Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/08/1964REGM AR MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL September 8, 1954 - 7:30 P.M. CITY HBLL Invocation was liven by ik; -or Clay P. Devidso::. Roll Cell City Staff Present: Cley ?. Davidson, R. L. Graves, Jr., Clell l7. WFhelchel lbsent: Miss Margaret McNeil, Donzld Q. Miller Present: J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk, P. Chapman, Director of Planning & Building; 41. M. Houser, City Attorney; .1. D. Miller, Administrative Officer; D. F. Romero, City Engineer; L. Schlobohm, Fire Chief; W. Schofield, Police Chief; E. P. Thompson, Water Superintendent. On motion of Councilman I-Thelchel, seconded by Councilman Graves, claims against the City for the month of September, were approved, subject to the approval of the Administrative Officer. ....... �- 1. Mayor Davidson presented certificates of completion of course and yualificatione as water treatment operators for following named City employees and congrat- ulated them on their efforts to improve themselves and do a better job for the City. Robert H. Turner Water Treatment Works Operator III George A. Bell lister Treatment Works Operator IV Joseph Frank 8nepple Water Treatment Works Operator IV 2. On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Whelchel, the following ordinance was introduced for final passage. Ordinance No. 290, an ordinance levying a tax for the current fiscal year 1964 -65 upon all taxable property within the City and fixing the rate of such tax ($1.50). Finally passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: Clay P. Davidson, R. L. Graves, Jr., Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: McNeil, Miller 3. On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman.Whelchel, a Grant Deed and Agreement from Harold J. Esser and Dorothy I. Esser for street widening on Foothill Boulevard was accepted and the Mayor was authorized to sign the Grant Deed on behalf of the City and record same. Motion carried. 4. On motion of Mayor Davidson, seconded by Councilman Graves, the following salary step increases were approved: ANDERSON, William D., Police Officer, from Step 1 at $455 to Step 2 at $480 per month, effective October 1, 1964. ENGLERT. Don E., Police Sergeant, from Step 4 at $600 to Step 5 at $635 per month, effective October 1, 1964. LI�THERL,AND, Doris M., Stenographer, from Step 3 at $345 to Step 2 at $365 per month, effective October 1, 1964. MITCEM.L. Tamy L., Stenographer, from Step 3 at $385 to Step 4 at $405 per month, effective October 1, 1964. f �II �J 1 City Council Minutes September 8, 1964 Page -2- LOTH, Curtis D., Police Officer, from Step 1 at $455 to Step 2 at $480 per month, effective October 1, 1964. VENTURELLA, Ann S., Typist - Clerk, from Step 2 at $345 to Step 3 at $365 per month, effective October 1, 1964. 5. On motion of Councilman Whelchel, seconded by Councilman Graves, the following contract payments were approved: A. B. Street Projects Madonna Construction Company Phase "M ", Part 4 Phase "M", Part 6 Phase "M", Part 7 Valley Paving Company Est. ;r2 Est. ;rl Est. ;rl Pismo Street Reconstruction Est. #4 Phase "M ", Part 5 M. J. Hermreck Foothill Boulevard Culvert Ted Watkins Construction Co. Murray -Broad Culvert Water Projects Fred J. Early,_ Co. Water System Improvements (Filtration Plant) W. M. Lyes Compaav Water System Improvements (Johnson -Flora Streets) Est. #2 Eat. 43 (final) Est. M Est. 41 $2,987.47 (45% complete) $5,988.46 (65% complete) $10,183.58 (907. complete) No payment, overpayment to contractor on previous estimate (90% complete) $6,304.63 $1,163.12(1007. complete) $20,820.15 (717. complete) $6,222.60 (10% complete) Est. 112 $33,165.58 (997. complete) Est. #5 $6,860.73 (100% complete) (final) Change Order #2 $62.00 6. At this time the Council committee on signs reported on their recommendations on conditions for granting use permits nor rotating, flashing and free standing signs. The Committee asked for additional time to prepare recommendations on flashing signs, but that their recommendation on rotating signs was the same as previouslS reported. 7a. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of Shell Oil Company on the denial by the Planning Commission of the request to allow a rotating sign on their service station located at Marsh and Carmel Streets, San Luis Obispo, California. Mayor Davidson declared the public hearing open. The following letter was received from the Planning Director, Peter Chapman: City Council Minutes September 8, 1964 Page -3- "Resolution No. 101 -64 of the Planning Commission approved the application of the Shell Oil Company for a free - standing sign at Marsh and Carmel subject to the condition that it be non - flashing and non - rotating. This application was submitted to the Board of Adjustments, who approved it with the condition prohibiting rotating and flashing in line with the policy adopted by the Planning Commission and the City Council. This matter was appealed to the Planning Commission who upheld the Board of Adjustments for the same reasons. The matter is now appealed to the City Counc'�. Another memo on this general subject has been sent to the City Council requestin policy guidance for future references in administering the sign ordinance." Peter Chapman, Planning Director, reported that the sign is 28 feet above ground level and is eight feet square or sixty four (64) square feet. Ivan J. Albert, Shell Oil Company, appeared before the Council urging the granting of the use permit for a rotating sign as it is a standard sign for the Shell Oil Company and is being used throughout the United States to identify their station. Councilman Graves moved that the appeal be denied due to the size of the sign. Motion died for the lack of a second. Ivan J. Albert stated that his company, in anticipation of the denial by the Council, has installed a 7' x 7' sign or 49 square feet and urged that the Council grant the rotating sign permit. Councilman Graves explained to Mr. Albert the Council's prior adopted policy on rotating signs and the changes being considered by the Council for adoption and for guidance of the Planning Commission and staff. Mayor Davidson explained that the policy presently in existance and the policy under consideration are not really available to the public, so that the people dealing with signs can be aware of than -es under consideration. Councilman Whelchel stated that the information on the recommendation of the Council committee was available to the public and to interested parties, and that he believed the 5' :: 6' signs on the Shell Station at Broad and Foothill Boulevard would fit the committee's recommendation and suggested that this size sign be placed at Carmel and Marsh Streets, Carlos Moerman stated he could not see any reason for the Council to deny the requested sign and further, objected to the Council committee recommendation as the committee has consulted the sign industry for suggestions and further believed the standards are arbitrary and there is no basis for such recommendatic On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Whelchel, that the appeal be denied and uphold the -Planning Commission s recommendation. Motion lost on the following roll call vote: AYES: Graves, Whelchel NOES: Davidson ABSENT: McNeil, Miller On motion of Councilman Whelchel, seconded by Mayor Davidson, that the matter be continued to the next regular meeting. Notion carried. City Council Minutes September 8, 1964 Page -4- R. The following communication was received from the Retail Merchants' Association! "This letter is in reference to our annual "Sidewalk Days" event which is planned for Tuesday, Septembrr 15th. Therefore, we are requesting your permission at this time for the privilege of allowing the Retail Merchants to display their wares on the sidewalks of San Luis Obispo on the above mentioned date. This would be between the hours of 9 :30 A.M. and 5:30 P.1•4 Thanking you in advance for all courtesies extended." D. F. Romero, City Engineer, recommended that at least six feet of sidewalk be left clear for pedestrian traffic. On motion of Councilman Whelchel, seconded by Councilman Graves, that at least two thirds (2/3) of sidewalk or six (6) feet sidewalk be left clear and that the merchants hold the City harmless from liability. Motion carried. 8a. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of Charles Delmartini, et al, from a decision of the Planning Commission in denying the request for the rezoning from R -1 to R -3 of that property along Foothill Boulevard. Mayor Davidson declared the public hearing open. The following letter was received from the Planning Commission regarding the above rezoning: "Resolution No. 96 -64 of the City Planning Commission recommended denial of the application by tar. Delmartini to rezone from P. -1 to R-3 properties on Foothill Boulevard as shown on the attached map. There was considerable local opposition to this application on the grounds of the increased traffic volume that would be created, the lowering in value of adjacent single family homes which are relatively new, loss of privacy, inadequF sewers, and the fact that they had bought their homes on the assumption that the area would remain A -1. In view of the fact that there were fairly new single family homes and a commercial use in the area proposed for rezoning, the Commission felt that the rezoning would be premature and would have a deleterious effect on adjacent single family homes. We therefore recommend that the application be denied." Peter Chapman, Planning Director, presented to the Council the proposal for rezoning by Charles Delmartini, et al, and also briefed the objections presented by adjacent property owners against the rezoning. The following letter was received from Dave Ethridge: "I wish to protest the proposed rezoning at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Tassajara Drive, as requested by Mr. Charles Delmartini. I was a protestant at the hearing which resulted in the Planning Commissions denial of the request and I take this opportunity to explain my position to you also, as part of the appeal hearing. There are several reasons for my opposition to the rezoning of this property from the current predominately R -1 status to the requested R -3. City Council Rinutes September S, 1964 Page -5- First, as a property owner in the area, I object strongly to any further encroachment by the apartment house complexes upon one of the City's prime single family residential areas. We see continued commercial development of the College Square shopping area, and more and more apartments being built. To protect the property values of the home owners in the Foothill section, the time has come to draw the line and halt the march westward of the apart- ments. Second, with only a few exceptions (all of which were here before the City expanded into the area with its accompanying zoning laws), the area in question is occupied and almost entirely surrounded by well kept and attractive single family horses. Again, I object to apartment house encroachment on the character of the area. Third, any increase in tae population density of the area cannot help but increase the traffic congestion that already exists on Foothill Boulevard. Unless the City intends to complete the widening pro.-ram for Foothill in the very near future, such added congestion could well become intolerable. Therefore, please consider my strong objections to this rezoning." Charles Delmartini appeared before the Council on behalf of his appeal to the denial of the request to have the property on Foothill Boulevard rezoned to R -3 for development as mutiple dwelling an office on his property. Mr. Delmartini then presented facts on each parcel of property represented by his requested rezoning. He also commented that taose who were objecting to traffic problems on Foothill Boulevard :gust consider the continued growth of San Luis Obispo and that the increase in traffic will continue on Foothill Boulevard. Also, he and the other petitioners must give up their land for street widening for the good of all of the City and not just for themselves. Mr. Willson, Elm Court, Chairman,represented- his neighbors who objected to the - requested rezoning. iir. Willson stated that his group objects to increased traffic and the encroachment of additional multiple- storied apartments adjacent to their new single family residences. Robert Wilcox, 7 Elm Court, objected to the.razoning on the basis that the rezoning will dama *e and depreciate the values of the single family residential property adjacent to the area being requested for rezoning. Further, the change of zonin* to R -3 would allow 35' high buildings 4 feet from his rear property line which would take away any privacy he now may enjoy. Also, the noise from such an apartment would be unbearable to people living in their oVm homes. Further, he doubted the need for additional apartments in the City. As he believed that any future student housing in the City should be on the Cal Poly campus, where they might have some supervision, which they do not have in private homes or apartments. He also questioned the le3ality of allowing strip zoning along main streets for multiple uses. He therefore requested that the City Council deny the appeal and deny the rezoning. Carl Lundquist, 9 Elm Court, presented a scale model of the properties as they exist now in the vicinity of Elm Court and under consideration for re- zoning at this time. He objected to the possibility of a 35' high building backing up to within 4 feet of the single family property. He believed that property values in the R -1 area would decline due to the height of adjacent structures. He listed as an example the enisting apartment house at the end of Verde Court, Mrs. Henry Isman objected to some of the statements made by the opposition to the requested rezoning of Mr. Delmartini. She believed that the opponents are presuming what was going to be done by the property owners. Further, she owned property north and west of the property on Foothill and would like to have her property zoned R -3 so that the high potential of the land can be returned to the property owner and was in favor of the requested rezoning. City Council Minutes September 8, 1964 Page -6- Osa A. Roy, 8 Elm Court, objected to the proposed rezoning as he would be against the development of a high apartment adjacent to his home and believed that his property rights were being infringed upon, and urged denial of the request. Dave Ethridge appeared on behalf of his letter, demanding denial of the re- quested rezoning and requested that Mr. Chapman, Planning Director, list uses in an R -3 zone. Mr. Chapman listed for the public and Council the uses allowed in an R -3 zone with and without use permits. Mr. Willson, Elm Court, again appeared before the City Council urging denial of the requested rezoning to R -3 by Mr. Delmartini. Mr. Willson again listed items that the Council should consider when deciding this matter. He listed traffic congestion, density of population, safety of school children, en- croachment of multiple uses on single family uses, etc. Mrs. Beverly Delmartini objected to some of the statements being made by the opponents to the rezoning particularly on the subject of traffic flaw, con- gestion, etc. Mr. Dike, 22 S. Tassajara Street, objected to the rezoning due to the possibilit% of high rise apartment of 35' next to single family uses. Mrs. Blodgett urged the Council to rezone this property so that she can make proper use of her property and allow her to realize the highest value on her property through redevelopment to multiple uses. Mrs. Campbell appeared before the Council urging that the Council rezone her property to R-3 so that she can add a 6 unit apartment to help her pay for taxes and allow her to use her property. Councilman Miller took his seat at 9 :25 P.P•L ------------------ - - - - -- Ralph Franzon, Elm Court, objected to the rezoning due to possible danger to the small children who would have to face the increased traffic on Foothill Boulevar� due to R -3 uses. Mr. Sanderson, Verde Drive, objected to the rezoning and presented a map showing the zoning in the City as he cannot understand why the R -3 must be extended west along Foothill Boulevard when there is so much unused R -3 property in the City. He stated that if these people wanted to build apartments then let them go in the areas that are no-y zoned for multiple uses. Mr. Sanderson again listed his objection to the rezoning such as density of traffic, danger to children, unknown sewer problems, lack of good city planning, etc. Mr. Willson presented a petition from adjacent property owners and residents objecting to the rezoning. "We the undersigned do hereby protest and oppose the rezoning from R -1 to R -3 as requested by Charles Delmartini and others, that property along Foothill Boulevard and adjacent to Tassajara Drive as shown on the map of application for rezoning and shown in the notice of public hearing which appeared in the Telegram Tribune of August 21, 1964, for the following reasons: City Council Minutes September 8, 1954 Page -7- 1. It will increase the density of the population in an area that is already extremely congested. 2. The loss of property value to home owners in the area which is a new residential section built under the ?rotection of the zoning laws of our city, which laws we believe should be maintained and upheld at this time. 3. The loss of privacy, view and the drastic change it would cause in the environment of our neighborhood. 4. The safety of our children is at stake. They have to walk along Foothill Boulevard which has no sidewalks to and from school. our children also have to cross Foothill Boulevard to go to and from the School Bus Loading Zone. 5. Traffic congestion is extremely heavy in this area. There are only two outlets for residents of this area on each side of Foothill Boulevard and these funnel into Foothill Boulevard increasing the traffic on this congested street which currently is not designed to carry the load. 6. The sewer lines in this area are already loaded to maximum capacity and now cause frequent problems. Any further density of population at this time would cause serious trouble. 7. There is no buffer zone, not even a street, between the R -1 and the proposed R -3 zone. This invites continuing encroachment upon R -1 property which destroys confidence in the zoning laws. 8. There is no need as there is already a substantial amount of undeveloped R -3 and R -4 areas within the city limits, much of which is available and for sale to developers. 9. Now is not the time for granting the rezoning of this area. We believe in the policy of first things first. The many things listed above indicate the urgent needs that should be taken care of to facilitate the improvement of the city in our area for the good of all its citizens and not just a few investors or speculators. The petition had 156 signatures. Mrs. Esser questioned the validity of the petition being presented to the Council. Mr. Delmartini again appeared before the City Council urging that the property be rezoned as requested. He then listed various reasons why the property should be rezoned for its highest and best use. He stated that he proposed to place an office building on his property for his own use and possibly one additional office to rent to others. Mr. Sanderson again appeared before the Council objecting to the present request for R -3 primarily because of the fact that they are afraid of additional 35' high apartment buildings, but that he would not object to a planned development along Foothill Boulevard where the actual development can be =een ahead of time. Havor Davidson declared the public hearing closed. \ Councilman Whelchel asked for a report from City Engineer David Romero on sewer conditions in rem.ard to this matter. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, reported that the sewer serving the Foothill Boulevard area has been scheduled for present enlargement since the Adamson. Jenks report made around 1954. The work recently conducted on Cuesta, Tassajara; and Cerro Romauldo will relieve backup conditions to some extent but will not help the overloaded trunk line on Foothill Boulevard. City Council Hinutes September 8, 1964 Page -8- Mr. Romero explained that he hoped to complete the enlargement of Foothill Boulevard sewer line as funds become available but in the meantime the overload condition will prevail. Councilman Graves stated that he objected to this rezoning as the single family properties must be protected. On motion of Councilman Graves seconded by Councilman Miller, that the appeal be denied and the Planning Commission recommendation be upheld. Councilman Miller seconded the motion as he believed there is sufficient propert; zoned to multiple uses in the area. Further, this rezoning to R -3 must be denied as it encroached on good, well -kept sin .-le family dwellings. Councilman 'Whelchel opposed the rezoning as the proponents have no actual plan for development and that this could lead to possible speculation. :;ryor Davidson supported the Planning Commission as they are presently studying the overall zoning of the City and the studies show that this zoning is wrong. Therefore, he would support the recommendation. notion carried unanimously. 9. Second hearing on the application of Sters -Fre Corporation for family billiard room, located at 895 Pacific Street. Mayor Davidson declared the public hearing open. Mayor Davidson declared the public hearing closed. On motion of Councilman T•?helchel, seconded by Councilman Graves, the issuance of the license was approved. Motion carried. 10. Preliminary report of Council committee on installation of certain subdivision improvements with the use of assessment procedures, was held over for additional studies by the committee and report on October 5, 1964. 11. The Council considered the following: A. Proposal from D. Jackson Faustman to prepare a study of off-street parking needs for the City. B. Amendment to the above proposal dated September 1, 1964. C. Proposal from D. Jackson Faustman to prepare a traffic flow study for the City of San Luis Obispo. The off street proposal was accepted as amended on motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Whelchel. Motion carried. Delay action on traffic flow study until after the Council meeting of Sent. 29, ; 12. Report from the Taxi Cab Committee on complaint of the Yellow Cab Company that A 6 M Cab Company is operating in violation of the Municipal Code in cbarging rates other than those approved by the City Council, was continued to September 21, 1964. 13a. Peter Chapman, Planning Director, presented his program for the developme-t of the Mission Plaza. The following recommendations were taken from the Mission Plaza Report: "The basic concept of this Plan is the development of a "park - like" setting for the Mission relating it to the creek with a park, pedestrian areas and land- scaping. City Council Minutes September 8, 1964 Page -9- A vital requirement of this concept is the closing of Monterey Street to through traffic. The rejection of the "Broad Street" route for Highway 1 facilitates this approach. However, provision has been made for access to the front of the Mission for emergency vehicles, funerals and weddings. A "terminal feature" is needed to close the vista along Monterey Street. We recommend that a Moreton Bay Fig be planted opposite the Mission at the earliest opportunity. The creek will be developed with a footpath system, landscaping, bridges, seats and low dams to provide access to the shops on Higuera Street and a pleasant setting for people to browse around and enjoy. With full participation by the merchants an intimate shopping area comparable to E1 Paseo in Santa Barbara can be created and even improved upon with the creek as a background. In general we visualize the area south of the creek being developed by individuiO merchants, the south bank, the creek and the north side being the responsibility of the City. A return on the City's investment can be achieved by the leasing of cleared sites for a group of small shops and offices as indicated on the Plan_ A tourist bureau has been provided in the key location at the corner of Monterey and Chorro Streets with the Chamber of Commerce relocated into the Madonna house and possibly other office uses above. Restrooms are provided nearby. The Murray adobe is recommended for acquisition by the City and con- version into an annex to the County Museum. Parking has been provided for tourists and to replace the parking area behind the Warden building. Preferential rates should be offered to the current users of this area. A children's playground has been included at the suggestion of one of the merchants to provide facilities for the supervised play of toddlers ' while their parents shop in unhurried, unworried peace." Mayor Davidson thanked Hr. Chapman for the report and stated that as the Council had just received the report he asked for some time for study to come up with a final recommendation. Peter Rardel urged the Council to move along on this plan so that the program can come along to a conclusion as soon as possible. Burt Fugate state that he believed it to be a good report and asked if there were to be street lights along the creek in the plan. Mr. Chapman stated that some type of period lighting such as gas lights should be used and not the giant type of lights used on our streets. Councilman Graves believed this to be a good report and hoped that the City will move ahead as soon as possible in order to save the central business d:- ,trict and revitalize the downtoyn area. The Planning Director was authorized to get bids for 100 and 200 copies of the report for public distribution,and report to council. The City Engineer was authorized to prepare a cost estimate for improveo.::-6 of the parking lot on Monterey Street across from the Museum. On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Miller that a pro,.:asal be sought from appriasers for Block adjacent to Lot 3. 13b. Planning Director Mr. Chapman presented a proposal for a creek study by the County. The County will charge $750 or less for the study. On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Miller, authorization was given to make the study. Motion carried. City Council Minutes September 8, 1964 Page .10- The City Council discussed the Mission Plaza program as proposed by Mr. Chapman including an immediate start on parking lots. The Mission Plaza report held over to September 29, 1964 at 8:30 P.H. for additional study by the Council. Y. Mayor Davidson was authorized to leave the state from September 17 to 2u, 1964 on motion of Councilman Hiller, seconded by Councilman Graves. 13c. Consideration by the Council of relaxation of policy on street widening, was referred to Councilmen Graves and Miller to prepare a written report. 13d. Request of the Public Works Department that the Council Committee on Street Widening be requested to assist in negotiations with Martin Polin for Foothill Boulevard widening on the north side, was approved. 14. Discussion by the City Council on whether or not the City should trim trees and shrubs growing in creeks and encroaching on private property, was held over for a written report by City Zngineer Romero. 15. At this time the City Council discussed Christmas lights in the downtown area. Councilman Whelchel su- rested that a Council committee be appointed to meet with the Chamber of Commerce and the Junior Clan er of Commerce and merchants to discuss Christmas lights and decorations and what the City would contribute. Administrative officer i,ir. Miller said he understood it would cost about $700 to put up the decorations on hand which would be unlighted except for several strings of lights at the entrance to the business district reading "Merry Christmas ". It would probably cost another $1,000 or more to light the other ' decorations, according to chamber representatives. The chamber committee had been thinking of requesting this amount from the City but had decided to try and do the unlighted part only at merchant expense, according to the last word he had received. On motion of Councilman t,Thelchel, seconded by Councilman Graves, that a Council committee be appointed and that a report be presented to the City Council on September 14, 1964. Motion carried. Councilman Whelchel and Mayor Davidson was appointed to the committee. 16. At this time, the City Council considered the draft agreement negotiated between the Department of Finance and Fish and Game representatives regarding recreational fising at Uhale Rock Reservoir and temporary alternates. A letter from E. P. Thompson, Water Supt., regarding Whale Rock Fish & Game Agreement and proposed amendment. (see letter dated September S. 1964 to R. D. Miller from B. F. T_aompson)(on file in F 266 Whale Rock Commissiri: file). The following letter was received from Dale Banner, Department of Finance: This morning at its regular meeting, Mr. Shannon and I explained the proposed Whale Rock draft agreement principles to the California Fish and Game Coikallission. Mr. Shannon suggested that the proposal be put over to their October 2, 11 %;4 meeting to give the City Council and the Whale Rock Commission time to ad<,pt the proposal. The Fish and Game Commission agreed to do so and at the sa time pointedly intimated that if a sanctioned proposal was not offered to --:hem by the Whale Rock Commission at the October 2nd meeting, they would take immediate steps to bring action. I attempted to persuade the Fish and Game Commission to independently review the proposals to determine if they could be agreed to, however, the Commission chose not to pursue it. �I 1 City Council Minutes September 8, 1964 Page -11- While Mr. Shannon, I believe, made a conscientious attempt to accurately describe the principles the Commission was non - committal. I will check with him to determine whether or not they informally gave him any indication of their reaction to the proposal. It seems apparent to me that the Fish and Game Commission will brin; action if the Whale Rock Commission fails to adopt and present some proposal at the October 2nd meeting. Would you, if at all possible, bring this situation to the attention of your council and keep either Ll Wendroff or Chuck Harper informed as I will be out of the office for the ne::i three weeks ?" Wm. M. Houser, Jr., City Attorney, explained that the proposed draft agreement was the result of a meeting of staff members of the Department of Finance, City of San Luis Obispo and Department of Fish and Game, on the basis of ;ermitting an interim period of time to examine various proposals for the solution of the problem and to avoid continued litigation. That the draft was not intended to be a final document, but merely a general statement of the proposals and and could include speci`ic reference to studies and development of Laguna Lake. Mayor Davidson stated that he was interested in the Laguna Lake development and was informed by I•Ir. Houser that the Department of Fish and Game representa- tives had stated that Lacuna Lake could be studied and, if justified, planted without reference to the Whale cock problem. It was the common consent of the Council that the City continue the recommenda- tion of the Whale Rock Commission in their resolution at their last regular meeting regardin; recreation at Whale Rock reservoir. 17. Recommendation from the Swimming Pool Coruuittee regarding the swimming Pool Ordinance was set for public hearing on September 21, 1964. 18. Recommendation from the Building Construction Board of Appeals that the City adopt the 1964 Uniform Building Code and the 1964 Plumbing- Code, was held over to September 21, 1964. 19. Communication from the public hearing on the 20. Communication from the the City's application being forwarded to the received and filed. Division of Highways forwarding transcript of July 6th iighway No. I rerouting, was ordered received and filed. Department of Finance notifying the City Council that for 701 Funds has been approved by the State, and was federal government for further processing, was ordered 21. On motion of Councilman ':'helchel, seconded by Councilman Graves, the A?reement with Water Works District No. 2 was approved and the Mayor was authori:.gd to sign on behalf of the City and the Whale Rock Commission. 22. On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Major Davidson, the meeting, adjourned to 7:30 i'.M., September 14, 1954. Motion carried. Approved: October 19, 1964 J. H. FTTZPATRICK, CITY CLERK