Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/20/1959iWAY 4 U !! ou - SPECIAL CALLED COUNCIL MEETING May 20, 1959 = 7:30 PM The City Council met in special called session with Mayor Fred M. Waters pre- siding. Roll Call: Present - Kenneth W. Jones, Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey, J. Barry Smith, Fred M. Waters Absent - None Mayor Waters explained the purpose for the meeting was to discuss Ordinance No. 111 (1959 Series), "An Ordinance Rezoning Property on Johnson Avenue_ From R -1 to C -1 -S." The Mayor requested that the City Clerk read the following statement: 11:4 "During the past several days, I have had the privilege of meeting with representatives of both viewpoints in regard to the present rezon- r; ing controversy, first with both sides present, then with each G side separately. d ' "As a result of these discussions and in a spirit of compromise and give and take, I feel that agreement can be reached on the follow ing basis: "Because of my sincere belief that we have a basic meeting of minds, I would recommend that the Council take the following steps at this evening's meeting: 11(1) Pass a resolution of intention to rezone all or part of the area shown on the attached map from R -1 or C -2 to C -1 -S. From a legal .standpoint, I am advised that the Planning Commission in consid- ering this resolution could reduce said area to be rezoned but could not increase it. I feel we should ask the Planning Commis- sion to exhaust every effort to secure agreement from all parties concerned, keeping in mind the interests and needs of the city as a whole. I would also ask that the commission expedite its con- sideration as much as possible in view of the long delay already experienced in considering this zoning request. "(2) In order to stop the present'dispute and to give us a fresh start in working toward a fair solution for all concerned, I feel it necessary for the Council to pass to print this evening an ordin- ance repealing Ordinance No. 111. "(3) Finally, I would ask that the City Council appoint two citizens, each representing one of the major viewpoints, who would be asked to work with .'the Planning Commission in working out a solution. It would be my suggestion that R. L. Graves and Morgan Flagg be named and that the Planning Commission inite these individuals to any and all meetings, study sessions, etc. on the rezoning proposal. "In conclusion, I would like to state that I have found both sides in this controversy to be willitg and able to sit down and discuss the matter on a gentlemanly basis, regardless of their personal, economic or emotional itt erest. I Am very grateful to find this to be true ' and feel that our community is fo rtunate in having citizens of this caliber." Mr. Fraser, Planning Director, explained'the proposal of the Mayor. (see exhibit A) R. L. Graves, objected to the proposal, as the basic protest was placing of C -1 -S against R- i'which is not what is desired. Leonard Blaser stated that as far as he could see, all that the new proposal does:iissincrease the C -1 -S area and take away the C -2 area from the Mc Keens, and he does not see this as a compromise. 1491. MAY 20 1959 Richard Harris, Attorney, asked if what the Mayor proposed was repeal of Ordinance No. 111 and then to have the Planning Commission study the over -all area for a better location of the C -1 area. Louis Isola asked, under this proposal could all the area proposed for study be zoned to C -1 -S. If so, this is not what he was asking for. Morgan Flagg, Subdivider, stated that he had faith in the wisdom of the Planning Commission and was sure that they will do what is fair and equitable in the new study regarding location of the shopping area. He also asked that the Planning Commission expedite their deliberations on the shopping center prob- lem as the delays are costing his organization money. Mr. Ward objected to the present scope of planning by the City and urged that some proper standard of'planning be assured by the Planning Commission as planning was very poor at present. Morgan Flagg asked could not the Planning Commission study the are involved in theproposal without repealing Ordinance No. 111. R. L. Graves asked could not the Council send the proposal back to the Planning Commission for study without delineating the boundaries of the area for study as shown on the map, exhibit A. Mr. Houser, City Attorney, explained the methods by which rezoning can be con- sidered, which are; by the City Council, by the Planning Commission, and by the public. For the Council to request the Planning Commission to hold hear- ings on a proposed rezoning, the area must be delineated for their consideration. R. L. Graves suggested that the boundary line of the C -1 -S area along Johnson Avenue be reduced to the first road west of Johnson so that this area could be returned to the R -1 zone and act as a buffer along Johnson Avenue. Mayor Waters explained that the large area was needed so . that the Planning Com- mission could study the entire area which could be reduced after proper t buffers and safeguards were approved by all parties concerened. Mr. Houser, City Attorney, explained the method that could be used to consider this proposal without repealing Ordinance No. 111. Louis Isola stated that the original request of the Protestants to the, rezoning was that thematter be referred back to the Planning Commission for deliberation, and now under threat of referendum, the Council was sending it back to the Planning Commission for study, which should satisfy everyone. Mrs. Mc Keen appeared before the Council and wanted.to know why her property on Laurel Lane was now involved in the rezoning when the problem was brought about by a request for rezoning on the Flagg property. She asked that all her property be rezoned commercial. Further, she would rather see the commercial .development placed on Laurel Lane and not on Johnson Avenue, which should be.reserved for R -1 zoning. R. Pimentel asked if the taxpayers could be assured that competent professional help be given to the Planning Commission in their deliberations on this new proposal. He agreed with,the proposed compromise and urged that all property owners go along with it and settle this matter fairly. Mr. McKeen asked why change C -2 to C -1 -S, and where does he stand as far as his ' business is concerned, as the C -1 -S classification would limit his operations as far as his buildings are concerned. - Mr. Harris agreed with the compromise and if the referendum is filed and the voters turn down the ordinance, then the Planning Commission will again have under study the matter which will only delay the matter longer. He agreed with the compromise mainly on the basis that it will save time in arriving at a just de- cision. MAY 2 0 -1959' 11511. Mr. Flagg stated that (1) there was.no question that this delay was costing his company money, (2) that he trusted the wisdom of the Planning Commission in arriving at a solution, (3) that he believed that the matter of attempting to placate a small group of citizens would have dire repercussions in the city government in the future. Kenneth Schwartz objected to Mr. Flagg's statements, stating that the people have a right.to make their feelings known to their elected representatives as a step in the democratic process and sound city planning. ' Mr. Berger asked why the city did not have a master plan so tla t the citizens will know what is happening, or is planned to happen to the land use of the city. Mr. Basslein suggested the possibility of the Planning Commission considering a residential buffer strip along Johnson Avenue. R. Pimentel agreed with the proposal that a necessary step was repealing of Ordia ance No. 111 to show the good will of the city. Mrs. Grace Flannery stated that the city needs a broader tax base and that she rrr believed that additional commercial property and developments would add to Q that tax base with their new buildings and inventories. She cited the CZ problems:-of the schools in attempting to do their job while they need more' D taxes to carry on. She requested that an over -all study of the problem be made as rapidly as possible. Mrs. Berner urged that a complete plan be made of the city and that patchwork re- .zoning, as is now being done, should be stopped.. Louis Isola asked the Council what could be done to stop Mr. Flagg from starting construction on his property if Ordinance No. 111 is not repealed while the Planning Commission is studying the compromise. Mr. Mc Keen stated that Mr. Flagg was an honorable man, but that this rezoning does ' not.mean as much to him as it does -to the folks living on Johnson Avenue as the property owners have just their home and a small piece of land, where he is developing large tracts for profit. Councilman Miller moved to adopt the proposal of the Mayor, items 1, 2 and 3. Motion.was lost for lack of a second. On motion of J. Barry Smith, seconded by Gerald W: Shipsey, Resolution No. 555 (1959 Series), "A Resolution of Intention to Amend Section 9200.5 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code" was introduced and passed by the following roll call vote: 1. . . AYES: Kenneth W. Jones, Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey, J. Barry Smith, Fred M. Waters NOES: None ABSENT: None On motion of'Kenneth W. Jones, seconded by J. Barry Smith, Mr. R. L. Graves, and Mr. Morgan Flagg were requested to work with the Planning Commission on this rezoning study as suggested by the Mayor in item 3 of the compromise. On motion of J. Barry Smith, seconded:;by Kenneth W. Jones, the meeting adjourned. Approved this /0 day of July, 1959. J �