HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/20/2004 September 20, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 253
p,. L tr
a~ ~ City of'etalua, C'alfo~°nia
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PETALUMA CITY COUNCIL
~85$
1 City Council Minutes
2 Monday, September 20, 2004
3
. 4
5 MONDAY SEPTEMBER 20> 2004 - AFTERNOOiV SESSION
6 3:00 P.M:
7
8 CALL TO ORDER
9
10 A. Roll Call
11
12 Present: Narris> .Healy, Moynihan, O'Brien, Thompson, Torliatt and Ma_ yor
13 Glass
14
15 B. Pledge of Allegiance
16
17 PUBLIC COMMENT
18
19 Bill Hammerman, • 1Nestridge Knolls Neighborhood Network - Reported on his
20 neighborhood fire drill and thanked the Petaluma: Fire Department for their assistance wit
21 the drill' and commended' fheir educational outreach efforts.
• 22
23 . Juan Carlos Angulo, Union Carpenters Local (751:) - (through an. interpreter) Wanted
24 assistance with their strike. and reported unfair labor practices with lack of concern •for
25 worker safety by their employer Hardin Drywall Construction (Theater District). He said
26 shoddy construction practices are routine and construction code/building standards are
• 27 routinely violated.
28 • •
29 Jose Estrada Mejia, Union 'Carpenters Local (751) - (through an interpreter) Asked for
30 assistance -for their strike. He reported labor problems with Hardin Drywall's lack of
31 concern for the safety .of its employees and the quality of its construction. .His wages
32 have gone down since the strike and living expenses have increased.
33
34 Shawn Leonard, Field Representative Carpenters Union. -Informed Council that workers
35 have been on strike against Hardin Drywall for eight weeks: The Washington Creek,
36 Ridgeview Homes, and the Theater District projects are all projects that have contracted
37 with this company. He said. thaf the company is discriminating against the workers for.
• 38 their desire to be in the union. He stated that the company does not~meet building code
39 standards and wanted City officials to be aware of this company's policies..
40
41 Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma -Talked about building and adding fill in the floodplain.
42
43
44
Vol. 40; Page 254 September 20, 2004
1 COUNCIL COMMENT
2 .
3 Vice Mayor ,Moynihan commented on the new: proposal from Norfh Bay Corporation
4 regarding their garbage franchise proposal. He requested. Council approve going back.
5 to the consultant to corppare this proposal to the others; and ha wanted to distribute this
6 proposal to the other companies so than they could respond.
7
8 Council Member Healy' said this would be ;more appropriate to be addressed with jtern
9 4.A. -the extension of the garbage contract.
10
1 1 ~Mdyor Glass said this should. be dealt with in the: future agenda approval `
12
13 Council MemberTorliatt..wanted to let people know that, Sorioma. County will be one of
14 six California communities participating in a, yearlong pilot program. This" would tje part
1,5 - of a $2.5 million grant awarded to ABAG' called the Local Government. Energy -
16 Partnership :.Program and is" a result of Petaluma joining, .the Climate Protection
1,7 Campaign. She wanted the City Manager to address the>prevailing wage on the Owner
1'8 Participation Agreement in the Theater District' Project. 'She also mentioned the.
19 Marin/Sonoma Nari-ovvs Policy Advisory meeting that she attended. in the Mayor`s
20 absence. It was noted that two members of, Petaluma'a SPAR,C .need to be selected. to;
2.1 participate in some of the- design process. She mentioned at the October mee ing the
22, decision of what projects remain in the scoping process were .going to be selected:
23
24 CITY MANAGER COMMENT -None
'25
26 ~ AGENDA.CHANGES.AND DELETIONS (Changesto current agenda only)..
27
28 Council discussed `Vice Mayor 'Moyraihan's suggestion to 'consider the .new North Bay
29 Corporation proposal after review by" the:. Consultant. There was not a majority of
30 Council support to do this. Council'Member.Healysuggested following Council IVI"ember
31 -Harris' suggestion, to. put out a. memo to address the legal, technical, and timeframe ,
32 issues, and.; if no problems, agendize in the future. He. also wanted 'to invite County
33 ~ officials to address the fransportati,on and circulation element of the .General Plan",
34 -
35 PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS -None.
36
37 APPROVAL OF MINUTES"
38
39 1: `APPROV-AL,OF MINUTES
40
41 None submitted.
42
43 2. APPROVAL OF~PROPOSED AGENDA
44
45; A. Approvdl of Proposed Agenda for Council`s Regular Meeting of October
46 4' .2004.
47
48 MOTION, to approve the; Agenda: "
49
50 M/S Healy and O"Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
51' _
52
September 20, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 255
1 3. CONSENT.CALENDAR
2
3 Mayor Glass removed. item 3.C. and Vice Mayor Moynihan recused himself from
4 Item 3.C.
5
6 Council Member Torliaff requested Item 3.D be removed.
7
8 Council Member Healy stated for the record he had a conflict of interest on Item
9 3.G because his home is within 500 feet and would not be voting on the matter.
10
1 1 MOTION to approve the balance of-the Consent Calendar:
. 12
13 M/S O'Brien and Torliatt. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
14
15 A. Resolution 2004-177 N.C.S; Accepting Completion of Weed Abatement
16 Contractor. (Ginn) ,
17
18 B. 'Resolution 2004-178 N.C.S.. of the City of Petaluma Adopting a Conflict of
19 Interest Code for Publio Officials and Designated Employees as Required
20 by the Politicai Reform Act and Reguldtions of the Fair Political Practices
21 Commission and Repealing Resolution 2002-193 N.C.S. (Petersen)
22
23 C. Resolution. Approving the Final Map for Magnolia Place Subdivision. _
24 (Moore/Bates) Removed from the Consenf Calendar for separate
25 discussion.
26
27 D. Resolution Approving the Submittal of the 2003-2004 Consolidated Annual
28 Performance Report (CAPER) to the Department of Housing and Urban .
29 Development. (.Gaebler) Removed from fhe Consent Calendar for
30 separate. discussion..
31
32 E. Resolution 2004-179 N.G.S: Authorizing City Manager to Sign Enrollment
33 Agreement in .Enterprise Assurance Program for Soffware Licensing with
34 Dell Computer in the amount of $49,900 Per Year for Each of the Current
35 and .Following Two Years. (Netter/Williamsen)
36
37 F. Resolution_ 2004-180 N.C.S.. Recognizing North Bay Veterans Stand Down;
38 October 12-14> 2004.
39
40 G. Adoption (Second. Reading) of Ordinance Rezoning a 31,906 Square Foot
41 Parcel, APN 006-216-004, to Planned Unit District, to Allow for 14 Residential
42 Lots and a Common Area Parcel, and Development of 14 Residential
43 Units to be Located at 331 Keller Sfreet. Removed from Consenf Calendar
44 for separate discussion.
45
46 H. Adoption (Second Reading), of Ordinance 21`92 N.C.S. Pre-zoning a 2-
47 Acre Parcel, APN 019-070-043, to R-1 20,000, to Allow for 3 Residential Lots,
48 and .Development of 2 new Residences to be Located at 1081 Bantam
49 way.
50
51 I. Resolution. 2004-181 N.C.S. Accepting the Claims and Bills from August
52 2004. (Netter)
Vol. 40, Page 256 September20, 2004
1
2 .Items Removed From ,Consent Calendar fo"r FSeparate~ Discussion•
3
4 C. Resolution 2004-182 N.C.S. ,Approving the Final Map for Magnolia Place
5 Subdivision. (Moore/Bates)
6
7 ~ MOTION fo adopt the Resolution: "
8
9 M/$ Torliatt and O'Brien.:CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
10 .
1 1 AYES: Harris,. Healy, Thompson, O',Brien, Torliatt
~ 2 NOES: Glass .
13 RECUSfD: Moynihan
14
15 D. Resolution: 2004-183 N.C.S. Approving the Submittal of the 2003-2004
16 Consolidated Annual Performance. Report (CAP,ER) to the Department of
17 Housing and Urban Development. (Gaebler)
18
19 Council',Member ,Torliatt commented that when this comes back :for the,
20 five.-year update she wanted. seniors ahd sidewalk accessibility ,issues
21 addressed; access to transportation for seniors, specifically Trarisit; minority
22 access to information regarding services and mobility; and potentially
23 expanding affordable child care in the community.
24
25 MOTION to adopt the resolution:
26
27 M/S Torliatt and O'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
28
29~ G. Adoption (Second Readirig) of Ordinance 2191' N:C:S. Rezoning a 3.1,906 ~ "
30 Square Eoof Parcel, APN 006-216-00.4, to Planned Uriit.~.District; to, Allow for
31 14 Residential 'Lots aril a Common Area Parcel, and Development of 14
32 Residential :Units to be Located at 33:1 Keller Street. "
33
34 MOTION, to adopt the ordinance:
35
" 36 M/S Torliatt and. Thompson. CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING' VOTE:
37
38 AYES: ~ Harris, Thompson, Moynihan,. Glass,. Torliatf, O'Brien
39 NOES: None
40 RECUSEDr Healy
41
42 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
43
44 A. Resolution 2004.-'1'84 N.C,S. Amendigg .Refuse: Collection Franchise.
45 Agreement to Extend Term fo June 30, 2005. (.Bierman)
46
47 City Manager .Bierman said this action was necessary due to 'the
48 timeframe involved with, the new refuse franchise decision process..
49
50 Council Member Hegly was. concerned about the process and not
51 meeting deadlines; he would not support-this. _
52
September 20, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 257
1 Council Member Torliatt expanded, stating that the time period was
2 originally recommended by the City- Manager and shortened by Council
3 due to negotiations... The timeline requested now would be in
4 accordance with"" the originally recommended schedule.
5
6 Mayor Glass was .concerned about the process and re-expanding the
7 number of proposers would require additional. time.
8
9, Council ,IVlember O'Brien was concerned about the timeline as well. The
10 expectation was fo reach a decision on November 15, 2004. He did not
1 1 want to continue negotiations and pay the consultant additional fees,
12
13 City Manager Bierman clarified the. timeline was to finish in December and
14 sign a contract with whatever firm was chosen; it would take at least 3-4
15 :months for the selected company to become- operational if it was a new
16 provider.
17
T 8 ~ MOTION to adopt the Resolution:
19
20 M/S Glass and O'Brien. CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
21
22 AYES: Harris, Moynihan, O'Brien, Thompson, Torliatt, Glass
23 NOES: Healy
24
- 25 5. NEW BLISiNESS
26
27 A. A;-~u~~~~~ ~,n~1 p~~~~h~~ ~ p~~arding SCWA Streem Mei~teEe
28 EI'....r IRnr./G~Lor~i~nl This Item was removed from the Agenda.
29 -
30 B. Resolution 2004-185 Appro"wig%Confirming _ Appointment of Don Smith as
31 PARA Representative to the Airport Commission. (Petersen)
32
33 MOTION to .adopt the resolution:.
34
35 M/S Torliatt and.0'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
36
37 CITY"COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION
38
39 PUBLIC COMMENT -None.
40 .
41 ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
42t
43 The:-City Council adjourned to Closed Session at 3:40 p.m. to discuss the following items:
44
45 ~ CONFERENCE WITH LABOR .NEGOTIATOR: Government Code §54957.6._ Agency Negotiator:
46 -Michael. Bierman%Pamdla Robbins. Employee Organization: AFSCME, IAFF Local 1415 and
47 Unrepresented Employees.
48 PUBLLC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to Government Code §54957(e}: City
49 Manager
50
51 .
52 {~ea~ev~d} ,
Vol. 40, Page 258 September 20, 2004
1 _
2
4
5 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL C:QUNSEL -EXISTING LITIGATION (Government Code Section
6 54956.9(a)) Brarnblett et al vs. City. of Petaluma (Sonoma. County Superior Courf.Case #MCY
7 1749,$2) •
8 Thompson`vs. City of Petaluma .(Sonorria' County Superior Court Case #SCV-225672) _
9 .
10
11
. 12 . MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 20.2004 -EVENING SESSION
13 7:00' P_.M.
14 CALL TO ORDER
15
16 A. Roll Call
17
18 Present: Members Harris, He.dly, O'Brien, Thompson,. Torliatt and; 'M'ay",or
19 "Glass
20 Absent: Vice Mayor Moynihan.
21 - (Arrived' at 7:15 p:m.)
22
23 B. Pledge of Allegiance =
24 C. Moment of?Silence
25
26 REPORT`O.UT O.F CiOSED.SESSION ACTIONS TAKEN -.No Report.
27 .
28 PUBLIC COMMENT.'
29
30 Carey Fergus, Petaluma. Firefighters Local. 141.5 -Invited all to attend City Council
31 Candidates Night September2l, 2004.
32
33 Janef Gracyk; PHS ,Library Boosters -Made. City Council and the: public aware of q new
34 fundraising event for the Petaluma Library called "One for the Books." It will; take.place
35 . on October 3, 2004.
36 ~ ~ .
37 Theresa Haire, Petaluma. High :°School' Music Boosters -Invited the City Council, ;and the
38 public to the Fifth Annual Invitational Band ,Review aril thanked the Council for its
39 support through TOT funds.
40
41 Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma -Talked: about the Kohls site and raised, questions of fill beingy
42 used in the area, He indicated he did riot feel this met the Zero-Net-Fill requirements. and
43 commented on how it affects flooding elevations.
44
45 Peter A. Tscherneff, Petaluma - Talked about the number of lawyers, and their fees; prison
4b populations; migrant workers; Leonard. Pelletier; number of animals murdered; each, day;
47 and Ramohe Salcido. He mentioned candidates for office: at the local and federal level..
48
49 COUNCIL CO11A'MENT
50 ~ •
51 Council Member Healy asked City .Engineer Craig Spaulding to respond to Geoff
52 Cgrtrwright's concerns.
53
September 20', 2004 Vol. 40, Page 259
1 City Engineer .Spaulding explained that they had talked to Mr. Cartwright and that
2 AssociateCivil Engineer, Curt";Bates, would. meet with him tomorrow. He stated that the
3 Zero-Net-Fill calculations were correct for the site. He would put together a report
4 regarding "the status of fill on the property.
5
6 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS -None
" 7
8 6. PUBLIC HEARING
9
10 A. Riverview Subdivision. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding: A)
1 1 Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Riverview PUD and
12 'Subdivision on seven parcels totaling 22:9-acres at NlcNear Avenue and
13 Mission Drive (APN 019-210-01.7', -019, -026, -027, -030', -031 8~ -037) and; B)
14 Prezoning .the subject parcels to PUD- Planned Unit Development; C) A
15 Tentative Subdivision 'Map to subdivide 17.11-acres into 63 residential lots
16 and a 3.68-acre parcel- to be retained as open space; and D)
17 Annexation: ~ (Moore/Allsep)
18
19 Jayni Allsep, Planner explaihed the area involved in the proposed project.
20 She reviewed the .proposal, the Planning Commission recommendation
" 21 and alfernatives they requested. She corrected the residential density
22 ""from 2.9/dwelling units per acre to 3.7 dwelling units per acre, excluding
23 the-St. Johns `church .area.
24
25 Council Member Harris had a"question regarding Alternate "A" regarding
26 pres"erving tree 87.
27
" 28 Ms. Allsep said that grading too close to a tree would generally adversely
29 ~ ~ affect it, depending on :the health of the tree and how the soil removal is
30 done.
31~ ,
32 ~ Mdyor:Glass was concerned about the grading and- hillside development
33 placemenfi'for'hornefoundatlons. "
34
35 . - Ms. Allsep explained: fhat there are some relatively flat areas and that
. 36 homes were "being-built according to the slope of the terrain.
37
38 Council Member Harris confirmed that there was no round a bout
39 proposed for this application.
40
41 Vice Ma"yor Moynihan referred to Attachment 8 under the final map,
42 which, `establishes •the financial mechanism for utilities, water treatment,
43 and roads :for ,Parcel "B." He was concerned about the public
44 improvements accepted by the City, in particular the play area. He
45 would like to add this and how the City would pay for the operating costs.
46
47 Ms. Allsep stated that this could be specified and the applicant would
48 discuss the financing" mechanism being proposed. She said the Planning
49 Commission had unanimously approved the plan.
50
51 .Bruce Aspinall, Planning Consultant for Cobblestone Homes -Referred to
52 graphics to illustrate the annexation, prezoning of 23 acres, and the
Vol. 40, ..Page 260 September 20, 2004
1 concurrent tentative map for a portion of the site. He stated there would..
2 be a proposed special tax district to rnaihtain the open. space and public
3 park area..All trees, and slopes. would be maintained without any grading
4 of slopes of ,30~ or more.. He pointed out a discrepancy. 'between.
5 Attachment 1:0, the Development Standards and the Tentative Map .
6 regarding the minimum lof size thatshould'state 4900 square feet.
7
8 Council, Member ,Torliatt asked .wh.y the whole- area wasn't ,being
9 annexed. She .pointed out that in regards to orderly development; why
10 this property;,ano.ther parcel on Petaluma Boulevard, South, and the buts
1 1 property weren't looked at in their entirety for annexation. She asked,
12 once again, for a map that shows 'the entire area in relationship to ofher
13 properties.
14
15 Frank Deriny,. Cobblestone: Homes, pointed out that the annexation
16 outlined is .only for the ,property that they control. He stated. he expecfed
17 these additional properties would be annexed~as they are developed:
18 .
19 Council. Member Healy also wanted clarification. otthe City's. annexation.
20 process and pointed out that this project appears to c.ceafie an island,.
21
22 Community Development ,Director Mike Moore: stated he did not see the
23 creation of an island and. explgined~ the. City has not forced annexation.
24 on properties that have not been °willing to be annexed.: He said that in
25 order. to do this,. it would require a vote of the affected property owners.
26 He explained .access has been coordinated with the Dutra project' that
27 adjoins this area:
28
29 City- Council discussion ensued regarding under -,grounding u,tilities'; -
30 retaining walls, traffic flow, access, tree retention,. and, park and play area
31 sizes..
32'
33 Mayor Glass asked for- clarification between a Special Tax District for
34 maintenance, as compared to 'Landscape Assessment Districts that
35 Petaluma currently .is using.. :He- wanted assurances. that the .City ~ was
36 protected against;liab'ility in the park or common areas.
37
38 Frank Denny, Cobblestone Homes, explained the Tax District would be
39 formed like the Landscape Assessment bisfrict but, with ''a different
40 purpose.:. The 'Special Tax District has a CPI, factor that carries it forward.
41 ~ instead' of annual public hearings. Ne explaihed that-the tax district has a
42 fund reserve established and. is reassessed .according to the income
43 stream that provides for maintenance. The :Mayor did not see this as
44 adequate.
45
46 NIr: .Moore explained that the Conditions of Approval indicated a
47 "financing mechanism.'" We stated in the past, the City :has used a
48 Community Facilities District to cover these costs. He illustrated with the
49 Cross Creek CFD that was created to cover a catastrophic destruction of
50 the weir and, diversion channel with a .replacement cost estimate: He
51 stated, to satisfy the Mayor's concerns, that this CFD had to come back to
52 Council for approval.. and it' could. bereviewed afi that time.
September 20, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 261
1
2 M'ayorGlass opened the public hearing.
3
4 Jeannette. '`RC" Ramaciotti-Coca, Petaluma -Stated she was satisfied
5 with the applicants' addressing traffic concerns in the Grant School area.
6 She brought up the access angle of traffic flowing onto the street -that
7 might create a line of sight problem. -
8
9 Stuart Hyde, Petaluma -Reported neighborhood concerns regarding
10 increased traffic entering Mission. He and his neighbors were also
1 1 concerned about the number of houses and additional .traffic coming
12 from the butra site when it was developed.
13
14 Hearing no further requests to: speak, Mayor Glass closed the public
15 hearing.,
16
17 COUNCIL COMMENT
18 •
19 Vice Mayor •AAoy,nihan stated he had concerns about traffic heading
20 toward. Grant School as well and' wanted assurance that the angles are
21 right angles to make a clear line•of sight.
22
23 Council Member Healy supported looking at the sight line .issue. He was
24 also concerned about the lack of innovativ_ e water use and water
25 conservation for the project.
26
27 City 'Manager Bierman suggested Council could add conditions to -
28 request zero-net water use for this project.
29
30 Ira .Bennett,. Cobblesfone Homes, indicated they would propose to request
31 _ a citywide, programmatic water conservation approach rather project- .
32 by-project. He suggested this development could provide a Best -
33 Management Practices (BMP). He stated he has given the City Manager
34 d report with a menu of items that could. be put in place to reduce water
35 use by approximately 40% on=site without- additional work by the City. He
36 explained this program could bring statistical water-use to zero as ~ .
37 compared fo a. regular. subdivision without off-site. mitigation. He said
38 cities and counties that are implementing; this conservation practice are
39 following a coordinated program with an enterprise fund. • .
40
41 Council Member Healy :asked if it would' be possible to use SMP standards
42 for this subdivision: with a commitment #o participate in q program that
43 would be instituted within a certain time .period.
44
45 City Manager Bierman indicated #hat -this could be done as Cobblestone
46 has other projects that include this type of system.
47
48 Mr: Bennett stated this could be conditioned on the map and would
49 require nofation.that the "project would be subject to a fee if at the time
50 there were an established-fee when building permits were pulled. He
51 expected to begin building in Spring 2005.
52
Vol. 40, Page 262 September 20, 2004
1 Vice Mayor Moynihan was concerned that Council' was:. setting policy on
2 aproject-by-project basis, and that a policy should. be in place so the
3 applicants are- aware of it; If the developer olunteers to mitigate this, he
4 supported the ided of BMP's. He wanted to bring this bdck.
5 -
6 City Manager Bierman, stated that the developer was aware .of this
7 requirement when they began.
8
9 Council,Member Torliatt'sdid she has. brought this issue up many times and
10 that the: City.: water ,us_e needs to be :reduced: across the board. She
1 1 wanted to see .new development use: th_e most water efficient practices
12 possjble: She wanted to know when th.e issue of development water use
13 and conservation would be agendzed, She supported an dndlysis of
14 water use for each development/unit and the capacity, of the
15 wastewater fhat will be discharged,. and how the City is mitigating this.
16 She agreed with following suggestions regarding the line of sight at Mission
17 Drive; :the Dutra site would pay for infrastructure ,that will benefit their
1°8 development;. and to. avoid using. the street nar-ne of "Quarry"' because
1'9 there is alteady a .Quarry Street. She was concerned about the lack. of a
20 _ policy that'anwould identify parkland parcels to provide open, space for this
21 additional: ,development. She ..suggested. that on the slope areas%tree
22 covered areas, that they remove some units .and c~eafe a larger play
23 area.
24
25 Vice ,Mayor Moynihan referred to the Parke Master Plan_ that had been.
26 coordinated with the. General .Plan and identifies park sites and. their
27 source of funding. Ne stated' that this development had been reviewed
28 ~ and fits into the master plan.
29 .
30 -Council Member Torliatt fated she was concerned with the overall policy
31 and' asked Vice Mayor Moyri_han f.he could idenfity where large .park
~32 ~ space would be available. She did not feel'the park. area described for
33 the development was large enough to serve 67'units and wanted p larger
3'4 play area. She .suggested SPARC adeiress using the size. of. the homes fo
35' minimize some of the impact of tree removal. She asked to look at the
36 annexation of tie total: area. ~to bet;ter accommodate park. space and
37 irifrastructure,Shc stated concerns with there being no single-story :homes
38 and he, cumulative .trdffic impacts.. She would -like- 1;,0~ of the homes to
39~ have `solar installed or at least constructed to have solar power.
40.
41 Vice Mayor Moynihan stated that four',pocket parks were proposed.
42 `
43 Council Member Thompson stated,. after .reviewing the various
44 alternatives, that he supported what the developer proposed. and the
45 .Planning Commission approved.
46
47 Mayor Glass polled the Council to build consensus about what alternative
48 shou d be agreed' to; all agreed to ,accept the original plan: Regarding.
49 the size of the proposed park :arid eliminating certain lots, a majority
50 agreed to the proposed. park;size..The retaining wall. in right,of=way- could.
51 be modified. to state "to retain hillside on, Jacqueline"; all agreed..
52 Regarding having SPARC request smaller sized homes, with some single
September 20, 2004 Vbl. 40, Page 263
1 .story homes, the developer stated that amending the footprints would
2 affectevery lot in the subdivision. It was. recommended to send this to
3 SPARC fo address architecture only. To aecomrriodafe solar power, the
4 developer responded that the condition was acceptable; all agreed.
5
6 Mr. Denny wanted to incorporate the bonus-room garages on the north
7 side of the property:
8
9 MOTION to adopt the following resolutions and ordinance:
10
11 1. Resolution 2004-186 N.C.S. Adopting the Mitigated Negative
12 Declaration.
13
14 2. Introduction (.First Reading) of Ordinance No. 21'93 N.C.S. Prezoning
15 of Parcels to Planned Unit Development District.
16
17 3. Resolution 2004-187 N.C.S. Approving Planned Unit Development
18 Plan.
19
20 4. .Resolution -2004-188 N.C.S. Approving the Tentative Map to
21 Subdivide 17.11-acres into 63 residential lots, and a 3.68-acre
22 Parcel (Parcel B) to be Retained as Open Space.
23
24 5. Resolution 2004-189 N.C.S. of the Petaluma City Council Making
25 Application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
26 Supporting 'Proceedings fore a 22.9 .Acre Parcel at McNear Avenue
27 and Mission brive, Al'N O19-210-0`17, -O19, -026, -027, -030, -031 & -
28 037 Pursuant to the Cortese/I:nox Local Government
29 Reorganization Act- of 1985.
30
31 M/S Thompson and O'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
. 32 .
33 B. Public Hearing and Introduction (First Reading) of an Ordinance 2194
34 N.C:S. Amending Section 17.20.070 _of the Petaluma Municipal Code
35 Requiring Insfalldtion of Automatic- Fire Sprinklers in. Pre-Existing Buildings in
36 the Historic Downtown Business District. (Albertson/Ginn)
37
38 Vice Mdyor Moynihan recused himself as he has clients with property
39 within the boundaries of this proposal and Jeff the Council Meefing at 9:15
40 p.m.
41
42 Fire Chief Chris Albertson presented the item to Council for consideration.
43 He explained that retrofitting was required in this district to improve fire
44 protection and to protect the architectural history of the City. He
45 - explained the efficiency of fire sprinklers and that investment in fire
46 sprinkler installation protects income and preserves property.
47
48 Councif Member Torliatt expressed concerns about the cost to bring the
49 pipe from the curb to the business and repairing the sidewalk as well: She
50 asked' if this would address funding as well as adopting the ordinance.
51 She suggested looking into esfablishing an assessment district with a lower
52 interest rate.
Vol. 40, Page 264 September 20, 2004
1
2 .Chief Albertson. explained that was why there: wps a 20-year time period
3 allowed and there would be costs involved to retrofit. -
4
5 City .Manager Bierman "sfated that the City could look at establishing an.
6 ~ assessment district.
7
8 Council Member Healysuggestedtwelve-years qs a reasonable timeline.
9
10 Fire Chief:Albertson explained the business community had raised issues of
1 1 cost, disruption, inconvenience - he stated that the work could be done
12 at night with minimum disruption.
13
14 PUBCIC COMMENT
15
16 Jeff.- Mayne, Petdluma Downtown Association -Brought flaws in the
17 ordinance to the: C.ouncil's attention.. He :did not feel due diligence was
18 done on the part of the' Fire Departmenf or Chamber of Commerce. to
19 establish how the property owners would pay for this installation. He said
20 the property owners appreciated. the Cty's efforts to improve
21 infrgstru-cfure in ,thee area. He stated that insurance providers and
22 merchants have indicated that insurance oosts~would go up, not down as
23 the Chief had' indicated... In .regards to protecting the :architectural
24 integrity; the time period would lead to owners not retrofitting until the last
,25 hour and wanted the task force to spell out -how to achieve compliance
26 sooner to protect the, downtown. Ne pointed to fhe HR1'824 legislation -
2Z that allows for accelerated depreciation of thecapitaf investment and, at
28 this point, it `was- not ,known if it would, pass. He could ..see no cost savings -
29 but expenses of $20,000 to $300;000 to retrofit are anticipated and.
30 property owners would not have the funds. He suggested the fask force -
31 pursue alternate means of paying #or these required irnprovernents.
32 _
33' George F. Whitten, Secretary,: Petaluma .Masonic Hall Association - -
34 Opposed the ordinance. He addressed the lack. of water pressui!e in the
35 - area,, which-he feels contributed to the devastation in the Kentucky Street
36 fire of 2002.. He stated that- fire sprinklers do not necessarily prevent fires or
37 reduce their severity. Nis insurance company informed hire that the
38 building's fire damage rates would go down, but water dprngge rates
39 would increase. He stated' that, another- .$225,000 to retrofit like the
40 earthquake retrofitting would be financially devastating.
41
42 Allen Martin -Stated he save good. intentions but that would result in a
43 compromise that was worse than doing. nothing. He suggested .using
44 redevelopment money and being consistent in applying 'these
45 requirements.
46
47 Fire .Chief Albertson commented on the 2002 Kentucky Sfireet fire: and its
48 affect on the entire block and explained this' is what they~wanf to prevent.
49 He responded it did not take. 90 minutes to get water on the fire. He
50 stated redevelopment in the area would. cause rents to increase as well
51 as ,property values; retrofitting for'fire sprinklers alone will not cause: an
52 increase in rents.
September 20, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 265
1
2' Council Member Torliatt asked. about the boundaries described. She was
3 concerned about preserving the downtown but to also assure that no
4 one is hurt as a result of a fire. She thought this should program should be
5 applied on a larger scale.
6
7 Chief Albertson explained than a committee was formed involving City
8 Departments, the Petaluma Downtown Association, and the Petaluma
9 Chamber who determined that the historic downtown area was a
10 significant Petaluma attraction and needed to be protected.
- 11
12 Council Member O'Brien 'supported this and placed protecting lives
13 above all.
14
15 Council Member Thompson addressed the insurance cost issues. His
16 research indicated that an; average of 20-28% would be saved and that a
17 ~ ~ building with sprinklers would receive a better rating.. He also asked about
18 what type ofi business they would not discount and insurers indicated
19 "bookstores." He had never heard `of water damage rates but it would
20 depend on the company.
21
;22 - Council :Member Nealy also questioned the boundaries and saw the
23 number of stories and basements as, a good reason for the delineation.
24 He reiterated that atwelve-year phase in would be more appropriate
25 with a possibility of redevelopment agency support to underwrite property
26 owners' expenses.
27
28 Council Member Harris suggested sending this back to the task force to
29 .discuss the cost, redevelopment, and cost savings.
30
_ 31 Mayor Glass noted the millions of dollars the City has invested downtown.
32 He• did favor using redevelopment agency money for the short term to
33 ~ ~ improve the timeliness of cornpliance.
34
35 ~ Council Member- Healy amended the motion to create atwelve-year
36 ~ timeline for retrofitting buildings and asix-year timeline for.. the basements.
37'~
- 38 Council Member Torliatf asked about how the architectural integrity issue
39 was .going to be addressed for these buildings. She wanted to give
40 property .owners the option of using an assessment district fo get the work
41 done sooner.
42
43 . ` 'Chief A16erts.on stated he, had contacted several sprinkler installers and
44 conducted a walkthrough at 4th and VNestern. He stated there would be
45 additional costs to work. behind, millwork/insfgN' boxes to run pipes for the
46 sprinklers, but it could be done.
47
48 MOTION to introduce and ordinance:
49
50 M/S O'Brien and Healy. CARRLED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
51
52 AYES: Harris, Nealy, Thompson, Glass, Torliatt and O'Brien
Vol. 40, Page 266 ,September 20, 2004
1 NOES: None
2 ABSENT)
3 RECUSfD: Moynihan
4
5 7. NEW'BUSINESS
6
7 A., Presentation. and Discussion Regarding Rossible living Wage Ordinance.
8 (Bierman)
q ~ -
10 ~PUB'LIC COMMENT
11
12 Marty Bennett, Co-Chair .Living Wage Coalition -Requested tte :City to
13 authorize a fiscal. impact study fora Living Wage Ordinance. He stated
}4 the completed report was necessary for .the Council fo assess the, actual
15cost and benefits of any proposed 'ordinance. He reported that over 130
16 cities ~ have passed ordinances nationwide and the cost to implement is
l7 .normally no more ;than 1 of the total city budget. He stated Sebastopol
18 and Sonoma have implemented this ordinance.. ,He proposed that the
19 City and 'the. Cga ition each;:assume 50~-of 'the cost of an Upd'afed fiscal.
20 impact report; 'the study was expected to cost a maximum o`f $5;000. 'He
21 asked that Council Members use $400 ~-$500 from their individual expense ,
22 accounts to cover ahis cost:
23
24 John Matyja, ,f'resdent'~AFSCME .Local 675- Reported that union members
25 had reviewed the ordinance and' passed a motion to endorse and
26 support the study and asked the Council. to support this study:as well:
27
28 Reverend Ggyl.e Madison, Minister Petaluma United .Church of Cfirist` -
29 Indicated that ftieir church operates a food pantry for the working: poor
30 and works for social justice. Sh'e asked Council #o support the study
31 because of the~demonstrated.need to help the poop..
32
33 Council Member Healy atated he would be pleased to contribute.. X500
34 from .his travel and conference account.
35
3b Council Member Torliatt was .proud: to state that the City of Petdluma
37_ does pay 99:9% of its employees a living wage. She would support
38 moving forward with the study. .
39
40 Mayor :Glass also supported this; and. offered a portion of nis expense
41 money to support this. -
42
43 Council Member O,'Brien ,did, not' understand why .the money should be ,
44 spent on sornethng ,that is already known. He fated that the timing was
45 poor because of ongoing .negotiations with two bargaining groups.. He
46 supporfed'tiiis but at a future date..
47
48 Council Member Harris thought ahis was a noble idea but agreed that the
49 timing is poor and: thought private funds should be used.
50
September 20, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 267
1 Marty Bennett, .Living Wage Coalition responded to the concerns and
2 pointed. out that at this point it was difficult to determine how contractors
3 and non-profits would be affected to determine their costs. ,
4
5 Council Member Thompson was not philosophically in favor of the
6 government dictating the wages that should be pdid.
7
8 Council Member .Torliatt explained why she was in support of this. She
9 stated this was necessary fo assure that everyone is living above the
10 poverty level and'that the businesses contracting with the City should be
1 1 held' to a stand'gcd that the City can, be comfortable with. She felt that if
12 the .Council had brought the Living Wage Ordinance forward without
13 studying its impacts they could be accused of not doing due diligence on
14 -this item.
15
16 Mayor Glass explained he felt the Living Wage Ordinance was
17 ~ fundamental. He stated that using .government money was being used to
18 do business in the private sector and it was imperative that these public
19 - moneys be shared across a-broad spectrum.
20
21 CounciF Member Healy. supported the study to provide an informed
- 22 discussion about proposing such° an ordinance. He asked if Council
23 Members Thompson, Harris and O'Brien would object to the three willing
24 ~ Council Members contribution of funds from their travel. and conference
25 accounts towardthis study:
26
27 Council Member Harris objected because he felt this should be funded
28 privately.
29
30 Council Member Thompson was objecting to using public funds as well.
31
32 Given the City Council was split 3-3 on whether or not to move forward
33 with a Living Wage ordinance study utilizing City Council Member funds,
34 there was no •formal Council direction given.
35
36 The City Manager;, based on individual. City Council. Member input,
37 offered a solution to move forward with the study utilizing funds from those
38 individual's accounts.
39
40 ADJOURN
41
42 The Council Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p..
43
44
45 ~
46 David Glass', Mayor
47 Attest:
48
49
50
51 Gayle Pe rsen, City Clerk