HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 03/22/1976205
MINUTES OF MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL
PETALUMA; CALIFORNIA
. MARCH 22, 19 7 6
COUNCIL MEETING The adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of
Petaluma was called to order by Mayor Helen Putnam at
the hour of 7:30 p.m.
ATTENDANCE Present: Councilmen Brunner *, Cavanagh, Harberson,
Hilligoss, Mattei, Perry and Mayor Putnam.
Absent: None.
*Councilman Brunner arrived at 7:45 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of March 15, 1976, were approved as mailed.
CONSENT CALENDAR A motion was made by Councilman Perry, seconded by
Councilman Harberson, approving the resolutions on the
Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
Agenda Item #1 Resolution #7327 N.C.S. accepting completion of work
ACCEPT COMPLETION required for Dickson Hill Parcel Map (off of West 19
-- PUBLIC Street) (Ron M. Nunn and Hannah M. Nunn, his wife) was
IMPROVEMENTS adopted by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes.
DICKSON HILL
PARCEL.MAP
RES #7327 NCS
Agenda Item #2
Resolution #7328
N.C.S. authorizing
the City Manager to
AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT
execute license
agreement for use of
Fairgrounds facili- 19 F
-- FAIRGROUNDS,
ties for July 3,
4, and 5, 1976, was
approved by 6
JULY 3, 4, 5, 1976
affirmative and
1 absentee votes.
RES #7328 NCS'
DISCONTINUANCE OF Finance Director John Scharer outlined the route pres -� ? r�/
GOLDEN GATE ently covered by the Golden Gate Transit Route 71. l�,c
ROUTE 71 Primarily, the route starts at the bus depot at 4th and
RES 47329 NCS . "C" Streets, and travels to the valley side of the ;�a9 F
community along McDowell Blvd. South to East Washington'
Street, thence to Ely Boulevard and on.to Sonoma State
College, eventually ending up in Coddingtown in Santa Rosa, and returning to
Petaluma via the same route. Mr. Scharer advised the Council the operating
deficit for Route 71 for the fiscal year 1975 -76 is estimated to be $228,000.
The deficit estimate for 'fiscal year 1976 -77 is $255,000, with Petaluma's
responsibility being $41,742. The interim agreement between the Sonoma County
Board of Supervisors and the Golden Gate Transit District will terminate June
4, 1976.
The.County -wide committee studying alternatives to Route 71 on which Mr. Scharer
has served, prepared and presented a report dated March, 1976, which had pre-
viously been given to the City Council and is on file with the City Clerk. Mr.
Scharer reviewed the report stating Alternate "B" would provide a bus service
operating in.Rohnert Park and the Cotati area, with a loop to Sonoma State
College, then with the bus running from Petaluma to Sonoma State College and
return, it was felt this service would be the most viable for southern Sonoma
County. Alternate "C" would have the City of Santa Rosa providing service from
Santa Rosa to the College. Mr. Scharer stated, however, the Santa Rosa City
Council has rejected the proposal and has recommended Alternate "B" to the
Board of Supervisors. Mr. Scharer stated the total effect of Alternate "B"
would be instead of a cost of $255,000 to the County, it is estimated the cost
would be $148,080, with Petaluma's share being $20,580. Mr. Scharer advised
the Council the Committee felt Alternate "A'', which would provide a shuttle
service between the inter- and intra- county Route 70 to the College, was the
least desirable of the alternatives because it would necessitate a transfer
system and would drastically reduce the level of service. Alternate "A" would
not serve the College during the time when it would be most needed. The early
morning commute buses beginning around 5:00 in the morning, run approximately
every 6 minutes until about 6:45. Thereafter, the schedule is on an hourly
basis. It was the staff's opinion Alternate "B" would provide better service
to the citizens of Petaluma.
206 March 22, 1976
DISCONTINUANCE OF Some discussion was then held on the ridership of Route
GOLDEN GATE 71. Mr. Scharer was asked whether or -not he had a
ROUTE 71 breakdown of the locations where the pas'sen'gers em
RES #7329 NCS barked and disembarked; however, Mr. Scharer stated he
(Continued) was unable to get this breakdown from the Golden Gate
Transit District. He did know, however, the total was
160,000, and 70 college students utilize the service.
A mention was made of the fact that Santa Rosa was drastically reducing their
service. Mr. Scharer stated there were underlying reasons for their decision
to favor Alternate "A" because of Title 13 -C, Federal funds. Mr. Scharer
advised the City of Santa Rosa's resolution did state, however, they would
reconsider at some future time. Mr. Scharer stated the cities involved in
Alternate "B" include Cotati, Petaluma and Rohnert Park, with each having a
monitary obligation for providing service, in addition to the County of Sonoma.
If this alternate is adopted the City of Petaluma, in the first year, would
save $14,000 over the cost of operating Route 71 and approximately $21,000 in
the next fiscal year.
City Manager Robert Meyer advised the Council the Board of Supervisors could
continue their contract with the Golden Gate Transit District to operate Route
71, and 'this would cost the City $29,220, or approximately $9,000 more than
Alternate "B ". Mr. Meyer asked Mr. Scharer who would have the final authority
on discontinuing Route 71. Mr. Scharer reported it was the feeling of the
Committee if all the cities would go to the Board of Supervisors with the
statement they wish to discontinue Route 71, he felt the County would be in a
very awkward position to enter into another contract with the Golden Gate
Bridge District. It is his understanding from the staff of the City of R'ohnert
Park, their Council was meeting tonight and would recommend the discontinuance
of Route 71 and the substitution of Alternate "B ".
Mr. Scharer advised the Council the elimination of Route 71 would not save
dollar for dollar"as passenger ridership would shift to Route 70 and would
increase the efficiency of this route thereby increasing the amount of'money
the County would have to pay for operation of Route 70.
Mr. Scharer stated the urgency in the matter was due to the fact the Transpor-
tation Development Act funds had to be claimed before April 1st. He had talked
with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and they agreed to extend the
deadline until April 5th. However, the Board of Supervisors would be acting
upon the matter at their meeting Ma_rch.29th, and.Mr. Scharer stated he would'
like to be able to have a decision from the Council before the end.of the
month. He then reviewed the guidelines for allocation of TDA funds in Sonoma
County which had been prepared by Don Head, the County Engineer, for presenta-
tion to the Board of Supervis'or.s. The Council indicated they would prefer to
have some additional time to study the material and no action was taken at this
time; however., the Council did pass Resolution #7329 N.C.S. requesting discon-
tinuance of Route 71, which was introduced by Councilman.Harberson, seconded by
Councilman Mattei, and adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
At the conclusion, Mayor Putnam asked Mr. Scharer if he would summarize the
materials contained in the two reports for the Council's review for action to
be taken before April lst.
APPROVE ROUTES, Finance Director John Scharer outlined the four routes
FARES & HOURS -- proposed for the City bus service,as depicted on a map.
CITY BUS SERVICE Four routes are proposed; two to serve the valley side
RES #7330.NCS of the community, one to serve the southwestern end of
the communit and the fourth to serve the northwestern
end of the community. Mr. Scharer stated the,two
routes on the valley side of the community would traverse in opposite direc-
tions; one go_ng'clockwise, the other counter - clockwise. It was also proposed
to extend one of the routes along.McDowell Boulevard' North to serve the mobile
home parks; out as far as Youngstown:: The focal point for all routes would be
the present bus depot located at 4th and "C" Streets. Mr. Scharer further
stated, although it was not the intention to provide service to the schools.,
all of the.buses passed relatively close to a number of schools. The routes'
would, in most cases, provide a '30- minute headway. It was.the suggestion of
the staff the routes, as outlined, be.given -a 90 -day trial in order to deter-
mine whether or not the ridership warranted the areas selected for bus service.
During this period, no formal schedules would be printed, but some.manner :of
publication would be done.at a minor expense. Mr. Scharer also stated it may
be necessary to consult with the Traffic Committee to remove two parking meters
near the bus station at 4th and "C" Streets in order to accommodate. the City
March 22, 1976
APPROVE ROUTES, buses. The question was raised whether or not some
FARES & HOURS-- service was to be provided for the Leisure Lake Mobile
CITY BUS-SERVICE Home Park, located'at 300 Stony Point Road, and Mr.
RES ,� #,7330 - .NCS Scharer pointed out the .Golden Gate Route 70 served
(Continued) Petaluma Boulevard on a regular schedule.
The hours of .operation were then discussed by the City Council. The recom-
mendation from the staff was to start the system with the maximum service
suggested in the City's request for proposals and in the Kaiser Report. The
southwest and northwest routes would begin at 5:00 a.m. and discontinue at 7:00
p.m. The east routes would begin at 7:00 a.m. and discontinue. at 7:00 p.m.,
Monday through Thursday. The Friday schedule would be -5:00 a.m. to 9:00 P.M.
for the southwest and northwest routes, and 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. for the east
routes. The Saturday schedule for all routes would be from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m.' There would beano service on Sundays or holidays:. Some discussion was
held.regarding the 5:00 a.m. starting time for the southwest and northwest
routes. Mr. Scharer indicated this was in order to try to relieve some of the
parking problems around the bus depot and other areas where commuters park
their cars, and would give the commuters an opportunity to connect with the
express Golden Gate commuter buses. The necessity for the early starting time
on the valley side of the community was eliminated because several club buses
and other transportation was available by means of the Golden Gate Transit
System. The question was then asked of Mr. Scharer what he considered would be
a reasonable ridership for the southwest and northwest routes at this early
hour. Mr. Scharer said if the system handled 100 people, it could be con-
sidered very good patronage because the buses were 19- passenger buses. The two
buses would only be able to make about two loops in order to meet the schedule
of.the commute buses. Mr. Scharer stated because the cost of the bus system
would be calculated on an hourly.basis.if it was determined:there was.not the
ridership before 7:00 in the.morning, or until 7:00.in the evening, the number
of hours could be reduced, thus decreasing the cost of operation.
Mr. Scharer then referred to Item #2 on his report concerning fares. The
recommendation is.for a $.25 fare, with a $.10 senior citizen and handicapped
fare. The system would honor the Bay Regional Transit Discount Cards for the
senior citizens and handicapped. Children under six years of age accompanied
by a fare - paying passenger would be charged no fare.
At the conclusion of Mr. Scharer's.presentation, Resolution #7330 N.C.S. ap-
proving routes, fares, and hours of operation for the City of Petaluma_'s bus
service., was introduced by Councilman .Harberson, seconded by Councilman Hilli-
goss, and approved by 7 affirmative votes.
NAMES FOR BUSES City Manager Robert Meyer reported to the Council he
was researching names of various vessels which had
travelled the Petaluma -River early in the history of 59 J_ v
the City. His suggestion was to have a plaque inside the bus describing the
vessel and part of its history and several names had been suggested. The
Council agreed on two of the names; one the Steamer Gold, and the other the
Steamer Petaluma. There wa some question raised, however, regarding other
names suggested, such as the Alma, the Fourth of, °July, as to whether they were
designated as schooners or.scow- schooners. Mr. Meyer indicated he would do
some further research; however, the buses would be painted in the very near
future, and he asked the Council to reach the decision on naming the buses.
AMEND RES 46824 NCS A brief discussion preceded the adoption of the reso - ^OF
-- REDEMPTION FEES & lution. City Manager Robert Meyer stated there were y
CHARGES FOR ANIMALS some inequities in Resolution 46.824, wherein the redemp-
RES 47331 NCS tion fees for smaller species of animals, such as
calves, sheep or. goats, sometimes could be more than
actual market value of the animal. In addition, Finance
Director John Scharer suggested a change be made in:the resolution whereby an
animal brought or given to the pound by the owner =for the purpose of adoption
or destruction would not have to pay a.fee. This would avoid the problem of
having citizens take animals to the Animal-Control Shelter either for adoption
or destruction, but disclaiming ownership. - -In these cases, the Animal Control
Officer is required'by.law to house the animals for a period of five days. Mr.
Jake Morgan, the Animal Control Officer, stated it hindered his'program for
adoption of animals in many cases where he had to hold the animals for five
days.
2 Q 8 March 22, 1976
AMEND RES #,6824 NCS
-- REDEMPTION .FEES `&
CHARGES` FOR ANIMALS
RES 47331 NCS
(Continued)
Upon conclusion of the discussion„ Resolution 47331
N.C.S.. amending Resolution 46'824 N.C.S. establishing
license fees,.redemption fees and charges., and late
registration.charges to be collected under,the authority
of Title 9 of the.Petaluma Municipal Code, was intro-
duced by Councilman Perry, seconded by Councilman
Brunner, and adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
V CURB ; ROUNDINC- City Manager Robert.Meyer had been requested to report
PETALUMA BLVD. SO, back to the Council the curb rounding project at the
`V AND "D" STREET northwest corner of Petaluma Blvd.. South and "D" Street.
Mr. Meyer stated the developer had hired an engineer
and would take the responsibility for most of the.work;
however, the recommendation was for the City to assume the responsibility for
moving the fire alarm.system.and the traffic signal in an amount not to.exceed
$5,0.00. The proposed development-is the "D" Street Plaza, to be constructed by
Robert F. .Carmody. *Mr. Meyer stated he was not.sure whether the developer was
going to continue with the project; however, if the work did progress, the City
would be - assuming no more responsibility than they had on another corner
intersection. A motion was.mad'e by Councilman Perry, seconded by Councilman
Brunner, to approve expenditure not to exceed $5,000 for the.proposed curb
rounding at this site. Motion carried by 5 affirmative and.2 negative votes.
Councilman.Harberson and Councilman Hilligoss voted "no ".
CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
AUXILIARY GENERATOR •City. Manager Robert Meyer reported since the.Council'
MAINTENANCE -- WATER had approved attendance at a clinic in San Diego for -
POLLUTION CONTROL the Water Pollution Control Superintendent,Fred-Schoen-
PLANT eweis, it would not be necessary to enter into a main-
tenance contract with the Solar Company.. The routine
maintenance can now be handled by City personnel.. The
annual cost of the contract had:been anticipated to be $2,400,.and the cost for
,- the course for Mr. Schoeneweis was $665.
COUNCIL.INFORMATION The City Manager advised the Council it.is the inten-
PACKAGES Lion to deliver the Council's mail each Friday after-
noon, instead of late Friday evening or Saturday
morning.
Some discussion was held relative to an earlier delivery than Friday of the
packets. Mr. Meyer indicated this could be done; however, it would be neces-
sary to have an earlier cut -off date for acceptance of items for the Council's
agenda. Mr. Meyer further advised the Council items..which pertained to future
Council meetings will be.sent packages, but placed in !separate packets..
No decision to change the cut -off date for receiving Council agenda items was
made and it was left,as a matter for further discussion.
U.S. CONFERENCE OF Mayor Putnam reported on the trip she had made the .
MAYORS.& NATIONAL previous week to Washington, D.C., to attend the Joint
LEAGUE OF CITIES Conference of Mayors and National League,of Cities...
JOINT MEETING Fifteen hundred delegates from throughout the United.
States attended the conference. Mayor Putnam reported
as revenue sharing was one of the.main topics of dis-
cussion, the delegates learned that President Ford supported revenue sharing in
his speech. Senator Humphrey also supported revenue sharing and our own,legis-
lators, Congressman Clausen, and.Senator Cranston., likewise indicated they
supported the continuance of revenue sharing.. However, as the Sub - committees
met to discuss revenue.sharing, adamant res- stance was reflected in the.Sub
committee meetings. The Sub - committee on Intergovernmental Relations met on
March,llth, and after voting on several issues,. finally passed a motion to
extend revenue.sharing. for 3 -1/4 years. She advised even though they had
passed a motion to support the extension, they had not supported the extension
of the funding.program,.longer than a year, which means the program would have
to be reviewed annually.
March 22, 1976
U.S. CONFERENCE OF Mrs. Putnam reported that approximately 1/3 of the
MAYORS & NATIONAL Congressional Districts were not represented at the
LEAGUE OF- CITIES Sub - commit=tee meeting; however, a number of local
JOINT MEETING representatives and senators were at the meetings, and
(Continued) the local d'e-1'egations - added support to their presence.
Mrs. Putnam stated she felt every city should make some
effort at least once a. -year to have a representative go
to Washing -ton to mak& contact with their congressman, and felt it was important
for all communities to keep their congressmen and senators advised of how they
were using revenue sharing monies. Mrs. Putnam stated the legislators from the
northern areas seemed to favor the continuance of revenue- sharing; however, it
would still be a difficult task to convince some other areas" congressmen and
senators of the importance of continuing the program She further stated the
Redwood Empire Division of the League of California Cities was well represented
by delegations from Eureka, Napa, Vallejo, San Rafael, Santa Rosa, and Petaluma.
ESTABLISH RULES AND
Ordinance
#1211 N.C.S. establishing rules
and regula-
REGULATIONS FOR
tions for
rationing water during a water
shortage � ®��
WATER RATIONING
emergency,
and establishing penalties for
violation
ORD #1211 NCS
thereof, was adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
The
(SECOND READING)
effective
date of the ordinance is April
21, 1976.
APPEAL BY DOCTOR
LAWRENCE JONAS TO
CERTAIN CONDITIONS—
JONAS PARCEL MAP
(HELD FROM 3/1/76
MEETING)
City Manager Robert Meyer reminded the Council that at ��
the meeting of March 1, some questions had been
raised whether or not the City Council would,have the
latitude,, under the provisions of the Water Ordinance,
to participate in the extension-of the water main -to
serve the Jonas Parcel Map. The matter had been de-
ferred until such time.as -the City Attorney had an
opportunity to review the•Water Ordinance.
The question was raised whether or not the City could determine the "loop"
through Dr. Jonas' property was necessary in the interest of public safety.
The City Attorney responded by advising the Council could have done-this
previously; however, the application by Dr. Jonas for subdvision•of the
property now changes the situation and the question before the Council is the
applicant's proposal to develop the property.
The matter of priority for upgrading the water and fire protection system on
the westside of the community was then discussed. Fire Chief Joe Ellwood
advised the Council the property in question could be serviced by the Depart-
ment by using a reverse method, i.e., by pumping the water up the hill rather
than depending upon pressure.. Chief Ellwood further advised there are a number
of locations within the City where this procedure is necessary, either because
of the distance from the fire hydrant, or because of the terrain.
The appellant, Dr. Jonas, then spoke to the City Council. -He contended that
situations, such as Halsey Avenue,. have caused the Insurance Service Office to
give deficiency points to.-the-City., thereby increasing the rate for all tax-
payers. By permitting the fire hydrant at'the crest of Halsey Avenue, with the
City participating in the water .main, the deficiency in the area would decrease.
Chief Ellwood responded by,stat -ing there are other areas_ the City which have
higher- priorities and a greater need for service.than this one area. As
various sections are improved, the deficiency points decrease; however, if the
City Council permitted the subdivision proposed by Dr. Jonas without - adequate
fire protection, I.S.O. would assess additional deficiency points.
The question then arose as to.whether the extension of the water main would be
an on -site or off -site improvement. Dr. Jonas indicated his research in the
Subdivision Ordinance did not clearly define the matter,. but the Ordinance did
state the City Council would be permitted to make modifications depending upon
the physical and other qualifications of the area.
City Attorney Matt Hudson advised the Council the
City Engineer's
statement at
-
the prior meeting was correct. The section which
into payback agreements is dependent upon whether
permits the Council
the improvements
to enter
are on -site
or off -site. If the improvements are off -site, the City Council,
after first
going to the_Water Commission, may enter into a payback agreement;
however, if
it is'determined the improvements are on- site, no
agreement can be
entered into
for payback purposes. .
The question was raised whether or not the City could determine the "loop"
through Dr. Jonas' property was necessary in the interest of public safety.
The City Attorney responded by advising the Council could have done-this
previously; however, the application by Dr. Jonas for subdvision•of the
property now changes the situation and the question before the Council is the
applicant's proposal to develop the property.
The matter of priority for upgrading the water and fire protection system on
the westside of the community was then discussed. Fire Chief Joe Ellwood
advised the Council the property in question could be serviced by the Depart-
ment by using a reverse method, i.e., by pumping the water up the hill rather
than depending upon pressure.. Chief Ellwood further advised there are a number
of locations within the City where this procedure is necessary, either because
of the distance from the fire hydrant, or because of the terrain.
The appellant, Dr. Jonas, then spoke to the City Council. -He contended that
situations, such as Halsey Avenue,. have caused the Insurance Service Office to
give deficiency points to.-the-City., thereby increasing the rate for all tax-
payers. By permitting the fire hydrant at'the crest of Halsey Avenue, with the
City participating in the water .main, the deficiency in the area would decrease.
Chief Ellwood responded by,stat -ing there are other areas_ the City which have
higher- priorities and a greater need for service.than this one area. As
various sections are improved, the deficiency points decrease; however, if the
City Council permitted the subdivision proposed by Dr. Jonas without - adequate
fire protection, I.S.O. would assess additional deficiency points.
The question then arose as to.whether the extension of the water main would be
an on -site or off -site improvement. Dr. Jonas indicated his research in the
Subdivision Ordinance did not clearly define the matter,. but the Ordinance did
state the City Council would be permitted to make modifications depending upon
the physical and other qualifications of the area.
210 March 22, 1976
APPEAL BY DOCTOR City Manager Robert Meyer responded by advising Dr.
LAWRENCE JONAS TO Jonas the Subdivision Ordinance did not apply to the
CERTAIN CONDITIONS -- Water Ordinance or the Fire Code. He further advised
JONAS PARCEL MAP the Council the only way they could authorize the
(HELD FROM 3/1/76 expenditure of such funds would be to amend the ordi-
MEETING) nance to assist not this project, but future
(Continued) projects as well. Mr,. Meyer asked the City Engineer to
clarify whether water main extension for this
particular parcel map would be an on -site or off -site
improvement. Mr. Young advised it would be an on -site improvement, as it is
entirely on Dr. Jonas' property.
.
Fire Chief Ellwood stated when the plans for the subdivision were submitted,
two recommendations were made to meet the fire requirements; one was to install
a main to serve-the three parcels proposed for the,property; the alternative
was to protect only the portion of the property where he could build a home.
This would require the constructibn of a road to serve this piece ofproperty
from Olive Street. At that time, Dr. Jonas indicated'it would be too expensive
to build a road. Dr. Jonas then responded by stating it would be cheaper to
construct the road than install the -water main; however, he would encounter
problems with flood control. He-advised he would not be able to get . ease-
ment from an adjacent.property owner for flood control purposes.,` Dr. Jonas
stated he felt the best solution to the problem was the loop system, which
would not only benefit his property, but.would also upgrade the fire protection
for the residents of Halsey Avenue. He further stated by participating in this
project now, the City would not have to expend some $50- 60,000 at . a future date .
to'provide adequate service to the residents of Halsey Avenue. Dr. Jonas
further said he did not feel his claim to-ask the City "to participate in the
amount of approximately $5,000 to build one portion of the loop was an unjust
one.
City Attorney Matt Hudson stated,,to the best of his knowledge, the ordinance
has been applied uniformly to all builders, and if changed, the consequence .
could be the City may have to multiply this $5,000 contribution many times in
the course of a number of years,, and this would be the first of many requests.
During the discussion, Dr. Jonas indicated he would build only one house on the
property and he was willing to guarantee this by entering into an open space:
agreement with the City fora 20 -year period. Planning Director Dennis Boehlje
stated, however, the parcel map indicated at least three homes could be built
on the property and the City Engineer further advised there is an existing
structure on what is known as Lot #3.
The Council took no action on the matter. Mayor.Putnam asked the City Attorney
to determine whether or not the City Council could legally waive the require-
ment for a fire hydrant to serve.Dr.. Jonas' property and report back to them.
The matter of the cul -de -sac at the end of Halsey Avenue was then discussed.
The City Engineer stated he had made the recommendation the end of 'Halsey
Avenue be developed as a cul -de -sac. The Planning Commission agreed with -his
recommendation: The cost of the cul -de -sac, Mr. Young stated,.'would be no more
than would be required of any subdivider with three lots to provide street
fronting on the property. He further stated.he was of the opinion Halsey
Avenue was too long, and the residents deserved a turnaround_ at•the end of
their street and were entitled to such an arrangement under the provisions of
the City's Subdivision Ordinance.,
Dr. Jonas presented a letter to the City Council signed by Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth
Colin, and Mr. and Mrs. A, V. Schaff, residents of Halsey Avenue, stating they
preferred the hammerhead type cul =de -sac proposed by the subdivider, rather
than the standard cul -de -sac required by the City.
At the conclusion of the discussion, Councilman Harberson entered a motion to
override the Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the cul -de -sac and
permit a hammerhead type cul -de -sac to be built, but to uphold the balance of
the conditions requested by the Planning Commission. The motion was then
seconded by Councilman Mattei; however, Dr. Jonas requested both items be
handled separately, as he would like to have further discussion regarding the
water main system. Councilman Mattei then withdrew his second to.the motion,
and no action was taken.
211
March 22, 1976
ADJOURNMENT There.being no further business to come before the City
Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m.
yor
Attest:
City C• erk