Loading...
05/11/1982M I N U T E S ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1982 - 4:30 P.M. COUNCIL HEARING ROOM, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA STUDY SESSION ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: GlennaDeane Dovey, Ron Dunin, Robert Griffin, Allen Settle and Mayor Melanie C. Billig Absent: None Planning Commission Present: Mark Bailey, Randal Bullock, Patrick Gerety, William Howard, Penelope Rappa, Jerry Reiss and Chairwoman Sylvia Drucker City Staff Present: Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer; Pamela Voges, City Clerk; Geoff Grote, Interim Community Development Coordinator; Terry Sanville, Senior Planner; Trude Lisagor, Recording Secretary ' 1'. HILLSIDE PLANNING Mayor Billig explained this was an informal meeting between the Planning Commission and City Council to exchange ideas and concerns before the Planning Commission began public hearings on the Hillside Planning Program. Geoff Grote, Interim Community Development Coordinator, stated.the purpose of the meeting was to let the Councilmembers and Commissioners, as individuals, respond to any concerns they had regarding the Hillside Planning proposal. He said this matter involved six different areas in the city. The proposal would be heard on May 26, 1982, in a public hearing before the Planning Commission and that two matters needed to be resolved: 1) what kind of meetings would be necessary; and 2) how many meetings would be required by the Planning Commission. Terry Sanville, Senior Planner, said discussion of possible dates was difficult because he was unable to determine the regular meeting agendas schedules. He thought there would be room on the regular meeting agenda of June 9, 1982, but if not, suggested scheduling a continued meeting on one of the off - Wednesdays (June 2 or June 16, 1982) to devote to the remainder of the Hillside Planning program. He said the commission was looking at proposed changes to the General Plan Map;'proposed additional policies to be included in the Land Use-Element; and changes to the City Zoning Map to maintain consistency between Zoning and General Plan. He pointed out there were really 19 hillside areas and Council might wish to consider discussion of other areas in addition. Mayor Billig said establishing dates was key because a number of months ago Council made a very definite commitment that in this round of General'Plan hearings some kind of answer would be given to hillside property owners. She felt the six most crucial areas needed to be addressed first, and the remaining areas could be handled at some later point. City Council Minutes Tuesday, May 11, 1982 - 4:30 p.m. Page 2 Councilman Settle stated he was looking at six criteria on all hillside standards: 1) seismic concerns; 2) flood potential; 3) fire potential; 4) traffic on and off site and how it will integrate with existing pattern; 5) access;. and 6) density. He supported hillside planning that provided for density transfer, possibilities of dedication, cooperation with the county and some annexation to get services. Councilman Griffin stated the city needed a firm but equitable system of policies and regulations to protect the streams, creeks, hillsides and wetlands, and he was concerned with the balance between public interest and landowners rights. He felt each method in the folder needed to be applied carefully and was interested in implementing the following regulations: 1) clear and specific statement of intent; 2) a systematic interface with up -to -date erosion/ grading • controls; 3) slope- density - standards; 4) other pertinent performance- standards developed upon specific and up -to -date information about each site or area; 5) a design emphasis which seeks to maintain the natural processes of the hillside rather than just a designation of the required uses to which the area can be put; 6) an enforcement /administrative framework which is straight forward and not fiscally burdensome to implement. He considered three factors to be critical to the development of a responsible ordinance: 1) a sound effort at analyzing the natural processes sought to be protected; 2) an accurate job of identifying and mapping the areas and collecting /evaluating critical data in an objective manner; 3) the fortitude to be forceful, fair, and clear in developing the necessary legal language which will, in turn, be easy to administer., Councilwoman Dovey recommended that the commissioners get out on the hills and climb them because it would give them a picture of what was being discussed. She said she could see earth slippage when she was there. She felt density and development transfers should be looked at on a site - specific basis because they do not necessarily apply in all of the areas. She said urban services as a trade -off for open space should also be dealt with on a site - specific basis. She questioned whether hills should all be available to everybody as open space or was there a factor of preservation to consider. She said they needed to state in concrete policy where they have been talking for a long time so every- body has a complete picture of what city sees for the hillsides. Councilman Dunin stated there were general policies and specific areas and it would be a difficult job for the Planning Commission. He men- tioned the following concerns: 1) fire protection -- was it the respon- sibility of the city or the county; 2) drainage -- will have to consider properties below, how property and building projects itself and looks from the city; 3) slippage; 4) traffic; 5) infill in the city. He was supportive of voluntary density transfer and thought dedication was a potential option for owners but should not be required. He said building should go on buildable part of property even if it was visible. He felt every site should be visited. He said the urban reserve line should have some reason and be coincidental with the lot line and building should not necessarily be within the reserve line if it meant putting the house on an unsuitable location. He said water service was impor- tant and should be considered when placing line in the special areas. Mayor Billig said the hillside tours were very beneficial and proposed so that the City Council could be ultimately fair in decisions to property owners and provided first hand experience and familiarity with the land. She stated there was very little left for development except the hillsides and sensitive areas, and Council was striving to take this out of the arena of confrontation and deal with it from a philosophical point of view which would be translated into very clear policy. Prop- erty owners would then know what to expect and not get overly subjective opinions; the community would also have the same benefits and understanding. She was concerned with the following: 1) slopes; 2) drainage and erosion; 3) geological questions; 4) access; 5) health, safety and welfare questions; and 6) density. She had not given up the concept of preservation of water service inside the city only; she had no problem with density transfer; felt development transfer was a potential headache City Council Minutes Tuesday, May 11, 1982 - 4:30 p.m. Page 3 but could be a viable option. She thought open space would have to be dealt with very carefully -- how open space would be taken care of, not just through easements, but have public open space and provide some kind of control so it was not overly abused. She was concerned with balancing the private good with the public's good. Commissioner Gerety questioned what Council called a "minor annexation" and "private facilities" in regard to the water situation. He felt the water problem could be solved given enough money and wondered to what extent Council thought it was good to allow private facilities in a development. Councilman Settle responded he would like to get away from the idea of private facilities and plug into municipal system but in some cases would need separate services for fire protection. He said minor annex- ation referred to one or two acres only. Councilman Dunin agreed there was an adequate water supply but felt the sewers were a different situation. He said sewers should be self -con- tained and perculation systems should not be allowed. Councilwoman Dovey pointed out that getting water up the hill was a problem. She discouraged private facilities. Mayor Billig also preferred not having or avoiding private facilities and thought annexation would be better. Chairwoman Drucker left the meeting at 5:30 p.m. Commissioner Gerety commented the document seemed to address the tech- nical problems with hillside development and still needed to address solving the aesthetic problems associated with hillside development. He felt there should be landscape standards based on geology and suggested a street tree program similar to downtown. Commissioner Howard addressed state of the art concerns regarding geological hazards and seismic safety. He considered the Seismic Safety Element a farce and said a risk assessment technique was needed to apprise-what the risk might be. He was concerned on how to certify geological hazards and that air pollution data accurately reflected conditions. He asked if the city should be coordinating with the county. Commissioner Rappa felt the Planning Commission should visit the sites. Commissioner Reiss was pleased the city was acting on this head -on rather than trying to sidestep the problem. Commissioner Bullock stated he would have liked the opportunity to visit - the sites with Council because it would have saved the expense of going separately and would have offered a one -on -one experience. He was _ concerned with differentiating between public open space and private property rights. Commissioner Bailey said he would have liked to visit the sites with Council and was concerned with private property rights versus public property rights. On a question by Commissioner Bullock, Geoff Grote, Interim Community Development Coordinator, stated the Planning Commission did not have a June deadline but staff was hoping the proposal would be finished by the middle of July. Councilwoman Dovey said if the Planning Commission had any questions of Council later on, please send a message. City Council Minutes Tuesday, May 11, 1982 - 4:30 p.m. Page 4 There being no further business.to come before the City Council and Planning Commission, Mayor Billig adjourned the study session at 5:55 p.m. to Tuesday, May 11,1982, at 7:00 p.m. in.the Council Chambers. amela Voges, Cit k . Respectfully.- submitted;by: Recording Secretary, Trudy Lisagor APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 7/6/82 1 1 1 M I N U T E S ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1982 - 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL HEARING ROOM, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 1 STUDY SESSION ROLL CALL 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; Geoff Grote, Interim Community Development Director; Terry Sanville, Senior Planner A. WORK PROGRAM /STATE OF THE CITY MESSAGE Mayor Billig reviewed the 1981/1983 two year work program which the Council had adopted last year and updated it to show the different ' stages the community goals programs were in, significant accomplishments made in planning, resources and services, transportation and circula- tion, finance, administration and the listing of priorities for the forthcoming year. Councilman Dunin suggested staff compile a list showing where projects are today in relation to two years ago, recognizing and clarifying project status so the public could see what was accomplished in the last year including reevaluation of Council priorities. After brief discussion and upon general consensus,.Council directed staff to expand the newsletter-to include a more descriptive explanation of various actions taken by the Council on important issues. On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman Settle, to approve the Mayor's Work Program for 1981/1983. Motion carried, all ayes. 1. SIDEWALK SALES ORDINANCE A. Council considered three alternate draft ordinances regulating sidewalk sales in the downtown area. Geoff Grote, Interim Community Development Director, reviewed the Council Agenda Report (see file no. 478) including: 1) an original sidewalk sales ordinance drafted by city staff; 2) outline of sidewalk ' sales ordinance as proposed by a segment of the business community; and 3) revised draft of the sidewalk sales ordinance drafted by the city staff after discussion with the business community.' Staff was not recommending any one ordinance but suggested Council review the various approaches to this matter and instruct staff to bring the revised draft of the sidewalk sales ordinance back to the Council at a future meeting for a pass to print. Briefly, the original sidewalk sales ordinance, Exhibit 2, would prohibit use of the sidewalks by individual merchants unless they received a Council permit. It would also allow use of the sidewalks as part of an area -wide sales event City Council Minutes Tuesday, May 11, 1982 - 7:00 p.m. Page 2 sponsored by a merchants' association (maximum of four such events per year). The second ordinance, proposed by the merchants, would allow use of the public sidewalks by individuals, without any city permit. This would restrict the use to one -third the width of the walk, with a minimum of five feet to be kept clear. Exhibit 5, the redrafted side- walk sales ordinance amended by staff following input from the BIA, would allow use of the public sidewalk by individual merchants on Saturdays, and Thursday evenings, with a permit issued by the Community Development Director. This would require that a minimum of five feet be kept clear and a hold harmless agreement from the merchant. Councilman Griffin stated he would be supportive of examining the redraft, Exhibit 5, at least insofar as using it as a point of departure. Councilman Dunin would also support Exhibit 5 as a discussion document. The areas he felt needed to be strengthened were: 1) insurance require- ments; 2) would be opposed to the duration of the sale for three days; 3) if a sale were held on Thursdays, it would be for Thursday nights only (from 6 - 9 P.M.); 4) he was concerned that no reference was made to imported merchandise. He felt that only merchandise normally sold in the store should be offered during the sale. Signs on display tables should be prohibited except to indicate price and manufacturer of the item. He also questioned if four sales a year might be excessive. He was concerned that San Luis Obispo didn't turn into a flea market type of downtown. Councilman Settle stated that regarding the signs, he felt the sign ordinance should govern its enforcement. He also would be supportive of using Exhibit 5 for discussion purposes. He was concerned that.the merchandising regulations through the ordinance were not too restric- tive. He was unsure as to the number of times a sale should be held a year, whether that number be four, two or six. Councilwoman Dovey stated that she was totally opposed to any type of ordinance allowing sidewalk sales. She would prefer: 1) total restric- tion or, through the BIA, a specialized one -time permit basis; or 2) no restriction whatsoever, let the merchants police themselves; or 3) if the City were to accept the redraft of Exhibit 5, she would also share other Councilmembers concerns to strengthen the ordinance. The Council discussed the possibility of limiting sidewalk sales to one area of town. Geoff Grote, Interim Community Development Director, stated that he felt it would be difficult to try to limit it to one area. It would also be difficult to force merchants not to use imported merchandise during sales, as suggested by Councilman Dunin. Councilman Dunin felt the ordinance as it was presently drafted would allow service stations to display tires on the sidewalks, car dealers cars and bicycle shops bicycles. The Council should keep in mind that not only should they protect the downtown businessmen but protect the rest of the community from having its downtown looking like a flea market. Mayor Billig was concerned that there was only a five foot sidewalk clearance provision. She was also concerned about insurance require- ments and language added that displays also be aesthetically pleasing. After discussion it was moved by Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, to direct staff to redraft the ordinance (Exhibit 5) receiving additional input from the BIA, the Chamber of Commerce and the public and set for public hearing. Motion carried, all ayes. B. Geoff Grote then reviewed for the Council the status of temporary outdoor sales on private property. He outlined three alternatives: 1 1 Ali City Council Minutes Tuesday, May 11, 1982 - 7:00 p.m. -page 3 1) Council to instruct staff to ban all outdoor temporary sales on private property; 2) choose to continue to allow temporary outdoor sales on private property subject to a use permit but impose criteria which would be used by the planning staff in granting the permits; 3) take no action and allow the granting of temporary use permits of outdoor sales to continue in much the same manner as the past. He was not recommending any one of the three alternatives but merely providing them as information to the Council. Councilwoman Dovey favored banning all outdoor temporary sales on private property. Councilman Settle would support continued use of temporary outdoor sales on private property with conditions. Councilman Dunin agreed to continue the policy of allowing temporary outdoor sales on private property but that they should be subject to certain criteria. Councilman Griffin would severly restrict any outdoor sales. He was philosophically opposed to them. Mayor Billig would support total banning of any temporary sales on private property. Councilman Griffin suggested that staff look into any specific uses that might by warranted, i.e., Christmas trees. After brief discussion it was moved by Councilman Griffin, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, to direct staff to come back with a zoning ordinance amendment to ban temporary outdoor sales on private property. Motion carried, all ayes. Council also directed staff to investigate the possibility of adding a section to the Municipal Code to include specific uses if warranted. (5 -0) 2. PARR AND RECREATION ELEMENT CONTINUED Council continued its discussion of the Parks and the General Plan (continued from 7/13/81, 9/14/81 Terry Sanville, Senior Planner, then reviewed the and suggested Council make any further changes to Recreation Element and schedule a public hearing (see file no. 462). Recreation Element of and 3/9/82). Council Agenda Report the draft Parks and to consider its adoption The Council then reviewed the Parks and Recreation Element on a page by page basis. The following changes were made as follows:1) the technical reports #1 and X12 should be referenced in the Parks and Recreation Element as important resource documents; 2) Councilman Griffin, to rewrite the goals statement to insure clear enumeration of Councils' objective; 3) page two, item 1, delete "the City will develop and maintain Parks and Recreation facilities that will ". In front of every paragraph beginning with provide, add the word "to "; 4) page 4, item 2, "Park Size (space): The following criteria will be used to determine the size for new parks and to evaluate the adequacy of existing parks." 5) page 8, whenever Mission Plaza expansion is identified add the words "cultural facilities "; 6) page 9, paragraph 9, second sentence should read "the general allocation of land for passive and active areas ""I 1 should be as portrayed by the schematic plan. "; 7) page 10, paragraph entitled Golf Course, revise to eliminate the words "as it is" following Laguna Lake Golf Course; 8) page 12, reword the first paragraph to read, "Reservoir Canyon and Lopez Canyon: Public access to these areas will be allowed consistent with sound resource management. Minimal facilities mi ht be provided. These areas should be preserved in its natural state. Local nature groups and other organizations that use the canyon should be asked to help provide periodical cleanup. "; 9) page 13, Table 2, add community park under type of Park Status to include existing /new, secure land to be city, build passive improvements by both city /developer, City Council Minutes Tuesday, May 11, 1982 - 7:00 p.m. Page 4 build active improvements both city /developer, and long term maintenance both city /user fees. Developer to help contribute in new district parks for both building passive improvements and building active improvements; 10) page 14, various syntax changes; 11) page 15, in addition to syntax changes Item D to be revised as follows: "Selective Landscaping: use of plants and trees which require.limited maintenance and water." and Item F "student assistants: whenever feasible, use students to help maintain public landscaped areas "; 12) page 17, paragraph 1, revise "reviewing detailed park plans.and making recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council." Paragraph 3, second sentence "reviewing detailed park plans and making recommendations to the Parks and Recreation Commission. "; 13) page 19, number 3, Item E, add "may be located on city -owned land outside the city limits. "; 14) page 20, Item B rewritten as follows: (Jim Stockton and the Planning staff were directed to reltructure the definition of Community Centers to reference cultural facilities.) 15) page 21, paragraph D revised as follow$:.'"Golf courses are special facilities which help meet overall community recrea- tion needs. A very large community park might contain. a.golf course. "; 16) page 22, sub - paragraph 3, second sentence to read, "more intensified uses, such as parks might be considered for major scenic areas..." 10:10 P.M. Councilman Dunin lef Upon general consensus, Council Recreation Element as discussed hearing. (4 -0 -1) There being no further business Billig adjourned the meeting at 12:10 P.M. APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 6/1/82 t. the .meeting. directed staff to.redraft the Park and this evening and.schedule for public to come before the City Council, Mayor 10:40 P.M. to Monday, May 17, 1982 at .Pamela Voges, Ci y Clerk 1