HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - unsigned - 1994-06-21 - Special City Council, Special Meeting
City Council Chambers
1313 California Street
Redding, California
June 21, 1994 6:30 p.m.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Anderson with the following Council
Members present: P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, Murray and R. Anderson.
Also present were City Manager Christofferson, Assistant City Manager
McMurry, City Attorney Hays, Director of Electric Utility Lindley, Electric
Utility Operations Manager Ryan, Electric Utility Power Plant Manager
Heckenberg and Special Counsel Bonnie Baker representing Dugan Barr.
CLOSED SESSION
(L-100 & E-120-150)
Mayor Anderson stated that pursuant to California Government Code Section
54956.9(b)(1), the City Council would adjourn to closed session to discuss
one case of anticipated litigation (City of Redding and MLP Energy).
At the hour of 6:30 p.m., Mayor R. Anderson declared the meeting adjourned to
closed session.
At the hour of 7:24 p.m., Mayor R. Anderson reconvened the meeting to regular
session.
No action was required on this matter.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, at the hour of 7:24 p.m., Mayor R. Anderson
declared the meeting adjourned.
APPROVED:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
City Council, Regular Meeting
City Council Chambers
Redding, California
June 21, 1994 7:25 p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag was led by City Attorney Hays.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor R. Anderson with the following
Council Members present: P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, Murray and R.
Anderson.
Also present were City Manager Christofferson, Assistant City Manager McMurry,
City Attorney Hays, Director of Planning and Community Development Perry,
Police Chief Blankenship, Fire Chief Bailey, Director of Community Services
Gorman, Director of Finance Downing, Assistant City Engineer Curtis, Principal
Planner Keaney, Public Works Operations Manager Russell, Director of General
Services Masingale, Director of Information Systems Kelley, Director of
Personnel Bristow, Director of Utilities/Customer Service Vokal, Assistant
Director General Services Kohn, Risk Manager Mlinarcik, Associate Planner
Hanson, Associate Planner Morgon, Associate Planner Manuel, Assistant Planner
Haddox, Assistant City Clerk Moscatello, City Clerk Strohmayer, and Secretary
to City Council Rudolph.
RESOLUTION
- Commending retiring City Manager Robert M. Christofferson for his
service to the City
(A-050-080)
MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member P. Anderson,
that Resolution No. 94-164 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Redding in appreciation of the services of Robert M. Christofferson to
the City of Redding upon the occasion of his retirement.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, Murray and R.
Anderson
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
Resolution No. 94-164 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The following matters were considered inclusively under the Consent Calendar:
Approval of Payroll and Accounts Payable Register
(A-050-100-500)
It is recommended that Accounts Payable Register No. 23, check numbers 207294
through 207903 inclusive, in the amount of $6,815,143.12, be approved and
paid, and Payroll Register No. 25, check numbers 379132 through 379975
inclusive, in the amount of $973,013.18, and Automatic Payroll Deposits, check
numbers 19896 through 20085, in the amount of $285,379.13, for a total of
$1,258,392.31, for the period May 22, 1994 through June 6, 1994, be approved.
TOTAL: $8,073,535.43
Planning and Community Development Monthly Status Report
(A-050-250)
It is the recommendation of the Planning and Community Development Director
that the Monthly Status Report through May 1994 for the following work areas
be accepted: (1) Annexations; (2) Zoning, Subdivisions, and General Plan
Amendments; (3) Building and Population; (4) Housing Assistance and
Rehabilitation; and (5) Surplus Property.
Resolution
- Appropriating funds for annexation processing costs and
authorizing receipt of related revenue
* (B-130-070 & A-150)
It is the recommendation of the Planning and Community Development Director
that Resolution No. 94-165 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Redding approving and adopting the 77th amendment to City Budget
Resolution No. 93-239: (1) appropriating $4,600 for annexation fees; and (2)
authorizing the receipt of $4,600 in revenue.
Acquisition of Property
- Offer by Jess W. Nelson (3232 Nicolet Lane)
(C-070-010 & P-050)
It is the recommendation of the Planning and Community Development Director
that the City advise Jess W. Nelson it is not interested in acquiring property
at 3232 Nicolet Lane for a park site and direct staff to notify the Redding
School District of the property's availability.
Animal Permit AP-1-94
- by Stephen and Ann Gaines
(A-130-140)
It is the recommendation of the Board of Administrative Review and the
Planning and Community Development Director that the City Council approve
Animal Permit AP-1-94, by Stephen and Ann Gaines, subject to the Conditions of
Approval dated
June 2, 1994, and authorize the City Manager to issue said permit.
Resolution
- Agreement with Redding Housing Authority for administration of
Tenant-Based Assistance Program
(H-150)
It is the recommendation of the Planning and Community Development Director
that Resolution No. 94-166 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Redding between the City of Redding and the Housing Authority of the
City of Redding for administration of the Tenant-Based Assistance Program
funded through the Home Investment Partnerships Program.
Resolution
- Authorize Submission of 1994 HOME Program Application
(G-100-075-202)
It is the recommendation of the Planning and Community Development Director
that Resolution No. 94-167 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Redding authorizing the City Manager to file an application for
federal fiscal year 1994 funding under the Home Investment Partnership (HOME)
Program in the amount of $1,000,000 with the California State Department of
Housing and Community Development.
Resolution
- Extension of Cooperation Agreement with the Redding Redevelopment
Agency
(R-030-010)
It is the recommendation of the Planning and Community Development Director
that Resolution No. 94-168 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Redding authorizing the extension of the Cooperation Agreement with
the Redding Redevelopment Agency through June 30, 1995.
Resolution
- Consent to Assignment of Lease of Office Suite B in Building C at
Diestelhorst Landing Office Park
(C-070-100)
It is the recommendation of the Planning and Community Development Director
that Resolution No. 94-169 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Redding approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute the Consent to
Assignment of Lease, effective June 30, 1994, of Office Suite B in Building C
at Diestelhorst Landing office Park from the Shasta Region Big Brothers/Big
Sisters, Inc. to the Shasta County Child Abuse Prevention Coordinating
Council.
Resolution
- re Execution of Employee Benefits Contracts
(P-100-150-030 & P-100-150-055 & P-100-150-060 & P-100-150)
It is the recommendation of the Personnel Director that Resolution No. 94-170
be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving
entering into and authorizing the Mayor to execute contracts with the
following companies: 1) The Insurance Company of North America for insuring
employee life and dependent life insurance benefits, as well as the City's
excess health and dental policy, for the period July 1, 1994 through June 30,
1995; 2) The Unum Life Insurance Company of America for long-term disability
(renewal), for the period July 1, 1994, through June 30, 1996; 3) Coresource
to administer the health care (renewal), for the period July 1, 1994, through
June 30, 1995; and 4) Charles E. Bertolina, doing business as CEB Business
Insurance Services-Business Insurance Consulting Agreement (renewal), for the
period July 1, 1994, through June 30, 1995.
Requests for Proposal
- Automatic Call Distribution Phone System
(B-050-100 & C-175-825)
It is the recommendation of the Director of Utilities/Customer Service that
the City Council authorize staff to prepare and distribute a request for
proposal for the purchase of an Automatic Call Distribution system, with voice
mailbox and automated attendant capabilities which can interface with the AS
400 to provide direct access to utility customer information.
Resolution
- 1994-95 Shasta Interagency Narcotics Task Force Budget
(P-150-150)
It is the recommendation of the Chief of Police that Resolution No. 94-171 be
adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving the
fiscal year 1994-95 budget for the Shasta Interagency Narcotics Task Force
depicting operating and equipment needs in the amount of $108,795.
Resolution
- Reapplication for Serious Habitual Offender Grant
(G-100-170 & P-150-150)
It is the recommendation of the Chief of Police that Resolution No. 94-172 be
adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding authorizing
the filing of the necessary documentation to continue the City of Redding
Serious Habitual Offender (SHO) Program, funded in part from funds made
available through the SHO Program administered by the Office of Criminal
Justice Planning (OCJP).
Resolution
- Agreement with State of California for Assignable Lease Option
for Property at Benton Airpark (C-070-100)
It is the recommendation of the Airports Director that Resolution No. 94-173
be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving
the agreement between the City of Redding and the State of California, acting
by and through the Director of the Department of General Services, for an
assignable lease option for a certain parcel at Benton Airpark, and
authorizing the Mayor to sign same.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2869, Three Transfer Truck Tractors for Solid
Waste (B-050-100 & S-020-650)
It is the recommendation of the General Services Director that Bid Schedule
No. 2869, three transfer truck tractors for Solid Waste, be awarded to the low
bidder, F. B. Hart Company, in the amount of $238,439.27. Funds for this
purchase are available in the Solid Waste Collection fund.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2870, Three Transfer Trailers for Solid Waste
(B-050-100 & S-020-650)
It is the recommendation of the General Services Director that Bid Schedule
No. 2870, three transfer trailers for Solid Waste, be awarded to the low
bidder, Central Valley Truck Center, in the amount of $127,458.05. Funds for
this purchase are available in the Solid Waste Collection Fund.
Resolution
- Contract for Custodial Services
(B-050-100 & A-070-020)
It is the recommendation of the General Services Director that Resolution No.
94-174 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
bypassing the formal bidding process pursuant to Redding Municipal Code
Section 4.20.080(A)(4), and authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and sign
a contract with the Shasta County Opportunity Center for custodial services at
all City locations and any new City locations that may be added, with the
exception of the Electric Department facility on Heather Lane, for a one year
period with the option to renew the contract for two subsequent years.
Resolution
- Agreement with Richard Guy Paulson dba Paulson's Catering for
Catering/Concession Services at Redding Convention Center (Bid Schedule No.
2838)
(B-050-100 & C-050-050)
It is the recommendation of the Community Services Director that Resolution
No. 94-175 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
approving entering into an agreement for catering/concession services to the
Convention Center by and between the City of Redding and Richard Guy Paulson,
individually and dba Paulson's Catering, for the period of July 1, 1994,
through June 30, 1999, with options to renew for two successive one-year
terms.
Notice of Completion
- Bid Schedule No. 2811, Redding Municipal Airport Sign
Installation and Runway 12-30 Lighting
(B-050-020 & A-090-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2811 (Job No. 9314), Redding Municipal Airport Sign Installation and Runway
12-30 Lighting, awarded to Hill Construction Co., be accepted as
satisfactorily completed, and the City Clerk be authorized to file a Notice of
Completion. The final contract price is $239,968.
Resolution
- Supplemental Appropriation for Unanticipated Costs Associated
with Current Litigation
* (B-130-070 & A-050-300 & L-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Resolution No. 94-
176 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
approving and adopting the 75th amendment to City Budget Resolution No. 93-239
appropriating $8,900 for legal costs associated with Eakens versus the City of
Redding.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2864, Removal of Sludge from Pond 3B and 9 at
Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility
(B-050-020 & W-010-450)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2864 (Job No. 9684), removal of sludge from Pond 3B and 9 at Clear Creek
Wastewater Treatment Facility, be awarded to McCollum Engineering in the
amount of $25,700, an additional $2,500 be approved to cover contract change
orders, and $2,000 be approved to cover the cost of engineering and inspection
fees, for a total of $30,200. Funds for this work have been provided for in
the 1993-94 wastewater budget.
Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 2865, 1993-94 Asphalt Concrete Overlay Program
(B-050-020 S-070-200)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2865 (Job No. 9523), 1993-94 Asphalt Concrete Overlay Program, be awarded to
J. F. Shea in the amount of $662,997.85, authorize the issuance of a change
order for approximately $227,000 to overlay four additional streets, and an
additional $10,000 for testing and contingencies, for a total project amount
of $900,000. Funding for this project consists of $866,000 from ISTEA funds,
$17,000 from the
wastewater utility for raising manholes and rod holes, and $17,000 from the
water utility for raising water valves.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2846, Ferric Chloride
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2846 (Job No. 5330-35), ferric chloride, be awarded to Imperial West Chemical
Co. in the amount of $376.82 per dry ton, including freight.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2847, Liquid Sulfur Dioxide
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2847 (Job No. 5330-33 and 5340-33), liquid sulfur dioxide, be awarded to All
Pure Chemical Co. in the amount of $489 per ton for one to four containers,
and $459 per ton for five or more containers.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2848, Liquid Sodium Bisulfite
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2848 (Job No. 5330-33), liquid sodium bisulfite, be awarded to Sierra Chemical
Co., in the amounts of $1.10 per gallon for 2500 gallons, $1.22 per gallon for
2000 gallons, and $1.35 per gallon for 1500 gallons.
Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 2849, Lime
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2849 (Job No. 5330-34 and 5203-15), lime, be awarded to Chemical Lime, Co., in
the amount of $115.20 per dry ton delivered.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2850, Liquid Aluminum Sulfate
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2850 (Job No. 5203-15), liquid aluminum sulfate, be awarded to Rhone-Poulenc
Basic Chemicals of Southgate, California, in the amount of $147.93 per ton.
Funds for these purchases have been requested in the 1994-95 budget.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2851, Liquid Cationic Polymer
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2851 (Job No. 5203-15), liquid cationic polymer, be awarded to Calgon
Corporation of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in the amount of $0.358 per pound.
Funds for these purchases have been requested in the 1994-95 budget.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2852, Liquid Chlorine
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2852 (Job No. 5203-15, 5330-32), liquid chlorine, be awarded to All Pure
Chemical Company of Tracy, California, in the amount of $396 per ton for ten
or more tons, $379 per ton for four to nine tons, and $389 per ton for one to
four tons.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2853, Water Meters
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2853 (Job No. 5221-10, 5204-15), water meters, be awarded to Schlumberger
Industries for Items 1, 2, 3, and 9 and to Badger Meter Inc. for Items 4, 5,
6, 7 and 8. Funds for these purchases have been requested in the 1994-95
budget.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2854, Rock & Mineral Products
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2854, rock and mineral products, be awarded to J. F. Shea for Items 1, 2, 5,
6, and 10, to Northstate Asphalt for Items 3, 4, and 9, to Morgan Emultech for
Items 11a and 11b, and to Swarts Sand and Gravel for Items 7 and 8. Funds for
these purchases have been included in the 1994-95 budget.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2867, Liquid Sodium Hydroxide
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2867 (Job No. 5340-35), liquid sodium hydroxide, be awarded to Sierra Chemical
Co. in the amount of $1.35 per gallon. Funds for these purchases have been
included in the 1994-95 budget.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2868, Liquid Sodium Hypochlorite
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2868 (Job No. 5340-36), liquid sodium hypochlorite, be awarded to Sierra
Chemical Co. in the amount of $.89 per gallon. Funds for these purchases have
been included in the 1994-95 budget.
Resolution
- Supplemental Appropriation for Various Safety Improvements at the
Downtown Mall Parking Structure
* (B-130-070 & M-010-200)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Resolution No. 94-
177 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
approving and adopting the 74th amendment to City Budget Resolution No. 93-239
(1) appropriating $11,000 for costs associated with maintaining the Downtown
Mall Parking Structure; and (2) authorizing an advance of $11,000 from the
General Fund to the Parking Fund.
MOTION: Made by Council Member McGeorge, seconded by Council Member P.
Anderson, that all the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved and
adopted as recommended.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, Murray and R.
Anderson
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
Resolution Nos. 94-165, 94-166, 94-167, 94-168, 94-169, 94-170, 94-171, 94-
172, 94-173, 94-174, 94-175, 94-176, and 94-177 are on file in the office of
the City Clerk.
- - - - - - - -
SHASTA COUNTY OWNERS RENT STABILIZATION COMMITTEE
(A-050-060)
The following individuals made a presentation on behalf of the Shasta County
Owners Rent Stabilization Committee:
Earl Murphy, 4617 Underwood Drive, related that the Western Mobile Home Park
Owners Association missed its deadline for placing an initiative on the
November State ballot. Park owners within the state, however, are attempting
to obtain signatures from 600,000 registered voters at $1.00 per signature to
qualify a similar initiative for the March 1996 California Presidential
Primary Ballot. If it prevails, the initiative would eliminate the legal
power of cities and counties to regulate mobilehome park rent. He noted that
AB122 and AB1320 are also pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee and
represent the repeated efforts of mobilehome owners to have the State
legislature take away the rights and protection provided for in the California
Mobilehome Residency law and eliminate the power of municipalities to regulate
mobilehome rents. He indicated that there are currently 85 cities and 7
counties in the State which have enacted local ordinances establishing control
of mobilehome park rents. He requested that the City Council appoint a
committee to review various material and make a recommendation to the City
Council regarding whether an ordinance similar to that enacted by Calistoga in
1993 should be adopted in the City of Redding. The suggested committee
composition would include the City Attorney, Planning Director, Assistant City
Manager, and Housing Supervisor. Based on statistics provided by the
Department of Housing and Community Development in April 1994, there are 1,752
mobilehome lots within the City of Redding. He submitted petitions signed by
740 residents of mobilehome parks requesting the City Council to enact a rent
control ordinance.
Robert Kerr, Director of Region 4 of the Golden State Mobilehome Owners
League, related that his volunteer position allows him to connect with 25
chapters in 6 northern California counties and allows direct connection to
lobbyists who work full time in Sacramento monitoring bills. He explained
that the main function of the league is to create legislation which enhances
mobilehome lifestyle. The Shasta County Mobilehome Owners Rent Stabilization
Committee gave birth to a formula to provide protection to prevent outside
influences from creating programs which alter lifestyles and adding exorbitant
amounts to the monthly cost of living in a mobilehome park. He related that
there are currently 92 ordinances in successful operation in the State. If an
ordinance were adopted, the residents of mobilehome parks would gain the
comfort of knowing what lies in store from them.
Nancy Sismondo asserted that the proposed ordinance would do the following:
1) ensure fairness and recognize the property rights of all parties
concerned; 2) establish a panel of community representatives to handle any
disputes; 3) cover residences not on a long-term lease; 4) accept only
leases which are in complete compliance with the mobilehome residency law; 5)
stop forcing new home buyers to sign long-term leases before they can move
in; 6) install vacancy control; 7) provide for rent increases every 12
months according to current economical indicators occurring in the free
enterprise system; 8) limit pass through of utilities or outside services to
actual costs incurred; and 9) require reduction in services to have a
corresponding reduction in rent. She explained that under the current
established guidelines, rent could be increased annually. It is suggested
that the Social Security cost-of-living adjustment be utilized with a four
percent cap, or a formula for passing through capital improvements if that is
preferred. If the landowner requires a higher rent, he may appeal it to the
rent review commission established under the ordinance and the commission
would consider such things as rents in other parks, change in property tax,
natural disasters, fair rate of return on investment, etc. If the dispute is
not resolved after 90 days, an appeal to the commission for a hearing within
60 days can be made. Fees to cover the administrative costs are paid by the
parties petitioning to the commission. She requested that the City Council
appoint a committee to review the matter.
Lance Fredrickson, representing the Shasta Mobilehome Park Owners Association,
stated that the County, through its Housing Director, Jerry Brown, has
repeatedly examined the issue during the past 12 months and meetings have been
held with representatives of the mobilehome park industry and the Shasta
County Mobilehome Owners Rent Stabilization Committee. Mr. Brown has reported
that progress is being made in the private sector and the mobilehome park
owners have been cooperative to date in resolving some of the issues. Mr.
Frederickson indicated that the City of Shasta Lake has also examined the
issue. The City of Redding previously examined the issue and in a memorandum
from the City Manager dated October 14, 1993, the results depicted the rent
for the last four years in some of the key mobilehome parks and recommended
that the matter be monitored, however, there did not appear to be a problem at
that time. Mr. Frederickson acknowledged that the speakers this evening have
raised issues that everyone is concerned about, however, government cannot and
should not resolve every perceived grievance of its electorate. He maintained
that progress is being made
and resolution will be made in the free market system.
Council Member McGeorge shared the speakers concerns, however, he did not
believe this was an area the City should become involved in.
Council Member Kehoe concurred with Council Member McGeorge and shared certain
sympathies for those individuals on fixed incomes. He viewed rent
stabilization as an intrusion of government into the private sector and he
personally favored less government intervention. While not in favor of
becoming directly involved with a rent stabilization ordinance, he was
receptive to receiving information from time to time from the Shasta County
Mobilehome Owners Rent Stabilization Committee and monitoring the situation.
He noted that he received telephone calls from two residents of mobilehome
parks who were concerned about the City becoming involved in rent
stabilization.
Council Member Murray did not favor rent control. Based on information he has
received, he was concerned, however, with the widespread belief in the park
residence community that rights are being violated in some fashion. He
suggested that the City Attorney compile a list of legal resources available
to individuals on low or moderate incomes where legal advice can be sought as
to whether their rights are being interfered with. He opined that the City
has an obligation to ensure that there are sufficient mobilehome spaces
available in the community to preserve competition. He also wanted to make
sure that the appropriate vehicles are in place to permit mobilehome parks to
be converted to condominium projects, whereby the owners can purchase the
lots.
Mayor R. Anderson stated that the City needs to be concerned about
unreasonable increases, however, the figures he has reviewed do not indicate
it. He noted that there has been some indication on the part of the
mobilehome park owners to work with the residents and work out any problems at
the private sector level.
Mr. Murphy indicated that the Shasta County Mobilehome Owners Rent
Stabilization Committee will consult with the mobilehome park owners'
representative and report the results back to the City Council. He also
related that the City has provisions to convert mobilehome parks to
condominium projects, however, it is an expensive proposition.
City Attorney Hays indicated that he would work with the Housing Department to
develop a listing of legal resources available and forward it to Earl Murphy.
MOTION: Made by Council Member McGeorge, seconded by Council Member Kehoe, to
not take any action on the request to appoint a committee to review the
proposed mobilehome rent stabilization ordinance. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
- re Amendment to Chapter 18.47 of the Redding
Municipal Code, Floodplain Ordinance
CITY COUNCIL POLICY
- re Floodplain Development and Storm Water Detention
(L-010-500-050 & A-050-250)
The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor R. Anderson opened the continued
public hearing regarding the amendment to Chapter 18.47 of the Redding
Municipal Code, floodplain ordinance.
The following documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
Affidavit of Posting - Continued Public Hearing
Planning department recommendation dated June 14, 1994
Associate Planner Manuel related that the City Council, at its meeting of May
17, 1994, continued consideration regarding the proposed amendments to the
floodplain ordinance in order to consider the draft City Council policy
regarding floodplain development. Staff's recommendation has not changed;
however, depending on the City Council's disposition of the policy document,
additional amendments may be necessary.
Mr. Manuel noted that the City Council, at its meeting of May 17, 1994,
directed staff to meet with the local engineering community and Council Member
Murray to ensure that all the issues and alternatives relative to the proposed
floodplain development and storm water detention policy have been identified.
A meeting was held on May 27 and was attended by a broad cross-section of
local engineers. The concerns raised at the meeting are included in the
Report to City Council dated June 14, 1994, incorporated herein by reference.
Mr. Manuel explained that the policy arose as a result of the City Council's
acceptance of the Storm Drain Master Plan prepared by Montgomery Watson
Engineers. Principally, the study was commissioned to determine the sizing
needs for culverts and bridges on the various streams and drainage ways in the
City based on future urbanization of watersheds. An outgrowth of the study,
however, was the development of data that identified what the 100-year
floodplain elevations would be at full development.
Mr. Manuel stated that prior to this study, two sources were used for
floodplain data: 1) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); and 2)
Information required to be provided by developers to supplement FEMA data if
alterations to the floodplain are requested or when FEMA data is not
available. Significant difference exists in the underlying assumptions of the
FEMA data and that provided in the Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP). FEMA data
projects flooding based on the level of urban development in 1985. The SDMP
considered future full urbanization of watersheds and the higher runoff that
will occur with increasing impervious cover. Therefore, the two are not
comparable. The SDMP represents a worst-case scenario. FEMA assumes that
future development would not significantly alter flood flows in that local
jurisdictions would institute measures to ensure that flood elevations would
not increase. At this point in time, across-the-board measures to prevent
such flow increases have not been adopted by any Shasta County agency.
Mr. Manuel said that the proposed policy and related floodplain ordinance text
amendments attempt to establish how the SDMP data will be used. The Planning
Commission and staff feel that the base flood elevation should be based on the
worst-case scenario, the SDMP data, given that life and property are at risk.
This is particularly crucial since, with the exception of Clover Creek, the
upper reaches of each stream are located in the jurisdictions of either Shasta
County or the City of Shasta Lake. The City of Redding must be proactive in
protecting its citizens from land-use decisions beyond their control. Neither
of these jurisdictions currently have ordinances or formal policies dealing
with this important issue.
Mr. Manuel provided an overview of the following policies: 1) Recorded maps
that have lots below FEMA and SDMP 100-year flood elevations; 2) Recorded
maps that have lots below the SDMP, but above the FEMA 100-year flood
elevation; 3) Approved tentative maps based only on the 100-year FEMA flood
elevation; 4) Tentative maps not yet submitted; and 5) Subdivision density
and detention requirements for maps not yet submitted. He provided an
overview of the ramifications of the policies based on the requirement to use
data which shows the highest flood elevation.
Mr. Manuel explained that the engineering firms advocate a regional detention
basin system, indicating that if sites are identified (and presumably
purchased and constructed) now, the increased flows predicted by the SDMP will
not be realized. This is not disputed; the issue is timing. With the
exception of Clover Creek, the headwaters of creeks traversing Redding are
located in the jurisdictions of Shasta County and the City of Shasta Lake.
This is viewed as a time-consuming and costly process of identifying and
constructing sites, one that may be exacerbated by the fact that preferred
sites may not even be located within Redding's corporate boundaries. The
question before the City Council is whether the City can afford to do nothing
to protect land owners along its creeks in the meantime given both funding and
political uncertainties.
It is the opinion of staff that the potential liability issues are too great
to ignore. It is staff's opinion that the City would be remiss in its charge
to protect the public if the issue were ignored. Accordingly, it is the
recommendation of staff that the City Council adopt the policy as proposed.
Utilizing the "ultimate urbanization" flood elevations and requiring detention
provides a safeguard if upstream jurisdictions remain uninvolved in this
problem. It is further recommended that the City request Shasta Lake and
Shasta County to refer projects in the drainage basins to the City for review
and comment.
Mr. Manuel related that staff proposed to eliminate the requirement for an
environmental impact report (EIR) for every floodplain fill over 20,000 square
feet. The engineering firms have concurred. The City Council, Planning
Commission or staff could require an EIR at any time if it is warranted.
In response to Council Member P. Anderson, Mr. Manuel indicated that staff met
with representatives of Weld-Brower & Associates today to review the data
submitted. He did not believe that any information received indicated the
City's study was faulty.
Council Member P. Anderson questioned the urgency of adopting the policy and
whether the City of Redding had worked with the City of Shasta Lake in
developing regional area detention basins.
Mr. Manuel responded that the urgency is liability to the City. The
homeowners in the Churn Creek Bottom have put the City on notice that it can
expect to be sued if it does not take proactive action with regard to
increased water levels downstream. Staff has had conversations with both the
City of Shasta and Shasta County and they do not appear to be concerned enough
at this point to pursue a policy.
Assistant City Engineer Curtis explained that if an engineering firm disagrees
with information the City uses as a basis for its decisions, it can present
additional information which the City will review. At this point, staff has
not received any information which would invalidate the study being used.
Planning and Community Development Director Perry stated that the City hired
an engineering firm to develop a SDMP which has only been accepted by the City
Council. The information contained in the SDMP provides the City with
constructive notice that reliance on FEMA floodplain is not adequate. It does
not mean that the FEMA floodplain will be the ultimate floodplain, but will
depend on further studies down the road which will need to be funded over a
period of time by the City Council to create basin plans, and perform flood
channel design work. It is a cycle which could take the next 10 to 20 years
to complete due to the number of creeks and floodplain. He noted that it is
difficult to do things on a cooperative basis with other agencies when the
only threat is a lawsuit. Many of the residents in the Churn Creek bottom
have been
allowed to build in floodplain and the City's goal is to not increase the
flood levels and geographically expand the floodplain. City planners will
rely on engineers, both public and private, to make reasonable approaches to
this community problem.
Virgil Weld, Weld-Brower & Associates, stated that he does not have concern
with the floodplain ordinance. His concern relates to the magnitude of flows
which were calculated in the SDMP. He opined that if the City is looking at
ultimate runoff and detention facilities, it is compounding the problem. He
believed other jurisdictions would be receptive to considering regional
detention facilities. He encouraged the City Council to consider a
combination of alternatives four and five. He offered his assistance in
obtaining cooperation from the other jurisdictions.
Chris Kraft, Planning Director of Sharrah Dunlap Sawyer, Inc., stated that the
SDMP shows that future development will cause an expanded floodplain. He
noted that the main issue is the requirement for onsite retention and
detention facilities by every project which is located adjacent to any creek.
He explained that some basins are so steep that retention and detention
basins are not required. In other cases, the area is too flat and would
require pumping. He supported alternative five, possibly in conjunction with
alternative four, as an interim solution. He had no objection to the adoption
of the proposed ordinance.
Mayor R. Anderson determined that there were no additional individuals present
wishing to speak on the matter and closed the public hearing.
Council Member Murray pointed out that the ordinance still contains reference
to requiring an EIR for an area with fill in excess of 20,000 square feet.
Mr. Perry stated that it would be acceptable to staff for this reference to be
deleted.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Murray, seconded by Council Member Kehoe, that
the City Council make the following findings regarding Amendments to Chapter
18.47 of the Redding Municipal Code, floodplain ordinance:
1. Project is compatible with the Redding General Plan;
2. Project will not significantly alter existing land form;
3. Project is compatible with surrounding land use;
4. Project is compatible with the Code of the City of Redding,
California; and ratify the Negative Declaration authorized by the Planning
Commission on April 12, 1994. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
Council Member Murray offered Ordinance No. 2089 for first reading, an
ordinance of the City Council of the City of Redding amending Redding
Municipal Code Title 17 by repealing Title 17 in its entirety and adding a new
Title 17 entitled Subdivision Ordinance with the following modification to
Section 18.47.130: delete reference to requiring an environmental impact
report (EIR) for encroachments which exceed 20,000 square feet.
Council Member Murray related that the Montgomery Watson study projects
flooding at ultimate build out 50 years from now. An alternative premise
which has been presented assumes no increase in runoff beyond current levels
based on mitigation to be incorporated into the project, which is a
combination of alternatives four and five. Mr. Murray inquired as to the
proposed ordinance's triggering mechanism.
Mr. Perry explained that the triggering mechanism is two things: 1) FEMA;
and 2) Absent FEMA, the City Council would have to adopt something such as
the SDMP or a basinwide drainage plan.
Council Member Murray favored the adoption of alternative four and the first
two sentences of alternative five. He also believed it was necessary to
define the purpose of the proposed ordinance, what study is being utilized,
and at what level. He desired to use the Montgomery Watson study using 1994
figures. Since the premise for adopting the ordinance and these policies is
that there will be no increase in flood flows, there is no need for
infrastructure.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Murray, seconded by Council Member Kehoe,
directing staff to utilize the 1992 year flood flows estimated by the Storm
Drain Master Plan rather than the higher, full urbanization estimates and
directed staff to undertake additional studies to determine the most feasible
locations for detention facilities as proposed by the local engineers. The
study could focus on the more general parameters of establishing detention
facilities in each basin. Floodplain elevations are to be derived from the
Montgomery Watson study for July 1, 1994. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
MOTION: Made by Council Member Murray, seconded by Council Member Kehoe,
directing staff to contact Shasta County and the City of Shasta Lake for a
project referral on all projects originating in either of those entities
impacting the storm drainage basins within the City of Redding, thereby making
the City of Redding a reviewing agency under California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) provisions for review and comment. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
At the hour of 8:35 p.m., Mayor R. Anderson declared the meeting recessed.
At the hour of 8:45 p.m., Mayor R. Anderson reconvened the meeting to regular
session.
PUBLIC HEARING
- re Amendment to Chapter 18.62, Off-Street Parking and Loading
Regulations
(P-030-200 & L-010-500-050)
The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor R. Anderson opened the public
hearing regarding the amendment to Chapter 18.62, off-street parking and
loading
regulations.
The following documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
Affidavit of Publication - Notice of Public Hearing
Planning Commission recommendation dated June 14, 1994
City Clerk Strohmayer advised that no protests were received.
Planning and Community Development Director Perry related that the Planning
Commission, at its meeting of May 10, 1994, recommended approval of amendments
to the off-street parking ordinance. The amendments are necessitated by the
disabled persons access requirements of the Federal Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). With the signing of the act into law, the State of
California has also taken action to ensure that its regulations are consistent
with the Federal requirements. One of the many aspects of these regulations
that affects development in the City is disabled parking regulations.
Mr. Perry explained that the California State Accessibility Standards and the
California Multiple Family Disabled Access Regulations specify numerous
requirements to ensure that adequate parking and access are available to those
persons with physical disabilities. Among other things, those regulations
cover the following areas: number of accessible parking spaces required;
location of accessible parking spaces; signage and striping requirements; size
of spaces; and arrangement and slope of parking spaces.
Mr. Perry noted that the proposed amendments are the minimum necessary to meet
the above mandates. This requires an increase in the required number of
handicapped spaces by approximately 35 percent over existing code, as well as
ensuring that routes of travel from parking areas to building entrances are
provided. The size of these parking stalls remains unchanged, except that at
least one space in each eight handicapped spaces must be "van accessible" with
a total width of 17 feet.
It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council ratify the Negative
Declaration and offer the ordinance for first reading.
Mayor R. Anderson determined that there were no individuals present wishing to
speak on the matter and closed the public hearing.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member McGeorge,
that the City Council make the following findings regarding the amendment to
Chapter 18.62 of the Redding Municipal Code:
1. Project is compatible with the Redding General Plan;
2. Project will not significantly alter existing land form;
3. Project is compatible with surrounding land use;
4. Project is compatible with the Code of the City of Redding,
California; and ratify the Negative Declaration authorized by the Planning
Commission on May 10, 1994. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
Council Member Kehoe offered Ordinance No. 2090 for first reading, an
ordinance of the City Council of the City of Redding amending Redding
Municipal Code Chapter 18.62, off-street parking and loading regulations, by
repealing Section 18.62.300 and adding a new Section 18.62.300 entitled
special requirements.
PUBLIC HEARING
- re General Plan Amendment GPA-14-92, Upper Stillwater Area
Plan
(G-030-010)
The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor R. Anderson opened the public
hearing regarding General Plan Amendment GPA-14-92, Upper Stillwater Area
Plan.
The following documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
Affidavit of Publication - Notice of Public Hearing
Planning Commission recommendation dated June 21, 1994
City Clerk Strohmayer advised that a letter was received from Pacific Gas &
Electric.
Assistant Planner Haddox related that the Planning Commission, at its meeting
of May 24, 1994, recommended approval of the Upper Stillwater Area Plan, GPA-
14-92. The amendment was initiated by the City and is intended to be a
refinement of the Redding General Plan which will establish the future land
use and circulation pattern in the area, as well as address the recreation,
shopping, employment, and housing needs of the area's present and future
residents. The plan area encompasses 5,690 acres, or approximately 8.87
square miles, and is generally bounded on the north and east by the City's
Sphere of Influence boundary, on the south by State Highway 299E, and on the
west by the extension of Sun Ridge Drive northerly to Moody Creek then north
along Moody Creek to the City's Sphere of Influence boundary. The Area Plan
document and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR-4-92 were delivered
to the City Council on May 26, 1994.
Ms. Haddox provided an overview of the Report to City Council dated June 21,
1994, incorporated herein by reference, which discussed the area plan and
noted that all environmental impacts, except those related to the area's
school facilities, can be mitigated to a less than significant level through
mitigation measures incorporated into the Area Plan as policies. Alternative
3 in the EIR forms the basis of the recommended General Plan in the Area Plan
document. The mitigation measures identified in the EIR form the basis of the
mitigation monitoring program intended to be utilized during any discretionary
permit review in the plan area upon annexation into the City of Redding. The
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is Appendix A of the Area Plan.
Ms. Haddox explained that as required under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15093, the decision makers need to balance the
benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in
determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of a proposed
project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse
environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." Where the decision of
the public agency allows the occurrence of significant effects which are
identified in the Final EIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, the
agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based
on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. The unavoidable
environmental risk is the continued overcrowding of the area's school
facilities due to the potential population growth facilitated by the adoption
of the Area Plan's higher residential densities. As discussed in the EIR,
both elementary school districts within the plan area are operating at
capacity. Additional growth, regardless of whether it is facilitated by the
adoption of the Area Plan, will severely impact currently overcrowded
facilities. Application of all feasible mitigation measures will not
significantly reduce this impact.
Ms. Haddox highlighted the four requests received to modify the proposed
General Plan which were discussed at the Planning Commission's May 24, 1994,
meeting and the appropriate recommendations.
It is the recommendation of the Planning Commission and staff that the City
Council approve the Upper Stillwater Area Plan, GPA-14-92, as recommended by
the Planning Commission. It is further recommended that: 1) pursuant to
Section 15090 of the CEQA guidelines, the City Council adopt the resolution
certifying that it has read and considered the Final EIR and find that the
Final EIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA; 2) under Section 15091 of the
CEQA guidelines, the City Council find that changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into the project design which mitigate or avoid
certain significant environment effects associated with the project as
identified in the text of the Final EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Report Program for the Project; 3) pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA
guidelines, the City Council adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations
regarding certain project facilitated unavoidable environmental impacts; and
4) pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, the City Council
adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program prepared for the Project.
Mayor R. Anderson determined that there were no individuals present wishing to
speak on the matter and closed the public hearing.
Council Member Murray opposed the adoption of the area plan, as it is not
integrated with the Air Quality Element of the General Plan and does not
include means for alternate transportation. He did not accept staff's premise
that the plan was a building block for getting some where. He understood the
purpose of area plans to be the further refining and defining of the general
plan in a great deal of specificity. He did not believe the area plan
contained sufficient specificity to warrant its adoption and suggested that
the matter be tabled until the City Council has reviewed the Planning
Department's General Plan process and procedures.
In response to Council Member Kehoe, Planning and Community Development
Director Perry related that the urgency behind the area plan's adoption is
that there are projects, i.e., Tierra Oaks, which are in the City but are not
covered by the City's General Plan. It also protects the City's sphere of
influence. Mr. Perry related that assuming Council Member Murray is correct,
the proposed area plan is still 100 percent more complete than currently
exists. He believed staff did a pretty good job in preparing the area plan
due to the lack of testimony at the Planning Commission and the very few
requests received regarding change in the amount of density.
In response to Council Member P. Anderson, Mr. Perry noted that the issue of
bike trails was raised and part of that will be accomplished on public
streets. In the long term, however, the City is going to need to make a
decision on whether it wants to develop a bike corridor plan. He commented
that while there is not a major community park in the area, there will be
neighborhood parks. He concurred that the plan does not support bussing
except in the Shasta College
area, however, it is a low density area. He reiterated that this is not the
final product, but is better than what currently exists today.
MOTION: Made by Council Member McGeorge, seconded by Council Member Kehoe,
that Resolution No. 94-178, approving General Plan Amendment GPA-14-92, the
Upper Stillwater Area Plan, finding that, inter alia, final EIR-4-92,
adequately addresses the environmental impacts of the Upper Stillwater Area
Plan; and adopting (1) findings for the project; (2) a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the project; and (3) a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for the project.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, and R. Anderson
Noes: Council Members - Murray
Absent: Council Members - None
Resolution No. 94-178 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
PUBLIC HEARING
- re Appeal of Conditions of Planning Commission Approval of
Tentative Subdivision Map S-9-93, Lincoln Estates, Unit 3
(S-100-437)
The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor R. Anderson opened the public
hearing regarding the appeal of conditions of the Planning Commission's
approval of Tentative Subdivision Map S-9-93, Lincoln Estates Unit 3.
The following documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
Affidavit of Mailing - Notice of Public Hearing
Affidavit of Publication - Notice of Public Hearing
Planning Commission recommendation dated June 14, 1994
City Clerk Strohmayer advised that a letter dated July 18, 1994, was received
from Frank Cabezud of Shasta Construction.
Associate Planner Hanson explained that the Planning Commission, at its
meeting of April 26, 1994, granted Joe Delija, et al., permission to subdivide
17.43 acres into 34 single-family residential lots. The subdivision site is
located southeast of Enterprise High School, south of Lawrence Road, and east
of Harpole Road in a "U" Unclassified District.
Mr. Hanson related that during its review of the application, the Planning
Commission addressed the issue of secondary access, primarily the cost of off-
site improvements to Lawrence Road. Lincoln Estates and an adjoining
subdivision to the north, Greenway Subdivision, Unit 2, which both have the
requirement to make substantial improvements to the off-site Lawrence Road
before any additional lots may be recorded. These conditions were applied in
1990. Since then, the Lincoln Estates Tentative Map has expired, requiring a
reapplication. The developers of the Lincoln Estates Subdivision objected to
the off-site Lawrence Road improvements and have filed a letter of appeal. A
letter was received from the engineer for the Greenway Subdivision objecting
to the applicant's request to modify conditions.
The Report to City Council dated June 14, 1994, incorporated herein by
reference, provided a background on the project and the issues raised by the
applicant.
Mr. Hanson related that the developers of Lincoln Estates want to modify the
off-site Lawrence Road improvements requirement in Condition 7 should Lincoln
Estates develop before the Greenway Subdivision. The developer is hoping to
obtain relief from the off-site improvement requirements to Lawrence Road by
establishing a per-lot fee for reimbursing the Greenway Subdivision developer
for Middleton Road improvements and a second per-lot fee for an escrow account
for future improvements to Lawrence Road. Under this proposal, the 34 lots in
Lincoln Estates, Unit 3, would use Middleton Lane.
Mr. Hanson explained that in reviewing the developer's request, the Commission
expressed concern that additional traffic would burden Middleton Lane
residents. The Commission also suggested that the conditions as approved for
Lincoln Estates not be modified unless both developers reached an agreement
that resulted in appropriate and timely improvements to Lawrence Road.
Several Middleton Lane residents expressed concern for the developer's
proposed conditions during the Planning Commission hearing.
Mr. Hanson indicated that from staff's perspective, the requirements for
secondary access are necessary to avoid a substantial traffic-safety problem.
It is also important for the City Council to understand the history of the
two tentative maps. Both tentative maps were submitted in 1990, one right
after the other. Both sets of conditions were developed and approved with the
same expected result, that Lawrence Road would be improved as the primary
access, including a signal at Hartnell Avenue to allow safe ingress and egress
to the subdivisions, with Middleton Lane providing secondary access. The
developers
have lived with these requirements and the City's concern for traffic safety
for four years. Changing the requirements for one will lead to a request for
leniency from the other. If Lincoln Estates is permitted 34 more lots with
only Middleton Lane access, Greenway Subdivision can also be expected to
request 34 additional lots (in addition to the 50 already recorded) with
access only via Middleton Lane. In the end, the Lawrence Road improvements
may not be built.
Mr. Hanson related that the intent of the conditions was to allow some phasing
of off-site costs relative to the number of lots constructed. In other words,
both Middleton Lane and Lawrence Road need to be upgraded, but it is not
realistic to require both roads up front with the first phase regardless of
who built first. By itself, the per-lot costs for Lincoln Estates would be
higher. That is to be expected since the project is an additional 1,500 feet
from any paved public street.
Mr. Hanson recognized that the off-site costs are substantial for just 34
lots; however, at the time the property was acquired and a tentative map
approved, access to a paved public road was not available without expensive
off-site acquisition and off-site construction. It is the opinion of staff
that the Planning Commission's reasoning on this issue was sound and that
lacking any agreement between the two developers, the Commission's approval
should not be changed.
Boyd Cassidy, 3201 Middleton Lane, expressed concern that the road is only 33
feet from the edge of the curb to a power pole on the opposite side of the
street. Middleton Lane is utilized as a thoroughfare by students from
Enterprise High School. He opined that it would create an unsafe situation to
add additional traffic from the proposed lots.
Virgil Weld, of Weld-Brower & Associates, representing the applicants, related
that the subdivision as conditioned and approved by the Planning Commission
would mean a cost of $23,500 per lot, thereby not allowing for a profit
margin. He noted his greater concern, however, is the inequity which has
occurred in the conditioning of the project. He referenced a letter from
Planning Commissioner Brown which states he believed the Planning Commission
was mislead and the conditions were represented to be mere images of those
placed on Greenway Subdivision, now known as Daphney Subdivision. He pointed
out that the conditions for Greenway Subdivision does not require
reimbursement to the developers of Lincoln Estates if they build Lawrence
Road, whereas the conditions for Lincoln Estates requires its developers to
contribute to the cost of Lawrence Road if Greenway developers construct it.
Mr. Weld believed the only way to rectify the situation would be to create a
zone of benefit or something of a similar nature. On a conservative basis, he
estimated that if Lincoln Estates were permitted to develop utilizing
Middleton Lane, it would generate approximately 1,000 vehicle trips per day.
He requested that the City Council consider all the factors before making a
decision.
Frank Cabezud stated that the issue is allowing the exiting of 34 lots from
Lincoln Estates and 50 lots from Greenway Subdivision through Middleton Lane.
He noted that the Planning Commission did not know that the safety issue had
already been considered by the Planning Department and these conditions were
set forth with Lincoln Estates and Greenway Subdivision. It did not become an
issue until the Planning Department realized that allowing Greenway
Subdivision to develop the first phase and not contribute to the improvement
of Lawrence Road was a mistake on the part of the Planning Department. He
stressed that the issue of traffic on Middleton Lane had already been resolved
to allow 84 lots, 34 from Lincoln Estates and 50 from Greenway Subdivision, to
exit Middleton Lane. He alleged that the Planning Department contradicted
itself during the proceedings that only 50 lots were allowed on Middleton
Lane. He suggested that the only way to have Lawrence Road improved is via a
benefit district, which is equitable to both developers. He opined that if
the proposal is not approved, it is doubtful that Greenway Subdivision will
proceed due to the high cost of developing Lawrence Road.
Mayor R. Anderson determined that there were no additional individuals wishing
to speak on the matter and closed the public hearing.
In response to Council Member P. Anderson, Planning and Community Development
Director Perry stated that the two subdivisions were processed at different
times. Staff's original intent was to have both subdivisions contribute to
the upgrading of Middleton Lane and Lawrence Road, which provide access to the
area. Middleton Lane, which is a substandard street, has been somewhat
improved by Greenway Subdivision. The disadvantage to Lincoln Estates is that
it has no paved access, while Greenway Subdivision has the advantage of having
paved access it can connect to. Mr. Perry believed that the only way a
benefit district could be formed is for an arterial street, not a local
residential street. If both parties are agreeable, however, an assessment
district could be formed. Staff does not believe the developers of Greenway
Subdivision would be willing to
participate in an assessment district. With regard to Greenway Subdivision's
conditions, the only way the conditions can be changed is at the time the map
has completely expired or the developer is willing to change the conditions.
Council Member Murray opined that the City is utilizing new development to
solve a problem which already exists on Lawrence Road. Mr. Perry related that
the residents on Middleton Lane are requesting that no further traffic be
allowed without further improvement to Lawrence Road.
Council Member McGeorge questioned whether at any time the developers of
Lincoln Estates believed they had permission to utilize Middleton Lane.
Associate Planner Hanson explained that in developing the conditions for
Lincoln Estates, staff tried to consider all possibilities. There was a
condition that would have allowed the utilization of Middleton Lane had
Lincoln Estates been approved first. The development of three-fourth of a
mile of off-site improvements would have been the only way Lincoln Estates
would have been allowed to utilize Middleton Lane. The developer chose not to
do that and delayed development of other phases of the subdivision, presumably
waiting for Greenway Subdivision to develop.
Mr. Hanson related that the conditions were written that if Greenway
Subdivision developed first, it would be required to develop off-site
improvements to Lawrence Road. If Greenway Subdivision developed Lawrence
Road, Lincoln Estates would be required to pay a per-lot fee to reimburse
Greenway Subdivision. The only reason no reimbursement agreement was attached
to Greenway Subdivision is that it was approved prior to Lincoln Estates'
application.
Mr. Perry noted that the ideal situation would be for both property owners to
share the cost of developing Lawrence Road through an assessment district,
however, there is no mechanism to force that to occur.
Mr. Hanson noted that staff contacted the developer and engineer for Greenway
Subdivision and suggested that Lincoln Estates' proposal would assist them in
future development, however, they did not want to enter into a cooperative
agreement.
Council Member Kehoe questioned whether staff and the Planning Commission had
the capability of developing additional alternatives to the situation. Mr.
Perry stated that could be done, however, the problem is the ability to work
with two subdividers in developing a workable solution. The City Council must
deal with this specific appeal and once the public hearing is closed, it has
30 days to render a decision unless there is agreement to continue the public
hearing.
Council Member Kehoe favored continuing the public hearing and taking a field
trip to the property.
Mayor R. Anderson reopened the public hearing.
Betty Cassidy related that Middleton Lane does not have room to walk other
than on the road. In her view, it is unsafe to add additional traffic to a
street occupied with children and bikes.
Joe Delija, developer and co-owner of Lincoln Estates, stated that had they
known that Lincoln Estates would not be permitted to exit Middleton Lane, they
would not have invested to this extent.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member Murray, that
the public hearing regarding the appeal of conditions of Tentative Subdivision
Map S-9-93, Lincoln Estates, Unit 3, be continued to July 5, 1994. The Vote:
Unanimous Ayes
APPOINTMENT AND REAPPOINTMENTS - Economic Development Corporation
(B-080-150)
MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member P. Anderson,
to appoint John Dunlap and reappoint George Lewellen and Alan Hill to the
Economic Development Corporation for two-year terms expiring June 30, 1996.
The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
REAPPOINTMENTS
- Senior Citizens Facility Advisory Commission
(B-080-450)
MOTION: Made by Council Member McGeorge, seconded by Council Member Kehoe, to
reappoint Mary Martz and Beverly Romero to serve as the Soroptimist
International of Redding's representatives to the Senior Citizens Facility
Advisory Commission for two-year terms expiring May 1, 1996. The Vote:
Unanimous Ayes
ORDINANCE NO. 2087
- Amendment to Chapter 16.28 of the Redding Municipal Code,
Swimming Pools
(L-010-500-050)
MOTION: Made by Council Member McGeorge, seconded by Council Member Kehoe,
that the full reading of Ordinance No. 2087 be waived and the City Attorney be
instructed to read the full title. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member McGeorge,
that Ordinance No. 2087 be adopted, an ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Redding amending portions of Chapter 16.28 of the Redding Municipal
Code pertaining to swimming pools.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, Murray and R.
Anderson
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
Ordinance No. 2087 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
ORDINANCE NO. 2088
- Amendments to Chapter 18.55 of the Redding Municipal
Code, Trash Container Enclosure
(L-010-500-050)
MOTION: Made by Council Member McGeorge, seconded by Council Member Kehoe,
that the full reading of Ordinance No. 2088 be waived and the City Attorney be
instructed to read the full title. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
MOTION: Made by Council Member P. Anderson, seconded by Council Member Kehoe,
that Ordinance No. 2088 be adopted, an ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Redding amending Redding Municipal Code Title 18, Zoning, by repealing
Chapter 18.55 and adding a new Chapter 18.55 entitled Trash Container
Enclosures.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, Murray and R.
Anderson
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
Ordinance No. 2088 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
ALTERNATIVE FOR COMPLETION OF COMBUSTION TURBINE POWER PROJECT
(E-120-150)
Mayor R. Anderson stated that the City Council hoped to be able to make a
recommendation regarding the City's three options and provide a cost estimate
to complete the combustion turbine power project, however, the process has
proven to be more complex than anticipated and there are legal implications
which must be considered. He hopes to have a more definitive proposal
regarding the project within the next two weeks.
RESOLUTION
- Memorandum of Understanding with the Peace Officers Association
of Redding
(P-100-050-120)
Assistant City Manager McMurry stated that City negotiators have reached
agreement on a proposed 39-month Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the
Redding Peace Officers Association (RPOA) covering wages, hours, and working
conditions. The term of the agreement runs for 39 months to September 19,
1997. Economic features of the agreement include a 4 percent wage adjustment
effective in the current payroll period, an additional 4 percent effective
June 18, 1995, a 5 percent adjustment effective June 17, 1996, a flat $100
increase in the Uniform Allowance, and a flat $100 increase in educational
incentive program, and implementation of the 1959 third level survivor's
benefit under PERS. Also included are a number of changes in non-economic
items involving working conditions.
Mr. McMurry related that the MOU was ratified by members of the Redding Peace
Officers Association through a formal secret ballot election. It is the
recommendation of staff that the City Council adopt the necessary resolution
approving the MOU and providing for an agreement covering wages, hours, and
working conditions for employees in the police unit represented by the Redding
Peace Officers Association for 39 months ending September 19, 1997.
MOTION: Made by Council Member McGeorge, seconded by Council Member Murray,
that Resolution No. 94-179 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Redding approving the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding
between the City of Redding and the Peace Officers Association of Redding,
effective June 19, 1994 through September 19, 1997.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, Murray and R.
Anderson
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
Resolution No. 94-179 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT
- United Financial of Illinois, Inc. re Future
Equipment Purchases
(D-050-400-100)
Director of Finance Downing recalled that the City Council, at its meeting of
November 17, 1993, approved entering into a lease purchase agreement with
United Financial of Illinois for the purchase of equipment valued at $420,000.
In February 1994, the City Council approved extending this lease to include
additional equipment purchases through September 1994 with a maximum value of
$1,800,000. Terms of the November lease would be extended to such purchases.
However, when staff received documents for this lease extension, the terms
were somewhat different. United Financial is proposing an equipment lease
purchase with the following interest rates: 1) 3-year term - 5.3 percent; 2)
4-year term - 5.4 percent; and 3) 5-year term - 5.5 percent.
Ms. Downing explained that since this was a significant change in the lease
proposal, staff requested proposals from a number of other leasing companies.
The best of the eight proposals received was from Sutro & Co., Inc. and
proposed the following interest rates: 1) 3-year term - 5.85 percent; 2) 4-
year term - 5.9 percent; and 3) 5-year term - 5.9 percent. The lease-
purchase financing being proposed by United Financial, though different from
its November proposal, still provides the City attractive interest rates.
Staff has reviewed the equipment currently on order and equipment included in
the proposed 1994-95 budget and it appears that equipment purchases through
September 1994 will total approximately $1,200,000. Cost savings could still
be accomplished if these purchases were pooled together into one equipment
lease purchase financing. Equipment purchased through this financing
mechanism would be subject to the justification and control procedures of the
budget and purchasing process.
It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council approve the extension
of the lease purchase financing arrangement with United Financial of Illinois,
Inc. to include an additional $1,200,000 for future equipment purchases
through September 1994 and authorize the City Manager to sign the necessary
documentation.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member McGeorge, to
approve the extension of the lease purchase financing arrangement with United
Financial of Illinois, Inc. to include an additional $1,200,000 for future
equipment purchases through September 1994 and authorize the City Manager to
sign the necessary documentation. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
ADJUSTMENTS TO SCHEDULE OF FEES AND SERVICE CHARGES
(F-205-600)
Director of Finance Downing provided an overview of the Report to City Council
dated June 15, 1994, incorporated herein by reference, providing a report
depicting the fees and service charges which are proposed to be adjusted on
the master schedule at the public hearing on July 5, 1994.
Ms. Downing added that the Airports Commission has recommended delaying an
increase in the Airports' fees, as the Airports Master Plan will be received
some time in July or August and the Airports Commission will be making a
recommendation to the City Council in November based upon that study.
In response to Council Member P. Anderson, Ms. Downing explained that staff
has not finished the comparison of development costs and the information would
not be available for the July 5, 1994, City Council meeting.
In response to Council Member Murray, Ms. Downing related that the 1994-95
budget does not include any of the proposed increases.
No action was required on this item.
CONSIDERATION OF NORTHEAST AREA FIRE STATION
(C-050-275)
Director of Planning and Community Development Perry related that the City
Council, at its meeting of June 7, 1994, raised three additional questions
regarding the Northeast Area Fire Station. He provided an overview of the
Report to City Council dated June 14, 1994, incorporated herein by reference,
which outlined the questions and staff's responses.
Mr. Perry explained that one question which was not asked was what funding
would be used to construct a new station, which would probably occur before
the sale of the old station. The cost of a new station would be approximately
$600,000, which is too small for a bond issue with competitive rates. He
cited the following ways in which a new station could be financed: 1) Fold
it in with another bond issue and make the equivalent of mortgage payments
over the term of the bonds; 2) Fund the cost of construction out of the
City's Building Fund,
established by City Council Policy No. 407, and then repay that fund upon the
sale of the old station; 3) Utilize proceeds from the City's Capital
Improvement Tax over a period of three or four years to fund construction; and
4) Establish a fire station benefit fee for the area covered by the station
whereby new development would pay a fee to repay the cost of construction.
Mr. Perry indicated that staff is unsure if the City Council wants to proceed
with a fire station in this area. If it does, then the City Council needs to
continue to raise money for design and construction tied to the eventual
relocation of the people and equipment on the Canyon Creek location. If not,
then determinations need to be made on what happens when Buenaventura
Boulevard is extended, what other station is wanted, and how to back out of
the agreement entered into with the developer and the commitment made to the
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
It was the consensus of the City Council to delay consideration of the
northeast area fire station until the City Council has reviewed the City's
Capital Improvement Plan.
ANNEXATION WEST OF KNIGHTON ROAD/I-5 INTERCHANGE
(A-150)
Director of Planning and Community Development Perry related that the City
Council commenced annexation proceedings for Annexation 94-2, Knighton Road/I-
5 Interchange, at its meeting of June 7, 1994. At the meeting, staff
identified additional properties that wanted to be but were not included in
Annexation 94-2. Since the meeting, staff received a written request for
annexation from several of the adjoining parcels. The applicants understand
that this is a separate request and that Annexation 94-2 must be recorded in
order for their properties to be contiguous to the City limits. The reason
for annexation is to receive City services.
Mr. Perry explained that pursuant to City Council policy, the applicants will
be required to enter into an Agreement to pay all fees and staff costs
associated with the formation of a Mello-Roos district in conjunction with the
processing of the annexation request.
It is the recommendation of staff that the processing of this annexation
request be deferred until Annexation 94-2 is approved by LAFCO. If Annexation
94-2, Knighton Road/I-5 Interchanges is denied, withdrawn or held up pending
litigation, there would be no point in processing this current request.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member Murray, that
the City Council defer the processing of the annexation request of properties
west of the Knighton Road/I-5 Interchange until Annexation 94-2 is approved by
the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
PURCHASE OF CITY SURPLUS LAND
- by Wells, Wingate, Small, Selke and Graham
(2440 Sonoma Street)
(C-070-200)
Director of Planning and Community Development Perry stated that a Letter of
Intent to purchase City surplus land located at 2440 Sonoma Street was
received from Haedrich & Cox on behalf of Wells, Wingate, Small, Selke and
Graham (WWSS&G). The property requested is Parcel 1 of LS-12-92, which was
created in 1993 when Assessor's Parcel Number 104-880-06 was subdivided into
four lots. WWSS&G proposes to acquire the property to construct offices and
for future office expansion. The City recently entered into a purchase
agreement with WWSS&G for Parcel 2 which is located directly south of the
subject property.
Mr. Perry explained that the Letter of Intent is not a legally binding offer
to purchase. The City Council is being asked to indicate its willingness to
enter into a Purchase Agreement based on the terms and conditions outlined in
the Letter of Intent. A summary of the terms and conditions presented in the
Letter of Intent was included in the Report to City Council dated June 21,
1994, incorporated herein by reference.
Mr. Perry stated that the terms are consistent with the policies set forth in
City Council Policy 1901 regarding the sale of surplus City property adopted
by the City Council on May 17, 1994. The Letter of Intent indicates that it
is the intent of WWSS&G to purchase the property at the City's asking price.
The $5,000 non-refundable deposit equates roughly to the amount of interest
the City would earn on $380,000 over a three-month period if invested at five
percent. Additionally, the buyer anticipates expending a considerable amount
in pursuing due diligence to determine the feasibility of developing the
property for their purposes.
It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council waive a property
auction and advise WWSS&G that the City is prepared to enter into a Purchase
Agreement with the purchase price to be the current fair market value with the
timing for
WWSS&G to obtain financing for the purchase to conform with the time schedule
identified in Article 10 of the Letter of Intent.
Council Member Murray asked that the following language be added to Item #11
of the Letter of Intent: "In the event of cancellation, all such surveys,
tests, engineering or other studies shall be released to and become the
property of the City of Redding. Said document release shall precede any
release of deposit."
In response to Council Member Murray, City Attorney Hays stated that if the
Purchase Agreement contained any material changes from the Letter of Intent,
it would require the City Council's approval.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Murray, seconded by Council Member Kehoe, to
waive a property auction of City surplus land at 2440 Sonoma Street and
directed staff to advise Wells, Wingate, Small, Selke and Graham (WWSS&G) that
the City is prepared to enter a Purchase Agreement with the purchase price to
be the current fair market value with the timing for WWSS&G to obtain
financing for the purchase to conform with the time schedule identified in
Article 10 of the Letter of Intent, and the following modification be made to
Article 11 of the Letter of Intent, "In the event of cancellation, all such
surveys, tests, engineering or other studies shall be released to and become
the property of the City of Redding. Said document release shall precede any
release of deposit." The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
CITY COUNCIL POLICY RE VOLUNTEER WORK PROJECTS
(A-050-060-555)
Risk Manager Mlinarcik related that City Council Policy No. 209 encourages
volunteers and establishes a City-wide program for recruitment and training.
In addition to the daily activities of volunteers who donate their time in
City service, various citizen groups have also requested approval to perform
specific work projects. Some of the individuals or groups may be unwilling or
unable, due to financial or other considerations, to provide insurance to
cover the liabilities associated with their proposed activities. Those
activities may cause bodily injury or property damage to the participants
and/or the general public and thereby expose the City to potential liability.
Mr. Mlinarcik explained that the City requires its employees to adhere to
various safety regulations. All contractors are also required to do so and
provide evidence of insurance covering the liabilities associated with their
activities on behalf of the City. A City Council policy requiring volunteer
groups to follow similar guidelines reinforces the City's existing policy
which places the safety of its personnel and the public as its highest
priority.
Mr. Mlinarcik provided an overview of the proposed City Council policy
regarding volunteer work projects as depicted in the Report to City Council
dated June 21, 1994, incorporated herein by reference.
Mr. Mlinarcik acknowledged that some items would not be possible for all
events, but if that were the case, the project would need to brought back to
the City Council for its exclusive approval so that it is aware of the
potential liabilities. He noted that the purpose of the policy is not to
create additional paperwork, but to ensure that the volunteer groups carefully
evaluate safety issues which may arise and keep the City Council apprised of
the liability issues of the projects and help assess the benefits and risks of
the projects, thereby allowing an informed decision to be made.
Mayor R. Anderson stated his main concern is not to make the process so
burdensome that it discourages volunteer activities. He also questioned if
reviewing a group's safety training would place the City in a position of
assuming liability and endorsing the training program.
Mr. Mlinarcik believed that the City would be involved in any event, as the
volunteer group would be working on City property and giving some approval to
the project. He related that staff's main concern is that there be some type
of training and that the group understands what is involved before the project
starts. He stated that he spoke with the gentlemen who was the safety
coordinator for Project Playground in Fairfield and he indicated that the main
concern was power tools and ensuring that only the skilled individuals used
the power tools.
City Attorney Hays did not believe staff would be passing on the adequacy of
the training programs, but merely asking the groups to perform in a manner
that would allow the City to make some judgement as to what type of safety
program is being
utilized and provide the information necessary to evaluate and judge the risks
associated to the project and make a decision with regard to insurance
requirements.
Council Member Murray questioned why the procedures needed to be included in
the actual City Council Policy. Mr. Mlinarcik related that the procedures had
been included to ensure volunteer groups understand the City's concerns and
what is being required. He noted, however, that the procedures could be
omitted from the policy and included in an internal working document if that
was the City Council's desire.
Council Member P. Anderson opined that requiring volunteer groups to provide
the City insurance is insulting considering that the group is donating their
time and money to build a City resource.
Mr. Mlinarcik stated that he does not take the recommendation lightly and the
issue has been a matter of controversy among different public agencies and how
to approach the matter of insurance. He acknowledged that requesting
volunteer groups to provide insurance is a lot to request, however, they are
performing a service for the City and there is the potential for exposure
which may be borne by the City. The more severe the exposures are, the more
important the need for insurance.
Council Member P. Anderson suggested that the cost of the insurance become
part of the project cost borne by the City and budgeted accordingly by the
appropriate department. She believed that if the City required volunteer
groups to provide insurance, volunteer group efforts would become nonexistent.
Council Member Kehoe concurred with Council Member P. Anderson. He stated
that the associated risks cannot be ignored and noted the importance of
providing some guidance with regard to job hazard analysis, child labor laws,
blood borne pathogens program, etc. He asked why staff felt it necessary to
distinguish between group and individual activity.
Mr. Mlinarcik related that the primary reason for the distinction is that
group activity is on a much larger scale, i.e., Project Playground.
Council Member Kehoe was of the opinion that the City Council envisioned a
significant expansion of the Volunteer Program and that it is very possible
that volunteers in the future would be working with the Public Works
Department utilizing chain saws, etc. He noted that it would be logical for
the City to provide some training and analysis to the volunteers.
Mr. Hays believed that the proposed policy is geared toward volunteer projects
which are not supervised by the City but are located on City-owned property.
Council Member Kehoe related that there are three classifications of
volunteers, individuals, groups and sponsored volunteers. In most situations,
agreements are written in such a fashion that the sponsored group assumes the
liability and insurance protection. He was hesitant to have volunteers
working on behalf of the City without some level of supervision.
Assistant City Manager McMurry had the understanding that Project Playground
would be built by a group of volunteers under the direction of the architect
on City-owned property.
In response to Mayor R. Anderson, Mr. Mlinarcik related that discussions are
still ongoing with regard to the Redding Rotary sponsoring Project Playground.
Mr. Hays related that a Sponsorship Agreement was provided for the project,
however, it had not yet been signed.
In response to Council Member Murray, Mr. Hays noted that there have been
numerous occasions where insurance has been in place for volunteer projects.
Council Member Murray acknowledged that it is staff's job to present these
matters and relay the associated risk. It is then the City Council's
responsibility to make a decision on what it chooses to do. He noted that it
would be helpful to have a policy which differentiates between the traditional
type groups. He suggested that the policy be rewritten to better define the
categories which have been alluded to. Council Member McGeorge concurred.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Murray, seconded by Council Member Kehoe, to
refer the City Council policy relating to volunteer work projects back to
staff for further clarification and definition. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
PROPOSAL TO AMEND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FORMAT
(A-050-060)
City Clerk Strohmayer highlighted the Report to City Council dated June 15,
1994,
incorporated herein by reference, concerning suggested changes to the City
Council agenda format.
Council Member P. Anderson related that it would be helpful to have
informational items placed in a different section of the agenda from action
items. City Clerk Strohmayer responded that informational items are
delineated from action items by noting "information" under the recommendation.
Council Member Murray concurred that the agenda needs to clearly define the
City Council's intended action.
No action was taken by the City Council on this matter.
RESOLUTION
- Museum Funding Agreement with Turtle Bay Park & Museum, Redding
Museum of Art & History, and Shasta Natural Science Association
(B-130-070 & C-070-250-250)
Community Services Director Gorman explained that the Redding Museum of Art
and History and the Carter House Natural Science Museum are City agencies, but
are also private sector non-profit corporations: the Redding Museum directly,
and Carter House, indirectly, under its corporate parent, the Shasta Natural
Science Association.
Mr. Gorman stated that for some years now, the City has provided staff and
other services to these agencies, in accordance with provisions contained in
lease agreements for their use of City-owned facilities in Caldwell Park, and
otherwise as requested by the museums from time to time. Additional funds for
agency programming have been developed from the private sector, and
administered by City staff under the guidance of the Board of Directors.
Mr. Gorman related that in 1989, these two agencies joined with the Forest
Museum, a private sector non-profit corporation, to form yet another private
sector non-profit corporation, the Alliance of Redding Museums, for the
purpose of developing new museum facilities at Turtle Bay. Early in 1991, the
City leased to the Alliance sixty acres of land at Turtle Bay for that
purpose. Design work began shortly thereafter, and has continued throughout
the intervening time. Early last year, the Alliance reorganized its corporate
structure, and began doing business as the Turtle Bay Park and Museum.
Mr. Gorman said that last fall, the Board of Directors of the Redding Museum,
Carter House, and The Forest Museum approved a plan for reorganization of the
museum community that calls for an eventual merger of the agencies into the
newly restructured, and fully private Alliance, dba Turtle Bay Park and
Museum. It was evident at that point that appropriate action should be taken
to move the City museums the remaining distance into the private sector.
Shortly thereafter, staff began a series of discussions with agency
representatives as to how best to accomplish full privatization, while
assuring sufficient funding for museum purposes during an orderly transition,
and providing City museum employees the opportunities and considerations due
their service. The product of those discussions is the Museum Funding
Agreement which is before the City Council for consideration.
Mr. Gorman provided an overview of the key points of the agreement as outlined
in the Report to City Council dated June 14, 1994, incorporated herein by
reference.
It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council adopt the necessary
resolution approving the agreement.
MOTION: Made by Council Member P. Anderson, seconded by Council Member
McGeorge, that Resolution No. 94-180 be adopted, a resolution of the City
Council of the City of Redding approving entering into the Museum Funding
Agreement between the City of Redding, the Alliance of Redding Museums, the
Redding Museum of Art and History, and the Shasta Natural Science Association,
and authorizing the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - P. Anderson, Kehoe, McGeorge, Murray and R.
Anderson
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
Resolution No. 94-180 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
(A-050-060)
It was the consensus of the City Council to conduct a workshop at 8:00 a.m.
Saturday, July 16, 1994, in City Hall Conference Room A to consider planning
issues, the City's area plans and General Plan, annexations, and Mello-Roos
Districts. A subsequent workshop will deal with the City's capital
improvement plan.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, at the hour of 10:37 p.m., Mayor Anderson
declared the meeting adjourned.
APPROVED:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk