Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/01/1998.September 1,, 1998 Vo13 ~„ Page 22& 1 1VIIINIJ'IES 2 ®F A ItEGjJLAIt ADJOURNED 1VIEE'I'ING 3 PETALUMA CITY ('OiTNCIL a TUESDAY', SEPTEMBER 1,1998 s ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m. s Present: Keller (Councilman Keller), Torliatt (Planning Director Tuft), Hamilton ~ (Councilwoman Hamilton), Read (Councilwoman Read), Vice Mayor Maguire (Vice Mayor s Maguire), Mayor Hilligoss (IVlayor Hilligoss) 9 Absent: Stompe (IvIS) io Mayor Hilligoss: I call this regular adjourned meeting of the Petaluma City Council to i i order. Pat, if you want to lead us in the pledge of allegiance, please. 12 Mayor Hilligoss: Oh, and roll call first. 13 Roll call? Up down, up down. Council member Keller? Council member Torliatt? is Council member Hamilton? Vice Mayor Maguire? Mayor Hilligoss? Councilman Read? is Councilman Stompe is absent. i6 PLEDGE.. OF ALLEGIANCE i~ Mayor Hilligoss: Okay. Arid stand for the pledge of. allegiance. Now we'll have a is moment of silence. City Clerk Pat Bernard led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. i9 M®1VIENT OF SILENCE zo PUBLIC C®MIVIENT 2i Now is there any public comment? 22 Will Stapp: Council members, Madam Mayor. I just want to let you .know--anyway, 23 I'm Will Stapp, 1264 Mountain View--I read in the paper ari article about Lafferty last week za that the Fairfield Osborne was- closed, and that didn't sound right to me, so I called them up, 2s and sure enough they're not closed. They're open for tours at, on Saturdays at 10 and 1 you z6 can just show up, and if anybody wants to see the poor cousin of Lafferty Ranch they're 27 welcome to go over there and take a tour. Also, I just wanted to point out that given some 2s of the talk about costs in the paper, with Lafferty slated at $300,000, I thought, considering 29 that a neighborhood park on the east side's going in slated to cost $500,000, stoplights down 3o by the cop station are $148,000, I just wanted to let you. know I think Lafferty is sounding 31 like a better deal all the time. So thank you. 3z ('OUNCIL COMMENT 33 Mayor Htlligoss: Thank you. Okay, council comment? 34 Councilwoman Torliatt: Madam Mayor? I don't know if any of the other members of 3s the council or folks out in the audience have been driving through town across the railroad Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor M. PatriciaHilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (11~I~-vice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 226, Vol. 32 September 1, 1998 i tracks at maybe Lakeville and Washington; or,.East _D and Washington, or at Payran, where s the railroad tracks cross. at Payran, but T have been stopped numermus times, especially at l"2 3 o'clock in the afternoon and 5 o'clock at night; with the railroad guards going down, with. no. a train going by. And I'm not sure, I know it's .not the city's. responsibility as to when, the gates s go up and down, but I'd like somebody to take a look at it, because today I know Payran was 6 backed up all the'way to Washington; and it's just been crazy. And pegple's cars are getting ~ hit by the raikoad guards going down, because they're trying to go around the guards because a there's no train corning,- and it's just been a mess. So, -Tom, it looks like you have an .answer 9 for my question. io City Engineer Hargis; Yes, l~iadam Mayor, I'll have. Al Tilton give you an update, but ti he is working with the railroad on_ a project to redo. the drop, gates and .get rtd of that rz problem. So I'll try to get you an update as to the time being. I think he was meeting with 13 them very recently, or if not, in the very near future on that project. to Councilwoman Torliatt: Yeah, that would be great. I mean; I guess a guy came out is of the railroad, station the other day and was trying to hold up the dossing,, you know, thing;, i6 so people could get through. I. mean, its just unbelievable the am®unt of traffic. it's creating r~ or backing up. So that would'be very much appreciated if we could resolve. that. is We've also gone on ..record asking.. for the railroad attention to that in writing., I think t9 I may have provided a copy of that ..letter to the council information. And I also know -that zo Supervisor Harberson,, under one of his: hats he wears with the :railroad authority or~ one of u the committees, expressed concern;about this problem and`the emergency situations it could 22 create, and indicated: in fhe conversation a couple of-weeks ago that he was doing everything z3 he could to get focus on this. So I think there are a number of people trying to focus efforEs, za cooperate, and put :attention on this. zs Councilwoman Torliatt: That would be great. Thanks. s6 Madam 1Vlayor? s~ Mayor Hilligoss: Yes. is Just. to follow up on that: That is actually a part of the problem with the, 29 Northwestern Pacific; being broke, and' the government; the; governor just vetoed another two 3o million dollars that was supposed to go to them. But they have stated that they need some 3r computer parts acid sensors and things that they don't have the money fo"r, so it's kind of a 3i tough battle for them, but definitely it's scary to have those things come down, and with no 33 train. 34 Mayor Hilligoss: Any other comments oq it? 3s Councilwoman Read: Yes; Madam Mayor? I attended the Mann. County 36 transportation congestion management 'meeting; where alternatives to improve between 3r Petaluma -and- Novato at the .dump road were being discussedl. And the congestion 3s management, agency of Mann has gone..ahead with, 3 interim improvements of signage and 39 flashing in cooperation with. Caltrans. Their report was approved before; Tots of money. w111, ao be spent on either improving Binford Way .directly to the dump _ fom. Novato, from, Rush ar Creek; or half of an intersection,: but that, half of, the half of the intersection and the; a~ improvements would have to accommodate Big Narrows project once the Big. Narrows 43 project is done; hopefully within the next couple of years. Well,. 10 years or so. So there; it. as seems,, this land is in Mar-in County,. but more and. more people from Sonoma County as certainly go up and down the road, and -the safety issue is the, trnost important and thank. a~ goodness rt is being .looked at the present time. So for our Petaluma commuters, there will Key to abbreviations. (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton; (NR)-Councilmember IVdncy Read (PH): Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Sfompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (P )-Councilmember PamelaTorliatt (MNl)-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire ' ~'':`~~ September 1, 1998 Vo1.3~Page 227' i be changes next to the dump road within the next 3 weeks, to bring people's attention to the z safety hazards that occur there. Thank you, Madam Mayor. 3 Mayor Hilligoss: Any other? Okay, then we'll go on to unfinished business. Council a comments and direction to staff on Lafferty DEIR, draft management plan and related general s plan text amendments. 6 City Manager Stouder: Madam Mayor? Council member Stompe, as you know, 7 could not be here. She's at a scheduled meeting out of the city for several weeks now, for s this evening-- 9 Mayor Hilligoss: Out. of the state. io City Manager Stouder: That she could not change. And she leave, to you and to the i i council members, her comments that she would like to have read in the record. I can do that i2 if you would like,. read these things into the record, discussions. 13 Mayor Hilligoss: That's fine. is City Manager Stouder: Please read my comments to the record on Tuesday night is regarding the Lafferty DEIlt. As you know, I will not be able to attend the meeting, because 16 I am out of the state on business. I thank you. Number 1: Regarding a letter from Mary i~ Mitsui, part of the fire protection plan in the DEIR is dependent upon access through Miss is Mitsui's property. Without access, what is the time alternative proposal for fire protection 19 access? Point number 2: While I was touring Lafferty in 1995 with Councilmember so Maguire,. meaning Councilmember Stompe, Councilmember Maguire found what he termed Zi an Indian. artifact on Lafferty. He brought the artifact to a council meeting and said that he zz had found "an ancient prehistoric earthen pot," and that Lafferty was obviously an z3 archaeological site, and required a detailed study to explore the subject. He went on to say Za that he had an expert authenticate the pot, as being perhaps "thousands of years old." In the 2s DEIR, the archaeological report does not mention the discovery of this artifact, nor does it z6 refer to Councilmember Maguire's discussions with an expert. Did the archaeologist who z~ addressed Lafferty in the DEIR know of this discovery? Did Vicki Baird of Tom Oeringer is and Associates meet with Mr. Maguire and his expert? Where is this artifact today? What is 29 the status of Lafferty given this discovery? On receipt of this letter, Councilmember Maguire 3o provided me that artifact, or the earthen pot, that he did have, and indicated that he wanted 31 the record. to show that it had been provided 'to the city, that he had conversations with a 3z local archaeologist that indicated it perhaps was several hundred years old, not several 33 thousand. In any case, we are providing it to the professionals working on the DEIR for their 34 review and analysis of this and for whatever comments they want to make in the DEIR. So I 3s have that in my office, and will be ,sure that that's transmitted to Leonard Charles and the 36 associates working on this. Number 3: The DEIR does not adequately address how the city 3'7 will fund and separate a. park outside of the city limits. What is the specific operations plan, 3a and how will it be funded? Please provide a detailed analysis showing, all. legal costs 39 expended to date, projected legal cost, and where the costs are allocated in the general fund. ao Please provide a detailed analysis for all costs associated with operations, including police ai and fire services, parks, public works department, and staff costs; and the other city a2 departments impacted; finance, city manager, et cetera. Number 4: How will road repairs be 43 funded for Sonoma Mountain Road? Will the county pay for all subsequent repairs? With a as limited budget for citywide road repairs, how'will the city fund repairs to Sonoma Mountain as Road? Number 5: What are the projected condemnation costs associated. with the project, a6 including the road widening for Sonoma Mountain Road? How will these condemnation a~ costs be funded? Please include in the cost analysis all related costs for condemnation. as Number 6: Please provide a detailed analysis that shows the projected cost per visitor in Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH):MayorM. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (M~Lf)-Dice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 228, V~. 32 September 1, 1998 i relation to the projected,: number of'visitors. Citizens should have the opportunity to know z exactly how much the general fund will be fiznding the .operation. of the park on a per' visitor 3 basis..Number 7: The. DE..IR: does not adequately .address .alternatives. Additional analysis is a necessary. Number 8: Fee system for parking is projected, to be $~ a day. How will the fee s be enforced? What are the associated costs, with the .enforcement? So that is .for the record, 6 Madam Mayor, members of the council; and this has been provided to Mr. Charles and to the. ~ planningdirector. s Mayor Hilligoss: Olcay. 9 Planning Director Tuft: Thank you Madam Mayor. and City Councilmembers. We io are here this evening, to receive your comments on the draft.EIR, th.e draft management plan, i i and the proposed general.. plan. text. amendments that` walk along, with the :certification of the iz EIR and theapproval of the project. So we have received. to date ~3 written submissions of, 13 offering. comments on the draft EIR. The Lafferty exec team is working on the responses; is and will, continue to do so; and ~at your direction we -will prepare a final EIR, -offer it available is to the public for comment, and :bring it back to the planning commission and the music; i6 parks, and recreation commission; ..and then:after their recommendation, bring it on to :you.. i~ So we welcome. your comments ,tonight. We are not prepared. thus evening, of course; to is respond to those comments, but we will document them, carefully and will get back to you in 19 our staffreports, bringing you the. responses to the public comments. zo Vice Mayor Maguire: Madam Mayor? zi Councilwoman Read: I- have a question to staff. zz Mayor Hilligoss: Okay, question. z3 Councilwoman Read; Just a_question: 1~Iiss Tuft, at the; last meeting you had stated za you were. looking at end of November and beginning o£ December to bring the answers to the zs questions back. z6 Planning Director Tuft: We are still looking- at bringing the final EIR to the .council in s~ November. zs Vice Mayor Maguire: Madam Mayor? z9 Councilman Keller: Actually just ;a. question on the procedure, maybe it might make it 3o easier for all of us,, since I'm sure there is a wide range: of comments from council members,. it 31 might make it easier for staff.and the consultant if we were. to tak~'it on a chapter basis, so 3z that we cover each area with comments and then, proceed through. Does that make. sense. to 33 the rest of the council? 3a Planning Director Tuft: We're just. here to listen, so'=whatever you'd like: `We are 3s going to do verbatim minutes. Whatever is easiest. ~ . 36 Councilman Keller: Okay. 37 Mayor Hilligoss: No, not by chapter. 3s Vice Mayor Maguire:. Thank you,. Madam;Mayor. Just in ri~sponse to Councilwoman 39 Stompe's comments. You know;, I'm;not sure we had a meeting,. because. she got everything ~I ao said. wrong or, ,you know, ibis-ancient prelustonc pot;,,I flunk;... ~is as `the city manager :pointed. ai out, in consulting with. a local archaeologist, said, that it was ;possibly a 'few hundred years az old. And it's, acfually a broken mortar. I think I ahowed it to the council in the past.. It's not.. 43 an earthen pot. But the, I never did call for. a quote, I~ never saidl that Lafferty required: a, as metamain concern in he othe subject. So I just wanted to make. that comment. The other, y mments that have come in to the, :in. response to the -draft EIR are Key to abbrevigtions: (JH)-Couneilmember Jane. Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH)=Mayor M. PatriciaHilligoss, (MS)-CoirncilmembertllgryStompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Couneilmember Pamela Torlatt (1111)-vice Mayor Matt Maguire September 1, ,1998 Vo1:3~Page 229 i with Roy Sprague, the CDF's; area chief I guess you'd call him. I .have a friend who is a CDF z fighter pilot, retired out recently, who ..had some less than complimentary comments about s Mr. Sprague's ability to manage firefighting issues, so I thought, since somebody with that a experience brought. that up; it would be worthwhile for us to get a second opinion, as it were, s on this. particular issue. I'm sure that Mr: Charles. is gonna do that 'in any event; but I 6 thought, since I'd heard things that indicated a, particularly regarding a fire at Annadell and ~ how that was. managed by Mr. Sprague, that questioned. his judgment, I would be interested s to get a second opinion on that. 9 Mayor Hilligoss: What is the fighter pilot, what does he know about that? io Vice Mayor Maguire: Air, he fights fires, fires, in aircraft. ii Mayor Hilligoss: Did you want to go on and... iz Vice Mayor Maguire: That was it for right now: is Councilman Keller: Madam Mayor? I have a wide range of comments. On the fire is issues, if it could. be clarified where the tank would be filled from, whether .it's being filled is from the spring box or from the creek, and is it being filled by gravity or by pump? I have no i6 problem with it being filled by electrical pump, from either the spring box or the creek, or i~ both as need be; to keep it topped. I'm concerned, some, in the draft EIR there's concern is about acquiring; and this. is echoed by Councilmember Stompe's comments, acquiring a fire i9 access road to the top of Lafferty. It's my understanding that should the extremely rare zo circumstance of fire occur, there's never a problem with property owners in yielding access to zi firefighting crews, whether or not an easement has been obtained in advance. There is no zz prescriptive ;right that. is established by fire crews accessing property upside-down or z3 sideways, and it seems to me that acquiring a legal permitted access from the top is irrelevant. za If it looks like this marginal costs and suitable feasibility in improving the ranch road that's up zs there to carry fire, brush wagons; so be it, but during the dry season that road is hard-packed, z6 and that would be the time of year that it would be necessary. I don't see any need for z~ improving the fire access road or -legal right-of--way at the top. If the fire crew needs to get zs in there, they'll get in there. If you .look at firefighting anywhere in rural lands, ranchers are z9 never reluctant to yield permission if they're available, and if not, fire crews go through the 3o fences and leave protest to later. I'm not aware of any landowners protesting fire crews 3i crossing. their land to access a fire scene. Likewise, if the property is grazed,. I question the sz value of having- to do a mowed strip on the top or sides or bottom. Certainly, if the property ss is grazed there's no greater fire danger or fuel load than there is on any adjoining properties; sa which leads me to the basic comment on the whole fire issue: This seems to me to be a red ss herring, because the experience that we've gotten from other park districts and other fire 36 management officials are that public access sites such as Lafferty are not the scene of any s~ higher experience in fires. So this is, it seems to me that this whole issue is somewhat of a as red herring. And I think it's blown far out of proportion to both the risk and to normal 39 firefighting practices. In that regard, CDF's letter indicates that because their gauging station ao is in Santa Rosa, they couldn't tell whether or not a fire, burn index of 4'1 would be achieved ai at the gauging station in some correlation to the property on Lafferty. If that's true, then it az seems to me they'd have some very serious difficulties gauging closures on any other county- as owned open space or parks in the county with one gauging station. So it seems to me, again, as part of the red hemng argument on this. Certainly if compensation needs to be made to as determine when a burn index of 41 is achieved at Lafferty, so be it. It seems to me that there a6 are plenty of other park sites in Sonoma County that would depend upon the same a~ information for closures on fire danger days, and it seems to me this is not rocket science for as CDF or whatever other agency is responsible to indicate that the site should be closed. In Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH):MayorM. PatriciaHilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember MaryStompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (11~A~-wee Mayor Matt Maguire Page 230, VoL' 32 September 1, 1998 i terms of the argument about closure time,. that there, would be a gap of time between when a z burn index. hits 4.1 and the time, that. the ranch would have to be closed, again, this is absurd. 3 The argument would then be made that no other park or .open apace in the county would. be a able to be open.. It's, this 'is a series of non ..sequiturs: And. that leads me to, again, the s primary question here is that this property eems to be being; treated significantly differently 6 m fire management ,practices,, or fire management expectations, than virtually every other: ~ open space to the~Bay Area. that has public access, and every other .park in the B'ay Area that s has access: And it seems at least overkill if not an apparent attempt'to undermine, a' legitimate 9 use ofthis parcel: Let's see if there's anything else that I want to say on fire. No, Ial cave it to therefor the moment. Thank you. ii Vice Mayor'Maguire: Madam Mayor,. just a question for staff Pamela, just referring iz to some of the written. comments, speeificallp the letter from Les Perry dated July 20th; 13 There's a significant number of outright statements of misfact, to be polite about. it. Is it is .necessary to go through those and: challenge. them here, or is that going to be part of what is Leonard Charles will do in the process of responding to comments? i6 P.lanriing Director Tuft-: All comments that were submitted will be responded to by i~ the consultant and the executive team of staff members. is Vice .Mayor Maguire: I understand that,, but if;,;for instance, Mr, Perry in his letter i9 says that, talking aliout the city being "a bad neighbor,, as evidenced by several incidents of zo anti=agricultural actions," and to back up that point,.. he says we evicted Mr. Bettmann, .and zi that is absolutely categorically untrue. In fact we offered to rent, tm~~continue:renting grazing _. zz rights to Mr. Bettmann, but. we :asked 'him to fulfill the terms of previous .leases; amongst z3 other things, and maintain fences, which had gone; you know;. unmaintaned for' many, many za years; and he declined' to continue renting. And this letter is full, of incidences, °and citations zs like that; that are just ,complete fabrications or erroneous 'interprf;tations of fact. ;So that z6 letter in particular I'd like, to see the points responded to for the record. For instance, again, z~ on his bullet 15 he notes, he claims that the inconsistency°with the County General ,Plan, etc;, za and that the use of the. project: is' inconsistent, with many provisions; generate :impacts that z9 have not been analyzed. It should be noted in this regard that the County recently- directed all 3o trails to be removed. from. that. section of Sonoma Mountain because of the impacts and 31 incompatibility with existing: farming. operations: That` is completely inaccurate. The citizen 3z advisory committee recommended the removal of that in a very political move that: can be 33 traced back .actually to Mr: Pfendler, if `I'm not. misfaken. And. that. has not been codified: 3a This is not `somethi'ng that has been settled yet. So that's another example. There's a number 3s of them'in here. 36 Councilman Keller: Counclmernber Maguire, if I might, just tag .onto that fore:. just 37 a moment.. I would like the record to be :clarified on this' so called bad neighbor accusation 3g from Mr. Perry. The three instances cited are evicting a longstaneng tenant__grazer, which 39 Councilmember Maguire has spoken to ,and I'd like the record to be clear to .that.. In .fact, if ao some of the comes ondence on that offering the continuation Pease and declining it; on the. P- ai part of Mr, Bettman is available, I'd like that. 'in the record. Also, the historic water az connection. being removed in a purely vindictive action, quote, unquote, it should be noted. a3 for the record that again we have correspondence°that that was in fait an illegal,ppe that was;. as taking. water from our property over to Mr. Pfendler's property and the adjacent; site, and that: as was removed because there. was no substantiation, that the city could find in record a6 supporting such. water connection. Third is similar city through full force of administrative a~ and criminal penalties and an adjoining landowner for building a fence along the boundary as line and again in the administrative. record, I would. like included .dopy of ;the protest to ,the a9 County and documentation. indicating that 'that, in fact; was an. unpermitted fence and our so survey of records shows in fact that the fence was .constructed on our side of the line. So this Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (IVR)-Cos~ncilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor'M. Patricia;Flilligoss, (MS)-CoimcilmemberMary, Stompe (DK)-Couneilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela. Torliatt (MM)-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire at , I , ;,~~,, . , .,4h. September 1, '1998 Vo1.3Z, Page 231 n question about being a bad neighbor with. our agricultural neighbors is, in fact, spurious and a unwarranted. And I'd like that supported by the .documents in record. 3 Vice Mayor 1Vlaguire: And another item, if I may. On the same letter, point 14, Mr. a Perry is claiming that he states that has been stated that. one of the main attractions to s Lafferty is the views. That I have no dispute with. Iie says further, though, that it is further 6 recognized that it is extremely difficult to get to those views through the park. Anybody ~ that's been on Lafferty knows that that'is preposterous. You can walk on the swale at the a bottom of the park and see some fantastic views without having to hike up any particular 9 slope of any elevation. Those are a number of examples. .Also, I notice in the exhibit H-1, io from Carol. L. Rice, where she's describing the description and analysis of fuels and the fire i i hazard. She quotes herself as a reference and I have a little problem with that as a an expert nz source of information. Also, on page three of her letter, the bottom paragraph titled grass n3 fuels as a help to aerial bombers. It says regardless; most fire protection agencies do not rely na on aerial support because they are likely to have been deployed in the dryer inland portions of is the state. In my discussions of people who have direct CDF experience, the CDF typically n6 holds back equipment for just the sake of the possibilities of more than one fire occumng in i~ more than one place. On exhibit in dot five, where Mr. Pfendler has submitted a graphic with is the locations of sightings of eagles, I would like to point out that there is a significant cluster, n9 in fact, one of the tightest clusters seen on this .map, located straddling Sonoma Mountain zo Road downhill from the gate of Lafferty Ranch, which, to me, is proof positive that it zi contradicts his assertion that these birds would be upset and their forage habitat destroyed by ~~ the presence of people since they happen to have been spotted by Mr. Pfendler himself on z3 numerous times straddling the area on both sides of Sonoma Mountain Road where there is Za automobile traffic, which, I believe, it is reasonable to assume is going to be a lot more zs disruptive to the native habitat than our hikers. I'm through for the moment. I might .like to 26 come back. z~ Councilman Keller: Madam Mayor. I'd just like to address the eagle issue that's zs been raised, both in the EIR. I have concerns about the restrictions to the upper elevations z9 that are indicated as potential mitigations in the EIR for eagle habitat. The neighboring 3o rancher, Mr. Pfendler, provides us with a wonderful year-long observation notes, makes for 3n very nice reading. Some very interesting things in there that I noted that Councilmember 32 Maguire began to pick up on, which is that there seems to be a series of multiple standards 33 for how to deal with eagle habitat. On the one hand we're told that anything in their range 34 should be off limits for fear that they be spooked, that their nesting sites be disrupted, that 3s their young, be disrupted, that their feeding disrupted. And yet we have the observer in this 36 case. I did som_ a counting. And Inoted -some 17 occasions where the observer notes that 37 despite his own promises not to do it, he had spooked the eagles. In trying to get closer for 3s photography or observation and/or on his annual picnic day for his employees. Seventeen 39 instances cited in his ..observational list where he spooked the eagles or his personnel spooked ao them. Again, despite his early claims not to do it ever again. There are consistent claims that ai people's cars were parked at the base of Lafferty and no eagles were seen that day on three a2 occasions, as if somehow the appearance of the cars would somehow be responsible for the a3 eagles not being seen. And yet, there are also another 16 occasions where the observer as indicates that despite his car, truck, ATV, dogs, house, barns, phones, cameras, chainsaws, as walking or driving, there were no impacts to eagle activities, and he was able to observe them a6 without any problems whatsoever. So that somehow people would be unable to resist a~ climbing the hills to see .eagles or the .prey that's driving the eagles from Lafferty, yet at the as same time he offers up the- same behavior that he condemns and on some of those occasions a9 the eagles were spooked and on some of those occasions it was just fine. It's an so inconsistency and the standard that he and the experts' testimony are trying to achieve, which Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH)-Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (MM)-.vice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 232, Va1L 32 September 1, 1998 i is that this should .all be off limits for people ,because. it would disturb eagles,, is not z substantiated by his own observational. record, wh'ich' is very thorough. And ~as I said, it's 3 worth the read, .some very interesting ,stuff in there. about eagle behavior: There are -some 60 a observations, as Councilmember Maguire pointed out: Noted.. from his ranch of eagles either s perched or flying low along the road. -There are about a hundred observations on Mi. 6 Pfendler's property. There is no information. in the testimony from Mr. Pfendler or from the ~ experts that he's cited, or provided information from,, or` provided. testimony; no information s as to where the balance. of the eagles' temtory is. Certainly,, they don't just use Lafferty:. 9 Eagles, Golden eagles, have quite a large territory. It's only indicated. that there's a nesting. io pair on Sonoma Mountain. So there's nothing Ghat indicates within the testimony and the i i observational record of Mr. Pfendler that in fact human use of ;hi property or of Lafferty iz Ranch .has had any significant. impact. with any, longstanding impact on this pair of nesting 13 eagles or their young. In fact, his testimony contradicts his "assertion that in fact there is a is ,long. term impact because of the 17 times he spooked them ,and. they're still there with their is young. The observational; record ..also is only what he could see from a portion of his i6 property. And there is a letter :from Mr. Morelli indicating that eagles in .fact use his i~ property. So it seems` like the nesting;pair and the young and any other transients use quite a is bit of Sonoma Mountain.. In fact; acfuahy related to eagles and human contact, I :had -the 19 privilege. of watching, a pair of Golden Eagles ;take a rabbit`along the side, along the: shoulder zo of Stony Point Road on the way back from the dump. And I just parked the car and watched zi them for a while, and there were ears going on 101; several. hundred. feet from them Nand. cars zz going up and down .Stony Point, several hundred, right near them, and they just .happily z3 hunted along. .And I questioned the claim. of sensitivity both in the draft EIIZ and by these za assertions. Certainly we know of other instances, o_f arge birds of prey which, in fact, are zs shall we say eent'erpeces of observational. activity. Certainly Audubon Canyon Ranch. with, z6 the nestin sites ;are off limits; but there is a tremendous amount of activit for observation. g y z~ There's an osprey nest on Tomales Baythat: is ringed by a fence approximately a hundred or zs so feet in radius around the° nesting site on top of an old telephone pole that is actively"used z9 and. that is in fact .a :feature of the area. And as somebody who has been in lots of places 3o watching lots of birds; birds of prey as well. as other types of bird life; the caution that :is si advised in the draft EIR seems to me o. be unwarranted. I do note expect,. nor does the EIR 3z expect to see a large number of people hitting the upper elevations of Lafferty Ranch, and' 33 certainly even if they were; the very documented observations of MI'. Pfendler would seem to 3a say that it doesn't make a lot of difference. So I'm concerned that in fact we're again picking P. g P 36 thing goes for the conce snthere were concerns abouthWestern.PondlTurd tha~ The same t was raised 37 by an .expert. By the way; did anybody on staff give any of these .experts. permssion tq passe 3s on Lafferty for observations? No? No. Okay. Let it be clear four the record that none of 39 these consultants hired by non-city people were. given permission to be on Lafferty: They ao didn't ask. They°probably could.have gotten permission had they asked, but in.fact they were ai trespassing: The well read letter from, get my note here,, from Dr. Clemens," Riley's a2 Conservation ;Service,, on the Western Pond Turtle, essentially says: there's potential habitat: 43 there..I did not observe any on two days of observation~~ on Lafferty `Ranch: I .observed them as on ranches on either side and, in fact, the habitat on Lafferty Ranch seems to be superior than as that available on either side, and the :main detriment to the, habitat for t_he Western Pond a6 Turtle in than elevation of Sonoma 1Vlountain :is in fact the; adjacent ranchers development of a~ wetlands into ponds. :Such as Mr:. Pfendler's. or Mr. Bettman's or Mr: Saemen's., And he as goes on essentially to say than. he wants an overall management plan, for :all 'of Sonoma a9 Mountain for the Western Pond Turtle, and it seems to Mme that that is a bit beyond the scope so of this EIR qr the city's. legal territory. I'm happy to. improve the territory if that,. in fact, si shows up. I'm happy to improve the habitat for Western Pond. Turtle on Lafferty Ranch, sz however, an overall management plan is well. beyond the scope; and; in fact, .is: telling the Key to abbreviations. (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Ndncy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss; (MS)-Cozincilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller; (P )-Councilmember-Pamela Torliatt (M~L~-hice--Mayor Matt Maguire - ~ij'~A' 7+.f+" ky'..r~F3.tpi~t~'F' (f September 1, 1998 Vo1.3~ Page 233 i adjacent agricultural.ranchers that the' activities that they have been doing are threatening the z species,.. not_ he city. The same thing'is;true on Steelhead, where we have several comments. 3 In the draft EIR, Bill Cox indicates~that there: have been no verified .observations of Steelhead. a on site. There are unverified observations by several parties of interest in the opposition,. but s there have been no takings of fish to do an actual identification of species. Whether or .not . 6 we need to do that, given his observation that there seems to be above a physical bamer, ~ significant physical barriers to any fish migration and his concern that in fact any fish on site s were illegally planted, I don't know. I'll leave that up to our team as to whether or not we do 9 need to do an additional survey there. But however, Stillwater Echo System Services again io indicate that the channel gradient is near the upper limit of steepness for Lafferty for ii steelhead. 'The bed surface ,is relatively poor. The diversion structure's a barrier. The iz landslides on Lafferty are chronic source of materials that are not suitable for steelhead. The 13 low flow and the subsurface flows are a majority of the year making it inhabitable for any is transition other than pools. And goes on . to say, quote, decades of human use on the is landscape that is grazing and residential development are in part responsible for the degraded i6 conditions in Adobe Creek. And once again, essentially what Stillwater Echo Systems i~ Services is saying is that we should come up with a management plan to restore the fisheries is for the entire creek, if not for the rest of Sonoma Mountain as well. Which is, agairi, beyond 19 the scope of this project- and it's beyond the scope of the city's capabilities. There is interest zo in that. The RCD is looking at helping to do that. As any rancher knows, doing restoration zi on a creek is something that is looked at with a,great deal of .care in terms of impacts for an zz agricultural operation. So again, Stillwater Echo Systems Services seem to be saying to the z3 rest of the ranchers on. Sonoma Mountain, you better watch your step because there's an za endangered species here and if you don't treat the. creek correctly we're going to go after you. zs Because we're going to go after the city for the same type of treatment. In fact, however, the z6 city is doing a hell of a lot better job. If we fence our cattle out of that creek, we're doing z~ more than any other rancher downstream. And if that's not sufficient, then essentially this za group of people who are protesting the habitat protection or restoration is essentially saying z9 that agricultural practices on the rest of Sonoma Mountain. have to change, perhaps under 3o threat of lawsuit, if those ranchers, by these interested parties, or if maybe they can drag the 31 federal government into this, if those ranchers don't in fact start fencing their cattle out of the 3z creek, it seems very odd to me and I'd like to have some comments in the final EIR on 33 practices in other open space lands in-the Bay Area or in coastal California. Essentially, what 34 they're saying is that human access, cattle access to the site are both contradictory to 3s restoration of this fishery unless it was private agricultural land. And, in fact, if my 36 understanding is correct, if Lafferty was a privately held. ranch, none of these questions would 37 be on the table anywhere. And this is once again one of a series of red hemngs or maybe red 3a steelhead. But it's again way out of scale and way beyond what the city is already doing to 39 enhance and restore habitat on Lafferty Ranch, and it. seems that the draft EIR in regarding ao the steelhead covers that quite nicely. And I'll leave the section there. Thank you. ai Mayor Hilligoss: Yes? az Councilwoman Read: Thank you Madam Mayor. What we have before us tonight is 43 an EIR. The draft EIR that's in front of us that it's now the council's opportunity to as comment. Goodness knows, there have been meetings and hundreds and hundreds of as questions that are going to answered through the responses to come at process to get us to a a6 final EIR. This is about the eighth one a year, major EIR that I've read as my term as a city a~ Councilmember and many before that as a planning commissioner going through the Rainier as EIR and the general plan and the auto mall and the factory outlet EIR., of which many people a9 at this dais have commented on. And what we have in front of us tonight, though, is our so charge in reading this EIlZ, if we as Councilmembers believe that it's adequate or not. And Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (MM)-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 234, Vol. 32 September 1, 1998 i those questions that We ask: will let us determine whether we can vote for-'this to. be adequate: z The EIR is one editorial; that I: save that just struck. my heart;and said that all we want'to do is 3 protect. the environmental integrify and- everybody agrees. that that needs: °to :be done: And a whether you're in favor of this park or not, and I am on record as supporting 'the wilderness s park at Lafferty Ranch. The issue that's in front of us tonight is a document that we say yes, 6 rt's adequate or no, it's not. Arid once these questions are answered then. we can go 'from ~ there. The difficult part about this EIR, becauseahere's been so many questions ;asked and so s many questions that are yet to be answered, is that it's just note me saying 'it's, not adequate or 9 it's just not John:Smith who lives on Sonoma.Mountain saying,that it's not adequate,. or°these io are the things. you still need to look at. The- County of Sonoma has.. come across with a Getter tt stating that it's inconsistent and this troubles~me,greatly that the County has come across.with iz this statement. I :know there was a representative from the County here at our .last. `hearing 13 where just. the .public spoke and we didn=t. This is the :four pages that make rrle shiver is regarding this EIR. is Councilman Keller: Which letter is that one? i6 Councilwoman Read; :It is dated August the 24th. It's a four page letter from. the i~ Planning Department; from. Robert G-a-i-s-e=r; Gaiser, thank you for helping me pronounce is it. And this was included in the packet that we received. and in going through this on August t9 the 24th to tonight, causes me to make .sure that it's just :.. need to look at this. I hope that zo through the process. we'll be able to address and. give as much weight to the County questions z t as we do to the; hired gun consultant at the same times the people who say, you know,. we can zz turn a blind eye to that because it's more important to have the park up there: But what' we z3 have right now is an EIR that. we need. to get the questions answered so that we can make za this. determination, And we can give the best .possible product "for:the second look through zs the Planning Commission and through he .Parks and -Recreation Commission. And if we z6 don't do that, then we haven't. done our charge as elected- Councilmembers and we open up z~ this municipality to the liability sand could be ;subject to .a legal .challenge... So therefore zs Madam Mayor; as I. had asked you how you would be cgnducting, this part of our comments; z9 to the EIlt, I ask you, can.. we comment only on thee. _EIR or may ' we .comment; also. on the 3o questions, the comments, the letters, that. have come through since this opened up at 'the 31 meeting I attended: on June 30th; which was a joint. meeting of dur Parks. and Recreation 3z Commission and :our Planning Commission. It kind of looked like the ,last supper up here:. 33 There was--everybody just all, kind of shoved ogether with an interesting subject, matter: But 34 having .some of the questions asked there and 'our commissions did an excellent, job listening, 3s it's now time to the rubber meets 'the road, and it's now time to get the answers, and. if we 36 can't get the answers, then we go from there. We do an addendum or whatever we do: S.o, 37 Madam Mayor, my concerns regarding the EIR that's in front of us is basically on the,,road, 3a the fire, the litter and the liability. Regarding the litter; I drove up on Friday,. August the 39 21st, up the road, to see what: 'the, condition of the road was. ,And as I got to the first ao depression and the first fault, usually where the wand. slides away toward the south part of at Sonoma Mountain'Road, I went well, that one's repaired, but who knows -how long it's going az to be repaired. And' then the second huge pile of trash that I saw that Mr. Smith :had given 43 us, I went how did that trash get there in the first .place? And then when I almost :get to' the as top by the Lafferty Ranch road, T see, I couldn't believe it. You get to the apex and it's a as beautiful view and you're ready to make the 45-degree turn and what do I see all laid out in a6 front of me, but Coors Light beer cans. And that... a~ Councilman Keller: No taste: as Councilwoman Read:: No taste, yeah. No Lagunitas or'Pale Ale;: The litter question a9 and the litter plan that our Parks and Recreation ~Department'has came across with is part. of so their management plan. I think that that litter, joint litter clean up needs to be addressed Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jgne Hamilton, (1VR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH)=Mayor M Patricia Hilligoss (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe. (DK)-Councilmember David Keller; (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (A~-vice Mayor Matt Maguire September 1, 1998 Vo1.3Z; Page 235. i more in the. EIR and who is, going to be responsible and if we can get the County to share in z that with us, so that when we do drive up there we don't have to see the beer cans. And I 3 guess I just only saw a couple as opposed to Mr. Smith's photographs that he showed us last a week. T've gone through the. EIR, Madam Mayor; and I'd' like to enter into the record. my s questions. And my questions I will. just go through the EIR and then I will go through. these. 6 And if that's agreeable to you? I also have something in writing that I'd like to subrrut for the ~ record, I don't have to read into the record, some of .my .questions have been-- a Councilmember Stompe asked them about the money. How does the EIR plan on mitigating 9 the steep and unstable slopes and the city's liabilities on the proposed four trails regarding the io steepness of the slopes? And I'd like to see more information in the EIR regarding that i i Rogers Creek Fault and why we even had to breach the dam in the first place. And give that iz history in this EIR. Regarding the fire and the fire hazard data, I'll get into Mary Matsui's is letter as I get into that part out of the--I'd like that redouble the efforts for the information on. is the fire hazard data. Is it accurate or not? We had one letter said that it's wrong. Our traffic is engineer and .the County's letter that has come through dated August the 24th, talks about the i6 efforts to try to lessen the fact that we cannot .mitigate at all via this EIR, the impacts of the i~ road. There's got to be another way to skin the cat to say you can. And if it can't be: then is please define it further, just saying we can't mitigate it. In the alternative section m the 19 project, if there could be more review done on the alternatives and the other sites, there may zo be more sites out there than were just explored in the EIR with the alternative 1-A being the zi environmentally superior alternative. Please put more detail into those 11 areas of zz controversy and those issues that were raised. Madam Mayor, you said it was okay, we z3 could go through the letters? za ~ Mayor Hilligoss; That's fine. zs Councilwoman Read: I appreciate that opportunity. If I can get this all straight. The z6 first comment I have is regarding the letter that our Parlcs and Recreation director gave us on z~ August the 14th, talking about the Lafferty Ranch maintenance and operation. And I'd like to zs find out how this would be subject to our 15, 20 and 25 percent reduction in our general fund z9 for the 1999-2000 budget- due that vehicle license fee take-away. One of the letters, and I'm 3o glad to hear that the Planning Department and -the City Manager are going to do a 31 bibliography of every letter that's come through, because each one of us got a packet of 12, a 3z packet of two, three FAXed, one came in, and I remember that there were two letters that 33 came in by themselves and it was the first packet, the one from Paul Praetzel and then Mary 34 Matsui's handwritten letter. And as I was putting them all together, looking at Mary Matsui's 3s letter dated August the 20th states about the road .and I know Councilmember Stompe 36 referred to this, that the road, that heavy equipment is not appropriate on -her road. And 37 talking about the pond that's part of the EIR, that there's a place to get water and that she 3a needs protection from the liability for trespassers and at the end of it, she states that this is 39 her property at 3150 and it forces'her to urge her to deny the project. Well, we're not talking ao about the project, but a lot of the EIR fire is predicated upon the ability to get through ai somebody's land like Ms. Matsui's. In Terry Kraut's. letter dated July 13th, how the does the az consolidation of the fire protection districts-and the consolidation efforts that the County and a3 Lafco are doing, how would this, affect the. fire protection. In the first letter that Mr. Maguire as alluded to :about Mr. Roy Sprague, Mr. Sprague, •in his letter, offers to meet with people. I as would request. He says that he's able to meet with people and talk about this, and I hope that a6 they do, that they can. One of the letters we have received talks about David's Western Pond a~ Turtles. We had red hemngs, red steelhead, red-legged turtles, that's what I was laughing as about. Red-legged frogs. Somebody say... a9 Vice Mayor Maguire: I think we marked down red hemngs. Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (Mll~l)-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 236, Vol 32 September 1, 1998 1 Councilwoman. Read: I know.. He said that. He said the red herring., Let's determine z whether there truly are Western Pond Turtles ,there or note. and that there;.. if the frogs, are 3 there or not. One of the Getters from, regarding the behave fire rrftonitoring program where a they talked about simulations of fire and how :much wind. and. how ",hot it was and what the s fuel was. Could we rerun'that to include the wind danger that one letter brings out. I believe 6 this is from-=sorry about that... ~ Councilman Keller: I believe that- was'... s Councilwoman Read': Mr. Smith's letter. 9 Councilman Keller: Okay. io Councilwoman Read: No. It's Randall and Susanne Smith's;letter. If they could. rerun i i that. Let's ,get a determination. Mr. Staff said tonight that: the Fairfield Osborne is open,. I iz don'.t know if it's open gr not. Let's get that in the ,.. In regards to the water tank and the 13 proposed ports- potty and whatever's going, to be up on, Lafferty .:for some. fire protection. is How does that coincide with the Sonoma Mountain design guidelines that the County has is adopted for the Sonoma.Mountain area? Also,. in regards to bicycle safety, that's always been 16 an issue. I have. seen bicycles going down there. just as fast as can'b~;. And I don't even know i~ ifthere.is an answer to it with the road safety to find out if'there'is a safe way for bicyclists to is have passage on that road without. giving false hope that they'll be safe when they get. there 19 on their way back. Mr. Maguire alluded to Carol. Rice's' letter. Maybe. we. -can rerun. that fire zo model and give it that- worse. ease scenario that 'she was, talking about. Could we clari€y in a zi letter the fire response .time from the :Rancho Adobe Fire Pratection District and' the zz California Department of Fire? Somebody refiated'it. One person.,said 15 minutes: One z3 person said 12 minutes. Could we have that in the EIR please? Stillwater- Sciences that za Councilmember Keller had alluded. to, You know, we've got one. person who says they don't; zs one. person said they don't. Well, they did. Well, all I .know i"s about .five or six months the z6 National Marine Fisheries Association. was here right in Petaluma at_ Casa Grande.- High z~ School supporting Comfizre Grid his adobe fish 'hatchery program: If we can get a hold of zs somebody and we need to get a hold of the congresswoman 10 ask for her help ao get that z9 National Marine Fisheries person to come back and make a delineation. 3o Councilman Keller: Actually, Madam Mayor, there is a letter. 31 Councilwoman Read: Excuse me, delineation. Thank you. 3z Councilman Keller: There is a letter from Nymph's ',in the packet but the last page 33 is missing. If we could get... 34 Councilwoman Read: Is this the letter.dated February 19th? 3s Councilman Keller: The .second page... 36 Councilwoman Read: What? 37 Councilman Keller.: The attachment to, one of the lawyer's.letters misses, is missing 3s the balance 'of the letter. If we could get .the~complete letter. ` 39 Councilwoman Read: I'm not. at the,lawyer's letters. 4o Councilman Keller: No, this was from Nymph's. 4i Planning Director Tuft;, We just ..received.. a letter frc-m the fisheries, Marine az Fisheries Service, I `believe, Monday of: ~tlus week,, Friday or Monday.. :Last ,Friday or this 43 Monday. And I'd 'be glad" to make sure you get the `last page o:f that. That we will. be a4 addressing and responding to-that. Key to abbreviations. (JFI)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (IVR)-Councilmember.NancyRead (PN) Mayor M: PatriciaHilligoss, (MS)-Cotancilmembertl~faryStompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller; (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (NA1)-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire .a, .;~- ~, ,;, +. September 1, 1998 Vo1.3~ Page 237 i CouncilWoman Read: And will. you share that with us along with answering it? Will z that tell whetherthere are steelhead there or not? s Planning Director Tuft: The letter doesn't. say that there are .steelhead or not, a but we will be responding to it. And the letter itself will be in the final EIR, but I will s separately make sure ,that you get the. last page. 6 Councilwoman. Read: Oh, well,. the one page, Madam Mayor, in the midst of ~ everything that was duplicated, that's. fine. I'd certainly like to find out if we can even get s comments from Tom Ferrer regarding, at Casa Grande High School. 9 Vice Mayor Maguire: As an unbiased source? io Councilwoman~Read: Well, I don't see he's biased or not. I really don't. .All I know ii is that National Marine Fisheries Association and you and I were both there sharing with, you iz know, with their award. 13 Councilman Keller: If Ms. Defer is going to submit letters. is Councilwoman Read: Pardon? is Councilman Keller: If Ms. Defer is going to submit letters, it needs to be cleared i6 with the Board of Ed and also needs to be complimented with the gift of Mr. Pfendler to the i7 fish hatchery. is Vice Mayor Maguire: Actually, Madam Mayor, if I may, I think it's past comment 19 time for people like Ms. Defer to contribute. zo Mayor Hilligoss: I believe he can... zi Councilwoman Read: Madam Mayor? There was a letter dated February the 19th, zz '97 from Fish and Game. And it this is the one that talks about the wetlands issue. And z3 could we have comment in the EIR or incorporate this letter of February 19, 1997 in the za EIlZ? And then one of our last meetings we were talking about the summary, the draft zs summary of eland use of the Petaluma River Watershed that the RCD, Sonoma County, z6 Sonoma, Southern Sonoma Resource Conservation District is working on right now. If that z~ can be incorporated into this EIR. And also I know that this was brought up at our last zs council meeting by Councilmember Hamilton regarding this San Pablo Bay watershed study. z9 How that affects this. Isn't this the--how this affects .it, and I have to refute it, Madam 3o Mayor. The relationship between. the White Oak Estates and the Galvin property and how 31 the County has stated emphatically and this council's gone on record, and maybe we'll need 3z that resolution included in this of no development at the White Oak Galvin Estate. Okay. 33 You're going to get the Nymph's letter. If you. can't get a letter from Tom Ferrer, can you 34 get it from Richard Wantuck? He-was there from National Marine Fisheries Association. Is ss it possible that we could take up the offer of Mr. Lewis, and I can't pronounce his last name, 3e Soshiaddy of the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, regarding his comments. He 37 piggybacks on the. comments of Mr. Sprague. And also on the fire, Madam Mayor, I don't 3s know if this is even. possible to come to some middle ground on this fire issue of the CDF and 39 Rancho Adobe .Fire Protection District and our City of Petaluma to collectively meet and to ao come up with some .plan, some JPA for fire protection with utilization of all three entities to ai give triple protection up there. Okay. Also, I spoke with David Hansen last Friday at the az Open Space District regarding the trail alternatives and the recreation, what's the word, the-- a3 what is it? as Vice Mayor Maguire: Outdoor recreation. Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PFI) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (M~L~-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 238, Vol 32 September 1, 1998 i Councilwoman Read: Outdoor recreation. plan. And talk to him and also, to Philip z Sales about how that. could be :incorporated into this .:report. I .know one of them 'is in draft 3 form, but maybe it'll be further ,along by the ,time the comments. come through. Fairfield. a Osborn again. Outdoor recreation. Scenic landscaping. And then on the road,, Madam s Mayor, we need to look at the other,roads that are in the area. This is the' Hardin Road area. 6 and maybe some of the statistics in the work up that's being done on Hardin `:Road could be~~, ~ incorporated and helped. in trying' to find a middle way on the Sonoma 1Vlountain Road.. to a bring people up to the wilderness park that it is.: And the. major. ane is the County coming. 9 back with their comments: And Madam :Mayor, I'm sorry I took, 15 minutes in doing that'. io But I appreciate the council's time and look forward to the answers that are going to come i i through. iz Councilwoman Hamilton: Madam Mayor? 13 Mayor Hllligoss: Yes. is Councilwoman Hamilton: I just: want to make: sure that we coordinate. ;the EIR is and the management plan with the Russian River Watershed plan, with the Rainier, with the 16 widening of Highway-101. Just. joking. ~~ Vice Mayor Maguire: And the flooding of the Yangtse 'River. is Councilwoman Hamilton: Strike that.; I'm--Madam, Mayor? No, I still have the 19 floor. I would like to make sure that as we go and answer these long lists .of questions that zo we're not .answering questions. that have already ,been answered or .going: off onto--I -mean,. I zi don't want to bury our consultants and. our staff in paperwork. So I suggest first of all taking zz all. of the questions -that need to be answered and condensing them into--you did that. Okay. s3 I just want to make sure. za Councilwoman Torliatt: Madam. Mayor? I'm going to jump .around a little bit. zs And the first thing I've circled is the issue: regarding litter. And. litter on Sonoma 1Vlountan in z6 general. I will .say for the record, my grandfather was a rural route carrier :for over. thirty z~ years up on Sgno.ma Mountain Road. And in that- area up on Sonoma Mountain. And; he zs wouldn't even stop, and in our 'conversation last week,., to pick up less than a case of beer. z9 And I mean, no, he hasn't been there and that's probably why it's still' there: He retired 3o probably about seven or eight years, ago, or maybe even ten years ago. But there has .always si been an extremely long history of dumping, you know, cans or bottles' or garbage being' on 3z .Sonoma Mountain Road and, hopefully, having;morefolks up where that are responsible using 33 a park, .I think will increase the cleanliness of that area and that's whhat my hope would be. I 34 think tt's going to improve the area versus degradate. it, as we've had testimony there's already 3s an existing condition that is pretty bad. In the EIR, it's`been, and it's been. stated by the public 36 that this;ElR and the uses in this plan to accessLafferty Ranch is extremely restrictive. And, 37 you know, to .the amount. of people; to where ;people can go on Lafferty ..Ranch, you .know, 3s on and on and on. I would'like to go on record stating that I think more people should': be 39 allowed at Lafferty than what .exists in he~ Environmental Impact Report; I think that some ao of the uses should be expanded to include bike accessibility; as was asked for in the letter ai from; and I can't remember :,her name,, Dee Swanheiser;, looking; at bike accessibility at az Lafferty Ranch. In the long term, doesn't have to; be.now, but in the long; term, because: what a3 we're looking ~at 'is--what I'm looking at ~is the larger .issue, not ,just in .this environmental. as impact report, but what Lafferty Ranch means to this commtinify and to the entire outh as county and the region. And what 'it is is Lafferty is the .only put~licly owned property on a6 Sonoma Mountain, and I think that is very, very significant, because~:it's:going .to: be, hard and a~ fast for the public to purchase a piece of.poperty like this in'the future that people would be as able to use. I think the larger planning issue, open space for--that is publicly accessible for 49 the citizens of our community and perpetuity is extremely important. In every aspect of our Key to abbreviations. (JH)-Councilmember Jane,Hamlton; (NR)-Co~incilmem6er Nancy Read (PH)-Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilme~riberMary Sfompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (II~A~-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire r , J: September 1,'1998 Vo1.3~Page 239 i life, this is in perpetuity. This is a park that will be there. forever. And I think that's really z important to keep your eye on the ball. It's. not just'the money that we spend now. It's the 3 long term as"set that the .community :and this area receives. I think the other issue that we a need 'to keep our eye on is the future connection to Jack London Park. And .it may not s happen tomorrow. It may not .happen in five years. It may not happen in 25 years. But 6 hopefully, eventually, it will happen and we need to put those steps in place for that to be a ~ reality, because it will benefit us tremendously. I wanted to ask if the city had sent a letter to- a -I guess it's the Sonoma County Trails, asking for Lafferty to be, you know, re-included in 9 the trails system for that. I want to make sure that that happened or is going to happen. io Also, and' I don't know if it's actually an EIR issue, which, you know, may need to be clanfied ii for me, is if the Open Space District is willing to purchase property or easements for property iz for park use, why wouldn't the Open Space District want to purchase easements or 13 development rights, or open space rights for Lafferty Ranch. And my understanding is, and is maybe correct me if I'm wrong, if Moon Ranch has six units or five units that was purchased is by the Open. Space District, then why don't we sell ours on Lafferty. I think we have a i6 potential four units and I'd take a million dollars for that. I think that would be well into i~ helping us in perpetuity maintain this park, etc. tg Mayor Hilligoss: The Open Space District does not pay for units on publicly 19 owned land. zo Vice Mayor Maguire: Madam Mayor? zi Mayor Hilligoss: So there's no hope for that. zz Vice Mayor Maguire: If I may, I did have that conversation with David Hansen z3 several years ago, and he did indicate that that is the case and that they don't buy the land and za fee simple from other agencies, nor do they typically, nor do they buy the development rights. zs Councilwoman Torliatt: So you'd buy development rights from a private z6 landowner like on Moon Ranch and then you go in as a public entity and purchase the z~ property. zs Vice Mayor Maguire: In fee. z9 Councilwoman Torliatt: In fee. I'm trying to .figure out the logic on that one. 3o But let's see, my final comment, because I have commented on this EIR before at the 31 Planning Commission meetings, is why can't--why can't south county have Lafferty Ranch 3z and Moon Ranch as well? The citizens of Petaluma should have both types of park for their 33 use. So I would once again ask our Board of Supervisors to proceed with the acquisition of 34 Moon. Ranch. It's not an either/or question for me. It's both. And I don't know if that's just 3s a really difficult question to be asking, because I just don't seem to be getting the answer as 36 to why don't we have a park just like Moon Ranch. as well? So I think we need to go after 3~ both of those things. And in response to Councilmember Read's question regarding:. bicycle 3s access, included in your information should have been a draft resolution that the Petaluma 39 Bicycle Advisory Committee held a public hearing on and made a recommendation for a draft ao resolution looking at bike impacts and what their recommendations would be as far as safety, ai etc. So that's the extent of my comments. az Vice Mayor Maguire: Madam Mayor? a3 Mayor Hilligoss: Yes. as Vice Mayor Maguire: Thank you. It's--Councilwoman Torliatt brings up a good as point. And of course, the members of the Citizens for Lafferty and a regional park, of whom a~ there are few in the audience, have been making this point for a number of years, and that is Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)=Councilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (NAB-ice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 240, Val. 32 September 1, 1998 i .that Lafferty should not be the be all and end all of parks in the. south county. However, I z would broaden the ,point: again. and it's to be on Moon. IVloon is not the only potential 3 regional park :in the south county and the supervisors,. I believe,. have been ::negligent 'in a following. up on our numerous, requests for them to initiate a formal .search procedure, In the s surveys for the outdoor recreational plan, it's been noted that south:. county is lacking in 6 facilities, particularly passed 'up .recreation faclities'more than the rest. of the county and ~ Sonoma County per capita is lacking way behind fhe rest of the Bay .Area counties. So 8 certainly,, I think maybe. a far outgoing second district supervisor would like: to do something 9 for the public, he: can get this ;process going. However, .I have,my doubts that he will d'o this: io There's a number of issues have been--questions have been raised. I'm_a little concerned that i ~ a couple of ~Councilmembers are possibly attempting,.. to drive up the cost of this EIR draft, iz EIR by burying it in unrelated details, redundant. research :and. interviews: I would like us to 13 direct that our consultant use .his judgment and discretion `in addressing those issues that are is pertinent and not responding°to non-pertinent-:.issues. I'm glad that Councilman,Read brought is our attention back to the letter :from Robert Gaiser. If I'm not mistaken, Mr. Gaiser is the i6 same gentleman. that is referred. to 'in Dr. Marty Griffin's book, Sauirtg-the Marirt and Sonoma i~ Coast, and if it is the. same Mr. Gaiser, as I understand the history, Mr. Gaiser'has beenvery is willing to--and cooperative with the gravel :mining, interest 'in helping strip mine our Russian 19 River, which is putting our drinking. water in dire jeopardy. Of course, I' know Mr. Tibbetts zo has been working with the gravel industry as well, and I believe he's also working.. for Mr. zi Pfendler. I do note in the letter that he talks about .inconsistency' with the county,general zz plan. I would. just respond 'that I believe to our city council; our attorney and our planners z3 have noted that. because it's city owned property, consistency with the general. plan, is not za required. I-Ie, does make some assertions that changes in language o;n the 1.993 amendment to zs the Sonoma Mountain area .plan indicate that .thus and such willl happen, and,_ if I'm not z6 mistakem that was never ratified at the county level,, because we as an interested. party wee z~ never formally notified. I do have concern with the EIR on page 39 where our consultant is zs talking about the road, and.in the'third paragraph, although he rightly states that the county z9 should be responsible for improving the ;pavement on the existing :road,.. since this is an 3o existing safety problem, he also further on says the .city and county will prepare an extra 31 study, work ,together. That's great. He says, the city shall contribute its ,share of the 3z recommended cost. on a prorata basis prior to opening of'the park for public use: I. thirilc we 33 need to revisit that as a city council because if "the county says oh, yeah; we're going to bring: 3a this road up to ASHTO and you get to ,pay your share first. That. is not an: honest. approach 3s and that is not the way that these projects are addressed historically in the county. And 36 therefore; I'd like to make sure that we are held. to the same standard; nothing more and 37 nothing less, than what the county typically holds these kinds of projects to. And, in.:fact, 3s actually, if that were the- case, I think°we wouldn't be here: tonight. ~JUe wouldn't 'have an EIR 39 process because passive recreational use has such a minimal.impact that typically there is not ao an EIR performed on them. However, I don't want the county attempting to hold us to .:any at higher standard tha puny other,passive recr gtion ,project: Thy; question submitted by az Councilwoman Stom e~ I would 'ust reiterate uestions four„ °five `and six in my ,estimation a3 are questions that are not to be answered by an EIR consultant. T'hey:haye to do with, city as budgeting; and I'm happy to consider that at the .council: level if she wishes to bring that back as up. However, I will note that these questions pretty much .have Nall been ,asked more than. a6 once. Jean Marie Foster from the Sonoma. County Taxpayers Association `has asked much a~ the same questions !in very. similar °form actually. And has been, answered, both written and. as orally. So I, again, am concerned that we not try to bury the `E~IR consultant with extraneous. a9 detail .for the sake of driving up the cost of this project. After all, we all knowthat by rights so this has gone. on too long 'and really should be settled amicably. si Councilwoman Read; Madam`Mayor? Key to abbreviations:. (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember IVaney.Read (PH): MayorM. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller,, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela: Torliatt (A~-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire _,~ September 1, 1998 Mayor Hilligoss: Yes. Vo1.3~ Page 241 2 Councilwoman Read: I'd like to ask staff:if a letter did, in fact, go from the city to the. 3 county requesting that Lafferty be placed back into the trail plan to connect with the Jack a London Park s Planning Director Tuft: Director Carr said.no, so no. s Councilwoman Read: Okay. Well, we asked for `that to Happen and when will. it ~ happen? s Planning Director Tuft: Iwill--talk to Fred. 9 City Manager Fred Stouder: I'll check to .see to be sure it didn't go. And if it didn't, io we'll get it there. ii Councilwoman Read: I'd like to see a copy of it and I think it's extremely important iz that it be sent. And as a matter of fact, first of all, I think you need to check on the timeline 13 and when it's important to get it there. And if there's time, put a draft in front of the council is so that we can, and maybe put it on the next agenda, so that we can make sure it says what is we want it to say. I want the county, and I want the people on this committee to know how i6 the city feels and that we're representing our constituency and the citizens in the south county i~ and how they feel about it. This is--that trail is extremely important to the citizens in this part is of the county. And in Petaluma, and as Petaluma gets more built out it just is important for 19 people to be able to go.somewhere and take a walk and go for a long hike. It makes infinite 20 sense in the long term of all of our lives here. And we need to do everything we can to make Zi it happen. Even if it takes a long time to make it happen. z2 Councilman Keller:. Could we make sure that a copy of that letter goes into the 23 record for this draft EIR as well? Za Councilwoman Read: I'd also like the city to request from the Open Space District, I zs want to know how firm their policy is, I want to see their policy that says that they don't sell z6 to public agencies. I want to know if it's ironclad. 2~ Vice Mayor Maguire: They don't buy development... zs Councilwoman Read: They don't buy development rights from public agencies. 29 Sorry. I want to know if it's ironclad.. I want to know how--if Marin County has the same 3o practice and if other areas--if there's, you know, in the Bay Area, if it's comparable--pardon 31 me? 32 Mayor I-Iillgoss: Most of the--most of the land in Marin County belongs to a 33 private, like our land trust. 34 Vice Mayor Maguire: No. 3s Councilwoman Read: Well, I want. to know--I would like to question that because 36 we've been told all along that the development rights just can't be purchased because we own 37 it, but if we--okay, should I wait until you all finish talking or should Ijust--okay. I'm going 3s to continue now. 39 Mayor Hilligoss: Go ahead. ao Councilwoman Read: I want to find out what their policy is and I want to see it. And ai then I want us to request a variance to it. That they--I want us to request that they consider a2 making an exception. Because the .policy can be amended. And I think it should be. It a3 would make the most sense, and it would be an excellent expenditure of public funds for Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane. Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (11~A?)-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 242, Vc~' 32 September 1, 1998 t what they were intended for. So tliis is a good time to bring it up with :the open space' review z of policy and I think that we hould..get on it, so that will require another f etter: I also, as far 3 as the EIR.goes, I want us to define the impacts to: the road and what the minimum. mitigation a would be for that. I want to just,go on record as saying that I am g~~ing to make sure that the s City of Petaluma .and Lafferty is not required to bring that road up to higher standards than 6 anything else in this county: And 'so I. question that, the consistency of that request from the ~ county with. other things that.. are going,, on in the county, and other .parks: And the same with.. a the fire management practices. I want to make sure that, those are comparable to other 9 comparable places in the Bray Area, and I know they're not, and it needs to be consistent, to That's it. tt Councilman,Keher.: Madam Mayor? Likewise,. I: agree that there deems to b'e an iz extraordinary inconsistency between county policy, recommendations,. and inquiries' and 13 workload that has been given to this city staff and consultants for achieving :fire and road to mitigations. compared to the standards that the county is holding.. other parks anal roads in the is county. And I'm concerned that the county at this point is on .a road, shall we say that if, in 16 fact, their concerns are. legitimized, that, in fact, there will not be any additional open. space or i~ trails in this county. And `for that I would like to submit for the ri;cord the artele.from the is P.D. on uphill'baftle. So that: will.. go into the record :as well. I'll give you a copy of that: 19 This is a wayward path that we are. being, sent on. It's.filled with red herrings. I don't like the zo way it smells.. And' I'm concerned that the work. that we are being asked to do is zt extraordinary and. does not have any basis in. county practices elsewhere: Submitted :at the zz last hearing were a number of attachments that I'd referred' to in the' joint .meeting with.Parks z3 and Planning about .requests to the county .for:-by residents for road. improvements dating z4 back to the 60s. The county has been well aware of'problems on tlus road.; Their responses zs are there, or lack. of ,response is that there are petitions .that were submitted. by ;property z6 owners, by residents on Sonoma 1VYountan Road going back -into the 60s, and the county has. z~ been well aware of any deficiencies on .this road and has done minimal amount to correct zs them. Apparently, its not been a problem. And so my concern, both for the.road and .for fire z9 protection standards, we're: being asked to carry, a tremendous burden far beyond what the 3o county has' asked any development site or any'usage on Sonoma Mountain. Lwould `like the 31 county to ,produce any required mitigations on any projects on ,Sonoma Mountain .Road, 3z agricultural, commercial,, residential or otherwise: Asking the project proponents to..come up 33 with anything in the way of road improvements and :fire safety precautions beyond clearing 34 brush around a residence. Because it seems tome that the requests from the county are far 35 out of line, If what they are saying is in_ fact what they are going to hold to for policy, they 36 are essentially shutting down the ability of the county to have any additional, open. space 3~ accessible to the public. It seems far'in excess:. So I would like from the county how. many 3a homes have been approved on Sonoma. Mountain, Road, in what years. I'll .go back to the 39 past 30 years. And what conditions of approval relating. _1o either fire or roads have they ao placed on it? Certainly, the one, and by the way, Mrs: Cheda was correct, the winery address ai that. was approved, that. was reproved with. no road requests from the county, no road az impacts .from the county; was at 6611 Sonoma Mountain Road. It was not 1VIr. Lawrence's 43 property. It was a 15,0.00 gallon winery at 66:11 -Sonoma_ IViountan Road. And it says the as proposal is not: in conflict with any existing,. or planned county highway facilities, nothing as required. That was dated 1984. Did they require anything for even developments of an a6 8,000 square foot house? i don't. know. Regarding the .,road,: I will:. resubmit, because I didn't g , as Prot rest Se ember 997,r1o RoadgStandarcle from. Service Transportation Policy Project g p ds and Design Flexibility: There is, in fact;. 49 nationally a recognition that ASHTO standards. are inappropriate :for many °rural ,roads and so places that it would -impact. natural resources and in fact the Feds and a :number of states st offered alternative design standards to the green book, to the ASIi'TO green book; so that Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton; (IVR)-CorrncilmemberNaney Read (PH) MayoxM. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Sfompe. (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (MM)-Dice Mayor Matt Maguire "' ~ : t" ~i"' `~=~ ~J:` September 1, 1998 Vo1.3'$~ Page 243 i those impacts are not required for development :of rural roads. ASHTO standards are entirely z inappropriate. They're entirely wrong. And to bold this project to ASHTO standards for 3 road access is once again absurd. It's. a red herring.: And, essentially, that's all documented in. a this series of articles from that publication. Certainly, Sonoma County Highway Department s must be .familiar with alternatives to ASHTO standards. They use them for every other park 6 in the county. So that wi1T be submitted. Also submitted for the record will be the summary ~ sheets from the outdoor recreation plan survey, which indicated that this is the regional trail s corridor evaluation results, June 17, 1997. The trail names Sonoma Mountain location 9 Petaluma Adobe to Jack London State Park, 8.4 miles, public lands, Petaluma Adobe to Jack io London connect two state parks via Sonoma Mountain, bay views, valley views, bird life, i i ridge to destination, scored 96 points, the highest score of any trail link in the county. There iz is an extremely high public demand and request for, not only for Lafferty Ranch but for an 13 eventual trail linkage through to Jack London State Park, so that people can once again hike is historically as people have done since there have been human settlements in this area, be able is to hike over the mountain. That is a very high priority, again, in the county's own outdoor 16 recreation plan. And that will go into the record as well. And again, as Councilmember i~ Torliatt mentioned, we have to go back and take a look at the big picture on this. The reason is we're doing this for Lafferty Ranch is because the public has asked for it over and over and 19 over again. It has been in the city's general plan since 1..962. As a full service recreational zo park using water department facilities. This is nothing new. This is something that has been zi in city general plan for at least 36 years. And for ranchers on the mountain to all of a sudden zz say this is something new and out of the blue is absurd. For all the high priced consultants, it z3 seemed to me that once upon a time they would have read the general plans, and know that in za fact their land was adjacent to city- owned property that had been designated since 1962 for zs recreational use. As far as compatibility of these lands with agriculture, which seems to be a z6 claim, seems to be concern raised through the draft as well as a number of correspondence z~ that has come in, essentially what some of the adjacent property owners are saying is that zs public use of property is incompatible with agriculture. Public use of trails is incompatible z9 with agriculture: This is again absurd. That's where most trails are in this country. In fact, 3o that's where most of them are in the world. I just came back-from England which has in that 31 small country 135,000 miles of public rights of way in England and Wales. And those trails 3z go back to prehistoric times. They have been there. They are being used through agricultural 33 lands for thousands, not hundreds, not decades, but for thousands of years, with a 3a tremendous compatibility. There is no loss of agricultural practice. If the Councilmember 3s wants to find litter, you might drive out I Street Extension, which is all ag land, and you'll 36 find the public dumping. ground that the county is well aware of. It's used every day of the 37 week. You can find most rural roads and some corner will have a dump. Some of them are 3s dumps done by the ranchers over the past number of generations. Some of them are from 39 people from the city who just want to go out or contractors that want to go out' and dump ao their stuff without paying dump fees or taking the ride up to the dump. It happens. There is ai nothing unusual about Lafferty Ranch as a public .facility that would impact that. I'd like to az submit for the record one chapter from a book that I picked up while I was in England on the a3 gentle art. of country walking, in~which it talks_ about not only the history and traditions of as walking, but also the practices with agricultural use and compattbility with trails. Once again, as we're not talking about inventing something new here. Maybe these ranchers are not farruliar a6 with walking on trails, but certainly the public world wide is familiar with walking on trails a~ throughout. agricultural practices with no serious problems. Problems can be addressed as as needed. This is not something that's going to drive agriculture out of business. It never has. a9 And there's some documentation on that.. Finally, on this section of it, if some of these so consultants would have their way, as I mentioned before, there would be no agriculture on si Sonoma Mountain because it's--cattle grazing is incompatible with steel head habitat, it's Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember Dauid~Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (~l~l~-Vice Mayor MattMaguire Page .244, Veld 32 September 1, 1998 i incompatible with Western Pond turtle habitat, red legged salamander 'habitat, ~ it's z incompatible with Golden Eagle habitat `because of-the.,ranch activnties. There would"` be,no 3 ranc n and. it seems to me that the drift of w g, a .sa n a where the count seems to have been sa n so hat these consultants ar y yi g far is if they want to hold t ese and, in fact, s for the Ci of Petalum then- the. re om t 'standards up ty a, y' g g o drive agriculture ,out of Sonoma County.: 6 Because what they are saying is that. agriculture: has .to do the same thing: that.. we are doing.. ~ And that's absurd. That contradiction ~s.all over the. place and I'm orry to, see that we have s been forced to spend .hundreds of thousands of .dollars to answer spurious questions. to go on ~ long trails. We will answer them.: So afar with the, accepted notes. tFiat have made it so far on io the draft EIR, I'm happy to recommend it forward. There are a couple .other things. I:. would ~ i like to know the results of the lawsuit from the cyclist who became a quadriplegic at the--I iz believe at the corner of Sonoma Mountain .Road. There was a lawsuit against, I believe,.. 13 Mr. Pfendler and :the county regarding the safety. I'd like.. to find out. the results of that is lawsuit. Regarding the.: earthquake. questions, if earthquake was a problem .they wouldn't is have trails in Point Reyes on the earthquake itself, on the earthquake; fault itself. That's=-once i6 again, it doesn't. make any sense. Earthquakes are. a question if you'.have structures: National i~ Park Service saw fit ,to have a flat wheelchair accessible trail that traverses the San Andreas i a fault at the point, of .origin in 1906 in Olema. I do have aproblem -with the EIR's ;assertion 19 that no park is the environmentally superior ;alternative, because if there is; no park' there zo would be continued grazing, continued. degradation, there'd' .be no habitat restoration, there'd zi be no public stewardship of the property. And I think that misses the boat. In fact, having zz public stewardship, for the property via public access to a wilderness park is, in fact, the z3 highest and best use of that property, and'it.is'the environmentally superior project..And I'd za like to see. that recommendation .revised. And that's it for the :moment: zs Councilwoman Torliatt: Madam. Mayor? Madam. Mayor? I also. want. to state z6 for the record that this has been an emotional issue for;many, rriariy people: Arid my hope is z~ and it's probably far past this, ,but I as a Councilmember, and I would think-this entire council zs would like to work with the property owners up on Sonoma: Mountain to come to a z9 resolution where we can all work together and cohabitate together, because we need. to and 3o that's just the reality of;living together in a community: I just want to also atate there have 31 been many questions that have. been raised through the .public hearings and the documentation 3z that has been .submitted, .and' I think, you know,.. every possible question that could be asked 33 has been asked, so I don't think there has been much to :elaborate on because of that, and 34 there are concerns: 'There's concerns about fire and police and all the- basic services of 3s cleaning, but those are: in our every day life all the time. No matter whether' if you're on 36 Lafferty Ranch or you're a private home owner on the mountain, ora Sonoma 1Vlountairi, or if . 37 you live in the City of Petaluma. And we all unfortunately :have #o deal. with 'those type of 3s emergencies and Ithink- that this EIR is trying to address those things as well as the responses 39 and comments that we've received from Couneilmembers and. the public. The other issue I'd ao like to address is the fact that this council has not. been spending a tremendous amount of ai time on the Lafferty Ranch issue: )f you, pick up a Press: Democrat or an Argus-Courier az paper, I mean, I'm sick of seeing the`headline Lafferty this, Lafferty that'. I mean, you'would a3 think that. we spend, you know, 98 percent of our time ~on Lafferty Ranch and I: have to say as we probably spend three percent of our time on Lafferty Ranch, if that, in the .last year ..and a as half. I mean, other than reading this environmental impact report, we are spending our time: a6 on redevelopment, if folks were `watching last .night. We are spendiing our time on over 3.00 a~ issues that. this council has 'voted on with Pufnam_ Plaza:: I mean, :Rainier, we've; `been as discussing, the flood ;issues we've :been discussing. So I want to make it really clear. for the:. 49 public that Lafferty is not this huge time con"suming issue for this couriciL It's day-to-day so business that we work on and we've been meeting on for the last year. So--and it's very hard Key to abbreviations: (JH)-CouncilmemberJane Hamilto», (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss;, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-CounclmemJie`r Pamela Torliatt (ll~l~-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire . , ~t i .~' ~. , September , 1998 Vo1.3;~ Page 245 t to convey that to the public. And we're.sgendng a;tremendous amount of time reading other z documentation that has nothing°to do with Lafferty. So thank you. 3 Vice Mayor Maguire: '.Madam lylayor? a Mayor Hilligoss: Yes. s Vice Mayor Maguire: Just as a side note, in direction to staff regarding the letter s about the trail being removed from the outdoor recreation plan, I believe we also gave ~ direction asking that the Jack London to Adobe trail be reinstated in the... s Councilman.Keller:~ That would be the entire segment. 9 Vice Mayor Maguire: Okay. Great. Just wanted to make that. If there's no other...I io would like to move this. i i Councilman Keller: Okay. I do have 'one. On page nine, the allowed uses and the iz use program, compatible uses number three, compatible uses include, I would like to add 13 agriculture, which is currently not mentioned on that. This is on page nine, allowed uses, to compatible uses include. pedestrian. travel, passive recreation, education, park maintenance, is possible restoration, wheelchair access, and item G, agricultural activities. i6 Vice Mayor Maguire: Madam Mayor, I'd like to move we adopt the resolution i~ authorizing the City Manager to contract with Leonard Charles and Associates for additional is work. t9 Mayor Hilligoss: First, I'd like to say that, you know, we're not there yet. But... zo Vice Mayor Maguire: Oh, did I jump... zi Mayor Hilligoss: But I'm not going to go over all of this. There are two things zz that upset me more than anything are the--ts the road, it's dangerous. And also our liability z3 for anybody that might--might hurt themselves out there. It would be very dangerous for us. za Okay. Then we'll move onto item number two. Now, you can do it. zs ><tES®. 98-180A NCS z6 I,AFFEI2TY EIR z~ Vice Mayor Maguire: Madam Mayor, I'd like to move we adopt the resolution za authorizing the City Manager to contract with Leonard Charles for additional work. a9 Mayor Hilligoss: Okay, 3o Councilman Keller: Excuse me, if I can check with Planning Director. We need to 31 recommend that this move on with the comments. 3z Planning Director Tuft: We would just like direction to commence preparation 33 of the final EIR. 3a Councilman Keller: So that's all, you don't need any specific statement. 3s Planning Director Tuft: 36 Vice Mayor Maguire: I do so. No. We didn't offer a resolution, just direction. 37 Mayor Hilligoss: Is there a second? 3a Councilman Keller: I'll second it. 39 Mayor Htlligoss: Okay. Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (MNl)-Dice Mayor Matt Maguire Page 246, Voli 32 September 1, 1998 i Councilwoman Read: Discussion; Madam Mayor. z Mayor Hilligoss: Yes. 3 Councilwoman Read: The resolution in regards to Mr. Charles's bid proposal that he a gave stated on page: 32 that to .respond to the comments of the FIR he would.. attend .two s public hearings to take public testimony. Is that true, the July 30th, June 30th and then the s last meeting we had on August 24th? ~ Planning Director Tuft: Yes. , a Councilwoman Read: And then he. stated he'll be responsible~:for responding to all 9 written comments. plus- verbal comments rendered at the public hearings on the. draft EIR, and io that that will be part of the recgrd. So what--what the council's voting on .right now is ii 40,000 dollars more for responding to the comments. iz Planning Director Tuft: Maximum. . 13 Councilman.Keller: I'm preparing a final. I'm preparing a final. is Councilwoman Read: Just wanted to add it to discussion.. Thank: you, Madam. is Mayor. i6 .Mayor Hilligoss: Okay. i~ Four- ayes, two Noes, -one absent. is Mayor Hilligoss; Okay.. Any liaison reports? No? 19 Mice Mayor Maguire: Any liaison. zo Mayor Hilligoss: Hopefully not., I have a lot: zt Councilwoman Torliatt: Oh, there's a meeting; bike adyisgry committee is zz meeting: tomorrow -night at six. o'clock. We're continuing to ,go through our bike plan draft z3 and probably will be for the next month or so: And while we're chewing through some: stuff; za and I haven't received the agenda for the Planning Commission next week. 'So .I'll report zs then. z6 Mayor Iilligoss; We'll have one Monday night. Oh, did you? Yeah. I will. I'll z~ adjourn. the meeting in memory of lay Stromberg, who is--Stromgern, who is Mayor Sharon. zg Wright's husband. z9 Councilwoman Hamilton: Oh, Santa Rosa? 3o Mayor Hilligoss: Yeah. 31 Councilman Keller: .Madam Mayor? 3z Mayor Hilligoss: Yes. 33 Councilman:K.eller: I do have a question. Have Councilmembers been invited to 34 the Open Space District celebration party? 3s Mayor Hilligoss: That, I don't know. I was invited. 36 ADJOURN 37 At 9:00 p.m. the meeting was adjourned 38 39 Key to abbreviations: (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton; (tVR)-Councilmember 1Vancy Read (PH) Mayor M. Patricia:Flilligoss, (MS)-Cor.~nclmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (MM)-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire September 1, .1998 Vo1.3~! Page 247 1 2 y s M. Patricia Hilligoss, May a ATTEST: s 6 7 s Patricia E. Bernard, City Clerk Key to abbreviations. (JH)-Councilmember Jane Hamilton, (NR)-Councilmember Nancy Read (PH)1Lfayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, (MS)-Councilmember Mary Stompe (DK)-Councilmember David Keller, (PT)-Councilmember Pamela Torliatt (Mll~l)-Vice Mayor Matt Maguire