HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/12/1983City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 5, 1983 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 11
2. On motion of Councilman Griffin, seconded by Councilman Settle, to
support the City of Vista's resolution to oppose the Federal Government's
action to provide community development block grant programs for only
cities of 50,000 or more populace. Motion carried, all ayes.
3. Staff was directed to prepare resolution concerning the condominium
conversion issue relative to Speaker Brown and Senator Mello in a
clipping from the Los Angeles Times dated April 5, 1983.
4. Councilman Settle requested that councilmembers contact him concerning
their attendance of the Channel Counties, League of California Cities,
Division meeting to be held Friday, April 15, 1983.
9:20 p.m. Mayor Billig adjourned the meeting to closed session to discuss
Personnel and Litigation measures.
10:45 p.m. City Council reconvened, all councilmembers present.
There.being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor
Billig adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m. to sday, April 12, 1983, at
7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber.
amela oges, ty Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 5/17/83
M I N U T E S
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 1983 - 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers
Present: GlennaDeane Dovey, Ron Dunin, Robert Griffin, Allen K.
Settle and Mayor Melanie C. Billig
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer; Geoff Grote,
Assistant Administrative Officer; George Thacher, City
Attorney; Pamela Voges, City Clerk; Wayne Peterson, City
Engineer; Rudy Muravez, Finance Director; Roger Neuman,
Police Chief; Bruce Fraser;. MDW; Anne Russell, Assistant
City Attorney
' --------- - - - - -- -
------------------------------------------ - - - - --
A -1 CITY ATTORNEY TRANSITION
After brief discussion and on motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by
Councilman Griffin, the following resolution be adopted: Resolution No.
5088 (1983 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of.San Luis
Obispo authorizing the retaining of Arthur J. Shaw Jr., attorney, on an as
needed basis to assist in the transition of the current City Attorney
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 2
leaving and appointing Geoff Grote as Acting City Attorney effective May
20, 1983:. .
Passed and adopted -on the.following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Griffin, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor•Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None :
A -2 RESOLUTION OPPOSING SB259
After brief discussion and on motion of Councilwoman Dovey, seconded by
Councilman Settle, the following resolution be adopted: Resolution No.
5089 (1983 Series), a.resolution of the Council of the City of San.Luis
Obispo opposing Senate Bill 259 (Mello) as an unwarranted intrusion into
local affairs and requesting that each member.of the assembly join in
opposing this legislation.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dovey, Settle, Dunin, Griffin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
A -3 MOBILE HOMES
On motion of Councilwoman Dovey, seconded by Councilman Griffin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 5090 (1983 Series), a
resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo clarifying the
intent of the cost of living increases permitted by the city's mobile home
park rent stabilization Ordinance No. 923 and authorizing city intervention
on behalf of tenants subjected to a rental increase in violation of said
ordinance.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dovey, Griffin, Dunin, Settle and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
1. PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE
Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer, reviewed the,Council Policy Statement
and Action Plan for downtown parking that was adopted through Council
Resolution No. 4949. This resolution identified: 1) a need for 1,100 to
1,580 parking spaces in the downtown by 1990; 2) endorsed a policy of
concentrated.parking for the downtown area; 3) identified structural and
non - structural programs to address the need. Six program elements were:
1) centrally located downtown parking structures and surface lots financed
and operated on an enterprise basis; 2) participation in ridesharing
programs; 3) promotion of transit system for commuters to the downtown
area; 4) parking enforcement programs; 5) increasing lot and on- street
efficiencies through restriping; 6) a parking in -lieu fee policy for new
downtown uses. The five -step action plan would be: 1) implementation of a
ridesharing program on September 20, 1982 (completed); 2) proceed with the
financing, land acquisition and final design of a parking structure on the
southwest corner of Palm and Morro Street (this is what was before the City
Council this evening); 3) consider formation of an assessment district for
the acquisition and construction of.a surface parking lot (100 cars on
Marsh Street); 4) preparation of an ordinance establishing an in -lieu fee
in the C -C zone; 5) restripe city -owned surface lots where efficiencies
1
1
i' I
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 - 7:00 p.m..
Page 3
could be made. He stated the last .three items would be forthcoming following
tonight's meeting.
Rudy Muravez, Finance Director, then reviewed the budget scope for the
parking garage with budget estimates. He,stated that primarily the project
would be funded on an enterprise.approach.•.This means to operate the
program as close as possible as to private enterprise using user fees. The
parking revenues have always been based on that concept. He stated that
the revenues for the parking project would be generated from four sources:
1) parking meters; 2) monthly rental fees by users; 3) retail space and
theatres will provide an element of.profit used to fund the remainder of
the program; 4) public property out into commercial use. He stated that
the project would be financed over a 20 -year period. A standard authority
bond for parking purposes would be used. This is different than the
general obligation bonds of the city'as there would be no property tax
assessment leveled. He then reviewed the project budget estimates and the
differences between the targeted budget and the affordable budget. The
targeted budget (Item A), was for construction in the amount of $5,100,000.
The affordable budget would be based at $4,700,000. This would leave a
difference of a deficit - per =year with item (A) of minus $70,600 or (B)
minus $7,800 (see page 1 -3 of the project budget analysis). He also
explained the annuity income which would be gained through the sale of
property of Wayne's Tire and at Palm and Osos Street which the city had
purchased and could be sold within five years for $1 million or annuity of
$124,000 per year..
Bruce Fraser, Architect with Merriam, Deasey and Whisenant, described the
project-scope and,how it related to the-budget scope (see page 2 -1 of.the
project scope analysis). The only real revision suggested in response to
the lease-negotiation with Mann Theatres included: 1) an increase in the
number.of theatre - auditoriums from four to five;:and:2),a• small increase in
the total.area of,the:theatre-portion of the project. He reviewed.six
potential'cost reduction••items identified for a possible.net savings of
1 $416;000. Council would not need.to take any action on those suggestions
this evening. He would emphasize that the construction market is extremely
favorable throughout the State at this time..
Wayne�Peterson, City.Etigineer,-reviewed -two time schedules.-in the Council
packet (see schedules A and B on page 4 -1 and 4 -2). Proposed schedule A
was a standard procedure for the preparation of final plans advertising
bids and construction with final garage /theatre completion ready for
occupancy by May 1, 1985. He explained the advantages of this were: 1)
positive control of the contractor in the area of details;,.quality and
project scope and design would be clearly delineated; 2) portion of the
garage-may be available for parking during Christmas 1984 and most of the
project site parking-lots would be- available..during Christmas 1983; 3) bond
sale would be based upon firm construction bids. The disadvantages would
be: 1) interest rates may vary from present levels and could go higher
than the projected 9 percent. Registration would:also add some-cost after
July 1, 1983; and 2) the project would not:be completed until the spring of
1985. Staff was recommending the.proposed, schedule A. The.proposed
schedule B was a design /construct procedure which would allow for the
garage /theatre completion by November 1, 1984. The advantages would be:
1) the contractor could bid his-most efficient construction techniques
leading to-more competitive bids;:-2) project.bids..would be'established in
June-1983 at, current interest rates-and costs. Bonds-sold prior to regi-
stration requirements of July 1, 1983, would result in the earliest project
completion-.-:,The-,disadvantages--were:--l) all surfaceiparking;on -site would
be removed for one:-Christmas season-:(1983); 2)-certain adversary- :problems
may develop.--between the-contractoriand the city over details and-design of
construction quality,.that were!.not covered in project scope;= and.3) gener-
ally,-:contractors with this type.of contractnwould::look.for ways to keep
the project within budget to the:'extent of deleting items at the end of the
work that were-not clearly included•in the-.contract.-.
George Thacher, City Attorney•, then reviewed-two-of the proposed lease,.-
agreements, one with Mann Theatres and one-,with Shanghai Low Restaurant.
He stated.the Mann Theatre draft lease agreement,:was the:result of approxi-
mately a year of negotiations with Mann Theatre.Corporation. It,was then
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 4
that staff was directed to work with Mann and their representatives in
finding a solution to the downtown facility needs. That direction was
precipitated by a request to divide the Fremont Theatre into a two - screen
facility. He summarized the key components of the 23 -page draft agreement:
1) term of.the lease was a 20 -year period to include approximately 18,076
square feet of leasable space in the parking project. It would call for
the construction of a facility with a five - theatre auditorium; 2) theatre
patrons would be required to pay for garage parking at the same rate
charged to all other patrons of the garage facility and would receive no
preferential treatment; 3) the Mann Theatre Corporation was responsible for '
the installation of all the operating equipment including seats, carpets,
draperies, screens, concession equipment, etc; 4) there were two rent
formulas: A) a fixed minimum annual rent established based upon actual
construction costs of the theatre. The fixed minimum rent would be calcu-
lated on the actual construction costs plus a percent profit factor to the
city; B),a gross receipts percentage rent formula would be included. This
formula would be based on a percent of the gross box - office receipts
beginning in year eight of the agreement. A percent of concession sales
would also be included. The agreement calls for the city to receive the
larger amount of rent generated from those two rent formula options; 5) the
tenant would be responsible for all utility costs associated with the
operation of the theatre; 6) the tenant was entitled to four separate
options to renew for periods of five years each under the terms and condi-
tions set forth in the agreement; 7) the theatres would be made available
to the city for use up to six times a year at no cost. The lease agreement
was designed to: 1) accommodate a long- standing downtown business operator
and a relocation to more adequate facilities; 2) provide a sound revenue
stream to the city that would cover the cost of the theatre complex as well
as contribute to the.garage revenue needs over the life of the projects
financing schedule; and 3) would allow for various community interests to
identify and develop more appropriate uses in the Fremont complex. He
explained the city had received interest from other theatre operators
throughout the State concerning the proposed project. The city'had not
solicited formal proposals or bids on the 18,076 square feet of leasable
area. It was his legal opinion that the solicitation of bids was not a
legal requirement on the part of the city.
Mr. Thacher then reviewed the draft agreement with Shanghai Low Restaurant
identifying some of the elements of the agreement which could still be
changed and others could be added when the final agreement returned to
Council for approval. Primarily: 1) the basis for the agreement was a
desire on the part of both parties to exchange parcels. The parcels
conveyed to the Gin's to be in substantially the condition of the parcel
they leave. That is to have a fully equipped restaurant in place. The new
building would contain a single residential apartment as now exists in the
old restaurant building. The new restaurant /apartment would be located
nearly directly across Palm Street from the present location; 2) the
parties intent was to have the new restaurant complete and operable before
the Gin's were required to move; 3) there would be a complete list of
equipment which the city would be obligated to install including dining
room, kitchen and supply room, equipment and fixtures; 4) a "neutral
inspector" would be agreed to by the parties. The inspector would certify
completion in stages of the construction in conformity with the approved
plans and specifications; 5) plans and specifications would be subject to
Gin's approval. The plans were not finished yet but when they were, the
Gin's would be provided with copies to approve. Completed -plans and
specifications would become part of the agreement and corporated as an
incorporated exhibit and having some effect on agreement language; 6) there
would be some payment to Gin's for attorney, architect and incidental
moving expense; 7) the city would process a parcel map creating the lot '
upon which the new restaurant was to be built; 8) any changes during
construction requested by the Gin's would be at their cost. In essence,
the exchange would leave the Gin's in no worse condition from the location
from which they come but the city would have purchased property necessary
for the parking structure anyway at a cost of approximately that expected
if the matter were to result in condemnation litigation, to say nothing of
possible loss time and trouble: He stated the city was still negotiating
with Premier Music Company and if a settlement would not be worked out, it
may result in condemnation action by the city.
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 5
Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer, reviewed the Sauer Building agreement
explaining that Dr. Carl Kundert has proposed to rehabilitate the Sauer
Building at 848 Monterey Street. The Council in September considered a
request for encroachment of a second -story balcony into the city -owned
property in connection with the restoration: The Council had been generally
in support to allow the proposed encroachment; however, deferred the final
decision until plans for the city parking structure had been-completed.,-
Most of the discussion was focused on the possibility-of selling a portion
of city -owned land adjacent to the building to Dr. Kundert. This would
have the benefit of freeing the project from expensive and difficult
building code requirements and provide the city. with some revenue for the
parking project. He then outlined three distinct alternatives available:
1) an encroachment for the stair landings from the upper level of the
Sauer Building which was the original request. Past city policy
allowed encroachments for stairways or other access onto public
property with 30 =day revocable agreements; however, such encroachments
do not free the property owner from building code requirements for
firewalls for buildings less than 20 feet from the property line.
This firewall requirement would preclude the restoration of the wood
exterior facing the proposed paseo;
2) sell an approximately 10 -foot strip of land through a lot line
adjustment to Dr. Kundert. This would permit the stairways to.land
without encroachment and allow a•small setback for the building. The
firewall requirements would remain; .
3) sell approximately 25 feet of the paseo area to Dr. Kundert. This
would free him of many of the building code requirements and save
substantially on the cost of renovation; however, this area included
the site of building A in the parking structure proposal. In discussions
so far the city indicated that if this third alternative were-chosen,
Dr. Kundert would be obligated to.construct a building compatible with
the paseo project-and pave and landscape the area in a fashion approved
by the ARC for the remainder of the paseo by the time of completion
for-the-rest of the project. The-city would also retain a public
access easement•for those portions of the property which would logically
1 be considered part of the paseo. Alternative (3) would have the
greatest fiscal impact. It would reduce the cost of the parking
project by $40,000 to $55,000 and provide -a-one -time revenue of
approximately $70;000 to $80,000 from the sale of land: -This is the
preferred alternative by staff. Mr. Lanspery reviewed the recommended
action that was being-requested of Council this evening which would be
to:
1) authorize the project architect to complete the final design and construc-
tion drawings (consistent with their-existing contract for services). He
explained the-Council had authorized $84,000 to date. The Council needed
to authorize $102,000 this evening which would leave a remainder of approxi-
mately $54,000. The Council would be approving expenditures of this amount
at two future times, one for $15,000 and another for $39,000;
2) the project should be a final design to.achieve a project budget.of
approximately $4,700;000. The design would- include five theatre auditoriums;
3) Council should-approve the traditional design bid construction schedule
which resulted•in a• project completion date of May 1, 1985 (schedule A);
4) Council should approve in concept the leases regarding Shanghai-Low
Restaurant and Mann Theatres. The agreements should be brought to Council
for final approval within the recommended project schedule date set forth.
Staff should be directed.to consummate an agreement with the Sauer Building
owner:'to sell:approximateiy 25 feet of the paseo area.,
i
Jack Whitehouse, 135 Osos Street and President of the B.I.A., - stated he was
strongly in support of the parking project, and the B.I.A. was in agreement
that a parking deficit did -exist and believed that•the project.was not only
needed-but-affordable and would be a true-asset-for downtown as•well as all
San Luis Obispo. The B.I.A. Board of Directors had given unanimous support
for the project.
Martin,Tangeman; 1011 Pacific Street with the firm of Sinsheimer, Schiebelhut
and Baggett-; spoke to the project lease arrangements with Mann Theatres.
He stated he had received several letters from other interested bidders but
understood that the city was not interested in obtaining competitive bids
for the theatre project. He felt legal ramifications existed if the city
City Council Minutes - -- - -- -
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 6
maintained this approach. He felt it was apparent that.the lease•.was. -..
extremely important and an integral part of the financing.. He .cited the
City Charter as a requirement that the city must seek .competitive . bids in
order to generate the most revenue for the city thereby decreasing taxpayers
burden. This was not a "simple" lease as provided by a provision in the
City Charter. He was officially requesting to be able to examine more.of
the documents concerning the lease. He urged the Council to slow down and
seek competitive bidding.
Councilman Griffin questioned what information he had concerning the
interested bidders.
Mr. Tangeman replied he had several letters that indicated interest in the
project.
Councilman Griffin requested that Mr.- Tangeman read..all -of the-letters into
the record. - - _ . _ , _ _ .. - _ ...
Mr. Tangeman then read five - letters into.the record as Jollows:
- 1) - "Dear Mr. Lanspery: We.would -like to..advise you of our.
interest -.in bidding competitively for the..lease..of the-motion
picture theatres which-the-City of.San -Luis Obispo is..proposing
to construct in conjunction . with .the-community parking project in
downtown San Luis Obispo.
Inasmuch as we just learned that the time frame for.this.project
is very short, we are submitting this letter:of- intent and
interest without firm numbers. You may be- assured, however,-that
our interest is serious and that we are prepared..to.offer a.bid
which we believe will be a very competitive -one.
We own and operate approximately sixty motion picture theatres in
Northern California and Central California. We are proud of the
manner in which we operate our theatres, and we believe them to
be held in high regard in those communities in which we do
business. We are a privately owned company, and we can .assure
you that we would have more than sufficient-financial-substance
to be a responsible lessee of the City. Banking reference.can be
furnished upon request, and financial data will be divulged when
appropriate.
We look forward to receiving further information about -this
project and - learning about the process through which the theatres
will be leased.. _._.
Thank you for your consideration.." .
-2) "Dear Mr. Lanspery:- On March.7, -1983, we..wrote you to- advise,.,..
you of our interest in bidding competively_for the lease of the.. ...
motion picture theatres which the City of.San Luis Obispo is.
proposing to construct in conjunction with the community parking
project in downtown San Luis Obispo.
To date we have not had a response from you, and we should
appreciate hearing from -you at your earliest convenience so that
we may submit our proposal to the City for the lease of these
theatres. - -
We await your response, which we trust will include the City's
specifications and qualifications for bidding on this project.
Thank you for your cooperation."
3) "Dear Mr. Lanspery: Thank you for spending the time to.review.
your plans for the downtown four -plex theatre with me the other
day.
I took the plans.back to my office and everyone here -was- favorably
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 7
impressed with both the theatre itself•and your general plan-for
downtown San Luis Obispo.
We feel that it would be inappropriate to enter into negotiations
while the Mann people are still interested. However, if your
negotiations -with Mann-•Theatres reach an impasse and you are not
able to negotiate a reasonable deal with them, we would like the
opportunity.•to discuss,the situation with you further.. . We think
that our company would be very compatible in San Luis Obispo.
Again, thank you for your courtesy. If I can be of any help to
.you, please .. don't-hesitate.-to call. ".
4) "It has become apparent since, �(deleted). Coldwell-_Banker.has exposed to
you this opportunity in the San Luis Obispo area.and.since our
subsequent meeting with Paul Lanspery'of the City, that this
project should be pursued further. The City has conveyed as they
did at our meeting on Wednesday, February 23, 1983, the desire to
receive a proposal from us in regards to becoming.a major tenant
in the aforementioned project.
Please call me when you are prepared to make a formal proposal
and again meet with the City to discuss the financial aspects of•
this project."
5) "Dear Mr. Lanspery: I would appreciate a separate mailing to
be sent directly from. (deleted). lYou.will__i- ceive_a general proposal in
regards to the downtown theatre retail project. When we spoke
about the possibility of doing a deal, you and I discussed the
possibility of the City of San Luis Obispo paying in..commission.
This is'in necessity for this deal to come together,to final
negotiations.
I- have..enclosed. for your review Coldwell Banker'•s. standards,_
schedule of.sales,.and lease commissions:-to-be applied.to our
representation of.(-deleted) in a..lease with_the_City_of_San Luis Obispo.
I will call you shortly to discuss the current status with•(:deleted) and to
work out.:an agreement involving compensation of Coldwell_ Banker
commercial real estate."
Councilman Griffin questioned that Mr. • Tangeman had allud_e_d 'to _the fact= of-
the legal issues that the city•was:faced with and this was a policy question.
He asked Mr: Tangeman to elaborate.
Mr. Tangeman replied that it would be.good government for•it.,is in good
government's.interest to-ask for competitive bids to relieve the taxpayers
burden. The city should be trying to get the best price from competitive
bidders.. Upon question; he•.stated he was not here to discuss "his personal
opinion;" rather, this was'based on his legal opinion,.that the city. should
seek competitive bids.
Councilman -Dunin questioned if Mr. Tangeman was at the Council meeting
tonight representing himself or his law firm.
Mr. Tangeman replied he was concerned as a member of the law firm- repre-
senting.his client who was very interested in-getting the best price for
the city and that he was not at .liberty to disclose his client's name:
Mayor :iBillig requested City Attorney review the subject of- competitive
bidding.
George Thacher, City Attorney, stated that he had been:.requested by Mr.
Tangeman to provide certain documents and had provided what he felt were
the sufficient documents.-pursuant to law. He.'said. there was no_law•of.the
city or in any legislation concerning competitive public bidding on the
lease,.and.this had been verified.by.the Bond Counsel. •The-Charter requires
competitive bidding for public works projects. •.This will.be..done'on the
project itself but the requirement does not carry over to the lease. It
was, in his legal opinion, simply not a requirement.
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 8
Mayor_Billig reminded the.Council.that..they were.also.only „looking at these
leases in concept and would not be taking a definite action this evening.
Dave- Garth,.Executive Manager for.the-:Chamber of Commerce and representing
921 businesses throughout-the city, stated the Chamber:,had been•an,:active
supporter of the parking program -for: About seven months;- and ther` support
has been growing, not.waning: They are very enthusiastic. The.project was
needed now, not only for the convenience of parkers, but for the economic
stability.of the,downtown. He complimented the Council on proceeding with
the project.
Laverne Schneider, 1356 Marsh Street, spoke in support of- the:,project and
felt it was time that the parking plan got off the ground. This project
has been discussed going back as:far•.as 1966-with revisions to the•plan
even then, when .she was on-the Planning Commission. The ,parking•.needs
continue to grow and.even.with the- ..implementation of-the bus:'system, it has
still..not taken over... The County.Board.of.Supervisors has indicated a real
interest in helping solve the parking problem in their statements of their
plan from 20 years ago: The.County.made public.statements that.they would
replace the parking spaces covered over,when they.built the - .Courthouse
Annex approximately 20 years ago. Nothing has been built to date. When
the new Government Center was.built, they-took.-additional parking.spaces,
and they have not•:added any parking spaces.:for.;their employees, and yet
their employees in the downtown area are approximately 550 plus. „They are
continually putting additional employees out on the street and taking
spaces needed by our city.shoppers. The.. Datsun - :building.which!has.been
purchased.:by• the County, and- purchased..at.:a tremendous cost,:will_house the
fleet..of:,County cars. .The- plan the city has -is •excellent, .and- the• financing
problems should be easy to be accepted by all of the downtown people and
the.community.as A-whole because it doesn't take tax dollars or::increase
our taxes for additional cost. It is too.bad it wasn't built.yesterday
because it is certainly needed today.
Gini Allen, 191.Luneta Drive, spoke
for many years she had been opposed
she was convinced this-was --what:the;
there are others trying to muddy the
Diane Jefferson; 258 Patricia.Court,
program.
in support,.-of the. project: She stated
to the parking garage but at this time
city needed. It was.unfortunate that
waters.
spoke in support of the,.parking
Marcel Cote;,1351.Cavalier and•a'Charter member of the B.I.A.,,saw.the',
project as-a tremendous.:accomplishment. He:stated we have.before,us proof
positive that a city government and a.business community could.work well
together. There was no way that the business community or the private
sector could have financed the project on their own this.was thoroughly
studied. The.public's largest concern seemed to be;cost.overrun. That was
well explained in.the "newsletter” available. It:stated. the city_would .
spend only what could be financed from the revenues of the parking.meters,
revenues from the parking structure,,and commercial rents received from•;the
theatre and shops on the paseo. The method of financing the.project,.
called an enterprise basis, means that users, not taxpayers, would pay for
the parking program: It also means that .if the•.construction,.bid came-min
over budget, the project would be scaled down so as to.not.overrun.,the,;:
available-financial resources. City would build only what they could
afford, no more. The people.thatm would pay for it would be the people who
use it. No tax dollars would be used. The way to solve the problem was to
find ways to.bring back the shopping public by making it:easier and-)more
pleasant to shop downtown. He stated that since 1970 gross sales had
dropped-one-,percent per year and that trend was continuing-. More.parking
would be a major factor in reversing the trend. It would never be more
affordable or come at a more appropriate time, and he would urge the
Council to .proceed -. I .
Mayor Billig closed.the public portion of the.meeting.
After brief discussion.and on motion of:,Councilman.Settle, seconded by
Councilman Griffin, to authorize the.project. architect to-complete-the.
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. :,10 _`,.• cc;..; is
Page 9
final design and construction drawings consistent with the existing contract
for services:
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Griffin, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig
NOES: -None
ABSENT: None.
Moved by Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the project
be final designed to achieve a project budget of approximately $4.7 million.
The design would include five theatre auditoriums and include an•add' and
deduct basis.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dunin, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Moved by Councilman Griffin,. seconded by Councilman Dunin, to approve the
traditional design, bid, construction schedule, which results in a project
completion of May 1, 1985.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Griffin, Dunin, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Councilman Griffin stated that although the resultant project is due to be
completed in mid 1985, this type of project is too critical to use schedule
B approach. He would like the management schedule fully controlled as far
as overrides, etc.
Councilmembers Dunin and Settle agreed with comments by Mr. Griffin.
Councilman Dunin stated that the project would consistently be under
Council review to preclude override-without Council knowledge....
Councilwoman Dovey stated she was pleased that after so many years the
project was surely underway.
Mayor Billig stated that because.of the scope and nature we would have to
exercise true management control over the project.
After brief discussion and on motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by
Councilman Settle, to approve in concept the leases regarding Shanghai Low
Restaurant and Mann Theatres. The agreements would be brought to Council
for final approval within the recommended project schedule. Staff be
directed to consummate an agreement with the owners of the Sauer building
to sell approximately 25 feet of the paseo area.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote: :::..,
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Settle, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Councilman Dunin reminded staff that!.he would like..them.to look at all
alternatives with regard to the Sauer Building proposal.
City Council Minutes
Tuesday, April 12, 1983 -
Page 10
Councilman Griffin stated that he had.followed staff-efforts with'.regard to
negotiating with Shanghai Low and Mann Theatres, and was exceptionally
satisfied with its competitive nature.
2. RESOLUTION OF CONDEMNATION
After brief discussion, moved by Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilman
Settle, to continue consideration of the resolution condemning property
located at 861 Palm Street (Shanghai Low Restaurant) required for construction
of city's parking structure (continued from 1/4/83, 1/18/83, 2/1/83,
2/8/83, 2/15/83, 3/1/83, 3/15/83 and 4/5/83), to the Council meeting of
April 19, 1983.
Motion carried on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Settle, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig
r
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
1. Communication from Jim Stockton concerning the Wells Fargo grant monies
available to assist,in the installation of the game -field exercise courses
received and filed-. - 1
Mayor Billig adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. for a break and then to
Closed Session to discuss Personnel and Litigation Matters: .
9:00 p.m. City Council convened in Closed Session to discuss,Personnel and
Litigation Matters.
10:30 p.m. City Council reconvened, all Councilmembers present. '
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor
Billig adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. to Monday, April 18, 1983, at
6:00 p.m.
Pamela Voges, y Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 6/7/83
M I N U T E S
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MONDAY, APRIL 18, 1983 - 6:00 P.M.
COUNCIL HEARING ROOM, CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers
Present: Ron Dunin, Robert Griffin, Allen K.. Settle and Mayor
Melanie C. Billig
Absent: GlennaDeane Dovey
City Staff
Present: Paul Lanspery, Administrative Officer; Dave Thomas, Ralph
Andersen and Associates