|
MINUTES, CITY COUNCIL CITY OF CARPINTERIA CARPINTERIA, CALIFORNIA |
September 8, 1997 Regular Meeting Council Chamber 5:30 P.M. |
|
The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m., by Mayor Donna Jordan. |
CALL TO ORDER |
|
All Councilmembers were present in addition to City Manager Samantha Orduno, City Attorney Peter Brown and Community Development Director Ray Severn. |
|
|
TEMPORARY ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION |
TEMPORARY ADJOURNMENT |
|
The meeting was adjourned to a closed session for the purpose of discussion of the following: |
TO CLOSED SESSION |
|
a. Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing Litigation (G.C. 54956.9) Santa Barbara Superior Court No. 204321 Name of Case: Chevron Land and Development Company a Delaware Corporation; Carpinteria Ocean Bluffs Limited partnership, a California Limited Partnership; Ralph M. and Betty M. Brown; Mac Loren Brown; Mary Louise Sanchez; and Elizabeth Van Eyck, an individual vs. The California Coastal Commission; The City Council of the City of Carpinteria; City of Carpinteria |
|
|
b. Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing Litigation (G.C. 54956.9) Santa Barbara Superior Court No. 216589 Shea/Vickers Development L.L.C.; Ralph M. and Betty M. Brown; Mac Loren Brown: Mary Louise Sanchez; and Elizabeth Van Eyck vs. The California Coastal Commission; The City Council of the City of Carpinteria; and Peter L. Douglas, Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission |
|
|
c. Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing Litigation (G.C. 54956.9) Santa Barbara Superior Court No. 220601 Shea/Vickers Development LLC v. The City Council of the City of Carpinteria and the City of Carpinteria |
|
|
RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION |
RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION |
|
The meeting was reconvened in open session at 5:37 p.m. by Mayor Jordan. |
|
|
The City Attorney stated that there were no required announcements from the closed session. |
NO ANNOUNCE- MENT FROM CLOSED SESSION |
|
Councilmembers present: Michael Ledbetter J. Bradley Stein Gary Nielsen Richard Weinberg Donna Jordan |
ROLL CALL |
|
Councilmembers absent: None |
|
|
Samantha Orduno, City Manager Peter Brown, City Attorney Bob Nisbet, Public Works Director Ray Severn, Community Development Director Tom Evans, City Engineer Fred Goodrich, Principal Planner Jayne Diaz, City Clerk Approximately 19 interested persons |
OTHERS PRESENT |
|
All present were led in the salute to the flag by Mayor Jordan. INTRODUCTIONS, PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS: None |
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE |
|
PUBLIC INFORMATION REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS A brief discussion followed concerning possible cancellation of the October 13, 1997 regular Council meeting because of the entire Council’s planned attendance at the Annual League of California Conference in San Francisco. Motion was made by Mayor Jordan and seconded by Councilmember Nielsen to cancel the October 13, 1997 regular meeting. The motion was unanimously adopted by voice vote. |
INFORMATION REPORTS OCTOBER 13, 1997 COUNCIL MEETING CANCELLED |
|
PRESENTATIONS BY CITIZENS: None |
PRESENTATIONS BY CITIZENS |
|
CONSENT CALENDAR Motion was made by Councilmember Ledbetter and seconded by Councilmember Stein to approve the Consent Calendar, with all Resolutions and Ordinances as read by title only as follows: |
CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVED |
|
1. Minutes of the regular City Council meeting held August 11, 1997 |
MINUTES OF AUGUST 11, 1997 |
|
2. Expenditures for the period ending September 5, 1997 |
WARRANT REGISTER |
|
3. Planning Commission actions of the regular meeting held September 2, 1997 |
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS |
|
4. Animal Care and Control Agreement with County of Santa Barbara |
ANIMAL CONTROL AGREEMENT |
|
5. Actions of the Parking and Business Improvement Area Advisory Board meeting held June 10, 1997 |
PBIAAB ACTIONS |
|
6. Acceptance of final deeds and agreements for the Bermant Project #95-744-DP The motion was unanimously adopted by voice vote. |
BERMANT PROJECT DEEDS AND AGREEMENTS |
|
PUBLIC HEARINGS |
PUBLIC HEARINGS |
|
7. Underground Utility District No. 5 The City Council will consider the formation of an Underground Utility District pursuant to Chapter 12.16 of the Carpinteria Municipal Code for the purpose of removing all utility poles. Overhead wires and structures and requiring underground installation thereof. The District is generally described as Carpinteria Avenue from Holly Avenue to Elm Avenue. (Continued from August 11, 1997 meeting) |
UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 5 |
|
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: After accepting public testimony, adopt the attached resolution which establishes Underground Utility District #5, and direct staff to return with a resolution to appropriate the necessary funds after construction bids are received. |
|
|
DOCUMENTS: Staff Report dated September 8, 1997 prepared by Bob Nisbet, Public Works Director with attached proposed resolution. |
|
|
The Public Works Director said that this item was continued from the August 11, 1997 meeting at which time the Council directed staff to refine the cost estimate to convert the overhead utilities to underground and to investigate options for financing the work. He said that although there are only 2 or 3 poles which will need to be removed making for a very small district. Unfortunately there are no Rule 20A funds available for this project and it would therefore have to be funded by the City. Mr. Nisbet said that in response to the Council’s concerns he has had the City’s engineers have revised the cost estimate from $60,000 to $40,000 to complete the work. The difference in the cost estimate is primarily due to the fact that staff was of the impression that there was a federal tax that would be applied against the project which is not the case. Mr. Nisbet clarified that the only funds available in order for the City to proceed with the project are General Fund monies. He also reviewed the proposed resolution, including findings, and responded to questions from the Council. |
|
|
Ernie Villegas, Regional Manager, Southern California Edison, spoke briefly concerning the proposed utility district and responded to questions from the Council. |
ERNIE VILLEGAS ADDRESSES COUNCIL |
|
Discussion followed. |
|
|
Motion was made by Councilmember Stein and seconded by Councilmember Nielsen for adoption of Resolution No. 4408 entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARPINTERIA ESTABLISHING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 5 AND FIXING A DATE BY WHEN UNDERGROUND INSTALLATION AND CONVERSIONS SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED." The motion was unanimously adopted by voice vote. |
RESOLUTION NO. 4408 ESTABLISHING UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 5 ADOPTED |
|
8. Project No. 94-699 DP Creekwood The Council will consider the following: a. Amendment of Local Coastal Program, Policy 8.2 (Agriculture Conversion Standards) b. Amendment of Local Coastal Program, Adding Policy 8-3 (Agriculture Conversion Standards within City Limits) c. Amendment of Local Coastal Program Land Use Map to change designations for 32.9 acres from Agriculture (Ag-10) to Single Family Residential (SFR 3.81) d. Amendment of Local Coastal Program Urban/Rural Boundary to place the entire project site within said boundary e. Final Environmental Impact Report and Addendum The project site is located at 5800 Via Real and is developed with the Norman’s Nursery (APN’s 001-080-02, 30, 35, 40, 41) Applicant: Dave Tabor, Project Manager |
94-699-DP CREEKWOOD PROJECT |
|
The City Attorney said that this matter was originally continued from June to a hearing this evening to comply with the 45 day notice requirement which the Coastal Commission regulations require on Local Coastal Plan Amendments. He said when his office checked with the Coastal Commission at the end of August, he was informed that the Council needed to act on more than just the LCPA in order to get the matter to the Commission. He said that staff has determined that the public noticing that has been done so far for the Coastal Commission is proper but that in order for the matter to be acted on by the Council so that it can go to the Coastal Commission the Council needs to act on the legislative portions of the case (General Plan amendment and potential zoning consistency rezoning, etc.). He said that because an additional 45 day noticing is not required staff is recommending the Council direct staff to renotice the matter for September 22, 1997 at which time the Council will consider all components of proposal. |
|
|
The public hearing was declared open by Mayor Jordan. There was no response from the audience. |
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED |
|
The Principal Planner said that there are a few remaining issues that need to be finalized and incorporated into the conditions of approval that must be forwarded to the Coastal Commission dealing with Floor Area Ratio (FAR), Via Real Improvements and Length of Affordability. |
|
|
The Council discussed the FAR issue at length. Councilmember Weinberg suggested that prior to the next meeting the Councilmembers visit a new housing project in Oxnard that provides very visual example of floor area ratios. Mayor Jordan requested staff to obtain information on what the floor area ratio is for each of the models in the Oxnard development for review at the next meeting. The Council generally expressed that a 40% FAR for this project is appropriate. |
|
|
The City Engineer spoke concerning the proposed improvements on Via Real. He said that the need for installation of a sidewalk on the south side of Via Real is somewhat questionable due to space constraints. The Council agreed that there should not be a sidewalk installed on the south side of Via Real and that the City Engineer determine, based on drainage, etc.) the appropriateness of an asphalt berm on the south side. |
|
|
The Council indicated that they would discuss the length of affordability at the next meeting. |
|
|
Motion was made by Mayor Jordan and seconded by Councilmember Ledbetter to continue consideration of the Creekwood project to the next regular meeting September 22, 1997. |
PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED TO SEPT. 22, 1997 |
|
9. Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Project 97-807-DP The City Council will consider an appeal of the Planning Commission approval of Project No. 98-807-DP, John King/King Ventures, proposed demolition of the existing Teamster building and construction of a new 36,798 square foot office building with at-grade parking and two stories of offices above on property located at 6185 Carpinteria Avenue (APN 001-180-28). Grounds specified for the appeal are the method of floor area ratio calculation, the treatment of subterranean parking and compliance with Local Coastal Plan aesthetic policies regarding building height. Consideration of the appeal before the City Council shall not be limited to the grounds specified by the appellant. |
APPEAL OF PROJECT NO. 97-807-DP KING VENTURES (BLUFFS II) |
|
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Council affirm the Planning Commission approval of the project subject to the findings and conditions and modification of the Planning Commission approval of the project to include the addition of a condition requiring the applicant to provide a vertical screen under the north eave of the building to screen the parking located beneath the building from view. |
|
|
DOCUMENTS: Staff Report dated September 11, 1997 prepared by Ray Severn, Community Development Director with the following attachments:
Gross Floor Area Survey dated September 8, 1997 Proposed Revised findings |
|
|
The City’s Planning Consultant, Candida Neal, provided background information as detailed in the staff report and explained the City’s calculation of Floor Area Ratio, reviewed a survey of gross floor area calculation in several communities, subterranean parking vs. parking located below a building and building height. She reviewed the Planning Commission’s discussion on each of the issues. Mr. Severn clarified that the proposed parking is not subterranean but rather at grade. |
|
|
Mayor Jordan explained that the concerns that have been expressed to her about the project are related to the building being over the 30’ height limit, that it is a 3-story structure, floor area calculation clarification, and underground vs. at grade parking. She said she would prefer to see subterranean parking which would also resolve the height issue. |
|
|
John King, Project Applicant, discussed the reasons the building is positioned the way it is on the site, the building design, site constraints and parking plan. He expressed frustration with the length of the review, the micro-managing of the project and the lack of specificity of the LCP. He said that his proposed tenant was lost because of the length of the review period and subsequent appeal. He suggested the Council get a cross section of the community to work together on the planning of the remainder of Bluffs Area II and Area III. |
JOHN KING |
|
Mayor Jordan concurred with the formation of a committee to look at planning issue of a development agreement for Bluffs III. |
|
|
Dave Watson, King Ventures, provided specific information related to the issues of the appeal (FAR, parking and building height). He spoke concerning the importance of the definitions within the Zoning Ordinance and how they relate to the proposed project in the areas at issue. |
DAVE WATSON |
|
The public hearing was declared open by Mayor Jordan. |
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED |
|
Arturo Tello, 180 Ocean View, said that he understood Mr. King’s frustration with some of the planning process in the community. Mr. Tello said that he and others are trying to stick and defend the Local Coastal Plan Amendment and are not trying to purposely delay projects. He explained how the County of Santa Barbara computes floor area ratio. Mr. Tello said that if the Council likes the proposal then amend the findings to be specific to the project, making exceptions where necessary in certain areas and make a finding for overriding consideration so that the project won’t be precedent setting. Mr. Tello said that underground parking should be encouraged, that at grade parking should be counted in the floor area ratio. |
ARTURO TELLO |
|
Susan Allen, 790 Arbol Verde, said that no building should be "tenant driven" and that the community deserves quality projects. She said that the proposed structures are too big and too high, she is very concerned about parking standards and that subterranean parking is preferable. |
SUSAN ALLEN |
|
J.C. Martin, Real Estate Broker representing MGA, stated that any tenant leasing a building on ocean bluff property wants some ocean views on each of the floors which is why the building has been designed in its current configuration. He noted that because of the proposed below grade parking the site has about 3 acres of open space which is very beneficial. |
J.C. MARTIN |
|
Councilmember Stein asked for clarification on building grades at the entry of the project. Dave Watson showed the model to the Council at closer range and explained how the proposed grading was intended. |
|
|
Discussion followed. The Council requested that the Architectural Review Board review the screening of the parking, placing entry to parking behind the berm if possible, and screening and/or berming on the south side between the retention basin and parking. |
|
|
The City Manager reviewed the revised proposed findings for approval of the project. |
|
|
The Council determined that the project is unique due to its location, natural site amenities and unusual site constraints and there fore requires special site specific findings in the following four areas: Floor Area Ratio, Building Design, building height and below-grade parking. These findings are detailed in Finding Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6 and were read by the City Manager. |
|
|
Motion was made by Councilmember Weinberg and seconded by Councilmember Stein to deny the appeal and approve the revised findings as the City Council findings which also incorporates an affirmation of the Planning Commission’s action in approving the project and certifying the negative declaration. The motion was unanimously adopted by roll call vote. |
COUNCIL DENIES APPEAL AND AMENDS FINDINGS |
|
The Council requested staff to place the possible formation of a committee to look into a development agreement for Bluffs III, on the next agenda. |
|
|
The meeting was temporarily adjourned at 8:41 by Mayor Jordan. |
RECESS |
|
The meeting was reconvened at 8:52 by Mayor Jordan with all Councilmembers present. |
MEETING RECONVENED |
|
PROPOSED MUNICIPAL |
|
|
a. Request for an amendment of Section 14.08.190 of the CMC pertaining to the definition of a dwelling unit. |
CODE AMENDMENTS |
|
b. Request for an Amendment of Section 14.08.350 of the CMC pertaining to the definition of kitchen. |
|
|
c. Request for an Amendment of Section 14.082(1) of the CMC pertaining to lot coverage requirement in the single family (R-1) zone district. |
|
|
d. Request for an amendment of Sections 14.54.100 and 15.08.070 of the CMC pertaining to permit requirements for residential driveways in the single family (R-1) zone district. |
|
|
e. Request for an amendment of Sections 2.36.130, 14.12.090, and 14.54.040 of the CMC pertaining to garage conversions in the front of an existing dwelling and/or lot in the single family (R-1) zone district. |
|
|
f. Request for an Amendment of Sections 2.36.050, 2.36.130 and 15.08.070 of the CMC pertaining to noticing requirements for certain specified projects reviewed by the Architectural Review Board. |
|
|
All of the proposed amendments have been determined to be exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. |
|
|
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Council review the draft amendments, receive public testimony, and either continue the hearing and direct staff to modify proposed amendments or approve proposed amendments for first reading by title only. |
|
|
DOCUMENTS: Staff Report dated September 8, 1997 prepared by Fred Goodrich, Principal Planner with attached draft ordinance amendments |
|
|
The Principal Planner explained that the proposed amendments have come about due to some recent garage construction/conversions, community overcrowding and some zoning ordinance inadequacies. He said that the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments at their meeting September 2, 1997 and the minutes from their meeting have been provided to the Council. Mr. Goodrich reviewed each of the proposed amendments as follows: |
|
|
Building coverage – The existing R-1 requirement is that the total of all buildings shall cover no more than 35% of the lot area. It is proposed that lot coverage be reduced to 30%. This would provide a building coverage of 1,800 sq. ft. for a 6,000 sq. ft. lot, 2,100 sq. ft. for a 7,000 sq. ft. lot, and 2,400 sq. ft. for a 8,000 sq. ft. lot. |
BUILDING COVERAGE |
|
Garage conversion – City code currently has no prohibition against the conversion of existing garages into habitable floor area. This amendment would prohibit garages in the front of a residence from being converted to habitable area, thus changing the character, mass, and bulk of the residence as viewed from the street. This amendment would not prohibit attached garages located at the side or at the rear of an existing residence from being converted provided there is adequate area to construct a replacement garage on the site. |
GARAGE CONVERSION |
|
Driveways – At present a permit is only required for curb cuts and driveway aprons. The proposed amendment would require a permit for the construction, alternation, or demolition of a driveway for any residence in the R-1 driveway is sound and would provide adequate access to the garage. |
DRIVEWAYS |
|
Kitchen – The definition of a kitchen would be amended to include any area of a residence where food is stored, prepared, and/or cooked. A kitchen is currently defined as a place where food is cooked. The amended definition would include food storage and preparation areas. This expanded definition would aid City staff in determining when a second unit has been created in an existing single family dwelling. |
KITCHEN DEFINITION |
|
Dwelling definition – The definition of a dwelling would be amended to include a list of elements that, taken individually or cumulatively, would be evidence that a portion of an existing dwelling has been converted to and is being used as an additional ("second") dwelling unit. This amendment broadens the definition of a dwelling and assists the Community Development Director in determining the presence of a "second" unit in an existing single family dwelling. |
DWELLING DEFINITION |
|
ARB public notice – This amendment would add language to clarify the public hearing notice requirement and to place in the City building code a statement that ARB review is required for certain residential additions prior to issuance of a building permit. |
ARB PUBLIC NOTICE |
|
The City Attorney noted that the proposed changes will provide tools for the zoning enforcement staff to go out, look at a situation, and determine whether or not, taking all elements into consideration, it looks like the construction and/or existence of illegal second units. |
|
|
Mayor Jordan expressed concern about cutting the building coverage from 35 to 30% because it would put a lot of existing homes in the City in a non-conforming status and would possibly force more second stories which because of privacy issues may not be the best way to go. |
|
|
Councilmembers Stein, Weinberg, and Ledbetter concurred with Mayor Jordan’s comments to not reduce lot coverage. |
|
|
Councilmember Stein suggested that in situations where an old house is being taken down and a new one constructed, the surrounding property owners should be noticed of the ARB review. |
|
|
The public hearing was declared open by Mayor Jordan. |
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED |
|
James Casabona, 1416 Carnation Place, said he is concerned with the potential of duplexes taking over single family zoned neighborhoods. However, he said he did not want to see any ordinance changes that would encumber his ability to care for his elderly parent in his home in the future. |
JAMES CASABONA |
|
Don Wood, 1435 Begonia, said he is concerned about the word "storage" in the definition of a kitchen because many people have a storage pantry in their garage, does not support reducing building coverage to 30%, driveway repair should not require a permit, and is concerned about absolutely banning front yard garage conversions. |
DON WOOD |
|
Peggy Jones, 1425 Carnation Place, spoke in support of the amendments in order to provide the City with better tools for enforcement in the single family zones. |
PEGGY JONES |
|
Doris Floyd, 5538 Calle Arena, spoke against the reduction of building coverage to 30% and suggested the driveway amendments be made retroactive. |
DORIS FLOYD |
|
Bill Cooper, 1465 Azalea, spoke in support of the amendments and suggested requiring integral hallway where each addition, whether second story or first floor, are required to have an integral connection no less than 7’ wide attached to the main body of the house. |
BILL COOPER |
|
There was no further response from the audience. |
|
|
Councilmember Nielsen said that he concurs with staying at 35% building coverage, that consideration should be given to requiring connecting hallways when additions and/or conversions are constructed, supports changing kitchen definition to "stored, prepared and cooked", and striking the word "repair" from driveway permit requirements. |
COUNCIL COMMENTS |
|
Councilmember Ledbetter said that the 30% lot coverage is too restrictive, that unless we are going to define "driveway repair" it should be omitted, removal of old driveways should be required, some concerns could be done away with by adding "a habitable area" or removing the reference to food storage area. He encouraged looking at regulations adopted by communities that have addressed problems stemming from student housing because it is easier to find something that works in another community than to invent something completely new. |
|
|
Councilmember Stein said that the ordinance should include outside stairwells requiring that they be enclosed and part of the main structure. |
|
|
Mayor Jordan concurred that driveway repairs should not require a permit, agrees that the word "and" should be removed from the kitchen definition section that refers to "stored, prepared, and/or cooked", should clarify who notices are mailed by in ARB noticing section, and the ordinance should address multiple entries into a single home. |
|
|
Motion was made by Councilmember Ledbetter and seconded by Councilmember Stein to continue the public hearing concerning the proposed ordinance amendments to October 27, 1997. The motion was unanimously adopted by voice vote. |
PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 27, 1997 |
|
ITEM 12 ADVANCED |
ITEM 12 ADVANCED |
|
12. Discussion of Ash Avenue Parking Mayor Jordan explained that this matter has come to the Council from a number of members of the public who are aware of all the activity on Ash Avenue (Marsh Restoration Project and Beach Restroom/Storage Facility) and have expressed concern about the decrease in public parking that will result when the improvements on Ash Avenue are completed . |
DISCUSSION REGARDING ASH AVENUE PARKING |
|
Councilmember Weinberg explained that many residents and visitors use Ash Avenue extensively for the launching of small boats, kayaks and jet skis in addition to its daily use for regular beach use and the decrease in parking that will occur upon completion of the Marsh project is of concern to many residents. He suggested that consideration be given to changing one side of the street to diagonal parking rather than parallel on both sides. |
|
|
The Public Works Director gave a brief overview of the Marsh Restoration Plan and the many discussions that have taken place over the years concerning the parking on Ash Avenue. He said that through the years many plans and alternatives have been looked at by the Marsh Steering Committee and the public. The final plan approved indicates parallel parking on both sides of Ash Avenue. He noted that the right-of-way of Ash Avenue is 70 feet which is enough room to do parallel on one side and diagonal on the other. He said that there are potentially huge ramifications to changing the parking on the west side (i.e., contractor change orders, permit amendments through various governmental agencies, and redesign of the Marsh project). Mr. Nisbet showed an overhead of the Marsh project specifically as it relates to Ash Avenue. |
|
|
Connie Thompson, Resident of Carpinteria, said that she supports the Marsh project but feels the parking plan on Ash will be inadequate. She said that Ash Avenue is the only location to launch kayaks, boats and jet skis and many local people do so. She urged the Council to change the plan on the east side of Ash Avenue to diagonal parking which would add almost twice the number of spaces. |
CONNIE THOMPSON |
|
Linda Thompson, 7664 Stanley Park Road, spoke urging the Council to provide more parking on Ash Avenue for all the people who will be using the boat launch area and visiting the Marsh. |
LINDA THOMPSON |
|
Susan Allen, 790 Arbol Verde, urged the Council not to remove the bus parking on the west side of Ash Avenue and said that diagonal parking would not be appropriate on the west side of Ash Avenue because of the biologically sensitive habitat and the potential negative effects of car lights. She said that a lot of the parking on the streets currently are from the apartments and condominiums in the area. |
SUSAN ALLEN |
|
Nancy Alexander, Marsh Steering Committee Member, stating that she has been involved with the Marsh project for the last 15 years and that parking on Ash Avenue has been an issue all the way through the project design. She said that her recollection was that many of the people living on Ash Avenue preferred the parallel parking and did not want diagonal parking. She expressed concern that no notice of this discussion was given to residents in the Ash Avenue area. She said the City would incur tremendous expense if the Marsh project were to have to be redesigned. |
NANCY ALEXANDER |
|
Nysa LaFevers, Trenora Street, spoke in support of diagonal parking on Ash Avenue. |
NYSA LAFEVERS |
|
Chuck Thompson, Carpinteria resident, spoke in support of the Marsh Restoration Project but urged the Council to re-look at the parking plan for Ash Avenue and add diagonal parking. |
CHUCK THOMPSON |
|
Arturo Tello, Carpinteria Valley Association and Member of the Marsh Committee, spoke in opposition to diagonal parking on the west side of Ash Avenue. He suggested the Council look at the north ends of Ash and Holly where the street dead ends at the railroad tracks to see if there is a way to improve them for parking. |
ARTURO TELLO |
|
Wayne Ferren, UCSB Marsh Manager and Member of the Marsh Steering Committee, reviewed the history of the project related to the parking issue. He said numerous hearings were held throughout the planning process for the Marsh at which parking along Ash Avenue was discussed and ultimately the current plan was approved. He expressed concern about making a change to the parking on the west side at this point in time with the project fully under construction. He said many permits were required from a large number of agencies and he expressed concern about changes being made. He said that one of the original proposals was to place diagonal parking along the east side of Ash Avenue because the City has an existing easement over the entire east side of the street. |
WAYNE FERREN |
|
Discussion followed. |
|
|
The Council requested staff to prepare an analysis, for consideration at the next regular meeting, of potential diagonal parking on one side of Ash Avenue (cost, how to fund, how many spaces would be gained, etc.) and to include looking at development of parking at the north ends of Ash and Holly by the railroad tracks and along one side of Elm or Holly Avenue. |
COUNCIL REQUESTS STAFF TO PREPARE ANALYSIS |
|
The meeting was temporarily adjourned at 10:55 p.m. by Mayor Jordan. |
RECESS |
|
The meeting was reconvened at 10:57 p.m. by Mayor Jordan with all Councilmembers present. |
MEETING RECONVENED |
|
11. Presentation by Robert Ooley on the Smart Communities Concept Robert Ooley, City’s representative on the Santa Barbara Association of Government’s Smart Community Study Group gave a presentation on the Smart Community Concept and the work of the Study Group. Mr. Ooley explained that the Group’s primary work is in the area of telecommunications in Santa Barbara County. |
PRESENTATION RE SMART COMMUNITIES CONCEPT |
|
ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:27 p.m. Mayor Jordan. |
ADJOURNMENT |
|
__________________________ City Clerk, City of Carpinteria ATTEST:
_____________________________ Mayor, City of Carpinteria |
|