Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-10-14; City Council; Minutesi aitp of Carf!8baD COUNCIL - 1 .e Meeti ng of: CITY COUNCIL (Adjourned Regular Meeting) Time of ljleeting: 7:OO P.M. Date of Fleeting: October 14, 1980 Place of Meeti nq: Council Chambers - EOLL CALL: [32X] 1. GRANT APPLICATION. The City Ranager gave a brief introductory report on th matter explaining the proposed grant application and us of the van should the grant be approved. In response t Council questions, he stated the van would be owned by City of Carlsbad, but would be used by the Senior Ci tiz Association in connection with programs such as 'lMeals Wheel s" . Council discussion related to questions regarding the c for maintenance and operation of the van as well as cos for s, driver, and the possibility of utilizing the van occasionally for other purposes which would not conflic with the schedule of the Senior Citizens' Association. Counci 1 i ndi cated they had no opposition to the City accepting responsibility for maintenance and operation costs, but they believed the expense of providing a dri should be borne by the Association. Council approved the Grant Application and directed st; to file it with Caltrans. [77] 2. ,.-AGENDA BILL #6389 - PLANNING FEES. Following a brief introduction of the matter by the Ci. Manager , Mi ke Li ttle out1 ined the contents of the staf. report dated August 28, 1980, and explained the basic methodology used in determining the recommended fee structure. Council recognized Mr. Don Brown of the Chamber of Coml Mr,, Brown stated the Chamber previously received a of the proposed fees, but as yet had not had an opport to review same. He suggested action be delayed for tw weeks to a1 low distribution to developers. Council Member Lewis expressed the opinion that appeal fees should be refunded if the appellant was successfu Staff response indicated Council would ,.have the discre to refund any fee they deemed appropriate. Council recognized Mr. Bob Ladwig of Rick Engineering. Mr. Ladwig recommended Council adopt the proposed fees stated they appeared to be reasonable. Council approved the recommended fees and directed sta to prepare the necessary documents to implement same. Council adopted the following Resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 6329, FIXING CHARGES FOR COPIES, MAP, REPORT, MINUTES AND OTHER DOCUMENTS. 1451 3. GRANTSMANSHIP PROPOSAL. The City Manager gave a staff report on the matter referencing the proposed agreement with Internationa' Systems, Inc. Council Member Anear questioned the possibility of otl area cities also utili zing such services and expressel desire that the agreement be reviewed by the City Attc off i ce. - D e VZitp of GarlSbaD Page 2 COUNCIL October 14, 1980 Council authorized the negotiation of the grantsmanship program contract contingent upon approval of the City Attorney. [25] 4. MELROSE AVENUE ANNEXATION. The City Manager introduced the matter followed by a further report by the Planning Director. With the aid a wall map, the Planning Director indicated the locatio the proposed road, and explained problems for the devel in that development requires processing through Carlsba San Marcos and the County. The annexation of the propc road would then allow the developer to process with on1 one en ti ty. Council discussed the possibility of San Marcos annexir Carl sbad' s ha1 f of the road vs. the City of Carl sbad ar ing San Marcos' and the County's portion of the road. Council expressed concern about possibly acquiring the responsibility for maintenance of the road, but having voice in decisions about development to the east of thc road which could result in many access points and curb Staff referenced the map and indicated the portion of l.and to the east of the road which is currently in the County, but in the sphere of influence of San Marcos. Further discussion evolved around the possibility of t po:ssible annexation of that portion of land to the eas the road into the City of Carl sbad. Also questioned w the possibility of receiving an appropriate share of t taxes which would result from that. annexation to assis covering the costs for maintenance of the road. Counci 1 directed the City Manager to discuss the matte San Marcos and the County and return to Council with alternatives for Council action regarding the matter. [79] 5. POLICY DISCUSSION - PUBLIC FACILITY FEE USE. The City Manager gave the staff report outlining the c tents of his memorandum to Council date8 October 7, 1s Council recognized Mr. Roy Ward, Calavera Hills, 1207 Avenue, Carlsbad. Mr. Ward indicated the biggest buds i tem covered by the fee is parks. He urged Council tc consider dealing with developers to provide full imprc ments on the parks prior to turning them over to the ( He also requested that Council place the fees in a fur for use in the quadrants in which they were collected, Counci 1 recognized Mr. Mike Zander , Planning Practice P. 0, 3ox 684, Cardiff-by-the-Sea. Mr. Zander indica. he had been an employee of the City, and as such, had worked on the fee study. He detailed problems of con: tants working on major projects for the city in dealil with the fee and determining what facilities will be by payment of the fee. Assistant City Attorney, Dan Hentschke, reviewed brie the history of the development of the fee, placement ballot, and eventual designation as a.2% fee policy. that regard, he recommended Council not utilize the f for 100% funding of pub1 ic facil i ties, but use the fe those facilities necessary to serve the development. If !r i (- ts. f n ri t n i rY /. - de d the or i 329 Motion Ayes Plotion Ayes I ! i aitp af Car(s'ba8 Page 3 COUNCIL - P * L October 14. 1980 Council recognized Mr. Bob Ladwig, Rick Engineering. M Ladwig referenced the letter from the Chamber of Commer on the matter of the previous year, and reiterated the - tents of same. Council recognized Mr. Jim Goff, La Costa Land Company. ' Mr. Goff expressed agreement with the comments of Mr. R ' Ward. He expressed concern about the possibility of th La Costa Master Plan amendment being denied merely for :k of resol vi ng the pol icy issues regarding the fee. In response to Council inquiry, the City Manager- state( le matter was being discussed prior to development of a GI th Management Plan and prior to revision of the Parks and Recreation Element in that the pol icy decisions regard. the fee would affect those programs. It was moved and seconded that Counci 1 agree in concep with the suggestions of the City Manager as contained 1 page 2 of his memorandum to Council dated October 7, 1 subject to the refinement of the figures, and leaving fee at 2%. The motion failed due to lack of a majorit Council directed that the matter be placed on the agen the meeting of October 28, 1980. RECESS: Vice-Mayor Casler called a recess at 9:21 P.F md Council reconvened at 9:33 P.M. with four Council memt ; present. [70] 6. SWIMMING POOL. . .. The City Manager gave a staff report on the matter re. mc- ing the letter from the School Board dated October 3, 30, and outlining the requests contained therein. Council discussion reflected concern that if the pool re moved to the northern boundary of the property, an ac s would be eliminated. Also discussed was the desirabi of retaining the tennis courts for use by the public, retaining the land north of the pool to al1,ow for fur !r development in connection with the pool. It was moved and seconded that the City keep the tenr courts and return the rest of the area south of the F to the School District, and offer the District the PC i- bility of paving the extension north of the pool whic acts as a connector to Basswood. The motion fai.led 1 lack of a majority. Council Member Lewis requested the opportunity to chi 2 his vote on the previous motion. Counci 1 directed that the C4 ty keep the tenni s court nd return the rest of the area south of the pool to the District, and offer the District the possibility of the extension north of the pool which acts as a conn .or to Basswood. Counci 1 directed that the contract be modified to re !ct a beginning date on the completion date of the pool. Council agreed that the project should remain in the currently proposed location, and not moved to the-nr bo'undary of the property. I - b * 'Citt, of Grarlm%O Page 4 COUNCIL 7. ARJIS - Joint Power Authority. The City Manager gave a brief report on the matter and recommended that Council approve the proposed agreement CPO. He a1 so referenced the agreement prepared by Chul' Vista which would establish a "scaled-down'' version of JPA. Brief discussion by Council related to the preference f the JPA as proposed in the agreement prepared by Chula Council approved the agreement to establish a Joint PON Authority to govern and administer the ARJIS program, w preference for the agreement proposed by Chula Vista, a the proposed agreement by CPO being second choice. 8. DISCUSSION OF REQUEST TO SUPPORT PROPOSITION 8. The City Manager reported briefly on the matter explair the requested support of the Peripheral Canal issue. Council agreed to endorse Proposition 8. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: The City Manager stated he had recently recei.ved a reql for support of Proposition 2, and inquired if Council c to do so. Council requested the opportunity to review Proposi tiol and took no position at this time. Leased Sewer Capacity from Encinitas Following a brief description of the matter by the Ci,t Manager, Council unanimously agreed to txdd the item to agenda for action. The City Manager referenced the sewer capacity which C leases from Encinitas which to date has not been used, informed Council of the request by La Costa Land Compa for the City to assign this leased capaei ty to the San Marcos County Water District. tie continued stating tk if the assignment were made, La Costa would then be at receive additional capacity from San Marcos County Nat District. Council discussion reflected a desire that the assign6 capacity be uti1 ized with the City limits. Council accepted, in concept,' the assignment of the It Encinitas capacity to the San Elarcos County !.later Dis. for use by projects within the City 1 imi ts, but servec the District. Santa Fe Knolls Tract Map Following an explanation by the City Manager, Council unanimously agreed to add the item to the agenda for consideration. The Planning Director gave a brief staff report with aid of a wall exhibit showing the layout of the major subdivision. He also distributed to Council copies o prev.iously adopted Resolutions of approval of the ten map f.or the subdivision, and amendments to same. ta. I I t i ret Y ,e sba : Id to 3d ,t v :i ve - 1 b -T b + Ertp Ot QdwrMs'bab Page 5 COUNCII October 14, 1980 He referenced, in particular, the condition in question which relates to the school site, and noted the changes same which had occurred through the amendments. Council recognized Mr. William Berrier, Superintendent ( San Dieguito Union High School District. Mr. Berrier s' the School District would need the school site in the future, but possibly not for 5 or 10 years. He also st, the District is negotiating with La Costa for the site, La Costa is under time pressures. Therefore, they have requested that the condition be deleted, but they have indicated their intentions to continue to negotiate for site. The District, he indicated, would like assurance: that La Costa would be required to continue negotiation' for the site. Mr. Paul Graham, representing La Costa Land Company, addressed Council. Mr. Graham stated that La Costa Lanl Company and the School District are in agreement that ti will come to an agreement, but noted that the issue is complex. He continued stating their developer requires condition to be satisfied prior to closing escrow, then fore they are under time constraints. He concluded by requesting that Council el irninate the condition. Assistant City Attorney, Dan Hentschke, informed Counci tha.$ elimination of the condition would require amendin1 the tentative map. Such an amendment should follow thl required procedures, which would include hearings beforr the Planning Commission and Counci 1 . Therefore, he sugl ed Council take no policy position at this time so as nl to prejudice the public hearings. Mr. Hentschke continued by quoting' the condition 17 whil states an agreement shall be reached subject to the appl of the City Council. He indicated it may be possible tc satisfy the condition by presenting an agreement which indicates that the District and La Costa Land Company agree to agree. Council directed that the matter be placed on the agendl for the meeting of October 28, 1980. Additional Information: The City Manager distributed to Council for informationl purposes, a letter from the State Coastal Commission re' garding the adoption of the Mello Bill LCP. Also distr buted was a draft copy' of a statement to be given by thc Mayor at the League Conference, and a sumary from the City Attorney's office regarding mobile-home rent contrc ADJOUR?"T: By proper motion, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 P.1 As a reminder, it was noted .that the regular meeting WOI not be held on October 21 , 1980, and the next meeting would be on October 28, 1980, at 6:OO P.M. Respectfully submitted, I j ~ w #PA KLETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ City Clerk / - the ed d t e e t- al -)I 332 I I ~ Motion Ayes ~ ~~~