HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 1.A-Minutes 09/13/20041
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
i0
11
• 13
13
14.
15
1.6
17
18
19'
20
21.
22
23
24.
25.
26
.27
28
29
30
31
32
33
3'4
35
36
37
38
39
August 16; 2004- L °
L September 1, 2004
Cif .of Pet du a California
?8 MEETING OFT PETALUMA CITY CO'UNCIL%PETALUMA COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT _C:OMNIISSION
DRAFT City .Council %PCbC Minutes
Monday, August`14, 2004 - 3;00 P.M.
Regular Meeting
CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M.
A.. Roll Call
B.
C.
Present: Healy; Mpynihan;, O'Brien, Thompson, Torliatt, Mayor Glass
Absent: Harris
Pledge of' Allegiance
Moment of Silence
PUBLIC COMMENT
There were none.
COUNCIL COMMENT
Council Member O'Brien asked if the sidewalk project that was to be finished in : July 2003
was available for Council's review or its status if the. report wasn't finished.
Council Member`Torlid indicated sidewalk'maintenance was on a future agenda.
Council Member Torliatt' gave, an update from the Animal Services Advisory Committee
regarding an rnaill asking Councilr to oppose SB 1548: regarding canine ear cropping.
The
p ng the bill, chose to not take action at this time because of
the short n�the future they will be looking at this legislation and "make
recommendations to Council :tolsupport /oppose this practice.
She ; also, reported bn the challenge 'to Cotdf' r Rent Stabilization /Mobile Home
Ordinance and :;asked, Council to support Cotati_ wifh' a ,resolution to prevail against this
litigation, which may have statewide significance: She reported from the Water Advisory
Committee meeting 'concerning the new "Peaking Allocation ": that will be proposed in
City y g, . g
the new Memorandum. of 'Understandm that Council will be considering next mont h.
She felt the was!
as okay the allocation.
She commented "on theNotice of Preparation of the Draft'Environmental Impact Report
for General Plan and referred to the merno!'fhat was soliciting for concerns now. She
stated she was conceme.d about how' to ask the community to comment on an
'alternative that hasn't been chosen yet.
a
Vol. XX, Page 2 August 16, 2004
1 Mayor Glass thanked Council Member Thompson for pariicipaf1hg in the trip. to
2 Washington, D.C. to complete the flood . control project. The City's request was for $4.4
3 million.
4
5 CITY MANAGER COMMENT
6
7 There was none.
8
9 AGENDA CHANGES AND'DELETIONS (Changes to current agenda only).
10
11 There were none.
12
13 P RES ENTATIONS/PROCLAMAtfo
14
15 There were none.
16
17 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
18
19 11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
20
21 A. City Council/PCDC Regular Meeting Minutes ,of June 21, 2064:
22 B. City Council/PCDC Regular Meeting ,Minutes °of July 12, 2004.
23 D. City Council/ - PCDC Regular Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2004.
24
25 MOTION to approve the June 21,. July 12 and July 19, 2004 Minutes :as,
26 submitted:
27
28 M/S.3orliatt/O'Brien. CARRIED, UNANI MOOSILY.
29
30 C. Ci ty Council/IPCDC Budget Workshop: Meefih' Minutes 4of Ju �ly 14, 2004.
31
32 MOTION to approve the July 14, 2004 Minutes as submitted:
33
r
-
34 M/S to rdtf/Moynihan. CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
35
36 AYES, Hedly, Thompson, Moynihan, Glas's and'Tb
37 'NOES: None
38 ABSENT: Harris -
39 ABSTAIN` O'Brien
40
41 - 2. APPROVALOF PROPOSED AGENDA
42
?4,pp
43 A. App roval C . if . PropOsed Agenda for Co6n"cil'S'Spedial Meeting of August 23,
44 2004:
45
46 City Manager Bierman referred to a: revision with a Closed Session from
47 6!00 pxh. to 7`00 p.m., followed. by Open Session at 7 p.m.
48
49 MOTION to approve the agenda:
,50
51 M/S O'Bfien/Torliaft. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:
52
51 Consent. Calendarfor,separate discussion. '
52
August 1.6, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 3
B osed Agenda, . for Council',s, Regular. Meeting of
2
September 2004
13,
3
4
Council Meml;er Healy ire_ quested, moving, the Casa Grande Site item to
.5
the :evening agenda due to: a .scheduling conflict, and to move the
6
Sweed School item to the end since be lives within 500 feet of the project
7
and.will not be. participdfing. .
8.
9
MOTION to approve`the agendas
10
1 1
- 'M /S Torliatt %Healy: CARRIED °UNANIMOUSLY:.
1:2
13 3.
CONSENT'CALENDA. R
14
15
Council Mem ber Torliatt asked thdt;1D and 3.1 be removed.
16
17
Council Member Healy asked that 31 be rerrioved.
18
19
Counci '
I 'Member 0 B rien also.asked' that 3:D b removed.
;e
20
21
MOTION to adopt 'the balance of the, Consent Calendar:
22
23
M/S O' Brien /Torliaft. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.'
24
25
A. Resolution 2004 -143 N.0 -:S. Accepting the Claims and Bills from July 2004.
26
.,(Nett.er), .
•
27
28
B. Resolution 200'
4- 144.'N.CS. =Authorizing fhe'City Manager to Execute the
29
Agreement Between ABAG Power anti ;the City of Petaluma to, Wind Up
.30
Electric Program. (Bari)
32
200
C. Resolution -T45 N.C.S'. Accepting; the C
Completion of the Phase 1
33
Recycled
sled Water Pipeline Project-.
y p j ct -. The . Project Involved Installing
34
Approximately 19;000 Feet of Recycled Water Pipeline . to Convey
35
Secondary Recycl from the Oxidation Ponds to Rooster Run Golf
36
Course in the Near Term and to Serve Other Locations in the Long. Term.
37
Final, Contract 'Cost: $2,700,000: Funding Sources: Sewer Funds and
38
Sonoma County Water .Agency. Recycled Water Tier 2 Funding Program.
39
Contractor. TerraCo:n Pipelines, Inc. (Ban)
41
D. Resolution Accepting 'Completion, of the '2003 =2004 Traffic Signal
42
Modification Project 3306 71. Funding . Source: Traffic Mitigation.
43
(SKladzien /Castaldo , i ) , This iterii was removed from the Consent Calendar
44
for separate discussion.
45
46
E. Resolution Encouraging the. California, Coastal Conservancy, .California
47
Wildlife Conservation Board, and the California Parks and Recreation
48
Department. to Support the Sonoma County ''Open' Space District and
49
Board of Supervisors in Acquiring ',the `Tolay Lake Ranch Property as a
50
Regional -Park for Sonoma •.County. This item was removed from the
51 Consent. Calendarfor,separate discussion. '
52
Vol. XX, Page -4 August 16, 2004
F. Resolution 2004146 X.C.-S. Approving the Phase ll Find]. Map for the
Stratford Place /Gatti Subdivision. Bates /Moore) •.
G. Resolution ,2004 -147 N.CS. Authorizing City Manager to Sign. all Forms,
Certifications,. Authorizations, 'and. Requests for Authorizations Related to
State= Administered Federal Funding - Projects. (Goeb]er)
H. Resolution 2004 =148 .'N.C.S. Authorizing Grading Prior to Final Map
Approval 'for Phase'I of Southgate.Subdivislion. (Bates /Moore)
L Resolution Awarding the Petaluma' Senior Center Expansion Project to
Carr's Construction of Windsor; Authorizing the Use of Proposition 40 (Park
'Bonds) Monies to Augment the' Project Budget; and Authorizing Staff to
Work with the Contractor Through Values Engineering to Bring, the
Contract Price Within Allowablo:'Budgetary• Limits. (Carr) This item was
removed from the: Consent Calendar'forseparate discussion':
Items Removed for Separate Discussion:
D., Resolution 2004149 N.C. S. Accepting Completion of the 2003 =20.04 Traffic
Signal M'odificati'on Project 3306 - - 1 - . Funding Source` Traffic' Mitigation.
(Skladzien %Castaldo) ' .
Council Member Torliatk 'asked'' for additional information on 3:D. to
provide statistic 'iriformation to show that the five- element ; heads.,
in use at various intersections. have reduced accidents and vehicle idling
time.
Director- Ri'ck.iSkladzien. said he would provide this° information and that he
and 'the-Assistant' Traffic -Engineer reviewed - accident reduction' for left -'turn - -
movement only. The timesaving information willbe provided as well..
MOTON to adopt the resolution
M%S Torliatt and`Thompson. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
E. Resolution' 2004 -150 N:C.S Encouraging the California ' Coastal
Conservancy, California Wildlife Conservation Board, and the California
Parks and 'Recre,ation iDepartrnent to Support' the Sonoma County Open
Space District and Board of Supervisors in Acquiring the Tolay Lake Ranch
Property as a Regional :Park'forSonoma County:
Council Member Healy stated he would not support this and requested a
motion.
PUBLIC COMMENT
David Yearsley,; Pefaluma Riverkeeper , Explained the. ;im, portance of
Petaluma's full support for this acquisition. He, has .driven the road. 'in
school bus and is familiar with access to the property.. He stated that due
to the timeline requiremenfs of the acquisition: it was' importan't°to move •
on it.
r�
August1 6, 2004 Vol'.'XX, Page 5
'2
- timely acquisition of the
Grant Davis, T he Bay IhOifi.; Supporfedl the
3
Tolay property 10 create a wonderful regional park and asked for full
4
Council support.
5
'
6 '
MayorGlass cl
� used public'comment.
7
8
Council, Mem_ ber Healy explained his action on this item. His concern
9
bout realistic chance of obtaining° pa rtnership funds had been partially
a' ,
10
addressed with the support from the Wildlife Conservation Board, .on other
11
properties. The other issue of concern wa"s the disparage treatment and
1.2
standards for Sonoma Mountain Road, and Manor Lane as compared to
13
access to. the Cardbza property.
14
15
MOTION to adopt the resolution:
16
17
M/S Torlia`ff /Moynihan. CARRIED BY•THE'FOLLOWING VOTE:
18
1 9
AYES: Glass, M'oynihan,.,0?Brien, Thompson, Torliatt
20
NOES; Heal'
Y
21
ABSENT; Harris - (NOTE. Council Member Harris vote_ d in favor of the
22
priorresolution on this item.)
23
24
I. Resolution 2004 -1°S1 N.C.S Awardin, g the Petaluma Senior Center
25
Expansion Proje_ ct to Carr's Construction of Windsor, Authorizing the Use of
26
Proposition 40 (Park Bonds) Monies to Augment the Project Budget, and
27
Authorizing Staff to Work with the Contractor °Through Values Engineering
29
to Bring e Contract Price WithinAllowable Budgetary' Limits. (Carr)
g
,
30
Council '`Member Torliatt asked' what projects would potentially be
31
u eliminated. She asked. about tipmin'g� .for 'the skylights 'to allow -for later
32
installation -
33
34
Director' Jim Carr stated that no , projects were to be eliminated. He said
35
dues to the, size and the design for'theskylights they could not be framed
36
for later installation. With the necessary changes, to the roof's engineering,
37
he said of ie' asf two of the skylights would b6 installed in the reception
38
area and hopefully the office area.
39
40
MOTION, to adopt the Resolution:
41
42
M/S Torliatt /O'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
43
44 4..
Pugut6 HEARINGS
4'S
46
A. Public Hearing Re: Resolution 2004 -.152'. N.0 S. Authorizing th'e Allocation
47
of FY 04 =05 Supplemental "Law Enforcement Service,Funds (SLESF) for the
48
Compufer Aided Dispatch /Records Management System (CAD /RMS)
49
'(Net ter /R'ubaloff)
50
r�
M
Vol. XX, Page 6
August 1 2004
Director Joe Netter explained that this is an annual appropriation for
2 public safety purposes funded' through 'state . in the amount of
3 approximately $110,000.
4
5 Mayor Glass opened the public hearing and hearing no requests to speak,
6 thepdblic: hearing was closed.
7
q8 MOTION to,aclopt the res.olufi6n,
9
10 M
/S O'Brien/TPNiatt- CARRIED',UNA.NINOUSLY.
12 13: Public Hearing and Resolution 2064-153 :N.C:S., Confirmation of Cost of
13 Abatement of'Weeds. (Ginn) -
14
15 Fire Marshall,'Girfn asked Council to affirm the cost of weed ,abatement.
16 The names of the 13 property owners who did not pay would be
17 forwarded to the Assessor's Office for collection of the outstanding.f6es.
18
19 'Mayor Glass opened the public . hearing and hearing no requests to speak,
20 the public- 'hearing was closed;
21
22 -MOTION to adopt the resolution:
23
24 m/& b.Brien/Moynihan.. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
25
26 UNFINISHED BUSINESS," CITY COUNCIL AND PCDC
27
28 A. Viscussion of Rule 20A Underground Utility Districts, Designating Bodega
29 Avenue as Priority 1, and the Intersection of Old Redwood
80 Highway/j,ndustricil Avenup/Stqny; .Point Road as Priority 2 Underground
31 Districts, and ,Resolution 2004'154 _X.Q.S. Setting Date and Time of the
H - ring for Rod A -
32 Public ea . ven ue Underground District.
33 (Skladzien/Lackie)
34
35 Director of Public Facilities and Services - Rick Sklacizi6h introduced Project
36 Manager Susan Lac k1e ��vhb' . gave the project report with the history and
37 extent of the improvements to,156clepa Avenue and the "Old Redwood
38 Highvyay/Indusfrial Avenue/Stony Rodd. intersections. She explained
39 the"Rufe2OA funding allocation process -for the Council's consideration:
40
41. Council Member Heodly encouraged staff to convert the In'dustrial/Stony
42 Pt. Road /Petaluma Boulevard. North from Rural. .20B to 20A to take
43 advantage of: PG funds and save Redevelopment funds. He - had a
44 question °regqrcling . the prognosis for the actual: dollars to back-up the
45 allocations at this time.
46
47 Shawn Hoover, PG&E Project Manager answered, that the funding for Rural
48 20A had not been allocated. f or.2005 and beyond. She did, not know what -
49 funding would be and could not guarantee that PG&E could fbndthis
50 in 20;05. The funding for engineering must be allocated first to make the
51: construction dollars follow.
52
August 16, 2004 Vol, XX Page;7
1
Council Member Torliatt asked when PG&E's fiscal year runs and when
.2
would the budget be 'determined.
Ms. HooveC answered' that they usually do -not know until late in the fourth
5
quart er'of the calendar year.
6
7
Council , Merrib.er Healy was concerned about the funding and wanted
8
Council -to weigh with the,Leagu'e of California, Cities; he will pursue this.
9
10
Vice, Mayor Moynihan asked what this would cost ratepayers.
1 . 1
12
Ms.. Hoover explained that this prOgrarn IS mandated 'and, when the
13
project is operative its cost are put .into, the system -wide rate base; she
14
could not give an amount.
15
16
Mayor Glass clarified that this project addresses safety" and service issues
17
rather than just, aesthetics.
18
19
Ms'. Hoover explained that it ,is harder to locate /repair problems
20
underground.
21
22
Council Member Torliatt, mentioned the .Lakeville Highway gateway as a
23
potential Rural 2% project. She suggested that when .the Old Redwood
24
Highway area street iMprovements are ehgineered;'it should be looked at
25
to install conduits as was done with Bodega .Avenue. She would like a list
26
of Rural '20B projects_ as,
27
28
Council Member Healy explained that the project was :time- sensitive to
29
begin the engineering budgeting pro'cess recommendation to use
30
the 20A for Industrial /Stony Point was not as time- sensitive. He stated
31
Lakeville: was much more expensive because of the length of the project
32
and would require the use of 20B Redevelopment funds for repaving. He
33
felt he substitution of,20B for20A; slowdown the: Lakeville project.
34
35
Council Member Torliatt was concerned that this was to be an Assessment
36
District rather than affecting,;ratepayers in the community.
37
38
Director. of Economic :Developmenfi and Redevelopment Paul Marangella
39
expldined that for Lakeville, Council had approved ;the design and would
40
- allow considering the, feasibility of creating an .A'ssessrnent District but
41
there would be,some Redevelopment seed money too.
42
43
Council .Member T.orliatt was concerned 'about establishing Assessment
44
Districfs'in some areas but not others.
45
46
Ms. Lackie explained that p it was a timing issue with the Old Redwood
47
Highway project being about ten years away. Lakeville Highway was a
48
higher priority for the !Redevelopment area.
49
i
50
Mr. Marangella "explained that the engineering would be done next year
51
for Lakeville and a budget 'recommendation'for the Spring /Summer, so it
52
would be; about a two - year horizon.
Vol. XX; Page 8
August 16, 2004
Council Member Thompson asked the PG&E Project `Manager what the
next steps�would be to, take the Bodega Avenue project forward:
Ms.. Hoover, answering Council Member Thompson's questions explained
the;'next steps would be to begin the Bodega Avenue project. She
explained there would be a tormaiized walk with all the utility companies
present to determine where riser poles will. `be installed; right -of -ways; and
who would be the lead engineer. /contractor to create the composite.
PG&E requires a composite:.before budg „eting' could be presented to the
Rule: 20A Program Manager in Son Francisco. The, process is an internal',
forum, usudlly in October , or .November; when PG&E representafives , such.
as she all negotiate for available money.
Mayor Glass clarified that this is an allocation of funds and that the 'City is .
going to request the funds.
MOTION,to;adopt the resolution:
M/S Moynihan /Healy. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
'B. Adoption (Second, Reading) of Ordinance 2188 N.C.S. Providing for
Appropfiati_on• of Funds for the Operation of the City of' Petdluma; CA from
July '1, 2004 through June 30, 2005. (Total Appropriations $146,584,7 00, All
City Funds,. including Petaluma..Community Development c ��
ommission
(PCDC), Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) and the Low to Moderate
Income Housing Programs /,.,Projects.
Vice Mayor Moynihan said he felt, this budget reduced services to the
community for .things such as park and ,street maintenance and that the
Service and Supply expenditures are ;under - funded - and will need_;
adjustment: He didn't support the .employee compensation increases and,
felt theywere overpaid which results in shorting service levels.
MOTION to adopt the ordinance:
M%S O'Brien /Healy. CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE;
AYES: Healy, O' Brien,. Thompson, Torliatt, Glass
NOES;: Moynihan
ABSENT: Harris
1. Resolution. 2004 -1:55: N.C.S. Adopting the Council 'S "ulxommittee's
Recommendations for'the =Allocation of Transient Occupancy Tax
Funding for FY 04/05, . Funding Source: $300,000 General Fund and
$90,000 PCDC (Bierman)
City Manager Bierman explained the committee's
for funding..
Vice. Mayor Moynihan questioned the City Manager's earlier
recommendation for not funding non - profits and the Visitors Program.
•
August 16, 2004 VoL.XX, Page 9
J,
�
2
Ci Maria er Bierman ex Idined 'his recommenda changed
tY 9 p c g due
3
. _tion -
to the Council vote of'5 _ 1 to ena'ct `budget.
4
p
5
Vice Mayor Moynihan ! ,questioned this funding when services are
6
being cut_ He requested the sub- committee to explain why they are
7
recommending this funding to non- profits.
8
9
Mayor Glass - answered J that he 'originally agreed with. not funding
10
these programs but when Council agreed to fund the Visitors Bureau,
11
he didn't feel it made se,n "se hot to fund other fine programs,
12
especially with the community response in support of funding these
.13
programs..
14
15
Council, Member Torli aft explained that funding,,ithe Visitors 'Program
16
would help , achieve the $'1 million in TOT funds that are budgeted this
17
year.."'
18
19
Council Member O!Brien lagreecl with 1 h Mayor and Council Member
20
Torliatt. He changed his mind -after talking,'to citizens.
21
22
Council Me mber Healy viewed that TOT revenues were dynamic and
23
com from investing in the programs that th e 'co mm unity enjoys and
24
also, help' to`bring.people from other oreas'to spend money in the City.
25
26
MOTION to adopt the resolution :, .
27
28
'Ivl /S Torliatt /O'Brien., CARRIED °BY'THE' FOLLOWING VOTE:
29
30
AYES: Healy., O' Brien, Thompson, Torliatt, Glass
31
NOES: Moynihan .
32
ABSENT: Harris
33
34
Vice Mayor. Moynihan stated 'for- the record. he could not ;support
35
giving away $90,000 in public tupds. while 'intentionally under funding
36
public service
37
38
C. Resolution 2004 -156 N.C Authorizing, General' Contractor and Electrical
39
Subcontractor ,PrggqaIifipatiqn for the City of Petaluma Ellis Creek- :Water
40
Recycling Facility' Project. (Ban /Oer)� "
41
42
'Water Resources and Conservation: Engineering Manager Margaret' Orr
43
presented this ifem with an explanation of the need for prequalification of
44
- bidders for the Water Recycling',F,acility Project due to its ;complexity and
45
the tec expertise and experience required.
46
47
Vice Mayor Moynihan questioned why "Prevailing Wage was required.
48
49
Ms: Orr explained that this was necessary fo receive State, and Federal
50'
funding.
5 1
Vol: XX, Page 10' August 1'6, 2004
Council Member Healy' suggested adding to the prequalification
requirements that contractors. provide information on all their public works
projects ,of, a million dollars or more that have been completed within the
last , five ,yea.rs'.
Council; Member O'Brien suggested also adding a requirement for the
contracfors /subcontractors last motor carrier "inspection.
Vice 'Moynihan asked if the ,prequalification would delay moving
forward....
Mariager'Orrreplied that it'would , not:
Council second to in Cou
mber llatt and Thompson amended' their :motion d
an
ndl- M,embers',Healy and O' Brien's tsuggestions.
MOTION to adopt the resolution.:
WSTorliatt /Thompson. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
D. PCDC Resolution 1004 =15 Discussion & Action Adopting, a Resolution
Approving the Plans and 'Specifi'cations Prepared by Winzler, & 'Kelly
Consulting Engineers and ZAC landscape .Architects, Approving the
Project Budget, and Awarding th_e rntrac#
Depot for'the Petaluma Railroad.
Co
Renovation Project, Phase III, 'Project No. C200303, Authorizing the
Purchase of 'Trees from Sweet Lane. Wholesale Nursery. (Work ;Entails
Infrastructure Improvements Including. Instdllation of Sanitary Sewer, Storm'
Drain, Gas, Electrical, Railroad Signal Interconnect, Irrigation 'Water; and
lighting Work Also- Includes, Landscape and'Hardscape Improvements,
dnd1hstaliaticn.,of Site .Furnishings': Estimated Maximum Total Project Cost:
$l ,342,734.50 Funded. by Central Business District Fun 3300.) (Mdrangella)
Director of Economic Development and Redevelopment I dUL.Marangella
presented this ,item to. Council and answered' their questions regarding,
construction costs, niainten;ance access,, turf, trees, and concrete areas.
He explained that the rebidding resulted in d substantial:savings.
Vice 'Mayor Moynihan questioned spending $3:1 million on property fhat'�is
not owned 'by the City.
Council Member'Healy answered stating that the prominence of fhis� site
and investment Is inecessary -to entice a private developer' to partner with
,SMART 'and the City to do 'intense redevelopment of the block that will
generate tax income revenue.
Mayor Glass also commented. on the 'process of redevelopment to cure
blidht> restore - historical landrimarks and provide other - amenities for the.
City. He stated it makes economic sense for the future and that
developers look for-this ,type of commitment to improvements before they
invest.
MOTION. to adopt the resolution:
3'
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
1.5
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
50
A l
0; 51
52
KOgust 16 2004 Vol. XX Page I
M/S: Healy and' Thompson.. CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Healy,,,O' Brien, Thompson, Torliatt, Glass
NOES: Moynihan
ABSENT: Harris
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Introduction. (,First Reading). of O "rdinance 2189 N.0 S: to Re- Establish or
Amend
Speed'' Limits on' Various. 'Arte'ral and!. "Collector Streets Within the
Ci lumd S0
Cit , of Peta (, � adzi'en)
Director of Public Facilities) and.. - Services Rick Skladzien 'presented to
Council, the firsf phase to b;e, 'followed by the second in September. He
answered :questions °regarding speed limits, safety; and enforcement on
Petaluma Boulevard South.
MOTION to introduce the ordinance:
M/S Torliatt /Thompson. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
El.
° Resolution 2004457 N.C.S - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a
r ervices A reement w
P �ofessional S " "� g lth Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC for
'the Purpose. of Assisting the. City in the 'implementation of the Community,
Development Enterprise Fund .(Mo,ore)
Director of Community ;Development; Mike Moore presented the 'item to
Council and answered questions regarding budgeting for this item,
,service performance standards, staffing, public hours; creating„ an
`Enterprise Fund, subsidy and revenue information, controlling expenses,
and Council control funding.
Council Member O'Brien inquired, if there were proposed performance
standards for 'the community, Development Department and expressed
concern with f his information not being included.
Vice Mayor Moynihan stated he does not. recall. Council .discussing the
Oros and /or' cons, of "establishing Community Development as an
enterprise fund. He' ressed. reservations regarding °'the:I'ack of,discussion
,,regarding this proposal, service levels of the department and ,how the
department °would be, impacted. He ind'i'cated . a desire to, more discussion
and /or information before making a decision.,
Mr. Moore stressed the Community Development Department would not
be turning a; profit by becoming�an enterprise fund.
City" Manager Bierman explained the proposed. study would show what
the City "s subsidy is for various services Community Development provides.
MY. Moore explained where generated revenues go within the General
Fund.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 1
12
13,
14
16
16
17'
18
19
20
21
22
28
24
25
26
27
2.8
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39'
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50-
51
52
53
Vol. XX, Page 12 August 1:6, 2004
Council Mem6er arrived at 4:45 iD�.M.
City Manager Bierman added they could add in, that . eon& is
avq,ilabJa at the front, desk from 8 a.m-to 4 o 5 p.m. If they didn't perform,
the - ap0I1caht'w&u Idget a reduced,rate.
Co ' U ncil Meirnber'O'Brien indicated he feels the Community Development
Department knows the concerns with their restricted: counter hours. He
stressed. the need to know ;what 'the penalties would be, to the
department if expected deadline's met.
Council Merinbe ' r.H mak is, a heed for this professional services.,
agreement. ,to make 'an.-irif6rmed decision r&gar.diqg whether or , not to
make them, an. enterprise fund.
Mayor-�Glqss stated.- his suppprt- for the proposed enterprise fun -d and
noted it is all about cost recovery.,
Vice Mayor Moynihan com m. ented we don't need to streamline'
tre m line' and
provide. better service: -,he questioned if we are currently giving the public
good service,.
AA,O-TlqN to adopt the, resolution:
M/S Healy/Tho m pson. CARRIED BY VOTE:
AYES: Hedly, Thompson, Torliatt,'Glass •
NOES: Harris• Moynihan, O'Brien
ADJ CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION
PUIBLICiCOMMENT
:ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION -,5*00 p.m.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR:: Government Code §54957.6. Agency Negbtidt&.
'Michael �Bierrmon/Pamala Robbins. Emplbyee Organization: AFSCME, lAFF Local 1415 and
Unrepresented Employees.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE, EVALUATION ,Pursuant to Govt. Code '§,54957(e): City
mbnagj'Br
CONFERENCE WITH' L EGAL ' - COUNSEL - EXISTING, LITIGATION: Government Cod 6 §54956.9(a)` 1 ,.-
Bran bleffet al vs. City o f Petaluma et dl (Sonbmd County Superior'Court - Case #MCV- - 820 1
MONDAY, AUGUST 16,,2004 - EVENI SESSION,
7= P.M.
CALLTO "ORDER - 1.08 P.m:
A. Roll Call
Members Harris, Healy, Moynihan, Q.'Brien, Thompson, Torliatt and Mayor Glass
I
August 16, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 13
•
1
2
, .
B. Pledge of;Allegiance - , C'ouncil Member Torliatt
4
C. Moment of Silence
5
6
REPORT OUT'.OF CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS TAKEN
7
"
8
No reportable action was taken.
9
10
11
PRESENTATIONS
12
Jim Wanderscheid, Marin /Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control - Gave a ;Special Report
13
on the discovery of dead birds, that Were' nfected with West Nile Virus !in Petaluma. He
14
explained the process that his organization follows to ;detect, if mosquitoes in Petaluma
p
15
are infested and, so far,, have; shown. that insects tested. were not infected, He answered
16
Council and the public's questions regarding' this' .disease and how. to protect oneself
17
with repellent, long sleeves /pants, and reporting rriosquita sources that the organization
18
would not be aware of Once the virus is'in the mosquito population, it will bein.the area
19
permanently. He explained the symptoms as flu4ke,, with low- grade fever, headache,
20
. h fever , ind icates th
nausea; a .,hi g e virus is active. The virus can affect mammals and
21
amphibians. He explained the pesticide used is a;• BTI enzyme product .(,bacteria) that
22
acts on t he gut of' the developing' mosquito larvae': He stated that the storm drains area
23
source of th`e larvae.
24
25
PUBLIC:COMME�NT
26
27
Bill Donahue, Santlalwootl Homeowners Association - Requested the Council: to issue a
28
resolution in support of the City of Cotati's Rent Control Ordinance from the 9th Circuit
29
Court of . Appeals; decision on Cushman Vs.-City of Cotati concerning the vacancy
30
portion of their - ordinance as unconstitutional..
31
32
Geoffrey H. Cartwright, Petaluma - Addressed the illegal fill at the Adobe Lumber site that
33
had been permitted by the County of Sonoma. He cited FEMA's designation and
34
explained ,; the: water. ,normally would flow and how it,; has affected citizens
35
downstream an d had'resulted:in increased flooding.
36
37
Tom" Maunder, Pedestrian & Bicycle Advisory, Committee - Read a memo from the
38
Committee regarding, their support for filling the open position of Traffic Engineer to
39' !
address traffic safety problems '_in Petaluma
40°'
41
Judy Hillery; Petaluma' - Stated that with;ouf developers: there would, be no eastside in
42
Petaluma or much of'the We'stside.. She supported Rainier to allow access'for citizens and
43
to relieve the extra traffic on Washington. Street from the additional planned
4,4
development.
45
46
Stan Gold, Petaluma - Spoke about Y"Overriding considerations". and 'the Council's
47
res onsibi
p ", li f y t o determine `if the project were Worthwhile despite negative findings,
48
would rfhe' project meet -, a real communit need, and. be` will to accept the
49
consequences.
50
'
�"
51
Ron Kin Y oh ?,etaluma - Requested Council' support Cotati's Rent Control Ordinance
52
against the courts decision.
Vol. XX, Page 14 August 16 2004
Council Member 'Torliatt,. regarding the rent control ordinance, asked if Cotati had 'a
draft resolution. Mr. Donahue said there was a statement of support and he will find out
more and let Council know.
Andrew Packard;, Petaiuma Addressed ;Chelsea''s, non- payment of $1.2 ,million in funds'
owed from ten years ago traffic mitigation. He wanted a full public accounting of the
status .of this contract inciuding penalties and interest owed.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council Member :Harris invited - interested parties to the Dan Fager Memorial Scholarship
dinner and golf tournament.
Council AllemberTorliatt reported. on her support of d fundraiser'to benefit the Petaluma
People Services Center,:
Council Member Healy had a' question for" the City Attorney concerning Cotati's'issue.
City Attorney Rudnansky answered that the League of California 'Cities _Advocacy'
Committee was looking into this decision and he would follow -up to see whaf comes out
of their' meetings. He: also had ,:a call to Cotaf 's City. Attorney. He understood that Cotati'
does plan to fight this decision and they have requested a re- hearing.
Council Member Healy requested that the City Attorney monitor this situation and; bring it
to Council when action is: needed:
City. Attorney,110hansky said his office and other ,city attorneys are following this very
closely. He mentioned thatone.justice wrote a very..strong dissent.
Mayor Glass had a question regarding 'Petaluma's rent control and if it ,could be
challenged because of the: Cofati decision.
City Attorney Rudnarisky said' that the statute, of limitations issue is involved in, this and
Cofati's is different. He did not think Petaluma's was challengeable except possibly for
rent increases.
Mayor.Glass wished to supporf iCbtati.
Vice. Mayor. Moynihan commented on ,reading in, the newspaper that the Regency
Project °would ;include town homes and .he wanted a major retail center. He requested
identification , of.target.,areas'to' meet =the future.retail needs of'the community.
Council Member Torliatt wanted Council supporf' Cotati and asked if this could: be put
on the .August 231d agenda. Regarding the status, of' 'the, Chelsea contract, she also
requested information on the:contract and pursuing interest and penalty monies owed.
Council Member O'Brien agreed with Council Member Healy's recommendation
regarding supporting Cotatils efforts..
Mayor Glass also. wanted to know the resolution 'of' Chelsea's contract, the final date,
and any penalties and interest owed.
J 2
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
50
F` - I
L__�
August 16, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 15
and
inter M ere' allowed. He felt + y „ y Than said he had read the agreement and did not see where penalties
it was time'to move on and the money collected was
sufficient.
CITY MANAGER COMMENT&
There were none.
7. PUBLIC. HEARING
A. River.Oaks /,Petaluma Factory Outlet Village: Location; 2200 Petaluma
Boulevard North. [APNs�048 -080 -039, 067 =401= 043, 007 - 401- 044(Parcel A);.
007 =3911 =009 (Parcel B);, 048= 080 -038: (Parcel C) ' 048 -080= 033,007 -391 -035
(Abandoned Railroad right-of - w.ay)),, Project File No. REZ02001
Consideration. and possible action on a ,"recommendation from the
Planning Commission regarding;
• A 'Final `Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for Proposed
Development' of Parcels B and C''of ;the Former River Oaks /Petaluma
Fact ry "Ou'tl'et Village. „
®. A Modification 'to the River Oaks /Petaluma Factory Outlet Village
Master Plan to' Allow Development: of Parcels" 13 and C gas Proposed in
the Petaluma '' Village Marketplace Planned Community District
General Development Plan.
PUBLIC,COMMENT
Mayorr,,.Glass. :explained that public comment was to address the
adequacy of 'the Environmental ,Impact Report and not the merits' of the
p ro' Council decided'that the EIR adequately addressed the
lect. If the
environmental issues; then public: comment on the merits of the project
would be ,'ta.ken at a later meeting. .
Planner !Bets; ° "Lewitter introduced the project and the environmental
review process. She stated staff had provided additional information in
response to questions raised by Council at the previous public ,hearing. If
the
_. Council
could tak e :e ublic action on't e adequla deliberation
of thelssub egoe t, EIR. before taking
act;
public inpuf :on the project itself., At Council MemberTorliatt's request, and 11
for the benefit - of the public, Ms.. Lewitter gave a - brief: outline of the
project'.s history.
Community Development.Direc- -for Mike Moore explained the memo from
p h Iler ad s re attorneys that .had beenpla
'ced on the
Co s. The actor eKe'
y , q�uesfed that; the subsequen t 'El R be re-
circulated to which the Department. responded .that the EIR- was legally
adequate. The memo is : available to the public.
Vol. XX, Page 16 August 16', 2004
Mayor Glass explained `thdt'it.had been agreed at the last public meeting
to 'have people who- had ,comm "ented at the first meeting to speak after
the new speakers had made fheir"cornments.
John Klein, Senior V.P. of Real Estate,'Chelsea Property Group, Petaluma
Village Market Place. "addressed the merger of :Chelsea with Simon-
Property of Minneapolis. The purpose of the merger' was due to
Simon's evaluation - of Chelsea as the best developer of outlet malls., They
have developed three properties in 'a joint venture and fhe purpose 6f this
merger was to, create growth and expand the multi- tenant platform of
both companies. Chelsea will be a, division o,f 'Simon and will have the
same management team. The merger is'expect'ed to be completed this
fall and'they, plan to continue with the full development of the Petaluma
Villager Market Place.
Council Member 'Torliatt had questions about ,fhe performance of
Petaluma Village 'Market Place as compared to Chelsea's; other' outlof
malls''. Mr. Klein said that it was average in its performance and it is their
hope to , expdnd uses of ,Marketplace.
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT
Theresa Mahoney, Petaluma Stated .'it was important to ma:infpi
balance, in . a family - oriented community and- -she would like, to see this:.
area developed into parks and playing fields.
Michael, Litwak Petaluma Objected to; the expansion but was not
familiar -with the 'EIR. He referred "to ,his, prev',ious ' home. in S'an Fernando'
Valley: and the development that occurred to create a poor'
environment. 'He asked,, the Council to. look at a qualitative perspective
rather than just legal issues.
Jerry Price, Petaluma - Stated that a retail study listed this -project as
number 9 out of 9 ds: a desirable retail site. He' wanted to see a. report on
the ;cumulative traffic impacts in the EIR as it related to retgil, and;
, preventing °;sales .tax leakage._ He also 'mentioned -flooding that' °would
create fu,fure liabilities .and. that he supported creating ball fields /parks in
the area.
Murray Rockowitz, Petaluma Referred to the overall consideration of the
business climate, the floodplain; habitat, .character of the city, traffic, and
the need. for open space* and ball ,fields., He felt the. development 'in the
CPS
P (Central Petaluma Specific .Plan) and a,f Kenilworth would provide,
enough retail and that there is'only so much retail to go around.
Council. Member O'Brien asked about the °speakers not addressing the EIR.
ey Rudnansky agreed that the only agendized item.. is the
Cit y Attorn
subsequent EIR :but the speakers addressing the merits of the project does
not affect how the agenda was worded.
{
1
2
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
50
51
52
August 16; 2004 Vol: XX, Page_ 17
,Mayor, Glass did not support •denying anyone their comment -time
because the item is on the agenda. �He asked the public to focus on the
adequacy of °'the EIR.
Harold Bard Petaluma - He found it frustrating that issues like this have
been before. the Council for Years and resented the efforts of special
interest„ groups to prevent, any growth at all. He asked Council to support
sand approve the EIR as adequate:
Cindy Thomas, Sonorna , County . 'Wage Coalition - Felt that the
,community is part of the environment :and the EIR impacts did not address
this. The. Coalit on :suggested a Community Impact Report (CIR) to assess
the social and economic irnpacts on the community. The low -wage jobs
created, of ,the Outlet, would result in'subsidizing these jobs with welfare
an`d health' care 'because the '.emoloyees would not be self- supporting.
Shel said �other cities °are using CIR'.s.
,Barry Bussewitz;. Petaluma - Supported parks, open space ball fields, retail,
andvsales+ tax revenue. He referred to the sites rating from 'fhe Retdil Sales
Leakage 'Study, and that he felt this �de.velopment would take away parks,
open space and ball fields.
Bonnie Bard Petaluma - She read the EIR,. and, from her past experience
reviewing EIR's, she,supported the; EIR as being adequate, and asked for
Council's acceptance: ,
Stan Gold Petaluma = Addressed 'the Traffic Study in the EIR and stated
that the Mitigations cannot `be put7 into practice and are therefore not
mitigations. He thought the Kenilworth .and CPSP developments and other
retail development ' Would create retail that the not.support.
Nick Wilson, - Was .concerned 'with the,streams that are on the
property and the flooding issues. From an article he reported that
aesthetically, the Petaluma Outlet Mall was voted the ugliest in Sonoma
County .a_ few, years back. He saw vacant stores and little patronage
when he visited.,
David Yearsle.y, Petaluma. River Keeper Was against paving over the
River corridor and explained ;the posifi.ve; en.viro,nrnental affects of the
riparian area. He stated there was a better place for creating retail a "reds.
Ra' Pete etalurna - Addressed the EIR an
y' rson, P
d brought pictures showing
the flooding at the Outlet:Mail. He went'"through the sequence: of events
that brought the developrnent.and did not support'the.expansion.
Bill' Phillips, Petalum deal spot 1pa nd': pore" parks in Petaluma and.
saw the area as an i' e EIR' did not address this.
Ettamarie Peterson, Petaluma - Stated that water is +.necessary to recharge
the aquifer and paving it over will prevent this and this'Was not addressed
in the EIR; and the' parking. lot. run -off pollutes.
Vol. XX Page 1:8
August 16, 2004
Ruth "Feldman Petaluma. - Stated. that all of these issues were covered in
1994 when the mall, was established: She supported revenue from sales
tax that th °e mall will generate. She wanted to know -what the Council's
position was if the Citywas not going to get this additional sales tax.
Maf#i Christensen, Petaluma - She felt that` the outlet expansion and, the
apar- tments planned would cause more flooding, She proposed that the
, owners, of the project `or •t he writers of the hydrology report post an
annually renewing bond to coverthe property owners $800 per year flood
insurance ecost,. to indemnify the. City from 'flood damage; caused by
aeVeloprrient; .and also indemnify property owners for their incremental
loss of property value, caused by' flooding. (Elise Wilton, Petaluma ceded
her public comment time to Matti Christensen).
H.R:.Downs, O:W. L - Foundation, P.enngrove -. He did' feel the EIR'
adequately addressed the serious water supply problem or groundwater
management concerns in Sonoma County.
Jean Logan, Petaluma - 'She. visited the site and noted vistas,. creeks, .
certain wildflowers, grasses and vernal pools 'in the area:. She reiterated)
the groundwater and run -off issues; and stated =that the land is serving its
appropriate purpose.
John Mills, Petaluma = He did. not creation of "ball 'fields on the
property;and an EIR would,be. required torthat too.
Wayne Morgenthaler, - Petaluma Referred, to "Council Members a8 en,
Healy, Thompson's.position on the Rainier initiative and the development
of ;the adjacent land. He suggested an EIR that ,included cumulative
impacts on the whole area and would'avoid piecemeal planning.
Cori Madden Petaluma -Agreed with .Michael Litwak Sh& wanted to
know what the overall environmental, cultural and financial impact oh
the- City would be from this project.
John CheneY Petaluma - He stated he was against this EIR. He wanted
this "plan 'to be analyzed by the General' Plan's hydrology program_. 'He
also talked about traffic, :a current FEMA Report, and asked the Council to
not., support the EIR and put :it' off ffbr a year until FEMA and the hydrology
study was done. .
Geoffrey Cartwright;. Petaluma - (Ramona Paul .and ,B ll..D'on_ahue ceded
their time.) Reminded. Council that 400. homes are flooded in this area'
when a flood occurs..Stated the EIR.. is not adequate. He went over the
FEMA reports that showed various cubic: feet' per second of water flow
that determine EIR. impacts were' lower than several other studies of the
area. He felt that the EIR did not address the cumulative effects of
flooding, 'groundwater recharge needs; and traffic impacts that the
development projects would create. He referred to letters and
information he had . provided to the City regarding flooding . issues in
Petaluma that were.not addressed in the EIR.
•
•
August 16, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 19
•
PUBLIC . C O MM ENT ON THE 'ADEQUACY -.OF "TH E EIR CLOSED
2
'3
Council. R ecessed at -9 : 3 4 0 i O.M. to'9
Coun't :45, p at. which tun Council Member Thompson
4
1'eff the"City Council' Mee[
fing f6r�ihe evening.
5
6
Mayor,, Glass: explained that brief comments from the applicant or Council
7
Members would, be taken this,., evenin on" the EIR and then at another
8
meeting„ at. Which-Public, Comment' would Inot be reopened, Council
9
Members Would offer their comments °af "'fengfh.
10
11
-Discussion between - May - or Glass, Vice Mayor Moynihan, Council
12
..•Members Healy and Torliaff and City Manager Bierman resulted in a
13
dec'isi 't certify the E first and the �add
o �ce n' r6ss the merits of the project.
14
,on
Th6,Jimelihe"' 'woul be' Septeryiber 13, 2004 to finalize the Council's
15
decision on ,th&.adequaC-y of the EIR only'.
16
17
Vice Mayor Moynihan had questions for staff regarding his concerns
18
about circulation and traffic- issues es and their proposed mitigations and
19
mit gatiQn s'that were'not considered
20
21
Mr. Mbore explained thaf�th final EIR "would represent the extent of the
22
analysis and the commen and responses to the analysis. Any issues that
23
were separate from the EIR could be suggested as Conditions of
24
Approval., If the Qbuntil f6)t.'.fhdf issues were not covered,in, the EIR, then
,
Council 'cQvIO reqOest add ition0i'dn"holy'sis that might require:re-circulation
26
of the JBIR and r'ehecirin " g.
27
28
Council" Member Hedly clarified that , ".if , Council certified the EIR and then
29
after discussion of the project wanted to add conditions, this would not
30
require, re-cirtuldtibn of the EIR.
31
32
Mr.',1i,M66r6 an swered that if !'the Council determines that the EIR is
,
" ate
33
adO u then Council could more on to the project's issues. He
34
explained how 'the environmental im pacts. of the mitigations would be
35:
evaluated. He explained that if' the Council determines that the EIR is
361
inadequate and' if issues are hot' .qdverecl to a Council Member's
37
satisfaction, then those concerns should be addressed now.
lidg
Vice. Mayor Moynihan indicated thdt"he felt a north-south corridor would
40
benefit the project,, particularly along the rail line from Corona to Rainier.
41
He wanted 'to know howthi5 new access Would affect the impacts on
42
'intersections that the current EIR deemed as sufficient., He asked ' if this
43
would require voting "No" on': the EIR' at this point or would it be a
44
condition ofrthe project.
45
46
Mn Moore. 'indicated that this could be a condition of the project
47
approval and he said, this access; was,; covered in ffie; EIR, and, because it
48
was not " part of the project there were no traffic impacts. He stated this
49
road could be included in the Condtioris of Approval.
, 50
•
Vol. XX, Page 20 August 16, 2004
1
Council Member'Tbrilaft asked again for a colored Site Restraint Map
2
showing all the constraints with the -site Plan . overlaid so that she could see
3
Jhe constraints with and without mitigation.
4
5
Vice Mayor Moynihan commented on retail's special needs - for,lo co tion
6
and the present location was not: utilized to its full extent because of
7
access, constraints. He felt the project was dependent on the cross- town
8
connector and thezrossttown connector was dependent on the project.
roje
9
He once again 'explained bis, support for the. four-lane Village Rood'
10
alternative. He felt that the project should. pay for. its access; -and that
hot
withbOt this'a"ccess, the project would fail, he wanted'a plan that was do-
12
able,
14
15
16, ADJOURN
17
18 The meeting was adjourned at 1.0:.07 p.m..
19
20
21
2`2
23
24
25
26
27 Attest:
28
29
30 Gayle Petersen,' City "Clerk
31
32
33
34
David Glass, Mayor
35
.36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46-
47
48
50
51
52
•
N