HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/24/1985CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1985 - 7:00 P.M. PAGE 2
Councilman Dunin questioned the acreage number and felt that as it
included Reservoir Canyon and other areas that would not normally be used
for that purpose, it should not be considered.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open
Mike Mendes, 1045 Montalban, and president of the ASI Student Body,
reviewed his letter that he had submitted to the Council which was also
signed by Councilman Griffin explaining that since the review and
discussion with staff concerning this ordinance, they still felt that it
was overly restrictive. He submitted a draft ordinance that was similar
to that used by the City of Santa Barbara which would allow the Council to
adopt resolutions for individual parks to provide more flexibility to act
on a selective and specific basis rather than that proposed by the city
ordinance.
Mark Reichel, Rt. 2 Box 415, SLO, reviewed the meeting that was held with
himself, Mike and staff with regard to the ordinance. He felt that the
second reading was to allow opportunity to make changes. They had since
found another ordinance that they felt would be better for all concerned.
He also felt the proposed city ordinance would be negative insofar as the
tourist industry was concerned as San Luis Obispo County is well noted for
its wine country.
Russell Brown, Dean of Students, urged support of the proposal submitted
to Council by Mr. Mendez. He felt it demonstrated a willingness of the
students to work with the city and hoped that the Council would not
penalize all because of one incident that being Mitchell Park.
Upon question by Councilman Settle, Mr. Brown stated that no casual use of
alcohol was allowed at Cal Poly.
John Sweeney, 132 California Blvd., urged defeat of the proposed
' ordinance. He felt that the proposed wording submitted by the students
would be better.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed.
Geoff Grote, Assistant Administrative Officer, briefly reviewed the
discussions that had been held with Cal Poly representatives and felt
that: 1) the ordinance proposed by the students would transfer the
problem from one park to another; 2) that the proposed city ordinance was
within the guidelines set by the Park Element; and 3) the proposed
ordinance by the students would need additional criteria for its
establishment.
On motion of Councilwoman Dove y, seconded by Councilman Settle, to give
final passage to Ordinance No. 1042.
Councilman Griffin felt that at the last meeting it had been left open
that additional options and alternatives might be available. He had
become aware of the Santa Barbara ordinance from the Police Chief and
after discussion with Mr. Mendes, he found that there were still a
considerable number of negative comments made by the students for the one
under consideration. He felt that it is important to take a positive
approach and the substitute ordinance would give additional
flexibility.
Councilwoman Dovey stated that she was supportive of the ordinance at its
introduction, and she felt that it was more important to have the
ordinance written in stronger language and then later loosen restrictions
if it was deemed necessary. She was displeased about the process that had
been used after the staff report had been released.
Councilman Dunin stated he too had a problem with the procedure but for
different reasons. At the last meeting he had not felt there should be
any hurry and would have preferred there be an opportunity for revisions.
He felt that Mitchell Park had been the problem and felt the ordinance was
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1985 - 7:00 P.M. PAGE 3
a rippling effect. He felt the Council had already established a
precedent for taking care of individual parks by adopting the urgency
ordinance for Mitchell Park to begin with. The process would have been
more effective if time constraints hadn't been so great. He would,
therefore, support the alternative ordinance.
Councilman Settle was concerned about the liability issue. The university
does not allow drinking and there is no need for it in the parks either
for the same reasons. He too was afraid that the problem could be
transferred from one park to another under the newly proposed ordinance.
He felt that the current ordinance could be relaxed after reexamination.
He would be willing to try it for a trial period.
Mayor Billig suggested that f
however, she would be willing
changes if proved necessary.
Motion carried on a 3 -2 vote,
Upon general consensus, staff
January 1986 on activities in
inal passage be given to the ordinance,
to look at it again in 90 days and make
Councilmembers Dunin and Griffin voting no.
was directed to bring back status report in
parks relative to this ordinance (5 -0).
2. OFFICE DEVELOPMENT STUDY (ROSS - 431)
Status report and review of work program for office development study.
Toby Ross, Community Development Director, reviewed the agenda report
stating that the recommended action was to approve the work program and
authorize staff to proceed with hiring a consultant. He suggested that if
the Council wished to speed up the process, that a consultant be hired.
Staff would probably take 12 -13 months for completion of the study, which
was three -fold: 1) supply and demand, 2) urban design, and 3) housing
impacts. He also suggested that an interim measure could be required
during this time, utilizing a City Council development permit process. It
would not be a moratorium but would allow for additional scrutiny.
Mayor Billig asked for public comment.
Patrick Gerety, representing the Planning Commission, felt that the office
zone and neighborhood commercial zone are the most controversial. They
were particularly concerned about the supply and demand issue being
completed within six months and commented that one month had already been
lost. Personally he felt there were several conflicting policies the city
needed to clear prior to reviewing additional proposals. He would urge
that if an interim procedure regarding the possible use of a Council use
permit is approved, that the Planning Commission have an opportunity for
review.
Pierre Rademaker, representing the ARC, discussed the actions taken at the
last ARC meeting where they discussed the demise of the R -0 zone and the
reasons and the emphasis of how this had significantly changed Council's
directions.
Vic Montgomery, RRM, felt that there was entirely too much confusion and
lack of the definition of what the real problem was. He did not believe
that this would stop bad projects. He did not support a stop gap measure
as this interim ordinance would suggest. He would like to see staff
analyze the conflicting policies and have those amended. He would
recommend that the Planning Commission reevaluate those city policies and
resolve those issues first.
Michael Brady, AIA & Assoc., asked for clarification with regard to what
the interim regulations would entail.
Toby Ross, Community Development Director, stated that the interim
regulations would be on any business in excess of 5,000 sq. ft. with the
cutoff date of October 1. Development would still receive ARC and
Planning Commission review.
Mr. Brady would urge against the cutoff date of October 1 as he felt
several projects would be affected in mid - stream. Speaking as a BIA
member and Chairman of the Beautification Committee, he was also concerned
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1985 - 7:00 P.M. PAGE 4
that clarification be given to conflicting policies. He would support
ARC's recommendation of having more of an entitlement area for the
historical areas of the community. He would not support a stop -gap
measure at this time.
John French requested that in the review made for the supply and demand
study, that the school properties currently with mixed office space be
looked at carefully as they could skew the study if they were included.
Barry Williams, architect and local president of the AIA Association,
echoed the comments made by Mr. Montgomery and would also urge against the
adoption of an interim measure.
Aaron Corob, insurance salesman, also urged against the adoption of a
moratorium and asked that the Planning Commission be given discretionary
power.
Mayor Billig closed the public portion.
9:15 p.m. Mayor Billig declared a recess. 9:30 p.m. City Council
reconvened, all Councilmembers present.
Councilwoman Dove y stated she could support the supply and demand portion
of the study and would like to see the involvement of both ARC and
Planning Commission. She hoped this could be done as quickly as possible
including the use of a consultant if necessary. She would like some kind
of interim stop -gap measure, possibly using the use permit method.
Councilman Griffin felt that the work program component had his conceptual
support but he would like to look at Land Use policies in conflict. He
felt the Council may need to wait until after the results and analysis
were in before taking action. He would like to see staff resources, the
ARC and Planning Commission involved in the decisions of the LUE policies
including conflicting downtown policies. He felt there was a strong urban
design conflict and would like the Planning Commission to get some initial
input from the ARC. He could support an "S" designation on those
properties near the downtown office zone area under discussion but he
would not support any interim regulations to stop projects coming
forward. He would like the ARC to take on the urban design aspect. He
asked that the ARC and Planning Commission extend their review of the
Housing Element until some of the rest of this is in place. He felt that
the supply and demand component was an important one. This would provide
valuable information and would be willing to contract this out with the
use of a consultant.
Councilman Settle agreed that the Planning Commission should be utilized
in getting the policy language changed. The ARC should review the design
component. He could support the use of a consultant. He felt the Housing
Element should be reviewed by staff and Planning Commission. As far as
the mixed use is concerned, he would not want to add that to the study as
it would delay the process. He would like this to come back within six
months.
Councilman Dunin stated that he could conceptually support the program as
recommended. He too would like to see the policy language reviewed and
rewritten. He would prefer the R -0 approach and the LUE to allow greater
use of offices in the R zone. He would hope that retail use would not be
compromised in the downtown. He too would like to include as many outside
resources as possible, any of those individuals that might be affected by
these decisions. He felt the Housing Element was very closely connected
with the older downtown historical overlay. He could support the high
ratio conversion. The conversion of a one -to -one he did not feel was
right. He agreed with the comments by Mr. French that the school property
issue was important in the supply and demand study. He would like to
develop large offices in cul -de -sacs like the Pacific Street project. He
would not support an urgency measure.
On motion of Mayor Billig, seconded
the work program and authorize staff
for supply and demand study; 2) the
months. If necessary, staff to come
accomplish this; 3) ARC requested to
by Councilman Settle, to approve: 1)
to proceed with hiring a consultant
study to be completed within six
back for additional funding to
work with AIA on the urban design