HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/07/1963REGULAR MEETING
January 7, i7o3
7:30 PM City Hall
Invocation was given by Mayor Clay P. Davidson.
Roll Call
Present: Clay P. Davidson, R. L. Graves, Jr., Miss Margaret McNeil, Donald Q.
Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey
' City Staff
Present: J. W. Abraham, 'Director of Planning & Building; R. D. Miller, Administrative
Officer; J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; William Flory, Director of Parks and
Recreation; William Houser, City Attorney; David F. Romero, City Engineer;
E. P. Thompson, Water Superintendent; Lee Schlobohm, Fire Chief; William
Schofield, Police Chief.
The minutes of December 3, 10 and 17, 1962 were held over.
Claims against the City for the month of January, 1963 were approved on a motion of Councilman
Shipsey, seconded by Councilwoman McNeil, subject to the approval of the Administrative Officer.
1. R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, announced the appointment of Mary B.. Love, Steno-
grapher in the Police Department effective January 1, 1963 at $312 per month.
2. On a motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Shipsey, the following salary
step increases were approved, effective February 1, 1963.
BELL, George A., Filtration Plant Operator, from Step 1 at $350 to Step 2 at $368 per month.
' BRANZUELA, Donald A., Janitor, from Step 1 at $312 to Step 2 at $330 per month.
HARTMAN, Philip J., Police Officer, from Step 1 at $412 to Step 2 at $435 per month.
3. On a motion of Councilman Shipsey, seconded by Councilman Miller, the following resolution was
introduced. Resolution No. 1048, a resolution increasing the 1962 -63 budget (Account No. 343,
Water Transmission and Distribution Mains, increased by $2, 500.) Passed and adopted on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Clay P. Davidson, R. L. Graves, Jr., Miss Margaret McNeil, Donald Q. Miller,
Gerald W. Shipsey
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
4. On a motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Miller, the following resolution wa:
introduced. Resolution No. 1049, a resolution transferring funds and increasing the 1962 -63
budget ($10, 000 be transferred from the Water Fund to the Off - Street Parking Reserve and Capi-
tal Outlay be increased by $11,000). Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:. Clay P. Davidson, R. L. Graves, Jr., Miss Margaret McNeil, Donald Q. Miller,
Gerald W. Shipsey
' NOES: None
ABSENT: None
5. On a motion of Councilman Shipsey, seconded by Councilwoman McNeil, the following resolution
was introduced. Resolution No. 1050 , a resolution increasing the 1962 -63 budget (increasing
Account No. 211.4, City Engineer's motor vehicle by $250.) Passed and adopted on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Clay P. Davidson, R. L. Graves, Jr., Miss Margaret McNeil, Donald Q. Miller,
Gerald W. Shipsey
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
6. On a motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Shipsey, the following resolution
was introduced. Resolt<tion No. 1051, a resolution increasing the 1962 -63 budget and trans-
ferring funds on a loan basis. ($93, 000 fromthe General Fund effective December 31, 1962,
if auditors request same, to cover such temporary deficit.) Passed and adopted on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Clay P. Davidson, R. L. Graves, Jr., Miss Margaret McNeil,
Donald Q. Miller, Gerald W. Shipsey
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
7. On a motion of Mayor Davidson, seconded by Councilman Graves, the Council acknowledged
the fact that the sewer fund is still running in the red ($21, 073.74) and that if required by
auditors, the City Council intends to make a loan- transfer from the General Fund effective
December 31, 1962 to cover the temporary deficit. Motion carried.
8. On a motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Miller, the following contract
payments were approved and ordered paid including Change Order No. 1 on the Foothill
footbridge in the amount of $184.00:
P.J. Zuiderweg
Foothill Blvd. footbridge Est. #1 $4,013.10
Est. #2 445.90
Guido 0. Ferini
Street Repair Program Phase "L"
Est.
#f
10,194.86
Ted Watkins - Street Repair
Program Phase "M"
Est.
#1
2,996.44
Eugene Jackson
Est.
#2
1;189.31
Caudill Street Culvert
Est.
#3 (final)
295.92
Frank P. Donovan
Yoakum Assessment District
Est.
#4
4,432.68
North Bay Construction Co.
Sewage Works Enlargement
Est.
#4
55, 610.06
On motion. of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Shipsey, the contract payment to
W. M. Lyles, Est. #4, for Madonna Road Waterline Relocation, in the amount of $12,384.45
was ordered paid subject to receipt of funds from the Division of Highways. -
9. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, explained the provisions of Extra Work Order No. 2 on the
sewage works enlargement project which involves the removing of an abandoned irrigation
line that is causing flooding in the construction area.
Mr. Romero explained Extra Work Order No. 3, which involves the substitution of a variable
speed motor for the two-speed motor originally called for in the specifications. He explained
this would give the plant operator a great deal more flexibility in the discharge of plant effluent
onto the fields. The cost would be $1,815.09.
Both Change Orders were approved on motion of Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman
Graves, with the City Engineer to bring back to the Council the final correct figure for Change
Order No. 2.
10. City Clerk J. H. Fitzpatrick reported that no bids were received for plastering the south'
wall of the City Recreation Building. The matter was referred to the Administrative Officer,
R. D. Miller, Building and Planning Director Abraham, and Parks and Recreation Director
Flory for review of specifications as to the present matter of proceeding on this construction.
11. City Clerk J. H. Fitzpatrick reported 'in the following bids received for furnishing chlorine to
the City for the calendar year 1963:
1. Tops Chemical Company, Duarte, California $114.00 per ton
2. Jones Chemical, Inc . , Torrance, California. 122.40 per ton
January 7, 1963
1
1
F
L__J
E. P. Thompson, Water Superintendent, recommended that the low bid of Tops Chemical
Company be accepted.
On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Shipsey, the low bid of Tops
Chemical Company was accepted.
12. At this time the City Council, at the request of the City staff, discussed a policy determination
on the time when the 370 interest begins on deferred payment for sidewalk construction under
the 1911 Improvement Act and also policy on sidewalks not being constructed under the 1911 Act
W. M. Houser, City Attorney explained to the City Council the provisions of the 1911 Act re-
garding the time when interest would begin and stated that it was very clear in the law as to
the legal requirements under the 1911 Act.
Mr. Houser recommended that the City Council adopt an ordinance which would take care of
both improvements under the 1911 Act and those constructed on a voluntary basis.
Councilman Miller asked what the procedure was if a property owner put in his own sidewalk
under his own contract and how would the money be loaned to him by the City for the three (3)
year period.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that under the 1911 Act the only way the property owner
could take advantage of this procedure was for the City to require the sidewalk construction
and pay the contractor. No provisions have been made for direct payment to any property
owner.
The City Council discussed various alternatives to the sidewalk matter, particularly with
reference to the deferred payment.
Mayor Davidson appointed a Council Committee of Councilman Graves and Councilman Miller
to meet with theCity Attorney and the City Engineer regarding a proposed ordinance on this
' matter, and report back to the City Council at the January 21, 1963 meeting.
13. Public Hearing continued from December 3 and 10, 1962 meeting regarding construction of
sidewalk and /or curb and gutter under the provision of the 1911 Act was opened by Mayor
Davidson.
Dr. J. Barry Smith appeared before the City Council regarding installation of sidewalks on his
property at 124 Highland Drive. He stated that he would put in the sidewalk if the City would
do the grading and replacement of shrubs and aprinkler damages during the sidewalk con-
struction. He further stated that he understood the mood of the City Council and that they
wanted the sidewalk in and further that he would agree to repay the City for the cost of grading
and replacement &.shrubbery if the property is ever subdivided.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, explained to the Council upon question the City's present
policy on street widening on the matter of grading and replacement of shrubs, walls, etc.
The City Council discussed the matter of sidewalk installation, particularly in the magnitude
of the parcel at 124 Highland Drive.
Councilii= Shipsey stated that Dr. Smith's offer was very fair as he does not believe that them
are enough children which will use this sidewalk to make it a necessary improvement.
1 On a motion of Councilman Shipsey, seconded by Mayor Davidson, that the City accept the
proposition of Dr. Smith regarding sidewalks at 124 Highland Drive.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that he was afraid this decision would set a precedent
and that this type of proposal could be very costly to the City in the future.
Mayor Davidson, as the second of the motion, stated that he believed that this would only set a
precedent on large lots that are subdividable and would encourage large property owners to
put in sidewalks with a covenant running with the land to reimburse the City if the lot is divided
-3-
Councilman Miller objected to this policy which he claimed was unfair to other
property owners of small lots which would receive no help from the City on their side-
walk improvement.
The motion was lost on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P
NOES: Miss Margaret McNeil, R.
ABSENT: None
Davidson
L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q . Miller
The City Council continued to discuss the proposal of placing sidewalks at 124 Highland Drive. 1
Councilman Shipsey stated that the City Council was split on the need of sidewalks at the
location in question and believed that no precedent was being set regarding these large parcels
and further that he did not believe that the sidewalk policy was so rigid that no exception could
be granted when a need for sidewalks had not been demonstrated.
On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilwoman McNeil, that the City Council
grant a variance to install a four (4) foot integral sidewalk at 124 Highland Drive, the City
to replace and replant trees and major shrubs in like size and kind as nearly as possible (but
no larger than ten (10) gallon size) and proceed with slope with property owner's consent; if
not with consent, then proceed with the slope in as safe a manner as possible, within the
present right of way placing a retaining wall where necessary at the property owner's expense.
Wm. M. Houser, City. Attorney, asked the Council to consider the matter of going on to the
Smith parcel and sloping the land without the permission of the property owner, as this must
be done with his permission, or condemnation. Motion carried on the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Miss Margaret McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr., Donald Q. Miller
NOES: Gerald W. Shipsey, Clay P. Davidson
ABSENT: None
J. T. Cook, 1292 Sydney Street, appeared before the City Council protesting the requirement
of placing sidewalks on his Sydney Street frontage which would require a separated sidewalk
as this is the style placed by his neighbors and requested that the City Council consider
granting him permission to place a four (4) foot integral sidewalk in front of his house which
would save his hedge and trees and he would then proceed to place, at his own expense, the
required sidewalk.
It was moved by Councilman Graves that the Council policy be changed to require the replace-
ment of all trees, shrubs, etc . , when removed for sidewalk installation.
Councilman Shipsey stated that this was a hasty decision by the Council and the Council should
consider this in more detail in order to study the effect this new policy would have on the City.
Councilman Graves withdrew his motion.
On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Shipsey, that action on 1292 Sydney
Street be deferred until a report has been received from >the Planning Commission regarding .
sideway widths as requested by the City Council. Motion carried.
R. H. Vincent, 415 Patricia Drive, asked what the City was going to do regarding the grading
of his front yard after the sidewalk was placed as his front yard will have to be completely
regraded and replanted and he believed that the City should either do this work or pay for it
as he still does not believe that the sidewalk is neededor that anyone will use it and would like
the City to regrade and replant his front lawn which is being damaged by the sidewalk instal-
lation.
Dorothy Aldrich (Tunnell), 2505 Sydney Street, protested the installation of sidewalks along-
side her property and asked consideration of Council to replace trees and shrubs being re-
moved by the unnecessary installation of sidewalks and further stated that she objected to
the basis of placing sidewalks at her expense when she will receive no benefits from such an
installation.
January 7, 1963
Harvey Reinhardt, 1284 Sydney Street, did not appear before the City Council at this time but
had protested the installation of si dewalks at a prior "meeting. "
On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Miller, that all protests be over-
ruled but that the property owners be given sixty (60) days after receipt of report from the
Planning Commission on recommended policy for sidewalk installation.. Motion carried.
Mayor Davidson ordered the Public Hearing continued,to'February 18,' 1963 at 8:00 PM at whicl
time the City Council will consider the protests of John T. Cook, 1292 Sydney Street.
14. Communication from the San Luis Obispo City Schools notifying the City Council that they are
investigating the cost estimates for installation of a guard rail at the corner of Grand Avenue
and Slack Street and installation of sidewalks on the south side of Highland Drive, and'will
keep the Council posted on progress of these matters. Communication was ordered received
and filed.
15. City Clerk J. H. Fitzpatrick read a letter from Burt Polin requesting consideration by the City
Council of the rezoning of property at the southwest corner of Meinecke and Santa Rosa Street
to "R -3."
Mr. Fitzpatrick read a report of the Planning Commission regarding their action on the pro-
posed rezoning of property located at 175 Santa Rosa Street.
The Public Hearing was opened by Mayor Davidson.
Dr. Clawson appeared before the City Council stating that he believed this rezoning of propert)
to be a very sophisticated appeal. He stated that the rezoning was attempted previously but
was unsuccessful. He did not believe the City Council and Planning Commission were appointee
for the consideration of Cal Poly's problems. He then discussed the traffic, stating that the
Planning Commission agreed there are promising solutions to this problem. He further
commented that the City Council might approve of the dormitories if it would consider the
amount of money that would come from this housing facility and it would stay in San Luis Obisp
' At this time he submitted a petition of fifty (50) names, of which one was not a property owner
in this area and one person lived outside the area.
James Vogt appeared before the City Council asking how it was going to handle the traffic
proglem; by foot or by auto. He outlined directions that would have to be taken to get to Cal
Poly. He stated that he would like to see the Council back the Planning Commission'.
Ralph Westfall appeared before the City Council stating that he believed that 6e Council should
give a great deal'of consideration to the future of this area. He believed that'this consideration
should be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting. He further stated that the
traffic problem will not change'whether the' housing is constructed or not Therefore, some
good suggestions are needed for controlling traffic. He then discussed briefly the Division of
Highway's intention of re- routing Highway - #1. He spoke of property rights and also that, as
the Cityprogresses, expansion will be inevitable and that a housing facility such as this would
be a more desirable construction than many other facilities that could inhabit this area. He
stated that many sites have been explored for this use.
Ernie Graves then stated that he owns property in this area and believes that this would be an
asset to the whole town and the Council should not stand in the way of progress as Cal Poly is
necessary to the growth of the' City.
Dr. Clawson pointed out that'there were over' 300 places in the area that had been approved for
housing.
Ralph Westfall stated that 88% of the money will be spent for the development and use of the
property
Peter Andre submitted a sketch of the proposed housing and a picture of the proposed housing.
He also submitted clippings from the newspapers of student housing in other parts of'Texas and
California. He stated thatthis housing will keep forty. (40) people permanently employed.
Mrs. Patricia Eilers stated that the Council is not considering what Cal Poly needs, but
whether or not this area should be rezoned from "R -1" to "R -3."
-5-
Martin Polin pointed out that the Hewson House was a familiar student housing facility and
he had heard of no disturbances from it. He checked with the Division of Highways. regard-
ing traffic and re- routing of Highway 41.
Norman E. Holt, 904 Meinecke, agreed with the report submitted by the Planning Commission
that this would not be desirable to the area. He wanted the area to remain an "R -1" zone
as it is quiet.
Dr. Clawson pointed out that Cal Poly was holding other land in the area for student housing.
Everett Weant stated that one thing that should be remembered is when the subdivision was
put in Mt. Pleasanton i n 1924 and some of these homes in the area are that old. He, stated
that a lot of old homes on Marsh Street are old and not being kept up and the area is being I
developed commercially.
Peter Andre read a letter from Alvin Rhodes regarding this matter and urging rezoning to
„R -3."
Dr. Clawson asked if the letter was written as an educator or as a member of the Tri-
County Mortgage Company.
Martin Polin stated that Mr. Rhodes was the president of Tri -County Mortgage Company.
Mr. Lenger stated that there was a feeling on the part of the Commission that this kind of
a package deal does not work out here in this particular piece of property. They pushed
for immediate action and think that this sort of thing might be desirable in that we should all
work together to get the right arrangement and the right use. High density use of resi-
dential land is infringing on the rights of those people in the adjoining area. With some plot
rearrangement and some positive shielding and some planned entrances to the parking lot,
etc., so that it does not affect the people adjoining and the property set back so that the
landscaping could be worked out so that they could go. However, he believed that 600
people on the lot is going to be hard to work out.
Emmons Blake called to the Council's attention the City's ordinance and the facet that if we ,
rezone this as "R -3, " it would not be through the further devices they would be able to get the
618 students on that property. Because if "R -3," it would qualify as 618. We have heard
numerous qualifications that if it were any less than this, it would be economically infeasible
for t•h= to develop.
Mr. Schwartz stated that since the Planning Commission members have determined to have
their say, he would like to have his He still feels that their report is valid over those
arguments of.the people in the audience. The matter of timing is the essence of this problem.
Is the timing right for the development of this property? Mr. Weant stated that it was the
usual happenstance for the older homes to develop into R -3 and R -4 and commercial over a
long period of time. This is true, but not necessarily good planning. He stated that the City
is not widening the streets, etc., for the additional population that is put into those old "R -1"
areas. Our public utilities are also behind for this type of development. If the population
is developed in an area, how and where is the City going to get another school site and how
is the City going to develop the sewers, etc. He further stated that this area could be put
to any R -3 use, and that economics are not concerned here, but simply the use of the land.
He said that the streets are not prepared to take 600 people, and with proper planning and
control they could be used, but not today and perhaps not in five years. The people that own
the property took the change to hold out for their property. Others decided to develop as
"R -1." He did not think the people in the rest of the community should be punished for these
people's right to hold out. He stated that City officials are aware of what is going on as much
as possible with regard to the State's plans for the re- routing of Highway #1. He recommended'
that the Council uphold the Planning Commissinn's recommendations and deny the rezoning.
Tom Hart, Cal Poly student, appeared before the City Council stating that he has been here
for two years and he doesn't think this place would be a desirable place to live. 600 students
would mean approximately 300 cars and he did not believe that this would help the traffic
situation. He stated that he did not believe that the housing ::facility should be placed in
this area.
January 7, 1963
Mike Grogan, college student, stated that he thought.this was an extremely poor location as it
is too far from the college. He has been attending San Jose State College and that City is an
eyesore as that beautiful City has been ruined by sororities and fraternities being put into
the residential area near the San Jose State College.campus.,..The City. of San Luis Obispo
has been said to bean eyesore. He. did- not think that this would add to Cal Poly and didn't think
it was going to add to the property values in the area.
Mayor Davidson stated,that the City Council is :very aware. of developments that. are being
planned by the Division of Highways and has studied these plans and is concerned with the
traffic that is existing now and any traffic that will occur in the future in this area. With
this . in mind, . he asked the. City Engineer to review this particular area. He suggested that
the Council could work out the traffic. problem.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, reviewed the Hahn, Wise and Barber report of: 1959, showing
the 24 hour traffic counts. He gave figures on numbers of cars on Foothill and Santa Rosa
Street now and estimated. for. 1980 He stated that the City of San Luis Obispo not only has a
serious traffic problem in the area now, but it is expected to .increase . He then pointed out
that the intersection at Chorro and Foothill Blvd., and the intersection at California Blvd., and
the railroad tracks are very dangerous intersections. Since Cal Poly is not inierested in
participating in this development; it; will be some. years before this improvement can be made.
Within a short period of time, the City will probably have to :prohibit left hand turns from
Foothill onto Chorro. California and Foothill intersection is very bad now. Casa Street and
Foothill intersection already is overcrowded: The. most serious problem from this proposal
would be getting onto. Santa Rosa Street. - The Division of Highways has stated that they might
develop a left hand pocket on Santa Rosa Street from Meinecke Street. The intersection of
Meinecke and Chorro will also become more serious. .
Martin Polin stated that he thought these street improvements had to be made anyway -.
Councilman Graves pointed out the. need of Cal Poly and its effect on the economics of the
community. On one hand, he thought it was mentioned that. the placement and rezoning of this
property and the development of this dormitory might throw the highway to some other route.
And another being that a change of the highway would alleviate the traffic; some said the highw<
would hinder the development to an . "R F' use. He �aid.that he had talked with Mr. Lejonhud,
- who :said: that a left.hand• pocket could be developed along Santa Rosa Street so that the students
could. drive. to Murray and :then Casa and Foothill Blvd: However, he also .stated that it would
practically be impossible to get back onto Foothill from Casa. Further, it is cheaper to buy
"R -1" property and have it rezoned for "R -3" uses than to pay for "R -3" land for "R -3" uses.
On motion of Councilman Graves, seconded by Councilman Shipsey.that the Council uphold the
Planning Commission and deny the rezoning. . .
Councilman Miller disagreed with the Planning Commission. He stated that he. has looked into
this particular zoning, has talked to the residents, some of them, and also has had the oppor-
tunity to talk to the proponents of the rezoning,. and he would like to approve this rezoning for
the following reasons: .
"The request of Dorothea Meinecke, etal, for a change in zoning from '.R -1', and 'R -4' to 'R -3,
on a parcel of property located at the southwest corner of Santa Rosa dnd Meinecke Streets,
was .denied.by the Planning Commission.
"In reviewing the decision of the Commission, I do not agree with their finding, and therefore
recommend the rezoning be approved for the following reasons:
- FIRST:• The utilization of. land adjacent to highway one .(Santa Rosa Street) from the city
limits to the Meinecke property is either 'R -3' or 'C -1." This land use has been accepted by t
community as proper and orderly growth in the public interest.
It is difficult for me to accept the thesis of the Commission in their denying a 'R -3' zone for tl
Meinecke parcel. This parcel is contiguous to the 'R- 3 /C -1' strip adjacent to Highway one.
The appelants are asking for the extension of this buffer strip to include. their property.
"This in my opinion is a reasonable request.
"SECOND: The opponents claim and the Commission apparently concurred that if the Meineck
property were rezoned to 'R -3' the7 'R -1' land would decrease in value. One criteria is to
measure the effect to the presently zoned 'R- 3 /C -1' strip on the value of the adjoining 'R -1'
property. This 'R-1' has not depreciated in value, thus we may assume the opponents'
property will react in the same way.
"THIRD: The Commission claims there is'sufficient' property available in the area for
'R -3' development. What the Commission means by 'sufficient' is not clear. Do they mean
presently zoned 'R -3,' or just any property regardless of zoning?
The zoning map of the City shows there is not sufficient 'R -3' vacant property in this area
for a substantial multi- dwelling project. There is a large section of vacant land presently
zoned 'R -1.' Is This the 'sufficient' land referred to. by the Commission?
"FOURTH: The Commission stressed the problem of traffic. In reading the Commission's '
denial, it appears this was the primary reason for rejecting the rezoning. The question we
of the Council must ask is: does the anticipated traffic volume created by the zoning change
justify the denial?
"Suppose the property were.to develop as it is presently zoned. The vehicular traffic would
set a route pattern. With the zoning changed to'R -3' the route pattern would remain the
same - -the number of vehicles would increase.
"The Commission claims with justification this is adding to our traffic congestion. What
would be the Commission's determination if another 'R -3' rezoning request further out
Foothill Blvd. were requested? Would traffic be a major factor? The Commission has
granted 'R -3' zoning and subdivision development in the Foothill area. Traffic was con-
sidered, but these requests were not denied because they added to the traffic volume.
"In my opinion this property owner is being denied a rezoning because he is located near a
congested area, while property owners further removed are granted 'R -3' and residential
development.
"If traffic in the Foothill area is of such concern then the Commission should recommend to
the Council a moratorium on all development in the Foothill area while the City studies what
remedial action could be taken.
"FIFTH: The question of intended use. The Commission appraises the rezoning on the
assumption a student dormitory will be constructed on this parcel.. In all requests for zone
changes the specific intended uses of the applicant must not be the only consideration.
"The determination of zone changes should be predicated on all uses allowed within the
ordinance for the zone in question. As in the case beforeus, we must review all the allow-
able uses permitted for 'R -3.' Why? Because the sincere plans of humans are often thwarted
by extraneous conditions.
'!The allowable uses for 'R -3' granted by the ordinance appear reasonable for the Meinecke
parcel.
"CONCLUSION: To conclude I am going to be harsh- -what I say includes me. This City,
we of the Council and members of the Planning Commission are not facing our responsibility
for the future
"This zoning issue beforeus tonight places us in the glaring light of our own inaction. We
have known the land use adjacent to Cal Poly was in transition. Have we met this problem?
No: We have paused here and there hoping I suppose the problem would go away. It will not.
"Don't blame the college. They told us, five years or so ago, the antidpated enrollment
would be 10, 000. It is past 5, 000 today. They have told us, too, their plans: call for a walk
in campus.
"Why haven't we acknowledged these warnings with action?
January 7, 1963
"The Commission in the Meinecke rezoning informs the Council there is 'sufficient' land
for 'R -3' development. There is land, much of it like the Meinecke parcel, is zoned 'R -1.'
"Now it does not require a consultant to lead us by the hand and advise us that vacant 'R -1'
land adjacent to the college is ridiculous. It is, and we know it.
"The Commission in the Meinecke rezoning stresses the problem of increased traffic..
May I ask is it good planning to force student housing some distance from the campus?
Wouldn't the City be adding to our traffic problems?
"If the College plans to prohibit student cars on the campus, then the logical location for
private dorms and fraternity houses should be near the campus.
"We of the Council and the members of the Commission should initiate positive action in
rezoning the land close to the campus. We must have engineering studies how we can improve
the traffic congestion in the Foothill area.
"I don't mean next month or next year, I believe we should start now. "
Councilman Graves stated that if we are going to up zone some property, we must down zone
other land in order to keep a balance in the community.
Councilwoman McNeil agreed with the Planning Commission to deny rezoning.
Mayor Davidson stated that he thinks something should be done about the severe traffic problei
now, and that inasmuch as the problem is with us now and will increase in the future,
we should encourage this type of development so that we will be forced to improve these
streets, etc., because if we don't, we are holding the City back. He stated that he is
personally in favor of the rezoning, but only if it was done through the mechanics of
planned development .
' The Mayor read a portion of a letter from Mr. Larry Wise dated December 15, 1962,
outlining conditions for this type of use. He continued that this rezoning was in the best
interest of the City as this is a proper development and would help Cal Poly which is one
of our most important industries. The rezoning was denied on the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Gerald W. Shipsey, Miss Margaret McNeil, R. L. Graves, Jr.
NOES: Donald Q. Miller, Clay P. Davidson
ABSENT: None
Ralph Westfall urged that the City Council reconsider its action as this is the only parcel
of land available which is large enough for this type of development.
Kenneth Schwartz appeared before the Council stating that the Planning Commission and
City Council are making studies of all the zoning in the City and that they are moving ahead
on these matters and that some day this might be a good area for rezoning, but the time is
not now and that is the reason that he recommended against the rezoning to the Council.
On motion of Mayor Davidson, seconded by Councilman Graves, the meeting was adjourned
to 7:30 PM, Monday, January f4, 1963.
APPROVED the 21st day of January, :1963.
H. Fl"rZPATRICK