San Rafael council upholds reasonable accommodation for 131 Valley View after fire‑safety appeal

The San Rafael City Council on Monday denied an appeal of a planning decision and upheld a staff approval that allows modest additions to a residence at 131 Valley View Avenue intended to improve accessibility for a resident with a mobility disability.

The council voted 4–0 to deny the appeal after hearing testimony from the appellant’s attorney, city staff, outside counsel and the applicants. Council members said they were satisfied staff had followed the interactive process required by the Americans with Disabilities Act and the city municipal code and that detailed safety and building‑code issues would be reviewed during the later building permit process.

Appellant Elizabeth Brekus, attorney with Brekus Law Partners, told the council the approval was deficient in several respects and that the decision lacked an adequate nexus between the claimed disability and some elements of the proposed work. “The primary basis for the appeal and my clients’ biggest concern is about fire safety,” she said, arguing that plan documents appeared to show an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) that, if built, would change the scope of required fire‑hardening and structural support.

The applicant, who spoke in person, described the needs behind the request. “My husband, Habib Hasdai, has post polio syndrome,” the applicant said, explaining that the additions provide circulation space meeting ADA guidance and space for an elevator that would allow the home to be used safely as his mobility changes.

City planning staff and outside counsel told the council that staff had engaged in the confidential interactive process the ADA requires and had reviewed alternatives and constraints of the site. Outside counsel Connor McLean said the public record contains information the council may consider but that detailed health information gathered during the interactive process remains confidential. “That process did happen here,” McLean said.

Council members pressed staff on fire‑safety review. Planning staff said the project would undergo a technical review at the construction‑document and building permit stage, where the fire department and building division examine materials, setback impacts and any retrofit requirements. Staff also clarified that an ADU outline appeared on design review drawings but that an ADU requires separate, ministerial review under state ADU rules.

The motion on the record to deny the appeal was made and seconded by council members; the roll call in the meeting minutes shows four ayes and no no votes. (The formal motion as spoken at the roll call referenced “131 Bellevue Avenue,” a discrepancy the record contains; the record and the staff presentation consistently identify the site as 131 Valley View Avenue.)

Next steps: if the applicants proceed, building permit submissions will trigger a technical review by building and fire officials that will determine material and construction requirements, including any home‑hardening or retrofit obligations tied to future ADU construction. The council’s action preserves the Planning Commission’s approval while leaving technical fire‑safety details to the permitting stage.