HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 06.B-Minutes 02/24/2003I Draft City Council' Meeting Minutes
2 Monday, February 3, 2003 - 3:00 p.m.
3 Regular Meeting
4
5 ROLL CALL: 3:00 p.m.
6
7 Present: Harris, , Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass, Torliatt,
8 Moynihan
9
10 PUBLIC COMMENT
11
12 Richard Ramstead Petaluma, addressed the City Council regarding the
13 Magnolia Place item expressing concerns regarding density, tiger salamanders,
14 nitrates in the water and notification procedures.. He also commented on traffic
15 congestion and. conc'lud'ed by stating the City can provide City water to county
16 residents at least if they are within the Urban Growth Boundary.
17
18
Barry Bussewitz,.Petaluma, addressed the City Council in support of the Wetlands
19
Wastewater Treatment Plant and for the purchase of the Gray Property being
20
considered in Closed Session this afternoon.
21
22
Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma, addressed the City Council regarding an old article
23
in the Argus Courier regarding flooding. He asked the. City Council to do the
24
right thing and to follow the law.
25
26
CORRESPONDENCE
27
28
There were no comments.
29
30
COUNCIL_ COMMENT AND LIAISON REPORTS
31
32
Council Member Torliatt requested that the Sonoma County Water Advisory
33
Committee Budget be placed under Unfinished Business on the next Council
34
Agenda for discussion.
35
36
Council Member Canevaro asked that a discussion regarding the City's
37
Campaign Finance Ordinance be placed on a, future agenda for discussion.
38
39
Council Member Moynihan requested that a review and discussion of the City's
40
Vehicie and "Equipment Replacement Program be placed on a future agenda.
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
Vol. XX, Page 2
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
There were none.
February 3, 2003
AGENDA CHANGES AND DELETIONS HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW: Applicants
and /or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public
discussion to make their remarks and up to five minutes for concluding remarks
after other members of the public have spoken.
No changes made.
APPOINTMENTS
1.A. Sonoma County Library Commission. One Representative.
MOTION to reappoint Dorothy Bertucci and to adopt:
Resolution No.,2003 -13 N.C.S. Reappointing Dorothy Bertucci as the City of
Petaluma's'Representative to the Sonoma County Library Commission.
M/S Moynihan and Torliatt
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,.
Torliatt and Moynihan
NOES! None
I.B. Recommendations to the Mayors' 8, Councilmembers' Association City
Selection Committee, for the Following Appointments to Upcoming
Vacancies.
1. Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO): One Vacancy; Term
Expires 5/1 /05.
MOTION by Council Member Harris to support the appointment of Lisa
Schaffner, Council Member, Healdsburg;
MOTION by Council Member Torliatt to support the appointment of
Leah Gold, Vice Mayor, Healdsburg;
VOTE to support appointment of Lisa Schaff ner:
M/S Harris and Canevaro — Motion carried by following vote:
AYES:- Harris, Canevaro, Vice Mayor O - ' Brien, Moynihan
NOES: Healy, Mayor Glass, Torliatt
is
February 3, 2003 Vol. XX, Page 3
1
2. Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC): One Vacancy, Expires
•
2
February 9, 2003. Association Submits Three Names to the Board of
Supervisors for Consideration.
4
5
MOTION to support reappointment of Sharon Wright, Council Member,
6
Santa Rosa:
7
8
M/S Moynihan and Harris
9
10
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
11
Torliatt and Moynihan
12
13
NOES: None
14
15
3. Bay Area Air Quality Control Board: One Vacancy, Expires March
16
2003.
17
18
MOTION to support the appointment of Council Member Torliatt:
19
20
M/S Moynihan and O'Brien
21
22
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, . Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
23
Torliatt and Moynihan
24
25
NOES:.. None
26
27
4. Golden. ;Gate Bridge, Highway &. Transportation District: One Vacancy,
28
Expires March 2003. Association Submits Recommendation to the
29
Board 'of Supervisors for Consideration.
30
31
MOTION to support the appointment of Mike Martini, Council Member,
32
Santa Rosa:
33
34
M/S O'Brien and Moynihan
35
36
AYES: Harris; Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
37
Torliatt and Moynihan
38
39
NOES,: None
40
41
5. Affordable Housing Linkage Fee Working Group. One Representative.
42
43
MOTION to support the appointment of Council Member Healy:
44
45
M/S Torliatt and O'Brien
46
47
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
0
48
Torliatt and Moynihan
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
Vol. XX, Page 4 February 3, 2003
NOES: None
I.C. Sonoma County Tourism Council's Investor's Committee. One
Representative
MOTION to appoint Vice Mayor O'Brien and adopt:
Resolution No. 2003` -14 N.C.S. supporting the appointment of Vice - Mayor
Mike O'Brien to the Sonoma County Tourism Council Investor's
Committee.
M/S Torliatt and Canevaro
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
Torliatt and Moynihan
NOES: None
I.D. Cities for Climate Protection Campaign, Sponsored by the International
Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). One Representative.
MOTION to support the appointment of Council Member Torliatt and to
adopt:
Resolution No. 2003 -15 N.C.S. Appointing Council Member Torliatt as the
City's Representative 6n the cities for Climate Protection Campaign.
M/S Healy and. Canevaro
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
Torliatt and Moynihan
NOES: None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Torliatt requested that Item 7 be removed from the Consent
Calendar for discussion.
Council Member Moynihan requested that Item 9 be removed from the Consent
Calendar for discussion.
MOTION to adopt the balance of the Consent Calendar as proposed:
February 3, 2003 Vol XX, Page 5
1
EAG •0���i+�G�[ PI /e�iS (R Y`iYICYYlSky Item was not introduced
�i f�r I
v anuary
J
` 2
on 4 J � l
�27, 2003.
3
4
3
A Reel !Eg) f QF.Gij 4ReRdiRg PetG I ma__MURi%eil,
GIGPfiGR (S9GGRGI rar9G
5
Tr- r`1-\Gpt- 9 . 1 6 fG Add Sed -0nc 8 l.L' 330 and 8 1 6. 340 PFGhihitinq
Gie -eY
6
7
(RUGIRGRSI<¢4 Item moved to February 24, 2,003 Council Meeting.
8
9
4.
Ordinance 'No. 21,43 N.C.S Approving Ground Lease with Cingular
10
Wireless for Antenna at LaCresta Hill.. (;Beatty)
11
12
ti
o GI„n+iGR Ream APReRdiRg -Or GIRGe �I-� 2133
(�LZcot;Q ^a) - efQraiRG Ge r-re.
13
14
' _20 �\ f�Q�YI /'Y
p IYY1 /'y 'F 1 2vQi— Th YI'\l i/Y i'1 Ii -�Y1 II���D hIeY)
15
Item was not introduced on Jaan�u� aryy,27, 2003.
16
17
6.
Resolution No: 2003 -1,6 N.C.S Approving the Plans and Specifications
18
Prepared by the Water Resources and Conservation Department and
19
Awarding the Contract for the 2002 -2003 Water Main Replacement
20
Project. (The Project .Involves Replacing Water Mains at Various Locations
21
to Improve Service and Reduce Maintenance Costs. The Project Also
22
Includes the Replacement of a Deteriorating Sewer Main Located Within
23
the Water Main Construction Area.) Estimated Project Cost: $553,690..
24
Funding Sources: Water and Sewer Funds (Ban).
25
26
7.
Resolution Approving the Plans and Specifications and Awarding the
27
Contract for the Property Site Improvements - Water Field Office
28
Soundwall Project. The Project Involves Removal of Existing Fence and
29
Provide and ,Install Precast Concrete Soundwall. Estimated Project Cost:
30
$70,000.00. ('Ban /Simmons) Removed from the Consent Calendar for
31
discussion.
32
33
8.
Resolution No. 2003 -18 N.C.S Declaring Various Vehicles and Equipment
34
Surplus to the City's. Needs and Directing the City Manager to Dispose of
35
the Vehicles and Equipment in Accordance with Provisions of the
36
Petaluma Municipal Code. (Thomas)
37
38
9.
,Approval' of Proposed Agenda for. - Council's Regular Meeting of February
39
24,. 2003. Removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
40
41
M /S,Moynihanand
O'Brien
42
43
AYES :
Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass, Torliatt
44
and Moynihan
45
4.6
NOES:
None
•
47
48
Vol. XX, Page 6 February 3, 2003
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
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT: •
7. Resolution Approving the Plans and, Specifications and Awarding the
Contract for the Property Site Improvements - Water Field Office
Soundwall Project. The Project Involves Removal of Existing Fence and
Provide and Install Precast Concrete Soundwall. Estimated Project Cost:
$70,000.00. (Ban/Simmons)
Council Member Torliatt asked for language under 1. within the resolved
statement be removed which referenced that "the plans and
specifications for the above- mentioned project are hereby approved" as
the City Council had not actually.s them*.
9. Approval of Proposed Agenda for Council's. Regular Meeting of February
24, 2003.
Council Member Torliatt.requested that an item be added to Review and
Sonoma Count.y'Water Agency Proposed Budget.
Council. Member Torliatt also recommended that 3A be deferred until the
alternatives and analysis of the °General Plan Surface Water /Traffic Models
are discussed.
City Council discussion ensued regarding the request, the majority of
Council''.supporting keeping the item on the Agenda
With those amendments, the. following MOTION was made:
MOTION Jo adopt the resolution and approve the February .24, 2003
Agenda as amended:
Resolution No. 2003 -17 N.C.S Awarding the Contract for the Property Site
Improvements - Water Field; Office Soundwall Project. The Project Involves
Removal of Existing Fence and Provide and Install Precast Concrete
Soundwall. Estimated Project Cost: $70,000.00. (Ban /Simmons)
M/S Moynihan and Torliatt
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor' O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
Torliatt' and Moynihan
NOES: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
10. Discussion and Possible Action on an Appeal by Cobblestone Homes, Inc.,
of ai I Decision by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
(SPARC) to Apply "a Condition of Approval Prohibiting Vinyl Windows in
February 3, 2003
Vol. XX, Page 7
1 Their Approval of Cobblestone's 37 Unit Washington Creek, Village
2 Subdivision on East Washington Street Southwest of Prince Park.
3 (Moore /Robbe)
4
5 11. Discussion and, Possible Action on an Appeal by Bill Dick of a Decision by
6 the Site Plan and Architectural" Review Committee ( SPARC) to Apply a
7 Condition of Approval Requiring Wood Windows in Their Approval of
8 Baker Ranch Located at the Southeast Corner of Ely Road and Corona
9 Road. (Moore /Lafler)
10
11 Mike Moore, Director of Community ,Development, with the concurrence
12 of the City Council, gave the staff presentation regarding both the
13 appeals.
14
15 Ira Bennett, Appellant, addressed the City Council regarding the SPARC
16 decision to require that prior to issuing building permits, all residences in
17 the Washington Creek Subdivision shall be modified so that no vinyl
18 windows are proposed. He urged the- City Council to uphold his appeal.
19
20 Chris Lynch, SPARC Member, addressed the City Council clarifying that
21 this is not a standard for all residences in ,Petaluma, it pertains to this
22 particular subdivision. He clarified how SPARC felt this condition would
23 ensure that new development utilize the highest quality materials. He
24 continued by indicating SPARC Committee Members had discussed the
25 possible environmental affects of PVC at previous hearings. In conclusion,
26 he urged the City Council to support the staff's recommendation to
27 uphold the SPARC's decision and deny the appeal.
28
29 Jack Rittenhouse, Chair of SPARC, addressed the City Council urging
30 support of the staff's recommendation to 'uphold the SPARC's decision
31 and deny the appeal.
32
33 Teresa Barrett, SPARC Member, addressed the City Council in opposition
34 to using vinyl windows due to the effects of polyvinyl chloride.
35
36 Clayton Engstrom, Petaluma, addressed "the City Council in opposition to
37 requiring wooden windows and indicated that it would be precedent
38 setting. He stressed the need for homeowners to be aware of hazards in
39 their Houses without requiring developers to utilize specific products in
40 order to' protect them.
41
42 Steve Anre, Petaluma, addressed the City Council noting this is not a
43 clear -cut issue as the renderings,for the development are not accurate as
44 to how vinyl windows actually look.
45
46 David. Bradley, Ryder Homes,, addressed the City Council regarding
47 aluminum windows vs. vinyl windows. He stated his support of using vinyl
48 windows and for upholding the, appeal. He added that, actually, a vinyl
Vol. XX, Page 8 February 3, 2003
window is more expensive than an aluminum window ,and that. vinyl is a
better quality product - perhaps even better than wood. He noted the is
problems with the occurrence of mold with.woodenwindows.
David Rabbit, Architect, addressed the City Council in support of SPARC
and urged the Council'to deny the appeals.
Ira Bennett, ''Petaluma, addressed the Council' indicating staff has not
been able to provide anything refuting what he appealed. He added
the subdivision. is not "high end" and that everything in one's house is "'off-
gassing." He stated vinyl windows are a permitted material and he
doesrVt believe they can be precluded from using them: He. stressed this
issue is absurd and that there is a design standard to which the material
has to conform. He feels the City Council needs to send a strong message
to SPARC as to what their real mission is - SPARC's job is to reflect the
community's taste.
Bill Dick, Baker Ranch, addressed the City Council indicating this is an
issue of price and cost. The cost of the house does have an affect on the
buyer of the house. Vinyl windows are the windows of choice today and
actually preferred over aluminum, windows. He pointed out they do:n`t
have to be painted; they are a. superior project. He added` most
subdivision. homes near his project have vinyl windows. He noted his
drawings did not reflect wood windows and' if materials being used were
going to be that important, they should have been discussed upfront. He
concluded' 'by stating his company has received an award of design
excellence from SPARC for the Heritage Woods project and urged, the. -
City Council to uphold his appeal.
Chris Craiker, Architect for Baker Ranch, addressed the City Council,,
indicating that` when they went before SPARC they were given
alternatives of wood or aluminum windows. They could use wood
windows with a vinyl clad.
Janet Gracyk, SPARC Member, addressed the City Council, indicating .
SPARC tried hard to '.work with the applicants. She stated SPARC's input
helps to limprove projects and they do ask for materials that will be vsed
upfront. She stated the difference in the windows'is very apparent.
Jack Rittenhouse, Chair, SPARC, addressed fhe City Council, indicating
SPARC reviews 8 -12 projects a month.. They ask for materials being, used,
renderings, colors, etc. and clarified there is discretion allowed at. SPARC.
Linda Mathies SPARC Member, addressed the City Council, indicating
SPARC; works hard with applicants to come up with quality designs using
quality materials.
February 3, 2003 Vol. XX, Page 9
I Ira Bennett readdressed the City Council, stating that you cannot discern
2 the difference between the windows and that there are no real design
3 implications.
4
5 Council Member Torliatt agreed with the need for a uniform standard.
6 She commented that the City should'be requiring developers to provide
7 lists of what materials would be used. She noted adjacent uses and
8 structures should be shown on the site plans so that people have a better
9 handle on ihow.a project fits info ,,a neighborhood. She added that SPARC
10 does have purview over visual, quality, and environmental concerns and
11 stressed the need to strive for excellence in design.
12
13 Council Member- Healy commented `that SPARC is one of the best
14 committees and that this has been an evolving discussion. He indicated
15 he would be. voting to deny the appeals and would suggest that the issue
16 be sent back to SPARC for a refinement on legitimate design
17 expectations and what the real design standards are.
18
19 Vice Mayor O'Brien stated his agreement with most ' of what Council
20 Member ;Healy stated. He feels Council is being asked to compare apples
21 and oranges and stressed the need for more appropriate and true
22 comparisons of`windows. He indicated he sees nothing wrong with the use
23 of vinyl windows and would vote to uphold the appeals.
24
25 Council Member Moynihan commen ed that SPARC should take a look at
26 this issue overall and establish a policy and not establish policies on a case
27 by,case basis, indicating that_is.not good government. He added when a
28 policy is set, all aestheticsshould . be considered. He indicated his support
29 of Council Member Healy' "s suggestion and added there is a need for
30 more workforce housing; He stressed the need to address the affordability
31 issue also. He indicated he agrees with what SPARC is trying to achieve,
32 but feels it is not fair to hold this project up when there is no official policy.
33 He concluded by stating he would support the appeal and would support
34 having SPARC come back with a policy.
35
36 Council Member Harris commented on the use of vinyl windows, which is
37 an industry standard. He feels the City should have a uniform standard, as
38 well. He indicated he would be supporting the appeal.
39�
40 Council Member Canevaro indicated a desire to make the project in
41 question -.look like the surrounding community. He sees no problem with
42 vinyl windows and would support, the appeal with direction for staff and
43 SPARC- to come up with an overall policy regarding use of materials.
44
45 Mayor Glass commented on affordability to the user. He noted that if the
46 windows are an option, he could support the argument of affordability.
47 Otherwise, he would support staff's position of upholding SPARC's
48 recommendation.
Vol. XX, Page 10 February 3, 2003
Council Member Torliatt indicated she would be in favor of staying the
decision for the creation of a policy setting forth standards.
The 'City .Council took a three- minute recess' at S p.m and reconvened at
5:05 p.m.
Council Member° O'Brien stressed the need for a policy and a list of`
standard materials. 'He suggested a joint .meeting with SPARC to discuss
the issue.
City Manager Bierman commented that there should be a set of
standards and a policy on standards and process. He indicated he would
have both groups come together to address a. policy.
M 'OTION to uphold the appeals and adoptthe following resolutions:
Resolution No.. 2003 -79 N.C.S. Upholding the Appeal by Cobblestone
Horne, Inc. of a Decision by the Site Plan and Architectural Review
Committee (SPARC) to Apply. a Condition of Approval Prohibiting 'Vinyl
Windows in Their Approval of Cobblestone's 37 Unit Washington Creek
Village Subdivision on East Washington Street, Southwest of Prince Park.
Resolution :No. 2003'-20 N.C.S. Upholding the Appeal by .Bill Dick of a
Decision by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC)' :to
Apply a Condition of Approval Requiring Wood Windows in Their Approval
of the Baker Ranch Subdivision located at the Southeast Corner of Ely
Road and Corona. Road.
M/S Moynihan and O'Brien
AYES - Harris, Canevaro, O 'Brien, Moynihan
NOES: Healy; Mayor .Glass, Torliatt
NEW BUSINESS
12. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to, Sign an Amendment No. 2 to
the :Agreement for the Collection and Disposal 'of Garbage, Rubbish;
Waste Matter and Recyclables and Street Sweeping Within the City of
Petaluma, Increasing the Franchise 'Fee and Extending the Termination
Date; and Resolution Approving 2003 ,Refuse toll 'ection Rates. (Thomas)
Bill Thomas, Finance Director, gave, the staff presentation and
recommended approval of the Amendment.
City Council discussion ensued regarding the' calcula'tio'ns used: Income
will be segregated into two funds ` ( General Fund and Street
February 3, 2003 Vol. XX, Page 11
1
Maintenance); the amendment will result in about a $0.83 difference to
2
the ratepayer monthly.
3
4
Public Input:
5
6
James Landa Empire Waste Management; indicated he is fine with the
7
proposal before the Council this evening.. He noted they have been
8
working with staff, and although they have experienced some errors in
9
their billing system, they have hired a 'third party CPA who is reviewing
10
data back to 1 995. He added tha_ t the information will be available for
11
review in about two weeks and if the outcome is favorable to the City,
12
they will cut a check to the City for that amount. If the outcome is
13
unfavorable to the City, they will leave the issue alone.
14
15
MOTION to ,adopt resolutions:
16
17
Resolution No..:2003 -21 N.C.S. Authorizing the City Manager to Sign an
18
Amendment' N',o: 2 to the Agreement for the Collection and Disposal of
19
Garbage, Rubbish,. Waste Matter and R'ecyclables and Street Sweeping
e -
20
Within the City of Petaluma, Increasing. the Franchise Fee and Extending
21
the Termination Date_
22,
23
Resolution No. 2003 -22 N.C.S. Approving 2(j03 Refuse Collection Rates.
•
24
25
M/S Healy and O'Brien
26
27
AYES: Harris, Canevaro; Healy, 'Vice 'Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
28
Torliatt and Moynihan
29
30
NOES: None
31
32
13. - :. This item was
33
combined with Item #1.2 above.
34
35
13.A Resolution Urging the California Legislature to Reject the Governor's
36
Proposed. Shift of"Local Vehicle License Fee (VLF) Revenues and to Honor
37
the 1998 Commitment to Restore the VLF.
38
39
,MOTION to adopt:
40
41
Resolution No. 2003 -23 KC S. Urging the .C'aliforni'a Legislature to Reject
42
the "Governo'r's Proposed Shift of Local Vehicle License Fee (VLF) Revenues
43
and to Honor the 1998 Comrriitment to Restore the VLF.
44
45
M/S Healy and. Toriiatt
46
47
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
48
Torliatt and Moynihan
Vol. XX, Page 12 February 3 2003
NOES: None
- UNFI'NISHEU BUSINESS
14. Discussion Regarding Local Option Sales Tax for the City of Petaluma.
(,Bier man)
Rublic Input:
Daphne Shapiro, ;Plaza No'. Shopping Center; addressed the City Council,
expressing opposition to an increase 'in TOT Tax as it would further _erode
local shopping.
The City Manager explained the; request and why it was placed on the
y
agenda, noting that the Cit would b:e supporting legislation that'would
provide an, `optIi'or" for local .agencies to place a measure on the ballot
asking for ,an increase. This letter would be sent on to Assemblymember
J oe. Nation indicating PetIaluma''s support for' having the local option of
placing increases on the ballot. ..lacing such an increase on the ballot
would be a matter that the City Council could entertain when and 'if they
desire to pursue such an increase.
Council Member Healy further 'indicated this would authorize the City to
go to the voters with an' increase in sales tax, when and if needed, as
there is no ability to do so at this time. It was noted that such a ballot
measure would need to pass by a 2 /3rds vote of the public.
Council' Member T'orliatt recalled conversations she has had' with
Ass'emblymember Nation and indicated -she would not want Petaluma
competing with other sales tax increase measures placed on the ballot a:t
the some time.
City , Council discussion ensued supporting the proposed letter as well 'as
avoiding any conflict with future sales tax measures that may be
proposed by SMART.
Council consensus was reached' to have the City Manager send a letter
requesting: . legislation to be put in place to allow the flexibility of placing 'a
local, sales tax' measure on fhe ballot.
PUB'LICtOMfMENT REGARDING 'CLOSED SESSION ITEMS Persons wishing to .address
the Ci_fy Council regarding 'items. to be discussed during Closed. Session should do
so at this time. Speakers will be allowed ;three (3) rnin.utes;each and should fill out
a Speaker Card` and submit it to the City Clerk.
There was no public comment at this time. Council' adjourned to Closed. Session.
, at 5:4.0 p.m regarding. the items:
February 3, 2003 Vol. XX, Page 13
1
ADJOURN TO. CLOSED SESSION
2
3
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL,:- Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government
4
Code § 54956:9 (a); 18 matters as listed below:
5
1. Diane Allen vs. City of .Petaluma (Appeal), First Appellate District,
6
Division Five, Court No. A'097839..
7
2. Allstate Insurance Company vs of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma
8
County Superior Court No, 169
9
3. -Amino AkJamal vs. City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma County
10
Superior Court No. 171651.,'
11
4. San. Francisco Bayke,eper vs California State Water Resources
12
Control Board, Sonoma County Superior Court No. SCV- 224434.
13
5. Mike Carter vs. City of Petaluma, e't al, Sonoma County Superior
14
Court No. 227520.
15
6. City of Petaluma vs. Ann Morrissey, Sonoma County Superior Court
16
No. 452063..
17;
7. City of Petaluma vs. Maria I. Novak, `Sonoma County Superior Court
18
No. SCV- 226817.
19
8. City of Petaluma vs. Maria L Novak (Beason Station), Sonoma
20
County Superior Court No. SCV - 226816:
21
9. City of Petaluma vs. Petaluma Properties, Pacific Telephone &
22
Telegraph Companies, Sonoma County Superior Court No. 226706.
23
10. Linda Fox vs. City School District, City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma
24
County Superior Court No: SCV = '229807. .
25
11. Rosaura Gonzales and Juan Carlos Colorado vs. City of Petaluma,
26
et al, Sonoma County Superior Court No. 230688.
27
12. Patricia McCardle vs. City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma County
28
Superior Court No. 226978,
29
13. Jay Parsegia,n vs. City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma County Superior
30
Court N'o. 229976.
31
14, Jane Pinckney vs. City of Petaluma, et al Sonoma County Superior
32
Court No. SCV- 230564.
33
15. Sabrina Ruoff vs. City of Petaluma, , et al, Sonoma County Superior
34
Courf.No, .230622:
35
16. Sandalw, o.od Estates vs. City of Petaluma'; Sonoma County Superior
3.6
Court N,o.'23041.4.
37
17, Bobby Thompson vs. City -of Petaluma, et al (Thompson 1), Sonoma
38
County SuperiorCourt NO,SCV- 225677.
39
18. Bobby Thompson, vs. City of Petaluma, et ai ,(Thompson 11) (not
40
lifigatec!),
41
m CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Pursuant to Government Code §
42
5495,6.8, Property: Two Parcels Located on the 4000 Block of Lakeville
43
Highway, (APNs 017 -170 -002 and 0 Formerly Known as the
44
Gray Property. One Parcel Located ,Southwest of the City's Oxidation
45
Ponds (A'PN 019- 330 -009). A Small Portion of .One Parcel Located at 3880
46
Cypress Drive (APN 005 =090 -062) H'egotiating Party: Michael
an/Michael Ban. Under Negotiation: Price, Terms or Payment, or
48
Both.
Vol. XX, Page 14 February 3, 2003'
• CONFERENCE WITH LABOR, NEGOTIATOR, Government Code §54957::6 City
Representative: 'H'eather Renschler, Ralph Anderson & Associates.
Unrepresented Employee Position: City Manager
• PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPAINTMENT, Government Code § 54957. Title. City
Manager
TOO P.M. EVENING SESSION
ROLL CALL
.Present: Harris,, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass TO(Vidtt
Absent: Moynihan
PLEDGE' OF ALLEGIANCE
MOMENT OF 'SILENCE
PUB'LIC'.COMMENT
Valerie Neuhaus, Petaluma, addressed, fhe City Council with a formdl'`request to
consider the issue of placement of a BMX Track in Petaluma on a future agenda.
Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma, addressed the City Council regarding
redevelopment agencies and redevelopment funds.
William Donahue, Petaluma, addressed. fhe 'City Council regarding Sandalwood
Estd'tes and provided a handout to the.City'Council.
CORRESPONDENCE
Mayor Glass corm' mented on a letter from, Jane Ha,milton"and' David Keller, which
commended Mike Moore; Community Development irector, for his efforfs in
leading -the Petaluma Central' Spe.cifiC F)an Committee.
COUNCIL COMMENT AND LIAISON REPORTS
Council Member Tor,liatt recommended that the issue of placing a .B.MX Bicycle,
Track in Petaluma be taken to -the Recreation, Music and Parks Commissi'onprior
to the- City Council..
'She also ,thanked Mr Donahue for the information he h aSr provided, and
indicated the City will be looking at the , issue. of mobile home zoning during the
review of the General Plan.
Cl
•
February 3, 2003
Vol. XX, Page 15
1
2
Council Member Healy commented' on the issue regarding storage and
recreational vehicles parking on City streets and ,clarified with the City Manager
3
this matter has been referred to the Police and Code Enforcement Departments.
4
5
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
6
7
There were none.
8
9
AGENDA CHANGES,- ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS
10
11
There were none.
12
13
PROCLAMATION
14
15
Proclamation for Season of Non=violence.
16
17
Mayor Glass presented the proclamation to Rev. 'Linda Finley.
18
19
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED. SESSION
20
21
There was nothi'ng'to report.
22
23
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (CONTINUED)
24
25
14A. Project Update on the Renovation: the Polly Klaas Performing Theater
26
Arts Center and Acknowledgement of $5,000 Donation From Empire
27
Waste Management: (Carr)
28
29
James L•anda, Empire Waste Management; presented a $5,000 check as a
30
donation `to t I he Leadership. Petaluma efforts regarding the renovation of
31
the Polly Kla'as Performing Theatre /Arts Center:
32
33
Andrew.Packard, Petaluma, addressed the City Council and confirmed
34
Council ,Member Moynihan is, absent and did not recuse himself from
35
discussion regarding the Magnolia Place Subdivision.
36
37'
PUBLIC HEARIING
38
39
15. Magnolia Place Subdivision: Discussion and Possible Action Regarding:
40
A. Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Magnolia
41
Place. Subdivision (APN 048 7141 -0,1:2 and 048 - 231 -027) to be
42
° Located on Two :Parcels .Totaling 24.42 Acres on Magnolia and
43
Gossage.Avenues, West.of the Cypress Hills Cemetery.
44
B. Resolution Approving a General Plan Amendment to Amend the
45
Land Use. D,' , 'esignafions for an 8.76 Acre Portion of the Magnolia
46
Avenue .Site From "Proposed Public Park" to "Urban Standard" and
10
47
to Redesignate the 7.37 ,Acre Gossage Avenue Site From
48
"Suburban Residential" to "Urban Stan.dard."
Vol. XX, Page 16
February 3, 2003 .
C Dev District t ment D`s Cd t (PUD). Approving, Prezohing to Planned' Unit
D. Resolution.Approying Planned Unit Development Pldn.
E. Resolution Approving Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to Divide
the 24.42 Acres into 47 Residential Lots, Leaving 8.46 Acres to ' be
Dedicated to the City for a Neighborhood Public .Park
Steve Arago, Applicant; Planning /Engineoting Firm of CSW /Stuber= Stroeh'),
Marcy Matthews, .John Patoski, Architect, Christine Pillsbury,CSW/Stuber-
Stroeh, and Daylene Whitlock gave an overview of the proposed project.,
Steve Arago provided a summary of the recornmendations at the end of
the presentation.
Dan Aguilar, Mission Valley Properties, addressed, the Council an'd urged
approval.
18 Mayor Glass challenged the confusion with the revised 1996, `Land Use
19 Map of the Genera'I Plan, which depicts the, entire Magnolia parcel as a
20 "public pak proposed.
21
22 °Jim Carr; Parks and Recreation Director, asked from where money .would
23 come to purchase the land, as development has. dropped'.off.
Publicanput
Bill[ Phillips,. Committee for Magnolia: Park addressed the City Council,
indicating', the .application before: them should be denied. He stressed
that, this is' the "last best park chance:." He then went over history of the
space and fhe cutting of `the trees :and''pres'ented a petition of residents in
support of a potential park.
Jim Becker; Petaluma'; addressed the City Council 'regarding the ch'ic.ken
ranch abutting the proposed project,. He stated his support for .,a park .
and, agreed with Jim Carr's resolution to 'obtaining 'the park, through this
development. He concluded, by commenting that the project 'would
,have a °fe'athering of homes and 'a park and would bring in property t.ax
dollars as well as development fees.
4Q. Matt Maguire, Petaluma, addressed' the City Council and complimented
41 the applicant and community for trying, to work this issue out He agreed
42 that park funding is scarce and that Proposition 40' money may be
43 available, but the City would still need a willing seller. He recognize:d they
44 have worked' hard to meet the City's develo'pm'ent standards and
45 indicated his support if they would consider building the project with 'five
46 'fewer homes.
Buzz'Weisenfluh, Petaluma stated his , opposition to the proposal.
February 12003 Vol. XX, Page 17
2
John Mills, Petaluma address , ed the City'Council :in support of the project
3
and spoke to the lack of available funding sources. He noted there are
4
no monies earmarked 1h the CIP for parks and there is a need to look for
5
public /private partnerships.
6
7
Dr. GuyG'uillion, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
8
current proposal as it stands. He indicated the, best scenario would be to
9
find funding to, construct a park on the whole parcel. He indicated he
10
was neither in favor of annexing the area nor moving forward with a
11
General Plan Amendment. He'stated'further that there are no,guarantees
12
that if the, project is denied, that'theywon't develop in the county as they
13
want. He would support this if other concessions were made. He
14
concluded, by indicating he is supportive of a win /win situation, but not
15
the current {proposal. He urged the City Council to approve a revised
16
proposal if fhey feel a need to support .this.
17
„
18
Mari, -Ann Rivers, Petaluma, .addressed the City .Council in support of the
19
proposed development and park..,
20
21
David Keller, Petaluma addressed the City Council in opposition to the
22
project, asking "If no,t this ,park ;site, where ?" He asked where the
23
coordinate plan was. He inquired. as to; who will pay for_ the services. He
.
24
25
also: asked why 'the property owners have;n,'t been asked to pay for the
services. He concluded by indicating we need a legal proposal and
26
funding °mechanism.
27
28
Stanley S_hogk, Petaluma, addressed "the 'City Council in opposition to the
29
development, ,indicafing, "It is all about money,.." He. asked that the
30
Council '`drive a hard bargain" if they dpprove the plan.
31
32
Tom Worthen, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in support of the
33
proposal.
34
35
Rick O';Herre, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
3'6
development: He indicated his support, for open space and his opposition.
37
to annexation of this property. He asked the City Council to uphold the
38
Genera, Plan and oppose annexation of this property
39
40
Paui Bossert, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
4.1
project and asked why they would consider cred`ting an outlet on Samuel
42
Drive
43
44
Ray Peterson, 'Petaluma, addressed the. City Council, in opposition to the
45
proposal, stating traffic concerns on Gossage'Avenue, sewage concerns,
46
an;d the need for a master plan: of the area. . He concluded by stating' it
47
makes. no sense to put the City limits at the middle of the street.
48
Vol. XX, Page 18.
February 3, 2003
1 Larry Dito, 'Petal addressed' the City Council ;in support af' the
2- proposal; indicating;"parks and open ,space are important. H "e. recognized
3 the 'City does no:t have the resources to accluire property for parks and'
4 stressed " "ips" as the way to 'make things happen. He
5 encouraged the City Council to negotiate as tough a deal as; they c_ould.'
6 and urged support.
7 s,
8 The: City'Council took,a.recess at 9:35 p.m. to 9:45 p.m.
9
10 Edith Benson :Petaluma, addressed the City Council in o.ppositio'n to •`the
11 proposal, ;indicating more homework needs to be done - t0 make sure it'i's
12 right'. She urged Council to look at the impact this development will have
13 on the surrounding community.
14
15 Philip 'Becklund, Petaluma :addressed'the'Cit,y Council in opposition to the.
16 proposal, indicating it is. a dense housing proposal for an already densely.
17 populated area. He indicated the City does •not have to have a park and
18 that a park would•not offset the inconvenience of the additional housing.
19 He urged the City Council to drive a' hard deal and protect the
20 neighborhood'.
21
22 Pat Senseney, Petaluma, addressed the `City Council, indicating the - trees
23 were torn down and the property' was :heft a " trashy mess." She
24 .commente.d the animals; that are there think they are native and' if you
25 create a nuisance you should have to fix' it. She indicated the
26 neighborh`ood,wants.a "park but not at this expense. She stressed the need
27 to engineer a solution and urged `that th&Council oppose the project.
2s
29 Mark A, Winson, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
30 propOSal, stating concerns regarding .traffic circulation ,and impacts 'He
31 asked what the devel:opm would bring in terms of revenue to make:
32- improvements to Magnolia Avenue. He asked the ,Council n.ot to support
33 annexation and hot to trade'developmenf for the rights to a minor park.
34
35 Becky Winslow,, Petaluma; addressed the City Couuncil in opposition to the
36 develo "pment and Stressed that the entire. project area 'is wed 'fora park.
37
38 Judy Reynolds, Petaluma,, addressed the City Council regarding traffic
39 concerns, and voiced support for a park and opposition to the
40 development.
41
42 Stan. , Gold, Petaluma; addressed the 'City Council in opposition to the
43 development and urged them to not s.upport annexation of the property.
44
45 Jennay' Edward S, Petaluma' addressed th e'City Council in opposition to
46 the developrrienf. She noted the property is designated as o'p-enspace in
47 the General' Plan and she encouraged the Council to oppose
February 3, 2003 Vol. XX, Page 19
.,
•
1 annexation. Sh.e concluded by indicated that building only 12 homes
2 would be more acceptable than what is proposed.
3
4 Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma, addressed the City Council regarding
5 concerns with water drainage impacts from the proposed development
6
7 Raymond .Jaz, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
8 project. He stated concerns with affordability, the lack of City services,
9 and that he is tired of the rape of Petaluma and being pushed around by
10 rich people.
11
12 Andrea Hamilton, Petaluma, addressed the City Council, imparting a
13 message from her daughter, who indicated she would love a park that is
14 close to her home where she could'feel safe. She concluded by asking
15 the Council to consider affordable housing for this site.
16
17 Steve Arago readdressed the City Council and urged their support for the
18 proposed project.
19
20 City Council discussion ensued regarding monies to maintain the
21 proposed park.
22
23 Mayor Glass commented that the City is looking at development impact
24 fees now. He stated that the site at issue has been identified as parkland
25 in the General Plan and it is inconsistent with the General Plan to approve
26 this development:. He stressed the, responsibility of the Council to
27 implement the General Plan. He added 'that direction should be given to
28 continue the effort to acquire funds to purchase the land. He referenced
29 several sections of the General PI'an that pertained to the use of this
30 property and site.
31
32 Council Member Healy commented that the General Plan is a "living and
33 breathing .document" and noted this proposal does provide a park. He
34 referred to the Shollenberger expansion,, which also was not shown as a
35 park. He also referenced the Land Absorption Study that showed 60 units
36 on this site earlier. He noted there is City - owned property that has not
37 been developed as parkland due to lack of maintenance funds. He
38 concluded by stating he would like to have further discussions with the
39 d'evel'oper regarding some of'the details of the project.
40
41 Council Members Harris and Canevaro were supportive of moving
42 forward with the item this evening.
43
44 Council Member 'Torliatt thanked everyone for commenting tonight and
45 added that, "if you don't give entitlements, you don't create value of the
46 land. She indicated she would not support a change in the General Plan
47 and stressed the need to stand up for the people of the neighborhood.
Vol. XX, Page 20 February 3, 2003
She commented on how difficult it was to watch the, loss of the grove of •
trees on th'e proposed project site.
Mayor Glass referred to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, whereby he
reads .that there 'is a high possibility of'finding .human remains on the. site.
He proposed that there be an archeologist on the site when digging is
taking place, as a -matter of sensitivity, and that the possibility of human
remains being located on the site should be disclosed on property deeds.
City Council discussion then ensued regarding privately and publicly
owned park space; HOA maintenance of the private segment,
consideration of access to the cemetery area; the amount of
development fees for this project and if fhey''could be adjusted to a
higher rate, safe pedestrian traffic over the bridge, and drainage
concerns.
Vice Mayor O''Brien stated he would not support opening up the
cemetery to access, as the cemetery is private property and there has
been no indication that they would. want access.
Council Member Healy commented on the accessibility and usability of
the proposed .park space.
Dan Aguilar readdressed the. City Council, commenting on the possibility
of integrating a parking .bay on the stree:tscape, eliminating two', lots,
proposing a. three-car stall - parking bay to the north, and. a parallel.
parking bay. He indicated, however, he would expect to be able to
increase the custom lots to 4,500 square feet with accessibility from
Gossage,.
Due to the lateness of the hour, the City Council' entertained a, motion to
continue discussing this item:
MOTION to continue discussion:
M/S Harris and O'Brien
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, O'Brien
NOES: Mayor Glass, Torliatt
'Council .Member Torliatt remarked that Gaddy Park was a high priority
and there was a promise to Cross Creek, but no funds to build. She noted
that if this General Plan Amendment moves forward', this would be the
second time this Council has not supported the recommendation of their
Committees and Commissions.
•
February 3, 2003 Vol. XX, Page 21
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
3.6
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Council Member 'Healy noted that he would be willing to let staff work
with the applicant to make some changes to their proposal that Council
would consider supporting.
MOTION to continue this item to February 24, 2003:
M/S Healy and, O' Brien
AYES: Harris, Can.evaro, Healy, O' Brien, Mayor Glass, Torliatt
NOES: None
NEW BUSINESS
16. Discussion, Direction and Possible Action to Approve Amendments to City
Council: Rules and Procedures. (Ru.dnansky) Due to the lateness of the
hour, this item was continued to the February 24, 2003 City Council
Meeting.
ADJOURN
The City Council adjourned at 11:10 P.M. to a Special Joint Meeting of the City
Council and 'the_ Petaluma Community Development Commission to be held on
Friday, February 7, 2003, from 10:00 a.m. to 12 noon in the City Council
Chambers. The PCDC /City Council will conduct a discussion and give possible
direction and /or action on the Mid -Year Budget Review.
David Glass, Mayor
ATTEST: _
Gayle Petersen, 'City Clerk