Loading...
Minutes 2008/03/03 8805 City of Gilroy City Council Minutes Monday. March 3. 2008 REGULAR MEETING I. OPENING A. Call to Order at 7:15 p.m. Mayor Pinheiro led the Pledge of Allegiance. Pastor Mark Turner of South Valley Community Church gave the invocation City Clerk Freels announced that the agenda had been posted on February 27, 2008 at 4:30 p.m. and the revised agenda had been posted on February 29,2008 at 10:00 a.m. Roll Call: Present: Council Member Peter Arellano, Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Bob Dillon, Council Member Craig Gartman, Council Member Perry Woodward and Mayor AI Pinheiro Absent: Council Member Cat Tucker B. Orders of the Day Mayor Pinheiro announced that the Closed Session items were being moved in sequence on the agenda, explaining that the Public Employee Performance Evaluation for the City Clerk would be moved to the bottom of the Closed Session items and the Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation item would be moved to the top. City Attorney Callon asked that the other two conference with legal Counsel - Existing Litigation items be moved before the Performance Evaluation item. C. Introductions There were no introductions D. Presentations & Proclamations Mayor Pinheiro presented the Employee of the Month Award for February 2008 to Pat Bentson. II. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of February 4, 2008 Regular Meeting B Approval of Budget AmendmentsfTransfers C. Resolution 2008-05 Approving a Tentative Map Request for Two Commercial Units and Sixteen Upper Floor Residential Units with Common Garage Space located at 7711 Monterey Street (Northwest corner of Monterey and Third Street) S & P Properties c/o Michael Parsons Applicant, APN 799-03-54 & 55. TM 07-05 (Public Hearing held 2/25/08) D. Resolution 2008-06 Approving the Architectural and Site Review approval to construct a Walgreens store (14,469 square feet) and other retail building (6,105 square feet) east of Blockbuster Video at the corner of Wren Avenue and First Street at 770 and 776 First Street, APN 808-12-011. Glen Lorna Group/Craig Filice. AS 07- 34 (Public Hearing 1/22/08 and continued to meeting of 2/25/08) 8806 Motion on Item III. Motion was made by Council Member Dillon, seconded by Council Member Bracco and carried with a 6-0-1 vote (Council Member Tucker absent) Council Member Gartman asked if the amendment to the minutes adding the time of adjournment would be included. Council Member Dillon agreed. IV. BIDS AND PROPOSALS A. Approval of the renewal of a professional services agreement with Dr. Howard E. Michaels for the oversight of the City EMS program in the amount of $35,100 for a two-and-one-half year period The Staff report was presented by Interim City Administrator Jatczak. Council Member Bracco asked what services Dr. Michaels provided. Interim City Administrator Jatczak explained that he managed the entire program, laid out the EMS program and made sure the Fire Department hit the milestones that they set out to achieve. Council Member Bracco asked how much time the Doctor spent providing his services. Interim City Administrator Jatczak explained that he spent 10-12 hours per month. Motion on Item IV. A. Motion was made by Council Member Dillon, seconded by Council Member Bracco and carried with a 6-0-1 vote (Council Member Tucker absent) to approve the agreement. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no public hearing items. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Introduction of an Ordinance for the Zone Change Request from A1 (Agriculture) to R1-PUD (Single Family Residential-Planned Unit Development) to construct 2 Homes at 736 Gage Court, APN 808-47-009, Randy Kirk Applicant, Z 07-02. (Public Hearing held 2/25/08) Motion on Item VI.A. Motion was made by Council Member Dillon, seconded by Council Member Woodward and carried with a 6-0-1 vote (Council Member Tucker absent) to read the ordinance by title only and waive further reading of the ordinance. City Clerk Freels read the ordinance by title. Second Motion on Item VI.A. Motion was made by Council Member Arellano, seconded by Council Member Dillon and carried (Council Member Tucker absent) to introduce an Ordinance for the Zone Change Request from A1(Agriculture) to R1-PUD (Single Family Residential-Planned Unit Development) to construct 2 Homes at 736 Gage Court, APN 808-47-009, Randy Kirk Applicant, Z 07-02 B. Tentative Map Request for a Fourteen Parc~llndustrial Subdivision located Between Forest Street and Murray Avenue (South of Kishimura Street) APN 835-01-059, Forest Street Industrial Subdivision/Desmond Melia, c/o V. Sulic. TM 07-10 The Staff report was presented by Planning Manager Bill Faus. 8807 Mayor Pinheiro asked that two questions from the previous meeting be answered: 1) If the Fire Marshal required the project to have a through street and 2) if a through street was not a requirement, if a study of the area with a cul-de-sac would need to be performed. Fire Marshal Bretschneider stated that there was no requirement that the project be designed with a through street. Mayor Pinheiro asked if a study needed to be conducted to identify the impacts of a cul- de-sac. Traffic Engineer Dey showed a map of the area explaining that his concerns were that precedence could be set explaining that Murray road was identified as an arterial and Forest was identified as a collector street. He then explained that the general plan analysis had determined that the traffic would load equally between both roads and the cul-de-sac might have long term impacts on Leavsley and Forest. He then stated that a study would need to be performed. Council Member Gartman spoke on the design of Forest asking Engineer Dey if he was not sure that the street was designed to take the traffic flow. Engineer Dey agreed explaining that under the different configuration, he did not know that the street could take the traffic. He then explained that the general plan master plan assumption was that Murray was an arterial and the network was balanced between the two streets. Council Member Gartman asked if the intersection was designed for total build-out of the industrial park. Engineer Dey agreed. Council Member Gartman asked how many trips the street was projected for per day as designed. Engineer Dey said Forest was probably designed for 8,000 to 10,000 per day. Council Member Gartman stated that the current traffic was 1,000 per day. Engineer Dey stated that he did not know the intersection traffic trips. Council Member Gartman asked if the intersection was not designed to handle the road. Engineer Dey explained that the intersection design was usually less than a roadway explaining that he could not tell how many trips the intersection was designed for explaining that a roadway capacity was usually higher than an intersection capacity. Council Member Gartman asked if the intersection was designed for the business park. Engineer Dey agreed explaining that he didn't know the number of trips that were assigned to the intersection explaining that the intersection was designed for a even distribution of traffic from Forest and Murray. Council Member Gartman asked what the maximum trips would be on Murray. Engineer Dey stated that as an arterial, Murray was designed for 15,000 - 16,000 trips per day. Council Member Gartman explained that there was still a lot of capacity as there were only 3,000 to 4,000 trips on the street per day. Engineer Dey agreed. 8808 Council Member Arellano asked if the freeway interchange was a part of the design in the general plan at Buena Vista. Engineer Dey agreed. Council Member Arellano asked if Las Animas and Cohansey were designed to take traffic from the industrial park area. Engineer Dey explained that the further north in the industrial park area, the demand from all of the industrial park would be greater and the traffic flow would be balanced out throughout all of the roadways. Council Member Arellano explained that the Council was attempting to have the least amount of traffic impact on the area asking why a large study needed to be performed if the Forest would be more front loaded than Murray. Engineer Dey explained the traffic impact study process stating that the roadway was studied based on the localized impacts and existing conditions to make sure it was designed to accommodate the future development. Council Member Arellano asked if the road could be designed to accommodate those developments. Engineer Dey agreed. Council Member Woodward asked to hear from the applicant on the possible impacts of the cul-de-sac. Mayor Pinheiro asked that the question be more concise suggesting that the Council decide what they wanted to see and then have the study done if necessary for the cul- de-sac. Engineer Dey explained that each year the traffic flow map was developed sharing the process of gathering the information and the use of the map. Council Member Bracco asked what recommendation would be made if the property was designed to end in a different location on the map. Engineer Dey explained that he would need to follow the 100 peak hour trips process stating that it may not need an additional study. Council Member Dillon asked how long the study would take. Engineer Dey stated that it would probably take a consultant 8 weeks. Public Comment was opened. Lee Wieder, representative for the applicant, read a letter into the record: "Dear Mayor and members of the City Council, it is our understanding that the City Council voted to continue TM 07-10 to March 3, 2008 so that staff can determine whether a cul-de-sac could meet the City's requirements rather than a street thru the project connecting Murray Avenue to Forest Street. The Council's intent is to re-direct project traffic, especially truck traffic, away from Murray Avenue and onto Forest Street. It is with this in mind that wee have come-up with a cul-de-sac plan that results in minor modifications to the tentative map and achieves the objective of re-directing traffic away from Murray while conforming to all City standards". Mayor Pinheiro asked if staff had reviewed the new plans. Mr. Wieder stated that they had not, due to timing. He then continued reading the letter. 8809 " The tentative map remains unchanged as to the same number of 14 lots; substantially the same lot sizes; and essentially the same street alignment except for Sakai Way becoming a 460 foot long cul-de-sac measured from the centerline of Forest Street to the center of its cul-de-sac bulb. The specific results of modifying Sakai Way to a cul- de-sac are as follows: a. Only two lots (lots 8 & 9) will have access to Murray Avenue via a common driveway, b. Access to the remaining 12 lots will be from Forest Street via the Sakai Way cul-de-sac. C. The Oak tree on lot 9 will be preserved. As to comments on traffic, we suggest a traffic study of impacts to Forest Street is unnecessary. A traffic study was not required when the new street, Sakai Way, was originally proposed to connect Murray Avenue to Forest Street. The two major reasons for not requiring a traffic study still apply. 1. Forest Street is a collector that is no where near capacity; 2. The updated general plan has already accounted for the build-out of this area and since that time, three years ago, there has been very little development on Forest Street in particular and the most immediate area in general. We calculated that by re-designing Sakai Way to a cul-de-sac there will result in 234 more average daily trips on Forest Street. This alone does not constitute a reason to require a traffic study. Nor should consideration of doing a Master Plan or any variation thereof be any more reason to require a traffic study. Based upon the recommended minor changes to the tentative map and little justification if any to conduct a traffic study to determine the additional traffic generated from twelve buildings averaging 6500 square feet each, we request your approval of the tentative map as modified. Thank you for your consideration". Mayor Pinheiro asked that the Council have staff look at the new proposal and then report out at the next meeting. Council Member Woodward stated that the Council had suggested that the applicant look at doing the project as a cul-de-sac and he was troubled that staff had to do more study of the proposal. He then stated that he would prefer to push the item forward. Mayor Pinheiro stated that he believed staff needed to validate the proposal and the number of trips explaining that the Council had to make their decisions based on the guidance of the professionals on staff. Council Member Bracco agreed stating that the applicant had originally stated that the City had said no to the cul-de-sac concept and then at the last hour, the applicant presented a proposal that staff had not seen. He explained that the City Engineers needed to see if the numbers were correct. Mayor Pinheiro stated that staff had given direction on the needs of a cul-de-sac design and would need to evaluate the proposal to see that it met those needs. Council Member Dillon stated that staff had approved the through street and he did not see the big difference with traffic concerns of the residents. He then asked how much time would be involved with the staff review. Mayor Pinheiro stated that staff could review the proposal and return to the next Council meeting with the outcome. Council Member Woodward stated that Engineer Dey had stated that the traffic study would take eight weeks. Mayor Pinheiro explained that staff could validate the number of trips per day and could then determine if the traffic study was necessary. Motion on Item VI.B. Motion was made by Council Member Dillon and seconded by Council Member Bracco to postpone the item to the next meeting. Council Member Arellano asked which staff member would be working on the new proposal. Planning Manager Faus stated that he would review it and would need to circulate it to 8810 Fire and Engineering. He then reminded the Council that the packet for the 1 th would be compiled the following week and recommended that the item be delayed 30 days. Council Member Woodward asked why the new proposal would need to be circulated to fire. Planning Manager Faus explained that all revised plans were circulated to all divisions. Mayor Pinheiro explained that there were new exits and a new configuration and all changes such as set backs and driveways had to be reviewed by staff. Council Member Woodward stated that the item had been sent back at the previous meeting to be evaluated as a cul-de-sac, and it was going out to be reviewed by fire again. Mayor Pinheiro explained that there was a lot to be reviewed as the entire configuration was changed. Council Member Dillon stated that he was comfortable with amending his motion to continue the item 30 days. City Attorney Callon suggested that the staff could give a feel for the item by the next meeting. Continued Motion on Item VI. B. Council Member Dillon amended his motion to continue the item 30 days. The motion was seconded by Council Member Bracco and carried with a 5-1-1 vote (Council Member Woodward voting no and Council Member Tucker absent) C. Resolution prohibiting parking along the south side of Hecker Pass Highway from Santa Teresa boulevard to approximately 545 feet west of Santa Teresa Boulevard The Staff report was presented by Engineer Dey. Council Member Arellano asked where the visibility issue came in. Engineer Dey shared the location on the map explaining that it was sight visibility triangle area and sharing the needed distance of 150-200 feet. Council Member Woodward stated that he had been at the site and had seen some of the concerns with visibility issues due to the truck parking. He then suggested a compromise in the parking areas west of the site which would allow 1 or 2 trucks an area to park. Engineer Dey explained that 150 feet of red curb would allow 200 additional feet to the end. Mayor Pinheiro asked if Council was in agreement with allowing some truck parking areas. Council Member Bracco stated that he was against it as the City continued to red-curb anytime there was an issue with truck parking, which affected all vehicles not just trucks. He then explained that the trucks would find another place to park if the City red curbed and the people in the businesses in the area wouldn't have anywhere to park. Council Member Dillon stated that he would agree to 50 feet on either side. Council Member Woodward asked if it was lawful to red-curb for trucks only. Engineer Dey stated that he could look into it, explaining that it had been done in other areas of the city. 8811 Motion on Item VI.C. Motion was made by Mayor Pinheiro, seconded by Council Member Dillon and carried (Council Member Tucker absent) to adopt a Resolution prohibiting parking along the south side of Hecker Pass Highway from Santa Teresa Boulevard to approximately 545 feet west of Santa Teresa Boulevard, with the amendment of allowing parking to the range that was safe of 60-75 feet. VII. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS There were no new business items. VIII. INTERIM CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS Interim City Administrator Jatczak commented on the situation that had taken place earlier with the cul-de-sac explaining that the City Council needed to make decisions with the best information available as decisions could be compromised without it. She stated that when applicants provided materials at a meeting without giving the opportunity for staff review and analysis and asked Council to consider making a decision, it set a bad precedence. She then asked that the Council allow staff to have review of materials to offer the opportunity for analysis prior to Council making a decision. She then announced that the City had become the owners of Gilroy Gardens on February 29th. IX. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS There was no report. X. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Arellano stated that at the League of California Cities had invited a speaker to a recent dinner event who had addressed the proposed release of prisoners and the various impacts the release would have on cities. Council Member Gartman stated that the meeting of the South County Planning Advisory Committee had addressed the proposal before LAFCO for the incorporation of San Martin, explaining that the City of Gilroy sphere of influence did not include the south side of Masten Avenue. He explained that the City of Gilroy would be better suited to include the area and suggested that the City try to set a position on the issue and possibly discuss the issue at the joint session with the Planning Commission. Mayor Pinheiro explained that LAFCO had looked at the sphere of influence issue and stated that there was a lot of continued discussion on the issue. He then suggested that the Council receive a report to get a feel for the issue. Council Member Gartman suggested that the joint meeting with the Council address the issue. Mayor Pinheiro agreed. Council Member Woodward congratulated the High School wrestling team for their success at the State competition having placed 2nd. XI. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Pinheiro thanked Interim City Administrator Jatczak for all of her coordination with the purchase of Gilroy Gardens and then spoke on the importance of the purchase for the City into the future. XII. CLOSED SESSION 8812 The Council went into closed session at 8:25 p.m. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(b)(3)(C): Claim of Golden Bay Construction, Inc. against City of Gilroy filed January 31,2008 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Govt. Code section 54956.9(a)) City of Gilroy v. Kaufman and Broad - Monterey Bay, Inc. Santa Clara Superior Court Case No. 1-06-CV-077424City of Gilroy v. 140 Gilroy Associates, L.P. Santa Clara Superior Court Case No. 1-05-CV-055360 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 Title: City Clerk Closed Session Announcement The Council Adjourned to Open Session and Mayor Pinheiro announced that the Council had rejected the Claim of Golden Bay Construction with a 6-0-1 vote (Council Member Tucker absent) The Council then adjourned the meeting. , J I , I