HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 12/01/1977MINUTES OF MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
DECEMBER 1,, 1977
ADJOURNED MEETING .. An' Adj ourned Meeting: o'f the Petaluma City Council was,
called to order by Mayor Helen.Putnam at the hour of
7,37 p.m.
ROLL CALL Present: 'councilmen Balshaw *, Bond Cavanagh,
Harberson, Hilligoss, Perry *, and Mayor
Putnam.
Absent. None
*Vice =Mayor Perry arrived at p.m.
*Councilman Bal'shaw arrived at 8:`25 p.m.
DENY AP`PEALS'BY The City Council had heard the-'appeals from 11 de- :S
• o
DEVELOPERS velo.pers at an Adjourned Meeting November 28, 1977.
INTERIM The matter of the appeals were taken under advisement
EVALUATIOW CONTROL by tti�e Council fora determination to be made at this
SYSTEM meeting,. Prior to voting on the issue, Mayor Putnam
RES #7996 NCS ., asked the City Attorney to explain the • procedures the
'council could take.
City Attorney Larry Klose advised the ,procedure se in the Residential
Development Plan-,is not entirely precise.as to the method to followed in
making a judgment..on an appea1 He'fe]t, however, it was safe to assume the
Council should make findings on any matter.if points.are to Ve-adjustedifor•any
particular developer. The finding would be with regard not to a particular
voting member, bu;t - to a certain -category. Judgments :should be made on a
category- by- category..,bas s,, instead of. awarding. a blanket increase in the
number of points for each';developer. The Council would have to make findings
that would leave' the court, -of it - should reach - •a court, tol understand the
reasoning of the Council-in taking their- action. The review process is an
administrative act and that is why the findings are required. If no changes
are to be made' in the. points, then the Council should affirm ratings' given by
the Cit Committee and these would-be contained 'in the resolution.
There was some discussion regarding amending the Plan. to revert to the 85
points.which had been used, as the basis for awarding developments in previous
years. Mr. Klose. indicated, however, if any of;•the appeals are granted in part
or as a whole, th'ere'may be no,need ito amend the•Interim Plan to reduce the
points to since a sufficient' number of developers may qualify under the
present:: standards.'
Some:discussion• was held. r-egard'ing changing, the points awarded under the cate-
gories the Citizens' Committee.. Councilman Cavanagh who,had been a member
of the Committee, indicated-he would'be opposed to changing any points, other
than)those�for'Board, Members 12 and 13, as these members.of the'City
Council. Councilman Bond indicated.he felt it would be unfair, since the other
people would not have an opportunity to respond. Mr Bond also indicated he
felt no new evidence had been pre's'ent'ed at the.Appeals on November 28
that woul ter - -the', figures =on -the , t'ally sheet:- Most�of the matters brought
to•the Council's attention were objections -'tallow scores given by various Board
Members'and to the. `high' -level• of 100 poinis':1 Mr Bond -also stated he had .
compared..the minutes of the.Residental Development Evaluation Board and could
f ind. nothing-'new which : had = been presented •.at- the•l•Appeals . Hearing to' the. City.
Council.' Councilman' `Hi`l'l'goss: -also indicated she. wou -ld' not•-be in_ favor: of
changing points, and if the, p0ints•1 were to be. changed, • it � should = -be done! by, the
Citizens' ! or the She indicatedi she- would'•rather. lower -the
points in the Interim Plan than alter the scoring given'by the Citizens' Committee.
At the conclusion of. th;e 1 discussion -• Resol'ution. , #7996'! , N C! Si: denying appeals
from the determination.of'�points for developments . by the Cit- izens'.
Committee, pursuant to the Interim Residential Evaluation Control System for
the.1978=79 construction year, was introduced by Councilman. Bond,.seconded.by
Mayor Putnam, and adopted by 4 aff'irmative, 1 negative,.and 2 absentee. votes..
Councilman Cavanagh voted "no ". (Councilman Balshaw and Perry had not yet
arrived. for. the vote..)_ . 3 i . • �., .
i
,
w ,
33
December 1, 1977
AMEND INTERIM City Attorney Larry Klose stated ,it had been anti -
O RESIDENTIAL cipated the Council may wish to deliberate on the
DEVELOPMENT reduction of'the'point'count in the Interim Residential
CONTROL SYSTEM Development Control Policy. Mr. K'lose advised a draft
TO REDUCE-MINIMUM resolution had been;prepared• for the Council's consi-
e �b
POINT NUMBER T_Q deratiori: He stated the draft resolution makes a.
85 POINTS number of fiiid_ings and he reviewed the findings with
RES'. #7'997 NCS the , Council. Mr. R1ose stated.one of the things, that
happened when the system was originally developed was.
that it was subjected to extensive litigation. The system was affirmed in the
form originally `adopted which, required a threshold 6f'85 points`. Since the
time that PetalumA`s .Sys:tem was upheld in the Courts, there have been a number
of legal cases throughout California the most ,significant of which is the case
of the Associated Home:Builders versus the City of Livermore,, One of the
points of thin case is, while, cities will be allowed to control, their own
destiny in providing .reasonable - limits on the ;construction of new housing and
burdens, on municipal services, there mus,t'be some concerns for home buyers and
the •regional needs of ;people. He stated' while it is 'not particularly clear
from the Court case, some consideration should be given if: awar-ds'are particu
larly' low that the City; might be put,ting.the 'burden on,other communities.
Although. Petaluma''s case. was argued i.n Fed'eral Court, the ,Livermore case op'.ens
up a point' of State law, wherein the State'Cgnstiiution requires some cons -
deiation of ' the regional needs of people .iii the. area where they live
Mr..Klose also reminded: the Council. the Citizen's' Committee for this year's
Res*idential.Develd- ent Awards had suggested lowering the points in order to
gain a greater number. of units The'statement has been made in the 'hearings
that the. d'evelopments,that.have come through this- year. have been, as `a whole"
of higher, - .quality -, than- have been ,seen in :.prior years He also •indicated • he
felt the, f:indirigs.: the draft :resolut_ion,.'c .te some of.• the..matters , as: justi
f,ication .fo i .the point score. :., - , .. •
The City Attorney then ,read, the entire, draft, resolution and. the, Council made
some s,ugges;tions ; A mbtion•,was.made by Councilman, Cavanagh,
seconded by_ Council -man Perry to •change the, point : scoring in. the ,Int m Plan
from 100, points to:85. Motion carried' `by' 4,.,afflirmat ve, 2 negative: and , ,1
absentee_; votes,.,;Councilman.Harb_e;rson and..Counc lman,Hilligoss voted, "no".
Planning: Director_ Ronald Hall stated because of the, many • app`lications for
allocations=.in this construction year and',ithe higher ;point system,'the appji--
cants were, highly competitive and,, in his opinion, the sa_fet,y of the system was
protec•ted.,by ;the: competition between,; developer's:.
Resolution #7997.. N':C;::S': amending the,Inter.im. Residential! Develop n Control
System; fo.r the 19:78 -79 .cons tr.uct ion, ,year to ;reduce the .minimum .number+ of points
required ; therein under• •.S'ecton . V - to :85 points., and .providing for . further
review by the Citizens' Committee of those Development Applications which,
failed to qualify prior to said amendmentt,""was introduced-by Vice= Mayor}Perry,
seconded „by Councilman H ll• goss,: and, .adopted by & affirmative-and 1 =negative.
votes. Councilman Harberson.vo.ted "no.':' Mr..- Harberson indicated his only,
compla�int,wa.s changing• the•point_ system back_ and - forth., He was, ,however, happy
with the-quality. o.f developments the •C- it.y received for this construe -t "ion "year
Cb� AWARD• ALLOTMENTS 'FOR : ,, Some, discussion was held. reg&tdi.ng the award of al lot 197'8 79 ,.CONSTRUCTION menus in the various categories 'and . the, different,
YEAR sect -ions. of the City. - The two. -developments which had•
'
RES' # 7.99$ N.CS . ... _ .qualified under ithe :'J system, ii_&. ; Wolff
' Sesnon Development.,, 12.83, 94 units,; and •F.eature .Homes,
12.67;,;37 low -.to moderate- income. units, were included in the allocation, and
the balance.•.of -the allotments was. ,given: to, proj'ec.ts ,with the .highest scores on
a declining basis -.. • The award_ of the allotments left-,& ,remainder.- of .71 Low to
mod era t'e,- income. units and, one: unallocated. unit. for the ' 1978 - construction
:.year.:. - ��_, .. _ . _ • , . _ .. � ... , .
R'esoluti'on #7,99.8 N.C. SA.. certifying. points awarded .by the Citizens' 'Committee to
development applicat -ions . pur -suant 'to: the Interim: Re sidential;EValuation-, Control
System f.or;;the 1978 -79 :construct16n, -year and : ai7ar .ding
therefo,;-was +,introduced. b_y :Councilman H_arb.erson,, seconded by, Vice-Mayor. Perry,
and adopted by.7.- .affirmative: votes:
After adoption of 'the above resolution, discussion was held.•on the remaining:
unallocated units and the disposition of them. Councilman Harberson stated he
I .
December 1, 1977
AWARDa ALLOTMENTS; would be in favor. of Allocating units only if they were
FOR 1978:: -79 -awarded. to the developments which received the next
CONSTRUCTION; YEAR highest. ratings:. He, felt some.; effort should be made to
RES 4799.8 NCS% stay within`the system. Councilman Hilligoss stated
(Continued) ..she felt the.two Projects which would be a fill- in_.on
the westside, and complete�a..very important street,
i.e., Liberty Street should be given a great deal of
consideration.
Councilman.B'alshaw felt if the 71 unit's - remaining from the low- or moderate-
.
income „, Housing , could' not be given for this type of housing, they should be
carried over until the`following year. Councilman Bond also felt the two
projects which would offer-' a very important opening for the west side of the
commun "ty, ,.e. Keokuk. Meadows and" Cherry Hill multi = family units, were worthy
of consideration if these units are to be awarded for this construction year.
Counc lman'Cavanagh also mentioned there 'was another development on the' west
side' which had. only received a' partial 'allotment and ' wond'ered if” this develop
meni could continue if' not awarded 'additional units. Mr'. William Hsi, the
developer of the proposed Country Club Estates multi- family'and' "single- family
project:, stated although they would prefer to have all the units allotted at,
one'time; they intend ' to' proceed.with the p'roject': He als'o'stated the public
improvements would be`very "expensive ' a ' the` the price'of the multi- family
units 'to` be hghe'r an they had L • . _
The Council made no decision on the disposit'ion unallocated units and
was advised by the City Attorney they could recafl 'the matter at some future
time, but he suggested any future allocations should be within the System.
MOTION TO ADD ITEM Councilman Harberson stated ' lie had• received ' a call from
TO AGENDA a person who is scheduled to'move.,:into a new home
bbceiiber` 10,, 1977. " Since` the Council will not be
meeting until'December 12 and the Councl'had ;previously permitted
residents to move into subdivisions which were not completed under certain
conditions, he questioned whether or not the matter could be added to the
Agenda..
City Manager Robert Meyer advised he had 'received two',requests, one from
Williams and Aguirre and the other one,•,fr•om McBail Company, to grant occupancy
for a portion of 'Miwok Manor Subdivision and Alderwood Subdivision. Since the
Council had been informed that only one item would be taken up as a matter of
business at this meeting:, it would take unanimous: consensus of the Council to
add the items to the Agenda.. Mr. Meyer also stated the staff has reviewed the
subject subdivisions and could report to the Council 'at this time if the
Council is willing to -add these items to the Agenda. The motion was made by
Councilman Harberson, seconded, by Councilman Hilligoss, to add the matter of
approving occupancy - 'f'or a portion of Miwok Manor Subdivision and for a portion
of Alderwood'Subd`ivision - to the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVE OCCUPANCY FOR City;Manager Robert Meyer asked Assistant City Engineer ��� 6
A PORTION MIWOK MANOR Thomas Hargis to report on.the progress of the two
SUBDIVISION subdivisions on which requests had been received for
RES 447999 NCS occupancy of certain units. Mr. Ha "rgis'ndicated the
Miwok Manor Subdivision is requesting permission to
allow occupancy of 18 units on the.central street of
APPROVE OCCUPANCY the subdivision, Lots 15 through 23, and 34 through 42.�
PORTION OF ALDERWOOD Mr. Hargis stated the streets are paved in front of 9 p
SUBDIVISION these .lots., as well as the access street to Ely Blvd.. Q
RES #8000 NCS The water main improvements have been installed and a
portion of the subdivision is completed. The subject
units are accessible and serviceable.
On the Alderwood;Subdiv-ision Mr. Hargis indicated the request is to occupy, 14
units on the cul -de -sac, which comes off Ely Blvd. He advised all the improve-
ments are complete. There has been a problem, however, downstream of the cul-
de -sac street, with the sanitary sewer. A leak in the sewer main has to be
repaired and occupancy could not be permitted until, the City Engineer certified
it was ready for use. The developer would like to have.the Council grant
occupancy of these l4 units when the City Engineer certifies the sewer is safe.
He suggested if the Council wanted to certify occupancy for these units, it
should be contingent upon approval by the City Engineer'.. Mr. Hargis indicated
the subdivider is anxious to have the homes ready for occupancy, as there are
people who would like to 'move in the weekend.of December 10.
December 1, 1
APPROVE' ;OCCUPANCY FOR Councilman Harberson indicated he was disturbed because_
A PORTION-`MIWOK' -' --• ): the potential; new homeowners -for Alderwood Subdivision
MANORrSUBDIV:ISION
= who: called 'him on the telephone indicated: it was their.
RES J7999 NCS t understanding - ..the only stumbling block preventing. them
from moving into, their homes:'was the Cityi Council'.
They .had been .by representatives of. the developer
APPROVE; OCCUPANCY• to .call the ' Council to get. some action for them to move
PORT -ION OF AL-DERWOOD into the homes 'before; December' 12,. Mr. Dow, the tract
SUBDIVISION • salesman, and Mr. Leonard Wilson, representing, the
RES #8000 NCS. McBa l,Company,.were,present; in- te Council Chambers..
(Continued) Mr. Dow apologized to the Council and.Mr. Wilson.
indicated he was concerned because the Council was not
going to have a meeting until. December 12 and four people • had to move out , of
the r'homes and had planned to move into their.new.subdivision on the 10th_ of
December,. City Manager Robert Meyer suggested that before the Council approved
any more homes in this. subdivision, McRail Construction Company write a letter
to .the people who were. asked ';to call the'City Council and advis& them the City
Council, was not at, fault in this matter. Mr.. Dow indicated he would be happy
to wtiie7 a,-letter to everyone involved.
Mr. Walt Wil - `ams'was, also present in the.Council.Chambers and stated*he.would
have his subdivision completed during the month of November but was- unable to
get shipments of cement as were other contractors the area -.. Mr'. Williams
also stated none of his buyers have a date to.`move in. The problem n'his case
is bn the,15th of December,their commitments for loans on the houses, will be
up; ,and„ at that time, the interest rates will rise one- quarter -'of one percent..
At the. conclusion.of the discussion, ,Resolution X7999 N.C.'S. approving occu-
pancy for a portion of 'Miwok Manor 'Subdivision, was introduced by Councilman
Harberson, seconded by Vice -Mayor Perry,, and adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
Resolution #8000 N..0 „S, app "roving occupancy for a.portion of Ald'e_rwood Subdi-
vision, was .int,roduced :by Councilman Harberson, seconded by Vice= Mayor"Perry,
and adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to_come bef,ore:the
Council -, the meeting was adjourned at 9;15 p.m.
Attest:, ,
./ C i Clerk,.
._ 7
1
1
� ,i