Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPJT Minutes 1988-02-224 SRC MINUTES (Special Joint) 22/88 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1988 AT 7:30 PM. Special Joint Meeting San Rafael City Council: Present: Lawrence E. Mulryan, Mayor Albert J. Boro, Councilmember Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember Gary R. Frugoli, Councilmember Joan Thayer, Councilmember Absent: None San Rafael Planning Commission: Present: Suzanne M. Scott, Chair Paul M. Cohen, Vice -Chairman Ross L. Cobb, Commissioner Bob Livingston, Commissioner Joyce B. Rifkind, Commissioner Peter F. Walz, Commissioner Absent: Richard O'Brien, Commissioner Also Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager; Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk; Anne Moore, Planning Director 7:30 PM - INTRODUCTION Mayor Mulryan called the meeting to order, stating that the City Council, for the first time, has the Draft General Plan. He informed the audience that meetings scheduled include public hearings whereby the actual process of adopting, section by section, the elements of the General Plan will take place. He stated that the purpose of tonight's meeting is to bring the City Council up to speed after many hours spent by the Planning Commission on the General Plan. He added that the Council has received copies of all correspondence and Minutes of the Planning Commission meetings. Mayor Mulryan then introduced Planning Commission Chair, Sue Scott. 7:40 PM - PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN SUMMARY Planning Commission Chair Scott summarized the work done by the Planning Department staff and Planning Commission stating that verbal testimony was given by over 350 persons, and 250 written comments received,and have been responded to. This work comprised approximately 40 workshops and hearings and all have affected the General Plan in one way or another. She stated all comments and responses are available for the public in the Planning Department and have been provided to the Council. Chair Scott stated one important concern of the community was the protection of the natural environment and the community heritage while still allowing responsible growth. From this concern, policies were developed to acquire Open Space through the development review process and to relate new develop- ment with needed Circulation Improvements. She said the Planning Commission also set a minimum level of service for traffic and proposed policies to maintain the character of downtown and diversity within the planning area, while allowing for expanded linkages through access routes or services. Some of the policies that evolved were the fact that the density of housing must be responsive to the site and its surroundings, including the patterns of development that surround it. Another is to encourage major employers to provide recreational facilities for their employees. There are concerns in the downtown area. Chair Scott stated through the changing membership of this past year, they have had two people who held prestigious positions in finance, Albert J. Boro, Pacific Telesis Company and Ross Cobb of Pacific Stock Exchange. They have also had two outstanding architects who have lent their creative talents; an engineer and executive who works for a shipping company as a world traveler who has been able to hold many points of view and respond SRCC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2/22/88 Page 1 SRCC INUTES (Special Joint) 2, 2/88 Page 2 well to them; Paul Cohen, representing the building trade; Dick O'Brien, who, as a former highway patrolman is familiar with traffic conditions. Mrs. Scott also stated there are two people who dealt with the planning process from the other side of the table and who have stood in the developer's shoes: Joyce Rifkind, who serves on many service organizations and Mike Smith, whose family is an integral part of San Rafael, and herself, a house- wife and piano teacher, who is concerned with how it is to live in San Rafael. She stated they are presenting a plan that reflects the concerns of the citizens, changing patterns of our times, and hope they are clearing the air rather than clouding the horizon, indicating that the real strength of this Plan lies with the amount of informed comments received from the public. She thanked the Planning staff and in particular, Planning Director Anne Moore, who made it happen. Mayor Mulryan expressed the appreciation of the City Council for the many thoughtful and difficult hours that went into the process of bringing this Plan to where it is today. Planning Director Moore acknowledged people involved in the Plan, in particu- lar, Mr. Jeff Baird, General Plan Project Coordinator, who has worked on the Plan since 1985; Mr. Art Brook, former Senior Planner, now Transportation Engineer with Marin County, who studied the traffic challenge in Northgate and East San Rafael and who has assisted with the development and refinement of the Plan since he left the City; Mr. John Rumsey, Associate Civil Engi- neer -Traffic, who picked up the transportation planning baton and is doing very well; and Jean Freitas, Senior Planner, who knows the document backwards and forwards and who has spent many hours on the Plan's detail. Ms. Moore thanked the Planning Commissioners and also the public, stating there were times that staff wished they had not had 350 oral and 250 written comments, but the Plan could not be what it is now without it. Ms. Moore hoped there would be continued quality public input, mentioning the workshop scheduled for Saturday, March 5, 1988 at Terra Linda High School'= cafeteria from 9:AM to 12:Noon that would focus on the major issues of the Plan; March 17, 1988, a public hearing on the adequacy on the Revised Draft EIR; March 21, 1988, the City Council's public hearing on the Natural Environ- ment portion of the Plan and April 4, 1988, the City Council's public hearing on the Health and Safety. Ms. Moore indicated they are in the process of arriving at dates that work for the City Councilmembers in April to begin the public hearings on the Community Development portion of the Plan which is anticipated to take the bulk of public hearing time. 7:50 PM - PLANNING STAFF PRESENTATION Senior Planner Freitas described the General Plan staff presentation. She indicated the issues listed many of the major changes made by the Planning Commission and that more details on these changes were available on two published and widely distributed documents, in particular, the June 19, 1987 revisions to the Draft Plan, and the November 19, 1987 revisions. Addi- tionally, there are Minutes and published responses to the public comments of reasons for changes. The remaining issues will be the focus of the March 5, 1988 community workshop. She described staff -recommended changes and comments in the staff report, including a modification of the County Jail policy, to note that City support for the jail location will consider the jail's impact on the proposed East side arterial which starts at Civic Center Drive and will eventually connect to Highway 37. Ms. Freitas stated there is a proposed second change to the Natural Environment Policy 17 defining San Rafael's creeks. A third change is on Land Use for a few properties on Second Street where several properties along Second Street between "E" Street and Miraflores Avenue have been desig- nated as high density residential on previous Land Use Plan Maps. She stated when these sites were reviewed in detail, a high density designation was not considered appropriate because of steep slopes and poor access to these parcels, and that none take access from Second Street but from very narrow side streets. The properties are developed with more than one unit and there- fore a medium density designation is proposed to better recognize site charac- teristics and existing land uses. She said a fourth staff -recommended change not included in the January 1988 Draft, is to re-insert specific language from earlier drafts exempting two vacant parcels from the C-3 Timing of Development Policy. She indicated specific wording is included in the staff report and there was an inadvertent omission that was not discussed by the Planning Commission. SRCC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2/22/88 Page 2 SRC( IINUTES (Special Joint) 2 2/88 Page 3 In conclusion, Ms. Freitas stated that the Planning Commission did not endorse a Land Use designation for Parcel 3 at Smith Ranch. She said since the Draft General Plan needs to include some designation for all properties in the Planning area, staff included the designation recommended by the largest number of Commissioners in the January 1988 Draft General Plan. SLIDE PRESENTATION General Plan Project Coordinator Baird stated that portions of the slide show were put together in October, 1986 when the first Draft of the General Plan was released for public review. He explained the process began over two years ago with the development of a work program that laid out a number of steps to develop the Plan with opportunities for early public involvement in the Plan, with ample opportunity for public review and comment on the Draft Plan and Environmental Impact Report. He indicated that early in the process they utilized workshops, community opinion surveys, noise and other surveys, public hearings and other means to gather public comments and commun- ity sentiment on various issues. Community workshops and surveys played an important role in identifying issues and topics of concern of the communi- ties. Major assets identified at the workshop, as well as the surveys, include San Rafael's environmental qualities, historic character, its residential neighborhoods, quality of life and quality of community services and facili- ties, as well as the downtown area. Mr. Baird stated issues needing to be addressed included, traffic, environ- mental protection and affordable housing. Staff evaluated and tabulated the survey and workshop results and those were put together in reports that provided high quality community input into the drafting of the first Draft Plan and Environmental Impact Report. The Draft Plan was subject to a year long process of Planning Commission review and public hearings and is now being forwarded to the City Council for public hearings and eventual adoption later this year. He stated the Plan contained several inter -related parts which included the Introduction, Summary, and Goals -Policies. Land Use Policies cover Annexation, Residential Land Use Categories and Densities, Non -Residential Land Uses and Intensities, Design, Commercial and Community Services, and Implementing Programs. Circula- tion Polices cover traffic levels of service, Transportation Improvements and other issues. There is a section defining Housing Policies and the City's role in meeting its housing needs through protecting and conserving exist- ing housing and encouraging more new and below market rate housing. Parks and Recreation Policies address standards and requirements for Park and Recreation Facilities. Natural Environment Policies include policies such as Open Space Use and Management, the City's role in securing future open space, and Protection of Environmental Resources. Health and Safety Policies are another section. Specific areas/policies apply to the City's Residential Neighborhoods, the Lands of St. Vincents and Silveira, the Northgate Activity Center, Down- town, East San Rafael, Francisco Boulevard West and the San Rafael Canal and Bayfront. Ms. Freitas spoke on the traffic level of service standards and timing of development polices, LU -1, C-2 and C-3. She stated that in the original 1986 Draft Plan, the proposed policy relating development timing to needed infrastructure improvements, stated only that "new land uses and new develop- ment shall be consistent with maintaining acceptible levels of traffic service In response to the public comments and Planning Commission discussion that this policy language was not clear, the June 1987 Draft Policy stated that the mid -point of Level of Service D, which is defined as unstable traffic flow with delays at intersections, would be used as the standard for major streets and intersections at peak hour, and that "building permits for new development would not be issued until needed road improvements were under contract for construction". The Planning Commission was not satisfied that this language was flexible enough. For example, she stated a new development project might take one year to construct and be occupied while the needed road improvements might take two years, and traffic conditions might deteri- oate during that period. The Commission did not want to see traffic Level of Service D deteriorate at anytime. They concluded that new development must await funding and completion of environmental review for circulation projects, and at that point have flexibility to review the time frame for the proposed development and the corresponding road improvements to be able to conclude that Level of Service standards would not be exceeded if develop- SRCC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2/22/88 Page 3 SRC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2,_2/88 Page 4 ment projects were constructed. She stated that this is the policy language included in the 1988 Draft General Plan. Ms. Freitas indicated that while some groups have advocated a higher Level of Service C traffic standard on all streets at all times, the staff report identifies several reasons that Level of Service D has been recommended on major streets and intersections during the PM peak hour. She stated a peak hour Level of Service C standard or better is recommended for all of the City's local residential streets. She said the Planning Commission also realized there are some desirable projects that could be delayed by these timing and level of service policies and they wanted to give priority to some of these projects. Policy C-7 stated, in traffic impacted areas, affordable housing projects, high tax generating uses or needed neighborhood serving uses shall receive priority. Additionally, the Commission added language that the City would consider the bottom of Level of Service D on an interim or longer basis for these high priority uses. These policies now apply to the Bellam Boulevard Interchange, the Freitas Parkway Interchange and Lucas Valley Interchange. In order to minimize delays for any project resulting from the timing policies, it was recommended that a Circulation Improvement Committee be formed. She said another revision was the Land Use Map change for the St. Vincent's and Silveira properties. Originally the map showed high, medium and low density residential areas, and while the Commission retained an overall medium density housing designation to provide an overall intensity of use, they recommended that the location of different housing unit types be left to future development plans. They also requested the Plan be more specific about development timing for the St. Vincent's and Silveira properties. As a result the area was placed outside the City's 5 -year Urban Service Area; which means these properties are not expected to be developed within the next five years, due to major infrastructure improvements needed to serve those properties. She said the St. Vincent/Silveira properties continue to be controversial with different groups recommending agricultural, low density residential or mixed housing and job development. The Plan emphasizes medium density residential uses to provide a variety of housing to maximize opportunities for people to live closer to their jobs. Non-residential uses were not recommended because of significant additional trip generation and because jobs development potential elsewhere in San Rafael is very high. She noted that the Planning Commission's recommendation was a split vote. Ms. Freitas said Floor Area Ratios (FARs) which measure intensity of commer- cial development are proposed throughout San Rafael. To respond to public comments, the Planning Commission added flexibility to FAR's downtown for existing businesses and to encourage the downtown department stores. She said one change not highlighted in the staff report list but which deserve! mention, is the addition of housing and jobs development projections to the Background Section. The projections are found on three charts on pages 142 to 146 of the January 1988 Draft Plan. QUESTIONS OF STAFF Councilmember Frugoli asked if the priority given to properties funding the Merrydale Overcrossing Assessment District had been extended to include assessment district properties on Kerner Boulevard. He commented that there might be a lawsuit pending if the City did not look at that area as possible mitigation because they are paying assessments and may not be allowed to develop in a timely manner. Ms. Moore stated there are differences in the assessment districts with the Merrydale Overcrossing providing the local funding that guarantees con- struction of the needed ultimate transporation improvement at that inter- change. The Kerner Boulevard Assessment District funds some very improvement local street improvements but does not provide the local solution to the Highway 101, I-580, Bellam Boulevard situation. This, stated Ms. Moore is the reason why the Merrydale Overcrossing Assessment District was treated differently. Councilmember Breiner asked staff to verify if this Plan assures that every property owner would have some measure of development on that property while needed road improvements are under construction. SRCC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2/22/88 Page 4 SRC MINUTES (Special Joint) 1 2/88 Page 5 Ms. Moore stated they have been concerned about this situation, noting that they worked with the City Attorney in reviewing the Plan's Policies and Programs in this regard. She indicated that while it is possible that the ultimate or highest allowable development on property may be precluded by some of these policies for various time frames depending upon when needed transportation improvements are achieved, the Plan clearly states that interim use of any and all pieces of property would be allowed. She stated they were careful not to preclude any use of property for an extended period of time, but noted that there would be a limit upon the use of certain proper- ties. Ms. Moore stated the hope of the staff and the Planning Commission is that a much larger interest would be taken in achieving those transporta- tion improvements. Councilmember Frugoli referred to traffic, page 3, "...some transportation problems are regional... "He stated the majority of people do not believe the circulation of streets in San Rafael is their biggest problem but that the 101 Highway is the cause of the major tieups at Bellam, Freitas and Lucas Valley. He noted that the 101 Highway problem really shows that we have to work with the other areas and indicated that unfortunately, the neighbors in the North stated in the newspapers that they only worry about Sonoma County and Marin County should take care of their own. He said that the Plan should reflect that 101 Highway is still creating the majority of their problems. Mayor Mulryan referred to the Land Use and Circulation section, where a change was made in respect to the transfer of development policies, and asked if anyone could explain this to Council. Planning Director Moore responded that the limitation on transfers and floor area ratio transfers came about as a result of the Planning Commission review- ing the results of fairly wide ranging transfers among parcels over a fair amount of time in the Smith Ranch Master Plan area and some real concerns about reasonable uses remaining on property as a result of that kind of approach. She stated the original draft had a strict prohibition against such transfers but then there were some very good public testimony and corres- pondence that drew attention to potential situations where with properties under contiguous ownership, it would perhaps be in the City's best interest to allow some moderate amount of transfers. Planning Commissioner Cohen added that there had been a situation where traffic allocations were treated as part of the property and then sold or traded between different property owners. He referred to the Smith Ranch Road area where a situation was created when one of the parcels was left with the traffic allocation of nine trips; he stated this was an illogical allocation of trips, indicating the Planning Commission believed that was not a good approach to planning. He clarified that if the area has a limited amount of traffic capacity, even with the envisioned future circulation system, the City would want all parcels to have a reasonable amount of devel- opment potential, so that some future owner who has vacant land could find the City telling him that he cannot build on it. Mr. Cohen stated that rather than allow this type of situation to continue, it was felt best to limit transfers except where there is a clear public interest in allowing that transfer of development rights in order to secure open space or buildings of historic significance or similar. Mr. Cohen also commented that the Planning Commission and staff worked hard to come out with a General Plan for all aspects of the community. Councilmember Thayer stated that C-7 provides an exception to the Mid -Level of Service "D" standard by allowing the bottom of Level of Service "D" for projects which serve the community, such as affordable housing. She asked, at the present time, at how many intersections and areas of the City is this likely to happen? Planning Director Moore responded that projects would be competing for limited Level of Service "D" capacity at the Bellam, Smith Ranch/Lucas Valley Road and the Manuel Freitas interchange. Councilmember Thayer noted that the Bellam interchange is now at Level of Service "C" because of recently completed interim improvements. She indicated that if all the projects were to compete, would it be possible, under C-7, to proceed to the bottom of Level of Service "D" to allow for the majority or all of the projects? SRCC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2/22/88 Page 5 SRCC. MINUTES (Special Joint) 2, 2/88 Page 6 Ms. Moore stated not all of the projects could be allowed; there would need to be some selection as to which projects could proceed in the interim period of time until major Bellam improvements are completed, and which could not. She indicated that the way the Plan is set up now, there would be considera- tion for those projects to proceed to Mid -point Level of Service "D" and a separate consideration to go beyond that, if a project is vital to the community. Councilmember Thayer asked if most of the developable land is in the Civic Center/Northgate area, East San Rafael and the Smith Ranch Road area. Ms. Moore responded that East San Rafael would involve the most projects. She stated that the Freitas interchange would be affected by fewer projects. At Smith Ranch, she said a limited number of properties are involved but Smith Ranch does not include the Silveira/St. Vincent properties, and added that the Marinwood interchange would need to be modified to serve those properties. Councilmember Boro mentioned the issue of traffic and the proviso in the Plan to form a Traffic Circulation Committee, stating the intent is to have the City, along with the property and homeowners find a way to get in front of these problems and not react to them once it comes about. He stated there are a number of things the City can do in the process of working with the State rather than waiting in the 5, 6 and 7 year cycle that we may run into. He referred to the Implementation Measures in the Plan ranging from ongoing issues to those with priorities of 1, 2 and 3, stating this Plan will be continuing as it goes forward with the intent that it be kept up to date, and that the Implementation Plan will be implemented. He mentioned that when Council gets into the budget session for the City, this should be kept in mind even if the Plan is not complete at that time, indicating they should expect some input from staff as to what the impacts of these implementations are so they can be addressed and a decision made as to whether they can be funded. Councilmember Frugoli, referring to two sewer plants, one north of the hill and one in the south, indicated with the amount of development that will take place, he would like to facilitate the use of outfall water for landscap- ing. Councilmember Breiner recalled reading after the initial Draft Plan came out, that the Marin Municipal Water District indicated there would not be a safety factor or reserve, and asked if staff received a response on any new numbers? Ms. Freitas stated that the information in the present Draft Plan is informa- tion that has been reviewed by the Marin Municipal Water District staff who came up with the same projections Planning staff did. She indicated if San Rafael grew to the growth projections in the Plan, it would use up most of the District's remaining net safe yield supply by the year 2000. She indicated the District is looking for water conservation to cut back on the existing demands. Ms. Moore interjected that informally, City Planning staff has discussed this with the County Planning staff because they are in the midst of an early revision of the Countywide General Plan. She said they are talking about a Countywide issue because the County is served water in the eastern urban corridor by North Marin and the Marin Municipal Water Districts. She explained, for example, there is some question as to which district would provide water to the Hamilton development. She said that is a very significant amount of development that would make a substantial difference. She stated they are recommending that the "close to Countywide" issue, parti- cularly when the Hamilton development is looked at, be considered in the Countywide Plan update. She indicated that San Rafael acknowledges in the Draft General Plan what the figures are that Marin Municipal Water District has given the City. She stated that Policy LU -1 does not just apply to traffic improvements but to all other infrastructure improvements needed to support development. Planning Commissioner Cohen stated that it is difficult to draw a picture of a process as to what growth is, not only in construction of buildings but in the construction of circulation improvements. He asked the Council to remember in their deliberations that staff, when dealing with traffic allocations, worked with a model of a future circulation system that has a list of improvements in it. He referred to page 38 of the Draft Plan, SRCC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2/22/88 Page 6 SRC 2INUTES (Special Joint) 2 2/88 Page 7 pointing to the 28 items on the list, stating that it is unlikely that the majority will be funded and constructed within the 12 year time frame referred to in the document. He indicated, for example, if they had 100 percent funding for the Bellam Boulevard interchange improvements for I-580, it would take six years to get it constructed. He stated they can see there may be projects that come along that make good common sense, meeting a wide range of the goals in the Plan and rather than wait while they go through the Caltrans' process, etc., they go forward with certain projects. He stated, however, they did not intend to let Level of Service "C" slide into Level of Service "D11. In response to Mayor Mulryan's question re the difference between Mid -D and Low -D, Planning Director Moore stated that the bottom of Level of Service "D" is not generally felt by an individual motorist as being particularly different from Mid -point "D", but it would take a much smaller incident or influx of additional traffic to trigger Level of Service "E" conditions, which would mean waiting longer. She stated that with Level of Service "E" things are still moving, unlike Level of Service "F" which is grid lock and force flow. She added she did not think the motorist could perceive a difference and indicated the percentage difference of capacity is between .85 and .89. Planning Commissioner Rifkind commented when the Planning Commission came to what has been referred to as the "beauty contest criteria", the Commission then spoke of "benefit criteria" which is to achieve projects providing the greatest possible benefit to the entire City. She listed three criteria as follows: Affordable housing; high tax generating uses and neighborhood service uses, indicating they are co -equal concerns. She emphasized that "affordable housing" is first on the list and that it goes hand-in-hand with the on-going concern with problems focused on by many people as they addressed the overall General Plan process. She asked Council to remember that one goal cannot be achieved to the exclusion of any of the others. Mrs. Rifkind referred to the City having an abiding concern with sales tax generation, but hoped when the various projects come first to the Planning Commission and in many cases to the Council, that they look at all the criterii involved. 8:50 PM - PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Mark Dupam, resident of Seastrand, referred to the overview on page 2 of the General Plan regarding the section of the "Protection of the Natural Environment Canal and Bay Front". He asked about an open space area just beyond the Marin Tennis Club, off Point San Pedro Road, and whether it was zoned R-1 or Open Space. Planning Director Moore responded that the parcel under the PG&E wires on the Seastrand development project is listed for sale. She stated staff is researching the history as to how the lot was created and what the use was originally intended for. She stated she would contact Mr. Dupam when she had more information. Mr. Gil Deane, Sierra Club, referred to 1,100 pieces of correspondence submitted to City officials on the Plan. He said they are absolutely certain that these signatures and others will, if necessary, produce a Plan which is acceptable to the majority of the people in San Rafael. He indicated they are prepared to use every legal means available to get the best possible Plan, and hoped they would not need to do this. Councilmember Frugoli commented to Mr. Deane's statement, mentioning that the Council knows they must preserve the open hillsides, the Bay and Canal with questions on Wetlands, and added that he also does not want to see houses on hillsides. Councilmember Thayer commented to Mr. Deane's statement, stating that when she was campaigning for office last year, there was tremendous support for the environment and this was not just from the 1,100 people who wrote in. She indicated their concerns were divided into three groups; those who are the pure environmentalists; those concerned with traffic and those with poor architecture. She stated as Council reviews the Plan there will be responses to environmental concerns. Mrs. Marie Scoolie with the Northbay Transit Committee, resident along the Northwestern Pacific Right -of -Way, was concerned about the four -lane parkway to run from Civic Center to Highway 37. She stated they have for years been SRCC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2/22/88 Page 7 SRC` MINUTES (Special Joint) ,22/88 Page 8 fighting with the 101 Corridor Committee to encourage the use of the Northwest Pacific Right -of -Way, not as a busway or parkway or any other kind of paved over roadway going up to Highway 37. She asked if the road would run along side of it or be a part of, or if the road would impact the use of rail? Planning Director Moore stated the road is separate from the railroad, althoug. in some areas it may be alongside. She indicated the idea of the eastside arterial came out when staff was working on the Northgate Activity Center Plan and that Plan does endorse the eastside arterial from Civic Center Drive to Smith Ranch and conceivably into the lands of Silveira and St. Vincents. The Highway 101 Action Committee, Phase I Consensus Alternative, included the eastside arterial. She said it was never viewed as being compet- ing with or contrary to the interest of future use of the Northwest Pacific Railroad Right -of -Way. She indicated that at the present time, the cities of San Rafael, Novato and the County of Marin, have agreed to join in a Joint Powers Agreement to study more specifically, a possible alignment of the roadway. She stated the idea of such an arterial between the Civic Center and Highway 37 is one thing, but finding alignments that work environ- mentally and transportation and land use wise, is another matter, and the three jurisdictions will be moving ahead in the next few months to study it in more detail. Mr. Sandy Greenblat, resident of San Rafael was confused about the San Rafael Redevelopment and the San Rafael City Council, stating that the Council sits as such and reviews the Plan and subsequently will adopt the General Plan; and that the Council also sits as the Redevelopment Agency and will be guided by the final form of the General Plan 2000, once adopted. He asked if they as a populace could expect any different treatment from the Redevelop- ment Agency. Mayor Mulryan responded by stating that this General Plan will guide all city's actions, indicating that the Redevelopment Agency is a funding mecha- nism and the Council takes on detailed projects within that funding area, noting that the General Plan is the "bible". 9:00 PM Mayor Mulryan concluded the meeting by stating tonight's meeting is a good start and pointed out that City planning and planning in general is extremely important, and the effort gone into the Draft General Plan is a product of the latest and perhaps the most sophisticated type of planning he has seen, adding that it is very comprehensive which takes many things into account. He stated this is done at a time when San Rafael, with its beautiful natural surroundings, has over a period of years acquired open space which some people say is too much open space. He indicated there is very little land left, and stated what this Plan is about is how the City is going to approach future land use decisions which must be made. There being no further comments, Mayor Mulryan adjourned the meeting. GsL�- `lam JEAN M: LEONCINI City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1988 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Special Joint) 2/22/88 Page 8