Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 2000-04-17SRCC MINUTES (R, 'lar) 4/17/2000 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2000 AT 8:00 PM Regular Meeting: San Rafael City Council Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember Barbara Heller, Councilmember Cyr N. Miller, Councilmember Gary 0. Phillips, Councilmember Absent: None Also Present: Kenneth Nordhoff, Assistant City Manager Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk CLOSED SESSION: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 8:00 PM RE: DAY LABORERS IN THE AREA OF MARIN SQUARE - File 231 Jason Hadick, who has a business at Marin Square, stated the City had a real problem at this location. He reported that between 100 and 250 Hispanic -looking individuals are there every day trying to get work, people pull up in trucks and pick people up, and people pulling into the parking lot of the shopping center are mobbed. He noted he runs a business called House Plant Market, formerly Cost Plus Nursery, and explained his average customer was either a home decorator, someone setting up a house for sale, or someone with a large home, and they all purchase large plants. Most of his customer base are female, they carry credit cards, and drive big cars, which these days generally means driving an SUV. Mr. Hadick stated that when the laborers see an SUV, they think it is a contractor, and mob the car. He reported he has personally seen at least ten instances where a customer or perspective customer came to the store, had a bunch of Hispanic people run up and mob the car, and were frightened, because most of his customers are women. He stated he loses customers because they are frightened and run off. Mr. Hadick noted at first he thought this might be a temporary problem, but then found out his security guard was having problems all the time, and when he called Lieutenant Johnson of the Police Department and asked what could be done, he was told that this had been a problem for seventeen years, and while every once in a while there is a raid by the INS looking for illegal immigrants, there was nothing that could be done because it is not illegal to ask for work, although it is illegal to pick people up, and the Police Department can ticket those who do. Mr. Hadick stated perhaps it was time for the City Council to look at the situation, and follow the lead of other cities that have set up temporary job centers where people can go and legitimately find casual laborers looking for work. He stated he did not know if the Council could help him; however, a problem exists that is causing big problems with his business. He noted he has heard people in the shopping center, mostly women, who have said they are harassed and feel frightened. Mr. Hadick stated he is losing business and the City is losing sales tax, and in addition, the City is also losing image. He felt it would behoove the City of San Rafael to think about addressing this problem and finding a solution for what is obviously a genuine need on the part of some of its residents. Mayor Boro stated Mr. Hadick's landlord, Mr. Bloomenfeld, was well aware that this issue existed, and if he had not disclosed that to Mr. Hadick, that was something Mr. Hadick might want to discuss with him. He also pointed out that Mr. Bloomenfeld had security guards to keep the day laborers off that site. Mayor Boro noted Police Chief Sanchez was in attendance and had heard Mr. Hadick's comments, and the City would patrol that area to see if people were being stopped or harassed. Mayor Boro explained the City had pursued the issue of a job center several years ago, but the City was pre-empted by State law from starting such a center; however, if a private group wanted to start a center, they could. Mayor Boro pointed out that, unfortunately, this situation was not unique to San Rafael, it exists throughout the entire State, noting the Council and staff were dealing with the issue, as a City, the best they could. He acknowledged Mr. Hadick's customers and employees should not feel harassed or intimidated, and asked Chief Sanchez to pursue the issue if that was, in fact, occurring. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 1 SRCC MINUTES (Re—lar) 4/17/2000 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Boro announced there had been a change to Agenda Item #5. Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the following Consent Calendar items, including the change to Item #5: ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of Monday, Minutes approved as March 20, 2000 (CC) submitted. 2. Report on Annual Filings - Fair Political Practices Accepted report. Commission Form 700, Statement of Economic Interests for Designated Employees, Including Consultants, Geotechnical Review Board, Design Review Board and Cultural Affairs Commission (CD) - File 9-4-3 3 ki 5. Summary of Legislation Affecting San Rafael - File 116 x 9-1 Resolution Adopting Amendments to the City's 1999/2000 Budget (MS) - File 8-5 x 9-3-85 x 9-3-16 (CM) Approved staff recommendation: AB 2043 (Maddox), Workers Compensation. Injuries: OPPOSE; SB 2000 (Polano), Uniform Local Sales and Use Taxes. Revenue Allocation: OPPOSE; SB 1982 (Alpert), Local Government Finance. Reform: OPPOSE. RESOLUTION NO. 10626 - RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1999/2000 BUDGET. Resolution Amending the Public Agency Retirement RESOLUTION NO. 10627 - System (PARS) Trust Agreement (MS) RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE - File 7-1-36 AMENDED AND RESTATED PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SYSTEM (PARS) TRUST AGREEMENT. 6. Resolution Authorizing Street Closures for the RESOLUTION NO. 10628 - 13th Annual Greg Borrelli's May Madness Classic RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE Car Parade on Saturday, May 20, 2000 (RA) TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CITY - File 11-19 STREETS FOR THE 13TH ANNUAL GREG BORRELLI'S MAY MADNESS CLASSIC CAR PARADE (Saturday, May 20, 2000: "A" Street from Parking Structure driveway to Fifth Avenue from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM; Fourth Street between Lootens and "A" Street from 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM for stage set-up and take-down; Fourth Street from Lincoln to "D" Street from 12:00 PM to 10:00 PH: Cijos from South of Commercial to Fourth Street from 12:00 PM to 10:00 PM; Lootens from Third Street to apartment building driveway from 12:00 PM to 10:00 PM; "B" Street from Parking Structure driveway to Fifth Avenue from 12:00 PM to 10:00 PM; "C" Street from Parking Structure driveway to Fifth Avenue from 12:00 PM to 10:00 PM. 7. Request for Amicus Participation: (CA) Approved amicus participation. - File 9-3-16 L.A. Alliance for Survival v. City of Los Anqeles (U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 97-56742) AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAINING: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Boro (from Item No. 1 only, due to absence from meeting of 3/20/00). SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 2 SRCC MINUTES (R --Alar) 4/17/2000 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARING: 8. CITY INITIATED AMENDMENT OF: (CD) - File 10-3 x 10-5 x 11-7 x 2-11 x 10-1 a) SECTION 14.03.030 OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE ZONING DEFINITIONS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION FOR SEASONAL OUTDOOR EATING b) SECTIONS 14.05.020. 14.05.022. 14.06.020. 14.08.020 (TABLE OF LAND USE REGULATIONS) FOR THE REGULATION OF OUTDOOR EATING AREAS ON CITY SIDEWALKS AND PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY c) THE ADDITION OF A NEW SUBSECTION IN CHAPTER 14.16 (SITE AND USE STANDARDS) FOR OUTDOOR EATING AREAS ON CITY SIDEWALKS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY d) CHAPTER 14.17. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, SUBSECTION 14.17.1108 ("APPLICABILITY OF PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR OUTDOOR EATING AREAS") AND AMENDMENT TO SUBSECTION 14.17.110C (STANDARDS) e) CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 14 OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING) FOR DESIGN REVIEW OF OUTDOOR EATING AREAS Mayor Boro announced this item had previously been heard by the Council, and was being reopened in order to consider comments regarding the amendments concerning design review. Mayor Boro opened the public hearing, and asked for the staff report. Senior Planner Dean Parsons recalled staff had first presented the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance regarding outdoor dining for Council's review at the City Council meeting of February 7th. He noted that for the most part, the Councilmembers had agreed the amendments were satisfactory; however, Council did ask staff to explore options to require design review for outdoor eating areas. Mr. Parsons stated staff was recommending the design review section of the Ordinance be amended to require an Administrative Design Review Permit for all outdoor eating areas in the City regardless of where they are located, whether in the downtown area or outside of the downtown. In addition, as discussed at the meeting of February 7th, staff was also recommending an amendment to reconcile the Performance Standards Section and require Design Review Permits for that section, as well. Mr. Parsons explained staff was also recommending an amendment to the Design Review Section concerning the issue of approvals running with the land, proposing additional language to state that the issuance of a Design Review Permit for any outdoor eating area on public property did not confer any property rights, or incumber the City's property rights. Mayor Boro invited public comment, and there was none. There being no public comment, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing. Mayor Boro asked if the revised Ordinance included a recommendation, as previously discussed, regarding Licensing Agreements? Mr. Parsons stated that was correct, explaining the Ordinance included the requirement for a License Agreement or an option for a Lease Agreement between the City and the tenant, within a public right of way. The title of the Ordinance was read: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL TO AMEND TITLE 14 OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE (CITY OF SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE) SECTION 14.03.030 (ZONING DEFINITIONS) TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF SEASONAL OUTDOOR EATING AREA; AMEND THE TABLE OF LAND USE REGULATIONS (SECTIONS 14.05.020, 14.05.022, 14.06.020 AND 14.08.020) TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SITE AND USE REGULATIONS FOR OUTDOOR EATING AREAS WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY; AMEND SECTION 14.17.110 SUBSECTIONS A AND B TO PROVIDE FOR A LICENSE AGREEMENT OR LEASE AGREEMENT FOR USE OF CITY SIDEWALKS AND RIGHTS-OF- WAY FOR OUTDOOR EATING AREAS; AMEND SECTION 14.17.110 SUBSECTION C TO AMEND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR OUTDOOR EATING AREAS; AMEND SECTION 14.25.040 TO REQUIRE DESIGN REVIEW FOR OUTDOOR EATING AREAS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 14.25.140 TO CONFIRM THAT NO PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE CONFERRED BY ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR EATING AREAS ON CITY SIDEWALKS". Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety, and refer to it by name only, and to pass Ordinance No. 1751 to print, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 3 SRCC MINUTES Mr-ilar) 4/17/2000 Page 4 OLD BUSINESS: 9. STATUS REPORT ON PEACOCK LAGOON (PW) - File 4-4-6.b x 5-1-243 x 166 x 12-x 12-19 x 13-12 Public Works Director Dave Bernardi recalled that a little more than sixty days ago, Council directed staff to prepare a status report on the Peacock Lagoon and various issues associated with the Peacock Gap area. He explained the report identified three areas of concern to members of the neighborhood. Mr. Bernardi reported the Lagoon Management Plan discussed at the previous Council meeting was still under preparation, noting he had spoken with the consultant who is preparing the plan, and it appeared they would have a Lagoon Management Plan ready for Regional Board staff review in approximately a month. The consultant assured Mr. Bernardi that when the draft of the plan was completed he would receive a copy. Mr. Bernardi reported that on April 6th he met with some of the neighbors, Suzanne Mabardy, Ted Johnson, and Jim Goniea, and one of the items they had discussed was the Lagoon Management Plan. He stated they had set a tentative meeting date of May 8th, although that date would likely be changed, noting the intent was to meet and discuss the Lagoon Management Plan, and determine whether there were additional comments the City or the neighborhood wished to make before the Regional Board gives its final approval. Mr. Bernardi stated the Lagoon Management Plan would detail and outline some of the responsibilities the City would have as its part of the Lagoon Management Plan. He noted that currently, the City flushes the lagoon approximately every four weeks, explaining the purpose of that was to get the water colder and more salty, in order to eliminate the algae bloom in the pond. He stated the Management Plan would study that and make recommendations as to whether four weeks is enough, or if it should be more often or less often. Another issue to be discussed within the Management Plan would be trying to determine the nutrient load going into the lagoon, either from the golf course, through the use of fertilizers, or from residential uses, by people who fertilize their lawns and landscaping. Mr. Bernardi stated that would likely be an indicator as to how often the City needs to flush the lagoon. He noted another component would be educating not only the people at the golf course, which is a single entity, but more importantly, educating the neighborhood. He pointed out that was part of the Storm Water Management Program, explaining part of what they had to do in every neighborhood, not just Peacock Gap, was to educate people on the use of fertilizers and nutrients that get into the water system, creating nutrients that will, in this particular case, create algae blooms. Mr. Bernardi stated those discussions would take place within the next month. Regarding the Storm Water Pump Station, Mr. Bernardi reported they had talked a lot about priorities and how the City looked at this particular pump station, noting there was no other fail safe system similar to this one in all of the other pump stations maintained by the City. He explained that in this particular situation the City had an easement when the area was developed, which allows the City to flood the golf course in the case of mechanical or electrical failure at the pump station. Consequently, the priority for upgrading this pump station has been placed on a low schedule, because the other pump stations do not have this kind of fail safe system. Mr. Bernardi reported all the other pump stations have now been upgraded, and the current plan to renovate this particular pump station was scheduled for fiscal year 2001/2002. He stated the improvements would include not only replacing and upgrading the motor control center, which is where all the switches and sensing devices are, but also to flood -proof the pump station, and provide space for the emergency generator within that enclosure. Mr. Bernardi reported the cost was estimated to be approximately $250,000. Mr. Bernardi stated there had also been some discussion with regard to building a new pump station, such as the Lindaro Pump Station. He explained the reason the Lindaro Pump Station had been re -built was because it had been under -sized to begin with, and the drainage area and the drainage going to the pump station was beyond the capacity of the old pump station. Consequently, staff had recommended, and Council approved, that a new pump station be built. However, in the case of the Peacock Pump Station, the pump station was designed to handle all of the water coming to it in the ultimate situation, which is a hundred -year storm, and all of the developed land. He noted this station had adequate capacity to serve the area it was designed to serve, and there was no need to spend a great deal of money tearing out the old station and building a new one. He acknowledged a new station might be better, but he would not recommend that to Council, as the current station, once the improvements are made, will be perfectly adequate for a long time. He noted staff maintains the pumps and motors every year, and will continue to do so. Mr. Bernardi stated the last issue concerned the levee, noting he believed, after an earlier discussion with Mr. Johnson, one of the neighbors, that there was confusion regarding some of the questions that had been asked by the residents. Mr. Bernardi explained the levee was currently at Elevation 8, which was the minimum elevation he SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 4 SRCC MINUTES Mr—ilar) 4/17/2000 Page 5 would recommend any levee should be. He noted the City's other levees, around Spinnaker Point and the Bay front, were at Elevation 10, explaining the reason Elevation 10 had been recommended for those levees was the result of a study done by Harding Lawson Associates. He noted they had done an analysis using the worse case scenario, where there was a high tide, it was raining, the wind was blowing, and there was a tsunami caused by an earthquake inside San Francisco Bay which created a sloshing action. Mr. Bernardi explained that when all the numbers designated for those occurrences were added together, plus one foot of free -board, they had come up with Elevation 10. Referring to the Peacock Gap area, Mr. Bernardi stated that after the floods several years ago, staff recommended the levee be raised to Elevation 10. As a result of much discussion with the community, the Council had asked Mr. Bernardi what the minimum elevation would be that would still be considered appropriate, and he recommended Elevation 8, which was why this levee had been built to Elevation 8. Mr. Bernardi stated that at this point in time, there were no plans on the part of the City to upgrade this levee and raise it to a higher elevation, noting there certainly was no funding established, and it was not on any priority list at this time. Mr. Bernardi stated suggestions have also been made to widen the levee; however, he explained that to have the ultimate, highest level of flood protection, widening the levee would not make any difference. In addition, the only way to do that would be to raise the levee; therefore, they would have to determine a way to raise it an additional couple of feet. Mr. Bernardi stated that at this time, staff did not know the exact elevation of the levee because it is on bay mud, and he suspected it has settled a little, although they did not know by how much. Mr. Bernardi referred to a letter Mayor Boro had received from Leo Isotalo, President of the Peacock Gap Homeowners Association, in which Mr. Isotalo raised a couple of issues, and to which Mr. Bernardi wished to respond. He noted he had already discussed provisions for an engineering study to define alternative seawall design, and the evaluation of the pump station for effectiveness, and the possibility of it being rebuilt in a water -tight fashion. Mr. Bernardi stated there were issues concerning the need for the Flood Management Plan to address thoroughly and definitively the question of siltation reduction in the lagoon's holding capacity, and the City's long-standing, legitimate use of the lagoon to collect run- off from the total area watershed, creating the need for the City to undertake testing of the water. Mr. Bernardi explained those two issues would be addressed by the consultant preparing the Lagoon Management Plan for the Golf Course. Mr. Bernardi stated he had spoken with the consultant, who was establishing and developing a protocol which would identify the number of tests, when they would be taken, and the types of things they would be studying, noting the golf course would be paying for those tests. He pointed out the drainage impact to the St. Sylvester's property had been considered as part of the analysis of that development, and would not be a problem. Mr. Bernardi stated staff also recommended there be a plan to have a mechanism for regular review, to incorporate new knowledge and technology. Mayor Boro asked for further clarification regarding Mr. Bernardi's earlier conversation with Ted Johnson concerning the wall. Mr. Bernardi explained that when he and Mr. Johnson had spoken earlier regarding the levee, Mr. Johnson had asked whether it would make any sense to widen the levee, and fill -out into the Bay. Mr. Bernardi then explained to Mr. Johnson that if they were to fill -out into the Bay, they would then run into requirements for such things as permits, because that would be considered as filling the bay. Mr. Bernardi had informed Mr. Johnson that would be a difficult thing to do, and nothing would be gained by doing it. Mr. Bernardi believed the Association had mistakenly thought that by making the levee wider, they would also make it more resistant to flooding; however, he explained the only way to make it more resistant to flooding was to raise it. Mayor Boro referred to comments made publicly, and to him personally, regarding original discussions when the wall had first been designed, noting Mr. Bernardi had indicated that he had, at that time, recommended it be eight feet. Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Mayor Boro asked if there had been an issue with the neighborhood at that time, as well, with respect to the height of the wall, or was the recommendation of eight feet based upon Mr. Bernardi's preference? Mr. Bernardi explained that when it originally went to the Council, there had been a recommendation to raise the levee to Elevation 10, because that was the standard throughout the City. However, based upon discussions of the neighborhood and the Council, the Council had asked Mr. Bernardi for the minimum elevation he would recommend, and he had stated the minimum would be Elevation 8. Mr. Bernardi explained that what Elevation 8 left out was the confluence of all the worst cases, including an earthquake in San Francisco Bay. He acknowledged it was more likely there would be an event involving high winds and high tide, although someday there will be an earthquake that might coincide with all those events; however, the reality and probability of that was fairly low. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES Mr-ilar) 4/17/2000 Page 6 Councilmember Cohen recalled that a couple of years ago there had been flooding out there, and asked if that would have been prevented if the levee had been at Elevation 10? Mr. Bernardi stated it might have reduced the impact, noting, as he recalled, the way the storm came in and coincided with the high tide, the levee was overtopped. However, he did not believe it would have made any difference if the levee had been two feet higher, because the waves over the top of the levee were much higher than two feet. Councilmember Cohen asked how long ago the levee had been installed? Mr. Bernardi reported the levee was built when San Pedro Road was widened, which he believed was in 1975. Mr. Cohen asked if, in the intervening twenty-five years, the City had looked at subsidence? Mr. Bernardi reported they had done some surveying after the City had problems out there in 1982, and the most recent work had also occurred then, at which time rocks were cemented to the top of the levee. Mr. Cohen asked if that meant staff had brought the levee back to Elevation 8 in 1982, and since then nothing more has been done? Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Referring to the pump station, Councilmember Cohen asked if Mr. Bernardi felt the pump station was sufficient for the drainage area, with the quarter million dollars worth of improvements, or if it was sufficient because the City has a fall -back? Mr. Bernardi stated it was capable of pumping out the water that gets to it, explaining whatever quantity of water gets to the pump station, it is adequately sized to be able to pump that water out. Mr. Cohen clarified that in addition, there was also the fail-safe situation, which was the ability to flood the golf course. Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Mr. Cohen asked, if the City were to take the option of flooding a portion of the golf course, what would be the relative elevation toward the residences, and could a portion of the golf course be flooded before it gets to people's houses? Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct, as the golf course was lower than the houses, although he did not know the exact differential. Mr. Cohen asked if that meant the City could flood the golf course, although that did not mean people's houses were going to be flooded? Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Councilmember Cohen asked if there had ever been additional engineering studies of levee heights, and if staff had ever asked HLA to go back and re -visit their work on the 1975 engineering study on levee heights? Mr. Bernardi stated that had not been done. Councilmember Heller asked if there have been any particular problems with the levee at this level, other than in 1982 and 1998? Mr. Bernardi stated that if there is a good heavy wind blowing from the southeast, water can splash over the levee, noting he has seen it happen approximately every other year. However, to the extent that it causes a great deal of flooding, he could only remember four or five times that has happened, most specifically in 1982, 1986, and 1998. Ms. Heller referred to flooding the golf course, and asked how many times that had happened? Mr. Bernardi stated he could recall three times, noting the flood area had been developed in the mid- to late -60's. Mayor Boro stated he understood the recommendation to be for the City to bring the levee up to the current norm, and that there be a stand-by generator that should function. However, if for some reason something goes wrong, the City does have the golf course, unlike any other part of town where there is no other back-up to the levee. Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Mayor Boro clarified that Mr. Bernardi was also stating that spending the additional amount of money for a new station would not improve that situation, in Mr. Bernardi's opinion. Mr. Bernardi stated he could not recommend the City spend the money. Councilmember Phillips stated that looking back at the recommendation regarding eight feet versus ten feet, he wondered if it was still Mr. Bernardi's opinion that this was a sound recommendation, given past history? Mr. Bernardi stated he believed that remained a sound recommendation. Mayor Boro invited public comment. Suzanne Mabardv., 8 Lagoon Place, thanked Mr. Bernardi for having met with the neighbors a few weeks ago. She displayed a map, which had been produced by the Public Works Department through their GIS system, noting she had originally asked for the map to show how the water system and storm drains emptied into the lagoon. Ms. Mabardv stated that in collecting even more information, they had super -imposed one section to show the flood zone, which she described as the high level of Zone B. She then pointed out the lagoon, shown as Zone A, noting it showed that it would flood. Ms. Mabardv stated they had discussed three scenarios with Mr. Bernardi. The first involved high seas on the Bay, with water entering inland from the Bay, over the levee wall. Second, there was a scenario of heavy rains coming off the mountains and the entire basin, flooding down into the bowl, and then into the lagoon. The third was the worst case, where both of the prior scenarios happen simultaneously. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 6 SRCC MINUTES (Rr^talar) 4/17/2000 Page 7 Ms. Mabard.x recalled that in 1986 Mr. Bernardi recommended to Council that the area be reviewed with an engineering analysis and study; however, the residents were concerned, as and there were still questions that were unanswered, as indicated by the Council's own questions. She asked if the current wall was really sufficient, noting they did not even know what the height was, and that still needed to be determined. Ms. Mabardv asked if there were other flood prevention measures that could be implemented at this point? Referring to the questions that had been asked in 1986, along with Mr. Bernardi's recommendations to Council sixty days ago when he gave his report to the Council, she noted Mr. Bernardi had recommended "conducting the necessary engineering studies to determine the actual extent of the problems, and to identify the necessary and more extensive long-term solutions". She stated Mr. Bernardi had asked the Council for this in 1986, and the community was still asking for it. Again referring to the map, Ms. Mabardv stated the problems had now compounded, as there have been new developments that increase urban run-off. She noted the Marin Bay Park feeds into the area, pointing out Peacock Greens, Peacock Estates, six developments off of Knight Drive, and the proposed Chapel Cove development at the St. Sylvester's Church site, which they hoped would be routed away from the lagoon, but would still be entering into the marsh lands. She stated they hoped that would be a consideration, noting the community would be watching that carefully. Ms. Mabardv'stated that since 1986 they have known this was a problem, as has Mr. Bernardi, who asked that an analysis be done. She stated they felt it was time for the Council to "bite the bullet" and get an engineering analysis, and really have the questions answered. Ms. Mabardv presented Council with photographs of the flood which occurred in 1998. Noting the recommendation of 1986 which Ms. Mabardy had cited, Mayor Boro asked if she was referring to the levee wall or to the storm pump? Ms. Mabardv stated she was referring to what Mr. Bernardi had recommended, which was looking at the entire community and the whole watershed. Mayor Boro stated it had been his understanding that Mr. Bernardi felt the pump station itself was sized adequately, and that the corrections being proposed were to upgrade it, but not to re -size it. Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Ms. Mabardv stated they had spoken with Mr. Bernardi about the submersible pumps installed at the Lindaro Pump Station, which had been recommended because of that design study, and she believed a design study would also make that determination in this case. Noting the residents had three issues, Mayor Boro stated he understood the issue concerning the Lagoon Management Study, which would be addressed primarily by the golf course, although the City and community would also be involved. Ms. Mabardv agreed, noting that was actually regulated by the California Environmental Protection Agency. Mayor Boro clarified their second issue was with the pump station itself, and the third concerned the levee. He stated he was trying to understand Ms. Mabardy's comments as they related to what she understood Mr. Bernardi to have asked for in 1986, and whether that was with respect to the pump station, or with respect to the levee? Ms. Mabardv stated her understanding of Mr. Bernardi's report was that it addressed the pump station and the levee, and his last recommendation had been to incorporate long-term recommendations into a Citywide Drainage Master Plan, which she felt implied a comprehensive analysis needed to be established by the City. She noted the neighborhood needed to be incorporated into such an analysis, and they needed to look at not just the pump station in isolation, but collectively with the whole watershed, and then look at the watershed in terms of the City's Flood Management. She stated that had been her understanding. Ms. Mabardv noted that in the staff report she had not seen the direction that had come from Councilmember Cohen at the earlier meeting, and she asked if he recalled his request. Councilmember Cohen recalled that at the last meeting he had raised an issue regarding whether the City had any liability or responsibility on the Water Quality Control issue. Mr. Bernardi explained the notice the City received from the Regional Water Board had required the City to respond by a certain date, and describe what the City was doing to deal with the run-off issues, as is currently done in the City's Storm Water Management Program. He explained that in the response to the Regional Board, staff had described the City's street sweeping frequency, the cleaning of the pump stations and storm drains once a year, the work City Engineer II Steve Zeiger does in the community, as well as work done by volunteers on such projects as painting the drains. Mr. Bernardi stated the Regional Board had accepted the contents of the City's report, and they have not contacted the City again since that time, although Mr. Bernardi did call and speak with a staff person who indicated the response was adequate, and had responded to their demand for information. Ms. Mabardv asked if that meant the City was not requiring a clearance from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, in contradiction to the request of Mr. Cohen? Mr. Bernardi clarified the Regional Board had requested the City respond to their request to tell them what the City is doing to manage the watershed, and the City responded to that, and met the Regional Board's requirement. Ms. Mabardv. stated that was not, however, her understanding of SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (R— lar) 4/17/2000 Page 8 what Councilmember Cohen had requested. Councilmember Cohen stated he had asked Mr. Bernardi to follow-up on the status of the Regional Board's request and where the City stood, and he acknowledged he did wonder why the Regional Board would not put it in writing if they had found the City's response to be adequate. Mr. Bernardi stated he was told that was because the Regional Board does not write letters in that regard. Councilmember Cohen asked if Mr. Bernardi had the name of the person he had spoken with? Mr. Bernardi stated he did. Mayor Boro stated the record showed the question had been raised, that Mr. Bernardi had contacted the Regional Board and given them the City's approach, and he was telling Council the response was satisfactory, and that there was nothing pending from that agency to the City at this point. Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Councilmember Phillips asked for clarification regarding the concerns of the neighborhood. He noted that if, in fact, the City has a fail-safe system, and if the three worst case events were to occur and significant water goes over the levee, then he could understand the golf course having a major concern, because they would have salt water on the fairways and greens, which would undoubtedly not be good. However, he pointed out the water still would not be reaching the height of any residences. Ms. Mabardy stated that was an incorrect statement, noting there were people in the audience who could speak about the flooding of their properties when the golf course was also flooded. She noted that was why they were stressing the importance of an engineering analysis, to address such issues as the siltation of the lagoon and the capacity to hold the volume of water, the fact that it is not a submersible pump station and the pump station has failed, and that when the golf course is washed -back the properties do flood. Councilmember Phillips asked if the water level reached a number of the residences? Ms. Mabardy stated that was correct. Mr. Phillips stated if that was the case, that was different than what he had thought they were facing, and it concerned him, as well. He asked how frequently this had occurred during the past fifteen years? Ms. Mabardy stated she had lived in her residence for the past twelve years, and it flooded in February, 1998. She noted they had voluntarily sandbagged their property, as did other residents, because the water was coming over the wall and they anticipated a flood. Mr. Phillips stated anticipating a flood was different, and asked if the water had actually raised to a level where it was approaching her residence? Ms. Mabardy stated it had not, but the water was on her property. Mr. Phillips asked where Ms. Mabardy lived? She stated she lived on Lagoon Place, pointing out the location on the map, and indicating all the properties that had water come onto their properties. Mayor Boro asked if that had happened as a result of the pump station failing and the lagoon being flooded, or because of the unusual waves Ms. Mabardy had described going over the wall? Mr. Bernardi stated it was his understanding that when the levee was overtopped, the waves and water were going down Riviera Drive, following the same drainage route as the pipes. He recalled looking toward the lagoon and seeing a waterfall coming in between two of the houses where the drainage system was underwater; however, it was draining down between the two houses, which led him to believe the water was coming in from the Bay, and it was not because the lagoon had filled -up and was flooding the houses. Regarding the pump station, Mr. Bernardi stated there had been a lot of silt and debris that built-up on the fence and did not allow the water to get into the pump station, which made things worse, and soon there was water everywhere, and it was hard to tell where it was coming from by that time. Mayor Boro asked if, at that point, staff had flooded the golf course? Mr. Bernardi stated they had. Mayor Boro asked if, to Mr. Bernardi's knowledge, there had been any damage to the homes upstream as a result of doing that? Mr. Bernardi stated he knew that some houses had been flooded, particularly along Lagoon Road. Ms. Mabardy pointed out the pump station was flooded, and the electrical system was damaged to the point that it could not pump. Assistant City Manager Nordhoff stated it was important to note that what Mr. Bernardi had proposed in terms of capital improvements to the pump station would mitigate those problems in the future. Mr. Phillips asked if "mitigate" meant that the problem would be eliminated? Mr. Nordhoff stated he did not believe they could eliminate the fact that something mechanical could go wrong, in any pump station, in any part of the community; however, this would go a long way toward alleviating the current situation with electrical shortages and other problems at a pump station that was not protected from flooding. He noted they could put a facility around the pump station that would, to the greatest extent possible, eliminate those kinds of hazards; however, any pump station, in any location, at any time, even though they are well maintained, could throw a rod or break a bearing and fail. He stated Mr. Bernardi's job was to try to prevent that. Mr. Phillips clarified that the fail- safe system, which was the flooding of the golf course, was only fail-safe if the pumps continued to operate. Mr. Nordhoff stated that was true anywhere, because if the pumps and back-up generators failed, the system would cease to work as it was intended to. Mr. Nordhoff pointed out that each year staff comes before the Council during the budget process with a list of capital improvements, noting these types of SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 8 SRCC MINUTES (Rc^talar) 4/17/2000 Page 9 projects have generally been funded from the City's Storm Water fee, which is paid by everyone throughout the community. He stated the Council would have a chance to look at this issue and ask more detailed questions about this project during the budget hearings next spring. Councilmember Heller clarified that what Ms. Mabardy was asking, and what the community was asking, was for the City to do a comprehensive engineering analysis of Storm Water Management in the Peacock Gap area, if not the entire City. Ms. Mabard.v stated that was correct, based upon the 1986 report. Ms. Heller noted Mr. Bernardi had stated he did not feel that was particularly necessary, because what the City had in that area was sufficient. Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Referring to the 1986 report, he quoted, "The pond and pump station were also designed to accommodate a hundred year storm", explaining that meant that whatever water was thrown at it, it could handle. Therefore, he did not believe staff needed a study to tell them what they already knew. He noted what they were looking at now was making sure the pump station operates reliably and effectively. Citing another sentence from the 1986 report, he quoted, "The pond and the pump station were designed for the ultimate development of the entire basin". Mr. Bernardi stated staff wanted to propose a program that would mitigate the concerns raised about the operation of the pump station, noting that if they build a wall around it, install an emergency generator, and re -do the motor control center, they would have a station that will serve very adequately for some time to come. Ms. Mabard.v stated the residents believed that without analysis, that was a difficult statement to make, especially considering the history of the problem. Referring to the 1986 report and what Mr. Bernardi had stated regarding the pump station, Mayor Boro asked Mr. Bernardi if his reference point had to do with the levee? Mr. Bernardi stated it did not. Mayor Boro asked, if that was the case, and in light of the statements he had just read to the Council, what were the engineering studies he wanted to conduct? Recalling there had been flooding in 1982, 1983 and 1986, Mr. Bernardi explained part of what they had not known then, but do know now, was exactly what the system could handle. He noted that because they had not done the research back then, they had not known at the time exactly how the station was designed. He stated they had since done that research and spoken with those who designed it, and found that it was designed to accommodate everything, noting that information was verified subsequent to the 1986 report. Mr. Bernardi noted the inclusion of the Peacock area in the overall, Citywide Storm Drain Master Plan was a good thing; however, he pointed out Peacock Gap was a unique area, as it only drains Peacock Gap, and it does not inter -tie or inter -connect with anything else. Therefore, they can be fairly clear on what the needs are in that specific area. He explained that in other parts of San Rafael where they are inter- connected, the Rossi Street pump station and the four in the Canal inter -tie with one another, and they have built in overflows, so if one gets taxed, they can shunt the water to another one of the stations. Mr. Bernardi stated the Peacock Gap station was isolated enough that they could identify the problems fairly easily, which is what they have done. He explained they had to flood -proof it, and make sure the pumps turn on and that they run. He reiterated they were designed to handle the water that comes to them. Mayor Boro asked if, in essence, the work Mr. Bernardi had requested in 1986 for this pump station had been accomplished since then? Mr. Bernardi stated staff had done an in-house analysis, but because of various priorities and funding, the work had not been done. Mayor Boro referred to the submersible pump, asking, for example, what was different about this pump station, for which staff was not recommending a submersible pump, as compared to the Lindaro Street pump station? Mr. Bernardi explained a submersible pump has less moving parts, and the entire pump is in the bottom of the pump station, rather than having a motor on top and a propeller in the bottom that sucks the water up and pumps it out into the Bay. He stated it would be much less prone to break down, and much easier to maintain, noting the Sanitation District was eventually going to switch to having all submersible pumps because they are far more reliable, and a better design in the long run. However, the reality is that the pumps already there are perfectly adequate to do the job for which they are intended, as long as they are maintained adequately, and as long as staff does what it needs to do to make certain they run, which staff intends to do. Jim Goniea noted he lives directly across the street from the pump station, and he took umbrage with some of things Mr. Bernardi represented to the Council, and some of the words he had used. First, Mr. Goniea felt the word "fail-safe" was an entirely misleading term to use in connection with the Flood Management Plan currently in place. He acknowledged he was not the best person to speak to the history of this issue, as he was a recent resident to the area. However, it was his understanding there have been three major flood events in Peacock Gap, two which were the result of water coming over the levee, and a third caused by water being backed -up because the pump station did not work, resulting in the National Guard having to be called out. Mr. Goniea stated those were all situations where the golf course was flooded, although none of them involved a tidal wave or tsunami; therefore, he believed the situation was a little more pressing than Mr. Bernardi SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 9 SRCC MINUTES (Recullar) 4/17/2000 Page 10 has led the Council to believe, noting three times in trn rty-five years was more than a hundred -year flood. Mr. Goniea stated those who had spoken had correctly identified two problems, and the two necessary solutions to those problems. One was water backing -up in the lagoon as a result of the pump station not working, and the other was water actually coming over the levee. Regarding the first problem of the water backing -up into the lagoon, he believed the pump was the obvious solution to getting the water out as easily as possible. He felt the solution being proposed was better than nothing; however, he believed it was a "band-aid" fix on a long-term problem. He explained they were dealing with a thirty-five year old pump station which, in the future, was going to require an increasing amount of maintenance. He noted the solution being proposed was to build a wall around it, so if water does come into the area, it will not short -out the system. However, he believed there was a solution to both the age of the pump station and the shorting -out, which would be to build a submersible pump station that would not be affected by the water, and which Mr. Bernardi admitted would have to be done eventually, as all the pump stations would be switched over to submersible pumps. In addition, he asked why the City would build an unsightly eye -sore, with a big concrete wall, when the City knows it is going to have to spend the money anyway, down the road, to build the submersible? He felt the proper solution to this problem, at this time, was to actually fix it rather than put a "band-aid" patch on it. Regarding capacity, Mr. Goniea acknowledged Mr. Bernardi might be absolutely correct, and the pump may have sufficient capacity to pump out the water that needs to be pumped to resolve a flood situation; however, capacity was not the issue, because capacity did not matter if the pump was not working. He believed the real issue was how they were going to be sure the pump is working at that critical moment, and the way to do that was to make sure it is new enough that it is going to be working under those circumstances, and that would be solved by putting in a submersible pump like the one at the Lindaro pump station. Mr. Goniea stated the second issue associated with that was the back-up generator. He noted that because of where they are located, they were pretty far out on the energy line, and it was not infrequent that energy is cut-off. Therefore, if the pump station does not work because the energy is cut-off, then it is not going to pump, no matter what its capacity is. He felt the solution to that would be to have a back-up generator of some sort, noting they wanted to make certain that whatever solution is put in place, the City will keep in mind that there has to be a back-up system that will work in the case of an energy failure. Regarding the issue of the wall, Mr. Goniea stated he respected Mr. Bernardi's consistency that eight feet was adequate to deal with the problem; however, he believed the history of the situation clearly demonstrated that eight feet was inadequate, pointing out that since Peacock Gap was built, they have had at least two major flooding events as a result of water coming over the levee. He recalled a previous conversation with Mr. Bernardi regarding the raising of the wall by two feet, after which it had been his impression that a proper Cost/Benefit analysis might allow for that to occur. However, Mr. Goniea felt that if the residents were going to flood without it, then it should be done, with or without a Benefit/Cost analysis. He believed this was another situation with a clear solution and, again, it was not the time for a "band-aid" fix, it was time to make a decision on how to fix it. Mr. Goniea felt that before the Councilmembers took action they needed to make sure there was community consensus on the issue, and in order to do that, he believed there had to be a consistent proposal that all the community groups and neighbors could discuss. He noted that would require an engineering report, so it could be determined whether two feet was adequate, or, if the wall had sunk by one foot, that three feet would be adequate. He felt there had to be something consistent, so everyone could decide if there was consensus or not. He believed the first step was in the hands of the City, so that everyone would know what they were talking about, rather than it being left in the hands of the community to try to build consensus. Mr. Goniea noted a third issue had been raised relating to the water quality in the lagoon. He reported he had read the Order that had been issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and noted he was also an attorney and had dealt with situations that involved the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the issuance of citations and Demand Orders of action to be taken. He stated that after reviewing the Order, in his opinion the City did have liability for the water quality, that it was not solely in the hands of the golf course, and that the City had to take adequate action in order to meet the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, in order to make sure the water quality does not reach levels where it becomes a discharge of pollutants into the Bay. Mayor Boro stated the City understood that, and that was the purpose of the study, to determine the action that needs to be taken. Mr. Goniea stated it was his understanding the present posture was that the City was taking no action, and was waiting for the golf course to act, noting he would like to see the City taking more action than simply a holding pattern on this issue. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 10 SRCC MINUTES (Remilar) 4/17/2000 Page 11 Ted Johnson, resident of Peacock Gap, referred to Ms. Heller's earlier question regarding the flooding from water coming over the wall or off the golf course. Referring to the three major events described by Mr. Goniea, Mr. Johnson stated each one of those events had flooded inside his home, as well as the home next to him and the home Mr. Goniea now lives in. He acknowledged the system was probably adequate, on an overall basis, in trying to get the water back to the Bay; however, it does threaten individual properties, such as his own. Mr. Johnson agreed there was a need to develop community consensus regarding what should be done with the wall. He felt it would be helpful if they knew exactly what the status of the wall was, noting a number of the Councilmembers' questions seemed to lead to that same issue. He believed it would be helpful if Council could direct Mr. Bernardi to prepare an updated survey of the wall in front of Glenwood and Peacock, so they could study the settlement issues and see exactly where it is, and discuss that at their neighborhood meeting. Mr. Johnson stated that in their conversation, Mr. Bernardi had referred to the earlier engineering report from 1982, which was driving the decision to recommend the ten feet. He felt it would be a good idea to review that report with Mr. Bernardi, noting he and Mr. Bernardi had already discussed some ideas for doing that. He pointed out that a good deal of the work may have already been done in that report, and it could be that they were looking at simply an updating situation, but if not, that would at least be a base point from which to start. Recalling the flood of a couple of years ago, Mr. Johnson stated Mr. Bernardi deserved a lot of credit for getting the men and equipment out to that area, noting they had special pumps to get the water out of the lagoon, keeping the flooding from getting worse than it was. Mr. Johnson acknowledged this was a tough problem, but he believed they would be able to find some solutions. Tony Skalko, 20 Dellwood Court, reported he has owned his house since 1976 and they have been flooded -out three times, the last time being two years ago when they lost three cars. He noted water had gotten into his house in 1982, and again two years ago; therefore, he understands what the situation is. He stated the major concern on Dellwood Court is that there is no storm gate on the drainage going out to the Bay, and the water comes up through the drainage channel, fills up the street, and floods the entire area. He reported that when the tide rises to seven feet, they have to move their cars off their driveway, because the water comes up the driveway. In addition, when there are high winds, the water comes over the wall and plugs all the drainage going back to the Bay, and that acts like a dam, so the water just keeps filling up. Mr. Skalko recalled that after the flood two years ago, the City came in and cleaned -out the drain, and it was just like pulling the plug in a bathtub, draining everything out to the Bay. He believed the problem was the height of the wall, and the need for storm gates on all the drainage. He stated when he first moved into his home, between his subdivision and the next one over they used to have storm gates on the creek, and they could hear the gates banging all the time, which meant they were working; however, he does not believe those gates are there anymore. He felt something needed to be done with the drainage in that entire area, so the water does not back-up into the subdivision. Russ Mabardv, 8 Lagoon Place, stated his two concerns were the level of the break - wall, and the lagoon and the pump. He believed that whatever the current level of the levee wall, it was inadequate. He noted that standing on Lagoon Road two years ago, they could see breakers coming over the wall. He reported they had two feet of water on Lagoon Place, and the neighborhood had to use sandbags to protect their properties. He stated they watched the level increase as the tide came up, and saw the water come to within six inches of entering the main part of their house, noting that if they had not sandbagged, it would have flooded their basement area. He reported some of his neighbors did, in fact, have flooding in their basement areas. Mr. Mabard.y stated his second issue concerned the level of the lagoon, noting that, unfortunately, the water does not just selectively go to the golf course, as Council has been led to believe, it rises equally. He noted that in the case of the 1998 flood, which he experienced, the water rose over their break -walls. He explained that around the lagoon, most of the homes have break -walls that are made of concrete blocks; however, the level of water exceeded their break -walls, went onto their properties, and flooded patios and decking areas, because the water does not just selectively funnel into the flood plain of the golf course, and it does not spare the residents. Paul Bettini noted he has lived in the Peacock Gap area for approximately six years, the last six months on the lagoon. He stated the water does go over the wall, and does so continuously, noting that in 1998 it went into much of the property on the frontage, and they had a lot of damage. He explained his property was approximately 700 to 800 feet from San Pedro Road, and the water came up onto the street, almost all the way down to 64 Peacock Drive. He stated he had been amazed the water could go that far, and one could only imagine what it was like in the lagoon, noting the residents on Lagoon Place had really been in trouble. Mr. Bettini also believed the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 11 SRCC MINUTES (Rermlar) 4/17/2000 Page 12 wall should be replaced, noting that with the slightest windstorm there is water coming over it. He reported the streets had been flooded this week, and he did not know if it was because the drains were not clear, but there was water in two lanes along the Bay. Regarding the pump, Mr. Bettini stated he had been reading some of the literature, and it was his understanding the pumps were out several months, and he could not understand why they would be out for such a long period of time. He noted the lagoon was in terrible shape, and there was a lot of algae in it. He believed the City had some responsibility to protect the property owners, and to keep the lagoon in better shape than it is in. He urged Council to give this matter serious consideration. Ladd Schulman, 8 Peacock Lane, stated he has lived in the area for approximately five years, and has had the opportunity to stand next to the pump station and watch the water flood into it. He noted his question concerned the issue of the submersible pump versus refurbishing the existing hardware. He believed it sounded as though this was a budgetary issue, and asked if they were looking at a magnitude of a quarter of a million dollars versus a million dollars to bring in a submersible pump? Mr. Bernardi reported the Lindaro pump station had cost the City approximately $750,000. He acknowledged cost seemed to be one of the major issues, if not the major issue, of going to a submersible station versus the upgrading. Mayor Boro agreed cost was one of the major issues, and another issue was risk of failure, noting those were issues staff would discuss, and then make recommendations to Council, and the Council would have to weigh those decisions. Mayor Boro stated nothing was fail -proof; however, he noted there were degrees, which are paid for as more money is spent. Mr. Schulman asked how much of the flooding was attributable to water coming over the seawall, versus some sort of system failure at the pump station and all the factors aligning at the right time, such as high tides and heavy rainfall, and how much was the overflow over the seawall contributing to that specific area of flooding? Mr. Bernardi explained it eventually became difficult to determine where all the water was coming from, because it was everywhere; however, as he recalled, much of the water that was going up Riviera Drive and Peacock Drive came over the seawall. Mr. Schulman asked if simultaneous to that the pump had failed, adding to the additional water? Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Mr. Bernardi pointed out that if a pump station is re -built and submersible pumps are installed, they would still be pumping the same volume and amount of water, because they would be designed to carry the ultimate capacity of the drainage basin; therefore, they would not be up-sizing the pumps to pump more water, there would just be fewer pumps. Tom Cieol.v., a resident of 11 Lagoon Road since 1977, stated that if the lagoon was being flushed once a month it was news to him. He noted he called the City in April to report there was a large problem, and was told the pumps would be out for the next four to five months. In addition, he stated he had attended a meeting at which it was stated that the streets are swept once a week; however, he stated he had never seen a street sweeper on Lagoon Road, since 1977. He recalled that once one of the residents of Peacock Gap even bought his own street sweeper, and did it for two and a half years. Mr. Ciepl.Y stated he appreciated where the Council was heading, he just hoped they were going in the right direction, noting he had lived there a long time, and some things just did not happen as easily as others. He believed the pump was probably capable of taking up that much water; however, if the electricity was not making the pump generate, then nothing could happen. He noted these were problems that had to be addressed. Mayor Boro asked Mr. Bernardi about the pumps being out for three or four months. Mr. Bernardi stated the pumps were out at that station last year, but they are, in fact, working now. He also reported staff only flushes the lagoon from May, when it starts to get warm, to September or October, noting it depends on the weather more than anything else. He explained they only do it when it is hot, and the algae bloom has more of a tendency to occur, rather than in the winter months, when it is colder. He stated that has been their agreement with the homeowners, and with Lee Isotalo in particular. Mayor Boro noted that with such a light agenda, they had been able to hear from many of the residents, receive their input and, in effect, have a neighborhood meeting regarding this issue. He stated that for both the residents and the City to be productive, both sides needed to do some work outside of the Council Chamber. He asked Councilmember Cohen to join him in meeting with Mr. Bernardi, and then resume discussions with Mr. Johnson, Mr. Goniea, and Ms. Mabardy, to pursue some of these issues. He pointed out they were a long way from the 2001 budget cycle, with respect to configuration of the pump; therefore, they could certainly get into this issue in great detail, and make sure the Council, as well as the community, understand the ins and outs, and ups and downs of the different configurations and the costs. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 12 SRCC MINUTES (Rei 'ar) 4/17/2000 Page 13 Mayor Boro stated he needed to study a little more the entire issue of the wall and where the City should go with it; however, he believed they should take a little time and go to the site. He noted City Manager Gould was on a three week sabbatical at the University of California at Berkeley; however, Mayor Boro stated that when he returns, he will ask Mr. Gould to join them. He felt they all needed to understand a little more about the issue of the pump, and the cost and risk issues, noting he believed the Lagoon Management Plan the City will receive from the golf course will be a starting point, and the City can share that with the neighbors, and they can all go forward from there. He stated they also needed to better understand the issue of the levee, noting he would like to see the records going back to 1986. He asked City Clerk Leoncini to find the minutes so they can determine what the original discussion had been by the Council at that time, as none of the current Councilmembers had been here in 1986. Mayor Boro noted the Council would not be taking any action at this time; however, this would be their path forward, and he and Councilmember Cohen would keep the Council informed, and Mr. Johnson, Mr. Goniea and Ms. Mabardy would keep the neighbors informed as they all meet. He stated the Council was not going to let this go by, noting there was a timeline to come up with something for the budget within the next eighteen months, and that was what they would all be working toward. Councilmember Cohen stated he would be happy to do that, noting there had been some questions raised which the Council was not going to be able to answer at this time. He stated, for everyone's sake, he would like to get more information about the range of options in terms of the pump station. He pointed out the fact that the Lindaro pump station cost $750,000 may, or may not, mean that this pump station would cost $750,000. He stated he would like to see what various approaches the City might take with that, and whether or not there should be some kind of peer review, or perhaps ask Harding Lawson to dust -off their study and come back and double-check on the adequacy of such things as the pumping volume. In addition, Mr. Cohen stated he would like to know what the elevation of the levee is today, noting it may be that Elevation 8 is actually a minimum adequacy, and the problem could be that the levee is no longer at Elevation 8. He noted, it might not be an issue of raising it two feet; however, if it was decided to come back and restore it to that design elevation, that might help to address the problem. Assistant City Manager Nordhoff asked if Council would be willing to allow staff time to determine the height, prior to the meeting to discuss this item? Mr. Cohen agreed, noting that if they were going to be meeting to pursue some of these issues, they needed the facts. Mr. Nordhoff stated staff would study the issue and come back with additional information, prior to the meeting. Mayor Boro stated the City would keep the residents informed. COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS: 10. a. RE: BRIDGE HOUSING ASSISTANCE - 162/172 BELVEDERE STREET AND 129 CANAL STREET - File 13-16 x 229 x 187 (Verbal) Councilmember Miller reported on the meeting with the tenants of 162/172 Belvedere Street and 120 Canal Street. He explained representatives from BRIDGE Housing had met with the tenants at Pickleweed Park, principally to get basic information from the various tenants in order to assess whether they can purchase the property. He stated the first meeting was held on Thursday evening, and approximately forty to forty-five people attended; at the second meeting on Saturday, approximately fifteen to twenty people attended. Mr. Miller stated the BRIDGE representatives had been very good about letting people know exactly what was happening, why it was happening, and providing information on rent control, relocation, and the services that would be provided along the line. Mr. Miller stated it had been very fortunate that staff was there, noting Stephanie Lovette had been able to help the people who were concerned about giving any information at all, for anything, and clarify for them that the information was only to be used by the Agency in order to assist in determining whether it would be possible to purchase the property. He stated Ms. Lovette had also been very instrumental in guiding the questions. In addition, Ramone Lopez, who sits on the Police Advisory Committee and manages the property at 400 Canal Street, was hired by the property owner of both properties to manage those properties, and he was able to speak with the people in terms everyone understood and appreciated. Mr. Miller believed the meetings had gone very well. He explained that in cases where tenants had not attended the meetings, the representatives would go apartment by apartment. He reported they had three months to determine whether or not this project qualifies and would be feasible. He emphasized everyone was told they were not going to be thrown out on the street, noting staff had been superior, instilling confidence in this project and in the City itself, and he felt they should be commended. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 13 SRCC MINUTES (Re—lar) 4/17/2000 Page 14 10. b. RE: SANTA MARGARITA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION - DEL GANADO LANDSCAPING PROJECT - File 137 (Verbal) Councilmember Phillips announced that this Saturday at 10:00 AM the Santa Margarita Neighborhood Association was going to have an "unveiling" of the landscaping project they have been working on for the past year and a half. He hoped the Councilmembers could attend. There being no further business, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:25 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF 2000 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/17/2000 Page 14