Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1993-01-04SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page I IN CONFERENCE ROOM 201 OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 1993, AT 7:00 PM CLOSED SESSION 1. DISCUSSION OF LITIGATION AND LABOR NEGOTIATIONS - File 1.4.1.a No litigation was discussed. No. 93-1(a) - #7 No reportable action was taken. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 1993, AT 8:00 PM Regular Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor San Rafael City Council Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember Joan Thayer, Councilmember Absent: Michael A. Shippey, Councilmember Others Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to approve the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM 2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of December 7, 1992 (CC) 3. Report on Bid Opening and Authorization to Purchase Two Five -Passenger Mini -Vans From Joe Sio Chevrolet for Police Department (Gen.Svcs.) - File 4-2-268 x 9-3-30 4. Resolution Authorizing Execution of Agreement by the City Manager for Special Services Between City of San Rafael and the Law Firm of Liebert, Cassidy and Frierson (Pers) - File 4-3-214 5. Resolution Authorizing San Rafael Library to Submit a Joint Application With the Marin County Library for a Federal Title VI Grant to Support Library Literacy Services (Lib) - File 4-13-86 x 1 RECOMMENDED ACTION Approved as submitted. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 8807 - AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO FIVE -PASSENGER MINI -VANS FROM JOE SIO CHEVROLET (lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $29,946.62) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 8808 - AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BY THE CITY MANAGER FOR SPECIAL SERVICES BETWEEN CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AND THE LAW FIRM OF LIEBERT, CASSIDY AND FRIERSON TO PROVIDE SUPERVISORY TRAINING AND OTHER SPECIAL SERVICES TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL (for a fee of $1,925) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 8809 - AUTHORIZING THE SAN RAFAEL PUBLIC LIBRARY TO SUBMIT A JOINT APPLICATION WITH THE 9- 9-3-61 x 202 MARIN COUNTY FREE LIBRARY FOR A U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION LIBRARY SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION ACT (TITLE VI) GRANT FOR AN "ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE" COMPONENT SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page FOR THE EXISTING LIBRARY LITERACY PROGRAM SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 3 6. Resolution of Appreciation for Ruth Blanco, for State Mediation Services (CM) - File 102 x 9-3-11 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 8810 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO RUTH BLANCO FOR HER SERVICE TO THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AS A MEDIATOR WITH THE CALIFORNIA STATE MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Shippey 7.PUBLIC HEARING ON ADOPTION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SECTION 14.17.030 (EMERGENCY SHELTERS) OF CHAPTER 14 (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (Pl) - File 10-3 x 10-1 x 9-3-17 Planning Director Pendoley explained this item was last before the Council in December, 1992, at which time they referred it back to the Planning Commission with a request for their opinion as to whether references to standards for emergency housing shelters should be deleted from the new Zoning Ordinance. He stated the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered the staff recommendation that the reference to those standards should be deleted, as well as the standards themselves which were adopted by resolution. He stated this was back to the Council tonight to delete all references to standards for emergency shelters and to rescind the resolution. Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened and as there was no one from the public who wished to speak, then closed the public hearing. The title of the Ordinance was read: a."AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL DELETING SECTION 14.17.030 (EMERGENCY SHELTERS FOR THE HOMELESS) OF CHAPTER 14 (THE ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE" Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only and pass Charter Ordinance No. 1641 to print by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Shippey Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to adopt the Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 8739. b. RESOLUTION NO. 8811 - RECOMMENDING RESCINDING COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 8739 ADOPTING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS FOR THE HOMELESS AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Shippey 8.PUBLIC HEARING - TO CONSIDER A THIRD AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN TISHMAN SPEYER MEDIQ MARIN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE §65868 AND PARTIAL TERMINATION AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO LONGER ENCOMPASSES LOT 5A, THE SITE WHERE SKILLED NURSING FACILITY IS NOW BEING CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF SMITH RANCH HOMES DEVELOPMENT (CA) - File 5-1-290 x 9-3-16 Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened. City Attorney Gary Ragghianti stated Planning Director Pendoley had requested that he present the staff report to the Council. City Attorney Ragghianti referred to the staff report dated December 7, 1992, stating the second paragraph on the first page contained the reasons for the requests by Tishman Speyer. He noted the Third Amendment to the Development Agreement was presented as a result of the completed construction by Tishman Speyer of the 80 -bed skilled nursing facility located on Lot 5A and the fact that no further executory obligations of Tishman Speyer exist with respect to said Lot 5A. He explained that the effect of the granting of the Developer's request will be to amend the Development Agreement between Tishman Speyer SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 3 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 4 and the City to delete from the Development Agreement reference to Lot 5A and this request was being made for the reasons expressed in several written pieces of SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 4 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page k, correspondence sent to the Mayor and City Council, and has been subject of explanations made to the Mayor and other Councilmembers who have had the opportunity to visit the skilled nursing facility and meet with the representatives of the Developer. City Attorney Ragghianti went on to state his understanding from conversations with the Developer was that the principal reason the Developer seeks this amendment is so that they may transfer the skilled nursing facility to a qualified operator. He noted he was given to understand Tishman Speyer, regulated by the Department of Real Estate, is not be able to operate the facility at all. City Attorney Ragghianti stated that if there were questions from the Council he would be happy to answer them, but there were two items before the Council. One is an Ordinance authorizing the third amendment to the Smith Ranch Hills Agreement and then an actual third amendment which has been revised to insert the correct date of January 4th, both of which have been given to the City Council. Mayor Boro responded they received Exhibits A and B. City Attorney responded affirmatively that these were the attachments he was talking about. Councilmember Thayer noted she understood from a letter attached to the report there is no representation being made to the purchasers at the Smith Ranch development that skilled nursing care will be part and parcel of the agreement. City Attorney Ragghianti responded affirmatively, and stated he understood that the operators, Tishman Speyer, are precluded by law from making any such representation to a purchaser. Mrs. Thayer stated her concern that when the buyers purchase their homes it is with the expectation that the price they are paying covers any health care. City Attorney Ragghianti responded this was also a concern of Councilmember Breiner and stated he did not think this was accurate. He stated he believed the prospective purchasers when they are looking at the property, are advised about the insurance as a component of what is available there, but he did not think they were able to advise any prospective purchaser about the Skilled Nursing Facility or represent in any way that it is a part of the amenities available until after a purchase has been concluded. Councilmember Breiner stated on Page 2, with reference to the letter dated December 28, 1992, addressed to City Attorney Gary Ragghianti from Greene, Radovsky, Maloney & Share, Attorneys, there was an inconsistency at the bottom of the page from what the Council was originally told that there would be a covenant that enabled residents at Smith Ranch Homes to have the first available bed at the skilled nursing facility. She quoted from this, ". . it requires for thirty (30) years any entity which operates the Skilled Nursing Facility must admit Smith Ranch Homes residents on a first come, first served basis.", noting this is not the first available bed and not a priority admission. Mrs. Breiner stated that this makes the covenant worthless according to that. City Attorney Ragghianti referred this to the representative of the operator of the Skilled Nursing Facility. Mayor Boro asked a representative of the Developer to answer the questions from Mrs. Thayer, first regarding notification to the current residents and what has been done about this by the Developer, and then about notification to those people when they first bought their units and how long this has been going on. Graham Maloney, Attorney with Tishman Speyer, the developer of Smith Ranch Homes development, responded to Mrs. Breiner's question, stating that at the time the first units were sold the developer represented that a medical insurance plan was available and made no representations at all as to the availability of any facilities. He stated the Department of Real Estate precluded the Developer from making any representation of facilities because the Developer was not licensed as a health care provider, so any references to providing health care were ones that the Developer was specifically precluded from making and they never made any such representations. Mr. Maloney stated the health care insurance (the group plan) that the Developer obtained for the project permitted the residents to apply the insurance from that for home health care, for on-site mini -care, and for off-site care at any location of choice of the residents. He stated they intended not to restrict Smith Ranch residents to any particular plan or facility, but to provide insurance which would let them have their choice. He explained that the Developer did, at the same time, have the right from the Development Agreement to build the Skilled Nursing Facility on Lot 5A which is now being completed. He stated that before they sold the first unit, the Developer recorded a covenant running with Lot 5A, which is actually not on-site (maybe one mile away) and is not referenced in the package; and, in fact, the Developer is precluded from advising the homeowners that the covenant they created exists. He stated the Developer created this covenant which states that as long as a facility on that site is operated as a Skilled Nursing Facility, that a Smith Ranch Homes resident has a right for 30 years on a first come first served basis, depending SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page on any available beds, which was recorded before the first unit was sold, but the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page m SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 7 Developer has been precluded from disclosing that this exists by the Department of Health Services. Councilmember Thayer asked Mr. Maloney what would happen if a potential purchaser made inquiry in advance prior to purchasing as to this covenant, did the Developer have a duty to disclaim? Mr. Maloney responded negatively and stated they instruct their sellers to state the Skilled Nursing Facility is not part of the package or being offered by the public report, which is the exclusive listing of the benefits provided by the Developer. Mrs. Thayer asked, in other words, no representation was made to a potential homeowner that three levels of care will be available to them? Mr. Maloney responded absolutely not and stated it has never been represented to potential buyers and the Developer has no intention of doing this. He stated the insurance program is layered to provide insurance for those levels, but the provision of the care for which the insurance pertains is not something the Developer has promised to do. Mayor Boro stated his understanding was that at the time units are purchased, the Developer has given the buyers some type of notification, possibly written, that has these disclaimers within it. Mr. Maloney responded in order to sell subdivided units in California of more than 4 units, (there are 226 units) there must be a public report issued by the Department of Real Estate. He stated the description of the project and the disclaimers of what you can put in that report are regulated by the State Department of Real Estate and negotiated by them and in the first draft distributed to the Department of Real Estate, they stated the Developer should disclose that the Developer has developed this covenant because it is a benefit of the project, which they did, but before this ever became public the Department of Health Services stated they could not do this because some buyers might get the impression that the Developer is providing health care. He stated the two departments, Health Services Department and Department of Real Estate, decided that this disclaimer should be silent so it was deleted from the public report. Councilmember Breiner mentioned, with regard to the enclosed Declaration of Restrictions, the phrase on Page 2, Paragraph B, "The partnership desires to provide the availability, accessibility, continuity and timeliness of those services by providing residents with a first come, first served next available bed priority admission right in a skilled nursing facility and in an assisted living facility located near the project", and noted that the record should show what the Developers consider this to be and how it would be explained to potential buyers. Mr. Maloney responded this was drafted before the units were built and the covenant applies to the land; therefore, any operator of that Skilled Nursing Facility, if there is a bed available, has to make a bed available to a Smith Ranch Homes resident first who asked for it, as opposed to any member of the public. Mrs. Breiner asked City Attorney Ragghianti's opinion on this issue to see if this safeguards what the Council is looking for officially, and she wanted to make sure the priority rights of the Smith Ranch residents would also apply to the assisted living beds within the Skilled Nursing Facility. Mr. Maloney responded that the first come, first served basis applied to both assisted living and full-time care beds. He stated the intention was to have 50 beds of skilled nursing and 30 beds of assisted living; however, this could change to 60 beds of skilled nursing and 20 beds of assisted living and the Developer also built in the flexibility to attempt to make this economically viable for the operator to use an Assisted Living Facility bed for a Skilled Nursing Facility purpose if there was a demand for it. He noted the covenant runs with respect to the entire facility and does not say that there is a priority for the Skilled Nursing Facility, but not for the Assisted Living Facility; it is a priority for the entire facility. He stated the covenant was recorded before the first sale of Smith Ranch Homes and it runs with the land and the homeowners' association has a title insurance policy that assures them that they have that right. Mayor Boro asked if the Assisted Living could be within the resident's existing unit at Smith Ranch, which would come about by an insurance policy. Mr. Maloney responded this was a difficult problem, because the Skilled Nursing Facility is one that is licensed in which the law states they have to have eight qualifications to become licensed. He stated that an Assisted Living Facility has a number of types of intermediate care. He stated the Developer was concerned that in ten years this might not be suitable for the market and for this community, etc., so they had a concept of a flexible intermediate care facility that is less than the care given in a Skilled Nursing Facility, which depends on the amount of care an individual needs. He noted that home care is apparently where this market is going in that a person prefers to stay in their home as long as they can without going to another facility. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page Rl He noted they saw the Assisted Living Facility and home care as flexible concepts SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 0 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page A that they hope are adaptable to the circumstances and needs of the community as time passes. Councilmember Cohen observed that this agreement runs for approximately 30 years and then apparently ends. He stated his concern that the explanation of what constitutes a priority right is fairly clear, but it is not clear in the documentation provided to the Council for this meeting. He noted that in reading the document, that the Smith Ranch Homes residents on a first come, first served basis is not clear to him, even though in a later letter it states that they will be admitted on a priority basis. He noted that if there is a covenant that was recorded and the Council could be comfortable about that, he did not think it would be necessary to continue this further than it has already been. He did state that for the record he was comfortable with this and his biggest concern was that what was in writing did not specify all these concerns. Mr. Maloney explained that before the Department of Health Services stated the Developer could not disclose this to potential buyers, they had to submit the Covenant to the Department of Real Estate and after they read the Covenant, passed on its adequacy and wrote the Disclosure for how it should go into the report before the whole thing was taken out at the Department of Health Services, so the Covenant is not a surprise to potential buyers. He stated there is a regulatory background to this, even though no one knows this unless they were involved in the early politics of the project. City Attorney Ragghianti stated he had seen the Covenant and that it will be provided to the Council before it comes back to them for the second reading of the Ordinance. He noted that in his legal opinion the Covenant does guarantee to residents of the Smith Ranch Retirement Community, on a priority basis, admission to the Skilled Nursing Facility when beds are available, ahead of other members of the public. Mayor Boro closed the Public Hearing. Councilmember Breiner stated, for the record, since she was the only Councilmember on the Council when this process started many years ago, that the Council was approving in a very long, drawn out process something that was envisioned to be providing much more of a spectrum of care at the Smith Ranch Hills Development, in that there was a clear linkage between the different levels of care, even though there were many questions regarding how the Skilled Nursing Facility was likely to work out in conjunction with people moving into the units and not needing this care for some time. She noted she was disappointed that this is not going to be operated the way the Council envisioned at first and, had the Council known then that this would be the result, that property would have stayed a housing opportunity site. Instead, she stated, it is essentially being considered luxury senior condominiums with the connection being somewhat tenuous now. She stated, in terms of marketing, it is very unfortunate for the developers that they cannot make a clear linkage because there is a real marketing issue and the desire for the senior citizens moving into this complex to know that the next step is readily available and having the assisted living, at least 10 beds was a big plus, but from her own experience with a seriously ill elderly person the linkage is very important to improve the public perception of the linkage there would help market the units, which she thought was very important at this time. She noted she understood that the Council did not have much choice in this matter, but wanted to have the record state that she was disappointed in this. She then read some excerpts from the Minutes of July 6, 1987, where the change was made so that this particular Lot 5A was being subdivided, and in those Minutes Mayor Mulryan at that time stated, ". . . This is to be done for legal reasons regarding the transfer of ownership and questioned whether the technical review indicates there is no substantive change to the project". She stated the reply from the Planning Director was that, ". . None of the items are being changed. The only application pending is the Design Review application having to do with design of the building and site design changes which are not covered in the Development Agreement". With this in mind, she noted she was surprised at the way this project has turned out and expressed a desire to be more careful in the future with regard to issues like this one. Mayor Boro stated this project went through a long process and through a number of City Councils and Planning Commissions, and he noted from the Minutes of 1984 where the original proponent, Dr. Henry Grauz, mentioned that in addition to the 400 unit retirement community, he stated, ". . would be providing maintenance and other services would include a health care facility and a nursing care facility. The health care facility would contain the cost of health care and allow people to be taken care of in their homes; the nursing care facility would provide for those SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 9 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 10 persons who are unable to live in their homes, but would care for them in the community so that spouses would be able to visit daily". Mayor Boro noted there was a perception of a different type of facility when this was first envisioned versus what eventually evolved. He noted to the staff that he thought it was important as these projects evolve and change, that they keep going back and testing whatever prior Council agreed to, to make sure it was the same, unlike what happened with this project. The title of the Ordinance was read: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AUTHORIZING THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE SMITH RANCH HILLS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT" (to delete Lot 5A) Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only, and pass Charter Ordinance No. 1642 to print by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Shippey 9.ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES (MELLO-ROOS) DISTRICT CFD 1992-1, LOCH LOMOND #10: (PW) - File 6-50 x 5-1-297 x 9-3-40 a. APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE TO ACT FOR PROPERTY IN RESPECT OF MAILED -BALLOT, LANDOWNER ELECTION - To be filed. b. WAIVER AND CONSENT SHORTENING TIME PERIODS AND WAIVING VARIOUS REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDUCTING MAILED -BALLOT ELECTION - To be filed. C. CERTIFICATE OF ENGINEER - To be filed. d. CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK RE: WAIVER AND CONSENT - To be filed. e. RESOLUTION OF FORMATION OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND TO LEVY A SPECIAL TAX f. RESOLUTION CALLING SPECIAL MAILED -BALLOT ELECTION g. CONDUCT ELECTION h. CITY CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION RESULTS - To be filed. i. RESOLUTION DECLARING ELECTION RESULTS Item was continued to meeting of February 1, 1993, per staff recommendation. 10.CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN COMPENSATION FOR CITY COUNCIL (CC) - File 7-3-2 x 9-1 Mayor Boro summarized the staff report from City Clerk Leoncini which stated that, by law, each year this issue may come before the City Council for their consideration. He stated last year the City Council agreed to decline an increase and he strongly recommended that they do the same this year, due to the financial situation of the City and the continuing labor negotiations. After discussion, the City Council declined to consider any increase in compensation at this time. ll.CITY COUNCIL REPORT: a. UPDATE ON THE DAY LABOR CENTER - File 231 x 9-2-43 x 218 x 9-3-11 (VERBAL) With regard to the site for this center, Mayor Boro reported that the City has been working with the Golden Gate Bridge District in an attempt to secure a portion of the Park and Ride Lot for the Day Labor Center site; however, the Federal Government has turned that request down. He noted that in working with City staff on this, he has found it was not prudent to appeal this at this time, because it would delay the process further. Mayor Boro stated there were other sites the City had considered prior to the Golden Gate Bridge site, which will be looked at for possible location of the Day Labor Center. He noted they attempted to locate sites that the City basically owned and controlled as the best alternative and there are two sites: 1) a vacant parcel of land at the end of Andersen Drive next to the PG&E site, approximately 10,000 square feet; however the work needed to get this lot in shape would be quite expensive and the difference from where the day laborers are currently located is approximately 1 mile away; also the access is not very safe because it is on the turn where drivers pick up speed to get on the freeway; and, 2) the intersection of Bellam and Andersen (Redevelopment Agency property), a site where Jacopi's Auto Body & Paint is currently partially on that site; he SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 10 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 11 noted there is a vacant part with a rent -a -car operation there, also. He stated SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 11 12 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page what he had asked the City Manager to have City staff do over the next several weeks was: 1) Public Works to provide engineering plan for site at Bellam & Andersen, underneath the freeway. 2) Planning to provide zoning plan. 3) Assistant Executive Director (Redevelopment) to advise adjoining property owners of what the City plans to do (job center proposed for vacant property at Bellam & Andersen under freeway on part of property leased by Jacopi's Auto Body & Paint) Mayor Boro requested a report back by the February 1, 1993 meeting, along with a time line for bringing this site on-line for the Day Labor Center. City Manager Nicolai noted that the businesses on this property are leasing the property from the City. Councilmember Cohen asked if this involved dislocation of either of the two existing businesses and would the center be located on the vacant part of that property? City Manager Nicolai stated that because the businesses are leasing from the City, staff has been renegotiating with these businesses to use less space so the site should be big enough for the Center. Councilmember Thayer asked if the meeting in February would be informational only, or will it be in the nature of a Public Hearing? Ms. Nicolai responded the report could just be informational or a Public Hearing on a Use Permit, if that is necessary. Councilmember Thayer then asked what the time line would be on this project? Ms. Nicolai responded this would be part of the engineering study. She stated there were various options available, such as doing a minimal amount of work on the site, get some of the operation started, making this somewhat operational prior to the utilities being installed if the Council wanted a much shorter period of time. She noted the renegotiation of the current leases of the two businesses, with 30 -day notices on each one, would not take very much time through the Use Permit process. Mrs. Thayer asked for clarification that they could have something operational by late Spring and Ms. Nicolai responded probably before that. Mrs. Thayer indicated this should be done as quickly as possible due to feedback she has received from the community. Mayor Boro summarized what Ms. Nicolai had stated that the expectations were that this would happen very soon and in answer to one of Mrs. Thayer's questions, the Council probably would not have enough information for any formal approval at the next meeting, February 1, 1993, and Mayor Boro responded to Mrs. Thayer by stating that he doubted that they could have a report by this next meeting, but would have public input by then. Janise Harman, President of Canal Property and Business Owners Association, asked if this parcel is denied or declined for some reason, is there any alternative other than the two other alternatives that have been turned down? Mayor Boro stated there were other sites in the community; however, this site is the one being considered for two reasons: 1) because of the location; and, 2) the site is "doable". Ms. Harman asked how this would be implemented if and when this center is opened? Mayor Boro stated this was a separate issue that was discussed last year and when they come back there is a committee that Assistant City Manager Suzanne Golt chairs with approximately 12 or 13 people representing service agencies, the Builders Exchange, the Unions, etc., which will be reconvening over the next week to discuss the various aspects of how to get the center started and make the residents in the area aware of the process, concurrent with the site being reviewed and developed. Ms. Harman asked if this would be discussed by the end of the month? Mayor Boro responded affirmatively, that Ms. Golt intends to start this group this month. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 PM and the Council went back into Closed Session. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 1993 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 12 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 13 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 1/4/93 Page 13