Loading...
01/05/1982City 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