Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRA Minutes 1994-07-18SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JULY 18, 1994, AT 7:00 PM Regular Meeting: San Rafael Redevelopment Agency Present: Albert J. Boro, Chairman Paul M. Cohen, Member Barbara Heller, Member Joan Thayer, Member David J. Zappetini, Member Absent: None Also Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, Executive Director Gary T. Ragghianti, Agency Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, Agency Secretary OPEN SESSION - 7:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mayor Boro announced in Open Session that the Redevelopment Agency would be going into Closed Session to discuss the following Closed Session item: 1. CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 PM - CONFERENCE ROOM 201 a. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(a) Case name: County of Marin and Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District v. City Council of the City of San Rafael; City of San Rafael, and Does 1 through 25, Marin County Superior Court Case No. 159486. The Redevelopment Agency then met in Closed Session in Conference Room 201 to discuss the above-mentioned item. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JULY 18, 1994, AT 7:30 PM. Agency Attorney Ragghianti stated that no reportable action was taken on the item listed on the agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM 2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of July 5, 1994 (AS) 3. Unapproved Minutes of Citizen's Advisory Committee Meeting of July 7, 1994 (RA) - File R-140 IVB RECOMMENDED ACTION Approved as submitted. Accepted report. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 1 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 2 4. Approval of Resolution Pertaining to ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 94-27 - Compensation and Working Conditions of the AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 92-20 Assistant Executive Director (Pers) - PERTAINING TO THE SALARY RANGE FOR File R-58 x (SRCC) 7-3 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: MEMBERS: Cohen AGENCY CONSIDERATION Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Chairman Boro (from minutes of July 5, 1994 only, due to absence from meeting) 5. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FROM T.H. ROGERS - ASSOCIATES AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING CONTRACT BY ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR DOWNTOWN DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTS PROJECT (RA) - File R-345 x R-304 Assistant Executive Director Ours stated that this is the first step in the budget item which was approved for new street lighting to replace those which are failing on Fourth Street. He explained that in reviewing the three proposals which were received, the T.H. Rogers proposal was the most complete. Also, their ability to work with the Downtown Vision Committee and the other groups was better than the other bidders. Although their proposal is $150 higher than the other bids, staff is recommending that the T.H. Rogers bid be accepted. Staff feels that the quality of the work will be better in the long run. Member Zappetini inquired who were the other two bidders. Mr. Ours replied O'Mahoney & Meyer, and Industrial Light & Power. Member Heller inquired about the procedure to be followed by T.H. Rogers, regarding the new lighting fixtures. Mr. Ours responded that first they will actually set the scene for what we have presently and what we can have. They will examine the infrastructure, the underground wires, and test the bases to see if they can be re- used; then make recommendations for the types of lights and help staff and the Committee with the selection, and work through that process. Member Heller asked about the time frame, and Mr. Ours replied we should have the lights within this budget year. Member Heller moved and Member Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution authorizing the acceptance of the proposal from T.H. Rogers - Associates for the Downtown decorative street lighting services. RESOLUTION NO 94-28 - AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL FROM T.H. ROGERS - ASSOCIATES FOR DOWNTOWN DECORATIVE STREET LIGHT DESIGN SERVICES FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $11,325. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None 6. ANDERSEN DRIVE EXTENSION PROJECT (RA) - File R-246 a. ADOPT CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE LINDARO TO A STREET LINK. b. REPORT ON SUGGESTED MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONCEPT PLAN. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 2 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 3 Ms. Katie Korzun, Senior Planner (Redevelopment Agency) stated that six months ago the Agency made a decision to put Andersen Drive through and have it terminate at A Street, and asked the Downtown Vision Committee to set up a subcommittee to work with others to make further decisions. She stated at that point they did not even have a right-of-way selection. The Downtown Vision subcommittee joined with members of the Park and Recreation Commission, a member of Davidson School, a member of the Design Review Board (DRB), and worked with Andrew Preston of the Public Works Department, and Don Blayney, a landscape architect contracted for the design work. Ms. Korzun stated there was very detailed input from everyone on the Committee, which was a very active one, and they had visits from the Recreation Director and from the engineers working on Andersen Drive. She added that after the subcommittee came up with their recommendations, the Concept Plan was taken to five boards and commissions for their comments, before coming to the Agency tonight. It has had extensive review. She noted that for tonight's meeting, and for the Planning Commission's recent meeting, there were announcements to the adjacent property owners, the business owners she was aware of, the legal assistants for some of the businesses, and a number of neighborhood associations. While there was no notice required, she had sent a notice, a set of plans, and a staff report to quite a few people as well. She stated that Elissa Giambastiani, a member of the Downtown Vision Committee as well as the subcommittee, will say a few words about the process. Mrs. Elissa Giambastiani described the process and the lively discussions among the Committee members. She stated the Committee agreed with the Concept Plan, particularly the new entry to Albert Park. The Committee felt that many people are unaware of the park, and that this will not only allow easier access to the park, but will provide greater visibility of the park, and by having vehicular activity on the other side of the park, it will encourage much more activity. On behalf of the subcommittee of the Downtown Vision Committee, Mrs. Giambastiani encouraged the Agency members to accept the Concept Plan which will be presented tonight. Ms. Korzun showed slides of the area in its present context, indicating the view from Albert Park to St. Raphael's Church up A Street. The first picture was taken at the time of the Street Painting Festival and showed the community participation. There was also a view across Albert Park playing field, showing the Siberian Elms at the perimeter which will enhance the new plan. There was a picture of the present Marin Produce building which will stay, but Ms. Korzun noted their parking lot and adjacent area will be changed. Another picture showed the rear of the Safeway store, with the right-of-way lines in chalk. Mr. Don Blayney, landscape architect who was contracted to design the plan, explained the details by means of a colored rendering. He explained that Lindaro Street will become a new City gateway, with the low, colored concrete walls and Palm trees or similar planting. It will not have the "Welcome to San Rafael" signs. There will be a solid fence or wall to screen the maintenance facility, and he is recommending an entry from the maintenance facility directly onto the field for convenience in maintaining it. The Siberian Elm trees are a fine buffer for Andersen Drive and the ball field. There was concern about foul balls, and he is proposing black netting hung between the trees to prevent foul balls from exiting the ball field. Mr. Blayney described the ingress/egress to Albert Park, stating there will be a series of medians near the corner to soften the appearance of Andersen Drive and lessen the vehicular speed. They are planning colored concrete walls on both sides of A Street toward the Mission, and additional street trees with brick bands on each side of the trees and tree wells. They are recommending that feature go all the way to Third Street. Mr. Blayney described the Palm -lined promenade within Albert Park, SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 3 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 4 which will tie the Mission site to the Park. If you were inside Albert Park, you would look all the way to the Mission site from the promenade. Also, they are taking down the overhead power lines in that vicinity. He explained that the promenade will make it possible to enter the park through the Lonatese Gardens, which are in the planning stage for the rear of the Recreation Center, and hopefully will become the public entrance to the Recreation Center. He noted there will be ramps and a speed bump to slow cars down as they enter the Park. In the parking lot there will be bollards at the rear of the Recreation Center to prevent through traffic. He noted that they have eliminated 14 parking spaces and added 9 spaces along the south side of Andersen Drive as mitigation. Chairman Boro inquired about the issue of the left turn from Andersen Drive which might reduce the on -street parking from 9 to 6, and Ms. Korzun explained that the planning group had received a variety of comments on that issue. Everyone recommended that the plan be approved, and the plaza area be included. There was a variety of comments from the Design Review Board, the Planning Commission, and the Redevelopment Citizens Advisory Committee that there should be some access into the park off Andersen Drive. Her group decided they could have a left turn process if they took out the median and put in a left-hand turn pocket, but they would lose 3 of the parking spaces. She noted the plan also says there will be no left turn onto First Street; however, to facilitate use of the Safeway parking lot, it was recommended there be two-way traffic allowed in and out of Safeway but no left-hand turn when you exit onto Andersen Drive. There would still be no left turn into First Street. Ms. Korzun stated that is the staff recommendation, and they also are recommending inclusion of the plaza, allow left-hand turns into Albert Park, and allow two-way entry and exit into Safeway. Member Heller inquired, would you be allowed to make a left-hand turn onto Andersen Drive, across traffic, to go up to Second Street? Mr. Andrew Preston, Associate Civil Engineer, Public Works Department, responded that would be a final design detail. He explained they are hoping to allow for both a right and a left turn at First Street. Member Heller asked if the traffic would be a problem because of the traffic lights. Mr. Preston stated that it should work, and there would be good sight distance with the left turn. Member Cohen stated it is the right turn onto First Street which concerns him. He feels the people in the Gerstle Park area would cut through the Safeway parking lot and turn right on Andersen Drive. He stated that what concerns him more is that someone coming eastbound in a hurry on Second Street, seeing lights ahead on Second Street, would cut down B Street, go through the Safeway parking lot and exit from First Street by making a right turn onto Andersen Drive. He stated it would jam up traffic coming out of Gerstle Park. He stated he does not have a simple solution, but remains concerned about creating that traffic pattern. Mr. Preston stated that there is no ideal solution, but one advantage of allowing the ingress and egress from the Safeway parking lot onto A Street, is that the large semi -trucks do not have to cut through the B Street area to get to Second or Third Streets. They would have better access to Second and Third Streets and could go east or west to go through San Rafael, rather than going back onto B Street and through the residential area. That would be an advantage. Member Cohen stated that if we were going to look at this approach, he would like to have evaluated the prohibition of right turns out of that driveway at certain times, such as in the morning when that will be a problem. He recommended having a sign stating, "No Right Turn from this Driveway from 6:00 to 9:00 AM", which would slow it down dramatically. Chairman Boro stated that is something we can look at as we SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 4 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 5 get closer to finalizing, and bring back recommendations as to how we might do that. Member Cohen added there is also the issue of the parking lot. He feels there was a lot of concern from the Gerstle Park neighborhood about the impact of this project on the neighborhood, and we should not forget those concerns. He asked about the left turn from Andersen Drive into the parking lot, the modification which reduces the parking spaces and allows for a left turn from Andersen Drive, and inquired if that eliminates the possibility of a left turn out of the Marin Produce property onto Andersen Drive. Mr. Preston responded that will not, but will make the left turn a little safer because they will have a left turn bay. Chairman Boro stated that looking at the slides and considering this project, there was a suggestion that at some future time we find a way to fund the entrance to Albert Park. He stated that Safeway is unattractive and will look worse when this work is done. He asked about staff talking to Safeway about beautification. Ms. Korzun responded that they have met with the Safeway store manager and with management in the East Bay, and they are considering painting the back of the building. They are more than willing to use the planters which are there now and upgrade them. She noted they will take down two of the larger transformers and do a general tidying up. She noted there will be a heavy hedge along the street. They are removing their Safeway sign, but it will probably come back so they would have a sign so people on Andersen Drive would know there is a Safeway there. Mr. Patrick Webb of the Park and Recreation Commission stated they met on June 23rd and talked about a few of the issues. They do not believe the plan should go forward without having a maintenance program for the entire Andersen Drive project. He added that low maintenance means "no maintenance". He stated this is an ambitious plan and the Redevelopment Agency should assure sufficient monies for the concept. He noted there are plans for the rear of the Recreation Center, and pointed out that in 1992 when we took down the Cerutti house, we were going to improve the parking lot on B Street. He noted we should improve the front of the Recreation Center building. The Cerutti lot is simply a bare parking lot, but while it is nice to do something on the A Street side, we should continue to improve the B Street frontage. Member Cohen inquired about the removable bollards planned for the new parking lot, along the promenade. He asked when would they be installed, and when would they be removed? Mr. Webb stated he is more concerned about the speed bump or ramp. Member Cohen stated the bollards should be in place to prevent through traffic from cutting through the Park, and should be there all of the time, except when a major event is taking place. Chairman Boro noted that the Park and Recreation Commission, in their letter, brought up three points. One was low maintenance, and will we be able to do it. Assuming that with the existing level of funding for park maintenance right now, can we handle it if we keep it at the level of our other entrances to the City? Ms. Korzun stated that we can. Chairman Boro asked, do we feel we can put in a series of plantings here which will have an impact and will still require the maintenance? He noted it will be a Council decision at some point. He noted that in the letter from the Commission, they talk about landscaping, lighting, etc., and we are basically saying in this report that we think that with the similar design to the existing entryways that we can handle it with our existing level of funding. Ms. Korzun stated that is correct. We will not do landscaping of medians in long rows now the way we did it in the 1960's and 1970's. Those are the areas which are giving us trouble now. Chairman Boro stated that what that comes down to is that future Councils will have to keep that in mind - that if we make further cuts that something we are putting in today would be subject to the low maintenance problem, SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 5 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 6 unless we have another source of funding. He asked if staff feels they can do it with the existing funding. Ms. Korzun replied they feel they can. Mr. Preston explained there will be 12 months' maintenance as part of the contract, so the plants will be established when we take them over. There will be a fully augmented sprinkler system for all of the trees and shrubs, and most of the medians will be hardscaped between the trees and shrubs with cobbles in cement, so staff feels there should be a fairly minimal maintenance effort. Member Cohen noted the staff recommendation is that we find a way to fund the Albert Park entry - not the improvements to the front portion of the parking lot - so it can be done at the same time that the Andersen Drive Extension is actually constructed. He asked, what is included in the Albert Park entry? Is the promenade included, or just the driveway, and what will be funded there? Chairman Boro clarified, what is the $200,000 tab? Mr. Blayney explained it would be the promenade from Andersen Drive, to the rear entrance of the Recreation Center beyond the future Lonatese Gardens. He pointed out the area on the rendering. Member Cohen noted there is a recommendation that we wait on the sidewalk treatment farther up. He noted the text says, "A Street from Third to Fifth". Ms. Korzun explained that was a recommendation which came from the Planning Commission, and we are suggesting that we wait on that, for other sources of funds. She explained that on this proposal, we would take the sidewalk treatment to Third Street. Member Cohen verified that is included in the staff recommendation. Chairman Boro noted that, regarding the money for the front parking lot on B Street, there is no funding and no recommendation from staff. Ms. Korzun agreed, stating it would be a good thing to do, but we would have to look for other funding sources, and are not recommending that we cut back or alter any of the other projects at this time. Member Thayer agreed that we should finish what we started on B Street several years ago. She stated this area has to be looked at as a whole. We will have to do it in piecemeal fashion because of the funding, but she wondered if we do indeed do the promenade, if something could be done with the front at that point in time. Ms. Korzun replied, not unless we find the funds for it, and that would basically be the Council's decision as to which project we should take that money from. Member Thayer stated it seems to her that it was not that much money which we needed at that time. Mr. Preston responded it was approximately $120,000, depending on what type of improvements you put in. Member Thayer stated she would like that brought back at a later date, going back to the meetings we had at that time regarding the B Street parking area. Chairman Boro noted that when we get into next year's budget, these items will be there for us to consider and make decisions. However, the recommendation tonight is, that staff is supporting the concept and if we have a priority, the first one would be the back parking lot because of its relationship to the Recreation Center, and then the second priority would be to try to complete the front parking lot. Member Heller noted that would include the landscaping. Member Cohen pointed out that by adopting this plan, we are saying we are going to make a good faith effort in next year's budget to find the money for these improvements. He stated his sense of it is that there is no harm in going back and looking at those things, but he feels that if the improvements in the front were easy we would have done them at the time, and low cost was the option which we took. A better treatment, which it needs, was expensive then and still is, and he is not prepared, even conceptually, to say we want to find that money. He stated it should be weighed against the whole range of other choices we have to make. He stated this one is key to making the terminus of Andersen Drive at A Street really work in terms of relation to Downtown. He stated he feels comfortable saying tonight that we are SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 6 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 7 going to make an effort to find the funds for this lot in the Agency's budget next year, but he does not feel comfortable making any kind of hint of a commitment for the front even though he recognizes the need and the Park and Recreation Commission's concern. Member Thayer stated that was not what she was suggesting, but we should take a look at it, because it should be considered in view of the other improvements in Albert Park. B Street is an extremely important street to the Gerstle Park neighborhood. She would like to see something done, but realizes it is not part and parcel of this particular project tonight. Member Cohen stated that there will be a real imbalance when the rear area is developed and the front area looks at it does. Chairman Boro noted that there is now a use there, with 600 people a week coming to Albert Park who did not come there before, but the Bocce Ball courts have intensified the use and we are setting a tone for the City. He stated the B Street frontage should be a high priority and we should do whatever we can to make that happen. The first priority is the back lot, and the second priority is the front, and we will have to deal with it next year. He asked for a motion. Member Cohen moved and Member Heller seconded, that we adopt the Concept Plan for the Lindaro to A Street link with Andersen Drive, and accept the staff recommendation that we incorporate the left turn into the parking lot. Secondly, that we incorporate the two-way exit from the Safeway parking lot. Third, that we include the Albert Park entry as presented tonight into the Concept Plan, and set a goal for securing funding so the improvements can be made at the same time as the construction of Andersen Drive. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer and Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None DISQUALIFIED: MEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of interest). Chairman Boro thanked Ms. Korzun, the Commissions, the Vision Committee and all of the volunteers for their work in bringing this project forward in a timely manner and with such great suggestions. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Agency Secretary SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 7/18/94 Page 7