Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/11/1995September 11, 1995 Vol. 29, Page 199 ~ o'' ~ i MINgTTES ~ z OF A ItEGUY.AR AI9JOURNED 1VIEETING 3 PETALUMA CIT~' COUNCII, a ; IVYONDAY, SEP'I'EMBER 11, 1995 s fl~OLI, CALI. 3:00 p.m. 6 Present: Hamilton, Stompe, Maguire, Read, Barlas, Vice Mayor Shea, Mayor Hilligoss ~ Absent: None s PLEDGE OF ALI.EGIANCE 9 i MOIVIENT OF SII.ENCE io ~ P~JBLIC COlVIlVIENT ii Connie McClain - noted there is a group forming whose goal it is to develop an outreach iz program for needy children. This group has been designed to work with youth on a one- is to-one bas~s. The Council was asked to support this and to come to Kenilworth Center on ia Saturday to help make the world safe for children. is I COZJNCIL COMIVIENT i6 Matt Maguire asked if the Council is willing to have a discussion of Lafferty on the i~ September ~18th meeting to hear the presentation referred to by Mr. Stapp on September ia 5. The Mayor said if they could get something in writing to the Council by Wednesday, it i9 could be distributed to the Council. 2o The Council then went into a Study Session to discuss the studies currently being handled 2i by the Plarining Department and additional studies as may be directed by the Council. z2 Staff asked the Council to focus on no more than three goals and suggested they be (1) 23 The Railroad area near the Center of Downtown, (2) a Gateway Overlay Zone, and (3) Za Transportation and Land Use. For gateways, it was noted that Lakeville is the most Zs pressing. Although the Planning Department is working on the Petaluma Blvd. South z6 Specific Plan, most of that land is not in the City Limits. i z~ Planning Director Pamela Tuft reviewed some of the projects the department is working 2s on. Assistant City Manager Salmons noted that a number of the studies being undertaken 29 by the Planning Department include gateways. One gateway that is not being worked on 3o is Lakevillel There are minor corridors which are not being addressed at this time, such as 3i I Street, Bodega Avenue, and Magnolia Avenue. There was agreement among the ~ 3z Council to develop design guidelines or design policies for Lakeville from the Highway 33 101 freeway overpass southeasterly to the City Limits. The area of Lakeville Street from 3a the Highway 101 freeway overpass northwesterly to the Petaluma River is an area that the ss City should~ begin to address. 36 For the record, staff noted the description of `~pecific planning" is to design higher and 3~ better uses ~of land. Page 200, Vol. 29 ~ • Railroad Stud,~ - 2 Railroad Study Are~ 3 overcrossing northwe: a behind Payless and Gr s between Washington ~ 6 the Petaluma River ba~ September 11, 1995 Warren Salmons suggested making Lakeville Street part of the . That area would include Lakeville from tfie freeway ~erly to the.Petaluma River and Madison Street, include the area ~nd Auto (northwesterly towards the feed mill), the railroad area '~treet and D Street, (not to include the McNear Peninsula) and k(southeasterly) to the Highway 101 freE,way overcrossing. ~• Lakeville from the Hiehwav 101 freewav ~vercrossi a - this is already covered by the General Plan land use descriptors. If the Council feels 9 there should be an amendment to these land use designations, the Council could io generate a General Plan amendment. It was noted that none ~f that area is planned i i industrial park. . iz e Design of Lakeville area - Another type of building material co~uld be used other than ~3 `~ilt up" construction. Special design guidelines would be app~ropriate for this area. ia The zoning is fine as it is. We need to strengthen the Lakeville gateway .design is guidelines. ~6 s Washington Street - Trees should be planted on Washington Snreet from Prince Park ~~ into the Downtown. ~ There was Council concurrence vrith tree planting on ia Washington Street. ~ i9 o Transit studv - A question arose about how the City would benefit from the study that zo is going to be done by the Calthorpe Planning Group for th~e Marin and Sonoma 21 Counties' transportation modeling. With the amount of money that study is going to Zz cost, there would be a ismall amount of detail that would be helpful for City planning. 23 o Redevelopment -There was discussion about a possible merger of the two 2a redevelopment districts. Staff advised that would cause the City to lose about 30% of 2s revenue, because of tlie different redevelopment laws that wer•e in effect when each 26 district was formed. ~ 2~ e Planning Department teport on studv session requests - Planning Director Tuft said 2g she would re-evaluate the Department's study load and report back to the Council at a z9 regular meeting with her evaluation of the direction to staff at this meeting. 30 • Economic Information - The Council had a number of questions regarding the si economic information'that could be made available to them. They asked for previous s2 economic reports made to earlier Councils to be used as comparison documents. They 33 talked about development of an incentive plan for industrial development. They asked 34 for what ofher cities have done along this subject 1ine. ~ ss e Council's additional information renuests - 36 1. A synopsis of vacant land and how that land is zoned.. 3~ 2. Finance Department to produce a report of business by sales tax reporting ss types. ~ ~ i 39 3. Finance Department to report on the types of businesses and the number of ao businesses of that same type. ai 4. If possible, ~these reports could contain some comparison with the past. az 5. Why and where sales tax dollars are leaving; i.e. "dollar leaking." September 11, 1995 Vol. 29, Page 201 I ~ r i Adjourn At 9:00 p.m. the meeting was adjourned. -~ ~ z C s M. Patricia ~ ligoss, Mayor a ATTES : s 6 Patricia E. Bernard, City Clerk