City Council
Mayor Patrick Slayter
Vice Mayor Neysa Hinton
Una Glass
Sarah Glade Gurney
Diana Rich
City Manager
Larry McLaughlin
[email protected]
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk, MMC
Mary Gourley
[email protected]
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
`MINUTES FOR Meeting of March 1, 2022
As Approved by the City Council at their regular meeting of March 15, 2022 The City Council Regular meeting was held via teleconference pursuant to AB 361. Pursuant to AB 361 (2021), Teleconference Restrictions of the Brown Act Have Been Suspended, as Well as the Requirement to Provide a Physical Location for Members of the Public to Participate in the Meeting. The City of Sebastopol City Council meeting was not be physically open to the public and all City Council Members teleconferenced into the meeting via Zoom.
Please note that minutes are not meant to be verbatim minutes and are meant to be the City’s record of Actions Taken (Approved Motion of Agenda Item(s)).
6:00 pm Convene City Council Meeting - Meeting Start Time (ZOOM VIRTUAL FORMAT) CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Slayter called the regular meeting to order at 6:01 pm.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Mayor Patrick Slayter – By video teleconference Vice Mayor Neysa Hinton – By video teleconference
Councilmember Una Glass – By video teleconference
Councilmember Sarah Gurney - By video teleconference
Councilmember Diana Gardner Rich - By video teleconference
Absent: None
Staff: City Manager/City Attorney Larry McLaughlin
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk Mary Gourley
Engineering Consultant Toni Bertolero, GHD
Planning Director Kari Svanstrom
SALUTE TO THE FLAG: Mayor Slayter led the Salute to the Flag.
PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS:
The following was presented:
Proclamation: Proclamation Proclaiming March 2022 as AMERICAN RED CROSS MONTH Natalie Henry, American Red Cross, received the presentation.
Reference Number: 2022-069
Noted:
Public Comment on all items listed on the agenda will be limited to two minutes, per person, per item. The Public Comment Portion of the Agenda will allow for 20 minutes at the beginning of the meeting and public comment not heard during those 20 minutes will continue at the end of the agenda, following the last calendared item and before Reports.
Council welcomes and encourages additional comments via email. Public Comment Emails can be sent to:
[email protected]
COUNCIL PROTOCOLS FOR MEETING:
City staff read the protocols for the meeting.
• This meeting is being conducted utilizing virtual settings for teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of California Executive Orders regarding the COVID 19 pandemic and AB 361. • Live stream and zoom are being utilized for this meeting. In case of technical issues, meetings will be uploaded to the City web site as soon as possible after this meeting. • Members of the public may view and listen to the meeting by use of Zoom and Live Stream as noted on the City’s website and as noted on the agenda.
• Members of the public wishing to speak to the City Council may do so during public comment or may comment on agenda items during the discussion of each item and must be logged into Zoom. Live Stream is a viewing only format.
• Anyone using abusive, vulgar, offensive, threatening, or harassing language, personal attacks of any kind or offensive terms that target specific individuals or groups will be muted and removed from the meeting.
Item Added to Agenda: February 25, 2022 3:00 pm
*Resolution of Support for our Sister City Ukraine and the Whole of Ukraine (Requestor: Mayor Slayter) Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• Before we go to public comment for items that are not on tonight's agenda, we are going to take up the last-minute addition to the agenda which is brought to you by me, which is a resolution of support for our Sister City in Ukraine and I think everybody that is at all connected to anything in the world understands the most terrible thing that's going on in the world right now, and this is an item that, frankly, when we were having our special meeting last week and I saw the news that Ukraine had been invaded, it was quite something.
• This week has been quite something in the news, and particularly in respect to the difficult for our Sister City organizations.
• We have a very close organization with Chyhyryn and Ukraine. • To date it looks like Chyhyryn is not suffering attacks, but it's difficult to know just what is going on there. • So I brought this before the Council. I think it's an important thing for us to take up. • It's Sebastopol doing the things that we do, which is speak out when that is necessary. • Read the proposed resolution.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions. There were none at this time.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Steve Levenberg commented as follows:
• Thank you for allowing me to speak.
• It's difficult to really encapsulate what this means. • One of the things we've heard from our Ukrainian friends is that knowing that we care about them, knowing that we're willing to show we care and do whatever it is we're able to do, even if it's not of great practical value, is extremely important to them.
• It lifts their spirits. It boosts their morale, it gives them a greater sense of strength to carry on through this really difficult time.
• I just want to applaud the Council for taking a step and continuing to encourage supporting Ukraine.
Kyle commented as follows:
• I just want to give my appreciation to both the Mayor and the Council for their statements in this resolution.
• I would also like to call on us as a city, as well as our elected officials to continue truth to power and use your voice on the platform to continue other decision makers to do what we can to help with Ukraine. • Thank you very much.
Rick commented if there is any information that you could pass on in regard to materials being donated, blankets, things like that.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• To the question, at this point the way to help Ukraine the most, as I understand it, is through monetary donations, and I think everybody would understand that there could be some bad actors and hesitation on the part of good, well-intentioned, caring people who feel they would like to donate but are willing they would be taken advantage of.
• Sebastopol World Friends in their special board meeting late last week discussed certain organizations, and that organization has deep ties to Ukraine, and one of the members served in the peace corps in Ukraine and understands the need for donations.
• They also have the energy and the time to spend in that organization to make sure they are legitimate and not in places where people are being taken advantage of. • If you go to the Sebastopol World Friends Website, on the banner page, on the front page, there is a brief statement and a very prominent button that says, click for information about making donations. • That list of organizations has been vetted and they are trustworthy and good organizations to support. • There is a wide range of ways that you can support.
• Pick one that speaks to your heart.
• That is the best answer that I can give to that particular question from the public.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I'd just like to speak out on behalf of Ukraine.
• I'm proud to see our City Council stepping up in this way. • I agree wholeheartedly with the comments made by the public. • Anything we can do, including statements of support, postings on Facebook, flying a blue and yellow flag in front of your house, thinking positive thoughts, anything that we can do that puts us in line with all the others throughout the globe who are standing up and with the people of Ukraine are powerful moments for all of us combined.
• Thank you, Mayor Slayter, for bringing this to us, and I Am so pleased that I live in a town where this action is embraced so wholeheartedly.
• I feel for the people of Ukraine, and we just have to be there for them. • Thank you for bringing this before us.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I wanted to thank you personally for your getting this on the agenda as quickly as you could, and I'm thankful for all the members and world friends who are here in this meeting. • I am sure your hearts are hurting as are mine.
• I think it's important now for our community to remember world friends and know that they're another group that we can support locally here and help them keep alive our connections to our sister city. • Thank you very much.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• In support, I'm just going to go ahead and share this, and I assume it will be okay with world friends. • I know that one of the members of world friends has organized the printing of some 11x17 Ukrainian flags with a statement of support.
• I think that that's something that will be available. • I'm not sure what the distribution is or even what the numbers of those are. • Hopefully I'm not speaking out of turn. But those will be available for people, and go on the Internet and download one and print it and hang it in your front window. • The other member of the public who spoke to using our voice and taking it up the chain of command or up the food chain, and that is happening already.
• I suppose laterally it's happening with other cities in the County of Sonoma where there is a unique situation where we have three Sonoma County cities with Ukrainian sisters, and coincidentally each one of those three cities are in a different district.
• The Board of Supervisors is also going to be taking a look at an action. Their machine is a little bit slower to get moving, but I've been in touch with the Fifth District Supervisor, and that will be most likely coming to their agenda next week, as far as I know.
• I know at least three or four other cities in the county that are also hopefully taking action this week. • I know Santa Rosa shoehorned it on their agenda at the very last minute, and I'm not sure about the City of Sonoma and what they did. Those are the other two city sisters in Ukraine. • My final thoughts on this are that every single, ordinary, everyday thing I've done over the last several days, are there any City Councils meeting in Ukraine right now? I doubt it. Going to the grocery store? Ukrainians are going to the grocery store but it's not like going to the grocery store here. • We're not trying to sleep in bomb shelters. We're not huddled in subway tunnels. • We just need to be thankful for what we have and help those who don't have what we have.
MOTION:
Mayor Slayter moved and Councilmember Gurney seconded the motion to approve Resolution of Support for our Sister City Ukraine and the Whole of Ukraine.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Resolution of Support for our Sister City Ukraine and the Whole of Ukraine Minute Order Number: 2022-070
Resolution Number: 6406-2022
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA :
Speakers are allowed to speak for a maximum of three minutes so that all speakers have an opportunity to address the City Council.
Power point or visual presentations for public comment shall not be permitted unless approved by the Agenda Review Committee two weeks prior to the requested meeting date.
Speakers may not "yield" a portion of their allotted time to others.
The Mayor has the authority to limit or extend the time allowed for speakers dependent on the number of speakers in attendance.
The Mayor can poll the members of the public for an indication of the number of people wishing to speak, then call on individuals to speak.
It is the goal of the Council to conclude the public comments portion of the agenda within 20 minutes. If the public comment period exceeds twenty minutes, the presiding officer, typically the Mayor, reserves the right to reduce the time per speaker or carry over public comments to after all business items are completed.
The City Clerk will monitor the time for public comments and inform the speakers when the time limitation has been reached.
The Mayor could survey the members of the public, as appropriate, to move agenda items up or back to address the members of the public items of concern.
Public participation is encouraged on all public agenda items.
Council and staff will treat participants and each other with courtesy. Derogatory or sarcastic comments are inappropriate.
The public will likewise be encouraged by the Mayor to maintain meeting decorum.
In Council meetings when citizens are agitated, the Mayor may call a short recess to calm the situation.
If a member of the public is unable to attend the Council meeting, written communications may be sent to the City Clerk by e-mail or by regular mail.
Communications received after distribution of the agenda packet will be made available to the Council at/or as soon after the meeting.
The following public comment was received:
Kyle Falbo commented as follows:
• Some time ago, I believe sometime last year, the City of Sebastopol offered up small business loans in the tune of $5,000 to $10,000 which I think came out to a total of $120,000. • Since then I don't believe we've been updated on the balance of those loans, the interest paid by the City and what the expected date of those loans being closed out will be.
Angela commented as follows:
• We citizens own the water system of Sebastopol.
• It's a public right by law, and we have 3000 functioning algorithm water meters on our properties. • It is imperative that the City needs to be involved in any changes such as our water meters. • Sadly, this is not the case. The Council has voted to dump our current analog water meters and replace them with EMF-emitting ones by Badger.
• In the process the Council has disregarded its very own 2019 telecommunications ordinance 1123, which would have assured the public was properly notified about the proposed installation. • It has also failed to follow the 2015 General Plan language and intent regarding EMF in our community which states minimum exposure to electric fields.
• We citizens are left holding the bag to increase the pollution and health challenges to all the human beings in our community.
• Due to the production of 3,000 smart water meters, 3,000 lithium ion batteries with future meter replacements every time the batteries fail.
• $2.2 million future price and indebtedness of litigations suing Badger Meters in which the utility claims a breach of contract occurred relating to the professional services • In the end we citizens deserve better.
• There's got to be a way.
Martha commented as follows:
• I really appreciate the notion that Mayor Slayter was talking about appreciating everything we have right now, and that is so very true.
• In the spirit of cooperation, I have some things to say about the water meters to the Council. • Is it that you don't believe me when I tell you I would no longer be able to walk my dog, walk with my family or walk to stores.
• Instead I'll have to drive out of town where there are no wireless water meters to step over along the way.
• Wireless devices bring pain to the top of my skull, to my ears, to my temple, to my chest. • It brings pressure to my chest along with other symptoms whereas I feel none of these things with phones turned off in airplane mode and away from me.
• I feel pain and discomfort along with other systems exposed to Bluetooth streaming and towers. • On some days it is needed to take a nice leisurely dog with my dog. • Sometimes I feel the pain I have previously felt.
• This pain might be mild or excruciating.
• In the spirit of cooperation, I have some suggestions. • One suggestion is why don't we offer all city water customers the option to opt out with no fees for the first year?
• We wouldn't need to get a loan.
• What an interesting experiment.
• I believe you might have 50% of the citizens acceptable of the new meters and you might have 50% refusing the new meters
• The opt out is pointless, but I would like a publicized schedule if you were to put them in. • If I were to know the meter would pulse at 11:00 A.M., 5:00 P.M. and 2:00 A.M. • Otherwise I feel very afraid of the random disempowerment of not knowing what I'll have these effects.
Katie commented as follows:
• Sebastopol Senior Center
• You're more than welcome to come down to the senior center and see what it's all about. • If it's a nice day, you can come to the backyard patio and enjoy lunch with friends. • We also have a new practice starting this spring.
• For those of you who like art, we've got some relaxation coloring. • We're going on a couple day trips.
• Next week we're going whale watching, and I think at the end of the month we're going to the Castro to walk around, go to the LGBTQ museum and having lunch.
• Maybe you're not comfortable driving to the city anymore, finding parking, dealing with that headache. • You can come to the senior center, we can take care of that for you. • Last thing, if you all are not familiar with the legacy thrift store, you have to go check it out, especially if you like crafting or art in any way.
• If you haven't been down there, it's such a gem.
• It's great for kids or if you're a teacher, it's a great place to go and buy some consignment art products.
Laura commented as follows:
• First of all, thank you for the proclamation for our sister city in the Ukraine. • I think it's very important that we all gather and support as much as we can. • It's kind of a humbling experience, from what I'm hearing and seeing. • On a brighter note, I really wanted to take this opportunity to remind everybody about our 76th apple blossom festival coming up April 23rd and 24th.
• We still need volunteers.
• We have a sign-up sheet on our Website.
• I would encourage you to possibly donate a little bit of time that weekend • The other thing that I wanted to say is I had a wonderful experience this past Saturday. • I had never done Sebastopol walks.
• Councilmember Gurney did a phenomenal job.
• The spots where we stopped were fun, and I was so impressed, there were so many people. • In my opinion, it was a great turnout.
• I'm looking forward to the next ones coming up, and I really appreciate all the work that everyone is doing in our community.
Linda commented as follows:
• I wrote a letter and sent it for public comment and I would like to read excerpts of it regarding EMF and the water meters in Sebastopol.
• I am a 42-year resident of Sebastopol.
• I realize the crisis we face on human influence, the environment and climate. • Society reveals a double-edged sword, protecting and destroying our world. • Albert Einstein said it has become appallingly obvious that we will suffer as humanity. • As a person in my 70s, I lived in the era before there were warnings of secondhand smoke. • I lived in an era where kids rode in enclosed cars and under great risk for COPD, allergies and cancer. • They repeatedly left the regulators in their studies saying that smoking did not harm people. • It reminds me of the tobacco industry of that era.
• They are suppressing the scientific research that confirmed the danger to humans and animals. • We have complex challenges that require nuanced and skillful solutions. • Water usage is indeed an increasingly critical issue at a time of greater water scarcity. • It is self-defeating to charge ahead with a solution that creates greater problems with our city's health and well-being.
• We need to safeguard environmental issues as well as health awareness and safety. • To circumvent that process is not in the city's best interest or the citizens. • I just encourage us to broaden our passion for environmental concerns into compassion for the people who will be very affected by these water meters.
Linda commented as follows:
• I want to thank Linda and Laura for speaking up and continuing to speak up on this topic which needs to be discussed.
• We need a better remedy.
• It saddens me that our Mayor and City Council seem to care more about the assaults the Ukrainians are under than the assaults they are voicing on themselves, criminal assault by radiation from the water meters which, as you heard, the Badger Meters are being sued for good reason, because it's fraught with fraud.
• If you even look at their data sheets and their warranty that there is no warranty and they are reserving the right to change the product specifications and system without notice. • That's the exact wording in the product data sheets that you should have looked at before making these decisions.
• I want to read part of a brilliant letter written by Lee Napkis, and I guess sort of neighbor written a couple weeks ago. He writes, you have got to be kidding. You have gone from an entirely false claim that we could get free cellular water meters to a new proposal to extort thieves from EMF sensitive individuals. • The proposal to charge lockout fees of $59.75 a month to avoid potentially harmful and wireless transmissions in front of our homes is preposterous.
• The City Council needs to recognize the harm and danger of radiation and reduce it rather than continue the assault.
• Regardless, our citizens fraudulently are getting into contractual agreements with bogus and fraudulent enemies
Alan commented as follows:
• I know for a fact that the City Council has seen dozens of letters. • Included in those letters are dozens more questions.
• I really want to see the City of Sebastopol answer all the questions that were asked you from the public comments, from the citizens of Sebastopol.
• You have a duty.
• You owe us the answers to your questions.
Mayor Slayter responded to public comment as follows:
• A couple questions that came up during public comment, request for a report on the small business loans during the part of the pandemic, I suppose.
• I will go out not very far on a limb and say that I doubt staff is able to make that report tonight and that we will put that on our to-do list and get that information to both the Council and the community as soon as we can.
• There was a suggestion to publicize schedules regarding the water meter updates, and I know that the first notification went out, it was a couple weeks ago, for water meter box cleaning, and that came from public works.
• I'm sure the Public Works Superintendent was already going to do this but will suggest staff send out that kind of blast of information so our public Is aware of the schedule and how that's going to roll out. • I've had a couple questions come to me about are entire blocks going to be shut off for half a day while all the meters are swiped out, and I just don't know.
• I think that would be good information for us to have.
STATEMENTS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Conflicts of interest may arise in situations where a public official deliberating towards a decision, has an actual or potential financial interest in the matter before the Council. In accordance with state law, an actual conflict of interest is one that would be to the private financial benefit of a public official, a relative or a business with which the Councilmember is associated. A potential conflict of interest is one that could be to the private financial benefit of a Councilmember, a relative or a business with which the Councilmember is associated. A Councilmember must publicly announce potential and actual conflicts of interest, and, in the case of actual conflict of interest, must refrain from participating in debate on the issue or from voting on the issue and must remove themselves from the dais. There were no stated conflicts of interest for this meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR: The consent agenda consists of items that are routine in nature and do not require additional discussion by the City Council or have been reviewed by the City Council previously. These items may be approved by one motion without discussion unless a member of the City Council requests that the item be taken off the consent calendar.
The Mayor will read the consent calendar items; ask if a Councilmember wishes to remove one or more items from the consent calendar; and then open public comment to the members of the public in attendance. At this time, a member of the public may speak for up to three minutes on the entire consent calendar and request at that time that an agenda item or items be removed for discussion.
If an item or items are removed from the consent calendar, the item shall be placed at the end of the regular agenda items unless otherwise determined by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tern.
Councilmembers may comment on Consent Calendar items or ask for minor clarifications without the need for pulling the item for separate consideration. Items requiring deliberation should be pulled for separate consideration and shall be placed at the end of the regular agenda items unless otherwise determined by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem.
Mayor Slayter read the consent calendar.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment on the consent calendar. There was no public comment on consent calendar items.
Mayor Slayter asked if any Councilmember wanted to remove a consent calendar item. There was no request to remove any item from the consent calendar.
Mayor Slayter called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Glass moved and Councilmember Gurney seconded the motion to approve Consent Calendar Item(s) Number(s) 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
1. Approval of Resolution Authorizing Continued Use of Teleconference Meetings Based on Circumstances of the COVID-19 state of emergency and that the following circumstances exist:
a. The state of emergency as a result of COVID-19 continues to directly impact the ability of the members of City Council and the members of the City’s subordinate Committee’s, Commission’s, and Boards to meet safely in person; and
b. The State of California and the City of Sebastopol continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
(Responsible Department: City Administration)
Resolution needs to be submitted to Council every 30 days.
Continuation of Virtual Meetings: First Approved: September 21, 2021 Resolutions Approved Every 30 Days: a. October 19, 2021 b. November 16, 2021
c. December 7, 2021
d. January 4, 2022
e. February 1, 2022
f. March 1, 2022
City Council Action: Approved Resolution Authorizing Continued Use of Teleconference Meetings Based on Circumstances of the
COVID-19 state of emergency and that the following circumstances exist:
a. The state of emergency as a result of COVID-19 continues to directly impact the ability of the members of City Council and the members of the City’s subordinate Committee’s, Commission’s, and Boards to meet safely in person; and
b. The State of California and the City of Sebastopol continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
(Responsible Department: City Administration)
Resolution needs to be submitted to Council every 30 days.
Continuation of Virtual Meetings: First Approved: September 21, 2021 Resolutions Approved Every 30 Days:
a. October 19, 2021
b. November 16, 2021
c. December 7, 2021
d. January 4, 2022
e. February 1, 2022
f. March 1, 2022
Minute Order Number: 2022-071
Resolution Number: 6407-2022
2. Approval of Waiver of Building Permit and Encroachment Permit Fees for Sebastopol Area Senior Center for Kitchen Remodel (Responsible Department: Building/Public Works/City Administration) City Council Action: Approved Waiver of Building Permit and Encroachment Permit Fees for Sebastopol Area Senior Center for Kitchen Remodel
Minute Order Number: 2022-072
3. Approval Extension of Emergency Proclamation of Local Emergency (COVID-19) issued by the Director of Emergency Services (Fire Chief)
Resolution Needs to be Submitted to Council Every 60 Days a. First Proclaimed: March 17, 2020
b. First Extension May 5, 2020
c. Second Extension July 7, 2020
d. Third Extension September 1, 2020
e. Fourth Extension October 20, 2020
f. Fifth Extension December 15, 2020
g. Sixth Extension February 2, 2021
h. Seventh Extension March 16, 2021
i. Eighth Extension May 4, 2021
j. Ninth Extension June 15, 2021
k. Tenth Extension August 3, 2021
l. Eleventh Extension September 21, 2021
m. Twelfth Extension November 16, 2021
n. Thirteenth Extension January 4, 2022
City Council Action: Approved Extension of Emergency Proclamation of Local Emergency (COVID-19) issued by the Director of Emergency Services
Minute Order Number: 2022-073
Resolution Number: 6408-2022
4. Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Bid the First Street Water Main Replacement Project No. 0818-20.09 (Responsible Department: City Engineer)
City Council Action: Approved Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Bid the First Street Water Main Replacement Project No. 0818-20.09
Minute Order Number: 2022-074
5. Approval of Resolution of the City Council of the City of Sebastopol Authorizing Emergency Repair For Ives Pool Heater Repair (Responsible department: Public Works)
City Council Action: Approved Resolution of the City Council of the City of Sebastopol Authorizing Emergency Repair For Ives Pool Heater Repair
Minute Order Number: 2022-075
Resolution Number: 6409-2022
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/PRESENTATIONS: (Please Note: Although informational/presentations items are routinely informational in nature, some informational items may contain request for actions such as support, direction to staff, follow up, or receipt of item based on the presentation/information provided.)
6. Informational Item – Presentation by Zero Waste Committee on Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy (Responsible Department: Administrative Services/GHD)
Michael Siminitus made a presentation to the City Council.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• We've been looking at this for several months and we're a little delayed bringing this to the Council. • This is one of the actions required by SB-1383.
• When Toni Bertolero does her next agenda item, you'll see on the chart that there are a number of actions required by SB-1383 and this is one of them.
• I just wanted to mention to the Council that the City has had an environmentally preferable purchasing policy for some time.
• It just is in a very abbreviated form.
• What our present policy says in two or three pages, this policy goes into elaborate detail and really helps fulfill the objectives of SB-1383.
• So the committee feels this is one of the better things we can do to update our existing policy. • That's why you received the presentation tonight and that's why you'll see it come back on the next agenda for adoption.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Linda commented as follows:
• The speaker would be appalled as should the City Council if you do the least amount of research on Badger Meters rather than rely on our superintendent who has been scripted by the financial mover who has been controlling the narrative on this whole thing. • The cellular water meters are plastic. They fail right out of the box. • They were chosen over the more durable metal meters that last up to 40 years. • The current metal meter like the electric analog's mechanical meters, they last to 40 years. • I got that from the assistant superintendent, and then right out of the box. • This just flies in the face of what you're trying to do. • The City right now is implementing this policy that is the antithesis of everything we want. • They have betrayed our trust by following this route.
Sandi commented as follows:
• I appreciate the effort that is being made on behalf of Zero Waste. • I'm aware that the City of Sebastopol already had improved a Zero Waste in Sonoma policy. • That talked about environmental impacts, toxins, pollution as well as to purchase durable and long-lasting products.
• It seems that the city didn't care too much about complying with that purchase policy because 3,000 smart water meters this Council automatically approved and approved the purchasing for. • They use sound waves, they use non-replaceable batteries. The batteries are not replaceable. • The entire unit will have to be replaced if and when the battery fails. They are a toxin and should be considered pollution.
• These meters are plastic, and if it fails, the whole unit has to be replaced. • I'm not sure where the Zero Waste Committee was on this purchase, maybe they weren't consulted, but frankly I'm feeling a little doubtful that if you upgraded this purchasing policy, it would make any difference because it seems that it didn't matter in the past, so why would it matter if you changed it? City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I think that this is a good thing for us to be formalizing. • I think a lot of these procedures have been informal in a lot of ways, so formalizing it and also being in compliance with SB-1383 is also important.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I agree with you Mayor.
• I just wanted to add a thank you to Michael for coming this evening and presenting. • I'm very grateful to have you on Zero Waste.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• I also wanted to thank Michael for all the work he's done on this and for giving us this presentation so we understand all of this really detailed stuff.
• As I'm listening to him, the thing that I find a little bit discouraging, actually, is why are we able to purchase some of these toxic products?
• It's kind of unbelievable to me after I walked to school on the first Earth Day in 69 orn70 and in hopes that we would not be able to buy such harmful products.
• The fact that our City has to create a policy like this to make a distinction between buying something toxic versus what isn't just seems kind of insane.
• It is disheartening that you can buy products that are harmful in the way that some of these are.
Mr. Siminitus commented as follows:
• I totally agree.
• I'm happy to be on the committee, but the Europeans embraced something called the precautionary principle where the burden of proving things safe is on the producer and that's apparently a bridge too far here.
• I was once laughed out of it.
• Maybe we get in that direction and put things on the producer so we don't have to come back later and say, well, this product is doing us all this harm, then we have to prove it and we go after them.
City Council Action: None Taken. Informational Item Only.
Reference Order Number: 2022-076
PUBLIC HEARING(s):
7. Public Hearing - Introduction, first reading and consideration of an Ordinance for Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction (SB 1383 regulations - Responsible Department: City Manager/GHD) GHD Consultant Toni Bertolero presented the agenda item recommending the City Council approve Introduction, first reading and consideration of an Ordinance for Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction (SB 1383) regulations.
Mayor Slayter asked for questions of presenter.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• On page 2 of the staff report. One, two, three, four, fifth item under the discussion investigation of complaints of non-compliance by members of the public or other entities. • What does that look like? Who is responsible for those investigations? • Is it City staff? Is it consultants? Is it our waste dollar? Toni Bertolero commented as follows:
• With respect to the question of who was involved in that, it actually first starts with Zero Waste Sonoma because we have a memorandum of understanding to help us with this process, and then they are kind of the first step.
• If they need additional support from the City, because as with this ordinance, it's ultimately the City's responsibility to do the actual enforcement and penalties, so what would happen is if there are some complaints or some violations, then what would happen is if Zero Waste Sonoma is not able to get any kind of resolution on that, then they would pass it on to the City, and the City staff would be responsible. • It's actually under the City Manager's purview.
• There would be a notice of violation and there would be an appeal process before any penalties are imposed.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• This is in the resolution, which is on page 4 of 25, and it's the third paragraph, the requirements for businesses over time and the law contains a 2020 trigger that further increases effective businesses by imposing a maximum threshold of 2 cubic yards of solid waste generated by recovering businesses. • What's the period on that?
• It's page 4 of 25 of the item.
• It's the third "whereas" clause, solid waste generated by covered businesses. • I'm curious, what's the period on that?
• Is it a year, is it a month, is it a week?
Mr. Siminitus commented I believe it's a week.
Ms. Thompson, Recology, commented as follows:
• It's 2 cubic yards a week.
• If they have 2 cubic yards of solid waste or more a week, so it is weekly. • For people who don't understand how much 2 cubic yards is, a standard debris box - probably a 3 or 4 cubic yard and is it roughly half of one of those.
• Stated an example of one is next to Justin Farrell's in the alleyway, they roll a 2-yarder out every week.
Mayor Slayter commented Another one people might see all the time, if they walk along the senior center, there is the one at the top there of the knoll that I think is the businesses down on the knoll City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• I just wanted to say that it's referenced a couple places in the ordinance, including the section under waivers for generators that makes it clear you have 2 cubic yards a week or certifies in some way that you have a reason for deposit.
• There is a later section of the ordinance which provides the actual law.
Mayor Slayter opened the public hearing.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• Once again, do you see the irony in this?
• You're enacting policies that are cooking us alive, upping the heat from wireless radiation, you're on the other hand, ostensibly trying to do Zero Waste and at the same time, it is just nuts for a lack of any better description.
• Wwe need to up our game so that City Council will hear us. • We need to go back and put the signs back in front yards. • We need to possibly demonstrate out in front of the Public Works in order to get some publicity by the paper, to raise the awareness of the public in general about our message. • Maybe the City Council will hear us and backtrack on this fraudulent, ill-advised, and just unwise policy that they just seem hell-bent on asking to the detriment of the City and the population. • Since I'm the one with the public records act, you are invited to come over anytime, after 1:00, come over and take a look.
• You're welcome to go through it, it's really interesting reading about how we got to where we are with this $2.2 million-plus scam.
• Thank you for all of you for speaking up and being on this, we need to continue until the City Council hears us.
Hearing no further comments, Mayor Slayter closed the public hearing.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I'd just like to reinforce how important this ordinance is. • It's really consistent with our hearts and our goals here in Sebastopol. • It's moving forward, initiatives that are consistent with all of our environmental goals. • It's wonderful to see it coming before the City Council at this point. • I just want to make sure everyone understands what an important provision it is in terms of getting organics out of landfill and into compost, And recovering recoverable food that we can then get into the hands of human beings that can eat it.
• I completely support this ordinance, and to the extent that it's time for emotion, I would move to have it approved.
Councilmember Glass commented I'm in complete agreement this is really needed and I want to second it.
Councilmember Gurney commented to the maker of the motion, I believe there was that one clerical correction that the mayor pointed out.
Mayor Slayter commented it was clarified by the City Manager that it is in the text of the ordinance.
MOTION:
Councilmember Rich moved and Councilmember Glass seconded the motion to approve for first reading and introduction of Ordinance for Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction (SB 1383) regulations.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Introduction, first reading and consideration of an Ordinance for Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction (SB 1383) regulations.
Minute Order Number: 2022-077
Proposed Ordinance Number: 1137
10. Consideration of Amendment to City Council / City Staff Committee Assignments: Creation of City Wide Staffing Assessment Study Ad Hoc Committee (Requestor: Agenda Review Committee) City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Sebastopol City Council Consider Creation of City Wide Staffing Assessment City Council Ad Hoc Committee.
Mayor Slayter asked for questions of presenter.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• A question about timing. Given all of the tasks that our City Manager has described for this ad hoc committee, recognizing this is an ad hoc committee, short-term, City Manager mentioned the fall. • If he could provide us with some suggestion on the sunset, the time horizon for this particular ad hoc committee?
• Sounds like maybe it's the end of October.
• I'd like some, if we could, some additional suggestions from our City Manager on that question.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented my suggestion was going to be around October 1st but at least by early fall.
Mayor Slayter opened public comment. There was none.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I think it's clear what the ask is here.
• I will just see if anybody is interested in participating in this ad hoc. • We have the Vice Mayor volunteering for the position
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I'll just make it clear, at this time, I am not interesting in participating in this ad hoc committee. • Although I see it as really worthwhile, and I'm pleased that staff has brought forward this suggestion. • I'm also feeling pretty swamped at the moment.
• I would prefer to not be volunteered by any of my colleagues.
Councilmember Glass commented I feel likewise that I am also swamped.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I'm not volunteering, either.
• We're kind of in trouble here, because the assignments are and the hours are piling up.
Mayor Slayter commented I am not able to take this duty on and I'm overcommitted at this point already.
Councilmember Rich commented we have Vice Mayor Hinton and myself on the budget committee, if the Vice Mayor and I are also on the ad hoc staffing assessment committee, does that feel appropriate or are there any legal issues with respect to that.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• I thought it was useful, for example, to have one member of the budget committee also on the staffing assessment committee.
• I would welcome the vice mayor being part of that, which she's already indicated she would like to be. • It might have been somewhat preferable to have a second Councilmember who is not on the budget committee just to distinguish between the two, because as I said, they will both be looking at some staffing issues.
• There's no legal reason why it can't be the same two individuals.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I do think this very important issue, it would be quite beneficial to have an additional City Councilperson involved in the ad hoc committee.
• I certainly see the merits of the two of us who are on the budget committee also being on the ad hoc staffing assessment.
• I will toss my name into the ring here.
• But I would be very pleased if one of the other Councilmembers stepped up. • I think it would benefit the process to have another Councilmember involved. • I will make myself available if that's the outcome that we have here tonight.
The Council asked if staff could provide an expectation of the number of meetings and what the workload is on this one.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• In answer to your question, it would be helpful if we had seen the draft staffing assessment. • Then probably in a relatively short time, I think, staff would be able to better estimate the time issues and the timeline for this.
• We're operating in the dark because we haven't seen any draft yet at all. • I did think that if the Council did appoint Councilmember Rich to the staffing committee, it would definitely facilitate budget discussion arising out of that. • As we segue from the budget committee to putting into effect the recommendations from the staffing committee.
• I could see some actual benefit from having the same two individuals when it comes time to translate this into budget items.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I thought there might be an economy of effort if the same two were doing assignments. • I understood the concern might be for an overriding workload. • If Councilmember Rich would be willing to do that, I think the economy of it is important in terms of our hours and our Council workload.
• I'm just wondering if it's difficult to find two people tonight, it doesn't seem that way, the staff is going to get a chance to look at this in a few days. We could bring this back.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I was thinking the same thing, when we learned that the draft isn't available yet. • If it made sense for us to carry this over to our next meeting, it's not a long agenda item. • I think we can move through it rapidly then.
• I'm already going to warn you, that is a monster of a meeting. • It may be the best tack so that we get an ad hoc that the full Council thinks is the best Constitution.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I would be fine to carry it over.
• I would ask that tonight I be appointed to it.
• If there's not another volunteer, we can carry it over for the second volunteer in two weeks.
MOTION:
Mayor Slayter moved and Councilmember Glass seconded the motion to Create a City Wide Staffing Assessment City Council Ad Hoc Committee and appointed Vice Mayor Hinton to the Committee and asked that the item be returned to the Council once the Staffing Assessment Study has been received.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Creation of a City Wide Staffing Assessment City Council Ad Hoc Committee.
Minute Order Number: 2022-080
Mayor Slayter called for a break at 7:53 pm and reconvened the meeting at 8:03 pm
8. Public Hearing - 7950 BODEGA AVENUE “Huntley Square Townhomes” - Public Hearing to consider: a Zoning Amendment to Modify the Zoning from Multifamily Residential (R7) to a Planned Community (PC), Conditional Use Permit to develop in a PC district, Tentative Map, and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act /CEQA) for a 10-Unit Townhome Project known as “Huntley Square” (Responsible Department: Planning) (this item was continued from the City Council Meeting of January 18, 2022)
Planning Director Svanstrom introduced Kelly Hickler.
Kelly Hickler presented the agenda item recommending the City Council consider: a Zoning Amendment to Modify the Zoning from Multifamily Residential (R7) to a Planned Community (PC), Conditional Use Permit to develop in a PC district, Tentative Map, and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act /CEQA) for a 10-Unit Townhome Project known as “Huntley Square”
Mayor Slayter asked for questions of Council at this time.
Councilmember Gurney commented if we approve the tentative map, what is left for the tree board to decide about the trees if the mapping itself would compel the removal of a tree? Director Svanstrom commented as follows:
• The map itself is the division of the lots.
• The designs of the structures, how much they encroach on various trees, and there are some trees that will need to be removed, because the structures that regardless of where the proposed property lines are, which is what the tentative map is showing, we do the due diligence of looking at those trees when we have a development like this, because there are certainly implications of where the lot lines are and where the structures are proposed, especially for a development like this. • The tree board would still be responsible for approving the final tree removal project, which also entails conditions related to the size and type or number of tree replacements and proposed replacement trees on site.
• Then we look at the tree protection plan that the tree board office helps us with that.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I understand the protection plan part of it, but I think what you're telling me is we could approve a map that's going to take out heritage trees or trees that we don't even see because they're not on the map. • The map that we were just shown of the ten properties, correct? Director Svanstrom commented as follows:
• Yes, there are a few.
• We to make sure that the off-site trees won't be impacted as part of the review. • The structures that are implied with the tentative map would require tree removal, and this has often been the case where a design would get approved.
• There is a possibility that could you adjust the design, say, to save an additional tree after it moves forward.
• The tree board in this case has done a preliminary review. • So they are aware of the potential project.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• They are but we aren't.
• That's my point, and we don't have authority to change the design to present those trees is what I'm hearing you say.
• The other question, I'm just wondering, I couldn't quite hear the width of that easement. • I couldn't tell, was it 23 or 25?
• It looks like a two-way driveway, and I'm wondering what would be the standard width. • If 23 is narrow or bigger than what's usual, I don't know, for like a two-way driveway.
Ms. Hickler commented it's 25.
Director Svanstrom commented That is pretty typical and a lot of traffic goes through the traffic lane on a, on a City street, on a smaller City street.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I'm curious about the nine parking spaces that have been designated on Bodega, I don't think that section of Bodega allows parking between Golden Ridge and pleasant hill. • Is there space for parking safely?
• I just want to confirm, those spots will not be specifically designated for this particular project. • They would be available to the public in general, is that accurate? Director Svanstrom commented these would be public spaces and they're available, obviously, for the development, but also to the general public.
Steve Weinberger commented in the traffic study, we provided some dimensions that would be provided for, to provide room for parking, and that would allow space for the future bike lanes planned for that section of Bodega.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• What do we predict for the traffic on Golden Ridge onto Bodega. • Is there any projection as to what impact there might be? Mr. Weinberger commented as follows:
• The traffic study per CEQA, there was, the primary analysis was safety related in terms of reliable sight distance from turning onto Golden Ridge from Bodega.
• We did identify some restriction to the sight distance, so as you're leaving Golden Ridge look together East, to the left, the vegetation does block the view when you're setback from the crosswalk. • So the traffic, in the traffic study, we recommended that that future bike lane striping, the edge line be provided in advance of the bike lanes, because that gives some guidance to the drivers to be able to pull out and be confident that they're not in the path travel of vehicles but they would be out to the edge of the bike lane.
• When you're in that position you do have adequate sight lines, base the on the current speeds of the street.
• That was the one impact that we did note at that we did make a recommendation.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I do note in the staff report that we're being asked to give direction on whether there should be a prohibition against left turns off of Golden Ridge at this point. • It sounds like by rack tis that's been allowed.
• What's your opinion on the left turn option on this new project? Mr. Weinberger commented as follows:
• From my point of view and knowing traffic there, with the recommendation for the, the guidance for drivers to achieve adequate sight distance, I don't see an issue with the need to prohibit left. • It will just shift that traffic to other streets.
• It can safely make those turns with adequate sight distance, with the added recommendation. • There has been some past discussion about at one time in history there was a sign that suggested no left turns from Bodega onto Golden Ridge.
• From my point of view, that restriction, in essence, doesn't exist anymore. • The sign is no longer there.
• There's some pavement marking that used to say "no left turn", that's no readable. • To the general public, it's not viewable and not functional. • I don't know the history for that going in.
• I do know that it's a normal turn to make.
• It's very unusual and difficult to prohibit traffic from making a left turn like that. • You might see it on a side street for different reasons. • We're not recommending that there be any restrictions to turns there.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• To the Councilmember's point, it is chicken and the egg for the tentative map and the footprints of the buildings.
• This is not the first time the Council has struggled with this weirdness in the process, it's not just our process, I'm thinking of the South Gravenstein Project
Bob Massaro, Beth Farley and Dante Love made a presentation to the City Council.
Mayor Slayter asked for questions of presenter.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I'm really curious, you may not be in the position to share, but what is your predicted price point. • You do talk about making them your goal, your mission of making housing more available, more accessible.
Mr. Love commented I would say it's in the range of half what the median sales price right now is in Sebastopol.
Planning Commission Chair Paul Fritz commented as follows:
• The Commission agreed to move this forward unanimously. • There was a lot of discussion around some of the neighbors' concerns that you've probably received emails as well, and I'm sure you'll hear from some of the neighbors tonight, we discussed things like the height and density and number of units and all those things and ultimately, as was presented in the staff report, they're really asking for very little in terms of sort of variation from the development standards. • The planning commission thought that, I think generally that the project satisfies so many of our General Plan goals and policies and on the balance that the project is a good one they've come forward, they've been at this for years, come at the Planning Commission twice, to the Council previously, generally given thumbs up, yes, we are interested, keep bringing this forward, and at the end of day the Commission recommended approval.
Mayor Slayter opened the public hearing.
Calum Weeks commented as follows:
• We advocate for more, more diverse and more affordable housing. • We face an unprecedented housing crisis.
• This is really evidenced by Sebastopol experiencing substantial decline in the number of households with children.
• Sebastopol has more than five low-wage jobs for every affordable home. • It is a strong step forward in reversing these trends and creating a path for young families or professionals to secure home ownership without breaking the bank.
• Missing middle type housing like the square provides urban forms and residential opportunities in close proximity to jobs, services and transit and is the definition of smart infill housing. • We must, we must address the mismatch between available housing stock and shifting demographics as it relates to the ground swell of support for walkable, cycleable and climate smart communities, in all of these outcomes, it should be noted are stated priorities of their Council. • It is zoned for multi-family developments.
• The candidate has gone above and beyond.
• We therefore strongly encourage approval.
• Thank you so much.
Richard commented as follows:
• I'm one of your volunteer firefighters here in Sebastopol. • I live in this complex that's where this place is going to be built. • I thank Dante and everybody for a great job, and I think it will make the whole area a lot better. • We just have some very basic concerns that we just want to address to you. • One of my questions of those concerns would be have you read some of the letters and documents that we sent you and why haven't you responded to them, that's one question. • The other question I have for to you consider.
• How tall are these buildings?
• Will they be the same height as the buildings that are already exist? • I also wanted to make a note that the left turn onto Golden Ridge Avenue should be there and remain there with no left turn, because it's, in order to stop the backup when you can't make the left turn because of Westbound traffic, it backs up the pleasant hill. • So there was a reason why it was placed there, and I would encourage you to paint the no left turn and put up a new sign, because when I come home I usually drive down to Virginia and make a lift and come up Schwartz.
• Last thing is, why ten units? Why not eight or six. Why cram it in there like that? • One other thing is that the, at the driveway, the driveway is 20 feet. • It's a driveway. It's not an easement. It's not a roadway. It's a driveway. • That's what my concerns are.
Candace commented as follows:
• I'm Candace Nagle, and I live in 122, which is the Western side adjacent to the new property, and as Rich said, the easement, the driveway, is our driveway, which is their easement is 20 feet wide at the base. • It does not support two-lane traffic, this driveway, does not support two-lane traffic, especially if you are two trucks like we will out here doing the roofing job the other day, pretty precarious. • Some of the issues in terms of mitigating safety problems and pollution problems for the people in the surrounding neighborhood, noise abatement, all of that stuff really, I haven't felt that anyone's addressed any of that with us, we haven't heard back from anybody about it. • I think that what looks good on paper doesn't always turn out to be good in practice, and I have concerns that that's the case, that we're overloading that property. • I'm also concerned about the traffic that's going to be generated or the traffic safety that will be an issue on bodega highway and the traffic safety coming in and out of our driveway. • Even 47 trips in and out of the driveway underneath my bedroom window is a hazard, a pollution, an annoyance, a discomfort in my life and for the lives of others here. • I just don't think that you considered all of our needs in this, and I don't know if you ever will. • I'm also worried about the venting and where the venting is going to go. • Kids in playing in the driveway and somebody coming up the driveway fast. • My last thing to say is I'd really like before anybody does anything else for the City Council people to come out and walk the property and look and see the size of what we're talking about here, what we're cramming on there, and that's all.
Mrs. Ressler commented as follows:
• My concern is, I would like to talk about the recycling, the recycle bins, too. • Thinking about, we already have three in here.
• I wonder where are they going to park all the recycling. 30 is a lot. Plus the parking spaces. • I am very concerned about the safety issue in here coming out of my house. • There's only a driveway in there. I cannot see trucks driving in and out when I'm trying to pull out. • There's a lot of concerns.
• I would like to have like six units would be great, but ten units is a lot of traffic for only one driveway. • Because people, I'll be honest, they're probably going to come this way to the main entrance pretty much.
• It's not going to be parking on bodega, bodega's always too busy, and with people and their bikes, too. • I don't see that.
• They put a lot of things on paper, but it's different when you come and see it. • You get a different picture when they are working on the roof of my house, you couldn't get out. • We all have to park outside because of the big trucks. • There's a lot of concerns. A lot of concerns about the safety and the neighbors and walking. • I'm concerned.
• I really agree that it's good to have more housing, that it's important, but not when it's a safety issue too.
That’s the space and the parking. It's so much out there.
Linda commented as follows:
• As usual, I'd just like to bring your attention to the fact that I'm just wondering if they took into consideration the increased radio frequency microwaves and magnetic fields by their unshielded wiring in the walls.
• Of course everybody's got wireless devices, so what are you creating is another cancer cluster in Sebastopol.
• We already have one the City is seriously ignoring with a bunch of dead and increasing number of cancerous people which was built as an environmentally friendly project with non-toxic materials and a park and garden in the middle of it.
• About 12 years later there are a bunch of no longer viable people and sick people there and it is direct result to exposure of wireless radiation.
• The poor planning - there's a whole other system called building biology that takes into effect, takes into consideration, you know, the microwaves and magnetic fields, EMFs produced by electric appliances and electric cars and so on.
• Another scheme by corporate business interests which by the way has produced the traffic problems that we are now dealing with by the past, the planning director who authored traffic studies and other, other things that created this as a playground for business interests and to the death of the interest of the public.
• You need to stop it.
Barrett commented as follows:
• Barrett Shafer, and I'm a real estate attorney, and I represent 7940 Bodega Avenue, and I'm here out of concern for the quality of life of the residents and health and well-being of the local community. • I personally served on a planning commission in the planning commission in San Rafael, for eight years there.
• I've seen a lot of projects and developments.
• For this one, some aspects are certainly fine, but it's generally alarming for a basic and fundamental reason, it packs too much in a small space.
• There's not enough room for entrance and egress.
• I would urge the Councilmembers, if you haven't been out there, you need to go out there and see it. • It's so plain to the naked eye, before you go and vote. • It was very instructive to hear what the neighbors thought and if you look at the outpouring of concern from the neighbors and not just tonight, but over time. • I'll briefly point out just some of these issues and the solution, the main solution is just to make the project smaller.
• The big problem and first problem, main problem is that there is this tiny driveway easement. • It's too small for this project.
• The driveway is simply too small to service all the owners, guests, plumbers, electricians, bicycles, ambulances, fire trucks and others who will be needing to get to and from the development. • The solution is to reduce the size of the project.
• This tiny lane will be dangerous for children and the elderly, diminishing the quality of life for the neighbors.
• Please just reduce the size of the project.
• It would be greatly, greatly appreciated.
Jerry commented as follows:
• I also live in the project next to the project.
• We have valid concerns.
• The developer came out to the site and with the beautiful drawings and renditions, pictures and everything, came out to the site, talked to us and said, and I quite, in hindsight, we should have come to you before we did this.
• Now you've approved a variance.
• Now you're poised to approve the change to the City code to, to compete this project. • For the benefit of the developer.
• Every courtesy has been taken.
• No one has listened to us.
• We have sent letters over and over and over again with our concerns. • No one has come out to meet with us, and why?
• Are we chop liver?
• Why don't you, why are you doing this?
• Simply put, this project has our, the attorney said is too much on too little land. • Your job is to protect us, the people of this town.
• We want a meeting on site, no more zooms
• We want City planners, review board people and City Council to come out. • It's just too much, too little.
• Be real.
• Come out and meet with us and see what we're talking about. • The pictures are great.
• You haven't seen any pictures of our building and what it's going to do to us, okay. • Come out and see it on site.
• Get out of your office and come down.
• Tired of being nice.
Dorothy commented as follows:
• I very much agree with the last speaker.
• There are many people living near whose voices have not really been considered. • I'm living in Burbank heights, a community of elders with 200 apartments there, that's quite a lot of people there.
• We are all suffer from EMF sensitivity, from extra pollution problems. • We've made or contributions to society, and we don't deserve this at the end of our lives to have something that is dangerous to the neighborhood.
• To the quality of life and health, health of people.
• The one thing that we haven't discussed which is a consequence of more people living here, I was part of the evacuation in 2017, I think it was.
• Sometimes that road, whether this building is there or not, is completely choked on a normal day. • You can't get down the street at all for 15 minutes.
• In the case of the evacuation, it took us four hours to get over to the freeway. • Every single street was completely choked.
• This is death if there's a fire there.
• It's very important to lower the number of people living there, to take care of that easement and the dangers.
• It's not something that, design it to the best way you can with the least effort and money. • It's a question of doing the best you can to make it fit in to the people who live nearby.
Michael commented as follows:
• I think we should develop a moratorium until we develop a vehicular traffic plan. • It's an absence of intelligence.
• We all witnessed what happened during our last evacuation. • Traffic lights cycled to flashing red for two hours until batteries died, and intersections became a dark free for all, with vehicles stranded motionless for several hours. • I was on City Council and served on the Sebastopol emergency plan update committee, I worked to develop a comprehensive vehicular evacuation plan to control traffic moving through town. • Components of such a plan, one, control the intersection to favor the flow of vehicles from the most emergency impacted areas.
• Two, to take advantage of the full width of the roadways to enable to smoothest flow of vehicles. • Three, to develop emergency evacuation routes based upon the population of each area. • We have several projects and proposed developments that Will immensely add vehicular traffic into the intersection of our City.
• If we don't name the development of a comprehensive vehicular evacuation plan as the City's most important task, while allowing the more high density developments, we're setting the stage for an emergency disaster.
• I'll submit this in writing, too, if you would make that part of the record, I'd appreciate it. • A member of the audience commented as follows:
• My husband and I purchased property at 122 Golden Ridge, and we live in Oakland and plan on retiring up there.
• We're moving there to get away from density.
• I have a concern for -- and this has probably been mentioned, but not only the thoroughfare and the easement, which I think is far too narrow for two vehicles on it. • I'm concerned if there were a fire or ambulance needed to get up there, I know when there's high density situations, people don't abide by what we consider the rules. • I'm concerned about traffic going in and out.
• There's already somebody who Is a renter in the property that has a pretty loud vehicle, and I'm concerned about noise.
• In addition to, I just think it needs to be smaller.
• There are so many people that are going to be crammed in to a small pace. • I'd like you all to work with us.
• Come out, come out.
• See our place.
• See the narrowness of the easement.
Hearing no further comments, Mayor Slayter closed the public hearing.
Mayor Slayter responded to public comments as follows:
• How tall will the buildings be?
• What will become the finished grade at the interior of the courtyard, it looks like 22 feet to the top of the parapet.
• The highest point on the two-story unit.
• If I have correctly read the numbers 22 feet that's the answer there. • If you look at the building elevations, you will see that the ridge line of the condos next door, they are within, it looks like, less than a foot of the ridge line to the proposed height of this project. • That's the answer to how tall they will be.
• There were a few questions about, and comments about, the left turn lane, or left turn and I was unclear and asked for a summation of left turn off of Golden Ridge, and then also a left turn off of Bodega to Golden ridge. Can you give us another quick synopsis of those two motions? Mr. Weinberger commented as follows:
• The traffic study did address what is typical of projects like this, movements turning left on to bodega. • We evaluated available site distance, to see if there's any restrictions. • As you look left to the East, the vegetation along the property across the street does restrict the view if you are set back behind the crosswalk.
• In order to gain adequate sight distance given the traffic, you need to pull up further on to the crosswalk. • We recommended that the bike lane striping be provided pretty much in advance of the bike lane installation, which will happen at a later date, to provide guidance to the drivers, to give them a mark that they can pull out towards and gain adequate sight distance. • That was our recommendation in the traffic study.
• Turning our attention to the left turn from bodega on To Golden ridge. • As I said, historically, there has been a sign, although the sign no longer is visible or is gone, there's pavement markings that used to say no left turn.
• That's been eradicated, not maintained, and has essentially disappeared to the naked eye. • So we talked about this in public works, nobody can provide any historical knowledge why it was installed. • It's unusual to install a measure like that, it's difficult to enforce, turning left off of a main street. • There was adequate sight distance, if you're wanting to turn left on to Golden Ridge, you have an adequate view of oncoming traffic.
• So given that it's an unusual measure to take, it's not addressed in the traffic study, it came up at a previous hearing, and our recommendation was to maintain left turn access as currently operates on the street.
Director Svanstrom commented we did review that with the chief as well as other staff members.
Mayor Slayter commented going back a couple of years to the Bodega Avenue safety study, and the traffic accounts that were there, and the ultimate insulation of the hawk at Nelson, does that inform any of the traffic analysis for this job?
Mr. Weinberger commented as follows:
• Because of the size of the project, there was not a capacity analysis done or warrants or delay estimates. • It was simply, what is the trip generation of the project to show that it's below the thresholds and really then focus on safety, sight distance, pedestrian access, the need for space to provide that parking, how much room is needed on bodega.
• It was a focused effort and didn't get into some of the capacity issues because frankly, given the amount of traffic and the location, it was not going to cause a need for anything other than what is there today.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• What worst case scenario, it's a beautiful, sunny day, and we have dozens and dozens of non-Sebastopol residents traversing our town on roads that the county has caused to become overloaded. • The concern for backup and the inability to turn left from Golden Ridge on to Bodega. • Do you have any comments on that, other than traffic normally finds a way to filter? Mr. Weinberger commented as follows:
• It depends on what time of day you're traveling, and there are always users new to the area, no matter what day of the week you're looking at.
• Any side street like this, in the bodega corridor, will have some delay in turning left. • Generally, from my observations, there's some inconvenience turning left on to bodega during peak hours.
• It's generally within reason and is not so long where it lasts for several minutes. • The traffic in that area does have other options.
• Going back to Washington, using some of the other side streets. • Traffic generally finds the easiest way to reach its destination. • But it's not out of the ordinary, given the traffic on that corridor. • We focus on looking at safety, collisions, making sure there's adequate sight distance, that's what the traffic study focused on.
Mayor Slayter commented one final question on the traffic, the eventual installation of a traffic signal at Ragle, does that help the potential backup on Golden ridge for people trying to exit into the main thoroughfare? Mr. Weinberger commented as follows:
• I don't think a traffic signal at Ragle will have much effect at this location. • The signal at pleasant hill really dictates, that generally will dictate gaps in traffic there.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• There were a number of questions about the width of the easement, and I looked at the survey drawing and I noted it as 25 feet.
• We have staff confirmation of that.
• Is one or the other from a traffic perspective, for a project of this size • Is this something that you can give us an opinion on? • Is 20 feet adequate for A driveway that leads to ten parking stalls? • Plus the additional load of the existing houses?
Mr. Weinberger commented as follows:
• Generally, given the amount of traffic, and the number of units here, we have been seeing quite a number of apartment type and multifamily units in Sonoma County. • 20 to 25 feet driveway servicing two-way traffic is fairly normal. • Generally you don't see anything larger than 25 feet for sure. • I was surprised to hear 20 feet.
• A two-lane road sometimes can be as narrow as 20 feet, and serve two-way traffic. • I'm not concerned to hear that there's 20 feet of clearance. • Generally fire access, fire vehicles, fire departments generally want about 18 feet clear for their vehicles to enter.
• Normal vehicles can be served with 20 feet in two-way traffic. • Given the volume of traffic here, you know, it's not going to be a continuous flow of two-way traffic. • But two vehicles going the opposite direction may encounter one another, but it should serve well for them.
Director Svanstrom commented as follows:
• The Fire Chief has approved this plan
• If you think about the dimension of the vehicles, about seven feet, the parking space is eight feet. • That little bit of wiggle room, the vehicles, if you have a ten-foot lane, each way, that's actually plenty of room when you're talking about A driveway when people are driving ten miles an hour. • There's plenty of room in that.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I think there may be some confusion about the physical width of the asphalt that is out there. • What is perceived to be the width of the driveway.
• The legal description that a surveyor and land use people would be looking at, the legal easement is 25 feet.
• Whether or not it's entirely used is sort of a different question. • Not to dismiss anybody, I did visit the site, I've been out there a number of times actually. • It's not a far distance for me to go to take a look at. • I can see where there might be some gray area in what one thinks is the actual easement versus the pavement.
• A few questions about the size of the project and the number of units. • Why not eight or six units.
The applicant responded as follows:
• Looking at the staff report, the analysis that Kelly did, we're at the low end of the density spectrum. • If we start taking out units, we would drop below the minimum density required for that zoning. • It is within it.
• I thought we were at 12.8.
• The minimum allowed is 12.1 to 25.
• If we start taking out units, we'll drop below the minimum density. • We wanted to build a project that met the density in the zoning and in the general plan. • That's why we came forward with ten units.
• The minimum density for the site would be five units. • When you actually look at this for footage levels on a development, it's less than 6,000 square feet of structure.
• Which if you were to do 3,000 or 4,000, could easily exceed that.
Director Svanstrom commented as follows:
• I went back and I pulled out my zoning ordinance under the previous general plan. • This was a property where there was a major shift in the zone designations. • Back when this was in force, this is from December 2009. • This was zoned high density residential, 8.1 to 22 units per acre. • That's a much wider range than what we have now.
• So historically, it was sort of looked at as a higher density opportunity.
Mayor Slayter asked about recycle and trash bins.
The applicant commented as follows:
• What we're providing would be three of the large roll-out trash cans, and three of the biggest ones for recycling.
• There would be two compassing cans.
• Only six total would come out.
• The composting probably wouldn't come out every time. • It's not one per unit.
• They're going to share them.
• Location on site: If you looked at the site plan, but it's on the West side, off to the side of the parking lot.
Mayor Slayter responded to the question of venting:
• I assume that is domestic ventilation.
• Things like dryer vents, bathroom vents, range hood vents. • Those are covered by the building code.
• There are a lot of distances that are required.
• Three feet for an operable opening, and a wide variety of things. • But that's all in the building code.
• They have to comply with those requirements.
• It's even more specific when it gets to neighboring properties and you can't run your dryer vent to the fence and poke it through a hole.
• Those things are in the building code, and will be complied with. • Electric appliances.: Concerns about safety with those. • I assume everything will be listed and approved and meets the governmental standards for wiring and appliances.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• The fire department has reviewed this per staff
• There is a fire hydrant being added. In the courtyard area. • They also will have internal fire suppression spring sprinklers, so there's an inherent fire resistance built into the structures.
• Steel studs as well. Highly noncombustible materials.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• What I'm concerned about is the interface on the Easterly border of this project. • How it relates to the buildings of their downhill neighbor, just so you're oriented with me, going East downhill.
• I couldn't see the neighboring buildings downhill very well. • What I'm trying to understand is just get a glimpse of how imposing the Eastern side of this project will be to its downhill neighbor.
• Because that's an easier orientation.
• Is it possible that some of the nine parking spaces on Bodega Avenue be reserved for the occupants of this site?
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• That is generally not done for dedication of spaces for residents unless there is permit parking approved • I think that would be highly unusual to have a private parking in the public right of way Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• There are other neighbors that encountered resident parking only, Ragle road. • I'm wondering if it would help alleviate some of the neighbors' concerns about potential overuse of the driveway.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• I believe that, as a public road, that absent some kind of a permit program, we really can't restrict those parking places to residents only.
• There are a couple of spots, one spot, I guess, in the City where we have residential parking by permit. • That's a special circumstance for that one neighborhood. • Generally speaking, the public streets are for all of the public's use.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I'm hearing you say, we can do it if we want to, but we can do it with a permit program, and it's unusual. • Discussed building heights shown on elevations
• What I'm seeing is there's not that much difference in the building heights.
Director Svanstrom commented as follows:
• In the neighboring part, in the condos that are on the corner, that are already constructed, you need to remember that what we're seeing there are what's called a Gable end roof, where it slopes up. • The overall height is the ridge line.
Councilmember Gurney commented in this diagram, if I'm reading it right, it looks almost like the ridge line is the height is very close to the height of, these look like they're flat roofs.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• The height in the room, the ceiling height in the room is considerably lower than the ridge lines. • On the West side, on the left side there, there's a series of notations that indicate, they're called target heights over there.
• They've got the heights, that's where I got the 22-foot answer about how tall they are. • The top of the parapet, that's the overall height of the building. • The next one is where the roof line is.
• That's the roof that is behind that little section of wall that is above. • Then the ceiling is slightly below that on the inside of the building.
Councilmember Gurney commented what do we think is the difference in height? Mayor Slayter commented I would estimate it at two feet, plus or minus.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I think this is a great project.
• We need a lot of housing in our community, we do need more affordable housing, we need it affordable by design.
• My heart understands the concerns of the neighbors.
• They're worried about these changes, and how it will impact their lives. • But our obligation as a City Council is to the community at large, and we have very few opportunities to move forward a project like this, that checks off so many boxes. • I haven't even mentioned the environmental piece that is really impressive. • The effort the applicant has done and come in here and has really tried to produce a project that does in fact address the character of and the needs of Sebastopol. • I also am compelled by the fact that we need to remember that this project has been reviewed carefully by our planning commission is unanimously supported by them. • Our planning director looked at it, has analyzed it, we have hundreds of pages of documentation and I've heard here that this has been going on for six years.
• This is a lot that is owned by these people.
• They do have the right to use that land in a way that is consistent with our zoning rules and with our goals, with our general plan.
• I just see this as fitting in, in a way that is really pleasing to me despite the worries that I hear from people in the neighborhood.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I agree with a lot of what Councilmember Rich just stated. • I won't restate some of the benefits of this project. • I will say to address some of the comments tonight, again, I've been on Council five years. • This project has been in front of us two previous times. • I actually have walked the project.
• I've met with Dante Love, I featured it on a Sebastopol walk along with other potential housing projects. • I believe that was about four or five years ago.
• I personally lived on Nelson way, myself.
• I'm very familiar with the situation of using an alternating, the curb parking. • In the development I lived in, with eight units, we did not have enough parking for all the residents. • So we had to juggle with street parking a bit.
• I do understand some of the residents on my walk, some of the residents did come out and meet with me five years ago.
• It's a lot different on zoom, and we're all wearing masks. • I just wanted to say that I think that the price just keeps going up on these units. • I have focused in past meetings about the price points and low income, et cetera, et cetera. • I'm ready to move forward tonight as well.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• I have one question is the elevation of the lot, with the multiple houses, to the East, at the same elevation as the lot to the West?
• Meanwhile, we were comparing ridge lines, is the elevation of the land the same? • Questioned if the natural slope is downward
• Questioned if the new buildings are actually at a higher elevation than the older buildings - they're higher up the hill.
Staff stated that is correct.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• My other question has to do with process.
• There were remarks from members of the public who were concerned that they had sent in letters and they wanted all of their questions answered.
• I don't think that answering those questions as a non-design professional is really the best thing that I can do.
• What I am wanting, though, is that our staff has addressed the questions. • That's what I would like to know from staff.
• The questions that were transmitted by the neighbors, via letters, has staff addressed those issues and questions to the neighbors, has staff answered those
City staff commented as follows:
• We have answered many of them in meetings.
• I believe Kelly has also responded to a couple of the neighbors in particular, with some other questions. • We've both been in communication with the neighbors.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• I want to concur with Vice Mayor Hinton and with Councilmember Rich, I think this is the kind of project that we've been looking for.
• This is ten units, actually, at the lower end of the density for the zoning. • It is in alignment with and in compliance with the kinds of regulations that the state of California is giving us to provide denser housing and that means that therefore it is more affordable. • It's more sustainable.
• I also see the design of this project, this is someplace I could see being. • I think it's a really nice design.
• I see this as the kind of project that we're looking for which is high density, affordable by design, smaller in compliance with state law, which we as a City have to comply with. • It also is addressing the missing middle.
• That's the place where we're really lacking in building housing in this town. • That missing middle, which is the small families, the professionals, the nice list that you presented us with.
• This is the kind of place that could accommodate some empty nesters moving into it, that will free up some of the housing for families to move into these bigger houses that are out in some of the neighborhoods like I live in.
• So to me, it meets with what we were actually looking for and not just in terms of kind of the letter of the law, but in terms of doing a really very nice job in terms of design and implementation. • I'm interested in moving forward.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I agree with all those comments.
• I wanted to just say a couple of points that I haven't heard mentioned that I think may resonate for other Councilmembers.
• What I also like about this project is that it creates a living arrangement with less consumptive lifestyle. • It's where we need to go, to have less space and have less stuff, and use our real estate more wisely, and share more.
• That's where it gets me to the second point that we haven't yet stated, how this encourages interaction between the residents.
• We have the central courtyard, all the front doors meeting on that area. • We have the kitchen windows looking out.
• That's a really important window.
• That element, I think, is really important when you have smaller spaces. • It's great to have outdoors, and also if we're looking at potentially single people or empty nesters, it's nice to have a built-in community with people who have their eyes on you, who can be watching if you need help or to have the kids play together.
• Whatever it might be.
• That element is important to keep in mind for our future as we look at ways we can address climate to our building and housing practices.
• But my regret is that it's taken six years to get through here. • I think we need to have these projects happen, and we need them to happen a little faster. • We need to make sure we're responsible to the neighborhood and I think a number of concerns have been talked over this evening.
• I appreciate Councilmember Glass' concern about our process, double-checking to make sure we've been responsible in connecting with people.
• I've also been out there.
• I'm sorry that the neighbors feel they haven't had the attention, maybe it's because it has been a long time in process.
• That our visits aren't remembered or noted.
• But I did walk out there in all the leaves and wave my arms around. • So that should perhaps appease people that think we haven't been paying attention. • We've been waiting for this, and I think we would like to get to that missing middle and provide something sooner rather than any longer.
• So I'm good to go tonight, too.
• I think there are a few other topics we may want to talk about, but maybe after this.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• When we approved our general plan, the inclusionary housing requirement was one of the very last, if not the very last point that the Council discussed at great length. • Whether or not smaller units in quantities like this project would not be required to comply with, because they were providing quality housing for a different, very needy demographic. • This is a project that we had as an example, and we had financials for as an example, and we saw the benefit of, as a concrete example.
• So this is a project that we have asked for.
• We're seeing a proposal not very far away from this one that Is a project that is much, much more widely panned across our community.
• The density of this project in reality, it could be twice as dense by our zoning ordinance, then by the state who would take control of it, removing local control.
• So not to say that this is -- it will be a change. It will definitely be a change in this neighborhood. • However, I think it will be a positive change in this neighborhood. • It's very cleverly designed, it's sustainable, it's low impact, it's net zero energy. • These types of courtyard housing projects are very popular. • They're all over Southern California, all over Santa Barbara, several in St. Luis Obispo. • I can think of one in town here, it's only six units, right downtown. • It seems like a very nice place to live.
• The cost per square foot is going nowhere but up.
• We keep thinking it's going to go down, but that's a fool's errand. • You look at the existing residences there on the corner, and, what are they, around 700 to 800 square feet, I think.
• Today, they would Cost around a minimum of $650 to $750 per square foot to reconstruct. • That's just where we are right now. It's outrageous. But there's nothing we can do about it. • That's just the cost of commodities and label.
• I'm in favor also of moving forward.
MOTION:
Councilmember Rich moved and Councilmember Glass seconded the motion to:
1) Adopt the Resolution approving the IS/MND, subject to the Findings and Mitigations included therein, as well as the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program; and
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Motion passes unanimously.
Councilmember Rich moved and Vice Mayor Hinton seconded the motion to Adopt the Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit and the Tentative Map, subject to the Findings and Conditions included in Exhibit A:
Recommended Findings for Approval, and the Conditions of Approval included in Exhibit B: Recommended Conditions of Approval
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Motion passes unanimously.
Mayor Slayter moved and Councilmember Glass seconded the motion to 3) Introduce and waive the first reading of an Ordinance rezoning the parcel from R7 to PC zoning, subject to the findings and Conditions included in Exhibit A: Recommended Findings for Approval, and the Conditions of Approval included in Exhibit B: Recommended Conditions of Approval.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Motion passes unanimously.
Financial Assistance Request:
Mayor Slayter moved and Councilmember Glass seconded the motion to approve financial assistance request as follows:
• Financial assistance in the amount of $69,550 of $160,000 of the improvements (43% of the total • cost)
• Funded through waiver of the Traffic lmpact fee of $23,140 and reduction of the Underground Utility Fee of $92,500 to half, or $46,250
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved the motion to:
1) Adopt the Resolution approving the IS/MND, subject to the Findings and Mitigations included therein, as well as the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program; and
2) Adopt the Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit and the Tentative Map, subject to the Findings and Conditions included in Exhibit A: Recommended Findings for Approval, and the Conditions of Approval included in Exhibit B: Recommended Conditions of Approval; and
3) Introduce and waive the first reading of an Ordinance rezoning the parcel from R7 to PC zoning, subject to the findings and Conditions included in Exhibit A: Recommended Findings for Approval, and the Conditions of Approval included in Exhibit B: Recommended Conditions of Approval.
Minute Order Number: 2022-078
Proposed Ordinance Number: 1138
Resolution Number(s): 6410-2022 and 6411-2022
4). Approved financial assistance request as follows:
• Financial assistance in the amount of $69,550 of $160,000 of the improvements (43% of the total cost)
• Funded through waiver of the Traffic lmpact fee of $23,140 and reduction of the Underground Utility Fee of $92,500 to half, or $46,250
REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEMS (DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION)
9. Workshop on Draft Housing Strategy (Responsible Department: Planning) This item was continued to a special City Council Meeting of March 7, 2022 at 6:00 pm.
City Council Action: Item was continued to a special City Council Meeting to be held Monday March 7, 2022 at 6:00 pm.
Minute Order Number: 2022-079
As the meeting was beyond 10:30 am, Council protocols dictate the Council will need to be in Consensus to begin any item beyond the 10:30 pm meeting end time. The Council was in consensus to hear the following agenda item.
11. Consideration of Budget Amendment for Relaunch Sebastopol Contract (Requestor: City Administration) City Administration presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Sebastopol City Council Consider Budget Amendment for Relaunch Sebastopol Contract.
Mayor Slayter asked for questions of presenter.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I think the City Manager/Attorney did great job pointing out, we're going to have to deal with them and figure it out as we go.
• I just wanted to mention that staff ran this by the relaunch ad hoc committee members, myself and Mayor Slayter, and so it's been vetted by us.
• It's reported in the staff report that we're in favor.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• I'm very much in favor of this being completely fair for us to make this accommodation. • I also wanted to state, I am somewhat concerned about, it sounds like our City Manager is dealing with this on an ongoing basis.
• I am concerned that these kinds of restrictions, if this is what we're going to see ongoing, that we not let these restrictions preclude us from hiring local, smaller firms. • That is what I'm really concerned about.
• I'm concerned about it in this case where we're hiring a small, local firm that knows our community. • I want to make sure that we're on top of this, and not letting it preclude us from getting the right people for the job in the future.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• With that in mind that's why we've been in these discussions. • We don't want to be in a situation where the City has to be self-insured in order to accommodate our local consultants and contractors.
• We've found they're willing to work with us on that and still cover us fully through CERA. • That's the goal.
• I think we're doing what you basically said we should be doing, and we've gotten movement recently in the last couple of days on a couple of thorny issues that we're resolving. • I think we're working towards that.
• However, this was a special situation, if we had thought of it or knew about this issue potentially arising, we probably should have dealt with it in some other way to provide fair warning that you can't have this type of policy and do this work.
Mayor Slayter opened public comment.
Linda commented as follows:
• I do along with whatever City Manager McLaughlin and Councilmember Gurney want to do. I fully support them usually.
• I'd just like to know what CIRA is.
• I'm curious about particulars, what kind of consultant, what was the business or what was the thing that needed the insurance? What was the issue specifically.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin responded to public comment:
• Our question from the public, CIRA is our insurance company. • This is for essentially insurance coverage for our community vitality coordinator consultant under the umbrella name of Relaunch Sebastopol.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
There was no further discussion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Rich moved and Councilmember Gurney seconded the motion to Approve Resolution for Budget Amendment for a Not to Exceed Amount of $10,000 for the Relaunch Sebastopol Contract, Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Creation of a City Wide Staffing Assessment City Council Ad Hoc Committee.
Minute Order Number: 2022-081
Resolution Number: 6412-2022
Due to the length of the meeting, the following items were not heard.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
12. City Manager-Attorney/City Clerk Reports
13. City Council Reports/Committee/Sub-Committee Meeting Reports: (Reports by Mayor/City Councilmembers Regarding Various Agency Meetings/Committee Meetings/Sub-Committee Meeting /Conferences Attended and Possible Direction to its Representatives (If Needed) on Pending issues before such Boards)
14. Council Communications Received
15. Future City Meeting Dates/Events (Informational Only): (See City Web Site for Up-to-Date Meeting Dates/Times)
ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
March 1, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting will be adjourned to the Special City Council Meeting of March 7, 2022 at 6:00 pm. Zoom Virtual Meeting Format
March 7, 2022 Special City Council Meeting will be adjourned to the March 15, 2022 City Council Meeting, 6:00 pm, Zoom Virtual Meeting Format
Mayor Slayter adjourned the City Council meeting at 10:54 pm.
Respectfully Submitted:
Mary C. Gourley
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk, MMC