Loading...
Minutes 2005-06-14 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TUESDAY, JUNE 14,2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor/Chair Ferrara called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Council: CounciVBoard Members Dickens, Guthrie, Arnold, Mayor Pro TemlVice Chair Costello, and Mayor/Chair Ferrara were present. City Staff Present: City Manager Adams, City Attorney Carmel, Director of Administrative Services/City Clerk Wetmore, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Spagnolo, Director of Financial Services Pillow, Director of Community Development Strong, and Associate Planner Heffernon. 3. FLAG SALUTE Charles Howell, Sr. Vice Commander and Aimee Clayton, President Auxiliary, representing Veterans of Foreign Wars 2829, led the Flag Salute. 4. INVOCATION Pastor Paul Jones delivered the invocation. 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 5.a. Honorary Proclamation Recognizing Leavitt Woodland for Attaining the Rank of Eagle Scout. Mayor Ferrara presented an Honorary Proclamation to Leavitt Woodland and congratulated him for attaining the rank of Eagle Scout. 6. AGENDA REVIEW 6.a. Resolutions and Ordinances Read in Title Only. Mayor Pro Tem Costello moved, Council Member Dickens 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 None. 8. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Pro Tem Costello requested that Item 8.c. (Consideration of Confirmation of Assessments, Tracts 1158 and 1769) be pulled for separate roll call vote as he has a conflict of interest due to ownership of real property. Mayor Pro Tem Costello moved, and Council Member Arnold seconded the motion to approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.n., with the exception of Item 8.c., with the recommended courses of action. City Attorney Carmel read the titles of the Ordinances in Items 8.1 and 8.g. The motion carried on the following roll-call vote: CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14,2005 PAGE 2 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Costello, Arnold, Dickens, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification. Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period May 16, 2005 through May 31 , 2005. 8.b. Consideration of Annual Adjustment of Development Impact Fees. Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3842 approving the annual adjustment to the City's Development Impact Fees. 8.d. Consideration of Approval of Minutes. Action: Approved the minutes of the Special City Council (Closed Session) Meetings of March 22, April 26, and May 10, 2005; the Regular City Council Meeting of May 10, 2005; and the Special City CounciVRedevelopment Agency Meeting of May 18, 2005 as submitted. 8.e. Request for Approval to Proceed with Purchase of Used Fire Apparatus. Action: Authorized the purchase of one used 1996 Hi-Tech fire engine; declared Arroyo Grande Engine 6695 surplus and authorized the City Manager to sell the engine upon commissioning of the Hi-Tech engine. 8.f. Consideration of Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Title 2 of the Municipal Code to Change the Regular Meeting Schedule of the Senior Advisory Commission. Action: Adopted Ordinance No. 566 amending Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 2.28.050.D. to allow the Senior Advisory Commission to meet quarterly rather than monthly. 8.g. Consideration of Adoption of Ordinance Repealing, Amending, and Adding Provisions to Titles 8, 9, 12 and 15 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. Action: Adopted Ordinance No. 567 repealing, amending, and adding provisions to Titles 8 (Health & Safety), 9 (Public Peace & Welfare), 12 (Streets, Sidewalks & Public Places), and 15 (Buildings and Construction) to provide internal consistency with current City policies and practices; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 3845 establishing fees for moving permit application and inspection fees as authorized by Municipal Code Chapter 15.12. 8.h. Consideration of a Cooperation Agreement Between the County of San Luis Obispo and the City of Arroyo Grande for Joint Participation In the Community Development Block Grant Program, the Home Investment Partnerships Program, the Emergency Shelter Grant Program, the American Dream Down Payment Initiative Program, and the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Program for Fiscal Years 2006 Through 2008. Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3846 approving the Cooperation Agreement. 8.1. Consideration to Authorize the Solicitation of Proposals for Environmental Services to be Provided in Conjunction with Creek Cleaning Work. Action: Authorized the solicitation of proposals for environmental services to be provided in conjunction with cleaning the major creeks within the City. 8.J. Consideration of an Agreement with Caltrans for the Positive Location of Underground Utilities. Action: 1) Adopted Resolution No. 3847 approving an agreement with Caltrans for the positive location of underground utilities; and 2) Authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreement. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 3 8.k. Consideration of Acceptance of the Reservoir No. 1 Replacement Project, PW 2003-07. Action: 1) Accepted the project improvements as constructed by Papich Construction Company in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Reservoir No. 1 Replacement Project; 2) Directed staff to file a Notice of Completion; and 3) Authorized release of retention thirty-five (35) days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded, if no liens have been filed. 8.1. Consideration of Change in Council Appointment to the San Luis Obispo County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). Action: Appointed Council Member Ed Arnold as the City's primary representative to the San Luis Obispo County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) and Mayor Pro Tem Joe Costello as the alternate representative. 8.m. Consideration to Approve the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Bids to Construct Phase 1 of the Weli No. 10 Project, PW 2004-07. Action: 1) Approved the plans and specifications for Phase 1 of the Well No. 10 Project; 2) Authorized the Public Works Department to solicit public construction bids; 3) Determined that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15306; and 4) Directed the Administrative Services Director to file a Notice of Exemption; and 5) Adopted Resolution No. 3848 accepting the easement for the well site. 8.n. Consideration of Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Bids for the Sewer Lift Station No.1 Upgrade, PW 2005-02. Action: 1) Approved the plans and specifications for the Sewer Lift Station No. 1 Upgrade, PW 2005-02; 2) Authorized the Public Works Department to solicit public construction bids; 3) Determined that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301(b); 4) Directed the Director of Administrative Services to file a Notice of Exemption; and 5) Adopted Resolution No. 3849 authorizing the Mayor to sign a Certificate of Acceptance for a Quitclaim Deed for conveyance of real property from the County to the City. 8.c. Consideration of Confirmation of Assessments. Recommended Action: 1) Adopt Resolution confirming landscaping assessments for all parcels within Tract 1158; and 2) Adopt Resolution confirming landscaping and lighting assessments for all parcels within Tract 1769. Council Member Dickens moved to approve staff's recommendation on Item 8.c., Council Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Dickens, Guthrie, Arnold, Ferrara None Costello (recused) 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.a. Consideration of Development Code Amendment Case No. 05-008, Tentative Parce~ Map Case No. 05-003 and Conditional Use Permit Case No. 04-009; Applicant - Gary White; Location -1400 West Branch Street. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 4 Director of Community Development Strong recommended that the Council continue the public hearing item to the Regular City Council meeting of July 12, 2005. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. No public comments were received and the Mayor closed the public hearing. Following Council discussion concerning summer vacation schedules and absences during upcoming meetings, Council Member Arnold moved to continue consideration of Development Code Amendment Case No. 05-00S, Tentative Parcel Map Case No. 05-003 and Conditional Use Permit Case No. 04-009; Applicant - Gary White; Location - 1400 West Branch Street to a date uncertain. Mayor Pro Tem Costello seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll- call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Costello, Dickens, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 9.b. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of the 2005 Water and Sewer Rate Study and Resolutions Establishing New Water and Sewer Rates, and New Lopez Contract Charges (SPAGNOLO) Director of Public Works Spagnolo introduced Clayton Tuckfield from Tuckfield & Associates who would be giving a presentation of the results of the water and sewer rate study. Clayton Tuckfield, Tuckfield & Associates, gave a presentation of the results of the water and sewer rate study which included overviews of the existing water system, water major capital improvements, water fund financial plan, comparison of water fund revenue with revenue requirements, proposed rates and example water bills based on the current rate structure, comparison of example water bills under existing rate structure with other communities, water conservation rates, impacts of conservation rate structure, example single family residence water bills under the conservation rate structure; and overviews of the existing wastewater system, wastewater major capital improvements, sewer fund financial plan, comparison of sewer revenue with revenue requirements, sewer rates under existing structure, example sewer bills under existing structure, comparison of example sewer bills under existing rate structure with other communities, sewer rates under conservation rate structure; and an overview of the Lopez fund, Lopez fund projected cash flow, and Lopez fund existing and future charges. Staff and Mr. Tuckfield responded to questions from Council regarding average single-family residence water consumption; clarification concerning the status of existing debt service for the Water fund; clarification regarding how projections for water usage were made for the purpose of determining revenue; whether there has been success in achieving conservation with tiered water rate structures in other local jurisdictions; whether rates will stabilize in FY 200S-09 once financing of substantial capital improvement projects is complete; and clarification of the capital improvement plan. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. No public comments were received and the Mayor closed the public hearing. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 5 Council Member Guthrie stated that he had seen a tiered rate structure work well in conservation efforts in Santa Barbara; however, the tiers were higher. He supported the tiered rate structure and commented that if it was successful in achieving water conservation, the City needed to be prepared to build those factors into the base rates. He stressed the .importance of an educational program regarding the need for water conservation. Council Member Dickens stated the proposed tiered rate structure is a good compromise; however, he was skeptical whether the tiered structure would provide the adequate incentives for conserving water. He agreed with Council Member Guthrie in that there probably should be greater separation between tiers; however, he would not support that for Arroyo Grande. He felt that it would be a penal system and he preferred an educational approach for water conservation. He favored moving forward with the tiered rate structure as proposed as it was not significantly different from our existing structure. He acknowledged the need for funding future capital projects. In addition, he supported staff's recommendation concerning the proposed Lopez contract charges. Council Member Arnold supported the tiered rate structure as proposed. He commented he did not have a lot of faith that this would result in a lot of water conservation; however, he acknowledged that it would raise more money which would allow development of more water sources to benefit the City in the long run. He suggested reviewing the tiered rate structure in one year to see the results and possibly adding a fifth tier which would be more punitive. Mayor Pro Tem Costello supported the tiered rate structure and stated it was an excellent start. He did not feel the rates should be punitive; however, he commented that as time progresses, there needs to be more awareness of water conservation efforts. He agreed with the suggestion to review the results in one year. He expressed concern over the proposed increases in the Lopez contract charges, and Director Spagnolo responded that those costs are a direct result of the completion of the Lopez Dam retrofit project as well as plans for the upcoming water treatment plant upgrade project. Mayor Pro Tem Costello emphasized that an educational process would be a key part of this process and encouraged staff to explore every opportunity to educate the community concerning water conservation. City Manager Adams commented that due to the City's new financial services software system, the new tiered rate structure would not be implemented until the new utility billing component is installed. He stated this was anticipated to occur by March 2006, and this would give the City more time to provide public education prior to any rate changes taking place. He also clarified that previously approved increases would still take effect; however, the tiered rate structure implementation would be delayed. Mayor Ferrara stated he was hesitant about a tiered rate structure because he saw it as a punitive measure. He commented that even if we are successful with conservation programs that result in a material reduction, then the City's revenue stream is negatively affected and people are ultimately penalized across the board for conserving water because they pay so little for using less water that it affects revenue stream that supports operational costs. He stated that he could support this proposal with the stipulation that the City monitor this program, determine whether or not this program has a material effect on consumption, and bring the issue back to the Council for review. He also spoke of the need for the Council to consider build OlJl population, as it relates to the City's infrastructure and water supply resources. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 6 Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ESTABLISHING WATER AND SEWER RATES AND CHARGES", and approving the tiered rate structure with yearly usage monitoring. Following discussion, the motion was amended to include that the tiered water rate schedule would be implemented as soon as feasible and a water conservation status report would be provided a year from the date of implementation. Council Member Guthrie seconded the amended motion. Following further discussion concerning monitoring and reporting, the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Costello, Ferrara None None Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF ARROYO GRANDE SETTING FORTH THE AMOUNT OF LOPEZ CONTRACT CHARGES". Council Member Dickens seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Dickens, Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara None None At 8:25 p.m. at the request of Council Member Dickens, the Council unanimously agreed to take a recess to allow time to review correspondence received at the beginning of the meeting relating to Item 9.c. Mayor Ferrara reconvened the meeting at 8:38 p.m. 9.c. Consideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-004 and Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-001; Applicant - DB & M Properties, LLC; Location - 415 East Branch Street. Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended the Council consider an Addendum to a certified Environmental Impact Report and a proposal for a commercial retail, office and residential project. The Planning Commission recommended the City Council deny the project as presented at the April 19, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. Associate Planner Heffernon noted that the applicant had since made changes to the project in accordance with Planning Commission and public comment. Staff responded to questions from Council. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing. Joe Boud, Joseph Boud & Associates, spoke on behalf of the applicant and gave a brief background presentation on the status and design of the project which has been in progress for the past five years. He stated that the proposed mixed-use project had been presented to the Council as a pre-application last year in order to better understand the City's goals and expectations for the site. He stated the project had been reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee, Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and Planning Commission and support letters had been provided by the Chamber of Commerce and Village Improvement Association. He explained that the project had been redesigned as a result of feedback received. He referred CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 7 to Conditions #79 and #94 and suggested a change to the requirement for full sidewalk improvements along Le Point Street; had agreed to the down slope driveways on Crown Terrace; commented that the barn had been retained; referred to Condition #6 which requires an open space agreement and a trail easement; commented that the applicant agreed to eliminate the gate between the residential and commercial components; stated that the driveway between the barn and Maude house had been eliminated; stated they had also agreed to return the project back to the Planning Commission and ARC and suggested that a condition for this be added; noted that a guard rail sample had been provided which would be reviewed by the Planning Commission and ARC; noted that a storm drain filter sample had been provided; and noted that a scale model of the project had been prepared. He commented that the creek cleanup and restoration comments made at Planning Commission would be managed through the mitigation-monitoring program as specified in the EIR, as well as compliance with the flood control ordinance. He stated that they agreed to modify the streetlights, which may require a change to Condition #72. He concluded by stating that almost every item the Planning Commission brought up was incorporated into the project with the exception of the loss of one residential unit. He stated the project complies with all development code standards; the commercial building was designed to compliment the Loomis building, and the bungalow style residential units were designed to compliment the Village. He stated he hoped this was a project the Council could support. Mr. Boud responded to questions from Council concerning circulation issues surrounding the project; the proposed height of the commercial building; the proposed trail easement, proposed fencing, and clarification concerning required setbacks. Earl Balaeman, Le Point Street, spoke in opposition to the proposed project and stated he had only heard about this project in January. He suggested involving the neighborhood earlier, at the beginning of the process. He expressed concerns regarding safety on Crown Terrace and Le Point Street due to increased traffic generated from the development, density of the proposed project, as well as ingress and egress from Crown Terrace. James Norbv, Le Point Street, opposed the design of the project and said it did not make sense to have 24 units exiting the development onto a dead-end street. He also said he heard the adjacent property owner would not grant an easement and that this should be required so a driveway could be used from E. Branch Street. Carol Fulmer, Le Point Street, asked that the project include a crosswalk where the sidewalks on Crown Terrace and Le Point already intersect near the proposed island. She expressed concern that the growth of this area has not yet been addressed and it was not fair to dump the traffic from a mixed-use project into a well-established urban area; agreed that the traffic should be put onto the commercial streets and not back into the neighborhood. Bill McCann, Crown Hill, began by stating that the proposed Creekside Center should eventually be approved in some form and, if done properly, it will be a fine addition to the City. However, he expressed concerns about traffic impacts on E. Branch Street at the corners of Crown Hill and Crown Terrace. He believed that a complete evaluation of the subject property, the Hayes property, and the Scolari property should be done to determine how best to handle all of the traffic within the boundaries of E. Branch Street, Crown Terrace, Le Point and Mason Streets. He spoke of previous traffic studies. He displayed photos (on file in the Administrative Services Department) showing vehicles at these locations during peak hour traffic. He stated he did not believe that even with the proposed driveway relocation and an added left turn lane, that it would be adequate to service the development. He also stated it was imperative that a reciprocal access agreement be obtained with the adjacent property owner to the west and stated that without this agreement, the size of the project should be reduced. He suggested if the project was reduced, to eliminate the upper residential units on Crown Terrace. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 8 Ann Balaeman, Le Point Street, referred to the letter she wrote to the Planning Commission which included 37 signatures of her neighbors opposing the scope of the project as it relates to traffic and safety impacts, and asked the Council to visit the site and walk the streets surrounding the project site. Barbara Freel, Le Point Street, referred to the proposed island along Crown Terrace and expressed concerns that it will be all concrete without any landscaping. She stated she was unhappy with the trees along Crown Terrace being removed and also expressed concern with lighting generated from the project and its impact to the residences. Camav Arad, owner of Chameleon Fabrics on E. Branch Street, rebutted some of Mr. Boud's comments regarding redesign of the project; that the barn was retained (the barn was sold); and stated that not all of the Planning Commission's suggestions were addressed, including design materials for the commercial building and creekside access. She referred to the roofline of the proposed commercial building and objected to the metal roof. She noted that the design of the commercial portion should be cute, charming, and character driven to attract shoppers. Steve Ross, Garden Street, commented that the project had gone through the ARC and was reviewed by people who were familiar with the Cityscape; believed that the project is outside the strictest area of architecture that would include the Village Core and is in the Village Mixed Use area as far as zoning. He said if the City intends to provide affordable workforce housing, projects like this within the core of the City is where it should be provided. He said he did not believe this project takes away from the rural feel of the City. He stated that the project should follow the City's guidelines. Jacklin Pontarelli, Le Point Street, said there is a unique opportunity in the Village to provide a project that will benefit the citizens, merchants, and visitors. She spoke of the need to include businesses that will attract visitors and that those businesses have adequate parking. Howard Mankins, Hillcrest Drive resident and owner of several businesses in the Village, stated he has lived here all his life and has watched the changes in the City. He said there is more to being for or against a project; what is good for the City is what counts. He commented on the water supply issue. He stated it was important for the Council to consider a project that brings in sales tax, offers some workforce housing, and stated that projects cannot economically assume all of the mistakes made around it. He noted that the Village Improvement Association supported this project and that this project would be good for the Village. He supported the proposed project. Grea Moore, Village business owner and member of the Village Improvement Association, spoke in support of the project. He pointed out the project is compatible with the area and is a nice addition to the Village, provides a live/work environment, and nQted that residents could walk to the Village for services. Richard DeBlauw, property owner/applicant, stated that retired people who are interested in the project have contacted him. He spoke in support of the project. Susan Flores, E. Branch Street, stated that she sees potential for this project; noted that the developer is a long time resident of the City; commented that Crown Hill needs to be opened up; and more sidewalks are needed for the kids. She supported the project as proposed. John Gutierrez, E. Branch Street, commented that traffic is already coming from other areas of the City to the Village and he disagreed that the neighborhood would be impacted by additional traffic. He supported the proposed project. Mike McConville, E. Branch Street, commented that backing out onto E. Branch Street is tough. He stated this was a good project and that he felt there was too much negativity surrounding the project. He suggested that sidewalks be installed on Crown Hill. He supported the project and encouraged the Council to provide the applicant with clear direction. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 9 Michael Bondello, McKinley, acknowledged that the City Council is very concerned with the details of the project as well as the neighborhood's concerns. He spoke about the existing traffic problems near Crown Hill and stated that this prOject will exacerbate the problem. Ann Balaeman, Le Point Street, noted that the addresses of those who spoke in favor of the project are not directly impacted and do not live in the immediate vicinity of the project. Joe Boud, applicant's representative, responded to public comments and spoke of the traffic studies that have been conducted and the level of service impacts. He also clarified that his reference to a redesign of the project was from the original 35,000 square foot shopping center to this proposed mixed-use project of 24 residential units and a 12,000 square foot commercial building. He encouraged approval of the project. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. Council Member Arnold stated one of his concerns was the access through the west side of the property. He stated he could not support the project until that access is granted. He addressed the circulation issue; referred to the trees on Crown Terrace and suggested a way to save them; expressed concern with regard to the scale of the commercial building; requested story poles on the site; and concluded by stating that most of the issues could be resolved and this could be a good project. He reiterated that access to the west side of the parcel is critical. Council Member Guthrie asked questions of the traffic engineer regarding Crown Hill and E.. Branch. Mr. Dan Dawson replied that detailed studies, traffic, and pedestrian counts were conducted during a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Council Member Guthrie stated that he believes commercial use generates more traffic than residential; that the proposed improvements will return Crown Terrace to a residential street; the addition of a sidewalk on the west side also improves the street to a residential nature; and the driveways would contribute more to a residential nature of Crown Terrace. He stated the net affect is an improvement to Crown TerracelLe Point. He expressed a concern about the creek setback/property line issue as it relates to the residential component. In terms of the commercial component, he acknowledged that there is a traffic problem at the intersection at certain times of the day; however, the overall effect at this intersection is not serious according to the City's policies. He shared concerns with the proposed scalelheight of the commercial building. He said the addition of a second entrance on E. Branch is important and would improve the traffic congestion at Crown Hill and E. Branch. He concluded by stating that he would need clarification on the creek setback to ensure that houses are not being built within the creek setback, and agreed that the project needs the access easement for a second entrance on E. Branch Street. He stated that with those two additions he could support the project as designed. Council Member Dickens stated he relies in part on observations and input from residents in the immediate area for traffic concerns. He reflected on the pre-application process which was review of a conceptual plan and an opportunity to provide input. He spoke about the focus and vision for the Village Core. He stated that he had preferred the original commercial project and did not support the large residential component as presented. He spoke about the site and said a project needs to capitalize on its assets, including creekside access, close proximity to the Village, and the historic features and buildings on the site. He objected to the size and scale of the three-story commercial building which dwarfs the existing barn; did not see adequate pedestrian access or pathways to the Village; and felt there were land use conflicts between the commercial and residential uses. He stated there was also a conflict between the residential and open space. He commented that historically, this parcel has had no access to Crown Terrace ~ CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 10 and that it needs to be widened and improved to City standards. He was not in favor of relinquishment of any easements along Le Point, and stated that future circulation and access issues need to be addressed. He noted that circulation within the development was imperative and that circulation must include access to the west. He suggested the applicant look at the assets this parcel provides, capitalize on those assets, and mitigate traffic circulation problems more effectively. Mayor Pro Tem Costello inquired how many trees were proposed to be removed. He expressed concern with the left turn pocket as proposed; the driveway as proposed on E. Branch Street conflicts with Crown Hill intersection; stated that access from the west side of the property needs to be in place first; supported the four way stop at Crown Terrace and Le Point; did not have a problem with the driveways backing out into the street; noted that lighting impacts are mitigated and should not create a nuisance for the residential neighborhood; suggested a one year review period on an interior gate; agreed that pedestrian circulation needed to be improved; supported the proposed density and noted that in order to preserve agricultural in the City, we need to look at other areas for development; requested clarification regarding the open space and potential impacts to the homes; clarification regarding the creek setback; and stated at this point he could not support the project. Mayor Ferrara asked staff to address the potential for phasing the project. Director Strong stated there was initially a recommendation to phase the project to defer the 12,000 square foot commercial building until the western access was obtained. He said the applicant has been in negotiations with the owner of the property located to the west. Mayor Ferrara noted that a considerable amount of progress had been made on this project. He acknowledged existing problems surrounding the site. He stated that size, scale and intensity of use are the most critical issues in the Village. He stated he was pleased that negotiations were underway to obtain access to the western portion of the site. He agreed the creek setback and open space issues need to be clarified. He expressed appreciation for the three dimensional model; did not support the proposed roofline of the commercial building; stated that the commercial building needs to blend in better with the barn; supported the concept of "less verticality, more horizontality" and stated it needed to be softened and/or flattened. He liked the idea of phasing of the project overall for circulation purposes and stressed the need for a manageable circulation segment. He had issues with the results of the traffic study based on his actual experience. He stated with additional modifications, the project would work. He commented that live/work units are not working in this area and supported the concept of small residential units, with proper landscaping. Council Member Arnold moved to continue to a date uncertain consideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-004 and Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-001; Applicant - DB & M Properties, LLC; Location - 415 East Branch Street. Council Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara Dickens None Mayor Ferrara requested, and the Council concurred, to move Agenda Item 10.a. up on the Agenda for consideration prior to Item 9.d. ---:JI CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 11 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS 10.a. Consideration of FY 2005-06lFY 2006-07 Bi-Annual Budget [CC/RDA). Director of Financial Services Pillow presented the staff report recommended the Council: 1) Adopt a Resolution approving the FY 2005-06lFY 2006-07 Bi-Annual Budget; and 2) Approve the proposed change to the City's Financial Policies. Mayor/Chair Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. John Dunn, Acting President/CEO of the Economic Vitality Corporation, thanked the City for its support over the years. He stated the EVC is the only County-wide organization devoted to improving the economic vitality of the County in the creation of jobs. He said EVC programs are designed to assist in the retention, expansion, and attraction of business and industry. He said during a recent Board retreat, discussions were held of the EVC's role and function of the services provided and how to better serve its constituencies. He will be following up with specific work programs, which will include working closer with the cities to better align their activities with the City's economic goals and objectives. No further public comments were received and Mayor/Chair Ferrara closed the public comment period. Mayor Pro TemlVice Chair Costello moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING FISCAL YEARS 2006-06 AND 2006-07 TWO-YEAR BUDGET AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE AMOUNT BUDGETED". CounciVBoard Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Costello, Guthrie, Dickens, Arnold, Ferrara None None 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.d. Consideration of Proposed Resolution Increasing Operating Fees by 5"10 in the Fire, Building, Community Development, and Engineering Departments. City Manager Adams presented the staff report and recommended the Council adopt a Resolution increasing operating fees in the specified departments by 5"10. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. No public comments were received and the Mayor closed the public hearing. Council discussion and comments included support in recapturing fully City costs from those who benefit from the services; support for the recommendation that a comprehensive operating fee study be conducted within the next two years; and overall support for the proposed 5"10 increase. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 12 Council Member Dickens moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING OPERATING FEES FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, ENGINEERING, BUILDING AND FIRE SERVICES". Mayor Pro Tem Costello seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: Dickens, Costello, Guthrie, Arnold, Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None 11. NEW BUSINESS None. 12. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS a) Request to place on a future agenda consideration of sidewalk improvements in the Nelson Green area. (FERRARA) Mayor Ferrara requested, and the Council concurred, to direct staff to place on a future agenda consideration of sidewalk improvements in the Nelson Green area. 13. CITY MANAGER ITEMS None. 14. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Council Member Dickens requested, and the City Council concurred, for staff to investigate whether construction of the East Village Plaza is in conflict with creek setback requirements. Council Member Arnold thanked the Parks, Recreation, and Facilities Department for the Father Daughter Date Night. He also commended Commander Steve Andrews regarding the Police Department's response and investigation to complaints regarding door-to-door solicitations and suggested the development of an ordinance to address inappropriate behavior by solicitors. Mayor Ferrara gave a status update on the County Board of Supervisor's unanimous support to delay for one year maintenance responsibility for Flood Zone 1/1A to the State Department of Water Resources. 15. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS None. 16. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Steve Ross, Garden Street, agreed with the Mayor on his philosophy regarding tiered water rates and their impact on conservation. 17. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Ferrara adjourned the meeting at 11:53 p.m. -. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 13 To"d~ ATTEST: l~~l,j iu[!\^- Kelly Wet ore City Clerk/Agency Secretary \ (Approved at CC Mtg '7 - ,).1...<' - 00 ) 40