HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 02/03/2003February 3, 2003 Vol. 38, Page 329`
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
3'S
36
37
38
39
40
W~ALU~
a ~ City iof'I'etaluma, California
ITY C, NCIL MEETING
C ®U
I8S$
City Council Meeting ,Minutes
Monday, February 3, 2003 - 3:00 p.m.
Regular Meeting,
ROLL CALL: 3:00 p. m.
Present: Harris; Canevgro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor G'iass, Torliatt;
Moynihan
PUBLIC COAIIMENT:
Richard. Ramstead, Petaluma, addressed the City Council 'regarding the
Magnolia Place item expressing concerns regarding. density, tiger salamanders;
nitrates in the water and notification procedures. He also commented on traffic
congestion and concluded by stating the City can provide City water to county
residents. at least if fhey are within the Urban Growth Bouhdary.
Barry Bussewitz, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in support of the Wetlands
Wastewater Treatment Plarit and for the purchase of the Gray Property being
considered in Closed Session'fhis afternoon.
Geoff Cgrtwrighf, Petaluma, .addressed the City Council regarding a 7%25/2002
Press Democrat article regarding 'flooding. Ne asked the City Council to do the
right thing and to follow the law.
CORRESPONDENCE
There were no comments.
COUNCIL CONINIENT AND LIAISON REPORTS
Council .Member Torliatt `requested that 'th'e Sonoma County Water Advisory
Committee Budget be placed under Unfinished Business on the next Council
Agenda-for discussion.
Council Member Canevdro asked that a discussion regarding the City's
Campaign Finance Ordinance be placed on a future agenda for discussion.
Council AAernber Moynihan requested that a review and discussion of the City's
Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Program be placed on a future agenda.
Vol. 38, Page 330
February 3, 2003
1 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
2
3 There were none: '
4
5 AGENDACHANGES AND: DELETIONS: HEARINGS REQUIRE_f~ BY LAW: Applicants
6 and/or dppellarifs may :have up to ten miriutes at` the outset of he ,pub- lic.
7 discussion to make (heir remarks a_nd up to five minutes for concluding remarks
8 after other members of th.e public have spoken.
9 No changes made.
10 ,. _
11 APPOINTMENTS
12
13 l :A: Sonoma County Library Commission. One Represer~ifative.
14
15 MOTION to reappoint Dorothy Bertucci and to adopt:
16
17 Resolution No. 2003-13 N.C.S. Reappointing ;Dorothy Bertucci as the City of
18 Petaluma'- _Representafve to the Sonoma County Library Commission.
19
20 M/S Moynihan, and Torliatt ,.
21
22 AYES:.. Harris:, C:an;evaro; Healy.,,. Vice Mayar O'Brien,. ,Mayor Glass,
'23 Torliatt and,Moynih`an
'2.4
25 NOES: None
26
27 1.B. Recommendations "to the Mdyors' & Councilmemlbers' Assocation; City
28 Selection Committee; for the Following Appoinitments to Upcoming
29 bacancies.
30
31 1. Local Agency Formgton Commission (LAFCO) One Vacancy. Term
32 Expires 5/1 /05.
33
34 MOTION by Council Member :Harris to support the gppointrnent o.f Lisa
3.5 Schaffner, Council Member, Hegldsburg;
36
37 MOTION by Council Member Torliatt to support the appointment of
38 Leah :Gold,. Vice Mayor;. Healdsburg;
39
40 VOTE to support ap,pon;tment of Lisa Schaffner:
41
42 M/S, Harris anci Canevaro =.Motion' ca"rried by`folQowing;yote;
43
44 AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Vice Mayor G'Brien, Moynihan
45 NQES°. ~ - Healy, Mayor Glass, Tocliatt
46
February 3, 2003
Vol. 38, Page 331
1 2. ;M'etropoltan Transportation Commission (MTC): One Vacancy, Expires
_.
2 February 9; 2003:. Association Submits Three Names to the Board of
3 Supervisors for Consideration.
4
5 MOTION to support reappointment of Sharon Wright, Council Member,
6 Santa Rosa:
7
8 M/S Moynihan and Harris
9
10 AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O''Brien, Mayor .Glass,
11 Torliatt and Moynihan
12
1.3 NOES: None
14
15 3. Bay Area Air Qualify Contol Board: .One Vacancy, Expires March
16 2003.
17
18 MOTION to support the appointment of Council Member Torliatt:
19
20 M/S Moynihan and O'Brien
21
22 AYES: Harris., Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
- 23 Torliatt and Moynihan
24
25 NOES: None
26
27 4. Golden Gate Bridge, Highway .8~ Transportation District: One Vacancy,
28 Expires March 2003. Association Submits Recommendation to the
29 Board of Supervisors for Consideration.
30
31 MOTION to support -the appointment of Mike Martini, Council Member,
32 Santa Rosa:
33
- 34 M/S O'Brien and Moynihan
35
36 AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
37 Torliatt and Moynihan
38
39 NOES: None
40
41 5. Affordable Housing Linkage Fee Working-Group. One Representative.
42.
43 MOTION to support the appointment of Council Member Healy:
. 44
45 M/S Torliatt and O'Brien
46
47 AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass,
48 Torliatt and Moynihan
Vol. 38, Page 332 February 3, 2003
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1.1
12
13
14
15
1.6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
4'0
4.1
42
43
44
45
46
47
NOES: None
1.C. Sonoma County Tourism Council's Investor's Committee.
Represenfative
MOTION to appoint Vice Mayor Q'Brien and adopt:
One
Resolution 'No. 2003-14 N.C:S. supporting the app,ointmen:t of Vice Mayor
Mike O'B:rien to fhe Sonoma County Tourism Council Investor"s,
Committe,e.'
M/S Torliatt and Canevaro
AYES.: Harris, Ganevaro, Healy, Vice ,Mayor O''Brien, Mayor Glass,
Torliatt and. Moynihan
NOES: None
l .D, Cities 'for Climate Protection Campaign,. Sponsore:~tl by the; Internationdl
Council for Local iEnvironrnental Initiatives (ICLEI). One Represeintative..
MOTfON to support the appointment of'.Council Ivl'ember Torliatt and to
adopt:
Resolution No. 2003-15' N:C.S. Appointing Council Member Torliatf as the
City's .Representative on the cities for Climate Protection Campaign.:
M7S Healy and Ca_ nevaro `
AYES:. Harris,. -Canevaro, Healy, Vice ,Mayor O"'Brien, Mayor Glass,
Torliatt and Moynihan
NOES: None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Torliatt:.requested t,hdt Item 7 be.removed from 'the Consent
Calendar for discussion.
.Council Member Moynihan requested fihat Item 9 be removed from the Consent
Calendar for discussion:
MOTION to adopt the balance of the Consent`Calendaras proposed;
,r~~~e~t+9n ~:29.~6o~e#~ibl#-&nael~inQ~lV' o., ~n~~et~~-ot~'3.
February 3, 20'03 Vol;, 38, Page 333
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3'0
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
;~c-le~ed-~~c~l'+'~,T.~-~.-`~ek-+c-ks. '~~ ~^'nry^~~"~~~ ltem was not introduced
an January" 27, 20,03. ~_ .
__ - - -
{~-u~a~sl~} Ifem moved to February.24; 2003 Council Meeting.
4. Ordinance. No. 2143 N.C.S, Approving Ground Lease with Cingulgr
Wireless for Antenno.at LaCresta.H'ill. (Beatty)
~l-1nr~~ir~n "FC'onr~nrJ 17orv,^lin'i~vl ~#~j~rdir~~'nE~ ~monrlinrv (lri-lir~rvrii-o ~Ir~ 77''2'2
lfem was not introduced on January 27, 2003.
6. Resolution No. 2003-16 N.C:S. Approving the Plans and Specifications
Prepared by the Water Resources and Conservation Department. and
Awarding the Contract for the 20.02-2003 Water .Main Replacement
Project. (The Project Involves Replacing Water Mains. at Various Locations
to Improve Service and Reduce Mainfienance Costs. The Project Also
fnciudes 'the. Replacement of a Deteriorating Sewer Main Located Within
the Water Main Construction .Area.) Estimated Project Cost: $553,690.
Funding Sources: Water and Sewer Funds (Ban).
7. Resolution Approving the Plans and; Specifications and ..Awarding. the
Contract for the Property Site . Lmprovements - Water' Field Office
Soundwall Project. The: Project: Inyolx,es Removdl ofi Existing Fence and
Provide and .Install. Precast Concrete: Soundwall. Estimated Project C'ost':
$70,000.00. ('Ban/Simmons) Removed from the Consent- Calendar for
discussion. ,
8. Resolution ,No. 2003-18 N.C:S. Declaring Various Vehicles 'and Equipment
Surplus to the: City's Needs and Directing the City Manager to Dispose _of
the Vehicles and Eguipment .in Accordance with Provisions of the
Petaluma Municipal Code:. ;(Thomas)
9. Approval, of .P.ropgsed_ Agenda, for C_ouncil's Regular Meeting. of February
~24, 2003... Removed from fhe; Consent Calendar for discussion.
M/S Moynihan and O'Brien
AYES; Harris,. Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor Glass, Torliatt
and Moynihan
NOES: None
Vol. 38, Page 334 February 3, 20Q3
1 ITEMS 'REMOVED -FROM CONSENT:
2
3 7. Resolution Approving the :Plans. and Specifications and Awarding the
4 Contract for the Property' Site. Improvements •- Wafer Field Office
5 Soundwall Project. The Project Involves R:emovgl of Existing Fence .and.
6 `P.rovide and Install Precast Concrete Soundwall. Estimated Project Cost°
7 $70,000.00. .(Ban/Si.mrnons) '
8
9 Council Member Torliatt asked; for language under .1.. •within the. resolved
1;0 statement 'be removed' which referenced fhat '`the plans and
11 specifications for the above-mentioned project a_re hereby approved" as'
12 :the .City Council had not actually seen them.
13
14 9. Apprdval of Proposed Agenda for Council' Regulnr Meeting of February
-15 24, 2003.
16
17 Council Member Torliatt requested that an item be• added to Review and
18 Sonoma County Water Agency Propos°ed Budget.
19
20 Council Member Torliatt also recommended that 3A be deferred until the
21 alternatives an:d analysis of the Gen'eral_Pla'n Surface Water/Traffic Models
22 are discussed..
23
_ __
24 Council Nlernb.er, Torliat# made the MOTION t`o defer Item 3A, the motion
25 was seconded by Mayor Gldss, '~
26
27 City C:ouneil. discussion ensued regarding the~;request; with the cnajoritq of
28 Council supporting keep-ng the item on~the Agenda
29 -
30 With fhose amendments, the #ollowing MOTION ,was made.:
31 _
32 MOTION to adopt the resolutign (with the amendm'en'f to remove
33 language which referenced that plans: and specifications for the project
34 are approved) and to approv_ e the February 24, 2003 Proposed Agenda
35 as •amended: ~ ,
36 -
37 ~ Resolution No. 2003-17 N.C.S.; Awarding they Contract for the Property'Site
38 Improvements -Water-Field Office Soundwall Project. The Project Involves
39 Removal of Existing. ,Fence and' Provide and .Install Precast- C'onerete
40 Soundwall.. Estimated Projecf Cost,: $70;000:00. (Ban/Simmons)
41 .
42 NI/S Moynihan and,Torliatt
43
44 .AYES: Harris, Canevaro, H,ealy., Vice Mayor O'Brien, Mayor' Glass,
45 Torl,iatt and Moynihan
46
47 NOES: None
4g
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
February 3, 2003
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Vol. 38, Page 33'5
10. Discussion and Possible Action on an Appeal by Cobblestone Homes, Inc.,
of a Decision by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
(SPARC) to Apply a Condition of Approval Prohibiting Vinyl Windows. in
Their Approval of Cobblestone's 37 Unit V1lashington Creek Village
Subdivision' on East Washington Street Southwest of Prince Park.
(Moore/Robbe)
11. Discussion and Possible Action on an Appeal by Bill Dick of a Decision by
the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) to Apply a
Condition of Approval Requiring Wood Windows in Their Approval. of
Baker Ranch Located at the Southeast Corner of Ely Road and Corona
Road. (Moore/Lafler)
Mike Moore, Director of Community Development, with the concurrence
of the City Council, gave the staff presentation regarding both the
appeals.
Ira Bennett, Appellant, addressed the City Council regarding the SPARC
decision to require that prior to issuing building permits, all residences .in
the Washington Creek. Subdivision shrill be modified so that no vinyl
windows are proposed. He urged the City Council to uphold his appeal.
Chris Lynch, .SPARC Member,. addressed the City ~ Council clarifying that
this is not a standard for aIJ residences in P.'etaluma, it pertains to thin.
particular subdivision. He clarified how SPARC felt this condition would
ensure that ,new development utilize. the highest .quality materials. He
continued by .indicating SPARC Committee Members had discussed the
possible environmental affects.,of PVC at previous hearings. 1n conclusion,
he urged the City Council to support the staff's recommendation to
uphold the SPARC's decision and deny fhe appeal.
Jack Rittenhouse, Chair of SPARC, addressed the City, Council urging
support of the staff's recommendation to upho d the SPARC''s decision
and deny the appeal .
Teresa Barrett, SPARC Member, addressed the City Council` in opposition
to using vinyl windows due to fh+e effects of polyvinyl chloride.
Clayton Engsfrom, Petaluma, addressed the -City Council in opposition to
requiring wooden windows and indicated that it would be precedent
setting. He stressed the need for homeowners ~to `be aware of hazards in
their houses without requiring developers to ` utl4ize specific products in
order to protect them.
Vol. 38, P-age 336
Febeuary, 3, .2003
1 Steve Anre, Petaluma, addressed.. the City Council noting this is, noa a
2 clear-cut issue as the renderings for the .development are not accurate as
3 to how vinyl windows actually look.
4
5 David Bradley, ~ Ryder Homes,. addressed the City Council regarding.
6 aluminum windows vs. vinyl, windows. He stated his support of using vinyl
7 w. inflows and for upfiolaing the appeal. He added that,: actually, a vinyl
8 window is more- expensive than an' aluminum window and that vinyl is a
9 better .quality product =perhaps even better than wood. He noted the
10 proble.rns with the occurrence of mold with wooden windows.
11
12 .David. Rabbif; Architect,. addressed the City Council in support of SPARC
13 and urged the Counci(to deny the ap_ peals.
14
1.5 .Ira. Bennett, Petaluma,. addressed the: CounciC indicating: staff has not
;l6 been able to provide anything ref,:uting what he appealed. He added,
17 the subdivision is ;no,t "high end" and that' everythin~~ in one's house is "off-
18 gass_ng." He stated vinyl windows are a permit°ted ,material and he
19 doesn' believe they can be precluded from using them, He stressed Phis.
20 issue is absurd and that there is a design. standard to which. the material
21 has to conform. He feels the .Cify Council needs to;send a strong message
2~2 fg ~SP~ARC as. to what' fheir real mission. is - SPARC"s, job is to reflect the
23 community's: tas#e,
25 Bill Dick, Baker Ranch; addressed the City Council indicating fhis is an
26 issue of price and cost. The cost of the ,house does have an affect on the
27 buyer of the house. ,Vinyl windows are the windows of choice today and
28 actually preferred over alurrminurn windows. He poinfed out they don''t
29 have to be painted; they are a superior projE;ct. He added most
30 subdivision homes near .his project have vinyl windows. He noted his
31 drawings did not."reflect wood windows and if matE~rials being used were
32 going to be that'important, they should have, been discussed upfront; He
33 concluded by stating .his company has' received: an award. of design.
34 excellence from„SPARC for ,the Heritage Woods ,project and Urged the
35 City Council to uphold his appeal
36 ..
37 Chris Craiker, Archi#ect fore Baker Ranch, addressed. the City Council,.,
38 indicdting #hqt .,when they went before, SPARC. they were given
39 alternatives of wood o`r .aluminum ;windows. They cou d use wood
40 windows with a vinyl' clad: `
41
42 Janet Gracy:k, SPARC ..Member, addressed fhe City Council, indicati'n'g
43 SPARC fried hard to work with the app.l'icants: She stated SP`ARC''s.'input
44 helps to improve projects and they do. ask for materials than will be Used,
45 upfront. Sheatated the difference. in the windows is very apparent.
46 '
February 3, 2003 'Vol. 38, Page 337
1 Jack Rittentiouse> Ghair, SPARC; addressed the City' C,oun:cil, indicating
2 SPARC _reviews 8-12 projects a month, They ask for materials being ,used,
3 renderings, colors, etc. and clarified there is discretion allowed of SPARC.
4
5 Linda Mathies, SPARC Member, addressed the City Council, indicating
6 SPARC works hard with applicants tocome up with quality designs using
7 quality materials.
8
9 ira Bennett readdressed the City Council, stating that you cannot discern
10 the difference between the windows and that ther..e are no real design
11 implications.
12
13 Council Member Torliatt agreed with. the need for a uniform standard.
14 She commented that the City should provide a list of what materials will
15 be needed for SPARC review that the developers need to provide. She
16 noted adjacerif uses and structures should be shown on the site plans so
17 That- people have a better hq_ndle on how a project. fits into a
18 neighborhood. She added that SPARC does have purview over visual,
19 quality, and environmental .concerns and stressed the need to strive for
20 excellence in design.
21
22 Council .Member Healy commented that SPARC is one of the best
23 committees and That this has been an evolving discussion. He indicated it
24 he had to vote tonight, he would deny theappeal but would. prefer that
2'S' the issue be sent back to SPARC for a` refinement on legitimate design
26 expectations and what the real ;design standards dre.
27"
28 ~ Vice Mayor O'Brien stated .his agreement with most of what Council
29 Member Healy stated. He feels Council is being asked to compare apples
30 and. oranges and stressed the need, for ,more appropriate and true
31 comparisons of windows. He indicated he sees nothing wrong with th'e use
32 of vinyl windows and would vote to uphold the appeals.
33
34 Council Member Moynihan commented thaf SPARC shou_Id take a look at
35 this' issue overall and establish .a policy and' not establish polie,'ie`s. on a~ case
36 _ by case basis, indicating that is not good government: He a;dd'ed when a
37, ~ policy is set, all aesthetics should be considered. He indicated his support
38 ~ of Council Member Healy`'s suggestion and added: there is a need for
39 more workforce housing. He stressed the n~eed.to address the affordability
40 issue also... He indicated, he agrees with what SPARC is trying to achieve,
41 but feels it is not fair to hold this project up when there is no official policy.
42 He concluded by stating he would support the appeal and would sup.porf
43 . ~ having SPARC come back with a policy.
44
4'S Council Member Harris commented on the use of vinyl windows, which is
46 an .industry standard. He feels the City should have a uniform standard, as
47 well. He indicated he would'be supporting the appeal.
48
Vol. 38, Page 338
February 3, 2003
1 .Council Nlernber Cane~aro indicated a desire. to rn:ake the: project in
2 question look 'like the surrounding community.. He sees no problem with
3 vinyl windows and would support 'the appeal with direction f'or stafit and
4 S:PARC to come up with: an overall policy regarding use of materials...
5
..
6 Mayor Glass commented on affordability to the user.. _He noted that if ,the
7 windows are an _option, he could support the argument of afforddbility.
8 Otherwise; he would support stafif`s position of upholding SPARC"s
9 recommendation.:
10
11 Council .11Aember Torliatt '.indicated sh:e. would b.e in favor of staying the
12 decision for fhe creation of a policy setting forth standards.
13
14 ~ 'The City Counc.,l took athree-minute recess at 5 p.m a.nd reconvened; at
15 5:0~5.'p.rn.
16
17 Council Member O`Brien stressed the need for q policy and a .list of
18 standard. materials. He su:ggesfed a joint meeting with' SPARC to discuss.
19 the issue:
20
21 City Manager Bierman commented that there, 'should be a: set of
22 standards and a policy on standards and process.., He indicated he would,
23 _ have both groups-come. together to address apolicy. - -
24
25 MOTION to uphold. the appeals an'd adopt the following; resolutions:
26 ~ ~ .
27 Resolution No. 2003--19 IV,C.S. Upholding the: Appeal by Cobblestone
28 Home, In_c of a Decision, by the Site! :Plan and Architectural Review'
29 Committee; ~SPAR.C) to Apply a Condition of Approval' Prohibiting Vinyl
30 .Windows in Their Approval of Cobblestone''s 37 Unit Washington Creek
31 Village Subdivision on 'Ea'st Washington Stree4; Southwest of Prince Park.
32
33 Resolution N'o: -2003=20 iV.C:S. Upholding; the ApFieal _by Bill Dick of q~
34 Decision by the Site Plari `and Architectural Review (~omrriifitee (SPAR~Cj to
35 Apply a Condition of Approval Requiring CNood' Windows in Their Approval
36 of the .Baker Ranch. Subdivision located at the. SoutheastCorner of Ely '
37 Road'and Corona Road.
38 ~ .
39 M/S Moynihan and U"Brien - .
40
41 AYES: Harris, Canevaro, O'Brien, Moynihan
42
43 NOES: Healy, Mayor Glass; Torliatt
44 .
45 NEIN BUSINESS:-
46
47 12. Resolution :Auth`orizing the City Ivl.gnager to Sign an Amendment No., 2 'ao
48 the Agreement `for ;the Collection and Disposal' of Garbdge, Rubbish,.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
3:9
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
February 3, 2003
Vol.. 38; Page 339
Waste Matter and; Recycfables and Streef Sweeping Within the City of
Petaluma; Increasing, the Franchise Fee and Extending the Termination
Date; and Resolution Approving 2003 Refuse Collection Rates. (Thomas)
Bill Thomas, Finance Director,. gage the staff presentation .and
recommended approval of the Amendment.
City Council discussion ensued regarding the calculations used: Income
will be segregated into two funds (General Fund and Street
Maintenance); the amendment will result in about a $0.83 difference to
the ratepayer monthly.
Public Input:
James Lando, Empire Waste Management, indicated he is fine with the
proposal before the Council this evening. He noted they have been
working with .staff, and although they have experienced some errors in
their billing system, they have hired a third party CPA who is reviewing
data back to 1995. He added that the information will be available for
review. in about two weeks and if the outcome is favorable to the City,
they will cut a check to the City for that amount.. If the outcome is
unfavorable to the City, they will leave the issue alone.
MOTION to adopt resolutions:
.Resolution No. 2003-21 N:C.S. Authorizing the City Manager to Sign an
Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement for the Collection and Disposal of;
Garbage, Rubbish, Waste Mat#er and Recyclabtes and Street. Sweeping
Within. the City of Petaluma, Increasing the Franchise Fee and Extending
the Termination Date.
Resolution No. 2003-22 N.C.S. Approving 2003 Refuse Collection Rates..
M/S Healy and O'Brien
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'''Br-ien; Mayor Glass,.
Torliatt and Moynihan.
NOES: None
13, . ; ' _ This ite'rn was
combined with Item #12 above. -. ,
13.A Resolution Urging the California Legislature to Reject the Governor's
Proposed Shift of .Local Vehicle License Fee (VLF) ,Revenues and to Honor
the. 1998 Commitment to Restore the VLF.
MOTION to adopt:
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
°25
'2'6
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
3.9
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
4Z
48
Vol. 38, Fa,ge 340
February 3, 2003
Resolution IVo. 2003,23 N.C.S.. Urging the California Legislature to. Reject
the G'overnor's Proposed Shift ,of Loctaf Vehicle l'icervse Fee.(VLF) Revenues
ahd to Honor the 1998 Commitment to Restore the. VLF.
M/S Healy and Torliatt
AYfS: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor O'Brien., Mayor Glass.,.
Torliat`t and Moynihan
NOES: None
UNFINISHED B'USLNESS
14, piscussion Regarding .Local Option Shces° Tax for ~fhe City of Pe;taluma_.
(.Bierman)
Public 'Input:
.Daphne Shapiro, Plazci No. Shopping Center, addressed the City Council,
expres"sing opposition, to an increase in Sales Tax as it would further erode
local. shopping..
Thee. City Manager explained the', request and why' it was placed on the
agenda, noting that the City would be supporting legislation that would
provide qn "option" for local agencies to place a measure on the .ballot:
asking for an increase. This' letter would be sent on to Assemblymember
Joe Nation indicating Petaluma's support for having the local option of
placing increases on the ballot. Placing such an increase on the ballot
would be a matter that the City Council could entertain when and if they
desire fo pursue such an increase.
'Council Member `Hecily further indicated this woulei authorize the City to
go to the voters with. an increase in sales tax, when and if' needed; as
there is no ability to do so at this time.. It was noted that such a ballad
measure would need to pass by a 2/3rds vote of the public.
Council Member Torlidtt recalled conversations she -has .had with
.,
Assemblymember Nation who indicated he would dike clarification on
whether or not the Council would. be~ inclined to not put a sales t.ax
measure on th.e ballot that would compete with other safes tax mea"surer,
specifically the Smart If,sales:tax'measure. She added she would not want
.Petaluma competing wifh other sales tax increase measures. placed on
-the ballot at`the same time..
City Council discussion ensued` supporting the proposed 1e'fter as well as
avoiding ashy` conflict with future sales- tax measures that may be
proposed by SMART.
February 3, 2003
Vol, 38, Page 34`1
1
2 Council consensus was reached to have the Clfy Manager send a lefter
3 requesting legislation to be put in place to dllow the flexibility of placing a
4 .local sales tax measure on fhe ballot.
5
6 PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS Persons wishing to address
7 the City Council regarding ifems to be discussed during Closed Session should do
8 so at this time, Speakers will be allowed three (3J minvfes each and should fill ovf
9 a Speaker Card and submit it fo the City Clerk.
10
11 There was no public comment at this time. Council adjourned to Closed Session
12 of 5.•40 p.m. regarding the following.ifems: .
13 ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
14
15 • CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXIStIng LItLgClflOn PUI"SUant t0 GOV2rnl]"12nt
16 Code § 54956:9 (a)., 1,8 matters as lisfed below:
17 1. Diane Allen vs. City of Petaluma (Appeal), First Appellate District;
18 Division Five, Courf No. A09.7839:
19 2. Allstate Insurance Company 'vs.. City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma
20 County Superior Court No. 169954.
21 3. Arnina AI-Jamal vs. City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma County
22 Superior Court No. 171651.
23 4. San Francisco: Baykeeper vs. Califorhia State Water Resources
24 Control Board, Sonoma County Superior Courf'No. SCV-224434....
25 5. Mike Carter vs. City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma County Superior
26 Court No. 227520.
27 6. City of Petaluma vs. Ann Morrissey, Sonoma County Superior Court
28 No. 452063. .
29 7. City of Petaluma vs. Maria. I. Novak, Sonoma County Superior'Court
30 No. SCV-226817.
31 8. City of Petaluma vs, Maria I. Novak (Beacon Sfation), Sonoma
32 County Superior Court No. SCV-226816.
33 9. City of Petaluma vs. Petaluma Properties, Pacific Telephone
34 Telegraph Companies, Sonoma County-S,uperior'Court No. 226706...
35 10. Linda Fox vs. City School District, City, of .Petaluma, e al,~'~Sonomq
36 County Superior Court No. SCV-229807.
37 1 l.. Rosaura Gonzales .and. Juan Carlos Colorado `vs., City of Petaluma„
38 et al, Sonoma County S.u.perior Court~',No. 230688'. _
39 12. Patricia McCardle vs. City of Petalumd, et al, Sonoma County
40 Superior Court No: 226978.. r -
41 13. Jay Parsegian vs. City of Petaluma, e# al, Sonoma County Superior
42 Court No. 229976.
43 14. Jane Pinckney vs. City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma County.Superior
44 Court No. SCV-230564.
45 15. Sabrina Ruoff vs: City of Petaluma, et al, Sonoma County Superior
46 Court No. 230622.
47 16. Sandalwood. Estates ws. City of Petaluma, Sonoma County Superior
48 Court No;. 230414.
1.
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
t0
11
12
13
14
15
1~6
1T
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
3.1
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Vol. 38, Page 342
'February 3, .2003
17: Bobby Thompson vs: City of Petaluma, et al (Thompson. I), Sonoma
Co,un y Superior Court No. SCV-22567:7.
18. Bobby Thompson vs. City of Petaluma; of al (Thompson II) .(not
'litigated).
• CONFERENCE wITHR_EA.L PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR PUrSUC1nt to GOVernn"12t1,t CQCI;e'
5"495:6:8. Property: Two Parcels. Loca#ed on. °the 4000 Block :ot Lakeville
Highway, (A',PNs "Q_17-170-Q02 and' 068=0:;10-026'), Formerly Known .as the.
,. _
Gray Property. One Parcel Loc,a:ted Soufflwest ~>f the City''>s Oxidation
Ponds (APN 0.1'9-330-009). .A.-Small Portion of One Parcel. Lo"cat`ed at :3880
Cypress Drive (APN 005-090:-062).. Negotiating Party: Michael
Bierman/Michael Ban.. Under Negotiation: Price; Terms or Payment, or
Both.
• CONFERENCE. WITH LABQR NEGOTIATOR, GOVernrTlErlt Code §,54957.6 - Clty
Representative; Heather Renschler, Ralph Anderson 8~ Assocaies,
Unrepresented Employee Position; City Manager
® .PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT, Government Code" ,§ 54,957. Title; City
Manager,
7:OO .P.M. -EVENING' SESSION
ROLL CALL:
Pre_sent;. Harris; :Canevaro, Healy, Vice Mayor "O' Brien, Mayor Glass, Torliatt
Absent: Moynihan
PLEDGE:OF ALLEGFANCE
MOMENT_O:F SILENCE'
PUBLIC COMM'fNT
Valerie;" Neuhaws,: Petalum6;`addressed :the CityCouncil with a formal 're:gUes~t to
consider the issue of placement of a BNI`X Track;n Petalumi~.,on a future: agenda.
G:e,off Cartwright;, Petaluma, gddresse"d, the . City Council regarding
re.dev'elopment ag"encies and. redevelopment funds:
William Donahue,, Petaluma, addressed the City Council rE~garding Sandalwood
Estates~~and" provided a handout to the City Council. "
CO'RRESPONDENCE'
February 3, 2003 Vol. 38, Page 343
1 Mayor Glass commented on a letter from Jane Hamilton and David Keller, which
2 commended Mike Nloore, Community Development Director, for .his efforts in
3 leading the Petaluma Central Specific Plan Committee.
4
5 COUNCIL COMMENT AND LIAISON REPORTS
6
7 Council Member Torliatt recommended that the. issue of placing a BMX Bicycle:
8 Track in Petaluma: be taken to the Recreaton,'Mu"sic, and Parks Commission prior
9 to the City Council.
10
11 She also thanked Mr. Donahue for the inforrnatiori he has provided and
12 indicated the City will be looking at the issue of mobile home zoning during the
13 review of the General Plan..
14
15 Council Member 'Healy commented, on the issue regarding storage and
16 recreational vehicles-:parking on City streets and clarified with the City Manager
17 this matter has been referred to the Police and Code Enforcement Departments.
18
19 CITY MANAGER COMAAfNTS
20
21 There were none.
22
23 AGENDA_CNANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS
24 -
25 There were none.
26
27 PROCLAMATION
28
29 Proclamation for Season ofNon-Violence.
30
31 Mayor Glass~presented the proclamation to Rev. Linda Finley.
32
33. REPORT'OlJT OF CLOSED SESSION
34
35` There was nothing to report.
36
37 l1NFINISHED BUSINESS (CONTINUED)
38
39, . 14A. Project Update on the Renovation of the Polly Klaas Performing Theafer
40 Ails 'Center and. Acknowledgement of $5,000 Donation From Empire
4T - Waste Management. (Carr)
42
43 James Landa, Empire Waste Management, presented a $5,000 check as a
44 donation to'the Leadership Petaluma efforts .regarding the renovation of
45 the -Polly Klaas Performing Theatre%Arts Center.
46 ~.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1S
16
1~7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
4.7
48
Vol. 38, Page 344
February 3, 2003
Andrew Packard, Petaluma, addressed the City Council and confirmed
Council,Member Moynihan is absent and did not re.cuse himself from
discussion regarding the Magnolia Place: Subdivision.
PIIB'LIC HEARfNG
15, Magnolia Place: Subdivision: Discussion and Possibly: Action Regarding:.
A. Adopfion of Mitigated Negative Declaration f.or the: Magnolia
Place Subdivision. (A'PN Q48-141=012 an'd 048-231-027) to be
Located on Two Parcels Totaling. 24.42 Acres on Magnolia and.
Gossage Ayenu;es, West of the Cypress Hills Cemetery....
B; Resol,utign Approving a General Plan. Amendment fo Am:end 'th'e
Land .Use pesignati:ons for an: -8.7:6 Acre. Portion of the Magnolia
Avenue Site From "Proposed Public Park" to "Urban Standard" and
to Redesignate the 7.37 Acre: Gossage Avenue' Site From
"Sub.urban Residentidl'' to "U,rban,Standard:"
C.. .Introduction of Ordinance Approving• Prezoning to Paanned 'Unit
.D'evelopme'nt District (PUD);.
D. Resolution Approving Planned Unit Development Plan.
E Resolution Approving Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to Divide
the 24.42 Acres into 4Z Residential Lots,, Leaving 8.46 Acres to be
Dedicated to the City fora Neighborhood Pi.iblic Parka
Steve Arago, Applicant; Planning/~Eng`ineering Firm a~f CSW/Stuber=Stroeh),.
Marcy :Matthews, John :Patoski, Architect; Christine Pillsbury,CS,W/Stuber-
Stroeh, and Daylene. Whitlock gave an overview of the proposed project.:
Steve .Arago provided a summary of the'recommendations at the: end of
the presentation. .
Dan Aguilar, Mission' Vdlley Properties, addressed the Council and urged
approval. ~ ~ ~ g
Mayor Glass .challen'ged. the confusion with the •revised 1996"Land ~U e
Map of the General Plan, which depicts the entire Magnolia, parcel as~ a
"public park proposed." '
Jim Carr, Parks and Recreation Director; asked from where money would
come to purchase the land, as development has dropped. off.
Rublic Input: _
Bill Phillips; Committe'e• for Magnolia Park; addressed. the City Council;
indicating ..the application before- them. shouad be denied: H'e stressed.
'that this is fh'e "last best park' chance-," He the'n' went over history o.f the
space and'the cutting of the trees and presented a petition of residerits• in
support of a potential park.
February 3, 2003 Vo1.38; Page 345
1 Jim Becker; Pefaluma, addressed the. City Council regarding the .chicken
2 ranch ..abutfing the proposed project. He stated his .support for a park
3 and agreed with .Jim Carr's resolution to obtaining the park through this
4 development. Fie concluded by commenting that the project would
5 have a feathering. of homes and. a park and would bring in property tax
6 dollars- as well as development fees.
7
8 Matt Maguire, Petaluma, addressed the City Council and complimented
9 • the applicant and community for trying to work this issue out. He agreed
10 that park funding is scarce and. that Proposition 40 money may be
11 available, but the City would still need a willing seller. He recognized they
12 have worked .hard to meet the City's development standards and
13 indicated his support if they would consider building the project with five
14 fewer'homes.
15
16 Buzz Weisenfluh, Petaluma, stated his opposition to the proposal.
17
18 John Mills, Pefaluma, addressed the City Council in support of the project
19 and spoke to the Igck of available funding sources. He noted there are
20 no monies earmarked in the CIP for parks. and there is a need to look for'
21 public/private parfinershps.
22
23 Dr. Guy Guillion, Petaluma, addressed the. City Council in opposition to the
24 current proposal as it stands. ,He indicated thebestscenario would be to
25 ~ find funding to construct a park on the whole parcel. He indicated he.
26: was neither in favor of annexing the area -.nor moving forward with a
27 General. Plan Amendment. He.st.ated further thdt -there are no guarantees
28 that if, the project is denied, fhat hey won't develop in the. county as they
29' want. He would support this if' other concessions were made. He
30 concluded by indicating he is supportive of a win/win sifuation, but not
31 the current proposal. He urged ,the City Council to approve a revised
32 proposal if they feel a need to support this.
33
34 Mari-:Ann Rivers, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in support of the
35 proposed development and park.
36
37 David Keller, Petaluma, addressed :the City Council in opposition to the
38' project; asking, "1f no# this park site, where?" H'e asked where the
39 coordinate plan was. H:e inquired as to who will '.pay for the services. He
40 also asked why the property owners haven"t been asked fo pay for the
41 services. He. concluded' by indicating we need a legal proposal and
42 funding mechanism. ,
43 •
44 Stanley Shook, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to fhe
45 development, indicating, "It is alf about money." He asked that the
46 Council "drive a hard bargain"' if they approve the plan.
47
Vol. 38, Page 346
..February 3, 2003'
1 Tom IVorthen, Petaluma,. addressed the: City Council in support of the
2 proposal. ~ ,
3 .
4 Rick O'Hecre; Petaluma; addressed the City Cou;n~~il in opposition to the
5 development. Ne indicated :.his supporf for open spac-e and his; oppo ition
:.
6 to annexation of this property. 'He .asked 'the City .Council to' uphold the
7 General Plan and oppose annexation of this property
9 Paul. Bossert, Petaluma,. addressed the City Council in opposition, to the
10 project and.:asked why they would consider creating an outlet on Samuel
11 Drive.
12
13 Ray :Peterson; Petaluma; addressed the City Council in opposition to the
14 proposal, stating 'traffic concerns on Gossage Avenue, sewage concerns;
15' and the need for a master plan of the area. He concluded by stating, it
16 makes no sense. to put the City limits at the middle of the street.
18 harry Dito, Petaluma, addressed ;the . City Council in support of the
19 proposal, indicating parks grid open space. are important. He recognized_
20 the City .does "not have the; :resources to acquire property for `parks and;
21 stressed "partnerships" " as the' wa,y to make things happen. H;e
22 encouraged the City Council to negotiate as tough a deal as f hey could!.
23 and. urged support.
The City Council',fook a recess of 9:35 p.m. fo 9:45.p,,m.
27 .Edith Benson; Petaluma, addressed: the City Council ,in opposition to the-
28 ro osal; indicating, more homework needs. to ;be done to make sure it is.
p p
29 right; She urged' Council -to .look at the impact this c~eveloprnent will have
30 on the surrounding community. '" -
31
.,
32 Philip. Becklund, Petaluma, addressed the City Council :in ,opposifiion to the
33 proposal, in.diea"ting :it is a dense housing proposal for an already densely
34 populat:e.d area. H.e indicated the City .does not have. to have: d park and
35 that a park.. would not offset the inconvenience of the additional housing,
36 Heurged the City Council to drive a hard' deal arid. protect fhe
37 neighborhood.
38
39 Pat .Sen§eney; P.etciluma; dd:dressed the City Council; indicating. the trees
40 were, torn down. and., the property was left a "trdsh,y mess." She '
41 commented the animals that are there thihk" they are ~na'tive :and if'you
42 create a nuisance you should have; to -fix if. She indicated the.
43 neighborhood wants a park. but no'f at this expense... She stressed; the need ,
44 to engineer a solution and urged that the Council oppose the project. -
45 -
46 ..Mark Atkinson, Petaluma,, addressed th:e City C'ou.ncil in :opp;o5ition fo fhe_:
47 proposal, -stating .concerns regarding "traffic circu ation and impacts.. He
48 ..asked what the development would bring in 'terms of revenue to make
February 3, 2003 Vol, 38'~ Page 347
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
improvements to Magnolia Avenue:. He asked the Council not to support
annexation. and not to trade development for the rights to d minor park.
,Becky Winslow, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
development and stressed that the entire project area is zoned for a park.
Judy Reynolds,.. Petaluma, addressed fhe City Council regarding traffic
concerns and voiced support for a park and opposition to the
development.
Stan Gold, :Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
development and urged them to not support annexation of the property.
Jennay. Edwards, Petaluma, addressed the City Council in opposition to
the development. She noted the property is designated as open space in
the General Plan and she encouraged the Council to oppose
annexation. She concluded by .indicated that building only 12 homes
would be more acceptable than what is proposed.
Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma, addressed. the City Council regarding
concerns with water drainage impacts from the proposed development
Raymond Jax; Petaluma., addressed the City Council in opposition to the
project. Ne stated concerns with affordability, the lack of City services,
and that he is tired of the rape of Petaluma and being pushed around by
rich people.
Andrew Hamilton, :Petaluma, addressed the City Council", imparting a
message from her daughter, who. indicated she would love apark-that is
close to her home. where she could feel safe. She concluded by asking
the Council to consider affordable housing for this site.
Steve; Arago readdressed the City Council and urged their.su,pport for the
proposed project..
City Council discussion ensued regarding" monies , to maintain the
proposed park.
Mayor Glass commented that the City is looking at development impact
fees now. He stated. that the site at issue has been identified as parkland
in the General Plan and it is inconsistent with the General Plan fo approve
this development, Ne stressed the .responsibility of the Council to
implement the General Plan. He added that direction should be given to
continue the effort to acquire funds to purchase the land. He referenced
several sections of the General Plan that pertained to the use of this
property and site.
Vol. 38; Page 348
February 3, 2003
1 Council Member ;Healy commented that the Generdl Plan is a "living and
2 breathing documen.f'`' and noted this proposal daes provide a park. He
3 refer."red to fhe Shollenberger expansion, which also was not shown as a
4 park. He also referenced the Land Absorption St.u.dy that showed .60 units
5 on this site earlier. He noted there is City-owned'.. property .that has not
6 been. developed as parkland due to ,lack of rnai'ntenance funds. He
7 concluded by stating he would .like to have further discussions with the
8 developer rega"rding some of the details. of the project.
9 ~ '
10 Council Members Harris and Cdnevaro were supportive of moving
11 forward with. the item this evehing.
12
13 Council 'Member Torliatt tharked everyone for commenting tonight and
14 added that,':if you don't give entitlements, you don't create value of .fhe
15 land." She indicated she would not support a change in the Generdl Plan
16 and s ressed 'the .need to stand up for the people of the. neighborhood..
17 Sh.e .commented. on how difficult it was to watch the loss ofi the grove of
18 trees' on the proposed project site.
19
20 Mayor Glass referred. to the Mitigated Negative DE~claradion, whereby he
21 reads that there 'is a high possibility of~ finding humors remains on the site.
22 He proposed that there be an archeologist on the sit e when., digging is
23 'faking place; as a matter of sensitivity, and that the possibility of, human
24 remains being located on the-site should be disclosed on property deed
2'S
26 City Council discussion 'then ensued regarding priva ely and publicly
27 owned .park space;: HOA ma_ intenance of the private segment;
28 consideration of :access fa the ceme#ery area, the amoun'f of
29 development :fees for this project and if they could be' adjusted to a
30 higher rate, safe pedestrian traffic over the bridge, and drainage
31 concerns.
32
33 Vice .Mayor O'Brien stated he would not supK~ort opening' u,p the
34 cemetery to dccess, as the .cemetery is private property and. there has
35 been no indication that they-would want access'.
36
37 Council Member Healy commented on the .accessibility and usability of
38 the proposed park.space.
39
_..
40 D.an Aguilar readdressed the City Council;. commending on the possibility
41 of integrating a: parking bay on the streetscape, eliminating two lots,.,
42 '°proposing a three-car stalFparking bay t'o. the. ~iort,h, and a parallel
'`43 parking bay: He indicated, however, lie would. expect to be able. to
44 ` ~ increase th`e custom 'lots fo 4,500 square feet with accessibility from
45 Gossage.
4b
47 ~ Dve #o fhe -ateness of fhe hour, the City Council ei~fertained a motion. to.
48 continue discussing this item:
February 3, 2003 Vol. 38, Page 349'
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
3.9
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
MOTION to continue discussion:
N1/S Harris and O'Brien
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, O'Brien
NOES: Mayor Glass, Torliatt
Council .Member Torliatt remarked that Gatti Park was a high priority park
to complete because there was, a promise to Cross Creek subdivision to
build ball fields adjacent to that area but were not able to be completed.
These ball fields. are being moved to Gatti Park. 'She noted that if this
General Plan Amendment moves forward, this would be the second time
this Council has not supported the recommendation of their Committees
and Commissions.
Council Member Healy noted that he would be willing to let staff work
with the. applicant to make some changes to their proposal that Council
would consider supporting.
MOTION to continue this item to February 24, 2003:
M/S Healy and O'Brien
AYES: Harris, Canevaro, Healy, O'Brien, Mayor Glass, Torliatt
NOES: None
NEW BUSINESS
16. Discussion,. Direction and Possible Acfion to Approve Amendments to City-
Council Rules and Procedures> ~Rudnansky) Due #o the lateness of the
hour; this item was continued fo the February. 24, 2Qb3 City Council:
AAeeting.
ADJOURN
The City Council adjourned at 11:10 P.M. to a Special Joint ;Meeting of the City
Council and the Petaluma Community Development Commission to beheld on
Friday, February 7, 2003, from 10:00 a.m. to 12 noon `in the City Council
Chambers. Th'e PCDC/City Council will, conduct a discussion drill give possible
direction and/or action on the Mid-Year Budget Review.
av Pass, Mayor
Vol. 38, Page 350 February 3, 2003
1
2 ATTEST:
3
4
5
6
7 Gayle P ersen City Clerk
8
9
10
11
12 ~ *~******