Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981/08/19 - Minutes August 19, 1981 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, on Wednesday, August 19, 1981. The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Mayor Phillip D. Schtosser. Present: Councilmen James C. Frost, Jon D. Mikels, Arthur H. Bridge, and Mayor Phillip D. Schlosser. Also present were: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Manager/City Clerk; Robert Dougherty, Assistant City Attorney; Jim Robinson, Assistant City Manager; Jack Lam, Community Development Director; Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer; Harry Empey, Finance Director; Bill Holley, Community Services Director. Absent: Councilman Michael A. Palombo. Approval of Minutes: Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Frost to approve the minutes of December 11, 1980, May 7, 1981, June 22, 1981, and August 5, 1981. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. 2. ANNOUNC~MENTS. a. Mayor presented a proclamation to representatives of the Jaycees declaring August 28 and 29 as Muscular Dystrophy Days in Rancho Cucamonga. b. Mayor presented a certificate of appreciation to Lorraine Bailey for her service in taking pictures of historical sites in Rancho Cucamonga and present- ing them to the Historical Commission. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR. Councilman Frost requested that item "j" be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilman Mikels requested that item "a" be removed since he had not received a copy of the Warrants. moved for discussion. b. Refer Claim by Cheril Lyn Brown to the City Attorney for handling. (1) c. Alcoholic Beverage License for Brookside Enterprises, Inc., 12281 Arrow Blvd., (2) for Winegrower Still License. d. Alcoholic Beverage License for Beom Soo and Chong In Klm, Quality Market, 10120 (3) 25th Street, for Off Sale Beer and Wine. City Council Minutes August 19, 1981 Page 2 (4) e. Acceptance of Bonds and Agreement for Director Review 78-30 - Mobil Oil Corp. It is recommended that Council approve bonds and agreements for D.R. 78-30 located at the north-east corner of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route. RESOLUTION NO. 81-122 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVE- MENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW 78-30. (5) f. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for 9260 Mignonette Street. It is recommended that Council adopt the resolution accepting the Lien Agreement for 9260 Mignonette Street submitted~by Stephen Butters. RESOLUTION NO. 81-123 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM STEPHEN BUTTERS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. (6) g. Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and lien agreement for 9120 La Senda Road. It is recommended that Council adopt the resolution authorizing the city clerk and mayor to sign said Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for 9120 La Senda Road submitted by Pall W. and Mary Jane Bohne. RESOLUTION NO. 81-124 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL ' PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM PALL W. AND MARY JANE BOHNE, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. (7) h. Acceptance of Bonds, Agreement and Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for Willows School located at 8968 Archibald Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 81-125 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING BONDS, AGREEMENT, AND REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM OWEN LOFTUS, III. i. Release of Lien Agreement and Acceptance of Lien Agreement for Melvin B. Kornblatt located on Almond west of Hermosa. (8) RESOLUTION NO. 126 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELEASING THE REAL PROPERTY IMPROV~4ENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREE- MENT FROM DR. MELVIN B. KORNBLATT. (9) RESOLUTION NO. 81-127 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM DR. MELVIN B. KORNBLATT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME. City Council Minutes August 19, 1981 Page 3 ~em~eeYT-ehe-~e~eee-b~ee~-ee-~~gg-en~-eeehee~ee-eeeeee~ee-e~-ehe-eee- eeeee-eed-eRe-eeeeeeee-emeeee-p~ue-~g~-~ee-eene~ngeee~ee~ Removed for discussion. k. Forward Claim by Barbara L. Rogers to the City Attorney for handling. (il 1. Forward Claim by Randy R. and and Ronnie L. Stephens to the City Attorney for (12] handling. m. Release of Bonds for: (13] Tract 9423: located on the west side of Beryl, south of Base Line. Owner: Coral Investment, Inc. Labor & Material Bond $137,500.00 Tract 9583: located east of Haven Avenue at Hillside. Owner: The Deer Creek Company. Accept Maintenance Bond $ 22,000 Release Performance Bond (road) $440,000 Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Frost to approve the Consent Calendar with items "a" and "J" deleted. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. Item ~]": Councilman Frost stated that the removal of item "j" was a matter of self indulgence since he had a friend that had been fatally injured on that section of roadway. He wanted to move approval of the item. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Mikels to approve the awarding of the Carnelian' Street Improvement contract to Sully-Miller for the total amount of $232,555.50 plus 10% for contingencies. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS. 4A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 80-12 (TT 11663): Marlboroug~ Development Corporation. A request for change of zone from R-2 (two family resi- (14) dential) to R-2-P.D. (two family residential/planned development) for a total develop- ment of 413 townhouses on 40 acres located on the east side of Archibald, on the south side of Church west side of Ramona - APN 1077~341-01, 1077-133-08, and 1077-631-03. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 153. ORDINANCE NO. 153 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 1077-341-01, 1077-133-08, AND 1077- 631-03 GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ARCHI- BALD, SOUTH SIDE OF CHURCH AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF RAMONA, CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 40 ACRES, FROM R-2 TO R-2-P.D. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Mikels to waive further reading of Ordinance No. 153. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. He requested that the developer make a presentation first. Speaking for Marlborough Development Corporation was Paul Byrnes, the project engineer. Mayor Schlosser then asked for those who were in opposition to the project to speak. City Council Minutes August 19, 1981 Page 4 Speaking were: 1. Max Hackett~ 9911 Stafford. He presented some petitions to Council with approxi- mately 400 signatures in opposition to the project. He said their primary opposi- tion was as follows: a. Density of the units. b. Lack of transition from the multi-family to the single family, c. Most everyone was led to believe single family dwellings would be built, d. This project will bring additional unwanted noise, traffic congesti~on, and higher demand for public services. e. Ramona situation has not been resolved; widening of street will only take place at the southeast corner of the project; beyond that it cannot be widened because of the homes. 2. Andy Solorzano (lives in the other Marlborough tract). He opposed the: a. Rapid growth and high density proposed for the entire city. b. In the EIR there were several areas such as air quality, noise level, traffic, fire and police protection which the rapid growth would affect. 3. Fred Stuart? 10054 Balsa. Requested a stop to the irresponsible growth which created mir pollution and problems for schools, sewers, and other services. 4. Danny Brun% corner of Ramona and Church. Marlborough representatives assured him when he purchased his house that only single family dwellings would be built in the area. 5. Mike Gillatti. Spoke against the density. 6. John Klemptner. Requested that the project not be built because it is unacceptable. 7. John DiMuccio. Addressed the crime and fire protection problem. Also stated that Marlborough had promised him things in the past (a brick wall around his property) and did not honor the promise. 8. Betty Corer 9911 Stafford. She questioned the integrity of the builder. 9. Owner Barnes? 7915 Ramona. Felt there was a lack of storm water drainage. 10. Jane Lish? 9911 Norwick. Brought up the problem of access to Central School. 11. Bill Malone, 7853 Ramona. He supported the original plan with single family dwellings and a park. 12. Bob Dutto% 10155 Magnolia. Spoke in favor of the project and felt it was needed in the community. 13. Dr. Norman Guith? Superintendent of Central School. He said he was present to clarify the issues relating to schools. He said the project will not result in double sessions. The School District did not experience growth during the past year, and little growth was anticipated during the next year. Dr. Guith offered his services to Marlborough and the community to help mitigate any school problems. 14. Mr. Hackett said they now understood the process and no longer included the school issue as one of their objections. 15. Jeff Hill. He had a question for the School Board -- would they issue passes so the children could ride buses to another school if there was not room at Alta Loma High? City Council Minutes August 19, 1981 Page 5 16. Tony Colonna~ 7662 Dartmouth. Said he had been president of two associations in Upland. They found out that there are as many children being generated in condominiums as in single family homes. 17. Mr. Hackett asked Dr. Guith if the figures of generating students from multi- family units were accurate. Dr. Guith said at the time it seemed to be, but they were watching it. Mr. Paul Byrnes responded to the residents: 1. Regarding to what was always suppose to be he said this project has been zoned R-2 on the County's general plan and the city's general plan -- it has never been zoned R-1. 2. Regarding what someone had heard that this was a federally subsidized project, he said he did not know where this came from, but this was an F.H.A. project. 3. He said one of the residents made a reference to Mr. Parker who was the Vice President of Marketing for Marlborough. He said he was not familiar with the wall problem and what Mr. Parker might have said, therefore, he could not address the issue. 4. Regarding the storm water: He said that in order to satisfy the city engineer the run off during a storm on the project as developed could be no greater than the run off in the undeveloped stages; that is the amount of water allowed to run off to Ramona. The remaining portion must be retained and/or percolated into the pond. This pond has been determined as adequate in size. He said this was a condition of the map which could not be recorded until the require- ment was met. 5. Regarding crime going up with higher density: he did not believe such statistics prove out; perhaps with very high density and very low subsidized housing. 6. Regarding the wall along Ramona: He said there was no wall planned along Ramona. There is a set back green belt planned along Ramona. 7. School Access. He emphasized again that there was not a block wall along Ramona. He said perhaps a low wall will have to be put along Archibald, although they would prefer to use the same green belt there. There are walls along the south part and around the school there will be a low block wall with wrought iron. He said there was no problem in providing school access. There was a complete perimeter walk system around the project and both major streets will have side- walks on both sides. 8. Student generation. He stated that Marlborough would be willing to provide their own actual student generation data phase by phase, and voluntarily provide fees to the school district in accordance with that whether its higher than those set by ordinance or not. It is their intent, as with the drainage, to have no negative impact on the community. He said if the experts are wrong, and they do generate students as fast as an R-1 development, they would be willing to pay those fees which will allow the school district to accommodate those children and to apply to the State in order to get permanent school facilities. He said that Marlborough committed here and now to generate their actual buyer data to the city as these tracts are sold out and apply that fee to the nexl phase when they apply for permits. They committed to accumulate that through- out the project. City Council Minutes August 19, 1981 Page 6 Mr. Hackett responded: He said according to the Land Use Map posted, the medium density could be from 4-14. Therefore, he felt the zoning did not preclude single family dwellings. He said the Sales Representative was still working for Marlborough who had made all the promises to them, and was still making the same kind of promises elsewhere. Regarding the crime rate: he said they were not indicating that the people in this project would be out stealing their property. He said these types of units make it more convenient for others to come in to burglarize single family units. Regarding the wall: according to the staff report, he understood that there would be a 48" high wall along Ramona. Bill Atterberry, 7472 Matterhorne. He said increased density increases the traffic. He felt this was a tremendous risk and safety to the children playing in the area. There being no further public response, the Mayor closed the public hearing. Councilman Bridge stated that he favored a well planned development. Because of the great interest and that many issues had been presented which had not been addressed adequately, he felt this should be continued. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Frost to refer this back to the Planning Commission for further study and to come back to Council for consideration. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. Mr. Lam suggested that the ordinance be continued for second reading to a stated date since this is second reading. He requested that there be enough time allowed to work out all the issues. Council concurred that this should go to the Planning Commission on September 23rd and to come back to Council on October 7. Mayor Schlosser called a recess at 9:10 p.m. The meeting reconvened with all four council members and staff present. (15)4B. CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION OF THE DRAFT INDUSTRI~J~ SPECIFIC PLAN AND CERTIFICATION (16)OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. Tim Beedle presented the staff report. Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. Michael Jauron, general manager of the Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber is anxious to have this passed and wished for it to be adopted this evening. There being no further response, Mayor Schlosser closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Frost to approve Resolution No. 81-128 and to waive the entire reading. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 81-128. RESOLUTION NO. 81-128 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE INDUSTRIAL AREA AND CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. Mr. Beedle suggested that a letter be sent to the Chamber of Commerce and other individuals thanking them for their cooperation and help during the planning process. (17~C. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 80-03 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. An amendment to the Zoning Code adding Section 61.023(f) implementing the Industrial Specific Plan. Tim Beedle presented the staff report. City Council Minutes August 19, 1981 Page 7 City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 154. ORDIN~NCE NO. 154 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CItY COUNCIL OF THE CItY OF R~CHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SAN BERNAR- DINO COUNTY LAND USE AND BUILDING REGULATIONS AS ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. 17 OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SPECIFICALLY ADDING SECTION 61.023)f) TO THE ZONING CODE PROVIDING FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF A SPECIFIC PLAN. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Frost to waive further reading. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the Mayor set second reading for September 2, 1981. Jack Lam commended Tim Beedle for all the work he put in on the Specific Plan. (18) 4D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 80-03 (TT 11610). A change of zone from A-1 (limited agriculture) to R-2-P.D. (multiple family/planned develop- ment) for the development of 28 condominiums on 4.55 acres of land located on the west side of Turner Avenue between Church Street and Base Line. Mr. Lam pointed out in his staff report there were several issues raised by residents. After a meeting with both the residents and architect, solutions were reached as follows: 1. The swimming pool will be moved further north away from the residents; 2. The space between the residents and development will be planted with trees to avoid any gathering activity; and 3. A secondary access will be provided to the project through the con- struction of Teak Way going south from Ironwood to the project. (This will be accomplished through the parcel map that must be approved prior to finalizing of the project). City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 150. ORDINANCE NO. 150 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 208-061-03 FROM A-1 (LD~ITED AGRI- CULTURE) TO R-2-P.D. (MULTI-FAMILY/PLANNED DEVELOP- MENT) AND GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF TURNER AVENUE BETWEEN CHURCH STREET AND BASE LINE. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Bridge to waive further reading. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing Council was: Roland Sanchez, 322 Saratoga, Los Gatos, owner and developer of the property. Mr. Sanchez pointed out that there were two families involved historically with the property. The Sanchez family, which included his father, brother, and himself, who owned one parcel; and the Cortney family which was his aunt who owned the other parcel. Originally when they went to the Planning Com- mission, they felt all conditions for approval were met. Now they have found out that the city is requiring a secondary access. He personally felt that it would be a personal affront to have to go to his aunt and ask for 30 feet from her property since he felt the access was totally unnecessary. Mr. Sanchez requested that Council approve the project without the lot split. Mr. Sanchez requested that Council approve the project without the lot split requiring the dedication of 30 foot strip on the westerly side of the northern quadrant. There being no further public response, Mayor Schlosser closed the public hearing. Councilman Frost asked ~r. Lam if this would present problems since there are significant revisions made to the plan from the time of the Planning Commission approval to tonight's presentation. Would the developer be bound by certain conditions that are not formally required. Mr. Lam stated that this information has been transferred to the city, and that it would be placed as approved on the final drawings. He oointed out, however, that this plan does not address itself to Teak Way. In order for this project to receive actual formal approval, even if the Council made the formal zone charge tonight, it would require as a condition that the developer must come in with a parcel map and a condition of that parcel map would include these items. At that point staff would be requiring that Teak Way be built as a condition of that parcel map. The reason it was not made a condition was at the time the original parcel map came in, there was no indication of development and it is not normal practice to require minor streets when one does not know how the development is co proceed. In this case, the selection was from the lower parcel; one which we could not condition that other street on. We were fortunate enough that the parcel map had elapsed. Now that we know the development is going to occur on the south, there is a need for best possible secondary access, it can be achieved through this new parcel map that must be submitted, and staff feels that Teak Way is the best secondary access and not to double access onto Turner. As far as the landscaping, these will have to be approved at a later time when formal landscape plans are submitted. As far as the move of the swimming pool, they will request a letter from the applicant stipulating that he agrees with the drawings as transmitted by the architect. Mr. Sanchez responded to Mr. Lam's comments by stating that they always planned on developing this property. He opposed the comment that "we were fortunate to have the parcel map lapse." They were always under the impression that Teak Way would be abandoned since it was only a half street anyway. Mr. Lam pointed out that the only thing that has changed on the site plan that has to do with the site approval itself is the location of the swimming pool. He said that Mr. Dougherty just informed him that because of the change of the swimming pool location which changes the Planning Commission's approved site plan, then the Planning Commission needs to approve the change of the location of the swimming pool. Mr. Dougherty said the item before Council was simply a zone change. Now the developer is talking about changing the site plan. The site plan was once appro~,ed by the Planning Commission and no appeal of the site plan has been filed. It is an approved site plan and not the one shown to Council. If anyone wants to cha~ge location of items on the site plan, then it is encumbered upon him to apply to the planning commission for a site plan change, and allow them the opportunity to decide whether they agree with the location of the swimming pool. It would defeat the whole purpose of our review procedure if we permit a change in an approved site plan wi~h- out review by the proper body; unless there is an appeal. Normally the Council does not see the site plan unless there is an appeal. In this case it was a condition of the zone change. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Bridge to continue the second reading of Ordinance No. 150 to the September 2 Council meeting, and to refer the site plan back to the Planning Commission for review. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. City Council Minutes' August 19, 1981 Page 9 4E. PERS CONTRACT AMENDMENT. Staff report by Harry Empey. (19 Mr. Empey presented a Resolution of Intent to amend the city's contract with the Public Employees' Retirement System. This had been approved previously by Council as part of the budget process as one of the employee benefits. He said there would also have to be an ordinance passed revoking Section 20614 of the Government Code and an election by the employees. The election has been held. There 68 eligible employees; 64 voted in favor and 4 did not vote. Mr. Empey stated it was also a requirement to read publicly the following state- ment: "The current rate for our agency is 18.63% of gross payroll for those eligible to be members. If Section 20614, Statutes of 1978 is revoked, the city's rate becomes 9.36%, a change of 9.268% (18.631% - 9.363%). The cost to the city becomes $145,038, a reduction of $143,056. This percentage decrease is the pro- jected actuarial rate to the year 2000; but, as our contract reads, the employer rate is subject to change with future amendments and/or experience and other factors. "In addition to the above change, the city will continue to pay the additional 7% liability owed by the employee. This was previously agreed to. This will result in an overall net reduction in costs to the city of $34,622." Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Bridge to approve Resolution No. 81-129, a resolution of intent to amend the PERS contract and to waive the entire reading. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 81-129. RESOLUTION NO. 81-129 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL. 5. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS. 5A. REQUEST FROM THE CUCAMONGA SHCOOL DISTRICT FOR DECLARATION OF IMPACTION. (201 Staff report by Lauren Wasserman. Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public {nput. There being none, the public portion was closed. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Mikels to approve Resolution No. 81-130 and to waive the entire reading. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Resolution No. 81-130. RESOLUTION NO. 81-130 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONCURRING IN THE FINDINGS OF THE CUCAMONGA SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT CONDITIONS OF OVERCROWDING EXIST IN SAID DISTRICT. City Council Minutes August 19, 1981 Page 10 Consent Calendar Item 3A, the Warrants, had been removed in order to give Council- man Mikels a chance to review them since he had not received a copy prior to the meeting. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Frost to approve the Warrants, Register N~. 81-8-19 in the amount of $584,937.29. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1. Councilman Frost said that one of the directions from the Etiwanda Advisory Co~,i~tee was to request that the Etiwanda School District provide a representative to th,. Committee to serve in an ex-officio capacity. Councilman Bridge said he would not approve any more members to the Committee. Any- one is welcome to participate at the meetings, but he felt the present size of committee was a workable group. Council concurred with Mr. Bridge that this was the philosophy of Council and Mr. Frost to relay this message back to the school district and advisory commit,~ee. 6. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS. Mr. Dougherty said he had a matter which should be dealt with with the Council in legal session after the meeting. Councilman Mikels reported that he had testified at the Transportation Commission,% hearing representing SANBAG. He said the Commission made no commitment to provide any right-of-way protection funding for route 30 in the absence of the passage ~,f SB-215. However, if SB-215 passes, there will be some right-of-way funding coming. Jeff Hill expressed concern about citizens saying that they did not have a chance for input into the General Plan. 7. ADJOURNMENT. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Bridge to adjourn the meeting to a Redevelo,~enc Meeting with a Council Executive Session to follow the redevelopment meeting. M~iicc carried unanimously 5-0-1. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beverly Authelet Deputy City Clerk