HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/05/1979MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MONDAY, MARCH 5, 1979 - 12:10 P.M.
COUNCIL HEARING ROOM, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
STUDY SESSION
Roll Call
Councilmen
Present: Ron Dunin, Jeff Jorgensen, Steve Petterson, Allen Settle
and Mayor Kenneth E. Schwartz
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; Lee Walton, City Administrative
Officer; George Thacher, City Attorney; Richard Minor, Fire
Chief; Don Englert, Police Captain; Henry Engen, Director of
Community Development; Rudy Muravez, Finance Director; Glen
Matteson, Planning Assistant
Promotional Coordinating Committee
Present: Ron Ratcliffe, Bob Vincent, Joanne Ruggles, Charles Long,
Sally Punches
1. Preliminary staff reports on the mobile home rent control matter.
G1en.Matteson, Planning Assistant, submitted a preliminary report on mobile
home space rental which he felt would complement the cost information being
developed by the Human Relations Commission. He listed alternatives such as 1)
The market forces to increase supply or some method of inducing the demand for
mobile home spaces; 2) Governmental subsidies to allow more people to develop
housing at below- market price than what is being asked for in the market, a
direct subsidy through "Section 8" federal rental assistance program or an
indirect subsidy in a situation where the city would give tenants or owners
of mobile -home spaces preferential rates for utilities or a property tax "rebate"
which would be an indirect subsidy to their development.
He then reviewed several basic approaches to controlling prices such as:
1) Rent control; a) voluntary (under scrutiny), which would require a landlord,
before raising the rents, to give advanced notice to tenants including an
accounting of the factors that necessitated the increase. An additional step
might be to require the accounting to be published in the newspaper or presented
at a hearing before the Council. He felt that this approach would tend to focus
public attention on the reasons for and reasonableness of a price change. He
felt it would discourage "gouging "; b) Mandatory, (i) Absolute. Rents were
frozen at a given level. This approach would be legally defensible only as a
temporary measure under emergency conditions. It was not an equitable approach.
(ii) Cost -plus, The owner would be allowed to rent level sufficient to cover
his costs plus a reasonable return on the investment; and (iii),.Indexing. The
landlord could not raise rents faster than some index value. The index may be
a consumer price indicator, an average of space rents in the market area, or a
general cost -of- housing indicator.
2) Cost control; a) tenant ownership wherein the tenants would own the park --
in fact become cooperative owners. In that way they could eliminate the cost
of the owners profit and might perhaps prevent the biggest cause of rental
increases which were future sales of the park to new owners. Tenant owner-
ship would require the formation of a corporation with initial sale to the
tenant - buyers subject to the same cost - inflating forces as any other sale.
This might be a viable approach to keeping control on rent in mobilehome spaces
without government interference.
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979
Page 2
Finally, the Council might consider reducing the package. He meant by that,
that most park tenants were buying a package of facilities and services. The
lowest space rents are in the parks with the least common facilities to
maintain, such as meeting rooms with kitchens, swimming pools, saunas, or
jacuzzis which add to the initial cost which all must be amortized and
continuing costs= ofr.utilities, maintenance, and taxes. Some tenants may use
such facilities regularly, while others may not. It may be an approach to
convert from straight rental to a membership or an availability charge for
these facilities for those who wish to use them and they would then bear the
cost but not the entire mobile home park.
George Thacher, City Attorney, stated in Memorandum Opinion No. 79 -9, that
the California Constitution conferred upon all cities the power to make and
enforce within their limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances
and regulations not in conflict with the general laws. There did not now
exist State Legislation in the residential rent control. Further, the California
Supreme Court has held that residential rent control was a proper matter for
municipal regulation.under the police power doctrine. To enact rent control
measures, a City must determine the "constitutional facts" that a housing
shortage existed and that the:shbrtage was having a deliterious effect on the
rental market. Such an effect generally was in the form of exorbitant rents
to the detriment of the public health and welfare of the city and its inhabitants.
There were, of course, bounds within which the rent control mechanisms must be
drawn. , In the final analysis, a rent control measure which allowed a reasonable
rate of return and provided a fair, prompt method of achieving and maintaining
that rate, would probably meet with judicial approval. He continued that while
rents in mobile home parks legitimately may be regulated along with other resi-
dential properties in a city, the question arises whether a city may impose rent
controls on.mobile home parks without imposing controls on all types of rental
units. Would such a limited rent control measure fail as violative of the equal
protection clauses in the federal and state constitutions? So long as a legis-
lative classification was not arbitrary, and was based upon some difference in
the classes having a substantial relation to a legitimate object to be accomplishe
legislation would withstand an equal protection challenge. If it could be shown
that mobile home park rent controls were critical for reasons not generally
applicable to other rental units, such rent control was legitimate.
Orloff Miller, representing the.Human Relations Commission, submitted a preliminary
report to the City Council on space rental figures within the City of San Luis
Obispo. He stated that the Human Relations.Commission had analysed the 13 mobile
home parks within the City of'San Luis Obispo with a history of their rental
increases, the highs and the lows for single and double -wide vehicles, the percent
of increase over the last five years, the average annual increase and the year
the park was purchased and if any rebates had been given as a result of Prop.. 13.
He admitted that although the report was preliminary, he felt it was an indication
that, except in one specific instance, there did not seem to be any particular
gouging in rent increases in the mobile home parks in the city. He concluded
that the.City should initiate a mediation- arbitration board to handle rent and
rental control when implemented by the city...He felt for the H.R.C. to. undertake
this project, they should be allowed additional help, either full time or employees
or possibly.through the CETA program. He also asked that the City Council allow
the H.R.C. to complete their study for a final report before making.a decision.
Lee Walton, City Administrative Officer, recommended that the staff.and the
advisory boards be allowed to complete the final report for review with tenants
and owners with the final discussion with the City Council some time.in May, 1979.
Councilman Jorgensen stated that. he supported the mediation-arbitration board
to review all rent increases in the city in public view. He also felt that the
City Council should.keep on top of what's happening in Sacramento in this most
important.field.
Councilman Petterson agreed that Councilman Jorgensen's suggestion might be the
way to go but he wanted the statistics to be looked at.very carefully so that
the facts are true and correct and not guesses._
Councilman Settle also agreed with the adoption of a mediation- arbitration approach.
He felt that this was the way to go.
Councilman Dunin felt the mediation
the information must be factual and
or guessed by staff. He also felt
ently from the staff and the HRC so
information available.
Councilman Jorgensen then explained
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979
Page 3
route was the way to go. He felt that
checked for accuracy and not supposed
the CAC should prepare a study independ-
that the City Council would get the best
what he meant by mediation - arbitration
board as it affected rent.
Mayor Schwartz agreed with the other Councilmen and added that there was no
limit to the staff, CAC or HRC study or recommendation. The matter was con-
tinued to some Council meeting'in May, 1979,' pending completion of.the.final.
report..by the Human•Relations..Commission and- reviewed by mobile park owners,
tenants, and Citizens Advisory Committee.
2. At this time the City Council consdeted.a recommendation.of a joint
subcommittee of the Park and Recreation-Commission and the Promotional Co-
ordinating Committee recommending.rules and regulations governing the use of
Mission Plaza.`. T
Sally Punches, Chairperson Promotional Coordinating Committee, presented on
behalf.df the subcommittee, the.final draft of the rules and regulations
covering the use of Mission Plaza.. She stated all.members of the subcommittee
and the two boards and commissions had-.recommended that the City Council adopt
the proposed rules and regulations for use of Mission Plaza. Ms. Punches
then went through the-recommendations-of the-subcommittee for the Council's
consideration. There was-some-discussion as to exemptions, methods of handling
exemptions from fees for use of Mission Plaza etc.
The matter was continued -to.a study..session April 19, 1979 after update and
clarification by the Promotional Coordinating Committee, Park & Recreation
Commission and the Park and Recreation staff.
1 3. Activity grants of .the Promotional-Coordinating Committee,.
Mr. R. Ratcliffe, Promotional.Coordinating Committee member, presented a
revised method of awarding activity:grants, -which was•to offer on- going
support to those groups.who present- cultural services to San Luis Obispo,
and who have an established record of community support without denying
seed money for other viable groups-.,The resolution does not intend tan
alteration in-the formula for allocation of tax funds to the Promotional
Coordinating Committee. The precedent.and necessity of support for cultural
organizations has been. established ..worthwhile..- Without support from the
taxpayers, these groups -could not exist. Ron Ratcliffe continued that
under the present .system -of-application.for - city funds, established groups
must compete with.all other - organizations who seek monies or who desire
acknowledgement -of city support.in the form of -token funding. The result
has been that the established groups which bring historically recognized
cultural events to the community received :declining support at the time
when costs are escalating. He felt it..was unrealistic to believe that
these groups could.ever become.self- supporting, and further unrealistic
to believe that declining.city support would- stimulate the membership to
work harder for alternative fiscal- support-.' He then presented for.the
Council's consideration, Promotional -.Coordinating Committee Resolution
No. 1, which.would set aside each year, that for organizations which have
a proven history of receiving public funds for a period of no less than
five years, would continue to be funded without-being required to compete
' with other agencies. If -they wish additional funding, they-would be re-
quired to go before the Promotional- Coordinating Committee as any other
group. The Council could terminate this funding at any time they deter-
mined that the.quality of the organizations presentations does not make a
significant contribution to the citizenry of San.Luis.Obispo and doesr.
not warrant the.expenditure.. The Promotional Coordinating Committee would
make the initial recommendation:.to:.the City Council and then additional
organizations who meet the .criteria of five years of contributions,, could
apply for on -going support status through the Promotional Coordinating
Committee.
City Council:Minutes
March 5, 1979
Page 4
Sally Punches, Chairperson of the Promotional Coordinating Committee,
stated she felt the.present.system : of reviewing.applications for funds
has not been. painful,- embarrassing;..or humiliating. She felt that
the present system was very fair, was businesslike way to hear applicants
for funds. She felt if thennew resolution were to be adopted, the on-
going recipients for funds would still have-to report annually to the
committee, which is-.what they do now. There is very. little doubt which .
groups would receive grants from the city under the.Ratcliffe organization.
She continued that wish more and more groups would qualify for on -going
programs for support, less and less money would be available as.seed
money and would-discourage-new groups from applying for funds even though
they could promote_either._tou =ism or enhance the quality of life. She
also felt that the dependence and assurance.of..city funds would dis-
courage individual.fund raising activities; whereby the supportersodfaa
particular cultural activity could play a larger role in supporting of
this activity. And finally,.with gas shortages inflating and eating
into traveling vacation.money, the tourist.industry is not as pre-
dictable as it once.was, cultural.groups may.have..to.look to some other
souce of fuadings. She stated that some of.•the questions which occur
to her were:
1) how we decide the amount a qualifying group might receive.
2) how are we to know this is the..amount required or will the groups
agree that this amount is:enough?
3) shouldn't there be additional criteria for eligibility other than
five years?
She gave.as an.-example, La Fiesta,.representing.a. proven long history of
contributing to the .city's quality of.life...It.is.an activity that should
be supported because it has wide .appeal, •enhances.the.quality of life,
promotes tourism, and is the.only city =wide event that everyone in the 1
city canppartake in and contribute. to. She felt that the system should not
be changed`tFiat_ his worked -- successfully for many-years.-
On motion. of Jorgensen, seconded by Settle, that the City Council approve
the Resolution-No. 1 of the Promotional.Coordinating Committee in context,
with requirements as follows:
1) is the.five -year criteria more-of a determent than a support?
2) why is the limit.three years and-not five years? .
3) what would be the formula adjustment once funds were automatically
granted to certain activities?
Motion carried, all ayes, no noes.
4. Preliminary Council.review of the recommended-1979 - 1980 Capitol
Improvement Program.. This was the firsv.review.by the City. Council of
the C.I.P. for 1979 1980 as submitted.by the City.Administrative Officer.
The only thing the City Council did was to review the format of the report,
including the various funding options; the use of grants, the actual con-
templated five -year plan etc., with no..individual approvals or rejections
discussed. .After some discussion the matter was continued to the City
Council meeting of'March 5,.1979 at 5:00 p.m.
5. There being no.further.business • to.come before the City Council, 1
Mayor Schwartz adjourned the meeting at 2:15 p.m.
APPROVED: May 1, 1979
. . Fitzpatrick, City Clerk
1
0
1
1
M I N U T E S
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MONDAY, MARCH 5, 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 and
Mayor Kenneth E. Schwartz
ABSENT: None
City Staff
PRESENT: Leland Walton, City Administrative Officer; J.H. Fitzpatrick,
City Clerk; George Thacher, City Attorney; Henry Engen,
Community Development Director; Ken Bruce, Associate Planner;
Terry Sanville, Senior Planner; Wayne Peterson, City Engineer;
Rudy Muravez, Finance Director; Roger Neuman, Police Chief;
Richard Minor, Fire Chief; Dave Romero, Public Services Director
_1. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the report
of the Superintendent of Streets for the cost of installation of sidewalks
on the following properties:
D.M. & J. Morris
B.W. Polin, etal
J.E. & M.C. Hillard
J.E. Maino Estate
G. J. O'Hara
R.H. Gross (repair only)
628 Stanford Drive $1,085.10
896 Mill Street 1,340.00
(Morro side)
902 Peach Street 2,941.25
(Morro side)
1010 Peach Street 1,410.50
(Osos side)
1023 -1025 Walnut Street 1,412.00
1461 Mill Street 420.00
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
No one appeared before the City Council for or against the costs listed.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3786 (1979 Series), a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo confirming costs of sidewalk
construction pursuant to the Municipal Code and the 1911 Act.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
2. At this time the City Council held a
the request to rezone property at 3301 Broad
density residential, use permit required) to
tial, planned development) and to consider a
to construct 48 2- bedroom single - family atta
Jonathan Lindenthaler, applicant.
- public hearing to consider
Street from R -2 -S (medium
R -2 -PD (medium density residen-
preliminary development plan
:hed units on a 4.16 acre parcel;
Ken Bruce associate planner, reviewed the recommendation of the Planning
Commission with the City Council recommending that the City Council approve
City Council Minutes
March 5,.1979.,- ...7:00 P.M.
Page 2
.the preliminary :_development_.plan.subject to.conditions...contained in the
ordinance-and-'recommend that.-the. council. pas 6-the-:ordinance. to print. He
then listed the conditions established by..the- Planning.Commission as follows:
1. ..A.total.of..44 two - bedroom.units shall.be allowed with 2.5 on -site
parking spaces for each unit.
2. The project shall receive preliminary approval by .the.Architectural
Review-Commission.
3. The applicant shall be given.a period.of six months.to._.file a.tentative '
tract map and-18-months to.file_ precise development plan for city
approval.
4. The project shall be "built -out" in a single phase. Construction
shall commence within 12 months from the date of approval of final
tract map and shall be pursued in a timely fashion.
.5. The applicant shall.submit. draft declaration of .covenants, conditions
and restrictions (CC &R's) and documents related to the creation of a
homeowners' association.at the time of filing tentative tract map,
for review -and approval by the'Community Development. Director and
City Attorney. The CC &R's.shall.'contain'.the following:provisions:
a. A homeowner's association_to.'.enforce the•CC &R's and provide for
professional ,perpetual- maintenance oU all common areas including
- .landscaping, building exteriors, private driveways, lighting,
.:_walls, fences, etc., in first class condition;
b. A right of the City of San Luis Obispo to compel performance if
the homeowner's association fails to perform -and assess the home-
owner's association for expenses.incurred;
c. No arkin " in
p g private driveways except-in approved designated
spaces;..
........ .. ...............
d. A grant to the.City.of.San.Luis.Obispo, the right-to tow.away
vehicles on a complaint.basis; which-are parked in unauthorized
places;
e. No outside storage.of boats -, campers,...motorhomes,.trailers or
inoperable - vehicles; 1
f.
No unscreened'outside_storage by individual units;
g. Ownership and occupancy restrictions limiting all units to owner
occupied.
6.- The private driveways shall be improved to standards approved by the
City Engineer. -
7. All utilities shall be underground.
8. Each unit shall have individually.metered.water service. Meters shall
be.located adjacent.:to_driveways. _
9. Water service to each unit shall-be provided by extension of public
_ mains:.on private property. Sewer shall be private. Mains shall be
constructed to city standards.and easements..granted.to the city subject
to the approval of the:city:.erigineer.
10. ..All grading work shall be in- conformance with a.soils engineer and
foundation report a nd ' the.grading- ordinance:
l.
11. . App licant- shalinstali'.a.so1id 6 -foot high fence at - all property
-..,lines except -at street.frontages.
12. Development.shall..be.in.. accordance :with.the._,submitted - preliminary plans,
.as revised, and subject to further.revisions to comply with city
policies and ordinances.'..
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing.open.
John Lindenthaler, representing.th'e : property:.owner, reviewed the planned
.development for the council's.- information as approved by the Planning
Commission and asked for approval by the-City Council.
Mayor Schwartz.declared. -the public .-.hearing.closed.
On.motion.of.:Councilman Settle, seconded.by.Mayor Schwartz, Ordinance No. 800
..(1979 Series); an:ordinance..of..the.City of San Luis Obispo amending the
official zone -map to rezone property at '3301 Broad :Street ..to R-2-PD.
Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote:
'AYES: Councilman Settle, Mayor Schwartz, Councilmen Dunin and
Petterson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979 - 7:00 P.M.
Page 3
3. At this time the City Council held a public hearing to consider a
request to rezone approximately six acres _from A /C -20 (agricultural conser-
vation, 20 -acre parcel minimum) to C-T (tourist commercial), 100 Madonna
Road, Alex Madonna Road, applicant.
Terry Sanville, senior planner, presented the
Commission which was to rezone six acres north
' to C -T. He continued that the majority of the
was consistent with the general plan and there
to justify a smaller area. Also, they decided
necessary.
recommendation of the Planning
of the Madonna Inn from A/C
Commission thought the zone
were no physical features
the "S" designation was not
He continued that the city staff took exception to the recommended six acres
for rezoning and recommended that the City Council only rezone 3.9 acres to
C -T -S which would allow for an expansion of the existing use by about 1/3.
The reduced area and requirement for a use permit would increase the likeli-
hood of future development conforming with the general plan policies on
community growth and expansion of tourist uses. He felt that the "S"
designation would also provide for mitigation of on -site flooding conditions,
off -site flood problems aggravated by development, and utility design
concerns.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
Vic Montgomery, planner representing the property owner, stated that, contrary
Paul Wood, student at Cal Poly and four -year resident, objected to the zone
change without use or development plan being shown. He urged that more
study be done before a zone change was made.
Steve Bailfield, architect, was opposed_to this rezoning due to the visual
effect of the development on this land, and he felt it would be a detriment
to downtown San Luis Obispo businesses as he felt the property owner was
going to expand the retail business in this area. He also felt that this
was the first step in heading toward the top of San Luis Mountain, which
in his professional opinion, was detrimental to the visual effect of the
area.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
Terry Sanville again spoke in support of the staff's recommendation to
require the "S" designation on any rezoning of this property and to reduce
' the area to 3.9 acres.
Concilman Settle stated that he would support the recommendation of the
Planning Commission to rezone the land to C -T with the "S" designation
as he does not know what the property owner plans on.doing with the land.
He did not understand the logic of the staff's recommendation of 3.9 acres
after the Planning Commission, at public hearing,, had approved six acres.
He would go along with the six acre rezoning.
Councilman Dunin .stated he supported all phases of the tourist business. He
did not understand the logic of the staff's recommendation for 3.9 acres
to the staff's recommendation, the six acres was not an arbitrary acre
requested by the property owner, but involved an overall plan for the devel-
opment of the area. He felt the Planning Commission recognized this and
approved the six acre rezoning, but that the staff continued to request a
3.9 acre zoning. He also felt the "S" designation was unnecessary as any
development to the land must be reviewed by the numerous boards and staffs
of the city.
'
David Brodie, resident of San Luis Obispo, objected to rezoning this mans
property without any proposed development or use by the property owner.
He felt without a development plan, this area could be damaged, that it was
very serious and sensitive to the entrance of the city. He also felt that
this might be a ploy by the property owner to expand Madonna Plaza across
Madonna Road to the detriment of the downtown business. He would recommend
not to rezone without a major development plan.
Paul Wood, student at Cal Poly and four -year resident, objected to the zone
change without use or development plan being shown. He urged that more
study be done before a zone change was made.
Steve Bailfield, architect, was opposed_to this rezoning due to the visual
effect of the development on this land, and he felt it would be a detriment
to downtown San Luis Obispo businesses as he felt the property owner was
going to expand the retail business in this area. He also felt that this
was the first step in heading toward the top of San Luis Mountain, which
in his professional opinion, was detrimental to the visual effect of the
area.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
Terry Sanville again spoke in support of the staff's recommendation to
require the "S" designation on any rezoning of this property and to reduce
' the area to 3.9 acres.
Concilman Settle stated that he would support the recommendation of the
Planning Commission to rezone the land to C -T with the "S" designation
as he does not know what the property owner plans on.doing with the land.
He did not understand the logic of the staff's recommendation of 3.9 acres
after the Planning Commission, at public hearing,, had approved six acres.
He would go along with the six acre rezoning.
Councilman Dunin .stated he supported all phases of the tourist business. He
did not understand the logic of the staff's recommendation for 3.9 acres
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979 - 7:00 P.M.
Page 4
rather the-six acres recommended by the Planning Commission. He would
support the rezoning as recommended.by the Planning.Commission.
Councilman Petterson stated he too would support the "S" designation due
primarily to the fact that this land was subject to flooding. He has no
quarrel with either the 3.9 acres or the 6.0 acres as he felt that the devel-
opment would be done in stages.
Councilman Jorgensen stated he would support the rezoning as it was in compli-
ance with the general plan. He would support the "S" designation to give
the city more control on this property development.
Mayor Schwartz would support the "S" designation on this rezoning in order
to review all aspects of any development on the land. He could support the
six acres as recommended by the Planning Commission rather than the 3.9 acres
as suggested by staff.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen.-seconded by Councilman Settle, the following
ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 801 (1979 Series), an ordinance of
the City of San Luis Obispo amending the official zone map of the city (to
rezone property at 100 Madonna Road) six acres to C -T -S.
Passed to print on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Settle, Dunin, Petterson.and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
4. At this time the City Council considered final passage of Ordinance
No. 799, adding Municipal Code, Article IX, Chapter 8, Sections 9800 through
9816, entitled "Flood Damage Prevention Regulations ". I
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
No one appeared before the City Council except for Vic Montgomery who asked
for clarification on appeals to standards in -the flood control area. He
was referred to Section 9813 -A of the ordinance.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, Ordinance
No. 799 was introduced for final passage.
Finally passed on the following roll.call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
5. The Capital Improvement Program for 1979 -1980 was continued to the
end of the meeting.
6. At this time the City Council considered the report prepared by the
San Luis Obispo County Area Council of Governments dated February, 1979, '
entitled "Housing Need Allocations."
Glen Matteson, planning assistant, submitted the report of the planning staff
stating that the Council of Governments Staff had prepared another draft of
the "fair share" housing allocation, a requirement of state housing law.
Once adopted, the allocation must be incorporated into local housing elements.
The Council of Governments was scheduled to consider the proposal in the near
future.
He continued that San Luis Obispo should support adoption of the allocation,
although it was far from perfect. The city's efforts would be better spent
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979 - 7:00 P.M.
Page 5
solving problems than haggling over the numbers in the report. If changes
in the allocation would make it more acceptable to other cities or the county,
the-city should.not. prevent such changes.
He stated that the Council of Governments had been working on this since
June, 1978. The latest draft was a response to some of the criticisms of the
earlier one. Comments on the overall requirement and approach were summarized
' to the Planning Commission and City Council in October, 1978.
In short, it was Matteson's feeling that the fair share allocation attempts
to make each political jurisdiction in a housing market area accept some
responsibility for the low and moderate - income residents of that area. The
method used by COG aimed at having the differences between communities - -in
terms of rich and poor, owner and renter, young and old -- gradually disappear
by 1995. He then reviewed some of the statistics in the report which seemed
a little farfetched.
George Thacher, City Attorney, reviewed some of the legal implications of
the city adopting the COG approved plan on housing allocation as a part of
the city's Housing Element.
Councilman Settle urged the City Council to take action and approve the plan
even though the figures were-way off as the cities were not locked into these
figures but were just being used for planning purposes.
Councilman Jorgensen was fearful of adopting a plan that was so far from
factual and the impression it would give to the staff for future development.
He wondered if the city could not adopt in principle without accepting the
figures as submitted.
Councilman Petterson moved that the City Administrative Officer be directed
to contact the senators and assemblymen of the city in an attempt to get
legislation to kill this state requirement for adoption of a housing allocation
plan.
Motion died for lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Mayor Schwartz, that the City
Council approve the Housing Need Allocation Plan goals in concept, but with-
holding action on specific allocation formula pending clarification of their
report.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilman Settle, Mayor Schwartz, Councilmen Dunin and Jorgensen
NOES: Councilman Petterson
ABSENT: None
The City Attorney was asked to look into the implications of the council's
action by this motion.
7. At this time the City Council considered a petition by 20 citizens
requesting council: 1) comment on the Planning Commissioners' conduct at
meetings; 2) the City Council's policy regarding the value of public input
' during public hearings; and 3) that the City Council and Planning Commission
reopen public debate after discussion following regular public input so that
new information brought up by the council might be addressed.
Pete Evans, spokesperson for the petitioners, reviewed, for the City Council,
some of what they felt were improprieties of the Planning Commission during
public hearing. He said it was the impression of the people in the audience
that the Planning Commission was rude to those who challenged the position of
the Commission or staff. Also, they felt the Commission was now content to
just ignore attitudes and comments that diverge from the obvious philosophy
of its members.
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979 - 7:00 P.M.
Page 6
He continued that recently a Planning Commission meeting was attended by
over 100 interested citizens who wished to observe and contribute to a
public discussion concerning the development of two important hills in
San Luis Obispo. The first issue, Orcutt Knob, was contested by only
about eight persons, so their comments were dismissed forthwith, largely
because they hadn't appeared at two previous meetings. The second and
larger group addressed the Terrace Hill project and public testimony
(against the plan) went on for three hours. There were no comments favorable '
to the plan. After closing public input, the commissioners began their
debate as if the audience and their feelings, did not exist. Several of
the Commissioners made intempered comments relative to the attitude of
the audience.
Pete Evans continued that the petitioners were outraged by such callous
remarks and petitioned the council for its position concerning the attitude
of the Planning Commission. He concluded his comments by saying that the
council should direct the Planning Commission as to how sensitive it should
be to public input. It was the petitioners contention that the insensi-
tivity of the Planning Commission to public input had a chilling effect on
the democratic process of participatory democracy and inhibits general
interest in the welfare of the community. They asked the support of the
City Council in straightening this matter out.
David Bode, 2028 Osos Street, supported the people who signed the petition
as he felt something should be done to make the Planning Commission at
least consider the input presented by the public during its hearings. He
felt that the treatment by the Planning Commission during these hearings
was intolerable.
Clell Whelchel stated that the Planning Commission had held prior public
hearings and received input from both these hearings and what was being
considered was rehashed from prior meetings,-and he felt the Planning
Commission acted properly in this case.
Councilman Settle stated he agreed that the public should be courteously
heard at any public hearing. He felt that a copy of the petition and letter
should be sent to the Planning Commission for their input. He also felt
the council and Planning Commission should meet on a regular schedule in
order to keep city policy in perspective. He would also not object to
reopening a public hearing if new information were available.
Councilman Dunin felt the council and Planning Commission should meet to keep
their lines of communication open on .city policy. He hoped after the city
election, this would occur. He felt the Planning Commission should be sent
a copy of the petition for their comment.
Councilman Petterson agreed that the petition should be sent to the Planning
Commission for their input. He also felt that the council had been very
careful to try and appoint to the Planning Commission people from a cross
section of the citizens of the city. He did not support opening the public
hearing for a second time.
Councilman Jorgensen felt the Planning Commission members were in stressful
positions and the people should be careful of the way they speak. He stated
that he attended the subject Planning Commission hearing and agreed with
the petitioners that the Planning Commission lost control of themselves and
the meeting and made a number of intemperate comments to the public. He
felt that after the city election, the City Council should look very closely
at the present appointees on the Planning Commission as he did not feel
they really represented the City Council or the citizens of the city. He did
not wish to open public hearings for a second time.
Mayor Schwartz felt the petition should
for comments, not to the City Council.
City Council jobs were very difficult a
stand these presures. He stated he was
so he could not comment on the decor of
people present.
be sent to the Planning Commission
He felt the Planning Commission and
ad stressful and people should under -
not present at the subject meeting,
the Planning Commission or of the
I
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979 - 7:00 P.M.
Page 7
On motion of.Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Settle, the letter and
petition were referred to the Planning Commission for comment.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Mayor Schwartz, Councilmen Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Petterson
' NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Pete Evans again asked to speak saying that what had just taken place by
the council was what he was talking about because each one stated how he
felt with no rebutal by people or persons who were being discussed in the
audience.
9:20 p.m. Mayor Schwartz called a recess.
9:40 p.m. the City Council reconvened with all Councilmen present.
8. On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3787 (1979 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an
agreement between the City and Merriam, Deasy and Whisenant, Inc. for con-
sultant services concerning the Jack Residence.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES.: None
ABSENT: None
9. At this time the City Council considered the plans and specifications
for the JOHNSON AVENUE UNDERPASS -PUMP STATION & DRAIN INLET MODIFICATIONS,
CITY PLAN NO. C -02, bid estimate of $16,500 including 13 percent contingencies.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen,_ seconded by Councilman Settle, the plans
and specifications were approved and the city staff was authorized to call
for bids.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
CONSENT ITEMS
C -1 On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle,
claims against the city for the month of March, 1979, were approved and
ordered paid. Motion carried.
C -2 On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle,
' the following contract pay estimates were approved and ordered paid:
R. Baker Construction.Co. Est. #2 $ 186.98
WATERLINE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Est. #3 FINAL 2,782.50 (4/9/79)
City Plan No. C -03
W.A. Gus Howie Est. #3 5,076.00
JOHNSON AVENUE WIDENING - Est. #4 FINAL 19900.95 (4/9/79)
EASTERLY SIDE - HIGUERA TO
MARSH
City Plan No. C -01
Motion carried.
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979 - 7:00 P.M.
Page 8
C -3 On motion of Councilman Jorgensen. seconded by Councilman Settle,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3788 (1979 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo denying approval
of Tentative Tract Map No. 748, a 25 -lot residential subdivision on 8.09
acres on Orcutt Road between Fernwood and Lawnwood Drives.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz '
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -4 A communication from Charles Long, Chairman of the San Luis Obispo
Business for Fair Signing, requesting consideration.of amendments to the
1977 Sign Ordinance was referred to the staff for report with instructions
to consult with the Chamber Sign Committee on motion of Councilman Jorgensen,
seconded by Councilman Settle. Motion carried.
C -5 Petition from 28 neighborhood residents in the 1700 block of Osos
Street requesting council action to mitigate the noise, lack of parking,
privacy, etc., caused by a local fraternity was referred to staff for inves-
tigation and report on motion of Councilman. Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman
Settle. Motion carried.
C -6 On motion of Councilman Jorgensen,, seconded by Councilman Settle,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3789 (1979 Series),
a resolution of the Council-of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval
of tentative minor subdivision no. 78 -258, located at 1350 Madonna Road, 1353
Royal Way, and 1405 -1469 Galleon Way.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: ,
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -7 On motion of Councilman Jorgensen,. seconded by Councilman Settle,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3790 (1979 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval
of Tentative Minor Subdivision No. 78 -282 located at 2314 and 2324 Broad
Street.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -8 Councilman Jorgensen left the meeting due to a possible conflict
of interest.
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Settle, the ,
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3792 (1979 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an
agreement between the city and A.O. Righetti for right -of -way contract
amendment for Santa Rosa Street widening.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Settle, Dunin and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilman Jorgensen
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979 - 7:00 P.M.
Page 9
Councilman Jorgensen returned to the meeting and took his place at the
council table.
C -9 On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 3792 (1979 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting additional
time to file a final map for Minor Subdivision 77 -408.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Jorgensen, Settle, Dunin, Petterson and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -10 On motion.of_Councilman.Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, the
claim against the city by Union Oil Company of California in the amount of
$68,450 for reimbursement of the relocation costs of Union Oil Company's
three pipelines in San Luis Creek was denied and the claim was referred to
the city's insurance carrier. Motion carried.
BID ITEMS
B -1 The City Clerk reported on the following bids received for the
WATER FILTRATION PLANT NO. 2 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CITY PLAN NO. B -09,
bid estimate $259,000 plus $52,925 for contingencies, engineering and
construction fees, for a total of $312.425.
Deductive
Base Bid Alternative
1. Baker Corporation $313,100 $2,500
Post Office Box 419
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
2. Charles A. Pratt Const. $3149500 $8,200
Post Office Box 1295
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
3. Conco $318,250 $2,000
Post Office Box 511
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
4. R. Burke Corporation $335,737 $3,702
Post Office Box 957
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, - stated that the low bid on this
project was $313,000 which was $53,600 in excess of the engineer's estimate
of $259,500. He also stated that the low bid extends beyond the financial
capability for this year. He continued that a review of the bid items and
the plans and specifications indicate several areas where the city might
save considerable cost. Rather than negotiate with the low bidder from a
weak position after the contract is awarded, and perhaps without a firm
legal basis, he suggested that the City Council reject all bids, modify the
specifications by an addendum, and readvertise for bids immediately.
'
On motion of Councilman Petterson, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the
City Council reject all bids, modify, issue an addendum, and readvertise
immediately.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Petterson, Settle, Dunin, Jorgensen and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
March 5, 1979 - 7:00 P.M.
Page 10
5. The City Council then undertook their preliminary review and study
of the 1979/1980 Capital Outlay Plan beginning with 1) the C.I.P. Revenue
Projections, 2) Five -Year Capital Plan, and 3) Projects Included in the
1979/1980 C.I.P.
After discussion, the matter was set for public hearing on March 20, 1979.
The City Council adjourned at 10:45 p.m. to Executive Session. ,
The City Council reconvened in Regular Session at 11:00 p.m. and then
adjourned to March 13, 1979, at 7:30 p.m.
Approved by City Council: 5/1/79
d
H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk
1
1