HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1988-08-15SRCC MINUTES (Regul` ) 8/15/88 Page 1
IN CONFERENCE ROOM 201 OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, AUGUST 15, 1988
AT 7:00 PM.
Regular Meeting:
CLOSED SESSION
1. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS LITIGATION AND LABOR NEGOTIATIONS - File
1.4.1.a
No litigation was discussed.
No. 88-18 (a) - (#7). No reportable action was taken.
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, AUGUST 15,
1988 AT 8:00 PM.
Regular Meeting: Present: Lawrence E. Mulryan, Mayor
Albert J. Boro, Councilmember
Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember
Gary R. Frugoli, Councilmember
Joan Thayer, Councilmember
Absent: None
Also Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager; Gary T. Ragghianti, City
Attorney; Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Frugoli seconded, to approve
the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items:
Item Recommended Action
2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Approved as submitted.
Meeting of July 18, 1988 (CC)
3. Report on Bid Opening and Award RESOLUTION NO. 7791 - AWARD OF
of Contract - Alpine Street CONTRACT FOR ALPINE STREET
Drainage Improvements (PW) - DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS (To
File 4-1-424 Wildcat Construction and
Engineering, low bidder, in amount
of $8,225)
6. Resolutions of Appreciation For:
a. Eleen Morrisette, Secretary
City Attorney's Office (CA) -
File 102 x 9-3-16
b. John Powers, Former Design
Review Board Member (P1) -
File 102 x 9-2-39
10. Renewal of Lease Agreement with
San Rafael Pop Warner Football
Club Re Storage Space in Albert
Park Stadium (Rec) - File 4-10-
127
13. Legislation Affecting San Rafael
(CM) - File 9-1
14. Claims for Damages:
a. Claire A. Christensen (PW)
Claim No. 3-1-1328
b. Roselae H. Babcock (PD)
Claim No. 3-1-1353
c. Saundra Viglienzone (PW)
Claim No. 3-1-1355
RESOLUTION NO. 7792 - TO ELEEN
MORISSETTE, FOR SEVEN YEARS OF
SERVICE (In the City Attorney's
Office)
RESOLUTION NO. 7793 - TO JOHN
W. POWERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
MEMBER (For Three Years of Service)
RESOLUTION NO. 7794 - AUTHORIZING
SIGNING OF LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
SAN RAFAEL POP WARNER FOOTBALL
CLUB FOR STORAGE SPACE IN ALBERT
PARK STADIUM COMPLEX, JULY 1,
1988 TO JUNE 30, 1990. (Two year
Agreement at $35.00 per month)
OPPOSED - AB3341 (Floyd)
Compulsory and Binding Arbitration
for Police and Fire Officers.
Approved Insurance Consulting
Associates, Inc. recommendation
for denial of claim a.
Approved City Attorney's
recommendations for denial of
claims b & c.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Regu1G ) 8/15/88 Page 2
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Thayer (from Item 13 only)
4. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LONG TERM 1993 TO 1998 (AB -84) MAJOR
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS IN MARIN COUNTY AS RECOMMENDED BY THE MARIN
COUNTY URBAN SYSTEM COMMITTEE (PW) - File 171 x 4-10-66 x 11-15.1
5.
7.
Councilmember Boro questioned the priority given to item 12 - I580/Bel-
lam Boulevard - Relocate Westbound Off and On Ramps, and item 13 -
I580/Irene Street, Construct Underpass and Relocate Eastbound Off
and On Ramps at Bellam Boulevard - on Exhibit "A" of the Proposed
Highway Projects, stating in light of the approval of the General
Plan, the two intersections, especially Bellam need to be readdressed.
He requested a cover letter be sent to the County indicating the City's
desire to expedite the Bellam Interchange project.
There were no objections to Councilmember Bcro's suggestion.
In response to Councilmember Thayer's comments regarding the Andersen
Drive project being financed through local funding, Public Works Director
Bernardi stated the State asked that projects having an impact on
the freeway and its capacity be listed as Local Projects to be funded
locally.
In response to Councilmember Thayer's comment that the City does not
have support from the community for McInnis Parkway, Mayor Mulryan
indicated that an alternative means of moving from the Southern part
of the County to the Northern part has long been a goal of those study-
ing the issue.
Councilmember Thayer felt there is a real fear that it will spawn
so much development that it will overtake any kind of transportation
improvements, stating it is a "Catch 22" which can be funded in the
future.
RESOLUTION NO. 7795 - APPROVING THE LONG TERM 1993 TO 1998 MAJOR TRANS-
PORTATION PROJECTS IN MARIN COUNTY AS RECOMMENDED
BY THE MARIN COUNTY URBAN SYSTEM COMMITTEE (and
that a cover letter be sent to the County indicat-
ing the City's desire to expedite the Bellam
Interchange project)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
BASE MAPPING SYSTEM - AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OF THE LAS GALLINAS BASIN
(PW) - File 9-3-40 x 8-5
Mayor Mulryan asked staff if the quality of the aerial photographs
was such that they could be merchandised to make a profit, and Public
Works Director Bernardi replied they could be sold, adding that certain
areas of the photographs could be blown up at the purchaser's request.
He noted people do purchase their maps and are charged according to
the City's fee schedule, noting over a long period of time, some of
the costs are recouped.
RESOLUTION NO. 7796 - AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE FOR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
OF THE LAS GALLINAS BASIN (at cost of $3,705
from unallocated reserves)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH BRYAN & MURPHY AND FORSHER + GUTHRIE FOR
CONSULTANT PLANNING SERVICES (P1) - File 4-3-185
In response to questioning by Councilmember Frugoli, City Manager
Nicolai noted they are trying to complete some of the more complex
projects with some consultant firms, indicating that some of their
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Regul, ) 8/15/88 Page 3
staff were former employees of the Planning Department, so they are
familiar with San Rafael and the process. She stated this is expected
to be phased out as soon as the in-house staff people become more
experienced.
Councilmember Frugoli stated what the consultants are doing is what
the Planning staff should be doing and believed some consultants are
working on City projects and other projects for the same developer.
Planning Director Moore explained there are no cases where consultants
are working for the City and working for the same applicant in another
capacity. She noted they have been careful about not assigning projects
to Consultants in a geographic area close to the few private clients
they are working for in the City.
Mayor Mulryan stated there is limited Planning staff and because of
the General Plan process, staff has been proposing to developers that
if they want to pay for planning services at their cost, that in effect,
it enlarges the working capacity of the Planning staff, and if this
were not being done the process would inevitably be slower than it
is now.
Ms. Moore clarified that at the present time, the Planning Department
has a Principal Planner, one Associate Planner, three Assistant Planners
and a Senior Planner who works on advanced planning only. She noted
the three Assistant Planners have worked for the City between 6 12
months each; the Associate Planner has worked for the City for one
year and the Principal Planner has worked for the City for six months.
Councilmember Boro indicated the use of outside Consultants should
diminish, adding that staff will never get the expertise they need
if the City continues to do this.
In response to Mayor Mulryan's question if Planning Director Moore
was assigning the more complex projects to the outside people rather
than the Planning staff, Ms. Moore replied it has turned out that
way, noting that many of the projects started when there was no Princi-
pal Planner available to work on these projects. Now they are finding
that the Principal Planner's time is better spent in training the
new people and getting the other vacancies filled. She noted the
consultants are very experienced, having between 10 and 20 years of
planning experience.
Ms. Moore stated the Council will be receiving a list of department
projects very shortly, noting there is no shortage of projects assigned
to Planning Department staff. Presently, there are about 100 active
applications being processed by the staff, and typically, each planner
has 15 to 20 projects assigned to them. The Principal Planner has
only a few, but they are the largest and most complex, such as the
Costco project.
Councilmember Breiner mentioned that two projects have EIR's to be
done, and noting they are always sent to outside consultants.
Councilmember Thayer felt staff has been overloaded because of work
on the General Plan and beginning of the implementation procedures.
She did agree there should be less use of outside consultants in the
future, however.
RESOLUTION NO. 7797 - AUTHORIZING THE EXTENSION OF CONSULTANT
AGREEMENTS WITH BRYAN & MURPHY AND FORSHER +
GUTHRIE FOR SIX MONTHS (To February 15, 1989).
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
8. SMITH RANCH HOMES (A.K.A. SMITH RANCH HILLS - MARIN) RETIREMENT PROJECT;
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (CA) - File 5-1-290
x 9-3-16
Councilmember Thayer stated she was disturbed that none of the approved
400 senior citizens residential condominium units will be for moderate
income housing, compared to the 98 units at McInnis Park apartment
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Regul 8/15/88 Page 4
complex, where 20 of those units will be affordable housing for moderate
income in the 80 to 120 range. -
Planning Director Moore stated when the project was approved in 1984-85,
it was by specific denial and then reconsideration of the project
by the City Council whereby the family rental units became part of
the overall project and it was done specifically to have non -age re-
stricted and affordable housing throughout the project, as well as
to gain affordable units.
She noted the Development Agreement precludes the City from modify-
ing its policy or approval position on the project so long as the
Applicant performs according to all terms, and they have done so.
Councilmember Breiner also explained that the 98 units were kept on
a rental basis in perpetuity which was one of the trade-offs.
RESOLUTION NO. 7798 - AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLIANCE PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 65865.1 (Smith Ranch Hills
Development Agreement)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
9. RESOLUTION AMENDING 1987/88 BUDGET (Fin) - File 8-5
Mayor Mulryan asked how the figure of $115,000 for the Fire Department
came about, and City Manager Nicolai replied there was a vacancy in
the Captain's position which was not on the computer system and there-
fore, not included in the figure shown last year, causing a shortfall.
RESOLUTION NO. 7799 - AMENDING THE 1987/88 BUDGET (to provide an
additional $611,481 for current expenditures;
also, $130,696 to be transferred from the General
Fund to the Trust and Agency Fund and $19,000
from the General Fund to the Recreation Fund
project)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
11. RESOLUTION AMENDING MASTER FEE SCHEDULE (RESOLUTION NO. 7553, "SECTION
7 - LIBRARY", REVISING RENTAL RATES FOR VIDEOS (Lib) - File 9-10-2
x 9-3-61
Mayor Mulryan asked staff to provide a list to the Council of what
video tapes are available.
RESOLUTION NO. 7800 - AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE (RESOLUTION
#7553), "SECTION 7 - LIBRARY", REVISING RENTAL
RATE FOR VIDEOS (from "$1.50 first day; $3.00
per day thereafter," to $1.50 per day)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
12. REPORT ON LEASING AND RENTAL OF OFFICE SPACE AT FALKIRK TO NON-PROFIT
CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS (Lib) - File 9-3-84 x 9-3-61
Councilmember Boro stated although he agrees with the staff report,
his concern is that they keep a balance as to the amount of space to
be rented out versus the amount of space available for public use
for private parties, etc., and asked what floors would be leased out.
Cultural Affairs Director Stratford replied the upper floors would
be leased.
Council accepted the staff report, without motion.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Regul, 8/15/88 Page 5
15. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO JOHN POWERS, FORMER
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBER - File 102 x 9-2-39
Mayor Mulryan presented the Resolution of Appreciation to Mr. John
Powers, and thanked him for his volunteer work on the Design Review
Board for three years.
16. PUBLIC HEARING - ED87-112-APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL UNIT ON R-3 LOT WITH NEW PARKING; 279 UNION
STREET; DAN AND SEAN NOWELL, OWNERS; JEFF MULANAX, APPELLANT;
AP 14-024-06 (Pl) - File 10-7
Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened.
Planning Director Moore stated the City Council considered this matter
on July 5 and 18, 1988, resulting in Council directing staff to hold
a neighborhood meeting to try to resolve what the neighbors surrounding
279 Union Street consider to be a problem because property owner Mr.
Dan Nowell is attempting to build and rent out an additional unit
on his property, causing more traffic on the narrow streets in the
neighborhood. She noted that from the 75 people notified, only a few
interested neighbors attended, including the Appellant, nearby neighbors,
an adjacent neighbor who has an interest in the project and the Appli-
cant.
After reviewing all pertinent information, staff concluded that many
of the concerns have to do with the lack of a Neighborhood Plan, and
a belief that zoning and land use designations would be changed if
there were such a plan. Staff believes the most critical issue, aside
from the Neighborhood Plan, concerns parking. The Planning Commisson
approved the project requiring five parking spaces and there is a
strict interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance that could conclude
that the proposed three dwelling units would require six on-site parking
spaces. Those six spaces could be located on-site but would require
additional paving of the front yard area and the inclusion of another
driveway, or widening of the existing driveway width so there is a
gain of an additional on-site parking space. This would probably
eliminate one on -street parking space because this lot has curb, gutter
and sidewalk in front of it.
Staff looked at other issues raised including the fact that the garage
could not be used for storage. They felt it would be safe if the garage
were utilized with the cars backing up into the street. Staff recommends
roll -up garage doors for the garage in the existing structure and
the legal non -conforming free-standing garage structure toward the
front of the lot, believing this would mitigate some of those concerns.
Staff intends to monitor this project to ensure those garages are
being utilized and will require the Applicant to notify any tenants
of that requirement.
The Planning Commission imposed a rigorous condition regarding landscape
requiring irrigation. There is concern as to the looks of the yard
now and Ms. Moore encouraged Council to ask the Applicant to explain
in his own words, his rationale for not landscaping, noting she believed
he did not expect this matter to go on for so long.
Ms. Moore stated that as a result of the comments made by Mrs. Cochran,
the adjacent property owner, staff recommended that the setback of
the proposed free-standing unit, if approved, be maximized and be
the greatest distance possible from the rear inside property lines
without endangering an existing olive tree located in the courtyard
area of the proposed reconfigured backyard, and that there be some
additional landscaping in the setback areas.
In response to Mayor Mulryan's question whether the zoning is presently
zoned as R-3, Ms. Moore responded it is and added that the property
could hold 12 units if the existing structures were demolished and
a new apartment was designed for the entire lot. She indicated this
has been done on other properties over the years with similar lots
converted into apartments, and in some cases, some lots may have been
smaller.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 5
SRCC MINUTES (Regula) 8/15/88 Page 6
Councilmember Breiner asked Ms. Moore, if Council were to let the
additional unit proceed, if the maximum of what is there now could
be locked in through rezoning, and Ms. Moore replied affirmatively,
indicating the rezoning for consistency with the General Plan could
be modified. She noted this is not a zoning matter before the Council,
therefore, there is no way to preclude Mr. Nowell from never applying
for anything later.
Councilmember Breiner asked staff if Council took a stand that this
is the maximum they want to see on that corner, could Council not
direct that it be brought back to cap it at the existing intensity
during the time that properties are rezoned throughout the City, and
Mayor Mulryan indicated this could be done by agreement with the owner.
Ms. Moore responded that staff could look at the zoning in the existing
neighborhood and bring appropriate recommendations back for General
Plan consistency zoning. Also, that if Council's direction is that
they are not seeking maximum R-3 densities in this neighborhood, but
the low end of the allowable R-3 densities, that it would be taken
into consideration in the staff review.
Mayor Mulryan clarified once they get into the Neighborhood Plan,
that would become the zoning for the area and any demolition made
in future years on this particular site would not be consistent with
what the zoning would be.
Ms. Moore suggested Council require a condition to rezone the parcel
to R-3 (b or d) which would be "spot zoning" with staff looking at
more properties surrounding the area. She asked that Council direct
staff to look at this with the General Plan consistency rezoning to
be done in advance when starting the Neighborhood Plan.
Councilmember Thayer referred to the downstairs area of the main build-
ing, stating had this been zoned R-1 it would be a second unit needing
to be owner occupied; however, as it is zoned R-3 and not owner -occupied,
this bothers her, noting she would prefer having a Neighborhood Plan
in place before this project is accepted.
Mayor Mulryan stated the property is zoned R-3 and the owner purchased
this property zoned as such, which allows 12 units to be put on the
property, and yet the Council is only putting half that amount on
the property.
Councilmember Boro stated this issue has highlighted the need for
a Neighborhood Plan, and legally, there is no way they cannot go along
with this because Council is here to do what is correct under the
Zoning Ordinance. He referred to the roll -up garage doors, indicat-
ing that he assumes the Applicant would be required to install auto-
matic garage door openers and request the tenants to use the garage,
and noted this is an improvement.
Mayor Mulryan called upon anyone wish to speak.
Mr. Jeff Mulanax, Appellant read a letter into the record, noting
State Codes, especially CEQA, have been sidestepped or misapplied.
There have been inappropriate uses and the absence of applications
for proper building permits for the intended uses.
He referred to the repair permit for a parking structure was obtained
but that instead the entire structure was rebuilt, indicating the
proper method would have been to apply for a building permit for total
reconstruction, noting the garage would have then needed to be set
back an additional 13 feet from its current position with the increased
side setback from the current two feet to about five feet. He noted
this would have put the structure in compliance with City codes.
He stated it is clear that this parcel has had five separate living
units proposed: 1) The existing single family dwelling at 279 Union
St.; 2) The lot split which created 245 Jewell St.; 3) The construction
of a single family unit and a detached unit at 245 Jewell St.; 4)
Conversion of the downstairs to a separate living unit; 5) The current
proposed single family dwelling in the back yard of 279 Union St.
He referred to CEQA Section 15303(a) which does not cover more than
three units, nor apartments, indicating it therefore does not apply
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Regul, 8/15/88 Page 7
to this proposal and no categorical exemption should be given for
this property, as at least five units have been proposed on this
property; also mentioned an environmental study be conducted regarding
the entire parcel.
Mr. Mulanax stated the conversion of the downstairs into a separate
living unit was not done through the proper planning process; the
application was to allow interior improvements; no mention, notice,
or application for the conversion of the downstairs to a separate
living unit was made; from the time of purchase to the property applica-
tion process; environmental studies, notification to the Council and
neighborhood residents have been avoided; the City is being asked
to condone an activity that is improper, sending the wrong message
to the community that rules can be broken and later excused by the
City of San Rafael.
Mr. Mulanax concluded that the residents and homeowners of the Montecito
Neighborhood are entitled to a Neighborhood Plan, and currently they
are suffering from absentee landlords, such as the owner of 279 Union,
who come in, make changes not meeting code and ignore proper applications
for permits and noticing. He indicated too often development in their
neighborhood is approved, despite the fact it is not beneficial in
any manner other than to the pocketbook of the absentee landlord.
The residents who live in this area suffer, especially long time resi-
dents who have made an enormous investment to the community. He urged
Council to grant the appeal.
In response to Mayor Mulryan's question if there is an issue regarding
CEQA, City Attorney Ragghianti stated that staff advised him there
are three units here and on the basis of that it is categorically
exempt from the provisions of CEQA. He stated he knew of no information
or data that suggests there are more than three and suggested that
Planning Director Moore comment on this.
Planning Director Moore stated Mr. Mulanax is calling the property,
including the home owned by the Cochran's next door, to be parcels
purchased by the preceeding property owner. She noted there is some
question as to whether they were or were not merged but there is a
Certificate of Compliance granted for the parcel where the Cochran's
home now is, so Mr. Mulanax' counting of five units includes two units
of the Cochran's home plus the three here. Ms. Moore noted staff does
not count that way by interpreting the California Environmental Qualty
Act.
Regarding the garage, Ms. Moore stated there were no difficulties
and explained that the garage renovation was done with building permits
and noted a few years back the value was not such that it triggered
any special treatment. The property owner was treated the same way
they would have treated any other property owner who was willing to
make some minor improvements within the Zoning Ordinance to a legal
non -conforming structure, and stated there was nothing done improperly
in upgrading the free-standing garage structure a few years ago.
Mr. Dan Nowell, Applicant, stated he had copies of the building permits
of the parking garage on hand should Council wish to review them and
spoke on concerns regarding the proposed third unit brought up at
the neighborhood meeting held on August 8, 1988.
He stated in the early planning for this project he looked at the
feasibility and desireability of attaching a third unit to the main
structure, and felt more of an apartment feeling would be created
if it were attached, having privacy and more quality, and that the
courtyard area would be destroyed for the occupant. However, he noted
if he had attached the third unit only five parking spaces would be
required. He then chose to detach the unit, given the size of the
parcel, and felt it would be more in keeping with the surrounding
single family home. He positioned the structure to minimize the effects
on the adjacent neighbor's views and to maximize the solar gain for
Title 24 energy requirements. Mr. Nowell then showed Council a drawing
of his project.
Regarding the detached garage in front of the property, Mr. Nowell
stated most neighbors seemed to be in favor of automatic roll -up garage
door or the removal of the doors. He noted the locks have been removed
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Regul, 8/15/88 Page 8
on the detached garage and it has been available for parking and the
inside wood framing has been primed to show what it would look like
if it were left painted and the doors removed, turning it into a carport.
He stated he would be in agreement with placing a condition for the
automatic garage door on the detached garage to match the roll -up
garage doors and that it be part of the conditions of approval which
is the same condition of approval for the main structure garages.
He stated Ms. Cochran had a concern about being able to see the fifth
parking place behind the detached garage, indicating he would be in
agreement to install additional landscaping in order to screen the
view of a car behind the garage from her view. Another concern brought
up regarding the front yard landscaping be installed and maintained
will be taken care of by the required landscaping plan for the property.
Mr. Cliff Elbing, spoke of his concerns on having second units in
the area.
Mr. Rich Goss, 4 Highland Avenue across from the proposed development,
stated he felt their neighborhood has overly high density, noting
there is excessive traffic in their area and that this project be
disapproved.
Ms. Dorothy Chuche, spoke of her concern with the lack of planning
in the area but was not concerned about the proposed additional unit
on the site.
Ms. Monica Lau, former resident at 165 Park Street, one block east
of Union Street, stated she agreed with all the neighbors that Union
Street is heavily traveled and that Council consider a stop sign at
the intersection of Mary and Union Streets.
Ms. Cynthia Van Rozeboom, spoke in favor of the Applicant.
Mr. Fred Eberts, owner of 261 Union Street, stated he is in favor
of approving the project, including having a Neighborhood Association.
Mr. Dennis Fishwick, stated he reviewed the property with Mr. Mulanax
last Monday and spoke of the traffic problems in front of this property.
He referred to the separation of the R-1 and R-3 zoning, noting this
was done because of the hill slope, stating this may have been inappro-
priate that this property was included in the R-3 zoning. He stated
it would be more appropriate that this�roperty have an R-1 zoning
because of the hill slope. Regarding CEQA, Mr. Mulanax mentioned the
determination had been they are single family units and a categorical
exemption applied and neither a Negative Declaration or an EIR were
required was based upon the fact that they are single family dwelling
units. In the next instance, the rationale for allowing less than six
parking spaces was that this project was considered to be apartments,
and stated this does not meet the CEQA category of 15303(a), and indi-
cated that 15303(b) is for apartments and totally different. Mr.
Fishwick stated on one hand staff is requiring six parking spots by
code and on the other hand the rationale for allowing only five is
that this is considered an apartment complex.
Mr. Fishwick stated the property was one parcel with one household
on the entire property, and if this had been brought forward to Council
at the time of the proposal, it would not have a categorical exemption
because there would have been five entire dwelling units proposed
for it. Mr. Fishwick stated he believes this to be the point Mr. Mulanax
is trying to make with CEQA.
Mr. Fishwick referred to the garage setback and stated if it had been
properly set back it would take the fifth parking spot. If the Neighbor-
hood Plan were in effect, there would be proper design standards so
when a building becomes delapidated and a new owner comes into the
neighborhood, he would be able to review the property in light of
those standards, noting if the proposal were to be looked at in total,
it would be inappropriate to go along with what is being proposed.
Mr. Mulanax suggested alternatives, such as expanding on the back
of the current house which is a positive step. Mr. Fishwick noted
if this were done, the duplex would only require four parking spaces
and probably provide the same amount of income the owner hopes to
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (REgulL 8/15/88 Page 9
get and yet there would be no need for the entirely separate unit.
Mr. Fishwick referred to the units across the street from the proposed
parcel and stated it is another example of what is occurring in this
neighborhood, noting the garage directly across is being used as a
living unit and has a mailbox outside. He again referred to Mr. Mulanax's
concern of garages being used as living units.
In conclusion, Mr. Fishwick stated the neighbors are looking for a
Neighborhood Plan and requested the City deny the current proposal
and approve Mr. Mulanax's appeal.
Ms. Winifred Baker, resident of 16 Highland Avenue above the proposed
unit, spoke against the project, asking Council to consider a whole
Neighborhood Plan before this project is put in.
Mayor Mulryan closed the public hearing.
Council Discussion
Councilmember Frugoli asked staff if a variance had been given on
the parking because of the supposedly six parking units but now there
are only five. Ms. Moore responded negatively and stated an interpreta-
tion of the Zoning Ordinance was utilized, noting there was no parking
variance sought and none approved.
Councilmember Breiner asked if staff was going to assign parking spaces
to the live-in units or work with the Applicant? Ms. Moore stated
they would be checking on this.
After discussion, Councilmember Boro moved and Mayor Mulryan seconded,
to uphold the Planning Commission's approval and deny the appeal,and
to include that automatic garage door openers be provided on all four
garage doors. Also, to include discussion held on landscaping; that
the fifth space as seen from the Cochran residence be provided and
that modification of the setback be made.
Councilmember Frugoli stated the only way he would approve the project
is to have the Montecito Neighborhood Plan changed to the status of
Priority One instead of Priority Two.
Councilmember Thayer stated she felt the whole area is zoned inappropri-
ately, indicating the streets are too narrow for the density it is
zoned at this time, and noted she would vote against the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Frugoli & Thayer
ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Councilmember Breiner suggested staff review using this lot as a buffer
between R-1 and R-3 in general, and make an accommodation or change
in the zoning process along the way.
There were no objections to Councilmember Breiner's suggestion.
Ms. Moore asked that people in the neighborhood who believe there
are unauthorized units, provide the Planning Department with addresses
so staff can enforce its rules.
Councilmember Breiner asked staff to review those intersections mentioned
including the stop sign westbound on Jewell, to see if that would
improve the situation in terms of traffic flow.
Mayor Mulryan mentioned that the streets are very narrow, and although
the City does not have one-way signs in residential areas, he directed
Public Works to look into the matter.
17. PUBLIC HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER PUBLIC NECESSITY, HEALTH, SAFETY
OR WELFARE REQUIRES THE FORMATION OF AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
IN THE VICINITY OF MONTECITO SHOPPING CENTER, SAN RAFAEL CREEK, GRAND
AVENUE AND SECOND STREET (PW) - File 6-47 x (SRRA) R-267
Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 9
SRCC MINUTES (Regul ) 8/15/88 Page 10
Public Works Director Bernardi stated this is the opportunity for
those affected by the undergrounding project to speak of their concerns
regarding the timetables set forth in the Resolution, which indicate
that all properties must be ready to receive underground service by
April 1, 1989, and that the removal of all poles and overhead wires
and associated structures and the installation of all underground
facilities be completed by August 1, 1989. He estimated the project
will cost $500,000 and is being completed under PG&E's Rule 20B rules
and regulations, noting the San Rafael Redevelopment Agency will be
paying for the project which will enhance the Montecito Shopping Center,
and staff is recommending adoption of the Resolution.
Mayor Mulryan called upon wishing to speak on this item.
Mr. Cliff Elbing, spoke in support of undergrounding in this area.
There being no further comments, Mayor Mulryan closed the public hearing.
RESOLUTION NO. 7801 - ESTABLISHING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT IN
THE VICINITY OF MONTECITO SHOPPING CENTER, SAN
RAFAEL CREEK, GRAND AVENUE AND SECOND STREET
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
18. PUBLIC HEARING - VACATION OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN EAST SAN RAFAEL
(HELIPORT SITE) (PW) - File 2-12 x 211
Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened.
Mayor Mulryan noted Councilmember Breiner had mentioned earlier a
concern about this property; however, she had looked at the property
today and now has no objection to the vacation of the drainage easement.
Mayor Mulryan called upon anyone wishing to speak on this item, and
hearing none, closed the public hearing.
RESOLUTION NO. 7802 - ORDERING CLOSING, ABANDONING AND VACATING 15
FOOT WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN EAST SAN RAFAEL
(A.P. NO. 9-290-16)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
19. REPORT ON ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY FOR SEASTRAND SUBDIVISION PARCEL
"B", AP #16-301-21 (P1) & (PW) - File 5-1-242 x 9-3-16
Planning Director Moore stated Public Works and Planning staff were
directed by Council to prepare an Initial Study and Environmental
determination for the proposed construction of a single family residence
on Parcel "B" at Seastrand, and Mr. Nibbi was notified to submit the
Environmental information sheet required of applicants for Environmental
Determinations. She indicated Mr. Nibbi contacted her stating he would
be submitting the information sheet to staff on Thursday and requested
that the matter be continued pending his ability to meet with staff
to review the environmental information he submitted. She noted the
information is available to any interested persons, adding staff has
not as yet completed the Environmental Checklist and Environmental
Determination.
Councilmember Breiner asked if staff will be working with conservation
groups the City might not know about since the property has been dis-
rupted with the bulldozer grading and Ms. Moore replied they have
prepared a draft of the Environmental Determination prior to this
going to the legislative body for adoption or certification, and it
will be circulated for at least 10 days.
Terrel Mason, Attorney on behalf of the Seastrand Homeowners Association,
stated they have been advised of staff's preliminary investigation
and presented some pictures of Parcel "B", in particular, as viewed
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 10
a17
21.
SRCC MINUTES (Regul 8/15/88 Page 11
from Sea Way taken the winter of the 1982 floods, showing Parcel "B"
under water, and asked that Council and staff take particular notice
of the area.
Planning Director Moore indicated they will strive to have this item
back at the next Council meeting, noting they hope to have the Initial
Study Environmental Determination completed this week in order to
provide adequate notice prior to the next Council meeting.
APPROVAL OF IMPLEMENTATION OF CLERICAL/LIBRARY CLASSIFICATION STUDY
(CM) - File 4-3-180
Assistant to the City Manager Suzanne Golt, stated the Clerical/Library
Classification and Compensation Study was conducted by Personnel Associ-
ates as part of the City's continuing efforts to upgrade and update
its systems. She noted the Clerical/Library study is the latest effort
and was completed in early 1988. The goals included revising the exist-
ing classificaton specifications for Clerical/Library Classifications,
also creating new classifications for any newly created positions.
She stated they wanted the study to look at the appropriateness of
classifications assigned to the encumbents, to determine whether they
are properly classified for the work being performed; and to analyze
the compensation paid to the Clerical/Library Classifications with
an emphasis on studying the internal salary relationships within exist-
ing classification series.
The results of the study included abolishing several classifications;
creation of six new Clerical or Library Classifications,with a number
of positions to be retitled as a result of this study to reflect the
work being performed and to more accurately reflect the current industry
or market salaries that are prevalent today, and to reclassify 16
positions effective January 1, 1988.
Ms. Golt stated the cost of the study was over $14,000, representing
the cost for recommended reclassifications and a slight cost for the
internal salary relationship that will result from the study.
She stated the City met and conferred with both the Marin Association
of Public Employees (MAPE) who represents the great majority of Clerical
and Library employees, as well as the Police Association on minor
changes regarding the Police Clerical Classifications.
Ms. Golt noted that the MAPE Team consisted of Beth Winters, the Senior
Field Representative, Karen Limb from Recreation, Jan Lacues, Finance
Department, Joan Nilsen, Library, Sheila Edwards from Redevelopment
and Susan Southard from Public Works Department.
Ms. Beth Winters stated MAPE is very pleased with the outcome of the
meetings held and she expressed her appreciation to the Bargaining
and Managment Team.
Mayor Mulryan also expressed his appreciation for the good effort
by all concerned on this item.
RESOLUTION NO. 7803 - AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CLERICAL/
LIBRARY CLASSIFICATION STUDY
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
CONSIDERATION OF CERTIFICATE OF CONVENIENCE FOR TAXI SERVICE IN NAME
OF MARIN TAXI SERVICE, DANIEL THOMAS CARLSON, APPLICANT (Fin) - File
9-9
Finance Director Coleman stated this is the third application received
in the last ten years for a taxicab company to operate in San Rafael,
noting in 1982 an application was denied and in 1984 an application
was approved. He stated staff's recommendation is to deny the request
without prejudice, by Mr. Dan Carlson for a Certificate of Convenience
for Marin Taxi to operate a cab in San Rafael at this time.
Mr. Coleman stated upon application, the code requires that the City
review requests to determine if additional taxicabs are required at
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 11
SRCC MINUTES (Regul 1 8/15/88 Page 12
this time in San Rafael. He stated Council could approve or deny the
application at this time by considering the facts of the matter, or decide that
Council does not wish to regulate the number of taxicabs allowed in
San Rafael. Denial is based on the fact that there is no additional
need for another taxicab and in looking at cities similar in size
to San Rafael, there seems to be an adequate number of cabs based
on the population. He also noted the operator has limited experience
in operating a taxicab company and for that reason, also recommends
denial at this time.
Mayor Mulryan called upon the Applicant, but he was not present.
Councilmember Frugoli stated the two current cab companies in San
Rafael do an excellent job, noting the City is well covered.
Councilmember Frugoli moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to
deny the request without prejudice for a Certificate of Convenience
for Marin Taxi.
Councilmember Thayer commented this is a free enterprise system, noting
the market should decide.
Councilmember Breiner stated staff has indicated that Mr. Carlson
could again apply after he establishes a good track record, noting
she would be open to this should the request come back to Council.
Ms. Elissa Giambastiani, Executive Director for the San Rafael Chamber
of Commerce asked how many other businesses Council regulates, and
Mayor Mulryan replied this is the only one regulated in this manner.
Councilmember Frugoli mentioned tow trucks and card rooms are also
regulated.
Mayor Mulryan explained this was developed through the Charter and
is also based on the public's safety and service required, noting
the City might end up with no taxi service without Council review
of the market demand.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Thayer
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
22. DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE FOR LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 16-19, 1988 IN SAN
DIEGO (CC) - File 9-11-1
Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Frugoli seconded, to
designate Mayor Mulryan as the Delegate to the League of California
Cities Annual Conference, and Councilmember Boro as Alternate.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulyran
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
23. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCES: (CM) - File 9-12
City Manager Nicolai stated staff was presenting two options, one,
whether all options should be reviewed by the Committee, and two,
whether Council wanted to eliminate any of the options, which could
be done tonight and then discuss the process.
Mayor Mulryan referred to the staff report stating staff does not
recommend pursuing the garbage collection item because it does not
apply throughout the City and asked why it could not be applied in
Las Gallinas Sanitary District. City Manager Nicolai stated they have
the responsibility for setting rates and if there were a Franchise
fee imposed it would accrue to them.
City Attorney Ragghianti stated he was not 100 percent sure but thought
Ms. Nicolai was correct, and believed this to be a separate political
entity from San Rafael. He noted if a Franchise fee were imposed,
the City would not have any authority to impose it out of its jurisdic-
tion, but asked to be able to check on this.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 12
SRCC MINUTES (Regul ) 8/15/88 Page 13
Finance Director Coleman stated if the City were to impose the Franchise
fee, the garbage company would probably not be able to pass it on
to the homeowners because Las Gallinas sets the rate they can charge,
and noted the City could probably set a fee but it would come out
of Marin Sanitary's revenues rather than being an add on to garbage.
a. Increase in Hotel/Motel tax.
Councilmember Frugoli stated he opposes all tax increases, noting
it would be circumventing Proposition 13 and that consideration of
tax increases should go to the voters.
b. Increase in Overtime Parking Meter Fines.
C. Establishment of Garbage Franchise Fee.
d. Municipal Services Tax.
e. Utility Users Tax.
f. Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972.
Dr. Rafael Dufficy, President of the San Rafael Forward 2000 stated
their concern is that the taxes will hit upon homeowners and felt
the City should set up its fiscal priorities and if there is not enough
money, then the people should have the right to know what the taxes
are for and how long it will be used for.
After further discussion, Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember
Boro seconded, that Items a and b be put on a future agenda for further
discussion and public hearing (to be scheduled for September 19, 1988),
and agreed not to pursue item c at this time; to further discuss setting
up a broad based citizens committee to review and make recommendations
on items d, a and f, and that City Manager Nicolai bring back to Council
a Capital Improvement Program and a report on the composition of the
committee after receiving suggestions from Council.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Frugoli
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
J`
JEANNEO�LEONCINI; City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1988
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/15/88 Page 13