HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/05/1982City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 2
C -3 CONTRACT PAY ESTIMATES
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, contract
pay estimates and change orders be approved and ordered paid. Motion
carried, all ayes.
C -4 DEFERRED COMPENSATION
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4710 (1982 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an
agreement between the City and the ICMA Retirement Corp. for deferred
compensation plan agreement to include the City Administrative Officer.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Griffin, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -5 ABANDONMENT OF CHURCH STREET
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4711 (1982 Series),
a Resolution of Intention to abandon a portion of Church Street between
Santa Barbara and Osos Streets; King Development Company, applicant.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Griffin, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig
' NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -6 SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4712 (1982 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo requiring
sidewalk improvements on portions of Carpenter and Orange Streets in the
City of San Luis Obispo and setting the public hearing for February 2,
1982, at 7:05 p.m.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Griffin, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -7 TRAFFIC WORK ORDERS
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4713 (1982 Series),
' a resolution of the Council of the City of San.Luis Obispo approving
Traffic Work Orders for the period of October 1, 1981, through
December 1, 1981.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Griffin, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 3
C -8 DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, that the
report by Kahn & Associates on status of the proposed Downtown Parking
Structure be received and filed. Motion carried, all ayes.
C -9 ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ORDINANCE
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, that the
proposed ordinance restricting adult entertainment prepared by the City
Attorney be referred to the Planning Commission. Motion carried, all
ayes.
Mayor Billig requested that the Planning Commission give particular
attention to adopted "rules" regarding distances between adult enter-
tainment establishments and residential and school sites. Further, to
see if the permit revocation procedure was strict enough.
C -10 POLICE EXPANSION - CONSULTANT SELECTION
Council reviewed a report by Police Chief Neuman on the process of the
review of consultants for architecture and consulting services for
Police Department Facility Expansion.
Councilman Griffin stated that in the future he would like to see the
budget impact portion of the staff report reflect the actual monies
appropriated, whether it.be from the CIP or operating capital budget.
He also would like to see more diversity in the composition of the
screening committee for the consultant selection, such as, having a
Councilmember, Advisory Committee member, or community members sit on
the screening committee.
After brief discussion and upon general consensus, Council agreed to
refer this item to the CAO for further recommendation.
A -1 DOWNTOWN PARKING PROGRAM /METER CONVERSION
Councilman Dunin requested that this item be added to tonight's agenda.
After brief discussion and upon general consensus, Council agreed to
continue this item to Monday, January 11, 1982, at 12:10 p.m. to'allow
for additional citizen input.
1. LAGUNA LAKE MANAGEMENT PLAN EIR
City Council held a public hearing to consider public comment and
possible certification of the Environmental Impact Report for the Laguna
Lake Management plan.
Terry Sanville, Senior Planner, stated that the City had hired ENVICOM
Inc. to prepare a Management Plan for Laguna Lake an EIR critiqueing the
plan. The plan and EIR were published in August 1981 and a 45 -day
public review period was set. The draft EIR was sent to the State
clearinghouse to allow State agencies to submit comments. The EIR's
public review period ended on October 5, 1981. The consultant had
prepared and, included in the final EIR, written responses to all
comments received by the City.
Staff recommended that the Council review and consider the final EIR for
the Laguna Lake Management Plan and certify it as complete and prepared
in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City and
State EIR guidelines.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open. No one spoke for or
against the certification of the EIR. Mayor Billig declared the public
hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Settle, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4714 (1982 Series),
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 4
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo certifying
the final Environmental Impact Report for the Laguna Lake Management
Plan.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Settle, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
2. REZONING - 2250 BROAD STREET
Council held a public hearing to consider a Planning Commission
recommendation to rezone approximately 3 acres located at 2250 Broad
Street from C -N (commercial /neighborhood) to C -N -PD (commercial /neigh-
borhood /planned development).-and.consideration of a preliminary devel=
opment_plan fotiallow a_ neighborhood -shopping..center _ and _ mix.ed uses�of
bank, retail,cresidential" and office= uses =inclu _ding - utility company
officer;cMSB-Properties, applicant...---
Ken Bruce, Senior Planner, stated that the Planning Commission had
recommended on 4 -0 vote that the Council grant approval of the rezoning
and the preliminary development plan with a negative declaration on the
environmental impact and subject to findings and conditions listed in
the draft ordinance. He stated that staff had two additional concerns:
1) whether this project would meet the city's adopted general plan using
the definition of "professional office" and 2) the question of parking
relative to the use of the South Street right -of -way.
Councilman Griffin questioned whether a Council determination of general
plan consistency would establish a precedent which would make it diffi-
cult to implement the policies as stated in the general plan for other
C- N.zones.
Ken Bruce felt it could and in response to Mr. Griffin's question as to
whether there was sufficient language in the ordinance proposed by the
Planning Commission that would mitigate this, he did not feel there was.
Councilwoman Dovey was also concerned on the matter of the parking issue
and whether or not that would also set a precedent for other
developments..
George Thacher, City Attorney, did not necessarily feel this would set a
legal precedent and stated that the Council would have to determine
whether the proposed offices shall be categorized as something other
than an administrative regional office.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open.
Vic Montgomery, representing the applicant, MSB Properties, explained
that Carroll Pruett of-Mid -State Bank, Peter Kazakoff of P.G.& E. and
Rob Rossi from his office were available to give testimony. He then
outlined the history of this project and explained that in 1977 his firm
represented Mr.1 Rosetti, who was the owner at that time and asked for
this rezoning from C -R to C -N, which was approved by the Planning
Commission; and it was discussed that this should be a mixed -use site
for this development: In 1979 MSB and Mid -State Bank bought the
property and the additional property along Alfonso Street proposing a
bank building. This was approved -by the ARC and the bank was under
construction. He had, at that time, assured the owners that a mixed -use
on this property would be more favorable to the city as this was the
direction given by the city over four years ago. They proceeded with
that concept in mind. They discovered then that the definition of
mixed -uses was not just commercial property, but was also to include
residential. They then pursued this concept. In April they received a
request from P.G.& E. to provide them with the facility to serve the
district County wide. P.G.& E. received six proposals. At that time,
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 5
the revised zoning ordinance was adopted which would exclude utility
offices from the C -N zone. The Council then recently allowed, on 3 -2
vote, that a possible planned development for this property could be
entertained. Both the ARC and the Planning Commission had approved it,
and he felt the project more than met the criteria that was considered
for planned developments. The only item really under discussion was the
definition of a regional administrative office. He did not feel this
utility office was considered a regional facility but rather a district
facility. For one, a regional center would not allow local customer
services department, whereas this building would. He felt that this was
to be designed as a regional office and that it would have to be very
restrictive as it would be considered an extremely small one. He would,
therefore, not feel the neighborhood was being precluded from something
else that might be needed such as a grocery store or a drug store. He
felt that this site was not large enough for a grocery store except for
possibly a mom & pop grocery or deli shop. He also explained that
although this may or may not conform to the general plan depending on
the definition of regional office, it did meet the criteria of the other
seven elements. Further, the applicant was in agreement with 'all other
conditions set forth by the Planning Commission.
Carroll Pruett, Mid -State Bank, stated that he had attempted to meet all
city requirements from the beginning, felt this was going to be a good
project and would urge Council's support.
Upon question by Councilman Griffin, Mr. Pruett explained that the
ground floor would be a retail rental space to include meeting rooms,
lobby, conference room, restrooms, administrative office, customer
office, and customer service center. There would also be lease space
available. The second floor would be primarily private offices, market-
ing and lease space. The four biggest functions would, therefore, be a
customer service area, administrative offices, a conference room, and
marketing and engineering.
Upon question by Councilman Griffin, Mr. Kazakoff, of P.G.& E., 1
explained that approximately 35 percent would be used for the utility
office; about 20 to 25% of'the project would be directly related =to the
district offices. Thirty five to 40 percent would be serving locally.
Jamie Lopes, 977 Buchon Street, was concerned that this was not geared
towards a neighborhood shopping center. He felt the area would be
serving a great many people and felt there was a market area for
commercial uses. He felt the original plan submitted by the applicant
had been much better. He felt that additional problems created here
would be internal circulation and decreased security due to the street
facing orientation. He did not like the parking in the back. He felt
the center was looking more like an office complex, rather than a
neighborhood shopping center. He would like to see a redesign more
orientated towards the neighborhood.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed.
Upon question by Councilwoman Dovey, Ken Bruce stated that the Laurel
Lane Market was between 8 and 10,000 square feet.
Dave Romero, Public Services Director, explained further that more than
20 years ago the city had planned to extend South Street through the
railroad and if South Street was ever to be extended through this
property, it would be a grade separation structure. This property would ,
probably not have access to this parking at that time. He had no
problem with the applicant using this area for parking until such time
as South Street was considered for extension.
On motion of Councilwoman Dovey, seconded by Councilman Griffin, to deny
the request by MSB Properties to rezone the property from C -N to C -N -PD.
The Council then discussed the motion.
Councilwoman Dovey explained that if this is to be a neighborhood
convenience area, it should be looked at for this and nothing else. She
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 6
could not accept any kind of regional administrative office no matter
how it was interpreted. There is about 11 to 12,000 square feet which
could be used for a market with the upper floors for office and the
mixed -use concept still being maintained. She would rather see the
whole complex used for commercial and residential.
Councilman Settle felt that the PD would allow more flexibility, and he
could support the project. He felt the parking problem could be miti-
gated. He felt that the project had good site planning and would be an
improvement to the city.
Councilman Dunin felt that this was a unique site and that it was a
neighborhood commercial site. He did not feel that it could support a
neighborhood grocery or specialty deli. It offered a good living area,
and he felt that land in this area was at a premium and that these types
of units could only be built in conjunction with this type of develop-
ment. It was a difficult site, but he felt the developer had done a
good job in planning and design. He had some problem with the parking,
but he felt that it was not insurmountable. He felt that in some areas
of the'city, the land use element might need adjustment and given
relaxation of the permissible uses. He felt the term regional office
was a matter of interpretation, and he would support the Planning
Commission recommendation to rezone to C -N -PD.
Councilman Griffin stated that he would be reluctant to go either way.
He felt the proposal had a lot of merit; and he was very supportive of
the mixed -use plan as proposed but as well, he was supportive of the
land use objectives that staff had brought to Council's attention. He
hoped the developer could have developed the predominant portion of the
building to be more directly related to the community and neighborhood.
He did feel the project met a planned development criteria, however, the
planned development criteria did not contemplate for these land use
developments. He would, therefore, support denial of the rezoning.
' Councilman Dunin felt that as there was a housing shortage available, he
would see no problem with relaxation of the building standards in this
case.
Councilman Settle felt that the land use might not be appropriate in
this situation.
Mayor Billig stated that although at a previous meeting the Council
entertained the possibility of a planned development, one Councilmember
had stated his concern with the definition of regional office and that
this use might not be appropriate. She did feel that the overall
approach was a good one, the mixed -uses were exceptional; she felt that
it was a unique opportunity for the city and developer to cooperate but
felt the Council must be sensitive to the downtown. She felt that
P.G.& E. was a regional use and should be located in the downtown area.
She felt that if the Council felt that this site was not appropriate for
commercial uses, then they should look at the zoning itself but not
doing it through a planned development. She felt that this would be an
exception to general policy. She did think it appropriate to accommo-
date the developer for specific use such as this. Regarding South
Street, she said that there was no final decision made on the circula-
tion'element and, therefore, no final decision was made on the outcome
of the possible extension of South Street.
Councilman Dunin stated that
That in itself would indicate
rather a district office. H e
the city for good development
Mr. Kennedy's title was district manager.
that this was not a regional office, but
felt that they were closing options off to
such as this.
Councilman Settle questioned Councilwoman Dovey whether she would '
consider a zone change to C -S as being appropriate or did she feel that
this would be an inappropriate site for this type of use.
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 7
Councilwoman Dovey stated that a C -S zone could be a possibility, but
she would have to wait until she could look at the entire project from
that approach.
Councilman Griffin stated that he could support the existing land use
designation of C -N. He felt that this area needed both kinds of facili-
ties and the area had good potential as a distinct neighborhood. .
Mayor Billig stated that this should be a neighborhood area, and she 1
would like to have the project go ahead.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig
NOES: Councilmembers Dunin and Settle
ABSENT: None
3. ORDINANCE NO.. 914 - OVERSIZED STRUCTURES AND VEHICLES-ON CITY STREETS
Council considered the final passage of Ordinance No. 914, an ordinance
amending the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code to provide for the regula-
tion of transportation of oversized and overweight structures and
vehicles on city streets.
Dave Romero, Public Services Director, briefly outlined the ordinance
and the effect-that it would have regarding city streets.
Mayor Billig declared.the public hearing open.
Serreg Corella, stated that he was speaking on behalf of himself.and the
other 36 firms and individuals holding certificates of active insurance '
for transportation permits in the City of San Luis Obispo. He was
concerned that should the Council adopt this ordinance, he would like to
see the liability insurance requirement amended as he did not feel that
he could continue in business as a housemover if the insurance was
raised to the limits now proposed in the ordinance. He stated there
were only 46 housemovers in the state of California, this was a
specialized field and these people had not been contacted, if they had,
he was sure there would be others to protest the ordinance. He stated
that the city encourages affordable housing, but this ordinance would
attempt to do exactly the opposite.. He requested that this item be
deferred or continued, or preferably, to leave the insurance
requirements as they presently exist.
There was general discussion as to how much the increased insurance
rates would translate to actual.dollars that it would cost Mr.
Corrallis, with no definitive answer being made.
Dave Romero, Public Services Director, explained that.the insurance
requirements had not been raised in 20 years, and it was not felt that
going from the $300,000 to $1 million coverage would be that much of an
increase in premium. He would agree to continuing this item in order to
contact the insurance companies to determine how much cost was involved.
After brief discussion, on motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by
Councilman Dunin, to continue this item to the February 2, 1982, Council
meeting for further information regarding insurance requirements.
9:20 p.m. City Council adjourned to Closed Session to discuss Litigation
And Personnel matters. 9:30 p.m. City Council reconvened, all Council -
members present.
4. ENERGY CONSERVATION GUIDELINES AMENDMENTS
A. Consideration of a resolution amending the guidelines for
Architectural Review to incorporate energy- conscious design and
submittal procedures.
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 8
B. Consideration to amend ARC ordinance establishing the powers
and duties of the ARC to add inclusion of energy- saving design.
Glen Matteson, Assistant Planner, stated that in adopting the general
plan energy element, the Council directed the ARC to play an expanded
role in encouraging energy efficient project design and to draft
guidelines and submittal requirements which would assist applicants in
preparing more self- sufficient projects. He then briefly reviewed the
' guidelines and the ordinance change recommending that the Council adopt
the amendments to the ARC ordinance and guidelines as endorsed by the
ARC on November 9, 1981.
Councilman Dunin questioned who the experts would be to review these
projects. He was concerned that the city not try to impose something
that they had very little knowledge of. He stated the city had recently
had another example of this when they discussed the swimming pool
ordinance. He was not comfortable in supporting the guidelines at this
time.
Glen Matteson explained that the guidelines were not really that strin-
gent and would allow for flexibility. This was a fairly new field and
more knowledge was being gained all the time. Upon question by Council-
man Griffin as to whether the Planning Commission had reviewed this, Mr.
Matteson stated that they had not except initially as a part of the
energy element, which they were supportive of. He further answered that
he did not feel the Council would be obscuring the role of the Planning
Commission by bypassing them on this issue.
Councilman Griffin stated that he could support moving :to these.types
of solar energy programs but did feel the city must stay flexible on
these energy programs because of the emerging nature of the technology
and industry development.
Sandy Merriam, representing AIA, stated that he had only recently heard
about these new guidelines and that the AIA would like additional time
to address this matter and would request that this item be continued for
a future session. He would be supportive of the-intent, but he was
unsure as to the actual enactment of it. If the Council was not willing
to continue it, he would at least request a 6 -month performance evalua-
tion be given.
Paul Neal, consultant with the Energy Commission of the State of Calif-
ornia and also an AIA member, explained that the State was moving from a
prescriptive standard to a performance standard as they were hoping to
get away from the panic legislation caused by putting these things in
the hands of the non - experts. He would also support this being given
'more study first.
Jim Maul, Architect and member of the subcommittee with the AIA to
review the Architectural Review Ordinance, stated that there were two
areas of primary concern. One was with the general nature versus a more
specific nature. They were attempting to develop more specific lan-
guage. He was also concerned with the overlap of other city depart-
ments. He stated that you can get two different answers from the
Planning Commission or the ARC now, and he would also like to see these
guidelines given additional time of review."
Stan Bell, local builder, stated that he had real problems with people
not familiar with the cost .amenities=_ dictating to him what must be
included in a residential unit when they were not experts in that field.
He felt that these guidelines were extremely premature considering the
State's guidelines would not even be on line until July. Upon question
by Councilman Griffin, he stated he could not support either adoption of
the ordinance or the resolution at this time.
Henry Hammer, teacher of Architecture at Cal Poly and also teacher of
solar systems, suggested that the city get together a symposium to
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 9
discuss this and would suggest contacting local builders, AIA, possibly
Ken Haggard, who is an expert on solar energy, and other interested
individuals, allowing them to review and make further recommendations.
Councilman Dunin questioned if it might not be viable to train one of
the building inspectors on solar application.
Vic Montgomery stated that he would be very hesitant for the.Council to
adopt the ARC ordinance before adoption of the guidelines. He continued
that he had had bad experience with the ARC which had nothing to.do with
the "low end" of unknowledgeable builders. On many.occasions he:has
received a strict critique on how to build a building. He felt there
was a real danger in giving limited guidelines. Upon question by.
Councilman Griffin as to whether Vic would be.more.supportive of strict
or broader guidelines, he stated he did not feel that the city really
needed these guidelines, especially in lieu of the fact that :the State
guidelines wouldn't be adopted until July. It was obvious that if the
Council was to impose these guidelines, they're making them more.
restrictive than the State guidelines, otherwise, there would be no need
for them.
Glen Matteson explained that the new energy performance standards
imposed by the State would concern building design. Additional guide -
lines'addressing site.planning, etc., could be much more helpful. He
did not feel that Title 24 addressed many of the problems that will
arise in the future relative to the city's particular area..
Vic Montgomery continued that he was extremely fearful that the addi-
tional requirements which would be imposed by the ARC. This-kind of
ordinance would take an incredible amount of work and should be given to
experts for additional information.
Mayor Billig suggested forming an ad hoc committee to work with staff,
builders, and other concerned citizens, to make recommendation to the
Council.
Councilman Settle stated that he could support an ad hoc committee in
order to achieve a better.relationship between the.city staff „and
outside interested parties..
Councilman Griffin stated that he could support a continuation which he
hoped would be a progressive and productive one.
Councilwoman Dovey stated that she had no problem.with continuing the
item. . '
Councilman Dunin stated that he could support the ordinance. He was
also all for postponing this item to form an ad hoc committee to define
in general terms the-charge of the committee with a sunset clause that
it would dissolve upon the final report to the Council. He could also
support a course being given to the building inspector.
On motion of Councilwoman Dovey; seconded by Councilman Settle,•to
continue both items.
Upon question by Mayor Billig for volunteers to form an ad hoc commit-
tee, the following people were selected to form the ad hoc committee to
study the architectural guidelines in further detail: Paul Neal, Sandy
Merriam, Henry Hammer, Vic Montgomery, Jim Maul, Phil Humphrey, Stan
Bell, and Chuck French. IF
5. EDNA -ISLAY SPECIFIC PLAN
Council continued the Public Hearing of the Edna -Islay Specific Plan on
alternative housing programs (continued from 8/11, 8/31, 9/29, 11/9 and
12/8).
Terry Sanville, Senior Planner, briefly reviewed the alternate housing
programs as part of the Edna -Islay Specific Plan. He stated that the
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 10
provisions dealing with a density bonus programs could become an
optional element of the plan. Staff felt strongly that the section of
the plan that identified sites for the Housing Authority should be a
mandatory one. Site availability was one of the key problems that the
Housing Authority continues to identify. The Council should consider
requiring a site for assisted housing in both the Edna and Islay areas.
Chuck French, owner of the Edna side, stated that he could support
' staff's recommendation.
Vic Montgomery, representing the Islay side, stated that the applicant
had no problem identifying a site on the Islay side. Regarding the
density bonus, he questioned that if a developer asked for a 25 percent
density, would they all be required to be affordable to low or moderate
income people. Could the bonus units be transfers from one part of the
planning area to another?
Terry Sanville explained that if a developer of a project agreed to
build 25 percent of the total units in low or moderate income housing,
the Planning Commission would spell out where they would be if this was
not done on 'a voluntary basis: If an area could get an additional 25
percent density, it would have to happen in the same project area under
consideration. Upon question by Mr. Montgomery as to whether there
could be a density transfer some other place within the city, Mr.
Sanville stated that State law would prevail and the answer would be no.
Also, developer could not ask for a 25 percent bonus under State law and
then ask for another 25 percent under the planned development rules.
Rich Chubon; Director of the Housing Authority, stated the staff
proposal being considered did address the problem of siting and did not
preclude them gaining a site at the fair market value. He answered
Councilwoman Dovey's question that 8 out of the last 9 Housing Authority
Projects were done by turn -key development. -It is increasingly
difficult and most developers find it very difficult to guarantee a
price since city and the government process.is such a long one..
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed.
After brief discussion and upon general consensus; the Council decided:
1) that any density bonus provisions dealing'with.assisted housing
programs would become an optional part of'the housing program spelled
out in specific plan and 2) the specific plan would continue to require
that sites be made available to the Housing Authority at fair market
value for the provision of assisted housing. Sites would be located in
both the Edna and Islay areas (5 -0). The Council then congratulated the
developers and staff at having worked together and resolving these
issues to mutual satisfaction.
6. WATER SERVICE REQUEST — BULLOCK LANE
The Council considered a report from the Community Development,
Department of a request from Heloise S. Berry for water service to a
parcel located at 3590 Bullock Lane, outside the city limits (continued
from 12/15/81 at the request of the applicant).
Terry Sanville, Senior Planner, stated that staff was recommending
denial of the request; however, if :the.Council considered approval, it
would require an amendment to the city service policies which would
' allow the City Council to consider providing limited emergency;services
outside city limits. Those provisions could be.similar to the ones
included in the sewer service plan adopted by the Council in 1979.
Further, staff should look at "temporary" connections approved by the
city'in the past since many have become fairly permanent.
Councilman Settle questioned that if the Council was to deny this
request and the water became contaminated, could the city be held
liable.
George Thacher, City Attorney, replied no.
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 11
Leo Evans, representing Mrs. Berry, stated that the property is
presently being rented by Cal Poly students. They recently installed
all new well pumps; they ran out.of water for the horses and had to take
them off the property. He stated that the water is not drinkable and
never has been. This property would eventually be made a part of the
city and felt that the city should supply the water to them as the city
does supply water to the properties surrounding his. They would like to
run a 1 -inch line to the home for their domestic supply..
Terry Sanville commented that the increased use of this site by the
students might well have been responsible for causing the problem. He
did not feel that this water shortage was a "temporary" problem, rather
a "periodic" problem.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman.Dovey, to deny
the request for water service outside the city limits, consistent with
city policy. Motion carried, all ayes.
7. ALCOHOL SALES - SERVICE STATIONS
George Thacher, City Attorney, explained that the ordinance would:
prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages from service stations. The
ordinance was written using the most conservative approach. .If.the
Council would be interested in an amortization period for existing
businesses, he would review the ordinance.again and would come back to
the Council at a later date.
Dick Wade, local Arco dealer, stated that he was opposed to this
ordinance and explained that when this item came to the Council once
before, the Police Chief had said.that the station might become a stop
and rob. He explained that his station had never been robbed in 12
years, and he did not feel that this would happen now and would urge the
Council's support opposing this ordinance. He also questioned why the
other 49 service stations in the city had not been notified or more
would have been there to protest.
Gordon Prisbrey, representing Arco station operators and Arco as a
marketer of these types of stores, did not feel that there had been
sufficient problems to warrant this type of ordinance. He has.similar
stores in the Paso Robles area and in Carpenteria and there had never
been any robberies or other related problems.
After brief discussion, it was moved by Councilman Griffin, seconded by
Councilman Settle, that-the following ordinance be introduced:-
Ordinance No. 915 (1982 Series), an ordinance of the Council of the City
of San Luis Obispo adding Section 4290 to the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code to prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages from service stations.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Griffin, Settle, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8. BUILDING SETBACK LINES - ORCUTT ROAD OVERPASS
Council to consider revising the adopted official building setback lines
on Orcutt Road between Broad Street and Johnson Avenue; City of San Luis
Obispo, applicant.
Upon general consensus Council agreed to continue this item to the
February 2, 1982, Council meeting.
11:30 p.m. Councilman Dunin left the meeting.
City Council Minutes
January 5, 1982 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 12
9. CITY WATER BILL
Council considered a report by the Director of Finance on the status of
placing the cost of the Whale Rock Fishing Program on the City's water
bill.
Rudy Muravez, Finance Director, explained some of the pitfalls which
would be encountered if the City were to place a separate charge on the
' water bill for the operation of the Whale Rock Fishing Program. He
stated the report had been reviewed by the Whale Rock Commission and
subsequently referred to the Council for final resolution. It was his
recommendation that the cost of the fishing program be included on any
informational material distributed with the water bill which relates to
the cost of water operations or rates. This could include separate
features within the city newsletter or separate notices advising cust-
omers of changes in their water rates. It was primarily not cost
effective to place this cost on the water bill.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, that the
staff recommendation be accepted: that a separate charge for the city's
participation in the Whale Rock Fishing Program not be placed as a
separate item on the city's water bill; staff to come back with alterna-
tive approaches, i.e., newsletter, notices, etc.
10. TURBINE GENERATOR - WHALE ROCK PROJECT
Report by Public Services Director of bids received for "TURBINE
GENERATOR FOR WHALE ROCK PROJECT ", City Plan No. F -30; bid estimate
$11,500 without contingencies, bid date extended to 12/31/81.
Dave Romero, Public Services Director;. explained that the city had
received a promise of a $20,000 grant from the Governor's Office of
Appropriate Technology for the installation of a turbine generator at
Whale Rock with the stipulation that the generator be in operation by
June 1982. He explained that the city had advertised for bids on a
hurried schedule and failed to receive any bids by the December 14,
1981, opening. The City Council had accepted staff recommendation that
the city continue to solicit bids until the end of December and recon-
sider the matter at their January S.Council meeting. Since all bids
would not be received until the end of December, a complete Council
package could not be presented for the agenda closing period. The
specifications for the unit allowed for bids on one or more of four
alternate generating units as well as for the adjustment of bids. Based
upon the size of the unit and its guaranteed efficiency, he was recom-
mending that the Council approve the purchase of alternate "B" equipment
from Worthington with stipulated deletions for the total price of
$22,850, with final contract award by the Whale Rock Commission.
Mayor Billig explained_ that the Whale Rock Commission was unaware of
this new bid proposal being almost twice the original price that they
had first agreed upon, and she would suggest taking this before the
Whale Rock Commission before the Council were to take any action.
After brief discussion and upon general consensus, Council agreed to
continue this item until Monday, January 11, 1982, after the Whale Rock
Commission had made its final recommendation. Motion carried, all ayes.
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor
Billig adjourned the meeting at 12:10 a.m. until Monday, January 11,
1982, 7:00 a.m. at Maya Restaurant for Closed Session to discuss employee
negotiations.
v
Pamela Voge ty Clerk
APPROVED.BY COUNCIL: 2/2/82