Loading...
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