Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05/17/1999May 17, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 61 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 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PETALIJMA CITY COUNCIL `MAY 17,1999 ROLL CALL 3:00 p.m. Present: Healy, Torliaft, Caller-Thompson, Hamilton, Maguire; Vice Mayor Keller, Mayor Thompson Absent: None PLEDGE' OF .ALLEGIANCE Don Weisenflu PUBLIC, COMMENT Rudolph.Rentzel; 1.10 Round Walk Circle, spoke in opposition of the Domestic Partners Ordinance and also submitted signatures of others that oppose it. Don Weisenflu; 1092 Wren Drive, addressed the Council on ~B 15 Firearms. He wanted to know the procedure the Council was. going to take iri their discussion on this issue today as he and others were not given the chance: to speak on April S, when. it was brought back:as a Motion for Reconsideration of prior action of March 29; on a. Resolution in support of Senate Bill 1S Firearms. He was advised by Mayor Thompson that 'it would be a very short discussion and the audience would be allowed to speak. ifthe situation called for it. Chris McAuliffe of U. S. Filter, Manager of the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant. Reminded the Council of River Clean Up Day, Saturday, May 22, 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. from the Lakeville Bridge to Shollenberger Park. I-Ie also shared that the City o:f Petaluma's Wastewater Plant won the local section of Plant ofthe Year Award for safety, and also on April 30, won the State Award for Small Plant of the Year. It was noted that a year ago Chris won Supervisor of the Year. Terrance Garvey, 83 Maria Drive spoke again in opposition of the Domestic Partners Ordinance. Geoff Cartwright, 56 Rocca Drive; Spoke regarding the Brian Kangas Foulk Report and the Phil Williams & Associates Report. Has Brian Kangas Foulk paid money to Phil Williams Associates? Are these two reports supposed to be independent? He would like. an' answer. Kevin Marks, representing the Petaluma Firefighters Local 1415, Petaluma firefighters. are here to show support to the Fire: Master Plan ,process and the Citizens Advisory Cornrruttee. The firefighters would. like. to, thank the. Committee for all their hard work and dedication to the city and to the department. They would like. to see. the Citizens Advisory Committee stay active to validate the Master Plan. A timeline needs to be developed for implementation and funding of the Master Plan. Vol: 33, Page 62 May 17, 1999 1 COUNCIL. COMMENTS 2 DK, Presented an article from the San Francisco Chronicle to the Council regarding the. 3 addition of lands added to Mt. Diablo State Park. Why does the rest of the bay area get open 4 space on public lands and access to it and Petaluma doesn't. 5 6 During a SPARC meeting the Factory Outlet Stores had requested security gates be installed 7 on the bridge. The original project approvals was that it was to have free public access along 8 the entire riverfront over that bridge and security gates at the bridge would be inimicable to 9 that. 10 11 DK, would also like to see baseball and soccer fields successfully established for the 12 community as was originally promised, as a condition of the Cross Creek development, 13 although we do not have it in written agreement. He would ask the development community 14 led by Mr. Heaton to contribute money towards a difference between what we would have 15 gotten under that agreement and what it would cost the city to put that in place. I would be 16 happy to name it Doyle Heaton Park. 17 18 PT, stated that this week May 17-21 is Bike to Work Week. There will be energizer stations 19 at Putnam Plaza from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. hosted by the Petaluma Bicycle Committee and 20 Redwood Business Park @ Old Redwood Highway and Redwood Way from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 21 a.m. hosted by G & W Management. The stations are giving out refreshments as well as 22 prizes. 23 24 SCTA has transferred a call for projects for the Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) 25 funding program. The applications need to be submitted by June 15. Have we followed up 26 with the Chamber of Commerce regarding the Railroad Station on this project and whether the 27 funding would come from here. I'd like again to put our hand out to the Chamber to see if we 28 can do some sort of joint project and get together on this. 29 30 The Draft Bicycle Plan is out for review. 31 32 The Minutes of April 26 were approved as submitted. 33 34 The Minutes of May 3 were approved as amended: 35 Page 4 Line 26, Jim Carr was not at the meeting. He might have advised us per a memo, but 36 he wasn't here. 37 3 8 Page 10 Line 40, Approval of Parkway Plaza. There was an additional condition included 39 stating that the Shopping Center would be fo primarily serve Northeast Petaluma. 40 41 JCT, she voted for what Councilmember Healy said, but she didn't approve the language. 42 43 Page 14, Line 32/33, strike the sentence Some of the Councilmembers would support 44 deeding it over to the County. 45 May 17, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 l1 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 PROCLAMATIONS Water Awareness Month, National Public Works Week„ American Legion Buddy Poppy Days; Bay Area Air Quality Management -Bike to Work; National Safe Boating Week,. RSVP Volunteer Recognition Day,. GOOD ;NEWS The striping. for the on street bike land for McDowell Boulevard, from Lakeville Highway to Old' Redwood Highway has been completed. The project was funded by the.Bay Area Air Quality Management District's Transportation Funds for Clean Air .:program. The only cost to the City of Petaluma. was in the plan design and inspection. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items which are noncontroversial and which have been reviewed; by the City Council and staff were enacted by one motion wlveh was introduced by Councilmember Maguire; seconded by Councilmember Torliatt. ' AYES: Healy, Torliatt, Caller-Thompson, Hamilton, .Maguire; Vice Mayor Keller, Mayor.. Thompson NOES: None .ABSENT: None Item numbers 2,3, and 4 were removed from the Consent Calendar. RESO. 99-105 NCS OIIARTERIJY TREASURER'S:REPORT Resolution 99-105 NCS Receiving and Filing the Quarterly T'reasurer's Report. RESO.99 1;06 N,CS ACCEPT FIRE' MASTER PLAN Resolution. 99-106 NCS Accepting the ..Fire Master Plan -Five Year/Life Safety Plan as a resource document. - RESO.99-107 NCS FARMERS' MARKE'T' Resolution 99=107 NCS authorizing the use of Walnut Park for the 19.99 Petaluma Farmers Market season from May 22 to October 30 each Saturday. Hours of operation are from 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. RESO.99-.108 NCS PROJECT :GRADUATION Resolution 99-1.08 NCS' Authorizing free use of the Petaluma Community Center by Project Graduation of Casa Grande High School. RES'O. 99;1A9 NCS PETA~UMA SWIM CLUB Resolution 99-109 NCS Approving a Joint Use Agreement with the .Petaluma Swim Club for use of the Petaluma Swim Center for their- daily practice sessions and -two competitive meets. The Petaluma. Swim Club has agreed to pay a flat rate of $850 .per month, as well as other aspects of the proposed joint powers agreement. * *~* End of Consent Calendar* * * Vol. 33, Page 64 May 17, 1999 1 RESO. 99-110 NCS 2 1998-:1999 ON-CALL STREET RE'PAIR_PROJECT 3 Resolution 99-.110 NCS Approving. Plans and. Specifications and Awarding. Contract for the 4 1998-1999 On-Call Street Repair Project for $131,725. The project involves repairs of streets 5 at various locations on an "On Call Basis". The contractor North Bay Construction will be 6 called in to work whenever the street repair is needed that cannot be handled by the City crew. 7 Low bid amount was $131,725.00. Staff has been watching the street pavement over the last 8 18 months and we found that its been performing perfectly. Staff is coming before Council 9 next month to recommend acceptance of the improvements. The contractor is going to post a 10 two year bond beyond the date of acceptance. Introduced by DK, seconded by MM. 11 AYES: Healy, Torliatt, Cader-Thompson, Hamilton, Maguire, Vice Mayor Keller, Mayor Thompson 12 NOES: None 13 ABSENT: None 14 15 RES®. 99-111 NCS 16 PG&E EASEMENT DEED ON LAKEVILLE HWY. 17 Resolution 99-111 NCS Granting a 5'x15' easement to Pacific Gas & Electric for the 18 installation of a pole anchor at Lakeville Highway, across from Browns Lane and authorize the 19 City Manager to enter into agreement .for same. The power pole is located across the street 20 from Browns Lane where the Oxidation Ponds are. The power pole is being moved slightly to 21 accommodate the de-exceleration and the exceleration lane on the east side of the road where 22 Brown's Lane is. This is not a major power pole and it could be relocated if in the future the 23 city was to decide that that would be a new entrance to the future treatment plant, and would 24 be moved at PG&E's expense. Introduced by PT, seconded by DK. 25 AYES: Healy, Torliatt, Cader-Thompson, Hamilton, Maguire, Vice Mayor Keller, Mayor Thompson 26 NOES: None - 27 ABSENT: None 28 29 D®MES'I'IC PARTNERS 30 JH, has received phone calls from numerous people for and against the Domestic Partners. 31 She does not feel that the Ordinance is eroding the special meaning and status marriage has 32 long held in our society. It recognizes and offers support for family configurations that do not 33 conform to the traditional nuclear family model. These are families that exist in our society 34 and have existed for a very long time. This is very healthy for our community. 35 36 MM, finds Terrance Garvey's accusations unfounded in fact. He would like to move ahead 37 and adopt the Ordinance. 38 39 ®RD. 2089 NCS 40 DOMESTIC PARTNERS 41 Ordinance 2089 NCS Permitting City Clerk to register Domestic Partners. Introduced by DK, 42 seconded by JH. 43 AYES: Healy, Torliatt, Cader-Thompson, Hamilton, Maguire, Vice Mayor Keller, Mayor Thompson 44 NOES: None 45 ABSENT: None May 17, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 65 1 RESO. 99-111 NCS, 2 DOMESTIC EARTNERS REGISTRATION FEES 3 Resolution 99-111 NCS Establishing fees for Domestic Partner Registration. at $65.D0. 4 Introduced by DK, seconded by JH. 5 AYES: Healy, Torliatt; Cader-Thompson, Hamilton, Maguire, Vice Mayor Keller, Mayor Thompson 6 NOES: None 7 ABSENT: None 8 9 YOIJTIi_PI20GRAMS~ & HC2 10 In the Spring of 1998; the .Healthy Communities Consortium (HCZ) of Petaluma requested that 11 the Division of Adolescent Medicine and. the National Adolescent Health ,Information Center, 12 both ofthe University of California, San Francisco;, assist in the. process. of planning to enhance 13 the health and well-being of youth `in Petaluma. As a result Assuring the Health of Adolescents 14 in Petaluma Final Report has .been completed and submitted to the Council. Petaluma has the 15 capability, resources, and interest to significantly 'improve the health of 'its adolescents. By 16 continuing to work. towards inclusiveness; shifting the view of youth from problems waiting to 17 happen to assets waiting to be .developed,. setting. realistic, achievable community goals,. and 18 refining the community change process to facilitate the timely meeting of those; goals Petaluma 19 can move into the '2;1st century as a community which is rreating ;positive changes `"for the 20 economic;'social, spiritual and physical well-being of the community." 21 22 MC NEAR:PARK LIGHTS 23 The Department of State Architect's Office is requesting. additional engineering calculations 24 regarding the Musco lighting issue. That information will be disseminated to them and plans 25 should be approved by May 18. Once the plans, are appriwed by the Department of State 26 Architect's Office the bidding documents will be finalized and we can proceed with the 27 process. The project is on track and the Joint Powers Agreement is going through some. final 28 language. . 29 JH, asked that a letter be sent to the Sport. Leagues and spec>fically that they be invited to the 30 Park.and Recreation. Commission meetings where park bond. issues are under discussion. This 31 will. be discussed' on May 19. She would like phone .calls made to the Sport .Leagues and 32 specifically invite them to invite of parts of their membership to the meeting to .hear the 33 discussion. Note the meeting starts at 6:00 p.m. not 7:00 p.m. .She would like a report. back 34 on how many did participate. 35 36 SENATE,BILL 15 37 HAND:GiTNS 38 Vote on Motion for Reconsideration o send a letter of support for Senate Bill 15. Hand .Guns. 39 A vote was-taken to send,a letter in support of Senate Bill 15 banning hand guns. 40 AYES; Healy, Maguire; Keller (in support of SB15) 41 NOES: Torliatt, Cader-Thompson, Hamilton, Mayor Thompson (not in support of'SB15) 42 ABSENT: ':None 43 44 It was noted by Councilmember Healy that S'B 15 actually passed the State Senate and has 45 been sent to the Assembly.• It passed the Senate by a vote of 25 to 15. Vol. 33, Page 66 May 17, 1999 1 RESO'S. 99-113 NCS 2 ANIMAL SERVICES 3 Susan Simons, Chairman. of the Animal Services Committee presented the organizational 4 structure and staff recommendations to the Council. It was the recommendation of the Animal 5 Advisory Committee after exploring options through an RFP process to reassign city personnel 6 to provide a full range of animal service including the operation of the. shelter. 7 8 The committee recommendations are as follows: 9 10 1 Animal Services Manager 1 Animal Shelter Supervisor 11 1 Volunteer/Education Coordinator 3 Animal Services Officer 12 2 Kennel Attendants 13 1 Office Assistant II .5 Clerk Typist 14 15 Resolutions 99-113 NCS Adopting the committee recommendations for staffing except 16 deferring the Senior Animal Services Officer and just hiring 3 Animal Services Oi~cer's. Not 17 to exceed $320,000 per year. Council would also like some members of the committee 18 involved in the hiring. And report back in 12 months to let Council know how things are 19 progressing. Introduced by DK, seconded by MM. 20 AYES: Healy, Torliatt, Cader-Thompson, Hamilton, Maguire, Vice Mayor Keller, Mayor Thompson 21 NOES: None 22 ABSENT: None 23 24 Certifications of Appreciation were presented to Sheri Cardo, Dee Brillhart, Myron Hinrichs, 25 D.V.M., Mary-Dee Roy, Susan Simons, Skyler Timko, Judy Reynolds and Mickey Zeldes. 26 27 INDUSTRIAL WATER. EFFICIENCY 28 A presentation on the Industrial Water Efficiency Program was made by Grant Davis of the 29 Bay Institute of San Francisco and Ned Orrett of Pacific Technology Associates. 30 31 The City of Petaluma began its water conservation program by being one of the first cities to 32 require Ultra Low Flush toilets in homes and new ULF toilets, without charge, for 33 Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional customers. The next step in conserving is to save 34 large volumes of water that is based upon performance, not delivery of specific fixtures. 35 36 There are economic, and environmental reasons to invest public .funds to encourage private 37 industrial efficiency improvements in Petaluma. Some of the econonvc and environmental 3 8 benefits include: 39 40 Public Cost Savings: demand for water and wastewater services is reduced at less than the cost 41 of supply. 42 43 Cleaner Environment: the mass of difficult-to-treat industrial residuals reaching the Petaluma 44 River, ranches, and other sites via the sewer/treatment plan is reduced 45 46 Economic Multiplier: infrastructure funds are invested with local companies to improve long- 47 term efficiency ,improvements; May 17, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 67 2 Less Risk: 3 Economic development assistance, a collateral benefit of this Program, is directed to 4 companies afready established in Petaluma; 6 Public incentive tied-•to measured savings; 7 8 More. resilience in the face of potential environmental constraints (.e.g. Endangered 9 .Species Act issues concerning salmonids native to the -Eel and. Russian. Rivers, and 10 shallow water issues affecting discharge of treated eflhaent into the Petaluma River); 11 12 Stimulate :New Business; the Program will' create: a new market for efficiency products and 13 services that can be supplied from local sources; and 14 15 Carrot vs. Stick: transform the regulatory onus of the City's Industrial Pretreatment Program 16 {the requirement for industrial. users to reduce the concentration of discharged pollutants. to 17 residential levels) into an economic development. opportunity; for costly industrial pretreatment 18 facilities •may'be upgraded to enable beneficial reuse of water, energy, and chemicals. • 19 20 Means for achieving'thesebcnefits are: recommended after evaluating a variety of performance- 21 based demand reduction ,programs. Recommendations for a Petaluma ;program include the 22 best features of these, and two innovations, to improve benefits: (1) an emphasis on high 23 quality engineering design for each project; and (2) creating a long term .partnership between 24 the City~and participating companies. 25 26 CII Sector 27 This program addresses all indoor water used (except that covered by the existing toilet 28 program) by commercial, industrial, and .institutional (CII) customers who discharge 29 wastewater into Petaluma's .sewer system. Efficiency programs for CII ,indoor water use have 30 been. slow to develop in the U.S. because there is no cookie=cutter solution, and because the 31 low cost of water (typically less than 1% of facility operating expenses) does not compel 32 management attention. .However, :because relatively few industrial water customers consume 33 large amounts of water, and because. broadly conceived efficiency'improvements often deliver 34 impressive .economic performance, a focused CII program can provide dramatic results. 35 36 A:pilot program for Mishi Apparel, Inc. has been underway. This is a 50 employee Petaluma 37 fashion house that washes and dyes garments during their .manufacturing process.: Following a 38 detailed engineering study, it was found that Mishi; with. a `baseline water consumption of 39 approximately 7;70Q gallons per day has the opportunity to reduce water use by at least 46%. 40 When maintained over 20 years, the .project -will merit a public incentive of $48;000 'for saving 41 water; and reduce Mishi's costs by $1.5 million. 42 • 43 Hamisch, the owner of Mishi's volunteered his facility for this project. When he built the small' 44 dye house at 201 Western .Avenue 10 yearn ago hi`s knowledge and resources were limited. 45 The study that Ned and John :have: performed enables me to see what the capabilities' are. At 46 this time he has little choice but to continue utilizing the facility and while it's .,still pretty small Vol. 33, Page 6g May 17, 1999 1 he thinks there is a lot that can. be done within the environment to make it operate more 2 effectively and efficiently and reduce water usage. Since starting this study he has 3 implemented some things that are already reducing some of those overall costs. It really comes 4 down to .machinery. I feel the whole idea of working ,with the city as a partner in a 5 public/private test case is rather interesting. I think it is really important in the future that 6 business and local government work more closely together. I hope the city and community 7 also would become beneficiaries for this kind of project. I would devote myself 100% to it. 8 _His goal eventually has always been to put into play a new dye house that really addresses the 9 needs from an environmental perspective. In the meantime I have managed to stay a pretty 10 ,consistent user for the wastewater treatment department. 11 12 DK, This program opens doors to a whole new approach in terms of providing services and 13 paying for them. When you start looking at the avoided costs of infrastructure both to the 14 private sector as well as to the public sector and you start looking at how you can bring that 15 back into the equation you start looking at conservation of resources such as surface water 16 runoff and flood control. There is a tremendous number of things that can be done. I'd like 17 this to come back to us with the next proposal for clarifying the model, getting that into a 18 workable state and with that then the next layer of target business's that we could work with. 19 Some of the major water users in town whether their food processing ag industries or other 20 producers and lets go forward with it. This is not only self funding, what's not in your 21 economic analysis is the intangibles that hopefully we can bring into the economic analysis 22 down the line and that is the improvements both to the working conditions and to the 23 environment which at this point don't have $ price tags although we know there intrinsic 24 worth, and hopefully as we get down the line I know there is work being done in flood plain 25 structural avoidance that is attempting to include in its modeling for the corps of engineers, and 26 their benefit cost ratios, how to deal with flood plain values and functions on an economic 27 analysis. If we can incorporate those costs into the picture the public doesn't have to pick up 28 the slack when those items aren't dealt with. 29 30 Thanks to the Rose Foundation, Bay Keeper and Pacific Technology Associates. 31 32 Ned, the next step is to put together whatever project might be possible with Mishi's, to go 33 from the paper thing to some element of a real project. The Sonoma County Water Agency 34 has expressed interest in helping to finance similar start up work on a larger case study. 35 Thee 1.995. study that Michael Ban referred to had allocated $160,000 to save 10 acre feet per 36 year. We feel that for less than that amount we could exceed that target amount in the first 37 year while also defining a program to go as far as possible beyond that. 38 39 MM, Suggested that the city write a letter supporting these programs to the Sonoma County 40 Water Agency. 41 42 MH, There is a report that will be coming from staff that will describe the County Water 43 Agencies capital improvement plans, capital investment plans from the city's perspective. I 44 would like the idea of demand reduction included in that discussion. Maybe the city could 45 look at programs that would encourage more drought resistant plantings in town as opposed to 46 what has traditionally been done. That might be a cost effective way of shaving demand. May 17, 1999 Vol. 33, -Page 69 2 Lynn Hamm, Sonoma County Water Agency, Project Manager for the City of Petaluma Water 3 Conservation Program. Council has already approved funding for the development of seven 4 water conservation. programs and' landscape conservation is -very .strongly .emphasized. We 5 have a large turn audit program and an irrigation incentive program. The other .program that 6 you are talking about is installing drought tolerant plant r"material ,or zero scape and we are 7 going to be working- on a water conservation ordinance in addressing gutter flooding through 8 all existing landscape. 9 10 RESIDENTIAL .SUBDIVISION ALLOCATIONS 2000 11 Interim Planning. Director, Vin Smith. presented the staff report for .residential allocations for 12 the year 2000:. The.Planriing Department "has received allocation applications for .the year 2000 13 for a total.. of 195 allocations. Applications also include reservations for allotments not to 14 exceed 250 for the year 2001. The projects are as follows: 15 Oak Creek Apartments requesting 120 allotments for the year 2000 and 65 for the year 2001-. 16 Magnolia Park requesting 62 for the year 2001. 17 Hillside Village requesting 100. for year 2000 and 1'40 for the year 2001. 18 Traditions requesting 5 for the year 2000 to build S model homes and 70 :for the year 2001 19 (Corona Road). 20 21 Speakers: 22 23 Myrita Henry, 2'10 Chapman Lane read a letter from Gale Phillips with regard. to denying the 24 request for allocations for the Hillside Village project because this property is currently under 25 the Williamson Act until March 2000. If fhe Gouneil does consider this and' is in favor of 26 granting allocations please do not allow 'more than.. 60 residential units. Thee General Plan's 27 intent is to lessen density of housing as development moves towards rural lands not increase it. 28 Development of any 'kind on this land presents .serious challenges to the environment and 29 community. 30 31 Robert Maser, 2340 Western Avenue, represents the Neighbors. for a Better Petaluma. He 32 requests Council deny the application for Hillside Village for the amount.. of allocations 33 requested.. There is concern with flooding. There is current y a ,flooding study that is charting 34 the velocity of water flow ..into the river and since this property is the beginning of the Marin 35 Creeks ystem which feeds the lower flood plain. it would be best to wait until that study is 3b completed. There could possibly be a 15% reduction of spur existing water usage.. If that 37 reduction becomes a reality it seems prudent not allow 240 .more homes 'in the further most out 38 skirts ofthe city. ~ The City or Council should look'into the violation of the law for the property 39 owners who take advantage of -the reduced tax base and then apply for housing allocation 40 before the 10 years is up. Much. of the land is un6uildahle due to erosion. There is no 41 mitigation of the original problems that were outlined a year ago. One solution would' be to 42 halt the property owners aril advise them to sell the site to the Open Space District. Vol. 33, Page 70 May 17, 1999 1 2 Geoff Cartwright; 56 Rocca Drive, He is concerned with flooding with all. four of the projects. 3 The RIVII study is not completed as yet.. Please wait for the results of the study before making 4 any .development decisions at this time. 5 6 Marne Coggan, 43 Windsor Lane, concurs on what has previously been said. The .General 7 Plan is the constitution for development in this community. The General Plan says that the 8 Hillside Village project should get about 60 units, anything over that required a General Plan 9 Amendment. The General Plan says that development should be feathered, should be lessened 10 as it gets to the boundary of the community. Hillside Village would need to be annexed to the 11 city in order to be developed and even if it is that certainly puts it at the edge of the community 12 which means development definitely should be lessened not increased. There are many issues 13 that need to be addressed before development takes place. 14 15 Mark Johnson, Graylawn .Apartments, They were not aware that the Allocation Pool capped 16 for 2001 at time of the allocation request, therefore they would like to request an amendment 17 to their request and that being a reduction for their 2001 allocations by 30 units, and reallocate 18 those and up the allocation for 2000 to ~ 120 units (120 for the year 2000 and. 65 for the year 19 2001). 20 21 Ray Peterson, 636 Gossage Avenue, Represents the West Petaluma Concerned Citizens. Were 22 _ not aware of the Magnolia project coming before you. We specifically object to any entry of 23 city traffic onto Gossage Avenue. Require the developer to not access Gossage or don't give 24 him allocations at this time (he submitted a list of objection), .and is concerned with the runoff 25 going down Jesse Lane which already floods. Deny this project. 26 27 Guy Gullion, 9 Eddie Ct. Agrees with prior speaker. No. 1 its in the General Plan as a park; 28 No. 2 the design was done in a hurry. There has been no significant neighborhood input; No. 3 29 totally inappropriate number of units. Magnolia Avenue is dangerous; No. 4 scale would 30 degrade the quality of Gossage Avenue; No. 5 it would reward the blitz of clear cutting that 31 occurred during nesting season; No. 6 he would be happy to compromise, there doesn't seem 32 to be the money for the whole 17 acres on Magnolia to return to a park as the General Plan 33 would have it and the open space at the tot park for children that Mr. Aguilar suggested are 34 excellent ideas, but they don't go far enough. 35 36 John Cheney, 55 Rocca Drive, is opposed to the developments proposed. They will all 37 increase flooding and it is time to say No. 38 39 Sam Waterman, 1212 Kathleen Way, he is in favor .of seeing the allocations approved on the 40 Magnolia Park. Approve it and get an EIR done so we would know what's there and see what 41 the final plans would be. 42 43 James Meek, .Presley Homes, Hillside Village project. has talked to several neighbors, they are 44 also looking at the issues that were raised. The proposal that they will make is nothing close to 45 what was presented the first time. Presley Homes builds high quality projects, and lower 46 .density. The homes will be one unit to the acre or 1.2 to the acre when submitted. It is not May 17, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 71 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 going to be 240 units. We have addressed through our consultants all the issues that were brought up in the EIR. David Bradley, Ryder Homes,. the proposal is for a portion of the Brody .parcel. This. parcel is 6 acres and there would. be 10 units to the acre and is urban diversified. The .other. piece: is 18 acres which would be urban higfi and would .have '15 units to the acre.. The Brody property is already annexed into the city and is a part of the Corona Ely Assessment District. These designations are part ~of the General Plan. and our intent, is tc~ come back in the summer with a Tentative Map applieafion +and that will be necessitated upon having allocations awarded. to us. Council comments: DK, thinks all four sites are problematic. More information is needed for all the project sites. Hillside Village and :Magnolia. Park -are both outside the city linvts; but within the Urban Growth Boundary. There are significant issues that. need to be addressed,. drainage; utilities, fire service response time etc. Oak Creek Apartments - in the flood plain/fl'oodway. There are .issues of how we're .going to deal with the Corona Reach. He is reluctant to see Council encourage any further growth and development in that area until there is a .Corona Reach Master Plan. in place .that accommodates what . we now know or will know about drainage,. flooding 'and areas that should. be protected from future flooding damage. Traditions; This is an .area that is ,adj'acent to a future railroad station, transit. location. Council indicated that they would. like to see .higher density and orientation around a transit stop. There are issues around facilities, parking, and circulation. Look at the: balance of`the Brody property at Corona and McDowell and .look at potential. inclusion. of the Scott parcel. He would like to see the bigger picture on that area come before Council before anything goes forward on this project. MM, Concurs that each parcel has problems. There. are too many issues. that need to be resolved. MH,. Oak Creek Apartments are in the flood plain. The RNII Study wi1T be complete in two months. He feels that will result. in an interim ordinance: within the :.next. three months. If Oak Creek can .meet the ordinance they should ,be allowed to proceed.. Council. may also wish to consider conditioning final approval of that on completion of the Corps of Engineers project. as has: been done with Old Elm Village. Hillside Village, The General. Plan allows about 60 units. I-~e .has suggested a way' of possibly -- going beyond that in terms of bringing in transferable development rights from adjoining' properties.- Preserving some of the hillside on the western. edge of town. Magnolia Park,. Mr. Aguilar needs to do more homework on how to resolve the community's needs. If Council denies: allocations for Magnolia .the ,large parcel will be developed by County Vol. 33, .Page 72 May 17, 1999 1 standards. The design is inadequate in terms of feathering, and it should be more sensitive to 2 the Urban Growth Boundary interface. It is not clear that the areas proposed is open space or 3 parkland, or the ones that would best be suited for open space or parkland on the property. 4 5 JH, She has serious concerns about the project sites. Magnolia and Hillside Village because of 6 the General Plan, and density. Oak Creek Apartments -flooding, and Traditions is in the 7 extended zero net fill area. 8 9 JCT, Traditions is an important piece of property (Urban Growth Boundary), to tie Sonoma 10 Mountain.Parkway into Corona Road. She would like to see a bigger picture of what is going 11 to happen. 12 13 PT, .With regard to the Magnolia Park and Hillside Village site, when we put high density 14 near the edge of our community we're creating trip generation and automobiles. We're going 15 to increase traffic on Magnolia, Western Avenue and D Street The Oak Creek Apartments are 16 right in the middle of the flooding. The Tradition site, looking at the future of the rail site, 17 higher density in an area which we can accommodate ultra modes of transportation. Hopefully 18 we'll be able to use those as connectors from east to west side. She would endorse the 19 allocations for the Tradition site, but has concerns with regard to the other three project sites. 20 Motion made by MH and seconded by MM to continue this discussion until after the RMI 90 21 day study is complete and to also give the applicants a chance to respond to the concerns 22 brought up by Council and neighbors. 23 AYES: Healy, Torliatt, Cader-Thompson, Hamilton, Maguire, Mayor Thompson 24 NOES: None 25 ABSENT: Vice Mayor Keller 26 27 I'ETALUMA VISITORS PROGRAM COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT 28 This item was continued to a date not specified. 29 30 ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. 31 32 33 34 35 E. Clark Thompson, Mayor 36 37 38 ATTEST: 39 40 41 42 Paulette Lyon, Deputy C t Jerk 43 May 24, 1999 Vo1,33, Page 73 i MINiTTES. z OI+' A SPECIAL MEETINTG 3 PETALUMA AND NOVATO CITY COUNCILS a MONDAY, MAY 24, 19!99 s ROLL CALL: 7:00 q.m. 6 Petaluma Council Members Present;; Healy; Cader-Thompson, N[aguire, ~ Vice Mayor David Keller, Mayor E. Clark Thompson s Absent: Torliatt, Hamilton 9 Novato Council Members Present: Eklund, Henderson, Dillon-Knutson, Mayor DiGiorgio 1o Absent: Gray i i PUBLIC COIVIlVIENT iz Wendy Kallins, Forest Knolls -presented her brochures for the Walkable Communities. She 13 described the program, "How to Make Streets Friendlier." is Patricia Tuttle-Brown, Petaluma - on bicycle issues, ask Caltrans to create a bicycle trail is alongside the railroad. i6 STATUS OF U. S. HWY. 101 "NAR120WS".PROJECT AND HWY. lO1WIDE'NING p p ~ g g "n funds from is t escu enfirState Transport tiont Imp ovemenfeProg$amM(STIP) through the California 19 Transportation Commission. zo The Novato Council Members would like to see Galfrans improvements from Highway 3.7 zi (Black'. Point} to the Lakeville .Highway (Highway 116) interchange m Petaluma. At a recent zz meeting of the Novato and Petaluma. Chambers of Commerce, the attendees. agrees that z3 would be too large a project with any hope of action in the near future. za The. first Caltrans project study indicated a proposed widening of U: S: Highway 101 by 2s utilizing the current Highway 101 southbound 'lanes for ranch and business ,access. Two z6 lanes would be constructed to .the east of the. current northbound lanes. The reason for that z~ proposed plan is there i~s a Federal statute that appears to preclude improvements along the za Qlompali Park site if such improvements would impact the State Park.. z9 " Mr. F.arhad of Nlarin County suggested that at the Izedwood. Landfill turn-off,. there be 3o constructed a 3/4 interchange or a `flyover' in order to create a .safer egress from the landfill 3t for those proceeding toward the south. 3z Another thought was to increase the length of the acceleration lane going northbound :from 33 the aandfill in order to give truckers "su~cent room to accelerate to -highway speeds... But, the 3a trucks would then have' to travel north all the way to the .first Petaluma exit to use a safe turn 35 to the south. That portion of the roadway south of Petaluma would .need to be banked ,more 36 appropriately for such .a traffic movement. If that alternative were to be used, the 37 acceleration lane southbound from Petaluma Blvd: South would also. need `to be extended. It 3s is estimated that 70 vehicles per day use the landfill. Sorne thought was given to restricting 39 the ope "rating- hours for landfill access to relieve traffic congestion. On the other hand, 'it was ao noted that the Novato Refuse" trucks need. "to have. access to the landfill quite early in the day.