HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/30/197438
L
MINUTES OF MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
December 30, 1974
COUNCIL MEETING
ATTENDANCE
Harberson,
CONSENT CALENDAR
Agenda Item #1
Combs Parcel
Map
Res
Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the
City of Petaluma was called to order by Mayor
Helen Putnam'at 7:35 p.m.
Present: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh, Jr.,
Mattei, Perry', Jr., and Mayor Putnam.
Absent: Councilman Daly.
A motion made by Councilman Cavanagh, seconded by
Councilman Perry, adopting the Consent.Calendar, Items
#1 through #4.
Resolution 46781 N.C.S. accepting completion of work in
Combs Parcel Map on Cherry Street was introduced by
Councilman Cavanagh, seconded by Councilman Mattei,
and approved by 6 affirmative and l absentee votes.
Agenda Item #2 �Resolution N.C.S. accepting completion of work in
Venturi Parcel Venturi Parcel Map on Schuman Lane was introduced by
Map - Councilman Cavanagh, seconded by Councilman Mattei, /
Res 46782 NCS and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes.
Agenda'Item #3 Resolution N.C.S. granting R. Flatland Company I�
Time Extension an extension of time within which to complete the East �D
Traffi Signals, Washington -Maria Drive Traffic Signals Project #GT 3 -73
Maria Dr. and was 'introduced by Councilman Cavanagh, seconded by
Washington.St. Councilman Mattei, and approved by 6 affirmative and
Res 46783 NCS 1 absentee votes.
Agenda Item #4 Application filed with Alcoholic Beverage Control for
ABC Application -- an On -sale General Eating Place License person to person
The Victorian transfer for the Victorian, 208 Petaluma Boulevard North
was approved.
PUBLIC.HEARING -- Mayor Putnam opened the public hearing. 3�
ROBERT H. MEYER'S U
APPEAL RE SITE The appeal submitted by City Manager Robert Meyer, Novem-
DESIGN, PETALUMA ber 26, 1974, was ordered read and filed.
PUBLIC LIBRARY
City Attorney Matthew Hudson outlined the criteria by which
the Council must be guided in the appeal procedure if
they are to affirm, reverse, or modify the Planning Commission's decision. If
the Council wishes to modify the decision, they must be guided by Section
26.!405 of the 2 oning Ordinance.
Mayor Putnam called on Director of Community Development Frank•Gray:to give a
staff report. Mr. Gray indicated the area on!the wall map where the new
facility will be located and the 80 existing parking spaces on Fairgrounds
Drive which would be left to serve the area. Mr. Gray reported the Planning
Commission was concerned this major facility proposed for the area would
require, under present Zoning Ordinance, spaces for parking 113 cars. In
addition, under the provisions of the ordinance,, 83 spaces would be required
for the Kenilworth Recreation Center. He pointed out an area off Fairgrounds
Drive which used for the 113 spaces required for the Library facility.
He also indicated an area near the Fairgrounds-Administration Center, which
holds 50'-cars and is used by the administrative offices in the Fairgrounds.
Mr Gray - reported he had checked .into costs of constructing the parking area
and, the best of his knowledge, each space would cost approximately $500.
December 30, 191
He further indicated he had checked_ with other areas to.d "e.termine.their parking
requirements for such a facility. If.•.we were.operating under-an ordinance
such as Santa Rosa has, the requirement would be for 54 spaces; for Novato it
would be 56 and, the City of Napa 100 spaces.. The average for the
area is 111 spaces. Mr. Gray indicated the concern of the Planning Commission.
was for a unified site. The Commission felt both the Kenilworth Recreation
building and the new Library had to be considered jointly.
Mayor Putnam calle.d.on..the appellant, City Manager Robert Meyer, who. addressed
the Council stating he had filed 'the appeal in order to get the issue before
the City Council as there was no other way for the Council to make.a decision
regarding the site design-review. Had'he not made.the appeal, Mr. Meyer
stated, the matter would stand as approved by the Planning Commission -1 was
his feeling if a downtown site had "been. selected for' the proposed 1ibrary,'t.
would, have been impossible to force even one parking space on the :condition's.
as the site would have been :in a parking district. 'He suggested the Council,
consider phasing in the parking lot in stages in order to determine.whether or
not the need will .really exist for such a large parking area. Mr.. Meyer ,then
reviewed the eight conditions as -'set forth by the site design review. On
Condition #1,:.he felt the hydrant on East Wasliington Street would be something
that would be needed whether or "not the Library were located in this area and
felt the cost,for replacing the 'hydrant should.be borne by the City and not
come out.of_the Library fund. He had no objections-to Conditions. #2.and #3,
but took exception to Condition #4 requiring a change to limited =time parking
on Fairgrounds Drive. Mr,. Meyer felt this item should.be reviewed by the
Traffic Committee at a later date'and not be made a part of the conditions of
the site design review. He had no o sections -to Conditions #5 and #,6.
Condition X67 he felt had already been resolved.and did.not need to be-part of
the site design review. On'Condition,#8, calling for joint parking-Tacilities
for the'Retreation'Center.and the Library to-b6 established in accordance with
the requirements of the Zoning.Ordinance, Mr. Meyer: felt there.has been instances
where the Zoning Ordinance has been modified- and.could be modified to - reduce
the number of parking spaces -for- this area. The second sentence in the condition
related to on- street parking on:P'ayran Street in relationship -to the bike.
route scheduled for the future. 'Mr-. Meyer felt there was an area off the
roadway which was an unpaved sidewalk which could be utilized.as.a-bike route;
and, the third sentence of -the condition related to commuter "parking in the
area of the Swim Center and the - Fairgrounds. It was his feeling that if a
private development' were being considered,for the area, commuter parking would
not be.cons- idered a condition. and he felt, it did not. belong as .par•.t of the.
conditions of the Use Permit for the library.str-ucture. Mr. Meyer cited the
Planning.Commission minutes of December 3, 1974,.indicating that in order to
provide the parking required by the site design review, an additional $70,000
would be added to. the cost of library construction, which would be added to
the $200;000 deficit already anticipated.
Mayor Putnam commended Mr. Meyer for.bringing -the matter before the City
Council on appeal. She stressed that his presentation of the appeal was not a
personal one, but he was acting on behalf of the'City Council. Mayor'Putnam
then asked for comments.
Councilman Mat.tei, the Council's representative on the Planning Commission,
stated .his - major concern is whether or not the Council would be giving the
City preferential treatment over private.develo.pment..,.He stated there ,is .-
potential for additional parking at the Fairgrounds site and felt we should
treat a.civi-c building very much the same as a private one. He further suggested
space -could be provided on -a- temporary basis as the need comes along and felt.
when the Planning Commission is assigned a job, they should- treat.a,civic
building or development -in much the.'same manner as they would other developments.
Mr. Meyer agreed with, Councilman Matteis- statements, however., he felt• the..
City should have the right to appeal and -.ask for modification under the terms
of the ordinance as such rights are also given -to private-developments.. Mr.
Meyer remarked he had been trying to work with the Fair Board an providing
additional parking at the Fairgrounds; however, the money the.Fair.Board had
earmarked - for development of the parking area had to be used this year to
upgrade - water mains . and fire hydrants-to comply with,-CAL/OSHA-standards.
He still feels that by working.with the Fair Board additional parking -can be
provided in'the area. Land is available in the.area and it belongs -to the
City, but would require getting permission from the Fair Board to' utilize the
land in this fashion.
December 30, 1974.
3
Public Hearing -- During the course.'of: -the hearing, it was brought out that
ROBERT H. MEYER's when the Recr=eation Center- wa-s'built.and the Swim
APPEAL -RE SITE Center was built no requirements for parking were
DESIGN, PETALUMA imposed., .In response -to- Councilman Cavanagh's question,
PUBLIC LIBRARY . "If a pr vate. individual was building a facility in
(continued) this area, would they be required to spend $70,000 for
parking ?" Mr. Meyer responded by stating the requirement
probably would be imposed.; however, they would have
the right to appeal:'to the City Council. He�brought. out that the requirements
imposed for the.Library.:were more stringent than those which would be required
for a commercial grocery store. For the Library,.one. space per 200 square
feet is required and for a grocery store, one space per 300 square feet..
Richard Lieb, an.associate architect on the Library Building-Project,-reminded
the,Council they had paid -a� library consultant to :make recommendations for the
new facility and..Mrs. Bertha Hellum, in -.her report which was approved by the
City Council, recommended provision for a minimum of 40 parking stalls.
Mayor Putnam,asked the Chairman of the Planning Commission,.Patricia Hilligoss,
if she had any comments. -Mrs. Hilligoss stated the Planning Commission had.
been appointed by the Council to administer their ordinances and felt it would
be: remiss if it did not follow them and ask for additional parking for the
Library; however, she -did agree.with Mr. Meyer -that the.requirement.for art
galleries, museums, and libraries was-quite high. If the,.procedure used for
churches were followed where you provided parking by seating, the requirements
for.the Library would -coincid'e with those suggested -by Mrs. Hellum.
Mrs. Hilligoss remarked that both Planning Commissioners Balshaw and Waters
who had acted in the capacity of..the -Site Design Review Board were in the -
audience and called on Mr.. Balshaw-to-.speak.' Mr.- Balshaw he did not-
agree with the portion of the appeal which stated a precedent had not been set
for requiring additional parking for new development in the same area and
cited two instances - -(1) the.-Baywood Sho,pping less parking was
requested because the bowling .alley -would not be -used at the same.time as the
bank and ,(2) at the Lucky.Shopping Center where-the Commission would not
permit counting existing.:parking spaces-to satisfy additional.development.
Mr. Balshaw indicated the Site Design Review Board was riot aware additional
land-for parking would be available at the Fairgrounds site. Mr. Meyer assured
the Council that.as -late as..4:00 p.m. on this date he had- talked with Mrs.
Beverly Wilson; ,Manager of the Sonoma -Marin Fair, and her reaction -was that
they -would be willing .to have the City pave the entire . parking lot. Their
only restriction would..be .for - the.thsee days of.the..Annual.Fair.
Mr. Meyer stressed the fact -that his reason for appealing the decision was
mainly that ,a method could be established whereby when the City is constructing
a building at..the taxpayers' expense, the decision for expenditure of additional
funds such as $.70,000 to construct.a.parking lot.could rest : with the City.
Council and the Council should -have an o.pp'ortunity .to- determine whether or mot
it was a proper expenditure.
In response to Commissioner Balshaw's suggestion.that the parking area near
the Fair .Board':s.Admin stration- Center - - be utilized for additional parking in
the area,.Mr. Meyer stated.Mrs. Wilson, Manager.of the Sonoma -Marin Fair,
indicated they would not be willing to relinquish this area -for public parking
because of vandalism.in the.fairgrounds. They prefer to lock the area at 5:00
p.m. when they leave and..-have it.'secured. '-
Commissioner Balshaw suggested perhaps a_compromise,_could be reached, but he
felt the.P.lanning Commission was continuously being.asked to approve minimums.
When asked if he wanted to speak to the.Counc•il -, Commissioner Waters indicated
Commissioners Hilligoss and Balshaw and Councilman Mattei had adequately
covered the points in question.
Other matters not relative to -the .appeal -were discussedon the provision -:for.
bicycle parking at the site,.and the provision of -a- turnout lane -for buses.
During the.course of.:the_ public hearing, Commissioner Balshaw referred.specifically
to,Condition #8-of the .site:.design - .review relative to parking on.Payran Street
and the plans for the bicycle routes' which. - indicated the street is to be used
for a bicycle path. He further stated if there is enough room for parking and
bicycle paths, then the Commission would voice no objection;-'however, he did
not feel there was sufficient room.
3 December 30, 1974
PUBLIC HEARING -- A suggestion was made by City Manager Robert Meyer
ROBERT H. MEYER'S that perhaps the bicycle path could be routed along
APPEAL RE-SITE the fenceline :next to the site where there is an
DESIGN, PETALUMA unimproved' sidewalk area. This suggestion was discussed
PUBLIC LIBRARY by Commissioner. Balshaw who asked whether or not the
same procedur.e,could.be applied to other. areas in the
(continued) City whete.'.sidewalks were not being used, pointing out
the sidewalk which runs parallel with Lakeville Street
indicating this would set another precedent.. The City Engineer, David Young,
.stated that any right- of-way not being used by vehicles or pedestrians could
be considered -for bicycle - 'lanes.. Mayor. Putnam objected to.,applying this
procedure to sidewalk areas, however, stating she felt concern should be
given to. pedestrians,also.
The matter was not resolved, however, Councilman Harberson indicated, after
the : public.hear -ing had been closed ,., that he.did not want the City Council to
lose site of the bicycle.paths and arbitrarily delete.the.matter..
At the conclusion of the public hearing, Councilman Mattei suggested that
Condition A of the site design..review.be eliminated as a - cond i tion.-suggesting
this was in the realm,of the Traffic Committee to make a recommendation.to the
City Council. On Conditioni #8 he-.sugges.ted the wording be changed to add "as
modified by the City- Council." at the conclusion of the first,.sentence,.and
some mention be made that.future expanded.parking should be developed as ..
needed in the area on public land. :..Councilman Mattei also suggested that in
order to provide additional parking-in .the area on an immediate basis, the
opposite side,of the street from the facility should.be considered for diagonal
parking which would add more spaces in the area. Councilman Harberson commented
he felt the Planning Commission.and Planning ,staff should review the.ordinance,
with.reduction.in parking in mind -- especially for a facility of the nature of
the Library where more parking was required than for a commercial retail
outlet.
Speaking,from.the audience ; Mrs. Bucholtz asked if provisions had been..made.for
a meeting room in the new.Library and would parking be provided for such a
facility. Miss Hanna, the City's Librarian,.indicated there is provision made
in the plans .and. specifications for . a meeting facility `at,. the Public Library
wh ch.would be open to the public when the Library was not-in use.
Mayor Putnam then closed the public hearing and called upon City Attorney
Matthew Hudson for his comments.. Mr. Hudson indicated the conditions regarding
parking as.approved by the.Site.,Design Review.Board would.have to stand;
however, the Council.could make application for variance to the._Zoning.Admin- istratoz
and suggested Condition #8 be changed to read "Joint parking facilities for
the Kenlwor,ah Recreation Center and the Public Library shall be,
.in,accordance with the requirements of the-Zoning Ordinance:on a phased -or
demand basis as determined by.the City Council." He further advised the
Council to.act by :resolution.to affirm all.portions of the site design review,
except to modify,Condition #8 to read as above..
1
In response to Councilman Brunner's question whether or not,Mrs. Hellum's
suggestion for minimum
parking. "should be included,in the resolution, the City
Attorney advised.this
suggestion: was, in direct conflict.with: the City's ordinance.
Mr. Hudson indicated
he would prepare the.resolution for the Council's- consideration
at a future meeting.:
CLAIMS AND BILLS
Resolution It:678'4 N.G:,S. approving claims. and bills .
RES #6784 NCS
#2277 to #2495, inclusive, and #2605 to 462616,'inclusive,
approved for payment by City Manager;Rober.t Meyer was
introduced by Councilman Cavanagh, seconded by.Council-
man Perry, and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absen-
tee votes.
REGIONAL
City.Manager Robert Meyer reported he;and City Engi-
�l
X
WATER QUALITY
neer David Young.had attended the hearing conducted by
CONTROL BOARD
the Regional Water Quality Control Board on Waste
HEARING
Discharge Requirements. The Council's letter was.read
to the.Board along with excerpts-of the minutes of
December 2, 1974.
„n 339
December 30, 1974
WATER POLLUTION City Manager Robert Meyer reported to the Council
CONTROL PLANT there were.two items budgeted for the 1974 -75 fiscal /
EQUIPMENT year ta purchased.for the Water'Poliution Control
Plant'. The first was for two automatic - liquid samplers
for which $1800 was budgeted. In securing current
prices, the Superintendent of the Plant found one sampler will cost $1555,
therefore, only one sampler instead -of two will purchased. The other item.
was for a flow meter for which $1400 was budgeted. The current cost for this
item is $1957. Mr. Meyer wanted the Council to.be aware that instead of
purchasing two liquid samplers, the City would.be purchasing one and the flow
meter would cost. approximately $55.7 over the budgeted amount.'
SWIM POOL HEATER City Manager Robert Meyer advised the Council he had 33�
SYSTEM been informed repairs were necessary on the heat
exchanger boiler tubes at the Swim Center. The approximate
cost for -labor and a heat exchanger unit is estimated
to be $2180. The Director of Water- Utility Operations, Tom.Wilson, is re-
questing $2500 to rehabilitate the pool heater in order to meet the schedule
for the February lst opening date. Repairs need to be made almost immediately.
Upon a motion by Councilman Harberson, which was seconded by Councilman Perry,
and approved by 6 affirmative and one absentee votes, the Council moved to
appropriate $2500 from the Contingency Fund -for the repairs stipulated.
STATE DEPARTMENT City Manager Robert Meyer informed the Council he had
OF TRANSPORTATION received a letter from William S. Weber, State Transportation
INVITATION Board, inviting!him -to join! "People to People Dele-
gation 1975" to visit various.important cities in
Europe to study major - transportation systems.. The
delegation will leave September 6th and''return September 27th and visit nine
European countries. Mr. Meyer reported -the cost of.-the trip would be $2249.
SUMMER YOUTH Mr. Robert W. Smith, Supervisor, Employment Sect ion,
��`
EMPLOYMENT COUNSELOR Employment Development Department, Petaluma Office,
spoke to the Council regarding a program to be developed
, for the Petaluma area for summer employment for youth.
The program would begin May 19th through August 29th and would consitute
having one person hired to give job information to.youth applicants, accepting
youth job openings from employers, referring youth applicants to job openings,
make job developments for youths, and interviewing youth and completing their
applications for employment.
The person hired would be based at the Petaluma.Office of Employment Develop-
ment Department. The cost for the entire prof -ect, including Social Security
and Workmen's Compensation, is $962 of which the County's share would be -$481
and the City's contribution, if approved by the.Council this evening, would be
a matching $481. Mr. Smith reported the program had been very successful in
Santa Rosa last year and he was hopeful -with "the creation of the position in
Petaluma that young people from this area could be counseled for summer job
openings.
Upon a motion by Councilman Harberson,. seconded by Councilman Brunner, and
approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes, the Council consented to the,
expenditure of $481 out of the Contingency Fund to match the County's share of
$481 for the employment of a youth counselor.
REZONING -- 208 -210 Ord nance. #1165 N.C::S. Zoning.Ordinance 41072
BAKER STREET N.C.S. by reclassifying A.P.. #8 - 094 - and A.P. #8 -.
ORD #1165 NCS 0.94 -06 from a C -N (Neighborhood Commercial) District
(SECOND READING) to an R -C (Compact Single - family Residence) District
(208 -210 Baker Street) was adopted by 6 affirmative.
and 1 absentee.votes.
AGREEMENT -RE Director.of•Community Development Frank Gray.reported
ENVIRONMENTAL the land.acquisition. application for $3,7.4,000. in FAU
ASSESSMENT-STATEMENT funds,required_an Environmental Assessment Statement
WASHINGTON STREET be. on the.effects of the Washington Street.
WIDENING PROJECT Widening Project in order to meet the requirements for
RES #6785 NCS bo;th.the California Environmental Agency and the
Federal Environmental Protection Agency. They had
been advised by CALTRANS to prepare an EAS rather than
,
y i
December 30, 1974
AGREEMENT .RE an Environmental Report for the.project. -.This
ENVIRONMENTAL would meet_ the -requirements_of both agencies'. Upon
ASSESSMENT STATEMENT the completion -of the EAS,, the Council could_ then.
WASHINGTON STREET decide whether,_or not to declare a negative statement
WIDENING PROJECT for the „project., -
RES 46.7$5 NCS
The staff ,had written to agencies they .felt. were .
qualified,.to prepare such a statement and - had- received
bids - from. Environmental • Impact,Planning'Corporation in the amount of $7200;,
Ted Kreines, $8500;,. and,, . URS •Corporation, _.$8900. In determining: whom: to.
solicit for bids,, the staff felt they should contact only such f-irms.as had.
experience in the field and had gone completely through,the process at
time or another. It was, the staff 's.recommendation that the Environmental
Impact Planning Corp,oration,be awarded the.contract in the amount of $7200.
The City Manager recommended .th'e. funds for.the Environmental Assessment State-
ment from.speci,al Gas Tax Fund. 4kGT2 -Z2:
At the,conclusion,of the discussion,..,Resolution 46785 N.C.S..employing.Envi-
ronmental Impact Planning _ Corpora _tion to, prepare an Environmental- .Assessment
Statement for the Washington. Str.eet.,;Widening,Project. and also authorizing the
Mayor :to , sign_an- agreement -with them was introduced by Councilman Harber;s.on,
seconded by Councilman Perry, and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee
votes:•
REMOVE PARKING The, Traffic. Committee recommended that one metered
METER PETALUMA . space on:Petaluma Boulevard South between the Standard
BOULEVARD SOUTH Station the new driveway for the No.rthbay Savings
..and Loan be.removed. This is a 21- foot.area_and it is
the Committee's recommendation it be.,red- zoned. :Upon
a motion by Councilman Mattei, which was seconded by Councilman Harb.erson, and
approved by 6 affirmat ve.and 1 absentee votes. Approval was given for the
removal of this one:metered space on Petaluma Boulevard South..
SIGHT,DISTANCE -- The difficulties; of sight distance at this intersection
McDOWELL- CAULFIELD were referred by the.Traffic Committee to the Council
INTERSECTION and were described'by Assistant City Engineer Tom
Hargis. He:,indicated on the wall diagram the residences
located at 7.28,, 732,. and 736 South McDowell Boulevard
where ultimate provision for sight distance would require the removal of the
tree at the corner and the removal of.parking in front of the three residen-
ces. The residences are.single- family .dwellings with' one -car garages 'and
short setbacks from McDowell Boulevard and have room for only one.c.ar to park
in the driveway.
Councilman.Brunner asked at the beginning.if, one parking space could,be re-
moved on the north side . of the_ in.terseetioiii, ; Director of Public Works David
Young,suggested that we could come up.with some.sort of-compromise, perhaps by-
decreasing the width of the crosswalk at the area so that the nose of the car
would come out a little farther on McDowell Boulevard and eliminating the one
parking space in front of 736 South McDowell Boulevard and not disturb the
tree..
The question arose whether or not the removal of one parking space at the.
corner would allow sufficient room for one car to park in front of a residen-
ce. City.Mariager Robert Meyer suggested.that a policy should be set -by the
Council when it is planned to take parking away from in front of a person's
home or business they be,notified to appear-before the Traffic Committee or
the City Council.
The Council decided at this- poiit,to defer any action on this specific problem
at the meeting until the property owners had been contacted by Assistant City
Engineer Tom Hargis:. Councilman- brought up the fact also that the
corner is dark, the street light.is_some distance away from the intersection
and he was advised that P.G. acid E,. had been contacted regarding the matter
and planned to move the light to the -corner.location.
341
December 30, 1974
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the
Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:47 p.m.
Mayor
Attest:
City &Ierk
1