Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/07/2004 June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 75 ~AL`U~ W . ~ C'ity of Petaluma, California X85$ NIEETING~Of THE PETALLIMA CITY COUNCIL City Council Meeting Minutes Monday, June 7, 2004'-.2:00 P.M. Regular Meeting 1 CALL TO.O.RDER - 2:00_ P.M. 2 3 A. Roll Call 4 5 Present: Glass, Harris,, Healy, Moynihan, O'Brien, Thompson, Torliatt 6 Absent: None 7 8 PUBLIC COMMENT 9 ~ ~ 10 There was no public input at this time. 11 12 ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION. 13 ~ ' 14 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR' NEGOTIATORS (Government Code §54957.6) 15 City Designated Representatives: Mayor David Glass and Council Member Healy 1 6 Unrepresented. Ernployee:.City Attorney 1.7 ¦ CONFERENCE'WITH: LEGAL ;COUNSEL-ANTICIPATED LITIGATION -Significant Exposure to Litigation T8 (Government Code'§;54956:9(bJ) (1 .matter) 19 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to Government Code §54957(e): City 20 Manager 21 CONFERENCE WITH LABQR NEGOTIATOR: Government Code §54957.6. Agency Negotiator: 22 Michael Bierman/Pamala: Robbins. Employee Organization: AFSCME, IAFF Local 14T5 and 23 Unrepresented Employees:. 24 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY N.EGOTIATOR;`(Government Code §54956.8) 25 Properties: 26 Easement Over ?,PN #007-660-032 ~ Adjacent to Petaluma River, Madison Village 27 Homeowners Association, Property Owner 28 • Easement~0yer APtJ., #007-041-005, Clover-Stornetta Farms, Property Owner 29 Easement Over APN # 00.7-019-026~:Scalamini/Sprout, Property Owner 30 City Negotiator: Michael Bierman 3i Negotiating.Parties City of Petaluma and`Respective;Properfy Owners 32 Under Negotiation: Price, Terms of Payment, or Both 33 CONFERENCE_INITH LEGAL COUNSEL-Existing Litigation (Government Code,§54956.9(a)) 34 (1) Carter vs..City,of"Petaluma, et al. (Sonoma Couhty'Supe[ior Court Case #'227520)' 35 (2)' Dubrey vs. Petaluma;;et al. (Alameda Superior Court Case.#,2002057128) 36 (3) Thompson vs. City of Petaluma et' al. (Thompson I) (Sonoma County Superior Court Case 37 ~ #SCV-22567.7) 38 Thompson vs. City of Petaluma et al. (Thompson II) (U. S. District Court,.Northern California, 39 Case #C 03-0033EDL) 40 (4) Pacheco vs. City of Petaluma (Sonoma County Superior Court Case # 233469) 41 (5) Podobnkik et al. vs. City of Petaluma (Sonoma Superior Court Case #SCV 234431) 42 (b) Little vs. City of Pefaluma (United States District Court Case #C04-1254 EMC) 43 (7) City of Petaluma vs. Petaluma Properties (Sonoma County Superior Court Case #22'6706) 44 (8) Bramlett vs. City of Petaluma (Sonoma County Superior Court Case # 174982) Vol. 40, Page 76 ~ June 2;.2004 1 2 RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION 3 4 CALL TO.ORDER - 3:00 P.'M. 5 6 A. Roll Call 7 - 8 Present: Glass, Harris, Healy, Moynihan, O''Brien; Thompson, Torliatt 9 Absent: None _ 10 1 1 B. .Pledge of Allegiance 12 13 REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS TAKEN -There was no reportable: action taken. 14. 15 f UBLIC COMMENT ~ • 16 17, Jim Becker,. Member. of the'Chamber':G.overnment Affairs Committee; addressed the City 18 Council 'in support of the recent Retail `Strategy Study. He indicated he feels it is a. 19 valuable tool and the Councili should .get behind the report. He acknowledged; concer,.ns 20 with increased traffic: and that McDowell and Highway lD9 are •in need of major 21 improvements: He concluded by stating interchanges. at Rainier and Caulfield. should. 22 also be looked at. 23 24 Eileen. Morris; Director Hof the Cinnabar• Theatre, addressed the City Council and 25 encouraged them to continue. to give: TOT'funds to the-Cinnabar Theatre. 26 27 Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma, addressed. the City Council regarding .options for the 'new 28 fire station location and,. commented on flood plain concerns. He indicated there is a 29 need to identify the flood plain and flooding pattern"s in Petaluma' 'and to have.. that 30 information included iii the May 14th lefter fo FEN1A. 3l 32 COUNGIL£OMMENT' 33 - ' 34 Council Member Torliatt:+commented on 'the Water Advisory Committee Meeting where 35 groundwdter levels were discussed. There was a lpresentation by Mr..Jenkins of 12ohnert 36 Park where 'he articulated what the City of` Rohnert Park believes to be the :groundwater 37 levels., .She noted there was a :comment received under "Other Business" from- the 38 Sonoma County Water Agency th'at~ we have gone up to a peak of 75mgd during .the; ' 39 montt,of May,. Council Member Torliatt noted the Water Agency's capability at this time 40 is to pump about 84mgd, She indicated fhat hopefully, when. collector six comes. online 41 we would get up to 92mgd. It was noted. that it is early .in .the season: for they Water 42 Agency to be providing. a peaking period of 75rngd. She noted they vvere~ dlso updated 43 on the 2005 Urban Water Ntanagement Plan :'She indicated the V~/dter Agency would be 44 soliciting proposals for potential consultants: to_complete that plan. They are looking at a 45 completion. date. of December 2005.- 46 47 Council Member Torliatt announced the upcoming "Bark 'in the Park" Even'f, happening 48 Saturday`frorn 1 l q.rrm. to 3 p.rn: atMcNear Park. 49 50 She-continued. by asking hat the Council: Meeting be adjourned in memory of 'Eugene 51 Ruggles. - • 52 June 7, 2004 ~ Vol. 40, Page 77 1 Council Member Toriiatt added, although she has asked at least 6 or 7 times since 2 January, she would like- to see a joint meeting with the City Council and the Fair Board 3 set so potential of development ornon-development of the fair site could be discussed. 4 5 With respect to the relocation of the. swimming pool,. she indicated her desire would be 6 to have the issue agendized as soon as possible for the Aquatics Committee to identify 7 potential sites, have a public hearing, and give a recommendation to the City Council 8 regarding this .policy decision: 9 10 In conclusion, Council Member Torliatt indicated she had toured the Cardoza Ranch 1 1 along with the Mayor. She indicated she is thrilled to .see the opportunity at Tolay and 12 would like to have Supervisor Kerns make a "presentation sometime in July. She would like 13 to see a letter sent or have' the Mayor have a conversation with the Supervisor regarding 14 a possible presentation on July 12. 15 16 Council Member .Healy indicated his support for an open process regarding the 17 relocation of the swimming pool. He expressed there is a need to focus on a 50 meter 18 pool in the community. 19 20 With respect to the Lakeville trestle, he_ reported the old trestle has been demolished Arid 21 is out of the river; and reported on the Mayor's and Councilmembers' Legislative 22 Committee and activities taking place in Sacramento regarding the state budget. 23 24 Council Member Harris ;'indicated his desire to adjourn today's meeting also in ,memory of 25 former President Ronald Reagan.. He additionally indicated his support for an open 26 process for the relocation of the swimming pool. 27 - 28 Mayor Glass commented on having attended a 3-hour seminar with an economist in San . 29 Francisco regarding the .California deficit issue. He added. they had roundtable 30 discussion regarding solutions, which was very interesting. 31 32 Mayor Glass also reported on having toured Tolay and. indicated his support to call for a 33 special meeting at the convenience of Supervisor Kerns so he could make a 34 presentation to the City Council. Mayor Glass noted Supervisor Kerns had expressed 35 regret that the Council had moved to a vote on the issue already. 36 37 With regard to the aquatics issue, Mayor Glass supported an open public process. 38 39 Vice Mayor Moynihan indicated he looks #orward tg working with Supervisor Kerns and 40 the Mayor on the'Tolay issue; and looks forward to working on the_~elocation of the pool. 41 He indicated he was disappointed in the Argus-Courier article regarding the. Police and 42 Fire Department and pointed out the Council controls the ~ number of employees and 43 layoffs, if any. 44 45 Vice Mayor Moynihan expressed a desire to look at alternative ways of maintaining the 46 position of the Drug Force Task Officer for the City. 47 48 CITY MANAGER COMMENT 49 50 City Manager Bierman. indicated there would be an open and public process regarding 51 the relocation of the swimming pool and noted they have only talked about options at 52 this point. There have not been. any decisions made thus far. Vol. 40, Page 78 June 7, 2004 l 2 Council Member Torliatt clarified the public safety positions that are being added and 3 those that are not being filled. 4 5 AGENDA CHANGES-AND. DELETIONS (Changes to current agenda only). _ 6 7 City Council discussion ensued regarding communications: received in objection to the 8 second reading of the Animal Ordinance on the Consent Calendar for this evening: 9 10 The consensus of the City Council was fo remove. the item from the Consent Calendar 11 and to. schedule the second reading and discussion for the' ordinance at the June 1.4,. 12 2004 City Council Meeting just prior to the Budget discussion. 13 14 PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS 15 16 The Proclamation for "Affordable Housing Week." June., 5-13, 20.04 was accepted by 17 Paula Cook, Sonoma County .Housing Coalition Consensus Council. 18 19 APPROVAL•OF MINUTES 20 21 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 22 23 A, Approval of City ,Council/PCDC Minutes of May 3, 2004. 24 - 25 Council NlembeC` Torliatt indicated changes on page 1, line 22, which 26 should read "Council's" review. 27 28 MOTION to adopt the Minutes as amended: 29 30 M/S Torliatt and Thompson. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.. 31 ~ . 32 ~ B. Approval of City Council/PCDC' Minutes of May' 17, 2004.. 33 34 .Council Member Torliatt indicated page 12, line 12 should be amended to 35 reflect the " Cardona" family. 36 37 MOTION to adopt the Minutes as~ drnended: 38 ~ - 39 ~ M/S Torliatt and O"Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 40 41 C. ~ ~ Approval of City Council Budgef Workshop ~Minu#es of May 18, 2004. 42 43 MOTION to adopt the Minutes as submitted:. 44 45 M/S O''Brien'and Torliatt. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 46 47 D. Approval,of'City Council Budget Workshop Minutes of May 24, 2004. 48 49 Council Member Torliatt .indicated page 1, line l 5 should be amended to 50 reflect "Water" Advisory Committee. 51 52 MOTION to adopt the Minutes as amended: June 7, 2004 Vol. 40; Page 79 1 2 M/S O'Brien acid Torliatt. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3 4 2. APPRO:UAL OF.PROPOSED AGENDA 5 6 Approvdl of Proposed Agenda for Council's Regular Meeting of June 21, 2004.. 7 8 Council discussion ensued regarding amendments to the June 21, 2004 Agenda. 9 . 10 Council Member Healy requested the Prequalification of Bidders item be added 11 to the agenda. 12 13 Council Member Torliatt indicated she-had heard the Petaluma Outlet Mall item 14 was going fo be brought forward. She indicated that the public needs two weeks 15 notice if he item is going to be placed on the agenda. The City Manager 16 indicated. he is not sure if the matter is coming forward or not, but that the normal 17 procedures for public notification would be followed. 18 19 MOTION to approve the June 21.; 2004 Agenda as amended: 20 21 M/S O'Brien and Harris. CARRIED ON A 6=1 VOTE:. 22 23 AYES: ~ Harris, Healy, Moynihan; O'Brien> Thompson, Torliatt 24 NOES: Glass 25 26 3. CONSENT CALENDAR.-City Council and PCDC 27 28 It was noted that Item 3,D (Animal Ordinance) had been removed and moved to 29 the June 14, 2004 City Council Meeting agenda. 30 31 Council Member Torlidtt asked that item 3.E be removed from the Consent 32 Calendar for separate discussion. 33 34 Council Member- Healy asked that item 3.H be removed from the Consent 35 Calendar for separate discussion 36 37 Council Member .Harris asked that Item 3.1 and 3.M be removed from the Consent 38 Calendar for'separdte discussion. 39 40 Vice. AAayor Moynihan asked that items 3.J and 3.L be removed from the Consent 41 Calendar for separate discussion. 42 43 Council Member Thompson asked that item 3.N. be removed from the Consent 44 Calendar for separate discussion. 45 46 MDTIO;N to adopt the balance of the Consent Calendar: 47 48 M/S O'Brien and Healy. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 49 50 A. Adoption (Second Reading) of Ordinance 2182 N.C.S., Revising 51 Ordinance 2160 N.C.S. Modifying the Conditions of Approval as Necessary Vol. 40, Page 80 June 7, 2004 1 to Allow the Plan Approved by SPARC at their April 22~a Hearing. 2 Gatti/Stratford Place Subdivision. ('Moore/Robbej 3 4 B. Adoption (Second Reading) of Ordinance .2783 :IV.C:S: Amending 5 Community Development Project Area. Redevelopment Plan. 6 • 7 C. Adoption (Second Reading) of .Ordinance 2184 N.C.S. Amending Central 8 Business District Project Area Redevelopment "Plan. 9 10 D. Adoption ("Second Reading) of` Ordinance 2:1'85' N:C.S: Amending the 12 Th sat m was conf'nuedfo fhelJun~eA4'200 Regulations.. (Bierman/Tavares) 4 Special Cify Council Meeting:; 13 14 E. • Resolution Authorizing `.Execution of Contract with Moore 8~ .Associates for 15 Preparation of` City of Petaluma Transit Short Range Transit: Plan. 16 (Skladzien/Ryan) -This item was removed, from the Consent Calendar for 17 separate discussion. 18 19 F. Resolution' 2004-085 N.C.S°. ..Accepting Completion of Petaluma Transit 20 Maintenance • "and Operations .Building Remodef Project 9032. ~ 21 (Skladzien/.Castaldo) 22 . 23 G: Resolution. 2004-'.08'6 N.C.S. Accepting Completion. of the FY 2003-,2004 24 Phase 2 Petaluma Airport Fuel Conversion Project b"510-2. 25 (Skladzien/Castaldo) 26 27 H. Resolution Authorizing he Allocation_ of $ 962;658 of Additional F'ark'Fees, 28 Award. the Contracf to Construct the Gatti' Park Project to North Bay 29 ~ Construction of Petaluma: for an Amount of $2,799,09,2 and Autfiorze the • 30 City Manager to• Execute the Construction Contracf. (Carr) This item''was 31 removed from the. Consenf Calendar for separate discussion. 32 33 I. Authorizing the Filing of an Applications for federal Surface Transportation 34 Program and Congestion Mitigation antl Air Quality lmprovemenf Program. 35 Funding: 36 37 'Resolution for Street Rehabilitation - Bodega .Avenue, (Partial) and 38 - Committing the. Necessary' "Local Matcl for the Project and Sta'fing the 39 Assurance of the City of Petaluma, to Complete the Project. 40 (Castaldo) _ 41 42 Resolution for Street Rehabilitation - D Street (Partial) and Committing • 43 the Necessary Local Match for the Project and "Stating, the .Assurance • 44 of the City' of Petaluma fo Complete the Project: (Castaldo) 45 - 46 Resolution for Street Rehabilitation - South McDowell Boulevard and' 47 Committing the Necessary Local Matcli for fhe Project and Stating the 48 Assurance of the City of Retaluma to Complete the Project. 49 (Cas#aldo) 50 51 This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion. 52 June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 81 1 J. Resolution. Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services 2 Agreement. with The Covello Group for Construction Management 3 Services in ,Support of Construction of the Water Recycling Facility. 4 (Ban/Orr) This item was. removed from the Consent Calendar for separate 5 discussion. 6 7 K. PCDC Resolution 2004=07 Rejecting All Bids for the Petaluma Way Finding $ Sign Project; Project No. 0200603. (Marangella) 9 10 L. Resolution Approving the Quarterly Treasurer's Report. (.Netter) This item 1 1 was removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion. 12 13 M. Resolution :Rejecting All .Bids for the Petaluma Railroad Depot Renovation 14 Project, Phase II, Project No: 0200303. (Marangella) This item was 15 removedfrom the Consent Calendar for separate discussion. 16 17 N. PCDC Resolution Rejecting All ;Bids for the Petaluma South Gateway 18 Improvements Project No..C200204. (Marangella) This item was removed 19 from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion. 20 2l ITEMS. REMOVED'FOR.SEPARATE DISCUSSION: . 22 23 E. Resolution 2004=087 N.G.S: Authorizing Execution. of Contract with Moore 8~ 24 Associates for Preparation of City of Petaluma Transit Short Range Transit 25 Plan: ~Skladzien/Ryan) . 26 27 Council Member T.oriiatl clarified that as part of this process they would be 28 interviewing -the ridership and transit drivers. She also noted the 29 achievements and goals from the last. evaluation will be analyzed to 30 determine as to if they were achieved. She pointed out she felt the 31 interviewers. should be bilingual in order to get a full representation of the 32 ridership and transit drivers. ~33 34 MOTION to adopt the: resolution: 35 36 M'/S Torliatt and 0"Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 37 38 H. Resolution _2004-088 N.C.S: Authorizing the Allocation of $ 962,658 of 39 Additional Park Fees, .Award the Contract to Construct the Gatti Park 40 Project to North Bay Construction `of Petaluma for an Amount of 4~1 $2;799,092 and Authorize the Ci#y Manager to Execute the Construction 42 Contract. (Carr) 43 ~44 Council Member Healy commented on if it would make sense to add _ 45 ,back in the Gazebo .arid Bocce Ball Courts. He added the local service 46 clubs are already overloaded with projects, the dollar cost is not too high, 47 ahd there is anticipated park impact fees in the near future. 48 49 The balance of the City Council agreed with that suggestion. 50 5;1 Parks and .Recreation Dire.etor Carr, with respect to inline hockey, he 52 noted the skate park was originally designed to include the inline hockey Vol. 40, Page 82 June 7, 2004 1 adjacent to the skate park. He suggested having Council support the 2 marrying of. the inlne hockey with the new skate park. 3 4 Council Member Healy .indicated. `the Council should ,hold that. as an 5 option as it may prove to 'be attrdctive, .but those two uses together may 6 prove challenging to locate at a single- site. He would (ike to: see the 7 option preserved to come back acid adding the inline ~skatirig of this site. 8 9 MOTION' to adopt the resolution as amended to include the Gazebo and 10 Bocce Ball Courts. l1 12 M/S Healy and O.'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13 14 'Vice Mayor Moynihan, as the Council's Liaison to the Recreation and 15 Parks Commission, indicated his excitement about moving this forward 16 and thanked staff for their efforts. 17 18 Mayor Glass also thanked the Council forrdisirig the development impact 19 fees which helped to move this forward. 20 21 - I. Authorizing the :Filing of an Applications for Federal Surface Transportation 22 Program and Congestion Mitigation and Air Qudlity Improvement Program 23 .Funding: 24 . 25 Resolution 2004=089 N.C.S. for Street Rehabilitation - 'Bodega Avenue 26 (Partial)- and Cornrnit'ting the Necessary Local Match for the .Project ` 27 and Stating the Assurance of the City of Petaluma to Complete the 28 Project. (Castaldo) 29 . 30 m Resolution. 2004-090 N.C.S. for Street.. Rehabilitation - D Street .(Partial) 31 and' Committing the Necessary Local Match for thee. Project and 32 Stating the Assurance of the City of Petaluma to Comp(et'e the 33 Project. (Castaldo) 34 35 Resolution' 2004-091 N.C:S. for Street Rehabilitation -South McDowell 36 Boulevard and Commitaing the~Necessary Local Match for. the Project ` 37 and Stating the Assurance of the City of Petaluma to Complete-the 38 Project. (Castaldo) _ , 39 40 Council Member Harris clarified the City'sparticipation percentage would 41 be 11.47%. 42 43 MOTION to adopt the resolutions: - 44 45 M/S Harris and Torliatt_ CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 46 47 J. .Resolution. 2004-.0:92 NG.S. Authorizing the City Manager to ..Execute a 48 Professional Services Agreement with The Covello Group for Construction., 49 .Management Services in Support of Const"ructiion of the Water Recycling' 50 Facilify. (Ban/Orr) 51 . June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 83 1 Vice Mayor Moynihan expressed. concern with the cost of the contract. He asked 2 if we wouldn'i be better se_cved by .bidding this out to additional construction 3 management companies in order to possibly lower the overall cost. 4 5 Water Resources and Conservation Director Mike Ban noted this is a very 6 specialized area and they had looked at three qualified firms. 7 8 Council Member O'Brien questioned why a construction management company 9 is needed if the:City is•hiring the very best people to build the facility. 10 1 1 City Manager Bierman commented on the need for checks and balances. 12 13 Council Member Torliatt cocrimented that the Water Resources Department does 14 not have. enough staff to oversee this construe#ion. She also clarified the there will. 15 be subcontractors utilized by Covello and ddditionally noted her desire to have 16 someone from Covello who is accountable to the Council for this project. She 17 verified with staff that there would be monthly updates during construction to the 18 .City Council She also received assurance from staff that this project will have the 19 proper insurance and would'be done on time. 20 21 Staff responded that Bruce Pressor from "Covello and Ken Sinclair,. construction 22 management, would be the representatives that would be accountable to the 23 Council. 24 25 Vice Mayor Moynihan questioned if the contract could be approved one task at 26 a time. 27 28 City Council. discussion::ensued"regarding the Tasks to be completed, with Council . 29 Member' Healy recommending that the Council only approve Tasks 1 and 2 at 30 this time. 31 32 MOTION to adopt -the resolution with the ,recommended amendment to the 33 contract .(only Tasks l & 2) and' .direct staff to come back to the Council with 34 more supporting materials with respect to the remaining phases. 35 ~ - 36 M/S Healy and O'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 37 38 L. Resolution:2004-093'. fV:C.S. Approving the Quarterly Treasurer's: Report. (Ne.tter) , 39 . 40 Vice Mayor Moynihan expressed. concerns, with inter-.fund loans and indicated 41 balances are inconsisfent as'it relates to what is reflected in the-budget. He asked 42 the Finance~Director to look at this and make any necessary corrections. 43 44 Interim Finance :Director Joe. Netter explained the fund balance is different than 45 the loan balance and what is;reflected in the budgef'are "estimates." 46 47 MOTION to adopt the resolution: 48 49 M/S Moynihan and Thompson. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 50 51 M. PCDC Resolution 2004-08 Rejecting All Bids for the Petaluma Railroad Depot 52 Renovation Project, Phase II, Project No. C200303. (Marangella) Vol. 40, Page 84 June 7"; 2004 1 2 Council Member Harris. questioned' the need to rebid the project ;and the City 3 Manager pointed out there is a need'to: retool the bid with respect to the amount 4 budgeted. It was noted the project would be rebid in about 60 days. 5 6 Council Member Torli6tF suggested breaking it"out ihto two bids for landscaping 7 and under grounding. 8 9 Vice, Nlayor .Moynihan indicated the staff recommendation is prudent and the 10 project should be dropped. He suggested applying for TLC funds through MTC, ds 1 1 there are~lirriited funds in the redevelopment agency. 12 13 MOTION to adopt .thee resolution: 14 15 N1/S Harris and O'Brien. CARRIED'UNANIMOUSLY. 16 17 N. PCDC Resolution 2004-09 Rejecting All" Bids for the Petaluma South Gateway 1$ Improvements Project No. 0200204. ~Marangellaf 19 20 Council ,Member .Thompson -clarified with. staff that Caltrans is looking at' doing, - 21 some irnprovernents in that area. and staff wants to wait unt'il' the other work is 22 done' before moving forward with this. 23 24 MOTION to adopt the resolution: . 25 26 M/S Thompson and.0'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSL'Y:.. . 27 " 28 4. UNFINISHED`BUSINESS 29 30 ~ A. Resolution. ,2004-..094 N:C.S. Establishing .Interim Refuse Collection Rates 31, Effective Mayas 2004. (Beatty,) 32 ~ ~ ~ . 33 Gene Beatty gave the staff report and indicated. the. reduction in rafes will 34 be at 3':6%: 35 _ - . 36 Council Member Healy cbnfirmed~ with staff `-that the City; :with the use- of 37 the Redwood. Landfill, has a written communication `from VJdste: 38 Management, which includes their. intention to provide' indemnification 39 with respect to future mitigation fees beyond the tipping costs. 40 41 MOTION to adopt the resolution: ~ ~ ~ ' 42 43 M/S Healy and Thompson. CARRIED'UNANIMOUSLY. 44 45 B'. Reconsideration of Action Taken on May`3; 2004 of Re"solution 20b4=074 46 N.C.S Encouraging the California Coastal .Conservancy, the Cglifornia . 47 Sfate Park System, and Cocal Gov.emme~nt Officidls fo Work' Together to 48 Create a Park and Trdil System of Regional Significance on Sonoma 49 .Mountain. 50 51 MOTION to 'schedule reconsiderdton of'this item "to the .June 21; 2004 City 52 Council Agenda.. June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 85 1 . 2 M/S Thompson and O'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3 4 C. PCDC Resolution 2004-10 Accepting the Petaluma Leakage 8 Sustainable 5 Retail Strategy Study. (Marangella) 6 7 Director of Economic Development and Redevelopment Paul Marangella 8 .gave the staff report and introduced Chris LaTurner, Thomas Consultants, 9 Inc. who gave an overview ofi fhe Study. 10 1 1 Council Member Torliatt addressed the proposed resolution and pointed 12 out the third "Whereas" should read "the Study identified the opportunity 13 for 1.14 million square feet of additional retail space in Petaluma"; and 14 that the fourth "Whereas" should read "this additional space could 15 generate an estimated $2.5 million in additional sales taxes annually." 16 17 She continued by commenting oh the next steps to be taken. She 18 indicated the Council', as policy makers, need to give some refined and: 19 further direction regarding retail opportunities. ` 20 21 Based on the amount of retail the Council needs to focus on, she would 22 suggest focusing on those sites that are best located in the community, 23 which the Retail Strategy lays .out. She indicafe.d the Council should be 24 .looking at the top four sites which include the existing Petaluma Plazas, 25 the. Kenilworth site, the Redwood Center and the Golden Eagle Shopping 26 Center. She indicated the City Manager should. be focusing his time and . 27 energy on those opportunities. 28 29 She noted one of .her concerns. is what this Study articulates and shows 30 that the General Plan land use should- 6e for the actual fairgrounds site. It 31 talks about changing thdtto Highway Commercial and that being a retail 32 opportunity. She added she does not #hirik at this time the Council should 33 be adopting or including that or giving people the perception that site is 34 going to be entirely retail before we`ve had a ~ meeting with the Fair 35 Board, which she has asked for six or :seven times now, and that we've 36 actudlly had community input on 'the particular uses on that site. She 37 reiterated she is extremely concerned about -what the Council may be 38 moving forward with: She indicated if the Council 'is going to adopt a 39 resolution tonight,. we should be exempting the Fairgrouhds from what is 40 being adopted until we do due diligence, at least, in talking with -fhe fair 41 Board as to what may occur there. 42 43 ~ She indicated one of the things that the City should focus on and ask the 44 City Manager to focus on as part of the Retail Strategy is the opportunity 45 ~ the Council has for improvements to our transportation system that can 46 happen now; as opposed to some of the other alternatives that may take 47 10, 15 or 20 years to have the infrastructure in, place -which is some of the 48 proposals that are on the very end of the list of Retail Strafegies. . 49 50 She also indicated she would like some clarification on collaborating with 51 SMART to solicit joint venture developer interest for redevelopment of the 52 vacant site. She noted that part of what the Council was looking at with Vol. 40, Page 86 June 7, 2004 1 the Central Petaluma Specific Plan is the development of that site in 2 conjunction with having the tdiJ'in place. As soon as we know that will be 3 moving forward, that`s when we should. be focusing. on a major 4 development ih than area. She stressed .she does not want to ;get in :a 5 situation where w.e're just "opening the floodgates" and encouraging 6 developers to build everything we could possibly build: Sheindicated 7 ~ people will feel we have reached the saturation point and. will say 8 "enough.. is enough" -''too much traffic." She concluded by stating `if we 9 get to that point and don't build on the priority sites firsf and make it our 10 City policy to direct that, she feels we will be in a world of hurt. 11 12 Council Member Healy indicated hey had ~ asked for an alternative 13 resolution be prepared to indicate the Council would be "accepting" the 14 Retail Strategy Report and noted the desire to see staff put together a 15 work plan. 16 17 Vice Mayor Moynihan indicated his support for "accepting" the Report as 18 well. .as the language changes to the resolution as .proposed by Council 19 .Member iorliatt. He continued by commenting. he feels there is a need to 20 l?e more operi aril flexible to what is needed other than what is shown in 21 the pyramid. 22 23 ~ Council,Member O'Brien supported the proposed language amendments 24 ~ to the resolution and indicated the City should be very specific about the 25 fairgrounds. He expressed :that until relocation is accomplished there 26 should be no development proposed or considered for that site. 27 ` 28 Council Member Healy indicated one should not presuppose the .next 29 steps. He believes there are opportunities at the fairgrounds when their 30 lease is up, 31 32 Mr. Marangella pointed out that the Council should take into account the 33 Study`s outcome when considering the General Plan. 34 35 Council` Member Torliatt clarified the "nex# steps" are not part of the 36 approval of the,resolution. 37 38 Council Member Harris commented thaf 'this is an exciting day and that 39 the Retail 'Study will: be 'referred 'to as needed. He additionally supported 40 ~ the proposed language changes to the resolution. 41 42 :Council_:~M'ember Thompson commented the fairgrounds site should be 43 looked dt as a unique opportunity. 44 45 '.Public Iriput:~ 46 47 'Patricia Tuttle-Brown,:. Petaluma; addressed the City Council, indicating this 48 ~ is an important study. She expressed concerns and recommended taking 49 out the first two `'next steps" in .the process, which were, to direct, that the 50 Petaluma Draft General Plan support the retailuses recommended by the 51 °study, by retail cluster; and coordination of the development of the 52 Kenilworth School and Fairgrounds sites to provide retail uses. I June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 87 1 2 ~ Geoff Cartwrigft,, Petaluma; addressed the City Council and agreed that 3 Council should just "accept" the report and riot adopt it. He commented 4 on development at the Kenilworth site and traffic circulation issues. 5 6 Jim. Mikelson, Member of the Fair Board, addressed the City Council, 7 stressing this is just a "study." He .indicated he has. no problem with 8 identifying the fairgrounds as a retail' development site if this is accepted 9 as ,just a "study." He added ,the Fair Board looks forward to the 10 opportunity to meet with the- City Council and encouraged members to 1 1 take the time to come see the fairgrounds -not just the fair. 12 13 City Council discussion ;ensued regarding, use of the fairgrounds and the 14 tenants that are. currently housed there. Council Member Thompson 15 suggested there could be a unique shopping center concept developed 16 there that would allow their continued use. 17 18 City Manager .Bierman noted the Council ,is being requested to only 19 "accept" 'the study and that the next steps will be dealt with at a later 20 date. 21 22 MOTION by Council Member O'Brien to adopt the amended. resolution 23 and to take the reference of development of the fairgrounds out of the 24 re#ailstudy. MOTION DIED-for a lack of a second. 25 26 MOTION to .adopt the resolution "accepting'.' the Retail Strategy Study: 27 28 M/S Healy and. Moynihan. CARRIED ON A 6-1 VOTE. 29 30 AYES: Harris, Healy, Thompson, Moynihan, Torliatt, Glass 31 NOES:. O'Brien 32 33 D. Consideration of Appointment, ~of Two Council. Members to Serve on a 34 Subcommittee to Meet with Sonoma County Representatives Regarding 35 Waste. (Bierman) 36 37 Mayor Glass. noted he had received interest from Council Members 38 Torliatt, O° Brien and Healy thpt they were interested in serving on the 39 ~ committee.. 40 41 Vice- Mayor Moynihan announced he, too, was interested in being 42 appointed. 43 44 PUBCIG INPUT: 45 46 Jim Landa, Empire Waste .Management, addressed. the City Council and 47 rioted in discussions with Sonoma. County regarding Petaluma's refuse 48 going to the Redwood Landfill,. it was confirmed that the City is 49 indemnified for future and past use. 50 51 The City Council Members then cast ballots for the 3 members to serve on 52 'the subcommittee as follows: Vol. 40, Page 88 June 7, 2004 1 2 Council Member Harris voted for: N(oyni_han, Healy and O'Brien 3 Council Member Healy voted for: Heafy, Torliatt and O'Brien 4 'Council Member Thompson voted for: Healy, O'Brien and' Moynihan 5 Vice;Mayor Moynihan voted;for; Healy, O'BYien and Moynihan 6 Council MemberTorliatt`vofed for: O'Brien,.Healy and Torliatt ' 7 Council tvlember O'Brien voted for: Healy, Torliatt and O'Brien Mayor Gldss'votea for: Torliatt, Healy and O'Brien 9 l0 MOTION'to.appoint Council Members Torliatt, Healy and O'Brien to serve 1 1 on tlie'subcommittee: 12 13 AYES° Healy, O'Brien; Torliatf; Glass 14 NOES: Harris, Thompson, Moynihan 15 1•.6 5. NEW BUSINESS -'CITY COUNCIL. AND PCDC 17 18 A. Discussion "and Adoption. of'Resolutions,Setfing th`e November 2, 20Q4 City 19 of Petaluma Municipal Election. (Petersen) 21 Resolution 2004-.095 N:C.S. Calling and :Giving Notice. of a Regular 22 Municipal Election to, be .Held Tuesday,, November 2, '2004 f.or the 23 Election of Three Council Members and'Two School Board Members. 24 25 • Resolution. 2004-09'6 ':N~C.S. Requesting the Sonoma; County Board ,of 26 Supervisors. to 'Consolidate a Regular Municipal Election on Tuesday, 27 November 2, 20Q4 with the Statewide Presidential Election. 28 29 Resolution .2004-:097 N.cS. Establishing Regulations Pursuant to th'e 30 California ;Elections Code for' the 2004 G'eneral.,Muricipal Election ~ . 31 (candidates' Sta#Ar~tents, Including Charges Therefore). 32 _ 33 MOTION to adopt the resolutions: 34 35 M/S Glass and Torliatt. CARRIED UNANINIOUSiY. 36 _ _ . 37 B. 'Report From City Clerk ~ on Certification of Signcitures; Gathe""red . for 38 Campaign Finance Qrdinance Initiative Petitions. Discussion and Possible, 39 'Action to Adopt the Ordinance or Action to Pface the Measure on the 40 November 2, 20U4 General 'Municipal .Election Ballot. (Petersen). 41 . 42 Option 1: 43 44 Adoption of: 45 46 • Ordinance Amending Chapter 1.30 of the Petaluma Municipal :Code: _ 4.7 and Setting Nland"story Limits on Campaign Contributions to City 48 Council and City Mayor Candidates, Enacting :Mandafgry_ 'Public 49 Disclosure Regulations; Prescribing Enforcement' Mecfianisms and 50 Penalties for'Violations. OR 51 52 June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 89 1 2 3 Option 2: 4 5 . Resolution 2004-.098 N.C.S_ of the City Council of the City of Petaluma, 6 California, Ordering the Submission to th'e Qualified Electors of the City 7 of a, Certain Measure Relating. to Campaign Finance at the General $ Municipal. Election fo be Held on Tuesday, November 2, 2004, and 9 Requesting the .Sonoma County Board of Supervisors to Consolidate 10 Said. Election with the November 2, 2004 Presidential Election 11 12 o Resolution 2004-099 N.C.S. of the City Council of the City of Petaluma,. 13 California,.. Providing for the Filing of .Arguments for a City Measure 14 Submitted at the November 2, 2004 General Municipal Election and 15 Directing the City Attorney to Prepare an Impartial Analysis of the 16 Measure. 17 1$ . Resolution: 200.4-100 N:C:S. of the City Council of the City of Petaluma, 19 California Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments for City 20 ~ -Measures Submit#ed at Municipal Elections. - 21 22 City Clerk Petersen gave an overview. of Council's options with regard to 23 the proposed initiative. 24 25 Public Input: 26 . 27 Larry Modell, proponent of the initiative, addressed the Council, indicating 2$ he is supportive of either option. 29 30 Eve Roberson, League of Women Voters, addressed the City Council and 31 read a 1eft_er dated. June 7 from Carol Fontana-Cary, which urged the 32 Council to support Option 1. 33 - 34 Connie Madden, Petaluma Tomorrow, addressed the City Council in 35 support of the initiative, and indicated that 67% of the people polled 36 regarding the measure were in favor of it. 37 3$ Scott Vouri, Petaluma Tomorrow, addressed the City Council in support of 39 the initiative. He thanked the many volunteers and Bill Phillips for their 40 efforts. He also thanked the City Clerk and City Attorney for their 41 assistance in this process. 42 43 Council Member Healy questioned the City Attorney how the transition 44 from the old ordinance to the new ordinance would take place if the 45 Council were to just adopt the ordinance. 46 47 City Attorney Rudnansky noted that what funds had been received under 4$ the old ordinance would not be subject to the .new ordinance. It was also 49 noted if the proposed ordinance were to be adopted by the Council this 50 evening, it would not be effective for 30 days. 51 Vol. 40, Page 90 June 7,.2004 1 Vice. ;Mayor Moynihan thanked the .group who qualified this initiative for 2 the ballot; indicating it-would permanently eliminate public'fiinancing and 3 require the District Attorney~to prosecute complaints. 4 5 MOTION to adopt the resolutions provided in Option 2: b 7 M/S Harris and Moynihan: CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8 9 C'. Introdu~c#ion of _Ordinarice 2186. IVC.S. Authorizing Amendment No: 1 to; 1'0 Two 'Niter Inc.. Ground Eease 'Located a't the Petaluma Municipal Airport. 1 1 (Skladzen/Glase) 12 13 MOTION fo introduce the ordinance: 14 1'5 M/$"Thompson and. Glass. CARRIED. UNANIMOUSLY. 16 17 D. Resolution 2004=101 N:C:S: Re=Certifying Wafer Recycling Facility and River 18 Access. Improvement§ '.Project Environmental 'Impact Report, as Modified 19 by the Wafer Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements EIR 20 - --Addenduni;~Approving~the-Project Revisions; and Making- Findings-.of~~Fac# - 21 and Statement of Overriding Considerations grid Adopting a. Revised 22 Mitigation Monitoring. Program Therefore. (Ban) (This item was continued 23 .from fhe May 17, 2004 .City.Council Agenda.) 24 25 Margaret Orr; Water Resources and Conserva#ion Engineering AAanager; 26 gave an overview of the EIR and-introduced consultants who provided - 27 more in-depth information. ~ - 28 29 MOTION to adopt the resolution: 30 31 M/S Moynihan and Healy. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 32 33 ADJOURN TO THE'EVENING SESSION 34 . 35 The afternoari session was adjourned at 6:35. p:m. 36 37 MONDAY; JUNE 7, 2004 -:EVENING SESSION ' 38 7:00 f'.IVI: 39 40 CALL TO ORDER - 41 42 A. Roll Call 43 44 Present: Glass, Harris., .Moynihan; O"Brien; Thompson, Torliatt , 45 Absent: Healy (arrived laterin the meeting) 46 47 B. Pledge of Allegiance 48 C. Moment ofSilence 49 50 PRESENTATIONS 51 52 Bike to Work/School Awards June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Poge 91 1 2 Bernie Album and members of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee made 3 presentations to various students from local schools. 4 5 PUBLIC COMMENT 6 • 7 Peter Tscherneff, Petaluma; addressed the City Council regarding terrorism, 8 homelessness, farm workers, the DMV, D-Day, and greed in America. 9 10 Ednamae Campanile, Petaluma, addressed. the City Council as a Sdhdalwood Park 11 resident. She asked the Council to ,keep in mind the need to review the City's 12 Mobilehome Ordinance. She referenced a memo from the City Attorney regarding 13 inspection of mobile homes. 14 15 Nancy Prebilich; Cinnabar Theater, addressed the City Council, urging them to extend 16 TOT funding for their, theater. 17 18 David Libchitz, Petaluma, addressed the City Council, indicating he was glad to hear 19 that Council Member Torliatt and Mayor Glass had toured the Tolay property. He - 20 indicated he-hopes the Council and-citizens can work~on this joint venture for the citizens - 21 and community. With regard to the proposed campaign finance reform initiative, he 22 indicated it is the people's initiative. 23 24 Kirk Andrade, Petaluma,, addressed the City Council regarding controlled growth. He 25 expressed concern with fixing the- streets, increased traffic congestion due to 26 development,. and possible developer coercion regarding the moving of the firehouse iri 27 the downtown. 28 29 COUNCIL COMMENT 30 31 Vice Mayor Moynihan :encouraged the .people to follow the budget process. He 32 indicated he has tracked revenues which went up $4.2M per year and that there is a 33 need to have revenue ineceases and a control~ofi expenditures. He commented on the 34 under funding for streef maintenance. He commented on a need for a compensation 35 policy and- a capping of benefits, recognizing it wvould require employees to give up 36 some. He commented he feels this could be implemented through negotiations. 37 38 Mayor Glass commented' on the flyer he received about the proposed streets initiative 39 and indicated,it is full of lies'. 40 ~ . 4] Council Member TorliatF announced she will be seeking another four-year term on the 42 City Council dnd "proceeded to co.mmerit on many .good things that are happening in 43 the community. She indicated she supports the. urban growth boundary and that you 44 should limit and manage growth. -She concluded by .commenting on the infrastructure 45 needs, based on growth. 46 47 CITY MANAGER COMMENT 48 49 There were no comments. 50 51 52 Vol. 40, Page 92 June 7, 2004 1 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS. 2 3 A. Discussion and' Determination of the Location for the Future ~lnterchange 4 (Rdinier Avenue Cross-Town Connector/Interchange or Corona Road 5 Interchange): 6 7 Patrick J. Glynn; PE; HDR ..Engineering Inc. and- Matthew Ridgway, AICP, 8 ~ Fehr &'Peers Associates, Inc;; gave an overview of the options for_ cross- 9 town. connectors. 10 1 1 City Council discussion ensued regarding: at grade crossings vs. over 12 crossings. 13 14 Council' Member Torliatt questioned, trip generation details grid the 15 amount of proposed retail development` in the area of Rainier. 16 17 City Council discussion: also ensued. regarding the distance ,between 18 inferchanges and how there may be discussions about eliminating an - 19 existing interchange-situation in~Sdnta Rosa. 20 ~ - - . _ _ , 21 Council. Member Healy arrived, at fhe Council, Meeting of 8.•;15 p.m. 22 . 23 Public. Input: 24 25 Bill Paxton, Petaluma; addressed the°City Council regarding impacts; to his 26 property if` the connector were to be at Corona Road'. He questioned. if 27 the County is doing compatible planning and- stressed the need fo serve 28 the community as a whole. 29 " 30 Jerry Price; Petaluma, addressed the City Council; indicating the only 31 logical choice for dcross-:fown connector is Rainier Avenue. ,He expressed' 32 he felt this is more of a development solution rather than ~a ~traffic• solution: 33 He indicated. he fezls'tfie report'by-the consulfants is flawed. 34 35 ,Betty. AAazzucchi, Petaluma; addeesse.d~ the City Council 'in support of the 36 Rainier crossing alternative. 37 38 John Cheney, ..Petaluma; addressed the City Council iri„opposition to the 39 Rainier alternative and cited flooding 'as a concern. ~ He indicated he 40 would rather see it at Corona Rd. 41' 42 Janice Cader-Thompson; ~ Petaluma; addressed 'the City Council,: 43 indicating she, had sent' a letter o Caltrans on Friday.. She indicated 44 Caltrans is not supportive ofthe Rainier alternative;: She questioned if some 45 Council Members might have.a conflict of interest issue with this item and 46 questioned'who would pay for.this projecf? She cornrnented she feels the 47 Council is, protecting developers, not the•_community., citizens and 48 taxpayers: She stressed fhere be,no n'ew development if there is no means 49 to build the Rainier over crossing.- 50 51 Richard Hillery.;. Petaluma, addressed the City Council, indicating Rainier 52 needs to' be the first priority: . June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 93 1 2 Ednamae Campanile, Petaluma,. addressed the City Council and 3 expressed concern with traffic congestion at Washington 8~ McDowell. 4 She cited the .left-hand turn to get on the freeway as a bottleneck 5 situation and indicated she is not supportive of the~Rainier alternative. She 6 stressed the current traffic circulations issues need to be fixed before 7 considering. new cross-town connectors. 8 9 David Keller, Petaluma, addressed the. City Council, inquiring as to what 10 the measurable objective of this project is. He feels there should be 1 1 "data" and not "theory" taken into account before moving forward. 12 13 Tom Giovannoni, Petaluma, addressed. the City Council in opposition to `14 the Rainier alternative. 15 16 Richard Brawn, Petaluma,.addressed the City Council, pointing out there is 17 no cost/benefit analysis and. the net increase to revenue is what matters. 18 19 Diane Reilly Torres, Petaluma, addressed. the City Council in opposition to 20 ~ - the-.Rainier-alternative.-She questioned why the-Council-is-discussion this 21 issue now and not. during .the. General Plan process. She questioned if 22 either alternative is in the budget and asked what mitigations will be 23 offered for those people who live on Rainier. 24 25 Heather Muirhead, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to 26 the Rainier alternative. 27 28 Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma, addressed the City Council regarding flood 29 plain concerns. 30 31 Hank Flum, Petaluma,. addressed the City ,council, indicating places that 32 shouldn't flood are flooding and that the Council should spend $11 million 33 to fix the problems on Washington. 34 35 Council Member Torliatt clarified with staff the timing on such an 36 alternative, which is most likely four toa eight years out. It was also noted 37 that a Rainier alternative is predicated upon the future widening of 38 Highway 1 O1 and that the over-crossing is..not '.included in the cost., She 39 questioned when the freeway would, e'e widened and the Rainier 40 alternative done. It was noted Caltrans says it will be,~10 years out. It was 41 also noted that the City does not have funding for this alternative. 42 43 City Manager Bierman noted there, is no current funding, but that the City 44 would be looking at getting some funding from future development, 45 possibly federal funds, as well as Caltrans funding. - 46 47 Council. Member Torliatt questioned the measurable objective ofi a cross- 48 town connector. She also questioned what the impact would be on the 49 Washington/McDowell intersection. She went on to comment. on the 50 perception of the community as to how,much faster traffic would move 51 across town if there were a connector, or if there were improvements to 52 Washington/McDoweli. She additionally commented on the northbound Vol. 40, Pdge 94 June 7, 2004 1 on-ramp at E. Washington Street and the opportunity for-improvements at 2 Kenilworth. 3 4 Mayor .Glass commented on the overpass at the Redwood Business 5 Center, which there are no monies for at present., He questioned if the 6 ~ City were to move forward with across-town connection plan, what, 7 would that do to the funding-for Old Redwood Highway. He indicated he 8 is not supportive of a cross-town connectorat this point. 9 , 10 Council Member Healy noted, as the representative on SCTA, that the 1 1 number one priority is the widening of the 10'1 Freeway. He v~iould like: to l2 see. model, .runs done without assumptions for incremental future 13 development at the. Factory Outlets, the DSL site and Oak CreeK 14 Apartments. 15 16 In response to questions by Vice Mayor Moynihan, City Council discussion. 17 ensued regarding interpretations of the. models used.by the consultants. 18 19 Mayor Glass commented on using limited. funds to address complcafed 20 issues': -He-referenced-~and~-read an-article,from~the Argus-Courier on June ~ - - = 21 2, 2004. written by Jack, Balshaw~ regarding traffic circulation in' the 22 ~ McDowell%Washington Street area. He .quoted Mr. Balshaw was quoted 23 by saying, "As much as I 'hesitate to suggest the thought, these two new 24 ramps:, could, ,together, .obviate the need for an interchange at Rainier 25 and depending on the ac#ual results, possibly the cross-down connector..," 26 ~ The Mayor indicafed that seems to be the .cheapest solution and that has 27 not been analyzed that one yet:. He questioned if that wouldn't be the - 28 prudent thing to do, as the City is looking for the biggest bang.. for their 29 buck. Then there might be money to do the Redwood Highway overpass 30 and do other improvements, which could possibly happen now and not a 31 decdde~from now. 32 33 The..consultants responded they could certainly model that suggestion, 34 but in practice, Caltrans is not going fo approve that. 35 - 36 Council Member Torliatf commented on what she sees the "next steps" 37 ~ being'. She indicated she would like to see an alternative that is no project 38 and no, building of the 650,Q00 square- feet of retail and building Rainier 39 with no building, of 650;000. square feet of retail. She added if people, are 40 really looking for~solutions to getting across town faster, the developmenf 41 that ;is going to occur with the construcfibn of Rainier that we need. the 42 money:for, will create a traffic impact that will offset the use of Rainier and 43 getting. across town faster. 44 45 She indicated she also thinks that a model should be run with. going from 46 ~ the Community Center ~to Howard and Washington Street 'intersection; 47 and with- Rainier tell us how.long it would -take one to get there with all the 48 ~ development built out;. and additiorially how long it would take without 4.9 the Rainier alternative. People need to get a real feeling for how-much 50 faster they could. get across town. if a cross-town connector is built. She 51expressed concerns w'ifh the. moving forward of expanding retail at the 52 Factory Outlets before'Rainier is in place:. June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 95 1 2 Council Member Healy indicated the City has spent $7M+ t ,.tying to 3 improve Washington arid McDowell not Tong; ago.. He indicated there is a 4 huge demand in the community fo provide mea_ ningful traffic relief on 5 Washington. He-noted. he is as pleased as everyone else is that Caltrans is b wanting. to move forward on the new northbound onramp, but that is not 7 going. to provide .the overall kind of relief we need in that corridor, 8 especially with the Kenilworth .property being developed and the 9 downtown specific plan starting 'to materialize. Council Member Healy 10 indicated he is pleased with. the analysis received tonight and indicated 1 1 this is the first time he .has seen a meaningful .side-by-side comparison of a 12 Rainier alternative and a Corona alternative. He added he is prepared to 13 provide direction tonight to continue to look at what the west side street 14 congeetion.alterndtives would look like. He is also prepared to see further 15 sensitivity runs of the. computer models. around some of the issues 16 expressed by others. H'e noted the indication -that is before the Council 17 tonight, is that the .Rainier alternative is probably going. to provide more 18 .bang for the buck than a .Corona alternative. He did say that Caltrans' 19 acceptance of partial inferchanges is an ongoing issue. He indicated that 20- - - _--once--.we..havera fully designed connector and intersection---that--the City 21 .could explore doing a Phase I, of that .interchange and having a 22 northbound off-ramp and northbound on-ramp connecting at Rainier, 23 with the other parts to follow once the widening occurs. He added that is 24 a discussion that could be productive. with Caltrans.'He commented the 25 railroad .crossing will ,be a challenging issue, but it is one that, we won't get 26 our arms around unless we take.. the next steps. He noted with respect to 27 the street alternatives on the west side of the. freeway, there is a need to 28 look at the different places where it touches down on Petaluma Blvd. 29 North and we should also look at the traffic count to determine if it should 30 ~ be a two-lane, three-lane or four-lane configuration as it gets closer to 31 PetdlUmd Blvd. He noted. the southern alternative which is somewhat 32 different than the Shasta alternafiue~ and the. need to review these 33 alternatives., .He indicated he actually, feels a Corona interchange could 34 be potentially more growth inducing over the long term than a Rainier 35 alternative. He pointed. out when the urban growth boundary was passed 36 several years ago; .the .analysis supporting that urban growth. boundary 37 measure assumed that the very land the Council is talking about now-was 38 available for development. 39 40 Council Member Thompson indicated he has waited 3-4 years before he, 41 would make a commitment one way or the other for Rainier or Corona, 42 until there was a preferred route. He feels now the Council has the 43 beginning of the basic information for a good start. The Council has a 44 long time to work on this, but we have to move forward. 45 46 Council Member Harris commented he is glad to see the side-by-side 47 comparison of the two alternatives and. he is supportive of the Rainier 48 alternative as'the best and most efficient alternative. 49 50 Council Member O'Brien indicated his support for the Rainier alternative 51 and indicated. the data received supports that. He added a Corona VoL 40, Page 96 ~ June 7,-2004 1 alternative. would cause. seniors fo lose their homes and he -would not be 2 supportive of that:: He urged fhe Council to move forward on this issue. 3 ' 4 Vice Mayor Moynihan: made a MOTION to designate 'Rainier -Avvenue as 5 the -preferred' location for interchange ;based on alternative 1 preferred 6 interchange configuration, direct staff to, ,prepare an analysis of the. locdl 7 roadway alignment options to connect ,Rainier Avenue- to Petaluma 8 Boulevard 'North, take appropriate action. to amend 'the adopted, plan 9 line accordingly, and complete the appropriate California Environmental 10 Quality Act reviews. Vice Mayor`O'.~rien SECONDEb THI'MQ.TION. 11 l'2 Ma .or Glass indicated, he would su y pport this with an at-grade crossing at 13 the .railroad.. 'frock.. He would support if `if' development impact fees 14 accumulated to acquire open space were used'to acquire the floodplain 1:5 property:.: He would support it'if the' road were put in before.. the 650;000 1 b - square' feet of retail were developed: He noted people ace expecting 17 traffic relief. f development is frontloaded before the road comes he's 18 afraid there will pe more problems: He stressed he does not want to 19 sacrifice the widening of Old Redwood Highway. `21 Council Member .Healy indicated he agreed "with fhe Mayor to the extent 22 ~ that any GEQA analysis fora project that comes through has fo be 23 realistic;`in terms of what traffic mitigation is expected in the timeframes 24 ~ that those- projects are anticipated to be built: He pointed out thaf 25 Chelsea does not assume across-town connector or an interchange in'its 26 environmental documents and that, discussion wily be held, with the DSL 27 people `and property owners at the appropriate time. . 28 29 Council Member Torliatt noted her .concern with piecemealing 30 development, but That will be discussed at the time the Council discusses 31 the Factory Outlet, and } will be talked about when. we .come- to the '32 Johnson's project and. we'il talk about Rainier when we look at the 33 Downey Savings and Loan site across from the hospital area: She 34 expressed great concecri that the community will have .to suffer with the 35 additional development without having the infrastructure in, place., She 36 feels the community is already saying they have had: enough with,'traffc ; 37 congestion in the community. She questioned •why the, Council is 38 approving the interchange and cross-town connector thaf doesn't- have 39 where the: connection .,is. She pointed' out the alternative being proposed 40 doesn't connect to Petaluma:Blvd. 41 42 `The consultant pointed out thaf'it'would be fihe southernr-Host connection 43 to Petaluma Boulevard, which is essentially the Shasta Lane connection: 44 45 ~ Vice Mayor Moynihan indicated the dlgnment options' .to Petaluma 46 Boulevard would be discussed at a later date. 47 48 City .Manager Bierman clarified the next steps are where this will connect 49 to Petaluma .Boulevard and there are three alternatives for the Rainier 50 connection... Staff would focus on those alternatives and Council would 51 make the'selec#ion at a future date. 52 June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 97 1 Council Member Torliatt clarified with staff that the connection would be 2 determined at a later date. 3 4 Vice Mayor Moynihan called for the question. Council MemberThompson 5 SECONDED THE MOTION. 6 . 7 Mr. Geoff Cartwright then proceeded to shout from the audience and 8 disrupted .the Council meeting. 9 10 Council took a recess at 9:55 p:m. 11 12 MayorGlasscalled for a vote on the "Call for the Question." 13 14 M/S Moynihan and Thompson. CARRIED ON A 6-1 VOTE: 15 16 AYES: Harris, Moynihan, O'Brien, Thompson, Torliatt, Glass 17 NOES: Healy 18 19 VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION: 20 _ _ . _ . 21 Vice Mayor Moynihan repeated.the motion: 22 23 Motion. to desgndte Rainier Avenue as the preferred location for ari 24 interchange based on alternative 1 preferred interchange configuration, 25 direct staff to prepare an analysis of the local roadway alignment options 26 to connect Rainier Avenue to Petaluma Boulevard Norfh, take 27 appropriate action to amend the adopted plan line accordingly, and 28 complete the appropriate California Environmental Quality Act reviews. 29 30 M/S Moynihan and O`Brien. CARRIED ON A 5-2 VOTE AS FOLLOWS: 31 32 .AYES: Harris; Healy; Nfoynihan, O'Brien, Thompson _ 33 .NOES:: Glass and Torliatt 34 35 Mayor Glass clarified his 'no' vote and. indicated he did not vote for this 36 •because what is in front of- the. Council is a considerable "backpedaling" 37 from what was presented as "easy to do" last time with an at-grade 38 crossing of the railroad track. He indicated we now have a proposal that 39 says an "elevated structure" and there are no assurances as to "how 40 high" in the proposal, :for what "length," to ":what ramification" with an 41 environmental impact report to come later. He indicated he couldn't 42 support this; he hasn't supported it for a long time in this community, and 43 under the conditions. it passed here tonight, he indicated he would not go 44 there. He stated he hoped the Council will follow through with their 45 commitment to build this in a responsible manner, that they will pursue the 46 at-grade crossing across the railroad track to lessen the impacts into the 47 floodplan, that it will. be a cross-town connector that would go 48 underneath the freeway whenever that time would come, and the 49 original proposal that was made was so obnoxious, in terms of its 50 environmental impact into this community.. He added he is proud to have 51 been one that stood up against that for a long time. He said to the 52 Council he believes they can move past that, going forward, arid that he Vol. 40, Page 98 June 7, 2004 1 believes they can achieve less environmental impact', ..but it is not there to. 2 his satisfaction to support this, at this time.. He concluded the: burden would 3 be on the future Councils, going forward, to do the best they can with 4 this. 5 6 Vice Mayor Moynihan mentioned as a follow-up to staff, in addition to the 7 alternative. designs, he indicated he would like the Council to direct he 8 City Manager to go forward and report this vote to the Caltrans Novato- 9 Narrows Committee or the Sonoma-Mdfih Narrows Committee and the 10 SCTA; and encourage. him to reagendize and placing this ,particular 1 1 project in -the scope. of the project- for the Sonoma:-Macin ,Narrows project T2 for Caltrans Dis#rict #4. He pointed out; in suggested verbiage fora letter, 13 that the cumulative impacfi of this project; along with'the widening .of the 14 narrows, :needs to be investigated in any .kind of environmental clearance 15 that ;is being done on the narrows project.: It makes every sense in the 16 world. for our community to receive the benefit of the local. ana regional 17 ~ transportation boards in moving this forward in a cooperative..manner. This; 18 is a great project for our community and we should work together with the 19 other agencies. He urged that a letter, as suggested> go forward as'. 20 - ~written~b-y~"the Gity~Mariager,~~informing-them of-this decision-and-making ~ - - 21 this request. 22 23 Council Member Torliatt indicated at the last discussion. of Rainier she ` _ _ _ , 24 didn't vote in favor of the design of 'the interchange, -but the actual,. 25 exhibit that is shown under scenario # l shows the connection to Petaluma 26 Boulevard through Shasta Road. She no#ed she is not convinced that, i'n 27 fact, 'is the best route in which fo have a connection to. Petaluma 28 Boulevard North: if there is an interchange there. She indicated moving. 29 forward oh, talking to Caltrans about providing an access under Highway 30 101 is ce_ rtainly something, we should be looking of and ,planning for; 31 whether it happens or not. in her lifetime and if there is any funding for it 32 Unfortunately, she doesn't know if there was Council direction to provide ' 33 the information to look at a "no build" of the. 650,000 square feet of retail 34 with a "no project" alternative as well as the project alternative. ' 35 36 Council Member Thompson agreed'. with Vice Mayor Moynihan regarding , 37 sending a letter to Caltrans and acknowledging in that letter tfia_ t the 38 Council has selected Rainier:. 39 , 40 There was a majority of Council in support of that letter: 41 42 Council Member Healy suggested that the City Manager have a 43 conversation with. Suzanne'~!dilford before sending. thdt kihd of a letter.- He 44 pointed out that this city government's credibility at the Transportation 45 Authority is not high because of a :pattern of jumping the gun and 46 jumping in with.. half-baked ideas, as well as "individual council members 47 running up (here trying to 'push agendas that are not agreed to by the. 48 entire City Council.. So, before a letter is sent, he urged; the City Manager 49 to.check with Suzanne Wilford to see if the letter would be appropriate. 50 51 Council Member Thompson agreed. 52 June 7, 2004 Vol. 40, Page 99 1 2 Mayor Glass..got the consensus of the City Council to start a .new .item 3 after 10 p.m. 4 5 B. Discussion dnd Preliminary Evaluations of Solid Waste; Recyclable 6 Materials and'Yard Trimming Collection Services Proposals. 7 8 Tracy Swanborn, Hilton Farnkopf Hobson, gave an overview and 9 presentation on: the proposals. 10 1 1 Public lngut; 12 13 Art Cader, ,P.etaluma, addressed the City Council, noting he had toured 14 the North Bay Recycling Plan -and found it to be a very clean facility. 15 16 Davitl 'Yearsley, 'Petaluma, addressed the City Council, asking them to 17 consider carefully where the garbage will go. He urged the Council to 18 include the Redwood Landfill- on their site visits. 19 20 - - --Eldori=Killian;-Petaluma, addressed -the~•City;Gouneil,-noting he ~is--inspired 21 thaf there dre fine proposals before the Council. He pointed out there is a 22 local proposer, but would' hope the Council considers the best service for 23 the best rate. 24 25 Vice- Mayor Moynihan inquired about A6939 standards and diversion 26 rates. He also clarified if the City does not continue as a part of the 27 regional authority the 'city°would have. to come up with their own plan for 28 diversion .and .:measurements. 29 30 Mayor Glass expressed a desire to see-the Council tour all of the facilities. 31 32 Council .Member Healy indicated he would like more information 33 regarding ongoing discussions with the County regarding the JPA. He 34 would also 'like more 'information on alternative landfills, potential 35 indemnification, and if exiting the JPA, how that would go procedurally, 36 as well as.what the cost is-likely to `be. 37 ~ _ 38 Council.Member Torliatt expressed a desire to. engage the public. more in 39 the process. She suggested putting additional information in water biNs. 40 41 City- Manager- Bierman,, in response to questions, noted driving records 42 _ and use-..permits are being reviewed; and that Risk Management is looking • 43 at fhe compliance issues. 44 45 Council Member Healy requested information on indemnification for the 46 future and the past. 47 48 Vice Mayor Moynihan indicated he would like to. make sure the City could 49 stand on their own without the JPA. 50 Vol. 40, Page 100 June 7, 2004 1 Gene. Beatty indicated. to the Council that site visits need, to be conducted on 2 fwo separate days-and fhaf it would not be feasible fo expect to visit all the sites 3 in one. day. - 4 5 ADJOURN 6 7 The meeting vvas adjourned of l 1:05 ,p.m. in memory of Eugene Ruggles to a City Council 8 Budget° Workshop to be held June 9; 2004 at 5:30 p:m. 9. 10 11 ' l2 13 14 avid Glass, Mayor 15 16 Aftesf: 17 18 19 2'1 Gayle _P ' ersen, City Clerk. 22 23 - 24 25 26 27 28 , 29 30 31