HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 2006-06-05SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Pagel
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JUNE 5, 2006 AT 8:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting:
San Rafael City Council
Also Present: Ken Nordhoff, Interim City Manager
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
OPEN SESSION — COUNCIL CHAMBER — 7:50 PM
Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
Gary O. Phillips, Vice -Mayor
Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember
Cyr N. Miller, Councilmember
Absent: Barbara Heller, Councilmember
Mayor Boro announced Closed Session items 1.a), 1.b) and 1.c).
Closed Session 1.c). — Mayor Boro added the following language:
"With regard to Closed Session Item "c", anticipated litigation, the circumstances giving
rise to the City's exposure to litigation consists of the arbitrator's recent decision of Elite
Lifestyle's petition for a rent increase."
CLOSED SESSION — CONFERENCE ROOM 201 - 7:50 PM — File 1-4-1a
a) Conference with Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation
Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
Case Name: MHC Financing, et al. v. City of San Rafael, et al.
U.S. District Court, Northern Dist. of CA, Case #C003785
b) Conference with Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation
Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
Case Name: MHC Financing, et al. v. City of San Rafael, et al. (MHC II
U.S. District Court, Northern Dist. of CA, Case #C043325
c) Conference with Legal Counsel — Anticipated Litigation
Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(3)(B)
Number of Potential Cases: One
City Attorney Gary Ragghianti announced that no reportable action was taken
on items 1.a), 1.b) or 1.c)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE:
8:31 PM
a) Community Choice Power: - File 13-1 x 9-1
Bob Spofford, (Sustainable San Rafael), stated that currently, the issue of Community Choice Power /
Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) was entirely at the County; however, it appeared as though it
would become something cities would be voting themselves in or out of, probably this fall. Noting the
issue was complex, he indicated that everyone needed to try to understand the benefits and he
explained the three headlines:
It is by far the most important thing any city or this County could do to fight global warming.
Under CCA, over half the electricity could be received from renewable sources such as wind and
solar by year 2020. Nothing else came close to that in terms of its impact on global warming;
CCA provides more control over what is paid for electricity, and in the years ahead more control
would mean more protection against all the craziness of the energy markets. Under CCA,
contracts could be written for electric power that guarantee everyone in Marin and San Rafael
would be paying less for their electricity than they pay to PG&E, and this would be guaranteed,
no matter what; and
As the issue does not have a lot of political downside to it, should any business or homeowner in
the City or County have a problem, they could opt out and stay with PG&E.
Mr. Spofford reported that the County of Marin is holding a workshop on CCA, specifically for City
Managers and Councilmembers, on Thursday, June 22, 2006 at 3:30 p.m. and he expressed the hope
that San Rafael would be represented, as this was a really big issue.
Mayor Boro noted Councilmember Miller was the Council's designated representative on this issue and
along with the Interim City Manager, would be reporting to Council.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 1
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 2
b) Soccer Complex Lawsuit — City Council Meeting of 5/15/06: - File 9-1 x 10-2 x 12-12
Keith Meloney, President, Contempo Marin Homeowners Association, stated he was accompanied this
evening by dedicated residents of the community who shared his sentiments. He indicated they wished
to make it clear that no Contempo Marin residents were a party to the demonstration that took place at
the City Council meeting of May 15, 2006, nor did they support any behavior that represented any
disrespect towards City officials. Many were angered to hear about demonstrators appearing in masks
before the City Council. He noted that during the life of this highly charged debate over the soccer
complex application, the residents of Contempo Marin had not hesitated to share their views with
members of the Design Review Board, the Planning Commission and the project applicant, and at all
times they tried to show good manners and maintain civil behavior. Mr. Meloney noted there were many
residents in his community with differing views on the soccer complex proposal; however, they all spoke
with one voice when it came to an ongoing commitment of appreciation to the City for the support it
continued to show for the residents of their community in their legal affairs.
Jerry Frate stated some residents of Contempo Marin and Captain's Cove met with the applicant a
number of times in an effort to understand his position on the soccer field. He indicated they submitted
a number of mitigations to the Planning Commission which he hoped they would act on; however,
should they not wish to act on them, they would be presented to the City Council at the appropriate time.
Mr. Frate stated they appreciated the opportunity to participate with the Planning staff and tried to do
their best in meeting with the applicant on this large project.
c) Urban Forestry: - File 13-1 x 9-1
Sandra Sellinger, Marin Releaf, stated that this time last year she had the pleasure of attending the
World Environment Day in San Francisco when one of the accords signed by countries across the world
was the provision that there be 35% canopy cover over cities. A climate action team formed by
Governor Schwarzenegger to evaluate global warming produced a report listing five action areas, two of
which dealt with forestry:
Modifying forest management over watershed areas to help increased growth rates; the cities
are watershed areas. Ms. Sellinger noted that runoff had dramatically increased in the past
decade because of hard surfaces and if those areas were somewhat planted with trees the
runoff would be reduced.
Managing urban forests to reduce the heat island effect, thus reducing demand on electricity
during extremely hot periods.
With regard to what the City Council could do, and expressing thanks for signing the Mayors Climate
Protection Agreement, Ms. Sellinger suggested the 35% canopy cover could be increased by
demanding that new construction have it, not the numbers of trees, rather canopy cover over parking
lots and sidewalks. Noting no trees were installed at the Elephant Pharmacy, she stated standards
should be set for businesses to maintain and replace trees. She commented that even the City was not
replacing trees. Ms. Sellinger noted also that one of this evening's reports was printed on one side of the
paper only and she knew the City could do better.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar, as
follows:
ITEM
2. Approval of Minutes of Special and Regular
Meetings of Monday, May 15, 2006 (CC)
3. Reappointment of Dan Beittel, M.D., to Fill One,
Three -Year Term on the Marin Commission on
Aging (Term to Expire End of June, 2009) (CC)
- File 199
4. Summary of Legislation Affecting San Rafael
(CM) — File 116 x 9-1
5. Resolutions of Appreciation for Four Members of
the Community: Paul Chong, Hugo Landecker,
Carolyn Lenert and Gene Ness (CM) —
File 102
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Minutes approved as submitted.
ADDroved staff recommendation:
Dan Beittel, M.D. reappointed to a
further three-year term on the Marin
Commission on Aging, to end of June,
2009
Approved staff recommendation:
AB 2681 — Vehicles. Registration
Fees and Fines. Assembly
Member Pavley. SUPPORT
RESOLUTION NO. 11957 —
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO
PAUL CHONG, VOLUNTEER WITH
THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 2
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 11958 —
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO
HUGO LANDECKER, VOLUNTEER
WITH THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
RESOLUTION NO. 11959 —
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO
CAROLYN LENERT, VOLUNTEER
WITH THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
RESOLUTION NO. 11960 —
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO
GENE NESS, VOLUNTEER WITH THE
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
7. Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Enter into
RESOLUTION NO. 11961 —
Agreement for Curator Services at Falkirk
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
Cultural Center with Beth Goldberg, from July 1,
CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN
2006 through June 30, 2007 (CS) —
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL
File 4-3-334 x 9-3-84
SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF
File 5-1-360
SAN RAFAEL AND BETH
GOLDBERG FOR CURATOR
SERVICES AT FALKIRK CULTURAL
CENTER (Term shall be from July 1,
2006 to June 30, 2007)
8. Resolution Approving Use and Acceptance of
RESOLUTION NO. 11962 —
Federal Justice Assistance Grant Funds in the
RESOLUTION APPROVING USE OF
Amount of $12,251.00 for Law Enforcement
AND ACCEPTANCE OF FEDERAL
Programs for the Period October 2005 through
JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT
September 2009 (PD) — File 9-3-30
FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$12,251.00 FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS FOR
THE PERIOD OCTOBER 2005
THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2009
9. Resolution Approving Use of State of California
RESOLUTION NO. 11963 —
Department of Boating and Waterway Funds in
RESOLUTION APPROVING USE OF
the Amount of $55,000 for Equipment Purchase
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
by September 30, 2006 (PD) — File 9-3-30
DEPARTMENT OF BOATING AND
WATERWAY FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $55,000 FOR
EQUIPMENT PURCHASE BY
SEPTEMBER 30, 2006 AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE CONTRACT
10. Report on Bid Opening and Resolution Awarding RESOLUTION NO. 11964 —
Contract for Kerner Boulevard Pump Station RESOLUTION AWARDING
Renovation, Project No. 10729, to Valentine CONTRACT FOR KERNER
Corporation in the Amount of $790,369.00 (Bid BOULEVARD PUMP STATION
Opening Held on Tuesday, May 30, 2006) (PW) RENOVATION TO VALENTINE
— File 4-1-581 x 9-3-40 CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF
$790,369.00 (lowest responsible
bidder)
11. Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 11933 and
RESOLUTION NO. 11965 —
Approving Parcel Map Entitled "Parcel Map,
RESOLUTION RESCINDING
Lands of the State of California (DN 2574 OR
RESOLUTION NO. 11933 AND
47)" and Authorizing the City Clerk to Execute
APPROVING PARCEL MAP
the Map on Behalf of the City Council (PW) —
ENTITLED "PARCEL MAP, LANDS
File 5-1-360
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (DN
2574 OR 47)" AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE
MAP ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
COUNCIL
12. Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 11934 and
RESOLUTION NO. 11966 —
Approving Parcel Map Entitled "Parcel Map,
RESOLUTION RESCINDING
Lands of the State of California (DN 2283 OR
RESOLUTION NO. 11934 AND
117, 2001-00820223, 2002-0118173, 2003-
APPROVING PARCEL MAP
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 3
0036693)" and Authorizing the City Clerk to
Execute the Map on Behalf of the City Council
(PW) — File 5-1-361
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 4
ENTITLED "PARCEL MAP, LANDS
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (DN
2283 OR 117, 2001-00820223, 2002-
0118173, 2003-0036693)" AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO
EXECUTE THE MAP ON BEHALF OF
THE CITY COUNCIL
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Miller, Phillips and Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller
The following item was removed from the Consent Calendar for comment, at the request of
Councilmember Miller:
6. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE U.S. MAYORS CLIMATE
PROTECTION AGREEMENT AS AMENDED AT THE 74TH ANNUAL U.S. CONFERENCE OF
MAYORS MEETING (CM) — FILE 13-1 x 9-1
Councilmember Miller stated that the first part of the Resolution from the Conference of Mayors
meeting established the fact of global warming and its effects, and then the Mayors explored
ways in which cities could participate in an appropriate manner. Areas listed were:
Inventory global warming emissions, set reduction targets and create an action plan;
Adopt land use policies that reduce sprawl, preserve open space and create compact, walkable
urban communities;
Promote transportation options;
Increase the use of clean, alternative energy by investing in "green tags", advocating for the
development of renewable energy resources;
Make energy efficiency a priority through building code improvements and retrofitting City
facilities;
Purchase only Energy Star equipment and appliances for City use;
Practice and promote sustainable building practices using the U.S. Green Building Council's
LEED program or a similar system; (Councilmember Miller stated that earlier this evening the
Director of Community Development indicated there would be a study session on this subject
and the City would be able to march forward rather rapidly with it.)
Increase the average fuel efficiency of municipal fleet vehicles; (Councilmember Miller stated
that Public Works was studying this to see how the City could advance in this way.)
Increase recycling rates in City operations and in the community. (Councilmember Miller stated
that recycling was a practice in the City and was obviously neglected with one of the reports
tonight, however, most City departments did use two-sided paper.)
Maintain healthy urban forests, as well as help educate public schools and other jurisdictions.
Councilmember Miller stated that this was a very complete list and was exactly what the City
Council would authorize the Mayor to sign onto tonight.
Councilmember Cohen stated that Councilmember Miller missed one that he believed also
probably escaped the public's attention, probably for good reason. He explained that one of the
goals called for was recovering waste water treatment methane for energy production. The
Central Marin Sanitation Agency, of which San Rafael was a member agency through the San
Rafael Sanitation District, just made a significant effort in doing that by replacing a generator
that was now co -generating energy. It received a huge 6 figure rebate check from PG&E and
would have ongoing savings because of energy production at the Central Marin Sanitation
Agency through exactly this method.
Mayor Boro stated that tomorrow he would sign the resolution and send it off. Over 200 cities
had now signed it; therefore, he was very pleased that the Council had authorized him to sign it
so that San Rafael could become part of this effort.
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 4
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 5
RESOLUTION NO. 11967— RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE
U.S. MAYORS CLIMATE PROTECTION AGREEMENT AS
AMENDED AT THE 74TH ANNUAL U.S. CONFERENCE OF
MAYORS MEETING
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Miller, Phillips and Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
13. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION TO FOUR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMUNITY: PAUL CHONG, HUGO LANDECKER, CAROLYN LENERT AND GENE NESS
(CM) — FILE 102
Mayor Boro stated the staff report addressed the fact that the City had a wonderful group of
volunteers and at times some were extraordinary in the type of service they performed. He
invited honorees Paul Chong, Hugo Landecker, Carolyn Lenert and Gene Ness to join the City
Council at the podium.
Reporting that Paul Chong had been an active volunteer for the past two years with the
Emergency Volunteer Center, Mayor Boro stated he had worked many days after school
attending workshops, doing site visits, soliciting partnerships, scheduling training, writing plans
and procedures and meeting with City and County disaster preparedness officials. He noted
disaster preparedness was a huge issue for all cities and while San Rafael might not have
hurricanes, it did have the potential for urban land wildfires and earthquakes and it was very
important that the City be prepared. Mayor Boro congratulated and thanked Mr. Chong for all
the work he had done.
Indicating that Hugo Landecker was a tremendous community activist and true champion for the
entire City, Mayor Boro stated that the resolution addressed the fact that Mr. Landecker
regularly volunteered at least an hour a day, seven days per week, from November to May, for
many years pulling up invasive French broom in the open space above his Gerstle Park
neighborhood. Through his neighborhood association, Mr. Landecker had cleared sufficient
weed free space to expose a fire road, provide unencumbered paths for walkers, joggers,
bicyclists and dog walkers to use and enjoy. Stating that this had been a great effort for his
community and the City of San Rafael, Mayor Boro thanked and congratulated Mr. Landecker.
Noting DART was the area Carolyn Lenert had put a lot of time into, Mayor Boro stated she
performed an outstanding job as a public information representative for the City of San Rafael's
Disaster Area Response Team and she had promoted the program and explained its role in
disaster preparedness. He noted while she resided in the Terra Linda area, Ms. Lenert worked
throughout the entire City. She served as a director in her Santa Margarita Neighborhood
Association, participated in fundraising for "Recreate the Creek" — a great partnership between
the City and her neighborhood — and other neighborhood programs, and Mayor Boro was
pleased to report that with the newly hired Emergency Coordinator, much emphasis would be
directed towards the DART and Police Academy graduates so that together, the two groups
could serve as the arms of the City in the event of a disaster. Mayor Boro congratulated and
thanked Ms. Lenert.
Mayor Boro noted that Gene Ness had served as the Web Master extraordinaire for the San
Rafael Volunteer Program for the past five years, creating it from scratch in a professional and
cost-effective way. He continually updates and refines the web site, including the recently
developed volunteer database which tracks volunteers signing up on-line, and he is always
available to answer questions, initiate new programs, offer web advice and is never satisfied
with "good enough" but only "the best." Mayor Boro congratulated and thanked Mr. Ness for his
work.
Volunteer Coordinator Cory Bytof stated that volunteers such as these inspired him, kept him
going and made him happy in his job, for which he expressed thanks.
Paul Chong and Hugo Landekcer expressed thanks.
Carolyn Lenert stated she loved San Rafael and was so proud of the DART program through
the San Rafael Fire Department helping neighbors help other neighbors. She stated it was the
best in the community who came out to help others in a disaster. These people had to be kept
safe and training them was step 2 in a process of getting supplies, training and learning the
teamwork to build a stronger community. Ms. Lenert reported that the DART program was a
nationally recognized award program and she was so proud to be a part of it.
Gene Ness stated that the website was for him a labor of love and he especially enjoyed
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 5
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 6
working with Cory Bytof who was fun to work with, a great manager and a blessing, and he
deserved all the credit in the world.
14. INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES: MARK MILLER, PARKING SERVICES MANAGER
AND STEVEN RATHBONE, EMERGENCY SERVICES PLANNING COORDINATOR (MS) —
FILE 9-3-87 x 13-11 x 7-4
Introducing Steven Rathbone, new Emergency Services Planning Coordinator, Nancy Mackle,
Interim Assistant City Manager, explained that this was a new position for the City to try to focus
more attention within City Hall and the entire community on emergency services and response.
She noted Mr. Rathbone was located in the City Manager's office because he would be working
with every department in the City to get employees properly trained, have supplies, and be in a
position to operate an Emergency Operations Center as well as updating the plan. Ms. Mackle
stated that Steven was working also on a Vegetation Management Plan to help prevent fires, as
well as meeting with the community at neighborhood meetings discussing flooding.
Ms. Mackle reported that Mr. Rathbone came to the City from Contra Costa County Sheriff's
Office of Emergency Services and previously Berkeley Unified School District, the Red Cross
and Riverside County. He had lots of experience and would bring the City up to date and in
"ship shape" for emergencies.
Ms. Mackle reported that Mark Miller was the new Parking Services Manager, replacing Chad
Lynn, initial Parking Services Manager, who assisted the City in looking at parking in a new
way. Mr. Miller was taking parking on the next step forward bringing lots of ideas on improving
how parking structures and lots are operated, looking at the financial systems, etc. Previously,
he worked at U.C. Berkeley Parking and Transportation, was the Parking Manager at the City of
Sacramento and he had held a lot of interesting financial and other management positions at
city halls in other cities.
PUBLIC HEARING:
15. 1203-1211 LINCOLN AVENUE (CORNER OF LINCOLN AVENUE AND MISSION AVENUE)
PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING APARTMENT COMPLEX AND SINGLE-FAMILY HOME TO
ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 36 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS (CD) —
FILE 10-7 x 10-6 x 10-5 x 4-3-447
City Attorney Gary Ragghianti explained that this was a public hearing for the purpose of
soliciting public comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report. The colloquy tonight
was not intended to work out issues, rather the hearing was simply to receive comment from the
public in connection with their review of this document, and after the staff report was delivered it
would be appropriate to open the public hearing and take public comment. He indicated that
there was no need to respond, unless the City Council wished to do so, rather at the conclusion
of the public hearing, Council should direct staff to respond to the comments received.
Mr. Ragghianti emphasized that the public comment period continues, despite the conduct of
this public hearing, until June 30, 2006. Therefore, the public could continue to provide written
comments as deemed appropriate up to and including June 30, 2006.
Associate Planner Micah Hinkle stated this was a 36 -unit condominium project approved by the
Planning Commission. On appeal to the City Council, it was determined that the Mitigated
Negative Declaration was inadequate and directed staff to prepare an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR). He indicated that the Draft EIR had been completed, copies of which had been
submitted to the City Council, the 45 -day review period began on May 17, 2006 and comments
would be received up to June 30, 2006. He noted that this evening basically was to accept
public comments on the Draft EIR and direct staff to prepare Final EIR Response to Comments
after the end of the public comment period.
Indicating that the project affordability had been modified since last presented to the City
Council, Mr. Hinkle explained that on the last occasion it was three low-income and three
moderate -income units as part of the six affordable units. This had now been changed to four
low-income and two moderate -income units in order to meet density bonus requirements, and
also the amended City code requirements for affordable housing.
Regarding the alternate access from Mission Avenue variant, Mr. Hinkle stated Council
requested further study on this and it was included in the Draft EIR. He indicated that the EIR
determined the Mission Avenue access would not have an operational impact on traffic flow and
safety and it would slightly reduce the traffic that would use the Nye and Laurel loop as
compared to the single access from Lincoln. The plan variant was included on page 61 of the
report.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 6
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 7
Mr. Hinkle explained that subsequent to the comment period, the next step would be the Final
EIR together with addressing the project merits and appeal points which had been tentatively
scheduled for the summer.
Mr. Hinkle introduced Lynette Dias, LSA Associates, who would explain LSA's involvement in
the preparation of the Draft EIR.
Lynette Dias, Principal with LSA Associates, prime consultant responsible for preparing the
Draft EIR, indicated she was accompanied by Charity Wagner, Project Manager in the
preparation of the EIR.
Ms. Dias stated the main purpose of this evening's meeting was to receive comments from the
public. She explained that in preparing CEQA analysis, in determining an environmentally
significant impact, it was important to evaluate the proposed project against the existing
conditions on the site and in the project's vicinity at the time. Therefore, in evaluating the
proposed project they looked carefully at the existing conditions and documented each of those
as the setting described in each of the technical sections of the EIR.
Using slides, Ms. Dias explained the CEQA process that began in late 2005 and January, 2006.
The Notice of Preparation was issued at that time where input on the scope of the EIR was
requested from agencies as well as interested individuals in the proposed project. She
indicated they then prepared the analysis and the Draft EIR was published in May, 2006. The
review period would end on June 30, 2006 at which time, as required by the CEQA regulations,
a written response would be provided to each comment received on the Draft EIR. Since
written responses are required, Ms. Dias indicated they would prefer not to provide verbal
responses at this evening's hearing as they could provide much more comprehensive
responses in writing, treating each comment as it should be treated. However, should there be
simple clarifications this evening, they would be glad to provide these.
Ms. Dias reported that when the Responses to Comments document is prepared, it, together
with the Draft EIR, would serve as the Final EIR and be brought before the City Council for
consideration as to whether or not it provided an adequate analysis of the proposed project.
Assuming that finding was made and the Final EIR was certified, the City Council could
consider approval of the proposed project.
Based on the Initial Study prepared as part of the scoping process, Ms. Dias reported that the
topics addressed in the EIR included Land Use and Planning Policy, Traffic and Circulation, Air
Quality and Noise, Cultural and Paleontological Resources. Alternatives to the proposed
project were also evaluated, as required by CEQA, and the document also included a
discussion of cumulative impacts as well as some required CEQA conclusions.
Regarding the findings, Ms. Dias stated that under the topic of Land Use they did not identify
any significant impacts based on the significance criteria required by CEQA. Under Traffic and
Circulation, the evaluation estimated that the proposed project would result in an additional forty
new daily trips and would increase delay at eight intersections; however, the increase in delay
would not change the Level of Service at any of the intersections. Ms. Dias reported that they
evaluated both the one and two -driveway scenarios and determined that approximately thirty-
five new trips would be added to the segment of Nye Street between Mission and Laurel under
the one -driveway scenario, and under the two -driveway scenario, it would be approximately five
trips. Laurel Avenue between Nye and Lincoln would be approximately twenty-five trips with the
one driveway and five with the two driveways. She indicated that none of the traffic impacts
that would result from the proposed project reached the level that would be considered
significant; therefore, no significant impacts were identified in the transportation section.
Regarding Air Quality and Noise, Ms. Dias stated the analysis identified impacts very typical of
any construction or development project and mitigations were recommended to mitigate all of
these to a less than significant level.
Ms. Dias reported that Cultural Resources was the one topic where, related to historic
resources, a potentially significant and unavoidable impact was identified. She explained this
meant they could not recommend mitigation measures that would ensure that no significant and
unavoidable impacts would result, and these were detailed in chapter 4 of the document.
Indicating that three additional impacts were identified under the topic of Cultural Resources,
Ms. Dias stated these related to archeological resources. Noting the potential to identify human
remains and paleontological resources, she indicated mitigation measures were recommended
to reduce all of these to a less than significant level.
Regarding Aesthetic Resources, Ms. Dias reported that one potential impact related to light and
glare. A potentially significant impact was identified and mitigation was recommended to
reduce this to a less than significant level.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 7
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 8
Concluding, Ms. Dias stated that the steps subsequent to the closing of the comment period
had already been addressed.
Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened.
Roger Roberts, Appellant, expressed regret that some of the other appellants were not present
this evening.
Mr. Roberts complimented LSA on their Draft EIR. While he did not necessarily agree with
everything contained therein, it was clearly written for which he expressed thanks. He indicated
he would make some verbal comments this evening and believed that subsequent to
discussions with the other appellants, written comments would be submitted.
Indicating he hoped this would not be the one and only time for oral comments on the Draft EIR,
Mr. Roberts stated that should there be a further opportunity for oral comment before the City
Council, adequate notice should be given to enable people to prepare. He stated he had
received the material late last week and while he had been in possession of the Draft EIR he
had not realized there would be an oral hearing until late last week, which only left the weekend
to prepare his remarks.
Mr. Roberts indicated he had heard rumors, and was curious as to their authenticity, that the
applicant and project developer was considering changing the project to an assisted living
facility for seniors. Should that be the case and if, in fact, this was being contemplated, he
hoped the EIR would have an opportunity to analyze that alternative.
Noting only two alternatives were studied at the direction of the City, Mr. Roberts stated that
one was a No Project alternative and the other to Preserve and Renovate Existing Units. He
suggested a third alternative should be included with respect to Preservation and Renovation.
He explained that if the developer could show that it was economically infeasible, and he
believed this was a question the City should ask the developer under SB 1818 which governs
the density bonus they received, the City could, in fact, raise the question of economic feasibility
to grant this density bonus and then the burden of proof would be on the developer to show it
was economically infeasible to preserve and protect the existing units in and of themselves. In
the interest of preserving some of these units, should it be the case that it is economically
infeasible, he suggested the alternative that should be studied and incorporated into the project
was perhaps preservation of one or two of the units in their existing historic, architectural
character. Mr. Roberts stated that should the City deem it worthwhile to look at this (he
believed it should be deemed worthwhile), he suggested it be considered as a mitigated
alternative that would incorporate preservation and renovation of one or two of the units which
would go further to preserve an historic resource than that proposed currently as the solution,
which was basically photographic records and such that would be at the History Museum in the
City. He believed this would be a positive step that perhaps should be considered as an
alternative.
Mr. Roberts suggested that the Draft EIR appeared to disregard the visual impacts of the
proposed project. He noted it would be a four or five story building along a corridor on Lincoln
Avenue that had mainly two and three story buildings. This would be a much larger building,
with greater mass and more stories than could be seen along Lincoln elsewhere. It did have
significant visual impact and there was no significant analysis or comment in the Draft EIR that
addressed this issue. Mr. Roberts believed this deserved further attention in the report.
Mr. Roberts stated that the Draft EIR relied entirely on the Page & Turnbull report of 2005 to
determine if the existing structures were significant as to four criteria for historic resources and
concluded, and the Draft EIR echoed, that they only satisfy the very first criterion, which was
that resources associated with broad patterns of regional or local history. In this case both the
Page & Turnbull report and the Draft EIR focus on tourism aspects of this regional pattern of
local history. Mr. Roberts suggested that both reports overlooked the architectural significance
of these buildings. As far as he was aware, these structures were the only remaining southwest
mission revival style motor court structures and buildings in Marin and perhaps, in the entire
North Bay. He stated that the Draft EIR did not definitely analyze this aspect of regional
historic, architectural significance; therefore, he questioned how it could conclude that criterion
#3 did not apply — criterion #3 being Resources embodying distinctive characteristics of type,
etc. Mr. Roberts indicated that the Page & Turnbull report remarks were quite terse and only
stated that "the motel is not one of the finer examples of this building type." However, that
report did not prove its judgment and give examples of finer samples of such structures. If the
Page & Turnbull report did not justify itself, he questioned how this Draft EIR accepted that
judgment as final.
Indicating he would also like to question the trip generation analysis on page 59, Mr. Roberts
stated they were simply taken from Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, which
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 8
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 9
he understood was standard City practice. Noting it concluded that there would only be forty net
new vehicle trips generated daily, Mr. Roberts indicated they had stated from the beginning that
the trip generation analysis provided to the City had always been inadequate and understated.
The fact was that most of the residents who lived in that facility were Latino, relatively low
income individuals and families, and by and large used public transportation. They were not
driving in and out in the same way that standard apartment dwellers of a normal range of
incomes might generate in a transportation manual type of analysis approach. Mr. Roberts
stated that, unfortunately, those residents were no longer there because the existing developer
did not encourage them to remain and did not allow them to increase and extend their tenancy.
He commented that obviously, this was not done because the developer wished to develop the
site. Therefore, he believed that the net trip generation was probably and highly likely to have
been understated. It was not known whether 40, 50 or 60 was the correct number; however, he
was reasonably sure that 40 was not a correct number based upon the nature of those who
resided there previously.
Mr. Roberts stated that the Draft EIR table on page 55 indicated that the Second, Third and
Fourth Street intersections at Hetherton, Irwin and Lincoln were at Level E and the additional
trips would not make that congestion any better. He noted it would not be worse in the large
sense, but certainly in a marginal sense, and this was the problem with the CEQA process and
cumulative impacts. Mr. Roberts stated that CEQA did not have a process that was very helpful
and he believed there had been a fair amount of litigation concerning the issue of cumulative
impacts. While it could be claimed that this issue had been addressed for this project in
connection with the program EIR done in connection with San Rafael's General Plan 2020, the
fact of the matter was that at some point in time, for some project at some date, the cumulative
impacts of the developments that occur in the City would, in fact, reach a tipping point. With no
knowledge of where the tipping point was or whether it was, in fact, this project or the next one
in the area, he believed it unacceptable for the City to piecemeal allow congestion to become
worse and worse in this area of the City without taking steps to ensure there were mitigation
measures and that the developers paid to complete and correct those congestions they were
causing.
Mr. Roberts suggested that this Draft EIR and others like it now and in the future, should help in
determining whether or not there were cumulative impacts that would seriously lead to a tipping
point.
Indicating that this would conclude his remarks this evening, Mr. Roberts hoped there would be
opportunities to discuss this further in future meetings.
Hugo Landecker stated that General Plan 2020 recognized the importance of historically and
architecturally significant structures. He was happy with the destruction of the old Motor Court;
however, taking photographs of it and then carrying out the demolition did not cut it in his book.
He recalled having mentioned to the City Council in the past the importance of historical and
architectural significance. The list for the City needed to be updated and what was there
preserved. He indicated that this was one of the reasons so many came to this small town
community, and this was another example of another site being demolished to be replaced by a
condominium building.
On the issue of Parking, Mr. Landecker stated he realized the parking provided for this project
met the zoning ordinance requirements and the requirements of the state mandates; however,
he was totally unhappy with what he saw. In the Gerstle Park and the Canal neighborhoods,
the parking standards the old apartment buildings were built to were being emulated in this
project. He indicated his point was that in the 1960s and 1970s there was a deplorable zoning
ordinance which was subsequently corrected; however, state mandates returned the situation
to essentially the 1960s. He indicated that with a project such as this there would be more cars
than allocated spaces; therefore, these people would have to go into the surrounding area, the
impact of which he believed was wrong.
Dirck Brinckerhoff, Advocates for Housing and Economic Development, thanked the City
Council for the services provided. He commented that a few months ago he ran over an
horrendous pothole at Mission and Court, blowing a tire, and having called Public Works the
following morning, he reported that within twenty minutes they were out fixing the pothole. He
stated these were good services to the citizens.
Mr. Brinckerhoff stated that this project was ideal as infill housing. It fit all the requirements of
the Housing Element, it would not necessitate extension of roads, sewers or City services to
new areas, and at the same time, it provided needed housing to citizens who would like to live
in San Rafael and who would spend money in San Rafael and assist in paying for fixing
potholes, etc. Mr. Brinckerhoff noted that this neighborhood had been sufficiently changed
already over the years that there was no reason to keep the buildings there just for the purpose
of preserving the character of a neighborhood. He stated that the Motor Court as it stood, was
deteriorating and had been for probably the last fifteen or twenty years, and was an eyesore for
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 9
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 10
the neighborhood. He did not recall hearing of anyone traveling to San Rafael to view the Motor
Court, which he believed had suddenly become an historical resource with the advent of this
project. He noted that the documentation mentioned in the Draft EIR would, in fact, give those
interested in this resource more access than they would ever have had should it remain as a
Motor Court with citizens residing in it, unless it were turned into a museum or tourist attraction.
He believed the Draft EIR sufficiently addressed the issues and he hoped it would be approved
as it stood.
There being no further comment from the audience, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Phillips stated that City Attorney Ragghianti had made it quite clear the City
Council was here to receive public comment which he had done.
On a point of clarification, Councilmember Cohen stated he believed this was the only
opportunity for oral comment. To reiterate, he stated that the comment period remained open
until the end of June and anyone who wished was more than welcome to submit comments in
writing which would be responded to as part of the consideration of the Final EIR.
With respect to the issue of financial feasibility, and particularly both in the staff report and the
Draft EIR, the discussion of the financial feasibility of the Preserve and Renovate alternative,
Councilmember Cohen inquired as to what extent the City was required or allowed to consider
the issue of financial feasibility.
Tiffany Wright, Attorney, stated that CEQA requires an analysis of a reasonable range of
alternatives to the project with the goal of analyzing alternatives that would substantially reduce
the significant impacts of the project. She indicated that the initial analysis in an EIR is to
consider alternatives that are potentially feasible. Having gone through the analysis, when it
became time to consider the project, the City Council would go through the process of adopting
findings and analyzing whether the alternatives were, in fact, feasible. She indicated that that
determination would be based on the evidence in the record.
Mr. Ragghianti stated he believed it was quite appropriate to inquire about the economic
feasibility; however, the evidence submitted needed to be judged by the City Council and
determined to be credible or incredible as deemed appropriate.
With regard to Mr. Rogers' statements concerning the Density Bonus , Mr. Ragghianti stated
that SB 1818 did allow the City Council to require the developer to provide evidence that it was
infeasible. He noted the extent of that was a little murky because the legislation was new;
however, the City Council at its pleasure could ask staff, or could ask the developer to provide
information to staff on the support for its claim that it was simply economically infeasible to
rebuild or renovate. He believed some of this information has already been obtained.
Community Development Director Bob Brown added that when the project was returned to the
City Council for the Final EIR and Merits, there would be evidence. He noted an architect and
contractor had been hired who had gone through the building. There were cost estimates and
staff would be looking at the financial return; therefore, that economic information would be
available to the City Council.
Councilmember Cohen stated he would be interested in seeing this. He indicated that to some
extent, it would seem that the financial analysis in large measure would be driven by the cost of
acquisition, given that this was a developer who was purchasing the property. He noted that
part was the land value set by the seller, which, of course, was based on their expectation of
what would be permitted, as opposed to indicating that the land value needed to reflect what
actually was allowed there. He commented that the land cost was a big driver of whether or not
something penciled out.
Should the analysis be done disregarding land cost, just looking at rehabilitation costs and what
the units could be rented for, Mr. Brown noted that even at that point, there would not be
financial feasibility.
Regarding the Density Bonus, Mr. Ragghianti clarified that apparently, the developer had not
requested any concessions under SB 1818.
Council accepted public comments, directed staff to prepare the Final Environmental Impact
Report and respond to the comments received this evening, together with responding to any
additional written comments that may be received during the 45 -day public review period which
closes on Friday, June 30, 2006.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 10
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 11
COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
16. a) City Employees: - File 9-1 x 7-4
Observing City employees from a number of departments working at Pickleweed and in the
Canal neighborhood this morning, Councilmember Miller commented that the way they
sustain the City and its development and serve the citizens was truly remarkable.
b) Marin Economic Commission: - File 9-1
Having attended a further assigned Economic Commission meeting, Councilmember
Phillips stated it amazed him that it took approximately six months to arrive at a definition of
what a contract employee should be doing for the Economic Commission.
There being no further business, Mayor Boro adjourned the City Council meeting at 9:50 p.m. to Closed
Session 1.d).
OPEN SESSION — COUNCIL CHAMBER — 9:50 PM
Mayor Boro announced Closed Session item 1. d)
CLOSED SESSION — CONFERENCE ROOM 201 - 9:50 PM — File 1-4-1a
d) Conference with Labor Negotiators — Government Code Section 54957.6
Negotiators: Ken Nordhoff, Nancy Mackle, Lydia Romero, Donna Williamson,
Richard Whitmore
Employee Organization(s): San Rafael Firefighters' Association
San Rafael Fire Chief Officers' Association
San Rafael Police Association
San Rafael Police Mid -Management Association
Association of Confidential Employees
Western Council of Engineers
SEIU Miscellaneous & Supervisory
Mayor Boro announced at 11:13 p.m. that no reportable action was taken on item 1.d).
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 12006
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 06/05/2006 Page 11