HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/01/1976M I N U T E S
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY.OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MONDAY, MARCH 1, 1976 - 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
Pledge
Roll Call
Councilmen
PRESENT.: Myron Graham, T. Keith Gurnee, Jesse Norris, Steve Petterson
and Mayor Kenneth E. Schwartz
ABSENT: None
City Staff
PRESENT: J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; William Flory, Grants and Special
Project Director; D.F. Romero, Director of Public Services;
Lee Schlobohm, Fire Chief; Art Shaw, City Attorney; Wayne
Peterson, City Engineer
1. The City Council held a.public hearing on the recommendation of the
Planning Commission concerning.resource deficiencies (pursuant to provisions
of Ordinance 604 -A, Level I) on the following projects:
1) Request for use permit at 1136 Santa Rosa Street to construct a restaurant,
Charles'French, applicant.
The deficiency was that this project would contribute sewage to a downstream
sewer line in Marsh Street between Chorro and Broad Streets which was operating
beyond its theoretical-peak flow capacity. The Planning Commission previously
' recommended sewer connection (by pass) along Pacific Street from Chorro to
Garden Street should be accomplished by the City immediately. The subject
development -proposal should be issued a building permit only if the Council
was satisfactorily assured, with advise of legal counsel, that the intercon-
nection could be accomplished prior to the proposed occupancy of the building
addition.
2) Request for use permit at 2925 McMillan Avenue for warehouse, Rojac Enterprise,
applicant.
The deficiency was that the project (McMillan Avenue) was mot served by the city
sewer system.
The Planning Commission recommended that the project, because it would generate
very little sewerage, should be allowed to proceed under the following conditions:
1. Septic tank system shall be certified by the County Health Dept.
as sufficient to serve the proposed use.
2. The septic tank system shall be constructed in such a manner so as
to lend itself most easily convertililee to connection to a future
city sewer system in McMillan Avenue as determined by the city.
3. All owners having-any interest-in the subject property shall sign
and 'record an agreement to run with the land by which they waive
all rights to protest and agree-to participate in a sewer assessment
district.'
Finally, because McMillan Avenue was not served by a city sewer system, future
development.would be subject to Level I 604 -A reporting until a sewer system
was established. Each development would be considered with respect to the
amount of sewerage which it might generate and thereby may be recommended that
certain development not occur and permits be withheld because of limitations
of such capability.
City Council Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 2
Communication from Tim.Mazzacano, Director of .the Division of Environmental
Health for the Public Health Department, notified the City Council that their
.department was opposed to further development of septic.tanks and underground
leaching systems in the area of McMillan Road. They requested that the City
Council only approve development that could be placed on an approved sewage
disposal system.
On motion of Councilman Norris,, seconded ,.by..Councilman.Graham,..that the City
Council accept the recommendation of the-.Planning-Commission-and proceed on
that basis. Motion carried, all ayes...
2. The City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation of the
Planning Commission .to rezone 668 and 672 Serrano Drive and 88 through 98
Palomar Drive from R -1 to RD R -1 to construct 18 condominium single family
units and five single family lots, Brent Dickens, applicant.
Rob Strong, Community Development Director, presented the recommendation of
the Planning Commission, Resolution 871 -76, favoring a rezoning for the follow-
ing reasons:
1)
.The project as submitted did not appear to have substantial adverse
impacts upon the environment or neighborhood.
2)
The proposed project was a significantly better -means to develop this
property than a conventional subdivision:
A. Grading is minimized.
B: Building coverage is minimized.
C. Street area is minimized.
D. Maximum open space is retained.
3)
The project as proposed complied with ordinance requirements for a planned
unit development.
Therefore, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed sub-
,
division and planned developments'subject to the following conditions:
1)
The applicant shall dedicate and.provide full 1/2 street improvements
along all frontage on a public street.
2)
The applicant shall submit all documents related to the creation of a
Home Owners Association to the City Attorney and Department of Community
Development for review and approval. All six proposed lots shall be a
part of the Home Owners Association. Furthermore, the documents for forma-
tion of the Home Owners Association shall clearly indicate the responsibil-
ities of the Association for maintenance of all building exteriors, common
areas, on -site water and sewer facilities.
3)
The area adjacent to the culvert .which enters this project near. Serrano
Drive and the channel of the creek which crosses this property, shall be
improved to the satisfaction of the Department of Community Development.
Anticipated improvements include: a low rock wall near the culvert to direct
the flow, low rock walls and bank stabilization in other areas where the
channel is poorly defined.
4)
The entry driveway shall be realigned in order to preserve the three pepper
trees near the bridge.
5)
The concrete tank shall be removed.
6)
The applicant shall submit a drainage control plan for' review and approval
by the Department of Community Development -to indicate drainage control
measures along the rear of the lots with frontage along Palomar and in the
area of the carports serving Units 13 thru 16.
7)
The applicant shall submit a tentative grading plan for review and approval
'
by the Department of Community Development prior to approval of the final
tract map. -
8)-
The developer shall pay a proportional share of the costs for water and
sewer facilities existing in Serrano Drive and-Palomar Avenue.
9)
Units 11 thru 16 shall be constructed so as to-.have the floor elevation a
minimum of 18'inches above existing natural grade.
10)
The developer shall post a sign near the traffic island indicating that
parking is allowed in designated spaces only and that violators will be
towed away. This provision shall be a part of condition 1.
The City Clerk presented a letter from Newton H. Anderson, 671.Serrano Drive,
opposing the development of this property as he felt it would be hazardous for
traffic to enter Serrano Drive where it has been narrowed and.with a view of the
street and proposed sidewalk is obstructed.
Communication from George Karch, 699 Serrano Drive, protesting an outlet from
this tract- .on-Serrano Drive.. He felt it was unsaferto allow this tremendous
amount-of-traffic - come through their property.
Brent Dickens, architect for-.the developer, spoke in support.of the requested
rezoning and approval-of the tentative map. -He felt:the final location of the
access was the best that could be devised. He showed other studies for access:
1) Broad to Murray; 2) Serrano to Palomar; and 3) Palomar which he felt were
all inferior to the approved access-by the Planning Commission..' Finally, he
stated he felt he was bringing in a good plan for the City Council to consider.
John King, property.owner;:.spoke in support of-the development and what his
plans were within the planned development. -
H. Wilson, stated.he was opposed.to the-development due.to. the allowing of heavy
traffic to come from the development and onto a narrow city street. He felt
this was detrimental to people who had lived:in the area for;many years and that
the increase in traffic from the development was dangerous to the residents. He.
recommended that a new access be developed and to increase the parking requirements.
Jim Sheffen, 650 Serrano Drive, stated he was opposed to the development as he
felt that the whole scheme was to get these buildings turned into student housing.
He was also opposed that the access was dumping additional cars on- Serrano Drive.
Mrs. Keith Houser ,.Palomar= Drive,:stated::she was opposed-'to.-.the-development due
to traffic, etc. _
Dr. Gates stated he was..opposed due.to much student housing in the area already,
thought it was too high a density for such a small parcel--of land; too much
traffic, etc.
Fraser Neal;- Serrano Drive; objected-to the increase of traffic on Serrano. He
felt .that:aaother_:through_acces §;:Murray or Broad; should:be-.considered.-
Mrs. , 740 Murray Street, was opposed to allowing more traffic on Murray and
property due to heavy traffic now." She-felt-that-.Serrano residents:should.take
care of their own traffic and not push it onto their neighbors.
Mayor Schwartz declared.the public hearing closed.
Councilman Gurnee stated he would support the development on the basis of density
but questioned access to development by way of Serrano which-he felt was too
narrow but the Planning Commission, staff and Traffic Committee recommended
City Council-Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 3
11)
The private.-street shall be improved to standards approved by the
Department'of Community Development.
12)
The precise development plans shall . be approved by.the ARC prior to
the issuance of.any. permits.
13)
The existing:-barn shall be removed or improved to meet applicable stand-
ards of the Uniform Building Code.
14)
Construction on Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 shall be subject to review by the
ARC. This condition shall appear as a note on the final map and trust
deeds.
15)
Any subsequent proposal for .phased construction of the 16 attached units
would require Planning Commission approval.
16)
Applicant shall,submit precise plan for approval by the Planning Commission
within one year. Construction shall commence within six months from the
date of approval. of the precise plan and shall be pursued in a timely fashion.
17)
The applicant.shall provide three-spaces for parking of recreational vehicles.
.Parking of recreational vehicles shall be limited to authorized spaces. A
screen plan shall be provided for such spaces to be approved as part of the
preliminary view by the ARC.
Mayor
Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
The City Clerk presented a letter from Newton H. Anderson, 671.Serrano Drive,
opposing the development of this property as he felt it would be hazardous for
traffic to enter Serrano Drive where it has been narrowed and.with a view of the
street and proposed sidewalk is obstructed.
Communication from George Karch, 699 Serrano Drive, protesting an outlet from
this tract- .on-Serrano Drive.. He felt it was unsaferto allow this tremendous
amount-of-traffic - come through their property.
Brent Dickens, architect for-.the developer, spoke in support.of the requested
rezoning and approval-of the tentative map. -He felt:the final location of the
access was the best that could be devised. He showed other studies for access:
1) Broad to Murray; 2) Serrano to Palomar; and 3) Palomar which he felt were
all inferior to the approved access-by the Planning Commission..' Finally, he
stated he felt he was bringing in a good plan for the City Council to consider.
John King, property.owner;:.spoke in support of-the development and what his
plans were within the planned development. -
H. Wilson, stated.he was opposed.to the-development due.to. the allowing of heavy
traffic to come from the development and onto a narrow city street. He felt
this was detrimental to people who had lived:in the area for;many years and that
the increase in traffic from the development was dangerous to the residents. He.
recommended that a new access be developed and to increase the parking requirements.
Jim Sheffen, 650 Serrano Drive, stated he was opposed to the development as he
felt that the whole scheme was to get these buildings turned into student housing.
He was also opposed that the access was dumping additional cars on- Serrano Drive.
Mrs. Keith Houser ,.Palomar= Drive,:stated::she was opposed-'to.-.the-development due
to traffic, etc. _
Dr. Gates stated he was..opposed due.to much student housing in the area already,
thought it was too high a density for such a small parcel--of land; too much
traffic, etc.
Fraser Neal;- Serrano Drive; objected-to the increase of traffic on Serrano. He
felt .that:aaother_:through_acces §;:Murray or Broad; should:be-.considered.-
Mrs. , 740 Murray Street, was opposed to allowing more traffic on Murray and
property due to heavy traffic now." She-felt-that-.Serrano residents:should.take
care of their own traffic and not push it onto their neighbors.
Mayor Schwartz declared.the public hearing closed.
Councilman Gurnee stated he would support the development on the basis of density
but questioned access to development by way of Serrano which-he felt was too
narrow but the Planning Commission, staff and Traffic Committee recommended
City Council.Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 4
Serrano so he felt he-would have to go along with their recommendation as they
had spent much time studying this matter. He felt the developer's parking plan
was more than adequate and would go.along with the-rezoning and also the tenta-
tive tract map. He felt the development was immaginative and a well- defined
project and he felt with the controls established they would be ansasset tbethe
entire neighborhood.
Councilman Norris stated that he too would support the development as proposed
and felt that he would favor the rezoning but would not approve the tentative
map due to-the poor access and lack of adequate.parking.. He felt Serrano access
had too many problems. Finally, he stated that the width of the interior streets
were too narrow with no curb parking.
Councilman Petterson felt the proposal was immaginative,.was a good:.use of land
but questioned the poor access to Serrano but felt no alternative had been shown
so he would support the rezoning and the tentative map as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
Councilman Graham stated he would support the proposal, was a good plan, immagin-
ative, good use of open space for the amenities. He had hoped that.better access
could be acquired for some area other than Serrano and would like to see access
to Palomar.
Mayor-Schwar.tz felt.this was a good development of a problem property. He felt
the interior design was excellent as.was building placement but felt .design for
access was not acceptable. He felt that this additional traffic was excessive
and detrimental to the neighborhood and residents of the area. He felt that
property owners should not only consider the land under development but should
also include all the land owned by the.same property owner in order to really
help the entire neighborhood. He felt that in this way the access could be
made to Palomar Drive. He felt this matter should not be accepted and should
be sent back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration of access.
Rob Strong stated upon question that.the Planning Commission,-ARC and staff had ,
exhausted all alternatives for.access to this tract.
On motion of Councilman Norris, seconded by Mayor Schwartz, that the City Council
approve the rezoning but continue the tentative tract map until the Planning
Commission had had another opportunity to look at access.
Motion lost-on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Norris and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilmen Graham, Gurnee and Petterson
ABSENT: None
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham, that the City
Council approve the rezoning and tentative map with 17 Planning Commission con-
ditions with the planting in the lots to the rear to Palomar not to be so high
as to obstruct the view of the other neighbors and that the access be taken
through the barn to Serrano without disturbing the eucalyatus trees.
The motion was withdrawn by the maker and second.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman-Petterson, that the
matter be continued to Mangy 15; 1976 with staff and developer to study alter- '
natives to Serrano Drive access to condominium�.area and to list advantages and
disadvantages to include access to Broad Street, Serrano, Palomar, Luneta, etc.
Motion carried on the following-roll -call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Norris and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilman Graham
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 5
3. The City Council considered the adoption of an ordinance adding
sections to Article III.V, Chapter 10 of the Municipal code prohibiting
parking of certain vehicles near intersections and prohibiting nighttime
parking near dwellings of certain large vehicles and certain vehicles
operating air conditioning equipment.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before
' the City Council for or against the proposed ordinance. Mayor Schwartz
declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Graham, the follow-
ing ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 664 (1976 Series), an ordinance
of the of the City of San Luis Obispo adding sections to Article III.V, Chapter
10 of the Municipal Code prohibiting parking of certain vehicles near inter-
sections and prohibiting nighttime parking near dwellings of certain large
vehicles and certain vehicles operating air conditioning equipment.
Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Gurnee, Graham, Norris and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
.ABSENT:_ None
4. The City Council held a public hearing on a proposal to amend the
Municipal Code to add separate sections establishing fines for parking viola-
tions and increase $1.00 fines to $2.00 and to provide for more than one
offense for parking violations subject to minimum fines.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the
City Council for or against the proposed ordinance. Mayor Schwartz declared
' the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Graham, the follow-
ing ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 665 (1976 Series), an ordinance
of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the Municipal Code to add a separate
section establishing signs for parking violations to increase $1.00 fines to
$2.00 and to provide for more than one offense for parking violations subject
to minimum fines.
Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Graham, Gurnee, Norris, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
6. Homer Odom, Chairperson of the Promotional Coordinating Committee,
presented for the Council's information the subcommittee's plans for a four
year long -range plan for promotional funds administered by the committee.
He stated that the overall ratio of advertising to other promotional activi-
ties was being reduced in the four year period and as soon as the subcommittee's
long range plan had been accepted by the full committee, a written report of
their plan would be submitted to the City Council. He then submitted for the
Council's consideration a recommendation of the Promotional Coordinating Committee
that the City Council approve a grant of $3,260 to the Poly Royal Board of ASI
of California Polytechnic State University for the purpose of promoting the
1976 Poly Royal to encourage visitors to Poly Royal in the City of San Luis
Obispo.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Graham, the recommend-
ation of the Promotional Coordinating Committee was approved and a grant of
$3,260 was authorized.
City Council Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 6
Councilman.Gurnee stated he was opposed to.an outright grant.to Poly Royal as
he felt a grant was not�the answer but that- .maybe.a distribution. of tickets
to the elderly, poor,.etc. to .take part.in this activity might be a better use
of public funds.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
.AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Graham,_Norris and'Mayor.Schwartz '
.NOES: Councilman.Gurnee
ABSENT: None
Homer Odom then submitted.a recommendation .from.the'committee recommending that
the City.Council grant $7,500 to.the San Luis Obispo County Symphony Association
from promotional funds for the fiscal year 1975/76.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded.by Councilman Petterson, the recommend -
ation.was approved and a grant of $7,500.was given to the San Luis Obispo County
Symphony Association.
7. Rob Strong, Director of Community Development, on behalf of the Planning
Commission, submitted for the Council's consideration, Minor Subdivision No. 439,
which would combine eight existing lots into four lots as part of the development
proposal by the ARC. The purpose of the lot combination is to insure useable
open space served by.the.residents of.two_buildings without'property_ line fenc-
ing.and.allow sufficient construction of parking.lots proposed to be shared by
residents of two separate buildings. 'Both buildings would be on one lot rather
than two existing lots. The staff recomm ended approval of the minor subdivision
as submitted.
On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham, - Minor Subdivision
No:d439, J. Nachazel; was approved. '
Motion carried on the.following roll-call vote:
AYES: .Councilmen Gurnee, Graham, Norris, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8. The City Council .considered.modifications to the.final map of Tract 444,
Leonard Blaser, applicant near Los Osos Valley Road and Prefumo Canyon.Road.
Rob Strong, Community Development Director, reviewed the Planning Commission
action dealing.with the amended final map for Tract No. 444, Leonard Blaser,
developer. He stated that on July 5, 1972, the Planning Commission approved
a 90 lot conventional single.family subdivision located northwest of Descanso
Avenue and Los Osos Valley Road at the foot -of Prefumo Creek:, a portion of the
Irish Hills. This tentative map was approved by the.City Council on July 17,
1972 with the stipulation that the Council approve the grading plan prior to
any grading permit. The Municipal Code allowed one year time limit in which
the final map and related improvement plan must be prepared, approved and recorded.
The Council may consider a. one year.extension of time if applied for by the sub-
divider prior.to expiration. .'Failure to record'the' final map within one year
from the date of tentative map approval would terminate all proceedings unless
extended and a new tentative map must be submitted.to enable.subseauent map
filings.. Notwithstanding these time limits.in this instance, the city imposed
a two year construction moratorium in the Laguna area from November, 1972 to
November, 1974 and in the opinion of the City Attorney this action suspended
normal procedural time limits.'. It.was further determined that.the city should
require an EIR determination on.the_project.before allowing implementation, since
this procedure became a prerequisite for discretionary private, as well as public
project activities, pursuant to the "Mammoth case ".
City Council Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 7
In anticipatioryof " the.end of the.moratorium, the Commission approved a negative
declaration on September. 17, 1974-after.reviewing a comprehensive grading and
drainage. plan. providing for "terraced" lots and " balanced ".cut. and :fill, derived
from the tentative-map configuration superimposed on existin& terrain. The grad-
ing plan and EIR - determination were approved by the Council on October 7, 1974.
Despite Council's approval..of the final map, related documents such as subdivision
' agreement, security and performance bonds, fees. and other,data were not completed,
and the map was-:not recorded. Unfortunately, the city did not specify that the
developer must either record -the final map or request extension prior to July 17,
1975, nor did the subdivider diligently pursue completion and recording of the
map and agreement or request extension.
In January, 1976, as a part of-a
adequate specification and notif
Mr. Blaser was informed that the
recorded prior to March 17, 1976
the Planning Commission and City
of time.
staff program to rectify past practice of in-
ication of tentative map expiration dates,
city would consider the map expired unless
and would reprocess the final map only if
Council-authorized the requested extension
He continued that Mr. Blaser had-been cooperative - rather thanlchallengingsthe staff
position, presumably-recognizing that both the city and the developer were
involved in'uncharted legal territory, and they had now negotiated several
mutually agreed upon amendments to the final.map as .follows:
1) --The area show n as Lots l thru 13 and Lot 19 on the tentative map are
to be treated as a single parcel on the final map, to be combined with
the undeveloped adjoining acreage northwest of Los Osos Valley Road.
and Descanso, for possible future development proposals. This change
a) -creates a uniform boundary between the terraced.subdivision lots '
and the undeveloped,.rectangular_ acreage adjoining.Los,Osos Valley
Road;
b) facilitates more appropriate transition to a "site sensitive,
planned unit development" of.remaining acreage,;rather than compli-
cating mixture of planned unit and conventional.subdivision designs.
2) Reduces the amount.of. terraced- hillside area and .enables internal rather
than off -site grading to provide a less abrupt transition between natural
and modified land forms.
3) Requires minor street and lot adjustments to avoid_ commitment of.circu-
lation pattern extension to adjoining acreage, and eliminates 14 building
sites, retaining the lower sloped-area in a natural-appearing undeveloped
state.
On behalf of the Planning Commission, the'.Community Development.Hirector stated
that the Council finally amended the map for Tract No. 444 in related grading
and drainage plans to be in substantial conformance with the..previously approved
tentative map, and that the Council approved said amended final map and-grading
plan be accepted for recordation on or before.March 17; 1976, including all
associated agreements, construction plans.and other related documents.
In the event,-the final map-was not recorded prior to March-18',-1976, said
approval.to expire.and.all subdivision,:proceedings to be-terminated unless
a new tentative map was.submitted,.and.subsequently approved.;
Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, presented.for - the Council's consideration., the
amended subdivision agreement for Tract No. 444 listing the regular and special
conditions for.development of,the tract,
On motion.of Councilman Gurnee,•seconded.by Councilman.Graham, the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3003 (1976 Series), a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving _a revised final sub-
division map_ for Tract No. 444, Cuesta Highlands,.,Leonard Blaser, developer
and superseding Resolution No. 2741.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Graham, Norris, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 8
CONSENT ITEMS:
C -1 On motion of.Councilman Graham, seconded by
Councilman Norris, claims
against the city for the month of March, 1976 were
approved subject to the
approval"of the Administrative Officer. Motion carried.
C -2 No Agenda Item.
C -3 On motion of :Councilman Graham;- "seconded by.CbVnc'ilman
Norris, -the
,
following minutes of City Council meetings were approved as presented -:
October 27, 1975, October 29, 1975 and November 3,
1975. Motion carried.
C -4 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by
Councilman Norris, the
following contract pay estimates and change-orders
were approved and ordered
paid:..
Con-do General Engineering Est.' #1
$ 1,901.88
TRANSFER STATION MODIFICATION,
STENNER CREEK ROAD
C.P. 115 -75
Wally LaFreniere Construction Est. #10
11,842.00
ADMINISTRATIVE BLDG. C.C.O. X126
+ '635:60
ALTERATIONS
SINSHEIMER PARK - RESTROOMS Est. #8
585.00
CONCESSION &.PRESS BOX BLDG. Est. #9 FINAL " -
12,929.00 (4/15/76)
Motion carried.
C -5 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris, memor-
andum from the Public Services Director, asking Council consideration on main-
taining park maintenance was ordered received and filed. '
C =6 On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by-Councilman Petterson, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3004 (1976 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo an order of complaint
to the Federal Communication Commission.'
Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Graham, Norris and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C =7 Memorandum from Charles E. Dills, Chairperson to the Citizens' Advisory
Committee, requesting that'the City Council provide funds to the Council for
public television in order to promote public interest and participation in non-
commercial television was ordered - received and filed on motion of Councilman
Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris. Motion carried.
C -8 On motion-of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Graham, communica-
tion from the Housing Authority informing the City'Council that two vacancies
will exist on the Commission as of August of this year and asking Council action
regarding reappointment prior to that date was referred to the City Clerk to
handle by July 1, 1976. Motion carried.
C -9 Communication from Human Relations Commission, requesting that the
City Council consider a procedure,to shorten the process of filling vacan-
cies when they occur on- various advisory boards, commissions, etc.
On motion.of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris, the recommend-
ation was accepted by the City Council and referred -to the City Clerk to see
if there was some method of speeding up the filling of vacancies on the- various
boards and commissions.
City Council Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 9
C -10 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris, the
report of the Curator for the San Luis Obispo County Historical Museum for
the period January, 1975 through January, 1976 was ordered received and filed
and the City Clerk directed to congratulate Louisiana Clayton Dart for another
year of success at the museum.
C -11 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris, the
' communication from the Fair Political Practices Commission requesting the
Council to adopt a Conflict of Interest Code with tentative deadlines for
City of San Luis Obispo as of October 1,_1976 was ordered received and filed
with the City Clerk to calendar for further consideration. Motion carried.
C -12 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris, the
memorandum from William Flory, Director of Parks and Recreation, requesting
Council consideration of further development of Sinsheimer Park was ordered
received.and filed and referred to the budget study sessions.
C -13 On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Graham, the follow-
ing resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3005 (1976 Series), a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo superseding Resolution No. 2871
establishing water rates by adding fees for the use of city fire hydrant meters
and superseding Resolution No.- 2762 by establishing new acreage and front
footage fees.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Graham, Norris, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -14 On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Gurnee, the
request of the Chairperson of the City Planning Commission for legal counsel
at General Plan hearings was approved with the City Attorney to attend the
March 2nd hearing with the Council to continue study of need for legal services.
Motion carried.
C -15 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Petterson, the
request of the City Engineer for Council consideration to allow an extension of
time to Arroyo Coatings to March 5 to obtain bond for recoating Terrace Hill
and Bishop Street Water Tanks contract was approved. Motion carried.
C -16 Memorandum from the Design Review Board recommending that the City
Council: 1) not use the Obispo Theatre site;and adjacent city property on a
permanent basis for automobile parking facility; 2) the ultimate use of the
property should be for commercial office or residential purposes; and 3) any
future commercial use on this property should include sufficient parking on -site,
off -site parking or pay in lieu fees sufficient to defray costs incurred by the
city in providing sufficient parking elsewhere in the downtown area.
In summary, the Design Review Board felt that other sites other than the
downtown area are more suitable for permanent parking facilities or possibly
a Maltese level structure.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris, the recommend-
ation of the Design Review Board was ordered received and filed. Motion
' carried.
C -17 On motion of Councilman Graham,.seconded by Councilman Norris, the
resignation of Dr. Jerren E. Jorgensen resigning from the Jack House Committee
was accepted with regret. Motion carried.
C -18 On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Norris, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3006 (1976 Series), a
resolution increasing the 1975/76 budget engineering services.
City Council Minutes
March 1, 1976
Page 11
Introduced.and.passed to print-on the-following roll call vote:
AYES:.....Councilmen Norris, Petterson and Graham
NOES: Councilman Gurnee and Mayor Schwartz
ABSENT: None
1 TC- 6T -3 -76 ..On motion_ .of_Councilman.Graham,.seconded by Councilman Petterson,
..the.status report by the various agencies regarding a bicycle
trail from San Luis Obispo to E1.Chorro Regional Park was ordered
received and filed. Motion carried.
TC- 7T -3 -76 ...Request for-green zone at 764 Morro Street.
TC- 8T -3 -76 Request to review parking restriction on-Casa Street from Deseret
Place to the-south.
TC- 9T -3 -76 Request to eliminate certain.green parking zones along the north
side of Walnut Street at the Police Department.
On motion of.Councilman Graham, seconded by.Councilman Petterson,
...the.following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3010
(1976 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo eliminating a green zone on Morro Street, relocating
parking restrictions on Casa Street and eliminating a green zone.
on Walnut Street.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Graham, Petterson, Gurnee, Norris and Mayor
Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None ..
TC- 4T -2 -76 Recommendation that..the request for a stop sign at Woodland and
Wilding Lane be rejected was accepted by the City Council.
TC- 13T -2 -76 Recommendation from the Traffic-Committee that no.traffic signal
.be-placed at Hathway Avenue, Kentucky Avenue, Orange Drive and
Carpenter.Street was accepted by the City Council.
TC- 4T -3 -76 On motion .of.Councilman.Gurnee,.seconded by Councilman Petterson,
the following.resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3011
(1976 Series), a resolution of-the Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo establishing stop signs on Lawton Street at Woodbridge.
.. Passed.and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Gurnee, Petterson, Graham, Norris and Mayor
Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
' TC- 5T -3 -76 Recommendation.of the Traffic Committee-that the request of
the Post Office to close-off-the left lane of Marsh Street
above Carmel be denied was approved by the City Council.
TC- 3T -3 -76 "Recommendation of the Traffic. Committee to deny the request
to install a right turn only lane on Santa Rosa Street south-
bound at Palm Street was approved by the City Council.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Norris, the meeting
adjourned to 12:10 p.m., Wednesday, March 3, 1976. Motion carried.
Fitzpatrick, City Clerk