HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/13/1982City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 13, 1982
Page 2
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: ,
AYES: Councilmembers Dovey, Dunin, Griffin, Settle and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
1. SAN LUIS OBISPO CREEK FLOOD CONTROL MODIFICATIONS
Council continued its discussion on the study and environmental impact
report prepared regarding modifications to creek flood control for San
Luis Obispo.
Mayor Billig explained the procedure to be used this evening and that
the EIR had been extended to receive written comments through tomorrow
April 14.
Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, introduced Jim Schaaf of Nolte and
Associates who prepared the EIR and John Ashbaugh consultant for MDW.
Jim Schaaf, with Nolte and Associates, explained that the public hearing
workshop that had been held on March 30 had been extremely informative
for both the public and for staff. He then briefly reviewed the project
again explaining the limits of the project being from the city's sewage
treatment plant upstream to the confluence of Stenner Creek, a distance
of approximately 11,000 ft. The project would provide protection from a
50 -year flood including an allowance for free board. This level of
protection was compatible with that currently provided at the under -city
culvert upstream of the project limit. The preferred channel shape
would leave the lowest three ft. of the existing channel in place, with
widening taking place on only one side. Velocity protection, where
required, would consist of buried gabions (rock - filled wire baskets).
Planting to aid revegetation of the excavated portions would be part of
the project. The following three cross- sections were included in the
recommended plan:
1. Vertical concrete wall with an earthen bottom - approximately 1300
feet to be used to reduce right -of -way upstream of Prado Road and
upstream of Marsh Street;
2. Concrete -lined section (sides and bottom) - approximately 1200 feet
used downstream of Madonna Road due to very constricted right -of -way
in that section.
3. Earthen section with 2:1 side slopes - approximately 8500 feet with
approximately half this length requiring buried gabions.
The cost was estimated to be $15 million with approximately $ 9 million
for construction and $6 million for right -of -way.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open.
Joan Leon, representing the League of Women's Voters, stated that the
League had reviewed the draft EIR and had a number of questions and
concerns: 1) mitigation of impacts - throughout the EIR the creek
sensitivity to disturbance was emphasized on pages 6, 19, 70, 80a and
80b with discussion on pages 5 and 6 of mitigation measures for signif-
icant impacts was misleading. The heading on page 5 would lead the
reader to believe that all impacts could be effectively mitigated;
however, they felt that the section on vegetation and wildlife raised
serious questions concerning that mitigation. On page 5 the discussion
states "The habitat functions of this vegetation may not be effective in
restoring the proper balance of nutritional, cover and other require-
ments of the various fish and animal species which now inhabit the
creek. Page 6 states that "Even though mitigation measures are not well
understood in terms of their effectiveness in restoring or replacing
habitat, the following measures are recommended." How could measures be
1
i7
ri
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 13, 1982
Page 3
recommended for mitigation when their effectiveness was not understood.
Further, on page 22 the modification in Tract 592, used an example of
widening and revegetation, stated "In the two storm seasons since
completion of the improvements, the drainage and aesthetic goals had
apparently been achieved, although no systematic monitoring had been
done to substantiate this." She questioned the impacts on the eco
system of the creek. How could those modifications be recommended when
their effectiveness on mitigation of impacts had not been monitored; 2)
landscaping plan - they would like the description of the proposed
revegetation and landscaping more clear and detailed, since the revege-
tation was critical to mitigation of impacts. Would there be a
subsequent landscaping plan and what kinds and quantity of plants would
be used; where would the grading be done and how much; was it antici-
pated that such a landscaping plan would be developed for the project,
if the plan was anticipated, at what point in the project and in what
form would such information be available to the public?
Roy Parsons,local businessman and property owner o
creek felt the EIR should address three items. 1)
in the early years and he felt the EIR should make
gross recovery of vegetation was not adequate; 3)
address "people concerns ". People's concerns were
ECO- systems' concerns. He did say the project was
urged Council support.
E property near the
The creek use was dry
note of that; 2)
the EIR did not
as important as the
a good one, and he
Mr. Rayburn, Valle Vista Trailer Park, also emphasized the importance of
the people's environmental concerns.
Charles Long, owner of Village Mobile Home Park, was also interested in
the "people's concerns" and has been interested in the flood problems
since 1961, as he's now been through three of them. Damages have cost
the mobile home park an excess of $30,000 for these flood problems. He
and his 76 mobile homeowners were in favor of the creek widening in an
effort to mitigate the flooding problems.
John Sexton, student at Cal Poly, said that as a class project they had
been monitoring the flooding in the creek, most recently in the Elk's
Lane bridge area including Marsh Street, and said that even with the
heavy rains from the other night, the creek had only reached one -third
of it's capacity and felt this was an important point.
Eric Barham, Los Osos, and a resident for approximately one year, felt
that the EIR was an excellent report. He was representing the Fly
Fishing Club and felt there were two additional factors that did need to
be addressed; 1) effects on down- stream if it was channelized; and 2)
impact of the outflow of water at the sewage treatment plant. He had
previously submitted a copy of his letter for Council's information.
Reverend Irwin Lewis, First Baptist Church and owner of property in the
City near the creek, stated that he had also been through three floods
and had lost most everything, including a $4,000 piano. He was very
much in favor of flood control program and would urge Council's approv-
al. He was especially concerned that something be done near his church
location near Brook Street.
Peter DeGroot, Model Linen, stated he was primarily concerned with: 1)
past changes in previous years in efforts to mitigate the flooding of
the creek along the Mission area; and 2) the end of South Street which
had been banked with concrete when the highway was rerouted. He ex-
plained that this area had never flooded.until about ten years ago when
the creek was reworked. He felt the solutions of yesterday created new
ones. Although he had also lost some property due to erosion and miti-
gation efforts but he still thought the project was worthwhile and could
support it.
Marshall Ellis, owner of property on lower Higuera, explained he'd also
been through three floods. He had been active in forming the Zone 9
Flood Control Program and was concerned with problems concerning the
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 13, 1982
Page 4
Steelhead population. He did not feel this would ever be resolved until
the dam in Avila was removed. He was very supportive of the project and
urged Council's approval.
Bob Graham, owner of the Sunset Drive -In, objected to: 1) the removal
of the Elk's Lane Bridge. He relied on thousands of cars that needed to
get to his business both for the theatre as well as the Swap Meet. His
business would be hurt considerably; 2) aesthetics. He had always
maintained a green belt around the Drive -In but much of this would be
destroyed if the plan was implemented. He was supportive of flood
control but to take all of this property from him would be extremely
destructive; 3) In looking at the three alternatives proposed, he
questioned why the Council was looking at the most expensive, why not
the cheapest.
Mayor Billig explained it was prior Councils who had elected to go with
the more expensive one but no final decision had been made.
Charles leny, representing property owners
Luis Creek, suggested the following: 1) That t
the bank on the opposite side of the Cypress tr
the bridge, be widened and not the other side.
be placed on using vertical walls. 3. That th
should be retained wherever possible, including
Bridge.
near Elk's Lane and San
e plan be revised that
es, just upstream from
2. That more emphasis
u streets in the City
replacing the Elk's Lane
Paul Chappel, Department of Fish & Game, then read into the records the
following letter:
"Department of Fish and Game personnel have reviewed the
Draft EIR regarding the proposed San Luis Obispo Creek Flood
Control Modifications and find that the report is inadequate
in its treatment of the impacts upon fish and wildlife
resources.
"We are particularly concerned about the proposed removal of
riparian vegetation, the use of concrete -lined channels,
vertical walls, and location of parkways in the spawning
area. We are aware that some method of flood control is
necessary for San Luis Obispo Creek, however, we believe
there are other alternatives which may serve the same
purposes with less impact upon the fish an" wildlife
resources of the creek.
"The revegetation plan will not provide for the recovery of
those species lost when the riparian habitat is removed. We
view this 'short -term' loss as a long -term significant
adverse impact which could be avoided. Riparian vegetation
provides for the greatest diversity of wildlife species and
it is an integral part of the aquatic ecosystem. Removal of
riparian vegetation will promote a decline in the species
diversity and density in San Luis Obispo Creek. The
proposed revegetation will not mitigate for this loss, nor
do we consider it a short -term impact. The reason for this
can easily be seen by evaluating the already modified
section of San Luis Obispo Creed at Tract 592. This 5,000
foot section, modified for flood control, does not support
the density or diversity of fish and wildlife that once
occurred. The riparian vegetation has many more years to
grow before it can be expected to become moderately
productive. To further modify an additional 11,000 feet, in
a similar manner, would cause a major reduction in habitat
availability. We consider this type of loss as a
significant long -term loss and recommend any activity which
would further accelerate habitat reduction not be approved.
"The Draft EIR does not provide sufficient information to
evaluate the flow regimes that would be produced by concrete
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 13, 1982
Page 5
liners, vertical constricted walls, etc. Concrete channels
are known to produce velocity barriers to migrating fishes
preventing them from reaching spawning tributaries.
"Mitigation has been proposed which may alleviate some of
the problems associated with higher velocities in the
concrete sections, yet there is no mitigation for the
complete loss of aquatic habitat that will occur. The
' proposed design of bottom and sides composed of fist -sized
rocks, small depressions and moguls in the concrete will not
produce suitable substrate for benthic flora and fauna.
"The report has described the impacts of higher water
temperatures upon the aquatic ecosystem, yet there is no
proposed mitigation. We view this overall change in the
affected area as a substantial impact which should be fully
mitigated. The report must adequately address how the
steelhead resource can be protected.
" It should, be noted that Section 21081 of the California
Environmental Quality Act states 'No public agency shall
approve or carry out a project for which an environmental
impact report has been completed which identifies one or
more significant effects...'.
"The Department has direct jurisdiction pursuant to Fish and
Game Code Section 1601 -03 in regard to any proposed
activities that would substantially divert or obstruct the
natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel or
bank of any stream. Operators will be required to submit
notification of proposed channel modifications pursuant to
Fish and Game Code Section 1603. Work cannot be initiated
until streambed alteration agreements are executed.
1 "In summary, the proposed project is not acceptable to this
Department as it will result in a substantial loss of fish
and wildlife resources of San Luis Obispo Creek including
the very important steelhead resource.
"The City of San Luis Obispo has in the past recognized the
unique ecological relationship of the.creek and we recommend
the City consider alternatives such as the non - structural
which will preserve this highly desirable ecosystem.
"We are available to provide technical assistance on the
requirements of fish and wildlife. We would be pleased to
discuss alternatives which would provide for the desired
flood control objectives while preserving fish and wildlife
resources. To arrange for such a meeting, please contact
Mr. Paul Chappell, Fishery Biologist, telephone (805)
772 -1261; or Mr. Theodore W. Wooster, Environmental Services
Supervisor, Region 3; Department of Fish and Game, P. 0. Box
47, Yountville, CA 94599, telephone (707) 944 -4489.
Eric Barham complimented the consultants on the report. He felt it was
a good one because they addressed the problems .and possible mitigation
measures and did recognize that in some areas we did not know which
mitigation measures would be successful.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Griffin stated that in reviewing the EIR procedures and
guidelines.-he was unsure whether the EIR should also address the legal
constraints that bear on the project.
John Ashbaugh responded that the EIR did not require listing those;
however, they certainly could include them.
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 13, 1982
Page 6
Councilman Griffin stated that he was simply concerned that the EIR show
statutory or regulatory constraints that might impact the guidelines.
He felt that the City was working on two policy issues, 1) flooding, and
2) the creek represented a significant sensitive area subject to State
constraints that should be addressed.
Upon question by Mayor Billig, Mr. Ashbaugh stated that Fish & Game had
been contacted over a year ago and solicited for their comments for the
EIR. The EIR also went out in January as a public document, and the
letter received from Fish & Game was dated March 11. He could not
identify other governmental agencies that had received the report but
could get that information to the Council.
Councilman Griffin continued that he felt the scope and specificity was
adequate. He would like to see all the responses made both during the
public hearing tonight and at the March 30 meeting be addressed. He
considered the creek a major resource, one of four high priorities with
the City in addition to the Laguna Lake area, Hillside Planning and the
Park & Recreation Element. He would like to see a policy established to
accomplish some way to balance the notion.of protection of flooding from
sensitive areas.
Councilwoman Dovey did not feel the EIR was adequate until all responses
had been addressed. The creek in the horseshoe area near Brook Street
was not a natural curve, and she would like some additional background
addressed as part of the EIR. She would like to see how the stream
flowed in its original natural state.
Mayor Billig agreed that all comments from both the March 30 meeting,
written responses and public testimony received tonight, be included as
part of the EIR.
Councilman Dunin felt that the EIR report was adequate although he had
reservations in some areas. His major concern was to resolve the
problem with Fish & Game, and he would like to know to what degree the
federal protection act did or did not supercede the City's. He also
agreed that all agencies and jurisdictions even remotely involved should
receive copies of the EIR and be solicited for their input.
Councilman Settle thought the EIR was marginally adequate but he would
like additional information in the following areas: 1) all involved
agencies be notified; 2) the issues that Fish & Game had raised should
be addressed and adequate mitigation measures made; 3) the "people
factor" was very important; 4) he was also concerned with the revege-
tation of the creek bank. His major concerns were in the areas of Elk's
Lane, Brook and the Mausoleum; 5) financing would be critical, and he
would like to see the EIR address some cost - analysis. He would like to
see other options explored more thoroughly towards flood proofing and
maintenance rather than going. through with heavy . equipment and
rechannelization.
Mayor Billig stated she appreciated all the public testimony and written
comments received to date; she did feel the EIR was adequate with the
inclusion of responses to questions raised. She acknowledged that the
city does not know all the effects that the mitigation measures would
have. She would like to see an objective analysis made on the flood
control measures used in tract 592 (The Meadows). She assured the
public that the City would follow CEQA regulations and agreed it was
important to work with Fish & Game resolving those issues prior to the
adoption of the EIR. She would also like to see the Corps of Engineers,
Cal Trans and other public agencies notified and receive copies of the
EIR. She agreed with Councilman Griffin for an overall policy for
balancing of flooding vs. the sensitive areas. Previous Councils had
never addressed this before but she felt that the aesthetics were
important and should be addressed. She would also like to see a state-
ment with regard to financing be expanded and explore in detail alterna-
tive approaches as much as possible.
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 13, 1982
Page 7
Mayor Billig suggested appointing a Council Subcommittee including the
City Engineer and consultants for more detail on the specificity of the
project regarding tract 592 as well as aesthetic impacts.
Dr.Brown, also a consultant on the report, stated that he'd been working
with Fish & Game over a year and agreed that if the vegetation was
removed it would be very difficult to mitigate as over half of the fish
would be required to traverse the concrete lining area which was a
considerably high degree of the fish life.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed and explained that
public comments and written responses would still be received through
April 14. When the consultants had completed their responses to ques-
tions the report would come back to the City Council for an additional
public hearing to adopt the EIR.
C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
A. Council agreed to set a Hillside Planning field trip for Monday, May
3rd and Wednesday, May 5th, from 3:30 to 5:30 p.m.
B. Mayor Billig to write a letter in response to the communication
received from the City of Richmond supporting stricter controls of
Class 1 Drivers of larger trucks.
C. Council members to provide Mayor with nominations for members to
serve on the Senior Citizens Area Agency on Aging.
D. Council members to provide Mayor with in -put regarding their
concerns of horse racing off -track betting.
E. Mayor Billig appointed a sub - committee (Dunin /Griffin) to
establish criteria for city Certificates of Appreciation awards.
9:30 p.m. City Council adjourned to closed session to discuss personnel
matters.
9:32 p.m. City Council reconvened, all council members present.
A -2 AGREEMENT WITH CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
On motion on Councilwoman Dovey, seconded by Councilman Griffin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4799 (1982 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an
agreement with Paul Lanspery, City Administrative Officer, subject to
two modifications: 1) Reference the items referred to in the agreement
that they will go through escrow; 2) the first three years of the
agreement, the city will participate in a equity sharing of the pro-
perty.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dovey, Griffin, Dunin, Settle and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
' 9:40 p.m. City Council adjourned to Closed Session to discuss Personnel
Matters. 10:55 p.m. City Council reconvened, all Councilmembers pre-
sent.
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 13, 1982
Page 8
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor
Billig adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m. to Monday, April 19, 1982, at
12:10 p.m.
/J
Pamela Voges, C' y C erk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 5/18/82
M N U T E S
ADJOURNED MEETING OF.THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 1982 - 12:10 P.M.
COUNCIL HEARING ROOM, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
STUDY SESSION
RnT.T. r.AT.T.
Councilmembers
Present: GlennaDeane Dovey, Ron Dunin, Robert Griffin, Allen
Settle and Mayor Melanie C. Billig
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer; Pamela Voges, City
Clerk; Rudy Muravez, Finance Director; Mike Dolder, Fire
Chief
Paul Lanspery, City Administrative Officer, introduced Mike Dolder, the
new Fire Chief, to the City Council, and welcomed him as. the newest
department head.
ITEM A: Councilman Settle explained that an incident.had occurred on
Thursday, wherein a camera liquidating business got a business license,
came into town having a large two -day sale. He questioned whether there
shouldn't be tighter controls at the Business Licensing Department or at
the Use Permit level so that this type of thing would not occur in the
future as he felt that it was in direct competition with the local
businessmen. He would like to see a requirement that this type of
business would have to apply for a license at least 5 to 7 days prior to
an event so that staff had an opportunity to review the type of business
that had applied and use permits, if required.
After brief discussion, this item was referred -to staff (Paul Lanspery,
George Thacher, Rudy Muravez) for evaluation and report. back with
alternatives and available options. (5 -0)
ITEM 1: REVENUE STATUS REPORT
Rudy Muravez, Finance Director, reported on projected revenues for
budget year 1982 -83. He explained there were two basic assumptions
which had colored the expectations for next year. One was that the
1
i�
1