Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/03/1965REGULAR MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL May 3, 1965 - 7:30 P. M. CITY HALL Roll Call Present: .Emmons Blake, Frank Gallagher, Donald Q. Miller, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel City Staff Present: P. Clark, Librarian; J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; W. Flory, Superintendent of Parks & Recreation; W. M. Houser, City Attorney; R. D. Miller., Administrative Officer; D. F. Romero, City Engineer; L. Schlobohm, Fire Chief; W. Schofield, Police Chief; E. P. Thompson, Water Superintendent. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, claims against the City for the month of May 1965 were approved, subject to the approval of the Administrative Officer.. 1. At this time the student officials for Youth in Government Day were intro- duced. They were as follows: Name of Student School Ray Whitney San Luis Obispo High Tom Frady San Luis Obispo High Steve Sears San Luis Obispo High Cliff Cunningham Mission High School ' James Wathen Mission High School Kathy Brand San Luis Obispo High Barbara Bonifas San Luis Obispo High Dan Patterson San Luis Obispo High Mike Beresky Mission High School Rod Smith San Luis OBispo High Edward Davin Mission High School Roxana Towle San Luis Obispo High Jon M. Young San Luis Obispo High Mark Mills San Luis Obispo High Bob Swanson San Luis Obispo High Terry Stoner San Luis Obispo High Elaine Silva San Luis Obispo High Counterpart Position Official City Clerk J. H. Fitzpatrick City Council Frank Gallagher City Council Donald Q. Miller Mayor Clell W. Whelchel City Council Arthur Spring City Council Emmons Blake Street Supt. Milo Tappa City Engineer -D. F. Romero Administrative Officer R. D. Miller City Attorney -W. M. Houser Chief of Police W. E. Schofield Librarian Pat Clark Fire Chief L. Schlobohm Bldg. Insp. Frank Skiles Park & Rec. Supervisor W. E. Flory Planning Director L. Chapman Supt. of Water E. P. Thompson 2. Mayor Whelchel presented a Certificate of Completion of.fire service leader- ship and supervision earned by Fireman Don H. Burns. 20. The City Council reviewed the tentative map of Tract No.322 (Ray C. Skinner) 1 The following communication was received from the Planning Commission: "As of the meeting of March 16, 1965, the Planning Commission by Resolution No. 49 -65 (copy enclosed) recommended approval of the tentative map of Tract 322. This subdivision, lying on the west side of Los Osos Road will create 76 residential lots, many of which are located adjacent to a proposed Par 3 golf course and will develop an access road to a proposed trailer park. The following are conditions under which the Planning Commission recommends approval of Tract No. 322: City Council Minutes May 3, 1965 Page 2 a. There be street widening and improvements made on Los Osos Road. b. Sidewalk only may be omitted on the south side of Royal Way from Lot 1 to Los Osos Road, subject to review in two years. c. Street names to be to the approval of the Planning Director. d. Easements between Lots 52 -53 and 66 -67 as per P.G. &E. recommendations. e. The parcel with no number between Lots 54 and 55 shall have fully improved street frontages and any required easements. City Engineer Romero explained the proposed development and the improve- ments required by the Planning Commission, pointing out that widening on Los Osos Road would follow normal City street widening.practice for major subdivisions and that streets would be stubbed out from this development toward the west to serve developments in the hills and toward the north to serve the proposed trailer park and eventually extend on to Perfumo Canyon Road. The City Council discussed access to this trailer park. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, there was no objection and the tentative map was accepted subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission. Motion carried. 3. At this time the City Council considered the appointment of a committee to meet with representatives of Young Brothers Market regarding annexation to the City. City Clerk Fitzpatrick stated that the attorneys representing Young Brothers had called and they still were interested in being annexed to the City of San Luis Obispo and hoped that the City Council would ultimately annex them, but they were in no rush if prior to the need of utilities, the sewers would be allowed to be hooked up. City Attorney Houser reported that several years ago, when the area had a severe water problem, severl individual parcels requested permission to annex separately to the City and that the Council had at that.time taken the position that the entire area should be annexed as one unit to provide some degree of uniformity in the City's boundaries and to prevent either the formation of an island of unincorporated territory or, by separately annexing properities who owners are willing to annex, preventing the City from accumulating enough valuation to off -set property owners in the-pocket who constantly protest annexation proceedings. City Engineer Romero presented a map of the area. The City Council discussed the best way to not only serve Young Brothers with water and sewer, but also to serve the area north and east of Broad Street. The City Council also discussed the best method to finance water and sewer utilities for the whole area. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Spring, that the Mayor appoint a Council committee to study the matter and report back their recommendations to the City Council. Mayor Whelchel appointed himself and Councilman Gallagher to this committee. 4. The following communication was received from the Planning Commission regarding acquisition of Rosenthal property at Sinsheimer Park: "Resolution No. 57 -65 of the Planning Commission recommends against ac- quiring this parcel of land. The Commission reviewed the proposed Augusta- Richard Street connection and the effect this would have on the park if the Rosenthal property became a part of it. 1 1 1 City Council Minutes May 3, 1965 Page 3 It was felt that it would be highly undesirable to have .a park split by a street and that a walkway underneath might create mo 32 problems than.it would solve. Surface crossing would, of course, be dangerous for children and an overhead bridge would also be undesirable and too expensive. The Commission, therefore, agrees with the.Park and Recreation Commission's position opposing the acquisition of the Rosenthal property. The Commission does feel, however, that the possibility of acquiring the development rights of the creek and the wooded areas should be explored in an effort to preserve these features in their natural state. Reso- lution No. 58 -65 recommends that the City Council attempt to acquire these development rights." The following communciation was received from the Park and Recreation Commission: "The Park and Recreation Commission voted unanimously in favor of Richard Loomis' motion, and seconded, by Jim Douglas. Motion: The Park and Recreation Commission.is interested-in Mr. Mart.Rosenthal's property, if the price is.right and two properties (Mr.. Rosenthal's and Sinsheimer Park) are not divided by.a throughfare. The Commission is against the proposed tie -in between Augusta Street and Richard Street. They are not opposed to the other throughfare, Southwood Drive, the enters school property." Councilman Gallagher agreed with the Planning Commission. Councilman Spring agreed also with the Planning Commission and recommended 1 that Council support the Planning Commission's recommendation. Councilman Blake agreed that the City Council should back the Planning Commission in this matter. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, that the offer be rejected, except the small right- of-way needed for the street extension. Motion carried. Councilman Blake suggested that the City take steps to follow the Planning Commission'.s recommendations . on acquisition of development rights in the creek area. This matter was referred to the Park and Recreation Commission for study of acquisition from Rosenthal of development rights to protect the area as open space. 5. At this time the City Engineer.reported on the matter of curb, gutter and. sidewalk improvements on Ferrini Road along with necessary street widening. City Engineer Romero pointed out that property acquisition was needed along a good deal of the frontage in order to develop a minimum standard street section of 36 feet curb to curb with 6 foot sidewalks. He explained that he needed guidance from the Council in negotiations with.these property owners. ' City Attorney Houser explained the procedure the City.can institute for acquisition of the necessary street widening. That if the Council wished to complete the road widening and sidewalk installations on a.street that did not have a plan line or street widening setback ordinance, then the Council would have to condemn any property owned by people who refused to negotiate. This would necessitate the hiring of expert appraisers and budgeting neces- sary funds for court costs and jury awards. That it was recommended that the assessor set fair market value for the property, that the City agree to pay for any fence moving, replacing landscaping, trees not to exceed 15 gallon size, and the cost of placing property in substantially the same con- dition as it was prior to such acquisition, with the property owner paying for the cost of installation of the required curb, gutter and sidewalk. City Council Minutes May 3, 1965 Page 4 Vance Lewis, property owner, stated he would proceed with sidewalk on Ferrini Road if the Council orders the work done. He hoped he could be reimbursed for his tree removal and fence relocation. City Engineer Romero asked that the City Engineer be authorized to nego- tiate with the property owner on a voluntary basis paying for land and relocation of all improvments in accordance with the policy adopted on major street widenings. On motion of Councilman Miller; seconded by Councilman Spring, the City Engineer was instructed to proceed with the development and negotiate on value basis with the property owners and follow standard street widen- ing policy. Motion carried. Administrative Officer Miller presented the following financial problems involved with this development. He stated that of the $58,000 budgeted this year under capital outlay, $57,584 had been spent and outstanding commitments would push-the budget well over the amount allocated before the end .of the year. There were sufficient moneys in the capital outlay fund, but a Council resolution would be needed to increase the budget authorization. 6. City Engineer Romero presented plans and specifications for extension of Foothill Culvert, for Council consideration. On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the plans and specifications were approved and the City Engineer was authorized to call for bids and advertise. Motion carried. Estimated cost is $5,478.00 and the bids are to be opened May 17, 1965. 7. At this time the Council continued consideration of the formation of South Higuera Street Sewer and Water Assessment District. City Engineer Romero explained that he had received requests from only two county property owners adjacent to the South Higuera Assessment District and wishing to be included in the District, these being Dominica Touchstone and A:'J. Smith. He pointed out that the engineering was substantially completed and that any delay at this time in proceeding with the District would throw the work into the fall rainy season. Administrative Officer Miller explained for the Council's information the background on the formation of this District. He stated that although it took some time, a 60% sign up was finally achieved. The normal policy was to insist on the meximum expression of interest before the City ad- vanced engineering design funds which in this case would exceed $12,000. When bids were received and the final hearing held, it would take a 4/5 vote of the Council to overrule a majority protest. The project involved some $231,000 with the City obligated to contribute $95,000 for water and $15,000 for sewer, subject to reimbursement for sewer bond moneys advanced of about $25,000. City Attorney Houser explained that in order to obtain necessary juris- diction on the parcels outside the City, the Council should request such authorization by adopting the resolution submitted by the firm of Wilson, Jones, Morton and Lynch, bonding attorneys. On motion of Councilman Whelchel,' seconded by Councilman Spring; the, - following resolution was introduced. RESOLUTION NO. 1420, a resolution requesting consent of the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County to the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction to undertake proceedings for the acquisition and construction os public improvements and to pro- vide that the costs shall be assessed upon the district benefited, under appropriate special assessment and assessment bond acts. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: 1 1 1 City Council Minutes May 3, 1965 Page 5 AYES: Emmons Blake, Frank Gallagher, Donald Q. Miller, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None ' 8. At this time the City Council discussed the agreement with Southern Pacific Railroad on work to be done at Mill Street crossing. Communciation received from City Engineer Romero regarding the Mill Street Crossing: "Southern Pacific Engineers are proceeding with the design of the Mill Street crossing structure over the Southern Pacific Tracks, however, City and railroad staffs have come to a basic disagreement of the in- tention of the Council and the railroad in participation in the improve- ment cost for work outlined in the agreement of February 5, 1964. I am therefore, submitting these,;questions for your interpretation in order to provide me with a basis for continued negotiations with the Southern Pacific Staff. 1. Was it the intention of the City Council that the City or the railroad pay for the conrom street work on the adjacent roadway of Mill Street? The present approach grades to the railroad structure are quite poor. Because of the new structure's greater width the situation will worsen therefore an expenditure of approximately $4,300 will be needed for street work. 2. Was it the intention of the City Council that the City or the railroad pay for replacement of existing 4" water line now hung on the Mill Street structure? Mr. Thompson's estimate ' of this replacement cost including a temporary bypass water line during construction is $2,250. 3. Does the City Council wish to better the existing 4" water line by- installingr:a larger: main across-.the new .structure? Mr. Thompson's estimate for this work including the bypass is $4,200, giving a net betterment cost of $1,950. 4. Was it the intention that the City or the railroad pay for engin- eering design of the facilities mentioned above and in.spection- services during the construction? Our estimate for engineering design is approximately $400 with approximately $400 additional needed for engineering inspection. Enclosed is a copy of the first sheet of the agreement which covers the pertinent sections pertaining to the work." City Attorney Houser explained the background for reconstruction of Mill. Street bridge, that several years ago, the Council received numerous complaints from adjoining property owners that the boards on the Mill Street crossing were loose and caused excessive noise and appeared to be dangerous. The the Council directed.the City Administrative Officer to notify the Southern Pacific Company to correct the problem and that the Southern Pacific Company, after many months of delay, proposed to the Council that the Company would replace the Mill Street Bridge if the Phillips Street Bridge could be agandoned. After several negotiating sessions, the City Council.finally agreed that the Southern Pacific Company should replace the Mill Street Bridge at its cost, with the City, upon completion, accepting responsibility for maintenance of the surface and the Company agreeing to maintain the structure. The Council further agreed that the Phillips Street crossing should be maintained by the Company until the structural repairs in any given year exceed $1,000, exlusive of labor. That the written agreement between the City and the Company provided that plans and specifications for the nes bridge structure at Mill Street were to be approved by the City prior to construction. City Council Minutes May 3, 1965 Page 6 That the City had an unfortunate experience in the matter of the Foothill crossing, where the railroad rebuilt its tracks without any regard to the street approaches, which resulted in unanticipated costs to the City and a more hazardous sight distance problem than had existed before the im- provements, That it was the City's recommendation that the Southern Pacific Company replace the structure, approaches and the sidewalk line at its cost and immediately repair the existing structure. City Engineer Romero recommended that Southern Pacific Railroad pay for items 1, 2 and 4. City Attorney Houser explained that he felt the agreement protected the City and was in order. He also felt that the City Engineer would not approve the plans and specifications until the railroad had met all City requirements. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Spring, that.: 1. It is the intention of the City that Southern Pacific Railroad pay for street conform work. 2. That Southern Pacific Railroad.pay for replacement of existing water line. 3. That the City pay for betterment of water line. 4. That the Southern Pacific Railroad pay for design and inspection services provided by the City. Motion carried, Councilman Gallagher voting no. 9. Communication from Knuthson -Helms Company requesting extension of time to complete improvements in Ann Arbor Tract No. 317. City Engineer Romero explained the problems and recommended the ex- tension of six (6) months to one (1) year and no release of bond. City Attorney Houser explained the reasons for not releasing the bond. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Miller, the time was extended to six (6) months. Motion carried. 10. Communication from Leonard Blaser requesting an extension of time of twelve months from June 30, 1965 for completion of improvements on Trar_t No_ 290_ City Engineer Romero explained the necessity for the extension of time. Councilman Miller suggested that the matter of the six (6) foot strip owned by Blaser on Southwood be resolved before any action is.taken on his request. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher,. the matter was referred-to the May 17, 1965 meeting. Motion carried. 11. Robert.Wendt, attorney for Jack Hathaway, appeared before the Council asking that the City Council reconsider the prior action of moving the Yellow Cab Company stand from in front of the Bus Depot, in favor of the A & M Cab Company. Mr. Wendt stated that the Yellow Cab Company, by name, has maintained a stand in front of the Bus Station since 1942 and felt some consideration should be given to the company holding the privilege the longest time. He felt that any change should.be made at public-hearing so that repre- sentatives of both companies could appear and make their positions known. He further stated that he felt that the stands should be painted as they were and then a proper application should be made and all parties noti- fied so that a hearing can be properly held. 1 1 City Council Minutes May 3, 1965 Page 7 City Attorney Houser explained that the Council has sole jurisdiction over the parking on the City streets and therefore had the right to remove all taxi stands or to move them at their sole discretion. That such action would have to take place at a public meeting, but that there was no requirement that public hearings be held. Mr. Hathaway, upon question, stated. that since losing this stand, Yellow ' Cab Company has lost approximately $1,000 per month in their monthly gross. Mayor Whelchel stated that the change was made in an attempt to be fair to both cab companies. Mr. Wendt stated he felt that the Council should put the stands back as they were and then have a meeting to see both sides of the matter. Councilman Miller stated he voted against the change of stands on the basis that both principals involved should have been notified and have an opportunity to be heard. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the matter was referred.to the Taxi Committee and they are-to report back at the meeting of May 17, 1965. Motion carried. Councilman Spring is to act on Taxi Committee with Mayor Whelchel. 12. At this time City representatives reported on meeting with State officials regarding recreation on Whale Rock Reservoir. City Attorney Houser explained the background to the dispute with the Fish and Game Commission, which culminated with the Fish and Game Com- mission holding a hearing and directing the Whale Rock Commission to plant some 17,500 catchable trout at the Whale Rock Commission's expense ' in spite of the fact that the Fish and Game Department had withdrawn their protest to the building of the Dam, which protest was based on the same Code sections that Fish and Game Commission invoked at the rec- ent hearing. That the meeting was called by the Governor's Office with proposals by State representatives being made to the City to contribute some funds toward studying the recreation and health problems, or con- tributing funds to the Fish and Game Department to plant trout elsewhere in the County while the study was being made. The City took the position that no City funds would be paid for studying or interim planting inasmuch as the City had spent in excess of $800,000 of its general fund to take care of unanticipated costs of building the Dam and, also, the City felt the recreational facilities, if any, were more of a regional benefit than to the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo. The State finally agreed to conduct an impartial study of the - health and recreational problems, --financing and responsibility, and that the City would not be under any obligation to pay interim funds to the Fish and Game Department. The State further agreed that copies of all studies would be forwarded to all parties and that a meeting would be held in six to eight months to review the results. 13. At this time the City Council considered the appointments of persons to City Commissions and Council Committees. Councilman Blake suggested that after study, the Planning Commission re- commended that a representative of the contractor's profession would be an asset to the deliberation of the Planning Commission and submitted the name of Dennis Wheeler for appointment. Councilman Spring recommended Jim Twyeffort and was endorsed by Councilman Gallagher. Mayor Whelchel suggested that the decision be held over until the Council can meet with the candidates and discuss the appointment. City Council Minutes May 3, 1965 Page 8 On question, Mr..Schofield stated he should be kept on stand -by basis for felt they were an asset to the City ment's roll to the public. felt that the Police Advisory Board any problems that may arise. He n interpreting the Police Depart- In answer to Councilman Gallagher's question regarding the need for a Police Advisory Board, Administrative Officer Miller said he felt the Board could serve as a useful function, but he also felt that the Board , could be disruptive if it involved itslef in staffing and salary mat- ters in competition with other City departments. On motion of .Councilman Miller, seconded by.Councilman Spring, Council- man Miller and Councilman Gallagher were appointed to the.Traffic Committee. Motion carried. Mayor. Whelchel appointed himself and Councilman; lake to serve on the Economic Development Committee. Mayor Whelchel to serve on the San Luis Obispo Water Advisory Board. 14. Communication from the State Department of Finance certifying that the estimated population of the City of.San Luis Obispo on March 1, 1965 was 25,750, was received and filed. 15. On motion of Councilman Gallagher, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following resolution was introduced. RESOLUTION NO. 1413, a resolution increasing the 1964 -65 Budget. (Account No. 203.4, increased by $50.00; Account No. 208.4 increased by $2,850; Account No. 214.4 increased by $ $1,400; Account No. 215.3 increased by $1,200; Account No. 850.3 increased by $2,000; Unbudgeted Reserve be decreased by $5,500; Accod# No. 850.6 decreased by $2,000; Account No. 744 increased -by $2,860; Account No.. 346 decreased by $2,860) Memorandum from Administrative Officer Miller explaining the reason for 1 the above changes. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Emmons Blake, Frank Gallagher, Donald Q. Miller, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None 16. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following resolution was introduced. RESOLUTION NO. 1416, a resolution increasing the 1964 -65 Budget. (Account No. 232, South Higuera Assess- ment Distract Advance be increased by $4,358.86; Unbudgeted Reserve be decreased by $2,461.49; Account No. 200. 10, General Government- Planning Commission be decreased by $1,000; Account No. 230, Tree Program, be decreased by $897.37) Memorandum from Administrative Officer Miller explaining the reasons for the above changes' AYES: Emmons Blake, Frank Gallagher, Donald Q. Miller, Arthur F. Spring, Clell W. Whelchel NOES: None ABSENT: None 17. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Gallagher the following salary step increases were approved: City Council Minutes May 3, 1965 Page 9' OSBURN, Verhsa L., Stenographer, from Step 2 at $365 to Step 3 at $385 per month, effective June 1, 1965. REINSTEIN, Janice D., Stenographer, from Step 2 at $365 to Step 3 at $385 per month, effective June 1, 1965. SHERMAN, Reed E., Administrative Aide, from Step 2 at $430 to Step 3 at ' $455 per month, effective June 1, 1965. SOTO, Ralph H., Laborer - Equipment Operator, from Step 2 at $405 to Step 3 at $430 per month, effective June 1, 1965. YOUNGBLOOD, Gary M., Police Officer, from Step 2 at $480 to Step 3 at $508 per month, effective June 1, 1965. 18. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following contract payment was approved and the Burke Construction Company was relieved from responsibility of maintenance. BURKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Est. #3 $19958.19 Downtown Tree Planting (99% complete) Motion carried. On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, the following contract payment was approved: J. A. O'KELLY Est. #2 $1,359.79 Johnson Avenue Widening (80% complete) (County Health Center) 19. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following Grant Deeds and Agreements were approved. The Mayor was authorized to sign said Grant Deeds and have the Agreements recorded. A. Grant Deed and Agreement from Barney L. Barnett & Mary 0. Barnett for street widening and curb, gutter and aidewalk on Johnson Avenue. B. Grant Deed and Agreement from Clara M. McNiel for street widening and instal- lation of curb, gutter and sidewalk.on Johnson Avenue. C. Grant Deed and Agreement from Frank C. Silva & Alice M..Silva for street widening and installation of-curb, gutter and sidewalk on Johnson Avenue. D. Grant Deed and Agreement from J. W. Risley & D. L. Risley for.street widening and installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk on Johnson Avenue. 21. The Traffic Committee was asked to study traffic speed on Cliorro Street from the Freeway to Foothill Boulevard. 22. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Mayor Whelchel, Mayor Whelchel, Councilman Blake and staff members Houser, Miller, Romero, Fitzpatrick, Schofield and Schlobohm were given permission to go to Arizona on May 7 & 8, 1965. Motion carried. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Gallagher, Councilman Spring was granted permission to leave the State from May 28 -31, 1965. Motion carried. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Miller, the meeting adjourned at 10:45 P. M. Motion carried. APPROVED: May 17, 1965 H. ZPATRICK, CITY CLERK