HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 2008-12-15SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2008 AT 8:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting:
San Rafael City Council
Also Present: Ken Nordhoff, City Manager
Robert F. Epstein, City Attorney
Esther C. Beirne, City Clerk
OPEN SESSION — COUNCIL CHAMBER — 7:00 PM
Mayor Boro announced Closed Session items.
CLOSED SESSION — CONFERENCE ROOM 201 — 7:00 PM
Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
Cyr N. Miller, Vice -Mayor
Greg Brockbank, Councilmember
Damon Connolly, Councilmember
Barbara Heller, Councilmember
Absent: None
1 a) Conference with Real Property Negotiator (Government Code Section 54956.8)
Property: 1309 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, California
City Negotiators: Nancy Mackle
Negotiating Parties: City of San Rafael, Walker Vaning
Under Negotiation: Terms and Price
1 b) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code Section 54956.8)
Property: 30 Joseph Court, San Rafael, California
City Negotiators: Ken Nordhoff, Nancy Mackle
Negotiating Parties: City of San Rafael
Under Negotiation: Terms and Price
City Attorney Robert Epstein announced that no reportable action was taken.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 8:15 PM
Land Use / Community Garden: - File 9-1
David Haskell reported having attended a meeting this evening with a Canal neighborhood community group where
the issues of organic gardening, community gardens and the need for people to learn how to feed themselves were
discussed. Working in the community on community gardens for five years, he stated the issue was land use and
access, noting everyone needed to grow their food. Having worked with childhood obesity, he believed one out of
every three children in general would develop diabetes unless something was done immediately. Mr. Haskell
requested that in Council deliberations on greenhouse gas reductions, a significant amount of land be allocated so that
people had access and could grow their own food.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilmember Brockbank moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as follows.
ITEM
Resolution of Appreciation for Gus Guinan, Assistant
City Attorney, for Fifteen Years of Service (CA) —
File 102 x 9-3-16
RECOMMENDED ACTION
RESOLUTION NO. 12630
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR
GUS GUINAN, ASSISTANT CITY
ATTORNEY, FOR FIFTEEN YEARS OF
SERVICE
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 1
Second Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No.
1870 — "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY
OF SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTED BY
REFERENCE BY SECTION 14.01.020 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE, SO AS TO: 1) PREZONE TO
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) DISTRICT (AX07-
001) THE MT. TAMALPAIS CEMETERY LOCATED ON
A 56.8 -ACRE SITE AT 2500 FIFTH AVENUE; APN:
177-240-03; AND 2) PREZONE THREE CONTIGUOUS
DEVELOPED PROPERTIES TO SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL (R-5) DISTRICT LOCATED AT 2450,
2452 AND 2468 FIFTH AVENUE; APN: 010-351-07
(2450 FIFTH AVENUE); 010-351-17 (2452 FIFTH
AVENUE); AND 010-351-18 (2468 FIFTH AVENUE)
DISTRICT FOR ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF
SAN RAFAEL" (CD) — File 10-3 (1) Mt. TamaliDais
Monthly Investment Report for November, 2008 (Fin) —
File 8-18 x 8-9
Resolution Approving Use of State of California Office of
Traffic Safety Grant Funds in the Amount of $66,543.80
for a "Sobriety Checkpoint — Mini Grant Program"
Enforcement Campaign from October 1, 2008 Through
September 8, 2009 (PD) — File 9-3-30
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 2
Approved final adoption of Ordinance No.
1870.
Accepted Monthly Investment Report for
November, 2008 as presented.
RESOLUTION NO. 12631
RESOLUTION APPROVING USE OF STATE
OF CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC
GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$66,543.80 FOR A "SOBRIETY
CHECKPOINT — MINI GRANT PROGRAM"
ENFORCEMENT CAMPAIGN FROM
OCTOBER 1, 2008 THROUGH SEPTEMBER
8, 2009
Acceptance of the Annual Report, Including a Blight Accepted Annual Report, Including a
Progress, Agency Owned Property, Loan Compliance Blight Progress, Agency Owned Property,
AB 987 Reports for the San Rafael Redevelopment Loan Compliance AB 987 reports, as
Agency (RA) - File 8-18 x 8-9 x (SRCC) R-62 presented.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Mayor Boro stated that item #4 — Second Reading of Ordinance No. 1871 regarding Marin Energy Authority Joint
Powers Agreement - would be pulled from the Consent Calendar to be voted on separately because he had a potential
conflict of interest having stock in PG&E. Mayor Boro left the Council Chambers.
The following item was removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
4. Second Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 1871 — "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN
RAFAEL APPROVING THE MARIN ENERGY AUTHORITY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND
AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM" (CM)
- File 271 x 4-13-125
Vice -Mayor Miller noted that Mayor Boro had left the Council Chambers.
The title of the Ordinance was read:
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 2
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 3
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL APPROVING THE MARIN ENERGY AUTHORITY
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY
CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM"
Councilmember Connolly moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve final adoption of
Ordinance No. 1871.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly & Heller
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Vice -Mayor Miller
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Boro, due to potential conflict of interest
Mayor Boro returned to the Council Chambers.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION:
8. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO GUS GUINAN. ASSISTANT CITY
ATTORNEY, FOR FIFTEEN YEARS OF SERVICE (CA) — FILE 102 x 9-3-16
Mayor Boro reported that Gus Guinan had worked for the City of San Rafael in the City Attorney's Office for
fifteen years and on January 5, 2009, would become the City Attorney for the City of Burlingame. While he
was sorry to see Mr. Guinan leave, he believed this was a career opportunity he could not turn down. Mayor
Boro stated that in the long term everyone was very happy about what Mr. Guinan was doing for himself and
family and were pleased this opportunity had been afforded to him.
Quoting form the Resolution, Mayor Boro stated:
"Clark E. Guinan, fondly known as Gus, joined the City Attorney's Office on January 3, 1994, and has ably,
admirably and competently served the City of San Rafael as its Assistant City Attorney for just about 15
years.
Over the many years of Gus' service to the City, he has been a steady professional who discharged the many
duties of his office with skill and grace, always taking time to answer questions and provide advice. He has
been sought out as a confidant, legal counselor and a sounding board for all department staff, who have, in
turn, relied on his vast knowledge of the law to 'get them through'. Pages could be written about how he has
routinely gone the extra mile by spreading humor and good will; treating all employees with respect and
compassion. Gus, by his good nature, made everyone who came into his office feel comfortable.
Gus has that wonderful gift of even temperament, providing him a very special spark of humor which kept the
office fun, yet always professional. He clearly understands the importance of valuing the people he works
with. As a supervisor, he was always generous in sharing his knowledge and mentoring his staff to assist
them in being successful. He would frequently take the time to make you feel good about yourself with a
word of praise or a thank you for a job well done. Despite all these admirable qualities, if Gus had any fault at
all, it was his 'messy' office."
Mayor Boro stated he always felt good when he saw Gus because his office always looked worse than his.
Continuing, Mayor Boro quoted:
"Gus was the perfect liaison between the City and outside counsel, supervising claims and litigation,
mediations, and arbitrations. He was the 'go to guy' in all aspects of the municipal law. He always looked at
challenges presented to the office with a 'glass half -full, rather than a glass half -empty' viewpoint. He never
lost sight of the City's goal to serve the public needs with excellence and competency at all times."
Although a long resolution, Mayor Boro indicated it was well written and one that should be shared with
everyone.
On behalf of the City Council, staff, people of the City of San Rafael and personally, Mayor Boro thanked Mr.
Guinan for all that he had done and wished him much success.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 3
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 4
Mr. Guinan stated that this was one of the greatest organizations he was fortunate to have had the pleasure
of working with and for. He did not believe the citizens of this community fully understood and appreciated
the quality of the people, not only the Council, but the staff that had committed their time and effort to make
the City run so well. He had learned much from the staff and Council, appreciated everything that everyone
had done for him and considered the department directors personal friends.
Mr. Guinan introduced his wife, Signe.
The City Council meeting was paused to honor Mr. Guinan with a reception in City Hall lobby.
PUBLIC HEARING:
9. Public Hearing — File 2-1-11 x 11-13 x 11-5-1
1) ACCEPT REPORT AND AUTHORIZE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO IMPLEMENT THE
INTERIM CONVERSION OF D STREET TO A TWO-WAY STREET BETWEEN FIRST AND
SECOND STREETS AND ITS REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS: AND
2) AMEND MUNICIPAL CODE 5.52.021 `WEIGHT LIMITS' TO INCLUDE GERSTLE PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS (PW)
Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened.
City Manager Ken Nordhoff explained that much of what would be presented this evening would be the same
kinds of information presented at the two neighborhood meetings held in September and October. Several of
the staff would be involved in the presentation and available to answer questions at the end.
Indicating that there were two items before the Council for consideration this evening, Mr. Nordhoff stated the
first was acceptance of the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Traffic Operations Study and authorizing staff to
implement the interim solutions along D Street, also known as Option 2. The second action item included
amending the Municipal Code to restrict commercial vehicles over five tons which included amending an
ordinance section that would incorporate several streets in the Gerstle Park Neighborhood.
Mr. Nordhoff stated that tonight's presentation would include:
• Background information
■ Goals: some developed by the Association and their representatives and some by the City
■ Existing conditions of the traffic situation in and through the neighborhood
■ Proposed option before the Council for consideration, and others that were studied
■ Commercial vehicle restriction
■ Highlighting Next Steps, should Council choose to move forward
With regard to the study and process, Mr. Nordhoff explained that the Traffic Division of Public Works and he
had been involved working with neighborhood leadership over the last couple of years. He noted that traffic
was somewhat of a unique challenge in the Gerstle Park Neighborhood, as many were aware, having been
involved in these deliberations for many years. City staff had been very intentional in taking a different
approach to the situation, attempting to make an overture of looking at opportunities, choices and alternatives
in a mindset of a partnership solution. Staff had put a lot of time into not only gathering data, putting together
statistics, and modeling traffic information, but listening to the concerns of those involved in the process and
attempting to answer questions.
City Traffic Engineer Nader Mansourian introduced Suvra Chakrabarti, Associate Engineer (Traffic), and
Leslie Morris, Associate Traffic Engineer, both of whom had been working on the project for the past two
years and one year, respectively. In addition, Linda Zeng, Traffic Engineer, and Willie Lagleva, Traffic
Technician had also worked hard in the collection of data and conducting the modeling.
Providing some background. Mr. Mansourian reported that staff had been working with the neighborhood
since 1992 for various traffic operation issues. In 1995, a volunteer neighborhood group was formed to install
a signal at Bayview and D Streets. In 2001 and 2002, similar discussions were held with regard to converting
D Street to two-way. In 2006, this was more formalized: neighborhood representatives and City staff looked
at the various issues raised by the neighborhood. In order to address those issues, both the City and
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 4
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 5
neighborhood established goals and identified approximately twenty-one items. Because these items were
scattered throughout the neighborhood, it was decided to concentrate on First and C Streets, First and D
Streets and the D Street corridor, and as a result, many alternatives were developed. Mr. Mansourian
reported that in May, 2007 eight alternatives were developed, some of which were eliminated, and others
added. Overall, approximately ten meetings were held, studying sixteen alternatives, which resulted in eighty
scenarios for the morning and afternoon.
Mr. Mansourian reported that the Gerstle Park Neighborhood set goals:
■ To maintain a calm traffic flow on D Street, while increasing efficiency
• Contain through traffic to D Street, discouraging alternative routes in the neighborhood
■ Improve pedestrian safety in the neighborhood, particularly at First and C Streets, and First and D
Streets
Regarding common goals with the neighborhood, Mr. Mansourian stated it was agreed that improvements
should be a phased approach. Neighborhood quality would not be sacrificed for regional benefits and the
neighborhood traffic would be kept calm and safe. With all of the alternatives developed and analyzed, it was
realized that some of the common goals and neighborhood goals could not be met.
In order to analyze the neighborhood scenarios, Mr. Mansourian explained that the City conducted a
neighborhood traffic model in 2006-2007, which required very intense data collection, including turning
movement counts, i.e., manual person counts at intersections during peak hours, 24-hour machine counts,
speed studies, visibilities and observations. This information was used for setting up the model to analyze
the intersections and arterial and roadway segments. Each alternative and the results were compared to the
General Plan's Level of Service (LOS) Policies for intersections and arterials. Mr. Mansourian pointed out
that Second and Third Streets had regional significance — they are in the County of Marin Congestion
Management policies, which are a little different from the City's. Also, in working on the General Plan it was
realized that something needed to be done at First and C and First and D Streets, and at that point
signalizing intersections was suggested and approved.
Using PowerPoint Suvra Chakrabarti addressed the existing conditions. Identifying the network analyzed as
part of the study, Ms. Chakrabarti stated that the highlighted features were the focus points of the study. She
identified D Street between Wolfe Grade and Fifth Avenue, the First Street and D Street intersection, and
First Street and C Street intersection. Giving an example of traffic volume in the network, she noted there
were approximately 13,000 cars that travel on D Street in the neighborhood, with 7,000 going north and 6,000
going south. Referring to the morning peak hours, Ms. Chakrabarti displayed snapshots of the turning
movements at the First and D Streets intersection where 600 cars travel south on D Street at First Street, and
the First Street and C Street intersection where 300 cars make the `S' movement going from D Street to C
Street, using First Street.
Ms. Chakrabarti explained that in looking at the arterial operations, it was found that most of the segments of
arterials analyzed as part of the study operated at or near capacity, resulting in frequent congestion and
queuing. When the arterial operations and signalized intersection operation values were compared with the
General Plan Policy Standards, it was found that the highlighted intersections and arterial segments operated
at capacity. This was for existing volume conditions for morning peak hours.
In the next slide, Ms. Chakrabarti pointed out that in the morning all travel lanes on Second Street at D Street
were being fully utilized by vehicles. Similar situations existed in almost all of the arterial segments used in
the analysis. With regard to the p.m. peak hours and existing traffic volume conditions, she reported that the
condition intensifies due to larger traffic volumes. Using a snapshot of the evening turning movement counts,
she explained that there were a little more than 600 vehicles travelling south on D Street at First Street and
more than 500 vehicles making the `S' movement. Arterials and intersections continued to operate at
capacity. She noted the highlighted arterial segments and intersections that compared with the General Plan
Policy Standards.
With regard to the proposed options, Ms. Chakrabarti explained that at the beginning of the study the Gerstle
Park Neighborhood Association and the City decided to concentrate on First and C Street, First and D Street,
and D Street issues as priorities. Approximately 16 neighborhood alternatives were developed which gave
rise to 80 different scenarios, which included morning and evening peak hours, and existing and future
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 5
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 6
volume conditions. Ms. Chakrabarti explained that these alternatives were combinations of different
circulation patterns of the D Street conversion to two-way up to Second Street or Third Street, and different
traffic controls at First and C Streets, and the First and D Streets intersections, and a combination of these.
She indicated that together with the neighborhood association it was decided to present the final four options
during the general neighborhood meetings in September and October, 2008. These options ranged from no
or minimal changes to the network to moderate and even permanent changes.
Neighborhood Options -
■ Option 1: Low Level Intervention — same or existing street network, with few turn restrictions
■ Option 2: Medium Level Intervention
• Option 3: High Level Intervention — existing street pattern; however, with signalization at First and C
Streets and First and D Streets, and a median on First Street
■ Option 4: No changes in circulation or network pattern
During the general public meetings, Ms. Chakrabarti stated it was found that Option 2 had greater
neighborhood support, which was also confirmed by the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association's website
poll.
Change elements of Option 2 —
Convert D Street to two-way between First and Second Streets, which would help to open up D
Street to two-way. This was consistent with one of the goals of the study to contain traffic on D
Street.
Install all -way stop control at First and C Streets to assign right-of-way to the vehicles, which would
reduce confusion and was anticipated to make the intersection somewhat more pedestrian -friendly
Restrict northbound left turn movements at First and D Streets, and the D Street and Frances Street
intersection from 7:00-9:00 a.m. and 4:00-6:00 p.m. to prohibit diverted traffic from using
neighborhood streets
Explaining what would happen should the proposed options be implemented during the morning peak hours,
Ms. Chakrabarti, stated that the northbound left turn restrictions at First and D Streets, and D and Frances
Streets would eliminate some traffic volume - fewer vehicles on westbound First and Frances Streets. The
majority of these vehicles would turn earlier using Ross Street, Bayview Street, etc., to use Marin Street and
E Street to get to their destinations. She identified the diverted route.
Ms. Chakrabarti stated that as the left turning vehicles waited to find a gap in the oncoming southbound D
Street volume, the vehicles behind would begin to stack up resulting in frequent congestion and queuing on D
Street in the neighborhood. She noted that the highlighted section of D Street depicted how much the
congestion would be - at times, it would extend up to or even beyond Bayview Street. She identified the
queuing on northbound D Street. There would also be a small diversion of northbound traffic from D Street to
C Street and other side streets. The intersection of Second Street and D Street would also be of interest
because it would be a new conflict point due to the southbound and newly introduced northbound traffic. She
indicated that as southbound left turning traffic would now have to yield to the newly introduced northbound
right turn movement, cars behind them would start to back up, which would result in queuing on D Street,
between Second and Third Streets. Queuing would occupy the entire block length and cars trying to turn left
from Third Street onto D Street would be unable to do so. Consequently, queuing on Third Street as well as
frequent congestion and delays at the upstream intersections on Third Street would occur.
Ms. Chakrabarti stated the eastern crosswalk on Second Street at D Street would have to be removed to
make it safer for pedestrians. In addition, the Arco Gas Station and Kragen Auto Parts Store driveways could
require some changes. Parking layout and internal circulation could require modifications.
Ms. Chakrabarti reported that due to the change of D Street from one-way to two-way, eight on -street
parking spaces and one loading zone would need to be removed from D Street, between First and Second
Streets. Access, circulation and on-site parking issues for other businesses could also be of some concern.
Due to the change in circulation pattern and newly introduced all -way stop at First Street and C Street, the
eastbound volume on First Street would reduce. However, due to the diversion through the neighborhood
streets, the northbound volume on C Street would increase. The all -way stop control would assign right-of-
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 6
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 7
way and reduce confusion at First Street and C Street and the crosswalk on the west side of First Street at C
Street would be reinstalled. In comparing the arterial segments operations and signalized intersections
operations with the General Plan Policy Standards, it was found that the highlighted segments depicted on
the slide would be operating at capacity. These were exactly the same as the existing conditions.
Referring to an aerial photo, Ms. Chakrabarti, pointing to the zoomed -in area of the Second Street and D
Street intersection, identified the existing southbound left turn movement, now used only by pedestrians. She
identified the newly introduced northbound right turn movement, which was in conflict with the southbound
movement. The southbound movement would have to yield to the northbound movement, resulting in
queuing and backup north of Second Street on D Street.
Ms. Chakrabarti stated that the dotted arrow on the slide depicted the existing pedestrian movement, which
was in conflict with both southbound and northbound movements. In order to make the intersection safer for
pedestrians, the crosswalk would have to be removed on the east side of the intersection. It would also
reduce conflict points.
With regard to p.m. peak hours, Ms. Chakrabarti stated that in general, the pattern remained the same, only
the conditions intensified due to larger vehicle volume. Far less cars would be on First Street and Frances
Street due to the turn restrictions. There would be more frequent queuing on D Street and Third Street,
heavier rerouted traffic west off D Street, and more frequent queuing on D Street inside the neighborhood.
She noted there would be a heavy diversion of northbound traffic from D Street to the other side streets,
mainly on C Street, and as mentioned previously, the all -way stop sign would assign right-of-way and was
expected to reduce confusion. On analyzing the arterial segments and intersections operations with the
General Plan Policy Standards, it was found that the exact same segments operated at capacity, as was
seen for existing conditions in the p.m. peak hours.
Design Option 2 —
Leslie Morris reported that this PDF document could be found in the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Traffic
Operations Study Report on pages 149-150.
Ms. Morris reported that starting from south and moving north she would discuss the changes required to the
roadway network in order to install this interim change.
■ D and Frances Street — Installation of two restrictive left turn signs
■ First and D Street — Installation of two restrictive left turn signs
■ First and C Streets — Installation of stop sign for the eastbound direction, and reinstallation of the
crosswalk on the west side of the intersection
■ Removal of existing "Pedestrian Crossing Ahead" sign mid -block between C and D Streets for the
eastbound direction, to be replaced with a "Stop Ahead" sign.
Moving north, Ms. Morris reported that the majority of the changes would occur on D Street between First and
Second Streets where D Street was being converted to two-way.
Ms. Morris stated that the lane geometry required for this leg of First and D Streets was a southbound
through lane, a southbound left -turn lane, and a northbound lane. The existing roadway width was 42 feet.
To provide the left -turn lanes and requirements set forth for striping, cars would have to start being
transitioned back at Second Street, and in order to do this all of the parking on the west side of the roadway
would have to be removed, i.e., six two-hour parking spaces and one loading zone. Furthermore, in order to
have the northbound through lane, two additional parking spaces would have to be removed on the eastern
side. She indicated that staff hoped to maintain five existing spaces; however, this would need to be finalized
during the final design. Also, because of the striped median this would create, two double yellow lines would
be placed adjacent to each other and the California Vehicle Code prohibits turn movements to cross two
double yellow lines. Therefore, vehicles traveling in the northbound direction would not be able to access the
driveways on the western side of the road, and vice versa. Southbound vehicles would not be able to turn left
into the driveways on the east side. The crosswalk on the east side would also have to be removed.
Identifying the Kragen parking lot, Ms. Morris reported that it might need to be reversed in direction. Should
that occur, left -turns would need to be prohibited out of that driveway. The same would apply to the Arco Gas
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 7
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 8
Station. Ms. Morris noted that subsequent to conducting a neighborhood meeting, concerns were expressed
by local businesses on D Street, between First and Third Streets, and these letters had been provided to the
City Council.
With regard to commercial vehicle restrictions, Ms. Morris reported that one of the issues raised during the
initial portion of the study was that large commercial vehicles were using Gerstle Park roadways to travel over
Wolfe Grade to get into downtown San Rafael. After observations by City staff and in consultation with the
City Attorney's Office, it was recommended that the Gerstle Park Neighborhood roadways be included in the
Municipal Code for restricting commercial vehicles weighing over five tons to use those roadways.
Ms. Morris identified the roadways staff proposed to include, all of which were access points to the Gerstle
Park Neighborhood. She indicated it should be noted that businesses within the neighborhood would still be
able to receive deliveries from large vehicles as the California Vehicle Code permits entering the
neighborhood if their final destination is within the area. Therefore, Muffin Mania, the Panama Hotel and
other businesses would still be able to get deliveries.
With regard to the next steps, Mr. Mansourian stated that should the City Council approve the project and
authorize staff to move ahead, it was proposed to implement and monitor the project for six months.
Commercial vehicle signs would be installed, followed by the collection of a variety of data, including turning
movements at the intersections and arterials, and speed studies, to identify, address and mitigate as many
issues as possible. Staff would work closely with the Police, Fire and Parking Service Departments. The
model would be recalibrated, together with re -running the scenarios for existing and future conditions based
on the newly collected data. Final recommendations would be made and it was staff's intention to report back
to the City Council within nine months after implementation.
Mr. Mansourian outlined the proposed schedule:
■ December 15, 2008 public hearing.
■ Upon approval of the project by the City Council, staff would work on design and prepare the project
for informal bidding in March 2009, with implementation by the end of April or May.
■ Trial period would run from May to October, 2009.
■ Collection of after -study data would take place in October, November and December, 2009
■ Model run and final analysis in January 2010.
■ Staff would work with the neighborhood to discuss the issues, and should everything be in order,
return to the City Council in February, 2010, with a final report, findings and recommendation to
either maintain the project permanently or offer other solutions.
With regard to a partnership approach, Mr. Nordhoff reported that the neighborhood leadership and City staff
worked together to invite all from the neighborhood to be a part of these community meetings. Together with
a shared letter, a lot of work went into ensuring that everyone received notification affording ample
opportunity for participation. In addition, Mayor Boro and Councilmember Brockbank served as a sub-
committee throughout the process, so as staff worked with the neighborhood and dealt with results, this
information was shared.
Mr. Nordhoff noted that the Traffic Operations Study Report — pages 151 through 153 - listed the 21 items
and progress made. While some of these items had been accomplished, as noted by Mr. Mansourian, a
focus was placed on the D Street spine. To the extent that some additional items had not been finished, Mr.
Nordhoff stated they would be implemented or acted upon as appropriate as part of the study, if adopted.
Mr. Nordhoff stated that although it could be tempting to add in a 17th or 18th alternative, or move to 100
different ways of studying different resolutions, having tried a full and complete vetting of looking at a huge
variety of decisions, it was his and staff's recommendation that the Council focus on Option 2. This was
clearly an interim solution and, as Mr. Mansourian had indicated, staff would be out making improvements for
a fairly nominal sum of money after the design work was completed, reporting back to the City Council about
what had been accomplished relative to the assumptions made in the traffic modeling and data presented this
evening. Mr. Nordhoff expressed the hope that the decision this evening could be limited to looking at Option
2 and having staff return at some point to respond to that.
Councilmember Brockbank inquired as to how it was determined what streets would be designated with the
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 8
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 9
commercial vehicle restrictions, i.e., were they actual examples of cut-throughs or traffic patterns. He
guessed that part of the problem related to vehicles coming over Wolfe Grade, taking the first right on,
hypothetically speaking, Antonette Avenue, and cutting over to Andersen Drive, yet he did not see Antonette
Avenue listed as one of the streets with commercial restrictions.
Mr. Mansourian stated that staff looked at the neighborhood map and all roads leading to the neighborhood.
The suggested roads were all the access points into the neighborhood.
Councilmember Connolly inquired as to the purpose of the no left -turn restrictions on First and D Streets.
Mr. Mansourian explained that one of the scenarios in working with the neighborhood was to eliminate or
reduce the number of cars using the neighborhood as a bypass. For example, in the afternoon there were
more than 200 cars an hour going northbound on D Street, making a left -turn at First Street and using that to
get to Shaver Street to go back to Third Street. In order to discourage those movements and have vehicles
stay back to the original route, the idea was to eliminate the movements. However, when conducting the
modeling, a conservative approach was taken and it was realized that some cars would still use the
neighborhood roads and divert. This issue was discussed in detail with the neighborhood and an agreement
was reached to test it to see how well it worked. Additionally, Mr. Mansourian stated that because of the 200
cars now making that left turn, more on -street parking had to be removed in the vicinity of D and First Streets,
towards D and Frances Streets, and further south, in order to have an adequate left -turn pocket. Staff did not
wish to remove more parking in the neighborhood to accommodate the people bypassing the area.
Responding to Councilmember Connolly's comment regarding additional cars on other streets in the
neighborhood, Mr. Mansourian stated that the area would be monitored carefully to determine the impact and
behaviors of cars diverting into the neighborhood.
Councilmember Connolly inquired whether without those restrictions there would still be some adverse flow
into other parts of the neighborhood.
Mr. Masourian responded affirmatively.
Complimenting staff on the very informative report, Councilmember Connolly inquired as to the pros and cons
of the all -way stop versus traffic lights at First and C Streets in terms of safety and flow.
Indicating this was debated at length, Mr. Mansourian explained the neighborhood felt that signals gave a
commercial look to the neighborhood and reserved that as a last choice. He stated that signals would work if
there was a combination of signals at First and C Streets, and First and D Streets, i.e., they would be
synchronized with the rest of the system, and while this had its own impact, it was not as severe. The stop
sign, however, had more of a neighborhood feel and did not cost as much, whereas signals cost $200,000 -
$250,000 each. While they remained on the books, Mr. Mansourian commented that staff reserved the
signals for after the test, should it not work. He noted that in general, signalization was not well received as a
good option.
In terms of his expertise, Councilmember Connolly inquired whether Mr. Mansourian was satisfied that
relatively speaking four-way traffic stop signs were adequate in terms of safety.
Mr. Mansourian stated that stop signs were good for safety but not for congestion, especially when dealing
with large amounts of volume. That was why the two-way street in combination with all -way stops worked,
because with a volume of 500 — 600 cars an hour doing an 'S' movement in the afternoon, half would go
north towards Second and D Streets, and the other half would not. With stop signs, every car must stop
causing a longer delay and queue. He indicated that this was what the model and staff's professional opinion
demonstrated, together with measuring how well it worked. Mr. Mansourian pointed out this only pertained to
peak hours in the morning and afternoon, noting those living there would have a little easier life between 7:00
p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Mr. Nordhoff noted that there was also much confusion at the First and C Street intersection for those
unfamiliar with the area. He indicated that ironically, there was a fender bender incident on the night of one
of the neighborhood meetings at that location, which was indicative of the confusion; however, the stop sign
should actually help improve the safety in that corridor.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 9
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 10
Councilmember Connolly believed it was clear that something needed to be done.
Mayor Boro thanked staff and the neighborhood representatives for their great work they all had done.
Sharing his concern about the stop signs and the back-ups they would cause, Mayor Boro stated that should
more chaos than intended be created, staff would do something sooner rather than permit the problem to
continue. Real time judgment would need to be used to address the issue should it be evident that a bigger
problem was being created.
Mr. Mansourian explained that staff would work closely with the Police Department, especially during the first
two weeks, to carry out enforcement and monitoring in the area. Congestion would be monitored for a while
before reacting too swiftly; however, should it get really bad, staff would offer new options.
Councilmember Heller wanted to ensure that in doing the six-month test schools would be in session,
because D Street is used to get hundreds of people over to Marin Catholic.
Mr. Nordhoff stated that the timetable had a starting date of April which would include the end of this school
year, and August, September and parts of October would pick up the start of the new school year; therefore,
some school periods would definitely be monitored for impacts. Should there be a delay, Councilmember
Heller suggested that implementation not occur until September.
Noting former Councilmember Cohen was present earlier this evening for a previous action item, Mayor Boro
noted that he had smiled and stated "finally." Mayor Boro reported that Mr. Cohen had worked with the
neighborhood for quite some time on this issue, for which he expressed thanks.
Muriel Ballard, Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association President, stated that several months ago as she and
a friend drove down First Street to the intersection of First and C Streets, her friend questioned what was
happening there. Indicating that drivers were trained to expect certain patterns on approaching intersections
and people were aware that on approaching the intersections of First and C or First and D Streets, it was a
matter of who was on first. How to behave in those intersections was difficult to read, which resulted in
accidents, some of which were pretty bad. Furthermore, when continuing down First Street to E Street, by
the car wash, the blind intersection also led to a lot of confusion with cars hesitating resulting in fender
benders. She commented that people used Wolfe Grade to get to San Anselmo, etc., noting First Street did
not have the bend width for such a huge volume of traffic. Ms. Ballard believed that First Street should be a
closed off or walking street, yet it was a major thoroughfare.
Ms Ballard stated they believed that when planning took place for traffic flow off D Street the City did not take
into consideration how to move traffic westbound off D Street. It flowed into the neighborhood and it did not
flow well. Ideally, they would like to see traffic go up to Third Street heading out westbound, using the traffic
lights as a downtown should; however, they were being forced to look at stoplights at First and D Streets, and
First and C Streets. Ms. Ballard stated that, while people believed First and D Street could be a good place
for a four-way stop light, First and C Streets had many nice residences and not much business. If the traffic
could flow down D Street just one block further, the integrity of the close -in neighborhood could be preserved.
She stated that cities that had neighborhoods with charm and character within walking distance to town were
considered to be more desirable and rather than pushing the City deeper into the neighborhood, Ms. Ballard
suggested a solution be found to move the traffic out of the neighborhood, preserving the integrity of the
homes and charming streets.
Ms. Ballard noted that everyone wanted a stop sign at the intersection at First and C Streets, yet extensive
studies with the City indicated that this would back up traffic, hence the option of taking it up to Second Street
was considered. She stated that the stop sign in conjunction with the traffic flowing up to Second Street,
should not cause a huge backup because cars would have an alternate route to get out.
With regard to the appropriateness of no left -turns, Ms. Ballard reported that after exhaustive debate, it
appeared all concurred that it would be worth checking it out, because hopefully, some drivers would tire of
dealing with the various stop signs they would encounter in the neighborhood. She also hoped that as work
was completed on Highway 101, more traffic would determine to take the freeway into Central San Rafael
and use these routes alternatively to Wolfe Grade.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 10
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 11
Accepting the fact that a major thoroughfare went through the neighborhood, Ms. Ballard stated they were
trying to protect and defend it. She supported implementing the interim step with continued monitoring to
ascertain whether it worked and, should it not work, they were open to advancing to the lights, especially at
First and D Streets. Although not optimal, she indicated the current situation was not safe and this would
permit something to be done quickly, because anything else would take impact studies and years before
looking at a stop at First and C Streets.
In terms of parking, Ms. Ballard believed businesses had adequate parking, especially since there was a
parking lot behind the medical building with lots of unused spaces. She urged the Council to favor those
living in the community over those who ran their businesses there.
Mayor Boro requested that speakers limit their comments to approximately three minutes.
Roper Pierce, Marin Medical Center, 711 D Street, located on the west side of D street behind the Arco
Station, backing up to the creek at First and D Street, stated his issue was the loss of parking. He explained
that this building was filled with various medical practitioners, - dentists, medical laboratory, dental lab,
psychologists, and the Casa Manana Restaurant — and the loss of any parking on D Street would be
detrimental to his tenants, their employees, patients and customers. He reported that the building parking lot
was often filled to capacity. Many of the people visiting the building were elderly and used walkers and
Whistlestop used the loading zone in front of the building to drop off passengers. He noted that the proposal
before the City Council called for that loading zone to be removed. Mr. Pierce stated that tenants, their
employees and customers were already complaining about the tight parking at the building and taking away
any parking would only make matters worse. There were already problems with unauthorized persons
parking on the lot and catching them was difficult, time consuming, not to mention the hassle and possibility
of confrontation. Mr. Pierce stated this proposal would present a lot of problems for him, his tenants and
customers and he believed the City could find a more equitable way to deal with the neighborhood traffic
problems.
Dr. Spencer Bloch stated he practiced at the corner of First and D Streets since 1976 and within a block of
this area since 1970; therefore, he was there when the traffic pattern was both one-way and two-way. While
he did not want to appear presumptuous by recommending a modification to the proposal, especially since
Mr. Mansourian and his staff had thought of everything they could and more, nor want to frustrate the efforts
of the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association who devoted considerable time to this project, he believed
those working in the block to be converted to two-way traffic would potentially be most adversely affected by
the proposed changes. While Mr. Mansourian assured him that he had taken his concerns to the
Neighborhood Association, he realized that the input of none of them was ever solicited before the proposals
were finalized.
Noting the basic goals of the proposal were to increase or improve the safety of pedestrians at First and C
Streets, Dr. Bloch noted the other goal was to calm traffic on D Street and discourage it from dispersing
through the neighborhood streets off D Street. While this was certainly an understandable wish, it might not
be an appropriate or reasonable expectation as anyone who had moved to this area in recent memory was
aware, or should have been aware, of the traffic situation. Those residing there longer realized that there
was much more traffic than 40 years ago all over San Rafael.
Dr. Bloch pointed out D Street was a north -south artery, and First Street, like it or not, was transitional
between commercial and residential. To return the block to two-way traffic and to take parking spaces off the
street when they were always used would create two potential significant problems. The first had to do with
traffic driving either way and turning into buildings on the other side. From the slide representation, it looked
as though people would not be able to cross, necessitating going around the block and returning. The other
was the problem that Mr. Pierce mentioned regarding on -street parkers. Identifying the D Street lot on the
slide, Dr. Bloch indicated some would park at 711 D Street, 712 D Street, or Kragens; he had sufficient
parking spaces for his patients and staff, but no more. Specifically and especially in this time of fiscal
prudence, Dr. Bloch stated that, before making any more costly and dramatic changes, the City Council
should first consider the lowest tech, least expensive measure, which could very effectively solve the problem
of pedestrians at First and C Streets, by making it an all -way stop. Should traffic back up more on First Street
and on D Street going north, ascertain whether this could be regulated by timing of the light at Bayview and D
Streets. However, should it be decided to return the traffic to two-way, before going forward he requested
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 11
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 12
that the City Engineer explore solutions for the greater danger created for his patients turning across traffic
into the buildings and for the invasion of the parking lot. Substituting potential danger and disruption of
professional activities for convenience did not impress him as either a reasonable trade-off or a good
precedent.
Dr. Bloch stated it appeared that often in any kind of project, the conception turned out to be better than the
execution. In this particular case, he thought it was reversed, ironically, the execution, at least in terms of the
report prepared by staff, was fine, but the conception was flawed in the ways he mentioned.
Huao Landecker, three -time Past President, Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association, stated he worked with
Mr. Mansourian and several of his predecessors, and wished especially to thank him and his staff for an
excellent report. Issuing a reminder that First Street was primarily a residential street and with the current
configuration of the traffic scheme, the First and C Street situation made it a living hell for the people living at
that intersection, as well as nearby residences. It had always been his feeling that traffic flowed like water;
therefore, northbound making that `S' turn, going north on D Street, right on First Street and left on C Street,
was an extra turn that vehicles did not have to make. Mr. Landecker hoped that traffic would flow better
particularly during off peak hours.
Mr. Landecker stated that the scenarios investigated in the study had been so numerous that he wished there
was a magic bullet that would fix the whole problem and believed Option No. 2 was the way to go as an
interim measure. He also pointed out that in the event it should fail and could not be made to work, a lot of
the improvements being put into Option 2 would also be necessary should signal lights be installed at those
two intersections. He believed the First and C Streets intersection was so unsafe that something had to
happen there.
Indicating he understood the concerns of Roger Pierce and Dr. Bloch, Mr. Landecker noted that all were in
the City together and sometimes people had to pay the price. With a residential neighborhood so close into
downtown, the traffic situation was a problem that really needed to be addressed.
Kathleen Russell, business owner at 8 Willow Street and Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association Board
Member, stated as a business owner in the neighborhood she thought it important to show there was support
from local businesses in the community. She also felt a need to respond to Dr. Bloch and to Mr. Pierce,
particularly because this neighborhood had worked for two years plus on coming up with a solution, spending
many hours in meetings.
While she shared their concerns about losing parking, Ms. Russell did not agree with the assessment that
this was somehow an issue of convenience versus safety, because the very reason the neighborhood was
working, particularly in looking for a solution at First and C Streets, was because of safety issues. She noted
that a year ago a little girl was thrown 30 feet in the air and critically injured, and that was very much part of
the neighborhood's long history of working on this issue. While she shared their concerns about parking she
believed the neighborhood had worked hard, noting a number of signs were in place for weeks prior to each
of the public meetings. Therefore, with regard to the business owners coming forward this evening for the
first time with concerns, Ms. Russell stated there were ample opportunities prior to tonight to weigh in., such
as the two public meetings that were held in the fall with signs posted weeks prior. She urged the City
Council to move forward and adopt the proposal that so many people had spent so many hours working on.
Laura Acklev indicating she lived at the dreaded intersection, stated she wanted to rebut two statements
opposing the proposal, noting she had been working to try to help this traffic situation for eight years. There
were huge signs at every major intersection, including D and First Streets right next to 711 D Street, for
weeks preceding the public meetings. Secondly, eight parking spaces were involved, which were not always
full. Believing it could be a minor inconvenience for some people she stated that in considering not only those
living in the neighborhood but those inconvenienced by the traffic pattern every day, the decision was pretty
clear. Also taking into account the percentage of people in attendance this evening in support of Option 2
and those against it, was pretty reflective of the wishes of the community at large. She urged the Council to
implement the option, as it was by far the best.
Charlie Pick, C Street Resident, stated he had a seven-year old who would soon be commuting on his bicycle
or by foot to Coleman School. He stated that this intersection scared him every time he walked to his office
at D and Fourth Streets. It also scared everyone else in his family and his son's friends, noting the issue
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 12
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 13
concerned safety. Mr. Pick believed there was adequate parking in the neighborhood and being a big
supporter of businesses in the downtown and walking to his office, he was aware there usually was no
competition for parking spaces in the neighborhood in the midday hours. Convenience in this case was not
an adequate response to the question of safety.
Kim Fox, E Street Homeowner, stated while she supported Option 2 and appreciated all the work done to
create it, she was concerned about the no left -turn signs during peak hours, pushing more cars into the
neighborhood. She was especially concerned about speeding down E Street because as cars came down
Ross onto Marin and E Streets, there would be no speed controls. Ms. Fox requested that as the
assessment was being done over the next six months that staff work with the neighbors to get some
anecdotal information about changes and behavior including speeding and anything else that occurs. Should
this option not work out, she requested that staff consider two-way all the way through to Third Street. As
Ms. Fox was unsure as to why D Street did not have that option, she suggested that if it were to be two-way
between First and D that consideration be given to making it two-way between Second and D Streets where
the majority of the traffic would flow.
Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Mayor Boro invited Mr. Mansourian to comment on his evaluation on parking availability.
Mr. Mansourian stated that staff would evaluate the data collected, together with the parking utilization on D
Street between First and Second Streets, First and C Streets and First and D Streets.
With regard to Ms. Fox's concern about speeding on E Street, Mr. Mansourian reported there were existing
speed surveys; however further data would be collected, not just on E Street, but also on C and Marin
Streets, i.e., those areas where staff believed cars would divert, to determine not just the number of cars and
their speed, rather to generate other solutions or calming techniques.
Mr. Masourian noted the proposed loss of parking, unfortunately, was required based on the required number
of lanes. The street was only 42 feet wide and 36-37 feet of it would be used for the lanes.
Mayor Boro invited Mr. Mansourian to address the issues raised by speakers with respect to
loading/unloading in front of their building and not being able to cross back and forth.
With regard to the loading/unloading, Mr. Mansourian explained that the yellow zone was on southbound D
Street, which unfortunately, would be converted to two-way. Staff would evaluate the surrounding area,
perhaps on Frances Street, to locate a suitable loading area; however, at this time he had no clear answer.
With regard to the issue of crossing, i.e., cars making turns in and out, Mr. Mansourian confirmed that the left -
turn pockets needed to have a left protection area — islands — and painted or raised islands could not be
crossed. He indicated that staff would evaluate whether there was another way to modify the design.
Mayor Boro requested that staff conduct a follow-up visit with the property owners with respect to those
movements and how people might get to their locations with those in place going north and south.
Mr. Mansourian stated that initially the worse case scenario would be implemented and then staff would work
with businesses, etc., to ascertain whether it could be scaled back.
Mayor Boro noted that Lombard Street in San Francisco did not allow left -turns all the way up Lombard
during specific morning and evening hours. He inquired as to whether staff looked at no left -turns all the way
up and down D Street and what the impact would be.
Mr. Mansourian stated that this was discussed in at least one scenario and reported that most of the
residents coming over Wolfe Grade would be turning left somewhere. If left -turns were restricted they would
have to turn right somewhere, make a U-turn and come back. He indicated that for the time being staff
concentrated only on D and Frances Streets and First and D Streets so as not to impact the neighborhood
further.
Mayor Boro noted that this could be a mitigation going forward if there was a lot of traffic on side streets due
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 13
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 14
to people diverting earlier.
Mr. Mansourian stated that the situation would be monitored to ascertain whether this was needed.
Mr. Nordhoff explained that staff would look at a number of potential traffic calming solutions, such as
additional stop sign installations, etc., rather than restricted turning movements, because some of those
turning movements would be by residents trying to get home.
With regard to the question raised concerning the four-way stop at C Street, Councilmember Heller inquired
whether if the queue became too long the light at Bayview Street could be adjusted to shorten the queue.
Mr. Mansourian stated the idea was to control the flow of cars on northbound D Street and meter them at the
lights. He was hesitant to support that at this time because once cars coming down Wolfe Grade saw the
back-up on northbound D Street they would start to divert left and right and staff did not want to start this way
too early. He believed the analysis indicated that the all -way stop and the two-way stop up to Second Street
would do this somewhat by itself. He indicated he would monitor this if the signal timing adjustment would
help; however, he believed it was not a good idea.
Councilmember Brockbank stated it was hard not to feel sympathy for the loss of parking in front of
businesses and he tended to think the advantages outweighed the disadvantages. He wondered whether
there was a way, that had not been thoroughly examined, discussed or evaluated, to somehow replace the
parking, or measure the cost of the loss of that parking during the evaluation period. He inquired whether
there was a way to create some type of short-term parking anywhere within a half block.
Mr. Mansourian noted there was a parking lot nearby on Second Street, west of D Street, with a dozen
spaces, which was being leased out on a month-to-month basis. He commented that, should the situation
become really bad, staff could look into this as an option.
Mayor Boro thanked the staff for the work that they had done, together with the neighborhood for their efforts
and steadfastness in pursuing this issue. He was sorry that the two representatives of the properties on D
Street did not get more involved sooner; however even though they did not get involved for whatever reason,
the City was sensitive to their concerns. Staff would monitor the parking and see how it affected their
businesses and should there be issues they would be addressed during the trial period.
1) Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 12632 - RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT THE GERSTLE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STUDY REPORT AND TO AUTHORIZE THE
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO IMPLEMENT A TEMPORARY
TRIAL PROGRAM CONVERTING "D" STREET TO A TWO WAY
STREET BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND STREETS
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
2) The title of the ordinance was read:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING MUNICIPAL
CODE SECTION 5.52.021 `WEIGHT LIMITS' TO INCLUDE VARIOUS STREETS IN THE GERSTLE
PARK NEIGHBORHOOD"
Councilmember Brockbank moved and Councilmember Connolly seconded, to dispense with the
reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only, and pass Charter Ordinance No. 1872
to print by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 14
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 15
OTHER AGENDA ITEMS:
10. ELECTION OF VICE -MAYOR FOR YEAR 2009 (CC) — FILE 9-1
Councilmember Brockbank placed in nomination the name of Councilmember Barbara Heller to serve as
Vice -Mayor of the City of San Rafael for the year 2009. Councilmember Miller seconded the motion, and
Councilmember Heller was elected Vice -Mayor for year 2009 by acclamation.
11. APPOINTMENT AND DESIGNATION OF DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR FOR THE MARIN
ENERGY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY (CC) — FILE 9-1 x 271
Mayor Boro, having an interest in PG&E, recused himself and left the Council Chambers, due to potential
conflict of interest.
Vice -Mayor Heller noted Mayor Boro left the Council Chambers.
Vice -Mayor Heller appointed Councilmember Connolly Director and Vice -Mayor Heller Alternate Director to
the Marin Energy Joint Powers Authority.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT:
12. None.
COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS: (includinq AB 1234 Reports on Meetinqs and Conferences Attended at City
Expense)
Mayor Boro returned to the Council Chambers.
13. Highwav 101 Corridor Improvements: - File 170 x 9-1
Mayor Boro reported having attended a meeting today (December 15, 2008) of an Oversight Committee on
the Highway 101 corridor improvements. He noted Diane Steinhauser, Executive Director of the
Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM), was concerned at the possibility of running out of funds and being
unable to complete the project. Regardless of what happened with the state there was a shortfall of
approximately $4.5 million - $5 million and he noted that Dianne Steinhauser planned to go before the
California Transportation Commission to seek funding. Project work in jeopardy included relocation of the
railroad tracks and completion of the bike path. Indicating there were a lot of reasons for the substantial cost
overruns Mayor Boro stated the reality was that money was short and the matter was urgent.
Vice -Mayor Heller inquired as to whether SMART would pay for moving the tracks.
Mayor Boro clarified that it was part of Caltrans responsibility. There was an agreement between Caltrans and
the Golden Gate Bridge District, when they owned the property, and that agreement was transferred to
SMART. The contract calls for part of the building and improvement and the project overall would relocate
the tracks.
Vice -Mayor Heller noted that today no work was being carried out in the Linden Lane area.
Mr. Nordhoff believed this was weather-related.
Mayor Boro again thanked staff for their great work on the Gerstle Park neighborhood project, which was very
difficult and complicated. He believed the moving parts would be interesting to monitor over the next several
months, and he especially thanked Mr. Nordhoff and Mr. Mansourian.
There being no further business, Mayor Boro adjourned the City Council meeting at 10:13 p.m.
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 2009
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 12/15/2008 Page 15