Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1990-03-19SRCC MINUTES (Regula 3/19/90 Page 1 IN CONFERENCE ROOM 201 OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1990, AT 7:00 PM. Regular Meeting: CLOSED SESSION CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS LITIGATION - File 1.4.1.a 1. No. 90-6(a) - (#2). No. 96-6(b) - (#1) Albert B. Leahy vs. City of San Rafael. No reportable action was taken. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1990, AT 8:00 PM. Regular Meeting: Present: Lawrence E. Mulryan, Mayor San Rafael City Council Albert J. Boro, Councilmember Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember Michael A. Shippey, Councilmember Joan Thayer, Councilmember Absent: None Also Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager; Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney; Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 8:00 PM REPORT ON SISTER CITY CHIANGMAI, THAILAND - File 128 Mayor Mulryan took this opportunity to report on his recent trip to Thailand, where he presented a Resolution for a Sister City relationship with the Town of Chiangmai in Northern Thailand. He stated the City's population is 100,000 and at one time was a City State and Capitol of Thailand, noting San Rafael is the first City to offer a Sister City relationship and that he had a very warm welcome from the the citizens of Chiangmai. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Shippey seconded, to approve the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items: Item 3. Report on Bid Opening and Award of Contract - La Crescenta Way Drainage Improvements (PW) - File 4-1-433 5. Approval of Subdivision Final Map - "Gerstle Court" (PW) - File 5-1-317 6. Resolution of Appreciation in Memory of H.R. "Rusty" Ghilotti, Fire Commissioner (FD) - File 102 x 9-2-5 7. Approval of Contract with State Department of Health Services for Grant Funds for the Hazardous Material Response Vehicle, in Amount of $10,000 (FD) - File 4-10-242 x 9-3-31 9. ED88-121; Resolution with Findings Denying Without Prejudice Apartment Project for Failure to Proceed with EIR; 157 Woodland Ave.; Robert J. Copple, Owner & Appellant; Peter Brekhus, Attorney & Bruce Pendergraft, Rep.; AP 13-114-19 & 20 (P1) - File 10-7 Recommended Action RESOLUTION NO. 8136 - AWARD OF CONTRACT TO MAGGIORA & GHILOTTI, INC., FOR WORK ON LA CRESCENTA WAY DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, IN AMOUNT OF $12,700 (Low bidder) RESOLUTION NO. 8137 - APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION MAP ENTITLED "MAP OF GERSTLE COURT" RESOLUTION NO. 8138 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION IN MEMORY OF H. R. "RUSTY" GHILOTTI, FIRE COMMISSIONER FOR 22 YEARS RESOLUTION NO. 8139 - APPROVING CONTRACT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL RESPONSE VEHICLE (for two (2) one hour breathing apparatus units, two (2) Level A, fully encapsulated suits and a personal computer with software for the unit) RESOLUTION NO. 8140 - DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF ED88-121 THIRTY-FOUR UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AND ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE AT 157 WOODLAND AVENUE SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 1 SRCC MINUTES (Regula 3/19/90 Page 2 10. Claim for Damages: Approved City Attorney's recommendation for denial of claim. a. Glenn Walsh (PW) Claim No. 3-1-1454 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion: 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 5, 1990 (CC) - File 1-4 Councilmember Breiner requested correction as follows ... Page 10, last sentence of the 5th paragraph from bottom of page, should read..."She stated that requiring a use permit before removal of trees over a certain size would protect against removal in the interim." Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Boro seconded, to approve the Minutes of March 5, 1990, as amended. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 4. AUTHORIZATION TO PERFORM EMERGENCY REPAIRS/REPLACEMENT - STORM DRAINS AT EUCALYPTUS, PICNIC AND MAPLE STREETS (PW) - File 12-9 x 9-3-40 x 4-9 Councilmember Breiner stated at this time of year with the likelihood of not having more rain, she felt it would be more appropriate for staff to go through the regular bidding process rather than doing an emergency repair. Councilmember Thayer asked if the $18,000 included full replacement as opposed to only repairs. City Manager Nicolai stated in conversation with Superintendent of Public Works Endy, he stated if it was a drainage issue alone he would agree, however, the problem is the street above the drain is collapsing, causing a hole that is moving and worsening. He indicated one inch of rain would cause a significant problem. Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to adopt the Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 8141 - WAIVING FORMAL BIDDING PROCESS AND AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF GAS TAX FUNDS FOR EMERGENCY STORM DRAIN REPLACEMENT OR REPAIR ON MAPLE STREET, EUCALYPTUS LANE AND PICNIC AVENUE (Estimated Cost, $18,000) AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 8. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE RE SAN QUENTIN EXECUTION (PD) - File 11-19 x 9-3-30 City Manager Nicolai stated Police Chief Ingwersen, in coordination with the County and various law enforcement agencies in Marin, are attempting to prepare for an anticipated demonstration. She stated staff is seeking authorization for flexibility to either close or restrict parking in the areas where a high volume of demonstrators are expected. The intent is to be sure should there be a large number of people that they are safe and that traffic does not conflict with pedestrians or demonstrators. She noted the Chief needs to have some blanket authority to use his judgment as the situation evolves to best handle the safety of the demonstrators. Councilmember Shippey stated his concern is that First Amendment Rights not be inhibited, and asked if this action will preserve the rights of the demonstrators. Ms. Nicolai respond- ed affirmatively, noting this will guarantee the peoples' safety and facilitate allowance of a route for pedestrians to get from remote parking locations while walking along streets that do not have designed sidewalks, including restricting the flow of traffic to make sure there are no hazardous situations. Ms. Nicolai stated the County is presently working on a plan for parking proximity to the area having a reasonable walking distance, or having remote sites and possibly shuttling the people. Councilmember Boro commented that it is important for the people living in the neighborhood or who live in its proximity, be aware of what is happening, noting people do have the right to demonstrate, but also that the people who live there have a right not to be "put out of commission". SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 2 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 19/90 Page 3 Councilmember Shippey moved and Councilmember Boro seconded, to authorize the Chief of Police, upon his determination, to restrict or close the following streets between Tuesday, March 27, 1990 and Tuesday, April 10, 1990: (1) Francisco Boulevard from Main Street West to the entrance to the San Quentin Disposal site; (2) Grange Way. (3) Morphew St. (4) Pelican Way. (5) Kerner Boulevard extension from San Quentin Disposal site to Grange Way, to include Piombo Place. (6) Andersen Drive from Bellam to Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. Police Chief Ingwersen to have signs posted in the area as necessary, stating "No Parking - Tow Away Zones". AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 1. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION IN MEMORY OF H. R. "RUSTY" GHILOTTI, FIRE COMMIS- SIONER (FD) - File 102 x 9-2-5 Mayor Mulryan presented the Resolution of Appreciation in Memory of H. R. "Rusty" Ghilotti, who served on the Fire Commission for 22 Years, to Mrs. Ghilotti. 2. PUBLIC HEARING - TS86-4 - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION OF AUGUST 29, 1989, APPROVING TENTATIVE MAP FOR 28 LOT SINGLE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCH LOMOND #10; LAS CASAS & INVERNESS DRIVE; ROBERT B. HAM, INC., OWNER; OBERKAMPER & ASSOC., REP.; AP 186-031-02 & 06, 186-520-17 & 18 (P1) - File 5-1-297 Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened, stating that it is a continuation of previous hearings and that the issues to be addressed at this meeting are: 1) The adequacy of geologic studies outside of the immediate development area; and 2) The financial ability of the proposed Mello -Roos District to cover maintenance and liability costs. He noted that at the February 5, 1990 hearing, staff was asked to study those two issues further and report on them at this meeting. Planning Director Pendoley briefed the Council, stating that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was not appealed and has been determined to be complete. He added that, regard- ing the geology and mitigation, the Salem Rice studies of 1985 were not adequate, and that Gary Van Houten's studies are the basis for the final design and the basis for the EIR. He stated this complies with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the San Rafael General Plan 2000. Mr. Pendoley noted that both Gary Van Houten and Charles Winterhalder of Harding -Lawson Associates were present. Regarding the Mello -Roos District, Mr. Pendoley noted that one important cost had been changed, and that was the repair of debris fences, revised upward from $7,000 to $13,000. He explained that the lower cost did not include a cost for routine maintenance of the debris fences. Mr. Pendoley added that staff and the Planning Commission have recommended that the open space which would remain after subdivision and the various drainage mitigation devices be owned and maintained by the City. He referred to Table I, with an analysis of cost estimates including those for a major storm. Mr. Pendoley then referred to page 6 of the staff report, in which a third alternative is analyzed: Public ownership of the mitigation devices; private ownership of the open space. He stated it is possible for the City to own the mitigation devices within a drainage easement and to have the open space owned by the homeowners association. He then listed four advantages to this alternative: 1) The City would avoid the liability of owning open space; 2) The City would have complete control of the maintenance for the mitigation devices; 3) Maintenance costs could be funded by a Mello -Roos District; and 4) The City would be eligible for Disaster Relief Funds to repair damage to the mitigation devices. Mr. Pendoley added that the City would probably have more liability for the mitigation devices than under the private ownership scenario, but the City cannot completely escape liability for the drainage system in any event. Councilmember Boro asked, if the mitigation devices are not properly located, or more are needed, how would it be handled. City Attorney Ragghianti responded that the City would negotiate an ownership in the property to install the mitigation devices. Mr. Boro inquired, could that be drafted ahead of time, and Mr. Ragghianti responded that could be explored and possibly could be included in the CC&R's. Councilmember Thayer asked, would the figures include the contingency for wear and tear. Mr. Pendoley responded that wear and tear will be on top of the annual maintenance. He stated that for the purpose of this analysis there is enough leeway and Mello -Roos has the capacity to handle wear and tear as well as maintenance. He added that the final point is that if the Council decides to go with Mello -Roos the tax rate will be based on the Engineer's Estimate. Councilmember Shippey inquired if this open space would be useable for hiking. Mr. Pendoley responded that such activities should probably be discouraged because the area gets quite SRCCMINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 3 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) -'19/90 Page 4 steep and there could easily be cases of sprained ankles and such, which could cause a problem. He added that such activities should be discouraged. Attorney Albert Bianchi, representing the sponsors of this proposed project, addressed Councilmember Boro's question regarding expanding of mitigation devices if necessary. He stated he believes it is possible to adopt a condition of approval to allow that and that it should not only be in an agreement but to be noted on the Subdivision Map itself. Mr. Bianchi then noted that the application for this project was deemed approved and com- plete in May of 1988. He stated that during the ensuing time the applicant has presented to the City for review some thirty-two volumes of studies, and that this is probably the most detailed study project ever before the City of San Rafael. He added that the only significant criticism was having an expert who based his study on a 1985 study. Mr. Bianchi noted that he had been told some while ago by the attorney hired by the appellants, that they had gotten everything they wanted. He added he feels the appellants want nothing on this property, and that it is an embarrassment to the entire Planning process to go through the number of hearings and amount of time this has involved. Mr. Bianchi added that since the last meeting they have discussed this matter with Dr. Richard Comfort, a specialist in development, and development economics, and asked him to make a study. Mr. Bianchi described Dr. Comfort's education and background in this area. He added he hoped that at this meeting they could get past the emotionalism and hopefully lay to rest all of the opposition to this project. He noted that Dr. Comfort has interviewed virtually everyone involved with this project and all of the consultants. He stated he had gone through the certification of the EIR, and has had maps prepared to analyze the situation. Mr. Bianchi added that the only persons not interviewed were the Board of Directors of the Loch Lomond Homeowners Association. Dr. Comfort reviewed the 1979 Herzog study, the 1985 study by McEdwards and Van Houton, the additional studies by Cooper in 1985, and the 1987 and 1988 studies by McEdwards and Van Houton. He stated it is overwhelmingly clear that the geotechnical investigation has not been limited to the area where the houses are to be built. He explained the method of determining the stability of the soil in areas where houses are to be built. He stated that the ancient slide which has been mentioned is 10,000 to 35,000 years old, and is extremely stable, much more than can be accomplished today with compacting. He added that Loch Lomond and Villa Real are built on that ancient slide. Dr. Comfort stated he has concluded that everything which could influence this site has been studied. He questioned how the Planning and Pubic Works staffs and all of the consultants could be in error. With regard to the the mitigation measures, Dr. Comfort stated there can not be "certainty" when dealing with such matters, but that we are working with the higher standards of the technology of the day. He added that all of the mitigation measures proposed to deal with this have to do with the existing homes, and that the proposed homes are not threatened. He made the point that these are not exotic devices, but have been used successfully not only in Marin, but in Southern California and Switzerland. He added they are not complex, but their function is sophisticated. Dr. Comfort showed photos of the proposed mitigation devices, which are in use at Brook Farms subdivision in Novato, and explained their function, including the diversion walls. Dr. Comfort stated he agreed with the staff report, and stated that the Third Alternative being recommended struck him as being very good. He added that this alternative creates a nice compromise where the City is free of the ownership but has complete access to the mitigation devices. He stated he regrets he was refused the opportunity to speak to the Loch Lomond Homeowners, by the President of the Board. In conclusion, Dr. Comfort showed several maps he had prepared, regarding the geology of the area, and illustrating the location of the mitigation devices. Mrs. Henry Smith of 29 Dorian Way expressed concern about there being enough Public Works staff for maintenance of the mitigation devices, and stated that someone should be available during construction. She also questioned how much experience the City has had with Mello - Roos, stating it has not been tested in the courts. Daniel Bort, Attorney consulting on the Mello -Roos District, stated that Mello -Roos began in 1983. He stated there are three in Marin, with another being considered. He added there is no prospect of the downhill property owners being taxed without their vote on it. He stated there has been no occasion for Mello -Roos to be challenged in court. He added it was his recommendation that the City include insurance costs with a judgment including an injunction so that no one could challenge it. Mr. Mel Croner, president of Loch Lomond Homeowners Association, stated there has been a selective reading of the record. He stated they are not opposed to this project, per se, but the effective alternates to the entire project have not been addressed. He said they should have alternates other than this device as designed. Mayor Mulryan pointed out that the EIR was written and was not appealed. Mr. Croner respond- ed that if the City approves the project as proposed it will be accepting the risks, and they are concerned as to whom they would look to if the mitigation measures do not work. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 4 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) '19/90) Page 5 Mr. Lawrence Shaw inquired why the homeowners living within 300 feet of the development have not been notified of this hearing tonight. He also noted that the staff report was not ready until Friday evening and they did not have time to study it. Mr. Pendoley explain- ed that Mr. Croner is listed as the appellant, and with a file of this size there had to be limited distribution. It was also explained to Mr. Shaw that when a public hearing is continued to a date certain, as this was, there is no additional noticing required. Mr. David Bohejian stated that the reason he would prefer nothing being built is because the risks in connection with the mitigation devices have not been quantified. Mrs. Marianne Shaw stated she does not believe any studies have been done on the northwest corner, offsite. She stated that Mr. Van Houten claims the study effectively covers the area, which has no upslope risk. She stated that she does not believe there has been any study in the wooded area, that there is no evidence of it. She also complained that she is not getting all of the reports. Mr. Jeff Mulanax spoke supporting the appeal, citing that the number of lots should be reduced. Mayor Mulryan asked Mr. Van Houten to respond to some of the points raised. Mr. Van Houten stated that either you believe someone who is trained in these matters, or you believe someone who says it is not true. He stated that the 1978/79 Herzog plate shows the geology beyond the study area. He stated that they did look at the open space areas. He added that prior to 1985 he did not have the plans he has now. He added that they did not only look at the area below, but their engineering geologist and hydrologist went all the way to the top, and also took soils samples. In addition, they also performed seismic tests. Mr. Van Houten noted that the Brown report is on file with the City, and that is where he obtained it, and added that it is public information. Mr. Van Houten stated that Councilmember Thayer had concerns about whether the Brown property would effect this project. He stated that they have their responsibility and in the event they do not take care of their area any slide or flow would be held by the mitigation measures; and the debris flow pathways will be built out. He noted that the devices will protect the homes down below, and he cannot understand the reluctance to have improvements which will benefit them. Councilmember Boro stated that two meetings ago he had asked that Charles Winterhalder come to the next meeting and he did not. Cir. Boro added that perhaps Mr. Winterhalder can explain what he did when he certified the EIR. Mr. Charles Winterhalder of Harding -Lawson responded that his review included walking the site and confirming the mapping results contained in the prior report. He stated it had been mentioned that the Harding -Lawson report was withheld from the homeowners, and that is not so; the report was contained in the geologic section of the EIR and is a part of it. He stated that the upslope had been looked at in detail, to make sure that all areas of concern were looked at. He added that the results of that review and the informa- tion are in the EIR. Mr. Winterhalder stated it is his opinion that any work on the Brown property is not of vital concern for the Loch Lomond area because the mitigation measures are appropriate and adequate. Councilmember Boro stated that basically what the Council is hearing is that there were offsite testings done, and that the walls and other mitigation devices were designed as a result of the upslope testing. Mr. Winterhalder replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Breiner inquired, is the western area more of a problem because of the old slide, and Mr. Winterhalder responded that the accumulation of the ancient debris, lots 1 through 9, that hazard is recognized and the mitigation for that hazard is quite different than the debris flow hazard. He stated that mitigation would include removal of the unstable debris and installation of surface drainage and introduction of compacted fill. Councilmember Breiner then inquired about the advisability of not having swimming pools in the western area so as not to overload the slope. Mr. Winterhalder responded that it does not matter much if you are constructing a pool or a home. He added that the operation of a pool would be insignificant to the runoff from a rainstorm. Councilmember Shippey asked Mr. Winterhalder if it is his feeling that the net result would actually be a benefit rather than no mitigation devices at all. Mr. Winterhalder replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Breiner inquired about whether the new housing would enjoy a level of safety, being placed where they are planned, or will they have somewhat more risk than the present houses. Mr. Winterhalder stated that all he can say is that, with the individual lot analysis including the grading, and the placement of the protective devices including the deflection SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 719/90 Page 6 walls, would make for risk exposure comparable to the existing homes in Loch Lomond. Councilmember Boro inquired, with the construction of mitigation devices the fences will help, but without the mitigation devices would the debris go all the way down to Loch Lomond. He noted the City cannot force Mr. Brown to do anything, but the mitigation devises the City puts in would help. Mr. Arthur Bjork of Loch Lomond inquired who is going to maintain the mitigation devices, and who will pay for the cost of the maintenance, the new people or the present residents. Mr. Pendoley responded that the proposal, as recommended by the staff and Planning Commission under Alternate 3 indicates the mitigation devices would be maintained by the City but paid for by the homeowners in the new subdivision. There being no further public input, Mayor Mulryan closed the public hearing. Councilmember Boro referred to Table 2 on page 5 of the staff report, stating he is concern- ed that if we get the alternate with Mello -Roos, new homeowners may come down and complain about the money. He stated it should be made clear to anyone buying a home, and inquired if there is a way so the costs are set before there is any transfer of ownership. Mr. Bort responded that you could condition the Tentative Map to the actual formation and completion of the Mello -Roos process. Mr. Pendoley stated that is a condition on the map. Councilmember Boro referred again to Table 2, stating he would like to change the amount so that the $500,000 is accumulative so the project will bear the whole cost. He stated that with interest over a 10 year period, any interest could be deductible. Mr. Bort stated he would want to validate that. Councilmember Breiner stated she would like assurance that we, as a City, would not have $500,000 deductible. Councilmember Boro stated he feels that the numbers are somewhat unrealistic, citing the $13,000 annual maintenance cost. He said we could have a major storm and considerable debris, and not have a disaster. He stated that $6,000 for two men, $3,000 a day is not realistic. He said he would like to suggest that under Table 1 the estimate be more conser- vative. He also cautioned against building something the City cannot maintain. Councilmember Thayer noted that earlier in the evening there was mention of the City not owning the open space, and wondered about the funding. Mayor Mulryan responded that would be funded by Mello -Roos as well. Councilmember Boro mentioned that "Clerk of the Works" was recommended some time ago by the homeowners. Mr. Pendoley responded the City can do that. Councilmember Breiner stated she is in favor of a performance bond, to be sure that the devices are performing. Regarding "Clerk of the Works" she stated it should be a private manager, with whom the City is satisfied. She said the Public Works Building Inspector does not have the time to do that, and it would protect everyone. She recommended the "Clerk of the Works" be not only for the mitigation devices, but also for the building. She noted this hill will be very visible, and a maximum size should be established for the houses. Councilmember Boro inquired if there would be individual Design Review for each home, and would it be in the conditions. Mr. Pendoley replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Breiner noted there should also be a condition regarding construction being only from 8:AM to 5:PM and only on weekdays. City Attorney Ragghianti mentioned that height and setbacks can be controlled, but there is not Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for private residences. He agreed that there will be Design Review on the homes. Mr. Pendoley informed the Council that if they desire to act on this project tonight and call for a Resolution of Approval, the proper thing would be for the staff to come back with a subdivision map with conditions. Mayor Mulryan inquired if staff wished to discuss development of a sinking fund to contri- bute to the self insurance program. Mr. Pendoley responded that staff will work it out and come back with it under conditions. Mayor Mulryan mentioned inclusion of a "Clerk of the Works", and also the City to have the ability to go in and change mitigation devices as needed. Public Works Director Bernardi stated the latter is contained in the subdivision agreement. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 6 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) '1.9/90 Page 7 Councilmember Thayer noted she had asked about other alternatives, but none had been given, and inquired if this was a legal issue, because the EIR was not appealed. Mr. Pendoley replied in the affirmative. He also explained that when the question of open space first came up, no other public agencies wanted it, including the County and even the State. Councilmember Thayer asked about building less houses on the property, and Mr. Pendoley explained the developers had to make it financially viable. He noted they did apply a good deal of clustering, for safety reasons and visual impact. Councilmember Shippey stated he is now in favor of the project after hearing the consultants and considering the protection of hte environment through the mitigation devices. Councilmember Boro moved and Councilmember Shippey seconded, to uphold the Planning Commis- sion's decision of August 29, 1989 approving the map, and denying the appeal; and to instruct staff to come back with a Resolution for Council review, which will incorporate all the conditions discussed this evening, with respect to Mello -Roos, with respect to Alternative Three, and hopefully to build up the determination of the Mello -Roos fund and all the issues talked about, and have all those tested ahead of time so the Council can be sure they can implement them, so the homeowners understand it, as well as the new homeowners and have that all certified before the Council adopts the Resolution. Also, request that Mr. Pendoley work with Mr. Bernardi on the issue of the open space. Alternative Three says it will be owned by the homeowners, and determine if there will be any need for open space maintenance and, if so, include it in the Mello -Roos calculations. Mayor Mulryan stated he will support the motion, because he, too, feels that the studies have been extensive and it appears that the mitigation measures will make the entire area safer than it is today. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 13.PUBLIC HEARING UP88-11 APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION OF DECEMBER 12, 1989, REVOCA- TION OF USE PERMIT FOR OFFICE IN C-1 ZONING DISTRICT; 605 "B" STREET; JOSEPH & MICHAEL BROWN, OWNERS; MATT BROWN, REP.; AP 12-076-09 (P1) - File 10-5 Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened. Planning Director Pendoley stated in February, 1989, the Zoning Administrator approved the use permit to allow a 1,300 square foot professional office in a 2,600 square foot building; a condition of that approval was that 1,300 square feet of residential floor area be maintained. Later that year, it came to the Planning Department's attention, that the entire property,(which is a 2 -story building),had been developed as office and after a series of notices to the property owner to correct the violations, staff scheduled and conducted a revocation hearing before the Planning Commission, which is the subject of this appeal. Mr. Pendoley stated the specific violations found by the Planning Commission which were the basis of their decision, were that development of the property as 2,600 square foot office is inconsistent with the General Plan and land use designation which is neighborhood - commercial, it is inconsistent with the FAR limitations in the General Plan and conflicts with the City's Housing Conservation Ordinance which requires the preservation of existing units. The appellants have two bases of their appeal. First, they state they intend to abate the office use completely on the second floor that was to have been reserved for residential use. Staff and the Planning Commission would point out that up until March 5th, the violation remained and it has been in existence since July, 1989. Staff recommends that this is not an adequate basis for appeal. Second, the second floor is currently being used as residence by two employees. Staff conducted a number of inspections to deal with this part of the issue, noting a few weeks ago, staff found that the entire second floor was being used as an office and staff did consider the possibility that the second floor might be a resi- dence with a home occupation. However, given the amount of office furniture and other evi- dence of office use on the second floor, it was clear that the office use far exceeded the 25 percent allowance that could be permitted with a home occupation. Mr. Pendoley stated based on what was found, there is a violation of the General Plan on two counts as well as the Housing Conservation Ordinance and the use permit, and staff recommended that the appeal be denied. Mr. Andrew Giacomini who worked on remodeling of the building, showed pictures of the house as it was before and after, stating before construction, the area was a hovel inhabited by vagrants and garbage. He felt Council should consider what the building was and what it is now. Mr. Chris Thompson, appellant, stated his business deals with development as well as redeve- SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 119/90 Page 8 lopment, noting they have received much praise on what they have done to the building at 605 "B" Street, indicating it is neighborhood serving, adding that he and his father use the building as a residence. Mrs. Linda Bellatorre representing Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association, stated the build- ing is a fine example of restoration, but stated the facts should be considered. She stated at a Zoning Administrator's meeting, one of the owners, Mr. Matt Brown, asked what he could put in that was acceptable to the City; the City responded, 3 -bedroom residential and a 5 unit office space downstairs with parking. Instead, the owners converted the whole building to office use. Mrs. Bellatorre stated from day one, the owners moved office furniture into the building, and she felt it was never intended to be used as a residence. She stated a use permit is a privilege, noting the use has been betrayed, and cited the violations against the appellant. Mrs. Bellatorre asked Council to look into a system in the future of fining people who are in violation for illegal use of use permits, where a fine should be made per day as a deterrent. She also stated more landscaping was required on the site, and asked staff to look into this. Mr. Tom Lollini, member of the San Rafael Design Review Board, stated that during the design review process on this project, they questioned the layout of the residential unit, noting they suspected otherwise. He felt there was never the intent of using this as a residence, and that he concurred with Mrs. Bellatorre. He recollected that a different landscape plan for the rear of the property was originally approved, and suggested that this be brought back to what the conditions of approval were. Mr. Matt Brown, one of the owners at 605 "B" Street, stated they did not know they could not occupy the entire building as a commercial use. He indicated they based their use on the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance, under C-1 Zoning office is permitted without a flurry of ratio restrictions. He stated it was not until the Zoning Administrator's meeting when they found out the General Plan limited office use to 32 percent. For the record, Mr. Brown contended that the upstairs is used as a residence, and noted, if Council found otherwise, he contended that the previous condition of the property was not habitable. Also, he stated the street where the building is situated is neighborhood commercial, and noted the City set a precedent by removing a residence directly across the street from their building. Mr. Brown stated if they could prove that the building was not a residence when they pur- chased it, the floor area ratio would be up to 2,000 square feet which is roughly 2 or 3 rooms. He stated they could take those rooms out of service, occupy the property as commercial and be in conformance with the General Plan's FAR, (Floor Area Ratio). Mr. Brown referred to the General Plan Land Use Element -Neighborhood Commercial and stated the occupant of the building is in the business of building neighborhoods. He indicated they took a building that was a nuisance in this neighborhood and abated it and then to find that based upon a use that is benign and perhaps beneficial, it is puzzling. He stated they tried to find a place to buy and transfer the residential existing in this unit and maintaining the housing element. Mr. Brown stated shortly after approvals were given to build the building, the water morato- rium took place, thereby limiting them. He felt some issues were not stated correctly in the Zoning Administrator's meeting; one was the water moratorium. Additionally, they have made offers to three separate property owners in the neighborhood, but again there was the issue of water. One of the proposals they made was directly to the Parks Department was to be allowed to occupy the Cerrutti House and rehabilitate it at their expense and that this was made known to Council through a staff report. He stated there is one option whereby they could increase the land area, thereby conforming to the FAR. He also referred to the Housing Ordinance, stating they have made several attempts, but until the water moratorium is lifted, they would like to see if something can be worked out at a later time. He concluded that they had every intent to occupy the building but also had an ulterior intent that at some point when they could replace the residential unit, to convert the entire building to office space. Mr. Robert Thompson, resident of Marin County stated he wanted to have his offices in San Rafael and noted when the building was purchased in October, they thought it was allowed to have all offices in this building. He indicated they found out in February when there was a design review four or five months later after the plans were drawn and submitted that they found it was to be part residential and part office. He noted that contrary to what was stated, the house upstairs is designed as residential and that the kitchen area is more than ample. He stated it would be fair if a committee from the Council looked at what they have done to the building. Mr. Thompson stated he did not feel they were non -con- forming but an asset to the community. Mayor Mulryan closed the public hearing, and stated Council is familiar with this area and also aware that many houses need the rehabilitation that this particular building has been given, but noted this is not the issue and that the issue is the use. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90) Page 8 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 19/90 Page 9 Councilmember Breiner referred to parking and asked staff if there are five offices down- stairs and upstairs is used as office space, is there sufficient parking? Mr. Pendoley responded there is not adequate parking for two floors of office space, and even if the applicant brought in an in -lieu fee for the housing, there would be a parking problem. Councilmember Boro stated the rehabilitation job is beautiful, but found it difficult to believe that someone in the redevelopment business would not find out what is allowed on the site before they attend a hearing. Councilmember Boro moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to deny the appeal and directed staff to prepare Resolution Revoking UP88-111, and that the abatement process be commenced. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 14. PUBLIC HEARING - TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 12.40 TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE SETTING FORTH AN UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDING MITIGATION PROGRAM (PW) - File 13-11 x 9-3-40 x, 1-6-1 Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened and continued the public hearing to a Special City Council meeting of March 26, 1990. 15. PUBLIC HEARING - UP89-10; APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT FOR A SECOND DWELLING UNIT; 26 WILDWOOD WAY; ROBERT & CAROL BUTLER, OWNERS; STEVE KAY, ARCHITECT, REP.; FAIRHILLS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSN., APPELLANT; AP 10-121-05 (P1) - File 10-5 Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened and continued the public hearing to a Special City Council meeting of March 26, 1990. 16. SELECTION OF SITE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PREPARING ARCHITECTURAL STUDIES AND PROVIDING THE BASIS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR PROPOSED CITY/COUNTY LIBRARY (Lib) - File 4-13-78(a) City Manager Nicolai stated since August 1989, site options have been evaluated for the proposed City/County Library, and a site was conceptually endorsed at C Street between 2nd and 3rd Streets. She stated as part of this process, staff first met with the San Rafael Redevelopment Citizens Adivisory Committee and went through some of the preliminary analysis knowing that one of the sites being considered was an opportunity for housing. She stated they reviewed the various options the library would bring to the Downtown area as well as other site alternatives to achieve affordable housing if the B and C Street site was selected. Staff then met with a committee created with representatives from the Planning Commission, Redevelopment CAC, City Council, Design Review and Library Boards; also included was Anne Appel from the County Library and Supervisor Robert Roumiguiere from Marin County and a presentation was given by BOOR/A Architectural Consultants. She indicated the meeting lasted for 31-2 hours reviewing all alternatives, and the consensus was that the site between B and C Streets was recommended, but that Council/Agency should remain committed to achieving affordable housing, and direct staff to pursue other alterna- tives. She also made it clear that any monies used by the Redevelopment Agency to date to acquire that site, which is housing money, would be reimbursed to the Housing Fund through this project. Ms. Nicolai recommended that Council adopt the Resolution designating the site stated for architectural study and providing the basis for environmental review for the proposed City/County Library. Councilmember Breiner referred to the Safeway site and was concerned about regional access as opposed to having better access in terms of people coming on and off the freeway; also, the Safeway site is closer to the transit center as well as to the freeway, and she felt it would be safer for children coming from the high school or Davidson School. One of her biggest concerns was the multiple ownership of the property that is not controlled by the City in connection with the B and C Street site. She concluded that ruling out the Safeway site too early may not be a wise idea. Mr. Alan Hock resident of San Rafael, stated this evening was the first time he learned that the City Council was to decide on the site for the library at 3rd and C Streets. He said he did not see any public notices informing the public of this decision, and did not agree with the site proposed for the library. He also asked about the $500,000 left by a deceased citizen to the City for the library. He felt the Terra Linda area is being "short changed". He asked for the size of the parcels of the proposal on 3rd Street. He felt the City should look for a site on Fifth Avenue. Mayor Mulryan responded to the Davidson money, stating it is mentioned in the budget and accounted for with the current value in excess of $500,000. City Manager Nicolai added that the money is in a separate account earning interest, noting a small portion of the interest is used to purchase additional library books. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 9 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/90 Page 10 Ms. Nicolai stated one of the reasons they preferred the Downtown area for the library, is because the proposed library is not just relocating the existing library and not just a library to serve San Rafael; it is a major regional library consolidating the Civic Center Library and will serve the whole County. She noted being on major arterials and accessible to all segments of the community were very important. She stated they are also working on the North San Rafael area and a whole separate process will go into that site selection. One of the options is looking at space at the Mall, partly because of the square footage, which would be less costly to maintain, having joint operations, security, parking and other concerns, as well as some of the school sites because they are concerned about Terra Linda. In response to Councilmember Breiner's comments, Ms. Nicolai stated when evaluating the Safeway site and looking at the size of the library, to get to the site with the one-way streets and no left turn off Andersen, is, in fact, more difficult to reach than the 2nd and 3rd arterials for the C Street site. She indicated the committee looked at much more than the Safeway site, noting the Safeway site alone will not accommodate the library, so everything up to 2nd Street would need to be acquired. She said there are many multiple property owners and occupancies in those spaces, some are vacent and some are not going to be as difficult to relocate. Ms. Nicolai assured Council that other options came up that have not been proceeded with, noting they have been looking at alternatives since last year, and for a longer time for the San Rafael Library alone. The significant disadvantage of locating the library across Mission Avenue is that if it is outside of the redevelopment area a major option for funding disappears and makes it less feasible to accomplish the project. She explained neither the County nor the City nor the City and County combined can do this with the resources now available without the assistance of both the State Grant Fund and Redevelopment. Councilmember Thayer pointed out one of the reasons for the site chosen is that Sacramento has Proposition 85 Funding, and the City had to apply for this by January to qualify. She noted if the funds are awarded it would pay for 65 percent of a new library, and that this type of funding is rarely available, indicating a site had to be selected for the funding proposal. She added that the public will not be excluded, noting she has spoken to people in North San Rafael who want to be a part of the process with the library site and the kind of library. Councilmember Shippey stated he would like to have either this ad hoc committee or another one choose a site for the North San Rafael library even though they do not have the pressures of the State's grant funds facing them. He referred to the Safeway site and stated there are other properties they are concerned about and one is the (Flat Iron) building that would be a difficult one to acquire, noting there are no such sites at the 2nd and C site, so that would not be a problem. Another problem with the Safeway site is that they are not sure whether there may be toxics on the site because it used to be a railroad station, noting underground parking will be needed. Mr. Irwin Williams representing San Rafael Housing Corporation, stated they are concerned about the loss of another affordable housing site, noting it is another in a line following PG&E, the Bellam site and now this site. He commended efforts to replace this site and stated a concern is the timing of whether or not the library development pays back the money the City invests which seems to put housing further down the line. He urged Council to think about a program that would link the two more closely together in timing. He con- cluded that the San Rafael Housing Corporation is willing to help the City in any way it can to accomplish that goal. Ms. Elissa Giambastiani representing San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, stated they are con- cerned about the loss of an affordable housing site. She referred to a list of housing sites prepared by Richard Bornholdt, noting some are not viable, indicating there is a loss of potentially 50-75 units. She asked how much thought has been given to the relocation of businesses that exist at the site, noting it is important that they be relocated to the Downtown area, and that when relocation costs are covered that the cost of advertising as to where the businesses are moved be included. She referred to parking, noting the staff report states that because the B and C Street site is adjacent to the City parking lot, it seems to indicate that that facility next to the garage, where the garage is vacant 30% of the time would not mean that they would be tempted to "skimp" on parking for the library, noting it will be a regional draw. Mr. Tom Lollini, resident of Gerstle Park and Design Review Board member stated the report is very thorough and professionally done and concurred with its conclusion. He did, however, note that the site may not eventually be a viable site, and suggested that the Safeway site should be kept as a possible location. He said because of timing, the neighborhood was not consulted, particularly on something so profoundly involving that area, noting this should be done in the future. He felt there is an attractiveness to the location adjacent to Albert Park because there is a feeling that the park is a wasted resource; that this is a place for the homeless. He stated Council and staff should think of new creative ways to use the park, whether it be a restaurant or additional recreational faci- lities. He said there is a parklike tradition for small town libraries which could be SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 1D SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 19/90 Page 11 achieved on the site if a 3 -story solution was considered; he said this would free up more of the land, noting the sidewalks are very narrow and could be widened; the urban design issues should be addressed that a full block single entrance building might cause, particularly on C Street which will eventually be a residential corridor in the Downtown area. He noted two Victorian buildings designated as potential landmarks, and that diligent strategy should be developed on dealing with the buildings. In conclusion, Mr. Lollini said the alternative housing sites were identified with exception of the McPhail site; however, he stated each one is only one half to one third of the potential and if one considered the full 90,000 square foot site, it could have a potential of 100-120 units. He encouraged Council to continue studying sites for additional housing in the Downtown area and develop a strategy for mixed uses, as a way to achieve that rather than trying to look at housing only sites. Councilmember Boro stated the committee spoke on an additional thing the site can do for the City that none of the other sites can do, is to help boost the Downtown basin location and this could be another anchor to Downtown. He stated 250 parking sites are projected for this library. He reemphasized Mr. Lollini's comments on the housing issue, stating another option is not just to continue to think about single housing units but also have mixed uses, noting the Planning Commission has recently taken this into account. He asked City Manager Nicolai to bring back a report to City Council in a month on problems of homeless loitering at both the Boyd Park and Albert Park. Councilmember Breiner wished to add the old telephone building on H Street to the housing site list that has been vacant for many years and should be pursued. Councilmember Thayer stated several administrative staff members of the Dixie School District and San Rafael School District have asked to be included in the process, noting the schools are suffering; she referred to articles in the Marin Independent Journal. Mayor Mulryan stated they will be. In response to a comment from the audience regarding a 3 -story building, Councilmember Shippey stated a 3 -story building is a constraint, noting people do not like to carry books up and down stairs. He also stated he did not know if larger is better for affordable housing, suggesting they could replace a proposed 55-75 unit site with equivalent multi -sites of smaller sizes each, and that the City would probably be better off. Councilmember Shippey moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to approve the Resolution Selecting a Site for the Preparation of architectural studies and environmental review. RESOLUTION NO. 8142 - CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SELECTING A SITE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PREPARING ARCHITECTURAL STUDIES AND PROVIDING THE BASIS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE PROPOSED CITY/COUNTY LIBRARY AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned. JEA�'LEONCIIN,��C( Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1990 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/19/90 Page 11