Loading...
01/21/19741 1 Pledge Roll Call MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA. Monday, January 21, 1974 - 7:00 P.M. City Hall PRESENT: Councilmen John Brown, Myron Graham, T. Keith Gurnee,and Jesse Norris, and Mayor Kenneth Schwartz ABSENT: None Citv Staff PRESENT: J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer; A. J. Shaw, Jr., City Attorney; David Williamson, Assistant Administra- tive Officer; Jim Stockton, Park & Recreation Department; R. A. Paul, Water Department Director; E. L. Rodgers, Police Chief; D. F. Romero, City Engineer; L: Schlobohm, Fire Chief; Pat Gerety, Associate Planner. 1. The City Council 603. An ordinance of the Code to require review by grading activities within 20 feet of the top of the of building and grading p said review. considered the final passage of ORDINANCE NO. City of San Luis Obispo amending the Municipal the City of all proposed construction and certain flooded and flood -prone areas and within banks of certain waterways prior to the issuance -=rmits therefor; and providing a procedure for Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open. Charles M aino appeared before the City Council questioning the timing of the ordinance and the effect it would have-on existing property. Councilman Norris asked that the record show that this ordinance did not stop development but just required a permit from the City for development in the areas covered. Councilman Brown stated that he felt that this was a continuing study of flood hazards and would in time be released from City control as improve- ments were made. Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the ordinance was introduced for final passage. Passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None 2. W. A. Sullivan requested permission to discuss with the City Council the possibility of a parking permit in the City parking lbt behind Muzio's Groceries and Montgomery Ward's store. W. A. Sullivan did not appear to speak on his behalf. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Paae 2 R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, suggested that this matter be continued and discussed with Traffic Committee Report No. 1 at the end of the agenda. He also recommended for the Traffic Committee that the City Council not grant this permit request so that there could be a turnover in the downtown lots. 3. The City Council continued their discussion of consideration ' of safety equipment for police officers: A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, reviewed for the City Council the memorandum from the Administrative Officer, R. D. Miller, dated January 18, 1974 regarding the meeting of A. J. Shaw, R. D. Miller, and E. L. Rodgers with representatives of the Police Officers' Association and their attorney. In the discussion it was agreed that the City would purchase the listed safety equipment for all new personnel from this time on, and that personnel would be required to use standard issue equipment. The City would also offer to purchase used equipment from existing safety per- sonnel subject to the top dollar limit set forth in the Police Chief's memo and also based on the condition of the items. The City also offered to buy new standard equipment for present safety personnel and they could do what they wished with equipment presently owned by them. The City staff committee was unable to agree on the demand of the Police Officer's Association that the City provide cash reimbursement for equipment previously purchased by the officer, with the officers to retain ownership of the equipment. The Administrative Officer then recommended that the City accept the recommendation of the Police Chief including the offer to provide safety equipment of a standard classification to any safety personnel presently 1 on the force. E. L. Rodgers, Police Chief, presented a memorandum dated January 18, 1974 in which he and the Police Officer representatives had approved the following list of safety equipment and approximate costs. 1. K -38 Smith & Wesson Model 15 revolver (combat Master Piece, 4 -inch barrel) $85.00 2. Holster (Hoyt Breakfront high rise) 20.95 3. Sam Brown belt (basket weave) 14.75 4. Handcuff case 6.90 5. Smith & Wesson handcuffs 18.25 6. Ammo pouch 6.95 7. Baton ring holder 1.10 8. Key holder 2.95 9. Whistle (chrome) 1.50 10. Belt keepers 3.60 11. Pay-O -Vac flashlight (3 -cell) 3.77 12. Raincoat & Hat cover 25.95 Approximate cost of safety equipment to be purchased per man 191.67 Approximate cost of items on hand (name plate, helmet, face plate, baton, mace and mace 1 holder) 70.00 TOTAL $261.67 His memorandum also contained the following recommendations: 1. Equipment purchased by the City.would be City property and would be turned in in the event the officer left the Department or retired. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 3 2. During their service with the City, officers would be responsible for keeping all issued equipment in good condition, considering normal wear and tear. 3. Present officers could elect to continue to use their own equipment heretofore purchased by them if it conformed ' to departmental standards. If they should decide to sell their equipment to the City and continue using it on the Job, they might do so with prices subject to approval by the Administrative Officer and Chief of Police, and also subject io the top dollar limits for. the respective items previously listed. On the other hand, officers might have the option of switching to new City equipment and disposing of their equip- ment as they desired. Memorandum from A. J. Shaw, January 17, 1974, in which he stated that at the January 7 meeting he had not been prepared to advise the Council as to whether or not safety personnel might have a legally enforceable claim against the City for reimbursement for safety equipment previously purchased by them. He stated he had contacted other City officials concerning this problem, and stated it was not their opinion that they have to reimburse safety personnel for previously purchased equipment. He continued that at a Labor Relations Institute sponsored by the League of California Cities he attended a session wherein the question of furnishing safety equipment to personnel was discussed. He stated that no representative from any City indicated they were reimbursing safety personnel. On the contrary, all those who indicated that their cities had taken a position stated that their cities felt they had no duty to reimburse and they were not going to do so voluntarily. Therefore, A.J. Shaw, City Attorney, advised the Council that it was his opinion ' that the City could successfully defend against any legal action seeking to require the City to reimburse safety personnel for past purchases of safety equipment. He wished the Council to be aware that he did not mean to imply by this opinion that the City could not work out an arrange- ment with the Officers to purchase safety equipment which they now owned if it met City standards. He felt the City could successfully defend itself from any challenge to such a purchase program, especially if the purchase price substantially represented the present fair market value of the equipment. He suggested that the Council's action at this time would be to adopt the list of safety equipment as prepared by the Police Chief and representa- tives of the Police Officer's Association and secondly, to provide all new and present officers with such equipment; and, offer to purchase existing safety equipment from police officers at which time it then became the property of`the City after a mutual agreement of price. Richard A. Carsel, Attorney representing the Police Officer's Association thanked the City staff for recommending adoption of the list of safety equipment for all police officers and also thanked the staff for recom- mending that the City issue all police officers adequate safety equipment from the approved list. He stated that as a representative for the Police Officer's Association there were still two issues unresolved. 1. The matter of reimbursement for equipment already purchased ' by the police officers as required by the City regulations of the Police Department, and 2. The question of statute of limitations - how far the Citv must go back in such reimbursement. He stated that he felt it was unfair and unequal to officers who had been on the force a number of years not to reimburse them for their safety equipment which they were required to purchase at their own cost. He felt that they spent good money and they were not getting the advantage that the new officers were getting of free issue of equipment. He City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 4 further felt that the statute of limitations brought into this matter by the City Attorney did not apply, as he knew of no court case in this area. He felt that if the Council did not reimburse all officers for previously purchased equipment, he would take the City to court and force this purchase by the City Council. Edward Martin, Police Officer, stated that he too was in agreement with the list of safety equipment but felt that each officer had a personal pride in the hand gun he purchased and did not wish to give it up. He felt the City should pay each officer the original cost of the gun and then allow the officer to "buy back" the gun from the City with service to the City say amortized over a five year period at which time the gun would again become the property of the individual officer. If the officer were to leave before the end of the five year period, he would be reimbursed one -fifth the value for each year of the unused amortization schedule. Councilman Gurnee stated he felt the Police Officer's Association made sense and should be seriously considered by the City Council. R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, stated that he felt that if the City paid for any equipment with taxpayers funds then the equipment should become the property of the City and not allow some arrangement for ultimate private ownership of equipment purchased at public expense. Edward Martin again stated the City should either buy the equipment at cost and reimburse each officer, or accept the Police Officer's Association offer to buy back the equipment with service at the end of a stated period of time. Mayor Schwartz suggested that the Council action would be to 1) approve the safety equipment list as presented, 2) reimburse each officer for his equipment with City to retain ownership of the equipment, 3) to pay officers a minimum, and 4) allow.the officers to buy back equipment on an amortization basis over a five year period. He felt the question before the Council was: 1. Must the City buy equipment for new officers? 2. Must the City reimburse all other officers for equipment previously purchased? Councilman Brown stated he agreed with the adoption of the list of safety equipment and he was leaning towards buying all equipment for City ownership including the weapons. Councilman Graham agreed with the adoption of the safety equipment list and also agreed with reimbursement on all safety equipment with owner- ship to pass to the City including firearms. Councilman Gurnee agreed with the adoption of the safety list as recom- mended. He felt all officers should be reimbursed for equipment purchased with ownership to pass to the City and that the City staff be asked to continue negotiations on reimbursement or to consider the Police Officer's Association offer of the five -year, buy -back. plan. Councilman Norris also agreed with the adoption of the safety equipment list. He agreed with provisions to issue new equipment to all police officers and was also in favor of the City purchasing existing equipment and issuing it to each officer. He also agreed with purchasing the equipment at cost as shown on the standard list. Mavor Schwartz stated that he agreed with the.adoption of the safety equipment list, felt whatever policies adopted should be applicable to all officers, was in favor of purchasing the equipment from all officers without consideration of the statute of limitations. He felt the purchase should be based on the condition of the equipment at the time of purchase, 1 n 1 City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 5 and recognized that police officers formerly were allowed to buy what- ever gun he wished and the City should buy it at historical cost without any additional cost to the City for modification of grips, sites, etc. E. L. Rodgers, Police Chief, suggested that the City police should have a standard approved handgun which all personnel from the Chief on down ' would be required to provide himself. On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Brown the following resolution was introduced. RESOLUTION NO. 2563 (1974 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving and adopting a complete safety equipment list for police officers, requiring all new officers to use equipment on said list, and requiring the City to provide said equipment for all new officers and all present officers who so desire. Passed and adopted-on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Gurnee that the City purchase from any present officer without regard to years of service, items of equipment no. 3 and 12 based upon the condition of the equipment liberally construed to maximum amounts set in the Chief's list, plus purchase any weapon and its holster previously purchased ' by the police officer without regard to his tenure for the value of the weapon in its standard (no customizing) condition amortized as to its present condition. Officers would have 90 days to submit their request for purchase by City. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Council consideration of the memo from Councilman T. Keith Gurnee entitled Policy on Overburdened Facilities dated December 16, 1973.. Councilman Gurnee stated that over a long period of time the City had followed a policy of permitting construction of new develop- ment which would obviously place additional overloads upon already overburdened City water, sewer, drainage, traffic and fire hydrant facilities, services administered by the City and resources necessary to sustain the population. This policy in the past had brought serious consequences to the City due to a great degree by inadequate and over- burdened facilities. (1) The Los Osos Valley water crisis and (2) the disastrous flood of 1973. He felt other similar problems of lesser magnitude continued to serve as reminders of facility overloads; for example: the Hilton Hotel,the approval of which consciously placed an additional overload on an already overburdened sewer line. He continued we were now facing an impending resource crunch with respect to water supply, water filtration capacity, and sewage treatment capacity that promised to be a most demanding and expensive problem in terms of money, time, and energy. He felt it was the City Council's responsibility to foresee problems and plan their resolution in a swift and deliberate fashion well before a panic stage while the people of the City still had a choice in the future rather than have their future dictated by crisis. He continued that while the City had committed themselves to a long - range, advance - planning program vital to the future direction of the community, he felt the City must also turn its attention to the present. Instrumental to advanced - planning program vital to the future direction of the community, he felt the City must also turn its attention to the present. Instrumental to advanced- planning strategy was a cohesive package of measures and policies that must effectively operate in the now and render current problems manageable in the future. He felt it City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 6 was necessary to enact effective working policies and procedures affecting the day -to -day development of the City so that the citizens could be assured that problems of overburdened facilities would not befall us in the future and render advance planning obsolete. He presented a draft resolution as a method to deal with this problem. The resolution would deal with facilities only; but such a policy could act as an increment of a larger policy package on growth and I community development. He briefed the resolution for the Council's consideration stating that over a period of time the City had followed a policy permitting construc- tion of new development which would place additional overloads on over- burdened facilities. That such a policy was contrary to sound planning, created time- consurning and insoluble administrative difficulties, and had led to a counter productive policy of government by reaction to crises, which he felt was detrimental to the general health, safety, and welfare, and whereas potential developers of real property had a right to expect that the City would assure that sufficient City facilities were available to permit reasonable development and plans for such properties in accord- ance with existing zoning, and further, that the Council desired to implement a policy which would assure that the City would not approve or authorize further development which would not be served by adequate City facilities, and that the City would initiate timely action to assure adequate facilities to accommodate reasonable and authorized development. He asked the Council to adopt the following policy: 1. Effective immediately, the City would not issue any use permit or building permit for construction or development prior to certification by responsible City department heads that the proposed construction or development could be adequately accommodated without overloading, and within the design parameters of City sewer, water, ' drainage, traffic and fire hydrant facilities which already existed or which would be in existence prior to construction or prior to occupancy as required by the City. 2. If any application for a use permit or building permit were denied accordingly, the Planning Commission should request a complete report from each department head who was unable to certify to the adequacy of City facilities for the project. Upon receipt of the report, the Planning Commission should hold one or more public hearings concerning City facilities needed to provide adequate service for the proposed development or construction, and the Commission should thereafter submit a report to the City Council recommending additional facilities, zoning changes, or other changes needed by the Commission to make zoning demands compatible with City facilities. 3. Upon receipt of the report from the Planning Commission, the Council should at its next regular meeting consider the report and order such further study and action by responsible City officials as it deemed necessary for correction in all due haste of the lack of facilities, improper zoning, or such other deficiencies or inadequacies as the Council might determine. Finally, he listed a number of exemptions such as those previously granted permits, single family dwelling alterations, single family con- struction upon fully improved lots,construction of mobile homes within ' mobile home parks, and construction of public works other than buildings. Councilman Brown stated that in regard with Councilman Gurnee's memo that it was common knowledge that the City drainage system was now in- adequate and would be inadequate for many, many, years to come and following the preamble to his resolution this would effectively stop all development in the City. Councilman Gurnee agreed with Councilman Brown's statement and offered to delete the word drainage from the proposed resolution. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 7 Councilman Brown continued he felt Councilman Gurnee's proposal was too tight and did not feel it was adequate and would rather consider each proposal as it came along for consideration in light of condi- tions at that particular moment. Councilman Graham felt that the City Council should follow the policy as presented. Councilman Norris stated that he opposed and would continue to oppose the proposal of Councilman Gurnee as he felt it would hinder any development within the City of San Luis Obispo. City Engineer D.F. Romero asked how this policy would affect existing sewer plant which would be inadequate to full development of the City's general plan, but adequate for present flows. R. A. Paul, Water Department Director, felt that the resolution only formalizes what the City Council had been doing over the past few years. Councilman Graham stated that he agreed with Paul's comments that this was basicly the policy followed by the City Council although it had not been formalized. Dave Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer discussed with Council- man Gurnee some possible administrative problems in the proposed policy on facilities. A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, explained to the City Council the implication of the word "certification" in the proposed resolution. Mavor Schwartz declared the meeting open to the public. Harold Fields, 1704 Oceanaire-Drive, questioned the intent of the Gurnee resolution as no time limit for upgrading the overburdened facilities was established and without some time limit no intelligent developer could come into the City with proposals. Fred Strong, representing C.E.B.E.S., was opposed to the intent of the Gurnee resolution due to its definite no- growth philosophy. He felt that this approach to community life was wrong as the people were here, they were coming here to live and he felt the City Council should attempt to bring their public facilities in to order rather than postpone the issue. He urged the City Council to consider a positive approach to development and not a no- growth or negative attitude. Elizabeth Webee, 2964 Flora St., stated she was in support of the Gurnee proposal, felt the City Council should study the long range plan- ning and solve the lack of public facilities drainage in conjunction with a long -range study. Mayor Schwartz closed the public part of the meeting. D. F. Romero asked how traffic facilities could be certified for a new development when congestion was not where the new development was, but ' was in the central part of the City. He felt that the proposal would be difficult to administer by the staff. Councilman Gurnee again explained the purpose of the resolution on policy was to try and bring reality of City planning and upgrade City facilities. He urged the City Council to adopt the policy for solving the problems of overburdened public facilities. Mavor Schwartz reviewed for the City Council a memorandum put out by his office on October 1972 to the City staff asking for resource planning reports on facilities at that time. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page ° R. A. Paul stated that his department had been inventorying all water related facilities for the City including water supply, filtration, capacity, conveyance equipment, etc. and would be ready soon with a complete report for the City Council. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that his department presently study- ing and still continuing on the following: 1. Sewer plant and sewer lines - well along 2. Storm drainage system - survey completed, analysis barely started 3. Street program.- available now for Council consideration. Pat Gerety, Associate Planner, spoke to the Council on land use inven- tory and the vacant land survey. Dave Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer, reported to the City Council on discussions in the zone 9 advisory committee dealing with drainage and flood control, stating that the Advisory Committee had already recommended a $60,000 study to the Board of Supervisors for the drainage basin, a $20,000 annual maintenance of creek program, etc. Mayor Schwartz stated that Councilman-Gurnee's proposal was in line with his request to the administrative departments in October, 1972 for an inventory of water, sewer, traffic, drainage, etc. He felt he agreed with Councilman Gurnee's proposal to require each department head to signify that the City had potential to serve the development being proposed to the City. He felt that Councilman Gurnee's proposal put the City on record on facilities of the City and there was a need for the resolution although he did suggest that the City staff and ' Councilman Gurnee review proposal for wording changes and bring it back for Council consideration. Councilman Norris stated that he was opposed to any action.by the City Council that would limit the number of people who could live in San Luis Obispo. He was opposed to any attempt to adopt a no- growth policy for the City. He continued he felt it would be impossible for department heads to signify that the City streets could handle more traffic. He felt that this was a backdoor approach to a no- growth policy. He also felt that down - zoning as proposed by Councilman Gurnee was the taking of land from property owners without just compensation. He was opposed and urged the City Council not to adopt the policy as he felt it would hurt the citizens of San Luis Obispo. Mayor Schwartz explained that if the City Council had adopted policy as suggested by Councilman Gurnee, there would never have been a need to place a building moratorium on twenty percent of the City's area. Councilman Gurnee agreed that this proposal could be amended but he just wished the City Council to go on record of adopting some policy so that people who wished to develop in the community would know where they stood. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham that the City staff prepare a resolution amending the Gurnee proposal to include I the deletion of: 1. reference to traffic, and 2. to drainage, and clarify language in the "whereas" sections. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 9 a AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham and Gurnee and Mayor Schwart- NOES: Councilman Norris ABSENT: None 5. Communication from David Y. Farmer, Attorney, representing Dan Oxford regarding acreage fees on the Southwood subdivision. He stated that on January 31, 1973 the subdivision review board of the City prepared a memorandum to the Planning Commission which incorporated its recommendations on the Oxford development. Within these recommenda- tions on the Oxford development was one which called for the payment of $350.00 per gross acre as a water acreage fee. A review of that file at the present time would indicate that subsequent to the preparation of the memorandum the figure $730.00 was inserted in place of the $350.00 figure. Subsequent to the accept- ance by the Planning Commission of the recommendations of the subdivision review board Mr. Oxford deposited a requested amount with the City at the rate of $350.00 per gross acreage exclusive of the street area. This was as requested in R.A. Paul's letter to Larry Meek of First American Title Insurance Company dated March 13, 1973. Therefore, he felt there were two problem areas involved with the water acreage fees in the Oxford annexation. 1. The alteration of a government document to indicate that a recommendation was made which in fact was not made, 2. The attempt by the City to avoid agreement entered into between itself Mr.'Oxford after all conditions to be had been performed. On this basis Mr- City Council reconsider the matter of fees and go back to the original $350 the consequences of an through R.A. Paul and performed by Mr. Oxford Farmer asked that the these water acreage .00 per acre. A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, presented for the City Council's information a chronological listing of the City's processing of the tentative map for tract 485 the Oxford subdivision and the City's adoption of increased water acreage fees, which showed that on March 5, 1973 water fees for tract 485 were paid at the rate of $350.00 per acre. Also on the same date at the evening Council meeting the City Council adopted a resolution No. 2428 increasing water acreage fees from $350 to $730 effective at once. On April 3, 1973 the memorandum from the City Attorney to the Planning Director advising that at the time thereafter of final approval of the tentative map b� the City Council, the conditions should be changed to state that the Developer would pay the acreage fee in effect at that later time, $730. April 16, 1973 the Council by resolution No. 2454 gave notice of its intention to consider Mr. Oxford's Southwood Annexation; on May 7, 1973 the City Council approved the tentative tract map with condition no. 13 stating that "The developer shall pay water acreage fees in the amount of $730.00 per gross acre exclusive of street area ", and by the same motion of the City Council adopted resolution No. 2463 approving the annexation of the tract to the City. A. J. Shaw then submitted a memorandum from Ronald D. Young, former Planning Director regarding water acreage fees for tract 485, which stated at the time the tract was considered by the subdivision review board a communication was received from Mr. Paul, Water Department Director, in- dicating that the acreage fee would be $350.00 per acre. Subsequent to review of the tract by the subdivision review board and the Planning Commission the Council passed a resolution increasing the water acreage fee to $730.00 per acre and we were advised by Mr. Paul in his memo of April 3, 1973 that the conditions should be changed and that the developer would pay the acreage fee of $730.00 per acre at the time of approval of City Council Minutes January 21., 1974 Page 10 a the tentative map. Therefore, the condi-tions of the subdivision review board and the Planning Commission minutes were modified to require the $730.00 per acre. He condluded that the confusion would not have arisen if the planning staff could have supplemented the minutes of the subdivision review board and the Planning Commission with an addendum covering water acreage fees rather than changing of the minutes. A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, explained that the City did not annex or approve the tentative map of Tract 4 85 until two months after the increase in the water acreage fees and that acreage fees applied only to property which had been annexed to the City. He felt that the early payment-by Oxford did not stop the City from coming back for additional funds and he felt Oxford could be required to pay the addi- tional funds. Mr. Farmer, Attorney for Mr. Oxford, stated he felt that morally and ethi -cally the City had a covenant with Mr. Oxford through the various agencies of the City, subdivision review board, Planning Commission, etc. also a written direction by a staff member and he felt that the City citizens should be allowed to rely on such an action. Councilman Norris felt that the City should stick to the original commitment with the developer and accept the $350.00 per acre as has been previously paid. On motion of Councilman Norris that the City Council accept the original $350.00 per acre fee fog tract 495. Motion lost for lack of a second. On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman-Gurnee accept the recommendation of the City Attorney that the City was not bound by the developer's early payment of $350.00 per acre as originally established and that the City could require the additional fees in accordance with the resolution adopted March 5, 1973. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: Councilman Norris ABSENT: None 6. David Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer, stated that his report on staffing and relationship of City staff to consulting services was not quite ready and asked that it be continued for presenta- tion as soon as completed. 7. The Council considered the impact of Assembly Bill 2610, which would require cities to reimburse property owners if the fair market value of property decreased as a result of a zoning change. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham that a letter be sent to Assemblyman Nimmo and State Senator Grunsky and a telegram to the Chairman of the Committee before which this bill was being considered giving the City's opposition to its adoption and the reason therefor. Motion carried. 3. Memorandum from D. F. Romero, City Engineer, bringing to the Council's attention a cooperative agreement between the State of California and the City covering revisions and modifications to the traffic control system, highway lighting and channelization at the intersection of Santa Rosa and Foothill Blvd. The cost sharing of the project was calculated according to normal state formula based on the number of legs at the intersection. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 11 D. F. Romero, City Engineer, stated that in May, 1973 he submitted a memorandum to the City Council using the Division of Highways estimate for the work at $36,000 with the City's share being $18,000. Since that time the cost of signal work had sky- rocketed and the new cost estimate included within the agreement brought the City's share to $33,000. He stated he had verified this with staff at the Department of Transportation and this was a correct estimate. He continued that most of the signal installation at this intersection was installed in 1954 with the present controller installed in 1959 when substantial modifications were made. But the critical nature of this intersection and the ever increasing traffic loads he believed the City had no choice but to participate in the modification even at the increased cost, and suggested that the matter be considered favorably by the City Council. He concluded that the plans for the work were substantial- ly completed and the work would be conducted during the coming summer if approved by the City Council. The City Council discussed the need for this project and for the revisions of this traffic signal and also the extremely high cost to the City. On motion of Councilman Norris, seconded by Councilman Brown the follow- ing resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION 0. 2547 (1974 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving agreement with State of California for revision of existing traffic control signal system, safety lighting and channelization at the intersection of Foothill with State Highway Route 1 (Santa Rosa). Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, and Norris ' NOES: Councilman Gurnee and Mayor Schwartz ABSENT: None 9. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, asked the City Council for permission to purchase the State's share of the salvaged equipment of the existing signal standards, cabinet, and control equipment at the intersection of Foothill and Santa Rosa as this equipment could be used by the City at other intersections or it could be used as a spare in case of breakdown. On motion of Councilman Norris, seconded by Councilman Brown the City Engineer was authorized to purchase the equipment at a cost of $250. Motion carried. 10. Memorandum from D. F. Romero, City Engineer, requesting permission from the City Council to retain the consultant firm of Pomeroy, Johnson and Bailey in accordance with the City's application for permit to dis- charge waste water from the City sewer plant. As a condition of a federally mandated report the City must prepare additional information regarding industrial discharge into the municipal system. There.are approximately 20 industrial discharges which would have to be sampled and analyzed to meet Federal requirements. He estimates the cost to be approximately $1,750 for the requi-red testing which must be completed by June, 1974 for submission to the State Water Quality Control Board. On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Gurnee the City Engineer was authorized to enter into an agreement with Pomeroy, Johnson & Bailey. 11. D. F. Romero, City Engineer, reviewed plans and specifications for the City Council for Police Facility Carport Extension, City Plan No. 28 -74 at an estimated cost of $4,268 plus engineering design charges. This matter was approved by the City Council in Capital Outlay Account No. 4. City Council Minutes .January 21, 1974 Page 12 Pat Gerety, Associate Planner, reported that the Environmental Impact Report was not required under existing City policy for this addition. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman- Graham the plans and specifications were approved and the bids were authorized to be called for. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham and Gurnee and Mayor Schwartz NOES: Councilman Norris ABSENT: None 12. . Communication from the Design Review Board recommending that the public restroom in Mission Plaza be repainted. �It was the opinion of the DRB that the restroom's current color did not blend with its sur- roundings in Mission Plaza. The suggested colors would be to paint the restroom white with the exception of the center panel between the two entrance doors to be painted a dark brown similar to the brown trim. The white color would be similar to both the mission and the Murray Adobe and therefore given more continuity between the various buildings in the plaza. The DRB recommends that this suggestion be implemented perhaps by utilizing the assistance of the Youth Corps during a summer program. Recommendation approved on motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Graham on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None 13. R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, presented a memorandum to the City Council regarding the proposed restroom, press box, and concession stand complex at the Sinsheimer baseball stadium. He stated that atbudget time 1973 a preliminary figure of $32,000 for the facility was rounded off to $30,000 and placed under Revenue Sharing budget approved by the Council. It now appears that with various suggestions for features to be included in the facility that the project would cost $ 80,000. This was for approximately 3,000 square foot building including expensive items in connection with the concession stand, restrooms which would include vandal proofing. The Council should also bear in mind that the school board had indicated its intention not to approve final plans on this unit until the master plan had been completed and there might be some delay on this because the soil engineer, Robert Williams, was currently unable to get his equipment into the area to tie down the swimming pool location. James Stockton, Assistant Director of Parks & Recreation, presented schematic drawings and artist renderLngs of the press box, restroom, and concession stand at Sinsheimer Park. Several members of the Citv Council felt that this particular building seemed to-be quite elaborate and quite large for such an undertaking. But as these were just preliminary draw- ings the staff was authorized to take these drawings to the Park & Recreation Commission and to the joint Recreational Committee on Use of School District Property for their recommendation and information. 14. Memorandum from the Tree Committee regarding proposed changes to the make -up of the committee. The Committee discussed the following alternates for Tree Committee make -up. 1 1 1 1 Alternate 1. Alternate 2 Alternate 3 City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 13 Present make -up of Tree Committee as .proposed, no change. Same make -up of Tree Committee with two types of members: (1) staff members advisory- non - voting, and (2) Council members and lay people- voting members. Reduce the size of the Committee. There were two alternatives suggested: (1) Re- organization of Committee to have lay persons and remove tree authorities from the Committee, and (2) re- organization of the Committee to have only one Councilman represented. These alternates were discussed because of the problem of a spit vote with only four voting.members as in alternate number 2 above. Alternate 4. Re- organization of the Committee to.include only lay people and staff. After a quite heated discussion by the Tree Committee this matter was re- ferred to the City Council for final determination and guidance. Lane Wilson, Park Foreman, member of the Tree Committee stated that at the present. time the City Councilman, Park & Recreation representative, lay member and staff were all votd)ng on the Committee. The City Council discussed the make -up of the Traffic Committee and the Waterways Planning Board at which the City staff only acted as advisors with no voting privileges. Councilman Brown stated that with the Waterways Planning Board, presently consisting of seven members, it was quite unwieldy.to make a rapid de- cision. He suggested that possibly this was the p.roblem with the Tree Committee.. He suggested that the Committee could be made up of one Council member, one Park 3 Recreation Commission member, and one lay per- son, which would be voting. members and the various members of the Park Commission, Engineering Office and Planning Department would only be advisory to the Committee. Councilman Graham, member of the Tree Committee, stated that he wished to remain on the committee as he was quite interested in this particular area. Councilman Norris, also a member of the Tree Committee, stated that he would be willing to step down in order to make the thing work if only one Councilman were to be on the committee. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Brown that the Tree Committee be reconstituted to consist of one Council member, Councilman Graham; one representative of the Park E Recreation Commission; and one lay person appointed with staff representation with no vote to come from the Park Department, Planning Department, and the Engineering Office. Motion carried. 15. The City Council considered a communication from Julian C. Dixon, Assemblyman, requesting support by the City of San Luis Obispo of Assembly Bill 594, a bill dealing with environmental problems, and banning non- returnable or throw -away beverage containers. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 14 Communication from the Environmental Center of. San Luis Obispo County forwarding the gross income for the six month period in 1973 from their recycling center asking that the City Council support the ban on non- returnable containers so that this material could be recycled and reused. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham that the City Council go on record supporting Assembly Bill 594, a bill dealing with environmental problems, and banning non - returnable or throw -away beverage containers. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None B-1. Memorandum from Andrew D. Jones, Chairman, Subcommittee to Review Bids for a Public Transportation System, recommending that the City Council accept the bid of Doyle Griffith to perform the bus service in accordance with advertised specifications. Mr. Jones stated that the City committee had reviewed the proposed operation with Mr. Griffith and that the following items were discussed: 1. Mr. Griffith has a firm quote on an acceptable type of vehicle, with a firm delivery date of 90 days from placement of order. Bus size will be 17 passenger or larger. 2. Mr.. Griffith's estimate was reviewed and determined to be reasonable and all- inclusive. 3. Mr. Griffith can furnish the required $70,000 performance bond, and $5000 labor bond without difficulty. 4. Mr. Griffith agreed with the following items concerning operation: a. Vehicles will be washed and vacuumed daily. b. Vehicles will be radio equipped. c. Vendor will cooperate in the collection of basic data. d. The initial base of operation will be at the present Yellow.Cab terminal, however, separate bookkeeping will be established for a bus system. e. Hub meters will be provided for accurate mileage measurements. f. Bus operation and payment by the City will be measured beginning and ending at the terminal.. After reviewing all aspects of the bid and conditions the above subcommittee respectfully recommended acceptance of the low bid submitted by Mr. Doyle Griffith and award of contract to him. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the follow- ing resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2551 (1974 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo accepting the bid of Doyle Griffith for the operation of a transit system for a one year period as part of a transit system feasibility study. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None 1 J 1 City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 15 B-1A. Memorandum from Andrew D. Jones, Chairman Mass Transporatation Committee, regarding coordination and supervision of operation of the San Luis Obispo bus system. Assuming that the Council would award the contract for the proposed bus system at the January 21 Council meeting, the Committee offered the following recommendations for accomplishing the required coordination and supervision of the bus system: 1. Mr. Fitzpatrick's office would coordinate the accounting, daily fare collection, mileage and passenger number recording procedures. 2. Mr. Romero's office would coordinate operations with respect to location of bus stops, scheduling, route reviews, collection of passenger statistics by questionnaire, etc. The Committee was of the considered opinion that the above suggested procedures would enable maximum benefit to be derived during the oper- ation of the system through application of sound accounting and audit- ing procedures by the City Clerk's office and through application of traffic and transportation engineering principles by the City Engineer's office to provide for a high level of service and smooth operation. The Mass Transit Committee thanked the City Council for the opportunity to submit their recommendation. On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Norris that the recommendation on coordinating and supervision of the San Luis Bus System be approved. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None B -2. The City Clerk reported on the following bids received for various City equipment, motor vehicles and contractors equipment. Bids opened Friday, January 18, 1974. See exhibit "A ". R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer, made the following recommendation on the bids received. Item No. 1. That Alternate 1 - the Chevrolet Suburban Wagon be accepted for $4,805.02 including tax less trade -in. Item No. 2. The low bid of Kimball - Motors on Economy Pickup at $2,625.36 including sales tax less trade -in. Item No. 3. Recommend re- bidding since Lougee - Michael did not bid on the John Deere model that meets the specifications. The City believes it could bid on a model that does meet the specifications at a cost several hundred dollars lower than the Wallace Machinery bid on a Ford model. Therefore, they asked permission to re -bid this item. Item No. 4. The second low bid by Wallace Machinery on a caterpillar, four -wheel drive loader. Cost slightly higher than the Lougee - Michael bid on a John Deere, but Waliiace Machinery offered $15,500 on a repurchase option versus $10,200 from the Lougee_ Michael Company. Also, the caterpillar would be available for immediate delivery compared to 150 days for the John Deere, which would make a difference of more than $200 in sales tax since any item that was delivered after April 1, 1974 would be subject to a six percent rather than a five per- cent tar.. Total cost less trade -in, including sales tax is $17,750.00. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 16 On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Graham that the recommendation for purchase and for the re -bid of Item No. 3 as recom- mended by the Administrative Officer be accepted. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None B -3. City Clerk reported on the following bids received for CREEK BANK REPAIRS, City Plan No. 23 -74. Bids opened January <14, 1974 at 3:00 P.M. Bids listed are for use of grouted stone: BIDDER BID Engineer's Estimate $26,123.50 TED WATKINS Paso Robles $27,995.00 R. BURKE CORP. San Luis Obispo $30,427.00 CONCO San Luis Obispo $31,528.00 WALTER BROS. San Luis s Obispo $35,063.67 CAL - WESTERN RETAINING WALLS Fresno $37,753.00 C. L. BROOKS San Bernardino $43,674.00 M.J. HERMRECK, INC. Nipomo $49,577.00 MADONNA CONST. CO. San Luis Obispo $57,215.00 D. F. Romero, City Engineer, reviewed the bids for the City Council, the various alternates to the five basic projects. He recommended that the low bid of Ted Watkins - $27,995.00 using grouted stone be accepted. On motion of Mavor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Norris that the low bid of Ted Watkins be accepted and the contract awarded. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Brown, Graham and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: Councilman Gurnee ABSENT: None C -1. Claims against the City of San Luis Obispo were authorized paid subject to approval by the Administrative Officer. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 17 C -2. The following contract payment was approved: Dennis Landscape Est. #1 $14,526.23 Street Tree Planting City Plan No. 18 -74 Santa Rosa 8 Foothill C -3. The City Council minutes of August 6, August 8, September 11, October 1, October 3, October 8, October 18, October 26, and November 14, 1973 were approved as corrected. C -4. Council consideration of maintenance agreement between Depart- ment of Transportation and City of San Luis Obispo for State Highways within the City limits. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the follow - resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2546 (1974 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving agreement for maintenance of State Highways in the City. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee, Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None C -5. The Mavor was authorized to execute an agreement for employ - ment, on a contract basis, of a social services coordinator for the Human Relations Commission. C -6. Communication from Sinsheimer P.T.A. Board regarding traffic problems at Sinsheimer School was referred to the Traffic Committee. C -7. Memorandum from D.F. Romero, City Engineer, requested permis- sion to order an overhaul of existing cutter assembly ($4,400), and to order a spare lift assembly ($3,360) for sewage treatment plant without obtaining competitive bids. He continued that no purpose would be served in placing the overhaul and the lift assembly out to bid, as there was only one firm that manufactured the units and the Los Angeles office would serve the account. A. J. Shaw, Clty Attorney, stated that under the conditions as explained by the City Engineer, the City Council could find that it was an idle act to call for competitive bids for the equipment. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Norris, that based on testimony presented, the calling for competitive bids would be a useless act. The Administrative Officer was authorized to purchase the necessary equipment. Motion carried. C -8. Council consideration of a resolution confirming the cost of work to correct creek obstructions at 1041 -1043 Hiquera Street, Stanlev V. Cole, owner. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the follow- ing resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2563, a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo confirming the cost of work cor- recting creek obstructions, assessing a portion of said costs against the property owner, and providing three years for the payment thereof. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page l° C -9. Council consideration of a resolution increasing the 1973 -74 budget (Account No. 211.2 - Contractual Services). On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2548, a resolution increasing the 1973 -74 budget (Account No. 211.2 City Engineer - Contractual Services). Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None C -10. Council consideration of a resolution increasing the 1973 -74 budget (Account No. 343, Water Transmission and Distribution Mains). On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2549, a resolution increasing the 1973 -74 budget (Account No. 343, Water Transmission and Distribution Mains). Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee.and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None C -11. Communication from Don Kral] requesting amendment to the Municipal Code to allow card rooms to be open 24 hours a day. Charles Willis, former card room operator spoke in opposition to allowing card rooms to stay open 24 hours a day. He also objected to present card room licenses limiting who can play in their card room. He suggested that the City Council appoint a citizens committee to supervise card room operation. On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Graham the matter was referred to the Police Department for report. C -12. Communication from the Planning Commission regarding proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow administrative and general offices, not including medical and professional offices, in heavy commercial and industrial zones was held over until the Planning Commis- sion completed the second hearing and reported to the City Council. C -13. Communication from the Planning Commission regarding amendment to the Sign Ordinance allowing signs made of wood,to be erected in Fire Zone I (Central Business District) was set for public hearing. C -14. Memorandum from R. A. Paul, Water Department Director, regarding Council authority to advertise for bids - Pipeline Materials - Cross Town Feeder, City Specifications No. W73 -10. (Estimate $240,000, to be in- cluded in next year's budget. R.D.M.) was approved and authorization given to call for bids. C -15. Memo from R. A. Paul, Water Department Director, regarding Council authority to advertise for bids - Site Preparation - Edna Saddle Reservoir Site, City Specification No. W73 -8. (Estimate $265,000, to be included in next year's budget. R.D.M.) was approved and authorization given to call for bids. 1 1 1 City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 19 C -16. Council consideration of Resolution No. 73 -13. A resolution of the County of San Luis Obsipo approving Los Osos Road - Madonna Road Annexation to the City of San Luis Obsipo, (Firehouse site owned by the City) was referred to the Planning Commission. C -17. Memo from R. A. Paul, Water Department Director, regarding Progress Report, Ordinance No. 568 (1972 Series) was ordered received and filed. C -18. Summary of Public Works Department projects in design and construction projects was ordered received and filed. C -19. Administrative Officer announced the appointment of Neal Alston as Maintenance Man II effective February 1, 1974 at Step 1 or $636 sub- ject to one year probationary period. C -20. Administrative Officer announced the appointment of Brian F. Lapworth as Fireman effective January 16, 1974 at Step 1 or $772 subject to one year probationary period. C -21. The following salary step increases were approved effective Feb- ruary 1, 1974: Michael C. Alamo - Sr. Recreation Leader From Step 1 or $712 to Step 2 or $750 Gail A. Davis - Secretary From Step 1 or $568 to Step 2 or $600 Robert C. Isenberg - Maintenance Man II From Step 3 or $712 to Step 4 or $750 Alan D. Matthews - Police Officer From Step 2 or $860 to Step 3 or $910 Anthony N. Oliveira - Maintenance Man II From Step 2 or $670 to Step 3 or $712 David S. Phillips - Maintenance Man II From Step 1 or $636 to Step 2 or $670 John P. Quirk - Assistant Director of Water From Step 4 or $1,192 to Step 5 or $1,258 Malcolm W. .Stone - Police Officer From Step 2 or $860 to Step 3 or $910 C -22. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2550 (1974 Series), a resolution increasing the 1973 -74 budget (Account No. 400.15 Utility Tax - recycling Center). Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None. ABSENT: None C -23. R.A. Paul, Water Department Director, brought to the Council's attention that A.B. 2483 (Nimmo) regarding stockponds, was again active on the State Legislature's agenda, and further the bill had been further h.beralized to the disadvantage of the City and other holders of rights of record to Salinas River Water. The new amendments include domestic and recreational use incidental to livestock use, and also roll back the dates to allow additional time to perfect right. City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 20 On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Brown the Water Director was authorized to contact Assemblyman Nimmo and the chairman of the committee presenting the objections of the City Council to adoption of the bill. Motion carried. C -24. A. J.. Shaw, City Attorney, again brought the building permit for the Woodbridge Feed and Sound Com a restaurant at 271 Woodbridge Street, and particular comments by Attorney Gerald Shipsey that the City was State code, which required a city zoning ordinance to with the General Plan by the City (Govt. Code Section matter of the )any to construct ly in view of the in violation of be made consistent 65860). David Williamson, Asst. Administrative Officer, stated he felt that the City Council should proceed under existing City ordinances and grant a building permit because the proposed project Is in accordance with exist- ing zoning and the City's adopted policy for establishing consistency between the General Plan and zoning. This policy is that all future zone changes are to be made consistent with the General Plan; however, the City is not going to rezone all properties which are inconsistent at this time. This policy was adopted at a joint meeting between the City Council and Planning Commission.held a few weeks ago during which the ramifications of Assembly Bill 1301, which requires compatibility between the General Plan and zoning, were discussed. The matter was continued for further discussion to February 4, 1974. TC -1. 74 -1 -1C Recommendation that monthly parking permits in down- town lots be raised from $4 and $6 to $6 and $9, effective April 1, 1974. On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Brown that the recommendation that monthly parking permits in downtown lots be raised to $6 and $9, effective April 1, 1974, be approved. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham and Gurnee and Mayor Schwartz NOES: Councilman Norris ABSENT: None 72 -1 -2T Recommendation that stop signs along North Broad Street be re- evaluated at the end of May 1.974. On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Brown that the recommendation for re- evaluation of the stop signs along North Broad Street at the end of May be approved. Motion carried on the following .roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None 74 -1 -3T Recommend that Engineering Department be authorized to negotiate for rights of way for street widening - South side South Street, Higuera to Beebee. On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Brown that recommendation to negotiate for rights of way for street widening - South side South Street, Higuera to Beebee be approved. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 Page 21 AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None I 74 -1 -4T Recommend painting of bike lane east side of Los Osos Valley Road between Madonna and Prefumo!Canyon Road. 74 -1 -5T Recommend one 12- minute parking space in front of Saw Shop, 1177 Marsh St. 74 -1 -6T Recommend red zone (four spaces) north side Murray east of Santa Rosa in front of Sierra Vista Hospital. at Morro. 74 -1 -7T Recommend stop signs on Leff at Morro and on Church 74 -1 -8T Recommend red zone (two spaces) South side Palm west of Osos. 74 -1 -9T Recommend four 24- minute parking meter spaces at north end of Court Street in lot 6. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Brown the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2555 (1974 Series) a resolution restricting parking and establishing a bicycle lane on Los Osos Valley Road; establishing short term parking on Marsh Street; restricting parking on Murray Street; establishing stop signs on Leff and Church Streets; restricting parking on Palm Street; and establishing short term parking on Court Street. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Graham, Gurnee and Norris, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None The meeting adjourned to 7:30 P.M., Monday, January 28, 1974 to consider amendments to the Open Space Element of the General Plan. APPROVED: March 4, 1974 H. ZPATRICK, CITY CLERK 1 EXHIBIT "A" City Council Minutes January 21, 1974 (n O r CO. zz w cn = cn 7� (D x D�> DO r r- (D zC Zr Z- O(n 03 J YG7 -ir - m C O 70 m D D D- v D + o m c) U) i r s i m z- *-o-- r (D U 1 U t 00 a 0 O - I 2f ; _ :K p (7 - D - m Z O in 2 S O > •O (n -I -• D 2 C O O CL m - - - -;D CD r z m m O o < z C_ z -ICD Z-I O7 C) z -W Z-im (D mom - mom- O m - m�t < -i Dp -ID p - O p ti T m m m m m m O Ef+ En Z7 A A U) -i O `u p - m 0` ul %0O�O+ 0 0 0 J O J Z Z Z O O O O Co CD co UD Er En . 0 0 O O - N O N -F O•� O D\ • O 0.0 N b' (,Cl 69 !i Efl FA "" O O O N N N N Co O7 CD G� J U1 N J - - - A N J N (J A v OJ U1 w U1 CO O N IV - O - 000 W *-o-- O A O U 1 U t 00 000 000 b' (,Cl 69 bA v'1 bf O', W OD CD -• ED Z O O J W N J �O v OJ U1 w U1 CO O N IV - O - CO W A O A O U 1 U t 00 0 0 - - . p CJ N O N O O O O wow 000 .00�O Eft Ef N w min w= cc)rn Era w Era tra A Ut �O O J J 0 0 0 Z rn o' r') rn� v i m 0 O ON O ON U0% UUo 00 0w UD uo --j O -I i O O O - - A CD A O o 0 0 0 E,a En O O O O O O N N O O O O O O U t -,j 2 OJ J U7 u O U1 U1 O 0% O 0% (7 A O A Z Z Z Z O O O O O CD CD W C0 07 O O CD p p 07 p M m m (n (D DF - (D + m -• m 00 3 N 7 Z w ZE: O O + (C s O (D 7 7 + m - n O 7 7 7 O - m C0 n O C c -•� N d 7 cf) m + -I 1 O (D 7 - (D + -I + m m M O n (D C- Z -o O or r o + 0) w E3 n- CD (D + () A + CJ T (D (D - + (D -I - m C; M (D p � � z a - O 3 r (D o A (D Dl 7 (D + (D -0 ;J D) O Z a M � m (D< 3 3 Z d O O + (D (D 1 U (D 7 + � G a) n O n £ O a cc 0) =3 lz� n -• (D n Ut + o � n (D Dl -. o < < (D O a- 0 LO �. U1 c (D - n -< h 7 n + O O O =3 -I U) (D -• n CL - in (D N O 0) (D C 7 0_ CD C_ m 1 + n 0) D, n O 1 L U1 D 7 (D C D) C -G -O OJ C + -G O J A -} Dl (D + C7 N -• O < 0 O • Dl F- 0 0 U O EXHIBIT "A" (Continued) DEVIATIONS FROM SPECIFICATIONS KIMBALL MOTOR CO. Item No. 1, Alt. 1 - Suburban #18 Chrome hubcaps in place of Wheel Covers. #18 Bright Windshield molding not available. Item No. 1, Alt. 2 - Beauville Sportvan #7 Pear Spring Capacity 2,100 lbs. #10 Panel delivery type rear doors, fixed rear glass. #16 Clock, not available. Item No. 2 - Chevrolet LUV #6 Brake failure warning light not available. #15 Tires with 40,000 mile guarantee not included. #22 Ignition /steering lock with door buzzer not available. #23 "Omaha" orange requires special paint job, add $150 to bid price. Standard color such as white without black fenders, deduct $25. Standard orange is available but darker than "Omaha" orange. #24 Grill painted white. HYSEN - JOHNSON FORD, INC. Item No. 2 1. Compact Truck 1973 - Model 1974 - Model, not available at this time. 2. Tires - no mileage guarantee on original equipment. Warrantee handled by tire manufacturer. 3. Steering wheel lock - None. 4. Bumper - Chrome front only - rear bumper, step type painted. 5. Colors available to us, are - white - tan - red - blue or yellow. Unit bid can be picked out of stock. KOIVISTO EQUIPMENT INC. Item No. 3 Loader Model 1HC #2050A,'120 day delivery. Tractor Nlodel 1HC #2500 Series A: Item No. 4 Alt. 1 - Model H60E, 120 day delivery. Alt. 2 - Model H50C, rigid frame, 120 day delivery. No bid on guaranteed price for repurchase, s.ix month warrantee - parts and labor. No hour limit. WALLACE MACHINERY Item No. 3 Ford 3550 Tractor /Loader. 90 day delivery Item No. 4 Caterpillar Model 920 Wheel Loader. Immediate delivery. Guaranteed price for repurchase of equipment at end of four years or 3500 hours of operation, whichever comes first, $15,500.00 LOUGEE- MICHAEL EQUIPMENT Item No. 3 John Deere 302 Utility Loader. P..O.P.S. - two post R.O.P.S. - approved by OSHA and State of California. 3" seat belt. Delivery 90 days approximately. Itom Hn d John Deere 544B Loader. Tires - 17.5 x 25 - 12 ply. Delivery 130 days approximately. Guaranteed price for repurchase of equipment at the end of four years or 3500 hours of operation, whichever comes first, $10,200.00 1