HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 03/20/2000March 20, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 329
1
2 City of Petaluma, Cakfornia.
3 Minutes of a Regular
4 City Council Meeting
- s
_ 6
~ .. Monday, March 20, 2000
8 Council Chambers
9
to The Petaluma City Council met. on this date at 3:00. p.m. in the Council Chambers.
11
12
13 ROLL CALL.
14
is PRESENT: Council` Members Gader-Thompson, Healy, Maguire; Vice Mayor Torliatt;
16 Mayor Thompson ~ .
1~ ,
is ABSENT: CounciC Members Hamilton,. Keller
19
20 PUBLIC COMMENTS ~ ,
._ ~ -
2'1
22 None ~ ...
23 ,
24 COUNCIL COMMENTS,
25 <
26 Vice Mayor Torliatt stated that Council Member Keller was at the-Sonoma County
2~ Transportation Authority Meeting'and Council, Me-tuber Hamilton wasrecovering from
2s eye surgery.
29 . -
3o The Council wished her a speedy recovery.
31
32 Council- Member Cader-Thompson was happy to see: Loren.. Williams in the audience so
33 the Council could discuss the Petaluma Trolley.
34
3s AGENDA CHANGES, AD®ITLONS_AIVD DELETIONS:
36 ..
37 None
38
39 APPROVAL OE.MINUTES
40
41 February 24, 20.00
42
43 MOTION: Vice Mayor Torliatt moved, seconded by Maguire to Approve Minutes of
44 February 24, 2000.
45
46
Vol:. 34, Page 330 March 20,, 2000
i .,MOTION
2 PASSE®: 5/0/2 (Hamilton, Keller)
3
4
s CONSENT CALAIVDER
6
~ a Adopt Resolution. 00-46 NCS Approving Street Closures for Annual B,ufter &.
8 Eggs Day Parade (April 29;2000).
9
io a .Adopt .Resolution 00-47 NCS Accepting Cross Creek Well Building
i i Construction Project.
r3 a Adopt Resolution 00-48 NCS Approving the Plans and Specifications Prepared
14 by the V1/ater Resources ;and Conservation Department. and. Awarding the
is Contract for.the:1999-2OOb.:Sewer Main Replacement Project, West Street
16 between Kentucky Street a_nd the: Petaluma Boulevard North,, Project No. '9799
i7 (Phase 9): Estimated Project Cost: $73;000'.. Funding Source: Sewer Funds:
is
19 a Adopt Resolution 00-49 NCS Adopting Investment Policy for Year 2000..
20
21 a Adopt 'Resolution 00-50 NCS Autliorizin.g the Filing of an. Application with the
22 Metropolitan Transportaton:Commission for Allocation of Transportation
?3 Development.Act/Saate.Transit~Assisfance'Funds for Fi cal Year 200,0-2001:.
24 - ,..
-2s Vice Mayor Torliatt clarified that most of the funding for the Butter and Eggs D'ay
2s Parade came from~the TOT Fund.
27
2s MOTION: • Council Member Maguire' moved, seconded by Healy, to adopt items 1-5'.
29
3o MOTION - ..
31 PASSED:. 5/0/2 (Hamilton, Keller absent)
32 '-
..
33 UNFINISHED BUSINESS
34
3s a Central Business District:. (CBD)' Plan: Adopt ;Resolution 00=51 NCS' _
36 Amending Resolution 6986 NCS by Adding pan Additional' Area to the CBD
3~ Survey Area and Redefining the CBD Survey Area Boundaries.
38
39 Mayor Thompson recused .himself because he; ells insurance to many downtown;
4o businesses.
41
42 Vice Mayor To"rliatt disqualified herself due the commissions she collecfs from one of
43 the properties in the area.
44
4s Brent. Hawkins confirmed' that she should recuse herself:
46
March 20, 2000
Vol. 34, Page 331
1 Council'Member Maguire stated that a quorum was not.. present.; and questioned
2 whether the rule of necessity should be employed.
3
4 Brent Hawkins recommended that Council Members with conflicts draw straws to
s decide who will be brought back in to make a quorum.
6
~ Council Member Maguire- questioned whether a coin toss was acceptable.
s
9 Council Member Healy stated that would be fine.
to
11 Council Mernbe,r Maguire asked Mayor Thompson to call heads or tails.
12
13 Mayor Thompson picked Heads.
14
is Vice Mayor Torlatt picked Tails.
16
17 Brent Hawkins announced, "Heads."
is
19 Mayor Thompson resumed his seat at the ;podium.
20
21 Consultant Paul Marangella presented the plan amendment completed as part of the
22 overall redevelopment strategy to strengthen the central Business District. The Counc
23 adopted a resolution, in May 199.9, asking that. the "butterscotch" area be added to the
24 CBD and studied.. This was approved by the Planning Commission, with the additional
2s inclusion of the "emerald green" area. On July 12, 1999, it was brought to the .
26 Commission, but due to possible conflicts, it was note,acted upon. Mr. Marangella
2~ explained that what Council had before them the Resolution to add the "emerald green"
2s area. and conduct a feasibility study of this as.an amended area.
29
3o Council Member Healy confirmed that the resolution was to authorize the studies on
31 both the. "butterscotch".and "emerald green" areas..He asked if the "walk through" had
32 led to a preliminary conclusion. regarding he feasibility of those areas_being included.
33
34 Mr. Hawkins replied that-the walk through with legal .counsel and with.. Libby indicated
3s that they would meet blight requirements. The economic issues required further study.
36
37 IVIOT[OfV: Council Member Maguire, moved,, seconded by Cader-Thompson, to
3s Adopt Resolution 00-51 NCS Amending,;Reso ution 6986 NCS by ,_
39 .Adding an Additional Area to the CBD Survey Area and Redefining.
4o the CRD Survey Area Boundaries. ~.
41
42 MOTION _
43 PASSED: 4/1./2 (Torliatt recused, Keller., Hamilton absent) :
44
4s a Discussion and Possible Action on Request from. Burbank Housing Development
46 Corporation for a Finding by the City Council' that the U.S. Army Corps of
Vol: 34, Page.332 March 20, 2000
1 - Engineers Flood Project has Progressed to an Acceptable Level of, Completion.
2 to Meet Condition 2.9 of Resolutiori'99-97A:and also Allowing Burbank Housing
3 to Pay Detention ,Fees in Order to Proceed with Construction of OId Elm "Village
4 in Spring of,2000.
6 Housing. A'drninistrator Bonne Gaebler presented: "the agenda report and summarized
~ the action: OId Elrrl Village is a proposed 88-unit affordable housing community to be
8 developed on a four-acre pa_rce generally located at the corner of Payran`Street and
9 Petaluma Boulevard' North.
to
11 Land use approval hasbeen received. Included in the P:UD application is conditign 29,
13 Corps of En , That building permits shall not be issued until such tune as the U.S., Army
g'neer Flood 1Nay Project is complete. -
14
is Burbanl<'s request, with City Management's concurrence;-was that the start .of
16 construction ~be permitted, The Army Corps project will be complete before completion
17 of Old Elam Village and the hydrological impacts of development were less than
is originally calculated.
T9
20 Mitigationmeasure #6 of ,the Negative Declaration stated that the applicant would
21 provide. payment of storm drain impact fees and .incorporate on or off-site .detention.
22 Burbank: concurred with City Management that this measure be met by paying into this
23 fund for an off-site detention pond.
Zs There were,several issues .regarding the- payment of the detention pond impact fees
2~ that must be worked out prior'issuance, of certificate. of occupancy; however; there was
27 approximately one year in which' to do this: '
as
29 a How much. will the .fee be :and how will :it be calculated?
3o a How will the impact fees be utilized?
31
32 Vice Mayor Torliatt thanked Ms.:Gaebler and asleed Director of.lNater:Resources and'
33 Conservation Tom Hargis for a time frame for dealing with those issues.
34
3s Mr. Hargis stated that the ~RMI Study should ;be available possibly April 3, 2000... He
36 recommended that the RMI Study proceed';through public process in its current state
37 and that th:e issues raised. by Council be incorporated into the Surface Water Element
3s of the General Plan.. He thought the study was ready to go out to the public. to
39 determinetheir reaction to the concept.'
40 ,
4'1 He-explained that the existing ordinan, ce establishing a storm drain mitigation fee was.
42 ,geared, at, the time of its adoption;, to .creation of detention ponds. It``ihcluded .an option
a3 for paying fees or creating, detention ponds. 1Nhatwas being discussing was making,
44 .detention mandatory: Fees. collected in the past had been. used to create: some.
4s detention ponds and fo help fund a portion of the City's share, of 'the Corps of Engineers
46 Project.
March 20, 2000
Vol. 34, Page 333
1 ,~
2 Mr. Hargis had discussed determination of appropriate fees for detention ponds with
3 Ms. Gaebler and John Morgan, Burbank Housing Development Corporation. He
4 proposed that if the fee were doubled it would be in the appropriate range..
s .. ..
6 Council Member Magaire asked for an approximate amount.
8 Mr. Hargis stated. that the Storm. Drain Mitigation Fee would be approximately $14,40Q,
9 plus inflation.
to ~ ~_
11 Vice Mayor Torliatt expressed. concern about the City's responsibility/liability regarding
12 the detention pond.and flooding issues.. She wanted the. Cityto'ha~e the option to make
13 developers responsible for finding off-site detention instead of paying a fee:
14 ~ ..
is Council Member Maguire asked how far the' RMl Study was from completion and
16 whether there were tune constraints.
f
1~ -~ " .
18 Mr. Hargis. replied #hat residency was scheduled for May 2001; a~decision must 6e
19 made before that time.. ~ ~ ~. ~ . ~, .".
20 - ~ "
21 PUBLIC COMMENT
22 ~ ~ -
23 John Cheney,,,55'Rocca Drive, stated that although,the housirig.was~needed,. it was'ih a
24 sensitive area due to the flood issues.
2s
26 Bill Bennett, Bodega Avenue, questioned Council's. decision to allow construction to
27 proceed before occupancyand detention ponds.
28
29 Council Member Nlagure explained that Burbank Housing was asking to.begin
3o construction and.have on-site detention; which would filte"r tte water-that goes into, the
31 river, pay.a storm mitigation fee and a pond loop fee so that when the RMI study is
32 completed they would have already contributed towards that cost.
33
34 Mr. Hargis explained that' the ordinance was introduced in 1982. Thee City took on th;e
3s responsibility of finding the land and building the first detention :pond's.
36
37 Gouricil Member Healy asked Mr. Hargis'if that practice had continued.
38 -
39 Mr. Hargis stated~that some.years ago.the City decided to use the money for the Corp
4o projects and.. stopped .using it for the, detention ponds.
41
42 Council Member Healy .clarified that: the fees had been set aside for detention: ponds
43 but were diverted. to pay for the flood project.
44
4s He agreed that this is the way the City wanted to be moving and that requiring
46 contributions to detention. ponds should be a standard part of development proposals,
Vol. 34;, Page'334 March 20, 2080
i ;He thought the proposal, as it stood would "get the-project,gong." He nofed that the
2 resolution needed to include the Mr.~,Morgan's addtionaf'language regarding
3 occupancy.
4
s Vice Mayor Torliatt understood~"tfiat a flood management `project should be done priorfo
6 this being completed. ,
8 Mr. Hargis replied that there had been good progress with the construction; however;
9 there was a major funding issue that needed., to be addressed and' resolved. He stated
P J_ ,
i~ abotut four feet below what tthad been n~he~ aaout ,four weeks ago. The flood level was
12 e y
13 Vice Mayor'Torliatt stated that the .developer}should. be :responsible.. for the impact they
14 create, whetther .through detention' ponds or flood mitigation. She wanted to have the
is benefit of having; the study:. ~ .
16 ~ -~ .
i~ Council Member Healy commented that what the City had been doing up until now, 'in
i8 teams of detention ponds, was nothing; so anything was an improvement over ,nothing-:
i9 He was concerned that the kind, of'open-ended flexibility being discussed would,. snake it
20 difficult for developers :to secure financing for projects.
2~ .,
22 Vice Mayor Torliatt clarified that. what, shesuggested: was a maximum dollar amount:
23 The develg,per would.`have to determine how theywould, provide detention off-site:,
24 without. paying an impact fee. She' wanted to allow the project to go forward, without-
~:ZS putting the City in a pbsifon of not being able to make a different decision after~the City'
26 Engineer .completes his. report.
27 _ t ~
,.
2s Mr. Morgan agreed with Council Member Healy tfiat'it would be good to have a.clear
29 number to give the construction ;lende,r~when 'he reviews through th'e twe"nty conditions
3o in the approval regarding flooding. He explained that in November 2Q00, Dave Brown!
.;
31 principal of Adobe Associates, did' an estimate. of three detention options that the
32 Planning Commission' asked to see. 'His estimate for off-site. detention was $11;;,00`0 --
33 $12,000 which turned out to be less expensive than on-site de,tentiorror on-site in
34 tanks; however;., he did not.' have the benefit of an RMI Study or `the comments that
3s Council had made regarding: requirements fora detention pond sand the environmental
36 concerns. Regarding Mr. Haggis's suggestion to double the fee, he "found that
37 reasonable and stated that it fit within his budget.
38
39 Council Member iVlaguire asked how much that would be.
40 ~ ~ '
41 Mr. Morgan'stated that the currentfigure was $14_,000, which was based on 8/10 of an
42 acre-foot.
43
44 Council Member Maguire asked if`that was. the' Storm Impact Fee. -
45
March 20, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 335
i Mr. Morgan replied that'itwas, ,and that it was based on run-off volume of 8/10 of an
2 acre-foot.
4 Council Member Healy clarified that Mr. Morgan would, continue to pay the $1.4.,000 as
s the normal mitigation fee and would set aside an additional' $14,000 for the other fees.
6
~ Mr. Morgan disagreed.. He explained that he agreed to pay storm drain mitigation fees
s and provide 125-1.:30% of off-site detention. He thought he would agree to pay three
9 times the fee if the Engineering Department agreed to look at Adobe's analysis and
io base his fee on actual run-off: -
~~
12 Council Member Maguire stated that he appreciated Vice Mayor Torliatt's concerns;
13 however, there was, a .desperate need for housing.. He described the proposal as
14 covering every possible base, hydrologically speaking. Regarding establishment of an
is appropriate fee schedule or level, he thought $14,000 for the storm drain mitigation fee,
16 plus 130%-150% of Adobe's estimate would be sufficient to cover foreseeable
i~ requirements for detention.
18
19 Council Member Healy understood that the existing fee was based on a 0.8-acre fee
20 and the newer study showed that being Ceduced_by 75% to 0.2. He asked Council.
2i Member Maguire 'if he was proposing 'to leave it at 0.2.
22
23 Council Member Maguire clarified that it should ~be left at 0.8 for extra margin and
24 security purposes.
2s
26 Council Member Cader-Thompson requested further clarification from Mr. Morgan
27 about his willingness to pay three times the amount he was now paying.
28
29 Mr. Morgan confirmed that he thought'`it would be possible and asked that because he
~3o was the first to pay a detention. pond fee, it ;remain 'at $14,000, but if necessary he
31 would be willing to pay 2-3 times the current amount.
32
33 Council Member'Gader-Thompson thought it better to go with the higher.num.ber; it
34 could 6e reduced later if the report warranted it. She pointed out. that even though the
3s project was for low=:income housing, it still had an impact. She'thought it important to
36 'wait for the RM1 Study, because the upstream development would have an upstream
37 impact.
38
39 Vice Mayor Torliatt concerned that if the City were to begin charging detention pond
4o fees it would be responsible for any detention ponds that were. not built. The developer
41 wouldn't be responsible because they had paid the fees, and-the City shouldn't be
42 responsible.
43
44 She thought.. Burbank should budget a "dollar amount"; Staff and Burbank should have
4s the flexibility to .say that they may need to build their own' facility.
46
Vol. 34,, Page 336 Marche 20, 2000:
1 Council Member Healy was prepared'to ag"ree to either three -times the- $14;0.00 figure,
2 as proposed by City Management; or Co""u"Heil Member Maguire's proposal: bf 2~3 times
3 $14,000. In either case; if`the developer paid' in too much, it could be refunded.
4
s Council Member Maguire wanted to keep in ,mind that .the; pr,.oject hatl merit that a
6 standard project would not. Because of"that, he was willing to prose°ed without having,
~ all the information and,have excess charges retGrned if'they turn out not to be required:
s Regarding. Vice Mayor Torliatt's concern regarding liability, fie presumed that contracts
9 would contain 'the appropriate indemnity clauses.
io
`i i Ms. Gaeble.r confirmed that she would ask City Attorney Rich ~Rudnansky to review the
r2 contracts to that end.
13
14 Council Member Maguire emphasized that the project didn't necessarilq~set a precedent
s for future projects.
i6
i~ Vine Mayor'Torliatt requested. that the City Attorney address, unless he deemed; it
is unnecessary, the matter of potential liability.
19
20 City Attorney :Rich Rudnansky indicated,;that it was impossible. to speculate as 'to. what -
21 impact the decision made. today would have in the future.
2z
23 Council Member Maguire questioned if an:y action taken today would cause a precedent` . .
24 that others could potentially fry to exploit. -.
.ZS -
26 Mr, Rudnansky stated that a decision today-would not lock them into similar decisions
27 for future projects...
Zs
29 Vice .Mayor Torlatt asked if someone else, wanting to build in a flood plain area, could
3o come in and demand the same treatment.
31
32 Mr. Rudnansky indicated that such demand's could be made, but Council would !not be
33 required to agree;tothem.
34
3s Council Member;Healy'agreedwith Mr. Rudnansky His understanding of the detention
36 requirement was that. it pertained to the portion outside the flood, plain. He thought th_e
3? watershed area was the real issue and itwas a much bigger area than the flood, plain
3g area. So: the possible precedent. concerned, the entire Petaluma. River'1Natershed -knot
39 the flood plain area, -
4o Vice Mayor Torliatt was willing to have the-project go forward, but wanted the benefit of
41 the Staff Report and policy making process ;before making, ariy further decisions.
42
43 MOTION: :Council Member Maguire moved,. seconded by Caller-Thompson, fo
44 Ad"opt Resolution 00-52 NCS, allowing the commencement of construction.
45 by. Burbank Housing,;Developrnent Corporation (E3urbank) and the:
46 payment of "detention" fees as part of an off'-site pond fund three times
- March 20, 2000
Vol. 34, Page 337
1 the: amount of the stormdrain fees, and that language be added to the
2 ~ resolution ~t'o reflect that;because of the unique character of the project,
3 this decision° is intended as policy only for this project.
4
5 MOTION
6 PASSED: 5/0%2 (Wamlton, Keller absent)
7
s a Verbal Report Regarding Status of Payran. Project and Discussion and
9 Possible Direction Regarding Payran Flood Management Financing and
to Budget.
11
12 Mr. Hargis reported .issues with compaction of the storm drain pipe on Vallejo Street.
13 These were being resoled as quickly as possible. He also presented a report in
14 response to a notice of violation from the. Water Quality Control Board. for the Corps
is Contractor regarding not having proper erosion prevention measures in place. He will
16 provide Council with copies of the report..
17
is City .Manager Stouder announced the upcoming meeting in 1Nashington D.C. The main
19 meeting would be in the offices of the Assistant Secretary for the Armyfor Engineering,
20 the: Deputy Assistant Secretary for Finance and Budget, and possibly the Deputy
21 Assistant Secretary for Civil Works. The congressional representatives were working
22 with the agencies involved.... The goal. was to break through some of the former
23 bureaucratic legal constraints of the project, specifically: when the project was first
24 conceived and agreed fo, it was viewed appropriate' to have it under a section of U.S.
2s Army Corps authorizing participation with. limits of $5 million and a maximum of
26 $7million. C.ouncif .and City Management's main mission was to convince the Army
27 Corpse that this was not a Section 205 project and -that it .should not be held to those.
2s limitation. This. was a Federal U.S. Army Corps flood control project.
29
3o a Discussion and Rossible Action Regarding Naming and Dedication of Payran
31 Reach Bridges:
32
33 City Manager~Stouder.asked that any comments or suggestions regarding the Bridge
34 :Plaque. be provided; she .would then. meet with Mr. Vince Landoff -and the project would
3s proceed. ~ -
36
37 Vice Mayor Torliatt suggested the'plaque be entitled "Lakeville Street Bridge" and be
3s worded as follows: "The;Lakeville~Street Bridge and the Petaluma River Flood
39 Management Project°are dedicated to the Citizens of Petaluma and Petaluma's
4o Flood Victims ~#o Help, Protect Future Generations from the Devastating. Effects of
4i Flooding:"
42
43 Council Member Maguir..e concurred-with Vice Mayor Torliatt's ideas and wanted fo
44 include the words, "for their continued efforfs".
45
46 Council Member Healy confirmed that this was for the new bridge.
Vol. 34, Page 338 March 20, 2000
.~
1
2 MOTf01V: Council Member Maguire-..moved.,, seconded .by Healy, to approve option
3 #2 and' :ad`d the title ofi "Lake;ville Street"Bridge:";and ,add the° phrase
4 "Citizens of Petaluma."
5
6 MOTION
7 PASSED: 411/2 (Torliaft voting no; Mamilfon, Keiler absent) ~'
s
9
io NEW BUSINESS ~ `
ii
i2 a Petaluma Tree Advisory Committee's Annual Report.
13
14 Senior Planner Hans Grunt. reviewed the agenda report.and introduced-Ross Parkerson
is and Joseph Norel ofi the Tree Advisory Committee. ,
16
i~ Tree Advisory Committee Chair Ross Parkerson provided information on the
is committee's accomplishments, including tree planting in downtown and neighborhood
19 areas, working with. Petaluma Tree Planters to acquire grants and money to cut the'
20 sidewalks; buy trees, etc.
21
22 The Council was acknowledged for °its .help with the East `D' Street project,, which .was a
23 phenomenal success, and the East Washington Street project, which is on;going:.
24 Mr: Parkerson then. intr,.oduced Ed Anehordoguy, who manages the trees on East .
2s Washington.
26
2~ Council Member Maguire stated that the Liquid~Amber:trees in front: of Kentucky fried
Zs Chicken had received' a severe pruning and asked `Mr. Parkerson if he thought it was
29 too severe. . .
30
31 Mr. Parkerson informed Council that- the committee was in the:.process of forming a
32 letter of information to the community on caring'forfrees. _ .
33
34 Council Member Maguir..e asked if .the committee.had talked about informng~
:...
3s commercial property ,owners~abouficare. of maturing trees on~theirproperties::
36
37 Mr. Parkerson replied that.the committee was developing a public.:ou'treach',program,
3s with the :Chamber of Commerce newspaper as a ~ehiele. -
39
4o Council Member Cader-Thompson asked. if'it was possible to~have;~.the "businesses
41 contribute a fee and have. a professional prune their trees ratfler~than a non-
42 professional. She asked if the-Tree Committee would actually look into that and :come
43 back with a dollaramount.
44
45 Mr. Parkerson'thought it was a .good idea and would. look into it.
46 ~ ~ r .r
March 20, 2000
Vol. 34; Page 339
i Council Member Cader-Thompson clarified that she. was. speaking 'of the whole
2 Washington corridor. She wanted to know how interested citizens could get this
3 information.
4
s Mr. Parkerson agreed. that there was always a need to plant trees and the outreach
6 program would be designed to reach everyone.
7
s He commented on a letter received from the Forestry Service. There were four criteria
9 to be met in order for Petaluma to be~ recognized as a Tree City USA. The City must
io have:
i~
i2 a Tree Committee
13 a Tree Care Ordinance
14 a Comprehensive Community Forestry Program
is a Arbor Day Observance
16
v Mr. Parkerson explained that Petaluma met all four criteria,. and then presented Council
ig with a plaque naming Petaluma as an official Tree Cify USA.
19
20 Council Member Cade_r=Thompson asked:if the Tree Committee had worked with the
2i shopping center on the east side as fhe t"gees were looking quite messy. She asked if
22 the committee could talkto there about this.
23
24 Mr. Parkerson explained that it is private property, but the committee was looking at
2s ways to approach them and let them know that help was available.
26
27 Council Member-Healy thought that the reason some trees weren't doing well was
2s because they weren't... planted in their ideal location. He believed: the approved tree list
29 would contribute to the success of future tree planting. H;e thanked, the committee,,, Mr. .
3o Anchordoguy and fhe Tree Planters-for their efforts to make Petaluma a Tree. City USA
31 and a beautiful: place to be.
32
33 Mr. Parkerson agreed.
34
3s Council Member Maguire expressed his appreciation and asked Mr. Parkerson if-'tree
36 planting would take place on the side streets in the Old Eastside Neighborhood.
37
3s Vice Mayor Torliatt `read a portion of the staff report: The overall volunteer time
39 provided by the seven-member'committee was estimated at .80b hours per year; City
4o Management time was. estimated at 155 hours per year. She acknowledged what a~
41 great effort that was..She noted that a tree was missing in Golden Concourse; there
42 was only a hole where the tree was.
43
44 Mayor Thompson thanked Mr. Parkerson and the committee for their efforts and
4s commented on how much more he enjoys the street"s of Petaluma because of the
Vol. 34, Page 340
March '2Q 2b00
i natural beauty. He also app..reciated being a part of the tree planting and especially
2 enjoys watching those trees. grow and mature.
Discussion. and ;Possible Action on Appointment of Two Council IVlembers
to a Youth Commission Subcommittee
~ Mayor Thompson stated that'he had received a phone call from. Council Member Keller
s asking that this item be postponed until, the evening because. he had a.que tion
9 regarding the mission or the mi"scion statement of .this item. Mayor Thompson asked
io Parks. and Recreation :Director Jim Carr if the appointments were made at this .time;;
i,i would Council Member Keller be able to get: his answer during the evening meeting.
1'2
i3 Mr. Carr replied that he would, and added that the information. Council Member Keller
__
14 requested had. been provided the last ~trne Council rnet regarding the Youth
is Commission. The Council.: had granted City Management-.and- the Youth Commission a
i6 year:to develop a mission statement, etc.
1~
is Council Member..Maguire suggested appointing the Council Members at this tirne~.
19
20 Mayor Thompson noted that. Council Members Caller-Thompson and Healy had.:
21 expressed interest in'being part~`of the cornmitte-e.
22
23 IVIOTIONc. Vice: Mayor Torliatt moved„ seconded ;by Maguire; to appoint Council
24 Member Caller=Thompson and Council Member Healy to the Youth,
2s Commission Subcommittee.
26
27 MOTION.
2s PASSED: 5/0/2 (Hamilton; Keller absent)
29
3o Mr. Carr mentioned that the school board and the' :hospital foundation have made: their
31 appointments. V1/e have 1,3 written applications from interested .adults ands we'd like t_o
32 set a date the first part of .April so we sari start the interviews.
33
34
3s PUBLIC' COMMENT
36
37 Mr. Loren 1Nilliams, 12: North Napa Drive; invited Co,uncif Members to ride on the Trolley
3s in the.Butter and Eggs. Day Parade. He proposed creation of a Petaluma Trolley Living
39. History Museum and asked that the'.idea be brought to Council f,or discussion and
ao possible adoption. later'in Sp:"ring. It would inclu,de~~suggested changes to the draft fo
4i allow inclusion of'tlie Heritage Trol ey idea.
42
43 Council Member Caller=Thompson asked if this could~b.e put:on~;the agenda before the
44 Butter and Eggs'Day .Parade.
45
46 Vice Mayor Torliatt thought. if should be on the. Corona Reach Discussion Agenda..
March 20, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 341
1
2 Council Member Caller=Thompson thanked Mr. Williams for his hard work and for
3 bringing hi's ideas for the community to the Council.
4
s Mr. Stouder stated that the idea was to have asingle-purpose meeting with the Central
6 Petaluma Specific Plan.
s Vice Mayor Torliatt encouraged Mr. Williams to submit'-the plans to City Management`-
9 prior to the Central Petaluma Specific Plan Meeting so they could incorporate some of
to his ideas into their recommendations to Council. She noted that she had attending the
11 Heritage Homes meeting last Thursday night; saw the slide. presentation and thought it
12 was fabulous, and looked forward to seeing: it again.
13
14 Mayor Thompson thanked Mr. Williams and Don Campo for their time and hard work.
15 _
16 PUBLIC COMMENT - ~ ' '
17 .. • " _
is None - --
19
20 CLOSED SESSION _ ~ "
21
22 City Attorney Rich Rudnansky announced that Council would .adjourn to Closed
23 Session for the following:
2s Conference With Labor Negotiator, Pursuant to; Government Code §54957.6, Unit 7,
26 Fire. Agency Negotiator: Acorne/Beatty/Krout
2~
2s Conference With Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation (Subdivision (a) of Government
29 Code §54956:9), City~of Petaluma vs. Holmberg; S'onorna County Superior Court Case
3o No. 222739. :.
31
32 Conference With Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation-(.Subdivision (a) of Government
33 Code §54956:9): Gift' of Petaluma vs. Madison Village` Homeowners Association,
34 Sonoma County Court Case No. SCV 221052.
35
36 Public Erx~ployee Performance Evaluation, Pursuant to Governmenf Code. §54957.
3~ Discussion of City Clerk Evaluation. (Kline) '
38
39 ADJOURN
40
41 Council adjourned to Closed Session at 4:25 p.m.
42
43 '
44 ******
45
46
Vol. 34, Page 342 March 20, 20Q0
~ RECONVENE -
2
3 The Petaluma City Council reconvened its regular meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
4 Chambers.
s
6 REPORT O.UT OF CLOSED SESSION
s Mayor Thompson announcedthat there: was no reporfable action taken in Closed
9 Session,
io
1 i ROLL CALL
12 ...
13 PRESENT; Council... Members. Cader-Thompson, Healy, Keller; Maguire,; -Vice Mayor
14 Torliatt; 'Mayor Thompson ,
is
16 ABSENT: Council Member Hamilton
i~
~g PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, ~. '
19
20 At the request of Mayor Thompson;:. Boy Scout Troop 8 led the Pledge of Allegiance:
2i
22 MOMENT OF SILENCE
r.
23
'24 At the request of Mayor Thompson, a moment of silence was observed..
25
26 PUBLIC+COMMENT' `
27 _ ~ .
2s Wayne Bige ow, 1817~Laneaster~pri~e; spoke.regarding.the recent acts of arson and
29 violence at`the Fishrnan Supply Company. He stressed the need to stand ogether as a
3o community against this.: type of violence.
31
32 Terence Garvey, 83 Maria Drive; spoke regarding the:~recent violence:. at the Fishman
33 Supply .Company and in opposition: of~anti-Semitic graffiti and ri favor of the
34 .establishment of a reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the
3s perpetrators.
36
37 Petaluma Chamber of Commerce President Tom Knudsen.: spoke in opposition to
3s vandalism at the,'Fishrnan Supply Company and anti-Semitic sentiments demonstrated:
•39 He stated that a. reward fund was being established. at the. Petaluma Area. Chamber of
4o Commerce to assist in the arrest of the p.erson(s) responsible.: for this crime, adding .that
41 he would have more information on the scope of. the fund next week.
42
43 John .R.ecords, spoke::regarding the recent violence at the Fishman Supply .Company
44 describing it as an attack on the entire community.
45
March 20, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 343:
1 Bill Fishman (not involued in the family business) ,poke regarding the recent violence at
2 the Fishman Supply Company and in opposition of anti-Semitic graffiti, bigotry and _
3 expressed his appreciation to all speaking for his family this evening. He expressed
4 thanks and admiration to the Petaluma Police aril Fire Departments for their help -arid
s support with regard to the incident.
6
~ Saul Fishman expressed his family's appreciation to the City and community for their
8 aid and support.
9
to Diane Reilly-Torres, Rainier Avenue, spoke regarding Public Access charges.
11
12 Patricia Tuttle Brown spoke in opposition of the van.daliscn at the Fishman Supply
13 Company and_theanti=Semitic sentiments demonstrated.
14
is COUNC9L COMMENTS
16
1~ Council Member Gader-Thompson~spoke regarding the recent violence at the Fishman
is Supply Company and in opposition of anti-Semitic graffiti and bigotry. She thanked the.
19 members of the public speaking tonight and expressed her love for and fond memories
20 of the Fishman Family.
21
22 Council Member Keller empathized: with those who spoke in opposition of the recent..
23 violence at the Fishman Supply Company, anti-Semitism, bigotry, ethnic and racial .
24 prejudices.
2s
26 He congratulated the Petaluma High School Girls. Trojans for their sportsmanship and
27 accomplishments. 'Regarding -the Sonoma Coun"ty Transportation Association. meeting
2s of this afternoon., a motion for a summit fo develop a-tax or financing proposal was
29 defeated 6-5. There had been some concern. expressed that Senator Burton would .
3o move forward with a statewide measure for a sales tax. vote on .50% + 1 county by,
31 county to support county infra-structure.. If SCRA were to go forward with a.summt.or,
32 any other process, assurance was needed from the Board. of Supervisors that whafe~er
33 was developed would be put on fhe ballot.. That might not happen. The group did agree
34 to pursue additional State and Federal ..gas tax returns and SCA3 or some variation
3s thereof for sales tax on the .project.
36 ~~
37 Council Member Maguire asked who the Supervisors were. ,_
38 ~~
39 Council Member Keller replied Tim Smith, Mike Kerns and Mike Reilly.
40 ~ '
41 Vice Mayor Torliatt asked who voted against having a summit.
42
43 Council Member Keller replied that it was Mike Kerns, Tim Smith, Sharon Wright.,,. -
44 Phyllis Carter from Sonoma, and Erie Zeidrich from Healdsburg.
4s
Vol. 34, Page 344 March 20, 2000
1 :Council. Member Maguire :asked for a show of hands: from the people who were presenf;
2 in support of the Fishmans this evening.
Eighty,-five percent of the audience raised their hands.
6 Council Member Maguire spoke regarding the community's opposition to; prejudice and
7 hate.erimes. Hehoped.education, could eliminate motivation for such.crimes. 'H'e gage
8 his support to the- Fishmans.
9
to Council Member Healy spoke_against the. Fish. man :Supply incident and in favor of
11 education -for the: youth. of the community..
. -
i3 Vice Mayor Torliatt thanked Boy Scout Troop $ ;for leading the Pledge of Allegiance..
14 She spoke. regarding the. Rohnert Park City Council's working group workshop thaf was
is formed fo d.eal with their general plan process. She wanted Councihto talk.with
i6 Supervisor Mike Kerns,,. Open Space District'representatives and the Sonoma Land
17 Trust about.the :need to focus on a_ green belt around Petaluma, She was. in a "state- of
is disbelief" when she learned of th;e Fishman incident. She apologized to the: Fishrnans~
19 on behalfi of the perpetrators.
20
21 Mayor Thompson spoke;;in opposition.. of the crime against the: Fishman family. Me
22 asked Bill Fishman to read a quotation he had brought with him.
23
24 Mr. Fi`shnan read the following.:
25
2s "When they cache for the Communists, 1 did not speak. because l was not
27 a Communist: When they came for the Jews; l did not .Peak because I'
2s was not a Jew: When they carne for the Union Leaders,. I did not speak '
29 because J wasp not a 'Un""ion Leader. When fheycame for rrie; there was no
30 one left to speak.,"
31
32 COUfVCIL AND CITY MANAGEMENT'REP.- O.RTS
33 _
34 None
35
36 AGENDA CHANGES. ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS
37
3s None
39
4o PRESENTATIONS
41
a2 Presentation of Checks to High Schools fo'r Toilet Retrofit Pr®gram.
43 ~,
44 Mayor Thompson read a statement regarding the recent successful program, which.
.
4s raised $7,100.:00` each for Casa Grande and _Petaluma High Schools and replaced 957
46 toaets; the two schools will receive $15.00 for each toilet replaced for a total of
March 20, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 34s
1 $7,110:00 per high school. He thanked ahe following for th'e_ it leadership: Jane Decker,
2 Student Activities Director, Petaluma, High; JacobAvery and David Sterrep of Casa
3 Grande High School; and especiallythe high school students. He also thanked Joe
4 Devito and' Darren Hanson for the "Talking Toilef" video, and Craig Spaulding, Tony
s Tescano, Ted Andersen, Floyd Crane=for their assistance.
.-
6
~ Mr. Hargis, with the-assistance of A~II,ie.Qavidson and, Lynne Hulme of the Sonoma
s County Water Agency, presented the checks.
9 . ,...
to Ms. Davidson asked for a rouPnd of applause for Jane Decker, Petaluma High, and
y,
11 David Sterrep, Casa Grande High.: She then presented the.``big" checks.
12 _ _ .. .,
13 A student representative spoke regarding Casa~Grande High. School's current project,
T. ~.
14 "Project Tolerance," antl invited M'r. Fishman: and the Councif to the presentation in
is mid-April.
16 -
1~ Mayor Thompson stated that Casa Grande High.School won~the Academic Decathlon
is for the second year'in a row and Council would be presenting them with a proclamation.
.,
19 - - ~,
20 Ms. Davidson 'introduced the Student Body Presitlent of Petaluma High School, .and
21 recognized his efforts and ,hard workwith the Toilet. Refrofit project.
22 - -
23 Presentation on Green Power. . ~ _
24 ~~ ~ -
2s Natalie Peck,. 11-year Petaluma resident_,, asked Council to find and use renewable
26 energy sources and/or providers. ~.
2~
2a I<ari Smith, Center for Energy ,Efficiency and Renewable. Technologies, explained what.
29 electric restructuring is and how it effects the City. Generation of electricity is now
3o competitive. Transmission and distribution are still owned and operated by PG&E and
31 regulated by CPUC, but-the City now has the:.ablity fo choose how electricity will.be .
32 generated.
33
34 Vice MayorTorliaft asked Ms. Smith to define "renewable energy" and. to clarify whether
3s she was asking the City to switch to Green Power or the City and residents.
36
37 Ms. Smith .explained that "Green Power;" as defined. by California Law, included wind,
3s solar, biomass, landfill ;gas and small hydro and .geothermal power.. She clarified that:.
39 she was'proposing the City switch its municipal load, serve. as a leader in doing so, and
4o help to educate the community on how to do the same.
41
42 Council Member Maguire thanked Ms. Smith'for the information. He asked if the power
43 would be new power or repackaged -power and asked what she had' seen as part of the..
44 contract renewables.
4s
Vol. 34, Page 346 March 20, 2000
1 Ms: Smith replied that Oakland RFP have pecified,being. E-certified; Green E is;a
2 program run by Resources for Solutions., which.,is`non profit. They require all marketers
3 who sell Green E-certified product to include: 5% new generation `by the year "20:0.1 and
4 10% by .the year 2002...
._ ..
s -
6 Councif Member Maguire asked if"thaf percentage~would increase.
8 Ms. Smith replied that it currently stopped at 10%, She pointed out that if a:user were to
9 not switch to 100% renewable; that user would still be buying. 90% "dirty" and paying for
to the production and. distribution of the dirty power:. The Center for Energy Efficiency acid
9~ t9,
li Rene ~ pe Techpnolo 9 all resolu ces foward the puh the market. over time and displace
12 the dirt owes, uttin
rchase of_renewable .energy:
13 -
14 Council Member ;Maguire inquired if there was currently a'15% rebate.available.,
is ~ ~ .
i6 Ms. Smith replied that :it was 'a 50% "rebate.
1~
. ,- : ., ,
18 Council Member Maguire~~asked how 1ong:that would remain m effect.
19
20 Ms. Smith answered fhaf rebafes would be issued "until the money cans out:''-
21 .
22 Council Member` Maguire asked how much money'was: available for rebates..
23 -
24 Ms. Smith did not have thaf information with her...sle explained that it-was a State
2s funded program run by California.. Energy Commission.
26 .^ ...
27 Cqu,ncil Member Maguirernenti'oned that the City signed up to participate.wiih.ABAG
28 several years-ago in heir pooling of purchasing. He wondered whatthe~status was on
29 the contract wifh ABAG,
30
31 Cit Mpn 9 er Stoude.r re lied that he thou h the City was just ending their, second year
y g p 9.
32 m the ro ram. He recalled.. receiving a rebate check and a report:abouttwo weeks
33 ago.
34
3s. Ms: Smith stated that ABAG had "recently decided to offer a Green Power product; ,her
36 organization was working with ABAG because many cities felt:more comfortable buying
37 through. ABAG.
38
39 .City Manager Sfouder #hought the City was. participating'in the ;current program. He will
a~o provide Council with copies. of the report_he had recently received.
41
42 Council Member.Magure asked for information on the~convergence of cost.
43 -
44 Ms. Smith replied.that one of the things'-the eompari_ies we"re looking for was recognition
4s of providing Green Power to'large customers. She thought the City°would be in a good.
March 20, 2000 Vol.. 34, Page 347
negotiating position fora good deal with a marketer. She urged the City to issue an
RFP for 100% purchase to switch 100% of its load.
4 Council Member Maguire spoke regarding an article he read about the City of Santa
s Rosa's attempt to pump wastewater to the geysers to create steam in the steam fields.
6 Some of the Green Power'is geothermal power from the geysers.
7
s Council Merriber Keller thanked Ms. Smith her presentation. Regarding State
9 regulations and the definition of'small-scale hydroelectric, he asked if that was "new" or
io "existing."
it
12 Ms. Smith said it could be new. There was a new qualification being considered called
13 "low-impact hydro." American River's: project was working closely with the Center for
14 Resource Solutions (CRS) to come. up with new criteria.
15
i6 Council Member Keller asked if American River was currently working on a new
17 definition.
ig
19 Ms. Smith replied that they were, togetherwith a number of environmental groups,
20 including NRDC.
21
22 Council Member Keller thought. it best to ask ABAG what difference there would be in
23 fees if the City switched to 1DO%° Green Power. He also asked Ms. Smith to provide
24 model RFl''s foc City Management.
Zs
26 Council Member Healy stated that an article in the L.A: Times stated that their extra
27 cost was $115,000 per year for' Santa Monica. He wanted to see what Petaluma's cost
28 difference would be; than kind of a cost level would be .difficult for the City, given its
29 current financial. situation. He thought Council needed to subject this to some very
3o careful scrutiny.
31
32 Vice Mayor Torliatt pointed out that a Council Member from the City of Santa Monica
33 was at the local governmenf conference at Yosemite and gave a presentation on the
34 program. She stated-that there was a 5% increase in cost for the power but that by
3s using Green Power coupled with other energy measures, they actually saved that 5%.
36-
37 Council Member Maguire requested that City Management provide status report on the
3s current ABAG"program and more information about what;would be involved in issuing
39 an RFP and pursuing a Green Power basis for the City's consumption of power.
40
41 Council Member Cade,r-Thompson thanked Ms. Smith... She added that she. would like
42 to look'at this as part of the General Plan.
43
44 Mayor Thompson asked Ms. Smith if she. had copies of other City's RFP's.
45
vol. 34, Page 348
March 20, 200Q
1 Ms. Smith replied that she did not have them. with her b.ut she would .provide copies of
2 RFP's to Council., She extended an invitation to Council Members fo atte'nd. a
3 presentation on March 4,, .2000 about how cities could switch to Green Power and how
4 to use landfill gas to generate electricity for the, cities.
s
6 Council Member Cader-Thompson thanked Ms, Peck fo__r her hard work.
7
s Council Member Maguire asked That information on the 5.0% rebate also be provided..
9
to APPOINTMENTS
11
12 a Tree Advisory, Committee: One vacancy.. Two letters of interest. received,
13
14 Gabe Kearney stated' that he had reviewed th,e Tree C:ocnrnittee's plan and had, done
is some research regarding the- possibility of attaining those goals, including the Tree City
i6 IJSA program:
17
is Mayor Thompson, asked. Nlr. Kearney if he had participated in any horticultural
1~ programs at Santa Rosa Junior College.
20
21 Mr. Kearney stated `that there: was a hdrtieultural program and °in. Petaluma the Creek
22 Restoration Program was at the junior college campus.
23
24 Stephen'Stafford stated that.he did not have any educafi.on or expertise in horticulture
2s or land use.,, but he had kep_"t up w#h the progress the City had made and would like fo
26 get involved and, :help make Petaluma more beautiful.
27
2s .Mayor Thompson thanked Mr.. Kearney and Mr. Stafford.: He. then asked. Council
29 members to. cast their votes...
30
31 Gabe Kearney received 5 votes: Cader=Thompson, Keller, Maguire; Thompson,
32 Torliatt.
33
34 Stephen Stafford received 1 vote: Healy. ,
35
36 Candidate selected': Gabe Kearney- (.Resolution: 00-53 NC:S)
37
3s a Airport Commission One vacancy. Three letters of interest received..
39
4o John E. Cunningham was not present.
41
42 David Hansen, a resident of Petaluma, referred to. his letter. of` experience: and his:
43 interest in the airport and fhe rest of the community.
44
'March 20, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 349
1: Walter Magnon, Petaluma resident and business owner; spoke about the airport's
2 needs, present and future. He would like to be involved in the continued growth of the
3 airport.
4 -~
s City Attorney Rich Rudnansky addressed the Council regarding three potential areas of
6 conflict of.interest fo.r Mr. M:agnon, should he be appointed to the Airport Commission.
Mr. Magnon~had a rental agreement with the City at the airport, which qualified as an
s "interest in real grope"rty." Mr. Magnon owns a business at the airport, which presents a
9 "business entity" issue:... Thirdly, there was the question of his voting on issues that could
io affect his sources of income;. Mr. Magnon's ap"pointment alone would not present a
11 conflict of interest; however, every decision he made would have to be analyzed under
12 those three potential areas of .conflict.
13
14 Council Member Maguire, asked if there were an issue of building more hangers for the
is consumers, would" that constitufe a conflict of interest
16
1~ City Attorney Rich Rudnansky stated that it would depend on the level of involvement:
is If it directly involved Mr. Magnon's business, any potential increase in his revenue
19 would be a conflict; if he were i'ndirectfy involved;. there was another set of standards
20 involved.
21
22 Council Member Keller asked if Gity Attorney Rudnansky or City Manager Stouder knew'
23 if any other Commission members had businesses or economic interests in the airport.
24
Zs City Attorney Rieh Rudnansky replied, that he did not know; some may have tie-down or
26 hangar agreements, but those may not fall into the "business or source of income"
2~ category.
Zs ". ~ .
29 Council Member Keller was. concerned about current commission members having
30 ownership or economi"c interest in the airport, other than for storage.
31 "' '
32 City Manager Stouder commented .that several commission members had rental
33 agreements`or~lease agreements for hangers, but he didn't knowthat any ofithem
34.:owned the hangars.
35 '
36 ~ C_ify Attorney°Rudnansky clarified that ownership of a hangar was not likely to present. a
problem; however,,,ow;riing abusiness or having other sources of income at the airport
-- 3s could present a conflict.
39 -
40Council Member Keller"asked whose would make the ultimate decision regarding
41 conflicts. -
. 42 ,
- a3 City Attorney Rudnansky replied thaf it would ultimately be Mr. Magnon's decision:
44
4s Mayor Thompson instructed Council to vote.
46
Vol. 34; Page 350 March 20, .2000 _
i Dave Hansen .:received 5 votes:.Healy, Keller, Maguire; Thompson;~fi~orliatt., •.
2 -
3 Walter Magnon received 1 vote: Cader-Thompson .'
4 _
s Candidate-selected_ Dare Hansen (..Resolution 00-54 NCS) _
6 .
~ a Association of Bay Area. Governments Delegate and.Alternate - 1 year term ~ ._
8 -
9 MOTIQN: Council .Member Maguire moved, seconded by Mayor Thompson to
to appoint: Vice Mayor Torliatt as the City's Delegate to the Association of
i l Bay Area Governments.
12
13 MOTIO.N..
14 PASSED.:. 6/0/1 (Hamilton absent)
is
1'6 Recess: 8:35 p.rn.
17 _
is Reconvene: 8:40 p.m.
19
20
21 PUBLIC NEARING (,Continued from January 18, 2000 and March 6, 2000)
22
23 a Discussion and Possible .Action on the Draft;Bicycle Phan:
24
2s a Resolution 00 ;55 NCS Adopting a_ Negati~e.'Deelaration for the Petaluma
26 'Bicycle Plan..
27 a Resolution 00-56 NCS Adopting an Amendment fo the General Plan
28 Circulation Element and Circulation Map to Include the Petaluma Bicycle Plan
29 in its Enti'cety: .
,,
3o a Introduction bf Ordiharice 2099 NCS Repealing Sections of,, and,Adding
31 Sections-to, the Petaluma M_un,icipal Code; Including Article, 17 (Zoning
32 Ordinance). in Accordance .with Appendix:,A of the ;P.etalurna Bicycle Plan.
33 a Resolution,,,00 5,7 NCS Authorizing an Amendm:ent.to the Engineering .~
34 Department.,Rublic Street Standards and :Specif,ications in Accordance-Vuith;
3s Appendix A of the Petaluma Bicycle P an. ~ ,
36 y
37 Consultant`VinSmith announced he h.ad no additional;co.mrnents to make but~there
3s was one change to the agenda description: added a future action request fo adopt new
39 bepartment of Engineering .Standards for Bike Plans, Facilities and;;Roadways. ~Th'is
4o was at the regaest,of -the- new Direcfor`ofi Public Facilities and Services. _ .
41
42 Vice Mayor Tor,liatt wanted to :make one addition to the plan: At the `ti'me that the
43 Fairgrounds were developed she would I•ike° a, bike path. included; on the rnap..
44
March 20, 2000 Vol. 34, Page 3s1
1 Mr: Smith reiterated that what was on the map and what was in the plan remained
2 proposed and the implementation of those projects would have to come back for review
3 and approval.
4
5 PUBLIC COIVIMEIVT
6
~ Diane Reilly Torres, Rainier Avenue, spoke of her concerns regarding the Old Redwood
s Highway Bridge over Willow Brook Creek with regard to fhe Petaluma Access and River
9 Enhancement Plan.
to
11 Monica Martinez thoughf Council needed to-give the Kenilworth over-crossing more
r2 time and consideration. She did not think her opinions were being heard.
13
14 Vice Mayor Torliaft addressed Ms. Martinez regarding the number of discussions ,the
is City Council and members of Council had undertaken. She clarified that the City did'
16 not own the Kenilworth site and they had been investigating alternatives for working
1~ with the School D:istriet. She.and Mayor Thompson hosted a meeting last June with
is school staff to~discuss issues regarding :the. overpass. She had spoken to Sergeant..
19 Phimister ofithe Petaluma Police Department and told-.him she would be happy to be-a.
20 liaison. She was sorry to ..hear that the neighborhood felt the City had abandoned them.
21 She spoke about the Schultz. Foundafion Fund and'. how that could be used. She._
22 announced that there would be public hearings fo decide whether the overcrossing
23 would be opened 24/7.
24
2s Council Member Maguire empathized. with Ms. Martinez about her distrust of the
26 Council regarding the process'. He explained' thaf there was a Bike Plan that would
27 probably be adopted; however, that didn't. automatically mean that the Kenilworth
2s overcrossing would be opened. That matter still had to go through an individual
29 process., which would include the neighborhood, to approve the plan. The Council's
3o hope was to meet all concerns..
31
32 Ms. Martinez appreciated .knowing about future hearings and hoped they took place in a.
33 timely manner.
34
3s Vice Mayor Torliaft addressed Ms. Reilly-Torres's comments regarding the flooding
36 .issues,, specifically the Willow Brook issue, which the Bike Committee-and City
37 Engineering Department looked at in depth. That will come back to the Council.
38
39 She met with Superintendenf of Schools Carl. Wong and'the Bike Committee to go .over
4o any issues regarding opening access to school sites and he was in support of that.
41 There was also a member of the Police Department on the committee for a time so the
42 committee and the Police Department were able to communicate about the Bike Plan:
43
44 MOTION: Vice Mayor Torliaft moved, seconded b.y Maguire, to:
4s
Vol. 34, Page 352
March 20, 2000
i a Adopt Resolution 00=55 NGS, adopting Negative„Declaration for the Petaluma
2 Bicycle Plan.
3 a Resolution 00-5'6: NCS Adopting an Amendmenf to the General P-Ian Circulation
a Eiernent and Circulation Map to Include th`e ,Petaluma Bicycle Plan, as am~ended''to
s include `D' Street to Kenilworth Overpass for future implementation with proper'
6 notice.
7 a Introduction of. OYdinance 2099 NCS ..Repealing Sections of; and Adding Seetions~to,
s the Petaluma. Municipal Code,. Including Article 17 (Zoning Ordinance') in
9 Accordance with Appendix A ~of the- Pe.talurna Bicycle Plari.
io a Resolution 00-57 NCS Authorizing. an Amendment to'the Engineering Department
ii Public Street:Standards and Specifieati`o.ns in Accordance with Appendix A of the
i2 Petaluma Bicycle Plan.
13 - -
14 MOTION
rs PASSED: 6/0/1 (Hamilton absent) .
1~
17 Mayor Thompson thanked'. Patricia Tuttle Brown for her lime and energy and .hard work
is and also: thanked the' committee. He thanked Patricia Stanley for her tolerance; Lillian
i9 and Steven for their tol'erariee,, also.,. and ,extended. his appreciation. in working w,'ith
20 them.
21
22 Councif Member Caller=Thompson. indicated that no alfernate had been selected to
23 serve for ABAG and that she was interested:
24
2s MOTION:. C.ouncif:Member Healy moved; seconded 6y Maguire. to appoint Janice
26 Caller=Thompson to serve as; alternate for ABAG.
27
2s MOTION
29 PASSED: 6/0/1 .(Hamilton absent) ~ .
30
31 .Patricia Tuttle Bcow,n thanked the=Council and assured the Kenilworth, neighborhood
32 that opportunities would be presented and that ther'wo,ices would 6e heard:.
33
34 ADJOURN.
35
36 9:10 P..M.
37
41 ATTEST:. _
42
43
44
everly J. Kline, City Cle
******
E. Clark`Thompson, Mayor