Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/13/1978MINUTES OF MEETING OF' GITY COUNCIL . PETALUMA,, CALIFORNIA MARCH 13, 1978 City 'Manager Robert Meyer stated the Council:, as early as September of 1976 and October of 1976 determined that , masonry -or concrete fencing.. be required in subdivisions,where they backed onto arterial or collector streets. Mr. Meyer stated the City Attorney has :bro.ught it to his attention that this matter , should be included in tle: Zoning Ordinance. .The resolution before the_ Council at thismeeting would refer the matter to the Planning Commission. Mr. Meyer also stated he unders,tand's Mr—Joslyn will have a tentative map before , i e Council in the near fu;tur:e, and the.,matter of masonry-fences for the remainder of` the development could-'be, discussed .a.t that time,. The Council still has the prerogative of.placing a.condition on the tentative map which would require masonry fencing. City Engineer David.Y;oung pointed out .the,mat.ter,of masonry fences. for Park Place II was called to Mr..•Joslyn'.s attention,when the preliminary map was being discussed. City Manager- Robert ;Meyer indicated .he there -was an ove.rs'igh.t on,..the staff' =s part_in.1976 when.the.Council "s policy. requiring masonry.fences was not incorporated into a resolution and.brought back•to,the Council for.adoption. Resolution.,#8115 N.C..S. referring the matter.of requiring masonry construction for screening from arterial and collector streets. to. the Planning Commission for report and recommendation, was introduced.by Councilman Bond;,,seconded by Councilman Balsha4,•.and adopted by 5.af.firmative, l.negative, and l,abs:entee votes. Councilman Cavanagh voted "no ". RESOLUTION OPINION Resolution #8116 N''. &. S'., regarding County Human Serv- RE FINAL" .-REPORT- ices was :introduced by"Coiunci,lnan Hilligoss, seconded SONOMA COUNTY-'HUMAN by Councilman ' Bbnd, .• and' - adoopted by 'd affirmative and 1 SERVICES TASK FORCE absentee vote's. RES 48116 NCS_ . , AWARD BID - -ONE -HALF TON TRUCK FOR WATER DEPARTMENT' RES' #'81 "17 'NCS Mike Acorne, Management Analyst, reported on the bid opening held March 8', 1978.: Two 'bids had been received: one from Nave Dodge, wi <th, a total .amount of $4 and the other from Sanderson Ford fora total bid of $7,0:70. Mr. Acorne advised' he had received a letter from Aubrey W: Sanderson, .aa,.ed,,March 13, 19 ; 78, indi- cating they had made an error on their bid and their net bid_ should have been $5,848:73 ADJOURNED MEETING An Adjourned Meeting of the Petaluma City Council was called to order by Mayor Helen 'Putnam at 5:07 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen.Balshaw, Bond, Cavanagh, Hilligoss, Perry,,`and Mayor Putnam: Absent:: Councilman Harberson. REFER MATTER OF City Attorney tarry Klose explained the Council has REQUIRING MASONRY before.them a.resolution regarding the requirement for FENCING TO PLANNING masonry construction for screening from arterial and COMMISSION collector streets,to the Planning Commission for TES #81.15 NCS report-and recommendation.. Mr. Jon Joslyn of Qantas Development Corporation has expressed concern as to whether the proposed policy would "grandfather" developments such as Park Place I and II. Part of, the development has wood fencing and this.policy change would require masonry fencing,for the remainder of the development. City 'Manager Robert Meyer stated the Council:, as early as September of 1976 and October of 1976 determined that , masonry -or concrete fencing.. be required in subdivisions,where they backed onto arterial or collector streets. Mr. Meyer stated the City Attorney has :bro.ught it to his attention that this matter , should be included in tle: Zoning Ordinance. .The resolution before the_ Council at thismeeting would refer the matter to the Planning Commission. Mr. Meyer also stated he unders,tand's Mr—Joslyn will have a tentative map before , i e Council in the near fu;tur:e, and the.,matter of masonry-fences for the remainder of` the development could-'be, discussed .a.t that time,. The Council still has the prerogative of.placing a.condition on the tentative map which would require masonry fencing. City Engineer David.Y;oung pointed out .the,mat.ter,of masonry fences. for Park Place II was called to Mr..•Joslyn'.s attention,when the preliminary map was being discussed. City Manager- Robert ;Meyer indicated .he there -was an ove.rs'igh.t on,..the staff' =s part_in.1976 when.the.Council "s policy. requiring masonry.fences was not incorporated into a resolution and.brought back•to,the Council for.adoption. Resolution.,#8115 N.C..S. referring the matter.of requiring masonry construction for screening from arterial and collector streets. to. the Planning Commission for report and recommendation, was introduced.by Councilman Bond;,,seconded by Councilman Balsha4,•.and adopted by 5.af.firmative, l.negative, and l,abs:entee votes. Councilman Cavanagh voted "no ". RESOLUTION OPINION Resolution #8116 N''. &. S'., regarding County Human Serv- RE FINAL" .-REPORT- ices was :introduced by"Coiunci,lnan Hilligoss, seconded SONOMA COUNTY-'HUMAN by Councilman ' Bbnd, .• and' - adoopted by 'd affirmative and 1 SERVICES TASK FORCE absentee vote's. RES 48116 NCS_ . , AWARD BID - -ONE -HALF TON TRUCK FOR WATER DEPARTMENT' RES' #'81 "17 'NCS Mike Acorne, Management Analyst, reported on the bid opening held March 8', 1978.: Two 'bids had been received: one from Nave Dodge, wi <th, a total .amount of $4 and the other from Sanderson Ford fora total bid of $7,0:70. Mr. Acorne advised' he had received a letter from Aubrey W: Sanderson, .aa,.ed,,March 13, 19 ; 78, indi- cating they had made an error on their bid and their net bid_ should have been $5,848:73 �1r�5- . March 13`, 1978 AWARD BID- ONE, HALF Resolution '68117 N.C.S. awarding contract 'for.purchase- TON TRUCK FOR of one new 1978 one ton truck with cab and chassis to WATER DEPARTMENT. Nave Dodge, Petaluma, in the amount of $4,885.29, was RES 668117 NCS introduced by Vice- Mayor.P'erry, seconded'by Councilman (Continued_) Cavanagh,, and adopted . by -6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. I DISCUSSION RE CITY City Man_''ager Robert Meyer stated the Cou til`had PROPERTY, AT 739 directed, the staff to.solcit bids for the City -owned SOUTH MtDQWELL BLVD. property located at .739,South McDowell 'Blvd: `'Since that time, there. - has been some :indication the property should be considered for some other type of use rather than residentiaL In,order for the building to be used for any purpose, the minimum amount for repairs, would be.`$4,686„16. This. , figure does not include one off-street parking space. Mr. Meyer .stated he .did .not know- the use the Council had in mind for the building; however, ; if it is going to be used ..f,o a use 'Other than res.idential,, certain ,code requirements :,may have to be met;, such as the installation.of fire walls:. Mr..Meyer also stated if the decides to 'sell the property, a portion of the money received from the sale would have to be used to reimburse the gas. tax f. ands:.: Historically,.the people in the neighborhoodhave opposed other :than ,single - family residences in the area,. To change the use of this building;.from.,single- family residential to another use, would require,public hearings. Councilman Bal°shaw 'stated the matter surfaced: at the hearing for 'Robin Piggott" s day care center. He f elt the .Council should acknowledge there is, an obligation to provide for these kinds of. f'acilit es the community: There are.objections raised when such facilities are proposed for the, middle of residential neighbor- hoods. This par- tcular piece of ,prop.er•ty - is on a, corner, is the most ,remote,, yet cent-rally, located site that may be ,availabl .. He.felt it would be 'suitable for a.day care center, :possibly a teen center the: neighborhood, would approve, or a senior citizens' -center.. , ,He..f;elt. before the location is lost to the City, it should. be explored for, other. uses... He. also stated the objections raised by' the. ,neighbors previously.,. -in his. opinion,, .wer.e based upon the; fact a row of duplex units -had been, proposed.; .Councilman, Balshaw stated he would like 'to at least give the neighbors in the- area. an opportunity 'to turn, down such :a proposal.. Mayor Putnam suggested if it was:the consensus ;of the Council, the matter should.be given adequate pub.lici:ty so the surrounding community knows there may be' a p'roposat for a 'day care center •Or a- teen, center or a senior C1'tlzenS '' center. City Attorney Larry Klose advised the, Council to hold up on the: solicitation of bads° and have the staff investigate the ,p.ossibilities for the suggested proposals. No action was .taken. AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT Community Development and Service's Coordinator Frank WITH DAN PETERSON Gray stated this.matter had,been discussed' when the FOR P.RIN.TING ADDI- Council auth'orized..the; agreement with the State.of TIONAL COPIES -- California for . the,.printing of the Historical Survey.. HISTORICAL SURVEY At that time, Mr,. Gray-stated he was directed to RES #8118 NCS discuss, the terms. of the contract' `with. Dan Peterson.. The Council had..suggested a return of 10% of the sales by Mr. Peterson' to. the .City. This, would amount to about $170.,0.0 if, all .4,000 copies; were. sold Mr. .Gray recommended this amount be paid in one lump sum upon completion .of` the; sale of the book.. Mr,. Peterson is requesting permission to sell 4,.000 copies of the book in order: to try to, recapture some of. the costs incurred. while preparing the survey. , This amounts t o approximately $2,500 more than the, contract; formerly awarded to him.,by the City. Mr. Peterson would like to. have the ,Ci.:ty, extend, his time for the sale Hof the books for a. ,period of five years,. There was a.brief 'discussion by the: Council,. They felt that a three -year 'time limit should be sufficient. At the conclusion of the discussion,,`Resolution 668118 N.C,.S. authorizing contract with ,Dan Peterson. for distribution .of', Petaluma Historical. Survey outside of the Petaluma. Valley area:wa.s inty-- oduced.by Councilman Hilligoss,, seconded by Councilman Balshaw ,and. adopted, by.'six affirmative and one, absentee votes. March 13, 1978 ADJOURNMENT' ka`yoi adjourned .the Afternoon Session at 5:45 p.m. s and : c'alfeTd ih4 Counci 16 reconvene at 7:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL The Adjourhed ;Meeting .of the. Petaluma City Council was called to ord6r, by Mayor Helen Putnam at 7:37 p.m. Pr'esent:'Cdunci!man'BalshAw; Bond, Cavanagh *, l Harberson," Hilligoss, Perry*, and Mayor Putnam, I I ! . - 1 1 1 `*Cbuncilman arrived At 7:50 p.m., Councilman Perry arrived at 8:05 p.m. STATUS` REPORT- - City Engineer David. Young g 'the 'plans And SIGNALI2ATION specifitati6fis for'.the street improvement and signal- INTERSECTION izati 'n-projec't, at. the i f Lakeville 0 . 0 LAKEVILLE STREET,& Street and Petaluma Blvd... are ready to be approved by PETALUMA BLVD. NO. the Council and Advertised for bids., was, ,., I . .: � . Ut S , ; , important' ­h 1 . ' a� th e to recap he par s in `ihb are The project would cause removal of 29 park:ing bpae6g on Petaluma BIvd. North and seven. on Lakeville Street,.* Pre- ai .11 - viously, there had been,discuss1on at Council meetings regarding the devel- opment of off-street parking in ' the,,area " on-the Land's of Lois Thompson. This' private lot could provide 39'b 40 *parking spaces. If the *land could be leased or purchased,, the.-cost.fox the improv ements would be approximately $25,000. Mr. Young stated . 'he would 'not want to.delay the signallzatibn proj- ect; however, while.it is out , bid,, -it wbuld be. 'Possible' to design another contract fbi the "parking' lot a .1n this way, both the parking lot and the intersection b be' completed, at' the, same time.' When the matter had been discds's before-, there.'was'some. interest shown by the Chamber of Commerce to accomplish this off-street parking. City ManA er Robert' mbet' of '' the f" Gommerce 9tated - they would contact the pebp'le in.' the area, to Aeter'mifte if A' *a.tkirfg dis't'rict­ could' be p formed. The matter has never' been. bro'u"ght:,bA:ck..:t0' - the City by the merchants or the Chambei' of CoTiad'e r ' Mr., Meyer. recommendbd the City move forward on the project. The matter" 'the. Ci $25,000 for 'improvement of the off-street parki7ng wodld­be' a policy decisi:6n,.to be made by the Council. Councilman Harb.e.rson commented that the matter has been thoroughly aired at a c il ing Coup meei iwo years, -ago and several years Pr'ior'tb that. At" thesia- meetings, 'ihe mdV6 th­6'.A'kea 6 6se�d. �he_re' ' al of the parking but pp mov have taken no steps to form any.,sbkt bf an .assessment di,§,tridt 'to provide parking. He did not feel the City should spend,$25,0.00 for the,improvements of the off- street parking ,.lot andAndicated-he thought an assessment district would be appropriate. Mr. Meyer stated he f elt- 'this matter' had been given 'adequate publicity and urked Council to mov6 ihe The resolution approving the call for bid's would be placed on the Cohs,edt for the March 20, 1978 Meeting. He felt - the."0arking'shdu , l`d 66':treated. as A''separate matter. David Young advised the largest bilsiness in the.Ar6a, the Petaluma Grocery, is in -f avor of the project. "Mayor Putnam, re,cog�ftized - Mrg. El !wood ' ChAn f rom - 'the Petaluina: Gy_oce'ry" _,.Mi7,s;' ;ChddstAte"&.shb' had' not been 'c'ontact by anyone regar ;' 0 parking - ,Fqilig th Thompsoii,Prbperty. Petaluma.Gricery has a very large parki n area for''their'"bu - S' and' - had ,- advised 'the' - owners ;- of the f l'0w which was loca"t'e-d' across the street from 'them, they could' use the back of their lot for parking. Also,, the difstomers from.To'n k n their lot. The glass customers j y s par -, i company next to them has inside parking and'she.did not feel the residents in the area "would bb af f dued. Mrs.. Chan.1rfd'icated' sh'd f elt the project would be good for 'the area. as' there is a defidfte need for signa1ization at the inter- section' to reduce thb number 'of ac'cid'ents. Mr. Meyer commented he.felt some , of. the problems in the area Te 'to the opposition of removing parking may have been resolved through the'cooperation of the Petaluma' Grocery. If there l'are ''other 'bu8iriesses, in the area which seem to Ve a problem, perhaps this ma.t'ter­shqUd be worked` 'out - witff the merchants and' the ' 'C'haidber 'of 'Commerce. Mayor- - Putnam' 'asked - to :have 'the' matter placed' on the Agen , d a f or the'March 20, 1 1,978 meeting. 4�- 5� March. 13,, 1978 AUTHORIZE CONTRACT The City Clerk reviewed the proposal submitted WITH RECORD'S SYSTEMS Records Systems Associates, Inc.,:Mark F. Meier, . ASSOCIATES, INC. ,President and Executive Consul -tant. The date of the RES W8119 NCS proposal is February '15,, 19.78. I It was pointed out to the Council the present. filing system f or the C ity-'was established in 1965 and as the.City,has g.r.own,. the need for a more sophisticated system has become evident.. The City:Clerk.r.eques4ted.Phases I and II be con- si i this, fiscal year, and. the .Council .give,ser ous consideration to, continuing with the program..w th.P-.hase III in the next fiscal year. Phase I of the program would provide. for an ;inventory and review of all the materials presently stored in the vault area in. the basement. The consultant would provide.the: labor for this phase of..the" project and coordinate his results with the City Clerk, various, departmen -t -heads and the City Attorney.. Phase II of the proposal would.be the:design.and installation Of a records center,. In the proposal . submit;ted, the consultant., indicated he felt at least . one- third-more space could..be: utilized..by re a rr. a ng -ing the vault area in the: - basement.. _ The- third, ;phase of-the proposal, would, be to: do a complete inventory of active - records and convert the files. in, the.City..Clerk's"Off.ice to the Municipal Unified Functional. Filing System: '(MUFFS)... The cast for Phases I and II would total - $'7.,58;5,. The City Clerk pointed out the pilot projecf in the Clerk's Office could not be accomplished unt11 Phases and" II` would. be completed' as there is- inadequate storage room in the vault area. City - Rob'er•t .Meyer stated he knew' the- City .C'lerk had been, working on the projec.t.f`or a couple -of years, but it.has been very difficult to find qualified people to perform the consulting'service,, since it was such a specialized field. He recommended the City ' begin.implementation.,of'the program, as, the one which had been installed several .years ago was 'now out- moded and inefficient.. Councilman Harbers.on asked' about the.microflmin& program for, the- City. The City. Clerk'explained ,the equipment the, City` has, is, in Mark Meier's opinion some of the finest- available =; however.,. due -to :lack of personnel,.the',equipment has been used only very litt_le:. The ,other problem ar -ises on knowing what documents to microfilm and preparing documents for film. These are some of the questions that can be answered by the consultant when he does the inven- tory of records for the City. r r , 'Resolution authorizing the :Mayor :to. _execute an, agreement with Records. Systems Associates Inc,. ,. was introduced. by Councilman Harberson_, seconded by, man Cayanagh, and` adopted, b y,-, 7. affirmative 'votes. REVIEW OF COMPARATIVE The' comparative, report. presented to the Council for REPORT -- ENVIRONMENTAL their study listed, .as the basic document,, the,Envi- DESIGN PLAN ronmen Comm t.tee,, `the, Planning.,C,ommgested b t `ss on and, he Citizens' tal Des n.Plan as suggested staff. In additibn,, the :document. contains the° review ;,d'one by Wil,liams, Platzek, .and. Mo.c -ine, and the comments made at, the Community Conference: t ;study to be done by the Council ai.this meeting.would be a discussion on the diiff'e.r_ence.s between the two reports,, . ..City .Manager Robert Meyer reminded the Council during a previous . me eting...C,ounc- ilman.:Bond,had s.ugges't'ed he two documents be put into -a comparative .report,; therefor,e', the report',before the Council is a resu t of this request.. The .basic,.document to be 'used °for 'the, Environmental Design .Plan would, be, the one prepared.by the Citizens "Committee, the Planning Commission, and the Planning staf f,. "Community Development and Services Director Frank. Gray indicated he felt the format• presented' ; b.y the Citizens; ' , Committee .and the-Planning Commission was a good one. What the. Council, .needs to -do- now. is. weave: the suggestions provided by Williams., Platzek, and Mocine.;into•the; basic document, if they are accept- able to the Council.. 1 Discussion was held on. the greenbelt. area., or the urban separator' and urban re's.erve. Other 'items of discussion during, .the study of the comparative doc- ument was, a suggestion, that' , the, Environmental . Des ign�. Plan be made, an element of the. General ,Flan. Community Development., and. Sery ces Director- Frank Gray March 13, 1978 REVIEW OF COMPARATIVE stated the Environmental Design.Plan is a policy. REPORT - =ENVIRONMENTAL statement '-of the City 'and. , does not have the DESIGN PLAN and effect: of .law such as. the General Plan. Because the E.D.P. is flexible, the staff uses it as a guide- line; however,, Mr..Gray stated,if' the Council wished, they could make it more rigid•which would resul.t'n_ it having to be amended, as an element of the General Plan, There was some ,further discussion. on, the urban, reserve area and the urban separator and'how growth wouid .develop into - the'r.eserve area. Councilman Balshaw stated.he would,like to*have the document, include the policy that the natural waterways shall be .preserved and that.there shall be 'continuous access to the Petaluma River. Discussion then-led to the•optimum size.f..or the City .of Petaluma'. Councilman. Bond pointed out the Cominunity.C'onference spoke about. population size and felt this.would be more ankeeping with .the'.G`eneral Plan. The population recommendations in the Environmental Design Plan go 15 years beyond the General Plan date of 1985. It was pointed out.the's- zing.of public facilities would have to be based on the optimum ,limit in population of-the City. There was some discussion regarding the five percent _growth rate over the next seven years; Councilman Bond'f'elt one of the things-the City would be faced with would be the'strict' numerical balance between east. and west and felt this was a matter of contention. The Citizens' Committee had recommended implementaton.procedures be included in the text of. the 'Environmental Design ,Plan. Frank Gray ,indicated he felt the implementation idocument should be'_isepara`te !fr-oin.xthe goals. and policies, as some of the mechanisms for implementation are contained -in various documents, for example, park Bevel'opment`and.•ded "ication are, contained in the Subdivision Ordinance. It would also be possible to.have zoning requirements implement - some of the policies, as well as use permits and even capital improvement programs. City Manager - Robert Meyer pointed,out that on Page 73 of the Comparative Report the Citizens'.Committ.ee and the P.lanning Commission had recommended specific capital programs to be implemented...If these are adopted in the goals and policies,, the Council would .be,adop ..ting a : capital outlay program. He recommended these items,be removed from the goals and.policies'of the E.D.P. and contained in a seven year-capital outlay program which could be adopted concurrently.with the seven year „plan.for the Environmental Design Plan. Councilman•Balshaw stated *he .felt. the list contained. in-the comparative report was submitted as an addendum to the report. He,did'.not feel it was intended to be incorporated into the E.D.P. Mr..Balshaw. also stated he,felt, the greatest criticism of the first:Environmental.Design P_lan.result:ed because there were no implementation procedures except.for the Residential Development Control Plan. Mr. Gray stated the format he would like.;to.follow-in putting together the document would be the same'as had been used in the.City's Open Space Conser- vation Element of`the.General Plan. ..In.this particular document, the ,goals and.policies are easily identifiable and'.are..followed by an evaluation of the methodologies available for implementing them,.then,an implementation program, including a cross- reference chart. There was some discussion regarding hillside development, and Mr. Gray read the comments made by the Citizens' Committee and,the Planning Commission, which are contained on Pages 54 and 55, of -the comparative analysis. These could be considered specific hillsid_e.,policies,of -the City and part of this would actually be an implementation ordinance:. Councilman Balshaw .indicated. that :until .such..,time as the staff develops a hillside ordinance, these recommendations should be Mr. Gray stated some of the recommendations ,in .:the .W ll ains,,.Platzek, and Mocine column of Page 54 'relating,to.hillside development were taken directly from the 1972. E.D.P. The language in the.1972 E.,D,.P. and the.proposal for the new E.D.P. both state that accep.tab.le "measures shall.be taken , to retain ridge lines , as open space. Some discussion was also held regarding the Sonoma Mountains and Councilman Hilligoss felt the Council . could .not. dictate to the- County of Sonoma what to do with the mountains, but ;she.urged..the inclusion.in the Environmental Design March 11, 1978 REVIEW OF, COMPARATIVE Plan that the Sonoma, Mountains should, retain f lexi- , REPORT- ENVIRONMENTAL bility for the open space!.-. Kr-,, Gray' pointed out the, DESIGN 'PLAN Sonoma,Mountains to the ridge, line are within the. (Continued) Cit Y-lanning Area, and although the County area not, as yet, adopted.their Genera-1,pJan for this area as it was still in a, .state study, meetings! are to be held the following week on 'the matter. Mountain areas, on the City of Petaluma's General Plan are designated for agricultural and open space uses. Some discussion was then held. on the'ftty's. General, Plan. Councilman Bals-haw commented , only :copy h& .has ,..of the General 'Plan was-pub.ligh6d iii _1962, and he questioned whether or not, it had, been updated, . Mr_.. Gray - stated the General - Plan document had not been updated,-.but the :graphic map of :the General Plan has In add . ition, there have 'been .many el the General Plan. .Councilman 'Bond suggested, there was-a• real need, to put :the General, 'Plan together and have it'updated:._ r Mayor I Putnam, s0gg6s-ted since it did. not appear. the Council would - be able to complete_a full., on ihe,1-mat-te'r, another.- meeting,•should be set aside' to: comp,16te.the. review- of , Environmental Design Plan. goals and policies. Frank Gray suggested the'Council take the comparative ..doc note the pages where they, would like to,' se!e changes in, the,. basic policy, mark.the pages identifying where they would like; to have dhang'es,'ma.de, and return their marked copies, - keeping in mind' the column to the, lef t which Is the report-, of the Cit-izefis! Cbmm]ittee and Planning Commi . would be the basic docum6nt, and return, , these -to, the staff no later than March, 2'0.., The.Council agreed.to this.-procedu•e.and it was determined discussion.,on the. matter, would, be,.March 27 •, 1978. ADJOURNMENT There being no..fur.ther business to come before, the C od - hei , 1., the meeiingl,adj,ourned at 9:55 p.m., to an Executive Session,.' 1 Mayor Attest Oity, Clerk