Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/06/1961ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING .July 6, 1961 - -- 7:30 P. M. CITY HALL Invocation was given by Mayor Clay P. Davidson. ROLL CALL: Present - Miss Margaret M. McNeil, R. L. Graves,. Jr..,.Donald Q. Miller, Clay P. Davidson. Absent - Gerald W..Shipsey. CITY STAFF PRESENT: Administrative.Officer Miller,.City Engineer Romero, City Attorney-Houser, Planning and Building Director Abraham, Water Superintendent Thompson, City Clerk Fitzpatrick.. 1. The City Council discussed the plan line program presently in.opeEation in the City of San Luis Obispo, policies applying thereto, and problems of pending litigation on the same subject. Mr. Houser, City Attorney,. explained to the City Council the present plan line ordinances and various policies relative to- street widening. Mr. Houser recommended that the present ordinances be repealed and that a new ordinance or resolution be enacted adopting similar provisions without the provisions requiringgthe recording of the plan.line map, but merely requiring that the maps be on file in the Engineers' Office, Building Department Office, and the City Clerk's Office for the guidance of the public. Mr. Houser stated he believed that under his proposal the City would.continue to move along just as rapidly on a street widening program.as is being done under the present ordinance. He further stated that his recommendation for repeal of the existing ordinance and enactment of a new resolution or ordinance would only be valid if the proponents of the suit against the City with- draw the suit. ,. The City Council then discussed the proposal recommended by Mr. Houser, ' City Attorney, repealing the present plan line ordinance. The Council also discussed the effect of plan lines on building setbacks on streets with various zoning uses. Mr. Houser stated that he believed the only.way the recorded maps on file in the County Recorder's office could be made ineffective would be for the City to repeal the entire ordinance. Mr. Houser stated that after repealing the present plan line ordinances and initiating a new plan line or setback resolution!,-,the City Council can then decide just how far they wished to go in acquisition of property for street widening. Councilman Graves suggested that the City Council consider the following policy matters on street widening. A) Establish priority for development of all plan line streets in the City. Mayor Davidson stated that before the Council became involved with new policies for plan line widening that the Council should first decide whether the ordinance should be repealed as recommended by the City Attorney. Councilman Miller present ordinance cies of the Counc means of the plan Davidson that the line ordinance. stated that he agreed with and adopt a new ordinance 11 and explaining just what line program, but first he City Council should decide the proponents to repeal the Dr resolution containing the poli- the Council intends to do by stated he agreed with Mayor on repealing the present plan ' Mr. Houser, City Attorney, suggested that the new plan line program of the City be adopted by resolution so that changes could be made as the City Council developed new policies for inclusion in the resolution. Councilman Graves suggested that in adopting the new resolution, the Coun- cil consider the following policy matters on street widening: A) Establish priorities for plan line streets as much as possible. B) That moneys be budgeted for plan line development each year. C) Council establish a schedule for acquisition of property from the center of town to the outskirts. D) That the City make proper reimbursements to property owners for land -acquisition. E) Negotiate with property awners forseverange damage. such as retaining walls, landscaping, utilities, and suggested that a City citizens' committee be appointed to arbitrate problems with property owners and the City. - Mayor Davidson stated that he agreed with the suggestions presented by Mr. Graves for fair treatment to the property owners by the City. He sug- gested that the resolution should be left open so that in negotiating with property owners the cost of improvements being put in by-the City could be offset.by the cost of the land on an exchange basis. He also objected to the arbitrating committee. R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, suggested.that before the City Council repealed the present ordinance that the new resolution be prepared so that .it can go into effect upon expiration of the repealed ordinance so that _there will be continuity in the program. Mr. Romero, City Engineer, upon question of the City Council, stated he estimated the cost of. installing curb, gutter, and sidewalk on all present plan line streets would be over $500,000. . Mr. Abraham, Planning Director, suggested that when the City Council was reconsidering its plan line policies that it consider changing the require- ments of six -foot sidewalks in residential areas and eleven -foot sidewalks in commercial and industrial areas with the new standard of four -foot side- walks in residential areas and eight -foot sidewalks in commercial and in- dustrial areas. At this point Mr. Romero,. City Engineer, brought up the matter of street widening on Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road stating that on Laurel Lane along the Southwood area the street was being widendd eighteen feet with a six - foot sidewalk area, but that adjoining it at the corner of Laurel lane and Orcutt Road the widening would be twenty -three feet with an eleven -foot sidewalk area, but that adjoining it,-at the corner of Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road the widening would be twenty -three feet with an eleven -foot sidewalk area, and as there is no plan line on Orcutt, he supposed they would carry the same requirement. Mr. Romero stated that the City Planning Commission recommended that the street widening and sidewalk on Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road be carried the same as in the sidewalk area -- eighteen feet widening and six -foot sidewalk area -- eighteen feet widening and six -foot sidewalk. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Graves, the City Council accepted the recommendation.of the City Planning Commission for street widening at the corner of Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane that the land taken be eighteen feet with six -foot sidewalk area. Motion carried. The City Council discussed the possibility of studying future construction of a crossing of the Southern Pacific Company tracks at Orcutt Road for street planning and development of the adjacent area. Councilman Miller suggested that the City prepare preliminary plans for railroad crossing at Orcutt Road, Foothill Boulevard, and California Boulevard. .After discussion by the City Council, it was moved by Councilman Miller, seconded by Council- man Graves, authorizing David F. Romero to secure a proposal from engineers for design of a crossing at Foothill Boulevard and California Boulevard. After discussion by the City Council, it was moved by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Graves, authorizing David F. Romero to secure a pro- posal from engineers for design of a crossing at Foothill Boulevard and California Boulevard and Orcutt Road at the Southern Pacific Tracks. 2. At this time the City Council discussed the estimated costs of enlargements of the sewer plant and construction of a new water filtration plant and share to be paid by the California State Polytechnic College. These figures were requested by the administration at Cal Poly so they could begin scope studies by the various departments for inclusion at future budget sessions. Mr. Thompson, Water Superintendent, presented a detailed report on the various factors involved in construction of a new.filtration plant and the share to be borne by the College. It appeared that the College's share would be approximately $403,000.