Loading...
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