HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/07/1978City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 2
Vice -Mayor Petterson declared the public hearing open.
Harry J. Busselen, Jr., 807 Skyline Drive, appeared before the City Council
appealing the decision by the Commission not to require an E.I.R. on the
Foothill Rezoning and Minor Annexation proposal. It was his opinion that
an environmental impact report should be prepared by an objective professional
who was independent of the developer. He felt the following factors should
be considered as a minimum:
1) The project is at best controversial. The minor annexation
section of the General Plan is under question.
2) The project is growth inducing as there is no logical reason
to approve this project and deny others in the area.
3) The area is scenic sensitive and the project could damage
the scenic and aesthetic aspects of the area.
4) The cumulative effect of this minor annexation with others
may cause a water supply crisis as our water sources are
marginal in extended periods of drought even without minor
annexations.
5) The proposed scenic easements do not appear to be of a truly
permanent nature.
6) The proposed substandard streets are not adequate for fire trucks
and may be marginal for expected traffic.
7) The environmental damage by the proposed grading -has not been
adequately analyzed and reported.
8) Annexations are very expensive to the current residents of
the City in terms of City services, etc., which are to be
supplied especially if they contribute to crises requiring
the enlargement of City and school facilities. What is the
possible financial impact on current residents in terms of
taxes, etc.?
9) The cumulative effect of drainage and flood inducing potential
of the project needs to be analyzed.
10) The noise problem.of traffic on Foothill Boulevard has not been
fully analyzed and documented, nor mitigation measures determined.
11) The geology of the area needs to be investigated prior to
development to determine the potential for land slides and
other soil problems.
12) The question of parks and recreation for the neighborhood has
not been adequately analyzed and reported nor have mitigation
measures been determined.
He concluded by stating that the E.I.R. should consider the loss of vegetation
and wildlife, the archaeological aspects, fire protection, park and recreation,
impact on schools, access and circulation, sewer and water services, drainage,
' and the cumulative degradation of air quality and scenic beauty of the area. It
should also consider mitigating measures necessary to minimize.environmental
damage and tax increases. The E.I.R. should also consider in this case,
alternatives to the proposed project.
Diane Jefferson, 258 Patricia Court, appeared before the City Council urging
that a full environmental impact report be prepared on the Foothill Rezoning.
She felt that the Planning Commission was wrong in stating that the data
provided was sufficient, and that an E.I.R. was not necessary. She felt
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 3
that only through the E.I.R. procedure could both proponents and opponents
make available the development proposal and its probable effect on the
environment (to include its effect on the City as a whole and on the immed-
iately surrounding areas as well as on the land to be developed). She felt
it was only right that the public hearing should be held, and problems and
concerns should-be aired. She felt that only through the E.I.R. process would
alternatives to the development be brought to the fore. She felt that there
were other possibilities for use anddesign heretofore unconsidered by the '
E.R.C., the Planning Commission, and now by the City Council. She concluded
by stating that she was personally opposed to all annexations in the City and
hoped that none of the proposed developments ever become a reality, but should land
be annexed and developments proceed, she wanted to have the eventualities made
known to the public and dealt with by the developer insofar as possible, and
this could only be.done through the E.I.R. process.
Dirk Walters; Chairman - Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo County,
appeared before the City Council on behalf of the ECOSLO stating that the
Board of Directors felt that a full E.I.R. for the Foothill Rezoning and
annexation proposal should be prepared. He asked that the City Council reverse
the decision made January 4, 1978, by the Planning Commission and have the E.I.R.
prepared. In addition to being the right thing to do, ECOSLO felt additional
specific items needed to be discussed such as:
1) To describe the scenic and aesthetic characteristics of the area
which may be degraded by this development, and consider mitigating
measures and alternatives.
2) Was the project growth inducing and did it set a precedent for future
development in the area? Why is a road easement to the adjacent
property to the west a part of this proposal, and is further development
contemplated in the area?
3) Would this annexation be the last one in that area or are other
annexations likely to further extend the City Limits in this area?
4) Does the City have sufficient water supply sources to serve this
property and all other property within the city limits to an
optimum level of development? Should this development have priority
for water over land already within the City Limits, and other
annexations which may be more important?
5) Is the open space easement of a truly permanent nature and of a
quality sufficient to justify annexation at this time? Does it fit
into a Master Plan for the procurement of other even higher quality
open space areas in a practical manner? What is the relative value
of this open space compared to other open space areas which should
be considered for procurement.
6) What are the alternatives to the proposed project?
He closed his statement by.saying that in their view the E.I.R. process would
be the only way for the people who ultimately have to pay for development to
find out what was being done and was not used as a barrier to people trying to
earn a living.
Donald I. Smith, 1750 Prefumo Canyon Road, #48,.appeared before the City
Council asking that the City Council reverse the action of the Planning ,
Commission in denying the need for a full E..I.R. on the proposed annexation
and the zoning. He felt the E.I.R. was supposed to provide objective information
to the public and to government officials to.assist in the decision making
process and local government should require them on such controversial proposals
as this proposed annexation and development if trust were to be restored in local
government. He then listed a number of suggestions that had been brought for-
ward by the other speakers in support of the environmental impact report.
M I N U T E S
REGULAR MEETING.OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1978 - 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
Pledge
Roll Call
Councilmen
PRESENT: Ron Dunin, Jeff Jorgensen, Steve Petterson and Allen Settle
ABSENT: Mayor Kenneth E. Schwartz
City Staff
PRESENT: J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; Allen Grimes, City Attorney;
R.D. Miller, Administrative Officer; Henry Engen, Director
of Community Development; Dan Smith, Senior Planner; Terry
Sanville, Planning Associate; Wayne Peterson, City Engineer;
Don Englert, Police Captain; Dave Romero, Director of Public
Services
Vice -Mayor Steve Petterson, presiding.
Mr. Russ Johnson appeared before the City Council stating that he wished to
make a presentation to the Council, but he wished to reserve it until the end
of the meeting for discussion.
No objections from the City Council, Mr. Johnson's item was made.Item X.
1. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the appeals by
Harry J. Busselen, Jr.; Diane Jefferson; the Environmental Center of-San Luis
Obispo County; Donald I. Smith; and the Public Interest Action Center of San
Luis Obispo County, from a decision of the Planning Commission not to require
a full E.I.R. on the prezoning and Minor Annexation proposal for property located
at the west City Limits between Foothill Boulevard and Highland Drive.
Terry Sanville, Planning Associate, presented to the City Council the recommend-
ation of the Planning Commission. He stated that the Foothill Annexation
included the incorporation of 22 acres of land north of Foothill Boulevard
at the City's western boundary. The property owner proposed to create 19
single - family home sites, a one acre recreation area and a perpetual open -space
easement on about 50% of the property. He stated that on January 4, 1978, the
Planning Commission on a 5 -1 vote granted the Foothill Annexation a negative
declaration, and that this decision had been appealed in writing to the City
Council. He continued that this project was reviewed by the E.B.C. at three
separate meetings during October., November, and December, 1977. The property
owner's consultant prepared a project report which addressed most environmental
issues. The E.R.C. on two separate occasions asked the applicant to expand
this project report with additional information. The applicant presented the
supplementary information to the E.R.C. on November 23, and December 7, 197.7.
After extensive review, the E.R.C. decided that the project's initial environ-
mental study was complete and that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. A negative declaration was granted and was published
in the Telegram - Tribune on December 12, 1977. On January 4, 1978, the.Planning
Commission considered an appeal of the E.R.C.'s decision to grant the
annexation a negative declaration and voted to deny the appeal. As defined '
by State Environmental Law, an annexation was a "project" and must be evaluated
for its effect on the environment. While the Staff continued to support the
preparation of comprehensive environmental reports, they felt that the information
prepared for this project answered the majority of development related questions
and did not demonstrate that the project might have a significant effect on the
environment. The Planning Commission's Staff recommendations were:
1) Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's action to
grant the project a negative declaration.
2) Require the applicant to combine all environmental information
that has been prepared into a single document.
3) Require the applicant to make sufficient copies of the
expanded initial study available for distribution to the
Planning Commission, City Council and interested citizens.
1
City Council Minutes.
February 7, 1978
Page 4
A letter from Ray Bracken, Secretary - Public Interest Action Center of San
Luis Obispo County, was received asking that the City. Council over -rule the
Planning Commission and order a full E.I.R., to skip the significant impact on
the environment of the proposed Foothill Annexation. He stated that the last
meeting of the Board of Directors of this group voted to request that the
City Council require an Environmental Impact Report.in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act.
Martha Stewart -; Cuesta Drive, stated that she was in full support of the comments
by the previous speaker, demanding a full E.I.R. for full knowledge and disclosure
of the potential flooding and drainage problems to be caused by this proposed
development.
Bonnie Walters, 392 Christina. Way, was opposed to not requiring an E.I.R.,
particularly in face of the flood potential. She felt that a full study was
needed so that the adjacent neighbors below the development would know what
their problems would be.
, 135 Crandall Way, was in support of the E.I.R. to keep
growth down in order to keep visual impact of this portion of the City intact.
Vic Montgomery, representing the developer, reviewed for the City Council, the
report prepared by Priest, Richmond, Wolf & Rossi, dealing with the Foothill
Annexation and some of the area and studies already accomplished by his firm.
He answered a number of questions brought up by the appellants demanding an
E.I.R.
Bob Williams, Soil Engineer, upon request of Vic Montgomery submitted his
review of the geology of the proposed area and stated he found no significant
impact that this development would have on this area.
' Allen Grimes, City Attorney, stated that the Council's responsibility in this
action was whether the Planning Commission records showed that the Planning
Commission fairly heard the issues of the appeal from the action of the E.R.C.
and, finally, that the action of the Planning Commission was sound and
reasonable. The Council was not to consider new issues being brought up at
this time.
Councilman Jorgensen stated that he disagreed with the Attorney's opinion as he
felt that it has been Council policy in the past to hear all sides;:of the
issue and make a decision on merit and not limit their discussion to only the
conditions of the appeal.
Ila Harmon, 250 Highland Drive, supported the annexation and the decision of
the Planning Commission to not require full environmental impact report.
Donald I. Smith again stated that he felt the proponents of the annexation
have not told the complete truth on this proposal.
Russ Johnson opposed to the full E.I.R. felt the Planning Commission and E.R.C.
should be supported. He fully supported the development of housing in the
City.
Vice -Mayor Petterson closed the public hearing.
Terry Sanville again presented the recommendation of the Planning Commission
and Staff to not require the environmental impact report.
Councilman Jorgensen felt it was the Council's responsibility to decide
whether a full -blown E.I.R. was needed for this project. He felt that sufficient
information had been presented this evening showing a need for a full environ-
mental impact report in order for the Council to really see the impact on
adjacent properties such as drainage and flooding on lower properties. He also
felt that an E.I.R. was needed so that the City Officials would know the
cumulative effect of each small development. He would support the appeal.
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 5
Councilman.Settle stated that he saw the question for the Council was not
annexation or the project but whether an E.I.R. was needed for this or any other
development within the area. He felt the Planning Commission and E.R.C. had
done a thorough job in developing their information on this issue and felt that
an E.I.R. was not needed. He also felt his concern was to develop housing
within the City as long as it agreed with the.General Plan. He did not feel
any additional information was brought out at this meeting to justify an E.I.R.
and he would vote to deny the appeal.
Councilman Dunin stated that he did not feel that additional information was
presented to over -rule the Planning Commission and E.R.C. and he would not
support the appeal as he felt the project had been fully exposed and all
facets had been made public.
Councilman Petterson stated that he agreed with Councilmen Settle and Dunin
and did not feel that significant information had been presented to show the
need for an E.I.R. He would vote to deny the appeal.
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the Staff
be directed to prepare a resolution for Council's action to deny the appeal
for an E.I.R. based on the Commission's recommendation.
Motion carried, Councilman Jorgensen voting no, Mayor Schwartz absent.
4. Council's consideration of a request that a joint City Council /Univer-
sity Administration Committee be appointed to review areas of conflict or
agreements between both agencies.
Councilman Jorgensen presented to the City Council, the outlines as he
perceived the proposed City /Cal Poly Housing Committee Membership structure,
purpose and relationship to other committees for the Council's consideration.
He felt the committee should be basically formed of the following representa-
tives:
1) One representative
2) One representative
3) One representative
4) One representative
5) One representative
6) One representative
7) One representative
8) Two citizen repres
from the Associated Students of Cal Poly
from the Associated Students of Cuesta College
from the University Administration, Cal Poly
off - campus housing office, Cal Poly
from the City Planning Commission
from the Human Relations Commission
from the Citizens' Advisory Committee
entatives
He felt that the Committee should be an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee Task Force
with an assignment and duration of one (1) year unless extended because of
demonstrated need. The Committee would be responsible for its own rules
and organization with reports made quarterly to the City Council, Cal Poly
Administration, local media and any other interested agency, or at more
frequent intervals as considered desireable by the Committee. Each member of
committee would serve as an individual, but act as liaison with the group or ,
interest they represented. It was anticipated that the City of San Luis Obispo
and Cal Poly University would provide additional staff support as it became
necessary for the effective functioning of the Committee. He felt the purpose
of the committee would be to investigate, analyze and make recommendations
to the City Council and Cal Poly Administration-on measures which could be.taken
to alleviate the current housing crises as it affected the provisions of
adequate student housing in the community. The scope of the committee's
investigation should be broad; limited only by what the committee itself
considered relevant and capable of accomplishment. Among the topics which the
committee might consider but not intended as exhaustive, were the following:
J
1
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 6
1) Methods of providing additional student housing through appropriate
zoning, density incentives, construction and on- campus married student
housing or other technique.
2) Review of landlord /tenant relation with respect to housing conditions,
lease provisions and landlord /tenant grievances in general.
3) Mechanisms for stabilizing rents and housing controls at a
reasonable non - explorative level through rent controls or other
voluntary methods.
4) Establishment of cooperation and coordination between the City of
San Luis Obispo and the Cal Poly University Administration in their
respective planning processes with the establishment of an enroll-
ment calling at the University consistent with the City's General
Plan.
5) Improvement of Community /University relations through better
communication and involvement on housing matters and the development
of mitigating measures to alleviate hardships related by the present
housing shortage.
He concluded by stating that several other agencies and committees already
existed which dealt with specific housing problems in the community. Most
notable were the Housing Authority, the.Human Relations Commission and the
Economic Opportunity Commission. In addition, Councilman Dunin had been
working with Community leaders on the formation of a committee.which would
focus on means of encouraging and facilitating construction of immediate
housing. He felt that the City /Cal Poly Housing Committee was not intended
to replace or ignore the other legitimate housing concerns. He felt its
scope was narrow, but felt that it was anticipated that it would be necessary
to overlap with other interests. Finally, he felt that at some future point
a re- analysis of the committee would be appropriate and that consolidation
of various housing interests into a single formal commission might be
considered. If the Council felt this way, it was recommended that the
Citizens' Advisory Committee review such a proposal as part of the ongoing
analyses of the City's committee structure.
Henry Engen,. Community Development Director, reminded the City Council that
the City was in receipt of a report of an Ad Hoc Housing Task Force that was
more comprehensive in terms of membership then that being suggested by
Councilman Jorgensen. This committee included contractors; representatives
of lending institutions, landlords, etc. That report had been received over
a year ago and-was not in the process of being integrated into a new updated
Housing Element of the General Plan. There is a danger that the creation of a
new committee could inadvertently result in interfering with the timely
completion of the Housing Element. However, some of the issues such as student
overcrowding in single - family neighborhoods were not addressed by the original
task force. He felt it would be his Department's recommendation-to encourage
the creation of University /Student Committee which would prepare a problem
statement and make recommendations to staff for their consideration in developing
an update Housing Element.
Robert E. Kennedy, President - California Polytechnic State University, appeared
before the City Council and reviewed for the Council that a year ago, February 16,
1977, the County, City and University were working towards the development of
a tripartite arrangement which would establish a coordinating group to address
itself to such issues as housing problems in the community and City /County/
University relations. The City Council appointed a member of the City Council
and,the Board of Supervisors appointed a representative from the Board as
members to this committee, but that the Council member was unable to attend
meetings at which to develop an Agenda and address themselves to the organi-
zation of the group, although he did meet with Howard Mankins, Chairman of
the Board of Supervisors, and they did agree with staff level coordination similar
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 7
to that which had been worked out and carried on with the City over the
years. President Kennedy continued that he assumed that changes in the
composition and interests of the City Council and in the focus of local
issues had in part contributed to the City's delay in acting upon the
proposal for the tripartite group. Before any new proposals were acted
upon, which would involve the need to.go over old ground, he urged the
Council to review the proposal already in hand and that he, on behalf of the
University, stood ready to meet with the Council to discuss in Study Session,
how this could.go further in developing the coordinated group. He then sub-
mitted for the City Council, a chronology which reviewed steps which had been
taken and were being taken to coordinate and arrive at mutually acceptable
solutions to such problems as housing, traffic, etc. He also submitted a
report on past and future enrollment at the University. He concluded his
comments by saying he hoped that the City Council would proceed to develop
with the County and with the University, a coordinating body which would be able
to establish facts on which to base decisions affecting local government and
the University. For example, in current discussions of student tenants in R -1 .
Zoning areas, there seemed not to be available any reliable data that would
indicate the number of landlords and residences involved, the number of students
and other young people who would be affected by blanket enforcement, and what
kinds of action had been taken during the nearly 18 .years that the ordinance
under discussion had been on the books. It seemed to him that this information
must be known and made available for all interested parties before decisions
could be made. He stated that he could support Councilman Jorgensen's proposal
in principle, but would hope that this task force would concentrate on housing
and student housing problem and not on all City /County /University relations. He
would still support the proposal of February 14, 1977, for a tripartite liasion
panel of nine (9) members divided equally between the-City -, the County and the
University, and hoped the City Council would implement this committee as had
been done by the County and the University.
Larry Robinson, Chairman of the Board of Associated Students - Cal Poly, stated
he would support the concept of a task force as suggested by Councilman
Jorgensen and supported by President Kennedy. He hoped the Committee would get
into action immediately and urged the Council to appoint the committee tonight
so that this housing problem could be addressed face on.
Phil Dunn, Intra- Fraternity Council, was in support of the ASI position and
felt the first issue was the matter of three or more unrelated people living
in R -1 residences.
Brian Kohls, Chairman - Cal Poly Political Action Club, submitted a. proposal
for a larger responsibility for .a task force to represent the entire community,
including the University. His group wanted action and action on this Task
Force now, to develop a program for the housing within the community.
Joe Arsenio, 2053 Hays Street, stated whatever the Council decided, all that
he or his neighbors wanted was to have the integrity of the R -1 Zone limited to
family residents and he felt that families should be protected and not let it
be zoned to multiple use by inaction by the City Administration over the
years.
Walt Crawford, 2097 Chorro Street, felt that the Council should maintain the
integrity of the R -1 Zone and protect families. He would support the formation
of a task force to look into housing relief and housing problems for the
students.
Sylvia Drucker, 1317 Cavalier Way, was opposed to placing people on the task
force who had already made up their minds to change or ignore the zoning.
regulations of the City, particularly the area in three or more unrelated persons.
She felt that people should be placed on the committee who had not made up their
minds. She felt that the City Ordinance should be enforced as far as protecting
the R -1 Zones was concerned.
Liz Fisher, 2935 Augusta Street, would support the formation of the task force
on housing throughout the City. She had always felt that the University should
cooperate with the City and vice versa.
City Council.Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 8
Gail Moyes, 1831 Fixlini Street, felt the R -1 Zones.should protect families
in the R -1 Zones from the use of apartments in the zone. He then gave a list
of problems in his neighborhood that had caused him misery by developing
multiple uses in a large single - family area.
Henry Alberts, 1248 Madonna Road, opposed the formation.of a-task force and
felt that it would serve no purpose and would just delay the enforcement of
ordinances to protect the R -1 Zones. He felt that the overcrowding, noise
and vehicle violations were what this matter was all about and rather than
further delay the enforcement of City ordinances.by holding,up action by
forming another committee to study the action, he felt that the University was
the real culprit in this case and should do something to provide housing for
their own students.
Vice -Mayor Petterson closed the public hearing.
9:30 P.M., Vice -Mayor Petterson declared a recess.
9:40 P.M., the Council reconvened with all Councilmen present, Mayor Schwartz
absent.
Councilman Settle stated that he would support the task force on housing,
including the problems in the R -1 Zone. He felt the committee could look into
additional housing, rent controls, etc., but.he felt that the committee should
have a representative of a financial institution and possibly someone from the
University community to give input and balance the committee.
Councilman Dunin felt that there were three basic problems:
1) Housing in general.
2) Student housing.
3) City /University relations.
He would support the idea of the Jorgensen Task Force for housing but felt
that a representative from the real estate management field or rental field
and financial institution should be appointed to support the ad hoc concept
of the Committee. He would like this committee to be on a limited tenure.
and not to be a permanent City Committee.
Councilman Jorgensen stated that he would naturally.support the concept of
an ad hoc task force and would accept whatever-additional members the Council
felt would round out and give better support to the committee.
Councilman Petterson felt that the University was not to blame for the housing
problems in the City. He felt that the housing problems lay .within the City
Administration with the City attitude of supplying additional land to develop
housing. He did not feel that the Committee would accomplish anything. He felt
that the solution was in the Planning Commission and Planning Staff to analyze
their attitude toward housing and development within the Community.
On motion of Councilman Dunin.that the City Council adopt the proposed
committee as.suggested by Councilman Jorgensen but adding a representative from
the real estate management field and a representative of a lending institution.
Motion lost for lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Dunin; that the
Council instruct the Planning Commission Staff to analyze the housing situation
in San Luis Obispo as it related to student housing and as it related to three
or more unrelated people within the dwelling, and they could draw-upon other
members of the community if they felt they were needed for input'.
Councilmen Petterson and Dunin withdrew their motion after discussion with the
City Council.
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 9
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Jorgensen, that the City
Council adopt the proposed committee as suggested to act for one year as an ad
hoc study committee and that, in addition to-the members suggested by Councilman
Jorgensen, that a representative of the real estate management field (Arnett &
Broadbent) and a lending institution (Al Ingersoll) be added.
Motion carried, Councilman Petterson voting no, Mayor Schwartz absent.
2. At this time the City Council held a public hearing to consider a
Level I Ordinance 604 -A Resource Deficiency associated with the Use Permit
request for commercial development at 999 Monterey Street (C -4 Zone),
Irving W. Peterson, applicant's representative.
Dan Smith, Senior Planner, presented the recommendation to the City Council
as follows: The applicant was proposing to construct a two -story theatre /retail/
office building at the corner of Monterey and Osos Streets on the site of the
old Obispo Theatre. The building would not.be.provided with.sufficient fire
flow because the site was served by substandard waterlines in Osos and Monterey
Streets. This was reported as a Level I 604 -A Deficiency by.the City's Utility
Engineer who recommended that a new 10 -inch waterline be constructed in Osos.
Street from Marsh to Monterey Street to eliminate the deficiency.
The Staff recommended that the developer be required to construct the 10 -inch
waterline prior to construct -ion of the building and request City participation
through the quarterly funding program.
The Planning Commission at a public hearing conducted January 18, 1978,
considered the deficiency and recommended the City Council do the following:
1) Require the developer to construct the 10 -inch waterline with
the City to participate to the amount of 50% of the cost of the
line.
2) Reevaluating City Policy (as reflected in past 604 -A utilities 1
deficiencies) requiring developers to pay for new sewer and water-
lines even though such lines would have incidental benefit to other
properties.
Dan Smith stated that the recommendation from the Planning Commission
recommending a 50% City participation was.based on the fact that the-new
waterline would benefit the area as well as the subject property with improved
fire flow. The Commission was concerned that, because the area was substantially
developed, no new developments were likely, meaning the developer would probably
be reimbursed very little, if any, by other properties for the cost of the
line.
Concerning the Planning Commission's suggestion that the City Council
reevaluate its policy of requiring developers to bear the full costs of
correcting utilities deficiencies was based on Staff comment that the City
had rather consistently required developers to correct reported deficiencies.
The Planning Commission suggestion.was made, however, without the benefit
of knowing how many such projects had received subsequent City funding through
the quarterly funds or other funding sources.
The City Staff recommended that the City Council take the following action,
which is different from the Commission's reports:
1) Require the developer to install a 10 -inch waterline in Osos Street '
from Marsh Street to Monterey Street to eliminate the reported fire
flow deficiency.
2) Consider the applicant's written request for quarterly funds at
the next available quarter.
3) Direct Staff to provide the Planning Commission with information
regarding past 604 -A Deficiencies and to what degree the City
participated in the cost of their correction to determine if a
reevaluation of ordinance 604 -A policy were necessary.
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 10
Finally, Dan Smith stated that the applicant's Attorney asked the Planning
Commission to find the project exempt under Section 2800.5(3) of Ordinance
604 -A which lists several exemptions, including item 3 which reads:
"(3) Remodeling, repair or construction which does not-increase the
occupancy load or change the intended use of a structure."
The applicant's attorney contended that the proposed commercial building was a
reconstruction of what existed previously on the site and was thereby not bur-
dening City resources to any greater degree than did the previous building.
The City Attorney disagreed and advised that the project was a new building
and subject to provisions of Ordinance 604 -A. Therefore, the City Planning
Commission did not find the project exempt from Ordinance 604 -A.
Vice -Mayor Petterson opened the public hearing.
Irving W. Peterson, Attorney for the applicant, appeared before the City
Council stating that the applicant's objection to the recommendations of the
Planning Commission that Ordinance 604 -A Deficiency in connection with the
development at 999 Monterey Street be corrected by means of the applicant
and the City sharing the cost of replacing the waterline from Marsh to Monterey
Street. He questioned whether one property owner should bear a disproportionate
share of the cost to provide adequate water pressure for-fire protection to a
whole area when surrounding.property owners had remodeled, repaired and
constructed without having to assume any of the same burden. He again
reviewed Section 2800.5(3) of the Municipal Code which set forth the exemption.
He contended on behalf of his clients that the applicant-had submitted plans
for a building which was to replace a similar structure destroyed by fire in
late 1975. The replacement building would house substantially.the same type
tenants, i.e., a theatre, retail store space and office space. He did not
feel that the Staff had presented evidence of any increased occupancy nor
change of intended use. The applicant had testified that the new theatre
would have an occupancy capacity of approximately 400 people in contrast to
the approximate 700 people capacity of the old theatre. In addition, the
applicant had testified that the retail space would be occupied by a retail
store rather than the former retail on- premises liquor bar. He continued that
the Planning Commission made no findings in respect to the application of
Section 2800.5(3) M.C. Three members indicated without comment, that it
was their opinion that the exemption applied. All members expressed dis-
satisfaction with the present general policy of imposing the cost of correcting
a Level I Deficiency upon one property owner. Indeed, the Commission voted
that the City Council review its policy.-as to 604 -A Deficiencies due to the
unfairness of burdening an individual property owner with the duty and
obligation which was that of the community as a whole. It was in the context
of these circumstances and opinions that the Planning Commission by a 4 -3 vote
"request the City to share with the developer the cost of the waterline." The
three "No" votes were Commissioners who indicated that the exemption was
applicable. It appeared that the remaining four members voted for the sharing
of costs and therefore, the burden to the developer because of the past
policy of unfairness had been imposed upon prior situations in the City
and that this "policy of unfairness" should be uniformly administered if it
were to continue. However, the motion included a request that "the Council
review its general policy" in this matter.
Finally, I.W. Peterson stated that the applicant submitted that the City
Council find that-the Planning Commission's recommendation as to the applicant,
however well meaning, was unfair and required applicant to.bear a dispropor-
tionate share of the costs of correcting the 604 -A Deficiencies within the
area of the deficiency. The Applicant requested the specific finding that his
project fell within the Section 2800.5(3) exemption. Applicant further urged
that the City act upon the suggestion of the Planning Commission to correct
the policy of uniform unfairness by ordering a plan to correct the downtown
fire threat through means of uniform assessment whereby all property owners
bore their fair share of replacing the substandard waterlines to adequately
protect life and property.
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 11
Mike DeNeve, Member of the Planning Commission, stated that when discussing
this matter at the Planning Commission Meeting, the key in their discussion
was the issue of fairness in requiring the mitigation of a 604 -A Deficiency
and to try and attempt to treat all developers equitably, which under past
policy was difficult to comprehend.
Vice -Mayor Petterson. closed the public hearing.
On motion of
Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Dunin,
City Council direct the Staff to prepare
stating that a 604 -A Level I Deficiency
under the provisions of the ordinance.
Motion carried, Mayor Schwartz absent.
a resolution for Council
exists and that it is not
that the
consideration
exempt
Councilman Dunin moved that the City Staff be directed to prepare the
resolution and to install the 10 -inch waterline with participation either
from the quarterly allocation of funds or a 50 -50 split between the City
and Developer.
Motion lost for lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the
City Staff be directed to prepare a resolution -and bring it back at.the next
Council Meeting approving the Staff's recommendation to mitigate the
deficiency.
Motion carried, Councilman Dunin voting no, Mayor Schwartz absent.
3. George Silva, Chairman - Laguna .Lake Ad.Hoc Committee, appeared.before
the City Council on behalf of the Ad Hoc Committee (Laguna Lake) who were
charged with:
1) To develop a management program for the Lake itself which would
address the key issues of stabilizing the lake ecology and
maintaining the existing wildlife habitat and public recreational
opportunities.
2) To develop a Laguna Park Facility Program which would spell out the.
ultimate use of the park and the general location of proposed improve-
ments.
While both parts of the charge to the Committee were obviously related and had
common work elements, the Laguna Lake Ad Hoc Committee felt that::.it.:.was more
qualified to address the lake management problem and recommended.that the
Parks & Recreation Commission should ultimately be responsible-for-coordinating
the creation of a facilities program for the City Park area. The Committee
felt that the.lake management program could be developed independently of the
park facilities.program. and would not sacrifice the effectiveness of an entire
Master Plan. He continued that the problems of managing Laguna Lake became
obvious to the community because of the two.year drought drying up but.a small
part of the lake. While recent rains had refilled the lake,.the Committee
would like to stress the continued need for long -range management of this
resource. Sufficient rainfall would not eliminate lake management problems
such as siltation, destruction of.wildlife.habitat..and maintain the-lake
for recreational.use. Only concerted-City action would insure that the lake
would be there for future City residents to enjoy... As the first phase.of the
lake Master Plan, the Ad Hoc Committee recommended that the City Council
include as a high - priority item the cost of developing.a management program
in the 1978 -79 C.I.P. Budget. At the second phase the Staff should be directed
to begin work with the Parks & Recreation Commission-to develop a park facilities
program which would be consistent with the proposed management plan. During the
various committee meetings it became apparent that a.number.of members.were
concerned that the City would hire a consultant.to prepare the management
program and not get _a satisfactory product. Recent City.experiences with
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 12
civil consultants had been something less than satisfying. The committee felt
that the City Staff could probably prepare.a better.management program, however,
the committee realized that the lake management plan was only one of many projects
which were competing..for:.staff time and that all expertise necessary to prepare
the plan might not be available from in -house personnel. Therefore, if a
consultant were to do the work, the committee would recommend that representatives
of their committee be asked to help interview all consultants considered for the
job. The committee then working with City Staff would also be retained to
review the consultant work as parts of the plan are completed and make final
recommendation to the City Council for its adoption. Finally, he stated that
the City Ad Hoc Committee looked forward to discussing the contents of the
Laguna Lake Management Program's scope of work prepared by the Committee for
the Council's consideration.
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director stated that as Staff member for the
Laguna Lake Committee he felt that the current workload of the poor City Staff
was not possible to prepare the detailed management program and the implied
E.I.R. He,_therefore, recommended that funds be budgeted.in 1978 -79 C.I.P.
to hire a consultant -to prepare the management Program and the E.I.R. He
estimated the cost would be $53,000.00 for both reports. He felt the park
facilities program would follow soon after the management program. He then
would recommend that the Park .& Recreation Commission be requested to prepare
a workscope for a program which would be included in the 1979 -80 budget year.
He was also in agreement that the City Council should keep the Ad.Hoc Laguna
Lake Committee in office to work with the City Staff and the Consultant.
Vice -Mayor Petterson thanked Mr. Silva and all members of the Committee on
behalf of the City for a good job and hoped that the City Council would be
able to sit down soon with a representative of the committee and review their
workscope program prior to budget preparation for 1978 -79. He felt the
Committee had done a fine job.
' On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the matter
was referred to the Council's C.I.P. considerations for possible retention
of consultants, etc.
Motion carried.
5. Communication from the Bishop of Monterey requesting that the City
Council rescind the resolution abandoning Krebs Street was continued to
February 21, 1978, on behalf of the applicant.
6. Communication from Jerry C. Holland requesting that the City Council
grant a six -month extension for Minor Subdivision No. 76 -513. He also
requested that Subdivision conditions 2(d) and 2(i) be eliminated, on the basis
that he was unable to comply due to.the inability of getting easements from
the adjacent neighbors in order to put in the half street; and 2(1), which
called for finished floor elevations to be one -foot above the finished elevations
he felt was unfair as this property during the 1969 & 1973 floods was not affect-
ed by the water.
Dan Smith, Senior Planner, appeared before the City Council on behalf of the
Planning Commission stating that the Planning Commission recommended that the
Council approve the six -month time extension subject to all the same conditions
of the tentative map as approved. He did not feel that the subdivision
conditions (d) and (i) should be waived or modified on the recommendation of
' the City Engineer.
Jerry C. Holland, Developer, appeared before the City Council on behalf of
the waiver stating that he had done everything possible to get the easement
from the adjacent property owner to put in the half street and that the
adjacent property owner would neither give nor sell such an easement, as the
condition of paving this portion of the street would take away 3,000: feet of
pasture land from his property which he felt would be unfair to him. Finally,
he felt that condition 2(1) which called for the pad elevation to be one -foot
above the finished floor, as he wished to put his sunken living room in his
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 13
home, and that with this condition he would be unable to do so.
On motion of Councilman Dunin_, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the City
Council extend the filing of the final map of Minor Subdivision 76 -.513 be
extended six - months; that condition (d) be replaced in the Subdivision
requirements with no parking allowed on Royal Way and Rubio Way and include a
provision for erosion control on the half street portions; and that
Subdivision 2(i) not be changed.
Motion carried, Mayor Schwartz absent.
7. Robert G. Mote, Utility Engineer, submitted for the Council's considera-
tion a priority listing for the Third Quarter allocation of the $20,000.00._per
quarter funding program for water system improvements. He stated he had
received a request for two _projects for the $20,000.00. He, therefore,
recommended that the City Fund. the Pepper Street Apartment Complex in the amount
of $13,650.00, and that the balance go to the Woodbridge Park Subdivision as part
of the aid in their development.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Jorgensen, that the
recommendation of the Utility Engineer be accepted.
Motion carried, Mayor Schwartz absent.
8. The City Council considered the Policy Statement for the Multiple
Small Dams in the Salinas Watershed and opted for the resolution with Policy
Statement B.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the City
Council adopt Policy Statement B, but that the resolution be returned to the
City Staff to clear -up the language in a more formal basis.
Motion carried, Mayor Schwartz absent.
9. On motion.of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Settle,.the plans
and specifications for Traffic Signals - Intersection of Johnson Avenue and
Laurel Lane, City Plan No. B -07, Project SS 243, estimate including contingencies
and engineering fees, $48,000.00, were approved and the Staff was authorized
to call for bids.
Motion carried, Mayor Schwartz absent.
10. On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman.Dunin, the City
Council approved the plans and specifications for the Laguna Lake Treated
Effluent Force Main, City Plan No. B -29; bid estimate including contingencies
and inspection, $17,600.00, and the Staff was also authorized to call for bids.
Motion carried, Mayor Schwartz absent.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, th
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3496 (1978 Series), a
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo increasing capital
fund appropriations for the 1977 -78 Fiscal Year and authorizing
of $17,600.00 from the Sewer Treatment Plant Reserve Account to
Improvements Fund.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
e following
resolution
improvement
a transfer
the Capital
1
C
1
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 14
CONSENT ITEMS
C -1 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, claims
against the City for the month of February, 1978, were approved subject to
the approval of the Administrative Officer.
C -4 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3497 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting to Orloff
Miller, Coordinator for the Human Relations Commission, a leave of absence.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -5 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3498 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting annual
ratification for participation in a joint powers agreement for the San Luis
Obispo County Area Council of Governments.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -6 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3499 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo authorizing
preparation of a right -of -way certification for the Santa Rosa Street
Widening Project.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Jorgensen
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -7 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded.-by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3500 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval
of Tentative Tract No. 705, located at 3003 Rockview Place.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
QI$)*6 Zt.5,r-
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -2 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
Minutes of the Meeting of November 22, 1977, were approved and-ordered filed.
C -3 On
motion of Councilman Settle, seconded
by Councilman Dunin, the
following
contract pay estimates, change orders
and final payments were
approved
as presented. Motion carried.
C -4 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3497 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting to Orloff
Miller, Coordinator for the Human Relations Commission, a leave of absence.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -5 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3498 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting annual
ratification for participation in a joint powers agreement for the San Luis
Obispo County Area Council of Governments.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -6 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3499 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo authorizing
preparation of a right -of -way certification for the Santa Rosa Street
Widening Project.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Jorgensen
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -7 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded.-by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3500 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval
of Tentative Tract No. 705, located at 3003 Rockview Place.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
QI$)*6 Zt.5,r-
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
City Council Minutes
February 7, 1978
Page 15
C -8 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, communi-
cation from the San Luis Coastal Unified School District notifying the City
of a 10.15 acre parcel of undeveloped land located on the.easterly portion
of'Southwood Drive which the School District wished to sell was referred to
the City Planning Commission.
Motion carried.
C -9 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3501 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo finding and declaring
the necessity for condemnation of private property for public street improve-
ments, City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -10 The communication from the Advisory Committee on Joint Recreational
Use of School District Property requesting Council's consideration for placing
the lighting project for the Softball Field and Tennis Courts as a top priority
for the C.I.P. this year, was referred to the City Clerk to advise the Joint
Advisory Committee on the schedule for Council's C.I.P. discussions.
C -11 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
request of the City Administrative Officer that his unused vacation and convert-
ed sick leave benefits be paid.to him over an approximate two and one -half
month period after his retirement on November 30, 1978, was approved.
Motion carried.
C -12 On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Settle, the
City Council approved the recommendation of the Promotional Coordinating.._
Committee that the City grant $400.00 to the San Luis Obispo High School
Student Assembly Presidential Classroom for Young Americans.
Motion carried.
C -13 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
Engineering- Service proposal from Engineering- Sciences for:
1) Feasibility Level Investigation of a Pump Station at the
Turn -Out to the Chorro Lateral from the Whale Rock
Conduit; and
2) review the plans and specifications for the proposed modification
of the City's Water Treatment Plant was approved.
Motion carried, all ayes. Mayor Schwartz absent.
C -14 At this time the City Council considered a resolution increasing the
1977 -78 Budget by $2,300.00 to cover landscaping costs for development of a
parking lot at 630 Monterey Street. ,
Councilman Dunin moved that this matter be dropped from Council consideration
and that no further beautification be done until some of the flood hazards
with danger to life and property have been corrected.
Motion lost for lack of a second.
P
1
City Council Minutes_
February 7, 1978
Page 16
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Petterson, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3502 (1978 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo increasing capital
improvement fund appropriations for the 1977 -78 Fiscal Year for the landscape
and irrigation improvements to City parking.lot at 630 Monterey Street.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Petterson and Settle
NOES: Councilman Dunin
ABSENT: Mayor Schwartz
C -15 A communication from Mr. Richard Schmidt, 112 Broad Street, requesting
Council's authorization to reconstruct the Bressi- Hysen- Boriack Culvert in
the 100 block of Broad Street for the prevention of future flooding in the
area was referred to the City Staff for report.
C -16 Communication from.Raymond T. Hessi, 561 Couper Drive, requesting
Council take steps to alleviate the flood hazard which exists on Couper Drive
was referred to the City Staff for report.
C -17 Communication from Peter R. Andre requesting the City take some action
to provide for weep holes in retaining walls near his property to.allow for
natural drainage of water in an effort to protect his property from erosion
and gullies was referred to the.City Staff for report.
C -18 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
Annual Report for the Calendar Year 1977, by the Curator of the San Luis Obispo
Historical Museum, was received and filed and the City Clerk was requested to
write a letter to the Curator thanking her for her continued good work.
C -19 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
Corporation Yard Master -Plan prepared by S.U.A. was referred to a future Council
Study Session.
C -20 Claim against the City by Charles Weeks, 385 Higuera Street, for
damages to building,,property, etc., caused by flooding on January 16, 1978,
in the amount of $22,500.00, was denied and referred to the insurance carrier
on motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin.
C -21 Claim against the City by David B. Lesczynski, 3186 Rose Avenue for
water damage to clothing, papers and books stored in the garage and damage to the
fence and yard when storm drains overflowed during the rainstorm of December 27,
1977, in the amount of $2,000.00 was denied and referred to the insurance
carrier on motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin.
Motion carried.
BIDS
B -1 The City Clerk reported that the following bids were received for
BUENA VISTA CIRCLE LANDSCAPING,.City Plan No. B -28; bid estimate $6,950.00:
KARLESKINT -CRUM, INC. $ 7,100.00
225 Suburban Road
San Luis Obispo, CA. 93401
DENNIS LANDSCAPE $ 7,500.00
1921 Santa Barbara Street
San Luis Obispo, CA. 93401
VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE, INC. $ 8,800.00
7043 Commerce Circle
Pleasanton, CA. 94566
CAMACHO AND TENNIS CONTRACTORS $ 9,348.00
1195 Oceanaire Drive
San I;uis Obispo, CA. 93401