Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 011491 Approved as Amended 01/28/92 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 14, 1991 MINUTES Mayor Shiers called the meeting to order at 7 : 00 p.m. Councilman Nimmo led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present : Councilmembers Nimmo, Lilley, Borgeson, Dexter and Mayor Shiers Absent : None Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Raboin, City Clerk Staff Present : Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Art Montandon, City Attorney; Mary Redus Gayle, Assistant City Attorney; Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director; Greg Luke, Public Works Director; Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief; Bud McHale, Police Chief and Lt . Bill Watton, Police Department COUNCIL COMMENTS: Mayor Shiers noted that the City Clerk had received an educational grant from the California City Clerks' Association to assist with tuition costs related to continuing education and congratulated her. Councilman Lilley mentioned that he was in the third week of a trial and reported that he would be returning all of his calls . COMMUNITY FORUM: There was no public testimony. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing committees . Informative status reports were given, as follows . ) : 1. - S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/North Coastal Transit - CC01/14/92 Page 1 Councilwoman Borgeson indicated that she did have a report, but in light of the heavy agenda, would postpone the report until the next meeting. 2. Solid/Hazardous Waste Management Committee - Councilman Nimmo reported that he had attended the most recent meeting at which two representatives from the State Integrated Solid Waste Management Board spoke in support of the formation of a market development zone. Each municipality, he explained, would participate in this arrangement for marketing the residue or products of waste disposal. Councilman Nimmo stated that there was some enthusiasm on the part of the County and one or two others; but noted that he had expressed reservation until it became more clear what the City' s commitment would be in terms of personnel participation and dollars . In addition, he reported that there was also discussion regarding a single event for household hazardous waste. Because there was meager participation in 1990, the committee has not agreed to repeat this event but did discuss the possibility of utilizing a mobile pick-up unit . 3. Recycling Committee - Mayor Shiers reported that the committee had met twice and had received applications from a few citizens interested in serving on the committee. He announced that the committee had coordinated a waste audit training session for the 17th of January from 9 : 00 a.m until 4 : 00 p.m. at City Hall . The session, he stated, would focus on administrative and restaurant uses and the public is invited. 4. Economic Opportunity Commission - Councilman Dexter reported that the next meeting would be on January 16, 1992 , 5. City/School Committee - Councilman Dexter announced that the committee would be meeting in February. 6. Traffic Committee - Councilman Dexter indicated that this committee would meet on the following day at 3 :45 p.m. 7. County Water Advisory Board Councilwoman Borgeson reported that the she had attended the last meeting on January 6, 1992 and that the board was forwarding opinions on State Water to the Board of Supervisors. The next meeting, she stated, was scheduled for Wednesday, January 15, 1992 at 7 : 00 p.m at which time Dave Kennedy from the City of San Luis Obispo would be making a presentation about State Water. CC01/14/92 Page 2 8. Economic Round Table - Councilman Lilley reported that the committee had heard from Tim Hallett of Atascadero High School regarding vocational training. He stated that the round table is exploring ways in which the City can assist the goals and objectives of that program. 9. Colony Roads Committee - Henry Engen reported that Mary Gayle would be meeting with the County representatives the following day and that there would be a scheduled meeting to follow. B. CONSENT CALENDAR• Mayor Shiers read the Consent Calendar, as follows : 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 26, 1991 2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - DECEMBER 10, 1991 3. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - DECEMBER 19, 1991 (Special Meeting) 4. CONSOLIDATED CITY TREASURER'S REPORT —NOVEMBER, 1991 5. FINAL TRACT MAP 23-90, 9313 MUSSELMAN - Subdivision of one existing lot into eight airspace condominiums and a common area (Smith/Cuesta Engineering) 6. FINAL PARCEL MAP 12-89, 10785 EL CAMINO REAL - Subdivision of 10 . 0 acres into four lots : Two lots at 2 . 0 ac. , one lot at 1 .0 ac. , and one lot at 5 . 0 ac . (Columbo) 7. FINAL PARCEL MAP 8-91, 7605 MORRO ROAD - Creation of commer- cial condominium project consisting of six airspace units for professional/medical office use (Golden West Development) 8. FINAL TRACT MAP 22-90, 9305 MUSSELMAN AVE. -Conversion of an existing nine-unit multiple family project into airspace con- dominiums (Shahan/North Coast Engineering) 9. JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/CITY COUNCILS MEETING - FEBRUARY 1, 1992 10. ATASCADERO COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION, INC. - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEMBERSHIP 11. PROPOSAL BY THE S.L.O. COUNTY ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY TO PREPARE A MASTER PLAN FOR THE CHARLES PADDOCK ZOO 12. RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT - QUARTER ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1991 CC01/14/92 Page 3 13. RESOLUTION NO. 03-92 - DECLARING INTENTION TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH TO CONSTRUCT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ALONG A PORTION OF EL CAMINO REAL Councilwoman Borgeson pulled item #13. Councilman Dexter mentioned a minor correction to item #3, Minutes of the City Council meeting of December 19th. MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Mayor Shiers to approve the Consent Calendar with exception and correction; motion carried 5 :0 by roll call vote. Re: #13. RESOLUTION NO. 03-92 - DECLARING INTENTION TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH TO CONSTRUCT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ALONG A PORTION OF EL CAMINO REAL Councilwoman Borgeson asked the Public Works Director to clarify the share of cost . Mr. Luke explained that the estimated project would cost was approximately $200, 000 with the City and the State sharing the responsibility equally. He emphasized that the estimate was based on conception and was not an engineer' s estimate. Councilwoman Borgeson noted that the City would save $100, 000 because of the State' s participation. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Dexter to approve Resolution No. 03-92; motion carried 5 : 0 . C. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES: 1. 3-F MEADOWS ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - Request Council direction on how to proceed A. Report from Asst. City Attorney Mary R. Gayle E. Assessment district formation - Discussion Mayor Shiers introduced the matter and noted that the item was open to the public despite error on the agenda printed in the newspaper. Mary Gayle, Assistant City Attorney, reported that she had examined Department of Real Estate (DRE) files in Sacramento and determined that notice was given to prospective purchasers in 3-F Meadows that the roads were private and that maintenance and repair of those roads would be an obligation of the buyers . She also stated that she had met with the County Engineer and had further determined that the City had not received or accepted any offers of dedication on 3-F Meadows roads . Ms . Gayle reported that the City has no legal obligation to maintain those private roads . She added that DRE reports were given to first-time buyers, but clarified that CC01/14/92 Page 4 there was a time when disclosure was not revealed to those other than first-time buyers. Discussion and questions followed. Councilwoman Borgeson noted that DRE reports also state that no trees are to be cut on any lot in 3-F Meadows without review by an architectural control committee and that fire services are to be provided by the State Forestry Service. She pointed out that trees have been cut and fire protection has been given by the City; and wondered how the City could hold strictly to the letter regarding the streets, when it was not doing so on matters relating to the trees and fire service. Mary Gayle explained that the architectural approval committee responsible for approving the cutting of trees was composed of individuals specified in Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R' s) placed on the property when the developer offered it for sale. Unless CC&R' s specifically give a public agency the authority to impose conditions, she continued, they are private and property owners who were parties to the CC&R's .are the only ones who could enforce those conditions . Acting Fire Chief Mike McCain remarked that before incorporation, the California Department of Forestry was responsible for fire service to all acreage at the west side of San Gabriel Road and confirmed that initially the 3-F Meadows area was under the State's jurisdiction. After incorporation, he continued, the City began providing fire protection in that area. Responding to query from Councilwoman Borgeson, Greg Luke compared the roads in the 3-F Meadows to those in Chandler Ranch. He explained that the roads are substantially different . Councilwoman Borgeson asked the Assistant City Attorney if the City was liable for damage to the 3-F Meadows roads because of use by City vehicles . Mary Gayle reported that in the event the road conditions are negligible, the liability is with the lot owner. Public Comments : James Carpenter, 8200 Casita Road, asked what happened to the County' s agreement to take over the roads . He asked why owners are charged for encroachment permits on their own private roads and voiced objection to his tax dollars being used for potential improvements on E1 Camino Real . Hal Hayes, 2505 Alturas, demonstrated six points for the Council to consider. He outlined them, as follows : (1) Council classified the roads as "improved, but not City-maintained" in July of 1990; (2) Acceptance of roads can be by resolution or by prescriptive rights; (3) City has refused to use prescriptive rights with roads CC01/14/92 Page 5 in 3-F Meadows or in Las Encinas; (4) City has accepted roads from the County by prescriptive rights; (5) Roads in 3-F Meadows and Las Encinas most likely already belong to the City by prescriptive rights; and (6) City spends millions on roads accepted by prescriptive rights . Howard Marohn, 9265 Barrancha Heights, thanked staff for the light on the podium. Addressing the issue, Mr. Marohn asserted that the City had mistreated the 3-F Meadows property owners since incorporation. He reported that the homeowners had paid approximately 1 . 6 million dollars in gas taxes and were not asking for a hand-out, but rather a repayment of a debt the City owes property owners . Don Saueressig, 10735 San Marcos Road, stated that if the City can charge a fee for an encroachment permit for a final inspection it must have power over the roads . He proclaimed that it was the obligation of government to notify citizens of its' responsi- bilities and urged Council to resolve the issue in an equitable manner. In addition, he stated that he supported using funds earmarked for a median strip on El Camino Real to be used instead on unimproved roads. ----End of Public Testimony---- Councilwoman Borgeson commented that she differed with projections made by Mark Joseph about anticipated funding Local Transportation Funds . She stated that it looked very favorable that the City would receive $300, 000 this year and indicated that these monies might be used for an assessment district . Councilman Dexter remarked that the Chandler Ranch Assessment District was a good indication of what is possible with cooperation and supported a similar concept for the 3-F Meadows area. Mayor Shiers agreed that what had been done with Chandler Ranch was fair and ethical . He indicated that he would be willing to relax the road standards so that owners are not faced with a figure of $6, 500/lot . Councilman Lilley commented that it would be a gift of public funds if the City agreed to finance the road improvements and that it would be a disservice to the balance of the community to do so. He stated that he was willing to commit engineering talents to assist the formation of an assessment district and would be supportive of accepting the roads once they meet required standards . Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that it was time for the City to act . She proposed that the City set up a citywide assessment district and decide on an amount of participation. CC01/14/92 Page 6 Councilman Nimmo indicated that he was not prepared to go any further than what the City did for Chandler Ranch. Councilman Lilley suggested that one way to ease the burden of the assessment district would to be lengthen the payback period and indicated that he would not be opposed to approving this . The Public Works Director described the process of forming an assessment district, emphasizing that the next step would be to circulate a petition among the residents . He reported that the petition would need 60% of the property owners signatures to qualify. Councilwoman Borgeson voiced support for providing financial participation but opposed reducing the road standards . She declared that the City has used up the roads and expressed fear that someone will be hurt. She proclaimed that she would not vote in favor of ignoring the situation. MOTION: By Councilman Dexter to ask staff to formulate a preliminary proposal for an assessment district in 3-F Meadows on the same lines as the City had with the Chandler Ranch district and bring it back to the closest session possible for further action. Discussion of the motion: Councilwoman Borgeson asked Councilman Dexter to amend his motion by deleting his reference to Chandler Ranch. She indicated that the two areas are not exactly the same. Councilman Dexter pointed out that there had been a successful program in Chandler Ranch and clarified that he wanted a similar approach to guide the preparation of an assessment district in 3-F. Greg Luke suggested that Council direct to staff to support the formation of the assessment district and let the law take over from there. He said that staff will contrive the necessary petitions and paperwork and bring the matter back to Council in the proper, legal sequence. He added that Council, under the Assessment District Act, will stay in control and will see the issue a number of times . Motion amended and seconded: Councilman Dexter struck the word "preliminary" from his motion. Councilman Lilley seconded the motion. Councilwoman Borgeson expressed concern about the financial burden the formation of an assessment district would place on the property owners and proclaimed that she did not want the homeowners to be forced into it. She asked the Public Works Director to explain other costs associated with the formation CC01/14/92 Page 7 of an assessment district . Mr. Luke reported that the next step would be to get the necessary number of petitions to qualify it as an assessment district and then staff would work with the neighborhood to draw the boundaries. Once Council certifies the assessment district, he continued, there would be additive costs which include the cost of selling the bonds that generate the money to finance the construction, the raw engineering plans themselves and costs associated with a number of legal documents . Vote on the motion: Motion carried 4 : 1 with Councilwoman Borgeson voting in opposition. Mayor Shiers called a break at 8:27 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:47 p.m. 2. URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 237 - AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHING A DEFINITION FOR RECYCLING CENTERS AND PROVIDING STANDARDS FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT (City Council-Initiated - 4/5 vote required) (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and adopt on single reading by title only) (Cont'd from 12/10/91) Henry Engen presented background, staff report and recommendation to adopt Ordinance No. 237 defining recycling centers and providing reasonable standards for their establishment . He indicated that he had received requests from Brian Touey of Coast Recycling and from Wil-Mar Disposal to consider adding the Service Commercial Zone as one where recycling centers would be allowed. He reported that the General Plan Update proposes Mr. Touey' s site to be zoned Service Commercial and added that Coast Recycling would have to make an application for a Conditional Use Permit to conduct business at that address . Mr. Engen responded to questions from Council regarding appropriate conditions of approval, including specific hours of operation. Public Comments : Ruth Rentschler, San Carlo Road resident, complained about the noise from Coast Recycling' s operation and stated that her household had been impacted for months because of it . Sean Johnson, 5065 E1 Camino Real, indicated that as a neighbor of Coast Recycling, he was not bothered by the noise. He stated that the noise from Highway 101 is greater and spoke in support of allowing Coast Recycling to stay at their present location. Whitey Thorpe, 8025 Santa Ynez, asserted that he did not see the - urgency of the matter and that he was opposed to the City' s efforts CC01/14/92 Page 8 to put Coast Recycling out of business . Brian Touey, owner of Coast Recycling, urged Council to approve the use of Service Commercial zones for recycling centers. He emphasized that Coast Recycling had paid out $500, 000 to citizens of Atascadero for their recyclables and added that he was providing jobs for residents . Mr. Touey assured the Council that he could address the complaints received regarding noise and stated that he would limit processing to between the hours of 8 : 00 a.m and 5 :00 p.m. Mayor Shiers asked the businessman if these hours could be reduced. Mr. Touey projected that doing so would back up the work. ----End of Public Testimony---- Council discussion ensued and comments revealed that there was support for allowing recycling centers to be located within a Service Commercial district, as long as noise was regulated. MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to adopt Ordinance No. 237 by title only; motion carried 5: 0 . It was clarified that Service Commercial zones were approved. 3. OFFER TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY A. Resolution No. 02-92 (formerly Res . No. 105-91) - Finding and determining that the public interest, convenience and necessity require the acquisition of certain real proper- ty for public purposes as a part of the rounding out of Atascadero Lake Park (Guidry (Lake Park) ) (Cont' d from 11/12/91) Mary Gayle reported that she had a meeting set with attorneys for the property owner later in the week and requested that the matter be withdrawn from the agenda. She asked that Council meet in Closed Session to provide direction and noted that if the matter proceeds, staff will re-notice the hearing. MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Lilley to withdraw the item; motion unanimously passed. D. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF PROPOSED LAND USE, CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENTS and FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (Cont' d from 12/19/91) A. Resolution No. 01-92 (formerly Res . No. 107-91) - Approving the adoption of updated Land Use, Conservation CC01/14/92 Page 9 and Open Space Elements of the City' s General Plan (City of Atascadero) (Consultants Paul Crawford and Dave Moran, of Crawford, Multari & Starr present . ) Henry Engen, Community Development Director, provided brief background and recommendation to approve Resolution No. 01-92 amending the text of the General Plan Update of the proposed Land Use, Conservation and Open Space Elements and certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report. This item was continued from a special meeting of the Council on December 19, 1991 . Councilman Nimmo expressed appreciation to staff and members of the Council for continuing the matter so that he could participate in the decision. He reported that he had read the related documents and had listened to the tape recordings of the special meeting. He remarked that the plan was relatively unimpressive and reflected no vision. Councilman Nimmo criticized staff and the Planning Commission for not considering input submitted by Atascadero 2000 . Following brief discussion, Council agreed to go sequentially through the proposed changes to the April 1990 Draft General Plan (Resolution No. 01-92 - Attachment "A") and, by motion, refine or revise text . Re: P. II-20 (1/14/92 agenda packet page 119) By Council consensus, the words, "Wil-Mar Disposal, " was stricken. Councilwoman Borgeson disagreed with changing language regarding mandatory garbage collection from "should be considered" to "shall be instituted" . MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Dexter to adopt proposed change as set forth in the draft of staff for P . II-20/lst two sentences of subsection (c) changing the phrase "should be considered" to "shall be instituted" and changing "Service Line" to "Reserve Line"; motion carried 4 : 1 (Councilwoman Borgeson) . Re: P. II-21/5th para. (pg. 120) * MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to substitute language with: 111 . According to the Fire Department Master Plan, the addition of two or more fire *Note: Page numbers identified in parenthesis are those in the City Council Agenda Packet dated 1/14/92 . CC01/14/92 Page 10 stations serving the northwest section of the City may be required to provide reasonable emergency response. Where the creation of new lots are proposed beyond a goal of five minute travel time from existing stations, specific mitigation measures such as sprinkler systems, fire retardant plantings and water storage may be required. " Discussion of the motion: Councilman Nimmo opposed the specific five-minute travel time and specific mitigation measures and stated that these matters can be done by ordinance. Councilman Lilley agreed. Mr. Nimmo encouraged the Council to use wording suggested by Lester & Martha Jeffries, Atascadero property owners, in their letter to Council received on January 8, 1992 . Councilwoman Borgeson indicated agreement and withdrew her second to the motion. Motion died. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to change language to: 111 . To serve the west side of the City, third and fourth fire stations are needed and should be located in the western portion of the City. Minimum response time standards may be adopted and development proposals evaluated on the basis of ability to serve. Where new lots are proposed beyond an adopted - response time from existing stations, specific mitigation measures to address fire safety impacts shall be incorporated into project proposals . " Discussion of the motion: Mayor Shiers indicated that he was in support of the specific five-minute travel time because it sets community standards for emergency services . Vote: Motion carried 4 : 1 (Mayor Shiers) . Henry Engen noted that given this action, there is language on this issue on P . II-35/5th paragraph (page 121) that should be deleted. Council agreed and directed staff to remove any parallels in the text that would relate to specific changes approved by motion. P. II-30/Policy i. (pa. 121) : MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Lilley to change the sentence to read, "Public-owned creek reserves shall be preserved for park and recreational use. . . "; motion carried unanimously. P. II-30/add to subsection "n" (pa. 1211 MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to CC01/14/92 Page 11 delete the word "indeed"; motion unanimously carried. P. II-36/first sentence (pg. 122) : By consensus, Council agreed to change the word "felt" to "thought" . P. II-37/new section - 9. Miticcation Measures (Pgs . 122-127) : Councilman Lilley suggested that the section read simply, "State law requires that mitigation measures be monitored as defined by State Law. " Councilman Nimmo agreed and proposed that the remaining language (subsections (a) through (u) ) be deleted. Mr. Engen reported that the validity of the plan may be eroded without reciting mitigation measures for impacts identified by the EIR. Consultant Paul Crawford noted that the mitigation measures identified by the EIR had been included in the plan language itself to be informative. He advised that although State law does not require this language to be in the General Plan, if the public is to understand the full extent of the City' s efforts towards mitigating environmental impacts as a consequence of the proposed plan, it should reflect the mitigation measures as recommended by the EIR. Re: Subsections (c) , (d) , (e) , (f) and (cT) (paae 123-124) : MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Dexter to delete wherever the following statements occurs, "The City should establish thresholds beyond which new development will be restricted until facilities deemed adequate are provided. " and, "The level of development restrictions should reflect the severity of the services and facilities needs" or "severity of the facility deficiency" . Discussion of the motion: Mayor Shiers remarked that he was not in favor of removing the language because the information was necessary to ensure the people of the ability of the City to continue providing the community with certain services . Vote: Motion passed 3 :2 with Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Shiers opposing. *Minutes amended 1/28/92, as follows: Re: Additional revision to Subsection fcl : By unanimous concensus, Council deleted the following language from the text, "to achieve at least a ratio of 1.2 police officers per 1000 population". CC01/14/92 Page 12 Re: Subsection (1) (pane 125) : MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to change the language to: "Additional development will be conditioned upon the availability of water. "; motion unanimously carried. Re: Sections relatinc to traffic and circulation (paces 124-125) : Councilman Nimmo suggested that all paragraphs relating to traffic or circulation be organized together in sequence . Councilwoman Borgeson agreed. Re: Subsections (s) (pace 126) : Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that she was opposed to specific setbacks and made the following motion: MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson to substitute the language in subsection (s) with: "Building shall not occur within the creek riparian area, as defined by the mapping committee, without environmental review by appropriate agencies . " Discussion of the motion: Mr. Crawford indicated that this measure, if adopted, might raise some questions regarding administration because "riparian area" and "appropriate agencies" are not defined. Councilman Lilley stated that he hoped that the City would adopt a creekway master plan which would establish a riparian corridor and make specific recommendations for mitigation measures MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo to use language proposed by Commissioner Highland which would be to insert a general statement that creekway setbacks should be established and let a creekway ordinance address the specifics . Councilwoman Borgeson seconded the motion. Discussion: Henry Engen reported that there is language on page II-30 of the plan calling for building setbacks . Mr. Crawford pointed out that the "fifty-foot" setback was intended to be an interim mitigation regulation that would, in fact, go away when the detailed mapping program has been completed. He cautioned that if Council certifies the EIR with the setback deleted or modified, it must be satisfied that it is not possible that there will be significant impacts in the interim until the creekway mapping program has been completed. CC01/14/92 Page 13 Councilman Nimmo stated that he was opposed to an arbitrary fifty-foot setback without qualification and asserted that if it was to be an interim measure it had no business in the General Plan. Councilwoman Borgeson agreed. The Clerk pointed out there were two motions on the floor. Councilman Nimmo withdrew his motion. Councilwoman Borgeson reviewed her motion, as follows : "Building shall not occur within the creek riparian, as defined by the mapping committee, without environmental review by appropriate agencies . " She indicated that she was open for language changes . Councilman Lilley proposed specific revisions to subsection (s) and suggested that criteria for evaluation could be set forth as part of a creekway ordinance. Mayor Shiers remarked that 800 of those who spoke at the special City Council General Plan hearing had supported the fifty-foot setback and proclaimed that he could not ignore that kind of response. He indicated that he was not in favor of eliminating the fifty-foot "trip wire" which would trigger the site specific evaluation. Mr. Engen noted that the waterways of the major creeks are protected by flood hazard combining zoning; riparian vegetation is the area that is not addressed. Motion withdrawn, amended and seconded: Councilwoman Borgeson withdrew her motion in favor- of substituting language suggested by Councilman Lilley, as follows : *"s . Grading shall not occur and buildings or structures requiring permit approval shall not be located within 54 feet any creekway riparian vegetation boundary or within 50 feet of the eenterline of the ereekwayr whiehever is , unless : (i) A site-specific evaluation by a qualified b e3egist- pursuant to standards approved by the City determines that a lesser setback will provide eeuivale t adequate habitat protection; or (ii) (no changes - language proposed to remain) Councilman Lilley seconded the motion. * (Language struek through deleted, language bolded added) CC01/14/92 Page 14 Vote on the motion: Motion carried 4 : 1 with Mayor Shiers voting in opposition. Re: subsections (r) and (t) (page 126) : MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to delete subsection (r) and keep subsection (t) ; motion passed unanimously. Re: subsection (u) (pane 126) : MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to delete verbiage after the word "shall", up and until the word "implement"; so that (u) reads : "The City shall implement a comprehensive creek protection policy and management plan. Such a plan may include the following elements : . . . ; motion unanimously carried. Re: P. ,II-9 (page 113 MOTION: By Councilman Dexter to change language to: "New lots averaging 30% or more slope shall not be permitted; provided that exceptions may be permitted when the following conditions apply: Such a lot contains a "building envelope" with less than 20a average slope which includes building footprint, access driveway, leach field but not required property setbacks . Discussion of the motion: Councilman Nimmo suggested additional language proposed by Mr. & Mrs . Lester Jeffries in their letter to the Council on January 4, 1992 . Deliberation included deleting the words, "but not required property setbacks" . Motion amended: Councilman Dexter amended his motion to read: "New lots averaging 30% or more slope shall not be permitted; provided that exceptions may be permitted when the following conditions apply: (1) Such a lot contains a "building envelope" with less than 20% average slope which includes building footprint, access drives, leach field, etc. , and (2) The creation of such a lot offers public dedications or easements which would have a direct benefit to City residents . " Motion passed 5 :0 . *Minutes amended 1/28/92, as follows: Motion: By Councilman Himmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to replace the word "and" to "or"; motion carried 3:2 with Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Shiers voting in opposition. CC01/14/92 Page 15 Re: Location #20. Atascadero Avenue/Marchant. Matson/Petition. A request to increase density allowed from Moderate Density Single Family to High Density Single Family to allow for half acre lots : Responding to inquiry by Councilman Nimmo on the status of this request, Mr. Engen reported that the Planning Commission had encouraged the owners to submit a specific application for a general plan amendment . Mr. Engen remarked that Council could, if they chose to, address this request now. Councilwoman Borgeson mentioned that a general plan amendment at a latter date would cost the applicants at least $750 .00 and consensus was to deal with the matter at present . Mr. Engen presented a brief staff report and outline of the request to extend the 1/2 acre zoning. Discussion ensued and the following motion was made: MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson that the zoning change be adopted. Discussion of the motion: Mr. Engen pointed out that this request included parcels located across the street adjacent to the Iversen project and advised that if Council was to act supportive of the Watson' s request, it should also include this one. By consensus the "Location #20" property was included in this action. Vote on the motion: Carried 5: 0 . MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to extend the meeting beyond 11 :00 p.m. , motion unanimously passed. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Dexter to approve Resolution No. 01-92 approving the adoption of updated Land Use, Conservation and Open Space Elements of the City' s General Plan, as amended; motion passed 5 : 0 . 2. ORDINANCE NO. 236 - ADDING CHAPTER 8, "WATERWAY INTRUSIONS", TO TITLE 5 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE, PROHIBITING SPEC- IFIED ACTIVITIES IN ATASCADERO CREEK, GRAVES CREEK AND THE SALINAS RIVER (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and adopt on second reading by title only) (Cont'd from 12/10/91) Mayor Shiers introduced the item. There were no questions or comments from the Council or public. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to CC01/14/92 Page 16 adopt Ordinance No. 236 on second reading; motion unanimously carried by roll call vote. 3. HONEUSS SHELTER TASK FORCE - Consideration of request to create a task force to advise on possible use of the Armory as a homeless shelter. Lt . Bill Watton, Atascadero Police Department, reported that there had been a meeting with staff of the Economic Opportunity Commission Homeless Shelter regarding the opening up of the National Guard Armory building in Atascadero. He stated that there still had been no formal request by the County Office of Emergency Services or specific proposal from the EOC about how the Armory would be used. Brief Council comments followed. Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that the City Council should be involved in the decision but charged that it had not received any information upon which to base a decision. Public Comments : Gwen Guyre, Supervisor of the EOC Homeless Shelter in San Luis Obispo, clarified that the shelter is not the City of San Luis Obispo' s, but rather a County shelter. She pointed out that armories throughout California were designated by the Governor as an interim measure during the inclement weather months from November 15th until February 15th. She asserted that there are critical issues to identify and address and spoke in support of the City Council appointing a task force to begin work immediately. Shirley Summers, Atascadero resident and North County social worker, urged the Council to make a long-range plan for the homeless. Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, stated that he has witnessed sleeping bags and pup tents on Pine Mountain and in the Salinas River bed. He proclaimed that the homeless are already in Atascadero and a task force would be a means of assessing the situation. Larry Etter, Pastor of the Community Church in Atascadero, spoke in support of the proposed task force and volunteered to work with it . He stated that churches are privately-funded and could not be considered a "major community resource" . Other Atascadero residents, Nancy Horton and Pat Frank, spoke in support of the formation of a task force to address issues relating to the homeless . Brad Goans, San Luis Obispo resident, urged the Council to admit CC01/14/92 Page 17 that there is a problem and work towards a solution. John Clarke, 7320 Sombrilla, voiced concern for issues relating to safety and crime surrounding the use of the Armory and asked the Council to look closely at the matter before agreeing to it . He suggested that it maybe more appropriate to use facilities at Camp San Luis Obispo. ----End of Public Testimony---- Council comments followed. Councilwoman Borgeson volunteered to work with the task force. Mayor Shiers indicated that he had no problem with the Armory being opened up if safety conditions are first addressed. Councilman Nimmo stated that he had no quarrel with the formation of the Task Force to examine the City' s own resources before transferring the problem to the National Guard. Councilman Lilley observed that the Armory was a substandard place to lodge people, but contended that he was in support of the task force and would be willing to serve on it . Councilman Dexter agreed that the Armory was a poor place for a shelter and volunteered to also serve. There was consensus to form a task force which would include Councilmembers Borgeson and Dexter, with Councilman Lilley serving as an alternate. Other members to be: Gwen Guyre, EOC and the City Manager. It was agreed that a meeting would be set within the next couple of days . Chief McHale clarified that the reason the Police Department was involved was because it was responsible for emergency services in the City and Lt . Watton was the coordinator. 4. DEDICATION PLAQUE POLICY Brief discussion ensued regarding whose names would appear on a City building dedication plague: the Council members who awarded the contract for the construction, or those who were on the Council when the building was completed. By consensus, Council agreed that dedication would be in the names of those who had awarded the contract. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council Mayor Shiers reported that he had received a telephone call regarding graffiti on Santa Ysabel and stated that the City needs a policy on this issue. Chief McHale indicated that other cities have appropriate ordinances and stated that he would look into the matter. Andy Takata, Director of Community Services, reported that CC01/14/92 Page 18 staff had been directed to take down any graffiti immediately when it is observed. Councilwoman Borgeson inquired about the level of "gang activity" in Atascadero. The Police Chief advised that he would provide a summary to the Council. 2. City Clerk Lee Raboin indicated that she had provided Council with a written report (see City Clerk's Report - January 14, 1992) . 3. City Attorney Art Montandon requested a Closed Session regarding pending litigation entitled O'Keefe v. City of Atascadero and real property negotiations involving land owned by Mr. & Mrs. W.P. Guidry, as proposed in agenda item #D-3. OPEN SESSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 11:53 P.M. TO A CLOSED SESSION. SAID CLOSED SESSION HELD PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 54956(a) AND 54956.9. SESSION WAS ADJOURNED 12:27 A.M. MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY: cil LEE RABOIN, Pity Clerk CC01/14/92 Page 19