Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05/19/1975451 MINUTES OF MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL P.ETALUMA, CALIFORNIA May 19, 1975 COUNCIL MEETING The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Petaluma was called to order by Mayor Putnam at the hour of 7:30 p.m. ATTENDANCE Present: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh *, Daly, Harberson, Mattei, and Mayor Putnam. *Councilman Cavanagh arrived at 7:37 p.m. Absent: Councilman Perry. INVOCATION The Reverend. George Skarat, Penngrove Community Church, gave the invocation. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes.of April 21, 1975, were approved as re- corded. The minutes of May 5, 1975, were approved as corrected. CONSENT CALENDAR Prior to the adoption of the Consent Calendar, some discussion was held on Item #5 pertaining to Malprac- tice Insurance. Councilman Brunner had asked that this item be placed on the Consent Calendar and Council. man Mattei indicated he had not had an'opportunity to see the bills mentioned in the resolution. Dr. Jerome Beatie addressed the Council regarding the various bills currently before the legislature. Dr. Beatie indicated the bills, as originally intro- duced, had changed so much in Committee they bore little resemblance to the originals. The Council agreed'to support a resolution urging the legislature to take a role in resolving the problems created by the dramatic increases in malpractice insurance. rates. It was agreed by the members of the Council not to cite any specific bill presently before the legislature. Upon conclusion of the discussion a motion was made by Councilman Mattei, seconded by Councilman Daly, approving the Consent Calendar, Agenda Items #1 through #10. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item #1 ABC application for Tivoli II, Inc., 219 Lakeville ABC Application_ Street, for on -sale general license (self incorpor- J Tivoli II ation), approved by the Police Chief, Chief Building Inspector and Health Officer, was approved. Agenda Item #2 Resolution #6590 N.C.S. accepting completion of work Accept Public required by parcel map agreement for "Improvement Improvements -- Plans - West Payran Street, Parcel Map No. 62 - Oliver Kullberg Parcel Map Kullberg" was approved. Res #6950 NCS Agenda Item #3 Resolution 46951 N.C.S. which permits the City of Category I Petaluma to purchase a combination of surplus property Personnel- Surplus over and under $2,500, and designating Robert H. Property Meyer, City Manager, and John L. Scharer, Finance Res 46951 NCS Director, as the authorized representatives, was approved. Agenda Item 444 Cancel Taxes Various Properties Res 46952 NCS Agenda Item #5 Support Legislation Re: Malpractice Insurance Res 46953 NCS Resolution 446952 N.C.S. requesting cancellation of taxes on property named in the resolution acquired by the City of Petaluma, was approved. Resolution #6953 N.C.S. supporting legislation to alleviate health care crisis due to increased cost of malpractice insurance, was approved. 45 May 19, 1975 Agenda Item #6 Resolution #6954 N.C.S. calling fora voluntary water \ Voluntary Water rationing program was approved. 10 Rationing Program Summer 1975 Res W6954 N.C.S. Agenda'Item #7 Resolution #6955 N.C.S. directing the City Manager to 1� File Permt submit an application to the San Francisco Bay Area BCDC• Conservation and Development Commission for permit re Res 46955 NCS dredging of the Petaluma River, was approved. Agenda Item #8 Resolution 446956 N.C.S. setting a public hearing date Set Hearing Date for the purpose of considering reclassifying A.P. #06- Rezoning--67 031 -14, and a portion of 4406- 031 - -15, from a C -H (High - Magnolia Ave. way Commercial) District to R -M -G (Garden Apartment Res 46956 NCS Residence) District located at 67 Magnolia Avenue, was approved. I� Agenda Item 449 A letter received from the Petaluma Youth Soccer �/j b Petaluma Youth League requesting funds for the League, was ordered Soccer League filed by'the City Clerk, to be discussed at budget time. Agenda Item 4410 A letter from the Marin- Sonoma Mosquito Abatement 1 G1 Letter -- Marin - Sonoma District directed'to the Petaluma City Counc=il ad- Mosquito Abatement vising of their Board'Meeting, July 9, 1975, at the District Sonoma County Board of Supervisor's Chambers';,'7:30 p.m., was ordered filed. ,y AWARD BID - -TRUCK The report of bid results for the truck and hot patch WITH HOT PATCH UNIT unit prepared by Assistant'Purchasing Officer David L. RES'46957 NCS Smith, was reviewed and is on file with the City Clerk. Resolution #6957 N.C.S. awarding the contract for one 27,500 GVW truck hot;.patch unit for street repairs, or in the alternative one demonstrator model of same, was introduced by Councilman Daly, seconded`by Councilman Brunner, and approved by 6 affirmative, one absentee vote. The contract was awarded to Nixon -Egli Equipment Company, 1970 National Ave - nue, Hayward;, California, for one demonstrator hot patch unit in the amount of '$13,727.00. �( AWARD BID -- A'report prepared by Assistant Purchasing'Of :fiver AUDIO VISUAL SYSTEM David L. Smith on the bid results for various items to U J� OCJP GRANT be purchased under an Office of Criminal Justice RES #6958 NCS Planning Grant was reviewed and is on file with the City Clerk. Item 1 of the Audio /Visual System was awarded to Bingham Video Systems, 2395 De La Cruz Boulevard, Santa Clara„ California, in the amount of $2,254.04, by Resolution '4695'8 N.C.S., introduced by Councilman Harberson, seconded'by Councilman Daly,'and approved by 6 affirmative, and 1-absentee votes. Item 2 was awarded to'General Electronics Systems, Inc:, 4150 Piedmont Avenue, Oakland, California, in the 'amount of $5,341, by Resolution 46959 NX.;S., which was introduced by.Councilman Harberson, seconded by Councilman Daly; and approved by 6 affirmative, and 1 absentee votes. AWARD CONTRACT= Resolution 46966 N.C.S. awarding the contract for an l b OPTICAL IMAGE optical.image intensifier unit, OCJP Grarit.,'for the INTENSIFIER UNIT Police Department, to F. Morton Pitt Company, 1444 OCJP GRANT South San Gabriel Boulevard, San Gabriel, California, RES 46960 NCS in the amount of $3,092.02, was introduced by Council- man Harberson, seconded by Councilman Daly, and approved by 6 affirmative, 1 absentee votes. May 19,.1975 AWARD BID -- PORTABLE PAGING COMPONENTS OCJP GRANT RES #6961 NCS 453 Because only.one bid"had been received for this item, it was; . 1 eld for discussion 'until after approval of the three preceding resolutions. 'It was also suggested that Item Z"6 ap,pearing,,,on the agenda be moved ahead to be discussed at, this time. Both items pertained to the award_of'bids to the 'Motorola Communications and Electronics Company for communications equipment. In response to questions by the City Council, Asst. Purchasing Office David Smith advised the specifications had been written so that any number of firms could meet them. However, only one bid had been received and that was from Motorola Communications and Electronics Company. Upon conclusion of the discussion, Resolution 46961 N,..C.S., awarding contract' for portable paging components, O.C.J.P. Grant for the Police Department, to Motorola Communications and Electronics., Inc., 1170 Chess Drive, San Mateo,. California, in the amount $3,.56.7.16, was introduced by Councilman Harberson, seconded by Councilman Daly, and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. AWARD BID -- This matter had been held from the May 5, 1975 Council SECOND PHASE Agenda in order for a report to be given by Fire Chief COMMUNICATION SYSTEM Joseph Ellwood and Donald Bostrom, the City's radio FIRE DEPARTMENT maintenance technician. Chief. Ellwood explained to RES 46962 NCS the Council that when the bids were written for the second phase of the communications system, they speci- fied Motorola products. This was done to keep the second phase of the communications system compatible with the first phase purchased last year. Chief.Ellwood explained if one of the emergency radio units would be disabled at any hour of the day, the unit could be snapped from one emergency vehicle and replaced by.another. All communication systems within the.City of Petaluma are now Motorola systems, and =one technician services all of the equipment. Mr. Don Bostrom from Delta Communications, advised the Council if another brand of component were installed in the City's system, it would increase the cost of maintenance because the truck that now services the City of Petaluma is stocked exclusively with Motorola components . In order to service-another brand,, they would have to increase their stock, thereby increasing the cost for maintenance. Chief Ellwood reported to the Council the City of Santa Rosa has more than one type of unit in the City and they are endeavoring to go back to one system. Chief Ellwood also reported the City of San Rafael and Marin County have only one system which is General Electric because they want to stay with one com- ponent. Councilman Brunner mentioned that General Electric had, in previous bid on communication systems for the City; however, he felt they had become dis- couraged and would no longer bid. City Manager Robert Meyer explained to the Council the Motorola system had been installed in the City prior to his employment with the City, sometime in the early 1960's. The City hired a part -time maintenance man for repair of the communications system and it was necessary to maintain a stock of all the components. Mr. Meyer reported that Delta Communications has now been servicing the communications system for the City for about five years; and it was no longer necessary for the City to stock component parts. Upon completion of the discussion, Resolution 46962 N.C.S., awarding the contract for the Second Phase Communications System Update for the Fire De- partment to Motorola Communications and Electronics, Inc., 1170 Chess Drive, San Mateo, California, in the amount of the $10,115.09, was introduced by Councilman Harberson, seconded by Councilman Daly, and approved by 6 affirma- tive 1 absentee votes. AWARD CONTRACT- -WEED The results or the .bid opening for the Weed Abatement ABATEMENT SERVICES contracts were reviewed by Assistant Purchasing Office RES 46963 NCS David L: Smith. A memo dated May 19 1975 of the bid y �S results addressed to the Mayor and City Council, is on file with the City Clerk. 4 5 4 Maq 19, 1975 AWARD CONTRACT- -WEED Councilman Cavanagh expressed some concern about, ABATEMENT SERVICES whether or not the low bidder would be qualified to RES 46963 NCS handle the weed abatement program for the City'of (Continued) Petaluma., He cited the fact that numerous complaints. were received after the program was completed last year, and doped the City would avoid the same problems this year.. Fire.Chief Ellwood indicated that the low bidder„ Floyd Morehouse of Santa Rosa, appeared to have sufficient equipment to handle the City's needs for this year's weed abatement,program. Hejalso advised the Council at the complet- ion.of this second phase of the.program, the.entire weed abatement system •would be reviewed in order to evaluate and determine whether or not - 'a more modern system should be instituted - in the coming years- Upon the.conclusion of the discussion, Resolution 46963 N.C.S., awarding. . contract to Floyd Morehouse, 3481 Guerneville Road, Santa Rosa, California, to remove weeds heretofore declared,to, constitute a.nuisance within'the -City of Petaluma,,was introduced by .Councilman,,.Mattei,'seconded by Councilman Harberson, and approved by 6 affirmative -and 1 absentee votes. OFF PEAK WATER SALES Director of Public Works David Young referred to the MARIN MUNICIPAL proposed amendment to the Water Supply Contract with WATER DISTRICT : the Sonoma County Water Agency. The proposed amend- �b RES 446964 NCS ment would provide for the sale of off peak water to' Marin Mufticipal.Water District. Mr Young advised the Council.the proposal had been presented*to the Water ' Commission.the.previous week, and. -they voted to recommend favorably to the City Council on a split 2 to 1 vote. Mr,,. Young then introduced Mr. J. D. Stroeh, General Manager of'.the,Mar- -in Municipal Water.District. Mr. Stroeh have:a brief history of.the Marin Muni- cipal Water District and its quest for water to serve its customers. tt the present time, the District is faced with being able to supply only "26jacre M_ ° x 2 � feet of water with a demand for 32 ° acre feet.. If faced with a dry period,, 6 additional 1 � supplies pp would be needed. The proposed agreement would give Marin � � \ s, r p osed g { Munici P al Water.District a maximum of 4 300 acre feet during off peak � �\ 1 periods, and would still not make up the deficit with which the District is C.� faced. The District is working towards additional water supplies within �c� their County by wastewater reclamation projects and water conservation. Mr. C �J Stroeh, reported voters in the District approved joining the inter-tie.,p.roject in 1970; however:, subsequent bond ;issues in 1971 and 1973 failed because of the size of the project. Mr.. Stroeh pointed. out the proposed agreement protects the regular Sonoma County customers by granting his District the rights to water only during off peak periods. The diversion of water . to the Marin Municipal Water District would „not infringe upon any entitlements of the regular — Sonoma County customers. Mr. Stroeh also reported one,of the- other features of. the agreement is his District is required to take a mini- mum. o.f'2,500 acre feet; even if they do not take the minimum.amou_nt., they must pay -for it., 'The District would also be required to pay the highest rate per acre foot of any of the customers in Sonoma County. Mr. Stroeh estimated the cost for the - minimum of -2,500 acre feet be approximately $400,000 which would be dispersed to the various customers within Sonoma County. At.the conclusion of Mr. Stroeh'_s presentation„ the Council discussed the proposed agreement., and-in answer to a .question posed by Councilman Daly how the funds received from the Marin Municipal Water District would get back to the cities.:, Director of Public Works David Young advised the addi- tional funds - would be used to lower the maintenance and operation costs for the aqueduct, and not the capital cost. This would result in a lower cost per acre foot. Mr. Young advised the Sonoma County.Water Agency estimated the, savings for regular aqueduct . customer =s be as follows: For 1977- 78, $9.09 per acre foot; 1978 -79 $8.55 per acre foot; 1979 - 80,'$5.22 per acre foot; 1980 -8.1, $3.63 per acre foot. Mr. Young further stated that attraction for selling off peak water to the Marin Municipal Water.District would be .solely an economic one,, i.e., a way lower the cost to the contrac- tors. Councilman Mattei questioned why the City of Petaluma would not .receive a greater share of the reduced cost anticipated because of Petaluma's initial capital Inyestment indebtedness incurred in the aqueduct. Mr. Young advised the additional funds received.for the sale-of the off peak water would be distributed by a reduction in the maintenance and operation budget of the Water Agency: It was his understanding the proposed agreement would not Ir May 19, 1975 kj 455 OFF PEAK WATER SALES become effective unless.all of the water contractors MARIN MUNICIPAL ratified the agreement. Resolution X66964 N.C.S. WATER DISTRICT approving "Amendment No. 1 to Agreement for Water RES #6964 NCS Supply and Construction of .Russian R- iver= Cotati (Continued) Inter-tie Project", and ''- :Offpeak Water. Supply Agree- ment ; and;.auftiorizng:_Mayor to sign, was introduced by Councilman Daly, seconded by Councilman Brunner, and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. LETTER -- CHAMBER Because no one was present from the Petaluma Chamber OF COMMERCE of Commerce to discuss the letter, the matter was RE DIPLOMATIC scheduled for the June 2, 1975 Council.Meeting. CORPS TOUR VIDEOTAPING COUNCIL Mr..Ronald Cohen, President of Sonoma County Commu- MEETINGS nity Television, appeared before the City Council / with a proposal.as outlined in their letter dated April. 30, 1975, which is on file with the City Clerk. Mr. Cohen stated their company would like to videotape the Council Meetings on the meeting night - -to be shown either the following - night, or on another evening, over cable television in the Petaluma system. The location of cameras in the Council Chambers was discussed and Mr. Cohen presented an arrangement which seemed.to be satisfactory to the City Council., He advised the Council they would.pre -empt one of the duplicated stations in presenting it over cable television where several stations on the cable would be presenting the same program. The proposal is to tape the meetings in black- and - white, not color. Mr. Cohen indicated they would like to start the program the first meeting in July. City Manager Robert Meyer suggested they may want to televise the swearing -in of new members of the Council July lst. SET HEARING DATE -- City Manager Robert Meyer advised the Council it would REVENUE SHARING FUNDS be necessary for them to review the requests for :Revenue Sharing Funds in order to meet the deadline of June 24th for preparation of „the plan for expenditure of Revenue Sharing Funds..,It is the suggestion the Council hold.hearings on the expenditure of the Revenue Sharing Funds June 9th, at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Meyer further advised the Council funds available for the 1975 -76 fiscal year would amount $333,548.00, with 'the possibility of an additional $33.,000 being car- ried over from 1974 -75. He also reminded the Council they have a commitment to-buy the.necessary furnishings and equipment for the new library. Mr. Meyer further noted that with this entitlement the City will have received $1,391,950. In addition to capital requests from the various.City Departments, some outside agencies are.also requesting funds out of revenue sharing. - Upon conclusion of the discussion, a motion was made by Councilman Harberson, seconded by Councilman Daly, approving the televising of Council meetings. the Council take action on The motion carried unanimously. June 2nd to establish the guidelines. CLAIMS AND BILLS Resolution approving claims and bills X63833 to #4006, RES X66965 NCS inclusive, and X62823 to #2859, inclusive, approved for payment by the City Manager, was introduced by Council- man Mattei, seconded by Councilman and approved by 6 affirmative, 1 absentee votes. SET HEARING DATE -- City Manager Robert Meyer advised the Council it would REVENUE SHARING FUNDS be necessary for them to review the requests for :Revenue Sharing Funds in order to meet the deadline of June 24th for preparation of „the plan for expenditure of Revenue Sharing Funds..,It is the suggestion the Council hold.hearings on the expenditure of the Revenue Sharing Funds June 9th, at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Meyer further advised the Council funds available for the 1975 -76 fiscal year would amount $333,548.00, with 'the possibility of an additional $33.,000 being car- ried over from 1974 -75. He also reminded the Council they have a commitment to-buy the.necessary furnishings and equipment for the new library. Mr. Meyer further noted that with this entitlement the City will have received $1,391,950. In addition to capital requests from the various.City Departments, some outside agencies are.also requesting funds out of revenue sharing. - STUDY SESSION-- RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT City.-Manager Robert Meyer would like to do would be.go reported what. -the staff over, the guidelines with EVALUATION'BOARD the City Council and have the Council take action on GUIDELINES June 2nd to establish the guidelines. Director.of Community Development Frank Gray advised the Council applicants would be submitting_ their applications for development by June 30th, and it would be desirable to. give them at least a month's advance notice on what the guidelines for the ensuing year would be. Councilman Brunner questioned whether or not the guidelines could be changed because of the courts. 'Mr. Gray advised the Council that he is in contact with Mr. Anderson and - expects a decision from him at any time. The Council then agreed.to meet at 4 00_p.m on Tuesday, May 27, 1975. 4-56 May 19, 1975 CITY MANAGER'S Mr. Meyer advised the Council the Local Agency For - REPORTS mation. Commission has scheduled July 3•,'1975, for -consideration of the draft, revised sphere of in- fluence,guidelines.. The Local Agency Formation Commission is asking for the City's comments no later than June 16, 1975. Mr. Meyer reported the meeting scheduled for May 24th on the hearing of the Sonoma County General Plan for elected officials in the County, had been rescheduled to June 7th. The City of Santa Rosa has responded to Petaluma's request for inclusion in' their transportation system by stating they are not in a position at this time to give the City a figure, but they would us a letter to forward to - UMTA. Mr. Meyer further reported the application from the Penngrove Wastewater Collection System had been approved by ABAG. EXECUTIVE SESSION -The City Council adjourned to an Executive at 9:15 p.m.-,-and reconvened at 10:20 p.m. LEGISLATION AFFECTITNG CITIES 0 04 S.B. 1112 City Attorney Matthew Hudson advised the- Council he' had drafted a letter supporting Senator Collier's Senate Bill 1112 regarding employee - employer rela- tions..- Copies of the letter went to Senator Collier, Assembly Wornum, Senator Behr, and Senator Dill. S.B. 839 - Resolution #6969 N.C.S. in support of S.B. 839'was ( �I_ "SOBY DECISION" introduced by Councilman Brunner, seconded.by Council - lJ RES #(5969'14CS man.Harberson, and approved by 6 affirmative and l absentee votes. The subject, bill would reverse the effect of the E oby Decision, which would require large sums of money for potential post retirement workers' compen- sation heart- attack cases for Policemen and Firemen. - Copies of the reso- lution to be sent to Senator Howard Way, Senators Peter H. Behr and Randolph Collier, Assemblyman Michael Wornum, and to the League of California,Cities. WI HNERT PARK'S In response to a letter from the Local Agency Forma- THDRAWAL FROM tion Commission asking whether or -not Petaluma wanted HOSPITAL DISTRICT to comment on Rohnert Park's withdrawal from the Hospital District in order for. the comments to reach the Commission by June 5th, this matter was placed on the agenda. - It was the concensus of the Council they would not comment on the matter CITY COUNCIL REPORTS ARTS & CRAFTS SHOW Councilman Brunner requested that the Council not be put*in the same position they were two weeks ago by having to approve an arts and crafts show,, or other promotion in the downtown area-without sufficient advance notice..' He vised the Council he had heard comments, both pro and con, on the event. He asked that the Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Association be made aware of the concerns of.the "staff. Councilman Mattei advised the Council steps were. .being taken to bring a•definite conclusion to the matter. A survey-has been started by the Merchants Association an'd the - Chamber of Commerce. At the conclusion of the discussion, the City Clerk was directed to write.a letter to the Downtown Merchants. Association with a copy to the Chamber Commerce indicating the Council's concern over the matter. oO GRAND OPENING - - - Mayor Putnam indicated she had received a letter from GOLDEN "EAGLE. the.,.Golden Eagle•:;Shopping Center asking the City to SHOPPING CENTER display the Knickerbocker #5 hand pumper for their opening on June 7th. The display of the Knickerbocker would be at no expense to the City. City Manager May 19, 1975 GRAND OPENING -- Robert Meyer advised the Council the Fire Chief had GOLDEN EAGLE actually been approached first on the matter, and he SHOPPING CENTER suggested it should be given Council• approval. The (Continued) Ci would incur,no.expense in moving the vehicle and returning it to storage. It would also be safeguarded by off -duty fire fighters who would be paid by the Golden.Eagle Shopping Center. Mayor Putnam indicated this would set a prece- dent and felt the Council should be made aware of it. A motion was made by Councilman Mattei, seconded by Councilman Harberson, permitting the display of the Knickerbocker #5 hand pumper with complete control by the City. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVE FINAL Planning Commission Resolution #6 -75, the minutes of SUBDIVISION MAP AS the Planning Commission,'May 6, 1975, a letter from AMENDED =- GREENBRIAR Dr- sector of Public Works, a certification from Direc- II- UNIT 2, PHASE III for of Community Development Frank Gray, on the sub- v/ RES 46966 NCS ject final map, submitted and filed. Director of Community Development Frank Gray reported the amended map provided for a 15 -foot bicycle path in the single - family phase of the Greenbriar Sub- division. Previously it was found the bicycle path.provision was not sufficient to construct a pathway, as part of it was on the bank of the creekside. The amended map allows for a 15 -foot right -of -way rather than the 10 -foot. In addition, there had been a triangular area in the subdivision that had a clouded title and the - matter has been resolved. The modification includes these two items. Resolution 46966 N.C.S. approving final subdivision map of Greenbriar Unit 2, Phase III, as amended, was then introduced by Councilman Mattei, seconded by Councilman Brunner, and approved by 6 affirmative, one absentee votes. APPEAL EIR REQUIREMENT A request for an - appeal before the City Council was "D" STREET PLAZA -- submitted by Robert F. Carmody, 573 Riveria Circle,� ROBERT F. CARMODY Larkspur, California. Mr. Carmody is appealing the Planning Commission's requirement for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the proposed .development to be located at the corner of "D" Street and Petaluma Boulevard South, to contain a 7- Eleven and other stores. Director of Community Development Frank Gray explained the Planning Commission's decision to require an E.I.R. as, (1) the Commission-wanted full knowledge regarding traffic hazards and any mitigating measures which they should consider in their site design review to alleviate any traffic hazards which might be caused by this development; and (2) the impact of the 24 -hour sale of beer and wine across the street from Walnut Park. The Commission.did not consider this matter as a moral question, but rather they were concerned with what additional staff services might be required by permitting the sale of alcoholic beverages to take place-in this location. Mr. Gray further explained the Planning Commission has not approved or disapproved the project. He advised the City Council has two options available. (1) To require an E.I.R.; or (2) To instruct the Director of Community Development to p.repare.a negative declaration 'stating the development would not have a significant impact on the environment. Planning Commission Resolution #7 -75, copy of the minutes of the Planning Commission of April 15,:1975, memo from the Director of Community Development dated May 16, 1975, regarding the appeal, staff report dated April 30, 1975, submitted by Richard D. A. Anderson, and copies of two protests on the develop- ment, submitted and filed. A letter to the City Council dated May 8, 1975, from the appellant Robert F. Carmody, submitted.and filed. Mayor Putnam opened the public hearing'. Mr. Robert Carmody addressed the Council. He stayed he had sought, at the Planning Commission level, to separate the two issues of the traffic and the alcoholic beverages, and would at this time address himself to the traffic analysis. May 19, 1975 APPEAL EIR REQUIREMENT He advised the.Council he had been requested by the City '-'_D ".STREET PLAZA - to.pr.ep4rp- ;a;,.traffic analysis:.for..the site and someone ROBERT F. CARMODY in the Engineering Division, he was not certain_, but (Continued) felt it was Hargis, provided him with a name of an engineer whom he hired. A survey was taken of the most recent 7- Eleven store built in Petaluma.at Perry - , and Baywood. With the assistance the franchisee, a count for a 24 -hour period was which equalled 616 people. Mr. Carmody asked the engineer to be conservative.and add 15% to this survey. They arrived at a figure of approximately 700 people per day using the sto_re,•and determined.approximately 150 of these people were probably pedestrians. In, addition to the proposed 7- Eleven Store at the "D" Street Plaza, Mr. Carmody advised the Council the other.tenants would probably be a dry cleaners „ and perhaps a laundromat. Mr.. Carmody also advised the `Council he had.'checked the Southland.Corporat on to determine the volume. of business done at the Washing- ton Street store and the Baywood & Perry store, and what they anticipated`for the new location. Southland indicated the "D ".Street Plaza store.would'not'do the volume of business the other two stores now have., Mr., Carmody advised the Council the..traffic.generated'by, the cleaners would be approximately 1.7.5 cars per day, and by the laundromat,, 75 cars per day. -This to al.adde,d' to the anticipated 450 to be generated by the Store would'equal.700 cars per day. Based on these figures, the.-Traffic Engineer reached :three mportant- conclusions. (1.) The traffic generated by the proposed 7- Eleven.store would not overburden city streets. The second conclusion.was the.peak.ho.ur. traffic generated.by any one of these uses does not correspond to the peak hour traffic on the street. Mr'. Carmody said the engineer further stated the uses at the site would likely cause a total reduction of vehicle miles in the City of Petaluma, because-of the convenience nature of the stores. The engineer felt this factor was also-important to consider: In his appeal, Mr. Carmody requested the matter of traffic be continued to be discussed with the Traffic Engineer of.the City to reach a satisfactory,conclusion without .going into the preparation of an E.I:R., to determine whether or not. this is an-issue. Mr. .Carmody then addressed the Council in relation to'the beer. and wine license to be held by'the proposed, 7- Eleven.S,tore.. He said' beer was already being sold near the park.at Pinkey's Pizza Parlor. He did not feel this.has caused any problems'with the park, nor did he feel the sale of beer and wine at the 7- Eleven Store would create any problems. Mr. Carmody.further indicated he felt any appeals on this issue would more preferably be made with the Alcoholic Beverage Control as they had jurisdiction over issuing alcoholic beverage lise.nces. He further advised the Council in checking with Southland- Corp.', he was advised two or three appeals had been made to the alcoholic beverage control,,on their application, but none had been made on his. He further indicated.the ABC feels appeals for beer and wine licenses are a matter of routine... Mr. Carmody remarked he found it difficult to understand how he�would prepare E.I.R. on the effects of alcohol the or on the, people when doctors 'were unable to make such a determination. Mr. Carmody asked the Council then to consider the two issues ;sepa- rately. He asked the Council if they were not prepar-ed.to order a n.egative.declaration prepared on the traffic he be permitted to meet "wi,th.the traffic division. He ,further asked'if the Council were not nclined to ask for a negative declaration on the beer and wine license, that they direct their.appeal to the Alcoholic Beverage Control. A short discussion was held then ° on the traffic movements in the..a.rea.and whether or not problems would ,be caused by vehicular traffic entering and leaving the premises. Director of ,Community Development Frank Gray advised the Council the egress from the proposed project could be controlled.; however, difficulty could be encountered on vehicular traffic trying to make left -hand turns into the area, both from "D" Street -and from Petaluma Boulevard,South. May 19, 1975 APPEAL EIR REQUIREMENT Councilman Matte. , the Council's representative on the "D" STREET PLAZA -- Planning C'ommission, advised the Council he had voted ROBERT F. CARMODY in .the, minority at 'the Planning Commission level and (Continued) did not oppose the.projeet. Mr. Mattei's reasoning was that the subject property is zoned for commercial use -and hasnot been in use for some time. Regardless of what type of occupancy is granted for the land, it.is bound to cause some impact on the area as far as' traffic is concerned. He felt that as long as the land is zoned for commercial use, it would be proper to permit this type of application. Mr. Mattei also suggested that perhaps the Traffic Department could probably work some of the problems and the permit be granted with certain conditions. Mr. G: Roland Bond,.a member of the Planning Commission, then spoke to the City Council. Mr. Bond indicated there could.be no comparison of the traffic generated on the Baywood site with that on Petaluma Boulevard South. The subject property, he advised, is in the heart of the downtown area and is a very important corner in the City of Petaluma. Mr. Bond referred to comments made by the City Engineer regarding the traffic in the area which indicated . the traffic report prepared by Mr. Carmody contained figures which were ,somewhat misleading.. Mr. Bond also referred to remarks made by the Chief of Police with relation to the proximity of Walnut Park to the 7- Eleven Store as far as the sale of alcoholic beverages is concerned. Mr. - Bond felt the Planning Commmission should not ignore the remarks given by the City staff to the Planning Commission, but should weigh them very carefully. Mr. Bond then referred to Mr. Carmody's reference in his appeal to the moral issue of beer and wine in the park. - He indicated as a minister in the community, he could. very easily address himself to the moral issue, but as a Planning Commissioner he- looked only at the issue of the impact.on the park: He cited the fact that the P.D.Q. is directly across.from the park, and purchases were made there and taken to the park. If beer and wine were available directly across from the park, that is where it would be consumed. The impact would then be empty.beer and wine bottles in the park, as well as police problems. Mr. Bond felt the uses now.enjoyed in the park by the community are the proper uses. He felt the applicant should make a survey the neighbors in the area., as well as those who use the park, to determine their reaction. He also felt the appli- cant should get a review.from the Police Department'on what services they would be expected to provide if the use were allowed. He then -asked the City Council to uphold the action of the Planning Commission by requiring a limited E.I.R. based on the traffic.an.d the use of the park if the application is granted.. Following Rev. Bond's presentation, some discussion was held regarding the cost of the E.I.R., and the preparation of the report. Director of Community Development Frank Gray indicated this would be a limited E.:I.R. report; however, he could not access a cost figure to.the report. He did indicate that an independent party hired by.the City would-be the proper person to prepare the report in case the project was ever confronted with a - law suit. He further indicated some of the traffic data already prepared could be used as part of the E.I.R.; however, it would have to be tested against other 7- Eleven stores. Mr. Gray advised if an E.I.R. were requi- red, it would first be reviewed by the Planning Commission, then the City Council, and then would be used for Site Design Review. Councilman Harberson indicated he would have to agree there would be no comparison between the Baywood site and the proposed site on Petaluma Boulevard South and "D" Street. He further objected to, "ringing Walnut Park with asphalt :parking.lots. He .further indicated.an E.I.R. was necessary on the traffic in the area. Councilman Brunner stated he did not feel an E.I.R. was necessary and was -, therefore, opposed to placing this requirement on the project. Mr..Carmody again spoke to the Council saying he did not feel the preparation of an E.I.R. would solve the problem. He indicated he has done fifteen of these projects in the past 2- 1 /2.years in various places, including areas in and around Lake Tahoe, but has never had to prepare an E.I.R. There have been negotiations. and negative declarations, but no E.I.R.'s. He, then asked the Council to not require an E.I.R., but allow him to negotiate,. or suggested that if the Council or the Planning Commission did not feel the use was approriate for the site, then to let him know and he would withdraw his plan. Mr. Carmody stated he did not understand how a party making and paying for an E.I.R. report would not try to prepare the report favorably on his own behalf, especially if the report was going to cost somewhere around $2,000, as had been indicated. 9 40 May 19, 1975 APPEAL EIR REQUIREMENT ,Mayor Putnam then responded to Mr'.Carmody "D "_STREET PLAZA— that perhaps.,the City had done a disservice to the ROBERT- -F. CARMODY. area. Walnut.Park, she stated, is a part of the (Continued) community's past, and a very special part of the City. It could be that area should have been set aside as some.sort of•preserved area. She did.not feel, however, it was unreasonable to'ask that an E..I.R. be ;prepared to take a look at the traffic problems and the-related problems that may be caused by the development. 'Such a_- report "may indicate there'would not be problems caused - by the project. After the facts have been determined, it could then go aga n'to the Planning Commission for review. At the present time; however, the- 'Plan- ning Commission.is endeavoring to follow the guidelines set up for it. Councilman Daly questioned Mr. Carmody's statement on the fact that he could sway the.E.I.R. It is obvious, he stated, that you could do you did the report yourself, but it is his understanding the report would have to be prepared by a consultant. Director of Community Development Frank Gray clari- fied the matter stating that•although'Mr. Carmody would have to deposit the money with the City of Petaluma,.the E.I.R. is prepared for the City of Petaluma and the contract is by the-City of Petaluma. - Mr. Gray further stated the Planning Commission did not consider •the development as an appropriate or inappropriate use. They were merely asking for the conditions which.should be placed on the development at the Site Design Review to make it function properly in the community. Mr. Carmody then took exception to the memorandum prepared by the Director of Community Development, dated May 16, 1975, in response to his appeal to the conditions imposed by the'Planning Commission. Mr. Carmody specifically objected to the section of the memorandum which stated Mr. Hargis had not provided him with the name of the traffic engineer whichhe' had hiked Mr. Hargis responded by stating he had-given Mr. Carmody the names of several qualified traffic engineers who had done work for the City. He later received a call from Mr. Carmody stating he had hired Jim Robertson to do the traffic" study for him, and asked Mr. Hargis' opinion. Mr. Hargis stated he was not aware that Mr. Robertson did independent traffic analyses, because he was the employee of a public agency. Mr. Hargis' did state he was acquainted with Mr. Robertson through a traffic engineer's group. Mr. Gray then reviewed the time schedule from the point when Mr. Carmody had been asked to submit an Environmental Impact Questionnaire until the present time. Mr. Gray further stated the staff report made no recommendations and any recommendations made to the City Council had been.done so by the Planning Commission. City Atto,rney.Matt Hudson advised the Council the Planning Commission, and now the Council, is confronted with the decision of (1) declaring the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and should receive a negative declaration, or (2) the project may have a significant effect upon the environ- ment and that an E.I.R. will be required. If the Council rejects the option of requiring a negative.declaxation and asks for. an E.I,.R., then the nature and extent of the EJ .R. can be discussed. Mayor Putnam then closed the public hearing. A motion was made by Councilman Mattei, seconded by Councilman Brunner., asking that a negative declaration be prepared for the project. The roll call vote indica -ted 3 in favor of the negative declaration, 3 opposed, and therefore no decision was reached. Voting in'favor of 'the negative declaration were Councilman Brunner, Councilman Cavanagh, Councilman Matted; opposing the negative decla- rationLweret- Councilman Daly, Councilman Harberson, and Mayor Putnam. City Attorney Matt Hudson advised the Council to take the matter under submis- sion and if Mr. Carmody would give permission, to have Councilman Perry review the tapes or to hold the hearing over again. Mr. Carmody indicated he had no objections to having Councilman Perry reviewing the tapes. Mr. Hudson then suggested the matter be held until Mr. Perry has had a chance to review the hearing. The Council could reconvene and take a vote on the matter. May 19, 1975 �E SET PUBLIC HEARING Resolution 46967 N.C.S. setting public hearing date DATE- -NAME CHANGE for June 2, 1975, for the purpose of considering the ELY ROAD renaming off Ely Road to Ely Boulevard North and Ely RES 46967 NCS Boulevard South, :was introduced by Councilman Harberson, seconded by Councilman Daly, and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. TEMPORARY APPROPRI- Ordinance 41173 N.C.S. making temporary appropriations ATION ORDINANCE-- for current department expenses, chargeable to the FISCAL YEAR 1975 -76 appropriations for the fiscal year 1975 -76, to cover ORD 441173 NCS necessary expenses of various departments until the annual appropriation is enforced, was introduced by Councilman Harberson, seconded by Councilman Brunner, and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. The ordinance was ordered posted. PREPARATION OF AN Director of Community Development Frank Gray explained ECONOMIC ANALYSIS the request to the City Council stating the purpose RES 446968 NCS was to obtain an economic base study of the City of Petaluma concentrating on the marketability analysis of the commercial areas in the community, with special emphasis on the downtown core area. Mr. Gray advised the study would provide the City with pertinent information regarding possibilities of commercial and industrial development and what the residential development is costing the City. He also indicated it would provide a framework for a review of the City's growth control policies and would be useful for industry and commerce intending to locate in Petaluma. In addition, he stated it would be helpful to develop financial projections for the City. Mr. Gray felt it is necessary to be done to continue work on the Environmental Design Plan and the City's General Plan and it would be important for the City's redevelopment efforts. Upon the conclusion of Mr. Gray's presentation, Resolution #6968 N.C.S. approving the preparation of an economic analysis study, was introduced by Councilman Mattei, seconded by Councilman Daly, and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. The study is to cost not more than $15,000 with funds being taken from Revenue Sharing Fund 19 -75. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:55 p.m. Mayor Attest: Ci Clerk