Loading...
Minutes 2001-11-27 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2001 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 E. BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pro Tem Runels called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Council: Council Members Dickens, Ferrara, Lubin, and Mayor Pro Tem Runels were present. Mayor Lady was absent. City Staff Present: City Manager Adams; City Attorney Carmel; Director of Administrative Services Wetmore; Community Development Director Strong; Associate Planner Heffernon; Director of Public Works Spagnolo, and Consulting Engineer Campbell. 3. FLAG SALUTE Members of American Legion Post No. 136 led the Flag Salute. 4. INVOCATION Pastor Richard Harrison, TLC Christian Life Center, Arroyo Grande, delivered the invocation. 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None. 6. AGENDA REVIEW Mayor Pro Tem Runels announced that several City employees had recently lost close family members and expressed condolences on behalf of the City to Police Commander Steve Andrews, Police Department Executive Secretary Susan Lintner, Police Chief TerBorch, Public Works Office Assistant Glenda Murray, and Accounting Clerk Paula Willoughby. Mayor Pro Tem Runels also expressed condolences for the loss of a City employee, Senior Accounting Clerk Carol Anderson, on Saturday, November 24th. He asked for a moment of silence to honor those who passed away. 6.a. Resolutions and Ordinances Read in Title Only Council Member Ferrara moved, Council Member Lubin seconded, and the motion passed unanimously that all resolutions and ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read in title only and all further reading be waived. 7. CITIZENS' INPUT, COMMENTS. AND SUGGESTIONS Ben Davis, Arroyo Grande High School teacher, expressed serious concerns over the billboard located at the entrance to the Village and stated he would like to see it CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 2 removed. He suggested that if that weren't possible, he would like to see the City take over the advertising and convert it to a welcome sign, which would instill more pride in the Village. Mayor Pro Tem Runels asked the City Manager to respond to the concerns expressed. City Manager Adams replied that staff had been receiving various complaints and had been researching the issue. He explained that staff would be preparing an amended ordinance for the Council's review at a future meeting. B. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Ferrara requested that Item B.b. be pulled. Council Member Lubin moved and Council Member Dickens seconded the motion to approve Consent Agenda Items B.a. through B.e., with the exception of Item B.b., with the recommended courses of action: B.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification. Action: Approved the listings of cash disbursements for the period November 1, 2001 through November 15, 2001. B.c. Consideration of Acceptance of "Lot B" of Tract 550. Action: Adopted Resolution No. accepting an offer of dedication of Lot B of Tract 550, consisting of a strip of land one foot (1') wide. B.d. Cancellation of December 25, 2001 City Council Meeting. Action: Approved cancellation of December 25,2001 City Council meeting. B.e. Consideration of Employment Agreement: City Manager. Action: Approved employment agreement with City Manager. AYES: Lubin, Dickens, Ferrara, and Mayor Pro Tem Runels NOES: None ABSENT: Lady There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. B.b. Consideration of Approval of Minutes. Action: Approve minutes as submitted for the Special City Council Meeting of October 3, 2001. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara referred to page 11, paragraphs 5 and 6, of the October 3, 2001 minutes and asked for more clarification to be provided regarding his position opposing the conversion of the Vanderveen property from Agriculture to Residential. Following discussion, Council directed staff to review the audiotape, modify that portion of the minutes and continue the item for approval at the next regular meeting. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 3 9. PUBLIC HEARING None. 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS 10.a. Consideration of Route 227 Relinquishment. Director of Public Works Spagnolo presented the staff report. He explained that at the request of the Council, staff had investigated the possibility of removing the 227 Highway designation from East Branch Street in the Village. He stated the two options identified were relinquishment of the State route designation by legislative action and approval by the California Transportation Commission, and/or relocating the 227 designation to another roadway. He said staff had met with CalTrans, SLOCOG, the County, and Pismo Beach to identify and develop five alternatives which include options for relinquishing portions of Highway 227 within the City limits. Staff recommended the Council provide direction to staff with regard to the alternatives. Council Member Lubin referred to Alternative 4 - No Action, the last bullet point under "cons", which indicated that no private income producing business can operate within the State right-of-way (e.g., outdoor restaurant seating). He asked if the City had pursued any discussions with CafTrans concerning streetscape issues. Director Spagnolo stated Caltrans had brought up the issue, and stated one of the options included relinquishment of the sidewalks only. Council Member Dickens referred to annual reimbursements from Caltrans for maintainance and asked if the City would incur this as an ongoing cost if the City chose an alternative to assume responsibility for 227, in addition to the proposed road improvement costs over a 10-year period. Director Spagnolo responded that was correct; the City would incur the additional costs for maintenance of the traffic signals and for street sweeping costs. Council Member Ferrara recalled that former Council Member Tolley had raised this issue and asked Director Spagnolo if he remembered how this became an issue. Director Spagnolo responded that staff had been directed to conduct discussions with the businesses regarding complaints received with regard to issues relating to special events in the Village. Council Member Ferrara referred to Alternative 1A and asked questions with regard to eligibility of State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) funds if the City were to take control over 227. He asked if it would be continue to be eligible for STIP funding. Director Spagnolo replied that was correct. Discussion ensued with regard to placement of crosswalks near Paulding School, and fiscal impacts to the City if relinquishment of 227 occurred. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 4 Council Member Runels asked if there was a risk that the approved legislation allowing the relinquishment process would terminate if the City did not do anything at this point. Director Spagnolo stated it was his understanding there was no sunset clause on the legislation. Council Member Runels said if the City pursued the relinquishment and assumed complete responsibility, he would be concerned about the area near Corbett Canyon Road, Printz Road, and Tally Ho and the potential costs needed for a bridge there in the future. He expressed additional concerns about the City incurring additional costs and not having an alternate route. Mayor Pro Tem Runels opened up the item for public comment. James Worthly, SLOCOG staff representative, stated that SLOCOG would support whatever decision the City made and would assist the City through the process. He commented that the costs of rehab in the five and ten year cycles should not be an overriding consideration. He explained that Caltrans uses SHOPP funds for maintenance and if control shifted to the City, the route would compete very well in the competitive process for STIP or other regional funds. He spoke further about potential funding for streetscape projects. Council Member Ferrara asked for further clarification about the streetscape funding. Mr. Worthly explained that Caltrans would not allow streetscape funding under their guidelines. Dan Herron, Caltrans, stated they had been working with staff on the streetscape idea. He stated that their concerns were providing a safe street through the City as well as providing for the safety of pedestrian crossing. He indicated that there were issues at Caltrans with balancing community needs with a standardized process for the whole State. He stated that there were ways to get non-standard function reviewed and approved and referred to Highway 1 in Guadalupe where a design exception had been approved. Julie Gonzalez, Arroyo Grande Meat Company, read and submitted a letter for the record expressing concerns associated with relinquishment of Highway 227. She stated there was no issue with relinquishment of the sidewalks; however, expressed concerns with potential street closures on Highway 227 and the associated impacts to their business should the City assume control of 227. She opposed any proposal to close Short Street as it would limit truck deliveries and would force deliveries to unload from 227. Mike McConville, 529 E. Branch Street, asked how the funding cycles worked. He spoke in favor of relinquishment in order to obtain local control of the highway. - __.__._nO.____w_ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 5 John Keen, 298 N. Elm, commented that as traffic increases without an alternate route, he would be concerned that if the City did not have control, there would be a loss of parking on Branch Street which would be disastrous for the Village. He commented that personally, he was opposed to the relinquishment. Mike McConville asked if the State was pursuing an alternate route. Dan Herron responded no. Chuck Fellows, 507 Le Point Street, stated he did not get a sense that the Council had enough information on the benefits of relinquishment. He suggested tabling the issue until the Council was sure of the benefits. He commented that he appreciated being able to speak on the item. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Pro Tem Runels brought the issue back to the Council for consideration. Council Member Dickens stated it was important to work with regional agencies like SLOCOG and Caltrans, and commented that cooperative efforts have improved. He stated there was a need to be sure of the benefits of total relinquishment of 227. He expressed concern about the fiscal impact to the City; and addressed the issue of increased traffic through the Village. He supported recommending Alternative 4 - No Action and encouraged the City to continue working with Caltrans on streetscape plans. Council Member Ferrara favored Alternative 1 B - Partial Relinquishment to achieve some control of the sidewalks. He said his reason was focused primarily on fiscal issues. He stated if a portion of money was available for sidewalk improvements, partial relinquishment of the sidewalks would give the City better control of how the money is spent on the sidewalks and an influence in terms of how to further enhance businesses throughout the Village. In response to Ms. Gonzalez's letter, he stated he was not supportive of closing Short Street. Council Member Lubin stated that ongoing cost was a significant issue and a big impact to the City. He said to do nothing causes no harm at this point and encouraged continued discussion of streetscape plans. He stated he was impressed with the level of cooperation with Caltrans, particularly with respect to the streetscape plan. He supported Alternative 4 - No Action. There was further Council and staff discussion regarding SLOCOG funding cycles and eligibility for regional projects. Mayor Pro Tem Runels supported Alternative 4 - No Action until an alternate route was designated. Council Member Lubin moved to approve Alternative 4 - No Action on the relinquishment of Highway 227 and further directed staff to come back to the Council if CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 6 there was any interruption of the regional funds. Council Member Dickens seconded the motion, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit: AYES: Lubin, Dickens, Ferrara, and Mayor Pro Tem Runels NOES: None ABSENT: Lady There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 11. NEW BUSINESS 11.a. Consideration of Architectural Review of Building "L" of the Five Cities Center, Phase II. Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report. She explained that the Council had previously approved amendments to the original Five Cities Conditional Use Permit with a condition that the architectural elevations for Buildings L & M be reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee, Planning Commission, and City Council. She stated that Building "L" would be 4,0000 square feet in size and would be occupied by a local financial institution; the maximum height of the building would be 26.5 feet; and the exterior colors and materials were selected to match the other buildings of the Five Cities Center. The Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the architectural elevations for Building "L". Council Member Lubin asked for clarification that the proposed building would match the existing building. Associate Planner Heffernon replied it would. Council Member Ferrara referred to Attachment 3 and asked questions with regard to parking requirements for retail versus office. Staff explained that there was not a significant difference with regard to the parking space allocation between the two uses. Council Member Ferrara asked if staff knew how many employees would be located in this building. Staff responded no and referred the question to the project's representative. Grant Harris, representing the developer, responded he did not know how many employees there would be but that he could get the information to staff within a day. Council Member Lubin noted that the firm currently had approximately eight employees in their existing location. Mayor Pro Tem Runels noted that the use had changed from restaurant to commercial retail and that this potential tenant would not generate revenue for the City. He commented that the original intent of the Center was to generate sales tax for the City. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 7 Council Member Ferrara moved to approve Architectural Review Case No. 01-011 for Building "L" of the Five Cities Center. Council Member Lubin seconded the motion, and the motion passed unanimously by voice vote (Mayor Lady was absent). 11.b. Consideration of Telecommunication Siting Guidelines and Submittal Requirements. Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report. She explained that following a joint Architectural Review Committee and Planning Commission workshop to educate staff, the ARC, and Planning Commission on the needs of the wireless communication industry and to discuss potential design standards for siting these types of facilities, staff prepared draft Guidelines for the Council's review and consideration. The Planning Commission recommended that Council review the Guidelines, make any necessary changes, and adopt a Resolution approving the proposed Siting Guidelines and Submittal Requirements for Telecommunication faciltities. Council Member Lubin stated there appeared to be a conflict between the Planning Commission request and the proposed language concerning ridgelines. He referred to #2 under General Guidelines that states no facility shall be installed on an exposed ridgeline or prominent slope, when alternative sites are available. He did not support the clause "when altemative sites are available". Associate Planner Heffernon clarified the Planning Commission discussion regarding ridgelines and explained that the proposed language reflected the need for some flexibility. Council Member Lubin stated that throughout the Guidelines, there is reference to screening equipment from public view. He expressed concern with how equipment could be placed on a ridgeline and not be seen. Council Member Ferrara referred to the word "Guidelines" in the title of the document and stated that the document reads more like a policy which has mandated requirements. He suggested that the requirements become City policy instead of calling them guidelines. Staff explained that it was not created as an ordinance in order to allow some flexibility. Director Strong explained that the document would be used as a communication tool to guide the applicants by providing certain requirements and standards and for use by the Commissions to determine whether the project complies. There was further discussion regarding the intent of the document. Council Member Dickens commented that he was pleased to have a tool to provide the industry. He agreed with Council Member Ferrara's comments about making it a policy document and striking the word "Guidelines". He had no issue with the content and said the document was very comprehensive. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 8 Mayor Pro Tern Runels opened up the discussion for public comment. John Keen, 298 N. Elm, commented that the proposed document allows control of these facilities within the City. He expressed concerns regarding the ridgeline issue and gave a recap of the discussion held at the workshop. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Pro Tern Runels brought the issue back to Council for consideration. Council Member Lubin referred to #2 under General Guidelines and suggested that the wording be modified as follows: "No facility shall be installed on the top of an exposed ridgeline or prominent slope. when alternative sites am a'lailable. " Following further discussion, Council Member Ferrara moved to approve staff's recommendations for approving Siting and Submittal Requirements for Telecommunications Facilities, with the following modifications: On Page 2, insert the statement that Monopoles shall not be constructed on top of ridgelines; Strike the word "Guidelines" from the title of the document so that it reads "Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements"; Change Heading I. to read "Siting Requirements"; Change LA. to read "General Requirements"; Change LB. to read "Requirements for Building Mounted Antennas"; Change I.C. to read "Requirements for Monopoles and Towers". He further moved to adopt a Resolution adopting Telecommunication Siting and Submittal Requirements as amended to delete all references to the word "Guidelines" and replace it with the word "Requirements". Council Member Lubin seconded the motion, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit: AYES: Ferrara, Lubin, Dickens, and Mayor Pro Tern Runels NOES: None ABSENT: Lady There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 11.c. Consideration of Introduction of Ordinance Adopting the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. Director of Administrative Services Wetmore presented the staff report. She explained this was the last step in the comprehensive update of the City's Municipal Code. She stated that the recodification and republication of the Code, which was approved and funded in the Fiscal Year 2000-01 Budget, has resulted in a state of the art document which reorganizes the ordinances by subject, includes detailed ordinance history notes, has a revised, expandable numbering system, and a new comprehensive index for quick and easy access to the City's current legislation. Staff recommended the Council introduce the proposed Ordinance for first reading. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 9 Council Member Ferrara asked if an errata sheet had been issued to indicate what was amended in the Code. Director Wetmore explained that the recodification project involved a reorganization of the Code and that no substantive changes had been made to the Code. She stated that any changes to the Code were handled by Council action and approval of previous ordinances. Council Member Ferrara stated he had read through some provisions of the Code, one of which was the appeals procedure and process and the other relating to the duties and responsibilities of the Community Development Director. He asked if this was the time to amend the provisions of the Code. City Attorney Carmel responded that this item was simply a recodification of the old Code and that revisions to various provisions in the Code would take place over the next year in order to update current processes and procedures. City Manager Adams confirmed that staff would be initiating a process of reviewing the Code chapter by chapter to identify provisions that are outdated or no longer relevant. stated he was pleased the Code was going to be on the Internet and asked if it was already on the website. Director Wetmore responded that once the updated Code was formally adopted, steps would be taken to get it placed on the City's website. Council Member Lubin moved to introduce an Ordinance adopting the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. Council Member Ferrara seconded the motion, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit: AYES: Lubin, Ferrara, Dickens, and Mayor Pro Tem Runels NOES: None ABSENT: Lady There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS a. MAYOR MICHAEL LADY (Mayor Lady was absent) (1 ) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD). No report. (2) Other. None. b. MAYOR PRO TEM THOMAS A. RUNELS (1 ) Zone 3 Advisory Board. 1) Received preview of the Preliminary Budget for the upcoming year; and 2) In the process of upgrading the water treatment plant to meet new standards. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 10 (2) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). Received report from Christine Mullholland on her tour of the Los Angeles Aqueduct. (3) Other. None. c. COUNCIL MEMBER JIM DICKENS (1) Community Recreation Center Subcommittee. Next two meetings canceled. Next meeting in January 2002. Met with City Manager and Director of Parks, Recreation, and Facilities to work on strategy to approach other agencies requesting support for the proposed project. (2) Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC). Met November 15th; carnival fundraiser held in San Luis Obispo was not as successful as hoped. (3) South County Youth Coalition. No report. (4) Other. Attended SLOCOG meeting as Alternate. City Manager Adams also attended the meeting and gave a brief overview regarding discussion held on Regional Housing Needs Assessment. d. COUNCIL MEMBER TONY M. FERRARA (1) Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA). Reported on a new campaign called "Pepsi Send It Back", for recycling plastic liter bottles; Reported that the City of Paso Robles may be joining the IWMA. (2) Air Pollution Control District (APCD). Approved an energy efficient photo-voltaic; Continuing to work on recruitment process for a new APCO. (3) San Luis Obispo Council of Governments/San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA). Report given previously by City Manager. (4) Other. None. e. COUNCIL MEMBER SANDY LUBIN (1 ) South County Area Transit (SCAT). No report. Next meeting in December. (2) Economic Vitality Corporation. Meets tomorrow. The Executive Committee met and the Transition Team has determined that the EVC will not be shut down. Qualifications for the new Director are to be determined so recruitment process can begin in January. (3) Other. None. 13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS None. 14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS None. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 27, 2001 PAGE 11 15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Council Member Dickens stated he would be attending the Annual League of California Cities Conference. Council Member Lubin said he would not be attending so he could not serve as the Alternate Voting Delegate. It was determined that Council Member Dickens would serve as the Alternate Voting Delegate. Mayor Pro Tem Runels reported that a video of the Lopez Dam Remediation Project would be created to use for public relations purposes. 16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS None. 17. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pro Tem Runels adjourned the meeting at 9:18 p.m. in honor and memory of Carol Anders " -" ATTEST: s.lluoJV- re, Director of Administrative Services! Deputy City Clerk