Loading...
Minutes 2006-04-25 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Ferrara called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Council: City Staff Present: Council Members Jim Dickens, Joe Costello, Ed Arnold, Mayor Pro Tem Jim Guthrie, and Mayor Tony Ferrara were present. City Manager Steve Adams, City Attorney Tim Carmel, Director of Administrative Services/City Clerk Kelly Wetmore, Director of Financial Services Angela Kraetsch, Chief of Police Tony Aeilts, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities Dan Hemandez, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Don Spagnolo, and Director of Community Development Rob Strong. 3. FLAG SALUTE Jim Mitten, representing Knights of Columbus, led the Flag Salute. 4. INVOCATION Retired Pastor Paul Jones delivered the invocation. 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 5.a. Honorary Proclamation Recognizing "Arbor Day" - April 28, 2006. Mayor Ferrara presented an Honorary Proclamation recognizing April 28, 2006 as Arbor Day. Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities Hernandez accepted the Proclamation and invited the Council and public to Arbor Day festivities to be held at Elm Street Park on Friday, April 28'h. He also announced that on Saturday, April 29'h, the first phase of the Traffic Way Tree Master Plan would be implemented with the planting of 10 trees along Traffic Way. 5.b. Presentation of Tourism Business Improvement District Briefing by San Luis Obispo County Visitors and Conference Bureau. Jonni Biaggini, representing San Luis Obispo County Visitors and Conference Bureau, gave a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Administrative Service Departrnent) regarding the need for a Tourism Business Improvement District in San Luis Obispo County. Prior to consideration of the next Agenda item, Mayor Ferrara announced that John B. Loomis recently passed away. He acknowledged Mr. Loomis' contributions to the community and expressed condolences to the Loomis family on behalf of the City and requested a moment of silence in honor of Mr. Loomis' memory. He also indicated that the rneeting would be adjourned in his honor. Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Page 2 6. AGENDA REVIEW 6.a. Ordinances Read in Title Only Council Member Costello moved, Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion passed unanimously that all 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 Ferrara invited any member of the public who wished to comment on any Consent Agenda item to do so at this time. Mike Liebo, Destination Imagination Coordinator, referred to Item 8.e. and introduced a group of students from the Ocean View Elementary and Judkins Middle School Global Competition teams, who each gave brief overviews of their experiences during their recent competition at the State finals. They expressed that they are looking forward to going to the World Finals in Tennessee in May. Council Member Dickens requested that Item 8.i. (Consideration of Agreement for Contractor Services with SP Maintenance to Provide Street Sweeping Services) be pulled. In response to the supplemental information distributed to the Council (on file in the Administrative Services Department), staff recommended the Council approve an amendment in Section XI (Insurance Requirements) of the proposed Agreement to set the minimum limits of required insurance at $1,000,000. Council Member Arnold moved, and Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie seconded the motion to approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.i., with the recommended courses of action. The motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Costello, Ferrara None None 8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification. Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period April 1, 2006 through April 15, 2006. 8.b. Statement of Investment Deposits. Action: Received and filed the report of current investment deposits as of March 31, 2006. 8.c. Consideration of Resolution Increasing Operating Fees Based on Changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3913 increasing operating fees by the January 2006 CPI increase of 5.4%. a.d. Consideration of Approval of Minutes. Action: Approved the minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings of March 14, 2006 and the Special and Regular City Council Meetings of March 28, 2006 as submitted. Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Page 3 B.e. Consideration of Funding Request from Destination Imagination. Recommended Action: Appropriated $1.000 for a contribution to the Ocean View Elementary and Judkins Middle School Destination Imagination Global Competition teams. B.f. Consideration of Disposal of Surplus Bicycles. Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3914 declaring bicycles as surplus for donation to the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Office to be refurbished and donated to needy children. B.g. Consideration to Approve Final Tract Map 2310 - Phase II; Subdividing B.2 Acres into Fifty-Two (52) Residential Parcels, One (1) Park Parcel, and One (1) Drainage Basin Parcel, and to Approve Related Easement Agreements with S&S Homes and the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District. Action: Approved Final Tract Map 2310 and adopted Resolution No. 3916 conditionally approving Easement Agreements for Storm Drain and Sanitary Sewer Purposes with the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District and S&S Homes for Tract 2310. B.h. Consideration of a Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans for Development of the Brisco Road-Halcyon Road/Route 101 Interchange Project through Project Approval and Environmental Determination (PA&ED). Action: 1) Adopted Resolution No.3915 approving Cooperative Agreement #05-CA-0140 between the City of Arroyo Grande and the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for development of the Brisco Road-Halcyon Road/Route 101 Interchange project through Project Approval and Environmental Determination (PA&ED); and 2) Authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement. B.i. Consideration of Agreement for Contractor Services with SP Maintenance to Provide Street Sweeping Services. Action: 1) Approved a two-year agreement, as amended, with a provision for three one year extensions, with SP Maintenance, for street sweeping services; and 2) Authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreement for Contractor Services. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.a. Consideration of Ordinance Establishing Regulations for Peddling and Soliciting Activities. City Attorney Carmel presented the staff report and recommended .the Council introduce an Ordinance adding Chapter 5.76 to the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code establishing regulations for peddling and soliciting activities. In response to questions by Council, City Attorney Carmel clarified that all non-profit, non-commercial organizations that have legal non-exempt status are exempt from the ordinance and do not require a permit; and clarifications regarding how the provisions regarding the solicitation permit can be enforced. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. Tony Peret, representing Keller Williams Realty-Central Coast, expressed concerns regarding the impact of the ordinance on their Annual Food Drive in which food is collected from residences for the Food Bank and asked if the ordinance would prohibit or restrict this activity. City Attorney Carmel explained that there is some discretion involved in enforcement and under those circumstances, it appeared that the activity may fall under a non-profit exemption or on behalf of a non-profit agency as a representative of the Food Bank. Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Page 4 Michael VanBellinQan, realtor, expressed concerns regarding the effect of the ordinance on small businesses who go door to door as well as the costs to the City for enforcement. He noted that a Do Not Solicit sign that is posted at residences is the most effective way to restrict door to door soliciting. Steve Ross, Garden Street, expressed concerns regarding the effect the ordinance will have on political campaigning. City Attorney Carmel explained that political speech is exempt as a First Amendment right and does not fall under the definition of peddling which involves the sale of goods or services. He then reviewed the definition of "solicitor". Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. Council and staff discussion ensued regarding support for the ordinance; that it does not restrict anyone from doing business if a permit is obtained; that the provisions of the Do Not Solicit Registry provide privacy protection for residents who do not want to receive solicitors; the ordinance does not infringe on First Amendment rights; the availability of the Do Not Solicit Registry will save time for those who are soliciting; and that concerns expressed about solicitation activities were generated from complaints received from neighborhoods in the community. Council Member Arnold moved to introduce an Ordinance by title only for first reading as follows, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADDING CHAPTER 5.76 TO THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR PEDDLING AND SOLICITING ACTIVITIES". Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Dickens, Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 9.b. Consideration of Appeal of the Planning Commission's Interpretation and Denial of Viewshed Review Case No. 05-021; 1238 Montego Street. Director of Community Development Strong presented the staff report and stated the Planning Commission recommended the Council adopt a Resolution denying the appeal and denying Viewshed Review 05-021. Staff responded to questions from Council regarding the original project design versus the revised project design as it relates to building height and number of stories. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. Mark Vasquez, architect representing the applicant, gave a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Administrative Services Department), which included an elevation rendering of the proposed project, and noted that the issue at question is whether the project is a one or two-story residence. He described the original project as a two-story residence with a subterranean garage and the revised design as a single story residence; displayed an aerial photo of the existing neighborhood; displayed photos of one-story homes located at 1226, 1234, and 1238 Montego Street; displayed photos of one-story homes with basements located at 1214,1218,1230,1242, Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Page 5 and 1246 Montego Street; displayed photos of two-story homes located at 1202, 1206, 1222, and 1250 Montego Street; reviewed the design considerations in the proposed project design; and discussed Design Overlays throughout the City. He then responded to questions from Council regarding building height from highest point of the lot; design as it relates to viewshed issues; square footage of living space; determining definition of story versus basement; status of compromise discussions regarding the project design; and clarifications regarding ceiling height and roof pitch. Rav Bierinq, representing Howard Mankins, gave a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Administrative Services Department), spoke in support of staff's recommendation; referred to previous written comments submitted regarding the project; and expressed concern regarding two issues: 1) Is the proposed development subject to the viewshed ordinance (Yes), and 2) Is the proposed developrnent consistent with the three required findings (No). He discussed the definition of "basement" as meaning any area of the building having its floor subgrade, i.e., below ground level on all sides, and explained his interpretation of the definition as it relates to the project. He displayed a rendering of the proposed project and noted it appeared to be a two-story house consisting of a first story with a garage and various other living area including a workshop, a game room, and other large undisclosed living area. He said.he believes the proposed project is inconsistent with the findings because it is not consistent with the established scale and character of the neighborhood and will unreasonably and unnecessarily affect views of surrounding properties. Jim Garinq, engineer representing Howard Mankins, stated he was asked to look into the impact of this proposed structure on his viewshed. He stated the height of the existing roof was measured and then compared it to the planned height of the proposed building. He stated that the new building roof is going to go up 5.2 feet from the existing roof. He acknowledged that in terms of compromise, there were three things that could be. done to lower the impacts to the Mankins viewshed: 1) lower the garage down to a minimum reasonable grade; 2) lower the plate height down to 8 ft.; and 3) lower roof pitch from 4:12 down to 3:12. He noted the net result would be no height increase to the house or impact on views to the Mankins. He displayed before and after photos taken from the Mankins' residence of the existing Harmon residence compared to depictions of the proposed residence as it relates to resulting view impacts. Howard Mankins, Hillcrest Drive, read a prepared statement into the record (on file in the Administrative Service Department) expressing concerns regarding the proposed project's impact on his viewshed and requested the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the project as proposed. . Richard Duffin, Newport Avenue, spoke in opposition to the proposed project and expressed concerns about setting a precedent if the project is approved. Larry Harlan, Hillcrest Drive, spoke in opposition to the proposed project; stated the proposed project does not conforrn to applicable codes and ordinances; disagreed that the project is exempt from CEQA; the capacity of the proposed structure exceeds the capacity of the existing structure by 75%; examined the definition of "basement"; the viewshed process must apply; spoke of the intent of the City to develop D-Overlays for the north side of Montego Street; and that the establishment of precedence should be applicable. He requested the Council determine the project is not categorically exempt from CEQA; determine that the garage and adjacent living space do not meet the definitions of a basement as defined by the Municipal Code; propose and adopt an urgency ordinance that requires a viewshed review process for any replacement or reconstruction that exceeds the current height of the existing structure until such time that the City can adopt the D-Overlays; affirm the action of the Planning Commission; and not lose sight of the intent and spirit of the Municipal Code. Joseph Beckham, Hillcrest Drive, expressed concern with the proposed project's viewshed impacts. Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Page 6 Wendy Beckham, Hillcrest Drive, expressed concern that lower Montego Street has more restrictions than the north side of Montego Street, and further expressed concern about the establishment of precedence if the proposed project is approved. Diane Feraqe, niece of Mr. Mankins, spoke in opposition to the proposed project due to viewshed impacts. Stacv Harmon, appellant, referred to the first design of the proposed project, noted he approached Mr. Mankins to review his plans and he had refused, making it clear he wanted to preserve views from all parts of his property. He stated he redesigned the project to preserve as much as possible; a compromise was attempted, but was unsuccessful. He stated that his current plans demonstrate compromise and noted that future plans for a D-Overlay will protect the other homes. Albert Epstein, Woodland Drive, noted the rural character of the City has always been a priority in the City. Carrie Randolph, Sierra Drive, spoke in opposition to the proposed project and stated that the viewshed needs to be protected. Karen Phillips, Sierra Drive, spoke in opposition to the proposed project. Mark Vasquez, architect, responded to comments made" regarding issues related to undisclosed living space, suggestions to mitigate impacts to the view, retaining walls, character of the neighborhood, and the D-Overlay. Jim Schiller, Montego Street, said viewshed review should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Tom Parsons, Montego Street, urged the Council to preserve the views and protect property values. Scott Adams, Montego Street, stated he would lose some of his viewshed; however, he supported the proposed project. Stacy Harmon, appellant, responded to public comments and clarified the intention of his previous comments. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. Council comments and discussion ensued regarding whether viewshed review applies to the proposed project; the definitions of "basement" and "story" pursuant to the City's Municipal Code versus the Uniform Building Code; impact of interpretations and findings on future projects as it relates to establishment of precedent; what is reasonable as it relates to viewshed impacts; acknowledgement that the City is currently studying the viewshed review process and expanding D-Overlays for residential areas in the City; the need to put some form of a policy in place which will provide cri(eria to be used on a case-by-case basis; and acknowledgement of the applicant's efforts to redesign the project. Further discussion ensued with regard to the potential actions the Council could take to make a determination that the viewshed review process applies to the project and then take action on . the viewshed appeal; to continue the viewshed review, or both. Council requested that if the item was continued, to direct staff to provide clarification regarding the findings for viewshed reviews and related definitional issues. Council Member Costello moved to continue the item to the Regular City Council meeting of June 13, 2006. Council Member Arnold seconded the motion, and on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: Costello, Arnold, Dickens, Guthrie, Ferrara None Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Page 7 ABSENT: None Mayor Ferrara called for a break at 11:00 p.m. The Council reconvened at 11:10 p.m. 9.c. Consideration to Amend the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code to Permit Service and Consumption of Alcohol at the Village Green for Special Events Upon Issuance of an Alcohol Beverage Service and Consumption Permit by Chief of Police. Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities Hernandez presented the staff report and recommended the Council approve the Parks and Recreation Commission's recommendation that the Municipal Code not be amended to permit service and consumption of alcohol at the Village Green for special events. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing, and when no one came forward, he closed the public hearing. Council comments and discussion ensued regarding the nature and intent of the Village Green as a neighborhood park; concerns about potential impacts to the surrounding neighborhood; that consumption of alcohol is not allowed in any other City parks; that there are other areas and facilities within the City that allow consumption of alcohol at special events upon obtaining a permit; and concern about potential enforcement issues. Other comments included the suggestion of a policy that allows the use of alcohol at the Village Green if limited to wine for no more than a limited number of fund raising events per year as an opportunity to meet certain objectives in the City's Economic Development Element of the General Plan. Council Member Costello moved to approve the Parks and Recreation Commission's recommendation that the Municipal Code not be amended to permit service and consumption of alcohol at the Village Green for special events. Council Member Dickens seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Costello, Dickens, Arnold, Ferrara Guthrie None 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS None. 11. NEW BUSINESS None. 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS a. MAYOR TONY M. FERRARA: (1) San Luis Obispo Council of Governments/San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLOCOG/SLORT A). Approved expanded transit service to include Sundays; started pilot route to serve Nipomo/Mesa area; providing evening service on certain routes to meet unmet transit needs. (2) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD). Routine items discussed; plant continues to operate well. Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Page 8 (3) Other. Attended League of California Cities Channel Counties Division Business Meeting and CITIPAC fundraiser. Reported that 18 of 25 member cities were represented at the meeting. b. MAYOR PRO TEM JIM GUTHRIE: (1) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC). None; haven't met since the last report. (2) Other. None. c. COUNCIL MEMBER JIM DICKENS: (1) South County Area Transit (SCAT). No report. (2) South County Youth Coalition. No report. (3) Other. None. d. COUNCIL MEMBER JOE COSTELLO: (ABSENT) (1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board. No report. (2) Air Pollution Control District (APCD). APCD providing County residents opportunity to participate in the lawn mower exchange program. Staff was requested to investigate the APCD program to determine if it would be beneficial to the City to participate. (3) Fire Oversight Committee. Mutual training efforts ongoing; approved shift in boundaries for first response; joint efforts between Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande continue to be successful. (4) Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee. Committee agreed on process regarding scope of work as well as efforts to pursue studies on joint dispatch opportunities. (5) Other. None. e. COUNCIL MEMBER ED ARNOLD: (1) Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA). Staff was requested to investigate the potential for City participation in the IWMA rubberized asphalt grant program. (2) California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA). No report. (3) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). No report. (4) Other. Participated in a tour to review proposed new bike lanes, routes, and sidewalks in the City. 13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS: None. 14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS: None. 15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: None. 16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: City Manager Adams announced there would be a Town Hall Meeting on Thursday. April 27th at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers regarding City funding needs and a potential sales tax measure. Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Page 9 17. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS: None. 18. ADJOURNMENT Council Member Dickens moved, Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion passed unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 11:40 p.m. in honor and memory of John B. Loomis. TO"y'F.,,~AMM - ATTEST: (Approved at CC Mtg !)-.;I.,-zoo&)