Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/17/1980City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 4:00 p.m. Page 2 a project site design. If it was for a design, she would go along to hear additional professional help; but not on a general plan call. Councilman Bond stated he agreed with Councilwoman Billig, that the council should establish policy to eliminate or reduce the number of continuances of items scheduled on council agendas. Councilman Dunin stated he felt that he could support the request for a continuance due magnitude of the project. He felt council should establish a criteria for continuations in the future. Councilman Munger agreed stating that he would be willing to share the continuation but that someone should establish criteria for the staff to follow on requests for continuations. The matter was continued to 7:40 p.m. 1. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Mayor Cooper, the following members were appointed to the City Tree Committee: Albert Gazin, George Drumm and Mr. Emory. Motion carried. 2. City Council considered the introduction of an ordinance allowing for the deregulation of Taxicab rates. Geoff Grote, Assistant City Attorney, reviewed for the City Council's inforation, the proposed ordinance which would deregulate council's control over taximeter rates and upon adoption of the ordinance, council could adopt a resolution deregulating the fares at the time if they so desired. Also, the ordinance would amend the liability insurance requirements updating the requirements to cover -to -date actual liability. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 856 (1980 Series), an ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo amending Sections of Article VI, Part 4 of the Municipal Code - Regulation of Taxicabs. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper. NOES: None ABSENT: None 3. City Council considered a request on HRC Policy regarding confidentiality on files in their offices on grievances. Walt Lambert, HRC Chairman, stated that the Human Relations Commission does not feel that the HRC policy on confidentiality should include the statement that the City Attorney and the City Adminstrative Officer are allowed to review the files for administrative purposes. They felt that under city organization, the City Administrative Officer and City Attorney have that right. He continued that the policy being adopted or requested to be adopted by the HRC was one for control and review by HRC members, not by administration or council. He ' further urged that the City Council not adopt the policy with that statement but reconsider the policy as adopted by the HRC which applies only to HRC staff and commissioners. Councilman Bond stated he would support the HRC policy statement with the understanding that the C.A.O. and City Attorney have the rights, etc. to review confidential grievance files for administrative purposes. Councilman Munger agreed with Councilman Bond's statement that the C.A.O. and City Attorney would have a right to see the files. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 4:00 p.m. Page 3 Councilwoman Billig stated she saw no problem with adopting the recommended policy statement on confidentiality subject to the understanding that the C.A.O. and City Attorney would have the right to review files for administrative purposes. On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the City Council adopt the policy as recommended by HRC with understanding.the City Attorney and C.A.O. would have the right to review files for administrative ' purposes. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Billig, Dunin, Munger and Mayor Cooper. NOES: None ABSENT: None 4. City Council to consider communication from the Human Relations Commission requesting that the Council consider adopting an ordinance to consider regulations to prohibit discrimination against families with children in rental housing. Walt Lambert, HRC Chairman, stated that the HRC feels that there is an identified need for such an ordinance in the city as their study shows that 95% of the dwelling units surveyed in the city had restrictions on children and that in another survey it showed that 82% of all mobile home spaces in the city were limited to adults only. He continued that the San Luis Obispo Housing element adopted by the council in July of 1979 recognized the need for this ordinance and estblished a time frame for adoption which he felt was long overdo. He also felt that waiting for litigation in Santa Clara County prohibiting discrimination against children might take over a year for final conclusion. They urged that the City Council adopt ordinances similar to Santa Monica and San Francisco which had been challenged in court and had been upheld to date. Geoff Grote, Assistant City Attorney, reported to pending litigation in Santa Clara County which is procedure would effect a number of ordinances inc felt were technically correct. He urged that the least the decision had been made at the appellate the adoption of new ordinances. the City Council, that the now going through the appellate Luding those that the HRC City Council wait until at level before proceeding with Councilman Dunin left the meeting due to a possible conflict of interest. Mayor Cooper left the meeting due to a possible conflict of interest. Councilman Alan Bond presided at the meeting. Councilwoman Billig felt that the matter should be referred the City Attorney to look closely at the proposed ordinance and also to review all litigation in the state in this area in view of a possible decision for the council to proceed. Councilman Munger agreed that the city should wait until the court decisions, at least at the appellate level, had been made before entering into this area. Councilman Bond agreed with both Councilmembers Munger and Billig. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Munger, that the ' request of the HRC be referred to the City Attorney for review of the pending litigation at the appellate level and return when that decision has been made or least a progress report within 90 days. Motion carried. AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Munger and Bond. NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Dunin and Mayor Cooper Councilman Dunin and Mayor Cooper returned to the council desk. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 4:00 p.m. Page 4 5. City Council continued their consideration of recommendations by the city staff and Mass Transportation Committee. Regarding Item No. 3, recommendation that the council increase the monthly pass to $18 per month. Councilman Bond stated he did not want any change in the monthly pass. Councilman Munger stated he would support the increase in order to reduce the large subsidy to public transportation by.the general taxpayers of the city. Councilman Dunin stated he would support the staff and the Mass Transportation Committee's position. Councilwoman Billig felt that no transportation system can exist without subsidy. She would wish no change for at least six months. She felt that an increase in the monthly pass might reduce the use and the subsidy would be greater than it is at the present time. Mayor Cooper stated he felt that the subsidy should be reduced but usage must be increased first. Councilman Bond felt that rather than subsidize parking structure, the city should spend more money better by increasing bus usage. Councilman Bond moved that there be no change and that the rate for a monthly bus pass stay at its present cost. Motion lost for a lack of a second. On motion of Councilman Dunin,..seconded . by Councilwoman Billig, that the monthly pass be increased to $16 a month with a review in six months on its effect. Motion carried. ' AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: Councilman Bond ABSENT: None Regarding Item No. 4, eliminate discount on volume purchase of tokens. Councilman Dunin suggested that the Mass Trasportation Committee contact the Promotional Coordinating Committee for a joint promotion of bus service. He felt that more promotion by the city to encourage use of the buses might encourage more use. He also felt that a review of scheduling would be in order. Council also suggested that they meet with the Mass Transportation Committee for a joint discussion of the bus system, schedules, fares, etc. Councilman Bond urged his fellow councilmembers not to eliminate the discount on volume purchase of tokens. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, that the City Council accept the recommendation and eliminate the 20% discount with a status review in six months. Motion Carried. Councilman Bond voting "NO." Regarding Item No. 5, recommendation to eliminate bus service on Thanksgiving and Christmas. On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Munger, that the City Council accept the recommendation an eliminate bus service on Thanksgiving and Christmas. Motion carried. All Ayes. Regarding Item No. 6, eliminate Route 1 service on Saturdays (same as current Sunday operation). This would provide one hour service tl all areas of the city. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Munger, accept the recommendation and eliminate Route 1 service on Saturdays. Motion carried. All Ayes. Regarding Item no. 7 -b, reduce Sunday service to one bus (one bus would alternate City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 4:00 p.m. Page 5 between routes 2 and 3, thus providing two -hour service to all areas of the city.) Dave Smiley, minister, objected to the Sunday 2 -hour service schedule as he felt it reduce his church attendance. He felt that 2 -hour scheduling was just too long for people to wait. He urged regular bus services in the morning and the reduce all service in the afternoon. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the recommendat to reduce Sunday service to one bus was approved with the city staff to study an alternate to two -hour services on Sunday morning. Motion carried. Councilman Bond voting "NO." Regarding Item No. 8 , recommendation to allow advertising on inside of bus. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, to allow the Mass Transportation Committee to submit guidelines for allowing advertising on the inside of the bus to include subject matter, space, etc. Motion carried. All Ayes. Regarding Item No. 9, a recommendation from the Mass Transportation Committee that the entire bus transfer operation be concentrated on the west side of Osos between Palm and Mill Streets rather than having people running across Osos Street to make transfer to different buses. On Motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, that the request be approved and that the entire bus operation be concentrated on the west side of Osos between Palm and Mill Street. Motion carried. All Ayes. Councilwoman Billig felt that the City Council should consider placing a handicapped person on the Mass Transportation Committee in order to have their point of view brought out at these meetings. City Council concurred and the City Clerk was directed to bring back the resolution for amendment to appoint a handicapped person to the Mass Transportatio Committee. 6. Communication from the Business Improvement Area for the City Council to appoint a parking advisory committee to work with the City Council in the development of the parking program for downtown San Luis Obispo. The BIA recommended that the committee consist of 9 persons; one City Councilmember; one city staff member; one San Luis Obispo County staff member; two business persons; two business persons and property owners; and two property owners. Councilman Bond questioned the propriety of having a city councilmember on this advisory committee to the parking authority as the City Council will be the parking authority. They were wondering what the conflicts, if any, might be in that position. Robert Carpenter, member of the BIA, spoke in support of the request and the reason for the requests. He stated that this advisory committee would not be part of the BIA organization as it would have members and property owners who were not part of that organization. He stated the BIA put this request in as they thought it would someone to work with the city staff bringing recommendations to the parking authority (City Council). Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, explained the need for the committee a sounding board to work with the Parking District consultants and would be disolved upon creation of the Parking Authority. This would be group of people who would ' work in the interim with the property owners, business people in downtown San Luis Obispo. Don Smith stated he was opposed to this development. He said it was a poor precedent to set and that councilmembers should not sit on committees on which they would ultimately be judging the work. Mayor Cooper moved, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that Councilwoman Billig be appointed as the council liaison with the Advisory Parking Committee as the council representative. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 4:00 P.M. Page 6 After further discussion, it was determined that the City Council would appoint members of the committee. They also discussed that the Mayor appoint a sub- committee, to interview candidates, and to make recommendations for appointment. Final action by the City Council was to refer the request to the C.A.O. for the establishment of criteria and membership on this committee to work with the city BIA committee and the city engineer and to return with this criteria as ' soon as possible. 7. City Council considered a draft memorandum of understanding between the Nacimiento Water Users Coastal Branch and the Whale Rock Water Exchange Proposal. Briefly, the proposal was to exchange water with the Whale Rock Commission members with the Coastal Partners, South Bay, Cayucos, and Morro Bay, who in turn would receive Whale Rock water, the key being the elimination of a large section of transmission pipe and property acquisition for right -of -way for the South Coastal area and Morro Bay to receive Nacimiento water. D.F. Romero, Public Service Director, asked for continuation of consideration of this draft until all the ramafications of the proposed agreement have been reviewed. City Council received a communication from Frederick Bold, Jr. the City Council's special Water Council, quoting some observations and problems with the proposed memorandum. Also, a Memorandum of Opinion received from George Thacher, City Attorney, warning the City Council of various pitfalls in the proposal. Don Smith submitted a lengthy report objecting to various provisions of the Nacimiento -Whale Rock Water Exchange Memorandum of Agreement and listing some of the pitfalls in the proposed agreement. I Ken Schwartz agreed that the proposed Memorandum of Understanding was poorly drafted and he felt it gave way all of the city's water rights in the Whale Rock Reservoir. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded .by Councilman Munger, that the consideration be continued to a future study session when all the information has been received, the meeting to be in the evening in the form of a public hearing. Motion carried. All Ayes. 8. City Council considered a report form the Community Theater Study Committee on the feasibility of purchasing the Veterans Building for use as a community Theater. Claire Gates, Chairperson of the Community Theater Study Group, presented a report favorably considering the acquisition of the Veterans Building by the city for a subsequent lease to the Little Theater Association for conversion to a fixed seat theater. She reviewed the meetings held by the committee and the various individual studies made by committee members and concluded that after consultations with architects, building officials and fire marshal, the feasibility of conclusion there.was not problem that could not be dealt with. The building aesthetically has a proper scale and character which would relate to theater use. There are no significant legal, structural or financial problems which would make this acquisition conversion infeasible. The only obstacle seemed to be objections from those organizations who seem to have 'a greater need for flat floor space rather than auditorium -type seating. She felt a theater would provide a significant boost to the local economy when used properly. She concluded her comments by statint that the Little Theater representatives indicated that the $300,000.00 estimated cost for converting the main auditorium to theater was a feasible target for their proposed fund- raising activites. Their analysis also indicated that the theater would be entirely self- supporting even after paying for utilities and reasonable rent. Assuming the theater is self- supporting, then the amount of the city's subsidy for maintaining other portions of the building would depend on the philisophy City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 4:00 p.m. Page 7 of its use. If the city were to promote the building for commercial uses that pay full cost, the subsidy would minimal. However, if the city elected to reserve space and time for city recreation programs and for use of the many non - profit organizations in the community, then some public subsidy would be required. Based on the current county budget, the subsidy would not exceed $20,000 per year. She stated that the committee had carefully reviewed the current use of the ' auditorium and was able to find many uses which could be very accommodating and other areas of the building or in other facilities already existing in the community. Also, the theater remodeling could be used by additional groups within the city. She recommended that the City Council with the lease arrangements with the county and allow the Little Theater to come with the money for the conversion of the building for thier use. She then submitted" a series of studies prepared by experts dealing with the various portions of the project for rehabilitation: electrical engineering, architecture, etc. Glenna Dean Dovey stated she hoped the committee had looked into all the ramifications of their proposal and have all facets been looked at such as management, maintenance, operation, promotion, etc. She felt the county had not operated the building economically and she hoped the City Council would look into this matter very carefully. Robert Griffin was opposed to the proposal and opposed to any agreement with the county and /or the Little Theater without some type of a facility management plan for the entire structure so that the public would know exactly what they were getting into by acquiring this property. Laverne Schneider stated she was opposed to the proposed use of the Vet's building to convert it to a single use for a small organization. She felt that if they could raise the kind of money they were talking about, they should develop their ' own single - purpose building and not take away a building that is used by many, many groups. She felt that by removing this use from the general public it was unfair as a great number of people would be displaced and would be relocated by a limited support recreational group of the Little Theater. She reviewed the maintenance and operation cost.experienced by the county on an annual basis. She urged the City Council not to proceed with the Little Theater proposal. Anthony Schneider agreed with his wife's comments and further stated that he felt that the city had no right to take away the Veterans rights in the building. He said each year the county had taken more and more area away so the veterans don't even have an adequate building at this time. Elmer Hansen, representing the Veterans organizations, stated he was opposed to the conversion of the Veterans Building to a single - purpose use by the Little Theater Association. He continued that the veterans groups still use the building although each year the county takes more space for thier courts, administration, etc. He did not know when the veterans would actually be thrown out, but he hoped that the City Council was not the group to do it. Cooper, represented the Disabled American Veterans, and was opposed to turning over the Veterans Building to the City of San Luis Obispo and they in turn leasing it to the Little Theater Association. He felt that the veterans had little time and space in the building now and he hoped that they would not lose anymore. Don Wells supported the theater and arts in the city. Although he was opposed to the loss of flat floor space in the Veterans Building. He stated there was no other facility available in this city and it would be unfair to give one small group the use of a community to the detriment of other groups. He suggested that the Little Theater use chair rather than permanent seating so that everyone would have an opportunity to use this one building. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 4:00 p.m. Page 8 Penny Rappy stated she was opposed to allowing one group to have control of a public building. She wanted everyone to be able to use the building on an equitable basis. Jane Cambly supported the Little Theater's proposal to remodel the Veterans Building for a theater. She felt everyone should be made to cooperate with all the other groups. Hasen, Little Theater Association, supported a lease and conversion of the Veterans Building for the use of the Little Theater Association. Carl Young, American Legion, would be opposed to turning the Veterans Building over to a single purpose organization. He did not feel the city had the responsibility to provide the theater fora private groups. He felt the veterans were tired of being squeezed out of their building as has been experienced in the past. Councilman Bond stated he supported the Little Theater but opposed the conversion of the first floor for use by the Little Theater. He felt that the county government has made plans for the use of this building. He would oppose the city acquiring the Veterans Building. Councilman Munger stated he agreed there was a need for the Little Theater but he felt there were other needs for a multi - purpose use of the Veterans Building that would be destroyed if converted by the Little Theater. Councilman Dunin felt the Veterans organization position should be considered in the council's proposal of conversion of the building for the Little Theater. He would take no action at this time until'this matter had been cleared. He would appreciate a complete recommendation from all the veterans groups using the Veterans Building. ' Councilwoman Billig felt the staff report and Little Theater proposal were adequate. However, she felt there was a lot of misinformation and misgivings expressed and she wanted some background as to the project. She felt the council had been aware of the Little Theater's needs for a long time and had tried to work with them in developing a facility, including the one under consideration at that time to use the Veterans Building. She felt the proposal took into consideration all needs of the individuals and group and she felt that a proposal should take into consideration all these needs who are now using the Vets facilities. She felt she would support the Little Theater proposal until they cannot come up with the necessary funds. Mayor Cooper agreed with Councilwoman Billig's statement. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Mayor Cooper, that the city staff be authorized to proceed with a six month option to purchase the Veterans Building and allow the Little Theater Association to see if they could come up with the necessary conversion funds, and C.A.O. to check out this new figure of $200,000. Motion carried. All Ayes. Councilman Munger asked that the staff prepare a proposed financial operation and management plan for the city's operation'if they acquired the Veterans Building. 9. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Bond, the City Council approved the application for a federal demonstration grant for ' "Pavement Marking" a program to provide semi - permanent striping, reflectors and markings for most streets in the city. Motion carried. All Ayes. Due to the lateness of time, the balance of the agenda, Items 10, Consent Items and the Bids were continued to the 7:30 Council meeting. _Mayor Cooper adjourned the meeting at 6:40 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, June 17, 1980. COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES ON: 7/15/80 J. itzpatrick, City Clerk City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 1 M I N U T E S ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1980 - 7:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET Pledge Invocation by Reverend George Pielenz, Christian Hope.Center Roll Call Councilmembers PRESENT: Melanie Billig, Alan Bond, Ron Dunin, Jerry Munger and Mayor Cooper ABSENT: None City Staff PRESENT: Lee Walton, Administrative Officer; George Thacher, City Attorney; J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; Henry Engen, Community Development Director;-Terry.Sanville, Senior Planner; Wayne Peterson, City Engineer; Captain Don Englert, Police Department; and D.F. Romero, Public Services Director Mayor Cooper announced that the City Council would now complete the few remaining ' items left over from the afternoon session before starting with the public hearings as scheduled. 10. City Council considered a recommendation from the city staff to provide a golf driving range rather than a golf driving cage previously discussed. Staff stated they had met with five-of the professionals in the county and they were unanimous in recommending that the modification of the full open range could be utilized. A driving range would be a real asset to the course not only for driving practice, but also to attract increased play and additional green fees. In general, the modification to the existing plan as recommended by the professionals would. include: 1) making use of mats on the practice tees; 2) incorporating a series of low baffle screens between practice tees to stop errant hooks-and slices; and 3) installing a thirty foot screen at the bottom end of the range and along the sides as determined by shot angle from the tees. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Munger, that the proposal was approved, the staff was to proceed with the plans and specifications and call for bids for a modified driving range development at Laguna Lake Golf Course. Motion carried. All Ayes. CONSENT ITEMS C -1 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig claims against the city for the month of June 1980 were approved subject to the approval of the Administrative Officer. Motion carried. C -2 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, minutes to the meetings of June 3, 1980, 4:00 p.m., and June 3, 1980, 7:30 p.m. were approved as amended. Motion carried. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 2 C -3 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the claim against the city by Gail Moyes in the amount of $1,175.00 for damages to claimant's property allegedly caused by the city was denied. Motion carried. C-4 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4183 (1980 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo requiring construction of Mission Style Sidewalks in the core of downtown and authorizing contribution of city funds to such construction. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Billig, Dunin, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None B -1 City Clerk reported on the following bids received for the Orcutt Road Widening and Culvert Extension, City Plan No. D -01, Engineer's Estimate of $82,340.00 without contingencies: 5. M.J. Hermrick 94,420.00 96,450.00 P.O. Box 217, Nipomo 6 C. Boyd Construction 105,760.00 106,785.00 163 Ramona, SLO D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, recommended that the low bid of R. Burke Corporation be accepted. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Munger, the following resolution was introduced: REsolution No. 4184 (1980 Series), a resolution awarding the bid to R. BURKE CORPORATION, was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Munger, Bond., Dunin and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None B -2 City Clerk reported on bids received for the Foothill Sewerline, (Tassajara to Ferrini), City Plan No. D -21, Engineers Estimate $47,142.50 without contingencies: 1. C. Pratt Construction $45,930.00 P.O. Box 1295, SLO 2. Sierra National $54,944.00 472 Indio Dr., Shell Beach 3. Walter Bros. Construction $55,005.00 P.O. Box 809 Alternate 1 Alternate 2 1. R. Burke Corporation $669773.00 $69,899.00 P.O. Box 957, SLO 2. Walter Bros. Construction 79,005.00 839125.00 P.O. Box 809, SLO 3. John Madonna 849096.00 919516.00 Rt. 2, Box 869, SLO 4. Conco Engineering 842143.10 82,995.60 P.O. Box 511, SLO 5. M.J. Hermrick 94,420.00 96,450.00 P.O. Box 217, Nipomo 6 C. Boyd Construction 105,760.00 106,785.00 163 Ramona, SLO D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, recommended that the low bid of R. Burke Corporation be accepted. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Munger, the following resolution was introduced: REsolution No. 4184 (1980 Series), a resolution awarding the bid to R. BURKE CORPORATION, was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Munger, Bond., Dunin and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None B -2 City Clerk reported on bids received for the Foothill Sewerline, (Tassajara to Ferrini), City Plan No. D -21, Engineers Estimate $47,142.50 without contingencies: 1. C. Pratt Construction $45,930.00 P.O. Box 1295, SLO 2. Sierra National $54,944.00 472 Indio Dr., Shell Beach 3. Walter Bros. Construction $55,005.00 P.O. Box 809 City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 3 4. Vics Pipeline $65,104.00 Rt. 1, Box 15B Templeton 93465 D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, recommended that the low bid of C. Pratt Construction Company be accepted. Councilwoman Billig stated she was opposed to granting this bid to the Pratt ' Construction. She felt that the city had had a number of problems with this company in the past and the city does not look very good with these problems. She listed a number of problems in the past with the Pratt Construction Company and stated she could not vote to grant him this contract. She urged the City Council to look at evaluating Mr. Pratt and determine whether he is a responsible bidder and determine whether council wanted to award this bid to him. Councilman Bond agreed that Pratt is not a responsible bidder and that the city should not award future bids to him. _George Thacher, City Attorney, explained the legal interpretation of "responsible bidder" and stated that the City Council if the City Council does not want to aware d the Pratt Construction Company the bid then they should hold a public hearing on his qualifications, either that or reject all bids and call for new bids on the project. After some discussion by the council, it was decided that this bid consideration would be continued for a public hearing within 30 days. B -3 City Clerk reported on the following bids received for the Johnson Avenue Widening, Higuera to Monterey Streets, City Plan No. D -18, Engineer's Estimate $72,730 without contingencies: 1. Walter Bros. Construction $46,052.00 P.O. Box 809 2. R. Burke Corporation $50,142.85 P.O. Box 957, SLO 3. John Madonna $53,053.00 Rt. 2, Box 869, SLO 4. C. Boyd Construction $589922.00 163 Ramona Dr., SLO D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, recommended that the low bid of Walter Bros. Construction Company be accepted. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4185 (1980 Series), a resolution awarding the contract to Walter Bros. Construction. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None B -4 On motion of Councilman Bond., seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4186 (1980 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an agreement between the City and Joseph Lopez, for Mr. Lopez to purchase for $1,000 (and remove) the structure located at 1020 Walnut Street, Parcel No. 1205 -12, Recorders' Lot 12 at the corner of block 28. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Billig, Dunin, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None 1 1 City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 4 11. City Council held a continued public hearing to consider a proposal to use a $350,000 federal grant to rehabilitate-the downtown-rental housing (continued from June 10, 1980 City Council meeting). Terry Sanville, Senior Planner, again reviewed for the council's information, the proposed block grant application for a downtown housing conversion program. He stated that the council had covered in detail the proposal at their June 10 meeting and that rather than go over the entire proposal again he would be ' available to-answer any questions the City Council may have. He also stated that Mr. Rich Chubon, Executive Director of the Housing Authority, had just returned from a meeting with the HUD and explained the block grant program and he would be available also to answer questions. Rich Chubon, Executive Director of the Housing Authority, reviewed the-activity of the Housing Authority under the block grant to rehabilitate downtown rental housing. He stated that the grant is a city responsibility but that the City Council could contract with the Housing Authority to actually operate and manage the grants for the city. He stated upon question that the $350,000 grant was broken down as follows: $15,000 - relocation payments and assistance; $315,000 - to rehabilitate private properties; $10,090 for general and admin- istration; and $10,000 for contingencies. He said that they hoped that with support from the city, the overhead.and general administration costs could be reduced. He said that the administrative costs were for the 2 -year period that the block grant operation would be in existence although there would be a longer period for repaying of loans, etc. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. Russell Johnson opposed to the city entering into the agreement to procure $350,000 federal grant to rehabilitate private downtown rental housing. He explained that there was nothing but a boon - doggle using federal funds ' recycled back to a city for expenditure. Sophie Taylor, Granada Hotel, supported a proposal to help landlords update their property-so that people can continue to live in downtown San Luis Obispo. Russ Colter stated he was opposed to using the money to update someone else's private property. He felt the money should be used to help working people get a home to live in. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Dunin stated he was disturbed over-the fact that in order to administer the $350,000 grant it would take two employees and he wondered what would happen to those employees when the program was completed. Councilwoman Billig stated she supported the program. She felt it was a good program to retain good, affordable housing in the downtown district. She stated that this program was a loan program and not a gift program. _Councilman Bond stated he.would support the rehabilitation portion of the program. He felt that viable housing was needed in downtown. He felt that the city government, not the federal government, should run the program. New staff should be kept to a minimum. ' Councilman Munger stated he supported this particular program. He agreed that the City Council and staff should administer the program and maybe use city funds and not even apply for federal grants. He could not support this because of the strings attached to federal money, a subsidy. Mayor Cooper agreed with the need for the .program. He agreed that maybe the city should administer the program with city funds and not live up to federal rules and regulations which add costs to every program. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 5 Councilwoman Billig objected to the council discussion of a different downtown program with any funds now after council had supported this grant and the staff time already spent. She was outraged that after all these months of staff work, that council now comes up with a city revolving fund program. She previously suggested that program and the council did not accept or even consider it. _Councilman Dunin stated he only objected to the overhead cost of the administrati' of $350,000. He felt that it was an exhorbitant cost to administer. Terry Sanville stated that in developing this block grant application, the staff looked to the most economical, administrative cost that was feasible. He felt that the Housing Authority were experts in these programs and would do a good job. Finally, the city would contract with the Housing Authority to do the work under city supervision and conditions. He doubted personally that the city had any personnel competent to administer this or other housing programs. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4187 (1980 Series), approving an application for federal assistant for a block grant program with the Department of Housing Authority and Urban Development. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Bond, Munger NOES: Mayor Cooper ABSENT: None 12. City Council considered a public hearing on the appeal of Planning Commission decision regarding a general plan amendment, an appeal by I Merrell Williams, of this decisions. City Clerk presented a letter received by the Community Development Department from Merrell Williams asking that this appeal be continued to the next available City Council hearing. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Munger, that the requested be approved and the hearing continued to July 1, 1980. Motion carried. Councilwoman voting "NO." The city staff was requested to prepare.criteria for guidance of city staff in accepting requests for continuations of items previously scheduled for public hearing and that have been advertised. Upon advice of the City Attorney, Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. Russ Johnson stated he was in support of the Williams proposal to develop a commercial establishment on Broad Street. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. The matter was continued to July 1, 1980. 13. City Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal by Harold Pillow of an Architectural Review Commission action denying a I plan revision to west elevation of an approved duplex structure at 2305 Broad Street, R -2 zone. Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, stated that this was an appeal of an Architectural Review Commission denial to allow revisions to west elevation of an approved duplex structure on the west side of Broad Street between Funston Avenue and Woodbridge Street. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 6 The owner /builder of the project had appealed the action of the commission. The builder wanted to add a cantilevered balcony and sliding glass door to the west elevation of a building previously approved by the commission. The balcony had caused a conflict with the neighbor to the west. He stated this was an issue where after the ARC has approved a project and a building permit was issued and the construction started on the site, it was called to the attention of Planning and Building staffs that what was being built was not what had been approved by the ARC. The builder went back to the commission to ask for a plan revision and his request was denied. The staff recommended that the City Council uphold the ARC denial. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the City Council for or against the appeal. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Bond stated he would recommend the City Council deny the appeal. Councilman Munger stated he would support the ARC and recommend denial of the appeal Councilman Dunin stated he too would support the ARC and deny the appeal. Councilwoman Billig stated she would support the ARC and deny the appeal. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Bond, the appeal of Harold Pillow was denied. Motion carried. 14. City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approved the tentative map for Minor Subdivision 80 -33, ' t combine three lots into one lot at 3190, 3196 and 3230 South Higuera Street, PF -S Zone, Don Walters subdivider. Henry Engen, Community Development Director, stated that the proposed tentative map was to combine three lots into one lot located on the west side of South Higuera Street near Margarita Avenue. The combining of these lots into one a prior condition of the use permit, permitting the Social Services complex to be built on this side. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the minor subdivision subject to five findings. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the City Council for or against the proposal. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4188 (1980 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval of tentative map for Minor Subdividion 80 -33, located 3190, 3196 & 3230 South Higuera Street. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper ' NOES: None ABSENT: None 15. City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve a tentative map for Minor Subdivision 80 -67, to create a 4 -unit residential air -space condominium located at 178 Stenner Street, R-4 zone; Singchou Wu, Subdivider. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 7 Henry Engen, Community Development Director, presented a recommendation of the Planning Commission stating that-the project had previously been a subject of a resource deficiency heard by the council and that the building plans had received final approval by .the Architectural Review Commission. He recommended.that the City Council approve the tentative map for the Minor Subdivision subject to the five findings and eight conditions. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. ' Mr. Singchou Wu appeared before the City Council stating he was in support and also available to answer any questions the Council might have. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig�.the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4189 (1980 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval of tentative map for Minor Subdivision 80 -67, located at 178 Stenner Street. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None 16. City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of-the Planning Commission to approve a 12 -month time extension to file the final parcel map for Minor Subdivision 79 -094 to create two lots from one lot at 579 Highland Drive and 618 Felton Way, R 71 and R -2 -S zones; Archie Lux subdivider. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. ' No one appeared before the City Council for on against the proposal. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4190 (1980 Series), a resolution of the City of San Luis Obispo City Council approving a 12 -month time extension for Minor Subdivision 79 -094. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None 17. City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve a 12 month time extension to file the final parcel map for Minor Subdivision 79 -096 to create two lots from one lot at 585 Highland Drive and 630 Felton Way, R -1 & R -2 -S zones; Claud Batchelor subdivider. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the City Council for or against the proposal. , Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. On motion of.Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Munger, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No: 4190 (1980 Series), a resolution of the City of San Luis Obispo City Council approving a 12-month-time extension for Minor Subdivision 79 -096. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Munger, Billig, Dunin and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 8 At 9:05 p.m., Mayor Cooper declared a recess. At.9 :20 p.m., the.City Council.reconvened._ All councilmembers present. 18. City..Council held ,a.public _ hearing..to.consider- amendments to the 1977 Sign:..Ordinance. Prior.to...discussion.of_the_ sign ordinance, -it was moved by.Councilman- Dunin,. seconded_by.. Councilwoman.. Billig ,:..that.the.City.Council_ would adjourn'at 11:00 p.m. unless they were.in.the midst..of.a discussion of a; specific item. Motion carried. All Ayes. Sign Ordinance Henry Engen,. Community. Development .Director.,.reviewed.for._the City - .Council the - tentative . changes or.amen.dments. proposed by:the Chamber of Commerce and tentatively approved to amend the sign ordinance: Sections 9702..2B,..9702:2O., 9702.3G, 9702.3H, 9703.1, 9704.3C9 9704.3E (2)(b), 9704.3F,.9705.3 '..,.9707.i and 9707.2 Mavor Cooper declared the public hearing open. Donald J. Kahn, ARC.Chairman,.,submitted.a. letter_.to.the : council.stating...that. as. the ARC.wishes.to express :their deep concern.to. pending ..action. to. the..amendments to'the..City.- Sign. Ordinance. He. continued..that.after.reviewing the- proposed amendmei to the sign.ordinance as'-requested by.the council; they felt-that some.of the amendments did not reflect the views of.t.he.community as a whole, but rather. of -.a smal1,..vocal..minority in the business community.; nor did. the ARC.feel'.the:amendments _ meet,the intent and purposes as specifically noted in the ordinance. Thest.:being to: A. Protect and enhance the..character and natural.beauty.of the . .,..community.and..its._various neighborhoods and.districts; - B._..- Protect..those.:.uses which.-are adequately and appropriately identified.from too many and too large signs in their environs; Protect commercial districts.from sign clutter; D. Protect the public:s.ability to.identify uses and premises.,without. _confusion; E... Eliminate- .unnecessary- distractions which may jeopardize pedestrian _. ..or.vehicular:.traffic safety; F. ..Assure.:the maintenance of.. signs; and G... Implement the community design objectives expressed in.the General Plan.:. The..ARC alsorfelt °:that.the..proposed.change in the amortization schedule..--would : unnecessarily ..dely.any.benefits to..be derived from enforcement.of.the -.sign ..ordinance. It would' - extend "the.present amoritzation fromthree to five years, possibly longer. If.we'have an ordinance, the ARC felt it should be enforced under the present schedule. Finally, the ARC ..felt that the proposed.changes:mentioiied .were- _benefi.tting -only ....a- select.few.. Therefore;- the - .ARC- could..not support them.. The..commission was - concerned of.what..is going to become of-San Luis Obispo, not that .their.. recommendations were.being.cast aside. The-council asked for the ARC'.s.advice and they..were- giving it. The.commission::and citizens of San.Luis.Obispo would be awaiting to see what action the council took. He hoped it would be the right one: Jane Lilly,. Design IRevi.ew_ Bo ard.Chairperson,.. stated.. that..the..DRB. - was - in..support of -the Architectural.Review Board's position regarding proposed.amendments to the.sign ordinance. The DRB would be happy to attend future study sessions which may be planned regarding the proposed amendments. Jan Clucas; President.of the-League of Women Voters, submitted the following statement: 1 1 1 City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 9 "The League of Women Voters of San Luis Obispo has been involved in working with and speaking for a sign ordinance in San Luis Obispo since 1966. We supported the 1967 ordinance and during the ensuing ten years consistently encouraged the enforcement of that ordinance. In 19777 we followed the process of re- writing that ordinance and were able to accept the resulting compromise which retained the amortization period for non - conforming signs. In regard to the currently proposed amendment to the 1977 ordinance, we feel 1 that the intent of sign control enforcement has been negated. We essentially concur with the .comments to this proposal which have been made by the city professional staff and the Architectural Review Commission. The League is aware of and sympathetic to some of the concerns of business groups, represented by the Chamber of Commerce, who may have exceptional sign problems. We are, however, confident that, under the available appeals processes, most grievances can be resolved without sacrificing the basic sign ordinance objectives which have long been supported by the general community. We do urge that information about the city's appeals process be made widely available to.interested citizens and that this .information be written in a clear and concise manner, understandable by the average, less - informed person. Our members encourage energy conservation wherever possible and therefore the League supports the suggestion regarding reflective materials and submits the following wording for your consideration: Section 9702.3, add: 'Use of energy- saving reflective materials is encouraged where appropriate.' We also heartily encourage the city to participate in the CalTrans program of informational signing of State highways approaching San Luis Obispo. The League of Women Voters of San Luis Obispo therefore requests the City Council to retain the 1977'ordina.nce as is, with the exception of minor ' changes as approved by the ARC and to direct staff to immediately begin the process of enforcement:" Martha Schwartz, Chairperson of the Obispo Beautiful Association, submitted the following statement: "I speak as chairman of the Board of Directors of Obispo Beautiful Association. You and I live in a rare and beautiful area. Nature has blessed San LUis Obispo with a uniquely scenic landscape. Yet this landscape cannot be taken for granted -- it is a fragile thing too often abused and too easily destroyed to be lost forever. ---As-members, of Obispo Beautiful- Association.,_ our purposes ale: 7. 1. To bring about an increased awareness of our beauty and setting; 2. To maintain, promote and preserve our environment; 3. To inspire and motivate new projects of beautification; 4. To study new developments as they may effect our environment; and 5. To enlist public support for these goals. To these goals -- especially the one about studying new developments as they may effect our environment and to enlist public support for these goals -- I now speak in regards to the sign ordinance changes about to be considered. Section 9702.1 - Permit required - It would be impractical to do away with fees and permits altogether. Obviously some get away without permits and there will be no record of their signs. For those who do comply with the rules, it would be unfair to eliminate this section. We recommend you leave the ordinance as it is. There should be enough staff to contend with this item. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 10 As for the sign height limit, we believe that the..cunrent height standards should be maintained. There is no justification for increasing the height of signs u pit, C.�T_?lges. �. We .,don't fee,L -the: her�ht of ai�nm promldes better oadibility 7.: z-h= signs _,s3:osez tro_,eyei3evei, Eire City- Oou=11 r.dn-3:977 agreed) that higher signing would not enhance our entryway to our town and Obispm:Baauti:ful Association agreed then and now. Do not eliminate staff for enforcing this ordinance. We feel that if anything, I staff should be increased. An ordinance is no good unless it is enforced. There are many examples in neighboring communities where sign control does not affect the business community. I cite only one at this time — the City of Monterey, California, where along motel row it is nearly impossible to find a motel -hotel sign. Yet, one must make reservations well in advance in order to spend time in these lodgings. Their signs are low, monument -type, designed in extremely good taste. I urge you to consider our objections carefully before making any decisions." _David Brophy, designer, urged the City Council to continue their strict enforcement of the existing sign ordinance in order to enhance the beauty of San Luis Obispo. He urged that all city regulations be enforced. Gus Thomasson, Johnson Avenue, urged strict enforcement of the sign ordinance. He felt that permits should be collected on all signs. Liz Fisher, C.A.C. Chairperson, stated that after reviewing the ARC letter and discussi like to indicate to the council they are in in this matter. Their major points were: the Citizens' Advisory Committee, zg the- dssue.in detail, would complete agreement with the ARC 1. The allowance of 25 -foot signs along Calle Joaquim is inappropriate since ultimately to remain competitive, all businesses will erect sign of that height. This will make our scenic entryway to our beautiful city cluttered with high and medium size signs, more of an "advertising paradise" than a nice place to visit and live. 2. Changing the sign height from 25 to 35 feet in C -T zones will simply encourage sign wars among motels, restaurants and service stations. In addition to being more costly and provide no competitive edge, they will be a detriment to our skyscrape. Another example of "advertising paradise." 3. Freeway logo - signing is an excellent alternative to taller signs and is more in line with the ordinance's intent to "protect and enhance the character and natural beauty of the community and its various neighbor- hoods and district." 4. The present amortization schedule should be enforced and should not be extended. 5. It is indeed a gross inequity to allow those who put up their signs illegally a reward by not having them pay the fees that all those others - who went through official procedures - had to pay. She concluded her comments by saying that the believed the ARC is working in the best interests of the residents of this fine city. Their voting record indicates that they have been keenly aware of the signage matter in this city so that signs conform to present height and spatial relationships, in addition to presenting a pleasing appearance. She urged the City Council should act.sn a: -in ar.manner more:suppor-tative of their advisory committees. She hoped they would carefully weight the sign ordinance amendments and then act in a manner showing a true concern for keeping San Luis Obispo beautiful and uncluttered with advertising displays. _Allen Settle, memeber of the Planning Commission, stated he supported the 1977 Sign Ordinance and hoped the council would not change the existing sign ordinance. Lawrence Field, Alta Street, supported the 1977 Sign Ordinance. He felt that the DRC and ARC had spent many days arriving at a good ordinance. He felt that City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 -J:30 p.m. Page 11 the sign people, Chamber of Commerce and himself had come up with an adequate sign ordinance in order to.keep the city beautiful. Herb Miles, Lincoln Street, felt the people he talked to did not want the sign ordinance amended. Diane Jefferson, member of the Citizens' Advisory Committe, stated she felt the council should listen to the people and not listen to business interests. She wanted the ordinance enforced strictly. Robert Griffin, Del Norte Way, was in support of all comments that evening dealing with enforcement of the 1977 Sign Ordinance. Mike North, 198 Paso Robles, opposed the proposal for increasing and allowing higher signs. He did not feel that the signs helped business. Stoffer, Manager of the Johnson Motor Lodge, Chairman of the Hotel -Motel Association and member of the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce, felt that the recommendation of the industry had been presented and he did not feel that they were asking for anything that would hurt the community. Kenneth Schwartz reviewed for the City Council the past history of developing adequate sign regulations for the city. He continued that the amortization schedul in the 1977 Sign Ordinance was the same as in the 1967 Sign Ordinance. He hoped the. council would nor allow this schedule to. change nor allow higher signs in the C -T_and C =R zones and not listen to -the business community. Roger Macally, President of the Chamber of Commerce, reported on the actions of the Chamber of Commerce.in their recommendations to amend the sign ordinance. After a one year study, he urged the council to review their recommendations carefully. Jeff Jorgenson stated that during his tenure on the City Council, the 1977 Sign Ordinance, he felt that the study by the Chamber was a very narrow recommendation and only helped a limited number of properties and businesses in the city. He felt the council should not adjust the amortization schedule but enforce the ordinance and remove the non - conforming signs in the city. He felt the people must be represented, not the businesses. Jesse Norris, 2047 Wilding Lane, member of the Chamber Sign Committee, said he felt they were a broad based group. He supported the recommendations of the Chamber except for the exemption to government signs. He.did.not feel the ordinance amendments were perfect, but a compromise between business needs and aesthetic desires. He felt that the 1977 Ordinance is very restrictive to business and if he had to replace his signs, he could not afford to pay for it. Curtis Longaecker, 1001 Motel, agreed with Jesse Norris's comments regarding the cost of replacement of signs. jr- Tom Priest felt the council, the people and the Chamber should look to the positive effect of the signs rather than the .hegat vei-,- :ie!urged;rdfund of bed tax for good signs on motels. Russ Johnson stated he objected to the many statements made against businesses -and businessmen made at this meeting. He felt this was a sign of the time but he did not feel that all businessmen were dishonest or immoral; afterall, they do pay the bills for the freeloaders. Joseph•Nunzio, Palomar Drive, supported the views of,the ARC, the DRB, the CAC, etc., as to the sign ordinance and the need to enforce it. He felt that good sign control was good for a city and also good for business. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30p.m. Page 12 Jane Lilly, DRB Chairperson, stated again on behalf of the Design Review Board the present regulations were carefully designed to protect the beauty of the community while allowing suitable identification of businesses. During the two year process of preparing the ordinance, the DRB worked with the Chamber of Commerce, the signing industry,-local. graphic artists, as well as the ARC and other intera9fed citizens.. They therefore .felt. it .represented the interests of the entire community rather than that of one special group. She did not wish to comment on the payment of sign fees or the proposed changes , in the amortization schedule. She felt these decisions were political and not within her purview. She believed that the business community, as well as the rest of the citizens, would benefit with the present sign ordinance. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Dunin felt the ordinance changes should be reviewed - moment by moment.. He felt that the public comments should be considered in view of the overall ordinance. Councilwoman Billig felt -the large audience showed the great concern the public had for the environment and the attractivenss of the city. She supported the 1977 Sign Ordinance which she felt was a compromise over the original proposal. She felt that the city has never honestly enforced the 1977 ordinance so it Oas never allowed to operate. She was disturbed over the apparent division of feelings within the city as demonstrated this evening between the business communit and the non business community. She felt that the further people are apart, the harder it would be to bring them back together. She thought the main issues were: 1) amortization schedule; and 2) height of signs in_the C -T and C -R zones. Councilman Bond stated he felt that all city ordinances should be enforced -- whether a new sign ordinance or the 1377 ordinance: He felt.the'dity should have an adequate sign ordinance. He felt that signs were nedessary1 for busines but they should be of a quality that enhances the community. Councilman Munger felt the problem with the signs was the difference between realism of business and the resentment by the non - business persons to business people. As far as the signs were concerned, he felt the city should have a sign ordinance that could be enforced without damage to another person. He was disturbed at the anti - business sentiment.expressed by the majority of the speakers. on this matter. Mayor Cooper thanked the people for participation in discussion and felt that any and all city ordinances should be enforced. Also he felt that the city's enforcement officer has done an excellent job. City Council then reviewed the proposed ordinance amending the sign regulations section by section. Amending Section 9702.2B Official federal, state or local government traffic, directional and informational signs and notices issued by any court, person or officer in performance of a public duty or any other sign that is required to be posted by any government agency. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Mayor Cooper, this exemption would -b�e, approved'. Motion carried, '5-0.. Note.:.. All othek'publ "ic signs should follow , the sign ordinance "provisions. Adding Section "0" to Section 2702.2 Signs showing the location of public telephones and signs placed by utilities to show the location of underground facilities. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 13 On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, accept this addition. Motion carried, 5 -0. Amending Section 9702.3.G Signs made wholly or partially of highly reflective material, except energy - saving reflective material, and flourescent painted signs. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, accepting as written. Motion carried, 5 -0. Amending Section 9702.3H Any sign which does not conform with the clearance requirements for communication lines, utility lines and power lines, provided that further restrictions adopted by the California Public Utilities Commission. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Munger, approved as amended. Motion carried, 5 -0. Adding Section 9703.1 To avoid great expense and inefficient use of staff enforcement.time, no sign permit application fee shall be required for any sign erected without a permit prior to September 3, 1977, and which conforms to the provisions of this chapter. Councilman Dunin said he could accept this as written. Councilwoman Billig said no, she could not accept this. She felt the required permits and fees.should be paid on all signs in order to get control of them. Councilman Munger said he could accept the amendment as written. ' On motion of Mayor Cooper, seconded by Councilman Munger, that the amendment be accepted as presented. Motion lost on the following roll call vote: AYES: Mayor Cooper and Councilman Munger NOES: Councilmembers Billig, Bond and Dunin ABSENT: None On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Bond, that the amendment be rejected and leave the section as it reads in the present ordinance. Motion carried. All Ayes. AmendiRg-Section 9704.3.0 The following signs are permitted in the Retail Commercial (C -R) zone district. Total area of signs, exclusive of shopping center identification signs, shall not exceed 200 square feet for each business or tenant. On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Munge , accept as written; four signs total plus window sign. Motion carried 4 -1; Councilman Munger voting "NO." Amending Section 9704.3.E(2)(b) One free - standing sign at each premise not to exceed 35 feet in height or 72 square feet in area, which sign may be located within the required yard area on lots where buildings existing on or before September 1, 1980, are in the required yard area. On motion of Mayor Cooper, seconded by Councilman Bond, reduce the height back to 25' in height. Motion carried, 5 -0. City Council Minutes June 17, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 14 Amending Section 9704.3.F Calle Joaquin area: Free - standing signs in the Calley Joaquin area shall not exceed 25 fee in height or 72 square feet in area. On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, this be reduced back to 16 feet as in the present ordinance. Motion carried, 5 -0. , Amending Section 9705.3 Amortization of non - conforming signs. On motion of Mayor Cooper, seconded by`Councilwoman tillig,.that the.City Council use the original schedule, double value of sign and use years 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10 for amortization periods. Motion lost on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig and Bond NOES: Mayor Cooper and Councilmembers Dunin and Munger On motion of Mayor Cooper, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, leave the amortization schedule as in the 1977 Ordinance except use the amortization period of 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10 years. Motion lost on the following roll call vote: AYES: Mayor Cooper NOES: Councilmembers Billig, Bond, Dunin and Munger On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Bond, use the original amortization schedule as shown in the 1977 Ordinance, but double , the values of the individual signs. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Bond, and Dunin NOES: Councilman Munger and Mayor Cooper Section 9707 is added to the ordinance for appeals. Section 9707.1 - Architectural Review Commission Appeals. Section 9702.2 - Community Development Department Appeals. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Munger, that this amendment stay in the proposed ordinance. Motion carried, 5 -0. There being.no further discussion to come before the City Council on this matter, the ordinance was referred back to the Community Development staff to prepare the final ordinance as directed that evening. There being no further business coming before the City Council and due to the lateness of the hour, Item Nos. 19, 20, 21 & 22 were continued to Tuesday, June 24, 1980. Mayor Cooper adjourned the meeting at 12:10 a.m. to 12:10 p.m. Wednesday, June 18, 1980. COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES ON: 7/15/80 1 itzpatrick, City Clerk