HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/02/19701
Pledge
Roll Call
Present
City Staff
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
February 2, 1970 - 7:00 P.M.
City Hall
Emmons Blake, Myron Graham, Arthur F. Spring,
Donald Q. Miller, Kenneth E. Schwartz
Present: R. D. Young, Planning Director; J. H. Fitzpatrick,
City Clerk; J. Stockton, Park and Recreation Supervisor;
H. Johnson, City Attorney; R. D. Miller, Administrative
Officer; D. F. Romero, City Engineer; E. Rodgers, Police
Chief; L. Schlobohm, Fire Chief.
The minutes of the meetings of January 12, and 19, 1970 were approved as
corrected.
On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Graham, claims against the
City for the month of February 1970 were approved subject to the approval of the
Administrative Officer. Motion carred.
1. R. D. Young, Planning Director, presented to the City Council a list of sign
owners who have been notified to remove their signs as the businesses they ad=
vertise are vacant.
Councilman Blake suggested that the City Council should meet in a special study
session to discuss amendments to the Sign Ordinance.
The Planning Director was instructed to make periodic checks to eliminate ir-
regular signs or abate violations and to make monthly progress reports to the
City Council.
2. At this time the City Council considered the final passage of Ordinance No.
476, an ordinance amending the Municipal Code to establish a thirty -five MPH
speed limit on Grand Avenue from McCollum Street to Monterey Street.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
No one appeared before the City Council for or against the final passage of this
ordinance.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Graham stated that he still was opposed to the passage of this ordin-
ance as he felt that the increased speed permitted in the vicinity of Wilson Street
was extremely dangerous.
On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following ord-
inance was introduced for final passage. Ordinance No. 476, an ordinance amending
the Municipal Code to.establish a thirty -five (35) MPH spee& limit on Grand
Avenue from McCollum Street to Monterey Street.
1 Finally passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Emmons Blake, Arthur F. Spring, Donald Q. Miller, Kenneth E. Schwartz
NOES: Myron Graham
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 2
3A & 3B. Communication from the City Housing Authority notifying the City Council
that the annual payment in lieu of taxes for the housing project at 353 King St..
will be $500 per year, and the in lieu payments for the housing project at
408 - 520 Hathway Street will be $1400 per year, in accordance with the agree-
ment between the City and the Housing Authority.
On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Graham, the communication
was ordered received and filed.
4. Communication from R. S. Johnson, requesting a one -year extension for final
compaction of fill material on the property located at the corner of Santa
Rosa and Walnut Streets was considered by the City Council.
Mayor Schwartz stated he had no objection to an extension of time for compacting
the fill on the site, but he felt that the entire lot was unsightly due to the
litter and the ungraded lot. He felt that before an extension was granted, the
lot should be cleaned and graded.
On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Councilman Miller, that R. S. Johnson
be granted six months extension for compacting the fill material on his property,
with the area to be cleaned up immediately. Motion carried.
6. Communication from Mrs. Joyce Pederson, League of Women Voters, regarding a
report by the California Youth Authority at the request of the City Council, en-
titled the Community Youth Survey. The League of Women Voters requested the
Council to notify them of any information that might be helpful to them in their
study of the detaining of youth in the County of San Luis Obispo.
Councilman Blake explained to the Council that the San Luis Obispo County Co-
ordinating Committee had approached the City Council to have a survey made of all
the youth facilities in the county. He stated that the report had been prepared
by the California Youth Authority and had been submitted to the Coordinating
Committee for their deliberation and use in meeting with the various youth
agencies in the county.
The City Clerk was instructed by the Council to notify Mrs. Pederson that the
report had been sent to the Coordinating Committee and also that.any members of
the City staff whom the League wished to discuss this report with would be
available to them.
7. Communication from Care Construction Company, developers of a convalescent
hospital on Meinecke, requesting that the City Council make some determination oil
sewer service for the proposed hospital site.. They explained that the existing
six -inch sewer line appears to be inadequate for the proposed hospital site and
they would like to remove this burden from their property. They stated that
they would like to cooperate with the City in changing the sewer route. They
further stated that-D. F. Romero, City Engineer, had recommended that.the sewer
line be extended from the front of their property on Meinecke to Santa Rosa Street
and then the City would possibly place a ten -inch line in Santa Rosa from Meinecke
to an existing adequate line at Santa Rosa and Murray Street.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, explained that the biggest problem is that the exist -
ing six -inch sewer line serving Meinecke is inadequate and subject to overload due
to the addition of the Stenner Glen student housing project on Foothill Boulevard.
He stated that he proposed in his plans for sewer improvement to run a.line from
Foothill and Santa Rosa down Santa Rosa to the adequate service at Santa Rosa
and Murray. If the hospital were to place an eight -inch line from the front of
their property on Meinecke to Santa Rosa, this would be connected to the proposed
sewer line. He stated that the estimated cost for placing an eight -inch line
from the hospital to Santa Rosa would be $4,600. The ten -inch line on Santa Rosa
from Meinecke to Murray would be paid for by the City and would cost approximately
$12,000, and at some future date, a six -inch line from Foothill to Meinecke would
cost approximately $12,000.
1
1
r_�
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 3
D.:F.- Romero.,continued that there were other alternatives for the developer, but
he felt that the proposal as outlined was the best solution.for.both the City 'and
the developer. He-felt that the City should insist that the developer route the
sewer line around his building rather than having possible maintenance problems
under his building. He felt the proposal was fair.to the developer and would
help the City.
Councilman- Spring suggested that the developer pay for all of the sewer line on
Meinecke and one- half,the cost.of the.ten -inch line in Santa Rosa from Meinecke
to Murray as he felt that the additional burden on the sewer line was caused by
the'proposed hospital.
Councilman Blake agreed with Councilman Spring that the hospital was creating the
need for enlarging the sewer line which would not be needed if the area were de-
veloped to residential density.
Mayor Schwartz suggested that perhaps the City should cooperate with the developer
and pay one =half of the eight -inch line in Meinecke and one -half the cost of the
ten -inch line in Santa Rosa.
On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Mayor Schwartz, that Care Construction
Company, Inc. place an eight -inch line in Meinecke_ to Santa Rosa Street and con-
tribute one -half the cost of the ten -inch line on Santa Rosa to Murray; with the
City to abandon existing lines on the property subject to the developer being re-
imbursed for additional connections in accordance with City regulations. Motion
carried, Councilman Miller voting no.
8. At this time the City Council held a. public hearing on the report of the Super-
intendent of Streets on a list of properties lacking standard improvements where
more than 50% of the block is already improved.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
The City Clerk read the names of the property owners, the addresses of the prop-
erties to be improved, and the improvements required for file numbers 212 through
235.inclusive.
No one appeared before the City Council for or against the improvements.
Mavor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, reported that Mrs. C. Fisher, 795 Nipomo Street, re-
quested that in addition to the improvement to her property on the Nipomo Street
frontage, she would also like to have improvements made on the Villa Street front-
age to her property. The Council was in agreement with the inclusion.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Spring, that the Department
of Streets is to proceed with,the installation of t_he improvements in accordance
with the notice of the hearing. Motion carried.
9. At this time, the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of J. E:
Hazard from the order of the City Engineer to abate.a nuisance in San Luis Creek
to the-rear of 546 Higuera.
Mavor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, presented a sketch of the hazard in San Luis Creek
and the work he felt should be done to correct the hazard. He continued that his
analysis of the channel near the Hazard trailer.park on Higuera Street indicates
that. the critical section at the bend has approximately 30% less capacity than a
channel immediately upstream or downstream under a condition of peak flow. His
analysis indicates that an equivalent capacity can be provided at this.critical
bend by excavation of surplus materials to create a 1/2:1 slope immediately behind
the trailers and improvement of the slope with sack concrete rip rap (approximate
total cost - $14,000) or reinforced concrete grouted . slope paving (approximate cost
of $9,000).
The improvement implies removal of the sycamore trees which create an obstruction
to the flow. The improvement-will extend.for approximately.three - fourths the
length of. the trailer park development; however, it will not encroach into any
of the flat area now being used by the trailers.
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 4
;J. E. Hazard appeared before the City Council stating that at.no_ time in.the past
seven years, since the property was acquired by him, has any fill been put into the
creek. He continued that any fill in the creek was done prior to acquisition by
him. He stated that the trees which were being recommended for removal have been
on the property for the past forty years and he did not feel they were a problem
as he was sure that many heavy storms had occurred during this time. He further
stated that the retaining wall on his property which he is being -asked to remove '
was constructed under a City building permit issued by the City sometime in the
early 1960's. He also felt that his property did not cause any additional damage
during the 1969 storm. He stated that his neighbors upstream, the Leitcher and
Martin properties are narrower in width than his creek and he wondered why he was
being singled out for creek improvement when his neighbors were not. He continued
that he would be more than willing to pay his -share of the cost for creek improve-
ment if the entire creek were placed in an assessment district and everyone shared
in the cost.
H. Johnson, City Attorney, upon question from the City Council,.explained the
City `s position in this matter; namely that, having notified the property owner
that a hazard to public welfare and safety exists, the City could be joined as a
defendant in a suit by an adjoining property owner who may have been a victim of
some future flood damage allegedly.attributable to the obstruction in the creek
next to the Hazard trailer park. While the Hazard family themselves are primarily
responsible legally for any damage resulting from their negligence, the courts
have sometimes applied the "deep pocket philosophy" to hold the municipality liable
in flood damage-cases.
D. F. Romero stated-that.-his preliminary studies in the creek area were to correct
the most critical hazards as soon as possible and then correct the balance of the
problems when the complete creek survey had been made.
Councilman SArina stated that he had visited the site and.had discussed the matter
with Mr. Hazard and he did not feel the problem was as bad as was stated in the
Engineer's report. He did not wish to force the work on the property owner at
this time.
Councilman Graham stated that he too had inspected the problem and he felt that the
creek upstream was narrower than the Hazard property and this should be corrected
first. He also felt that cleaning up the creek at the Hazard property would in-
crease the creek's capacity.
Councilman Miller asked Mr. Hazard when the filling in of the creek to the rear of
his property, in order to add additional trailer spaces, had taken place.
J. E. Hazard stated he did not know when this was done as no additional trailer
spaces had been added under his ownership, although he was sure that some fill
had been done over the years.
Mayor Schwartz wished to remind the City Council that the City Engineer, at the
instruction of the City Council, had prepared a list of the most critical creek
hazard problems and the Engineer had presented evidence that this property was
one of the most critical problem areas in the San Luis Creek vicinity.
Councilman Blake stated he agreed with the report of the City Engineer and felt
some modifications could be made to the recommended work by the property owner so
that the improvements needed would be less costly. He felt that some improvement
must be made in order to avoid property damage in future storms..
R. Leitcher stated he.felt that as an adjacent property owner he should get into
the act and discuss the matter with the City Council. He also wished to clear up
the matter of the property owner's liability on downstream properties.. He felt
the City should look into who was responsible for_ causing the flooding..-In San Luis
Creek. He felt it was due to development of San Luis Obispo with more buildings,
more streets and more parking" lots. He felt the property owners along the creek
should not be blamed for flooding. He felt that everyone who contributed to the
flooding should share the blame. He stated that long before the 1969 floods,.he
had talked with the City Council urging consideration by them of the construction .
of check dams in the Cuesta Canyon area to hold the storm waters for release later
in order to protect.the City. He felt this might be the time for the City to de-
cide whether to proceed with a program of making the creek an improved drainage
channel or to continue with the program of making the creek an esthetic_place to
visit.
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 5
Mayor Schwartz explained that the problem was not'that the creek's capacity had
changed, but that many property owners build in the creek, put obstructions in
the creek, and fill in the creek in order to enlarge-their holdings, which has
caused the creek's capacity to be reduced and has caused many problems in
drainage.
J. E. Hazard asked why the County Flood Control District wasn't required to
improve San Luis Creek as a flood zone.
H. Johnson, City Attorney, explained the method for forming a flood zone in the
Flood Control District which would then assess the district for improvements to
the drainage system.
Councilman Miller stated that upon inspection and study of the San Luis Creek,
he has found that many property owners have built into the creek and reduced its
capacity. Subsequent owners who buy the property must assume responsibility for
these obstructions even though they did not cause them. He felt the creek must
be protected. Therefore, he would vote to have Mr. Hazard correct the creek
obstruction on his property.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, suggested the following alternatives for J. E. Hazard
to improve the creek for minimum capacity.
1. Remove the surplus earth and trees to provide full capacity.
2. Remove the surplus earth and trees and place cement sack or rip rap on
the slope to provide full capacity.
3. Remove the surplus earth as an interim measure only, to improve present
conditions, but not full capacity.
Councilman Graham stated he felt he would go along with the minimum alternative of
removing the surplus earth on an interim basis until a complete creek study and
flow pattern has-been made.
Mayor Schwartz stated that the hazard in San Luis Creek was brought -to the Council's
attention by a competent engineer. He wonders if the City can shrug off the
responsibility by-notifying the affected property owner and allowing him to make
corrections as he sees fit.
H. Johnson, City Attorney, again explained the potential liability for the City
under flood conditions, and also explained the property owner's liability.
J. Hazard again informed the Council that the retaining wall had been built under
City Building Permit 43122 issued by the City of San Luis Obispo in 1960 and he
couldn't understand why it must be removed now as it has not changed since it was
built. Further, he reminded the City Council that the property abutting his from
the north is much narrower and he wondered why his property had been cited for
correction and the adjacent property had not been cited.
F. Schott, Consulting Engineer, stated that he had made more studies of the 1969
storm and he felt that this was not a 100 -year storm as previously stated, but
was more in the neighborhood of a 30 -year storm. He stated that a 100 -year storm
would have caused tremendous damage to the City.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Graham moved that the City Council amend the prior action taken by the
Council in ordering J. E. Hazard to complete improvements in the creek and issue
a lesser requirement of removing the earth in the creek which would increase the
capacity of the creek and leave the retaining wall and trees.
Motion died for lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Spring, that the prior.
action of the City Council be modified; that the sycamore'trees between stations
1 +68 and 1 +70 be left. Motion carried, Councilman Graham voting no.
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 6
10. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of Mrs.
Viola M. Defreese, 398 Broad Street, from the order of the City Engineer to
abate a drainage channel obstruction on her property.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, explained that the standard City notice sent out by
the City had not made it entirely clear that the City desired reinforcement of the ,
existing board wall. Rather than contact the City for clarification, Mrs. Defreese
had hired an attorney to file a formal objection to the City action. The City
Engineer stated that the City's desires were only that the wall be made safe so
as not to constitute a drainage hazard.
Mrs. Defreese appeared before the City Council stating that she did not believe
that her pipe and board fence constituted a hazard to the free flow of water
through the creek. She felt that the fence and pipe are essential to the pro-
tection of her property in guiding the water around her property to avoid damage.
She felt that if the fence were removed it would be a detriment to her property.
Further, she felt that her property was on the outside part of the creek where
all the wash comes and without the protection of this fence she would lose much
of her property. She stated she would agree to making whatever repairs were
necessary to strengthen or improve her fence but she did not feel that she could
remove the fence without causing damage to her property.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that if Mrs. Defreese made improvements to
the fence, she would meet requirements of the posting.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
No action was taken by the Council as the property owner promised to make the
necessary improvements.
11. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of S. V.
Cole from the order of the City Engineer to abate drainage channel obstruction his
property at 1041 Higuera Street.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, explained that the building supports for the structure
at 1041 Higuera Street obstructs the clear flow of the creek and could cause
hang -up of debris with subsequent damage to property in the neighborhood. He
continued that his study of this problem shows that the building supports are
badly undermined and disintegrated in addition to being creek obstructions,
these building supports must be repaired in order to protect the building.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
S. Cole appeared before the City Council stating he felt that the City of San
Luis Obispo was partially responsible for creating the problem of the building
supports as the City had approved a building permit and building plans thirty
years ago for construction of.this building in the way it had been built. He
felt that part of the cost of repairing these building supports should be shared
by the City taxpayers as the City had approved the construction. He stated it
would cost approximately $15,000 to correct the problem and make the building
safe. He stated he was willing to repair the underpinnings as originally con-
structed, but he felt that anything beyond the original construction should be
paid for by someone besides himself.
Councilman Graham asked what was the least that could be done to alleviate this
problem at the least cost to the property owner.
Councilman Miller stated he felt that if the City has approved the construction
plans and issued a building permit for construction then the City-.must assume
some responsibility for correcting this problem.
Councilman Spring agreed that the City morally must assume some responsibility
as they had issued a building permit and approved the construction plans.
City Council.Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 7
H. Johnson, City Attorney, explained the City's responsibility in issuing a
building permit. In.particular, he emphasized that the mere fact that a building
permit had originally been issued for a structure does not .mean that the doctrine
of estoppel will.prevent.the City from subsequently declaring the structure a
public nuisance and.ordering abatement proceedings where the public welfare and
safety would be adversely affected if the building were to remain in its present
condition.
Councilman Blake stated that he felt that if Mr. Cole would repair the building to
keep it from falling into the creek then possibly the City could cooperate in the
correct -ion of .the.drainage channel obstruction. He continued he felt that the.
.City had no.legal responsibility to repair this building, but -.they possibly had
a moral responsibility as they had issued the building permit.
Councilman Spring stated he felt that Mr. Cole should be allowed.to restore the
underpinnings of the. building as originally approved by the City and then if
storms should again damage the supports, Mr. Cole would be responsible,:.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing.closed.
J. -Kellerman, Chief .Building Inspector, explained to the Council the problem
faced by Mr. .Cole in repairing these columns in addition to any problem's in the
creek below. He explained that to repair these supports in their present location,
it would be necessary to remove and reinstall them with deeper bearing. It was
pointed out that Ordinance No. 459 (1969 Series) -- Drainage Channel Obstructions—
prohibits.the Building Department from issuing permist.for the erection of any
obstruction in the creek channel. Mr. Kellerman then asked if, in.the light of
this ordinance, can-the Building Department permit,Mr, Cole to effect•a repair
of the building supports in their present location?
Councilman Miller suggested that the Mayor appoint a• committee to study the City's
responsibility, if any; for problems arising after the City has issued 'a building
permit.
Councilman Graham asked if other. alternatives could be :presented for the Council's
consideration, as this was only the first public hearing.
Mayor.- Schwartz suggested that the City Council could do one of the following at
this time:
1.. Take action and -order the obstruction repaired or removed.
2. Continue the matter and have a consulting engineer look into
the problem: I • .
3. Appoint a Council committee to resolve the.moral problem of..
the City's involvement due to the building permit. .
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Miller, that 1) the build-
ing department be authorized to retain a consultant to study the Cole problem,
including the drainage channel and 2)-that the Mayor appoint a committee to look
into the City's obligation. Motion carried.
Mayor Schwartz appointed Councilmen Blake and Graham as a committee to study the
City's responsibility in this matter, .with Councilman Blake to act as chairman.
9:55 P.M. Mayor Schwartz declared a recess.
10:05 the meeting reconvened with all councilmen present.
12. At this time the City Council.held.a public..hearing-on the.suggestion`to
require compulsory garbage collection in the City.
Mayor:,Schwartz stated that the.purpose of this informal.hearing at..this time was
to hear comments from the public on the.proposal that had been made to the City
Council to enact an ordinance which would require compulsory garbage collection
for all properties within the.City.
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 8
He continued that this proposal had been made to the City Council in an attempt
to eliminate the garbage problem caused by people throwing their garbage and
trash into the creeks and other drainage channels of the community. He continued
that the City Council had no specific proposal under consideration at this time,
but had called this hearing to hear comments from members of the community.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
J. Bazin stated he was in support of compulsory garbage collection for all
properties within the City, but felt that a better method of contacting the pub-
lic to get their feelings on this matter must be found. He felt that a poll of
some type must be taken in order to counteract the noisy minority who will oppose
this proposal.
R. Leitcher asked what the.purpose of mandatory garbage collection was.
Mayor Schwartz read a section from the State Public Health Code which stated in
part when all residents subscribe to collection.service there is less likelihood
of rubbish accumulating around properties which tends to attract flies and rodents.
L. Shankland stated he would support compulsory garbage collection as well as a
plan to ban all outdoor burning, but he.felt that the City should own the garbage
collection system and not grant a subsidy to a private company.
D. Tenenbaum stated he was in favor of mandatory garbage collection and no out-
door burning, including the Fire Department's weed burning program, but.he felt
that with mandatory collection and the City handling the service, the rate should
be excused from compulsory garbage collection.
Mrs'.'_Bressi',::.North Broad-Street, stated she was opposed to compulsory garbage
collection for herself as.she lives on a ranch with a large acreage outside the
City limits and she felt•that� she and other property owners like herself should
be excused from compulsory garbage collection. 1
L. Blaser stated he would support mandatory garbage collection for the City of
San Luis Obispo.
B. Corrck felt that a better method of polling the citizens should be found in
order to let everyone know what is being.proposed under this plan.
J. Applegarth objected to compulsory garbage collection and felt that a broader
consensus of the public is needed before the City Council goes into the program.
He felt that consideration should be given to the property owners who have gar-
bage disposals in their homes and would only have a minimum amount.of garbage
collected. He continued that in his case, he takes the cans that have accumulated
around his home to the City dump several times a year.
T. Hyer objected to compulsory garbage collection due to the fact that the garbage
company is privately owned and he felt that many people would object to subsidiz-
ing a private company.
H. Blassingame stated he would support a compulsory garbage collection ordinance
but he also felt that the City should operate the collection system.
Dr. R. Alberti suggested that the City Council should include in their study all
methods of cleaning up our environment. He was not sure that mandatory garbage
collection was the answer but he felt it should be studied: He also felt some-
thing should be done to stop outdoor burning in San Luis Obispo as he felt it was
an environmental problem with a light haze hanging over the City.
Mrs. Dubin presented a study she had prepared for the Council's consideration of
the construction of a compost plant;to reduce all waste and-garbage-into usable
compost. She continued that -in her studies she had found that the federal govern-
ment would cooperate financially.with communities building compost plants. She
gave examples of similar plants throughout the United States. She continued that
the compost manufactured by this plant could be used to build up the soil on
farms in the county and for City gardens and parks; She stated she felt that one
plant could serve the City and the entire county and she hoped that the Council
could spend some time looking into this matter.
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 9
B. Leitcher suggested that possibly an advertisement in the paper explaining the
proposed program might enable the Council to hear the feelings of the public on
the compulsory garbage program.
L. Schlobohm, Fire Chief, stated that he would support the proposal for a com-
pulsory garbage collection system and for banning all outdoor burning in the City,
including the Fire Department's weed burning program.
Councilman Miller stated he felt the Council must now move ahead with some type
of compulsory garbage program and a ban on outdoor burning within the City.
Councilman Graham stated he would support a program of mandatory garbage collec-
tion and would also support a ban on outdoor burning.
Councilman Spring suggested that the Mayor appoint a Council committee to meet
with representatives of the Garbage Company and County Health Department to dis-
cuss the proposal to initiate mandatory garbage collection and a ban on outdoor
burning within the City.
Councilman Blake stated he felt the City Council had already gone on record sup-
porting compulsory garbage collection and a ban on all outdoor burning. He felt
that now the City Council should proceed with the development of this program.
He. continued that he felt the public had been notified of this meeting and if
more people objected to the proposal they would have attended the meeting to
offer their objections as had those who had appeared this evening.
Mayor Schwartz stated that it has been his feeling that the people of San Luis
Obsipo want and demand of the City Council, a community effort to eliminate the
City's solid waste disposal problem and he was sure that the people of the
community were now ready to do whatever is necessary to clean up our environment.
He also agreed with the proposal to appoint a Council committee to look into a
proposed ordinance to implement the mandatory garbage collection system.
' Mayor Schwartz appointed Councilmen Spring and Miller as.a Council committee, with
a report of recommendations to be made to the City Council on March 16, 1970,
13. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of
the Planning Commission to amend the City'-s General Plan in Planning Commission
Study Area 6, bounded by Sydney Avenue extended, Southern Pacific Railroad,
Johnson Avenue and Buckley Road extended.
R. D. Young, Planning Director, presented a map showing proposed changes and ex-
plained that the Commission has.studied quadrant six of the community defined as
the.area south of Bishop .Avenue and east of the Southern Pacific Railroad right -
of-way. As a result of this study it-was the consensus of the Commission that
the Plan in that area should be amended as follows: change the area along bbth
sides of Augusta Street between Sinsheimer School and Laurel Lane from low to,
medium density residential to high density residential; change the area on the
south side of Orcutt Road east of the Southern Pacific Railroad right- of-way
from low.to medium density residential to medium to high density.residential;
change the area east of the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of -way, now proposed
for industrial use to low to medium density residential: In addition to the above
mentioned major changes, the Commission also recommended that the Plan in this
area be amended to reflect existing conditions as shown on the map presented to
the Council.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
P. McMillan, property owner, agreed with the amendment as proposed by the Plannning
Commission but he also felt that the land west of the Southern Pacific Railroad
right -of -way and south of Orcutt Road should also be changed to allow high density
residential use so that the land could be developed. He continued that this land
has been zoned for industrial and manufacturing use for a great number of years
and rio development.has taken place..
No one appeared before the City Council against.the proposed amendment to the
General Plan.
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 10.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
The City Council discussed the proposed amendment to the General Plan as recom-
mended by the Planning Commission.
Councilman Miller felt that the Planning Commission should have studied amendments
to the General Plan for the entire City and not just a small area. He felt.that
study areas 3 and 4 should also have been studied.
He then presented the following statement.for the Council's consideration:
The City of San Luis Obispo is stifling the development of housing by means of
outdated zoning restrictions.
The low- income family has for years experienced difficulty in finding decent
housing within the City. Many of these people have to reside outside the com-
munity. This places an additional burden on these people because of increased
transportation costs.
Today we find the low- income people are being joined by middle- income families
who cannot find housing within the City.
Now I recognize the City is not totally responsible for the housing shortage.
We are, however, a contributing element.
What has happened is this:
1. Land costs have increased.
2. Land improvement costs are up.
3. Money, the stuff to finance homes, is expensive.
4. Building material and labor costs have gone up.
.All these factors added together exclude middle- income families from purchasing
a home. It seems reasonable to say that the.single- family residence as we de-
fine it - one house on a 60' by 100' lot - is history. Except for the fortunate
few in.the upper- income group.
This is not a matter of class distinction. It is economics - housing is essential -
this City Council must act now to alleviate the housing shortage.
What can we do?
First, we must remove the unrealistic zoning freeze we have imposed on property.
The allowable density for single - family housing must be increased. No longer is
the 6,000 square foot minimum lot size for R -1 economical. This is not to say
we must discourage large R -1 lots. They have their place in upper- income tract
developments.
We must reduce the R -1 lot size for several reasons. First, to stimulate housing
by reducing development costs, and second, to achieve better utilization of land
area.
Another feature in R -1 zoning that ought to be modified in some areas of the City
is allowing row (stacked housing) or modified row housing.
PRESENTLY ZONED LAND IN CITY
When the zoning map of the City is examined we find our City has failed to keep
pace with a changing economy. A lay person can see immediately large areas of ,
R -2 zoning near the City core. This land must be zoned to high density resid-
ential to allow economical utilization of the land.
We find other areas of the community zoned R -1 when in reality this land should
be zoned for higher density residential. To be specific -- single family zoned
land on our arterial streets is not realistic. With the cost of single - family
homes as they are, no one can get the financing to construct a $20,000 or
$30,000 house on an arterial street. Yet we refuse to face reality and insist
R -1 on a major City street is good land use.
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 11
We still have R -1 adjacent to the railroad in several areas in our community.
May I ask? Is this good planning?
Summing up, we must recognize high- density residential must be permitted in and
around our downtown area. Our arterial streets must be zoned for a higher den-
sity. Lastly we ought to take a -look at our height limit. We probably will find
our limits should be increased.
MOBILE HOME PARKS AND FACTORY BUILT HOMES
I have continually hawked the cause for mobile home parks. Until recently most
cities looked down their nose at this type of housing.
Look at the location of this community's mobile home parks -- near the sewer
farm or down by the railroad. Recently the City granted a mobile home park in
the Laguna Lake area, which proves they deserve to be in residential areas.
I do not think it unreasonable to allow this type of housing development to lo-
cate in and around residential areas. Certainly this city could write a code
stiffer than the state code (which is good), and give mobile home folks a chance
to live in residential areas; at the same time protecting the residential areas
from future blight.
What has this city done with their zoning and building codes to facilitate the
placement of factory -built homes? I'm afraid we have done little planning in
this area. Where will we allow this housing to locate? Will our building and
fire codes permit factory -built housing? Have we negotiated with the building
trade unions for construction compacts?
As far as I know we have done none of these things. Are we going to wait until
the day of confrontation? Then the community will be in an uproar - the battle
lines will be drawn. Who suffers? The innocent family looking for decent hous-
ing. Thus, I urge the Council to waste no time. We must get with it. Even if
this means meeting three or four extra times a month. We have allowed too much
time to pass.
We unintentionally find ourselves playing the role of "hard hearted" City
Councilmen out to stop progress. Not by design - just innocent inaction.
Mayor Schwartz stated that the reason the Planning Commission studied this plan-
ning area only was that a development is ready to proceed and the Planning
Commission studied this area first in order to accomodate the developer. He too
agreed with Councilman Miller that the Planning Commission should consider the
General Plan of the entire City. He felt that this particular recommendation of
the Planning Commission was a good one for the east side of the Southern Pacific
Railroad track.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following res-
olution was introduced. Resolution No: 2010, a resolution amending the General
Plan to show changes in quadrant six thereof.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: - Emmons Blake, Myron Graham; Arthur,F. Spring,
Donald Q. Miller, Kenneth E. Schwartz
NOES: None
' ABSENT: None
14. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of
the Planning Commission to rezone from M to R -H -AH that property located at the
southeast corner of Bullock Lane and Orcutt Road, being lot 120 and a portion of
lot 119 of the San Luis Obispo Suburban Tract.
J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; stated that 11 the property owners within 300'
of the proposed rezoning had received written notice of the public hearing.'
Citv Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 12
R. D. Young, Planning Director, presented the following recommendation of the
Planning Commission for this proposed rezoning:
1. The subject property is'9:2 acres in ar.ea.'The property is zoned M and
has frontage on Orcutt Road and Bullock Lane. Five acres of the subject
property are developed with a mobile home park and the balance of the
property is developed predominantly with single family residences.
2. This application was initiated in order to allow expansion 'of the '
existing mobile home park which is a part of this rezoning.request.
3. The subject property falls within quadrant six of the City of San Luis
Obispo described as that area south of Bishop Avenue extended and east of
the Southern Pacific Railroad.right -of -way with the easterly.and
southerly boundaries being the City limits line. Within quadrant six there
are 20-acres zoned for multiple family residential use and 14.5 acres
are developed or plans for.development are pending. 'Within this quadrant
there are 77 acres zoned for industry and 12 acres are developed for
industrial use.
4. The Commission has taken action to recommend to the City Council that
the General Plan be'amended to show medium to high density residential
use for the general area in which the subject property is located:
5. The Commission was of the opinion that in view of its recommendation 'to
amend the General Plan, the requested prezoning was appropriate.
Mayor Schwartz-declared the public hearing open.'
No one appeared before the City Council for or against the proposed rezoning.
Mavor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
Mayor Schwartz stated he questioned the City rezoning all'the property along
Bullock Lane and Orcutt-Road before acquiring themland the City will need for
construction of the railroad overcrossing. He felt that by rezoning this
property at this time the City is just increasing the cost of the land for
future acquisition.
Councilman Miller stated he disagreed with the Mayor. He felt it was unfair
to expect property owners to wait until the.City makes up-its mind where the
overcrossing will go and what property will be needed for its construction.
He felt that only the City would gain by holding down the value of the land and
he did not feel this was the duty of the City Council.
Mavor Schwartz suggested that if a development was pending on a portion of the
area to be rezoned, then-the City Council could.rezone that.portion only.
On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Spring,.the following ordin-
ance was introduced. Ordinance No. -478, an ordinance amending the Official Zone
Map of the City.of San Luis Obispo. (To rezone from M,to R -H AH that property
located at the.southeast corner of-Bullock Lane and Orcutt Road:)
Passed to print on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Emmons Blake, Myron Graham, Arthur F. Spring
Donald Q. Miller,'Kenneth E. Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
15. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of
the Planning Commission to pre -zone from A -1 AH to R -H -S AH that land located at
the southwest corner of Orcutt Road and Johnson Avenue, being Lots 122, 123 and
124 of the San Luis Obispo'Suburban Tract.
J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk, stated that all property owners within 300 feet of
the proposed rezoning had received written notice of the public hearing.'
R. D. Young, Planning Director, presented the following recommendations of the
Planning Commission for this rezoning.
1.
The subject property is.contiguous to the incorporated limits of the City
-
of San Luis Obispo. It'is approximately 30 acres in area and "is zoned
.County A -1 AH (light agricultural.airport hazard).
2.
The applicant is proposing to annex this area to the City of San Luis
Obispo and.is. requesting pre- zoning to R -H AH (residential high density -
airport hazard) with the pre - zoning to become effective upon effective
date' "of annexation.
3.
The subject property is bounded by an.M District to the west,.R -1 District
to the north,.and'an A -1 AH District-to the east and south. There is an
existing- mobile home park immediately contiguous to the west. Property
to the East, South and Southwest is presently vacant or in agricultural use.
4.
The Commission has taken action to recommend to the City Council that the
General Plan be amended:to show'medium"to-.high density residential use for
the general area in'which. the subject property is.located. -
5.
The Commission was of the opinion that.in view of its recommendation to
amend the General Plan, the requested prezoning was appropriate. However,
in order to assure-that the future development of the property would be
compatible with adjoining properties, it was recommended that the "S"
eesign control) designation be attached:
Mayor Schwartz declared.the public hearing open.
No one appeared before the:City Council -for or against the proposed rezoning.
Councilman Miller presented a letter from W. E. Rice, 1436 Orcutt Road, protesting
the rezoning on the basis that she feels it would:be a detriment to the.residents
of the area due to the increased traffic in the area and decreasing existing
property values.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Spring, the following or-
dinance.was introduced.: Ordinance.No. 477, an ordinance amending -the.Official
Zone Map of.the City of Sail Luis Obispo. (To prezone from A -1 AH•to R -H -S AH
that land located.at.the southwest corner of Orcutt.Road and .Johnson Avenue.)
Passed to print on the following roll call vote:.
AYE_S:. Emmons Blake,,Myron Graham, Arthur F. Spring,
Donald Q. Miller, Kenneth E. Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
17. Communication from D. F. Romero, City:Engineer,.requesting Council approval
of his approach for.the"Highland Drive Assessment.District. His cost
figures include the privately owned property, City property and a payment . to the
City on the cost of the off -site improvements put in by the City for the street
facing the private property to be bought. He continued that.prior.to proceeding
with the project, he wished to have the Council's guidance on a problem that had
arisen.. On the extreme westerly end of.the.street.a 30 -foot parcel :of land is
desired by both Councilman Miller; who.wishes.to..usethis.-as.an access to the. =ear
of .his property fronting Felton Way, and Mr. L. V. Hanson,,549 Highland Drive, who
wishes to widen his lot fronting Highland Drive. He stated that both property
owners had valid arguments as to why they wished to acquire this parcel of land.
He suggested a compromise whereby Mr. Hansen can acquire the westerly ten feet of
the parcel to widen his lot and Mr. Miller the easterly twenty feet in order to
construct an access - driveway to the rear of.his.parcels.- Mr.. Romero stated that
prior to proceeding with the preliminary assessment spread this problem must be
resolved by the City Council.
Communication from L. V. Hansen, requesting that the,City Council allow him to
purchase the thirty -foot parcel adjacent to his property at 549 Highland Drive
so that he can develop his property into a more adequate use for his family.
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 14
Communication from Donald Q. Miller stating the reasons why he wished to acquire
this parcel on Highland Drive. He stated that the main problem is that he cannot
presently service the rear portion of his properties on Felton Way with wheeled
vehicles for weed control and drainage channel maintenance and he felt that by
allowing access to Highland Drive he will be able to use this 30 -foot strip for
this purpose and also to develop the rear of his property. He continued he felt
the Council had agreed to give the'property owners on Felton Way the opportunity
to purchase from the City the land directly behind their lots that fronted on the
Highland Drive Extension.
L. V. Hansen appeared before the City Council on behalf of his request, stating
that.he was opposed to D. Q. Miller acquiring this property as he "was sure if this
happened, Mr. Miller would develop the property to high density,use which would be
a detriment to his R =l property.
Councilman Spring left the meeting at 12:00.
H. Johnson, City Attorney, explained that due to the provisions of Government Code
section 1090 dealing with conflict of interest, a City Councilman cannot bid on
the sale of any City property while he is on the City Council.
Councilman Miller requested that this matter be continued so that -he can contact
his attorney to see exactly what the legal interpretations were.
Councilman Miller left the meeting at this time (12:10 A.M.)
The City Council instructed the City Engineer to include all costs for land and
improvements in the assessment district in accordance with present City policy..
The matter was continued to the next Council meeting.
18. Communications from H: H. Kusumoto and Lois King Crumb; regarding the danger-
ous traffic situation on Johnson Avenue at Bishop Street. They requested that the
City Council do something to protect this intersection, preferably installation
of traffic signals.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, reported to the City Council that he had informed
Mr. Kusumoto that his office will have plans and specifications ready for const-
ruction of a traffic signal at this intersection in April 1970 with construction
to take place early this summer, provided funds are approved in the coming budget.
The City Clerk was instructed to write each person a letter stating that the
traffic signal will be constructed this summer.
21 & 22. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Graham, the Mayor
was authorized to sign and record on behalf of the City an agreement and Deed of
Easement from J. W. Lind for the Benton Way sewer line and also a Quitclaim Deed
from the Sari Luis Coastal Unified School District for street widening on San Luis
Drive. Motion carried:
23. On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Blake, the following
resolution was introduced. Resolution No. 2009, a resolution increasing the
1969 -70 budget. (Account-No. 251.13, Library Trust Fund Purchases be, increased
by $25.00)
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Emmons Blake, Myron Graham, Kenneth E. Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: Arthur F. Spring, Donald Q. Miller..
26. On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Blake; the following
contract payments were approved and ordered paid. Motion carried.
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
February 2, 1970
Page 15
J. A. O'Kelly & Son
Highland Drive Extension
City Plan No. 22 -.69
Ji A. O'Kelly & Son
Highland Drive Extension
City Plan No. 22 -69
Gleim -Crown Pump Co.
Overhaul Sewer Digestor
Assemblies Mixers
City Plan No. 4 -70
Est. 414 $4,766.96
Est. 415 $2,098.10
(Final)
Est. 412 $3,042.00
27. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Graham, the meeting
adjourned to 12:15 P.M., February 4, 1970 to continue items 16, 19, 20, 24 & 25.
APPROVED: February 16, 1970
J. FITZ CK, CITY CLERK