HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1996-05-20SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, MAY 20, 1996 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
Absent: None
Others Present: Suzanne Golt, Acting City Manager
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Patricia J. Roberts, Deputy City Clerk
OPEN SESSION (RE: CLOSED SESSION) - 7:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBER
1. 0 Conference with Labor Negotiator (Government Code Section 54957.6)
Negotiators: Suzanne Golt/Daryl Chandler/Dick Whitmore
Mayor Boro announced the Closed Session was not held.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE:
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
8:00 PM
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to approve the
recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items:
ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION
2. Monthly Investment Report (Fin)
- File 8-18 x 8-9
4. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF
ORDINANCE NO. 1696 - An Ordinance of
the City Council of the City of San Rafael
Adding Chapters 9.22 and 9.23 to the
San Rafael Municipal Code, Adopting
Regulatory Fees to Fund Household
Hazardous Waste and Conditionally
Exempt Small Quantity Generator Waste
Activities (Fin) - File 13-2 x 115 x 4-3-32
5. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF
ORDINANCE NO. 1697 - An ordinance of
the City of San Rafael Amending the
Zoning Map of the City of
San Rafael, California, Adopted by
Reference by Section 14.01.020 of the
Municipal Code of San Rafael, California,
So as to Reclassify Certain Real Property
from the PD (Planned Development 1613)
District to the PD (Planned Development)
District (Re: ZC96-2, 285 Smith Ranch Road,
AP No. 155-251-86) (Smith Ranch Court) (P1)
- File 5-1-328 x 10-3 x 10-5 x 10-7
Accepted report.
Approved final adoption of
Ordinance No. 1696.
Approved final adoption of
Ordinance No. 1697.
6. Report on Bid Opening and Award of Contract RESOLUTION NO. 9609 -
Regarding One or More Fire Engines for Use RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
by the Fire Department (Bid Opening on PURCHASE OF ONE OR MORE
Thursday, April 25, 1996 at 3:00 PM) (FD) FIRE ENGINES UTILIZING
- File 4-2-288 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND.
8. Authorization to Call for Bids for Emergency Approved staff
recommendation.
and Routine Tree Services (Current Contract
with Fahy Tree Services Expired 6/30/95) (PW)
- File 4-1-474
9. Extension of Time for Subdivision Agreement -- RESOLUTION NO. 9610 -
"Subdivision of Lands of Laurel Properties" RESOLUTION TO EXTENED TIME
(Fairhills Drive at Idlewood Place - a Four- FOR THE COMPLETION OF
Lot Subdivision) (Previous Extension of Time IMPROVEMENT WORK -
Ends May 18, 1996) (PW) - File 5-1-316 "SUBDIVISION OF LANDS
OF LAUREL PROPERTIES". (FAIRHILLS DRIVE AT IDLEWOOD PLACE - A 4 LOT SUBDIVISION)
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 2
10. Resolution Authorizing the Director of RESOLUTION NO. 9611 -
Public Works to Execute the State -Local RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
Master Agreement No. TSM/FCR-5043 for DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO
Andersen Drive Project (PW) EXECUTE THE STATE -LOCAL
- File 4-8-26 x 11-16 x (SRRA) R-246 MASTER AGREEMENT NO. TSM/FCR-5043
FOR ANDERSEN DRIVE PROJECT.
11. Partial Street
recommendation.
on May 29, 1996 (RA;
Closure of Bahia Way
- File 11-19
Approved staff
The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion:
3. ADOPTION OF INVESTMENT POLICY (Fin) - File 8-18 x 8-9
Councilmember Phillips noted the section of the report entitled "Selection of
Financial Institutions and Broker/Dealers" refers to obtaining multiple bids,
and asked if the City is actually doing that? Finance Director Coleman stated
that if the City is purchasing anything that is not sold at Par, such as a
Banker's Acceptance or something that is already in the secondary market, they
would get quotes in order to obtain the highest yield.
Councilmember Phillips referred to the section of the report addressing Maximum
Maturity, noting it states, "At least 40% of the portfolio will mature within
one year or less. The maximum maturity will not exceed five years." Mr.
Phillips asked why this was done? Mr. Coleman stated this is the current policy,
and explained the 40% figure was arrived at to ensure the City would have enough
liquidity to address any situation, noting they felt 40% would be adequate
to ensure the City would have liquidity, and five years is a requirement of
State law, which states five years cannot be exceeded unless the Council
specifically authorizes a longer time. Mr. Phillips stated he did not have
a problem with the five years, but felt 40% was a little arbitrary, noting
you must have a balance through projections. He stated you can determine what
an appropriate balance is through maturity, noting the longer the maturity
the greater the yield, so it is advantageous to have a longer maturity if at
all possible. Mr. Phillips stated that with the balance being somewhat of
an unknown, 40% times that balance seems rather arbitrary. He stated he would
vote in favor of approving this report, but would like Mr. Coleman to consider
these observations, and come back before the Council if it appears as though
there might be merit in altering that percentage. Mr. Coleman asked if
Councilmember Phillips was suggesting the percentage for one year or less be
lower than the 40%? Councilmember Phillips stated it might be, at discretion,
rather than just an arbitrary percentage.
Mayor Boro noted the Investment Policy is brought before the Council each year for
review, and asked Mr. Phillips if it would be sufficient to go through this
year, or if he felt it should be reviewed sooner. Mr. Phillips stated he would
like to review this during the Budget Hearings.
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the
Investment Policy.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
7. 1115 THIRD STREET -- MARIN TEEN CENTER -- REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CITY FEES
(PW)- File 9-3-40 x 8-5
Councilmember Heller stated she concurs with the report, and has no problem in waiving
the fees. She noted no fees were mentioned in the report, and asked how much
the City was waiving? Public Works Director Bernardi stated the fees would
have been no more than $1,000, because it is mostly interior work. Ms. Heller
reported she had attended the opening of the Teen Center, stating it is a
wonderful center.
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to grant the request
and waive the City fees.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 3
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
12. YOUTH SERVICE DAY AWARDS - File 109
Mayor Boro reported that two weeks ago the City had honored eight participants in
the San Rafael Public Library's Summer Reading 1995 Program, and was pleased
to honor five additional participants who were unable to attend the earlier
meeting. He noted all thirteen participants were being honored for performing
volunteer work for the City' s Library, noting they had assisted in making reading
games, displays, registering children, explaining and helping children play
the reading game, shelved and reorganized books, and kept statistics. Mayor
Boro stated these volunteers showed incredible patience, empathy, and
enthusiasm in working with the children in the reading program, and they
encouraged the children's reading and shared their accomplishments.
Mayor Boro stated the City of San Rafael is very proud of our Library Youth Volunteers,
noting they share the Library's goal that everyone's life should have as many
possibilities as the individual person has interests.
Mayor Boro stated he was pleased to honor these volunteers for helping to open the
lives of over 650 children by encouraging them to open a book, and presented
awards to the following individuals:
Robert Chin
Christina Holsberry
Patrick Holsberry
Cindy Soderblom
Philip Weinberg
13. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING A LETTER
OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO THE PINT SIZE LOUNGE, FOR THEIR BUSINESS
LOCATED AT 1615 FOURTH STREET (PD) - File 9-3-30 x 13-8
Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened.
Chief Krolak reported this item had been on the Agenda for the Council meeting of
May 6, 1996, and at the request of the applicant, it was pulled from the Agenda
and this Public Hearing was scheduled.
Chief Krolak stated his report is the same as presented two weeks ago, and highlighted
some of the main points. First, he pointed out that ABC (Alcohol Beverage
Control) advises there are currently 62 existing liquor licenses in this
particular census tract, although he noted this census tract is very large,
running from Highway 101 to the San Anselmo City border. He reported ABC stated
the average number of licenses should be 10, noting that meant we were already
52 over that number. Chief Krolak pointed out that this census tract does
encompass the entire Downtown area, including all of the restaurants and the
established liquor licenses and bars, which is the reason there are currently
62 licenses in this census tract, and stated he felt that was something that
should be considered.
Chief Krolak noted the applicants feel the closest establishment of their type is
in San Francisco, and believe they would be serving a clientele that is not
currently being served, which falls under the guideline for Public Convenience.
Chief Krolak noted there was no way for him to determine this for the Council,
other than the statements of the applicants.
Chief Krolak reported Planning Director Pendoley had provided him with a list of
establishments or Use Permits within a 1000 foot radius of this location, and
reported Marin Lincoln House, the only detoxification center in Marin County
for both alcohol and drugs, as well as a private high school and church, are
all within that radius.
Referring to the crime rate statistics, Chief Krolak stated this application falls
within the Police Department's Reporting Zone #7, noting this is a relatively
large police reporting zone, running from "B" Street to the point where Fourth
and Second Streets meet, and from Mission Avenue to Second Street, encompassing
a large portion of Downtown. He noted his staff report shows 419 incidents
that are used as criteria for evaluating crime statistics, which is a very
high number given the fact the City is considering approval of a liquor license.
However, given the fact this is in the Downtown area, many of the incidents
encountered by the Police Department relate to such problems as the homeless
and public drunkenness. Chief Krolak noted the majority of these types of
incidents do not take place, necessarily, in the particular area where this
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 4
business would like to locate.
Chief Krolak noted another criteria the Police Department looks at is the number
of calls received from this location, reporting that in 1995 the Police
Department received twenty-five calls for service at this address. He stated
most of those calls concerned noise complaints, and had to do with the
establishment that was previously located there, the Copa Cafe. He stated
the Police Department also reviewed the number and types of crimes reported
at this particular location, and noted there had only been one crime in 1995,
which was a burglary.
Councilmember Phillips asked for clarification of the existing license concept,
noting the City has 62 licenses in this tract, and only 10 are allowed under
ABC's formula. He asked if there had been any change in the law that, in the
past, would have permitted more licenses than are prescribed now, noting it
seems like a very significant difference for a Council to approve six times
the allowed number of licenses. Chief Krolak reported that in the past, ABC
took the applications for liquor licenses and approved them, if they so chose,
stating there was no body, such as the Council, to review the applications
or make these decisions. Chief Krolak explained it is not really based on
how many licenses the ABC allows, it is based on the average for the population
density within a particular census tract, and ten licenses is the average ABC
would look at for the population of this particular census tract. He noted,
obviously, the ABC has allowed more licenses, because of the nature of the
businesses and the applicants who have applied for licenses in this particular
tract. Councilmember Phillips asked if the Council should disregard the
average of ten licenses as a benchmark, stating it seemed contrary to what
is actually being reported as the right density. Chief Krolak stated this
is an ABC determination, and he is not certain how to balance it for the Council,
noting ABC has allowed the 62 licenses to be in place, after looking at the
particular applicants, noting these were not approved by the Council or any
other governmental body. Councilmember Phillips stated Chief KrolakkIs report
uses this formula of 10 licenses to conclude that the City already has more
licenses in this particular area than we should have. Chief Krolak stated
he had attempted to provide his review of the criteria based on the City's
Ordinance that was passed in September, 1995.
Councilmember Cohen felt the Council needed to look carefully at the criteria, noting
they are using the criteria established under the law giving the Council the
authority to review these applications. Mr. Cohen stated this is an issue
of averages, based on the Countywide average of the number of licenses per
census tract, noting there are probably certain census tracts throughout much
of the County where there are no licenses. He noted this would certainly bring
the average down, in terms of the Countywide average on census tracts, and
there is going to be a concentration in downtown areas. Mr. Cohen stated he
believes the Council needs to carefully consider this issue if they are going
to see every application made for a liquor license, noting he did not feel
the Council necessarily should say they do not want to see any more restaurants
Downtown. He noted the Council wrestled with this problem at the last City
Council meeting, and pointed out the City has a well established policy of
not supporting beer sales in gas stations. However, he did not feel the
Council should deny this application based solely on the number of existing
licenses within the census tract, as then the Council would have to take the
same position with any new restaurant wanting to sell beer and wine.
Chief Krolak reported he, Planning Director Pendoley, Acting City Manager Golt,
and the City Attorney' s office have looked at this issue, and all are in agreement
that they need to review the City's Ordinance, and perhaps bring revisions
to the Council that would change the method by which this issue is reviewed,
as well as the Department that would bring this issue before the Council.
He stated it had also been discussed that the Police Department, in bringing
business decisions before the Council, may not have the whole picture upon
which to base these decisions. Chief Krolak agreed the Police Department should
be part of the process, as these issues deal with liquor licenses and the inherent
issues that go along with that, but stated he did not believe the Police
Department should be the lead department making those types of decisions and
recommendations for the Council.
Councilmember Heller asked if this meant the Council would be required to vote "yes"
or "no" on every liquor license that is applied for in the Downtown area,
including any restaurant coming into the area? Chief Krolak responded, as
he understands it, that is not necessarily the case if it is a restaurant,
stating he would be looking to ABC for direction on this. He noted one of
the issues with the application now being considered is that it is not really
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 5
a restaurant, citing the applicants' intention of having a very limited menu.
Mayor Boro stated it was his understanding that if there is an existing use at an
existing location, and if the ownership of the establishment transfers, that
application would not come before the Council, and Chief Krolak stated that
was correct. Mayor Boro asked if an application would come before the Council,
not necessarily a new license to the area, but a new license at a specific
location and a new kind of business, and Chief Krolak answered that was correct.
Chief Krolak stated, in this particular instance, even though a license had
been established at
this location in the past, the location has been closed for a period of nine months,
and a different kind of business is being established at the location, noting
that is why this application is being brought before the Council.
Councilmember Cohen stated, regardless of the decision reached with this application,
this has become an issue the Council must follow-up on, noting ABC determines
an application must come before the Council to request a letter of Public
Convenience or Necessity based solely on undue concentration in the census
tract, yet Chief Krolak's report states an applicant must also come before
the Council for an on -sale license at anew location. He asked for clarification
regarding the distinction between a restaurant and an establishment that is
essentially a bar, and how ABC draws the distinction, noting he does not believe
the City of San Rafael has 62 bars Downtown, and the 62 licenses must include
restaurants that serve beer and wine. Chief Krolak stated that was correct.
Councilmember Cohen stated we clearly need to get more information in terms
of what the Council is going to be asked to approve and what, in general, the
City's policy will be in issuing new licenses.
Chief Krolak stated this particular law was enacted, in part, because of the 1962
riots in Los Angeles, when the South Central community told the City of Los
Angeles they felt there was an overabundance of concentration of liquor
establishments within their community. He reported that when the businesses
were rebuilt after the fires, the community stated they wanted some influence
as to whether or not they allowed those businesses to be re-established in
the same neighborhood. He stated the cities of Los Angeles and Oakland, where
similar problems were occurring, wanted to have more local control over the
establishment of liquor licenses in their particular neighborhoods, went to
the State Legislature, and got the legislation passed. Chief Krolak stated
this was a brief history of the Government Code that is cited in the staff
report, noting the law was changed to allow local governments, both cities
and counties, to have more input as to whether or not they want to allow these
types of establishments in their jurisdictions.
Mayor Boro referred to Exhibit "A", noting it indicates the number of licenses allowed
and the number currently existing, and asked if he was correct in understanding
that if the number of licenses allowed in the census tract was 10, and if this
application would have been only the 7th license in the tract, then this
application would never have been brought before the Council? Chief Krolak
stated that was his understanding. Mayor Boro asked, even though the
application has been brought before the Council, does the Council still have
the discretion as to whether or not they want to grant the letter of Public
Convenience or Necessity, based on all of the various criteria? Chief Krolak
stated they did, noting his recommendation was based solely on the criteria,
but the Council has the authority to grant the letter of Public Convenience
or Necessity.
Chief Krolak agreed with Councilmember Cohen's statement that the Council would
not want to make the statement that they do not want anymore restaurants that
serve wine and beer. Planning Director Pendoley concurred, noting he shares
the same concern. Mr. Pendoley stated if this application was for a location
at Fourth and "C" Streets, it would likely be something the City would expect,
or that the zoning for that area would allow automatically, with the only
requirement being a business license, even though it would fail the test of
undue concentration, as well as proximity to incompatible uses, being close
to a number of churches, a school, and the drug or alcohol rehabilitation
facility. However, Mr. Pendoley stated he is not sure the proximity of other
like uses that are down there now have been a problem. Therefore, he stated
he believes there really is a problem with the criteria of the legislation
the City is attempting to administer.
Mayor Boro asked the applicants if they would like to address the Council.
Adam Violante and Jason Bennett, owners of the Pint Size Lounge, addressed the
Council, stating as they understand the Public Convenience and Necessity law
that has just been enacted, the burden of proof is now on the applicant, and
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 5
Mr
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 6
then it is enacted upon by the Council. Mr. Violante noted that in the past,
this was never reviewed by the City Council, which is why there is an
overabundance of liquor licenses in this area.
Bennett reported that when they first went to the ABC to begin their application
process, they were not given the impression that this would be such a formal
process, and their proposal to the City, the Planning Department and Chief
Krolak may not have been as thorough as it should have been. He stated they
would now like to address the concerns of Chief Krolak and the City, and give
the Council a better understanding of what they are trying to do with their
new business.
Addressing the first criterion, regarding the total number of licenses in this census
tract, Mr. Violante noted Chief KrolakkIs report states, "the approval of this
application would not result in an increase in the total number of licenses
in the City or in the census tract in which the business will be located, as
the application involves an existing business with a beer and wine license."
Referring to the second criterion concerning the number of establishments similar
to their own, Mr. Bennett noted they informed Chief Krolak that it was their
belief that there are many similar businesses in San Francisco, but not in
San Rafael. In support of this view, Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante presented
the Council with petitions which showed there is a call and desire for this
type of business. Councilmember Phillips asked Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante
to describe their business. Mr. Bennett noted a mission statement was attached
to the petitions and quoted, "The Pint Size Lounge will be a coffee tasting -house
for specialty coffee beverages and micro -brewed beers. As per conditions of
the applied for license, the Pint Size Lounge will be open to those 21 years
of age and older. Their target market is young adults 21 to 30 -something,
not currently being catered to in the San Rafael area. As they are not trying
to obtain a hard -alcohol permit, the associated concerns should not be relevant.
They look to provide a comfortable atmosphere for their customers to enjoy
their vast selection of specialty drinks, diverse jukebox, pool table, and
revolving art displays. " Mr. Bennett stated a lot of emphasis is being placed
on the liquor license, because that is what they are applying for, but noted
their emphasis will be on the espresso and coffee drinks, adding they also
plan to be serving food.
Mr. Bennett addressed the third criterion, which concerns whether the business will
be located within a 1,000 foot radius of incompatible facilities, noting the
Lincoln House Detoxification Center had been mentioned. Mr. Bennett stated
it was difficult for them to address that specifically, but he did point out
that their neighbors on both sides of their location have beer and wine licenses,
and there is a hard liquor license around the corner from their business.
He felt this showed they were not adding or making alcohol more accessible
to the people in this area, but rather diversifying what is available in that
part of town. Noting it has also been pointed out that the church and Marin
Academy are nearby, Mr. Bennett stated they plan to begin their hours of
operation at 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM, and will not be open during the hours that
many of the other businesses in the neighborhood are open, or when the students
are attending the Marin Academy. Therefore, he stated they do not see this
as a conflict.
Referring to the fourth criterion, which concerns the crime data, Mr. Violante stated
it was interesting that the crime data for this area is 200% over the recommended
crime data from the ABC, whereas the census tract and the number of licenses
allowed in the area are six times over the recommended number. He stated he
was curious, all things being equal, if the license data was on mark with the
ABC's census tract, would the crime data be in line with that as well? Mr.
Violante noted he was not stating there is not crime in this area, but as Chief
Krolak has stated, this zone is the nucleus of the City as far as the Downtown
area is concerned.
Mr. Bennett noted the fifth criterion addresses whether the issuance of the license
involves an existing business which has been located at a site that has had
three or more of the specified reported crimes within the previous one year
period. Mr. Bennett pointed out that Chief Krolak Is report states the majority
of the calls for service to this location were for loud noise, and noted the
use permit they have applied for does not include live music; therefore, they
do not believe the noise and the calls for service will be an issue in the
future. Mr. Bennett noted criterion six was basically a review and
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 7
recommendations made by Chief Krolak.
Responding to Councilmember Phillips' earlier question to describe their business,
Mr. Bennett reported his partner, Adam Violante, had been involved with the
business that had previously been located at the site, the Copa Cafe. Mr.
Bennett stated he and Mr. Violante have taken all the complaints that had been
received from the surrounding neighbors during the time the Copa Cafe was in
operation, and have tried to address them, citing problems such as loitering
and skateboarding. Mr. Bennett reported that after looking at these problems,
he and Mr. Violante were not comfortable with them, which is why they decided
to close the Copa Cafe. He stated they had originally planned to re -open shortly
thereafter as the Pint Size Lounge, but reported they ran into a lot of hurdles
with their license and application. Mr. Bennett stated they have now been
closed for eight months, which is what they had originally hoped to do, in
an attempt to provide enough time for the stigma that was attached to the Copa
Cafe to dissipate. Mr. Bennett stated they plan to open a new business which
will cater to people more in their own age group, those in the twenty-one to
thirty -something age group.
Mr.
Violante reported the type of license they are applying for is a Class 42 license,
as opposed to a Class 40 license. He explained a Class 40 license is a bona -fide
eating establishment and restaurant license, and a Class 42 is a license that
allows food service, and actually encourages it, but with the stipulation that
the business is a mandatory twenty-one years and older establishment. He stated
that is the reason they chose this type of license, because of the past track
record of the Copa Cafe, noting they wanted to ensure their customers would
be of this age group. Mayor Boro clarified that they would not allow anyone
under twenty-one years of age into the establishment, and Mr. Violante stated
that was correct.
Mr. Bennett stated they had reviewed the format for their business for quite some
time, and believe it is a workable formula, noting this application now before
the Council is their final hurdle.
Councilmember Heller, noting they are trying to overcome some neighborhood problems,
asked if they had formulated a plan as to how they hope to accomplish this,
stating she felt it was important for a business such as this to lay out how
they will be a good neighbor? Mr. Bennett stated that during the past nine
months they had added new stipulations to their lease, noting if there is
loitering in front of their establishment, they will be in violation of their
lease. He reported he had begun a dialogue with some of their neighbors, noting
it was not until recently that they were aware of the adamant protest against
the Pint Size Lounge opening at this location. Mr. Bennett stated he believed
the twenty-one and older age limit would diminish most of the concerns of the
neighbors, pointing out the most repeated complaints concern loitering and
skateboarding, and this is something they will not condone.
Mr. Violante stated the petition against them is, in a sense, a positive review
for them, as it is clearly focused on the past, and there is no mention of
the future in the petition against them. He stated they have contacted the
neighbors who signed the petition, to inform them of exactly what they plan
on doing with the business. Councilmember Heller asked what kind of supervision
they plan to have in the establishment, and how they will supervise their
customers. Mr. Violante stated it is recommended by ABC that they have someone
at the door checking identification prior to admittance to the establishment,
and they have been discussing hiring two people. He noted either he or Mr.
Bennett will be at the establishment at all times, so there will always be
at least three people on the premises to control the situation. Mr. Bennett
noted that of the twenty-five calls for service to this location in the past,
it is quite possible that a portion of those were calls made by the owners,
attempting to have the skateboarders removed. Mr. Violante stated one of the
actions they support, which the neighbors have been trying to put together,
is the hiring of an off-duty police officer if there seems to be additional
concerns about this few block area, perhaps hiring an officer to work foot
patrol and splitting the bill with the neighbors who wish to become involved.
Councilmember Phillips noted Mr. Violante and Mr. Bennett had stated they did not
intend to have live music, and asked if their lease precluded them from having
live music? Mr. Bennett stated their old lease allowed unamplified jazz music,
with the word "unamplified" being highlighted. Mr. Bennett stated they do
not plan on having live music at all. Mr. Violante reported blueprints have
been drawn up to soundproof their building, noting this has not yet been done
because of the cost, but it is something they plan to do in the future.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 8
Councilmember Cohen referred to the problem of loitering, noting this issue is even
addressed in their lease, and asked how they plan to prevent loitering at their
location? Mr. Bennett stated, over and above having a foot patrol officer
in the area, he felt he would likely be the one who would be responsible, along
with a doorman who would be responsible for the immediate area outside in front
of the establishment. Mr. Bennett noted the main concerns come from the two
neighboring restaurants, particularly the one located right next door at 1615
Fourth Street, because the restaurant has a lot of open windows, and the owner
does not want people standing in front of his building while his customers
are trying to eat. Mr. Bennett stated San Rafael is putting a lot of emphasis
on rejuvenating the Downtown area, and they would like to be a part of that,
specifically in their age category, noting it would be one of the first places
designed and owned by someone twenty-six and twenty-seven years old, for
customers who are twenty-one to thirty-five. He stated he believes there is
a large number of people who feel they are not catered to.
Councilmember Phillips asked what the penalty provisions of the lease are if, in
fact, loitering is found to exist? Mr. Violante stated they would be found
in violation of the lease, and would lose their lease at that point, within
thirty days. Mr. Phillips asked if the Council could make the license
conditional on some of these considerations, such as the loitering aspect,
and some of the other representations that are being made? Chief Krolak stated
he did not believe the ABC
license could be conditional. City Attorney Ragghianti stated he did not believe
the Council could condition the granting of the license for the premises on
such conditions as he is proposing, noting the Planning Director had advised
him that no Use Permit is required for this use. Therefore, City Attorney
Ragghianti stated the answer is "No", conditions could not be placed on the
issuance of the license.
Mr. Violante stated that after speaking with the ABC inspector on their case, he
understands that if they receive a letter of Public Convenience and Necessity
from the City Council, and if there should be any further protest after this
point, then the ABC inspector assigned to this case will be required to interview
anyone protesting, make a full statement, and then at that point he will arrive
at a decision, which would likely include placing a conditional use on the
approval, noting the ABC inspector would be the one to place the stipulations
on the license. Mr. Violante reported the inspector explained the types of
stipulations and conditions that could be enforced by ABC include placing
restrictions on the hours that liquor could be served.
City Attorney Ragghianti reported he had reviewed Resolution 9450, stating it appears
there is a provision that may permit what Councilmember Phillips had suggested,
quoting, "A decision, (meaning by the Council) to find Public Convenience or
Necessity will be served by issuance of a license, may be conditioned on
operating restrictions and other conditions if the issuance of the license
subject to such conditions is deemed sufficient to serve Public Convenience
or Necessity." Mr. Ragghianti stated it would appear this Resolution, which
the City adopted to implement this procedure, does grant the Council the right
to impose conditions if they make the necessary findings.
Mayor Boro noted this is an existing license, and asked if the prior establishment,
the Copa Cafe, did actually sell beer and wine? Chief Krolak reported the
Copa Cafe had sold beer and wine. Mayor Boro asked, if this location already
had a beer and wine license, why is it being brought before the Council at
this time? Chief Krolak stated the application was being brought before the
Council because of the change from a Class 40 license to a Class 42 license,
along with the fact that the establishment has remained closed for an extended
period of time, and the request is to start a new establishment.
Mayor Boro invited members of the audience, who are opposed to the application,
to address the Council.
Eric Frey, owner of Eric Frey Furniture, addressed the Council, noting his shop
is located across the street from the Pint Size Lounge. Mr. Frey reported
the neighbors have sent three letters to ABC regarding past problems they have
had in the area, and while Mr. Frey acknowledged Mr. Violante and Mr. Bennett
are trying to disconnect from that past, he stated the neighbors have a lot
of concern that it could be the same old story. Mr. Frey noted one of the
owners is the same, and there were many promises made in the past that did
not work out, and he was afraid it would not work out this time. He noted
Mr. Violante and Mr. Bennett spoke of having a guard and both of them being
on the premises, but Mr. Frey stated he did not think they would generate the
income to have the guard, nor did he expect they would both continue to be
on the premises after a period of months have passed. Mr. Frey stated that
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 9
if they are given a license, he hoped there would be a time limit placed on
it, such as a year, after which time they would be required to reapply and
show that there had been no complaints. Mr. Frey stated he was concerned the
license would be approved, and then the neighbors would be stuck with the kinds
of problems they have had to live with for many years. He stated he has been
at his current location since 1980, noting there have been very few problems
caused by any of the businesses, other than this particular establishment.
Councilmember Cohen stated he understood Mr. Frey's concerns regarding promises
being made, and whether or not the applicants will be able to maintain having
a guard, or their presence, on a consistent basis. However, Mr. Cohen stated
the Council must consider the applicants, and whether or not they are able
to address and prevent the types of problems that were experienced previously.
He stated he is not really concerned as to whether or not there is a guard
at this establishment, noting his concern is that if this application were
to be approved, the Council should have some way of reviewing what is happening
at the establishment, and if it is having the same negative impact on the
neighbors. Mr. Cohen asked, if the Council were to pursue a conditioned permit,
which outlined the types of things the applicants would have to take
responsibility for doing, would Mr. Frey see that as a reasonable approach?
Mr. Cohen explained that when a Conditional Use Permit is granted for a
business, it includes a number of conditions that must be met at all times,
and also bring the permit back for review after a set period of time. Mr.
Cohen stated if the Council is able to put conditions on this application that
would address the concerns of the neighbors, it seemed this might be one way
to give the applicants a chance to run their business and meet what appears
to be a demand for the service they are offering, and still allow the Council
to protect the neighbors'
interests and concerns, because if the applicants are not meeting those conditions,
then the City could pull their permit and close their doors. Mr. Cohen asked
Mr. Frey if he felt this was something that would be reasonable for the Council
to consider? Mr. Frey stated a Use Permit, with numerous conditions, had been
issued in the past, noting that at one time he was shown a copy of the permit,
which one of the neighbors had obtained. He reported that although the
conditions had been placed on the permit, the neighbors still had problems,
and stated since it did not work last time, the neighbors would be skeptical
of that approach being taken again with this application.
Mr. Frey stated the neighbors have suffered for many years, noting the problems
have gone on without City or Police involvement because most of the things
that have occurred have not been the types of crimes that the Police Department
normally pursues, such as skateboarding, trash and vandalism. He acknowledged
these are not life threatening types of crimes, but for those who live or have
businesses in the area, it is a constant irritant, and certainly a drag on
one's business. In terms of controlling the clientele, Mr. Frey noted that
although the clientele must have also irritated the owners of the Copa Cafe,
they were apparently unable to control them; therefore, hearing that they are
going to take specific steps and be on the premises does not give him any
assurance that this is the way it will actually work out. Mr. Cohen asked
if the neighbor who had shown him the copy of the Copa's permit had ever
complained to the City, either to the Police Department, the Council, City
Manager's Office, or the Planning Department, regarding a perceived violation
of the Use Permit? Mr. Frey stated he did not know if that person ever contacted
the City, but felt it was likely they had. Councilmember Cohen stated the
City is very sympathetic to those kinds of complaints, noting they have a lot
of concern about businesses that operate to the detriment of the businesses
around
them. Mr. Cohen stated he would think that if a complaint had come before the Council,
they would have responded to it.
Councilmember Cohen asked Planning Director Pendoley if he recalled receiving such
complaints in the past? Mr. Pendoley stated the property has had a Use Permit
for live entertainment going back to 1983, which was granted to the original
owner, prior to the Copa Cafe. He noted the Copa Cafe did not offer live
entertainment, and since they were not using the Use Permit, any problems that
occurred at the location were not a violation of the Use Permit. Mayor Boro
asked if that meant that there was no Use Permit in effect, and Mr. Pendoley
stated that was correct, noting that technically it was still alive, but no
one was using it. Mayor Boro asked if this meant that what the Council is
potentially exploring in this instance would be much stronger than what we
had in the past, and Mr. Pendoley stated that was correct, noting that if the
Council decides to use the option of placing conditions on the finding of Public
Convenience and Necessity, the control will be as strong, or even stronger,
than with a Use Permit.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 9
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 10
Councilmember Phillips asked, if conditions were to be placed upon the permit, what
conditions did Mr. Frey feel should be included if the permit is granted?
Mr. Frey stated it was difficult to decide on the architecture for a conditioned
permit, as many of the problems of the past were not under the owners' control.
He stated the business had been the source of the problem, insofar as kids
under twenty-one would go to the Copa Cafe, and then they would end up on the
sidewalk in front of the club, with their skateboards, at 2:00 AM, not going
home. Mr. Frey stated he did not know how it could be structured so that the
owners could be held responsible for what spills out of their establishment
onto the street. Mr. Frey referred to what has been said about the music,
noting that in previous years there had been times when the music was very
loud and late into the night, although he acknowledged this has not happened
recently.
Bruno
Albini, representing the partnership that owns the building at the corner
of Fourth and "G" Streets, addressed the Council. He reported Mr. Frey is
one of his tenants, noting there are twelve additional apartments, as well
as another tenant downstairs. Mr. Albini stated the neighbors feel as though
they are in heaven now that everything has been so quiet, noting they can now
sleep, do what they want to do, and are not afraid to go outside because they
are no longer being intimidated. Mr. Albini stated he has policed the area
time and again, finding debris and bottles on a daily basis, and has had to
scrape his windows and repaint his building because of graffiti. Mr. Albini
stated he and his neighbors are not against the situation, they just feel it
has to be toned down, in the sense that everyone can get along, noting he and
the neighbors were willing to get along, but noted no one from the Copa Cafe
had ever met with them. Mr. Albini stated one of the current owners is a former
owner of the Copa Cafe, so he knows the situation and what is going on.
Mr. Albini reported his building has apartments upstairs, directly across the street
from this establishment, one of which is occupied by a woman who is 95 years
old. He stated the situation with the Copa Cafe had been a bad situation for
the whole
area, noting he had sent letters to all of the agencies he felt were appropriate,
including the Chief of Police, the Planning Department, Public Works Department,
and the City Council.
Diana May, resident of San Rafael, addressed the Council, noting she lives on "G"
Street, half a block from the Pint Size Lounge. Ms. May stated she has a lot
of concerns regarding the issuance of any type of liquor license to a business
at this location. She stated there are children and seniors in the
neighborhood, noting some of the seniors have, in the past, called and asked
her to go outside and check to see if it was safe for them to go outside their
building. Ms. May reported they have all enjoyed the quiet that has existed
during the past year while the Copa Cafe has been closed, noting they have
not had such quiet since the early 1980's. Ms. May stated she has a fifteen
year old daughter, noting she will not let her walk in this neighborhood if
the Pint Size Lounge opens. Ms. May stated Mr. Albini is a good landlord,
who maintains his property and has a good rapport with his tenants, and she
noted this part of San Rafael is a lovely neighborhood, and always has been.
However, Ms. May reported she has neighbors who are single women, and noted
those who have lived there for more than a year were very relieved when the
Copa Cafe closed, because they had been afraid to go out at night.
Ms. May acknowledged the parking problems will always be there because of the
restaurants. She stated there are three lovely restaurants on that corner,
which are patronized by families, and noted that if a place that caters to
people who want to drink opens up in that area, the families will leave and
the other businesses will suffer. Ms. May stated she will be picking up bottles
out of the ivy in front of her apartment again, and will be forced to keep
her child in the house, for fear she will be approached, as she was several
times when the Copa Cafe was in operation.
Ms. May stated if Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante can promise their patrons will stay
off the residential streets, and will go home when they leave their business,
then she would not object to the opening of their business. However, she noted
there is a history there, of approximately ten years of seniors being
intimidated, and having to move off the sidewalk and down into the gutter to
walk around groups of people who have gone to patronize this location. Ms.
May stated she was not referring to juveniles, rather it has been people
twenty-one years and older. She reported there is a new policy, which she
applauds, of putting newly released inmates on busses and getting them out
of San Rafael. However, she reported they get on the Number 20 bus and head
down Fourth Street, and she believes if they see alcohol for sale at this
location, they will get off at Fourth and Ida Streets and spend whatever extra
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 10
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 11
pocket money they have.
Ms. May stated she is not the one who has always called the Police Department, and
she is not behind all of the complaints, noting she gave up approximately two
and a half years ago, at which time she stopped making calls, drew her blinds,
closed her door, and told her daughter that one day they would be able to leave.
John Gillis, book publisher for McMillan Publishers U.S.A., addressed the Council,
noting that he is 32 years old and asking the Council if they really wish to
continue to export thousands of dollars that should be spent in San Rafael
every weekend, as that is what happens with people of his age group because
they take their entertainment dollars to San Francisco every weekend.
Mr. Gillis stated, as a magazine and newspaper reporter for the last several years,
he has noticed the transformation of Marin's Downtown areas from daytime
business centers to nighttime entertainment centers, pointing out this has
continued in San Rafael with the San Rafael Film Center, and some of the other
businesses that are beginning to locate in the area near the Macy's location.
Mr. Gillis felt everyone would agree this transformation has been good for
the City, and good for the City's economy, noting he believed the Chamber of
Commerce would encourage the continued growth of San Rafael as a nighttime
entertainment center. Mr. Gillis stated that, unfortunately, this nighttime
entertainment center has, to a great degree, excluded people under the age
of thirty-five, and noted this is the kind of business the City should encourage
because it is innovative and energetic. Mr. Gillis stated he felt many of
the complaints against the Copa Cafe were unfounded and unproven, noting that
in this forum there have been wild claims of criminal behavior that is in no
way definitively linked to the Copa Cafe. He believed the people who live in downtown
urban or semi -urban areas should not focus on a single business or establishment
as the source of every problem that happens in the street, when they have no
reliable evidence that the particular business is the source of the problem.
Mr. Gillis stated he wished to address some of the assessments he had heard during
the meeting, which he felt seemed rather strange. Referring to the census
figure on concentration of liquor establishments, Mr. Gillis stated it seemed
a strange
measuring stick to apply. Mayor Boro stated this was not an issue that could be
addressed by the Council, as it was a given the Council has received from the
State of California.
Mr. Gillis stated the Council was trading an establishment that had a beer and wine
license, was allowed to play loud music, and permitted teen-agers to enter,
for an establishment that will not play loud music and will not allow teen-agers,
and they have made the responsible decision to open the establishment only
to those who are twenty-one years of age or older. Mr. Gillis stated he felt
Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante had really done their part to address these concerns
by imposing that restriction on themselves; therefore, he encouraged the Council
to pass the measure to allow them the liquor license.
Mickey Mason, property manager, addressed the Council, reporting he manages
approximately $1 million worth of property in the 1500 block of Fourth Street,
and noting he probably has his hand on the pulse of the heartbeat of that
neighborhood more than anyone else in the entire community does. He stated
the issue of liquor should be irrelevant, compared to the amount of liquor
sold at United Liquor, and the calls for 5150 they get, which he estimated
to be at least twice a day. Mr. Mason stated the homeless problem far exceeds
any of the problems the kids have caused in that neighborhood, noting the
indigent walk up and down the street and sleep on porches, and he felt those
are the issues to be dealt with, not the issue of Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante
trying to open an entrepreneurial effort. Mr. Mason stated the graffiti
situation and the trampling of flowers are things that are happening right
now, with this business not even open, noting the wall Mr. Albini mentioned
was covered with graffiti right now, and neither the Copa Cafe nor the Pint
Size Lounge even exist at this time.
Mr. Mason stated he just wanted to make an effort to ask the Council to give Mr.
Bennett and Mr. Violante an opportunity, and to forget about the past, noting
they are making an effort to do something for the future, and should be given
a chance.
There being no further public comment, Mayor Boro closed the Public Hearing.
Mayor Boro stated, based on what City Attorney Ragghianti had informed the Council
earlier, the Council would have the option of approving this application with
conditions. He asked if the Council could also impose a time limit, at which
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 11
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 12
point the permit would be brought back to the Council for review, and could
be revoked if the conditions were not being met. City Attorney Ragghianti
stated that was correct, adding that if this were the sense of the Council,
it would be his recommendation that the Resolution imposing those conditions
be referred to staff so that it could be done properly and brought back to
the Council for review and approval.
Councilmember Cohen stated he appreciated City Attorney Ragghianti raising these
issues, as he had been thinking it was a shame there did not appear to be a
vehicle to allow this business to go forward and give Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante
an opportunity to prove what they say about how they are going to operate their
business. Referring to the comments that were heard from Mr. Frey and Mr.
Albini, Mr. Cohen stated he felt the Council should not have to make Mr. Bennett
and Mr. Violante responsible for that behavior, and yet if operating their
business at this location it brings back all of the problems that Mr. Frey
and Mr. Albini identified, then the responsibility would fall to Mr. Bennett
and Mr. Violante to address those problems, and the Council must look for a
vehicle that would allow the Council to provide for that. He stated that if
it falls to the Council to impose a standard of responsibility on how the business
is going to be operated, and if it cannot be done successfully, then the issue
will come back before the Council, who will close the doors.
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to refer this issue
back to staff to explore and prepare a Resolution for the Council's review
regarding conditional approval of the application for finding of Public
Convenience and Necessity. Councilmember Cohen stated he would further ask
staff to ensure the conditions address the concerns that have been raised to
the Council by letter, and seek additional input from the neighbors who have
taken the time to address this issue, to make sure the conditions give the
Council the opportunity to address the concerns that have been raised.
Councilmember Heller stated she agreed with Councilmember Cohen, and was very happy
there might be a vehicle for the Council to place conditions on the approval
of this application, noting she had been under the impression there would be
no way for the Council to do this unless there was live music. Ms. Heller
stated she felt the neighbors were entirely within their rights to complain,
as it is a Mixed Use neighborhood, and everyone has to understand that in those
types of areas there are two sides to the question, and both sides have their
rights. Ms. Heller stated she would like to see the business open, noting
she does not particularly wish to get
into the business of saying "yes" or "no" to every liquor license coming through
the City of San Rafael, and would certainly like to see what the Council can
do with placing conditions, particularly with the issues of loitering, the
hours of operation, and noise complaints.
Councilmember Phillips stated he concurs with the points that have been made, and
acknowledged that this business will provide a unique service, noting he plans
to come down and visit the establishment. Mr. Phillips stated he felt the
message has been loud and clear, Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante seem like bright
young men, and he applauds their spirit. However, Mr. Phillips reiterated
the Council is very serious about this working, and if it does not work, he,
for one, will bring a motion before the Council that the business be closed,
emphasizing the Council is very serious about doing that. Mr. Phillips offered
his support to Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante.
Mayor Boro stated he would like to see the issue addressed as to how enforcement
will come about, both on and off the premises, noting it should not be predicated
upon expanding the foot patrol, or by a community effort to obtain off-duty
Police Officers, rather it should be the responsibility of the applicants to
come back with a plan they can prove will be workable, and that the City can,
in turn, follow-up on. Mayor Boro stated this was a condition he would like
to see included, in addition to the points previously made, and anything else
that may come from the public.
Chief Krolak reported the Government Code has established that off-duty Police
Officers cannot work at a licensed premises, because of the potential for
conflicts.
Councilmember Cohen referred to a letter to ABC, dated March 28, 1996, noting eleven
points had been raised in opposition to this license, and those points really
break down into three specific categories: noise, loitering, and littering.
Mr. Cohen stated those were impacts that are outside of the business, based
on how the business operates and who hangs around. Mr. Cohen stated these
are the issues Mr. Bennett and Mr. Violante are going to have to address, and
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 12
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 13
they are going to have to take responsibility for dealing with them.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Councilmember Cohen stated the Council should follow-up on the discussion of this
whole issue, and noted the Council should direct staff, right away, to review
this issue and come back to the Council with a larger view, so the Council
does not find itself struggling with the same underlying philosophy when the
next application is received.
OLD BUSINESS
14. CONSIDERATION OF OPTIONS/CALL FOR APPLICATIONS TO FILL VACANCY ON CITY COUNCIL
(CA)- File 9-1 x 9-4
Mayor Boro reported the City has sixty days, from the date of Mr. Zappetini's
resignation on April 24, 1996, in which to call for applications and make an
appointment to fill this vacancy, if they so choose. He stated that if
applications are not called for, and an appointment is not made within sixty
days, the City would hold an election to fill this vacancy during the General
Election in November.
Jonathan Frieman, resident of San Rafael, addressed the Council, stating he would
like to apply for the vacant Councilmember position, and hoped the Council
would consider an appointment process rather than an election.
Mayor Boro stated he had given this matter a lot of thought, and based on the timeframe
that is left on this appointment, he felt it seemed prudent to make a selection
from applications and appoint someone to fill this vacancy. He stated it would
best serve the interest of the City, especially when considering the cost of
an election to fill the position ($30,000), with only one year remaining in
the term.
After further discussion by the City Council, Acting City Manager Golt suggested
the Council might want to consider adding additional questions to the
application form that will be given to those interested in filling the position.
Mayor Boro asked the Councilmembers to look at the application and see if
there was anything they would like to add to the form. Councilmember Phillips
referred to the question "What are the three major issues facing the City of
San Rafael", and suggested adding the question "and how would you address these
issues?" Mayor Boro directed staff to revise the application to include this
question.
Councilmember Cohen asked if the Council had a supplemental questionnaire the last
time candidates were interviewed for appointment, noting he seemed to remember
there were additional questions. Councilmember Phillips stated there had been
a list of thirteen questions, from which the Councilmembers could choose
questions to ask the applicants. Mayor Boro stated he recalled all of the
applicants were sent a list of questions, and were told to be prepared to answer
any of those questions during their interview.
Mayor Boro announced applications would be accepted in the City Clerk's office
beginning tomorrow, and the final date to submit applications would be June
7th at 5:00 PM., noting the Council must make an appointment no later than
June 24th.
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to call for
applications to fill the vacancy on the San Rafael City Council.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
NEW BUSINESS
15. DISCUSSION OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ON SAN PEDRO ROAD MEDIANS (PW)
- File 12-15 x 9-3-40 x 8-5
Mayor Boro referred to a letter the City received earlier in the year from the
Homeowner Association Presidents, a response to a meeting he attended with
Supervisor Kress, a response from the community regarding their interpretation
as to what had been agreed to, and the City' s response as to our interpretation
of the agreement. Mayor Boro reported he, Public Works Director Bernardi,
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 13
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 14
and Assistant Public Works Director Naclerio met with Hugh Campbell,
representing the Ad Hoc Committee of Pt. San Pedro Road Neighborhood & Homeowners
Associations, and it was agreed that the City, in conjunction with the County,
would pay for the first phase of the maintenance. Mayor Boro reported the
City's share of the cost would be approximately $2,000 for the first phase,
and then the community would begin working on the second phase, getting the
subcommittee together and coming up with short term and long term plans, which
would address not only how the medians are to be planted, but how they will
be maintained and how this effort will be financed, understanding very clearly
that the role of the City and the role of the County, after this initial effort,
would be somewhat minimal.
Mayor Boro noted that when he met with the Ad Hoc Committee, he made the point that
the reason he was concerned with the way this project was characterized was
because there are a lot of street medians in San Rafael that are not being
taken care of, and when the maintenance is done on San Pedro Road, others are
going to want the same kind of treatment in their areas, and rightly so;
therefore, it is important that the tone the City is trying to create is one
of a partnership between the community and the City, as we have done with a
lot of our park projects, where the City will contribute some money, but look
for the community to take over and carry the project through.
Stuart Lum, member of the Ad Hoc Committee of Homeowners Associations, addressed
the Council, thanking Mayor Boro and the members of the Council for their
interest and support of this issue. Mr. Lum stated the Committee has, through
their letters, expressed concern over the lack of maintenance on the medians
on San Pedro Road, noting this is a unique area, and one of the few median
strip areas in the City of San Rafael. Mr. Lum stated these medians lead to
some very high value neighborhoods, and the neighbors would not like to see
any further deterioration of the medians. Mr. Lum reported the Ad Hoc Committee
is very pleased with the time Mayor Boro spent with them regarding this issue,
as well as representatives from both the City's and the County's Department
of Public Works and Parks and Recreation Department. Mr. Lum stated they are
appreciative that the City and County are going to take on the first phase
of this project, which is to clean up the area, noting the Committee realizes
there must be a cooperation and a partnership, because it cannot be a one-sided
affair.
Mr. Lum reported it has been approximately a year since they began this effort,
stating they are serious, and noting their letters have indicated a specific
plan of action they want to follow to arrive at a plan that identifies the
specific needs of the medians, and what must take place to have them refurbished.
Mr. Lum stated they had indicated in their latest letter that they, as a group
of Homeowner Associations, would commit $1,000 toward the clean-up effort,
and he was remaking that commitment at this time, noting a number of Homeowner
Associations have already approved their allocations. Mr. Lum stated, from
the meetings they have had with City staff, they understand the scope of what
they are trying to accomplish and what it might take, and he reiterated this
will definitely be a partnership effort.
He stated they believe there is an opportunity to invite not only the Homeowner
Associations to participate in the future, but also public and private groups, to
hopefully share in the refurbishment and enhanced condition of these medians.
Councilmember Cohen reported the City has had to make some unhappy choices over
the years, noting there are other medians throughout the City that have suffered,
and the City is going to have to find a way to address those. He stated he
felt this way of leveraging what the City can put toward the project, in
cooperation with the neighborhoods, is a very good pattern for this type of
project. Mr. Cohen referred to Mayor Boro' s letter of May 7th to Mr. Campbell,
noting that in outlining Phase II it states a subcommittee of the Ad Hoc Committee
of Neighborhood and Homeowner Associations will meet to examine the medians
on an island by island basis, develop a landscape design utilizing drought
resistant plantings and water efficient irrigation, and provide a cost estimate,
noting they were to try to complete Phase II by June 15, 1996. Mr. Cohen stated
it seemed as though this was an area where the City would have some expertise,
and as Phase III specifically calls for City representatives to be involved,
he felt the City should have people involved in Phase II as well, providing
that expertise and helping to come up with the designs. Public Works Director
Bernardi reported Parks Maintenance Supervisor Tom Rothenberger is on the
committee, and he is already involved in working on this.
Mayor Boro reported the medians are in both City and County jurisdiction, noting
staff has done an excellent job of coming up with computer aided graphics for
the neighbors to use, as well as the City and County. Mayor Boro noted the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 14
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 15
City and County jurisdictions run through each other, with the total amount
of median space under City and County jurisdiction being a fairly equal split.
He stated it is the City's goal to make this project a seamless process, so
that when the project is completed, the neighbors will not have to worry about
whose jurisdiction a particular section of median is in. Mayor Boro stated
he wanted the motion for approval to be predicated upon the County joining
with the City in the financial effort for this first phase. Councilmember
Cohen stated the Council should also recognize and express their appreciation
for the Ad Hoc Committee's offer of $1,000 to help in this effort.
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the
recommendation to authorize the expenditure of up to $4, 000 from Unappropriated
Reserves to fund the clean-up of San Pedro Road from Embarcadero Way to Riviera
Drive, predicated upon the County of Marin joining with the City in the financial
effort for the first phase.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Councilmember Heller asked if the County had acted on this issue yet? Mayor Boro
stated he had spoken to Supervisor Kress, noting Supervisor Kress had received
the City's letter, and was informed the Council would be discussing this item
during tonight's meeting. Mayor Boro stated he would telephone Supervisor
Kress and tell him the Council had approved the recommendation to authorize
the expenditure, noting Supervisor Kress could then agendize the item for their
Board of Supervisors' Meeting.
Councilmember Phillips stated Mayor Boro is to be commended on the approach that
has been taken with this issue, meeting with the neighbors, and developing
a workable solution that satisfies one of the City's objectives of working
together in a partnership with the community. Mr. Phillips noted there are
several other communities that have similar concerns, and suggested the plan
and process for this project be used as a model for other communities interested
in putting together similar projects. Mayor Boro agreed, noting his initial
thought to the committee had been that whatever is done on this project may
have to be done elsewhere, and agreed this should be a model that can be used
by other neighborhoods and communities, allowing them to use those parts of
the plan that might apply to their own project.
16. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED DRAFT "BLINDER ORDINANCE" (CM) - File 13-8 x 13-9
Acting City Manager Golt reported this issue first came before the Council for
discussion in mid-April, 1996. She noted the City Attorney's office had given
the Councilmembers a sample of an Ordinance adopted in Santa Barbara,
California, which has thus far stood the test of the Court of Appeals, noting
the City Attorney's office is recommending a similar Ordinance as something
appropriate for consideration in San Rafael. Ms. Golt reported this type of
Ordinance is called a "Blinder Ordinance", which means an opaque material is
placed in front of material that would be deemed harmful to minors, noting
there is a specific section of the Penal Code which gives a more specific
definition of what is harmful to minors.
Ms. Golt noted this information is being presented to Council for initial discussion,
and for the Council to give staff further direction if they would like this
issue to come back at some point in the future.
City Attorney Ragghianti stated these types of Ordinances are fraught with
Constitutional problems, although a case was just successfully litigated in
Santa Barbara, and Federal District Judge Manual Real in Los Angeles recently
rendered a decision upholding the constitutionality of Penal Code Section
313.C.2, which is an integral part of this legislation, and declares unlawful
the sale of this harmful material described in the Penal Code Section. Mr.
Ragghianti stated the relevance of Judge Real 's decision to the proposed Blinder
Ordinance is that if the District Court Decision is ultimately upheld in the
Ninth Circuit Court, then the threat of prosecution under this Penal Code Section
might eliminate vending of adult
publications from coin operated vending machines. Mr. Ragghianti stated this
Ordinance was the result of one citizen's concern, expressed after several
occasions traversing Fourth Street, noting the City Attorney's office feels
comfortable about adopting the Ordinance.
Councilmember Phillips stated he was in favor of this Ordinance, but would like
a clarification of the definition of the phrase "harmful to minors". Mr.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 15
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 16
Ragghianti noted there is a three -prong test in the Penal Code Section for
harmful material, which is an adaptation of the 1973 case in the United States
Supreme Court, and which really defined obscenity, in terms of the law. He
reported that section defines harmful material as, "Matter, taken as a whole,
which to the average person complying contemporary Statewide standards, appeals
to the prurient interest, and is matter, which taken as a whole, depicts or
describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct, and which taken as
a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for
minors." Mr. Ragghianti reported the Penal Code Section goes on to further
describe it, and the three -prong test essentially has been incorporated into
our Ordinance, so the City will be establishing the following: 1. The cover
material, to the average person, appeals to the prurient interest; 2. The cover
material, to the average person applying contemporary Statewide standards,
depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way; 3. The cover
material, to the average person applying contemporary Statewide standards,
lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors.
Mr. Ragghianti pointed out that "contemporary Statewide standards" are
different in the Northern part of the State of California than they may be
in the Central, Eastern, or Western part of the state, noting it is that subject
which has produced the cases that have determined what really constitutes
obscenity. Mr. Ragghianti stated at least there is now some objective criteria
in case law, which suggests the cities have the right to enact these Ordinances,
which entails placing opaque material over the bottom half of the newsrack
so the material cannot be seen while passing on the street.
Councilmember Phillips asked who is charged with making the decision as to whether
specific material is harmful to minors and must be covered? Mr. Ragghianti
reported that in the usual scenario, which ultimately leads to the courthouse,
a complaint is made about a specific publication, and the Police are called.
He noted a Police Officer would have to go to the location, look at the material,
and make the decision as to whether the material was harmful to minors. Mr.
Ragghianti noted that decision is not usually made on the spot, but rather
after a discussion between the Police Officer and his superior, and the City
Attorney or District Attorney. Mr. Ragghianti stated some material is clearly
material which has no redeeming social worth, and is calculated to appeal to
the prurient interest. He noted the type of material that is involved in this
definition has evolved over the years, so things that may have been clearly
determined to be obscene forty years ago, may not be determined by courts in
Northern California, Berkeley, or San Francisco to be obscene today. Mr.
Ragghianti stated there was no easy answer to this question, noting these are
very difficult cases if they are litigated. He stated the idea is to prevent
the public, and especially youth and youth accompanied by their parents, from
being subjected to this type of material when they are walking down the street.
Councilmember Phillips asked if complaints would be made to the Police Department,
and then the Police Department would respond? Mr. Ragghianti stated it could
be that a Police Officer would be called about a merchant displaying this type
of material, or newsracks with this type of material, or the City Attorney's
office might be contacted about a complaint, as they have been in the past.
Acting City Manager Golt noted this could also be a matter for the City's
Code Enforcement Officer, as well.
Mayor Boro asked if some of the newsracks had already been covered in the past,
in response to a complaint to the City. Ms. Golt reported this issue had been
raised several months ago by Jennifer Glassman, who complained of the material
in the news -racks. Ms. Golt stated she had thought some of the newsracks were
covered after Ms. Glassman's complaint, but in researching the issue for this
proposed Ordinance, she
found that had not actually been done. Councilmember Heller noted that from what
she has observed, it appears as though some of the newspapers had self-selected
themselves for this, because they were covering their newspapers with a sheet
of paper, in effect providing their own blinder without the City pushing them
into doing it. Ms. Heller stated she is in favor of the Ordinance, reporting
she has received several complaints about what is happening. She stated she
would like to protect people who are unhappy with this kind of thing, noting
she sees no reason for the neighbors in the community to have to look at this
kind of material if they do not care to.
Councilmember Cohen stated he also supports the Ordinance, but is very concerned
about the constitutional issues, noting any time the Council takes up an issue
such as this, they need to give it very careful consideration and weigh all
the aspects of it. Mr. Cohen stated, in this particular case, he is comfortable
with the Ordinance as it is presented. He remarked he sees no compelling public
need to prevent people from having access to this material, but stated that
is not what is really at issue in this case, noting what is at issue is making
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 16
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 17
this type of material less visible to children. Mr. Cohen stated he does not
see an overwhelming constitutional need to publish this type of material in
a way that places it in public view without some protection for those who are
concerned about limiting access to it; however, Mr. Cohen stated he did feel
that when the City makes these decisions, we have to stop and ask ourselves
those questions. He stated it was important that every time we address one
of these issues where we are limiting people' s rights that have been guaranteed
by the constitution, we have to make certain it is the appropriate thing to
do, noting that in this particular case, he feels it is.
John Maher, resident of San Rafael, addressed the Council, stating his business
is located at Fourth and "C" Streets. Mr. Maher stated he occasionally bring
his two oldest sons to work with him, and takes them with him when he goes
down the street to the bank. He reported that just within the two blocks of
Fourth Street between "C" and "A" Streets, there are several of these newsracks,
as well as at the Post Office. Mr. Maher stated his concern, as a parent,
is that he wants his sons to be able to learn to work, and be a part of the
community, without having to be exposed to that kind of material. Mr. Maher
stated, as a businessman, when he walks down the street and sees this material,
it reminds him of the Tenderloin District in San Francisco, noting he does
not want to see San Rafael look like the Tenderloin. Mr. Maher stated he is
not looking for a public ban of this material, but at this point the material
is in public newsstands that effectively are on public property, promoting
that type of business versus other publications, and stated that was offensive
to him.
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to direct staff
to schedule a Public Hearing and present an Ordinance for Council's
consideration at the next City Council meeting, to be held June 3rd, 1996.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
17. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
a. RE: FREITAS INTERCHANGE - File 11-16 x 11-15 (Verbal)
Councilmember Cohen recalled that one of the goals set early in the year during
the Priority Setting conference was the issue of revisiting the alternatives
to Freitas Parkway. He reported they have been pursuing that, and the Council
agreed to extend a contract with CH2M Hill, noting two meetings have been
scheduled with CH2M Hill on May 21st and June 5th. Mr. Cohen noted the stated
agenda is to discuss cost breakdown and some of the features of the design
as proposed; however, what they were really hoping, and now appears to be the
case, is that CH2M Hill will be prepared to present a potential alternative
to the design, which has basically been raised by CalTrans. He reported that
when they accepted the committee report, CalTrans submitted a letter at the
last minute, with the key component being where Redwood Highway will access
Freitas. The conceptual design recommended by the committee, which was in
the report that was accepted, called for Redwood Highway to intersect Freitas
almost at the beginning of the structure crossing the freeway, and CalTrans
is not willing to entertain that possibility unless the investment in that
onramp is amortized over a period of ten to fifteen years, which takes the
project out of the timeframe the City is looking for in completing the Freitas
Interchange. Therefore, Mr. Cohen reported, CalTrans arrived at this
suggestion for Redwood Highway, noting it is similar to a design that was
considered in 1993. He stated staff has met with CalTrans in an attempt to
determine how we might modify that plan and see if there could be a workable
design.
Councilmember Cohen stated he feels many of the issues they worked through with
the committee last year have gotten us closer to an agreement with CalTrans,
as CalTrans has had to come to grips with the fact that this issue is not going
to go away, and that the City is determined to find a design that is going
to work, as opposed to the current design. Mr. Cohen stated the current design
does not meet anyone's criteria for a normal intersection design, and noted
CalTrans is beginning to accept that, and may be able to grant some exceptions,
as they are going to have to look at this intersection in some non-standard
ways.
Councilmember Cohen stated there is an additional concept that has not been raised
in the past, and one that he would like to share with the Council. Mr. Cohen
referring to Highway 101, noting that after it comes down the hill past North
San Pedro, it flattens out almost to grade, and then starts to climb again
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 17
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 18
to go over the railroad tracks and dips, and at that dip is where Merrydale
is being constructed. He reported that if we were to construct the new off ramp
at this location, traffic could conceivably be brought off Highway 101 at Civic
Center Drive, coming onto the surface streets at approximately Avenue of the
Flags in front of Marin Center. Mr. Cohen stated there would need to be a
signal at that location, and there would also be signals at Merrydale and
Freitas. He stated the Freitas Interchange would then be Civic Center Drive
to Freitas, with Redwood Highway coming off of that as a T -intersection, without
the offramp at all. Mr. Cohen noted one of the issues of this plan would be
three stop lights; however, in having staff run some of the traffic models,
it appears that timing is not an issue. Mr. Cohen stated that when he first
heard this idea, he did not think it would work, and did not feel they should
waste a lot of time on it; however, after thinking about it, he stated he felt
we should at least explore the idea, see how the community reacts to it, and
see whether or not it would be workable. He acknowledged it is a completely
different way of addressing the problem at Freitas, but he felt it would
eliminate the problem at Freitas and provide a much more standard intersection,
allowing us to break-up the Freitas Interchange, and create two T -intersections,
separated by hundreds of yards.
Councilmember Heller asked if Mr. Cohen would have this concept ready to present
to the committee. Councilmember Cohen stated he felt he should present this
option to the committee tomorrow, at the same level of detail as he had just
presented it to the Council, noting this may not be a workable plan, and if
the traffic models are run and the numbers do not work, then the idea would
not be worth any further discussion. However, if it seems workable based on
the traffic modeling, he felt it would be worth some thought.
Councilmember Cohen acknowledged that when he first heard this plan, he did not
think it had much merit; however, after considering it for a while, he saw
that this plan might work, and could address a number of issues. This plan
would greatly change the traffic distribution, and the traffic model would
have to be studied closely to determine the impact. He noted, for example,
that if someone is going to an event at Marin Center, they would take that
exit, and someone going to the Farmers' Market, or the Hall of Justice, would
also take that exit, rather than exiting the freeway at San Pedro. Mr. Cohen
stated it is possible this might address existing traffic problems on San Pedro,
which we had not anticipated being able to solve. Mr. Cohen stated the people
in the southern portion of Terra Linda might suddenly find that Merrydale may
be a viable alternative, noting they had previously discussed the idea that
people might get off the freeway at Freitas, make a right turn, and then another
right turn to Merrydale, but he felt those people would be much more likely
to make a left turn at Merrydale and go across, so this idea could also relieve
traffic on Freitas as well. Mr. Cohen acknowledged there are many further
questions that would need to be answered, such as the impact to Northgate and
Terra Linda if the traffic pattern were to change, but he felt this proposal
was at least worth exploring.
Councilmember Heller asked if this plan would be financially feasible, and Public
Works Director Bernardi stated he felt it would be much less expensive than
the proposed $6 million plan, noting this new idea would require mainly grading
and paving, while the proposed plan would require more extensive construction,
such as retaining walls.
b. COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING - File 11-8 (Verbal)
Mayor Boro asked Public Works Director Bernardi to proceed with the formation of
the committee to review the Commercial Vehicle Parking Ordinance, and noted
Dennie Dyer has asked to be a member of the committee.
C. SMOKING ORDINANCE WAIVER FOR ST. VINCENT DE PAUL - File 9-2-49 x 13-8 (Verbal)
Mayor Boro directed Acting City Manager Golt to bring Council a report on a potential
change to the Smoking Ordinance, to accommodate smoking at St. Vincent de Paul,
noting he felt this was something the City should pursue.
d. 1101 FIFTH AVENUE (former Garden Court Building) (P1) - File 10-2 (Verbal)
Mayor Boro stated he had suggested to Planning Director Pendoley that even though
the appeal period has passed, and this item will not be coming before the Council
for change or appeal, he felt it would be worthwhile for the Council to be
given a brief presentation, at the City Council meeting of June 3rd, on the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 18
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 19
building that has been approved at 1101 Fifth Avenue, across the street from
Saint Raphaels Church. Mayor Boro noted this is a very significant structure,
which has already been approved by the Planning Commission, and he felt it
would be worthwhile for the Council to have a chance to see it and understand
it.
e. GERSTLE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC PLAN (PW) - File 11-1 x 11-10 x 11-11
(Verbal)
Councilmember Phillips asked the status of the study for providing either a stop
light or stop sign on "D" Street in Gerstle Park. Councilmember Cohen reported
the staff work has been completed, and it has been determined that a stop sign
creates gridlock on "D" Street, either down the hill to the stop light at Sir
Francis Drake, or all the way back to the hospital. He noted the entire
intersection would immediately fail, violating the City's General Plan
standards, because a stop sign at "D" and Bayview would cause that intersection
to go to Level of Service "F".
Mr. Cohen stated it is possible to meet the standards for a stop signal, one that
is appropriately timed to rest on a green light on "D" street, and would be
triggered by cars and pedestrians from Bayview. Mr. Cohen stated this would
basically be a policy decision, noting that based on the traffic counts and
turning movements, there is enough to justify making the decision to put in
a stop light. He stated the question now is, "What does the community really
want?", noting there is a great diversity of opinion in the neighborhood.
He reported most people in the neighborhood say they want to do something about
"D" Street, and Mr. Cohen stated he agrees it is time to do something about
this problem, noting this is the only neighborhood with this much traffic that
has no controlled intersection in the neighborhood. He felt it was overdue
for the Council to look at the issue of crossing "D" Street; stating, however,
the agreement starts to fall apart once you get passed the idea that something
must be done. He stated some of the neighbors still want a stop sign, regardless
of the results of the engineering studies, while other neighbors support the
idea of a stop light. He noted there were even those who would rather see
the City work solely at attempting to reduce the speed of travel on the street.
Councilmember Cohen stated there were really two issues, one is crossing "D" Street
and the other is average speeds on "D" Street, which suggests to him that
whichever issue someone is concerned about depends, in part, on where they
are in the neighborhood. Mr. Cohen stated he had suggested to the Gerstle
Park Neighborhood Association that once the City had done the technical work,
the next step would be a community meeting, in partnership with the City and
the Neighborhood Association, noticing the meeting as publicly as possible,
and perhaps even doing a mailing to everyone in the neighborhood. He suggested
Mr. Mansourian attend such a meeting, making a presentation and discussing
the results of the traffic study, showing the residents what the model projects,
based on the number counts the residents themselves generated for the study.
Councilmember Cohen stated he would be looking to the Gerstle Park Neighborhood
Association to provide some leadership and help to the City, to get to the
point where enough people in the neighborhood agree, and the City can then
consider possible solutions.
Councilmember Cohen noted Councilmember Heller had attended a meeting of the Gerstle
Park Neighborhood Association Board of Directors, and asked if anything positive
had come out of the meeting? Ms. Heller stated she had attended the meeting
a week ago, and Assistant Civil Traffic Engineer Nader Mansourian had done
a very good job with his presentation of the traffic
model, noting all of the details were fully documented. Ms. Heller agreed the
residents are not clear on what they want, and seemed to be divided between
the two main issues, noting it is very difficult to understand that driving
too fast is one issue, and trying to cross "D" Street is a separate issue.
Ms. Heller stated there is a real safety problem with trying to cross "D" Street,
and she felt a stop light would help, because a light would give everyone a
moment of opportunity to cross "D" Street, not just at Bayview. She stated
some of the neighbors feel a stop light would be too expensive, while others
feel it must be done. She noted the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association
is supposed to be discussing the next step they wish to pursue, and then get
back to us, noting they realize it is up to them to decide what it is they
want to do, and then the City will work with them through their neighborhood
meetings.
Councilmember Cohen stated one of the points he has heard many times during the
past year is that people doubt the City will ultimately approve funding a traffic
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 19
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 20
signal on "D" Street and, therefore, we are being disingenuous to discuss it,
because it is not really a solution the City would be prepared to entertain.
Mr. Cohen reported that because of the power lines and some of the trees in
the area, the City would be looking at approximately $100,000 to $150,000 to
install the kind of signal it would take to deal with the problem. Mr. Cohen
felt the Council should recognize this concern, and if the City really is not
prepared to entertain such a solution, it is not worth having a community meeting
if the City is going to tell them that we are not prepared to attempt to find
a way to fund a signal. Mr. Cohen stated the Council would need to consider
this issue soon, if a signal is going to be something that we are going to
discuss as an alternative with the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association.
Mr. Cohen stated he has spent a lot of time thinking about local funding, and
he does not feel this is a locally generated problem, it is a Citywide issue.
Mayor Boro stated he did not oppose pursuing a traffic signal as a solution, he
just is not certain when it could be funded. Councilmember Cohen stated this
was something the Council needed to consider, and decide if it is something
they feel is a priority and a responsibility of the City, and when and how
the City would pay for it is a separate issue. Councilmember Heller stated
the traffic on "D" Street has increased significantly, and now has the same
amount of traffic as Lincoln Avenue, which has very heavy traffic even with
stop lights, noting the Council needs to look at this issue from a different
perspective.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned
at 10:30 PM.
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
By: PATRICIA J. ROBERTS, Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1996
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 5/20/96 Page 20