HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 01/05/1976127
MINUTES OF MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
JANUARY 1976
COUNCIL MEETING A special meeting of the City Council of the City
of Petaluma was called to order by Mayor Helen Putnam
at the hour of 4:05 p.m.
ATTENDANCE Present: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh, Hilligoss, Mattei,
and Mayor Putnam.
Absent: Councilman Harberson and Perry.
NOTICE OF CALL Notice of call for special meeting dated. January 2, 1976,
certificate of the.City Clerk of the delivery of said
notice, and consent of City Council for holding said
meeting, submitted and filed.
PURPOSE OF MEETING The meeting was called to consider the following:
ABC Application, Cattlemen's Restaurant; approval of release of bond, Mountain
View Estates Subdivision; accepting public improvements on 100 -104 -108 High
Street parcel map, Parcel Map No. 64, Lot 1, and Parcel Map No. 64, Lot 2;
resolution setting City Attorney's salary; resolution declaring certain City
properties surplus and authorizing the sale of same; and the appointment
of members to the 1976 Community'Development Advisory Committee.
In addition, the following results of bid openings:
Replacement of Well Water Collection Tanks for Stations 1 and 9; Liquid Sulfur
Dioxide Contract; and, Lease of the Lafferty Ranch.
Other items to be considered include the status of preparation of architectural
plans and specifications for the Public Safety Building, and the issuance
of a taxi certificate to Margaret and William Flud.
MAYOR'S MESSAGE Mayor Putnam advised the audience she had prepared
a "State of the City" message to be delivered during
the first meeting of the Council in the new year;
however, when she learned the Council meeting would not only be in the afternoon,
but would continue in the evening, she preferred to defer her message until
the meeting of January 19, 1976. She did comment, however, on the fact the
year 1976 is the Bicentennial_ Year of our Nation, and that 200 years ago,
a very small sgroup of people on the Eastern seaboard, confronted with a vast,
wilderness, gained their independence and established a constitution for
the Country which was to govern them then. She further stated the document
has survived the 200 years, is a well put together document which still governs
the country even though it is subject to a great deal of interpretation,
and is still the document by which the Country abides. Mayor Putnam then
recited the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States, stating the
Preamble as written 200 years ago and the goals set by it are still the concerns
of the Country.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Putnam then asked the audience to join with
her iri pledging allegiance to the flag.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES. The minutes of the meeting.of December 15, 1975,
were approved as corrected. Councilman Brunner asked
the time of adjournment be changed from 12:15 p.m.
to 12:15 a.m., December 161, 1975. Correction noted.
128 January 5, 1976
CONSENT CALENDAR A motion was made by Councilman Brunner, sec6hded
by Councilman Cavanagh, approving the f'ilin'g'..of. the' �.
ABC application; Agenda Item• #1, and appr'ov fig - 'the
resolutions; Agenda Items - #2 through #8,- on the
Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
Agenda Item #1 ABC application for Cattlemen's Restaurant on sale,
CATTLEMEN'S Twin Fa eating place;; person -to- person transfer from
ABC APPLICATION--- :generallls Feeding Company to Peter C. G1l1-ham7;.Sr.,
RESTAURANT et al,'was ordered filed.
Agenda Item #2 Resolut on.#7246 N.C..S, accepting completion ofwwQrk•
RELEASE. BONDS -- required in Mountain View Subdivision was adopted
MT. VIEW ESTATES by 5 affirmative and 2 absentee votes. Y
RES #7246 NCS
Agenda. Item #3 Resolution #7247 N.C,. S.. accepting completion-of .public -
ACCEPT 'COMPLETION improvements- 100 to 108 H gh Street., Petaluma
HIGH STREET PARCEL Kenneth G, and Helen.L. Johnson was adopted by 5
MAP affirmative and 2 absentee voi es..
RES47247 NCS
I
Agenda. Item #4 Resolution #.7248 N_C..S. accepting completion of. ; public
ACCEPT PUBLIC' improvements - Parcel Map #64, Lot 1 - Malcolm- -
0 {� IMPROVEMENTS-- Susan G�. Burnett - Amber Way was adopted by affirmative
1 PARCEL MAP #64 and 2 absentee votes.
(BURNETT- -AMBER WAY)
RES X67248 NCS
Agenda Item X65 Resolution 66724.9 N.C.S. accepting completion pub is
ACE'PT PUBLIC .improvements - Parcel Map #64 Lot 2 - Roy''R'', and-
IMPROVEMENTS-:-- Alice Curtis - Amber Way, was adopted•by 5.aff.irmative
1 PARCELMAP 464 and 2 absentee votes.
(CURTI•S -AMBER WAY)
RES x{7249 NCS
Agenda Item X66 Resolution. #72 =50 N.C,.S.. setting salary for` position -
CITY ATTORNEY'S of City Attorney was adopted by 5 affirmative and
SALARY 2 absentee votes
RES X67250 NCS
Agenda. Item `#7 . Resolution X67251 .N.C. S. finding personal property
,\ DECLARE CERTAIN herein named is surplus surplus no longer required, and
PROPERTIES directing the City Manager to dispose of and sell
RE S1 X67251 'NCS the 'same, was adopted by 5 affi- rmat-ive and 2 absentee
votes.
Agenda Item_ #68 Resolut on #7252 N.C.S. establishing a Community
ESTABLISH COMMUNITY Development Advisory. Comm tee .and appoin
DEVELOPMENT A.. Maser•, Mary ,Issak, Roger Giese, Carolyn Geiger,
ADVISORY COMMITTEE Jane Jewett, 'and James J. Gross•i,, . to said Community- -
RES X6.7`252 NCS `Development Advisory Committee was a;dopte'd by ",,5. affir -m=
atve.and 2- absentee votes. -
AWARD B'ID- -WELL Resolution 467253 N.C.S. awarding the contract for
O\ p
WATER COLLECTION re ' lacement of well water collection tanks for •Stations
TANKS 1 and 91, to Pacific Wood - Tank D vision, Sauer&.Forest
RES 467253 NCS Products =., Healdsburg, California; in- amount
$16,1501; was intro,duced.by Council "man Hilhigoss, .
seconded by Councilman Matteis, and approved by 5
affirmative, and 2 absentee vot•eL. The bid received from Pacific Wood Tank.
Division was. the only one of two bids;received•which conformed to the',
specifications.
The.o;ther bid in the amount of °$18,785. submitted by,Nation4_1 Tank and'Pipe :
Company was not accompani'ed.by a.bid bond. "The Eng neer's :Estimate,for the
1
project for th'e tanks gply was 1 $18,300. Additional, costs for 'installations
and work by City force's is estimated to be '$12,5'00.
January 5..., 1976
AWARD CONTRACT-- Resolution #72.54 N.C.S. awarding contract for the n n
LIQUID: SULFUR purchase of liquid„sulfur dioxide to Georgia Pacific
DIOXIDE,'PURCHASES Company ,Richmond.,, California., in the amount of $13,$64,8 ,
RES #7254 NCS was' introduced.,�by,Councilman Brunner, seconded by
Councilman Cavanagh,; and approved by 5 affirmative
and 2' absentee votes.
Purchasing, Office C. D. Huffman advised the Council three bids had been received
and Georgia. - Pacific was-the lowest .responsib'le bidder. Other bids were from
Jones Chemical in the amount of $16,.536, and from Snowden Enterprises in.
the amount of $14;946.
REJECT '•BTD -= LEASE OF One proposal had received.for the one -year lease
LAFFERTY RANCH for the Lafferty Ranch from Dr. Alfred Sonoma
Mountain Road. Dr. Bettman agreed to pay $1,800 1 r
for a one -year pasture lease, but stated if he could // J
negotiate -tea longer term lease, he would be willing to pay a higher cash rent
and improve the'property,by investing in water trough development, better.•
fence repair, seeding and fertilization.
City Manager Robert Meyer recommended that the City Council defer awarding
the bid on the Lafferty Ranch and advertise the lease for a 5 -year period
which would contain a cancellation clause Mr. Meyer further stated it was,
his recommendation not to use t.he property for purposes other than the agri-
cultural lease which has been.historical, because the Russian River- Cotati
Intertie project would not be completed until 1977. It could be,possib
with the shortage of water, the loss of the property and the wa- tershed to
other°uses'could have a harmful effect upon the - citizens. Councilman Cavanagh
asked whether or not it would be'poss ble to negotiate on the bid presented
to the-. City Council, The City. Attorney- advised the Council the. notice required
a minimum bid -of $2,410 per- year, and the bid offered -by Dr. Bettman:did.
not reach,that fgure,'there'fore -, the Councl.did not receive a conforming
bid. Mr: Hudson did state it could be possible, in certain circumstances;,-
to negotiate for a longer'term lease on the property. -
The City-Clerk was requested to again advertise the notice to bidders, and
have the matter brought back to the City Council at the January 19th meeting.
A motion was then made by Councilman Hilligoss, seconded by Vice -Mayor Mattei,
rejecting the b'ids'•on the Lafferty Ranch.. Motion carried unanimously..
CLAIMS AND.BILLS Re8olution - #725'5 N: approving claims and bills,
RES 0 255.NCS' #6481 to #6647,, excluding #6639 and #6640, general
city funds, • and #216. to 126`5, inclusive,. Water Depart,
ment funds; approved for- payment by the City Manager,
was introduced by Councilman Mattei, seconded by
Councilman Brunner, and approved by 5 affirmative
and 2 absentee votes;.
ESTABLISH PROJECT City Manager Robert;Meyer'advised the Council)it .
PLANNING COMMITTE -E appears now -that Congress is going to pass- a.Public n ti
PUBLIC• - SAFETY Works Bill - which will be sent onto the President
BUILDING for his signature He f eels- those cities ;which are
RES 117•25'6 NCS prepared with'desgns and specifications for Public
Works buildings will- have .an opportunity�to. receive-
'Part of -these funds fore construction.. He:.recommended
to the City Council they take action - to hire an. •archi,tect• to` design .the public
safety building, keeping n'the-mind the fact construction could begin under
the provisions of the Congressional Bill sometime within the next 5 -year
period. He also suggested any plans or designs prepared at this time should
take into consideration--the fact they would not.• :become outdated.
Police Chief Larry Higgins, by means of a viewfol., outlined the present
area in the Civic Center occupied b.y,the Police Department buildings and .
the present City Hall. Chief Higgins pointed out how'the building could
be situated in the present parking lot, between the Council' Chambers and
the Police Department, and the City Hall building. To utilize this
13 () January 5, 1976
ESTABLI
howeveriaxmum of 7,325 sq. fa. would available;
PLANNING
I ,- the floor space would be reduced by partitioning
PUBLIC SAFETY and thelvarious rooms to be included in.the building.
BUILDING ;He alsolindicated it would be possible to have a
RES. #7256 NCS multi- storied building, either one with a basement
(Continued) and one level above that, or to build additional
levels. i Chief Higgins further pointed out by losing
the parking behind the Police Department, it would
be necessary to provide additiona.'l,par.kng•.for 38 vehicles. In order to _
accomplish this, it would be necessary to purchase three parcels, one facing
on Howard and Bassett Street, the parcel next to that facing on Howard Street,
and the third parcel facing on Howard Street. He further- advised the City
Council the driveway between the ; present Police Station and the temporary
building now in use for administrative offices,. would have to be retained
in order to have access to the original Police Department building where
the jail area is located. .It is not anticipated to provide additional jail
facilities it-the new building because of the cost factor involved.
I
Chief Higgins advised the Council that through a grant awarded to the City
sometime ago, arrangements were made with-the National-Clearinghouse-for
Criminal Justice Planning and Architecture to make a survey of the needs
for the Petaluma Police Depar-tment:Safety Building. An..ar`chitect from
Mr. Stephen R. Polson, visited Petaluma at that time and.spent one..and: one-
half days reviewing what would be needed,. Upon his return to Chicago, Mr.
Polson filed a report with Chief Higgins on the project which each Council
member had received and is on file =with, the City Clerk. The report outlined
several functions to be accomplished as the project moves forward,. Chief
Higgins advised the City is now in-'a predesign.phase for 'the building, and
the report suggests the establishment of a project planning. "team to clearly
define the present and future law enforcement needs of the building,, taking
various factions into - consideration, such as population grow'th,.annexations,
increase in crime, etc. Mr. Higgins further stated` the Committee could also
look at whether or not some other segment of public safety services could
share the building. The committee would assist in planning to,get everything
into the building in its proper place in order to function efficiently.
The recommendations by the National Clearinghouse and by the Chief himself
for the makeup of the Committee is as follows' A p ative,;
a representative from the Engineer's Division; the Community Development
and Services Coordinator; a representative from the City Manager -'s Office;
one or two representatives from. the City Council; and,, <a pr;o.fessional contult.ii :
sultant who would be a design architect capable of guiding the committee
in the right direction in planning the building.
Vice -Mayor Mattei wondered whether or nos a committee could not be formed
which would have some decision be ore the expert or .coiisultant.was hired
to join the committee,. Chief Higgins,said this would be entirely possible;
however, the. - design architect would' not be drawing any plans for the building,
he would merely assist the committee and lend.his expertise.
City Manager Robert Meyer explained the.job ,of the committee would be to
interview architects,who have: done functional work in this type of a facility.
He further suggested the committee obtain a list of architects whohave expertise
in the field and visit some,:of the projects :which have been,complet,ed., or•
are underway or in the design stager. He stressed,,however, -the important
thing was for the Council to -=move ahead in order to be able to be eligible
for the funds which may become available.
After some discussion, it was resolved the original committee would have
representatives from the Petaluma Police Department., the Engineering Department,
the Department of Community•Development, and the City Man'ager's 0ffce,.and .
two members of the City Council. This committee would then,select the design
architect to assist the committee.
Upon conclusion of the discussion, Resolution #7256 N.C.:S. establishing the.
Project Planning Committee for public saf.ety'building was,introduced by Councilman
Brunner, seconded by Councilman Mat'tei, and adopted by 5 affirmative and
2 absentee vo.tes..
January 5, 1976
11 , 31 ,
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC Report dated November 14, 1975, to the City Manager
CONVENIENCE AND from Police Chief Larry.Higgins on the subject application
NECESSITY -- MARGARET submitted.and filed. Report dated September 18, /
L. AND WILLIAM D. 1975, to the City Manager from the Planning Director a v
FLUD
RES #7257 NCS
by the ordinances of
permit to operate a
Dennis Boehlje, on the subject application, submitted
and filed. Both reports recommend the approval of
the application as submitted. Chief Higgins further
stated that everything has been satisfied as required
the City in order for Mr. and Mrs. Flud to obtain the
taxicab service in the City of Petaluma.
Vice -Mayor Mattei asked the question whether or not the applicants were aware
the City intended to have a bus system in the near future and Chief Higgins
advised the applicants were aware of the fact, but still requested the application
be approved.
Councilman Cavanagh asked whether or not the taxis would be metered, and
Mr_ Flud answered in the affirmative.
Upon conclusion of the discussion, Resolution #7257 N.,C.S.'granting a certificate
of public convenience and necessity to Margaret L. and William D. Flud to
operate a taxi service in the City of Petaluma was introduced by Councilman
Hilligoss; seconded by Councilman Mattei, and adopted.by 5 affirmative and
2 absentee votes.
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the
Council, the meeting was adjourned to an executive
session at 5:10 p.m.
Mayor
Attest:
ity Cl &k
132
MINUTES OF MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL -
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
JANUARY 5,., 1976
COUNCIL MEETING The regular meeting of City'COuncil of the City of
Petaluma was called to order by'Mayor Helen at
the hour of 7:30 p..m.
ATTENDANCE Present: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh,'Harberson,'
Hilligoss, Mattei;'Per'ry, and Mayor'Putnam:'
Absent: None.
INVOCATION The Reverend Arthur Nunn of the First Southern Baptist
Church gave the invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Putnam commented on the fact this is the 200th
Anniverser•y'of the founding of our Country and led the
audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
MAYOR'S MESSAGE Mayor Putnam advised the audience and the City Council she
would defer her comments regarding the State of the City,
which she had intended 'to give at this until the
meeting of January 19th.
Mayor Putnam did, however,, want to'thank the community and those who had
worked so diligently to assist the ''Maeder family who had suffered a tragic
loss in an-early Christmas morning fire. She particularly to thank
the Assistant City Manager David Breninger for coordinating the'efforts of
the community, as well as the Fire Chief, Police Chief, and members'of' their
departments. 'Mrs. PutnaM'stated the response from the community'had'been
tremendous and immediate,-.' She did feel, however, some arrangement "should
be made whereby a committee should be formed to garner information of'all '
the community services available in such times of crisis. She asked Vice -
Mayor Mattei to head such a'committee, composed - of'Councilman Hi'lligoss'and
Councilman'Brunner, and Mr. Breninger, to determine what community
are available. She further indicated she would select people from'the com -?rn`
munity to work with the committee.
DENIAL APPEAL-- The City Clerk read'a letter'dated September 17,
STREET CONSTRUCTION 1975;, from Burton Engineers regarding the Nagel public
VICTOR,.NAGEL improvements on Lindberg Lane, which' been addressed
RES. #7257 NCS to the City Council. Burton Engineers
a disapproval by the City Engineer of street improvement
plans for Victor Nagel, 1250 Lindberg Lane, Petaluma.
City Manager Robert Meyer reviewed the prior history of the subject parcel; 5, 5 5
stating at the Council Meeting of September 8, 1970., Mr. Nagel had appealed
the requirement to include'the public improvements - in a 240 - foot' length on''
Lindberg Lane where he was constructing a single - family residential dwelling.
At that time, the area was zoned ''agr.icultural,''and because of a hardship
which would be created by the in'st'a'lla'tion`of the public improvements; the
Council approved an exception to their policy Resolution #5430 N.C.S., because
the lot was located in an agricultural zone and at the end of an unimproved
street. Mr. Meyer stated, however, since time-the area has.been rezoned
to Light Industrial, and Mr. Nagel now has'a'commercial use ori'his property
for the 'st6iag'e of recreational'vehicles - and - traffic has increased..' The
.only other activity'on the parcel subsequent to'that time was the'appeal•
to the City Council for the height of to be-placed for the commercial
enterprise on the property.
1 3 4 January 5, 1976
DENIAL APPEAL-- City Engineer David Young advised the Council,the
STREET CONSTRUCTION problem arises because,Mr. wants to construct
VICTOR NAGEL a partial - improvement ,at .this time. It was his unders.tanrl
RES #7257 NC5 standing at,the time.the City Council - waived the
requirement for the street improvements, the action
had been taken for the residential use. He did not
feel, however•, the Council's intention -w,as.to.waive the City's requirements
at such time the street improvements were to be completed. The present
plan submitted to the City Engineer ,is calling for only nine feet of street
pavement, where the Council's policy requires one -half of the street to be
improved.. If only nine,feet were permitted,, this would represent only about
one - fourth of -the street width...Mr. Young also stated the plans call for
a structural thickness which does not conform to City specifications. Mr.
Young said he did approve of the plans for the sidewalk, curbs, and gutters;.
however, he did not feel the nine -foot width or the thickness of the proposed
pavement would meet the City standards—
Mr. Victor Nagel spoke to the City Council supporting his appeal; he indicated
he was not req.uired,to install any public improvements in the.area;_howeve -r,
he did offer to do the 240 feet,. nine -foot wd:th:s,treet after having discussed
the matter with the Engineering Department. He stated he was led to believe
at that time there would be no problem with his proposal. Mr. Nagel further
indicated if he couldn't proceed with the project as he proposed, he would
not.be financially able to-do any.of it.
It was brought..out during, the course discussion that since.the original
application of the single- family dwelling for Mr. Nagel at this
location was approved for which permits had been issued, the use has been
changed,to include,,a recreational.vehicle storage yard and,,,on the same parcel,
six garages., From the time of the original application the parcel., the,,
area has.been rezoned from Agricultural to Light.Industrial. Mr.,,Nagel indicat
dated he had,not requested the rezoning,of. the property,, he,was not making
any improvements to the property at this.time,.but,at,some future date, if
he determined to expand, he would then'do.the.road. He further.stated he
would not have spent the money .to.hire an engineer to draw, the plans if
he would have known,he ,had, to, go. the -full half -width ,of the street. Mr.
Joseph,Burton, Mr. Nagel's City Council intent
of the plans and specification was_,to go less.than the by
the City,; however, the thickness of the road would be in accordance,with .
City standards..
In the discussion which followed, it was pointed out Lindberg Lane was made
a deadend street by the construction.of the fr,e -eway; however, when Kenilworth
Junior High School was built, the road was, looped in order to serve the.school
buses to-the school The addition of the commercial use,on..the',,.
Nagel property adds further, traffic to,Lindberg Lane.. Mr. Nagel complained
the street had never been built to City.stand'ards,be'cause it had originally
- been annexed to the City from .the,County. City Engineer David Young`advised
the Council when new constructiontakes ,place,..the property owners originally
improve the streets; gas tax funds received by the City are reserved for
the construction of major arterial streets, bridges, etc,. .
At the.conc:lusion of the discussio,n,.,Res,olution #7257 N.C:.S. denyying,ap,pea1
of Victor.Nagel regarding street construction with ap:gropriat;e findings was
introduced by Councilman -. Perry ,.secon`ded.by..Counc'ilman .Harbe�rs.on, and approved
by 6 affirmative and 1 negative votes.._ Councilman Cavanagh voted "no"
GRANT OF EASEMENT - A letter ,dated December, 15 1975., directed t:o.the,.
P.G. & - E,, -- :OVERHEAD Planning. ; Department; of the City of Petaluma from,
TRANSMISSION Mr. C. Bart Jr. , Manager,, Petaluma Dis.tr;ict
ORD #1204'NCS Pacific Gas.and.Electric Company, was read by the
City.Glerk, and ordered - filed. Excerpts from the
Planning Commission minutes December -1, 19:75, sub.-itte
mitteddand filed.
January 5, 1976
GRANT OF'EAS'EMENT =- Planning Director Dennis.Boehlje advised the Council
P.G. &E,. -- OVERHEAD there . ar.e - ,two - .separate items concerned with P.G. &E.'s
TRANSMISSION request The Planning.Commission was asked to comment
ORD 1 1204 NCS on the, routes, of the, lines, and the City Council is: -being
asked.to grant an easement over a portion of City
property— The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed
route for the transmission•lines,.and since•no- other•.alternative seemed to
be available to the transmission lines traversing Ely- Boulevard, they did
not oppose the route or the proposed easement. They did, however,.have some
reservation's about.transmission lines of this high voltage being suspended
in a residential area.
Mr. Donald Marquardt the representative from the - Pacific Gas and Electric
Company, outlined the route of the.115 KV transmission lines along Ely Boulevard,
and the area owned -by the City through -which they would need.an easement.
In addition Mr. Marq.uard.t showed the Council pictures of Ely Boulevard.South
with the existing lines, and also additional photographs with the proposed..
transmission lines superimposed. Mr. Marquardt advised the Council.transmission
lines of-this voltage are not normally placed underground. The plan is to..
use the existing poles and no.new construction would be necessary.
At the conclusion of the.discussion, Ordinance 91204 N.C.S. of the.City of
Petaluma authorizing the grant of an easement•to the- :Pacific Gas and Electric
Company for overhead poles across certain property by-the City of Petaluma,
which property is more particularly described in,the body of this ordinance,
was introduced by Councilman Brunner, seconded by Councilman Perry,.and ordered
posted 7 affirmative votes.
13 5-
APPEALiPLANNING A:letter directed- the-City-Council dated December
COMMISSION DECISION 20, 1975;.from Mr..Robert F. Carmody, was read and
CARMODY.7= ELEVEN ordered.filed: -
STORE _ _ • : _ : G7
RES 97258 NCS The:site.design-review which had been disapproved
by.the•Planning Commission-.at their meeting December
16 1975.,.•submitted filed.;iExcerpts from the
Planning Commission . - iminutes,December.16; 1975 -; submitted
1 and filed.
The project had been rejected by the Planning Commission on a 3 to 3 vote,
with one member being absent. The original site design review contained
14 conditions;.however,"the final contained •,12:conditions,_and._Mr.
Carmody's:let.ter indicated he was appealing:Items- .#4 #13, #14;.however;
since 913 and': 1'14 were deleted from .the. site design- : the.appeal. was
addressed to' :Item_#4 was withithe :improvement .--.
utilities relocation and the the-northeast corner.of '_•`D'.'
Street and Petaluma Boulevard South. . . _
Planning Director Dennis Boehlje;.by mean.s..of the•:viewfoil, described the
layout -the proposed project.. He Planning Commission
had not turned down the entire project, Mr. Carmody would have appealed.Item.
#4 of the site design review; however, since the Planning Commission had
rejected and if the Council.approves the project,
wouldti still be.appealing the conditions under Item #4,.which.has to do with
the%relocation'.of the utilities. Councilman.Hilligoss; the Council's!.repre.
sentative on Planning Commission, advised -the Council she was.one.of
those who had voted againstethe7p•roject. - .It - was -- her - .feeling.-that since the
City was trying to upgrade the downtown area, the project would not be in
conformity' the core area. Councilman Hilligoss further stated she did
not feel this, was a compatible use for the area. ' for
Councilman 'Hilligoss, the Council's rep,.resentative:on the,Planning.::Commission,
stated her main) objection tb .the_projec,t was the - _placement�:of, - the._building on
the site:. Planning Director':DennisrBoehlje, stated •_some- 1- of_the-Commissioners
were also concerned with the placement of the buildings on the project site
and felt rather than being placed toward the rear of the property, they should
be situated in_the manner of other: commercial :bui - ldings•in_the.•downtown -area.
City Attorney.Matt ' Hudson:•�reviewed. the context: o.f° Section:_ 26 -405 . of :;the.•: Zoning
Ordinance by which the Council -to be guided --in_; the ! appeal: of_Mr. -.Carmody.
3 6 January 5, 1976
APPEAL PLANNING •The:Xouncil discussed the-permitted use for the area,
COMMISSION DECISION and reviewed the that the corner has beennzone'd
CARMODY 7- ELEVEN commercial for many years, but has stood idle for
STORE quite sometime. the formerly held a service.
RES.167258 NCS station and the.discussion also led into the fact
that the..other three corners at the area had been
rounded as projects took place. The property owners
or developers were required to round,the corners and the City rounded the
southwest corner abutting.Walriut Park. The fact also'came.out in the discussion
the corner in question which is at the site of the proposed 7- Eleven store;
has far more utilities to be relocated than the other sites. The'_major
control system for the entire intersection is located on the site, as well
as the traffic signal, fire box, and undisclosed underground utilities.
The City Engineer David Young advised the-Council-, corner - would have to,
be rounded -if the project were permitted, and he - further stated. there -was.
no way to do this without.moving the utilities. When asked by Councilman
Cavanagh whether or not he had been able to figure a monetary cost for this
portion of the project, Mr. Young stated he has-not.,
The appellant', Mr. Robert F. Carmody, then addressed the Council in support
of his appeal.. He stated when he first-entered into the project, .he.was
advised by the City. staff- the.co.rner would not have to be rounded
because the not afford to do it. He also stated a local realt_or
had advised•him`he was formerly•involved.witho trying to locate 'a project
on this site and had been told the corner would.not be rounded. Mr.. Carmody
did state, however, he would be willing to round the corner, i.e:. - , move the'
curb, gutter, sidewalk, and do the required paving, and move the traffic
signals, but he didn't think it was fair to impose the requirement on -him
to move City services that benefit the entire community and not just..that
property. Mr. Carmody stated he would be willing to provide as. much work
on rounding the corner at that location as had.been- provided by'the owners
of the other three corners at the intersection -. Mr. Carmody further stated
he felt the condition for the rounding of the corner .was included in the
site design because of the comment made in the E.I.R. recommending the rounding
of the corner. He further stated the K. I. R. .was contradictory in that it
said the service condition of the street traffic would not exceed the
level. Mr. Carmody stated he agreed to permit the;construction ; of certain
barriers on "D" Street and Petaluma Boulevard which would prevent illegal
left turns onto the site.
Mr. Carmody disputed the relocation of the building �to•the front, stating
it_would-prevent sight distance at the-corner and cteate of. a'traffic.
hazard than if located toward the rear of the property:. Mr: Carmody further
stated by locating the building,.toward.the of.the.property, he would.
lose some square footage- in the rental area which the, '
economcially unfeasible,. He further stated by having building'.toward
the rear of the property, southbound traffic on Petaluma Boulevard would
still have a view of Walnut Park.. If the building were to be reversed, south-
bound traffic would be able •tu see Walnut Park until they actually reached
the intersection.
Mr. Carmody. .further defended his project by stating he and his archi,tec.t
have tried'to make the building•aesthetically pleasing by incorporating:-some
of the staff recommendations into•the plan,providing landscaping and planters
which would contain some.type of evergreen plants. In addition, Mr.. Carmody
said the plan calls for a canopy around•the •building.•
The Counc =il .then discussed the types.of services which might be found-in
the corner which needed to be rounded to conform with :the b Cher three.corners
at the intersection. City Engineer David Young advised Council the power
pole would be the resp.onsibility..of',the Pacific Gas & Electric Company
move. He also advised. the Council the Cit"does have forces'wh ch.would
be able to move the fire hydrant and the - controller box.. As far the storm
drain' is concerned: - Mr'. Young stated - he- was riot• sure what - type of
storm drain ways -at the intersection; however, he did not feel it would pose
any great difficulty. Mr. Carmody again stated he would be willing to round
the corner and move the traffic signal, wh mean curb, gutter, and
sidewalk,, and repaving the-street-and he would the .
ramp as being installed in other•areas of the City. What,'he was concerned
with, however, were unknown factors which Tay-.be found in the corner for
which he would not want to bear the expense of relocation.
January 5, 1976
APPEAL PLANNING Mr.-,Glenn-Head,, a member of the.Planning Commission,
COMMISSION.DECISION thent:Addresse8- Council stating if the Planning -
CARMODY 7- ELEVEN Commission had been aware .'the City had the capability
STORE of moving some of the-utilities, the vote may have
RES #7258 NCS gone differently at the Planning Commission level,
(Continued)
and rather than have a 3 to 3 tiervote °felt the
vote would have been 4 to 2. City Engineer David
Young stated he was.not.sugges.ting to the Council
they.bear'the expense'.of relocating some of the ,utilities, he was merely
advising them they had the'cap.ability of doing the same. Mr. Young further'
stated other developers under the provisions of policy'Resolution #5430 N.C.S.
had been required to relocate utilities such as are located at this corner.
City Manager Robert Meyer also stated that only the Council has the power
to make exceptions to the policy resolution, the Planning Commission is an
advisory body.- and. makes recommendations to'the- City'Couneil. Mr. Meyer further
stated if there is something unusual in the corner that would require additional
expense, the matter could be brouAtt to the'Cit Council.
13T
Further discussion was held.on. who would assume -the responsibility for -the
various utilities relocation. Mayor Putnam advised Mr. Carmody the`Council.
would be unable to advise him at this meeting precisely what his responsibilities
would be and.asked whether he would prefer the Council not vote and have
the matter "brought back before them at a later date "Mr. Carmody then suggested
a meeting be set up between the City Engineer and himself in order to discuss
the matter, and even though he did not agree the corner should be rounded,
he was willing to accept -sole responsibility for doing the concrete work
and widening the corner. He did.not, however, feel he should bear°the responsi-
bility of hiring a civil,gngineer to determine what utilities were contained
in the. I corner and to draw up improvement plans be presented to the City.
The City Engineer responded -by stating the City's policy is to have improvement
plans presented before taking any action. He further stated the Engineering
Division'is capable doIing. this engineering work; however,. this relates
to money and other developers'in'similar situations had to take the responsibility
of presenting the plans.. „
Councilman Brunner stated he has been in.favor of the project all along,;
however,.if Mr. Carmody would not some responsibility-.of the rounding_
of the corner, he.would withdraw his support. Mr. Carmody then.stated_he
wanted the records to show'he`was'willing assume sole responsibility for
doing the concrete work and widening corner.
Mr. Young .then questioned whether or,not th I e . Ci ty was'to do the'.engineering,
or whether Mr. Carmody was to hire a • .civil 'engirieer to 1 - prepare the street
improvement plans and take the.r.esponsibility to contact P.G. &E...to determine
when the'pole .could be relocated, to determine radius of the rounding,
and matters of this nature., City.Manager.Robert Meyer advised the 'Council.
he had researched a previous corner which had been rounded at the iri:tersection
by Union Oil Company, and one of the conditions attached to the site design
review at 'that ' time was to "have " e 'developer present the, "improvement plans
for the street work, in addition to other requirements. Mr. Meyer - further
stated he recalls of cases where.the City Council had modified the requirements
on improvement plans. He.further suggested the matter should be bro.light
back to `the City Council's• attenton,.after a conference between the developer
and the City. 'In answer to Councilman .Cavanagh's.question.what had been
required on the corner where the used lot now stands, Mr. Meyer advised
the Council the.. rounding of.the,corner at that location'was part of the street
widening project on "D'.' 'Street, and the corner was: rounded to permit left
turn flow of traffic.
At the conclusion of the dis.cuss'on, the Attorney suggested to the Council
if they wanted to vote'.on the matter, hey' could include Items #l. through
#3, and #5 through #12, and Item #4 on the site design review be' amended
to read as follows: '.'Improvement plans for curb rounding and related utilities,
and traff c relocation, of the northwest corner "of "D "'Street and
Petaluma'.Bouleva -rd South shall.be prepared by.the applicant and presented
to the City Engineer for approval."
Resolution #7258 N.C.S.,appr;oving site design plan for "D" Street'Plaza,
subject to certain conditions, .w as then I ntroduced_by Councilman Perry, seconded
by Councilman Brunner, and approved liy 5 and 2 negative votes.
Councilman Harberson and Hi'lligoss�voted-"no ".
January 5, 1976 _•_..
RECESS Mayor.. Putnam called a recess at 10:05 p.m.- and.th'
e.
Council reconvened at 10:1.0 p.m.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
MEETING'DATE Mr. Meyer ",r,eported tle'Cty,Council would meet in
SCHEDULES the study session - devoting "the early part of _the'.
JANUARY 12, 1976 evening'to'a reporr on "the furnishings for - the library
as presented to them:by the - Petaluma - Library - Advisory
"'Commission.. On January January 12th.at 10:45.a.m., Mr'. Meyer advised'the'Council Congre's'sman
Clausen would be, present - in the City Hall from •10':45 am.' till'noon discuss
various matters'with members of the City Council --the meeting to•be held
in the conference room. - - ='`
January - 197 -6.' Mr. reminded the'City`Council ; of the Mayor "and'Counc linens
meeting "to be'held Thursday, January,8th. - -
January 31, 1976." Division, League of California Cities
Napa. _ ..
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilman Cavanagh reported if City of Petaluma
wished to host the May lst, meeting of the
'Empire Division, they should make their des'ire
the ieague. meeting to be held in Napa January.3Tst.
Mayor :Putnam.aske'd Councilman Cavangh to 'act - od behal'f 6f.-the,' C ity - to.extend
the invitation to the Redwood Empire Division to meet in Petaluma- In •'May:' • Councilman Cavanagh requested three members of the City "Council and perhaps
one staff - member be assigned to make preparations for the meeting.
LIBRARY FURNITURE Councilman Brunner:, the Council's 'represent ative
On. Petaluma" Library Advisory commented"
on the suggestions the Board would bring'be.fore "the
,Council at the study session on January 12 -th regarding the furnishings for
the new'library. - He'stated fheir�'p- resentation should be very short . the
Board has worked very diligently on the :selection of the types -of furniture
to be 'piurchased for. the new library, and' - other than: at" the. -very 'beginning
when the Board was working on - . the bonds ao construct the library,- very, little
input had been 'received from `the community and the Advisory Commission's
meetings.had not been attended by the..press or members of the Council.' Mr.
Brunner further stated he was hopeful'the Council would concur with -the Library
Board's. - recommend'atio'ns.
BODEGA,AVENUE - "Planning Dir.ector.'Deinnis'Boeh'lj:e =had placed "seven `
STUDY,AREA different plans on the wall for'the Council's review.
The 'pl'ans had.been.assembled by"the'Planning Department.,
and' each'Council "member had been givefi "a copy:of°.
the staff'.report' dated December 30, 1975, from the Planning, D.epartment,'a
copy of - which is_on "file with.'the City Clerk. 'Mr: Boehlje reviewed"Plans
"A" through "G ", stating that all.of -the plans would require•rezoning and
some type of public street layout proposals, and those proposed with lower
density and larger lot sizes`would'requre fewer streets than. those proposals
which related to R- 1- 10,000 - dit .R =1= 6;500 sq:;ft. lots.
The Council'.then•centered' their attefit ion - on flan 'F ",. - which would"rezone
the northern half of.the study area; to - R -1= 20,'000 - and "the'southern one -half
to R- 1- 10,000. This proposal would allow a maximum'of-177 single - family,'
units, or an overall denisty of 2,.2:dwelling units per acre:
further stated this would conform to "the City's General Plan•and,generally
with the Environmental Design Plan. The mat' ter - "was brought up "or
not "the higher elevation on'tii"
Ts p °Tan could, - no't be changed 'to 40;.000 sq.
ft. minimum lot size, with the adjacent property being 'zoned R -1- 20,,000 for
_ 6
January 5, 1976 c3
BODEGA•AVENUE one_lot depth, and then the southern part.of - the
STUDY AREA section to R -1- 10,000. Planning Director Dennis
(Continued) Boeh1je stated- this was, a possibility and it would'
require practically'the same street pattern as needed
for the R- 1- 40,000 - and 9=1= 20,000 zoning.
The circulation pattern and road systems the- various plans :were also
discussed by the City Council
Planning Direetor,Dennis Boehlj said if the Council does nothing about the
area'and the lots remain R -1- 6,500, then the City would be again faced with
lot splits and the problem of street.circulatiori in, the area. Mr. Beohlje
further stated that regardless of .what plan was presented, not all of the
property .owners be favorable to the plan. The primary concern from
a planning standpoint, however; is to regulate those areas which -are located
inside the City limits:
Mayor Putnam-suggested'perhaps the City Council should come to some.decision
and send one of the plans back to Comm ss on•for their consideration.
She further-stated ultimately the City -may find there is%no way•an• agreement
can be reached; however, something must be tried._ It was the concensus of
the Council to ask the'Planning'Commission to review Plan "F" or Plan ''G ",
or a combination of the two to make another recommendation to the City Council.
City Manager Robert Meyer stated that even if rezoning is decided, it doesn't
solve the problem in the_area because an assessment - district would have to
be form ed ' to - provide for essential.services,�such' -as a sewer line. He..further
stated he did not feel it should be sent back- to'tle Planning Commission
unless Council had ve'rystrong feelings "on the-manner they wanted it
rezoned.. He suggested Perhaps Councilman Harberson's remarks regarding doing
nothing,about the area located in the County, but place the concern of the
Council on those areas inside the -City limits-Imay be?one solution.
Mr. Ace Marcellus then addressed the Council stating-- he wr-itten.a letter
to the City Council which was considered at the last meeting, and he was
hoping to have an answer which would solve his financial problems at this
meeting. -He also stated the'- road`would'have to•go through his property.
He was the impression he would get a de'Hsion since that.
did not seem probable;' -the Council he has- 'the.County's approval
to split- the. lot into 40,0.00 sq. ft: lots on a minor lot split basis..:Mr.
Marcellus presented two plans which he had drawn up for the use of his property,
both of which would require a street plan through the property. One,of the
plans would require 415 feet of road at a cost of approximately $100 -per
foot, .or.a total of', $41,,500., which.Mr. Marcellus indicated he would not be
able-t6 afford• to "accompli'sh; If the lower portion-of this property - were .
divided into 10,000 sq. ft. lots, then the properties- facing the road couild
assume the responsibility of the road at a cost of approximately $5,000 per
lot.
Planning Director Dennis Boehlje,- indicated either plan for the road.might
be acceptable; however,.'if the lots were divided into 10,000 sq..ft. lots,
it would. increase the density .in the. area which would not conform to_
General •Plan. Mr. Boehlje• s,tat'e,..h:owever - 't prezoned-in such
a way to allow 40,000 20,000 and.10,000 sq.. ft. lots, then it would conform
to the General Plan. Mr. Marcellus further stated if the County would receive
a letter from the City stating 10,000 sq. ft. lots would be permitted on
Bodega Avenue with the se'wer', would be -ab -le• -to • go- forward •with, -his plan;
however, City Manager Robert Meyer.reminded the Council he did not.-feel the
City could guarantee sewer-service 'to any of the lots in the area.
The
in
following discussion was concerned with the development
the area, the'need'for-upgrading Bodega Avenue, and the
of a sewer district
street pattern
in
the 'Bodega Avenue Study Area,.- -- -
At
the conclusion of the discussibn it was= agreed •to have •the
Plan "F" returned
to
the Planning Commission :to modify possibly by combining
it with 'P -lan - "G ",
or
the proposed 40,000; 20,000;1and 10;000 sq. ft. lost sizes,
eliminating
some of the road patterns. A motion was mad' by Councilman
Mattei, seconded
1 4 0 January 5, 1976
BODEGA AVENUE by Councilman,.Harber:son,. to, return the. study •to.:the
STUDY AREA Pla•nning using=Plan_ "F" as a basis for
(Continued) ..their review,.;keeping in,mind.the suggestions made.,
to eliminate -the..ar -eas outside-of-the City, giving
consideration to a lessor road•pattern, and Mayor
Putnam suggested the Planning Commission could be flexible in their.recommendations
to the City Council. The motion., however•, .was not . -voted .upon, ..and . City - .Manager
Robert Meyer asked the Council to-take copies of the plans them..
t try to determine how far they wanted the 10,000 sq. ft. lots to extend,
whether they should extend principally_ along Bodega Avenue, or one..more.additional
lot depth.. • It was agreed the 'Council would review the plans• and. the .matter
would be brought back•before.the .-City Council the January 19th..meeting..
The property. • is located near -the southwest corner of Cor_oria, Road . and _'Ely
Road, and is-des on,.the City's.Gener,al Plan for urbanydensty residential
uses; therefore, Planning Director Dennis Boehlj,e stated.it.would be,in conflict
with Petaluma's General Plan.
/ L \ AMEND.ZONING
ORDINANCE RE GARAGES
& PARKING` SPACES
ORD 461203• NCS -
(SECOND READING)
DESIGNATE CARNEGIE
LIBRARY HISTORIC
LANDMARK
ORD 461202 NCS
Ordinance #1203 N.C.S. amending Zoning Ordinance
41072 N. C. S. by amending . a. port -ion . of .Sec.tion: 2.0-
30.0 regarding number.. o;ft� parking spaces. required. for
dwellings., single-- family,; duplex or , compact <, .was••
adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
Ord•inance;461202.N•,:C.S.. designating the Carnegie Free
Library hocated.at.the.corner . of Four.th.and "B" Streets
in the City of.Petaluma, a historic landmark was.
adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
• .City Manager.•..Robert Meyer reminded,the City Council
they had received a letter from Michael R.-Bentley regar6ing. the use. -of -the
Carnegie. Library Building after it had been designated a historic. landmark.
Mr. Bentley's su,ggestion.was to.u,tilize the structure as:the official museum
for the City of Petaluma. He was'pr.esent in the audience and also•s
he hoped -the• library would. also. be used as a research library,.. n...addition
to a museum use. Mayor Putnam advised Mr. Bentley.-his "letter would not be
discussed at this meeting; however', the matter would come before the Council
at a study session at a future time, not at a regular meeting.
APPROVE AGRICULTURAL
Resolution.47259 N.C.S. approving A.P. #136- 130 -01
PRESERVE -- LANDS OF
as part of an agricultural preserve:(Lands :of _B-ionda),•
BIONDA
( 0
was introduced by Councilman Cavanagh, seconded by
RES #7259..NCS
Councilman Mat.tei; and. approved..by 7 affirmative.
votes. .
The subject property is
located at 2150 Old Adobe Road ,.b..etween..East..Washington
Street and Corona Road-,.and
consists of 91_acres.. -The Petaluma General.Plan .
designates -the area for
rural uses, and therefore -it would not,be.in- conflict
with .the General Plan..
n O APPROVE AGRICULTURAL
Resolution- #7,260,. N.C._ S,. approving A. -P 4 47 07.4 -01,
PRESERVE--LANDS.•OF •.
447- 074 -05, and•47- 141 -05 as part o.f an.agricultural
MARTY
preserve (Lands of Marty) was in,troduced..by: Councilman.
RES #7260 NCS ..
Cavanagh, seconded.by Councilman Hilligoss, and._approved
by 7 affirmative. votes:..
The subject property is
located.at.485.Elysian Avenue, and:consists.of. approx =�i
imately 26.89 acres. -The
Petaluma General Plan designates the area for rural
uses, and therefore it
would not be in conflict with the General-Plan..
PROTEST WILLIAMSON
Resolution ' #7 . 261. N.C.S. protesting execution-.of Williamson
Q-w ACT CONTRACT- -LANDS •.
t for A.P. #137- 070 =1_. (Lands of Christina
OF CHRISTINA DANGERS
Dangers),, was introduced by Councilman.Hilligoss,
�J
RES #1'261 NCS
seconded by Councilman Mattei and approved..by 7
affirmative votes.
The property. • is located near -the southwest corner of Cor_oria, Road . and _'Ely
Road, and is-des on,.the City's.Gener,al Plan for urbanydensty residential
uses; therefore, Planning Director Dennis Boehlj,e stated.it.would be,in conflict
with Petaluma's General Plan.
/ L \ AMEND.ZONING
ORDINANCE RE GARAGES
& PARKING` SPACES
ORD 461203• NCS -
(SECOND READING)
DESIGNATE CARNEGIE
LIBRARY HISTORIC
LANDMARK
ORD 461202 NCS
Ordinance #1203 N.C.S. amending Zoning Ordinance
41072 N. C. S. by amending . a. port -ion . of .Sec.tion: 2.0-
30.0 regarding number.. o;ft� parking spaces. required. for
dwellings., single-- family,; duplex or , compact <, .was••
adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
Ord•inance;461202.N•,:C.S.. designating the Carnegie Free
Library hocated.at.the.corner . of Four.th.and "B" Streets
in the City of.Petaluma, a historic landmark was.
adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
• .City Manager.•..Robert Meyer reminded,the City Council
they had received a letter from Michael R.-Bentley regar6ing. the use. -of -the
Carnegie. Library Building after it had been designated a historic. landmark.
Mr. Bentley's su,ggestion.was to.u,tilize the structure as:the official museum
for the City of Petaluma. He was'pr.esent in the audience and also•s
he hoped -the• library would. also. be used as a research library,.. n...addition
to a museum use. Mayor Putnam advised Mr. Bentley.-his "letter would not be
discussed at this meeting; however', the matter would come before the Council
at a study session at a future time, not at a regular meeting.
January 5, 1976
ADJOURNMENT There being,no further business to come before the
City Council, the meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
to an Executive Session. and to January 12, 1976,
at 1.0:45 a.m. to 12:00 noon in order to meet with
Congressman Clausen, and to a Study Session January
12, 1976,-at 7:30 p.m.
r il.� r,
141
Attest:
City CleA