Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/05/1979City Council Minutes February 5, 1979 Page 2 He then.reviewed a.complicated.financial formual between the City and his family for development of.this.facility. He stated.that.he formally requests that: 1.. That.the City Council consider this matter seriously. 2. The Council make a judgement as to the need.and desirability.of such ' a facility at this site. 3. That the Council determine whether or not a long term lease is a feasible and proper method of obtaining such a facility. 4.. That the City Council appoint a representative to work..with.him in addressing specific problems and in preparing a draft lease agreement. 5. .The City Council authorize him to. employ, at his and the City's joint expense, an architectural firm to prepare preliminary floor plans,' renderings of the exterior, and cost estimates. He submitted for the Councils information two written proposals for this work. One from the Firm of Priest, Richmond, Rossi & Montgomery with the following cost estimate: Conceptual design services $3,000 Soils borings and geological study $1,400 _..._ Hydrology..report .$500 Topographical and boundary survey $2,000 Total $6,900 At 12:15 p.m., Councilman Settle arrived at the meeting. The other proposal was from Merriam, Deasy and Whisenant, Inc., local planners,-who submitted the following estimate: Zoning,Analysis, Code Analysis and Foundation Review, Program Refinement and Liaison $15350 Design and Presentation Documents $4,750 Perspectives.- 2 @ $500 $1,000 Cost.Estimate ,$500: Total $7,600 Leland Walton, City Administrative Officer; stated this was a good: concept but felt it was .premature as there were too many problems due to.the size of the parcel owned by the Spradlin Family: He did not feel it was feasible due to the size of.the parcel and the amount of improvements planned unless additional land were included in the development. Councilman Jorgensen.'.stated that he:had many concerns involving this project. He felt the city'should not get'involved-in any expense with a consultant, designer, etc. -As far as the concept was concerned, he does not have enough information on the benefit of the city, if any. He stated that so far it seems the property owner is .receiving all the benefits with the .city getting a part -time use of the basement'.for a community center.. He too agreed that the proposal was premature until the.city had completed its own Master Plan in the general area. Further, he would.not waive any patking.•requirements for this type of development. City Council Minutes February 5, 1979 Page 3 G.D. Spradlin stated that he had..the same concerns-as.-Councilman Jorgensen. He does not wish to risk'his.own capital on plans-and-:specifications for design unless the council approves the plan in concept. Councilman Settle felt the proposal was too much building on too small amount of land, and-that the City Council should look to the development of the entire area. He too would oppose public funds to develop plans for a private property owner. ' Councilman Petterson stated he felt.the city had other plans for this general area. He-fdiii not'feel Spradlin's proposal was a short term proposal for his benefit and not to the best interest of the city. He did not feel the city should participate.under the conditions presented. Mayor Schwartz felt that the facilities proposed by Mr. Spradlin were needed, but that the Spradlin proposal was too small to affect the needs of the city. He had no objection to cooperative development with private owners. His main objections with the the Spradlin proposal were the size of the land to be used and the division of such space between public needs and private use and also the length of the lease. He felt the City Council should look to developing the entire area before becoming involved. There being no further discussion, the G.D. Spradlin proposal was received and filed without prejudice. 2.. Consideration by the council of adopting a Flood Damage Prevention Regulations Ordinance. Wayne Peterson, City Engineer,.presented to the City Council.a proposed flood ordinance for their consideration. He stated that the City Council must enact flood plain management measure's by April 16, 1979, in accordance with the direction of the Department of Housing.and Urban Development, Federal Insurance Administration, in order to maintain continuity in.the community's , eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program. Wayne Peterson continued that the city has been enforcing.requirements contained.in this ordinance for the most part on an interim-basis, utilizing the best information-available since'the city entered the program in 1973. Now, since the study has been completed which established base flood eleva- tions and final flood elevations for our city, coupled with the fact that the Flood Insurance Rate Map would become effective on'April 16; 1979, it was imperative that the City Council adopt the ordinance ..prior to March 16, 1979 in order to meet the deadline. He stated that the city had been supplied with a limited number of .proof copies of the Flood Insurance Study and maps and that he placed one on the wall in the hearing room and a copy had been placed in the council's office for their study. He would hope the City Council would proceed and approve the proposed ordinance. As a note of interest for the City Council, he stated that after this study, Laguna Lake elevation was again at 126' according to HUD. The.City Council then proceeded to review the proposed ordinance, Article IX', Chapter 8, of the Municipal Code entitled "Flood Damage. Prevention Regulations." The council reviewed the proposed ordinance section'by section. In Section 9802 (s) (2), a question was asked why the City.-could-not add .a condition'to include consideration of the city's own.historic building element in the -flood control prevention: In Section 9805 (a) AO Zones, the council felt the language should be cleared up. In Section 9806 (a), drop the word "as" after the word "elevations." In Section 9810 .(c), add the words "or.architect" after the words "professional engineer." City Council Minutes February 5,1979 Page 4 Section 9811.should be amended to.include wording to allow continuation of study. Section 9813 (a) (3), add the.words. "including all possible environmental impacts" after the.words "all relevant•factors, ". In.Section 9813 (b) (1), same similar comment to include historical element of the city to be considered. Also, in Section 9813 (b),_add or-consider "the three conditions for variances in the zoning ordinance." In Section 9816 (b) fourth line, drop the word "measurable ". After some other general-comments-by the council on wording of the proposed ordinance, on motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the city staff review the suggested amendments and word clean -up and bring it back to the City Council for introduction to print at the next council meeting.. Motion carried. 3. Consideration .by the City.Council of an Amended Air Quality.Containment Plan submitted to the City Council by the San Luis Obispo County Area Council of Governments, continued from November 20, 1978. Henry Engen, Community Development.Director,.stated that the land use and growth section of the Air Quality Containment and-Maintenance Plan are a necessary part of the plan. The basic content.of the draft is good. However, a few items should.be added or-improved, and the report could say more with far fewer words. He stated that the City Council should support adoption of the plan, incorporating the changes suggested in the staff draft. He continued that: most of the: topics .covered in the November 20,i:1978 'report to the council -were -again discussed.at.the COG'.s last meeting. Generally, the city's policies and the.plan's policies are in agreement. He•urged adoption by the council. On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded..by Councilman Jorgensen, that.the City Council approve the staff's position on ... the..Air Quality Containment and Maintenance Plan and that COG.reduce the number of words as it is too heavy. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Settle, Jorgensen, Petterson; and Mayor Schwartz NOES: Councilman Dunin ABSENT: None R. Mayor Schwartz reviewed, with..the City Council, his comments -on items coming before the City Council at the February 6, 1979.regular council meeting as he would be absent.from that meeting. He also reported on the-actions of the League Committee on.Revenue and Taxation for additional funding for cities in California but collected by the state, particularly, a reapportionment of lc of the state sales tax. He then reviewed various formulas brought forth by these various committees for distribution of the extra state funds for cities, counties, schools,. etc. 4. R..Muravez, Director of Finance, submitted a report prepared by ' Peasley.Accountant Corporation.of a Water Rate Study - Private & Public - Fire Protection.. Mr. Muravez stated-that-in August of 1978•the City Council requested that a study of fire protection service rates be conducted.:•This study was to determine the validity of our current rates in response to questions raised by Mr. James Kimball of the Kimball Motor .Company. He continued-that he retained Gerald.Peasley, CPAV to perform the study and prepare a report to the city. He stated that the-final conclusion drawn by the report is that the city's current rate for both private and public fire services are justified and reasonable. Based upon a survey of comparable City Council Minutes February 5, 1979 Page 5 cities and private water companies, the-city's current rate for private fire protection service is slightly above the average but not unreasonably so. The practice of charging for such service is within the present position of the Public Utilities Commission. He stated that in regard to Mr. Kimball's service, it falls within the sphere of private protection service and should be charged accordingly. Mr. Muravez recommends that all charges against the Kimball account and similar accounts be considered valid and payment be due to the city. ' Councilman Jorgensen asked how much the report by Gerald Peasley cost the city. Rudy Muravez stated that the total cost of the report was $1,000. After brief discussion by the City Council, on motion of Councilman Petterson seconded by Councilman Jorgensen, that the matter be continued for 30 days and to notify Mr. James Kimball and see if he wishes the City Council to reconsider his appeal. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Jorgensen, Dunin, Settle, and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None At 1:45 p.m. Councilman Jorgensen left the meeting. 5. Council consideration of League Legislative Bulletins. The City Clerk was authorized to contact the city's representatives in Sacramento opposing Senate Bill 114, which is Limitation on Contractural Indemnification and also to support Senate Bill 110, the Brown Act Emergency Situations Meetings. Due to the lateness of the hour, no further discussion of the legislative bulletin was made. There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Schwartz adjourned the meeting at 2:50 p.m. APPROVED: April 3, 1979 s . Fitzpatrick, City Clerk M I N U T E S REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1979 - 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 990 PALM STREET, CITY HALL SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA Pledge Roll Call , Councilmen PRESENT: .Ron Dunin, Jeff Jorgensen, Steve Petterson, Allen Settle ABSENT: Mayor Kenneth E. Schwartz City Staff PRESENT: Leland Walton, City Administrative Officer; George Thacher, City Attorney; J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Terry Sanville, Senior Planner; Wayne Peterson, City Engineer; Jim Stockton, Parks and Recreation Director; Roger Neuman, Police Chief; Dave Romero, Public Services Director.