Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/06/1965REGULAR MEETING OF;THE CITY:'COUNCIL . ...December 6,.- .1965,= 7 :00_P,:M. ., CITY: HALL:; t Roll Call: Present: Emmons Blake, Frank Gallagher, Donald Q. Miller, ,,ArthurfF: rSpring; CIell W.2W.helchel: City Staff. - -- present: P. Chapman, Planning & Building Director; J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; W. M. Houser, Jr. , City Attorney -,, R. D. Miller,---- Administrative Officer; D. F. Romero; City Engineer; Lee M. Schl.obohm; Fire• Chief; ::E-.rRodgers `Police•Captain E:- P. Thompson Water'. Superintendent -, ":.::. The minuteslof the meetings of October 18, 20, and 26, and November 1, 8, 15, and 22, .1965 were approved -on- motion of -Councilman Gallagher;'-seconded-by Councilman Miller :" Motion carried. On _motion- of, ouncilman' Blake.,,.seconded.by:Councilman Spring;' claims ) against -die City�:_ for the month_o_f_D_ec_e_mEFr_,_TT65 were ordered p is a subject to ne approval of the Admini= strative Officer. Motion carried. t. 1 1. Traffic_ Committee , Report -of:November.-18; 71965• <. 3J:,_ - : +s::: -:'": •_. .• 65, -12•-, T :. -The. Traffic :Commirtee . has:received -a request from '-the Saldation`•Army #or a oalEgzone adjacent to the hotel zone in front of the Fremont Hotel on Osos Street. The purpose of.this request• is to facilitate loading. and.unloading_of�furniture and'other_articles for the Thrift Store which is located next to the hotel. We feel that if the white hotel load- mg zone were repainted to :a yellow -color, . this would -se'rve.a -.dual =purpose: for the hotel - and for the Thrift Store and: so. recommend:_ _ .. . ,:!..:• "- -c:, : .: >:_ '::' • .cz• °•.: 65- 12 -6T. We have had a request that the two green zones in front of Thompson's Market on Leff Street north of Osos Street be shifted so that the two time limit spaces would start at the corner rather than the second and third spaces. -We so "recommend. 65 -12 -7C. The Traffic Committee has studied the suggestion of the Council that a stop sign be placed on King Street at South and we so recommend. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following Resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 1504, A Resolution establishing restrictions on Osos Street and Leff Street, and a evar stop on King Street. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Emmons Blake, Frank Gallagher, Donald Q. Miller, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None 65- 12 -2T. The City Engineer had recommended an additional street light midblock on Osos etween alm and Mill to help visibility at the entrance to the City Hall parking lot. Instead, the Traffic Committee has asked that Mr. Romero study the possibility of one large light in the middle of the City Hall parking lot which would light the parking lot and driveway entrance. Held over for additional information from the City Engineer. 65- 12 -3T. The Traffic Committee has had a request for an additional street light at the intersection of Albert Drive and Motley Street. We feel that this is needed and recommend that a wooden pole be erected on the west side of Motley opposite the Albert Drive inter- section. We also recommend that the existing light at the western corner of Slack and Motley be moved to the northeast corner. 65- 12 -4T. The Mayor had suggested that the speed limit on Lower Higuera be extended EeTETTe truck stop and we have asked the City Engineer to contact the County, asking them to conduct a speed zone study with the possibility of doing this. We also have asked the City Engineer to make a cost study on a blinking light for the intersection of Elks Lane and Higuera Street. As an administrative matter, he plans to place "curve" signs on Higuera at either side of the Elks Lane intersection. Amended to eliminate the blinking lights and try reflectors. 65- 12 -5T. The Traffic Committee has received a request from the Somerset Manor Motel or a oa ' g zone or extended red zone west of the double driveway ramp leading into the motel and restaurant to improve visibility. We do not feel that such a zone is necessary and would create a bad precedent which would result in numerous requests from other motels for the same privilege. 1 1 1 City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 2 65- 12 -8C. The Traffic Committee has again studied the request of the Council for US to study the feasibility of a stop or yield sign on Cypress at Branch. We recommer. against this at this time, for one- reason.because we feel that protecting Branch Stree: would have the effect of speeding up traffic on that thoroughfare. We also feel that on a street that isn't any busier than Branch, the intersections.which approach at a right angle and do not go through do not warrant a stop sign. ' 65- 12 -9T. We have had a request for better lighting in the vicinity of Orcutt Road and Bullock Lane and feel that the light on Orcutt opposite the Laurel Lane inter- section should be enlarged and that lights should be placed on either side of the railroad crossing. We also feel that a light should be installed on Bullock Lane in the vicinity of the Pepsi-Cola-plant. We recommend that the City Engineer be authorized to order these additional lights. 65- 12 -10T. The Traffic Committee has noted an increasing problem of traffic congestio on Santa Rosa between Peach and-palm and recommend that the'Council schedule a hearing on a proposal to install parking restrictions between-7-:00 and 9:00 A.M., and between 4:00 and 6:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Each property owner and resident on that street should be notified prior to the hearing, in our opinion. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, the recommendations of the Traffic Committee were approved as amended. Motion carried. 2. Request from the A&M Cab Company for a taxi stand in the first meter space. on Monterey Street in front of the Anderson Hotel was referred to the Traffic Committee for study and report on motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Miller. Motion carried. 3. The City Council discussed the report of November 12, 1965 on animal shelter cost and revenue for the past five years prepared by the City Clerk. 1 Councilman Spring stated that he was the Councilman who requested this information as he felt that the City was not getting the service it was paying for or had contracted for, and felt that the shelter should be put on notice that the City is dissatisfied with the existing service and if a better-job was not done, the City should consider some alternate method of control. The City Council then discussed a Council Committee report prepared in February 1964 estimating costs if the City took over the animal shelter service. By common consent -of the Council, R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, was to contact Ors. -Lee of the Woods Animal Shelter and let her know the Council's feelings and what can be done to make the existing contract operate." 4. At this time the City Council considered the request of the following employees to have their 1965 vacation carried over to 1966. A. Administrative 6 Legal Department Relly'Blalock 8 Days William M. Houser 10 Days B. City Clerk's Office J. H. Fitzpatrick Stanley Sanson Ann Overfield C. City Engineer's Office �_ Tom Gingg Loren.Edmands Doug Howard Tony Juarez Darrel Richards George Robertson Tom Rogers David Romero Lewis Santos Leo Studle Milo Tappa 15 Days 15 Days 15 Days IT Days 5 Days 10 Days _9 Days 5 Days 6 Days 5 Days 5 Days 5 Days 10 Days 15 Days D. Fire Department William Woodward 5 Days Mervyn Dixon 5 Days Lee Schlobohm 5 Days E. Planning & Building Department C. A. Jones F. Police Department W. Schofield E..L. Rodgers G. Water'Department Price Thompson Joseph Knepple -Frank Perry _ 5 Days 5 Days 10 Days 15 Days 10 Days 10 Days City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 3 Councilman Spring stated he felt that vacations were given to the employees so that'. some time during the working year an adequate rest period could be taken so that the person can come back on the job refreshed. Further, he felt that no one should be allowed.to: carry over - two, weeks..vacation•as he,,was,sure.that: this =could not;be done-_:: �in•private,industrv. and recommended ,that.a.,strict. policy be established`•requiring each, employee to,take :their. - vacation :during the. calendar year: = r ' ..Mr.- Romero;,City Engineer, objected to; the -.proposed change:stating.that =the present- policy of a owing carry over -.of one -year;'s vaca. tion '.created•greater•flexibility for both the City and the employee and had not shown a detrimental effect on City operation. _Councilman Blake, suggested _that- the:Council -grant .these extensions as-reque- sted'but'! :•_. �: . that no, future. vacation extensions:be, allowed. •: � • • • -�- On.. motion. of - Councilman Miller,:' seconded by •Councilman Sprin ,. thatat.the. end of : = = =• -- ,.j- , 1966'n6 vacations will - carried over into ;k9 : an eac '.person must take his vacation during the current calendar year. Motion carried.' ,On motion of..Councilman dall_a_ her,_, seconded' by Coun.cilman:Miller, - to. grant the request- for. vacation extension. for , - 0ver;of.1965;vacations t ey. must all be. cleaned up 1966.inclui* the. 1966. vaca.tion., Motion.carried.r _ .,--,.in _'i .._' g,: :w S. Communication from the Administrative Officer recommending that the City of San Luis Obispo. request a population estimate by the T*partment:of. Finance-as -of March, >. • 1966. On notion of; Councilman•Blake,_,seconded -by, C_ouncilman•:Sprin , the Administrative ..Offices was-authorized-to request a.populationestimate by.the,Department :of•Fihance. '"'6 'The -City Administrative Officer iegiiested'iuthorization to advertise foi-.the. purchase of five police cars and three pickup trucks for the Engineer and Water Departments., Request approved_on motion ;of Councilman. Gallagher; 'seconded by Councilman Spring,. ,Motion carried:.,.• ,T. Memorandum from the_,Fire Chiefirequesting Council permission -to dispose ofwa poition,of the.iowerie- cently removed from. the fire station number.1 by exchanging it ' .• with ttie Morro,Bay.Fire•,Departmentfora self- contained,oxygen•breathing unit... On motion of'Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the request. was' . approved. otion carried. 8. D. F. Romero, ,City.,Eiigineer„ presented 1a summary ,of street• sweeping - operations in_ _ other cities o California which indicated that the majority sweep residential areas once- -.;- a week....He pointed -out that since the sweeper is often broken down, :certain-areas: must .: go:an entire month if..the,sweeper.schedu'e is missed under the:present'operation. cHe . suggested that the City return to the .previous schedule of .sweeping. once a week .in residential areas. t -' a: After discussion by ttieJCouncil, it was the common consent of.the Council that the sweeping of the residential areas stay on the same schedule as presently existing. _. •. 9. Communication from the'Retail Merchants Association, Divisionof the Chamber of .Commerce, requesting. permission top ace a..s. portable house in:the.Missi:on Plaza 10r1 by Santa C1aus..from.;November 28 to j'anuary:2, 1966. _ .. • On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Gallagher.,_ the :request'for the Santa.,Claus house was-approved .- Motion carrie . 10. Communication from -the. Retail Merchants. Association requesting Council permission to have Santa Claus ride in a sleigh wn by five live Ala-Fkan reindeer.. on- December 15, from 4:00 to 5:30. P. M. ;was approved, on motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Council- man Galls her "1Vlotion'carried: "' - 11: ;Communication.from. the9San Luis Obispo,School District regarding.. the ;dedication of a portion of Balboa Street to the City for street purposes and also, requesting that the City and School District. share-the cost to repair,,the.- minor road deterioration.and -bring the street back to standard: "1'he -School Distr'ict.offered to supply the :material•for the - repairs if the labor. could be completed by the: City forces. ..discussion by the; City.Council it was moved by Councilman Miller :• seconded by 1 1 1 1 1 City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 4 Councilman SDring that the City Council accept the offer of dedication but that the repairs be completed on a 50 -50 cost sharing basis. Motion carried. 12. Communication from 11. Gallagher, County Road Commissioner, stating that with the County Board of Supervisor's permission, he felt the County and the City could share on a 50 -50 participation in the installation of protective crossing gates at the Orcutt Road crossing. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman.Gallasther, the following resolution was introduced. Resolution No. 1502, a resolution requesting County cooperation on installation of railroad crossing protective devices on Orcutt Road. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote. AYES: Emmons Blake, Donald Q. Miller, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring,. Clell W. u'helchei NOES: None ABSENT: None 13. At this time the City Council . held a public hearing on the report of the Superintendent of Streets for the cost of work for installation of curb, gutter and sidewalks on the following properties: A. D. H. & M. E. Boling 618 Sandercock Street $241.95 J. M. & M. Clark T. A. & M. R. DeVaul G. P. Hodge, Etal E. & H. Johe W. S. & N. V. Sing 0. B. & R. V. Pennington San Luis Obispo 902 Sandercock Street San Luis Obispo 251 Sandercock Street San Luis Obispo . 224 Sandercock Street San Luis Obispo 142 Harris Street San Luis-Obispo 261. Sandercock Street San Luis Obispo 804 Sandercock Street San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo City School 225 Story Street San Luis Obispo $239.05 $374.57 $228.40 $651.30 $ 73.60 - $ 45.00 $742.06 E. H. Seebeck 513 Sandercock Street $335.52 San Luis Obispo E. & J. T. Woelfle 698 Sandercock Street $260.66 San Luis Obispo B.-. The following property owners have requested three year option payment plan. R. A. McCutcheon 145 Story Street $225.50 San Luis Obispo - N. C. & M. R. Salviejo 266 Sandercock Street $205.60 San Luis Obispo G. D. & V. L. Bruce 236 Sandercock Street $259.28 „ San Luis Obispo M. Carla 312 Sandercock Street $246.26 San Luis Obispo C. M. Cragon 645 Sandercock Street $504.99 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 5 j L. R. &,C. R. Dana- Street 138. „Pr 24 :r r SaY, Obispo Luis J. F. & M. Escobar 2021 Broad Street :'�':.!Z.653.95 Sa3i-Lids.'- po E.B. 144 Cypress Street 801.08 San Luis Obispo J.- & -B: R ;.'Godstriae d j = 211•Ha"r'ns-.,— = 506.25 :Saii-LUis'' -0b'ispo- H. G. Hansen 519-529. Sandercock Street. 610.39 San Lui-s bb is"P� 0 G. & V"H-opkins,' Jr: -' 6-9i0i '- .-.” Sandercock S cock treet 247.73 Sari Luis'Obispo M. E. Horton 238 Sandercock Street 261.20 San Luis Obispo D.D. & E. M. Law. 546 Sande rc ock. Street -2.35.96 ' ' ' M. C. Lopez 834:'S'dn4:d'4-�"rc7o'clk'S"t'r"e<e.'t 258.76 San Luis Obispo M. & V. Nadelle:,:; 314 Sandercock Street 241.38 Luis Obispo.:.. .,,..San J. D. & R. Rouse 626 Sandercock Street 249.65 San Luis Obis.Po..,,- The City Clerk read the list of properties and the cost for such improvement. Mayor -Whelchel declared'the,p04c-he'akm ."opened. Mayor Whelchel declared the public hearing closed. On motion of Councilman Mjlleiii; ''second6d'by Councilman Gallagher,. the following Resolution wa—s-a—tr—oZj�uce- Resolution No. .15 1 .. . 03, A Resolution .Confirming costs of sidewalks constructed pu-r&ua—nt—t—o—tFe —MttniciI)al code. Pa,ssed and adopted on the following rolkcall. vote: AYES- Emmons Bldk6', Miller, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None 17. Request from the City Engineer that,he be allowed to keep on. the Public Works payr6li:Mr. A. Cardoza'�wE"o'was'.Ii*i're*d-"a"s a'6replacement for an employee who went into the service but who has now r4 in•a�nd'wish'es his job back. Mr. Romero stated that Mr. Cardozd is an extremely. fine employee and would hate. to lose -YiY—an-U—asked the Coulidil"ihit he be'ahow-edi-o'keep this "-rndn il an opening occurs thiougli normal turnover or increase in personnel in the.department. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Blake the request was City emp approved and Mr. Cardoza ;Fya s to stay on as a gy carried. ee Ion i- 18. Communication from Charles Port6i requesting that the City Council abandon a small portion of Wilson and Grove btreets which was not listed on a, prior abandonment -by the City. - Mr. Romero, City Engineer, bkolikhed die P r6blem to the city council stating that the origina.l.request had not included a small, parcel of land in the abandonment.of. Wilson Street to ihe. west. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded.by Councilman Spring -the request be that I f I —I 1 City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 6 referred to the Planning Commission for their recommendation. 19. At this time the City Council discussed methods for more effective collection of delinquent business licenses. It was the feeling of some of the members of the Council, that a very small percentage of the business licensees in the City are delinquent and they felt that the extra work in caring for-these accounts was unfair to the businesses that pay their license as required. The City Clerk explained to the Council the steps taken in the business license collection from the lst of July until the last account is payed or cancelled. On motion of Councilman Surinu, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, that in future years no delinquent business license be allowed to go beyond 90 days after the close of the license period and that the City Attorney file suit for collection by November 15 of each year. Motion carried. 20. Request from S. M. Forden for the City Council to extend the time limit one year on the tentative map of ito Tract No, 277. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, that the request be denied, since state law restricts tentative map extensions to one year. Motion carried. Councilman Gallagher voting no. Mayor Whelchel declared a recess at 8:50 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 9:00 P.M. - all Councilmen present. 14. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of H. M. Lacterman from a decision of the Planning Commission denying him a use permit for a home occupation at 716 Mission Street. Mr. Lacterman in his appeal stated that he wished to do fur repairing as a hobby, that ' he felt he was entitled to do sewing in his home, and further he felt sure that he would create no nuisance or additional noises and he would only do this on a part time basis as he was retired and enjoys sewing furs. Communication from the Planning Commission stating that the Planning Commission had denied the appeal of Mr. Lacterman against the Board of Adjustments denial of a use permit for a home occupation at 716 Mission Street, The Planning Commission stated that some members were concerned that the objections were largely based on what might happen and not based on fact. Further, it was pointed out by the Planning Commission that a home occupation is a permitted business use of a residential property. At the Commission hearing, a petition was presented signed by 70 residents protesting the granting of the permit. Also a dozen or more people appeared in person objecting to this use. They objected on the grounds that Mr. Lacterman was already conducting a business in his home and selling furs, and further had a female employee working with him which was illegal for a home occupation. Mayor Whelchel declared the public hearing open. Mr. Lacterman appeared before the Council stating that some of the persons who had signed the petition told him that they would be willing to remove their names if it would help the Council in their decision. Further he stated that this business would be in the line of a hobby rather than a full time business as he would not expect or' plan on spending more than a few hours a day at this work. Nr. P. W. Davis. Attorney representing the opponents to the use permit, stated that I, was his feeling after studying the City Municipal Code that the failure of Mr. Lacterman to appeal the denial by the Board of Adjustments within the three days required, had caused him to lose his rights to appeal not only to the Planning Commission but to the City Council. On this basis, he felt the Council had no juris- diction to hear this matter. Regardless of this legal objection, he felt that the Public Health and safety and property lines were involved as this particular neighbor hood where this business is to be established is a single family residential area and that a business of this type would ultimately downgrade the neighborhood. Mr. Davis continued that an inspection of Mr. Lacterman's property would show that based on the additions already made to his house and garage, that Mr. Lacterman anti- cipates a substantial amount of business in this area. City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 7 Upon question, William'Houser, City Attorney,-stated that he -felt the Council had the right to hear this matter as the Council always has the right to hear appeals from decisions of any board, commission or employee. Mr.-R. Tait, property owner, appeared before the Council stating that he objected to the' granting of this use permit for a business enterprise at 716 Mission Street listing various reasons for his objections. He stated that in the time that Mr. Lacterman has been going through the legal steps for a use permit that he has been operating a fur business with an employee on the premises in violation of all the City ordinances. Further, he urged that the Council protect this fine R -1 neighbor- hood and not allow this business to destroy this property. Mr: Lacterman stated he objected to some of the statements made by the opponents to his use permit but he wished the Council to know that he does not.plan to build a new business in the City of San Luis Obispo, but only wants to continue his fur work as a hobby while it was true he did accept money for any work done by him he further felt it.was not a business buildup. Mayor Whelchel declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Chapman, Planning Director, stated that under the present ordinance adopted by the City, this type of business can be operated as a home occupation in a R -1 zone. Councilman Spring stated that, based on his investigation of this matter, starting when the first remodeling was being done on the property, and the ad in the telephone book offering service in fur repair and styling and also the fact that Mr. Lacterman has taken out a sales tax permit in order to collect sales tax, Councilman Spring stated he was opposed to the granting of this permit. Councilman Gallaher stated that he felt that due to Mr. Lacterman's reputation as a furrier, that he would get a lot more business than he anticipates and it would not be long before it was a full time business and no longer a hobby and he there- ' fore felt that Mr. Lacterman should find suitable quarters where this can be done other than his home. Councilman Miller stated he was in favor.of granting the use permit to Mr. Lacterman to operate a furrier business in his home as he felt the application was legal and that the permit should be granted for a six month period to allow the neighbors to see the business in operation. Councilman Blake stated that he felt that Mr. Lacterman's reputation as a furrier would have a state wide appeal and that he would do much more business than he anticipates at this time. He felt that Mr. Lacterman should open up an office or a business in the City's business district and go about this matter in the right way. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Spring, that the appeal of Mr. Lacterman be denied and that the Council support the action of the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustments. Motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: Emmons Blake, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring NOES: Clell W. Whelchel, Donald Q. Miller ABSENT: None ' 15. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of the Planning Commission to rezone from R -3 and R -4 to R -C property located at'the corner of Walnut and Santa Rosa Street. Communication from the Planning Commission recommending that.the City Council approve this rezoning. The application was for a rezoning to permit the construction of a service station on the site presently occupied by the Nazarene Church. There were no objections to this application and the Planning Commission felt that a service station would be an appropriate use. The original application by the property owners was for C-1 but the Planning Commission felt that better control could be maintained by a zoning of R -C. The Planning Commission further recommends that prior to consum- mation of the rezoning, a widening agreement for Santa Rosa Street be entered into. Mayor Whelchel declared the public hearing open. City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 8 The Reverend Carsill, pastor of the Nazarene Church, appeared before the City Council on behalf of the church's request for rezoning of this property to allow a commercial use for development as a service station. He stated if the City would not allow a higher use, they would not be able to move the existing church buildings and therefore this inappropriate use of this property would continue which would be a hazard to motorists on Santa Rosa Street. He continued that one of the major decisions in building a new church away from this location was the hazardous traffic conditions ' and the fact that the church building is built close to the property lines hurts the site distance at this location. Fr. D. Lewetzow, 1021 Walnut Street, was opposed to the request of rezoning on the basis that he felt that this was a spot zoning and further he felt there were enough service stations in the City of San Luis Obispo already. Mr. John Smee, member of the Church of the Nazarene, stated that he felt the removal of the church building and construction of a service station on this corner would be an asset to the City and to the traveling public at this choice intersection. Mayor Whelchel declared the public hearing closed. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Spring, the following ordinance was introduced. Ordinance No. 333, an ordinance rezoning property at Walnut and Santr Rosa Streets from R -3 and R -4 to R -C. Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote. AYES: Emmons Blake, Donald Q. Miller, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ' ABSENT: None 16. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation.of the Planning Commission to rezone from R -1 to RHS a parcel of property lying between Johnson Avenue and Augusta Street. The following communication was received from the Planning Commission recommending approval of this property from R -1 to RHS. The Planning Commission stated that the applicant applied for rezoning to R -H to enable him to develop apartments in conjunction with adjoining property he owns on Augusta Street. There were no objections at the public hearing. The Commission felt that approval might encourage similar applications on adjoining properties and that these should not have direct access to Johnson Avenue in order to avoid added traffic conjention. They therefore recommend approval of this application with the S designation added to insure that vehicular access be from Augusta Street only. Mayor Whelchel declared the public hearing open. No one appeared. Mayor Whelchel declared the, public hearing closed. ' On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following ordinaz- was introduced. Ordinance No. 334, an ordinance rezoning the Zengiein parcel on Johnson Avenue from R -1 to RHS. Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote. AYES: Emmons Blake, Donald Q. Miller, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None 21. Communication from Charles M. Baker DBA Tropicana Village appealing the dect- of the Planning.Commission in stating conditions for the revised plan for Phase Y. City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 9 Tropicana Village. The conditions were (1) that proposed Palomar Avenue and the extension of Ramona Street to Palomar Avenue be improved by the developer or a performance bond be provided to guarantee improvements; (2) that engineering details of' street improvements be submitted with precise plan of Phase II. The Planning Commission wrote a letter to the Council stating that they had no objection to the change in phases of the development of Tropicana Village but they were seriously concerned with the proposal to defer all street improvements to the third phase. , The Planning Commission felt there was a danger if Palomar Avenue were not improved or guaranteed concurrently with the second phase that it might never be improved by the Bakers. The Commission agrees with the realignment of Palomar-Avenue-but feels - that engineering problems will be created and should be solved before the precise plan of Phase II is approved. The Commission also feels that the improvement of Palomar Avenue could be deferred without detriment to the development, but the majority recommends that a performance bond at least should be required with Phase II. Mr. Chapman, Planning Director, presented sketches of the original plan and the changes being proposed by Mr. Baker at this time for the planned development of Tropicana Village. Mr. Chapman also explained the changes being made in the alignment of Palomar Street from the original adopted plan. Mr. Charles M. Baker appeared before the City Council on behalf of his appeal from the conditions set by the Planning Commission stating that he did not feel that a performance bond could be procured guaranteeing the construction of Palomar Street, he felt that until the adjacent property was developed and their Phase III develop- ing, there would be no use for this street and to date there is no evidence that the adjoining property will ever develop. ' Mr. Baker stated that they had always acted in good faith with the City of San Luis Obispo, have cooperated in every request of the City Planning Commission, and felt that his request to develop Palomar Avenue sometime in the future was a reasonable one. He also explained the reason for starting Phase III prior to the original Phase II. He also stated that street improvement should only come when there is a mutual need to the owner, the neighborhood and City. Mr. Romero, City Engineer, explained the engineering problems involved with a street located along the Jacobsen property and with connection of a street through the Forden property to Serrano Drive. He recommended that Bakers be required to meet an align- ment which would be determined to be in the best interest of the City and all adjacent property owners. He stated again his belief that if some assurance was not required of the Bakers at this time, it is quite likely that the Baker Development could never afford to construct the street in,the future and that the City would be asked to participate financially in this improvement. The City Council discussed in detail the request of the Bakers to be relieved of the responsibility of putting in Palomar and Ramona'-Street with Phase II and to hold over these improvements to be completed with Phase III. The Council also discussed the need or requirement of having the Bakers put.up a bond guaranteeing future construction of these streets., On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, that the matter be ' re- referred to the Planning Commission with the recommendation that the street improvement on Palomar Drive from Luneta Street to Ramona Street not be made at this time but that the Bakers make the dedication for the future street right of way, the street alignment to be approved by the Planning Commission. Motion carried. 22. Communication from the Planning Commission recommending that the City Council establish a Fire Training Site on Prado Road adjoining the access road to the sewer plant as shown on the sketch presented. The Commission considers that this location would be suitable for a Fire Training Site particularly in view of the fact that there is no residential development in the immediate vicinity and none is likely to take place. Mr. Schlobohm, Fire Chief, stated in.discussion with the City Engineer that the location suggested would be .very adequate for a Fire Training Site. City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 10 Mr. Romero, City Engineer, stated while the sewer farm needed all the land it had, he felt that this would not particularly hurt operation and felt that this was a good location. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Miller, that the Fire Chief be authorized to plan the use of the area as requested for a Fire Department Training Site. Motion carried. ' The Planning Commission recommends to the Council against the development of a road side park on Prado Road adjoining the Freeway. The park was felt to be inappropriate in this location due to its proximity access from the Freeway and the reported objections of the Park and Recreation Commission and the Division of highways. Mayor Whelchel stated that he had never heard of any objection formerly to a road side rest from the Park and Recreation Commission or the Division of Highways, and felt that before a decision was made on this matter that a report be received from the Park and Recreation Commission and the Division of Highways. Also in connection with the road side rest, the Council discussed the possibility of leasing a corner of the sewer farm property on Prado Road to a major all company for a service station development. It was reported to the Council that several companies have been after the City for a lease for up to ten years or more. The City Attorney was asked to bring in a proposal call for lease proposals to the City Council, 23. At this time the City Council discussed the status of the sign permit issued to the Arctic Circle Drive Inn on California and Monterey Street suspended by the City Council at the last meeting. Mayor Whelchel explained to the City Council the telephone conversations he had had with representatives of the Arctic Circle Company and with the sign manufacturer who ' stated they would try to cooperate with the City on this matter. W. Carlos Moerman, City Neon, the company who is to install this sign, stated that the last he had heard from the Arctic Circle Company was that they had given in to the Council request and would try to install a smaller sign on their location. Miss Maxwell, representing the Sierra Club, appeared before the City Council protest- ing the granting of a permit for this terrible sign, and further she requested that the City Council adopt a much stricter sign ordinance for the City of San Luis Obispo than was proposed and defeated by referendum. Dr. Biedinger appeared before the City Council stating he did not wish to complain about a neighbor's business but felt that the sign proposed by the Arctic Circle. organization was too garish and too large for the neighborhood and hoped that the City would protect the adjacent professional offices and require a more subdued sign. Several other persons in the audience spoke against the sign proposed for the Arctic Circle Drive Inn. The matter was continued to the next meeting or when application was made on the new sign. 24. The following communication was received from the Planning Director, Peter Chapman. As instructed by the City Council I have discussed the matter of a mora- torium on signs with the City Attorney and the Planning Commission and recommend t,.• an emergency ordinance be adopted by the Council to include the following restricti- on signs in addition to those presently in the Municipal Code. (1) No free standiz.c: or attached sign exceeding 100 square feet in area unless approved by the City CM:_ (2) No roof signs to be permitted in any R or C -1 District. (3) No billboards to v- permitted in the C -1 or C -2 District or C -3 or M Districts without a use permit. After discussion by the City Council it was.moved by Councilman Blake, seconded r,, Councilman Spring, that the following emergency ordinance.be introduced. Ordinan -... No. 332, an ordinance declaring a moratorium on the erection of any flashing sign- within the City of San Luis Obispo. Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote. City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 11 AYES: Emmons Blake, Frank Gallagher, Donald Q. Miller 4"Akthur;Fi--.S - prilik.- ClLql-)'�Y Whe*i6b!4l- . NOES: None I '.-r. . I , - '.., .,!, 7" .1 ; . - -- - ABSENT:,!,. None . ............. .. . 25. Communication from the Planning Director, Peter Chapman, iftatftn'g­ Eh a: t.z "on October 23, 1965 the Council declared a moratorium on flashing.signs and requested_, •... !.-:- and - ­ r , ­ .. the'- Plaiudng s, Comiti ss ion 'to_� stitdy - th el:: ftob U mk: and 6kkizie'-c*omm'e'iid'at-i.o.ns'-'fo'r-'th'e :;c6ntrol,;of'su6hudigiis,"in^the'--fut-ur'-(i.,.': "; The Commisdi6h ippoiiitid a su'bc"o"m'm-it'td"e',-c'66-'t-isting-of--Commissio-ndrd'Abkin,'afad'Eva'n-,s and Mr. Charles Albaugh of City Neon, and John Freeman of Freeman's Sip qervice..:,- Th6_­subcommitte4. i'n'4ected:- alV the-if li3shi ng`sig'fisl the y "6661d 'fiiid-.i'n,,S'-aii"�L'u-iom s-'-ObI I S'R-. 0 ,and: the: onily one_ which all:i the:, c6idmitfii & embers agree was'-objectionable ' was 6e": flashing arrow outside the Mel-_:Smith" Chdviolet. 'Elbve s gag L r_e_`-)c onsidered'un- objectionable by all members of the committee but 7 signs were.felt.to have objectionable f eiatuires"D 1:..... U J.t The;- Committee--- was t6" aftive of controlling the 'rate -q&'flashirij which would prohibit 'Mel Smith'6 &kiroi?:'b6t t oermii� "he'Lainplighter: or Pancake House sign. Mr. Chapman then explained some of the studies and investigations made'6q':ti'h4i .' Committee, but found It would be impossible to write an ordinance that would control . I � � 7 . � " � , ., -. --I . - . . existence. - .. . . all 'the-�"objectionable'�-teaii3rii�"6f,--th"e'-f'liiihifii27iiiis--pteseritly in J J., The Commission recommends that the following definift6n"'`6f 'a--iiasfi'in-g;'silg'n'.-.b:'e-'J adopted. "Flashing sign means any illuminated sign other than.a.rotating,si.ga on which-.ihe.-'illuiginatidn-'is` or"givei 66 appearance "oft beihg I pifeririuipt_ ed �:Sri.�',Varii& in intensity.":-, The Commission further recommends that all signs in the future which fall under the abdve'-definitioii�;be...-doniidered by the''Desigb-.,Re-4i-ew":!Bokfd"whid"shou-ld.'.be'--- gi:v6i' the authority to aporovdi reject-,or,-Irequiie;am-e-idmenf6',to:Ehe.,dii�s'i-g"n -o-f 'such signs'- Naturally, any person agrieved by the decision of the Board should be permitted to appea either to ,the:: Commissi6n;-or direct ly'eo --the! Uti: Codn" il.'', c The.;City.'Couficil theb dfscusged:.,at-.%lingth: ihe-overall sign Or6bllesis lufid'Ef -,the.- ou Z� I. existing ordinance of the City and felvrthat,-afi--atte4t 'dh idl ^Ui madi : N:Fthi, Ciodiuffil to write an adequate ordinance for the City. J Mr.°Chap-m-an_'-felt that lit -would :Itake.:.appfoximate ly*- twd,:- yjei1rg%.-t,d :'preiiii" ordinancd,f6r,!theltitycstartirig_immddiat"e ly :• Several members of the City Council felt that with all the work done to date ow the ordinance that was rejected by the voters, that an adequate ordinance could be :written--`a'nd-,iid6ptedVift a much dh6ftd•"sledith' of It was suggested that the City Council appoint a committee consisting of City Officials, _is of- the -.6ign::iiiduiittr'y"fo"Or'e-'pa"'r"e""a sign" brainance for the Council's consideration. The Council -and -si'iiff-%idtii,.r-e4li'e'st6d-to'bi:Liig.:in' suggested name's' f o"r­'-m'-ember ship on'--'- the'.Comdittee tw stu4 the --n7ew _Is"igd-'dJrdin"a'nic6:_1_.,. On:liotion of:'C61iiici-lmin' Gilldglief7, geedndid % tiy Councilman S prInt; =th'e''-following emirgency-ordinaficei was ifitrdduddd.,'-; Ordinance Nd.'�`331 an: _or;d-in-ahce_'enadt r in- -9 temporary restrictions'•zon instaklatfdnildf 'iigng-. Intrdduced and fidal-ly 'passed 'on 'the following- r611cal-1 vote ns!!Blake", Donitl:&Q. -miller i,"Frank G&11'agh6'r,'-­: .:Arthxir s.F. .Spriiig cCl6-J%l:,zW: Wholchel. I.:• :;,7, 8L NOES - None L ABSENT: None ..-.!r�- I 7 I City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 12 26. Memorandum from the League of California Cities relative to the preemption initiative petition and announcing said petition as viewed by the League of CaliforniP Cities was ordered received and filed on motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, and the City Clerk was to notify Supervisor Dorn of Los Angeles Of t e Counc i s action. Motion carried. 27. Copy, of resolution from the City of Escalon that the public should be protected ' from the lawless and that freedom is not license.to corrupt nor to foster sedition or treason was ordered received and filed on motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher. Motion carried. 28. Communication from the City of San Mateo, forwarding a copy of a resolution passed by that City expressing devotion to the members of the armed forces of this country fighting in Viet Nam. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Miller, that the resolution was noted by the City Council and ordered received and filed. 29. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the following ordinance was introduced for final passage. Ordinance No. 328, an ordinance amending the fire zone map. Finally passed on the following roll call vote. AYES: Emmons Blake, Donald Q. Miller, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None 30. Oa motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Miller, the following ordinance was* introduced for final passage. Ordinance No. 330, an ordinance providing regulations for moving - buildings. Finally passed on the following roll call vote. AYES: Emmons Blake, Donald Q. Miller, Frank ;a.11agher, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None 31. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the following resolution was introduced. Resolution No. 1492, a resolution increasing the 1965 -66 budget by adding account number 233 entitled Traffic Study be increased by $3,850.00. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote. AYES: Donald Q. Miller, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: Emmons Blake ABSENT: None ' 32. The City Clerk reported the following bids received for construction of Stenne Reservoir Repairs and Improvements. 1. Pylon, Inc. $ 96,677.00 2. West Coast Construction Co. $118,426.11 Communication from'Paul L. Adamson, Consulting Engineer on the Stenner Reservoir Repair and Improvement Project. Mr. Adamson stated that his analysis and comparis: of the engineer's estimate and the low bidders break down of cost show agreement the lining and equipment costs but indicate that the estimate was low on the unde- drain system, flume bridge and railing. He stated that due to the varying and numerous crafts and types of work involved for a job of this type, he doubted that a lower bid could be obtained by readvertising. Therefore, he recommends that the City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 13 contract while it was 14% higher than the estimate, be awarded to Pylon, Inc. Mr. Thompson, Watei Superintendent, stated that this work was necessary and that this reservoir was an important link in the City's water system, he also recommended that the low bid of Pylon, Inc., be accepted. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, that the contract be awarded to Pylon, Inc. Motion carried. , 33. The City Clerk reported that the following bid was received for supplying the City of San Luis Obispo with one 48" Butterfly Valve for the Whale Rock Reservoir. 1. Henry Pratt Company $81674.00 Mr. Thompson, Water Superintendent, recommended that the bid of Pratt Company be accepted. On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, that the bid of Henry Pratt Company be accepted. Motion carried. 34. The Council considered the following contract payments: HOWIE AND SHELTON Est. #2 (100% complete) $2,075.40 Ferrini Road Widening Incl. Change Order #1 BURKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #2 (35% complete) 99401.58 Johnson Avenue Widening Allow 11 additional days for completion due to rain. WEST COAST CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #4 (91% complete) 89281.66 South - Beebee Drainage Incl. Change Order #1 & #2 Allow extension to December 21, 1965 for completion due to rain and slow delivery of materials on a change order. BURKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #3 & Final (100% 310.60 896.40 complete) Augusta Street Extension C. S. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #4 (60% complete) 122680.60 High Street Reconstruction Incl. Change Order #1 On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Councilman Miller, that C. S. Construction Company be allowed 11 days extension on contract due to rain. ' Motion carried. WEST COAST CONSTRUCTION Est. #1 (35% complete) 52,010.31 Lower Higuera Assessment #3 & Final (100% complete) 594.12 BURKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #2 (35% complete) 99401.58 Johnson Avenue Widening Allow 11 additional days for completion due to rain. WEST COAST CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #4 (91% complete) 89281.66 South - Beebee Drainage Incl. Change Order #1 & #2 Allow extension to December 21, 1965 for completion due to rain and slow delivery of materials on a change order. BURKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #4 (100% complete) 896.40 Augusta Street Extension Est. #5 & Final (100% complete) 2,701.58 WEST COAST CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #2 (100% complete) 625.95 Grand Avenue - Mill Street Sewer Est. #3 & Final (100% complete) 594.12 M. J. HERMRECK, INC. Incl. Est. Change Order #1 #6 & Final (100% complete) 8,235.83 ' Foothill Blvd. Street Improvement Incl. Change Order #1 D. F. Romero, City Engineer, explained that the City and Contractor had been in disagreement regarding Change Order #2 for approximately 12 years but that despite numerous phone calls and letters from the City, the Contractor was unable to find time to meet with City personnel to discuss the items in question. City Engineer Romero, recommended that this Change Order be withheld at this time until the matter can be settled with the Contractor. On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, approve payments including Change Order #1 in the amount of $8,235.83 and not approve Change Order #2 being contested by contractor. Motion carried. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Spring, all the contract City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 14 payments were approved including change orders and contract extension time as recommended by the City Engineer. Motion carried. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the following , resolution was introduced. Resolution No. 1500, a resolution increasing the budget (260.58, 250.1). Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote. AYES: Emmons Blake, Donald Q. Millen, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring, Cleil W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None 35. On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the following salary increases were. approved. ARNETT, Gerald L.., Fireman, from Step 1 at $480 to Step 2 at $508 per month, effective January 1, 1966. CHIAPELLA, C. Parker, Senior Librarian, from Step 1 at $480 to Step 2 at $508 per month, effective January 1, 1966. DITTMAN, Lawrence K., Police Officer, from Step 1 at.$480 to Step 2 at $508 per month, effective January 1, 1966. FRITZ, Richard J., Fireman, from Step 1 at $480 to Step 2 at $508 per month, effective January 1, 1966. OVERBEY, J. Steven, Fireman, from Step 1 at $480 to Step 2 at $508 per month, effective January 1, 1966. OVERFIELD, V. Ann, Account Clerk II, from Step 4 at $455 to Step 5 at $480 per month, effective January 1, 1966. SESENA, Leo J., Janitor, from Step 3 at $385 to Step 4 at $405 per month, effective January 1, 1966. Motion carried. 36. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Spring, the following resolution was introduced. Resolution No. 1499A, a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a quit claim to J. F. Lucas for street widening.on Foothill Boulevard and and a quit claim to William Baker and Charles Baker for a sewer easement. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote. AYES: Emmons Blake, Donald Q. Miller, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Spring, the Mayor was authorized to accept on behalf of the City and record same. Motion carried. 37. Communication from the State Department of Public Health notifying the City Council that San Luis Obispo County has again been declared a rabies area effective December 2, 1965 was ordered received and filed. 38. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the Mayor was authorized to accept and record a covenant for temporary erection of a sign within the public right -of -way at 363 Santa Rosa Street. Motion carried. 39. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Miller, the following City employees were authorized sick leave extending over two weeks. William Schofield Reuben Lewis Frank Kirchner City Council Minutes December 6, 1965 Page 15 40. Mr. Miller, Administrative Officer, announced the promotion of Burton Walter to Chief Building Inspector effective December 1, 1965 at $750 per month. Mr. Miller, Administrative Officer, announced the appointment of Raymond P. Barba as Police Officer, effective December 1, 1965 at $480 per month, Step 1, subject to completion of a satisfactory probationary period of one year. 41. The City Clerk reported that the following bid was received for furnishing public , liability and property damage insurance for the City of San Luis Obispo for the period December 7, 1965 to December 7, 1966. 1. Farmers Insurance (Atkinson & Hollister) $10,533.30 On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, accept the bid of the Farmers Insurance Group and award the contract. Motion carried. 42. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Spring, the following resolution was introduced. Resolution No. 1501, a resolution proclaiming December 10th as Human Relations Day and December 10 -17 as Human Relations Week in San Luis Obispo. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Emmons Blake, Donald Q. Miller, Frank Gallagher, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Miller, the meeting adjourned at 12 :30 A.M. Motion carried. APPROVED: January 17, 1966 FITZPATRICK CITY CLERK C