HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1985-04-01SRCC MINUTES (R.egulaL 4/1/85 Page 1
In the Conference Room 201 of the City of San Rafael, Monday, April 1, 1985
at 7:00 PM.
Regular Meeting:
CLOSED SESSION
1. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS LITIGATION - File 1-4-1.a.
No. 85-9(a) - Item #1. Landmark Insurance Company vs. City of San
Rafael. No. 85-9(b) - Item #1.
No action was taken.
In the Council Chambers of the City of San Rafael, Monday, April 1, 1985 at
8:00 PM.
Regular Meeting: Present: Lawrence E. Mulryan, Mayor
Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember
Gary R. Frugoli, Councilmember
Richard Nave, Councilmember
Absent: Jerry Russom, Councilmember
Also Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, Acting City Manager; Jeanne M. Leoncini,
City Clerk; Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Nave seconded, to approve the
recommended action on the following consent calendar items:
Item
2. Approval of Minutes of March 4,
1985 (CC)
3. Bid Opening and Award of Contract
Re Street Resurfacing - 1985,
Project No. 006-40698000867, and
Third & Lootens Parking Structure
Improvements, Project No. 005-
190008720 (PW) - File 4-1-379
and 4-1-380
5. Resolution Authorizing Renewal
of Agreement with State Cooperative
Personnel Services (CPS) for Written
Examination Service (Pers) -
File 4-10-56
6. Resolution Amending Resolution
No. 6690 to Provide for a New
Classification of "Secretary II"
(Pers) - File 7-3 x 10-2
7. Library Fine -Free Week - April
15-20, 1985 (Lib/Cult.Aff.) -
File - 9-3-61
Recommended Action
Approved as submitted.
RESOLUTION NO. 7064 - RESOLUTION
OF AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR STREET
RESURFACING - 1985, PROD. NO.
006-40698000867 and THIRD &
LOOTENS PARKING STRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 005-
190008720 (to W. K. McLellan
Company - low bidder at
$438,817.80, & Authorized
$40,000 for Third & Lootens Park-
ing Structure Project from Parking
District Funds)
RESOLUTION NO. 7065 - RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN
AGREEMENT WITH COOPERATIVE
PERSONNEL SERVICES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA (FOR SERVICES COMMENC-
ING APRIL 1, 1985 AND TERMINATING
MARCH 31, 1988).
RESOLUTION NO. 7066 - R.ESOLUTION
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 6690
PERTAINING TO THE COMPENSATION
AND WORKING CONDITIONS FOR
MISCELLANEOUS PERSONNEL (Re:
Secretary II Position) (Salary &
Wages, Range 8a - Planning Dept.)
Approved staff recommendation for
Library Fine -Free Week from April
15-20, 1985.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 2
8. Claims For Damages: Approved Insurance Consulting
Associates, Inc. recommendations
a. John F. and Betty Corbani - for denial of claims.
File 3-1-953 (PW)
b. Sophia Denis-Voelker -
File 3-1-954 (PW)
c. Patricia Johnstone -
File 3-1-956 (PD)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
4. BID OPENING AND AWARD OF CONTRACT - RADIO EQUIPMENT FOR PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT (CM) - File 4-2-193
Councilmember Frugoli asked staff if the $45,000 would come out of the
Replacement Fund, and Acting City Manager Nicolai replied it would not,
that this was a follow-up to a previous approval given by Council at its
February 4, 1985 meeting.
RESOLUTION NO. 7067 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF RADIO
EQUIPMENT FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
(Totalling $45,285.12, from various bidders.)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave and Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
9. PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST THAT CITY COUNCIL REVISE ITS PRIOR ACTION
(DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE) ON THE CANALWAYS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, URBAN
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY STATEMENT AMENDMENT, AND REZONING, AND THAT
A SPECIFIC HEARING SCHEDULE BE ADOPTED; BELLAM BOULEVARD AT KERNER
BOULEVARD; J. BLEDSOE, CANALWAYS, OWNER; DAVID COLDOFF, REP.; AP 9-010-
22, 23, 24 AND PORTION 33 (Pl) - File 5-1-288 x 10-3
Mayor Mulryan opened the public hearing.
Planning Director Moore reported that in December 1984 and January 1985,
the Canalways applicant requested that the City take final action on the
proposed development project. The Planning Commission recommended that
the Council deny the project without prejudice, and on January 7, 1985,
the Council took that action. The grounds for the denial revolved around
various potentials of the project which were deemed prejudical to the
neighborhood plan. The certified EIR and State and Federal agencies'
comments indicated that the proposed project did not provide habitat for
endangered wild life species on the site, and that there was a potential
significant traffic impact without the necessary mitigation fees having
been worked out. The applicant requests that the Council revise the
prior action, the denial without prejudice, to a continuance and that a
specific hearing be scheduled for future consideration of the
application. Based on initial discussions with the applicant and staff
of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered Species Section, staff
understands that the applicant is considering making several
modifications to the project before requesting future action. There is
no written description of what the revised project would be. For this
reason, staff cannot indicate what kind of process would be evaluated in
considering the proposal we do not have as yet. The best process for
considering the applicant's latest proposal is to accept a new
application to amend the previous proposal. This approach is consistent
with the Council's prior action to deny the project without prejudice,
allowing the applicant to resubmit the original project or a revised
project by filing a new application at any time and be subjected to a six
month waiting time for filing the same application.
Mayor Mulryan asked Ms. Moore for the basic rationale .regarding the
procedural approach that needs to be taken for a new application as
opposed to coming back to the Planning Department with modifications.
Ms. Moore replied that there are two procedures: 1) Final action on the
project was taken allowing the applicant to resubmit at any time. 2) To
accept a new application to amend the applicant's previous proposal would
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Regular, 4/1/85 Page 3
allow the City to charge the applicant new processing fees. The Planning
Department charges a flat fee for the applications, and this has been one
of the most complex projects. Ms. Moore indicated there were several
thousands of dollars of City staff's time that could not be recovered
through the fee process. Additionally, there is an outstanding bill owed
by the applicant of approximately $6,000. To date, this bill has not
been cleared.
Mr. Albert Bianchi, attorney representing the applicant, Mr. Bledsoe,
stated that he was asking Council to treat this application as a
continuation of the old application rather than a new one. He indicated
that Mr. Bledsoe is willing to pay any fees involved under the City's
current requirements. Also, the applicant is prepared to accept a
condition on the Council's action if favorable this evening, regarding
the monies owed to the City by him, that the payment be made before any
activity is required on the part of the City staff.
Mr. Bianchi continued to state that the reason it is important that the
property owner have this treated as an ongoing application, is primarily
because of the Corps of Engineers. When this application was submitted
to the Corps of Engineers in 1981, they only required satisfactory
mitigation of the habitat for the saltwater marsh mouse either on or off
site. Since then, new regulations require an application to show that
there is no practical location for the project on other sites.
Mr. Bianchi indicated that his client would have to be heard by the
Planning Commission not later than May 28th and by the City Council not
later than July 15th. To do this, they ask that the Environmental
Assessement and the merits of the project be considered at the same
hearing. They are asking the Council to do two things: 1) To proceed
with the application already on file as amended that will result in the
reduction of the developable area from 31-1/2 acres to 25 acres, which
will reconfigurate the habitat area as discussed with the Fish and
Wildlife Service to meet their requirements. 2) That Council establish
the dates indicated, May 28th and July 15th.
Mr. Richard Gosse, representing San Rafael Citizens for Better
Government, stated that in light of being unable to get housing units
on the PG&E site, he felt that this project should be approved because of
the number of housing units that will be provided to San Rafael.
Ms. Barbara Saltzman, representing the Audubon Society, stated that they
fully support the recommendation made by staff. Ms. Saltzman indicated
that the applicant should file a new application, and indicated that the
merits of the project have not been addressed adequately by the Planning
Commission.
Mayor Mulryan closed the public hearing.
During discussion, Public Works Director Bernardi stated that the fees
Mr. Bianchi mentioned, would cover assessment district liens, as well as
the lien for emergency levy repairs, totaling about $100,000.
Councilmember Nave moved and Councilmember Frugoli seconded, that this
matter be continued as requested, on the contingency that the fees as
outlined be paid by the applicant before Council hears it, that it also
goes before the Planning Commission for review, and that every effort be
made to meet the dates of May 28th and July 15th, based on timely
submittals by applicant and timing of other Planning Department projects.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
10.PUBLIC HEARING - ED84-82 - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL FOR THE DOCK APARTMENT COMPLEX; 516 CANAL ST.; L.H. LODER &
ROBERT H. SAN CHEZ, OWNERS & APPELLANTS; AP 14-191-05 & 06 (P1) - File
10-7
Mayor Mulryan opened the public hearing.
Planning Director Moore reported that on February 26, 1985, the Planning
Commission approved this project with numerous conditions and several of
those are the subject of the applicants' appeal before Council. A major
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Regulai, 4/1/85 Page 4
condition of approval required the combining of 4 other units into 2
units, the reduction of the number of boat berths, provision of an
outdoor deck along the canal and a condition requiring payment of East
San Rafael traffic mitigation fees. The applicant contends that the
combining of the units is unreasonable.
Ms. Moore indicated that just this evening, the appellants'
representative presented the units as redesigned, and she explained the
changes in the units.
In regard to the boat berths, the proposal showed 8 boat berths along the
canal frontage of the property to be leased separately, and that the
Planning Commission was concerned about the inadequacy of parking. They
disagreed with the applicants' proposal that there was ample on -street
parking in the area to meet parking needs for the boat berths, concluding
that there is no time when congestion is not in that area. The applicant
is also appealing payment of traffic mitigation fees, claiming that they
are unreasonable and possibly in error. The staff report is written in
detail explaining the formula of the traffic mitigation fees, and that
the formula is applied to this project as to all other projects.
Councilmember Breiner asked staff in regard to guest parking, if 16 units
and 21 on-site parking spaces are consistent with the requirements for
other rental type units, and Ms. Moore replied that this project meets
the bare minimum requirements of the City's Parking Ordinance.
Councilmember Breiner inquired what size boats would be in the berths and
Ms. Moore indicated the boats would be in excess of 20 feet in length.
Mr. Larry Loder, appellant, presented another drawing and explained to
Council, the changes made. Mr. Loder stated that in 1978 they had
approval on the lot for 6 condominiums in conjunction with a condo
conversion with the building next door of 18 units. Although he and his
partner, Mr. Robert San Chez did not do this project because of funding
problems, they did gain experience in handling apartments in that area,
and felt that they knew the type of units needed to replace the 6
condominium units originally on the lot, combined with parking for the 18
units. The concept was to have some part of the units facing the canal,
and a U-shaped building was developed, with a center area leading out to
the boat berths. Mr. Loder then stated that the Design Review Board was
concerned about the two units without sun. Since then, two buildings
were made by splitting them apart to the top, giving an open area down
through with 16 feet width to the roof. In addition, the units were
reoriented. After the Design Review meeting, some of the changes were
submitted to the Public Works Department for review concerning meeting
the Building Code for light and air. Since then, revisions have been made
to the building giving light access to the units. These units are all
studios, for which there is a need in San Rafael.
Mr. Loder indicated they would be willing to agree to a condition that
only tenants would be allowed to rent the eight boat berths; therefore no
outside people would be using the berths causing a parking problem.
Appellants' concern on traffic mitigation fees is that the cost is being
placed on new construction only. When they reviewed the Housing Element,
they felt that there was considerable concern about the cost of rental
units and that various parts of the element encouraged subsidizing the
units, and the reduction of fees to rental units. Because this is an
apartment building, they felt that there is room for some reduction of
that fee ($1,000 per unit) by the Council. Also, Mr. Loder suggested
that a better way to approach the traffic problem is to have this area be
made into an assessment district, so that everyone shares equally in the
cost.
Mayor Mulryan closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Frugoli stated that he would prefer not reducing the
building by two units because affordable housing is needed, and indicated
that Mr. Loder is getting a reduction on traffic mitigation because the
fee currently being charged is $1,900 per unit while their fee is $1,000.
Also, an assessment district has been currently discussed for other
projects for that area, but not for new construction.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 5
Councilmember Breiner stated that 21 on-site parking spaces are very
minimal for just 16 units with 4 boat berths without restoring two
additional units, and that she would not agree to 8 boat berths on this
site.
Councilmember Nave stated that there is a need for the units and if the
boat docks are for the tenants in the apartments, 21 parking spaces would
be ample.
Mr. Mike Lieberman, realtor, who is working with the applicant, spoke in
favor of the project.
Mr. Rich Berger of Canal Community Alliance spoke on the matter of the
sunlight in relation to the apartments and stressed the parking problem
Councilmember Breiner had mentioned.
Mayor Mulryan closed the public hearing.
Mayor Mulryan stated that the project does abide by the City's codes and
numbers and that smaller and less expensive units are needed. He
indicated that the docks do have a parking problem, but if rental is
restricted to tenants, that should help the parking problem. Regarding
the traffic mitigation fees, Mayor Mulryan indicated those figures are to
be adhered to and paid.
Councilmember Nave moved to allow for 18 units with 2 units having light
well. (Motion died for lack of a second).
Councilmember Nave moved and Councilmember Frugoli seconded, to allow 18
units with 4 boat docks, that full mitigation fees are to be paid by the
applicant, and that only tenants may rent the 4 boat docks.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
ll.REPORT ON HIGHWAY 101/INTERSTATE 580 INTERCHANGE FUNDING (PW) -
File 11-16
Public Works Director Bernardi reported that the Resolution submitted is
a formal recommendation to the Board of Supervisors requesting a
separation of the current project priority list into two lists. The
City's project is listed as "worthy but unfunded" under the Federal Aide
Primary (FAP) project list. A portion of the project is eligible for
Interstate funding but Metropolitan Transportation Commission will not
consider it unless it is one of the top priority projects. San Rafael is
the only City in the County having an Interstate connection to Highway
101. Staff recommends that a Council member testify before the
California Transportation Commission to inform them of the urgency of
this project and that the City is willing to partially fund the
Interchange portion.
Councilmember Breiner pointed out that County staff suggested that this
problem is exclusively a local one, and in response to that suggestion,
it should be noted that this was a poorly designed intersection and Marin
and San Rafael have suffered for it. It was not a San Rafael City
design. Also, County speaks of other communities having developers put
in the improvements, but the City does not presently have a major
developer. Mrs. Breiner added that without these improvements, the
redevelopment of West Francisco area would be impaired.
RESOLUTION NO. 7068 - RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING PRIORITIES FOR HIGHWAY
IMPROVEMENTS (HIGHWAY 101/INTERSTATE 580
INTERCHANGE FUNDING)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 5
SRCC MINUTES (Regula1, 4/1/85 Page 6
12.REVIEW OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROPOSALS - File 147 x
115
Acting City Manager Nicolai reported that this year a special request was
received from the Ecumenical Association for Housing (EAH) requesting
endorsement of a proposed Rental Acquisition Program requesting $150,000
funding assistance through the CDBG. Mrs. Nicolai indicated that after
meeting with the EAH staff and the Planning staff, staff agrees that
conceptually it is a good idea and requests Council's consideration of
endorsement which will conceptually provide down payment assistance for
the acquisition and rehabilitation of 20 to 30 units of low income rental
stock.
Councilmember Frugoli moved and Councilmember Nave seconded, to direct
staff to express to the Priority Setting Committee Council's conceptual
endorsement of the Ecumenical Association for Housing proposal and
reiterate Council's commitment to use previously allocated CDBG funds for
the Bellam site to develop affordable housing.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
13 -REQUEST BY GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE DISTRICT TO RECONSIDER COUNCIL ACTION OF
MARCH 18, 1985, WITHHOLDING GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE OF THE DISTRICT'S
PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS AT 1011 ANDERSEN DRIVE - File 112-2 x 10-2
Mayor Mulryan requested Council approval of a letter to Mr. Carney
Campion, General Manager of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and
Transportation District, assuring them that the Council's March 18, 1985
action was considered approval of the General Plan conformity
determination based on representations by district staff that there would
be no conflict regarding needed right-of-way for the future Interstate
580 crossing.
Council approved letter, without motion.
14.DISCUSSION OF PARKING NEEDSIN DOWNTOWN SAN RAFAEL (CM) - File 11-8 x
(SRRA) R-165 x R-155
Acting City Manager Nicolai indicated that at the request of a number
ofCouncilmembers, staff was directed to identify potential parking
expansion in the downtown area.
Parking can be enlarged by increasing capacity of existing facilities at
the Third and Lootens lot or the Third and A Streets structure or by the
purchase of additional property. It is estimated that approximately 150
spaces could be gained at the Third and Lootens lot and 100 at Third and
A Streets. Increased parking would depend on property that can be
purchased.
A study and cost estimate of expanding Third and Lootens lot and the
Third and A Streets structure would require design and engineering costs
of not more than $10,000.
Council accepted staff report, without motion.
15.CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE MAJOR CRIMES TASK FORCE (CM) -
File 4-10-114 x 8-5
Acting City Manager Nicolai reported that the request before Council is
to conceptually approve amendments to the Major Crimes Task Force. The
proposal includes three changes: (1) Staffing (increase from six to nine
man unit); (2) Funding formula (San Rafael contribution would be $64,000
for 85-86 with an increase in the percent commitment from the County);
and (3) Management responsibilities.
Councilmember Frugoli moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to
endorse the proposed changes to the Major Crimes Task Force organization
and funding, and direct staff to include this as an item for
consideration as part of San Rafael's 85/86 budget process.
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Breiner,
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
None
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Russom
Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 7
16.LEGISLATION AFFECTING SAN RAFAEL - File 9-1
Councilmember Nave moved and Councilmember Frugoli seconded, to Support
SB 885 (Maddy) Liability. Rescues by Public Agency Employees. Immunity.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
Councilmember Frugoli moved and Councilmember Nave seconded, to Oppose SB
730 (Seymour) Restriction on Local Taxing Authority.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Frugoli seconded, to Oppose
SB 1254 (Dills) Local Public Agency Employer -Employee Relations: Unfair
Labor Practices - State Public Employment Relations Board.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
RESOLUTION NO. 7069 - RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A
NATIONAL VETERANS' CEMETERY IN REDWOOD NATIONAL
PARK
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
ADD ITEMS:
1. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL ACCEPTING
CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTY & AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
CONTRACT - KERNER BOULEVARD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA
(A.D. NO. 27) (PW) - File 6-35
Public Works Director Bernardi reported that this resolution was being
brought to Council as an Add Item, because the right -of -Way agent did not
submit the Grant Deed to staff, and when the property owner inquired
about the status of his payment, staff found that Council approval had
not been given to allow for this payment.
RESOLUTION NO. 7070 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTY
AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY CONTRACT
- KERNER BOULEVARD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, SAN RAFAEL,
CALIFORNIA (A.D. NO. 27)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
2. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS - File 11-10 x 11-14
Councilmember Breiner asked staff to report back to Council at the next
meeting on the following items:
a) Report on the Traffic Management Plans for the local streets during
the freeway construction. Wants traffic signal installed at Mission
and Grand Avenue; inquired about filling Traffic Engineer position.
b) Having a one-way access between Los Ranchitos and Lincoln over to
Merrydale, Southbound in the morning and Northbound in the evening to
relieve traffic congestion. Requested police control traffic at
various intersections along Irwin Street during this time period.
c) Use Permit procedures for Fourth Street for all non -retail uses and
definition. Wants pros and cons on this approach to be brought back
to Council.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 8
3. SB 290 - TRANSPORTATION FINANCE - File 9-1
Mayor Mulryan stated that he received a letter from the League of
California Cities asking for support of SB 290, which Council has already
endorsed. He suggested that a letter be sent to the League informing the
Chairman that the San Rafael City Council strongly supports his efforts.
Acting City Manager Nicolai stated that when these urgency matters come
in, letters and telegrams are sent out indicating the Council's position
unless there have been major modifications.
There being no further business, City Council meeting was adjourned.
kms- A. _
JEANIY M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF ,1985
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 4/1/85 Page 8