HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/18/1980City Council - Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 1
M I N U T E S
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 1980 - 4:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
Roll Call
Councilmembers
Present: Melanie Billig, Alan Bond, Ron Dunin and Mayor Lynn R. Cooper
Absent: None (One Vacancy)
City Staff
Present: Lee Walton, Administrative Officer; George Thacher, City
Attorney; J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; Henry Engen, Director
of Community Development; Ken Bruce, Senior Planner; Wayne
Peterson, City Engineer; Roger Neuman, Police Chief; D.F. Romero,
Public Services Director
1. David Hafemeister, Professor at California Polytechnic State University,
presented a discussion on "The Exponential Growth of San Luis Obispo ".
Mayor Cooper thanked Professor Hafemeister for his presentation.
2. The City Council considered a recommendation from the Citizens'
Advisory Board for implementation of guidelines for the Rental Housing
Mediation Board and also recommendations from the Human Relations Commission
for implementation of guidelines for the Rental Housing Mediation Board.
Jackie Megow presented the recommendations of the HRC as they related to
the Rental Housing Mediation Board. She presented the recommendation which
included membership, terms of office, functions and duties, number of meet-
ings, records to be kept and procedures during mediation. She continued that
the HRC would like to keep the Rental Housing Mediation Board as part of their
organization and not set up as a separate division under some other city
agency or even independent agency.
Lee Walton, Administrative Officer, felt the concept as presented by the CAC
and the HRC were very good but recommended that the City Attorney be asked to
review and clean up the language and then bring it back for Council consider-
ation.
Councilman Dunin stated he would support the Rental Housing Mediation
Board although he would like to have nine members on the Board and even
would support it if there were 12 members in order to have plenty of
persons available to study the various problems.
f]
Councilwoman Billig stated she would support the Rental Housing Mediation
Board, felt that a team concept was very good and also felt there should
be some training in mediation before getting involved in the actual discussions. '
Councilman Bond stated he would support the CAC and the HRC on the Rental
Housing Mediation Board, felt it was a good job and should be referred to
the City Attorney for clearing up any legal position of the document.
There being no further discussion, the matter was referred to the City
Attorney to prepare an ordinance or resolution to implement the Rental
Housing Mediation Board.
3. The City Council considered a staff report regarding a review of
the proposed walls along San Luis Creek in the Mission Plaza extension.
The hydrology of the plaza extension and the effect the proposed improve-
ments would have on downstream properties.
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 2
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, reviewed the background of this
portion of San Luis Creek as to capacity and the effect various storms
had on this water system. He recommended the following:
1) Improve the entry to the Nipomo Street bridge so as to minimize turbu-
lence and erosion. This could best be accomplished by connecting to
the existing 17 foot high wall behind the transmission shop and con-
' struction of a wall which increasingly lays back till it conforms to
a proposed 3:1 slope approximately 60 feet upstream.
2) Conduct minor improvements to the outlet of the Marsh Street drainage
culvert.
3) Construct a wall connection between existing walls which terminate
upstream of the Phoenix Building and upstream of McLintocks Saloon,
and regrade the channel bottom along this easterly side. This work
would provide a continuous wall on this exposed outside curve and would
increase the channel capacity a sufficient amount to contain 30 year
storm flow within the plaza extension rather than flooding adjacent
properties.
4) Widen the channel bottom and slope the westerly side of the channel
to 3:1, preserving as much of the vegetation of the trees as possible.
This work would increase the channel capacity to handle a 30 year
storm and would meet city slope criteria which provides stability for
landscaping:
5) Construct a transition wall along the westerly bank of the downstream
face of the Broad Street bridge. This wall transition from vertical
at the Broad Street bridge to approximately 3:1, 40 feet downstream
would provide a smooth transition to the natural earth channel.
As far as soome Councils' concern with the aggrevation of downstream flooding
by a) the discharge of water from the Marsh Street storm drain; and b) improve-
ment of the entrance to the Nipomo Street bridge it was his feeling that the
capacity of the Nipomo Street bridge was now restricted by the very poor
alignment and limited capacity of the channel downstream. Improvements made
at this time with the channel approach to the bridge would have no effect on
the capacity of the bridge until downstream conditions were improved. The
recommendations listed above merely would solve city policy calling for all
improvements for drain facilities to meet design form. This was a prudent
approach which would avoid having to construct improvements at some future
date with all the implied disruption of developed facilities.
Richard Taylor, architect for the Mission Plaza extension, felt that he
accommodate the Engineer's recommendation on flood control without damage
to his basic development plan. He urged the Council use stone rather than
concrete as proposed for the walls and he offered to make a study on compar-
isons of costs between stone vs. concrete. He again urged the Council to
replace the amphitheater in the area of the Mission Plaza extension previously
taken out by the Council.
Gary Grant, representing Phoenix Company, stated that he agreed with comments
of the landscape architect to improve the creek in this area of San Luis Creek
and not leave it natural as he stated his firm had spent a great deal of money
to build the rear walkway for the public and if there were nothing to see, it
was really a waste of money.
Richard Krejsa, urged the City Council not to make the same mistakes in an
extension to Mission Plaza as in its first phase of the Mission Plaza which had
destroyed fish life in the creek. He had warned the City Council ten years ago
of this potential damage and after it happened, the fish were now gone. He
hoped the Council would not continue to segregate and destroy San Luis Creek
through San Luis Obispo.
Councilman Bond stated he would support a first class project in the Mission
Plaza extension and if necessary put the amphi- theatre back in.
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 4:00_ p.m.
Page 3
Councilman Dunin stated he would support the project but felt that the
downstream property owners must be protected from any work done in San Luis
Creek above Nipomo Street. He was opposed to the second amphitheater in
this stretch of Mission Plaza.
Councilwoman "Billig_stated she supported the project, would like the use
of stone if possible but she was also disturbed about possible downstream
flooding caused by this project. She would support a primitive picnic area ,
with no improvements so as to not impound water flow during floods. She
hoped these walls would be softened by planting and landscaping, etc. She
again voiced support for the walkway on the buildings to the rear of Higuera
Street facing the creek.
The hydrology report in the San Luis Creek area was approved in concept and
referred to the Public Services Director and architect Richard Taylor for
possible implementation.
4. The.City Council again considered a request from Eleanor Truocchio
to lease city -owned property in Reservoir Canyon. She stated that the
degredation of the canyon was getting worse by the day and she hoped that
the City Council would proceed and allow her to lease the property so that
she could protect the land for the future.
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, again reviewed for the City Council,
the history of this city -owned property in Reservoir Canyon.
Lee Walton, Administrative Officer, recommended that the City Attorney be
directed to prepare a three -year lease with a three -month termination clause
for $25.00 per annum and also to incorporate limited access for persons
specifically authorized into the area by the Administrative Officer.
Dorothy A. Rible, member of the Autobon Society, was opposed to the lease of '
this land to a private property owner. She felt it was unfair to the many
pgople.wbo_use_phis area constantly to study the plant life, birds, etc.
Councilman Dunin stated he would support a lease but hoped that organized
groups could visit the area for study, etc.
Councilwoman Billig stated she would support the lease and still accommodate
organized groups to visit the area.
Councilman Bond stated he would accept the CAO's recommendation with access
to groups.
Terry Sanville spoke in support of allowing the public to visit and use
Reservoir Canyon city property and not be limited to organized groups. He
felt the Council should face the issue of manning this city resource and
not just lease it to a property owner and take over the city's responsibility.
He felt the city should own the property and should take care of it.
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the City Attorney was
instructed to prepare the conditions for a three year lease. Motion carried.
5. Rudy Muravez, Finance Director, presented a proposed budget format
for the City Council's consideration for the 1980 -1981 City Budget. After
a brief presentation, the matter was continued to a special study session at
12:00 noon, Monday, March 31, 1980 as the City Council had not had an opportunity '
to see the format prior to the Council meeting.
6. Keith K. Bruington, appeared before the City Council, asking for
interpTgta.tion_of Municipal Code Section 9100.9.4.0 regarding subdivision
guarantees. He stated that in the early steps of preparing Tract 744 for
final map approval, he had worked with the city staff and that they had
approved the approach of using a set aside letter from a bank or instrument
of credit in lieu of surety bonds and he had been working on this premise
all during this period. He stated he had now received a notice from the City
Engineer stating that the City Engineer would no longer accept set aside letters
or instruments of credit but only surety bonds issued by insurance company to
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 4
guarantee the improvements. He felt that while he no objection to the change,
he felt it should have been brought to his attention early in the game before
he got involved to the point that he was at this time.
Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, submitted a memorandum stating that the city's
subdivisi,on ordinance gaye the City Council the ultimate authority to accept
or reject various forms of subdivision guarantee so that the City Engineer's
decision was in the form of a recommendation. He felt that the bond was the
better way to go rather than the extra work required in handling approvals of
payments as the work progressed on the subdivision.
George Thacher, City Attorney, stated that the set aside letter was accceptable
as far as he was concerned to guarantee improvements for development although
he said the subject letter had to have some language cleared up to completely
protect the city.
Wayne Peterson again stated that the set aside letter caused a great deal of
workload on city staff as they must approve releases from set aside monies
from banks to pay subtractors for improvements as they are put in.
Councilman Dunin stated that he felt that the city, by ordinance, allowed
both bonds and set aside letters to developers and did not see why one staff
member should make a change without Council concurrence. He also objected
to the tone of the letter to Mr. Bruington by the city staff.
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, explained some of the background for
staff making this decision; however, he agreed that it was not fair to impose
this change without first clearing it with council.
Councilwoman Billig felt bonds should be only acceptable document except in
this case she would accept a set aside letter as this tract had been approved
for quite awhile.
' Councilman Bond said he would uphold Bruington's appeal until the Council
approved changes in the method of guaranteeing subdivision improvements and
amends the ordinance.
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Bond, to uphold the
appeal with the City Attorney to approve or correct the set aside letter
wording. Motion carried, all ayes.
7.A Communication from Richard Schmidt, 112 Broad Street, bringing to
the Council's attention a perenial drainage problem in the 100 block of Broad
Street caused by the Bressi - Boriack drainage problem. He reviewed the work
that he and his neighbors have had to do each year for many, many years in
order to protect their homes from complete flooding. He stated he felt it
was unfair to be spending money on matters of less importance while citizens'
homes were being flooded.
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, reported that flood problems at this
located had been long standing and had been considered by the City Council
many times in the past. He stated the problem lay`-in the drainage leaving
from the Bressi property across Broad Street in a 30" pipe which reduced to
an 18" pipe within the Boriack property. In addition, at some distant past
time, the owners of the Boriack property extended their seweral lateral through
the center of the 30" pipe. The 18" pipe had a theoretical capacity of 1/3
of a 30" pipe which itself was severely restricted by the sewer lateral extend-
' ing through it. He then reviewed all of the things that had happened since
1970 when the City Council held numerous meetings with the property owners in
order to abate the drainage channel obstruction through the Boriack property.
It was his recommendation that the City replace this inadequate drain as a
priority project through the storm drainage capital improvement program. He
believed it was important that the improvement be constructed and recommended
that the City make one additional attempt to negotiate with the Boriacks. If
they were unsuccessful, he recommended that the City Council initiate condemna-
tion proceedings and proceed with the improvements following Alternate A.
He stated that plans were prepared and staff could go to bid as soon as rights
of way were obtained.
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 5
Keith Gurnee, next door neighbor to Richard Schmidt, stated he was in support
of Schmidt's appeal as he had spent many hours helping-Richard Schmidt protect
not only the Schmidt residence but his residence as well.
Councilman Bond felt the City Council should make this a priority on the
1980 -1981 CIP and staff should begin immediately to acquire easements so that
this project could be completed this summer.
Councilman Dunin stated he would support the improvements of this major city's
flood problem.
Councilwoman Billig stated she too supported the improvement of this property
and urged the staff to proceed.
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, that the city
staff be authorized to proceed with Alternate A with instructions to negotiate
with the Boriacks for the easement. If not, return to the City Council for
condemnation proceedings. Motion carried, all ayes.
7.B Communication from Arthur S. Hawthorne, 141 Cuesta Drive, and
�'$efitiori's geed "by'1l neighbors in the vicinity of Cuesta Drive and Serro
Ramouldo, bringing to the Council's attention, the flooding problems in
their neighborhood caused by inadequate drainage systems and urged that the
City Council take appropriate steps to rectify the situation.
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, stated that for approximately 15 years
the city had been attempting to improve the inadequate drainage channel which
served all the area north of Foothill Blvd. and west of Cuesta Drive. The
city had been conducting an- annual improvement program starting with the
worst structures and channels. However, in 1973 the Council philosophy
regarding the improvement of drainage channels changed and no work had been
conducted for a number of years since. Last year, the Council once again
authorized the staff to proceed with channel improvements and in the past
year, the city had corrected the most critical problem, the channel between
Felton Way and Highland Drive. The next project was the improvement of the
drainage structure crossing Cerro Romouldo which was to be done this summer.
He also stated that the catch basins on Cuesta were intended to handle only
surface runoff, not overflow from the main channel. Therefore, no plans
were being made for these channels.
He also continued that the sewer lines serving the Tassajara- Cuesta Drive
area were inadequate and had been enlarging the system on a piece meal basis
since the early 1950's. The next increment of sewer line to be improved was
the line on Foothill Blvd. from Tassajara to near Ferrini Road. This was the
top priority sewer project and plans and specifications would be completed
this spring for construction. A number of houses in this area were constructed
below curb level or just barely above curb level and were subject to sewer
backup during periods of heavy flow. In order to prevent damage due to this
backup, the City has periodically notified owners of critical properties to
install a check -valve in their lateral and this has been done in most cases.
He stated the next step would be for the city to study and find the infiltration
sources of water in the sewer system within this area north of Foothill Blvd.
He hoped to be able to process the T.V. inspection program in this area very
soon.
Martin Machado, Cuesta and Cerro Ramauldo, appeared before the Council urging
some improvement to this problem.
Mrs. Black stated she did not feel she could pay to install the back water
valve on her property which she felt was caused by the inadequate engineering
of the city.
Richard Krejsa asked the Council to look at all of the hazards in downstream
areas which were getting worse year by year.
1
I�
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 4:00 p.m.
Page 6
Based on staff report, the city staff was authorized to proceed with improve-
ments as listed on motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin,
all ayes.
There being no further business to come before the City Council and due to
the lateness of the hour, Mayor Cooper adjourned the meeting to 7:30 p.m.,
Tuesday, March 18, 1980. Motion carried.
Council approved minutes on:
J.H tzlrafrick, City Clerk
4/15/80
M I N U T E S
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 1980 - 7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
Pledge
Invocation by Father Dennis Gilbert, The Old Mission
'Roll C'All
Councilmembers
Present: Melanie Billig, Alan Bond, Ron Dunin and Jeff Jorgensen
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Lee Walton, Administrative Officer; George Thacher, City Attorney;
J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; Henry Engen, Community Development
Director; Ken Bruce, Senior Planner; Dick Minor, Fire Chief;
Mike Park, Fire Marshal; Roger Neuman, Police Chief; D.F. Romero,
Public Services Director
At this time, the City Council considered the appointment of a person to replace
Councilman Jorgensen on the City Council who resigned in order to take a place
on the County Board of Supervisors.
On motion of Mayor Cooper, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, that Gerald L.
Munger be appointed to complete the unexpired term of Jeff Jorgensen to April 1,
1981.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Mayor Cooper, Councilmembers Billig, Bond and Dunin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor Cooper then read a list of names of persons who had been considered
for appointment to fill the unexpired term caused by the resignation of
Councilman Jorgensen.
City Council.Minutes
March 18, 1980.- .7.:30.p.m.
Page 2
8.. The.City.Council.reviewed an application .for..commercial.development
in.the incorporate area. adjacent. to.--the city ..limits.
Henry Engen, Community Development.Director, reported that the County
Planning.Department.had.sent the.city.a copy of plans.for a.,commercial -•.
and light industrial project ..on.South.Higuera.Street at.the Buckley Road
intersection. The plans must be approved by. the County .Planning Commission
before the project could.be built. The project was scheduled for review.
by.the County Planning Commission on -March 27, 1980. The County Planning
Department had asked.the City Planning Department.to.review the.project_ and
make recommendations. However, because of the .nature ..of.the.project,,.size,
location.a_nd types of.iises - proposed, it was the Community. Development staff's
feeling that the City Council should make specific recommendations directly
to the Board of Supervisors. He continued that -the current.zoning of the
property was C- 2 -D -AH. The- D_.designation meant the County Planning Commission
must approve the - design of.any.project built on -site. The existing uses C -H .
zone did not allow sufficient variety of the commercial uses and - therefore
asked.that 150' wide strip.along.the eastern front would be zoned to C -2.
According to the County, the proposed development was to be...a furniture.store
and bakery within.the rezoned area. He urged that the City Council take the
following action:
"Formally ask the Board. of. Supervisors. to. defer- ,any County action on the
pending development pian.until.the.City's request -could be.acted upon ".
This would.be to formally ask the County Board of Supervisors to initiate
the rezoning of the property along the east side of.Higuera Street - between
Suburban and Buckley Roads from C- 2 -D -AH to M- 1- D -AH."
David Brenner,.architect for the - property owner, reviewed for.the Council,
the development proposed for this location and stated that he.objected to
the interference into this matter by the city staff because he.said it was
simply that the County Planning Commission's staff.was.going to-recommend .
to the Planning Commission to..approve the uses recommended with some minor
conditions. He asked the. City Council not to take action-as recommended by
the city staff but to allow the county planning commission and their staff to
do their own job.
Councilman Dunin stated he was.not opposed -to the uses as.proposed.but ques-
tioned the non- compliance with both city and county general plans which
would allow the County to complete their_land.use plan on zoning or..zone
the property to M -1.
Councilwoman Billig.stated she.would request the County'to..defer any action
on this matter and ask the County.Board.of Supervisors to look at the request
and zone the property M -1 as recommended by the City until-the County Land
Use Plan had been adopted.. -.
Councilman Bond felt.that.the..uses.proposed were incompatible with uses in
the general area.
Mayor Cooper felt -the City Council should let.the County proceed with their
land . use. study. and, that. no -.action.. be- taken,.by.the.City Council.
Councilwoman Billig moved that the City Council ask the Supervisors to with-
hold any action until the land use plan now under consideration had been
completed or request a change to M -1 zoning.. Motion,.died.for lack of a second.
On motion-of-Councilwoman Billig,. seconded .by...Mayor,Cooper,,that the City
Council ask the Board of Supervisors to review the proposal.for.compatibility
with land use in the area with the request to rezone the subject property to
comply with the City's General Plan. Motion carried, all ayes.
9. Request by the city staff for the Council.to consider.annexations
of minor street rights -of -way in.ord.er.to eliminate confusion.as to maintenance
and traffic control between the city and the county.
I�
1
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 7:30 P.M.
Page 3
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, submitted a sketch map showing 10
proposed minor annexations of street rights -of -way for the Council's consid-
eration.
After review of the ten suggested or recommended annexations, it was moved
by Councilman Billig, seconded by Mayor Cooper, that the city staff be
authorized to proceed with minor annexations of street right -of -ways deleting
no's 2, 3, 7 and 10 at this time. Motion carried, all ayes, Councilman Dunin
voting no.
10. Discussion by the City Council of a report from the planning staff
on the Airport Land Use Plan amendment issues was continued to a study session
on March 25, 1980 at 12:10 p.m.
11. Consideration of an abandonment of a portion of streets in the
Terrace Hill project was continued to 7:30 p.m. with Item No. 18.
12. Mayor Cooper appointed a Council subcommittee of Councilmembers
Billig and Bond to hold a hearing and review the claims against the city
by Pacific Western Construction Company for extra payments for alleged work
done in connection with the Santa Rosa Street widening.
13. On-motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, plans
and specifications for the "SQUAD BODY FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT EMERGENCY VEHICLE"
were approved and staff authorized to call for bids. Motion carried.
CONSENT ITEMS
C -1 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, claims
against the City for the month of March, 1980 were approved and ordered paid
subject to the approval of the Administrative Officer. Motion carried.
C -2 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following minutes of City Council meetings of January 7, 1980 and January 15,
1980 were approved as amended. Motion carried.
C -3A On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4125 (1980 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an agreement
between the City and Bobby Kober for extension of golf professional agreement
to March 31, 1981.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -3B On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4126 (1980 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an agreement
between the City and Bobby Kober for operation of the golf course concession
through March 31, 1981.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -4 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by.Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4131 (1980 Series), a
resolution approving the 1980 -1981 Handicapped Transit Budget.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 4
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig 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. 4127 (1980 Series), a I
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo finding and deter-
mining that Fire Captain John Silva was disabled.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin, Billig and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -6 On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4128 (1980 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo amending Resolution
No. 3991 by providing for payment for fire fighter reservists.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Bond, Billig and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
A. Robert Corcoran, Administrator for the Downtown Business Improvement
Area, presented the City Council with a report prepared by the Downtown
Promotion Reporter, a publication published by the Downtown Research and
Development Center, which showed the City of San Luis Obispo's downtown
business area first in a group of 17 cities.
14. The City Council held a public hearing to consider an Ordinance 604 -A
Level I Water Fire Flow Deficiency in conjunction with a request to build a
new four unit apartment located 1924 Garfield Street, R -4 zone; Robert Bruington,
applicant.
Henry Engen, Community Development Director, stated that the Planning Commission
unanimously recommended that the Council allow the project to proceed subject to
the following conditions:
1) Elimination of the defiency by quarterly funding or, if the project was
not funded by the city, the applicant be responsible for eliminating the
deficiency on his own; and
2) The building permit be issued in accordance with the Fire Marshal's
requirements.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the
City Council for or against the public hearing. Mayor Cooper declared the
public hearing closed. '
Councilman Bond stated he approved of the Planning Commission's recommendations
and conditions but wanted no occupancy until the work had been accomplished.
Councilman Dunin agreed with the Planning Commission's recommendations and
also no occupancy until the work had been accomplished.
Councilwoman Billig also agreed that the project should be allowed to
proceed with the conditions of the Planning Commission but no occupancy
until the work had been accomplished.
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 5
.On motion of Councilman Bond,. seconded- .by...Councilman.Dunin, that:the
.Council.:find•.that the_ pr -oject.be .allowed- to. proceed-subject .to the.follow-
ing conditions:
1) elimination of the deficiency budgeted . by the city..or that the applicant
be responsible for elimination of the deficiency on his own; and
2) building permit
be
.issued in
accordance
with
the
Fire Marshal.'s.require-
ments but that.no-
occupancy
be allowed
until.the
work had been
accomplished.
Motion carried..on.the following-roll-call-vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin,.Billig and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
15. The. ;City.Council. held a_ public: hearing.to:consider _ an.appeal by
.Merriam, Deasy. -& Whisenant,. Inc. of..an..appeal.of.a.denial by a Planning
Commission.decision regarding use permitted by the General Plan, Zoning
Ordinance and approved use permit-for the Laguna Village Shopping Center
at Madonna and Los Osos Roads.
Henry Engen,. Community Development .Director,. stated that the matter before.
the Council.this evening was an appeal of the Community Development Director's
decision regarding.2uses permitted by the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance in
.the .neighborhood.shopping.center being.developed • at the:north.corner of Madonna
-.Road..and.Los Osos Valley - Roads.. He stated that .the.Planning_Commission, in
:- October., 1978, had .approved the use permit allowing construction of a neighbor-
ing shopping center with offices on the second floor. The:city.had approved
building.permits for the project.-with the-exceptions-of the.driveup. restaurant
which the applicant had.withdrawn.:from the project. The applicant,had asked
the Community Development Director to approve a number of uses for-stores-and
offices in.the center. The Director had approved some of the requested uses
but turned.down others...The.applicant was appealing the Director's decision
to not allow.some.of.the.requested uses. The basis for determining which
uses are allowed is the zoning : chart.f or. the- C -N zone, .Section 9200.32. of
the zoning ordinance together with the use permit conditions and the general
plan. Uses.not listed in-the C -N chart are not allowed in-the C -N zone unless
the use was not listed in the zoning charts.and the.use was similar.in char -
.acter.uses which were permitted.in the C -N zone and do not generate more
traffic, parking, dust, noise, etc. Uses in the proposed shopping-center
were further subject to the requirements of the use permit issued. Condition
16 of that ..use permit affected the types-of uses allowed in:this center:
"16. Office-uses shall.be- allowed.on second floor- level. -only and shall
be limited .to -off ices..which.are intended to.serve primarily the
Laguna.neighborhood.or.branch offices of,uses already established
in..the.city. Jndividual..occupancy requests for -office use, as they
occur, shall.be.approved...by.the Community.: Development Director to
.ensure compliance with:the intent of this- condition and the General
Plan."
He continued.that the State.Law required that _all:.:zoning: actions be consistent
with the. General ..P.fan.ande.the. intent ;of a. neighborhood. shopping- center: -
is..to provide for day -to -day convenience, retail, and service needs of.the
neighborhood area, as contrasted with regional shopping centers which meet .
the comparison.shopping needs of�the.overall city.and:its trade area. :He
continued. that..the allowed,•uses .with .this- particular.. use .permit. was .a agift
shop, .. determined to be.similar:in character to a.stationery store:.- -Banks
and savings.and loans.were.considered under:. offices. Other.muses such as
hardware, auto accessories,.florist, drug, etc, were allowed uses except
auto accessories. Auto accessories were not allowed in the C -N zone and
did not..appear.similar to.o.ther allowed uses so-it was not authorized. A
variety store was requested of 5,000 square feet maximum and not allowed.
This use was..not..similar.to any use listed-in-the C- N:zoning• chart.- A,depart-
ment store was.listed in:the C- R- ,zone. This too.was.a. comparison.retail use.
City Council Minutes .
March 18, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 6
Clothing accessories, jewelry,.etc. were..not.allowed as they were not similar
to any uses listed in..the C. -N. zoning .chart...,It_was_a_comparison retail use.
The requested-use for professional uses,'total of-1500 square feet per.office,
the description -was not - specific enough to make a..determination. Professional
offices were not specified, nor specifically excluded.in.the.General Plan and
could be considered for approval. The medical/dental-offices for general
practice were not allowed.. General Plan policy specifically.mentions doctor
offices and medical clinics as uses.which were not - appropriate within
convenience commercial centers i
He recommended that the City Council..uphold.the.decision of.the Planning ■
Commission who in turn upheld'the decision :of'the.Community:.'Development
Director.
Jay Whisenant,.representing the property.owner, stated..tliat..they were..
requesting .the.approval.of..specific tenant -types for the center which .
appeared to be in conformance with the intent of the zoning ordinance and
general plan. The zoning ordinance had many conflicts with regard to the
allowed uses and the general plan language allowed for a great.deal of
intrepretation.. It ..was their.purpose to provide a center with a.variety
of uses which would serve'the'local neighborhood ;.specificilly.;._the..Laguna
Lake area. The center itself was not a-cbnveritional= strip =type neighborhood
center.and it would serve a large population area currently without local
services. All of the retail uses requested were allowed by -the zoning ord-
inance if -they were incorporated in the:correct.overall.business. For
example, a super -. drugstore was an allowed use for a C- N.zone...The.majority
of a superdrug sales were clothing, household goods; auto accessories; etc.
The property owner was requesting the same uses but'oh"a limited basis; both
in size and in.number which they felt would be more beneficial and attractive
to a neighborhood scale. Many. -of the same type retail uses were specifically
allowed by'ordinance. A stereo store'was allowed, a hardware store was allowed
which again would sell household.supplies, garden supplies, auto.accessories,
etc. were an allowed use. In order to obtain a ... reasonable_mix of use for
a- center serving a neighborhood of this size, these kind of_ businesses were
required-and they would "like the option of having several "small local businesses.
As far as:their..request of office.uses was - concerned, they were also based on
the local neighborhood use. The adjacent property across Los Osos Valley Road
was currently zoned PO and the offices there were 99% leased.
The general plan language-stated that professional offices should -be excluded
from neighborhood 'centers.. They-felt this left the door open for professional
offices in specific.cases. With the adjacent office uses and the number and
size limits proposed, these.uses were compatible. The city had already
approved accounting offices, advertising firms, travel'agencies, marriage
coUn'selors, =and 'insurance `offices, all of which fall into' the professional
office category. A small law or medical office doesn't appear to be any
different in terms of neighborhodd orientation from these uses.
It was their intent that this request to provide a reasonable mix of
tenants.which would serve the'Laguna neighborhood. The economics of the
area would also "control the.tenant type.. Without neighborhood support a.
tenant was not going to want to locate. -there and /or be able to survive. .
They felt their request would benefit not only the center but the.neighborhood
and community as well. The requested uses being requested and not specifically
allowed by zoning ordinance. were: Clothing /shoe store, 10,000 sq. ft. maximum;
Variety store, 5;000 sq. ft: maximum and'a clothing accessory-store (jewelry,
etc.'), 3500 sq. ft. maximum. The office uses requested were: professional
offices, 1500 sq. ft. maximum per office'a total of 4500 sq. ft. and a medical/
dental, neighborhood type only and general practice (pediatrician, optometrist,
etc.), 4500 sq. ft. maximum. He felt.these uses were needed, would make the
center truly neighborhood, and'would with the size.of the neighborhood; would
possibly reduce much running back and forth into'the main part of San Luis
Obispo for strictly local uses.
Stuart Macklin, representing the shopping b eriter developer, then reviewed
the entire neighborhood center development.and how it was devised and why
the mix of tenants was placed as it was. He said.the purpose.of the tenant
mix was to get a viable mix in.the center to .serve -the neighborhood. He
urged that the City Council use the uses that had been excluded by the
Community Development Department as the center had developed as a neighborhood
center and it was not to compete with downtown shopping or regional shopping
1
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 7
centers. He felt that the drawing should include some professional offices
such as a dentist, doctor, pediatrician, etc. but not a clinic. These practioners
would only serve the general neighborhood and that residents were entitled to
these types of facilities.
He concluded his comments by stating that he was afraid that without these
additions and this mix of tenants, it would be difficult to get financing to
complete the other stores.
' Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Dunin felt that the city was to blame in zoning this large 10 -acre
parcel to C -N and now attempt to take away uses to make the C -N a viable
development. He also felt this neighborhood deserved this facilitiy if it
could be done legally. He would uphold the appeal in those areas.
Councilwoman Billig stated she could not support the appeal based upon
the general plan and zoning ordinance conditions and she could not find
any exception for allowing the uses requested.
Councilman Bond stated he would support the appeal as he felt the residences
of the area were entitled to close -in shopping for necessities. He felt the
uses requested were not the type that would compete with downtown or regional
shopping centers.
Mayor Cooper felt this was the only parcel of this size in the city zoned
C -N and he doubted there would ever be another and he felt that if it were
legal he would support some of the uses requested as he felt that the neigh-
borhood deserved this type of facility and that might help eliminate these
residences driving long distances to shop for strictly neighborhood type and
home type uses.
George Thacher, City Attorney, reviewed for the City Council, some of the
wording and definitions in the zoning ordinance dealing with auto accessory
stores, variety stores, clothing stores, etc. which were shown as C -R uses
but not as C -N uses.
After discussion, it was moved by Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman
Dunin, that the City Council would uphold the appeal and direct the City
Attorney to prepare the proper language for a resolution upholding said
appeal.
Councilwoman Billig stated she was opposed to the motion as she felt it was
in opposition to the adopted General Plan and.existing ordinances. She felt
the Council could not make the necessary interpretation as to allow these
uses.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper
NOES: Councilwoman Billig
ABSENT: None
16. The City Council held a public hearing to review the recommended
Capital Improvement Program for fiscal year 1980 -1981. The Council also
considered the recommendations from the Planning Commission on the CIP
priorities and the Citizens' Advisory Committee on the CIP priorities.
Lee Walton, Administrative Officer, reviewed for the City Council, the
staff proposed capital improvement program for the city for the year 1980 -1981.
He reviewed the format, the backup information, the projections of revenues
for the project and the order of priorities as follows:
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 7:30p.m.
Page 8
The Planning Commission also recommended that all landscaping in the city be
drought resistant species to avoid costly irrigation systems. The Commission
also recommended that the summary of proposed expenditures by geographic area
and catagory should be incorporated into future CIP presentations. They also
recommended that the city change their policy on street trees being planted
at city cost to have maintenance responsibilities assumed by property owners.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
Ken Schwartz, 201 Buena Vista Avenue, came before the City Council stating
that he liked the format and the extension of revenue within the plan but
he was displeased with the five -year plan for the life of the plan. He felt
that the Capital Improvement Program should be carried on for a period of at
least 20 years. He felt the city should not city funds to correct flood
control deficiencies within the city but that they should be handled by
the county through their so- called Zone 9. He felt they had the tax base
and the expertise to do the job. He also questioned the priority on several
of the other items established by staff such as he felt the plan to renovate
and expand the existing headquarters fire station was a mistake. That in
the past the city had spent many, many dollars developing a master plan for
the fire service and that building was to be demolished and sold and not
used for future fire services and that was the basis on which the fourth
station was built in Laguna Lake but now it seems that the city was moving
ahead to retain all four fire stations. He felt that should be looked
at very carefully. He also felt the Council should look very carefully at
number 9, improvements to Laguna Lake, as this was a very valuable resource
and must be very carefully protected for the future.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the matter was
referred to a Study Session to be held at 12:10 p.m., March 31, 1980. Motion
carried.
17. . The City Council held a public hearing to consider a recommendation
from the Planning Commission to approve the tentative map for Minor Subdivision
No. 79 -258 to create three lots from one lot at 620 Park Street, R -1 zone;
Timothy and Karen LaSalle, subdividers.
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, stated that the Planning Commission recommended
the Council adopt the attached draft resolution granting approval of the
tentative parcel map for Minor Subdivision No. 79 -258 with a negative declar-
ation on environmental impact and subject to the findings, conditions and
exceptions.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the
City Council for or against the tentative map. Mayor Cooper declared the
Public hearing closed.
1
1
1
Priority
Priority
Recommendations
C.I.P. #
Project Title
P.C. C.A.C.
1 Downtown Parking - Land Acquisitions
1
7
2
Mission Plaza - Nipomo Phase
10
3
3
*Corporation Yard - Phase I
9
11
4
Flood Control Deficiency Coorections
2
2
5
Police Department Parking & Facility
5
6
6
1500 GPM Pumper
3
1
7
Sinsheimer Park Development
15
9
8
Community Center Building Fund
13
5
9
Laguna Lake Improvements
11
8
10
*Landscape Area Improvements
14
12
11
*City Hall Modifications
4
4
12
Lagune,_Lake Park Development
12
13
13
Hydro -Crane - Corporation Yard
8
10
14
Meadow Park Expansion
7
14
15
Capital Contingencies
6
15
Both the
Planning Commission and C.A.C. did not
establish any priority
list
beyond CIP No. 15
The Planning Commission also recommended that all landscaping in the city be
drought resistant species to avoid costly irrigation systems. The Commission
also recommended that the summary of proposed expenditures by geographic area
and catagory should be incorporated into future CIP presentations. They also
recommended that the city change their policy on street trees being planted
at city cost to have maintenance responsibilities assumed by property owners.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
Ken Schwartz, 201 Buena Vista Avenue, came before the City Council stating
that he liked the format and the extension of revenue within the plan but
he was displeased with the five -year plan for the life of the plan. He felt
that the Capital Improvement Program should be carried on for a period of at
least 20 years. He felt the city should not city funds to correct flood
control deficiencies within the city but that they should be handled by
the county through their so- called Zone 9. He felt they had the tax base
and the expertise to do the job. He also questioned the priority on several
of the other items established by staff such as he felt the plan to renovate
and expand the existing headquarters fire station was a mistake. That in
the past the city had spent many, many dollars developing a master plan for
the fire service and that building was to be demolished and sold and not
used for future fire services and that was the basis on which the fourth
station was built in Laguna Lake but now it seems that the city was moving
ahead to retain all four fire stations. He felt that should be looked
at very carefully. He also felt the Council should look very carefully at
number 9, improvements to Laguna Lake, as this was a very valuable resource
and must be very carefully protected for the future.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the matter was
referred to a Study Session to be held at 12:10 p.m., March 31, 1980. Motion
carried.
17. . The City Council held a public hearing to consider a recommendation
from the Planning Commission to approve the tentative map for Minor Subdivision
No. 79 -258 to create three lots from one lot at 620 Park Street, R -1 zone;
Timothy and Karen LaSalle, subdividers.
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, stated that the Planning Commission recommended
the Council adopt the attached draft resolution granting approval of the
tentative parcel map for Minor Subdivision No. 79 -258 with a negative declar-
ation on environmental impact and subject to the findings, conditions and
exceptions.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the
City Council for or against the tentative map. Mayor Cooper declared the
Public hearing closed.
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
March 18, 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 9
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Councilwoman Billig, the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4129 (1980 Series), a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting approval of the tentative
map for Minor Subdivision No. 79 -258 located at 620 Park Street.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
' AYES: Councilmembers Bond, Billig, Dunin and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
11. Continued from the 4:00 p.m. meeting for consideration with Item
No. 18.
The City Council was asked to consider a Resolution of Intention to abandon
a portion of William Street, Bushnell Street, Haskins Avenue, Fletcher Avenue,
Florence Avenue and Leona Avenue within the Terrace Hill project area.
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, stated that the Planning Commission, after study,
had recommended that the Council adopt a Resolution of Intention to abandon
the subject streets as they were unnecessary for present or future public
rights -of -way and that they lie within the Terrace Hill project. He then
listed the conditions for each individual street, which easements had to be
retained, etc.
Bob Vesseley, representing the Cuesta Valley Properties, agreed with the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and staff on these abandonments
feeling that they would be an advantage to the property owner but would also
would avoid problems for the city.
' On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Bond, the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 412 (1980 Series), a Resolution
of Intention to abandon portions of William Street, Bushnell Street, Haskins
Avenue, Fletcher Avenue, Florence Avenue and Leona Avenue within Terrace Hill
Planned Development Project Area.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
18. The City Council held a public hearing to consider a report on
the request of Cuesta Valley Properties to dispose of a city -owned property
at 2243 Augusta Street, R -1 PD zone.
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, again presented the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to dispose of the subject property. In taking the action, the
Commission made the following recommendations:
1) That city ownership of the property would not serve any continuing
public purpose and disposing of the property would be consistent
with city plans and the general plan;
2) That the property should be split approximately along the water line
easement bisecting the lot and each portion sold to the two immediately
abutting adjacent property owners.
3) That the sale price of the property should be established by appraisal
and negotiation. The Council should authorize administrative and
engineering staff to proceed as soon as possible.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open.
City Council Minutes
March 189 1980 - 7:30 p.m.
Page 10
Bob Vessley, representing the Cuesta Valley Properties, spoke in support of
the Planning Commission recommendation to divide the lot between both adjacent
property owners and sell to them in order to clear up this little odd piece of
property.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Bond, that the City
Council find the lot surplus to city needs, authorize the staff to proceed ,
to have the lot appraised and authorize sale to adjacent property owners on
the same conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion carried,
all ayes.
19. The City Council considered the final passage of Ordinance No. 844
(1980 Series), an ordinance adding Chapter 7, Title 6, Sections 6700- 6700.11
to the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code to regulate security and fire alarm
systems, businesses, agents and users.
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Bond, Ordinance
No. 844 was introduced for final passage. Finally passed on the following
roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Bond, Billig and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
20. The City Council considered the final passage of Ordinance No. 8459
an amendment to the Police PERS ordinance to amend the contract between the
Board of Administration and the California Public Employees' Retirement System
to provide for one year final compensation for Police Officers.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the
City Council for or against the proposed ordinance. Mayor Cooper declared
the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Bond, Ordinance No.
845 was introduced for final passage. Finally passed on the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
21. Communication from George Thacher, City Attorney, asking that the
City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Municipal Code deleting certain
sections in Article 7 regarding Driveway Standards which were duplicated in
Article 9. The proposed ordinance would simply rescind Article 7 sections
leaving those Driveway Standards covered in Article 9.
Mayor Cooper declared the.public hearing open. No one appeared before the
City Council for or against the proposed ordinance amendment. Mayor Cooper
declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilwoman Billig, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 846 (1980 Series),
an ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo rescinding sections 7330.5,
7330.6, 7330.6.1 and 7330.7 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code regarding
Driveway Standards.
Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote:
City Council Minutes
March„18, 1980;7 7:30 p.m.
Page 11
AYES: Councilmembers Billig, Dunin, Bond and Mayor Cooper
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
22. Council requested to consider a revised ordinance establishing
requirements for street right -of -way, purchase, dedication and improvements.
D.F. Romero, Public Services Director, presented a revised ordinance establishing
general requirements for purchase, dedication and improvements of streets
rights- of- way,in street widenings. In addition, there was a resolution establishing
special requirements under certain conditions. He continued that the
purpose of the revision was to consolidate conflicting legislation into a
single package and to clarify requirements for the city and property owners.
The revised document should reflect latest Council policy but since there were
contradictions and previous legislation, the Council should adopt the revised
ordinance in order to make it clear for both the staff and the public-what the
Council's intention were.
Mayor Cooper declared the public hearing open. No one appeared before the
City Council for or against the proposed.legislation. Mayor Cooper declared
the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Bond, seconded by Mayor Cooper, the following ordinance
was introduced: Ordinance No. -847, (1980 Series), an ordinance of the City of
San Luis Obispo establishing requirements for purchase, dedication and improve-
ments of street rights -of -way.
Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilman Bond, Mayor Cooper, Councilmembers Billig and Dunin
NOES : ' None
ABSENT: None
On motion of Councilman. Bond;,!seconded by.Mayor Cooper, the following
resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4130, (1980 Series), a resolution
of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo establishing special requirements
for the purchase, dedication and improvements of streets rights -of -way.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Co. uncilman Bond, May Cooper.,.Councilmembers Billig . and Dunin
NOES.: None.
ABSENT: None .
There -being no further business. to...come before.the.:City.Councili. Mayo r
Cooper adjourned the meeting to 12:10 p.m., Tuesday, March 25, 1980.
Council approved minutes: 4/15/80
Fitzpatrick,,City.Clerk..