HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 12840 (330 Bellam Blvd. - Denying Appeal)RESOLUTION NO. 12840
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAN RAFAEL DENYING TWO
SEPARATE APPEALS (AP09-004) AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S ACTION AFFIRMING THE ZONING ADMINSTRATOR'S
CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED09-014), ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT (UP09-015),
SIGN PERMIT (SR09-012) AND GRANT OF A PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR
NECESSITY (PCN09-001) TO ALLOW: A) EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE
EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING, INCLUDING AN ALTERATION TO THE
BUILDING ENTRY, NEW COLORS AND MATERIALS ON THE BUILDING AND NEW
WOODEN TRELLISES AND COLUMNS ALONG FRONT OF BUILDING; B)
OUTDOOR DINING AREA ON THE PRIVATE SIDEWALK AREA IN FRONT OF THE
STRUCTURE; C) NEW BUILDING SIGNS; AND D) ALCOHOL SALES IN THE NEW
GROCERY STORE AT 330 BELLAM BLVD (APN 009-280-06).
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RESOLVES as follows:
WHEREAS, on March 30, 2009 David Mena of Mena Architects, on behalf of Mi
Pueblo Grocery Store, submitted applications to the City of San Rafael Community Development
Department requesting an Administrative Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED09-014),
Sign Permit (SR09-012) and Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN09-001) to allow: a) exterior
modifications to the existing commercial building, including an alteration to the building entry,
new colors and materials on the building and new wooden trellises and columns along front of
building; b) outdoor dining area on the private sidewalk in front of the structure; c) new building
signs; and d) alcohol sales for a new grocery store use located at 330 Bellam Blvd; and
WHEREAS, on April 28 , 2009, the applications were deemed incomplete for processing
due to the need for additional information on the project plans and the requirement that an
application for an Administrative Use Permit be filed for the proposed outdoor dining. An
incompleteness letter was sent to the applicant; and
WHEREAS, on May 1, 2009, revised plans were submitted along with the application
for an Administrative Use Permit (UP09-015) as required by the incompleteness letter and the
applications were deemed complete for processing; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Use Permit application was reviewed by the Land
Development, Traffic Engineering, Fire Prevention and Building Divisions of the City of San
Rafael and was recommended for approval subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2009, the City of San Rafael Zoning Administrator (ZA) held a
duly -noticed public hearing on the proposed Administrative Environmental and Design Review
Permit, Administrative Use Permit, Sign Permit and Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN)
applications, accepting all oral and written public testimony. Seven neighboring business owners,
property owners, and residents were present at the hearing, raising a number of concerns and
issues about the proposed new use; and
WHEREAS, following closure of the public hearing on May 19, 2009, the ZA continued
the matter to May 20, 2009 to allow for the review and consideration of the numerous comments
raised at the hearing; and
WHEREAS, on May 20, 2009, the ZA rendered a decision, approving the project with
conditions. Notice of said decision, including transmittal of the meeting minutes and findings and
conditions of approval were provided to the applicants and their team, as well as the members of the
public who requested such notice; and
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2009, Ruth Donohugh, a neighboring business owner (Picante
Restaurant at 340 Bellam Blvd), filed an appeal (AP09-002) pursuant to the provisions of San
Rafael Municipal Code Chapter 14.28, citing I 1 points of appeal and requesting that the Planning
Commission reverse the May 20, 2009 decision of the ZA; and
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2009, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public
hearing to consider the Appeal (AP09-002), accepted and considered all oral and written public
testimony and the written report of the Planning Division; and
WHEREAS, upon review of the appeal and the scope of the project, the Planning
Commission has confirmed that the project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15301; and
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2009, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 09 -06 -
by a vote of 4-0-3 (Commissioners Colin, Lang and Paul absent) denying the appeal (AP09-002)
and upholding the Zoning Administrator's May 20, 2009 approval of the Administrative
Environmental and Design Review Permit, Administrative Use Permit, Sign Permit and Public
Convenience or Necessity (PCN) for the new grocery store at 330 Bel [am Blvd; and
WHEREAS, on July 21, 2009, two separate appeals of the Planning Commission decision
were filed pursuant to the provisions of San Rafael Municipal Code Chapter 14.28. The first was an
appeal by Ruth Donohugh of Picante Restaurant and the second was an appeal by Bruce Livingston
of Marin Institute (AP09-004) (collectively, "the Appeal"), citing two separate reasons for the
appeal and requesting that the Council reverse the May 20, 2009 decision of the ZA; and
WHEREAS, on September 21, 2009, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing
to consider the Appeal (AP09-004), accepted and considered all oral and written public testimony
and the written report of the Planning Division.
WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the City Council reaffinns that the project is
categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Section 15301 of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which exempts reuse
or additions to existing private structures that result in an increase of less than 10,000 square feet
from the requirements of CEQA, if the project is located in an area that is served by all available
public utilities to allow for maximum development permissible under the General Plan and if the
project is located in an area that is not environmentally sensitive. A separate CEQA finding has
been made below; and
WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which this decision is based is the Community Development Department.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby denies the
Appeal (AP09-004) by Ruth Donohugh and upholds the Planning Commission's July 14, 2009
decision affirming the Zoning Administrator's approval of the Administrative Environmental and
Design Review Permit, Administrative Use Pen -nit, Sign Permit and Public Convenience or
Necessity (PCN) for the new grocery store at 330 Bellam Blvd. The City Council finds that the
points of the appeal (identified in bold/italics) cannot be supported for the following reasons:
Appeal #1— Anneal by Ruth Donohugh
Appeal Point W a - Proposed Food Center coittains a fast food restaurant
a) When reviewing proposed land uses to determine whether they are allowed or conditionally
allowed, the City makes its land use decisions based on the primary use or multiple primary
uses of a building. In this particular case, the food service portion of the use was not determined
to be a separate use, but rather an ancillary use to the main use of the building, a grocery store.
b) The food service component of the grocery store is neither a separate nor a primary use of the
building, therefore it is considered an ancillary use to the primary use of the building, a grocery
store. The primary use of the structure is found to be that of a grocery store based on the: I )
proportion of the prepared food sales/food service vs. the total sales from all other uses in the
building is less than 25% of the total sales, 2) amount of area dedicated to the food service vs.
the total floor area is less than 25% of total building area; 3) there is no demised or separate
space for the food service and it is a part of the grocery store use; and 4) most of the food
service sales would occur in conjunction with the sales of groceries and other household
products in the grocery store.
c) In addition, the proposed food service component of the grocery store use would not be
considered a "fast food restaurant" since it does not meet the definition of "fast food restaurant"
contained in Section 14.03.030 of the Zoning Ordinance given that the use does not include any
of the five listed elements. Specifically, the proposed use does not include a drive-thru service,
an outdoor speaker for drive-thru service, nor does it propose to include late (past 11 pm) or
early hours (before 6am) of operation. Furthermore, the proposed use would not present
potential litter problems or outdoor gathering places more than a typical food service
establishment or grocery store.
d) The retail sales of prepared foods for on or off-site consumption, including a bakery, deli,
butchery and other similar uses are a common and integral component of nearly all large, full-
service grocery stores.
e) Considering this type of ancillary food service as a "fast food restaurant" would not be
consistent with the historical application of the Zoning Ordinance for other food service
establishments in the City and would render other uses that have been considered food service
restaurant to be considered as fast food. If the City were to apply the rationale and definition of
fast food in a manner suggested in the Appeal, then nearly all of the other small restaurants,
deli's, coffee shops, taqueria's and similar food service establishments would have to be
considered as fast food and thus necessitate Use Permits.
Appeal Point #1b - Proposed Food Center does not comply with parking requirements.
a) As discussed above, the use is considered a grocery store, with ancillary food service,
office, storage, beer and liquor sales and a variety of other ancillary uses. The parking is
based on the gross square footage of the primary use of the building, and not the
individual calculation of parking of all ancillary uses. The food service component of the
grocery store is neither a separate nor a primary use of the building, therefore it is
considered an ancillary use.
b) The parking requirement for grocery stores is 1 space/250 gross sq ft. of building area.
The project site provides 162 on-site parking spaces, 17 more than the 145 required by
the zoning ordinance.
Appeal Point #1 c — The Mi Pueblo Fastfood restaurant is also a /nigh volume food service
establishment.
a) It is determined that the food service component of the proposed use, whether it be high
volume, fast food, or a restaurant, is a minor and ancillary component of the primary use of the
building as a grocery store. Therefore, it is considered an accessory or ancillary use to the
primary use of the building, a full-service grocery store.
b) The land use table for the General Commercial Zoning District identifies that "Accessory
structures and uses customarily incidental to a permitted use and contained on the same site" are
pennitted uses.
Appeal Point #Id - The Mi Pueblo fast food restaurant requires a Conditional Use Permit and
the high volume service establishment requires a Conditional Use Perntit.
a) As stated in appeal points la and lc, it is determined that the food service use is considered
ancillary to the grocery store use and not a separate use. Therefore, no Use Permit is required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby
denies the Appeal (AP09-004) by Bruce Livingston of Marin Institute and upholds the Planning
Commission's July 14, 2009 decision affirming the Zoning Administrator's approval of the
Administrative Environmental and Design Review Permit, Administrative Use Permit, Sign Permit
and Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) for the new grocery store at 330 Bellam Blvd. The
City Council finds that the points of the appeal (identified in bold/italics) cannot be supported for
the following reasons:
Appeal #2 — Appeal by Bruce Livineston of Marin Institute.
Appeal Point #2a - The Planning Conuttission failed to follow the letter of the law in part due to
facts that were ignored by dee Zoning Administrator. The Planning Commission was under the
erroneous impression that they were simply deciding whether or not to approve dee alcohol
license, when in fact it was decided to carve out an exception to state law that protects the public.
a) The State Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) is the agency that has the
authority to issue alcohol licenses. A local governmental agency, such as the City of San
Rafael, does not have the authority to grant a license. In certain circumstances where there is an
undue concentration of licenses, ABC will not issue a new off -sale license or certain on -sale
licenses unless the local government body (city or county) first grants a finding of Public
Convenience or Necessity (PCN). The Planning Commission was clear in their roles and scope
of the review and consideration of the PCN.
b) San Rafael City Council Resolution No. 10299 governs the procedures for the City's review and
criteria for determination of whether such license would provide a public convenience or
necessity and identifies seven criteria that are to be considered by the City as part of its
determination whether the public convenience or necessity would be served.
c) The appeal point that the project does not meet all seven criteria and therefore cannot be
approved is an incorrect application of the PCN resolution. The Resolution requires that "for
purposes of determining whether public convenience or necessity will be served by issuance of
an .... off -sale retail liquor license subject to local determination, the following criteria shall be
considered."
d) The City is required to consider the seven criteria as part of their review, but does not mean that
all seven criteria are absolute. The intent of the review criteria is to consider the specific request
for a PCN, determine whether there would be a public convenience or necessity served by the
addition of that specific license in the area, and consider the request in light of the review
criteria. The ZA and the Planning Commission properly considered all seven criteria.
e) The appellant's claims that the project did not meet the following four criteria are incorrect
given that the City did consider these criteria, along with all other criteria, and determined that
based on the type of license, operation location and surrounding conditions, the project would
provide a public convenience as discussed below.
1. Will the issuance of a liquor license increase the total number of licenses in the city or
census tract?
a) The appeal is correct in that this license would increase the number of licenses in the
area. However, the entire purpose of the PCN process is that when a new license is
proposed in a community that has an over -concentration of existing licenses, the local
agency has the authority to review and consider the request and must first grant a PCN
before ABC will issue another new license in the area.
b) The City of San Rafael has considered the type of license requested, the nature of the
license and the review criteria contained in the PCN Resolution and determined that the
public convenience would be served by the addition of this license.
2. Will issuing the license serve a segment of the population not presently being served?
a) The appeal is correct in that there are 29 other licenses in the area and this constitutes
an overconcentration of licenses. Of the 29 existing licenses, four (4) are for off -sale of
beer, wine and hard alcohol (Type 21), such as the license sought by the applicant here.
b) The Canal area does have an overconcentration of licenses based on ABC's criteria,
and that is the reason why, before issuing a new license, ABC requires the local agency
to process a PCN and to review the application and determine whether it finds a public
convenience or necessity would be served by the addition of a new license.
c) The preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that issuance of a PCN to allow
liquor sales at this grocery store would provide a convenience to the shoppers of this
facility given that the opportunity to buy liquor would be in conjunction with typical
shopping for purchase of groceries, household products produce, meats and other
supplies typically found at other frill service grocery stores. There are no other large,
full-service grocery stores in the Canal neighborhood and adding this new license
would serve that need.
d) Furthermore, off -sale of beer, wine and hard alcohol is a common component of nearly
all full-service grocery stores in this City, as well as in other communities throughout
the state. There are 4 existing ABC licenses in the area that permit off -sale of beer,
wine and hard alcohol and none of the 4 licenses are associated with a full-service
grocery store. Additionally, given the operational plan and amount of area dedicated to
liquor sales, the liquor sales are expected to make up less than 4% of the overall sales
from the store, a minor portion of the merchandise sales.
3. Is the location of the business applying for the liquor license within 1,000 feet of an
incompatible facility such as day care centers, schools, churches, parks, honteless
shelters, rehabilitation centers of places that are designed and operate to serve minors?
a) Prior to the Zoning Administrator hearing, there was no oral or written comment from
any person or group that the proposed license would be located near an incompatible
facility.
b) On the evening of the Planning Commission hearing, the County Department of Health
and Human Services did submit a letter providing information and data to help the City
make its decision, citing the higher density of alcohol sales in San Rafael than in the
rest of Marin County, concern with drinking and driving, concern with placing alcohol
sales close to the County facility and suggesting conditions of approval that should be
placed on the grocery store.
c) Prior to the ZA hearing and after the Planning Commission appeal, the Police
Department was consulted to solicit their input and experience with off -sale licenses in
the Canal area as well as other parts of the City and even though the site may be located
near an incompatible facility, it was determined that it would not be an issue given that:
• Alcohol sales are a small part of the overall sales from this grocery store (less than
4%), no on-site consumption is proposed and the amount of display of alcohol is
limited to two interior merchandise racks that are not visible from the outside of the
store.
• The majority of alcohol sales from full-service grocery stores are not typically
stand alone sales of alcohol, but rather a part of larger shopping trip.
A Police Department review of five other comparable grocery stores in the City,
(Safeway in downtown and North San Rafael, Scotty's Market, Whole Foods, and
Andy's Market on Pt. San Pedro Rd) revealed that all of these other stores are near
potentially "incompatible facilities" as defined by this criterion, including schools
and youth based programs and that these full-service grocery stores with minor
alcohol sales did not increase alcohol-related crimes in the area nor were they
found to be incompatible with those surrounding uses.
4. Is Nee potential licensee located in a high crime area?
a) This appeal point is incorrect since the City Council Resolution 10299 identifies that
the City is to consider "reported crines means reported offenses of criminal homicide,
forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny !heft and motor vehicle
theft, combined with all arrests for other misdemeanor crimes offelony crimes, except
for traffic citations " (known as Part 1 crimes).
b) The crime statistics provided by the appellant are from the City's Police Department
web site and are not Part 1 crimes. The data they provided was from the "calls for
service" section.
c) The Police Department analyzed the crime statistics for the area for the previous year
and found 36 Part 1 crimes that met the definition contained in the PCN resolution. In
addition, the Police Department has analyzed part 1 crime rate in the Canal against
other parts of San Rafael and found that there are 41.2 part 1 crimes per 1,000 residents
in the Canal vs. 39.5 Part 1 crimes per 1,000 residents for the rest of the City.
Therefore, the Canal area exceeds the remainder of the City by 4.3% and is well below
the standard of 20% recommended for denial of an alcohol license.
d) Therefore, the addition of an alcohol license in this area would not pose an impact on
the Canal neighborhood which is an over -concentrated (alcohol licenses) and high
crime area given that the type of business (Mi Pueblo) that is proposed, the nature of
the surrounding uses and the part 1 crime data and the non -part 1 crime data pertaining
to alcohol-related incidents in the area.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the time within which to seek judicial review of this
decision is governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6.
BE IT FURTI-IER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Rafael upholds
the Planning Commission action to deny the appeals and reaffirm the Zoning Administrator
approval of an Administrative Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED09-014),
Administrative Use Permit (UP09-015), Sign Permit (SR09-012) and Public Convenience or
Necessity (PCN09-001), as modified by the Planning Commission through Resolution No 09-06,
based on the following findings:
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED09-014) Finding
1) The project design to modify the exterior building materials and colors and revise the design of
the building entry tower is in accord with the General Plan 2020, the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance and the purposes of this Chapter in that the project would be consistent with the
applicable General Plan 2020, including:
a. Land Use Policy 15 (Cogyetrience Shopping). This policy states "encourage the retention
and improvement of existing retail stores and services in residential neighborhoods that
provide needed neighborhood services and reduce traffic." This project would place a full
service grocery store adjacent to a high density residential area. Given that there are no
large frill service grocery stores within 2 miles of the Canal, this would place a needed
service near residents.
b. Land Use Policv 23 (Land Use Map and Catezories). The site is designated GC, a general
commercial district which allows general retail and service uses, restaurants, automotive
sales/service and hotels/motels.
Circulation Policv 5 (Traffic Level of Service Standards). This policy establishes level of
service standards for intersection in the City of San Rafael to evaluate new development.
The City's Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project and identified the change in use to a
grocery store would result in the generation of between 83 and 108 new A.M. peak hour
trips and 226 to 308 new P.M. peak hour trips. However, the proposed grocery store use is
a permitted use in the GC District and as part of the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance and
the General Plan 2020 (adopted in 2004), the traffic generation from the wide range of
allowable uses permitted in the GC District were incorporated into the traffic analysis
prepared for the General Plan 2020 EIR as existing baseline conditions and has been
accounted in the traffic system.
d. Element Neighborhood Element Policv 49 (Conflicting Uses). This policy states "prevent
the encroachment of new residential development into the Light Industrial/ Office District
to minimize conflicts. Businesses locating adjacent to residential areas shall be designed to
minimize nuisance impacts." This new business would place a new grocery store across the
street from residential uses. The subject site is a commercially zoned property that allows
grocery stores by right, therefore through the development of the zoning ordinance it has
been determined that grocery store uses would be appropriate for the area. Furthermore, the
proposed use would not operate outside of typical hours of typical grocery stores.
e. Neighborhood Element Policv 52 (New Business Develoament). This policy states
"encourage and give priority to new business development that benefits the neighborhood
through provision of needed services, low traffic impacts, or employment of a high
percentage of neighborhood residents. Encourage opportunities for local residents to own
and operate businesses." As previously discussed, the Canal neighborhood has expressed a
long standing desire for a full service grocery store in the Canal. Although there are many
smaller neighborhood or specialty markets in the area, there is no large full scale grocery
store. Furthennore, through the public hearing process, staff has received over 50 calls from
residents in the Canal seeking employment at this facility. The operator of the grocery store
has stated that their other facilities include large portions of the employees that reside in the
same neighborhood as their stores.
Furthermore, the project design would: a) provide a comprehensive design scheme for the entire
building; b) upgrade the appearance of the existing commercial building through the provision
of accent features and visual interest to break up the large expanses of walls; c) address and
upgrade all four sides of the existing building; d) incorporate the use of high quality materials
for the construction of the exterior modifications; e) add visual relief and interest to the main
entry and front fagade of the building through the addition of pergolas, tile wainscoting and
columns; f) improve landscaping at the main entry to the building and reestablish areas of failed
landscaping; g) provide defined walkways and pedestrian entryways to the site to create a
pedestrian friendly design from Bellam Blvd and encourage more pedestrian activity to the site;
h) incorporate the proposed ancillary outdoor seating/dining area into the existing site without
reducing existing on-site parking area; and i) improve the sense of entry to the building through
the redesign of the building entry and addition of design features to the front of the structure.
2) The project design to modify the exterior building materials, colors and design of the existing
commercial structure is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping design
criteria and guidelines for the General Commercial (GC) District in which the site is located in
that the project would: a) not propose any new development of structure; b) even though new
development is not proposed, the existing structure complies with all current development
standards for the GC District, including setbacks, lot coverage, building height, and landscaping
requirements; c) provide 162 on-site parking spaces, in excess of the 145 spaces required for a
grocery store use (at a rate of 1/250 sq ft); d) maintain all existing landscaped area and
reestablish dead or dying landscaping in parking lot planter areas; and e) in addition to
Environmental and Design Review Permit Finding #I above, improve the overall site plan
design, site circulation, landscaping and design of the building.
3. The project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts in that the project: a) is a reuse of
an existing developed site that hosts an existing commercial building; b) proposes exterior
modifications to an existing structure; c) would not result in any new grading, development or
tree removal; and d) is categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA per section 15301
of the CEQA Guidelines (Existing Facilities) since it is a reuse of an existing commercial
building that entails minor alterations to the exterior and the site plan of the structure and
interior tenant improvements.
4. The project design to modify the exterior building materials, colors and design of the existing
commercial structure will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that: a) there is no new
development proposed on the site, would be consistent with the development standards for the
GC District; b) proposes a use that is permitted by the General Commercial Zoning District, c)
has been reviewed by appropriate City Departments and appropriate conditions have been
included to mitigate any potential impacts from the exterior redesign; and d) would be required
to obtain a building permit and health department permit for the interior and exterior
modifications to ensure that the use and structure complies with all current building, electrical,
mechanical, plumbing, health and fire codes.
ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT (UP09-015) FINDING
The proposed outdoor dining/seating use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance, and the purposes of the General Commercial (GC) District in which
the site is located given that the proposed outdoor dining/seating area: a) is consistent with
the applicable General Plan policies as discussed in Environmental and Design Review
Permit Finding #1 above; b) complies with the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance
by proposing a design that is integrated with the building remodel and satisfies the design
criteria in Chapter 25 as discussed in the Environmental and Design Review Pen -nit findings
above; c) is listed in the GC District as a permitted use subject to approval of an
administrative Use Permit; d) complies with zoning setback, height, site distance and site
design standards and does not have any significant effect on the existing site plan, and e)
complies with the performance standards that apply to the outdoor seating use under Chapter
17 as discussed in Use Pen -nit Finding # 2 below.
2. The proposed outdoor dining/seating use as conditioned conforms to the standards established
in Chapter 17 (Performance Standards) given that: a) the proposed outdoor seating area will not
have a permanent roof over the outdoor seating area, b) outdoor seating fixtures would be
movable and not permanent, c) the area does not exceed 25 -percent of the indoor dining/seating
area capacity; and d) the seating area would be available during the normal hours of the grocery
store and food service area.
The physical placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the
surrounding uses in the neighborhood given that the use has been: a) located in front and near
the main entry to the grocery store use, a permitted use in the GC District; b) away from
adjacent residential uses, c) integrated into the site design with new architectural features,
including an open, non permanently -covered wood pergola and potted landscaping; and d)
designed in accordance with and subject to approval of an Environmental and Design Review
Permit pursuant to Chapter 25 with appropriate findings made to approve the design.
4. The outdoor dining/seating use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City given that the use is a)
integrated into the site plan on an existing walkway area, b) the redesign of the parking layout
and landscaping do not reduce the available parking area on-site, and the site plan has been
reviewed by all appropriate City departments, including the City Traffic Engineer, and has been
conditioned accordingly to ensure that City standards are met as a part of the re -use of the
building to the maximum extent feasible.
The outdoor dining/seating use, as conditioned, will be compatible with surrounding uses in
that the use is: a) located on a commercially developed site that will be occupied by a grocery
store with ancillary food service and the outdoor seating is ancillary to the food service use; b)
compatible with the other uses in the area, including the County medical clinic, restaurant,
residential uses, office uses and other commercial, retail and light industrial uses in the area
since food service is complementing to other commercial and residential uses in terms of type
and intensity of use, c) consistent with the applicable performance standards as discussed in Use
Permit Finding #2 above, d) located entirely on-site and would operate only during the normal
business hours of the grocery store and ancillary food service within he grocery store; it should
not have significant impacts on the nearby residential neighborhood, particularly in the
evening hours.
SIGN PERMIT (SR09-012) FINDING
1. The proposed signs for the re -tenanting of the building are in general conformity with the sign
ordnance and well integrated with the proposed design of the structure. A complete sign
evaluation will be conducted at the time of Sign Permit submittal to ensure compliance with the
Ordinance. This approval does not grant approval of specific signage, just the conceptual
placement and design.
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY (PCN09-001) FINDING
The Planning Commission makes the following findings related to the criteria identified in City
Council Resolution No. 10299 required for the determination of whether Public Convenience or
Necessity will be served by the issuance of an on -sale or off -sale license where a finding of undue
concentration has been made by the State Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control.
Criteria 1:
Whether the issuance involves an existing business license which is being transferred to a new
location, and which will not result in an increase in the total number of off -sale retail liquor licenses
or on -sale retail licenses in the City or in the census tract in which the business would be located.
Finding: The applicant proposes a full-service retail grocery store use, with ancillary food service,
within the General Commercial Zoning (GC) District. Oft -sale alcohol sales are proposed to be an
ancillary part of the grocery store use. The grocery store use, including the ancillary food service
use, is pennitted by right in the GC District given the fact that grocery stores that do not operate
past 11:00 pm are permitted uses in this Zoning District. The application would increase the
number of off -sale retail liquor licenses within the census tract by one. The off -sale liquor license
would be transferred from another full-service grocery store in Marin County and would therefore
increase the number of off -sale liquor licenses in the subject census tract. The San Rafael Police
Department has reviewed the proposed project for an additional off -sale liquor license at this
location and based on the type of use has recommended approval of the application.
Criteria 2:
Whether the business, by reason of its location, character, manner or method of operation,
merchandise, or potential clientele, will serve a segment of the City's business or residents not
presently being served.
Finding: The proposed grocery store use, with off-site sales, is marketed as a full-service grocery
store. The grocery store would not sell:
• Items/containers with more than 7% alcohol content;
• High alcohol malt liquor;
• Single unit containers less than 20 ounces;
• Hard alcohol containers under 9 fluid ounces; or
• Half pints or airport size bottles.
The proposed use would focus on grocery and food items, with alcohol sales estimated at
representing less than 4% of total store sales. This particular store would service the demand for a
large, full-service grocery store, including the sale of off -sale beer, wine and hard alcohol, a type of
use and convenience not readily available in the entire Canal or East San Rafael area. In addition,
there are only four other similar off -sale licenses in the Canal neighborhood (of the 29 total alcohol
10
licenses) and the addition of this license for this grocery store would provide the only off -sale
license associated with a frill -service grocery store in the area.
Criteria 3:
Whether the business will be located within a 1,000- foot radius of incompatible facilities, such as
public and private schools, day care centers, churches, parks, homeless shelters, and alcoholic
rehabilitation centers, and facilities designed and operated to serve minors.
Finding: The proposed liquor store at 330 Bellam Blvd is located on a major transportation corridor
within the East San Rafael area and would not be within 1,000 feet of a church, public school day
care center or homeless center. Although the proposed license would be located within 1,000 feet of
the County Health and Wellness Center, a facility that provides services to youths, the granting of a
PCN is not found to pose an issue on this facility given that:
• Alcohol sales is such a small part of the overall sales from this grocery store (less than
4%), no on-site consumption is proposed and the amount of display of alcohol is
limited to two interior merchandise racks that are not visible from the outside of the
store.
• The majority of alcohol sales from full-service grocery stores are not typically stand
alone sales of alcohol, but rather a part of larger shopping trip.
Lastly, the Police Department has reviewed 5 other comparable grocery stores in the
City, including Safeway in downtown and North San Rafael, Scotty's Market, Whole
Foods, and Andy's Market on Pt. San Pedro Rd. All of these facilities are near
potentially "incompatible facilities" as defined by this criterion, including schools and
youth based programs. This review found that these full-service grocery stores with
minor alcohol sales would not increase alcohol-related crimes in the area nor would it
be incompatible with those uses.
Furthermore, the Zoning and General Plan designations for the parcel allow grocery stores or
supermarkets, uses that typically contain alcohol sales, by right and do not require a Use Permit.
The proposed business with operational conditions would not be incompatible with surrounding
uses and facilities in that there are other small retail establishments and liquor stores in the vicinity.
Criteria 4:
Whether the location of the license will be in a crime data area covered by Police Department
statistics, which has a twenty percent (20%) greater number of reported crimes than the average
number of "reported crimes" for all crime data areas in the City, over previous year. For this
purpose, "reported crimes" means reported offenses of criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery,
aggravated assault, burglary, larceny theft, and motor vehicle theft, combined with all arrests for
other misdemeanor or felony crimes, except for traffic citations.
Findina: The property at 330 Bellam Blvd was formerly an electronic retail store and is located
within a crime data area with high calls for police service; however, the subject site has only had 36
calls for service for calendar year 2008. Of these 36 calls, seven calls were for Part 1 crimes. There
were 110 Part 1 crimes in the entire crime data area (Zone 2) in which this site is located. The 36
calls for service for this site over this period are considered to be low. As stated above, the Police
Department has recommended approval of the project.
In addition, the Police Department has analyzed part 1 crime rate in the Canal area against other
parts of San Rafael and found that there are 41.2 part 1 crimes per 1,000 residents in the Canal vs.
39.5 Part 1 crimes per 1,000 residents for the rest of the City. Therefore, the Canal area exceeds the
remainder of the City by 4.3% and is well below the standard of 20% recommended for denial of an
alcohol license.
In conclusion, based on the type of business (Mi Pueblo), the surrounding uses, the part 1 crime
data and the non part 1 crime data pertaining to alcohol-related incidence, the Police Department
recommends that the Mi Pueblo project will not have a negative impact on the area.
Criteria 5:
Whether the issuance of the license involves an existing business, which has been located at a site
which has had three or more reported crimes defined in (4) above within the previous one-year
period.
Finding: This proposed grocery store, with ancillary off -sale liquor sales, is not an existing business
within the City of San Rafael and this subject site. Therefore this is not applicable.
Criteria 6:
Whether the issuance of the license will promote the goals and policies of the City's adopted
General Plan, any applicable specific plan, or any similar policies that have been formally adopted
by the City Council.
Finding: The proposed grocery store is a permitted use for the General Commercial district. Liquor
sales contained in a full service grocery store are considered an ancillary use to the grocery store use
and therefore considered within the scope of a typical grocery store. Establishment of a full service
grocery store in the Canal area is a long standing goal of the City's General Plan to provide full
service groceries sales to residents in the area. Currently, there is no full service grocery store within
walking distance of the Canal neighborhood and residents would have to travel 1.9 miles to the
Whole Foods on 3`d St or 2.3 miles to the Safeway in downtown. The use would be compliant with
all General Plan 2020 and Zoning Ordinance regulations. The General Plan designation for 330
Bellam Blvd is General Commercial and the Zoning is General Commercial (GC). As stated in
item 1, a grocery store with ancillary liquor sales is a pennitted use by right in the GC District.
Criteria 7:
Whether any other information supplied by the applicant, or other competent evidence shows that
public convenience or necessity will be served by issuance of the license.
Findina: The applicant has submitted a proposed letter and operational plan, dated April 16, 2009
from Mi Pueblo Foods that addresses various Planning and Police Department concerns. The
proposed business would provide the convenience of having beer, wine and liquor available to
customers when they purchase groceries at the new full service grocery store. There is no other
large full service grocery store in the Canal (nor is there within 1.9 miles) with the proposed wide
variety of food and household products, including off-site alcohol sales.
The project was noticed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property and although
objections were voiced at the public hearing, no evidence was presented that the liquor sales would
not serve a public convenience or necessity as described by the project proponent. In addition, the
project was referred to the Canal Area Property and Business Owners Association, Canal Alliance,
Rafael Bay Townhomes HOA, Spinnaker HOA and Baypoint Lagoon HOA.
12
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT (CEOA) FINDING
The proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) per Section This project qualifies for an exemption from the requirements of CEQA
under Section 15301 (Existing facilities) which exempts additions to existing structures less than
10,000 square feet on sites where all public services and facilities are available to allow for
maximum development permissible in the General Plan and that are not environmentally
sensitive. This exemption was found to be acceptable given that the:
a. Proposed project involves the reuse of an existing commercial structure with a use that is
permitted in the zoning District;
b. Exterior modifications would not result in an increase in floor area, the project proposes
minor exterior modifications to building materials and colors and site and landscaping
improvements that do not change the mass or bulk of the existing building;
c. The site is located on a completely developed and graded lot and there are no known sensitive
environmental factors located on this site.
d. The site is served by all necessary utilities
e. The proposed use is a permitted use in the GC District and provides more parking that that
required by the City's Zoning Ordinance for this type of use. Given that the grocery store use
is a permitted use and there is no expansion of floor area, the traffic intensification or de -
intensification associated with all use occupancies of existing building by permitted and
conditionally permitted uses were incorporated, evaluated and analyzed as part of the
environmental review conducted in conjunction with the adoption of the City's General Plan
2020.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael in
denying both appeals from Ruth Donohugh and Bruce Livingston of Marin Institute (AP09-004)
reaffirms the approval of the Administrative Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED09-
014), Administrative Use Permit (UP09-015), Sign Permit (SR09-012) and Public Convenience or
Necessity (PCN09-001) subject to the following conditions of approval (as modified by the
Planning Commission Resolution No. 09-06):
ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED09-014)
General and On -Going Conditions
Community Development Department - PlanninR Division
1. The exterior modifications to the structure and the site shall be developed in substantial
conformance with the building techniques, materials, elevations and appearance of the project,
as presented for approval on plans prepared by Mena Architects, titled Mi Pueblo Food Center,
date stamped Approved September 21, 2009 by the City Council and on file at the Community
Development Department containing Sheets No. P001, PI01, L1, P102, P103, P104, P105 and
P106 and colored elevation of Sheet P105 and shall be the same as required for issuance of a
building permit, except as modified by these conditions of approval.
2. Minor modifications or revisions to the approved design of the exterior of the structure and site
approved by this project shall be subject to review and approval of the Community
Development Department, Planning Division. Modifications deemed not minor by the
IN
Community Development Director shall require review and approval by the original decision
making body, the Zoning Administrator, and the City's Design Review Board, if necessary.
3. This Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED09-014) shall be valid for the life of the
project provided that a building permit is issued and construction begun within two (2) years of
this approval or until September 21, 2011. Failure to obtain a building pen -nit or a time
extension by the specified date or a time extension may result in the expiration of this
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED09-014) approval.
4. Approved colors are as shown on the approved building elevations contained in the approved
plans as on file with the Community Development Department, Planning Division. Any future
modification to colors shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Division and
major modifications may be referred to the Design Review Board.
Applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers,
attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding brought
against any of the foregoing individuals or entities ("indemnities"), the purpose of which is to
attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this application or the adoption of any
environmental document which accompanies it. This indemnification shall include, but not be
limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted or
incurred by any person or entity, including the applicant, third parties and the indernnifres,
arising out of or in connection with the approval of this application, whether or not there is
concurrent, passive or active negligence on the part of the indernnitees.
In the event that any claim, action or proceeding as described above is brought, the City shall
promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, and the City will
cooperate fully in the defense of such claim, action, or proceeding. In the event the applicant is
required to defend the City in connection with any said claim, action or proceeding, the City
shall retain the right to: 1) approve the counsel to so defend the City; 2) approve all significant
decisions concerning the manner in which the defense is conducted; and 3) approve any and all
settlements, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Nothing herein shall prohibit
the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action or proceeding, provided that if
the City chooses to have counsel of its own to defend any claim, action or proceeding where
applicant already has retained counsel to defend the City in such matters, the fees and the
expenses of the counsel selected by the City shall be paid by the City.
As a condition of this application, applicant agrees to be responsible for the payment of all City
Attorney expenses and costs, both for City staff attorneys and outside attorney consultants
retained by the City, associated with the reviewing, process and implementing of the land use
approval and related conditions of such approval. City Attorney expenses shall be based on the
rates established from time to time by the City Finance Director to cover staff attorney salaries,
benefits, and overhead, plus the actual fees and expenses of any attorney consultants retained by
the City. Applicant shall reimburse City for City Attorney expenses and costs within 30 days
following billing or same by the City.
8. The City shall have the right of entry to inspect the premises to verify compliance with the
conditions of approval and the San Rafael Municipal Code.
9. The property owner shall pay the costs of any code enforcement activities, including attorney
fees resulting from the violation of any conditions of approval or any provision of the San
Rafael Municipal Code.
14
10. All site improvements, including but not limited to, the site lighting, fencing, landscape islands,
paving and striping shall be maintained in good, undamaged condition at all times. Any
damaged improvements shall be replaced in a timely manner.
11. The site shall be kept free of litter and garbage. Any trash, junk or damaged materials that are
accumulated on the site shall be removed and disposed of in a timely manner. The applicant
shall institute a program to provide regular cleanup of the parking lot, landscaped areas and
sidewalk in front of the store, as well as all other areas immediately around the new structure.
12. The operator shall remove all graffiti from the building or site in a timely manner.
13. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and
debris. Any dying or dead landscaping shall be replaced in a timely fashion with new healthy
stock of a size compatible with the remainder of the growth at the time of replacement.
14. All existing and new site landscaping shall be routinely maintained in good order and free of
weeds, debris and overgrown vegetation. Plants and trees shall be irrigated and/or watered as
necessary to ensure their growth and stability.
15. All new exterior lighting shall be shielded down to avoid spillover onto adjacent properties or
public streets.
16. Drive through and drive up facilities are prohibited.
17. Amplified sound or music on the outside of the building shall be prohibited.
Public Works Department Land Development Division
18. The applicant shall be responsible for the repair of all damages to public improvements in the
public right-of-way resulting from construction -related activities, including, but not limited to,
the movement and/or delivery of equipment, materials, and soils to and/or from the site.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
Communitv Development Department — Planning Division
19. Construction plans submitted for building permit approval shall include a plan sheet, which
incorporates these Conditions of Approval for ED09-014, UP09-015 and SR09-012.
20. The open, uncovered vending machine area at the front of the building shall be covered and
designed with a cover/enclosure that places the equipment within an architectural screening.
The purpose of this is to screen the sides and top of the equipment from view with an
architectural feature. The architectural feature shall be designed as an integral part of the
building design. This feature shall also include a grill/security barrier at the front to prevent
theft and vandalism from the machines during off hours.
21. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit the design of this new
screening feature (as required by #18 above) to the Planning Division for review and approval.
22. Once the final design of the architectural feature is approved by the Planning Division (as
required in #19 above), the final design of the screening feature shall be incorporated into the
plans submitted for building permits.
a
23. The outdoor dining/seating area and area on the sides of the seating area shall be illuminated
with one -foot candle level of illumination. The method, light design and illumination levels
shall be identified on building permit plans and shall be subject to review and approval of the
Planning Division.
24. All mechanical equipment (i.e., air conditioning units, meters and transformers) and
appurtenances not entirely enclosed within the structure (on side of building or roof) shall be
screened from public view. The method used to accomplish the screening shall be indicated on
the building plans and approved by the Planning Division.
25. Prior to issuance of the building permit, any outstanding Planning Division application
processing fees shall be paid.
26. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the plans shall be revised to incorporate on site
bicycle parking equal to that required by Chapter 14.18.090 which requires 4 bicycle parking
spaces (bicycle parking equal to 3% of the 145 required parking spaces).
27. Prior to the building permit issuance, the outdoor seating area shall be reduced to not exceed 18
seats and 190.75 sq. ft (25% of the 723 sq ft indoor seating area).
Communitv Development Department — Buildins and Fire Prevention Division
28. A building permit is required for the proposed work. Applications shall be accompanied by
four (4) complete sets of construction drawings
29. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the 2007 California
Building Code, 2007 Plumbing Code, 2007 Electrical Code, 2007 California Mechanical Code,
2007 California Fire Code, and 2005 Title 24 California Energy Efficiency Standards.
30. Please note on the construction documents that fire sprinklers are required throughout the
building. A licensed C-16 contractor shall submit fire sprinkler system plans to the Fire
Prevention Bureau for approval prior to making alterations to the existing system.
31. Please note on the construction documents that a commercial kitchen hood fire -extinguishing
system is required in each Type I hood. A licensed contractor shall submit the kitchen hood
fire -extinguishing system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation
of the system.
32. Please note on the construction documents that a fire alarm system is required where the
occupant load exceeds 499. If a fire system is required in this building, based on the occupant
load, please note on the plans that fire alarm system plans shall be submitted to the Fire
Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation of the system.
33. A Knox Box is required at the primary point of first response to the building.
34. On site fire hydrants will be required.
35. Fire lanes must be designated; painted red with contrasting white lettering stating "No Parking
Fire Lane" A sign shall be posted in accordance to City of San Rafael standard #204.
36. Hazardous Materials Placard shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 704.
V
37. Storage height in excess of 12 feet shall require a "High Pile Storage" permit.
38. The proposed facility shall be designed to provide access to the physically disabled in
accordance with the requirements of Title -24, California Code of Regulations. For existing
buildings and facilities when alterations, structural repairs or additions are made, accessibility
improvements for persons with disabilities may be required.
39. In -ground grease separator(s) will be required outside the building perimeter to handle waste
water from the restaurants and food court area.
40. Review and approval by the Marin County Health Department may be required prior to
submittal for building permit plan review.
Public Works Department - Land Development Division
41. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide details on the building
permit plans showing how the new accessible sidewalk and other elements that connect to the
existing City sidewalk interface.
During Construction
Community Development Department Planning Division
42. Construction of the project shall comply with the City's noise ordinance.
Public Works Department - Land Development Division
43. An encroachment pen -nit shall be required for debris boxes or any construction or work in the
City right-of-way.
Prior to Fina! Occupancy
Communitv Development Department - Planning Division
44. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to request a final inspection, prior to the
issuance of the final building permit. The request for final inspection by the Planning Division
shall require a minimum of 48-hour advance notice.
45. All exterior lighting shall be subject to a 60 -day lighting level review by the Community
Development Department, Planning Division staff to ensure compliance. This lighting review
period shall commence upon issuance of final inspection approval by the Community
Development Department, Building Division.
46. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall have their landscape architect inspect the existing
and new landscaping and irrigation to ensure the health of all species and operation of all
irrigation. If any deficiencies are discovered, those shall be remedied. A letter from the
landscape architect shall be submitted to the Planning Division as part of the final inspection.
47. The four required bicycle parking spaces shall be installed on site as approved on the building
permit plans.
17
ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT (UP09-015)
1. Except as modified herein, the Administrative Use Permit (UP09-015) authorizes outdoor
seating/dining on the subject site on the private sidewalk area in front of the existing building
as shown on the approved plans.
2. This Administrative Use Permit (UP09-015) shall be valid for the life of the project provided
that a building permit is obtained from the City's Community Development Department and
the outdoor dining/seating use is initiated within two (2) years of this approval or until
September 21, 2011. Failure to obtain a building permit and initiate the use, or apply for a
time extension by the specified date, may result in expiration of this Use Permit.
3. The outdoor dining shall remain in conformance with the General Commercial District
Zoning District and the performance standards for outdoor dining contained in Section
14.17.130 of the Zoning Ordinance.
4. The outdoor dining/seating area shall only be used during the hours of operation (public
hours) for the grocery store. Outdoor dining area shall not be used outside of those hours.
5. Adequate number of trash and recycle bins shall be maintained outside the store at all times.
These bins shall be serviced as frequently as required to prevent overflow.
6. The operator shall implement a regular trash clean up program to patrol and clean up trash
and debris from this site. If any trash from this site is blown or deposited on the public right-
of-way or sidewalk, it shall be cleaned up as well.
7. Prior to the issuance of a business license, the applicant shall receive approval of an Alcoholic
Beverage Control (ABC) for off -sale of liquor.
8. An alarm system shall be installed and connected to a central station prior to the business
operating.
9. The grocery store, including the ancillary alcohol sales and food service and all other ancillary
functions of the grocery store, shall not operate past 11:00 pm, 7 days a week, unless a
Conditional Use Permit is applied for and approved by the Planning Commission (as requircd
for grocery stores in the General Commercial Zoning District identified in the land use table).
10. The outdoor dining/seating area shall be illuminated with adequate lighting levels to allow
visibility of the area from the parking lot (one -foot candle level is the standard). The method,
light design and illumination levels shall be identified on building permit plans and shall be
subject to review and approval of the Planning Division.
11. There shall be no solid walls, fencing or screening surrounding the outdoor dining/seating
area. Visibility into the outdoor dining/seating area shall remain non -obscured from the
parking lot area and shall be visible to persons in the parking lot.
12. There shall be no consumption of any alcoholic beverages allowed within the outdoor
dining/seating area or on the site. The applicant and operator of the business shall be
responsible to monitor this and to implement any appropriate security measures to remain
consistent with this requirement.
K
13. The business operator shall comply with the alcohol policies and procedures as identified in
the April 16, 2009 letter from Jeff Aldaz of Mi Pueblo Foods to the City of San Rafael,
including:
a. No items/containers with more than 7% alcohol content will be sold. No high alcohol
malt liquor will be sold. No single unit containers less than 20 ounces will be sold).
b. No items or containers under 9 fluid ounces shall be sold. No half pints or airport size
bottles shall be sold.
c. The following signage shall be posted and maintained at the entrance and exit of the
store.
i. State ABC license
ii. No loitering
iii. No open containers
iv. No littering
d. The operator shall employ an external security company that specializes in
supermarkets and shall have the security personnel on site during all hours of store
operations.
14. The applicant shall obtain a City of San Rafael business license.
15. The outdoor seating area shall be reduced to not exceed 18 seats and 190.75 sq. ft (25% of the
760 sq ft indoor seating area).
SIGN PERMIT (SR09-012)
1. This Sign Permit approves only the conceptual sign plan and locations as presented in the
architectural elevations.
2. Prior to the installation of any signage on the site, the applicant shall apply for and receive
approval of a sign Pen -nit. The application for a sign permit shall include all required submittal
requirements for sign review.
I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing
resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of said City held on Monday, the 2151 day of September 21, 2009, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller and Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
fzsf�-X e . 00-f,e.,44 -
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
lF