Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 061085 COUNOL MEETI I!G : 6/24/85 AGENDA ITFM MO A - 1 MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting JUNE 10, 1985 Atascadero Administration Building The regular meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. ROLL CALL Present: Councilman Molina, Councilwoman Mackey and Norris, Mayor Pro Tem Handshy, and Mayor Nelson STAFF Mike Shelton, City Manager ; Roger Lyon, Interim City Attorney; Grigger Jones, City Clerk; Henry Engen, Planning Director ; John Wallace, Interim Public Works Director ; Bud Mc Hale, Police Chief and Karen Vaughan, Deputy City Clerk COUNCIL COMMENT Councilwoman Mackey expresses her concerns related to continued building being allowed in the Separado/Mananita area located north of Traffic Way, which has known sanitation problems, discusses theos- sibility of a buildin moratorium being imposed, and asks what City staff proposes to mitigate _the problem. Mr. Wallace states that staff is currently reviewing the situation but has not, as yet, initiated a study on this matter. Problem origin is unknown, but could possibly be a combination of of high ground water level and septic effluent Staff will research the most cost effec- tive solution to mitigate the current problems. Alternatives could be: A) Moratorium, B) Assessment District, C)Voluntary Sewer Hookup. Mr. Shelton introduces Mr. Joe Dominguez who has recently been employed by the City as a Maintenance Worker to the Streets Crew in the Public Works Department. A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of May 28, 1985 2. Proposed Resolution 43-85 - Transferring a Portion of Calendar Year 1985 Activity Bond Limit from the City of 6/10/85 COUNCIL MIrMES PAGE TW0 Atascadero to the City of San Bernardino 3 Proposed Resolution 40-85 Authorizing the Mayor to Ratify San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council Joint Powers Agreement for 1985-86 4. Proposed Resolution 41-85 - Authorizing the Mayor to; Ratify the Department of Animal Regulation 1985-86 Contract Renewal 5. Tentative Map 14-85 9850 Las Lomas (Parcels 1&2 of Lot 36, Block 6) - Bebeau/Kennaly Mr. Shelton clarifies that the Activity Bond Funds (private industrial development bonds) listed in Item A-2 were not scheduled for usage and will terminate at the end of this calendar year . The City of San Bernardino, who has need of 'these funds this year, has offered to pur- chase our allocation. MOTION: By Councilman Molina; Seconded by Counwilwoman Mackey to APPROVE Consent Calendar Items 1-5. Passed Unanimously B. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Proposed Resolution 38-85 - City/School Development Fee Proposal to Alleviate School Overcrowding (Cont'd from 5/28/85) Mr. Engen states that this item was continued_ from the 5/28 Council Meeting to allow an additional City/School Committee Meeting and additional review by-Mr. ` Lyon. Staff recommends continuance of this item to June 24, 1985 to prepare a "201 Ordinance" in lieu of the proposed Resolution 38-85. Discussion on this item is interupted by the presence of a singing telegram balloon lady, who proceeds to complement members of the Council on a job well done and present each of them with balloons. Public Comment Dr. Avina, City School Superintendent, urges the City to expedite this item, as the School District is anxious to proceed with the acquis- ition and relocation of temporary classrooms at various city schools prior to September, 1985. It is noted that the County of San Luis Obispo will be considering a similar ordinance on the same subject Wednesday, June 11th, -which is recommended for approval. A member of the audience expressed concern with the proposal to tax Building Permits and feels the School Board should refund monies after the lottery goes into effect.. 6/10/85 COUNCIL MIES PAGE TEN 0 Council discusses the need to assess possible safety problems at the wading pool area, the need for lifeguards, the cost to provide service for 3-months, and the liability concerns. Councilman Molina expresses concerns to opening the wading pool prior to an evaluation of safety conditions. Mr. Shelton suggests that if major safety problems exist at the wading pool, staff will present to Council reasons to close the pool for repairs. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey and Seconded by Councilwoman Norris, staff is directed to OPEN the Wading Pool for 3-months this summer, REPORT any possible safety repairs and costs, and PROVIDE Lifeguard supervision during open hours. Individual Determination and/or Action 1. City Council Councilwoman Mackey reports the Library Committee reviewed the pro- posed oposed architectural plans for the new library. Approval of grant funds will be known by August 9th and if approved, will be received by September 1, 1985. The architectural plans are available for review through Mr. Joel Moses, Planning Department. Councilwoman Mackey commends Mr. Shelton for a job well done on newsletters. 5. City Manager Mr. Shelton recites a letter received from the Atascadero Bible Church, commending the Atascadero Engineer Peter Gaw and Fire Fighter Pat Simoneau for their instruction and demonstration on fire extin- guishers. Meeting i's adjourned at 10:30 P.M. to a Clossed Session on June 18, ` 1985, at 6:00 P.M. in the City Manager ' s Office regarding Labor Negotiations. RECORDED BY: T M. , City Clerk' PREPARED BY: KAREN VAUGHAN, Deputy Wky Clerk 6/10/85 COUNCIL MINAES PAGE THREE Mayor Nelson interupts public comment in order to clarify Council's direction as to taking an action on proposed Resolution 38-85 or deferring it and addressing the preparation of an Urgency 201 Ordinance and returning the item back to the June 24, 1985 Council for consideration as first reading, which will allow additional- public comment. MOTION: By Councilman Molina and Seconded by Councilwoman Mackey, to DIRECT staff to BRING BACK an Urgency 201 Ordinance to the June 24, 1985 Council Meeting, and DESIGNATE it as the first reading; Mr. Lyon clarifies that there will be two separate ordinances to consider : School fees adopted pursuant to specific legislative pro- visions under SB-201 and another ordinance to adopt a more general development fee going into the general fund and not earmarked for a specific purpose. Mr. Lyon states ;that timing related to an urgency ordinance will require 30-days for implementation, and collection of school fees can not be enforced till after completion of the 30-days following the ordinance. Mr. Lyon to verify life span of an urgency ordinance of this type and the possible need for re-adoption. It is noted that Council can control the timespan the fees may be collected. Three-years is being proposed. Mr. Jim Agar states that the building permit tax proposed by the School District disregards the recent electoral decision on this same subject. He concludes, "If the citizens do not want to accept the responsibilities, then they accept the consequences. Mr. Paul Miller feels the proposed building permit tax alternative is not viable and should be done through a tax base. Ms. Barbara Dowdy agrees with the proposed funding solution. Ms. Lois Williams accepts the fee proposal although she feels it is not the best alternative. Mr. Richard Shannon feels the proposed fee schedule should not have an effect on those permits already in the system for processing, ,but-does accept the proposal concept. --------------------- MOTION CONTINUANCE: Motion pases-unanimously by roll call vote. 6/10/85 COUNCIL MIS PAGE FOUR B-2-A Amapoa Tecorida New Development/Construction Deposit Discussion (Cont'd from 5/28/85) B-2-B Proposed Resolution 42-85 - Authorizing Mayorto Enter into Agreement for Drainage Improvements Mr. Wallace states that at the 5/28 Council Meeting, this item was continued to allow staff to prepare related drainage agreements for council consideration. Staff presents the following agreements for Council consideration and conceptual approval:•' A. Agreement to Participate In and Not Oppose Formation of an Assessment District for the Construction and Installation of Road and Drainage Improvements B. Deferred Improvement Agreement C. Performance and Rei'nbursement Agreement for Drainage, Improvements Contents of the above proposed agreements (which staff is 'request-- ing conceptual approval of) will allow development of projects pending. Mr. Wallace continues that approximate construction costs to the spil- lway (using 1985 figures) is estimated ' at $260 ,000, with Caltrans responsible for _ $36,000 and the remaining amount to be split between development projects upstream and downstream of the spillway. Caltrans has verbally recognized an obligation, but has not commited funds as yet. Construction was assumed to start within a 2-year time- frame and construction deposits exceeding drainage impact fees will be reinbursed with interest, over a 15 year eligibility period. Mr. Wallace reviews flood hazard maps indicating the range of property boundaries affected by drainage impact fees and agreements related to reconstruction of the spillway. Discussion continues on the amount of $10 ,000 construction deposit being requested versus the previously proposed ifies that less money received per property owner, the more develop$12,500 or alternatively $5,000. Mr. Wallace clarment will need to be allowed in the area, increasing engineering problems prior to mitigating flood impacts. It is noted that the $10,000 requested can be in the form of a bond rather than cash. It is clarified that if the property owners reject an Assessment District, Council has the option to force the assessment with a 4/5th vote. Public Comment Mr. George Palmer, property owner on Morro Road, who purchased said property approximately 4-months ago, stated that he was informed at that time, by City staff that there was no immediate flood hazard problems related to his property. Since that time, he has become 6/10/85 COUNCIL MIES PAGE FIVE aware of the City' s proposals to asses properties to correct flood hazard problems (as presently being discussed) . He also received a letter from Caltrans requiring curbs, gutter, sidewalk, and street widening related to development. He estimates an additional $25,000 for improvements to develop his property, which was not made known to him through his discussions with City staff 4-months ago. He feels this amount is unreasonable. Mr. Molious, states that the Council should take action to tax all property owners developed or undeveloped at one time rather than what is presently being proposed. Mr. Wallace clarifies to Mr. Herb La Prade that imposed elevations ' of buildings will remain, in accordance with Federal Flood Insurance requirements till the flood hazard problems have been corrected, even though assessment fees have been paid. Mr. Gary Daniel, resident on Amapoa _Avenue, states costs for the reconstruction of the spillway should be shared by all property owners, developed or undeveloped, and not by current development only. He reviews past development, zone changes, and -moratorium to this area -------------------------- Mr. Wallace projects that spillway improvements will be completed in 1987 unless funds are collected sooner. The Assessment District formulation timeframe- is expected to be 9-months to 1-year, and will have different assessments related to location within the flood zone and impact by flooding. Motion: By Councilman Molina and Seconded by Councilwoman Mackey to APPROVE IN CONCEPT staff' s recommendation and three agreements as follows: 1. Agreement to Participate In and Not Oppose Formation of an Assessment District for the Construction and Installation of Road and Drainage Improvements. 2. Deferred Road Improvement Agreement on Amapoa Avenue 3. Performance and Reinbursement Agreement for Drainage Improvements Motion carries with a 3/2 vote. Motion: By Councilman Molina and Seconded by Councilwoman Mackey to APPROVE Proposed Resolution 42-85 Authorizing the Mayor to Enter Into Agreement for Drainage Improvements Motion carries with a 3/2 vote. B-3 Business License Ordinance - Staff Recommendations- 6/10/85 COUNCIL MIKES • PAGE SIX Mr. Shelton states this item was continued from 5/13 Council Meeting for additional staff recommendations to proposal by the Chamber Business License Committee. Staff concurs with the Committee' s recommendations with the exception " of the fee schedule. Outcomes of the business license fee survey are reviewed, which revealed the current charge of $15 being the lowest fee in this area, and the proposed fees being approximately in the middle of those Cities surveyed. Staff proposes a revised fee schedule ' which increases the basic license minimum fee to $50 plus $10 per employee effective 1/1/85 and to $75 plus $10 per employee effective 7/1/86, with a maximum fee in any category not to exceed $500. It is noted that the July, 1985 business license renewal fee will remain at $15.00. Discussion continues regarding the inability of the proposed flat rate fee to increase in the future, and the need to reassess at a later date. Council directs staff to provide full enforcement efforts to coinside with the installation of the new fees in January,' 1986. Staff to utilize an additional part-time employee to accomplish enforcement measures. Mayor Pro Tem Handshy requests an amendment to the fee schedule - related to storage units to be changed on the basis of number of units. It is clarified that Doctors and Attorneys are considered a pro- fessional service and do apply for business licenses. Public Comment Mr. Arthur Jazwiecki, member of the Chamber Business License Committee, feels the proposed $25 basic minimum fee is appropriate ; and is opposed to the $50/$75 fee without additional phasing-in over a longer period of time. Mr. Dale Winslow, owner of Pacific Home Improvement and a member of the Chamber Business License Committee, feels the proposed rate change by City staff is much higher than the Committee proposed and is opposed to it. He questions how the local business person will benefit from paying higher fees? Mr. Garry Brill, member of the _ Chamber BusinessLicenseCommittee, expresses concerns ' as to impacts the higher fees will have on small businesses in town. He announces the Chamber Committee will meet again to compare their business license survey figures with the City' s. The Committee, as a whole, stands by their initial recommendation of $25.00 for a basic business license fee. C\ 6/10/85 COUNCIL MI ES PAGE SEVEN Mr. Brill also expresses that after initiation of the $50 basic license fee and prior to incorporation of the $75 fee, the City needs to make a determination that all businesses are paying their fair share. Ms. Maggie Rice, Chamber Business License Committee member,, states that the gross receipt formula proposed by the City was almost unan- imously rejected by the Committee. She is to provide the Arroyo Grande fee schedule to Mr. Shelton and City Council members. --------------------- Mayor Nelson offers the business license survey results to whomever wishes to review it. Mike Shelton will provide the City of Arroyo Grande' s BusinessLicense Fee Schedule at the the next Council Meeting addressing this issue. Discussion continues on the unfairness to each individual business caused by the fixed rate formula. It is clarified that the gross receipt alternative, which allows a fairer formula, was rejected by the Chamber Committee Through discussion, it is determined that the general consensus of Council is that the proposed fees are not too high. MOTION: By Councilman Molina and Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Handshy, APPROVE Chamber Business License Committee recommendations with the revised City proposed Fee Schedule (with amendment to Storage Buildings) and to CONTINUE item to a July Council Meeting for consideration in ordinance form. Motion passes unanimously. C-1 Dial A Ride Proposed Fare Increase Discussion Mr. Leib, Supervisor of the 'Dial-A-Ride Contract, reviews the his- torical drop in fare box revenues from 14% to the present 11%, which , is expected to drop to 10 1/2% by the end of the fiscal year. The proposed fare increase of $.75 and $.50 over the present $.50 and Presently, there are 5 buses operating. Other local Dial-A-Ride services are operating at a range of $.60-$.50 and $.50-$.25 No public comment is given on this item. MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey and Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Handshy, to APPROVE staff recommendation of proposed fare increase of $. 75 and $.50, and CONTINUE item to June 24, 1985, for consideration in resolution forma \0 6/10/85 COUNCIL MI*S PAGE EIGHT C-2 Fiscal Year 1984/85 Audit Agreement - City of Atascadero Mr. Shelton explains that, to date, the City has not entered into an audit agreement for fiscal year 1984/85, and recommendscontracting with the firm of Robert M. Moss Accounting Corporation. He continues that the City has utilized` this firm for several years with outstanding results, and feels it is advantagous to continue contract- ing with the firm. It is noted that the proposed contract is for $3,175, which is 4.10% higher than the 1983/84 contract. No public comment was made on this item. MOTION Councilman Handshy moves and Councilman Molina seconds to APPROVE the 1984/85 fiscal year City of Atascadero Audit with Robert M. Moss Accountancy Corporation for $3,175. C-3 Architectural Review Report Mr. Engen review possible alternatives to establish an architectural design review process within the City of Atascadero. Alternatives include: 1. Architectural Review Commission - Reviewing almost all proposed development except for non-sensitive areas, which could require full-time Planner and support staff." 2. Architectural Review Committee - A subcommittee of the Planning Commission to review architectural aspects of Precise Plan and Use Permit projects. 3. Staff Review - Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include criteria for architectural review, which would apply to precise plans and use permits going to the Planning Commission. Candidate Locations for the the architectural review process would be E1 Camino Real, the freeway corridor, and Morro Road. Council discusses a possible negative reaction from the public related to a regulatory type of architectural control, and indicates that an informative approach may be more acceptable and hopefully create less delay in permit processing. Councilman Molina expresses his concerns related to proceeding with the formation of an Architectural Committee without amending the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan also. He also feels that the Zoning Ordinance should resolve any architectural concerns that may exist. 6/10/85 COUNCIL MRAkEs PAGE NINE Public Comment Mr. Richard Shannon questions the usefullness of such a committee, as it is in the best interest of the builder to build an attractive structure. Ms. Andrea Shultie states there is a need to control irresponsibility. Prior to incorporation of such a committee, staff needs to research surrounding cities as to their means of architectural review. Mr. Jean Cole agrees with the needfor some consistency between structures related to design, elevation, and aesthetic value. With experience in this area, he offers to donate his services to the City. No motion is presented on this item. However it is the consensus of the Council to favor Alternative Number 2 comprised of a subcommittee of the Planning Commission in a guidance but not regulatory role. This item to be presented to the Planning Commission and returned to Council with their recommendations. D-1 Fiscal Year 1984/85 Audit Agreement - _Atascadero County Sanitation District No discusion is given to this item, as it relates to Item C-2. MOTION: By Councilman Molina and Seconded by Councilwoman Mackey, to APPROVE the 1984/85 Audit Agreement for the Atascadero County Sanitation District by Robert M. Moss Accountancy Corporation for $2,375. Community Forum Mr. Terry Graham discusses the intent of the public hearing process, the feeling of Tittle influence on elected officials by the public, special interest groups speaking at Council Meetings, locations- for elderly care facilities, possible concerns related to the "Poe Project" which is presently being processed by the City of Atascadero, depressed feelings by the general public towards the Atascadero ; City Council which causes them to move from this area, and Council' s desire to vote on proposed projects, against the citizen' s desires. _Ms. Cindy Bast presents Council with a petition to Mayor Nelson of approximately 150 names who agree with the banning of swimming in Atascacero Lake but requests the re-opening of the wading pool. Ms. Maggie Rice expresses her desires for the wading pool to be re- opened, providing safety improvements are done to the pool area, specifically the slippery surface of the pool.