Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1995-08-07 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, AUGUST 7, 1995, AT 8:00 PM Regular Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor San Rafael City Council Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember Barbara Heller, Councilmember Gary O. Phillips, Councilmember David J. Zappetini, Councilmember Absent: None Others Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk OPEN SESSION - 7:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBER Mayor Boro announced Closed Session item: CLOSED SESSION AGENDA ITEM - 7:00 PM - CONFERENCE ROOM 201 1. Conference with Labor Negotiator (Government Code Section 54957.6) Negotiator: Suzanne Golt Employee Organization: San Rafael Firefighters' Association The Council then met in Closed Session in Conference Room 201 to discuss the above mentioned item. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY AUGUST 7, 1995 AT 8:10 PM ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: COMPLAINT - RE: LOCH LOMOND UNIT 10 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT - File 5-1-297 x 100 Mary Ann & Robert Christensen of Villa Real, San Rafael, asked to speak before the Council, and noted they were also speaking for their neighbors, the Melcher's and the Powell's. Mrs. Christensen stated their three lots adjoin the southern boundary of Loch Lomond Unit #10. She referred to an excerpt from the Conditions of Approval, which were approved by the City Council on September 17, 1990. Mrs. Christensen stated that work on their privacy fence had only recently begun and was not yet complete, yet three homes have been built behind her residence, and one of them is occupied. Mr. Christensen stated that construction began in the development over a year ago, and that he and his neighbors have had repeated confrontations with the Planning Department and the developer prior to the first portion of the fence adjacent to Loch Lomond #10, Lot #1 being completed in mid-June. Following another month and a half of confrontation, the second portion adjacent to Lot #3 was completed this week. Mr. Christensen stated he did not understand why nothing had been completed adjacent to Lot #4, noting the fence should have been completed over a year ago as a condition of construction, and did not understand the need for continued confrontation with the property owner regarding this matter. Planning Director Robert Pendoley noted Mr. and Mrs. Christensen had correctly copied the relevant Condition. He stated, however, that in looking at the language of the Condition, what is actually required is a fencing plan be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of the building permits for each of the affected lots. Mr. Pendoley stated the lot at issue was Lot #3, and noted that in this particular case, a building permit was issued prior to the fencing plan being approved. However, once construction began on the house itself the City did require that a fencing plan be submitted, and that the plan also be approved by Mr. and Mrs. Christensen, as well as the Melcher's. Mr. Pendoley noted he believed the Powell's reviewed it also. Mr. Pendoley stated the Condition does not specify when the fence is to be built, noting the usual way to handle an issue such as this is to require that the fence be completed prior to the affected home being occupied. Mr. Pendoley acknowledged it was true there was one home in Loch Lomond #10 that has been allowed to be occupied; however, he noted the occupied home was not affected by this Condition, as it was not one of the lots listed in the Condition. Mr. Pendoley stated that in an effort to assist the families who were concerned, the City became involved with the developer this past Spring and asked him to expedite the building of the fence, making clear to the developer this was not a requirement, but asking him to finish it early. Mr. Pendoley noted the fence at Lot #3, the lot nearest to Mr. and Mrs. Christensen, was nearly completed this afternoon, and stated he had contacted the developer today and told him that he had expected the fence at Lot #4 to have been completed also. Mr. Pendoley stated Lot #4 does not have a building permit, nor an approved design review. Therefore, he felt the City was operating within the Condition, and noted that the error the City made was allowing one of the units to proceed prior to having a fence plan approved, even though the fence plan was approved and filed prior to completion of the fence, and also had the approval of Mr. and Mrs. Christensen. Mayor Boro asked if Mr. Pendoley was stating that the City now had an approved fence plan, that no units affected by this fence plan would be occupied until the fences are completed, and that the fences are being completed prior to the issuance of a building permit? Mr. Pendoley responded this is correct with respect to Lot #4. Councilmember Zappetini stated he felt one of the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 1 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 2 problems in this situation was that one of the developers had died, and another developer was brought in as a partner. Mr. Christensen stated he agreed with Mr. Pendoley's remarks with one exception. Mr. Christensen stated the understanding of the neighbors was that a privacy fence would be built for the purpose of shielding existing homes from the construction, as well as for occupancy of the homes as the owners moved in. Mr. Christensen noted this had always been their understanding, and felt the issue was subject to interpretation. Mayor Boro suggested that if Mr. Pendoley's explanations were not satisfactory, Mr. Christensen should feel free to put his concerns in writing for further review. Mr. Christensen stated he would continue to appear before the Council, if necessary, until the fence was installed. RE: CLOSED SESSION ITEM 1. Mayor Boro reported that in Closed Session to discuss labor negotiations, no reportable action was taken, and Council will reconvene Closed Session following this meeting. RE: CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REDEVELOPMENT - File 140 Mayor Boro announced that Agency interviewed candidates for 5 positions on the Citizens Advisory Committee on Redevelopment. The Agency reappointed Bob Cooper, Rob SImon and Abraham Yang and appointed Renwick Breck and Helen Gregory to four-year terms; (terms to expire the end of June, 1999). CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION 2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of Approved as submitted. June 5, 1995 and Special Meeting of July 17, 1995 (CC) 3. Acceptance of Statement of Disclosure for Accepted Statement. James Atchison, Planning Commissioner (CC) - File 9-2-6 4. Resolution of Appreciation for Suzanne M. Scott, ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 9421 - former Planning Commissioner (CC) RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR - File 102 x 9-2-6 SUZANNE M. SCOTT, FORMER PLANNING COMMISSIONER. 5. Resolutions of Appreciation Re: Italian Street a. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 9422 - Painting Festival: (RA) - File 102 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR a. Sue and Joe Carlomagno, Coordinators SUE AND JOE CARLOMAGNO, b. Pascale Hery, Artist COORDINATORS. c. Youth in Arts b. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 9423 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR PASCALE HERY, ARTIST. c. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 9424 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR YOUTH IN ARTS. 7. Resolution Calling Upon the State Legislature ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 9425 - and the Department of Insurance to Resolve RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL the Homeowners Insurance Crisis in California OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL (CM) - File 9-1 CALLING UPON THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE TO RESOLVE THE HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE CRISIS IN CALIFORNIA. 10. Adoption of Resolution Rejecting Bids and ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 9426 - Authorizing Rebidding for Repainting of RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Pickleweed Community Center (PW) OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - File 4-1-476 REJECTING BIDS FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "REPAIR AND REPAINTING OF PICKLEWEED RECREATION CENTER". Project No. 219-6619-122. ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 2 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 3 11. Request to Relocate Commuter Parking Temporarily ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 9427 - on Hetherton Street and Tamalpais Avenue (PW) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL - File 11-18 x 11-8 OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AUTHORIZING THE PROVISION OF FREE PARKING ON HETHERTON STREET AND TAMALPAIS AVENUE. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 12. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO SUZANNE M. SCOTT, FORMER PLANNING COMMISSIONER (Pl) - File 102 x 9-2-6 Mayor Boro presented the Resolution of Appreciation to Ms. Scott, thanking her for her active role in the community for the past ten years. 13. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION RE: THE ITALIAN STREET PAINTING FESTIVAL TO: a. SUE AND JOE CARLOMAGNO, b. PASCALE HERY, c. YOUTH IN ARTS (RA) - File 102 Mayor Boro presented the Resolutions of Appreciation to Joe Carlomagno and Therese Rettinger, Representative of Youth in Arts. Sue Carlomagno and Pascale Hery were unable to attend. Mayor Boro expressed his appreciation to Sue and Joe Carlomagno for their work with the Street Painting Festival for the past two years, and thanked Therese Rettinger for her exceptional work as Director of Youth in Arts. The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion: 6. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH WISE CONSULTING SERVICES, CONSULTANT RE: DATA PROCESSING STUDY (CM) - File 4-3-296 x 4-3-117 Mayor Boro stated he had two concerns. He noted that when we hire a consultant and pay him $40,000, the consultant is not going to report that everything is fine. Mayor Boro stated one of the policy decisions the Council made a number of years ago was the City's approach to how we support and supply the data processing services to the City. Basically, the City does not own the equipment and does not employ the programmers. Mayor Boro asked if the consultant understood this, and would make his recommendations accordingly? City Manager Nicolai responded that he did. Mayor Boro stated the Budget Oversight Committee had made the recommendation for this study, but noted that in an overview of the proposals for the study, he did not see where the Budget Oversight Committee had a role in the study. He asked Ms. Nicolai how the committee will be involved. Ms. Nicolai reported the sub-committee of the Budget Oversight Committee had worked with the Data Processing Policy Committee, interviewing the consultants and making the recommendation to the City Council. She stated this core group will continue to work with the Data Processing Policy Committee, and will be involved in the interviews, coordination and review of all steps taken. This sub-committee will then report to the Budget Oversight Committee. Mayor Boro noted the consultant's written project assumption stated that the consultant would be interviewing the City Council, City Manager, department heads, and the Data Processing Committee. Mayor Boro asked Ms. Nicolai to convey his request that the consultant also interview the Budget Oversight Committee to determine their expectations. Ms. Nicolai stated that each time the consultant had met with the Data Processing Committee the meeting had included the members of the sub-committee, and some of these issues had already been discussed. Councilmember Phillips noted there was an impressive list of cities the consultant had assisted in the past, and asked if these references had been verified? Ms. Nicolai stated the references of all candidates for the consultant position had been verified, and staff had contacted the cities that had hired the consultants in the past. Mr. Phillips referred to the proposal's reference of two options, and stated this made it unclear as to the consultant's approach. Ms. Nicolai stated the Budget Oversight Committee chose the more comprehensive option, noting that when the City went out with the RFP, the candidates stated they could take one of two approaches; the first option would be a less collaborative and interactive study, merely just walking in, taking a look, and telling us what they thought, basing their recommendations in part on their past experiences of working with other cities. A second option would include interviewing and goal setting, and would involve the Council and department heads. Ms. Nicolai stated two quotes were given, $25,000 for a less comprehensive study, and $42,000 for a full study. Ms. Nicolai reported the full committee preferred the comprehensive study, and she has reviewed the proposal and excerpted those portions related to the full study being recommended, rather than present two sections to the Council. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 3 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 4 Councilmember Phillips noted recommendations are being made regarding our data processing, and he felt much of the proposal would be constrained by our budget and the funding available. Ms. Nicolai stated two approaches to this could be taken. First, we could design what we need to achieve certain goals, and then as the money becomes available it could be used as the needs are prioritized. The consultant and the committee would also be reviewing our current expenditures to identify any areas where they might find savings in what we are currently doing, and perhaps how to reallocate in a more effective way. Ms. Nicolai stated part of the plan would be to achieve the goals, and then determine how long it would take to implement the plan, or how to rearrange other priorities within the City in order to implement the plan. Mr. Phillips noted he hoped they would take into consideration what we are actually able to fund at this time, in order to make practical recommendations. Councilmember Heller asked when the study would begin and how long it would take for the final report to be prepared? Ms. Nicolai stated the consultant was scheduled to meet with the department heads this week, that questionnaires had been distributed to the department heads and Councilmembers, and further meetings were being planned for next week. She noted a time frame for this study had been given in the proposal, and felt this could be met. Ms. Nicolai stated she assumed Council was in agreement to contract with Dennis Posadis to work with Wise Consulting Services. Mayor Boro stated Council had agreed. Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution approving an agreement with Wise Consulting Services, consultants for a data processing study. RESOLUTION NO. 9428 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN AGREEMENT WITH WISE CONSULTING SERVICES, CONSULTANTS RE: DATA PROCESSING STUDY (NOT TO EXCEED $42,000), AND APPROVED HIRING DENNIS PASADIS AT A FIXED PRICE OF $4,480, AS COMPUTING FACILITY EXPERT. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini and Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 8. POLICE RADIO SYSTEM: (PD) - File 4-10-280 X 9-3-30 a. ACCEPTANCE OF REPORT FROM FRANK THATCHER ASSOCIATES, INC; APPROVE THE REPORT'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND PLAN OF ACTION b. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH FRANK THATCHER ASSOCIATES, INC., AS RADIO SYSTEM CONSULTANTS Mayor Boro stated he had received a recommendation from Commander Pennington that Council not approve additional funds. Councilmember Cohen stated he would like to clarify that an amendment to the agreement is not being authorized, and Council is only accepting the recommendations subject to the discussions held during the special meeting. Mayor Boro stated he did support the recommendations for Alternative "C" and Alternative "D"; however, he felt there was some "grey area" between where we are and where we want to be. Mayor Boro stated it was his hope the Radio Committee would not only address the issue of how we get to where we want to be, but as importantly, what do we do in the interim. Mayor Boro referred to a letter Council had received from Dan Dufficy, which Mayor Boro felt raised concerns and issues that needed to be considered. Mayor Boro stated we need to reach a point where an end goal is identified, and then determine how to get there in the most expeditious way, and at the same time make the current system as safe and responsive as possible until we can reach the final goal. Mr. Daniel Freeman, representative of E. F. Johnson Company, asked to address the Council, stating he recognized that the City of San Rafael and E. F. Johnson Company are faced with collective technical issues that neither the City, E. F. Johnson Company, the Police Radio Committee, other manufacturers, nor the consultant can solve alone. E. F. Johnson Company wanted to point out that since its inception, the original radio committee had never requested recommendations from E. F. Johnson Company, and since the contract was awarded to Frank Thatcher Associates, Inc., that firm had never contacted E. F. Johnson Company's engineering or technical service departments for advice or recommendations. Mr. Freeman stated the communication problems facing the City are not the norm. He noted E. F. Johnson Company shares a very high degree of frustration over this issue. He believed there was a need for rapid dialogue between the Council, the Police Radio Committee, Frank Thatcher Associates, Inc. and E. F. Johnson Company to recommend true cost effective solutions, and he requested the Council assist in allowing this to happen. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 4 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 5 Mayor Boro stated that Councilmember Heller, at a previous meeting with Mr. Freeman, had asked for a copy of his report, and she had shared it with the Council. Mayor Boro further noted Councilmember Heller, who is also a member of the Police Radio Committee, did intend to invite Mr. Freeman to come before the committee in the future. Councilmember Heller stated the next committee meeting will address E. F. Johnson's report to the City Council, and that she would contact Mr. Freeman if the committee would like him to attend the meeting. Councilmember Zappetini moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to accept Item a., acceptance of the report from Frank Thatcher Associates, Inc., to approve the report's recommendations and plan of action. a. ACCEPTED REPORT FROM FRANK THATCHER & ASSOCIATES, INC., APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS AND PLAN OF ACTION. b. RESOLUTION WAS NOT ADOPTED. RADIO COMMITTEE TO CONTINUE TO STUDY WHAT THE NEXT STEPS SHOULD BE, AS WELL AS BETTER DEFINE THE SCOPE OF WORK. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 9. AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH DKS ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DESIGN TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF: (PW) - File 4-3-215 x 11-10 a. BELLAM AND KERNER BLVDS. b. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE AND McINNIS PARKWAY Councilmember Zappetini referred to Item B of the report, which stated preliminary results of the North San Rafael model indicate the McInnis Parkway approach will require a traffic signal. Mr. Zappetini asked if this was likely to change if the McInnis plan changed again, or was this the final recommendation? Public Works Director Bernardi responded the intersection referred to in the staff report was the road leading to Embassy Suites Hotel. He explained Phase II of the Freitas Interchange was a separate intersection, approximately 2000 feet to the north of this road. Mr. Bernardi noted that as far as the Freitas Interchange was concerned, that issue would be brought back to Council in September for policy determination. Mr. Bernardi stated it was clear that a signal was warranted for McInnis Parkway and Civic Center Drive, given the modeling that had been completed thus far, noting that since the City already had a contractor in that area, one of the options being considered was adding this as a change order to the existing Merrydale project. If not, then both of these intersections would be bid as one project. Councilmember Zappetini moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to adopt the resolution with regard to traffic signal installation. RESOLUTION NO. 9429 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN AGREEMENT WITH DKS ASSOCIATES TO DESIGN A TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM FOR THE INTERSECTIONS OF BELLAM & KERNER BOULEVARDS AND CIVIC CENTER DRIVE & McINNIS PARKWAY IN THE AMOUNT OF $28,000. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None PUBLIC HEARINGS 14. PUBLIC HEARING - RE: BAYPOINT LAGOONS LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT: (PW) - File 6-48 x 5-1-292 a. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND LEVYING ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 Mayor Boro opened the Public Hearing and asked Public Works Director Bernardi for the staff report. Mr. Bernardi stated the assessment remains the same as last year, and noted the purpose of the assessment was to fund the ongoing monitoring of the lagoon and wetlands at Baypoint Lagoons. Councilmember Zappetini asked if this issue was one that must be presented to Council on an annual basis? Mr. Bernardi responded the assessment SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 6 must be approved by Council every year. There being no public comment, Mayor Boro closed the Public Hearing. Councilmember Zappetini moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution confirming the diagram and assessment, and levying an assessment for fiscal year 1995-96 for Baypoint Lagoons Landscaping and Lighting District. RESOLUTION NO. 9430 - RESOLUTION CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND LEVYING ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 BAYPOINT LAGOONS LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT (Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 15. PUBLIC HEARING - RE: ESTABLISHMENT OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF A" STREET, SECOND AND THIRD STREETS (PW) - File 6-51 x 12-18 Mayor Boro opened the Public Hearing and asked for a report from Public Works Director Bernardi. Councilmember Zappetini excused himself from the hearing due to conflict of interest and left the Council Chamber. Mr. Bernardi presented a diagram of the boundaries of the proposed Undergrounding District. He stated all of the property owners in that district had been notified, and a listing of property owners was included in his report to Council. Mr. Bernardi stated if Council adopted this Resolution establishing the Underground District, they would be ordering the improvements to take place, which meant the utility companies would be constructing underground facilities and ultimately remove the poles and wires from their present locations. He noted this would also impose a responsibility on the property owners to convert their existing overhead services to underground services. Mr. Bernardi stated that as part of the undergrounding expense borne by the utility companies, P.G. & E, the telephone company and the cable company would extend what they call their "hundred foot rule", which meant that from the right-of-way to the back of the property the utility companies would extend up to 100 feet at no cost to the property owner, and if the house is within the 100 foot distance, they would extend to the meter box. It would be the responsibility of the property owner to hire an electrician to convert the overhead service to the underground service. Mr. Bernardi reported the normal procedure would be to notify the property owners when facilities are to be converted, informing them of the time period within which they must have the conversion work completed, which is generally a six month period. He noted electrical permits would be issued at no charge to the property owners or to their contractors, and the City would also provide the inspection. Mr. Bernardi stated the cost to the property owner averages $1,000, but could be either more or less, depending on the complexity of the services provided to a particular property. He noted the tentative dates established in the Resolution specified the property owners must be ready by June 1, 1996, and further orders that all of the poles and overhead wires be removed by December 1, 1996. Mr. Bernardi stated the dates will likely change depending on the utility companies' ability to actually perform the construction between now and next June. Mr. Bernardi stated that staff recommended adoption of the Resolution establishing the district and ordering the improvements to be constructed. Mayor Boro asked if the process Mr. Bernardi described with regard to the property owners' responsibilities was the same process used in the past in other districts throughout the City? Mr. Bernardi responded that it was the same process. Deborah Kohoe, resident of San Rafael, asked to address the Council on behalf of her landlords, owners of property from 800 "E" Street to 806 "E Street. Ms. Kohoe stated she had been a renter at this location for fifteen years, and they have concerns about this project because of the noise, access to apartments and parking, and vacancies during the time of construction. She stated the owners, Bob and Louise Reed, are also concerned about the cost. Ms. Kohoe noted the expense was also a concern to her, as a renter, because the landlords currently provide low-cost housing, and she was afraid this expense could cause rent increases for the tenants along with the costs to the owners. She stated the landlords do not believe that the expense will be only $1,000 for each property because they have had to make other changes in the past and paid much more than $1,000. Mr. Bernardi responded that concerning the actual construction, construction would only be allowed during the times permitted by City Ordinance, specifically 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM. However, Mr. Bernardi noted these locations were affected by peak hour traffic; therefore, construction would not be allowed during those peak hours. Also, this type of work is not done at night, so the workday would probably be much shorter. With regard to access, Mr. Bernardi SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 6 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 7 stated the City required that access to properties be maintained throughout the construction of the undergrounding facilities. Referring to the concerns over the cost, Mr. Bernardi noted that $1,000 was an average cost. If a property had ten units and ten separate meters, then obviously more work would be required to change and convert ten meters, depending upon how the electrical service is laid out. Mr. Bernardi stated the City was trying to provide enough notice to property owners so they could prepare for the conversions. He noted the property owners would need to be able to fund this, and if they were to pass this expense on to their tenants, they might be able to amortize the expense over a period of a year or two. Mayor Boro stated he felt the positive aspect of this was that the conversion should enhance the property value by replacing the overhead wires and poles, and create a much better looking thoroughfare throughout this entire area. He noted that in areas where the City had already replaced overhead wires and poles, it had been an enhancement and a betterment to the whole community and the people who live in that community. Mayor Boro stated this was the reason the City was attempting to complete this project. Alicia Carl, a resident of Second Street, stated one of her neighbors is eighty-three years old, and felt it would be very difficult for them to pay the $1,000 in order to convert their utilities. Ms. Carl stated she was very concerned and did not know what to do about this. Mayor Boro asked Mr. Bernardi how the property owners had dealt with the utility companies in the past during this type of conversion? Mr. Bernardi reported the poles remained in place until everyone had been converted. The City would then have the option of ordering the poles removed, thereby terminating service to those who had not converted, or the City could make arrangements for the conversion and put a lien on the property for the cost of the conversion. Mr. Bernardi stated that ultimately, the property owner must bear the cost of the conversion. City Manager Nicolai stated although the City was required to give six months' notice, in this instance the City was giving the property owners almost a year's notice to plan for this expense. Councilmember Heller asked if neighbors had joined together in an attempt to obtain a "group rate" bid for doing a whole block? Mr. Bernardi stated the property owners could contact the electrical companies and make any arrangements they chose. Ms. Heller encouraged Ms. Carl to get everyone on her block together and attempt to obtain a firm bid at a lower price. Ms. Heller asked Mr. Bernardi if the property owners would be paying a private contractor? He stated they would, and no money would be going to the City or the utility companies. He noted the property owners would be paying only the cost of converting the service from overhead to underground service. Louise Reed, San Rafael resident, stated she had spoken to a representative from P.G. & E. today, and was told it would cost her several thousand dollars for her conversion because older houses such as hers had a different type of system, and all of the conduit needed to be removed and replaced. She stated it would cost her $15,000 -$20,000 for the conversion, and that she could not afford it. Deborah Kohoe stated she resented Mr. Bernardi's statement suggesting landlords might increase rents and amortize the expense of the conversion. She felt there was a real need for low-cost housing in this area, and was very concerned that rents might be increased to pay for this. Mayor Boro responded he did not feel Mr. Bernardi had been insensitive in his remarks about increasing rents, and felt he had merely been trying to suggest one way the cost of the conversion might be recovered. Robert Durant asked what the cost of this project would be to the taxpayers. Mr. Bernardi responded the utility companies were responsible for the entire cost of the undergrounding, which would be approximately $2.2 million. Mr. Durant stated the utility company informed him they were not paying for this, that the City was. Mr. Bernardi stated it was being paid with funds set aside by the Utilities Commission to pay for underground utility services. Mr. Durant stated this was still taxpayers' money, and Mr. Bernardi responded it was utility companies' money. Mr. Durant stated P.G. & E. disagreed, and had told him the taxpayers would be paying for this. Mr. Bernardi explained the Public Utilities Commission required P.G. & E. to set aside a specific amount of money each year for each city to underground their utilities. Mr. Durant asked why the property owners were not allowed to vote on the conversion? Mr. Bernardi stated all property owners had been notified by mail. Mr. Durant stated the letters did not clearly detail the changes and costs the property owners would incur, and he felt this was nothing more than another form of taxation. Mr. Durant felt the poles did not need to be removed, and that undergrounding should only be implemented if a new housing tract or industrial area were to be built. He felt the public was being railroaded, and that the cost would far exceed $2.2 million. Mayor Boro stated the money was being funded by the rate payers, as required by the California State Public Utilities Commission, and was not a city imposed tax. Mayor Boro further stated he felt that if we have an opportunity as a city to take advantage of this and beautify the city, we had a right to consider this proposal. Mr. Durant then asked why the City did not attempt to beautify the streets? He then asked Mayor Boro why the property owners were not allowed to vote on this? Mayor Boro explained the process was to hold a Public Hearing, which the city was doing. Mr. Durant responded he had come 225 miles for the Public Hearing, but felt many of the property owners did not know about the meeting. Mayor Boro noted that all of the property owners had been notified about the Public SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 8 Hearing by mail. There being no further public comment, Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing closed. Councilmember Phillips stated his only question had been whether all of the property owners had been notified of the Public Hearing, and was now confident they had been. Councilmember Cohen stated it appeared as though most properties affected by the undergrounding conversion would be within the 100 foot rule guideline, in which case the only cost the property owner would incur would be the cost of changing the meter at the house. Mr. Bernardi responded this was correct, and noted the City was not requiring any upgrading of any of the services, because they recognize this would be an additional burden on the property owner. He stated all the City wanted to do was make certain the overhead service was converted to underground service. Mr. Cohen asked if this meant any upgrading of meters or changing of conduits within a residence or business would be necessary only if required by P.G. & E. and to comply with their standards, and that the City would not be imposing code upgrades? Mr. Bernardi stated this was correct. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the resolution establishing an underground utility district. RESOLUTION NO. 9431 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL ESTABLISHING AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF "A" STREET, SECOND STREET AND THIRD STREET. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (Due to conflict of interest). 16. PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT OF USE PERMIT/ZONING CONDITIONS TO DELETE CONDITIONS REQUIRING ADDITIONAL OFF-SITE PARKING ARRANGEMENTS BETWEEN EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL AND THE ADJACENT CIVIC CENTER NORTH OFFICE AT 100 EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL, DENNIS HALE, GEN. MGR., OWNER; THOMAS M. SHERWOOD, ATTORNEY, REP. (Pl) - File 10-5 x 10-3 Mayor Boro opened and continued the Public Hearing, stating that applicant has requested that this item be carried over to the meeting of August 21, 1995. 17. PUBLIC HEARING - TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED RESOLUTION AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE TO INCREASE PLANNING PERMIT FEES AND APPEAL FEES (Pl) - File 9-10-2 x 10-2 Mayor Boro opened and continued the Public Hearing, stating that staff has requested that this item be carried over to the meeting of September 18, 1995. OLD BUSINESS 18. CONSIDERATION OF PROCESS FOR COUNCIL REVIEW OF CITY MANAGER AND DEPARTMENT HEADS (CM) - File 9-1 x 9-3-11 Mayor Boro asked Councilmember Heller and Councilmember Phillips if they would like to work with City Manager Nicolai on this review. Each of them accepted. Councilmember Cohen stated he would like to clarify that the review would include department heads, and Mayor Boro stated it would. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 8 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 9 Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to accept the report. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None NEW BUSINESS ADD ITEM: Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to add the following item to the agenda, which came up after agenda was posted. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None RE: GRANT FOR COMPLETION OF MURAL AT 519 FOURTH STREET - File 202 City Manager Nicolai stated John Childress, President of the San Rafael Board of Education, had applied for this grant, not realizing the City must have authority to accept it. Because of the shortness of time, she asked Council to accept the award of this grant so the mural can be completed before school begins. Mayor Boro stated this is a very beautiful mural and will compliment the building when it is finished. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to accept a $3,000 grant from the Marin Arts Council for completion of the mural at 519 Fourth Street. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 19. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS RE: REQUEST FROM MARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR RECOMMENDATION FOR NEIGHBORHOOD AWARDS PROGRAM - File 226 Councilmember Heller reported the Marin Community Foundation provides the Marin Community Foundation Neighborhood Achievement Awards for local communities, and suggested the Councilmembers may be aware of certain neighborhoods that have not been considered for these awards in the past. As these are very generous awards of up to $5,000, she felt the neighborhood associations and small parks in the area should all be aware of this program and told how to contact the Foundation. Mayor Boro asked if Councilmember Heller knew if the Foundation had contacted the Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods and the North San Rafael Coalition of Residents groups directly, and Ms. Heller responded that she would find out if they had. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 PM. Council returned to Closed Session. Mayor Boro then reported in Open Session that no reportable action was taken, and adjourned the meeting at 9:50 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1995 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/7/95 Page 9