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

Meeting Minutes


 

CITY OF BRENTWOOD
CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2006
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 7:00 P.M.

CALL TO ORDER (5:34 PM) 734 Third Street, Brentwood, CA 94513

CITIZEN COMMENTS - None (5:34 PM)

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION (5:35 PM) 150 City Park Way, City Hall Conference Room

1. City Council Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
Name of case: Misan Construction, Inc. v. City of Brentwood.

2. City Council Closed Session pursuant to Government Code 54957.6:
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATIOR: City designated representative: Brian Swisher. Unrepresented employee: City Manager.

RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION (07:03 PM)

Roll Call (07:04 PM)
Present: Beckstrand; Brockman; Gutierrez; Swisher; Taylor

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - None (07:04 PM)

PRESENTATIONS (07:04 PM)

A. Recognition of Chris Robinson for service on the Arts Commission. (Council Member Beckstrand)

Council Member Beckstrand presented the plaque to Ms. Robinson, stating she was one of the founding members of the Arts Commission and had served as Chair during her dedicated service from January 2001 to February 2006.

AGENDA REVIEW - None (07:07 PM)

CITIZEN COMMENTS (07:08 PM)

Jayson Valencia announced the fourth annual Brentwood film festival would be held September 25 - 30, 2006, and would benefit the downtown, cultural arts master plan, youth/teen master plan and cable access channel. He would be available to create, train and promote since he was a trained filmmaker and felt a student program could be established for youth. He asked Council for their support and endorsement.

Barbara Guise spoke about a woman who rode her bike every morning on the trail system where she had noticed broken glass, trash in the water, items dropped off in the area and graffiti. She contacted Parks and Recreation Department and had received an immediate response saying they had gone above and beyond.

Mark Underwood, Summerset IV, asked Council to support the Summerset IV community request for the extension of a 14-foot soundwall currently designed to terminate south of Fairview Avenue be extended from Fairview Avenue to the south eastern limit of Summerset IV to a position south of the Summerset IV retention basin. He contended that a soundwall should have been included in the Summerset development plans before the project was approved. Noise in the community would exceed 60 decibels and no mitigation work had been planned. In November 2005, he had presented Council with a petition signed by 456 people supporting the movement. The City and Bypass Authority had met with Summerset and had come up with three alternatives. The first was the recommended alternative, which was a rubberized roadway, and was not acceptable to the Summerset community. He felt it was not an option since over time, the noise may come back and no one knew for sure what would happen since it was an unproven product and the cheapest alternative. The second alternative was the eight-foot soundwall which ran about 1,500 feet and he felt would not work because the wall was not long enough and it did not take into account the homes that had rear fencing. He requested the third alternative, which was continuation of the 14-foot sound wall. He felt the property values would be reduced because of the Bypass, and increased traffic and requested that the soundwall extension be the alternative. He asked the City to voice the position to the Bypass Authority. He also asked that the issue be placed on the Council agenda and for Council to support residents for the soundwall extension.

Jim Slawson read and submitted a position statement from the Summerset IV Board of Directors in relation to sound wall requirements adjacent to the Summerset IV community and the Highway 4 Bypass project. The Board of Directors formally requested that the planned 14-foot soundwall currently designed to terminate south of Fairview Avenue and east of Highway 4 Bypass be extended from Fairview Avenue to the south eastern limit of Summerset IV community. The wall needed to continue to south of the Summerset IV detention basin at the south eastern edge of the community to protect the community from the noise wrap-around effects. Three noise studies had determined noise levels would exceed the noise element standard of 60 decibels. A maximum level of 65 decibels would be allowed if all feasible mitigation had been incorporated. Under the current proposal, there was no mitigation work planned for that portion of the Bypass and he felt the decibel standard would be violated. He recommended the Council support the policy and direct the Highway 4 Bypass Authority to incorporate the extension of the sound wall into the construction plans.

Rose Strother was concerned about her home value and said the sound standard of 60 decibels and studies had exceeded the level. Summerset IV was entitled to have sound mitigation on Highway 4 Bypass. Summerset I, II and III had or would have a 14-foot sound wall and Summerset IV asked for the same mitigation. She expressed concerns about property values.

Donna Meyer asked that Council Member Beckstrand be directed to work with the Bypass Authority to ensure the soundwall be continued and that it be placed on March 14th Council agenda.

Jeff Morris spoke regarding the retention basin which he felt could cause flood danger in Summerset IV. He saw Highway 4 Bypass being built and said it needed the 14-foot wall. The 60 decibel sound limit would be a lot of noise and he asked what if the noise limit was exceeded. A 14-foot soundwall was essential to neighborhood, property values and health.

Mayor Swisher said that Council would take all comments into consideration.

J. P. Troy spoke about Consent Calendar Item No. 5 regarding the establishment of a benefit district. The 130-acre project was zoned Ranchette Estates and the developer changed the property to a Planned Development to sell more homes. Neighbors backed the project and now sewer and water were being installed. Costs to be incurred by existing residents were for the hook ups. He felt that establishing a benefit district after the fact was not the right way to go about it and it had never brought to their attention. He asked Council to look at the issue of developers changing Ranchette Estates into Planned Developments and should ask the developers to step up to the plate.

Linda Greene, resident of S & S Farms, did not wish to speak and submitted an interest card giving her time to J.P. Troy.

Keith Schaffer spoke about an assessment for homeowners in the S&S area. Residents had gone to different meetings and nothing had been mentioned about having to recoup fees. Residents had endorsed the project in terms of property values and knew it was in the best interest to work with the developer. Residents were promised paved roads and the opportunity to receive sewer and water, which would be at their cost and the Redevelopment Agency would pay for items. This may potentially cause debt for people to pay for an assessment. He asked why residents were not notified of the agenda and what the process was to be able to vote on the item. He asked for council support with respect to not having an item after the fact and that the process be changed in the future.

Mayor Swisher explained that before any assessment could be handled, any properties affected would be publicly noticed.

George Clemens said he had lived on Lone Oak since the 1950’s and he had taken offense to an article in the paper which said conditions on Lone Oak were blighted. People did not have the money to pay the assessment.

CONSENT CALENDAR (07:39 PM)

1. Adopted Resolution RDA 107 authorizing the Agency Treasurer to appropriate funds from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Brentwood Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 2001, to fund a Reimbursement Agreement with Brentwood Sand Creek Partners, LLC, Subdivision No. 8788, for the southern phase of Lone Oak Road Utility Improvements in the amount of $642,000. (H. Sword/G. Rozenski)

Mayor Swisher and Council Member Beckstrand abstained.

2. Authorized the Executive Director or her designee to execute an Affordable Housing Covenant with Brentwood Green Valley Associates for Green Valley Apartments, a 28-unit multi-family apartment complex located at 8510 Brentwood Boulevard. (H. Sword/D. Kwong)

3. Approved minutes of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting held February 14, 2006 and the special City Council meeting held February 11, 2006. (M. Wimberly)

4. Adopted Resolution 2006-33 authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with ClientFirst Consulting Group, LLC, to develop an Information Systems Strategic Technology Master Plan (P. Ehler/G. Leech)

5. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION - Adopt a Resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Reimbursement Agreement with Brentwood Sand Creek Partners, LLC, Subdivision No. 8788, for costs associated with southern phase of the Lone Oak Road, Lone Oak Court and Saddle Creek Court Sewer and Water Improvements and Adopt a Resolution to direct staff to establish a benefit district for these and related improvements. (B. Grewal/B. Bornstein)

6. Adopted Resolution 2006-34 authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment One for the Design Contract with Mark Thomas and Company Inc., for the Brentwood Boulevard Widening - Central, CIP Project No. 336-3149, in the amount of $33,600, plus a 10% contingency of $3,360 for a total amount of $36,960. (B. Grewal/R. Craig)

7. Adopted Resolution 2006-35 authorizing staff to temporarily close and perform necessary repairs to Garin Parkway from just north of Mendota Street and Lawrence Lane to just north of Redhaven Street. (B. Grewal/M. Huber)

8. Adopted Resolution 2006-36 adopting a Conflict of Interest Code applicable to certain designated officials and employees, pursuant to section 37300 of the Government Code and repealing Resolution 2199. (K. Chew/M. Wimberly)

9. Reappointed Ron Beatty and appointed Annette Day to the Arts Commission. (C. Bronzan/R. Burr-Siegel)

10. Approved the appointment of Cassandra Youngblood to the Brentwood Advisory Neighborhood Committee (BANC) for a three-year term commencing February 28, 2006 and ending December 31, 2008. (Council Member B. Taylor)

11. Adopted Resolution 2006-37 approving, and authorizing the City Manager to execute, Amendment No. 2 to the legal services agreement with McDonough, Holland and Allen in an amount not to exceed $150,000. (D. Brower)

12. Rejected claim of Steve Tingdahl. (M. Wimberly)

CONSENT CALENDAR ACTIONS (07:39 PM)

Motion: Approve Consent Calendar Items 1 - 4 and 6 - 12 as recommended. Mayor Swisher and Council Member Beckstrand abstained on Item 1. Item 5 was pulled for discussion.
Moved by Brockman, seconded by Gutierrez.
Vote: Motion carried 5-0.
Yes: Beckstrand; Brockman; Gutierrez; Swisher; Taylor

5. Adopt a Resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Reimbursement Agreement with Brentwood Sand Creek Partners, LLC, Subdivision No. 8788, for costs associated with southern phase of the Lone Oak Road, Lone Oak Court and Saddle Creek Court Sewer and Water Improvements and Adopt a Resolution to direct staff to establish a benefit district for these and related improvements. (B. Grewal/B. Bornstein)

Mayor Swisher and Council Member Beckstrand declared a conflict of interest and left the Council Chamber.

Council Member Gutierrez stated that if the recommendation passed, there would be a public hearing with notifications sent out. The assessment district would not charge anything and existing property owners would pay only if they subdivided or made additions to their property in the future. It was a proposal that would benefit both those living in the area and the City.

Motion: Approve Adopted Resolution 2006-38 approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Reimbursement Agreement with Brentwood Sand Creek Partners, LLC, Subdivision No. 8788, for costs associated with southern phase of the Lone Oak Road, Lone Oak Court and Saddle Creek Court Sewer and Water Improvements and adopt Resolution 2006-39 to direct staff to establish a benefit district for these and related improvements. (B. Grewal/B. Bornstein)
Moved by Brockman, seconded by Taylor.
Vote: Motion carried 3-0.
Yes: Brockman; Gutierrez; Taylor
Abstain: Beckstrand; Swisher

Mayor Swisher and Council Member Beckstrand returned to the Council Chamber.

PUBLIC HEARINGS (07:44 PM)

13. Consideration of a Resolution approving RGMP applications for five projects totaling 189 allocations in Calendar Year 2006, including 23 units for Bonnie Lane by Site Homes, LLC, 6 units for Last Ranch by Rob Hanberg and Frederick Lamb, 28 units for Magnolia by Discovery Builders, Inc., 126 units for Mission Grove by Discovery Builders, Inc., and 6 units for St. James Court by Minnesota Rentals, Inc. (H. Sword/W. Rhodes/J. Zilm/E. Nolthenius/D. Hill/T. Nielsen)

Council Member Gutierrez recused herself from Item 13 due to a potential conflict of interest since she lived approximately 500 feet from one of the proposed developments and left the Council Chamber.


Senior Planner, Erik Nolthenius, presented a staff report explaining scoring and evaluation for the five applications. The total of allocations would be 189 and the RGMP committee had recommended approval.

Mayor Swisher opened the public hearing.

Walt Gaudinier said he lived on Bonnie Lane and expressed concerns at not seeing improvements such as storm drains and lights along his street, as well as heavy construction trucks going down his steet, and noise. The street needed repair and he asked if there would be access to the new development from Bonnie Lane, Anderson Lane or Lone Tree Way. He had been guaranteed by Pulte that there would be no two-story houses backing up to his property and he was in support of their project. He now had two two-story homes backing up to his property and he was not notified until after the fact and was concerned about what developers had promised and would come through with.

Carlos Briones said he owned property on Bonnie Lane and expressed concerns regarding the site plan and the ingress and egress granted by easementand the right of access road easement to Lone Tree Way. He said he believed the action should not be taken to approve Bonnie Lane parcels that would violate the existing easement rights and he urged that a revised proposal site plan be submitted respecting the ingress and easement rights and leave the easement area as a condition of the RGMP allocations for entitlements that may be approved with respect to the Site Homes parcels. Easement rights could be accommodated with a reduction in overall residential density and he requested that Site Homes should be required to similarly reconfigure a site plan so that valuable easement rights were preserved. Construction from the outlet street directly from Bonnie Lane to Lone Tree Way along the existing access could serve to mitigate some of the traffic impacts the homes would have on Bonnie Lane. The site layout plan contained a note to the effect that Bonnie Lane used to be tied into existing Kenwood Lane improvements. He would not consent to tying Bonnie Lane to Kenwood Drive resulting in any physical encroachment to his property. He would not consent to such encroachment without payment of just compensation for property taken. It appeared that only the southern half of Bonnie Lane was supposed to be improved and residents were concerned that this would result in construction of roadway and would be too narrow to meet traffic safety standards and not wide enough to support the safe movement of cars, pedestrians, fire trucks and other remergency vehicles.

Louis Parsons, Discovery Builders, representative of two applicants, thanked Council for their consideration.

Dan Tosh said his home was on the end of Kenwood Drive as it went to the drainage area. He had been told when he purchased his home that the street would not go through. If the street went through, it would lower the value of his property.

Jerry Rincon, Site Finish Homes, said he had extra plans and maps available if any members of the public or City Council needed to view them at the hearing.

Carmen Briones said she lived on Bonnie Lane and had been promised by the Pulte developers not to have any two-story homes behind her house. The new developer had sent her a proposal and the proposal for her five acres was $50,000. She did not have the money and told them she was not interested and had not planned to do any development and if the developer was going to take any easement or encroachments from her, she did not want to give it for free.

Jerry McGoveran said his property was in an isolated area. There was a fence that Pulte had put up behind him and he did not want to end up an island or giving away a portion of his property to anyone. He asked how the project would impact his property.

Motion: Approve closing the public hearing.
Moved by Swisher, seconded by Taylor.

Vote: Motion carried 4-0.
Yes: Beckstrand; Brockman; Swisher; Taylor
Abstain: Gutierrez

Mayor Swisher explained that this was an allocation of units that the developer had applied for through the RGMP and the maps submitted were conceptual and Council was not approving maps or entitlements. When the developer went through the process, it would be a public hearing and anyone in the surrounding area would be notified. Bonnie Lane had a lot of concerns such as the standard two ways in and out of a project. Lone Tree would a major thoroughfare and ingress and egress off of Lone Tree Way made it difficult for any project. There was a concern if Bonnie Lane would handle any more units.

City Engineer, Bailey Grewal, said improvements had to be made on Bonnie Lane and the existing road would not handle all of the traffic and he believed there would be improvements conditioned on the project. Engineering would work with the developer who would need to work with the surrounding neighborhood properties.

Mayor Swisher asked why the project should pass through with so many issues, which may need to be addressed in the RGMP process. He hesitated to let the project go through because issues needed to be resolved first before coming back for the RGMP.

Council Member Brockman said the RGMP was set up to control growth and there was a lot involved to allow them to even submit a plan. Engineering and Planning would all require improvements on the road and if improvements were not made, the project would not move forward. He was inclined to see it through and he asked members of the public to offer their approval or disapproval to the Planning Commission. There were certain requirements that would have to be met and the project needed to fall within the range of what the criteria for the RGMP was set up for. Decisions would be made at the Planning Commission level.

Council Member Beckstrand said she believed either the Fire Department or Police Department had standards for the RGMP with regard to how many homes should be built.

City Engineer, Bailey Grewal, explained the requirements saying that the standard was 25 single family units with one access. Prior to building more than 25, the developer would need to build a second access.

Mayor Swisher said he was concerned the infrastructure to get to the subdivision was not complete and he was uncertain if it could be made a condition of the project.

Council Member Beckstrand said the proximity of the development to the signaled intersection at O’Hara was too close to do another access, unless it was a restricted access.

City Engineer, Bailey Grewal, said Engineering had looked into access and suggested not to provide direct access to Lone Tree Way since it would become a cut through and he had suggested to the applicant to not provide direct access to Lone Tree Way.

Council Member Taylor said he was not in favor of passing the item since there were issues that needed to be answered by the developer to residents in the area. Site Homes needed to explain to the residents what was going on.

Motion: Approve a Resolution approving RGMP applications for four of the five projects totaling 189 allocations in Calendar Year 2006, denying and excluding the 23 units for Bonnie Lane by Site Homes, LLC, and including 6 units for Last Ranch by Rob Hanberg and Frederick Lamb, 28 units for Magnolia by Discovery Builders, Inc., 126 units for Mission Grove by Discovery Builders, Inc., and 6 units for St. James Court by Minnesota Rentals, Inc. (H. Sword/W. Rhodes/J. Zilm/E. Nolthenius/D. Hill/T. Nielsen)
Moved by Swisher, seconded by Taylor.

Vote: Motion failed 2-2.
Yes: Swisher; Taylor
No: Beckstrand; Brockman
Abstain: Gutierrez

Council Member Brockman said that he felt Bonnie Lane had the possibility to be a good project. These were land owners that had met all the criteria laid out for them to qualify to submit a project to Planning. At that time, it is required for them to meet the City standards, which would be even more difficult. The Bonnie Lane project earned the highest points of all five projects and this was only an allocation as required by the RGMP. Since they had met the requirements laid out for them by the City, it was not fair to add new conditions for them after the fact. The next step would be to submit actual development plans and not just concepts and that was the appropriate time for the issues presented tonight to be addressed.

Council Member Taylor said it was small area and he was not in favor of this and it needed to be explained by the developer to the neighbors.

Council Member Beckstrand said staff was not authorized to work out final details and address the details until a map had been through the process. Citizens would have an opportunity to work through issues at the Planning Commission and Council levels.

Mayor Swisher said he was encouraged by the other four parcels and he did not believe that the infrastructure was ready in the Bonnie Lane area yet.

Motion: Adopt Resolution 2006-40 approving RGMP applications for five projects totaling 189 allocations in Calendar Year 2006, including the 23 units for Bonnie Lane by Site Homes, LLC, including 6 units for Last Ranch by Rob Hanberg and Frederick Lamb, 28 units for Magnolia by Discovery Builders, Inc., 126 units for Mission Grove by Discovery Builders, Inc., and 6 units for St. James Court by Minnesota Rentals, Inc.
Moved by Swisher, seconded by Beckstrand.
Vote: Motion carried 3-1.
Yes: Beckstrand; Brockman; Swisher
No: Taylor
Abstain: Gutierrez

14. Consideration of an Ordinance (RZ 06-04) amending Sub Area "F" of the PD-67 Zone, correcting minor discrepancies between the approved building setbacks and the approved master plotting plan for the cluster homes within the Siena Village project, located off of Cortona Way, north of Balfour Road and west of the State Route 4 Bypass. (H. Sword/E. Nolthenius)

Senior Planner, Erik Nolthenius, presented a staff report, saying that the amendment to the text of the PD-67 zone corrected minor descrepancies that were noted between approved set backs and a master plotting plan approved by the Planning Commission in connection with Sienna Village mixed use project on the Cox property and the development of 90 single-family homes. Planning commission had unanimously recommended the item for approval at their February 7, 2006, meeting. He recommended approval by introducing and waiving first reading of the ordinance.

Mayor Swisher opened public hearing.

Motion: Approve closing the public hearing.
Moved by Swisher, seconded by Gutierrez.
Vote: Motion carried 5-0.
Yes: Beckstrand; Brockman; Gutierrez; Swisher; Taylor

Motion: Approve the introduction of Ordinance 820 (RZ 06-04) amending Sub Area "F" of the PD-67 Zone, correcting minor discrepancies between the approved building setbacks and the approved master plotting plan for the cluster homes within the Siena Village project, located off of Cortona Way, north of Balfour Road and west of the State Route 4 Bypass.
Moved by Beckstrand, seconded by Gutierrez.
Vote: Motion carried 5-0.
Yes: Beckstrand; Brockman; Gutierrez; Swisher; Taylor

NEW BUSINESS (08:33 PM)

15. Accept Report and provide direction to staff regarding the placement of a Measure on the November 7, 2006 ballot related to the length of term for the office of Mayor as requested by Mayor Swisher. (K. Chew/M. Wimberly)

Mayor Swisher accepted the report and directed staff to prepare a staff report to place a measure on the November 7, 2006 ballot related to a four-year term for the Office of Mayor, adding that this was not the approval to spend the money.

City Clerk, Margaret Wimberly, said the fiscal impact would come back in the staff report with the Resolution to place the measure on the ballot.

City Attorney, Damien Brower, said Council could provide direction to staff to come back with the Resolution to place the measure on the ballot.

Council Member Brockman said he had no problem with changing the term to four years. The subject had been on the ballot before and gone back and forth and that the reason was a chance for a full change of Council. If it was placed on the ballot as a four-year term, he asked that a parameter be set for how it was run. He was in favor of a rotation and who ever would come out as highest vote getter on a majority Council of the three elected, would become vice mayor. At the next election when there were two Council Members elected, who ever had the highest votes at that time became Vice Mayor. Who ever became Mayor had two years experience on the Council and the highest vote getter each time became Vice Mayor for two years and Mayor for two years. There would be a rotation of people that had experience of being in the leadership role for the Council. It would still be a four-year term and members would have experience.

Council Member Taylor agreed with Council Member Brockman and he would like to see a round-robin, which a lot of cities did and it would bring experience.

Council Member Beckstrand said that staff could bring back both ideas with the pros and cons.

Council Member Gutierrez said she was not necessarily interested in making it rotational, even though she believed it made sense, she was not sure that the constituents were advocating it. She agreed with having a four-year Mayoral term.

Barbara Guise said when she was on Council, the Mayor was rotated and the highest vote getter was Mayor on rotation for two years. A two-year or four-year Mayor term was on an informal ballot and on the same ballot, which of the three people would you want as Mayor. She believed that it should have kept rotating. Two years later, the same Council decided that a good choice had not been made as far as asking for an elected Mayor and they had decided to ignore it. The people had overwhelmingly voted to have an elected Mayor, even though it was an advisory ballot. She had suggested it be placed on the ballot to ask citizens if they wanted an elected Mayor and it was for two years or four years and the citizens overwhelmingly selected two years. It was done again and the citizens still said two years.

Motion: accept the Report and direct staff to prepare a staff report regarding the placement of a Measure on the November 7, 2006 ballot related to a four-year term for the Office of Mayor.
Moved by Swisher, seconded by Taylor.
Vote: Motion carried 5-0.
Yes: Beckstrand; Brockman; Gutierrez; Swisher; Taylor

INFORMATIONAL REPORTS FROM STAFF - None (08:48 PM)

INFORMATIONAL REPORTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS - None (08:48 PM)

REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS (08:49 PM)

ADJOURNMENT (08:49 PM)

Motion: Approve adjournment.
Moved by Swisher, seconded by Gutierrez.
Vote: Motion carried 5-0.
Yes: Beckstrand; Brockman; Gutierrez; Swisher; Taylor

Respectfully Submitted,

Cynthia Garcia, CMC
Assistant 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