Loading...
Minutes 2008/06/02 8845 City of Gilroy City Council Minutes Monday, June 2, 2008 I. OPENING Mayor Pinheiro called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. Mayor Pinheiro led the Pledge of Allegiance. The Invocation was given by Pastor Malcolm McPhail of New Hope Community Church. City Clerk Freels report that the agenda had been posted on May 28,2008 at 5:00 p.m. and the revised agenda had been posted on May 29,2008 at 9:00 a.m. Roll Call Present: Council Member Peter Arellano, Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Craig Gartman, Council Member Cat Tucker, Council Member Perry Woodward and Mayor AI Pinheiro Absent: Council Member Bob Dillon B. Orders of the Day Mayor Pinheiro requested to move item VII.A. Consideration of a Request to Revise the RDO Affordable Housing Exemption Approval for the Harvest Park Project from 83 Owner-Occupied Townhouses to 83 Rental Apartment Units with Revised Architectural and Site Review for a Property Located west of Monterey Road, north and south of the Extension of Cohansey Avenue, APN's 790-06-16,029,030,032 and 033, South County Housing, AHE 06-01 up on the agenda prior to Item IV. A. Bids and Proposals. C. Introductions of New Employees Jennifer Corona, Human Resources Assistant I was introduced by Human Resources Director McPhillips. D. Presentations & Proclamations The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) presentation was presented by Fire Captain Roy Shackel and Public Information Officer Joe Kline The Annual Presentation by the Personnel Commission was presented by Sue Czeropski. II. PRESENTATIONS A. BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA, BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MA rrER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. Patty Worthen of Catholic Charities spoke on the Day Break One program which provides outreach services in South County. III. CONSENT CALENDAR B. Claim of Gabriel Velasquez (City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote under the consent calendar shall constitute the denial of claim) C. Resolution 2008-22 Authorizing Officers Who May Execute Right of Way Certifications on Behalf of the City of Gilroy D. Appointment of Jenny Velasco and Joe Walton as Housing Advisory Committee Members to Fill Un-Expired Terms Ending June 30, 2010 8846 Motion on the Consent Calendar Items B, C & D Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Woodward and carried (Council Member Dillon absent) to approve Consent Calendar items B, C & D. A. Approval of Minutes of May 19, 2008 Regular Meeting Council Member Woodward explained that he had voted no on item VI.A. City Clerk Freels stated that the motion should read that Council Member Woodward had voted no and the motion was to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving the item. Motion on Consent Item A The item carried (Council Member Dillon absent) VII. A. Consideration of a Request to Revise the ROO Affordable Housing Exemption Approval for the Harvest Park Project from 83 Owner-Occupied Townhouses to 83 Rental Apartment Units with Revised Architectural and Site Review for a Property Located west of Monterey Road, north and south of the Extension of Cohansey Avenue, APN's 790-06-16, 029, 030, 032 and 033, South County Housing, AHE 06-01 Mayor Pinheiro asked Council Member Arellano to preside for the item as Mayor Pro Tern Dillon was not present. He then recused himself, explaining that South Valley Housing had previously been a client of his. He then left the Council Chambers. The staff report was presented by Planner II Durkin. Dennis Lalor Director of South Valley Housing spoke on the item explaining that he concurred with the staff recommendations. Council Member Arellano spoke on the undergrounding of the parking asking if there was a financial difference. Mr. Lalor stated that the financial difference was significant and there would be more open space with the change in the parking. Motion on Item VitA. Motion was made by Council Member Woodward to direct Staff to prepare a Resolution approving AHE 06-01 Revision. Council Member Arellano asked if the staff recommendations were to be included in the motion. Council Member Woodward asked if the architectural and site approval would return to the City Council. Planner II Durkin stated that the architectural and site approval would come back to the staff level. Council Member Arell~no Q~ked thfilt thEt 2 f.tqdition~1 conditions be re~d. Planner II Durkin stated that the first condition was that a contract be entered into for the new affordability scheme and that they return with the revised architectural and site approval be approved at the staff level. Council Member Woodward agreed that the additional conditions be added to the motion. Council Member Gartman stated that he had met with the applicant, but could not vote in support of the item. 8847 Continued Motion on Item VitA. The motion was seconded by Council Member Bracco and carried (Council Member Gartman voting no and Dillon and Mayor Pinheiro absent) Mayor Pinheiro returned to the dais. IV. BIDS AND PROPOSALS A. Approval of Bid to General Sports Venue/Astro Turf of Rochester, MI in the amount of $58,234 for Christmas Hill Park Synthetic Turf Project, No. 08-CDD- 158 The Staff report was presented by Senior Engineer Headley Council Member Woodward asked what the projected life of the turf would be. Senior Engineer Headley stated that it could be approximately 15-20 years. Council Member Woodward then asked if there would be a savings in the costs to maintain it. Senior Engineer Headley stated that he did not have the operational costs, but there would be significant savings in maintenance. Council Member Bracco spoke on issues with sanitary concerns as several high schools had experienced their students contracting staff infections they believed were caused by to the turf. Senior Engineer Headley stated that it would be in a dedicated use area and not for drop in use. Council Member Bracco stated that animals would be urinating on it and kids would play on it. Senior Engineer Headley stated that staff had determined that a regular hose-down schedule would need to take place as needed. Council Member Tucker asked if other cities utilized the turf. Senior Engineer Headley stated that the Operations Staff had contacted other communities who used the turf and had determined that it would an appropriate use. Mayor Pinheiro spoke on the funding from the Garlic Festival asking if there would be future funding coordinated. Senior Engineer Headley stated that there were other improvements that the Garlic Festival would be participating in the August and September time frame and explained that there were other state grant improvements the City was pursuing that would come before the Council. Council Member Tucker asked what would take place if the Council chose not to approve the bid. Senior Engineer Headley stated that the area would be seeded in turf and renovations would possibly take place in the fall and would possibly be able to take the Garlic Festival the following year. Council Member Tucker asked what the benefits of the turf were stating that she was wondering if the public had been given any consideration as to their preference. Senior Engineer Headley stated that operations staff had considered the area and had 8848 determined that the area was an improvement area of the park. Council Member Arellano asked what was in the play area. Senior Engineer Headley shared the play area location and composition, explaining that the area under consideration had previously been the play area but had remained unimproved. Council Member Arellano spoke on the difficulties in keeping the area healthy. Senior Engineer Headley stated that it was difficult due to the amount of shade. Council Member Bracco stated that he could not support the approval of the item as it was not a good use of the 440 fund for the Garlic Festival and he had concerns with the issues with health issues and he didn't believe it would last through the Garlic Festival. Council Member Gartman concurred with Council Member Bracco stating that it was not a proper use of the 440 funds and explaining that it was a potential headache waiting to happen. Motion on Item IV.A. Motion was made by Council Member Woodward, seconded by Council Member Arellano and carried (Council Member Bracco and Gartman voting no, Council Member Dillon absent) to approve the bid. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. A Public Hearing to Consider the Annual Destruction and/or Removal of Weeds and Refuse Constituting a Public Nuisance in the City of Gilroy, Pursuant to Section 12.51 of the Gilroy City Code . The Staff report was presented by Fire Marshal Jackie Bretschneider. The public hearing was opened. There being no public comment, the public hearing was c1o~ed. Motion on Item V.A. Motion was made by Council Member Woodward, seconded by Council Member Tucker to continue Public Hearing to the June 16, 2008 Regular Meeting. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Consideration of the Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Proposing an Amendment to the City Charter to the Electors of the City Changing the Election Cycle from Odd to Even Years for the Municipal Election to be Held on November 4, 2008 City Attorney Callon stated that she had provided the Council with a revised second page of the resolution at the dais. City AdministrEttpr H~g14nQ Ih'r~q the p~o~grq~nQ of the item, sharing the pot~ntial savings with the change in lh~ ele~~lon eyol,. City Attorney Callon spoke on the timing of the arguments in favor and against the measure and the order of preference given to Council for arguments in favor. Council Member Woodward stated that Council Member Dillon had asked the City Attorney to provide an opinion on the ability for the election to be held entirely by mail, explaining that the same, if not more cost savings could be achieved if a mail ballot election. He stated that he had been told that Council Member Dillon had not received a reply from the City Atto~fley and Council Member Woodward was interested in 8849 determining if their was a cost savings. City Attorney Callon stated that she did not have the request for information in hand, stating that it could have been discussed during the policy summit. City Administrator Haglund stated that there had been some email traffic on the issue with City Clerk Freels. City Clerk Freels explained that she had responded to Council Member Dillon's request on mail ballot elections and had provided the Elections Code sections that defined the uses for mail ballot elections, explaining that the City did not qualify under the Elections Code. She then stated that she was unaware of any communications with the City Attorney's office. Council Member Woodward stated that he believed the City may qualify and he had discussed the issue with Council Member Dillon and Council Member Dillon had forwarded on the question to Berliner Cohen. City Attorney Callon stated that she had not received the inquiry stating that she had previously received an email from Council Member Dillon regarding term length. Council Member Woodward asked to continue the discussion of the item until the answer to the question was provided. City Attorney Callon stated that there was no issue with timing. Council Member Arellano stated that he was willing to wait until the next meeting to get a response. Council Member Gartman stated that 78% of the last election was mail-in ballots and shared mail ballot elections in the State of Oregon. He then spoke in favor of continuing the item to the next meeting. Mayor Pinheiro stated that the public should have the choice to walk in or mail in during an election explaining that he would not support an effort for mail ballot only elections. Council Member Woodward stated that Santa Clara County was putting a policy in place for mail ballot elections for smaller precincts. Council Member Arellano stated that the question was the legality of the effort explaining that it was disenfranchising members of those smaller communities. Motion on Item VI.A. Motion was made by Council Member Woodward to continue the item to the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried (Council Member Dillon absent). B. Introduction of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Approving Application Z 05-12 to Change the Zoning Designation from R1 (Single Family Residential) to R2-PUD (Medium Density Residential - Planned Unit Development) on Approximately 1.97 Acres Located at 9060 and 9070 Kern Avenue, North of Mantelli Drive, APN 790-18-015 and 017 The Staff report was presented by Planner II Dur~in. Council Member Woodward stated that for the record he had voted no at the previous meeting. Motion on Item VI.B. Motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Arellano and carried (Council Members Gartman and Woodward voting no, Council Member Dillon absent) to Read Ordinance by Title Only and Waive 8850 Further Reading of the Ordinance. City Clerk Freels read the ordinance by title. Second Motion on Item VI.B. Motion was made by Council Member Arellano, seconded by Council Member Bracco and carried (Council Members Gartman and Woodward voting no, Council Member Dillon absent) to Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Approving Application Z05-12 to Change the Zoning Designation from R1 (Single Family Residential) to R2-PUD (Medium Density Residential - Planned Unit Development) on Approximately 1.97 Acres Located at 9060 and 9070 Kern Avenue, North of Mantelli Drive, APN 790-18-015 and 017 VII. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS B. Consideration of a Request for a One (1) Year Tentative Map Extension for a Property Located at 9435 Monterey Road, APN 790-07-001, Salvatore Oliveri, applicant,TM 04-13 Planner II Durkin presented the Staff report. Council Member Gartman asked what the previous extension had been granted for. Planner II Durkin stated that the applicant had participated in the ROO process but had not received the number of allocations he needed. Council Member Gartman asked how much longer was needed to complete the sale. Salvatore Oliveri stated that he had a potential purchaser, but he did not have an exact date that the purchase would be made. Council Member Gartman shared his concerns with the extension explaining that only one other extension could be made and the timing would run out. Mr. Oliveri stated that he had explained the issue with the potential purchaser and they intended to come in and talk with staff. Motion on Item VII.B. Motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried (Council Member Dillon absent) to direct Staff to prepare a Resolution approving TM 04-13 1-year extension. Council Member Woodward recused himself explaining that he owned real property within the area of items VII.C VII.D and VII.E. He then left the Council Chambers. C. Adoption of an Emergency Ordinance of the City of Gilroy Amending the Gilroy City Code Section 7.4.1, Modifying the Boundaries of the Zero Fee Area (As Defined by Exhibit "A") and Providing that Certain Fees and Costs Charged to Development Projects in the Zero Fee Area are Eliminated until December 31, 2011 The Staff report was presented by Community Development Director Rooney. Motion on Item vlI.e. Motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried (Council Member Dillon and Woodward absent) to read the Ordinance by title only and waive further reading of the Ordinance. City Clerk Freels read the Ordinance by title. 8851 Second Motion on Item VII.C. Motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried (Council Member Dillon and Woodward absent) to Adopt an Emergency Ordinance of the City of Gilroy Amending the Gilroy City Code Section 7.4.1, Modifying the Boundaries of the Zero Fee Area (As Defined by Exhibit "A") and Providing that Certain Fees and Costs Charged to Development Projects in the Zero Fee Area are Eliminated until December 31, 2011 D. Introduction of an of an Ordinance of the City of Gilroy Amending the Gilroy City Code Section 7.4.1, Modifying the Boundaries of the Zero Fee Area (As Defined by Exhibit "A") and Providing that Certain Fees and Costs Charged to Development Projects in the Zero Fee Area are Eliminated until December 31, 2011 Motion on Item VitO. Motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried (Council Members Dillon and Woodward absent) to read the Ordinance by title only and waive further reading of the Ordinance. City Clerk Freels read the Ordinance by title. Motion on Item VitO. Motion was made by Council Member Tucker, seconded by Council Member and carried (Council Members Dillon and Woodward absent) to Introduce an Ordinance of the City of Gilroy Amending the Gilroy City Code Section 7.4.1, Modifying the Boundaries of the Zero Fee Area (As Defined by Exhibit "A") and Providing that Certain Fees and Costs Charged to Development Projects in the Zero Fee Area are Eliminated until December 31, 2011 E. Consideration of the Request to Proceec.t wijth ~ ~()% Design Cost Estimate for Two Downtown "Shared Trash Enclosures" and to Utilize South Valley Disposal and Recycling Funds for the Estimated Design Costs The Staff report was presented by Environmental Programs Manager Jensema, Community Development Director Rooney and Engineer II Krueger. Council Member Bracco asked what the cost would be for the 20% design. Environmental Programs Director Jensema stated that it was estimated at $15,000. Community Development Director stated that the Engineers estimate was for the conceptual design and was needed to find out what it would cost to build the facilities. She then explained that the conceptual design was done at the same time sharing some of the details of the design. She then spoke on working with the downtown developers for contribution and ultimately turns over the maintenance to the Downtown Association. Council Member Bracco asked what would if the tenants didn't want to use it. Community Development Director Rooney stated that there would be a savings to the users and the outcome of preliminary outreach was very positive. Council Member Bracco asked if there would be a requirement to use the facility. Community Development Director Rooney stated that they were in the preliminary stages of the project. Council Member Bracco asked for the dimensions of the facility. Engineer Krueger stated that they were approximately 20 feet long by 10 feet wide stating that they were designed for a future compacter. 8852 Council Member Arellano spoke on areas for recycling asking if people would be forced to participate in the program explaining that it didn't make sense to build the facility if everyone wasn't required to use it. Environmental Programs Manager Jensema stated that a shared use would be a savings to the user and the aesthetic improvements were also a plus. Council Member Arellano spoke on the amount of money spent on the design asking how the alleyway cleanup would be able to be accomplished. He then stated that the apartments and condominium users would also need to use the facility. Community Development Director Rooney stated that it was a pilot program and clear answers were difficult to provide at the preliminary stages of the project. She spoke on the partnership plans and funding and operating options. Council Member Arellano asked about recycling trash enclosures in the downtown areas. Environmental Programs Manager Jensema spoke on the recycling trash enclosures in the downtown areas sharing the discussions of the program. Mayor Pinheiro spoke on the current garbage container requirements in the downtown areas explaining that the shared enclosures would need to be required for all users in the area. He then spoke on the regulations for the building of the structure. Council Member Gartman asked how many parking spaces would be used. Engineer Krueger stated that 10 parking spaces would be used in total. Council Member Gartman asked what the cost would be for each station. Engineer II Krueger stated that the costs were all over the place which is why the engineers design was needed. Mayor Pinheiro stated that South Valley Disposal had provided $70,000 for the program. Environmental Programs Manager Jensema stated that the $70,000 was provided for the consultant explaining that it would pay for the design costs. Council Member Gartman asked if the monies were coming out of any other fund. Environmental Programs Manager Jensema stated that they were not. Council Member Arellano spoke on the money and space savings for the developers and the Downtown Association, asking why the people who benefited from the enclosures were not paying for the 20% design. Community Development Director Rooney stated that the momentum needed to be built so the City was trying to partner with the downtown to get something moving. She spoke on the downtown specific plan explaining that the City was offering an inventive to encourage redevelopment. Council Member Tucker spoke in favor of the project sharing the benefits of the City participating in the program and going forward as recommended. Council Member Gartman asked how the tallow would be handled. Environmental Programs Manager Jensema spoke on the tallow bins. Council Member Gartman spoke on the value of tallow asking who would be receiving 8853 the monies from the recycling of the tallow. Mike Brownfield, a business owner in the downtown area, spoke on the location of the trash enclosure explaining that it would take 5 parking spaces from his back door. He explained that he had done quite a bit of work on his building suggesting that it be built in the middle of the parking lot instead of by someone's back door. He stated that a tree would be cut down if it was put next to his building it would be very dirty and would affect the customers entering the businesses. He then spoke on responsibility of the trash compactor and the need for maintenance. He stated that he did believe it would cleanup the alley and it did need to be done, but there were other ways to do it. James Suner spoke in favor of the project and shared the concerns of the Down Town Association stating that they association did not have the funding to maintain or take liability responsibility for the enclosure. He then suggested that the enclosure be placed in the empty lot that the City had just purchased and spoke on the possible funding mechanisms suggesting that funding be from the City's CIB budget and suggested impact fees to fund it. Jose Montez spoke in support of the garbage enclosures and suggested that the garbage compactors be run every other day. He then spoke on the design costs suggesting that the City copy another design that was already in place in another community. He suggested that the business owners utilize the enclosure to ensure the downtown alleyways are maintained. He then asked how the costs would be shared and spoke in support of working with other developers to get the costs down. Mayor Pinheiro asked Community Development Director Rooney to speak on the public-private partnership. Community Development Director Rooney stated that the property would need to be sold to the private party to prevent the City from going through the competitive bid process. Mayor Pinheiro asked if the BMX tract proposal was building on park land. Community Development Director Rooney stated that they were contracting the land as far as she knew. Mayor Pinheiro stated that staff needed to work with legal to provide a report on how public-private partnerships were taking place in other neighboring communities. City Attorney Callon stated that they could provide the information and shared some background on how the partnerships took place and issues with prevailing wage. She stated that she would get the Council information to see how it could be accomplished. Mayor Pinheiro stated that there were possible creative ways to accomplish such a partnership. Community Development Director spoke on another development agreement project. Council Member Gartman suggested a 99 year lease for $1 per year. He then explained that there were more questions than answers that could be provided. He then spoke on the need for answers to the important questions before $15,000 was spent on a design. He spoke on the benefit to the business owners and their ability to build the facilities for much less. He then asked to see much more to answer the questions that had been asked. Council Member Arellano agreed, stating that there were issues with partnerships with the downtown and the location of the facilities explaining that the money spent on a design needed to take place after the concept was completely ironed out. Mayor Pinheiro stated that he disagreed explaining that the discussions did need to take place, but upcoming development was waiting to hear from the City. He explained 8854 that it would be a savings for the downtown developers and he believed the design needed to take place. He spoke on the outreach and positive response, explaining that the City had found the monies to pay for the design and believed the City should move forward with it. Council Member Bracco stated that he felt more information needed to be provided to the Council and then shared his experience in the City of Monterey explaining that the enclosure was poorly taken care of. Mayor Pinheiro stated that if the enclosures were to be put in, they would need to be mandatory for everyone in the downtown and would need to be maintained properly. Motion on Item VitO. Motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Arellano and carried to send the item back to staff. Council Member Gartman asked that staff review the meeting and answer the questions that had been posed by Council and return with those answers. Continued Motion on Item VII.D. The motion carried (Mayor Pinheiro voting no, Council Members Dillon and Woodward absent). VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS City Administrator Haglund spoke on the work on the Library Expansion Project and proposed ballot measure. He spoke on the Lew Edwards Group and request to return with the specifics of the proposal of a measure on June 9th. Council Member Woodward spoke on the need for an analysis of using City funds to push the measure forward. City Administrator Haglund stated that the efforts were to develop what would be turned over to a campaign committee if the City Council decided to place the item on the ballot, explaining that the City could not advocate for the measure. Council Member Woodward stated that there was a line that he wanted to be clear on. City Administrator Haglund explained that there was a line and he too was concerned that the City do the work necessary and then turn the process over. He spoke on the timing of the General Election and high voter turn out opportunities sharing the need for the campaign committees' work on advocacy of the measure. Council Member Arellano spoke on the questions raised previously regarding timing for campaigning for the measure explaining that the discussion had been to let the campaign committee handle it. He stated that the timing issue was of concern and he was concerned with the language of the measure and advocacy. He then asked how it would proceed in a fair manner. City Administrator Haglund stated that such measures were not advanced unless the City Council wanted to see them go forward explaining that after the question was submitted to the voters, the City could not advocate one way or another. He explained that commonly there was a very long effort of outreach with the community to explain the information of the effort. Council Member Gartman stated that the local results from the state wide library bond were very strong explaining that there was a local group that was working on a website and would be working very hard on campaigning for the issue. Council Member Arellano asked if the consultants would be attending for free. City Administrator Haglund explained that they would be attending to give their 8855 presentation and respond to the questions the Council may have. Council Member Gartman spoke on a school board "pass-or-don't-pay" measure arrangement, asking if the Lew Edwards group would be receptive to such an arrangement. City Administrator Haglund stated that it had not been discussed with them. Mayor Pinheiro suggested that the question could be asked at the June 9th meeting. He then suggested that staff return with information on the budgeted costs for the election and consultant services. IX. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS There were no reports. X. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Gartman asked if the library item would be heard before or after the discussion of sidewalks. City Administrator Haglund suggested that the item be agendized as the first issue. Council Member Gartman then thanked everyone for their participation in the Memorial Day Parade and event. XI. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Pinheiro spoke on a request from the City of Los Gatos to support the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008 (H.R. 6049) asking if the Council was receptive to adding the item to the next regular meeting agenda. He then spoke on his debriefing with CalFire at Christmas Hill Park after the summit fire. The Council adjourned into Closed Session at 10:10 p.m. XII. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: Old City Hall, 7400 Monterey Street Agency Negotiators: Anna Jatczak, Christina Turner, Tom Haglund Other party to negotiations: Chips and Salsa, Inc. Under Negotiation: Lease Terms ADJOURN to Open Session. Public Report of any action taken in Closed Session and the vote or abstention of each Councilmember, if required by Government Code Section 54957.1. There were no closed session announcements. XIII. ADJOURNMENT TO MEETING OF JUNE 16, 2008 ( , \ / ! Stlawna Freels,,~ City Clerk