HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/27/1975Pledge
Roll Call
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING.OF THE.CITY COUNCIL
CITY-OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MONDAY,.00TOBER 27, 1975 - 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
PRESENT' Myron.Graham, Keith.- Gurnee,;.Jesse Norris, Steve
Petterson and Mayor-Schwartz
ABSENT.: None
City Staff
PRESENT: J.H. Fitzpatri
Officer; Wayne
City Attorney;
Robert Strong,
Police Captain
:k,..City Clerk; R.D. Miller, Administrative
Peterson, City Engineer; A.J. Shaw, Jr.,
.D.F. Romero, Public Services Director;
.Director of Community Development; and
Englert
1. The City.Council.held a public hearing on the appeal of Paul A.
Hawkins from a- denial by..the Planning Commission for a church rescue mission
at 3026 South.Higuera.Street denied by the City Planning Commission.
Rober.t.Strong, Community .- Development_Director, presented -the reasons for
denial by.the Planning Commission..as-follows:
..1.. The phased_development-plan.proposed_by the applicant did not indicate
specific time:periods for.completion.of phases and did not refer to the
installation - of.minimum ordinance.requirements for ingress, egress paved
:parking or street frontage..improvements.
..2. Public..testimony:was_ offered. iin:. opposition _to _the. proposed..project by
neighbors in the.vicinity and a petition --.was submitted-in.opposition to
the project-indicating adverse land use impacts.
3. The.proposed._project appeared to be-in.-conflict with the adopted General
Plan:-
.Robert Strong-stated-that-the staff:recommended:against: the -.use permit primarily
because of the residential - boarding-house :aspect of.the proposed rescue mission
which was-contrary to:the CH:commercial zoning.
Rev..Paul..Hawkins appeared before the.City. Council . on behalf of his appeal
to the denial by the Planning - Commission stating that the basic and-primary
function-of-the Praying.liands Gospel - Mission was not and would not.be that
..of.a lodging house.. The.primary function of the Mission would be that of
a church. There would-be church services...every night with only one doctrine
preached—He felt.that the definition.of..a :church was that of a. building
for public. worship. -..The Mission : would.be_.open -to:all people regardless
of..race.or- religious ..beliefs- or.ethnic-.background and their primary concern
would -be for-the spiritual .well:.beiiig- of.those who:came for help.- Along
with the church facility the proponents wanted to provide -food and temporary
shelter ... for those-in.need_ including men;.women and children. They would
also like to-help-low income.families by:.providing clothing and whatever
was available. -for their_ need. :but_ before- this,-.there would -_always -be the
church:.service,.after:_which each...person.:needing - it would_receive:.counseling.
..He.:continued_that.the mission-would be .open 24 hours a day with constant
..professional supervision. He continued that he.felt that being.a church
mission they -did belong in-the CH..zoning_and -he -felt -that this was.-one of
the best locations.for the mission because-it-was accessible-.to everyone
who wished.to.help;.they would.have_ the use-of the building that.they could
work on,.the building itself was-60 feet.-from its nearest neighbor.and back
from the= street,.SO.feet. He-:did not .feel that its location would be of-
any inconvenience to the neighbors, there was ample parking and he felt
CITY.COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975
PAGE TWO
there was a.crying need for.this_type_of.mission to serve.the needs of
.the men,.women_and. children of San.Luis Obispo. He felt that the mission
._as.. conceived.was desirable and would ... bring_a healthy element to the commun-
ity. He.therefore asked.that the City Council grant a temporary use permit
so.that they might be able to bring.the, structure at 3046 South Higuera
Street.up.to..ity.code. They would follow.the guidelines .and . regulations
....outlined..by.the City.of..San.Luis Obispo.:-:.-He asked that- .a.temporary permit
be.granted. and that at.the_.end:of one:.year.it be..restudied for continued
use.if it-met with everyone's approval. .
Mayo r.Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
Rev. Martin -of . the .Four.Square.Church_stated.that he was in.support of
. the.concept-.of.the location.of the. rescue _mission.proposed.- by.Paul Hawkins.
felt .that • there was a desperate .need for..:this. type of operation in
.San Luis Obispo: His_church..was.supporting the initiation of the rescue
._operation. He felt that.-the-use permit was for a church if the food and
lodging were.incidental.to_ the church use. Finally, he felt-that-this
was- a.good_ location for this operation.and that it was large enough to
- allow - expansion.
Diane.Stonesipher supported_the.rescue.mission concept to serve the needy
_..of the community. She felt that there was a great.need to serve the
women of San Luis.Obispo.
... Dave- Smiley,..Minister.of_ the Christian ::Church, stated that he was in
___._strong.support.of the.use- permit.for:the.rescue mission at 3026 Higuera
Street. He-felt that the proposal was.one of primary church use with
.food and lodging as incidental use to the primary church operation.
Norma Rocka, Chumash.-Village..Mobile_Home Park, opposed the use permit
due to its.use as a food and lodging place for transients:and.not as
a church.
.William.Peach;- Chumash_Village Mobile ..Home Park,._opposed..the : rescue.mission
as proposed with food and lodging-for-itinerants.
Nina Goodrich,.Chumash Village. - Mobile Home Park, was opposed to a use
permit for -.it for.the.socalled.rescue mission.. She felt that this was
.. an..inappropriate use in.an.area -where there were children and people
living in-relatively-good conditions -and that the rescue mission would
..be a.gathering place for.the_rehabilitation of alcoholics and -other unfor-
tunate people..and they.didn't.feel that.this was a.good environment for
the children living in.Chumash.Village who must each day take the bus
from.across.the. street from the socalled rescue mission.
Epperson; Chum-ash Village.Mobile Home Park, was not opposed to the
church use.but.was opposed to the rescue-mission with people eating and
sleeping-and.spending all kinds of time in the area.
ISabel..Albert,.San Luis..Mobile.Park,.was opposed to the rescue mission.
She._felt that.- the rescue .mission operation -was different .than...the church
as it- catered_to.a.different. type of: clientele that.would be detrimental
to the people-living in the general.vicinity.
Mrs: Swapoda,.- Chumash.Village Mobile.Home Park,
mission.at.3026 South .Higuera.Street..due_.to..the
ize.the.operation and.who..would. affront -the dec
Village who would daily be required.to view the
Allan.Peterson, Anaco-- Mobile Homes.-vas,.opposed
mission in-this general area.
was opposed to.the rescue
people-who-would patron-
ant people-.of Chumash
operation.of this mission.
to".the concept of a rescue
Dr. - H.C.- Hurvey,.San Luis Vetinary.Clinic, submitted-.a- letter opposing
the.use permit-for a.transient facility..in'.the -area of a- concentrated
private housing area and hoped the Council would.deny the.request.
F�
1
1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975
PAGE THREE
The City Council was presented a petition signed by close to 600 residents
and business people in -the general area of the proposed rescue mission.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
Robert Strong, Community Development Director, again reviewed the reasons
and recommendations of the. Planning Commission and Planning Staff in
the denial of the use permit for the church and rescue mission.
The City Council discussed with Robert Strong the deliberations of the
Planning Commission in denying the requested use permit.
Councilman Gurnee-felt that this was a difficult decision. He felt the
use was primarily a church use with.incidental aid for poor for food
and lodging. He felt that he could support the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and would deny the appeal although he felt the proposal
was good but was in the wrong location.
Councilman Norris stated that he would not.support the action of the
Planning Commission and would support the appeal. Further, he felt that
the use is for a church and would be willing to grant permit for one
year.
Councilman Petterson stated.that he would support the action the action
of the Planning Commission and would deny the appeal. He felt that the
use was incompatible with the neighborhood although he did feel that
the mission was needed but not in this location.
Councilman Graham felt that a church in this area was approved by him
and further he would support a temporary permit with conditions controlling
the operation of the rescue mission.
Mayor Schwartz felt that the proposal as presented was basically a church
use but he felt that the auxiliary uses proposed were more residential
in nature and he would support the.Planning Commission action and deny
the appeal primarily on the basis of the attitude of the adjacent property
owners and residences of the area.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Gurnee, that
the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the action of the Planning
Commission but direct the staff to work with the Rev. Hawkins to find
an adequate location for possible construction of a rescue mission.
Motion carried on the following.vote:
AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Gurnee and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilmen Graham and Norris
ABSENT: None
2. The City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of Edward
Salas from a denial by the Planning Commission of his requested rezoning
from CH zone to R2 zone of that property located at the southwest corner
of High and Beebee Streets commonly known as 169 and 175 High Street
in the City of San Luis Obispo.
' Robert Strong, Community Development Director, presented the City Council
the reasoning by the Planning Commission for denial of the request for
rezoning by E. Salas. The application was denied because of nonconformity
with strict interpretation of the General Plan, that action to rezone
the property would be contrary to.State Law unless the General Plan was
amended and that the General Plan Revision under consideration at this
time proposed this property would be more suitable for medium density
residential rather than heavy commercial and would be so recommended
in the Revised General Plan.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975
PAGE FIVE
Finally passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Norris., Graham and
Mayor Schwartz
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Petterson, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2901, a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo requiring the removal
of certain driveway ramps on portions of various streets in the City
of San Luis Obispo.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Norris, Graham and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
6. Robert Strong, Director of Community Development, presented
a proposal from the City Planning Commission regarding the-abandonment of
' Emily and Haskin Streets in the City of San Luis Obispo. He reported
that the Planning Commission recommended that the City abandon the right -
of-way for street purposes with the condition that utilities and all
railroad spur easements for the City utility and railroad companies
be retained and that the location of said easements be determined by
the City Engineer. A further condition would be that the owner or owners
directly benefiting from the abandonment of Emily Street would construct
a manhole and sewer line in Roundhouse Avenue.
On motion of.Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Petterson, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2902, a resolution
of intention to abandon a portion of Emily and Haskin Streets.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Norris, Graham and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
7. A.J. Shaw, City Attorney,- presented a communication from the
firm of Wilson, Jones, Morton and Lynch, Attorneys for the City of San
Luis Obispo in the case vs. the County of San Luis Obispo and Brughelli.
The City Attorney stated that the Council had previously budgeted $5,000
to handle this particular litigation but that the matter had been continued
four times in the various courts and that the additional expenses involv-
ing court appearances, depositions, interrogatories and conferences with
witnesses had brought increased costs to the attorneys. Finally, a third
party, Brughelli, was ordered into the case by the court and this had
added an additional burden for the City's portion of the case. At this
time they had actually accrued expenses of an additional $1,710 and they
did not know how much additional funds would be needed as the trial had
not been completed to date. They recommended that an additional $5,000
be budgeted by the City for this action.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
5.
The City Council considered -the adoption of a
resolution to
require
installation of curbs and sidewalks on property
with driveways
that
the City proposed to remove or narrow.
D.F.
Romero, City Engineer, presented the proposed list
of properties
that
would have driveway ramps removed and sidewalks and
curbs installed
and
discussed implications of the proposed action at a
number of locations.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Petterson, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2901, a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo requiring the removal
of certain driveway ramps on portions of various streets in the City
of San Luis Obispo.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Norris, Graham and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
6. Robert Strong, Director of Community Development, presented
a proposal from the City Planning Commission regarding the-abandonment of
' Emily and Haskin Streets in the City of San Luis Obispo. He reported
that the Planning Commission recommended that the City abandon the right -
of-way for street purposes with the condition that utilities and all
railroad spur easements for the City utility and railroad companies
be retained and that the location of said easements be determined by
the City Engineer. A further condition would be that the owner or owners
directly benefiting from the abandonment of Emily Street would construct
a manhole and sewer line in Roundhouse Avenue.
On motion of.Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Petterson, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2902, a resolution
of intention to abandon a portion of Emily and Haskin Streets.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Norris, Graham and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
7. A.J. Shaw, City Attorney,- presented a communication from the
firm of Wilson, Jones, Morton and Lynch, Attorneys for the City of San
Luis Obispo in the case vs. the County of San Luis Obispo and Brughelli.
The City Attorney stated that the Council had previously budgeted $5,000
to handle this particular litigation but that the matter had been continued
four times in the various courts and that the additional expenses involv-
ing court appearances, depositions, interrogatories and conferences with
witnesses had brought increased costs to the attorneys. Finally, a third
party, Brughelli, was ordered into the case by the court and this had
added an additional burden for the City's portion of the case. At this
time they had actually accrued expenses of an additional $1,710 and they
did not know how much additional funds would be needed as the trial had
not been completed to date. They recommended that an additional $5,000
be budgeted by the City for this action.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER.27, 1975
PAGE SIX
Councilman-Petterson stated .that.he..was opposed to-pursuing this lawsuit
any.longer.. He.felt that it. had..gone:.too..long..and..that there was no
end in sight::He felt that if._the.Council approved the request, the
Council..would_have spent over .$13,000.and.the County over $35,000 or
a total..of $50,000 for the general City and County.taxpayers on a case
that-would prove nothing. He felt the .case was wrong and.that the matter
could have.been..settled by.a Council.:subcommittee meeting with the Board
. of ..Supervisors.:subcommittee.and that._all.these lawyers accomplished
..nothing.
_Councilman..Graham. stated he.would.continue the suit to a final decision
but would.-not-support funds for an appeal after a final..decision had
been made.
Councilman.Gurnee felt the City should-continue the suit to a final
decision_as..the issue .was most important.to_ both the-City and the citizens
...in..the.fringe.area which involved utilities, taxes, etc. He was.of
......the..opinion_that, there was no way to meet.with the supervisors on this
matter and.-he explained the issue with .them as they were constantly
in.violation of state zoning law.
Councilman Norris stated he .felt ..that- the . law .suit. was wrong and a. bummer,
was expensive -to the City and County government and when and if a decision
was.eve.r. arrived at, nothing.would really be proven as the.County could do
as it pleased if it amended the General Plan and the zoning ordinance.
He stated- that..he was-unalterably opposed to spending City funds in
this.case.to fight the County.
Mayor Schwartz stated he-would support..additional funds to the Attorney
as he felt that this matter must be brought to a final conclusion to
see if the State laws were viable as.it applied to zoning. He continued
._.,that the County had had many.opportunities-to meet and confer with the
City Council.and.staff.on this.problem: He felt that the matter should
be continued-and the.additional $5,000 should'be authorized.'
..On.motion_of.Mayor Schwartz,.seconded.- by.Councilman Gurnee,.that the
City Council.authorize an additional..$5,000 to Wilson, Jones, Morton
and Lynch for legal service to the City in the case vs. the County in
the Danley rezoning.
Before voting, Mayor Schwartz asked if there was any public,comment.
Roy,Garcia, representing. the Brughelli.interests, questioned the City
Council'.s.right to continue to spend.public monies on suing the County.
He.felt that this is a waste of funds.as one judge had already thrown
out twothirds of the property involved in the -case.
.Dan Danley, a real party -in- interest,.questioned the City Council's
action to-continue the suit when.the.Council themselves did not follow
their.-own General Plan whichever General Plan they referred to at any
given moment. He.felt that.-the Council.did.not follow its own rules
.and.regulations but when necessary, used the proposed conditions of
a.nonadopted General Plan for making-decisions. He felt that the Council
was irresponsible in spending these additional funds.
Fred Strong, resident of.San.Margarita_.also representing CEEB_EES,.was
..opposed to the City Council spending additional public funds on-this .
..case as it.was. -a disservice to every.citizen living in the City.as.the
Courts had.already.removed ' threefourths of,the land in the original
suit.. He felt that this was just.a spite .suit prolonged by three.Councilmen.
Mayor Schwartz asked.for any additional input. There was none and he
called for..a vote.
Motion. - carried on the following roll-call vote:
u
1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975
PAGE SEVEN
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Graham and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilmen Petterson and Norris
ABSENT: None
8. Communication from Alex Madonna to Robert Strong, Director
' of Community Development, regarding the use of the former Bianchi House
as a guest ranch part of the Madonna Inn.
Mr. Madonna's letter stated that in discussions with Mr. Strong regarding
City procedures to obtain authorization to use the remodeled Bianchi
residence as a guest ranch that the following conditions existed:
1. Temporary uses for periods not exceeding two years may be conducted
in "undeveloped areas ", provided a use permit is approved;
2. Uses (such as guest ranches) not listed in the Zoning District Charts
which are similar in character to those permitted in a particular
district and do not generate more traffic problems, etc. may be per-
mitted by the Planning Director; and
3. If neither of the above procedures is acceptable, then the property
owner would initiate an amendment to the zoning of the property.
Mr. Madonna continued that because the former Bianchi residence was isolated
from other developments, was easily accessible but separate from the
Madonna Inn, and its use as a guest ranch, he was asking City consideration
of a tourist accommodation (1) temporary use and /or (2) use similar
to the permitted uses which would not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare. If the City Council wished, he would seek the necessary
steps to rezone -the property to develop commercial or intensive residential
' uses of the property.
A.J. Shaw, City Attorney, referring to the comments in the A. Madonna
letter, stating that although the Municipal Code authorized the granting
of temporary use permits for periods not exceeding two years in undeveloped
areas, he found nothing in the code section which indicated that such
use permits could authorize nonconforming uses. Therefore, a prerequisite
to any such use permit would be a finding that the use was a conforming
use within the zone for which the use was permitted. Also there is a
legal principle concerning zoning ordinances which provided for "accessory"
or "incidental" uses within a zone where such uses were.expressiy permitted
or authorized in the given zone. However, it did not appear that a
commercial guest ranch operation related to a motel business would be
a use expressly permitted or authorized in the R1 zone. He also stated
his concern over the precedent establishing effect of authorizing accessory
or incidental uses on a case by case basis by the City and he strongly
recommended that the City amend the zoning ordinance to take extra care
to define the terms therein. He concluded that if the City desired to
approve a guest ranch in the R -1 area he would recommend that the zoning
ordinance be amended to define the term guest ranch and that the zoning
chart for the R -1 district be amended to authorize guest ranch uses
under whatever conditions the Planning Commission and City Council impose.
Robert Strong, Director of Community-Development, stated that the Planning
Commission at a regular meeting held October 21, 1975 considered the request
' of A. Madonna and a report from staff recommending that said use be interpreted
as conditionally permitted by virtue of its similarity to uses allowed in the
R -1 zone. The Planning Commission by a vote of 6 -1 determined that the use
in question would be appropriate for the particular location as a temporary
use in an undeveloped area provided a use permit was approved. Also, until
the General Plan revisions were adopted and /or a development proposal
for the property submitted, the Planning Commission believed rezoning
of the property would be premature. In making their determination for
the temporary use, the Planning Commission made the following findings:
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 272 1975
PAGE EIGHT
1... Despite. the . fact that. the: proposed: use.: would.not..generate more traffic,
...parking,_dust.or- noise. and may.:_thereby.qualify as a.use similar
in.character to.R =1 uses, it.would be an- inappropriate precedent
to establish for all R -1 zones.
2. The intent of the zoning ordinance permitting temporary
nonconforming uses for a temporary..period.in a specific
..uses.or..permitted uses;.would. obviously not require any
since they are permitted by definition. .
3. The request to.use the.property:in.:question fora guest
.been more:appropriate if.submitted prior'.to.its active
uses is to allow
zone. Conforming
authorization '
ranch would.have
isage as such.
..If the City Council interpreted.the Zoning Ordinance similarly to the
....Planning Commission recommendation the ,Council should direct staff to
so advise - the. Commission :and:advise.the:applicant. that he may submit
an application for a temporary use permit to the Planning Commission.
..Dorothy_.Conner, President of the- local.chapter of.the League of Women
Voters,...stated• that. the. League.:. of -Women_Voters.:of.San Luis Obispo was
....- _.opposed.to the_decision. and recommendation.of the Planning Commission
...in approving the staff's interpretation of.the.Zoning Ordinance as well
as.a temporary use permit for.the property in an R -1 zone for the following
reasons:
1. In order.to grant.a use. permit: the .ordinance:must.state -that the
use use be .authorized or in.conformance.:..The.term 7guest ranch" or-
:co_temotalris =a commercial use.and :is not •therefore an appropriate use
in ain a R- l.zone.. A motel.or.guest..ranch by its nature and-use cannot
.be.construed as a use "similar in character" to a single-family
residence.
2. To.even stress that a use.permit - .gives greater control.over a given
..property obscures the.basic point.of..the- ordinance and misunderstands 1
. the grounds.for: even- granting.this.type.of permit. Also, a use
perapermit.is.. only. as: restrictive, as -. the- conditions placed on. it (which
Vi -n this case are still unknown) and-.the enforcement of the conditions.
3...In.all.:.fairness to individuals..who :have.come before public bodies
as well as the public .at- large,.uniform.enforcement is.of great
consequence in terms of respect for the law and those who interpret
and administer it.
4. The request -for this-type of interpretation and use sets .a highly
questionable precedent..
5. The League.of.Women. voters were .under-the-impression that this.matter
would -be openly discussed at a scheduled public hearing.. It is
regrettable ...that -more notice was -not given in order.to obtain more
public output.
For these..reasons as well as those outlined. earlier .at.the.:.last:_P.lanning
..Commission.meeting,..the League.respectfully.urged that the..Council.reject
the Planning Commissions recommendation.with respect to the use of
this property for.a guest ranch.
Mayor Schwartz.declared.the public.hearing open.
Walt- Crawford, Chorro Street,.questioned the.right of..the.:City:Council
:in-granting-exceptions to the- zoning ordinances:ind-general plans of
the City.
Charles Flight, 388 Chorro.Street,.felt that.all property owners have.
the right to.-ask for - exceptions to.City.:laws..but also.the City- government
should -be careful not to abort City law for.everyone:
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975
PAGE NINE
Mr. Robasciotti asked who lives near the Bianchi house and who are complain-
ing about the uses of the building as a guest ranch.
Peggy Ioppini, representing A. Madonna, stated that she was aware that
he must apply for a use permit for a temporary use with whatever conditions
were established by the Planning Commission and she hoped that the City
Council would go along with the Planning Commission's recommendation.
Councilman Graham felt that the property owners should proceed with
an application to amend the zoning classification also the definition
of a "guest ranch" in the City ordinance.
Councilman Gurnee stated that he was personally shocked at the interpretation
presented by the Planning Director to legalize an illegal use of property.
He also felt that there was no such thing as a temporary use permit
as there was no enforcement of any use permits issued by the City of
San Luis Obispo. He was opposed to the precedent being established by
the Planning Commission in this recommendation as the people of the
City would lose any confidence they might have left in City planning.
Councilman Norris felt that the Planning Commission was trying to help
a property owner correct a mistake that he did not know he made. He
felt that while the city ordinance did not allow or approve guest houses,
it did not deny them. He felt that the use represented was desirable
and thought it was a good use of the land and a good program. He also
felt that this was an asset to the tourist programs within the City.
On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Petterson, that
the City staff be directed to work with Mr. A. Madonna to implement
item 3 in his letter of October 10, 1975 to initiate a rezoning of the
Bianchi property and further that the staff be directed to work with
Mr. Madonna in determining if a General Plan for the development of
his properties both in and contiguous to the City of San Luis Obispo
existed in the form which would allow.consideration and possible integra-
tion in the City's General Plan revisions now in progress.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Norris, Graham and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilman Gurnee
ABSENT: None
9. The City Council considered a request from Walter Bros. Construction
Company that a red zone or no parking signs be placed on the west side
of Higuera Street north of Prado Road which would include a bike lane
and a request for a bus loading zone which would prevent the storage
and parking of large trucks along this new commercial development.
' Walter Bros. representative submitted pictures of the problems in front
of the new little shopping center where large highway trucks were stored
overnight and on weekends. The City Staff agreed with the request stating
that this should have been done and recommended that the Council so
approve.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Graham, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2903, a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo prohibiting parking and
establishing bicycle lanes on South Higuera Street.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing
closed.
Councilman-Petterson felt that this was a
desirable
use of the property,
felt that A. Madonna would comply with the
conditions established by
the Planning Commission for the use permit
and that
he would support
the use as he felt it would be an asset to
the City
and to the land.
Councilman Graham felt that the property owners should proceed with
an application to amend the zoning classification also the definition
of a "guest ranch" in the City ordinance.
Councilman Gurnee stated that he was personally shocked at the interpretation
presented by the Planning Director to legalize an illegal use of property.
He also felt that there was no such thing as a temporary use permit
as there was no enforcement of any use permits issued by the City of
San Luis Obispo. He was opposed to the precedent being established by
the Planning Commission in this recommendation as the people of the
City would lose any confidence they might have left in City planning.
Councilman Norris felt that the Planning Commission was trying to help
a property owner correct a mistake that he did not know he made. He
felt that while the city ordinance did not allow or approve guest houses,
it did not deny them. He felt that the use represented was desirable
and thought it was a good use of the land and a good program. He also
felt that this was an asset to the tourist programs within the City.
On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Petterson, that
the City staff be directed to work with Mr. A. Madonna to implement
item 3 in his letter of October 10, 1975 to initiate a rezoning of the
Bianchi property and further that the staff be directed to work with
Mr. Madonna in determining if a General Plan for the development of
his properties both in and contiguous to the City of San Luis Obispo
existed in the form which would allow.consideration and possible integra-
tion in the City's General Plan revisions now in progress.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Norris, Graham and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilman Gurnee
ABSENT: None
9. The City Council considered a request from Walter Bros. Construction
Company that a red zone or no parking signs be placed on the west side
of Higuera Street north of Prado Road which would include a bike lane
and a request for a bus loading zone which would prevent the storage
and parking of large trucks along this new commercial development.
' Walter Bros. representative submitted pictures of the problems in front
of the new little shopping center where large highway trucks were stored
overnight and on weekends. The City Staff agreed with the request stating
that this should have been done and recommended that the Council so
approve.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Graham, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2903, a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo prohibiting parking and
establishing bicycle lanes on South Higuera Street.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975
PAGE TEN
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Graham, Petterson, Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
10. R.D. Miller, Administrative Officer, presented for the Council's
consideration an amendment to the Municipal Code dealing with an update
of the bicycle license ordinance to comply with Assembly Bill 3329 recently
adopted by the State legislature. The licensing would be on an annual
basis at a fee of $2.00 per year and all licenses would be controlled
by County. The recommended changes to the Bicycle Ordinance was recommended
by the City staff.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris, the follow-
ing ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 651, an ordinance by the
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the Municipal Code to
comply with California Vehicle Code sections concerning licensing of
bicycles.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Graham, Petterson, Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
11. A memorandum from Paul Landell on behalf of the Waterways
Planning Board requesting that the City Council take action to abate ,
a nuisance on the Helen Freitas property at 633 Woodbridge Street which
consisted-of a wooden drainage structure and'culvert which.was disintegrat-
ing and possible downstream plugging could occur.
Communication from Alice M. Randell, 647 Woodbridge Street, conservator
of the Hazel Freitas property at 633 Woodbridge Street, stating that
Mrs. Freitas is a.patient in a local hospital and would be unable to
represent herself at the public hearing, that she was a poor woman and
could not afford to pay for repair the damage or alleged damages caused
by her property.
The matter was continued for a better cost estimate from.the City Engineer.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded.by Councilman Petterson, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2904, a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo finding that a public nuisance
may exist upon the premises at 633 Woodbridge Street and ordering a public
hearing concerning same and the abatement thereof.
Passed and adopted on the following.roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Graham, Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None '
ABSENT: None
12. Recommendation from the Promotional Coordinating Committee
recommending that the City Council grant the San Luis Obispo Babe Ruth
Baseball Organization $750 to apply for the 1976 State Tournament for
Babe Ruth.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Petterson, the
recommendation was approved. All ayes.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975
PAGE ELEVEN
13. Communication from the Planning Commission recommending that
the City Council consider the approval of the annexation of the South
Street addition to.the City of San Luis Obispo consisting of 17.28 acres
of land at the top of the hills. The subject area was composed of three
separate parcels and that this land was part of the development under
the South Street Specific Plan and that in order to square off the lines,
the Planning Commission felt that this should be annexed to the City.
Charles Teague, property owner-in the area to be annexed, objected to
the proposed annexation as he did not want to be in the City. He felt
he had been mistreated by City officials in the past and did not wish
to get involved with any City employees again and he.had asked Council
to please accept his request not to be annexed.
On motion of.Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Graham, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2905, a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo giving notice of proposed
annexation to the City of uninhabited territory described herein and
designated "South Street Annexation", and giving notice of time and place
for hearing of protests thereto.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Graham, Gurnee, Norris
and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
14. Wayne Peterson, City Engineer., presented for the Council's
consideration the recommendation of the Planning Commission in approving
the tentative map for Minor Subdivision No. 432, 2900 and 2910 McMillan
Avenue (Alberti, Emmons and Morton). He stated that the Planning Commission
had a public hearing on September 12, 1975 to consider the tentative
map of Tract 432 and recommended that the City Council accept the tentative
map subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant provide City standard curb, gutter and sidewalk along
the frontage of both proposed parcels.
2. The developer agrees that all lots shall be subject.to sewer assessment
proceedings and agree that he will require as a condition of the
transfer of any lots that the transferee shall be bound by and waive
any objection to sewer assessment proceedings by the City.
3. The developer shall install street trees along both frontages at 30'
foot intervals or pay the City $1.00 per lineal ft. of street frontage
for street frontage for the purpose of street tree planting.
4. The developer shall provide utility easements in accordance with
the requirements of the utility companies.
5. The developer shall provide a 10 ft. easement along all lot frontages
for the purpose of the installation and maintenance of street trees.
6. The creek (near the rear of the property) shall be shown as an easement
' and a provision for access to.the easement from the street shall be
granted to the City; the easement to be subject to the approval of the
City Engineer.
7. The developer shall remove from the site all of the outbuildings, the
railroad tank car and any other junk or debris subject to approval
and inspection of the Chief Building Inspector.
8. Tract No. 552 shall become null and void with the approval of this
subdivision.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975
PAGE THIRTEEN
C -4 On motion.of.Councilman Graham.-seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the request by the Community Development Department regarding the consid-
eration of the amendment to the reversion of the acreage map, Terrace Hill
R -1 zone, Exhibit B, was approved. Motion carried.
C -5 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the request from the Pacific Gas and Electric Company for the City to -.
adopt a proposal involving utility tax refunds of general refunds ordered
by the Public Utilities Commission was approved.
C -6 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the Mayor was authorized to sign the amended agreement with the Department
of Transportation for maintenance of State Highways in the City of San Luis
Obispo and further, that the Public Services Department, continue sweeping
the City streets six nights per week. The following resolution was intro-
duced: Resolution No. 2907, a resolution of the Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo approving a maintenance agreement with the Department of
Transportation and authorizing the Mayor to execute same.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilman Gurnee, Norris, Graham, Petterson and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
'C -7 Communication from Robert Strong, Director of Community Development,
forwarding a draft copy of the revised excavation and grading regulations
for the City of San Luis Obispo and asking that the City Council consider
setting this matter for a future public hearing, with Council discussion
' to be held on November 17, 1975. Motion carried.
C -8 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2908, a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an agreement with
the Department of Transportation for relocation and adjustment of a water
line at Tunston and Lawton and authorizing the Mayor to execute the same.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote.:
AYES: Councilman Gurnee, Norris, Graham, Petterson and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -9 On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Graham,
the request from the Human Relations Commission requesting a student
intern to work with the Human Relations Commission was approved with
no financial support requested. Motion carried.
C =10._. On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the following resolution-was introduced: Resolution No. 2909, a resolution
increasing the 1975 =76 budget (insurance premium).-
' Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Norris, Petterson, Graham and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None 1.
CITY COUNCIL'MINUTES
OCTOBER 27, 1975"
PAGE FOURTEEN-
On.- motion.of.:Councilman Pet.terso-d, seconded.._by..Councilman
Graham, claim - against the.City..on..behalf_of.Rose E. Barger was denied
and referred,to the insurance carrier. Motion carried:
C -12 R.D. Miller, Administrative Officer, announced the appointment
of.:Phili _R. McKim,. Utility.Plant.Operator.I;_to Range 11, Step I, $752
per month-effective 10 /'16 /75.'aiid.the appointment of Bernard-M. Silva,
Jr., Police Officer, to-Range 22P, Step I; $960'per month, effective
11/1/75.
C -13. On.motion of-Councilman Graham,._seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the following step increases were approved:
Roberta I. Goddard - Accountant
From Step 4 or $1,232.to Step 5 or $1,300
Gerald F..Lenthall. -- Police Officer
From-Step 3 or $1,100 to'Step 4 or $1,162
Elwyn D..Littlefield - .Mechanic I
From Step 2 or $888 to Step 3 or $940
John P. Richerson - Maintenance Man II
From Step 1 or $752 to Step 2 or $794
Dale E. Strobridge - Police Officer
From Step 3 or $1,072 to Step 4 or $1,130
Motion carried.
C -14 On.motion.of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the request of Harr - Woolpert, Chairman of the.Ordinance`614, Citizens;.
Committee.for an extension of their report until Decembei 31, 1975 were
approved..Motion carried.
C -15 On.motion _ of.- .Councilman- Graham,_seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No..2910, a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo recommending bail amounts to
the Municipal Court for parking citations.
AYES: Councilman Gurnee, Petterson, Graham; Norris and
_._ Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
B -1 The..Clerk reported on the following bids received for one
_hot high.pressue washer. Bids opened.10 /2/75 at 10:00 a.m.
Westside Auto Parts, Inc. $3,055.00 With remote control
1232:�M6nterey- Street 2,905.00 With dead man gun
_. San Luis Obispo, Calif.
Truhitte.Automotive $3,225.50
998 Quintana Road
Morro Bay, Calif.
Water.Wagbn of Atascadero $3,420.00
P.O. Box 204
Atascadero, Calif.
Selig Chemical Industries $3,678.78
2840 South Alameda Street
Los Angeles, Calif.
HOTSY of San Joaquin $4,110.00
.Valley Cleaning Chemicals
No. 6 South Bliss
Bakersfield, Calif.
u
1
1