HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/06/1980City Council Minutes
May.6, 1980.- 4:00 p.m.
Page 2
X -2 Lee Walton, Administrative Officer, asked that the City Council
consider the proposed-statement of city policy to.be entered-into the
record at the May 13th hearing of the State Water Board.
This was to be a hearing on-applications to take water from various
tributaries to the Salinas River.
After discussion review,.on motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by
Councilman Dunin, the Mayor was authorized.to present the statement on
behalf of the City Council. Motion carried.
1 -A. City Council received a report.from Wayne Peterson, City Enginner,
on preliminary plan and project alternatives for parking program for the
Palm -Morro garage and additional parking in the Nipomo Street area..
He reviewed in detail a very lengthy, comprehensive and complete procedure
and scheduling for the development of additional parking for the retention
of various consultants for the various phases of the parking program.
On motion of Councilwoman Billie, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the
City Council support the concept of the program as outlined. Authorized
to proceed with the program as outlined by Wayne Peterson, and that the staff,
in their request.for proposals, ask for alternatives for either a full -time
architect manager or architect and manager, two.separate positions. Motion
carried.
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Munger, and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: Councilman Bond
ABSENT: None
1 -B. On motion of Councilwoman.Billig,.seconded by Mayor Cooper,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4151 (1980 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of_San Luis Obispo approving an
" agreement between the City and Jones, Ha11 Hill & White to assist in the
City Parking Assessment Program. Passed and adopted.on the following roll
call' vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES . Councilman Bond
ABSENT: None
2. City Council considered a progress report prepared by the staff
on various locations to locate the postal distribution center.
Terry Sanville presented a report which included an analyses of 19 separate
sites studied by the staff for recommendation to the council and to the
postal service for development of the Post Office distribution and customer
service area. He reviewed for the council the various criteria established
by the staff to check the alternatives. He continued that all the sites
that were studied were located in the southeastern and southwestern part
of the city. The Post Office prefers the sites in the southwestern sector
because of the proximities of the freeway. However, many.o.f .these sites
are near San Luis Creek or tributaries and are subject to: flooding. All
' sites evaluated are generally large enough for the proposed facility.
They also looked at sites located within industrial or commercial zones
with an understanding that a new.pos_tal facility would be more compatible
in a commercial- industrial setting. No sites for the.downtown.were
considered because they are generally too small, would require removal
of a significant number of buildings and would add to downtown traffic.
congestion: Also,.isolated industrial sites in the airport area outside
of the city were not evaluated because of the lace of needed public services
Availability of sites for sale was not used as a factor.
Based on their staff's evaluation of the various sites, they recommended
that the City Council consider the following sites, listed in priority order:
City Council.Minutes
May 6, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 3
1) Site #11, South.Street.
2) Site #3, Calle Joaquin.
3) Site #1, Madonna Road (Kuden property)
4) Site #8, Higuera Commerce Park
5) Site #2, Madonna Road ( Dalidio Property)
Harold Monighan, representing the postal service, explained the needs of the
U.S. Postal Service to develop a postal distribution.-center for the people
of San Luis Obispo. He reviewed for the council the long past history of
over ten years of the Post Office Department attempting to develop
a better mail service to the public in this county. He stated that
the council has approved the Calle Joaquin site in 1975 and 1978.
But as the'postal service could not acquire the property at that time,
they had continued the matter. Now, they have been able to acquire a
site 200 feet to the west of the recommended site outside the city but
adjacent to the city limits..-.
He asked that the City Council approve the new site, amend the general
plan or whatever, to allow them to proceed with their plans. He
continued that the Post Office has agreed to purchase the land and -hoped
that the council would approve and .allow them to proceed to provide
better service to the city. _...
Councilman Bond stated he was supportive of the new center.
Councilman Munger stated he .too was supportive.
Councilman Dunin stated he-was supportive of a new mail center but he
questioned the location on Madonna Road due to the traffic problems and
circulation problems on Madonna Road to and from the .facility.
Councilwoman Billig also questioned the location -on Madonna Road. She felt
that she could support the staff's number l.priority on South Street.or
the Higuera Commerce Park over the Madonna Road. location. She felt that the
city and Post Office would regret the day they would develop on this street
due to traffic and circulation problems, congestion and residential safety
problems. She continued she could not support the Madonna Road location
because of the land use issues. The Delidio property should be developed
property and not on a piece- meal.basis. She could not given. her blessing
to this approach by the post office. She wanted to cooperate, but would
not be told that the post office would put its facility where it pleased.
Mayor Cooper stated he supported the location and hoped the Post Office would
go to the A.R.C. and other city regulatory bodies and get started on their
development.
Terry Sanville, Planning Department, again reviewed the staff report presented
to the council on April 15, 1980 council,meeting. He also stated on behalf
of the staff that they also felt that_the..South.Street location was superior
to-any other within the city. But if the.council wanted the Madonna location,
the council must then go through the necessary steps to amend the general plan
and amend the land use.plan,,zoning, annexation, etc..
George Thacher, City Attorney, then reviewed for the-council the legal steps
necessary that the City Council must follow to proceed with this plan in order
to accomplish the.development.
Charles Andrews, representing the.Planning Commission, .. stated upon questioning
of the City Council, that the matter of the Post.Office distribution center
had never been to the Planning Commission.for..discussion or recommendation.
On motion of Councilman Bond,.seconded by Councilman Munger, that the.City
Council approve the Madonna Road ( Dalidio Site) for the Post Office
distribution center and that they-be authorized to proceed and.staff to
cooperate. Motion passed on the following roll call vote:
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 4
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Munger, and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: Councilmembers Billig and-Dunin..
ABSENT: None
' Councilwoman Billig stated she was opposed to the motion and felt
was the wrong location. She felt traffic and circulation problems had
not been considered or mitigated. She felt it was the wrong ibay to allow
the Dalidio land to develop as she felt this "unique parcel of land should
be master planned for its highest use.
3. On motion.of.Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the
following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 852 (1980 Series), an
Ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo amending section 3220 of the San
Luis Obispo Municipal Code to include motorized bicycles in the city
bicycle license regulations. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:. Councilmembers Bond, Billig, Dunin, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None 1. 4. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4152 (1980 Series), a
Resolution.of the..Council of the City of San Luis,.Obispo approving the
application for grant funds.of the State Litter Control Recycling and
Resource and Recovery fund. Passed and adopted on the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
5. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4153 (1980 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Obispo Luis Ospo granting additional
time to file final map'of Minor Subdivision 78 -132 (extension expires
September.26, 1980). Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
6. City Council.consideied a memorandum from the Tree Comiittee
protesting the proposed removal of the palm trees on-Los Osos'Valley Road
east of Madonna Road, which was authorized by the City Council on
December 3, 197,9.
Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, reviewed the reports from the City .s.taff dealing
with street widening and plan line development on Los Osos Valley Road east
of Madonna Road and the.necessity of either allowing the .removal of the Palm
trees at some future.date after replacement trees have been planted, or purchase
and additional right -of -way from adjacent properties in order to handle the
widening. It was the staff's recommendation that the,City,Council reaffirm
their action of December 3, 1979. "
Rose McKeen, Chairperson of the Tree Committee, begged the council to
reconsider their action. She felt there was nothing wrong with these
particular trees and that they were put there as a buffer for the residents.
She could not see what purpose would be accomplished by removing the trees.
Councilwoman Billig explained the reasons.that she asked to have this matter
placed on the agenda which would allow the Tree Committee to discuss this
matter with the council as she claims they had not been notified when the
City Council.Minutes
May.6, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 5
council made their decision in December. She also agreed that she did not
want to .see -the trees removed, but-rather than purchase-additional trees for
the right -of -way, she agreed to the replacement with adequate trees. She
also urged that the staff members . be asked to see, if..possible, that the
trees be moved either within city parks or to other areas, and not destroyed.
She also asked the City Council to appoint the necessary members to make
up the membership of the Tree Committee.
Councilman Bond.stated.that he.felt that council's prior action had.been.well. 1
thoughtout and.should be reaffirmed.
Councilman Munger agreed in support of the council's prior action.
Councilman Dunin stated he supported the council's -prior action but he also
urged that the.City Council have someone, either in the staff or outside of
the staff, to review the-.type of trees.being placed in the city.. He..felt that
many of the trees being placed were the':wrong kind for the area,if.they were
expected to grow.
Councilwoman Billig was.also in support of-the-.prior council.action but hoped
that the trees would not be destroyed but would be replaced in a city park
or in other areas in the county.
7. City Council received a request from the City.Planning Commission
that they be included in the procedure when development projects and land
use decisions adjacent to.the City.of San Luis Obispo are referred to the
city by the County Planning Department.
Up until this.time, the procedure has been for the city staff without -any
input from the - council or.Planning Commission to submit their reaction
to the proposal. Therefore, the Planning Commission ask that.they.be. allowed
to be included in the procedure. The Planning Commission also felt that if there
was some formal procedure.established. between the City Planning Commission
and the County Planning Commission, they would tend to get a better working
rapport with the County Commission in the decisions in the fringe areas of
of San Luis Obispo. The Planning Commission felt the proposal would not affect
the staff preparation of information for the commission or council consideration.
The Planning Commission also felt that since the Planning Commission had the
responsibility for the creation of and amendments to the general plan, it should
only follow-that-they should be.a part of the-process. asked the
council to give them an opportunity.to do this;.and they hoped for a trial
period, and.they would report.to the.council in.-four-to six months.
Charles Andrews, representing the Planning Commission, stated that he did.not
vote for this particular procedure when it- was- _before..the Planning Commission.
He stated he understood the frustrations of members of the Planning Commission
and he would support the majority view.
Councilman Bond felt that the Planning Commission is busy enough -.now without
having another level of responsibility added to- .their work. -He felt they
were already overloaded with planning at this time.
Councilman Dunin stated he agreed with the request to allow the.Planning
Commission to review county referrals. He felt that this would give the
Planning Commission opportunity to overcome any possible abuse.by staff
quoting city policy. He suggested that this be a consent item on the
Planning Commission agenda to be.only taken off.if_ there is_some major
disagreement.
Mayor Cooper stated he supported the Planning. Commission's request....He felt
that this would give the Planning Commission an opportunity to follow through
on all development in the environs of the City of San Luis Obispo. -
Councilman Munger stated he too.would support the proposal in.order to allow
the Planning Commission to oversee all the development, not only within the
city, but immediately adjacent to the city.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1980. - 4.:00 p.m.
Page 6
Councilman.Bond felt that this whole thing looked.like..another struggle between
'the Planning Commission and.city.stiff t6-control development. He felt this was
riot the way to ''go, but he. felt that someone should- sit down with the city
staff and Planning Commission and settle these differences as they were
not helping the community.
Charles Andrews felt the council should lay down some explicit rules for
.the Planning Commission's participation in county development processes.
1 Councilwoman'Billig again stated that this proposal was not the answer
to planning the areas adjacent to the city.
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig ,.that the
City Council.deny the request of the Planning Commission. Motion lost
on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond and Billig.
NOES: Councilmembers Dunin, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
ABSENT: None
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Mayor Cooper, that the.Planning
Commission's request be approved for a six - months trial and that the Planning
Commission submit a letter at the end of six months on the progress or
results of this program. Motion carried.
AYES: Councilman Dunin, Mayor Cooper, Councilman Munger.
NOES.: Councilmembers Bond and Billig.
ABSENT: None
8. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded.by Councilman.Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4154 (1980 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo and George S. Nolte
and Associates, Civil and Environmental Engineers, for design plan and
draft and final Environmental Impact Report for San Luis Obispo Creek Flood Control
modifications between Madonna Road and Marsh Street. Passed and adopted on
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
9., On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded-,by-Councilman Bond; the
plans and specifications for the.Orcutt Road Widening and Bridge Extension,
City Plan No. D -01, bid estimate $82,340 without contingencies, was
approved and the staff was authorized to call for bids. Motion carried.
All -ayes.
' 10. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilman Bond, the
plans and specifications for the Foothill Sewerline, Tassajara to Ferrini,
City Plan No. D -21, bid.estimate $47,142.50 without contingencies, was
approved and the staff was authorized to call for bids. Motion carried.
All ayes.
11. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilman Bond, the
plans and specifications for Johnson Avenue Widening; Easterly Side,
Monterey to Higuera, City Plan No. D -18, bid estimate $425730 without
contingencies were approved and the staff was authorized to call for bids.
Motion carried. All ayes.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 7
12. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilman Bond,-the
plans and specifications for -the Marsh Street.at Southern Pacific Railroad
Storm Drain,.City Plan -No. D -06', bid estimate $16,250.without contingencies
was approved and the staff was authorized to call for bids. Motion carried.
All Ayes.
13. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilman Bond,-.the
plans and specifications for the Wilson Street Waterline, Grand to Park,
City Plan No. D- 49,.bid estimate $18,464 without contingencies was
approved and the staff was authorized to -call for bids. 14otion carried.
All Ayes.
CONSENT ITEMS
C -1 On motion of.Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, claims
against the city for the month of May 1980 were approved and order paid
subject to the approval of the Administrative Officer.
C -2 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following Council Minutes were approved as- amended. Motion..carried.
April. 8, 1980. -.7:30 p:m.
April 15, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
April 15, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
April 22, 1980 - 12:10.p.m.
C -3. On motion of.Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin,
the following contract pay estimates and change orders were approved
and ordered paid subject to the Johnson /Laurel Storm Drain, final payment
being held up until the county and adjacent property owners approve of
the work. Motion carried.
Burke Construction Co.
Est.
113
PHOENIX PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY/
*C.C.O. 112 -
CITY PARKING LOT 4112
Est.
114 Final
C.P. 11D -39
Sierra National Construction
Est.
Dennis Landscaping Co.
Est.
411
STREET TREE PLANTING FOR
Est.
112 Final
TRACT. 444
Lee Wilson Electric Co.
Est.
C.P. 11D-40
TRAFFIC SIGNAL REVISIONS
Karleskint -Crum, Inc. Est. 114 Final
EXPOSITION PARK - IRRIGATION
& TURF
C.P. #C -21
Charles Pratt Construction
Est.
114 -
JOHNSON /LAUREL STORM DRAIN
Est.
115 Finale
C.P. 11C -05A
Sierra National Construction
Est.
111
JOHNSON AVENUE STORM DRAIN
C.P. 11C -05B
Lee Wilson Electric Co.
Est.
111
TRAFFIC SIGNAL REVISIONS
C.P. 11C -07
I
�J
1
$3,269.17
717.59
2,107.09 (6- 10 -80)
$8.,545:50
949.50 (6- 10 -80)
$4,696.99 (6- 10 -80)
$ 934.00
3,569.00 (6- 10 -80)
$4,275.00
$4,686.30
*C.C.O..- Landscape material consisting of 2,123 bulbs not available
until fall of 1980,,reducing.contract by $717.59. Requisition
to be made to Karleskint -Crum, Inc., in same amount for planting
in fall.
C -4. On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 853 (1980 Series), an
1
1
1
City Council.Minutes
May 6,. 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 8
Ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the contract between
the Public Employee.:s Retirement.System and the.City of.San Luis Obispo
to.provide..for one year final compensation for..miscellaneous members.
Passed and adopted.on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -5A. On..motion of Councilman-Bond, seconded by.Councilman Dunin,
the following.resolution was introduced: .Resolution No. 4155, (1980 Series),
a Resolution of Intention.to Abandon a portion.of Swazey "Street,'adjacent
to the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of -way, and set for public hearing
on June 3, 1980. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin,.Billig, Munger and Mayor.Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -5B. On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin,
the following resolution was.introducedd Resolution No. 4156 (1980 Series),
a Resolution of the Council.of the City of'San Luis Obispo approving an
agreement between the city and Alan R. Ochs, et. al., and Richard D. Ochs,
conveying to the city 1,800 square feet along Swazey Street. Passed and
adopted on the following roll.call vote:.
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -6. Council consideration.of abandonment of Edna Street and
a portion.of.Agnes Street was.continued at the request of the City Attorney.
On motion of Councilman Bond,,-seconded by Councilman Dunin, the matter
was continued to June 3, 1980. Motion carried.
C -7. On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin
the request from the San Luis Obispo Garbage Company for Council consideration
of.proposed 20% rate increase for household and commercial services, and other
services was set for public hearing on May 20, 1980. Motion carried.
C -8. On motion of Councilman.Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin,
the request from Sonic.Cable T.V. requesting Council consideration to
discuss rate modifications for cable service `or take action to deregulate
cable television rates under recent State legislation was referred to the
City Attorney for analysis of the state law. Motion carried.
C -9. Request for the City Council to hold a public auction.to
sell the city -owned building at 1020 Walnut Street was approved on
motion of Councilman Bond, seconded.by..Councilman Dunin, subject-to
notification being sent to all groups who could use the material such as
the California Conservation Corps., the Self -Help Housing, etc. Motion
carried.
C -10. On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4157 (1980 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving the
closing of State Highway for the La Fiesta Parade. Passed and adopted on
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1980 - .4:00 -p.m.
Page 9
C -11. On motion- of.Councilman.Bond, seconded by.Councilman Dunin,
the street.deficiency.list..for. 1980781'was approved.with.the.city.staff
directed to bring back a list of their priorities after.budget considerations.
Any changes after the first priority group to be returned to council for okay.
Motion carried.
On question, D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, stated that there would
be time.available if any of the councilmembers wished to inspect the various
deficiencies as recommended.'
C -12.. On motion..of..Councilman Bond,.. seconded.by.Councilman Dunin,
that.the claim against the.city by Louise.B..Rollins in ..the amout..of $15,000
for.injuries sustained when the claimant allegedly slipped on a city
sidewalk_was.denied. Motion.carried.
C -13. On motion.of.Councilman.Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin,
that the claim against the city by Tom Creath, in the amount of-$250,000 for
injuries sustained when claimant put his through a glass door at the City
Recreation Center was denied. Motion carried.
B -1. City Clerk reported on the following bids received for
portable.emergency.generator for the.fi.re.department. Bid estimate $7,000.
ESCO - Equipment Service Co.
P.O. Box 1307
Long Beach,.CA 90801
Model 15.ORDJC:
Model 17.5RDJF:
SAN LUIS POWERHOUSE
798 Francis Avenue
San Luis Obispo
Model- 15.OKW:
Model 17.5KW:
HOLCOMB.& SON; Inc.
P.O. Box 9186
1420 N. Hughes
Fresno, CA 93791
$7,268.42
7,526.00
$7,519.00
7,955.00
Company fails to meet all specifications
of the bid requirements and was therefore
rejected.
On motion -of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin,.the City Council
accepted..the.low.bid of- Equipment. Service Co._( ESCO ):of.Long,Beach,..California
in the amount.of $7,526.00. Motion carried.-.
There.being no further - business to -come before the City Council, Mayor Cooper
adjourned.the meeting at 6:15 p.m. to-7:30 p.m., May 6, 1980.
COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES ON: 5/20/80
!J
1
J FTtzpitrick, City Clerk '
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 1
_ _.... .._:..M I N U -T -E S.
- ADJOURNED-MEET -ING OF:THE.CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TUESDAY, MAY 6,.1980'- 7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS9,CITY,HALL9- 990'PALM STREET
Pledge
Invocation by Pastor Dean Keller, Grace Church
Roll Call - - -
Councilmembers
PRESENT: Melanie Billig, Alan Bond, Ron Dunin, Gerald Munger
and Mayor Lynn Cooper
ABSENT: None
City Staff
PRESENT: Lee Walton, Administrative Officer; George Thacher; City Attorney;
J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; - -Henry Engen; Community Development
Director;.Ken Bruce., Planning Department; Richard Minor, Fire
Chief; Roger Neuman, Police Chief; -D.F. Romero, Public Services
Director.
14. City Council held a.public hearing to consider a recommendation of
' the Planning Commission.to approve the tentative map for minor subdivision
No. 80 -25, to combine three lots into one lot at 3183 Duncan Road; Jerry
Reiss, subdivider.
Ken Bruce, Senior.Planner, stated that the subdivider wished to combine
three lots into one lot to allow for better development of the site. The
ARC had already approved - plans for three commercial /industrial buildings, but
the lots must be combined before the buildings can.be built.•.The Planning
Commission recommended..approval • of the minor.subdivision-subject.to five (5)
findings and five (5) conditions of approval.. The five conditions of
approval were reviewed for the City Council.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
Jon Eckland, representing the - developer, appeared before the City Council
asking that the City-Council require only three (3) conditions established by
the Planning Commission.
1. Conditions-.I,.2, and.3, where he stated he was not - opposed to .dedicating
land but he felt that while the city was not sure where the future alignment
of Orcutt Road would be, it did not seem prudent.to install permanent.
improvements at this time. He suggested the city accept an irrevocable
.offer to dedicate the Orcutt Road frontage and the corner of Orcutt and
Duncan with dedication and permanent improvements along Duncan from the
northern boundary.to and including the southernmost drive ramp of the pro-
posed development.. If this is acceptable,.the developer will pave out and
berm - at.the existing property line and-.landscape the 'offered" property
while final_ plans are developed by the city for Orcutt Road, at which time he
would make dedication and install the permanent improvements.
Condition 4, he objected to- giving up'access rights along the Orcutt Road
.frontage unless he could be guaranteed access.along Duncan Road from the
southernmost driveway to-the northernmost property line.
Condition 5, he felt that requiring the extension of the box culvert under
Orcutt Road would place a burden on the project which they feel was unreasonable.
Also, it did not seem prudent to extend the culvert prior to developing a
final plan for Orcutt Road.
City.Council..Minutes
May 6, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 2
Finally,.he stated he.was very concerned with the quality of the overall develop-
ment of the - property: The obvious problems generated by small lot developments
such as on Capitolio Way prompted the pursuit of allot combination which has
become a very expensive subdivision process. He felt-that placing
the burden of a box culvert under Orcutt Road.on the project would cause an
overall downgrading of on -site improvements such as the creek rehabilitation
and could realistically be the final factor in reverting back to "Three Lots
for Sale." I
While he stated he was not opposed_to.dedicating land -..and putting in'permanent
off- site.improvements along both Duncan and Orcutt Roads, he wished to be
assured by the City that the proposed alignment decisions are final -.and those
permanent improvements would-not be removed or.replaced, as his experience has
shown him that the city many times is not sure where their street.alignments
will be.
He finally stated that he would suggest that the "City Council make a very
careful study to the length of Orcutt Road from Broad Street to the railroad
tracks. He felt it might.be much less costly of a project to realign the
other side of the street rather than where the improvements are being.placed
at this time.
D.F..Romero, Public Services Director,'stated that past City policy had not
required extension of major drainage facilities As a condition of minor
subdivisions. Sometimes, but not always, the condition had been imposed on
major subdivisions.. He stated.that staff was.following the adopted plan line
for the widening of Orcutt Road in its recommendation for improvements across
the frontage of this parcel. He agreed that the street widening line would.
change slightly with a new plan line which-is being prepared to reflect the
latest grade separation design; however, this would not be a significant change
in the alignment. In his opinion.-the- grade separation.structure itself would
not be built for many years, thus the staff had recommended permanent improve-
ments acrosst:the frontage -of this property with the thought that at some
distant time in the future, it would be removed and replaced at city cost.
Mayor Cooper declared-the-,public hearing closed:
Councilman Dunin felt that the subdivider should.comply.with existing ordinance,
all conditions, and.no deviations.are warranted.
_Councilwoman Billig discussed with staff the appeal of Jon Eckland on behalf
of Bunnell Construction Company and also what were ordinance requirements
being asked to be relaxed. She felt that in the interest of. fairness, the
council should eliminate the .total cost of the culvert if the property owner
would comply with.all"'other'conditions, and only pay a percentage based on
the amount of his property contributions to the total drainage problem.
Councilman Bond.stated he agreed with Councilwoman Billig "'s compromise.
Councilman Munger also agreed with the compromise on improvements.
Mayor Cooper agreed with the proposed compromise on improvements and to
eliminate the total culvertin g;
..
The final concensus -of the' council- was..that-the.developer was"to pay
for a proportionale share..of the culvert based on his drainage contribution.
On motion of-Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Mayor Cooper, the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No..4159, a Resolution of the Council
of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval of the.tentative map for
minor subdivision 80 =25; "- located at 3183 Duncan Road, as amended. Passed
and adopted on the following roll call vote:
City Council Minutes
Page 6, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 3
AYES: Councilmember Billig, Mayor Cooper, Councilmembers Bond,
Dunin and Munger.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
15. City Council held a public hearing to consider a recommendation of the
Planning Commission to approve a request for a street name change of William
Street to Binns Court.
Henry Engen, Community Development Director, stated after a public hearing
held by the Planning Commission, they recommended the approval of the street
name to Binns Court which would reflect city policy for type of street. In
addition, however, they recommended that the applicant bear the cost of
staff time needed to correct the name on maps and records which was estimated
to be $75.00.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before
the City Council for or against the propsed name change. Mayor Cooper
declared the public hearing closed. On motion of Councilwoman Billig,
seconded by Councilman Munger, the following resolution was introduced:
Resolution No. 4160 (1980 Series), a Resolution changing the name of
William Street to Binns Court. Passed and adopted on the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Munger, Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
' 16. City Council held a public hearing to consider whether an application
to convert 16 units at 1563 E1 Tigre Court into residential condominiums
meets city standards for such conversions (continued from the 4/15/80
council meeting).
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. The council was to
determine if the application should be allowed to proceed. The council must
make specific findings as required by the city's new Condominium Conversion
Ordinance. It was the staff's recommendation that the council deny the
application because the density exceeded that allowed by the General Plans,
and public testimony was convincing that a significant number of lower
or moderate income or senior citizens would not be displaced and that
relocation would not post a significant problem. Some of the issues that
the City Council must consider were the application requirements, the
organizational documents, the tenant provisions, general plan conformance,
zoning and building regulation conformance and map act findings. Finally,
the council must find that all provisions of these regulations have been
or will be met, that the proposed conversion is consistent with the general
plan, that there exists facts adequate to support the seven map act findings
noted, and the proposed conversion would not displace a significant number
of low income or moderate income households, or senior citizens, at a time
when no equivalent housing is readily available in the City of San Luis
Obispo.
Ken Bruce continued that concerning finding No. 5, city staff has no data
' available on the age or financial status of the present tenants. This
information may come out during the public testimony. As part of the
council's packet, they should note that seven of the present tenants have
responded to the "Notice of Intention to Convert." Two have no objection
to the conversion and five object to the conversion.
Staff saw two primary issues surface: 1) Is the project consistent with
the General Plan? Staff feels it is not consistent. 2) Would the conversion
City'Council Minutes
May 6, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 4
displace.a significant .number.of•low- iincome or moderate= income.households or
senior citizens at a time.when no equivalent housing is readily available in
the City of San Luis Obispo? The staff has no facts or data-to support or not
support this issue. Staff would speculate that most, if not-all, the.present
tenants are of low or moderate income and equivalent housing is not readily
available in the city. The tenants presently pay $255 a mont for the one -
bedroom units and $325 for the two- bedroom units. Most units have more than
one tenant residing.
The City Council.then.discussed at length with the staff the.lack of statistical'
data on rentals in the city or rental rates and vacancy factors so that they
could better understand-the effect this conversion might have on the tenants.
They questioned the lack of amenities of this particular.complex . in converting
this from an-apartment complex into a private; residential area. -.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open-..
Mike Brady, Architect for the-property owners, reviewed the the tenants
living in the-.apartment house and stated-that.-the majority.are active
students.and. leave at the.end of the school year, so.he felt that no one
would be.inconvenienced by the conversion. He further stated that the staff
.had prejudged the.application• for conversion by the lack of information
submitted to the City Council. He said that just a call.to his office, he
would-have been more than.pleased to submit an overwhelming amount of information
on this individual complex and others similarly located.
Mayor.Cooper declared the public hearing closed. ..
Councilman.Dunin stated he was opposed to this conversion as there were no
amenities for the people who would alternately purchase these condo units.
He felt this was developed as an apartment house and should ontinue to be
.an apartment operation.
Councilwoman Billig agreed with.Councilman Dunin's comments but she felt 1
that particular purchase would'be getting nothing.but an apartment for
their money. Apartments are needed in the city. She felt that these
should stay as rentals.
Councilman Bond.:stated..that:.there was.nothing outstanding about this particular
proposal. He.felt apartments were still needed and that this.project should
remain as apartments. There was.no asset in this condo conversion request.
Councilman Munger stated he could -support.this. proposal as he felt there was
a.need for home ownership in this price- range.:.He also felt that home ownership
would Help the neighborhood's transit problems.
Mayor Cooper stated that housing in this price range was needed. He agreed that
many amenities for home ownership are lacking, but he would support the
conversion'if the promoters would improve the general area. .
George Thacher; City Attorney, again explained the findings that the City
Council must make; particularly with the map.act. findings; .1).The tentative
-.map is consistent with the general.plan;•2) the design and.improvements of
the proposed sub - division are consistent with the general:plan;.3) the site
is physically feasible for the type of development proposed; 4)..the.site is
physically feasible for the proposed density of development;-5) the design of
the sub - division and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or.substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wild life
in.their habitat; 6) the design of the sub - division -or the type of. improvements
are not "likely to cause public health- problems; 7):the design of the subdivisio
or the type of improvements,will.not conflict with easements for access
through or use of -the property within the proposed sub - division.
On motion of Couricilmaii-Bond,.seconded.by Councilwoman Billig, the following
resolution was introduced:..Resolution No.. 4162 (1980 Series), a Resolution
of the Council of the City.of San Luis Obispo denying request for-conversion
to.condominimums of a 16 -unit apartment complex located at 1653 E1 Tigre.
Court, based on nos. 2;3, &1, of the subdivision map act. Passed and adopted
on the following roll call vote:
City Council Minutes
May 6,.1980.- 7:30 p.m.
.Page 5- .....
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Billig,.Dunin, and Mayor Cooper
NOES:.. Councilman Munger
ABSENT: None .
17. City Council held a.public hearing to consider the Planning
Commission recommendation to approve..the tentative map for Tract No. 895
known as Laguna Green, to allow a 33 -unit residential air.-space condominium
located-at 1445.Prefumo.Canyon Road, R-3-zone; Laguna Lake Company,
subdivider (continued from the 4/1/80 council meeting).
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, presented the proposed tentative tract map
No. 895 for the.council's.consideration stating that.the subdivider proposed
construction of 33, two - bedroom,.air -space condo units projects, adjacent to
the city's driving range. He stated that at the meeting of March 12, 1980,
the commission recommended approval..of the tentative tract.map subject
to seven (7) findings.and 16.conditions. He recommended.that the City
Council approve the tentative tract map subject to the.same.findings and
conditions. He also recommended all dimensions shown on the map be
deleted since they were incorrect.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
..Robert Richmond,•representing Richmond, Rossi.:& Montgomery, appeared.before
the City Council -on behalf.of.the subdivider and stated-that they were in
agreement with all conditions of the Planning Commission.and.also.stated.
that -any dimensions.in.area on the original plan map would.be corrected
prior to filing the final map. He said this was an error in .transcribing
from one map-.to the other.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
' Councilman Dunin stated he would support this project_as.he.did not see
any problems.
Councilwoman.Billig said she felt the density was too high.. She thought there
were.too many units on the lot. She felt this.was a poor living environment,
felt the noise..level could be high from the adjacent streets,..and she was
n
concered about building 6 foot.walls.along Los Osos. Valley Road to-protect
residents from noise.
Councilman Bond stated -he was.also concerned about -the density. He could
support this particular development with relocatance.
Councilman Munger.agreed he could.support.the tract. He did not see.
any problems...
_ Mayor Cooper felt this was a good project, it :was.needed. in-the : community, and
he would support it.
Richard Minor, Fire Chief, questioned the,City Council's concept of.this type
of development:.within the city,.particularly the..private, narrow streets
which.make it very.difficult to..impossible to get.in.emergency..fire, police
and medical.vehicles while cars are parking on these private streets.
..While it is true that the tenants are not supposed to park on streets,
they still do and it causes problems.
The Fire Chief was directed to bring these items to the attention of the
Planning Department on future developments of this type.
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1980 -.7:30 p.m.
Page 6
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Munger, - the.following
.resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4161 (1980 Series), a Resolution
of.the Council of the City of San Luis - Obispo granting approval of the
tentative.tract map No.,895, located at.1445.Prefumo Canyon Road. Passed
and adopted on.the.following roll .. call voter .
AYES: Councilmembers Bond,.Munger, Billig, Dunin and Mayor -Cooper.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None
18. City Council considered the final passage of Ordinance No. 850
(1980.Series)., and ordinance amending.the.o.fficial zone map to rezone
property 251 Margarita Avenue.. - . . ...
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the
City. Council for or against the rezoning. Mayor Cooper declared the public
hearing closed.
.On:motion..of Councilman Dunin, seconded.by.Councilman Bond,,. Ordinance No. 850
was introduced.for final passage. .Finally- passed on the following roll.call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Bond, Billig., Munger and Mayor:Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
19. City Council- considered the.appeal by the developers of 1350 Madonna Ro
regarding uses.permitted. by the General.Plan- Zoning Ordinance and Use Permit
in the neighborhood center at the north.corner of Madonna-Road.and-Los Osos
Valley Road.
City Council.received.a letter from the property owner-, Karl Kundert, asking
that the council continue this matter.to a future..date as they had just
received.the.City Attorney's report.on the above appeal, and would like to
devote appropriate time to consider the options. Dr. Kunder.t.stated he
would contact the council in the near future to submit an application for
a new hearing date.
City Cbuncil.discussed. the request.of. the property owner-'stating they felt it
was unfair to.keep continuing these matters as it cluttered up the agenda,
and that some decisions could not be made. But after discussion,.it was
common consent that the matter be continued to June 17; 1980.
20. On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the
following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 854 (1980 Series), an
Ordinance of the City-of San Luis - Obispo amending - section 5220.5 and 5220.6
of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, to increase.the administrative charge
assessed for city weed and debris abatement work -from. 20% to-75 %.
Introduced and passed.to print on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Billig, Dunin, Munger and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
21. City Council considered a request from the Transportation Project,
Ron Bearse,.Executive Director, for the City Council to declare "Free
Ridership Day" on.Saturday, May 10, 1980, on all city busses to help promote
City Council Minutes
May 6, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 7
Transportation Fair being held.for.the purpose - of.educating..the public in
economical,.energy efficient, safe.and environmentally sound types of
transportation found in the local area.
He said one part of the reason -for asking for..a free bus..ride.day was to
allow citizens of the community who have not used the busses to see how
convenient and how pleasant bus transportation could be, with a.goal in
attracting additional persons to riding the busses and eliminate cars in
the downtown and-city areas.
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, reviewed for the City Council, a policy
adopted by the-council on April 18, 1978, regarding "Fare -Free Days" for
the city bus system. He stated that in effect, the policy says that anyone
may pay for normal fare revenues, thus allowing fare -free operation of the
busses for that day. He stated that the fare payment weekdays when Cal -Poly
was in session was $445.00. Weekdays when Cal -Poly was not in.session, $245.00.
On Saturdays, $135.00. On Sundays and holidays, $60.00. It was his
recommendation that the city not make any exceptions to current policy regarding
fare -free operation. He felt that should.we.start making exceptions, the
council would be inundated with requests for decisions as to which organization
was worthy and which was not.
City Council then discussed the effects of a free -fare day as part of
ridership day.
Councilman Dunin stated he could support the free.ridership day. He felt
it should be paid for by the city, and he suggested it be-taken out of the
Promotional Coordinating Committee's contingency fund, which can only be
spent by the.City Council.
Councilwoman Billig felt the bus system should be supported. She felt the
city should not pick up the cost for.this particular day. She was worried
that if the city -did it once, it would be very difficult to say not to the
next group,= and.the group after that, etc..
Councilman.Bond felt the city should sponsor ridership day in order to get
more people on our busses.
Councilman Munger stated.this..was a worthy project and that the city should
not.only support, but.should advertise the fact that they were supporting
..it. He agreed-with the concept-that the Promotional-Coordinating Committee
should fund it. But if not, it should be taken out of the city's funds.
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded.by Councilwoman Billig, that the
City.Council._approve.the request for "Ridership Day" Fair with $135.00
to come-from the. Promotional. Coordinating .Committee's..contingency funds
and further.that the city do.all that it could to help to advertise the
free "Ridership Day."
.Motion carried.. All _Ayes._
' .There- being.no further.business.to come before the City.Council, Mayor
Cooper adjourned the meeting to Tuesday, May 13, 1980, at 7:30 p.m.
COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES ON: 5/20/80
J
J. itzpatrick, City Clerk