Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1992-11-16SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 1 IN CONFERENCE ROOM 201 OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1992, AT 7:00 PM CLOSED SESSION 1. DISCUSSION OF LITIGATION AND LABOR NEGOTIATIONS - File 1.4.1.a No. 92-21(a) - #1 - Alan Titus & Marjorie Goldman vs City of San Rafael No. 92-21(b) - #7 No. 92-21(c) - #1 - Landesman, et al, vs City of San Rafael No reportable action was taken. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1992, AT 8:00 PM Regular Meeting: San Rafael City Council Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember Paul M. Cohen, 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 None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Shippey seconded, to approve the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM 2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 19, 1992 and Special Meeting of October 29, 1992 (CC) 4. Report on Bid Opening and Award of Contract - Reroofing Fire Station No. 3 (30 Joseph Court) (PW) - File 4-1-454 5. Extension of Time for Payment of Traffic Mitigation Fees - Orchard Supply (PW) - File 10-2 x 9-10-2 x 9-3-40 7. Report on Retaining Wall on Altura Way at Bret Harte Road (PW) - File 9-3-40 11. Adoption of Resolution Amending Resolution No. 8578 Pertaining to The Working Conditions for San Rafael Police Mid -Management Association (Pers) - File 7-8-5 x 7-4 RECOMMENDED ACTION Approved as submitted. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 8778 - AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR REROOFING FIRE STATION NO. 3 (30 JOSEPH COURT) (to Alpha Roofing and Construction Co., lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $14,665.00) Item deferred to meeting of December 7, 1992. Accepted report. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 8779 - AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 8578 PERTAINING TO THE COMPENSATION AND WORKING CONDITIONS FOR THE SAN RAFAEL POLICE MID -MANAGE- MENT ASSOCIATION (7/1/92 - 6/30/93) AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion: 2(a). APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF OCTOBER 26, 1992 (CC) City Manager Nicolai noted that the meeting of October 26, 1992 was a Closed Session and she requested that the Minutes be amended to reflect that was the meeting where the confirmation of the appointment of Robert Krolak as Chief of Police occurred. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 1 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 2 Councilmember Shippey moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to approve the Minutes of October 26, 1992, as amended. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 3.REPORT ON REPAINTING AND SIGNING OF FIFTH AND "C" AND THIRD AND LOOTENS PLACE PARKING STRUCTURES (PW) - File 4-1-444a Councilmember Breiner stated she feels the City is vulnerable to criticism if we do not go out for bids when possible, and it seems that this would have been an opportunity where we should be going out to bid. She noted that the actual structural repair work might have come in at a much cheaper price. Public Works Director Bernardi explained that the price quoted by the contractor with whom the City has the contract, is the result of bids received from sub -contractors to the principal contractor. He stated that, in essence, we have already received the low bid and the principal contractor is going out to bid for us. He stated that the problem with going out to bid for this work now, is that we would have to stop the contractor with whom we have currently obligated to complete work in a certain specified amount of time. He noted that the contractor could claim we had stopped him from the orderly completion of his work and that he was subject to damages from us. He stated that by adding the extra work, it is simply adding to the contract which he is under. He explained the contractor has an obligation to get the lowest price for the epoxy work, and he has done that. Councilmember Breiner stated that she would like to see the list of the sub -contractors' bids. Mr. Bernardi stated he will provide that information. Councilmember Breiner moved and Mayor Boro seconded, to adopt the Resolution authorizing transfer of funds, as recommended. Councilmember Shippey stated he would like clarification of the issue. Mayor Boro explained that the City Council had approved three garages being repainted, and the Public Works Director is asking that the $40,000 which was allocated for painting the Third and "A" Streets garage be transferred to the other two garages, and that money be used to perform the structural work to those garages before the painting is done. He explained that Mrs. Breiner had a question about going out to bid on that separate piece of work. Mr. Bernardi agreed with the clarification. Councilmember Cohen inquired of Mr. Bernardi if, when the principal contractor goes out to bid for sub -contractors, is that process subject to the City's standards such as bonding, etc.? Mr. Bernardi replied in the affirmative. He added that the prime contractor has to bond all of the work, including this extra work. He can make his own arrangements in that regard with the sub -contractors, but he is the only one responsible to the City. Councilmember Breiner stated she thought there were no sub -contractors because of the explanation in the staff report and stated it should have been more clearly explained. Mayor Boro then asked for clarification that it would not be the contractor who will be doing the crack repairing, but instead the sub -contractor will do the work. Mayor Boro also confirmed that Mr. Bernardi would bring the sub -contractors' bids back to the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 8780 - AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF $40,000 FROM THE THIRD AND "A" STREETS PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT TO THE FIFTH AND "C" AND THIRD AND LOOTENS STREETS PARKING STRUCTURES TO PERFORM STRUCTURAL CRACK REPAIRS (By Abbot Construction) AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 6.AUTHORIZATION TO CONVEY OPEN SPACE LANDS TO MARIN COUNTY OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (PW) - File 4-13-84 x 13-14-1 x 9-3-40 Councilmember Thayer asked for clarification, if the City is still responsible for the mowing. Mr. Bernardi responded that the City is not responsible, that this fiscal year the County has been responsible for the mowing, and will continue to have that responsibility. Mayor Boro stated his concern is that these lands which are going to the County will remain with the same restrictions which were imposed at the time the City acquired them, that they will not be available for any sale or use without a vote of the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 2 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 3 people. Mr. Bernardi stated that is a fact and that the restrictions under which the County is accepting the lands are even more strict than when the City had acquired SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 3 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 4 them. There are California statutes which put them in open space in perpetuity, never to be sold for anything else. Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to adopt the two Resolutions authorizing execution of the Grant Deeds for conveyance of the open space parcels. RESOLUTION NO. 8781 - AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF GRANT DEED FOR CONVEYANCE OF EIGHT OPEN SPACE PARCELS IN THE SUN VALLEY AREA TO THE MARIN COUNTY OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (AP #010-011-07, 18, 35, 46 & 57 and AP #010-041-42 and AP #177-240-23 & 24) RESOLUTION NO. 8782 - AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF GRANT DEED FOR CONVEYANCE OF SIX OPEN SPACE PARCELS IN C.S.A. NO. 23 TO THE MARIN COUNTY OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (AP #175-010-08, 88, 93, 95 & 96 and AP #179-242-36) AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 8.RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO APPLY FOR A STATE OF CALIFORNIA, OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING (OCJP) JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION PROGRAM GRANT (PD) - File 4-10-262 x 9-3-30 Councilmember Thayer noted that the staff report indicates the City will still be responsible for some of the funding in connection with this program grant, and inquired whether we could use Drug Asset Seizure funds for this type of endeavor, noting that the second and third years we will be sharing funding with the City School District. Police Chief Krolak responded that the two years and nine months would cost the City and School District roughly $20,000. He stated they will look at the guidelines from both Federal and State to see if they would be in compliance with the guidelines to use Drug Asset Seizure funds for that purpose. Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Shippey seconded, to adopt the Resolution authorizing the Chief of Police to apply to the State of California, Office of Criminal Justice Planning, for a Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Grant Program. RESOLUTION NO. 8783 - AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO APPLY FOR A STATE OF CALIFORNIA, OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING (OCJP) JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION PROGRAM GRANT AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 9.RESOLUTION REGARDING COUNTYWIDE HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS (Fin) - File 13-2 x 115 Councilmember Shippey inquired how does this Countywide Hazardous Waste Plan tie in with AB939, and why the haste? City Manager Nicolai responded that this project was completed about two years ago and we are just asking the State to take action on it and get it approved. She explained that this was a joint project, a Countywide Plan specifically on toxics and the Placement of a Potential and future site in the County. She added we went through the process of doing the Countywide Plan on all of the agreements. They were submitted to the State, but the State has not acted on it. Finance Director Coleman added that apparently there was a reorganization at State level and because of that and other reasons, after June when the law sunsetted, then in August or September the State realized this and stopped processing the applications. Even though they were partially responsible for the fact that they were not approved because they had kept sending them back to the Counties for changes, after the June, 1992, expiration date the State said they would not process the applications because the time had expired. He explained that there will be legislation introduced in January to correct the situation, but this Resolution is basically to encourage the State to take some sort of action to correct the situation. Ms. Nicolai added that without this Plan we did not have the authority to approve or disapprove an application from some company coming in and SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 4 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 wanting to become a solid waste or hazardous waste disposal site or processing location. She explained that if we got this Plan approved, we could approve or disapprove such an application. She stated it was important at the time, and remains important, that the Plan be adopted to give us the ability to review and control these issues. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 6 Councilmember Shippey moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to adopt the Resolution requesting the State to take action on the Countywide Hazardous Waste Plans. RESOLUTION NO. 8784 - REGARDING COUNTY HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 10.RESOLUTION ADOPTING EARLY RETIREMENT PROGRAM QUALIFICATIONS AND CONDITIONS (CM) - File 7-1-26 x 7-4 x 9-3-11 Councilmember Cohen pointed out an apparent typographical error on Page 2 of the staff report, in the next -to -last line of the middle paragraph. It states that the actual retirement date must be 6/28/92 or earlier, and he wanted to make sure that it should have been 1993. Ms. Nicolai stated that 1993 would be the correct date. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to adopt the Resolution adopting the Early Retirement Program Qualifications and Conditions. RESOLUTION NO. 8785 - ADOPTING EARLY RETIREMENT PROGRAM QUALIFICATIONS AND CONDITIONS AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 12.PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 1992 CALIFORNIA CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION AWARD FOR BEST IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM FOR A SMALL JURISDICTION WON BY THE HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES MANUAL (Pl) - File 109 x 9-3-17 Councilmember Thayer presented the award to the City Council, which she had accepted on behalf of the City of San Rafael at the State Planning Conference Awards Banquet in Pasadena on November 9, 1992. She stated this is a very special award, and that only two had been given, one to a large jurisdiction and the one to San Rafael as a small jurisdiction. She added that Planning Director Pendoley, as well as Principal Planner Sheila Delimont and Consultant Dan Hillmer and the Advisory Committee members are to be congratulated. She stated she is very proud of these Hillside Design Standards and hopes that one day we can convince the County and some of the other cities in Marin that this is the course to take. Mrs. Thayer noted that two of the Advisory Committee members, Linda Bellatorre and Mary Ellen Irwin, are in the audience. Mayor Boro added his congratulations and stated that the Manual has been submitted for a National award also. 13.PRESENTATION OF CANAL AREA INSPECTION PROGRAM CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE TO JACQUES DAHAN, PROPERTY OWNER OF 9 MARIAN COURT (Pl) - File 10-2 x 9-3-17 x 13-1 Mayor Boro explained the Canal Action Plan, with a four -point program for bringing our buildings into compliance with building, health and safety codes. Mayor Boro then read the Certificate of Compliance, stating that the 9 Marian Court complex has been inspected and found to be in compliance. He then presented the Certificate to the owner, Mr. Jacques Dahan, and thanked him. Code Enforcement Officer Claire Machado stated that Mr. Dahan had been very cooperative. 14.PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING TITLE 4 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, ADOPTING A UNIFORM FIRE CODE (1991 EDITION) AND PRESCRIBING REGULATIONS GOVERNING CONDITIONS HAZARDOUS TO LIFE AND PROPERTY FROM FIRE, EXPLOSION AND OTHER DANGERS, AND ESTABLISHING A FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU AND PROVIDING OFFICERS THEREFOR, AND DEFINING THEIR DUTIES AND POWERS (FD) - File 1-6-4 x 9-3-31 Mayor Boro reopened the Public Hearing and announced that this is a continuation of the Public Hearing from two weeks ago. Fire Chief Marcucci addressed the Council, stating that when the draft Ordinance adopting the 1991 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code was before the Council at their last meeting, they asked that several issues be studied further and that a revised Ordinance be resubmitted. He stated that one item was that while the Fire Department had recommended a six-year period in which apartment house owners would install smoke detectors whose primary source of power would come from the building's electrical system, the Council recommended it be a 24 -month period, and that is now reflected in the Ordinance. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 6 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 7 Chief Marcucci pointed out that another area discussed was the appeal process, on the abatement of wildland fire areas. He stated it is a policy decision on the part of SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 8 the Council, whether they want the appeal process to go forward to the Council, or to the Fire Chief. He stated that when the Fire Marshal finds a hazardous condition he requests the property owner to clear the brush from 30 to 100 feet from the structure. He added that once the request has been made, the person is given a certain period of time and if he has not done the clearing the Fire Department will go in and do it. He stated that is where the appeal process comes in and over which the Fire Chief has had authority. Chief Marcucci referred to Page 18 of the Ordinance, noting it is a hearing, not a "public hearing" as stated in the draft Ordinance, which is an error, which takes place prior to recording a lien on the property. He stated that the owner could come forward and say they were charged too much to clean up his property. He added that if the Council wishes to have the authority of the appeal process, the appeal would not be regarding the cleanup, but the charges. Chief Marcucci then addressed the sprinkler system issue brought up by Councilmember Cohen, regarding a small addition to a home but the property owner finding out he also needs a new foundation. The question was whether that would be considered a major remodel. Chief Marcucci said that after consideration, it was agreed that it would have to be a major remodel to trigger the requirement for a sprinkler system, and not work which was considered repair. Chief Marcucci noted that he and Fire Marshal Schoenthal have been working with the Marin Builders Exchange on the Ordinance, and they heartily support the Ordinance as written. Mayor Boro stated that the Fire Department should administer the appeal process, and when they have the work done it will either be by Fire Department personnel and charged on a time and materials basis, or by a third party and the owner will be charged the same amount the City paid for the work. If the owner feels it is out of line, he can let us know. Councilmember Thayer questioned placing the lien, but if the Council is comfortable with it she will go along. Mayor Boro pointed out that in the case of sidewalk repair the City decides when it should be done. Mr. Bernardi agreed. He added that if the Public Works Director orders the work to be completed and the person does not pay, there is a lien put on the property the next time the tax bill goes out. Councilmember Shippey inquired, should the people be able to come to the Council, and Mr. Bernardi explained that if it is a situation which has to be abated right away, there is a distinction between that kind of case and the type under discussion. Mr. Shippey stated he did not find in the Ordinance the question of when remodels trigger installation of sprinklers. Chief Marcucci responded that the requirement is on new construction, or on a remodel of 500 of the structure. Councilmember Breiner noted that when the first notice is sent on weed abatement the property owner should be told that if they do not have the work done, the City will do it and he will have to pay. Chief Marcucci stated he will have a procedure in place to cover that issue. Councilmember Breiner referred to Page 9 of the draft Ordinance, and stated the section on Fire Hydrants is somewhat vague with reference to upgrading. She inquired what the cost would be to upgrade a fire hydrant. Chief Marcucci stated it would be about $600 to put a larger outlet on one already existing. He stated if it cost more, they would not burden the individual, but would let them pay over a 6 to 8 month period. He added that the Fire Department actually does the work. He stated that if there is a hardship, they are always willing to compromise. Mrs. Breiner noted that the property owner doing the remodeling first would have to pay for the whole thing. City Attorney Ragghianti stated he feels that section of the Ordinance is reasonable. He noted that Assistant City Attorney Walker has worked with the Fire Marshal. Mrs. Breiner then referred to Page 10, sub -paragraph 2, which refers to newly created, attached, second dwelling units which are defined as a substantial remodel, and inquired if there is a per foot figure? Chief Marcucci responded it is $1.25 per foot. He stated if you added a 1500 square foot addition it would be about $1,500. Councilmember Cohen stated he is concerned about property rights, but this is about hazard and danger to others. He stated he does not think it is something for Council level. He stated he appreciates the Chief's response to his concerns regarding sprinklers, and he feels they are well worth the cost. He noted that the roof issue gets more attention, but the sprinklers are very important. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 8 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 9 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 9 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 10 Stephen Nass, of 101 First Street, addressed the Council in reference to a memo he had written. Mayor Boro noted the Councilmembers all had copies of the memo. Mr. Nass then highlighted the contents of his memo, which addressed 5 points: 1) Recognize Illegal Campsites as a Priority Fire Danger Concern; 2) Timely Response to Citizen Alerts Concerning Campsites; 3) Instruct City Agencies to Monitor the Hilly Areas Adjacent to Downtown; 4) Alert the Public to the City's Need to be Informed of Illegal Campsites; and 5) Identify and Eliminate the Attraction which Stimulates Campers to Establish Illegal Campsites Adjacent to Downtown San Rafael. Mr. Nass stated, with regard to Item #2, that it was over four months of attempting to get action concerning the campsites before he had a satisfactory response. Jorge Yllescas, a homeless person, stated that people are sleeping outside because they have no other place to go. Mayor Boro informed Mr. Yllescas that the subject under discussion at this public hearing is the illegal campsites, and that the homeless problem cannot be discussed tonight; we are discussing a Fire Ordinance, and there is a resident who just spoke about the illegal campsites. Mayor Boro noted that we have an Ordinance which states that it is illegal to camp in public open space. There being no further public input, the Public Hearing was closed. Mayor Boro asked Chief Marcucci for comment on Mr. Nass' comments, especially with respect to patrolling the open space. Chief Marcucci stated they are in the open space, particularly the areas in question on San Rafael Hill and adjacent to Fairhills, as often as they can. He stated that both the Fire and Police Departments receive complaints and both the Fire and Police have been out there making the campers leave. He added that it is a social issue, and during the summer it is a fire issue. Chief Marcucci noted there are only so many resources to go around, and they are doing the best they can do. He added that Chief Krolak is as frustrated as he is with the problem. City Manager Nicolai stated she has been discussing this issue the past couple of weeks, and trying to pull together a program. With regard to response to complaints, she noted we have only our Open Space Ranger who does the best he can. She stated she would like to have a concerted effort regarding the campsites, and also dealing with the fuel base. She stated we do not have the resources to send the Police and Fire out after dark. She promised to have a further report in a month. Councilmember Cohen stated he understands the City does not have the resources, and the people should know we need help in notifying the City. He stated that Mr. Nass might want to talk with people about going above and beyond what is covered by tonight's action. Mayor Boro stated that Chief Marcucci has been working with the residents of Coleman Drive, on the same concerns mentioned in Mr. Nass' letter. He added he understands that the Open Space Ranger has been out there and has torn down campsites, and will continue to do that. However, unfortunately, we cannot have people out there patrolling on a regular basis. Councilmember Thayer stated that in response to Mr. Nass' letter, the Police Chief as well as the Fire Chief are out there frequently. She stated one thing she would like to say is that these people have nowhere to go, and yet there is no support in the community for homeless shelters. She pointed out that the reason there are more homeless in San Rafael than other cities in Marin County is that we have the services the other cities do not. She added that we have to all work on this problem together on finding these people a place so they will not be on the hillsides. Mayor Boro noted that San Rafael, being the County seat, is the place where most of the services are for people on the various social programs. He noted there are homeless people in all of the other cities in the County, and he hears from people in all of them about their problems. Councilmember Cohen stated that when he was growing up in Mill Valley there were homeless people living on Mt. Tamalpais. The title of the Ordinance was read: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING TITLE 4 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, ADOPTING A UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND PRESCRIBING REGULATIONS GOVERNING CONDITIONS HAZARDOUS TO LIFE AND PROPERTY FROM FIRE, EXPLOSION AND OTHER DANGERS, AND ESTABLISHING A FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU AND PROVIDING OFFICERS THEREFOR, AND DEFINING THEIR DUTIES AND POWERS" SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 10 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 11 Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only and pass Charter Ordinance No. 1640 to print by the following vote, to wit: City Attorney Ragghianti stated he wanted to make sure that on Page 18 the word "public" is deleted, as discussed. Also, the record should state that Councilmember Breiner has familiarized herself with the subject by reading the staff report and Minutes of the previous meeting. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to adopt the Resolution with findings relative to adoption of the 1991 Uniform Fire Code. RESOLUTION NO. 8786 - MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 17958.5, 17958.7, AND 18941.5(c) RELATIVE TO THE ADOPTION OF THE 1991 UNIFORM FIRE CODE AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None (At the end of the meeting, City Attorney Ragghianti decided that Councilmember Breiner was not required to familiarize herself with the Minutes of the previous Public Hearing held November 2, 1992, as the Ordinance was being passed to print as amended at this meeting.) 15.PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF DENIAL OF USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO LEGALIZE EXISTING UNAPPROVED DWELLING UNITS; 822 "B" STREET; CALIFORNIA TENFOLD DEVELOPMENTS, INC., JOE BOHANEC, OWNER; JOHN SHARP, ATTORNEY, REP.; AP #11-262-15 (Pl) - File 10-5 x 9-3-17 Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened. Planning Director Pendoley briefed the Council on the history of the building. He stated that on August 11, 1992 the Planning Commission had denied a request to legalize existing unapproved dwelling units, a dental laboratory and an office/storage area located in the front portion of the second floor of 822 "B" Street. He explained that the denial was based on the incompatibility of the existing mix of uses, the livability of the apartment units and the existing floor plan of the overall area, the lack of on-site recreational facilities, and the fact that no new parking spaces were provided for the residential uses. Mr. Pendoley stated he also would like to respond to a letter received late last week from the applicant's attorney, Mr. Sharp. Mr. Pendoley stated that staff recommended, and the Planning Commission concurred, that this permit be denied on several bases. He noted in the staff report to the Commission there was a review of previous permitting on this property, and the most recent relevant activity went back to a 1981 Use Permit and Design Review Permit which were approved for, among other things, 8 residential units as well as some retail uses. In 1982 the Code Enforcement Officer, on an inspection for the Police Department, found three additional dwelling units which had been added without the proper permits, as well as the office. The owner was notified that he should either abate the units or apply to have them legalized, which he did with a Use Permit application. He did not, however, apply for the required Design Review Permit. Mr. Pendoley stated that in the staff report to the Planning Commission, the staff had reviewed a series of General Plan and Zoning policies which were their basis for denial. Among these were Downtown Policy 13 of the General Plan which sets out the allowable Floor Area Ratios (FARs), and this use would exceed those FARs, both in terms of the commercial and the density of the residential expansion. He noted that Land Use Policy 15 talks about the intensification of uses and traffic. He noted this use would be above the intensification of use in the General Plan standards. Mr. Pendoley added that Policy LU -27 requires appropriate on-site recreational facilities and outdoor recreation areas to be provided where appropriate for high density residential development, and this project has none. Mr. Pendoley explained that a number of General Plan Housing Policies are relevant, including H-17, which encourages quality affordable housing. He stated the applicant has indicated he would like to apply for a density bonus, to which he may be entitled if he provides affordable housing. However, staff would recommend that this is not the quality design which H-17 calls for. Mr. Pendoley stated that, in terms of the Zoning Ordinance, it would require a Use Permit to legalize the three additional units, but the Design Review Permit which would be required has not been applied for. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 11 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 12 Mr. Pendoley stated that, finally, there is the parking issue which must be resolved, but without the proper application it is not possible to do that. He added that, with this basic analysis, the Planning Commission determined that the application should be denied. Mr. Pendoley reported that last Thursday he received a hand -delivered letter from Mr. Sharp, attorney for the applicant, Mr. Bohanec, asking for additional time for Mr. Bohanec to submit the design review application which may, or may not, resolve the uses discussed in the staff report. He stated staff is recommending the Council take action tonight and not agree to Mr. Sharp's request for an extension. He stated staff's basic recommendation has been to deny the Use Permit and to ask staff to begin abatement proceedings in 60 days if the owner has not applied for a Demolition Permit. He stated if the owner does apply for a Demolition Permit, the abatement of the illegal units would proceed if the demolition does not start within 90 days. Mr. Pendoley stated that if the Council is inclined to consider Mr. Sharp's request, they could deny this appeal without prejudice, which would mean that Mr. Bohanec would not be barred from applying for a Design Review Permit. That should have a 60 -day maximum time limit, and staff should be directed to come back for abatement at the end of that period. Councilmember Cohen inquired if it would be possible for the applicant to come forward for the Design Review application and have a chance to meet the Zoning requirements, etc. Mr. Pendoley responded that it would take analysis by an architect. He stated he believes it would be possible to get decent units in this building, but the next problem to be solved is parking, which he believes would have to be solved off-site. He added that may be the more difficult issue. He explained there is a policy issue which the Planning Commission or the Council would have to decide, and that is the grandfathered parking which they have the right to accept, but it was before the present standards. He explained that could be applied to the retail, which was previously approved in 1991, but staff would recommend against that for residential, because we are striving for quality housing downtown. To have the simple reality of people going grocery shopping, you need to be able to park as close as possible to the building to bring your groceries upstairs. For that reason, either on-site parking or somewhere immediately adjacent should be provided, and that the grandfathered rights should not be granted for residential. John Sharp, attorney for the owner, addressed the Council, stating he is not asking them to continue this matter, and he appreciates their continuances. He stated he does not have a problem with denial without prejudice. The applicant will complete the application, and they need reasonable time lines to do that. He stated it will take some time to explore the parking problem, and also the design issues. He added that, without waiving any legal argument, he would hope the Council could grant the denial without prejudice. Mayor Boro inquired how long would Mr. Sharp think it would take. Mr. Sharp responded 60 days should be adequate. He pointed out that these are affordable housing units, and that Mr. Bohanec has requested a density bonus. He stated they are prepared to pursue agreements on the affordable rentals. There being no further public input, the Public Hearing was closed. Mayor Boro inquired of staff if it would be satisfactory if they receive the completed application within 60 days. Mr. Pendoley stated it would, and it would have to be complete according to staff. He stated that on the 61st day they would schedule the abatement hearings before the Council at the next available Council meeting. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to deny the appeal without prejudice, with the stipulation that the applicant provide a completed application within 60 days; if not, abatement proceedings will be scheduled at the next available Council meeting. Councilmember Breiner noted that it has happened in the past that there were buildings close to downtown which did not have some of the amenities originally built in. She noted that a two-tiered approach had been discussed. Mrs. Breiner pointed out that this is a building where recreational facilities would be impossible on-site. She stated this is an issue which we will face again, and it may not be consistent with affordable housing, to try to apply the recreational facilities requirement. She stated that this issue should be dealt with before too long. Mayor Boro asked would Mrs. Breiner recommend that staff evaluate that component when they bring this proposal back, and Mrs. Breiner stated she would. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 12 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 13 Councilmember Shippey stated that if the new application includes the dental laboratory it should include all safety issues. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None Mr. Pendoley noted he will bring back the required Resolution for the next Council meeting. 16.PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SECTION 14.17.030 (EMERGENCY SHELTERS) OF CHAPTER 14 (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (Pl) - File 10-3 x 10-1 x 9-3-17 Mr. Pendoley reported that this was last before the Council on September 21, 1992, when the Zoning Ordinance was adopted and passed to print. At that time, the Planning Department and City Attorney's staff recommended certain changes to the Council having to do with performance standards for Emergency Shelters. Due to error, those changes were not made in the Ordinance which was finally passed to print, and this staff report proposes to correct that error. He noted that Mayor Boro has had some questions on the wording. Mayor Boro explained that when he was studying the Ordinance this afternoon he recalled the committee which had worked on this issue a couple of years ago, and he is not certain of the definition of Emergency Shelters, whether they were to be long term, short term, temporary or rotating. He stated tonight he would like to open the Public Hearing, take testimony, and then continue the Public Hearing to the next meeting, so these issues be clarified. Mayor Boro opened the Public Hearing. There being no public input, the Public Hearing was continued to December 7, 1992. 17.PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OF OCTOBER 13, 1992, RE: DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF APPLICATION FOR USE PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE (UP92-6) - 721 EAST FRANCISCO BLVD., LITCHFIELD'S EMPORIUM; IRVING LITCHFIELD, OWNER; PERRY LITCHFIELD, ATTORNEY, REP.; AP #14-204-11 (Pl) - File 10-5 x 10-4 x 9-3-17 Mayor Boro opened the Public Hearing. Principal Planner Sheila Delimont briefed the Council, stating this is an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, denying without prejudice the use permit and parking variance for the use of the existing Litchfield building for a restaurant, bar, dancing and charity events including Bingo games. She explained the primary issue in the appeal is whether the use permit and parking variance are required, or whether the use is an allowable, non -conforming use. She stated the secondary issues relate to whether the Appellant was granted a fair hearing before the Planning Commission. Ms. Delimont reported that staff recommends strongly that the Council uphold the Planning Commission's decision denying the application. She explained that the proposed use, as presented to the Commission, would substantially impact the adjacent neighborhood since on-site parking is not available on this site. She noted that staff has had a difficult time processing the application, as the Applicant has not provided an adequate site plan. The plan presented showed 45 parking spaces where approximately 16 are available. Also, the parking lot for those spaces has a dead end, and cars could not exit the parking lot without backing out. Adequate site information was not provided to staff. Ms. Delimont reported that the Applicant's attorney requested that staff take the proposal for a hearing before the Planning Commission and that a parking variance be granted to handle the parking issue. She stated that the Commission heard the proposal on October 13, 1992, and did deny the application. She stated the Commission had determined that the use did not have grandfathered rights. She noted that there are a number of buildings on this site. The Bermuda Palms building itself was established in the 1950's and does include a lounge. That building is a separate building from the Litchfield Emporium. Ms. Delimont explained that in 1970 there was a concert use proposed for that building and the Applicant at that time claimed grandfathered rights, but he did not provide information to verify that and subsequently applied for a use permit, and that use permit expired in 1973. Ms. Delimont reported that, subsequent to that, there have been a number of retail uses on that site, and all of those use permits have expired, and there are no existing use permits. She added that the last permitted use was 19 years ago and, under the Zoning Ordinance, if a use ceases for a continuous period of six months it is considered abandoned and the property must comply with current regulations. She stated it is clear that the use is not grandfathered, and does require the use permit. She added that the Planning Commission made the appropriate findings in making their decision. The Commission SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 13 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 14 also noted the potential impact of inadequate parking, and potential problems with crowd control and litter, and denied the permit without prejudice. They noted that the Applicant had not provided adequate information to deal with management on the proposed project, but they also commented that there was a need for a place for charity events and that if an adequate parking plan was brought back the use might be considered. Ms. Delimont noted that the Applicant also claims grandfathered parking rights. However, the Zoning Ordinance states that the previous standards could apply unless the use intensifies. She explained that the Pepperland project had obtained a parkingvariance for the intensification of use; however, since then the use of the site has been primarily retail. She stated that, due to lack of information and some discrepancies regarding the size of the building, staff has not been able to give a definitive answer as to the number of grandfathered spaces. She stated the highest number possible would be 36, and this use would require 157 spaces, which would leave a deficit of 121 spaces. Ms. Delimont noted that the current motel use is also under -parked. It would require 95 spaces, where 85 are provided. She stated that the Applicant requested a variance and the Commission denied the request, and they did not find there were any special circumstances applicable to this site. They also felt that the surrounding area would be severely impacted by overflow parking from the site, as there is already a shortage of parking in the area. Ms. Delimont further reported that the Applicant has stated he was denied due process and a fair hearing. She noted the Council has the minutes from the Planning Commission hearing, which indicate that the Applicant was given every opportunity to respond to the staff report and provide evidence for the necessary parking variance. She stated that the Planning Commission considered all of the evidence and the findings in the record do support their decision. She stated that it does not constitute a taking, and that the Applicant could come forward with a reduced project which would reduce parking on the site. He also has an opportunity to provide off-site parking. Ms. Delimont stated that staff strongly recommends that the Council support the decision of the Planning Commission, and deny the appeal. She added that if the Council takes this action, staff will bring back a Resolution with detailed findings for the Council's consideration. Councilmember Shippey stated as near as he can tell, the lack of due process was because the Planning Director was not present at the Planning Commission hearing, and he inquired of the City Attorney if that would be a valid reason? City Attorney Ragghianti responded that if that were the only reason, it is not a valid reason for the contention that he was denied a fair hearing. Councilmember Cohen inquired what was the basis for the parking variance for Pepperland, and was it perhaps a smaller use? Ms. Delimont responded that there is nothing in the record to indicate why the variance was granted. She noted that, at that time, there were not detailed findings. Councilmember Cohen asked for an explanation of the requirement for 157 spaces. Ms. Delimont responded that is based on the Zoning Ordinance requirements, based on the types of uses. She noted that this was to be a restaurant, night club and dance hall and, based on that type of use the parking requirement of 157 spaces was determined. She added that the Fire Department has an occupancy load of 389 for this building, so it could have very intense uses on the site. Irving "Whitey" Litchfield, property owner, addressed the Council, first asking if he will have a quorum. Mayor Boro assured him that he will have a quorum, and asked that Mr. Litchfield discuss the subject being heard tonight. Mr. Litchfield pointed out that he has been housing the homeless at the Bermuda Palms Motel. He stated that 50 years ago he built this motel, and he wants his buildings for charity affairs and for the homeless. He stated he has 45 parking spaces, and not 16 as stated, and that the State of California will give him 45 parking spots. Mr. Litchfield stated that when Pepperland opened there were 8,000 people, and the Marin Rod & Gun Club held sports shows which drew 60,000 people. He pointed out that the Bermuda Palms building was 6 feet above the highway, and 300 feet of Francisco Boulevard was taken away by the State and he never received a cent. He stated he has plenty of parking, and the Planning Commission knew he had plenty of parking. He stated that he houses the homeless, and the City of San Rafael has authorized the Chief of Police to bring people to the Bermuda Palms Motel and they stay overnight free. He stated it is still available for the homeless free, instead of on the County. Mr. Litchfield disagreed with the statement about no special circumstances, citing his housing for the homeless. He also noted that he recently put up a fence around the site, and was told it should have gone through design review. With regard to the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 14 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 15 parking variance issue, he stated he is not going to impact businesses when there is not one store open on Francisco Blvd. after 5:00 PM. He stated there was only one letter from a lady next door, and she was operating illegally. He stated he is trying to keep the Canal Area under control, and there will be a lot more homeless people. He stated he will take care of the good people, and many of them will become citizens. Mr. Litchfield stated he is not making an appeal, but he is an old man and a retired general contractor. He stated that the Council is listening to a woman who says he has 16 parking spaces, when he has 45, and there are lies in here (the staff report). He stated this building has been available since February, and this is November. He stated if the Council wants him to get the people out he will get them out tonight, and abide by the Council's wishes. He noted he is not accepting any money from the Buck Fund, the City, or the County, to house the people, but it all comes out of his pocket so the decision he wants tonight is should he close and if so, he will close tomorrow. He stated the Police Department has already been notified. There being no further public input, the Public Hearing was closed. Mayor Boro noted that the issue before the Council is the appeal on the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Councilmember Shippey stated that the issue is the use permit, and not the Bermuda Palms Motel. Mayor Boro agreed, and added that they are separate issues. Councilmember Thayer inquired how many of the parking spaces which are currently on the site are being used by the motel? Ms. Delimont responded she does not have the records, but it appears there are about 85 for the entire site, for the motel building and the Emporium. Councilmember Thayer noted that denial without prejudice would allow the Applicant to come back with a proposal which would address the issues discussed, including the off-site parking. Ms. Delimont agreed, and stated that with the original application the owner's attorney said they would close between 4:00 and 6:00 PM because of traffic. Mr. Litchfield stated it is utterly impossible to get 157 spaces, and that is more than the City Hall and also the Civic Center have. Mayor Boro stated that one of the options Mr. Litchfield has is to find appropriate off- site parking for the proposed use. Mr. Litchfield stated he will have to close the whole site down. Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Shippey seconded, to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission regarding denial without prejudice of application for use permit and variance for 721 East Francisco Boulevard (UP92-6), and direct staff to prepare an appropriate Resolution. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 18.EAST SAN RAFAEL NEIGHBORHOOD TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP RECOMMENDATIONS (CM) - File 9-2-43 x 9-3-11 Mayor Boro, who is a member of the Task Force, explained that there is a recommendation for adding four members to the Task Force. He stated that a committee of three interviewed the candidates, and then the committee as a whole reviewed the candidates. He stated there was some disagreement on the entire slate, and it is being recommended tonight that these four people be added to the East San Rafael Neighborhood Task Force: Louis C. Bell, Jesus Lozano, Paula Jean Valerio, and Bill Weeks. Mayor Boro added that one concern which came up in discussing this item was that the Executive Director of the Canal Community Alliance would like to become a member. It was explained that at the time the Task Force was created that we had decided not to have directors of agencies sitting around the table, but people in the community. Mayor Boro stated he had suggested that now that they have a sub -committee looking at by-laws, the issue of membership as far as possibly having agencies represented on the committee, can be pursued at that time. That item may be coming back at a later date. Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Shippey seconded, to accept the staff report, approving the following new members to the East San Rafael Neighborhood Task Force: Louis C. Bell Jesus Lonzano Paula Jean Valerio SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 15 Page 16 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Bill Weeks COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None 19.CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro a. ST. VINCENT DE PAUL DINING ROOM COMMITTEE - File 10-2 x 9-2 (VERBAL) Councilmember Cohen gave a brief progress report on the Committee's attempt to find a new location for the St. Vincent de Paul dining room. He stated they have identified an area of the City, which is in the industrial area bordered by Woodland Avenue and Francisco Boulevard West, which is in Andersen Drive Corridor. He stated it is accessible to the Downtown, but is not in the core area. It had been agreed that when a site was being considered they would include a representative from the respective neighborhood, and they may be requesting a resident of Bret Harte or someone close to that area. Mr. Cohen noted there are a couple of potential sites, and it is possible we will see some development on this very soon. b. COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDANCE AT VARIOUS FUNCTIONS - File 9-1 (VERBAL) Mayor Boro stated that occasionally there are events where it is appropriate to have a Councilmember attending. He noted that usually the whole Council is invited, and at least one member attends. He suggested a plan so that if he cannot attend a function there will be another representative from the Council. He recommended having the City Manager's Secretary, Dorothy Lobedan, follow through with finding a Council representative to attend when he is unable to do so, first checking with Vice -Mayor Breiner. The Councilmembers agreed. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 1992 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/16/92 Page 16