Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/11/1983City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 2 AYES:. Councilmembers Dunin, Settle, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: None :C -3 REPORT ON BIDS - VARIOUS STREET RESURFACING AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Report on bids was received for "VARIOUS STREET RESURFACING AND RECONSTRUC- TION PROJECTS - FISCAL YEAR 1983/84 "; City Plan No. H -31A; bid estimate $184,560, . without contingencies. On motion of Councilman.Dunin, seconded by Councilman Settle, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 5228 (1983 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo awarding contract to Madonna Construction Co. in the amount of $156,343.84. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Settle, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: None G E N E R A L P L A N C O N S E N T C A L E N D A R A. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS /REZONINGS Council considered the following General Plan amendments and rezonings: GP1. APPENDIX A (GP 1090) -- amend Appendix A of the Land Use Element concerning implementation measures; City of San Luis Obispo,.applicant (continued from 8/9/83). GP2. BROAD /SANTA BARBARA STREETS (GP /R 1091) -- amend the Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map to change the designations from Neighborhood - Commercial (C -N) to Service - Commercial /Light Industrial (C -S) on property located at 2110 Broad Street and 2121 Santa Barbara Street; Jules Rogoff; applicant (continued from.8 /9/83). GP3.':HATHWAY AVENUE (GP /R 1093 & 1103) a. (GP /R 1093) -= amend the Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map to change the designations from Low - Density Residential (R -1) to Medium - Density Residential (R -2) on property located at 331 Hathway Avenue; Jessie Norris, applicant (continued from 8/9/83). "b. (GP /R 1103) -- consideration to amend the Land Use Element Map to change the designations from Low- Density Residential (R -1) to Medium - Density Residential (R -2) on property located at 291, 301 and 321 Hathway Avenue; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant (continued from 8/9/83). GP4. ALICITA COURT AND MARGARITA AVENUE (GP /R 1096 -& 1102) a. (GP /R.1096) -- amend the Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map to change the designations from Medium - Density Residential (R -2) to Medium -high Density Residential (R -3) on property located at 3120 through 3195 Alicita Court; John Wiebe, applicant (continued from 8/9/83). b. (GP /R 1102) -- amend the Land Use Element.Map and Zoning Map to change the designations from Medium - Density Residential (R -2 and R -2 -S) to Medium -high Density Residential (R -3) on property located at 206 and 210 Margarita Avenue; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant (continued from 8/9/83). GP5�-FOOTHILL SHOPPING CENTER.(GP /R:1097) -- consideration of request to amend the Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map to change the City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 3 designation of approximately 5 acres from Neighborhood - Commercial (C -N) to Retail - Commercial (C -R) on property located at 765 -789 (odd) Foothill Blvd.; Foothill Plaza Associates, applicant (continued'from 8/16/83). Toby Ross, Community Development Director, reviewed the council agenda report (see file no. 463) stating that the Council had held public hearings on each of these items reaching consensus. Tonight's meeting was for the purpose of taking the legal action required to implement that consensus as follows: GPI. Reaffirm consensus vote to delete Appendix A of the Land-Use Element. GP2. Reaffirm consensus vote supporting the General Plan amendment and pass to print the rezoning ordinance. GP3. Reaffirm consensus vote supporting the General Plan amendment and pass to print the rezoning ordinance. GP4. Reach consensus supporting the General Plan amendments and pass to print both rezoning ordinances " GP5. Reaffirm previous consensus vote and deny the requested General Plan amendment and rezoning. After brief discussion it was moved by Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, to approve the General Plan consent items as recommended by staff, Councilman Settle voting no on GP5, with individual roll calls on those ordinances introduced to print as follows: On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 988 (1983 Series), An ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the official Zone Map of the City C -N to C -S at 2110 Broad Street and 2121 Santa Barbara Avenue (GP /R 1091): Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Dovey, Griffin, Settle and Mayor Billig NOES: None On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 989 (1983 Series), an ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the official Zone Map of the City R -1 to R -2 at 291, 301, 321 and 331 Hathway Avenue (GP /R 1093, GP /R 1103). Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Dovey, Griffin, Settle and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: None On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 990 (1983 Series), an ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the official Zone Map R -2 to R -3 on property located at 3120 through 3195 Alicita Court (GP /R 1096). Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Dovey, Griffin, Settle and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: None On motion of Councilman Dunin, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 991 (1983 Series), an ordinance of City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 4 the City of San Luis Obispo amending the official Zone Map R -2 to R -3 at 206v.and 210 Margarita Avenue (GP /R 1102). •.Introduced and-passed to print on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Dovey, Griffin, Settle and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: None 1. CASA STREET (GP /R 1115 Council held a public hearing to consider a Planning Commission recommenda- tion to amend the Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map to change property designation from Office (0) to High- Density Residential (R -4) on property located at 60 Casa Street; William and Beatrice Jeong, applicants. Toby Ross, Community Development Director, reviewed the council agenda report (see file no. 463) stating the Planning Commission had approved the rezoning and General Plan Land Use Map amendment on a 6 =0 vote. Staff was also recommending approval to: 1) concur with the negative declaration on environmental impact granted by the Director; 2) reach a consensus to approve the General Plan Land Use Map from Office to High- Density Resi- dential; and 3) pass to print the ordinance to amend the Official Zone Map from 0 to R -4. Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open. Rob Strong, Planning Consultant and representing the applicant, briefly reviewed his client's request, stating that as the Poly Motel had become non - conforming, it was the applicant's intent to remove the existing motel to build new apartments. Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Dunin questioned if there would be any control later for the Council to control the height of the apartments, which he understood now to be approximately 45'. He was concerned with the number of stories intended. Toby Ross, Community Development Director, stated the use permit should be sufficient to provide that kind of protection, however, an "S" designation would allow additional approval by Council. Three or four stories would be allowed depending -,upon the roof slope. Upon question, Rob Strong stated the applicant's willingness to commit to a two -story apartment building with four of those units designed as two floors built over ground floor parking On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin,-the following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 992 (1983 Series), an ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the Official Zone Map.to rezone property at 60 Casa Street from 0 to R -4. Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote: AYES: Settle, Dunin, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig NOES: None . ABSENT: None 2. LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD (AUTOPARK WAY) GP /R 1095 Council considered amending-the Land Use Element Map and,Zoning Map to change the designation from Service - Commercial /Light Industrial - Planned Development (C -S -PD) to Tourist Commercial (C -T) on property located at 12300•Los.OsosiValley.Road; Jay.Stream,.applicant (continued from-:8 /9/83). City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 5 Toby Ross, Community Development Director, reviewed the council agenda report (see file no. 463), and the 8/9/83 public hearing at which time staff recommended denial of the requested changes. Staff was still recom- mending denial but now suggests removal. of .the PD designation which would limit the site to auto sales and related uses. A letter had been received from Rob Strong, the applicant's consultant, stating that the representa- tive for the proposed Holiday Inn had decided to withdraw their application for hotel development. Apparently due to the delays and the difficulties with the proposed design, they have decided not to extend their escrow or revise their ARC application to facilitate further City Council considera- tions of the proposed Tourist - Commercial development. Staff would recommend adoption of the resolution denying the requested General Plan amendment, introduction of an ordinance to rezone the property from Service - Commercial Planned Development to Service - Commercial; and direct staff to work with auto dealers to develop financing incentives for relocation from downtown to Autopark Way; and initiate rezoning to C -T or other appropriate zone if processing of the development was not underway within eighteen months. Mayor Billig asked for public testimony. Upon question Rob Strong stated he was supportive of the staff recommended action to drop the PD designation which would allow other automotive;' related uses. To confine this property's use to an automotive dealership only did not seem likely as nothing had happened on this property in the last five years. He did have two possible clients that would provide auto related uses. Mayor Billig closed the public portion. " Councilman Griffin stated he would be reluctant to remove the PD without a real effort on the part of the City to encourage an autopark way. Council discussed the pros and cons of dropping the PD and adding an S designation. After brief discussion it was moved by Councilman Dunin, seconded'by- Councilman Settle, to introduce the following ordinance to print: Ordinance No. 993 (1983 Series), an ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the Official Zone Map of the City from C -S -PD to C -S -S at 12300 Los Osos Valley Road. Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote: . AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Settle, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: None 8:00 p.m. Mayor Billig declared a recess. 8:15 p.m. City Council reconvened, all Councilmembers present. 3. SAN LUIS MALL (GP /R 1071 & 1072) a. Council considered amending the Land Use Element Map to change the designation of approximately 6 acres from Medium - Density Residential (R -2) and Public Facility (PF) to Retail - Commercial (C -R) on property located at 353 Madonna Road (continued from 8/16/83).- b. Council considered amending the Zone Map to change the designation from C /OS to C -R -PD and preliminary development plan for an approximate 250,000 square foot enclosed mall shopping center (continued.from 8/16/83). C. Council considered a resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed San Luis Mall, an amendment of the General Plan for subject properties shown as items GP 1 -5 and items 1 -3. City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 6 Mayor Billig reviewed the procedure that would be followed this evening, stating that the Council had previously given informal direction to staff on the -land use issue and rezoning. Council had been concerned at that time that the anchor store be a full -line, major department store, non - discount. Of utmost importance was that it would have to be compatible with the current Madonna Plaza. Council was concerned with traffic circul- ation and design, and had addressed.each of those with additional direction to staff. Although several names had been bandied about for the anchor store, no agreement had been reached with any store. Any store-fitting the proposed description would be welcomed. Although no public hearing was required on tonight's meeting, she was going to open it for additional public testimony if anyone wished to speak. Toby Ross, Community Development Director, reviewed the agenda report, (see file no. 416) and the recommended actions explaining the differences of the .zoning request and land use including the role of the PD district. He stated the PD was a special zone to allow modification from the primary zone. Council was currently looking at the preliminary development plan and would expect in six months to receive the precise plan, should Council approve it this evening. Any major amendments would require additional plan changes.. The PD designation.represents' this particular plan and not just any plan for a mall proposal. The council could act on the General Plan by itself or on the planned development by itself. He had received a call••just before tonight's meeting from Stephen Evans, Regional Real Estate Representative for JC Penney, who said a letter had been sent but had not arrived in time to be read at the council.meeting, making the following points: 1) JC Penney had been in the area since 1929; 2) they would have opposition to the .proposed mall if it only had one major anchor store: They felt that,JC Penney would•,not be allowed to participate as:the store is designed primarily for Gottschalk's. ;There would no longer be assurance Penneys would be able to continue-in the downtown if only one anchor store was allowed in the mall as it may not be economically feasible. They were supportive of the mall prospect, but contingent:upon allowing two anchor stores. , Mayor•Billig'stated a letter had.been.received from Gottschalk's; a communi- cation.from Dr::& Mrs: McMichael, owners of Ye O1d.Candy Shop, who were opposed to the mall addition; and.a letter received from Mr. James Thomas, General Partner in Madonna Plaza Associates, opposing the proposal which would require integration with the existing mall. Mayor.Billig asked for-public testimony. Bill Bird, applicant and developer for Trojan Enterprises, stated that they had -made a diligent effort to redesign the proposal according to`the City's wishes. They had gone back to the Planning Commission, receiving unanimous approval, and to the Architectural Review Commission who also did not indicate any major faults..-He stated that Gottschalk's.was.prepared.to become the major department store, that Payless or Savon would be the.: tenant for the drugstore. With regard to the concerns for connecting to the existing Madonna.Plaza, the original plan was submitted based on one major department store and its connection to the existing plaza: No agree - ment'had been reached at this time;.however, they.were.continuing to.work toward that as one of the conditions:of the agreement. They'had-reduced the parking substantially, there was significant reduction off:of.Calle Joaquin as required•by the City: Pads.on Madonna Road had been reworked, increased landscaping between Madonna Road and the buildings on the pads, the windows had-also been revised, however; they-need..a,certainlamount of 1 visibility to the main road or the tenants would not be supportive of it. They relocated the tire and battery.shop next to.Gottschalk's.as.requested. Councilman Dunin stated,•the shuttle service requirement was only a temporary condition to be exercised at.the first Christmas: He hoped for some._.i assurance that this would-be extendedlon a.permanent•basis.shared with: ,:the. downtown 'and .possibly subsidized: by the City if it•proved to be viable. He was also concerned with the flood and drainage aspects as'.the condition allows for both partially opened and closed channels. He would prefer to have it covered. City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00-p.m.' Page 7 Bill Bird stated he would be willing to look at a permanent shuttle''service if it proved to be in demand and could be.worked out economically with the other parties. He felt that the covering of the drainage could probably be worked out, although'additional maintenance problems would probably result. Councilman Griffin asked for clarification-of'the' mall's current'sgtiare footage compared to figures given at the previous Council Meeting.•- 205,000 square feet had been discussed, however, the current condition proposed in the ordinance showed-250,000 square feet as the total gross building area including the peripheral buildings but excluding the pedestrian mall itself... He felt this was extremely confusing and would like to`see'additional definition or language given to this condition stating exactly what the total gross building site included. Toby Ross, Community Development Director, stated the total gross building area had not changed since the previous council discussion. However, the calculations used were different than what had been previously shown in order to show a better comparison for - parking requirements. Using-the new 250,000 square foot gross building area would have reflected approximately 360,000 square feet for the original proposal requested by the applicant. Upon question, he stated that the square footage of the four pads-had also remained unchanged. Jim Thomas, 221 Madonna Road and General Partner in Madonna Road'Plaza; protested any action taken by Council to approve the mall. He stated that the Madonna Plaza had invested a great deal'of funds in the-center to help make it a viable shopping center for the city, there was no agreement with Trojan Enterprises, he felt that any designs submitted at this time were premature. He was concerned about the access routes, the effect on existing businesses. He still had not been shown the plans by the developer; this should have been worked out before submitting any plans to the city. Gary Label, 228 North Chorro Street; stated that he had no connection with any retail outlet, however, he was against the mall because of the - threat it posed to the lifestyle and the public welfare of San Luis Obispo citizens. He felt the proposal was similar to a design of an L.A. mall. The congestion was already bad in this area; it would be much worse with the addition of a mall. He cautioned the Council not to make San Luis Obispo -a clone of the San Fernando Valley. Charles Pasquini, Jr., 255 Elks Lane and representing Valley Vista Land Corporation, is the fee owner of the land underlying the Madonna Road Plaza Shopping Center. He stated that no one from Trojan Enterprises had contacted him concerning the new proposal and that there would be no support for providing for abandonment of Calle Joaquin or an easement for connecting the proposed mall to the existing one. Doug Warschauer, owner of Et Cetera,'spoke in opposition to the mall. He felt that if the Council were to approve it, they were only sealing'the fate.of the - downtown. He for one would have to investigate moving out of the downtown and possibly going either into the proposed new mall or the Foothill shopping center. He countered previous arguments that the business would recapture any great amount from the Santa Maria area for either Gottschalk's or the drug store. He also felt that it would turn San Luis Obispo into a San Fernando Valley. After reading the Strategic Planning Program, he.also felt the city should wait until its implementation: Councilman Dunin stated he objected to the comments made by both speakers regarding the current Council's attempt to turn San Luis Obispo into the likes-of any other larger size city. Bob Corcoran, 220 Kentucky Avenue, read a letter into the record stating his opposition to the mall for various reasons. He felt that the downtown would have to be able to prove first that it could accommodate the new "mall and the beautification program'should also be completed: He reminded the Council that 97 percent of the businesses are independently owned and -could not compete with the chain stores proposed- for.the mall. 1 1 1 City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 8 Dave Garth, Executive Manager of the-Chamber of Commerce, again reviewed that the Retail Committee and the Board of Directors supported the concept of the mall as proposed. They felt this center would keep San Luis Obispo viable. He too responded to comments made that San Luis Obispo would look like another larger city and stated that the main reason he.did not feel this would be true is that there were very few cities that have the same kind of a market place as San Luis Obispo as a tourist and government center base. Santa Maria was thinking about remodeling their center and are holding up their expansion because of the possibility of the City of ' San Luis Obispo proposing its mall because they too felt that 50 percent of the Santa Maria's draw was from San Luis Obispo. Bob Douglas, 1323 Fernwood, and a business owner in the downtown, stated he was opposed to the proposed shopping center. ' Dean Hall, 1325 Portola, was thinking about building a business in San Luis Obispo but is seriously considering doing otherwise if the mall did not go in. He was supportive of the mall and would urge Council's support. Ken'Porche, 865 Higuera and 267 E1 Cerrito, questioned the Chamber of Commerce's unanimous position when the Madonna Plaza and downtown merchants were speaking in opposition. His primary concern was the letter that is being submitted by JC Penny and the possibility of their moving out of the downtown. He felt that would cause the downtown irreparable harm. Dennis Kazade, 235 Madonna Plaza and a merchant in'the Plaza, stated his opposition to the mall. He felt the mall would seriously jeopardize his business. Eric Wand,- 221A Madonna Road, then,read several letters into.the record as follows: Letter #1'from Hull's Children's Shop: "In regard to the proposed San Luis Mall at Madonna Road, as an owner /manager, I am in opposition to the present plans. .Let this letter'stand as a no vote as I cannot attend the-November 11 meeting. Sincerely, Adele Hull." Letter #2 from Moyne's Styling: "San Luis Obispo City Council: I am definitely in favor,of the new mall. Competition breeds good retail traffic. Our customers tell us that even now they go out of town for their "Basic- Need" shopping at the enclosed mall. . :,We need-more variety of stores where our everyday shopping:can be done. Not more boutiques. Catering to the tourist trade.is fine, but those of us who live here need the convenience and lower.prices that a new mall would provide. Sincerely, Moyne Ann Waldmeyer." Letter #3 from All American Video Shop: "City Council of S.L.O. " As a business in the city of San Luis Obispo, I wish to state :that:I object to the plan as submitted'in the development of the enclosed mall purely on the basis that the rights of individual ownership of property is not to be circumvented by any special group, be it political or otherwise:. As a' capitalist who believes 1 in our free enterprise system I cannot accept -a decision of any group that'usurps.the inherent rights of any individual. In this sitiiation the plan as I understand it denies these rights to the legal owners of:some of the.property involved. I feel strongly that the rights of.the property.owners should be respected and a .new plan protecting those:rights.be submitted for consideration. Respectfully,:J. Vanni." Letter #4 from Central Coast Sewing Center: "San Luis Obispo City Council, I favor the new proposed mall because: 1 -there exists a strong need for additional retail space (demonstrated by City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:OO p.m. Page 9 increasing rent factors). 2 -The new mall would enhance the entire retail community and provide a selection demanded by local consumers.. 3 -A regional type retail community would cut down' retail leakage to neighboring communities. Sincerely, Jerry Borges." Letter #5 from Straw Hat Pizza: "Dear .City Council:. .Concerning :the mall across from Madonna Plaza-, please be sure it is feasible before.you permit construction. Competition and free enterprise . are the way of life in America. Yet fairness counts. too. Hence'. Government. You musn't allow people to force their way into a.. place they are neither wanted or needed. Business should be welcomed where it is going, and if there is unhappiness, it, should be researched and the cause discussed. If there is good .. reason for the unhappiness, it is Government's duty to step in and assist. matters. For the new mall to infringe on the rights of the present owners: _ of the Madonna Road Plaza is causing unhappiness. It is up to you to be an arbitrator to either-reconcile the parties or don't'' allow the new mall until there is -no longer unhappiness. Sincerely, James Rockwood." Letter #6 from Mervyn's: "Dear Mr. Ross, L am, writing to.express: my concern, and that of the Company I represent, over the proposed mall at Calle-Joaquin and Madonna Road. I do not oppose the competition that this new mall would bring. On the contrary, I welcome it, but, I do object to the current proposal on the layout of this.mall. The traffic flow.to our location will be seriously impeded if the attachment is made at Sears. In addition, the abandonment of Calle Joaquin would force our employees, emergency ;vehicles, 'and our merchandise trucks to enter from Zorba Way. This would be a big inconvenience, and at times, our access could be completely blocked. Another area of concern if Calle Joaquin is abandoned and made into a private road is the increase of our common area costs for road maintenance. It appears to me that the only merchant to benefit from the current proposal would be Sears. The vast,.majority.of.merchants at Madonna Plaza would be hurt by this new enclosed mall. My recommendation is that any,new mall should be consistent.with the current structural layout of Madonna Plaza. The new mall should be open air and unattached to leave Calle Joaquin as our major thoroughfare. .. _ • Your consideration in this matter is greatly appreciated.. Sincerely, Michael Murray, Store Director." . John Cleeves, 2132 Harris, was opposed to the mall for similar reasons stated earlier.. He, too, cited the.Strategic Plan, as showing that 179 of the city's revenue was derived from the tourists who would probably not come to San Luis Obispo if the mall was present. Ellen Gillam Puryear, 762 Higuera Street and owner of Creekside Toys, stated that she also had.a. shop in Santa Maria and was moving it to the south end of Santa Maria because,the clientele was no longer in the mall area there. The rents in the new mall would probably be prohibitive. She did'not see any similarity between San Luis Obispo and Carmel, as she felt that people who shopped in Carmel would spend thousands of dollars at a clip and these were not.the kind of shoppers-you had in San Luis Obispo. Madonna Plaza was trying to upgrade their stores. Her'last concern was that Calle Joaquin should not be abandoned. Fred Johnson, co -owner of Johnson's for Children, stated his opposition to the mall. He also had a store in Bakersfield and had seen a similar 1 1 1 1 1 1 City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 10 problem when JC Penney had moved out of the area and how.it affected the businesses in that area. -Don Andreason, 1316 Laurel Lane 412 and owner of Friedman's Microwave Ovens, stated that he was.from Visalia and had also seen a similar problem when ' Fashion Fair Mall was built and how it negatively affected their downtown. Dave:Cox, 270 Foothill Blvd., stated that he did not think that a mall would be a detriment. He cited a similar. situation using.the City of Chico as the analogy. That particular city showed how well a mall could enhance ,the downtown and it worked well there: Mayor'Billig'declared the public portion closed. Upon question by Councilwoman Dovey, Toby Ross stated that the developer had-met Finding 413 of the Zoning Regulations, Statements 2,..3 and 4 in particular on.page 65 of the Zoning:Regulations. Councilman Dunin questioned Condition 4148, he wanted to be sure that the lights for the parking lot would stay on for safety purposes. Condition 4119, he was concerned about the 25 year design standard for flood control and if it was sufficient. Toby-.Ross, Community Development Director, stated that it was consistent with the Flood Plan recently adopted by Council. Council then discussed the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed mall: Councilwoman Dovey stated that she still had concerns with traffic and circulation. . . . . Mayor:Billig agreed. After.brief discussion and-upon general consensus that the Environmental Impact Report. and Economic Study for the proposed San-Luis Mall was.ade- quate. Motion carried, Councilwoman Dovey voting no. Mayor Billig and Councilmembers Dovey and Griffin stated they still had concerns relative to mitigating various traffic and circulation problems. Councilman Griffin stated that he was very supportive of the downtown.. He renewed his.commitment -,to the downtown and Madonna Plaza to continue its viability, but felt the Council was.•limited as to what it could do to. continue'to make the downtown successful. He was prepared to participate in that effort. He was supportive of the General Plan amendment as proposed, the downtown is first in his heart, no abandonment of the downtown.was intended. He felt -urban sprawl and lack of commitment by councils in other cities caused those malls to cause the problems that were cited this evening. He did not feel this was the case in San Luis Obispo. The Council could not save the downtown but it could stay committed to it. The Strategic Plan outcome would not be prejudiced by this project. There was still a lot of work that this community must do and felt that they need to work together.. He would support the proposal as requested. Councilman Settle - stated that the downtown made the community economically viable--and he too felt it was.most important. The EIR in his opinion would only.advise.the City as to the problems, the.conditions for its.mitigation were those outlined.in the Planned Development. Traffic and circulation he felt could be mitigated; we must look at the- whole_picture including the economics of the City. He remembered that when Madonna Plaza was first proposed-it too met with -a.great. deal of oppositions but.has proved to be good for the, community, :. and: he- felt: as::long-,as::the. mall,was .looked at carefully -by the_CouncilAt: too would not :be hurting the downtown. Most important, he felt that-the applicant.had•worked well with staff and the property owner in a way not -to'augment.but rather keep both viable and working together. City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 11 Councilwoman Dovey was sorry all the,General Plan amendments were-in-one resolution because she had nothing against the other. land use changes;T'she just doesn't like malls. She was concerned about the downtown because she had seen a lot of them•go down. She agreed with some of the comments made this evening that perhaps the reasons were different. She felt the downtown could do a lot.of things to maintain their.viability, and she felt.ithe' city could do a lot to assist. She was concerned about the traffic situation and felt.there was nothing that would.mitigate it other than a.complete revamping of the circulation in .that area and the offramp at Madonna Road. She stated the main reason people want•a mall in San.-Luis Obispo is to capture the money people are spending elsewhere. This is.the same`.argument that was always used for every proposal for a shopping mall that she has ever seen. Overall, she felt she would have to vote -for the resolution because she didn't want to turn down all the others but wanted everyone to understand that she was against the amendment for a mall: She felt the land use decision at this point was too early and would like to wait for the strategic planning policies to come about and decide what..the.needs of the city really are and what will give us the financial independence that we're looking for and perhap "s.the mall will be part.of it. Councilman'Dunin stated there.are.no arguments that the.•land-use.of -this property is proper at this location. He felt the.loss of the prime agri- cultural land in that area and in the other areas in the valley are things the city should consider. 'Most of the concerns from the public were about the livelihood. He felt.the- responsibility to.maintain.the viability of the downtown should be a dual effort. First, the downtown should develop a program and project for what the downtown should be looking like down•the road 15 -20 years from now. The city could become a partner-and help the downtown. He stated the city has started a Strategic Planning Program which-probably would be a part of this projected-future. Instead of concentrating on an effort to prevent the competition, the emphasis should be in the direction of how can we compete and become more viable. The city's responsibility is to the community and despite the fact that-there was only one merchant that was supportive of the proposed mall, the community needs service in both areas of commerce and professional services. ,The council is striving-to see this community as a regional center.and• the whole commercial community would be integral part of the regional center, including downtown, University Square, the proposed mall and Madonna Plaza's existing mall. If the project is approved, the main concern of this,Council, the Architectural Review Board and staff should be developing a controlled end product, how this project will fit into the community, the neighborhood and into..commercial structure.of the existing commercial mix.: It was his hope that the developer - understood that his responsibility towards this community.is much greater than just .coming in to build the buildings and - taking the.profit.. In .developing the.mix! for the proposed shopping center, the developer•should.take into consideration the needs in the community and should not-duplicate-stores in the .downtown but bring non-existing-services and products: He supported the.rezoning and the General Plan-amendment and that the Land Use of this..area was proper as proposed.' Mayor Billig felt the Council was looking at the overall communityJand not just the special interests. She stated she has had a long -time cof3mittment to all of the existing retail areas in the city and their.viability:-. -She strongly supported and encouraged the retention of San Luis Obispo as the retail-hub of-the Community and County,..and felt:Council had worked very strongly in that regard and encouraged cooperation'between. city and the business community not achieved by other Councils. She reviewed the - property designation. She felt the city had long been concerned with this area being the-last large.piece of commercial- retail property in this community. The Land Use on this property is Commercial - Retail; PF and Residential. It would not be inconsistent with the city's philosophy-,to make the General Plan change which she would support as she felt the long -term goal for the property was for some kind of additional commercial - retail in the community. Timing and design were not the issue when talking about General Plan amendment changes. Council would be acting upon a designation of the General Plan Map to make it consistent with-what-the city has long talked about, additional commercial - retail space in the community. 1 1 City Council Minutes Tuesday, Ocotober 11, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 12 On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded-by-Councilman Dunin, the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 5229 (1983 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo amending the General Plan Land Use Element Text and Map for the various locations:as amended. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dunin, Dovey, Griffin and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: None 10:10 p.m. Mayor Billig declared a.recess. : . 10:25 p.m. City Council reconvened, all Councilmembers present. The Council then reviewed, page by page, the proposed ordinance with 51 conditions, making considerable changes to existing proposed conditions and adding an additional four (please see Exhibit 5 in the City Clerk's Office for individual word changes and additional language). Upon guestion.by Councilman Dunin, Bill Bird also gave his word and assurance of good faith to keep the stores different in the mall from the downtown so that they would not be competitive.. He also suggested that in response to Councilwoman Dovey's suggestion to the revamping of the Madonna Road offramp, that the City look at a possible redevelopment..- After brief discussion it was moved by Councilman Griffin, seconded by Councilman Settle, to refer the ordinance to staff to be revised and returned to the Council-at its earliest opportunity in November or December. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: tAYES: Councilmembers Griffin, Settle, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: • .None C O M M U N I C A T I O N S Council congratulated Councilman Settle on his upcoming appointment as President of the Channel Counties Division of League of-California Cities. 11:30.p.m. Mayor.Billig adjourned the - Council to Closed Session to discuss Personnel /Litigation matters. 12:05 a.m. City Council reconvened in-Open Session. After.brief discussion it was moved by Councilman Griff-in,•seconded by Councilman Settle, the following resolution.was introduced: Resolution No. 5230 (1983 Series), a resolution of the Council of.the City of San Luis Obipso adjusting the Assistant City Attorney's salary from $2400 /month to $2625 /month. „. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:.i - AYES: 1-Councilmembers-.Griffin,,--Settle', Dovey,-, Dunin- and Mayor-•Bill-ig- - NOES: .None ABSENT: None There being no further business to come before the fty Council, Mayor Billig adjourned the meeting at 12:10 a.m. APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 12/13/83 if - --------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --