HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/02/1980.City Council'= Minuug, :}
January 2,1980 =.. 400 p.m.
Page 2
which they proposed.to.refurbish for use. The condition that would.be
amended would.be as follows:. "That'grantor :agrees to.repurchase from.the city
approximately.826 square.feet of.the "office.building that remains.on grantor's
property for.the.sum of $2.,042 and grantor.agrees to remove that,portion of the.
building that presently-exists on the-site "and.an additional five feet on the
grantors property for-setback purposes. ".
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen ,.seconded.by.Mayor_Cooper,.the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4059.(1979 Series), a.resolution
of the.Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an amendment to.the
agreement between the City and San Luis Mill & Lumber, Inc. providing that
grantor .repurchase "approximately 825 square feet of-office building from the
city and remove.that'portioin.of the office building which stands on area
conveyed and an.additional five feet of grantor's property for setback
purposes.
Passed and adopted-on the following.roll call vote:.
AYES: Councilmembers Jorgensen, Mayor Cooper, Billig, Bond and Dunin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The.City staff was also directed to send a letter to the:property' owners
that the building.being repurchased would have to be brought up to the
city codes.
2'. On motion..of Councilwoman Billig', seconded'-by Councilman'Dunin,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution-.No. 4060 (1980 Series),
amendment to the.Joint.Powers Agreement. for._self - insurance to.increase
employee fringe.benefits. Passed and adopted. on the following roll call vote:
' AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond, Jorgensen and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
.ABSENT: None
3. The City Council.considered.a report from the.staff:on proposed formula
for proration of cost-for undergrounding.PG&E.facilities.as required by the
.subdivision agreement-for Tract No. 592, "The Meadows "; Cal -Coast Construction,
subdivider.
Dave Romero, Public Service Director, stated that at its meeting of
November 20, 1979,.the Council. considered. .a.request.from..the..developer to delete
condition. #1 0.of the subdivision agreement for Tract No. 592, which.required
that.•the developer agrees to. underground ..the powerlines along the,-southern
boundary or contribute to future undergrounding.
At the meeting of November 20,.the City Council determined they would not
waive the condition and.directed staff to:arrive at a prora.tion,:;of cost for
undergrounding these facilities.
Dave Romero stated they received an estimate from PG &E that the cost
of converting overhead lines to'underground along :Los Osos,Valley.Road,
between Higuera Street.and Hwy. 101 -would be.$80`;000 in- addition to the
' $22,000 value already installed in.the development of Los Verdes.Tracts
1 and 2, thus giving-:a total cost between Higuera and 101 of,$102,000'.
He then submitted two approaches.for assigning this cost -
_Alternate I' -- Assigns all the:-cost on_'an acreage basis against-those properties
abutting either the existing or proposed line.
A. Tract 592 21.31 AC X 1269.288 = $ 27,048.53
B. Kundert 9.93�AC 122604.03
C. Tract 467, Unit 1 16.97 AC 21,539.83
D. Kundert 14.09 AC 17;884.27
E. Tract 467, Unit 2 18.06 AC 222923.34
TOTAL 80.36 AC TOTAL $102,000.00
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 4:00 p7m.
Page 3
$102,000
80.36 AC = $1,269.288 per AC
Alternate 2 -- An alternate calculation would
avoid this problem by.as.sign-
ing the $80,000 remainder. -cost for undergrounding between Higuera Street
and U.S.-101 against the.two Kundert.parcels
(B &D) and Tract 592.:. This
approach would.result in.-the figures shown below:
A. .Tract 592 21.31.AC
X .1764.83565.=:$37,608.65
B. Kundert 9.9.3 'AC
-17,524.82
D. Kundert 14.09 AC
24,866.53
TOTAL 45.33 AC.
TOTAL $80,000.00
$80,000
_
45.33 AC = $1,764.83565 per AC
C v:
He recommended.Alternate 2 which would assign
no cost to Tract 467, Units
1 and.2,.as they are completely installed and
would have :no reason.to.become
involved in.construction. He suggested..that
the $80,000 remainder cost
for undergrounding be shared between Tract 592
and the undeveloped parcels
owned by Kundert, parcels B and D..
At the.time the undergrounding. was...to be placed.not.knowing.when.the other
properties were developed, the city .would have pick up the additional cost..
It was Mr. Romero's recommendation, however, that the city adopt Alternate 2
and require Tract No. 592 developer to deposit $37,608.65 with the city.
The Council reviewed the - calculations as presented by staff and asked
if it were possible for.the staff; to develop.a formula for .undergrounding
utilities in future developments in 6rder.E6'avoid separate negotiations
with each developer...
Dave Romero said.this.would be.ve.ry.difficult.as each tract-was-separate
and distinct as to the.type.of improvement necessary.
Phil.Humfrey., Vice President., Cal -Coast Construction Company,.developer
Tract No.-592, objected.to their being required to.underground.this power -
line as-it is.not a part -of their..tract and.is not.part of their property.
He also.felt that the expense to undergrounding-would be spread over each
lot in Tract No. 592,.just adding.to the cost -for people trying to buy the
property.
He.asked the Council to waive this requirement as it did not set a- precedent
as.he understood no- tracts along Los Osos.- Valley Road were forced.to under-
ground the existing powerlines.
Councilmember.Billig felt that.granting_Cal Coast the.request.would establish
a precedent if it were granted. She felt that.the City should continue to
support-city-undergrounding policy for aesthetic reasons. She would support
Alternate 2.
Councilman Jorgensen stated he, -too, would support Alternate 2-and would
not waive this undergrounding requirement. He urged that the Council
insist.on undergrounding utilities.in.all future developments.
Councilman Bond stated he would also support.Alternate 2 and :also felt
that all utilities should be underground,
_Maor Cooper agreed to support Alternate 2. He felt that.all.new
developments should have the utilities underground.
On..motion.of.Councilman. Jorgensen ,..seconded.by.Councilwoman Billig,.that
the•City Council approve and accept.recommendation,in Alternate ' -No. 2'and
require -the developer to. deposit the required funds prior to aceptance of
the development. Motion carried. All Ayes.
4. Report by staff -on grading of Vista del Lago Park as required by
subdivision.agreement.of.Tract No. 465; Stan Bell, subdivider.
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 4:00 pm
Page 4
Dave Romero, Public Service Director, reported at the time of approval of
the final map of Val Vista Estates (Tract 465), the developer was required
to dedicate parcel 81 at the northerly end of Vista del Lago, The parcel
was to be used as an easement for utility lines, as emergency access between
the two cul -de -sac streets, and as a small park primarily for fishing and
wildlife purposs.
' The approved grading plan shows the main area of the park being left at
its natural grad, which is approximately 8 to 9 feet lower than the cul -de -sac
and adjacent lot grade. The transition between the two grades was to be
accomplished by a 4:1 slope.
During an inspection of the tract several weeks ago, he noted that the grading
on the parcel had left slopes varying from 1.7:1 to 3.2:1, thus making the
slopes less stable, more subject to damage by foot traffic, and more
difficult to maintain. He therefore arranged with the developer's super-
intendent for additional material to be brought in to flatten out the
slopes. The city made final arrangments to do this and the contractor
elected to work on Saturday, December 15.
The contractor was blocked from carrying out his work by property owners
living adjacent to the site as they objected to additional dirt being
brought in. Agreement was finally reached that the contractor would
withdraw his equipment and that no more earthwork would be conducted
until the property owners had an opportunity to prepare a letter stating
their desires regarding improvement of the park area.
Subsequently, he stated that he had received a petition signed by four
neighbors on each of the park requesting that the park area be left in its
natural state. Since the petition implies no change in the present slopes,
and thus is a significant deviation from the approved plans, he wished to
bring this matter to the Council's attention. Although the existing slopes
are steeper than those approved, they are safe and would present no hazard.
The existing slopes are too steep to be mowed, thus if the City ever wished
to use equipment for slope maintenance, the slopes would have to be regraded
at City expense. The petition reads as follows:
"As neighbors of the small wildlife park which was donated to the City
as a part of Tract 465 agreement, we request that the park be
retained in its present natural state, which is consistent with the
traditional use by wildlife, fishermen, and bird watchers. We believe
that no development is desirable except for trash containers, a simple
walkway, as natural as practical, and probably simple steps to aid
the fishermen in getting down to the lake. The present street parking
is adequate for the anticipated use, and no off - street parking is
necessary. We would appreciate the dumped dirt be removed as quickly
as possible."
Don Smith, 1111 Vista del Lago, then submitted a petition signed by 23
homeowners on Vista del Lago and Vista Collados Streets asking that
the City concur in the petition previously presented to do nothing on
this area.
Michael Dobrzensky, then submitted a petition signed by 45 property owners
stating that neighbors are in support of 1) addition of dirt and grading
of subject area adjacent to Laguna Lake, at end of Vista del Lago Street,
to a 4:1 slope to allow easier access to the lake and adjacent open space
area, and 2) development of the open space area into a small "neighborhood"
picnic area and fishing pier, designed primarily for access by local residence
on foot. No parking facilities to be added.
Greg Bixler, 1105 Vista del Lago, stated he was opposed to the development
of any park adjacent to his home due to the annoyance to his family by
people using the park. He felt it was detrimental to his home's peace and
quiet.
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 5
_Don Smith, 1111 Vista del Lago, submitted for the Council's information
extracts from the EIR for this tract, showing and listing the species of
birds, mammals, and reptiles that inhabit this portion of-cLaguna^Lake.
He urged the City Council to do nothing to this open space area and to
remove the dirt that had been placed there by the contractor.
Kenneth Evans, 1052 Vista Collados, objected to the dumping of the dirt
on parcel 81. He felt it was a violation of state law and was done without
an approved plan.
_Michael Dobrzensky again went before the City Council stating that his
neighbors supported some development of the park for use by the people
living in the area for a small neighborhood park. He did not feel a full
blown recreational development was needed in this area.
Craig May, 1092 Vista Collados, opposed to any formal park development.
Gary Granneman, 1129 Vista del Lago opposed to dumping of dirt on Saturday
morning without any surveying or grading plans. He felt it was wrong to
dump dirt without permits. He hoped the Council would not allow develop-
ment of a park here or a fishing peir. He would like to have it left alone
just for the use of the neighbors in the area and not to bring in outside
people.
Councilman Dunin stated he was opposed to the development of a small
park as part of this tract, although the adjacent property owner felt
the land was for their use and not for the public use of all the citizens.
He felt that with two petitions, that even the neighbors are divided
equally on its use. He felt that this park would not be used in relation
to the cost of development and maintenance. He would support leaving
the lot as it is in its natural state.
Councilwoman Billig felt the City Council and Planning Commission had I
spent many hours discussing the development of this land. She felt that
the Planning Commission decided this park should be a low profile
development and should be treated very sensitively. She agreed that small
development parks were too expensive to maintain and felt that this
area should be kept an open space with no formal development.
Councilman Jorgensen stated that this lot was not intended as a formal
park. He felt it was a sensitive area and that only minimum improvements
for fishing, bird watching, etc., should be made. He felt that possibly
the addition of a garbage can and steps, but nothing else.
Councilman Bond agreed that minimum improvements should be made as it
is a very sensitive area.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Bond, that the
City Council accept the recommendation of the Administrative Officer
recognizing this lot as a sensitive area with a minimum development
and minimum modifications for erosion, and that all surplus dirt that
was dumped be removed. Motion carried. All Ayes.
5. On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilwoman Billig,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4061 (1979 Series),
a resolution of intention to abandon a portion of Lorraine Terrace was
introduced and passed on the following roll call vote: ..
AYES: Councilmembers Jorgensen, Billig, Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
6. On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilwoman Billig,
the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4062 (1980 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an
agreement between the city and the California Division of Highways for
water line relocation - Cuest Grade. Passed and adopted on the following
roll call vote:
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 6
AYES: Councilmembers Jorgensen, Billig, Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
7. On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Bond,
' the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4063 (1980 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval
of the final map of minor subdivision SLO -78 -282 located at 2314 and
2324 Broad Street, Darwin Brussow, applicant, with Condition 412 amended
as follows: PARCEL A AND B SHALL REMAIN UNDER COMMON OWNERSHIP, THE
LINE BETWEEN SAID PARCELS SHALL BE CONSIDERED A LEASE LINE AND THE PARCEL
SHALL NOT BE SOLD UNTIL SUCH A TIME THAT THE EXISTING METAL WAREHOUSE IS
PROVIDED WITH A FIRE WALL APPROVED BY THE CITY OR REMOVED. Resolution
amended. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Jorgensen, Bond, Billig, Dunin and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8. City Council again considered the plans and specifications for the
Laguna Lake Golf Course Driving Range Protective Screen, bid estimate
$51,500, and also a proposal to install automatic sprinkler system and
to hydromulch the golf driving range.
City Council felt that this project was increasing in cost dramatically and
that there could be no guarantee from professionals or others that this
extremely high screen would protect adjacent properties and public streets
from golf balls being driven out of the driving range. Therefore, the
City Administrative Officer suggested that possibly the matter should be
continued so that the staff could look into other alternatives such as
some type of a driving range cage similar to batting cages, where people
could take lessons-, practice with their clubs, but there would be a smaller
area and the balls would not be flying out of the golf area.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Mayor Cooper, the request
of the Administrator was accepted and the matter was continued for further
input by the City Administrative Officer and staff. Motion carried.
C -1 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Mayor Cooper,. claims
against the City for the month of January 1980 were approved and ordered
paid subject to the approval of the Administrative Officer.' Moridn carried.
C -2 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Mayor Cooper, minutes to
the following meetings, November 20, 1979 - 7:30 p.m., and December 3, 1979 -
12:10 p.m. were approved as amended. Motion carried.
C -3 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Mayor Cooper, the following
contract pay estimates and change orders were approved and ordered paid.
Motion carried.
Burke Oilfield Construction
Est. 413
$ 7,704.45
OSOS STREET WATERLINE
C.C.O. 411 +
19000.00
'C.P.
MARSH TO MONTEREY
41C -25
Fred Julien & Associates
Est. 411
13,896.90
SWAZEY STREET WATERLINE
C.C.O. 411 +
544.00
C.P. 41D -04
Est. 412 Final
1,544.10 (2/5/80)
Charles A. Pratt
Est. 417
15,795.00
WATER FILTRATION PLANT NO. 2
C.C.O. 411 +
3,000.00
C.P. 41B -09
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 7
Charles A. Pratt Est. #1 10,584.00
JOHNSON /LAUREL STORM DRAIN
C.P. #C -05A
Video Inspection Specialists Est. #5 2,487.37
T.V. INSPECTION OF CITY
SEWER LINES
C.P. #C -31
C -4 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4064 (1980 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo accepting
the off -site improvements for minor subdivision 77 -66, Augusta and Helena
Streets, John King, developer. Passed and adopted on the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin,.3illig, Jorgensen and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -5 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4065, (1980 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo accepting the
off -site improvements for minor subdivision 78 -09 at the intersection of
Rosita Street and Cerro Romauldo, Walt Ross, developer. Passed and
adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Jorgensen and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
B -1 The City Clerk reported on bids received to supply various chemicals
for the water filtration plant and sewer plant and swimming pool as follows:
t9K#7Mail
BIDDER
1.
Activated Carbon
McKesson Chemical Co.
2.
Soda Ash
Van Waters & Rogers
3.
Glassy Phosphate
Los Angeles Chemical Co.
(Sodaphos)
4.
Sodium Silico Flouride
McKesson Chemical Co.
5.
Liquid Chlorine
Western Farm Service
6.
Liquid Aluminum
Allied Chemical Co.
Sulphate
7.
Ground Aluminum
Stauffer Chemical Co.
Sulphate
. 'COST /TON
$721.65/T
.1.27.60/T
864.20/T
462.00/T
300.00 /T
125.25/T
167.10/T
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Bond, the City
to accept the low bid in each category and that the Departments concerned
should obtain purchase orders for their purchase. Motion carried.
Councilman Jorgensen absent.
B -2 The City Clerk reported on the following bids received for
Tract 444, Street Tree Planting, City Plan No. D -40, Engineer's estimate
$9,000.00:
1. Dennis Landscape Co. $ 9,495.00
1921 Santa Barbara Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
2. Karlesking -Crum, Inc. 125136.00
225 Suburban Road
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Mayor Cooper, that the
low bid of Dennis Landscape Co. be accepted. Motion carried, Councilman
Bond voting no. Councilman Jorgensen absent.
C
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 8
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Cooper
adjourned the meeting to 7:30 p.m., Wednesday, January 2, 1980.
APPROVED BY COUNCIL ON: 3/4/80
. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
M I N U T E S
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 2, 1980 - 7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
Invocation by Father John Leo, St. Stephens Episcopal Church
Tom Schuman again objected to the invocation prior to the City
Council meeting, as against the First Amendment of the United
States Constitution.
Roll Call
COUNCILMEMBERS
PRESENT: Melanie Billig, Alan Bond, Ron D.unin, Jeff Jorgensen and
Mayor Lynn R. Cooper
ABSENT: None
' CITY STAFF
PRESENT: Lee Walton, Administrative Officer; J.H. Fitzpatrick, City
Clerk; Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Roger
Neuman, Police Chief; D.F. Romero, Public Services Director
9. The City Council held a public hearing on the Mission Plaza
Extension Environmental Impact Report and project description.
Glen Matteson, assistant planner, stated that the Council had tentatively
approved a concept plan for the extension of Mission Plaza and has retained
a landscape architect to prepare detailed plans. Further, an environmental
impact report had been prepared and circulated for comment. The Council
must consider the EIR and endorse a specific plan.
The staff recommends: 1) the City Council certify the EIR as conforming
with state and city guidelines; 2) decide on several issues of project
design for guidance of the designer.
Glen Matteson continued that the EIR discussed several alternatives to
this project. After the study with the architect, three major issues
have emerged: 1) Should a new retaining wall approaching the Nipomo Street
bridge be built?
The wall will have a detrimental effect on creek habitat and will be a
dramatic visual change. It would have limited flood protection benefits.
An estimated cost of: $36,000.
The Community Development staff recommended that the City not build a
wall now. If it is built now, it should be funded from the flood -
deficiency- correction fund, not the plaza extension budget.
2) Should the kukuya grass be eradicated to make way for more desirable plants?
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 2
Permanent eradication doesn't appear feasible, though it could be brought
under control sufficiently to allow other plants to compete. Because it
grows to the water's edge, contamination by using herbicides seems inevitable.
The Community Development staff recommended not to try to eliminate the
kukuya grass with herbicides; allow it to remain part of the landscape.
3) What's happening with the walkways along the creek side of Higuera Street I
properties?
The new building at 674 Higuera Street (Zevely) will make it more difficult
to continue the upper -level walkway than originally planned. The steeply
sloping bank which drops away beneath the balconey makes it necessary to
span between potential balconies of adjacent buildings in order to continue
the walkway begun along the Phoenix Building.
The Community Development staff recommended the Council should establish as
policy the intent to have a continuous upper level walkway to be implemented
through Architectural Review Commission approvals as projects are proposed.
John B. Nelson and Elizabeth B. Nelson submitted a letter opposing the
City's inclusion of their property in the extension of the Mission Plaza.
They asked that the Council eliminate their property as the driveway and
parking area are needed in order to continue their business operation.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open on the EIR.
No one appeared before the City Council for or against the EIR as presented.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
Councilwoman Billig stated she had no problem with the EIR and felt that
it was adequate. ,
Councilman Jorgensen stated he felt that the EIR was adequate and that
he could accept it.
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4067 (1980 Series), a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo certifying the environmental
impact report for Mission Plaza Extension, Broad Street to Nipomo Street.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig, Jorgensen and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Glen Matteson then reviewed for the City Council the design of the Mission
Plaza extension as prepared by Richard Taylor, landscape architect for
the project. He also presented two -year cost estimates for development of
the extension.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open on Phase II, Project Design.
Linnaea Phillips, Mission Plaza coordinator, questioned the size of the
proposed amphitheater which she felt was just as small as that one existing '
in the first phase Mission Plaza, and cannot be properly used. She
felt that rather than develop additional amphitheaters, the City should
consider more grassy areas for picnics.
Gary Grant, Phoenix Development, questioned the City allowing the Zevely
property at 674 Higuera Street not to be required to continue the deck
over the creek as other adjacent property owners had been required to do.
Bob Sheperd asked how did the pathway cross Broad Street to connect with
the original Mission Plaza extension.
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 3
Glen Matteson explained a landing would be required and would go under
the bridge on Broad Street.
No one else came before the City Council.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
Dave Romero, Public Service Director, discussed with the Council the
proposed improvements to the Nipomo Street bridge and urged that these
improvements be made to improve the flood capacity of the bridge.
Councilman Jorgensen stated that he would accept the plan as presented,
although he questioned the height of the proposed retaining walls. He
would ask the staff to study and minimize the need for retaining walls. He
would ask Council to adopt a policy of intention to have a continuous
upper level walkway from the parking lot to Higuera Street; and he would
also agree to delete the Nelson property from the present plan. He
also agreed to no herbicides being used in the creek.
Councilman Bond stated he would accept the plan as presented. He also
felt the retaining walls should be carefully looked at. He also agreed
that no herbicides should be used in the creek. He, too, felt that the
Council should adopt as a policy, the installation of the upper walkway
parallel to Higuera Street along the creek.
Councilman Dunin stated he felt that this project would cause flooding
down stream and that the City should mitigate this matter before additional
construction. He, too, felt that the retaining walls were too high and
hoped they would be redesigned. He agreed that the kukuya grass should
be reduced one way or the other. He felt there was no need for additional
amphitheater, but he felt that there was a need for additional grass areas
and picnic areas. He would like to see the present amphitheater improved
' so that it could be adequately used. He also felt that additional lights
should be planned for this expansion in order to protect the property and
the people using the area. He felt that access to Mission Plaza and walk-
ways should be on a voluntary basis, but he felt that they should be shown
on the plans so for the property owners' future guidance.
Councilwoman Billig stated she would basically support the design of the
project and wanted this phase of the development to be more natural using
natural shrubs and vines and less grass. She also felt that the walkway
should be eliminated from the plans behind Aggson's and the Nelson's prop-
erties. She would support lower walkways with natural type construction.
She also felt that additional lighting should be added to the property.
She agreed no herbicides should be used in the creek and also questioned
the need of such high retaining walls in this portion of the plaza. Each
phase of the plaza should have its own identity, first formal and second
more natural.
Mayor Cooper stated he agreed to exclude the Nelson property from the
present plan, did not feel there was any need for an amphitheater,
reviewed the architects estimated cost of $534,429 for the entire
project vs. $228,000 for the first phase. He suggested that the City
proceed with the $228,000 portion and drop the balance.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilwoman Billig,
that the City Council approve the project plans in concept for the
' Mission Plaza extension with the following amendments:
1. attempt to minimize use of retaining walls.
2. review options for informal picnic areas in lieu of amphitheater
3. Council approve the policy of intent to have a continuous level of
walkways with the ARC to implement. Nelson property not to be
a part of the project at this point in time but if sold then reeval-
uated.
4. Council to eliminate tot lot, stone facing,.and service ramp
from first phase
5. pay particular attention to additional lighting for security purposes
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 4
6. accept the C.A.O.'s recommendation to eliminate: a)rework of
parking lot; b)Nipomo Street bridge railings; c)restrooms as
the initial project.
7. the engineer requested to review and report on potential flood
problems, downstream of this project, if any.
Motion carried.
AYES: Councilmembers Jorgensen, Billig, Bond, and Mayor Cooper. ,
NOES: Councilmember Dunin
Councilman Dunin stated that he was not opposed to the project per se;
but voted against the proposal as he felt that the potential downstream
flood problems had not been mitigated.
10. The City Council held a public hearing to consider a request of
the San Luis Transportation Company for an increase in taxi fare rates.
Patrick D. Linington, President, Yellow Cab Company, requested an increase
on flag drop from $1.00 to $1.50 and a mileage rate increase from $.10 to
$.15 for each tenth of a mile over the first six with the flag drop.
City Clerk reviewed a compilation of comparative taxi cab fares for the
Tri- County area for cities wherein the population ranged from 20,000 and
50,000 and had recent changes in rates, 1979 calendar year as prepared
by the City Clerk.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. '
Pat Linington appeared before the City Council stating he did not have
any figures to present but that the last rate increase was 1974 and
that everyone realized the increase cost for the salaries for drivers,
vehicles, gasoline, maintenance, etc., and felt that he needed a minimum
of 50% increase in rates in order to stay even.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Dunin stated he would support a rate increase but did not
know how much not knowing what the problems were with the taxi company.
Councilwoman Billig agreed that she would support an increase in taxi
rates but did not know how much without additional information as to
costs, etc.
Councilman Jorgensen felt some sort of rate increase was due but that
much relied on additional information that the Council did not have at
this time. Looking over the comparisons, he suggested that possibly the
City could use the same rates as the Five Cities cab rates, but he felt
that the matter should be continued for additional information either from
the taxi cab operator or from the City staff.
Councilman Bond agreed that some rate increase was justified but wanted
additional information on income and expenditures before increasing rates. '
On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the
request for taxi rate increase be continued to a Study Session. Motion
carried.
11. The City Council an appeal by San Luis Transportation Inc. from
a decision of the Planning Commission denying an application of a use
permit to allow an office use at 521 Higuera Street.
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, presented a report of the Community Development
Department stating that on December 5, 1979, the Planning Commission
technically denied application for an office use based on a 3 -1 vote to
approve, pursuant to their by -laws.
to the Council.
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 5
The applicant is appealing this denial
The staff recommended that the City Council support the appeal, subject to
conditions incorporated into the Planning Commission's draft motion for
approval. Conditions as follows:
1. Applicant shall install and maintain at all times three city
standard parking spaces.
2. This use permit shall not be effective until the chief building
official certifies the structure for occupancy for office use.
3. The site shall be maintained in a clean.and orderly condition and
all landscape materials shall be maintained and replaced as necessary.
4. No parking or storage of company equipment (buses, cars, etc.)
shall be permitted on site.
5. A screening fence shall be "erected between the office and adjacent
yard for the full length of the lot to the approval of the Community
Development Director.
6. Use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commisssion in six
months to assure full compliance.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
Patrick Linington appealed the technical denial of the Planning Commission
as only four members attended the Planning Commission meeting, three voted
for the permit. But because it was not a unanimous vote of four or more,
it was denied. He continued that the company wished to use the building on
a temporary basis for an office. They expected to have new facilities for
the buses and taxi business within two years. The house at 521 Higuera would
then be turned back into a residence. He stated that he would preserve the
house as it is. The parking for employees would.be provided at their facilities
at 505 Higuera Street. He concluded by saying that he felt that members of
the Planning Commission reviewed the wrong property based on some of the statements
made at the meeting.
Mike Deneve, Chairman of the Planning Commission, stated he was available
to answer Council questions on this matter if they wished.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Jorgensen stated he felt that he could support the appeal if
conditions #2 and #4 were amended and condition #7 added. He felt that
condition #2 should be amended to read: Use permits shall not be
effective until the chief building inspector certifies the structure
for occupancy for office use adding, "including access for handicapped."
Condition X64 to be amended as no parking or storage of equipment (buses,
cars, etc.) related to the office use shall be permitted on the site.
And, Condition #7 to be added: Use permit limited to two (2) years and
that existing service, office, bus and car storage be maintained in a
clean and orderly manner.,
Councilman Dunin stated he would agree with the appeal and also the
conditions added by Councilman Jorgensen.
Councilwoman Billig also agreed with approving the appeal and adding
and amending the conditions.
' On motion of Councilman Jorgensen; seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the
City Council uphold the appeal of San Luis Transportation subject to the
seven conditions previously listed. Motion carried. All Ayes.
12. The City Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal by
Walter Brothers Construction Company from a decision of the Planning
Commission to deny use permit #0794 which would allow a three -story
social services office complex at 3220 South Higuera Street, PF -S zone.
Henry Engen, Community Development Director; stated that on December 12,
the Planning Commission considered the use permit and after seeking to
City Council Minutes
.January 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 6
continue it for redesign of the overall site .plan, and after considerable
discussion, voted for denial of the use permit. The applicant was appealing
that decision.
The City staff prepared for Council consideration a resolution with conditions
of approval which the staff felt reflected the concerns that had gone into
the commission's decision to deny at their December 12th meeting.
He stated that the Planning Commission denied the use permit for the
following reasons:
1. The proposed project would be detrimental to the health, safety
and welfare of persons working or living in the area.
2. The proposed intensity of development 3s not appropriate at the
proposed location and would not be compatible with surrounding land uses.
There was a lack of consideration of alternative.
3. There is an absence of a city - approved development plan for the
overall complex.
4. The proposed use does not meet Zoning Ordinance intent with respect
to public facility traffic flowing through a neighborhood shopping center.
5. The proposed use would have a significant environmental impact on
the proposed site.
He then submitted for the Council's consideration proposed conditions of
the staff that would take care of the objections of the Planning Commission
as follows:
1. Applicant shall revise the submitted site plan for the approval
of the Community Development Director to provide for:
a. Elimination of all vehicular access across the common property
line between the project site and the Padrea Plaza shopping center
adjacent to the south.
b. Elimination of the driveway between the existing Employment
Development Department office building and the proposed social
services office building.
c. Redesign of the existing EDD entry drive to make it a major
entryway to the overall Human Services complex.
d. Elimination of access to Higuera Street north of the present
EDD entry drive.
2. Applicant shall submit an overall development plan of the entire PF -S
property to the Planning Commission for review and approval concurrent
with the filing of a parcel map as required pursuant to condition #3.
No additional construction shall occur on the property until the
Planning Commission has approved an overall development plan.
3. Applicant shall file a parcel map combining both lots-of record
comprising the site for City approval prior to the issuance of an
occupancy permit for the new structure.
4. Applicant shall pay the city prior to any building or construction
permits being issued on the site, 35 percent of the total cost toward
the future installation of a traffic signal light at the intersection
of South Higuera Street and Margarita Avenue. Costs shall be
determined by the City Engineer. The city shall install the signal
when sufficient funds are available.
5. Applicant shall pay the city prior to occupancy of the proposed
building, 15 percent of the total cost toward the future installation
of a traffic signal light at the intersection of South Higuera Street '
and Prado Road. Costs shall be determined by the City Engineer.
The city would install the signal when sufficient funds are available.
6. Use of the propsoed building shall be limited to the office of
government human services agencies dealing directly with the general
public. Exceptions may be approved by the Community Development
Director for semi- public or non - profit private human service agencies.
Exceptions for non -human services governmental agencies, or private
human services businesses may be approved by the Board of Adjustments.
7. Applicant shall install bicycle racks and motorcycle parking
areas to the approval of the Community Development Director and
the Architectural Review Commission.
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 7
8. Applicant shall grant an avigation easement to the County of
San Luis Obispo for the entire property. Said easement shall be
to the approval of the County Airport Land Use Commission.
9. Applicant shall obtain approval of the County Airport Lane Use
Commission for building materials, height, and placement prior to
issuance of any building or construction permits on the site.
10. The applicant shall provide 295 city standard parking spaces.
11. The property shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner.
All plant materials shall be maintained and replaced as necessary.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
Sandy Merriam, representing Merriam Deasy & Whisenant, architects for
the project, stated that the property owner, Walter Bros., had no
objection to submitting an overall development plan of the entire
PF -S zone property. They also agreed to all the other conditions as
recommended to the Council by the Planning staff except they object to
conditions #4 and #5, which involve certified funds for installation of
traffic signal at Santa Margarita and at Prado Road.
Bruce Fraser, Merriam Deasy & Whisenant, reviewed the property owner's
objection to condition #4, particularly requiring the property owner
to install a traffic signal. He further stated he'd rather use dollar figures
rather than some kind of a percentage at some future date unknown to the
property owner. If they are required to do this, they would like to have
the figure set now and they would like to contribute the funds at this
time.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Dunin stated he was uneasy about the process in this particular
appeal whereafter the Planning Commission denial at a public hearing,
' the Planning Commission staff got together and came up with a new set
of conditions. Although he would support the compromised conditions as
presented by staff, he still felt it was a strange procedure.
Councilwoman Billig stated that she was displeased with the overall
development of this property on a piece -meal basis. She felt it was wrong
for the property owner then to expect the city to approve some development
with such questions about compatibility of uses and circulation. She felt
that the City should have required an overall plan to begin with and agreed
with the concerns of the Commission.
Councilman Jorgensen agreed with Councilman.Dunin's comments dealing
with the process to this compromise but that he would support the
compromise as proposed.
Councilman Bond stated he would support the compromise.
Mayor Cooper agreed with the compromise and felt it was one way of getting
the project completed, but that he would put a•limit on condition # 4 and
X65 as to when the property owner would be required to deposit funds.
On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4068 (1980 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo upholding an
appeal from a Planning Commission denial of an application for use permit
' (U0794, 3220 South Higuera Street, Walter Brothers Construction, applicant).
Subject to the 11 conditions presented, amended as follows:
Condition 2 amended to include not only the C PF -S zone, but the CN -S zone
property.
Conditions 4 and 5 were amended by adding, "in event the traffic signal
installation is not completed in two years, the conditions are to be
referred back to the City Council for determination of current approval
of costs. "
City Council Minutes
January 2, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 8
Resolution passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Jorgensen, Dunin, Billig, Bond and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
13. The City Council held a public hearing to consider a recommendation
,
of the Planning Commission approving a request to rezone property at
3023 Rockview Place from R -2 -S to R -2 -PD and consideration of preliminary
development plan to allow a 4 -unit residential condominium project;
Jack Foster, applicant.
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, stated that the Planning Commission at the
December 12, 1979 meeting, recommended approval of the PD rezoning request
for the development of 4.0 equivalent units subject to the conditions as
follows:
1. The project shall receive preliminary approval by the Architectural
Review Commission.
2. The applicant shall be given a period of 12 months to file precise
development plans for city approval. Preliminary development plan
approval shall become null and void after 12 months if precise
development plan is not filed and approve.d
3. The project shall be "built -out" in a single phase. Construction
shall commence within 12 months from the date of approval of a final
tract map and shall be pursued in a timely fashion.
4. The applicant shall revise the site plan showing the driveway
to city standards with the density not to exceed 4.0 equivalent units
with no structures or grading above the 285 foot contour elevation.
5. The applicant shall install automatic garage door openers on
all garages.
'
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
Vic Montgomery, engineer, spoke in support of the project and stated
he was available for questions.
Mavor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Jorgensen stated that in his mind, the only question was
whether the project qualified for extra density due to outstanding design
in order to warrant the PD classification.
Councilman Dunin stated he agreed that this plan development was qualified
for extra density due to design. He felt it was good project and could
support it.
Councilwoman Billig stated that while this is a.nice project, she did
feel that it was exceptional enough to get the density bonus of the
plan development zone. She felt that she could not support the ordinance.
She hoped the PD conditions would be clarified in the new zoning ordinance.
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Bond, the following
ordinance was introduced: _Ordinance No. 836 (1980 Series), an ordinance
of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the official zone map of the
city to rezone property at 3023 Rockview Place from R -2 -S to R -2 -PD '
(Applicant: Jack Foster) (PD 0808).
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Bond, and Mayor Cooper.
NOES: Councilmembers Billig and Jorgensen
ABSENT: None
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4070 (1980 Series), a resolution
City Council-Minutes
January -2, 1980'-'7:30-p.m.
Page 9
of the Council of .the City of. San. Luis . Obispo . granting. approval.of.:.tentative
tract map 842, located. at. .3023.Rockview... Place, .subject to.- 13.conditions
established by_the.Planning Commis sion,.. with . the following. - condition added
by the City-Council to.be placed on-the tentative :tract - map:.- "THIS. .
RESOLUTION SHALL BE EFFECTIVE UPON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF'ORDINANCE NO. 836,
REZONING THIS PROPERTY FROM R- 2 -S.TO R -2 -PD. IN THE EVENT ORDINANCE..NO.
836 IS NOT EFFECTIVE ON OR.BEFORE FEBRUARY. 14, 1980, THIS RESOLUTION SHALL
1 EXPIRE. THE:TENTATIVE MAP.HEREBY.APPROVED SHALL EXPIRE 12.MONTHS FROM THE
DATE.OF.ADOPTION OF THIS RESOLUTION UNLESS EXTENDED BY LATER ACTION OF
THE COUNCIL."
Passed and..adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: . Councilmembers Bond,.Dunin, and Mayor Cooper
NOES: Councilmembers Billig and Jorgensen
ABSENT: None
14. The City.Council held a public hearing to consider;an.appeal .
by James Michael ...Brady.on.behalf.of.Fred Snyder,.of: :a.Planning Commission
condition of his use permit.,..#0764,.for a proposed auto..'.repair and
service complex limiting the restaurant. -to 96 seats; located:at 3200
Broad Street, C- H- S.zone... . - I , .. , I
J.
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner.. stated .that.on December '5, 1979, the.Planning
Commission, on a.4.:0.vote, approved... this.use:permit . subject.to reducing
-the size of the - restaurant .. from the.modified 112- seatrcapacity :
(originally 142 -seat capacity was requested) to.96- seats.
On behalf. of the. .Planning..Commiss ion, ..the City. staff .recommended. that.
the Council.deny..the. appeal.. The scale and ..propriety..of..the.restaurant
1 at the CH -S ( Service - Commercial. - -: Use permit...requiredy:loca.tion' was the..
primary issue throughout the environmental and planning-review process
when.the Planning.Commission.reduced the number of seats in-.the-.restaurant.
Mayor Cooper declared the..public.hearing open.
James Michael Brady,:.architect.for Fred Snyder, stated that -on behalf
of the applicant, he.. :was appealing the conditions set at the Planning
Commission meeting on December. 5, reducing a number.of seats for the
restaurant from 112 to .96 while maintaining the number of- parking spaces
at 54. The original number submitted for the restaurant was.:112.seats.
He said the following were some of -the concerns the owner had regarding
the Planning Commission action:
1.. At the first Planning.Commission:.meetiiig_ there were -5 members
present. :There was a straw ..vote.taken;..3- 2,'the:'item was continued.
The second meeting_they. attended, the.itein was not heard.
The.third_meeting, there.were 4 commissioners.in.attendance,.2 of .
which were not present-at the first meeting.. They felt there was
a great deal of continuity lost as a- result of the Planning Commission's
poor attendance.
2. At the last meeting after the hearing was closed to-the public,
one commissioner.brought up the issue of 'reducing.the_number _ of seats.
This was subsequently made a condition-of approval'.
3. He said..that.the property. owner.. had .met.the- ordinance..:require-
ments of the parking.for the entire project,.including.the restaurant
at 112 seats, according to City ordinance.
He•continued that the-112 -seat restaurant was.an:economical.opeiating
limit of reduction.'. .'The property.'owner had already reduced the
restaurant from 142 seats upon staff suggestion and parking regulations.
He begged the City Councii.to consider this change.of condition.request
as..they review the use permit. They concurred with all other conditions
set in the Planning Commissions`s unaa :ous - approval.
City Council Minutes -
January'2, 1980 - 7.30 p.m.
Page 10
James Brady.continued that after.studying three.(3)'similar restaurants
operating -in San Luis Obispo, he found .that. -at lunch and.ditiner times
over. a '10 -day period; ..that .the: use:.of .the..restaurant .was.-M. Therefore,
he felt the Council should..allow. the additional.-16 seats for the restaurant
without any'a'dditional parking. He urged the City Council :'on behalf-of
the property owner to replace the lost seats:
Mike.Deneve,, Chairman.. of the Planning. Commission, stated- .- .that'..the Planning
Commission's key:issue was. the. safety- of.people using.the- parking area
for the restaurant. patrons.and..the conflict with patrons..of other motor-
vehicle.associated.uses on the property.
Councilman Jorgensen.stated would support the Planning.Commission's decision
based on.safety.on: this property and.the intersection of;Broad'an&
Orcutt Road.
Councilwoman Billig.agreed but she also questioned:the.appropri.ateness
of this mixed-use on the property. She felt the mixed use was poor.and
the site-planning was bad-and-she would oppose the project.
On.motion of.Councilman Jorgensen,.seconded by Councilman ... Bond,.that the
.appeal -of James Michael .Brady be denied, but:.that the•City Council approve
the use permit subject.to 'the 15 conditions established by the Planning
Commission. Motion carried.
AYES:' Councilmembers..Jorgensen, Bond, Dunin and Mayor. Cooper.
NOES: rCouncilwoman Billig .
ABSENT: None
There.being no: "further business to.- come.before - the City Council,
Mayor Cooper adjourned the meeting to Monday, January 7, 1980.,
at 7:30 p.m.
APPROVED BY COUNCIL ON: 3/4/80
Fitzpatrick, City Clerk
M I N U T E S
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE'CITY COUNCIL
CITY.OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MONDAY., JANUARY 79 1980, 7:30 'P:M.'"
COUNCIL.CHAMBERS, CITY.HALL9:990 PALM STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
Roll Call
Councilmembers
PRESENT: Melanie Billig,.Alan Bond, Ron Dunin, Jeff Jorgensen and
Mayor Lynn R. Cooper
ABSENT: None
City Staff
PRESENT: Lee Walton ,.:Administrative:Officer; Geroge Thacher, City
Attorney; J.H. Fitzpatrick; City Clerk; Henry Engen,
Director of Community'Development; Richard Minor, Fire
Public Services
Chief.; Dave Romero, Director of
D
I
1