I think to name, that's pretty much all of them. There's a few others in town, but basically heritage trees are trees that were planted at the time of the origin of the city of Atascadero uh back in the era of EG Lewis. And they're trees that have significant prominence in the community. Not just really age, but they're so not just like really big oak trees on my property that have been there for 300 years. No, there's a very specific list and they're all within um close to downtown.

Not cutting them down. I'm just wondering about that. Yeah. Okay, there is I'm gonna follow up on that one. We're on a roll with follow-ups. So, if a heritage tree, which we've had a couple of them now in sunken gardens that have died and been taken out, is replaced with another tree, is it still considered a heritage tree?

That question has not ever been asked. It has to have some heritage behind it to become a heritage. Takes a long time. Well, we're replacing one. I would think that, you know, we would want it to live on, but okay, that makes sense either way. Um, question I had. Um, Genevieve, great job. You covered a ton of stuff really quickly. Um, there was a couple of slides that showed um where the decision- making was be was taking place. Uh, yeah, these here, there was one in particular that caught my attention and and then I just I'll ask I'll ask a question specifically on that one. It had to do with with zoning variance changes being done at the planning commission level and not city council. And I Yeah. Is that is that or is any of these changed or these all existing the way we're doing them now?

This is the existing process. Um so no changes are proposed there. Okay. So, all of these that are on these charts that on these few slides are all they're all currently nothing's changing on any of these. Correct. Yes. Okay. It's just that one caught my attention and I didn't know if that was if that was a current way that was done. Thank you very much. That's all I have. Okay. Thank you. I I will have some questions but I'll wait till I get to the end. So, Council Member Funk.

Yeah. for uh could you go back a few slides to the the diagram that was essentially a flow flowchart that went back a little fast for me and I wanted to keep going not not the cartoon which I was al there what next simplify and streamline review okay so the um just walk us through this again you've got um multifamily residential or mixed use for projects and they either go to a permit review that's exempt or they go to planning commission if they need SQA right planning commission CUP. Yes. So this process is actually the process that was set up when the objective design standards project was adopted um back in 2024. So it set the thresholds for review of um housing projects at these thresholds. So if you have greater than 40 50 units or more, you do go through the planning comm commission process which is uh a discretionary process. Less than that goes through the the clear process assuming you're you're following all of the objective design standards. We've also got that process where if you choose not to follow all those standards, you can go through a modification process which is is discretionary.

Okay. So the code code standards that you're referencing there are the objective design standards we worked on that are related to the design as opposed to say building code or other things. Correct. Yes. Okay. and going through first of all kudos that simplify streamline make it easier to find stuff for everybody to comply a ton of work it's am I correct in understanding that this code is functionally has the same structure that it's had since the city was incorporated

largely yes we zoning codes tend to have a a kind of natural state of being um the tricky tricky part I think with your quote and it was set up that way um back in in 1983. The tricky part is as amendments happen placeholders were not left to allow those to slot into the right places. So we are we are moving some things around. So it will be um it will be a total kind of reddoing of things but there's a lot that that lives in in in a similar structure.

Okay. Okay. So, essentially this thing is about as old as a downtown fire station and it's time for a tear down and re rebuild. Okay, got that. Uh one other thing I just want to note for I think that this is for future reference uh but that we've with the objective design standards in particular and the other streamlining efforts that we've done and the ability of projects to get exemptions uh through state approved um exemptions of various kinds. Um the role of the design review committee has shrunk to almost nothing. uh I think it's met I chair that and I think I I think once right okay since in the last uh you know 13 months uh so it is something we don't necessarily have to revisit it in this process but it is something that the council I think should revisit um probably at our next strategic planning session um and um you know in next January to see do we even need this thing. Does it have a role? Is it worth bothering to create this structure and have everybody do form 700 and you know all that stuff? Will will staff be prepared to make a recommendation on that uh at a later point or is there a reason that we should to have that discussion during the course of of these code amendments that you're doing now? I think we can look with uh Genevieve at what that might entail in terms of this code reorganization. Um I think if we start taking things apart too much, we might unravel some things and prolong our process. But um it's definitely on our radar to um discuss and if it happens to dovetail into this code text project um we can

certainly bring some of that back for discussion. Sure. I'm not trying to work myself out of a job on that, but I just have noticed that if we if we don't if we're not using it, maybe we don't need it. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, Council Member Newsome, I have no questions.

Okay. Thank you. I I'd had to have some questions. Um, and been speaking of the DRC, you you mentioned somewhere where you did mention DRC, you mentioned about DRC approvals and it was kind of had been my basic understanding of the role of the DRC and having been on it at one period. Um the purpose of the DRC was to provide basically free guidance back to applicants, you know, so that they get a preview of what two council members and two planning commissioners thought and but that so it basically advised it didn't make approvals. So I was a little confused about the wording of approvals in here and I'm tagging on to council member Funk's comments that I mean if we're not using it or we're not using it in that way, uh what is it? um accomplishing. I mean, I thought it was useful to applicants because again, it's a free look because in some cities they charge a thousand bucks or something to go to for a design review committee. So, we were doing folks giving them kind of a free look, if you will. But, uh am I correct in that its purpose was not to do approvals?

Yes. Um so, and that that was also something that stumped me when I found that the approvals for entitlements expired after a year. So I think at some point in time maybe the DRC was written in a different way. Um but the the function has is as you um as you have outlined it as a recommending body and give that that feedback um when the the community development directors is the the acting body on that. Um and so that's one of the efforts of this um process as well is to make that clear. If we if you do have the DRC, we want to make clear what their role is um and and what their charge is um because it's a little unclear in your code right now.

Okay. And does that need to be done then before we adopt the general plan or um it can be done in conjunction as part of this process? Um so we had kind of assumed in this process it's to to clarify that role right now. Um and and leave that in the code as as a recommending body. Um and so that's been folded into into the draft that you'll see in in June. Okay. So I mean it doesn't have to be done as part of but it can be okay.

There are no general plan policies that dictate that. So we can do that separately. we could do it, you know, before with the general plan, after the general plan. Um, I think just, and this is staff opinion, I think that the DRC review process is definitely something that needs revisiting. It is a different time and when it was created, it had a different intention and the way it's codified is different than the original intention and it's also different than how we're using the process today. And the state is also guiding us in a much different position today. Okay. It's something I would like you to look at then whether it comes back in June as part of general plan or just in general and I would certainly like you to look at the purpose function and how we address the DRC. And I still have questions but council member Funk you have something related

brief yeah brief note just the the question has come up a couple times about the one-year uh project deadline. I they I think that was put in because there was quite a stretch where DRC projects had no deadline at no um expiration date at all and that became apparent when we had a current local process that uh hasn't finished construction yet that was under a DOC approval under Fonzi um who hasn't been on this council for quite a while now. So, uh this is um you know just just in terms of a matter of the timing of that uh we recognize the need for for an expiration and and that one year was put in. I don't have a big issue with with two years although if we're not actually approving anything the expiration of its approvals is sort of moot. I do also recall that DRC has previously approved fences and things like that um that are variances to projects and I don't see any of that in adhere. Um is that an authority that's no longer needed? Could that you know defer to staff on that?

Sure. Um it's what's considered there under the design review modification director major. Those are those things like fence height exceptions and those design modifications where they are recommending body to the director for formal action. Okay. So, if you could back up on these slides to where you showed the initial 18 current chapters versus and then Okay. So, there. Okay. So, in here I see some kind of specific things. Native tree regulations, adultoriented business, cannabis, um some kind of specific things. And when you go to the proposed six of them, it made me wonder, okay, where do they where do them some of those kind of specific types of things land in here into these new chapters. Then you were kind of going along and you showed where native trees ended up. It made me wonder, okay, where do some of those other very specific things like cannabis or adult businesses, where do they end up? What chapter are they now under? So they they were going to end up where they should have been originally before we started tearing and patching our code over the years. But essentially the chapters 2, three, and four are going to contain those things. Standards for specific uses might have the trees in it. You know, regulations applicable to all zoning districts will have many of those aspects. And again, in chapter 2, some of those things will be in there as well. So if you look at a lot of other municipalities, this is done in the same format they would utilize for those other really specific sections that you see lying out there that we had to kind of patch in.

Okay. Exactly. Yeah. The the the cannabis will end up in in chapter 4. The the use related things where they are a particular special use, those all end up in chapter 4. Development standards that apply across the board, those will end up in chapter 3. Uh but with our hierarchy system, you'll be able to find them quite easily um with the new articles.

Okay. Got it. All right. Thank you. Can you go where you have a little more detail on chapters six and seven? I hope I will prompt me to remember my question here. So that's six. Um because like here like here here's where I saw native tree permit under um entitle under chapter six entitlement processing procedures and that's what prompted me to wonder where do these other things land. So given what you talked about things landing under either two three or four why are these ending up in six?

Good question. So this is the process by which the permits are issued. The actual standards will exist under the the appropriate place in chapter 3 or chapter 4. This is all about the process of getting the entitlement not necessarily about the actual development standards for that thing. So the those other specific things I mentioned like cannabis or adult business or whatever they would they don't have a separate processing procedure whereas native tree permit does have a correct processing procedure. Exactly.

Okay. Okay. And I'm always look at on the outlook of you know trying to have some ways less things come to council. Um because native tree permit I see you know we have the non-heritage the planning commission or the director can make the decision but it's appealable to the planning commission and then appeal then appealable to the city council but those those are appeals with a fee. Correct. Correct.

Got it. Um, okay. Okay. Um, let's see. I think that's all I had in the way of in the way Oh, actually, back up. Go back to the the chart that Council Member Funk asked about the two different kind of showing the easy process and the long process. Um, go ahead. You know, it showed you're you're looking at our object the objective design.

Yeah, it was a flowchart. It was a flowchart. That one. There you go. So, in in this code, in this chart here, um, you know, we're saying projects that comply with all the standards and are SQA exempt, you know, they they go to construction permit review and they can be approved. But then we're saying if they do not comply with the objective design standards and again that's an or greater than 49 units or mixed use projects outside of downtown. They're going to go to the planning commission for a cup but it says not squa exempt. Not all of these things would apply. I mean they still might be happen to be squa exempt. Correct.

You still might be. I think construction permit projects are not even subject to squa at all. So exempt is probably the wrong word. they are just not subject to SQA review and then planning commission entitlements are subject to SQA review but they can be exempt through that SQA process or they can require additional documentation

and to the extent that as part of the you know general plan update and one of the things that's we're kind of finishing up now that took months and months is is the EIR there's you know a large EIR associated with the general plan update the premise there is though that that EIR is going to then make you know most projects that are in conformance with the general plan would make them then squa exempt. Correct. Correct. And there's actually a new state law SQA exemption for consistency with a general plan um that provides a lot more latitude and flexibility to staff for SQA exemptions for projects.

Good. Good. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. Let's go out see if we have any public input on this item. Jeff Osen, once again, I think this looks great. I have one comment question, and that of course is notification. Um, council spent a lot of time, we've spent a lot of time on notification on certain projects so people know what's going on. and uh this director in the future will do what is needed because council has made it clear. But when this director retires then it's vague in my eyes on notification that said 300 ft. Um where I live is about 8/10 of a mile away from and I'm going to pick on Barrel Creek which I think is a great project but I never would have been notified. And if you take Apple Valley right across the street, uh maybe 50% of those residents would be notified and the others wouldn't because it's outside of 300 ft or even down San Ramon. So just curious if there's another way that that could be worded. Thank you. Um I I think in there you clarified that uh the director could expand a notification area particularly for major projects.

Yes. I mean 300 feet would really like an Apple Valley would only affect the first row of houses you know whose fences back up to Del Rio I would guess maybe a few more but in a project like that you you could expand the notification area. Yes. And we're already doing that for projects. We just want to codify what we're already doing. We're already making custom notices every time we look at an application. If we feel that the standards aren't adequate, we actually increase it. And also in our west side, it's good to note in the RS zoning district, it's a thousand foot already. Interesting.

Um, and so there's already variability based on lot size essentially and there's already discretion by us looking at the map and ensuring that an adequate neighborhood has been noticed, but it's nice to have it codified. I think that was Mr. Osceland's comment is how do we know going forward? That's why we're codifying some of these things so it continues to be a sliding scale that's adequate for each neighborhood. And in that comment where it said the director could expand anything. I assume by extension then obviously the city manager could as well basically tell you to expand the notion. Yes. Because he's picking up that vibe from five individuals. Okay. Got it. Mayor Promander.

Thanks. Just a quick question. So on that is it is it stated in there that the the radius for notifications is a minimum of 300 or 500 or thousand square feet because by I think by stating it in that manner then it it shows that you have discretion to increase it if needed. Is that necessary? Um it is listed right now just to kind of be clear that all occupants within 300 foot radius must be notified. Um and then we have the ability to go wider. Um so yes, we've we're we want to codify that clearly that here's the standard and we can go wider and for major projects like general plan up and zoning we're going to go wider anyway.

Okay. as long I think as long as it's clear that there is discretion to increase it. Like Apple Valley is a great example because it's the whole neighborhood is going to be affected by it. If you only notify handful of houses, it's kind of doesn't serve the purpose. So then to extend that to whatever radius it is to include the whole thing, then it makes sense. But as long as it's clear that it's that it's a minimum and and or the director has the discretion to increase it, I think that's a good idea.

Yeah. Yeah. And the reason it's worded um that way is that all everybody within 300 ft shall receive notification is that's the state law requirement for these types of actions. And so then our code goes above and beyond to allow the discretion to increase and to allow wider radius in our larger lot zones. Okay, great. Thank you.

Okay, so this item is simply a receive and update and provide direction. So we don't have to take a motion, but is there any particular direction that any member of the council thinks needs to be provided to staff that beyond what we already discussed? Okay, seeing none, then we will consider that item closed. Is that sufficient for you staff? Okay, excellent. Then we will move on to our next item, which is actually council announcements and committee reports. And I will start on my right with council member Nome. Thank you. I had a slow cog meeting on Wednesday and some of the topics that were discussed was so windy. Anyways, um some of the topics that were discussed at the slow cog were very productive and that this council will be also getting a presentation from slow on the 24th agenda. And then we have the city schools meeting coming up um next week. And that's it.

Council member Funk. I have nothing to report on my formal committees, but I did want to mention that the mayor's um or mayor the uh uh city manager's um uh task force on the wastewater treatment system is uh starting to do some tours and we are being graciously hosted tomorrow by our very own wastewater treatment staff and the public works department. uh so that um everyone who is giving us citizen input um on this process can get a thorough understanding of what the options are and what how some other per communities have approached u the same issues that we're trying to deal with.

Sounds interesting. I have toured the plant before myself and it's pretty interesting. Promises, thank you. uh APCD met I think a couple weeks ago. Unfortunately, I don't have my notes. I'm going by memory. But two major things that we talked about was well, we selected a chair and vice chair and uh and then decided that city representatives would um again be getting a stipen, but they cut it out for a while because of some legal issues, but now the city representatives will get a small stipen for their time and travel uh to the meeting. And other than that, it was I think everything else was just business as usual. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Peak. Uh, yeah, water resource advisory committee was cancelled last week. It looks like there's not going to be a lot of meetings this spring. There's some shakeup over there and their um staffing. Uh, looking forward to the city schools committee. And you kind of freaked me out with that. You said next week. I don't think it's next week. I'm like, okay. So, you got me a little jump scare there. Um, but um, yeah, just happy Valentine's Day.

Thank you. Um, and I tomorrow have an integrated waste management authority meeting. Last week I went to Central Coast Community Energy or 3CE meeting and at that meeting the board voted to lower our the generation rates the electricity generation rates that 3CE charges by an average of 25%. So that s that is great sounds great. Unfortunately um the PUC the public utilities commission approved a a large increase in what's called the PCIA or the power charge and difference adjustment. uh and and people will see that on their bill and that is money that goes to PG&E um and that pretty much is going to almost you know wipe out the um most of the of that 25% reduction in the generation rates um however the good news is that last year um Tascadero benefited at that PCIA was very low for our our residents um and PCE saved about 5.5 million dollar for our community in terms of uh electricity bills compared to PG&E. Um and this year that will be substantially less unfortunately. Next year we expect the PUC by their way of doing things will um bring that back in line and those those savings for the community will go back up next year. So the good news is 3CE lowered their rates very substantially. The bad news is that the arcane uh setting of the PCIA went the other direction and will take away a lot of our savings. So, um but uh you know, like I said, last year saved over five half million dollars for residents in our community. So, that's a good thing. So, okay, I think that's it. Does any member of the council have any individual determination? Seeing none, we are adjourned.