Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/16/19801 1 City Council Minutes September 16, 1980.- 4:00 p.m. Page 2 1. Jay Schetzer,. representing ..the..Plaza.Anniversary Committee,.presented a check for.$1,471.59..to.the City of San Luis.Obispo_to be.used.for.a kiosk to be located.in .the - Mission Plaza. Mayor Cooper,.on behalf of the City Council, CONSENT ITEMS thanked Mr. Schetzer for this contribut C -1 On.motion of. Councilman Bond,._sec_onded_by. Councilman .. Dunin,:: - claims against the.city for.the.month_of September.1980 were..approved.and.ordered paid subject to the approval of the Administrative Officer. Motion carried. C -2. On motion of-Councilman Bond,_.seconded..by Councilman.Dunin,.minutes of the following council.meetings were approved.as amended. Motion carried. August 20,.1980 - 4:00 p.m. September 2, 1980 4:00 p.m.. C -3 On motion of..Councilmain. Bond ,..;,seconded:.by.Councilman Dunin,,_the.following resolution was introduced: Resolution No..4254..(1980'Series),,.a: resolution of the City Council of the City of San .Luis Obispo.increasing travel reimbursements. Passed and adopted on the following roll-call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None C-4 (a) On motion of. Councilman.. Bond, „seconded by. Councilman Dunin,. the following:.resolution was.introduced: Resolution No..4255..(1980.Series),.a resolutio of the Council of "the 'City of San Luis:. Obispo. approving .an. agreement. - between the city. and Telecommunications Management Corporation. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:_ AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig,-Munger-and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT:. None C-4(b) On motion of Councilman.Bond,._seconded.b Councilman.'Dunin ._the. following resolution was introduced:. Resolution:No....4256 (1980 Series),- a.resolutioi of the Council of the.City of San Luis.Obispo.increasing the general.fund appropriat. .for. the 1980/81 Fiscal Year (Planning_and•Research services,.L.A. TV - $2,720.) Passed and adopted-on-the following roll-.call vote: _ AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig,-Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT:. None C -5 On-motion of_ Councilman-Bond ;_,seconded..by.- Councilman Dunin,.:-Mayor Cooper was appointed as_the_delegate and-Vice-Mayor Dunin as..the.alternate to be the city's delegates to the League of California Cities Conference to be held in October 1980. Motion carried. C -6 Consideration of.a ... resolution.. finding._ and... determining.that.Fire.Captain Jack Wainscott.is.disabled was continued for more information for the.City Council. C -7 On motion of Councilman Bond,.seconded..by.Councilman Dunin,ithe:.following resolution was introduced: REsolution..No..4257 .(1980.Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving.an.agreement.between the city and Engineering Science,.Inc. Passed and-adopted on the following.roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None City Council Minutes September 16, 1980 - 4:00 p.m. Page 3 C -8 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by.Couricilman:Dunin, the following resolution.was introduced: Resolution No. 4258 (1980 Series), a resolution of the Council..of the City of San Luis Obispo - .approving an agreement.between..the city and People's Self Help Housing Corporation,.to.pay PSHHC - $26,400 to make its housing rehabilitation services available to San Luis Obispo residents from 7/1/80- 6/30/81. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin; Billig, Munger'ind Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None C -9 On.motion.of Councilman.Bond,.seconded by.Councilman Dunin, .the following resolution-was introduced: Resolution No..4259 (1980 Series), a resolution of the Council -of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an agreement between the city and San Luis Obispo County Hotline, Inc. to.provide- three..tho.usand six hundred dollars ($3, 600) for.services.provided' from July-1, 1980 -June 30, 1981: Passed and adopted on the following roll.call: vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Munger and Mayor-Cooper _ NOES: None _ ABSENT: None C -10 On motion of Councilman Bond ,. seconded ..by.Councilman. Dunin ,.the following-resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4260 (1980 Series) , a resolut of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving.an.agreement between the City-and Grandmother's House of-San Luis Obispo. to provide. $500 .for services .for.the. period of July 1, 1980 through June 30 .,.1981.=-- Passed.and.adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Munger and Mayor Cooper 1 NOES: None ABSENT: None C -11 On motion..of•Councilman.Bond, seconded.by.Councilman.Dunin, the report.-of. the Traffic Committee for- their.meeting of September 4,. 1980, was .- ordered received and filed. Motion carried. . C -12 On motion of Councilman.Bond,_...seconded by Councilman.Dunin, the following resolution was introduced:. Resolution.No. 4261 (1980 Series ),.a resolutio: of the.Council..of the City of San.Luis_Obispo appropriating funds for purchase of.a . portable.truck- mountable trash compactor.: $4,100...Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Munger -and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None BIDS B -1 City.Clerk reported on the. following .bids..received.:for.the ANDREW STREET FEEDER - 8 INCH WATERLINE, CITY PLAN NO:_D- 10'as.f6llows: (Engineer's Estimate $70,523.00) R..BAKER, INC.. $64,246.00 P.O. Box 419 Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 City Council Minutes September 16, 1980 - 4:00 p.m. Page 4 . FRID_JULIEN & ASSOCIATES. $71,640.98 4725 Santa Fe Road SLO. 93401 MADONNA- CONSTRUCTION ..,$88,070.00 P.O. Box 910 SLO 93406 On motion of Councilwoman Billig,. seconded.by.Councilman Munger,-the following ' resolution was introduced: Resolution..No. 4262.(1980 Series),_.a resolution awarding the.contract to R.-BAKER, INC. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Munger, Bond,.Dunin..and Mayor Cooper 1 1 NOES: None ABSENT: None B -2 City.Clerk reported .onthe.following..bids - received for-the-MONTEREY/ GARFIELD WATERLINE, CITY PLAN 'NO. D -53, as follows:. (Engineer's Estimate $6,406) - FRED JULIEN.& ASSOC. $.6,020.00 4725 Santa Fe Road SLO 93401 R. BARER, INC. $ 6,330.00 P.O.: Box 419 ..Arroyo Grande,. CA. 93420 CROUCH BROS .. 1 u, $' 6',333.84- 618 Laura Way . Paso Robles 93446 MADONNA CONSTRUCTION. $13,650.00 P.O. Box 910 SLO. 93406 On motion of Councilwoman Billig,..seconded.by.Councilman Munger, the._following resolution.was introduced:. Resolution...No...4263.(1980 Series),:a..resolution awarding the contract to _ FRED JULIEN.& ASSOCIATES. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Munger, Bond, Dunin -and Mayor Cooper NOES: . None ABSENT: None There being no further business.to "come.before the C ty.Council, Mayor Cooper adjourned the meeting at 4:40 p.m.,.to 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, September 16, 1980. COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES ON: 10/7/80 J Fitz atrick City Clerk M I N U T E S ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER '169 1980 - 7:30..P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS,.CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET Pledge Invocation by Reverend.David Smiley, San Luis Obispo Christian Church Roll Call City Council Minutes September 16,.1980 - 7.:30 p.m. Page 2 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;.Roger Neuman, Police Chief; D.F. Romero, Public Services Director 2. Councilman Dunin reported on behalf..of the-council subcommittee for appointments to.the Planning Commission, nominating Randall.Bullock..to complete the term of Commissioner. Breska on the Planning.-Commission.. Councilman Munger seconded the motion for.the.appointment. Councilwoman Billig stated'she objected.. She did feel that all the applicants for the Planning Commission vacancy had.been properly interviewed afer applying. She felt it had been the policy of the City Council to advertise for advisory members and that those people who.-applied were interviewed and listed for the council's consideration and that those councilmembers not on the subcommittee received a background report and copy of.the application.of..the nominees. She also felt that ..she.could not support the.recommendation of the council subcommittee as she had not received any information on the appointee. Councilman Bond agreed that all applicants.should have.been.interviewed for the position and then a recommendation made by the subcommittee. Councilman Dunin explained how they had reviewed..the.applications and interviewed .the newer applications.but that the other applications on file had been interviewed at a prior time. Councilman Munger felt -that all. applications. had been rev_iewed..and.that the appointee was the subcommittee's recommendation. Councilman Dunin stated that due.to. the objection.of two.councilmembers, he.would withdraw his nomination and continue it to the next council meeting. Councilman Munger stated he would withdraw his second reluctantly. Mayor Cooper would continue the matter and the matter of the change in the membership on the Planning Commission.to. the next council.meeting of. October 7, 1980 3. City Council.held a public hearing on Resolution No. 4229 (1980 Series), a resolution of intention to abandon a.portion of Marsh Street easterly of California Boulevard. D.F. Romero,,Public Services Director, reviewed.for the City Council what was being proposed by this abandonment. Mayor.Cooper declared..the public.hearing open... No:one appeared before the City for or against.the proposed abandonment.. Mayor Cooper declared the public heari .closed; and on motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Bond, the following resolution..was introduced: Resolution No. 4264 (1980 Series), a resolutio of the Council of the City of San Luis-Obispo finding.and determining.that Marsh Street,.northeasterly of California Boulevard, was unnecessary for present or prospective public street purposes and ordering the abandonment of same. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers.Billig,..Bond,_Dunin, Munger.and- Mayor..Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None City Council Minutes September 16, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. rage 3 City.Clerk was directed not to record.-the abandonment.until..the final approval of a final parcel map. 4. City Council.held.a public hearing to .consider a.city initiated rezoning of a 5 -acre parcel northeast of Flora Street..and adjacent.to easterly city limits fr A /C -5 to R- 1- S -2.5; City of San Luis Obispo;.applicant. Henry Engen, Community.Development Director, reviewed the proposal and.recommendatio of the .Planning Commission stating that-the draft EIR._and proposed R -1 -S zoning, and after receiving public testimony, the commission recommended that the property be rezoned R- 1- S =2.5. This zoning would-allow up.to two houses to built-on the ' property if use permits were granted by-the Board of Adjustments. -Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing-open. Charles French appeared before the.council..questioning water supply.to the proposed rezoning recommended by the Planning Commission. He-also questioned the designation of R- 1- S -2.5., when other similarly situated properties are not so treated. He urged that the City Council try to find some way to treat all property owners equitably on.zoning and on development .on. elevations above the utility lines. Henry Engen again..explained the Planning Commission's reasoning for making this recommendation to the City Council. Leonard Blaser, property..owner,.stated . he supported the Planning.Commission's action in order to make the.land usable to.the.people.of.San.Luis Obispo. .He.reviewed for the City Council various alternatives.discussed.•in: the EIR for development of this property, and he said R -1 -S would be satisfactory, although he no longer owned the property but has sold it to Kenneth-Smee. Mary Rice, 1138 Carla Court, stated._she..was opposed to development of the hill above her property due to problems listed in the EIR. -and not.mitigated. She also urged that the "S" designation not be dropped-from the land. She hoped the.land would stay A/C in order to keep the beautiful vistas available for the people living below. Ken Smee, property owner-and developer, said:-he had.no. plans at this..time to develop the land and did not request.any change.of land use. He said the EIR ad the rezoning.were initiated.and.paid for by the City of San Luis Obispo. Further he does not use city water now, and has not used city water for the past 30 years. Mrs. Ken Smee., property.owner, supported.the. proposal for two.houses to be developed on her and husband's newly owned property -- although they had no plans for such at this time. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing.closed. Councilwoman Billig.stated she would not..suppor.t the R- 1 -S -2.5 zoning. She felt the zoning should remain A /C- 5.to.protect..agriculture and futher, as it was beyond the urban reserve line and utility service areas.. - .Councilman Bond stated he too would support A /C -5,.no change to the.R- 1- S -2.5. Councilman Munger stated he. could-support . the-Planning Commission.'s.recommendation to R- 1- S -2.5. in order-to make the land.usable.and available to the people. Mayor Cooper also.agreed with the EIR and..-supported the R= 1 -S -2.5 which would allow two homes to be built on this large parcel of.land. On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Munger,..that.__the City Council find that the EIR prepared for this.project..has - been prepared:in accordance with. provisions of California Environmental Quality Act and the city's environmental guidelines and has been found to be adequate: Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Munger, Bond, Dunin.and -Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None 1 1 City Council Minutes September 16,.1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 4 On motion of Councilman Bond, sec onded _by..Councilwoman.Billig, that.the.City Council reject the recommendation of.the Planning .- Commission..and.leave.the zoning to A /C -5. Motion lost.on.the following-roll-call vote: AYES: . Councilmembers Bond and Billig NOES: Councilmembers Dunin,.Munger.and Mayor Cooper AYES: Councilmembers Munger, Dunin and Mayor Cooper. NOES: Councilmembers Billig:and-Bond ABSENT: None 5. City Council -held a.public-.hearing..on .... the . appeal of .a- Planning_Commission decision to deny use permit.No..BA 33 -80.to allow a deep.lot:subdivision at 3300 Johnson. Avenue, R -1 zone; Roger Brown, applicant. Henry Engen, Community Development Director,_ reported that the Planning - Commission technically denied -the use.permit request on-a.3-1 vote.. Pursuant to the Commission bylaws, four affirmative botes are required;to approve the use pursuant. The applicant was appealing this denial to the City Council. Mr. Engen continued -that the: conditional .use.permit..request.is.one of three applications pending on.this- .site. .All. applications- pertained:.to.resubdivision of the property. The tract map application..and a variance application -are on "hold" at the Planning Commission until.the use permit- appeal_was..resolved by-the City Council. The proposed subdivision.is..what is known as a "deep lot ".subdivision. The city's zoning ordinance ..requires.approveal_of -a conditional use..permit to allow a deep.lot subdivision.in order to approve the.use permit. Findings must be made including the following: "The.lots.to be subdivided cannot.:be..developed by.:the.installation _ of a standard subdivision street,_either alone or in-conjunction-with adjoining properties." In the opinion of the Community Developmen.t.Department.and the Public.Services Department staff,.this finding could not..be. made..- He concluded .that .the . staff recom- mended that the .appeal. be,.denied. and -t -he commission's action to- deny the use permit be upheld.. The staff also felt the required.findings could not be made. Although he. stated that if the council desired..to.uphold_.the.appeal and approve the use permit, staff recommended the - council have prepare the appropriate resolution, including the- threee conditions recommended established by the Planning.Commission. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing -open. Roger-Brown, developer, explained.how he_ proposed.; to_ develop:the_five.lots involved in this development.. He listed the.background:of_ how -.this -whole program.started ' when the city came to:him asking that he place a sidewalk on the -full frontage along.Johnson Avenue on the five lots. He continued that this property was difficult -to develop.-as there were..currently five parcels under different ownership including _an.existing..residence..on_ the site. There is an existing storm drain and sewer - easement through,the- property. He indicated.that they had hoped..to. establish the.storm..drain• within the proposed common driveway easement of.the -deep lot ordinance and that.the sewer, easement could go down the same:driveway easement.. He felt the proposal would give the development a sense of continuity, as well.as.being the most equitable for all parties concerned. He added that.the five parcels as they presently exist would mean five possible driveways off of Johnson Avenue which would create a traffic hazard. The deep lot subdivision would create only two driveways. He felt that ABSENT: None ' On motion..of Councilman.Munger,,seconded by..Councilman.Dunin, the_following Ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 863.(1980 Series),...an.Ordinance of the -City of San. -Luis Obispo - amending the official .. map of the city to rezone approximately 5 acres north of Carla.-and E1.Caserio Courts from A /C -5 to R- 1 -S -2.5 (Applicant: City of San Luis Obispo,.CR0795). Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Munger, Dunin and Mayor Cooper. NOES: Councilmembers Billig:and-Bond ABSENT: None 5. City Council -held a.public-.hearing..on .... the . appeal of .a- Planning_Commission decision to deny use permit.No..BA 33 -80.to allow a deep.lot:subdivision at 3300 Johnson. Avenue, R -1 zone; Roger Brown, applicant. Henry Engen, Community Development Director,_ reported that the Planning - Commission technically denied -the use.permit request on-a.3-1 vote.. Pursuant to the Commission bylaws, four affirmative botes are required;to approve the use pursuant. The applicant was appealing this denial to the City Council. Mr. Engen continued -that the: conditional .use.permit..request.is.one of three applications pending on.this- .site. .All. applications- pertained:.to.resubdivision of the property. The tract map application..and a variance application -are on "hold" at the Planning Commission until.the use permit- appeal_was..resolved by-the City Council. The proposed subdivision.is..what is known as a "deep lot ".subdivision. The city's zoning ordinance ..requires.approveal_of -a conditional use..permit to allow a deep.lot subdivision.in order to approve the.use permit. Findings must be made including the following: "The.lots.to be subdivided cannot.:be..developed by.:the.installation _ of a standard subdivision street,_either alone or in-conjunction-with adjoining properties." In the opinion of the Community Developmen.t.Department.and the Public.Services Department staff,.this finding could not..be. made..- He concluded .that .the . staff recom- mended that the .appeal. be,.denied. and -t -he commission's action to- deny the use permit be upheld.. The staff also felt the required.findings could not be made. Although he. stated that if the council desired..to.uphold_.the.appeal and approve the use permit, staff recommended the - council have prepare the appropriate resolution, including the- threee conditions recommended established by the Planning.Commission. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing -open. Roger-Brown, developer, explained.how he_ proposed.; to_ develop:the_five.lots involved in this development.. He listed the.background:of_ how -.this -whole program.started ' when the city came to:him asking that he place a sidewalk on the -full frontage along.Johnson Avenue on the five lots. He continued that this property was difficult -to develop.-as there were..currently five parcels under different ownership including _an.existing..residence..on_ the site. There is an existing storm drain and sewer - easement through,the- property. He indicated.that they had hoped..to. establish the.storm..drain• within the proposed common driveway easement of.the -deep lot ordinance and that.the sewer, easement could go down the same:driveway easement.. He felt the proposal would give the development a sense of continuity, as well.as.being the most equitable for all parties concerned. He added that.the five parcels as they presently exist would mean five possible driveways off of Johnson Avenue which would create a traffic hazard. The deep lot subdivision would create only two driveways. He felt that City Council Minutes September .16,. 1980 .- ..7:30 p.m. Page 5 the cul -de- sacs. suggested.. by. staf f ... would_.cause =more:'problems. The cul -de -sacs would be on the average of..100..to 120 feet deep which.would not be very deep for a street off -.a This would-also create-very little off - street parking. Seven off - street parking spaces..were..created.in.the developers' proposal. He felt that staff proposal I and II.would..create hazards..since they proposed short.access to.Johnson Avenue. He felt the common driveway as.he proposed gives a nicer environment witti.less paving, off - street guest parking and more privacy. He also felt that if the council- could-limit structures to one,storv. Charles Maule, 3219 Flora Street, questioned the developer.'s.right.to.develop mu story buildings and hoped the city would require Brown to only,.build one -story building. Leonard Lenger, engineer for Roger Brown, state_d..that if.the proposal of Brown was accepted for the deep lot provisions, it .would eliminate.all.needs for a variance to develop the land. He felt that the deep lot subdivision proposal was a much better proposal than the cul-de -sac development by the city staff. , 3215 Flora Street, was concerned with what was to be built on the new lots in-order not to cut off his view from Flora Street. He also objected to bringing high density into this area of Johnson Avenue. Jack Foster, property owner of two lots,.stated that this-was an R- l.zone and not high density as the prior speaker-stated. .He'felt.the deep 1ot_progosal.was.better than Alternates I..& II proposals with cul -de -sac streets. He would support Brown's proposal for a 10 lot develop. If not, he would sell his.lot separately and let .. the people develop them as individual properties.. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing.- closed. City Council discussed with Henry Engen the.alternatives to development of the land .as discussed by the.Planning Commission. Councilman Munger stated he.could.support.the Planning Commission action and fin He would support the appeal. Councilman Dunin stated he could support.the.appeal if lots 1, 2.& 3 were developed into..two lots and only allowed two-.driveways to.Johnson Avenue, and have the ARC look.to mitigating the-noise, etc., on proposed lots 1, 6, 7. & 11. Property should be developed so as not to be an eyesore. Councilwoman Billig stated she.would.recommend the use.permit be denied.. She felt there had.to_be a better way to develop this property. 'She felt the property owner could mitigate the drainage problems listed in the statement. She did.not feel that the deep lot ordinance provisions were the..way.to go on .this Particular development. She suggested that.possibly a way to develop.this:.particular piece of land, due-to it sensitivity and size and shape, would be through the Planned-Development (PD) proposz She felt in this way, the various Problems of drainage, sewer easements, and access, could be mitigated. Mayor. Cooper'.:stated.he would 'support..the Planning.. Commission's. action. with the. same conditions as.submitted.by.the Planning Commission, except he would not require that all the lots.be subject to ARC approval. He felt that no two story homes should be built on lots 1 and 2. On motion of.Mayor Cooper ,..seconded...by.Councilman Bond,:the.following.resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4268.(1980 Series), a resolution-of the Council of the City.-of San LUis'Obispo upholding .an-appeal from a Planning Commission denial of an application for use permit (BA 33- 80,.330 Johnson.AVenue,.Roger Brown and Jack Foster, Applicants), subject to the following conditions: 1. Lots 1, 2 and 3 shall be combined.to.form two lots. 2.. Development of lots land 2 shall be limited to not.more than single -story structures. 3. Subdivider shall install a directory sign at..street.frontage.adjacent to common driveways showing street addresses- for:interior.lots, to the approval of the Community Development Director. Passed and .adopted on the following roll call.vote: AYES: Mayor Cooper, Councilmembers Bond, Dunin and :Munger NOES: Councilwoman Billig City Council.Minutes September 16, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 6 ABSENT: None At.9:05 p.m., Mayor Cooper.declared a..recess. .At.9:25.p.m.., council reconvened with all councilmembers present. I . 6. City Council._ held _A. public hearing:to...consider a. request.to_modify condition no. l of approved use permit.to ... allow.a -new 3 -story social services ..office complex.on South Higuera Street.near.Margarita Avenue;.and. secondly, .a public.hearing to.request.approval.an overall development plan different than ...that approved by the.Planning Commission for C -Nand PF -S zone property on the west side of South Higuera STreet, north on Prado Road (site of Human Services �. Center and the -Padre Plaza neighborhood.shopping.center). Henry Engen; Community Development Director, -stated .that ._the.. applicant. -was .asking that the council.modify one.condition of..the._approved . use..permit.;The applicant was asking that the overall development.plan required of.`.the use.permit.approval be approved that.it is.different than the one.approved by the Planning Commission. Further, the staff felt that condition..no_..l..of the..approved..use permit..should be amen as asked.for by the applicant.and recommended by the Planning-Commission.-and also, the staff.felt the council.should support and accept .the overall development plan approved by the Planning Commission.. He stated the reason.this matter ..was.before..- the.City Council was.that.the.City Council in January 1980; upheld an appeal of the Planning Commission.denial and approved the use permit allowing the new Social Services complex. In. approving the use permit, -the council established certain conditions and now that these conditions were asked to.be amended, the council.should be the ones to review those. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council amend Use Permit U0794, condition no. 1 to.read as follows: 1. Applicant shall - revise the submitted.site plan to the approval .of-the Community.Development Director to .provide for:. A. Elimination to the driveway. between '.the.existing.Employment Development Department office building and the proposed.social services-office building. B. Redesign of the existing.EDD. entry drive to make it a;major entryway to the overall Human Services complex. C. Elimination of access to Higuera Street north.of the present EDD entry. 2.. Planning Commission.also.recommended that the.council approve the overall development plan for the following reasons: A. Eliminating the vehicular connection-between buildings B & C.was partially a..trade -off for .permitting a.common access-driveway.. B. Eliminating . the parking- lot.aisles from-accessing the common access entry near Higuera would preclude traffic - conflict points. C. Moving the bus .stop was desirable to serve population east of Higuera. Southbound passengers can still.get off by Building G. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. Bruce.Fraser, MDW representative,.stated he was :available,to..answer any questions the City Council.might have. He.stated.that.Mr. Engen had presented the facts and presented the property owners request - fairly. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing.closed. Councilman.Dunin.stated he.was opposed to the. - elimination of .a driveway between the PF zone properties and.the:CN zone properties... He.felt if a_person was.leaving from zoned area to another they would have.to go.out.into Higuera Street and.re -enter a different driveway.which he felt would cause further.traffic conflicts on Higuera St. ' Mr. Fraser stated upon question that the developer wanted.the driveway- .access behind Building "C" connecting -the P -F zones and the C -N zones so that delivery and trash collection could be made at the rear of the building. Councilwoman Billig stated she could .support:the.modification.of Condition No. 1 and also approve the Planning Commission 's.overall.development plan.. Councilman Bond agreed that he could support the modification of Condition No. 1 and also approve the overall plan. Councilman.Munger.stated he agreed.with the-modification of..Condition No. 1, but he could support Alternate B as presented by the developer for the overall plan of the complex. City Council Minutes September 16, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 7 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Munger, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4269 (1980 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo amending Use Permit U0794 (U0794 -A 3220 S. Higuera Street, Walter Bros., applicant.) Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Munger, Billig, Dunin and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None F- 7. City Council held a public hearing to consider an extension for submission of the final tract map creating a 104 -lot residential subdivision at 850 Los Osos Valley Road, R -1 and A /C -20 zones; Valleycrest Land Company, subdivider. Henry Engen, Community Development Director, reviewed the request for extension of time for Tract 683 stating that the Planning Commission unanimously approved and recommended the council extend a 12 -month period of time for filing of the final map of Tract 683, subject to all previousl conditions of the tentative map approval. The 12 -month time extension would go on to September 5, 1981. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. Stan Bell, developer, appeared before the City Council asking the City Council to support the Planning Commission's recommendation for an extension of time to file the final map on Tract No. 683. He stated one of the problems they have had has been to complete financing and they hope to have that settled in the next few months. Betty Griffin questioned the need for further delays in developing this tract. She felt that the developer should proceed or it should go back undeveloped land. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed. I On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4265 (1980 Series), a resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving a 12 -month time extension for Tract No. 683, to September 5, 1981. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Billig, Bond, Munger and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None 8. City Council held a public hearing on a Planning Commission recommendation to approve the tentative map for Minor Subidivision No. 80 -87 to combine two lots into one lot located at 787 Francis STreet, M Zone; Steve Smith, subdivider. Henry Engen, Community Development Director, stated that the Planning Commission unanimously recommended the council approve the tentative parcel map for minor subdivision No. 80 -87, located at 787 Francis Street, subject to findings listed in the resolution. He explained that primarily what was being accomplished was the combining of two small lots into one large lot, basically eliminating the line between the two lots, to permit building across the lot. 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 clo On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4266 (1980 Series), a resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval of a tentative map for Minor Subdivision 80 -87, located at 787 Francis Street. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: I 1 AYES: NOES: City Council Minutes September 16, 1980 - 7:30 p.m: Page 8 Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond, Munger -and Mayor Cooper None. .. ABSENT.: . None 9. .. City Council - considered a resolution upholding an appeal by Jerry Holland (agent for Spencer Kulick), for Use Permit No. U0869, to allow a house on a non- conforming lot located at 557 Hill Street (San Luis Mountain), A/C 20 zone, continued from September 2, 1980. Mayor Cooper announced that.. before .discussing..the.resolution. It was his - •aa s , understanding that there had been a change amongst_the City.Council..and that one of the members who had supported the resolution two weeks ago was now opposed to it and that before discussing iti.the.-council should decide if it were to be passed or rejected. Councilwoman Billig moved that.the..City Council.not adopt the resolution - prepared for.this meeting and that.the.appeal be denied based on the following findings: 1. That this request.is not compatible with its.surroundings,.is not an development for this particular site..considering its location -on the side of the scenic, natural resource of the community above .the.heigth of all the houses in that neighborhood and:is visually prominent from many areas of the community. 2. Another finding is that -this request-is not consistent with the General Plan in that the house interruprts the scenic and open space area on. -the side of the significant natural feature of the community, San Luis Mountain, when the General Plan says that it should.be left generally in.the natural state. 3. THis request would be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the people residing in this area. Also included in the motion_is..the intent to direct the City Attorney to draw up a resolution .which.is-consistent.with this motion and to direct-and authorize the Mayor to sign the.motion ... resolution.: Mayor Cooper said the..motion had been -made. Is there a'.second to that motion. Councilman Bond stated he -would second that motion. Resolution No. 4267 (1980 Series) ,_.a..resolution of.-the Council of.the.City of San Luis Obispo denying.an appeal from--a.-Planning-Commission'-denial.-of-.an application -for a Use Permit (U0869 -557 Hill Street, Spencer Kulick'; applicant). Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Bond and Dunin NOES: _ Councilman Munger and-Mayor Cooper ABSENT: None Councilman Bond.then stated.as far.as_ this particular.issue was concerned, that the Planning Commission and City Council . and staff all seem ..to..have a..different interpretation and feeling relative to.the General Plan. He-felt that unless the three seperate. groups -got together and.discussed their feelings regarding the General Plan, this type of confused .development.would.continue. He suggested the City Administrative Officer set up a meeting.with_the.Planning Commission to .discuss the General Plan as it.ekists, what.changes the Planning Commission and City Council wish to make, and to proceed on.a.more orderly basis. Councilwoman Billig agreed with Councilman Bond-that the Planning Commission and council must meet and .establish .a policy-on all.hillside'.developments.and to avoid these long council.-meetings on a. one: buildin .g- by.-one.building.proposal. She then submitted several suggestions for digcussion..of..'standards_for development of hillside properties. Councilman Dunin.also.reminded.the City .Council.that_it...had..been over.a year, he thought, since the staff.had..been_directed..to bring..to.the_Planning Commission some hillside standards for adoption. City Council Minutes September 16, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Page 9 10. City Council considered adoption.of an.ordinance- establishing a Human Relations Commission, terms of office, purposes, functions, etc. Jackie Megow, staff member for the Human Relations Commission, appeared.before the City Council stating that due.to-pr.ior..commitments,.none of- the.members of the HRC culd attend this meeting.to discuss this.proposed.ordinance with the council and they asked here to ask the .City Council to-continue the matter until they had an .opportunit.y_ to:meet with' 'the council. ._She. stated that-the HRC was. unalternately opposed to.the proposed.ordinance in reducing membership:. She.felt that now that the-City Council-had reduced the professional staff; that the members of the HRC were doing more work.and by having more members, this work could be spread around. City.Council agreed and stated they.would have_a meeting sometime in the future with the Human.Relations Commission.to.review the proposed ordinance. 11. City Council considered the adoption of.an.ordinance.reestablishing and defining membership duties and responsibilities.of the Mass Transportation Committee, including composition, term of office, method of appointment and functions. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No..one_ appeared before the City Council for.or against the proposed ordinance. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed: On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Munger, the following ordinance was introduced:. Ordinance No....864..(1980 Series), an ordinance of the City Council of the City.of San Luis Obispo.establishing.a Mass Transportation Committee,. was introduced and passed to -print on the following roll' -call vote: AYES: Councilmembers.Billig, Munger, Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None 12. City Council considered an amendment.to -.the Utility Tax.Ordinance; dealing with the refunds to low income housing,.increasing..limits..of amount of refunds, etc. Mayor Cooper declared-the public hearing open.. No one appeared.before.the City Council for or against the proposed ordinance. Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing.closed. On motion-of Mayor Cooper, seconded by...Councilwoman.Billig; the following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 868 (1980 Series), an ordinance of the City Council of.the City of San Luis Obispo amending sections of Article VI, Chapter 6, of the Municipal Code - Refunds /Low Income Households. Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote: AYES: Mayor Cooper, .Councilmembers.Billig.,..Bond, Dunin and Munger NOES: . None ABSENT: None There being no further business to..come.before...the City.Council,_Mayor Cooper adjourned the meeting to 7:30 a.m., Friday, September 19, 1980. COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES ON: 10/7/80 , ;0W., itzpatrick, City Clerk