HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/02/1980City Council"Minutes
September 2,1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 2
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, prepared a memo for the City Council
stating that -the original grading plan had been changed.to reflect permission
to- deposit roadway and trench excavation which would amount to- approximately
3,000 cubic yards from the development onto the building sites. Since this
quantity would result in less than .8" of fill, the grading plan itself did not
need to be- modified.. He recommended that the control of.the deposit of this
material was.governed by the addition of Note 19 on the tract map -which reads
as follows:
"Excavation material may be spread..and compacted on the site outside
the riparian protection area, drainage easement.and outside:the drip
line of all trees to a depth of 8 inches and over properly graded and
scarified surfaces."
i
He recommended that the City Council authorize this minor.revision to the grading
plan.
Ken Smee, owner of the adjacent property development, stated he was opposed
to allowing Blaser to distribute his dirt on -site rather.than-haul it off.
He stated that as an adjacent developer he was required to have his grading
dirt and.trench dirt hauled away. Also, he stated he was concerned with
future siltation of the creek and culverts.caused by loose fill dirt being
placed on each lot.
Leonard Blaser, developer, reviewed his proposal, and stated he agreed to
limit 6" fill on each lot.and haul off.the balance if any. He also stated
that any grade soil placed on the various lots would be decompacted for control.
Councilmember Billig stated she was opposed -to their being asked to make a
decision on this amendment to the grading.plan without having.full information
and without having a grading plan before the Council. She stated that this
final map -had just been approved two weeks before and she could not support
amending and deleting conditions of ..final maps -so late -in the process. She
asked why has the applicant waited until the last minute for this request.
She stated she would not support the change in the grading plan. Mr. Blaser
had previously requested 3 -5" reading from minutes of council meeting. Now
we have a request for 8" of bill.
Dale Freitv, 1616 Southwood Drive, stated he too was opposed to adding more
dirt..on these lots.that was loosely compacted.as when it rained the runoff
would flow onto adjacent properties and plug up culverts, etc.
Councilmember Billig moved... that_the.City.Council deny the - requested change
in the grading plan. Motion lost due-to-lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the City
Council.approve the change in the grading plan with the.developer allowed to
place three to five inches maximum.on each lot and that special consideration
be given to the installation of.a silt trap to protect the underground culverts
which would be handled by a separate agreement with the city.
Motion carried on the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Munger, Dunin, Bond and Mayor Cooper
NOES: Councilwoman Billig
ABSENT: None
Councilman Dunin asked that in the future the.staff to be.particularly
awaie.of narrow slopes, small-culverts, etc. on.subdivisions to be included
in the grading plans.
2. The City Council considered a resolution.establishing salaries and
benefits for management personnel and superseding previous resolutions in
conflict.
1
City Council Minutes
September. 2,.1980.- 4:00 p.m.
Page 3
Councilwoman Billig commented that she could not support the.resolution but
that she wanted personnel to know that this-should-not-be construed as a lack
of confidence in them.
On motion of Councilman-Dunin, seconded by Councilman Munger, the-following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4242 (1980 Series), a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo establishing salaries and
benefits for certain management personnel and superseding previous resolutions
' in conflict. _
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
L
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Munger, Bond and-Mayor Cooper
NOES: Councilwoman Billig
ABSENT:. None
3. On motion of..Councilwoman.Billig, seconded...by Councilman.Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: .Resolution..No. 4243 (1980 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the -City of,San Luis Obispo authorizing the sale
of city -owned personal property at public auction.
Passed and adopted on.the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper
0401REI R f•T,[-
ABSENT: None
4. On motion of Councilwoman:Billig,__seconded by.Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution.was.introduced:. Resolution No: 4244 (1980 Series), a
resolution of the.Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an agreement
between the City and Grassroots II for Grassroots II to provide services from
July'l, 1980 -June 30, 1981 and the city'to .pay Grassroots I $6,,000 for said service.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES.: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
CONSENT ITEMS
C -1 On.motion of_ Councilman. Bond,_:seconded.by..Councilman. Munger,_ claims
against the City for the month of-September, 1980-were approved and ordered
paid subject to the.approval of the.Administrative Officer.
C -2 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Munger, the
following minutes. of Council.meetings.were approved.as - amended:
August 6, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
August 7, 1980 - 4:00 p:m.
August 11, 1980.- 4:00 p.m.
August 12, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Motion.carried..
August.12,
1980
- 7:30..p.m.
August
19,
1980
- 4:00
p.m.
August
19,.1980
- 7:30
p.m.
C -3 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded.by Councilman Munger, the
following contract pay estimates were approved-and ordered paid:
R. Baker, Inc. Est. #3 $ 270.00
WATERLINE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
MOUNTAIN VIEW
C.P. #D -27
R. Baker, Inc. Est. #3 513.00
LIZZIE /WILDING WATERLINE Est. #4 Final 1,623.00 (10/7/80)
C.P. #D-44
City Council Minutes
September 2, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 4
R. Burke Corporation Est. 412 9,450.00
ORCUTT ROAD WIDENING
& CULVERT EXTENSION
C.P: 41D -01
Fred Julien &.Associates
Est. 414
2,009.41
MONTEREY HEIGHTS WATERLINE
C.C.O. 412* +
2,009.41 (not to exceed
C.P. 41D -07
Fred. Julien & Associates
Est. 412
28,733.47
LAWRENCE DRIVE SEWERLINE
C.C.O. 411 **
5,055.28
C.P. 41D -23
Sierra National
Est. 415
(1,034.11)
JOHNSON AVENUE STORM DRAIN
C.C.O. 411 * ** +
950.00
C.P.-#D-05B
Sierra National
Est. 412
15,908.58
FOOTHILL SEWERLINE
Tassajara - Ferrini
C.P. 41D -21
Walter Bros. Construction
Est. 411
12,946.50
JOHNSON AVENUE WIDENING
Higuera to Monterey
C.P. 41D -18
* C.C.O. - For extra work
performed on water tank.
** .. C.C.O. - Replace sewer
laterals that will not-drain
to the new sewer main.
* ** C.C.O. - Encase existing
sewerline with P.C.C. on.Johnson
Avenue and on
Rose Avenue
Note: Councilwoman Billig
asked that.in the future the
City Council be sent
detail on the change
orders.
C -4 On motion of .Councilman Bond, seconded.by.Councilman Munger, the
..following.resolution was introduced: Resolution..No. 4245.(1980 Series), a
resolution-of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving the closing
of State highway for the California State Firemens Association Conference Parade.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Munger, Billig, Dunin and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None-
C-5 On motion of Councilman Bond,- seconded:_by;Councilman Munger, Jerry
..Kenny.was appointed as alternate to the Zone 9 Committee.replacirig Dan Smith.
Motion carried.
C -6 On.motion of Councilman= Bond, - .seconded by
annual report of.the Citizens' Advisory.Committee
Motion carried.
Councilwoman Billig asked the council.if it did n
the Council on projects of mutual.concern.
C -7 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded.by
Silva was appointed to the BIA Advisory Board rep.
the term ending 11/30/80. Motion carried.
Councilman Munger, the
.was ordered received and filed.
ot.want.the-
C.A.C. to assist
Councilman Munger, Kathy
Lacing Harry Henderson for
City Council Minutes
September-2., 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 5
C -8 On motion.-of Councilman..Bond,.,seconded.by Councilman Munger,.a claim
against the.city.by.Toni Rae. Van ._Note.in_the.amount.of.$20.00 to repair the
claimant's car when she.allegedly hit a chuckhole in.the street.was denied.
Motion carried.
B -1 The City Clerk reported on the following bids received for the "DOWNTOWN
SIDEWALK REPAIRS",. City Plan D- 56,.bid estimate $54,407 without contingencies:
1. A.D. Construction $379600.18
495 Embarcardero
Morro Bay, CA. 93442
2. Black Mountain Construction. $45,806.00
P.O. Box C
Santa Margarita, CA
3. Tri- Valley Construction $49,754.05
1108 W. Main
Santa Maria, CA 93454
4. W.A. Gus Howie $57,851.00
1813 Marsha Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
5. Gray Construction $63,479.82
180 S. Dolliver
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
This matter was continued from the August 19, 1980 meeting for concurrence
by the BIA.
Art Hird, representing the Public Services Director, recommended that- the.City
accept the.low bid of A.D. Construction Co. and ask them to proceed as rapidly
as possible with the contract_in order to.beat the winter rains and to.be out
of the downtown area during the Christmas season.
Marcel Cote appeared.before the City Council and.urged that-the Council not
just iepair the sidewalks.in their present ... character but he stated..that the
sidewalks should be repaired.by installing Mission -style sidewalks including
the tiles with _the full cost being paid,by the city. The reason he made this
recommendation was that.if the city did not make the.proper repairs, that in
a few years half.of the sidewalks would have to be done over again in the
Spanish or Mission style without the tiles. .Secondly, he felt the city should
automatically remove trees from.-the repair areas.and plant acceptable trees
or leave an opening-for future planting.
Ken Porche spoke in support of.repairs..that were needed for safety sake but
hold off on the Mission style concept until an overall construction plan had
been approved by the BIA. He.reminded.the.Council.that the city and the.BlA
had just retained an expert to.make a study of downtown development but he would
support D.F. Romero's position on getting the work .done.
The BIA submitted a letter asking the City-only do minimal repair.at this time,
using if necessary blacktop and things of that nature to make the streets and
sidewalks safe but hold off the major repairs and the large sums of money needed
in order to tie it in with the new streetscape improvement.being planned for
downtown. At that time all the merchants might cooperate in installing Mission
style sidewalk.
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig,,that the City
reject all bids for sidewalk..repair in downtown San Luis Obispo but set up a
.fund of up.to $6,000 to allow temporary repair-of sidwalk.using either cement
or asphalt and then direct the staff to work with-the BIA fora signup for
Mission style sidewalk with-the city to contribute a portion of the cost at.
the new cost figures.
Motion lost on-the following roll-call vote:
City Council Minutes
September 2, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 6
AYES: Councilmembers.Dunin..and Billig
NOES: Councilmembers Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper
ABSENT: None
Councilman Bond..stated he would support the award of-.the existing bid. He did
not feel.that enough merchants would pay.their share of-the Mission style side-
walk due to the great cost involved.
Councilwoman Billig felt the Council.- should consider the cooperative attitude
of_the.BlA in .trying to develop, -.the Mssion.style sidewalk for downtown and
also their attempt to update the streetscapes in the downtown San Luis Obispo.
Councilman Dunin again.spoke.in support of this motion-and hoped to cooperate
more with the downtown merchants.
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded...by Councilman Munger, the following
resolution was introduced_: Resolution No. 4246 (1980 Series), a.resolution
awarding the contract to A.D. Construction Co.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond,'Munger and Mayor Cooper
NOES: Councilmembers Billig and Dunin
ABSENT: None
B -2 The City.Clerk reported that no bids.had been received
for "LIGHTING
OF THE SOFTBALL FIELD AT SINSHEIMER PARK'% C.P. #PR= 80 -0.-
Jim Stockton, Park and Recreation
Director, appeared before the
City Council
stating that he reviewed the bids
with several contractors and
that they had
been unable to bid originally due
to..the constraint.of time but
he felt that
.they might be able to bid-later.
He.asked to "be authorized.to
readvertise for
lighting of the softball field at
city.park:
The city staff was authorized to.proceed.
B -3 The City Clerk reported on.-the following bids received for the "LAGUNA
GOLF COURSE DRIVING.RANGE PROTECTIVE SCREEN:', City Plan No..D -35, bid estimate
$36,500 without contingency as follows':
1. A.D. Construction $34,699.82
495 Embarcadero
Morro.Bay,"CA "93442
L Security Fence $34,950.00
698 Don Pablo Drive
Santa Maria, CA 93454
3. Black Mountain-Construction.. $36,619.45
P.O. Box C
Santa.Margarita, CA
4. John.Madonna Construction $37,500.00
2061 San Luis Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
5. C.W. Fence Co. $39,733.00
2419 Palma Drive
Ventura, CA 93003
6. The Dutcher Company, Inc. $39,810.00
.148 Otto Circle
Sacramento, CA 95822
u
City Council.Minutes
September 2, 1980 - 4:OOp.m.
Page 7
Art Hird, representing the Public Services .Director,...recommended that the
low bid of A.D..Construction Company be accepted.
On.motion.of Councilman._Bond, seconded_by..Councilman Munger.,.the following
resolution -was introduced: Resolution.No. 4247..(1980 Series)., a resolution
awarding.the contract of the'Laguna Golf Course Driving Range.
Passed and.adopted.on the following roll call vote:
AYES:. Councilmembers.Bond, Munger, Billig,.Dunin.and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
S -1 The.City.Council_ reviewed. a..staff_report. prepared by David F..Romero,
Public Services Director;.on existing City Tree Planting and Maintenance Program.
Lane Wilson, Parks Superintendent, reviewed for the City Council the.background
and existing program of tree planting -and maintenance within -the city reviewing
personnel, equipment,.number.of. -trees to take care of, etc: He then reviewed
for the City Council,.seven possible alternates the Councii.'could consider as
options for continuation for the present.tree maintenance program:
I.a. Continuation of current personnel and programs with no change in policy.
I.b. Continuation of :.current personnel.and programs. Change residential
.policy to require that city plant trees, with property owner to maintain
trees.
I.C. Continuation of current personnel.and.programs. Change.residential
policy to- require that city plant trees,.property owner pay full cost
of tree purchase and•planting (including overhead).
I.d. Continuation _of.. current. personnel_and..programs. Change definition of
"Street Tree" to cover.only trees within the public right -of -way or
easement. (This would eliminate maintenace responsibility for trees
within five feet of the right -of -way).
II.a. Elimination of current personnel and programs, no contract work.
II.b. Elimination of current personnel;.replace with contract work.
III.a. Expansion of tree program with continuation of CETA or additional .
permanent city employees.
Lane Wilson then reviewed- _each.option.in. detail .for.Council'.s.consideration.
Finally, he reviewed the present downtown tree maintenance -and planting program
and the various policy changes dealing with the way the trees were to be trimmed,
topped, etc.
The City Council made the following suggestions for staff:
1) Trees not.to be planted in new tracts or subdivisions by the developer but that
a deposit (labor & trees) be made..with the city and that when the housing was
completely built, have city or a separate contractor plant the trees;
2. The Council felt the.approved.tree list should be reviewed for more appropriate
species for downtown arid - residential areas. Charles Hall Page will be
assisting in this for downtown.
3) .City maintain their own trees on.city property and the property owner take
care of trees.on his property;. use same system as with weed abatement
program if trees are -posiag_•a safety problem and owners, after notice, don't
remedy it.
4) Downtown trees should-be maintained by the city with the property owners to
pay the cost of new trees etc., city gets trees on list, owners get wholesale.
City Council Minutes
September 2, 1980.= 4:00 p.m.
Page 8
5) The property owners would.share in.the cost of.planting trees in the
residential areas./ owners maintain option of owners plant as per city
specs or city plant.
6) The city.could over the years replace the trees that have fruit, buds, or
other droppings with an adequate species of tree that would be. easier
to maintain,'not only the: trees, but the sidewalks and'adjacent property.
7) Plant trees two times per year..
After general discussion," "the.city staff .was asked to review the.report and
the Council's discussion and comments this evening-and bring back a program
to tighten up the city tree planting and maintenance policy. Hopefully,
within 30 days.
There being no further business to..come before the City Council, Mayor.Cooper
adjourned the meeting at 6:05.p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, September 2, 1980.
r
MINUTES APPROVED BY COUNCIL: Q /
9/16/80 Fitzpatrick, City Clerk .
M I N U T E S
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1980 - 7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
Pledge
Invocation by Reverend.Pat Wahl,. Inter- Varsity_Christian.Fellowship
Roll Call
Councilmembers
Present: Melanie Billig, Alan Bond, Ron Dunin, Gerald Munger and
Mayor Lynn..R. Cooper
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Lee Walton, Administrative Officer; George Thacher, City .
Attorney; J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; Henry Engen, Community
Development Director; Roger Neuman, Police Chief; John Hawley,
Engineering Associate; Jerry.Kenny, Engineering Associate
5. Mayor Cooper, on behalf of the Council.Subcommittee, nominated Lolita
Rodriquez to serve on the:Housing Authority.
On motion of Councilman.Bond, seconded by.Councilman Dunin,.Lolita.Rodriquez
was-appointed to fill the vacant term on the Housing Authority, term expires
June 30, 1981. Motion carried.
6. The City Council held a public hearing..on.a Resolution.of In
to abandon a portion.of Montalban Street.between Stenner Creek and Santa Rosa
Creek subject to various conditions established'by the Planning Commission.
Henry Engen, Community Development Director, reviewed.for.the City Council.
some of the conditions for-the abandonment.
City Council Minutes
September 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 2
Mayor Cooper declared the - public hearing.-open. No.one appeared before the
City Council for or against the proposed abandonment. Mayor Cooper declared
the public:hearing.closed.'-
On motion of Councilwoman Billig,.seconded.by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4248.(1980 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo finding and
t determining that a portion of Montalban Street between Stenner Creek and
Santa Rosa Street is unnecessary for present or.prospective street purposes
and ordering the abandonment of same subject to the .resolution becoming
effective upon the approval by the City of the final parcel map subject
to easements and conditions.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote;
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
7. The City Council held a public hearing on an appeal of a Planning
Commission decision to deny.'Use Permit.No. U0869 to allow one house on a
non - conforming lot located at.557 Hill Street.(San Luis Mountain), A /C -20
zone; Jerry Holland, appellant (agent for Spencer Kulick).
Henry Engen,.Community Development Director, reviewed the action before the
Planning Commission -on the conditional use permit to-allow a single family
house on a non - conforming lot located -on the east.flank of San Luis Mountain
off the southerly-end of Hill Street. He.reviewed for.the City Council, the
.approval of the Planning Commission.and reviewed..the 17 conditions established
by the - Planning Commission for the.development.but because_the.Planning .
Commission technically denied the use permit on .a 3 -1 vote and pursuant to the
Planning Commission's bylaws, 4 affirmative votes would.be required to approve
a.use permit. Therefore, the request was denied and-the-applicant is appealing
this.denial to the City Council. He continued that the planning staff recommended
that the use permit be denied because the proposed use is:. 1) inconsistent with
the adopted General Plan; 2) the request.is not.compatible with its surroundings
and is not an appropriate.development for the site; and 3) the request may be
detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of persons residing in the area.
He concluded his comments by stating that if-.the-Council desired -to uphold the
appeal and approve the use permit, the staff recommended that the.Council close
the public hearing and continue the item to the Council meeting.-of September 16
which would allow the staff to prepare the appropriate draft.resolution of
approval addressing environmental impact mitigating measures,.conditions to
mitigate the resource deficiencies and..conditions..of the.use permit approval.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
Glenna Dean Dovey stated.she.was opposed'.. to ..the.proposal.withoiit...some'control
over future development of this parcel.- She.siated..that: one house might not
cause irrevocable damage but more than.one.would..surely follow. -.She urged the
City Council to have a study prepared.of..the entire hillside.-of San Luis
Mountain paid for by-the property owaers.in.order to.master -plan future
development. She stated that she and.most citizens were tired.of.coming
to City "Hall to constantly-fight :development-.on San-Luis Mountain on a_one
house basis. She felt that a master plan would let.neighbors.know what the
city was planning on doing with this sensitive area including dedication of
open space, etc.
Herb Miles, 670 Lincoln Street, opposed development on.San_Luis Mountain:. He
felt the city should not allow any development above the :city water service
line. _
.Councilwoman Billig.informed.the public that.the applicant -was not the property
owner and the land was.owned.by someone else.
Brain Anthony, 575 Hill Street, was opposed to- development due to the need
for a long road construction, the lack of water-, lack of city sewer and the
dangerous erosion and drainage problems in the area. He felt there should
City Council Minutes
September 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 3
be no development allowed over the utility service line. He also felt
accessability for service vehicles, fire equipment, etc.-would be very
difficult to provide.
Arthur Hawthorne, Foothill area, opposed development on the city.'s'hillsides.
He felt that to serve development on hillsides-required cut roads, sewer lines,
water lines,.utilities, etc. and once this happened drainage and erosion problems
begin.
Diane Jefferson, C.A.C.., opposed development.of.San Luis Mountain. She felt
that this permit-was only to put money in the property-owners pocket and no
support for the quality of life in the city. There is no development over
the City's utility service line.
Dorothy Connors, League of Women's Voters, submitted.a letter for the
record as follows:
"The League of Women.Voters supports.the long -range general plan which provides
for orderly.land use, and the consideration of environmental and aesthetic
factors. We believe the existing naturalistic rural setting of the city should
be protected and enhanced. And that zoning should be compatible with the
general plan.
Rather than speaking against the use permit request, we would like to take
this opportunity to speak in favor.of following-the general plan, the zoning
regulations and other city.policies that affect this request.
The city's Zoning Regulations, 1977, states.-that the Planning Commission shall
not grant a use permit that might prove detrimental to the health, safety or
welfare of persons working or living in the vicinity.
Since this area may be beyond the four.minute_response time for emergency
services considered to be standard by the city,. and the water and.sewage
availability and water quality.are.unanswered questions, this could prove
detrimental.
The intent of the general plan, adopted by the.city and community in 1977.,
is not to allow development above the limits specified in the G.P.; in order
to protect hillside areas such as scenic backdrop.to the.city. Extension of
services beyond, places an undue burden on resources available to the rest
of the community.
The.zoning.for this area.is A /C -20.. Both.the_ general plan.and zoning regulations
places this area of the.city in this..catagory because of its scenic sensitivity,
geological and topographic aspects and historical significance.
The League would encourage the Planning Commission.and City Council.to be
responsive to the General Plan policies and goals-as adopted. It is important
to follow the zoning regulations, findings and.the.criteria on page 20, item #5 --
that is to consider-all criteria, including all general plan elements, such as
land use, noise, seismic safety, public safety and conservation. Using this
criteria and basing decisions on availability of resources, safety and health
standards, land use compatibility and consistency with the general plan make
good guidelines for your decision making."
Jeff Jorgensen reviewed for the Council prior actions .taken by the city in
protecting the hillsides from development -on a piecemeal basis., He-felt the
....Council at that time felt development. should be allowed.on the lower slopes
below the utility service line but keep the upper areas in open space: He
urged the City Council to deny the use .permit.
Richard Krejsa also .reviewed the past history of attempts to develop
the various slopes and areas of-San Luis.Mountain.. He.urged denial of
the use permit.
Jim Hoffman, designer of the proposed house to be built for Kulick, showed
sketches of how the building was to be placed.on the site with minimized
visual impact on the other areas of the city. He..even stated that the house
would be sodded with a sod roof and natural grasses.
Ken..Schwartz,.201.Buena Vista Street, urged .that.the City Council deny the
appeal and not grant the use permit. He felt.the property owner had no
right to a use permit. He must prove the need for such a. permit. The Council
must keep in.mind where other citizens of the city want the hillsides to.look
like and want they mean to them. He urged a no vote on the appeal.
1
1
City Council Minutes
September .2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 4
Bill Ryan_was opposed -to granting of.the..use permit._ He.urged the Council
to follow.the General-Plan.
Ila Harman, Highland Drive, supported the appeal-And urged_the..granting of the
use permit. She.was.not.opposed to someone.building.a house on San Luis
Mountain.
Jerry Holland,. representing. the.. prospective .property.owner,..urged the City
Council to approve-the use permit.as.being..consistent within-the-limitations
1 of.the General Plan and allow the use within.the..zoning..for.a residence in
the A/C zbne. He also asked that'ihe permit be approved with the following
conditions:
1) That the home and water tank meet ARC approval prior-to issuance -of a.
building permit;
2) Applicant to have Fire Department approval prior to issuance of.building
permit;
3). Access road to.be engineered at owners expense.to meet city.requirements
for .a.private. drive and where reasonably possible..to.meet_ARC requirements
so as to.minimize visability from lower points within the city;...
4) Applicant submit to the city for recordation., an access easement for.the
drive consistent with city zoning ordinance where the drive crosses property
other..than: the applicants;
5) .Applicant to provide an engineered septic system or pay all expenses
,to hook into-city sewer system in the manner designated by the City
Engineer;
6) .Applicant agrees, no power driven.person transporting equipment-or .
permanent irrigation system-may be.used for.landscaping.or cultivation
the property except that plateau immediately surrounding.the dwelling
without city approval;
6)..Applicant to prepare a deed.giving...to_..city..a perpetual open..space_ease-
ment on the portion of.-land in.the County retaining only the right to
use land for a.well and casual.use of.the.owner.
7) No additional grading or building shall occur.on.the site except as
authorized by..amendment.to the use permit;._.
8) Applicant shall provide an agreement.that.the entire length of the access
road shall be.maintained in a manner acceptable to the_.Fire.Department to
assure adequate access for emergency.services.
Robert Griffin, Del Norte Way, asked. that. all ..the'.testimony..presented.at
the .Planning Commission be included in..the.minutes of this meeting.. He also
felt that the City Council.should follow its.own.General.Plan and protect.
the city.'s environment. He urged the Council to deny the appeal and deny
the use permit in the public's best-interest.
Steve Speck urged the..,Council.to deny-the appeal and reject-the use.permit
on the basis of the precedence setting action which would allow more building
on hillsides.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing.closed.
Councilman:Dunin reviewed the.various comments.-made by.the public-during the
public portion -of the.testimony. He felt.that_most.comments..were based on
emotion rather.than..fact. He felt .the.most.testimony.involved the view of
the hillside from other areas of.,the city and._not.:.on.factual information such
as adequate power and water supply,.land availability for sewer drain.lines,
slope control for drainage, topography for road- construction.and the visual
impact,of the development, etc....He was also.concerned about future - density
transfers and.a.trade off for.development . of.this_.mountain at this time.
Councilwoman Billig stated-she would limit..her comments-to-this one parcel
of.land, this.one use permit and.no.other. :She agreed..this.property.was a
sensitive site and must.be "consider.ed.in. its .environmental.consideration.
She did not agree-with the negative declaration of the-environmental impact.
She felt that an EIR, should have been.done to determine if.all.utilities,.
topography, grading, archeology, etc. had been looked at. She stated that
she stated the use permit concept as this gave the Planning Commission
and Council an opportunity to review the condition of the use and its effect
on the health, public welfare of the city and of the neighborhood. She could
also not find that this development meets with the conditions of the general
plan. She felt the Council should not ignore the provisions of the general
plan that dealt with public utilities over certain elevations. She did not
feel the matter of fire protection in this high area had been adequately
answered. She agreed that some day there would be development on portions
Cit'y.Council Minutes.
September 2, 1980 — 7:30 p.m.
Page 5.
of the hillsides of San Luis.. Mountain.. but it. should.. only. -be done when.all
the information needed fora decision had-been submitted: She also did not
feel that the City Council should allow all the mitigating actions that would
take to allow development of this proposal on this hillside. She would oppose
the appeal and deny the use permit.
Councilman Bond stated he.would not support-the use permit or appeal. He
did not feel that the hillside should..be.developed..on a building by building
basis but he felt -the entire.slope.should be.planned..in detail. He would
oppose extending city sewer and water service to this development. He also ,
disagreed with the negative declaration on the environment for this property.
He felt a directed EIR should have been prepared on this parcel development
and on the house.
Councilman Munger stated this was.a very sensitive site and a great-impact
on the environment. He also felt the City Council should..recognize. and protect
property rights. He felt.that the.negative..declaration.on the environment was
adequate as presented by the staff. He felt the Planning_Commission had reviewed
this proposal very carefully.and only approved 'it subject to 17 conditions that
were very strict. .He did not feel that one house.on 18 acres of land would
desicrate this mountain and he would support the appeal and grant the use permit.
Mayor..Cooper..stated he felt that the Planning.Copmzission had approved the use
permit with 23 conditions to protect the tbmmuniiy: He felt that he would
support this appeal only if the Council would also allow four or.other houses
on similar large lots on lower slopes.-of the'mountain'. He also listed some of
the beautiful houses on hillside developments.in the city.
George Thacher, City Attorney, reviewed for the City Council the general
plan conditions that prohibit extension of sewer and water above the service
line. Also, no resolution approving or denying the appeal had been prepared
as the staff did not know which-way the Council.would be going and that if
the Council proceeds for or against he should be directed.to prepare a
resolution and bring it back to the Council for their consideration.
Councilwoman Billig moved to deny-the appeal and not grant the use permit.
Motion lost for lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded .by..Councilman.Bond,.that_ the City
Council.uphold.the. appeal and grant the use.permit but have the staff prepare
a resolution listing the conditions of approval and also adopting the environmental
statement.
Motion carried on the following roll call.vote':
AYES: Councilmembers Munger., Bond..and Mayor Cooper
NOES: Councilmembers Billig and Dunin .
ABSENT None u_c P i
Councilwoman Billig stated she was-opposed-to the motion.as.this motion sets
a precedent-which would make future denials impossible-without the.preparation
of an EIR. Much information had.not been exposed at the public.hearings either
before the Planning Commission or Council and mitigating remedies had not been
discussed.
9:35 p.m. Mayor Cooper declared a recess. 9:45 p.m. The meeting reconvened
with all Councilmembers present.
8. The City Council held a public hearing to-consider the final map for
Minor Subdivision No. 78 =131 located at.1260_Ella Street.to.combine five lots
into one lot under abandoned street rights of way; Merilee.Peck, subdivider.
Henry Engen, Community Development Director, presented.the facts to-the City
Council stating that the subdivider.was asking for final..map approval for a
City Council Minutes
September.2,.1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 6
.minor subdivision. The.approved.tentative tract.-map to..allow condominiums
on the same site.contained.a.condition that could alter..the boundaries of
the development. The.subdivision boundaries for.the..minor.subdivision and
tract map should be consistent. The Council should resolve this issue
.before approving the final map for the minor. subdivision.. He stated that
the staff position was-to accept the additional.land. area proposed and the
.adjustment-of property line and approve..the final map for..minor subdivision
no.78 -131. When the Council approved the.tentative map for Tract 807, Condition
No. 2.was attached . which stated,. "Density shall:be..reduced to.12.7 equivalent
units;'.unless at time of final map approval the subdivider..has proof..of purchase
of an additional 2300 square feet.of proper.ty,..in which case density allowed
may be 13.3 equivalent units per the area. He.concluded'his comments by saying
that the project represented as indicated to staff that the area originally
..proposed to be added to the site 2300 square feet could not.,be.cured. However
he indicated that additional area had.been.secured.in.a.slightly different
area. The.staff had asked-the representative for proof of purchase as required
and found that the area was adequate.
On motion.of Councilman Bond, seconded.by..Councilman Munger,. the City Council
finds that the- extra area.provided.by.the. developer meets the.intent of
resolution 4001 (1979 Series). .Motion carried, Councilwoman Billig.voting no.
..On motion of Councilman Munger, seconded.by Councilman Bond, the-following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No..4249 (1980 Series), a resolution
of the City of San Luis Obispo City Council finding.that portions of -Iris
and George.Streets between the improved..portions_of said streets-and the
Central Coast Chemical-Company parking lot is.no longer used for - street
purposes and abandoning same with certain reservations for utility easements.
Passed and adopted.on'the following roll..call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Munger, Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper
NOES: Councilwoman Billig
ABSENT: None
8.0 On motion of.Councilman.Bond, seconded .by.Councilman.Munger,.,the
following. resolution was .. introduced:.... Resolution .No...4250 (1980.. Series) , a
of the Council of the City of San Luis-Obispo granting approval of the
.final map..for.Minor Subdivision SLO 78- 131.located at 1260 Ella Street;
Merilee Peck, subdivider.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Munger,.Dunin and Mayor..Cooper...
NOES: Councilwoman Billig
ABSENT: None
Councilwoman Billig stated for.the.record_that she was..not.opposed.to.the
development or the proposal.per.se but she was.opposed.to the - method used
in order to increase density by getting some strips of -land to come up with
the right . square.frontage,.but not utilizing..the.land.as part.of the proposal
use requested. She'felt.this.was a subterfuge to get greater density.
9. The-City Council held a. public hearing-to consider_approving..the
final map. for. Minor.. Subdivision -No. 79- 082. -to..- create two lot s. from one lot
at 2890 South Higuera Street, the Trailer Lodge No. 168, I.O.O.F, subdivider.
Henry_Engen ieviewed..the proposal for.the City-Council stating.that,the City
Engineers had.reviewed.the property, the guarantees.for improvements had been
filed and.the final map should be.approved. .
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman .Dunin,..the - following
_resolution was introduced:. Resolution ..No..4251.(1980.Series), a resolution
of the Council of.the.City of San Luis_Obispo.granting: approval of final.map
of Minor Subdivision SLO 79. -082 located at 2890.South Higuera- Street, Chorro
Lodge No. 168, I.O.O.F., subdivider.
City Council Minutes
September 2, 1980 - ..7:30 p.m.
Page 7
Passed and ado.pted.on.the.following roll call vote:..'
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Duriin, Billig, Munger_and.Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
10. The City Council held a.public hearing.to consider approving.the
final map for Minor Subdivision No. 79 -201 to combine.-two lots.into one
lot located.at 3424 and 3432 Roberto Court;.Henrik and Susan Nielson, sub-
dividers.
John Hawley, Acting.City Engineer, reviewed the conditions:of_ the . minor.
subdivision.- stating that Public Services had_also.reviewed. the..map,.,ah
ordinance requirements had been met, no additional conditions, no . agreements
required, recommended that the final map be approved.
Mayor Cooper-declared the public-.hearing open.. No.one_.appeared before the
Council for or against: the.proposal. Mayor Cooper declared the public_ hearing
closed.
On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by.Councilman Dunin, the following
resolution was introduced:. Resolution.No. 4252 (1980 Series),.a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis.Obispo granting approval. -of -the. final
map for Minor Subdivision No. SLO 79 -201 lo_cat_ed. at 3424 and_3432.Roberto Court;
Henrik and Susan Nielson, subdividers.. _..
Passed and adopted on the following.roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond, Munger.and.Mayor- ,Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
11. At this time the City Council.-considered a.repor.t presented.by Art Hird
on behalf Dave Romero, Public Services Director,.regarding _.alternates for side -
walk construction at the southwest corner.of Foothill.Blvd. and..LaEntrada Avenue.
Art Hird stated that at the meeting.of.August 19., 1980, the. _City Council
requested a staff report listing..various alternatives to.provide for the.needs
of school children who might wish to traverse this. area on their.way.to classes.
The three alternates are listed:
1). Install standard concrete sidewalk.($2650.00)
a) Property.owner pay full.cost
b) Cost.sharing (owner, school committee, city)
c) City pay full cost
2) Install temporary improvements
a) Asphalt ($1750.00) - 2;inches
b) Redrock ($1450.00) - 4 inches
3) Make no improvement but route school- children.across existing,. lawns
(within public-right-of-way) to relocated crosswalk.
Art Hird,.on.behalf of David Romero, stated it.was.his.`recommendation.that
the city should conduct its.project in the best possible fashion with permanent
improvements which would serve the ultimate needs of the area and that the
city should . not deviate from this long- standing policy regarding financial
participation.. He., therefore, recommended the.installation:of. full _ standard
concrete sidewalk, under.the provisions,of.the city's public convenience and
necessity ordinance which calls.for the property owner to bear the entire
installation cost. He stated he had attached a resolution for the Council
to take action to make.a determination..of public convenience.and.necessity.
The City Council ... discussed with staff the.best approach.to.making these improve -
ments if they were necessary. After discussion by the Council of the.various
i
I
1
City Council Minutes
September.2,1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 8
alternatives, it was moved by. Councilwoman. Billig ,_:._s_econded.by.Councilman Munger,
..that the city ;staff contact..the.two..prop.er.ty :.owners involved.with_the.installation
of sidewalk. to.see_if..the.property..owners would-pay.-the-difference between the
$2,650'.00 for the total sidewalk installation and the.asphalt_temporary. installa-
-tion by the'City of.$ 1750:00 fb be shired.by.both..property.owners on a finish
basis. Motion carried.
The city staff brought.to the Council's attention-some additional information
1.
_dealing iaith.sugges
de tions.for_traffic_ improvements- in-the Patricia -Drive area
but.due to the fact that-they had not been.included in the Council.agenda..packet,
the Council did not wish to discuss them at this time.
10:20 p.m. There being no further.business to. -come before-the City__Council,
Mayor Cooper-adjourned the meeting:at 10:25 p.m.:.'t.o 12:10 p.m., Monday,
September 8, 1980.
MINUTES APPROVED BY COUNCIL:
10/7/80
Roll Call
Councilmembers
r '
J. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk
M I N,.0 T.E S-
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE..CITY COUNCIL .
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 85:1980 - 12:10.P.M.
COUNCIL.HEARING ROOM, CITY HALL9.990.PALM STREEET
SAN.LUIS'OBISPO,_CALIFORNIA
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
At 12:15 p.m., City Council - adjourned to an..Executive Session-to discuss
ongoing litigation.
At 12:40 p.m., City Council reconvened to Regular.Session: All
councilmembers present. .
The following staff.members attended this meeting:
Wayne Peterson, Dave Romero, Tom Gingg and-J.R. Schaaf and D. Bergoine,
representing.Nolte & Associates.
2. J. Schaaf .representing Nolte &.Associates,.reviewed for_the..City Council
their Phase I.report of-the-San Luis Obispo Creek.-Study which_presented..feasbility
and. investigations. into the.engineering;.and environmental _aspects.of-providing
flood protection along.San Luis Obispo Creek downstream of the Stenner Creek
confluence.
He reviewed.the findings
compatibility with other
to be done. He.reviewed
making process to.select
San Luis Obispo Creek.
with respects-to-level-of protection,•.cost,..potential
city plans, and.. environmental .consequences.of...any work
a.matri.X..which ... was intended.to.facilitate, the decision -
the.most... appropriate design level of protection for