HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/10/1970Pledge
Roll Call
Present:
Absent:
City Staff
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
August 10, 1970 - 7:30 P.M.
City Hall
Emmons Blake, Myron Graham, Arthur F. Spring
Donald Q. Miller., Kenneth. E.. Schwartz
Present: R. D. Young, Planning Director; D. F. Romero,
City Engineer; R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer;
H. Johnson, City Attorney; J. H. Fitzpatrick,
City Clerk.
I. Continuation of the hearing on the possible rezoning of property located
at 3217 Johnson Avenue from PD R -2 to R -1.
R. D. Young, Planning Director, reported to the City Council on the result of
the Council- Planning Commission Committee meeting attempting to bring the pre-
cise plan in with the approved preliminary plan of development. He
stated that the committee had met with the developer and had reached agreement
that the.precise plan should be revised to increase the recreation area and
that the developer should obtain a landscape easement to be allowed to land-
scape and maintain the creek adjacent to the southerly boundary line.
Councilman Blake explained that with only three Councilmen present any Council
action must be unanimous for the three Councilmen present and the proponent
can ask for a continuation when the full Council. will be present.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer reported on the grading plan presented for the
precise plan.
Robert Wendt, Attorney for Mission Development Company, presented for the
Council'.s information revised sketches of the landscaping plan for the Mission
Development Company's proposal.. He continued that the recreational area in
the precise plan has doubled and the residents will have more freedom and
open space in the complex. Further, he stated, the landscaping plan includes
the planting of trees to replace those previously removed by the developer.
H.-•Hoffineister,,representing Karleskint -Crum Landscaping Contractors, presented
a landscaping plan their firm has proposed for landscaping the entire area of
the planned development. He listed the types and placement of shrubbery and
the effect of each species on the other.
Councilman Spring asked what types of trees were being planted to replace those
that had been removed.
Mr. Hoffineister answered that liquid amber, flowering peach, California Syca-
more, and eucalyptus trees would be used in the development.
Dave Kelly, 1337 Oakwood Court, objected to the fact that the detail of the
planned development had not been made available to the public prior to the
start of this meeting so that the adjacent property owners could make an in-
telligent objection to the development if they so desired; but as it was they
would be required to object to the entire plan as usual in order to stop the
proposed development. He felt that the best offer the neighbors could make
was to continue the matter until the full Council was present and a full and
complete discussion could be made of the entire planned development proposed
by Mission Development Company. He felt just from looking at the plan pre-
sented this evening that it still contained the objections of the neighbors
which was that the precise plan changed the preliminary plan from cluster
housing to row housing.
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
August 10, 1970
Page 2
Mr. Kelly further felt that at no time had the Mission Development Company
even made an attempt to comply with the planned development standards of the
Zoning Ord.inance to develop a unique and different neighborhood.
Tom Peterson, 3186 Rose Avenue, again asked the City Council to insist on
the compliance of the planned development in requiring that all the bound-
aries of the tract adjacent to the R -1 zone be fenced on order to eliminate
1 the pedestrian traffic from the R -2 to the R -1 area.. He asked that the
Council order a fence or other solid.barrier along these lines.
Mrs. Rose McKeen, 3109 Richard, asked what the extent of fencing along the
Hacienda Hospital side of the development was under the revised plan.
R. D. Young, Planning Director, reported that the planned development requires
a six -foot high solid fence along the entire property line of the development
except "on the south side next to the Hacienda property.
Robert Wendt, attorney, stated that at no time had Mr. Stickler wished to
eliminate the necessary fences along his property boundaries:
Rose McKeen urged the Council to require a high class development to be put
in by Mr. Stickler, something that would fit the nice area already developed.
Councilman Graham stated that while he personally objected to the row housing
proposed, he felt that the developer had tried to make a compromise between
the precise and preliminary plan and he felt 'that the housing as proposed under
the compromise was a sort of cluster development and not strictly in rows.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, upon question, explained the problems of the grade
in the parking area, pointing out that the parking lot, entrance driveway,.and
property slopes, all were designed at City permissible maximums. He explained
some of the difficulties which would be met in using these facilities.
Bill McKeen, 3109 Richard, stated that he felt that the problem here was that
the developer had reduced the land area but still wished to improve with the
same number of dwelling units. He suggested that the City Council reduce the
number of units so that the area would be more compatible with the nubmer of
people the developer wishes to place on the land.
D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that he objected to the driveway proposed
for the development, however it does meet city minimum standards and he had
reluctantly had to approve it.
Mr. Donald Stickler, developer, stated that he has received verbal permission
to landscape the area adjacent,to his property next,to the supermarket in or-
der to have a larger open space next to his development.:-
Nat Colby, 3111 Richard, objected to the reduction of open space for each unit
had been reduced and the yards were minimal. He also objected to the proposed
row housing in this development after cluster housing had been promised by the
developer.
Robert Wendt, Attorney, stated that he felt that the precise plan was more in
accord with the approved preliminary plan for this development. He stated
that he velt the revised plan now met all the objections of the City Council
and the adjecent property owners. He further felt that this was the best
' possible development for this most difficult parcel of land..
Councilman Graham felt that if the developer could drop two or three units,
the plan could again be a culster development instead of row housing. -
Councilman Blake explained that the Council's action this evening was not a
hearing to revise the entire planned development but was only an attempt by
the City Council to get the planned development approved by the staff and
Planning Commission into conformity with the preliminary plan approved by the
City Council. He continued he felt that the location and development of the
buildings would hinge on the grading and site development by the developer.
City Council Minutes
August 10, 1970
Page 3
Councilman Blake felt that the revised precise plan for the planned development
reviewed by the Planning Commission -City Council Committee was substantially in
agreement with the approved preliminary plan of the planned development.
Councilman Graham continued to question the matter of row housing in lieu of
the original cluster development.
Councilman Spring felt that as the plans were just received by the City prior
to the convening of this meeting, the staff and the public should have some
time to study the matter and allow the Council to vote with full knowledge of
all the conditions in the plans. He suggested that the matter be continued
to the next meeting and allow the full Council to vote on the matter. He
objected to being asked to vote on a matter when he did not have full know-
ledge of the extent and conditions of the plans.
Councilman Blake asked if all conditions of the Planned Development Ordinance
for the precise plan had now been received by the City for study by the staff.
R. D. Young, Planning Director, stated that all required elements of the pre-
cise plan had now been submitted to the City by the developer and all conditions
of the Planning Department and Planning Commission had been complied with.
Mr. Wendt, Attorney, stated he questioned the need for additional time to
study and approve this plan as this was becoming a definite financial.hard-
ship to the developer and he wanted to know just what the City Council needed
in order to make some decision on this.matter tonight.
The matter was continued for final decision on.Monday, August 17, 1970.
2. The City Council adjourned to executive session to discuss pending poten-
tial litagation against the City.
On motion of Councilman Spring, seconded by Councilman Graham, the meeting
adjourned.
J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Cle;k
APPROVED: September 21, 1970
1