Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 02/17/1976/(� 7 MINUTES OF MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL PETA_L-UMA,, CALIFORNIA FEBRUARY 17,- 1976 COUNCIL MEETING The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Petaluma was-called to, order-by-Mayor Helen Putnam at the hour of 7:35 p.m. ATTENDANCE' Present: Councilmen Cavanagh, Harberson, Hilligoss, Mattei, Perry, and Mayor Putnam. Absent: Councilman Brunner. INVOCATION The Reverend Donald Moore of the Church of the Nazarene gave the invocation. CONSENT CALENDAR A motion was made by Vice -Mayor Mattei, seconded by Council- man Perry, to adopt the resolutions #1 through #4 on the Consent Calendar,rand approve the ABC application for the Peking.Low Chinese Restaurant. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution 47290 N.C.S. approving agreement between the City 1031 / of Petaluma and the County of Sonoma for County revenue sharing funds for the new public library and authorizing the 3 Mayor to sign was adopted. Resolution 467291 N.C.S. finding personal property 'herein ) ,� named is surplus, no longer required, and directing the y Ci Manager to d- i-spose of and sell•the same, was adopted by 6 aff.irmat ve,•l absentee vo,tes.. The property named included 12 motors, 1 pump and 6 windows. Resolution #7292.N.C.S. approving agreement with Santa Fe Pomeroy, Inc., for use of City's dredging spoils site and authorizing -the Mayor,to sign, was adopted by 6 affirm - ative, l absentee,votes. CALL R ing o for 1 bid 4 s 7 March . 10, 1976, for various ousregulatory V �I Ag enda approving specifications s REGULATORY SIGNS for the Street Division, was adopted by 6 affirmative, RES #7293 NCS 1 absentee votes:. Agenda Item 465 ABC application for Peking Low Chinese Restaurant, 20 East ABC APPLICATION-- Washington Street, for on sale beer wine eating place, PEKING LOW was approved by 6 affirmative, 1 absentee votes. RESTAURANT 'REQUEST ALLOTMENT A letter dated February 5, 1976, from Debra Homes Inc. CHANGES - WESTRID'GE to the City Council regarding transfer of allocations Va UNITS 3 & 4 was read by the City Clerk and ordered filed. Planning Director Dennis,Boehlje described the-area by means of a viewfoil, and stated Debra Homes was requesting permission to transfer their allotments on Units 3 and 4.' The original allotments called for 89 single - family units on Unit No. 3, and 58 multi - family units,on Unit No. 4. -Debra Homes now is proposing to build all single-family units; decreasing the units from 157 units overall; to 77 single - family uri1ts :-• Th& request would be in conformance with the Subdivision Ordinance.. The req,ue.st. also shows some advantages wherein zero lot 'lines would be eliminated in the area. Mr. Boehlje further indicated Agenda Item 46 1 APPROVE AGREEMENT FOR SONOMA COUNTY REVENUE .SHARING FUNDS RES' 467290 NCS Agenda-Item 462 L� DECLARE CERTAIN � \ PROPERTIES SURPLUS AND :DIRECT 'THE SALE - OF .SAME RES 467291 'NCS Agenda Item 463 APPROVE AGREEMENT SPOILS.SITE -- SANTA FE P.OMEROY RES'• 4671292 'NCS Resolution 47290 N.C.S. approving agreement between the City 1031 / of Petaluma and the County of Sonoma for County revenue sharing funds for the new public library and authorizing the 3 Mayor to sign was adopted. Resolution 467291 N.C.S. finding personal property 'herein ) ,� named is surplus, no longer required, and directing the y Ci Manager to d- i-spose of and sell•the same, was adopted by 6 aff.irmat ve,•l absentee vo,tes.. The property named included 12 motors, 1 pump and 6 windows. Resolution #7292.N.C.S. approving agreement with Santa Fe Pomeroy, Inc., for use of City's dredging spoils site and authorizing -the Mayor,to sign, was adopted by 6 affirm - ative, l absentee,votes. CALL R ing o for 1 bid 4 s 7 March . 10, 1976, for various ousregulatory V �I Ag enda approving specifications s REGULATORY SIGNS for the Street Division, was adopted by 6 affirmative, RES #7293 NCS 1 absentee votes:. Agenda Item 465 ABC application for Peking Low Chinese Restaurant, 20 East ABC APPLICATION-- Washington Street, for on sale beer wine eating place, PEKING LOW was approved by 6 affirmative, 1 absentee votes. RESTAURANT 'REQUEST ALLOTMENT A letter dated February 5, 1976, from Debra Homes Inc. CHANGES - WESTRID'GE to the City Council regarding transfer of allocations Va UNITS 3 & 4 was read by the City Clerk and ordered filed. Planning Director Dennis,Boehlje described the-area by means of a viewfoil, and stated Debra Homes was requesting permission to transfer their allotments on Units 3 and 4.' The original allotments called for 89 single - family units on Unit No. 3, and 58 multi - family units,on Unit No. 4. -Debra Homes now is proposing to build all single-family units; decreasing the units from 157 units overall; to 77 single - family uri1ts :-• Th& request would be in conformance with the Subdivision Ordinance.. The req,ue.st. also shows some advantages wherein zero lot 'lines would be eliminated in the area. Mr. Boehlje further indicated AC y February,17, 1976 REQUEST.ALLOTMENT the change.: in, Unit 'No. 4 would require public ; hearing,;' CHANGES-- WESTRIDGE however, he did feel the to all single- family UNITS`3 & 4 units would•make ay much more desirable: development in the area, and felt 'it was an improvement in the overall plan. Mr., Trowbridge : , Vine - President of Debra Homes =; Inc., was present 'in the' audience and in answer to- Councilman. Harberson's :que_stion. of density on the plan, Mr.. Trowbridge. explained the new proposal' would. place only 3.6 units per acre. - Mr:. Trowb;ridge.fur -,thee is,tated- the change was - being, requested 'because they wanted, •to make' the entir-:e, development- mor-.e,. unff'brm A brief d s7 cuss-ion was held. by the Council; th seemed, to favor the change 1 in .the plan however, the -City Attorney advised' them- the, move. would ,be, fo,r Debra Homes to •submit•' a tentative map, for approval;, and he advised, the Council- to . defer` any action until the: matter is brought betfor-e• them in the proper form. Councilman Harberson -asked what'would` then'happ'en, with the 70 units not being. used'by West•r Mr. Boehlje indicated they :would probably :go ; back into, the fund of "unused allotments. -No •action was taken on the matter \I A letter dated R.eb:ruary 12, 1976•, -from _Daniel -Barwick; �v ENDORSEMENT- PETAL•UMA Youth' Services Coordinator Petaluma People; Services ` TEEN ACTION.,PROGRAM Center,, addressed to the Mayori.and•City Council, was read by the City-Clerk ordered filed. A copy of the gr.oposed °budget•,for'- an emergency dousing ~facility : °for 'youth in ,. family •crisis, suBmi't,ted" and filed: ' " The letter was asking the. City , .Counc =il to adopt, a resolution of .support for their request f'or' revenue sharing fund's in the - amount-• of - $48,9 fromi the County' of Sonoma City Manager Robert•Meyer' advised the Council if the endorsement was fo"rth`coming . from the City Council,-the County would probably reduce oither. allotments. under , revenue sharing to the 'C lty and, asked the City to, fund the - project from their . . own revenue sharing fund. Mr. Meyer further,- stated, with the ,3advent of the discontinuance .of revenue• sharing fund's for cities,,. he could not recommend the expenditure to the .City Council'.: Mayor .Putnam asked Mr•,. 'Barwic'k - if he had any -comments to make.. ng', the proposal. Mr. Barwick stated,, in his interviews with youth -who participate in the program at the Petaluma °'People Services Center, it is his understanding, the Petaluma Recreatioi'Department doesn't have the kind of programs direcfed.• to these young people in'Petaluma., He•felt if ,young peop'l•e had a drop: -in center or a place to spend. their.' evenings, the high :rate- of jiinven,le delinquency in Petaluma could be :reduced,. Mr.. Barwick stated, he felt 'the ;South. County area was being �neglected as as County' services - ,were concerned,. .He.-further: stated there was a need for such a facility,.to place, youth, on--an iter m basis a'o 'a, max - imum 'of 3'0 days, instead of "':sending, 'them to - Juvenile :Hall, and cited the case of four, runaways the Center had handled in the; recent past, but had- no- : place ; ..' to house them. The question of whether a .Housing f:acili.ty -for yquth and ,a, recreation facility contained in :one building 'vould appropriate was then discussed,. The The Council also showed a great deal of.concer.n regarding Mr, Barwick.'s• regarding the -rate of juvenll -e delinquency in Petaluma being the 'h�lgh'est in the County, 'and, Vice- Mayor`M'attei asked to have some veer f-i- cation of these figures:. He stated: he felt-it, was not only a city, but -a county. and statewide problem. Councilman Perry indicated he felt if such:a facility were made available.,, it would bean inducement for teenagers't'o run away from home. When asked 'whether or not the ; facfli -ty would serve the entire County,, Mr Barwick -- responded by stating he invis;ioned.'the program serving the Petaluma. Ro'hnert- Park, and C'ota -ti areas After ,some discussion, Mayor Putnam advised Mr. ,Barwick she felt it. was necessary for the Council, to have.a great deal more information on whether or not Petaluma was the proper area for such a: facility. It would be advisa have discussions with Pet'aluma'.s'Police Chief and.Recreation Director, and gather the types of information needed to make a decision on the matter before spending the limited amount of revenue sharing available to the City and the. County. February 17, 1976 CLAIMS AND. BILL Resolution_467294 N.. @',.:S.: ap.proviiig claims and bills #6907. RES 4'7294.. NCS tb #7063,. inclusive., G'eneral,City.; `• #321 to, in- _ clisive, r Water approved for payment by the City Manager,. was'intr,oduced'by Councilman,Perry,',seconded by Councilman Hilligoss, and approved by 6 affirmative, 1 absentee votes. 169 REVI'EW"OF STRATEGIC City, Manager Robert .Meyer referred to the. memorandum dated E.D.P. POLICIES February 10 ,_1976, - .which he received from the Planning Director-, Dennis.Boehlje. The.matters contained in the memorandum were those which - the , City,'Council had reviewed �/ V at their :Stud 'y - Session on January 26,•1976. - Meyer asked..,the Council if they had any coxrections or.additions to report before: was returned.to the •Plan- ning Commis'si'on -,for updating. Mr. Meyer.remin.ded the Council the Residential De- velopment�Plan. is. ,adop ed by .• -the City Council; - .however, the Environmental Design Plan'is subject to review by.the Planning Commission and .public hearings would be held. Councilman Hi'lligoss,, the. Council's representative. on the Planning Commission, asked if , the.Planning,Commission.would have.a-..Committee :set up as had been done on the original Environmental Design Plan.. Robert Meyer responded by stating the decision to use committees had.been the Planning Commission.'§, and.:if they so desired to use the committee procedure, had that latitude. Both Mayor Putnam-and-Councilman Hil'ligoss agreed that regardless of how it'was handled, whetlierrahrough .public, hearings' or a citizens,' commit_ tee.; the public should become involved .in the .Environmerita-1 .Design Plan. City Manager Robert Meyer stated the Environmental Design.Plan has been in effect for nearly five years, and not,a great'.many . areas needed.to be changed': The report' presented to th'e Council suggested areas which.the•P'lannng Commission would pro- bably want to review and make' recommendations to the City Council. He also advised if the Planning `Commission determined other'areas- needed to, be addressed,, they could make furtlier' recommendations. When asked by Councilman Mattei .what.time schedule. - was predicted for the review, the City'Manager stated he felt it would,take least four months to go through all the public hearing process and return to.the Council. Planning•,.Director,Z ennis Boehlje- indicated the City-could go ahead - with the allot merit system with the present five year plan',-as it still had another -yeas before its expiration date.. Mayor--Putnam' -then asked to have-the Planning-Commission-review the policies,-and-to seek community involvement in'the'ir decisions. Mr: Dean Merrick, a�member ofsfhe•Community Development Committee, asked that':some.liaison be set-up between tte Planning Commission and their Committee in order to_keep the Committee abreast ofAevelopments oii the Environmental Design'Plan. STATU,S'REPORT -City Manager Robert.Meyer reported to the Council that - ON WATER even with the recent rain, the =City wll'be faced with / V a critical water problem next summer. .He advised the Coun'cil.the'-staff was trying to secure as- mueh,well water capacity.as possible.,.arid- had,been successful in leasing a third well which. produce between"250j000 300,000 gallons of -water per day. The well is located on the•Willowcreek property iin.the Denman Flat area. Mr. Meyer advised the Council there would be'-some cost to the City to' reactivate this well and anticipated an expenditure of about $1 He further stated the staff has been working on the possibility of drilling more well somewhere in the Denman.ar,ea.on City -owned property.* The Lucchesi Park 'area-had been .,given some, considera -tion, but it is the feeling the Denman area could produce another 300,000 gallon per day .well�; :as opposed to a capacity in the- Lucchesi Park area-.- Mr.. Tom Wilson.,•D Utility.Operations, stated the Lucchesi Park site is not a good water producing,area. City Manager Robert Meyer also•advised the Council the cost for the use of the water on the`Willowcreek�p,roperty would be._$30.00 ; pbr,..a'cre' foot-, and it , would also be necessary to require some easements torrun the lines to the well. 1 7 0 February 17, 1976 STATUS REPORT The City Manager asked the City Attorney's advice whether ON`WATER or not an emergency could be declared and the bidding pro- (Continued cedure.for water exploration could ;be eliminated in case such an emergency was declared. The City Attorney responded stating the Council could -go out to bid tonight; however, if they desired to eliminate the bidding :procedure, it would,depend upon - the facts of the moment. Mr. Meyer stated it would take approximately six weeks to drill a well, and he was aware the cost would be more than the $3,000 limit set forth in the City Charter. Tom Wilson commented stating he• felt t_ he •City was being, unrealistic if they„ .were depending upon getting 4,MGD•of, water from..the aqueduct. The Sonoma.County Water Agency would not guarantee this. amount unless weather conditions change drasti- cally in the near future. Mr. Bob;Wells then addressed the City Council stating the-Engineer's Reports done approximately,eight years- ago.f,or the,.Council,and the Water Company,indicated the sub strata:in, this area was not. - capable o.f,,producing_economical. wells and.he doubted whether or-not-the City would get much water,from future drilling. Manager Robert Meyer responded,b.y st`a'ting the City does not intend to endeavor to drill enough_ wells to provide all,of the City's water. The.wells. the City was able to obtain last year played a•very important role in the water shortage. Even if it was ,possible to drill another- .300,000. gallon per •day well, i.t.,would relieve some of the stress of the•anticipated. wager shortage for the coming summer. Mr. Meyer stated the two wells activated last / year ,produced approximately 600,000 gallons, the Willowcreek well would produce.another 300,000 gallons and if. they were able to find water by drilling a new well, the supplement from the wells could amount to about 1 MGD. This would still not relieve the water shortage for the summer, ,but it would be of a great . help.. Mr. Meyer reported Tom Wilson would be attending a meeting the:•following day with other agencies in an endeavor to have -each city, or agency, treated equitably in the distribution ,of water. Some.-of the iteins. to be discussed are methods of saving water, restrictors „to b.e.placed in the water lines, and a procedure resolution will be brought back to Council at the.next,.,meeting,. Vice -Mayor Mat.tei asked whether or, not it would be possible to`hold off on such drastic measures for a short while, with the anticipat- ion,there may_be:enough rain in the next 30 to 60 days to fill the reservoirs. Asst.•City`Manager, David Breninger responded by stating.the gravity of.the.stuation now is that, the Lawler Reservoir at this period in the year should.be holding-74-MG of water, whereas it now contains 22 MG, or one month',s supply. He further stated as. far as the citizens and ; consumer s'are,concerned they can continue to irrigate up until about the first -part of April; at that point,.the demands on the northern part of the County would increase and the City of Petaluma could not depend upon the aqueduct for water. Mr. Breninger -' further stated the critical would arr;ive.earlier this year than,in past years, and anticipated April, rather than later in the.year. In response to ,a citizen in the audience Mr. Doty,, regarding what measures the City has taken for back -up systems for fire..pro.tection, Mr`,. Breninger.. responded by stating the City has quit'e..a, few tanks and half of the :supply in the tanks is set aside for fire supp'ression,. The balance is reserved for the needs for domestic, commercial and,industrial during this summer when the consumption is the greatest and the.0 ty is confined, MGD_. „ maximum from the aqueduct. In order: to keep the needed amouria water for fire suppression, the City reverted to the voluntary water rationing program the last two years At the conclusion of the discussion, City Robert Meyer asked the Council to be prepared to give some directiori.at the March,:st meeting,, particularly in the problem areas of whether or•no.t they wanted to provide water for new•construction,,,so some policy decisions could.be made.-at that meeting. The report prepared by the Water Emergency Task-Force for the City Manager,, with Attachments A and B, submitted and filed. 1 1 February 17, 1976 BICENTENNIAL .SPRING City Manager Robert Meyer reported he had received a CLEANUP letter from the Petaluma Refuse Company asking the City Council to..designate the week of March 29th to April 2nd as Spring Cleanup Week 'for 1976. The letter from Mr. Ratto indicated the customers of. the Reaaluma Refuse Company would be welcome to place all - garbage, clippings, garage' cleanup, or whatever else they wish to dispose of during this designated week without any additional charge to them. The service would be limited only to the present customers of the Company, and not all citizens in Petaluma. The letter is on file with the City Clerk. 171- 19V Mayor Putnam asked the City Manager to reply to Mr. Rat-to indicating the Council's approval and appreciation for their offer. LEGISLATION AFFECTING CITIES AB 1938 City Attorney Matt Hudson reported to the City Council this bill would place a,mandatory continuation upon refuse collectors to service a newly annexed area for ,a period of not less than five years from the time the City,, County, or special decided a new or alternative service was in the public interest. The present law provides for a three year period, as long as the service is adequate meets the same requirement of services for the remainder of the City. Mr. Hudson recommended the City follow the recommendation of the League of California Cities and oppose the bill. A motion opposing AB 19'38 was made by'Councilman Harberson, seconded by Council- man Perry, and unanimously approved. AB 2574 This 'bill pertains to-joint powers- revenue bonds for /" 6 I V projects over $5',000,000. Mr. - Hudson stated any public (� ggency•which is part of a joint.powers would have to gain the approval - of a maj the voters of local agency which is a party to* the agreement before any pub':lic <works project over - $5,000,000. could be constructed. Mr. Hudson..advised this could stifle or prohibit the building of some sewer plants, water construction, or other necessary services. He again advised the League of California,Cities opposed the bill -and recommended the Council concur with the League's decision.• A motion was made by Councilman Cavanagh, seconded by Councilman Perry, opposing AB 2574. Motion carried unanimously. SB 1550 Mr: Hudson stated this bill changes the method of penalty ��� assessments of fines and levies in court. He further stated the League projects a 2'0%: loss, in'- revenue in cities and in• California:: He . also indicated-it--would create a substantial financial impact on cities, particularly large cities. with n the State. The League is opposing the bill and recommended the Council concur. A motion was then made by Councilman Perry, seconded by _Councilman Cavanagh, opposing SB,•1550. Motion carried unanimously. ABAG BYLAWS Mayor adv.is.ed the.Council she had attended the 5 V p AMENDMENT business meeting of the Association of Bay Area Govern-:- O V ments as a delegate and the bylaws of the Association were amended•to•include • a per diem payment for persons serving on - c`ommittees;.task forces,. and attending other meetings of the Association of Bay Area Governments.•::Mayor !Putriam:r:eported to the Council Sonoma County -was well represented at meeting, wi- th.s -,the eight incorporated cities being presented thus giving Sonoma a strong part in the deliberation. Mayor Putnam also advised she and Planning Director Dennis Boehlje attended the seminar on earthquakes entitled "On Shakey Ground'''., The seminar focused not -only on the larger problems-related to- earthquakes, but also to individual problems in smaller communities, such as Petaluma, with older buildings, and the kinds of problems which are sometimes overlooked. 1 February 17, 1976 APPRAISAL SERVICES Finance Director John Scharer stated, in response fo a f OF CITY -OWNED request by the City Council, he had obtained proposals (� PROPERTIES for appraisals of City -owned property and inventory of ` RES #7295 NCS equipment. Two .companies responded - -one, the Tait Ap- . praisal Company of San Francisco, and the other, General Appraisal—Company of San Francisco. Tait Appraisal gave a quotation of $4,365 'to inventory the buildings and $6 „3:60 for the equipment inventory, or a total of $10.,725. General Appraisal Company's quotation for the buildings was $3,- 800,,.and.for the .equipment $2,600, or a total of $6,400. When asked why such a difference in the quotations., Mr. Scharer stated the Tait Com- pany has a much more sophisticated system, and General Appraisal addresses itself to the basic need's. Some discussion followed regarding the need for appraisal of the equipment; however, Mr. Scharer indicated a complete inventory has not been taken since 1969, and he felt the - quotation from General Appraisal Company of $2:,600 was quite reasonable, and probably less expensive than could be done by using the City's staff. At the conclusion of the discussion,'Resolution #7295 N..C:S., employing the professional services of General Appraisal Company, 111 Pine Street:, San -. Francisco, CA, in the amount of $6,400. to perform appraisal of City -owned properties.,was introduced by Councilman Cavanagh, seconded by Councilman Perry, and approved 6 affirmative, 1 absentee votes. / STATUS REPORT OR Finance Director John Scharer reviewed - memorandum G TRANSIT SYSTEM dated February 13, 1976, on the transit.progress report. RES 47296 NCS He indicated by negotiating with the prospective operator RES 467297 NCS of the system, Patterson Transportation, they were able to reduce the•cost of operation from $207,800 to $176,165. This was done by reducing the cost per hour for a total savings. of $31,635. Mr. Scharer also stated.there were two items in his report which would take Council action; one 'was 'the lease of the faclites. for the 10,00.0 gallon fuel tank and pump, office..space, 5,70.0 square feet of storage and maintenance area�at a cost of $6,130, plus the prorated share of the taxes:, which would approximate $'600. The lease would be for a one-year period. The second action needed to be taken by the Council would be to approve an interim services contract with the Patterson Transportation.Company'to help.set up the system. This would entail 100 hours at $10 per hour.. The Council questioned some of the costs contained in the report submitted by Mr. Scharer. Councilman Perry questioned the amount for telephone service& :;..however, Mr. Scharer—said this included all utilities, and not just the.telephone services.. Councilman Cavanagh then asked what the estimated mileage per year per vehicle was and Mr. Scharer indicated approximately 40,000 miles per year. Councilman Cavanagh also questioned the amount of $;2,000 contained in the report for repair parts. Mr. Scharer stated this was predicated on the fact the buses, in the first year of operation, would still be'under warranty as there was a 50,000 warranty on each vehicle. In answer to Vice -Mayor Mattei's question whether or not there would be any. possible way to lower the cost of the operation <,•Mr�. Scharer ,started since the contract would be on an hourly basis, the cost c be reduced or increased by raising or lowering the number of hours of operation. Mr—Scharer further stated the'money.set aside out of revenue sharing funds for 75 -76 can be.carried over to 76 --77, and about one -half of fiscal year 77 -78. He further stated the City would not spend any of the $100,000 set aside in the General Fund in this fiscal year. Mr. Scharer indicated,a.fare structure cou =ld bring the cost of the operation closer to the anticipated.MTC funds to be received annually.. City Manager Robert Meyer reported to the Council an article in the recent issue of the American City Magazine pointed out San Diego had $1,;00,0 for the same type of buses proposed for the City of Petaluma and has;had very good. success with them. Their maintenance costs and cost of` operation has been very favorable. Councilman Harb`erson indicated he shared Vice -Mayor Mattei's ;concern over the City's ability to operate within the money available; however, he did feel after the system is in operation,, it probably will be possible to reduce some of the hours of operation, thereby realizing some savings. He felt the figure presented February 17, 1976 178. STATUS REPORT ON ,to the Council• tonight was the•maximum figure. City TRANSIT SYSTEM Manager Robert.Meyer.also indicated some additional. RES #7296 NCS work would need to be done establish a fare structure, RES #7297 NCS and after the system has •been s,tar:ted, some public hear -` (Continued) ings could be held to determine if the- routes, as pro- posed; are the ,to -be ..incorporated into the system.. Mr. Meyer also asked the •Council• to•give -some . indication.regarding.the color of the buses.and if the.y•wanted-.to - call• the system a fleet,:and give buses mames of steamers which formerly had travelled the Petaluma River., i.e., the Steamer Gold, the Steamer Yolo. the-.Steamer:Alma, etc. Councilman Perry also asked if a logo had been determined to be used on the buses and suggested the wheel of a steamer, or similar type..of logo, could be used. Two members of the audience spoke-to the City Couneil• regarding the transportation system. Mr. Doty indicated the cost factors.would depend on the number of stops buses would have to make. Each stop would contribute to the overall maintenance cost. Mr: Doty also suggested the insertion of advertisement cards inside the coaches to help defray some­of:the costs. Mr. Rozasco spoke to the Council object- ing to the use of taxpayers` funds when a-former.minibus.•system in,the City.was not successful. Mayor Putnam.responded by stating,:much study _ had -gone into the matter, the.City was aware the small buses operated.in the City were not successful; but the City is going something in an endeavor to give our growing community more freedom.rof; movement. Mr., Scharer - :also °stated the.City does -not anti - cipate in the transit business, but we -,are able to handle the situation:a little better than a private concern because of the'TDA funds available to the City. Mr. Scharer explained these -funds are a portion of gasoline sales taxes, which are allocated back to-communities. They are derived from the community and should be returned for.the basic needs-of the community: Mr. Rozasco further commented on the City buying foreign -made buses and the - legality of such a transaction. CtyvAttorney Matt Hudson-stated it was.legal for the City-to buy the Mercedes Benz buses. - City,Manager Robert Meyer further commented:ron the matter stating much of the work on the buses is done.in'the�United fact, the transmissions for the Mercedes Benz bus is manufactured . in -San- Leandro..­He advised-Mr. Rozasco the Council attempted to provid'e system for.the citizens.of Petaluma:whichi would cost the least amount.-of money. -• At the conclusion the•d.iscussion the following -resolutions were passed Reso- lution #7296 N.C.S. authorizing lease between the City of Petaluma and N. J. Nielsen, and authorizing the Mayor sign for real property located at 67 Magnolia Avenue, was introduced by .Councilman Perry, seconded by Councilman Hilligoss, and adopted by 6 affirmative•, 1 Resolution #7297 N.C:S: approving agreement between City of Petaluma and Patterson Transportation for professional .services•:•regarding. setup and organization-of City's transit system•; and. authorizing Mayor:..to sign, wasr•.introduced by Councilman- Perry, -• - seconded by Councilman Harberson, and, by•5 1 negative,,and 1 absentee.votes. Councilman..-.Cavanagh "no ".! GOLDEN GATE.)TRANSIT Financ'e,,Director.John Scharer gave a brief- report:- on.the ROUTE. 71 . status of- :Route,:71 which• Golden Transit,.Route running from Petaluma to Rohnert Park and! to Santa.Rosa. It is an intracounty. service and primarily serves Sonoma State College. -- Santa Rosa, the City of Petaluma, -anal the County of Sonoma are look- ing into.other•alternatives to Route 71, as each entity-.must share,in the cost -for this_ A possible•I solution; would sbe,:f or. � Santa Rosa--to.-run one :loop from Santa­ Rosa to the: Col-lege;o Petaluma to run the• southern, loop. to -the College and the County:of Sonoma to - operate the.-central_,loQp system: City Manager Robert Meyer advised the Council further meetings - .would be held on a solution to an alternative to Route J:1. - 17 4 February 17, 1976 \� ( SMALL CRAFT HARBOR Community Development and Services Coordinator Frank Gray FEASIBILITY STUDY reported•he and the Council Committee; assigned to ;select . CONSULTANT- =DAMES a consultant'for the feasbility'study had received seven AND MOORE proposals from consultants /.consortiums to perform.the pro -. RES #7297A NCS posed =feasibility study...• Mr. Gray advised the Council the Committee -had received. t'he•packages from all. of the. sultants.-the previous Friday, had - reviewed them over the weekend, and had met this morning to review the proposals.. .'It was the recommen- dation of the Committee to.select the firm of .Dames and Moore from San Francisco to perform the feasibility study based on prior.experience,:their professional capabilities,, and their past work done in the City of Petaluma...Mr.. Gray also.. indicated their approach••for•,a three -phase systems to.,do the study .was the. most._.. . acceptable. Mr. Gray also indicated the phasing.approach suggested by Dames and Moore would permit -the Council to review the study at the completion of each phase and - decide whether or not they wished to continue.. Councilman Cavanagh, a member of the._selection committee,, indicated the Committee very thoroughly studied three- of.the seven proposals, and the decision to select Dames and Moore to prepare the.feasibility study -was unanimous The proposal. submitted by Dames and Moore, dated February 12,, 1976, _is. on file in. the_ City Clerk's office. Mr. .Cavanagh reported' the first .phase would cost .$13,290. Vice -Mayor Mattei expressed some concern.,that.the.- Council received;.the•report at such,a late-date and did.notihave:time to"thoroughly�review_it. He also expressed some concern that only one site could be considered-'for-the placement of the.s craft harbor: He still favors •a' more •versatile' recreat -onal facility: to include perhaps the small eraft•harbor:, a golf course, bicycle trails,, and other-facilities. Mr. Gray responded by stating two of the consultants.involved: expressed concern that an overall plannng.study be made-for recreational needs in the community;..however, this `would .involve an additional charge' somewhere- in . the neighborho.od.. of • :$10-, 000, and would ,be an entirely different project-. The consultants further: _ that when the • City started •looking "for boat harbor si•te's, site s 'election is ;very limited. This same -statement.had.be.en :made in the Ebas'co Report:compiled.in 1962. Tse onsultants•,have taken .into-conside r ation'the•cost of and upstream obstructions for other sites.. Mr-. Gray further stated one of the favor- able reactions to the Dames and Moore proposal was they would .do a preliminary environmental review in the first phase of the report. Mr. Gray further stated if the City delayed longer it would not be- eligible to apply for.funds until 1978. The loan application must be filed by July 1, 1976. There was.some further- discussion regarding an, overall masten:r"ecreational st.udy being done, and the question arose regarding how many people would-:really take . advantage of a small craft harbor in Petaluma. The. question was also raised by Councilman Perry if the City has an inventory.;of,peop,le ` in Petaluma who own boats who would take advantage of berthing, -T ac_ lit es:,. .Mr. Gray advised this information is available from the Department of Motor. Vehicles. Mr. Gray also stated the De- partment of Ocean Development and Navigation-would not.issue,a.coristruction loan unless the studies determined. the - pro,j , ect was 110% feasihle., - He. did' not.. feel -there were enough boat owners in the City to completely fill the berthing facilities; however, the studies would address themselves to the market area and if the studies indicated a�suffic ent interest in the small craft harbor, the harbor "_should be self - sustaining.. Mr..Gray stated the same could-,be-true fora golf course if it were constructed in the 'area. Mayor Putnam spoke in favor of proceed ng.'with• the smal craft harbor, stating the xivcr river had'now been dredged and the focus is on the river at'the present time - .- The river has a reasonably good channel and' cited the fact that during the previous weekend, two yacht clubs visited Petaluiria, and; although she was unable to relate what the visit- meant to the 'City•of P'etaluma - in-.dollars and cents; ,she felt such an installation could be of some commercial value to the community. Three members of the audience spoke to the .Counci•1•on the. mat;t'er." _A Mr. Doty: indicated perhaps boat builders "wo:uld be interested in creating industry in the City of Petaluma. Mr. Dean Merrick spoke stating the:new harbor being constructed by Shellmake.r at the.mo;uth of the Petaluma River is not open as yet, and they already have a.long'waiting list for berths in that facility., Mr. Mel Hein spoke to the Council stating the small craft harbor being constructed by Shellmaker was the appropriate place for a harbor and hoped the Council would reserve the :sites along the river for other industrial uses, rather than a boat harbor. Mr. Hein.further;sta in order to have the Corps of-Engineers continue dredging of the river, the City would have to show cause why the river should be kept navigable. February 17, 1976 SMALL CRAFT HARBOR At the conclusion of the. =discussion,. Resolution #7297A FEASIBILITY STUDY approving.pr:oposal ' of Dames and Moore for consultant CONSULTANT- -DAMES services regarding.the.siriall craft harbor and authorizing AND MOORE Mayor to sign was,intr:od•uced by Councilman Perry, seconded RES #7297A NCS by Councilman. Cavanagh,.,and.approved by 5 affirmative, 1 (Continued,) negative, and 1 absentee votes. Vice -Mayor Mattei voted "no ". Vice -Mayor Mattei clarified his ".no" vote by stating he was mot opposed to the boat, harbor, but felt the Council should have had more time to study the proposal before voting on the issue. v RECESS Mayor P.utnam.called a recess at 10:25 p.m. and the Council reconvened at 10:30 p.m. FAU FIVE - YEAR PROGRAM City .Engineer ;David Young advised the-Council the Federal RES_ #7298 NCS Aid Urban Systems Program has been expanded. -from a three- 3 33F year program to a five -year program. The program is being administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission as prompted.by Federal law. The five -year program projects to the.fiscal year 1980- 81. Under the three -year program, the last action the Council had taken was to approve the East'Washington Street, Liberty,:S.treet, and Magnolia Avenue projects under the FAU funding. Over the five- year.period, additional sums will become available at the .rate of $125,000 per year. The bulk of the additional money has been put into the East Washington Street.Program.for right -of -way acquisition. Mr. Young stated the City has 'been unable to get a definite commitment from CALTRANS when they expect to.have the right- of- way...,acquisi.tion for the project completed; however,'.they .did•-speak in terms ofr,1-1/2 years. Mr.. Young, further stated.:after the acquisition of the right -of -way on East Washington Street, if any funds re- mairied:they could be transferred to construct on.phase of the.project. Report of th'e•Sonoma County Urban�System .Technical:Ad- visory Committee submitted and filed. Mr. Young out the first item on the-report was-;the.signal modification at the intersection of North McDowell Boulevard.and East.Washington Street; however, this project has already been funded— Mr. Young further stated the Board of Super- visors was asking each city to-pass a resolution approving report;for_the County- wide program. After a brief discussion, Resolution #7298,N,.C.S. of the City of Petaluma approving the five -year Federal Aid Urban System Programs.for the Healdsburg area - Santa Rosa urbanized area and the :Petaluma.urban area,, was introduced by Councilman Mattei, seconded by Councilman:.Harberson, and approved by 6 affirmative, l absentee votes. PREZONE 107• ACRES Planning Director Dennis Boehlje reviewed the proposed FROM .COUNTY A TO project to*'be located .adjacent to Park on North PC DISTRICT- -NORTH McDowell Boulevard. The parcel is'approximately 107 acres_ MCDOWELL BLVD. and' Qantas Development* Company'is planning to ., build 636 , (Q ANTAS) multi- and single- family units. ORD #1208 NCS Mr. Boehlje stated the. plans first submitted by Qantas Development,Corporation in January were reviewed by the Planning Commission and some suggestions were made. The new plans "submitted now incorporates the realign- ment of Maria Drive onto the property where-the original plan'did not show this, and the second change is the realignment_of a local street to provide a'buffer zone between Lucchesi "Park and the p`roject.'_The original "Plan had called for single - family units to be placed next - to Lucchesi Park; however,' the new plan submitted by Qantas does not show the buffer street, but shows-'mul'ti- family units to act as a buffer along Lucchesi Park. The new proposal submitted by'QaLntas Development eliminates the 19 low- income units which had been a part of their "allotmen"t for the prq ecf." The Planning Commission took no official action concernng.the elimination of these units; however, the' consensus was the low- income units should be .implemented into the design- of'this type of development,,. Mr. Boehlje_stated the Planning Commission did, however, recommend to the City Council that;the Planned'Community Development prezoning be approved. Mr.'Boehlje reported the overall.density for th'e entire project would be six units per acre, with the single- family.'port -ion of the project to have 3.8 units per acre, and the "multi - family portion 10 or 11.'units per acre. The revised plan shows a reduction dedicated park land to the City from nine acres to 5.3 acres. Mr. Boehlje did state, however, by the'revison there would be as much or more open space in the entire development; however, not'all of it would be dedicated. 176. February 17, 1976 PREZONE 107 ACRES In discussing the elimination of the 19 low income units, FROM COUNTY A TO City Manager Robert Meyer advised the Council he had 'c'on- PC DISTRICT -= NORTH taated Mr. Robert An'd'erson,•the Attorney for,the City in, MCDOWELL BLVD. the Construction Industry suit against the City Petaluma. (QANTAS) Mr. Anderson's advice was to retain the low- income units ORD #1208 wherever possible as'this had.been an intregal part of (Continued). the "Environmental _Design Plan -: Maps and•drawings of.the revised Planned Community Development were reviewed with the City Council by - the'Planning- Director. The first phase of the development would commence at the opposite end -,of the acreage from Lucchesi Park. Mr. Jon Joslyn from Qantas Development.explained the reasoning for beginning the project at this site was.due to the availability of water-and sewer. Mr. Joslyn also stated a- lthough they did not feel it was-economically feasible for them to build the 19 low- income.units, if they were required to do so, they would build them. He disputed the fact, however, that they would be considered low -to- moderate because.they would have.to:sell from.between _ $32,000 to $35,:000 and he doubted if there would'be much of.a market for this type of unit. Mr. Joslyn further remarked that because of.a series of changes which'have occurred in , the Building Code, the units could not be built as economically as had first been proposed. He further stated by affix- ing the term "low cost" to.the.unit:would.apply only to the initial sale and once the _unit changed fr-om•one-owner to another, the price would undoubtedly increase. Mayor- Putnam at this time `stated she felt it was inappropriate. to .discuss. the . matter of eliminating the low -cost units from the development in.view.of.the fact the matter was still before the courts._ The advice'from•- the Attorney had been received,.and the City Council would Have to take this into consideration. City Manager Robert Meyer pointed out to the City Council by having the Phase*I begin at the north.end'of the property would create problems..for the con- struction of McDowell Boulevard.. The.street has been a matter of.some concern to the City Council.in r- ecent'months, and developing at the northern end rather than the southern end of the property.in• the first phase would create spot.development, of McDowell _Boulevard. 'He also pointed out the area facing on 'McDowell Boulevard is quite a large one, would cover approximately the.area similar to the..area from Washington Street to Caulfield Lane. Mr. Joslyn r'eponded by stating it would be almost economically impossible for-them to complete.constr.uction of McDowell Boulevard during the construction of'Phase.I as it.would-place.a • financialrimpact on the Phase I development. City Manager Robert Meyer • stated.he - had_ merely brought subject up.so the Council would be aware of the fact that McDowell Boulevard would be developed on a spot basis, rather than a completed basis for the area. Planning Director Dennis Boehlje advised the Council the.question of`the•.street and.other problems brought up;by_the'City Council tonight could be answered at the tentatve map- stage. They need not be resolved in order to prezone the property to a Planned Community Development district. Mr. Dean Merrick, speaking-from the, audience, suggested as the phases were - developed;, the street could .be dev,eloped;, and. Mr Bo.eh "lj e " responded by stating he felt this was the preference, however, the Council is discussing the complete development of McDowell Boulevard along, the project site' City Manager Robert Meyer. indicated he felt it was important to.b,, these matters r :_ out at this tme_ before the applicant went ahead and invested further funds. He felt Qantas should be, made aware of the fact that,Council may require such a provision at the tentative map stage. Planning Department staff report dated January 2, 1976, , and add`erdum to .the staff report dated-January .6 , 1976; excerpts from the-Planning Commission minutes of January_6, 1976;.-staff report from Planning dated January 28; 1976; and excerpts of the Planning Commission dated.February 3, 1976.; submitted and filed. In addition, memorandum - dated February 13, .1976; from the Planning Director to the City Manager` regarding the•low- income housing for, Qantas 'D'evelopment'Corporation, submitted and.filed.;,.Planning Commission Resolution_No 2'3-76., submitted and filed; and,,,letter•from Qantas Development Corp - o.ration dated January.27,,-1976, submitted and filed. February 17, 1976 PREZONE JOT ACRES Upon.conclusion of-,the discussion, #1208 N.C.S. FROM COUNTY A TO .- amending Zoning Ord nance, #1072'- ,N.,C ;S. by reclassifying PC DISTRICT- -NORTH - A.P. 4136- 11:0 - 11,4136- 110 -18., #1367110- MCDOWELL BLVD. 46136 110 - 38,.4136- 110 - 39,..:4.136 110 -.4.0 (consisting.of approx- (QANTAS)B imately 107• -from a County ';A!' (Agricultural) dis- ORD 461208 NCS trict to a PCD (Planned Community) located on (Continued). the easterly_.sid °e..of North:McDowell Boulevard, north of East Washington Street and adjacent to the City's Lucchesi Park introduced by Councilman Hilligoss, .seconded by'Councilman Perry, and.order•ed published by 6 °-.affirmative; l..absentee votes., BODEGA AVENUE Planning Director Dennis Boehlje rev ewed.%the map on the STUDY AREA wall.showing the proposed,rezoning and prezoning of the r]If� areas-in-question. He stated it was the recommendation I ? of the Planning Commission to rezone and prezone the area north-of Bodega to.R -1- 20,000., to a line- where.a proposed roadway would be shown, and south of that and south of�Bodega.Avenue:to R- 1- 10,000: There would also be a .reduction in the ,C =N District. tflr. - ' Boehlje stated- the Planning; Commission had held public hearings.and there was really no,agreement from the property owners; however, the recommendation from the Planning Commission was unanimous. Mr. Boehlje further stated the plan recommended by.the Planning-Commission was basically the Plan "F" which the City Council had returned to them for review with modifications. He further stated the road line shown on the'plan.is basic -. ally where the slope.area begins. After the Planning• Director'• s-.presen,tation,, • Mr: Joe- of Burton Engineers, spoke to City Council stating -he had_been . by,•two of the larger,-owners in the area to make some-calculations- on.the slopes-in-,the.-area-and the possibility of development in the slope area. Mr. Burton presented copies of - maps to the City Council showing the topography of the area— He stated where it would be necessary to put streets, curb's; gutters., and.sidewalks• f. there was•a 10% slope, -the cut bank would be.two feet, at 15 % :three and 20% four .feet. Mr. Burton was of the opinion the area could be developed in 6,500 square foot lots, reserving larger lots for the higher sloped areas,. but he felt an overall R -1 -8,000 density in the area. should be considered:: City Manager Robert Meyer asked Mr. Burton i.f.this matter had been brought before the Planning Commission.at their public hearing,.and Mr-: Burton replied in the negative. Community Development and Se•rvices::Coordinato:r Frank Gray.addressed the Council stating this was the opportunity•he;;had to look at the.proposal. -by Burton Engineers; however;; he. feel - there .were some ' conf-licts with -the plan- and with the City's Subdivision Ordinance,. _ such . conf -lic.t being the length permitted for cul -de -sac streets; and thet•other the•slope;o-f driveways.. Councilman Hilligoss, the.Council's representative.to.the Planning'Zommission, stated at the public hearing of the Planning Commission.she had spoken'with Mr. Dorenfeld and Mrs. Fowler and - - advised them if some of the- property.owner in the;.area.could bring a plan in for one piece of land by combining.several properties, there could - be a possibility of rezoning- the. area to a- Planned.. Unit Development and, work out some of in the--area. She.was of the opinion-, however, it could not be done as long as the area remained-in.separate lots. -. Vice -Mayor Mattei commented it appeared there could be a possibility of the property owners in • the - area - now. ;wanting- to--.get:. together-Ao present some type of workable solution to the .City for rezoning prezoning.the. area... - :..: At the conclusion of the discussion, Mayor Putnam stated she did not feel the City Council could make any decision on the matter-in view of the new proposal presented by Burton Engineers, which the City.staf:f; the Planning.Commission and the City Council not•had.tan opportunity to study: ­Mayor,Putnam further stated the a very di-ffi =cult.area to—.be—able to reach any conclusions on, especially due to` the - condition _.of­.Bodega.Avenue. :The,,fact that some of the property owners -have now hired an Engineer to'take a.look at the problem was some indication the property owners may try to resolve some of the problems. She further asked the City Manager not the • sched_ule•. ,matt•er ; for. the. Council for the next several meetings. 1 7 8 February 17, 1976 ESTABLISH P.ERMIT. City Manager Robert Meye'r.reminde& the City Council the PROCEDURE'FOR ordinance had. been thoroughly reviewed by them at'their ENCROACHMENTS study session February 9th. 'Suggestions were made, - 'for ORD #1209'NCS some•.changes in••'the languagein the ordinance, and it is now being - brought back to the Council for introduction. Councilman - -Cavanagh' asked for• �some.�clarification whether or 'not the ordinance would pertain' to -signs 'pr esentl :instal led, on , structures in 'the City. City Attorney 'Matt: Hudson stated generally s -eated a differently through the sign- ordinance. 'This•iordiiiance� 'propos'ed - to- cover awnings or structures to be placed on the - •sidewalk;- "However'; .`it ,does- pertain, in instances, where there are projecting signs. In answer to Councilman Cavanagh''.s question of how many signs would be involved,, City Manager Robert Meyer explained every sign'now"either - has a - "perm t.'-or has been granted. by Council action. City Attorney Matt. Hudson said �rif "a sign - •has =Been •erected with approval or by Council permission, the-applicant would`�not even have' come'in for a- permit. Upon, - conclusion !of'-the discussion Ord nance #1209 •N.CcS. establishing'•aoperm t .• procedure - for- - encroachments on, "over, •in; ?or';under any-real property', alley easement; or sidewalk owned ;or controlled by the ;City of Petaluma, Section 13':04 -.030 and iSection 060: of -- the• Petaluma Muncipal 'and.-adding Sections 13..04:100, 13'.04: 110;'13:04.120 13 --and 13.04.160 thereto, was introduced by Councilman Perry, seconded by Councilman Harberson,•'and ordered - published 6'•affirmative ,, 1 absentees votes - INTRUSION ALARM Ordinance 46120:7 N.C.-S. of the City of•Petaluma'adding REGULATIONS Chapter 10.60 to Title 10-of the Petaluma Municipal ORD 461207 NCS Code•re.gulating the:ins..tallation, maintenance; sale, (SECOND READING) lease, and`al'teration of alarm•,systems was - adopted by .6' +affirmative, 1 absentee votes.1. EXECUTIVE-SESSION The Council,ad`journed _ to an Executive Session at 12:02 a.m. February"18, - 1976, and reconvened at 12:13 arm. ; ( ALDERWOOD :SUBDIVISION Two letters had been• submitted' to the City'; ' one dated ©� -- EXTEND AGREEMENT February 10•,.19.76, to,the Mayor and City Council, and - another'%d`ated February 10, 1.976; to Manager. Meyer. Both letters -are on file -with the City-Clerk. City Attorney Matt. Hudson summed up the contents of both letters by stating Kaiser Aetna is. either.: asking for a, two= year'�ext'ension the subdivision agreement', or-a potential 'alt;ern to7submit•a new pareel' on the pro- perty=, including;a,ne'w agreement withlthe City for single- family units and reserving certain-'portions f or dedication,.-, The 'City Attorney advised the Council to direct..Kaser %'Aetna to extend their present bond' on the subdivision until such =•time as :they'were:prepared submit a new, proposal for a parcel map. The extension of the - .bond•would, - protect the City under the - prior subdivision agreement. - :Mr. Kyle Morgan', Jr., Manager of the Pl'anned..Development Operations for Kaiser Aetna,'ind icated to the City Council this would be—satisfactory—.to them and they would extend the -bond during the period time when they-were preparing the new subdivision agreement and map. At the conclusion of the discussion,'a motion. was made by Councilman Mattei, seconded by Councilman Hilligoss, accepting the proposal of—Kaiser—.Aetna, and granting the extension of time. Motion carried unanimously. BICENTENNIAL - DANCE== Mayor'Putnam: asked the..City Attorney to prepare va resolution COMMEND 'SONS OF ITALY which would -in dit aae "the Council's - ap;prec action for the RES #7299' • endeavor put forth b,y: the: Sons' of Italy sin the 'City's first Bicentennial celebration, .a dance which was - held February '14 1976, at the Veterans' Memorial - Building. Resolution 467'299 N.C.S. of 'appreciation to. the .Sons of "I=taly - for °Bicentennial. Celebration Dance was then introduced by Vice -Mayor Matt'ei, seconded by Council- man Cavanagh, and approved by 6.affirmative, 1 absentee votes. February 17, 1975 17 9 PETALUMA FLOOD Mr. Mel Hein addressed the Council as he had done on 33 3 V PLAIN REPORT February 2, 1976, expressing.his concern over the adopt - V ion of the County of Sonoma.'s Flood Plain Zoning Plan. Mr. Eein.advised.the.Council the matter would come before the Board of Supervisors and once it. s adopted', it goes on to the Federal govern- ment and becomes zoned as recommended without any possibility of change. Mr. Hein's particular objection was to the. F- 1.category.whIch.would. prohibit any additional fill on the banks-of the river outside of the -City limits. He..asked.the City Council to contact Supervisor Kortum, or the Board of. Supervisors, and felt they.would be willing to hold off on maki-ng.a final decision. Mr. Hein stated he felt the report exaggerated the possibility of flooding in the area,.and the loss of the land for industrial uses would affect the City economically in.future years. There was some discussion held regarding the matter, and Vice -Mayor Mattei questioned whether or not the County's ordinance would take precedence over a City,ordinance. Planning Director Dennis Boehlje. stated he had represented the City on the Committee working on the flood plain zoning plan, and had suggested some amendments to their ordinance concerning the flood plain. One recommendation was to permit the construction of a marina somewhere in the area along the river. City Attorney Matt Hudson questioned whether or not if the City annexed property downstream, would they still be bound by the plan. .City,Manager Robert Meyer advised the Council the zoning is' mandated by the Federal government, it is a permissive zoning and is required because of the flood insurance program. Congress had passed the bill.stating the people were en- titled to some flood relief and very stringent controls have been placed on any building near waterways. Mr. Hudson further stated the bill is all encompassing, even to contributory streams which might have their origin in the high ,Sierras. Some discussion was then held on how far the zoning should extend, and it was Mr. Hein's feeling the zoning for industrial use should extend as far as the Higby property on the western side of the river. Mayor Putnam stated she did not feel this.was an-unreasonable request to make, and Vice -Mayor Mattei added he felt the City should protect as much of the land as possible. Mayor Putnam then asked to have a representative from the City present at the Board of Supervisors meeting when the matter was discussed. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:40 a.m., February 18, 1976. Attest: sk --w ity Cleirk 180 r i 1 1