HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 9099 (1 Trinity Way Use Permit)RESOLUTION NO.9 0 9 9
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A USE PERMIT,
ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT,
SUBDIVISION, AND TRIP PERMIT FOR A 62 -UNIT
AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT (ST. ISABELLA),
Z91-6, UP91-53, ED91-69, s91-6, T93-1,
1 Trinity Way, AP175-181-26
San Rafael
WHEREAS, applications for a 62 -unit senior housing project on the subject site, including a
zone change, use permit, environmental and design review permit, subdivision, and trip
permit for the 62 -unit affordable senior housing project (St. Isabella) were submitted; 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; and
WHEREAS, a second Initial Study was prepared to reflect issues raised 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
prepared 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; 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 City Council determined that the
"policy alternative", which consisted of the original proposed amendment with some
- 1 'U R I G I �4 L -
-o909 9
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 reviewed the entire record
including the staff report; and
WHEREAS, by separate Resolution based on its review of the entire record, the Planning
Commission has recommended to the City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration including a mitigation monitoring program for the project; and
WHEREAS, by separate Resolution the Planning Commission has recommended to the
City Council adoption of the General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, in light of the modifications to the General Plan Amendment and the new
Initial Study, the Planning Commission also considered its previous recommendations
regarding the other project approvals; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 94-3 recommending to the
City Council approval of the zone change, use permit, environmental and design review
permit, subdivision, and trip permit for the project; and
WHEREAS, on February 7, 1994, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing at
which time it considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan
Amendment and project applications; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Rafael reviewed and considered the proposed
environmental document, public testimony and staff reports and by separate resolution has
- 2 -
adopted previously the Mitigated Negative Declaration including the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Rafael reviewed and considered public
testimony and the staff report on the General Plan Amendment to revise General Plan
Policy provisions to allow density bonuses in certain Low Density Residential Land Use
Designations (GPA93-2) and by separate resolution has adopted previously the General Plan
Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered public testimony and the staff
reports on the project applications for the proposed 62 -unit affordable senior housing project
(St. Isabella).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the San Rafael City Council approves the use
permit (UP91-53), the environmental and design review permit (ED91-69), the small
subdivision (01-6), and the trip permit (T-93-1) for a 62 -unit affordable senior housing
project (St. Isabella) subject to the attached conditions based on the specific findings
pertaining to the project approvals contained in Exhibit A to this Resolution and hereby
adopts such findings.
I, JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City 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 B- 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 50% 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
1
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. Reauested Approvals and Anolications
(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;
OAI
(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.
3
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 Proceedinas
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
0
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;
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.
s
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
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 Hearinas
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 Prosect 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;
S. 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 Findinas
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
20
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. Liaht 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. Findings
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 Insianificant 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
Judcrment
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
Monitoring and Renortina 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 4.716 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
Zoninq 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) Prosect 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:
32
W 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 3.716 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) Proiect consistency 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. Adeuuate Public Facilities
Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
the entire record before the Council, and for the reasons
more fully described in Section EA below, the Council finds
that adequate public facilities are provided to serve the
anticipated population at the Project.
35
5. 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. Adeauate Design 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 Opportunities
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 Damage
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
Recrui rement s
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 sea.), Trip
Permits (Sections 14.26.010 et sea.), and Amendments
(Sections 14.27.010 et seq.), 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
Neiqhborhood
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 Typical 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 Zoning 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 lo. 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.S, 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 Desian Review Permits)
1. Consistency with General
Plan/Zoning Ordinance
Based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
50
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 Design 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
04
i�. a
bo cu
bo oo 60 0o E
p go caA a a mL
0 0
1.4
c� 0 0o co 0o .~ to 0o
�o v
WPI 0
a P PC :3
o�a�
60N
T
H
it \
p C�
0. u ea H •p
vl o 'p
0 to
~ M end '"" .N. A � V
fu a
0 pa
r ; W r poO CCCC +: U)o
N ' a
bQJ R
ed a
O cn °c °u0 'c°o
' o
o
0.0
oc a
po
fa
u cu
z > oa• b o�•Gao,
oo N V
as ciU cviw :3 Uiar
O
c9
N