Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/11/19721 1 1 Pledge Roll Call Present City Staff MINUTES ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA SEPTEMBER 11, 1972 - 7:30 P. M. CITY HALL Emmons Blake, John C. Brown, Myron Graham, T. Keith Gurnee, Kenneth E. Schwartz Present: J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; W. Flory, Director of Parks and Recreation; R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer; R. A.. Paul, Director of Water Services; D. F. Romero, City Engineer; A. J. Shaw, City Attorney 1. The City Council discussed the adoption of an ordinance requiring the dedication of park land in new subdivisions. W. Flory, Director of Parks and Recreation, explained the need for an ordinance requiring the dedication of park land in subdivisions. He ex- plained there was a need for additional parks to serve the people living in these new developments but the City did not have the resources to buy land for development of parks. He felt the developers should cooperate and provide the land for the people living in their developments. A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, explained the legal provisions for allowing the requirement of the dedication of park lands. He also reviewed a proposed ordinance which he had prepared for the Council's consideration. The City Council discussed various sections of the proposed ordinance with the City Attorney and clarified several questions. On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Gurnee, that the City Council set a public hearing for Monday, September 18, 1972, for consideration of the ordinance. Motion carried. 2. The City Council discussed the request of the County that the City provide sewer services to County Service Area No. 18, Country Club Estates. Russell Powell, Deputy Administrator, San Luis Obispo County, submitted an amended agreement for the Council's consideration. He stated the agreement differed from the one presented to theCounty by the City in the following respects: 1. The County removed those sections dealing with commitments between the City and the State Water Quality Control Board, as the County felt this was not an area in which the County should be involved. 2. Removal of sections concerning annexation as the County felt they couldn't dictate policy to.the Local Agency Formation Commission. 3. Increased the amount of discount proposed, from 15A to 30%. This action resulted from the feeling that the citizens could afford a $3.50 service charge plus operations and maintenance costs, but not the proposed fee of $5.00 plus operations and maintenance costs. City Council Minutes September 11, 1972 Page 2 4. The County has retained the reference to the Lewis property being included in the agreement in order to re- main consistent with the goals of the State Water !duality Control Board. A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, presented the following analysis of the con- tract proposed by the County: 1. The County Agreement proposes service to areas outside of present Service Area No. 18, specifically the Lewis Tract. If the City agrees to enlargement of present Service Area No. 18 to include the Lewis or any other property, the Agreement should set forth the general boundary limits of all such-property, and the Agreement should just refer to Service Area 18 (not "Service Area No. 18 and the Lewis Tract "). 2. The County Agreement deletes the,Water.Quality Control Board as a party, thereby deleting guarantees from the Control Board that it will not again attempt to require the City to service areas of the County which do not now or in the future have adequate sewage disposal capabilities. 3. The County Agreement also deletes the Water Quality Control Board as an arbiter of any disputes between City and County as to the quality of sewage delivered by the County to the City and deletes an Agreement by the Control Board that it will not penalize City for low quality sewage delivered by County. 4. The County Agreement deletes the $5.00 minimum monthly charge, it also modifies the basic formula of a charge double the sewer charge to City residents by allowing a discount of30N, which represents the cost to County of maintaining the system outside the City. 5. The County Agreement adds the $35.00 hookup fee suggested by the City Engineer. 6. The County Agreement deletes all provisions concerning ownership, control, and payment for the portions of the facilities constructed by the County which may be in territory later annexed to the City. 7. Wording has been added to Paragraph 16 in the County Agreement which could nullify the intent of the paragraph. The intent was to prevent one party or the other or even a third party from going to Court and obtaining an order which rewrites portions of the Agreement, and which also requires the other party to accept the Agreement as rewritten. A. J. Shaw stated that it was his belief that the changes made by the County could be deleted and still provide the County with the result it desires, since the last clause in the paragraph permits the parties to voluntarily agree to any revision of the Agreement by a court. He stated that it should also be noted that the County Agreement does not contain any provision relating to infiltration into the sewerage system in the County areas. The City Engineer desires that there be a provision by which the City can assure itself that such infiltration is kept to a minimum. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, presented an aerial photograph of the Edna Valley showing the location of Service ARea No. 18, the Lewis property, the route of the pipeline to San Luis Obispo, the location of the pump stations and the affects additions would have on the total project. He ' also submitted a report dated September 11, 1972, reviewing some of the recommendations from the Pomeroy, Johnson & Bailey Report on the formation of Service Area No. 18. Mayor Schwartz reviewed the steps taken to date by the City and the County in discussing the possibility of the City accepting sewage from County Service Area No. 18. He stated that the key to the entire negotiations was the fact that a health problem existed in the Country Club area and that one of the solutions was for theCity to make its City Council Minutes September 11, 1972 Page 5 treatment plant available for the disposal of the sewage. The City's main consideration was that of the health of the residents of that area. He stated that he was opposed to the addition of the Lewis property to Service Area No. 18 as this would only increase the development problems by bringing large amounts of unimproved acreage into the proposed service area which would guarantee them sewer services. He further stated that without control by the County, that the area could have a density equivalent to 10% of the City of San Luis Obispo but the area would not share percentage -wise in further costs of the sewer plant. Councilman Brown agreed that the inclusion of the Lewis property was unsatisfactory to him and that the City should only consider service to Service Area No. 18 as originally designated and agreed to by the City Council. He felt it was wrong for the County to continue taking in large unimproved acreage and allowing the areas to be subdivided into urban development. Clint Milne, Deputy County Engineer, felt that including the Lewis property in Service Area No. 18 made the entire project economically feasible and in that way they could qualify for federal funds and still meet the conditions of the Water Quality Control Board. Ken Jonas, State Water Quality Control Board, stated he did not care whether it cost the property owners $5, $500 or $5,000 perlot to get adequate sewer service. His only interest was in the consolidation of all waste water disposal in a given area and not a number of small plants. He felt that too many small plants made it difficult for his department to control and one large plant was easier to supervise. He again warned the City Council to remember that a large project for improvement of the City's sewage plant would be necessary soon and the City would be seeking State or Federal funding for such a project and his agency would have to approve any application for such funds and they would look with more favor on an application by the City if they demonstrated a more cooperative attitude. Ken Jones stated that the Water Quality Control Board had nothing to say about zoning or land use, and he was not sure that the County or City can stop development if that is what the property owner wanted to do with his land. The City Cannot control growth as things radiate outward. In response to.a question from Councilman Blake, Mr. Jones stated: "I can guarantee that if you don't provide this central service, your grant will be ON." Councilman Brown felt that if the Council followed the Ken Jones demands, they would be forced to take in thousands of acres of undeveloped land and that this land could then be developed to suburban type use under the permissive attitude of the County with no financial responsibility for the sewage disposal plant. Walter Lewis, developer, explained his proposal for development of a portion of the acreage south of the Country Club. He stated he only needed sewage disposal for a small portion of his holdings (about sixty acres) because the County Planning Commission andWater Quality Control Board would not allow him to develop R -1 or higher densities without a hook up to a municipal type sewage treatment plant. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, read from the Pomeroy, Johnson & Bailey report which pointed out that if the Lewis property were included in the Service Area, it might result in an over -all saving of 25% for owners in Service Area No. 18. Councilman Gurnee stated his major concern in this whole proposal was the poor land use allowed by the County outside the cities and that if sewer service were available, the County would allow more development and the City taxpayers would have to pick up the tab for planning and City Council Minutes September 11, 1972 Page 4 development errors by the County. He objected to the County justifying the inclusion of the Lewis property in order to make the district economically feasible and thereby allow further uncontrolled growth which would cause new sewer problems. Councilman Blake felt that over the weeks all had been said that needed to be said about this prograin. He felt the City Council did recognize Service Area No. 13 and was willing to take their sewage but the Council was opposed to adding further undeveloped areas which would just complicate the problem. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, upon questioning, stated that the full development of Service Area No. 18 and the Lewis property would tax the lift stations on Broad Street so that the City would have to enlarge the facilities. After discussion by the City Council, the Mayor reveiwed the following items for Council approval: 1. Water Quality Control Board would not be a party to the agreement. 2. plater Quality Control Board to act as arbitrator on disputes between the City and County on sewer quality. 3. The monthly charge to Service Area 13 to be $5.00 per month less 15p discount to the County for maintenance and operation. 4. Upon annexation, the main remains the property of the County for maintenance and operation, unless City and County agree otherwise. 5. In designing the system, the County would protect the City from storm water infiltration into the sewer mains. 6. Property owners would reimburse Service Area for hook -up of any property now in the City. 7. Limit City participation to the original Service Area boundaries. (Councilman Blake stated he had no real objection to including the Lewis property) 3. City.Engineer to review contract. On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Blake, that the City Council direct the City Attorney to modify the agreement based on the preceeding 8 items and bring it back for review with the City Council on September 18 if the Supervisors had taken action by then. Motion carried unanimously. 3. The City Council discussed the possible formation of an assess- ment district to upgrade the fire protection facilities for a portion of the existing residential properties west of Terrace Hill and east of the railroad right of way. R. A. Paul, Director of Water Services, submil-ted a report showing the area that needed upgrading in order to have adequate water flows for fire protection. He estimated that the total upgrading to 8" cast iron mains would cost approximately $150,000 which would break down to approximately $655 for a 6,000 square foot lot. He stated that if the City Council wished to reimburse the district for the existing water distribution facilities in the area, then the approximate cost for a 6,000 square foot lot would be about $420. R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, explained past Council policy when considering the formation of an assessment district in order for the City to avoid large expenditures for engineering and legal costs without some indication from the property owners that they would support the program. He continued that past Council policy required an informal petition representing at least 60% of the property owners in addition to which the City Council holds an informal public hearing to learn the property owners opinions. 1 1 1 1 City Council Minutes September 11, 1972 Page 5 D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that if the Council wished to proceed with this district, they should be prepared to override a majority protest as he felt the people in this area would feel it was the City's responsi -. bility to improve an inadequate system which has been providing poor service for many years. The matter was continued for further discussion. 4. Captain Gary G. Fowler, Commanding Officer of the California Army National Guard, 1498th Supply Company, appeared before the City Council offering the services of the personnel and equipment of his company for public projects for which no profits were made for individuals. He stated he had discussed this matter with the Mayor and that the City was preparing a list of projects for. his unit which would help not only the community but would help train the personnel in his company. He mentioned that he had already worked out an arrangement with ECOSLO to encourage recycling of newspaper by transporting the paper with military vehicles to the receiving point. Mayor Schwartz thanked Captain Fowler on behalf of the Council for his offer and stated that the City would work up a list of projects for consideration.. 5. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Brown, the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2371, a resolution of the Council of..the City of San Luis Obispo approving an agreement with Pacific Gas and Electric Company for common use of. an easement and authorizing the Mayor to execute same. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Emmons Blake, John C. Brown, Myron Graham, T. Keith Gurnee, Kenneth E. Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None 6. The City Council adjourned to executive session. 7. On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman BI the meeting adjourned. Motion carried. APPROVED: November 6, 1972 �: �- -. C