Loading...
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