City of Brentwood
Home PageContact Us!Back

City Administration

2010 Council Goals and Strategic Plan | City Council Members | Calendar of Events | Elections
eNotification | Sub-Committees| Pledge of Allegiance Sign Ups | Invocation Sign Up
Live Streaming Council Meeting | Streaming PC Help |
Streaming Mac Help |

Current Council Agenda and Past Meeting Information

CITY OF BRENTWOOD
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Minutes of April 9, 2002

A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Brentwood was called to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Community Center located at 730 Third Street, with Mayor McPoland presiding.

Roll Call
Present: Councilmembers Beckstrand, Gomes, Hill, Petrovich, Mayor McPoland
Absent: None

PRESENTATIONS

A. Presentation of plaques to members of the General Plan Update Working Group. 

Mayor McPoland and Councilmember Petrovich presented plaques to the members of the General Plan working group including Karen Rogge, Bruce Ghiselli, Ray Shipley, Connie Stickney, Richard Fertado, Madelyn Krebs, Ron Nunn, Jim Wagerman, Bertha Ruiz, Mike Thomas, Chris Mosser, Steve Padgett, Mike Kerchner, Bob Brockman and the members of the City Council.

B. Presentation of new employees. 

Bailey Grewal, City Engineer, introduced Lori Sanders, Administrative Secretary to the Engineering Department. 

Pamela Ehler, Director of Finance and Information Systems, introduced Patti Bowden, Accounting Technician II.

Mitch Oshinsky, Director of Community Development, introduced Rebecca Purdue, Administrative Assistant I and Tim Nielson, Planning Technician I.

Paul Zolfarelli, Director of Public Works, introduced Joe Ferstler and Jim McCormick as Public Works Maintenance Workers. 

C. Presentation by Marilyn Harper regarding Bright Star Perceptual Motor Skills Program.

Marilyn Harper, Bright Star Perceptual Motor Skills Program introduced Janette Alli, Director of Bright Star School and Ricky Ship, Director of Child Care Services and David Biles, Physical Education Specialist, gave a brief presentation on their perceptual motor learning program explaining that children physical activity helps children with their academics. They had children present to demonstrate some of the learning tools they use.

AGENDA REVIEW

Item 5 Corrected project location.

CITIZEN COMMENTS

Wes Tilton, 1875 Pheasant Run, Brentwood, spoke regarding TSM 8170, stating that he felt there has not been substantial completion on Subdivision 8170. He further stated that the original bond is not valid and wondered if they were currently working under a valid bond. Mr. Tilton then said that he would like closure on this issue and urged the City Council to inform Richmond America that he is open to settlement.

CONSENT CALENDAR

Approve Minutes of March 26, 2002. 

Approve Agreement for Payment of Contract Services with Lucia Albers for Environmental Review for proposed development on Lone Tree and Fairview. 

Approve Agreement for Contract Services with Richard Loewke for Environmental Review for proposed development on Lone Tree and Fairview. 

Approve Resolution No. 2507 authorizing the closure of certain streets to facilitate the City of Brentwood Parks and Recreation Department’s Spring to Life Fun Run on Saturday, April 27, 2002. 

Approve Resolution No. 2508 authorizing the City Manager to increase the project budget to a total of $544,275, approve a Change Order up to 10% of the contract amount, and amend CIP budget to conform to these amendments for John Muir Parkway, CIP Project No. 336-3121, north of Balfour Road. 

Approve Resolution No. 2509 approving the following actions: (1) approve an agreement for purchase of a fee parcel (property exchange) with Jack B. Gregory and Linda A. Gregory, Trustees of the Gregory Living Trust under instrument dated May 10, 1991, for a portion of real property identified as APN 016-120-015, generally located on the east side of the future intersection of Sand Creek Road and O’Hara Avenue, hereby accepting real property on behalf of the City, and authorizing the Mayor or City Manager and City Clerk or any of their designees to execute the agreement, and such other documents as may be needed to complete the transaction including acceptance of the Deed; (2) authorize the Mayor or City Manager and City Clerk or any of their designees to execute a Grant Deed, and such other documents as may be needed to complete the transaction to convey the City owned property identified as APN 016-120-021 (property exchange) from the City of Brentwood to Jack B. Gregory and Linda Gregory , Trustees of the Gregory Living Trust under instrument dated May 10, 199l described in said purchase agreement. 

Approve Resolution No. 2510 approving an agreement for purchase of a fee parcel with Elizabeth A. Albers-Iannaccone, a married woman as her sole and separate property as to an undivided 50% interest and Monte R. Albers, a single man as to an undivided 50% interest, as tenants in common, for a portion of real property identified as APN 019-010-010, generally located on the north side of Lone Tree Way between Empire Avenue and Fairview Avenue, hereby accepting real property on behalf of the City, and authorizing the Mayor or City Manager and City Clerk or any of their designees to execute the agreement, and such other documents as may be needed to complete the transaction including acceptance of the Deed. 

Approve Resolution No. 2511 approving an agreement for purchase of a fee parcel with Ralph D. Giannini and Mary Ann Giannini, his wife, as joint tenants, for a portion of real property identified as APN 019-010-007, generally located on the east side of Empire Avenue and the north side of Lone Tree Way, hereby accepting real property on behalf of the City, and authorizing the Mayor or City Manager and City Clerk or any of their designees to execute the agreement, and such other documents as may be needed to complete the transaction including acceptance of the Deed. 


Approve Resolution No. 2512 approving an agreement for purchase of a fee parcel with Elizabeth A. Albers-Iannaccone, a married woman as her sole and separate property as to an undivided 50% interest and Monte R. Albers, a single man as to an undivided 50% interest, as tenants in common, for a portion of real property identified as APN 019-010-009, generally located on the north side of Lone Tree Way between Empire Avenue and Fairview Avenue, hereby accepting real property on behalf of the City, and authorizing the Mayor or City Manager and City Clerk or any of their designees to execute the agreement, and such other documents as may be needed to complete the transaction including acceptance of the Deed. 

Approve amendments to the current Capital Improvement Budget for the Orchard Waterline Project, CIP Project No. 562-5623, to reflect prior authorized funding from the Redevelopment Agency. 

Approve an allocation in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for sponsorship of the 2002 Brentwood Cornfest as recommended by the City Council Ad Hoc Committee. (Pulled for further discussion.)

Approve Resolution No. 2513 authorizing the City Manager to approve an Agreement with the Highway 4 Bypass Authority for Police Enforcement Services.

It was moved/seconded by Hill/Beckstrand to approve Consent Calendar Items No.1 – 10 and Item 12 as approved by staff. Motion carried unanimously.

Item 11

Approve an allocation in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for sponsorship of the 2002 Brentwood Cornfest as recommended by the City Council Ad Hoc Committee. 

Councilmember Petrovich requested Councilmembers Hill and Beckstrand give a verbal report on the AdHoc Committee meeting regarding the Cornfest.

Councilmember Hill gave brief recap of the meeting explaining that, based on the financials of last year’s success and the anticipated success of this year’s event, the City would contribute $20,000 to the Fireworks event and credit $10,000 towards City services. 

It was moved seconded by Hill/Beckstrand to approve item 11 as recommended by staff. Motion carried unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Consideration of appeals on Design Review 01-32, Lone Tree Center, located on Lone Tree Way east of Empire Avenue. 

Jeff Zilm, Associate Planner, gave an overview of the proposed plan for the shopping center citing three appeals that have been received by the City as follows:

Appeals No. 1 and 2

Mayor McPoland, Frederik A. Jacobsen for Lucia Albers

· The Lack of additional access points to the adjacent properties.


Appeal #3

Adams, Broadwell, Joseph & Cardozo for the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1179.

· The EIR’s analysis and conclusions regarding potential traffic impacts and the respondent mitigation measures required by the Planning Commission are not appropriate and are inadequate and that the EIR used the wrong appropriate trip generation rate.

· Potential impacts from existing soil contamination that could be released during construction would not be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

· Potential impacts from existing soil contamination that could be released during construction would not be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

· The EIR inappropriately addressed potential impacts and health risks from toxic air contaminants.

· Growth Inducement.

· Mitigation Measures not included in the Conditions of Approval.

Mr. Zilm highlighted staff’s response to each appeal point. He further noted the annual revenue to the City of $454,000 per year and the creation of 350 jobs. Mr. Zilm then recommended that staff hear, discuss and act on the appeals; certify the EIR and approve the project.

The applicant, Gordon Davis, Brentwood Partners along with Martin Land Co., developers of the shopping center, and his attorney, Clark Morrison with Morrison Forrester approached the Council. Mr. Davis urged Council to consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission and staff and overlook the ploys of the union to raise environmental issues in order to bring their complaints over working conditions to the forefront. Mr. Davis further stated, in response to the appeals filed by Mayor McPoland and Frederik A. Jacobsen for Lucia Albers, that the access plan for the area is consistent with the zoning approval and the concept access plan for that area. To go beyond that begins to infringe upon the rights of private property owners. 

Mr. Morrison addressed Council regarding the adjacent property pointing out that the property is vacant and no development plan has been filed to develop that piece of property. He stated that they will be more than happy to work with Ms. Albers should any plans for development be filed, but feels that to do so now would be premature. He further stated that Ms. Albers has asked the Council to step in and take the easements from the project and pointed out that, per the statutes of the State of California and the Constitution, private property cannot be taken by government for private purposes. 

Mr. Davis reiterated that there is no application in front of the City for the other property at this time, but they presume there will be some time in the future. Mr. Davis submitted to the Council a small paragraph containing language which stated a willingness by them to meet with the property owner and City Manager to determine what points of access can be mutually beneficial to both properties at such time that plans are filed and it is appropriate.

Councilmember Petrovich asked what would be used to separate the two properties. 

Mr. Davis responded that a concrete wall will be at the rear of the property and a chain link fence will extend down the side of the property along with some landscaping.

Councilmember Petrovich stated that when the other property does develop, he felt that both properties should appear as one big parking lot not two separate parking lots.

Mr. Davis concurred with Councilmember Petrovich stating that once there is a development plan for vacant parcel all parties should meet to examine how the buildings are laid out and find that common design that works best for the customers.

Councilmember Petrovich asked Mr. Davis to refer to the business practices that he spoke of earlier.

Mr. Davis responded that, to his understanding, WinCo is an employee owned company or E.S.O.P. The employees enter into a contract with management on a store-by-store basis. He further stated that his understanding of the contracts is that they have met the courts requirement of a valid contract for purposes of bargaining. The United Food and Commercial Workers Union would like to be the unit that does that bargaining. There is a debate between the U.F.C.W. and WinCo Foods about whether WinCo should do it through E.S.O.P. or whether U.F.C.W. should do the bargaining.

Councilmember Petrovich then asked Mr. Davis if there had been a request for a neutrality agreement. 

Mr. Davis responded that he was unaware of any specific request for a neutrality agreement.

Councilmember Petrovich asked if there was a WinCo representative present to address that question.

Michael Reed, Vice President of Public and Legal affairs for WinCo Foods, responded that they have had some discussion with U.F.C.W. Local #1179, as recently as last week, U.F.C.W. did not, in that meeting, request a neutrality agreement although they had mentioned it previously over the phone. Mr. Reed stated that he explained to them that WinCo Foods will not agree to a neutrality agreement, but what they will do is honor the law. The Union has the opportunity to contact employees to make their arguments and WinCo has the opportunity to do the same. If there is sufficient interest expressed by the employees to merit a supervised election by the N.L.R.B., then we will honor our obligation to do so.

Frederik Jacobsen, attorney for the Albers family, addressed Council regarding the Albers’ concerns stating that Ms. Albers has been unable to submit any plans to develop her property because her property was burdened by a four-month purchase contract with Mr. Martin. Mr. Martin waited until the end of the four months to inform Ms. Albers that he was not interested in purchasing her property. Mr. Jacobsen went on to say that the Albers did indeed have a development plan for the property that includes ample customer parking for her stores. Their only concern is circulation in and out of the property. Mr. Jacobsen stated that if the City would grant the cross-easements, Ms. Albers would pay for them and the City would not incur any costs. He then requested that the City be very specific in the Conditions of Approval by having some language which states, at the City’s instance, the fence must be removed. He warned that if this language does not appear, the City would not be able to require Mr. Martin, or whomever the owner of the parcel is at that time, to grant the cross-easements.

Councilmember Petrovich asked if he had a copy of the contract between Ms. Albers and the Martin Land Co. 

Ms. Albers supplied each Council member a copy of the contract and supporting documentation.

Councilmember Hill asked the City Attorney if he had received the letter of indemnity for this?
Mr. Beougher responded that he had not.

Lucia Albers, owner of the adjacent property, explained to Council the reason she had not submitted the development plan was because she had been entertaining offers from potential buyers of her property. She has plans ready to submit. She also commented that she would have difficulty finding renters for the buildings without cross-easements because the stores will not be visible and it will be too difficult to get in and out of the parking lot.

Councilmember Hill asked Ms. Albers if she was actually on the title to the property?

Ms. Albers replied that she was not, adding that her son and daughter were on the deed. 

Elizabeth Iannaccone, property owner, went on record that she would be willing to sign an indemnification. Ms. Iannaccone read into the record a letter composed by her brother, Marty, regarding his support of the cross-easements on the 30-acre piece of property.

Gordon Davis commented that he did not disagree with the long term development plans for this property, he is in agreement that it should be one contiguous shopping center, his issue is with the fact that there is currently no development plan and no one is really sure when there will be one. Mr. Davis stated that, per the language of the statement he submitted to Council earlier that, at such time that there is a development plan, he intends to enter into discussions about what the most appropriate joint and cross-easement access points should be and how they should work.

Councilmember Gomes stressed that the City does have public access responsibilities with regards to police and fire services and asked if that would be considered public access.

Mr. Morrison replied that they were not being asked for public access, they were being asked for real property and trust to be conveyed to the Albers property.

Dennis Beougher, City Attorney, stated that the City is in its right to grant the easement, however, in order to do that, there needs to substantial evidence in the record to substantiate a public interest. And there is no evidence in the record right now to show that we need access for police and fire services because we have no development plan to show where those points would be. Those would be emergency vehicle access concerns. At this time, unless the record shows that you need those public interests, you cannot demand that a property right be given up.

Gordon Davis reiterated they are very willing to work with the Albers because a joining road makes very good sense but there needs to be a plan in place. 

Councilmember Hill stated that he and Mayor McPoland have spent many hours working on the plan, continually looking at this issue, but there has been nothing concrete with regards to the 10-acre piece. He pointed out to Council that the most recent configuration of Ms. Albers plan only came to their attention three months ago. He then asked what if this property were developed as a residential property? The constraints with the 10-acre site are its own internal constraints due to the shape of the property. This issue has been pushed around long enough. Councilmember Hill then asked Mr. Gordon if he would be willing to concede the authority of additional future access points to the City Manager and the City Engineer

Mr. Davis stated he would agree to that with the understanding that it is not without the adequate discussion of both parties. 

Paul Martin, property owner, addressed Council regarding the access issue stating that his property would be the most affected by the access points. He stated that he would also like to have some input in the discussions so that they could protect the rights of their tenants.

Councilmember Hill asked Mr. Martin if he too would be willing to concede the authority of addition future access points to the City Manager and the City Engineer. 

Mr. Martin replied that he concurred with Mr. Davis.

At 9:04 p.m. Council recessed to a break

Council convened at 9:20 p.m.

Mayor McPoland called the applicant to the front.

Councilmember Hill asked the following questions: “Would you, the applicant, agree to leave the ultimate decision with the City Manager as long as he seeks input from both you and Ms. Albers on the ultimate and appropriate cross easement access points?

Mr. Davis and Mr. Martin both responded in the affirmative.

Mr. Davis then commented that he would like the same condition imposed upon the Albers when their property does finally come before the Council.

Councilmember Hill repeated the question for Elizabeth Iannaccone.

Ms. Iannaccone responded in the affirmative.

Councilmember Gomes asked the City Attorney if their answers were legal and binding.

Mr. Beougher responded that he would put the question in writing and confirm it next week.

Mayor McPoland requested Lt. Kevin King approach Council to give his opinion of the new center from a Police perspective. Lt. King stated that it would benefit daily police patrols and emergency access by having the access points where theoretically proposed from the conceptual drawing. He further stated that easements could do nothing but aid emergency access.

Appellant No. 3, Mark Wolfe, Attorney, Adams, Broadwell, Joseph & Cardoon for the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1179, approached Council along with Barbara Carpenter, President of Local 1179.

Ms. Carpenter spoke concerning potential environmental impacts pointing to existing soil contaminants that could be released during construction and would not be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. In addition to the soil contamination, Ms. Carpenter stated that she was concerned with the working conditions of the future employees of the WinCo Supermarket, which will be a tenant in the new shopping center.
Mr. Wolfe stated that the traffic impact report is not correct because the Category used for traffic impact report was for a shopping center and not a supermarket or discount supermarket which would better fit the description. Likewise, the impacts on the air quality due to the increased traffic are also incorrect. He requested that Council re-do the traffic analysis and air quality analysis before a decision is made.

Councilmember Hill asked how Mr. Wolfe accounted for the fact that WinCo Foods accounts for only of the shopping center.

Mr. Wolfe stated that the non-WinCo traffic was accounted for in the report and the WinCo traffic alone was higher than the total traffic count in the original EIR.

John Stevenson, City Manager, asked Mr. Wolfe if he took into account the discount in traffic that would be generated by Highway 4 By-pass traffic?

Mr. Wolfe responded that it took into account the same discount as the original EIR.

The following people spoke in support of the appeal:

· Teresa Torchia, Antioch 911 W. 7th Street, Antioch
· Valerie Austin, 575 Canyonwood Drive, Brentwood 
· Christopher Gray, Union Representative, 3109 Moyers Rd., San Pablo
· Dwight Rogge, 2608 Princeton Lane, Antioch
· Connie Ferry, 100 Village Drive, Brentwood
· Greg Feere, 3234 Westbourne Drive, Antioch
· John Dalripple, 1333 Pine Street, Suite #, Martinez, Executive Director AFLCIO
· Richard Hedges, 4121 Alhambra Ave., Martinez

The following people spoke in opposition: 

· Karen Rogge 23321 Windy Springs, Brentwood
· Jim Moita, 8117 Marsh Creek Road, Clayton
· Doug Lewis, 2125 Neroly Road, Brentwood

Mayor McPoland allowed the applicant to approach Council for a rebuttal. 

Mr. Davis reminded Council that the real issue before them was the EIR. He further commented that the traffic study is examined very carefully because if the traffic study is not done properly, the customers will have difficulty getting in and out of the shopping center.

Chirstopher Gray, who prepared the traffic study for the EIR, addressed two issues:

1) Is it a shopping center or is it a supermarket? Mr. Gray stated that they examined the size of the store, length of stay of the customer and decided the shopping center was the best definition.

2) Future Conditions. Mr. Gray stated that they examined the future capacity of the surrounding intersections, stating that all the surrounding intersections operate at service level C or better during the PM. If you were to double or triple the amount of traffic coming out of the shopping center, all of the intersections would operate at an acceptable level of service in the future. For those reasons they feel they are accurately representing the traffic coming out of the center and the long term traffic impacts of this project.

Mayor McPoland asked what service level is projected for the proposed light at the corner of Empire and Lone Tree Way.

Mr. Gray responded that the projected service level is a low D in the morning and mid-C during the p.m. period.

Mayor McPoland then asked what the current traffic levels are.

Mr. Gray replied that some of the signalized intersections on Lone Tree are C but some of the unsignalized intersections are E. Keeping in mind that currently Lone Tree Way is only two lanes. 

Mayor McPoland asked Roger Wilson, Liberty Union High School District, to approach Council. 

Councilmember Beckstrand asked Mr. Wilson if the school district had any concerns with regards to the increase in traffic around LaPaloma High School. 

Mr. Wilson responded that the school district did not have any traffic concerns.

Michael Reid, Vice President of Public and Legal Affairs for WinCo Foods, addressed some of the social issues that were raised by a majority of the speakers during the public comments. Mr. Reid stated that the wages at WinCo are the same or higher than those of unionized grocery stores. Better than 90% of all WinCo workers, whether full or part-time, get full medical benefits, WinCo also offers a completely employer-contributed contribution to E.S.O.P. (retirement plan) and he feels that WinCo’s wage/benefit/retirement package is better than most union stores.

There being no one else wishing to speak the Public Hearing was closed. 

Councilmember Hill commented that he had visited three WinCo stores in the northwest a few months ago as well as the WinCo distribution center. Councilmember Hill reiterated that 50% of the center is not related to WinCo, if it isn’t this project on this site, what else? We will have many of the same issues regardless the tenant. The big question is: does this shopping center work? Councilmember Hill further stated that he felt this plan was the best the City is going to get.

Mayor McPoland commented that he felt there were too many unanswered questions with regard to traffic and recommended that it be sent back for further study.

Councilmember Beckstrand disagreed stating that she felt the EIR is correct and that there has not been enough evidence presented to appeal the EIR. She further stated that she is in favor of the project and would not support the appeal.

Councilmember Gomes pointed out that the task of the Council this evening is to decide whether or not to certify the EIR. He further stated that we have to be careful that we have very accurate information in our EIR to be sure we come up with adequate mitigations for the impacts. He asked why we are rushing to approve this. He cited concerns with the traffic levels and the dust and dirt that could be potentially harmful to Loma Vista School students. If we have an EIR in question, then let’s re-study the traffic levels and air quality and make use we are correct.

Councilmember Hill responded that prior to this project moving forward, there would be adequate mitigation with regard to dust and dirt adjacent to Loma Vista School and Parks, etc. 

John Stevenson, City Manager responded to Councilmember Gomes’ concerns stating that the dust and dirt in the air would be taken into account on the grading permit. He further commented that the difference in the traffic generation figures between a warehouse and a shopping center is 2% and that percentage would not make a difference in traffic flow on a six-lane road.

Mayor McPoland pointed out that all that information was included in the staff report but he would like to go back and take a look at the rest of the information that was brought to the forefront during the council meeting.

It was motioned/seconded by Beckstrand/Hill to certify the EIR and approve the project as recommended by staff. Motion failed by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Beckstrand and Hill
NOES: Councilmembers Gomes, Petrovich, Mayor McPoland
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

It was moved by Gomes to send the EIR back for review in an appropriate time.

Councilmember Petrovich asked if that was the correct procedure.

Mitch Oshinsky, Director of Community Development, asked to clarify that the issues to be reviewed are traffic and air quality.

Councilmember Petrovich confirmed and asked if Councilmember Gomes had given the correct motion.

Mr. Oshinsky confirmed that he had.

Mayor McPoland requested a second for the motion.

Councilmember Petrovich asked if it was a second to return it for further review.

Councilmember Gomes repeated the motion to return it for further review.

Councilmember Hill asked if he would make the motion to a date certain.

Councilmember Gomes responded that he was unsure if he could set a date.

Councilmember Hill responded that he would like to see it on the next agenda. He further stated that he recognizes that we don’t want to rush this, but he doesn’t believe we have rushed this. It has been around for well over a year. He would just like to see resolution to the issues and if the City Manager says that we can get it back on the agenda next meeting, I would like to have that as date certain. And with that, I would support you on the issue.”

Councilmember Gomes responded that he doubted the traffic service level issue could be resolved that quickly but if staff can accomplish that, then that is fine. 

It was moved/seconded by Gomes/McPoland to send the EIR back for review until such time that staff is ready to bring it back. 

AYES: Councilmembers Gomes, Petrovich, Mayor McPoland

Dennis Beougher, City Attorney asked if they were continuing the appeal to a date unspecified.

Councilmember Gomes stated that no, he wasn’t’ continuing the appeal to an unspecified date, what he is asking to do is to send it back for review and to address those two issues which are traffic service levels and air quality. When that can come back is when staff has the report prepared for Council.

Councilmember Beckstrand asked if that would leave the public appeal open. 

Mr. Beougher responded that the public hearing is closed so we would not take any more testimony except as to those two issues that you have requested further information on.

Councilmember Gomes asked for a point of clarification. He asked whether the proper action, because the recommendation was to ‘hear, discuss and act on the appeals’ and his decision is to grant an appeal, should the motion be to grant the appeal or does he need to do more.

Mr. Beougher responded that if he did so, the appeal would be that the application has been denied. Because the appeal would be upheld that you are denying the application. Mr. Beougher further commented that if he wanted to approve the project, subject to the certification of the EIR, that’s another matter, because you can’t approve the project until you certify the EIR.

Councilmember Gomes responded that we would then be putting on hold whether to grant the appeal.

Mr. Beougher confirmed and explained that that is why he asked, to make sure that the issue before you is an appeal. It is to grant the appeal or not.

At 10:42 p.m. Council recessed to a break 

Council reconvened at 10:49 p.m.

It was moved/seconded by Gomes/Petrovich to grant the appeal without prejudice.

Councilmember Hill request discussion and addressed Councilmember Gomes stating that there are a lot of facts that need clarification. He suggested that we continue the decision, regardless of granting the appeal or denying the appeal, for two weeks, to give our staff time to respond to his concerns. He further pointed out that that was all he was suggesting from a ‘date certain’; not necessarily finding in favor of or against, but giving us the two weeks to review it. He then asked Councilmember Gomes to please consider that.”

Mayor McPoland asked if there was any further discussion. There was none so he called for a vote. 

The motion passed by the following vote: 

AYES: Councilmembers Gomes, Petrovich, Mayor McPoland
NOES: Councilmembers Beckstrand and Hill
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

Approve a Resolution approving GPA 02-02 which would enable exceptions to the City’s Residential Density Transition Policy under defined circumstances following review and approval by the Planning Commission during the tentative map review process. 

Mike Leana, Chief of Planning, gave a brief overview of the City’s current Residential Density Transition Policy which currently requires that proposed lots facing or abutting existing residential lots zoned Ranchette Estate (RE) or of one (1) acre or more shall have a minimum area of 20,000 square feet even in those instances when the adjacent property owner did not mind a smaller size lot.

The Public Hearing was opened.

Karen Rogge, 2321 Windy Springs, Brentwood spoke in support of the amendment but requested that Council examine the verbiage of No. 1 that currently states:

“When the adjacent property has a land use and/or zoning designation that would enable the future subdivision of the adjacent property into lots of a size similar to those planned in the proposed subdivision, even though the property owner has no present intentions to subdivide their property.”

She requested that Council eliminate the last phase “even though the property owner has no present intention to subdivide their property”. She stated that she would like to see the property owner be able to make the decision.

Dave Biddle, 2152 Empire Avenue, Brentwood, reiterated Karen’s comments and also requested that the last phase of No. 1 be eliminated.

Erma Gomez, 2301 Empire Avenue, Brentwood, concurred with Ms. Rogge and Mr. Biddle.

There being no one else wishing to speak the Public Hearing was closed.

Councilmember Hill asked Mr. Leana to reiterate the three options available if Planning Commission decides to deviate from the Residential Density Transition Policy.


Mr. Leana responded that the three options were as follows:

1. Allow the Planning Commissions decisions to be final.

2. Council could review every project which deviates from the policy. To do so, the entire map would have to be brought to the Council. The meeting would have to notice and Council would have to go through the entire Subdivision.

3. Whenever the Planning Commission took action, we would sent Council a memo and explain why we did what we did and then, if the Council wanted to review an individual project, they could do so without reviewing every project that deviates from the policy.

Councilmember Hill expressed concern over the process stating that if there is a dramatic change, he would not want the memo to be lost in the shuffle. He also pointed out that as council members they often aware of land use issues before the Planning Commission is and further stated that he feels that Council should hear the map before the decision is made.

Mayor McPoland concurred with Councilmember Hill and stated that this is too important to the residents. 

RESOLUTION NO. 2514

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 02-02 AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE CITY GENERAL PLAN RELATING TO DENSITY TRANSITION.

It was moved/seconded by Hill/ that the full reading of Resolution 2514 be waived and that Council will hear any requests for changes. Motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Beckstrand, Gomes, Hill, Petrovich, Mayor McPoland
NOES: None 
ABSENT: None

Consideration of Ordinance amending Planned Development No. 35 (PD 35) Mission Peak Homes, adding Development Standard for Subarea “D” located at the southeast corner of Lone Tree Way and Empire Avenue. 

Mike Leana, Chief of Planning, explained that this is a request to add development standards to PD 35 and gave a brief overview of the existing plans. 

The Public Hearing was opened.

Karen Rogge, 2321 Windy Springs, spoke regarding the Mission Peaks Subdivision stating that she is satisfied with the development standards however, she did have concerns with fuel trucks or any hazardous materials be allowed on Empire south of Lone Tree Way because of it’s close proximity to the elementary school. She recommended that no trucks carrying hazardous materials be allowed to travel on Empire south of Lone Tree. Ms. Rogge asked if Empire Ave. would be a truck route and if a negative declaration would be done for the construction of Empire Ave.

Mayor McPoland directed the City Engineer to work with Ms. Rogge to answer her questions.

Erma Gomez, 2301 Empire Avenue, Brentwood, reiterated Ms. Rogge’s comments that she was very impressed with Mission Peaks and was excited to have them as a neighbor.

There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.

ORDINANCE NO. 701

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD TO AMEND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 35 (PD-35) BY ADDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUBAREA ‘D’ WITHIN PD-35, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LONE TREE WAY AND EMPIRE AVENUE

It was moved/seconded by Hill/Gomes that the first reading of Ordinance No. 701 be waived and that the same be adopted as recommended by staff. Motion passed by the following vote: 

AYES: Councilmember Beckstrand, Gomes, Hill, Petrovich, Mayor McPoland
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

Consideration of an Ordinance amending Section 2.36.080 (Q) and adding Chapter 2.39 to the Municipal Code appointing the Director of Finance and Information Systems as City Treasurer. 

Dennis Beougher, City Attorney, addressed Council stating that the current Municipal Code designates the City Manager as the City Treasurer. The amendment will designate the Director of Finance.

The public hearing was opened.

There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. 

ORDINANCE NO. 702

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD REPEALING CHAPTER 5.24 AND ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 5.24, BRENTWOOD CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE 

It was moved/seconded by Hill/Gomes that the first reading of Ordinance No. 702 be waived and that the same be adopted as recommended by staff. Motion passed by the following vote: 

AYES: Councilmember Beckstrand, Gomes, Hill, Petrovich, Mayor McPoland
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

CITIZEN COMMENTS - none

INFORMATIONAL REPORTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS - none

REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS – none

ADJOURNMENT

There being not further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:13 p.m. in memory of Carrol Elkins, City of Brentwood Supervising Construction Inspector.

Respectfully Submitted



Cynthia Goulding
Deputy City Clerk

City Administration
City of Brentwood City Council
150 City Park Way
Brentwood, CA 94513
(925) 516-5440
Fax (925) 516-5441
E-mail allcouncil@brentwoodca.gov