Loading...
1979/04/09 City Council MinutesROH7ERT PARK CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 9, 1979 The Council of the City of Rohnert Park met this date in regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m. in the City Offices, 6750 Commerce Boulevard, Rohnert Park, with Mayor Roberts presiding. The regular session was preceded by an executive session which commenced at 7:00 p.m. and at which all Councilmen and City Manager Callinan were present and which was held to discuss personnel and litigation matters. Call to Order Mayor Roberts called the meeting of the regular session to order at approximately 7:18 p.m. and led the pledge of allegiance, Roll Call Present: (5) Councilmen Beary, Carbone, Hopkins, Stewart, and Roberts Absent: (0) None Staff present for all or part of the meeting: City Manager Callinan, City Attorney Flitner and Planning Director Skanchy. Approval of Minutes Upon motion of Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Carbone, and unanimously approved with Councilman Stewart abstaining, the minutes of March 26 and March 27 were approved as submitted. Approval of Bills Upon motion of Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Carbone, and unanimously approved, the bills presented per the attached list in the amount of $184,982.34 were approved. Golf Course Rates Mr. Dave Lurie, 1023 Santa Cruz Way, was recognized and commented on the recently approved increase in golf course rates saying that raising the rates effective May 1st might have been premature because the city really didn't know who would be operating the golf course. Discussion followed between Council members and Mr. Lurie. Backyard Fence Mr. Stan Johnson, 7901 Santa Barbara drive, was recognized and explained that approximately 2 years ago his backyard fence was blown down in a wind storm. Since that time he had been unable to get the adjacent owner to help pay for the cost of installing another fence. Discussion followed during which City Manager Callinan advised that he would follow -up on the matter in an effort to get the problem resolved. C O N S E N T C A L E N D A R City Manager Callinan referred the Council to his memo dated April 5, 1979 to the City Council for explanation of all the matters on the Consent Calendar. Page 2 April 9, 1979 Resolution No. '79-61 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF R01PTERT PAt', RATIFYING CONTRACT WITH COMPREHENSIVE EMPLOYMENT Atli) TRAINING SERVICE DEPARTMENT (CETA) Resolution .No.' 79-,62 RESOLUT1011 .bESIGNX-tING FIR14 TO CONDUCT EXAMINATION OF 1978-79' FINANCIAL TRWTSACTIONS Resolution No. 79-63 RESOLTITION OF THE ". CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROH14ERT PARK APP11OVING AGREEMENT WITH COUNTY OF SONOMA FOR SERVICING ASSESSMENT BONDS Resolution No. 79-64 A RESOLUTION DETERMINING TO UND.EPILTAKE, PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AF U ASSE$Iql ENT BOND ACTS FOR THE ACQUISITION AM. COTITSTRUCTION OF IMPROIUT!TIENTS WITHOUT PROCEEDINGS UNDER DIVISION 4 OF THE STREJETSY'A14D HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (Classic I Cour . t Assessment District, Project No. 1979 5) Resolution No. 79-65 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ENGINEERS AND ATTORNEYS (Classic Mayor Roberts opened the public hearing concerning notices to destroy weeds in the City of hohnert Park. There being* no one desiring, to be heard and no written communications ommunications received, Mayor Roberts closed the public hearing. Court Assessment District,.-F-roject No. 1979-5) Resolution No. 79-66 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION T6 AC"QTJ'IRE AND CONSTRUCT IMPROVE- MENTS (Classic Court Assessment District, Project No. 1979-5) Final Map, File No. Approval o,f'tpal map, File No. 06,53, Classic Industrial 0653, Classic Subdivision No.' 2 (7 lots) and authorizing; the Mayor to Industrial Sub. 2 execute appropriate subdivision agreement prior to the map being ,.released for recording._ I-losquito.Abatement Acknowledging March 20, 1979 letter. from Marin/Sonoma Criteria Mosquito Abatement District and accepting proposed criteria to eliminate the creation of potential mosquito breeding sources. Upon motion of Co ,qncilman Carbone, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approvled,wlith Councilman Beary abstaining from voting on Resolution N.os. 79-54, 79-65 and 79-66 and the final map listed 'for approval, reading of Resolution Nos. 79-61 through 79 -66 was waived and said resolutions were adopte d, and the listed miscellaneous approvals on the consent calendar were approved. Weed Abatement City Manager Callihan reviewed his April 5th memo to the City Council,concerning weed abatement proceedings, informed that notice of the public hearing had been published in the local newspaper and sent to certain owners of properties and residents in the city. Mayor Roberts opened the public hearing concerning notices to destroy weeds in the City of hohnert Park. There being* no one desiring, to be heard and no written communications ommunications received, Mayor Roberts closed the public hearing. Page 3 April 9, 1979 OLUTION NO. 79 -67 RESOLUTION ORDERING CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF ROHITERT PAP.37, TO ABATE NUISANCES EXISTING WITHIN THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARE Upon motion of Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Beary, and unanimously approved, reading of Resolution No. 79 -67 was waived and said resolution was adopted. .ial Environments City Manager Callinan reviewed his April 6th memo to the Re. Hossital City Council regarding the firm of Medical Environments Inc. and the possibility of that firm putting together a program to get an acute hospital developed on the city owned hospital site. Mr. Kenneth Hoffmann, Vice President of Medical Enviornments Inc., was recognized and commented on his firm's background in developing and administering hospital facilities. Mr. Ron Roberson, Hospital Building and Equipment Company, was recognized and commented on his firm's background in constructing hospitals. Mr. Hoffmann requested at least a three month exclusive negotiating period to conduct an investigation to determine if it would be feasible to get State approval for a hospital in the community. Discussion followed between Councilmembers, City 1.tanager Callinan and representatives of Medical Environments Inc. and Hospital Building and Equipment Company. Upon motion of Councilman hopkins, seconded by Councilman Beary, and unanimously approved, the Council went on record as granting Medical Environments Inc. a three month exclusive negotiating period to investigate whether or not it would be feasible to pursue a Certificate of ?teed for an acute general hospital facility to be located on the city owned hospital site. Le No. 0413 - City Manager Callinan reviewed his April 5th memo to the itas Development City Council regarding the public hearing scheduled to rp., Revised EIR consider the revised environmental impact report for Qantas ea South of East Development Corporation for.approximately 2`33 acres south tati Avenue of East Cotati Avenue and east of the Northwestern Pacific railroad tracks. lie informed that copies of the revised EIR and various communications received had been distributed to each Council member for.review. Bob Davis, Mayor of Cotati, was recognized and inquired if a verbatum record of the meeting was being kept and, if not, requested that a court reporter record the proceedings. City Manager Callinan and City Attorney Flitner responded in the negative. Cotati Mayor Davis then asked if they could supply their oven court reporter to record the proceedings. Mayor Roberts and City Manager Callinan. responded in the affirmative. Page 4 April 9, 1979 City Manager Callinan informed that''the Revised FIR for Qantas Development Corporation was scheduled for a duly noticed public hearing and that in addition to the legal notices that had been published that the matter had been widely publicized in the local and Santa Rosa newspapers. Planning Director Skanchy informed that copies of the revised FIR had been supplied to each Council member as well as copies of all communications and Planning Commission minutes. He advised that copies of same were also supplied to Del Davis Associates. City Attorney Flitner advised that the City Council could do one of the following: 1. Approve the revised EIR if the Council finds it is adequate,. The EIR must contain certain elements as provided in the Public Resources Code and, in addition, the lead agency must respond to the best of its ability to public questions, concerns and comments. lie explained that the purpose of soliciting comments was to allow public expression about the contents of the EIR and to allow the lead agency to address those concerns As they relate to the environment. 2. Refer the FIR back for additional comment and response to concerns raised at the public hearing if the Council feels that additional information is available that will assist in making an adequate EIR. 3. Reject the FIR as being inadequate. City Attorney Flitner further advised that if the Council found,,the EIR -to be adequate it should also issue findings indicating, how the effects of the project might be mitigated. In making that determination the Council could consider social, economic, technical or other conditions which make it infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects of the project on the environment. If the Council determines that significant effects will result from the project that may not be mitigated, Section 15089 of the guidelines authorizes the City Council to issue written reasons supporting its action based on the final EIR and other information in the record. Suebl a statement is referred to as a "Statement of Overriding Considerations". If the Council ultimately approves the project and determines to carry it out it must file or cause to be filed a-"Notice of Determination" in the office of the County Clerk. Finally should the'Council'determine that the FIR is presently inadequate, but that it can be made adequate by detailed or researched answers or responses to questions raised at the public hearing, then the Council can refer those questions back to the preparer of the FIR, city staff or to other appropriate sources for the responses. Page 5 April 9, 1979 Mayor Roberts opened the public hearing on the revised EIR for Qantas Development Corporation City Manager Callinan advised of the following communications received, copies of which had been provided to each Council members 1. Letter dated March 16, 1979 from City of Cotati trans - mitting a copy of Planning Director Boehlje's comments on Qantas EIR 2. Letter dated March 26, 1979 from Planning Director Boehlje to City Attorney Flitner 3. Letter dated April 3, 1979 from the City of Cotati transmitting a copy of Cotati Police Department's comments on Qantas EIR. 4. Letter dated April 5, 1979 from Director of Public Safety Dennett to Cotati Police Chief Tester 5. Letter dated April 5, 1979 from So. Co. Community and Environmental Services 6. Letter dated April 6, 1979 from City Attorney Flitner to Cotati City Manager Milliman 7. Copy of letter dated April 6, 1979 from California Regional Water Quality Control Board to Cotati Planning Director Boehlje Mr. Del Davis, Del Davis Associates, EIR consultants from San Rafael, was recognized and commented that the Qantas project had been going on for several years. He reminded that the project was undertaken in late 1975 when a draft EIR was prepared and later certified in the springy; of 1976. Afterwards the City of Cotati pursued litigation contending that the EIR was inadequate. Although the loiier court ruled in favor of Rohnert Park, the Appellate Court reversed that decision finding that the EIR was inadequate because it had not responded adequately to certain comments - concerning environmental impact. Since the initial preparation of the draft EIR it was necessary to update various data contained in the revised EIR, more specifically: 1) air quality, 2) traffic, and 3) sewer disposal, which were of primary concern with reference !to the adequacy of the EIR. Mr. Davis explained that his firm had worked with various agencies to respond to each of their concerns. The draft document was submitted to the Planning Commission and found to be adequate. The Planning Commission then authorized the certification of the draft EIR for review and input by by other agencies. Comments were solicited.from other agencies and a public hearing scheduled before the Planning Commission. Page b April 9, 1979 Ile informed that in cooperation with city staff, his firm was directed by the Planning Commission to respond to various communications and comments regarding the EIR. The Planning Commission then determined that the document was adequate and referred it to.the City Council. Mr. Davis indicated that he had just received copies of two letters, one from the City of Cotati and the other from the County of Sonoma, and requested that he be given adequate time in which.to respond in writing to each of the communications as well as other comments made during the public hearing to follow. Robert Davis, Mayor.of Cotati, was recognized and expressed that he wanted to address several of the assumptions and comments in the EIR to which there had not been adequate response, in particular traffic, concerns raised by the Cotati Police Department., and sewer. He explained that the primary concern was the development's impact on the City of Cotati and not the internal impact to Rohnert Park which Rohnert Park .would,have to deal with. Mayor Davis felt that the EIR..assumed that northbound traffic would use.Snyd3er Lane and Rohnert Park Expressway, whereas previously it had assumed that the motorists would use East Cotati Avenue. He said the assumption that there would be less impact,on East Cotati Avenue because motorists would be using Snyder Lane was faulty. He also noted that the EIR projected that 27 %:of the .workday traffic would use Petaluma Hill'Road and not Railroad Avenue in traveling to Napa and Vallejo. He commented that although this would not affect Cotati, it is of concern in showing the validity of the document. Ile noted that two of the intersections that would be overtaxed were Adrian Drive and Lancaster Drive both at East Cotati Avenue. In this regard, the.E.IR offered no alternate ways in which to mitigate this.impact. Mayor Davis said that the development would increase the number of nighttime individuals in Cotati and thus the amount of police services provided by the City of Cotati. The potential for an increase in juveniles in Cotati would also increase the demand for police services. Mayor Davis noted that the EIR suggested that the increase in sales tax revenues would.somewhat mitigate the expenses incurred for police services. Mayor Davis explained that the amount.of increased population that would be shopping in the City of Cotati would not generate enough sales tax revenues to offset the number of police officers required to service the additional population. He said that Residential :development of the type proposed seldom pays for itself. The City of Rohnert.,Park would receive income from the proposed development in the form of development fees, but the amount of sales tax derived in Cotati would be much less. He pointed out that there would be an impact since the growth around Cotati was not occurring at the same rate as Cotati's growth. Pape 7 April 9, 1979 Mayor Davis felt that sewer treatment capacity should be more adequately addressed in the EIR. He pointed out that this should be of concern to the city and its residents. He informed'that Cotati sub - contracts with Rohnert Park for its sewer treatment, and that the project would more than use up sewer capacity the size of Cotati, the capacity which may not be there. He felt that the project's impact would affect Cotati's ability to plan for future sewer capacity. Mayor Davis summarized that the EIR was inadequate in addressing 1) traffic impact, 2) increased services that the City of Cotati might have to provide, i.s. police, parks, streets, etc., and 3) sewer capacity that had been planned on for Cotati. In conclusion Mayor Davis expressed that the EIR was not adequate at this time because it didn't provide sufficient mitigation as to the project's effect on Cotati. Councilman Hopkins inquired if Cotati had a traffic survey available. Mayor Davis indicated that he had mid- decade census data on the present flow on East Cotati Avenue and that the number of cars generated is probably the proper number or as good a speculation as can be made. Mr. David A. Catano, 9435 Railroad Avenue, was recognized and informed that he represented a group of citizens from his neighborhood who were concerned about the EIR. The preparation of the EIR, according to its contents, was to determine the projects impact on surrounding communities. He indicated that the group was concerned about the EIR and that he had a petition of about 50 signatures expressing opposition to the project because of the inadequacy of the EIR. Mr. Catano read a letter from Marthe Norwick, 6750 Petaluma Hill Road, a copy of which is attached to the original set of these minutes. Ile explained that the EIR only came to his attention six -seven weeks ago although he had lived in the area two years. Ile informed that at the last hearing there had been mention of the dubious nature of the effect on well water, especially with Rohnert Park using a well water system. Mr. Catano read excerpts from the 'EIR which related to water and commented that the EIR mentioned that the ground water study was supposed to be finished in late 1977. He pointed Ott that it is now 1979. Ile 'noted that as neighbors they were on wells. If the city is on wells also, their concerns was how much water is available. He said that the EIR says that there is enough water available, but there are no statistics available to substantiate that. Mr. Catano read excerpts from the EIR relating to flooding, pointing out that flood waters would be collected and drain to the south. That he informed, was where he lived now. Ile informed that the County had cleaned out the ditches which had helped, but in the wintertime the area floods. Page S April. 9, 1979 He noted that the EIR had been corrected to reflect that the drainage from the site flows in a southwesterly direction. All the runoff water could`only'go into the creek, which already can't handle the water he said. When it rains, the rear of the property gets flooded. They didn't feel that the EIR dealt adequately with the flooding problems. With reference to traffic, Mr. Catano noted that the EIR had numerous statistics relating to-various roadways, although he didn't see anything on monitoring Railroad Avenue. The project anticipated act&qs to Railroad Avenue, but no where in the EIR does it deal with the impact on Railroad Avenue. Mr. Catano informed that the number of signators on the petition represented about 300 acres, which was about as large an area as the project itself. He expressed his opinion that whoever prepared the EIR had the responsibilit by law to put down in words some of the various things mentioned, that is with reference to water sewerage; flooding and traffic, and they urged that the City of Rohnert Park not adopt the EIR. City Manager Callinan ,requested that Mr. Catano submit the petition which he had made reference to so that it could be made a part of the meeting record. Mavis ,lakes, 392 Eucalyptus Avenue, was recognized and informed that she had read the traffic section of the ETR three times and although she had a law degree, she didn't find anything about Railroad Avenue or that it was considered to be a dangerous road. She didn't feel that Railroad Avenue should be compared to East Cotati Avenue and that it was important to note that we are in an age when people are taking up jogging, etc., and that you just, can't talk about vehicular traffic. City Manager Callinan informed that he had the petition which Mr. Catano had made reference to, which consisted of three sheets and was dated March 5, 1979 and would be made part of the record of the public hearing (a copy is attached to the original set of these minutes). Susan. Reynolds, 514 Santa Alicia Drive, was recognized informing that she was a member of the Rousing Task Force .at Sonoma State University. She mentioned problems in housing students at the university, saying; that a recent survey of students at the university showed that more axed more students are moving out of Rohnert Park. She would have a copy of the survey results for the city later. 'tae desired that more information be in the EIR in terms of housing university students and the resultant increased traffic for students commuting to the university from out of the area. She felt that Qantas should have low income housing, the need for which was shown in the survey. There should also be provision for walkways and bicycle paths to facilities. She desired that the EIR inquire how the campus planning commission felt about the Qantas development and the housing effect on campus. Page 9 April 9, 1979 Councilman Beary suggested that she might also find out Vhy the people are moving to outlying areas. Miss Reynolds informed that a major consideration was cost. Councilman Beary said that the study should indicate whether there was adequate housing available and the cost of the housing units. Miss Reynolds said that she thought that the E7R inadequately addressed the matter of traffic and with reference to Sonoma State University. Councilman Hopkins expressed that we would be happy to help the university with its on campus housing, but that traditionally the students didn't want to live on campus. Sylvia Thomas, 410 East Railroad Avenue, was recognized and described the general makeup of Railroad Avenue as a 28 feet wide roadway with drainage ditches on each side with no walkway for pedestrians. She noted that it had been mentioned that there would be access to the project in the area of the railroad tracks. City Manager Callinan explained that the access roadway from Railroad Avenue to the proposed development would be several hundred feet east of the railroad tracks. Mr. Del Davis confirmed Mr. Callinan's statement. Planning Director Skanchy pointed out the proposed access road on a map which was displayed. Miss Thomas expressed that the intersection would be a hazard. She explained that Old Redwood Highway was scary because of its traffic conditions and that Railroad Avenue is'very well traveled. She desired that there be more emphasis on the fact that it be a safe road and pointed out that because it was a secondary road, there would be very little policing for speeding, etc. Tom Elliott, 3670 Eucalyptus Avenue, was recognized and expressed that he had a few areas of concern with reference to the ETR. He informed that with a 3/4 to 1 inch rain storm his front yard was flooded and that if all the water coming; out of the project goes into the creek he would have to buy a boat to get into his house. Also, he felt that if access were provided to the development from Railroad Avenue, that people would use Old Redwood Highway and Railroad Avenue to get to the development. The (easterly) intersection of Railroad Avenue and Old Redwood Highway is a'cut back and very dangerous he informed. Also Railroad Avenue is not adequate to accommodate the additional traffic and people would start using Eucalyptus and Willow Avenues. Page 10 April 9, 1979 Charles Kitchen, 444 Hollingsworth Circle, was recognized and commented that a project of the size proposed could generate crime and could develop into a slum. Insofar as the water table was concerned, he felt that there should be more time to consider the project's effect on the water table. John Lehman, 9405 Willow Avenue, was recognized and explained that a majority of the water would be taken from Well Rio. 8 in holiday Park Subdivision.. and that he was concerned about living in the area where the majority of the water would be taken from. Mr. Lehman read excerpts from the EIR with reference to the water table and ground water study, commenting that several of the comments were redundant. Councilman Hopkins asked about the 1977 ground water study and City Manager Callinan responded that staff would get into that matter later. Mr. Lehman polnted out that Rohnert Park was not a stagnant community and was growing by leaps and bounds. He made reference to various SB;90 population estimates for the years 1977, 1973 and 1979 for Rohnert Park and million gallons per day of water usage. He felt that there would be a 66% increase in water usage in Rohnert Park as a result of the proposed project. Mr. Lehman, referring the the EIR's comments on growth, felt that the city limits would keep .growing. He pointed out that Rohnert Park may grow beyond its means to supply. Ile concluded saying that he would like to see the EIR rejected. Adrian Swenson, 897 West Railroad Avenue, was recognized and expressed that there was one relatively small area of concern that hadn't been addressed by anyone else. She and her neighbors were concerned with the traffic, even on West Railroad Avenue. The potential problems she explained were 1) the intersection of West Railroad Avenue and Old Redwood Highway. She felt that because a project this size could tip the balance of the intersection, that traffic signals should be installed. She inquired who would pay for same. 2) noted problems with traffic on West CotatVi Avenue,, nart_icularly in the mornings and later afternoon, saying; that the EIR assumed commuters would take Rohnert Park Expressway. It could also be assumed that some commuters would take West Cotati Avenue and that road is wide in some areas and narrow in others and is most hazardous between the hours of 5000 and 7000 p.m. She suggested that the EIR take a look at the potential increased problem on vest Railroad Avenue. There being no one further desiring to be heard, and no other written communications received, Mayor Roberts closed the public hearing. Recess Mayor Roberts declared a recess at approximately 9008 P.M. Page 11 April 9, 1979 :onvene Mayor Roberts reconvened the meeting at approximately 9020 p.m. with all Council members present. Mayor Roberts informed that the public hearing concerning the Qantas Development project EIR had been closed and that some of the Council members had questions for Mr. Davis. Mr. Davis was recognized and explained that he would like to review the testimony, but that a few comments had been made concerning the need to provide additional data on .Railroad Avenue. There had also been a lot of discussion concerning drainage and direction of drainage from the proposed development. He explained that he felt the information concerning drainage was adequate, although it may not have been clearly stated in the EIR. He commented that a hydrology study was made and that major drainage improvements would . be made in the area of the project. There had been a misunderstanding of where the water goes now or in the future, but he would also review that to clarify information so that there would be no misinterpretation. Mr. Davis noted that there had been several comments on the water table and underground water supply and that there had been a lengthy statement in the 'EIR concerning same. He explained that there had been a ground water study to determine the underground storage area /basin and its magnitude. He pointed out that there was a under- ground gelogic barrier, and that a majority of Cotati was in a different ground water basin. He informed that the State Department of Water Resources ground water study was being conducted at present. If there was additional_ information, he would include that in the EIR. He commented that there were several questions raised about traffic distribution. That information contained in the EIR dealt strictly with the peak hour traffic when there is the greatest demand. The EIR also utilized the mid - decade census. He had also commented on the primary and secondary wage earner and noted that among the written communications there was a comment made about employment of the persons working in the area which was erroneous. He said that he would review those comments in the EIR to make sure that they were properly stated. Mr. Davis pointed out that under Proposition 13 property tax revenue would be distributed to various agencies throughout the county. With reference to the communication from the County, he felt it would be wise to include in the EIR the city's growth management program. He thought that some people felt that the project would be built almost immediately. He pointed out that under the growth management plan the development would take place over a period of time. Mayor Roberts informed that it was the consensus of the Council that Mr. Davis should prepare responses to the comments on the EIS'.. Page 12 April 9, 1979 Mr. Davis commented that he would like to respond to all of the comments in writing so that the city could rely on them in the future. Councilman Beary asked what action the,county and City of Cotati should, take in preparing for the project. Councilman Carbone inquired if the main road which would serve the project could,be terminated at the southerly end of the project without being.extended to Railroad Avenue. Tf that was done ::'hat effect would it have on the neighborhood /project and East Cotati Avenue. Mr. Davis informed that a project of this size must have at least two accesses. Councilman Stewart informed that she .would not have thought of West Railroad Avenue and the.developers having to do anything about the West Railroad Avenue intersection on Old ?redwood Highway. She asked what the county and City of Cotati would do on the project to help the city out. Mayor Roberts commented that the site plan showed that there would be one major entrance. Mr. Davis had made reference to several entrances. At what stage would he consider if mandatory to have other entrances, rather than one. When would the connection to Railroad Avenue be required. Councilman Beary expressed that he hadn't seen any comments in the EIR on the number of available housing units and the cost of those units in Northern California. Another factor to which Mr. Beary requested a response was the additional costs of the project due to litigation, other costs to the developer in providing; information for the various hearings, delays and time and energy spent in responding to all concerns raised in the EIR process. Councilman Hopkins commented that one of the things that was mentioned was the project in its entirety. He felt that there should be some comment on the gradual impact and not the total impact, i.e. how many housing units will be going on line in the next 5, 6, and 7 years? Councilman Bea r d -'a- 4 ,� also r7 commented 4t"t1 461x4 there �'YV l�LU d1.bV U CC EA impact in crime and police problems since the people come from somewhere so that there would be less cost somewhere else for police services. Mr. Davis commented that Cotati Mayor Davis had raised questions about the potential crime impact. He had read about a week ago about a program that was initiated in Cotati that experienced Less crime. Councilman Stewart inquired which way the drainage runoff water flowed. Mr. Davis indicated on the site plan which was displayed the major topographical break in the site's terrain where water water flowed southwestward and southeastward. Page 13 April 9, 1979 City Manager Callinan briefly commented on the flow to Laguna de Santa Rosa. Mr. Davis explained that there would be a major engineering study as part of the subdivision design. City Manager Callinan informed that any development inside the city would have to conform to the Sonoma County Water Agency's standards which had been adopted by the city. Councilman Beary commented question to Cotati Mayor that this project had been on and off the boards several years, starting with Morrison Domes, therefore, everyone in Cotati and the surrounding area had been aware of the proposed development of the area in question. Mayor Davis considered the project to be inside the City of Rohnert Park. He commented that lie found the question a liftle bit difficult to address as to what Cotati should be doing to handle the development. City Manager Callinan asked Mayor Davis if he had said that Cotati had a sales tax revenue of $15.00 per capita. Mayor Davis responded in the affirmative. City Manager Callinan informed that the Rohnert Park city budget showed that Cotati received $61 per capita in sales tax and that the average of all cities in the county was $52 per capita. Mayor Davis commented that it was not enough to warrant hiring a policeman. Mr. David Catado was recognized and informed that he had misstated that he lived on Railroad Avenue, but he lived at 9435 Willow Avenue. Also he asked if he would be able to receive notice of the next meeting concerning the EIR. City Manager Callinan informed that everyone appearing at the hearing would receive notice of the next meeting. 11ow /American City Manager Callinan reviewed his April 5th Council meeting rth Realtors memo regarding this matter. elopment on caster Drive Planning Director Skanchy described the site plans and elevations of the proposed Swallow /American hearth Realtors development on Lancaster Avenue in Cotati. City Manager Callinan informed that each Council member had been provided with a copy of the letter from the City of Cotati to Mr. Sandy Swallow concerning their consent to hooking up to the Rohnert Park sewer and water mains and reviewed his memo to the Council dated April 5, 1979. Councilman Beary informed that he had done sub - contract work for Swallow Construction in the past. City Manager Callinan explained the resolution and a change in Section II paragraph "D" by deleting No. 5) of the policyg a copy of which is attached to the -^r4g4-al Set of these minutes. � �IL L L. Upon motion of Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Beary, and unanimously approved, reading of Resolution No. 79-63 was waived and said resolution was adopted. Golf Course City Manager Callinan reviewed his April 5th memo to the Matters City.Council with reference to golf course matters. Discus- sion followed. The Council agreed that various golf course matters should be considered at an adjourned regular meeting scheduled for Monday, April 16th at 7000 p.m. Page 1G April 9, 1979 City Attorney Flitner informed that he had been contacted by both Messrs. Beary and Mullins concerning their ability to vote on the proposed development. Mr. Flitner felt that Mr. Beary was qualified to make a decision concerning utility hook-up fees. Councilman Carbone made a motion, which was seconded by Councilman Beary, to approve.the hookup of the proposed Swallow development to the city's sewer and water mains, subject to payment of Rohnert Park's usual and customary fees. Discussion followed, with Cotati Mayor Davis participating, concerning Cotatils Policy of charging fees for city services. Mr. Mullins, in response to a comment made by City Manager Callinan, agreed to put on a wood shake roof and heavy wood trim. Councilman'Carbonel-- motion to approve the 1-lookup of the Swallow development to the city's sewer and water mains was unanimously approved. Rohnert Park City Manager Callinan informed that the firm of Del Davis Expressway Westward Associates had been retained by the County of Sonoma to Extension prepare the environmental impact report concerning the westward extension of the Rohnert Park Expressway and that at,long last work on the EIR had been started. Traffic Matters City Manager Callinan reviewed his April 5th Council meeting memo concerning various traffic matters* "Discussion followed. wed. It was the general consensus of the Council members that a permanent.island should be installed on Commerce Boulevard near, I its intersection with Rohnert Park Expressway and that the matter should be scheduled for the April 23rd CitY,Council meeting for possible action concerning same. Resolution No. 79.68 RESOLUTIOT1 APPROVING COMMUNITY CENTER AND RECREATION FACILITIES USE POLICY City Manager Callinan explained the resolution and a change in Section II paragraph "D" by deleting No. 5) of the policyg a copy of which is attached to the -^r4g4-al Set of these minutes. � �IL L L. Upon motion of Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Beary, and unanimously approved, reading of Resolution No. 79-63 was waived and said resolution was adopted. Golf Course City Manager Callinan reviewed his April 5th memo to the Matters City.Council with reference to golf course matters. Discus- sion followed. The Council agreed that various golf course matters should be considered at an adjourned regular meeting scheduled for Monday, April 16th at 7000 p.m. ABAG (Emergency Medical Task Force) (Roberts) ABSG (Hopkins, Alt. Roberts) Ad Hoc Committee for Theatre Arts Center (Roberts) Chamber of Commerce Liaison (Roberts) City - County Policy Committee (Hopkins) Cities -- School District Coordinating Committee (Stewart) County Solid Waste Management Plan Advisory Committee (Carbone) Cultural Arts Commission Liaison (Hopkins) Golf Course Advisory Committee (Beary /Stewart) Legislation Review (Hopkins, Alt. Stewart) Library Advisory Board Member (Carbone) Page 15 April 9, 1979 mmunications Communications per the attached outline were brought to the attention of the City Council. Fo action was taken on any communications unless specifically noted in these minutes. dscaping. and kiting Act City Manager Callinan explained that there was nothing new to report at this time concerning the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. y Manager's City Manager Callinan referred the Council to his Council ort meeting memo dated April 5th to the City Council for explana- tion of all matters on the City Manager °s Report section of the agenda. City Manager Callinan noted that a letter of resignation was received from City Historian John DeClercq. The Council directed.that an appropriate letter of appreciation be sent to Mr. DeClercq. ianical Play Lces Upon motion of Councilman Carbone, seconded by Councilman Stewart, and unanimously approved, the City Council directed that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing to determine if the city's municipal code should or should not be amended with reference to mechanical play devices. & E. Franchise City Manager Callinan informed that the city had received lent today P.G. & Els franchise payment for 1978 in the amount of $42,432. Ing on School City Manager Callinan referred the Council to City Attorney nds Flitner's April 9th memo regarding the regulation of parking on school grounds. Discussion followed. Upon motion of Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Beary, and unanimously approved, the City Council directed that City Attorney Flitnerfs memo regarding parking of school grounds be referred to the Cotati - Rohnert Park Unified School District Board of Trustees. s Action Lawsuit City Attorney Flitner briefly commented on Rohnert Park's nst PERS Et Al exposure in the class action lawsuit against P.E.R.S. and other cities. cif Assignments Mayor Roberts noted that there would be no changes in the following Council assignments: ABAG (Emergency Medical Task Force) (Roberts) ABSG (Hopkins, Alt. Roberts) Ad Hoc Committee for Theatre Arts Center (Roberts) Chamber of Commerce Liaison (Roberts) City - County Policy Committee (Hopkins) Cities -- School District Coordinating Committee (Stewart) County Solid Waste Management Plan Advisory Committee (Carbone) Cultural Arts Commission Liaison (Hopkins) Golf Course Advisory Committee (Beary /Stewart) Legislation Review (Hopkins, Alt. Stewart) Library Advisory Board Member (Carbone) Page 16 April 9, 1979 Mobile Home Advisory Committee (Carbone/ Stewart) Parks and Recreation Commission Liaison (Carbone) Planning Commission Liaison (Roberts) Water Agency Policy Committee (Geary, Alt. Hopkins) Youth Advisory Commission Liaison (Hopkins) LAFCO Councilman Hopkins initiated a discussion concerning Special District members of the Local Agency Formation Commission. Upon motion of Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Bear-, and unanimously approved, the City Council went on record in oppositon to providing additional special district representatives to the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission. City Historian Councilman Stewart inquired about the resignation of the City Historian and City Manager Callinan informed that the position was not a city position and could be filled by the Rohnert Park.Cultural Arts Corporation. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Roberts adjourned the meeting at approximately 10:26 p.m. to April 16, 1979 at 7200 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Faus APPROVED* Arthur N. Roberts, Mayor Marthe t4orwicku \\� 6750 Petaluma Hill Rd. Penngrove, Ca. 94951 ro: Rohnert Park City Council Subject: EIR for the Proposed Quantas Planned Unit Development. The EIR for the Proposed Quantas Planned Unit Development is inadequate in regard to its treatment of scenic corridor, open space, and agricultural land considerations. The proposed project viol eenbeltecommunipycseparator scenic concept. The designations ABAG comments for the area as well as the gr specifically support the Sonoma County General Plan. The EIR dots not address these points. The The soil type in the project area is Class II5 -5 and is 60 inches deep. EPA has called for the protection of al�ndlthe ABAGdletter recommendapreservations III soils. The Sonoma County General Plan of agricultural land. The 11 not states of this 288 -acre site will of Sonoma County's agricultural land was available used for field crops was lost Y ear in the Sonoma County Agricultural Report. The Sonoma Mountain Study designates Agricultural /Residgory i sutheepreservation project and states "the primary intent of this land use category p of agriculture "(T -5). It further EIRsis"these incorreclands when it within saysthe "thearea landsuitable is in for wastewater irrigation "(I -6). The lans "(III.1.). The EIR general conformity with regional and preliminary County p does not mention wastewater irrigation. The EIR for the Proposed Quantas Planned Unit Development is incomplete and therefore unacceptable. The Rohnert Park City Council cannot accept the EIR in its present form. Sincerely Yours, by Marthe Osborne Norwick We the undersigned residents of Sonoma County whose proximity to the proposed Q%ntas Project necessitate us to voice our opposition to said project for the following reasons. The Environmental Impact Deport has not dealt, to our satisfaction, adequ2ity with regard to the following: I. traffic, 2. sewage, 3. flooding, 4. water table. Oej) 17 -lac 97So �✓, / /�� �i ve 5= 7 ©% W ; 5 --13 7.3 1 � . g-q7 '4 ?qq w1 Pie 7b ' q661 7 qq 7q :'.. ^ y� � C_CC March, 19 79 u.. We, the undersigned . residents In the area South of Rohnert Park and Cotati oppose the proposed Quantas Project because' of probable impacts on traffic and roads, flooding, and the groundwater 'supply, SIGNATURE ER NA ADDRESS, CITY, ZIP- PHONE fL. 17610 L;I}U 1 'if`G77'Ir� YY �� / 4' S~ �% sch s K 11 L /49t ►��� -� g G r f L t L. G. gl> 1c °Za ✓^ 79 5 ` l! C A JJ '7 7 S,C/S- 1 • ,; t �,� f � �: � 9 5 pp G } j 6 R h a S Larch 5, 1979 We the undersigned residents of Sonoma County whose proximity to the proposed Qantas Project necessitate us to voice our opposition to said project for the following reasons. The Environmental Impact report has not dealt, to our satisfaction, adequately with regard. to the following; 1. traffic, 2. sewage, 3. flooding, 4. water table. q�,a5 UU +It0w peg, AUe, Ccft�#i "O'MUNITY CENTER & PWCRr!1TTON FACILITIES USE 1PIL'CY S:,:CTTO`d T GENERAL POLICY T.; r - )PMATTCF, The ^maximmm n cor.rninity use of the Fecreat_c.al facilities is a general poll^ goal. Encourapement shall be given to -he fullest nossille, reasonable ut li- zation of the facility. 1. Administrative Responsibility - The City Vanager or his appointed represen- tative shall authorize, approve, and a,_Iminister the use of the Co=!unity Center and neighborhood recreation build . ^s in accordance with the general policy set forth. 2. Hours of Use - There is no policy limiting the hours during :which recreation facilities ray he used, however, since facilities are located in residential areas, considerations rust be given to noise factors and traffic generated by each proposed activity and reasonable restrictions :-a_i be imposed to min - imize th-e disturbance to nearbv residents. The Community Center (only) may not be used after 1:00 a.m. on the Friday, Saturday, Sunday and 11:00 p.m. on '`onday thru Thursday, Clean -up must be completed- within one hour after completion of event. Keep existing policy for recreation facilities. 3. Eauinyment - City equipment may be used in the Com= pity Center and recreatio- buildings at the discretion of the City Tanager or his assigned representative. The ComR,:,sni *.y Center or recreation facilities equipment shall not be loaned or rented to any group for t':e use outside the Center's premises without the City Manager's permission. 4. Religious Services may be conducted in the Co- mmunity Center and Recreation Facilities so long as they do not con=lict with community events or S. Alcoholic Beverages - Shall be allowed. Users will be responsible for ob- taining from the City a letter authorizinrz the serving of alcohol beverages and necessary permits and insurances required by the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Applicant must provide proof of public liahility insurance in the minima m ammount of $50,000 with the city named as co- insured. See section three, 131 _ -. 5. Responsibility of Users - Users of the Co-,m -ar-it�r Center or recreation facilities shall be responsible for damage or theft of City property during the period of use. Any user group failin7 to exercise proper care and responsibility in the maintenance of the facility nay be refused use of the facilities in the future. 7. The City of Rohnert Park is NOT responsible for accidents, injury of loss of individual property. 9. Evaluation - The City "Tanager or his appointed representative shall conduct a continuous evaluation of the Community Center and recreation buildins -s and shall periodically report on same to the City Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission on surpested recom:rmended changes of the policv. -1- t SECTION II BUILDING RESERVATIONS - GROUP CLASSIFICATIONS Users of the Cow u-nity Center and recreation buildings shall be classified into the. following groups which are listed in order of suggested priority. A. City ; Department Sponsored Activities - Leisure service activities and pro- grams directly sponsored by the City of Rohnert Park. B. Co- saonsored Recreation Groups - Recognized civic, community or local organ- izations whose leisure activities are being presented in conjunction with the City's cormrunity leisure services programs. C. School Sponsored Activities - Adult or yout`i activities sponsored by the Rohnert Park /Cotati Unified School District or Sonoma State University. D. Community Adult Youth Groups - Any organized corms unity group having the following qual;fications: 1 Non - profit, 2) is recreation or community service orientated, 3) has a majority or its members being Rohnert Park residents, and for youth who are 18 years old or younger, 4) has volunteer adult leaders for youth, 5) _ _joMbrr, 6) has a definite organizational structure. E. Religious Church Services - Any group which takes an offering and or collection, conducts a service or devotional and or asks for response for religious committ- ments is considered conducting religious services. Only churchs with a City of Rohnert Park address will be allowed to use the facilities for religious services, and 50% of its memberships must be residents of Rohnert Park. F. Resident Use - Private Activities - To he eligible for resi'.ezt classification permit must have a resident signature. Weddings /Receptions, the parents of the groom or bride must be residents, and include any youth, adult, or in- dividual group not covered under classifications A, B, C, D, E, or H. G. Non- Resident - Groups or organizations which are composed of non - residents of the City of R.ohnert Park. This includes all individuals and groups not residing in the City of Rohnert Park. H. Commercial Groups - "Any group or individual using, the facility for personal profit or gain. This classification shall include all shows, paid perfor- mances lectures, classes and dances under private or commercial sponsorship for which admission charges are made or contributions solicited. SECTION III C0111I)ITIOFS IN USr 1. Permission for use of facilities will be granted upon the condition that all rules governing the use of said facilities are followed and all necessary fees and de*>o sits are paid. Permission for use may be revoked at any time if user fails to do so. 2. The City reserves the right to cancel, reassign or otherwise adjust reservations to comply with the demands of its ovrn pro -rams, community programs, or emergency requirements. -''- 3. A uermit to use a facility will be issued provided: a) Issuance will not c'-^- struct or interfere with recreational use ands. b) the date and time requested have not previously been allocated by permit or assigned to a department f=action; c) the required deposits and /or fees have been paid. 4. The application for use must be completed in person by a oualified represe* - tative of the reauestin?_ organization or croup who is 13 years oL age or older. Application. for groups serv?ng alcohol must be completed by a representative 21 years of ale or older. 5. The requested organization or group representative shall be required to host a cash deposit for fees and charges applicable to the rental of the facility as stated in the use fee policy at the time the permit is issued. Balance of =ees due must be aaid five days prior to use. 6. Reservations for use of the facilities rray be made up to a year in advance ^^o- viding a deposit cf 25% or fee is collected. 7. Reservations for the Corgi unity Center rooms :^list be made with seating arrange- ment at least (5) days :ricr to use along with required fees. S. The requesting group and its representative signing for the facility are res- ponsible for all damage to the facility during the time of use. 9. The requesting group or party shall comply with all requirements of the State Health and Safety Codes, City Ordinances, department policies, fire and police department policies and any other applicable laws. 10. Co"f',L.TITY I " ONLY :`n attendant of the Recreation Department shall be on duty at all tines, other than normal operatin.7 hours, who is responsiby^ for th,e enforcement of rules Govern= the use of the building. Control o5 lights, heating and coclin7 system, oublic address system and other. equi=ne ^t is the,responsibility of the at•�endant on duty and any recuests for changes shall be directed to him. 11. Plans for decorations must be submitted to the Recreation Department at the time of application and arnroval. Decoration must be fire proof or fire re- tardent materials. ,,hey must be removed by the applicants and they cannot block exit signs. 12. Community Center Only- Smo':ing is permissible in designated areas only. 13. Any indiv =dual or or�a nisat'_cns spensoriag a:z activity t.,here alcoholic beverages a_re sold or where alcoholic beve~ ages are 'ncluc.� d in the price of admission must be licensed by -he alcoholic 3evera <ye Control, 14. A copy of --z= ar^,roval r-_ a- ,nlication form or caterers license to serve alcoholic beverages must ^e completed and submitted to the Director of Recreation or his desi- aver (10) da,s prior to the activity. 15. Dances - X11 - ,lance :requests are governed by Ordinance 112 - Section 5.16.0LL0 Of the Rohnert Park I!' -!icipal Code. 16. No meetings or entertainment shall be held for the purpose of advancinp- a. ^.y doctrine or theory subversive to the United States. 17. Users are responsible For cleaning the facility before leaving unless a cleaning fee has been paid or arrangements have been made with the City to do otherwise. Clean -up includes depositing all trash in trash containers, -•• ----__ r . ® s1,� �li,ir� nG er,;ij.A fn ..A nr Y- frP_shT^entS, (DO''S 'TQ4 PERTAIN: TO CC` 14 ',ITY C=rER ►�T2LTI -USE HALL FLOCP), cleaning the itchen if used which includes stove and refrigerator. Vaccuum carpets if used. 18. Users are also responsible for security of facility if no Building Attendant is on duty. Double check to see that all doors > windows inside and out are secure. 19. Kitchen Usage - Burton Avenue Recreation Center - The Recreation Center kitchen does not include any cooking utensils, dishes or silverware. Groups using the kitchen are responsible for their own kitchen clean -up and for fur- nishing their own utensils and necessary serving ware. Individuals using the sterilizer must realize that it is not a dishwasher and all dishes must be hand washed prior to placing into t:;e sterilizer. A custodian or the City employee may be required to be on duty when the kitchen facilities are used to serve ;.peals to larger gatherings or Banquets. No Food is to be left in the refrigerator. 20. Kitchen Usage — Community Center - Use of the kitchen is only available to caters and qualified persons approved by the Director of Recreation or his designate. All equipment and silverware will be inventoried and checked before after use. Any damage or lost equipment must be replaced at the cater °s or individuals expense. All silverware and equipment must be thoroughly cleaned after use. No food is to be left in the refrigerator or freezer. SECTION IV APPLICATION PROCESS 1. Reservations for use of facilities may be made by contacting the Recreation BeDartrent at the Community Center, 5401 Snyder Lane. 2. All applications must be filled out in person at the Community Center. No advance publicity should be done until application has been approved by the Director of Recreation or his designate. 3. Upon approval of application by the department a permit will be issued to the requesting organization or group at which time applicable fees and charges must be Daid. 4. If cancellation of permit is necessary the department must be notified immediately. Cancellation must be rade at least five days in advance or the applicant shall forfeit all fees and charges paid. 5. The organization or group representative who applied for use must be present at the Facility during the time of use and have a copy of facility use permit in his possession. The facility cannot be left with a minor in charge. 6. All requests for professional clean-up services :rust be stated at time of application for Burton Avenue Recreation Center & Recreation Buildin7s. Cleaning service does not entail clean -up of the kitchen Facilities. An additional fee will be charged for kitchen clean -ups. Clean -up fees are mandatory for classifications F and G. SECTION V FEES F CHARGES 1. There shall be no charge to classifications A, B, C when the facilities are used at such time that the City custodian_ or other City employee is normally on duty or when the facilities are used in such 3 manner that the presence of a City employee is not required. 2. In the event that a custodian or other employee has to be present, a fee of $5.00 per hour may be charged. It shall be the responsibility of the City manager or his assigned representative to determine whether a custodian or City employee need be present and a fee charged. Classifications D, E, F, & G will be required to pay a $50.00 damage and cleaning deposit for all rooms and recreation center and building use, and $100.00 deposit for Community Center multi -use hall. The deposit will be refunded in its entirety if no property damage has been incurred. 3. The minimum rental period for Burton Avenue Recreation Center, Main Fall and Commmity Center M -U for classifications F & G is (3) hours and (2) hours for classification E. 4. For groups F & G serving alcoholic beverages an additional fee is being charged which is indicated in the fee schedule. This additional fee in- cludes professional clean -up services at the conclusion of the activity. This does not include the kitchen area. The services provided include taking down of tables and chairs and the general clean -up of the Burton Avenue Recreation Center, Main Hall and the Community Center Multi -Use Room. See rule B for classification D group fee for serving alcoholic beverages. 5. Activities for the sole purpose of raising funds for a profit or for the benefit of an individual or commercial groups will be charged twice the regular fee of the F or G classification. 6. Fees or charges may be waived or reduced by the City Manager or his appointed representative if the proceeds of fund raising activities are to be expended solely for the welfare of the public or of the City or for charitable purposes not in conflict with the Constitution of the United States or the State of California. In such instances, a report shall be filed with the City Offices and submitted to the City Council and Parks and Recreation Commission showing the disposition of the receipts from the activity. 7. Classification D, Burton Avenue Recreation Center 6 Recreation Buildings. Flat fee per month or for single use. An additional cleaning fee of $25 for recreation buildings and $40 for Burton Avenue Recreation Center will be charged for all special functions serving alcohol beverages having dances or dinners. 8. Classification D - No charge for scout groups using scout hut. 9. No charge for Senior Citizen groups (with a majority of members 55 years or older using the Burton Avenue Recreation Building.) I SECTIOto VI PEE SCKEDULE PROPOSED RECD ?it?'* ?DATIO'S NC = No Charge 1. Functions which are serving alcoholic beverages. 2. * *Kitchen facilities may be shared with another activity, if 4U East and West used. 3. NOTE: Classification C will not be charged a fee, but for functions using the multi -use room they must set up and take down tables and chairs. 4. NA = Not Available 5. A deposit fee of $50 is required for use of all recreation facilities, and $100 for use of community center multi -use room. Minimum rental for multi -use halls is three hours and for all other rooms two hours minimum. 6. Classification H - $300 or 10$ gross receipts, whichever is greater - Burton Avenue Recreation Center and $600 or 10$ of gross receipts, whichever is greater for Community Center Multi -Use 3 1 1 ,B,C, ^ E,F F URTON AVE REC CTR. ITC MAIN HALL NC 15 $10 /hr $15 /hr $20 /hr $30 /hr .A.R.C. CLUB ROOM, SCOUT HUT NC 2 $ 5 /hr $10 /hr $10 /hr $20 /hr RECREATION BUILDINGS Includes use of kitchen G Minimum 3 hours, E Minims 2 hours - Flat fee per month or for single monthly special use OMMUNITY CENTER ,B,C, 3 D,E F F 1 G G 1 ulti -use - Entire NC 15/ $25 /hr 30 /hr $35 /hr $50 /hr ulti -use - West t7C 10 /h $15 /hr 20 /hr $25 /hr S35 /hr ulti -use - East NC 8 /h. $1,1/hr 15 /hr S20 /hr $25 /hr eeting 'i1 NC 3/h $ 5 /hr 4A NA NA eeting #2 NC 5 /h. $10 /hr 15 /hr $20 /hr $30 /hr onference Rm NC 3 $ 51hr 4A $ 8 /hr NA afts - 1 ?;C 5/ $10 /hr qA NA ctivity NC $ 5/ $10 /hr 15 /hr $10 /hr $30 /hr ounge NC 5/ $10 /hr 4A NA NA e- School NC $ 5/hr NA 'A !di NA 'tchen (Flat Fee) NC $30 $50 50 $50' $50 NC = No Charge 1. Functions which are serving alcoholic beverages. 2. * *Kitchen facilities may be shared with another activity, if 4U East and West used. 3. NOTE: Classification C will not be charged a fee, but for functions using the multi -use room they must set up and take down tables and chairs. 4. NA = Not Available 5. A deposit fee of $50 is required for use of all recreation facilities, and $100 for use of community center multi -use room. Minimum rental for multi -use halls is three hours and for all other rooms two hours minimum. 6. Classification H - $300 or 10$ gross receipts, whichever is greater - Burton Avenue Recreation Center and $600 or 10$ of gross receipts, whichever is greater for Community Center Multi -Use