HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 2008-08-18SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, AUGUST 18, 2008 AT 8:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
San Rafael City Council Cyr N. Miller, Vice -Mayor
Greg Brockbank, Councilmember
Damon Connolly, Councilmember
Barbara Heller, Councilmember
Absent: None
Also Present: Ken Nordhoff, City Manager
Robert F. Epstein, City Attorney
Esther C. Beirne, City Clerk
OPEN SESSION — COUNCIL CHAMBER — 5:30 PM
Mayor Boro announced Closed Session items.
CLOSED SESSION — CONFERENCE ROOM 201 — 5:30 PM
1. (a) Conference with Labor Negotiators - Government Code Section 54957.6(a)
Negotiators: Ken Nordhoff, Jim Schutz, Leslie Loomis, Cindy Mosser, Nancy Mackle, Chris Gray
Employee Organization(s):
San Rafael Fire Chief Officers' Association
San Rafael Firefighters' Association
(b) Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Government Code Section 54957)
Title: City Manager
City Attorney Robert Epstein announced that no reportable action was taken.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE:
8:12 PM
33 San Pablo Avenue, San Rafael: - File 9-1 x 10-2 (2)
John Mosher, Tarrant Court, San Rafael, stated that although he disagreed he understood the City uses state
guidelines to calculate maximum height and density instead of tighter City guidelines. He noted that the Design
Review Board meeting on July 22 was supposed to have been a final review; however, instead, there was a new
architect with a new plan, design, and building; not just with smaller windows and balconies, rather with a penthouse
on the roof, raising it to seven stories and the elevation from 151 to 166 feet. He stated that the builder just could not
add elevation and break commitments to its Tarrant Court neighbors without even a hearing. He noted that while the
building may look similar, the fundamental structure was different from that approved. Mr. Mosher noted City Planner
Kraig Tambornini indicted that with significant changes, a new design review hearing was "required", (he provided
copies of the minutes to the City Council) and requested a new hearing for the new design. He noted it was claimed
neighbors were notified of the first meeting proposing a change in use from commercial to residential and requested
evidence as proof of this notification, or in the spirit of transparent government, that decision should also be part of the
next meeting.
Joan Gordon, Tarrant Court, San Rafael, stated that in comparing the original approved plans with the new plans for
33 San Pablo Avenue, she noticed a downgrading process and inquiring whether these units could become rentals,
she questioned who would consider fifteen feet taller insignificant.
Matthew Griggv, Tarrant Court, San Rafael, stated that in widening the street as mandated, the developer appeared to
be skirting around the issues in terms of complying with the letter of the law while bypassing common sense, which
concerned many members of the neighborhood in terms of this development. Expressing concern regarding parking,
etc., he suggested limiting the developer with regard to changes they appeared to be making on their own, and
introducing more oversight from staff into the process.
Mayor Boro requested staff to provide a written update to the City Council, with a copy to those residents in
attendance, regarding allegations concerning changes in plans subsequent to approval of the project.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 1
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 2
Marin Clean Enerav: - File 9-1 x 271
Bob Spofford, Sustainable San Rafael, reporting on a door to door survey they conducted this past weekend within
San Rafael City limits, stated that of 102 postcards collected, 101 expressed interest in Marin Clean Energy. His
honest guess from having talked to people was that approximately 80% of those they met, once informed a little about
Marin Clean Energy, were absolutely in favor. Mr. Spofford indicated they would continue to do this each weekend
and report back between now and November as results built up.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Connolly seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as follows.
ITEM
2. Approval of Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of
August 4, 2008 (CC)
3. Resolution Appointing Members of the Tree Advisory
Committee as per Recommendation of the City Council
Sub -Committee (CS) — File 9-2 59
4. Monthly Investment Report for July, 2008 (Fin) —
File 8-18 x 8-9
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approved as submitted.
RESOLUTION NO. 12550 —
RESOLUTION APPOINTING THE MEMBERS
OF THE TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AS
PER THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE
Accepted Monthly Investment Report for
July, 2008, as presented.
6. Resolution of Appreciation for Public Works Director RESOLUTION 12551 —
Andrew Preston, Retiring After 27 Years of Service (PW) — RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR
File 102 x 9-3-40 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ANDREW
PRESTON, RETIRING AFTER 27 YEARS OF
SERVICE
7. Resolution Confirming Waiver of Traffic Mitigation Fees
and Authorizing Release of Covenant Burdening Land
(PW) — File 9-10-2 - Traffic Mitigation Fees
8. Resolution Accepting a Proposal from Lim and Nascimento
Engineering Corp. for Professional Services to Provide
Project Administration and Inspection Services for the
Parking Structures 2008 Repairs Project, Project No.
11120 and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the
Agreement in an Amount Not to Exceed $75,364.44 (PW)
— File 4-3-496 x 4-1-604 9-3-87
RESOLUTION 12552 —
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING WAIVER OF
TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEES AND
AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF COVENANT
BURDENING LAND
RESOLUTION 12553 —
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A PROPOSAL
FROM LIM AND NASCIMENTO
ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
TO PROVIDE PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE
PARKING STRUCTURES 2008 REPAIRS
PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 11120, AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $75,364.44
Resolution Authorizing Temporary Closure of Alto Street RESOLUTION 12554 —
from Larkspur Street to Belvedere Street & Belvedere RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
Street from Louise Street to Verdi Street to Allow for the 4`" TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CITY STREETS
Annual International Festival, Sunday, September 7, 2008 FOR THE 4T" ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL
from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. (RA) — File 11-19 FESTIVAL, SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2008
FROM 8:00 A.M. TO 7:00 P.M.
10. Resolution Authorizing Temporary Closure of Ritter Street Removed from agenda at request of staff.
from Lincoln Avenue to Third Street September 20 & 21,
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 2
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 3
2008 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. to Support Goodwill —
Ritter House Partnership Donation Drive / SOS Marin (RA)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
The following item was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion at the request of Mayor Boro:
5. REPORT ON BID OPENING AND RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PARKING STRUCTURES
2008 REPAIRS. PROJECT NO. 11120. TO TRUESDELL CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $627.627.00
(BID OPENING HELD ON THURSDAY. JULY 31. 2008) (PW) — FILE 4-1-604 x 9-3-87
Mayor Boro invited Mr. Preston to provide the Council with information regarding the winning bidder.
Mr. Preston reported that Truesdell Corporation, a seasoned company from Tempe, Arizona, had been in
business since 1975, and undertaken 6,000 projects. The company had worked on intricate projects, such as
restoration work on dams and pump stations and seismic retrofitting of structures; however, their specialty is
structural concrete bonding, deck topping and sealing. In California, they hold an 'A' General Engineering license,
'D06' specialist concrete -related services license, and 'C33' painting and decorating license. For this project, two
additional local contractors would be employed for the parking lot striping and some plumbing and drainage work.
Although the contractors are located out of state, Mr. Preston believed they were well qualified to do the work.
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Brockbank seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 12555 - REPORT ON BID OPENING AND RESOLUTION AWARDING THE CONTRACT
FOR THE "PARKING STRUCTURES REPAIRS 2008", PROJECT NO. 11120, TO
TRUESDELL CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $627,627.00
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
SPECIAL PRESENTATION:
11. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ANDREW
PRESTON. RETIRING AFTER 27 YEARS OF SERVICE (PW) — FILE 102 x 9-3-40
Mayor Boro reported that on Thursday last City employees celebrated with Mr. Preston on his retirement after 27
years of service, five in his current capacity as Director of Public Works. Having been presented with a
proclamation naming Thursday, August 14 Andrew J. Preston Day in the City of San Rafael, this evening, he was
being presented with a Resolution of Appreciation from the City Council.
Quoting from the Resolution, Mayor Boro stated: "Andy has been a valued employee of the City of San Rafael and
the Department of Public Works since January 5, 1981, when Ronald Reagan was President, gasoline was $1.38
a gallon and Andy's comb was more than just a fond memory." The Resolution also addressed how Mr. Preston
worked his way up through the ranks to become the 7th Public Works Director in San Rafael's 135 -year history and
that he had done many projects, including Anderson Drive, East Francisco Blvd, Stormwater Pump Station,
Parkside Childcare, Public Works World Headquarters, Pickleweed Community Center, under -grounding work to
flood proof the City, Fourth Street/West End Village project, and many more. Mayor Boro stated that Mr. Preston
also assisted him with respect to the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM), and not only did he work with TAM
but also the Marin Public Works Association, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Bay Conservation
Development Corporation, and Marin County Bicycle Coalition.
Noting Vice -Mayor Miller and he, along with Supervisor Kinsey serve on the San Rafael Sanitation District, Mayor
Boro stated it was great sharing Art Carney experiences with Mr. Preston and he was thankful, that due to his great
work and long-term planning, the City had not endured any significant spills.
Having served the City of San Rafael with enthusiasm and flair, Mr. Preston had well represented the community
and Council for more than a quarter of a century and on behalf of all, Mayor Boro congratulated and thanked Mr.
Preston and presented him with the Resolution of Appreciation.
Expressing thanks Mr. Preston stated it was the end of a wonderful journey of 27 years. In those 27 years he
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 3
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 4
worked on many projects and for many people and it was the most wonderful part of his life. He stated that the
San Rafael City Council was the best he could ever have hoped to work with or work for because they were smart,
seasoned veterans who worked with staff and he believed everyone was very fortunate to have this Council
leading the City.
Mr. Preston also remarked that it was a pleasure working for Ken Nordhoff, the City Manager. In taking over from
Rod Gould, Mr. Nordhoff had a hard act to follow but had stepped up to the task, and if anything, had taken the City
in a bigger and broader direction. He also acknowledged the good fortune of having worked with the other
department directors, some for a long time. The hardest decision he had to make was deciding when to retire
because of the great change in his life. Passionate about his work, he believed he would be the only director
retiring from a job he really loved and he expressed thanks to all for the wonderful years.
Mayor Boro noted that with nine cars Mr. Preston would have a lot to do. He paused the City Council meeting to
honor Andy with a reception in City Hall lobby.
PUBLIC HEARING:
12. Public Hearinq — 226 MAGNOLIA AVENUE (MAGNOLIA HOUSE) — REQUEST FOR A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, REZONING, AMENDMENT TO MASTER USE PERMIT, AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN
REVIEW PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING HISTORIC SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TO
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE USE FOR DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY (CD) —
FILE 10-2 (3) Magnolia House x 115 (2020)
a) RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT (GPA07-005), A ZONE CHANGE FROM LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL (R -1A) TO
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) (ZC07-003), AN AMENDMENT TO AN APPROVED MASTER USE
PERMIT (UP07-063), AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED07-102) TO
CONVERT MAGNOLIA HOUSE, LOCATED AT 226 MAGNOLIA AVENUE, FROM RESIDENTIAL USE
TO UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE USE, AND TO PROVIDE A HANDICAP ACCESS TO THE
HOUSE AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS;
b) RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN 2020 (GPA07-005) TO
CHANGE THE LAND USE MAP OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT FOR THE 1.35 ACRE SITE LOCATED
AT 226 MAGNOLIA AVENUE FROM LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL TO PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC (P/QP)
FOR DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY;
c) ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL (ZC07-003) SO AS TO
RECLASSIFY CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R -1A) DISTRICT
TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) DISTRICT AT 226 MAGNOLIA AVENUE, AND RESCINDING
ORDINANCE NO. 1730 THAT RECLASSIFIED DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY PROPERTIES AS PART OF
THE DOMINICAN COLLEGE CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED IN 1998 AND
INCORPORATING THOSE PRIOR APPROVED REZONING ACTIONS AS PART OF THIS APPROVAL;
d) RESOLUTION APPROVING A USE PERMIT (UP07-063) FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE DOMINICAN
UNIVERSITY'S MASTER USE PERMIT (UP97-45) TO INCORPORATE MAGNOLIA HOUSE INTO THE
DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, AND APPROVAL OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN
REVIEW PERMIT (ED07-102) TO ALLOW EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE MAGNOLIA HOUSE
TO CONSTRUCT A HANDICAP ACCESS RAMP AT THE REAR PORCH AND TO ADD PARKING AND
ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 226 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened.
Lisa Newman, Contract Planner, reported that the proposed General Plan amendment, Re -zoning and
Design Review applications for the Magnolia House project would permit Dominican University to incorporate
a residential home into its campus and convert the historic use for residents to university administrative office
use. The Magnolia House property and conversion from residential use to office use would involve changes
to the General Plan and zoning ordinance in order to bring the land use designation and the zoning into
compliance with what the university at large had in place; public/quasi-public land use designation and
planned development district zoning.
Ms. Newman reported that the proposed physical changes to Magnolia House to accommodate this
conversion and use would be to add a handicap ramp at the rear, new parking, paving the existing gravel
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 4
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 5
driveway and the historic landscaping would be retained to maintain the existing historic character. Going
forward, the property would still have the appearance of a residential estate.
Reporting that an initial study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and circulated for public
comment, focusing in on the question of cultural resources, Ms. Newman stated it concluded that there would
be no significant adverse impacts.
Ms. Newman stated that on July 15, 2008, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the
MND and project applications and voted unanimously to support all of them. Questions were raised and
addressed in the Staff Report. The first question was the reassurance of sufficient parking on campus, given
the fact that Magnolia House was only going to have 14 spaces, whereby a strict reading of the code would
require 30. The staff report indicated that currently, the university was well ahead of the required parking and
adding 14 spaces would bring the total to 98 extra parking spaces. The second question was in regard to the
relocation of historic locust trees along the driveway. Eventually the trees would be relocated because the
driveway would be widened, and their historian stated it was appropriate and in the best interest of the trees.
Ms. Newman stated that In summary, staff recommended the approval of the project. With the proposed
mitigations and conditions of approvals, the project would be fully consistent with the General Plan and the
zoning ordinance.
Paul Hartman, TWM Architects, stated he was accompanied by Jeff Bialik and Jacques Charton, Dominican
University and all were available for questions.
There being no comment from the audience, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Connolly seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
a) RESOLUTION NO. 12556 — RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA07-
005), A ZONE CHANGE FROM LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL (R -1A)
TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) (ZC07-003), AN
AMENDMENT TO AN APPROVED MASTER USE PERMIT (UP07-
063) AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT
(ED07-102) TO CONVERT MAGNOLIA HOUSE LOCATED AT 226
MAGNOLIA AVENUE FROM RESIDENTIAL USE TO UNIVERSITY
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE USE AND TO PROVIDE A HANDICAP
ACCESS TO THE HOUSE AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND
ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS (APN: 015-121-10)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Brockbank seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
b) RESOLUTION NO. 12557 — RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL
PLAN 2020 (GPA07-005) TO CHANGE THE LAND USE MAP OF
THE LAND USE ELEMENT FOR THE 1.35 -ACRE SITE LOCATED
AT 226 MAGNOLIA AVE FROM LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL TO
PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC (P/QP) FOR DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY
(APN: 015-121-10)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
The title of the ordinance was read:
c) "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP (ZC07-003) TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R -1A) DISTRICT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD)
DISTRICT AT 226 MAGNOLIA AVENUE AND RESCINDING ORDINANCE NO. 1730 THAT
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 5
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 6
RECLASSIFIED DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY PROPERTIES AS PART OF THE DOMINICAN COLLEGE
CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED IN 1998 AND INCORPORATING THOSE PRIOR
APPROVED REZONING ACTIONS AS PART OF THIS APPROVAL AT 226 MAGNOLIA AVENUE;
APN 015-121-10"
Councilmember Connolly moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to dispense with the reading of the
ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only, and pass Charter Ordinance No. 1868 to print by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Councilmember Brockbank moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
d) RESOLUTION NO. 12558 — RESOLUTION APPROVING USE PERMIT (UP07-063) AN
AMENDMENT TO THE DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY'S MASTER
USE PERMIT (UP97-45) TO INCORPORATE MAGNOLIA HOUSE
INTO THE DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS AND APPROVAL
OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT
(ED07-102) TO ALLOW EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE
MAGNOLIA HOUSE TO CONSTRUCT A HANDICAP ACCESS
RAMP AT THE REAR PORCH AND TO ADD PARKING AND
ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
226 MAGNOLIA AVENUE (APN: 015-121-10)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
13. Public Hearinq — PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS 2008 — PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS (PSP)
DETERMINATION FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE CIRCULATION -IMPACTED AREAS OF NORTH SAN
RAFAEL. CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL. EAST SAN RAFAEL. AND FRANCISCO BOULEVARD WEST AREA; P08-
02 (CD) —FILE 115 (PSP
a) RESOLUTION GRANTING 2008 PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS (PSP) DETERMINATION FOR
DEVELOPMENT IN THE NORTH SAN RAFAEL AREA PSP08-010;
b) RESOLUTION GRANTING 2008 PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS (PSP) DETERMINATION FOR
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL AREA PSP08-001, PSP08-002, PSP08-003 &
PSP08-004;
c) RESOLUTION GRANTING 2008 PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS (PSP) DETERMINATION FOR
DEVELOPMENT IN THE EAST SAN RAFAEL AREA PSP08-005 & PSP08-008;
d) RESOLUTION GRANTING 2008 PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS (PSP) DETERMINATION FOR
DEVELOPMENT IN THE FRANCISCO BOULEVARD WEST AREA PSP08-007 & PSP08-006
Mr. Boloyan reported that the Project Selection Process (PSP) had two purposes: 1) to take a macro level
view of traffic impacts likely from future development projects and determine if there was adequate traffic
capacity for those projects; and 2) to give the City more choice in selecting the most desired projects in an
area. PSP was developed to implement various policies, starting with the General Plan 2000 in 1988. It had
been in operation since the late 1980s and had been implemented nearly every year since then. Currently it
implements three specific policies in the General Plan from the Land Use section, as well as the Circulation
Element policies contained in the Circulation Element for traffic Levels of Service (LOS).
Describing what PSP does not do, Mr. Boloyan reported that PSP was not an entitlement to develop, nor a
commitment by the City to approve any subsequent development application. PSP was an authorization by
the City Council for projects to pursue their planning entitlements, while the City held the traffic necessary for
those projects aside for two years allowing them to pursue their development applications during that time. It
allowed the City to allocate out the limited traffic capacity available citywide to those projects providing the
most public benefit to the community. Mr. Boloyan stated it usually was the first step for projects in their
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 6
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 7
development process where a detailed review followed the PSP review. The detailed review includes all the
specific consistency evaluations, CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) review is done for
environmental impacts, together with evaluation of noise and other types of project impacts. He noted that the
PSP process solely looks at public benefit versus traffic and allows the City to ultimately choose the projects
providing the most public benefit and serving the needs of the community.
Mr. Boloyan explained that PSP is initiated by a City Council resolution. It was first initiated following the
General Plan 2020 update in its current form through Resolution No. 11666. This was updated in 2007 with
some minor refinements to the process to clarify some points and close some loopholes.
Mr. Boloyan reported that notices inviting PSP applications were mailed in February 2008, and an April 4`h
deadline was established for submittal of applications. A pre -application workshop was conducted to help
applicants understand the process and assist them in formulating their application materials. Nine applications
were submitted for this year's competition and after submittal, a PSP staff committee, comprised of members
of the City Manager's office, Community Development, Community Services, Redevelopment Agency and City
Attorney's Office held three meetings, ranked the projects and formulated their recommendations. Traffic
modeling was completed for all projects by City Traffic Engineer, Nader Mansourian. Mr. Boloyan reported
that ultimately, the PSP Committee's recommendations were forwarded to the Planning Commission and were
included in Council's package.
Mr. Boloyan explained that the rating criteria used were threefold:
• Public Benefit — affordable housing, high tax generating or needed community facilities or needed
community use category;
• Circulation Impacts — project's impacts on the circulation system; and
• Timing and Project readiness.
For North San Rafael Mr. Boloyan reported that only one project was submitted which was a proposal to
convert 10,000 square feet of mid-level parking at One Thorndale to make room for additional office space.
The public benefit proposed was a $45,000 contribution to Marin Head Start to purchase a van and make
computer center improvements at their facility at 96 Pilgrim Way, North San Rafael. Fifteen intersections and
one arterial were analyzed in North San Rafael and this project would not result in any unacceptable
operations. The PSP Committee initially recommended against granting PSP for this project based on the fact
that under the PSP rating criteria, Marin Head Start was not considered a true childcare center. However,
the Planning Commission disagreed with the recommendation finding that it did provide a significant public
benefit and recommended approval of the PSP. The draft resolution before the City Council this evening was
to grant PSP to this project.
Councilmember Brockbank inquired whether the name "Project Selection Process" could be changed,
because the word 'selection' implied Council was selecting. He also disliked the words competition, ranking or
anything else that implied the making of some determination tonight, other than that there was sufficient
capacity potentially to accept the project pending its formal application later. He suggested language such as
"initial review, pre -review or pre -consideration" to indicate the project was potentially acceptable.
Mr. Boloyan explained that the name was actually a source of lengthy debate during the General Plan 2020
update process and a competition was held to come up with a new name. It was derived from a committee
formation; however, he agreed there were other ways it could be termed.
Councilmember Brockbank inquired as to where people would park from a significantly increased sized
building.
Mr. Boloyan indicated that this issue was expressed to the applicant. He explained the proposal was to
replace the parking lost through the conversion into office and the extra parking that would be necessitated by
the additional density created would be on the street. Although a private street, it would still count towards
their parking requirements; however, the question was whether it was feasible to use parking on a slope, and
this would be evaluated in more detail through the merits review.
There being no comment from the audience Mayor Boro closed the public hearing for North San Rafael Area.
a) Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 7
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 8
RESOLUTION NO. 12559— RESOLUTION GRANTING 2008 PROJECT SELECTION
PROCESS (PSP) DETERMINATION FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE
NORTH SAN RAFAEL AREA; CITY FILE NOS. PSP08-010
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened
Of the four applications received for Central San Rafael, Mr. Boloyan reported that the first was for 1312
Mission Avenue (Elks Club Condominiums) for 52 residential units. The public benefit proposed was a
provision of ten below market rate units (BMR).
Village at Loch Lomond Marina — Mr. Boloyan explained that the City Council approved this 81 residential unit
project, 17 of which were Below Market Rate, in August 2007. The other part of the pubic benefit was the
creation and ongoing maintenance through a funding mechanism of six acres of park improvements within the
development.
333 Biscavne — Peacock Gap Golf Course — Mr. Boloyan explained that this project had two components and
the component going through PSP was the construction of a new day spa and fitness building with outdoor
pool. The second half of the project, which does not require PSP, was a new exterior fagade to the existing
clubhouse. The new day spa/fitness building would be 10,000 square -feet and was proposed to be built to the
side of the clubhouse building. The proposed public benefit was a $30,000 contribution to a neighborhood
landscape median improvement project, currently under discussion between the City and Peacock Gap
Neighborhood Association, to redo and establish ongoing maintenance mechanisms for all the entry medians
within that area. The second part of the proposed public benefit was a $30,000 contribution to Glenwood
Elementary and Brendeis Hillel schools and thirdly, increased sales tax generated from the entire renovation of
the clubhouse.
226 Magnolia - conversion of a single family home to Dominican University offices — Mr. Boloyan reported that
the public benefit proposed would be the construction of 850 linear feet of sidewalk from Forest Meadows to
Coleman School for Safe Routes to Schools. Approximately 1,700 linear feet of sidewalk is missing in that
area and the university would be obliged to construct 850 linear feet on completion of phase IV of their
masterplan; therefore, they proposed to take on a portion of sidewalk that would not normally be required,
filling it in now, which would implement a Safe Routes to Schools program in that area.
In terms of traffic, Mr. Boloyan reported that 19 signalized intersections, 3 unsignalized intersections, and 2
arterials were studied by City Traffic Engineer Nader Mansourian for these four projects, all of which
individually and cumulatively met the City's Level of Service (LOS) standards for signalized intersections. He
indicated that the PSP Committee initially recommended granting PSP determination for all four projects;
however, the Planning Commission ultimately recommended granting PSP for only three projects,
recommending against the Peacock Gap Golf Course project. Explaining, Mr. Boloyan stated that firstly, they
understood that traffic capacity in that area was very limited and believed it should be reserved for projects
that provided significant public benefit, and in looking at the public benefit proposed by this project they did not
consider it adequate or significant enough to warrant the 31 trips that would be generated. The contribution
to the school was undefined, and no specific improvements would be implemented by the school district with
that money. Also Brendeis Hillel school was actually in the County's jurisdiction on North San Pedro Road and
the schools were not listed specifically as criteria in the City's PSP Resolution. Their final point was that the
Planning Commission did not wish to reserve these trips and limit any future development that could occur for
higher priority projects.
Mr. Boloyan reported that since the Planning Commission meeting the applicant had submitted a letter that
refuted their recommendation, primarily on two points. First, that the Planning Commission misunderstood the
public benefit offer, especially towards the schools, and second, the sales tax generation was understated
from the entire renovation project, and they believed that should be an important part of the consideration.
Indicating that as part of their August 8`" letter, the applicant offered an additional $30,000 towards the
landscape median improvement project, which would now total $60,000, Mr. Boloyan stated their belief was
that if they had misunderstood the criteria for public schools and contributed $30,000 towards that, an
additional $30,000 would be added to the landscape median project, which was found to be a public benefit.
They would not take the money away from the schools, which they have already donated.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 8
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 9
Mr. Boloyan confirmed the other parts of the public benefit were the $30,000 to the two schools, $61,000 in
affordable housing in lieu fee, and additional sales tax generated from renovating the clubhouse.
Mr. Boloyan reported that the PSP staff committee found the project met the public benefit criteria and
recommended granting PSP. Staff noted that the draft Resolution before the Council was based on the
Planning Commission's recommendation, which was to grant PSPs to only three of the four projects.
Mayor Boro suggested that each item be discussed independently and inquired whether the City Council or
audience had any questions on 1312 Mission Avenue — there was no comment.
Regarding the Village at Loch Lomond, there was not comment from the City Council or audience.
Regarding 333 Biscayne Drive — Peacock Gap Golf Course - Mayor Boro invited the applicant to comment.
Ms. Carolvn Keats, representative for the Peacock Gap Country Club and Spa, noted that Mr. Boloyan did a
good job expressing what was stated in their letter to the Council. Clarifying the contributions to public
education, she indicated they believed this should be considered because it truly went to the physical
improvement of education for the two schools. She indicated representatives were present who would like to
comment and explain where the money would be spent; however, should the City Council not believe this fell
within its policy, they were willing to provide an additional $30,000 towards the median project. Ms. Keats
requested that the City Council consider this and approve their project for PSP.
Grea Knell, Del Ganado, San Rafael, stated he was appalled that Resolution No. 11666 would not see public
schools as a public benefit. He noted the City Council saw public school as a public benefit and in fact,
appropriated $180,000 for two school resource officers at campuses, so it was obviously a priority; therefore,
prima facie, any donation from a corporation to public schools should automatically qualify under PSP and he
found this to be a real oversight. Mr. Knell noted that in Resolution No. 11666, the criteria included
improvements to a public facility and by law, public schools were a public facility. As documented by
Glenwood's Principal, these improvements would go toward overhead projectors, facility improvements, and
electives. Mr. Knell believed that failing to include schools as a public benefit set a bad precedent.
Mr. Knell believed it a bad idea to state that private corporations, such as the one that owns Peacock Gap,
could not donate money to public schools as it was not considered a public benefit. He believed it was a
public benefit, meeting two criteria under Resolution No. 11666, and should this document remain on the
books it should be revised so that public schools were recognized as a public benefit to everyone living in that
neighborhood.
Sidnev Johnson, Emeritus Director of Peacock Gap Homeowners Association Board, speaking in favor of the
application, stated they were in the process of negotiating with the City about the median project, and were
close to contractual conclusions. He believed it quite generous of the club to donate the extra money and put
them in a position to do the maintenance work. He considered it a very significant change and contribution
and should be deemed a public benefit. From a personal point of view, Mr. Johnson was delighted to see
these facilities being considered to be built, particularly the pool. Ten years ago, he suffered serious health
problems; however, swimming and using facilities such as this had been very beneficial in improving his
health. Mr. Johnson stated that having this located in Peacock Gap was of great benefit to him personally and
also for the wide variety of senior citizens who would like to have access to a more local facility.
Leo Isotalo, Peacock Drive, considering this a fabulous project stated they saw this as a vast improvement for
the neighborhood. For the past two years, volunteers, board members and others, had been in discussion
with Mr. Preston and the Public Works staff to develop a plan to renovate the extensive medians on Riviera
Drive and Peacock Drive, which had been in tatters for years. Asserting their best energies on behalf of
raising money within the neighborhood, they had collected over $75,000. Believing the project would not be
inexpensive, Mr. Isotalo stated the contribution from the club's owner would be critical to ever having a chance
to make the neighborhood look like it should, noting that it still was one of the premium neighborhoods in the
City. He hoped the City Council would include this project.
Councilmember Heller requested clarification on the second $30,000, i.e., whether it was going to the schools
or whether $60,000 was going to the neighborhood association.
Mr. Boloyan explained that the second $30,000 would be in addition to the $30,000 previously proposed as a
public benefit towards the landscape median improvement project. In addition, $30,000 would be donated to
the two schools, for a total contribution of $90,000. Mayor Boro noted the applicant confirmed this.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 9
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 10
Councilmember Brockbank stated that he had been prepared to go along with the Planning Commission's
recommendation; however, was having trouble. He requested Mr. Boloyan to shed light on what appeared to
be a blatantly contradictory and inconsistent application of the Planning Commission to the criteria. For
example, in the case of One Thorndale, he wondered why there was a reversal in opposite directions for
seemingly opposite reasons. On One Thorndale, staff's recommendation was to deny on the grounds that a
contribution to Marin Head Start was not in the criteria, but the Commission stated it was a good cause
anyway, and recommended approval. With Peacock Gap, Mr. Brockbank noted money was being given to
schools and a median strip and the Planning Commission stated it was not a good cause, and he invited Mr.
Boloyan's comments.
Mr. Boloyan explained that the PSP resolution allowed the Planning Commission and ultimately the City
Council, a lot of discretion. Regardless of how projects were ranked by staff or Planning Commission, the City
Council had the ultimate ability to select which projects met their priorities. As to Councilmember Brockbank's
first point about the rationale for recommending against it, Mr. Boloyan stated the second $30,000 towards the
neighborhood improvement project did not go before the Planning Commission. They only looked at a
$30,000 contribution to the neighborhood median project, plus $30,000 to the schools. Because the
contribution to the schools was not listed as ranking criteria, they had difficulty making the stretch for that
portion. In terms of the $30,000 to the neighborhood improvement project, they believed that on balance, with
the amount of trips generated by the new addition, 10,000 square feet, $30,000 was not enough of a
contribution to offset the 31 trips.
Councilmember Brockbank stated he could not understand the recommendations. Mayor Boro stated that was
not the issue before the Council and that Mr. Boloyan answered as best he could.
Councilmember Brockbank stated he would like to have the resolution amended to include the Peacock Gap
item.
Mayor Boro clarified that Councilmember Brockbank's motion was that the Resolution would be amended to
include the additional $30,000 towards the median strip.
Mr. Boloyan suggested staff rewrite the Resolution to incorporate all appropriate facts, and bring it back at the
next Council meeting as a Consent Calendar item.
City Attorney Robert Epstein stated it was his recommendation to rewrite the Resolution to memorialize the
action being taken tonight. This would appropriately reflect the findings upon which Council was basing the
change to the draft Resolution.
Clarifying for Councilmember Brockbank, Mr. Epstein stated staff sought Council's action this evening and the
Resolution before the City Council at the next meeting would simply be for adoption of the action already
taken, i.e., memorializing this evening's action to grant PSP determinations to the Peacock Gap Golf Course
Spa/Fitness Building (333 Biscayne Drive) project.
Mayor Boro confirmed the sense of the Council was to bring a resolution back as a Consent Calendar item for
adoption at the meeting of September 2, 2008 to also include support for the Peacock Gap Golf Course
Spa/Fitness Building (333 Biscayne Drive) — PSP Determinations for the four Central San Rafael area
projects.
b) PSP Determinations granted to all four projects in the Central San Rafael Area. Resolution memorializing
this action to be placed on the Consent Calendar for adoption at the City Council meeting of September 2,
2008
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
East San Rafael - Mr. Boloyan reported that the Target proposal was a 137,000 square -foot new retail
building estimated to generate $675,000 in annual sales tax to the City. The second project was a proposal
for a 49,000 square -foot mini storage building on a vacant lot on Windward Way with no public benefit
proposed. The application reported that the project would create construction jobs and that the mini storage
was a needed use for the community.
Mr. Boloyan reported that in this area seven intersections and one arterial were analyzed for traffic purposes.
Under current conditions with regard to traffic in the East San Rafael area, Mr. Boloyan explained that the
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 10
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 11
intersection of Bellam and Kerner currently operates at LOS E, which was beyond the acceptable LOS
standard for the area during the a.m. peak period of 7:00-9:00. However, between 4:00-6:00 p.m., the same
intersection operated within an acceptable LOS. Mr. Mansourian also evaluated the entire corridor, the arterial
segments, and found it did operate within the City's acceptable LOS standard for arterials.
With regard to the Target application, Mr. Boloyan reported that traffic analysis was redone, adding in the new
trips. This would result in a deterioration of the LOS at the Bellam/Kerner intersection by 2.4 seconds, from
LOS D to E in the peak p.m. period. It would also reduce the arterial LOS standards; however, they would still
be within the acceptable LOS standards prescribed by the General Plan. Mr. Boloyan noted that the project
would result in unacceptable operations to the circulation system. The City may grant an exception to LOS
standards if it makes findings and grants an overriding consideration to the Environmental Impact Report
(EIR). He indicated that an EIR is being prepared currently and anticipated it would be reviewed by the
Planning Commission in September or October, ultimately going before the City Council for final decision. He
noted that the issue of whether the City should grant an override to the LOS standards would ultimately be up
to the City Council during the merits review.
Mr. Boloyan reported that the mini storage facility was also looked at by itself as well as cumulatively and
because of the current conditions in that area where baseline already operates past the current standards, that
project would also result in unacceptable operations to the circulation system; therefore, it would necessitate
an EIR to proceed and require the City to grant an override. Mr. Boloyan reported that both the Planning
Commission and staff committee recommended PSP be granted for Target, given the high sales tax
generation, and denied PSP for the mini storage project due to the lack of public benefit.
Jim Geraahtv, Canal Street, inquired whether the City would conduct an EIR for Target, indicating his
concern that time and millions of dollars had been invested in developing downtown and big box stores were
known to pull money away from downtown business. He inquired whether it was true that the site was on an
old dump site. As schools were not allowed to be built on such sites, he was concerned that Target would be
attracting mothers that were pregnant and with small children, and he inquired whether employees would be
paid a living wage.
Mr. Geraghty inquired whether there could be better notification when the Target discussion would be before
the City Council so that the public could use democracy to the advantage of the community, and whether the
project suited the greenness and direction in which the City was going for sustainability and green. He noted
that Target sells a lot of packaged goods in plastic that would add to the problem; therefore, he was curious as
to whether the City was going to address these issues, the most important one being an EIR which many
communities look at with big box stores.
Mayor Boro thanked Mr. Geraghty and indicated that his questions would be raised during the discussion of
the merits of the project and the EIR.
Bob Wriaht, TWM Architects, representing the Target project, inquired whether staff had received the most
recent correspondence from the Target Corporation with regard to public benefits that were being proposed
with the project. He offered to provide Mr. Boloyan with copies of the correspondence addressed to Mr.
Dhaliwal that was sent out on Sunday. In addition to the tax generation, the letter addressed the five areas of
public benefit as being approximately $772,000 in affordable housing, community giving program, local hiring
and training programs, and the Shoreline Park adjacent to the site. He reported having been in contact with
Ms. Starkweather and the City in negotiating improvements to Shoreline Park, either through donation of land
or actually making improvements for parking and access.
Councilmember Brockbank stated he understood the basic concept currently was to determine if any of the
project's specific benefits, such as affordable housing, sales tax generation, or writing a big check exceeded
the traffic capacity. Should traffic be really constrained in this area, he inquired whether the benefits would
have to be commensurately greater.
Responding, Mr. Boloyan explained that there was no requirement; however, it was something that could be
considered. Following up on Mr. Wright's explanation of the additional public benefit, Mr. Boloyan explained
that those public benefits were not part of the PSP process, but rather benefits being proposed as part of the
EIR for the City's consideration of overriding considerations. These were separate public benefits for and EIR
process.
c) Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 11
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 12
RESOLUTION NO. 12560 — RESOLUTION GRANTING 2008 PROJECT SELECTION
PROCESS (PSP) DETERMINATION FOR DEVELOPMENT IN
THE EAST SAN RAFAEL AREA; CITY FILE NOS. PSP08-005 &
PSP08-008
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
West Francisco Blvd. - Mr. Boloyan reported that the first project was a hybrid of former projects that were
before the Council in the last round of PSP. RAB Motors proposed a new SMART car dealership and
expansion of their current RAB dealership to include a pre -owned lot and building expansion. Changes
resulting from the modifications and new dealership would be an increase in annual sales tax of $386,000.
Staff compared the applicant's figures with other sales tax projections in other communities, and found the
$386,000 to be a more conservative and realistic projection of sales tax generation. Based on that it would be
generating approximately $5,800 per each trip generated by the new expanded dealership.
Indicating that the second project, also an extension of a previous PSP determination for the new
Volkswagen/Audi building, was previously approved by the City for the area formally known as Baxter's Court,
Mr. Boloyan explained that this would be a brand new dealership next to the existing VW/Audi dealership.
VW/Audi would move into the new building, and the old VW/Audi building would be converted into a Nissan
dealership. He reported that the new dealership was estimated to add $312,000 in annual sales tax directly to
the City.
With regard to traffic impacts, Mr. Boloyan stated this was an area which went through significant change with
the Caltrans project where a lot of structures were removed with subsequent reduction in traffic in this corridor
based on the historic use of industrial spaces. He indicated that both projects were well below the LOS
standards contained in the General Plan and would, individually and cumulatively, generate fewer trips than
historical levels in the area. As such, the staff committee and Planning Commission recommended granting
the PSP determinations for both projects given the high sales tax generation and minimal impact to the traffic
system.
There being no further comment from the audience, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
d) Councilmember Brockbank moved and Councilmember Connolly seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 12561 — RESOLUTION GRANTING 2008 PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS
(PSP) DETERMINATION FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE WEST
FRANCISCO BLVD AREA; CITY FILE NOS. PSP08-007 & PSP08-006
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
14. a) Public Hearing — AUTOMATED RED LIGHT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM — CONSIDERATION OF A
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN AUTOMATED RED LIGHT PHOTO
ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL (PD) — FILE 9-3-30
b) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
WITH REDFLEX TRAFFIC SYSTEMS INC. TO INSTALL. SUPPORT AND MAINTAIN AN AUTOMATED
RED LIGHT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM AT INTERSECTIONS DESIGNATED BY THE CITY (PD) —
FILE 9-3-30 x 4-3-497
Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened.
Lieutenant David Starnes announced that he would first discuss the red light photo enforcement system for
the City of San Rafael followed by a presentation from Wade Bettisworth covering the entire program.
With regard to the current traffic patterns and impacts in San Rafael and the unique problems, especially in
downtown, Lieutenant Starnes stated that heavy traffic in downtown San Rafael was caused by funneling of
cars coming from San Rafael, Fairfax, San Anselmo and the coast that fed into Highway 101, and the fact that
there was only one on-ramp to the southbound highway and one to the northbound highway. He indicated that
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 12
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 13
red light violations caused gridlock at the intersections, and collisions, further backing up traffic. Compounding
traffic problems were the construction projects on Highway 101, West End, and Lincoln Avenue.
To illustrate the amount of traffic in the downtown area, Lieutenant Starnes reported that a car count was
conducted last May at Third and Heatherton between 6:30-9:00 a.m. There were over 1,000 vehicles on
Heatherton and 1,771 vehicles on Third, with five bicyclists and 128 pedestrians. Pedestrians were included
because of the concern about pedestrians crossing in crosswalks. He indicated that the same car count was
conducted during the p.m. rush hour - 955 vehicles on Heatherton and 1,700 on westbound Third, 13
bicyclists and 172 pedestrians (bus station).
Lieutenant Starnes reported collision statistics were collected at intersections throughout the entire City of San
Rafael from July 1, 2007 -July 31, 2008. Total collisions amounted to 767, of which 66 were caused by people
running red lights, which was a significant problem in the City. To combat red light violations and traffic, the
Traffic Division was increased to seven motor officers and a riding sergeant. Between November 2006 -May
2007, officers wrote 2,990 citations and 5,267 from November 2007 -May 2008. He noted that it was difficult
for officers to work red light enforcement because of where they have to position themselves, and the dangers
of negotiating an emergency vehicle through the intersection to pull over the violator. This caused danger not
only to the officer but also to other motorists on the road.
Reporting that the Police Department received a STEP (Selective Traffic Enforcement Program) grant,
Lieutenant Starnes stated that part of this grant enabled enforcement of traffic, red lights, speed, and working
high -collision rate intersections. He reported that the main goal of installing red light cameras was to improve
the safety for the community at signalized intersections, reduce collisions, and modifying the behavior of the
public. Studies had shown a halo effect for neighboring intersections, i.e., by installing a red light system at
Third and Heatherton, studies had shown a lower collision rate at neighboring intersections. Another goal
was to free up motor officers so that they could attend to other problem areas within the City.
Providing an overview of work completed in the last year, Lieutenant Starnes reported that in May, 2007, the
City Council approved the Request For Proposal of red light cameras. A group was formed to evaluate
potential vendors and Redflex was selected. Having contacted the Marin County Traffic Court they concurred
with the red light program and would prosecute citations. A City Council Study Session was held in May with
three public meetings - at B Street Recreation Center, Pickleweed Park Recreation Center, and Terra Linda
High School in June.
Should the City Council approve the program, Lieutenant Starnes stated that red light cameras would be
located at intersections based on collision rates, history of traffic violations, traffic volume, proximity to major
thoroughfares, and congestion. Based on these factors, the recommended locations would be Third and
Heatherton, Third and Irwin, Third and Grand, and Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Del Presidio. The Police
Department would also work with Redflex on an extensive public outreach program, to distribute newsletters to
Home Owner Associations, publish articles in the press, SNAPSHOT newsletter, and on the City's web site to
explain the program and what would happen in the event of receiving a citation. If approved, Lieutenant
Starnes stated staff would negotiate a contract with Redflex. Three months would be required for the
installation of the equipment, with a subsequent one month warning period. He believed the timeline would be
approximately six months from contract date to issuance of citations.
Wade Bettisworth, Redflex Traffic Systems, stated that Redflex offers two forms of output they utilize with
their system, four still images and a video (displayed). The video provides situational awareness, which
cannot be achieved with still image and was very compelling in terms of the evidence provided. In addition,
videos could be used by the City for other purposes such as dispatch, traffic counts and monitoring traffic flow.
With regard to effectiveness of the program, he stated that cities within the state reported a reduction in
violations and collisions, not only at intersections where equipment was installed but also throughout the
community, in what was called a halo or spillover effect. He cited studies showing significant reductions in
crashes.
Mr. Bettisworth noted the California Vehicle Code addresses photo enforcement as providing an ample
number of protections:
• Minimal yellow light change interval set to DOT (Department of Transportation) standards;
• Agency must issue only warning notices for the first 30 days of the program;
• Only a governmental agency may operate the system;
• Agencies must develop uniform guidelines for screening and issuing violations for the processing and
storage of confidential information;
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 13
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 14
• Agencies must maintain overall control of the program and citations must be issues by a sworn officer
or authorized employee of a law enforcement agency.
In terms of data integrity Mr. Bettisworth reported that a number of things were done to ensure the integrity of
the data was maintained. Redflex would affix a data bar showing location, date/time, vehicle speed, speed
limit, and most importantly, how long the light had been red. Data would be authenticated through heat
cryptography and the data would be encrypted when transmitted via a secure network. Violations would be
sent in real time via a virtual private network utilizing the latest firewalls.
In terms of data storage, Mr. Bettisworth stated they use co -location of the data and retention requirements
from the state are strictly followed. Violation viewing would be utilized by the Police Department via a Redflex
server that was accessible through a secure internet connection and user password protected.
Mr. Bettisworth described the process flow for delineating the responsibilities of Redflex vis-a-vis the City, and
referred to a chart showing the areas of responsibility. Redflex would capture the violation images and
transmit them to the processing center where three forms of review would be carried out:
• Ensure a violation occurred;
• Ensure it was prosecutable; and
• Conduct a quality assurance phase, i.e., someone not involved in the first two steps would look over
the evidence to ensure everything was in order.
Mr. Bettisworth stated that through that process they would populate the citation with registered owner
information and store it in the police inbox for review, approval or rejection of the violation. Upon notification of
an accepted violation, Redflex would print and mail citations on behalf of the City. The defendant would
receive the citation and have the ability to pay or attend court.
Mr. Bettisworth stated that the interface screen used by the Police Department to review and approve
violations would list the incident details, vehicle and owner details, display four thumbnail pictures, and provide
the ability to view the video. The first image known as a Scene A, would display a car behind the limit line with
the light in the red phase. The second image, Scene B, would show the vehicle typically midway through the
intersection with a close up of a plate and facial image. Only the defendant's image would be viewable, while
passenger images would be obscured. The slow motion video would allow police to look at the violation frame
by frame to ensure a violation occurred. He indicated that citations mailed out would show the four still images
and list a web site address to view the same video.
Mr. Bettisworth stressed the importance of public outreach to let people know about the program, the success
of it elsewhere, and the City's intent. Initially planning, developing timelines, implementation strategies, and
identifying groups with which to communicate would be done. Implementation could include generating
community awareness, educating and engaging the news media, web site development, and providing City
Officials with the ability to provide information to the community. He indicated that Redflex would be involved
earlier on in the public outreach process and this would continue. As the program matured, public outreach
would be evaluated.
Councilmember Heller inquired whether a minimum number of cameras were required to establish in a city.
Mr. Bettisworth stated that from a contractual standpoint, they would list a not -to -exceed number with no
minimum requirement.
With regard to working with Caltrans on some intersections, Councilmember Heller inquired whether it was a
long process. Mr. Bettisworth stated that they had extensive experience of working with Caltrans. An
encroachment permit would be necessary; therefore, the process would not be as fast as working through the
City in terms of getting the required permits.
Councilmember Heller inquired whether another staff person would be hired or assigned as light duty.
Lieutenant Starnes stated that current staff would be able to handle the workload at the beginning, but as
intersections increased employees might have to be hired. If that were the case, a half-time employee would
be hired, then possibly one full time after an evaluation of the system. The problem with assigning it as light
duty meant the injured officer/employee would have to be trained. The plan was to have traffic personnel
assigned to conduct reviews and then train future hires for that specific job.
Mr. Nordhoff added that since this would be a trial period an evaluation would be conducted and a report
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 14
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 15
brought back to the Council to make a determination. He also spoke with the Chief and staff about ultimate
staffing levels in order to make this work.
Councilmember Heller stated at that time they would know if the savings would pay for that particular person
being hired.
Councilmember Brockbank stated that he had been struggling with the issue, while he had no problem when
first discussing it with the Police Department at the study session. While there were many good reasons to do
this he found a lot of good reasons not to, and was having trouble balancing the two. He was sensitive to, if
not the potential civil liberties violations, the perception of civil liberties violations and loss of privacy that
eroded people's confidence, faith, and trust in government to feel like they were being photographed all the
time. The financial questions were simple, in that, he was not sure how the City benefited if the excess money
was going to an out-of-town company.
Councilmember Brockbank posed two key questions:
• Did it really reduce accidents? In an article from the Washington Post, and a different study from the
University of Iowa, it came down to what study one believed in. The Washing Post indicated it did
not reduce accidents, but the University of Iowa stated it did. The University of Iowa's studies had
dramatically different results, in particular for rear end collisions. There seemed to be a huge
discrepancy even in the pro red light camera studies. He noted the most striking statistic was on the
first page of the Staff Report which stated that of the 767 accidents in the City in one year; only 66
were found to have been caused by red light violations. That meant 66 injury accidents in
intersections caused by red light violations in all the intersections in the entire City with hundreds of
intersection; therefore, he questioned the amount of accidents that would be avoided at the four to
eight intersections in the City by the use of these cameras. He ventured to guess this reduction
would be 6 — 12 accidents and unless he saw better statistics that resulted in more of an accident
reduction within that, he would have to weigh a reduction of a half dozen to a dozen accidents
against the downside - public perception of the City. Therefore, his question was how many
accidents would be reduced in San Rafael from these four to eight intersections.
• What this would do to free up officers to work in the neighborhoods? If there were not a lot of officers
on patrol because it was difficult for them to catch red light violators, how many could be freed up to
work the neighborhoods.
With regard to privacy issues and taking images of people within the community, Mr. Bettisworth stated it was
important to point out that the cameras were only triggered to take pictures in the event a car went through the
detection zone and it was determined likely that the vehicle would not stop for the red light as opposed to
taking pictures of every vehicle that traveled through. According to the California Vehicle Code, agencies were
limited to only taking images of cars violating this type of infraction. Mr. Bettisworth stated that to look at the
type of reductions to be achieved in violations it would be necessary to look at other communities where these
programs were in place in California. He also noted it had been determined through studies that red light
cameras would not only have benefit at the intersections where the equipment was directly in place, rather a
halo or spillover effect would be achieved throughout the community.
Noting Councilmember Brockbank referred to 767 traffic collisions, 66 of which were at an intersection, Chief
of Police Odetto stated there was a big difference between a normal traffic collision and red light runner, as the
gravity of the accidents could be a lot worse than with a normal fender bender. In order to measure the ability
for the system to lower the percentages of accidents within a certain area, a study would need to be conducted
during the 30 -day trial. In six months, another report of the effectiveness/non-effectiveness of the program
would be brought to Council.
Responding to the comment made about potential revenues going to a private company, Chief Odetto noted
that the use of technology, especially in the Redflex system, was beneficial not only to police officers but to the
City as well. The program was about public safety and not about making money. Even if it did cost the City
money or was revenue neutral, it would be taking a proactive approach to keeping the community safe and
identifying those issues. Chief Odetto believed the program would be effective and worthwhile based on the
data and information gathered by Lt. Sterns, Captain Franzini and Redflex.
Councilmember Brockbank inquired about freeing up officers for the neighborhoods.
Chief Odetto stated it was inherently dangerous for motor officers to interface with moving traffic, and if red
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 15
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 16
light violations were reduced by just the mere presence of the system, he thought that great. Should the
system prove to be a deterrent, measured by the number of citations, resources could then be moved to other
parts of the City and neighborhoods.
Councilmember Brockbank inquired whether police officers were currently stationed at intersections that would
no longer be required if cameras were installed, enabling them to be placed into the neighborhoods.
Chief Odetto stated he could not answer whether or not this was exactly what would happen. He indicated
that currently, officers worked certain intersections during both commute time and afternoons. Referring to
page 4 of the Staff Report he stated there were several locations specified as problem areas and areas that
needed to be addressed, not just locations arbitrarily picked.
Jim Geraghty stated that while not a punitive act, the Police Department supported it because of the issuing of
tickets and prosecuting cases. His concern was that instead of being a punitive Police Department, it should
be a more community -minded Police Department, and he was unsure whether Chief Odetto indicated he did
not want to have his officers directing traffic. He was curious as to what extent the Police Department would
consider having police out in traffic where they could be seen, as he thought it would deter as many people
going through the lights as the cameras would, and people would interface more with the Police Department.
There being no further comment from the audience, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Chief Odetto stated that in the past police officers were part of the details of directing traffic but the
intersections identified were much too dangerous to have an officer direct traffic; however, Mr. Geraghty's
point was well taken.
Mayor Boro thanked Redflex and the Police Department for their work. Noting a number of outreach
meetings were held, he stated there did not seem to be a hue and cry in the community not to do this, which
did not make it right or wrong, but reflected the fact that people were looking for ways to make City streets safe
and that was what this was all about. Mayor Boro stated he could not get excited about the paranoia of
cameras because of the fact that they were everywhere. He believed cameras would send a message that it
was important to the City and community to make the streets safe, noting the intersections in question were
very critical. He believed the cameras would be a calming device, and if someone were to incur an infraction,
they should pay the price, not meaning a dollar price, but the penalty.
Regarding the trial period, Mr. Nordhoff stated that both the Police Department and Redflex identified a series
of processes to go through. Intersection installation determinations would be made which would run for an
appropriate period of time. Subsequently, an evaluation would be completed, based on statistics, to look at
those specific locations or some other perimeter areas to evaluate the number of red light incidents, and then
make a determination of whether to continue in those locations or expand them to others, and what it would
take from a staff level to continue it into the future on a more permanent basis.
Regarding the time frame, Mr. Nordhoff anticipated possibly a year between negotiating a contract,
conducting analysis, getting things up and running around the first of the year, running it for a several -month
period and having enough months to gather data from which to make some intelligent evaluations and
recommendations.
Personally knowing someone who received a red light ticket but who believed the light was yellow when going
through, Councilmember Heller believed that the camera in such a situation would be proof. Mr. Nordhoff
added that individuals in this circumstance would be able to review their own violations and draw their own
conclusions.
Councilmember Brockbank noted he was appreciative to receive answers to his question as they went a long
way to reassure him, but it all came down to the review period. He found it hard to believe that the City could
do this trial run for six months and perhaps decide not to proceed having investing money, time and effort
putting up the cameras and training. Believing it would be a huge loss for them he inquired whether the City
really would have an out clause after six months. He could entertain voting `yes' now, and then if was not
working, voting 'no', or the other way around.
Mr. Nordhoff indicated that he did not specifically think of "pulling the plug" necessarily as the outcome;
however, he believed there needed to be an out clause should something not be working. He believed there
had to be an exit strategy as was the case with any other contract and he would be working with the Police
Department and the City Attorney's Office to put the details together.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 16
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 17
Mr. Bettisworth noted the process to be undertaken in determining the locations of the equipment would be
very diligent and involved and initially they would rely on the information from the police and transportation
departments. Next steps would be to conduct a video analysis that would entail a 12 -hour time frame
recording activity at a particular intersection approach. Redflex would provide a report to the Police
Department outlining the number of violations and time of day. In addition, they would supplement the video
survey with a calculator model. This tool would determine speed limit, percent of big rigs, distance from limit
line through the intersection, and number of factors that contribute to red light running. The combination of the
video survey and calculator model would provide the best locations. Having been in the business for 20 plus
years, Mr. Bettisworth stated they had a good sense as to where the maximum impact would be for the City.
Councilmember Brockbank stated the concern was not about location. To him the favorite lines in the article
stated there were six locations in counties and cities in Virginia that were doing this, and that the State
Legislator eliminated red light cameras a couple of years ago because of concerns raised by some legislators
about civil liberties. The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) was apparently opposed to this and he quoted
from an article by AAA: "They're making a heck a lot of money and they are picking the motorists' pockets on
the pretense of safety."
a) Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 12562 — RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN
AUTOMATED RED LIGHT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM IN THE
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Connolly
b) Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 12563 — RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE
AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH REDFLEX TRAFFIC
SYSTEMS, INC. TO INSTALL, SUPPORT AND MAINTAIN AN
AUTOMATED RED LIGHT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM AT
INTERSECTIONS DESIGNATED BY THE CITY
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Connolly
For the record, Mayor Boro noted that Councilmember Connolly left the meeting a few minutes ago to make a
scheduled overseas telephone call.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT:
15. None.
COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS: (including AB 1234 Reports on Meetings and Conferences Attended at Citv Expense)
16. SMART (Sonoma/Marin Area Rail Transit): - File 245
Councilmember Brockbank distributed invitations to an "Advocates for SMART" luncheon on September 5, 2008 at
the Club at McInnis, 250 Smith Ranch Road, San Rafael.
There being no further business, Mayor Boro adjourned the City Council meeting at 10:50 p.m
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 12008
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 08/18/2008 Page 17