Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/30/19615. Councilman Graves asked the Council that all Department Heads not on the agenda be excused from attending City Council Meetings as many of the. - department heads attend other commission meetings and are required to be out several times a week on City Business, and should not be required to sit through a City Council Meeting unless some matter effecting their department was included on the Agenda. He further suggested that if they have a matter to report, it should be placed on the first part of the Agenda, after which they would be excused from the meeting. e. R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer agreed with Councilman Graves, and stated that many cities did not have the department heads attending the meetings, but the City Manager; or. Administrative Officer reported for each department and if any matter was.required, it would.be prepared in writing for the next Council Meeting by.the department concerned. After discussion by the Council, the Mayor suggested that this could be done by arranging the agenda for departmental reports during the first part of the meeting between 7:30 and 8:OO P..M., and-the public hearing then could be heard at 8:30 P. M. On motion of Councilwoman McNeil, seconded by Councilman,Graves, the Meeting adjourned at 11:30 P. M. Approved this 30th day of October; 1961 y Clerk SPECIAL CALLED MEETING October 30,1961 - -- 7:30 P. M. CITY HALL Invocation was given by Mayo= Clay P. Davidson ROLL CALL: Present - Miss Margaret M. McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P. Davidson Absent - None CITY STAFF PRESENT - Planning Director Abraham, City Attorney Houser;, Admini- strative Officer Miller, City Engineer Romero, City Clerk Fitzpatrick 1. The City Council considered approval of.the final map of-Tract-No:•230, Laguna Lake Homes. Mr. Romero, City Engineer explained that there were no special provisions in the subdivision agreement. On motion of Coun- cilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Miller, the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 862 (1961 Series) "A resolution approving the final map of Tract No. 230." Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Miss Margaret McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P. .Davidson NOES: 'None ABSENT: None On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Shipsey, the fol- lowing resolution was introduced: 1 I I 1 J RESOLUTION NO. 860 (1961 Series) "A resolution increasing the 1961 -62 budget ", Skinner Inspection Fees No. 3. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Miss Margaret M. McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P. Davidson NOES: None ABSENT: None la. The City Council considered the final map of Tract No. 231, Laguna Lake Homes. Mr. Romero, City Engineer explained that no special provisions were included in the agreement. Mrc Jean Abraham, City Planning Director reported to the City Council that Ray.Skinner, Subdivider, was appealing to the Council from the denial by the Planning Commission of the variance on several lots in both Tract 230, and 231, and was requesting a rear lot variance as the houses are just too large for the lots.. Mr. Abraham further stated that while that while this requested variance appeal did not affect the acceptance of the final map, he wished to bring it to the Council's attention so that the Council would be aware of the pro - lem. Mr. Romero, City Engineer stated that this matter of variance did not affect the final map and should not be considered at this time, but when the appeal was made by the subdivider. Mr. Romero also reminded the City Council that similar variances had also been granted other subdividers in the past. Mr. Romero recommended acceptance of the final map of Tract No."231. On motion of'Councilman•Graves, seconded by Councilman Miller, the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 863 (1961 Series) "A resolution approving the final map of Tract No'. 231." Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Miss Margaret M. McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P. Davidson NOES: None ABSENT: None On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Shipsey, the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 861 (1961 Series) "A Resolution increasing the 1961 -62 Budget ", establishing account No. 211.14, Skinner Inspection Fees No. 4. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Miss Margaret M. McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P. Davidson NOES: None ABSENT: None 2. Minutes of October 16, Page 6, Item 11, corrected as follows: "Mayor Davidson presented to the City Council negotiations which are under way with the Grading and Contractors Association to supply at least 12 pieces of earth - moving equipment and men for two full days work, and to move at least 10,000 cubic yards of earth under direction of the City Engineer, in accordance with the Laguna Lake Master Plan. City to pay the Association $2,000.00 for the work. Mayor Davidson also explained negotiations going on with repre- sentatives of the Operating Engineers Union whose men will operate the equipment. The City and Union Representatives will be meeting on the 17th of October to see if the Union will donate the labor to operate the equipment to further develop Laguna Lake. The City Council discussed the proposal as presented by the Mayor re- garding the Grading and Contractors Association and Operating Engineers Union. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilwoman McNeil, the City was authorized to contract with the -above groups with an expendi- ture up to $2,000.00. .Motion carried. ". Item 12, Traffic Committee Report No. 61- 10 -2T, following action was rescinded on motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilwoman McNeil, motion.carried. Rescinded Recommendation approved on motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Graves, but the obstruction to visibility be corrected at corners only." Also rescinded 61- 10 -4T. Paragraph (a) The four (4) green spaces on the south side of Marsh, west of Morro be replaced with four (4) parking meter spaces; On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilwoman McNeil, the' minutes of the Council Meetings of October 3, 4, 10, 16, and 18, 1961, were approved as amended. 3. At this time, Mr. Houser, City Attorney explained to the City Council the request of the League of California Cities for all Cities to amend their sales and use tax ordinance under the uniform sales and use tax law, to conform with legislation passed during the last State Legis- lative Session. Mr. Houser explained that the changes were primarily administrative changes to make the collection of the sales and use tax more equitable to the taxpayer and the governmental agencies con- cerned. On motion of Councilman Shipsey, seconded by Councilman Miller, the following ordinance was passed to print on the following roll call vote: ORDINANCE NO. 206 (1961 Series)'hn ordinance to amend portions of Article 6, Chapter 4, of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code relating to sales and use tax." AYES: Miss Margaret M. McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P. Davidson NOES: None ABSENT: None 3a. On motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Shipsey, fol- lowing resolution was passed and adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 859 (1961 Series) "A resolution increasing the 1961 -62 Budget by increasing Park Budget Account No. 252.6 by $2,000.00. Passed on following roll call.vote: AYES: Miss Margaret M. McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P. Davidson NOES: None ABSENT: None 4. At this time the City Council considered establishing certain policies to implement the recently passed Building Setback Ordinance. The Mayor suggested in order to keep the various issues separate, the City Council should discuss: 1. A policy for normal residential lots. 2. Small subdivisions. 3. Large or commercial type subdivisions. L 1 1 If the owner will dedicate the necessary right -of -way for the street widening, the City will give the owner credit for the value of the pro- perty dedicated, not to exceed.the cost of installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk and normal grading. At this point the City Council discussed what was normal grading. After some discussion normal grading was defined as follows: Normal grading that might be involved at the previous curb line on a standard installation. Mr. Romero, City Engineer asked the Council's guidance on how to proceed if a property already had curb, gutter and sidewalk on the old City line. Would the City replace curb, gutter and sidewalk at the City's expense for the dedication of the land? It was -the common consent of the Council to continue the policy. City Council discussed the method of compensation to the property owner for land didicated for street widening. Councilman Graves suggested that the matter of payment for land acquired for street widening by the City be established and listed in policy documents. Councilman Miller suggested that when a property owner, on a setback street having full improvements, deeds his property for street widening, said property owner will be com- pensated at the appraised market value and the City will relocate all improvements when money is available. Councilman Graves suggested that the policy adopted by the Council contain provisions that the issuance of building permits -and connection of utilities not be conditioned on the dedication of land for street widening purposes. If the property owner does not wish to construct curb, gutter, and side- walk at the new building.setback line, then the permits should be issued but a cash deposit be made with the City to guarantee placement of improve- ments at-a future date after negotiation with the City Council. The City Council then discussed street widening policy in relation to the issuance of Use Permits and variances for specific uses. Councilman Graves suggested that the issuance of the Use Permits or variances may be con- ditioned on increased density of the property. Mr. Romero, City Engineer, stated that the dedication of right -of -way for street widening in the past has been a condition of granting the Use Permit, or variance when the Planning Commission determined that the Use Permit or variance would increase traffic flows or population density. Councilman Graves suggested when a Use Permit or variance is requested, then dedication of land for street widening should be acquired when the density exceeds 5,400 ft. per family unit, or when in the opinion of the Planning Commission traffic flows would be increased on major streets. Councilman Graves stated dedication of right -of -way for street widening purposes may be required in connection with a Use Permit or variance where the land density exceeds 5,400 sq. ft. per family unit or where, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, traffic needs are increased as a re- sult of the improvement. After discussion the following proposed policy was adopted on normal residential lots: On single- normal.sized residential lots, if the owner will dedicate the necessary right -of -way for the street widening, the City will give the owner credit for the value of the property de- dicated not to exceed the cost of installing the curb, gutter, 1 sidewalk, and normal grading that might be involved at the pre- vious curb line on a standard installation. If the cost of these improvements exceed the land value, then the property owner will !°L2 tpay the City the amount of such excess costs. The City will provide all necessary engineering and preparation of documents and will pay for the cost of relocation of utilities, replacement of landscaping,.and replacement of driveways. The City will install a retaining wall whenever a 2:1 slope in a cut or fill will create a front yard substantially less than the re- quired setback. The time when improvements would be installed by the City would depend upon the funds budgeted for these purposes and the written agreement between the City and the property owner would provide that the dedication of the right -of -way would be subject to the conditions that the City would install the necessary improvements when the monies are available. At this time City Council discussed setback policy as it applied to major subdivisions consisting of five lots or more which would be required to dedicate the necessary land for street widening, and who would follow the normal procedure regarding the installation of curb, gutter and sidewalks. On residential parcels that'are large enough to_ be subdivided, if the property owner will dedicate the necessary right-of-way for street widening, the City will give the owner credit for the value of the property dedicated not to exceed the cost of installing the curb, gutter, sidewalk and grading: If the cost of these improvements exceed the land value then the property owner will pay the City the amount of such excess costs. In either event, the property owner will covenant with the City-that-in any subsequent sub- division or subdivisions the owner would reimburse the City for all im- provement costs except an amount equal to improvement of one normal re- sidential frontage or that parcel retained by the subdivider. Councilman Miller suggested that regardless of size of the-subdivision, the City negotiate with all subdividers,-on the first four lots the City -would negotiate for street widening and improvements, but with all lots above four that'are subdivided, the subdivider will put in the improvements and deed all the land for street widening, or.-:as the City minimum lot width is 60 ft., then four lots times 60 ft., or 240 ft. of frontage would be negotiated for by the City, and the City would contribute to improvements on the 240 ft. frontage. Everything over 240 ft. frontage would be deeded to the City and improvements placed by the subdivider. Councilman Miller urged that special consideration be made'for small subdividers of four lots or less. 10:05 P. M. Councilman Shipsey left the meeting. 10:05 P. M. the Mayor 'called a recess. 10:20 P. M. meeting reconvened. Present: Miss Margaret M. McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller, Clay P. Davidson Absent: Gerald W. Shipsey Mayor Davidson stated he was not in favor of the City paying for the' sub'- divider's: property, as the owner can and will get his money back from the sale of said lots, and he does add to traffic congestion and'agreed that the proposal for resubdivided lots is fair if a covenant 'runs with the land. Upon question Mr. Houser, City Attorney explained that the covenant would run forever with the land, or until the subdivision was completed at which time the City Would remove the covenant that was recorded to run with the land. City Council discussed various suggestions made by members of the Council regarding ways and means of acquiring property susceptible to small sub- divisions. R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, stated that the present Council has considerably liberalized the street widening program to the point where relatively less street widening can be accomplished or if the present rate of widening were to continue substantially greater amounts of money would have to be provided for the program. Mr. Miller also indicated the new policy would be substantially in excess 'of what most cities are doing. After discussion the following proposed policy was adopted for residential land that can be subdivided: 1 1 1