HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPCC Minutes 1998-08-10SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 1998, AT
7:30 PM
Special Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
San Rafael City Council Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember
Barbara Heller, Councilmember
Cyr Miller, Councilmember
Gary Phillips, Councilmember
Absent: None
Also present: Rod Gould, City Manager
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
OPEN SESSION - 7:00 PM
Mayor Boro announced Closed Session item:
CLOSED SESSION - CONFERENCE ROOM 201 - 7:00 PM
1.Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation - Government Code Section
54956.9(a)
Case Name: Jenkins v. City of San Rafael, Marin County Courts Case No.
17025
Mayor Boro announced no reportable action was taken.
OPEN SESSION -COUNCIL CHAMBER -7:30 PM
2.PUBLIC HEARING - FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
FOR THE DOMINICAN COLLEGE CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSISTING OF A GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, ESTATE RESIDENTIAL AND
HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL TO PUBLIC/QUASI PUBLIC; ZONE CHANGE TO PD (PLANNED
DISTRICT); USE PERMIT; MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT;
ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR PHASE I; ENVIRONMENTAL AND
DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR FOUR PARKING SPACES AT CALERUEGA DINING HALL; AND
HEIGHT EXCEPTION FOR A RECREATION CENTER. THE COLLEGE CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT
PLAN WILL ALLOW THE COLLEGE TO CONSTRUCT FOUR NEW BUILDINGS AND ASSOCIATED
SITE IMPROVEMENTS OVER THE NEXT TWO DECADES. THE BUILDINGS AND PHASING ARE
AS FOLLOWS: PHASE I, RECREATION CENTER AND GRAND AVENUE PARKING LOT AND
LANDSCAPING AND PARKING IMPROVEMENTS IN THE ACADEMIC CORE AREA, INCLUDING
PARKING BY CALERUEGA DINING HALL; PHASE II, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BUILDING
ON PALM AVENUE, PARKING LOT NEAR CALERUEGA HALL AND CHAPEL AT MAGNOLIA AND
LOCUST; PHASE III, RESIDENCE HALL AND RELATED PARKING ON MAGNOLIA AVENUE,
PHASE IV, FOREST MEADOWS OUTDOOR FACILITIES AND RELATED PARKING: APNs 15-
141-02, 15-142-03. 15-142-04, 15-161-01 and 15-162-02 (CD) - File 4-3-318
x 115 x 10-2 x 10-3 x 10-4 x 10-5 x 10-7
Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened, and reviewed the format that
would be followed during the meeting. He noted Planning Manager Sheila
Delimont would present the staff report, Council would then hear from
consultants of Dominican College and the Environmental Impact consultant,
after which the Councilmembers would ask any questions they might have, and
then Council would take public comment. He explained that as questions are
raised during the public comment period, they would be recorded, and at the
end of the public comment, he would declare a short break to allow staff
time to review the questions, which would then be addressed, along with any
other questions the Councilmembers might have, when the meeting reconvenes.
Planning Manager Sheila Delimont introduced Leslie Thomsen, Legal Consultant to
the City, and Scott McPhearson, EIR Consultant with Nichols•Berman. She
also acknowledged Associate Planner Bill Tuikka, co -Staff Planner on this
project, whom she noted had done a tremendous amount of work in getting
this project to Council.
Ms. Delimont reported this meeting concluded a very lengthy EIR process, which
began more than two years ago with the Scoping hearing before the Planning
Commission on July 9, 1996. The original Draft EIR had been circulated for
a review period, which ended on April 27, 1997, and then was extended at
the request of the College. The College and the Neighborhood Committee
entered into an agreement that required substantial changes to the project,
and a second Draft EIR was prepared and circulated. She explained the
Final EIR now before Council consisted of both the revised December, 1997
Draft EIR, and the Responses to Comments document. Ms. Delimont stated
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 2
responses were prepared to all comments received during the comment period,
on both Draft EIRs, and the final Draft EIR analyzed the revised Events
Management Plan submitted to the College on May 7, 1997, noting subsequent
changes had been made to the Events Management Plan, which Dominican
College would explain during their presentation. The changes that had been
made were consistent with the Final EIR recommendations, and did not
require additional Environmental Review.
Ms. Delimont reported the Final EIR recommended noise levels be limited to 50
dBA levels between 9:00 AM and 9:00 PM, and 40 dBA levels between 9:00 PM
and 9:00 AM, noting the Final EIR recommended using a one-hour averaging
time period to measure compliance with the standard, and the revised EMP
(Events Management Plan) incorporated a five-minute averaging standard.
She stated the noise consultant testified that either of these standards
would provide adequate mitigation, and the Planning Commission conditioned
the project to require the five-minute review.
Ms. Delimont stated another major issue was related to the drainage on Palm
Avenue, reporting the existing culverts on Olive Avenue cannot accommodate
a five-year flood discharge, and they overflow; the excess flows divert
down Olive Avenue toward Palm Avenue, where they join with storm water,
entering a topographic depression at the base of Edwards Court, near 31,
37, and 43 Palm Avenue. Ms. Delimont stated this was an existing
situation, and was not affected by the campus development; however, the
College had revised its project description to include a reinforced head-
wall and trash rack at the culvert inlet, under Olive Avenue. Ms. Delimont
reported there was a second flood problem, which the College does
contribute to, and the Final EIR concludes that additional run-off
generated by Phase II development could increase the floodwater ponding
depth by .1 inch, at 31-37 Palm Avenue. She noted that because this was an
existing situation, the applicant could only be held responsible for
funding the cost of the storm drain replacement that relates to the
increase in pipe size necessary to handle the increased runoff. To
mitigate the impact, the applicant must make a lump -sum payment, prior to
Phase II construction, to cover the cost of increasing the size of the
storm drain to handle the increased runoff caused by the College. Ms.
Delimont noted Public Works Director David Bernardi had testified the City
was currently preparing a design for a new storm drain system to deal with
the flood situation at 31-37 Palm Avenue, noting money was currently
budgeted for the project, and work could begin as soon as Council directs,
in light of the current litigation. Ms. Delimont noted the EIR Hydrologist
could further expand on this situation, and Deputy Public Works Director
Andrew Preston was also available to answer further questions regarding
this issue.
Councilmember Cohen referred to the revisions in the Events Management Plan,
noting he had been informed earlier that there was a revised EMP, and it
was his understanding that it had not been presented to the Planning
Commission, but was not what had been presented in the Councilmembers'
packets. He noted the revision was dated the same date as the Planning
Commission hearing, and asked if the revision included with the staff
report had, in fact, been presented to the Planning Commission? Ms.
Delimont stated that it had. Mr. Cohen asked if, to Ms. Delimont's
knowledge, there was a further revision to the EMP, which had been agreed
to by the College and the DNC (Dominican Neighborhood Committee)? Ms.
Delimont stated, as far as she was aware, this was the only revision,
noting the Planning Commission did have this revision in their packets at
the time they were considering the Project Merits.
Jeff Bialik, Executive Vice -President and Treasurer for Dominican College, noted
this was the first opportunity the College has had to address the Council
regarding the complete application; therefore, they would be providing an
overview of their entire application, and the various aspects of the
project. Noting that the members of their Planning Team would be available
to answer any questions the Councilmembers might have, Mr. Bialik
introduced Cecilia Bridges, Legal Counsel; Ron Van Buskirk, CEQA Litigation
Counsel; Elizabeth Shreve, SWA Associates; Kirk Bovitz, CSW Civil
Engineers; Frank Markowitz, Transportation Planner for the Events
Management Plan; Alan Rosen, of Charles Salter Acoustical Engineers; Dave
Bieling, Archeologist; Peter Wong and James Yee, Architects from ED2; and
Project Manager Lenore Junker.
Mr. Bialik stated the projects analyzed in the EIR were critically important to
the future viability of the College, noting the sooner they achieved
approval, the sooner they could begin to secure that future, which they
believed would be to the benefit of the entire community. He stated that
given the incredible level of widespread neighborhood and community support
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 3
they have received on the merits of the project, they believed the
importance of the project was self-evident. He noted this was their first
major hurdle, and respectfully requested Council certify the Final EIR, so
they could go on to the Merits aspect.
Mr. Bialik stated that in addition to the Project Team, there were a number of
people who worked very hard, many as volunteers, to help them get to this
juncture, pointing out many of them were in the audience this evening,
wearing "Yes" buttons. He stated the work represented in the report now
before Council was just the "tip of the iceberg" of all the effort that had
gone into the project, noting they were forever grateful for that effort.
He stated there were two people he particularly wished to acknowledge,
Sheila Delimont and Bill Tuikka, from the Planning Department, noting they
had been with this project from the very beginning. He stated the College
would not be here without their professionalism and dedication to this
project.
Mr. Bialik noted the College's application was more than just a technical
representation of their need for new facilities; it was also a contract
with their neighborhood. He stated countless hours of discussion had gone
into the development of agreements with the Dominican Neighborhood
Committee regarding the Master Plan and the Events Management Plan, and
those discussions had greatly benefitted from the input of the Friends of
Dominican College and other neighbors and community members, including
those who used the College facilities. Mr. Bialik stated now that they had
reached those agreements, the College requested the project application and
EMP not be modified, in order to allow them to maintain the positive
momentum they have all worked so hard to achieve.
Elizabeth Shreve, SWA Landscape Architects and Planners, the project's Master
Planners, reviewed the Master Plan, and the Phase I application. She
reported that in 1994 the College asked SWA to assist in preparing the
Master Plan for developing the facilities the College needed for the
coming years, noting they were given three major goals: 1) to improve the
identity of the College; 2) to plan for four new facilities, a Recreation
Center, a Science and Technology building to serve the academic programs of
the College, a Chapel, and a Residence Hall to serve student needs; and 3)
to address the neighborhood context and potential concerns, such as traffic
and parking, visual quality, and preservation of the natural character of
the Dominican neighborhood. She pointed out the wooded character of
Dominican College and its neighborhood give it a special quality,and the
General Plan requires projects to respect such site features by minimizing
grading, erosion, and the removal of natural vegetation.
Ms. Shreve stated that as they went through this process with the College, they
worked hard to try to save significant trees, particularly the oaks; to
preserve two drainageways, one which runs through Forest Meadows, and one
through the Academic Core; and to preserve Native American archeological
resources located in Forest Meadows. Referring to the renderings, Ms.
Shreve pointed out Grand Avenue, which provides major access to the campus,
Acacia Avenue, the "identity" street, which gives access to the central
portion of the campus; and Palm, Olive, and Magnolia Avenues, which form
the edges of the campus. She noted other important elements were the
streams, pointing out Black Canyon Creek, which runs through Forest
Meadows, and what the EIR consultants have named Sisters Creek, which runs
through the central area. She reported they had looked at Sisters Creek as
a pedestrian spine, and at opening -up walkways and future buildings to
pedestrian circulation along that area.
Ms. Shreve explained the campus fell into three basic districts: 1) the first is
the Forest Meadows District, which now has an existing multi -use field,
tennis courts, gravel parking lot, and the amphitheater, which is known for
its performances. This area had a very wooded, natural character; 2) the
Academic Core, which is where the majority of the classroom space is
located; and 3) the Residential Area, where the Caleruega Dining Hall and
the residential halls are located. Ms. Shreve stated the Development Plan
tried to match the existing characteristics with the facility needs of the
College. They located the Recreation Center in Forest Meadows, adjacent to
existing sports fields. She pointed out the Recreation Center building
would help in giving identity to the College, noting that when driving up
Grand Avenue, it is easy to miss the College because there is no landmark
out on the street. Therefore, the Recreation Center was intended to serve
both the College's program needs, and also provide a physical landmark
along Grand Avenue. Ms. Shreve reported they kept traffic off of Grand
Avenue by putting the major parking facility in Forest Meadows, which will
help in keeping traffic off narrow residential streets, such as Magnolia,
Locust, and Palm.
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 4
Ms. Shreve reported they located the Chapel along Acacia Avenue, within the
Academic Core, as a symbolic structure on that major identity street. The
Science and Technology building has been located in the Academic Core,
within close proximity to other classrooms and the Library. The Residence
Hall has been located near Caleruega Hall and other dormitories, with
adjacent parking. In the last phase of the project, there would be an
intercollegiate soccer field, expansion of the amphitheater, and additional
parking in Forest Meadows. Ms. Shreve noted the Master Plan had been
submitted to the City as a comprehensive, phased Development Plan, and
referring to the Phasing Chart, she pointed out Phase I, which includes the
Recreation Center, the parking lot in Forest Meadows, and landscape and
parking upgrades in the Academic Core; Phase II, additional parking, the
Science and Technology Building, and the Chapel; Phase III, the Residence
Hall and its associated parking; and Phase IV, the Forest Meadows fields
and parking.
Ms. Shreve stated part of the application being presented at this time was the
Environmental and Design Review submittal for Phase I of the project.
Phase I of the project in Forest Meadows consisted of the Recreation
Center, a 29,000 square foot building, plus a 7,000 square foot area for an
outdoor pool. She noted the Recreation Center was sited behind an existing
screen of 80 to 100 foot eucalyptus trees, and provided a physical landmark
for the College along Grand Avenue. She pointed out it was located as far
away from the street as possible, while still observing the City's minimum
25 foot stream setback from Black Canyon Creek. Referring to the location
of the Grand Avenue parking lot, she reported this was a 215 car, fully
improved lot, which also served to provide a cap to the Native American
archeological resources, in accordance with the laws for preservation of
such resources. Ms. Shreve stated the building was tied into its
surroundings with an in -fill of landscape planting, shrubs, groundcover,
and trees, and the site was planned so the major entrance to the site
aligned with Acacia Avenue, cars are diverted into the lot, and access is
continued as a pedestrian spine to provide access to the entry plaza into
the Recreation Center, and other destinations in Forest Meadows. The
parking lot was screened from the street by a heavily landscaped 50 foot
setback from the curb. One of the issues in this area was a desire on the
part of the Design Review Board to add a berm to the landscaping, and that
was something that also became part of the project Conditions. She stated
the parking lot is also provided with signs and lighting, which is directed
inward toward the site, away from the surrounding neighborhood, also
pointing out an existing overflow lot, noting as part of the project, this
had been minimally improved with grading and gravel.
Highlighting the area across from Grand Avenue to the Academic Core, Ms. Shreve
reported the proposed improvements had been limited to the upgrade of an
existing parking lot, and landscape improvements. She pointed out the
simple entry design, which has been planned to provide pedestrian access,
and a bridge which has been proposed to replace a pedestrian bridge that
was washed out several years ago. Referring to Sisters Creek, she noted
part of the project includes an upgrade of the culvert, and a trash rack in
that location, noting these would be part of the Phase II improvements.
Moving across into what is called Meadowlands West, she pointed out an
existing parking lot that accommodates approximately 40 cars. Currently
access to that parking lot is from Acacia Avenue, across a bridge, and out
to Palm Avenue. She reported that as part of this project, the parking lot
would be upgraded to accommodate 49 spaces, it would be moved slightly away
from the creek to observe the 25 foot minimum, and the access road would be
limited to emergency vehicles
only, which would result in less traffic on that residential serving street.
Ms. Shreve noted landscape improvements were also proposed, as were new
walkways, in -fill planting to screen the new parking lot, new planting,
lighting, drainage, and paving. In addition, the rose arbors would be
maintained, with new paving underneath.
Referring to the final corner of the site, Ms. Shreve pointed out the future
site, in Phase II, of the Science and Technology Building, stating at this
point, the college has only studied the site conceptually, noting the
design and review would be part of the Phase II submittal. However, as
part of Phase I, the College proposes to install buffer planting and
grading in this location, so this area of landscape buffer will be fully
established once Phase II construction comes around. She stated the
grading here was very interesting, noting the elevation of the building,
based on existing grades, was approximately 90 feet, and Palm Avenue was at
95 feet, with the berm bringing it up a little more than that. Therefore,
the grade relationships, the setbacks, and the plantings were intended to
combine to screen that future building. In addition to the Science
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 5
Building, the College intended to landscape the entire edge of Palm Avenue,
in a manner consistent with the character it has now, to help define the
"green edge" as an edge to the campus.
Councilmember Cohen clarified that the drainage improvements on Olive Avenue
were to be part of Phase I, and Ms. Shreve stated that was correct.
Peter Wong, ED2 Architects, Executive Architects for the new Recreation Center,
stated his report would address three points: 1) the size of the Recreation
Center; 2) site context; and 3) the building's aesthetics, massing, and
material usage.
First, referring to the size and height of the Recreation Center, Mr. Wong
reported there were four elevations to this building, with the south
elevation, which faces the parking lot, and the east elevation, along Grand
Avenue, being the two main public faces of the building. The west
elevation faces Black Canyon Creek, and the north elevation faces directly
north, in alignment with Locust Avenue. Mr. Wong stated the Recreation
Center contained three main elements designed to address the Recreation
Program needs of the College. The first component is an efficient, multi-
purpose gymnasium, which will seat 1,285 people, and accommodate
competition and practice courts for basketball, volley ball, badminton,
aerobics, general physical education activities, and assembly functions.
The second component consists of non -court recreation support areas,
including student facilities, the Athletic Department, administrative
offices, public restrooms, weight and fitness areas, physical therapy,
sports equipment, furniture, and maintenance storage rooms. The third
component is the Aquatic Swim Center, an outdoor facility with seven lanes
and a deck, including pool equipment, office, storage, and vending areas.
Mr. Wong stated that to meet the specific programs for the Recreation
Center, the Center will be 29,357 gross square feet indoors, and 7,743
square feet outdoors, in terms of the pool and deck area. He reported the
gym must accommodate a 29 foot clear interior height, to accommodate inter-
collegiate competition volley ball, and this resulted in two heights for
the gymnasium building; at the eave area the building exterior is 35 feet
in height, and at the center of the building it is 38 feet.
Referring to the floor plan, Mr. Wong stated the gymnasium portion of the
Recreation Center accounts for approximately 45% of the total indoor area,
noting the gym area is 13,267 square feet. The non -court portion of the
Recreation Center is a one-story component, which wraps around the
gymnasium on all four sides, varying in size from 14 feet to 16 feet high,
and 18 feet in height at the lobby area. He stated this component was
slightly more than 50% of the indoor area. The outdoor pool and deck area
is located on the northwest corner of the Recreation Center site, adjacent
to Black Canyon Creek, in order to take advantage of the morning and
afternoon sun, and minimize shadows from the building and the existing
trees.
Addressing his second point, Mr. Wong stated the site influenced the building
placement and the relationship of the surrounding context. He noted the
site was triangular in shape, and the Recreation Center was positioned
between the existing 100 foot eucalyptus trees along Grand Avenue on the
east side of the site, Black Canyon Creek on the west and northwest, and
the Phase I parking lot and entry plaza to the south. He stated the
building's south entrance arcade and lobby facade were sited parallel to
Acacia Avenue, forming a strong visual pedestrian and vehicular connection
from Forest Meadows through the Academic Core of the campus, and he pointed
out that most of the front doors of the Academic Core buildings were
organized along Acacia Avenue. Mr. Wong noted the corner of the Recreation
Center building closest to the street was the one furthest north on Grand
Avenue, across from the most northerly driveway of the Convent, and that
was the closest setback, at 70 feet. He stated this was a one-story
storage element of the Recreation Center, and noted an additional 15 foot
setback, totalling 85 feet, would reach the corner of the Recreation Center
at the gymnasium. As a frame of reference for comparison, Mr. Wong noted
the Council Chambers, from the front of the dais to the back of the room,
was approximately 45 feet, so the 85 foot distance of the setback would be
approximately twice that length. He stated the corner of the building most
students and other people would see was at the Recreation Center's
entrance, located along the drive that is the extension of Acacia Avenue,
noting at this point the building facade is setback 99 feet from the Grand
Avenue curb. On the north and northwest sides, the building is staggered
and stepped back from the top of the creek bank by a buffer, which
incorporates pedestrian, vehicular, and emergency services, and this varies
from 25 feet to 100 feet.
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 5
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 6
Referring to the aesthetics of the building's massing and building materials,
Mr. Wong reported that from the outset, the Recreation Center was intended
to be contextual, and designed to integrate with the College campus and the
neighborhood, as a whole. He stated the Recreation Center was designed to
respect and blend with the surroundings, especially the contemporary rustic
vernacular style, and scale of the surrounding Convent and College
buildings. The 15 foot wide structural module, and the human scale
pedestrian arcade, were the two public faces of the building, and the
trellises, the rough sawed wood trim wall siding, and the double -textured
warm earth tone concrete masonry units, with small window panes and
storefronts, were all referential design motifs, which recalled the design
quality of durable, timeless, non -institutional architecture, which
emphasizes the composition of simplicity and rectangularity, and is similar
and compatible to the proportion, color and texture used in the most
recently constructed buildings of the Convent across from Grand Avenue.
Mr. Wong stated the massing and organization of the spaces presented this
facility as a smaller building. He noted as shown in the elevations and
the perspective, the building is a low profile structure, shaped as a
series of layered volumes, which step back with subtle horizontal
regulating lines, created by both smooth and rusticated concrete block
bands, linking together all the step forms. By locating the larger mass of
the gymnasium back from the building entry to the northeast corner of the
site, toward the backdrop of the 100 foot eucalyptus trees, the building
appeared smaller in scale, when viewed from the public edges along Grand
Avenue. He stated the rhythm and hierarchy of the roof lines really
expressed the different parts of the building, and its underlying
structure, and brought natural lighting into the interior. Mr. Wong noted
the painted and stained wooden facies and soffits, and a flat roof at the
gymnasium and many of the lower elements, really were undisguised uses of
modern, natural, and sustainable materials, and renewable resources, which
included non-toxic, biodegradable, and environmentally appropriate building
materials.
In conclusion, Mr. Wong stated it was Dominican College's intent to build a
safe, secure, efficient, and attractive Recreation Center, and to serve the
needs of the students and the surrounding community, noting the Recreation
Center would be fully accessible to the physically challenged.
Jeff Bialik noted Bill Dietrich, representing DKS, was also in attendance, and
apologized for having failed to introduce him earlier.
Mr. Bialik outlined the Events Management Program, noting the latest version of
the EMP was dated July 14, 1998, and stating the idea of developing an
Events Management Plan was first suggested by the college during
discussions held last year with the Dominican Neighborhood Committee. He
explained that by developing an Events Management Plan, they broke new
ground for "Town/Gown" relations, noting that based on their research, no
other College or University in the Bay Area had implemented anything close
to this document. There were four primary objectives to having an Events
Management Plan: 1) to establish policies and procedures internal to the
College, relating to how they manage the neighborhood impacts of their
events and activities; 2) to provide a tangible demonstration to their
neighbors of their commitment that they are serious about managing the
impacts of events and activities; 3) to provide an ongoing monitoring and
feedback role to their neighbors, to ensure they continue the dialogue, and
foster improved communication; and 4) to provide the teeth, through the Use
Permit process, for the neighborhood to enforce the provisions of the plan,
if the results are not satisfactory. Mr. Bialik stated the Events
Management Document places, in one document, an accumulation of policies
and procedures necessary to properly manage the use of College facilities
for events and College activities, in a way which ensures that parking,
traffic, and noise impacts at these events and activities do not exceed
reasonable levels. He noted that implementing the Events Management Plan
would result in some restrictions, but only in ways that relate to the
impacts of parking, traffic, and noise.
Mr. Bialik reported Page 2 of the Table of Contents of this document gave a good
overview as to the types of things that are incorporated in the EMP. He
noted they have defined exactly what the terms are; they have established a
central campus Events Management Office, to facilitate the central booking
of all activities; established hours of operation, both for indoor and
outdoor venues, College activities, and non -College events; established
attendance limits, based upon the accessibility of parking and traffic;
established and set the maximum annual number of events at 475, with
specific guidelines for how they will manage event traffic and parking, as
well as sound, noise, music, and lighting; established a role for ongoing
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 7
monitoring, which includes an Advisory Committee, as well as periodic
reviews by the City; and established a schedule of implementation, so they
can state very clearly, in writing, the steps that will be taken, and a
timeline for implementing those steps.
Mr. Bialik reported that in response to comments received during the Draft
Environmental Impact Report hearing, the EMP was revised, to ensure that
events such as Marin Shakespeare and Winifred Baker Chorale could continue
to rehearse and perform at the College, as they have for many years,
provided they meet the reasonable standards for parking, traffic, and
noise. In addition, the College has agreed to ensure that a live person
will be available whenever events of a certain size are taking place on
campus, to allow a neighbor with a concern or complaint to have his or her
problem resolved immediately, if at all possible, simply by making a phone
call. Mr. Bialik noted they had also heard from many neighbors that the
number of non -College events was currently too great, and they feared an
increase as the new facilities were built. In response, the College has
agreed to reduce the number of non -College events allowed, from 650 a year
ago, to 475 per year, beginning with the fiscal year that began on July 1st
of this year.
Mr. Bialik reported another critically important component of the Events
Management Plan was the establishment of a neighborhood -based Advisory
Committee, to assist the College in implementing and monitoring the plan.
He stated this was a very important aspect of the Plan, noting the
Committee will have neighborhood and College representatives, who will work
to monitor the College's compliance with the EMP, to informally resolve
issues, and provide input to the City as part of the periodic review
process. Mr. Bialik reported the first such review would be after six
months, and annually thereafter, for at least the first five years. He
stated the College believed the Events Management Plan, if given an
opportunity to be implemented as it has been revised and presented, would
go a long way in specifically mitigating the impacts of parking, traffic,
and noise associated with these activities and events.
Mayor Boro noted Council had only just received the final revision of the EMP,
and asked if there were any significant changes from what they had received
earlier? Mr. Bialik stated the fundamental issues were there, noting the
area most significantly changed was in the area of ongoing monitoring,
which has now been more clearly defined as to the role of the Advisory
Committee, specific steps in the City review process, and areas for the
Council and Planning Commission to consider as part of that review process.
He noted those areas were defined on Page 8, Section 10, "Ongoing
Monitoring", pointing out that area had been significantly revised in the
latest document, while the rest of it was mostly the same as it was in the
earlier document.
Councilmember Phillips asked for the number of events the College anticipated
under this Plan? Mr. Bialik stated the maximum annual number of non -
College events would be 475. Mr. Phillips noted that in looking at the
table on Appendix D, it showed 376. Mr. Bialik explained this table had
been prepared some time ago at the request of the Planning Commission, to
differentiate between two different classifications of non -College events.
He acknowledged it was confusing, noting Page 58 showed 274 events, and
Page 61 showed 376, totalling 650 events held last year. He stated that
number was being reduced to 475. Mr. Phillips asked if it was significant
for Council to know whether the events were College sponsored or non -
College rentals? Mr. Bialik did not believe it was significant, although
it had been significant to the Planning Commission during the review
process, as there had been some interest in being able to differentiate
between the two, because the College sponsored events were activities
which, in many cases, the College was subsidizing without charging for the
use of the facility, whereas in the non -College rental, all of those were
paying some rental fee. Referring to the total number of 475 events, which
would be allowed this year, Mr. Phillips asked if it was significant, in
terms of traffic impacts, as to which of the events that took place last
year were being eliminated or scaled back? Mr. Bialik stated they had not
specifically targeted any groups to be eliminated from the list, explaining
that as groups call to renew, or come back and use the facility, the
College will have to ration those uses, so in effect, it will be on a first
come, first served basis. Mr. Phillips asked if he could assume that the
Dominican Neighborhood Committee, which the College has worked with so
closely, was in concurrence with the process of reducing the number of
events from 650 to 475, and agreed to live with the traffic associated with
the 475 events that would be allowed? Mr. Bialik reported the DNC, as a
group, and the neighbors, as individuals, had agreed and approved of the
language in the revised Events Management Plan.
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 8
Scott McPhearson, Nichols•Berman, reported he and his team had prepared the
Environmental Impact Report for this project, and introduced consultants
Daylene Whitlock, Whitlock and Weinberg Transportation; Rich Ellingworth,
Ellingworth and Rodkin, Noise Consultants; Bill Vander Vere, Clearwater
Hydrology; David Chavez, EIR Archeologist. Mr. McPhearson stated the
general areas of impact in the EIR were geologic, such as creek bank
instability; hydrology and drainage, such as storm water runoff and
erosion; biological impacts, such as tree removal and disruption of
wildlife habitat; visual impacts, such as light and glare, and intrusion
into open space; land use impacts, which primarily concern consistency with
the General Plan; traffic, such as parking, street width issues; noise and
air, such as dust from construction; and public service impacts, including
water pressure issues for fire flows. Mr. McPhearson stated the EIR
recommended mitigation for these impacts, which were designed to reduce
them to Less Than Significant levels; however, a few of the impacts could
not be reduced to Less Than Significant levels. He reported these
Significant Impacts included construction noise, which he acknowledged
would be elevated outside existing homes during the grading, or the
installation of new water and sewer lines. He noted that while they did
recommend mitigations to reduce these impacts, they would remain
Significant until construction was completed. He stated short term visual
impacts would remain Significant until the landscaping matured, which would
be approximately five years, and there were also Significant visual impacts
regarding the proposed location of the Science and Technology building,
along Palm Avenue. He reported that while these impacts could also be
reduced, they could not be totally eliminated.
Mr
McPhearson stated the EIR had also described seven alternatives to the
project, as required under CEQA, including the mandatory alternative of no
development, and six different on-site development designs. The alternate
site designs included a current zoning alternative, which would allow
residential development in Forest Meadows and some of the other areas, and
a number of other alternatives which were, basically, variations on a
theme, such as moving the Recreation Center, Science and Technology
building, the Chapel, and the soccer field to various locations. He noted
the site plans for these different alternatives were contained in the EIR.
Mr. McPhearson stated the final alternative analyzed the previous site
plan, which was proposed and evaluated in the March, 1997 EIR. Based on
the EIR's analysis, the environmentally superior alternative turned out to
be the "No Development" alternative. CEQA stated that if the No
Development alternative was superior, the EIR also had to identify a
superior alternative from among the development alternatives. He stated
the EIR found that two development alternatives were fairly equal, and both
were considered to be environmentally superior "build alternatives". These
were alternative #3, which would place the Science and Technology building
at the current Chapel location, and place a new Chapel near the corner of
Palm and Olive Avenues; and alternative #7, which was the previous site
plan from 1997. Mr. McPhearson reported the proposed project would be
worse than these alternatives, in that it would create one Significant,
unavoidable visual impact in locating the Science and Technology building
along Palm Avenue; however, he noted it also needed to be pointed out that
the proposed project was actually better, environmentally, over
alternatives #3 and #7, in that impacts associated with daily parking would
be Less Than Significant, and in both of the two environmentally superior
alternatives the parking would be more of a problem.
Mr. McPhearson referred to the Draft EIR of December, 1997 and the Response to
Comments on the Draft EIR of last June, pointing out both of these
compromise the Final EIR. Regarding some of the major comments received to
the Draft EIR, he noted that while many of them were minor, there were
three "clusters" of comments. One group of comments addressed the proposed
driveway for the 90 vehicle parking lot planned at the corner of Grand and
Belle Avenues, which was a later phase element of the project; there were a
number of comments regarding the Events Management Plan; and there were
questions regarding hydrology issues, such as flooding along Sisters Creek.
Regarding the 90 vehicle parking lot, Mr. McPhearson stated the Campus
Developmental Plan had proposed the driveway on Grand Avenue, while the
Draft EIR recommended the driveway be placed on Belle Avenue, to avoid
headlights shining into the homes along Grand Avenue. However, because of
the comments this might create regarding traffic issues, the Final EIR
included an alternative plan to have an entrance on Grand Avenue, and an
exit on Belle Avenue, which would be a right -turn only.
Regarding the Events Management Plan, Mr. McPhearson reported there were a
number of issues. The maximum allowed attendance indicated in the Events
Management Plan was essentially correct; however, maximum attendance during
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 9
Phase III, Phase IV, and on weekends, when classes are not in session,
needed to be slightly modified. He also stated the Campus Parking Supply,
as indicated in Exhibit 1 of the Events Management Plan, was a little off,
noting the Final EIR included a table which shows the correct number of
spaces available. He pointed out the Final EIR was also revised to include
a mitigation to note that care must be taken when scheduling consecutive
events, specifying all attendees from the first event would have to be gone
and have left the campus prior to attendees arriving for the later event.
Mr. McPhearson noted the issue of flooding along Sisters Creek was also
addressed, explaining that flooding, as an existing condition, was not
considered Significant in the Final EIR; however, the additional level of
water, which would be approximately 1 inch, was considered Significant in
the EIR, and they included an added mitigation, Mitigation Measure 4.2-2,
to replace the existing 12 inch storm drains at 37 Palm Avenue.
Mayor Boro invited public comment.
Ray Taylor, 126 Palm Avenue, stated he was pleased, as a member of the Dominican
Neighborhood Committee, to announce their support of the Final
Environmental Impact Report, and he urged Council to certify it, reporting
the concerns they worked on with the College during the past two and a half
years had been largely resolved by the terms contained in the Memorandum of
Understanding, and the Events Management Plan. He noted both documents had
been signed by representatives of the College and the DNC, and relevant
portions were used as mitigation measures in the FEIR. He stated that so
long as the provisions in these documents remained intact, so did the DNC's
support of certification of the FEIR, and of the project itself.
Councilmember Cohen asked if the DNC agreed that the Events Management Plan with
which they were currently in agreement was the one dated July 14, 1998?
Mr. Taylor stated that was correct.
Gary Ragghianti, 110 Palm Avenue, expressed support for the Resolution now
before the Council, and urged them to certify the Final Environmental
Impact Report. He also expressed appreciation for the patience and hard
work of the College representatives, as well as those members of the DNC
who were in attendance, acknowledging Shirley Sanderson and Jim Huckins, in
addition to Mr. Taylor. Mr. Ragghianti stated he believed the resolution
of the neighborhood/project applicant dispute in a project of this
magnitude was an extraordinary event, and was an example of intelligent and
resolute analysis, discussion, and constant patient compromise. He thanked
Mr. Bialik, staff, President Fink, and all those who, through the many
months that turned into years, allowed them to come to an agreement, not
only with respect to the Merits of the project, but also with regard to the
Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Ragghianti urged Council to adopt the
Resolution, and echoing what Mr. Bialik had stated, asked Council not to
change anything, noting too much time had gone into attempting to resolve
the disputes that existed.
There being no further public discussion, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Mayor Boro noted there had been no questions raised by members of the audience
to be brought back to the Council; therefore, he asked for questions and
comments from the members of the Council.
Councilmember Miller stated he was impressed with the City of San Rafael,
because the Events Management Program evolved from a deep community
process, and spoke of what the City was all about. He noted San Rafael was
about all the citizens getting together, working together to build a
compassionate community that provides for the future, and he stated that
certainly the neighbors and the College did this. Mr. Miller stated, as
Mr. Bialik had pointed out, this was a first, and really weds "town" and
"gown", and he did not believe this could be found anywhere else in the
Country. Mr. Miller noted that working together on the EIR, and coming
together to a full solution, was remarkable.
Councilmember Cohen agreed there had been legitimate interests on both sides of
what had been the dispute, noting the community at large had a stake in
those points of view. He stated he appreciated all the hard work everyone
went through to resolve this in a way that the College feels comfortable
going forward with this project, and will continue to grow and prosper, and
be a valued member of this community. At the same time, he appreciated the
neighbors' determination in preserving the quality of life in San Rafael,
which makes it such a wonderful community, and makes us all want to stay
here, do business here, and raise our families here. Mr. Cohen thanked
everyone, noting it had been very clear to him, coming into the meeting
tonight, that a lot of other people had done the "heavy lifting", and that
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 9
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 10
this would not be a long, dragged out hearing for the Council. He stated
he was satisfied the Councilmembers had enough information to make a
judgment on the Merits of the plan, noting that was what the EIR was
supposed to do for them.
Councilmember Heller concurred with Councilmembers Miller and Cohen, stating she
was very pleased this was not going to be a contentious hearing, noting
there was one issue she would like the College to look at as they go
forward, and that was with regard to the parking facilities. She noted
that in order to protect the neighbors from the lights, and the cars coming
and going, the parking lot was fairly well bermed-up and enclosed, and
although she was certain Campus Security would be aware of that, she
believed this could be a problem at night. She noted there would be women
and older people coming and going at night, and asked that Campus Security
really look at this parking lot, because it is separated from the rest of
the Campus, suggesting perhaps they might even consider security cameras.
Councilmember Phillips stated he agreed with the comments and observations of
his fellow Councilmembers.
Mayor Boro noted that when this process began a couple of years ago, he had an
initial meeting with Dr. Fink, Mr. Bialik, and members of the College Board
of Trustees, and also a meeting with members of the DNC, after which he
suggested both parties begin talking with each other. Mayor Boro
congratulated the College and the neighbors for their cooperation and hard
work, and especially for sticking with the process. He acknowledged it had
not been easy, but believed the community understood the importance of the
College, not only to the neighborhood in which all of them live, but also
the importance of the College to the County of Marin. At the same time, he
also believed the College recognized the importance of its neighbors, and
why it was important to work with them. Mayor Boro felt that through the
work of many people, they had crafted something that would meet all the
needs of the College and the community.
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the
Resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report.
RESOLUTION NO. 10294 - RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING
THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DOMINICAN COLLEGE
CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:None
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 PM.
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, CITY CLERK
APPROVED THIS DAY OF ,
1998
VICE -MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Special) 8/10/98 Page 10