Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 08/15/1977Iq3 MINUTES OF MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA AUGUST 15, 19,77 REGULAR MEETING ROLL CALL INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES CONSENT CALENDAR Agenda Item #1 APPROVE CERTIFICATE OF COPIPLIANCE- -STU AND ELLIE LUMSDEN RES #7860 NCS Agenda Item #2. APPROVE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- -STU AND'ELLIE LUMSDEN RES #7861 NCS Agenda Item #3 SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE -- STREET NAME" CHANGE, FRATES ROAD TO CADER LANE RES #7862 NCS Agenda Item #4 PARTICIPATE IN VARIOUS AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS RES #7863 NCS Agenda Item #5 ACCEPT COMPLETION -- "I" AND OLIVE STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT RES #7.864 NCS Agenda Item #6 DESIGNATE APPOINTEE - -(911) JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT PREPARATION RES #7865 NCS The Regular Meeting';of the Petaluma City Council was called to order by Mayor Helen Putnam at the hour of 7:37 p.m. Present: Councilmen Balshaw, Bond, Cavanagh *, Hilligoss, Vice =Mayor Perry and Mayor Putnam. Absent.: Councilman. Harber.son. Mayor Putnam advised Councilman Harberson indicated he would be out of the City and unable to attend the meeting. - Councilman Cavanagh arrived at 9:10 p.m. Pastor Ernest Toppenber.g, SeventH Day Church, gave the Invocation. Mayor. Putnam led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. The minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 18,, 1977, were approved as mailed. The minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of July 25, 1977, were approved as mailed. A motion was made by Vice- Mayor Perry, seconded by 'Councilman Bond, to adopt the resolutions, Items #1 through 4fl2, on the Consent Calendar. Resolution #7860 iv:C.S. approving certificate of com- -/ pliance.on three lots located at 327 Lakeville Street, / (A. R. ff7- 154 =14, ff7- 154 -15, #7- 154 -16 and #7- 154 -18) was adopted. Resolution #7861 N.C.S. approving lot line adjustment �/ �I� for properties owned by Stu and Ellie Lumsden, at 327 / Lakeville Street, A.P. #7- 154 - 14., #7 - 154 - 15, #7 - 154 - 16, and #7 154 - 18, was adopted. Resolution #7862 N.C.S. setting public hearing date Far)") September 6, 1977, for the purpose of considering the renaming of Frates Road within the City limits to Cadet Lane, southwest of Lakeville Highway, was adopted. Resolution #7863 N.C.S. authorizing the City Attorney to lend the name of the City of.Petaluma to certain Amicus.Curiae briefs was adopted. Resolution #7864 N.C.S. accepting completion of the "I " and Olive 'Street Reconstruction : ructioi Project No. GT 1 -74 -, was.ado.pted. Resolution #7865 N.C.S. desginating, a City appointee to prepare a joint powers agreement for "911" Emergency F Public Safety System, was adopted. 1914 August 15, 1977 f� A gend a Item #7 Resolution #7866 N.C;.S., authorizing release of summary A ✓✓✓"' ' RELEASE OF criminal.history information to the Personnel Officer SUMMARY CRIMINAL was 'adopted. HISTORY RES #7866 NCS Agenda Item #8. Resolution #78,67 N.C.S. approving claims and bills APPROVE' CLAIMS #2799 - #2904,, inclusive, General and,, #540 - AND BILLS #563, inclusive, Water, approved fo.r payment by the RES #7867 NCS City Manager., was adopted. Agenda Item #9 APPROVE RENTAL- - SWIM CENTER SANTA ROSA' JUNIOR COLLEGE. RES #786'8 NCS AR-enda Item. x{10 APPOINT JOAN' I. PEASL•EE TO RECREATION COMMISSION RES #7869 NCS Agenda Item . #I APPOINT HARRY W. SCHLOETTER, TO RECREATION COMMISSION RES #7870 NCS .Agenda Item #12' DECLARE'S'COW- S'CHOONER ALMA OFFICIAL SAILING VESSEL RES #7871 NCS PUBLIC'H.EARING- =AMEND � ZONING 0 RDI NAN C E REZONE "CORNER LAKEVILLE AND EAST WASHINGTON STREETS ORD #1259" NCS (SECOND READING): Resolution #786'8 N,. C,. S. approving rental of the Petaluma Swim Center by Santa Rosa Junior College, Petaluma Center, and authorizing the.Mayor to execute an agree ment for the use of the Swim Center, was adop:ted.. Resolution #7969 N.G.S.. appointing Joan I ;Peaslee to the Petaluma Recreation, Music and Parks Commission - , to June 30, 1981, was adopted. Resolution #7870 N.C;.S. appointing Harry W. S'chloetter to the P.etaluma.Recreation,,Music and Parks Commission, to June ,30, 1979, was adopted. ,Resolution #7871 N.G.S.: declaring the Scow- Schooner Alma.the'offic al sailing; vessel of the City of Peta= luma, was adopted. Planning Commission Resolution No. Z;9 - 77, adopted July 19, 1977, "submitted and filed; excerpts of the Planning. Commission Minutes of July 19; ,1977, submitted and filed; Planning sta'f'f report to the Planning Commission regarding subject rezoning, submitted and, filed; notice of the publ has been published by the City Clerk as required by law.. In addition,: notice of the public hearing had.been mailed by City Clerk to, property owners within a.300-foot. radius of the "subject property. By means of the vewfoil,'Planning Director Ronald Hall outlined the corner lot being proposed for rezoning and reclassification. He reviewed the stuff report stating the site. is presently vacant and covers approximately 17,•850 square feet of area, If the rezoning is permitted,, it would conform with the zoning on the opposite side of Lakeville Street where the Kieckhefer Shopping 'C'enter is proposed,. Councilman Bond stated, in reviewing the minutes of the Planning there was a suggestion made at that time that a condition be placed on .the. project to permi't.only right hand turns from the driveway onto Washington Street. The comments from the City's Crime Prevention Officer, G. T,. Evans, dated June 30,1977, submitted to the Planning Department, suggested the right turn only sign for egress traffic due to the close proximity Of 'the inter= section of Lakeville and East' Washington Streets. Planning Director Ronald Hall stated although this could not be made a condition of the rezoning, it, could have been but was not included in the Site Design review. City Eng - David Young stated he thought there was a double double- yellow stripe extending Mayor Putnam opened the Public Hearing. 'No communications had been received by the City Clerk and no comments were made by the audience. City Manager Robert Meyer pointed but the 'minutes of the Planning Commission' dated July 19, 1977, indicated _Mr. Ron Evans, associated with Lucky Stores, the parent company for Kragen Auto Supply-suggested a " - right turn only" sign to be posted at the driveway on East Washington Street. Mayor Putnam then closed the Public Hearing. Ordinance #1259 amending Zoning Ordinance #1072 N.C.S. by reclassifying and rezoning A.P. 0 - 082 - 21, #7• - 22, and #7 082 - 30 (tonsi >sting of approxi- mately .4 acre) from C - and M - to C -H (highway commercial) located at the northeast corner of Lakeville and East Washington Streets (Kragen), was adopted by 5 affirmative and 2 absentee'votes. Effective date of Ordinance, September 14, 1977. !q5 PUBLIC HEARING -- ADOPT AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL Planning Director Ronald Hall outlined the area pro - �J ' posed for change on the General Plan from Urban Residen- August 15, 1977 tial to Urban High Residential and on the Environmental PUBLIC HEARING- -AMEND as far back as the propgs,ed driveway for the project.. ZONING ORDINANCE This has the same effect as•a median barrier in the. REZONE NJE CORNER middle of the saree,t and a left hand turn would be LAKEVILLE AND EAST illegal. He state, however, he thought it was WASHINGTON STREETS advisable to warn motorists leaving the proposed pro- ORD #1259 NCS ject by having the' developers place a "right turn only" (SECOND READING) sign a "t the exit., 16, 1977. The matter (Continued) Plan and the Environmental Design Plan. Vice -Mayor Perry then questioned whether the auto supply agency would'be doing any type of repair work at the site. Mr. William Elliott, representing Kragen Auto Supply, stated the occupancy of the building is for retail use only and no repairs would be done,.- The Kragen Auto Supply sells packaged automotive parts.. Councilman Bond..aske'd Mr. Elliott if they would be agreeable to placing a rght turn only sign at the site. Mr. Elliott stated at the Planning 'Commmission Meeting,, they had asked if 'they could see how the traffic situation was to determine if there was a problem. If it is a requirement by the Council, the owners would cooperate. Mayor Putnam opened the Public Hearing. 'No communications had been received by the City Clerk and no comments were made by the audience. City Manager Robert Meyer pointed but the 'minutes of the Planning Commission' dated July 19, 1977, indicated _Mr. Ron Evans, associated with Lucky Stores, the parent company for Kragen Auto Supply-suggested a " - right turn only" sign to be posted at the driveway on East Washington Street. Mayor Putnam then closed the Public Hearing. Ordinance #1259 amending Zoning Ordinance #1072 N.C.S. by reclassifying and rezoning A.P. 0 - 082 - 21, #7• - 22, and #7 082 - 30 (tonsi >sting of approxi- mately .4 acre) from C - and M - to C -H (highway commercial) located at the northeast corner of Lakeville and East Washington Streets (Kragen), was adopted by 5 affirmative and 2 absentee'votes. Effective date of Ordinance, September 14, 1977. !q5 Mr. Hall stated he felt it was important, however, to review the information prepared by the Planning Department staff for the Planning Commission Meeting of August 16, 1977, in o;rd,er"to °familiarize both the . Council and the audience with the project. The plans submitted indicated a total of 50 garden -type apartment units and a 50 -unit apartment building,, with parking for 50 cars which * would cover approximately 47,602 square feet of the.subject site. The remaining area would be for roadways, uncovered parking, paths and landscaping. The developers. have proposed to construct the building to within 15 feet of the adjoining single - family lots; however, the Planning staff responded and recom- mended the .units beset back at least 40 feet. Washington Creek is located .along the southeast property line. and would be subject to improvement. The garden -type apartments would incl'ud'e 12 two - story, four unit structures, and one single - story, two unit structure, -for a total of 5'0 apartment units. Each apartment would have two bedrooms and one bath. The 50 -unit apartment building proposed would be a two - story structure.to cover approximately 23,500 square feet of ground area. Those apartment units would have one bedroom with-one bath, with some of the units designed specifically for handicapped. Mr. Hall reviewed the Environmental Impact Questionnaire'EValuation and Recom- mendation contained in the staff report dated August 11, 1977. The Planning staff anticipated one of the major impacts would be traffic and recommended a traffic study'be completed., The applicant agreed and a report has been re- ceived from Renato G. Martinez,, Traffic Engineering Consultant. A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING -- ADOPT AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL Planning Director Ronald Hall outlined the area pro - �J ' posed for change on the General Plan from Urban Residen- PLAN & ENVIRONMENTAL tial to Urban High Residential and on the Environmental DESIGN PLAN -- WESTERLY Design Plan from Church /School to Urban High Residential. CORNER E. WASHINGTON The area isbounded by East Washington Street, Ely STREET & ELY ROAD Blvd. 'North., and East Madison Street. Mr. Hall indicated RES #1872 NCS a joint application had been received from the Roman Catholic Bishop of Santa Rosa and Goldrich, Kest, and Associates, to rezone the area from R -1- 6,500 to Planned Unit District. This. matter would be reviewed by the Planning Commission at'their meeting of August, 16, 1977. The matter before 'the Council this evening is to change the General' Plan and the Environmental Design Plan. Mr. Hall stated he felt it was important, however, to review the information prepared by the Planning Department staff for the Planning Commission Meeting of August 16, 1977, in o;rd,er"to °familiarize both the . Council and the audience with the project. The plans submitted indicated a total of 50 garden -type apartment units and a 50 -unit apartment building,, with parking for 50 cars which * would cover approximately 47,602 square feet of the.subject site. The remaining area would be for roadways, uncovered parking, paths and landscaping. The developers. have proposed to construct the building to within 15 feet of the adjoining single - family lots; however, the Planning staff responded and recom- mended the .units beset back at least 40 feet. Washington Creek is located .along the southeast property line. and would be subject to improvement. The garden -type apartments would incl'ud'e 12 two - story, four unit structures, and one single - story, two unit structure, -for a total of 5'0 apartment units. Each apartment would have two bedrooms and one bath. The 50 -unit apartment building proposed would be a two - story structure.to cover approximately 23,500 square feet of ground area. Those apartment units would have one bedroom with-one bath, with some of the units designed specifically for handicapped. Mr. Hall reviewed the Environmental Impact Questionnaire'EValuation and Recom- mendation contained in the staff report dated August 11, 1977. The Planning staff anticipated one of the major impacts would be traffic and recommended a traffic study'be completed., The applicant agreed and a report has been re- ceived from Renato G. Martinez,, Traffic Engineering Consultant. A copy of the August 15, 1977 PUBLIC HEARING- -ADOPT Planning staff report and the .Consultant's report is on AMENDMENTS .TO `GENERAL file with the City Clerk._ The conclusion reached in. PLAN & ENVIRONMENTAL the Traffic Impact Study was that the,propo -sed develop- DESIGN .PLAN- -WESTERIY meat will contribute to the undesirable traffic con - CORNER E. WASHINGTON 'dition on Washington and ,Ely;, however, the traffic STREET & ELY ROAD associated with the pro,po;sed development would not be RES #7872 NCS the. significant contribution for the creation of (Continued) unfavorable traffic conditions. Mr.. Hall'adbi'sed the Sonoma County Water,Agency indicated the channel can handle any increase in surface :runoff water because of the size of the units:. It is felt that 25 or 26 school children would be added to the, public school system. The Planning ,staff does not believe the proposed uses,are incompa- tib tigating measures would be necessary to 'promote harmony. The staff report contains .20 suggested conditions be placed on the project. Councilman Bashaw asked if any of the staff were aware Of the requirement the Department of Housing and Urban Development placed on such projects with regard to the maximum number of children and other restrictions on occupancy. Commu- nity Development and' Services. Coordinator Frank Gray indicated he felt the best person.to answer these questions would be the'developer. Mr._ Robert Hirsch, a partner of the firm of Goldrich, Kest, and Associates, Builders and Developers, then spoke to the City Council. 'Mr. Hirsch stated -, in responset to Councilman Balshaw's question; there are a number of federal condi- tions imposed-on Section 8 Housing. , Through Section 8 Housing, the tenants -pay 25 percent of their .gross income for 'housing,. The typical senior cit "zen would be a widow,,approximately 72 years of age. The average rent a senior citizen would pay who is on social security would be approximately $90:.0,0 per month,, including' utilities, except for telephone. In the case of the two - bedroom apartments for low- to moderate- income applicants, their cross section indicates a young family, the husband is approximately 28' years old, is' a -blue collar worker with an average income of $8,000. The rental fee for this type of family would be ,25-percent of.their,income, or $166..00 per month for th °e two.bed "-room units, including utilities, but not telephone. The two - bedroom units are not limited to younger families,. If applicants qualify and are certified that they meet the requirements,, older couples may these units where there is a. need for a, two- bedroom apart - men This could - include a husband and wife, one of whom. may be ill two sisters :who live to,gether, which is quite 'comm Ion; or two friends, In respond ing to the.number of children permitted in the units, the average for the units they operate, which is approximately 10;,0.0,0 units in the State of California, is 1.05 children per apartment. This includes some one, two and three bedroom apartments throughout the State.. By management policy, they do not permit more than one child in ,a two - bedroom apartment. The anticipated n -: umbe of children for this particular project would be 50, ages from infancy through 18,years. On the basis of this prediction, they feel there would be approximately 25 children of elementary school ,age. The balance would be.divided b etween those under school age and those.in high school. Mr. Hirsch also indicated there: :are other federal requirements which they must follow. One is that the,d'evelopment would be maintained in an exemplary manner. The developers are required to impound monthly reserve for replacement in the'dmount of one-half of one percent of the construction cost, which would equal approximately $5,000 per year. Mr. Hirsch indicated the building.itsel'f.would meet federal government standards which are higher than, those required by the Petaluma Building Department, The plans have already gone through the Architectural and Planning Section of HUD, and if any changes are implemented'by the City, the plans would again have to be reviewed by HUD. Councilman B'alshaw asked if there was not a HUD require- ment that if young people move in with One "child and their- family grows they are required to be relocated. Mr. Hirsch stated if it is known the family size was going to. increase, they would ask occupants to move. The firm of Goldrich, Kest and Associates owns approximately 4,000 units in the Bay Area and they would try to find them other housing. This cannot be guaranteed, however. The'HUD requirement does stipulate that in.a two- bedroom apartment there would be a maximum of two children, but Goldrich and Kest management policy is to keep this number down to one child:. Mayor Putnam then opened the Public Hearing., No. communications had been re- ceived by the City Clerk. August 15, 1977 PUBLIC HEARING- -ADOPT AMENDMEVTS 'TO GENERAL PLAN & ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PLAN -- WESTERLY CORNER E. WASHINGTON STREET & ELY: ROAD RES #7872 NCS' (Continued) Mr. George Wells :from.1633 Joan Drive asked Mr. Hirsch where other units, owned and o the firm were located in the Northern California area. Mr. Hirsch stated they range from Capitola, San Jose, San Francisco, Santa Rosa, Livermore San Pablo,:, and Pleasant Hill. Mayor Putnam indijcated she felt Mr. Wells was interested in precise addresses of some of the developments, and Mr. Hirsch indicated he would provide the City with a list. . Mr. Tom Toborg of 131 Rene Drive then addressed.the City Council and presented the City Clerk with a.petition containing 198 signatures opposing the proposed land use designation. Also presented to the City Clerk was a petition signed by 25 residents who do not live in vicinity of.the proposed project. Mr. Toborg then read the text of the petition. He pointed out the fact the area would not be able to handle the traffic overload and cited the 173 single - family units which were already under construction.along Ely Blvd, North. Adding the proposed 100 -unit apartment and senior .citizens' area would generate over 1,000 people. In.addition, there are 276 new Young America Homes being proposed along McDowell Blvd. North, as well as the proposed hospital and park development. He felt the road servicing these proposed projects, i.e.., North McDowell .Blvd. and'North Ely Blvd. were inadequate to serve the traffic to be generated by all of these developments. Mr. Toborg- also stated he had seen the plans for the development and objected to the use &f concrete for the slab floor and also for the ceiling to support the second story in the senior citizens' housing pr.o °j'ect. He.further stated he did not feel adequate parking was being provided for the 100 units. Other objections to, the development by the residents in the area ,-wereits layout, location, and, design. He cited the fact there is only one entrance to the development and the Fire Department requires an emergency entrance which could not be used by the residents. Mr:: Toborg also objected to the 1act.that a two- story' building would would be placed close to single - family residents which would : completely block out their view. He cited the fact the homes along Rene Drive are now selling for between $60,000 and $100,000 each. The `people who own the homes are working people and are not asking for any special consideration other than have a protection for their investment. Mr. Toborg also stated he felt the developer had.made a major public relations mistake in not advising the neighborhood regarding the ,proposed project. He and his neighbors.are.no;t opposed_to ; growth or housing for the elderly, but he questioned the advisability of a high density project in an area which cannot possibly support commercial development. The next person to' address the.Co:uncil was Mr. De1-Woods, 132 Rene Drive. Mr. Woods stated as the residents of his neighborhood inquired about the proposed project, they had been given conflicting statement's by City officials. He. cited., for example, they had been :told that.water was no problem, that the landscaping for the project would be beautiful, but due to water.problems, the landscaping would be ,postponed. He also cited the fact it was stated traffic would not be.a problem, but then they were told traffic would. cause some problems. He felt because of these kinds of conflicting comments from ,City officials, the residents in the area could not be expected to be anything but apprehensive. Mr. Woods objected to the'mann.er in which.the residents within 300 feet of the apartment complex were notified by letter for the Planning Commission Meeting, but not advised of this hearing:. He stated he and his neighbors felt, the urban high density is not fair to the people who have purchased.homes in the general area. In the. course of his presentation, Mr. Woods referred to quotations. given to him by certain "City :officials: ". However., hedid not refer to.anyone specifically by name. Mr. Woods'.stated if the General Plan and Environmental Design Plan can be amended to suit pet projects of City officials, he felt there was no use having these two plans. He and his neighbors are opposed to such proposed amendments as would constitute "spot zoning ". Mr. Woods stated he'had hoped the City would have involved the community. As he talked to people in his neighborhood, he did not find people who oppo,sed the elderly or the low - income. He felt the, social conscience of the neighborhood was played upon by the term "elderly "'.. Mr.. Woods, indicated`Mr. H rsch.',s letter, which he had copied and made available to the 140 homes in the area, made no mention of the fact the project would be a.p : ub,lic housing. deve`lopmen,t. City Manager Robert Meyer .responded to some of Mr. Woods comments. He stated if Mr. Woods was going to charge City "officials" that specific persons should be named and not include all officials. If Mr.. Woods was unhappy after talking with a certain individual within the City, this matter should be brought to the August 15, 1977 PUBLIC HEARING - -ADOPT City's attention; however, Mr. Meyer felt very strongly AMENDMENTS, TO.oGENE :'about+_ineluding: :all' off icials_ in Mr. Woods' PLAN &.ENUIROIVMEN.TAL remarks.. ':Mr. Meyer also then continued with. his com DESIGN PLAN- WESTERLY 'meats regarding the'history behind the project, stating CORNER E -. WASHINGTON it was not a developer who came into Petaluma :and asked STREET & ELY ROAD. to do , the project. The Community Development Block RES #7872 NCS Grant came about over two years ago.. A citizens' (Continued) committee was formed, they searched throughout the City for various sites and made recommendations to the City` Council. The staff was not involved in determining the sites for project. Citizens have.appeared before the Council.over the last four years asking_ the„ Council to get involved in finding housing which they could afford. Mr. '.Meyer also stated although the funds are coming from 'the Department of Housing and Urban.Development, it will not be a public project, but will be.managed by a. private concern. Mr. Woods indicated his comments regard -ng City officials were made purposely because he did not intend to _single out any one City official, unless he is advised o,therw se. When he spoke of City officials, he.meant anybody in a managerial position or.a member of the City Council. Mr. Woods further stated he felt the developer did not inform the residents properly and also indicated with the right development, they'would support it. Councilman Bond asked Mr. Toborg for some clar.ifications'on some-of the state ments made on their petition. He was particularly concerned with the clause 'in the petition that stated the project was f:or.the apparent benefit of'the,de- velopers. Councilman Bond stated he, as a Councilman, feels such projects would benefit senior citizens, and low- and moderate - income families.. What tFe. Council, is seeking is some relief for these people who need decent housing at a moderate cost. Mr,. Toborg responded by saying .at the time the petition was written., perhaps they did not have all the facts, but at that time they could see no'benef -it except for the developer. They are not a developer making a profit. Mr. Bond then asked .if it would be possible for the.Communit :y Development and S'`ervices Coordinator''to give`a thumbnail. sketch of the ;history of the project :. Mr. Gray stated the selection of this site as a possibility for housing for senior citizens came about approximately two years ago. The Citizens' Advisory Committee for the Community - Development Block Grant was looking for alternate "sites for housing.projects. The criteria was that it had to .be at least five acres in order for :it,to be of sufficient size,. Second,. i -t - had to be within a residential neighborhood or adjacent to a r,es dential'neigh- hbrho'od. The third criteria was that it be near and convenient to shopping and medical facilities. Based on this criteria'., the Committee searched out sites in all sectors of the City and ten sites were selected. These sites have always remained. as options as prime sites - to be explored. 'Mr. Gray stated on, this particular piece of land he was riot, fully aware of the sequence, but felt the church found itself with a surplus of land and offered it for sale. In some manner, the developer was contacted., thus, the proposal is before the Council this evening. Councilman Bond next asked Mr. Toborg if he had further do "cumentation for the charges in the petition that this pro'j'ect, if it went through, would turn the area into a slim. Mr. Toborg indicated only from general observation of pro- jects in San Francisco and Oakland :where these public ,housing projects are situated. The residenta in the. area have; no assurance there would not be a mix of low- -income:and elderly housing in the same 'area. Councilman Bond stated he felt comparing 54 units of low - income housing in ,;Petaluma with areas in .flun,ter ".s Point or the Pink Palace in San ;Francisco was similar to comparing apples• and oranges. Mr. Bond further, stated'he fel.t`neither.Mr. Toborg or•he could prove their point, but he did not feel No.. 4.1n the petition has been documented. The next person to address the Council was Carol Streif, 1720 East 'Madison Street.. Ms. Etreif stated when they bought their home, they were told the area adjacent to their home was zoned for school /'church property.. !She opposed. the proj,ec.t because even now on religious .holidays there is,no:t sufficient:area.for cars to park for the church•. She also .stated there are two developments on Ely Road that "will add to the parking and traffic problems. The next person, to speak was 'Ernie Bennett,, President of. the Golden Age Club. Mr. Bennett :spoke in favor of the project,, stating he was not speaking for the Golden Agers, but only from his own .observations,. Mr. Bennett stated- there are a large number of,seniors'in the audience who came to'Show`concern' regarding the matter. Mr. Bennett stated while there have been °many complaints off ere'd regarding this project, .it is hard to find a perfect solution to many things.. He stated he 'felt the better comparison of what this project could 'be is the August 15, 1977 19 PUBLIC HEAR -ING -- ADOPT Park.Lane Apartments, which is an example of proper. AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL, management. He ' -stated `there are many members in his PLAN & ENVIRONMENTAL club who aie'on fixed income's and would welcome the DESIGN PLAN-- WESfERLY opportunity to Give in, such a development. He also CORNER E. WASHINGTON stated the fact there are 'two churches close to the . STREET ELY 'ROAD. _proposed p.rojec,t,yo uld be of benefit to elderly citi- RES #7872 NCS tens. In relating to the traffic matter, Mr. Bennett (Continued) stated many of the elderly would 'welcome the use of the City b.us and would not enlarge the traffic problem. He hoped some of the concerns could be met and made satis- factory to those in the neighborhood. The next person to speak was,.Mr. Ralph Ellis. Mr. Ellis stated.it was his understanding the project was to be for seniors and asked the Council to be concerned about mixing the project with young families.' Helen Brazell, 1654 Lauren Drive, stated she opposed the project. Because the buildings were to be built on.cement slab floors and because of the adobe soil in the area, she did not'fee'l the buildings would hold up well. The next person recognized by the Chair was Mr. Albert DeRosa, 1641 Jeffrey Drive. Mr. DeRosa suggested'befo re consideration is given on this project that a committee of the Council and representatives of the neighborhood be appointed to visit projects outside of .Petaluma. Mr. DeRosa stated there is a similar project in San Rafael called Pilgrim Park near the Marin County Civic Center. He felt it would be advisable for a group to visit this p.roje'ct and get some information from projects which already exist. Jack Stawiski, 139 Rene Drive, opposed the project because of the traffic it would generate. George Engfer, 1709.East Madison Street, stated he did not feel anybody is against housing for the elderly or,low- or moderate - income families, but 198 homeowners have told the "Council 'they don't want the project in their back- yards. He suggested the Council try to find a new'place' for the development. Mr. Ernest Vivas stated he lives at the corner of Ely Road and East Madison St-reet. He questioned the use of the remaining piece of property which is not being offered by the church and how it would eventually be zoned. He felt it would be rezoned for commercial purposes. It was his understanding the church was unwilling to lease the property to the developer because it was too valuable. When he moved into the area,, it.was his understanding the entire property was going to be a school,,.' Mr Vivas also stated he is not opposed to the project and did not the petition. Further, it was his understanding the Bernard Eldredge School was not enrolling children, as they did not have any more room. He then addressed the traffic impact, not only from this project but from three other projects in the immediate vicinity. He felt the impact on traffic would: be significant and disagreed with the report made by the Traffic Consultant. Mr. Vivas also stated he did not feel the number of children per unit could be controlled because he felt the law'states you•eannot discriminate because of the number of children. Mr. Vivas also expressed concern about mixing single - family low- to moderate- income housing with the elderly. During the course of Mr. Vvas' comments, there was some discussion held re- garding the requirements for the developer to widen Ely Blvd. Mr. Meyer, the City Manager, advised developers are required to.widen streets as developments proceed through the City. This requirement would.also be - placed on this development. The following people also gave testimony at the public hearing Mr. Bill Maples, 1641 Lauren Drive, indicated he felt the intersection of Ely and East Washington Street was one of the most dangerous in the City and asked the Council to check the Police records on the number o"f accidents in the past - y'ear. Mr. Maples also indicated he felt the residents within 300 feet of the project should have been notified of this hearing. Mr. Wayne Rollins, 1640 Joan Drive, asked for clarification .regarding street widening along Ely Blvd. in front of the church property. City Larry Klose indicated the project would involve a minor subdivision or the Attorney parcel map and one of the conditions which could be.placed on the map is that all street frontages would be developed. Whether they would be developed by the church or the contractor is .not certain,, but the .requirement could be placed on the development. August 15, 1977 PUBLIC HEARING--ADOPT AMENDMENTS TO'GENERAL PLAN '& ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PLAN =WESTERLY CORNER E.., WASHINGTON STREET: & ELY ROAD RES #7872 NCS (Continued) Mr. Mel Larsen, 128 Rene Drive, expressed concern about the widening of only a portion of Ely Blvd. , as traffic flow would have to be reduced.to two lanes to ; go over the'-bridge. Mr. Larsen also expressed concern that the project could eventually 'turn into multi- family dwellings if the senior citizens moved away from the project. Mr. Vic;Er"vine, 2237 Parkland Way, stated .the-inter- section of Ely Blvd.. and, East Washington Street is unsafe now and'more traffic would make it more dangerous. Capt. John Kilpack objected to changing the zoning from school /church to apartments. Mrs. Gladys Boysen, 112 Rene Drive, spoke in opposition to the project. Ms. Janie. Warman, a member of the City staff,, s,tated she would like t'o' address three issues which had been brought up at the Public Hearing. The; first was the question of would the senior center, remain as senior citizens' housing,. This matter has been discussed with the developer, and at the time the development is.buil't, they would be required to record a covenant against th;e.property'for the length of the development, and in this case 40 years, which would restrict the rental,of the units to persons 62 years ofd age and older:- There is no question 'that anyone younger could reside in those units.. In addressing the - problem of`the traff ic at Ely Blvd. and East Washington 'Street', Ms. Warman stated it was her understanding a traffic signal is being installed.in that area. City Engineer David Young stated a traffic signal would have to be installed, but the question would be.when. Ms. Warman then continued to'`review the project and stated this was one of three sites recommended by the Citizens' Committee which had been approved by 'HUD. There are other vacant lots in Petaluma, and for the 'past six months, the staff has gone out to the different sites- Ms. Warman stated she had spoken to many realtors and had a major meeting with the ; realtors and asked for sugge'st.ions for. sites which, would be suitable for such a project. This'is really the only site that could, be located which appeared to be financially "feasible, within a'residential area, and relatively close `to shopping. 1 The last 'citizen to oppose *the project was Mr. Gary Heil, 136 Rene Drive. Mr. Heil stated `he chose, his home in the area approximately three .months .ago be clause of the open space and felt he would not be able to sell it quite as' easily if the zonings is changed. Mayor Putnam asked.for other comments from the floor. There were none. She stated she felt many of the people in the audience were of the same mind., but had a variety of concerns regarding the development. 'The is! very much . concerned about taking care of all.se'gmen;ts of the population. She indicated although the community is very old, there are newer sections, but there are still,some,very old streets in the community where new developments have been placed side by side to older and smaller homes. The community itself' has a` completely integrated population. The City is endeavoring to look construe- tvely at what can be done. She stated it is not possible to 'say that. some- thing is going-to be- perfect, nor can it be said that something is going to be terrible until the project is developed. Mayor Putnam also stated vandalism and crime are not :limited to only one section of the community and referred to Item No. 4 on the petition. She felt,this was an unfair statement to make regarding the quality of. the community. Mayor - Putnam indicated the Council is also concerned about. the .traffic pattern., arid. the City is endeavoring tc make_ corrections wherever and whenever possible. The public hearing was then closed'.. Councilman Balshaw asked for some clarification as he.wis the C'ouncil's represen- tative on the Planning Commission and, wonder=ed if there was any 'flexibility to the plan. City Attorney Larry Klose indicated there are a ,range of possibilities in every stage of the process. The Planning Comniss'ion, r: Howeve, cannot proceed to consider the plan if the change in the Environmental Design Plan and General Plan is not adopted by the Council. Councilman Bal - shave indicated his question was the matter of .flexibility on the number of` units. City Manager Robert Meyer indicated if .a plan for a Planned Unit Development is submitted., the number of units could be determined by the Planning Commission. r -f the Plan- ning Commission approved the plan, the Council still would.have to introduce . and adopt an ordinance on the zoning for the Planned Unit Development:. Community Development and Services. Coordinator Frank Gray advised it' was his understanding that when .HUD approved the 'loan to the developer, -and he pointed out the loan would go to the developer and not the City of Petaluma and the August 15, 1977 PUBLIC HEARING -- ADOPT project is not considered public housing, th& maximum AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL number of. units would.be 100. Of these, 50'would be PLAN & ENVIRONMENTAL for elderly Housing and 50. for low- to moderate - income.. DESIGN PLAN -- WESTERLY Mr. Hirsch'indicated HUD had.,advertised for 50 units CORNER E. WASHINGTON for the elderly and 3O for :low-'to moderate - income. .He STREET -& ELY ROAD stated he did.;not ..feel 'he could take the project for RES #7872 NCS much. :than ; '100 units:. There could be some latitude; (Continued) however, he had only learned tonight there would be extensive street improvements required. He could not exceed the 100 units, but somewhat less may be workable. There was some fur -ther- discussion on the flexibility of. increasing the housing for the elderly and decreasing the housing for the low- to moderate- income. Frank Gray indicated, although the project is designed for'low -cost - housing, it is for low- income people and the construction is a very expensive project. Mr. Hirsch stated the only flexibility would be to make some of the two - bedroom units available for elderly. He was not sure whether this would be two or ten units.. Councilman Cavanagh indicated since 'he had not been present at the entire hearing, would there be any question on his voting on the matter. He stated he had listened to the hearing on the radio en.route to the Council Meeting. The City Attorney advised if Councilman Cavanagh chose to abstain from voting without a conflict, the vote would have to be counted -as a "yes" vote. Resolution #7872 N.C. S,. - adoptin`g amendments to the General Plan and the En- vironmental Design Plan 'in the vicinity-of the westerly corner of East Wash - ington Street and Ely Road,'was introduced by Councilman Balshaw, seconded by Mayor Putnam, and adopted by 4 affirmative, 2 negative and 1 absentee votes. Councilman Cavanagh and Vice - Mayor Perry voted "no ". RI The change would require a zone.change in the General Plan where no.General Plan classification exists.. Consideration for change of the Willow Creek property is also part of the request. The frontage properties in the area would be changed to Service Commercial and the outlying areas to Industrial. Councilman Cavanagh questioned whether the change would comply with the request from•Willow Creek Properties. Mr. Hall stated Willow Creek Properties.indicated they would like to have a change from Agriculture and Open Space to more ex- tensive development. Planning Commission Resolution, No. 14 -77, recommending adoption of said proposed amendment, submitted and filed. Councilman Balshaw commented with regard to the amount of land being designated for industrial use. He felt that additions for 'industrial use should not be suggested by private owners, but by the City's professional planning staff. He also stated he would like 'to know the status of the industria•1 zoning and the amount of acreage the City presently has. Planning Director Ronald Hall indi- cated the staff, in its preliminary analysis while studying the Environmental. Design Plan, had determined to•make the exact changes as'had been requested. The staff was pleased when the applications came in .at_ the time they were studying the Environmental Design Plan.. He -also' stated the staff does not have a tabulation of the total industrial land; however, 'approximately .8 square mile has'been committed for residential use over. the -past few years. City Manager Robert Meyer also commented the a- r-ea`und'er consideration for land use changes has an assessment district which is be'in'g paid for by the landowners -. RECESS Mayor Putnam declared a recess at :10:20 p and the Council reconvened at 10:30 p,.m. AMEND GENERAL PLAN & E.D.P. TO PROVIDE By means.of the•viewfoil, Planning Director Ronald HalIF9 .outlined the areas to be designated Service Commercial ' SERVICE COMMERCIAL & and Industrial on the General Plan and the Environmental INDUSTRIAL AREAS -- Design Plan. The first request is to rezone approxi- (� N. McDOWELL BLVD. & mately 6 acres on the northeast corner of Old Redwood OLD REDWOOD HIGHWAY Highway and North McDowell Blvd. from M -L, light indus- RES #7873 NCS trial,, to 'C -H, highway commercial, to accommodate the Big "R" Hardware Supply Store. The second request is to prezone approximately 10.6 acres located on the• east side of Old. Redwood Highway from County Industrial Area to City Highway Commercial and Light In- dustrial to allow for the - Friedman Hardware Store and separate industrial development. The change would require a zone.change in the General Plan where no.General Plan classification exists.. Consideration for change of the Willow Creek property is also part of the request. The frontage properties in the area would be changed to Service Commercial and the outlying areas to Industrial. Councilman Cavanagh questioned whether the change would comply with the request from•Willow Creek Properties. Mr. Hall stated Willow Creek Properties.indicated they would like to have a change from Agriculture and Open Space to more ex- tensive development. Planning Commission Resolution, No. 14 -77, recommending adoption of said proposed amendment, submitted and filed. Councilman Balshaw commented with regard to the amount of land being designated for industrial use. He felt that additions for 'industrial use should not be suggested by private owners, but by the City's professional planning staff. He also stated he would like 'to know the status of the industria•1 zoning and the amount of acreage the City presently has. Planning Director Ronald Hall indi- cated the staff, in its preliminary analysis while studying the Environmental. Design Plan, had determined to•make the exact changes as'had been requested. The staff was pleased when the applications came in .at_ the time they were studying the Environmental Design Plan.. He -also' stated the staff does not have a tabulation of the total industrial land; however, 'approximately .8 square mile has'been committed for residential use over. the -past few years. City Manager Robert Meyer also commented the a- r-ea`und'er consideration for land use changes has an assessment district which is be'in'g paid for by the landowners -. August• 15, 1977. AMEND. GENERAL PLAN. & E.D.P.. TO - PROVIDE' SERVICE COMMERCIAL._ &: INDUSTRIAL AREAS- - N. McDOW -ELL BLVD. & OLD REDWOOD HIGHWAY RES #7873 NCS (Continued.) RESULTS OF BID OPENING \ I� FOR BREACHING DIKES' -- V WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITIES, Mayor Putnam then opened the.Public Hearing.. Mr. Art Lafranchi, representing Willow Creek Properties, indi cated. hisl clients are -n -favor of the plan as proposed. The Public Hearing was.then closed. kesolutio.n #7873 N:C. adopting amendments to 'the General Plan and the Environmental Design Plan in the, area..of ,iVorth: McDowell, Blvd. and Old Redwood - Highway, was 'intro'duced.by Vice -Mayor Perry, seconded,by Council - man Bond, and adopted by 6 affirmative -and 1 absentee votes. City 'Engineer David Young advised the 'bid's had been opened August 17 Only y . DutraCorporat8 oniintheamountobfl $130,,000ce ved from 1912 PROJECT Mr. Young advised present at this evening's meeting - were Mr. ;David Sills' of the, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Mr. .Bob Mapes of the California Department of .Fish and Game, Mr:. !)avid Bailey of the Marin /Sonoma Mosquito Abatement District, and the City's Consulting Engineers from CDM, Inc. A meeting'had been held with these gentlemen at 5:00 this afternoon at the site of the breaching,. There is no action the Council can take at this time to award the bid,,.as. the City has not -had a decision from the State Division of Wager Quality Contr,ol,.and the bid would have to be reviewed by 'this agency. Mr. Marvin Lindorf of CDM, Inc. advised the State's position is that just . because the City received only one bid does not negate the action. The bid is presently under a review process. Mr. David Sills of' the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in Sacramento reaffirmed that agency's position that the dike had to be breached and the remaining property of approximately 80 acres reverted to marshland,. Mr. Robert Mapes•of -the .California,Department of Fish and Game stated his Agency is also in favor of the 80 acres being reverted back to marshy area. 'There was a discussion held between the City Manager Robert Meyer. and:Mr. Mapes regarding the 80 acres which is to be. turned back to marshland.. Mr. : Meyer pointed out: the :fact the land is the. same now as it has been for more than 100 years and asked if it'was possible f;or the•City to deed the 80 acres to the ,State., rather than have the City retain the responsibility for, maintaining it. after the dikes have been breached. Mr. Mapes indicated his Department's pos tion:has been that it is the applicant's responsibility to take -any miti- gating measures.. Mr. Meyer then questioned whether this policy has been carried out throughout the Sonoma- 'Marin area. on the river and' down into San Pablo Bay where land had to be' restored to marshland and projects had been built. Mr. Mapes indicated the Corps of Engineers makes the final decision. There have been many cases where developers have been required.to give more than acre for acre; however there were some instances where lesser acreage was involved in the exchange. City Engineer David Young asked Mr. Mapes whether the Department would, consider the alternative of the fresh water lagoon in: the area, rather than s_al.t water. Mr. Mapes indicated the recommendation is for tidal restoration. City Engineer David. Young summarized the 'City`.''s position to date and stated: the project is grant eligible. After the bids were opened, they had been sent to 'Sacramento and the City is now awaiting their decision -. He .stated - the only new piece of information he has received was some indication that the City would have to have a second permit and.he .would pursue the matter. Mr. David :Bailey of the Marin Sonoma Mosquito Abatement District spoke to the Council stating he, was.awa -re that some•. levees were being breached. Before this particular,piece ; o;f land is inundated, he would like to suggest that the p:ro perty be dsced before the work .proceeds.. Mr. Young stated:, in their review onsite at the project this evening, it was obvious that in order to accomplish what the Mo,squite Abatement Distr-,ict desires, it would be necessary to channel outboard of the dike to the river. If this is not done, the 80 acresa, will not drain. Mr. Bailey indicated if the. area is disced, the marsh grasses and pickle weed would.have a better chance of growing and .there, would be l'es's chance of infestation o.f mosquitos. If the area 'becomes. a pro,bl'em, the landowner would have to bear the cost, in this case it would be the City ' of;Petaluma. August 15, 1977 RESULTS OF BID OPENING FOR BREACHING DIKES-- WATER- POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITIES 1972 PROJECT (Continued) City Engineer David Young advised the Corps of Engineers has requested: the City to ask for an extension of time which he would handle. There was a brief discussion on how, long the City would have- before they would have to award the bid City - Attorney Larry Klose advised the City Charter indicates bids are good for 45 days. There was no further discussion and no action taken on the matter. HISTORICAL RESOURCES Community Development and Services Coordinator Frank SURVEY -- PRINTING COST Gray the State of California has reviewed the Historical Resources Survey done by Dan Peterson. The State has indicated they would like to participate in the amount of 50 percent of the actual cost for reproduction for the Survey. They feel it is a good project and worth printing in a professional manner similar to a publication done for the City of Fairfield called "The Way it Was ". Mr. Gray advised the actual cost for 1,000 copies, providing the ,State took care of all the art work and graphics, would be about $2.81 a copy. Mr.. Gray. recommended a delay,on awarding the bids and exploring further with the State, coming b.ack.to the Council with a proposal, and possibly reject all bids: Mr: Gray further indicated he felt it would be advisable to contract with Mr. Peterson for professional services. Mr. Gray advised Dan ;Peterson made the suggestion that the.per'copy rate could be less expensive if the City would permit Mr. Peterson to the copyright to the publication. Mr.' Peterson feels it is a marketable item and he could sell copies of it. No action was taken on the matter. Mr. Gray will report back to the Council. V574 SURFACE RUNOFF A letter dated August 2, 1977, from Mr. W. R. Stillman,Kri33 MANAGEMENT PLAN Civil Engineer with the Sonoma.County Water Agency, an informational brief on the Environmental Protection Agency 208 Program, and a draft of the Plan Summary for 1978 to 1980, is on file with the. City Clerk. Mr. Stillman advised he had brought with him two people to address the Council, i.e., Mr. Win Smith, who dealt with the planning aspects of the Surface Runoff Management Program, and.Mr. Rod Schullar, who worked in the.engineering and technical field. Mr. Smith advised the Surface Runoff Management Plan is a, portion of the Environmental Management Plan being prepared through the Association of Bay.Area Governments .for the entire Bay Area.. The Sur -face Runoff Management Plan has been prepared.in cooperation with the Association of Bay Are'a: the City of Petaluma and the City of Sonoma. The reason these two cities are included in the Plan is because they drain directly into San Francisco Bay.- Mr. Rod Schullar•gave slide presentation. Mr. Schullar explained some of the materials contained.in surface runoffs, may have a direet.bearing on shellfish life in San Francisco Bay.. Adverse effects are felt from overgrazing of small parcels, heavy-metals being built tip and being washed into the basins, asphalt, built up ramps, and streets. Mr. Schullar explained it was difficult in many older sections of cities for street sweepers to clean close to the curbs and much of this material eventually 'finds its way into the basin. David Young indicated many of the requirements in the program are already being carried out by the City. Mr. Schullar: felt this was the case in many cities; however, before fall rains come, perhaps some additional house cleaning and intensified acitivity would prevent many of the heavy - metals and debris being washed into the creeks and river. Mr. Schullar also pointed out many of the pollutants,come from animal waste in outlying areas. Mr. Smith then continued to review the programs anticipated to be started, . including an educational program, which would include news media alert, mailing of information to citizens, septic system maintenance.programs and management practices. The program also•provdes for improved street sweeping practices which would affect not only the County . of Sonoma but the City of Petaluma and the City_ of Mr. Smith indicated the City of Petaluma had cooperated by sending a schedule of their street sweeping pro,,gram and they would like to reverify these schedules during the course of the program. At the present time, the County of Sonoma does no street sweeping:- He suggested an intensification of street sweeping activities prior to the rainy season. The program also calls for the control of chemicals and reclaimed water. Mr. Smith advised they had met with the agricultural of the County, and their use of chemicals is closely watched by the County Agricultural Department and by EPA. The focus on the use of chemicals would be the household chemicals being used and, how they were being disposed of. R65 August 15., 1977 SURFACE RUNOFF At the conclusion of :Mr. Smith's report, City Manager MANAGEMENT PLAN Robert Meyer indicated he the Council should'be (Continued) aware that the requirements would cost the City add tional funds for more sophisticated street sweeping and possibly the cost for other. mit�iga <t ng measures. Mr. Meyer indicated he .felt the Committee had 'put together a very good report and'the choices for the two cities and the County of Sonoma would be to-have the Federal Government tell the agencies how to respond or to work with the local committees and have input from local sources. No action was taken on the report. MOTION TO MOVE Because o,f the length of the `meeting and the fact that AGENDA ITEM Mr. William G'pple was still to be heard on Agenda Item #26, a motion was made by Councilman Hilligos''s, 'seconded by Councilman- Perry,*to move Agenda Item, #26 to this place on the. Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. DENY REQUEST'FOR This matter had been. continued from the August 1, 197 7 V VEHICULAR ACCESS ONTO Council Meeting, Assistant City Engineer Thomas•Hargis V CAULFIELD LANE advised the Engineering Department s position for the RES #7874 NCS, request by Mr. Gipple to have access from onto the new Caulfield Lane Extension,•remains ?the same and they were opposed.to granting the reques.t.. Their main oppo'sition.to the. driveway access is because iof' the safety factor.. A memorandum 'dated August 8, 1977, to the Mayor and . City Council by City Attorney.P Lawrence Klose,, indicated since Mr. Gipple. had, reasonable access to a public street from his property, vi'a Crinella.'Drive,.the Council has the right to-deny. the request. Councilman.Bond questioned whether the City is now able to close off all drive- ways onto Caulfield Lane. It was his understanding there are some 'dup'lexes to be built on the long section of vacant land. Mr. Hall indicated the driveways for the duplexes would not face onto Caulfield Lane. City Engineer David Young stated basically the City doe&, not object 'to driveway access onto Caulfield assuming there are proper safety considera cons. The area to which Councilman Bond referred to is between Park Lane and McDowell Blvd., In this area, from Park Lane to M61)owel'1, there will be a - fivec foot shoulder. The City had not used City funds. to put in curb,. gutter and, side= walks: n this .area. If the ownership of;this portion.brings in some sort of development plan and are willing to build a wider street and put in. the parking buffer, it may be possible, depending upon the amount of traffic,, to have driveway access in this area. If there is not the proper si;ght:distance for a parking buffer, then.it may not be safe to have access off Caulfield Lane. The area between Park Lane and Crinella Drive., where Mr. Gipple':s home is located, will not have parking, as there is a one -foo;t non - access easement.. Councilman Bond indicated he felt it would be best if there were no openings onto Caulfield 'Lane and Mr. Gipple's case would depend upon whether-'or =riot there were other areas which had access. After some discussion„ i -t was deter- mined most of' the 'a'ccess onto Caulfield. Lane would be eliminated, namely by the one -foot non- ,accesss easement and .the fat -,p that the new duplexes would. eliminate the three rema -inng entrances., City Manager `Rober:t Meyer indicated the house the City owns at the corner o'f South .McDowell Blvd. and- Caulfield Lane would then have to take its access from Daniel Drive or McDowell Blvd. The property i -n question.is large enough to be split, but if ,access is not permitted off Caulfield Lane, then the property would have to be sold as: one lot. Resolution #7874 N.C.S. denying request for vehicular access onto 'Caulfield Lane (William Gipple) was introduced by Vice- Mayor.Perry, seconded by Council- man Balshaw,. and adopted by ?5 affirmative, 1 negative, and 1 absentee-vofes. Councilman Cavanagh voted "no ". LETTER REQUESTING A letter dated.August 2, 1977, addressed to the, City LEGALIZING BINGO Council.by Mr'., Steve Sanders, was read by the City Clerk and ordered filed. A brief discussion held on the matter, and City Attorney Larry Klose advised the games that are now being: operated in the City are illegal and,he,was requesting direction from the City Council. City Manager. Robert Meyer suggested if the. Council would like to have an ordinance, that it be a very minimum ordinance which would not require.a lot of police enforcement. The City Attorney advised the State Statute is very specific what can or cannot be done within the context. It is the local option to permit bingo games; however, the ordinance would have to follow very closely what the State requires. The Council asked the staff to research the, matiterand rep.o.rt'back to them. ac August 15, 1977 TENNIS COURTS-- Councilman Hilligoss, the Council's representative on LUCCHESI PARK the Recreation, Music and Parks Commission, stated.it was her understanding the tennis courts at Lucchesi. Park are completed,.except for the l -ight; standards. .She questioned whether or. not it would be possible to open them for play before the summer is over. City Manager Robert Meyer indicated the.contracto.r has not turned the project over to the City yet, but he would investigate further. He did not feel, however, they could be used until the project was accepted by the City Council. Council- man Hilligoss suggested when the courts are available for play that a formal opening ceremony be held. ACCEPT 2156 STREET Public Works Superintendent Roy Kelly stated the report Fo? 3 REPORT -- 1977 -78 is a projection of'the City's needs in order for the THROUGH 1986 -87 State Department of Transportation to evaluate the RES #7875 NCS needs of local agencies and counties on.a Statewide basis. Resolution J /787. accepting Streets'and Highways Code Section 2156 Street Report for 1977 -78 through 19$6 - 87, was introduced by Vice -Mayor Perry, seconded by Councilman Bond, and adopted by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. ESTABLISH STRUCTURE Planning Ronald Hall advised the resolution F5-so FOR RESIDENTIAL prepared for the Council's consideration allows for the DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION same structure for the Residential'Development Evaluation �fQ _79 BOARD Board asswas used under Resolution #6990 N.C.S. It // UU RES #7876 NCS would be comprised of 17 members to administer the Interim Residential Development Control System. City Manager Robert Meyer advised this would give the responsibility for evaluating projects for the construction year of 1978 - back to a citizens' committee, rather than have.the Planning Commission do the evaluations.. Resolution #7876-N.C.S. establishing new.membership composition of the Resi- dential Development Evaluation.B'oard, pursuant to the Interim Residential Development Allotment Control System adopted in Resolution #7846 N.C.S., was introduced by Councilman Bond., seconded by- Councilman Hilligoss, and adopted by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. REAFFIRM SUPPORT OF Planning Director Ronald Hall reviewed a staff report��/' OPEN SPACE NATURE -- prepared for the City Council dated. August 9, on the ((�© NOVATO /PETALUMA Silveira Countywide Plan Amendment -- Proposed Land Use CORRIDOR Policy for North Marin County. Mr. Hall - indicated the RES #7877 NCS Council, in 1976, adopted .a Memorandum of Understanding with Marin County that whenever.a: land use change was being considered, the City of; Petaluma would have an opportunity to respond. An application has been made by several large ranchers. in the area between Novato and Petaluma to extend' the City centered corridor from its present location north to the Sonoma County line.. This area would be approximately 2,760 acres along both sides of H= ighway 101, and would result in a land use policy change which could lead . to future development in the Study Area. There was some discussion regarding the matter and the 'loss' of open space land along this corridor if development was permitted along the 101 Highway.. At the conclusion of the discussion, Resolution 0 877 N.C..S. expressing support for the recommendation.of'the Marin County Planning Commission of June 27, 1977, to bring existent Agricultural Zoning in the Novato-- Petaluma,Corridor into conformance with the Marin.County General Plan was introduced by Vice - Mayor Perry, seconded by Councilman Balshaw, and adopted by 6 affirmative and . 1 absentee votes. ESTABLISH CHARGES FOR SEWER AND WASTEWATER CONNECTION, CONSTRUC- TION AND UTILIZATION RES #7878 NCS Finance Director •John Scharer advised the resolution F1 --) before the .Council is the final step in completing requirements for the grant for the Wastewater Pollution Control Facilities Expansion. He stated Sections 1 ,through 5 reflect no changes and remain the same as they have been in the pasta Section 6 would change Residential Charges from $ 2.00 to $2.60 per month: Commercial and Non - Residential, excluding industrial,. charges are based on a formula of a minimum of $2.60, and could range depending • upon 'the strength of the discharge and the flows. Industrial user charges will be'calculated individually and will be dependent upon their flows, suspended solids and B.O.D.'s. The .resolution follows the revenue program prepared by J. B. Gilbert and Associates -. City sewer charges will be based on the assessed valuation as determined by the, County Assessor. Under Section 8, a new clause has been added',to charge $25.00, plus direct costs Q August 15, 1977 ESTABLISH CHAkGES,FOR SEWER AND-WASTEWATER CONNECTION., CONSTRUC- TION AND„UTILIZATION RES #7878 NCS (Continded). associated with the processing, for non- residential.and industrial users. Resolution #7878 N.C.S. establishing charges fo_r.'sewer and wastewater connection„ construction and 'utilization, pursuant to Sections 15,.44 through 15.77 of the Petaluma Municipal Code, was introduced'by Vice -Mayor Perry, seconded by Mayor Putnam, and adopted by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. ESTABLISH WATER Finance Di-rector Scharer explained the.resolution \ CONNECTION FEES prepared for the Council's consideration more nearly RES #7879 NCS reflects the actual cost for" installation of the various meter sizes. He also indicated there would be very,f'ew cases where these fees would be charged as the work is usually done'by contractors. 'Mr. Scharer advised in the past subdivisions did not contribute to the' source of _supply of water. They did, however, contribute to expanding the internal distribution system. The..increased cost in connection fees and service charges would help offset the increased cost per acre foo'tlof water purchased from the Sonoma County Water Agency. At the conclusion of the discussion, Resolution #7879 N;.C.S. establishing water connection fees' was introduced by Vice -Mayor Perry, seconded by Councilman Balshaw, and adopted by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Vice -Mayor Perry indicated at the groundbreaking for COMMITTEE Sola Optical,. U. S.A. there was a great deal of interest expressed regarding the Petaluma.Sky`Ran'ch. Vice -Mayor Perry advised he would .like 'to chair a committee to make a study for a municipal airport, since the status of the Petaluma Sky Ranch was uncertain at this time. He asked if C'ommun-ity Development and;Servic'es.Coordinato.r Frank Gray_ would work with him on the project. CALIFORNIA MARINE Councilman Cavanagh reported Councilman :B'ond, Council- PARKS & HARBORS.ASSOC. man Hilligoss, Fred Schram from the Chamber.of Commerce., MEETING and Bob McLaughlin and.he had.attended the meeting of the California .Marine Park's and Harbors :Association. Councilman Hilligos''s asked Councilman Cavanagh to report on their meeting with Jim•Mat"suueda of the Department. of Navigation and Ocean Development. Courci -1man Hilligoss indicated the impre'ss she got from Mr. Matsueda was that the City should not be. sitting waiting for the Corps of Engineers to come:forth with funds, but should be looking in other areas if the City is really interested in developing a.marina. Frank Gray :indicated the Corps of Engineers by telephone h`as advised him they , feel the marina is worth a full Section 107 Study. DISCUSSION REGARDING Pro -- to adjourning the meeting there.was a lengthy ST. JAMES MANOR AND discussion regarding the,proposed project on -Ely Blvd. GARDENS PROJECT North. Councilman Balshaw asked to, have, sine. direction given to .him regarding the matter and what the options would be, whether or not the requirement.for the developer to put in.the road. could be negotiated and what the time schedule to meet HUD`'s requirements were. There.was some further discussion regarding the fact the rezoning would be to PUD'. Mr. Gray ind- ica'ted the PUD would be'the zoning to be considered because of the type of units proposed, which were a mix of buildings 'and not of-one particular type.. It was also suggested that Mr. Balshaw visit the HUD office in Embarcadero Center in San Francisco, in order to have some of his questions answered regarding whether the ; senior citizens' housing portion could be increased, what the time schedules would be, and whether or not some of 'the low- to mo'derate - income housing could be eliminated from the project. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come befoxe,the Council., the meeting.was adjourned at 1:10 a..m. August 16, 1977, to Monday, August 22, 1977., at 4::0'0 p.m. Mayor 1 Attest: Deputy .City Clerk