HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 1.A-Minutes 04/05/2004
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
March 1, 2004
�ALU�
City of Petaluma, California
�85a MEETING OF PETALUMA CITY COUNCIL
Draft City Council Minutes
Monday, March 1, 2004 - 3:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting
CALL TO .ORDER
A. Roll Call
Present: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Vice Mayor.Moynihan, Torliatt
Absent: O'Brien
B. Pledge. of Allegiance
OATH OF OFFICE
Clark Thompson sworn in as the appointed Council Member to fill the temporary
vacancy created by Keith Canevaro.
The Oath:of .Office was administered by the City°Clerk to Clark Thompson.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council Member Tbrliaft reported and gave an update on the recent Water Advisory
Committee Meeting and indicated they,had approved the proposed budget. She noted
she had voted "no" on the budget for two reasons_ 1) the clarification regarding Park
Reclamation .costs -were passed out at the meeting and she did not have adequate time
to review them; and 2) she had a problem with the proposed .Study and Evaluation of
the Future,'Wafer & Supply Demands for Sonoma County Water Agency as there was no
Scope of Work included.
Vice Mayor Moynihan ,announced Council Member O'Brien had recent heart by-pass
surgery and was doing well., He indicated if people Wanted_ to send "Get Well" cards to
do so through City Hall..
Vice Mayor Moynihan also noted it had been some time since. the Council has reviewed
Claims and Bills, received a Quarterly Report and that he would like to receive a
Variance Report.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
There were none.
Vol. XX, Page 2
March 1, 2004
1
2
AGENDA CHANGES AND DELETIONS, (Changes to current agenda -,only).
3
-
4
There were none.
5
6
A. APPROVAL` -OF PROPOSED AGENDA.
7
8
Approval. of Proposed Agenda for Council Meeting of Monday, March 15, 2004.
9
10
MOTION to approved the proposed Agenda for March 15, 2004.
11
12
MIS Healy and Moynihan. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
13
14
1. CONSENT CALENDAR
15
16
PUBLIC -COMMENT
17
18.
hy Bertucc',taluma; addressed the City Council on behalf of the Library
Dorot'Pe
19
Advisory. Board and Thanked them for consideration of the Petaluma Library
20
Meeting Room'Expansion.
21
22
Council Member Torliatt remarked on the monies raised by the Friends of the
23
Libraryfor Phis project' and "recommended the City expend the " City's" amount
24
first and:if'there are'odditional funds left over that they be returned to the Friends
25
of the Library to support their programs.
26
27
C.ouncil Member Tli'ompson thanked Vice Mayor Moynihan for his efforts toward
28
thisproject as he has served,on the Library .Advisory Board.,
29
30
Council MemberTorliatt requested Item 1.B be removed from the Consent
31
Calendar for 7sQoarate,discussion.
32
33
MOTION to approve the balance of the, Consent Calendar as presented'. M/S
34
Torliatt and Moynihan.
35
36
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
37
38
A. Resolution 2004-02.1 N.C.S.. Awarding Contract :for 2003 Petaluma Library,,
39
Meeting Room Expansion Project � 9028-2. The Estimated Project Cost:
40
$160�,000. Funding Sources: Sonoma County and Community Facilities:
41
(SRladzien/Castaldo)
42
43
B. Resolution Approving Termination. of ;the Lease With McBail Company for
44
the Aldetwood Well. (Ban/Nguyen)
45
- .Removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion.
46
47
C. Resoluti'on.2004-023 N.C.S. Accepting Historical'Museum Roof
48
'Replacement Project 03-3360-1. (Skladzien/Castaldo)
49
50
D. Resolution. 2004-024 N.C.S. Declaring Vehicles acid Equipment Surplus to
51
the: Citys Needs and Directing the City Manager to Dispose of the
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 3
1
Vehicles and Equipment in Accordance with Provisions of the Petaluma
®
2
Municipal Code. (Thomas)
3
4
E.
Resolution 2004-025 N.C.S. Awarding Landscape Maintenance Contract
5
to Sonoma County Tree Experts for the Pruning of Trees in the Willowglen
6
Landscape Assessment district. (Anchordoguy)
7
8
F.
Adoption (Second Reading) of. Ordinance 29 75 N.C.& Incorporating
9
Recommendations Made by the Fireworks, Taskforce and Amending
10
11
Petaluma's Fireworks Ordinance. (Albertson)
12
G.
Adoption (Second Reading) of Ordinance 2,176 N.C.S. to.Amend Lease for
13
Mangon Aircraft, a Business Located at the. Petaluma Municipal Airport.
14 .
(Skladzien/Glose)
15
16
Items Removed from Consent for Discussion:
17
18
B.
Resolution 2004-026 N.C.S. Approving Termination of the Lease With Mc Bail
19
Company for'the Aldecwood Well -(Bah/ Nguyen)
20
21
Council Member Torliatt questioned asked the reason for terminating the
22
lease when the City has the rightsuntil.2027.
23
24
Staff'responded that the water quality was poor and there was not much
25
capacity.
26
27 .
Council Member Torliatt indicated ishe would not be supporting this
28
request, as it,doesn't cost the City anything to maintain it.
29
30
City Councildiscussion ensued regarding the possible need for access for
31
future water needs and staff .conveyed that the well has not been used
32
for many years because it does not meet current Department of Health
33
Services standards for water quality. By -terminating the lease, the property
34
owner would `then have the property rights to, the well site.
35
36
MOTION to adopt Resolution'2004=.026 MC:S. M/S Healy/Moynihan.
37
38
MOTION CARRIED by the following vo'te`.
39
40
AYES: Harris, Healy, Thompson, Vice Mayor Moynihan
41
NOES: Torliatt, Mayor Glass
42
ABSENT: O'Brien
43
44
2. NEW
BUSINESS
45
46
A.
Introduction of Ordinance 2177 N.C.S. Amending Petaluma. Municipal
47
Code Section 1.118, "Claims Against the `City" to Authorize the City
48
Manager to Settle Claims for Amounts of $20,000 or Less. (Rudnansky)
49
50
City Attorney Rudnansky gave' the_ staff report and urged Council
51
approval.
52
Vol. XX, Page:4 March 1, 2004
Council Member Harris 'commented he felt this, would result in. a more •
efficient process.
MOTION to. introduce, Ordinance2177 N.C.S. "M/S Moynihan/Thompson.
MOTI.ONtARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
B. Resolution.2004-027 N.C.S. of the City of Petaluma, Amending the,Rotation
Tow List Franchise .Agreement Eliminating Franchise: Fees Charged to the
'Tow Operators for Tows Under Vehicle Code .Sections 226511(k) and (o).
(Thomas/,Hood)
Tim Lyons; Police Department, gave the staff report, and recommended
Council.approval.
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2004-027 N.C.S.., M/S Moynihan/Healy.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
C. Discussion of Property Acquisition and disposition: (Bierman)
Martinelli et al
■ Station 1 Fire House
Casa Grande Motel
City Manager Mike Bierman briefly commented on the Martinelli property,
indicating that the purchase has been con iple.ted.
Vice Mayor Moynihan remarked on his desire to get Capital Improvement
'Project information, including what- the funded sources are and what is
being spent. He also requested; based on future development, to get
projected figures on the need for possible future water rate increases due
to increased water needs.
Council Member Torliatt. confirmed with the City 'Manager the City is on a
three-year incremental increase for water rates and that there is no need
for discussion regarding water rate increases of this time.
City Manager Bierman continued on regarding the Station 1 Fire House
Relocation issue. He briefly commented on the issues of why staff. is
recommending ,locating Fire House # 1 to the Casa Grande site. He noted
the Casa Grande site remains his recommendation based on reasons of
Fire Department needs, geographic preference, site availability,
economics and City Redevelopment.
Vice Mayor Moynihan commented he would like to see the City secure
whdt funding they could from a developer to find a site and would_ prefer
the recommended options #a or #2 submitted by the Fire Chief.
Council 'Member Healy commented if the Casa Grande property is still
available, the City could, make the information available to the public
and schedule public meetings to discuss the proposed relocation prior to
the decision being placed on a City Council agenda ,for action.
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 5
®
1
2
Council Member Torliatt expressed concern that the relocation of Station
3
# 1 to this site was never discussed during the Central Petaluma Specific
4
Plan or General Plan discussions and feels making this land use decision
5
outside of that process would be problematic. She questioned what the
6
actual costs would be for a new Fire Station to be, built, including the
7
differences from one site to another:
8
9
Vice Mayor Moynihan commented the City has a Five -Year Capital
10
Improvement Program that does not include this project. He questioned if
1 1
Basin Street was creating an impediment by building `the garage so close
12
to the current Fire Station.
13
14
Chief Albertson responded that the Fire Department would be having a
15
loss of parking and storage space for vehicles and that there will be
16
increased traffic at the current location, which is problematic due to the
17
increase in the number of emergency calls.
18
19
Mayor Glass stated his support for the relocation of the Fire Station and
20
indicated he feels the Casa Grande site has met its useful life. He
21
suggested the old fire station could perhaps be converted to a restaurant.
22
23
PUBLIC COMMENT
24
25
Patricia Tuttle Brown, Petaluma, addressed the City Council and
26
commented she was a member of the Central Petaluma Specific Plan
27
Committee. She stated her frustration 'with how 'far this issue has gotten
28
without public noticing of the surrounding neighborhood of the Casa
29
Grande Motel. She pointed out that Case Grande is surrounded by low-
30
income housing and stressed the need for public input prior to making this
31
kind of decision. She further noted the Central Petaluma Specific Plan
32
committee has never heard about this proposal to move the Fire Station
33
to this location. She indicated if the Council goes along with this, it would
34
be as though Basin Street is dictating land use in the City. She expressed
35
her desire to have the Fire Station remain next to; the parking garage, as it
36
would create a safer environment.
37
38
City Council discussion ensued regarding what would be done with the
39
existing structure and the City Manager noted there would be a public
40
process and proposals would be received regarding the existing Fire
41
Station site.
42
43
Council Member Healy noted the next step should be to host a workshop
44
regarding information on the disposition and relocation of Fire Station # 1.
45
46
Council Member Torliatt expressed the desire to hear from staff as to the
47
timelihe and notification process that will be utilized.
48
49
City Manager Bierman confirmed he will work with staff and come, back
50
with the timeframes and process at the March 15, 200'4 City Council
•
51
52
Meeting.
Vol. XX, Page 6 March 1, 2004
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Vice Mayor Moynihan stated a desire to have the CIP "fleshed out" and
brought back, with information on .resources, expenditures, and funding
sources.
Council Member Thompson commented he feels it is up to the experts to
decide where the Fire House should ,be, located. He would like to see a
thorough public process once the site is established.
John Barella, North Bay -Construction, noted'they would be doing the
demolition of the Casa Grande site and, that they would be demolishing it
for $75,000 or less. 'He added. after demolition the value of theproperty
would be approximately $60.00 a square. foot for the land alone and
stressed that real estate is going up higher and higher each day.
There was no Council action taken on this item.
& UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. ,Motion for Reconsideration of Action Taken February 2, M04 Regarding
Boulevard . Apartments (Buckelew Programs) A Request to Approve
Mitigated Negative Declaration; Rezone to PUD; Adopt Proposed Unit
Development Plan; Adopt Proposed Development Standards for PUD.
(Gaebler) - Motion carried - reconsideration of the matter will be
heard at the March 15,, 2004 City Council Meeting
Council Member Healy left the Council Chambers at this time.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mary Beth Ray, Petaluma;, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
proposed Buckelew Apartments, stressing that the housing is needed, but
this is a poor choice of location..
Tom Fry, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
proposed'Buckelew Project.
Miguel A. Jimenez, Petaluma, addressed the City Council and inquired if
this'will be a public works project.
Mayor Glass indicated the project would be subsidized, with public
monies.
Mr. Jimenez indicated that project should be a union project and he
would like to see a union labor agreement.
Mayor Glass noted the discussion regarding the project will, actually, take
place at the next Council Meeting and would_ not be discussed this
evening.
•
•
fr�J
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 7
•
1
2
Victor Chechanover, Petaluma, addressed the City Council and
requested that when the item is reconsidered, it should be reconsidered in
3
the evening and it should be a public hearing.
4
5
Council Member Thompson noted that Council Member Healy had to
6
leave the meeting as he was needed at a court appearance. Council
7
Member Thompson continued by stating he has read all the materials
8
regarding this issue and indicated he will be supporting the
9
reconsideration. He concluded by stating he most likely will support the
10
11
project when the Council reconsiders the item next week.
12
Vice Mayor Moynihan commented the denial of fhel project has never
13
been an issue regarding the capability of the Buckelew Program; it is a
14
bad land use decision. He indicated there are other locations available
15
that would be more suitable.
16
17
Council Member Harris also noted he feels this is about a decision
18
regarding land use.
19
20
MOTION made by Council Member Healy at the February 23, 2004 City
21
Council Meeting, SECONDED by Mayor Glass,
22
23
MOTION CARRIED by the following vote:
24
25
AYES: Thompson, Torliatt, Mayor Glass
•
26
27
NOES: Harris, Vice Mayor Moynihan
ABSENT: Healy
28
29
This item will be reconsidered and discussed by the City Council
30
at their March 15, 2004 City Couneil.Meeting.
31
32
ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
33
34
The City Council adjourned to Closed Session at 4:15 p.m. with the City Attorney reading
35
into the record the matters to be discussed.
36
37
PUBLIC COMMENT
38
39
There was none.
40
41
CLOSED SESSION
42
43
■ CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION - Pursuant to Govt. Code
44
§54956.9(a).
45
o Bobby Thompson vs. City of Petaluma et al (Thompson 1), Sonoma County Superior
46
Court Case No. SCV-225677
47
o Bobby Thompson vs. City of Petaluma et al (Thompson II), United States District Court
48
(Northern District) Action No. CO3-0033 EDL
49
o City of Petaluma vs. Petaluma Properties, Sonoma County Superior Court Case No.
50
SCV 226706
51
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: Significant Exposure to
•
52
Litigation Pursuant to Govt. Code §54956.9(b). - 1 matter
Vol. XX, Page 8
March 1, 2004
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY .NEGOTIATOR ,Pursuant, to Government Code §54956.8. is
Three parcels, located at the northeast corner of Lindberg Lane and Lakeville
Highway, APN's '05-005-020-003, 039, 040. Negotiating Party: Michael Bierman. Under
Negotiation: Price, Terms or Payment, or Both.
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Pursuant- to Government Code §54956.8.
Property Description: 74.71-acre property, APN 019-330-009, located adjacent to the Petaluma River.
Negotiating Party: Michael Bierman. Under Negotiation: Price; Terms or Payment, or Both.
CALL TO ORDER
A. Roll Call
Present: " Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Vice Mayor Moynihan, Torliatt
Absent: O'-Brien-,, Thompson
16 B. Pledge of Allegiance, - led by Council Member Harris
1 7 C. Moment of Silence
18
19 REPORT OUT. OF CLOSED SESSION - No reportable action.
20
21 PUBLIC COMMENT
22
23 ., Don Weisenfluh, Petaluma, stated his belief that claims,by school districts of cutbacks in
24 education are false. He recommended voting "no" on school taxes.
25
26 Patricia Tuttle Brown, Petaluma, stated that the offer from Basin Street Properties to
27 "donate" the Casa Grande Hotel as a possible future Fire Station site was in reality a •
28 "quid pro quo" to, reduce the requirement for green space at the Southgate
29 Development. She thought there should be public input, on the location of the fire
30 station.
31
32 COUNCIL COMMENT
33
34 Vice Mayor Moynihan spoke regarding traffic mitigation fees owed to the City for 5 years
35 by Chelsea GCA. He thought that once someone made :a promise to the community, it
36 should be fulfilled. When those fees are collected, they should be earmarked for a
37 crosstown connector.
38
39 Regarding the Kennilworth acquisition, he wanted to go on record to say that traffic
40 mitigation for a retail development there would only, be possible with a crosstown
41 connector.
42
43 He hoped that when moving forward on projects, Council would keep in mind the need
44 for Little League playing fields.
45
46 Council Member Healy reminded voters that absentee ballots could be turned in at any
47 polling place. They,should not be mailed on Election Day, as they would not be received
48 in time to be counted.
49
50 He thought Ms. Tuttle Brown's comments had some misconceptions.
51
52 Council Member Torliatt referred to a letter from Pisenti and Brinker regarding their annual •
53 audit of the City. She would like City staff to respond to recommendations in that letter.
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 9
1
2
She had the opportunity to go to the all-weather soccer field at Lucchesi Park for the
3
State Cup Championship. A Petaluma team played in the under-12 finals. Rick Hewko,
4
Rick Mitchell and Greg Gehring were the coaches, and deserve a lot of credit for getting
5
those girls where they were. The event was hosted by Petaluma United Soccer - Corky
6
Cabrera, Tom Siragusa,_and Danny Ortega. The City needsanother all-weather soccer
7
field. New development must include enough park space to accommodate those
8
residents it will bring to the community.
9
10
Mayor Glass thanked Pauline Potter, Dr. Andersen and others who had contributed
1 1
money to the City. These were exceptionally generous donations from individuals .
12
wanting their town to have a little extra to get through these times.
13
14
He attended a Friday night celebration of Black History Month. Music was the theme,
15
and he found it informative and enjoyable. He hoped,the community would participate
16
in Black History Month events.
17
18
On Saturday night he attended the American Cancer Society's celebration of 25 years in
19
Petaluma. This was the final year for this particular event.
20
21
Tomorrow he will be reading from Harry Potter. He.urged citizens to "take a little time to
22
read to your child or grandchild."
23
24
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
25
26
A. Resolution 2004-028 N.C.S. Establishing a Schedule of Fees and Charges
27
for City Services and Repealing Previously Adopted and Conflicting Fees
28
and Charges for Such Services. (Thomas)
29
30
Finance Director Bill Thomas presented the, staff report and explained that
31
the January 2002 fee study prepared by Revenue Costs Specialists has
32
been revised by the author, and the recommendations presented to
33
Council tonight are based on that revision. He stressed the importance of
34
keeping fees in line with costs.
35
36
Vice Mayor Moynihan recalled that when the initial fee study was done,
37
an administrative overhead charge was built into the cost structure.
38
39
Mr. Thomas explained that the same process was used for the update.
40
41
Vice Mayor Moynihan noted some charges were going up a lot. He asked
42
if there was a cap.
43
44
Mr. Thomas replied that the fees were based on the study, which
45
determined the cost of providing the service
46
47
Vice Mayor Moynihan wondered if some of the increases were reflecting
48
a more involved process, rather than the actual cost. He thought fee
49
increases enabled inefficiencies to occur. He preferred to streamline
50
processes.
51
Vol. XX, Page 10
March 1, 2004
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Council Member Torliatt thought the reality could be that the City is
processing more applications, etc. •
Mr. Thomas agreed.
Council Member Healy asked what the City's expectations were for
recovery of ambulance'fees.
Mr. Thomas said that "The reality is, you get what the insurance
companies pay you."
Council Member Healy pointed.out that on the staff,report, the swim
team pool rental is indicated .as $3,000 "per month," but in another place,
the report reads $3,000 "per year."
Jim Carr, ,Parks and Recreation Director explained that was a
t_ypo,graphicdl error - it should read "per month."' The Recreation, Music
and Parks Commission's recommendation is $3,,000 per month.
Council Member Healy announced that the Swim Center opening would
be delayed until April 1 for technical reasons.. Donations for the Swim
Center have been coming in. He thought some of the fee increases
seemed steep.
Mr. Carr replied that the commission was looking at cost per hour for use.
Their recommendation was based on a very reasonable cost for -the
service provided.
Council.Member Healy looked forward to when the,Swim Center could
be modernized.
Council Member Torliatt referred to "softball" under "Adult Sports." She
asked whateffect the opening of RESA (Redwood Empire Sports Arena)
would have.
Mr. Carr answered that once RESA came on line, the City would be "out
of the softball business." He added that softball, for the City, is close to
being "revenue neutral."
Council Member Torliatt would like to get input from the Animal Services
Advisory Committee regarding proposed, fee increases for adoptions, etc.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
Council Member Healy asked if other Council Members would like to find
a way to reduce the impact on the cost of recreational swim.
Council Member Torliatt -thought it important to go ahead with the fee
increases and re-evaluate after a year. There are. many issues that need
to be addressed, including making sure that everyone who comes in is
March 1, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 1 1
1
actually paying the fees and improving the management of the Swim
2
Center.
3
4
Mayor Glass and Council Member Harris agreed.
5
6
Vice Mayor Moynihan said he "hod a problem" with the proposed
7
Community Development fee increases. He has received feedback from
8
citizens that processes are taking longer. He thought the City needed to
9
evaluate the services offered and make sure they`re done as efficiently as
10
possible. He thought it would send the wrong message, to the department
1 1
to increase fees. He supported the other proposed fees.
12
13
Council Member Torliatt thought the goal for the Community
14
Development Department was self-sufficiency. She supported the
15
proposed fee increased "absolutely." Fees should be compared to those
16
charged by neighboring cities
17
18
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2004428 N.C.S. M/S Healy/Harris.
19
20
Vice Mayor Moynihan asked if the motion.included approving the
21
Community Development fees.
22
23
Council Member Healy said that it did, as modified in the memo Council
24
received at the dais this evening.
25
�.
26
27
MOTION CARRIED 4-1-2 as follows:
28
AYES: Mayor Glass, Healy, Harris, Torliatt
29
NOES: Vice, Mayor Moynihan
30
ABSENT: O'Brien, Thompson
31
32
B. Discussion and Possible Action on an Appeal by Delco Builders and
33
Developer, Inc., of the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee's
34
(SPARC) Decision to Deny the 46-Unit Single Family and 46-Unit Townhouse
35
Gatti/Stratford Place Subdivision at 710' Sonoma Mountain Parkway. This
36
item will be continued to a date certain. (Moore/Robbe)
37
38
Mike Moore, Community Development Director, explained that Delco
39
Builders would like to move forward with their appeal. He asked Council to
40
set a date certain hearing on the appeal for afternoon session of the
41
March 15, 2004 Council Meeting.
42
43
Council consensus was to agendize a Public Hearing on the matter
44
for the afternoon session of the March 15, 2004 Council Meeting.
45
46
C. Consideration and Possible Action on a Recommendation from the
47
Planning Commission Regarding Basin Street Properties Applications for
48
the Southgate Development, a 40-acre Planned Unit Development, which
49
Proposes 216 Detached Single -Family Homes, a Park Site and a Parcel to
50
be Retained for Future Affordable Housing. A Stormwater Detention
51
Facility/Linear Open Space Area (Urban Separator) is Also Proposed Along
Vol. XX, Page 12 March 1„2004
1
the South Side of the Site Adjacent to the City limits. The project
2
entitlements include:
3
Resolution 2004-029 N.C:S. Adoption of a Mitigated Negative
4
Declaration for the project.
5
Resolution 2004-0030 N.C.S. Amending the General Plan land use
b
designation from "Specific Plan Area" and "Transit Terminal" to "Urban
7
Diversified." -
8
Introduction (First Reading) of- Ordinance 2178 N.C.S. Rezoning from
9
the, existing "Study" Zoning classification to Planned Unit Development
10
(PUD),;
1 1
Resolution,2004-0031 N.C.S. Approving the Southgate Unit
12
Development Plan and PUD Development Standards;
13
Resolution 2004-0032 N.C:°S. Approving Vesting Tentative Map and
14
Conditions of Approval.
Mayor Glass announced that Council Member -Thompson had recused
himself from this item due to a conflict of interest.
Jayni'Allsep, Project Planner, presented the staff report, and the Planning
Commission's recommendations to Council regarding the project.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Dev Goetschins, Housing Land Trust of Sonoma County Executive Director,
explained that the Land Trust provides home ownership opportunities to
low and moderate -income families -who would otherwise be priced out of
the housing market. The land beneath homes is owned by the Land Trust
and leased to the homeowner on a 9:9-year'lease. The land lease
provides the Land Trust the ability to buy the house back when the
homeowners decide to sell. The developers will donate lots and build
three homes, which they will sell to Land Trust at cost.
Council Member Torliatt asked how much buyers would pay for those
homes,
Ms. Goetschins replied that families would buy the home based on the
maximum they can qualify for on their first mortgage. When they sell, they
have to sell to someone in the same income level.
Arthur Kerbel; Petaluma, Adobe del Oro.Group, urged Council's support of
the project as presented.
Stephanie McAllister, Petaluma, Planning Commissioner, saw some issues
stiil.unresolved. She clarified that the whole community should be.
concerned with the project. She was not against the neighborhood
working with the developer. She thought many people hoped this
development would provide a "sense of gatewo,y,." A soundwall with
residential development behind it does not provide, that. She would like to
have the entire area outside the soundwall landscaped, including the
CalTrans right-of-way. She asked that SPARC be alerted that when
reviewing this landscape design, they should look for that "sense of
gateway." She asked Council to consider an increase in urban separator. is
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 13
•'°
1
2
Teresa Barrett, Petaluma Planning. Commissioner, referred to the initial
3
acoustical study, which showed noise, level above acceptable levels. The
4
second study withdrew all data and simply stated that it had been
5
modified and now was within accepfable.levels. As far as stop signs or
6
traffic lights were concerned, she thought the City Engineer should
7
determine what would be safest. Students, seniors and disabled citizens
8
need as much time as possible to get across the street. If the City decided
9
against a traffic light at Frates Road and; Ely Road - then a lighted
10
crosswalk should be installed. Her third issue was the urban separator- 1.20
11
feet is non -buildable space. The park now being suggested is even smaller
12
than what.came to Planning Commission.,She said the applicant had
13
agreed when asked to move housing that faces on Ely' Road back in
14
order to double the open space on that side, and she didn't think that
15
had happened. Important to respect ,General Plan'. She had questioned
16
"rushing to move this project along"� vvhen.it was clear there was so much
17
to be done and so many compromises were being made regarding open
18
space'and the urban separator. The she read in the Argus-Courier that the
19
"tail wagging this dog" is the City',s, need for another fire station on the
20
west side of town. She didn't see the nexus. She did not`think the City
21
should sacrifice land for something that could be five or ten years down
22
the road. There is no money for a fire station.
23
1
24
Steve vonRaesfeld, Petaluma, Planning Commissioner, praised the staff
25
report as "very accurate.'' Regarding .the urban separator on Ely Road, he
26
27
noted that as drawn; it averaged about18 feet.'He described a plan
involving reducing the size of some lots thdt would result in the average
28
being raised to about 30 feet. He suggested :that the gateway item and
29
the urban separator°be treated as separate SPARC items. He referred to
30
Sheet C- 13,and noted that Lakeville Highway is higher than the site. He
31
suggested that an underground storm drain be required instead of a v-
32
ditch.
33
34
Mark Albertson, Petaluma; Chair of the Adobe Del Oro Action Group, lives
35
in the neighborhood adjacent to the project. He spoke about why the
36
group opposed previous proposals for this'site, and supports the project
37
presented to Council tonight. He emphasized that careful attention must
38
be given to the treatment of -the frontage on Frates Road. There should be
39
a traffic light at Calle Ranchero,, and a four-way stop at Ely Road. The
40
median should be fully landscaped. Frates Road should be reclassified as
41
a; minor arterial or minor collector. There should .be a two-story height limit
42
on the senior housing element of the project. He thanked Basin Street
43
Properties for working with his group.
44
45
Patricia Tuttle Brown, Petaluma, urged; the Council.to honor the General
46
Plan.and Bicycle Plan that'call for. a 300-foot urban separator. As the
47
developer is proposing this project she did not think it would be a
48
"destination." ,She urged Council to ask Basin Street Properties for what
49
the citizens need_ .
50
51
Scott Vouri, Petaluma, former- Planning Commission member, said 18 feet
52
i0e'ss than the length of a driveway, and not an urban.separator, in his
Vol. XX, Page 14 March 1, 2004
opinion, The development has improved dramatically from what he saw •
as, a Planning Commissioner. He was. troubled by the idea of giving away
part of, the: urban separator to: ;the, development. Every other
development on the east side of Petaluma ,has. honored the 300=foot
buffe? between development and the Urban Growth Boundary. He felt
Petaluma "needed another 20Q,half-a-million. dollar McNansions like we
need holes in our heads." What Petaluma does need is, enough
affordable, workforce housing. He thought if the City`was giving away
urban separator rights, it should. in return stipulate that any,housi'ng built in
the -separator be affordable, workforce housing. He added that several
Planning Commission issues with the project -.have not been resolved. He
urged. Council: to,return the project to'the Planning Commission before
approval.
Len rSvinth,. Petaluma, resident iof Petaluma for 45 years and President of
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties Board of Directors, urged Council to
approve project. He thanked Basin Street Properties for providing
affordable housing in this project.
Dusty Resneck; Petaluma; Pedestrian and. Bicycle. Advisory Committee;
.explained that the com,mittee's goal into encourage people to get out of
their cars.'They wrote up�conditions,of approval - mitigation 10-4.- PBAC
will get to review;each stage. He showed Council the PBAC's proposed
circulation plan that shows five additional cut-throughs to provide public
access. He noted that the Parks and Recreation Department is
understaffed and the City is under a tight budget. He expressed concern
that parks that aremade a•condition of.approval be maintained, as
"there are never really any -,.funds for mainten:ance." He urged Council to
include a mechanism for funding, He was concerned about connectivity
to .other parks: and neighborhoods. He felt a 300-foot�urban separator
along the PG&E easement and Ely Road was important.
Council. Member Healy asked, regarding. the additional access points, if
any involved going through soundwall.
Mr. Resneck confirmed that one did
Paula Cook, Petaluma Ecumenical Properties, spoke on behalf of Vera
Ciammefti, who was out on medical leave. She. conveyed, PEP's support-
for,this project. A condition was placed on the PEP portion-of.:the project
at the January 27 Planning Commission meeting;,requiring a Conditional
Use'P;ermit. She said this would'be an unexpected, and difficult,financial
burden for PEP.
Mayor Glass asked if the Conditional Use Permit requirement was put
there as a mechanism to bring the project back to the Planning
Commission.
Ms.,Allsep agreed.
•
March 1, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 15
1
Mayor Glass asked if the project went back to Planning Commission,
2
could the permit requirement then be waived as the goal would have
3
been achieved.
4
5
Ms. Allsep recommended that Council change the conditions to not
6
require the permit.
7
8
Council Member Torliatt asked if PEP was:purchasing the.site, and if,so,
9
were they paying market rate.
10
1 1
Ms. Cook replied that it was being purchased,for significantly below
12
market, rate.
13
14
Vice Mayor Moynihan explained that he�had talked to Ms. Cook earlier
15
today about providing senior housing on the edge of town and wondered
16
if this would cause hardship for seniors., He asked Ms.. Cook to paraphrase
17
her response..
18
19
Ms. Cook explained that PEP looks at, potential sites to see how close they
20
are'to .amenities. She added that services are available through
21
Paratransit and volunteer drivers who work, through PEP.
22
23
David Alleigh, Petaluma, moved to Petaluma because he could not
24
safely ride his bike in San Francisco. He opposed this project adamantly
25
from the beginning. Tonight he was here in support of the project. He
26
27
thanked Basin Properties -for listening to the community.
28
Connie Madden, Petaluma, supported the'300-foot urban separator,
29
which she sees as "common sense." This is the border between "us and
30
the rural countryside, and should be d° gateway. -Should follow the
31
General Plan and ask, developers to go a •little further in their effort to listen
32
to the community.
33
34
Victor Chechahover, Petaluma, thought back to when there was talk of
35
putting a Wal-Mart or similar big box store. on the site. He thought Basin
36
Street's proposal was much better: Parcel .to, be retained for "future
37
affordable housing." Affordable housing to him means "affordable
38
housing for all`' - no.t just disabled "seniors. He asked if the developer was
39
paying in -lieu housing fees. He had heard, it was necessary to replace
40
sewer plant "immediately" and that was,ten years ago. He asked if studies
41
had shown there would be enough sewer and water to support additional
42
population.
43
44
PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED.
45
46
47
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2004-029 N.C.S. Adoption of Mitigated
48
Negative Declaration for the project: M/S Healy/Harris.
49
50
.Council Member Torliatt announced thatsherwould not be voting in favor
51
of the resolution because she does not believe,there is sufficient evidence
Vol. XX, Page 16
March 1., 2004
on record that there will be an adequate water supply for the
development, and because ;of the urban separator issue.
MOTION carried 4-1-2 as follows:
AYES: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Vice Mayor Moynihan
NOES: Torliatt
ABSENT: O'Brien, Thompson
MOTION -to adopt Resolution 2004-0030 N.C.S.. Amending the General
Plan land ,use designation from '-Specific Plan Area" and "Transit Terminal"
to "Urban Diversified." M/S Healy/Moynihan.
MOTION carried 5-0-2 as follows:
AYES: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Vice Mayor Moynihan, Torliatt
NOES: None
ABSENT: O'Brien, Thompson
MOTION to introduce (First Reading)Ordinance 2178.N.C.S. Rezoning from
the. existing "Study" Zoning classification. to Planned Unit. -Development
(PUD,)..
MOTION .carried 5-0-2 as follows:
AYES: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Vice Mayor. Moynihan, Torliatt
NOES: None
ABSENT:, O'Brien, Thompson
MOTION to adopt, Resolution 2004-0031 N.C.S. Approving the Southgate
Unit, Development Plan grid P.UD• D,e,Veloprnent Standards. M/S
Healy/.Harris.
MOTION carried 3-2-2 as follows:
AYES: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy
,NOES: Vice Mayor Moynihan, Torliatt
ABSENT: O'Brien, Thompson .
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2004-0032,-N.C.S. Approving Vesting
Tentafive: Map and Conditions of- Approval, with amendments' made at the
dais. M/S Healy/Harris.
Council Member Torliatt did not believe the project had public benefit,
apart from ,providing senior housing.
MOTION carried 4=1-2 as follows:
AYES: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Vice Mayor Moynihan
NOES: Torliatf
ABSENT: O'Brien, Thompson
•
•
March 1, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 17
01
2
The following
meeting:
are the amended findings and conditions of approval, as amended at the
3
4
FINDINGS:
5
6
1.
The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is consistent with the
7
provisions of Title 20, Subdivisions, of the Municipal Code (Subdivision Ordinance)
8
and the State Subdivision Map Act.
9
10
2.
That the proposed subdivision, together with provisions, for its design and
1 1
improvements, is consistent with the General Plan, and will not be detrimental to
12
the public health, safety, or welfare in that adequate public facilities exist or will
13
be installed, including roads, sidewalks, water, sewer, storm drains,, and other
14
infrastructure.
15
16
3.
That the site is physically suitable for the density and the type of development
17
proposed.
18
19
4.
That the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause
20
substantial environmental damage, and that no substantial or avoidable injury
21
will occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat_. An Initial Study was prepared
22
indicating that there would be no significant, environmental impacts that could
23
not be mitigated.
24
25
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
6
7
From the Planning Division:
28
29
1. The plans submitted for building permit review shall be in substantial compliance
30
with the Vesting Tentative Map, Unit Development Plan and Preliminary Grading
31
Plan, dated February13, 2004, except as modified by these conditions.
32
33
2. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with the Mitigated Negative
34
Declaration for the, Southgate Residential Development, revised February 20,
35
2004, are herein incorporated by reference as conditions of project approval.
36
37
3. Upon approval by the City Council, the applicant,shall' pay the $35.00 Notice of
38
Determination fee to the Planning Division. The check shall be made payable to
39
the County Clerk. Planning staff will file the Notice of Determination with the
40
County Clerks office within five (5) days after receiving Council approval.
41
42
4. Prior to the approval of Final Map/improvement plans and/or submittal for final
43
Site Plan and Architecture Review approval for the Southgate Residential
44
Development, the applicant shall submit a Master Landscape Plan which
45
includes but is not limited to the following:
46
47
a. Details of the landscape strips and entry features along Frates Road and Ely
48
Road.
49
50
b. Street trees and other landscaping planted along the internal streets.
Vol. XX, Page. 18 March 1, 2004
c. Color and material of sound walls (noise barrier) along Lakeville Highway and
Frates Road. 0
d. Enhanced landscaping adjacent to the pump station at the corner of South
Ely and Frates Roads.
e. Details of the development of the open space and park parcels, including
landscaping, exterior lighting, outdoor furniture, paths and playgrounds.
Prior to the approval of Final Map/improvement plans and/or submittal for final
Site, Plan and Architecture Review approval for the Southgate Residential
Development, the applicant shall apply for an encroachment permit .from
Caltrans for landscaping within the Lakeville Highway (SR 1 16) right-of-way along
the project frontage.
Prior to the approval of Final Map/improvement plans and/or submittal for final
Site Plan and Architecture Review approval for the Southgate Residential
Development, the applicant shall 'contribute toward the cost of a public art
element on the Parcel D gateway/park ,parcel located at the. corner of Lakeville
Highway and Frates Road."Jf the City does not yet have a public .art program in
place,. the applicant shall negotiate a suitable design with the Petaluma Arts
Council.
Prior to the approval of Final Map/improvement plans and/or submittal for final
Site Plan and Architecture Review approval for the Southgate Residential
Development, the applicant shall submit detailed plans for the landscaping and
noise wall along Lakeville. Highway, including landscaping proposed within the
Lakeville Highway (Caltrans) right-of-way, and the two "Gateway" elements
along Lakeville Highway (within Parcels Q and D). These plans; shall be subject to
review and approval by SPARC.
8. Prior to the issuance of building permits, POD Development Guidelines and final
architectural site plans shall be reviewed and approved ,by SPARC.
9. During construction, the applicant shall be required to utilize Best Management
Praefices regarding pesticide/herbicide use and fully commit to Integrated Pest
Management techniques for the protection of pedestrian/bicyclists. The
applicant shall be required to post signs when pesticide/herbicide use occurs to
warn pedestrians and bicyclists.
10. The design, development and dedication of the proposed public park (Parcel C),
shall be completed prior to the occupancy of any individual,housing unit'.
1 1.. Prior to submittal of the Final Map,, the applicant shall designate oa the Final Map
a parcel to be dedicated to the, City of Petaluma, which contains the, sound wall .
and landscaped areaalong both sides of the wall adjacent to Lakeville Highway.
This parcel shall be included in the area maintained by the Community Facilities
District required by Condifion 60, below.
12. Construction and demolition debris shall be recycled to ther maximum extent
feasible in order to minimize impacts on the landfill.
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 19
1
• 2
13. At the time of Final Map submittal, the developer shall submit names for the
internal streets and cul-de-sacs to the Community Development Department for
3
review and approval.
4
5
14. The developer shall require a signed disclosure to property owners of the single-
6
family lot within the Southgate development, indicating that they are aware of
7
the maximum density, building height and setbacks for the future senior housing
8
site, identified on the Vesting Tentative Map as Parcel "A," as established in the
9
PUD Development Standards.
10
11
15. Plant materials to be installed as part of the Landscape Plan shall consist of a
12
minimum of 15 gallon can size for trees and 5 gallon can size for shrubs.
13
14
16. Prior to the approval of Improvement Plans for the proposed development, the
15
applicant shall submit revised PUD Development Standards for the Southgate
16
Residential Development, which address the following:
17
18
a. Clearly specify all permitted and conditionally permitted uses allowed with
19
the Southgate PUD.
20
21
b. Clearly specify the permitted and conditionally permitted accessory
22
structures allowed with the Southgate PUD.
23
1
24
c. Revise Development Standards to be consistent with approved Vesting
25
Tentative Map and Lot/Parcel Numbers; as amended by conditions of
�6
7
approval.
28
d. Future modifications to Unit Development Plan. A Conditional Use Permit
29
(CUP) approved by the Planning Commission shall be required for
30
Senior/Disabled housing on PEP site only if three-story buildings are proposed.
31
32
e. Lots 84-101 and 129-138 shall have minimum 17-foot rear yard setbacks.
33
34
f. Side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of five feet, except on the street side
35
of a corner lot, where the "minimum side yard shall not be less than 10 feet.
36
37
17. Prior to the approval of Improvement Plans for the proposed development, the
38
applicant shall submit a plan that shall reflect the°approved Unit Development
39
Plan for the Southgate Planned Unit Development.
40
41
From the Engineering Division:
42
43
Prior to or concurrent with the Final Map/Improvement Plans submittal and/or submittal
44
for final Site Plan and Architectural Review and approval, the applicant shall provide or
45
address the following:
46
47
Frontage Improvements
48
49
18. Lakeville Highway (State Route 116) - Provide frontage improvements per
50
Caltrans re.quiremehts.'The Bicycle Plan calls for a class II bike lane along Lakeville
01 Highway.
2
Vol. XX, Page 20 March 1, 2004
19. Frates Road. Construct'/2 street improvements along the entire frontage: including
but not limited to: pavement construction and reconstruction, curb, gutter,
sidewalk, striping, streetlights, bike lanes, fire hydrants, and.landscdping.
a. The street section -shall be of least 6 inches of asphalt concrete over 21 inches
of class 2 aggregate base, The developer may, have the existing pavement
evaluated and tested with a recommendation to bring the road section to
arterial standards.
b. The street width shall include two 6-foot bike lanes,. two 12-foot travel lanes
and 12-foot turn lane. Left turn lanes shall be located at intersections.
c. No double left turn lanes shall be allowed.
d. Parking shall not be allowed along Frates Road.
e. ,Prior to the submittal of improvement plans/Final Map; the proposed entry
street at Lakeville :Circle shall be evaluated by a Traffic Engineer for
pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle safety. The evaluation shall include options
for right -in and, right -out only, a median in Frates Road to prevent left turn
movements and an uncontrolled intersection. Recommendations shall be
specific to safety issues. The, applicant shall be responsible for the cost of the
evaluation and peer revibw, if deemed necessary by the City Engineer.
20. Ely Road. Construct -'/2 street improvements along the entire frontage including
- but not limited to: pavement construction and reconstruction, curb, gutter,
sidewalk, striping, streetlights, bike lanes, fire hydrants and landscaping.
a. The street section shall be at least 5 inches of asphalt concrete and 15 inches
of class 2 aggregate base. The '% street width shall include a 12-foot travel
lane and a 6-foot bike lane plus a 12-foot travel lane in the opposite direction
if the existing road conditions;warrant.
b. At the intersection of Frates Road additional improvements shall be necessary
including turn lanes and ;through lanes.
Intersections
21. A traffic signal shall be constructed at the intersection of Calle Ranchero and
Frates Road.
22., - A four-way stop sign shall be, installed at the intersection of Ely Road and Frates
Road. The intersection shall be equipped with enhanced pedestrian safety
features including but not limited to a lighted in -ground pedestrian warning
system and/or other pedestrian safety features as deemed appropriate by the
City Engineer.
23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall deposit a- bond with
the City Clerk for 150% of the design, construction and installation of a traffic
signal at the Frates Road/Ely Road intersection. The bond shall be released at the
discretion of the City Council two (2) years after the last certificate of occupancy
for a single family home is issued for the Southgate Development.
March 1, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 21
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
027
6
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
70
Grading
24. Grading shall conform to the soils investigation report. The soils report shall address
the need for moisture barriers along the back of curb and additional fill over the
existing city utilities in Fates Road;
25. Cut and fill information shall be provided on the improvements plans.
26. Provide the necessary grading and drainage improvements on the City Pump
Station site.
27. Prepare and. submit an erosion control plan, storm water pollution prevention
plan (SWPPP) and a notice of intent (NOI).
28. Any existing structures above or below ground shall be removed if not a part of
the new subdivision. Structures shall include, but are not limited to fences,
retaining walls; pipes, septic systems, wells, debris;, etc.
Streets within Southgate Subdivision
29. Access to Frates Road at Calle Ranchero shall include an ingress lane, a
combination straight and left turn lane and aright turn lane. Face of curb radius
at proposed intersections on Frates Road and Ely Road shall be at least 40 feet.
30. All subdivision streets shall be 'at least 32 feet wide. Single -loaded streets may be
28 feet wide and parking shall be limited to one side of the street. Sidewalks shall
be required on both sides of all streets. Stop signs and'crosswalks shall be required
at applicable. intersections within the subdivision. Pedestrian ramps are required
at all corners. Face of curb radius at interior street corners shall be at least 25-feet.
Street sections at the, sound walls shall include landscaping adjacent to the
sound wall. Modifications to these standards are at the discretion of the City
Engineer.
31. A temporary all-weather turnaround shall be provided on Parcel A (Senior
Housing site) for the two streets ending at Parcel A.
32. All interior streets shall have a minimum street section of 4 inches of asphalt
concrete and 12 inches of class 2 aggregate base.
33. Additional outside turn radius (knuckles) shall be provided at 90-degree
intersections within the subdivision. Modifications to this standard are at the
discretion of the City Engineer.
34. All streets shall be crowned at the center, directing surface drainage to both
sides of the street.
Vol. XX, Page 22
March 1, 2004
1
Site Drainage and Storm Drain System
2
3
35.
The detention pond system shall be designed to prevent any increase in the peak
4
discharge from the project site due to a 100-year storm. Provide a _spillway in the
5
detention pond system and an, over flow path to safely' direct runoff from a storm
6
exceeding 100 years.
7
8
36.
Lot to lot drainage is not allowed without a conduit system and corresponding
9
easement.
10
11
37.
Provide a storm drain system -in Frates Road .and Ely Road per City standards as
12
necessary.
13
14
38.
All hydrologic, hydraulic and storm drain system design shall be reviewed and
15
approved by the Sonoma County Water Agency.
16
17
39.
Access roads and easements shall be provided for public storm drains on private
1.8
property. Easements for public storm drains shall be at least 10 feet wide.
19
20
40.
In, order to reduce the apparent height of the sound wall along Lakeville
21
Highway, the v-ditch shall be filled and an underground storm drainpipe shall be
22
.installed along the Lakeville Highway frontage if necessary. This shall be reflected
23
on the improvement plans submitted to the City.
24
25
Sanitary Sewer and Water Systems
26
27
41.
Storm Drains shall be at least 15 inches in diameter.
28
29
42.
The water main system shall be capable. of delivering a continuous fire flow as
30
designated by the Fire Marshal.
31
32
43.
Fire flow calculations shall be provided.
33
34
44.
The water main connection in Lakeville Highway shall ber eliminated if final fire
35
flow calculations indicate the connection is not needed. -
36
37
45.
Access roads and easements shall be provided for public sanitary' sewer and
38
water mains on private property. Easements. shall be at` -least 10 feet wide.
39
40
46.
Water services shall be 1.5" diameter with 1 " water meters.
41
42
47.
The developer shall be required to construct all on -site and off -site recycled water
43
facilities to provide recycled water to the park and open space parcels for
44
landscape irrigation. Design, operation, and maintenance of the recycled water
45
facilities shall comply with the City's Recycled Water Rules. The off -site facilities
46
shall include all pipelines, reservoirs, valves, connections, and other
47
appurtenances necessary to deliver recycled water from the City's existing
48
recycled water main in Ely Road to the irrigation points of connection for the park
49
and open space parcels. The on -site facilities shall include all components of
50
landscape irrigation systems for the park and open space parcels, beginning at
51
the recycled water service meters.
52
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 23
• 2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
0-2-7
8
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
48. The landscape plan, irrigation plan and grading plan shall comply with the City's
Landscape Water Efficiency Standards. Prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the project, each of these plans and all supporting documents shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval..The Landscape Water Efficiency
Standards shall apply to all common area, open space, park, and subdivision
perimeter landscaping, as well as single-family front yard landscaping.
49. Planting materials shall be selected and assessed using the California Department
of Water Resources' "Guide to Estimating Water Needs of Landscape Plantings in
California," or similar guide. Turf grass shall not be allowed in front yards.
50. The design water budget and landscape water requirements shall be established
for all proposed landscape areas and itemized on the Landscape Design Water
Budget Statement.
Final Map
51. Clearly and accurately show the boundary and dedications on the final map.
52. Provide a 10-foot wide public utility easement on' both sides of all interior streets.
The width of the easement may be reduced, subject to agreement by all
affected public utility companies.
53. A final map technical review fee is due at final 'map application.
Miscellaneous
54. Parcels B-K shall be dedicated to the City of Petaluma.
55. Gas mains or underground electrical mains shall not be allowed on private
property beyond the standard 10-foot public utility easement along the street
frontage.
56. Improvement plans and final map(s) shall be prepared according to the latest
City policies, codes, ordinances, resolutions and standards.
57. If the project is phased, each individual phase shall be designed to provide the
required utility services and street system independent of any other phase.
58. Detention pond maintenance shall include tasks and time intervals for inspection
and maintenance.
59. Formal application- shall be filed for the abandonment of the Old Lakeville Road
between Frates Road and Lakeville Highway. The abandonment shall include
removing the existing public utility easement (PUE) on •APN 017-150-019 (37 acre
site). The formal application shall include a title report, appraisals and legal
descriptions for the areas proposed to be abandoned. The abandonment
process shall be complete prior to final map application.
60. Prior to approval of the final map, the applicant shall establish a Community
Facilities District for maintenance of all land and improvements within Parcels B
through K, Frates Road medians, and the new parcel to be created along
Vol. XX, Page 24 March 1,.2004
Lakeville Highway per Condition 11, including but not limited to all sound walls,
detention ponds, drainage facilities, bicycle/pedestrian passageways and paths,
gateway features and landscaping. The instrument for creating the Community
Facilities District shall be subject to review by City'Staff and the City Attorney, and
approved by the City Council. The ,applicant shall be responsible for the full cost
of establishing the Community Facilities District.
From the Parks and Recreation Department
61. The proposed public park, identified on ' the Vesting Tentative Map as Parcel C,
shall be designed and developed with a playground along the same scale as the
playground recently approved for the Gatti Subdivision. Plans .for the playground
shall meet the approval of the Recreation, Music and Parks Commission, and the
Parks and Recreation staff prior to review and approval by SPARC.
62. The Final Map and Improvement Plans for Southgate shall provide for a
connection of the bike / pedestrian path located in the urban separator to the
frontage road that parallels Lakeville Highway. This connection or passageway
shall be aligned with the. street that is the extension of Caile Ranchero.
Other
63. Prior to submittal of the Final Map, the applicant shall adjust the property line
between the public park (Parcel C) and the, parcel currently identified as Lot 128,
in order to widen the park parcel.
64. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its ,
boards, commissions, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the 'City, its boards, commissions, agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set,aside, void, or annul any of the approvals of the project,
including the certification of associated environmental documents, when such
claim or action is brought within, the time period provided for in applicable State
and/or local statutes. The City shall" promptly notify the" applicants/developers of
any such claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense.
Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a
defense of any claim, action, or, proceeding and if the City chooses to do so
-appellant shall reimburse City for attorneys fees by the City.
Mitigation Measures to be Applied as Conditions of Approval
3.1 All earthwork, grading, trenching, backfilling, and compaction operations shall be
conducted in accordance with the City of Petaluma's Subdivision Ordinance
(# 1046, Title 20, Chapter 20.04 of the Petaluma Municipal Code) and Grading and
ErosiomControl Ordinance # 1576, Title 17, Chapter 17.3'1 of the Petaluma Municipal
Code).
3.2 The project sponsor shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan prepared by
a registered professional engineer as an integral part ofthe grading plan. The
Erosion ,and Sediment Control Plan shall be subject to review and approval of the
Planning Division and Engineering Section, prior to issuance of a grading permit.
The Plan shall include temporary erosion control measures to be used during
construction of cut and fill slopes, excavation for foundations, and other grading Is
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 25
711
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
operations at the site to prevent discharge of sediment and contaminants into the
drainage system, The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall include the following
measures as applicable:
a'. Throughout the construction process, disturbance of groundcover shall be
minimized and; the existing vegetation shall be retained To the extent possible
to reduce soil erosion. All construction' and grading ,activities, including short-
term needs (equipment staging areas, storage areas; and' field office locations)
shall minimize the amount of land area disturbed. Whenever possible, existing
disturbed areas shall.be used for such purposes.
b. All drainage -ways, wetland areas an creek channels shall be protected from
silt and sediment in storm runoff through the use of silt fences, diversion berms,
and check dams. All exposed surface areas shall be mulched. and reseeded
and all cut, -and fill slopes shall be protected with hay' mulch and/or erosion
control blankets as appropriate.
c. Material and equipment for implementation.of erosion control measures shall
be on -site by October 1st. All grading activity shall be -completed by October
15th, prior to the on=set of the rainy season, With all disturbed areas stabilized
and re -vegetated by October 31 St
d. Upon approval 'by the Petaluma City Engineer, extensions for short-term
grading may be allowed. The Engineering -Section in conjunction with any
specially permitted rainy season grading may require special erosion control
measures.
3.3 All construction activities shall meet the Uniform Building Code regulations for
seismic safety (i.e:, reinforcing perimeter and/or load bearing walls, bracing
parapets, etc.).
3.4 All public and private improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for
compliance with. the approved Improvement Plans, prior'to City acceptance.
3.5 Foundation and structural design for buildings shall' conform to the requirements
of the Uniform Building Code, as well as state and local laws/ordinances.
Construction plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Building
Division prior -to the issuance of a building permit. All work shall be subject to
inspection by the Building Division and must conform to all applicable code
requirements and approved improvement plans prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy.
3.6 Prior to issuance,of a grading or building permit, the. project sponsor shall submit a
detailed schedule for field inspection of work in progress to ensure that all
applicable codes, 'conditions and mitigation 'measures- are being properly
implemented through construction of fhe project.
3.7 The Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) shall review and
approve the landscaping. plans, which show how disturbed areas are to be
replanted. Any changes to the landscaping plan as required' by SPARC shall be
incorporated into plans that are submitted for building permit issuance.
Vol. XX, Page 26 March 1, 2004
3.8 Prior to issuance of a grading. permit, building permit or approval, of an
improvement plan or Final Map, 'the project. sponsor -shall provide a Soils
Investigation and G.eotechnical Report. prepared by a registered professional civil
engineer for review and approval of'the City Engineer and Chief. Building Official
in accordance with the. Subdivision Ordinance and Grading and Erosion Control
Ordinance. The soils report shall address site specific soil conditions (i.e. highly
expansive soils) and include! recommendations for, site preparation and grading;
foundation and soil engineering design; pavement design, utilities, roads, bridges
and structures.
3.9 The design of all earthwork, cuts and fills, drainage, pavements, utilities,
foundations and structural- components shall conform with the specifications and
criteria contained in the geotechnical report; as approved by the City Engineer.
Thq;geotechnical engineer,shall.sigh the improvement plans and certify the design
as conforming to the specifications. The geotechnical engineer shall also inspect
the construction work and shall certify to the City, prior to acceptance of the
improvements or issuance of' a certificate of occupancy, that the improvements
have been, constructed in accordance with the geotechnical specifications.
Constructionand improvement plans shall 'be reviewed for conformance with the
geotechnical specifications by the Engineering Section of the Community
Development Department and the Chief Building Offic ial. prior to issuance of
grading or building permits and/or advertising for bids on. public .improvement
projects. Additional soils information may be required by the Chief Building
Inspector during the plan check of building plans in accordance with Title 17 and
20 of the Petaluma Municipal, Code.
4.1 The Project sponsor shall incorporate Best Management Practices into grading, Is
building and/or improvement plans, and clearly indicate these provisions in the
plan specifications. The construction contractor shall incorporate the following
measures into the required Erosion .and Sediment Control Plan to limit fugitive dust
and: exhaust emissions during construction:
a. Grading and construction equipment .operated during construction activities
shall be properly mufflered and maintained to minimize emissions. Equipment
shall be turned off when not in use.
b. Exposed soils shall be watered periodically during construction, a minimum of
twice daily. The frequency of watering shall be increased if wind speeds
exceed 15 mph. Only purchased, city water or reclaimed water shall �be used
for this purpose. Responsibility for wafering, to include weekends and holidays
when work is not in progress.
c. Construction sites involving earthwork shall provide for a gravel pad area
consisting of an impermeable liner and drain rock at the construction
entrance to clean mud and debris from construction vehicles prior to entering
the public roadways. Street surfaces in the vicinity of the project shall be
routinely swept and cleaned of mud and dust carried onto the street by
construction vehicles.
d. During excavation activities,. haul trucks used to transport soil shall utilize tarps
or ;other similar covering devices, or maintain at least two feet of freeboard to
reduce dust emissions.
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 27
1
2
e.
Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non -toxic) soil stabilizers on all
3
unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites.
4
5
f.
Sweep daily (with: water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas,
6
and staging ,areas and sweep streets daily (with, water sweepers) if visible soil
7
material is deposited onto the adjacent roads.
8
9
g.
Hydroseed or apply (non -toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive, construction areas
10
11
(previously graded areas that are inactive for 10 days or more).
12
h.
Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non -toxic) soil binders to exposed
13
stockpiles.
14
15
i.
Limit trafficspeeds on any unpaved roads to, 15 mph.
16
17
j.
Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to
18
public roadways.
19
20
k.
Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as, quickly as possible. Post -construction
21
re -vegetation, repaving or soil stabilization of exposed '.soils shall be
22
completed in a timely manner according to the approved Erosion and.
23
Sediment Control Plan and verified by City inspectors prior to'acceptance of
24
improvements or issuance of Certificate of O,ccu,pancy.
25
I.
If necessary; install windbreaks, or use trees/vegetative windbreaks at the
026
7
windward side(s) of construction areas to prevent visible dust clouds from
28
affecting nearby sensitive uses (e.g., residences).
29
30
m.
Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts)
31
exceed 25 mph a_nd visible dust emission cannot be prevented from leaving
32
the construction site(s)'.
33
34
n.
Limit areas subject to disturbance during_ excavation, grading, and other
35
construction activity at any one time.
36
37
o.
Project sponsor shall designate a person with authority to require increased
38
watering to monitor the dust and erosion control program and provide name
39
and phone number to the City of Petaluma prior to- issuance of grading
40
permits.
41
42
p.
If applicable, the project sponsor shall obtain operating permits from the Bay
43
Area Air Qualify Management District, and shall provide evidence of
44
compliance prior to requesting a Certificate: of Occupancy. The Planning
45
Department and/or Building Division shall' verify that the project sponsor has
46
obtained an operating permit and that .the facilities conform to the permit
47
requirementsprior to authorizing'the Certificate of Occupancy.
48
49
5.1 All
construction activities shall be performed in a manner that minimizes the
50
sediment
and/or pollutants entering directly or indirectly into the storm drain
4 1 system or ground water. The project sponsor shall incorporate the following
02 provisions into the construction plans and specifications, to be verified by the.
Vol. XX, Page 28 March 1, 2004
Community .Development Department, prior to 'issuance of grading, or building
permits.
a., The project sponsor shall designate on the. improvement plans, construction
.staging areas and areas for the storage of any hazardous materials (i.e.,
motor oil, fuels, paints, etc.) to be used 'during construction. All construction
staging areas shall be located away from any drainage areas to prevent
runoff' from construction areas from entering into the drainage system. Areas
designated for storage of hazardous. materials shall include proper
containment features to prevent contamination from entering drainage
areas in the event of a spill or leak.
b. No debris, soil, silt, sand, cement; concrete, or washing thereof, or 'other
construction related materials .or wastes, soil or' petroleum products or other
organic or earthen material shall be allowed to enter any drainage system. All
discarded material including washings and any accidental spills shall be
removed and disposed .of at an approved disposal site.. The project sponsor
shall designate appropriate disposal methods and/or facilities on the
construction plans or in. the specifications.
5.2 The project sponsor shall submit a detailed grading and drainage .plan for review
and approval by the ,Engineering Section and. the Planning Division prior to
approval of any improvement plans "or the; issuance of a; grading permit. Project
grading and all site drainage improvements shall be designed and constructed in
conformance with the City of Petaluma Engineering Department's "'Standards
Specific_ ations," and, with the ,Sonoma County Water Agency's "Flood Control
Design Criteria," if applicable. Drainage plans shall include supporting
calculations of storm drain and culvert size using acceptable engineering
methods. All hydrologic, hydraulic, and storm drain system design, if applicable,
shall be subject to the review and approval of the Sonoma County Water
Agency (SCWA), and the City Engineer.
5.3 The project sponsor shall pay all applicable Storm Drainage 'Impact Fees prior -to
final inspection or issuance of',a Certificate of Occupancy.
5.+ The project sponsor shall submit Sonoma County Water Agency letter of
approval.,
5:5 The project sponsor shall develop :and implement a comprehensive Urban Runoff
Control. Plan submitted for review and approval of the Planning, ;Division prior to
approval of improvement plans; or issuance of ,grading or building permits. At a
minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify "specific types and sources of storm water
pollutants; (2) determine the location and: nature- of potential impacts, and (3)
specify and incorporate appropriate control measures into .the project design
and improvement plans. Constructidn plans shall be reviewed by the Planning
Division for conformance with the Urban Runoff Control Plan prior to approval of
improvement plans or issuance of grading or building permits. City inspectors shall
inspect the improvements and verify compliance prior to acceptance of
improvements or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. urban Runoff Control
'Programs shall=include the following as appropriate:
40
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 29
1
a. Pesticides and fertilizers shall not be applied to public landscape areas or any
2
maintenance access way during the rainy season.
3
4
b. All drainage improvement plans shall include installation of permanent signs
5
(concrete stamps or equivalent) at each storm drain 'inlet. The sign at each
6
inlet shall read "No Dumping, Flows To The Petaluma River" or•equivalent, and
7
shall be installed at the time of construction and verified prior to acceptance
8
of public improvements or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
9
10
5.6
The developer shall be required to construct all on -site and off -site recycled water
11
facilities to provide recycled water to the park and open space parcels for
12
landscape irrigation. Design, operation, and maintenance of the recycled water
13
facilities shall comply with the City's Recycled Water Rules.
14
15
7.1
All construction activities shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday
16
through Friday and (9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall be
17
prohibited on Sundays and all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma,
18
unless a permit is first secured from the City Manager (or his/her designee) for
19
additional hours. There will be no start up of machines nor equipment prior to 8:00
20
a.m., Monday through Friday; no delivery of materials nor equipment prior to 7:30
21
a.m. nor past 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; no servicing of equipment past
22
6:45 p.m., Monday through Friday. Plan submitted for City permit shall include the
23
language above.
24
25
7.2
All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall be
26
properly muffled and maintained to minimize noise. Equipment shall be turned off
07
when not in use.
28
29
7.3
Construction maintenance, storage, and staging areas for construction
30
equipment shall avoid proximity to residential areas to the maximum extent
31
practicable. Stationary construction equipment-, such as compressors, mixers,
32
etc., shall be placed away from residential areas: and/or provided with acoustical
33
shielding: Quiet construction equipment shall be used when possible.
34
35
7.4
The project sponsor shall designate a Project Manager with authority to implement
36
the mitigation measures who will be responsible for responding to any complaints
37
from the neighborhood, prior to issuance of a building/grading permit. The Project
38
Manager shall determine the cause of noise complaints (e.g. starting too early,
39
faulty muffler, etc.) and shall take prompt action to correct the problem.
40
41
7.5
Prior to the approval of Improvement Plans 'for the Southgate Subdivision, the
42
project sponsor shall submit an acoustical report prepared by a qualified
43
acoustical professional, which demonstrates that the specified location,
44
construction and height of the proposed noise walls will provide the mitigation
45
necessary to comply with the Ldn 45 (interior) and Ldn 60 (exterior use areas) noise
46
standards for residential and open space uses, as established in the City of
47
Petaluma General Plan. The acoustical report shall be subject to peer review and
48
shall be approved by the Director of Community Development prior to approval of
49
the Final Map.
50
41 7.6 The project sponsor shall submit an acoustical report(s) prepared by a qualified
2 acoustical professional, which demonstrates that the proposed applicable interior
Vol. XX, Page 30, March 1, 2004
and exterior noise standards as established by general plan noise policies shall be
met. Said report shall be submitted in conjunction with applications. for Site Plan
and Architectural Review for each phase of development, including park and
future affordable housing uses. The report shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Division prior to `issuance of a building permit for that phase of
development. The report shall include but not be limited to the following:
a. Recommendations regarding placement of buildings, and/or installation of
sound walls that would shield roadway noise from exterior use areas in order to
meet City noise standards.
b. Sound transmission class ratings (STC) for windows and floor/ceiling assemblies
on multi -family residential units necessary to achieve Ldn of 45 dBA interior
noise level, as well 'as STC levels between units.
c. The need for modified exterior wall constructions at second floor rooms along
the roadways necessary to achieve Ldn of 45-dBA interior noise level. These
modifications may include extra" layers of gypsum board or additional stud
framing:
d. Plans submitted for a building permit shall conform to the specifications
identified in this study.
7.7 All land uses shall conform to the Performance Standards listed in Section 22-300 of
the Petaluma Zoning Code.
8.1 All exterior lighting shall be directed onto the project site ,and access ways and is
shielded to prevent glare and intrusion onto adjacent residential properties. Plans
submitted for project review and approval shall ,incorporate lighting plans, which
include photometric plans of active open space areas, and identify the location
and design of all proposed exterior lighting, including streetlights.
8.2 Detailed site plans, architectural plans, landscape plans, including details for
exterior lighting and sound walls shall conform to the Site Plan and Architectural
Review Design Guidelines and shall be subject to review by the City's Site Plan and
Architectural Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits.
8.3 All ,new and existing overhead utilities (except for high voltage transmission lines)
shall be placed underground.
8.4 Development plans shall be designed to avoid vehicular lighting impacts to
bedroom areas and other light-sensitive living areas of .any nearby residential lot,
home or facility. Development plans for lots proposed at street intersections or in
.other potentially light-sensitive locations shall incorporate, architectural or
landscape design features to screen interior living space from the headlight glare.
10.1 A four way stop control or traffic signal shall be installed at the Frates Road
intersection with Calle Ranchero.
10.2 A four way stop control or a traffic signal shall be installed at Frates Road
intersection with South Ely Road.
March 1, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 31
1
2
10.3
Stop controls shall be provided for exiting the project at the proposed access point
at Lakeville Circle.
3
4
10.4
The project shall comply with the requirements of the City of Petaluma Bicycle
5
Plan. Plans for each phase of site development shall be referred to the Pedestrian
6
and Bicycle Advisory .Committee (PBAC) for review and comment to ensure
7
compliance with the City Bicycle Plan.
8
9
10.5
The project sponsor shall provide a Traffic Control Plan for review and approval of
10
the City's Traffic Engineer, prior to issuance of a building or' grading permit. At
1 1
least one lane of traffic in each direction shall be maintained at all times through
12
the construction period, unless a temporary .detour plan. is submitted -and
13
approved the City Traffic Engineer. Heavy construction traffic ,and haul trucks
14
shall avoid school zones between school arrival and departures times. During
15
non -working hours, open trenches and construction hazards shall be provided
16
with signage, flashers, and barricades approved by the Street Superintendent to
17
warn oncoming motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians of potential safety hazards.
18
19
10.6
All, road surfaces shall be restored to pre -project conditions after completion of
20
any, project -related utility installation activities. All trench pavement restoration
21
within existing asphalt streets shall receive a slurry seal. If the trench cut is within
22
the parking strip, then only the parking strip needsl a slurry seal. Otherwise, half the
23
street shall receive a slurry seal.
24
25
10.7
Any pedestrian access through and/or adjacent to the project site shall remain
26
unobstructed during project construction or an alternate route established as
0-7
approved by the Police Chief and City Engineer.
28
29
10.8
Frontage improvements shall be installed in accordance with the City's Street
30
Standards to provide for safe access to and from the site. Turning lanes,
31
acceleration and deceleration lanes, curb cuts, median islands, signing and
32
striping shall be incorporated into the design plans as required by the City's Traffic
33
Engineer. Pedestrian and bicycle access connecting the City's bikeways and
34
pedestrian circulation through the site shall be incorporated into the
35
development plan. Improvement or construction plans shall be subject to review
36 .
and approval of the Traffic Engineer prior to issuance of a grading or building
37
permit. All street frontage improvements shall be constructed to City standards
38
and inspected by City Inspectors prior to final inspections or acceptance of
39
improvements.
40
41
10.9
The project sponsor shall be responsible for .the payment of the City's Traffic
42
Mitigation Fees. Traffic Mitigation Fees shall be calculated at the time of issuance
43
of a building permit and shall be due and payable before final inspection or
44
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
45
46
10.10
The project sponsor shall upgrade the existing transit .stop on Frates Road as
47
necessary to include a bench, shelter and pedestrian access, subject to review
48
and approval by the City of Petaluma Transit Coordinator.
49
50
10.11
The project sponsor shall be responsible for a fair -share contribution to fund to the
1
construction of signal and/or other improvements at the Frates /Adobe Road
Vol. XX, Page 32 earth 1, 2004
1 intersection. The fair -share contribution shall be based upon the project's
2 contribution to the cumulative traffic projected for this intersection.
3
4 15.1 If, during the course of construction, cultural, archaeological or paleontological
5 -:resources are uncovered at the site (surface or subsurface resources) work shall
6 be halted immediately within 50 meters (1.50 feet) of the find until it can be
7 evaluated by a qualified professional archaeologist. The City of Petaluma
8 Planning Division and a qualified archaeologist (i.e., an arch aeologisi''registered
9 with the Society of Professional Archaeologists) shalt be immediately_ contacted
10 by the responsible individual present on=site. When contacted', Community
11 Development Department staff and the archaeologist shall immediately'visit the
12 site to determine the extent of the resources and to develop proper mitigation
13, measures required for the discovery.
14
15
16 ADJOURN
17
18 The meeting, was adjourned at 1 1:42 p.m:
_19
20
21
22
23
24 David Glass, Mayor
25
26
27 ATTEST:
28
29
30
31
32
33 Gayle, Petersen, City Clerk
34
35
36
37
38 Claire Cooper,, Deputy City Clerk-
39
40
41 APPROVED AS TO FORM:
42
43
44
45
46 Richard R. Rudnansky, City Attorney
47
48
49
0