HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1986-07-21SRCC MINUTES (RE far) 7/21/86 Page 1
In Conference Room 201 of the City of San Rafael, Monday, July 21, 1986
at 7:00 PM.
Regular Meeting:
CLOSED SESSION
1. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS LITIGATION & LABOR NEGOTIATIONS - File 1.4.1.a
No. 86-18(a) - (#2); No. 86-18(b) - (#2); No. 86-18(c) - (#1 - Beatrice
Hough vs. City of San Rafael et al); No. 86-18(d) - (#5 - 346 Mt. View,
San Rafael & Mr. & Mrs. Newton K. Gregg); No. 86-18(e) - (#2); No. 18-86
(f) - (#2).
No action was taken.
In the Council Chambers of the City of San Rafael, Monday, July 21, 1986
at 8:00 PM.
Regular Meeting: Present: Lawrence E. Mulryan, Mayor
Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember
Gary R. Frugoli, Councilmember
Richard Nave, Councilmember
Jerry Russom, Councilmember
Absent: None
Also Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager; Gary T. Ragghianti, City
Attorney (arrived at 9:40 PM); Mary R. Casey, Assistant City
Attorney; Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
CONSENT CALENDAR
Item
Recommended Action
2. Approval of Minutes of Special Approved Minutes as submitted.
Meetings of June 26, July 2,
7 and 12, 1986 (CC)
3. S86 -5 -Resolution Directing
Staff to Record Notice of
Merger; 27 Stevens Place;
Rita and William Edrich,
Owners; AP 14-011-19 & 20
File 10-2
6. Grant of Easement to Marin
Municipal Water District
for Pipeline Purposes -
Peacock Gap Improvement
District (Neighborhood Park)
(PW) - File 6-37 x 2-14 x
151
8. Request for Authorization to
Purchase Duplicating Equip-
ment without Going Through
Bid Process (CM) - File
4-2-212 x 8-5
9. Acceptance of Grant Deed
from John W. and Gloria J.
Russell - 335 Forbes Avenue
(RA) - File 2-5-18 x 3-1-821
10. Acceptance of Grant Deed
from Newton Gregg - 346
Mountain View Avenue (RA)
File 2-5-19 x 9-6-1
RESOLUTION NO. 7384 - DIRECTING STAFF TO
FILE A NOTICE OF MERGER ON CERTAIN REAL
PROPERTY AT 27 STEVENS PLACE (AP 14-
011-19 AND 14-011-20)
RESOLUTION NO. 7385 - AUTHORIZING THE
SIGNING OF GRANT DEED OF EASEMENT FOR
INGRESS, EGRESS, AND UNDERGROUND
UTILITIES (to Marin Municipal Water
District and to PG&E - Peacock Gap
Improvement District Neighborhood
Park)
RESOLUTION NO. 7386 - AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE OF COPY CENTER REPLACEMENT
EQUIPMENT ABSTAINING FROM USE OF THE
PUBLIC BID PROCESS UTILIZING REVENUE
SHARING FUNDS (Equipment to be replaced
with a Multigraphics System 7 duplexing
offset duplicator in amount of $89,774.78)
RESOLUTION NO. 7387 - ACCEPTING CONVEY-
ANCE OF REAL PROPERTY FROM JOHN W. &
GLORIA J. RUSSELL (335 Forbes Avenue)
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (RL .lar) 7/21/86 Page 2
a. Resolution Authorizing a. RESOLUTION NO. 7388 - AUTHORIZING
Execution of Purchase THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
Agreement AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF
PROPERTY AT 346 MOUNTAIN VIEW
AVENUE, SAN RAFAEL
b. Resolution of Acceptance b. RESOLUTION NO. 7389 - ACCEPTING
of Grant Deed from Newton K. CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTY FROM
& Lucile R. Gregg NEWTON K. & LUCILE R. GREGG (346
Mountain View Avenue)
11. Claims for Damages: Approved Insurance Consulting
Associates, Inc. recommendations for
a. Edward J. Edmond (PW) - denial of claims.
File 3-1-1109
b. John & Patricia Bicknel
(PW) - File 3-1-1112
c. Linda H. Mace (FD) -
File 3-1-1115
d. Irene C. Hawkins (PW) -
File 3-1-1124
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russum & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
4. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL WITH FINDINGS RE APPEAL OF 81 McNEAR DRIVE;
DENISE Y. RYAN, APPELLANT; AP 186-470-86 (Pl) - File 10-7
RESOLUTION NO. 7390 - UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL AND DENYING THE APPEAL ON THE DESIGN
REVIEW AMENDMENT OF 81 McNEAR DRIVE (ED84-40(c))
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner
ABSENT: COUNICLMEMBERS: None
5. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF TRUST - EXTENSION OF RICE DRIVE (PW) - File
2-5-17 x 10-1 x 10-3
Councilmember Frugoli stated for the record, that developer James
Schafer should be recognized for not only constructing the buildings
but for dedicating the street back to the City.
RESOLUTION NO. 7391 - ACCEPTING "DEED OF TRUST" AS PAYMENT SECURITY
FOR THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF RICE DRIVE (from
Samuelson, Hornaday & Schafer -Francisco
Business Center)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
7. REPORT ON FRIENDS OF LIBRARY VIDEO COLLECTION (Lib/Cult.Affs.) -
File 9-3-61
Mayor Mulryan noted that he was recently made aware of the growing
availability of cassettes and books on tape, with up to 12,000 titles
being available. Library Director Stratford stated that the Library now
has a collection of 70 titles and in the coming year another 60 to 70
titles will be added through the Friends of the Library.
Councilmember Briener moved and Councilmember Frugoli seconded, to
accept report and approve staff recommendation setting fees for rental
of video cassettes.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Rt lar) 7/21/86 page 3
19. REPORT ON EXTENDING HIGHWAY 101 SOUTHBOUND HOV LANE AND CLOSURE OF LOS
RANCHITOS ROAD ENTRANCE AT PUERTO SUELLO HILL (PW) - File 11-16 x 9-3-40
Mayor Mulyran announced that this item is to be continued. Public
Works Director Bernardi stated that in a recent meeting with Caltrans
and the County of Marin, a number of issues were raised needing
further investigation by the Caltrans' staff. Therefore, Caltrans will
bring back more information on the HOV extension over Puerto Suello
Hill, and the item will be brought back to Council for consideration.
17. KERNER BOULEVARD REFUNDING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: (PW) - File 6-35.1
Public Works Director Bernardi stated that this item is a refinancing
of the bonds to obtain a lower interest rate.
Daniel Bort, Bond Counsel for Sturgis, Ness, Brunsell and Sperry, stated
that the existing interest rates ranged from 7k% up to 1040. The
average interest rate on the new bonds will be approximately 8.2% which
represents a savings in cash flow to all of the property owners, and
recommended that Council act on the preliminary steps before Council.
a. Resolution Approving Agreement for Legal Services
RESOLUTION NO. 7392 - RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR
LEGAL SERVICES - KERNER BOULEVARD REFUNDING
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (with Sturgis, Ness,
Brunsell and Sperry, a Professional
Corporation)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
b. Resolution Approving Agreement for Engineering Services
RESOLUTION NO. 7393 - RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR
ENGINEERING SERVICES - KERNER BOULEVARD
REFUNDING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (with
Oberkamper & Associates)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
C. Resolution of Intention
RESOLUTION NO. 7394 - RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO CONDUCT
REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE KERNER
BOULEVARD REFUNDING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
d. Engineer's Report - Filed.
e. Resolution Preliminarily Approving Report and Setting Hearing (To
be held August 18, 1986)
RESOLUTION NO. 7395 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND
SETTING HEARING OF PROTESTS - KERNER
BOULEVARD REFUNDING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
f. Notice of Hearing - Filed.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (RE Lar) 7/21/86 Page 4
12. PUBLIC HEARING - Z86-1; ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SIGN ORDINANCE TO
PERMIT NEON IN SPECIFIC INSTANCES (PL) File 10-3 x 125
Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing reopened, indicating that the
public hearing had been continued from Council meeting of July 7, 1986.
Planning Director Moore stated that the Ordinance was in order and that
the only addition to the staff report was a letter of support for the
amendment from the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce.
There being no further comments, Mayor Mulryan closed the public
hearing.
RESOLUTION NO. 7396 - CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR TEXT
AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 14 (ZONING) SO AS TO PERMIT
NEON SIGNS IN SPECIFIC INSTANCES; CLARIFY
PROHIBITION OF FLUORESCENT SIGNS; AND INCLUDE
DESIGN REVIEW FOR NONWINDOW NEON SIGNS
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Councilmember Breiner requested that staff suspend the item and have it
brought back to Council for review after one full year.
The title of the Ordinance was read:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING
SECTIONS 14.11.020.A.-l.g, 14.12.020.E.2 AND 14.12.030.A.5 OF THE SAN
RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 14 CONCERNING REGULATION OF NEON SIGNAGE"
Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Nave seconded, to
dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer
to it by title only and pass Charter Ordinance No. 1530 to print by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
13. PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF BUILDING OFFICIAL'S ENFORCEMENT OF SECTION
3305(q) OF THE 1982 BUILDING CODE - 160 MITCHELL BOULEVARD, ROBERT H.
GREENE, APPELLANT; AP 155-110-27 (PW) - File 1-6-1 x 9-3-32
Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened.
Public Works Director Bernardi stated that the Council, sitting as the
Board of Appeals, is being asked to allow the Applicant to make use of
Section 3305(g) of the 1985 Edition of the Uniform Building Code with
additional smoke detectors as determined necessary by the Fire
Department in lieu of the 1982 Edition of the Uniform Code, as it
relates to the Occupancy Requirement to the building at 160 Mitchell
Boulevard. Council was informed that the 1985 Building Code has not yet
been adopted and is less restrictive than the 1982 code but meets the
same intent of the 1982 code with certain provisions.
In response to questions by Council, Mr. Bernardi stated that the
building is a new one and that the 1985 Building Code will be adopted
after it is first adopted by the State.
Mr. Robert H. Greene stated that he was in agreement with what was
stated by Mr. Bernardi.
There being no further comment, Mayor Mulryan closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Frugoli moved and Councilmember Nave seconded, to approve
the staff recommendation to uphold the appeal and directed staff to
prepare an appropriate Resolution with Findings and bring said
Resolution back for adoption at the meeting of August 4, 1986.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Rk lar) 7/21/86 PaGE 5
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
14. PUBLIC HEARING - TS85-7, UP85-116 AND ED85-105 - APPEAL OF PLANNING
COMMISSION CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF SUMMERHILL, 48 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS
ON THE HARTZELL SCHOOL SITE; 211 LOS RANCHITOS ROAD, SAN RAFAEL CITY
SCHOOLS, OWNER; KUYKENDALL-CHATHAM DEVELOPERS, REPS.; JERRY CRANER,
PRESIDENT, LOS RANCHITOS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, DARBY BEETHAM,
PRESIDENT, TERRA LINDA VALLEY PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, RICHARD LOVE,
PRESIDENT, MARIN GARDENS HOME OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, BETTY BASILE,
PRESIDENT, SAN RAFAEL MEADOWS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, APPELLANTS; AP
175-060-16 & 17 (Pl) - File 10-6 x 10-8 x 10-5 x 10-7 x 5-1-304
Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened.
Planning Director Moore stated that the applications for this project
were filed in October 1985, and notices were sent to all vicinity
homeowners' associations and nearby property owners. On June 24, 1986,
the Planning Commission, on a 5-1 vote, certified a Negative Declaration
and conditionally approved a use permit, design review and tentative
subdivision map for the project. This was done after first having heard
the matter in May with continuation granted so the neighborhood and
surrounding homeowners' associations could review the project and
attend a special meeting facilitated by staff.
Associate Planner Jensen gave background on the project stating that
in October 1984, the City Council executed a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) and adopted planned development zoning for redevelopment of the
Hartzell School site. The land uses included 40,000 square feet of
office, up to 50 residential units and requirements for establishing
a public park of approximately 19,000 square feet. Development
standards were established at that time and made a part of the zoning.
As a followup to the zoning and MOU, use permit and design review
permit and tentative map applications were filed by the present
developers for the residential portion of the property. The project
consists of 48 cluster townhouse residential units on 5.7 acres at
the south end of the site. Consistent with the MOU, access is designed
from two driveways, one from Golden Hinde Boulevard and the other from
Los Ranchitos Road. There are six floor plans ranging in size from
998 square feet to 1,495 square feet and each unit is designed with a
two car garage, driveway parking for two vehicles and independent
guest parking scattered throughout the development. The project also
consists of recreational facilities, i.e. swimming pool and clubhouse,
a public park proposal along Golden Hinde Boulevard and four below
market rate units priced at approximately 90 percent of the median
which is slightly below moderate income.
Upon completing the environmental review process, the project was
forwarded to the Design Review Board who favorably reviewed the
development, and then on to the Planning Commission for consideration.
The Planning Commission utlimately certified the Negative Declaration
and conditionally approved the project. They concluded that the
project is consistent with the many restrictions and conditions of
the zoning in the MOU and granted three exceptions from the Condominium
Ordinance and imposed numerous conditions of approval, addressing
specific issues.
Mr. Jensen noted that on July 30, 1986, an appeal was filed by
representatives of the four homeowners' associations who were
involved with the execution of the MOU and zoning, and also the
review of the specific residential project.
The homeowners' cite eight reasons for the appeal:
1. The project is not acceptable to the community.
2. Staff and applicant are using the MOU as a precise document
rather than a document imposing general guidelines.
3. That the applicant was using conceptual plans originally presented
with the zoning to dictate the specific design of the project.
4. They do not believe that the project provides enough unit mix nor
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 5
SRCC MINUTES (RE lar) 7/21/86 Page 6
is there enough below rate units.
5. That the visual appearance of the project from the street is poor
because of building height and design.
6. That the project is in violation of environmental rights and
detracts from the quality of life to the neighborhood.
7. Not enough input throughout the entire design review process.
8. The appellants claim that there was not one single meeting with
the developer regarding the present site plan.
Mr. Jensen acknowledged that there were no neighborhood meetings with
the developer but stated there was input solicited early in the process
through the design review of the project since October 1985. There were
numerous meetings held between staff and the neighborhood representatives
in an effort to solicit comments and respond to issues directly, with
special meetings scheduled involving the Design Review Board and
Planning Commission members. There were changes made to the project and
specific conditions imposed by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Jensen pointed out that even though the neighborhood is not in favor
of the design of the project, the Design Review Board and Planning
Commission did find the project acceptable and approved the development.
In response to a question re the MOU posed by Mayor Mulryan, Mr. Jensen
stated that the MOU was viewed as a minimum set of guidelines for
developing the property and not used in general or specifically. The
project is consistent with the standards of the MOU.
Mr. Jensen gave the changes made to the project in response to some
of the issues raised:
a. Elimination of the originally proposed masonite siding and roofing
material. The project now proposes the use of natural wood siding
and dark asphalt shingle roof.
b. Additional independent guest parking spaces have been provided to
address the concern over the 24 -foot wide street width and the lack
of street parking.
C. Units have been shifted and relocated to address concerns over the
project appearance from the two City streets. The purpose is to
increase the amount of one-story elements along the street front.
d. Changes have been made to the public park to improve usability,
City maintenance and security.
e. Changes have been made to the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions
to address concerns expressed by adjacent neighborhood
association representatives.
f. Changes have been made to the placement of buildings to ensure
specific compliance with the Condominium Ordinance and to
minimize requests for exceptions.
Mayor Mulryan indicated that one of the comments from staff was that
masonite should not be used on the siding but that wood should be used,
and asked if there were changes from the Planning Commission level.
Mr. Jensen replied that the use of masonite material was changed prior
to the Planning Commission's consideration and it was changed by the
applicant. Staff supports the natural wood siding because it is in
keeping with the neighborhood.
In response to a question by Councilmember Breiner, Mr. Jensen stated
that there is wording in the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions
(CC&Rs) that state that the garages are to be used for the parking of
vehicles, and provisions for limited use of driveways for
recreational vehicle parking.
Councilmember Breiner suggested that the wording be made strong and
clear that there can be no conversion to a non -parking use.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Re far) 7/21/86 Page 7
Mr. Jerry Craner, President of Los Ranchitos Improvement Association,
residence at 16 Oakridge Road in Los Ranchitos, spoke on behalf of the
Terra Linda Property Owners Association, Marin Gardens Homeowners
Association and San Rafael Meadows Improvements Association as well.
Mr. Craner stated that they did not like the original plan on the
project and that that was the last meeting held with the developer.
The key issues brought up by Mr. Craner were Resolution No. 6945; the
San Rafael General Plan, Housing Element of 1985 and the MOU which was
developed after the conceptual site plan.
RESOLUTION NO. 6945 - was approved on October 15, 1984 along with the
MOU. Mr. Craner pointed out that the Resolution states "encourage
functional and visual integration of the area, protect the scenic
attributes of the area, provide a variety of housing sites."
Mr. Craner pointed out that the developer is proposing 39-3 bedrooms
and 9-2 bedrooms, indicating this was not enough of a mix of units.
Mr. Craner referred to the MOU - paragraph 1 which states in part"...
to plan a development on this site acceptable to the community and
the City...", and stated that the project is still not acceptable to
the community. Craner went on to quote other paragraphs from the MOU,
and stated that paragraph 4 stated, "...that final development plans
are generally consistent with the concepts discussed during community
meetings...", and is the key.
Mr. Craner referred to the conceptual site plan and made contrasts of
the square footage in the units and the mix of units. He also spoke on
the privacy between units, secluded patios, landscape, walkways and
varied views from the street.
Mr. Craner stated that the conceptual site plan is maximized and noted
that they want the City to follow the General Plan adopted in February
1984 - Housing and Residential Environment IV, page 26, policy 8 -
"encourage local representative groups to engage in the planning of
their areas", and the Housing Element of 1985, page 78, A.5 Neighborhood
meetings, "encourage developers to have neighborhood meetings".
He continued to state that they want Council to approve (grant) the
appeal; instruct staff to hold meetings with the developer and
homeowners' associations; change the design to include a better mix,
achieve variety over the whole lower section and that this will vary
the height and density and cause a better siting from Los Ranchitos
Road; take out unit 3 from the Los Ranchitos Road section, and unit 24,
and have secluded patios.
Mayor Mulryan asked Mr. Craner how the conceptual site plan was
developed, noting that the ultimate result is very close to the
conceptual plan. Mr. Craner stated that Matthew Guthrie drew the
conceptual site plan and mentioned that there is a similarity with
changes to give an open space feeling.
Mr. Richard Love of 220 Los Ranchitos Road spoke against the Summerhill
project.
Ms. Ruth Thon, who is the tenant representative for the Golden Hinde
Senior Citizens Complex directly across the street from the Hartzell
School, spoke against the development and stated that she was not
notified of the public hearing. She also requested a slow sign be
installed near their complex.
Ms. Moore stated that property owners within 300 feet are noticed,
as well as any neighborhood or homeowners' associations within the
surrounding area of influence, pointing out that the Golden Hinde home
is a rental unit and has no association that staff is aware of. She
noted the Housing Authority was notified of the application and
Planning Commission and City Council hearings but evidently does not
have a mechanism to notify its tenants. Ms. Moore suggested that their
group form an association and have a spokesperson notify staff so there
will be communications independent of their property owner.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (R� lar) 7/21/86 Page 8
Councilmember Frugoli inquired about the traffic generated now with the
offices in the school being used, and Mr. Jensen replied that the
present use generates approximately 108 PM peak trips, and the proposed
residential use anticipates 49 trips during the PM peak hour. He also
mentioned that the driveway proposed to service the units along Golden
Hinde covers about two-thirds of the density of the complex.
Mr. Bob Brown of 100 Oakview Drive stated that he was in total support
of the appeal.
Mr. Larry Simmons of 49 Golden Hinde Boulevard spoke against the project.
Mr. Darby Beetham with the Terra Linda Valley Homeowners' Association
stated that this was a unique experience by the school district to
involve the homeowners and thanked Jerry Gill and Lynn Sedway for their
help in having the conceptual site plan made; however, they did not
think that the MOU was used as it was intended, but stated they do
appreciate the time the Planning Department gave them.
Mr. Tom Newton, planning consultant, spoke on behalf of the applicant.
Mr. Newton complimented the staff on the thorough and comprehensive
report given. He stated that the property was purchased with the MOU
and the conceptual site plan, adding that they met with the homeowners
and showed them a plan for single family homes which was rejected. They
were told that the only thing that would be acceptable would be to
follow the MOU and the conceptual site plan. They then developed a
plan that was very close to the conceptual site plan given the
circumstances and conditions of the site, coming up with 48 units
which is very close to 50 units,and made the footprints larger in order
to meet the range of 900 square feet up to 1,800 square feet. There
now is a mix of sizes in the 3 -bedroom units.
Councilmember Breiner asked Mr. Newton to address the issue of walkways,
and he stated that they are in the same location, behind the townhome
units and lower units leading to the private recreation area.
Mr. Art Chatham spoke in favor of their plan.
There being no further comments, Mayor Mulryan closed the public
hearing.
Planning Commissioner Willms commented on the request for one story
units, stating that the original MOU signed was for two and three story
units and that the one story element was put in by staff and approved
by the Planning Commission as part of the zoning. Also, at the last
meeting, additional comments were requested of the homeowners and the
only statement made was a brief one that the development as designed
was not acceptable to the neighbors.
Mr. Bill Liskamm. of the Design Review Board stated that they look at
each project on its merits, noting that they looked at the model and
plans and felt that it was a high quality project. He added that they
listened to the community groups and tried to address the concerns of
the groups.
Mr. Jensen responded to a question asked by Councilmember Breiner re
the frontage along Los Ranchitos Road by stating that there are six
units facing the frontage of Los Ranchitos Road and that originally
four were of the same unit type. The applicant then changed the units
to increase the amount of one story element but staff has not had the
opportunity to bring this to the Design Review Board nor is it as yet
acceptable. Mr. Gunner Andersen, the project architect, then explained
how the change will look.
Ms. Moore commented that the neighborhood was slighted because the
developers on their own initiative did not coordinate neighborhood
meetings, and yet the neighbors acknowledged that staff played the
usual conduit role which is usually done,adding that staff encourages
developers to have meetings although it is not mandated. Ms. Moore
noted that the neighborhood feels that there are too many
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (R{ lar) 7/21/86 Pagd 9
3 -bedroom units, which is unusual. She stated that the neighborhood
associations originally endorsed a draft of the MOU that did not
mention one story configurations; it was suggested by staff to give
added texture and variation in the design, but originally, the homeowners
were satisfied to specify two to three story units.
Councilmember Breiner suggested that special attention be given to the
landscaping by the Design Review Board, and that strong language be in
the CC&Rs that no conversions are to be allowed in the garage areas.
Councilmember Frugoli moved and Councilmemer Nave seconded, to deny
the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission decision, with staff
directed to prepare a Resolution Denying Appeal to be brought back at
the meeting of August 4, 1986.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
15. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR FUNDING FROM COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER OF
MARIN - File 13-1 x 8-5 x 8-14
City Manager Nicolai stated that the request came from Councilmember
Russom for the budget hearings, but because he was absent at the
budget hearing when this item was to be discussed, it is being presented
tonight.
Councilmember Russom stated that he had been approached by the Executive
Director and a Board member of the Community Health Center of Marin
who indicated they faced a funding crisis in providing a free
medical clinic which is carried out in various parts of the County,
including one day in San Rafael. Councilmember Russom stated that
he is in favor of contributing $5,000 but that he felt it would take
more study by staff before a decision could be made on the request for
an additional $15,000 contribution.
Administrative Assistant Alan stated that he had spoken with Mary Feldon,
Director of the program, and was told that the County of Marin has
authorized $26,000; City of Novato authorized $3,000; Fairfax and
Mill Valley are reviewing the item, and that these are the communities
with centers within their jurisdication. The United Way is funding
$72,000 for this fiscal year and the grant from the State of California
has decreased from $40,000 to $15,000. The health center is currently
requesting additional funding from the San Francisco Foundation, but
this has not been considered for the past three to four months.
After discussion, Councilmember Russom moved and Councilmember Breiner
seconded, to allocate $5,000 from unappropriated reserves to Community
Health Center of Marin to help to continue their program.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Staff was directed to monitor the program and bring information back to
Council on the program's progress and what the total budget is for the
health center; to send a letter to the Governor requesting release of
funds and to the State Legislature to have more money put into the
Community Health Center; also to send a letter to the Buck Fund on
community health, asking for funds during the interim.
16. CONSIDERATION OF REYUEST FOR CITY PARTICIPATION IN EAST SAN RAFAEL
TRANSIT PROGRAM - File 11-33 x 8-5 x 8-14
City Manager Nicolai stated that this item was previously before
Council, but specifics at that time were not known. Staff has been
working with the ad hoc committee (San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, East
San Rafael Property Owners, Canal Community Alliance, Marin County
Transit and the City) putting the proposal together and a bid has gone
out. Ms. Nicolai continued to state that the program has been modified
because the San Francisco Foundation grant became contigent upon the
shuttle service being handicapped accessible which would have a financial
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 9
SRCC MINUTES (R( lar) 7/21/86 Page 10
impact. The proposed budget of $150,000 with a request for $25,000
from the City of San Rafael is for discussion. Ms. Nicolai indicated
that the specifics of the promotion program have not been worked out
and that this is an important component of the success of a pilot
program. She suggested that Council consider a phased contribution
($17,000 is necessary to award the contract) and recommended that a
specific program be brought back to Council re the promotion. She also
advised that it should be made clear that this is a unique project in
an area where there is the highest congestion and highest employment,
which sets a scenario to allow a specific pilot project but that the
City not be committed to any similar project in the future.
Councilmember Breiner suggested that this be tied into the actual
implementation of pledges received from the East San Rafael property
owners.
Councilmember Frugoli acknowledged Senior Planner Art Brook for his
excellent report on the subject, and indicated that $20,000 was too
much to begin with, suggesting that $17,000 be allocated with
$8,000 being given at a later date.
Councilmember Russom moved and Councilmember Nave seconded, to allocate
$17,000 from unappropriated reserves with an $8,000 contingency at a
later date, awaiting a breakdown of proposed promotion costs.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
18. AUTHORIZATION FOR PARTIAL AND TEMPORARY RELIEF OF BUILDING CODE
REQUIREMENT - PROPOSED NORTHGATE MALL ENCLOSURE (PW) - File 1-6-1 x
9-3-32
Public Works Director Bernardi stated that the 1982 Building Code
imposes very strict requirements on mall enclosures and new mall
projects, and in this case, it deals with air circulation and air
evacuation in case of fire in a business unit. The problem is that the
Mace Rich Company want to meet the requirements of the 1982 Building
Code but are prevented from doing this because of existing leases. Mace
Rich proposes to convert the spaces unable to be converted now as leases
expire. They have agreed to have the required enhanced smoke evacuation
system provided and indemnify the City and hold the City harmless should
any problem arise with the shopping center not being converted at this
time. Staff recommends that Council grant Mace Rich temporary and
partial relief of this portion of the Building Code.
City Attorney Ragghianti indicated that the hold harmless provision
will hold up in court and directed staff to have the wording of the
hold harmless/indemnification provision reviewed by him before any
issues are considered or permits granted.
Mr. Darryl Brown of Mace Rich Company, asked Mr. Bernardi to give him
an update of the hold harmless provision of which he was not familiar.
Mr. Bernardi recommended that Mace Rich Company set up the hold harmless/
indemnification as a condition, otherwise the transaction would not take
place.
Councilmember Nave moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to adopt
staff's recommendation that Council grant authorizatin for partial
and temporary relief of Building Code requirements for the Northgate
Mall enclosure. Specifically, that the smoke evacuation system
required for tenant space will be installed as the leases of current
tenants expire or are extended, when major remodeling is done, or when
new heating, ventilation, or air conditioning equipment is installed.
The smoke evacuation system for the mall itself shall be upsized to
allow for 10 air changes per hour. Staff also directed to prepare an
appropriate Resolution with Findings and bring said Resolution back for
adoption at the next meeting. Also, that an acceptable "hold harmless/
indemnification" agreement be drafted and be reviewed by City Attorney
Ragghianti.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 10
SRCC MINUTES (RL lar) 7/21/86 Page 11
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned to closed
session.
JEAN TA 'M. LEONCINI, City C erk
ON THIS DAY OF 1986
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 7/21/86 Page 11