HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 14329 (Dominican Sister Lourdes Convent Appeal)RESOLUTION NO. 14329
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL
DENYING APPEAL AP 17-003 AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
ACTION TO UPHOLD THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S APPROVAL OF A USE
PERMIT AMENDMENT (UP16-057) TO PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF
THE 1,995 -SQUARE -FOOT "YELLOW HALLWAY" AREA OF
THE LOURDES CONVENT TO A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL UNIT
FOR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FOR A TERM OF TWO YEARS
77 LOCUST AVENUE
(APN 015-112-23)
WHEREAS, the Sisters of Third Order of St. Dominic Congregation of the Most Holy
Name Support Charitable Trust (Dominican Sisters) own and occupy the "Lourdes Convent"
located at 77 Locust Avenue. The 2.1 -acre property is developed with a 16,450 -square foot
convent facility that houses a retirement center with congregate care unit for retired nuns; The
retirement center and ancillary uses operates under a Use Permit (UP79-18) that was issued by
the City in 1979. The Lourdes Convent property was rezoned from the U (Unclassified) District
to PD (Planned Development) District in 1992; and
WHEREAS, in late 2016, the Dominican Sisters filed an application to amend the
Lourdes Convent Use Permit (UP16-057)to convert a 1,995 -square -foot portion of the retirement
center ("yellow hallway" area) from residential rooms to a single, residential unit with a kitchen
for transitional housing. In partnership with Homeward Bound, the residential unit would be
made available to two single women and their children as a shared residence. The shared unit
would be for "transitional housing" for the residents. The Use Permit Amendment request is for
two years following unit occupancy; and
WHEREAS, following City staff review of the proposal, the Use Permit Amendment
application was scheduled for review and action by the Zoning Administrator. On January 4,
2017, the Zoning Administrator held a noticed public hearing on the Use Permit amendment
application. The Zoning Administrator hearing was attended by approximately 50 people that
included the applicant and neighboring residents. Approximately 20 people provided public
testimony expressing both support and opposition to the proposal. Following public testimony,
the Zoning Administrator: a) closed the public hearing; b) indicated that all concerns and
comments would be reviewed, addressed and considered in an action on the application; and c)
reported that a decision on the Use Permit Amendment application would be issued by January
28, 2017; and
WHEREAS, following the January 4, 2017 hearing, the Zoning Administrator compiled
and organized 17 questions and comments presented at the hearing and in correspondence
submitted to the City. A detailed response to each question and comment was prepared and
considered in the findings for action on the Use Permit Amendment;
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2017, the Zoning Administrator issued a Notice of Action
conditionally approving Use Permit Amendment UP16-057. The approval action was: a) based
on facts and findings and supported by the response to comments and questions raised by the
public; and b) subject to conditions of approvals included in the Notice of Action; and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing to review and consider Appeals AP 17-001 and AP 17-002 to the Zoning Administrator's
approval of Use Permit Amendment UP16-057, and considered all oral and written public
testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2017, the Planning Commission, on a 6-0-1 vote
(Commissioner Paul absent) adopted Resolution No. 17-02 denying Appeals AP 17-001 and AP -
002 and upholding the Zoning Administrator's approval of Use Permit UP 16-057. As part of this
action and at the recommendation of staff, the Planning Commission amended Use Permit UP 16-
057 condition #7, which addresses the two-year term of the Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, on March 21, 2017, a timely appeal of the Planning Commission action
(Appeal AP 17-003) was filed by Christopher Dolan. The written appeal was appropriately filed
with the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, on May 15, 2017, the City Council held a public hearing to consider
Appeal AP 17-003, take public testimony, consider the evidence in the record, and review the
findings and decision of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the project has deemed to be exempt from environmental review per
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities);
and
WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings
upon which this decision is based, is the Community Development Department. The records of
proceedings include the "Notice of Zoning Administrator Action" with attachments dated January
28, 2017, the Planning Commission staff report with attachments dated March 14, 2017, the City
Council staff report with attachments dated May 15, 2017, and all correspondence received to
date on this matter by the City of San Rafael.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby denies Appeal
AP17-003 and upholds the Planning Commission's March 14, 2017 action to uphold the Zoning
Administrator's January 28, 2016 approval of Use Permit Amendment UP16-057. The City
Council finds and determines that points of Appeal AP17-003 cannot be supported for the
following reasons:
Findings for Denial of Anneal AP 17-003
Appeal Point #1:
The proposed use would necessitate a rezoning. The proposed use will constitute a residential,
multi family use.
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. The City Council finds that the
proposed use would not necessitate a rezoning in that it: a) maintains the basic residential use of
the yellow hallway area; b) is a minor re -use of an existing development portion of the existing
retirement center; and c) is considered a temporary use as the Use Permit Amendment is term -
based (two-year approval). Further, the City Council finds that the proposal would result in a
single, residential dwelling unit with a single kitchen that would be shared by two single women
and their children. The arrangement does not constitute a multiple -family residential use. The
San Rafael Municipal Code (SMRC Title 14, Zoning) (the "Zoning Ordinance") defines a
multiple -family residence as three or more individual, attached residential dwelling units on a
single site.
N
Appeal Point #2:
The current PD District zoning does not permit the proposed use.
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. The City Council finds that the
proposed use would not violate or be prohibited by the current PD District adopted for Lourdes
Convent. The City Council acknowledges that the current PD District does not have an approved
Development Plan, which sets forth land use regulations and development standards for this
district. However, the City Council finds that per San Rafael Municipal Code Section
14.07.035C, the improvements and use are minor and do not require an amendment to the PD
District. The approval of a Development Plan and amendment to the current PD District would
be triggered when or if the property is redeveloped or if there were a major re -purposing or reuse
of the existing retirement center facility. The continued operation of the existing use is governed
by Use Permit UP79-18. Minor changes in the existing use are typically processed and permitted
through a Use Permit Amendment.
Appeal Point #3:
The proposal constitutes an amendment to the PD District zoning and should require a new
zoning application. The appellant notes that Zoning Ordinance Section 14.07.150 states that
"requests for changes in the contents of approval of a PD District zoning and Development
Plan shall be treated as a zoning amendment (rezoning)."
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. The City Council finds that the
project does not require an amendment to the PD District and that the processing and issuance of
a Use Permit Amendment is the appropriate process for this request. As noted in the response to
Appeal Points #1 and 2 above, the project proposes a minor change to the existing residential use
of the yellow hallway area. Per San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.07.035C, the
improvements and use are minor and do not require an amendment to the PD District. The City
Council finds that this approach has been taken on minor use changes for other properties located
in the PD District, including 1600-1650 Los Gamos Road (Marin Commons) and 111 McInnis
Parkway (office complex). The City Council finds that if a major change in the use of the
Lourdes Convent facility (e.g., a commercial retirement center) were proposed or if the facility
was demolished and the site was proposed for redevelopment, a zoning amendment to the PD
District and a Development Plan would be required.
Appeal Point #4:
The proposal is non-compliant with Zoning Ordinance Section 14.16.115 as the City has zoned
GC and LI/O Districts in other area of the Cityfor shelters for families. The proposal does not
meet the Performance Standards of this ordinance section.
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. The City Council finds that San
Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.16.115 is not relevant or applicable to the proposed project.
This section of the zoning ordinance is specific to the establishment and operation of emer2encv
shelters not transitional housing. The project proposes transitional housing. The City Council
confirms that since this code section is not relevant or application to the proposed transitional
housing use, the require performance standards of this code section are not applicable.
Appeal Point #5:
3
Objective studies conducted pursuant to statutory mandate, show that homelessness among the
population of families with children has decreased. Therefore, the stated urgent need is not
supported by the empirical evidence.
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. The City Council finds there is
nothing in the approval of the Use Permit Amendment that cites or implies that there is urgency
in approving this proposal. The City Council acknowledges that the application for the Use
Permit Amendment was not promoted or prompted by the City; rather, the City is responding to
an application filed by the Dominican Sisters, no different than any other applicant to the
Planning permit process. Regardless of the matter of urgency, there is a need for housing in
general. San Rafael General Plan 2020 Housing Element (page 42) explicitly identifies: a) a
broad list of those that need housing (which includes very low-income households including
those without a place to call home); and b) the kind of housing that is needed.
Appeal Point #6:
The Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator demonstrated bias in the handling of the
[Use Permit Amendment] and in his [Zoning Administrator's] participation in the Planning
Commission's [decision]. Therefore, the decisions made incorporating said bias should be
overturned The appellant notes that materials submitted to the City during the permit review
process were shared with the applicant and their attorneys but the same benefit was not afforded
to the appellant. Further, it is argued that the Zoning Administrator did not provide notice of the
Use Permit Amendment action to the appellant. Lastly, the appellant noted that the Zoning
Administrator was biased in approving Use Permit Amendment condition #7, which initially set
four mandatory options for the applicant to pursue following termination of the two-year
operation period.
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. As presented in the report, the
City Council finds that: a) there has been nothing unusual or out -of -the ordinary in the processing
of this Use Permit Amendment request that is different than all other similar permit applications
processed by the Community Development Department; b) there is nothing in the information
that has been presented to conclude that there was a bias toward the applicant; and c) there is
nothing in the information that has been presented to conclude that the appellant was denied due
process or access to public records.
Appeal Point #7.
If the Planning Commission's action is upheld, any change in zoning/use should have a
condition to run with the land that if the [Dominican] Sisters ever transfer title to the property,
whether it is by sale or gift, the transitional housing must terminate.
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. As included in this resolution,
Use Permit Amendment Condition #7 requires that the proposed use terminate two years
following unit occupancy and the permit amendment will sunset at that time. Therefore, this
suggested recommendation by the appellant is no longer necessary.
Appeal Point #8:
Should the Planning Commission's decision be upheld, there should be a moratorium of three
months following the expiration of the two-year amended Use Permit so that those within the
affected community can reflect upon and discuss the appropriateness of any future amendment
to the change in use.
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. The City Council has
considered the input and recommendations of staff and the City Attorney, and finds that a
moratorium following the termination of the use is not necessary or warranted. If approved, the
transitional housing use would be in operation for two full years following occupancy of the
yellow hallway area. The two years of operation will provide the City and the neighborhood an
opportunity to review the operations and gauge conditions and potential issues. As supported by
the findings that are made for the Use Permit Amendment, the proposed use would not impact the
public safety, health or welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or the community.
Appeal Point #9:
Should the Dominican Sisters cease to use the Lourdes Convent for convent use, the PD
District should be abolished and the property should revert back to the RI a District.
The City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff response to this appeal point
presented in the Report to the City Council dated May 15, 2017. The City Council finds that
should the Dominican Sisters cease to use the convent the property as a convent the current PD
District would not be abolished or automatically be rezoned to the Rla District as suggested by
the appellant. Given the property size (over two acres), a rezoning of the PD District to
incorporate an approved Development Plan would likely be recommended. Any change in
property zoning requires a public process, which is set forth in San Rafael Municipal Code
Chapter 14.27 (Amendment). The public process requires public hearings with the Planning
Commission and City Council. Any major re -use of the existing convent facilities or
redevelopment of the property would require a property rezoning.
The City Council finds that property zoning must be consistent with the San Rafael General Plan
land use designation. The property land use designation for the subject property is Public/Quasi-
Public. While this land use designation permits residential use, its primary purpose is to
accommodate public and quasi -public uses and facilities.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council denies Appeal AP17-003 and
upholds the Planning Commission's action to uphold the Zoning Administrator's approval of Use
Permit Amendment UP16-057 based on the following findings and subject to the following
conditions:
Findings for UPI 6-057
As proposed and conditioned, the use is in accord with the General Plan 2020, the
objectives of the City Zoning Ordinance, and the purposes of the PD (Planned
Development) District in that:
a. The General Plan 2020 Land Use Element land use map designates Lourdes Convent
for public/quasi-public use. This land use designation permits residential use. The
current use, the Lourdes Convent, is a residential use. The proposed transitional
housing is also a residential use and is therefore consistent with the allowances of this
land use designation.
b. The proposed use is consistent with General Plan 2020 Housing Element Policy H-9,
which recognizes special needs. Policy H-9 encourages a mix of housing unit types
throughout San Rafael, including housing for very low- and low-income families with
5
children and single parents. As proposed, the residential unit would provide
transitional housing for two single mothers with their children living as a single
household.
c. Consistent with General Plan 2020 Housing Element Policy H-10, the proposed use
represents an innovated housing approach that supports the financing, design and
construction of a residential unit that increases the availability of low-income housing.
d. The proposed use would create a shared household of two single parents with children,
which would be consistent with General Plan 2020 Housing Element Policy H-11
(House Sharing).
e. The proposed use is consistent with one of the objectives of the PD (Planned
Development) District, which is to accommodate various types of compatible and
complimentary uses within a development. Lourdes Convent presents a setting of
compatible residential uses.
f. The approval of a Use Permit Amendment for the proposed use is appropriate in that it
would allow the re -purposing of existing building area for a two year period. Given the
limited scope and timeframe of this project, it would not result in a substantial change
to the property or use that would necessitate or mandate a comprehensive, long-term
master plan for Lourdes Convent.
2. As proposed and conditioned, the use 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 in that:
a. The project will not result in new development, additional building area or major
physical changes to the Lourdes Convent property; it proposes the conversion of
existing residential rooms, the "yellow hallway," to a single dwelling unit for a shared
household. Further, the "yellow hallway" represents a small percentage (12%) of the
overall Lourdes Convent facility.
b. The project would re -purpose an existing 1,995 square foot area of the convent to a
single residential unit which will not result in an increase in traffic that would change
or exacerbate existing traffic patterns or conditions, or increase safety hazards along the
local street system.
c. As demonstrated by a one-week parking survey conducted at the project site, the
existing parking supply exceeds the demand, thus there is adequate off-street parking to
serve the proposed use without impacting properties in the vicinity.
d. The project would not impair or reduce safety to the residents of the convent facility or
to surrounding residents in that the single residence is set back from the public street
and the outdoor yard area would be fenced and screened with vegetation. Further, to
maintain a line of sight for safe vehicle back -out along Locust Avenue, it is
recommended that the heavy vegetation located east of the informal, gravel parking pad
be trimmed back.
e. The exterior improvements proposed for the project are limited to the creation of a
fenced yard area, which is currently fenced and well screened from the public street by
heavy vegetation. These improvements will not result in a noticeable change to the
property conditions and would not be injurious to properties or improvements in the
area.
f. As proposed, Homeward Bound will provide residency oversight to ensure that
residents are properly screened and meet the criteria for residency. This oversight will
ensure that the proposed use is properly managed to ensure the safety and welfare of
the residents and the surrounding neighborhood.
Co
As proposed and conditioned, the use complies with each of the applicable provisions of
the City Zoning Ordinance in that:
a. As required by the provisions of the PD District, the proposed transitional housing use
is a residential use that is compatible with retirement center use. Further, the processing
and approval of a Use Permit Amendment is consistent with the requirements of the PD
District to ensure that all uses on one site are compatible and complimentary.
b. There is adequate parking to meet the City Code. Further, it has been demonstrated by
the one-week parking survey conducted at the subject property that the existing parking is
adequate to meet the City Code. A study of the parking found that the existing parking
exceeds the demand.
4. The proposed use meets the City Zoning Ordinance definition for transitional housing,
which complies with State law. Per California Government Code Section 65583,
transitional housing must be treated as a residential use only, subject to only the same
restrictions as other housing of the same type in the subject zoning district. The sole
requirement for the approval of a Use Permit Amendment is that Lourdes Convent is
located within a PD District. A Use Permit Amendment would be required for other similar
residential uses proposed for the "yellow hallway" such as a manager's or caretaker
residence.
Conditions of Annroval for UPI 6-057
1. Except as modified by the conditions of the Use Permit Amendment, all conditions of
approval for Use Permit UP79-18 relating to the use and operation of the Lourdes Convent
are unchanged and shall remain in effect.
2. This Use Permit Amendment approves the conversion of the 1,995 square -foot "yellow
hallway" area of the convent to a single residential dwelling unit (including a kitchen) for
transitional housing. As proposed, the residential dwelling unit is approved for a shared
household.
3. As the primary tenant of the "yellow hallway," Homeward Bound is responsible for
managing the oversight of unit residency and operation. As presented in the Use Permit
Amendment application, unit residents must be participants in the Homeward Bound
program, meet the screening criteria for occupancy, enter into an occupancy agreement and
comply with the Code of Conduct for residency.
4. Prior to any and all construction, a building permit is required and shall be secured for this
project. Upon completion of the construction and City inspection process, a Certificate of
Occupancy will be issued by the City.
5. Along the Locust Avenue frontage adjacent to the main driveway is an informal, gravel -
surfaced parking pad, which is located within the public right-of-way. In order to provide a
line of sight for safe vehicle back-up, the heavy vegetation located east of this pad shall be
trimmed back to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The vegetation trimming
shall be completed prior to the occupancy.
6. The application for a building permit will require review and approval by the Fire
Department. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the
California Fire Code and City of San Rafael Ordinances and amendments. An upgrade to the
7
existing fire alarm and sprinkler system serving the "yellow hallway" may be required as
determined by the Fire Department.
7. This Use Permit Amendment is approved for two (2) years commencing on the issuance date
of Certificate of Occupancy. At the end of the two year period, the Use Permit Amendment
shall terminate. At that time, the kitchen facility shall be removed and the area returned to its
current use as residential convent rooms. If at the end of the two year period the property
owner decides to retain the kitchen and extend the Use Permit Amendment or re -purpose the
yellow hallway area, City Council approval will be required.
I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk if the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing
resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
held on the 15th day of May 2017.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Colin, Gamblin, McCullough & Mayor Phillips
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
jet, -r
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk