HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/21/19741
1
Pledge
Roll Call
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA.
Monday, January 21, 1974 - 7:00 P.M.
City Hall
PRESENT: Councilmen John Brown, Myron Graham, T. Keith
Gurnee,and Jesse Norris, and Mayor Kenneth Schwartz
ABSENT: None
Citv Staff
PRESENT: J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; R. D. Miller,
Administrative Officer; A. J. Shaw, Jr., City
Attorney; David Williamson, Assistant Administra-
tive Officer; Jim Stockton, Park & Recreation
Department; R. A. Paul, Water Department Director;
E. L. Rodgers, Police Chief; D. F. Romero, City
Engineer; L: Schlobohm, Fire Chief; Pat Gerety,
Associate Planner.
1. The City Council
603. An ordinance of the
Code to require review by
grading activities within
20 feet of the top of the
of building and grading p
said review.
considered the final passage of ORDINANCE NO.
City of San Luis Obispo amending the Municipal
the City of all proposed construction and
certain flooded and flood -prone areas and within
banks of certain waterways prior to the issuance
-=rmits therefor; and providing a procedure for
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
Charles M aino appeared before the City Council questioning the timing of
the ordinance and the effect it would have-on existing property.
Councilman Norris asked that the record show that this ordinance did not
stop development but just required a permit from the City for development
in the areas covered.
Councilman Brown stated that he felt that this was a continuing study of
flood hazards and would in time be released from City control as improve-
ments were made.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed..
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the ordinance
was introduced for final passage.
Passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
2. W. A. Sullivan requested permission to discuss with the City
Council the possibility of a parking permit in the City parking lbt
behind Muzio's Groceries and Montgomery Ward's store. W. A. Sullivan
did not appear to speak on his behalf.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Paae 2
R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, suggested that this matter be
continued and discussed with Traffic Committee Report No. 1 at the end
of the agenda. He also recommended for the Traffic Committee that the
City Council not grant this permit request so that there could be a
turnover in the downtown lots.
3. The City Council continued their discussion of consideration '
of safety equipment for police officers:
A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, reviewed for the City Council the memorandum
from the Administrative Officer, R. D. Miller, dated January 18, 1974
regarding the meeting of A. J. Shaw, R. D. Miller, and E. L. Rodgers
with representatives of the Police Officers' Association and their
attorney.
In the discussion it was agreed that the City would purchase the listed
safety equipment for all new personnel from this time on, and that
personnel would be required to use standard issue equipment. The City
would also offer to purchase used equipment from existing safety per-
sonnel subject to the top dollar limit set forth in the Police Chief's
memo and also based on the condition of the items. The City also
offered to buy new standard equipment for present safety personnel and
they could do what they wished with equipment presently owned by them.
The City staff committee was unable to agree on the demand of the Police
Officer's Association that the City provide cash reimbursement for
equipment previously purchased by the officer, with the officers to
retain ownership of the equipment.
The Administrative Officer then recommended that the City accept the
recommendation of the Police Chief including the offer to provide safety
equipment of a standard classification to any safety personnel presently 1
on the force.
E. L. Rodgers, Police Chief, presented a memorandum dated January 18,
1974 in which he and the Police Officer representatives had approved
the following list of safety equipment and approximate costs.
1.
K -38 Smith & Wesson Model 15 revolver (combat
Master Piece, 4 -inch barrel)
$85.00
2.
Holster (Hoyt Breakfront high rise)
20.95
3.
Sam Brown belt (basket weave)
14.75
4.
Handcuff case
6.90
5.
Smith & Wesson handcuffs
18.25
6.
Ammo pouch
6.95
7.
Baton ring holder
1.10
8.
Key holder
2.95
9.
Whistle (chrome)
1.50
10.
Belt keepers
3.60
11.
Pay-O -Vac flashlight (3 -cell)
3.77
12.
Raincoat & Hat cover
25.95
Approximate
cost of safety equipment to be
purchased
per man
191.67
Approximate cost of items on hand (name plate,
helmet, face plate, baton, mace and mace 1
holder) 70.00
TOTAL $261.67
His memorandum also contained the following recommendations:
1. Equipment purchased by the City.would be City property
and would be turned in in the event the officer left the
Department or retired.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 3
2. During their service with the City, officers would be
responsible for keeping all issued equipment in good
condition, considering normal wear and tear.
3. Present officers could elect to continue to use their
own equipment heretofore purchased by them if it conformed
' to departmental standards. If they should decide to sell
their equipment to the City and continue using it on the
Job, they might do so with prices subject to approval by the
Administrative Officer and Chief of Police, and also subject
io the top dollar limits for. the respective items previously
listed. On the other hand, officers might have the option of
switching to new City equipment and disposing of their equip-
ment as they desired.
Memorandum from A. J. Shaw, January 17, 1974, in which he stated that
at the January 7 meeting he had not been prepared to advise the Council
as to whether or not safety personnel might have a legally enforceable
claim against the City for reimbursement for safety equipment previously
purchased by them. He stated he had contacted other City officials
concerning this problem, and stated it was not their opinion that they
have to reimburse safety personnel for previously purchased equipment.
He continued that at a Labor Relations Institute sponsored by the League
of California Cities he attended a session wherein the question of
furnishing safety equipment to personnel was discussed. He stated that
no representative from any City indicated they were reimbursing safety
personnel. On the contrary, all those who indicated that their cities
had taken a position stated that their cities felt they had no duty to
reimburse and they were not going to do so voluntarily. Therefore,
A.J. Shaw, City Attorney, advised the Council that it was his opinion
' that the City could successfully defend against any legal action seeking
to require the City to reimburse safety personnel for past purchases of
safety equipment. He wished the Council to be aware that he did not
mean to imply by this opinion that the City could not work out an arrange-
ment with the Officers to purchase safety equipment which they now owned
if it met City standards. He felt the City could successfully defend
itself from any challenge to such a purchase program, especially if the
purchase price substantially represented the present fair market value
of the equipment.
He suggested that the Council's action at this time would be to adopt the
list of safety equipment as prepared by the Police Chief and representa-
tives of the Police Officer's Association and secondly, to provide all
new and present officers with such equipment; and, offer to purchase
existing safety equipment from police officers at which time it then
became the property of`the City after a mutual agreement of price.
Richard A. Carsel, Attorney representing the Police Officer's Association
thanked the City staff for recommending adoption of the list of safety
equipment for all police officers and also thanked the staff for recom-
mending that the City issue all police officers adequate safety equipment
from the approved list. He stated that as a representative for the Police
Officer's Association there were still two issues unresolved.
1. The matter of reimbursement for equipment already purchased
' by the police officers as required by the City regulations of
the Police Department, and
2. The question of statute of limitations - how far the Citv
must go back in such reimbursement.
He stated that he felt it was unfair and unequal to officers who had been
on the force a number of years not to reimburse them for their safety
equipment which they were required to purchase at their own cost. He
felt that they spent good money and they were not getting the advantage
that the new officers were getting of free issue of equipment. He
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 4
further felt that the statute of limitations brought into this matter by
the City Attorney did not apply, as he knew of no court case in this
area. He felt that if the Council did not reimburse all officers for
previously purchased equipment, he would take the City to court and
force this purchase by the City Council.
Edward Martin, Police Officer, stated that he too was in agreement with
the list of safety equipment but felt that each officer had a personal
pride in the hand gun he purchased and did not wish to give it up. He
felt the City should pay each officer the original cost of the gun and
then allow the officer to "buy back" the gun from the City with service
to the City say amortized over a five year period at which time the gun
would again become the property of the individual officer. If the
officer were to leave before the end of the five year period, he would
be reimbursed one -fifth the value for each year of the unused amortization
schedule.
Councilman Gurnee stated he felt the Police Officer's Association made
sense and should be seriously considered by the City Council.
R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, stated that he felt that if the
City paid for any equipment with taxpayers funds then the equipment
should become the property of the City and not allow some arrangement for
ultimate private ownership of equipment purchased at public expense.
Edward Martin again stated the City should either buy the equipment at
cost and reimburse each officer, or accept the Police Officer's Association
offer to buy back the equipment with service at the end of a stated period
of time.
Mayor Schwartz suggested that the Council action would be to 1) approve
the safety equipment list as presented, 2) reimburse each officer for
his equipment with City to retain ownership of the equipment, 3) to pay
officers a minimum, and 4) allow.the officers to buy back equipment on
an amortization basis over a five year period. He felt the question
before the Council was:
1. Must the City buy equipment for new officers?
2. Must the City reimburse all other officers for equipment
previously purchased?
Councilman Brown stated he agreed with the adoption of the list of
safety equipment and he was leaning towards buying all equipment for City
ownership including the weapons.
Councilman Graham agreed with the adoption of the safety equipment list
and also agreed with reimbursement on all safety equipment with owner-
ship to pass to the City including firearms.
Councilman Gurnee agreed with the adoption of the safety list as recom-
mended. He felt all officers should be reimbursed for equipment purchased
with ownership to pass to the City and that the City staff be asked to
continue negotiations on reimbursement or to consider the Police Officer's
Association offer of the five -year, buy -back. plan.
Councilman Norris also agreed with the adoption of the safety equipment
list. He agreed with provisions to issue new equipment to all police
officers and was also in favor of the City purchasing existing equipment
and issuing it to each officer. He also agreed with purchasing the
equipment at cost as shown on the standard list.
Mavor Schwartz stated that he agreed with the.adoption of the safety
equipment list, felt whatever policies adopted should be applicable to
all officers, was in favor of purchasing the equipment from all officers
without consideration of the statute of limitations. He felt the purchase
should be based on the condition of the equipment at the time of purchase,
1
n
1
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 5
and recognized that police officers formerly were allowed to buy what-
ever gun he wished and the City should buy it at historical cost without
any additional cost to the City for modification of grips, sites, etc.
E. L. Rodgers, Police Chief, suggested that the City police should have
a standard approved handgun which all personnel from the Chief on down
' would be required to provide himself.
On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Brown the following
resolution was introduced. RESOLUTION NO. 2563 (1974 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving and
adopting a complete safety equipment list for police officers, requiring
all new officers to use equipment on said list, and requiring the City
to provide said equipment for all new officers and all present officers
who so desire.
Passed and adopted-on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Gurnee that the
City purchase from any present officer without regard to years of
service, items of equipment no. 3 and 12 based upon the condition of
the equipment liberally construed to maximum amounts set in the Chief's
list, plus purchase any weapon and its holster previously purchased
' by the police officer without regard to his tenure for the value of
the weapon in its standard (no customizing) condition amortized as to
its present condition. Officers would have 90 days to submit their
request for purchase by City.
Motion carried unanimously.
4. Council consideration of the memo from Councilman T. Keith
Gurnee entitled Policy on Overburdened Facilities dated December 16,
1973.. Councilman Gurnee stated that over a long period of time the
City had followed a policy of permitting construction of new develop-
ment which would obviously place additional overloads upon already
overburdened City water, sewer, drainage, traffic and fire hydrant
facilities, services administered by the City and resources necessary
to sustain the population. This policy in the past had brought serious
consequences to the City due to a great degree by inadequate and over-
burdened facilities. (1) The Los Osos Valley water crisis and (2) the
disastrous flood of 1973. He felt other similar problems of lesser
magnitude continued to serve as reminders of facility overloads; for
example: the Hilton Hotel,the approval of which consciously placed an
additional overload on an already overburdened sewer line. He continued
we were now facing an impending resource crunch with respect to water
supply, water filtration capacity, and sewage treatment capacity that
promised to be a most demanding and expensive problem in terms of money,
time, and energy. He felt it was the City Council's responsibility to
foresee problems and plan their resolution in a swift and deliberate
fashion well before a panic stage while the people of the City still
had a choice in the future rather than have their future dictated by
crisis.
He continued that while the City had committed themselves to a long -
range, advance - planning program vital to the future direction of the
community, he felt the City must also turn its attention to the present.
Instrumental to advanced - planning program vital to the future direction
of the community, he felt the City must also turn its attention to the
present. Instrumental to advanced- planning strategy was a cohesive
package of measures and policies that must effectively operate in the
now and render current problems manageable in the future. He felt it
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 6
was necessary to enact effective working policies and procedures
affecting the day -to -day development of the City so that the citizens
could be assured that problems of overburdened facilities would not
befall us in the future and render advance planning obsolete. He
presented a draft resolution as a method to deal with this problem.
The resolution would deal with facilities only; but such a policy
could act as an increment of a larger policy package on growth and I
community development.
He briefed the resolution for the Council's consideration stating that
over a period of time the City had followed a policy permitting construc-
tion of new development which would place additional overloads on over-
burdened facilities. That such a policy was contrary to sound planning,
created time- consurning and insoluble administrative difficulties, and had led
to a counter productive policy of government by reaction to crises, which
he felt was detrimental to the general health, safety, and welfare, and
whereas potential developers of real property had a right to expect that
the City would assure that sufficient City facilities were available to
permit reasonable development and plans for such properties in accord-
ance with existing zoning, and further, that the Council desired to
implement a policy which would assure that the City would not approve
or authorize further development which would not be served by adequate
City facilities, and that the City would initiate timely action to
assure adequate facilities to accommodate reasonable and authorized
development. He asked the Council to adopt the following policy:
1. Effective immediately, the City would not issue any use
permit or building permit for construction or development prior to
certification by responsible City department heads that the proposed
construction or development could be adequately accommodated without
overloading, and within the design parameters of City sewer, water, '
drainage, traffic and fire hydrant facilities which already existed or
which would be in existence prior to construction or prior to occupancy
as required by the City.
2. If any application for a use permit or building permit were
denied accordingly, the Planning Commission should request a complete
report from each department head who was unable to certify to the adequacy
of City facilities for the project. Upon receipt of the report, the
Planning Commission should hold one or more public hearings concerning
City facilities needed to provide adequate service for the proposed
development or construction, and the Commission should thereafter submit
a report to the City Council recommending additional facilities, zoning
changes, or other changes needed by the Commission to make zoning demands
compatible with City facilities.
3. Upon receipt of the report from the Planning Commission,
the Council should at its next regular meeting consider the report and
order such further study and action by responsible City officials as
it deemed necessary for correction in all due haste of the lack of
facilities, improper zoning, or such other deficiencies or inadequacies
as the Council might determine.
Finally, he listed a number of exemptions such as those previously
granted permits, single family dwelling alterations, single family con-
struction upon fully improved lots,construction of mobile homes within '
mobile home parks, and construction of public works other than buildings.
Councilman Brown stated that in regard with Councilman Gurnee's memo
that it was common knowledge that the City drainage system was now in-
adequate and would be inadequate for many, many, years to come and
following the preamble to his resolution this would effectively stop
all development in the City.
Councilman Gurnee agreed with Councilman Brown's statement and offered
to delete the word drainage from the proposed resolution.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 7
Councilman Brown continued he felt Councilman Gurnee's proposal was
too tight and did not feel it was adequate and would rather consider
each proposal as it came along for consideration in light of condi-
tions at that particular moment.
Councilman Graham felt that the City Council should follow the policy
as presented.
Councilman Norris stated that he opposed and would continue to oppose
the proposal of Councilman Gurnee as he felt it would hinder any
development within the City of San Luis Obispo.
City Engineer D.F. Romero asked how this policy would affect existing
sewer plant which would be inadequate to full development of the City's
general plan, but adequate for present flows.
R. A. Paul, Water Department Director, felt that the resolution only
formalizes what the City Council had been doing over the past few years.
Councilman Graham stated that he agreed with Paul's comments that this
was basicly the policy followed by the City Council although it had not
been formalized.
Dave Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer discussed with Council-
man Gurnee some possible administrative problems in the proposed policy
on facilities.
A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, explained to the City Council the implication
of the word "certification" in the proposed resolution.
Mavor Schwartz declared the meeting open to the public.
Harold Fields, 1704 Oceanaire-Drive, questioned the intent of the
Gurnee resolution as no time limit for upgrading the overburdened
facilities was established and without some time limit no intelligent
developer could come into the City with proposals.
Fred Strong, representing C.E.B.E.S., was opposed to the intent of
the Gurnee resolution due to its definite no- growth philosophy. He
felt that this approach to community life was wrong as the people
were here, they were coming here to live and he felt the City Council
should attempt to bring their public facilities in to order rather
than postpone the issue. He urged the City Council to consider a
positive approach to development and not a no- growth or negative
attitude.
Elizabeth Webee, 2964 Flora St., stated she was in support of the
Gurnee proposal, felt the City Council should study the long range plan-
ning and solve the lack of public facilities drainage in conjunction
with a long -range study.
Mayor Schwartz closed the public part of the meeting.
D. F. Romero asked how traffic facilities could be certified for a new
development when congestion was not where the new development was, but
' was in the central part of the City. He felt that the proposal would
be difficult to administer by the staff.
Councilman Gurnee again explained the purpose of the resolution on
policy was to try and bring reality of City planning and upgrade City
facilities. He urged the City Council to adopt the policy for solving
the problems of overburdened public facilities.
Mavor Schwartz reviewed for the City Council a memorandum put out by
his office on October 1972 to the City staff asking for resource
planning reports on facilities at that time.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page °
R. A. Paul stated that his department had been inventorying all water
related facilities for the City including water supply, filtration,
capacity, conveyance equipment, etc. and would be ready soon with a
complete report for the City Council.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that his department presently study-
ing and still continuing on the following:
1. Sewer plant and sewer lines - well along
2. Storm drainage system - survey completed, analysis
barely started
3. Street program.- available now for Council consideration.
Pat Gerety, Associate Planner, spoke to the Council on land use inven-
tory and the vacant land survey.
Dave Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer, reported to the City
Council on discussions in the zone 9 advisory committee dealing with
drainage and flood control, stating that the Advisory Committee had
already recommended a $60,000 study to the Board of Supervisors for the
drainage basin, a $20,000 annual maintenance of creek program, etc.
Mayor Schwartz stated that Councilman-Gurnee's proposal was in line
with his request to the administrative departments in October, 1972
for an inventory of water, sewer, traffic, drainage, etc. He felt he
agreed with Councilman Gurnee's proposal to require each department
head to signify that the City had potential to serve the development
being proposed to the City. He felt that Councilman Gurnee's proposal
put the City on record on facilities of the City and there was a need
for the resolution although he did suggest that the City staff and '
Councilman Gurnee review proposal for wording changes and bring it back
for Council consideration.
Councilman Norris stated that he was opposed to any action.by the City
Council that would limit the number of people who could live in San
Luis Obispo. He was opposed to any attempt to adopt a no- growth policy
for the City. He continued he felt it would be impossible for department
heads to signify that the City streets could handle more traffic. He
felt that this was a backdoor approach to a no- growth policy. He also
felt that down - zoning as proposed by Councilman Gurnee was the taking
of land from property owners without just compensation. He was opposed
and urged the City Council not to adopt the policy as he felt it would
hurt the citizens of San Luis Obispo.
Mayor Schwartz explained that if the City Council had adopted policy as
suggested by Councilman Gurnee, there would never have been a need to
place a building moratorium on twenty percent of the City's area.
Councilman Gurnee agreed that this proposal could be amended but he just
wished the City Council to go on record of adopting some policy so that
people who wished to develop in the community would know where they stood.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham that the
City staff prepare a resolution amending the Gurnee proposal to include I
the deletion of:
1. reference to traffic, and
2. to drainage, and clarify language in the "whereas"
sections.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 9
a
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham and Gurnee and Mayor
Schwart-
NOES: Councilman Norris
ABSENT: None
5. Communication from David Y. Farmer, Attorney, representing
Dan Oxford regarding acreage fees on the Southwood subdivision. He
stated that on January 31, 1973 the subdivision review board of the
City prepared a memorandum to the Planning Commission which incorporated
its recommendations on the Oxford development. Within these recommenda-
tions on the Oxford development was
one which called for the payment of $350.00 per gross acre as a water
acreage fee. A review of that file at the present time would indicate
that subsequent to the preparation of the memorandum the figure $730.00
was inserted in place of the $350.00 figure. Subsequent to the accept-
ance by the Planning Commission of the recommendations of the subdivision
review board Mr. Oxford deposited a requested amount with the City at
the rate of $350.00 per gross acreage exclusive of the street area.
This was as requested in R.A. Paul's letter to Larry Meek of First
American Title Insurance Company dated March 13, 1973. Therefore, he
felt there were two problem areas involved with the water acreage
fees in the Oxford annexation.
1. The alteration of a government document to indicate
that a recommendation was made which in fact was not made,
2. The attempt by the City to avoid
agreement entered into between itself
Mr.'Oxford after all conditions to be
had been performed. On this basis Mr-
City Council reconsider the matter of
fees and go back to the original $350
the consequences of an
through R.A. Paul and
performed by Mr. Oxford
Farmer asked that the
these water acreage
.00 per acre.
A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, presented for the City Council's information
a chronological listing of the City's processing of the tentative map
for tract 485 the Oxford subdivision and the City's adoption of increased
water acreage fees, which showed that on March 5, 1973 water fees for
tract 485 were paid at the rate of $350.00 per acre. Also on the same
date at the evening Council meeting the City Council adopted a resolution
No. 2428 increasing water acreage fees from $350 to $730 effective at
once.
On April 3, 1973 the memorandum from the City Attorney to the Planning
Director advising that at the time thereafter of final approval of the
tentative map b� the City Council, the conditions should be changed to
state that the Developer would pay the acreage fee in effect at that
later time, $730.
April 16, 1973 the Council by resolution No. 2454 gave notice of its
intention to consider Mr. Oxford's Southwood Annexation; on May 7, 1973
the City Council approved the tentative tract map with condition no. 13
stating that "The developer shall pay water acreage fees in the amount
of $730.00 per gross acre exclusive of street area ", and by the same
motion of the City Council adopted resolution No. 2463 approving the
annexation of the tract to the City.
A. J. Shaw then submitted a memorandum from Ronald D. Young, former
Planning Director regarding water acreage fees for tract 485, which stated
at the time the tract was considered by the subdivision review board a
communication was received from Mr. Paul, Water Department Director, in-
dicating that the acreage fee would be $350.00 per acre. Subsequent
to review of the tract by the subdivision review board and the Planning
Commission the Council passed a resolution increasing the water acreage
fee to $730.00 per acre and we were advised by Mr. Paul in his memo of
April 3, 1973 that the conditions should be changed and that the developer
would pay the acreage fee of $730.00 per acre at the time of approval of
City Council Minutes
January 21., 1974
Page 10
a
the tentative map. Therefore, the condi-tions of the subdivision review
board and the Planning Commission minutes were modified to require the
$730.00 per acre. He condluded that the confusion would not have arisen
if the planning staff could have supplemented the minutes of the subdivision
review board and the Planning Commission with an addendum covering water
acreage fees rather than changing of the minutes.
A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, explained that the City did not annex or
approve the tentative map of Tract 4 85 until two months after the
increase in the water acreage fees and that acreage fees applied only
to property which had been annexed to the City. He felt that the
early payment-by Oxford did not stop the City from coming back for
additional funds and he felt Oxford could be required to pay the addi-
tional funds.
Mr. Farmer, Attorney for Mr. Oxford, stated he felt that morally and
ethi -cally the City had a covenant with Mr. Oxford through the various
agencies of the City, subdivision review board, Planning Commission,
etc. also a written direction by a staff member and he felt that the
City citizens should be allowed to rely on such an action.
Councilman Norris felt that the City should stick to the original
commitment with the developer and accept the $350.00 per acre as has been
previously paid.
On motion of Councilman Norris that the City Council accept the original
$350.00 per acre fee fog tract 495. Motion lost for lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman-Gurnee accept the
recommendation of the City Attorney that the City was not bound by the
developer's early payment of $350.00 per acre as originally established
and that the City could require the additional fees in accordance with
the resolution adopted March 5, 1973.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee, and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilman Norris
ABSENT: None
6. David Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer, stated that
his report on staffing and relationship of City staff to consulting
services was not quite ready and asked that it be continued for presenta-
tion as soon as completed.
7. The Council considered the impact of Assembly Bill 2610, which
would require cities to reimburse property owners if the fair market
value of property decreased as a result of a zoning change.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham that a
letter be sent to Assemblyman Nimmo and State Senator Grunsky and a
telegram to the Chairman of the Committee before which this bill was
being considered giving the City's opposition to its adoption and the
reason therefor.
Motion carried.
3. Memorandum from D. F. Romero, City Engineer, bringing to the
Council's attention a cooperative agreement between the State of
California and the City covering revisions and modifications to the
traffic control system, highway lighting and channelization at the
intersection of Santa Rosa and Foothill Blvd. The cost sharing of the
project was calculated according to normal state formula based on the
number of legs at the intersection.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 11
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that in May, 1973 he submitted a
memorandum to the City Council using the Division of Highways estimate
for the work at $36,000 with the City's share being $18,000. Since
that time the cost of signal work had sky- rocketed and the new cost
estimate included within the agreement brought the City's share to
$33,000. He stated he had verified this with staff at the Department
of Transportation and this was a correct estimate. He continued that
most of the signal installation at this intersection was installed in
1954 with the present controller installed in 1959 when substantial
modifications were made. But the critical nature of this intersection
and the ever increasing traffic loads he believed the City had no
choice but to participate in the modification even at the increased
cost, and suggested that the matter be considered favorably by the
City Council. He concluded that the plans for the work were substantial-
ly completed and the work would be conducted during the coming summer
if approved by the City Council.
The City Council discussed the need for this project and for the
revisions of this traffic signal and also the extremely high cost to
the City.
On motion of Councilman Norris, seconded by Councilman Brown the follow-
ing resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION 0. 2547 (1974 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving
agreement with State of California for revision of existing traffic
control signal system, safety lighting and channelization at the
intersection of Foothill with State Highway Route 1 (Santa Rosa).
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, and Norris
' NOES: Councilman Gurnee and Mayor Schwartz
ABSENT: None
9. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, asked the City Council for permission
to purchase the State's share of the salvaged equipment of the existing
signal standards, cabinet, and control equipment at the intersection of
Foothill and Santa Rosa as this equipment could be used by the City at
other intersections or it could be used as a spare in case of breakdown.
On motion of Councilman Norris, seconded by Councilman Brown the City
Engineer was authorized to purchase the equipment at a cost of $250.
Motion carried.
10. Memorandum from D. F. Romero, City Engineer, requesting permission
from the City Council to retain the consultant firm of Pomeroy, Johnson
and Bailey in accordance with the City's application for permit to dis-
charge waste water from the City sewer plant. As a condition of a federally
mandated report the City must prepare additional information regarding
industrial discharge into the municipal system. There.are approximately
20 industrial discharges which would have to be sampled and analyzed to
meet Federal requirements. He estimates the cost to be approximately
$1,750 for the requi-red testing which must be completed by June, 1974 for
submission to the State Water Quality Control Board.
On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Gurnee the City
Engineer was authorized to enter into an agreement with Pomeroy,
Johnson & Bailey.
11. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, reviewed plans and specifications
for the City Council for Police Facility Carport Extension, City Plan
No. 28 -74 at an estimated cost of $4,268 plus engineering design charges.
This matter was approved by the City Council in Capital Outlay Account
No. 4.
City Council Minutes
.January 21, 1974
Page 12
Pat Gerety, Associate Planner, reported that the Environmental Impact
Report was not required under existing City policy for this addition.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman- Graham the
plans and specifications were approved and the bids were authorized to
be called for.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham and Gurnee and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilman Norris
ABSENT: None
12. . Communication from the Design Review Board recommending that
the public restroom in Mission Plaza be repainted. �It was the opinion of
the DRB that the restroom's current color did not blend with its sur-
roundings in Mission Plaza. The suggested colors would be to paint
the restroom white with the exception of the center panel between the
two entrance doors to be painted a dark brown similar to the brown trim.
The white color would be similar to both the mission and the Murray
Adobe and therefore given more continuity between the various buildings
in the plaza. The DRB recommends that this suggestion be implemented
perhaps by utilizing the assistance of the Youth Corps during a summer
program.
Recommendation approved on motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by
Councilman Graham on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
13. R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, presented a memorandum
to the City Council regarding the proposed restroom, press box, and
concession stand complex at the Sinsheimer baseball stadium. He stated
that atbudget time 1973 a preliminary figure of $32,000 for the facility
was rounded off to $30,000 and placed under Revenue Sharing budget
approved by the Council. It now appears that with various suggestions
for features to be included in the facility that the project would cost
$ 80,000. This was for approximately 3,000 square foot building including
expensive items in connection with the concession stand, restrooms which
would include vandal proofing. The Council should also bear in mind that
the school board had indicated its intention not to approve final plans
on this unit until the master plan had been completed and there might
be some delay on this because the soil engineer, Robert Williams, was
currently unable to get his equipment into the area to tie down the
swimming pool location.
James Stockton, Assistant Director of Parks & Recreation, presented
schematic drawings and artist renderLngs of the press box, restroom, and
concession stand at Sinsheimer Park. Several members of the Citv Council
felt that this particular building seemed to-be quite elaborate and quite
large for such an undertaking. But as these were just preliminary draw-
ings the staff was authorized to take these drawings to the Park &
Recreation Commission and to the joint Recreational Committee on Use of
School District Property for their recommendation and information.
14. Memorandum from the Tree Committee regarding proposed changes to
the make -up of the committee. The Committee discussed the following
alternates for Tree Committee make -up.
1
1
1
1
Alternate 1.
Alternate 2
Alternate 3
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 13
Present make -up of Tree Committee as .proposed,
no change.
Same make -up of Tree Committee with two types of
members:
(1) staff members advisory- non - voting, and
(2) Council members and lay people- voting members.
Reduce the size of the Committee. There were
two alternatives suggested:
(1) Re- organization of Committee to have
lay persons and remove tree authorities from the
Committee, and
(2) re- organization of the Committee to have only
one Councilman represented.
These alternates were discussed because of the problem of a spit vote with
only four voting.members as in alternate number 2 above.
Alternate 4. Re- organization of the Committee to.include only
lay people and staff.
After a quite heated discussion by the Tree Committee this matter was re-
ferred to the City Council for final determination and guidance.
Lane Wilson, Park Foreman, member of the Tree Committee stated that at
the present. time the City Councilman, Park & Recreation representative,
lay member and staff were all votd)ng on the Committee.
The City Council discussed the make -up of the Traffic Committee and the
Waterways Planning Board at which the City staff only acted as advisors
with no voting privileges.
Councilman Brown stated that with the Waterways Planning Board, presently
consisting of seven members, it was quite unwieldy.to make a rapid de-
cision. He suggested that possibly this was the p.roblem with the Tree
Committee.. He suggested that the Committee could be made up of one
Council member, one Park 3 Recreation Commission member, and one lay per-
son, which would be voting. members and the various members of the Park
Commission, Engineering Office and Planning Department would only be
advisory to the Committee.
Councilman Graham, member of the Tree Committee, stated that he wished
to remain on the committee as he was quite interested in this particular
area.
Councilman Norris, also a member of the Tree Committee, stated that he
would be willing to step down in order to make the thing work if only
one Councilman were to be on the committee.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Brown that the
Tree Committee be reconstituted to consist of one Council member,
Councilman Graham; one representative of the Park E Recreation Commission;
and one lay person appointed with staff representation with no vote to
come from the Park Department, Planning Department, and the Engineering
Office. Motion carried.
15. The City Council considered a communication from Julian C. Dixon,
Assemblyman, requesting support by the City of San Luis Obispo of Assembly
Bill 594, a bill dealing with environmental problems, and banning non-
returnable or throw -away beverage containers.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 14
Communication from the Environmental Center of. San Luis Obispo County
forwarding the gross income for the six month period in 1973 from their
recycling center asking that the City Council support the ban on non-
returnable containers so that this material could be recycled and
reused.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham that the
City Council go on record supporting Assembly Bill 594, a bill dealing
with environmental problems, and banning non - returnable or throw -away
beverage containers.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
B-1. Memorandum from Andrew D. Jones, Chairman, Subcommittee to
Review Bids for a Public Transportation System, recommending that the
City Council accept the bid of Doyle Griffith to perform the bus service
in accordance with advertised specifications.
Mr. Jones stated that the City committee had reviewed the proposed
operation with Mr. Griffith and that the following items were discussed:
1. Mr. Griffith has a firm quote on an acceptable type of
vehicle, with a firm delivery date of 90 days from placement
of order. Bus size will be 17 passenger or larger.
2. Mr.. Griffith's estimate was reviewed and determined to
be reasonable and all- inclusive.
3. Mr. Griffith can furnish the required $70,000 performance
bond, and $5000 labor bond without difficulty.
4. Mr. Griffith agreed with the following items concerning
operation:
a. Vehicles will be washed and vacuumed daily.
b. Vehicles will be radio equipped.
c. Vendor will cooperate in the collection of basic
data.
d. The initial base of operation will be at the present
Yellow.Cab terminal, however, separate bookkeeping
will be established for a bus system.
e. Hub meters will be provided for accurate mileage
measurements.
f. Bus operation and payment by the City will be measured
beginning and ending at the terminal..
After reviewing all aspects of the bid and conditions the above subcommittee
respectfully recommended acceptance of the low bid submitted by Mr. Doyle
Griffith and award of contract to him.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the follow-
ing resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2551 (1974 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo accepting the
bid of Doyle Griffith for the operation of a transit system for a one
year period as part of a transit system feasibility study.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
1
J
1
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 15
B-1A. Memorandum from Andrew D. Jones, Chairman Mass Transporatation
Committee, regarding coordination and supervision of operation of the
San Luis Obispo bus system.
Assuming that the Council would award the contract for the proposed bus
system at the January 21 Council meeting, the Committee offered the
following recommendations for accomplishing the required coordination
and supervision of the bus system:
1. Mr. Fitzpatrick's office would coordinate the accounting,
daily fare collection, mileage and passenger number recording
procedures.
2. Mr. Romero's office would coordinate operations with
respect to location of bus stops, scheduling, route reviews,
collection of passenger statistics by questionnaire, etc.
The Committee was of the considered opinion that the above suggested
procedures would enable maximum benefit to be derived during the oper-
ation of the system through application of sound accounting and audit-
ing procedures by the City Clerk's office and through application of
traffic and transportation engineering principles by the City Engineer's
office to provide for a high level of service and smooth operation.
The Mass Transit Committee thanked the City Council for the opportunity
to submit their recommendation.
On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Norris that the
recommendation on coordinating and supervision of the San Luis Bus
System be approved.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilman Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
B -2. The City Clerk reported on the following bids received for
various City equipment, motor vehicles and contractors equipment.
Bids opened Friday, January 18, 1974. See exhibit "A ".
R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, made the following recommendation
on the bids received.
Item No. 1. That Alternate 1 - the Chevrolet Suburban Wagon
be accepted for $4,805.02 including tax less trade -in.
Item No. 2. The low bid of Kimball - Motors on Economy Pickup
at $2,625.36 including sales tax less trade -in.
Item No. 3. Recommend re- bidding since Lougee - Michael did not
bid on the John Deere model that meets the specifications. The City
believes it could bid on a model that does meet the specifications at
a cost several hundred dollars lower than the Wallace Machinery bid on
a Ford model. Therefore, they asked permission to re -bid this item.
Item No. 4. The second low bid by Wallace Machinery on a
caterpillar, four -wheel drive loader. Cost slightly higher than the
Lougee - Michael bid on a John Deere, but Waliiace Machinery offered
$15,500 on a repurchase option versus $10,200 from the Lougee_ Michael
Company. Also, the caterpillar would be available for immediate delivery
compared to 150 days for the John Deere, which would make a difference
of more than $200 in sales tax since any item that was delivered after
April 1, 1974 would be subject to a six percent rather than a five per-
cent tar.. Total cost less trade -in, including sales tax is $17,750.00.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 16
On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Graham that the
recommendation for purchase and for the re -bid of Item No. 3 as recom-
mended by the Administrative Officer be accepted.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris,
and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
B -3. City Clerk reported on the following bids received for
CREEK BANK REPAIRS, City Plan No. 23 -74. Bids opened January <14, 1974
at 3:00 P.M. Bids listed are for use of grouted stone:
BIDDER BID
Engineer's Estimate $26,123.50
TED WATKINS
Paso Robles $27,995.00
R. BURKE CORP.
San Luis Obispo $30,427.00
CONCO
San Luis Obispo $31,528.00
WALTER BROS.
San Luis s Obispo $35,063.67
CAL - WESTERN RETAINING WALLS
Fresno $37,753.00
C. L. BROOKS
San Bernardino $43,674.00
M.J. HERMRECK, INC.
Nipomo $49,577.00
MADONNA CONST. CO.
San Luis Obispo $57,215.00
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, reviewed the bids for the City Council,
the various alternates to the five basic projects. He recommended that
the low bid of Ted Watkins - $27,995.00 using grouted stone be accepted.
On motion of Mavor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Norris that the low
bid of Ted Watkins be accepted and the contract awarded.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilman Brown, Graham and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilman Gurnee
ABSENT: None
C -1. Claims against the City of San Luis Obispo were authorized paid
subject to approval by the Administrative Officer.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 17
C -2. The following contract payment was approved:
Dennis Landscape Est. #1 $14,526.23
Street Tree Planting
City Plan No. 18 -74
Santa Rosa 8 Foothill
C -3. The City Council minutes of August 6, August 8, September 11,
October 1, October 3, October 8, October 18, October 26, and November
14, 1973 were approved as corrected.
C -4. Council consideration of maintenance agreement between Depart-
ment of Transportation and City of San Luis Obispo for State Highways
within the City limits.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the follow -
resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2546 (1974 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving
agreement for maintenance of State Highways in the City.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee, Norris, and Mayor
Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -5. The Mavor was authorized to execute an agreement for employ -
ment, on a contract basis, of a social services coordinator for the
Human Relations Commission.
C -6. Communication from Sinsheimer P.T.A. Board regarding traffic
problems at Sinsheimer School was referred to the Traffic Committee.
C -7. Memorandum from D.F. Romero, City Engineer, requested permis-
sion to order an overhaul of existing cutter assembly ($4,400), and to
order a spare lift assembly ($3,360) for sewage treatment plant without
obtaining competitive bids. He continued that no purpose would be
served in placing the overhaul and the lift assembly out to bid, as
there was only one firm that manufactured the units and the Los Angeles
office would serve the account.
A. J. Shaw, Clty Attorney, stated that under the conditions as explained
by the City Engineer, the City Council could find that it was an idle
act to call for competitive bids for the equipment.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Norris, that
based on testimony presented, the calling for competitive bids would
be a useless act. The Administrative Officer was authorized to purchase
the necessary equipment. Motion carried.
C -8. Council consideration of a resolution confirming the cost of
work to correct creek obstructions at 1041 -1043 Hiquera Street, Stanlev
V. Cole, owner.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the follow-
ing resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2563, a resolution of the
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo confirming the cost of work cor-
recting creek obstructions, assessing a portion of said costs against the
property owner, and providing three years for the payment thereof.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page l°
C -9. Council consideration of a resolution increasing the 1973 -74
budget (Account No. 211.2 - Contractual Services).
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the
following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2548,
a resolution increasing the 1973 -74 budget (Account No. 211.2 City
Engineer - Contractual Services).
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -10. Council consideration of a resolution increasing the 1973 -74
budget (Account No. 343, Water Transmission and Distribution Mains).
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the
following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2549, a
resolution increasing the 1973 -74 budget (Account No. 343, Water
Transmission and Distribution Mains).
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee.and Norris, and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -11. Communication from Don Kral] requesting amendment to the
Municipal Code to allow card rooms to be open 24 hours a day.
Charles Willis, former card room operator spoke in opposition to
allowing card rooms to stay open 24 hours a day. He also objected
to present card room licenses limiting who can play in their card
room. He suggested that the City Council appoint a citizens committee
to supervise card room operation.
On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Graham the matter
was referred to the Police Department for report.
C -12. Communication from the Planning Commission regarding proposed
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow administrative and general
offices, not including medical and professional offices, in heavy
commercial and industrial zones was held over until the Planning Commis-
sion completed the second hearing and reported to the City Council.
C -13. Communication from the Planning Commission regarding amendment
to the Sign Ordinance allowing signs made of wood,to be erected in Fire
Zone I (Central Business District) was set for public hearing.
C -14. Memorandum from R. A. Paul, Water Department Director, regarding
Council authority to advertise for bids - Pipeline Materials - Cross Town
Feeder, City Specifications No. W73 -10. (Estimate $240,000, to be in-
cluded in next year's budget. R.D.M.) was approved and authorization
given to call for bids.
C -15. Memo from R. A. Paul, Water Department Director, regarding
Council authority to advertise for bids - Site Preparation - Edna Saddle
Reservoir Site, City Specification No. W73 -8. (Estimate $265,000, to be
included in next year's budget. R.D.M.) was approved and authorization
given to call for bids.
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 19
C -16. Council consideration of Resolution No. 73 -13. A resolution
of the County of San Luis Obsipo approving Los Osos Road - Madonna Road
Annexation to the City of San Luis Obsipo, (Firehouse site owned by the
City) was referred to the Planning Commission.
C -17. Memo from R. A. Paul, Water Department Director, regarding
Progress Report, Ordinance No. 568 (1972 Series) was ordered received
and filed.
C -18. Summary of Public Works Department projects in design and
construction projects was ordered received and filed.
C -19. Administrative Officer announced the appointment of Neal Alston
as Maintenance Man II effective February 1, 1974 at Step 1 or $636 sub-
ject to one year probationary period.
C -20. Administrative Officer announced the appointment of Brian F.
Lapworth as Fireman effective January 16, 1974 at Step 1 or $772 subject
to one year probationary period.
C -21. The following salary step increases were approved effective Feb-
ruary 1, 1974:
Michael C. Alamo - Sr. Recreation Leader
From Step 1 or $712 to Step 2 or $750
Gail A. Davis - Secretary
From Step 1 or $568 to Step 2 or $600
Robert C. Isenberg - Maintenance Man II
From Step 3 or $712 to Step 4 or $750
Alan D. Matthews - Police Officer
From Step 2 or $860 to Step 3 or $910
Anthony N. Oliveira - Maintenance Man II
From Step 2 or $670 to Step 3 or $712
David S. Phillips - Maintenance Man II
From Step 1 or $636 to Step 2 or $670
John P. Quirk - Assistant Director of Water
From Step 4 or $1,192 to Step 5 or $1,258
Malcolm W. .Stone - Police Officer
From Step 2 or $860 to Step 3 or $910
C -22. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham
the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2550 (1974 Series),
a resolution increasing the 1973 -74 budget (Account No. 400.15 Utility Tax -
recycling Center).
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None
C -23. R.A. Paul, Water Department Director, brought to the Council's
attention that A.B. 2483 (Nimmo) regarding stockponds, was again active
on the State Legislature's agenda, and further the bill had been further
h.beralized to the disadvantage of the City and other holders of rights
of record to Salinas River Water. The new amendments include domestic
and recreational use incidental to livestock use, and also roll back
the dates to allow additional time to perfect right.
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 20
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Brown the Water
Director was authorized to contact Assemblyman Nimmo and the chairman
of the committee presenting the objections of the City Council to
adoption of the bill. Motion carried.
C -24. A. J.. Shaw, City Attorney, again brought the
building permit for the Woodbridge Feed and Sound Com
a restaurant at 271 Woodbridge Street, and particular
comments by Attorney Gerald Shipsey that the City was
State code, which required a city zoning ordinance to
with the General Plan by the City (Govt. Code Section
matter of the
)any to construct
ly in view of the
in violation of
be made consistent
65860).
David Williamson, Asst. Administrative Officer, stated he felt that the
City Council should proceed under existing City ordinances and grant a
building permit because the proposed project Is in accordance with exist-
ing zoning and the City's adopted policy for establishing consistency
between the General Plan and zoning. This policy is that all future
zone changes are to be made consistent with the General Plan; however,
the City is not going to rezone all properties which are inconsistent
at this time. This policy was adopted at a joint meeting between the
City Council and Planning Commission.held a few weeks ago during which
the ramifications of Assembly Bill 1301, which requires compatibility
between the General Plan and zoning, were discussed.
The matter was continued for further discussion to February 4, 1974.
TC -1. 74 -1 -1C Recommendation that monthly parking permits in down-
town lots be raised from $4 and $6 to $6 and $9, effective April 1, 1974.
On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Brown that the
recommendation that monthly parking permits in downtown lots be raised
to $6 and $9, effective April 1, 1974, be approved.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham and Gurnee and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilman Norris
ABSENT: None
72 -1 -2T Recommendation that stop signs along North Broad
Street be re- evaluated at the end of May 1.974.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Brown that the
recommendation for re- evaluation of the stop signs along North Broad
Street at the end of May be approved.
Motion carried on the following .roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
74 -1 -3T Recommend that Engineering Department be authorized
to negotiate for rights of way for street widening - South side South
Street, Higuera to Beebee.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Brown that
recommendation to negotiate for rights of way for street widening -
South side South Street, Higuera to Beebee be approved.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
Page 21
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
I 74 -1 -4T Recommend painting of bike lane east side of Los
Osos Valley Road between Madonna and Prefumo!Canyon Road.
74 -1 -5T Recommend one 12- minute parking space in front of
Saw Shop, 1177 Marsh St.
74 -1 -6T Recommend red zone (four spaces) north side Murray
east of Santa Rosa in front of Sierra Vista Hospital.
at Morro.
74 -1 -7T Recommend stop signs on Leff at Morro and on Church
74 -1 -8T Recommend red zone (two spaces) South side Palm
west of Osos.
74 -1 -9T Recommend four 24- minute parking meter spaces at
north end of Court Street in lot 6.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Brown the
following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2555 (1974 Series)
a resolution restricting parking and establishing a bicycle lane on Los
Osos Valley Road; establishing short term parking on Marsh Street;
restricting parking on Murray Street; establishing stop signs on Leff and
Church Streets; restricting parking on Palm Street; and establishing short
term parking on Court Street.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and
Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The meeting adjourned to 7:30 P.M., Monday, January 28, 1974 to consider
amendments to the Open Space Element of the General Plan.
APPROVED: March 4, 1974
H. ZPATRICK, CITY CLERK
1
EXHIBIT "A"
City Council Minutes
January 21, 1974
(n
O r
CO. zz
w
cn =
cn 7�
(D
x
D�>
DO
r
r-
(D
zC
Zr
Z-
O(n
03
J
YG7
-ir
-
m
C
O
70 m
D D
D-
v
D
+
o m
c)
U)
i
r
s
i
m
z-
*-o--
r
(D
U 1 U t
00
a 0
O
-
I
2f
;
_
:K
p
(7
- D
- m
Z
O
in
2
S O
> •O
(n
-I
-•
D
2
C
O
O
CL
m
-
-
-
-;D
CD
r
z
m
m
O
o
<
z
C_
z -ICD
Z-I O7
C)
z -W
Z-im
(D
mom -
mom-
O
m -
m�t
<
-i Dp
-ID
p
-
O
p
ti
T
m
m
m
m
m
m
O
Ef+ En
Z7
A A
U)
-i O
`u
p
-
m
0` ul
%0O�O+
0 0 0
J O J
Z
Z
Z
O
O
O
O
Co
CD
co
UD
Er En
.
0
0
O
O
-
N O N -F
O•� O D\ •
O 0.0 N
b'
(,Cl
69
!i
Efl
FA
""
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
Co
O7
CD
G�
J
U1
N J
-
-
-
A
N J
N
(J A
v
OJ U1
w
U1 CO
O
N IV
-
O -
000
W
*-o--
O A
O
U 1 U t
00
000
000
b'
(,Cl
69
bA
v'1
bf
O',
W
OD
CD
-• ED
Z
O
O
J W
N
J �O
v
OJ U1
w
U1 CO
O
N IV
-
O -
CO
W
A
O A
O
U 1 U t
00
0 0
-
-
.
p
CJ
N
O N
O
O O
O
wow
000
.00�O
Eft Ef
N w
min w=
cc)rn
Era w Era tra A Ut �O O
J J 0 0 0 Z
rn o' r') rn� v i m 0 O
ON O ON
U0% UUo 00 0w UD uo
--j O -I i O O O - -
A CD A O o 0 0 0
E,a En
O O O O O O N N
O O O O O O U t -,j
2
OJ J U7 u
O U1 U1 O
0% O 0%
(7
A O A
Z Z Z Z
O O O O O
CD CD W C0 07
O O CD p p
07
p
M
m
m (n
(D DF -
(D + m
-• m
00 3
N 7
Z
w ZE: O
O
+ (C
s O
(D 7
7
+
m
- n
O
7 7
7 O -
m
C0 n O
C c
-•� N
d
7
cf) m
+ -I
1 O
(D 7 -
(D + -I
+ m
m M
O n
(D C- Z
-o O
or r
o
+
0) w
E3 n-
CD (D
+
() A
+
CJ T
(D (D -
+ (D -I
- m
C; M
(D p
� � z
a - O
3 r
(D o A
(D Dl
7 (D
+ (D
-0 ;J
D) O
Z a M
� m
(D< 3
3 Z
d O O
+ (D
(D 1 U
(D
7
+
� G
a)
n O
n £
O
a cc
0)
=3 lz�
n -•
(D n
Ut
+ o
� n
(D
Dl -.
o <
< (D
O a-
0
LO
�. U1
c
(D -
n -<
h 7
n
+ O
O O
=3 -I
U)
(D
-• n
CL -
in (D
N
O
0)
(D C
7 0_
CD
C_
m
1 +
n 0)
D, n
O
1
L U1
D
7 (D
C
D) C
-G -O
OJ C
+
-G O
J
A -}
Dl (D
+
C7
N -•
O <
0
O
• Dl
F-
0
0
U
O
EXHIBIT "A" (Continued)
DEVIATIONS FROM SPECIFICATIONS
KIMBALL MOTOR CO.
Item No. 1, Alt. 1 - Suburban
#18 Chrome hubcaps in place of Wheel Covers.
#18 Bright Windshield molding not available.
Item No. 1, Alt. 2 - Beauville Sportvan
#7 Pear Spring Capacity 2,100 lbs.
#10 Panel delivery type rear doors, fixed rear glass.
#16 Clock, not available.
Item No. 2 - Chevrolet LUV
#6 Brake failure warning light not available.
#15 Tires with 40,000 mile guarantee not included.
#22 Ignition /steering lock with door buzzer not available.
#23 "Omaha" orange requires special paint job, add $150 to bid price.
Standard color such as white without black fenders, deduct $25.
Standard orange is available but darker than "Omaha" orange.
#24 Grill painted white.
HYSEN - JOHNSON FORD, INC.
Item No. 2
1. Compact Truck 1973 - Model 1974 - Model, not available at this time.
2. Tires - no mileage guarantee on original equipment. Warrantee handled
by tire manufacturer.
3. Steering wheel lock - None.
4. Bumper - Chrome front only - rear bumper, step type painted.
5. Colors available to us, are - white - tan - red - blue or yellow.
Unit bid can be picked out of stock.
KOIVISTO EQUIPMENT INC.
Item No. 3
Loader Model 1HC #2050A,'120 day delivery.
Tractor Nlodel 1HC #2500 Series A:
Item No. 4
Alt. 1 - Model H60E, 120 day delivery.
Alt. 2 - Model H50C, rigid frame, 120 day delivery. No bid on guaranteed
price for repurchase, s.ix month warrantee - parts and labor. No
hour limit.
WALLACE MACHINERY
Item No. 3
Ford 3550 Tractor /Loader. 90 day delivery
Item No. 4
Caterpillar Model 920 Wheel Loader. Immediate delivery. Guaranteed price
for repurchase of equipment at end of four years or 3500 hours of
operation, whichever comes first, $15,500.00
LOUGEE- MICHAEL EQUIPMENT
Item No. 3
John Deere 302 Utility Loader. P..O.P.S. - two post R.O.P.S. - approved by
OSHA and State of California. 3" seat belt. Delivery 90 days approximately.
Itom Hn d
John Deere 544B Loader. Tires - 17.5 x 25 - 12 ply. Delivery 130 days
approximately. Guaranteed price for repurchase of equipment at the end
of four years or 3500 hours of operation, whichever comes first, $10,200.00
1