Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 9097 (1 Trinity Way Senior Housing)RESOLUTION NO. 9 0 9 7 RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL QTY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FOR AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECTS IN CERTAIN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS (GPA93-2); AND FOR A ZONE CHANGE, USE PERMIT, ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT, SUBDIVISION, AND TRIP PERMIT FOR A 62 -UNIT AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT (ST. ISABELLA), 1 Trinity Way, AP175-181-26, San Rafael WHEREAS, the proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment to allow for affordable senior housing projects in certain Low Density Residential Land Use designations (GPA93-2); and a zone change, use permit, environmental and design review permit, subdivision, and trip permit for a 62 -unit affordable housing project (St. Isabella); and WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Negative Declaration was unanimously adopted by the City Council on February 18, 1992 for this 62 -unit senior affordable housing project in the Terra Linda district of San Rafael; and WHEREAS, a second Initial Study was prepared to reflect certain issues raised in the ruling of the Superior Court of Marin County in Alan Titus, et al. v. City of San Rafael, et al., and also to address the General Plan Amendment now proposed for the project; and WHEREAS, the second Initial Study recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted for the project; and WHEREAS, the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was processed and reviewed in accordance with CEQA, and whereas the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, the General Plan Amendment and other project approvals were reviewed at a duly noticed public hearing by the Planning Commission on September 14, 1993 at which time the Planning Commission accepted oral testimony and written comments on the proposed project, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after having reviewed and considered all evidence and testimony in the record, adopted Resolutions recommending that the City Council; 1) adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 2) adopt the General Plan Amendment; and 3) grant the other requested project approvals; and WHEREAS, on October 18, 1993, the project was considered by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing, at which time the City Council requested that Staff prepare for their consideration two alternative proposals regarding the General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, on November 15, 1993, the alternative proposals were considered by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing, at which time the council determined that the "policy alternative", which consisted of the original proposed amendment with some modifications, appeared to be the preferred alternative for further consideration by the Planning Commission. The City Council voted unanimously to request that the Planning Commission reconsider the proposed modifications to the General Plan Amendment, and provide a recommendation regarding the project to the City Council; and WHEREAS, in response to the City Council's direction, Staff also prepared a new Initial Study dated December 9, 1993 to analyze the entire project, including the proposed modifications to the General Plan Amendment. The Initial Study determined that the Project would not have any significant environmental impacts which had not been mitigated to a level of insignificance by the incorporation of various measures into the project; and WHEREAS, the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was processed and reviewed in accordance with CEQA, and was reviewed at a duly noticed hearing by the Planning Commission on January 11, 1994, at which time the Planning Commission accepted oral testimony and written comments on the proposed project; and WHEREAS, the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program was prepared and reviewed in accordance with CEQA, and was also reviewed by the Planning Commission on January 11, 1994; and WHEREAS, for any project on which the City Council has discretionary approval, the City Council must certify the environmental document and approve the project applications; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has exercised its independent judgment in evaluating the Mitigated Negative Declaration, found that the document has been completed in compliance with CEQA, and adopted Resolution No. 94-1 recommending to the City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, on February 7,1994, the City Council held a public hearing at which time it considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, oral testimony and written comments, the Planning Commission staff report dated January 11, 1994, and the City Council staff report and all other material previously entered into the record. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council has exercised its independent judgment in evaluating the Mitigated Negative Declaration. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby adopts the findings pertaining to the environmental review for the General Plan Amendment and the - 2 - St. Isabella Affordable Senior Housing Project contained in Exhibit A to this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael hereby finds that the mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA and adopts the document, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. I, JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of said City on Monday, the Seventh day of February, 1994, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk - 3 - EXH.I,B,I,T A CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA FINDINGS PERTAINING TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION GPA93-2, REZONING APPLICATION Z91-6, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP APPLICATION S91-6, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION 91-3, ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT APPLICATION ED91-69, AND TRIP PERMIT APPLICATION T93-1 FOR THE ST. ISABELLA AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT IN THE TERRA LINDA DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL The City Council of the City of San Rafael, California (the "Council"), hereby adopts the following findings relating to the St. Isabella affordable senior housing project located at One Trinity Way in the Terra Linda district of San Rafael (the "Project"). I. INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Project is a proposed 62 -unit affordable senior housing project. It will serve seniors, aged 62 and over, whose income is less than 50k of the average for Marin County. The Project is proposed by Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of San Francisco ("Catholic Charities"), a non-profit housing corporation. Since 1975, Catholic Charities has developed 19 affordable housing projects (1,115 units), including nine senior residences. Catholic Charities has developed three affordable senior housing residences in Marin County in cooperation with the IN V 0 Ecumenical Association for Housing: Martinelli House (54 units, San Rafael), Parnow House (66 units, San Rafael), and Bennett House (70 units, Fairfax). These findings relate to the following seven (7) separate actions that were considered by the Council: A. Requested Approvals and Aonlications (i) Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (the "Mitigated Negative Declaration") for the Project, including a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; (ii) Approval of an amendment to the City's General Plan which specifically amends policies LU -10, H-20, H-37 and RES -3 of the City of San Rafael General Plan 2000 (the "General Plan"); (iii) Approval of a rezoning of the Project site from PD to PD with Specific Development Standards; (iv) Approval of a small subdivision for the Project site; (v) Approval of a conditional use permit, including a density bonus, for the Project; (vi) Approval of an environmental and design review permit for the Project; and (vii) Approval of a trip permit, including granting of bonus trips, for the Project. The rezoning, small subdivision, conditional use permit, environmental and design review permit, and trip permit are referred to collectively herein as the "Approvals" B. Procedural History On September 3 and November 7, 1991, Catholic Charities submitted applications for the following approvals related to the Project: (1) an environmental evaluation; (2) a zone change of the property from Low Density Residential (R-1) to Planned Development (PD); (3) a conditional use permit for the PD designation and bonus trips; (4) an environmental and design review permit; and (5) a tentative subdivision map. ki Following a review of the Project applications and supporting information, Planning Department Staff prepared an Initial Study for the Project dated January 7, 1992, which determined that the Project would not have any significant impacts that were not already mitigated to a level of insignificance by the incorporation of various mitigation measures and conditions of approval into the Project. For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and the CEQA Guidelines, and based upon the evidence, analysis and data set forth in the Initial Study and supporting background documents, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project pursuant to Cal. Pub. Res. Code Section 21080 (c) (2) . After reviewing and considering all testimony and evidence in the record, the Planning Commission ("Commission") on January 28, 1992 adopted unanimously a resolution recommending to the Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of a zone change for the Project, and approving the use permit, environmental design review permit and tentative subdivision. On February 3 and 4, 1992, Mr. Alan Titus and his wife, Ms. Meg Goldman, residents of Terra Linda, appealed the Commission's decision to the Council. On February 18, 1992 and March 2, 1992, the Council held public hearings to consider the 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration and the zone change and to hear the appeal. On March 2, 1992, the Council adopted unanimously the following: (1) a resolution denying the appeal; (2) a resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and (3) an ordinance granting the rezoning. C. The Superior Court Proceedings On April 2, 1992, Mr. Titus (the "Petitioner") filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate (the "Petition") in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Marin, challenging the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Project approvals adopted in reliance on the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Court issued a ruling on October 2, 1992, granting the Petition on the following grounds: (1) that the City had not complied with certain notice and findings requirements; and (2) that the City had misinterpreted Policies H-37, H-20 and LU -10 of the General Plan, pertaining to density bonuses for affordable housing, and RES -3, pertaining to General Plan residential policies. On these bases, the Court ordered the City to rescind the Project approvals. In accordance with the Court's ruling, on February 1, 1993, the Council rescinded the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Ordinance No. 1612, and Resolution Nos. 8624 and 8625. Consistent with the Court's ruling, the 5 Council rescinded the approvals only and left the original Project applications intact. During the period that the Project was in litigation, the City adopted revisions to the City of San Rafael Zoning Ordinance (the "Zoning Ordinance") which, among other things, eliminated the R-1 designation. In connection with the rescission of the Project approvals, the Project site was reclassified to PD to reflect the elimination of the R-1 category. D. Reconsideration of Project Applications and Environmental Review Documentation To reflect the issues raised in the Court's ruling, Catholic Charities on April 13, 1993 took the following actions regarding the Project applications: 1. Submitted an application to amend Policies H-37, H-20, LU -10 and RES -3 of the General Plan; 2. Submitted a trip permit application, prepared pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 14.26.030, to reflect a new requirement that a separate application be prepared for trip allocations; 6 3. Requested various minor changes to the applications for the zone change, environmental and design review permit, use permit and subdivision as follows: (a) to reflect that the site will total 116,305.2 square feet rather than 110,388 square feet as was previously indicated; (b) to reflect the elimination by the City of the R-1 designation and to request a rezoning from PD to PD with Specific Development Standards; (c) to incorporate in the subdivision application a Subdivision Development Plan that complies with the requirements of Section 15.02.050 of the San Rafael Municipal Code; and (d) to incorporate in the zone change application a Planned Development District Development Plan that complies with Zoning Ordinance Sections 14.07.020 and 14.07.060; 4. Requested minor updates to the Project Description and Environmental Information documents to reflect the proposed General Plan amendment; and 5. Submitted letters from the various consultants who performed analyses for the Project indicating that their analyses remained current. Following a review of the Project applications and supporting Project information, Planning Department Staff prepared a new Initial Study for the Project dated July 1, 7 1993, which determined that the Project would not have any significant environmental impacts which had not been mitigated to a level of insignificance by the incorporation of various measures into the Project. For purposes of compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, and based upon the data, evidence, and analysis set forth in the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project pursuant to Pub. Res. Code Section 21080(c)(2). The Mitigated Negative Declaration was made available to the public for review and comment pursuant to CEQA Section 21091.. Although only a 21 -day public comment period is required by CEQA, the public comment period on the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project began July 2, 1993, and ended September 14, 1993. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21092, the Mitigated Negative Declaration was filed and posted in the office of the Clerk of Marin County on July 20, 1993. Notice of the availability of the Mitigated Negative Declaration was also (1) posted in the office of the Clerk of the City of San Rafael; (2) posted at three locations on or near the Project site; (3) sent to neighbors within 300 feet of the Project site (and to others who had previously requested notice); and (4) published in the Marin Independent Journal. 8 Catholic Charities has continued to consult with the community throughout the application process. This consultation has included written and oral correspondence with neighbors and others in the community. Catholic Charities also sponsored a community meeting on August 11, 1993 to consider additional public comment on the Project. In response to comments received at the public meeting, Catholic Charities constructed additional story poles at the Project site to provide further information to the neighbors regarding the dimensions of the proposed building. E. Initial Commission Recommendations On September 14, 1993, at 7:30 p.m. in the San Rafael City Council Chambers in San Rafael, California, the Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing on the Project to consider the proposed Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, the General Plan amendment and the other Project Approvals. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered all evidence and testimony in the record, as described more fully below, the Commission adopted a Resolution recommending that the Council adopt the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Commission next considered the General Plan amendment for the Project. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered all evidence and testimony in the FJ record, the Commission adopted a Resolution recommending that the Council approve the General Plan amendment. Finally, the Commission considered the other Approvals. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered all evidence and testimony in the record, the Commission adopted a Resolution recommending that the Council grant the Project Approvals. The Commission also voted to adopt findings for the Project, which were incorporated as Exhibit A to each of the Resolutions of the Commission described above. F. Subsequent Council Hearings On October 18, 1993, at 7:30 p.m. in the San Rafael City Council Chambers in San Rafael, California, the Council held a duly -noticed public hearing to consider the Project and the Commission's recommendations regarding the proposed Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, the General Plan amendment and the other Project Approvals. During the public hearing, several Council members requested additional information from Staff prior to reaching a decision regarding the project. In particular, the Council requested that Staff prepare two alternative proposals regarding the General Plan amendment. The first alternative would be a more site-specific amendment, which would be tailored to the 10 St. Isabella site only. The second alternative would be substantially similar to the amendment that was originally proposed and recommended by the Commission, but would add additional language regarding such issues as scale, parking and trip allocations. It would also increase the eligible lot size from 1/2 acre to 1 acre. Staff prepared the requested alternatives and presented them to the Council at a public hearing on November 15, 1993. The Council determined that the second alternative, the original proposal with some modification, appeared to be the preferred alternative. The Council also determined that it would not formally consider and approve the Project, but would seek additional review and recommendation from the Commission. The Council voted unanimously to request that the Commission reconsider the Project together with the proposed modifications to the General Plan amendment, and provide a recommendation regarding the Project to the Council. In response to the Council's direction, Staff also prepared a new Initial Study dated December 9, 1993 to analyze the entire Project, including the proposed modifications to the General Plan amendment. The Initial Study determined that the Project would not have any significant environmental impacts which had not been 11 mitigated to a level of insignificance by the incorporation of various measures into the Project. For purposes of compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, and based upon the data, evidence and analysis set forth in the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project pursuant to Pub. Res. Code Section 21080(c)(2). The Mitigated Negative Declaration was made available to the public for review and comment pursuant to CEQA Section 21091. The public comment period on the Mitigated Negative Declaration began on December 10, 1993 and ended on January 11, 1994. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21092, the Mitigated Negative Declaration was filed and posted in the office of the Clerk of Marin County on December 10, 1993. Notice of the availability of the Mitigated Negative Declaration was also (1) posted in the office of the Clerk of the City of San Rafael; (2) posted at three locations on or near the Project site; (3) sent to neighbors within 300 feet of the Project site (and to others who had previously requested notice); and (4) published in the Marin Independent Journal. G. Reconsideration by Commission In response to the Council's request, on January 11, 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the San Rafael City Council Chambers in San Rafael, California, the Commission 12 held a duly -noticed public hearing on the Project to consider the proposed modifications to the General Plan amendment and the Initial Study and Final Mitigated Negative Declaration. In light of the modifications to the General Plan amendment and the new Initial Study and Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Commission also reconsidered the Approvals. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered all evidence and testimony on the record, as described more fully below, the Commission adopted unanimously a Resolution recommending that the Council adopt the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Commission next considered the General Plan amendment for the Project. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered all evidence and testimony in the record, the Commission adopted unanimously a Resolution recommending that the Council approve the General Plan amendment, including the modifications proposed by the Council. Finally, the Commission considered the other Project Approvals. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered all evidence and testimony in the record, the Commission adopted unanimously a Resolution recommending that the Council grant the Project Approvals. 13 The Commission also voted to adopt findings for the Project, which are incorporated as Exhibit A to each of the Resolutions of the Commission described above. H. Consideration of Proiect by Council On February 7, 1994, at 8:00 p.m. in the San Rafael City Council Chambers in San Rafael, California, the Council held a duly -noticed public hearing to consider the Project and the Commission's recommendations regarding the proposed Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, the General Plan amendment and the other Project Approvals. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered all evidence and testimony in the record, as described more fully below, the Council adopted a Resolution adopting the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Council next considered the General Plan amendment for the Project. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered the entire record, the Council adopted a Resolution approving the General Plan amendment. Finally, the Council considered the other Project Approvals. Upon review of the Project, and after having considered all evidence and testimony on the record, the Council adopted a Resolution granting the Project Approvals. 14 The Council also voted to adopt findings for the Project, which were incorporated as Exhibit A to each of the Resolutions of the Council described above. I. Description of the Record For the purposes of CEQA and these findings, the record before the Council relating to the Project includes, without limitation, the following: 1. The applications for, and all documents and evidence submitted in connection with, the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the General Plan amendment and the other Approvals, including, but not limited to, all documents related to the Project applications that were submitted on September 3 and November 7, 1991, and April •13, 1993; 2. The Order of the Superior Court dated October 2, 1992, regarding the Project; 3. Staff Reports prepared for all public hearings regarding the Project, beginning with the January 28, 1992, Planning Commission hearing; 15 4. All documentary and oral evidence received and reviewed by the City during all public hearings and public comment periods on the Project; 5. All meeting minutes and any available tapes of transcripts of all public meetings and hearings on the Project; 6. The Initial Studies and Mitigated Negative Declarations prepared for the Project; 7. All studies prepared by consultants for the Project, including, but not limited to, a geotechnical investigation, archaeological survey, traffic study, engineering survey, acoustical survey, line -of -sight study and shadow study; 8. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the Project; 9. The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the General Plan; and 10. All matters of common knowledge to the Council, including, but not limited to: 16 and a. The General Plan; b. The Zoning Ordinance; C. The City's Subdivision Ordinance; d. Other City policies and regulations. J. Optional Findings The findings contained herein include certain required findings pursuant to CEQA, established General Plan amendment procedures, the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision Code, as well as certain optional findings included by the City. The Council hereby adopts the following findings with respect to the Project: II. FINDINGS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21000 ET SEO.) The following Findings set forth the basis for an analysis supporting the Council's decision to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project. Reference is made to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 17 attached to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopted as part of these Findings. A. Geolocry The Initial Study on pages 9-11 indicates that the Project may have some impact on geology due to grading of earth surfaces and the potential exposure of people or property to earthquake hazards. However, these impacts are expected to be insignificant. Any soil disruption during grading is expected to be short-term and minimal. Any exposure of people or property to earthquake hazards is expected to be insignificant because the property is not located in any area of significant earthquake concern. In December 1991, the Geotechnical Review Board reviewed the Treadwell & Rollo Geotechnical Investigation, a Topographic Map, and a Mass Grading Plan. The Board concluded that an appropriate subsurface exploration and laboratory testing program was performed, and that the Geotechnical Report is adequate for the Project at this time, and meets the intent of the Geotechnical Review Matrix and current standard practice. Catholic Charities confirmed with Treadwell & Rollo, Inc. in a letter dated March 16, 1993 that the Geotechnical Investigation continues to reflect the geotechnical condition of the property. 18 Although the Project is not expected to result in a significant impact on geology, Catholic Charities has agreed to incorporate the various measures described below into the Project to further reduce any potential impacts on geologic hazards. 1. Facts Measure No. 1 on page 1 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program provides that the Project would comply with standard grading permit requirements. Measure No. 2 on page 1 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program requires that, to minimize the threat of human injury in the event of an earthquake, the Project would comply with all recommendations contained in the geotechnical investigation. 2. Findinas Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, including, but not limited to, the information contained on pages 9-11 of the Initial Study and described in paragraph II.A above, the Council finds that any potential impacts of the Project on geology will be insignificant and will be further reduced by the design of the Project and Catholic Charities, agreement to the mitigation measures imposed on the Project referenced herein. 19 B. Noise The Initial Study on pages 17-19 indicates that the Project may have some impact on noise due to short-term noise generated by construction, some new noise generated by the Project, and exposure of new residents to some outdoor noise. However, the noise impacts of the Project are not expected to be significant. The acoustical engineering firm of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. prepared an acoustical survey dated January 17, 1992, that concludes that the Project is within the "conditionally acceptable" category of the City's noise guidelines. The survey also suggests various measures that could be implemented by Catholic Charities to further reduce any potential noise at the site. Illingworth & Rodkin confirmed in a February 25, 1993 letter that the acoustical survey continues to reflect the noise conditions at the site. Although the Project is not expected to result in significant impacts on noise, Catholic Charities has agreed to incorporate the various measures described below into the Project to further reduce any noise impacts from the Project. 1. Facts Measure No. 3 on page 1 of the Mitigation 401 Monitoring and Reporting Program provides that the Project would establish appropriate construction work hours to minimize noise impacts during construction. Measure No. 4 on page 1 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program provides that the City would limit delivery times to daylight hours to eliminate any noise inconvenience to surrounding properties. Measure No. 5 on page 1 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program provides that the Project would incorporate the sound insulation measures recommended in the acoustical study. 2. Findinas Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, including, but not limited to, the information contained on pages 17-19 of the Initial Study and described in paragraph II.B above, the Council finds that any potential impacts of the Project on noise will be insignificant, and will be further reduced by the Project design and Catholic Charities' agreement to the mitigation measures imposed on the Project referenced herein. C. Licht and Glare The Initial Study at page 19 indicates that the Project may produce some new light from building illumination. However, the impacts of the new light sources 21 are not expected to be significant. Although the Project is not expected to result in significant impacts on light and glare, Catholic Charities has agreed to incorporate the various measures described below into the Project to further reduce any light and glare impacts from the Project. 1. Facts Measure No. 6 on page 2 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program provides that the light sources at the Project would be designed to light the development area and not cast light toward the surrounding residences. 2. Findinas Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, including, but not limited to, information contained on page 19 of the Initial Study, the Council finds that any potential impacts of the Project on light and glare will be insignificant, and will be further reduced by the Project design and Catholic Charities, agreement to the mitigation measures imposed on the Project referenced herein. D. Traffic The Initial Study at page 26 indicates that the Project may result in some alterations to present patterns 22 of circulation due to a variety of proposed roadway improvements. However, the impact on circulation patterns is not expected to be significant. The Project will incorporate a nearly ninety degree four-way intersection at the juncture where the three main roadways now provide access to the site, thereby improving traffic circulation. The traffic study conducted by Robert L. Harrison states that the proposed realigned north leg of Trinity Way will have adequate sight distance between the intersection with Freitas Parkway and the proposed intersection with the north driveway of the parking area. The intersection of the north and south legs of Trinity Way is proposed to be controlled by a four-way stop which would provide some control on the speed of traffic near the Project as well as providing for the safe operation of the intersection. The traffic engineer also indicates that the proposed parking plan meets the requirements for safe vehicle maneuver and parking. Mr. Harrison confirmed in a letter dated March 2, 1993 that the traffic study continues to reflect the condition of the Project site. Although the Project is not expected to result in significant impacts on traffic, Catholic Charities has agreed to incorporate the measures described below into the Project to further reduce any traffic impacts from the Project. 23 1. Facts Measure No. 7 on page 2 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program provides that Catholic Charities will pay a traffic mitigation fee in the amount of $28,836.00. Measure No. 8 on page 2 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program provides that the circulation and parking plans for the Project would be built according to the traffic engineer's recommendations. 2. Findinas Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, including, but not limited to, the information contained on page 26 of the Initial Study and described in paragraph II.D above, the Council finds that any potential impacts of the Project on traffic circulation will be insignificant, and will be further reduced by the Project design and Catholic Charities' agreement to the mitigation measures imposed on the Project referenced herein. E. Other Insignificant Impacts Only the impacts in the Initial Study identified as having the potential to result in an impact on the environment have been identified herein. As discussed above, these impacts do not have the potential to be 24 significant with the adoption of the measures described above. Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that all other impacts of the Project not expressly referenced herein have been identified as insignificant in the Initial Study and therefore do not require mitigation. F. Growth -Inducing Impacts Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, including, but not limited to, the information contained on pages 19-28 and page 31 of the Initial Study, the Council finds that the Project will not have any growth -inducing impacts. The City has not received any other applications requesting density bonuses to develop affordable senior housing on low-density residential sites. Moreover, according to a survey conducted by Planning Department Staff, the proposed site is the only site in the City that could currently meet the criteria of the revised General Plan language for development on low-density sites. The Project is located on an infill parcel adjacent to existing development, and will provide for only those public facilities and services needed to service the Project. 25 G. Cumulative Impacts Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, including, but not limited to, the information contained on pages 19-28 and page 31 of the Initial Study, the Council finds that the Project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. The Project is located within an infill area that has been zoned for Planned Development use and is compatible with surrounding uses. The application for the proposed Project is the only request that the City is currently considering for density bonuses to develop affordable senior housing on low-density residential sites. According to a survey conducted by Planning Department Staff, the proposed Project site is the only site in the City that could currently meet the criteria of the revised General Plan language for development on low- density sites. The Initial Study did not identify any potentially significant impacts that would be cumulatively considerable. H. Overall Findings; Independent Judgment In making these Findings, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15074, the Council has reviewed and considered all of the evidence and testimony in the public record, including, but not limited to, the evidence 26 previously referenced and incorporated herein. Based upon this evidence and testimony, the Council finds that all impacts, including cumulative impacts, have been mitigated to a level of insignificance by the imposition of mitigation measures on the Project, as referenced and discussed in detail herein, and by modifications to the Project agreed to by Catholic Charities before the Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review. The Council also finds that there is no substantial evidence before it that the Project as modified by these various design measures and mitigation measures may have a significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21082.1, the Council finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the Council's independent judgment. I. Finding Regarding Mitigation Monitorinq and Revortina Proaram. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081.6, the Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The mitigation measures described above have been incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contains all of the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study as necessary to ensure that any impacts of the Project are 27 reduced to a level of insignificance. III. FINDINGS RELATED TO PROJECT APPROVALS, A. Finding Under Resolution 8379 of the City of San Rafael (General Plan Amendment Procedure) 1. Public Interest Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the public interest is served by the proposed amendment to General Plan Policies H-37, H-20, LU -10 and RES -3. The Council finds that the potential impacts of the General Plan amendment have been adequately analyzed in the Initial Study and the Mitigated Negative Declaration and are consistent with the General Plan EIR. The General Plan amendment is consistent with the total buildout analyzed in the General Plan EIR, and also helps to clarify the limited circumstances where development on certain low density, non -Hillside area sites is appropriate. The application for the proposed Project is the only request that the City is currently considering for density bonuses to develop affordable senior housing on low-density residential sites. The proposed amendments serve the public interest by clarifying the General Plan policies that the Superior Court determined the City has misinterpreted. In addition, 28 various General Plan policies, including H-33, H-36, HB -55, HB -60 and HB -62-64, place strong emphasis on the need for additional low-income senior housing in the City. As noted in HB -63, there are approximately 357 low -moderate or subsidized senior units in the City and its unincorporated planning area, sufficient to accommodate only 4.71k of all persons aged 62 or over. By contrast, nearly three-quarters of the City's senior households are either low- or moderate - income. Fifty-six percent of senior households earned less than $15,000, thereby qualifying for federal assistance. HB -63. The General Plan amendment, together with the other Project approvals, will allow Catholic Charities to construct an additional 62 units of much-needed affordable senior housing in the City of San Rafael. The amendment ensures that affordable senior housing will be built only on sites that will meet the special needs of seniors. Under the proposed language, the housing sites must be on flat sites within walking distance of services and transit, thereby ensuring that seniors will remain mobile and have access to important services. The amendment also guarantees that density bonuses will only be awarded to projects that will provide at least 40% of the available units to low- and very low-income seniors for a period of at least 40 years. 29 The Planning Department has conducted a City-wide survey and has not identified any other sites that would currently qualify for a density bonus pursuant to the proposed amendment. Other sites could become available in the future if existing structures are demolished. This outcome is speculative, however, and there are currently no plans for the demolition of buildings located on sites that would be suitable for development under the proposed amendments. For the reasons described above and based upon the entire record for this Project, the General Plan amendment serves the public interest. B. Designing in Consideration of Neighborhood Scale (General Plan Policies LU -10, H-20 and RES -3) Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council -finds that the Project is designed in consideration of neighborhood scale. The Project has undergone an intensive review process that has spanned over two years, and has included numerous public hearings before the Design Review Board, the Commission and the Council. One of the primary issues that was discussed on an ongoing basis throughout the public hearing process is the scale of the Project, and the importance of ensuring that the Project is consistent with 30 the surrounding neighborhood in terms of scale, density, intensity and design. Although the Project is larger and denser than the adjacent homes, the impacts on scale have been substantially reduced and harmonized with the neighborhood by, for example, applying appropriate design techniques, maximizing setbacks and adding landscaping and fencing. The Project is also limited to 30 feet in height, consistent with the existing height limitations for single- family zoning areas. When considering scale, it is also appropriate to consider the older surrounding neighborhood, which some of the Planning Commissioners have noted is more dense and includes two-story structures. In addition to the single-family homes, the Project is adjacent to Freitas Parkway and a variety of church uses, including the church building and the St. Isabella Elementary School. For these reasons and the reasons discussed in Sections C.2 and E.5 below, the Project is designed in consideration of neighborhood scale. C. Findings Under Sections 14.27.060 and 14.07.090 of the City of San Rafael Zoning Ordinance (Rezoning) 1. Public Necessitv/General Welfare Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the public health, safety and general welfare are served by the rezoning of the property from PD to PD with Specific 31 Development Standards. As described in Section A.1 above, the Housing Goals and Policies section of the General Plan states that there is a large undersupply of units for lower income senior households in the City. The Project is necessary to meet the undersupply of senior housing in the City and allow for development of senior housing on a residentially designated site. The rezoning would allow a density bonus for the property, thereby enabling the Project sponsor to construct a sufficient number of units to keep each unit affordable to low- and very low-income seniors. For these reasons and the reasons discussed in Section A.1 above, the zone change is required for public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. 2. Consistencv with General Plan Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the rezoning from PD to PD with Specific Development Standards and the Project as a whole substantially comply with and are consistent with the General Plan for the following reasons. (a) Prolect consistencv with housing policies. The Project is consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the General Plan for housing. Those goals include, but are not limited to, the following: kv-1 (i) The Housing Background section notes: "There are currently no proposals for additional low/moderate or subsidized senior units in the planning area. By the year 2000, if no additional units are constructed, only 3.7% of the projected persons aged 62+ will be accommodated in existing projects." The Project would address this need by providing additional units for low- and very low-income seniors. (ii) Housing Policy H-17 encourages new affordable housing that is of quality construction and design to meet local demographic needs and complement existing neighborhoods. General Plan, p. H-2. As determined by the Design Review Board ("DRB"), the Project is of quality construction and will complement the existing neighborhood by incorporation of the various design elements discussed in Section (b), below. The Project addresses demographic needs by providing much-needed units for low- and very low-income seniors. (iii) Policy H-32 encourages low-income senior housing projects to be developed in residential areas of the City generally. General Plan, p. H-4. The Project is proposed for the Terra Linda neighborhood in a primarily residential area. 33 (iv) Policy H-20 provides that low-income projects are to be given priority in awarding traffic allocation bonuses. General Plan, p. H-2. The Project will be affordable to low- and very low-income seniors. (b) Prosect consistencv with applicable residential neighborhood and land use policies,. The Project is also consistent with the applicable residential neighborhood and land use policies of the General Plan. For example, Residential Neighborhood Policy RES -1 provides that: "The City will protect and conserve existing neighborhoods by requiring that new development be harmoniously integrated into existing neighborhoods in terms of density, intensity and design." Land Use Policy LU -19 requires that projects be designed in relation to the surrounding area. The Project is consistent with these goals. As discussed on page 29 of the Initial Study, the DRB reviewed the Project eight times beginning in January, 1991. As a result of comments from the DRB and the community, the architect has created a lower building with greater architectural articulation to create a more residential concept. While the Project is more dense than surrounding detached, single-family houses, it is designed to conform to 34 the community context. Building elements at the perimeter of the site are one-story structures, in scale approximating the neighborhood residential structures. The use of varying roof forms, decks and patios, as well as the staggering of portions of the structure, serves to "break up" the general linear layout of the building and permit greater integration with existing development. The current design allows the Project to remain economical while achieving integration with the existing neighborhood. 3. Harmonv with Surroundina Neiahborhood Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, and for the reasons more fully described in Sections B and C.2 above and E.5 below, the Council finds that the Project constitutes a residential environment of sustained durability and stability in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, and that adequate open space has been provided. 4. Adequate Public Facilities Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, and for the reasons more fully described in Section E.6 below, the Council finds that adequate public facilities are provided to serve the anticipated population at the Project. 35 S. Improvement by Deviations from Standards Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, and for the reasons more fully described in Section E.7 below, the Council finds that the Project is improved by deviations from typical property development standards. The Project also contains adequate parking based on studies conducted by staff and the parking standards contained in Section 14.18.040 of the Zoning Ordinance. 6. Adequate Desian of Traffic Svstem Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, and for the reasons more fully described in Section E.8 below, the Council finds that the auto, bicycle and pedestrian traffic system is adequately designed for circulation needs and public safety, and emergency vehicle access is provided. D. Findings Under Sections 66412.3, 66473.1, 66473.5, 66474, 66474.6, and 65567 of the Government Code and Sections 15.12.030 and 15.12.050 of the City of San Rafael Subdivision Ordinance (Subdivision) 1. Compliance with Regional Housing Needs Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Government Code, 36 and based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the City of San Rafael has balanced the regional housing needs of the region against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. As discussed in the staff report, the Project meets a need for affordable senior housing identified in the Housing Element of the General Plan. The Initial Study has not identified any environmental resources on the site which could be impacted by the Project. The Initial Study has also determined that adequate public services are available to serve the Project. 2. Passive or Natural Heating or Coolina Oonortunities Pursuant to Section 66473.1 of the Government Code and based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the design of proposed improvements provide, to the extent feasible based on balancing the need to create a design compatible with the neighborhood with solar energy needs, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. The Project is oriented to the east/west and will be able to take advantage of prevailing winds. 37 3. Phvsical Suitabilitv of the Site Pursuant to Section 66474 of the Government Code, and based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the site is physically suited for the proposed type and density of the development. The Council has recommended adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration which has found that any potential impacts can be mitigated to a level of insignificance. The Project site is a level site adjacent to Freitas Parkway, a major City street. The Geotechnical Review Board has reviewed the reports and documents prepared for the site and recommended that development of the site meets current standards. The Project design has been reviewed by the City's Design Review Board which recommended that the project design is compatible with the existing neighborhood and that all design elements, including parking, open space, and building height and setbacks meet zoning and General Plan guidelines for design. 4. Environmental Damaae Pursuant to Section 66474 of the Government Code and based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the design or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife or their habitats. The site 38 is located within an urban area and does not contain any streams, waterways, or other habitats. The Initial Study prepared for the Project has not identified any significant impacts on environmental resources or habitats. 5. Consistencv with General Plan Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Government Code, and based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified therein. The subdivision and the Project as a whole are consistent with the General Plan for the reasons more fully discussed in Section C.2 above. 6. Compliance with Sewer Discharge Reauirements Pursuant to Section 66474.6 of the Government Code, and based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the Project will not result in a discharge of waste into an existing community sewer system in violation of existing requirements of the Water Code. As discussed on pages 27-28 of the Initial Study, the Project involves sewer system impacts that are typical of the impacts of urban residential 39 development and will not result in the discharge of hazardous materials or waste. The City has planned for the development of the area and has allocated services, including sewer services, accordingly. 7. Consistency with the Open Space Plan Pursuant to Section 65567 of the Government Code, and based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the subdivision is consistent with the Open Space Plan of the General Plan. The site is not shown as a proposed park, trail, or other recreation use on the Recreation Plan Map of the General Plan. Ordinance 1558 which implements Policy R-4 of the General Plan requiring payment of a parkland dedication in -lieu fee provides for a waiver of fees for projects which provide below market rate units as defined by the General Plan. The Council has approved a waiver of these fees as part of the Project. The fee waiver is appropriate because all 62 units meet the affordability criteria of the General Plan. 8. Public Health Problems Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health 40 problems. The subdivision will allow construction of a senior housing project. The Initial Study prepared for the Project has not identified any hazardous materials on the site or any other potential impacts on public health. 9. Conformitv with Law Pursuant to Section 15.12.030 of the City of San Rafael Subdivision Ordinance (the "Subdivision Ordinance"), and based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the proposed subdivision is consistent with law and the Subdivision Ordinance generally. For the reasons more fully discussed in Section C.2 above, the subdivision and the Project as a whole are consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 15.12.030 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Catholic Charities has also submitted a Subdivision Development Plan that complies with the requirements of Section 15.02.050 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 10. Compliance with Section 15.12.050, Approval of Access Over Private Right -of -Way, of the City of San Rafael Subdivision Ordinance Approval of the proposed access to the Project over a private right-of-way is recommended based upon the development plan submitted pursuant to this section. The 41 proposed right-of-way width, grade and material specifications are consistent with the existing roadway alignment. Application for the exceptions has been field with the Planning Department and made available to the Council. The location of the existing entrance way is appropriate for the configuration of the project and the proposed roadway street width has been reviewed and recommended by the Public Works Department. The Council approves the exception based upon the following facts: a. There are special circumstances with regard to the location of the proposed access road in that the roadway is in existence and is an extension of a public street called Trinity Way, the configuration of the entrance of the new project is oriented toward the proposed private way, and additional access from Freitas Parkway would create additional curb cuts and intersections with Freitas Parkway. b. The private roadway extension is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the petitioner in that the roadway alignment currently exists, and is a logical access as it is an extension of a City street. 42 C. The granting of the exception to allow access by a private right-of-way will not be detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to other property in the vicinity in that the private roadway already exists and provides the safest access to the Project from a traffic and engineering standpoint. E. Findings Under Section 14.22.80 of the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance (Conditional Use Permit) 1. Consistency with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Purposes of the District Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the proposed use of the Project is consistent with the General Plan, for the reasons more fully discussed in Section C.2 above. The Council further finds that the Project is consistent with the relevant objectives of the Zoning Ordinance contained in Section 14.01.030. For the reasons more fully discussed in Section C.2 above, the Project has been designed to foster harmonious and workable relationships among land uses, reduce or remove any potential negative Project impacts and promote design quality. The Project also furthers General Plan and Zoning Ordinance policies regarding preserving housing stock and promoting development to meet special housing needs by providing 62 new affordable housing units for senior 43 citizens. Finally, the extensive public participation process, including community meetings, design review board hearings, and public comment received through the Commission and Council public hearing process, and the public meeting held by Catholic Charities, has provided for effective citizen participation. 2. Public Health, Safetv and Welfare Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City. For the reasons discussed more fully in Sections A.1 and C.1 above, the Project is consistent with the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare of the community. In addition, the Initial Study and the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project establish that the Project will not result in any potentially significant impacts on the environment. In particular, the Initial Study at pages 28-29 determines that the Project will not result in any potentially significant impacts on human health. 44 3. Compliance with Applicable Provisions of Zonina Ordinance Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that, for the reasons more fully discussed in Sections C and E.1 above, the Project is consistent with objectives of the Zoning Ordinance contained in Section 14.01.030. The Project is also consistent with specific provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, including, but not limited to, provisions regarding Planned Development Districts (Sections 14.07.010 et sea.), Site and Use Regulations (Sections 14.16.010 et sea.), Parking Standards (Sections 14.18.010 et sea.), Use Permits (Sections 14.22.010 et sea.), Environmental and Design Review Permits (Sections 14.25.010 et seq.), Trip Permits (Sections 14.26.010 et sea.), and Amendments (Sections 14.27.010 et sea.), as discussed in detail throughout these findings. 4. Consistency with General Plan and Other Policies Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that, for the reasons more fully discussed in Sections C.2 and E.1 -E.3 above, the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan, and all other applicable plans and policies of the City. 45 5. Harmony with Surrounding Neighborhood Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the Project constitutes a residential environment of sustained durability and stability and harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, and provides adequate open space. As is more fully discussed in Section C.2 above, the Project has undergone significant design review and alteration to ensure harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Although the Zoning Ordinance does not provide a specific open space requirement for the PD district, the Project incorporates a substantial landscaped backyard. 6. Public Facilities Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that adequate public facilities are provided by the Project to serve the anticipated population. As is described in further detail on pages 27-28 of the Initial Study prepared for the Project, the Project is typical of urban residential development, and can be served by existing public facilities. The Project is also within walking distance of a transit stop and services. Catholic Charities has submitted a site plan and a utility plan which describe in 46 detail the proposed streets, lot patterns, parking, utilities, drainage, and other improvements. 7. The Project Is Improved by Deviations from Tvpical Standards Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the Project is improved by deviations from typical zoning ordinance property development and parking standards. Parking for the proposed use is 0.76 space per unit, consistent with Section 14.18.040 of the Zoning Ordinance. The current zoning for the Project is PD, and does not contain specific development standards. For purposes of comparison, the Project is consistent with the setbacks required for the prior R-1 zoning designation. The maximum building height of the Project is thirty (30) feet, which is consistent with the R-1 requirements. The proposed plan involves a density of approximately 23 units per acre, compared to the R-1 standard of approximately 8.7 units per acre. Consistent with the General Plan policies described in Section C.2 above regarding density bonuses for affordable senior housing, Catholic Charities has requested an appropriate density bonus as part of the Project. 47 The deviation from the minimum lot coverage standard improves the Project because it allows Catholic Charities to construct a more economical project that will be affordable to very low- and low-income seniors. At the same time, Catholic Charities has incorporated a variety of design elements to ensure that the Project is well integrated with the existing neighborhood. 8. Circulation Needs and Public Safetv Based upon the information in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the auto, bicycle and pedestrian traffic system is adequately designed for circulation needs and public safety and that emergency vehicle access is provided. As is discussed on pages 24-27 of the Initial Study, the Project incorporates various traffic improvements such as a four-way intersection and a parking plan to ensure that circulation needs and public safety are adequate. The traffic report prepared for the Project indicates that (1) the realigned north leg of Trinity Way will have adequate sight distance, (2) the four- way stop at the intersection of the -north and south legs of Trinity Way will control the speed of traffic near the intersection, and (3) the parking plan meets the requirements for safe vehicle maneuver and parking. 48 F. Findings Under Section 14.26.050 of the Zoninq Ordinance (Trip Permits) 1. Traffic Level of Service Standards Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the Project will not cause traffic Levels of Service (LOS) standards to be exceeded for any local streets or critical interchanges. According to the traffic study prepared for the Project discussed at pages 24-25 of the Initial Study, the majority of the traffic generated by the Project will not occur during peak traffic hours. The estimated peak hour Project traffic would increase the existing peak hour traffic on Freitas Parkway by less than 11i. The relatively small number of trips that would be generated by the Project would have no potentially significant impact on the operation of the local streets or critical interchanges. Moreover, traffic circulation will be improved by the incorporation of various traffic improvements, as discussed in detail in Sections II.D and III.E.8, above. 2. Consistency with Bonus Trip Purposes Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that an award of bonus trips for this Project, an affordable 49 senior housing complex, is consistent with specific bonus trip purposes described in the General Plan. The reasons for this finding are described more fully in Section C.2 above. 3. Public Health/Welfare Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the granting of bonus trips to the Project will not materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. The requested bonus trips are consistent with the purposes of the General Plan discussed in Section C.2 above, and will allow Catholic Charities to address the undersupply of affordable senior housing in the City. The bonus trips will not result in a significant increase in traffic in the neighborhood or in the City generally, as discussed on pages 24-25 of the Initial Study. G. Findings Under Section 14.25.090 of the Zoning Ordinance (Environmental and Desictn Review Permits) 1. Consistency with General Plan/Zoning Ordinance Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and 50 J the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the granting of an environmental and design review permit for the Project is consistent with the General Plan and the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, as more fully described in Section C.2 above. 2. Consistencv with Desian Criteria Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the Project is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping criteria and guidelines for the district in which the site is located. The site is located in a PD district, and Catholic Charities has provided a Planned Development District Development Plan that is consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. For the reasons more fully described in Section C.2 above, the Project is consistent with the residential character of the surrounding neighborhood. 3. Minimization of Adverse Environmental Impacts Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, the Council finds that the Project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts, as more specifically described in the Initial Study. In particular, the design is consistent with the intensity, 51 density and design of the existing neighborhood, as described more fully in Section C.2 above, and will not result in a significant alteration of the land use in the area. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that will further reduce any potential impacts has been adopted for the Project. 4. Public Health/Welfare Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the entire record before the Council, and for the reasons more fully described in Sections C.1 and C.2 above, the Council finds that the Project design will not be detrimental to the public welfare nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. H. Findings Pursuant to Ordinance No. 1558 (Waiver of Parkland Dedication Fees) Pursuant to Ordinance No. 1558 of the City of San• Rafael which establishes Regulations for the Dedication of Land, Payment of Fees, or Both, For Park and Recreational Purposes and provides for the waiver of fees for dwelling units which are to be built as below market rate (BMR) units as defined by the San Rafael General Plan, the Council finds that a waiver of the Parkland Dedication Fees for the Project is appropriate because Catholic Charities has submitted a written request for such waiver and all 62 units 52 meet the affordability criteria of the General Plan. 53 0 WN .d C C u a3... bo bC bo S��boOa �c vi a d 0o A _ to S'G GO R., in R. A C C bo �`' ' �' ' `�'; r � • ,.