HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1997-05-19SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, MAY 19, 1997 AT 8:00 PM
Regular Meeting:
San Rafael City Council
Barbara Heller, Councilmember
Cyr N. Miller, Councilmember
Gary O. Phillips, Councilmember
Absent: None:
Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember
Also Present: Rod Gould, City Manager
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Patricia J. Roberts, Deputy City Clerk
OPEN SESSION - 7:00 PM
None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE:
a. OPEN SPACE IN SAN RAFAEL - File 233 x 13-14-1 x 9-3-30 x 9-3-31
Hugo Landecker, resident of Gerstle Park, addressed the problem of the homeless
living in Open Spaces in San Rafael, reporting he had been the victim of an
unprovoked assault by a homeless person in the Open Space above Gerstle Park.
Mr
Landecker stated a project of clearing non-native French Broom has been ongoing
in this area for approximately six years, in order to make the area accessible
to the public and reduce the fire hazard. He reported this work was being
done by neighborhood volunteers, noting the Gerstle Park Homeowners Association
sponsors an annual Trail Days Event, and Centerpoint, the Marin Conservation
Corps, and the San Rafael Fire Department have also been involved. He thanked
the Fire Department for their efforts and encouragement in the continuation
of this project.
Regarding his assault, Mr. Landecker complimented the San Rafael Police Department
for the way in which they handled the case. However, he stated the assault
against him was not just a simple assault, it represented a direct conflict
between the homeless people living in the Open Space areas and the efforts
to try to improve the area. Mr. Landecker reported there had been many
unpleasant encounters between homeless people and those using the Open Space
areas for pleasure, although this was the first encounter he was aware of which
resulted in violence. Mr. Landecker stated San Rafael has invested in Open
Space to acquire this as a valuable asset for the community, but by allowing
the homeless to live in the Open Space areas, these areas become their bathroom,
garbage dump, and their drug and pornographic centers, and the asset then becomes
a dangerous liability. Mr. Landecker reported they have seen many signs of
these types of activities when they are clearing brush in these areas, noting
he had also seen campfires that have been left unattended and burning during
the worst part of the fire season.
Mr. Landecker stated he wants to see the Open Spaces safe, he wants to see the work
efforts that have gone into the Open Spaces continue, and he wants to see the
people of San Rafael continue to enjoy the Open Spaces without fear. Mr.
Landecker stated this assault on him has highlighted the conflict between the
homeless living in Open Space and the objectives to make our Open Space areas
better, and he urged the City Council to take a leadership role in resolving
this conflict.
Mayor Boro asked City Manager Gould to review with Council at the next meeting the
role of the Police Department and Fire Department with respect to people camping
in Open Spaces, and what our plans are for this year.
b. DEL GANADO ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - File 6-53
Paul Vince, resident of the Del Ganado area, reported that in the two weeks since
Council passed the Resolution to proceed to form the Del Ganado Tax Assessment
District, residents representing over three hundred properties have signed
protests against the project, noting that was nearly half of the total property
owners in the proposed District. He further reported that opposition to the
proposed Assessment District, based on canvassing of the neighborhood, was
approximately 80%. Mr. Vince stated the pressing questions now were how the
City will respond to the expression of community concern, and specifically,
will the City proceed to spend the $13,680 authorized for the engineering plans
and the $5,000 authorized for the architectural plans, will the City proceed
with a ballot on this issue, and will the City evaluate the need for an
Environmental Impact Report? He also asked where members of the community
could go to get answers from the City, who would answer their questions, and
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 2
when they could expect answers.
Mayor Boro asked City Manager Gould, with the help of Mr. Vince and Ian McLeod,
a leading sponsor of the Assessment District, to see if a community meeting
can be organized by the community, noting Mr. Gould and his staff would be
happy to attend such a meeting to go over some of the issues Mr. Vince had
brought up, such as the process in general, the issue of noticing, legal issues,
and the issue of design, and see if we can reach some kind of decision as to
what to do. Mayor Boro stated the City would place this issue on hold as far
as going forward with the contract, and as soon as Mr. Vince and Mr. McLeod
can get together and make arrangements with City Manager Gould, the meeting
will be convened. Mayor Boro stated it was important everyone understand this
is a community project, not a City sponsored project, and while the City is
more than willing to support it, the leadership on both sides really needs
to come from within the community, and then the City will work with them.
Councilmember Cohen asked if any of the $18,000 Council voted on at the last meeting
had been spent? City Manager Gould reported none of the money had been spent,
and noted there was a thirty -day cancellation clause in the contract. Mr.
Cohen stated if there was difficulty in getting this meeting together in a
timely fashion, the City might want to think about putting this off, noting
that based on what appears to be opposition to the project, the City may not
want to commit itself until we see where this is going. Mayor Boro felt this
should be left to the discretion of the City Manager, but noted if we start
to reach the end of the thirty day period and the issue has not been resolved,
Council would look for him to initiate the cancellation clause.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to approve the
following Consent Calendar items:
ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Approved as submitted.
(w/Redevelopment Agency) and Special and
Regular Meetings of Monday, May 5, 1997 (CC)
2. Call for Applications to Fill One Three-year Term Approved staff
recommendation:
on the Marin Commission on Aging, Due to Expiration 1) Called for applications
to
of Term of Dan Beittel, M.D. (CC) - File 199 fill one three-year term on
the Marin Commission on Aging, term to expire end of June, 2000; 2) Set deadline
for filing applications Tuesday, June 10, 1997 at 12:00 Noon in the City Clerk' s
Office; 3) Set date for interviews of applicants at a Special City Council
meeting to be held on Monday, June 16, 1997, commencing at 6:30 PM, Conference
Room 201, City Hall.
3. Request for City of San Rafael Council voted unanimously to
Participation as Amicus Party: (CA) participate as amicus party.
- File 9-3-16
a. Case Name: Penn Pacific Properties, Inc.
v. City of Oceanside, et al.,
California Court of Appeal,
4th Appellate District
Case No. D027555
4. City's Exercise of Marin Housing Authority's Option Declined to exercise
option
to Purchase Two Below Market Rate (BMR) Units at to purchase two BMR units.
the Marin Lagoon Condominium Project: 38 Mariners
Circle and 55 Mariners Circle, San Rafael (CA)
- File 229 x 5-1-313
5. Summary of Legislation Affecting San Rafael (CM) Approved staff
- File 9-1 recommendations:
AB 610 (Margett), Marijuana:
SUPPORT; AB 880 (Craven), Return of Local Property Tax Revenue: SUPPORT; ACA
4 (Aguiar), Constitutional ERAF: SUPPORT; AB 671 (Floyd), Public Employees
Mediation and Factfinding: OPPOSE; AB 972
(Torlakson), State Mandated Local Costs: OPPOSE; AB 1070 (Campbell), Design
Professional Indemnification: OPPOSE; SB 874 (Calderon), Public Works
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 3
Contracts: OPPOSE; SB 994 (Johnson), Local Agency Contracts: Eligibility:
OPPOSE; SB 1325 (Mountjoy), Impoundment, Vehicles: OPPOSE; SB 1340 (Prenter),
Sales Tax - Vehicle Purchases: OPPOSE.
6. Monthly Investment Report (Admin. Svcs.) Accepted report.
- File 8-18 x 8-9
7. Resolution to Amend Resolution No. 9402 Which RESOLUTION NO. 9846 -
Pertains to Compensation for Part Time, Temporary, RESOLUTION AMENDING
RESOLUTION
Intermittent, and Seasonal Employees (Per) NO. 9402 WHICH PERTAINS TO
- File 7-4 COMPENSATION FOR PART-TIME,
TEMPORARY, INTERMITTENT AND SEASONAL WORKERS.
8. Resolution Authorizing Execution of Contract forRESOLUTION NO. 9847 -
RBF (Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates), RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE
Environmental Consultants, to Prepare EIR for EXECUTION OF A PROPOSAL
Fair, Isaac Office Park (P1) AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
- File 4-3-325 x (SRRA) R-368 x (SRRA) R-140 XIV THE AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT
BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (RBF) FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FAIR, ISAAC OFFICE PARK DEVELOPMENT.
9. Request for Waiver of Use Permit Fees for the Approved staff
recommendation
Teen Center, a Non-profit Organization (P1) for waiver of Use Permit
fees.
- File 10-2 X 10-5
10. Purchase of New Paramedic Ambulance (FD) RESOLUTION NO. 9848 -
- File 4-2-292 X 9-3-31 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
LEASE PURCHASE OF A PARAMEDIC AMBULANCE.
11. Resolution of Appreciation to Coca-Cola RESOLUTION NO. 9849 -
Bottling Company of California for Placing RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO
a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Message on COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY
Their Soft Drink Cans (PW) - File 102 X 4-4-6.b OF CALIFORNIA.
12. Resolution of Appreciation to Ivy Wellington, RESOLUTION NO. 9850 -
Board of Library Trustees (Lib) RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO
- File 102 X 9-2-3 IVY WELLINGTON, MEMBER, BOARD OF
LIBRARY TRUSTEES.
13. Resolution of Appreciation to Glenn David
Mathews, Cultural Affairs Commissioner (Lib)
TO
- File 102 X 9-2-24
AFFAIRS COMMISSIONER.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
RESOLUTION NO. 9851 -
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
GLENN DAVID MATHEWS, CULTURAL
14. INTRODUCTION OF FRANK SMITH, ENGINEER I AND KRISTIN DRUMM, GIS TECHNICIAN
(PW)
- File 9-3-40
Public Works Director David Bernardi introduced Kristin Drumm, reporting she had
been hired as the Public Works Department's Geographic Information Systems
Technician. He noted Ms. Drumm would be instrumental in developing,
maintaining, and implementing the City's GIS, explaining the Geographic
Information System was the mapping base which staff uses to prepare information
for the Council, and is also used to keep their records. Mr. Bernardi reported
Ms. Drumm was a graduate student in Urban and Regional Planning at San Jose
State University, is in the early stages of researching and writing her thesis
toward obtaining her Masters Degree, and for the past year and a half she has
been working with the Marin Community Development Agency's Advanced Planning
Department, helping them with their GIS system.
(Frank Smith, Engineer I, was unable to attend the meeting).
15. DEMONSTRATION AND PRESENTATION OF EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS DEPICTING THE
COUNTYWIDE EFFORTS OF MCSTOPPP TO COMPLY WITH THE MARIN COUNTY ACTION PLAN
2000 (PW)
- File 4-4-6.b x 102
a. MCSTOPPP MANAGER STEVE ZEIGER TO MAKE PRESENTATION.
b. MAYOR BORO TO PRESENT RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY
OF CALIFORNIA.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 4
a. Steve Zeiger, Public Works Department's Manager of the City's MCSTOPPP Program
(Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program) and Gina Purin,
Education Coordinator, presented a diorama depicting how the stormwater system
works throughout Marin County. Mr. Zeiger reported the diorama is used as
part of an educational program, with demonstrations being given at schools
and various locations within the community. Mr. Zeiger pointed out their goal
was to educate school children and the public, by showing how the many different
types of pollution find their way into the storm drains, which then flow into
creeks and the San Francisco Bay. He demonstrated how common causes of
pollution, such as lawn chemicals or pollution from farms in the County, are
also washed into the storm drains by the rain, pointing out that anything that
goes into the storm drains remains untreated, and does not go through the water
treatment plant before flowing into the creeks or the bay. Public Works
Director Bernardi pointed out this was a Federally mandated program under the
Clean Water Act of 1972, and noted one of the main goals was to teach young
people about the environment, and ways they need to be respectful of the
environment.
b. Mayor Boro stated the City of San Rafael was the lead agency for this program
in Marin County, working with the other cities in Marin. He reported they
had approached the Coca-Cola Bottling Company of California and asked if they
would participate in a public awareness program, and Coca-Cola distributed
26 million Diet Coke and Sprite cans with information about storm drains and
pollution, including a telephone number people could call for further
information. On behalf of the City of San Rafael, Mayor Boro presented
representative Anne MacDonald with a Resolution of Appreciation to the Coca-Cola
Bottling Company of California, thanking the company for its outstanding effort
in helping to educate the public.
PUBLIC HEARING:
16. PUBLIC HEARING (P1) - File 10-5 x 10-7
a. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION OF FEBRUARY 11, 1997, RE: ED96-67,
ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION (PANEL
ANTENNAS FOR GROUND EQUIPMENT) AT 1 WELLBROCK HEIGHTS, SAN RAFAEL, CA; APN
175-606-56; ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, OWNER: WHALEN & CO.,
REPRESENTATIVE; ALEIDA HELLE, ROSALIND KATZ, CAROL RUSSELL, ET AL., APPELLANTS.
411 IW
b. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION OF APRIL 15, 1997, APPROVING USE PERMIT
AMENDMENT TO ALLOW WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES AT ALDERSGATE CHURCH,
1 WELLBROCK HEIGHTS, SAN RAFAEL, CA; APN 175-606-56; ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST
CHURCH, OWNER: WHALEN & CO., REPRESENTATIVES, ALEIDA HELLE, ROSALIND KATZ,
CAROL RUSSELL, ET AL., APPELLANTS.
Mayor Boro opened the Public Hearing and asked for the staff report.
Planning Director Pendoley reported the Telecommunications Act of 1966 contains
provisions for many things having to do with communications, including the
regulation of antenna structures in connection with PCS (Personal Communication
Systems) technology. Mr. Pendoley stated what is probably most relevant about
this law, for our purposes, is that the Federal Government has stated City
Councils and County Boards of Supervisors will retain their zoning authority
to regulate the placement of these types of antennas and related facilities;
however, in deciding whether or not to approve such antennas, they may not
deny them based on the perceived health effects of radio frequency radiation.
Mr. Pendoley explained PCS technology is essentially a new way of providing cellular
telephone service, and one of its distinctive features is that it relies on
digital technology, rather than analog technology, which means the signal is
generated with much lower power than with earlier technology. This also means
the antennas need to be closer together, and the service will have less static
and "dead" spots. Mr. Pendoley stated that because this technology is new,
cities across America are now faced with applications for literally hundreds
of thousands of these, and most cities do not have much in the way of design
standards or regulations to govern antennas. He reported the Planning
Department refers to guidelines adopted by other
cities in the North Bay and the interim design guidelines developed by Marin County,
with input from several of the cities. He stated the staff report provides
a summary of those guidelines, as well as that portion of the Zoning Ordinance
governing the design of utility features such as these antennas, noting the
general approach has been to require Design Review Permits.
Regarding the Sprint application, he stated one of the guidelines they have been
enforcing administratively is to require that each vendor provide a master
plan showing where in the City they would propose to place antennas in order
to provide their service. He reported Sprint had done this, initially proposing
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 5
ten locations within San Rafael. He noted the Design Review Board, after notice
of the public meeting, considered Sprint's master plan, requested adjustments,
the adjustments were made, and the Design Review Board then proceeded to review
the individual applications for antennas. He noted all but the application
now before Council were reviewed by the Zoning Administrator and approved.
He stated there had been a lot of public concern about this one application,
and it was taken to the Planning Commission, where it could receive a more
convenient public hearing.
Mr. Pendoley reported on February 11, 1997 the Planning Commission voted unanimously
to approve the Design Review Permit for an antenna at the Aldersgate Church.
He pointed out the basic design was to put panels on two side walls of the
church building, and one on the front of the building underneath the cross,
noting the Design Review Board was satisfied the installation was almost
unnoticeable, and would look like architectural features.
Mr. Pendoley reported the Planning Commission had considered this issue at a public
hearing, and noted there had been a good deal of input, both pro and con, from
the public. He stated neighbors from the Wellbrock Heights area expressed
concern, noting one particular concern was that this Design Review Permit was
not consistent with the Use Permit approving the church. Mr. Pendoley stated
initial advice, from both the Planning Department and the City Attorney's
Office, was that it was consistent with the Use Permit; however, they
reconsidered that advice after an appeal letter was received. He reported
that on the advice of the City Attorney, the church did apply for an amendment
to the Use Permit to specifically allow the antennas, and that was approved
on April 15, 1997. Mr. Pendoley noted there was, again, a great deal of concern,
particularly from the Wellbrock Heights neighbors, and that prompted the appeal.
Mr. Pendoley explained the Planning Department felt there were three major points
in the appeal. The first of the Appellant' s three points is that the language
of the Telecommunications Act protects site and Land Use restrictions and,
therefore, the Commission may not amend the Use Permit. Mr. Pendoley stated
the City Attorney had advised that this is not the case and, in fact, Federal
law allows the City Council to retain control of the permits, and it is within
the Planning Commission's and the Council's authority to make the amendment.
The second point of the appeal was that the Planning Commission should have denied
the application at Aldersgate Church because of potentially hazardous
conditions. Mr. Pendoley stated the testimony received by the Planning
Commission addressed health concerns caused by radio frequency waves; however,
the City Attorney has advised that the Planning Commission and the City Council
are not permitted to deny these applications based on perceived health affects.
Mr. Pendoley also pointed out the antenna, as it is described in the
application, is well within the power range permitted by the Federal
Communication Commission in the Telecommunications Act.
The third point of the appeal was that the Planning Commission, in approving the
Use Permit, in effect, amended the Act. Mr. Pendoley reported the City Attorney
had advised that this simply was not the case, and the Planning Commission
had acted within its discretion.
Councilmember Phillips noted Mr. Pendoley had stated there were a number of potential
providers, and asked if the City could expect to see other providers coming
in, locating antennas at the same or other locations? Mr. Pendoley stated
the City could definitely expect to see more providers, noting the City has
already received applications from Sprint, Pac Tel, and GTE, and he expects
there will be applications from other vendors, as well. Mr. Pendoley reported
the approach many other cities have taken, and one that is contemplated in
the guidelines, is to consider opportunities for co -location, noting there
may be less visual impact if the vendors tend to locate together. He pointed
out the Design Review Board considers this when looking at the overall proposed
master plan. Mr. Phillips asked if we should assume this would be one of the
locations for other vendors to similarly locate their antennas? Mr. Pendoley
stated he could not speculate on that at this time.
Councilmember Phillips noted the staff report states antennas and communication
facilities are to be avoided in Open Space, but stated he understood there
were antennas located in at least one Open Space location. Mr. Pendoley
reported the
City had received applications for antennas on MMWD (Marin Municipal Water District)
properties at tank sites, not within the Open Space proper, and not on properties
owned by the Open Space District. He reported one had been approved and
installed in San Rafael on MMWD property behind the old Lucas Valley Road.
Mr. Pendoley stated there have been similar applications in other jurisdictions
within the County.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 5
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 6
Councilmember Heller asked if this technology overlapped, or if each vendor had
their own radio technology, and if there was a Sprint telephone, could it pick
up radio transmissions from the Pac Tel or GTE antenna? Mr. Pendoley stated
our experience has been that the antenna systems vary from vendor to vendor,
but he did not know if telephones from one vendor could pick up transmissions
from another vendor's antenna.
Mayor Boro invited members of the public to address this issue.
Rosalind Katz, 5 Wellbrock Heights, asked that the following statement be read into
the record, "If the San Rafael City Council approves an amendment to this 1981
Use Permit, it sends a loud and clear message to the property owners in our
neighborhood, that neighborhood concerns are of no interest, and the Council
panders to outside interest".
Nicholas Cassimus, 142 Trellis Drive, stated that under the Design Review criteria,
co -location of wireless communication facilities shall be required, and noted
if Sprint gets in, everyone can get in. He stated we were talking about a
lot of money, and if Sprint gives the church $25, 000, and Pac Bell gives $25, 000,
it is no longer a church, it is a business, because the money received by the
church would far outstrip anything from the parishioners or fundraisers. Mr.
Cassimus pointed out the Design Review Board requires co -location, and stated
he wanted a list of every site in Terra Linda where Sprint has visited and
talked to the property owners, noting Sprint was required to look for locations
where they could co -locate. He stated there were two excellent sites in Terra
Linda, Commerce Clearing House and Villa Marin. He pointed out there were
a lot of antennas at Villa Marin, and asked if they had been approached? He
also noted Commerce Clearing House had an excellent view and could have done
a better job.
Mr.
Cassimus reported he had information that a retiree connected with the Planning
Commission was a member of the Aldersgate Church, and he wanted that looked
into. He stated if the church cannot make it with their parishioners and
fundraisers, like every other church does, then they should call it quits,
noting they cannot be expected to become a commercial business if they are
a church.
Aleida Helle, 8 Wellbrock Heights, pointed out it has been stated that more antennas
will likely follow on the hill in Wellbrock Heights, and she is concerned about
the health issue. She noted the fluoroscope of forty or fifty years ago, and
x-raying feet in shoe stores years ago, were supposed to be harmless, but it
has turned out that they were not so harmless after all. She stated we do
not know what the long term effects are going to be, and she was very concerned
with the possibility of even more of these antennas and panels being put up
in residential areas.
Ms. Helle asked, if this property was specifically designed for church use by the
San Rafael Planning Commission in 1981, with the exception of the Day Care
Center which the neighbors conceded to, why can it now be changed, why can
the residents not depend on the San Rafael Planning Commission, and why does
the Planning Commission have the right to amend this? She also asked how the
Zoning restrictions were going to stand up if, at will and at any time, they
can be amended by the San Rafael Planning Commission?
Ms. Helle stated those in the neighborhood strongly felt the Planning Commission
had let them down by approving this, and it had outraged them. On behalf
of the neighborhood, Ms. Helle asked the Council, as elected officials, to
honor the original Land Use restriction incorporated sixteen years ago, and
not amend it, noting these panels would be very close to their homes.
Harry Wright, retired Building Inspector for the City of San Rafael, stated he had
been involved in the Use Permit when it was first granted, noting that at the
time the Use Permit was issued the neighbors were told, absolutely, there would
be nothing else built at the location except the church. He stated they consider
the church to be a good neighbor, and understand the church needs money.
However, he stated the neighbors have been told that if the antennas go in,
the property values on their homes could drop $25,000 to $50,000. Mr. Wright
also pointed out the City of Novato had put this project on hold, and Sausalito
voted "No" on it.
Guido Lorenzi, 134 Trellis Drive, noting he has lived in his home since it was built
in 1962, stated he had no problem with the church being located on the hill,
and he would rather have the church there than a bunch of apartments. However,
he stated the neighbors were promised this location would be the site of a
church, and
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 7
a church only. He noted they had gotten involved in a commercial situation that
does not belong in their neighborhood at all, stating it does not belong there
today, and it will not belong there tomorrow.
Carol Russell, 5 Wellbrock Heights, pointed out this was not a neighborhood issue,
it was a Marin -wide issue, and noted the Marin Independent Journal had covered
this issue in a fair manner, in an article of May 5th entitled "Static Over
Antennas Grows in Marin". Ms. Russell stated the neighbors' concerns were
pretty much the same as they were in 1981, creeping commercialism. She reported
that in 1981 they stated they would be happy to have a church in their
neighborhood, but not necessarily a church of 9,875 square feet, with a parking
lot built for 250 cars. She stated it was gigantic, and noted she had stated
back then that it was too big, and pointed out there were hardly any churches
in Marin County that could support that kind of property. She noted they had
been afraid back then, and they were terrified now, that if this site restriction
is amended, and we begin creeping commercialism, before they know it there
will be something at the base of the cross, or something hanging off the cross.
She stated she was glad she was not the person who has to deal with such a
breath -sapping public relations disaster of actually placing an antenna at
the foot of a cross, noting she had never heard of anything like this before.
Ms. Russell stated creeping commercialism was exactly what they were seeing, noting
Planning Commissioner O'Brien had articulated it very well at an earlier
meeting, and reporting that had been her argument in 1981, and it was her argument
now. She pointed out this was a church site, and she and her neighbors
considered that sacred ground, although they were a little nervous, back in
1981, that it might not make it financially because it was just too big a site.
She reported the community was concerned about what would happen if the church
folds, and noted she did not think the church would survive. She asked if
the church does not survive, what is going to happen to that hallowed ground
which, sixteen years ago, the Planning Commission promised the neighbors would
remain church property? Ms. Russell stated this was her concern, and urged
the Council not to allow the antenna at the base of the cross.
Larry Scholen, 16 Langlin Avenue, stated his family moved to Marin because they
considered it to be a safe and healthful environment, and while he acknowledged
the Council could not, on paper, deny this application because of health reasons,
he noted there was obviously a significant question of safety in people's minds,
pointing out other countries, such as Sweden, have established increasingly
tougher standards. He stated he did not want his child to be a guinea pig
in this kind of technological experiment. Mr. Scholen stated he and his wife
were not against technology, but felt it was not appropriate in the area
involved, and believed there were other alternative sites.
Edward Aguisti, 150 Trellis Drive, stated he had attended the last Planning Commission
meeting, recalling Betty Ann Wright had stated, "The health concerns, the
unknown, is very big for the neighborhood. Can the Commission guarantee that
we will not get sick?" Mr. Aguisti noted projects coming before the
Redevelopment Agency often require various types of impact reports, and asked
if there was a health impact report from a City health official?
Mr. Aguisti noted the issue before Council at this time concerned one company
installing antennas, but noted the City has had applications from many different
companies. He reported at one of the Planning Commission meetings a technician,
in explaining how the radio frequencies work, stated there was little effect
on human health when the emissions were far away; however, the closer one gets
to the amplifier, the more the health risk increases. Mr. Aguisti stated that
was with just one company, and asked if several companies were doing the same
thing, did the health risks remain the same, or did they get worse?
Mr. Aguisti asked, if the public cannot trust the promises and the words of their
public officials sixteen or twenty years ago, or today, who can they believe
and trust? He pointed out the Council was in a very high decision making seat
this evening, and urged them to make the right decision.
Dorothy Horton, 48 Esmeyer Drive, stated she had lived in her home for twenty-four
years, where she raised three sons. She noted her home was directly below
the church, where they had access to the hill, and where her children had played
and had a great time. She stated she had hoped her grandchildren would be
able to do the same things, but with the antennas being placed there, she would
not trust it, and she knew there were many others in the audience who would
not trust it, either. Ms. Horton stated she wanted to be able to look out
her window and feel safe to go up and walk on the hill and enjoy it; however,
with all this on it, who knows? She stated she could not expose her children
or grandchildren to that, noting no one with children would buy her house once
they saw the antennas up there, because
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 8
nobody wants to live around that. She pointed out there are a lot of hills in San
Rafael where there are no homes, yet the City is allowing this to be placed
right in the middle of a community. Ms. Horton stated her life felt threatened,
noting she had lost her husband to cancer, and she did not want her children
to lose their mother to cancer. Ms. Horton asked the Council to reconsider
the Planning Commission's decision.
Chris Ferko of Whalen & Company, representatives on this project for Sprint Spectrum,
introduced John Schwartz, Radio Frequency Engineer with Sprint Spectrum, Dr.
Jerry Bushberg, Professor at UC Davis, and Chris Swenson with the law firm
of Knox/Rickson.
Mr. Ferko reported Sprint Spectrum consisted of Sprint Corporation,
Telecommunications Incorporated (TCI), Talks Communications, and ComCast
Corporation. He reported Sprint had obtained one of two licenses available
for the San Francisco Major Trading Area (MTA) in March, 1995 from the Federal
Communication Commission (FCC), explaining the San Francisco MTA covers the
northern border of California down to the Fresno area. He stated that by
granting a license, the FCC authorized and obligated Sprint to provide PCS
services to the San Francisco MTA within five years of receiving its license.
Mr. Ferko explained PCS represents the trend in communications technology, which
is to combine a number of typically foreign technologies into one convenient
package. He noted PCS will provide a universal phone number for a phone the
user can carry anywhere, which will also include paging, FAXing, E-mail and
InterNet access, and he reported PCS will eventually move into the video realm,
and we will see such things as video phones, and be able to rent movies
wirelessly, noting it is the digital framework that allows those types of
technology to be combined.
In terms of what this means for San Rafael, Mr. Ferko explained the Telecommunications
Act of 1996 deregulated telecommunications, allowing more carriers to enter
the marketplace to provide better communication services at competitively low
prices. He noted this meant economic growth, and a benefit for San Rafael
and the entire Bay Area, reporting communities across the United States, such
as Portland, San Diego, Chicago, and Washington D.C. currently have PCS, and
are beginning to seethe benefits on a local scale. He pointed out an individual
can have one of these phones for safety purposes, as well as for convenience;
businesses can use them to be more creative and flexible in how they do business;
public service agencies can benefit by providing better services to the
community; and it can be a tool to foster economic growth by attracting
businesses.
Mr. Ferko reported that in choosing a site they look for a locations that are public
sites, light industrial, commercial, and remote sites, noting they try to take
advantage of existing elevation, noting the facilities operate best at higher
elevations, so if there is existing topography or architecture that can be
used, that is a real benefit. Mr. Ferko stated this site is an excellent example
of that, as the hill provides the height and elevation needed to integrate
the facility on the sides of the building, rather than having to construct
one or two monopoles at different sites. He stated other criteria in site
selection included having a willing property owner, and having a site that
is constructible in terms of being accessible. In addition, he noted the sites
have to be evenly spaced, because these are very low power facilities, and
must be separated by a distance of one to three miles. He explained that if
the sites are too close together there are interference problems, and if they
are too far apart there are "holes", and calls can be lost as they transfer
from one area to another.
Regarding design, Mr. Ferko stated their priority is to look for a building rather
than do monopoles, and integrate the flat panel antennas into the building
facade, and then paint them to match. He reported they also provide screening
as necessary, noting they have installed some fiberglass screens to look like
chimneys, and provide landscaping around the equipment cabinets. He noted
they also design to the minimum height necessary, to provide the service they
need without becoming obtrusive in the environment.
Referring to the issue of co -location, Mr. Ferko stated Sprint Spectrum's corporate
policy was to actively pursue co -location, noting that in Marin County Sprint
is either sharing or co -locating at 43% of its sites. For example, he pointed
out they are currently co -locating at sites of Cellular One and Pac Bell Mobile
Services, and with several other carriers at the Dollar Hill tower in San Rafael.
He reported they are locating on five Water District properties, including
the Marin Municipal Water District, North Marin Water District, Stinson Beach
Water District, and are also locating at a P.G.&E. sub -station in Novato.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 9
Mr. Ferko stated they are also pursuing sites at Tiburon Town Hall, and San
Anselmo Town Hall, and have a site approved at the Bolinas Fire Station in
Stinson Beach, which will be a co -location with Cellular One.
Addressing the comments made by the community, Mr. Ferko noted there had been a
question as to whether Sprint Spectrum had looked at other sites within San
Rafael, particularly Commerce Clearing House. He reported Commerce Clearing
House had been one of the very first sites they had looked at, and he agreed
with the earlier statement that this location had a great line of site for
the entire City. He noted they had pursued that site; however, the owners
did not want to enter into a lease agreement with Sprint Spectrum. Regarding
Villa Marin, Mr. Ferko stated this was a location they had not identified as
a site that would meet their objectives. He noted they also looked at Kaiser
Hospital as a viable alternative, but found it was enshrouded within the
hillside, with the building at a lower elevation, and in order to provide
coverage from that location that would be equal to coverage from the Aldersgate
Church site, they would need to erect a structure on top of the hospital that
would be equal to the height of Aldersgate Church, which would look very
obstructive, or they would have to locate another site on the opposite side
of the hill. Mr. Ferko stated the hill could be either their best friend or
worst enemy, noting if they did not locate at a site there, they would likely
need to have two sites in lower lying areas to obtain coverage equal to that
provided by locating at the church, and in lower lying areas they would need
either a tall structure or a monopole to provide the service, which would
probably be more obtrusive.
Mr. Ferko referred to the question of "creeping commercialism", and noted it was
his understanding that each site proposed before the Council would have to
go through a public hearing process. He stated Sprint's objective was to
provide a service to the surrounding community, and it was kind of a catch-22
for them, because they would like to be able to locate a facility within the
community to provide that service, but not locate within residential areas,
or on residential property, per se; however, there were very few
non-residential properties within this geographic area that they could look
at as viable sites. He noted, in terms of land use, this site was not typically
a commercial type of use, in that it was not a traffic generating type of use,
nor was it a noise generating type of use, pointing out it functions more as
a utility to provide a service to the community.
Mr. Ferko stated Sprint Spectrum agrees and supports staff's recommendation on this
project, and requests Council's approval. He noted they had worked carefully
with staff, the Design Review Board, and the Planning Commission, pointing
out the votes for the project reflect that. Mayor Boro noted Mr. Ferko had
stated his company had received one of two licenses in 1995, and then stated
that with the Telecommunications Act of 1996 competition had changed. Mayor
Boro asked if initially there would have been only two carriers in this area,
but now it could be whoever wants to be here? Mr. Ferko stated initially only
two Spectrum band widths were auctioned off, with Pac Bell Mobile Services
buying one and Sprint buying the other. However, down the road additional
band widths will be auctioned off by the FCC for purchase by other carriers
in the future. Mr. Ferko explained the marketplace would determine how many
more will enter the market, and whether it will be financially viable to compete
with Sprint and Pac Bell in this region. He stated we could expect that other
carriers will enter the marketplace, noting it could be up to eight, but he
believed it would likely be only five or six additional carriers.
Councilmember Cohen referred to co -location, noting someone had raised the concern
that we could see multiple antennas here, and asking if we might see the church
location festooned with five or six different sets of antennas if Council were
to approve this application? Mr. Ferko stated each company would have its
own network of coverage objectives for a geographic region, explaining they
would want to put sites in various locations based on their technology and
who they want to provide service to. Therefore, it may not be as likely as
it seems that other carriers would want to come to the church site, because
they might find another way to do it, which would be within their technological
realm in providing service to the community. Mr. Ferko stated the process
would require future carriers to come before the City of San Rafael and get
their permits, so it may be possible that a future carrier would come to the
site, locate on it, and do a design that is acceptable to the City, which would
not be such a bad thing. Mr. Ferko explained there is "shared location", which
is using the same property or building for the antennas, and then there is
"co -location", which is when the same monopole has two to three different
carriers on it. Mr. Cohen asked if this meant that since Sprint will not be
using a monopole, this would be more of a "shared" location, and we would be
looking at everyone hanging their own antennas off of the building if that
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 9
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 10
were to be permitted? Mr. Ferko stated that was correct, if that were to be
permitted. Mr. Cohen asked if the various carriers would share the antennas
that were put up, and Mr. Ferko stated they would not, as they are different
technologies.
Councilmember Heller asked if this meant the City would be looking at each company
with their separate antenna at one site, or if there was some way they could
share each other's antennas? Mr. Ferko stated these were different types of
technology, so they would each have their own different antennas. He pointed
out they would all be very similar in look, being panels one foot wide by five
feet tall, and could be
painted and integrated with the building. Ms. Heller asked if the radio technologies
were proprietary? Mr. Ferko stated they were, with different frequencies.
He noted the different carriers do try to cooperate with each other in terms
of locating their facilities together.
Councilmember Phillips referred to the power output with co -locations and shared
locations, asking if with two carriers we would be doubling the power output,
or creating six times the power output with six carriers? Mr. Ferko stated
he would ask Dr. Jerrold Bushberg, consultant from the University of California
at Davis, to respond to that question when he addresses the Council. Mr.
Phillips asked if there was a reason Sprint had not had discussions with Villa
Marin, other than perhaps an oversight? Mr. Ferko stated this was a location
they had not identified up front, and the other sites they identified did meet
their objectives. Mr. Phillips noted Commerce Clearing House apparently did
meet Sprint's objectives, but they were unable to consummate an agreement,
and asked why that was? Mr. Ferko stated it was his understanding that in
a lease negotiation process there is an offer, and sometimes the offer is not
good enough for the property owner, or there are certain terms that one is
not willing to agree to, or certain information the property owner might ask
the carrier to divulge which causes an end to the negotiations. Mr. Phillips
asked, if this application were rejected, would the Commerce Clearing House
site meet Sprint's other objectives if they were willing to pay the price?
Mr. Ferko stated that site might meet 80% of their coverage objective, explaining
you had to think of the system as a number of sites functioning together, noting
if they have sites at the Wyndham Garden Hotel and on Dollar Hill, the sites
would all have to function together in terms of their proximity to each other.
He pointed out the Commerce Clearing House site would now be too close to
the Wyndham Garden Hotel, and too far away from the community to which they
are trying to provide service.
Councilmember Phillips noted Mr. Ferko had stated Sprint was not interested in
locating within a residential area, and asked why that was? Mr. Ferko explained
that within Marin County, and other counties that are predominantly residential,
there was a general opposition toward locating in Residential zones, versus
Commercial or Industrial.
Mr. Ferko introduced Jerrold Bushberg, Ph.D., Clinical Associate Professor and
Director of the Health Physics Program at the University of California at Davis.
Dr. Bushberg stated he had been retained by Whalen & Associates as a consultant
on health and safety issues, to guide them on those issues as they relate to
wireless communication technology. Dr. Bushberg pointed out he was not
representing the University, and was speaking as an individual consultant.
To give perspective on the levels of exposure related to this type of wireless
technology, Dr. Bushberg reported the FCC had undertaken a study in which they
reviewed all the current standards that are available, in an attempt to determine
which standards should be used to protect the public health and safety. He
noted that during the two and a half years this study was being conducted,
the FCC received input from several entities, including the public, academia,
federal health agencies, EPA, FDA, and the telecommunications industry. He
reported the net result of all the deliberation was to create a hybrid standard,
taking the most restrictive parts of several different standards and combining
them, leading to the recommendation for exposure from PCS of a maximum continuous
exposure of 1,000 microwatts per centimeter squared, twenty-four hours per
day, three hundred sixty-five days per year. He noted the maximum allowable
for cellular technology would be approximately half of that, because the energy
absorption is frequency dependent and, therefore, the standards shift with
frequency; as an example, the maximum allowable for television channels would
be approximately 200. By way of comparison, Dr. Bushberg noted the typical
exposure in these cases typically represent less than 1% of this allowable
standard.
Dr. Bushberg pointed out the health and safety standard is not set at a threshold
between which it is believed hazards exist and where safety lies, rather there
are safety margins built into those standards to protect against a variety
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 10
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 11
of things, including those things not currently known, such as sensitivities
in some people that we may not currently be aware of. He stated the current
standard has a fifty fold margin of safety built in, so when typical exposures
from these facilities of approximately 1% are compared to the threshold for
harm, which is approximately 50,000, the built-in margins of safety are quite
large.
Referring to standards around the world, Dr. Bushberg reported one of the ways they
evaluate how scientists in the United States are perceiving and analyzing the
health and safety information is to compare the results of the standard setting
process in the United States with those of other countries and organizations.
He presented a comparative list showing the highest and lowest standards set
around the world, pointing out the recommendations for PCS are all set at
approximately 1,000, with the exception of the United Kingdom, which allows
a standard approximately ten times
higher than all the other entities around the world. He noted the level specified
by the United Kingdom is still within safety ranges, they simply did not feel
they had to build -in as robust a safety margin as the other countries have
decided to do.
Dr. Bushberg reported typical PCS facilities have a maximum public exposure of
one-tenth to one-half of 1%, while ambient levels of electromagnetic fields
from AM/FM broadcasters may be as high as 1% of the allowable standard. He
noted these emissions add together, so in the presence of a cellular PCS facility
there might be from 1-1/2 to 2% of a safety standard that is 50 times below
where it is believed the health risks lie.
Councilmember Heller asked if there were two antennas located together, would it
double the exposure? Dr. Bushberg stated if they were the exact same antennas
and the exact same types of facilities, they would be additive. Referring
to this specific case, he noted the PCS facility contributed approximately
1/2 of 1% of the standard, and if there were three such facilities, all located
within an identical location, there might be approximately 1-1/2 percent total,
which would be the total amount directly at the site, but which would fall
off very rapidly beyond the site.
Mr. Ferko introduced Charles Semple, an appraiser for Whalen & Associates. Mr.
Semple stated he had been an appraiser, active in San Rafael, for the past
forty-four years. He noted two earlier speakers had voiced concern that some
damage to residential land values would occur by reason of a facility such
as this. However, Mr. Semple reported he has had many occasions over the years
to study the 60 Kilovolt line that runs through six of our communities, from
Tamalpais Valley to Santa Venetia, for both P. G. &E. and for the property owners
of adjacent properties who have had this same concern. He stated he had been
unable to establish that the electromagnetic field had any effect on residential
land values. He pointed out the most notable example of that is the SeaStrand
Development, which was the most recent development under that line, noting
the highest prices were obtained for the sites which had the 60 Kilovolt line
over them, because they had a huge backyard thrown in. He stated he has found
this to be consistent throughout the communities of Mill Valley, Corte Madera,
Larkspur, Villa Real, and the Canal area, noting there has been no effect on
residential values generated by electromagnetic fields.
Allan Reed, local resident, stated he was alarmed by what he had heard this evening.
He stated that while this issue did not affect his property, he was under
the impression the local officials were here for his benefit, and not for the
efficiencies or inefficiencies of Corporate America, such as Sprint. Mr. Reed
stated he was alarmed to hear the praise given by Sprint to the local officials,
and hear of the Planning Commission's ability to work so diligently and smoothly
with an outside entity such as Sprint, when his neighbors have not experienced
the same courtesy.
Tony Eason, resident of 145 Great Circle, Mill Valley, and property owner of 318
Holly and 109 Las Flores in San Rafael, stated he is a member of Aldersgate
Methodist Church. Referring to the potential health risks, Mr. Eason stated
he had a cellular phone which had been issued to him by Kaiser, and when he
first got the phone he was concerned about possible risks, and looked into
some of the issues Dr. Bushberg had discussed. Mr. Eason noted there has been
an absolute explosion of hand-held cellular phones in the last five or ten
years, and unlike an antenna two to three hundred yards away, with the power
falling off with the square of the distance, the power source for these phones
is right at the user's ear. He stated one of the telling things for him was
that there has been no change in the frequency of brain tumors, or in the location
of brain tumors, and if these cellular phones were causing a significant health
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 11
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 12
risk, the risk should be tumors in the brain; however, there has been no
significant change since 1949 in the distribution of those tumors.
Bill McNue, 225 San Marino Drive, stated he was also a member of Aldersgate Church,
noting a number of church members were present in the audience. He reported
what they have heard over the last series of meetings was that this was a hill
where the neighbors used to run their dogs and fly their kites, noting this
had been permanent, unpaid, untaxed Open Space, which was a sweet deal.
However, it could not stay that way forever, and a Use Permit was issued in
the early 1980's. Mr. McNue acknowledged the phrase"church use" could probably
only be established through litigation, asking if Wednesday night Bingo at
the Catholic Church was an actual church use? He agreed the term church use
opened a whole can of worms in this instance; however, he assured those who
begrudged Aldersgate Church the money that they are a "connectional" church,
and any money they get for allowing Sprint to install their antennas will go
toward paying the church's bills, and to the church's outreach programs. Mr.
McNue stated he discovered Marin County during World War II and fell in love
with it, moving here with his wife in 1956, and while he would have liked Marin
County to have stayed as it was then, he acknowledged that was impossible,
noting change is inevitable. He stated the Council now has to deal with the
real world, and has to deal with a tough alternative, noting there are fifty
people who did not want the church here in the first place, and if it stays, they
will be unhappy; but on the other hand, there could be 150 wounded and unhappy
Methodists. Mr. McNue stated he knew the Councilmembers would do their best.
Reverend Frank Stone, Pastor of Aldersgate Methodist Church, stated it saddened
him to see this conflict and mistrust, noting there had been a lot of
misinformation. Reverend Stone stated the people at Aldersgate Methodist
Church were not some horrendous outside force coming in to do the will of
corporations, pointing out that many of the parishioners had lived in the
community for as long as twenty years. He noted he, too, was concerned about
safety, stating he had seen some of the literature reassuring them the
installation was safe, and he was impressed by that. He reported he had also
contacted a number of colleagues, including his personal physician, and asked
if there were any studies about the harm of this type of radiation. He stated,
to his knowledge, there was no data to support the danger.
Reverend Stone stated he was most offended by the mention in the Marin Independent
Journal that the antenna was going to go on the cross, noting as long as he
is Pastor of the church, there would be no neon lights, no antenna, no bells
and whistles on the cross where his Lord and Savior died. Reverend Stone stated
he did not own nor control the church, but they would really hear from him
if he thought the cross was going to be disfigured, noting he believed the
visual impact on the environment would be very minor.
Reverend Stone
there was
stated he was also concerned about the children, and if he thought
the slightest chance the children would be harmed, he would speak
up and oppose what the Board of Trustees proposed to do. He stated if those
children were endangered, he would not remain as Pastor; however, he truly
believed the technology was safe.
Reverend Stone asked the neighbors to consider what the alternative would be? He
noted all the local communities he has lived in have been opposed to progress
or development, and there is a long involved process of approval so the
development that does take place is done considering the interests of the people
who are impacted. He stated from the description of the alternative, that
may be worse. He noted he had not heard the word "poles" associated with
installing antennas at Aldersgate, although he heard it associated with the
other alternative, and he agreed, as one of the earlier speakers had stated,
"Better a church than a bunch of apartments".
There being no further public comment, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Miller asked for direction from the City Attorney, asking if the factor
of the health hazard was not to be included because of Federal law? Assistant
City Attorney Guinan stated that was correct, noting the Telecommunications
Act of 1996 specifically prohibits local agencies from making their
determinations based upon the health risks or health evaluations of RF radio
waves.
Councilmember Miller's second question referred to our ability as a City, versus
Federal law, regarding the determination if another antenna were to be sought
at that sight, and what kind of control the City would have in that situation?
Assistant City Attorney Guinan stated such a request would have to go through
the same design process this application has gone through, with the same rigorous
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 12
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 13
evaluation of the criteria involved in the environmental design process.
Councilmember Miller noted the question came to mind that if Federal law allows
for co -location or shared areas, it would seem that the same rules would have
to apply to others, and the ones that got in first and met the design standards
would be approved. Mr. Guinan stated that was correct.
Councilmember Heller noted one of the neighbors had asked why the City had the right
to change a Use Permit, and why any entity operating within the City under
a Use Permit could come in and ask to have the Permit changed, and she asked
if this meant that, legally, each side had the right to change it at any time?
Assistant City Attorney Guinan stated the Zoning Ordinance permits anyone
to apply for amendment to the Use Permit, noting that starts the hearing process,
by which various staff and bodies of the local government would review and
determine whether or not the amendment meets the criteria established for
allowing such an amendment; if it does not, such amendment cannot be issued,
but if it does, then it is at the discretion of the Planning Commission, and
ultimately the Council on appeal, to make that determination.
Councilmember Phillips referred to "church use" and the Use Permit process, and
asked if Mr. Guinan was suggesting there was, in fact, a change to the original
Use Permit agreement if the City were to provide for this antenna system to
be in place, and that before it could be in place, the Council would have to
approve that by an amendment? Mr. Guinan responded that was correct. Mr.
Phillips asked if,
therefore, the Use before them was not in conformity with the original 1981 agreement?
Mr. Guinan stated that was not totally correct, noting the issue was originally
brought before the Planning Commission on an Environmental Design Review Permit,
and the issue was raised at the time that this particular site already had
a Use Permit on it, with a restriction that was grounded on evidence presented
back in 1981 regarding traffic and noise conditions. However, the actual
limitations in the Use Permit were worded in such a way that staff believed
it would probably be best to amend the Use Permit to specifically permit the
antenna use at this site, otherwise, if it were brought up in a writ to Superior
Court, a reviewing Judge might well look at it and say, strictly speaking,
the condition as worded was "church use", and send it back to go through the
process again. Mr. Guinan stated what staff had tried to do was to make sure
the issue was cleared -up now, rather than later.
Mayor Boro asked Assistant City Attorney Guinan if it was his understanding, as
he read the record back in 1981, that the condition had been included to assure
the neighborhood there would be no Intensification of Use on this site, and
as such, with the wording as prescribed in that Permit, Mr. Guinan does not
see this particular Use as further Intensification of Use, but he does see
that in order to make sure it is upheld if it is challenged, it is necessary
to grant this Use Permit, and the original intent of the Use Permit is still
being upheld, and the site is not being further intensified by this Use? Mr.
Guinan stated this was correct.
Councilmember Phillips questioned whether or not this would be an Intensification
of Use. Mayor Boro stated it was his understanding that in 1981 when this
was approved, the Use Permit was put in place to assure the neighbors there
would be no Intensive Use on that site, other than what was being proposed,
noting he understood that to be the spirit and the intent of the Use Permit.
Mr. Phillips stated clearly, to some degree, there is an Intensification of
Use at this particular site, noting there is maintenance and construction,
particularly if there are multiple antennas or co -providers. Assistant City
Attorney Guinan stated this was an addition specifically allowing the use of
these antenna at the site; however, what is not intensified, in staff' s opinion,
is the original concern of the 1981 Use Permit, which appeared to be traffic
and noise congestion. Mr. Guinan stated the Planning Commission had found,
in granting the amendment to the Use Permit, that this particular additional
limited use of the site would not increase or impact those two areas.
Councilmember Cohen noted several people among the appellants commented that Council
should listen to who was speaking to them, and should listen to their neighbors
versus the corporate entity from outside of town. He stated he believed this
was a valid point; however, he agreed with the Pastor of Aldersgate Church
who felt Council should also consider the voices of those at Aldersgate, who
are also members of the community. Mr. Cohen stated it was also Council's
obligation to listen to what was being said, and to the issue in front of them
and the points being made about this issue, not just the emotion of it. Mr.
Cohen stated whether or not Council agrees about the health issues, or whether
it was right for Congress to take away their ability to make a decision based
on health issues, that is, in fact, the law of the land, and Congress has made
that decision. He noted that when they passed the Telecommunications Act they
took health, as an issue in this decision, off the table. He noted that when
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 13
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 14
Council gets beyond that, it is left with the issue of amending the Use Permit,
and he would take that at face value.
Councilmember Cohen stated the answer to the question of how anyone could trust
the process if Use Permits can be amended is simply that the City has such
a public process. He pointed out that this issue came as a Design Review
application in January of this year, and there have been five full months with
multiple opportunities for members of the community to comment and raise the
concerns Council has heard tonight. Mr. Cohen pointed out that because staff
felt it might not be appropriate to approve this at the Zoning Administration
level, he assumed there had been community input at that level which made them
aware there was concern and opposition, and therefore should be addressed at
a public forum. He noted there were also at least two opportunities in front
of the Planning Commission for public testimony to be provided, as well as
tonight's meeting, so those who asked how they can trust the process if the
Use Permits can be changed, did have an opportunity to be heard.
Mr. Cohen stated that while Council may not always agree with the points they make,
they do have an opportunity to be heard, noting if he makes a decision that
they do not agree with, it is his obligation when these difficult issues come
before the Council to reach some kind of decision, and he must fall back on
the facts in front of the Council. In this instance, he stated the facts are
that Council is being asked to amend the Use Permit issued in 1981 which limited
this property to church use, particularly for concerns of the impact of that
use on the neighborhood in terms of intensity, noting traffic and noise were
specifically testified to. He stated it appeared to him that within the
existing Use Permit there could be
Intensity of Use that would have a much greater impact than what is proposed at
this time. He noted the language of the Use Permit includes a congregation
of approximately 300 people, which is larger than the current congregation,
and it includes a day care school of up to 15 students, choir practice, and
exercise classes, so presumably within the current Use Permit someone could
run a dance studio offering classes twelve hours per day. He pointed out that
would be more intensive than the current use, but would be within the confines
of the Use Permit.
Councilmember Cohen stated it was not clear to him that the Use Permit granted in
1981 stated this use, and only this use, and that this is the absolute maximum
intensity that would be acceptable in terms of impact on the community. Mr.
Cohen stated the issues that were raised which he felt were significant are
the issues of commercialization, whether or not this represents creeping
commercialism, and what would happen if the church use does not continue there.
Mr. Cohen stated if the church use does not continue there, and the use of
the site is re-examined, he did not believe approval of an antenna on the church
building implied Council would approve an extension of Kaiser Hospital or some
other commercial use of the site if the church ends up being replaced. Mr.
Cohen reported he was specifically concerned about the issue of co -location
and proliferation of antennas at this site, noting he had looked at the draft
criteria currently being used, and the third criteria regarding co -location
states, "Co -location of wireless facilities should be required when it is
feasible, and minimizes adverse impact related to land use or visual impacts.
Co -location should not be required when it creates or significantly increases
such adverse effects."
Mr. Cohen stated he was inclined to support the application for amendment to the
Use Permit and for the Environmental Design Permit, but he would not be inclined
to so favorably consider future applications at this same site, noting if we
were to see four or five different companies hanging antennas off this single
structure, the issue of creeping commercialism and whether this has become
a base for antennas as opposed to a church use would be a valid point. Mr.
Cohen stated for him to be comfortable with this, he wanted the record to be
clear that this was not precedent setting, and Council is not opening the door
to the location of antennas for anyone who chooses to put one here based on
the co -location policy. He stated his reading of the draft policy provides
Council with ample grounds to state that the City feels this use is minimal,
that continued proliferation of antennas at this site would not be consistent
with the draft policy, and Council would be likely to look unfavorably on that.
He asked staff if there was a problem in his stating this as part of his decision?
Planning Director Pendoley stated staff read the standards the same way, and
he felt it would be very difficult to successfully propose additional antennas
without having a visual impact. He noted this design had been worked and
reworked by the Design Review Board to get it to the state it is tonight, and
pointed out it would be a very complicated exercise to apply anymore antennas
on that building without visual impacts.
City Attorney Ragghianti stated that from a purely legal standpoint, regarding Mr.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 14
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 15
Cohen's concern that Council's action would be precedent setting, the granting
or the denial of this Use Permit application would not compel similar decisions
by Council in the future, or by successor Councils, as a matter of law.
Councilmember Heller asked when the City would see standards for the antennas?
Mr. Pendoley stated staff had draft standards from the County which were
available now, and will be looked at by the Countywide Planning Agency on
Thursday night. He reported the County was expected to recommend final
standards in August, and noted our best bet may be to wait and use the County' s
final standards, because we are so close to those now. He stated he would
report back to Council after the Countywide Planning Agency meeting. Ms. Heller
asked if the City had any other antenna requests coming through the Planning
Department at the moment? Associate Planner Bill Tuikka reported there were
two applications pending from GTE PageNet, a pager company.
Ms. Heller stated she agreed with Councilmember Cohen's statements, noting it was
very difficult to make a decision like this because Council was literally voting
for or against a segment of the community. She stated she felt the Church
should have the right to amend their Use Permit, and did not feel it was impacting
on the traffic or noise limitations. Therefore, she stated she would vote
to deny the appeal.
Councilmember Phillips stated he felt the applicant had alternatives that might
work as well, noting other alternative sites had been examined, so they must
have had some merit. He stated he was not sure all sites, Villa Marin
specifically, had yet been considered, noting that particular site would be
slightly less residential. Mr. Phillips stated the one thing that was driving
him on this issue was the fact that a deal is a deal, and he believed the Church
had made a deal that it was not going to go into commercial endeavors. He
noted he sympathized with "found money", but felt it was clear that a deal
was made to restrict and limit the use, and that
the use would not be expanded beyond church activities at this particular site.
He stated, to him, Sprint was not synonymous with a church; therefore, he found
it inconsistent to say that it does not run counter to the agreement.
Councilmember Phillips stated he believed Council had other options, in which the
community could still benefit; the facility could still be put in place through
more diligent negotiations, and the integrity of the agreement would be in
place. Mr. Phillips stated he would vote counter to the two previous
Councilmembers.
Mayor Boro stated he felt the Church, as property owner, had the right to ask for
a change in their Use Permit, noting he truly believed the intention was to
regulate traffic and intensified use, and he did not feel the addition of an
antenna would do that. He stated Councilmember Cohen made a point about further
antennas on that site, and felt the whole policy of dealing with these issues
needed to be resolved quickly. He pointed out that if there are eight potential
vendors out there, the City should be determining where these sites are, and
at some point the vendors should engineer to our specifications, and if their
technology will not work, that is the way it is.
Mayor Boro stated that in this specific case, the applicant has come forward, gone
through the process and come up with a design that has minimal effect on the
building in question. Mayor Boro stated he did not feel the Council was not
being faithful to their commitment, they were being asked for a reasonable
change.
a. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to direct staff
to prepare a Resolution denying the appeal of the Planning Commission Decision
of April 15, 1997 approving the Use Permit amendment to allow wireless
communication facilities at Aldersgate Church, 1 Wellbrock Heights, San Rafael,
California, with three specific points to be addressed when the Resolution
is brought back to Council for approval; 1) City to include on-going monitoring
of impact on traffic and noise if it turns out that the maintenance of this
facility is not the minor impact that has been addressed, and requires daily
servicing; 2) Included in this draft policy, and any other policy later adopted,
that the City is to review, on an on-going basis, health issues associated
with the placement of these antennas. Should it transpire that evidence is
presented indicating a health hazard in residential areas, and if local
communities are given the ability to regulate based on health issues, City
will revisit this and any other Use Permits that we grant for the siting of
antennas in residential areas, or anywhere else that there may be a health
risk if one is identified in the future; 3) Resolution to state that in this
specific case the City would like to discourage co -location at this site, and
would expect to look unfavorably on any other application to mount antennas
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 15
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 16
at this facility.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
b. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to direct staff
to prepare a Resolution denying the appeal of the Planning Commission decision
of February 11, 1997 for Environmental Design Review Permit for the same
facility.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
After a brief recess, Mayor Boro reconvened the City Council meeting.
COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
OLD BUSINESS:
18. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF SITE FOR ST. VINCENT DE PAUL DINING HALL RELOCATION
(CM)
- File 9-2-49
Mayor Boro explained the only issue before Council at this time was the criteria
for the relocation of the St. Vincent de Paul Dining Hall, noting no locations
were being presented at this time, and none had yet been identified.
City Manager Gould stated in December of last year the St. Vincent de Paul free
dining room and the City of San Rafael issued a joint statement of cooperation
and partnership aimed at relocation of the Dining Hall within the City of
San Rafael. He explained the joint statement reiterated the City's commitment
to support the mission of the Dining Hall to feed the needy in our society,
and indicated that staff and St. Vincent's representatives would undertake
discussions to successfully accomplish the relocation of the Dining Hall within
the City of San Rafael.
Mr. Gould reported that since that time there have been approximately five meetings
with Bob Kuntz, President of St. Vincent de Paul's Board of Directors, Sue
Brown, Executive Director, Mary Casey, Legal Counsel for St. Vincent de Paul,
City Attorney Gary Ragghianti, Economic Development Director Jake Ours, and
City Manager Gould. Mr. Gould reported that in these discussions they built
a constructive dialogue and worked through a number of issues that were necessary
in order to begin to move forward and actually examine sites, and they developed
a set of site selection criteria, which is now before Council. Mr. Gould stated
the criteria could be used by the Council and community to evaluate the
appropriateness of various alternative sites for the relocation of the Dining
Hall. Mr. Gould noted St. Vincent's has retained the services of a professional
relocation specialist to assist in this process, and the City has appointed
a Commercial Real Estate Broker to assist in developing sites, as well. Mr.
Gould pointed out that with the site selection criteria in hand, these experts
can help identify sites, and then both the City and St. Vincent' s are committed
to moving expeditiously to cull down the number of sites to a number that can
be analyzed in depth, leading to the successful relocation of the Dining Hall.
Bob Kuntz, President of the Board of Directors of St. Vincent de Paul Society,
introduced St. Vincent de Paul Board of Directors Beverly Compano, Rebecca
Tremmel, Ginny Acton, Joan Clark, Bill Webb, and Dr. Rafael Dufficy.
Mr. Kuntz stated everyone had worked very hard to get to where we are tonight, and
he hoped they could continue and come up with a site that will be adequate
for both the City and St. Vincent de Paul, as well as the diners they serve.
Mayor Boro noted he and the entire Council saw this as a critical issue, one they
hoped to get resolution on. Mayor Boro stated if the Council approves these
criteria, he hoped the City and St. Vincent's would devote as much time as
necessary over the next couple of months to going out and identifying sites,
and then hold hearings on the alternative sites and make a decision. Mayor
Boro noted he hoped this could be accomplished by the end of this year, because
the process has been going on for quite a while, noting they had started with
an agreement last December. He stated he hoped they could have as a goal that
they want to move this quickly, with an outside date at the end of the year,
if practical.
Mary Casey, Legal Counsel for St. Vincent de Paul, stated it was important to point
out that the site selection criteria represented some very serious discussions
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 16
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 17
held over the past several months, noting those discussions ranged from easy
to difficult, and reflected the fact that the City and St. Vincent de Paul
can work together in partnership through the difficult issues, which she felt
was extremely positive. In terms of being able to identify when the process
will end, Ms. Casey felt it was a good idea to set a goal, but at the same
time take into account that the process takes time. She stated more regular
meetings would be appropriate, and now that St. Vincent's has the professional
staff onboard, she felt that would expedite the process and assist City staff
in moving the matter forward. However, she could not guarantee that they will
be finished by the end of the year, although she agreed that should be set
as a goal.
Councilmember Miller stated he sees a lot of wonderful things in this agreement,
noting the agreement allows for a positive attitude toward the clients, and
therefore, they will be looking for a place that will be better for the clients,
and giving them more opportunities. At the same time, in terms of community,
he noted this would resolve the conflict within the community of the general
welfare over individual needs, noting now we were addressing change as a friend,
not as a foe. However, he believed we were now at the crisis part of it, the
critical path in terms of how we go about this, stating this critical path
is what gives credibility back into the community. Therefore, he believed
we had to have a critical path, whereby we do the inventory, do the analysis,
narrow down the options, and continue down the path so that we do choose and
then act. He stated that if we did not have a genuine, real path with timelines
and timed dates we go to, we then lose credibility within the community, and
he felt credibility was a very important part of this, because it showed a
genuine commitment of cooperation, and to enhancing the services for those
who need them most. Mr. Miller noted he was not mentioning a specific date;
however, he pointed out that we were now directing and managing change, and
in order to do that we had to have a critical path.
Ms. Casey asked if Mr. Miller was suggesting that a critical path be the next step
in the process? Mr. Miller stated he felt that would be an excellent next
step. Ms. Casey stated they would be open to dialoguing that issue, and
hopefully reaching resolution on dates that are agreeable to both the Board
of Directors and the City Council. She noted she felt this would be a good
idea, and pointed out St. Vincent's did not want to see this languish either.
She reported St. Vincent's Board of Directors had made it clear there are
certain needs that are not being met at its current site, and meeting those
needs in a new place would be not only
positive for the Dining Hall, but also for the community at large. She quoted,
"Compromise is not getting everything you want, but it is getting something
you can live with", stating that is what St. Vincent de Paul hopes to do.
Councilmember Heller referred to a section of the guidelines, Consistent Land Uses,
and quoted, "Downtown shall be defined by the following boundaries, Irwin Street
to West End, and Second Street to Mission Avenue". She asked if that referred
to the West End District or West End Street? City Manager Gould stated this
meant the West End District. Ms. Heller asked which streets formed the boundary
for the West End District, and Councilmember Miller explained it started at
approximately Marquard and went to the boundaries of the Town of San Anselmo,
and across the freeway it starts where Fourth and Third Streets come together,
and goes to approximately "H" Street. Ms. Heller asked if that description
of the boundaries could be included. Ms. Casey stated St. Vincent's had been
under the assumption that it was West End Street. Mayor Boro reported that
when he and Councilmember Cohen had met with St. Vincent's several months ago
and discussed the boundaries, the intention was down to the west end of town,
which would be as Mr. Miller had described it going to the town limits. Ms.
Casey stated she would need to define that further with St. Vincent's Board
of Directors, because it appears to be unclear. Mayor Boro stated he would
be working based on what he had stated earlier, because that was his word,
noting what he had stated earlier was that the boundaries, as described, were
the areas south of the Downtown, and east and west of the freeway, and those
were the areas the City would entertain. He stated it was relatively academic
as to how far down the boundary goes on the west end, because the agreement
that had been concluded was that it would be south of the Downtown. Ms. Casey
stated she hoped Mayor Boro would appreciate her position, and the fact that
she did not have the authority to agree to that at this time, when she, herself,
was not clear on it, and the Board of Directors were giving her puzzled looks
from the audience. She stated she believed they could clarify this, and she
did not feel this was a large issue, but she asked Council to permit the Board
of Directors the ability to clarify the issue in their negotiations, and then
they would bring it back to the City for confirmation. City Manager Gould
stated he felt this could be worked through during negotiations.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 17
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 18
Councilmember Cohen agreed it would be appropriate to discuss this further and not
try to resolve it at this time; however, he stated whether it is at "H" Street
or at the West End of town, the balance of the Miracle Mile and other
neighborhoods in the West End area would fail on other criteria, because with
the exception of the first block along Miracle Mile, that is very much a
residential neighborhood, and he believed it would raise some issues if a site
were identified there.
Councilmember Cohen stated it had always been his intention to seek cooperation
and a positive outcome, noting the City and St. Vincent's had spent many hours
in meetings over many years. He noted he was not as concerned about whether
they adopt a timeline or a critical path, but he was concerned that they keep
moving forward on this, and remain aware that the words, whether spoken or
written, are positive steps, but sooner or later we have to see action. He
acknowledged it was not the Board of Directors' central mission to come to
meetings such as this and discuss relocation, but he noted he had been working
on this issue for five years, and he would really like to see it resolved,
or at least know where we are going with it, before we see another year.
Ms. Casey stated she understood what Mr. Cohen was saying, and while she was not
privy to the five years of negotiations undertaken by the City and St. Vincent
de Paul, she believed that in looking at the site selection guidelines Mr.
Cohen would see major concessions by the Board of Directors, which in their
mind already equate to action, pointing out that to publicly adopt these findings
and these guidelines was a major step forward in the process of accomplishing
the goal. Ms. Casey stated she also understood the City wanted to see physical
moves, as did St. Vincent's. Mr. Cohen stated he recognized Ms. Casey's point,
and felt the process they are currently following has been more productive
during the past year, with the mediated sessions and what has followed since
then being more productive than any other slice of time in that whole period.
Mr. Cohen stated he appreciated that, and appreciated the commitment now coming
forward from the Board of Directors; however, he felt that for many people
outside the Council Chamber, the words on paper are not action at all. He
stated he recognized that there is a lot going on in the negotiations and in
developing the partnership, but the larger community is looking for actual
physical change, and that must be the goal we have to be aware of and keep
driving toward.
Councilmember Phillips thanked everyone who has brought us to this point,
acknowledging it has been a long, drawn-out process. He agreed the point was
well made with regard to the actual relocation, noting that was what this was
really about, not words, but an actual physical thing, and he agreed we should
try to do that as quickly as possible. Mr. Phillips quoted from the staff
report which states, "The new dining room will be located so as not to be near
schools or residential neighborhoods", and asked what "near" meant in those
discussions, and
what kind of distances and types of locations were referred to when we said "near"?
City Manager Gould stated they specifically did not define the proximity to
a residential neighborhood or school because that would be an arbitrary
calculation, noting that in the end these guidelines will hopefully lead them
to identify three or four sites that might possibly work, and if St. Vincent
de Paul feels comfortable with them and the City feels we can support them,
then they would become the subject of public meetings, and out of those public
meetings consensus would emerge as to which would be the best site, and we
would move forward with it. Mr. Gould stated no one site in San Rafael was
likely to meet all of these criteria equally, noting there were a lot of criteria,
and some of them were somewhat of a contradiction. Mr. Gould reported the
economy is very strong, and there are very few sites that are even on the market
right now. Mr. Gould stated the criteria was to give the Council and the
community a sense of where they will be looking, and how they will be evaluating
the relative merits of alternative sites.
Councilmember Phillips asked if the Council were to approve this, what would happen
next in the timeline that Mr. Miller was referring to, and what would be the
sequence of events that would take place to ultimately lead to relocation?
City Manager Gould stated the logical next steps would be that if the City
Council and St. Vincent's Board adopted these guidelines, then we would provide
them to the experts we have engaged to help us identify sites, and they would
begin to scour the sections of San Rafael to determine if there were sites
available that began to meet these criteria. He noted we have also worked
through a number of logistical issues, which have been touched on in the
negotiations, and while he would rather not elaborate in public at this time,
he did report that they have begun to refine St. Vincent's needs and how they
might be met. He pointed out St. Vincent's has stated it will relocate as
long as their relocation needs are met, so we will be spending more time on
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 18
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 19
determining how those needs can be met. Mr. Gould noted Council was asking
for some type of schedule or work plan to ensure a successful relocation, and
he stated it would be one of his requests of St. Vincent's that they develop
something and bring it back for Council's consideration. He pointed out this
was not a linear process, stating they will likely identify some sites and
discard others, and some sites may move up and down in consideration as they
go through the process. He stated they would take, as Council's direction,
the request that this be completed by the end of the year, and move accordingly.
Phillip Fields, a homeless man living in San Rafael, stated that by signing this
contract without the homeless having a stake in it was not 100% agreeable,
noting the homeless have something at stake because they are the customers
and patrons who go to St. Vincent de Paul. He reported some of the homeless
had asked members of St. Vincent de Paul's Board of Directors that the homeless
be informed of the negotiations, but he felt they had been stonewalled and
kept in the dark. He stated they were never invited to the negotiations,
although they would have been happy to be part of the negotiations and reach
an agreeable commonplace to relocate, pointing out it was difficult for people
who could not walk very far to try to get to St. Vincent's for their food.
Mr. Fields requested there be a poll by an independent organization, in which the
homeless are allowed to participate, and stated the actual contract between
the City and St. Vincent de Paul should also include the homeless. He stated
the homeless would be happy to move to a place that was agreeable, a place
that could be good for the City Council, the neighborhood, and for the homeless
people, and noted that by not including the neighborhoods we were opening
ourselves to a possible legal question, as many neighborhoods have already
refused to house the new dining hall. He pointed out that people feel very
deeply about newcomers coming to their neighborhoods, and this might become
a big problem.
Mr. Fields stated the homeless would like to have a voice and a vote on the Board
of Directors of St. Vincent de Paul, and requested this issue be tabled for
a suitable amount of time until the homeless can voice their concerns, by being
included in the contract, or being polled and surveyed.
Mayor Boro stated Mr. Fields' relationship with St. Vincent de Paul was not something
the Council could affect, as that was a matter between Mr. Fields and St. Vincent
de Paul. Regarding the neighborhoods, Mayor Boro stated the Council was not
picking a location, they were picking multiple sites that meet the criteria,
and would then hold public meetings on those sites, noting the homeless could
speak, as well as the people in the community.
Mr. Fields referred to Mr. Landecker's earlier statements before the Council,
relating the fact that he had been attacked by a homeless person living in
the Open Space above Gerstle Park. Mr. Fields stated he was very sorry Mr.
Landecker was attacked, reporting he, too, had been the victim of a battery.
However, he noted not all homeless people are violent, and Mr. Fields requested
this be discussed at a future Council meeting, as he and other homeless people
wished to address the issue.
Alice Vipiana, resident of San Rafael, stated she was concerned about the "Iffiness"
of what is Downtown and what is not, noting she felt there needed to be a clear
definition, and that there had to be some similar type of business to call
it either part of the Downtown or out of the Downtown. She pointed out that
within the criteria for Downtown the boundary might be all the way over to
San Anselmo, while excluding the location of her business. She stated she
felt as though the City was putting them on the "other side of the tracks",
yet they are very similar to the Downtown. Ms. Vipiana reported the properties
immediately to the east of Irwin Street are similar to Downtown in the fact
that Allen Realty, Old Republic Company, and Heller's Baby Store are located
there, and there is retail along Grand Avenue, a large furniture at Grand Avenue
and Third Street, piano sales on Third Street, ReMax Realty, United Market
and Nursery, Lindskog Realty, a watchmaker, and an optometrist, as well as
many other businesses. Ms. Vipiana felt they should be included in the Downtown
because they are similar businesses, and are much more a part of the Downtown
than anything on the other side of "E" Street. She requested the City amend
the boundaries for the Downtown to include like type businesses and areas.
Deborah Stapleton, Bret Harte Neighborhood representative to the committee to help
move St. Vincent's, stated that while the committee had not met in a long time,
she did not believe it had ever been formally disbanded, and noted she had
read the staff report for this item with great interest.
Ms. Stapleton stated it has become known in her neighborhood that the City, within
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 19
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 20
these last five months of discussions with St. Vincent's, has again attempted
to move the Dining Hall to DeLuca Place, this time to 51 DeLuca Place. She
stated this is just one block from the residents' homes, and only a few blocks
from Davidson Middle School. Mayor Boro stated the City had not looked at
moving to any specific location as yet, noting he had already reported the
City had not yet picked a site.
Ms. Stapleton stated there needed to be more public input, and the talks should
be opened to include everyone, noting she agreed with Mr. Fields' comments
that the City needs to include everyone who is concerned. As someone who sat
through the earlier committee meetings, Ms. Stapleton noted it was much better
to call everyone together in the initial stages, than it is to wait until sometime
down the road, after decisions have been made. Ms. Stapleton stated she had
four requests of the Council: 1) City identify the Real Estate Broker and the
Relocation Specialist who are being used, noting it would also be good for
the public to know how much of their tax money is going into this; 2) City
inform the public, in precise terms, exactly where we are looking for a
relocation site, and why the particular areas were chosen; 3) All meetings
between the City and St. Vincent's be open to the public. She stated her
Neighborhood Association and other interested parties need to be invited to
these meetings; 4) From this time forward, all sites and ideas for the relocation
of St. Vincent's be analyzed in open meetings, with representatives from all
facets of the community, the City, St. Vincent' s, the neighborhoods, businesses,
other social service agencies, and the homeless and other users of St. Vincent' s.
She stated such due process was essential, as it was the only way to find
an agreeable solution, and would give the City an opportunity to make a good
faith effort to fulfill ethical responsibilities. She asked that everyone
be included in discussions prior to the public hearings, and before things
have to be posted.
Ms. Stapleton suggested the Committee to help St. Vincent's move be reconvened,
noting she would be willing and happy to participate, and would give her valuable
time to reconvene that committee, or any other committee that would bring the
community together before we reach the public hearing stage.
Steve
Patterson, Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods, pointed out St. Vincent's
was approaching the end of their second decade at their present location, noting
meetings have occurred for almost six years regarding relocation and possible
sites. He reported their new administration is about to start its second year,
and while there was great hope initially, if there was ever a honeymoon, it
is over. Mr. Patterson stated that on their best days St. Vincent has been,
at best, a marginal neighbor, and most often an irresponsible one, noting the
neighborhoods have no more patience or tolerance, and are not very willing
to extend much more rope.
Mr. Patterson stated it was obvious that after all this time, the City and St.
Vincent's cannot even agree on what the corridor should be that is available
for potential site location. He stated we would all be here five years from
now unless specific benchmarks and deadlines are laid out for identifying,
obtaining, and moving to a new location, although he felt that even under the
best of circumstances, this was going to be extraordinarily difficult. He
asked that St. Vincent's investigate reinventing themselves, because he felt
it may be that their present mode of operation, in a single site location,
was not a workable solution, and they would have to deliver their services,
and deliver the very valuable things they provide the homeless in a much
different manner than they are currently.
Elizabeth Campos stated she was a homeless and disabled person living in San Rafael,
and utilizes the services of St. Vincent's Dining Hall, and noted she was also
a working person and a voting person in the City and County. Ms. Campos
acknowledged the concessions from the Board of Directors of St. Vincent de
Paul were profound, and the City's work has also been profound.
Ms. Campos asked Council to consider for a moment some of the meaning of the words
in Exhibit "A" of the staff report, noting it states the new dining room will
be located so as not to be near schools or residential neighborhoods, and
excludes for services elderly people who live in residential neighborhoods,
who pay 90% of their income for rent and come to St. Vincent's Dining Room.
She noted they are not homeless, and some of these people were born in the
community 80 years ago, but they will not be able to go and get services if
it is not near their homes. She reported there were men and women who come
to the dining room who are single parents, who have children in schools, and
who cannot leave work for several hours on a Saturday or Sunday because they
work two or three jobs to take care of their children, and so they bring their
children to St. Vincent's to eat at the dining room.
Ms. Campos noted an article in the newspaper last week stated Golden Gate Transit
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 20
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 21
was cutting Whistle Stop services, so no matter how close the new dining room
is to certain transportation, she herself may not be welcome there, because
if there is one other wheelchair on a bus, it will not stop and pick her up,
and some busses are not wheelchair accessible. She stated that without Whistle
Stop, if the dining room moves too far away, she will not be there. Ms. Campos
stated homelessness was not a crime, and without providing housing, there is
no way for the City to guarantee that the new dining room will not draw clients
through residential neighborhoods. She pointed out that if she were living
outside the corridor, on the other side of town, and if she has to walk through
town and through another residential neighborhood to get to the new dining
room, that would be very difficult. She asked that when the City and St.
Vincent's meet, they consider the life of a homeless person, or a disabled
person, or an 80 year old who can barely walk down the four steps in front
of their own home to come to the dining room.
City Manager Gould assured Council that the transportation needs of the elderly
and the disabled have been the subject of a number of their discussions, and
would be an issue that will be addressed during the negotiations. He stated
it would be his advice that to conduct the negotiations in public sessions
and involve large numbers of people would be extremely counter-productive at
this time, noting if the City wished to move expeditiously to accomplish this
at any time within the next year, then we would need to follow the current
process. Mr. Gould stated if the City and St. Vincent's have to conduct real
property negotiations in a public forum, that would be tantamount to playing
poker, where one player has to put his cards on the table, and he noted it
would end up costing much more money later. He pointed out Council has stated
there would be public process when sites have been identified that might work
for both sides, and that is when the neighborhoods, the homeless, and everyone
can come down and have a say. Mr. Gould urged Council to stick with that process.
Mayor Boro stated he agreed.
Councilmember Cohen referred to Ms. Stapleton's comments regarding the earlier
committee, stating he did not know if the committee had been formally disbanded,
so much as just collapsing from exhaustion. He stated he would have to say,
looking back at the three and a half years the committee was active, he could
not say it had been particularly productive, and what he learned from that
experience was that it was not necessarily the way to go, and that to do every
single step of the process with everyone at the table led far more often to
accusations and counter -accusations shared on the front page of the Marin
Independent Journal than it did to any substantive progress. Mr. Cohen stated
he was concerned and somewhat skeptical when the City was approached by St.
Vincent's about mediation, and having some private discussions and trying to
understand what each other's issues and concerns were. He believes that was
fairly productive, noting they had gone over many of the same issues the
committee had addressed, but maybe for the first time actually heard each other.
Councilmember Cohen stated the process now was primarily being negotiated at the
staff level, and they are again dealing with the same issue the St. Vincent's
Relocation Committee and representatives from St. Vincent's worked with two
and a half years ago to come up with site criteria. Regarding the issue of
pre -identifying sites, Mr. Cohen reported his experience has been that as soon
as someone identified a potential site they wanted to bring up for consideration
the protests started, flyers started getting passed out stating "Did you know
they are going to bring all these homeless people our neighborhood?", "Did
you now these bums are going to be hanging out?", "March on City Hall now and
demand that they stop this". Mr. Cohen stated it was counter-productive to
float individual sites without context, noting it simply had not worked the
three different times we tried that.
Mr. Cohen stated the approach that has been laid out here is the only way to go,
stating we need to agree on the general terms, and then get more and more
specific,
and once we have this agreement, then clearly there are some unresolved issues,
such as Council has heard tonight, but those need to be negotiated not by the
Committee as a whole, but at staff level and, if necessary, brought back to
Council for approval. He noted if there are changes to what Council adopts
in this agreement, then that would need to be done in public. Mr. Cohen stated
we needed to move from the general to the specific, and he felt the only way
for this to work once we have a specific set of criteria, is to go out and
identify not just one site, but several sites, so they can be compared and
the relative merits of different areas of the City can be discussed. Mr. Cohen
stated this was the only way he could see this working, because any other way
it has been tried it has immediately become an issue of "for" and "against",
"our neighborhood against St. Vincent's", and "our neighborhood against City
Hall", noting the process gets bogged down and does not lead to the kind of
action he spoke of earlier.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 21
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 22
Mr. Cohen pointed out that any action taken by the City would be taken in public,
on a vote by Council in public, noting the public would have the opportunity
to comment before any other actions are taken by the Council, just as they
have done this evening. Mr. Cohen stated he was hopeful this would lead to
a good result, one that could be done respecting the public nature of this
process, respecting everyone's democratic rights, and the necessity for the
community to be involved, and participate and air their opinions. However,
he felt if Council did not set the framework for that, we would, as Mr. Patterson
had stated, still be here five years from now debating the same issues, and
Mr. Cohen stated he was not willing to let that happen. He stated we had to
seek movement, which he felt we could do in a positive way; however, he believed
going back to what they tried, unsuccessfully, for three years was not the
way to do that.
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution
approving the St. Vincent de Paul site selection guidelines.
RESOLUTION NO. 9852 -RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ST. VINCENT DE PAUL DINING ROOM SITE
SELECTION CRITERIA.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
MONTHLY REPORTS:
17. DEPARTMENT REPORT - LIBRARY (Lib) - File 237 x 9-3-61
Library Director Vaughn Stratford stated he would be showing the newest version
of the Library's catalog, WebPac. Mr. Stratford explained WebPac was a Web
browser, noting it has the same kind of interface, and is capable of linking
with the InterNet. He pointed out this was different from the Card Catalog,
which has information only about the books in the Library. He stated we go
from the Card Catalog to OPAC, which has information on books in all the different
Libraries in Marin, and then get to WebPac, which has the same information
about things held in Libraries in Marin, but also links to information resources
that are on the Internet. He noted, therefore, the Library Catalog becomes
a tool for getting information from all different sources, breaking down the
walls of the Libraries and linking different information resources.
Councilmember Phillips stated he had AOL (America On Line) at his home, and asked
if he could access this? Mr. Stratford stated Mr. Phillips could access things
on the Internet through AOL, so he would have access to the catalog. Mr.
Phillips asked for the code, and Mr. Stratford provided the code,
HTTP://MARIN.ORG/LIBS
Mr. Stratford introduced Phil Youngholm, Manager of MarinNet, who explained the
WebPac system. Mr. Youngholm reported AOL has a problem with the on-line
catalog, and while Mr. Phillips could access this information, he would have
to load an independent copy of NetScape Navigator or Internet Explorer, noting
AOL's built-in browser had a couple of problems with our Library catalog.
Councilmember Cohen noted AOL had a version of NetScape that can be downloaded,
noting Mr. Phillips could get a copy of NetScape through AOL that would work
very smoothly, pointing out it was also a better way to browse the Web.
Mr. Youngholm explained MarinNet was a group of independent Libraries within Marin
County, five city Libraries and ten branches of the County Library. He pointed
out the catalog was a shared catalog for all of these Libraries, and whichever
version a person uses, whether they walk into a Library and use one of the
terminals in the Library, or come in over the WorldWide Web, they are searching
the catalogs of six political jurisdictions and approximately sixteen
individual buildings throughout the County. Mr. Stratford reported 800,000
items were in that data base, as opposed to just what is in our Library.
Mr. Youngholm reported flyers were available at the Library for people to take home
and use as instructions for accessing the catalog through the Web, and using
his own laptop computer, Mr. Youngholm demonstrated how one would first access
the MarinNet Library Catalog Web interface, and then showed the screen which
introduces the catalog. He pointed out this capability had only been turned
on a few weeks ago, noting they were still working on it and it would soon
be much better, and would eventually be able to do everything the catalog in
the Libraries can; however, at this point it could not, for example, place
holds on a book, which could be done in the Library itself.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 22
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 23
Mr. Youngholm demonstrated how to do a simple search by author, pointing out he
is shown what books written by the author are available in all of the Libraries,
as well as determining which books are located in just the San Rafael Library,
and those currently available to be checked out.
Mr. Youngholm presented other options available to the City. First he showed how
to search by author on someone else's catalog, searching the University of
San Diego's catalog as an example. Mr. Stratford pointed out that searching
through WebPac it was much easier to search with a minimal amount of information,
even an incorrectly worded title, and is a much more powerful searching tool.
Mr. Youngholm noted his computer was now linked to the University's catalog,
pointing out an "encyclopedia" choice, noting that if he were to click on that
choice, the computer would take him online to the Encyclopedia Britannica,
showing what the Encyclopedia Britannica has on file about the author. Mr.
Youngholm reported this required a contract between the Encyclopedia Britannica
and the University' s Library, and because he does not personally have an account,
and the computer knows he is not at the University of San Diego Library, he
would not be allowed access to the entire text of the article, pointing out
the notation, "Links to full text articles are for subscribers only". Mr.
Youngholm reported what the City would need to implement this program in our
Library catalog would be to sign a contract with the Encyclopedia Britannica
to have the interface hooked up. He noted this would be accomplished without
anyone from the City doing any work, and the Encyclopedia Britannica would
then become available to all the residents of Marin County who have access
to the WorldWide Web. Councilmember Cohen noted that when Mr. Youngholm
attempted to access that information from the University of San Diego's catalog,
it noted that he was not a subscriber, and he asked if we were to set up such
an interface, would anyone who held a San Rafael Library card be considered
a subscriber, or how that would work? Mr. Youngholm stated that with our
magazine index, people are asked to identify themselves by their Library card,
and he believed it would work the same way.
Identifying another option, which would not require money but would require a
commitment on the part of staff to do the cataloging, Mr. Youngholm connected
with the Library at Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas. He explained every
Library has a Zip Code Directory in their reference collection, but if we were
to have that catalog on the Web, and if we had created records in that catalog
for resources on the Internet, then we could go from looking things up in the
catalog straight to a reference item on the Web. Mr. Youngholm did a word
search for "Zip Code" on the Web, and then went to the United States Postal
Service Address and Zip Code Information file on the Internet, noting he was
now connected to the U.S. Postal Service. He then showed how to look up a
specific Zip Code, rather than looking it up in a reference book or having
to go to the shelf. Mr. Youngholm noted that because this is a free data base,
and there are many on the Worldwide Web, we would not need to pay any money,
all we would need to do is get a cataloger to put this into our data base.
He stated this capability is so new they have not yet discussed which of the
six Libraries was going to put the staff and energy into doing this kind of
thing, but that was an issue the Libraries would be discussing.
Councilmember Cohen stated he was intrigued with the idea that the Library should
catalog Internet resources, noting he was not stating he was opposed to it,
but pointing out it was a large amount of work cataloging the 100,000 volumes
the San Rafael Library has, or the 800,000 volumes that exist in Marin County.
Mr. Cohen wondered how many different types of resources were available?
He pointed out Zip Codes and Census Data were obvious ones, but noted at times
when he has been doing research projects and needed to access that type of
information, the data was not difficult to find without the Library having
cataloged it. Mr. Youngholm stated Libraries do not usually catalog
independently, they latch on to somebody else's catalog, noting there were
places we could go to capture other Library catalogs and put the information
into our catalog with a minimum of effort. He pointed out we would be selecting
only the most useful resources, and integrating them with the resources we
already have in our collection.
Mr. Stratford noted that when students come into the Library with the same assignment
every year, a Reference Librarian at one of the six different Libraries
participating in MarinNet can find a good resource on the Internet and put
that link on our catalog, and then it will be a piece of information the students
can find, and whether it is an Encyclopedia entry or a link to some other
resource, it can be linked to the student's PC at home.
Mr. Stratford stated Libraries were reinventing themselves, noting that while the
Libraries have gotten competition from the bookstores, the Libraries are
different and have another role to play, in that they provide reference
information, for which WEBPAC really points the way for us.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 23
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 24
Councilmember Cohen noted books were the most efficient delivery system for
information until the last ten years or so, and while they have a certain value
that cannot be replaced electronically, there are other resources for accessing
information which tremendously surpass books. He felt we had to consider that
in terms of the kind of commitment the City is going to take on, and how far
our obligation extends to provide access to that kind of information, as well
as how much of a financial obligation it is for us to take that on.
Mayor Boro stated the big thing that has been touted for the past couple of years
is the fact that anyone can have access to the Library of Congress via the
Internet. He asked, if everyone can have access to the Library of Congress,
and everything we have been talking about is already available at that source,
why are we going to replicate a lot of this locally? He stated if someone
is on the Internet, their charge is already set; therefore, it would not make
any difference if the user went to the San Rafael Library, the Sausalito Library,
or the Library of Congress. He wondered how much effort the City was going
to have to extend locally to include things that may already be there? Mr.
Stratford stated that having access to the Library of Congress actually meant
having access to their catalog of books.
Councilmember Phillips stated the service he felt might be missing was in getting
the word out to those within San Rafael as to how they actually access the
system, noting he did not think that was as effective as it might be. He asked
where we stood with the average user linking up? Mr. Youngholm stated
approximately 1% of the use of the system is through the Worldwide Web, and
it has not been advertised at all. Mr. Phillips stated perhaps this was
something we should try to promote through the schools. Mr. Youngholm agreed,
noting there has been very little publicity thus far, and this was something
that needed to be publicized, noting the Library has been on the Worldwide
Web, with limited use, for the past two years. Mr. Phillips suggested this
be advertised in the City Newsletter.
19. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
a. BERNARD HOFFMAN BALLFIELD - File 4-7-28 x 220 x 9-3-65 x 9-3-66
Councilmember Cohen reported the Board of Directors of the San Rafael Girls Softball
League voted unanimously to conceptually agree to provide $7,000 cash or in-kind
service toward the maintenance of the Bernard Hoffman field, over and above
what they currently do. Mr. Cohen stated we had initially discussed a ten
year participation, noting he had made it clear this would be an ongoing
commitment, and as long as the League planned to be prime users of the field,
they would have to chip in and participate. He stated they had been working
actively with Recreation Director Sharon McNamee and Public Works Department
staff to find ways to take on some of the $9,000 the City is spending to maintain
the field. He noted they hoped to have the agreement in place at the time
the City's agreement is in place with Dixie School District.
b. COUNTYWIDE PLANNING AGENCY MEETING - File 191
Mayor Boro announced the Countywide Planning Agency Meeting would be held on Thursday
night in the Council Chamber, noting the main topic will be the presentation
of the Calthorpe study. He urged everyone to try to attend, noting all cities
had been invited, and this would be a good time to hear the results of the
study, and to discuss it.
Mayor Boro asked Council and staff to join him in wishing Councilmember Heller a
Happy
Birthday, noting her birthday had been last Friday.
There being no further business , Mayor Boro adjourned the meeting at 11:35 PM.
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City
Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1997
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/19/97 Page 24